STUDY ON THE MONORAIL PROJECT IN CENTRAL MANILA

Transcription

1 STUDY ON ECONOMIC PARTNERSHIP PROJECTS IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES IN FY2012 STUDY ON THE MONORAIL PROJECT IN CENTRAL MANILA IN THE REPUBLIC OF PHILIPPINES FINAL REPORT SUMMARY February 2013 Prepared for: The Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry Ernst & Young Shin Nihon LLC Japan External Trade Organization (JETRO) Prepared by: Oriental Consultants Co., Ltd. Nomura Research Institute, Ltd. Hitachi Ltd.

2 1. Background and Necessity of the Project As the capital of the Philippines, Metro Manila is the political, economic and commercial metropolis of the country. The population of Metro Manila was million of Moreover, the total population in the City of Taguig (where this project would be mainly located) was about 0.27 million in 1990, and it has increased to about 0.6 million in 2010 (2.42 times). The Bases Conversion and Development Authority (BCDA), a Government Owned and Controlled Corporation (GOCC), had transformed former military bases located in Metro Manila into an alternative productive civilian use since its activation in 1992 to date. The biggest two of these are Fort Bonifacio, a 240-hectare world class residential and business district, and Villamor Airbase, the site of Newport City located right across Ninoy Aquino International Airport Terminal 3 (NAIA-3), which is emerging as the country s premiere urban integrated tourism resort with a strong Information Technology (IT) component and airport related businesses. The growing demand for efficient mass transport system in the metropolis and the growing traffic congestion within the mix-use districts of Bonifacio Global City (BGC), Newport City, NAIA-3 and its environs would necessitate the construction of a fast, efficient and safe public transport that would link up with the existing Metro Rail Transit (MRT) System servicing Epinafio de los Santos Avenue (EDSA) route, Light Rail Transit (LRT) System traversing the entire length of Taft Avenue from Baclaran, Parañaque City to Roosevelt in Quezon City, and the Philippine National Railway (PNR) that cuts across Metro Manila towards the Southern Luzon regions. A conceptual study for the Proposed Global Cities Mass Transit Project (GCMT Project) has been conducted in the early part of this year through the assistance of Oriental Consultants Company, Ltd. who recommended for the conduct of a full blown feasibility study in order for the project to advance to the next stage. Included in the Public Investment Program (PIP) submitted by BCDA to National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA) for implementation within the medium term, the proposed project would traverse inside BGC and other adjoining premier mix-use districts such as McKinley Hills, North Bonifacio and South Bonifacio, Newport City and NAIA-3 in Pasay City connecting from the MRT-3 in Guadalupe, Makati City. Based on this situation, the BCDA has requested that the study team submit proposal of feasibility study for development of a mass transit (Monorail) strategy connecting all Global cities to Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI). The road improvement of the circumferential and the radial main corridors in Metro Manila is proceeding in accordance with the city spread. However, due to physical right-of-way (ROW) constrains, the three major destinations within the study area of this project, Makati CBD, BGC, and NAIA, are very scarcely connected by roads. In fact, only two roads exist between Makati and BGC, McKinley Road and Kalaayan-Buendia flyover, where heavy traffic congestion occurs on daily basis, and where there is no possibility of further capacity

