Bolivia national transport study (Vol. 3 of 5) : Appendices one - six

61812 V3 BOLIVIA NATIONAL TRANSPORT STUDY FINAL REPORT VOLUME T .... REE APPENDICES "~6 PREPARED FOR GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIc.:: OF BOLsVI.A ~ CMH\,HSTRY t.1F TR.ANSPO~T ArJO CCMMU'<.t!CA'nONS) INTEf·'~NAT!r:1NA~w 81t!!,I\lK FOR RECC~NS'rRlJC"l'iONANO OeV~:;LO~".)r"'ENT lJNITEO NATIONS DEVe~.O~'MENT PR(:Jr":;;;1.AMM£~ ~ ~ 0\ ~ G\ ~ \).l '"~'\ l ~" p,t\ 'cr.<, i .Ji" , '~'i::z~<"" "  BOLIVIA NATIONAL TRANSPORT STUDY FINAL REPORT VOLUME THREE APPENDICES ~-6 PREPARED FOR GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF BOLIVIA [MINISTRY OF TRANSPORT AND COMMUNICATIONSl INTERNATIONAL BANK FOR RECONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME I PREPARED BY WILBUR SMITH AND ASSOCIATES IN ASSOCIATION WITH CONSA SRL & ECOVIANA SRL LA PAZ. BOLIVIA .JULY 19S1  PREFACE TO VOLUME THREE This volume contains appendices associated with Chapters 1 - 6 of the Bolivia National Transport Study Final Report. A list of appendices in this volume appears on the next page. In- dividual indexes for each appendix (when appropriate) appear after the divider page marking the start of the appendix. (i)  Appendices contained in VOLUME THREE Appendix lA Available Working Papers 1 3A Roadside Interview Surveys 4 3B Collection of Other Transport Data 19 3C Socio-Economic Data Collection 28 3D Definition of Analysis Zones 44 3E Definition of Commodity Classifications 56 3F The Transport Model 63 3G Case Study of Project Evaluation 120 3H Evaluation of New Modes on Existing Links 128 4A Existing Characteristics of Railroad Transport 139 4B Principal Results of Roadside Origin-Destination 152 Survey 4C Existing Characteristics of Waterborne Transport 183 4D Existing Pipeline Characteristics 199 4E Existing Characteristics of Air Transport 208 5A Costs of Railroad Transport 215 5B Costs Related to Road Transport 223 5C Costs of River Transport 230 5D Costs of Air Transport 235 5E other Aspects of Transport Costs 253 6A Road User Charges 257 6B Financial Analysis of AASANA 262 6C Financial Analysis of Rail Transport 268 I Abbreviations used in the Study Inside Back Fold-out Reference Map Cover (ii)  APPENDIX lA -AVAILABLE WORKING PAPERS  Appendix lA AVAILABLE WORKING PAPERS Surveys English Spanish 1. Roadside Interview Surveys Survey and Coding Manuals (Roadside Sur- * * 2. * veys) 5. Check and Supervision of National Road * Inventory Performed by SNC 8. Traffic Counts * 11. Agricultural Data Collection * Initial Data Analysis 14. Analysis of Roadside Interview Survey * (RIS) 14a. Analysis of Observed Capacities and Loadings of Trucks and Buses * * 15. Preparation of RIS Grossing-up Factors * 16. Analysis of 1976 Census Tapes * * 17. Derivation of 1977 Railroad Flows and * * Tariffs Profiles and Deficiencies of Each Mode 22. Existing Pipeline Characteristics * * 23. Existing Characteristics of River * Transport 24. Existing Characteristics of Lake * Titicaca Navigation 25. Existing Characteristics of Road * Transport 27. Characteristics of Railroad Transport * Transport Costs 32. Costs of Railroad Transport * 33. Costs of Road Transport * 33a. Analysis of Vehicle Operating Costs * * 33b. Average Annual Mileage of Passenger * Vehicles 33c. 34. Tariffs of Road Transport River Transport Operating Costs and * * Tariffs * * 35. Costs of Regular Air Transport * 35a. Costs of Non-Regular Air Transport * -1-  English Spanish 35b. Airport Costs and Tariffs 38. Costs of Railroad Construction * 38a. Costs of Road Construction * 38b. Costs of Road Maintenance * 40. Cost Projections * * * Socio-Economic Analysis 41. Socio-economic Factors Affecting the Demand * * for Goods Transport 41a. Report on the Socio-economic Base (Agrarian * Sector) 44. Workshop on Alternative Stretegies of * * Regional Development 45. The Bolivian Economy during the Next Two * Decades 46. The Bolivian Economy * 46a. Alternative Development Patterns * * 47. Quantification of 40 Major Planned Projects * 48. National Strategy on Steel-Making * 49. Forecast and Distribution of Socio-economic * * Variables Modelling 50. The Base Year Transport Network * 51. Classification of Base-Year Network Road * * Links 52. The Transport Model * * 53. 54. The Test Program Flow Forecasts for the 1989 Committed and * * Test Networks * * 60. Computer Users Manual * * Analysis of Transport Improvements 66. Prospects for New Penetration and Feeder * * Roads 68. Design and Evaluation of Penetration and Feeder Road Networks * * 93. Procedure for Project Evaluation * * 94. Economic Evaluation Package for Texas * Instrument TI 59 Calculator with Print Cradle 109. Proposed Methodology for the Evaluation of * * Highways 110. Rehabilitation of Rail Lines * 113. Highway Roughness in Bolivia * * 119. Analysis of Pavement Designs and Axle * * Loadings 122. International Agreements Concerning Trans- * port to and from Bolivia 135. Geometric Characteristics of Highways * * -2-  English Spanish Policy, Organization and Administration 127. Analysis of Road Transport Regulations * 127a. Vehicle Registration * 141. Organization for Future Transport Plan- * ning 146. Organizational Structure of Road Transport * Industry 147. Organizational Structure of Regulations * of Water Transport Financial Analyses 151. The Capacity for Future Investment in * * Transport 155. Financial Analyses of Rail Transport * 157. Financial Analyses of AASANA * -3-  APPENDIX 3A ROADSIDE INTERVIEW SURVEYS  Appendix 3A ROADSIDE INTERVIEW SURVEYS TABLES Number Page 3A-1 Dates of Wet-Season Interviews 6 3A-2 Dates of Dry-Season Interviews 7 3A-3 Number of Valid Wet-Season Interviews 8 3A-4 Number of Valid Dry-Season Interviews 9 3A-S Percentages of Night Traffic: Wet Season 10 Compared to Dry Season 3A-6 Factors for Saturday and Sunday Traffic 11 3A-7 Derivation of Annual Adjustment Factor 12 1979/1977 13 3A-8 Expansion Factors - Wet Season 16 3A-9 Expansion Factors - Dry Season FIGURES Follows Number Page 3A-1 Roadside Interview Form (Wet Season) 5 3A-2 Roadside Interview Form (Dry Season) 5 3A-3 Definition of Vehicle Classes 5 3A-4 Form for Manual Classified Counts at 5 T-Intersections 3A-S Growth Trends of Road Traffic 11 -4-  Appendix 3A ROADSIDE INTERVIEW SURVEYS This major survey exercise was undertaken to collect data on the characteristics of light-vehicle, truck and bus movements over the national road systero. The lack of coroprehensive road data within Bolivia made this survey essential for the identifi- cation of person travel and goods movements, and for the building of trip matrices. It was anticipated that there would be substantial differences in travel characteristics between the wet and dry seasons, and thus a two-season origin-destination survey was planned. Survey locations were kept constant for both survey campaigns with the exception of various locations in the Beni Department where roads are generally impassable during the wet season. In general, interviews were conducted for both directions of traffic on all roads on the outskirts of each Department capital, thus intercepting all traffic entering and leaving the major population centers of Bolivia. In addition, inter- views were made at other important points in the road system. Survey station locations are presented in Figure 3-1 of the main Final Report Volume. The wet-season surveys took place from February 20 to March 27, 1979, and most of the dry-season surveys from June 5 to 25. In the Beni Department, the surveys were organized between July 19 and August 4. In most cases, three days of interviews were taken at each site during each survey season. Each day of interviewing consisted of two eight-hour shifts, generally extending from 6:00 AM to 10:00 PM; at a few stations, full 24- hour interviews were conducted. In addition to the period of interview, a-hour manual classified vehicle counts were made at most stations from 10:00 PM to 6:00 ~M during the dry season. This part of the Appendix presents the forms used in the survey and, for each location, the survey dates and number of valid interviews obtained. This is followed by the summary tables compiled during the development of expansion factors. More details on the roadside interview surveys can be found in Working Papers 1, 2, 14, 14a and 15. -5-  ESTUDIO INTEGRAL DEL TRANSPORTE FORMULARIO DE CAMPO Y CODIFICACION PARA LAS ENCUESTAS DE ORIGEN Y DESTINO HOJA •• ...! I i ESTACION ................................. W FECHA ................ DIA ............. b HORA ........... A ................. (Ij ENCUESTADOR............... , ..................... .. CODIFICADO POR .................................... .. rOlUIULAIUO .11 1er N!l 0 0 V I A J E rfTMJ TIPO PASAJEROS CARGA TIPO DE CARGA TRANSPORTADA 0 CLASE VlAJE LETIU DE j::: DE DE n coso TlPO 1 TIPO 2 TIP 0 3 de close SERVI- N!! O! TOTAl. Alii!'" ~::. Z iVEHiCULO PLACA OR'IG EN DESTINO CAP_O iii CIO f/) ~,7u8l '10$. ~os. ARTICULO PESO ARTICULO PESO ARTICULO PESO 1..... '6~•. DE ~i;..._ CIudod £I Pueblo Ciudod 0 Pueblo 1-'1.,. ..... iI. l. ~:r::.lJ\I. • ".C. t,Oll. :",Co.1oitw. trllot. C_ dt lift aIdod l' Ctt!:a dt qui Cludad!, '~.Cl.'.r. • SrP••• ,. ~C-_N TN!>. .. ,p.,t. ... DE 10 I ....·""'11 t:-AuUJt~911 2~_ I It f Il! Cludod 0 Pueb 10 rr Cludod 0 PueblG r-r r- I:-Tur. 1,MII. 19 I to I 2~ I 2. 2e I I I I I I fT 29 ~ lit! I I I r-r I r 1 r-r B7 St ""- I I I .... ~Ol'.'l". -8.,.'•• • lit.,. 5 .. C.,.,..0., I, •••. itrOII. 6:"C'lm.C.t.f. 7~CQjlkCO.M ... Ctrea de ... Cludad I' c..co de qui CkIdod I' · Tro!>. SrPu•• ., .. II, ... .,..... r-r r- .... 41"Por'. DE r- 8, .....' ..... ~ ~'I ~tut~VI090. CcIIP:foh1Jf'Q I Ciudod 0 1'\1"'10 r-r Cludod 0 Pueblo I'T.... eA I S~ I 58 I I I I I I 11ft r r-r &., I I I It FT .,., '" I I I I I I I 11 .,. 110 1.MII. ~'.,.L,.. • f4,e" ~c..._ ... cereo de qua CUdod I' Carea d. qui CkIdodI' ,,...... II.t. ,.011. ~a.. C....,. • T-. 5,,,.~. 7!-ea.._A< .. It, r-r ,..r'~ r- -""'" Ir.-o··.. r 12 1 II r-r r-r r- 15 I itO 1 21 122 1 III 104 H rr r I I It r-T lIZ 111 114 rT ,.,. I I 1 lItO 41 111 44 . DE .... t"'Au'o~. :-c...~Mto ~f""'''' "' IIrC_. &:-C-.C.O ..... eludad 0 I'\Iebto Cerco dl que CIudodl' ° Cludod Pueblo C - III qui Cludad r Jr'T.r. "'... • I,.Me,. • 1't<III. ,,"Mil. t,att. 'l"'''.-' .. "C-_A< ... 4'S I CLASE ~MtitN4' '1 DE ~ YEHICUlO I .. e 'r-r r-r r- "',,:~. II' I I S. 57 !l! 5,.Comionu eon capacidod de 41 'l'l (210n.l 0 ma •. 6,.Comiones Cislerno 1 III St 4U 'L rT 1 rr ,., J I I TIPO OE SEItVICIO I' FT '7t! I I I 1'1 'P!I I I N 77 MOTIVO DE VIA"'E I I 12 .,..ee l,.Au!omoviles 1 Va90nelOl hOllo \I aslenlOi ~C(,.r.ionetas con eapacidad hasla 40 'l'l' (2 la,,' 7.,.Comiones con remolque £I .e"'""'olq.... l,,.Servlcia Milita, 3~ Servl\';!o ~blh:a l,..Tllrismo 0 r~ :s,.ofras livlanos como Jeep., FU''il0MIOS ,doble eoblna etc. e:-Moloeiclelos incluyel'do MotonelOI, 2,Servieio Ollclol 4:-S.rvieio Partlc...hlr 2,. Ne\lOciG. 0 Irobajo +'-Bus" eon capoci«lod de 12 asiento. 0 mos. 9:-Traelore. a9rleolo •• moquina,io dt eond,uccion,efe. '---- ROADSIDE INTERVIEW FORM W8,ur Smith ~ A~tl~ (WET SEASON) FIGURE 3A-1  ESTUDIO INTEGRAL DEL TRANSPORTE FORMULARIO DE CAMPO Y CODIFICACION PARA LAS ENCUESTAS DE ORIGEN Y DESTINO , HOJA ••. _LI "I ESTACION ................................. FECHA ................ DIA ............. O m • HORA ........... A ................. o=J 1 II ENCUESTADOR .......................... COOIFICAOO: I-IOJA ..................... EST.y SEN............................... ZONAS ...................... CARGA ....................... OTROS............._...... _........ FORMULARIO N! fA 1er.N9 0 0 V I A J E MOTII/O TlPO PASAJEROS CAPAC'''AD TlPO DE CARGA TRAN SPORTADA 0 CLAS!: LETRA PE VIII.IE OE ~ OE DE fen ceoo SERVI- O! TIPO 1 TIPO 2 T IPO 3 COIll!NTII>IIIO Z U! 1)(" 'TA:AtfS" CAlleA W (j) VE"IICULD PLACA ORIGEN DESTINO d4 close ,2,3,809) CIO A1,[,,· PORTh' T05. oo~. ARTICULO P:;:SO ARTICULO I PESO ARTICULO PESO l.-I..,'O,V090. DE ZpO:o~iC1!"o Ciudod 0 Pueblo C,udod 0 Pueblo ~~Tv ... \·MII. !=-OtI"CSLfw. .....ft.",.. • R.e. ,,.oil. ~:<o",iOM' Coreo de que PobloclcS", Cerco de QIIt Poblocldn I,,,,,,. IS!"COf'ftCh.f.,. • 5:",P",•• 1-eOftu~:Ofi!Ac 1)011. ... r-r r- 4lrPorf. DE r- e.. M'!t+n, I "'0'1'01 1.- Auta.Yota., f!..- :-t:Of!I'Iioft.t(l !t I- i t Ciudod 0 Pueblo ~ C,udod 0 Pueblo 1.. 1'"". r- tT' ~T I I I t~IIIIH. Z" 2$ 'r-n lat I I 3 m a7 I I" iI <4, I 1I 3-0"0' L.... 4-!'J•• ' • 'tn. '"Clf!. 5:"C... I11'1~ I:-N.I;J. ~.-C~.CiJ."" 1':"~OIll.COftAc Cereo de <lilt Pobloeldn Cerc<l de fI<JII P\)blocidfl • TrOll 3, ...... r-r r-r r- 4:-P....,. CE r 8':"'Motot"e: lI-ot... '''Av.",\toqo, ~-C(t"'tlO"'''O ! 47 I U Cludod 0 Pueblo Ciudod 0 Pueblo hTur. '" I I,,,,,. " I S " I S. !I, I I I 01 iLl 1117 I I" LTI 1t I I '/'II ft I I 7f iT7 L1 J3 lie: ..f)tl"OILh" 3. 0 .-Bu .... 5.-Ca ....0ftIN ".C. f, ..... I,()II. Cereo de que Pobloeldfl Cen:o de QIII PobIodcS... 6·C~.O""'. • ~:"P" •• .. 7: COfI'ICOftAc. T, ... r- "-PO*t. DE 8-Met·':,1 9 .. 0.t•• 2':'"CaMlo~. i 1:- A",fl!l;4ttO. ,% I fa C.,"od 0 Pueblo n-= Cludad c Putbl0 r-rrr r- LoT.f. I zo I r't! I 131 14 I I I 1$ iri 2 I I' 3A m 37 I I 111 rT 4t I I I 4~ t,1III1. 3~OtfO' "'':'"e"••• LN. • II... 1,()It S:-CC",ioMl 1'"09. 6-o,...c"tot Cerco de que PoblocicS... Cere" de que Pobloci';'" • S, ...... 7'c-.....Ac T...... ., r- m ~P.. t. 8-"-4' '4 ".0.... , 47 , 48 F=C rT~ [- I 55 I 811!!1 I 58 ,I. 1I I iTi $1 1I n 11 I I 74 n I I ?II 1'1 I I 14 11(1 SiLASE DE VEHlCUJ...Q 5cComl0l\n COl\ copoc.ldcd de 41 q q (2 tonJ " mas. UOTIVO OE VIAJE TIPO DE SERVICIO 1, Au!omOllil to J ¥ogone!o. ~ oS~~ 11 oslentos 6cCamionu Cisterna 2-Comionetos eon copocldod hosto 40 qq. [ 2 10",1 7~COInlol\es con remolque 0 wmiremolque l:-Turisml.' 0 reefeaei~fI 1, S.r.lclo Mililor 3~ Servici 0 I'Ilbllco 3-OI,os Ii.lonos como Jte"l, FU'Qol\etos, dob1e cobin" .Ie. e~Mo!oc.1cl~tas Incluye"do MotOl\e!al 2,. Ne\locios 0 lrobajo 2~Servlclo Oficiol 4"Servicio PorliculOt 4:-Buses con copaeldod do 12 oslentos 0 mfts. 9:-Troctores 09rlcolo', moquinorio de co",Irucclofl,etc. ROADSIDE INTERVIEW FORM W6,u, Smith anJ. AJociaf6J (DRY SEASON) FI GU RE 3A-2  C\..ASES DE V~HICULOS Descrlpeion 1- AUTOMOVILES Vehiculos de posajeros con coco- • VAGONETAS cidad hoste 11 osientos inciusive . .. II at Description 2:- CAMtONETAS s& • Veh[culos livianos de Coroa con copacided hosle 2 Ton.-{40;q.1 inclusive. 3:-0TROS LlVIANOS eRii ., • ! 1 DescrfpciJn Vehiculos livioncs de cergo y/o pasajeros I como Jee:;:s ,Furg:;r,elos. • • ill doble Cobino,con copocl::::::d haste 2 Ton. 40qq. u U osientos. 4:-BUSES 41l1G' ------ DescripciJn Veh(culos de posojeros can co- pacidad de 12 0 mas osien:os. DescripciJn 5:-CAMIONES ezxv Camiones con capocidod de 41'lq, {2 Ton..) 0 mos. . .' Descrlpclon 6_CAMIONES Vehrculos provistos de tor,cues • CISTERNA cisterna para el transporle: oe liquidos. DescripciJn 7_CAMIONES CON Vehlculos de cor go con remol- • ACOPLADO que 0 semirer.loIQue. cuyo nu- mero toto I de ejes (incluyenco camicn yremolque)sea 30 rr.os. ..' D eSCriptlon 8:-MOTOCICL ETAS Vehiculos motorizodos de cos ruedas( incluyendo moto netas.) OucripciJn 9:-0TROS Tractores agr:co los, ma quina ric de construccion. DEFINITION OF VEHICLE CLASSES WIbu,. Smith ant! Asociak4 FIGURE 3A-  ESTUDIO INTEGRAL DEL TRAN.5PORiE fORM'LARIO DE CAMPO PARA _. CONTEO .- .. _- _....... - CLAS1FICAC10N VEHICULAR DE .... --. ESTAClQN" ........,',.... ,.. ,....................... CAMiNO ............................................. FECHA .................................................. DIA .................................................__ .... CONTADOR ... ,.................................. HORA...................... A ..................... FORMULARIO 1'1' , a..ASE [IE 'X,NTIDO A-O£ SEt.TIOO B-OE, SfNTIDO c-oc VEHICULO I 2 3 4 ~ I> 7 8 S :(./ TC.... t..:.. " 3 " ~ G e 9 10 TOTAL 'IE~6 I I 7 8 9 10 T(,,~L I ! I AUTOMOVILES I I I Ii m w.ooNETAS r-!- I H- I (1\0$10 II O$lenlOS) CAM!ONETAS i J t , i eFt : I I I i ( ho'$tQ 40qq) , i I : , ,: I i : , I I I i I i , , I I i i t I I i I I OTROS , I : I I : ! : I I I I I..!ViANOS I I , , : i I I ' : , I , I : M;CRO Bi,;::;ES i , , i ! 12- cl os'e"lo> I : I I i t I ; I I I I ; : I I : I ! : : I I I I , , 9JSES M::'D:t.J~OS I I I , I : , I i , I (22-3~ C~'€nk' ) , I I I : I I I I : I , , , i i I +~-~- I BUSES G?~NJES I I I I I , , . i i I I I I i !:36 o ntC:ls os.en1~ I : i , I I . ! i I I i I I i I I , I I I CAMIONES : i I I , , I , : I I I I : i : I I I I : I ~~ I ! I I I I j . I I i I I I ! , ! , I PEQlIENOS I , : I I I I i I I I I (41 qq 119qq.1 I I i i I I I I I ! I I I I I I : , : I : I : : : I i , j I : I : I CAMIONES : I : i ~ I I I I : , I I I I 4+ =~: I I I MEDIANOS I I I I , ! ; I I I I i I I ( 120qq. 199 qq. ) I I , I . ! =+th:r! I I I . I I I I I I I ! I I I ~ CAMIONES I I I GRANOCS ( 200 qq, 0 mas I r-ji- I + 11 J -r+ -t I, r CAMIONE!: I i m CISTERNA I CA·,~!OI.ES COl, I I A:::Of\.[,!)O t- MOTOCltLET.'IS l- I I I nTn",c v ......... TOTAL l:±± I I 8±I FORM FOR MANUAL CLASSIFIED COUNTS 1M£", S..iIL••<'-~:!:.t.!-INTERSECTIONS FIGURE 3A-4  Table 3A-l DATES OF WET-SEASON INTERVIEWS (1979) INTERVIEW STATION MONDAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY FRIDAY SATURDAY SUNDAY LA PAZ All Stations 2/20 2/21 2/22 ORURO Caracollo 3/B 3/9 3/10 Machacamarca 3/12 3/13 3/14 Capachos 3/15 3/16 3/17 Patacamaya 3/21 3/22 COCHABAMBA Suticollo 3/B 3/9 3/10 Angostura 3/12 3/13 3/14 CUza 3/15 3/16 3/17 I 0'1 Punata 3/15 3/16 3/17 I Sacaba 3/20 3/21 3/22 Oui11acollo 3/20 3/21 3/22 Epizana 3/26 3/27 3/25 SANTA CRUZ I<m.12 3/8 3/9 3/10 Warnes # 3/12 3/13 3/14 Guabira I 3/16 3/17 3/18 Guab1r' II 3/21 3/22 3/23 Guabirci III 3/26 3/27 3/25 SUCRE Yota1a 3/B 3/9 3/10 Zapatera 3/12 3/13 3/14 Yanpares 3/19 3/20 3/21 Aeropuerto 3/14 3/15 E1 Tejar 3/16 POTOSI Cantumarca 3/B 3/9 3/10 San Roque 3/12 3/13 3/14 El Surco 3/15 3/16 3/17 Ipatt 3/21 3/22 TARIJA Santa Barbara 3/9 3/10 3/11 Panamericano 3/16 3/17 3/18 Puerto Ustares 3/13 3/14 Mojo 3/20 3/21 SOllF.CE: Work1n9 Paper 1.  Table 3A-2 DATES OF DRY-SEASON INTERVIEWS (1979) INTERVIEW FRIDAY SATURDAY SUNDAY STATION ~ TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY --- LA PAZ All Stations 6/5 6/6 6/7 ORURO Caraco110 6/13 fi/14 6/15 Cruce~ 6/18 6/19 6/20 Capacho8 6/21 6/22 6/23 Patacamaya 6/27 6/28 COCHABAMBA Sut.1collo 6/13 6/14 6/15 Angostura 6/13 6/14 6/15 Cl1za 6/18 6/19 6/17 Punata 6/18 6/19 6/17 Sacaba 6/20 6/21 6/22 Qu11 lacollo 6/14 6/15 6/16 Ep1zana 6/20 6/21 6/22 SANTA CRUZ Km.12 6/12 6/1j 6/14 Warnes ... I I Guab1r' I 6/18 6/19 6/20 6/21 6/15 6/16 Guab1ra II 6/25 6/22 6/23 Guab1ra III 6/26 6/27 SUCRE Yota1a 6/13 6/14 6/15 Zapatera 6/18 6/19 6/17 Santa Ana 6/21 6/22 6/23 Aeropuerto 6/25 6/26 POTOSI -cantumarca 6/13 6/14 6/15 San Roque 6/18 6/21 6/16 6/17 E1 SUrco 6/19 6/20 6/21 Ipad 6/25 6/26 TARIJA ---santa Barbara 6/13 6/15 6/16 CI:uoe Panamer1cano 6/18 6/19 6/23 Punte Ustares 6/20 6/21 6/22 Mojo 6/25 6/26 TRINIDU)) Ibare 7/19 7/20 1/21 7/22 Sachojere 7/19 7/20 7/21 7/22 RIBERALTA camIno Ivon 8/2 8/3 Y.P.F.B. 8/2 8/3 GUAYARAMERIN Las Arenas 8/3 8/4 SOURCE! Worki.nq Paper 1. i; ;, '" .. • It, . t t!r ~ " ,  Table 311.--3 NUlotBEll OF' VALID WET-RFASON INTERVIEWS NUMBER OF DRIVERS INTERVIEWED . INTERVIEW STATION , Mondal Tuesda~ Wednesda:ll Thursday Friday SaturdilY Sunday TOTAL LA PAZ Rio Seco 774 690 762 2226 Senkata 1169 1260 1264 3693 Chuquiagui110 227 206 224 657 V1acha 570 642 709 1921 Ma11asa 157 177 171 505 ORURO Caraco110 652 666 584 1902 Cruce Machacamarca 452 499 560 1500 Capachos 293 203 312 799 Patacamaya 79 69 149 COCHABAMBA Sutico11o 603 564 601 1769 Angostura 1359 1323 1667 4349 I Cl1za 464 399 574 1427 eM) Punata 654 529 556 1738 I Sacaba 769 712 751 2232 Qu111acollo 98 91 114 293 Epizana 301 372 332 1005 SANTA CRUZ f<rn.12 2039 1974 1594 5507 Warnes 2497 2321 2411 7229 Guab1ra-fto.Banegas 855 909 899 2663 Guabira-Chan~ 2732 2757 2679 9168 Guabir(-YapaCani 1622 1666 2030 5318 SUCRE Yota1a 299 309 285 891 Zapatera 73 92 71 226 Santa Ana 160 141 154 455 Aeropuerto 90 99 179 E1 Tejar 772 772 POTOSI Cantumarca 401 409 419 1229 San Roque 294 290 303 997 E1 Surco 490 483 471 1434 IpaU 96 121 217 TARIJA Santa Barbara 218 204 187 609 Cruce Panamericano 521 547 4:l6 1494 Puente Us tares 42 71 113 Mojo 51 99 149 Total 63.702 ---------- ..-- Sct,RCF: : worl',1.Il(l ('af-er 1.  ·l"I1D~e "11.-. NUMBER OR VALID DRY-SEASON INTERVIEWS NUMB£R OF DRlVERS INTERVlEWEO INTERVIEW ,a,TATION IiConday Tuesdax Wedneadl!. Tbursdal Friday Satur4al SWl4al ~ LA PAl Rio Seeo < 960 813 8U 2616 S.nltata 946 1026 981 2953 Chuqutaqui110 295 228 249 172 Viaeha 592 566 709 1867 Mall . .a 405 l63 4U 1181 ORURO Caracollo 741 602 681 2024 Cl'Uc. Macheea. . rea 519 540 675 1714 Capaehoa 366 285 2" 950 Pat.ae...,a 149 U7 346 COCHABAMBA Sutteoll0 482 394 355 12ll Anqoatura 1404 1056 1276 371i Cltaa UI 541 ..I 1894 PUllata 474 1477 415 2361 Saeaba 1357 725 779 2861 QuUlacollo lU 95 132 370 Bpta .... 296 110 327 un IAN!'A CJlUI ... 12 1886 1I3i 1569 SUI .eorll•• 2176 2163 3251 1"0 Qab1dl-l'laerto Bantl9a. 1110 11]] 954 3197 Guabtrl-cu.'" 274. 3108 2tll 1781 I Ouabtd-Yapacant • 1513 1537 1504 4124 T SUCRE Yotal. 21? 310 313 910 Zapatera 105 104 31 24' SAnta Ana lit 153 156 473 Aeropwarto 9l 137 210 POTOSI Cantuaarca 464 ]7] 3t7 1234 San Roque 468 4" 43' 4il 1833 E1 Surco 427 530 518 1475 Ipatf 88 101 189 TARIJA Santa Blrbara 239 280 294 813 Cruce Panamertcano 350 347 tol 1105 Puent. Uatare. 12 U. 27 237 Mojo 57 24 81 TRINIDAD fhaI'. 218 299 378 234 1149 Sachojere 121 112 187 111 531 RI!£RALTA C_lno IvlSn 279 253 532 y.p.r.!. 280 432 712 GUll. YARJIJ'IF!RIN Las Arenas 146 191 ]]7 Total 71.316 !ivUJ(CE: Working raper 1. ... .. ~"" , . " ~ • ." . .. .- !iii il; III  Table 3A-5 PERCENTAGES OF NIGHT TRAFFIC: WET SEASON COMPARED TO DRY SEASON WET SmsoN NTlDT(%) DRY SmsoN NT/bT(%) RATIO VAWE AOOPl'ED DT NT (a) DT NT (b) alb FOR RATIO alb LIGHT VEHICLES SN:! STATIOOS - Ia Paz - Oruro lbad 1,604 176 11.0 2,240 228 10.2 1.08 - Other Stations 884 127 14.4 1,429 215 15.0 0.96 0.90 N'l'S S'mTIONS 1,168 44 3.8 925 47 5.1 0.75 I I-' 0 1 ruSES SOC STATIOOS - Ia Paz - Oruro Road 2,138 353 16.5 2,551 952 37.3 0.45 - Other Stations 251 20 8.0 499 98 19.6 0.41 0.45 N'l'S S'mTIONS 141 6 4.3 177 19 10.7 0.40 'mJJCKS SN:! S'mTICNS - Ia Paz - Oruro Fbad 3,145 852 27.1 4,675 1,724 36.9 0.73 - Other Stations 2,266 726 32.0 3,801 987 26.0 1.23 0.90 N'l'S S'lATIONS 1,180 102 8.6 1,099 125 11.4 0.75 DT = Day Traffic. NT = Night Traffic. SOt..JRCE: W::>rking Paper 15  Table 3A-6 FACTORS FOR SATURDAY AND SUNDAY TRAFFIC WET smsoo SATURDAY 'l.tY.I2U., AVERAGE FAC'IORS FOR 'IOTAL AVER1!GE FAC'roRS POR 'lRAFFIC WEF.::I<J:lr\Y TRAFFIC SA'IURDAY SllNDAY 'lRAFFIC WEE£«)AY TRAFFIC SUNDAY (a) (b) fs (a/b) (a) (b) fd(a/b} Light Vehicles 2,949 2,648 1.11 1,467 996 1.47 BuseS 1,406 1,107 1.27 135 121 1.12 Trucks 3,758 4,506 0.83 708 1,038 0.68 M:>torcyc1es 1,622 1,652 0.98 665 458 1.45 I I-' I-' I DRY smroN TOTAL SA~Y AVERAGE FAC'IORS FOR TOTAL AVERAGE Fllt.:.:'lORS FOR TRAFFIC WEEl<DAY TRAFFIC SA'llJRDAY SUNDAY 'lRAFFIC WEERDAY TRAFFIC SUNDAY (a) (b) fs(a/b} (a) (b) fd(a/b} Light Vehicles 2,249 1,908 1.19 501 383 1.31 Buses 879 831 1.06 392 481 0.81 Trucks 2,596 2,641 0.98 842 1,156 0.73 Moto~les 246 144 1.71 66 34 1.94 Salrce: W::>rking Paper 15 4i ..... ., ~oti.~ "1:"" • • 4 • • • • • •  • :: • 9 % annual SUMMATION OF ADT ;00000 ON ROAD SYSTEM I /.::65 0/00 nnUOI / 90000 / / ,,,.. / ""'/ / / / / / / / 80:) J:;.., I I , 70000 I I I I , I I Years ... 1972 1973 197 .. 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 GROWTH TRENDS OF ROAD TRAFFIC Ultlbur 5:mith and A~uj FIGURE 3A-5  Table 3A-7 DERIVATION OF ANNUAL ADJUSTMENT FACTOR 1979/1977 REGRESSION (72-76) REGRESSION (73-76) REGRESSION (74-76) YEAR ADT Linear Semilog. Linear Semilog. Linear Semilog. 1972 63,377 60,118 60,564 1973 62,785 64,497 61,304 61,634 1974 65,271 68,685 67,144 65,404 65,508 1975 73,224 73,145 73,146 72,696 1976 80,382 77,897 77,896 79,527 79,684 80,515 80,673 I ..... PROJECTIONS '" I 1977 82,342 82,954 85,601 86,808 88,070 89,526 1978 88,341 94,567 99,350 1979 91,232 94,078. 97,750 103,021 103,181 110,252 Annual Growt.h Rate % 5.3 6.5 6.9 8.9 8.2 11.0 Factor 79/77 0.90 0.88 0.88 0.84 0.85 0.81 SOURCE: Working Paper 15  Table lA-8 EXPANSION FACTORS-WET SEASON LIGHT V!HlCLES BJSES TROIS ~ 1lEPI'. S'III.'l'ltII OM' Su.tvey F.24 hra. F. Week I' SUrvey F.'1t>tal 1'.24 hrs. F.Week "'Day F.'lbW 1'.24 hra. F.19lk F.~ ~ 1'.24 bra. t.Week F.~ F.'1t>W --- -- ~ LA PAZ 01 ,Rio Seoo 2 '1Ue. 1.059 1.111 0.", 0.,,, 0.'9" 1.0105 0.98" 0.", 0.,102 1.1" 0.882 0.", 0.'21 1.000 1.000 0.,,, e.", , Wed. 1.059 0.936 o.'}O 1.0105 1.219 0.,,, OS" 0 ..... 5 1.'" 1.028 0.'" 0.,81 1.000 0.", 0.", It 'Ihlr. 1.0;9 1.221 0.", o.IJ:n 1.0105 O.~O 0."" 1.'" 0.8910 0.",· 0.", 1.000 1.000 0.", 0.", 02 2 'I\lea. 1.059 1.280 0.", 0.lt51 , .0105 1.2", 0.", 0."'" 1.", 0.901 0.", 0."" 1.000 2.000 0.,,, 0.666 Selllrat. , Wed. 1.059 0.96" 0.", 1.0105 0.'" 1. ,,, 0.,,, 0.", 0.266 .. 'Ihlr. 1.059 1.039 0.,,, 0."9 0.'66 1.0105 0.9'" 1.021 0.", 0.,2" 0.'51 1.113 0.985 0.909 0.,,, 0.", 0.,65 1.000 1.000 0.800 1.000 0.", 0.", 0, 2 '1Ue. 1.055 0.865 0.,,, 0.,0It 1.000 1.182 0.", 0.,,, 1.,,6 0.9" 0.", 0."09 1.000 0.", 0.", C:buqul., , Wed. 1.055 1.216 0.'" 0."2'1 1.000 1.08, 0.", O.,*,O 1.,,!; 0.9111 0.,,, 1'1."'2 1.000 1.000 (I.", 0.", 0.,,, It '.\toar. 1.055 1.1810 0.,,, 0.1016 1.000 1.000 0.", 0.", 1",6 0.88" 0.", 0.,81 1.000 0.", 0" 2 '1Ue. 1.059 1.1006 0.,,, 0."96 1.0105 1.1108 0.,,, 0.'99 1.", 1.005 0.", 0.312 2.000 0.", n.oba , Ned. 1.059 0.,,, 0.", 0.,}6 1.0"5 1.056 0.,,, 0.,61 0.,,,, 1.1" 1.015 0.,,, 0.316 1.000 1.000 0.800 0.", 0.666 0.266 It 'Ihlr. 1.059 0.99' 0.,,, 0.'50 1.0It5 0.,81 0.", 1.113 0.807 0.", 0.299 1.000 1.000 0.", 0.,,, 05 2 '1Ue. 1.055 1.200 0.", 0.1022 1.000 1.000 0.", 0.", 1.,,6 1.000 0.,,, 0 ... ,8 1.000 1.000 0.", 0.,,, ...11 ••• , Ned. '.055 0.9'" 0.", 0.", 1.000 1.011 0.", 0.}58 1.,,6 0.891 0.", 0.", 1.000 0.'" 0.", It 'Ihlr. 1.055 1.125 0.", 0.'95 1.000 1.071 0.,,, 0.}58 1.,,6 0.891 0.,,, 0.", 1.000 0.,,, 0.,,, OIIUIO 11 It '.\toar. 1.068 1.121 0.", 0.,,, 0.1000 1.,0It 1.066 0.,,, 0 ...62 1."" 0.8"2 0.", 0.'91 1.000 0.f.61 0.,,, 0.222 ... I ... Cs..soollo , Fri. 1.068 1.01) 0.,60 1.:!)O" 0.980 0.", 0.1025 1.'9" 0.871 0.", 0.1t01 1.000 2.000 0.", O.F66 I 6 Sat. 1.068 1.09" 0.", 0.,89 1.,0" 0.990 0.", 0."'0 ',.,910 1.111 0.", 0.518 1.000 ".000 0.'" 1.,,2 12 1 M:in. 1.0It, 1.1", 0.,,, 0.'91 1.098 1.101 0.,,, 0.1002 1.068 1.092 0.", 0.,,, 0.,88 1.000 1.000 0.", 0.", Mscbao. .s ... 2 '1Uea. 1.CIt, 0.906 0.", 0.,,10 1.098 1.190 0.,,, 0.901 0.,,, 0."'5 1.01'8 0.910 0.'''5 1.000 1.000 0.", 0.'" , Wed. 1.0It, 1.2", 0.", 0."" 1,098 0.", 1.068 0.18.. 0.", 0.218 1.000 1.000 0.", 0.,,, " .. 'ItIur. 1.1119 1.222 0.,,, 0.1061 1.19" 0.926 0.", 0.,6!! 1.229 0.161 0.", 0.,,, 1.000 0.", Cs,.cbo. 5 Fri. 1.1"9 1.1"9 0.", 0.10" 1.191t 1.M? OS" 0.6!;2 1.229 , .192 0.,,, 0 ...81 1.000 1.000 5.000 0.", 0.,,, 1.665 6 Sat. 1.1", 0.6111 0.,,, 0.2101 1.1910 0.521 0.", 0.201 1.229 1.1.... 0."" 0.1068 1.000 0.250 0.", O.o8It ," ratsc ••• J. , Ned. .. 'Ihlr. 1.000 10000 0.900 0.500 1.286 0.500 0."50 0.56' 1.000 1.000 1.2" 1.000 0.500 0.500 0.615 0.500 1.000 1.000 0.810 1.026 0.500 0.500 0."" 0.513 1.000 1.000 0.500 0.500 0.500 0.500 CII1. 21 .. 'Ihlr. 1.1"9 1.2..6 0.", 0."'6 1.1,,, 0.981 0.", 0.'90 1.229 0.898 0.,,, 0.,61 1.180 '.000 0.'" 1.118 S"Uoollo , Fri. 6 ..t. 1.1"9 1.,.., 1.056 0.'" 0.191 0.,,, 0.,0, 0.1tO" 1.1910 1.19" 1.122 0.812 0.", 0.,,, 0 .....6 0.,116 1.229 1.229 0.980 0.", 0."01 0 .....0 1.180 1.180 1.000 0.,,, 0.'9' 1.015 0.", 0 ...29 0.", 0.168 22 1 M:in. 1.082 1.021 0.", 0.", 0.310 1.009 1."" 0.", 0.31 10 1.082 1.086 0.,,, 0.'910 1.088 0.1)2 0.", 0.265 llllnt"N 2 '1Ue. 1.082 1.059 0.,81 1.009 1.1"8 0.'" 0.,86 0.,,, 1.082 1.069 0.,,, 0.,88 1.088 1.661 0.", 0.601t , Ned. 1.082 1.112 0.", 0.1022 1.009 0.,,2 0.'" 1.082 0.128 O~'" 0.26" 1.088 1.200 0.", 0.",,, 2, ·!lh.s .. 'DM'. 1.00" 1.000 0.", 0.".. 1.025 1.019 0.,,, 0.,"8 1.0It0 0.905 0.", 0.,,, 1.021 1.011 0.,,, 0.,6.. 5 Fri. 1.00" 1.188 0.,,, 0.'91 0.,60 1.025 1.,,2 0.,,, 0.10107 1.01>0 1.055 0.", 0.,65 0.,0, 1.021 0.882 0.", 0.29' 6 Sat. 1.004 1.015 0.,,, 1.025 0.601 0.", 0.205 1.0100 0.815 0.'" 1.021 1.815 0.,,, 0.6". . .., :8  'l'llble 31\-8 (Chnt.) , NET SEI\SCIl UGHI' VEIUcr FS IJUSES 'I'RI.l::IS .If:m:R:lrCUli 1lEP1'. B'mTlQ/ p Surv. Surv. IW{ r. Total F •~'eek II" ___ Surv. F."""'. .] r.Week Surv. r. ~ r~ F.24 hrs. r.Week 'Day F.24 hrs. F.Week F.'lbtal F.24hrs. ~ I".24hrs. 'lbtal ellA. 2' , -n:.. 1.169 0.912 0.", 0.'55 1.1'" 1.057 0.", 0.'99 1.096 0.816 0.", 0.298 1.021 0.950 0.", 0.'2, ' ••• t. , Ned. 1.169 1.107 O.'l~ 0 ... ,0 1.1,4 '.1" 0.,,, 0 •• 20 1.0gE 1.109 0.", O."O~ 1.021 1.11ft 0.", 0.,80 6 'lhIrII. 1.169 1.81, 0.,,, 0.705 1.,,~ 0.759 0.", 0.286 1.(1)6 1.0-.6 0.", 0.,81 1.021 1.000 0.", 0."9 25 2 -n:.. 1.050 1.175 0.", 0.1010 1.006 0.690 0.'" 0.298 1.188 0.90' 0.", o.,~ 1.027 0.829 0.,,, 0.28, 8 ....... , Ned. 1.006 1.117 0.,,, 1.027 1.100 0.,,, 1.050 0.911 0.,." 0."9 0.,7" 1.188 0.99' 0.", 0.'92 0.581 , 'I.'hurs. 1.050 1.1" 0.,,, 0.'91 1.006 1.'''' 0.", 0.)82 '.188 0.899 0.", 0.", 1.027 1.000 0.'" 0.,,,, 26 2 -n:.. 1.00-. 1.8~6 0.", 0.611 1.025 0.902 0.", 0.'07 1.0100 0.868 0.", 0.'00 1.021 0.150 0.,,, 0.255 Q..1l1ac. , Ned. 1.00-. 1.000 0.", 0.,,10 1.025 1.19~ 0.", O.~ 1.0100 1.,20 0.", O.~" 10021 6.000 0.", 2.040 10 'lhIrII. 1.00It 0.828 0.", 0.276 1.025 1.156 0.", 0.'94 '.0lI0 0.1" 0.", 0.2!>It 1.021 0.150 0.,,, 0.255 21 ? Pun. 1.000 0.8:n 0.", 0.271 1.000 1.000 0.", 0.", 1.000 1.015 0.,,, O.,,? 1.000 1.250 0.", 0.",6 II:p1 .... 1 Il'ln. 1.000 1.}C' 0.", o.~" 1.000 1.211 0.", 0.1005 1.000 1.072 0.,,, O.,,? 1.000 1.000. 0.'" 0.", 2 -n:.. 1.000 0.8" 0.,,, 0.285 1.000 0.90' 0.", 0.,00 1.000 0.88? 0.", 0.295 1.000 ,.250 0.", 0.",6 a~l 1.017 1.058 0.", 0.)19 1.022 1.0" 0.", 0.}51 1.059 0.810 0.,,, 0.:506 1.0'9 0.821 0.,,, CIUZ " . . . 12 " 'DwnI. , Fri. 1.017 1.155 0.", 0.",10 1.022 1.016 0.,,, 0.,10, 1.059 0.9~ 0.", O.'}C 1.0" 1.260 0.", 0.2"" O."~ 6 Set:. 1.017 0.88~ 0.,,, 0"'1 1.022 0.960 0.,,, 0.,26 1.059 1.1026 0.", 0.502 1.0" 1.0,10 0.", O.,,? .... I ... ,2 1 M2'1. 1.088 1.120 0.", 0."06 1.011 0.891 0.", 0.299 1.188 0.927 0.", 0.,,, 1.071 0.8" 0.", 0.291 I Wanta. 2 -n:.. 1.088 1.128 0.,,, 0.1008 1.011 1.1"9 0.'" 0.,8? 1.188 0.91" 0.", 0.,61 1.071 1.2)1 0.", 0 ..... , , Ned. 1.088 1.008 0.", 0.56' 1.011 1.186 0.,,, 0.}99 1.188 0.95" 0.", 0."5 1.071 1.229 0.", 0."" 0.)18 1.000 0.550 0.8" 0.,,, 0.561 1.018 0.", " .•_ ..l r ' I 1 M2'1. 1.062 1.071 0.", 1.000 1.652 0.", 0.}C1 1.21" 1.000 0.,,, 0.~010 1.018 0.9'? 1.015 0.", 0.,,,,, 0.'21 , F:r1. 6 sat. 1.062 1.062 1.11? 0.", 0.9" 0.", 0.'9' 0.}2) 1.000 0.905 0.61, 0.", 0.,,, 0.201, 1.21" 1.21" 1.0ll! 0.", 0.~11 1.018 1.1", 0.,,, 0._ ,.. , Ned. 1.105 ,.129 0.", 0.",10 1.028 1.018 0.", 0."9 1.,,8 0.960 0.,,, 0.~21 1.069 0.962 0.", 0.,'2 0 .....1 r' t1 .. 'DwnI. 1.1'0, 1.025 0.,,, 0.,?6 1.028 0.98, 0.", o.,~ 1.,,8 0.906 0.", 0.'91 1.069 1.0" 0.,,, 0.}68 6 sat. 1.10' 1.021 0.", 0.", 1.028 1.150 0.", 0.", 1.,,8 1.10, 0.", 0."810 1.069 1.018 0.", 0."2 1 M2'1. 1.070 1.1,10 0.,,, 0."01, 1.0210 1.08, 0.", 0."9 1.198 0.890 0.,,, 0."5 1.061 1.1'" 0.,,, 0.~10 " a....1r' III 2 'tUM. 1.070 1.070 1.059 0.,,, 0.105 0.,,, 0.," 0.251 1.0210 1.02" 1.102 0.82' 0.", 0.", 0.'15 0.280 1.193 1.193 0.92? 1.?" 0.", 0.", 0.,69 0.691 1.06? 1.06? 1.111 0.76? 0.", 0.", 0 • .59" 0.272 ?~. 1.007 1.~ 0.,,, 0.~6 1.012 0.912 0.", 1.02, 0.917 0.,,, 0.", 1.000 1.200 0.'" CIIlIQUI SACA ", l'ot.l. " '!hun. 0.,,, 0.'07 1.02, 0.", 0.,,, 0.'99 0.", ,Fri. 6 Set. 1.007 1.007 1.,10, 0.", 0.8" 0.", 0.,8, 0.296 1.012 1.012 1.1108 1.192 0.,,, 0.58? 0."01 1.02, 0.875 1.209 0.,,, 0.298 0.1012 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.", 0.'" "2 1 M2'1. 1.0" 1.08, 0.,,, 0.,,2 1.000 1.200 0.", 0.,,, 0.,,, 0.", 1.0,8 0.9610 0.", 0.", 1.000 1.000 0.,,, 0.", Zapet.,. 2 'tUM. ,Ned. 1.0" 1.0" 1.08, 0.", 1.08, 0.", 0.,,2 0.,?2 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.", 0.,,, 1.0,8 1.0,8 0.828 '1.000 0.'" 0.", 0.286 0.,.., 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.'" 0.", O.,,~ 0.,,;, 0.,8, 1.000 1.250 0.,,, 0.1t16 1.0,8 0.", 0.288 1.000 0.'" 0.", '" at. ...... 1 M2'1. 2-n:.. 1.0" 1.121 0.", 1.226 0.,,, 0.1021 1.000 0.,,, 0.27? 1.0,8 0.8" 0.988 0.", 1.000 0.'" 0.", 'Ned. 1.0" 1.0:n 0.956 0.,,, 0.529 1,000 0.8" 1.250 0.", 0.Io1 t 1.0,8 1.000 0.,,, 0 • .5111 0.,. , 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.'" 0.",  Table lA-8 (CCI'It.' WFI' SFA9:JI IJ~ vmICI..J:S IIJSES 'I'ROCI(S ............-..rr~ DP'f. STATICII DAY F.24 hrw. F.Week ,..~. F. '1btal F.24 hn. F . _ F.~· F.'lbtal F.24 hno. F.Week F.:;:· ............ 1 1'.~4 t-.rs. r.l''eI!I< ".Surv. PO. '!1:JtAl - , - - --- ~ CBOQOI- flit , lied. 1.009 1.282 0.500 0.6106 1.0'9 1.100 0.500 0.571 1.0,6 0.968 0.500 0.501 1.000 0.500 0.500 SACA Aoropuort. ~ '!hum. 0.962 0.500 0.~85 1.0'9 1.222 0.500 0.6,~ 1.0~ 0.909 0.500 0.~70 1.000 1.000 0.500 0.500 1.009 ~5 1.000 1.0,8 0.929 1.000 0.9610 1.000 1.06, , fri. 1.0" 1.08, 1.000 1.118 1.056 1.000 1.056 1.000 1.06, n "ojar P01'OIII 51 ~ '!hum. 1.010, 1.06, 0.", 0.~9 1.098 1.000 0.", 0.~5 1.068 0.980 0.,,, 0.,108 1.000 0.", 0.", Caat ... 5 fri. 1.010, 1.086 0.", 0.'77 1.098 1.111 0.", 0.~06 1.068 0.92~ 0.", 0.'28 1.000 1.200 0.", 0.'99 6 Sat. 1.010, 1.056 0.", 0.,66 1.098 0.882 0.", 0.,22 1.068 0.980 0.", 0,'~8 1.000 0.667 0.", 0.222 52 1 M:In. 1.0'7 1.~58 0.", 0.50' 1.000 1.000 0.", 0.", 1.0105 0.882 0.", 0.,06 1.000 0.625 0.", 0.208 s.. Roquo 2 '1'128. 1.0'7 1.129 0.'" 0.,89 1.000 1.,08 0.", 0.~'5 1.0~5 0.92~ 0.", 0.,21 1.000 1.250 0.", 0.1016 , lied. 1.0'7 0.8" 0.", 0.287 1.000 0.9~~ 0.'" 0,'1~ 1.045 0.985 0.", 0,'~2 1.000 1.667 0.", 0.555 5' 10 '!hum. 1.050 1.0'7 0.", 0.~2 1.025 1.100 0.", 0.'75 1.018 0.961 0.", 0.,,, 0.,25 1.000 1.000 0.", 0.", n 8U'Oo 5 fri. 1.050 1.217 0.", 0.1025 1.025 1.222 0.", 0.1017 1.018 0.9,1 0.,15 1.000 1.200 0.", 0.'99 6 Sat. 1.050 0.8210 0.", 0.288 1.025 0.786 0.'" 0.268 1.018 1.021 0.", 0,'~6 1.000 2.000 0.", 0.666 5~ , Nod. 1.000 1.1000 0.500 0.700 1.000 1.111 0.500 0.555 1.000 1.0~2 0.500 0.521 1.000 0.500 0.500 ~ IpaU 10 '!hum. 1.000 0.955 0.500 0.~77 1.000 1.111 0.500 0.555 1.000 0.8~, 0.500 0.1021 1.000 1.000 0.500 0.500 .,....... ." I !'UIoJA 61 5 frt. 1.0109 1.'51 0.", 0.~71 1.0,6 1.,10, 0.", 0.'9~ 1.152 1.176 0.", 0.~51 1.02, 1.125 0.", 0.)8, , Sat. 1.0109 0.658 0.", 0.229 1.0,6 0.59' 0.", 0.20~ 1.152 0.667 0.", 0.256 1.02, 0.818 0.", 0.278 !lara 7 S\m. 1.0109 0.556 0.", 0.1910 1.0,6 1.1~' 0.", 0.'94 1.152 0.8" 0.", 0.)20 1.02' 0.818 0.", 0.278 62 5 P'r1. 1.065 1.009 0.", 0.'57 1.099 0.950 0.", 0.'~7 1.11, 0.9~' 0.", 0.,109 1.000 1.107 0.", 0.~8 P--. Cnoco 6 Sat. 1.065 1.0)2 0.", 0.,65 1.099 1.000 0.", 0.,,, 0.~5 1.11, 0.87' 0.", 0.)210 1.000 0.775 0.", 0.258 7 Sm. 1.065 0.919 0.", 0.,26 1.099 1.'57 0.~97 1.11, 1.806 D."' 0.669 1.000 0.886 0.", 0.295 6, Pto. Oeta. 2 '1'128. 1.1111 1.500 0.500 0.8,8 1.167 1.000 0.500 0.58~ 1.'77 1.259 0.500 0.866 1.000 0.500 0.500 , lied. 1.118 0.91, 0.500 0.510 1.167 0.500 0.584 1.'77 0.72, 0.500 0.497 1.000 1.000 0.500 0.500 rez 6~ 2 '1'128. 1.195 1.27' 0.500 0.760 1.137 1.,00 0.500 0.7'9 1.270 0.828 0.500 0.525 1.000 1.000 0.500 0.500 110.10 1.195 1.000 0.500 0.597 1.1'7 1.000 0.500 0.568 1.270 1.091 0.500 0.69' 1.000 0.500 0.500 3 lied. sana:. Working Paper 15. . ", "" ;, ,. 41 " ~ 111 '$" . II  Table lA-9 i:lCPANilta. FICI'OIIS - m SElISCN LIr'H!' vnuCLES_ IIJro'iS 'I'RJOS ~ oAr J)P! • S':I:l\1'IaI 1'.24 hnI. 1'._ ";;"7' F. Total 1'.24 hrs. 1 ' . _ F.;.:v· F.Total 1'.24 hrs. F._ l>UrV. ~ F. Total 1'.24 hnI. ~~ SUrv. F. Tnt... 1 LAPAZ 01 2 ~. 1.065 1.09'1 0.,,, 0."" 1.000 0.,,, 1.099 0.1,2 0.,,, 0.268 1.125 0.970 0.", 0.", 1.000 0.800 0.", 0.260 Ito aeco , Ned. 1.065 0.,89 1.099 1.,,6 0.", 0.482 1.125 0.95' 0.", 0.'57 1.000 1.,,, 0.'" 0 ..... ' It 'l'hura. 1.065 1.1'7 0.", o./tOII 1.099 1.085 0.", 0.'97 1.125 0.955 0.", 0.'58 1.000 2.000 0.'" 0.666 02 1.0'I'~ a.,,, 0.", 1.12~ 0.960 0.'" 0.", 0.", SeDltata 2~. , Ned. 1.065 1.117 0.", 0.,,,, 0''''1 1.099 1.099 0.995 0.", 0.:56~ 1.125 0.90& 0.,,, 0."9 0.,"0 1.000 1.000 1.000 2.000 0.", 0.666 " 'l'hura. 1.065 1.065 0.978 0.'" 1.062 0.", 0.'76 1.099 0.88' 0.,,, 0.,2, 1.125 1.0" 0.", 0.,8, 1.000 2.000 0.", 0.6f6 1.051 1.000 0.815 0.", 0.,,, 0.291 1.261 0.891 0.", 1.000 0.'" clau,~lal 2~. , Ned. 1.051 0.7" 0.,,, 1.571 0.,,, 0.z,6 0."'9 1.000 1.166 0.,88 1.261 1.026 0.", 0.'16 o."}0 1.000 0.500 0.'" 0.,,, 0.166 " 'lhUl":ll. 1.051 1.251 0.,,, 0."" 1.000 1.0'1'7 0.'" 0.'58 1.261 0.965 OS" 0."05 1.000 2.000 0.", 0.666 011 2~. 1.06, 1.20, 0.,,, 0."26 1.099 10000 0.,,, 0.,65 1.12~ 1.0}0 0.", 0.,86 1.000 0.8" 0.", 0.277 'fhe'lla , WI!d. 1.065 1.10'1' 0.,,, 0.,,2 1.099 1.051 0.", 0.,84 1.125 1.115 0.", 0."'7 1.000 0.", 0.", 1.065 0.91000.", 0.", 1.099 0.905 0.", 0.", 1.12~ 0.792 0.", 0.296 1.000 1.000 0.", 0.", " 'lhura. 0.,,, 0.386 0.", 0.,,, 0.,,, 0.,,, 0."'" 0."" 2~. 1.051 1.105 1.000 0.553 0.18 .. 1.261 0.986 1.000 1.500 05 lIalla. . , WI!d. 1.051 1.1" 0.,,, 0.,89 1.000 1.530 0.", 0.509 1.261 1.Of9 0 .....8 1.000 0.750 0.", 0.2"9 " 'l'hura. 1.051 1.006 0.", 0.,,2 1.000 1.'}0 0.", 0.50') 1.261 0.850 0.", 0.'" 1.000 10.500 0.", 1."98 Olno 11 , WI!d. 1.090 0.981 0.,,, 0.", 1.,,0 0.881 0.,,, 0."0'1' 1."27 0.856 0.", 0."06 1.000 0.'" 0.", ... Caracllllo 1.090 1.22, 0.", 0."'" 1.081 0.", 1.1t27 1.061 0.,,, 0.5011 1.000 I '" I 5 Fri. 6 Sat. 1.090 0.8,2 0.,,, 0.lO1 1.'90 1.)90 0.968 0.,,, 0.50' 0.""8 1."21 1.06" 0.,,, 0.505 1.000 0.500 1.000 0.'" 0.'" 0.166 0.", 12 11tln. 1.0118 1.069 0.", 0.'1' 1.217 10191 0.,,, 0."82 1.D?6 1.0'1'2 0.", 0.,,, 0.,8" 1.000 1.000 0.", 0.", lIaeloao. 21\as. 1.0118 1.20" 0.,,, 0."20 1.217 0.'" 1.0&1 0.7'1' 0.,,, 0.,1tO 0.,,.. 1.0'1'6 0.989 0.,,, 0." . 1.000 1.", ('.", 0.'" ,Ned. 1.0118 0.".. 0.", 0.,,2 1.217 1.076 0.8.... 0 • .)02 1.000 2.000 0.", 0.666 " ItDlun. 1.165 0.92') 0.,,, 0.,60 1."" 1.0119 0.,,, 0."" 1.255 0.789 0.'" 0.'29 1.000 1.1,000.,,, 0.""(; Ca,a.loo. 1.165 1.219 0.,,, 1."" 0.,., 0.'" 0.'55 1.255 1.101 0.", 0.460 1.000 1./0000.", 0.1of>6 51'\'1. 6 Sat.. 1.165 1.000 0.,,, 0."72 0.,81 1."" 0.811 0.,,, 0.,86 10255 1.,011 0.", 0.,,,, 1.000 0.,8, 0.", 0.19/0 ,.tao_. 11t , Ned. 1.059 1.0,., 0.,00 0.'''9 1.155 0.966 0.500 0.558 ,."" 1.114 1.226 0.500 0.~82 0.10", 0.500 0.500 It 'lhUl":ll. 1.059 1.161 0.500 0.619 1.155 0.966 0.500 0.558 0.792 0.500 0.500 0.500 CUA 21 , Ned. 1.165 1.086 0.", 0."21 ',~" 0.87, 0.,,, 0.1016 1.255 0.785 0.", 0.,28 1.2811 1.", 0.,,, 0.5)1 a"Ueollo " 'l'hura. 1.165 0.178 0.", 0.,01 1."" 1.0,8 0.'" 0."9" 1.255 1.09' 0.,,, 0."56 1.200 1.,,, 0.'" 0.5)1 0.,,, 5 !'ri. 1.165 1.10, 0.", 0.660 ,.10" 1.0'1'8 0.", 0.51, 1.255 1.068 0.", 0."'" 1.200 1.000 0.,,, 22 , Ned. 1.091 1.167 0.", 0.~2" 1.021 1.", 0.'" 0.772 0.,,, 0.2(2 1.0')2 0.822 0.'" 0.,,, 0.298 1.098 1.500 0.'" 0.,,, 0.5'" 0.,... ADIoatura o.,,~ 1.021 0."" 1.0')2 1.28, o.iof.r 1.098 1.050 0.,,, 0.", 0.,,, " 'lhUl":ll. 1.091 0.921 0.", 5 Fri. 1.091 1.1" 0.,,, 0."22 1.021 0."7 1.0')2 0.880 0.", 0."9 1.098 1.2}5 0."" 2, 0.51f. 1.056 1.201 0.", 0.422 1.011" 1.185 0.", 0."'1 1.02, 1.286 0.", o.,)! eU . . 1 M:n. 1.00II 1.00/0, 1.5" 0.,,, 1."20 0.,,, 0.~74 1.05(' 1.012 0.", 1.044 0.959 0.,,, 0.", 1.02, 1.,85 0.,,, 2 'I\Ies. 7 Sun. 1.00/0, 0.}59 0.,,, 0.120 1.056 0.f89 0.", 0.'55 0.242 1.0~~ 0.",,, 0.'.", 0.255 1.02, 0.621 0.,,, 0.'71 0.l'11  Tllble lA-' (Ca'lt.) IlIIIt' SFASCII LJ:QIT W1ICUS ~ TRlCI<S ~ 1Fl'. lI'I:7aIaf DIIX ~ F.'MIeek F.r;:;· F. 'lbtal F. 24hra. F.'MIeek • r~ Surv. F. 'lbtal F. 24hni. F.Week 1'. Surv. IlaV 'lbtal 1'.__ _ 1'.24 tn. F.'MIeek ~ SUXV. F. 'lbtal CIIA 2~ 1 M:ln. 1.188 1.228 0.", 0 ...8, ,.298 1.091 0.'" 0.,,, 0.'71 '.107 1 ...2_ 0.,,, 0."," 1."" 1.000 0.'" 0.760 Puata 2 ""-. 1.1t1t1 0.56' 0.", 0.22, '.298 0.,,, O.Z'" "'07 0.,,8 0.,,, 0.12, ,.,''' 0.", 0.'" 0.2Z1 7 11m. 1.188 1.009 0.", 0.," 1.2'18 1.7" 0.", 0.'1" '.10'1 1.808 0.,,, 0.666 1.", O.'Z~ 0.", 0.161 2, , lied. 0..,." 0.", 0.272 1.01, 0."" 0.'" 0.1'16 ,.209 0.'1" 0.", 0.,,, 0.)0' 1.0)0 O.t', 0.,,, 0.)22 a• ., .... ~ '!hun!. 1.05' 1.,.,., 0.'" 0.'8, 1.01, 1.6,0 0.,,, 0.,56 1.209 1.17'1 0.~'1' 1.0)0 1.500 0.,,, 0.", , rrt. 1.05' 1.05' 1.270 0.,,, 0."6 1.01, 1.tIOi!9 0.", 0.617 1.209 1.05' 0.", 0."2, 1.0)0 1.''11 0.,,, 0."'10 26 , 'DIUnI. 1.~ 0.719 0.", 0.2~ 1.056 0.9Z9 0.,,, 0.,Z6 , .011" 0.917 0.,,, 0.,,8 1.02, 0.8'1' 0.,,, O.l!9tI Quill•••llo , rrt. 1.~ 1.78, 0.,,, 0.'96 1.056 1.026 0.", 0.)60 1.0~' 1.0" 0.", 0.,,, 0.,,, 1.02, '.500 0.", 1.1", 6 Sat. 1.00' 1.079 0.", 0.)60 1.056 0.886 0.", 0.,,1 1.0"~ 0.11106 O.~ 1.02, 0.6)6 0.", 0.Z16 11'1_ 27 , lied. , 'DIUnI. 1.000 1.,~8 0.500 0.67' 1.000 0."" 0.,00 O.lt6z 1.000 ,.,6' 0.500 0.511Z 1.000 2.", 0.500 1.166 1.000 0.805 0.500 O.W 1.000 1.10" 0.500 O."Z '.000 0.87' 0.500 0.')8 1.000 0.'100 0.500 0.'50 , rrt. 1.000 1.,'8 0.500 0.6?' 1.000 0.9Z, 0.500 0 ...6Z 1.000 1.1*" 0.500 0.,82 1.000 2.", 0.500 1.166 .~A 2n-. 1.08, 1.178 0.", 0."2, 1.0119 1.1Z, 0.", 0.,,2 1.06, 0.812 0.", 0.287 1.~' 0.'" Cu. Ia "12 , lied. 1.08, 1.262 0.,,, 0.11" 1.~9 0.9'Il 0.", 0.", 0.", 0.", '.06, 0.850 0.", 0.,,, 0.)01 1.011, 1.'28 1.269 0.", 0.1161 O.,~ ~ 'DIUnI. 1.08, 0.1" 0.", 0.,,2 1.0~9 0.901 ,.06, 1.,86 0.'91 4.011, 1.,,8 0.", o.m ,2 1.098 1.079 0.", 0.,,, 1.0Z' 1.05'10.,,, 0.)60 0.95' 0.,,, O.,~ 1.079 1.066 0.'" I .... ... .an•• 1 M:ln. , rrt. 1.098 O.,M 1.OZ, 0."0 0.", O.,ZO '.Z09 1.Z09 0.986 0.,,, 1.'" 0.'" 0.,8, I , Sat. 1.098 1.062 0.", 0.909 0.,,, 0.,,2 1.0Z, 0.861 0.", 0.293 1.209 0.9 9 0.,,, 0.'91 0.)69 1.079 1.0'19 0 •.,.,8 0.'" 0.507 0.2'19 2 on... 1.069 1.026 0.,,, 0.)6, 1.000 0.959 0.", 0,"9 1.2)8 ' 0.901 0.", 0.)71 1.020 0.,,, o.~" " 1.29' a..II. I , WII4. 1.069 1.02, 0.", 0.)6' 1.000 O.91Z 0.", 0.)2' 1.2,11 0.902 0.", 0.,,, 0.''12 1.020 1.092 0.", 0.3'10 , 'DIUnI. 1.069 1.177 0.", 0.,,8 1.000 1.029 0.", 0.'''2 ,.z)8 1.09' 0.'" 1.020 '.3'7 0.", 0.'51 1 M:ln. 1.11~ 1.129 0.", 0."8 1.062 O.9'1Z 0.", 0.,. , 1.", 0.9'1' 0.", 0.')1 1.077 1.229 0.", 0.'199 a••II. " II H'ri. 6 Sat. 1.11~ 1.11' 0.912 0.", 1.~, 0.", 0.)60 0.,87 1.06Z 1.06Z 1.OIIz 0.8" 0.", 0.", 0.,68 o.Z" 1.", 1.,,, 0.96' 0.929 0.", 0.", 0.'" 0.~18 1.077 1.077 1.19~ 0.", I.", 0.", o.~ 0.758 2on... 1.078 1.086 0.,,, 0.389 1.~ 1.0119 0.", 0.,,, 0.)68 1.ZZ0 0.909 0.", 0.)69 1.0'1~ 1.,88 0.", o.~, a..... " III , WII4. 7 11m. 1.078 1.078 1.* 0.", 0.8" 0.", 0.", 0.)06 1.~ 1.05" 1.OZ9 O.~~ 0.,,, 0.)6' 0.296 1.Z20 1.220 0.96" 1.666 0.,,, 0.", 0.)91 0.6'16 1.07' 1.0'1' ,."6' 0.", 1.079 0.", 0.,2, 0.)8, 1.008 O.W O.96z 0.'" 0.,Z8 1.0Z6 0.990 0.", 0.,,1 1.000 0.'" ODQU- nCA ~1 '_'ala , WII4. , rrt. 1.008 1.200 0.,,, 1.099 0.,,, 0.)68 1.026 1.oZ6 1.087 0.,,, 0.}71 1.026 o.tIIltI 0.", 0.)0' 1.000 0.'150 1.,00 0.,,, 0.2" 0.," , Sat. 1.008 0.6~ 0.", 0.229 1.026 0.926 0.", 0.", ,.026 •• 118 0.", 0.)81 1.000 1.500 0.", 0."" '2 1lb>. 1.0)7 1.", 0.", 0.'9' 1.000 1.,,, 0.", O... ~, 1.0112 0.8" 0.,,, O.Z~ 1.000 0.500 0.", 0.166 h,.hra 2on... 1.0)7 1.,. , 0.,,, 0.,,, 0.9" 0.'" 0.,2, 1.000 0.66'1 0.", 0.Z22 1.01oZ 0.9"6 0.'" 0.)28 1.000 0.'" 0.", 781m. 1.0)7 1.000 8.000 0.'" z.66~ 1.OItZ Z.8oo 0.", 0.911 1.000 0.", 0.", " .. . .. ..  • Table 3A-9 (COOt.) IIlI SEI\SCtl LlWl' YWICUlj BI~FS moe<; ~ IIPT. STATIW Do\Y iiunr. 1". 24hrs. !.:::!::::!'- F.;V· F. TotAl F. 24 hrs. F. Week F.;V· ~ F. 24hrs. ~ F.~· 1'. "'""', F. 24hrs. r.WeeIc ~ F. '1t>tAl 4 '!hun. 1.0" 1.056 0.", 0.}6' 1.000 1.", 0.", 0.1010, 1.042 0.888 0.", 0.)08 1.000 0.,,, CBIlQVI- IACA " St •• Asa 5 l"rt. 1.0" 1.042 0.,,, 0.'59 1.000 1.000 0.'" 0.,,, 1.0"2 1.026 0.", 0.'56 1.000 1.000 0.", 0.'" 0.,,, 6 Sat. 1.0" 1.01' 0.'" 0.'50 1.000 0.800 0.", 0.266 1.oIt2 1.068 0.", 0.,'0 1.000 0.", 0.'" 0.111 .... 1 1t:In• 1.010 1.'00 O.~ 0.701 1.081 1.200 O.~ 0.652 1.0100 1.225 0.500 0.6)1 1.000 0.661 o.~ 0.", ....opu.rt. 2 "..,... 1.010 0.889 O.~ 0.,1tS 1.081 0.92, 0.500 0.501 1.040 0.80, 0.500 0."" 1.000 0.500 0.500 '1 1.0}' 0.", 0.", 1.01, 0.,,,, 0.", 0.'" 0.,,, POfOII C ••t .... , Ned. , '!hun. 1.028 0.,,", 1.205 0.811 0.218 0.1,10 0.", 0.266 1.000 0.,,, 0.", , l"rt. 1.000 1.000 1.060 0.", 1.1" 0.", 0.352 OS" 1.000 1.000 1.2,4 0.98, 0.'" 0.,,, O.W 1.000 1.000 ,.20, 1.056 0.,,, 0."00 0.", 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.'" 0.", S2 1 1t:In. 1.000 1.081 0.250 0.210 1.000 0.891 0.250 0.222 1.000 0.980 0.'50 0.210, 1,000 0.800 0.250 0.200 Saa 10". . , '!hun. 1.012 0.950 0.250 0.235 1.001 0.851 0.250 0.215 1.019 1.088 0.250 0.271 1.000 ".000 0.2,0 1.000 6 Fri. 1.012 1.0)0 0.250 0.260 1.001 1.}6" 0.250 0.,.., 1.019 0.995 0.250 0.25' 1.000 0.44" 0.250 0.111 1 SUn. 1.000 0.961 0.250 O.nO 1.000 1.1)1 0.250 0."'2 1.000 0.880 0.2,0 0.220 1.000 1.000 0.250 0.250 0.,21 1.020 0.", 0.'" 0.,,, " 10 1 .... 0 2 "..,... 1.055 1.020 0.,,, 0.,,8 1.056 0.91, 0.9" 0.", 0.,,, 0.,21 1.020 1.1" 0.891 0.,,, 0.,8' O.,oIt 1.800 1.000 o.~ 0.'" 0.1~( I .... , Wed. , '!hun. 1.0" 1.05' 0.9'2 0.", 1.182 0.", 0.')0 0.'" 1.056 1.056 1.161 0.", 0."'0 1.020 0.881 0.,,, 0.2,., 1.000 1.000 0.", 0.", '" I 5' 1 M:ln. 1.0" 1.000 O.~ 0.,,8 1.000 1.091 O.