3 expansion. Additionally, there is only one road which connects directly BGC and NAIA, Lawton Avenue, and traffic congestion. Considering that this area is not yet fully developed, with more than double (2.67 times) to be built in these Global Cities until 2025, plus an additional 76 million annual trip to/from all the terminals at NAIA by the same year, the mass transport capacity will be clearly insufficient for supporting further rapid development of these areas. Therefore, since large-scale urban development is planned, a public mass transportation system that connects these three destinations will be required for this area. 2. Concept of the Project 2.1 Objectives The objective of this study is to describe the monorail system that could link all Global Cities, i.e. BGC, McKinley Hills, McKinley West, Bonifacio South, and Newport with a mass transit mode, including interconnection to an existing mass transit mode (MRT-3) and the NAIA Terminal 3, evaluate possible routes, estimate costs, and propose possible financing schemes and implementation timetables. This project will contribute to improve environmental conditions and alleviat the traffic condition of Manila Metropolitan Area (see Figure 1). 2.2 System Selection The system should be chosen in consideration of the conditions of the project such as expected demand, maximal capacity (around 20,000 pphpd), environmental and social conditions, road diversion impact, road traffic impact, cost, and alignment constrains (minimal curves and slopes). BRT The capacity of a BRT system is comparable to that of a LRT (at-grade) or monorail system if using dedicated high-occupancy vehicle lanes (HOV). However, the greatest challenge in integrating the BRT system in the study area is road space. The proposed BRT system for Makati and Taguig should as much as possible run on exclusive. Several sectional concepts along Ayala Avenue with exclusive lanes could be achieved, and the future widening of Lawton Avenue includes a ROW of 10 meters for a dedicated HOV. However, not all corridors will have enough space for exclusive BRT lanes. Therefore, it is considered that for the expected demand for the corridors in this project, the BRT system is not a suitable solution as it cannot be implemented entirely on HOV, reducing its capacity considerably, hence, not satisfying with the demand.

4 Figure 1 Study Location Map

5 LRT The capacity can reach over 40,000 pphpd, which is higher of the monorail, however, the capability to negotiate small curves and steep slopes in the revenue line is the main demerits of this system to be employed for the study area. Moreover, the massive slab-type structure, which is less aesthetically attractive and marginally more expensive than a monorail structure, is not very welcomed by the stakeholders (users) of the project. AGT The AGT and monorail have similar performance for constricted alignments, and that both could have similar capacity; however the main difference is in the size of the rolling stock. The capacity of one car for monorail is about 200 passengers, as for an AGT car is 100. Thus, in order to carry the same amount of passengers in one train, the AGT needs the double amount of cars of the monorail. Since one car for AGT is 9 meters. long, and the monorail is 15 meters. long, so the total train length will be 20% larger for an AGT, reducing the available space for depot area. We also have to consider that the stations would be 20% longer and the viaducts would be based of a deck-slab structyre, which is less aesthetically attractive and marginally more expensive than a monorail structure. Table 1 shows the results of the comparison between the three rail systems. Table 1 Summary of Comparison between Rail Systems Item LRT Monorail AGT Capacity Under used Satisfactory Satisfactory Route condition Limited Satisfactory Satisfactory Depot size Satisfactory Satisfactory Limited Noise unsatisfactory Acceptable Acceptable Daylight interference Poor Acceptable Poor Novelty merit None Attractive Satisfactory Aesthetical Poor Acceptable Poor Overall cost Similar level Serviceability Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Total Evaluation Unsuitable Suitable Unsuitable The particular characteristics of this project include several curves with small radius and very steep slopes, and also a limited available space for the depot as the area is prime real estate area in Metro Manila. Thus, the options of LRT and AGT do not seem to be suitable to the project. Accordingly, the monorail system is recommended as an optimum system for this project.

6 3. Outline of the Project 3.1 Route Alignment The main objective of the proposed project is to connect a mass transit system to BGC to NAIA Terminal 3, which will satisfy the demand of workers at the BGC, the Resort World Casino and Hotels complex, and the airport. After a review of site conditions and interviews with stakeholders concerned, several options were proposed and in turn discarded due to their potential constraints for implementation. The description of the final and recommended option is as follows. The terminal station would be located underground where currently Intercontinental Hotel stands, then a tunnel under McKinley Rd would directly connect to MRT Alaya station, with the transition from the tunnel to be built along McKinley Parkway south of the intersection with 5th Avenue.. From McKinley Parkway the alignment reaches Market-Market, and then crosses 32nd street taking University Parkway, connecting with 38th street and 8th Avenue to continue along 8th Avenue and turns right at 34th street, passing behind St. Luke s Medical Center, takes 5th Avenue towards McKinley Parkway to pass above the tunnel section and then continue along Lawton Avenue. The alignment takes the entire Lawton Avenue before the intersection with South Luzon Expressway (SLEX), taking to the south at the creek right after the intersection with Chino Roces Avenue Extension. This small creek will lead to the intersection with the East Service road 200 meters south of Sales Bridge, and then will cross below the Skyway and above the PNR tracks and the SLEX, then entering inside PAF Villamor Base. The alignment would take the main internal road from east to west until reaching behind the Aerospace Museum, and finally taking the existing parking lot of NAIA Terminal 3. Then, it is considered to enter inside the premises of NAIA and use the taxiway in front of DHL hangar as transition to a tunnel that would cross under the runway 13/31 and exit within the current Nayong Filipino, then take MIA Road up to the parking lot of Terminal 2, then using the service road between T1 and T2, reach the parking lot of Terminal 1. Finally, the alignment would take Ninoy Aquino Avenue toward south until reaching the bridge where the alignment would connect with the future LRT Line 1 Ninoy Aquino station to be built for the Line 1 Cavite Extension Project. Although this new alignment will be parallel to the NAIA-Skyway extension and both projects will not be affected, close coordination between the two projects detail designs will be required. The recommended alignment (Option 5) is shown in Figure 1. Pending Issues for recommended alignment Although this option is the most suitable one, it still has some pending issues that have to be addressed during detailed design stage and prior to project implementation as described below. One is the ROW between Pasong Tamo and the crossing of Skyway. There are several houses that will be affected and ROW acquisition is unavoidable. This matter is explained in detail in Chapter 4. Another ROW issue is the sharp curve at 34th street corner 5th Avenue where St. Luke s Hospital and S&R Shopping are located. The alignment is fixed as far as possible from the hospital, but it gets very close to the supermarket. Probably additional ROW would be needed.

7 The crossing of the Philippine Air Force (PAF) Villamor Base is another matter that was not addressed during the implementation of this Study, but sooner or later this issue should be discussed at higher levels of the Government. 3.2 Location of Stations The station for the GCMT Project should be aesthetically attractive, functional, able to cope with future demand, safe, and provide good connectivity to existing structures. The proposed stations for the project are the indicated in Table 2: Table 2 List of Stations Station Km post Location 1 Ayala 0k+000 Intersection of Ayala Avenue-EDSA. Underground station at current location of Intercontinental Hotel. 2 Memorial 2k+735 Along McKinley Parkway close to 8th Avenue, beside American Memorial Cemetery 3 Market-Market 3k+600 Between Market-Market and Serendra 4 Schools 4k+255 Along University Drive in front of football field of ISM 5 Uptown 5k+287 At 8 th Avenue corner 38 th street 6 St. Luke's 6k th Avenue corner 32 nd street, in front of McDonald s 7 23 rd Street 7k+080 Along 5 th Avenue, in front of Singapore Embassy 8 McKinley Hills 8k+228 Along Lawton Avenue, just north of future rotunda at the entrance of McKinley Hills and McKinley West 9 Bayani Rd. 8k+970 Along Lawton Avenue. in front of current NAMRIA 10 ASCOM * 9k+820 Along Lawton Avenue. in front of current ASCOM football field 11 Pasong Tamo 10k+688 Along Lawton Avenue. Just east of Pasong Tamo ext. 12 NAIA T3 13k+124 In front of T3, mezzanine at same level as departure hall 13 NAIA T2 16k+784 At parking lot in front of T2 14 NAIA T1 17k+712 At parking lot in front of T1 15 Ninoy Aquino 19k+178 *:Name and location to be revised based on future development Along Ninoy Aquino Avenue. connecting with future LRT Line 1 station of Cavite Extension. 3.3 Depot The depot is always a very challenging item in any planning of a railway project as it occupies a considerable large area. This is particularly critical in the GCMT project as the alignment crosses prime real estate areas, and consequently, a large space exclusivery used to a depot, and close to the alignment, is difficult to find. However, BCDA has identified a site at the Consular Road that could be utilized as it has enough available area (10 hectares) and has easy access. Currently, 3.5 ha have been reserved for as a site for the proposed depot (please refer to Figure 2) but the Study Team considers that a minimum of 5.5 ha is necessary for this project. For comparison purpose, the proposed layout of the depot is shown in Figure 3 at the same scale of Figure 2. The required area is around 5.5 ha. Figure 4 shows a computer generated 3D model of the depot area and the vicinity of McKinley Hill Station.