~ 0.5"5 ,.oIt2 1.111 0.500 0.610 1.000 1.200 O.~ 0.600 l,.tt 2 "..,... 1.0" 1.,1tS o.~ 0.595 1.000 1.000 0.500 0.500 1.oIt2 0.828 O.~ 0."" 1.000 '.~ O.~ 0.150 'AlI"" 1.019 0.,8" ,.16') 0.98, 0.,,, 0.,82 1.026 0.", 1.252 ..... 61 St. 1111'- , lied. 5l"rt • 6 Sat. 1.0,", 1.05' 1.05' 1.205 0.", 0.912 0.91' 0.'" 0.", 0.'22 0.,,,, 0.,20 1.019 1.019 1.069 0.9'9 0.195 0.'" 0.,,, 0.,,, 0.", 0.285 1.169 1.169 0.921 1.026 0.,,, 0.", 0.,,., 0.'58 1.026 1.026 '.661 1.000 0.1tIto 0.", 0.,,, 0.,10, 0.150 62 11t:1n. 1.072 1.1" 0.,,, 0."25 1.220 0.905 0.'" 0.}61 1.126 0.92" 0.,,, 0.,,, 1.000 1.08, 0.'" 0.}60 c.ue. 2"..,... 1.072 1.001 0.", 1.220 1.111 0.", 0."" 1.126 1.022 0.", 0.,8, 1.000 1.500 0.'" 0.10,.. P..... 6Sat. 1.012 0.820 0.", 0."9 0.292 1.220 0.950 0.", 0.,85 1.126 0.915 0.,,, 0.", '.000 0.1166 0.,,, 0.288 0.0 0.0 0.0 ... 6, Pte. V.ta- ,lied. ' DIun. ,l"rt. 1.000 1.07' 1.000 1.07" 0.0 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.0 1.000 0.956 1.000 0.956 0.0 1.000 1.200 1.000 0.0 1.200 0.0 6It 1M:ln. 1.000 1.000 0.661 0.661 1.000 0.'50 0.61i1 0.500 1.000 1.0,8 0.66, 0.692 1.000 1.000 O.f67 0.6'1 "30 2"..,... 1.000 1.161 0.661 0.118 1.000 2.250 0.661 1.500 1.000 0.8"" 0.661 0.562 1.000 0.661 0.661 SCXl!CE. ~ p,.,.... 15.  APPENDIX 38 COLLECTION OF OTHER TRANSPORT DATA  Appendix 3B COLLECTION OF OTHER TRANSPORT DATA CONTENTS Railroad Transport 20 Highway Inventory 21 Road Transport Surveys 25 Air Passenger and Cargo Surveys 25 Waterway Transport 26 Pipeline Transport 27 TABLES Number Page 3B-1 Passenger By Section on the Main Andean 22 System for 1977 and 1978 3B-2 Rail Freight Flows by Commodity - 1977 23 3B-3 SNC Road Inventory: Percentage of Checked 24 Roads by District FIGURES Follows Number Page 3B-1 Example of SNC Road Inventory Form 23 3B-2 Roads for Which SNC Inventory was Checked 23 3B-3 Windshield Survey Form 24 -19-  Appendix 3B COLLECTION OF OTHER TRANSPORT DATA To complement the roadside origin-destination surveys and provide similar information for all other modes of transporta- tion, extensive data collection efforts were undertaken of rail- road, air, pipeline, river and road transport facilities. These efforts included a physical inventory, traffic characteristics, usage volumes and trends, tariffs, operating and maintenance costs, and capital expenditure. Railroad Transport All available statistical data and reports were compiled and analyzed. In addition, field reconnaissance was undertaken of the railroad network, rolling stock and workshops. Numerous meetings were held with staff of the National Railroad Company (Empresa Nacional de Ferrocarriles - ENFE), to facilitate data collection and to keep abreast of their current work program and planning efforts. Considerable time was spent in obtaining, analyzing and summarizing information in the following areas: e Inventory of the Rail Network • Operating Procedures • Current Traffic Volumes e Current Rolling Stock e Rehabilitation Program e Other Rail Projects e Design Standards and Construction Techniques • Organization and Management • Finances and Operating Costs. Principal findings on the railroad system inVentories are highlighted in Working Paper 27. In addition to the general data collection regarding rail transport, a computer analysis was made of several data tapes received from ENFE. Also, exten- sive research was perfomed to estimate the economic costs of this mode; this is described in Working Paper 32. Analysis of Computer Tapes - In 1977, ENFE began to store their movement records on computer tapes, which proved to be an ideal data source for this Study. Such tapes were available for 1977 freight and 1978 passenger movements on the Andean system, as well as for freight movements on the Oriental system during the first half of 1978. From this source, and from addi- tional statistics, it was possible to construct complete origin/ destination matrices for passenger and freight transport, in the latter case by type of commodity. Rail tariff matrices were also derived from this source, as detailed in Working Paper 17. -20-  The rail passenger matrices indicated a total of 1.34 mil- lion passengers in 1977 as compared to 1.29 million in the year- ly railroad statistics prepared by ENFE. The derived freight matrix totalled 1,208,130 tons in 1977, corresponding very I closely to the 1,211,000 tons figure published by ENFE (see Tables 3B-1 and 3B-2). Highway Inventory In 1978, the National Highway Service (Servicio Nacional de Caminos - SNC) had prepared a road inventory of the districts of La Paz, Cochabamba and Santa Cruz. During the course of the Study SNC extended this ~nventory to the rest of the country. The complete inventory was available in mid-1980. An example of the SNC road inventory form is shown in Figure 3B-1. To check and complement this work, two other surveys were included in this Study's work program. The first was a check on the accuracy of the existing SNC inventory. The second sur- vey was a windshield survey of the roads included in the trans- port model road network, to collect data for transport modelling purposes. The latter survey was mostly conducted by professional Study personnel, coordinating field reconnaissance trips with this collection of basic highway data. Check of SNC Inventory - The Terms of Reference of the Na- tional Transport Study required that the road inventory data col- lected by SNC be verified on a sample basis. As SNC's survey teams were completing their work in the four southern districts, they were visited by members of the Study team to observe their modus operandi. Moreover, available inventory data were checked in the field, not only in the southern districts, but also in those of La Paz, Cochabamba and Santa Cruz which had been sur- veyed in 1978 (see Figure 3B-2). Table 3B-~ indicates that about 6 percent of the roads covered by SNC were checked by the Study. The results of the inventory check were described in Work- ing Paper 5. In general, it was concluded that the data compiled by SNC could be regarded as reliable. Windshield Survey - This survey was primarily conducted to provide travel time data needed to oode the pzesent highway network. It was also useful in providing supplemental data for the trans- port model. The form used is presented as Figure 3B-3. Categories for vertical alignment, horizontal alignment and topography match those used by SNC in their inventory. -21-  Table 3B-l PASSENGERS BY SECTION ON THE MAIN ANDEAN SYSTEM FOR 1977 AND 1978 FERROBUS PASSENGERS RATIO 1977/1978 TRAIN PASSENGERS RATIO 1977~1978 SECTION 1977 1978 Actual Achieved 1977 1978 Actual Ac ieved 11 La Paz - El Alto 81,108 81,327 1.00 1.00 112,250 77,757 1.44 1.50 12 El Alto - Viacha 81,108 81,030 1.00 1. 00 116,317 78,604 1.48 1.50 13 Viacha - Oruro 81,108 81,031 1. 00 1. 00 100,814 63,776 1.58 1.48 14 Oruro - Machacamarca 17,375 20,267 0.86 0.87 278,228 209,148 1.33 1.12 15 Machacamarca - Rio Mulato 17,375 20,456 0.85 0.87 241,175 226,629 1.06 1.05 I IV 16 Rio Mulato - Uyuni 250,177 234,966 1.06 1.11 IV 1 17 Uyuni - Atocha 209,413 190,986 1.10 1.14 18 Atocha - Villaz6n 296,859 178,098 1.67 1.66 21 Viacha - Charana 50,937 32,014 1.59 1.59 31 Uyuni - Ollagfte 23,193 10,203 2.27 2.00 41 Oruro - Cochabamba 145,054 133,293 1. 09 1. 09 171,783 178,932 0.96 0.96 42 Cochabamba - Aiquile 36,379 23,099 1. 57 1. 57 51 Rio Mulato - Potosi 16,005 17,402 0.92 0.92 60,514 31,309 1.93 1. 93 52 Potosi - Sucre 13,406 13,384 1. 00 1. 00 45,041 34,032 1.32 1.32 SOURCES: Estadistica Ferroviaria 1977 (Railroad Statistics 1977), prepared by ENFE, La Paz; and Anuario Estadistico Ferroviario 1978 (Yearly Railroad Statistics 1978) prepared by ENFE, La Paz.  Table 3B-2 RAIL FREIGHT FLOWS BY COMMODITY - 1977 ANDEAN VIACHA- ORIENTAL COMMODITY (1) SYSTEM GUAQUI SYSTEM TOTAL 1 1,367 0 11,106 12,473 2 93 0 0 93 3 13,065 0 12,138 25,203 4 37 0 231 268 5 373 0 680 1,053 6 113,948 5 24,097 138,050 7 95 0 0 95 8 143 0 2 145 9 3,470 0 6,098 9,568 10 3,716 0 157 3,873 11 0 0 6 6 12 4,470 0 16,802 21,272 16 18,426 0 5,539 23,965 17 44,365 0 12,739 57,104 18 5,561 0 0 5,561 19 152,679 7,952 1,815 162,446 20 71,801 0 4,382 76,183 21 13,923 0 30,775 44,698 22 53,637 8,082 6,361 68,080 23 194 0 6,087 6,281 24 9,752 5,718 5,435 20,905 25 2,156 74 1,367 3,597 26 21,132 0 61,955 83,087 27 9,912 0 2,848 12,760 28 3,952 0 224 4,176 29 25,578 9,963 15,911 51,452 30 335 0 1,195 1,530 31 16,387 0 1,653 18,040 32 11,766 0 7,458 19,224 33 48,096 0 50,990 99,086 34 15,279 0 17,228 32,507 35 35,528 9,981 35,964 81,473 36 8,181 0 4,724 12,905 37 18,147 1,004 24,288 43,439 38 25,976 2,235 19,930 48,141 39 7,949 5,099 6,343 19,391 Totals 761,489 50,113 396,528 1,208,130 ( 1) For definition of commodity group, see Appendix 3E. SOURCE: Derived by Wilbur Smith and Associates from data provided by ENFE. -23-  Table 3B-3 SNC ROAD INVENTORY: PERCENTAGE OF CHECKED ROADS BY DISTRICT TOTAL LENGTH OF ROAD INVENTORIED LENGTH CHECKED PERCENTAGE OF DISTRICT BY SNC (KM) BY NTS (KM) ROAD CHECKED COMMENTS 1 La Paz 5,723 242.0 4.2 % 2 Chuquisaca 3,400 * 108.8 3.2 % * Estimated Length 4 Cochabamba 2,914 403.9 13.9 % I N 5 Santa Cruz 6,238 486.1 7.8 % "'I" 6 Oruro 3,900 * 232.4 6.0 % * Estimated Length 7 Potosi 4,800 * 170.4 3.6 % * Estimated Length Total 26,975 1,643.6 6.1 % SOURCE: Working Paper 5.  , t Road Transport Surveys To supplement the road interview surveys, extensive inves- tigations were undertaken and discussions held with trucking and intercity bus operators and with the agencies responsible for the regulation of road transport services. The field reconnais- sance and data collection efforts included the following: • Information on Truck Operations • The User's Viewpoint • Organization and Regulation of Truck Transport • Information on Bus Companies • Non-r~gular.Passenger Transport (taxiS, trucks) • Procedures for Vehicle Registration • Function of Transit Check Points • Vehicle Standards • Vehicle Import Controls. Air Passenger and Cargo Surveys Data compilation efforts in the air transport sector were far ranging as indicated by the following listing: • Airfield Infrastructure Location of all airfields Nature and conditions of - runways - taxi areas Control tower facilities Landing aid equipment (type and condition) Airfield operating costs (including maintenance) Projects for improvement or redevelopment Seasonal restriction in use Tariffs charged Air navigation plan by UNDP/ICAO. • Air Services (Lloyd A~reo Boliviano, Transportes A~reos Militares, independent cargo airlines, taxi services and private planes) Current operating fleet (number, age and capacity) Intensity of use of aircraft Operating schedules (passenger and freight) Tariffs Costs of operation Passenger trends Origin/destination movements Plans for development of routes Cargo carried. -25-  ItJIYtOO e.",........ ••t:tONAL 0( CA"UlOI flltUIfI . ., . . INVENTARIO VIAL NACIONAL . - .. : .................. INVENTARIO DE CARRETERAS III III ~UT.; .'OP~ ..(~~ Int:. 251 au T A : CAI;.."..U.O.,Q:jnllodr1-l'\Ichu~1 I. .AU A onos • " .....1 : . !!J;\I~, ..O'\'tu,bre.. 22. ,d~ ..1'" ... T.... O: /:1;,., .~t •. OOOl..,l-Cl' •. Rt:.,.109-1 Puehunl Fun II: 01 LOS onos ... !.1I1'OO:t0 .J!lTJGIIAt. D~ ~POR'rI . .... .. • I .; •:;; COtilOlCIO .. I ! =5 . . ... Ii I 81 . 0 C i .. • ., I · C coo,.o ..... II t; • ! ;I .. ., II s ! ~ . ." II ~C ! I..... c9 0" ! c c 0: !5 c ;; ~~ 0 2 i:. ~ . !~ ... Ii .. j ..... • r ..... .. !: 5 .• .... .. <la i!ii .1 ,I C ~ u · •. ,.... ... c c ;: II ~ I I .. - " !. L U A 8 0 '" " OIL T_AIICI • I r= i .. ... 2'" .... I ...... . .... C ~& 5• I I iI" iii iii I ~= ..... = i: .... ., . ~:i z .... .... •• .. . Co .. e ;:; .. .. 8!~ I: ! . .. t ::1 .;!; i lI" .... !3 il t.= ......• • ~f .... C N :; e · .,.... ......- 0 :. I ... I ,.., . " " c., ,. . .. il!l! o. ,. . 0 iI i ~ _8 S i l!I ;:; o. ;:: ~! ~§ ;:; ,, "'0 II !il!: e • 11/ I '''I (II"I (11"1 ,II", /5;; 1"41 - ''''1 till.) (.1') 0,;. -4tI!Ot _ t 0 ",..."". OOOt- - - - - - - - - -- - -- - - - - - - - - - 3.~O t !IallIIa ~lo 1.090 1.090 - - Ine - -- - -- - _CI - PIN - - - - - !lIN> ,.~O P tJIIIB A -' 2 Rfo 00rac01lo • • "''''' ...... ",.., ,. "", 0001-1 0.160 1.250 \lIP 6. !!:Ii ---.1.1!1lL. IIIP 3 355 U.235 \lIP - B II II - - - - '.00 4.SO 4.SO - - II) TIE '!'IE INS "'" iR - INS - - - H -II - - - IB: PUI R:!t PUI - - - - , • - 1 - IIINl 2 2 em.. 1 lOP 100 95 IVO ).700 3.710 3.730 P alL p 0 alL II II. II. - - - - - - - * ).750 0 ctIL 11.' . .!I 11115 U.C20 \lIP II 5.00 TIl! ms IR - -H 100 lIN) t; Ib1ri.oI 2.440 14._ 'Ia) It - 4.00 - II) I...., - - - - 1 - 3 100 lIN) 3.790 0 alL II. lD 7 lb. 20.535 R • -"'.... (_..., ...~. . DDII lUna """"" • Olfnnt 9 .•50 2245 1.060 24 310 26.555 27.615 'Ia) 'Ia) 'Ia) 'ItO B II B II - - - - 4.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 - - - - II) II) II) II) ! INS H'- INS H- H-S "'" - - INS - -Is H - B - - - - R:R R:R 1DI R:R a<o (R) a<o - (H) r--!- , 1 2 to - to 5 *> 2 *> 1 U 7 3 2 em.. 3 2 1 10 10 lIN) lIN) 3.710 3.1100 3.1100 3.820 0 0 0 OW - l1li' II II. II II - - - ....... - - - Jf:J:uvo ,5.140 33.355 'Ia) II 3.00 lr) let ~ 1 to 4 4 1 lIN) 3.840 Pilii' II. U CaMrio 5.500 38.855 'Ia) R - 3.00 - lr) - - - '-"= 1P!lf - - - 2 100 IVO 3.850 Pilii' II. 11 il:.llmln1 1.365 40.220 'Ia) R - '.00 - II:! ...lI!S H- H - B - R:!t ~ - - - - oblL lOP IVO 3.1'!O II u cr 1ft: 109-1 (J'uctun11 6.965 41.1115 'ltD B - .l,OO - II) .... - - - ~ Pm - 1 1 lOP lIN) 3.900 P alL II. . EXAMPLE OF SNe ROAD INVENTORY FORM 'iAAb;u,. Smith ani ...A~ociale~ FIGURE 38-1 ~  It 'I ,.... , I' \ A R· GE X T 1·::\ A ROADS FOR WHICH SNC INVENTORY Wtf,UI' Smith ..,J .A~4 WAS CHECKED FIGURE 38-2  ESTUDIO INTEGRAL DEL TRAN$PORTE INVENTARIO PARABRISAS DE CARRETERAS fltUTA ..........................................•................................... DIA ..................................... FECHA ............. ... ,,~ ........... ,.ORMULARIO Ni .. A Comienzo Cotoctetisticos de 10 corretero Topo- Ttolico Observationes Lugar Disl. Hora Super!. Ancho Alineom VerI. Alineam. grafia Veh Bus. Com Hor Liv. ! - \ ALINEAMIENTO AliNEAMIENTO j SUPERFICIE VERTICAL HORIZONTAL TOPOGRAFIA TRAFICO l:-Povimenlo l~Plono(O% - 3%) 1~Reelo-nin9~n efeelo l:-Plono ISenlido conlrorio) 2:-Onc1ulodol3"A.- 7%) sobre 10 velocidod. , Yth.LiY.::VthlcuIoS de hasto 2:-Ripio 2:-Recto con curvos-olgun 2:-0ndulodo 40 qq u 11 oSlentos. l:-MtdioI7% - 9%1 eleclo lobre 10 velocidod. 3""TII"0 ~Sinuoso-controlo 10 3:-MonloliOlo Bus.:8U'&u(mcis de!1 csieniOS ..,.8,uleo ( 9·A. + 1 vtlOcidad. Cc:I'I\.: ComioneslmOs de 40qq -- WINDSHIELD SURVEY FORM 1Mlbur SmitA rmJ .A~kj FIGURE 38 -3  • Organization and Control of Air Transport Organizational structure Policy making department Licensing of aircraft, pilots and airfields. A particular effort was made to obtain passenger and freight origin/destination data, to be used in the development of an air transport model. Detailed data were obtained from the two prin- cipal domestic airlines, Lloyd A~reo Boliviano (LAB) and Trans- portes A~reos Militares (TAM). Moreover, the Directorate of Air Transport and Aerial Work of the Ministry of Transport supplied similar data for 20 of the non-regular air transport companies, providing cargo services between principal cities and remote re- gions of the country. The data were coded, punched on cards and edited by computer to remove errors. Tabulations were subsequent- ly produced, and passenger and freight matrices built. Survey of Non-regular Airlines - In addition to the above, a special survey was organized to obtain data on transport costs and operating characteristics of non-regular airlines. Informa- tion was obtained on the following major items: (a) Current operating fleet, (b) Ground operations, (c) Transport patterns, Cd) Expenditures, and (e) Tariffs. Each airline was visited twice, first to deliver the question- naire and to explain the purpose of the survey, and then to pick up the completed questionnaire and to discuss the answers. The seven larger companies, representing well over half of all air- planes in this category, proved to be very cooperative. Many of the smaller companies, mostly owning a single airplane each, had difficulty in complying with the survey's requests. Waterway Transport Waterway transport is of great importance to Bolivia's re- mote areas in the north and northeast. Extensive data collection efforts, including field reconnaissance and discussions with boat operators and regulatory agencies were carried out. They included: • Inventory of Water Transport Network e Inventory of Ports • Analysis of Operating Procedures • Inventory of Vessels • Role of Bolivian Navy • Organization and Labor Aspects. -26-  '. River Survey - A field reconnaissance of ~river trans- port conditions and the operations of the ports of the Ichilo- '. Mamor~ system and a boat survey took place in March 1979. On ." that occasion, a number of questionnaires were distributed at the major ports, to be completed and sent to the Study's office in La Paz. Since only few returns were received, a second visit was made to the Ichilo-Mamor~ in June. During this trip, the '. survey forms were filled out by the survey crew. The data ob- tained represent a summary of boat operations and conditions, including: '. e Boat Characteristics • Financing Conditions • Maintenance 10 Taxes o Salaries o Origin/destination Patterns. ·iIi Data on River Transport Patterns - The Bolivian Navy re- ceives monthly reports from the major ports on the Ichilo-Mamor~ and Beni rivers, including information on transport flows. In an extensive analysis of the relevant files, these data were transferred onto coding forms, and subsequently punched on cards and processed by computer. In general, information was obtained in this way on or1g1ns and destinations of each commodity shipped. Moreover, the data include the weight of each shipment as well as the month in which the movement took place. Pipeline Transport The extent and characterisitcs of all pipelines were deter- mined along with type of product carried (crude oil, gas or re- fined petroleum products), amount transported, capital and trans- port costs, product demand and consumption. Pertinent data were obtained principally from the National Oil Company (Yacimientos Petrol!feros Fiscales Bolivianos - YPFB). ". -27-  APPENDIX 3C SOCIO-ECONOMIC DATA COLLECTION  Appendix 3C SOCIO-ECONOMIC DATA COLLECTION CONTENTS Corporation of Regional Development 29 Central Government Agencies and State 30 Enterprises Private Companies Engaged in Manufacturing 31 Collection of Agricultural Data 31 Analysis of Census Tapes 33 Analysis of Foreign Trade Tapes 35 TABLES Number Page 3C-1 Number of Surveyed Manufacturing Companies 32 3C-2 Economically Active Population by Department 34 and Groups 3C-3 Comparison Between Publications and Data Tape 36 for La Paz Department 3C-4 Economically Active Population by Zone and 37 Group 3C-5 Foreign Trade by Commodity Group - 1977 42 3C-6 Foreign Trade by Trading Partner - 1977 43 FIGURES Follows Number Page 3C-1 Agricultural Survey Form (1) 32 3C-2 Agricultural Survey Form (2) 32 3C-3 Agricultural Survey Form ( 3) 32 3C-4 Agricultural Survey Form (4) 32 3C-5 Agricultural Survey Form (5) 32 3C-6 Agricultural SUrvey Form (6) 32 3C-7 Agricultural Survey Form ( 7) 32 3C-8 Agricultural Survey Form ( 8) 32 -28-  Appendix 3C SOCIO-ECONOMIC DATA COLLECTION Although the collection of socio-economic data was constrained by the lack of information in many areas and the discrepancies in statistics furnished by different government agencies on the same subject, much valuable information was obtained from a variety of sources. One principal data source were reports and other documents prepared by the Central Bank and various Government ministries. To complement this, structured interviews were conducted with numerous public agencies, private firms, and representatives of the agricul- tural sector. Moreover, the National Statistics Institute (Instituto Nacional de Estad!sticas - INE) provided several magnetic tapes containing data of relevance to this Study. Corporations of Regional Development Under the auspices of the Ministry of Planning and Coordination, an important meeting of the Regional Development Corporations took place in Cobija in February, 1979. Taking advantage of this meeting, a representative of the Study team was sent to explain the objectives of the Study and to seek their cooperation, particularly in regard to providing information that would be requested of them. A number of questionnaires and accompanying instruction leaflets were distributed to the respective presidents of the departmental corporations. The questionnaires addressed the following subjects: • Agricultural production e Livestock production e Mining and oil production • Manufacturing production • Future development plans. The design of each questionnaire was to satisfy the data needs of the Study. The questionnaires on existing agricul- tural and livestock production related, on the level of province, to products, area cultivated in hectares or number of heads (respectively), tonnages produced, location, and distribution of goods produced. The mining and oil production questionnaire related to province, establishment, location, type of mineral, gross output and comments. The manufacturing production questionnaire related to type of industry, location, principal product, annual production (physical units of production, units used and equivalent in tons), and distribution of the goods produced. -29-  Three teams, each consisting of a professional and an assistant, visited the Development Corporations to collect this information. The task was initiated on March 19 and completed on April 2, 1979. In general, the information was successfully collected from the Development Corporations in the nine Departments. However, further work was required to crystallize the details of the respective analyses concerning regional prospects and future plans. . Central Government Agencies and State Enterprises Overall, 20 agencies and public enterprises were selected, and special letters and questionnaires were prepared for them. To insure maximum benefit from these contacts, the content of these inquiries did not only concern socio-economic topics but also questions concerning transport characteristics. These letters and questionnaires, special to each agency, were sent to the following: 1. Ministry of Industry and Commerce 2. Ministry of Rural Affairs and Agriculture " 3. Ministry of Mining and Metallurgy 4. National Enterprise of Smelters (ENAF) 5. Bolivian Geological Service (GEOBOL) 6. Mining Corporation of Bolivia (COMIBOL) 7. 8. Mining Bank (Banco Minero) Bolivian Corporation of Development (CBF) i' 9. National Sugar and Sugar Cane Commission " 10. National Enterprise for Rice (ENA) 11. Ministry of Planning and Coordination 12. Secretariat of Integration 13. National Statistics Institute (INE) 14. Ministry of Energy and Hydrocarbons 15. Bolivian National Oil Company (YPFB) I~ 16. Development Corporation of the Armed Forces (COFADENA) 17. National Steel Company (SIDERSA) 18. National Directorate of Community Development 19. National Colonization Institute 20. Autonomous Administration of Customs Warehouses (AADAA) • " In addition, two private agencies were contacted in a similar manner: 1. National Chamber of Mining 2. National Chamber of Flour Mills. Information was received from all the agencies, although follow-up interviews were required in a number of instances. -30- Private Companies Engaged in Manufacturing Similar to the other socio-economic surveys, a questionnaire was developed to obtain data on type and amount of production, type and amounts of inputs and distribution of goods produced. In addition, questions were included concerning the transport modes used, the truck fleet owned by the company, warehousing facilities, and whether the company has railroad sidings. A sample of firms was defined for this survey with the objective of covering each industrial branch, and particularly the major generators of transport demand. In total, 88 companies were selected, and an interviewer from the Study team visited the managers of these companies in order to fill out the questionnaires. As shown in Table 3C-1, well over half were companies in the food and drink industry. Collection of Agricultural Data Since the 1950 census on population and agriculture, only some departmental sampling surveys have been carried out regarding the agricultural sector. Data from the 1950 census, the first one carried out in this century, are not up to date, largely due to the Agrarian Reform of 1953, which had vast implications on land ownership and exploitation. In addition, considerable internal migration has taken place to previously undeveloped regions. Since this Study required this information on a detailed analysis zone basis for the entire country, the lack of statistical data was an area of major concern. In order to remedy this, assistance was solicited from the office of Economic and Statistical Studies of the Ministry of Agriculture. This office indicated that they were in a position to provide the data, but would require a long period of time and a large amount of money for the elaboration of these data, which had been derived from a sample based on the 1950 Census. In the face of this situation, the assistance of the Bolivian Institute of Agricultural Technology (IBTA) and of the Agricultural Extension Department was requested. The latter promised the assistance of the provincial extension agents on the survey. In this regard, it is important to note that the extension agents, who previously were mainly university-trained agronomists, are now generally technicians. The Survey - The survey forms consisted of an eight-page questionnaire, shown in Figures 3C-1 to 3C-8, complemented by a brochure explaining the survey procedures. Based on an initial visit to Santa Cruz, the questionnaires were revised in some areas and a month's time was scheduled for filling in the survey forms, after their distribution to the extension agents. . -31-  Table 3C-1 NUMBER OF SURVEYED MANUFACTURING COMPANIES INDUSTRY LA PAZ STA.CRUZ CBBA. CHUQCA. ORURO POTOSI TARIJA BENI TOTAL Food 9 6 2 2 1 2 4 1 27 --- Beverages 4 1 1 2 5 8 2 23 Tobacco 1 1 2 Textiles 3 2 1 3 9 Leather 1 1 2 I w Wood 1 1 1 3 N I Paper products 1 1 Printing 1 1 Chemical products 4 4 Rubber 1 2 3 Non-metallic mineral products 1 2 1 1 5 Other manufacturing industries 3 4 1 8 Total 28 10 9 9 5 8 12 7 88 SOURCE: Bolivia National Transport Study, Firs~ Interim Report. .. ,jJ 4 ~ ~ ~ • • ~ 4 ... . III "0 .n ."""f-lli  ·.....__ ._-, I'~_"''''''-''.-''--- "_ _ ~_"' ___ _____ ' _____ " _ _ _ _' ________ " ~' . _ _ _ _ _. _..... ,.. -...- _ _ ......... _.. _ _ *_.......... _ ........ _ _ "__ , ..,........ "'.• _' _ _.... l .--.... ---.- ---....- ....-.--. w _ _ _ _ _ _. , ! ::'~v\!n·Jj::1A .............. ",.u ............. _.•••••" ••. L •.• __ .. ___ .. __ . ..__ .....__ ... _., i):, .'.~{ i A~ill:::: ·(·0 ............................... _..................... ..,. '._ •._____ .•.__._. _____ ...... " _ _ ._ . ___ • ____... _ _...... _.J ! ------- ..._---_.. -.-~---- ........... --- - ..._--_.__ .. _-_. --. - '.' ...... , ;:·\',l .... ...);; _ - - ~ ....... i -" C ·' ':" Ho. -- t ~ERRt"S Y : '" I.,) -------------.i---------~ .----- CON BOSQUES -------.-------~--------.----.--+-----.--I-.--1 I I :;- . f.; ,/-••• I I .•.. _ _ _ _ _ _._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ TOT.,,\l. i ..../ I '//0 I I ~." TOlY,L TIEf,nAS CULTI',~_8LES ----I I I rC. , - ur;)"-:~~s I i I j.._._. __ . ____. . __________ ... ______ ..... "....... ___ -~_< ____..._;_______ . .-w>_._...., , ., 'L '\"" -, ~ 1 'rT\O'/;i·~CIAL I I'.' t >,1.. 100 i I -----.. ~. ~-"C-~,.._ . . . --,:.~..:..1~..:!"~~":e.,_ _~_.,'~~,:':.~~~~-~~~~ ~,~~ -.:;:~:_... ~ _-:::.~ L._ . . _I •..2':. ... __ •.- .• ... .. __ AGRICULTURAL SURVEY FORM UAttur Srutl wul .AM«Ji.hJ , I) FIG~RE 3C-1  · I ; - - - --~------------------- . _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . ' ' ' - - - j - - ' - l ' ~ ~ . - ":L;- <:'fJ<C!:': C()i\1 A?~~C\lEGi ';:~:>lTI) : :Oi~ES1·i-\L OF. I f I 1 TiPO --.-----.-----------------..--.------. ---------·--------r:---l /\ CLL~·l'/O.3 ,., . \ ;"1",')""" :'."::,',.r';'; 0 i ·,l""·.t. . AGRICULTURAL SURVEY FORM WIbu,. Swutl .,J .A~J , ~) FIG~RE 3C-2  , .... - ---. " ... -~'"."'----- .. _---'.-- '--------~ . --_.....,,"._-_.__.,,---------_. ',' -------".:- -.-~---,.--~---'------- .-::: I -,-;;:-, \;.: "'0- p~;c.,:·"~'.,'.J ------- -.- _.--------_._,-_._- -"--, I I I i.:.ST.,:,CI:.: ~-'.- I, [,,:.-~C7':-::JA I' . ..... ......... ...,""'~ M,J,D::HA I L":-:\ ':.1\, ( ~) C"""'O 1"1""'1\ I~;";\.o.. (1 ) I () 11 ~'ij~ I l=';;il',"S •• " SECOS \.. I I "0 ) (. I ".,l) "I. • • 1. ( .. ) --.- -'" '."'-' . -..- ."-- . . '" I --r·------·-'-·---·~ ~ I I , I '----T--T - - - . _ +_ _ _ _1 I r- i_ '-----(----1-----'-- I ------t- ------t--i -----+------~!------- ·----·-·----I-----I:-----+----~ ---l---~ - . - - - - -.._ - - - - - - - 1 - - - - - ; - - - - - - - i I-----·--L-L--+-- 1. ___ .... . .-.-.;"_-~ J. __~. .=~"-~-.-~_ _J . . . . , " __.~ •• AGRICULTURAL SURVEY FORM Wlbur Sruih tutl AMDCi«/t4 ( S» FIG~RE 3C-3  ~... ,...... _ ...--~- ..... - -:~_# ... ,., '~-""'----."~~----"'---"--'---'~''''''''''-''.'''-''''- '''''---~~---~~----r--- - -.. ---.~- __ ... ___ ~_",,_J I .. i I I . S:;;.JE~~i(:j;::: I r\;:r;~~;/./;!~);'l 'J-'~/"" ,. I P;:~l??~;:;C;'=;·4 'pF;~~?!rl;;'-~;~' 'A:9~-·!/0·::.~~~ t i "." ,....-.... - I' , r--------------'----..---,--------1- - . - r-- ---I j I J1fJ)':;U(;TO :1 j ~ .\J. u'. 1'8 I '. ",Jvv i. tl "-'~'. ,1 :J. • .. :",t~ L' \.1 V ~ ,'-' ,,---- ------- -----;.-----J----.-1-------i ~- --t r-- +-------1- -"---1 : -~- ---: ____J. ..'--.-------1 I , ! [------~-·---r -. .-- ----'-~r-·--~-~L--=~ .. r----.. .· i I -I--------·-I~--··--· i ! -'-l I I -----f-----+-----~Ir- I I /---'--'"1 -1 :______- +______~------I----__ ' I I. I I I ; I ~l i I I '---b--" - .- f I r----· .---- --- - - ~- I '1 I j· t ___ .,~~~..,~., . . ~ ~.-_~_ ~~~~~~~ .',. .!\.;!';!~._-" ! ~ :l'I! '!'~_l ':~ ~ "ll'_.. .... '_1oo . . ....... . ___ ._~~...:t.~~ ~~ ..,.:..~-- __ .... •• t .. _ - AGRICULTURAL SURVEY (4'  100 100 I _i-_ _ _ _ _t-_ _ _ _-l:.-_ _ _ _t -_ _ _ _ _ I__ O I_ _O __ I IvO '._------------ ......__ .~._. __ ._.... ~. .'-.""" L . .=-~.=l__. __ . ___ =,.'" ._= . . ~ __.....>....-_I._O0_ __ --x~~J_~ __ AGRICULTURAL SURVEY W//'ur Swut1.,.J .A~J (5)  I <, -~ . . . . . . . . <'-' -- - AGRICULTURAL SURVEY Wlbur Swuih .,J -A~.w (6,  ----------------------------------~------ ;;,[\\ Qur: F8DRlA SEn ODJi?TO ---- ! ---.------.-~-----.-.--.--.-.-.--.----.-.------- .. --------- .. -----. ----------_._-- .---.--- .. _._-_._-------,-- ',~. ·""..··---·--·li'3\>:;;~ic·!E -1- r,i~::sco ''''''-''1- i.:.":;l~·t:.(... L.:. -"'"';, Mr)LL. ! "'~'''-'I ~v::";_.:... j·"1..... .•, ~.- .. "-'--~-~'~"-c';'::~;;Ci0~~Es------' -··--~-I~"'-·-··" l - .. . .-. --- -·-::l-.. -::·-...--~·{--~~ "T-""-'-- -'-1 ho. 1 crb./ ha, ! I ;:~~:/~_ F~:::::J.:::,,··J:~I ~.~:::~.::.~::cs :,,:C;:~!~IL~ ,'.::/!?Frs-:->~:~! ~":":::~:l:CS --- ._.,,_1_ f----r l.--,-- ---. -'---f"--'-__L -- . L... . . _ ,---- --'-'- l I__ ~- -----7-----1 l ___ --~ - - . - . - -.. =____.-l___ -----.~ .. -- .. - . . ----.------~.--.~. __ _"-' r' AGRICULTURAL SURVEY FORM WL, S-uih ,.,.J .A~.t.~ ( 7) FIG~RE3C-7  I~C'-~:~~~--T-;3"t~~:~;~Y-s}""!~3:i~~~;~1~0::?i~~g~~T~~~ft.:~i;0=:,0~:-~~~:-1 : !----j--------L-----r- -I----f---I-"---'----l-___I : ""---- -"--I-'-----r----------"-"----- '--,---- ,-----------..-----1- j--r--r-f--..- -1--1 1-"' -- f-""--.._-----,-----, ---- '----1-----1----- '----------""--- --------"'"------"", - - - - - , - - r-"-"--,----------- -C --I ~_. j 'II __ "-~'---"- --"-'"--,----------~-- AGRICULTURAL SURVEY W£U,. S-utL .,.J .A~.h~ C8 )  Evaluation of Survey - The completed forms were received over a two-month period. During this time, supplemental information was requested from the Ministry's Office of Economic and Statistical Studies. The data obtained from the latter were not complete. In order to determine whether the provincial information provided was accurate, a comparison between these data and information received from the Regional Development Corporations was made. Another comparison was made with available depart- mental data provided by the Ministry of Agriculture, assuming the summed production of the provinces would be similar to the data by Department. With these statistical data and other information avail- able through various agencies such as the Development Corporations, the Interamerican Institute of Agricultural Sciences (IICA), and the universities, estimates were developed of agricultural production and consumption by analysis zone. Details of the agricultural data survey are contained in Working Paper 11. Analysis of Census Tapes In order to allocate production and consumption of goods to the Study's analysis zones, data were required on economically active population by category and zone. Although these data had been collected in the National Census of 1976, they were not completely published. It was therefore necessary for the Study to derive these figures independently. The source for the derivation was a set of six computer tapes provided by the National Statistics Institute (INE). The procedure used is discussed in Working Paper 16. Method of Anal~sis - There were about 1,760 files on the tapes correspon ing to the census units defined by INE. These consisted of either whole cantons or parts of cantons. The first task in the analysis was, therefore, to define which localities were contained in which analysis zones. The computer program to analyze the files and the table relating census units to analysis zones have been included in Working Paper 16. Results of the Analysis - The results of the analysis are summarized in Table 3C-2. For three of the four Departments of which INE have published results (Chuquisaca, Cochabamba and Santa Cruz), agreement between these results and INE's published data was exact. For the Department of La Paz there were small differences between the two sets of -33-  Table 3C-2 ECONOMICALLY ACTIVE POPULATION BY DEPARTMENT AND GROUPS 1976 NUMBER OF PERSONS BY ECONOMIC ACTIVITY GROUP (1) DEPARTMENT 2 3 _. 4 0- 7 8 9 10 11 Total --- --- Pando 7,608 10 688 7 273 275 184 39 1,835 327 7 11,253 La Paz 199,668 18,898 51,279 928 30,205 47,937 17,493 6,147 107,906 16,613 3,137 500,211 Oruro 39,635 8,431 10,724 156 4,688 8,826 4,566 722 17,206 3,826 472 99,252 Potos! 119,287 25,136 13,079 217 6,853 7,350 5,079 770 22,889 6,510 664 207,834 Beni 24,054 333 3,861 49 2,830 2,412 2,271 421 11,156 1,897 146 49,430 I Cochabamba 110,412 3,695 27,167 419 11,634 14,795 8,283 1,707 39,803 8,884 977 227,776 VJ ~ Chuquisaca 72,931 674 12,125 125 4,265 3,776 2,281 503 12,524 4,277 274 113,755 I Tarija 28,717 416 4,806 72 4,207 3,608 2,612 482 12,607 2,247 134 59,908 Santa Cruz 91,063 2,852 21,647 194 17,461 17,799 13,286 2,165 55,828 8,997 690 231,982 TOTAL 693,375 60,445 145,376 2,167 82,416 106,778 56,055 12,956 281,754 53,578 6,501 1,501,401 (1) Definition of Groups: 1 - Agriculture, hunting, forestry and fishing. 2 - Mining. 3- Manufacturing. 4 - Electricity, gas and water. 5 - Construction. 6 - Commerce, including restaurants and hotels. 7 - Transport and communications. 8 - Banks, insurance and other commercial services. 9 - Government. 10 - Not specified. 11 - Persons seeking work for the first time. SOURCE: 1976 Census. .... .. ... (\jlf ~ 4 .. results as shown in Table 3C-3. Despite careful checking of the results derived from the tape, no explanation of these discrepancies has come to light. The detailed distribution of economically active population is shown in Table 3C-4. Analysis of Foreign Trade Tapes The source for this analysis was another set of three computer files provided by INE. One file contained data on mineral exports, another on all other exports and a third on all imports. For the purpose of this analysis, ten commodity groups were used. They are shown in Table 3C-5 and are defined in terms of the Study's commodity classes, defined in Appendix 3E. Exports - The tonnages derived from the INE export files are shown in Table 3C-5 by commodity group and Table 3C-6 by country of destination. The figures quoted are in gross tons. As the files gave province of origin, it was usually possible to determine the analysis zone from which the product came, for inclusion in the matrices. In cases where a province was split into more than one zone, the origins were split either based on local knowledge of production or based on population ratios. In cases where the file gave only department of origin, the origins were estimated on the basis of known origins of that commodity in that department. Imports - The tonnages derived from the INE import files are shown in Table 3C-5 by co~modity group and in Table 3C-6 by country of origin. Although two files were provided covering these data, one proved unreadable and the second incomplete. It was estimated that about 2,950 tons were missing from the second file, all in co~modity group 10: these are not included in the tables. The file did not contain data on province of destination but only the customs disctrict of destination. Therefore, the imports were allocated to the main town in each customs district. On the other hand, information on point of entry was available. -35-  Table 3C-3 COMPARISON BETWEEN PUBLICATIONS AND DATA TAPE FOR LA PAZ DEPARTMENT EC:X::NG1IC NUMBER OF ECONOMICALLY ACTIVE PERSONS lCrIVIT'i GFroP (1) INE Publications (2) INE Tape Difference 1 199,917 199,668 249 2 18,844 18,898 -54 3 51,298 51,279 19 4 907 928 -21 5 30,240 30,205 35 6 48,015 47,937 78 'I 7 17,400 17,493 -93 8 6,144 6,147 - 3 9 108,001 107,906 95 10 16,629 16,613 16 11 3,115 3,137 -22 TOTP.L 500,510 500,211 "299 (1) See Table 3C-2 for group definition. (2) Table p. 16 Resultados del Censo Nacional de Poblaci6n y vivienaa 1976, Departamento de La Paz (Results of National Population ana Housing Census, 1976, Department of La Paz), National Statistics Institute. SOURCE: Working Paper 16. -36-  Table 3C-4 ECONOMICALLY ACTIVE POPULATION BY ZONE AND GROUP NUMBER OF PERSONS BY ECONOMIC ACTIVITY GROUP (1) ANALYSIS 1 2 9 11 ZONE 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 rorAL 1 3,632 10 212 7 208 194 99 39 1,322 166 6 5,895 2 3,976 0 476 0 65 81 85 0 513 161 1 5,358 Pando 7,608 10 688 1" 273 275 184 39 1,835 327 7 11,253 3 5,338 93 95 1 122 202 26 34 431 167 23 6,552 4 31,510 1,144 1,356 1 659 933 144 28 1,509 680 41 38,005 5 7,650 572 184 3 138 356 45 7 596 215 16 9,782 I w 6 3,480 2,336 162 5 137 298 100 17 499 148 36 7,218 -..-J I 7 4,945 23 1,032 2 305 461 134 8 964 167 26 8,067 8 17,213 68 1,685 2 661 2,045 205 15 1,772 417 41 24,124 9 10,127 110 1,018 8 590 741 69 7 658 274 11 13,613 10 14,451 4,066 37,411 773 23,176 34,808 13,707 5,884 90,055 10,632 2,372 237,335 11 18,570 39 727 6 675 966 327 25 1,793 431 39 23,598 12 11,862 ,1,582 292 7 423 729 180 24 1,054 323 37 16,513 13 11,868 24 765 1 372 811 309 6 1,793 339 34 16,322 14 8,703 47 1,414 2 723 955 616 15 2,033 537 68 15,113 15 11,842 1,146 1,085 27 499 924 378 31 1,390 613 144 18,079 16 25,774 379 3,053 2 997 2,408 892 25 1,7:35 785 150 36,200 17 11,820 3,959 632 79 546 921 271 12 1,162 574 42 20,018 18 4,495 3,310 368 9 182 379 90 9 462 311 57 9,672 La Paz 199,668 18,898 51,279 928 30,205 47,937 17,493 6,147 107,906 16,613 3,137 500,211 (1) For Definition of Groups see Table 3C-2.  Table 3C-4 (Cont.) ECONOMICALLY ACTIVE POPULATION BY ZONE AND GROUP NUMBER OF PERSONS BY ECONOMIC ACTIVITY GROUP (1) ANALYSIS 1 2 3 4 5 G 7 8 9 10 11 TOTAL ZONE 19 8,596 2,850 7,874 127 3,324 6,562 3,571 639 12,199 2,361 323 48,426 20 1,130 3,533 494 26 471 474 279 39 1,726 499 75 8,746 21 4,560 40 209 0 115 256 42 3 252 138 13 5,628 22 10,637 40 1,075 1 297 774 209 11 988 242 13 14,287 23 3,289 17 57 0 61 98 102 1 236 80 4 3,945 24 11,423 1,951 1,015 2 420 662 363 29 1,805 506 44 18,220 I w Oruro 39,635 8,431 10,724 156 4,688 8,826 4,566 722 17,206 3,826 472 99,252 0:,- 1 25 20,313 63 1,612 0 122 114 30 5 703 633 21 23,616 26 11,649 6,906 1,432 30 761 982 604 86 4,275 1,203 164 28,092 27 28,322 808 2,851 9 203 352 126 11 696 534 45 33,957 28 3,528 673 74 2 141 65 283 26 666 150 22 5,630 29 5,165 1,690 432 69 387 428 1,012 45 1,620 409 68 11,325 30 10,982 7,080 2,633 59 2,241 2,487 1,378 357 7,803 1,458 132 36,610 31 12,769 893 1,315 0 397 356 159 9 668 415 34 17,015 32 12,573 472 880 0 327 218 110 15 682 273 14 15,564 33 7,973 2,444 404 6 457 208 182 53 1,031 550 54 13,362 34 4,154 3,876 653 38 1,177 821 805 117 3,463 644 80 15,828 35 1,859 231 793 4 640 1,319 390 46 1,282 241 30 6,835 Potosi 119,287 25,136 13,079 217 6,853 7,350 5,079 770 22,889 6,510 664 207,834 (1) For Definition of Groups see .Table 3C-2. ... • • ~ • • • ~ ~ 5  Table 3~-4' (Cont.) ECONOMICALLY ACTIVE POPULATION BY ZONE AND GROUP NUMBER OF PERSONS BY ECONOMIC ACTIVITY GROUP (1) .ANAIXSIS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 '!UrAL zam 36 4,142 24 1,348 16 626 962 902 87 3,692 851 24 12,674 37 6,896 277 743 3 510 385 262 64 1,926 454 25 11,545 38 4,600 0 392 0 241 156 139 26 946 47 17 6,564 39 8,416 32 1,378 30 1,453 909 968 244 4,592 545 80 18,647 Beni 24,054 333 3,861 49 2,830 2,412 2,271 421 11,156 1,897 146 49,430 40 13,137 1,896 1,202 2 117 354 62 9 553 431 24 17,787 I 41 10 271 203 368 905 385 42 14,382 w 11,740 72 336 50 \0 I 42 6,632 36 1,479 14 1,105 586 515 11 1,386 360 35 12,159 43 7,928 4 943 1 151 255 155 9 410 297 21 10,174 44 6,939 91 977 1 50 70 15 0 184 197 9 8,533 45 7,976 522 354 0 480 65 212 0 236 267 95 10,207 46 9,172 66 3,417 47 1,709 1,455 968 58 3,366 978 96 21,332 47 3,488 770 10,372 325 6,288 8,464 4,782 1,484 28,128 3,784 426 68,311 48 5,363 13 674 7 145 177 144 9 459 155 12 7,158 49 9,864 14 3,130 3 565 884 304 25 1,399 691 93 16,972 50 4,620 26 1,853 6 361 1,564 413 14 1,130 388 46 10,421 51 9,758 11 1,031 2 118 231 148 11 601 274 28 12,213 52 13,795 174 1,399 1 274 487 197 27 1,046 677 50 18,127 Cochabarnba 110,412 3,695 27,167 419 11,634 14,795 8,283 1,707 39,803 8,884 977 227,776 (1) For Definition of Groups see .Table 3C-2.  Table 3C-4 (Cont.) ECONOMICALLY ACTIVE POPULATION BY ZONE AND GROUP NUMBER Of PERSONS BY ECONOMIC ACTIVITY GROUP (1) ANALYSIS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 TOTAL ZQttE.. 53 12,193 279 3,722 IlB 2,447 2,093 1,504 401 8,485 1,162 98 32,502 54 7,236 3 3,454 1 138 225 68 7 261 262 25 11,680 55 7,366 6 1,460 1 305 185 56 6 294 459 14 10,152 56 11,198 22 1,612 3 342 323 97 22 812 624 31 15,086 , .c::.. 57 14,598 179 698 0 294 262 180 24 786 575 44 17,640 0 I 58 5,371 0 330 1 55 50 2 2 208 335 14 6,368 59 8,366 126 594 1 501 467 235 33 1,047 581 20 11,971 60 5,171 15 169 0 79 136 90 6 352 200 9 6,227 61 1,432 44 86 0 104 35 49 2 279 79 19 2,129 Chuquisaca 72,931 674 12,125 125 4,265 3,776 2,281 503 12,524 4,277 274 113,755 62 6,686 15 255 1 147 101 116 4 474 419 41 8,259 63 6,636 45 1,873 32 2,220 1,589 1,108 366 6,348 564 11 20,792 64 3,271 24 299 1 158 153 97 6 423 160 7 4,599 65 5,228 273 1,196 25 1,121 1,221 846 57 3,745 712 63 14,487 66 6,896 59 1,183 13 561 544 445 49 1,617 392 12 11,771 Tarija 28,717 416 4,806 72 4,207 3,608 2,612 482 12,607 2,247 134 59,908 (1) For Definition of Groups see Table 3C-2. * ;:,,.:t: jJ; ~ •  Table 3C-4 (Cont.) ECONOMICALLY ACTIVE POPULATION BY ZONE AND GROUP NUMBER OF PERSONS BY ECONOMIC ACTIVITY GROUP (1) ~.N1..LYSIS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 'lUl'AL ZONE 67 14,586 89 1,483 5 570 550 829 57 2,372 924 39 21,504 68 23,770 60 3,226 15 1,590 2,107 1,900 72 5,508 1,451 78 39,777 69 7,832 5 669 0 355 117 265 9 988 312 21 10,573 70 5,581 3 446 1 356 168 173 20 1,341 178 29 8,296 71 7,651 9 433 3 363 368 290 16 938 304 13 10,388 I 72 16,168 1,461 13,395 141 12,302 12,838 7,891 1,844 35,642 4,519 386 106,587 "' I-' I " 73 6,237 26 393 3 213 256 90 15 1,154 305 22 8,714 74 5,257 732 1,056 21 888 767 719 96 4,680 634 64 14,914 75 1,252 231 147 2 145 103 296 8 485 108 9 2,786 76 1,783 57 215 1 322 200 494 13 1,509 132 13 4,739 77 946 179 184 2 357 325 339 15 1,211 130 16 3,704 Santa Cruz 91,063 2,852 21,647 194 17,461 17,799 13,286 2,165 55,828 8,997 690 231,982 ror.AL 693,375 60,445 145,376 2,167 82,416 106,778 56,055 12,956 281,754 53,578 6,501 1,501,401 (1) For Definition of Groups see ,Table 3C-2. Sa::JR:E: Working Paper 16.  