8 Figure 2 Current Master Plan for Consular Area Source: BCDA Figure 3 Proposed Depot Layout at Consular Area Figure 4 CG 3D image of Proposed Depot at Consular Area

9 3.4 Passenger Demand Forecast A comprehensive passenger demand forecast was carried out during this study. The results are summarized in the following table showing different fare structures. Fare: year Table 3 Ridership and Revenue Case A /km Case B /km Case C /km Daily Pphpd Trip Fare Revenue Daily Pphpd Trip Fare Revenue Daily Pphpd Trip Fare Revenue pax pax km Pesos Pesos/day pax pax km Pesos Pesos/day pax pax km Pesos Pesos/day ,996 11, ,984, ,990 11, ,959, ,080 11, ,206, ,657 12, ,344, ,657 12, ,125, ,890 12, ,946, ,955 12, ,447, ,955 12, ,188, ,206 12, ,997, ,254 12, ,551, ,254 12, ,252, ,522 12, ,048, ,552 12, ,655, ,552 12, ,315, ,838 12, ,100, ,850 12, ,752, ,850 12, ,375, ,154 13, ,148, ,934 16, ,558, ,717 16, ,027, ,480 16, ,252, ,022 16, ,702, ,887 16, ,116, ,663 16, ,324, ,110 16, ,846, ,057 16, ,206, ,847 16, ,396, ,197 16, ,992, ,227 16, ,297, ,030 16, ,469, ,285 16, ,138, ,396 16, ,387, ,213 16, ,541, ,737 17, ,411, ,094 19, ,323, ,748 19, ,319, ,318 18, ,600, ,022 19, ,447, ,864 19, ,423, ,900 18, ,778, ,951 19, ,565, ,980 19, ,521, ,481 18, ,968, ,879 19, ,690, ,097 20, ,626, ,063 18, ,147, ,808 19, ,815, ,213 20, ,731, ,644 18, ,340, ,736 20, ,934, ,330 20, ,831, ,226 18, ,521, ,665 20, ,061, ,446 20, ,937, ,540 19, ,632, , ,936, , ,684, , ,632, , ,936, , ,684, , ,632, , ,936, , ,684, , ,632, , ,936, , ,684, , ,632, , ,936, , ,684, , ,632, , ,936, , ,684, Summary Outline of the Project The project outline is summarized in Table 4. Table 4 Summary Outline Item Value Route Length km Track lenght 20 km Number of Stations 15 Passengers per Day 185,996 (2017); 405,934 (2023) PPHPD 21,333 (max, 2035) Headway 2.25 min Train Composition 4 cars Rolling Stock Required 44 trains (2035) Location of Depot and Workshop Consular Area, 5.5ha 3.6 Estimated Costs of the Project The total project cost is shown in Table 5. The cost is shown considering phasing of the project, but it is not considering future additional disbursement for the purchase of rolling stock when reaching maximal capacity in The cost for Phase 1 is 31,373 million pesos, and the total project cost is around 55.8 billion pesos, of which almost 70% is foreign component (rolling stock, depot equipment, E&M and tunneling, mainly).

10 3.7 Financial and Economical Evaluation The Financial Internal Rate of Return (FIRR) was estimated considering the total project cost, Operation and Maintenance cost (refer to Table 6), revenue due to ridership and other non-revenue income (ref. Table 4). The results are shown in Table Financial Analysis The main purpose of financial analysis is to examine the financial viability of the implementation of the project from view point of project implementation body. Three different fare structure cases were studied, case A: P P/km; Case B: P P/km; and Case C: P P/km Finance Plan The financial plan in case of the work sharing method will be discussed below. It is assumed that necessary funds of this project will be provided by the yen loan. Table 5 Total Project Cost Cost(Myen) Cost Component (Million) Cost Items Unit Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Total percentage Local (Pesos) percentage Foreign (yen) 1 Rolling Stock (Monorail) train 15,960 8,400 9,240 33, % % 33, Signal, CTC, Telecom Double km 2,860 1,960 1,680 6, % % 5,200.0 Signal, CTC, Telecom Single km 1, ,024 2, % % 1, Track Switch (Turnout) set 1, , % % 1,280.0 Track Switch (Hanoji) set , % % 1, Traction Sub- Station set , % % 1, Power Line double km 2,503 1,715 1,470 5, % % 4,834.4 Power Line single km , % % 1, Spare Parts LS 1, ,754 15% % 2, Test & Commission LS 1,200 1,152 1,152 3, % % 3, Civil Viaduct Double Track km 4,576 3,136 2,688 10, % 4, % 1,040.0 Tunnel Single Track km 7, ,713 13, % 1, % 10, Station Double Track (Elev) set 2,100 1, , % 2, % Double Track (Under) set 2, , % % Depot Buildings & Facilities ha 1, , % % 88.0 Depot Equipment Ls 2, , % % 1,995.0 Track works Ls 3, , % 1, % 1,122.0 Civil Works ha 6, , % 2, % Total Investment Cost : 59,295 19,847 26, , , , Total Project Cost 59,295 19,847 26, , % 69.61% Table 6 Operation and Maintenance Cost Unit: Million Pesos Phase , , , ,515.26

11 Cash Flow Analysis The results of the financial analysis are summarized in Table 7. Judging from this analysis only Case a is financially viable. Table 7 FIRR for the Project Case FIRR Case A 2.9% Case B -1.8% Case C -4.6% Economic Analysis The main purpose of economical analysis is to show the effects of the implementation of the GCMT Project from viewpoint of national and regional economy. Effect of Introduction of the Project Effect of introduction of the Project consist of a) direct effect, b) indirect effect. Among these effects, the following tangible benefits are calculated: Saving in vehicle operation cost (VOC) Saving in vehicle operation time (VOT) Saving in travel time Cost Benefit Analysis Based on the estimated economic benefits and costs, the cost benefit analysis is made and is shown in Table 8. The result of EIRR shows that all cases have more than 15%, the social discounting rate. Therefore, it is considered that all cases are feasible from national economic viewpoints. Table 8 Result of Cost Benefits Analysis Case A Case B Case C EIRR 15.2% 15.5% 15.8% B/C NPV (Mill. PhP) ,260 1, Environmental and Social Impact Present Condition of the Project Area In the Republic of Philippines, as well as in Metro Manila, the transportation system and transport infrastructure are in poor condition and posing critical problems such as congestion, accidents and environmental pollution. The