Table 3C-5 FOREIGN TRADE BY COMMODITY GROUP - 1977 (tons) COMMODITY GROUP EXPORTS IMPORTS 1. Agriculture 33,634 142,081 2. Minerals 301,389 3,392 3. Hydrocarbons 2,738,843 28,748 4. Food 111,918 130,017 5. Textiles 88 8,930 6. Wood and paper 45,493 22,146 7. Chemicals 22,731 51,303 8. Building materials 55 35,234 9. Metals 1,092 110,223 10. Machinery, vehicles and other 738 67,753 Total 3,255,981 599,827 SOURCE: INE Foreign Trade Tapes. -42-  Table 3C-6 FOREIGN TRADE BY TRADING PARTNER - 1977 (tons) TRADING PARTNER EXPORTS IMPORTS Argentina 2,628,969 164,411 Brazil 22,087 72,084 Paraguay 470 1,202 Uruguay 10,192 8,244 Chile 29,285 33,433 Peru 1,625 15,428 Colombia and Ecuador 1,032 2,423 Venezuela, Guyana, Surinam, French Guyana and the Caribbean 1,922 22,837 Central America and Mexico 1,930 2,583 USA and Canada 417,228 138,779 Europe 102,367 84,211 Africa and Middle East 5,058 2,182 Japan 32,846 46,911 Rest of Asia 960 5,022 Australasia 10 77 Total 3,255,981 599,827 SOURCE: INE Foreign Trade Tapes. -43-  APPENDIX 3D DEFINITION OF ANALYSIS ZONES  Appendix 3D DEFINITION OF ANALYSIS ZONES CONTENTS Internal Zone Plan 45 External Zone Plan 46 TABLES Number Page 3D-1 Internal Zones 47 3D-2 Detailed External Zones 54 3D-3 External Zones for Model Analysis 55 FIGURES Follows Number Page 3D-1 Administrative Boundaries 45 3D-2 Analysis Zones 46 3D-3 External Zones in South and Central America 54 -44-  Appendix 3D DEFINITION OF ANALYSIS ZONES An internal and an external zone plan have been prepared which form the basis of the Study analysis system. Internal Zone Plan Seventy-seven zones have been defined based on the administrative areas of "provincias" and "departamentos". The administrative boundaries shown in Figure 3D-1, were adhered to where possible to simplify the analysis of census data on total population and economically active population. For this reason, when splitting a province between two zones, the dividing line was made to conform to canton boundaries. Only 14 provinces out of a total of 99 were sub-divided be- tween more than one zone. The following guidelines, as set out in the body of the Final Report, were observed in defining zones: (a) The zones should be relatively homogeneous in respect to the current production patterns and future development prospects. (b) They should contain sufficient population and productive capacity to generate and attract significant volumes of goods and person traffic. (c) Zone boundaries should follow the borders of the administrative units on the basis of which statistics of population, employment and produc- tion are maintained. (d) Zone boundaries should conform to natural local trading, agricultural or industrial areas. (e) The total zone system should reasonably reflect the significant variations in the configuration of the country's transport system and actual traffic flows over the system. In allocating provinces to zones, including amalgamation or sub-division when necessary, the following additional detailed considerations were kept in mind: -45-  (a) A zone must not contain two separated areas with no means of land communication between them. (b) Areas with significantly different levels of access to transport modes should be in separate zones. (c) A zone should not be too big or the centroid will not be representative of the activity in the zone. (d) A single zone should not contain two major parallel corridors of transport. The resulting configuration of analysis zones is shown in Figure ,30-2. A complete list of zones showing division by department, province and canton is included in Table 30-1. External Zone Plan Two sets of external zones have been defined. The first set of 32 zones (78-108) were selected for the tabulation of Roadside Interview Oata and Railroad data and also for the initial analysis of foreign trade movements. Zones were defined to encompass major external trade routes, with sepa- rate zones for each major part serving Bolivia. These zones are listed in Table 30-2 and the zones in South and Central America are also illustrated in Figure 30-3. It became evident during the analysis of foreign trade that available statistics for foreign countries could not be subdivided by geographical region within the country. Also, for the model analyses, there was no value in specify- ing separate zones for ports. Therefore a simplified zone plan with only one zone per country (or group of countries) and omitting ports was defined. These zones, and their relationships to the previously defined external zones, is shown in Table 30-3. ,- -46-  L £G£ND _ _ Departmenlol Boundaries - - Provincial Boundaries o 100 lOOK"" ADMINISTRATIVE BOUNDARIES FIGURE 30-1  LEGEN D c Zone Centroid , ,. / 47 Zone Number \-~,~.";.- ,'1/ ,/ , - ,.. \ \\ . -~.- \ - v \\ - - I <'. /) hI ~ -/ -. ( .\ \\ \. \.' \1 \) ,:, \. \. ,\ .( ,\ <.1 .... \" - - R r: I' i' B L J C :\ ~ .\ r{ (; [ ~ T r '\ .\ -- INTERNAL ANALYSIS ZONES FIGURE  Table 3D-1 INTERNAL ZONES 1976 POPULATION ZONE PROVINCIA CANTON POPULATION OF ZONE 1 Nicol!s Su!rez All 12,239 Manuripi Zone 2,Zone 3, Zone 4 5,101 17,340 2 Abun! All 3,065 Federico Rom!n All 1,997 Madre de Dios All 8,928 Manuripi Zone 1 3,079 17,069 TOTAL PANDO 34,409 3 Iturralde All 4,300 Franz Tamayo All 16,260 20,560 4 Saavedra All 10,696 Camacho All 73,016 Mufiecas All 21,275 104,987 5 Larecaja Consata,Chacapa, Lijuata,Sorata, Yani,Ancoma, Itulaya,Ananea, Cornbaya,Ilabaya, Laripata,Obispo Bosque,San Pedro de Sorejaya,Milli- paya,Chuchulaya, Quiabaya,Tacoma 26,745 26,745 6 Larecaja Mapiri,Teoponte, Challana,Santa Rosa,Sararnpiuni, Chifiijo,Tipuani, Guanay,Litoral 19,199 19,199 7 ~1anco Kapac All 23,561 23,561 8 Omasuyos All 83,621 83,621 9 Los Andes Puerto Perez,Ba- tallas,Pefias,Pa- tamanta,Pucarani, Aygachi 42,906 42,906 10 Murillo All 695,566 695,566 -47-  Table 30-1 INTERNAL ZONES (Cont. ) 1976 POPULATION ZONE PROVINCIA CANTON POPULATION OF ZONE , 11 Nor-Yungas All 48,397 I Sud-Yungas Santa Ana, Alto Beni, Palos Blan- cos, San Miguel de Huachi,Covendo 7,044 55,441 12 Sud-Yungas Yanacachi,Villa " Aspiazu,Chirca, Huancan~,La Asun- ta, Villa Barrien- tos,Laza,Tajma, '. Chulumani,Ocobaya, Chicaloma,Irupana, "'I Plazuela,Taca,Pa- riguaya,Lambete 38,424 38,424 13 Los Andes Laja,Tambillo 19,873 Ingavi Tiwanacu,Oesagua- dero,Taraco,Guaqui 32,813 52,686 14 Ingavi Viacha,Villa Reme- dios,Jesus de Ma- chaca,Aguallamaya, Santiago de Macha- ca,Chama,San Andr~s de Machaca,Mauri 53,376 53,376 15 Pacajes All 65,582 65,582 16 Aroma All 66,695 Villarroel All 16,152 Loayza Sapahaqui,Caracato, Luribay,Anchallani, Poroma,Cachualla, Porvenir 20,597 103,444 17 Loayza Araca,Yaco 22,026 Inquisivi Circuata,Cajuata, Arcopongo,Choque- tanga,Pedro O.Mu- rillo,Licoma,Suri, Charapaxi,Escola, Huanacota,Quime,In- quisivi,Capinota, Gral.Camacho,Ichoca, <,' Franz Tamayo 40,823 62,849 -48-  Table 3D-l INTERNAL ZONES (Cont. ) 1976 POPULATION ZONE PROVINCIA CANTON POPULATION OF ZONE 18 Inquisivi Cavari,Colquiri, Lanza,Caluyo,Cori- ri,Uyuni,Janko Ko- ta 35,204 35,204 'I' 0 TAL LA PAZ 1,484,151 19 Cercado All 158,713 158,713 20 Dalence All 33,452 33,452 21 Sajama All 14,612 14,612 22 Saucari All 7,254 Carangas All 24,972 Litoral All 2,885 Atahuallpa All 5,043 40,154 23 Ladislao Cabrera All 10,842 10,842 24 Poop6 All 19,464 Avaroa All 34,008 53,472 TOTAL ORURO 311,245 25 Gral.Bilbao All 9,358 A.de Ibanez All 23,446 Charcas All 31,962 64,766 26 Bustillo All 91,570 91,570 27 Chayanta All 90,525 90,525 28 Daniel Campos All 5,769 Nor Lipez All 9,162 Sud Lipez All 4,140 19,071 29 Quijarro All 37,991 37,991 30 Tomas Frias All 122,677 122,677 -49-  Table 30-1 INTERNAL ZONES (Cont. ) '" 1976 POPULATION ;; ZONE PROVINCIA CANTON POPULATION OF ZONE ..t 31 Cornelio Saavedra All 54,191 54,191 32 Linares All 53,858 53,858 .'. 33 Nor Chichas All 48,426 48,826 34 Sud Chichas All 55,018 55,018 35 Hodesto Omiste All 20,620 20,620 TOTAL POTOSI 658,713 36 Vaca Oiez All 43,028 43,028 37 Gral.J.Ballivian All 24,664 Yacuma All 15,084 39,748 38 Mamor~ All 9,317 IU~nez All 14,383 23,700 39 Moxos All 14,896 Cercado All 34,983 Marb.§.n All 11,614 61,493 TOTAL BENI 167,969 40 Ayopaya All 56,020 56,020 41 Chapare Villa Tunari 17,218 Carrasco Census Zone 3, Census Zone 4, Puerto Villa- rroel 15,241 32,459 42 Chapare Colomi,Palca, Chifiata,Ucuchi, Sacaba 40,483 40,483 43 Carrasco Pocoma,Pojo, Totora 31,585 31,585 44 Tapacari All 22,285 22,285 -50-  Table 3D-1 INTERNAL ZONES (Cont. ) 1976 POPULATION ZONE PROVINCIA CANTON POPULATION OF ZONE 45 Arque All 29,206 29,206 46 Qui11aco110 All 76,711 76,711 47 Cercado All 221,856 221,856 48 ·Capinota All 22,974 22,974 49 Jordan All 25,646 Arce All 27,914 53,560 50 Punata All 45,324 45,324 51 Arani All 38,049 38,049 52 Mizque All 27,882 Campero All 31,964 59,846 TOTAL COCHABAMBA 730,358 53 Oropeza All 106,082 106,082 54 Yamparaez All 28,442 28,442 55 Zudafiez All 27,585 27,585 56 Belisario Boeto All 13,933 Tomina All 30,672 Luis Calvo Ticucha 1,791 46,396 57 Nor Cinti All 60,953 60,953 58 Azurduy All 20,832 20,832 59 Hernando Si1es All 30,751 Luis Calvo Sapirangui, Igftembe 7,180 37,931 60 Sud Cinti All 22,029 22,029 -51- -52-  Table 3D-1 INTERNAL ZONES (Cont.) 1976 POPULATION ZONE PROVINCIA CANTON POPULATION OF ZONE 70 Velazco All 24,458 Sandoval San Matias,Las Pe- tas,Candelaria 5,963 30,421 71 Caballero All 14,213 Florida All 21,488 35,701 72 Andr~s Ibanez All 318,804 318,804 73 Valle Grande All 30,481 30,481 74 Cordillera All except Zone 1 53,850 53,850 75 Chiquitos El Cerro,Motacucito, Natividad,San Jos~ 9,709 Cordillera Zone 1 (part of) 143 9,852 76 Chiquitos San Juan, Robor~, Santiago, Santa Ana 13,333 Cordillera Zone 1, (part of) 500 Sandoval Santo Corazon,La Gaiba 2,094 15,927 77 Chiquitos El Carmen,Puerto Suarez, Mutun 10,694 10,694 TOTAL SANTA CRUZ 715,072 TOTAL BOLIVIA 4,647,816 -53-  Table 3D-2 DETAILED EXTERNAL ZONES ZONE LOCATION ZONE LOCATION '. --------~~~~~-------- 78 Argentina (North) 94 Rosario Port (Argentina) 79 Argentina jSouth) 95 San Nicol&s (Argentina) 80 Brazil (North) 96 Buenos Aires Port (Argentina) it 81 Brazil (South) 97 Santos Port (Brazil) 82 Paraguay 98 Manaus Port (Brazil) 83 Uruguay 99 Porto Velho Port (Brazil) 84 Chile (Arica Area) 100 Venezuela, Guyana, Surinam, French Guyana 85 Chile (Antofagasta and and the Caribbean Iquique Areas) 101 Central America including J 86 Chile (South) Mexico 87 Peru 102 U.S.A. and Canada (West Coast) 88 Colombia, Ecuador 103 U.S.A. and Canada (East 89 Matarani Port (Peru) Coast) 90 Ilo Port (Peru) 104 Europe 91 Arica Port 105 Africa and the Middle East 92 Iquique Port (Chile) 106 Japan 93 Antofagasta Port (Chile) 107 Rest of Asia 108 Australasia -54-  @ Monous 80 ------- ---- -- -- O~!!!!!iiiiiiiiiiiiiil.0;;i;;!0!!!!!!0!!!!!!!!!iiiiiiiiiii 2iiij'000 km, EXTERNAL ZONES IN SOUTH AND CENTRAL AMERICA F'GURE3D-3  Table 30-3 EXTERNAL ZONES FOR MODEL ANALYSIS ZONE NUMBER LOCATIOO DETAILED EXTERNAL ZONE NUMBERS 78 Argentina 78, 79, 94-96 79 Brazil 80, 81, 97-99 80 Paraguay 82 81 Uruguay 83 82 Chile 84-86, 91-93 83 Peru 87, 89, 90 84 Colombia, Ecuador 88 85 Venezuela, Guyana, 100 Surinam, French Guyana and the Caribbean 86 Central Arrerica, 101 M:xi.co 87 USA, Canada 102, 103 88 Europe 104 89 Africa, Middle East 105 90 Japan 106 91 Rest of Asia 107 92 Australasia 108 -55-  APPENDIX 3E DEFINITION OF COMMODITY CLASSIFICATIONS  Appendix 3E DEFINITION OF COMMODITY CLASSIFICATIONS TABLES Number Page 3E-l Comparison of Commodity Classification 58 Systems 3E-2 Commodity Classifications Used for Tabulating 60 the Roadside Survey, Rail and River Transport Data -56-  Appendix 3E DEFINITION OF COMMODITY CLASSIFICATIONS For analysis purposes, and especially for the transport modelling, it was necessary to define commodity classifications. A total of 39 classes were defined for the computer model and these are shown in Table 3E-l together with their relationships with other commodity classes described below. In developing the commodity classes for computer modelling, tabulations were produced from the roadside interview data and from the computerized rail data supplied by ENFE. As these tabulations were of an exploratory nature, 69 commodity classes were defined which are shown in Table 3E-2. The socio-economic analysis of production and transport demand used initially 56 commodity groups related to availability of statistics and relative volumes of production. These groups were based on the original 69 survey commodity classes described above. Finally, a limited number of commodity classes were required for analysis of foreign trade movements and these are related to the basic system in Table 3E-l. -57-  Table 3E-1 COMPARISON OF COMMODITY CLASSIFICATION SYSTEMS '. ROADSIDE SOCIO- FOREIGN .'" SURVEY ECONOMIC TRADE COMPUTER MODEL CLASS CLASS CLASS CLASS Livestock and Livestock Products 1. Live animals 1 10,12 1 2. Meat and fish 2 11,13 1 3. Other animal products (wools, skins, etc. ) 3 14 1 Cereals 4. Corn 4 2 1 5. Rice 5 3 1 6. Wheat 7 1 1 7. Other cereals 6,8 4 1 Other Agricultural Products 8. Potatoes and other tubers 9,10 6 1 9. Fruit 11 7b 1 10. Other vegetables and plants 12 7a 1 11. Sugar cane 13 9 1 12. Other Agricultutal Products 14 5,8,15,16 1 Petroleum Products 13. Crude oil 16 26 3 14. Natural gas 17 27 3 15. Gas in bottles (LPG) 18 41a 3 16. Petroleum products - unsuitable for pipelines 19 41b 3 17. Petroleum products - suitable for pipelines 20 41c 3 Minerals 18. Iron ore 21 23 2 19. Non-ferrous metallic minerals 22,23 18-22 2 20. Non-metallic minerals 24-29 24 2 -58-  Table 3E-1 (Cont.) COMPARISON OF COMMODITY CLASSIFICATION SYSTEMS ROADSIDE SOCIO- FOP.EIGN SURVEY ECONOMIC TRADE COMPUTER MODEL CLASS CLASS CLASS CLASS Food, Beverages and Tobacco Products 21. Sugar and confectionary 30 30 4 22. Flour and grain products 31 28 4 23. Beverages 33 33 4 24. Other food (including dairy) and tobacco products 32,34 29,31,32 4 Textiles, Wood and Paper Products 25. Textiles and leather products 35 34 5 26. Wood and wood products 15,36-38 17,35 6 27. Paper and paper products 39-41 36,37 6 Chemical Products 28. Fertilizers 42 39 7 29. Other chemicals 43-46 38,40,42,43 7 Building Materials 30. Sand and aggregates 49,50 25b 8 31. Lime and plaster 51 25a 8 32. Bricks, ceramics, concrete products and others 47,48,53 45 B 33. Cement 52 44 8 Metals 34. Primary iron and steel 54,55 46 9 35. Other fabricated metals 56 48 9 36. Primary non-ferrous metals 57 47 9 Others 37. Vehicles and transport equipment 58,60 51 10 38 • Machinery 59 49,50 10 39. Miscellaneous manufactures 61,62 52 10 SOURCE: Bolivia National Transport Study, Progress Report,prepared by Wilbur Smith and Associates for the Government of Bolivia, the World Bank and the United Nations Development Programme, La Paz, September, 1979. -59-  ''It D 'ft .tt Table 3E-2 '~ COMMODITY CLASSIFICATIONS USED FOR TABULATING THE l' ROADSIDE SURVEY, RAIL AND RIVER TRANSPORT DATA ~ II COMPUTER MODEL It ROADSIDE SURVEY COMMODITY CLASS CLASS ,. Livestock Products 1 1. Live animals 1 2. Meat and fish 2 3. Other animals and fish products (wool, hides, etc.) 3 Cereals 4. Corn 4 5. Rice 5 6. Barley 7 7. Wheat 6 'II 8. Other 7 Other Agrarian and Forest Products " 9. Tubers: Potatoes, oca, papaliza 8 10. Yucca,yams 8 11. Fruit 9 12. Garden and other vegetables 10 13. Sugar cane 11 14. Other industrial agrarian products (hops and barley for 12 beer, coffee, soya, cotton, tobacco, etc.) 15. Tree trunks and unfinished cork 26 Petroleum Products 16. Crude petroleum 13 17. Natural gas 14 18. Gas in bottles (LPG) 15 " 19. Other petroleum products not distributed by tanker 16 , '1 trucks 20. Refined products distributed by tanker trucks 17 -60-  Table 3E-2 (Cont.) COMMODITY CLASSIFICATIONS. USED FOR TABULATING THE ROADSIDE SURVEY, RAIL AND RIVER TRANSPORT DATA COMPUTER MODEL ROADSIDE SURVEY COMMODITY CLASS CLASS Minerals 21. Iron ore 18 22. Non-ferrous minerals 19 23. Concentrates of non-ferrous minerals 19 24. Sulphur 20 25. Salt 20 26. Limestone and other products for cement production 20 27. Clay 20 28. Coal and charcoal 20 29. Other non-metallic minerals 20 Food, Beverages and Tobacco Products 30. Sugar 21 31. Flour and other grain products 22 32. Dairy products 24 33. Beverages 23 34. Other food and tobacco products 24 Textiles 35. Textiles, apparel and leather products 25 Wood Products and Furniture 36. Sawn timber 26 37. Industrial timber (railroad ties, pit props and 26 telegraph poles) 38. Furniture and other wood products 26 Paper Products and Printing 39. Paper pulp 27 40. Bulk paper 27 41. Printed and other paper products 27 Chemical Products 42. Fertilizers 28 43. Industrial chemicals 29 44. Non-industrial chemicals 29 45. Rubber products 29 46. Plastic products 29 -61-  't" I' Table 3E-2 (Cont.) Ii f< COMMODITY CLASSIFICATIONS USED FOR TABULATING THE ROAD SURVEY, RAIL AND RIVER TRANSPORT DATA l' COMPUTER 'II MODEL if ROADSIDE SURVEY COMMODITY CLASS CLASS Building Materials If 47. Bricks, tiles and ceramics 32 , 48. Cement products (pipes, etc.) 32 49. BaDast for rail tracks 30 Ii 50. Other aggregates including sand and gravel 30 51. Plaster and lime 31 III 52. Cement 33 I 53. Other non-metallic building materials 32 '~ Primary Metals fi 54. Iron products 34 55. Steel tubes 34 <, 56. Steel sections and fabricated steel 35 ,j 57. Non-ferrous metals 36 " Others I 58. Vehicles 37 59. Industrial machinery 38 60. Agricultural machinery, including tractors 37 <~ 61. Household durables 39 62. Others or unknown 39 ~ f Empty Receptacles 63. Gas bottles (1) 64. Wine, beer and other beverage bottles (1) . 65. Containers (1) 66. Pallets without cargo ( 1) 67. Other empty receptacles (1) Various 68. Mining materials (2) 69. Mail (3) ( 1) M:>verrents of enpty receptacles, while a useful class for identifying surveyed :troVe!teIlts, were considered in the rrodel as the backhaul of a given cxmn:xlity noverrent and therefore did not ra:;JUire a separate , cama3.ity c:ode. (2) Used in the survey to identify the general nature of Sate vaguely defined products. Was not nn:le1led. (3) Mail was not Jrodelled. SOURCE: Bolivia National Transport Study, Progress Report. -62-  APPENDIX 3F THE TRANSPORT MODEL  Appendix 3F THE TRANSPORT MODEL CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 66 THE FREIGHT NETWORK MODEL 68 Definitions 68 Freight Tariffs 70 I(oute Choice 72 Parameter Matrices 74 Assignment 74 THE FREIGHT DISTRIBUTION MODELS 77 The Modelling of Depots 77 The Three Alternative Distribution Models 78 Validation of the Distribution Model 82 THE FREIGHT MODAL ALLOCATION MODEL 86 Form of the Model 86 Excess Time Costs 87 Derivation of the Diversion Curves 87 Results of Modal Allocation Model 90 THE VEHICLE AND ASSIGNMENT MODELS 97 Loaded Truck :t-1odel 97 Empty Truck Model 99 Results of Truck Assignment 101 Rail Wagon Model 101 THE PASSENGER MODELS 108 Passengers of Public Surface Transport 108 Private Car Passengers 114 Air Transport Passengers 115 -63-  TABLES Number Page 3F-l Regression of Rail Freight Tariff Against 73 Distance 3F-2 Comparison of Vehicle Counts With Network 76 Assignment 3F-3 Commodities and their Distribution Models 80 3F-4 Gravity Model Calibration 83 3F-5 Comparison of Observed and Synthesized 1977 84 Freight Flows 3F-6 Excess Time Incurred in Train Operations 88 3F-7 Excess Time Costs 89 3F-8 Observed Modal Allocation Data - Agriculture - 91 Mining and Manufacturing 3F-9 Commodity Calibration Factors 92 3F-IO Estimates of 1977 Internal Ton Movements by 93 Mode 3F-ll Estimates of 1977 Internal Ton-kilometers by 94 Mode 3F-12 Comparison of Observed and Synthesized 1977 96 Internal Rail Tonnages 3F-13 Commodity Factors for Loaded Truck Model 98 3F-14 Comparison Between Observed and Synthesized 100 Loaded Truck Trips - 1977 3F-15 Constants and Correlation Coefficients for Empty 102 Truck Model 3F-16 Selected Statistics on Synthesized Internal 103 Truck Usage for 1977 3F-17 Comparison of Assignments of Observed and Synthe- 104 sized Daily Truck Volumes 3F-18 Average Internal Rail Wagon Loads by Commodity 105 3F-19 Comparison of Observed and Synthetic Internal 107 Rail Wagon Movements - 1977 3F-20 Observed Modal Allocation Data - Bus and Rail 111 Passengers/Year 3F-2l Comparison of Observed and Synthesized 1977 112 Daily Bus Flows 3F-22 Corr.parison of Observed and Synthesized 1977 113 Annual Rail Passenger Flows 3F-23 Comparison of Observed and Synthesized 1977 116 Daily Private Vehicle Flows 3F-24 Effect of Flight Frequency on Air Passenger 118 Trips/Year 3F-25 Comparison of Observed and Synthesized Air 119 Passenger Trips/Year -64-  FIGURES Follows Number Page 3F-l Overall Study Work Flow 66 3F-2 The Freight Transport Models 66 3F-3 Idealized Transport Network 68 3F-4 City Screenlines for Road Transport Checks 76 3F-5 Comparison of Observed and Synthetic Cumulative 82 Trip Length Distribution - Commodity Class 3 3F-E Distribution Probability Curve - Commodity 82 Class 3 3F-7 Modal Allocation - Diversion Curves 87 3F-8 Trucks Required to Carry 10 Tons of Freight 97 3F-9 Passenger Modal Split Rail/Bus 111 3F-I0 Flight Frequency Adjustment 118 -65-  INTRODUCTION This appendix describes the computer transport models developed by the Study to forecast movements of passengers and goods. Figure 3F-l shows the modeling work in the context of the overall study work flow. There are two basic subdivisions to the transport model: freight models and passenger models. The more complex of these are the freight models which are illustrated in Figure 3F-2. The ordering and linkage of all the models is described below. Freight Network Model - This uses the network data and the transport costs and times to compute minimum zone-to-zone routes, and also the parameter matrices of cost and time associated with these routes. The network data consist of a description of the transport facilities being considered, i.e. the infrastructure and the characteristics of road, rail, river and pipeline transport. Also included are definitions of rail services or routes, and the location of possible points of transfer between modes. For the transport costs in the base year, observed tariffs were used in which case the minimum routes were computed using time as a criterion. In 1989, variable economic costs were used for computing routes. -66-  Distribution Models - The inputs to these models consist of the zone-to-zone transport costs produced by the network model, together with zonal productions and consumptions of goods. The outputs are matrices of zone-to-zone flows of goods for each commodity. Modal Allocation Model - The inputs to this model consist of the modal transport costs produced by the network model, the excess time costs,. and the flow matrices produced by the distribution models. The outputs are two flow matrices for each commodity class, one made up of flows which use only road and the other of flows which use rail for some part of their journey. Vehicle and Assignment Models - These models convert the tonnage flows produced by the modal allocation model into vehicle flows using as input time matrices produced by the network model. The road tonnages are first converted into loaded trucks and then empty trucks are added. The rail flows are converted directly into loaded wagons. The final stage of this procedure is to assign the vehicle flows onto the routes produced by the network model to give the number of vehicles on each transport link. Passenger Models - There are three different passenger models. These are all regressipn based and consist of the surface public transport model, the private car model and the air model. They are similar in form to the freight models being made up of, firstly, the passenger network model which produces zone-to-zone routes, costs and times; secondly, the regression model which produces zone-to-zone passenger flows, and thirdly, in the case of surface public transport, a modal allocation model to split bus and rail trips. These trips are finally converted to vehicle flows which are assigned to the network. Thus, taken with the results of the freight models, the total flow on each link can be obtained. -67-  RECOMMENDED TRANSPORT .--- POLICIES AND TARIFFS " / CONSTRUCT DETAILED FORECAGT I NVESTMENT AND , - SOCIO - ECONOMIC "- I-- I--- / ECONOMY FINANCIAL PROGRAM ,,- BASE ,V ,,- (981 _1990 " " ;~~~iit~~ , , FORECAST EVALUATE INDICATIVE / / TRANSPORT DEMAND /lND FLOWS ON EACH NETWORK + TR ANSPORT PROJE~ /I NO POLlCrES "- / INIlf.STMENT AND FINANCIAL PROGRAM 1991 _ 2000 v 'v ~ 4 DETAILED ROAD DEVELOP ~ MAINTENANCE / f' r--- TRAN:;PORT f--- PROGRAM COSTS 1981 - 1990 'V ANALYZE CURRENT / f' COLLECT DATA STATUS IN) FUTURE , ,,- II EOOMMENDlTIONS Oft OItGANIZA'rIOft POTENTIAL FOR " ~m" INCLUDING SURVEYS) / Of IACH 11001 DEVELOPMENT OF' ,j EACH MODE ,V ,/ f' FORMULATE ASPECTS COVERED ANALYZE POTENTIAL i-- "- TEST I-- IN APPENDIX 3F / DEIlf.LOPMEHT ARIA! PROGRAII 'V 'I' ANALYZE PO.18" i - - TRADE MTTERNS I - - AND ROUTES , ,,- RECOMMENDATIONS ON REORGANlUTlOlll OF' D.P.C. ., OVERALL STUDY WORK FLOW tu£u, Smil' a"J A~ociale~ FIGURE 3F -I~ ... .......................................... _ ~~ ...... _... _................................... _............. _.- .................. _...... _......................... . , : NE TWOR K MODEL . : TRANSPORT FREIGHT PRODUCTION AND TARIFF AND CONSUMPTION COST DATA NETWORK DATA ........ . ... .. .. .. .. .. . ... ....... . .. .. .. .. . ... .... ..............................~ ............. i : 0/ STH/8U TION MODELS DISTRIBUTION / DEPOT CONVERSION MODEL " (IF REQUIRED I FLOW MATRICES BY COMMODITY : ........................................................................ " ••.....,It'............................................. . : MODAL ALLOCATION MODEL MODAL EXCESS TIME ALLOCATIOfrii , MODEL COSTS "AIL TO_AGE IIDAD TONNAGE F LOW MATRICES FLOW MATRICES "' j.............•.•............•...•.•...•..••••.•.••••.••••••.•..'l~••••••••••••••••••••••.•.•••• :lIlt'••••••••.•.••••••.•.•....•......... : VEHICLE MODELS RAIL WAGON LOADED TRUCK MOVEMENTS MOVEMENTS : ....................................................................... ::'I~......... - ••• : ASSIGNMENT MODEL VEHICLE EMPTY TfinJCK ASSIGNMENTS MOVEMENTS . , : .......................................................................................................... -:...................................................................... " THE FREIGHT TRANSPORT MODELS WL,~.lAIMi.'.$ FIGURE 3F -2  THE FREIGHT NETWORK MODEL The function of the network model is to define the trans- port system for testing so that information on transport characteristics by mode can be extracted for use in later models. The network describes the characteristics of each mode present in the transport system and the characteristics of transfers between modes. The main feature of the network model is its ability to compute optimum routes between pairs of analysis zones. Net- work evaluation programs are available for extracting informa- tion on zone-to-zone travel characteristics by mode, including direct transport costs. A detailed description of the base year transport networks is given in Working Paper 50 (1). The main elements of the network are briefly described below. Definitions A transport network represents a physical transport system in numerical terms, designed for use in a computer. As shown in Figure 3F-3, the network describes the character- istics of each mode present in the transport system and the transfers among the transport modes. Nodes - The nodes form a set of defined geographical points that occur at break points in the transport system. For example, in the road network they usually represent intersections or pOints where the physical characteristics change significantly; in railroads they represent stations and also junctions, in rivers, ports and confluences; airports in the air network; and conjunctions and points where the diameter of the pipes change in pipelines. There are special classes of nodes that do not have the same physical interpretation and these represent the zone centroids and transfer nodes. The first are the pOints where it is supposed that the movements from and to zones begin and end and the latter represent the transfers between the modes. (1) Redes de Trans or~ ara el Ano Base (Base Year Transport Networks, Working Paper 50, Bolivian National Transport Study, April 1980. -68-  I, The nodes have a number assigned for their identification. In the case of zone centroids, the nodes have the same number as the zone. ., Links - The links represent the physical elements of the transport system and are the basic elements through which the network is described in the computer. For example, in the road II network, the section between two intersections forms a link, provided that the characteristics of the road do not change between the two intersections. In the same manner, in railroads, the section between two stations chosen as nodes is also a link. " Special links in the network are: the centroid connectors that link the centroids with the network proper and allow access from the zones to the network; and the transfer links that link the transfer nodes with network nodes and facilitate transfer of cargo and passengers between the transport modes. These links in general do not represent physical infrastructure, but the impedance that freight and passen<;rers encounter in entering or leaving the network, or in transferring between modes. The links are defined to the computer by the nodes at each end, by the mode and jurisdiction, and by their physical characte- ristics such as distance, travel time, altitude, etc. " Modes, Jurisdictions and Services The mode is the prin- cipal form of classifying links. Thus, all the network links are classified by the transport rrode that uses them. Also, wi thin one basic mode, there are sufficient dif'ferences to justify other classifications. There are four classes of modes: modes with services, modes without services, centroid modes and transfer modes. Modes with services are those that run with schedules on specific routes, e.g. passenger trains. The services are described to the computer by indicating the links traversed. Modes without services would be those where the routes through the network can vary for each consignment and are not subject to any schedule. A typical example are truck movements in the road network. The centroid modes are used to classify the centroid connectors and the transfer modes to identify the transfer links. The jurisdiction is a subclass within the mode, used to represent special characteristics. Its primary function is to allow the separation of unit costs within a mode, for example it is possible to specify vehicle operating costs for different types of road surface (paved, gravel or earth) if a different jurisdiction is specified for each surface class. -69-  LEGEND 2401~ -t 2 2 03 ........l 2202 ~ Centroid . \\ . a-.·. ~-- o Transfer node I " i "-.,L \ '''. , 'r2\. • Road,rail,rlver nodes \-"" " '-'-, 501 \\ : I ----;:q-.,--, ./~ ·t \ I . Air node , ili ". I ~ \ " '> • __ .t 1002 ,-, ,\ "',,\ I' ''\ -e t ........ Road link Roil link "\- 2402 River link 5 0 2 \- \ Transfer link \ Centroid connector 2002 ~ 503 /".'fl .. ~, -~ / I'" 2201 I"'" I'. 003~-, ___,.j) __ ---i· 2404 t fio~ 2 " "'504\ ;' 'm \. IDEALIZED TRANSPORT NETWORK WI/,ur 5;milh and A'Hocialt':J FIGURE 3F-3  Internal Freight Network - The freight network is concerned only with the internal freight movements and comprises the fol- lowing modes: (1) Trucks that run without fixed routes or schedules on the three types of road links: affected, not affected and interrupted by the rainy season. (2) River freight transport carried out on the Orthon, Beni, Ichilo-Mamor~ and Itonamas-Itenez rivers. (3) The pipelines as a whole, through which oil, natural gas and petroleum products are transported. (4) The freight trains that run on the Oriental and Andean railroad systems. In the freight network, this is the only mode with services. Freight Tariffs The operation and calibration of the subsequently described models use as an important input zone-to-zone tariffs, because these are what the transport user has to pay for transport services. These tariffs, which were determined for the Study's base-year (1977) are described in detail in several working papers and so are only presented briefly here. Road Tariffs - The derivation and details of these are presented in Working Paper 33c (2). The equations used relate tariff to distance and are summarized below: (i) Interdepartmental Truck T = 0.80D Where T = Tariff per ton in Bolivian Pesos. D = Distance in kilometers. This equation was used for all movements between Department capitals. (ii) Interprovincial Truck - Agricultural Products For paved routes: - in flat terrain T = 49.9 + 1.33 D - in undulating terrain T = 49.9 + 1.46 D - in mountainous terrain T = 49.9 + 1.58 D For unpaved routes: - in flat terrain T = 49.9 + 1.83 D - in undulating terrain T = 49.9 + 1.91 D - in mountainous terrain T = 49.9 + 2.00 D. (2) Tariffs of Road TransEort, Working Paper 33c, Bolivian National Transport Study, July 1980. -70-  '. '. Beside these basic equations, regional factors were ,. also applied to reflect differing costs in different areas. These are: Altiplano 0.75 Yungas 0.80 Valleys 0.80 Santa Cruz 1. 25 Pando 1.50 Other areas 1. 00, These equations were used for the movements of ~ agricultural produce ,that is commodity classes 1 to 12, within one Department (3). " (iii) Interprovincial Truck - Other Products For paved routes T = 18.3 + 1.052 D For unpaved routes T = 18.3 + 1.256 D These equations were used for the movements of all other products, not covered by the agricultural equations, within one Department. For movements between zones in different Departments, but not Department capitals, the tariff was calculated by adding the interdepartmental rate between the capitals to the relevant interprovincial rate. River Tariffs - The derivation and details of these are presented in Working Paper 34 (4). They consist of tables of port-to-port tariffs and were used in that form.. Thus,if a zone-to-zone movement used river as part of its path, then the relevant port-to-port tariff was added to the cost of that movement. Rail Tariffs - The derivation and details of these are presented in Working Paper 17 (5). The tariffs were derived from a computer tape provided by ENFE and were aggregated into the following cost groups according to type of rail car used: (3) For definition of commodity codes, see Appendix of Bolivian National Transport Stud~, Progress Report, prepared by Wilbur Smith and Associates for the Bolivian Government, IBRD and UNDP, Septe~ber 1979. (4) River Transport Operating Costs and Tariffs, Working Paper 34, Bolivian National Transport Study, March 1980. (5) Derivation of 1977 Railroad Flows and Tariffs, Working Paper 16, Bolivian National Transport Study, April 1980. -71- COST GROUP CAR TYPE CORRESPONDING STUDY COMMODITY CLASSES 1 Wagon 18-20, 30 2 Tanker 17 3 Flat Bed 26, 34-38 4 Box Car 1 4-7 5 Box Car 2 1 6 Box Car 3 2, 3, 8-12, 16, 21-25, 27-29, 31-33,39 Whenever possible, the tariffs actually recorded on the computer tape were used: however, in cases where there was not an observed movement, tariffs were estimated using a set of regression equations. These equations related tariff to distance and are presented in Table 3F-I. Pipeline Costs - As far as the transport of petroleum pro- ducts by pipeline is concerned, the concept of tariffs is not applicable, since the pipelines are owned and operated by the same company that produces and transports the products. Thus a cost rather than a tariff was placed on pipeline linY~. This was taken to be $b 0.08 per ton-kilometer. Pipeline costs are documented in Working Paper 22 (6). Route Choice Zone-to-zone routes (paths) were computed for each major mode by assuming the travel time through the network was to be minimized. As tariffs were used instead of costs in the base year, it was not possible to use this as a routing criterion, because tariffs only apply to complete journeys and not to the links that make up the route. Four sets of paths were built for the base year. These were: (i) Rail favored paths - these were built by dividing all rail times by four, thus ensuring that all movements that could reasonably use rail would do so. The factor of four was determined by examining selected paths for various factors and choosing the one that appeared most reasonable. As not all analysis zones are connected to the rail system, some of the paths also used road or river, wholly or partially. (6) Existing Pipeline Characteristics, Working Paper 22, Bolivian National Transport Study. -72-  .. ·f Table 3F-l ,I REGRESSION OF RAIL FREIGHT TARIFF AGAINST DISTANCE 'IJ COST DISTANCE (1) CONSTANT (1) CORRELATION GROUP COEFFICIENT TERM COEFFICIENT ($b per ton) ($b per ton) ·f 1 0.45 93 0.78 2 0.55 290 0.80 3 0.71 21 0.87 4 0.38 66 0.92 5 0.35 385 0.74 6 0.49 62 0.75 (1) The equation is of the form Tariff = a x Distance + c where a is the distance coefficient and c is the constant term. -73-  (ii) Road/river paths - these were built by banning all movements on rail so that the paths could only use road or river. (iii) Pipeline/rail paths - these were built with the pipe- line links included in the network and rail favored as before. (iv) Pipeline/road paths - these were built with the pipe- line links included and rail banned. Parameter Matrices One of the main uses of the paths described above is in the accumulation of various zone-to-zone parameters. Thus by summarizing the distances along the path from one zone to another and applying the tariff equations described earlier, zone-to-zone tariff matrices can be built. These matrices have many uses in the subsequent models. For instance, the minimum tariff for each zone pair between the tariff matrices built from paths (i) and (ii) above forms the input to the distribution models for all commodities except commodity 17, petroleum products suitable for pipelines, for which the minimum of costs built from paths (iii) and (iv) is used. The individual tariff matrices from (i) and (ii) are also used in the inputs to the modal allo- cation model. Similarly the number of mode changes or rail service changes on the paths can be summed to provide an indication of possible delay occuring on the route. This is also an input to the modal allocation procedure. The third type of parameter matrix calculated is that of zone-to-zone times. These are used in the loaded and empty truck models Assignment The other major use of paths is the assignment technique. This involves placing the tonnage or vehicle flows on each link forming part of its path from origin to destination. If this is carried out for all origins and destinations, the result is the total flow on each link. -74-  An illustration of the volumes resulting from this process is given in Table 3F-2." This compares the counts on the city screenlines made during the roadside interview survey for 16 hours and factored back to 1977, with the results of an assignment of 1977 24-hour vehicle matrices. Allowing for the difference in time period, the comparison is very close indeed. • The city screenlines for which this comparison was made are shown in Figure 3F-4. The screenlines are frequently used for comparison throughout this report. -75-  Table 3F-2 COMPARISON OF VEHICLE COUNTS WITH NETWORK ASSIGNMENT LIGHT VEHICLES BUSES TFGCKS M:Y.roRCYCLES (1) (2) CI'IY Counted Assigned Counted Assigned Counted Assigned Counted Assigned La Paz 418 472 685 755 1216 1307 9 8 Oruro 283 318 328 384 643 706 10 9 Cochabamba 471 521 535 590 1289 1399 56 69 Santa Cruz 1290 1539 472 496 1858 1979 183 219 I Potos! 280 293 115 100 681 611 7 8 -...J m I Sucre 170 193 43 44 329 334 7 4 Tarija 226 243 44 45 267 322 22 27 'lbtal 3138 3579 2222 2414 6283 6658 294 344 (l) Results of 1979 inte:rview site counts factored back to 1977 16-hour daily flows. (2) Obtained by adding network assignnent of 1977 24-hour daily flows to oounted intra zonal flows.  THE FREIGHT DISTRIBUTION MODELS The analyses made by the Study of Bolivia's economic activity have quantified for each commodity and each analysis zone the tonnage produced in that zone and the tonnage consumed there (7). If imports are considered as a form of production and exports as a type of consumption, then for any commodity the total production over all zones will be equal to the total consumption in all zones. However, considering a particular zone, the quantity produced of a given commodity is only rarely exactly equal to the amount consumed there. Due to this imbalance of zonal production and consumption, it is necessary to distribute goods from their zone of produc- tion to zones of consumption and in this way to arrive at a matrix of zone-to-zone freight movements for each commodity. The process of determining a matrix of commodity zone-to- zone movements from a set of production and consumption data and a specified transport network is performed by a number of computer programs and manual analyses, collectively known as the Distribu- tion Model. The major factor in determining the pattern of freight movements is zone-to-zone transport costs. These costs are derived from the network model and are used as inputs to the distribution model. The function and development of the various elements of this model are described in this qection. The Modelling of Depots Before describing the main distribution models themselves, it is necessary to discuss the role of the depot in the distri- bution process and its subsequent modelling. The depot acts as a distribution center for the surrounding area that i t serves. It therefore receives products from one or more production units and then redistributes them at a later stage. These two move- ments are quite distinct and are therefore modelled separately. In general, a depot only handles the products of a single com- modity. From observations for the base year, only two commodities were found to use depots to any degree. These were sugar (com- modity 21) and cement(commodity 33). For these commodities both the production-to-depot and the depot-to-consumer movements are modelled. After specifying for each depot its location and the zones to be served by it, the consumption in each of these zones is summed to determine the throughput of the depot. This quantity is then considered as the amount consumed in the zone of the depot when modelling the first stage in the distribution process, and as the amount produced by the zone of the depot for the second stage. (7) Forecast and Distribution of Socia-Economic Variables, Working Paper 49, Bolivian National Transport Study. -77-  o 50 100 150 200 km. i - - - Screenlines ',;> I I l_, \ , / ') TARIJA / I I I I \ I / ) I \ "/ \ \ \ \ .,- ) , I -- I I / I I --------~ ._j I CITY SCREENLINES FOR ROAD TRANSPORT Wlbur Smith and A~uj C HE CK S FIGURE 3F -4  The production-to-depot movements are modelled in the normal manner. However, the depot-to-consumer movement can be modelled more simpl~ since supply at the depot must by definition exactly equal total consumption in the zones it is to serve. This second stage therefore only involves specifying each zone's final consumption as being the amount moved from depot to zones. Besides the above mentioned co~modities, two others show similar characteristics, although with important differences. Firstly, petroleum products suitable for pipelines (commodity 17)pass generally through a depot, in general at the terminal of the pipeline. This type of movement is handled by the pipe- line network model and does not require two separate distribution models. The second example is co~modity 24 A, food distribution, which was introduced as a result of the analysis of the roadside interview survey. This commodity consists of movements of various types of food and drink moved in small mixed shipments from the cities to the surrounding villages. As the origins of these movements are not depots but the cities' shops and markets, and as the freight moved is not of a consistent commodity, it was introduced as a separate cO~~Ddity and not treated as a depot movement. The Three Alternative Distribution Models The pattern of distribution of a particular commodity depends on a large number of factors. Some of these are influenced by the characteristics of the commodity itself while others are a function of the nUITber and location of alternative production units for the commodity and the relative location of the consumer. The distribution of meat for example would generally be typified by a short journey length, due to the highly perishable nature of the commodity. Tubers may also be expected to travel comparatively small distances on the average, although in this case this is due to their widespread production across the country. On the other hand, when a commodity is produced in only one zone and yet is consumed in every zone, then the journeys will vary in length over the entire range from very short to as far as the furthest zone from the production unit. When the product is also consumed in only a small number of zones, how- ever,then extreme journey lengths are not so corr~on due to the opportunity often available to plan the location of production units in proximity to the zones of production of the raw material. An example of this latter case are specialized products which are the raw materials of another industry, such as limestone for cement production. -78-  " 'I Due to this variety in patterns of distribution, three alternative distribution models have been developed. These models are described below, together with the situations in which they are thoughtto be adequate models of particular '. 