12 problems of traffic congestion brought by population growth, urbanization and motorization are rapidly becoming major social issues. In the Project area, air pollution as well water quality and noise level are higher than the environmental standards in several locations Environmental Impacts of the Project By proposed Monorail project, motor vehicle travelling is expected to decrease and air pollutant from vehicle will be decreased. Carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) emission from vehicle will also be decreased, but it was estimated that CO 2 emission by monorail operation will exceeded this reduction effect. The environmental items that are necessary to survey the influence of the impact in more detail prior to the implementation of the project are as follows. Impact of Noise along the Monorail Alignment Impact on Hydrology Impact on Ecosystems and Biota Impact on Current Transport Systems Impacts during Construction (Traffic Congestion, Noise, Water, Waste) There is a possibility that the AFPOVAI Village in Taguig City located in the north side of Metro Manila Skyway (MMSW) will be affected by the construction of the elevated guideway between Pasong Tamo station and MMSW with about 400m. In order to minimize the environmental and social impact problems, alternative routes were proposed as follows. Case-1: Base Case: Monorail alignment will pass G. Julliano Avenue and R Crame Avenue. Case-2: Monorail alignment will pass in Maricaban Creek Based on review of comparison of these alternative plans, Case-2 plan which will pass into the existing Maricaban Creek towards NAIA terminal 3 is more attractive. Detail survey for resettlement and acquisition should be conducted in detail design stage, and based on this survey, resettlement plan should be prepared. This proposed Monorail project will be categorized as ECP (Environmentally Critical Project). Therefore, EIA report called Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) shall be prepared during the next Feasibility Study (FS) Stage which will decide the project design in detail. 3.9 Recommendation Despite lower financial return, it is recommended to further study the feasibility of Case A (P P/km) in a full blown study.

13 4. Project Implementation Schedule The implementation of the GCMT Project is not completely independent of the implementation of other projects, not only in terms of possible demand if some developments are not done, but also physical, such as the renovation of the Ayala center area where currently the Intercontinental Hotel is located, and also the widening of Lawton Avenue. Thus, the Project Implementation schedule for the GCMT Project is estimated taking into account the abovementioned projects, and divided into the following phases: 1) Phase 1: The Phase 1 is taken as to McKinley Hill Station via BGC from Ayala Station. Furthermore, divide into 2 sub-sections: a) Phase 1-a: From BGC to McKinley Hill Station b) Phase 1-b: From Ayala Station to BGC 2) Phase 2: From McKinley Hill Station to NAIA terminal 3 station 3) Phase 3: From NAIA Terminal 3 station to Ninoy Aquino station (LRT 1) Figure 5 shows the Implementation Schedule of this project, assuming a funding scheme based on JICA STEP Loan.

14 JICA Study Phase Environmental and Social Consideration NEDA Approval JICA Appraisal Loan Agreement EIA Study and preparation of document (EIS/EPRPM) Evaluation of EIS report/issue of ECC Validation of Affected Person and Structures Negotiation for Resettlement Site Selection Consultants Engineering/ Tender Assistance ROW Acquisition Selection Contractor Construction Liability Period Activity Civil Works E&M Works Rolling Stock Commissioning Revenue Operation Viaduct Tunnel Stations Figure 5 Project Implementation Schedule a b

15 5. Feasibility of the Project and Possibility of Yen Loan Requests 5.1 Position of the Executing Agency for Financing the Project As a Government Owned and Controlled Corporation of the Philippine government, BCDA has in theory the following financing mechanisms for this project. 1) Budget allocation from the National Government under General Appropriation Act 2) Retained earnings 3) Equity paid-in by the National Government 4) Concessional loan from Bilateral and Multilateral Developing Banks 5) Loan from Export Credit Agencies 6) Loan from commercial banks 7) Issuance of bond Judging from legal requirements, interest rate, tenure and so forth, 4) Concessional loan from Bilateral and Multilateral Developing Banks is the most feasible among debt finance, followed by 5) Loan from Export Credit Agencies. 2) Retained earnings can serve as a local counterpart fund in case of 4) Concessional loan from Bilateral and Multilateral Developing Banks. 5.2 Funding by Other Financing Agencies Essentially, there have been no bilateral or multilateral development banks other than JICA (including former JBIC then) which have loaned rail transport infrastructure projects in the Philippines over the past few decades. Among multilateral development banks, the World Bank (IBRD) and the ADB (Southeast Asian Region Department), both of which chiefly loan the public sector, have little precedence in financing transport projects in the Philippines over the past few decades, and have little future projects in the transport sector in pipeline. Henceforth, chance seems to be slim that either of them becomes a lead financier for this project. Chinese and Korean export-import banks remain active in other sectors, but would have little, if not none, interest in financing this project, as Chinese and Korean companies are not necessarily competent in Monorail technology and products. 5.3 Expected Financing Scenarios and Status/Possibility of the Japanese Yen Credit Application The most feasible financing mechanism for this project is the concessional ODA loan from bilateral and multilateral development banks, in consideration of sizeable project cost, length of amortization period, and low financial return unsuitable to commercial debt finance. Among bilateral and multilateral development banks, JICA seems to be the most promising, as it has several precedence in loaning rail transport projects in the Philippines,