'I distribution processes, or are considered to represent a reasonable compromise between conflicting types of distri- bution within a single co~~odity class. The models chosen for each of the commodities to be distributed are shown in Table 3F-3. Minimum Cost Model - In this model, the output of each "I production zone does not normally go to every consumption ,J zone but only to a sub-set of the zones in such a way that the total cost of distribution over the country as a whole is minimized. Since it is usually cheaper to transport goods over a short distance than a longer one, this logic generally results in production units serving only the consumption zones around it. Although the principle of minimizing costs for the system as a whole should be the basis for most distribution processes, it is in practice not always suitable as a model due to the unavoidable grouping together within a commodity class of distinct products produced in different production zones. Consider a commodity which is produced in both zones A and B. Then provided the consumption in B is less than or equal to the production in B, the minimum cost model will not distribute any of the production from zone A to B. If, however, the commodity class contains two distinct products, one of which is produced in zone A and the other in zone B, and both products are consumed in zone B, then in reality some of the production from zone A will be transported to B. The use of this model is therefore best suited to commodi- ties containing essentially only one type of product such as bottled gas, rather than a number of many distinct items. Cost Independent Distribution Model - In this model, each production zone distributes to every consumption zone, but in a way which is independent of the transport costs to reach each zone. If a particular production zone produces X percent of the total national production of a commodity, then the quantity transported from that zone to a zone whose total consumption of that commodity is T tons may be taken as X percent of T. -79-  Table 3F-3 COMMODITIES AND THEIR DISTRIBUTION MODELS COMMODITY DISTRIBUTION COMMODITY DISTRIBUTION Number Description MODEL (1) Num5e~ DescriptIon MODEL (1) 1 Live animals M 21 (2) Sugar and confectionary M 2 Meat and fish M 22 Flour and grain products M 3 Other animal products G 23 Beverages G 4 Corn M 24 Other food and tobacco pro- 5 Rice M ducts G 6 Wheat M 24 A Food distribution M I 7 Other cereals M 25 Textiles and leather products G ro 8 Potatoes and orh~r tubers M 26 Wood and wood products G o 9 Fruit G 27 Paper and paper products G I 10 Vegetables G 28 Fertilizers M 11 Sugar cane M 29 Other chemicals G 12 Other agricultural products G 30 Sand and aggregates M 15 Gas in bottles M 31 Lime and plaster M 16 Petroleum products un~uitat·le for 32 Bricks, etc. M pipelines M 33 (2) Cement M 17 Petroleum products suitable for 34 Iron and steel G pipelines M 36 Non-ferrous metals M 18 Iron ore M 37 Vehicles and transport equip- 19 Non-ferrous metallic minerals M ment C 20 Non-metallic minerals M 38 Machinery G 39 Miscellaneous manufactures G (1) The distribution models are: M - minimum cost; G - gravity; and C - cost independent. (2) This refers to the production-to-depot movement.  'I Such a model is suitable for a commodity which consists of II, a number of discrete products (e.g. vehicles) ,each of which is produced in only one zone and for which the relative proportions of the products consumed are reasonably constant in all zones. "I Gravity Model - In this third distribution model considered, each production zone distributes to every consumption zone, but the quantities involved are a function of the cost of transport to these zones. If two zones, A and B, consume equal amounts of the commodity, but the cost of transport to zone A is cheaper than to B, then the model will distribute a greater quantity from the production zone to A than to B, provided of course that other production zones exist to satisfy the remaining demand at B in a reasonable manner. The gravity model in effect supposes that a commodity may sometimes be transported extreme distances, from a production unit to the furthest consumption zone, but that cheaper (shorter) journeys are more likely. With this model, a production zone generally transports most of its output to the neighboring area, with diminishing (though non-zero) quantities being distributed to zones further away. The value of this model is chiefly that it represents a compromise between the two extreme situations covered by the two models described earlier, rather than being itself a representation of an actual or desirable distribution process. The mathematical formulation is: Tij Where: Tij = Movement from zone i to zone j Pi = Production in zone i Cj = Consumption in zone j d .. ~J = Cost from zone i to zone j "II F = Distribution probability function n = Number of zones. -81-  Calibration of Gravity Distribution Models - For the first two types of distribution model described, no calibration is possible, since for a given set of productions, consumptions and costs, the resulting zone-to-zone movements are completely determined. However, for the gravity model, the function P, shown in the formula above, must be calculated. This function gives, for any trip cost, the relative probability of a trip occurring. The method used in the calibration is to find a probability function which results in a trip length distribution of synthesized flows, which is as similar as possible to that of observed flows. A trip length distribution function gives for each cost interval the percentage of the total flow which oc~ in that interval. An example of the cumulative observed and synthesized trip length distribution is given in Figure 3F-5 for commodity 3. The distribution probability function obtained for this commodity is shown in Figure 3F-6. The data, on which the observed trip length distributions were based, were only complete for rail movements. For road movements, most data were obtained in the roadside interview survey (RIS), which generally covered only intercity and city- rural movements. It was thought that these would form most of the interzonal movements, as rural-rural movements of long distance are unusual. Thus the interzonal trip length distribu- tion derived from the RIS data was retained, and adjustments were only made to the intrazonal element. This element was estimated by comparing zonal statistics of production and consumption against roadside interview data. Thus, if produc- tion and consumption in a zone were both high, but observed movements into and out of the zone were low, it was concluded that the percentage of intrazonal movements was high and vice versa. The percentage of intrazonal trips and the average trip cost are shown in Table 3F-4. Also shown are the Chi-squared obtained between the observed and synthesized trip length distributions, together with the degrees of freedom, which allow an estimate to be made of the final closeness of fit. Validation of the Distribution Model Since no national statistics exist of total ton-kilo- meters transported, the major check available on the cali- bration of the distribut"ion model is the comparison of screenline crossings. Table 3F-5 presents such a comparison between a network assignment of the observed tonnages and one of the synthesized tonnages for the cities around which inter- views were carried out. The observed flows in the table correspond well with the truck assignment shown earlier in Table 3F-2, with the following exceptions: -82-  " Table 3F-4 if GRAVITY MODEL CALIBRATION ,. PERCENT AVERAGE DEGREES OF '" COMMODITY INTRAZONAL TRIP COST CHI-SQUARED FREEDOfvl ,~ ($b. ) 'I, 3 43 233 44.0 81 'i~ 9 37 299 77.6 93 " 10 50 278 61.7 117 I. 12 18 293 72.0 91 ~ 23 54 143 37.3 69 ,11 24 44 190 56.1 69 '~ 25 65 108 30.4 67 26 38 234 34.9 81 " 27 41 212 41.9 57 ill 29 28 236 52.7 69 34 7 311 35.9 74 1 38 4 354 57.8 75 39 8 278 42.9 76 -83-  100 OBSERVED 90 SYNTHETIC ao 70 60 CUMULATIVE PERCENTAGE 50 OF TRIPS 40 :30 20 10 o 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 aoo 900 Trip Cost $b COMPARISON OF OBSERVED AND SYNTHETIC CUMULATIVE TRIP 'milk an!-~!!i~l:rH DISTRIBUTION - COMMODITY CLASS 3 FIGURE 3F- 5  o o r-. o o It) o o LC') o ~ o 'It _.t:l ... '" o c..i c.. o .~ o .- ,.., o o N o - o o o o o 8 0. 8 o o A.l1118\180~d 3AI.l\113~  Table 3F-5 COMPARISON OF OBSERVED AND SYNTHESIZED 1977 FREIGHT FLOWS RATIO CITY OBSERVED FLOW SYNTHESIZED FLOW SYNLOBS (1,000 Tons) (1,000 Tons) La Paz 1,195 1,352 1.13 Oruro 778 725 0.93 Cochabamba 1,706 1,625 0.95 Santa Cruz 2,074 2,123 1. 02 Potos! 402 462 1.15 Sucre 521 646 1. 24 Tarija 223 228 1. 02 Total 6,899 7,161 1. 04 -84-  Firstly with regard to the Santa Cruz screenline, the volume of sugar cane required by the city's refineries was used as the observed figure for commodity 11 instead of the lower figure obtained from the three days of roadside inter- view during the sugar cane season. .jj The other exception was in the Sucre and Potos! area where a more extensive roadside interview survey (8) had been carried out during the dry season, covering a total of 118 days inter- views as opposed to the 27 days of the National Transport Study. Thus, the observed dry season volumes for Sucre and Potos! are based on the more extensive survey; they were a::mbined with wet season figures from the National Transport Study interviews. After these adjustments, the total screenline crossings synthesized are within 4 percent of the observed figure, with the worst city comparisons, Sucre and Potos!, being for cities with two of the smallest absolute flows. , (8) Ltd. and Justifi- a) -85-  THE FREIGHT MODAL ALLOCATION MODEL The output from the distribution models consists of a set of matrices containing zonal flows, but with no specification of how these flows should be carried. The object of the freight modal allocation model, then, is to allocate the zone-to-zone freight movements among the available modes. This allocation is made on the basis of relative modal costs using a set of diversion curves derived from observed data. The modal costs employed include the cost of excess journey time as well as direct transport costs. The modes involved are only those of surface transport, with air being excluded from the model. This is because the freight volumes carried by air are very small, with the exception of meat transported from the lowlands to the Altiplano, a special case which is dealt with in a separate analysis. Several commodities have been excluded from this analysis. These are crude oil (commodity 13) and natural gas (14), because they are only shipped by pipeline; and also bottled gas (15), food distribution (24 A) and the depot-to-consumer parts of sugar (21) and cement (33) because of the short distance of travel involved. This section deals with the time costs, diversion curves and the modal allocation of the remaining com- modities. Form of the Model The model is based on the diversion curve technique. That is, that for any ratio of road cost divided by rail cost, a point is looked up on a curve, which gives the percentage of that movement which would go by the rail dominated route, with the remainder going by road. The form of the cost ratio is: Ratio = R+ 0 + CD + E + F where C = Cost of zone-to-zone road trip R = Cost of zone-to-zone rail trip 0 = Cost of road trip to railhead at or~g~n D = Cost of road trip from railhead at destination E = Cost of excess time F = Factor applied to average curves to give com- modity specific curves. -86-  'I It should be noted that the road and rail costs used in the base year calibration were observed tariffs. The other parameters used in the equation are explained in more detail in the following two sections. The diversion curves derived are shown in Figure 3F-7, in their general form, for agricultural products and other pro- ducts. Excess Time Costs This is the cost associated with the time taken to trans- port the freight. In general, the time given by the network model, which is the time spent in motion on either road or rail, is similar. However, rail wagons are more likely to be subject to delays while waiting in marshalling yards or sidings, but these times are not explicitly included in the network. For example, if the wagon, is initially attached to a train which is not going to the desired destination, then a marshalling opera- tion with its consequent excess time must be undertaken at an intermediate point in the journey. For these reasons, times coded in the network are ignored when calculating the additional time costs incurred by rail users, and a special evaluation program is used which accumu- lates a matrix of potential delay points for each zone-to-zone rail movement. The places where potential rail excess time can occur are summarized in Table 3F-6. 'l It has been assumed that a wagon accumulates a day's delay at each of these points encountered. Using the commodity value, and assuming an opportunity rate of capital of 12 percent, a time cost can be calculated for any particular rail journey to II be included in the total costs used for modal allocation for that commodity. These costs are shown by cOEmodity in Table 3F-7. Derivation of the Diversion Curves The two types of data that were required for the deriva- tion of diversion curves were (a) the cost ratios and (b) the corresponding road/rail modal split. In the cost ratios, the only terms which have not so far been explained are the cost of road trips to and from rail- heads and the cost factor. Concerning the first of these, a '! knowledge would be required of the true origins and destina- tions of rail freight movements. However, DC such data are available, although the opinion was expressed by ENFE repre- " sentatives that most road journeys forming a part of predominant- ly rail movements were short. As a result, a costcorrespon- ding to a road journey of ten kilometers was assumed in all cases where a rail siding was not thought to be available. These costs, in terms of 1977 pesos, were $b 65 per ton for agricultural products and $b 37 per ton for other products. -87-  ~ PEF CEt T R ~IL I ...... CrrHE,R ~ / t;RICUI lTURE V i .. ", J '-1 ----- -- '-V Af\ Ir J / - :::.0. ,--- V Ij . V / ~~~ i ~ ..." .1 .2 .3 . 4 . 5 . 6 . 7 .8 .9 I 2 3 4 5 10 RO A 0 / R A I Leo S T RAT 10 MODAL ALLOCATION - DIVERSION CURVES UAtt.,. Smith anJ A~ocinl'j FIG U R E 3F- 7  Table 3F-6 EXCESS TIME INCURRED IN TRAIN OPERATIONS OCCURRING ON THE TYPE EVENT OF LINK OR SERVICE TYPE OF OPERATION Loading wagon or Centroid connector - obtaining vehicles for loading truck (1) - loading vehicles. Transferring at Transfer link - unloading truck station (1) - obtaining wagons for loading I - loading wagons. CD CD I Operations at Counted as operation to - shunting wagons stations join the first train - dispatching train. service Intermediate mar- Junction with another train - marshalling wagons shalling - dispatching train. Inter-gauge transfer Transfer link and junction - shunting wagons with new train - transfer goods (or wagons to new boggies) - shunting wagons - dispatching train. (1) The operation at the destination is the same as at the origin.  TabJe 3F-7 EXCESS TIME COSTS COMMODITY COST OF ONE DAY COMMODITY COST OF ONE DAY (Sb/Ton) (Sb/Ton) ~ 1 4 22 2 2 11 23 9 , 3 10 24 17 li 4 2 25 76 5 3 26 9 '. " 6 2 27 2 '~ 7 2 28 10 8 3 29 10 '~ 9 4 30 0 10 4 31 0 11 0 32 3 .~ 12 7 33 1 16 2 34 8 17 1 36 8 19 66 37 43 20 0 38 49 21 1 39 52 -89-  Two criteria were applied todetenmne whether a particular zone-to-zone movement should be included in the analysis. The first was that a movement should have both of its ends in zones lying on the same rail system. The second was that at least one of the ends of the movement should be in a city around which roadside interviews had been conducted. These criteria were to ensure that the rail and road movements, respectively, were complete. Tabulations were then produced of road and rail movements against cost ratio. These tabulations were initially produced for each commodity individually. However, despite the fact that all rail movements were included, which had been derived from the complete ENFE records for 1977, little pattern was found at this level of detail. It was therefore necessary to further aggregate com- modities, with the best results obtained with two groups, one for agricultural products and the second for other products. An effort to disaggregate the data by distance bands was made, but produced no results worth including in the model. The data at their final aggregated level are shown in Table 3F-8 and diagrammatically in Figure 3F-7. As can be seen, the two curves are of very similar shape, with agricultural products being rather less likely to use rail, at any given cost ratio, than other products. As a result of the similarity in shape, it was decided to use the observed points in the predict- ive model, instead of regressing a theoretical curve through them. For other cost ratios, interpolation or extrapolation was used corresponding to the lines shown in Figure 3F-7. The curves as derived represent the average behavior over many commodities, and so another factor was introduced in their application to individual commodity classes. This factor, as shown in the earlier equation, was added to the rail cost before the cost ratio was calculated when applying the curves. It is either negative or positive according to whether a particular commodity class is more or less inclined to rail than the average of the group. The calibration process for each com- modity consisted of establishing a value for this factor which gave the closest results to the observed modal split. The values are given in Table 3F-9. Results of Modal Allocation Model The basic results of the modal allocation are presented in Tables 3F-IO and 3F-II in terms of tons and ton-kilometers. Whichever measure is employed, road is the dominant mode for transport movements within Bolivia. The percentage of rail use is somewhat higher for ton-kilometers than tons because of the longer trip lengths for rail, with an average of 375 kilometers as against 95 kilometers for road. For only two commodities does rail handle over ten percent of the tonnage; these are minerals and metals, about a third of which is carried by rail. -90-  Table 3F-8 OBSERVED MODAL ALLOCATION DATA - AGRICULTURE ~ COST RATIO WEIGHTED AVERAGE RAIL ROAD PERCENT RANGE COST RATIO TONNAGE TONNAGE RAIL " 0.00-0.79 0.55 1,910 184,216 1.0 0.80-1.19 1. 07 5,793 43,864 11. 7 ,It 1. 20-1. 79 1. 49 5,324 5,459 49.4 . 1. 80-2.79 2.36 4,710 4,353 52.0 • 2.80+ 3.16 444 175 71. 7 , ~ OBSERVED MODAL ALLOCATION DATA - MINING AND MANUFACTURING 1\ COST RATIO WEIGHTED AVERAGE RAIL ROAD PERCENT ,; RANGE COST RATIO TONNAGE TONNAGE RAIL 'I 0.00-0.19 0.10 864 82,599 1.0 0.20-0.39 0.30 12,345 368,861 3.2 0.40-0.59 0.50 15,522 416,410 3.6 ,j 0.60-0.79 0.70 31,856 214,475 12.9 0.80-0.99 0.90 19,326 61,135 24.. 0 ' '~ 1. 00-1. 59 1. 30 52,161 44,326 54.1 1. 60-2.19 2.01 13,609 11,094 55.1 2.20-2.39 2.30 8,390 2,835 74.7 2.40+ 2.73 3,247 221, 93.6 -91- "  Table 3F-9 COMMODITY CALIBRATION FACTORS COMMODITY FACTOR COMMODITY FACTOR 1 - 180 22 - 115 2 1,500 23 1,100 3 190 24 440 4 1,500 25 600 5 700 26 90 6 300 27 0 7 1,200 28 600 8 1,500 29 - 160 9 1,000 30 1,400 10 250 31 20 11 100 32 800 12 130 33 250 16 30 34 - 370 17 80 36 80 19 85 37 - 900 20 140 38 - 215 21 1,500 39 500 -92-  4 Table 3F-lO ;, ESTIMATES OF 1977 INTERNAL TON MOVEMENTS BY MODE ., -, :FI.aV IN 'lmS Rail Road COMMODITY GROUP (1) Tons Percent Tons Percent Total ". Agriculture 25,580 0.4 6,564,190 99.6 6,589,770 '. •• Mining 44,170 35.3 81,000 64.7 125,170 -oj Hydrocarbons 42,650 4.5 896,540 95.5 939,190 11 Food 20,420 1.9 1,080,080 98.1 1,100,500 Textiles 550 0.5 100,900 99.5 101,450 • Wood and Paper 43,490 9.0 437,270 91.0 480,760 ''I Chemicals 5,810 9.0 59,030 91.0 64,840 • Building Materials 26,060 0.9 2,950,250 99.1 2,976,310 'I Metals 11,200 31. 0 24,900 69.0 36,100 t Vehicles and Machinery 7,950 6.4 116,520 93.6 124,470 1 Total 227,880 1.8 12,310,680 98.2 12,538,560 (1) The commodity groups are made up of the following commodity classes (CC): Agriculture - CC 1-12; Mining - CC 19-20; Hydrocarbons - CC 15-17; Food - CC 21-24, 24Ai Textiles - CC 25; Wood and Paper - CC 26-27; Chemicals - CC 28-29; Building Materials - CC 30-33; Metals - CC 34-36: Vehicles and Machinery - CC 37-39. -93-  Table 3F-ll ESTIMATES OF 1977 INTERNAL TON-KILOMETERS BY MODE FLOW IN TON-KILOMETERS (1,000) Rail Road COMMODITY GROUP (1) Number Percent Number Percent Total Agriculture 11,483 2.1 547,362 97.9 558,845 Mining 17,237 30.8 38,700 69.2 55,937 Hydrocarbons 12,113 19.7 49,225 80.3 61,338 Food 9,875 4.0 235,764 96.0 245,639 Textiles 292 3.0 9,462 97.0 9,754 Wood and Paper 15,022 15.6 81,136 84.4 96,158 Chemicals 2,065 25.0 6,181 75.0 8,246 Building Materials 11,268 6.4 163,685 93.6 174,953 Metals 3,150 42.3 4,303 57.7 7,453 Vehicles and Machinery 2,995 7.9 34,885 92.1 37, 880 Total 85,500 6.8 1,170,703 93.2 1,256,203 (1) The commodity groups are made up of the following commodity classes (CC): Agriculture - CC 1-12; Mining - CC 19-20; Hydrocarbons - CC 15-17; Food - CC 21-24, 24Ai Textiles - CC 25; Wood and Paper - CC 26-27; Chemicals - CC 28-29; Building Materials - CC 30-33; Metals - CC 34-36; Vehicles and Machinery - CC 37-39. -94-  • Table 3F-12 gives a comparison between the observed and synthesized rail tonnages for each of the rail systems. The synthesized tonnage is one percent high overall, being com- posed of an excess of three percent on the Andean system and a deficit of three percent on the Oriental system. The total • rail synthesized ton-kilometer figure of 85.5 million also compares well with the result of assigning the observed flows, • which totalled 82.0 million ton-kilometers. No statistics on total tonnages and ton-kilometers exist for road transport so no similar comparison could be made for that mode. Data on truck flow comparisons are presented in the following sections on the truck model. -95-  Table 3F-l2 COMPARISON OF OBSERVED AND SYNTHESIZED 1977 INTERNAL RAIL TONNAGES 1 ANDEAN SYSTEM ORIENTAL SYSTEM TOTAL SYSTEM COMMODITY GROUP() Observed Synthesized Observed Synthesized Observed Synthesized Agriculture 8,522 7,230 15,889 18,350 24,411 25,580 Mining 42,133 42,360 2,348 1,810 44,481 44,170 Hydrocarbons 34,028 28,520 8,195 14,130 42,223 42,650 I Food 12,042 15,410 7,974 5,010 20,016 20,420 ~ cr'\ Textiles 120 530 408 20 528 550 I Wood and Paper 13,748 12,020 29,265 31,470 43,013 43,490 Chemicals 4,987 5,600 862 210 5,849 5,810 Building Materials 20,660 23,840 5,028 2,220 25,688 26,060 Metals 6,433 10,240 4,743 960 11,176 11,200 Vehicles and Machinery 4,475 6,090 3,748 1,860 8,223 7,950 Total 147,148 151,840 78,460 76,040 225,608 227,880 (1) The commodity groups are made up of the following commodity classes (CC): Agriculture - CC 1-12; Mining CC 19-20; Hydrocarbons - CC 15-17; Food - CC 21-24, 24A; Textiles - CC 25; Wood and Paper - CC 26-27; Chemicals - CC 28-29; Building Materials - CC 30-33; Metals - CC 34-36; Vehicles and Machinery - CC 37-39. SOURCE: Observed figures based on ENFE computer tapes. Synthesized figures derived by the Study.  THE VEHICLE AND ASSIGNMENT MODELS The previous section dealt with the derivation of road and rail flows in terms of tons. This sectior. explains the conversion of these flows into the units that physically carry them. That is, trucks on the road and wagops on the railroad, which are the units that need to be considered in designing or evaluating a transport system. Also dealt with in this section are the results of assigning these flows to the transport networks and their compa- rison with observations wherever sufficient data were available. Loaded Truck Model This model is used firstwhen converting the tonnage flows allocated to road by the modal allocation model into zone-to- zone vehicle flows. The method is based on a set of curves relating nu~ber of trucks required to carry a given load to journey time. These curves were derived from data extracteafrom the results of the roadside interview surveys, and are illustrated in Figure 3F-8. The curves as shown give the number of each truck type required to carry ten tons of freight. Thus for example, at a journey time of 300 minutes, 0.2 small trucks, 0.7 mediurr trucks and 0.6 large trucks would be required to carry ten tons(9). Normally much larger tonnages would be involved in a zone-to-zone JI'OVeIreI1t,and results are therefore given in whole numbers of vehicles. As can be seen from the figure, the average truck size increases as the journey length increases while at the same time the total number of trucks required falls. The curves illustrated are the average over all commodities, because no commodity by itself provided enough data to produce such curves. In their application, commodity specific factors derived from the data available for each commodity are used. The factors are applied to the number of vehicles obtained for any zone-to-zone movement and are shown in Table 3F-13. 'l'hese factors represent two different effects. Firstly, for example, petroleum products suitable for pipelines (commodity class 17 - CC 17) and cement (cc 33)have very low factors for both small and medium trucks, indicating that these products are rarely shipped in small quantities. Secondly textiles (CC 25) and miscellaneous manufactured products (CC 39) have high factors for all truck types, probably as a result of their being shipped in small consignments with bulk rather than weight determining the truck load. "'(9) TruCk loading capacities defined as follOVlS: small - 41 to 119 qq, necllum - 120 to 199 qq, large 120 qq or rrore; 1 qq (quintal) equals 46.36 kg. -97-  1.9 1.8 1.7 1.6 1.5 1.4 1.3 1.2 1.1 II) :lI:: () 1.0 ::J a:: .9 t- "- .8 0 a:: IIJ .7 a:J ~ ::J .6 z .5 .4 .3 .2 MEDIUM .1 SMALL - a 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 Time (Mins) TRUCKS REQUIRED TO CARRY 10 TONS OF FREI G HT _ tltUf' Smith and AJocialllJ FIGURE 3F' 8  Table 3F-13 COMMODITY FACTORS FOR LOADED TRUCK MODEL FACTOR APPLIED TO COMMODITY Small Trucks Medium Trucks Lar~e Trucks 1 2.295 1. 679 1.021 2 1. 925 1.195 0.812 3 2.104 0.859 1.036 4 1.550 1.115 0.813 5 0.745 1.072 0.739 6 1.129 0.850 0.910 7 1.994 1.255 0.711 8 2.898 1.639 1. 053 9 1. 866 1.169 0.789 10 3.193 1.663 0.933 11 0.357 0.809 0.375 12 0.897 1.149 0.757 15 1.737 0.532 0.999 16 1. 249 0.795 1. 025 17 0.145 0.103 1.477 18 0.344 0.544 1.124 19 0.951 0.630 0.939 20 0.972 0.752 0.962 21 0.560 0.510 0.919 22 2.038 1.110 0.919 23 2.033 0.771 1.334 24 3.321 1.199 1.101 25 4.184 0.949 1. 361 26 1.152 0.896 0.768 27 1. 823 0.583 1.216 28 2.030 0.994 0.966 29 1.133 0.464 1.242 30 0.833 0.908 0.326 31 1.300 1.105 0.638 32 1.448 0.847 0.892 33 0.247 0.282 1.116 34 0.763 0.691 1.157 36 1.441 0.616 0.992 37 0.457 0.531 1.245 38 1. 894 0.613 1.014 39 4.383 1.320 1.088 -98-  Table 3F-14 shows the results of applying these curves together with the commodity factors to the tonnages observed in the roadside interview. The comparison between the syn~­ sized results and the observed number of trucks is in general very good. Again, this table illustrates the variation of vehicle .,' size with trip length, large trucks making up 78 percent of the journeys of over 10 hours, but only 19 percent of journe~less than 5 hours. 'III Empty Truck Model The second stage in the production of truck flows is to estimate the movements of trucks carrying no freight. These were derived using a regression equation, based on data observed in the roadside interview surveys, which related empty truck moverrents (of a particular size vehicle) to loaded truck reove- ments of that vehicle size, and also to trip length. This trip length was represented by journey time rather than any other measure of zonal separation, because it gave the best results in the regression analysis. A basic assumption in this model is that total truck flows between each pair of zones should be symmetrical. Thus, if the loaded truck flows are not symmetrical, sufficient empty truck movements are added to the direction with the lower flow to make it so. The regression equation is now used to add the further empty truck movements beyond those required to make the flow symmetrical. The form of the equation is: (FAB X FBA)q . 1 Where: EAB = Number of excess empty truck movements from zone A to zone B of a particular truck size FAB = Number of loaded truck movements from zone A to zone B of that truck size TAB = Journey time from zone A to zone B p,q,r = Constants to be determined. Thus if FAB is greater than FBA,then the total of empty trucks from A to B is s1mply EAB, and the total of empty trucks from B to A is (FAB - FBA + EBA). As the time from A to B is equal to the time from B to A, EAB is equal to EBA and so the truck move- ments between A and B are symmetrical. '!he above equation could not be used for the prediction of intrazanal errpty truck IIDverrents because in this case journey time is not defineO. So the follCMing equation was used for this type of traffic: E = s F t 'A A -99-  Table 3F-14 COMPARISON BETWEEN OBSERVED AND SYHTHESIZED LOADED TRUCK TRIPS 1977 TIME SMALL TRJCl<S :MEDIUM TRUCKS LARGE TROCKS 'lUI'AL INTERVAL CEserved !'.Ynthesi zed Observed Synthesized Observed ~thesized Observed Synthesized (Minutes) 0- 99 143,091 139,069 417,543 416,623 104,081 93,110 664,715 648,802 100-199 19,848 20,910 57,874 58,279 35,885 37,459 113,607 116,708 200- 299 7,221 8,385 19,346 20,258 17,842 18,009 44,409 46,652 300-399 8,071 8,165 17,759 19,061 20,512 21,356 46,342 48,582 400-499 2,602 2,765 10,429 6,433 6.545 7,596 19,576 16,794 500-599 4,273 4,668 16,709 14,649 20,799 20,793 41,781 40,110 600-699 1,180 2,455 5,168 7,625 13,637 13,348 19,985 23,428 I I-' 700-799 1,465 0 639 2,973 2,189 4,609 6,175 9,047 9,003 0 I 800-899 1,171 1,923 4,610 8,644 38,196 41,177 43,977 51,744 900+ 2,069 1,935 9,436 8,160 42,117 45,153 53,622 55,248 Total 190,991 190,974 561,847 561,921 304,223 304,176 1,057,061 1,057,071 where: = number of empty truck movements within zone A of a particular truck size = number of loaded truck movements within zone A of that truck size s,t = constants to be determined. The regression constants determined and the correlation coefficients obtained are presented in Table 3F-15. Results of Truck Assignment The final stage in the analysiS of truck flows is the assignment of the zone-to-zone movements to produce volumes on roads. This is done by routing the movements along the minimum paths and accumulating volumes on the various links. Some of the overall results of this process are shown in Table 3F-16. From this it can be seen that, although medium trucks 1 are the most important in terms of number of trips, large trucks , dominate in truck-kilometers because of their much greater trip length. Small trucks are mostly used for short distance trips with only 28 percent going outside the zone of origin; of these, only 38 percent are loaded. The comparable figures for large trucks are 64 percent and 58 percent, respectively. Table 3F-17 gives a comparison of the city screenline cros- sings between an assignment of the observed and the synthesized aSSignment matrices. The excess of truck trips in the synthe- sized assign~ent for the cities of Santa Cruz, Potos! and Sucre is due to the same causes as were explained in the earlier section on the validation of the Distribution Model. If those cities are deleted from the comparison, then the remaining syn-· thetic totals are within one percent of the volumes observed for all truck types. !~ Rail \,-lagon Model This model is used to convert rail flows, in tons, into rail wagon movements. The method merely consists of applying an average load by commodity to the ton flows. The factors used are presented in Table 3F-18. Tiley were derived from an ENFE publication (10) which lists wagon movements by commodity for the Andean system. Applying these load factors to tonnages (given in the same publication) for the Oriental system gave a total number of wagons less than 2 percent dif- ferent from the number of wagons quoted. Thus it was concluded that average load by commodity was similar enough to be conside- red the same for the two systems, and that the different overall average load of 22.6 tons per wagon on the Andean system against 16.9 tons per wagon on the Oriental system was caused by the dif- ferent commodity mix on the two systems. ( i 0 ) Estadfstica Ferroviaria 1977 (Rail Statistics 1977), published by the Nat1Oi1a1 Railroad CbIrpany (ENFE), La Paz, 1978. -101-  Table 3F-15 CONSTANTS AND CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS FOR EMPTY TRUCK MODEL INTERZONAL EQUATION CONSTANT (1) SMALL TRUCK MEDIUM TRUCK LARGE TRUCK P 43.28 516.7 11.16 q 0.3893 0.3280 0.4711 r 0.4115 0.7655 0.4844 Correlation coefficient 0.86 0.87 0.84 INTRA ZONAL EQUATION CONSTANT (1) SMALL TRUCK MEDIUM TRUCK LARGE TRUCK s 5.82 4.27 15.77 t 0.8960 0.9055 0.7041 Correlation coefficient 0.92 0.93 0.86 (1) For definition of constan~/see text. -102-  'I Table 3F-16 SELECTED STATISTICS ON SYNTHESIZED INTERNAL TRUCK USAGE FOR 1977 TRUCK SIZE STATISTICS Small Medium Large I, Total truck trips 1,064,558 1,992,142 638,275 Total interzonal truck trips 294,556 731,644 409,974 Loaded trucks trips 453,982 1,085,168 422,584 Loaded interzonal truck trips 112,179 305,856 235,842 Truck kilometers (1,000 ) (1) 43,445 100,715 145,358 Average trip length (1) (km) 41 51 228 Average interzonal trip length 121 121 349 (1) Assuming an average intrazona1 trip length of 10 km. -103-  Table 3F-l7 CIMPARISCN OF ASSIGJMENTS OF OBSERVED AND SYNTHFSIZED DAILY TRUCK VOLlMES SMALL TRUCKS I>1EDIUM TRUCKS IARCE TRUCKS TOrAL CITY' Cbserved Synthesized Cbser\led Synthesi zed Cbserved Synthesized Cbser\led Synthesized La paz 195 212 536 430 367 422 1,098 1,064 Oruro 63 82 125 160 268 230 456 472 Cbchabamba 268 250 464 576 550 510 1,282 1,336 Santa Cruz 140 226 616 816 310 426 1,066 1,468 Potas.! 104 44 86 96 73 172 263 312 Sucre 31 26 71 84 75 214 177 324 I Tarija 35 22 73 48 67 94 175 164 ..... 0 . .bo I Total 836 862 1,971 2,210 1,710 2,068 4,517 5,140  ., Table 3F-18 II AVERAGE INTERNAL RAIL WAGON LOADS BY COMMODITY ,iii Andean System '. ·4 :AVERAGE WAGON AVERAGE WAGON ;" COMMODITY LOAD (Toos) COMMODITY I.QAD('T'OP s) 1 10.2 22 28.5 :~ 2 15.0 23 21. 3 3 28.0 24 22.0 4 18.5 25 12.3 5 28.5 26 21.2 6 30.6 27 14.4 ~i 7 22.8 29 20.9 8 28.8 30 23.1 '1 9 16.0 31 29.3 10 9.0 32 19.2 '4 12 19.1 33 23.3 16 24.7 34 21.3 17 23.7 36 10.9 19 28.1 37 15.0 20 27.2 38 15.5 21 29.4 39 10.4 SOURCE: Appendices 9 and 10 of Estad!stica Ferroviaria 1977 (Railroad Statistics 1977), published by National Railroad Company (ENFE), La Paz, 1978. -105-  The result of applying these factors to the synthesized tonnages is shown in Table 3F-19. For the Oriental system no breakdown of wagons by commodity carried is available, because rail records were not coreputerized for that system in 1977. However, ENFE quotes a total of 4,813 internal wagon movements in a table which also records internal tonnage as 26,427 tons. In all other references to internal tonnage in the publication, the figure quoted is 23,240 tons. If it is assumed that the first reference includes soree movements which are continuations of import or export flows, and that the wagon total can be factored in proportion to the tonnage ratios, then a total of 4,233 internal wagon movements is arrived at. This is extremely close to the synthesized total shown in the table. -106-  it Table 3F-19 COMPARISON OF OBSERVED AND SYNTHETIC INTERNAL RAIL WAGON MOVEMENTS - 1977 ANDEAN SYSTEM ORIENTAL SYSTEM COMMODITY Observed Wagons Synthesized Wagons Synthesized Wagons Agriculture 623 558 1,474 Mining 1,483 1,524 68 Hydrocarbons 1,435 1,202 608 Food 441 581 197 Textiles 15 43 2 Wood and Paper 572 668 1,514 Chemicals 231 268 10 Building Materials 601 344 135 Metals 856 887 99 Vehicles and Machinery 316 515 46 Unknown or not Specified 105 Total 6,678 6,590 4,153 SOURCE: Observed figures from Appendices 9 and 10 of Estad!stica Ferroviaria 1977 (Railroad Statistics 1977), published by National Railroad Company (ENFE), La Paz, 1978. Synthe- sized figures derived by the Study. 'i -107-  THE PASSENGER MODELS The model of personal trips seeks to establish mathematical expressions that allow the prediction of passenger flows through a determined transport network. When analyzing the characteristics of passenger travel, it becomes evident that there are reajor differences between the various modes used for person transport; it is therefore neces- sary to develop separate models for the following three catego- ries of passenger travel: • Passengers of public surface transport e Private car passengers • Air transport passengers. The pararoeters affecting passenger flow include generally the socio-economic characteristics in the zones of the trip origin and destination, the travel time between these zones, and the fares to be paid by the passenger. It can be noted that not all of these variables have to be included in the expression projecting the flow, but only those that prove to be significant. Passengers of Public Surface Transport In a similar manner to the freight network model, it is pos- sible to extract froIl'! the passenger network model the routes that the railroad trips follow and also the routes used for travel by bus. The same model is used to calculate the travel tiroes between these zones. Also, by applying the functions describing the tariffs charged for each service, the network model calculates the fares applicable for each trip. In railroad transport, two roodes are considered: passenger trains and ferrobuses. The functions that are entered into the network model to obtain the respective tariffs are based on ENFE's tariff book which was in force in 1977; they are as follows: For trains: TRF = 2.946 + 0.156 X d For ferrobuses: TRF = 4.81 + 0.255 )(' d where TRF is the 1977 tariff to be charged in pesos and d is the travelled distance in km. -108-  '~ '. ,II! The road transport tariffs present a bigger variety: for 't interdepartmental service, the tariff is expressed by,~: ~ TRF = 0.225 x d ,t Interprovincial transport requires a greater division, as detailed below: Altiplano in the La Paz Depart~ent TRF = 0.117 x d Yungas in the La Paz Department TRF = 0.256 x d Oruro Department TRF = 0.120 x d Santa Cruz Department TRF .. 0.181 x d Potosf Department TRF = 0.186 x d Chuquisaca Department TRF = 0.184 x d Cochabamba Department TRF = 0.180 x d Tarija Department TRF = 0.230 x d These formulae give 1977 tariffs in Bolivian pesos provided tha t the distance dis rr,easured in kilo~eters. The derivation of the constants is described in Working Paper 33c (11). Subsequently, a tariff matrix is built, indicating travel costs between pairs of zones. This is based on routings resulting in minimum tariffs, allowing for situations where several trans- port modes can be used. The results of the roadside origin/destination survey and the data extracted from the tape of ENFE statistics are the basis to obtain a ~atrix of interzonal trips. The total pas- senger travel between any two zones is then estimated by sum- ming rail and bus passengers. Once all the variables determining passenger travel have been defined, the mathematical expression representing the pas- senger flow between two zones is found by rr.eans of the ~ultiple linear regression method; the variables are being selected accor- ding to their statistical significance. The best correlation was obtained considering the following variables: total gross domestic product(GDF) in the zones of origin and destination and the travel cost between the two zones. These were related to passenger flow according to the following expression: FL = 10 ax A + bx B + Cx C + d where: FL = the annual passenger flow between a zone pair A = the logarithm of the travel cost between the zones B = the logarithm of the total GDP in the zone of origin C = the logarithm of the total GDP in the zone of desti- nation. (ll)Tariffs of Road Transport, Working Paper 33c, Bolivian National , -, Transport Study, July 1980. -109- L i~  The regression analysis resulted in the following values for a, b, c and d: a =-1.66039 b = 0.60029 c = 0.60028 d = 2.73526. The zonal GDP is calculated as the sum of two products. These are the urban population multiplied by the average urban GDP per person, and the rural population multiplied by average rural GDP per person. The above equation is used to predict total surface public transport passenger trips. The second stage of this model splits these passengers between the two modes of rail and bus. For this modal allocation a curve is defined that determines the proportion of trips that use rail as a function of the rail/bus trip cost ratio, with the remainder of the trips being assigned to bus. This curve was drawn up from observed data in the following manner: Firstly, the set of origin-destination pairs to be inclu- ded in the analysis was identified, i.e. those pairs for which complete information on the passenger flows by rail and bus was available. Secondly, the network model was used to calculate the rail and bus tariffs, and thus the tariff ratio for each movement. Thirdly, the rail and bus trips \-lere aggregated into groups according to the tariff ratio, and the percentage of rail trips for each tariff ratio group calculated. The results of this analysis are presented in Table 3F-20. The distribution function is found by linking the points determined for each passenger group of Table 3F-20 with straight lines on a logarithmic graph. The value of the function then indicates the percentage of rail passengers based on the ratio between the bus tariffs and the rail tariffs (Figure 3F-9). Returning to the matrix of interzonal movements and knowing the ratio between the tariffs, this matrix can be divided in two, one corresponding to railroad users and the other to bus users. Each element of these matrices is determined by a factor that represents the modal allocation function for the indicated move- ment assigning it to rail: the remainder of the passengers is carried by bus. The resulting flow is calibrated with the observed data. In the case of bus passengers, these are the passenger flows observed by the Study at the roadside survey stations; in the case of rail passengers the observed data are based on ENFE's statistics. Tables 3F-21 and 3F-22 indicate the results of the cali- bration. As can be seen for the bus volumes, the worst compari- son is for Santa Cruz. This is due to the almost urban nature -110-  Table 3F-20 OBSERVED MODAL ALLOCATION DATA - BUS AND RAIL PASSENGERS/YEAR RANGE OF BUS/ WEIGHTED AVERAGE RAIL TOTAL PERCENT RAIL TARIFF RATIO TARIFF RATIO PASSENGERS PASSENGERS ~..Ik. o- 0.69 0.37 74,357 3,604,630 2.06 0.70-1.19 0.91 326,429 6,186,213 5.29 1.20 - 1.59 1.25 128,291 1,895,888 6.77 I I-' I-' 1.60 - 1. 89 1. 68 75,001 133,195 56.31 I-' I 1. 90 + 2.07 20,654 20,654 100.00 .a. ... .", ~ - ,.; • • • • • 4 ~ 4 ~ r ""'I , en --0IIII I LL. rt) -0 c a: - 0 I I' C) lU Q: a. ~ ... e" I l- - La.. c ! ,a: ~ o II' ..... N :::J L-- ""- ~ i !:!3 III " '-... ~ i i ~ t-: ~ en ::) m ~~ ! ~ " - ..I - l I I ; I I I I " ", ! T ~ !<) c ~ 1 I '-" I- I I I N - - - l- . .I A. I I I I ! I en 1 I ! i I I ; q ! ..I I C i I I I C1l a 6 0 I CI) 2 0 I i I T j E I i ! ! 1&1 f'- CD I I 0 z 1&1 I en~ I I CD 6 en g .~ I -- ~~ 0 0 0 en 0 lID d f'- 0 CD d It) ~ 0 It) 0 N 2 I ~ 1 0 ~ tSn I!O~ Ok '" ~ ~ ~ J .....  Table 3F-21 ~ARISON OF OBSERVED AND SYNTHESIZED 1977 DAILY BUS F'I.1lA1S RATIO CITY OBSERVATIONS SYNTHESIZED FLOW SYN/OBS La Paz 738 664 0.90 Oruro 313 238 0.76 Cochabamba 553 606 1.10 Santa Cruz 365 158 0.43 Potosi 38 70 1. 84 Sucre 24 44 1. 83 Tarija 42 30 0.71 Total 2,073 1,810 0.87 -112-  Table 3F-22 COMPARISON OF OBSERVED Al.~D SYNTHESIZED 1977 ANNUAL RAIL PASSENGER FLOWS RATIO SECTION OBSERVED FLOW SYNTHESIZED FLOW SYN/OBS La Paz-Oruro 103,317 85,410 0.83 Oruro-R!o Mulato 43,193 44,530 1.03 R!o Mulato-Uyuni 28,243 23,360 0.83 Uyuni-Villazon 15,495 18,980 1. 22 Oruro-Cochabamba 196,568 107,310 0.55 R!o Mulato-Potos! 16,465 14,600 0.89 Potos!-Sucre 20,122 15,330 0.76 '. Santa Cruz-CorumbS 53,555 6,570 0.12 Santa Cruz-Yacuiba 37,606 27,740 0.74 SOURCE: Observed flows based on ENFE statistics. Synthesized flows derived by the Study. -113- of the movements in the area north of Santa Cruz towards Guabir! and Montero. The synthesized results for Potos! and Sucre are both high, but on very low observed volumes, and the problem found for frei9ht volumes in this area as was described earlier may be applicaole. In the case of observed rail volumes, both foreign trips and the large number of trips going to sparsely populated border areas have been excluded from the comparison. (The trips going to border zones have been included in the external passenger analysis.) The worst aEparisons are for the Cochabarnba-Oruro and the Santa Cruz-Corurnb! sections. For the latter the observed nurrher of trips implies that each person in the zones on that line made 3.33 trips per year as opposed to the national average of 0.27. These factors will be taken into account when this model is used for testing. Private Car Passengers From the network model, the travel times of light vehicles can be extracted for each path on the road system. The same model can also calculate travel costs based on only the fuel value, but this was not found to be a significant variable in the determination of private car travel. The socio-economic variable that is used in this model is the non-rural population of the zone. Based on these variables, an expression for passenger flow was derived through a multiple linear regression process. The final expression for private passenger flow is the following: FL = 10(ax A + b x B + ex C + d x D + e) Where: FL = the annual flow of light vehicles between a zone pair A = the logarithm of the travel time plus 60 minutes between zones of origin and destination B = the travel time plus 60 minutes C = the logarithm of urban population in the zone of origin D = the logarithm of urban population in the zone of destination. The constants a, b, c, d and e were found by regression analysis, which resulted in the following values: a =-4.05258 b = 0.00140 c = 0.21794 d = 0.21738 e =10.41454. -114-  The passenger flow between each zone pair is derived by the formula above and is then loaded onto the network in order to obtain the nUJTI.ber of vehicles using each road link. These flows are calibrated with those observed at the road survey screenlines. The results of this calibration are shown in Table 3F-23. A relatively great discrepancy is observed at the screenlines around Cochabamba and Santa Cruz, particularly at the short paved road links carrying large traffic volumes, as is the case with the links between Cochabamba, Sacaba and Angostura. The link between Santa Cruz and Montero is different from most links in the country, in that it is used by many persons that live in Santa Cruz and work in Montero, and vice versa, producing a high number of observed trips without Montero having a big enough urban population to attract, in the model, as many interurban car trips as were observed. Air Transport Passengers The air passenger model is a two phase model, the first part of which is a regression JTlodel and the second part an adjustment for flight frequency. It was not possible to include frequency in the regression model, since in this case it would have become the most important variable in the equation. This would mean that in future productions the frequency input would determine the number of passengers almost irrespective of the values of the other variables. For this type of model it is obviously desirable that frequency should be an output rather than an input. Air Regression Model - The variables that proved most signi- ficant in this analysis were: total gross domestic product (GDP) , in the zones of origin and destination, as described earlier; travel cost; and difference in time between surface public trans- port and air. The following equation was determined to predict basic passenger flow: FL = lO a It A + bit B + C It C + d It 0 + c where: FL = Annual passenger flow for a zone pair A = Logarithm of trip cost B = Logarithm of trip time difference C = Logarithm of total GOP in the zone of origin 0 = Logarithm of total GOP in the zone of destination. The regression analysis determined the values of the con- stants which are: -115-  Table 3F-23 COMPARISON OF OBSERVED AND SYNTHESIZED 1977 DAILY PRIVATE VEHICLE FLOlvS RA.TIO CITY OBSERVED FLOW SYNTHETIC FLOW SYN/OBS La Paz 442 476 1.08 Oruro 220 282 1. 28 Cochabamba 486 828 1. 70 Santa Cruz 1,108 192 0.17 Potos! 113 lOS 0.96 Sucre 84 104 1. 24 Tarija 106 116 1. 09 2,559 2,106 O. 82 -116-  ,., a =-1. 51535 b = 0.15721 " c = 0.83983 d = 0.83983 '" e = 0.83478. <Ii It should be noted that, because coefficient b is positive, the n~ber of air trips decreases as surface public transport time between a pair of zones decreases. Flight Frequency Adjustment Model - This was derived by plotting the ratio of observed trips between a zone pair divided by the trips predicted by the above model against flight frequency per week. These data are shown in Table 3F-24 and the line regressed through them is Figure 3F-10. The equation of the regressed line is: R = 5)( (1 _ e - 0 • 0 2 818 Fl. 5 ) where: R = The factor by which to ~ultiply regressed trips in order to get final trips F = Flight frequency per week. The results of applying these models are shown in Table 3F-25 for major city pairs. The regression model by itself under- estimates trips between zone pairs with high flight frequency and overestimates those with low flight frequency. Although the results after application of the adjustment are not perfect, they are a definite improvement over the pure air regression model. '\ -117-  Table 3F-Z4 EFFECT OF FLIGHT FREQUENCY ON AIR PASSENGER TRIPS/YEAR NUMBER OF TRIPS PREDICTED BY FLIGHTS PER \-lEEK FEGRESSION EQUATION OBSERVED TRIPS RATIO 2 53,270 12,954 0.24 3 24,597 22,644 0.92 5 21,636 27,652 1.28 6 25,936 38,888 1. 50 7-8 28,746 67,166 2.34 9-12 18,312 53,655 2.93 22-23 63,860 217,370 3.40 32 22,711 113,304 4.99 SOURCE: Observed trips based on LAB and TAM statistics. Remainder derived by the Study. -118-  Table 3F-25 a:::MPARISCN OF OBSF..RVED AND SYNTHESIZED AIR PASSENGER TPJPS /YEAR SYNTHESIZED TRIPS BEFORE FLIGh"T ADJUS'IMENT AFTER FLIGHT AIlJUS'lMENT Trips Ratio Trips Ratio CITY PAIR OBSERVED TRIPS - - I.a Paz:...cochabamba 136,835 41,939 0.31 200,468 1.46 I.a Paz-Trinidad 25,592 11,318 0.44 39,047 1.53 I.a Paz-Sucre 15,742 8,867 0.56 11,970 0.76 I.a Paz-Tarija 6,977 3,067 0.44 6,226 0.89 I ...... I.a Paz-Santa Cruz 113,304 22,711 0.20 112,873 1.00 ...... 1.0 I Cochabanba-Trinidad 24,398 5,662 0.23 15,061 0.62 Cochabamba-Sucre 11,345 8,567 0.76 11,565 1.02 Cochabamba-Santa Cruz 80,535 21,921 0.27 103,686 1.29 Santa Cruz-Trinidad 35,444 7,739 0.22 18,264 0.52 saJtICI!:: 0beeX"V'C!!ld trips balled on 1J\B and TAM stAtistios. SyntneBized trips derived by the Study. . y .. . . ..... . ~ " cit .Ji  5 4 .. ... o " 3 ~ . ., CJ' c II) :: 2 o a.. 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 Flight Frequency llerWeek FLIGHT FREQUENCY ADJUSTMENT Wlbul' Smith anJ .-4~ociale~ FIGURE 3F-IO  APPENDIX 36 CASE STUDY OF PROJECT EVALUATION  Appendix 3G CASE STUDY OF PROJECT EVALUATION CONTENTS Definition of Alternatives 121 Collection of Relevant Data 121 Cost-Benefit Analysis 122 Conclusions and Recommendations 127 TABLE Number Page 3G-l Discounting of Costs and Benefits 125 -120-  Appendix 3G CASE STUDY OF PROJECT EVALUATION Project evaluation falls into three main phases: 1. Definition of Alterpatives 2. Collection of Relevant Data 3. Cost-Benefit Evaluation. By far the bulk of the work lies in phase 2, collection of relevant data. In comparison, the tasks of the definition of alternatives and the cost-benefit evaluations are remarkably easy, with complications occurring in only a few cases. Definition of Alternatives - All evaluations are concerned with a comparison of two alternative courses of action. In the simplest case, one alternative is to do nothing and the other alternative is to make an improvement (pave a road, clean a river, extend a runway, rehabilitate a rail line, etc.). In these cases, the costs of construction are compared with the savings in costs allowed by 'doing something' compared with 'doing nothing'. In the case that a number of different courses of action are available, they must be evaluated as a series of pairs of alter- natives. For example, in the case of the rail interconnection, the following alternatives may be defined: 1. Do nothing 2. Rehabilitate the existing road 3. Build the rail interconnection 4. Rehabilitate the existing road and build the rail interconnection. If the Chimore - Yapacani road is not considered committed, then the alternative courses of action clearly become more nu- merous and more complex. In the above case though, three evalua- tions may be initially defined; 2 vs 1, 3 vs 1 and 4 vs 1 with the possibilities of later considering 3 vs 2, 4 vs 2 and 4 vs 3 depending upon the earlier results. Collection of Relevant Data - Essentially an extension of the Initial Data Collection stage but this time concerned with specific problems. Transport costs and traffic forecasts will come from either the model, from the external traffic forecasts or from the producers' surplus analysis depending on the project. -121- Construction costs come from a variety of sources and frequent- ly present the most problems, usually because of an absence of information on what the problems are. For example, how high an embankment would be required on a land connection to Puerto Busch to keep it above flood levels, what are the soil conditions in this region and how would they affect costs, how costly would it be to provide a year round channel to Puerto Ouijarro (how much rock blasting would be required) and to keep it open thereafter? These are crucial questions which critically affect an evaluation but which are often difficult to answer. This is why this stage of the evaluation can be so time consuming. Cost-Benefit Analysis - A process in which the economic be- • nefits of a project are compared with the costs of project im- plementation. As noted above an evaluation is always a compari- son of two alternatives. Calling the two alternatives A and B, the costs could be the additional cost of construction for B com- pared with A and the benefits in this case would be the savings in operating costs, in B compared with A. In a little more com- plexity, the process can be shown in the following example: A: Length LA = 12 km B: LB = 10 km Volume 0A = 70 veh/day 0B = 100 veh/day '. Vehicle Operating Cost CA = CB =8 pesos per veh-km 11 pesos per veh-km Maintenance Cost MA = MB =1 peso per veh-km 2 pesos per veh-km Construction Cost CCA =0 CC B =2 million pesos per km. Operating costs over the route per vehicle are 80 pesos in Band 132 pesos in A. Maintenance costs per vehicle are 10 pe- sos in Band 24 pesos in A. In both cases, alternative B shows a saving over A. However, construction costs in Bare 20 million pesos compared with nothing in A. What then are the costs and benefits? A complicating factor is that traffic has ~ased in B com- pared with A and this traffic increase is due to the reduction in transport costs between the two places. This additional traf- fic is either generated traffic (which would otherwise never had -122- made the journey) or diverted traffic (traffic which has switched from another route because it now finds this new route cheaper}. For example, if the Uncia-Sucre route is improved, it will generate traffic between the towns of Uncia and Sucre and will also proba- bly divert Oruro - Sucre traffic from the alternative route via Potost. In calculating benefits, the generated and diverted traffic are treated separately from 'normal' traffic. Clearly the nor- mal traffic (the basic 70 vehicles a day) gains all the benefit from the road improvement, a sum of 52 pesos per vehicle. For generated and diverted traffic the case is rather different. If the operating cost saving in B compared with A is only slight, only a small growth in traffic will occur. This small amount of traffic will in fact, gain almost all the cost saving of B compared with A. Were the cost saving of 52 pesos per vehicle to be reduced slightly, some of the generated' vehicles would dis- appear and some of the diverted vehicles would no longer find it worthwhile to divert. In other worlds, these vehicles gain only a slight advantage in case B compared with A. Therefore, some of the diverted and generated vehicles enjoy all the cost saving while others gain only a slight advantage. On average, it is assumed that this traffic enjoys only half the cost saving of B compared with A. The benefits can be summarized in general terms as follows (using the symbols given in the example): Benefits to Normal Traffic: QA x (LA· CA - LB • CB) Benefits to Generated and Diverted Traffic: 1 = (QB - QA) x 2 x (LA • CA - LB • CB) Adding these terms together gives: Total Benefit = ~ x (QA + QB) x (LA • CA - LB • CB, The change in maintenance costs can be represented as follows: Substituting values in the example given above gives the follow- ing: Total Benefit =~ (70 + ~OO, (12 • ~1 - 10 • 8) + 70.12.2 - 100.10.1 -123-  = 1 2 x 170 x (132 - 80) + 1680 - 1000 = 5100 pesos per day = 1,861,500 pesos per year. Hence the benefit is just under 1.9 million pesos per year com- pared with a construction cost of 20 million pesos. Having established a yearly benefit for the project as well as its costs, economic indices can be calculated to show the pro- ject viability. The first index to be calculated will be the single year ~989 rate of return which is simply the 1989 annual benefit expressed as a percentage of the capital costs. Projects should obtain a rate of return of about eight percent to be worth considering fur- ther. The example above has a rate of return of just over nine percent assuming all the costs and volumes apply to 1989. After this, a more sophisticated test will be applied taking into account the total benefits over the life of the project. Year by year benefits will be estimated based on the 1989 model traffic forecasts and hopefully also on a 1999 traffic forecast as well. These benefits as well as construction costs will then be discounted to a common year. This process is shown in Table 3G-l using the values from the example above. Benefits for the years 1989 and 1999 of 1.9 million and 3.7 million pesos respectively are assumed to come from the analysis of the model traffic forecast. All other be- nefits have been estimated to cover a twenty year project life. Costs of construction are assumed to be spread over three years after which benefits start accruing to the project. The discounting process allows for the fact that a million pesos received in ten years time is worth less than a million pesos received today. If this sum is received today, it can be put in a bank and earn interest. If the interest rate is 10%, the million pesos will be worth 2.6 million pesos in ten years time. This is aside from any question of inflation which is ignored in these calculations. Therefore, it is not good enough to simply add up the benefits (54.9 million pesos) and compare with the investment (20 million pesos) and say the project is worthwhile. If the money had been put in a bank in 1981, it would have earned 140 million pesos at 10% interest by 2003 which, on the face of it, is considerably more than the project benefits. However, this is just as much a distortion of reality as before and Simply adds emphasis to the need to discount all costs and benefits to a common year. It does not matter whether 1981 or 2003 is ~ although the earlier year is more usual as shown in the table. If several projects are being evaluated, the dis- count year must be common to them all. -124-  Table 3G-l DISrrt:~ (F 0'l'>T!lAND BFNEFITS (~1111an of pesos) 10 PEFICENI' DISC'a.m WlTE B. ~ PER»lT DISa:J.Nl' RATE CXH3'lKJC'l'ICN Discount Factor DisOOlll'lted DisOOIlI'Ited D1sOOIlI'It Factor Discounted Discounted ~ _. a:.sTS BENEFl'I'S to 1981 Cbsts Benefits to 1981 Q)sts Benefits - --- 1981 8 1.000 8.0 1.000 8.0 1982 8 0.909 7.3 0.922 7.4 1983 4 0.826 3.3 0.849 3.4 1984 1.5 0.751 1.13 0.783 1.17 1985 1.6 0.683 1.09 0.722 1.15 1986 1.6 0.621 0.99 0.665 1.06 1987 1.7 0.564 0.96 0.613 1.04 1988 1.8 0.513 0.92 0.565 1.02 1989 1.9(1} 0.467 0.89 0.521 0.99 1990 2.0 0.421 0.84 0.480 0.96 I .... N 1991 2.1 0.386 0.81 0.442 0.93 V> I 1992 2.3 0.350 0.80 0.408 0.94 1993 2.5 0.319 0.80 0.376 0.94 1994 2.6 0.290 0.75 0.346 0.90 1995 2.8 0.263 0.74 0.319 0.89 1996 3.0 0.239 0.72 0.294 0.88 1997 3.2 0.218 0.70 0.271 0.87 1998 3.4 0.198 0.67 0.250 0.85 1999 3.7(1) 0.180 0.67 0.230 0.85 2000 4.0 0.164 0.66 0.212 0.85 2001 4.2 0.149 0.63 0.196 0.82 2002 4.4 0.135 0.59 0.180 0.79 2003 4.6 0.123 0.57 0.166 0.76 18.8 18.66 20 54.9 18.6 15.93 i1) From analysis of model traffic forecasts. saJK:E: WorId.nq PI!I;ler 93.  Of course, the alternative to building the project is not only to put the money in a bank to earn interest. This simply represents the most conservative way in which the money could be put to work and is the base against which to compare the be- nefit earning potential of a project. If a project cannot do at least as well as this it is not worth considering. The interest rate, or discount rate, chosen is not a bank interest rate as such. It is often referred to as the opportunity cost of capital and represents the minimum potential earning capacity of capital. If capital is spent on a project, it can- not be spent on an alternative project and the benefits from this alternative project are foregone. The opportunity cost repre- sents the minimum benefits which could be earned elsewhere and so for a project to be viable and to justify investment, it has to earn benefits at at least this rate. The ~rtmUt¥ cost, or minimum discount rate, is usually fixed by government or by a lending agency and today is often about 10 or 12 percent. In countries where a lot of capital is available and only a few projects could be justified at this discount rate, such as in a major oil exporting country, the minimum discount rate may well be much lower. On the other hand where there are a lot of projects competing for limited capital, as 1s probably the case in Bolivia, the minimum discount rate may have to be set much higher to help select the most worthwhile projects. In the example above, the discounted costs at 10 percent are more than the discounted benefits (18.6 vs 15.9 million pe- sos). On this basis, if 10 percent represents the minimum dis- count rate, the project is not viable. The alternatives are to postpone construction or to reduce design standards and hence construction costs in the hope that benefits would be reduced to a lesser degree. In both these cases, the comparison of dis- counted costs and discounted benefits would become more favora- ble and the project could become viable. Several different indices are available for comparing the sums of discounted costs and benefits. One is Net Present Value (NPV) which is simply the benefits minus the costs. For a pro- ject to be viable, NPV must be zero or positive at the minimum discount rate. In the example, NPV is -2.7 million. Another index is the benefit cost ratio which is the benefit divided by the costs. To be viable, the ratio must be greater than 1. In the example, the ratio is 0.86. The last is the Internal Rate of Return (IRR) which is the discount rate which would give a zero NPV. Viability is indicated by an IRR at least as high as the minimum discount rate. The IRR in the example is 8.5 per- cent as indicated in the table. -126-  The above represents the basic approach on established links or on new links in comparatively developed regions. In the underdeveloped regions, the producers' surplus approach will be used which seeks to identify the increased production in a region caused by a transport project and the benefits which accrue from this. Fundamentally, it is no different from the evaluation outlined above except that the emphasis is on generated traffic and on the underlying reasons for this traffic. Conclusions and Recommendations Having evaluated individual transport projects, the Study must now select projects to make up a Transport Master Plan. Possibly more than one plan will be outlined in order to face such issues as the need for national unification and defense and this aspect is dealt with in another note. The economic evalua- tion of projects will be refined to establish the optimum start year although this will be subject to budget restrictions and the need for continuity of a project in particular corridors. The number of projects included will of course be subject to budget limitations. This may also lead to the reduction in design stan- dards so that a limited budget can be shared by more projects. Finally recommendations will be made on transport pricing, equipment requirements, maintenance policies and transport or- ganization and management to harmonize with the selected Trans- port Master Plan. -127-  APPENDIX 3H EVALUATION OF NEW MODES ON EXISTING LINKS  Appendix 38 EVALUATION OF NEW MODES ON EXISTING LI~KS CONTENTS Traffic Transferring to New Mode 129 Generated Traffic 130 Method of Calculation 133 Example 135 Extension of Existing Modes into New 135 Corridors Introduction of a New Road 137 TABLES Number Pasr e 38-1 Diversion Curve Data for Agricultural 131 Products 38-2 Diversion Curve Data for Non-agricultural 132 Products 38-3 Benefit Coefficients (y) 134 38-4 Benefit Coefficients for Road Transport 138 Demand Curve FIGURES Follows Number Pasre 3H-1 Modal Allocation - Diversion Curves 130 3H-2 Demand Curves for Rail Transport 132 38-3 Demand Curves for Road Transport 137 -128-  Appendix 3H EVJI.LUATION OF NEW MODES ON EXISTING LINKS When a new transport route, be it a road, rail, river or air, is opened up where previously there was no feasible means of transport, the benefit to the users of that route is measured directly by estimating the producer1s surplus thereby generated; and when an existing route is improved or replaced by another facility of the same mode, the benefit to existing users is measured directly from their savings in transport costs and the benefit to new users is usually measured indirectly from the cost reductions that induced them to use the route. But when a new facility, say a road or a railroad is introduced on a route already served by another mode, a new problem arises, namely the problem of quality of service. When a road is improved, of course the quality of service is improved, and this improvement is measured in terms of higher journey speed, lower vehicle operating costs and possibly savings in accidents. But the road is still a road and offers the basic characteristics of road transport. A railroad offers diffferent characteristics in respect of loading, scheduling, comfort, safety, security from theft and damage, reliability, convenience and other aspects. If speed and cost are the same by road and rail, some users prefer rail, others prefer road, for a wide variety of reasons. If a railway is introduced where only a road presently exists, some traffic will transfer from road to rail for reasons quite apart from any attraction of lower cost or higher speed. Naturally the users that transfer to rail will tend to be those that most value the particular attributes of rail transport. Equally there may be others who transfer to rail only because it is cheaper, but who actually consider it an inferior service to road. The problem is how to evaluate correctly the benefits from the new mode, taking into account the significant difference in quality of service offered. We may consider first the traffic that transfers from the existing to the new mode, and secondly new traffic generated by the new mode. Traffic Transferrina to New Mode The only available information about users' modal preferences is contained in the diversion curves produced for distributing goods traffic between road and rail. In principle other diversion curves could be produced for other modal choices and for passengers as well as goods. The purpose of the diversion curve is to introduce into the modal distribution the influence of the amalgam of service quality differences (with the possible exclusion of speed, which may be treated as a separate variable factor or combined with cost). If diversion curves are not used and modal distribution is- deter~ined solely by cost and speed, the influence and importance of other service quality differences are ignored. -129  Two road/rail diversion curves have been produced, for agricultural and non-agricultural products respectively. See Figure 3H-l and Tables 3H-l and 3H-2. If the price of road trans- port is known (and is independent of the price of rail transport) demand curves for rail traffic ean be inferred from the diversion curves. These are shown in Figure 3H-2 for aqricultural and non- agricultural products respectively, with the price of a road trip taken as equal to 1 and the quality of rail traffic expressed as a percentage of the traffic formerly using tbe road. The benefits to rail users are measured by the area between the demand curve and the rail price line~i.e. if ~ rail price is • 0.6 the benefits are measured by the shaded area above 0.6 and below the demand curve. These curves are, of course, the same as the diversion curves with the axes moved. But an essential feature of the derrand curve, unlike the diversion curve, is that the price of any competing product - in this case, road transport - is fixed. When the price of road transport is known, the price axis ean be shown in pesos per ton-km instead of ratios; and when the total volume of traffic is known, the traffic axis can be shown in ton-km instead of percentages.Then ~ areas under the demand curves will be direct measures of value in terms of pesos. If the road is improved at the same time, or before, the demand curves for rail transport will fall and the area of surplus or benefit above the price line will be correspondingly reduced. This reflects the obvious.fact that, the better the road, the less will be the benefit from building the railway and the less traffic will use it. Generated Traffic A new railway, or any other new mode, may be expected to generate new traffic which was not attracted to the other mode. If the railway is much cheaper to use than the road, the amount of generated traffic might be substantial, but there is no satis- factory way of estimating it. Without more information about the relative attractions of road and rail, there seems to be no entirely logical way of estimating the amount of generated traffic. The following method, however, is recoIDro.ended as the best available: (a) Distribute existing traffic between road and rail in accordance with the diversion curve. -130- ,  pull PEF CElT R ~IL io" i~~ (J II::t~R i V GRICUI .TURE / I""" J -J ...... r----~~. ~----~ ~ .-~ ---~ '-v An Ir ---- / v I",,,. V V ~ ~ J VV ~ .1 .2 .3 """" . 4 . 5 . 6 . 7 .8 ,9 I 2:3 4 5 10 RO A D / R A I LeO S T RAT I 0 MODAL ALLOCATION - DIVERSION CURVES UY/.UI' Smith a'lJ ....-'4Hocialll~ FIGURE 3H-1  Table 3H-1 DIVERSICN OJRVE [)!ITA FOR ,N;RIaJLTURAL POODUC'IS OtyZ:PStON eUIIV!!: RU'IO 'ALUP; 1 11 0.0 0.0 IItAfro VALUr; 2 0.0 IIA flO VAtu!!: 3 0.0 RAnD VALU! 4 0.0 IIATIO VALUe: 5 0.0 0,') RUtO vaLur; 6 '.0 0.0 flUtO 'ALUr.: 7 0.0 IIATtO 'aLUr.: 8 [1.0 0,0 , "_rro 'uut :1,0 IIAfIO "ALUt 10 0.0 12 0.(1 13 0.0 14 0.0 15 16 17 0.0 18 19 0,(1 20 (1.0 21 0.0 22 0.0 2l 0.0 24 0.0 25 0.0 26 0.0 27 0.0 28 0.0 29 0.0 30 (1.0 31 O.tI :u 0.0 Jl 0.0 34 (1.0 35 O.tI lIS 3.0 31 0.0 l8 0.0 39 0.0 40 0.0 41 0.0 42 0.0 43 0.0 44 0.0 45 0.0 46 0.0 47 0.0 48 (1.0 49 0.0 50 0.0 51 0.0 52 0.1 53 0.4 54 0.7 55 1.0 56 I. J 57 1.6 58 1.9 5~ 2.1 50 2.4 61 2.7 62 2.9 6) ).2 64 ).4 65 3,1 66 3. 9 67 4.2 fl8 4.4 69 4.' 70 .. 9 71 5.1 '72 5.) 73 5.6 74 5.8 75 6.0 H 6.2 77 5.4 78 5.11 79 6. 1 80 7.0 It 7.2 112 7.4 8) 7.6 84 7.8 B5 B.O 86 '.2 B7 B.4 118 B.6 III, 8.7 90 (1.9 91 9.1 112 9.) 93 9.6 95 9.8 10.0 91 118 1[1.3 lao t(ll 111 10.8 u.' 102 112 10.9 16.9 103 113 9.4 11.1 17. , 94 104 114 11.2 11'.9 105 115 11.4 III." 96 11)6 116 II. , 2:>.'" 101 Itl 10.1 11.7 21,9 108 118 12.8 22.8 '" 1011 IU 10.5 1l,8 7.3. 8 110 120 10.6 111.11 H.B 121 25.7 122 26,6 123 2 7 .6 124 26.5 125 :l9, , 126 30.l 127 11.2 1211 n.1 12' )),0 130 )lo9 III )4.7 U2 )5.'" IU 36.5 134 31.) 135 3 9 .2 136 ):i.0 1]7 J9.9 138 40.7 119 41,5 140 42.3 141 4),1 142 4).11 143 44.7 144 45.5 In 46.3 146 47.1 147 47.9 148 48.11 149 .9.4 150 49.4 151 49.5 152 4 9 .5 153 49.5 154 49~6 155 4'.6 156 49,7 151 49,7 15B '19.7 1S9 49. 8 161) 49.8 Ul 49.8 U2 4'.9 16) 4'.9 164 49.9 165 50,0 166 !. J. 0 1~1 50.0 1"'11 50.1 IU 5').1 170 50.1 171 50.? 172 50.2 173 50.2 174 50.) 115 50.3 176 53.) 171 !io.4 178 50.4 179 50. 4 I~O !io.S I. I-' 1111 191 50.5 50.8 11'2 III 2 50.5 50.11 lB) 19) 50.8 50.9 1114 194 50.6 51).9 1I" 195 5Q,'S 5(1.~ It'S 196 5 J. 1 51.0 1~ 7 117 !lO.7 ".0 1~8 198 5e,7 51.('1 tn n9 5:1. 7 51.0 190 200 51'1.8 !H.l W 201 51.1 202 51.1 203 51.1 20' 51.2 205 51. i. 2')6 51.2 2:)1 St.] 209 51.3 209 51,3 210 !11.3 I-' 211 51.4 212 51.4 213 51.4 214 51.4 215 51.5 216 51.5 211 51,5 218 51.6 2!9 51 .6 220 !11.6 -I 221 231 5t.6 51. 9 2?2 232 51.7 5t.9 22) 233 51.' !51.9 224 234 51.7 52.0 225 235 5t.7 52.0 n~ 2)6 51.' 52.0 221 2)7 5t. 1l 52.3 228 2lB 51.8 52.6 229 239 ". - 52.9 2)0 240 !i1.9 5hl 241 53.4 242 5).7 24) 54.0 :244 54,2 245 54,5' 216 54.8 241 55.1 248 55.3 249 55,6 HO 55.9 251 56.2 252 51ii.4 253 56.7 254 57.0 255 57,2 256 !P.5 257 57,8 2~1I 5t1.0 259 58.3 2110 58.5 HI 58.8 2"2 5 9 .1 263 5 9 .3 264 59.6 265 5?P 2~6 6~.1 267 60.3 2(>8 60.6 269 60.' 270 61 • t 211 61.3 212 61.6 27) 61.8 274 f.2.1 215 62.) :>16 62.b 277 6,.8 ,711 6l,1 279 63.3 Ho 63.5 231 6)._ 2ft2 64.0 2g) 64.) 284 6 4 .5 285 64.1 296 65.U 297 65.2 2P A 65.4 1'811 ~5,7 Ho 65.9 291 ]01 6b.l (lB.4 2q 2 302 66.4 68." 29) 303 66.6 68.9 294 )04 "".8 69,1 295 )05 61,1 59.3 296 306 61.J 6i. !I 291 lCJ7 t\1.5 69.8 2"8 )09 61.1 10.0 299 JI)~ Sq,O 7'),2 ))0 Jl0 "'.2 70.4 HI 70.6 312 70,8 313 71.1 314 11.3 315 71,5 )16 71,1 lt1 71. 9 l18 12.1 )19 12.) )20 72.5 321 72,8 322 73.0 323 73.2 324 73.4 325 1].6 )26 73.11 327 74,0 32~ 74.2 l2~ 14,4 3)0 74.6 HI 74,8 H2 75.0 ))l 75.2 334 75.4 )J5 1'S,6 )(0 75.8 lJl 76.0 ))8 76.2 3J9 16.4 )40 76.11 HI 76.9 342 71.0 34) 71.:1 344 77.4 )45 71.6 H6 , 1.1 347 7R .0 H8 111,2 149 111,4 350 7P.6 351 78.8 )'12 19,0 35) 79.2 354 ".4 )55 1~.6 )5S B.l )57 79.9 ]58 80,1 JH ~o.) HO 110.5 )6l 80.7 362 80.9 363 fl.l ]64 SI.2 )65 ~ 1.4 366 81.6 )67 ~I,fI )68 ~2.!) J/\9 -2.2 )70 d2.3 )71 82.5 372 82.7 37) 82.9 374 P3.1 375 Pl.) 316 Pl.4 377 Ill.6 118 83,8 J79 ~t.O lllO 114.1 )81 84.3 J R2 84.5 39) 84.' 394 114.9 JII5 PS.~ lU 1.'5.2 )91 ~5.4 lAB 85,6 )U P!!.7 HO 115.9 3'1 86.1 )112 U.2 393 86 •• ]94 86.6 )95 tl6,8 396 810.9 391 17 Be .1 ,_ )98 87,3 399 117.4 400 '" ,6 401 87.8 402 87.9 40) U.l 404 118, ) 405 1tII.4 406 11'1.6 407 40B n.9 40~ n.1 410 89.) 411 421 8'.4 91.1 412 422 19.11 '1.2 413 423 89.1 91.4 414 424 1!I.9 91.5 415 425 90.1 91.7 4111 426 9:). ] 91. 9 411 427 90,4 '2.0 411 428 '0.8 92.2 419 4;,' '0,' '2.' 420 4)0 '0.' 92.5 4]1 92. 11 412 '2.11 433 9).0 434 ').1 435 91.] 4)6 9).4 4)7 9),6 4)8 9,.7 439 9).' 440 94.0 441 94.2 442 94.) 44J 94.5 444 94.7 445 94.8 "16 9~.O 447 95.1 ~19 '5.3 U-, 95. 4 450 95.6 451 95.7 452 95.9 453 96.0 454 'r'.2 455 '!I6.J 4511 9~.~ 451 96.6 4~~ '5.7 4B !l6. 9 460 97.0 UI 97.2 462 97.3 H3 97.5 464 97.6 4&S 91.9 46'S ·H.9 46 , 'B.l 4108 9a .2 4n H,' 410 9P.5 411 93.6 412 til ,II 473 98.9 474 99.1 475 99.2 416 9~.J 471 ~9.5 418 99.6 "9 99,8 490 99.9 481 100,0 482 100.n 4B) 1110.0 484 100.0 485 100.0 4U 103.0 481 100.0 4 A8 lUO.O 4lI~ 10,.0 490 100.0 491 100.0 492 100,0 4') 100.0 494 100.0 495 100.0 06 10~.0 497 100.0 498 100.0 HI 130,0 500 100.0 NOTES: ~tio is ratio of road cost to rail cost ~ressed in hundredths, e. C? 421 indicates road cost = 4.21 x rail cost. Value is percent of traffic using rail at that cost ratio.  Table 3H-2 Dl"VER)IOO a.m.v.E 0A'rn. FOR NCN-AGRIOrr..'ruRAL poorucrs DIVP;RStON CURVE RATIO VAt.Ur: 1 11 0,0 1,2 ",TIO nLUr. 12 2 0,1'1 1,4 RU'IO VALU! RATI:) YAW! 13 3 0,0 1,5 14 4 0," 1.7 puro 5 15 HLur: 0.0 1.8 RlTtO VAI.Ur; I" 6 1),0 1,9 RA1'10 hLP! 7 17 o,l 2.1 RATIO hLPr: 18 tI 11,6 2.2 19 , RAlro v'I.UE 0.' 2,3 RArIO fU,Ut 10 20 1.0 2.4 21 2.5 22 2.~ 23 2.7 24 2.lI 25 2,8 2~ 2." 21 l.O 28 3.1 29 ).1 )0 ).2 31 3.2 12 l.l II :t.3 ]4 3,J 35 3,3 36 3,J )7 3,4 38 3,4 19 ).4 40 ).4 41 3.4 42 3,5 43 3,5 44 3,5 45 3,5 46 3.5 47 3,6 411 3.6 49 ),6 50 306 51 4.1 52 4,7 53 5,2 54 5,7 55 6,2 56 6,7 51 7,2 511 1,7 59 8.2 50 1,6 61 9.1 U 9,5 63 10.0 64 10.4 !l5 10,9 66 11,3 67 11.7 118 12.1 6'1 12.5 10 12,9 71 81 19.3 U.' 72 Il2 14,1 1',9 7J 113 14, , 20,' 74 84 15,4 21,0 75 85 1'5,9 21,5 76 e6 U,5 22,0 71 87 17 .1 22,5 111 811 17,1 23,0 19 89 18,2 :n,5 10 90 n.1 ''',0 91 24,9 112 25,8 93 H,7 94 27,6 95 211,' ~6 2 9 ,3 97 10,1 U lI.o 99 3t, , 1~0 32.6 101 III )l,4 41.2 102 112 H.' 4t .9 I:)) 113 35,0 42,6 104 114 35,8 4" 3 105 115 Ho,8 ·.,1 1(16 116 H,4 44.~ 107 117 :!8 .2 45.5 108 118 18,9 46.2 109 1%9 )9.7 .S.9 120 120 41.',4 41.5 121 48 ,2 122 48.9 123 49,6 124 5~,2 125 50.9 126 5t,5 t27 52,2 121 52. 8 129 5'3,5 1]0 54,1 III 54.1 132 54,1 III 54,1 134 IH,2 135 54,2 1)6 54,2 137 54.2 118 54,2 .IH 54.2 140 54,3 141 54.3 142 54 ,3 143 54.3 14'1 54,3 145 54,3 146 5 1 .J 147 54." 148 54,4 In 54.4 "0 54.4 151 161 54,4 54,S 152 162 54,4 54,6 153 163 54,4 154 54.6 . 164 154,4 54.6 155 1&5 54,5 54.5 15~ 156 54.' 5 t." 157 167 54.5 5'.6 158 1611 54,5 '~,6 15~ 1"11 "',' 'J4.5 150 170 54.5 54.7 , ..... 111 181 ~4,1 54,8 172 1~2 54.7 5·. A 173 183 54.7 54.8 114 184 54.1 54,8 175 lt15 ~4.7 ~4,~ 17t'o !P6 5".7 'H," 177" 1117 ~ 1.7 '51.9 178 S'II, 54,7 5·,9 179 t"l) 54." 51.9 UO 190 54.8 54.9 191 54.9 192 '54,9 193 ~4,9 194 54.9 195 H,II 19!- 54,'1 197 55.0 1"8 55.~ 1 9 ,:, 55.0 200 55,0 W 201 55.0 202 55,1 20) 56.4 204 57,2 a5 57,9 7011 5a,6 207 59,3 208 6C,O lOll SO,7 :ItO 61,4 tv I 211 221 62,1 68.9 212 222 62,1} 69,5 213 223 63,5 70,2 214 224 6~,2 10,8 215 275 64.8 7J,5 216 126 "5,' 72 ,I 217 227 66,2 72,8 218 228 66,9 7],4 21 et H9 !107 • , 220 2)0 U,2 74,7 ",I 211 75.2 232 75.7 2lJ 76,1 234 76,6 2)5 77 .1 '36 17 .6 231 711,0 231 79,5 239 ",0 240 ",4 241 '9.9 242 80,4 243 to,s 244 (11.3 245 1't,7 246 82.2 241 1'2.6 ,.1 1'.1 249 11),5 251.' .... 0 251 84.4 2'12 84,9 253 P5.) 254 "5,lI 255 P6,2 2S!> P.!>." 257 P.7,1 2~1I B7, , 259 .7. 9 250 IIP.4 261 ee," 2"2 89. , 26) e9,S 2S4 9~.1 265 ~O.5 25~ 9;),' 2('7 'H.3 '~I! 91,7 ".9 ".2 270 92.6 271 281 93.0 91.0 272 2A2 9),4 97,4 27) 28) 93,~ 97.8 274 2114 9~.2 9~.2 275 285 ''',5 98,6 2"" 2n~ 95,0 9~,0 277 2P7 ':15,4 99,4 279 2PP 95,8 99.e 279 21'9 '~.2 1".0 2~0 210 96,6 10(1,0 291 ICO,O 292 100.0 293 ICo.o 294 100.0 295 I~O,(I 2'6 In:l.O 2D7 101',0 298 10n,(I 299 1~',0 100 100,0 301 1011.0 3112 100." 303 100,0 304 100.0 )(15 I~O,O 306 100,0 307 1(\(\.0 3('1 10(1.. 0 )09 I~O,O 110 100.0 3tl 100.0 312 100,I! 313 100.0 314 10 11 .0 115 100,0 116 101,0 317 100.0 3U SOO.O 31~ 1:'10,0 320 100.0 321 100.0 "2 100,0 323 101',0 324 100,0 )25 teo.o )26 10 l. 0 327 tet'.O 321 too,O 329 .".0 Ho 100,0 III 10(1,0 lU 1011,0 313 100,0 3H 100,0 315 1(10,0 ))6 1(1'.0 337 1 (1).0 1U 100.0 lH BO,O HO 100.0 HI 100,0 ,'S 100.0 ,42 100,0 )-;2 1011,0 343 lCO,O )" 100,0 )44 100,0 ". 100,0 345 H5 1t'l0.0 1'10.0 346 "6 10:1,0 I')J.O 347 '!l7 lCO,O 100,0 348 100,0 :t58 100,0 ,,, )49 loa.o 1'0,0 3'0 Ho 100.0 100.0 361 371 11,)0.0 1011.0 )1\2 )12 1011.0 100,0 'U I!)/I.O l '3 leo,o n. )14 IO~,O 100.0 H5 ]75 1~0,0 100,0 361\ 1H 11)0.0 100,0 387 377 10!).0 100,0 )68 ]78 100,0 100,0 ]69 3'9 1'0.0 I~:).O 370 HO 100.0 lon.1I 381 100.0 JII2 100,0 3~3 1t'0.0 U4 100.0 3~5 1(10.(1 n~ 10:1,11 )87 100.0 3P8 100,0 3119 1'~.0 390 100,0 391 100,0 '92 10n,n 39) 100,0 )U 10~.0 )95 1~0,0 3'111 100.0 397 toO.o 398 100,0 399 ItlO.O 4no 100,0 401 lno,O 41)2 100,0 40J 100.0 404 100,0 405 1(\0,0 406 10'.0 407 lOO .(1 41" 100,0 409 DO.O 410 100,0 4U 100.0 412 11l0.0 U3 teo.o 414 J(I(I,O 4t5 100.0 4t6 tO~,o 417 1(1).0 411 100.0 419 1(1('),11 4~0 100.0 421 100,0 4" 100,0 423 100.0 424 100,0 425 1"0,0 426 100,0 427 100.0 428 100,0 429 Ino.O 4)0 100,0 431 100,0 412 100.0 U3 100,0 4)4 100,0 4)5 1:)0,0 436 10'.0 437 1<'0.0 438 100,0 439 t '0.0 440 10t'.0 441 100,0 442 100.0 44) 10t',O 444 11'0.0 445 loo.n 4<~ IO~.O 447 10(1,0 449 10(\.0 4H S'H).O 450 101.',0 451 100.0 4'12 100,0 453 100,0 454 100,0 455 11'10.0 456 1(1(1,0 457 l!IO.(I 4!'8 100,0 459 f:lO,O 4S0 1011.0 461 100,0 462 101l.0 463 ICO,O 464 100.0 465 too.o 466 I (ll, 0 <167 10".0 46B 100,0 41\11 1!)!l.0 470 100,0 411 100.0 472 1"'0.0 47) 1t'0.0 414 lor. () 475 100,0 476 10',0 477 100.0 4'" 10().0 479 1'0.0 480 100,0 481 100.0 4112 100,0 483 100.0 484 1 o~,o 41'5 100.0 41'6 103.0 4B7 10~,0 4RI 100.0 489 1(1).0 490 100.0 491 100.0 492 100,n 493 100,0 494 100.0 495 100,0 416 10',0 491 100.0 4 1i1 t 100,0 499 100.0 500 100.0 N.'Jl'ES : Ratio is ratio of road mst to rail cost eJCpressed in hundredths", e.g. 421 indicates road cost = 4.21 x rail cost. Value is percent of traffic using rail at that cost ratio.  3.8 3.6 3.4 3.2 .... 3.0 ~ ~ 2.8 LEGEND .... ... - == .... 2.6 Surplus (btntfit,) oeeruin, to non-a,rieultural transport at • .... 2.4 ~ rOil/rood priet rotio of 0.6 ;: 2.2 Surplus I btntfits) aeeruilll to olrleultural tronsp.rl at '.. -' 2.0 .... ~ rOil/rood priet ratio of 0.6 ~ 1.1 ~ .. .. 1.6 .... .-. • :: 1.2 1.4 .::: :::: 1.0 t ~ 0.' .~ 0.' Q;: 01611111t1 fIr IItIII-o,rir:llltllro I frollsplrf 0.4 0.2 O'mond fIr o,riclln~lIr~(J~/~"~O~II~s:p;,r~f~------------===:: 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 P,rclllfo" (Jf fr IIl1ic IIsill, rllil DEMAND CURVES FOR RAIL TRANSPORT Wlbul' Smifh and AJociafeJ FI GURE 3H-2  (b) Raise the volume of rail traffic in proportion to the cost difference between road and rail, i.e. apply a demand elasticity of unity with respect to cost to that part of the traffic attracted to rail. - (c) Redistribute the new volume of traffic in accordance with the diversion curve. (d) For purposes of evaluation assume that all generated traffic is among the rail traffic. This method is weak in logic but is the best that can be offered without more information of a kind that would be impossible to obtain. Method of Calculation For a given zone-to-zone movement let v = existing tonnage of agricultural or non-agricultural products A = cost of transport per ton by road B = cost of transport per ton by rail x = percentage of tonnage transferring to rail y = benefit coefficient The value y represents the area under the demand curve for a given percentage of traffic transferring to rail. It is obtained from Table 3H-3, with interpolation as necessary. It is read from the table against the value x. Given the values of V, A, B, x and y, we have the follm'ling results: Tonnage by rail: Ito {I + 100 (~- 1}) Tonnage by road: (10°1()OX)V (1 + 100 (~ - 1)} x A Total tonnage: V(l + 100 (B - 1}) Generated tonnage: 160 (~ - 1) ,negative values taken as O. Benefits to existing traffic: V (Ay - Bx) (2 + x(A-B) - ~) TIn) lOOB B Benefits to generated traffic: 160 (Ay - Bx) Total benefits: 1 V OO (Ay - Bx) (1 + x (A-B)) 100B -133-  Table 3H-3 BENEFIT COEFFICIENTS (y) x y :l -%- agr icultural prcrlucts non-agricultural prCrlu:ts (' 0 0 5 8.30 14.82 10 14.39 23.32 15 19.24 30.55 ~ 20 23.75 37.01 25 28.00 42.94 t 30 32.05 48.36 I 35 35.94 53.31 40 39.62 57.80 45 43.12 61.92 50 46.41 65.74 55 48.83 69.14 60 50.83 71.62 65 52.60 73.93 70 54.21 76.13 75 55.71 78.28 80 57.11 80.38 85 58.43 82.41 90 59.66 84.39 95 60.81 86.24 100 61.87 87.96 -134- Example: Let V = 1,500 tons (agricultural products) A = 300 pesos B = 200 pesos x = 49.4 percent y = 46.02 Hence, tonnage by rail = 924 tonnage by road = 947 total tonnage = 1,871 generated tonnage = 371 benefits to existing traffic (i.e. 553 tons transferring to rail) = 43,991 pesos benefits to generated traffic (i.e. 371 tons on rail) = 29,445 pesos Total benefits = 73,436 pesos. Extension of Existing ~odes into New Corridors In the above analysis, the situation was considered of the introduction of a completely new mode into a corridor, previously only served by another different mode. In this Study, we are principally referring to the introduction of a railway when previously there was only a road. What was not considered above was the possibility that, although only one mode previously existed in the corridor under consideration, traffic could have arrived by the new mode using links already in existence outside the corridor. For example, La Paz-Cochabamba-Santa Cruz traffic can presently move either entirely by road or alternatively, by rail to Cochaba~ba and then by road to Santa Cruz. In this case, the traffic in the Cochabamba-Santa Cruz corridor will be a mixture of vehicles which !"lave come all the way from La Paz, and vehicles which have picked up a load in Cochabaroba which has arrived there from La Paz by rail. If now the rail interconnection is built, it can be presumed that the previous La Paz-Cochabamba rail ~ovements will continue to Santa Cruz all the way by rail, and some of the La Paz-Santa Cruz road movements will transfer to rail. In addition, some traffic will be generated by the new rail line. This is a slightly more complicated situation than considered earlier, and the argument must be carried a little further. Considering the situation before and after extending a rail link into a corridor previously served only by road, and adapting the previous terminology: -135-  Let A = Cost by road Bl= Cost by rail before (in fact~ a road-rail movement) B2= Cost by rail after xl= % by rail before X2= % by rail after Yl= Benefit coefficient corresponding to Xl Y2= Benefit coefficient corresponding to x2 Vl= Volume by road before V2= Volume by rail before V = Vl + v2 = Total volume before I T = Total volume after • In this situation, generated traffic can be estimated considerinq the change in costs from road-rail (before)to pure rail (after). Hence the total traffic in the corridor , after will be: B T = V + V 1 • l 2 B2 • Consider now the two diagrams: • The diagrams show demand curves with the shaded area showing the benefits to traffic on a new rail link. The two demand curves are not complete and show simply the volume of traffic using rail at a given rail to road cost ratio when total demand is fixed - at V in the case of Cl,and at T in the case of C2. A complete demand curve could be drawn by estimating generated traffic in the manner indic~ted previous- ly. For example, points band g in the right hand diagram are on the complete demand curve. The diagram on the left shows the situation discussed earlier. The area above the price ratio (i.e. the total benefit) is measured by: -136-  All this benefit accrues to either diverted or generated traffic. The diagram on the right shows the more complex situation. Clearly, the area abed measured the benefit to traffic already on rail while area bgfe measured the benefit to diverted and generated traffic. Area abed is easily measured as: V2 (B - B ) l 2 Area bgfe is less easily measured but can possibly be taken as the following sum: 1 bgfe = 7 (abcgfed + abfed) - abed 1 Say = 7 (Ai + A2 ) - A3 A3 is given as above = V2 (B l - B2 ) T Ai = TIfO (A (Y2 - Y1 ) - B2X2 + B1X l ) V A2 = TIfO (A (Y2 - Yl) - B2X2 + B1X l ) Benefit to generated and diverted traffic and this can be distributed equally among the volumes of such traffic. Introduction of a New Road The previous demand curve and table of benefit coefficients covered the case of the introduction of a new railroad into a corridor already served by road. The alternative case of the introduction of a new road in a corridor already served by railroad requires a different deIIland curve and a set of brnefit coefficients, and these are shown in Figure 3H-3 and Table 3H-4 respectively. -137-  Table 3H-4 BENEFIT COEFFICIENTS FOR ROAD TRANSPORT DEMAND CURVE PERCENT TRAFFIC BENEFIT COEFFICIENT (y) DIVERTING TO ROAD Agricultural Products Non-agricultural Products (%) o 0 o 5 23.5 14.10 10 44.68 27.53 15 64.68 40.34 20 83.30 52,53 25 100.49 64,01 30 116.58 75.26 35 131.58 85,97 40 145.48 9€.47 45 158.23 107.47 50 168.54 116.22 55 176.04 122.16 60 182.91 127.76 65 189.47 133.10 70 196.02 137.90 75 202.27 142.50 80 208.21 146.75 85 213.83 150,60 90 218. 90 154.04 95 223. 30 157.14 100 22~ 88 160,52 SOURCE: Bolivia National Transport Study. -138-  5.0 4.75 4.5 425 LEGEND - 4.0 Surplus (benefits) accruing to agri cultural transport ~ 3.75 Q at rood/roil price ratio of 1.0 ~ ~ 3.5 - 'to ... .... 3.25 ~ Surplus (benefits) accruing at rood/roil price ratio to of 1.0 000- agricultural transport - Q 3.0 "t: 2..75 .... Cl. Q 2.5 ~ ~ 2.25- t ... ~ 2.0 ~ 1.75 , :; ... 