16 and can extend concessional Yen loan for long-term of 30 to 40 years. In fact, BCDA also find it most concessional and hence promising. This project, as an urban public transport, is eligible to enjoy terms and conditions of Special Terms for Economic Partnerships (STEP) of Yen loan. Under STEP, the procurement is tied to Japanese contractors and suppliers to a certain extent, and the interest rate becomes further concessional. Hence, from the viewpoint of BCDA, choice is either to enjoy the most concessional interest rate with Japan-tied procurement or to go for the usual concessional interest rate with untied procurement. 5.4 Status of the Arrangements for Japanese Yen Credit BCDA plans to start construction of this project at earliest possible timing during the current Aquino administration (until 2016), and to start commercial operation even in part from late 2010s. BCDA has requested NEDA to include this project in the Public Investment Plan ( ) which is still draft. The current working draft of PIP ( ) lists this project as one of priority projects. 5.5 Actions Required towards the Application to Japanese Yen Credit Moving forward, necessary actions towards the application to Japanese Yen Loan are listed herein under, 1) and 2) among which are the most important ones as a preparatory procedure for realizing this project. 1) Feasibility Study Implementation Program in detail Environmental Impact Assessment in detail 2) Project Approval Environmental Compliance Certificate (ECC) Project Approval by the BCDA board Project Approval by NEDA Investment Coordination Committee (ICC) 3) Application to Japanese Yen Loan Administrative procedure among the Philippine government agencies Administrative procedure from the Philippine government to the Japanese government 5.6 Action Plans and Issues to be Resolved upon the Request for Japanese Yen Credit The very next step for BCDA is to conduct a comprehensive feasibility study, which shall be prerequisite in securing the ECC from DENR and the project approval from NEDA-ICC. Based upon the result of this pre-feasibility study, BCDA will need to discuss the conduct and fundraising of feasibility study with JICA and other concerned agencies.

17 6. International Competitiveness of Japanese Company & Japanese Components The competitiveness of Japanese companies in the field of railway technology is well known worldwide as a high performance, safe and reliable mass transit system. For example, rolling stock, station and depot facilities, signaling, telecommunication, and train control systems, as well as appropriate construction methods in congested urban area and so on. In case of monorail technology, Japan has almost 50 years of experience since when Tokyo Monorail was opened for the Olympic Games in Japanese railway companies have also high quality operation and maintenance capabilities and an excellent program for technology transfer for the recipient country s staff. Thus, it is understood that Japanese companies have a good chance to get engaged in this project. Regarding construction plan of the GCMT Project, import of related railway technologies was studied. The expected items to be procured from Japan are, but not limited to, monorail rolling stock and associated E&M systems, depot equipment, and tunneling (TBM) technology. Japanese companies are well known for excellent quality of their products, especially reliability and cost performance, including Monorail System. Nevertheless, the following matters should be considered in order to promote the participation of Japanese companies in this project: Operation and Maintenance Minimum impact on existing traffic Consideration for Social and Natural Environmental issue Single Package 7. Possible Risks against Realization of the Project Potential risks against realization of this project can be considered as listed herein under. BCDA shall need to explain to and discuss with stakeholders concerned including those with vested interests. Objection by residents and entities locating alongside or near Monorail alignment Objection by users and operators of buses and jeepneys to be affected Closure or curtailed usage of NAIA and relocation of airport functions to other places