1.5 " ~ to ... Q 1.25 ~rol tronsport - ';:; .~ 1.0 , , J ,.- ~ ... 0.75 Oef1l(]f1(/ lor non- ogricu/fu,q, 0.5 tronsport 0.25 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 R~ Cln CI~ Inn Percentoge of trollic using rood W.t.,S~lh...JA.!,~MAND CURVES FOR ROAD TRANSPORFTGURE 3H-3  APPENDIX 4A EXISTING CHARACTERISTICS OF RAILROAD TRANSPORT  Appendix 4A EXISTING CHARACTERISTICS OF RAILROAD TRANSPORT TABLES Number Page 4A-1 Commodities Transported by Rail 1977-1978 140 4A-2 Characteristics of the Railroad Network 141 in Operation 4A-3 Characteristics of Traction Equipment l4lA 4A-4 Characteristics of Passenger Coaches 142 4A-5 Characteristics of Freight Wagons 143 4A-6 Availability of Traction Equipment - 1979 144 4A-7 Historical Evolution of ENFE's Passenger 145 Traffic 4A-8 Historical Evolution of ENFE's Cargo Traffic 146 4A-9 Historical Evolution of International 147 Traffic - ENFE 4A-10 List of Commodities Transported in the 148 Andean System 4A-11 List of Commodities Transported in the 149 Eastern System 4A-12 ENFE's Passenger Traffic by Section in 1978 150 4A-13 ENFE's Wagon-load Traffic by Section - 1978 151 -139-  Table 4A-l COMMODITIES TRANSPORTED BY RAIL 1977 - 1978 rONS TRAN~PORTED (IN Tlmnl':lINn~l TON-KILOMETERS 'IN MI1·I.InN~ 1 Andean urlental Andean Svs1:em Oriental System Total ENFE Total ENFE :':r:ste.m System COMMODITIES 1977 1978 1977 1978 1977 1978 1977 1918 1977 1919 1911 1918 Minerals '215.8 I'7'il:2 ~ -W 22T:T '"T74.5 13.6 62.9 J:3 """'i78 16.9 '6"5"X Construction iron 50.5 46.2 62.3 57.3 112.8 103.5 29.0 24.1 31.0 29.8 66.0 53.9 Petroleum products 62.6 58.8 39.4 12.0 102.0 10.8 21.5 25.9 19.3 5.8 46.8 31.1 Cement 48.2 23.1 25.5 52.9 73.1 76.0 29.2 12.4 15.4 33.2 44.6 45.6 Wood 20.5 21.0 36.4 41.9 56.9 68.9 9.4 10.1 18.5 19.0 21.9 29.1 I ..... 20.0 24.3 20.0 24.3 9.7 0 9.7 10.9 .... 0 Chemical products 0 0 10.9 0 I Machinery 30.5 24.4 19.1 24.5 48.6 48.9 16.7 12.6 9.5 14.1 26.2 26.1 Paper 10.0 12.6 0 0 10.0 12.6 4.1 4.4 0 0 4.1 4.4 Vehicles 16.7 16.5 11.6 18.2 28.3 34.7 7.0 5.5 5.9 9.4 12.9 14.9 Wheat 113.8 la5.9 14 .1 30.0 127.9 215.9 60.0 102.9 1.6 17.6 67.6 120.5 Flour 53.3 47.9 14.9 4.3 69.2 52.1 35.9 33.6 8.2 2.2 44 .1 35.8 Rice 0.4 16.0 0 0 0.4 16.0 0.2 7.0 0 0 0.2 1.0 Cotton 1.4 0.1 9.4 14.6 10.8 14 .1 1.0 0 5.8 9.2 6.8 9.2 Sugar 13.9 19.7 43.9 19.0 57.9 31.7 9.8 13.1 25.1 10.3 33.9 23.4 Cattle 1.3 0.9 14.6 13.0 15.9 13.8 0.1 0.3 5.2 4.2 5.9 4.5 Others ~ 120.0 102.4 101.6 222.9 221.6 49.1 49.4 51.4 53.5 99.5 102.9 TOTAL 779.4 787.4 398.9 398.6 1.178.3 1.186.0 360.9 375.6 212.2211.1 573.1 586.7 NOTE: Excludes traffic on the Viacha-Guaqui line (67,000 tons in 1978) SOURCF-, First Interim Report, Bolivia National Transport Study.  Table 4A-2 ClJARACl'ERISTICS CF '!HE RAILRQN) NE'MJR1< IN OPERATICN LENGTH AI!1TlU[E DIFFERENCE MINlMlM MAXIMUM MAXlM.lM DIS- MINIM.M LEKm RUNN1N3 TIMES, IN T1INCE B~ IF PASS~ RXrnS HID MINt1l'ES ~ SECTIONS A.S.L. IN ALTITUDES RADTIlS GRADIENT PASS~ TRI\CK TRACKS STATlCR> (lem) (m) (m) (m) (a/co) (m) (m) Passengers Cargo La Paz- El Alto 17 3.701-4.106 405 77 30 9.000 80 0-26 0-50 La paz El Alto -Viacha 25 4.10~3.859 247 98 23 12.000 180 0-40 1-35 Viacha- San Pedro 198 3.859-3.708 lSl 143 10 32.000 149 3-19 5.-13 Viacha San Pedro - Oru.ro 6 3. 708-3~706 2 382 8 6.000 150 0-13 0-07 Orum- Rio Mulata 208 3.706-3.814 108 200 12 24.000 259 5-55 6-52 O!:uro Rio flllato - Uyun1 105 3.814-3.669 145 200 11 29.000 177 2-06 2-40 Rio folllato t¥un1 - Atod!a 93 3.669-3.658 11 77 32 32.000 63 2-21 3-01 Uyun1 Atocha - 'l\lp1za 97 3.658-2.950 708 82 30 22.000 lSO 3-18 2-16 'l\lp1za - Villaz6n (F) 101 2.950-3.477 527 100 30 31.000 85 2-55 3-03 Villaz6n Viacha - <mqu1 65 3.859-3.810 49 120 lS - 104 1-39 2-lS QJaqu1. V1acha - Olaraiia (F) 210 3.859-4.059 200 100 20 - 129 3-57 6-U Olaraiia I Gral Pando - Q):roooro 7 3.9~3-3.923 0 82 20 - 100 0-20 0-20 ... ..... ..... San Pedro - Ox:habanba 205 3.708-2.559 1.149 77 30 22.000 81 6-14 7-44 I Coc:hab!mba - A1.qu1.le 216 2.559-2.260 299 82 30 36.000 143 7-45 7-45 Cochabanba Rio Mulato - Potosi . 174 3.8lS-3.905 90 77 30 26.000 89 6-13 6-57 Potosi - Str::re 175 3.905-2.765 1.140 77 30 21.000 101 6-47 8-52 SUCEe - Tarabuco 78 2.765-3.295 530 77 30 22.000 107 2-10 - Uy\.D'I1 - Avaroa (F) 172 3.669-3.701 32 200 6 32.000 239 6-35 6-35 AVIll'OIl J\ndean SystaD - ENFE 2.lS2 Machacamarca - Ulela 105 3.702-3.921 219 40 '1bta.l J\ndean Systan 2.257 Santa Cruz - Quijano (F) 643 476- 190 286 - 10 31.000 146 16-45 21-55 Q)rurb4 Santa cruz - ~ tas (F) 539 476- 583 10? - 7,5 28.000 412 13-45 lS-35 Yacu1ba Santa Cruz - Yapacan! 204 406- - - 6 24.550 453 6-10 6-10 Santa Cruz l'alltam Syat.ll - DIn: 1.386 - - ENFE Nebiorlt 3.'518 '1bta.l Neblerk 3.643 (F ): Border sa.mcE: tobrk1ng Paper 27. ... ,j, . ...  .- '! !' ,. Table 4A-3 CHARACTERISTICS OF TRACTION EQUIPMENT 1. LOCOMOTIVES - ACTUAL No. OF WEIGHT PER WHEEL UIC I MOTOR I TYPE MANUFACTUREE ~ YEAR NUMBER JOO.ES AXlE ARRANGEMENT NOMINAL WORKING _ (toos) POWER POWER I I Series950 Diesel electric Hitachi Mitsuhishi Japan 1968 20 6 13,6 Bo-Bo-Bo 1870 PS 925 rpm 1270 PS 925 rpm MA~ V6~ 2? OATLj Series 1000Diesel Hitachi 3020 CV 2028 PS MTU 12V electric Mitsublshi Japan 1978 16 6 15,0 Bo-Bo-Bo 1500 rpm 1500 rpm 956TB 11 Series950 U10B Die General Catez.pi- sel electric Electric Brazil 1977 9 4 15,0 B-B 875 HP 800 HP llar D-398 Series 1000 U20C General GE Diesel electric ; Electric Brazil 1977 8 6 - C-C 2180 CV 2030 CV FDL 12 I ..... 'Series 841 Diesel 625 HPx2 535 HP Hitachi .... pydraul1c Hitachi Japan 1968 5 4 13,75 B-B 1500 rpm 1500 rpm Man R6V S; 18/21TL I Series 521 Diesel Nippon 625 HP 535 HP Hitachi Ihydraulic Sharyo Japan 1968 4 4 11,25 B-B 1500 rpm - - Man R6V 1500 rpm 18/21TL 2. FERROBUSES COMPOSI- NUMBER OF MAXlHM NOMINAL ACTUAL TIPE Ml!\NUFJ\C'ltJRER YEJ!.R NUMBER TION SEATS SPEED POWER WORKING M:JroR (km;hr.) POWER jDiesel Ferrostal Germany Motorized 44 in 1st. 3-35 HP 240.HP NHHRIO- 1967 10 car & Traile 54 in 4lrl. 80 2100 'rpn 2100 Ipn 681 aM- MINS USA.. ,j.,:> H.I:' Ferrostal Ger.tnany 1978 2 Motorized 34 in 1 st. 285HP CtJ.'MINS 210~ rpm 4000 11'12 car , Traile 58 in 2.nd. 98 NT855R3 Ferrostal Germany 1978 2 iMotorized 34 in 1 st. l.l! HP 285 HP CU4MI:NI!I car and 58 in 2 nd. 2100 rpm 2100 rpm NT855R3 ~- .. - Trailer L_ ...... __ ..... _ _ ...... ~ _ _ _ ..... ~ 58 in 3rd. -- - ...... -_ ..... ~- ... - L ... 98 __ .. _ _ ... _ - ------ - - scx:mcE: Working Paper 27.  Table 4A-4 CHARACTERISTICS nF .ASSENGER COACHES 1979 ~'IME NO. OF CLASS MANtlFAC'ltJRER COUNTRY YEAR l ............ TONS. SEATS BOX Saloon Birmingham ~l8nd 1954 3 34,3' 33 Metal First Various 1917-1950 13 27,3-35 j. 42-48 Wood PUle 1963 1 23,2 Metal ~tsubishi ~apan 1968 4 40 Fiat ~tina 1979 24 29,0 60 Metal Second Various 11912-1950 17 20,0-25p, 52-68 Wood pule 1963 7 23,2 Metal iM1 tsubishi P-ap8n 1968 4 72 ENFE la:>livia 1978 4 56 Soa::rretal pule 1978 12 Fiat ~tina 1979 23 29,0 92 Metal Second with baggage can- part:r!'ent Fiat Argentina 1979 10 29,0 46 Metal Mixed Various 1 Auxil1ar Various 11912-1939 9 28-58 Baggage car Various 1962 8 18,0-29,C ib:x'i -Met. ENFE Bolivia 1978 7 Cabcx:>se Gloucester England 1911 10,3 Armed Forces Argentina 1928 2 Wocx1. Dining car Metropoli tan 1917-1930 5 30 Wocx1. Soo::rootal Ol1le 1978 3 Fiat Argentina 1979 3 29,0 42 Metal Sleep1ng oar Various ~911-1930 10 34,S Wocx1. Private Various 17 13,0-25,0 1bxl SOURCE: Working Paper 27. -142-  Table 4A-5 CHARACTERISTICS OF FREIGHT WAGONS 1979 CLASS MANUFACIURER COUNTRY YEAR ~ - ......... CR1;CIT':l TONS. M 3 TARE TONS • BOX .Box car 1 Various 1906-1950 554 ~0-25-30-35 40-65 11, 7-15~ Wood""'Met. Mitsubish! Japan 1968 19 40 62 '15,2 M:!tal FNV Brazil 1971 48 42 60 M:!tal FNV Brazil 1974 50 42,3 60 17,7 M:!tal C C C, Brazil 1977 250 42,5 65 17,5 M:!tal P:>brasma BrazU 1978 500 41,3 65 18,7 Metal 1909-1950 89 30,0 11-26 10 ,2-13,~ Wood .Box Car 2 Mitsubish! Jap1n 1968 79 40,0 24 12,0 M:!ta1 Sta. Matilde Brazil 1974 98 42,0 30 17,2 M:!tal Flat Bed Various 1906-1950 127 18-30 8,3-11,1 CCC Brazil 1976 40 45,5 14,5 Tanker Various 1906-1950 52 20,0-30,0 20-30 12,3-15,e M:!tal Sta. Matilde Brazil 1954 23 30,0 30 15,0 M:!w Socx:rTetal Brazil 1977 10 40,0 40 20,9 M:!tal .Box car 1 Various 1909-1941 30 24,0-30,0 ~4-58 12,0 Wood Mager U.S.A. 1948 47 30,0 55 13,6 Wood Tanker Various 1926 11 I I Box car 2 Metmp::lli tan 1910-1930 6 25,0-30,0 1:'1 10,5-11,: Wood I Arrerican Cor. U.S.A. 1930 7 25,0 20 11,0 Metal i I I I I Box car 3 MidletCMn 1906 26 30,0 18,5 12,5 Wood Aceros Andes ~h:1.le 1978 20 40,0 19,9 M:!tal I Box car 3 M:!tmp::ll1 tan 1911 3 25,0 15,2 10,5 Wood Bi:cningham England 1910 2 25 15,2 9,5 Wood Flat Bed Mager various . U.S.A. 1911-1939 1950 63 2 12,0-30,0 30 8,3-10,5 11,0 SOURCE: Working Paper 27. -143-  Table 4A-6 AVAILABILITY OF TRACTION EQUIPMENT 1979 CLASS TYPE ~ERIE9 NtJM9R , IN SERVICE N° N° , IN REPAIR Locomotives Diesel., Electric 950 20 15 75 5 25 Locomotives Diesel Electric 1000 16 14 88 2 12 Locomotives Diesel Electric 950UI0B 9 7 78 2 22 Locomotives Diesel Electric 1000U20C B 5 63 3 37 Locomotives Diesel Hydraulic 841 5 3 60 2 40 Locomotives Diesel Hydraulic 521 4 2 50 2 50 Ferrobuses Diesel 321 10 7 70 3 30 Ferrobuses Diesel 341 4 4 100 - 0 TOTAL and Averaqe Percenta~es 76 57 75 19 25 , SOURCE: Working Paper 27. -144-  Table 4A-7 HIS'l'ORlCAL l!:VOLtJTION OF ENFE' S PASSENGER 'l'RAFFIC ANDEAN SYSTEM EASTERN SYSTEM ENFE Passengers pas-km Average Passengers Pas-km Average Passenge123 Pas-km Average YEAR Journey Dis- JOU:rl1EY Dis- Journey Dis- Thousands Millions tande (kin) Thousands Millions tance (Jan) Thousands Millions tanoe (klnl 1965 1. 323- 167 126 168 29 173 1.491 196 131 1966 1.241 173 181 - 139 31 171 1.422 204 143 . 1967 1.231 182 148 180 30 167 1.411 212 150 1968 1. 222 200 164 226 50 221 1.448 250 173 1969 973 193 198 257 63 245 1.230 256 208 I :;,. 1970 1. 016 212 209 228 59 259 1.244 271 218 ~ 1971 923 211 229 224 59 263 1.147 270 235 1972 893 194 217 243 67 276 1.136 261 230 1973 875 184 210 280 87 311 1.155 271 235 1974 689 150 218 276 99 359 965 249 258 1975 838 191 228 317 120 379 1.155 311 269 1976 932 242 260 319 126 395 1.251 368 294 1977 919 248 270 372 149 401 1.291 397 308 1978 797 225 282 440 173 393 1.237 398 322 SOURCE: Working Paper 27.  Table 4A-8 HISTORICAL EVOLUTION OF ENFE'S CARGO TRAFFIC ANDEAN SYSTEM EASTERN SYSTF.M ENFE Average Average --- . Average YEAR Tons Ton-km Journey Dis Tons Ton-Jan Journey Di Tons Tal-km Journey Distance Thousands ~11l10ns tanee (km)- 'Ihousands Millions tanee (km) Thousands ,..i11ion-" I-'-(~) -~-.- 1965 1.020 259 254 51 20 392 1.071 279 261 --- 1966 1.084 246 227 52 20 385 1.136 266 234 1967 1,\,051 272 259 56 27 482 1.107 299 270 1968 1.039 277 267 103 39 379 1.142 316 277 . 1969 1.090 290 266 205 92 449 1.295 382 295 I .... .... 1970 1.035 266 257 140 60 429 1.175 326 277 0'\ I 1971 1.074 268 250 216 86 398 1.290 354 274 1972 .841 253 301 222 111 500 1.063 364 342 1973 830 258 311 220 115 523 1.050 373 355 1974 805 239 297 294 157 534 1.099 396 360 1975 874 300 343 326 171 525 1.200 471 392 1976 749 305 407 389 218 560 1.138 523 460 1977 829 371 448 399 212 531 1.228 58' 475 1978 854 382 447 398 211 530 1.252 593 474 - --~-.-- .... - SOURCE: Working Paper 27. $:: ,.  Table 4A-9 HISTORICAL EVOLUTION OF INTERNATIONAL TRAFFIC - ~NFE (In thousands of tons) rt'EARS EXPORTS IMPORTS GUA- CHARA- AVA- VILLA- YACUI- QUIJA.!.. GUAQUI CHARA- AVA- VILLA- YACUI- OUIJ'A- f----- QYL_ _ ___ ROA _!Q!L_ -~!!--- -~Q_- !Q!!!I!- 3~ 1------- -~~--- _8Q~ __ _!Q!:L_ -~~--- __88Q __ __!2!!!I! _____ 1------.- 1965 31 17 89 SO SO so - 90 55 169 SO SO SO - 1966 51 20 116 SO SO SD - 92 64 134 SO SO SO - 1967 45 32 114 SO SO SO - 100 68 174 25 SO SO - 1968 35 54 94 SO 6 3 - 64 78 187 24 34 11 398 1969 37 60 93 SO 13 10 - 61 80 149 64 116 9 479 1970 33 61 86 SD 21 9 - 56 82 113 54 49 9 363 t ... I-' ..... 1971 20 54 83 SD 33 14 - 58 67 137 136 105 12 515 I 1972 25 47 64 6 35 27 204 62 73 117 97 6S 47 461 1973 23 51 122 8 40 55 299 69 34 63 134 52 29 381 1974 9 24 97 13 59 62 264 69 81 103 66 57 60 436 1975 3 19 117 16 42 47 244 53 90 211 49 76 91 570 1976 8 21 139 12 34 89 303 50 61 197 62 83 113 566 1977 8 15 174 16 72 25 310 42 72 229 105 81 139 668 1978 10 29 154 5 47 28 273 57 87 280 82 84 140 730 -- ~ .. SO 2 No data available. SOURCE: Working Paper 27.  'I'able 4A-10 LIST OF COMMODITIES TRANSPORTED IN THE ANDEAN SYSTEM 197 3 197 4 1 9 7 5 1 9 7 6 1 9 7 7 197 8 COMMODITY Ton. '!h. KIn. Ton. '!h. KIn. Ton. '!h. KIn. Ton. '!h. KIn. Ton. '!h. KIn. Ton. '!h. 1Qn. (theus. ) millions) (theus Cmillions (thous" (JtlilliOl'l!\ (thoos. (millions (thous. ) Cmillials (thous. rtnill10ns 'Minerals 190,8 53,1 171,3 45,3 160,9 48,7 181,1 60,1 215,8 73,6 170,2 62,8 Ccnst:ruct:icn iron 36,4 11,7 24,7 8,8 79,4 29,9 42,4 22,1 50,5 29,0 46,2 24,1 Pet:r:olelln products 55,0 15,7 60,9 19,9 67,8 27,9 60,2 26,1 62,6 27,5 58,8 25,9 CEm!'!nt 14,7 5,8 14,0 5,3 17,1 10,6 36,4 19,9 48,2 29,2 23,1 12,4 'Wood 22,3 6,9 11,5 4,2 19,8 9,3 18,6 8,9 20,5 9,4 21,0 10,7 Olem1cals 32,3 7,8 27,2 6,2 34,0 12,7 22,7 8,9 20,0 9,7 24,3 10,9 'Machinery 9,9 2,3 10,0 3,1 21,4 10,8 25,5 11,2 30,5 16,7 24,4 12,6 I ~ Paper 7,4 2,1 6,0 1,6 7,6 2,5 6,1 2,1 10,0 4,1 12,6 4,4 .... CX) I 'Vehicles - - 9,9 3,0 11,1 4,8 9,7 4,0 16,7 7,0 16,5 5,5 Wheat 37,9 16,7 57,3 26,5 65,7 39,7 102,6 54,5 113,8 60,0 185,9 102,9 Flour 94,7 36,2 111,9 37,3 88,5 39,7 52,9 26,9 53,3 35,9 47,8 33,6 Rice 1,7 0,3 3,5 1,1 5,9 2,0 0,9 0,4 0,4 0,2 16,0 7,0 oottal Sugar 0,3 0,2 31,6 0,7 0,5 3,6 2,2 5,7 1,5 2,5 3,8 15,8 2,2 9,6 1,4 1,0 8,8 0,1 19,7 - 13,1 48,S 8,1 13,9 Cattle 0,7 0,2 0,3 0,1 0,8 0,2 1,3 0,6 1,3 0,7 0,8 0,3 Others 157,4 51,3 207,1 64,8 226,9 51,4 110,7 42,9 120,5 48,1 120,0 49,4 'l'OrAL 710,0 241,9 724,4 231,3 814,8 294,2 691,3 300,4 779,4 360,9 787,4 375,6 .. -- -- '--- - -, --- Y Not inclOOed Viad1a-Gwlqu1. SQJID!:: Wol:k.1ng Paper 27 • • .;Ii ... *' '" ... a. -.iii .. .,. ~ ~ .. '0  Table 4A-ll LIST OF COMMODITIES TRANSPORTED IN THE EASTERN SYSTEM I COMMODITIES Ton. 1 9 7 3 Tn. b. Ton. 1 9 7 4 Tn.KIn. 1 9 7 5 Ton. Tn. Km. Ton. 1 9 7 6 Tn.KIn. 197 7 Ton. Tn.b. 1 9 7 8 Ton. Tn.b. (tlw:Jus. ) :(mUl1one) (thous. ) (mlll1onS \ (t:!nls.) (m1111ons (thous • (m:1111ons) (thowi.) (m1111onsl (tlDua. (ii1l~ . I .~alS 1,2 0,8 3,6 2,3 3,0 2,0 1,5 2,3 6,3 3,3 4,3 2,8 Cbnat:.ruct:ton Iron 10,2 6,0 12,2 6,6 29,7 13,4 43,7 22,4 62,3 37,0 57,3 29,8 . Petrol.el:m p1"Cducta 4,2 2,1 8,9 4,0 8,1 2,4 18,7 9,3 39,4 19,3 12,0 5,8 CEment 1,7 0,8 1,1 1,0 6,2 3,6 35,2 21,7 25,5 15,4 52,9 33,2 -M:lod- 60,1 29,5 65,8 34,6 30,1 15,6 37,2 20,8 36,4 18,5 47,9 19,0 -~ 10,8 5,2 6,1 3,2 16,3 8,5 20,6 10,1 18,1 9,5 24,5 14,1 -Vehicles 7,7 4,2 11,2 6,2 20,3 12,1 12,6 7,0 11,6 5,9 18,2 9,4 I ... I-' - ffieat - - - - 3,6 1,9 4,0 2,1 14,1 7,6 30,0 17,6 \D -Flour 10,3 5,4 23,0 13,5 33,0 16,7 26,5 14,6 14,9 8,2 4,3 2,2 I ~ton 32,6 20,3 21,1 13,0 22,6 14,2 10,6 6,3 9,4 5,8 14,6 9,2 ; Sugar 0,7 0,3 25,6 15,0 34,7 21,4 75,0 49,5 43,9 25,1 18,0 10,3 Cattle 10,5 4,0 11,6 4,2 11,4 4,1 13,2 4,7 14,6 5,2 13,0 4,2 . 0tIII!mI 70,1 36,4 103,7 52,9 107,3 55,4 88,0 47,3 102,4 51,4 101,6 53,5 'rorAL 220,1 115,0 293,9 156,5 326,3 171,3 388,8 218,1 398,9 212,2 398,6 211,1 .- -------------- SCX1lCE: tbrk1..rr:J Paper 27  Table 4A-12 M'£'S ~ 'l1W1'FIC BY' SEC'l'IOS IN 1918 , EXPI!ESS '1'RAD4S OROINI\RY: 'IRAINS FERfOBlSES ~ '1'OrAL '1'RI\fFIC SECrIONS Distanoe tnkm NI.mtJer. ot Pu..m in rtlrtb!r ot PurIatIin N'm'b!t: of Pas-km in tbItler ot PluHm in lbrller of Pas-km in ~ t.r'louaands Pasl!lll!l'lget'lt t:h;)UIaI'ds ~ t:I1ouaands .Pa1l8el'lgel:'a t:hauMIlds Pasaenqere thouaarda , - - ! 11. La paz- £1. Alta 11 20.800 3S4 53.951 918 81.321 1.311 156.084 2.6.0 U. £1 Alto-ViAd:la 13. V1ac:ba - 0Nz:0 25 204 20.804 20,804 521 4.245 51.800 42.912 1.445 8.460 81.030 81.031 2.025 16.531 - ... ... ... 159.634 144.807 3.991 29.236 14. 0ruJ:D-Ma~ 24 51.193 1.230 157.955 3.186 20.267 486 ... ... 229.415 5.502 ... I 15. ~Rf.o Mulata 184 51.207 9.422 175.422 9.686 20.456 3.162 ... .- 247.085 42.870 III o 16. Rf.o MJlato - t.\'Im1 105 54.106 5.681 179.966 8.516 - - ... ... 234.072 24.197 - - I 17. lIy\n1. ... Atod:la 93 47.166 4.327 143.820 3.010 ... ... 190.986 17.337 18. At:ocha ... Vll1az6l 196 37.265 5.625 140.833 8.481 - - - ... 178.098 24.106 21. VJacha - CharaiIa 207 ... - 32.014 5.894 - - ... ... 32.014 5.894 31. 0ym.1- 0l1ague 41. 0Nz:000 CochabImI:.a 175 211 37 8 1&.203 178.895 1.462 ~2.191 - 133.293 ... 28.060 - - - ... 10.203 lU.225 1.462 50.259 42. c::'lcchaballlba-A1qu11e 51. R10 Mulato- IOtoId 216 174 - 5 ... 1 19.038 31.304 1.995 3.869 ... 11.402 ... 3.028 4.061 ... 453 ... 23.099 48.711 2.448 6.898 52. Pews!- ax:re 175 4 1 14.497 2.011 17.384 3.042 19.531 2.374 51.416 7.428 61. V:Lac:ha - G~ 71. santa Cl'."I..I2Kbrurbll 65 643 - - - - - 172.715 - ~3.265 - 11.249 - 38.799 1.554 8.869 101 440 1.554 258.833 101 102.504 81. santa Cxuz-Yac:uibt 91. santa cruz - Yapacanl 539 204 - - - - 139.398 304 p3.327 24 24.767 - 11.942 - - 10.666 ... 873 164.165 10.970 65.269 897 , - -- L_~_ ...... __ ...... !OJR:E: Jt>rk:1ng Paper 27 iii!; .;£ .iI. ... .. . . • Jii iii: .- ..  Tabl~ 4A-13 ENFE'S WAGON-LOAD TRAFFIC BY SECTION 1978 SECTIONS 11M. EXPORTS IMPORTS LOCAL TOTAL TRAFFIC 'tbtt:ler of 'lbn-1Qn in N't:Inber of 1'Ibn_1Qn NlJnI::er of 'Ibn-1Qn in N't:Inber of loaded 'Ibn-1Qn in 'lbns Lo!lded 'Ibns in Loaded . 'Ibn loaded 'lbns N!gons tlDusands tlDusands 'IilgC>llS t:h:Ius. ~ t:housa.nda 1iIa<:k>ns 11. la Paz-El Alto 17 74 1.246 21 3.482 96.612 1.642 258 5.116 . '87 3.814 102.974 1.750 12. El Alto-Viacha 25 318 7.925 19B B.764 185.500 4.637 590 12.050 302 9.672 205.475 5.137 13. V1acha-Orw:o 204 1.039 31.550 3.B13 4.704 119.645 24.404 1.B26 47.319 7.013 7.569 198.514 35.230 14. Oruro-Machaca- marca 24 1.698 52. lOB 1.250 12.612 321.759 7.717 2.B61 62.079 1.4B7 17.171 435.946 10.454 15. Machacanarca - RfoMulato 1B4 1.812 56.095 O.OBO 12.573 320.604 5B.9B3 2.587 53.626 9.736 16.972 430.325 7B.799 I ~ 16. R10 Mllato- U'I ~ Uyuni 105 3.11B 101.410 10.649 13.541 345.0BO 36.220 2.679 57.950 5.92B 19.338 504.440 52.797 I 17. Uyuni-Atodla 93 1.828 4B.934 4.51B 3.647 B2.296 7.591 2.337 4B.BOO 4.066 7.B12 180.030 16.175 18. At:odl&-Vllla- z6n 196 436 11.776 1.4B5 3.729 84.019 16.140 642 14.703 946 4.807 110.498 18.571 21. Yiac:t.ta-chi!ll:a 207 9B3 2B.720 5,619 5.0B2 B7,274 IB.065 39 610 47 6.104 116.604 23.731 31. Uyuni-<)1lague 175 5.069 153.739 26.905 10.644 279.607 4B.930 296 6.934 476 16.009 440.280 76.311 41. Orum- Cocha- bcInba 211 1.201 37.389 7.554 4.004 92.955 19.544 1.67B 37.406 6.770 6.S83 16'7.750 33.868 42. Cochabaarba- Mqu1l.e 51. R10 Mulato- 21. n. 5.151 B'3 - - - 115 2.796 400 313 8.747 1.263 Potos! 174 1.308 45.354 6.275 973 24.571 4.277 5B7 15.26B 2.032 2.868 B5.193 12.5S4 ~2. Potos!-suere- 'l'araluD 175 281 10.640 255 359 B.543 1.495 47 948 143 687 20.131 1.893 ~1. V1adla-Guaqui 71. Santa Cruz- 65 384 10.372 67B 2.269 56.726 3.6B7 - - - 2.653 67.09B 4.365 Corunb! 643 1.833 32.364 ~1.195 6.263 139.60B 90.027 3.506 47.690 16.006 11.602 219.662 127.228 81. Santa Cruz- Yacu1ba 539 1.S00 47.1B6 25.B90 4.585 83.843 41.367 1.155 23.014 7.617 7.540 154.043 74.874 ~1. Santa Cruz- . Yapacan! 204 - - - - - - 596 9.9B4 1.630 596 9.984 1.630 s:x:rRCE: W;)rldng Paper 27  APPENDIX 48 PRINCIPAL RESULTS OF ROADSIDE ORIGIN- DESTINATION SURVEY  Appendix 4B PRINCIPAL RESULTS OF ROADSIDE ORIGIN-DESTINATION SURVEY TABLES Number Page 4B-l Vehicle Classes 153 4B-2 Average Daily Traffic - Wet Season-1979 154 4B-3 Average Daily Traffic - Dry Season-1979 155 4B-4 Passengers Carried by Vehicle Class - 156 Wet Season 4B-5 Passengers Carried by Vehicle Class - 157 Dry Season 4B-6 Vehicle Occupancy Factor - Wet Season-1979 158 4B-7 Vehicle Occupancy Factor - Dry Season-1979 159 4B-8 Cargo Capacity - Wet Season-1979 160 4B-9 Cargo Capacity - Dry Season-1979 161 4B-10 Distribution of Trucks by Load Factor-1979 162 4B-ll Number of Trucks by Load Factor - Wet 163 Season-1979 4B-12 Number of Trucks by Load Factor - Dry 164 Season-1979 4B-13 Cargo Carried To and From Major Cities - 165 Wet Season-1979 4B-14 Cargo Carried To and From Major Cities - 166 Dry Season-1979 4B-15 Observed Volumes by Vehicle Type 167 4B-16 Distribution of Trucks by Freight Capacity 168 4B-17 Average Truck Capacity, Load and Person 169 Occupancy 4B-18 Distribution of Buses by Seat Capacity 170 4B-19 Trucks by Load Factor 171 4B-20 Analysis of Truck Occupancy and Freight 172 Carried 4B-2l Truck Load Factors Into and Out the Major 173 Cities 4B-22 Distribution of Trucks by Load Carried 174 4B-23 Equivalent Axle Calculations - Small Trucks 175 4B-24 Equivalent Axle Calculations - Medium 176 Trucks 4B-25 Equivalent Axle Calculations - Large Trucks 177 4B-26 Equivalent Axle Calculations - Buses 178 4B-27 Average Vehicle Weights 179 4B-28 Truck Load Factors 180 4B-29 Assumed Cargo Loading Factors 181 4B-30 Surveyed Axle Loads and Equivalent Factors 182 -152-  Table 4B-1 VEHICLE CLASSES CLASS VEHICLES 1 Cars, station wagons 2 Pickups 3 Other light vehicles 4 Bus with 21 seats or less 5 Bus with 22-35 seats 6 Bus with 36 seats or more 7(1) 41-119 qq truck 8(1) 120-199 qq truck 9 (1) 200 qq truck or more 10 Tankers 11 Trucks with trailers 12 Motorcycles 13 Others (1) Excluding vehicles in classes 10 and 11. SOURCE: Working Paper 14. -153-  Table 48-2 AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC Wet Season - 1979 VEHICLE CLASS 9_ __ _1_0_ Cities !-OCATION 1 --- 2 3 4 --- --- 5 _6_ 7 8 _1_1_ -!..L _1_3_ La Paz 227 1ll 202 48 509 313 344 688 499 21 5 10 6 Oruro 87 93 113 57 166 156 112 198 368 33 3 12 5 Cochabamba 212 203 149 58 390 233 402 526 563 62 8 67 11 Santa Cruz 578 669 298 82 419 68 320 1,145 421 50 18 274 29 ... I Sucre 43 100 60 1 42 6 79 185 91 3 0 10 3 ... 1,11 I Potod 44 107 101 2 54 26 287 271 117 153 4 14 2 Tarija 129 127 64 3 41 8 88 106 123 10 1 l8 1 Subtotal 1,320 1,430 987 251 1,621 810 1,632 3,119 2,182 332 39 425 57 Other Locations Patacamaya 0 4 12 3 11 2 7 22 11 0 0 0 4 Epizana 9 8 12 0 6 21 22 70 168 17 4 4 0 Ipatl 0 8 9 0 8 2 9 37 23 8 3 0 1 Puente Uatarez 4 13 2 0 1 0 7 13 10 4 0 1 0 Mojo 2 4 5 0 4 7 8 6 9 1 0 0 1 subtotal 15 37 40 3 30 32 53 148 221 30 7 5 6 TOTAL 1,335 1,467 1,027 254 1,651 842 1,685 3,267 2,403 362 46 430 63 COMPOSI'1'ION (\) 9.0 9.9 6.9 1.7 11.1 5.7 11.4 22.0 16.2 2.4 0.3 3.0 0.4 SOQRCE: Working Paper 14 ioIi> a; ... ,,. " <iii . - . .- .. . ... . ., ". .. .. .. jjiii . .. ... JlIi .. "'  Table 48-3 AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC Dry Season - 1979 VEHICLE CI.ASS IDCATICN 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ...!!L ..!.L 12 13 ,:cities La P,'lZ C=uro 242 147 157 101 221 120 43 a6 527 177 246 137 388 141 790 170 . 458 447 19 28 17 8 18 11 8 3 Coehabamba 263 157 138 150 336 120 2~5 565 585 51 10 65 3 Santa C:uz 542 591 397 105 381$ 67 298 1.532 409 58 43 178 34 Sucre 57 aa 51 5 35 10 . 66 241 103 2 0 7 1 ~ f:Ot03! 171 103 119 1 144 31 240 271 128 15!) , 3 4 ,3 ~ Tarija 119 70 44 '2 30 20 102 118 81 8 0 18 1 I Subtotal 1.541 1.267 1.096 392 1.535 631 1.530 3.687 2.211 316 .81 301 53 Other IDeations Patacamaya 8 9 5 3 23 .3 36 40 36 3 1 0 2 Epizana 26 12 22 9 14 52 17 100 432 18 1 t;' 0 Ipat! 3 15 10 1 8 3 16 15 15 5 0 5 0 Puen~e Ustarez 21 46 27 0 5 3 23 36 32 0 0 5 0 :1ojo 1 4 9 0 G 6 7 12 9 2 0 1 0 S;;S'!OTAL 59 87 73 13 55 67 99 203 524 .28 e 11 2 701'A1. 1.600 1.354 1.169 405 1.691 698 1.629 3.890 2.735 344 89 318 55 a:MPOSITICN % 10,0 8,5 7,3 2,5 10,6 4,4 10,2 24,3 17,1 '2,2 0,6 '2',0 0·,3 SOURCE: tbrk1ng Paper 14.  Table 4B-4 PASSENGERS CARRIED BY VEHICLE CU\SS Wet Seasa\ - 1979 NuriJer and Perc::entage of Daily Passengers (%) VEHICI.E CIASS 1 1 -- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 S 9 10 11 12 13 CITY --- Tl:rti Other Total TJ".:?.t laPaz , N . 156 598 0.37 1.44 1.81 754 495 1.19 680 1.64 1,030 13.457 11.975 2.48 32.38 28.82 2,180 7,149 5.25 - 17.20 3,000 7.22 40 0.10 15 11 12 0.04 0.03 0.03 40.799 100 t Oruro , N 123 20S' 0.75 1.26 2.01 331 357 2.17 351 2.20 978 4,676 5,587 5.94 28.40 33.9~ 698 1,381 4.24 8.39 1,667 10.13 63 0.38 G 14 13 0.04 0.08 0.08 16.132 100 \ Pat:.ace:t'aya , N 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 2.80 35 5.75 19 213 3.13 35.03 54 S.89 60 158 9.87 25.99 45 7.40 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 1.15 60S 100 % 1,087 4,266 I I-' St:.a • C:tu2: , N 237 1,260 1,497 0.82 4.37 5.19 2,249 7.79 931 2.88 1,559 10.199 2,772 5.40 35.36 9.G1 3.77 14.79 2.323 8.06 91 0.31 37 394 48 0.13 1.36 0.16 27.353 100 " , VI 0'1 N 37 120 157 575 341 29 1,412 865 3,457 2.792 1.125 297 17 18 2 11.0e7 I Potos! 0.33 1.07 1.40 5.11 3,03 0.26 12.56 7.70 30.74 24.83 10.00 2.64 0.15 0.16 0.02 100 " l'pat:! , N 0 0 o '. o . 0 0 28 4.07- 30 4.36 0 150 0 21.80 35 5.09 75 249 10.90 36~20 90 13.09 17 .2.47 13 1.89 0 1 o 0.14 6aS 100 " Tarija , N 335 116 6.59 2.28 8.87 451 459 9.03 259 5.09- 79 1,214 loS5 23.87 304 5.99 611 12.02 914 16.00 3G8 7.24 19 0.37 3 51 2 0.06 1.00 0.04 4.634 100 \ M:>jo , N 6 6 1.20 1.20 2.~0 12 14 2.80 30 6.00 0 86 226 0 17.20 45.2:> 39 7.80 29 5.80 49 9.60 0.4 2 0 0 0 3. 0 0.60 100 " ~89 Pte .. Ust:arez N 0 26 26 49 14 0 a 0 48 61 Sl 13 0 1 0 271 0 8.67 9.67 16.'33 4.64 0 2.26 0 16.00 20.34 17.00 4.34 o 0.34 0 100 \ Suc..."'1! "N \ 53 89 0.86 1.45 2.32 142 10.00 613 196 3.20 3 978 0.05 15.95 240 3.91 816 13.30 1,676 27.33 1,304 21.26 0.08 5 0 14 3 o 0.23 0.05 5.990 100 , Coc:habarrba ,N 129 787 0.27 1.68 1.95 916 1,140 2.44 599 1.28 842 14.201 12~630 3:.80 30.35 26.99 4.008 8.56 6.502 13.89 4.71:1 10.07 120 0.25 18 149 38 0.04 0.32 0.08 45.876 100 , E:pbana ,N 0 30 0 0.93 0.93 30 25 0.78 30 0.93 0 0 101 725 5.62 22.51 245 7.61 694 21.54 1.221 37.91 26 a 6 0.81 0.24 0.19 0 0 3·191 100 , 'Ibta! .,N 1.0i6 3.240 4.316 6.021 3.406 4.539 46.775 35.414 13.32425.771 15.955 693 117 0.68 2.06 2.74 3.S3. 2.17 2.89 29.77 22.54 8.48 16.40 10.15 0.44 0.07 658 0.~2 129 0.08 157.118 100 % Scm:cE: Working Paper 14. :iIk .. ... .. ... .. ... .. .. >Ii ;. ... ., . ... iii • ;Ii ... .. .. .,.. .. '" .Ii  Table 4&-5 PJ\SS'ENGERS CARRIED '3Y VEHIClE ClASS Dry Seasoo - 1979 Nmber and Percentage of Daily Passengers VEHla:.E ClASS crrr . 1 1 1 2 3 4 S 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 '.l'OTAL Tax1 Other '1btal N 203 584 781 542 703 758. 13064 8977 1848 6242 2538 41 29 27 10 35566 La Paa , C.56 1.60 2.15 1.49 1.93 2.09 - 35.94 24.69 5.08 17.17 6.98 0.11 0.08 0.07 0.03 100 N 208 332 540 407 413 1428 5094 5238 868 1293 2401 54 15 15 2 17768 Or:uzo 1.13 1.81 2.95 2.22 2.25 1.80 27.83 28.61 4.74 7.06 13.11 0.30 0.08 0.08 0.01 100 " N o 32 32 47 14 18 344 102 361 411 130 4 1 o 3 1467 Pet:.aea!lllya , o 2.13 2.33 J.13 0.93 1.~0 22.90 6.79 24.03 27.36 8.66 0.21 0.07 o 0.20 100 N 418 1103 1521 1760 1183 1498 9135 2955 893 4166 1691 97 8C 259 63 25305 Santa O:uz , 1.56 4.11 5.67 6.56 4.41 5.58 34.05 11.02 3.33 15.53 6.30 0.36 0.31 0.97 0.23 100 N 393 233 626 613 479 16 2034 1205 3299 2989 1061 279 7 7 2 12617 Potosi , 2.79 1.76 4.73 4.63 3.61 0.12 15.36 9.08 24.91 22.57 8.01 2.11 0.05 0.05 0.02 100 N 5 1 6 59 51 6 224 95 245 117 111 10 o 6 2 932 I ..... lpaU , 0.53 0.11 0.64 6.29 5.44 0.64 23.08 10.13 26.12 12.47 11.34 1.07 o 0.64 0.21 100 U1 "t Tart,. N , 348 7.55 71 1.54 419 '.09 283 6.14 134 2.91 32 914 0.69 19.84 519 11.26 16.04 73!1 739 16.04 3110 7.81 20 0.43 o o 25 0.54 5 0.11 4189 100 N o 2 2 15 35 o 147 256 20 45 21 3 o 1 o 545 M:>,o , o 0.36 0.30 2.74 6.40 o 26.87 46.80 3.66 8.22 3.84 0.55 o 0.19 o 100 N 33 49 82 172 89 o 165 77 119 161 117 o o 6 1 991 pte. Usta.."H , 3.07 4.57 7.64 16.03 8.30 o 15.)7 7.17 11.09 15.00 10.90 o o 0.56 0.28 100 N S2 154 206 591 216 87 8G4 313 691 1749 866 3 o 9 1 5596 Suere , 0.89 2.65 3.55 10.19 3.73 1.50 14.90 5.39 11.91 30.14 14.93 0.05 o 0.11 0.02 IOC 178 718 896 674 471 2862 7634 4575 2099 2717 2557 91 23 5 24700 Coc:habarrba N , 0.69 2.81 1.50 2.63 1.84 11.18 29.82 17.87 8.20 10.61 9.99 0.30 0.09 " 0.38 0.02 100 N 19 102 121 46 90 140 333 2022 133 1271 2567 36 16 11 o 6786 l."piuna , 0.29 1.47 1.75 0.67 1.30 2.03 4.82 29.27 1.93 18.40 37.17 0.52 0.23 0.16 o 100 N 1857 3381 5238 5209 3878 6845 39952 26334 11315 21900 14420 638 175 462 96 136462 'lbW , 1.36 2.47 3.83 3.82 2.84 5.01 29.28 19.30 8.29 16.05 10.56 0.47 0.13 0.34 0.07 100 BOlJR(E: Working Paper 14.  Table 4B-6 VEHICLE OCXlJPNIlCY FACTOR wet Season -1979 VEHICLE cr..ASS CI'lY OR - 1 1 1 DllERSEC'rICN Taxi !.a Paz 3.5 Other 3.3 Tctal 3.3 -2 3.8 3.4 3 4 21. S 5 26.4 6 33.3 -7 6.3 8 10.4 -6.0 9 10 1.9 -3.1 11 -- 12 1.1 13 1.9 C!'':.!ro 4.4 3.5 3.8 3.8 3.2 17.2 28.2 35.8 6.2 7.0 4.5 1.9 1.8 1.2 2.6 Pe ~aca.'T.aya . 0 0 0 4.3 2.9 6.3 19,3 27.0 8.5 7.2 4.0 0 0 0 1.6 Sta. Cruz 3.2 2.5 2.6 3.4 . 2.8 19.0 24.3 40.8 3.4 3.7 5.5 1.8 2.1 1.' 1.6 ?O~OS! 3.4 3.6 3.6 5.4 3 •• 14 .4 26.1 33.3 12.0 10.3 9.6 1.9 4.3 1.3 1.0 l?at.! 0 0 0 3.4 3.3 0 18.7 17.3 8.3 6.7 3.9 2.1 4.3 0 1.0 ~ 'tarija 3.6 3.2 3.5 3.6 4.0 26.3 29.6 38.0 6.9 7.7 3.0 1.9 3.0 1.3 2.9 ~ }1:Jjo 5.5 5.S 5.S 3.4 5.9 0 21.4 32.3 4.8 4.8 5.3 2.0 0 0 2.S t Pte. Ustares 0 6.5 7:1 3.8 6.8 0 7.5 0 6.9 4.7 5.1 3.1 0 1.0 0 S':.!ere. 2.6 3.9 3.3 6.1 3.3 2.5 23.3 40.0 10.3 9.1 14.3 1.7 0 1.4 1.0 Cochaba.-::ba 3.0 3.3 3.2 4.0 2.8 13.5 25.5 39.8 8.0 7.0 5.9 1.8 2.2 1.4 1.5 !:pizana 0 3.3 3.3 3.1 2.5 0 30.1 34.5 11.1 9.9 7.3 1.5 1.9 1.4 0 Average 3.7 3.9 3.9 4.0 3.7 15.1 23.4 34.3 7.7 7.4 6.2 2.0 2.8 1.3 1.1 '. sa.mt:E: N:lrk1ng Paper 14. .... ..iii ___ A .... .,iii *'t,Iii .....rill •••• " .. '"  • Table 4B-7 VEHICLE OCOJPANCY FACroR Dry Season - 1979 VEHICIE CLASS CITY OR 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 --11 lNTEBSEcrroN -- Taxi Other Total La Paz 3.4 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.2 17.6 24.8 36.S· 4.8 7.9 5.5 2.1 1.7 1.5 1.2 Oruro 4.2 3.4 3.7 4.0 3.4 16.6 28.S 38.2 6.2 7.6 .5.4 1.9 1.9 1.4 1.0 Patacar.:aya 0 3.9 4.3 5.2 2.S 6.0 15.0 J4.0 10.0 10.3 3.6 1.3 1.0 0 1.3 I Santa Cruz 3.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.0 14.3 23.7 41.1 3.0 2.7 4.1 1.7 2 .. 0 1.5 1.9 I-' VI \0 I Potosi 3.2 4.9 3.7 5.9 4.0 16.0 14.1 38.9 13.7 11. 0 8.8 1.9 2.2 1.8 1.0 Ipati '-.5 1.0 2.0 3.7 5.1 G.O 28.0 31.5 15.3 7.8 7.4 2.0 0 1.2 0 Tarija 3.7 2.8 3.5 4.0 3.0 15.8 30.5 26.0 7.2 6.3 4.4 2.4 0 1.4 6.8 Mojo 0 2.0 2.0 3.S 3.9 0 2L5 42.7 2.9 3.S 2.3 1.5 0 1.0 0 Pte.Ustares 2.8 5.4 3.9 3.7 3.3 0 33.0 25.7 5.2 4.5 3.7 0 0 1.2 0 Sucre 2.7 4.0 3.6 6.7 3.8 17.4 24.7 31.3 10.5 7.3 8.4 1.5 0 1.3 1.0 Coe habar:-,ba 3.4 3.4 3.4 4.3 3.4 19.1 22.7 38.1 7.1 4.8 4.4 1.8 2.8 1.5 1.8 Epizana 4.8 4.6 4.7 3.8 4.1 15.6 23.8 38.9 7.8 12.7 5.9 2.0 2.2 1.8 0 Average 3.4 3.4 3.4 4.3 3.6 14.4 24.5 35.5 7.8 7.2 5.3 1.8 1.9 1.4 2.0 SOUlCE: ~rking Paper 14.  Table 4B-8 O\ROO CAPACITY wet Season - 1979 Average Daily Number of Vehicles and Percentages (%) CAPllCITY (qq) CITY OR AVERACE lNIERSECI'ICN 0 1-20 21 -40 41 - 60 Gl-80 81-100 101-119 120-159 160-199 200-249 250-299 300 + ~ggl La Paz , N 187 9.8 Sl 2.7 95 5.0 175 9.2 69 3.G 100 5.3 0.3 5 631 33.2 G9 3.6 291 15.3 187 9.9 41 2.2 128.5 Oruro , N 107 11.5 22 2.4 71 7.7 93 9.0 17 1.8 21 2.3 1 0.1 160 17.3 46 5.0 214 23.1 160 17.3 25 2.7 144.8 Patacamaya , N 15 25.9 3.4 2 4 6.9 4 6.9 1 1.7 2 3.4 0 0 21 36.2 1 1.7 3.4 2 4 6.9 2 3.4 104.7 Sta.Cruz , N 281 9.5 331 11.2 351 11.9 109 3.7 56 1.9 180 G.l 0.3 8 954 32.3 214 7.2 273 9.2 146 4.9 S5 1.9 108.0 I ..... Potos! , N 101 9.7 28 2.7 77 7.4 209 20.1 94 9.0 87 8.4 3 0.3 271 26.1 42 4.0 46 4.4 70 6.7 12 1.2 100.9 ~ , Ipati , n 10 10.2 4 4.1 5 5.1 6 6.1 2 2.0 2 2.0 0 0 30 30.6 7 7.1 21 21.4 7 7.1 4 4.1 149.4 Tarija , N 63 12.1 58 11.2 61 11.7 68 13.1 . 2 0.4 30 5.8 0 0 94 IB.1 15 2.9 87 16.7 36 6.9 6 1.2 103.6 MOjo , N 7 20.6 1 2.9 3 8.9 5 14.7 2 5.9 2 5.9 0 0.0 3 a.B 2 5.9 6 17.6 3 B.8 0 0 120.9 Pte.Ostares : 2 3 7 5 0 4 0 12 6 7 3 2 122.0 3.9 5.9 13.7 9.8 0 7.8 0 23.5 11.a 13.7 S.9 3.9 Sucre , N 60 11.6 1S 2.9 as 1G.4 51 9.8 11 2.1 20 3.9 0 0 159 30.6 2G 5.0 48 9.2 42 8.1 2 0.4 107.2 Q)cl-~ , N 140 7.3 95 4.9 116 6.0 266 13.8 70 3.6 69 3.6 10 0.5 40B 21.1 137 7.1 304 15.8 232 12.0 83 4.3 134.9 Ep1zana N , 10 3.4 3 1.0 5 1.7 9 3.1 7 2.4 1.4 4 0 0 59 20.0 15 5.1 69 23.4 a7 29.5 27 9.2 19B.l Total , N 9~52 983 G13 5.93 880 9.52 990 9.5B 331 3.20 521 5.04 27 0.26 2,802 27.12 580 5.62 1,368 13.24 977 9.46 259 2.51 !.nJR:E: It:)rJd.ntJ Paper 14. . .. ~. -. .. . '"  '. Table 4B-9 CARCD CAPACITY Dry Season - 1979 Average Daily Ntrnber of Vehicles and Percentages CAPACITY (qq) CITY' OR . 'AVERAGE INTERSEcrrrn 0 1-20 21-40 41-60 61-80 81-100 10 1 120-159 160-199 200-249 250-299 --- 300+ (co) « t .:N. 214 64 102 229 71 94 3 699 101 238 1BO 67 La Paz 126.7 % 10.4 3.1 4.9 11.1 3. -1 4.6 0.1 33.9 4.9 11.5 8.7 3.2 N 118 42 70 101 19 20 0 129 51 243 176 S3 Oruro 149.9 % 11.5 4.1 6.8 9.9 1.9 2.0 0.0 12.6 5.0 23.8 17.2 S.2 N 7 3 7 29 <I 3 0 36 5 13 19 7 " I-' ~ Pataca:'::'.aya % 5.3 2.3 5.3 . 21. 8 3.C 2.3 0.0 27.1 3.B 9.8 14.3 5.3 138.5 . I-' I N 346 307 341 84 36 186 4 l,29B 257 256 152 96 Sta. Cruz 113.2 % 10.3 9.1 10.1 2.5 1.1 5.5 0.1 38.6 7.6 7.6 4.5 2.9 Patos! N 117 29 71 169 79 78 1 263 62 63 60 " ,,~ , '104.6 % 11.5 2.9 7.0 16.7 7.S 7.7 0.1 26.0 6.1 6.2 5.9 2.1 N 11 10 7 10 3 3 0 12 4 11 5 0 Ipati 0.0 101.9 % 14.5 13.2 9.2 13.2 3.9 3.9 0.0 15.8 5.3 14.5 6.6 N 44 31 44 65 5 31 0 112 7 41 42 7 Tarija \ 10.3 7.2 10.3 15.2 1.2 7.2 0.0 26.1 1.6 9.6 9.8 1.6 109.9 Mojo N a 2 3 4 1 2 0 10 '2 3 6 2 116.3 % 18.6 4.7 7.0 9.3 2.3 4.7 0.0 23.3 4.7 7.0 14.0 4.7 N 22 23 27 16 1 7 0 35 1 18 10 4. 94..1 Pte. Ustares 0.6" 11.0 6.1 2.4 % 13.4 14.0 16.5 9.8 0.6 4.3 0.0 21.3 N 45 28 74 40 14 17 1 176 66 49 44 8 Sucre· % 8.0 5.0 13.2 7.1 2.5 3'.0 0.2 31. 3 11. 7 8.7 7.S 1.4 121.8 ('}:)c:.'1.absrnba N 132 60 114 188 50 39 18 436 137 320 232 91 145.1 % 7.3 3.3 6.3 10.3 2.8 2.1 1.0 24.0 7.5 17.6 12.8 5.0 E?izana , N 22 3.6 7 1.1 6 1.0 9 1.5 3 0.5 0.7 4 0 0.0 83 13.6 20 3.3 162 26.6 214 35.1 eo 13.1 219.7 N 1,086 60G 8G6 944 235 484 27 3,239 713 1,417 1,140 436 Total ~ 9~62 5.37 7.67 8.3G 2.53 4.28 0.24 29.12 6.31 12.55 10.09 3.86 ~(tTJrF.: Worldna P~r 14.  ·. Table 4B-10 DISTRIBUTION OF TRUCKS BY LOAD FACTOR -1979 l: .~ TRUCK CLASS (2) If 10 11 LOAD FACTOR(l) 7 8 9 Wet Q!Y Wet Dry " 0 percent (empty trucks) 64 56 37 54 62 60 46 • ., 1 - 80 (percent) 20 17 24 10 13 9 15 81 - 100 (percent) 10 17 36 36 25 31 33 '. " 100 percent (overloaded trucks) 6 10 3 0 6 ~ --- Total 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 (1) Load Factor = Cargo carried/Capacity. (2) 7 - trucks below 119 qq, 8 - 120-199qq truck, 9 - trucks above 200 qq, 10 - tankers, 11 - trailers '\ SOURCE: Working Paper 14. ,j '11 -162-  ~ Table 4B-11 NUMBER OF TRI'J(l{S BY LOAD FACn:>R wet Season - 1979 Average Daily Nl..I'I'ber of Trucks and Percentages LOAD FAClUR (t) (2) (2) Aver.L.F. Aver. L.F. Including Excluding CU\SS 0 1-20 21-40 41-60 61-80 S1-100 101-120 121-140 140+ TOTAL atpty ~ Trudt 7 , N 1.090 91 . 78 79 82 154 51 23 26 1. 680 21.7 64.2 64 .88 5.42 4.64 4.iO 4.80 9.17 1.31 1.37 1. 55 100 , Truck 8 , N 1.991 57.21 167 5.08 126 3.83 151 4.59 125 3.S0 50S 15.1,5 149 4.50 57 1.74 125 . 3.80 3.288 100 1,: 28.1 69.S I Trudt 9 , N 905 37.62 97 4.03 112 4.66 111 4.61 199 8.23 37.20 995 73 3.03 14 0.58 1 0.04 2.406 100 1,: 51.0 82.4 ',.... w CT'I I Tankers . , N 189 54.15 3 0.S6 4 1.15 5 1. 43 1 2.01 127 36.39 10 2.86 3 0.86 1 0.29 3(9 100 1,: 54.9 95.3 Truck 11 , N 24 60.0 S.O 2 0 0 2.5 1 . 2.S 1 12 30.0 a 0 0 0 0 o 40 .100 , 34.7 76.1 'lbtal , N 4.089 52.7 360 4.6 320 4.1 347 4.5 413 5.3 1.696 21.8 288 3.7 97 1.2 153 2.0 7.763 100 , 38.1 77.S (1) load Factor = Ca.1:go carried/Capac!ty • (2) L. F. = load Factor SOURCE:: tbrldng Paper 14.  Table 4B-12 NUMBER OF TROCKS BY LOAD FAcroR (1) Dry Season - 1979 Average Daily Nmber of Trucks and Percentages I (2) (2) I-' " 0'1 AVER.LoF. AVER.L.F. ~ ImD FAcroR (%) I INCWDING EXCLUDING eLMS 1.;..20 21-40 41-60 61-S0 81-100 101-120 121-140 140+ TOTAL EMPTY EMPTY - Truck 7 N 0 1. 036 72 80 72 ~3 130 53 18 18 1.622 ---- 23.0 152.3 ~ 63.87 4.44 4.93 ~.44 5.73 11.10 3.27 '1. 11 1.11 100 % Truck 8 ~ 2.135 162 139 198 206 G85 239 82 sa 3.90( 29.2 6905 ~ 54.69 4.15 3.56 5.07 5.28 17.55 6.12 2.10 1. 48 100 ~ N 1.014 112 150 lsS 203 91j1 63 9 10 2.750 48.8 76.6 Truck 9 \ 36.S7 4.07 5.45 5.75 10.6r. 34.:2 2.29 0.33 0.36 100 % Tankers , N 207 61. 98 1 0.30 0.30 1 7 2.09 26 7.713 134 25.15 5 1. 50 3 0.90 0 0 334 100 % 43.1 9407 Truck 11 ~ 38 1 2 2 . 7 :'7 3 0 2 82 55.1 36.5 % 46.34 1.22 2 • .:.; 2.44 B.53 32.93 3.66 0 2.44 100 % N 4.430 3':8 372 437 625 1. 917 363 112 BB 8.692 39 08 79.1 Total % 50.96 4.00 4.30 5.02 7.19 22.05 4.17 1.29 1.01 100 ~ (1) load Factor = Cargo carried/Capacity 0 (2) L.F. = Load Factor scxm::E: Work~g Paper 140 *. ali _ .. .. ,," . ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~ .. . - ~.  J , I I , I if II I Table 4B-13 c.rum CARRIED 'to MD f'R:'l.! M1\JOR CITIES Wet Season - 1979 a:MDDtTY AVERAGE D/\ILY CARQ) (W) IAPAZ o RtlRO SA~TA cmn POTOSI TArtIJA SliCRE COC~AB~·31. Torn.!. GrouP 'Ib Jl'rcm To From To Fran To Fran To Frqn To Fran To Fran To Ftan Cattle Products 2,580 cereals 2,382 1,095 552 363 599 83 1,232 429 5,033 508 2,068 201 67 3 26 223 10 331 645 - 70 2.172 6,053 836 2,570 6,299 !'.779 2,525 6,528 others 1\gri- cultural and 8,325 705 1,366 503 2,809 l,Ol2 456 418 2.81 946 919 272 4,648 2,112 18,804 6,028 fOrestry prod. , t-' Petrole\ll\ Prod. 76J 2,840 658 2,210 721 4,':91 25 2,982 1,024 200 399 482 2,120 5,088 5,710 19,283 Ch Minerals 2,282 785 2,187 2,345 290 642 615 425 250 206 280 236 215 6,066 4,692 lit I rood, Beverages' ard Tobacco 5,940 8,946 2,420 3,444 5,301 !o,478 370 1,047 1,327 2,156 590 208 4,367 8,265 20,315 33,5C4 Textiles 331 151 45 10 6 260 221 603 427 "bod Products and Furniture 2,988 611 425 248 1,741 3,633 537 168 120 560 398 135 1,872 1,e04 8,081 7,159 Paper Products and Printing 233 635 145 90 5 100 130 130 240 938 770 Chenicals 1,334 1,142 351 872 445 478 409 288 SO 850 309 3,395 3,139 Building Mat. l3,609 2,902 3,684 2,273 6,881 2,943 1,171 249 950 650 195 1,899 9,551 2,505 46,047 13,421 Primary Metals 719 1,111 619 579 287 403 211 39 40 409 5 7f:6 879 3,051 3,616 Others 2,294 2,109 750 644 1,000 2,224 222 78 90 1 279 1,150 1,221 5,785 6,883 Enpty Receptacle 2," 8 3 .1,144 512 662 869 116 158 87 130 121 190 1,256 ·610 5,529 3,609 Various 119 .200 18 100 190 50 137 540 'Ibtal 56,388 26,128 14,097 15,195 25,896 28,836 4,548 6,070 4,441 4,523 4,622 3,721 35,547 26,691 14$.$U 111,164 sc:x.JICE: 1'brking Paper 14.  Table 48-14 CAlQ) O\RRIED TO AND F'Rl\t M1>JOR CITIES Dry Season - 1979 AVERAGE DA.1LY CAlQ) (ClI) CXJMX')iTY GR:XP lAPAZ ORURO SANTA elU!!: POTOSI TA::t!J'A SUCRE COCHABA.~3A TOTAL To f"J:aa To FreIn 'IbFran To Frcm To Fran To FreIn To Fran To f"J:aa cattle Products 2,701 1,442 397 742 1,032 2,062 224 263 68 360 191 111 2.139 366 6,752 5,3(6 Cereals 2,301 1,647 1,699 1,454 1,779 3,841 582 147 485 210 110 503 3,896 2,000 10,852 9,808 Other ~­ cultural and 9,862 1,792 1,918 671 42,862 4,319 1,580 571 531 626 1,3lS 645 11,172 4,3(5 69,240 12,969 forestry prod. Petrole\l'l'l Prod. 357 2,450 180 3,487 1,026 5,ge2 107 1,3(19 4.59 16 190 37 540 C,963 2,S59 18,324 Mine.rals 1,862 1,281 5,280 2,860 669 82 754 613 35 250 305 350 2,934 561 11,639 5,9n I .... en Pbod, Beverages en 3,780 8,501 1,453 3,136 3,742 6,164 3,226 530 1,146 1,158 810 644 2,556 C,793 16,713 24,926 I and Tobacco 'l'eXtiles :.10 217 143 37 112 134 40 50 233 428 685 816 ttxxl Products and Furnitun;! 3,352 610 2,387 6" 2,869 5,595 296 785 '!'" 545 707 20 2,094 1,894 11,705 10,126 Paper Pmducts and Print..inq 68 464 172 6 140 216 462 604 Olmd.cals 609 913 461 954 183 521 152 196 253 3 986 1,193 2,644 3,780 Bu1.1dinq Mat. 22,394 2,357 2,241 1,723 3,119 1,981 1,666 111 815 520 5 3,322 '16,031. 2,829 46,351 12,~9 Pr:f.mary Metals 168 1,261· 435 814 715 939 140 156 20 160 51 25 424 701 2,553 4,056 Others 895 1,589 739 1,617 2,479 2,582 305 11 20 70 70 5 1,625 573 6,123 6,441 Qrpty Receptacles 1,894 1,090 675 802 935 929 259 222 52 71 73 155 1,051 1,321 4,939 4,590 Various 34 33 '.300 60 .;. '- -. 394 33 Total SO,987 25,647 18,480 18,974 61,588 35,277 9,391 5,000 3,994 3,986 3,827 5,820 45,894 25,9&7 194,151 120,671 saJR::E: W::lrldnq Paper 14~ _ ai ... .", ~ ... ... .,. . ... ... ... ,. .. . . .- tt> :ti8 6--. ,. ... .  Table 4B-15 OBSERVED VOLUMES BY VEHICLE TYPE (16 hour, average weekday, 1979) VEHICLE CLASS WET SEASON DRY SEASON 4 Small Bus 291 652 5 Medium Bus 1923 1957 6 Large Bus 1022 910 7 Small Truck 2059 2478 8 Medium Truck 4244 6127 9 Large Truck 2707 3163 10 Tanker Truck 392 384 11 Truck with Trailer 60 136 SOURCE: The 1979 Roadside Origin Destination Survey. -167-  Table 4B-16 DI~TRIBUTION OF TRUCKS BY FREIGHT CAPACITY (16 hour, average weekday, 1979) TRUCK CLASS CAPACITY WET SEASON DRY SEASON AVERAGE PERCENT (qq) 7 41 ... 60 1051 1213 1132 11 61-80 341 429 385 4 81-100 615 804 709 7 101-119 28 29 29 0 I 8 120-159 3516 5059 4287 41 I-' 0'\ , en 160-199 737 1079 908 1517 9 15 9 200-249 1443 1591 250-299 1011 1165 1088 10 300 + 249 401 325 3 TOTAL 8991 11770 10380 100 NOTE: Totals of vehicles do not agree with Appendix Table 4-28 due to rounding errors. SOURCE: The 1979 Roadside Origin Destination Survey. .... *."" ... ,. ~,. '. ..  Table 4B-17 AVERAGE TRUCK CAPACITY, LOAD AND PERSON OCCUPANCY (16 hours, average weekday, 1979) TRUCK CLASS ITEM 7 8 9 Wet Season Number of trucks 2,059 4,244 2,707 Number with no freight 1,354 2,554 1,111 Average capacity (gg's) 74.3 133.2 241.5 Average load-all (gg's) 19.0 41.7 116.5 Average load-excluding empty vehicles (gg's) 56.6 104.6 198.2 Average person opcupancy 6.9 6.8 6.3 Dry Season Number of trucks 2,478 6,127 3,163 Number with no freight 1,635 3,538 1,277 Average capacity (gg's) 75.5 133.3' 247.1 Average load - all (gg's) 21.3 47.5 118.7 Average load-excluding empty vehicles (gg's) 62.6 112.0 199.6 Average person occupancy 7.1 5.1 5.1 Average (1) Number of trucks 2,258 5,185 2,935 Number with no freight 1,494 3,046 1,194 Average capacity (gg's) 74.9 133.3 244.5 Average load - all egg's) 20.2 45.1 117.7 Average load-excluding empty vehicles (gg's) 59.9 109.1 199.0 Average person occupancy 7.0 5.8 5.7 (1) Weighted by number of observations (see Table 4B-15) SOURCE: The 1979 Roadside Origin Destination Survey. -169-  Table 4B-l8 DISTRIBUTION OF BUSES BY SEAT CAPACITY (16 hour, average weekday, 1979) BUS CLASS CAPACITY WET SEASON DRY SEASON AVERAGE PERCENT (seats) 4 12-15 62 181 121 4 16-18 78 71 75 2 .... I -..J 0 I 19-21 152 391 271 8 5 22-28 1213 1308 1261 37 29-35 706 635 670 20 6 36-50 1015 885 950 28 51+ 11 28 20 1 TOTAL 3237 3499 3368 100 NOTE: Totals of vehicles do not agree with Appendix Table 4-28 due to rounding errors. SOURCE: The 1979 Roadside Origin Destination Survey. .. __ __ • ...,. lilt. tlltW~" "" .. .. Table 4B-19 TRUCK BY LOAD FACTOR (16 hour, average weekday, 1979) TRUCK CLASS LOAD FACTOR 7 8 9 No. % No. % No. % Wet Season Empty 1353 65 2550 60 1106 41 1-60% 305 15 567 13 349 13 61-100% 281 14 760 18 1155 43 Overloaded 122 6 390 9 94 3 2061 100 4267 100 2704 100 Drl Season Empty 1626 66 3530 57 1273 40 1-60% 321 13 660 11 457 15 61-100% 355 14 1285 21 1337 42 Overloaded 170 7 662 11 107 3 2472 100 6137 100 3174 100 Average Empty 1489 66 3040 58 1190 41 0-60% 313 14 613 12 403 14 61-100% 318 14 1023 20 1246 42 Overloaded 146 6 526 10 100 3 2266 100 5202 100 2939 100 NOTE: Totals of vehicles do not agree with Appendix Table 4-28 due t rounding errors. SOURCE: The 1979 Roadside Origin Destination Survey. -171-  <. Table 4B-20 ANALYSIS OF TRUCK OCCUPANCY AND FREIGHT CARRIED (24 hour, 7 day annual truck movements from merged and factored wet and dry sea.on roads1de survey data, 1977) TRUCK 7 --..!!.UCK'!!.!.....:8:....-__ TRUCK 9 TOTAL TRUCKS ITEM , No. , No. , No. Trucks w1th - 7 occupants or lell 472,538 75 1,231,974 83 458,324 81 2,162,836 81 - 8 occupants or more 158,304 ..ll -1.22,036 17 .!.Q!, 916 .1:.! ~,256 .J:! TOTAL 630,842 100 1,489,010 100 563,240 100 2,683,092 100 B Tr~cks with 8 occupants or more - no fre1ght 124,434 79 171,276 67 59,010 56 354,720 68 - w1th freight 33,870 21 ..12,760 33 45,906 44 165,536 32 TOTAL 158,304 100 257,036 100 104,916 100 520,256 100 c Truck with no fre1ght 7 occupants or leBs 296,767 70 725,355 81 216,487 79 1,238,609 78 8 occupants or more 124 !ill 30 171, 276 .1:.! .2.!!. 010 354,720 22 TOTAL 421,201 100 100 275,497 100 1,593,329 100 o Underloaded trucks (1) 7 occupants or less 58,118 71 186,823 72 83,045 74 327,986 72 8 ocuppantl or more 29 72,606 28 29,627 26 125,458 28 lliill TOTAL 81,343 100 259,429 100 112,672 100 453,444 100 E Normally and overload (1) trucks - 7 occupants or less 117,653 92 319,796 96 158,792 91 596,241 94 8 occupants or more 10.645 8 13,154 16,279 _9 ...!.Q., 078 _6 TOTAL 128,298 100 332 ,950 100 175,071 100 636,319 100 F Trucks w1th no fre1ght 421,201 67 896,631 61 275,497 49 1.593,329 59 Underloaded truckl (1) 81,343 13 259,429 17 112,672 20 453,444 17 Normally loaded trucks (1) 107,316 17 318,536 21 175,071 31 600,923 23 Overloaded trucks (1) 20,982 3 14,414 o 35,396 1 TOTAL 630,842 100 1,489,010 100 563,240 100 2,683,092 100 (1) Por def1nitions of overloaded, normally loaded and overloaded trucks, see text. SOURCE: The 1979 Roadside Origin Destination Survey. -172-  = '!" ~ ~ ,. ! Table 4B-21 TRUCK LOAD FACTORS INTO AND OUT THE MAJOR CITIEfi (16 hour, average weekday, 1979) TRUCK 1 TRUCK a TRUCK 9 ___In Out In Out In Out LOCATION No. Load F~c. No. Load Fjil£.. No. Load Fal<. No. I&ad Fac. No. Load Fac. No. ~c. (%) (% ) (%) It) (t) (t, Wet Season La Paz 163 4a.2 181 15.1 326 4a.9 369 14.9 220 67.1 275 29.1 Oruro 55 24.9 56 14.9 104 3a.7 97 17.7 219 57.2 143 43.8 Cochabamba 204 37.9 196 11.7 258 43.6 275 10.0 282 55.3 285 43.8 Santa Cruz 140 74.7 182 11.8 584 7a.0 562 10.4 207 60.5 218 40.0 Sucre 37 J4 .4 41 6.3 103 45.0 84 7.3 54 39.8 39 44.4 Potosi 130 29.6 157 6.4 133 44.2 141 12.6 52 53.0 68 50.5 Tarija 45 19.6 43 13 .4 43 18.6 63 15.9 66 69.7 57 56.6 I Total 774 43.2 856 11.5 1551 56.8 1591 12.1 1100 59.0 1095 40.4 ..... " "" I Dry Season La Paz 201 55.0 192 16.3 377 51.7 421 14.8 194 59.6 267 25.8 Oruro 73 21.4 67 19.4 a1 31.9 92 20.9 256 46.0 188 39.3 eochabamba 131 35.5 161 15.1 310 54.7 254 12.2 314 57.9 278 42.2 Santa Cruz 137 66.3 160 11. a 764 79.9 769 9.3 190 58.2 226 38.1 Sucre 31 40·3 37 7.5 114 59.8 127 10.6 42 45.6 62 42.6 Potosi 108 28.2 128 4·9 148 43. 3 127 10.1 63 54.8 62 49· 5 Tarija 45 27.0 52 10.1 50 26.7 68 21. 4 33 53.1 51 39.2 Trinidad 22 73.8 24 18.8 33 103.7 31 17.7 6 14.8 5 0 Riberalta 19 33·0 14 11.2 40 37.0 42 31. 9 6 26·4 2 62.1 Total 767 44.5 835 12.9 1917 62.4 1931 12.6 1104 54.6 1141 37 .2 SOU~CE: The 1979 Roadside Origin Destination Survey.  Table 4B-22 DISTRIBUTION OF TRUCKS BY LOAD CARRIED (16 hour, average weekday, 1979) NUMBER OF TRUCKS BY LOAD CARRIED (In qq) TRUCK CLASS SEASON Empt..-Y 1-20 21-40 41-60 61-80 81-100 101-119 120-159 160-199 200-249 250-299 300+ --- ':'OrAL 7 Wet 1354 179 131 131 92 60 57 22 15 0 0 0 2041 Dry 1635 176 147 176 113 90 38 67 30 1 0 0 2473 I Average 1494 178 139 153 103 75 47 45 23 0 0 0 2257 ...., I-' ". I 8 Wet 2554 189 140 137 139 181 75 512 269 57 2 0 4255 Dry 3538 198 153 173 202 263 90 995 474 65 5 0 6156 Average 3046 193 147 155 170 222 83 753 371 61 4 0 5205 9 Wet 1111 54 41 48 49 76 9 112 119 543 465 66 2693 Dry 1271 57 43 62 57 120 13 169 111 624 511 116 3160 Average 1194 56 42 55 53 98 11 140 115 583 488 91 2926 NOTE: Totals of vehicles do not agree with Table 2 due tq.rounding errors. SOURCE: The 1979 Roadside Origin Destination Survey • ... .. . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .  Table 4B-23 EQUIVALENT AXLE CALCULATIONS - SMALL TRUCKS I.o.n.n ~"'l' A.'CE Pa\!t l\.\'LE 'ro'.IJ\L •VEHICLE fi'u~:o.l 'lbtal Q,.)i-~tcl~ A~:le Kc.iC]~t Ec:uiv.:llcnt A.",:lc i'%:ight Equi'ITal(;>~"lt Total D. ~~o. Vehs. Ax B Kos. . -r_ F~ctc:'" toad ---- O:c} j\x]cs (S\) Fw.c!::.or Lend (;~q) A'des (FA) (A) (3) ~ty 0 900 .00005 2100 .00218 .00223 1494 3.33 1-20 430 0.3 144 1044 .00009 0.7 335 2436 .00425 .00434 178 0.77 I I-' 21-40 1440 0.3 432 1332 .00028 0.7 1009 31M .01271 .01299 139 1.91 -..J U1 41-60 2400 0.3 720 1620 .00068 0.7 1680 3780 .03066 .03134 153 4.80 I 51-SO 3360 C.3 1008 1903 .00141 0.7 2352 4452 .06402 .06543 103 6.74 f.1-100 43::':0 0.3 ·1296 2196 .00266 0.7 . 3024 5124 .12053 .12319 75 9.24 lCl-119 5;:3() 0:2 1055 1956 .00158 0.8 4224 6324 .31067 .31225 47 14.68 12C-159 6720 0.2 13':4 2244 .C0293 0.8 5376 7476 .65970 .• 66264 45 29.82 1(1)-199 8640 0.2 1728 2628 .00S9i 0.8 6912 9012 1. 52944 1.53541 23 35.31 ·0.05 2257 106.48 saJRCE: l'brking Paper 14a.  Table 4B-24 ZOUIVALENT AXLE C~LCULAT!ONS - Mr.DIU~ TRUCKS LO.i\D FRONT AXLE REAR Jl.X!..E TOTAL VEHICLE Axle Total Ec:;u!vnlc..lt A,.-:le Totnl Equiv. Equ.:tv. No.Vehs. Q·..l.:t:t~ales Ras. Factor INad- t'ieight Ay.l~s F.:lc':or Lond \-;c ioht Axles Axles (A) (E) --"-- (Kg} ---- (1\g) A :It B Er::pty 0 1170 .00016 2730 .00709 .60725 3046 22.07 1-20 4S0 0.3 144 1314 .00026 0.7 336 3066 .01195 .01221 193 2.36 21-40 1440 0.3 432 1602 .00064 0.7 1008 3738 .02916 .02980 147 4.38 41-60 2400 0.3 720 1890 .00135 0.7 1680 4HO .06135 .0627 155 9.72 51-80 3360 0.3 1008 2178 .00257 0.7 2352 5eS2 .11614 .11871 170 20.18 81-HiO 4320 0.3 1296 2466 .00449 0.7 3024 -5754 .20310 .20759 222 46.08 101-119 _5280 0.3 1584 2754 .00737 0.7 3696 6426 .33387 .34124 83 28.32 I 120-159 6720 0.2 1344 2514 .004S9 0.8 5376 8106 .94944 .954 753 I-' 718.6 -.J 160-199 8640 0.2 172S . 3098 (1) .01252 O.S 6912 10142(2) 2.602522.62 371 970.2 0'1 I 3530(1) 200-24? 10800 0.2 2160 ,.02253 (l) 0.0 8640 11t370m 5.28282 5.31 61 323.6 250-299 13200 0.2 2640 4010(1) .'04000 (1) 0.8 10500 13790 10.37234 10.41 4 41.6 0.42 5205 21R7.18 (1) 200 kgs added to E!fI1?ty 'Weight - see text. .i (2) 500 kgs added to E!fI1?ty 'Weight- see text. SOURCE: Working Paper 14a. c:e ~ iii . .4  Table 4B-25 ~OUIV~LE~T AXLE CALCULATIO~S - LARGE TR~CKS LO,!\D FRONT AXLE REAR A:'::LE TOTAL VEHICLE Axle Total Eq~l ~ 'J'::ll~nt Axle Total Equ1v. Equiv. No.Vehs. Qu1ntalcs Kgs. F1:l.ctor Lo~d ivcight Axle Factor L01.".d i':("ight Axles Axle (A) OJ) A x S E:':':?ty 2300 .003 3400 .019 .022 1194 27 1-20 480 0.3 144 2444 .004 0.7 336 3736 .029 .033 56 2 21-40 l·nO 0.3 432 2732 .007 0.7 1008 4408 .061 .068 42 3 I I-' ...j' 41-60 2400 0.3 720 3020 .011 0.7 1680 5080 .115 .127 5S 7 ~ .220 12 I 61-30 3360 0.3 1008 3308 .017 0.7 2352 5752 .203 53 81-100 4320 0.3 1296 3596 .024 0.7 3024 6424 '.333 .357 98 35 101-119 5280 0.3 1584 3884 .035 0.7 3696 7096 .522 .557 11 6 120-159 6i20 0.3 2016 4316 .056 0.7 4704 8104 .948 1. 004 140 141 160-199 8640 0.2 1728 4028 .041 0.3 6912 10312 2.805 2.846 115 327 200-249 10800 0.2 2160 4460 .065 0.8 8640 12040(3) 5.632 5.697 583 3321 250-299 13200 0 .. 2 26'40 5190(2) .128 0.8' 10560 14310 12.252 12.380 488 6041 300 +(1) 15600 0.2 3120 5670(2) .190 0.8 12480 16230 (3) 21. 591 21. 78'1 91 1982 4.07 2926 11904 (1) Value of 325 qq's taken. (2) 250 kgs added to enpty weight - see text. (3) 350 kgs added to errpty weight - see text. SOURCE: t\lbrking Paper 14a.  Table 4B-26 EQUIVALENT AXLE CALCULATIONS - BUSES ITEM MEDIUM BUS LARGE BUS .. Average number passengers 24 38 Average weight per passenger 55 kgs 55 kgs ,a Average weight baggage per passenger 15 kgs 15 kgs Total weight passenger and baggage 1.700 kgs 2.700 kgs Weight parcel post 400 kgs 1.000 kgs .~ Weight fuel 100 kgs 200 kgs Tare weight of bus 6.700 kgs 8.000 kgs • Total weight bus 8.900 kgs 11.900 kgs Load on Front Axle (25%) 2.225 2.975 Equivalent axles 0.003 0.01 Load on rear axle (75% ) 6.675 8.925 Equivalent axles 0.396 1.46 Total equivalent axles per bus 0.40 1.47 SOURCE: Working Paper 14a. :1 -178-  Table 413-27 AVEPAGE VEHICLE WEIG.H'IS (tons) VEHICLE EMP'IY MAXIMUM MAXIMUM WEIGfrr (1) NUMBER(2) WEIGfrr AV.'lUI'AL CI.J\SS WEIGfrr CAPACITY GVW AV.LOAD PER...CONS PEBSONS WEIGHT 7. Small Truck - Empty 3.0 4.0 7.0 0 0 0 3.0 - Average load with errpties 1.0 7 0.4 4.4 - Average load excl. errpties 3.2 0 0 6.2 8. M=d.ium 'l'l::uck - Elrpty 3.9 6.1 10.0 0 0 0 3.9 - Average load with enpties 2.2 6 0.3 6.4 I r-' - Average load exc1.errpties 4.9 0 0 8.8 ....j \.0 I 9. Large Truck - Elrpty 5.7 l1.B 17.5 0 0 0 5.7 - Average load with errpties 5.6 6 0.3 11.6 - Average load excl.errpties 9.4 0 0 15.1 4 & 5 Small and r.t:rlium Bus (26 seats) - Empty 6.7 4.2 10.9 0 0 0 6.7 - lDaded 0.9 24 1.3 8.9 6. Large Bus (36 seats) - Elrpty 8.0 6.5 14.5 0 0 0 8.0 - lDaded 1.8 34 1.9 11.7 (1) Weight of load for vehicles excluding errpties based on average load factor of BO%. (2) Nunber of persons for ruses based on average occupancy rates of 93% for small and rredium buses and 94 % for large buses. ~: Working Paper 14a.  " . . .. Table 4B-28 • TRUCK LOAD FACTORS ~ SMALL MEDIUM lARGE .. I'ffM TROCKS TRUCKS TRIJCKS " A. Average RIS volurres (1) (No. 2,268 5,185 2,935 'I of trucks) B. C. No. of trucks with no freight Percent trucks with no freight 1,494 66% 3,046 59% 1,194 41% '. ,. D. Percent trucks with no freight fran partial :x:oad matrix (2) 67% 61% 49% ~' E. Percent of 0 in passenger ser- vice 30% 19% 21% 'II F. ~\mter of passenger trucks 448 579 251 G. Number of freight trucks 1,820 4,606 2,684 " H. Number ElIlPty freight trucks 1,046 2,467 943 'lI I. Percent ElIlPty freight trucks 57% 54% 35% ~ (1) Fran the :x:oadside interview tabulations averaged over the wet and dry season. (See TaPle 4B-17). (2) Fran the nerged and factored roadside interview data. (See Table 4B-18). SOURCE: Working Paper 14a. '" ill "II .. -180-  Table 4B-29 ASSUMED CARGO LOADING FACTORS (Percent values) SMALL MEDIUM LARGE ITEM TRUCKS TRUCKS TRUCKS For freight modelling Percent loaded trucks 55 55 70 Load as percent of capacity 80 80 90 for loaded trucks Overall load factor (percent) 44 44 63 For link costs Percent loaded trucks 34 41 59 Load as percent of capacity 80 80 80 for loaded trucks Overall load factor (percent) 27 33 47 SOURCE: Working Paper 14a. -181-  Table 48-30 SURVEYED AXLE LOADS AND EQUIVALENT AXLE FACTORS tUeER AXLES - 1976 (F NUMIER (F AAI.ES - 1977 NUMIER (F AXLES - 'lUrAL fi'FA"illRED AXlE IlW) SlnaB Trucks MediU'll Trucks laM Trucks SMll Trucks Medium Trucks Large Trucks 9nall Trucks MediU'll Trucks Lame Trucks' 2.5 tons 85 140 15 43 70 10 128 210 25 3.5 53 120 72 29 112 19 82 232 91 4.5 47 73 128 12 43 63 59 116 191 5.5 31 57 56 14 34 45 45 91 101 6.5 30 84 51 6 36 33 36 120 84 7.5 12 70 40 6 22 21 18 92 61 8.5 1 63 50 32 32 1 95 82 9.5 77 49 1 39 21 1 116 70 , .... 10.5 67 65 38 23 105 88 ... CD , 11.5 50 82 15 26 65 108 12.5 0 57 3 26 3 83 13.5 3 48 2 52 5 100 14.5 61 1 18 1 79 15.5 36 11 47 16.5 2 11 4 2 15 17.5 3 3 18.5 26 26 'IOtal M!asuIed 259 806 850 111 447 404 370 1253 1254 Equivalent axle factors 0.114 1.02 5.19 0.108 0.87 3.68 0.113 0.97 4.70 Equivalent .Axle Factors, WP 14a Values 0.047 0.42 4.07 Factor SOC ... WP 14a 2.40 2.31 1.15 1/4.5 (Factors) 1.21 1.20 1.03 SOURCE = Workinq Paper 14a. ., Ii ., ,. .- ,. ... *' . ... .. ... . .. .. . 1<' <I II> i!; "" Ii< • ... .~ ... Ii ...  APPENDIX 4C EXISTING CHARACTERISTICS OF WATERBORNE TRANSPORT  Appendix 4C EXISTING CHARACTERISTICS OF WATERBORNE TRANSPORT TABLES Number Page 4C-1 River Transport Navigation - Ichi1o-Marnor~ 184 System 4C-2 Goods Transported on Beni and Ichi1o- 185 Mamor~ Rivers 4C-3 Port Throughputs on Beni and Ichi1o-Mamor~ 186 Rivers 4C-4 Major Movements on Beni and Ichi1o-Marnor~ 187 Rivers 4C-S Boats Registered at Guayaramer!n Captaincy 188 - 1978 4C-6 Boats Registered at Trinidad Captaincy-1978 192 4C-7 Minor "Catraya" Boats Registered at 193 Guayaramer!n Captaincy - 1978 4C-8 Physical Aspects of the Paraguay River 194 System 4C-9 Locations on Paraguay River Where Depths 195 are Less than 2 Meters below Zero Level 4C-10 River Transport and Navigation - Paraguay 196 River System 4C-11 Volume of Cargo in Transit Through Puno 197 4C-12 Mineral Exports by COMIBOL Using Lake Transport from Guaqui to Puno 198 FIGURES Follows Number Page 4C-1 Ichi1o-Mamor~ River System 183 4C-2 Port Locations of Trinidad 183 4C-3 Beni River System 193 4C-4 Madre de Dios,Manuripi,Tahuarnanu,Orthon, 193 Acre, Abun~ and Rapirran River System 4C-S Itenez River System 193 4C-6 Outline of Rapids 193 4C-7 Navigation of Lake Titicaca 196 4C-8 Port of Guaqui 196 4C-9 Ferry Boat "Manco Kapac" 196 -183- PANDO LEGEND Departmental BOlolftdary Departmental Capital Customs - Port Captaincy Navigable Rivers Non-Navigable Rivers Rapids Ports B E N ...,i.n •• "tiYero :I ;I ..,\ t." ~ c 4: t> ~ \~ I ..... v..-..... ~o t._Cfm TrIn,dad .CornaVQ I 0 • LilHtrtod ~\ 0 50 100 I!IO ••. ICHILO MAMORE RIVER SYSTEM FIGURE 4C-J  LEGEND t::. Departmental Capital i Port Captaincy = Navigable Rivers _ Non- Navigable R jvera _ Roads • Ports PORT LOCATIONS OF TRINIDAD W~u~ Smith and A30Ci4leJ FIG U R E 4 C- 2  Table 4C-1 RIVER TRANSPORT NAVIGATION - ICHIJ.O-MAMORE SYSTEM DISTANCE DEPTH NAVIGATION TIME TOTAL DAYS OF NAVIGA- PORTS IN m Hours Minutes TION I I:laNn- Down- KILOMETERS ME'.I'ER) Upstream ;pstrea ~an. Partial Upstream ~-11Knvh. V-6 1an/h. 12h/d. 18h/d 1 • Pto. Villarroel 00 1,317 7 00 220 00 12 13 13 1,304 8 1 217 0 12 2 • Pto. Yuca 443 3 • Pto Boybo 456 861 7 41 144 3 8 •I 36 14,. po. Varacbr (Trinidad)) 492 825 4 * 45 138 4 8 36 789 7 48 132 4 7 5 • Montevideo 528 I 575 47 742 12 52 124 4 7 6 • Buenos Aires 590 15 727 15 54 121 5 " 7 7 • Pensilvania 599 9 718 11 54 120 5 7 8 • P~o. Habana I I-' 717 118 600 22 65 100 5 6 00 9 • San Miguelito 0I:>- 831 114 486 7 76 81 6 5 I 10. Pto Caballo 898 67 419 12 82 70 7 4 11. Tacuarel 50 12. Puerto Siles 948 369 13 86 62 7 3 956 8 361 17 87 60 7 3 13. Puerto Ito 957 11 350 11 87 58 7 3 14. Coopera ti va 1,003 36 314 10 91 52 8 3 15. Mayo Mayo 1,027 24 11 93 48 8 3 16. Puerto Vigo 290 182 108 9 110 18 9 1 17.P o. Coimbra 1,209 1,223 14 94 12 111 16 9 1 18. Pto. Solares 58 10 19. Pea. el C3rmen 1,281 36 8 116 6 0 36 roo ~uaya~a:er!n 1,317 00 6 120 00 10 00 NOTE: I'll meters V == speed ... km = ki16meter h = hour d ... day * = estimated. SOURCE: Working Paper 23.  Table 4C-2 GOODS TRANSPORTED ON BENI AND ICHILO-.HAHo.RE RIVERS 1978 Cmll-10DITY CLASS VOLUHE IN TONS (1) 1. Live animals 19,134 3. Other animal products 1,720 4. Corn 6 5. Rice 2,226 6. Wheat 1 7. Other cereals 103 8. Potatoes and other tubers 534 9. Fruit 198 10. Other vegetables and plants 659 .~. 12. Other agricultural products 6,361 15. Gas in bottles 1,175 16. Petroleum products - unsuitable for pipelines 890 17. Petrole~~ products - suitable for pipelines 35,010 20. Non-metallic minerals 1,656 21. Sugar and confectionary 5,719 22. Flour and grain products 2,071 23. Beverages 5,687 24. Other food and tobacco products 932 25. Textiles and leather products 888 26. Wood and wood products 2,541 27. Paper and paper products 2 29. Other chemicals 3,428 30. Sand and aggregates 3,313 32. Bricks, ceramics, etc. 4,789 33. Cement 7,865 34. Primary iron and steel 206 35. Other fabricated metals 255 36. Primary r.on-ferrous metals 15 37. Vehicles and transport equipment 584 38. Machinery 16 39. Miscellaneous manufactures 26 Subtotal 108,010 Empty bottles, gas bottles, containers, etc. 6,20:' TOTAL 114,211 (1) Exludes unrecorded trade. SOURCE: Bolivia National Transport Study, First Interim Report. -185-  Table 4C-3 PORT THROUGHPUTS ON BENI AND ICHILO-}~10RE RIVERS l.978 . VOLUMES IN TONS (1) PORT LoadeD. Unloaded: Puerto Linares 1,918 725 Rurrenabaque 259 1,913 Puerto Salinas 0 14 Cavinas 3,030 53 Riberalta 0 8,871 Puerto Grether 2,399 0 Puerto Vil1arroe1 76,315 15,732 Trinidad 15,057 45,494 Santa Ana de Yacuma 3,849 345 Magdalena 255 0 San Ramon 1,856 181 Navidad 219 146 Puerto Siles 2,877 617 Puerto Vigo 257 0 Versal1es 150 0 Guayaramerl.n 5,770 40,120 Total 114,211 114,211 (1) Excludes unredorded trade. SOURCE: Bolivia National Transport Study, First Interim Report. -186-  Table 4C-4 l-11}.JOR MOVEMENTS ON BENI AND ICHILO-HAHORE RIVERS 1978 ORIGIN DESTINATION VOLUHE IN TONS Puerto Villarroel Trinidad 41,409 Puerto Villarroel Guayaramerfn 29,024 Trinidad Puerto Villarroel 13,152 Puerto Villarroel Riberalta 5,841 Santa Ana de Yacuma Gua~:laramerfn 3,642 '" Cavinas Riberalta 3,030 Puerto Siles Guayaramerfn 2,877 Guayaramerfn Puerto Siles 2,580 Puerto Grether Trinidad 2,399 103,954 ''I SOURCE: Bolivia National Transport Study, First Interim Report. -187-  Table 4C-5 BOATS REGISTERED AT GUAYAP.AMERIN CAPTAINCY 1978 NAME: OF YI:AR BOATS OF CONS TYPE OF B~T LENGTH WIDTH DRAUGHT TNS. TRUCTION 1. Lex I 1976 Pontoon 12.00 3.00 0.40 20 2. Gral. Ren~ Barrientos 1975 Santaran 2 decks 20.00 5.00 0~70 95 3. Vikingo 1966 Pontoon 20.00 4.00 0.40 38 4. Raulito 1966 Pontoon 1/6 deck 13.00 3.00 0.25 22 5. San Cristo bal 1975 Pontoon 2 decks 16.00 4.00 0.40 194 6. Carola 1975 Pontoon 2 c:1ecks 16.00 4.00 0.35 198 7. Jos~ Lorena 1977 Santarem 8.00 1. 75 0.35 56 8. Esperanza 1973 Pontoon 2 decks 13.00 3.00 0.35 10 9. Libertador 1977 Pontoon 2 decks 13.00 3.00 0.60 20 10 San Agustin 1972 Pontoon 2 decks 21.00 5.00 0.60 160 11 Charito 1975 Santarem 2 decks 14.50 3.60 0.35 195 12 Progreso 1976 Pontoon 19.00 4.50 0.90 50 13 Santa Ana 1972 Pontoon 12.00 2.30 0.35 10 14 Mosetenes 1969 Pontoon 2 decks 16.50 4.00 0.35 15(' 15 Berlin 1970 Pontoon 2 decks 18.00 4.00 0.35 140 16 San Martin 1975 Pontoon 14.00 3.00 0.30 20 17 La Pinta 1966 Pontoon 13.60 3.25 0.30 12 18 Estre lla del Oriente 1977 PontDon 12.00 2.80 0.40 140 19 La Gloria 1974 Pontoon 13.00 2.60 0.40 10 20 Bolivar 1972 Pontoon 15.20 3.50 0.70 20 21 Miosotis 1977 Pon~on 13.00 3.00 0.40 8 22 CaInlenci ta 1977 Pontoon 12.00 2.50 0.50 7 23 Cristo del Rio 1978 Pontoon 16.00 4.00 1.00 200 24 Magaluz 1972 Santarem 1/2 deck 13.00 2.80 0.35 70 25 Roly 1970 Santarsn 1/2 deck 9.55 2.50 0.35 84 26 Roxanita 1978 Pontoon 15.00 3.60 0.35 20 27 Edwincito 1979 Pontoon 18.00 4.00 0.50 35 28 Marco Her- n§n 1974 Pontoon 18.00 4.00 0.35 105 29 Ray 1070 Santarem 17.00 3.60 0.40 1: 30 Tres HeInla- nos 1975 Pontoon 10.00 2.00 0.30 3 31 Mi Amor 1973 SantarE!ll 9.00 1.80 0.20 € 32 El Fara6n 1974 Pontoon 2 decks 22.00 5.00 0.50 65 33 Gitano 1977 Pontoon 15.00 3.50 0.90 30 34 Litoral 1976 Pontoon 2 decks 13.00 3.00 0.60 258 35 Magallanes I 1972 PontoOll 16.00 3.60 0.80 32 36 Magallanes II 1971 Pontoon 16.00 4.00 0.33 35 37 Amazonas 1975 Pontz:>on 2 decks 20.00 5.00 0.30 156 38 Chapumata 1973 Santarsn L/2 deck 10.00 2.50 0.35 160 39 El Padrino 1972 Pontoon 2 Clecks 15.00 3.60 0.35 160 40 Javierito 1977 Pontoon 20.00 4.50 0.80 4B 41 Sta. Cruz de la Sie- rra 1975 Pontoon 24.00 5.50 0.80 165 42 26 de Julio 1974 Pontoon 2 decks 14.50 3.20 0.70 13 43 Reina 1973 Santaran 2 decks 13.00 1.50 0.60 5 44 Copacabana III 1974 Pontoon 2 decks 19.00 5.00 0.40 130 45 Copacabana II 1968 Pontoon 2 decks 14.00 3.50 1.10 130 46 Armindita 1976 Pontoon 2 Clecks 12.00 3.00 0.40 13 47 Sonia 1965 Pontoon 19.00 4.50 0.60 40 48 Juan Carlos 1975 Pontoon 2 decks 17.00 4.00 0.35 200 49 In ternacio- nal 1960 Santaran 1/2 dec:k 9.00 2.00 0.35 90 -188-  Table 4C-5 (Cont. ) B01<TS REGISTERED AT GUAYARAMERIN CAPTAINCY 1978 YEAR OF NAME OF BOATS CONSTRUC TION - TYPE OF BOAT LENGTH WIDTH DRAUGHT TNS. ill 50 Escorpi6n 1975 Pontoon 9.00 2.00 0.35 180 51 Ul1ses 1972 Pontoon 2 decks 20.00 5.00 0.90 55 52 E1 Cohete 1974 Santarem 8.00 2.20 0.30 5 '" 53 Seno r de Mal toll 1973 Pontoon 2 decks 17.00 4.00 0.35 77 'I! 54 Cochabamba 1973 Pontoon 18.50 4.60 1.20 63 55 Puerto Sucre 1971 Pontoon 2 decks 17.00 4.00 0.40 84 41 56 Mojos 1973 Santarem 16.00 3.50 0.35 98 57 Dorita 1976 Santarem 13.00 2.50 0.65 13 58 Hercules 1973 Santarem 14.00 2.80 0.70 107 'lO 59 Jorgito 1971 Pontoon 2 decks 16.00 3.60 0.40 150 60 Ana Karina 1974 Pontoon 2 decks 15.00 3.00 0.35 20 ~ 61 Nueva Estrella 1976 A1barenga 10.70 2.40 0.50 55 62 Novina R.M. 1977 Pontoon 2 decks 18.00 3.00 1.00 14 ~ 63 Concepci6n II 1968 Pontoon 16.00 4.00 0.35 32 64 Concepci6n I 9172 Pontoon 2 decks 17.00 4.00 1.00 34 >II 65 Arco Iris 1976 Pontoon 11.36 2.50 0.20 E 66 Bolivia II 1977 Pontoon 13.00 3.00 0.65 95 67 E1 Cisne 1975 Santarern 11.00 2.10 O. BO 35 'I 68 E1 Toro 1971 Pontoon 13.00 3.00 0.30 lS 69 Triunfo 1971 Pontoon 2 decks 16.80 4.00 0.35 20 " 70 Rodo1fo 1976 Santarern 2 decks 17.50 3.50 0.40 140 71 Bismarck 1976 Pontoon 12.00 3.00 0.40 20 72 Michel 1978 Pontoon 12.00 2.50 0.20 10 73 Don Roque 197B Pontoon 15.00 3.00 0.30 8.50 74 Geminis 20 1964 Pontoon 16.00 4.00 0.50 18.50 75 Ang~lica 1968 Pontoon 20.00 5.00 1.20 40 76 E1 Rayito 1977 Pontoon 7.50 O.BO 0.20 1 77 E1 Guacha 1975 Pontoon 19.20 4.50 0.90 180 78 Shirley 1975 Pontoon 12.00 2.30 0.30 7 79 Jose10 1975 Pontoon 10.00 2.00 0.30 ~ 80 Gloria 1978 Pontoon 16.00 4.00 1. 20 173 ,"" 81 Santa Teresita 1975 Pontoon 22.00 5.00 0.40 14C 82 Ornar 1977 Pontoon 12.00 2.60 0.30 10 83 Ratia 1971 Pontoon 9.00 2.00 0.40 :: B4 Arana 1977 Pontoon 21.00 5.00 0.60 5: 85 Antofagasta 1973 Pontoon 18.00 4.50 0.50 4~ 86 Rosario 1975 Pontoon 12.00 2.60 0.20 7';. 87 E1 Indiecito 1975 Pontoon 20.00 4.50 0.90 50 88 Roxanita III 1977 Pontoon 20.00 5.00 0.20 74 89 Fernando 1975 Pontoon 17.00 4.00 0.30 30 90 Roxanita II 1973 Pontoon 18.00 4.00 0.30 121 91 Janette 1976 Pontoon 18.00 4.50 0.30 30 92 San Pablo 1976 Pontoon 22.00 5.00 0.40 72 93 San Pedro 1976 Pontoon 22.00 5.00 0.40 72 94 Rosmary 1970 Pontoon 7.00 2.00 0.30 3 95 Ivares 1972 Pontoon 11.00 2.50 0.30 12 96 Yacuma 1974 Pontoon 18.00 4.00 0.35 63 97 Rapecho 1974 PontJDon 18.00 4.00 0.35 35 98 Stoll. B~rbara 1976 Pontoon tanker 22.00 6.00 0.23 100 99 Selva 1976 Pontoon tanker 22.00 6.00 0.23 10 100 Guabira 1976 Pontoon 17.00 4.00 0.30 38 101 Santa Ana 1976 Pontoon 20.25 4.50 0.40 54 102 Zenia 1975 Pontoon 19.00 4.00 0.40 40 103 Machupo I 1975 Pontoon 24.60 6.30 0.40 95 104 Piragua 1975 Pontoon 18.00 4.50 0.60 4B 105 Maria Cristina 1975 1)0 n toon 19.00 4.00 0.30 40 106 Carlos Rarniro 1975 Pontoon 18.00 4.50 0.30 35 107 Lucitania 1976 Pontoon 20.00 4.20 1.00 55 108 Jenny 1976 Pontoon 22.00 5.00 1.00 65 109 Tibur6n 1975 Pontoon 2h.oo 4.50 0.90 45 110 Juanito 1977 Pontoon 22.00 5.00 1.10 70 111 Angelita 1976 Pontoon 16.00 4.00 0.30 30 112 Delicia 1975 Pontoon 16.00 4.00 0.30 30 -189-  Table 4C-5 (('ont. ) BOATS REGISTERED AT GUAYARAMERIN CAPTAINCY 1978 YEAR OF NAME OF BOATS CONSTRUC- TYPE OF BOAT LENGTH WIDTH DRAUGHT TNS. TION 113Malu 1974 Pontoon 18.00 4.50 0.30 40 114 Guidito 1975 Pontoon 22.00 5.00 0.30 60 115 Maysol 1977 Pontoon 15.00 4.00 0.20 28 116 Sibales 1976 Pontoon 20.00 5.00 0.30 45 117 Davicito 1974 Pontoon 20.00 5.00 1.00 45 llB Hua.car 1972 Pontoon 17.00 4.00 0.30 25 119 Mejillone. 1973 Pontoon 18.00 5.00 0.40 40 120 El Espectador 1973 Pontoon 18.00 5.00 0.40 40 121 Yacuma 1975 Pontoon 20.00 4.50 0.30 55 122 Selvy 1975 Pontoon 19.00 4.50 0.30 40 123 Chinita 1976 Pontoon 17.70 4.00 0.50 25 124 Esperanza 1976 Pontoon 22.00 5.00 0.30 65 125 Florida 1975 Pont-oon 22.00 5.00 0.30 65 126 Jor9ito 1974 Pontoon 19.00 5.00 O. BO ... 0 127 Okinawa 1974 Pont-oon 17.00 4.00 0.60 40 128 Tahuamanu 1978 Pont'oon 20.00 5.00 0.40 SO 129 Carnbita 1978 Pontoon lB.OO 4.50 0.30 30 130 Pompeyo I 1970 Pontoon 16.50 4.00 0.30 40 131 Pompeyo II 1970 Pontoon 22.00 5.0 -, 0.30 65 132 Motacaresito 1975 Pont-oon IB.OO 4.50 0.30 35 133 R. Maribel 1975 Pontoon 19.00 4.50 0.30 40 134 Quenia 1975 Pontoon 19.00 4.00 0.30 40 135 Chari to I 1975 Pont oon 19.00 4.60 o.lO 35 136 Roxana 1976 Pontoon 18.00 4.50 O.lO SO 137 Charito 1972 Pontoon 2l.50 5.15 O. lO 80 ll8 Raulito 1972 Pontoon 22.00 5.00 O.lO 60 139 Susy 1966 Pont,oon 20.00 5.00 O. lO 60 140 Charito I I 1975 Pontoon 20.00 4.50 O.lO SO 141 In9rid 1975 Pontoon 19.00 4.50 O. lO 40 142 Rosy 1974 Pontoon 17.00 4.00 0.30 40 143 Rasputin 1972 Pontoon 16.00 4.00 0.60 39 144 Randalo 1974 Pontoon ~9.00 4.00 0.60 25 145 Lorena 1975 Pontoon 19. BO 4.00 O. lO 25 146 La Petacuda 1976 Pontoon 22.00 5.00 O. lO 6:: 147 Quasimodo 1974 Pontoon 21.00 5.00 0.3C 60 148 Guichi 1975 Pont.oon 20.00 4.50 O. l5 SO 149 Teresita 1977 Pontoon 17.00 4.00 O.lO 32 150 Polaris 1974 Pontoon 16.00 4.00 o.lO 2B 151 Beni-Pando 1974 Pontoon 23.00 5.00 0.30 60 152 Versalles 1975 Pontoon 17.00 4.00 0.30 30 153 Ibarci to 1978 Pontocn 22.00 S.OO 0.30 60 154 UniOn 1978 Pontoon .18.00 4.00 0.70 15 155 Jhonny 1978 Pontoon 17.00 4.00 1.00 38 156 Trinidad 1978 Pontoon 16.00 4.00 O.BO l.22 157 Lex III 1976 Pontoon 20.00 5.00 0.60 3B 158 No me Olvides 1975 Pontoon 10.00 3.00 0.40 10 159 'I'opater 1974 Pont,oon 20.00 3.00 0.70 38 160 Negrito 1978 Pontoon 22.00 5.00 70 161 Superman 1974 Pontoon ~4.00 3.50 0.40 21 162 La Senorita 1977 Pontoon 13.00 3.50 0.80 10 16 3 Salvador 1973 Pontoon IB.OO 4.60 1.00 42 164 Mad.ol 1976 Pontoon 21.00 5.00 1.00 63 165 Carmencita 1976 Pont'oC'n 16.00 4.00 0.40 28 166 Guido 1973 Pontocn 18.00 4.50 0.35 40 167 Tina 1974 Pontoon .18.00 4.50 0.35 38 168 Janette 1975 Pontoon 11.00 2.50 0.20 8 169 Herculito 1974 Pontoon 20.00 5.00 l..00 55 170 Anita 1976 Pontoon 23.00 5.00 l..10 72 -190-  Table 4C-5(Cont.) BOATS REGISTERED A'l' r-UAYARAM.I:1UN CAPTAINCY 1978 YEAR OF NAME OF BOATS CONSTRUC- TYPE OF BOAT LENGTH WIDTH DRAUGHT TONS TION 171 Micky 1974 Pontoon 20.00 4.50 0.30 45 172 Elvira 1974 Pontoon 20.00 4.50 0.30 45 173 Claudia 1974 Pontoon 21.00 4.00 0.30 45 174 Rosalia 1974 Pontoon 21.00 5.00 0.60 70 175 Samuel 1974 Pont·oon 20.00 4.50 0.30 SO 176 El Nino 1973 Pontoon 12.00 3.00 0.30 16 177 Susy 1975 Pontoon 20.00 5.40 1.00 95 178 Lucy 1974 Pontoo.n 20.00 5.00 1.00 55 179 Luis Antonio 1971 Pontoon 18.00 4.80 0.30 60 180 Ady 1976 Pontoon 22.00 5.00 0.40 60 181 Sandra 1975 Pontoon 21.00 5.00 0.40 60 182 Mirian 1978 Pontoon 15.00 4.00 1.00 80 183 Maria Nama 1978 Pontoon 15.00 3.50 0.90 25 '111 SOURCE: Norking Paper 23. .,. -191-  Table 4C-6 BOATS REGISTERED AT TRINIDAD CAPTAINCY 1978 NAME OF BOATS YEAR OF MATERIAL OF TYPE OF WIDTH DRAUGHT TONS CONST. CONSTRUCTION BOAT LENGHT 1 • San Juan" R!S. 1.972 It.auba Pontoon 17 4 0.45 90 2 • Marla Luisa " R.S. 1.976 Cedar Pontoon 15 3.50 0.28 91 3 • Apolo 12 R.S. " 1.968 Twni Pontoon 16 4 0.40 127 4 • Trinidad R.S. " 1.975 Pontoon 12 3 0.40 122 5 • Taquii'ia 1.974 Itauba Pontoon 17 3.80 0.50 45 6 • Bolivia II " R.S. 1.972 Itauba Pontoon 12 3 0.50 44 7 • Carlos Fer- nancb 1.972 Tumi Pontoon 16 4 0.55 10C 8 • San Luis , R.S. 1.970 Tumi Pontoon 13 3 0.35 75 9 • Virgen Lour des'R.S - 1. 970 Cedar Pontoon 18 4 0.60 122 10. Keli ta , R.S 1.976 Cedar Pontoon 18 4 0.45 45 1l.Ben Hur R.S. " 1.973 Tumi Pontoon 12 3 0.40 80 12. Jorge Augu! to " R.S. 1.973 Itauba Pontoon 13 4 0.50 100 13. El Indio , R.S. 1.916 Itauba Pontoon 16 4 0.55 90 14. Boldito , Cedar Pontoon R.S. 1.971 17 4 0.50 15S 15. Soledad , R.S. 1.969 Cedar Pontoon 14 3.30 0.40 60 16. Virgen de Loreto'R. S. 1.971 Tumi Pontoon 20 4.50 0.55 90 17. Virian & R.S. 1.970 Itauba Pontoon 18 4 0.60 131 18. Don Segun do 'R.s7 1.974 Tumi _Pontoon 18 3.60 0.65 150 19. El Inca & R.S. .1.974 Itauba Pontoon 19 4.50 0.55 112 20. Virgen del Carmen 1.973 Itauba Pontoon 18 4 0.50 135 21. Joselito II & R.S. 1.973 Tumi Pontoon 19 5 0.65 120 22. Juan Anto- nio III 1.975 Cedar Pontoon 22 4 0.65 120 23. Neptuno & R.S. 1.974 Cedar Pontoon .12 2.70 0.40 115 24. El Patr6n & R.S. 1.976 Tum! Pontoon 22 5 0.60 170 NOTE: R.S. • Barg••• SOURCE: Working Paper 23. -192-  ,. Table 4C-7 ,it MINOR "CA1'.RA.YA" l'!Q.ll,!I'S 1ilEGIS'IERm ]I{! ~ CAPrAIlCl1' 1978 .. --------------------------------------------------------------------- .. _----- ·1lI N1IHE CF B01t.T 'l'CNNAGE RmISJ:ER NAME CF B01t.T '!I.tNW\GE mx;ISTEP. Anfibio Santa Fatima 2.5 2.5 C-Ol/79 C-03/79 Anfitr1.on El Peregrin:) 2.5 2 .----- C-02/79 C-04/79 -. Haiden Glec!1zcn 2.1 C-05/79 3 C-07/79 22 de Julio 6 C-DS/79 E1.oina Ek1n 1.5 C-09/79 "" Pedrito 2.5 C-Ol0/79 Mary Luz 5.5 C-ll/79 'Ill NiCXllal SuArez 2.5 C-012/79 El Aloon 4.5 C-013/79 1))1 Am1gos 2 C-014/79 Rio Belli 2,5 :-015/79 Da.i'S'j Satel1te 5,5 4 C-016/79 C-01S/79 Miguel EdnuncX;) El :Ebl1var 3 5 C-017/79 ':-019/79 '" !.A.lcito 7 C-020/79 La Pr1ma.vera 4 ':-021/79 .lit Santa 'l\i!resita ~'S'j ca.rr..en Magdalena 2,5 2 3 C-022/79 C-024/79 C-026/79 Satelite I Fortaleza '!'res !iel:manos 3.5 2.5 4 C-023/79 C-D25/79 C-027/79 .. San Xavier 7 C-02S/79 Jose 7.5 C-029/79 I))rita II Girasol 5 3 C-030/79 C-032/79 CUquil1na Ave Fen1x 12 3 C-031/79 C-033/79 • CorsariO 2.5 C-034/79 Jorgito 3·5 C-035/79 !j Estrella del Oriente e C-036/79 S1belita 5 C-037/79 El Ra.yito 1.5 C-D3S/79 America 3 C-039/79 II San Miguel 4.5 C-040/79 San Francisco 2.5 C-041/79 El Tibu.r6n 3.5 C-042/79 San R:::q\.E 5 C-043/79 II Felicidad 2 C-D44/79 Con Dios 4 C-045/79 Yerkito 4 C-046/79 Gonzalito 1 C-047/79 San JU/lJ'l El Cortklbes Oriente II 2 1 3 C-048/79 C-050/79 C-052/79 Esperanzi ta Oriente El Rayo C1nthia II 1.5 3.5 5 6 C-049/79 C-05l/79 C-053/79 C-055/79 '•. Marques Hijo 2.5 C-054/79 El GacuOO 5 C-056/79 El MaUCXl 1 C-057/79 Albatro 3.5 C-05B/79 Aurorita 2 C-059/79 Rosita 2 C-060/79 Sarita 1.5 C-06l/79 '" C-063/79 Meyi El ~bblma 3 3.5 C-062/79 C-064/79 Luoerito Femandito 1.5 2 C-065/79 " El Herald;) Adelita 8 2 C-066/79 C-068/79 Ca.rrlencita El Picaflor 2.5 5 C-067/79 C-069/79 .. " San Jo~ COpacabana 4 2.5 C-070/79 C-072/79 Santa BII..rbara 'Iorped::.l 3 3 C-071/79 C-073/79 .. Isabel 2.5 C-075/79 '. El Picaflor 3 C-074/79 Elvia 8 C-076/79 Charlie 9 C-077/79 Peroeverancia I 3.5 C-07S/79 Peroewrancia II 1 C-079/79 Liliana 2.5 C-080/79 carlos V 6 C-OB1/79 E.c;t.ercita San Manuel 3 4.5 C-082/79 C-083/79 San Miguel Elias Salaron 4·5 3 C-OB3/79 C-OB4/79 " SOrpresa 7 C-085/79 Amenia 5 C-OB6/79 "II ArgOnauta ElCastaiiero 6 3.5 C-OS7/79 C-089/79 It3m:Inci to Golondrina 9 8 C-De8/79 C-090/79 C-092/79 , Rafito 5 C-09l/79 r-bises 2 San Jorge 10 C-093/79 Fanarito 2 C-094/79 San Martin 3.5 C-095/79 La Ol.1n1ta 5 C-096/79 t. Mam:>re 2.5 C-097/79 Ti to el Grande 5 C-098/79 Ca.rrlenci ta Elvira Iraoena 3 9.5 C-099/79 C-Ol0l/79 I.orgito Marcia Patricia 5 6 9 C-Dl00/79 C-0102/79 C-0104/79 " Yoya 5 C-Ol03/79 RafaeUto Elicita 9 C-Ol05/79 Rio Mam:> 4.5 4 C-Ol06/79 C-Ol08/79 " El Neguiix:> Grover 3.8 5 C-Ol07/79 C-Ol09/79 El Rcberto El Ca.rrIen 3 10 C-ollO/79 C-Ol12/79 • Fl Angelito 2 C-Olll/79 Luz Mena La Flor 10 C-01l3/79 'l'riunfo 3 C-D1l4/79 Rosita 2 C-OllS/79 San Martin 3 C-01l6/79 Pa!!i'ita5 6 C-01l7/79 El Picaflor 6 C-OllB/79 ~ Femandito 3.5 C-01l9/79 C.A.N.S.A. 3 C-D120/79 Donald 1 C-0121/79 San xavier 5 C-D122/79 Huascar 13 C-0123/79 Joselo 6 C-0124/79 El IDbo 5 C-0125/79 Juanita 3 C-0126/79 Lex III 2 C-0127/79 leX IV 2 C-0128/79 ,II .J::~ Orlando 6 C-0130/79 El Inca 4 C-0131/79 .3- c~n111(7q ~i",'l1t" .II -3 0=01l2t29- -bI1.d1o san Ant:on1o 3 C-0134/79 San ~ncito 6 C-0135/79 Pr:1Jrer Satelite 4.5 C-0136/79 Ladislao 7 C-0137/79 iI San Martin 14 C-0138/79 Aroo IriS 10 C-0139/79 Pedrito II 6 C-0140/79 El Cisne 12 C-Ol41/79 Horizonte del Oriente 7 C-D142/79 Rio ltenez 6 C-0143/79 'II. Ad:>lfito II 10 C-0144/79 car10ea 5 C-0145/79 ChaCXlbo 3 C-0146/79 San Antonio e C-0147/79 JI Palestina 1.5 C-014S/79 Delly 3 C-0149/79 Marin 3 C-OlSO/79 Rio EIen1ci to 2 C-OlSl/79 ., SOOK:E:: Work.ing Paper 23. -193- :~  each AND 0 f; .,,.D~ ~ellQ 81'1&0 Concepcion eno Amari 110 Son Manuel Curichon ~ AI e \ , Son Lore n z<*:..,,, r- ,/......... .... Ethe~'" Santo Domingo ») ........., Fortole za·~' Carnayal ........... .;>;:: ........ K' och. 8itumbo B E NI TodosSan~ Cach, Los Angeles ...11 ~Po~~".Cormen O~nA~~Ylna, LA PAZ /;P leaCh \0 tomo /) Candelorlo LEGEND Santo RO\lta l National Boundary Tall"lOyCl r"Santa Elena De partmentol B oun da r y 5cr1 A",enl 0 ~ Customs Part Captain cy ':""::';, = Navigable Riyer. Non - Navigable Rivers Son PobIO~' RemanlO ena~ " ~ San Morcos - '-- ,........... • Rapids R.oads Ports ..,Wut: ; I til 0 50 ~ 100 150 km BENI RIVER SYSTEM WL, ~'..J .AMDa·~t.~ FIGURE 4C-3  _u.A !'lid'" v.... :c ... ~ :'" I R A s L .\ \, . \ , \,, LEGEND • Ports \, ,. ! \ U\ I::. Notional Boundary Departmentol Copitol " @ l Customs Port Captaincy l \ \ - Noy;vable Riye,. Nan - Nayivable Rlu,. - Rapids and Othert \ \ \ ~~.'II."'" ••,a" l M ..-. '-"' Ra p Ids (Coehuelas) Roods H,_ /P!tj, .J f @; o _ so I co I!>O 2 ..... i _.' MADRE',. DE DIOS. MANURIPI. TAHUAMANU .ORTHON',ACRE. JUt,~ _~mitl. /Uti A~!~UNA AND RAPIRRAN RIVER SYSTEMFIGURE 40 ~ 4  ~~ Son JOlt .Ricordo Franco Dos OnIol ~ N Coso Ararat AiIo~~:J.~Co,. "" ...",. ;"0 _. -, ... ' N " o "", .... " o ---- "-':--" '" - l '00 ,. . . . j ~~~_ COI~tC\MOrqu. Loo,,,.10 d. : ' Anton" N.... k ~ ..~o ~ Co L leJ'a- Poo de Oleo E" ~ • ~ ..... " , ."'mo '" }-...... V...." .. • ~ ,~ ~~,;£ .. S..to ,'It' N ,rol m~ Ho,.. \:\ - Pledrat e -~ Es~ra "~~~~M~tl~?:1~. •• L Santo Anlto • Mot.QUo • m8n~ ~c~" EI Cor ~ ) t So." Froncltc. :y,.:. __ J"'V!- Par POeUIOI- B E N VIIIOJ'On ., Cafttel- i LtGt"!'} Departmental Boundary ......... ,~ Plso "'M.t ,...,,' ...,,' - ....... .. Port C opta In cy ..." -==-- Navlvoble Rivert .......... Non-Navlvable RIv.,. '--./ Rapids .............. r--->. Por t s ...", ......... • - Roods r~""'" • ....." SANTA CRUZ I ITENEZ RIVER SYSTEM Wb,K,. Smitl.. 'anl A'f:lociale~ FI GURE 4C-5  . ,.' .·'-!ti:k~~~""" j~f;l~~~""b~~~',~ ,,~-- ~ " <:. :~! . ,~ 'fj, .... ' -p -0 \t\ "0 '" "'-: ~ ,~I<B,,' Z~/)' ...;- . ~,~,...,;:{ ' ;;,"'- •~ .,~~ o---~""., .. " ,~ ~-~' ..'" ~. ~.=-=- ~"'" ... co: .c \~ I\~/' --~~'-,~~~j;{';~~)'~:141'1 ,.. ~ ,, .'" _ _ _ '7[ '<.' ' Go ~ ".' -=.'-: ~. ~r~~~~ ~-' (r...... ,- ,~-",.".' , 1 ...~~r::""Il ~ "'.~ ~·)I "'~ ":,,,<O:t>~ ,.~ ,~.I ~ .... '. 6.~ ~, . .,~ ~ \., ' '" .. ' I ,-' tV/)i'l' .' .; ,,/ -: / ._f \. ~~ , __ -=-- I ,./~/·;;t:91,r,~,r;;/: ...." ' '-,,-,' , nl' d ' """",' ----- .,. .!ltl;~ _.!?Y/~i'll" ;//~I t; .,~ ~ .;:0 ,~' "I _ .___ - -'./ / / •• , - .' II' ~~~ ~~~'~----/"":.I(:jI) ~I /[1/11-"". " 'B'~ __ 'Il -~aG., .,' '':/1 ,I __ :.<.. i,. ~~ ~ rT. '-- .. -.~~- V / I, .'\. " ,~.: .,,, . ··/.~t:%t»J / / ! , ..4- . . C> ..&• "- .!!i:':" ':'-'J ~r~1 ~.~ .8 ,- /!; vl/!·"" ti~ -"'.:.i . ,'" c..;)~ ~ ~t._'" '. \:c::;7 ,-~rt~1 "t.1'\j\ - CACHUnA EL rUMBO ~ ~I/~ i . ~ ~t~I~~h ~b ~ ;J,rh---I\I .i"_ CACHU£lA RIO IT£NEl BEIRA \\\;-4fll~.' II. . ,i\\~\ ~ RIO BENI +. ,I, .",. <t;. • '.... " CACHUELA CUilACHO CACHUElA Navlgati.n - ......... Channel ~ Rock. ~ COICOJO ~ R.coso g~:f·tl Gr 0 vel k:~\~uJ Son d OUTLINE OF RAPIDS ~. 1Uh.t,,. Smith anJ AHocia/'1 FIGURE 4C-6  Table 4C-8 PHYSICAL ASPECIS OF THE P~Y RIVER SYST.EM -DEPTH DISTANCE IN lcrI..Cl£'IERS IN TRIBtJTA.RIFS METERS pc:Mns trearn Parcial tJr-strearo 1 • COrumb~ 00 2,771 3 266 2 • Bea. Rio Negro 266 2,505 5 15 3 • Bahia Negra 281 2,490 6 19.4 4 • Guarany 475 2,,296 6 f'3 5 • Murtinho 538 2,233 6 57 6 • Sastre 595 2.,168 4 8 7 • Bea. Rio Apa 603 23 2,168 4 8 • Casado 626 2,145 6 437 9 • Pratt Gill 1,063 1,707 2 52 10. Piquete ~ 1,115 1,156 3 3 11. Villa Hayes 1,118 1,653 5 10 12. Remanso Castillo 1,128 1,643 4 219 13. Villa Franea 1,347 1,424 7 94 14. Pilar 1,4(1 1,330 2 40 15. HI.1naita 1,481 1,290 5 49 16. COn fll.:en cia 1,530 1,241 ~ 33 I 17. COrrientes 1,563 1,208 4 451 I 18. La Paz 2,014 757 2 173 19. Santa Fe 2,187 584 5 584 20. Buenos Aires 2,771 00 3-10 SOORCE: Working Paper 23. -194-  Table 4C-9 LOCATIONS ON PARAGUAY RIVER WHERE DEPTHS ARE LESS THAN 2 MTS BELOW ZERO LEVEL NAME STARTS AT KM ENDS AT KM Confll.ler,cia Paraguay Parone • Referencia 0.0 1'''50 Me 111quc (08.2 40~.1 1'.,5'> R~o Verde 416.& 416.7 1'"50 Cerr~ Confuso <119.5 (1' .6 Vuelta de l~la Trcs Boca5 427.5 Vuclta Arecutacua 432.0 I'aso Ypccu~ 4H.6 Vue Ita de Puerto Pratt Gill Paso Vi 114 Ret .9(.( .9·1.5 r~~o L~~Ul)a V~ra !lOl.O $04.6 Paco 5,\1, Juan (i' Vuelta) !l0:;.2 506.2 1'.'50 I'i to Cany 511.1 !>ll. 3 Paso 1:1 ... 11'" SU.l !> 13.2 P~so Oeulto (I~!crior) (y Vuelta) 514.9 !>26.3 POH' ':>:ulto rSuperior) 5)0.4 5Jo.S p~"l~c: :'o!i.?rl0 ~l3 .C S)O:2 1',1',:' ~an Luis 538.5 5n.9 r ," '. !)i,O.7 !IiI. .1 1'.100 Color.oco sn.s !>~~.3 56S.5 5~e.S VucHa Nar.du 607.5 EO.as Pa.o Pc~ecnQl (Inferior) V\,;clta feder~al Paso red~[n~l (Superior) Iy Vuclla) 6~o.0 60 •• 6<2.0 610.5 'H.t '. ra~o Calera - Cue 650.0 651.0 1'''''.0 Ybal'?l;o CO., 670.3 Pil~O S(lJn JO$C 619. ) 619.6 Pnco U,~ita p,,~a 6&4.0 6B~.0 l'a50 ConcepcH\" 69£.8 (;99.6 P,'lr..o AV~l 70:;.S 70..1.9 Paso Sollndlll0 70~.O 701.0 1'.'50 It~c'Jrubi (y Vuclta) 70g.6 714.2 1'''50 BO'Jardo 710.7 720. ) P.lSO z."patero - Cue 42).0 424.0 1'''50 1", l:ovla nO.1 7B1. 6 Paso rindo eO).7 601.3 II Puso l~recifes (y Vuclta) B07.9 009.1 P(lSO 'tacat~ 626.1 8'-7.9 'II Paso Ma:.e 845.8 B~6.0 Paso Caa I'ucu Cauzu 848.1 051.2 Paso p~lucio-Cuc 854.' 859.0 VU!l:lta de Hirst 062.0 Paso Pen" Her~o~u 87G.5 sal.e Paso Risso (Superior) an.2 8!ll.l Pnso Hirst 894.1 896.6 Pa~o Casado (Inferior) 902.0 904.2 Pa$O Casado (SuperIor) 90~.1 '09.7 Paso CacHda Puo V"llemy 91'.' 921.8 920.0 922.5 1'1150 Confluencla 927.0 '29.0 1'0£0 Pluva9 {Inferiorl 1333.6 111(.0 Vuelta de F19uerlnha 13!)7.0 Vuall .. de Form19lielra 1(79.0 1481.1 COlumbo • T~rminQI fluviol ' la30.0 SOURCE: Working Paper 23. -195-  Table 4c-10 RIVER TRANSPORr AND NAVIGA.TICN - PAAAGUAY RIVER SYSTEM DISTANCE IN DEP'ffi NAVIrnTlCN TIME 'l:UrALDAYS OF NAVIGATICN PORTS KILOMETERS IN Hours Minut.as METERS Upstream J:'tMnstrea ~ Upstrearr ~trearr Downstream 'Partia Upstream V-15km;h. V-15J1m;h 16 hid. 16 hid. 1 • Corumba 00 2,771 3 00 185 0.0 11.5 141 2 • Esperanza 141 2,630 4 9 175 0.5 11 210 69 2,561 4 14 171 1 10.5 3 • Colmbra 26 4 • Puerto Busch 236 2,535 5 16 169 1 10.5 207 5 • 011mpo 443 2,328 6 30 155 2 10 167 6 • Puerto Vallemy 610 2,161 2 41 1,44 2.5 9 88 I 7 . Puerto Dinasco 698 2,073 3 47 138 3 9 ..... 66 \D 8 . Puerto Cooper 764 2,007 5 51 134 3 8 O'l 66 I 3 8 9 • Concepcion 830 1,941 2 55 129 113 10. Puerto Antequera 943 197 1,828 5 63 122 4 8 11. Asuncion 1,140 1,631 3 76 109 5 7 183 12. Formoza 1,323 142 1,448 5 88 97 5.5 6 13. BermejO 1,465 1,306 3 98 87 6 5 358 14. Reconquista 1,823 948 5 122 63 8 4 347 15. ParanS 2,170 601 6 145 40 9 2.5 68 16. Diamante 2,238 533 4 149 36 9 2. 88 17. San Lorenzo 2,326 445 3 155 30 10 2 25 18. Rosario 2,351 420 10 157 28 10 2 70 19. San Nicolas 2,421 350 2-7 161 23 10 1 350 20. Buenos Aires 2,771 o 0 2-10 185 00 11.5 o 0 NC1I'E: V = Speed km = kilareters h = hour d = day SOL'nCE: t'!orking Pappr 23.  '" Table 4C-11 VOLUME OF CARGO IN TRANSIT THROUGH PUNO (IN TONS) ,~ FROM BOLIVIA YEAR Guaqui Chaguaya TO BOLIVIA TOTAL 1973 46,937 67,678 71,194 185,809 1974 47,590 53,783 78,919 180,292 1975 38,930 47,596 60,981 147,507 1976 44,592 45,608 51,622 141,822 1977 39,477 41,083 43,033 123,593 1978 38,148 37,199 52,071 127,418 . SOURCE: ENAFER, Peru. -197-  PERU , 0 10 20 30 .0 50 km. ---- " / /" 1 N I BOLIVIA l •• ••• :::::::::: :: .- ::::::: ,:::: ..... LEGEND Area 8.171 km' ELevation above sea level 3.809 m Notional boundary Route used for navigation •••••••• Railroad ... I I I I I I Highway Ports ± NAVIGATION ON LAKE TITICACA FIGURE 4C-7  MoChin.,y Mous. rr--r-:-r"'Tj"'j","·-I-~:;::;::::' i i ~."ou•• I I \\ i i !! I i ~f _J /' I I ' ,!.i.. I,' W""~'hOp \' I '/' Y P F B ~ pi Il - -----I" /I "-\ "-\ if] / ~\" STREET ~ .",' ----- BACK ./,/ ~ .~-. .'-..... Ace E SS CHANNEL --. ~-.-. - - .. _ , I WA R E H 0 _ _ _ USE _~_ __ I_~~_ 'lolA R E H 0 USE I ._._ . . _, __ , __= - - ' RAIL ROA_D_, USE LD DOCI< IN USE ==:...:. -=-=-- -==-- .~, .:~._--'~ .~~~':::,-,-,--, ~s:;::]. -, -~--'- - - - --==- ::::r-- -----::-- -.--~. 'r::::::;:=:---~---'::--:::,;,; --- -, DOCK 1M I!A CONDITION rOf."o" .. IWork."op J Iw ._,- - - - .- - , - - ' -.-,.;:::::::::.-- R 0 A u___ . - - ~ aU .- . . - - - . - - _ _ _ [.. Slams - :--.:::::: ~--.-'- d on Wo"'hO~ ---.--:- -=-.:==::..." RAL!-_ - - - ' _ ----' - ~__ - - ' RAIL_ROAD~,TATION E L I:C-r"ICITY ARMY HOUSING PLANT MILITARY I ARE A ' , _____ ..J , i STREE-r I I ~ iIO lpo ., -- - - --- ----- ~ PO R T OF GUAQUI 'Uhh.",. _<)m;(~ O/'lJ AHorinf.... FIGURE 4C-8  t:; • ' ~ LUI d,1 palo cl4II.,oPO ,- To q \ ~t-J i,....--=,- JLL' . (, /. -::"" :;0-.' ... j, jF..i<t:;: ".6;.t: . .:...~, ?~Et"i" .~~ -~ ~~ ~' ~F-:C- -T J----~'~ - ~ ~--=: . -- • It' I~ ,.. C": .... I'" ,I rJ.L,.;~ ~J _L?- p~.,~. ..... ~ ~-l---'" G ~ dt li'no-l " _.= I 0 : L._ .~ ~ /-1:., )jO I t'"l! ;': )-:;"'-' I~ ,'-] I -.>; ilJJ_~...,..,-z._1 • ' = -.~ra(l.MalJ.ll- I I t . ' .. L_ '.n at _ t t T""I"T"TrT, . . V r ""_1' ..0 .... ~~LL:L!:.:~ ..~L~~t-.z:::LL=-..l~1·LlLr..::::LU-L" ... 'i: '1";'CC.".':S.,c---o_ • ..L:-:- 0"<'" dIItOlnb..JStl ~., 1 E'pol;lo .. I" FuturosTonquet I l 1 ". ,Tonquc')dtESl;ora: .• d~ bombosk:~ntro): I...... :Tonqt/'lsd4llTrmq : p; . . . . . ~".......r =.t1& I.l lt !;.~.~~ ~::-:-~ - !!, I,. "LA:r __ J..i I , I _~ ~-:+= I f'QS I ;,/ Tcrp.;'" ,A2-Uf.jL_t.'::~ I J V a c 10 • - ;d. Cargo'1"oleo: t/....: L. "'! ~ ~ LUl dt' R"J~to-(e yE Fan-,oro I . ____~ _ I • • ~~ ,t8!ltq, [S':bq' , : ! _,/ eMf,.,) ',,- Proa 80110 In'loblt SOl'lo\l'M1o' FOl;o d. hlro 15 PtrSOrtaS 'LumH'l c,on 51hJnCI~ I Db-- ....~--~lr.11 (~oLor ., -"..... ,i.lJ. "; Pantalla Tron,por'n" 1~~'4 ~.'lW~'~ ~lill 1 ',-),. I.Tub<> . . . . ColHld.1 :,~; I t:~llbU~!:rf at '---'"1 I ......=,"9 - c ., I'"' "I -." f,.r;-..... _ \\\ -."- Rtll.l;tDro V"nlo • Guic d. rO'dlOi .; :." ~ .,~ . ".~ ';1 ::~ i"'......... , n..~-"'- \ -.... >,'0 '.,.,,~ ~ Z':: ::l~' r~·" ~ ' ., mO'Or p"nc;pol " Q "I I , 'j:'G":'.r·c ~r-'S ~~~:'.~':<;on I~ I LUI dl tn' Popo \,""1' ~'t' I ~~. " , P·ty-o'l ~. -u~",,_u"""'~"~ ~~. £.: ~ UI ~~ . ; .,' t]·, J,1 -L- ~,~, --C> 1 I g , . . ",. - 1~-~.",i.~ . ~"""-= ) t\ [r, rl..~ h:" .:; .;' ~~J1 t,1 t.. ,,;r I: t 1·, -. -"" ,"" -I"r.:' ,/~ ~~. . J;,..,l- ·0 ;"-;.11 1 IC" .. I .. /1 If-.~, I ~..,.€: L:ill':l . -;',... . - .: Cl.BILRTA DE T~IPUL"CIJN CUI::HERTA SUJ.lEFtICR ClIIlERTA DEL PLENTf DE GOBlER NO TL:CtiO ~EL flUE p.;TE DE' CUSI! RTA tASTILLD GOtHE fiNQ. ;:~. E,ponlion (II A~\JO O",ICt d,1 Molar PrinCipal a _~_ _ • ~ o__ .:::::,~? ~- ----=-~-_----= ----~- . ~-----=-~~J--- .-8J ____ GuloAb,lrte 0 __ ___ __ .------._.____ ___ D."'.,-,=e',-. ___ _ _ Tar\qui'dt Co;nbultlLIt dt Usa Diono ~~~~~o~===~ cvon RTA nr:m ?RINCIPJ\L 0 FERRY BOAT .. MANCO KAPAC II WR".t, Smilh ani ~Hocialpj FI GURE 4C-9  Table 4('-]2 M1NEAAL EXPORlS BY a:MIBOL usm; U\f(F. TPJINSPORl' FJOt ruTOJI 'ro lUI) M.S.OLIJ\N'tI\. M.S. INCl\ FERRr MIIN(D CAPN:: 1977 1978 1979 1977 1978 1979 '.M'ES CF M:IES Min.1nq Cb. ~ ItJde N°v'In.T. N·V!!!.:.!:.. ~ ~ ------ :!!!.:.!:.. _19_7_7_ N°V ~ ~!!!.:!:... N°V ~ N"V ~ ~ ~ 1978 ..:1~9:..:.79::..-__ 'lUl'N:. ~ CMRIm !!!L- ..!21!L --1:!.!L catavi SIt bid 10 1,049 7 480 0 34 4,301 19 1,645 17 1.176 17 1,820 4 241 12 874 7,170 2,366 2,050 'l:l1s:Ju1rt SIt bid 11 846 21 1,395 0 33 2,233 26 1,936 22 1,159 23 1,686 10 1,153 18 1,172 4,765 4,484 2,331 thlf1eada SltAq bid 14 942 26 2,871 0 39 3,697 32 3,472 27 4,050 24 3,282 11 1,740 24 3,079 7,921 i,083 7,129 I .... .., Bolivar bid 17 1,93929 2,755 0 44 3,515 28 2,997 37 4,715 25 2,72710 1,091 26 3,046 8,181 6,843 7,761 lID P.M.Omm SltPb • Zn bid 11 322 17 546 0 20 546 15 417 11 311 11 501 6 194 11 311 1.369 1,157 622 Viloco SIt bid 4 178 10 401 0 20 1,074 13 539 0 4 120 3 178 0 1,372 1,198 Cimlooles SIt bid 3 182 11 939 0 16 1.182 9 545 8 786 5 364 2 61 1 60 1,728 1,545 846 San~ SIt JIa1l..r.oaS 7 267 17 2,691 0 19 966 18 3,419 25 1.265 6 176 7 329 3 120 1,409 6,439 1,385 Japo SIt bid 2 117 16 601 0 14 489 16 678 17 668 15 549 7 319 12 479 1,155 1,598 1,147 Santa Ft! SIt ItJad 2 40 5 190 0 5 140 4 110 5 171 8 200 3 120 5 181 380 420 352 M:m:lCXlcala SIt !bad 3 60 10 318 0 13 453 10 300 14 422 7 198 4 160 8 271 711 778 693 lllcta bid 3 61 7 183 0 8 162 11 244 0 8 182 2 61 0 405 488 BolsaNeqra WSlt !bad 2 40 5 134 0 9 322 8 192 10 311 2 44 2 67 3 90 406 393 401 Kant W bid 4 181 9 494 0 14 616 11 351 13 633 6 253 3 85 10 371 1.050 930 1,004 Cbl.quechaca SIt bid o 3 91 0 3 91 3 91 3 92 2 61 1 30 2 62 152 212 154 San~ ItCII Pb Aq l'Ill..r.oaS 4 143 11 384 0 14 460 6 177 16 569 1 29 3 89 2 60 632 650 629 Huanml Total bid 0 2 17 6,367 29 14,626 0 73 0 o 44 20.247 32 17.186 2 73 0 o 37 16,328 25 12,192 11 6,036 2 118 - - --- ------ 0 26 10,176 38,806 264 37,848 26,504 375 504 460 537 441 488 549 391 NOV - NIiitii!i of Trips '1h. T - '1t.nI Carried SWK:Et . aMIBOL, ~ on the IIOIIBIaIts of minerals thrCll,¥:Jh the Port of Gu!Iqu1.  APPENDIX 4D EXISTING PIPELINE CHARACTERISTICS  Appendix 4D EXISTING PIPELINE CHARACTERISTICS TABLES Number Page 4D-l Crude Oil Pipelines 200 4D-2 Balance of Petroleum Products and Consumption 201 During Recent Years 4D-3 Crude Oil Processed at Each Ref~nery or 202 Transported to Each Export Point 4D-4 Santa Cruz-Yacuiba Natural Gas Pipeline 203 4D-S Monteagudo-Sucre Natural Gas Pipeline 204 4D-6 Cochabamba-Oruro-La Paz Refined Product 205 Pipeline 4D-7 Sucre-Potos! Refined Product Pipeline 206 4D-8 Consumption in Centers Served by the 207 Santa Cruz-Camiri-Villamontes Product Pipeline FIGURES Follows Number Paqe 4D-l Crude Oil and Condensate Pipelines 199 4D-2 Details of Crude Oil and Condensate Pipe- 199 lines 4D-3 Natural Gas Pipelines 202 4D-4 Details of Natural Gas Pipelines 202 4D-S Refined Product Pipelines 204 4D-6 Details of Refined Product Pipelines 204 -199-  LEGEND Elisting Pipelines Ij It ./ '~ ~ , I SJA. CRUZ t. i :\ \ , I , \ "'. J ( . .\ ~ , '\ , \\ \. . G I ) .~ ! - : I .. ~ o \' .\ 'f \'\ ,\ ~ I - p Oe it J: l' IJ B L' (' .\ .~ It (I E '\ T ~ .\ CRUDE OIL AND CON DENSATE PIPELINES IOVER4LL LOCATION) FIGURE 40-1  Corando 6" - 54 km. COCHABAM8A 10" .. I~" ~ ~~. _ ::::;;...r ,,4 ",,,,. ~, 9 l"- Tita I:\! I ~ 4" -66km. C=-h-o-:-"r.ti' - - - - '-..J....:c::'o-m-'r-I7"( 3" _ 64 km. Comb.ltr 2 II _ 4 S k",. H~ I ~ 10 I.C 6'S/S".29km. ~.... v ,6!Va".34km. Coitua Le V.rti.nt. Yaeuiba (Poeitos' DETAI LS OF CRUDE OIL AND CONDENSATE PIPELINES w~{..,. Smdh ani A.focialp.f FI GURE 40-2  Table 4D-l CRUDE OIL PIPELINES LENGTH DIAMETER CAPACITY IN YEAR LOCATION IN KM IN INCHES BARRELS/DAY CONSTRUCTED Caranda-Santa Cruz 54 6 10,000 1965 Santa Cruz-Sica Sica 625 10 & 12 20,000 1965 Sica Sica-Arica 346 8 to 10 20,000 1965 Cliza-Cochabamba (2 pipes) 20 Camiri-Cochabamba 523 6 10,000 La Pena-Santa Cruz 35 6 10,000 1970 I Ti ta-Santa Cruz 163 10 20,000 1978 tv 0 Camiri-Santa Cruz 271 8 & 10 20,000 1957 0 Camiri-Santa Cruz 271 4 3,500 1957 I Cerrillos-Choreti 66 4 & 6 14,000 1967 Cambait!-Boyuibe 48 2 1,000 Boyuibe-Camiri 64 2 1,000 1968 Camiri-Yacuiba 258 6 15,000 1954 Lamboyo-Sucre (2 pipes) 71 4 5,000 1949 Caigua-Tiguipa 29 6 8,000 1973 La Vertiente-Tiguipa 34 6 2,878 SOURCE: YPFB  Table 40-2 BALANCE OF PETROLEUM PRODUCTS AND CONSUMPTION DURING RECENT YEARS (thousands of cubic meters) YEAR PRODUCTION OF CRUDE REFINED IN BOLIVIA EXPORT OF CRUDE 1973 2,744 880 1,883 1974 2,640 943 1,717 1975 2,342 1,171 1,317 I !IV 1976 2,362 1,262 1,282 0 ~ 1 1977 2,015 1,480 714 1978 1,883 1,560 455 SOURCE: Diez Anos de Estad!sticas, 1969-1978 YPFB. Note that the sum of refined and exports exceeds production. This is because some of the refined product is mixed with the crude and exported so that some double counting is involved • -. .. A ... ~ M.4..~." .. ~  Table 4D-3 CRUDE OIL PROCESSED AT EACH REFINERY OR TRANSPORTED TO EACH EXPORT POINT (thousands of cubic meters) REFINERIES Various EXPORT POINTS YEAR Small Cochabamba Santa Cruz Sucre Yacuiba Arica TOTAL 1973 64 576 155 85 800 1,083 2,763 I tv 1974 64 607 176 96 701 1,016 2,660 0 tv I 1975 77 755 211 128 789 528 2,488 1976 86 793 251 132 747 535 2,544 1977 86 973 283 138 501 213 2,194 1978 61 1,050 323 126 313 142 2,015 SOURCE: Diez Anos de Estad!sticas, 1969-1978, YPFB.  " .,. Table 40-4 SANTA CRUZ - YACUIBA NATURAL GAS PIPELINE 'Ill I. YEAR VOLUME TRANSPORTED (MMPC) 1973 55,449 1974 54,600 1975 54,973 1976 55,490 1977 57,886 I iii 1978 55,846 1979 69,676(1) 1980 to 80,517(1) 1989 SOURCE: YPFB - Informe Anual, 1979 (1) Volume assumed to coincide with the Second Contract for supply of gas between YPFB and GE, October, 1976. /'" , ' -203-  LEGEND Elistillg ----- .......... -.. Under Construetion PI annee! - ..- - .... ~ - l IJ It 'I . , ~ ) - \ -' i c I ( t~ - REP U H L'J (' .\ H (i E '\ T J ;\ .\ .\ NATURAL GAS PIPELINES (OVERALL LOCATION) FIGURE 40-3  LEGEND ElCi$ting ---- ••••••••••• Under Construction Planned LA PAZ -- . . "- " ... " COCHABAMBA ~J""" "eo hi ...~... SANTA CRUZ ......... ORURO 1-....... 26 ....... ... ~ Or 30" ........ ~ SUCRE 6"·225 km, <tJ8SIr·· ..~ r /7), .... • ••• •••••Pto, Suarez .0", POTOSI t e ... :: 'If N Yaeuibo (Poeitos' DETAILS OF NATURAL GAS PIPELINES FIGURE 40-4  Table 40-5 MONTEAGUDO - SUCRE NATURAL GAS PIPELINE VOLUME TRANSPORTED YEAR Total Per Da:L: (MMPC~ (MMPCD) 1974 130 .35 1975 693 1. 90 1976 793 2.17 1977 959 2.63 1978 1,097 3.00 1979 1,260(1) 3.45 1984 2,660(1) 7.29 1989 5,150(1) 14.11 SOURCE: YPFB - Inforrne Anua1 - 1978 (1) Estimated based on 15 percent growth from 1978. -204-  Table 4D-6 COCHABAMBA - ORURO - LA PAZ REFINED PRODUCT PIPELINE TRANSPORT COST MARKET DEMAND YEAR TRANSPORTED Oruro La Paz Oruro La Paz (CUbic 11.'eters) (pesos per cubic me:ters) (cubic me:ters) 1973 352,605 14.97 29.89 124,419 218,679 1974 369,489 17.79 34.26 125,311 239,547 I t-J 1975 404,323 21.49 48.74 132,998 267,875 0 U1 I 1976 462,063 20.03 45.43 139,735 296,642 1977 522,172 28.89 65.54 158,360 323,400 1978 576,994 36.69 79.14 164,446 350,700 1979(1) 550,000 174,000 375,000 1984 (1) 760,000 233,000 520,000 1989(2) 1,050,000 311,000 722,000 SOURCES: YPFB - Diez Afios de Estadistica Petrolera de Bolivia, 1968-1978. YPFB - Informe Estadistico - 1978 YPFB - Informe Anual - 1978. (1) Interpolation. (2) Derived from the 1989 projections by Wilbur Smith and Associates. ;;.: » • ... Ii ,. .. '. .. . ".  LEGEND --_ Existing Pipelines - , '. Jj I- t -J ~ \\ \ . , ( .\ \' - . ' - -- p. I: P L B L I (' :\ H (; E " T J :'\ ;\ .\ . -, REFINED PRODUCT PIPELINES 'lJUJ (? ,.1 I A. VVilbul' ....)wuth an4 ../<Ijjoaa~j (OVERALL LOCATION) FIGURE 40-5  LA PAZ (4,082 m) COCHABAMBA (2558 "') HilJhest Elevation <4500", STA. CRUZ (416m) ORURO (3709 m I SUCRE(2800 m) t CAMIRI 1827m) t VILLAMONTES (383m) DETAILS OF REFINED PRODUCT PIPELINES WL,.,S"utl..,J .A~k$ FIGURE 40- 6  Table 4D-7 SUCRE - POTOSI REFINED PRODUCT PIPELINE VOLUME TRANSPORT PRODUCT CONSUMPTION YEAR TRANSPORTED COST Potosi U~uni (cubic rreters) 3 (cubic rreters) ($b / m ) 1973 28 1974 25 1975 78,633 29 28,501 5,793 I 1976 49,692 33 32,426 6,503 N 0 0'1 1977 55,721 39 38,324 5,642 I 1978 63,441 45 44,637 5,288 1979(1) 52,000 46,500 5,500 1984(1) 65,000 57,000 6,600 1989(2) 80,000 70,000 8,000 SOURCES: YPFB - Diez Afios de Estadistica Petrolera de Bolivia, 1968-1978. YPFB - Informe Estadistico - 1978. YPFB - Informe Anua1 - 1978. (1) By interpolation. (2) Derived from the 1989 projections by Wilbur Smith and Associates.  Table 4D-8 CDNStJMPTION TI1 ~"':'ERS SEF.vw BY TI-rt:: S\!-'''TA C::z.~jZ - Cl\.!.'1IRI - v:rr..:r...ru-ONTES POODUCrr PIPELlNE PRODCCT CONSUMPTION YEAR -- Camiri . Vill<>.mcntes a ~ermejo Villaz6n Sanandita Total (cubic meters) 1973 11,680 12,089 5,413 3,331 3,338 40,851 1974 9,485 12,790 10,002 4,104 7,971 44,352 1975 11,442 16,474 9,805 4,201 10,806 52,728 1976 13,421 18,835 9,456 3,363 11,676 56,751 I 1977 14,363 21,650 13,059 3,411 11,546 64,029 tv 0 1978 12,628 6,677 23,809 11,401 3,051 4,491 62,057 -..J I 1979 (1) 66,000 1984 (1 ) 90,000 1989 (1) 120,000 SOURCE: YPFB - Informe Anual - 1978. (1) Future growth on growth rate calculated for the Study zones: 35, 61-66, 74 • •••••• lIi.II ................ -IIi.1Ii .j •• ..,j ",j ii-.ii ~ ...  APPENDIX 4E EXISTING CHARACTERISTICS OF AIR TRANSPORT  Appendix 4E EXISTING CHARACTERISTICS OF AIR TRANSPORT TABLES Number Page 4E-1 Existing Aircraft Fleet, by Type of Activity 209 4E-2 Summary of Air Transport Statistics 210 4E-3 Passengers Arriving by LAB-1979 211 4E-4 Non-Regular Air Transport by Type of Aircraft 212 4E-S Summary of Air Accidents and Events Within 213 the Country 4E-6 Air Accidents by Region in 1976-1978 214 4E-7 Causes of Air Accidents 1979 214 FIGURE Follows Number Page 4E-1 Airports Administered by AASANA 210 -208-  Table 4E-l EXISTING AIRCRAFT FLEET, BY TYPE OF ACTIVITY NUMBER OF AIRCRAFT (1) , BY REGION (2) La Paz Cochabamba Santa Cruz Beni Total Air Taxis 7 8 78 69 162 Training Aircraft 3 7 4 3 17 Private Planes 2 6 56 71 135 I tv Aerial Work 4 2 20 26 0 1.0 I Air Transport 40 33 3 76 Other (3) 2 8 2 12 Total 5B 56 169 145 428 (1) As of November 30, 1979. Does not include equipment belonging to Bolivian Air Force. (2) For definitions, see Figure lB. (3) Aircraft brought into the country for demonstration and commercialization. SOURCE: Direccion General de Aeronautica Civil - DGAC.  .. Table 4F-2 SUMMARY OF AIR TRANSPORT STATISTICS NUMBER OF PASSENGERS 1975 1976 1977 1978 DOHESTIC PASSENGERS LAB 395,655 455,560 551,405 860,135 .- TAN ·36,032 29,284 42,060 45,992 TAB 445 2,819 Other 45,579 29,847 ~9,007 22,769 Total 477,266 514,691 612,917 931,715 INTERKATIONAL PASSENGERS LAB 102,100 119,626 130,604 199,88C TAB 197 275 Other 98,391 109,629 130,409 200,155 Total 200,491 229,255 261,210 400,310 TONS OF AIR FPXIGET 1975 1976 1977 1978 DOl·1ESTIC AIR FREIGHT LAB 3,579 3,813 4,043 4,486 TAN 397 3,302 3,127 3,903 TAB 602 2,281 ,- Non-regular 34,010 30,728 33,090 38,497 Total 37,986 37,843 40,862 49,167 INTERNATIONAL AIR FREIGHT .. LAB . 901 1,724 5,737 8,905 TAB 57 123 Other 3,637 3,654 4,221 4,099 Total 4,538 5,378 10,015 13,127 -210- ,  LEGEND Airports with paved runways Other airfields administered by AASANA Airfields planned to be transfered under AASANA administration. Orientation of runways Re9ionol boundaries. Re9ions as defined for air transport are os folt ows. I LA PAZ COCHABAMBA SANTA CRUZ BENI PARAGUA y A R G E N TIN A o 50 100 150 200 k m. AIRPORTS ADMINISTERED BY AASANA WtZur Smith and Jhjocia!4j FIG U R E 4 E -I  'rable 4E-'3 PASSENGERS ARRIVING B~ LAB - 1979 (F-27) A NUMBER B-727 A NUMBER Ascencion 2.276 Cochabamba 251.353 Camiri 4.580 La Paz 239.498 Concepcion 2.994 Sucre 39.819 Cobija 2.883 Santa Cruz 206. 349 Guayaramer!n 10.196 Trinidad 53.905 790.924 ======= Magdalena 937 Oruro 1.715 Potos! 1. 006 INTERNATIONAL Puerto Suarez 56 Rurrenabaque 1. 519 Cochabamba 14.765 Reyes 1. 474 La Paz 25.882 Ribera1ta 6.904 Santa Cruz 29.314 Santa Cruz 899 Asuncion 4.238 San Javier 435 Buenos Aires 20.234 San Ignacio 3. 307 Caracas 4.385 San Borj a 1.671 Cali 2.772 Tarija 15.669 Limo. 17.98'"7 Yacuiba 5.825 Manaos 2.592 6,L 346 ====== Miami 26.738 Panam~ 8.402 Sao Paulo 11. 430 Santiago 5.834 174.573 ======= -211-  Table 4E-4 NON-REGULAR AIR TRANSPORT BY TYPE OF AIRCRAFT J.977 AIRCRAFT NUMBER OF FREIGHT AVERAGE PAYLOAD TYPE FLIGHTS (Tons) (Tons) C-47 837 1,527.6 1. 83 C-46 4,670 13,209.3 2.83 DC-6A 79 477.3 6.04 DC-6 417 2,447.8 5.87 B-25 59 115.3 1.95 CV-440 1,396 3,710.6 2.66 M-404 900 2,946.0 3.27 DC-3 112 219.2 1.96 C-54 1,004 4,420.6 4.40 B-17 364 1,596.9 4.39 .. CV-24 0 267 856.0 3.21 Twin Otter-300 1,427 366.3 0.~6 T/COM-690 310 1.5 0.00 T/COH-690A 117 0.2 0.00 Total 11,959 31,894.6 2.67 NOTE: Based on detailed records received on non-regular air transport, representing about 96 percent of total tonnage carried. SOURCE: Directorate of Air Transport and Aerial Work, Ministry .. of Transport. .. -212- ••  Table 4E-5 SUMMARY OF AIR ACCIDENTS AND EVENTS WITHIN THE COUNTRY YEAR ACCIDENTS EVENTS - 1949 3 0 1950 11 1 1951 10 0 1952 7 3 1953 5 5 1954 4 3 1955 10 5 1956 4 6 1957 5 3 1958 12 5 1959 10 3 1960 13 3 1961 10 8 1962 12 3 1963 13 7 1964 14 4 1965 18 16 1966 15 9 1967 25 7 1968 22 5 1969 26 20 1970 21 11 1971 20 6 1972 30 7 1973 34 3 1974 59 6 1975 70 9 1976 41 31 1977 66 26 1978 68 21 1979 79 19 Total 1949-1979 737 255 SOURCE: D.G.A.C. -213-  0' Table 4E-6 . "\I AIR ACCIDENTS BY REGION iN 1976-1978 1976 1977 1978 1979 '. Num. % Num. % Num. % Num. % " ,It Beni 22 53,7 38 57,6 45 66,1 42 53,2 ~? Santa Cruz 8 19,6 15 22,8 14 20,5 18 22,8 'Ii La Paz 6 14,7 4 6,1 3 4,4 6 7,6 ,.. Cochabarnba 1 2,4 2 3,0 2 3,0 2 2,5 Pando 1 2,4 2 3,0 1 1,5 1 1,3 1/1 Oruro 1 2,4 1 1,5 1 1,3 ~ Potos1 1 1,5 1 1,5 Sucre 1 1,5 1 1,3 * Tarija 2 4,8 2 2,5 " Apolo 1 1,3 10 Abroac 3 4,5 1 1,5 5 6,2 '1\ Total 41 100 66 100 68 100 79 100 41 SCt;RCE: D.G.A.C. Table 4E-7 CAUSES OF AIR ACCIDENT~ 1979 CAUSES TOTAL % QF ACCIDENTS Human error 46 Mechanical failure 33 Weather 15 Other causes 6 -::-214-  APPENDIX 5A COSTS OF RAILROAD TRANSPORT  Appendix SA COSTS OF RAILROAD TRANSPORT TABLES Number Page 5A-1 Breakdown of Passenger Train Cos~s,1977 216 5A-2 Breakdown of Ferrobus Costs, 1977 217 5A-3 Breakdown of Autocarri1 Costs, 1977 218 5A-4 Breakdown of Passenger Costs, 1977 219 5A-5 Breakdown of Less than Wagon Lo~d Costs, 1977 220 5A-6 Breakdown of Wagon Load Costs, 1977 221 5A-7 Breakdown of Cargo Train Costs, 1977 222 -215-  Table 5A-1 BREAKDOWN OF PASSENGER TRAIN COSTS - 1977 (thousands of pesos) TOTAL TERMINAL LINEHAUL SECTIONS (."(STS OF Total Fixed Costs Variable 'I'ota 1 Fixed Costs Variable Code i:2S:::i;j,!InAUS;m SECTION Costs Station Other 'D2ill. Costs Costs TraCK Other Total Costs FIXED VARIABLE 11 La Paz-El Alto 2,769 1,358 472 759 1,231 127 1,411 284 359 643 768 1,874 895 12 El Alto-Viadla 3,415 1,466 531 764 1,295 171 1,949 266 649 915 1,034 2,210 1,205 13 Viadla-Orum 14,380 2,293 1,172 327 1,499 794 12,087 2,128 5,190 7.318 4,769 8,817 5,563 14 Oruro-Madlacamarca 4,884 3,191 1,053 1,922 2,975 216 1,693 230 163 393 1,300 3,368 1,516 15 Madlacanarca-R!o Mulato 16,579 3,929 1,735 1,260 2,995 934 12,650 1,548 5.494 7.042 5,608 10,037 6,542 , IV 16 17 R!o Mulato-\'Jylni Uymi-Atodla 13,158 9,944 3,801 2,922 1,600 1.159 1,455 3,055 1,240 2,399 746 523 9,357 1,023 7,022 1,078 3,852 2,799 4,875 3,877 4.482 3,145 7,930 5.228 6,276 3,668 r- 18 At.oc:ha-Villazl5n 18,420 4,589 1,951 1,666 3,617 972 13,831 2,520 5,472 7,992 5,839 11,609 6,811 a.. I 21 Viadla-Olarana 4,913 802 347 229 576 226 4,111 1,363 1,392 2,755 1,356 3,331 1,582 31 UyuU.-ollague 2.845 390 175 85 260 130 2,455 774 901 1,675 780 1,935 910 41 Oruro-Cochabarttla 12,611 2,498 1,020 994 2,014 484 10,113 4,435 2,768 7,203 2,910 9,217 3,394 42 Ox::habanba-Aiquile 5,380 385 189 14 203 182 4,995 2,668 1,237 3,905 1,090 4,108 1,272 51 R!o Mulato-Potos! 6,325 1,054 479 288 767 287 5,271 1,876 1,676 3,552 1, 719 4,319 2,006 52 Potes!-Sucre 3,770 387 172 111 283 104 3,383 2,039 717 2,756 627 3,039 731 lINDF.lIN SYSTEM 119,393 29,065 12,055 11,114 23.169 5,896 90,328 22,232 32,669 54,901 35,427 78,070 41,323 61 Viacha-Gua:Jui lINDF.lIN SYSTEM (with Guaqui) 119,393 29,065 12,055 11,114 23,169 5,896 90,328 22,232 32,669 54,901 35,427 78,070 41,323 71 Santa Cruz-cot'l:llbS 35,824 6,619 2,965 1,657 4,622 1,997 29,205 7,584 14,585 22,169 7,036 26,791 9,033 81 Santa eruz-Yacuiba 30,481 5,524 2,475 1,485 3,960 1,564 24,957 6,856 12,138 18,994 5,963 22,954 7,527 91 Santa Cruz-Santa Rosa 2,200 84 38 16 54 30 2,116 1,553 466 2,019 97 2,073 127 EASTE:fIN SYSTEM 68,505 12,227 5,478 3,158 8,636 3,591 56,278 15,993 27,189 43,182 13,096 51,818 16,687 ENFE: (.Andean am Easte:rn) 187,898 41,292 17,533 14,272 31,805 9,487 146,606 38,225 59,858 98,083 48,523 129,888 58,010 saJRCE: Working Paper 32.  Table 5A-2 BREAKDOWN OF FERROBUS COSTS - 1977 (thousands of $b) TOTAL TERMINAL LINEHAUL SE!:~IQNS a::sTS OF Total Fixed Costs Variable Total Fixea Costs Variable Code Designation SECTION Costs Station Other ~ Costs Costs Track ~ Total Costs FIXED VARIABLE 11 La Paz-El Alto 1,218 774 266 414 680 94 444 44 101 145 299 825 393 12 El Alto-Viacha 1.416 776 276 394 670 106 640 54 206 260 380 930 486 13 Viacha-Oru.ro 6.122 804 485 13 498 306 5.318 504 2,574 3,078 2,240 3.576 2,546 14 Oru.ro-Madlacana 338 167 68 77 145 22 171 49 46 95 76 240 98 15 Madlacanarca-Rfo MIllato 1.243 172 96 21 117 55 1,071 205 461 666 405 783 460 16 Rfo Mllato-Uyurl. I 17 !.lymli-Atocha ~ 18 Atocha-Vi11az61 ~ 21 Viadla-Claraiia 31 Uyurl.-ollague 41 Orw:o-Qx:habatba 10.230 1,431 824 124 948 483 8,799 1,248 4,007 5,255 3,544 6,203 4,027 42 O:xhabmhl-Aiquile 51 Rfo Mulato-Potost 1.305 156 89 15 104 52 1.149 329 437 766 383 870 435 52 Potoet-Sucre 2,085 136 81 5 86 50 1,949 701 669 1,370 579 1,456 629 ANDEJ\N SYSTEM 23,957 4,416 2.185 1,063 3,248 1,168 19,541 3,134 8.501 11,635 7,906 14,883 9,074 61 Viad'Ia-GuaJui ANDEJ\N SYSTl'Jot (with Guaqui) 23.957 4,416 2.185 1.063 3,248 1.168 19,541 3,134 8,501 11,635 7.906 14.883 9,074 71 Smta crtlz-cb1':l.l1bA 16,937 1,965 1,047 450 1.497 468 14,972 2.068 8.448 10,516 4,456 12,013 4,924 81 Santa Cruz-Yacuiba 9.454 1,136 592 247 839 297 8,318 1,213 4,681 5,894 2,424 6,733 2,721 91 Santa Cruz-Santa laa FAS".l'Em SYSTEM 26,391 3.101 1.639 697 2,336 765 23,290 3,281 13,129 16,410 6.880 18,746 7,645 !:Nfl:: (Andean and Eastern) 50,348 7,517 3.824 1,760 5,584 1,933 42,831 6.415 21,630 28,045 14,786 33,629 16,719 SCl.JlCE: Working Paper 32. :e.:, -$' 0< .. "" . '" '"' .. ... .. '" " ,tio !Ii ... . <ill. .. '"'  Table 5A-3 BREAKDOlffl OF ACTOCARRIL COSTS - 1977 (thousands of $b) TOTAL TERMINAL LINEHAUL OOSTS OF Total Fixed Costs Variable Total Fixed Costs Variable Code Designation SECTION Costs ---- Station Other Total Costs Costs Track Other Total Costs ~ VARIABLE 11 La Paz-El Alto (*) 468 280 109 14B 257 23 1BB 52 56 108 80 365 103 12 El Alto-Viac:ha (*) 538 322 126 170 296 26 216 60 64 124 92 420 118 13 Viac:ha-oruro 14 Oruro-Mac:hacanarca 15 Mac:hacanarca-R'!o Mulato I 16 R'!o Mllato-Uyuni ~ 17 ~i-Atoc:ha (lO 18 Atoc:ha-Vil1az6n I 21 Viac:ha-<harafia 31 ~i-ollague 41 Oruro-O:>c:habanba 42 Cbc:habanba-Aiqui le 1,281 541 239 216 455 86 740 71 304 375 365 830 451 51 R'!o Mllato-Potos! 52 Potos!-Sucre 3,800 690 350 19 369 321 3,110 234 1,508 1,742 1,368 2,111 1,689 ANDE1IN SYSTEM 5,081 1,231 589 235 824 407 3,850 305 1,812 2,117 1,733 2,941 2,140 61 Viacha-Guaqu1. ( *) 1,334 798 311 422 733 65 536 146 162 308 228 1,041 293 ANDE1IN SYSTEM (with~) 7,421 2,631 1,135 975 2.110 521 4,790 563 2.094 2.657 2,133 4,767 2,654 71 Santa Cruz-~ 1,532 87 59 13 72 15 1.445 135 863 998 447 1,070 462 81 Santa Cruz-Yacuiba 1,213 97 53 5 58 39 1,116 110 682 792 324 850 363 91 Santa Cruz-Santa ~sa E'AS'l'EllN SYSTEM 2,745 184 112 1B 130 54 2.561 245 1.545 1,790 771 1,920 825 ENFE: (Andean and Eastern) 10,166 2,815 1,247 993 2,240 575 7,351 808 3,639 4,447 2,904 6,687 3,479 (*) Corresponds to the Ex-Guaqui "AutcNagOO" service. SCVRCE: Working Paper 32.  Table 5A-4 BREAKDmru OF PJ1.SSENGER COSTS - 1977 (thousands .of $b) TOTAL TERMINAL LINEHAUL SECTIONS CXSTS CF Total PixeCI Costs Variable Total Fixeo Costs Variable ~ Desi2nat1on SECTION Costs Station Other Total Costs Costs Track Other Total Costs ~ VARIABLE 11 Paz-El Alto Ia 4.455 2,412 847 1,321 2,168 244 2,043 380 516 896 1,147 3,064 1,391 U El Al to-V1adla 5,369 2,564 933 1,328 2,261 303 2,805 380 919 1.299 1,506 3,560 1,809 13 V1adla-<>ru:ro 20,502 3,097 1,657 340 1,997 1,100 17,405 2,632 7,764 10.. 396 7,009 U,393 8,109 14 Oruro-Madlacamarea 5,222 3,358 1,U1 1,999 3,120 238 1,864 279 209 488 1,376 3,608 1,614 ~ 15 Mad1acamarca-Rio Mulato 17,822 4,101 1.831 1,281 3,IU 989 13,721 1,753 5,955 7,708 6,013 10,820 7,002 I-' 16 Rio Mulato-Uyun1 13,158 3,801 1,600 1,455 3,055 746 9,357 1,023 3,852 4,875 4,482 7,930 5,228 'f 17 Uyun1-Atocha 9,944 2,922 1,159 1,240 2,399 523 7,022 1.078 2, 799 3,877 3,145 6,276 3,668 18 At.odla-V111az6'l 18,420 4,589 1,951 1,666 3.617 972 13.831 2,520 5,472 7,992 5.839 11,609 6,811 21 V1acha-Olaraiia 4,913 802 347 229 576 226 4,111 1.363 1.392 2,755 1,356 3,331 1,582 31 Uyun1-<lllague 2,845 390 175 85 260 130 2,455 774 901 1.675 780 1,935 910 41 0rul:0-C0chabaI 22,841 3,929 1,844 1.118 2,962 967 18,9U 5,683 6,775 U,458 6,454 15,420 7.421 42 Cod"laba!tla.-Aiquile 6.661 926 428 230 658 268 5,735 2,739 1,541 4,280 1,455 4,938 1,723 51 Rio Mulato-Pot.os! 7,630 1,210 568 303 871 339 6,420 2,205 2,113 4,318 2,102 5,189 2,441 52 Potos!-Sucre 9,655 1.213 603 135 738 475 8,442 2.974 2,894 5.868 2,574 6,606 3,049 ANIE.!\N SYSTEM 149,437 35,314 15,064 12.730 27,794 7.520 114,U3 25.783 43,102 68.885 45,238 96,679 52,758 U Vlacha-GwqW. 1,334 798 311 422 733 65 536 146 162 308 228 1,041 293 Ji\ND.".AN SYSTEM (with GuIIqui) 150,771 36,112 15,375 13.152 28.527 7.585 114,659 25,929 43.264 69,193 45,4til5 97,720 53,051 71 Santa Cruz--Q)l':l.I't'b4 54,293 8,671 4,071 2,120 6,191 2,480 45,622 9,787 23,896 33,683 11,939 39,874 14,419 81 Santa cruz-Yacu1ba 41,148 6,757 3,120 1,737 4,857 1,900 34,391 8,179 17.501 25,680 8.711 30.537 10,611 91 Santa Cruz-Santa Rosa 2,200 84 38 16 54 30 2,116 1,553 466 2,019 97 2,073 127 FASTERN SYSTE}t 97,641 15,512 7,229 3,873 11.102 4.410 82.129 19,519 41,863 61,382 20,747 72,484 25,157 ENFE: (Andean and Eastern) 248,412 51,624 22,604 17.025 39,629 11,995 196,788 45,448 85,127 130,575 66,213 170,204 78,208 SCXJRC.E: Working Paper 32. '" "" " :.tI ... "" ... ,j Oc "" iii. • jI  Table 5A-5 BREAKDOWN OF LESS THAN WAGON LOAD COSTS - 1977 (thousands of $b) TOTAL TERMINAL LINEHAUL SECTIONS CDSTS CF Total FIxeCl ~os£S Variable Total Fhea C:osts Variable TracK Other Totat Costs FIXED VARIABLE £.ode Designation SECTION Costs Station Other Total Costs Costs ---- 11 La Paz-El Alto 121 32 6 12 18 14 89 19 37 56 33 74 47 12 El Alto-Viacha 313 115 23 58 81 34 198 28 77 105 93 186 127 13 Viacha-Oruro 2.267 644 129 239 368 276 1,623 215 670 885 738 1,253 1,014 14 Oruro-Machacamarca 494 174 35 80 115 59 320 29 130 159 161 274 220 15 Machacanarca-Mo Mulato 4,079 1,306 271 539 810 496 2,773 213 1,229 1,442 1,331 2,252 1,827 16 Mo Mulato-Uywrl. 2.280 788 162 350 5U 276 1.492 120 634 754 738 1,266 1,014 I 17 Uy\mi-At.ocha 1.123 360 72 149 221 139 763 111 279 390 373 611 512 t.J 788 t.J 18 Atocha-Villaz& 1,779 567 112 242 354 213 1,212 218 419 637 575 991 0 I 21 Viacha-Olaraiia 1.554 463 91 184 275 1B8 1.091 229 358 587 504 862 692 31 t¥uni-ollague 2,714 885 185 382 567 318 1,829 198 778 976 853 1,543 1,171 41 Oru:ro-Qx::habarba 2,174 573 l18 238 356 217 1.601 518 503 1,021 580 1,377 797 42 C'odlabanm-Aiquile 398 39 8 7 15 24 359 235 62 297 62 312 86 51 Mo Mulato-Potost: 899 191 37 56 93 98 70B 210 233 443 265 536 363 52 PotosI-8uore 517 85 15 19 34 51 432 191 lOB 299 133 333 184 J\NDFJ\N SYSTEM 20,712 6,222 1,264 2,555 3,819 2,403 14,490 2,534 5,517 8,051 6,439 11,870 B,842 61 Viacha-Guaqui 82 37 5 19 24 13 45. 11 15 26 19 50 32 J\NDFJ\N SYSTEM (with Guaqui) 20,794 6,259 1.269 2,574 3,843 2,416 14.535 2.545 5,532 8,077 6,458 11,920 8,874 71 Santa Cruz-Q:)r\IIbA 11,125 3,058 797 1,577 2,374 684 8,067 2,985 2,926 5,911 2,156 8,285 2,840 81 SlI'lta Cruz-Yacuiba B,859 2,262 588 1,318 1,906 356 6,597 2,555 2,194 4,749 1,84B 6.655 2 1 204 91 SlIlta Cruz-Santa R)sa 723 33 10 16 26 7 690 544 119 663 27 689 34 FJ\S"J.'EIifl SYS'lDt 20.707 5,353 1.395 2,911 4.306 1,047 15,354 6,084 5,239 11.323 4,031 15,629 5,078 ENFE: (Andean and Eastern) 41,501 11.612 2,664 5,485 8,149 3,463 29,889 8,629 10,77119,400 10,499 27,549 13,952 scx.R:E: W:>rk1ng Paper 32.  Table 5A-6 BREAKDOWN OF WAGON LOAD COSTS - 1977 (thousands of $b) TOTAL TERMINAL LINEHAUL SECTIONS a:m'S CF Total Fixed Costs Variable Total Fixed Costs Variable Code Desig:natiQn SECTION Costli Station Other Total Costs !;;Qliil;,lii Track ~ Total Costs FIXED VARIABLE 11 La Paz-El Alto 1.633 213 20 116 136 77 1,420 658 372 1.030 390 1,166 467 12 El AltcrViacha 3,755 894 91 590 681 213 2.861 1,003 777 1,780 1,081 2,461 1,294 13 Viacha-Oruro 35.388 5.059 501 2.450 2,951 2,108 30,329 7,800 11,826 19,626 10,703 22,577 U,811 14 Oruro- Mac:haclmarca 6,205 1,339 135 798 933 406 4,866 948 1,854 2,802 2,064 3,735 2,470 15 Machacamarca-Rio M.llato 58,021 10.225 1,033 7,390 8.423 1.802 47,796 7,668 18,823 26,491 21,305 34,914 23,107 ~ 16 Rio Mulato-Uymi 30.148 6,158 624 3.562 4,186 1,972 23.990 4,338 9,639 13.977 10,013 18,163 11,985 t.J 17 Uymi-Atocha 15,170 2,819 276 1,634 1,910 909 U,351 3,900 3,838 7,738 4,613 9,648 5,522 'i' 18 Atocha-Villaz& 25,041 4.423 436 2,601 3,037 1,386 20,618 7,755 5,824 13,579 7,039 16,616 8,425 21 Viadla-Otarafia 23,842 3,621 351 2,065 2,416 1,205 20,221 8,974 5,U6 14,100 6,U1 16,516 7,326 31 Uymi -ollague 39,393 6.921 703 3.825 4.528 2,393 32,472 7,491 U,830 20,321 12,151 24,849 14,544 41 Oruro-Oxhabanba 36,427 4,482 449 469 918 3,564 31,945 15,857 10,146 26,003 5,942 26,921 9,506 42 Oxhabcmba-Aiquile 12,021 297 27 100 127 170 11,724 9,600 1,265 10,865 859 10,992 1,029 51 Rio Mulato-Potost 15,718 1,483 141 606 747 736 14,235 6,229 4,266 10,495 3,740 11,242 4,476 52 Potcst-Sucre 14,037 652 58 241 299 353 13,385 9,426 2.166 11,592 1,793 11,891 2,146 ANDEAN S'iS'ItM 316.799 48,586 4,845 26,447 31,292 17.294 268,213 91,647 88,752 180,399 87,814 211,691 105,108 61 Viacha-Q.\CK:!ui 31,020 10,463 1.307 4,989 6,296 4,167 20,557 2,886 10,558 13,444 7,113 19,740 11,280 ANDEAN S'isnM (with GUIIqUi) 347,819 59,049 6.152 31.436 37,588 21,461 288,770 94,533 99,310 193,843 94,927 231,431 116,388 71 S~ta eruz-coJ:\J'l'bS 81,082 16,290 3,263 8,375 11,638 4,652 64,792 26,275 23.428 49,703 15,089 61,341 19,741 81 S~ta eruz-Yacuiba 65,245 12,025 2,408 7,055 9,463 2,562 53,220 22.491 17,919 40,410 U,810 49.873 15,372 91 ~ta Cruz-Santa Rosa 6,005 166 32 13 45 121 5,839 4,789 939 5,728 111 5,773 232 EASTERN SYSTEM 152.332 28.481 5,703 15.443 21,146 7.335 U3,851 53.555 42,286 95,841 28,010 116,987 35,345 ENFE: (Andean and Eastern) 500,151 87,530 11,855 46,879 58,734 28,796 412,621 148,088 141,596 289,684 U2~937 348,418 151,733 S<XJRCE: IiJrking Paper 32. . ,. -.. . '" "" '" .. ... ill ... •• ;II ~ ;<1 ;;0  Table 5A-7 BREAKDOWN OF CARGO TRAIN COSTS - 1977 (thousands of $b) (Less than wagon load and wagon load) TOTAL TERMINAL LINEHAUL SECTIONS COOTS CF Total 'F'l.xea l:osts Variable Total Fixea Cos ts Variable Coae l5esIgnaHon SECTION Costs Statl.on Other Total Costs Costs Track Other Total Costs FIXED VARIABLE ----- ------ 11 La Paz-El Al to 1.754 245 26 U8 154 91 1,509 67'7 409 1,086 423 1,240 514 U E1 Alto-V1adla 4,06B 1.009 114 648 762 247 3,059 1,031 854 1,885 1,174 2,647 1,421 13 V1adla-Oruro 37,655 5,703 630 2.689 3,319 2,384 31.952 8,015 U,496 20,511 11.441 23,830 13,825 14 Oruro-MadlacClllarca 6.699 1.513 170 878 1,048 465 5.186 977 1,984 2,961 2,225 4,009 2.690 I 15 Machacamarca-R(o tolllato 62.100 11.531 1.304 7,929 9,233 2,298 50,569 7,881 20.052 27,933 22,636 37,166 24,934 '" 16 R(o Mulato-Uyuni 32,428 6,946 786 3.912 4.698 2,248 25.482 4,458 10.273 14,731 10,751 19,429 U,999 ~ 17 Uyun1-Atocha 16.293 3.179 348 1,783 2.131 1,048 13,114 4,011 4,117 8,U8 4,986 10,259 6,034 I 18 Atod:Ia-Vi llaz6n 26,820 4,990 548 2.843 3,391 1,599 21,830 7,973 6,243 14,216 7,614 17,607 9,213 21 V1ad1a:-Charana 25,396 4.084 442 2,249 2,691 1,393 21.3U 9,203 5,484 14,687 6.625 17,378 8,018 31 Uyun1-o11ague 42,107 7,806 888 4,207 5,095 2,711 34.301 7,689 13,608 21,297 13,004 26,392 15,715 41 Oruro-cochabatba 38,601 5.055 567 707 1,274 3,781 33,546 16,375 10,649 27,024 6,522 28,298 10,303 42 Cbchabatrba-Aiquile 12,419 336 35 107 142 194 12,083 9,835 1,327 11,162 921 11,304 1,115 51 RIo Mulato-Potos1 16,617 1.674 178 662 840 834 14,943 6,439 4,499 10,938 4,005 11,778 4,839 52 Potos1-Sucre 14,554 737 73 260 333 404 13.817 9.617 2,274 11,891 1,926 12,224 2,330 »lDEAN SYSTEM 337,511 54.808 6,109 29,002 35.111 19,697 282.703 94.181 94,269 188,450 94,253 223,561 113,950 61 Viacha-Glmqui 31.102 10,500 1.312 5,008 6.320 4,180 20,602 2,897 10,573 13,470 7,132 19,790 11,312 ANDEAN SYSTEM (with Guaqui) 368,613 65,308 7.421 34.010 41,431 23.877 303.305 97,078 104,842 201,920 101,385 243,351 125,262 71 Santa eruz-<:orl.llbS 92,207 19,348 4,060 9,952 14,OU 5,336 72,859 29,260 26.354 55,614 17,245 69,626 22,581 81 Santa Cruz-Yacu1ba 74,104 14,287 2,996 8,373 11,369 2,918 59.817 25,046 20,113 45,159 14,658 56,528 17,576 91 Santa Cruz-Santa R)sa 6,728 199 42 29 71 128 6,529 5,333 1,058 6,391 138 6,462 266 EAS'l'Em SYSTEM 173.039 33,834 7,098 18,354 25,452 8.382 139,205 59,639 47,525 107,164 32.041 132,616 40,423 ENFE: (Andean and Eastern) 541,652 99,142 14,519 52,364 66,883 32.259 442.510 156,717 152,367 309,084 133,426 375,967 165.685 SOUKE: Worldng Paper 32.  APPENDIX 58 COSTS RELATED TO ROAD TRANSPORT  Appendix 5B COSTS RELATED TO ROAD TRANSPORT TABLES Number Page 5B-1 Annual Expenditures for Interdepartmental 224 Passenger Transport 5B-2 Annual Costs by Cargo Transport, 12,0 ton 225 Capacity Trucks SB-3 Costs of Vehicle Repair and Maintenance 226 5B-4 Analysis of La Paz Road Maintenance Costs 227 5B-S Analysis of Cochabamba Road Maintenance Costs 228 5B-6 Changes in Maintenance Cost Levels-1977 229 to 1985 FIGURES Follows Number Page 5B-1 Interdepart~ental Truck Tariffs 229 5B-2 Interdepartmental Bus Fares 229 5B-3 La Paz Interprovincial Bus Fares 229 5B-4 Oruro Interprovincial Bus Fares 229 5B-5 Santa Cruz Interprovincial Bus Fares 229 5B-6 Chuquisaca Interprovincial Bus Fares 229 5B-7 Cochabamba Interprovincial Bus fares 229 5B-8 Potos! Interprovincial Bus Fares 229 5B-9 Tarija Interprovincial Bus Fares 229 -223-  Table 513-1 ANNUAL F:XPENnr'fIJRFS FOP INTERDEPARTMENTAL PASSENGFll TRANSPORT (in pesos) Routes La Paz La Paz I,a Paz La Paz La Paz Oruro Cochabba. Oruro Cost Components Oruro Cochabba. Potosi Sucre Tarija._ Cochabba. Sta.Cruz ~ Length in km !I 230.0 395.0 560.0 730.0 935.0 225.0 505.0 335.0 Comj2onents Depreciation and interest 298,319 308,827 312,839 288,194 298,319 301,567 343.693 329,173 Maintenance and repair 70,481 104,682 91,018 73,990 82,323 112,422 127,354 106,241 Filters and batteries 13,936 14,633 15,678 11,976 13,065 11,976 19,162 15,678 Fuel 38,480 39,130 38,415 30,030 33,540 32,890 53,300 41,925 Lubricants 14,916 15,168 14,892 l1,640 13,008 12,756 20,664 16,248 Tires and tubes 71,852 68,l10 72,975 53,115 58,380 53,515 106,145 72,975 Washing,greasing and fumigation 9,600 10,080 10,800 8,250 9,000 8,250 13,200 10,800 Fees and salaries 39,200 64,400 64,400 64,400 64,400 39,200 64,400 39,200 Per diem 9,950 17,700 13,400 15,750 13,440 15,860 23,760 14,560 Route sheets, tolls & simi lars 4,176 4,160 3,819 3,920 3,216 3,172 3,564 4,256 :, Garage 5,400 5,400 5,400 5,400 5,400 5,400 5,400 5,400 ~ , Taxes and municipal charges 3,738 3,738 3,738 3,738 3,738 3,738 3,738 3,738 Vehicle insurance 20,838 20,838 20,838 20,838 20,838 20,838 20,838 20,838 Passenger insurance 5,460 5,460 5,460 5,460 5,460 5,460 5,460 5,460 Administrative costs 35,825 35,825 35,825 35,825 35,825 35,825 35,825 35,825 Subtotal 609,615 685,594 677,704 599,587 627,396 629,930 814,423 690,429 Profit 41,262 49,119 47,599 41,320 43,396 43,356 60,337 47,177 Grand Total 683,433 767,270 757,096 673,846 703,348 706,225 906,840 769,494 Seats offered 12,528 6,372 4,824 2,700 2,304 8,784 7,128 8,064 cost/seat 54.55 120.41 156.94 249.57 305.27 80.40 127.22 95.42 Grand Total (I) 385,114 458,443 444,257 385,652 405,029 404,658 563,147 440,321 Cost/seat 30.74 71.95 92.09 142.83 175.79 46.07 79.00 54.60 !I The consigned distancps inclunp anditional journey lengths at terminal points (between 1 and 2 percent of the SNC recorded length bel.ween those poi ntsJ . SOUllCE: Working Paper 33.  Table 5B-2 ANNUAL COSTS BY CARGO TRANSPORT 12,0 TON CAPACITY TRUCKS (in pesos) COMPONENTS KILOHBTP..AGE' U$ED 35,500 40,100 46,900 . Depreciation and interest 218,122 225,388 237,419 Maintenance and repair 61,472 73,157 83,014 Filters and batteries 6,184 6,985 8,170 Fuel 26,075 29,453 34,448 Lubricants 10,104 11,424 13,356 Tires and tubes 36,559 41,254 48,298 Washing ,greasing and furnigation 3,500 4,000 4,700 Fees and salaries 45,000 45,000 45,000 Per diem 8,260 9,380 10,990 Taxes and ~unicipal charges 3,252 3,252 3,252 Garage 5,400 5,400 5,400 Tolls 2,485 2,807 3,283 Vehicle insurance 18,575 18,575 18,575 Cargo Insurance 6,160 6,720 7,080 Administrative Costs 19,170 21,654 25,326 Subtotal 470,318 504,449 548,311 Profits 30,263 33,487 37,307 Grand Total 500,581 537,936 585,618 Cargo transported in tons 768 768 864 Average distance 553.87 625.87 651. 00 Cost per ton 651.80 700.44 677.80 Grand Total Y 282,459 312,548 348,199 Cost per ton 367.78 406.96 403.01 !/ Without depreciation and interest. SOURCE: Working Paper 33. -225-  Table 5B-3 COSTS OF VEHICLE REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE (In $b) UNITS IN REPAIR AND OTHER VEHICLES EACH GROUP PAYLOAD MAINTENANCE LABOR SPARE PARTS EXPENSES SUM (number) (ton) (man-hours) 1. Gasoline En~ine: Jeep 3 0.75 558.0 56,885.75 40,412.30 16,193.35 113,491.40 Pick-up 4 1.00 402.8 34,732.81 50,377.68 10,816.57 95,927.06 Truck 4 3.50 733.5 84,613.31 58,984.40 2'3,457.86167,055.57 Truck 1 6.00 61.5 6,358.66 2,933.53 1,792.12 11,084.31 Dump truck 3 6.10 1,119.8 100,971.93 63,170.96 33,274.46 197,417.35 I IV Dump truck 4 7.60 1,479.8 133,766.73 74,473.58 43,714.74 251,955.05 IV ,0"1 . I 2. Diesel En~ine: Cump truck 2 9.10 221.2 17,597.39 51,997.58 5,119.50 74,714.47 Dump truck 6 9.90 315.8 30,405.80 67,101.53 7,632.23 105,139.56 Truck 1 12.00 685.5 61,587.55 40,104.98 19,889.52 121,582.05 NOTE: - Labor includes the salaries of the senior technical personnel and also of the administrative personnel as well as their social benefits. - Other Expenses includes: depreciation of the workshop equipment, food expenses and miscellaneous. SOURCE: "Registro Diario de Repuestos y Facturas" ("Daily Register of Spare Parts and Invoices") of the Central Workshop (El Alto) and the La Paz District Workshop, National Road Service, Year 1978.  Table 5B-4 1IN1I.LYSIS OF tJ\ PAZ ROI\D ~ COSTS Alternative 1 Alternative 2 IUternative 3 Alternc'!tive 4 BASE LINK TRAFFIC I..ENllT "''1DTH Cost(!) a (2) cc(3} Cost(!) a (2) b(2) ce(3) Cost(l) b(2) 0::(3) Cost'l) a (2 ) b(2) 0::(3) --;;m- (Ians) (iii) ---- - - --- --- --- -------- Paved ftlads 1 842 195.0 7 6009 9779 16282 8861 1.91 10607 1.00 9.97 10184 1.00 20.73 12699 1.00 7.14 11178 1.00 2 170 37.7 7.3 1060 1181 1639 1220 Gravel Roads 1 278 203 6.0 2003 3199 3965 1898 2 162 319 5.3 2356 3454 4151 3310 I 0.97 984 846 12.51 2782 0.99 3 98 105 5.1 607 10.92 1398 0.94 995 14.48 2843 20.19 2655 1.00 '" '" ..... 4 38 540 6.0 2271 3576 3816 3601 • 5 11 754 5.1 1239 3796 3857 3796 E!!.rth Fbads 1 75 154 4.0 322 360 498 1038 2 17 967 3.9 1386 6.33 913 1.00 1365 8.99 8.44 1.00 1505 15.88 852 1.00 2343 42.85 878 1.00 3 5 2388 3.9 3089 2924 3084 3706 (1) In thousands of US$ for 5e'V'eI1 years (2) El:juation is Maintenance Cost per km r W(aT + b) pesos where H width, T r I\IYI' (3) 0:: Correlation Coefficient. S(X)lQ;: Working Paper 3ab. '*' :;;l.i '" . ~< . . .. iIt, !Ii '" Ai ... .. ... .. ... ... . ... ,.. ~ " ft, ;j iii .. .~  Table 5B-5 ANl\LYSIS OF ~ R:lM MA.~ oosrn ALTERNl\TIVE 3 AL~TIVE 4 MSE a(2) b(2) a:(3) a:(3) Cost(l) a(2) 0:::( 3) Cost(l) a(2) b(2) 0:::(3) LINK TRAFFIC Li'1'VllI WIIml -- -- - - - -- - - - -- Paved R::lads 1>Cl 706 104.3 7.3 288 284 284 284 srI 980 284.0 5.5 18829 7.41 13715 .18 30778 30778 30778 11.21 20209 1.00 10.88 42488 10537 10537 sr2 322 97.0 6.6 5576 10537 I Gravel Ibads .... .... a> 1 490 39.3 8.0 903 1230 1363 1649 I 2 180 106.0 6.5 1001 1592 1803 2049 :3 94 120.0 7.4 2032 9.85 2011 .95 3183 10.56 4442 .88 3333 13.07 4232 0.95 3554 17.22 4210 0.97 4 29 37.0 4.5 201 413 365 374 5 8 844.0 4.8 1276 3843 3893 3937 Earth It:lads 1 69 38.0 3.5 55 68 104 245 2 21 150.0 3.5 123 8.76 405 1.00 137 12.08 389 1.00 181 20.70 392 1.00 354 54.48 405 1.00 3 5 1087.0 4.0 675 678 766 1108 (1) In tmusarrls of US$ for SIE!IIe.I'I years. (2) FJ:pJation is Maintenance per lim '" W(aT + b) pesos where W width. T .NJt' (3) 0::: '" Correlation Coefficient. SOURCE: Working Paper 38b.  Table 5B-6 CHANGES IN 1-1AINTENANCE COST LEVELS - 1977 TO 1985 (1978 US. dollars) FACTOR ITEM UNIT COST TYPE 1977 COST 1985 COST 1977 TO 198~· II' Dry Season Grading Km. Financial 48.00 50.39 1. 05 Unpaved Road Economic 49.24 51. 52 1.05 Foreign X. 28.08 29.53 1. 05 3 Spot Regravelling m Financial 6.00 6.29 1. 05 Economic 5.94 6.21 1. 05 Foreign X. 2.21 2.32 1. 05 '11 Gravel Resurfacing m3 Financial 4.30 4.50 1. 05 Economic 4.47 4.67 1. 04 Foreign X. 2.61 2.74 1. 05 .. ;f Routine Maintenance Km. Financial 135.00 141. 68 1.05 Unpaved Road Economic 129.32 135.53 1. 05 '\I Foreign X. 27.16 28.47 1. 05 II 2 Patching m Financial 4.09 4.19 1. 02 ~ Economic 4.04 4.13 1. 02 Foreign X. 2.06 2.09 1. 01 Surface Dressing 2 Financial 2.30 2.37 1. 03 m Economic 2.29 2.47 1. 08 Foreign X. 1. 44 1.48 1.03 " Overlaying m3 Financial 57.00 58.74 1. 03 " Economic 59.60 61. 28 1. 03 Foreign X. 36.28 37.20 1. 03 Rehabilitation Km. Financial 27,660.00 27,717.96 1. 00 Economic 28,085.00 28,110.74 1.00 Foreign X.17,147.00 17,735.60 1. 03 Routine Maintenance Km. Financial 180.00 188.91 1.05 Paved Road Economic 172.07 180.35 1. 05 Foreign X. 36.50 38.25 1. 05 SOURCE: Working paper 38b. -229-  45 40 • 35 - 30 I / • 25 J /' /- •• - c:i- cr • " ..Q 20 ..... /. - i fJ') • .... - • /- • . 0 15 t- • / • '] / o~ 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1.000 1.100 1.200 O;stani?e - Kms. INTERDEPARTMENTAL TRUCK TARIFFS Wb,,.,. 5;milh ani -.-AHociaflH FIGURE 58-1  y .OIl III. 200 / 150_ • / " ,/ • /' /' / 1- / - '/,"/ '/,,, • .ci • ",,,"" 0"/' ' /' / ., , /' ... c 100_ u. • • // .. /' • • ..• / / / 50 _ /' " / .;/. // ~X I 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1.000 ' Distance - Kms. INTERDEPARTMENTAL BUS FARES Wfl,u,. Smith and --AH"ciali!~ FIGURE 5B-2 j  'fungas 'f 60 101- i; ; O· 1,4:J • 50 • • 40 • •• Altiplano .0 • ........ 30 •• • • ... '" • o LL. • • • 20 10 • o .e: 50 100 150 200 250 'X Distance - Kms. LA PAZ INTERPROVINCIAL BUS FARES UAttu,. Smilh and A~ociaftH FIGURE 58-3  y 60 50 40 .0 ...... • ... ::. 30 20 • 10 • 01-<'= tx 50 100 150 200 250 Distance - Kms. ORURO INTERPROVINCIAL BUS FARES Wt/,ur Smith ani -.A.uociale3 FIGURE 58-4  80 • • • 70 60 50 D ..... 40 II '" 1.1.. 30 • 20 • • 10 •• o 150 200 250 50 100 Distance - Kms. Wb.u,5mil~""J~~'! A CRUZ INTERPROVINCIAL BUS FAREF~GURE 58-5  y 60 50 40 ... .G ,0' i' \ -01), 'f.. • • o 30 ............... LI.. 20 • • 10 • ~ IX o 50 100 150 200 250 Distance - Kms. CHUQUISACA INTERPROVINCIAL BUS FARES UY/'UI' Smith and A3ociatl!3 FIGURE 58-6  y 60 50 40 • 1 -~ • ... 30 • 1 c LL ~ • \'0 0" 20 ...J , o· 'I' • 10 • • ••• • Ie • X o 50 100 150 200 250 Distance -Kms. COCHABAMBA INTERPROVINCIAL BUS FARES 'lAAh.ur Smith and .Jh:Jociate:J FI G URE 58-7  y 60 50 • 40 .:. 30 .... c .... 20 10 • 0 1< 50 100 150 200 250 'X Distanc e - Kms. POTOSI INTERPROVINCIAL BUS FARES Wtf,u,. Smilh and ...Al:locialM FIG U R E 58 - 8  y 70 • • 60 50 -I ~ • • /' .ci ..,.... 40 4) .... "?;,O ;. 0 ,01- u.. i' 30 20 • 10 • oV tx 50 100 150 200 250 Distance - Kms. TARIJA INTERPROVINCIAL BUS FARES WR,UI' ~~)mj/h and A!Jodafl'j FIGURE 58-9  APPENDIX 5C COSTS OF RIVER TRANSPORT  Appendix 5C COSTS OF RIVER TRANSPORT TABLES Number Page SC-l Trip Characteristics 231 SC-2 Costs of Transport by River 232 SC-3 Matrices of River Tariffs 233 -230-  Table SC-1 TRIP CHARACTERISTICS (Annual Average) Ptc. Villarroel Trinidad Ptc. Villarroel - Trinidad -Guayaramerm - Guayaramerm Distance (kID) 470 fI~n 1,317 Navigation time downstream (hrs. ) 43 78 120 Journey time downstream (hrs.) 94 170 250 Navigation time upstream (hrs.) 78 143 220 Journey time upstream (hrs.) 94 170 264 "Nonnal" time per round trip (days) 16 22 30 Present time per round trip (days) 34 40 48 "Nonnal" trips per year 23 16 12 Present trips per year(est.)Class A 11 9 6 Present trips per year(est.)Class B 12 10 7 SOURCE: Working Paper 34. -231-  Table 5C-2 COSTS OF TRANSPORT BY RIVER At 1978 Prices CLASS A CLASS B CURRENT ESTIMATES PV-T T-G PV-G PV-T T-G PV-G Annual number of trips 11 9 6 12 10 7 Annual operating hours 1,331 1,989 2,040 1,327 2,023 2,169 Variable costs ($b.OOO) 75.1 111.6 114.4 95.8 146.1 156.6 Total annual costs ($b.OOO) 475.5 512.0 514.8 664.4 714.7 725.2 Annual kilometers 10,340 15,480 15,804 11,280 17,200 18,438 I N Annual ton-krn (000) 525 786 802 1,056 1,610 1,726 w tv Cost per ton-krn ($b.) 0.90 0.65 0.64 0.62 0.44 0.42 I HYPOTHETICAL ESTIMATES ($b.per ton-km) With 50 percent load factor 0.72 0.52 0.51 0.50 0.35 0.34 With 60 percent load factor 0.60 0.43 0.43 0.41 0.29 0.28 Normal utilization*,50 percent LF 0.40 0.34 0.36 0.27 0.23 0.23 Normal utilization*,60 percent LF 0.33 0.28 0.30 0.22 0.19 0.19 As above, fuel $b.5 per It. 0.45 0.39 0.43 0.30 0.26 0.25 * Number of trips as in Table 2, with one additional trip for Class B boats. PV: Puerto Villarroel T: Trinidad G: Guayararner!n SOURCE: Working Paper 34. .. • • ~ • ~ • ~ _. •• •• •• • ~ • I • I • ~  ".1. dSJ J. ~ ;;1\... - " MATRICES OF RIVER TARIFFS ($b/kg) Puerto Rurrena- Puerto Linares baque Salinas Cavinas Riberalta Rio Beni Puerto Linares 0.26 0.37 0.90 1.46 Rurrenabaque 0.33 0.11 0.64 1.20 Puerto Salinas 0.58 0.15 0.53 1.09 Cavinas 1. 23 0.90 0.75 0.56 Riberalta * 2.03 1. 70 1.55 0.80 Puerto Boca del Boca del Puerto Boca del Guayara Villarroel Chapare Almacen Yacuma Siles Itenez mer!n Rio Mamore I N w Puerto Villarroel 0.12 0.32 0.38 0.46 0.55 0.65 w Boca del Chapare 0.12 0.20 0.26 0.34 0.43 0.53 I Almacen (Trinidad) 0.32 0.12 0.18 0.24 0.33 0.43 Boca del Yacuma 0.38 0.17 0.11 0.13 0.20 0.23 Puerto Si1es 0.32 0.21 0.16 0.10 0.10 0.19 Boca del Itenez 0.35 0.20 0.22 0.18 0.10 0.10 Guayaramer!n 0.45 0.36 0.32 0.28 0.20 0.10 * Riberalta is an assembly port where the three rivers, Orthon, Beni and Madre de Dios converqe.  Table 5C-3 (Cont. ) MATRICES OF RIVER TARIFFS Boca del Porvenir Puerto Rico Orthon Riberalta Rio Orthon- Tahuamanu Porvenir 0.30 1.05 1.10 Puerto Rico 0.50 0.75 0.89 Boca del Orthon 1.40 0.90 0.10 Riberalta * 1.50 1.0 0.10 Puerto Heath Chiv~ Camacho Conquista Riberalta I IV w Rio Madre de Dios ~ I Puerto Heath 0.10 0.58 0.66 1.0 Chivl! 0.10 0.48 0.56 0.90 Camacho 0.70 o .6R 0.10 0.42 Conquista 0.82 0.80 0.1? 0.34 Riberalta * 1. 30 1.28 0.60 0.48 * Riberal ta is an assembly port near where the three rivers Orthon, Beni and Madre de Dios converge. SOURCE: Working Paper 34. .. ... ,;. ... ....- .. ~ .. Ai .. .. ... ... .. '" III "" <II "- .. .  APPENDIX 5D COSTS OF AIR TRANSPORT  Appendix 5D COSTS OF AIR TRANSPORT TABLES Ntmtber Page 5D-1 Annual Mileages Flown 236 5D-2 Block Times and Flights on Routes Operated 237 by LAB 5D-3 Operating Costs of Regular Air Transport 238 5D-4 Costs of Regular Air Transport 239 5D-5 Aircraft Used for Non-Regular Transport and 240 Their Annual Flying Hours 5D-6 Main Routes of Non-Regular Air Transport 241 5D-7 Meat Carriers 242 5D-8 Estimated Prices of Aircraft Components 243 5D-9 Payloads of Aircraft Used for Non-Regular 244 Transport 5D-10 Use of AASANA Airports, 1979 245 5D-11 Landing Fees 246 5D-12 Costs for Freight Service 247 5D-13 Airport Administration 248 5D-14 Costs of Runway Operation and Maintenance 249 5D-15 Costs of Air Navigation 250 5D-16 Costs for Passenger Service 251 5D-17 Costs of Service to Aircraft in the Airport 252 -235-  Table 5D-1 ANNUAL MILEAGES FLOWN (thousand of miles) YEAR: 1978 LINES BEING OPERATED TYPE OF AIRCRAFT NATIONAL INTERNATIONAL SUM F - 27 1.108,26 1.108,26 B 727 - 100 1.463,87 737,44 2.201,31 B 727 - 200 436,95 1.376,11 1.813,06 B 707 117,68 1/ 1.059,13 1.176,81 3.126,76 3.172,68 6.299,44 1/ Estimated. SOURCE: Cost sheets & "Valores de las velocidades ponderadas" of LAB aircraft, year 1978. -236-  'I " Table 5D-2 BLOCK TIMES AND FLIGHTS ON ROUTES OPERATED BY LAB " 41 ~ TYPE OF AIRCRAFT AND ROUTES BLOCK TIMES OF FLIGHTS (hrs) ( %) , ~ F - 27: • Secondary routes: ~ - From the northwest 0,78 52,60 - From the south 0,64 35,30 - From the northeast 0,66 12,10 .',' ' '/ Average values 0,71 100,00 , '~ B 727 - 100: , ~ - Domestic routes 0,62 66,50 I '" 33,50 4 - International routes 2,13 Average values 0,82 100,00 " B 727 - 200: - Domestic routes 0,62 24,10 - International routes 2,54 75,90 Average values 1,45 100,00 NOTE: The B707 performance is not included, because it is a cargo pl ane • SOURCE: LAB's itinerary in force until the last quarter of 1978. -237- .. • 11 . •• Table 50-3 I. OPERATING COSTS OF REGULAR AIR TRANSPORT (LLOYD AEREO BOLIVIANO) (in US$/hour) YEAR 1978 TYPE OF AIRCRAFT F - 27 B 727-100 B 727-200 B 707 Performance: Operation in hrs/year 1.150 2.100 2.750 2.850 - Average block times in 0,71 0,82 1,45 hours Items: 1. Capital service 196,20 463,80 814,00 510,10 2. Reserve for overhaul 54,10 125,50 205,40 259,10 3. Line and maintenance 259,50 335,40 347,00 412,60 4 . Fuel: - Local 117,90 452,10 347,20 406,20 - Imported 173,50 380,90 474,40 5. Crew 64,40 98,60 112,20 116,00 6. Landing fees: - Local 19,90 153,30 87,80 83,30 - Abroad 47,90 157,50 188,50 7. Insurance 1/ 16,20 53,10 74,90 42,30 8. Passenger services - Internal 15,60 79,90 100,90 - External 25,50 131,40 9. Perdiem - Internal 12,30 51,40 25,70 8,50 - External 25,80 77,10 76,50 10. Administrative costs - National 243,70 521,20 352,10 394,80 - External 200,10 387,30 390,80 Sum 999,80 2.807,10 3.601,40 3.363,10 - Internal 476,80 1.356,50 1.025,90 1.008,80 - External 523,00 1.450,60 2.575,50 2.354,30 Imported component 52,30% 51,70% 71,50% 70,00% Of the whole 61,90% 1/ Includes insurance service on ground facilities, as well as that for Aerocommander. SOURCE: Working Paper 35. -238-  Table 5D-4 COSTS OF REGULAR AIR TRANSPORT c il (in percent) TYPE OF AIRCRAFT F - 27 B 727-100 B 727-200 B 727 Performance: - Operation in hrs/year 1.150 2.100 2.750 2.850 - Average block tirres in 0,71 0,82 1,45 hours Fixed Costs: - Capital service 19,60 16,50 22,60 17,30 - Crew 6,70 3,50 3,10 3,40 - Insurance 1,60 1,90 2,10 1,20 - Administrative costs 24,40 25,70 20,50 23,40 Subtotal 52,30 47,60 48,30 45,30 Variable Costs: - Maintenance and repair 25,70 12,00 9,60 12,30 -Reserves for overhaul 5,40 4,50 5,70 7,70 - Fuel and Lubricants 11,80 22,30 20,20 24,10 - Landing fees 2,00 7,30 6,80 8,10 - Perdiem and others 1,60 3,60 6,50 - Passenger services 1,20 2,70 2,90 2,50 Subtotal 47,70 52,40 51,70 54,70 Total 100,00 100,00 100,00 100,00 I, c SOURCE: "Costas del Transporte A~reo Regular", ana 1978. , c -239- !.  Table 5D-5 AIRCRAFT USED FOR NON-REGULAR TRANSPORT AND THEIR ANNUAL FLYING HOURS TYPE OF AIRCRAFT 'YEAR 1977 YEAR 1978 NQ Hrs./ Year % NQ Hrs./ Year % Boeing B-17 1 367:39 3.10 1 10:31 0.00 Lockheed: B-25 1 62:19 0.50 Douglas . C-47 3 807:3D 6.70 4 1.185:24 8.70 DC- 3 1 163:13 1.40 1 185:25 1.40 C-54 2 1.250:07 10.40 2 2.300:05 16.90 DC- 6 3 573:55 4.80 1 538:33 3.90 Curtiss c-45 11 5.616:55 46.80 11 5.420:35 39.70 Convair 240 1 299: 28 2.50 1 876:38 6.40 440 5 1.796:47 15.00 3 1.936:06 14.20 r~artin 404 1 1.060:24 8.80 1 1.194:48 8. 29 11.993:18 100.00 25 13.649:05 100.00 SOURCE: Monthly balance of non-regular air transport companies. Years 1977 and 1978. -240-  ~ ,~ * Table 5D-6 ., ;1 MAIN ROUTES OF NON-REGULAR AIR TRANSPORT '~ Year 1978 Ii ROUTER LENGTH FLIGHTS -TIME TRAFFIC •• Hrs. NQ Hr. :min. % 1:/ ,II La Paz/San Borja 1:01 957 976:06 7.15 ""I La Paz/Trinidad 1:22 534 731:45 5.36 l! La Paz/San Francisco ~/ 1:29 395 585:56 4.29 ,~ Paz/Senti (Beni) 1:15 409 503:41 3.73 Cochabamba/Trinidad 1:13 293 331:15 2.79 La Paz/San J'.1an 1:32 2 354:49 2.60 «'. La z/Santa Rosa 1:10 273 317:00 2.32 ,.~ La Paz/Espiritu 1:13 250 302:29 2.22 ' ~ Paz/El Peru (Beni) 1:14 203 :39 1.89 Cochabamba/Trinidad/Uncla 1:02 241 243:52 1.82 • La Paz/Nieves 1:25 157 222:33 1.63 1 La Paz/Santa Pilla (Yacur.1a) 1:32 139 213:44 1.56 Paz/San Carlos 1/ l: 179 212:38 1. :j '. Cochabamba/Desengano 1:16 145 133:07 1.34 "'II La Paz/Palmira 1:43 88 150:40 1.10 1:15 4.500 5.647:14 41.37 '. " 1/ In relation to total flying hours. 2/ San Francisco, Naciff ~ 3/ San Carlos, Gutierrez. SOURCE: Monthly balance of flying hours of the non-regular air transport companies. Year 1978. -241-  Table 5D .... 7 HEAT CARRIERS 1/ AIRPORT CATEGORIES MAXIMUM 'TAKE""OFF GROSS ~GHT First Second Third Fourth Ton. pesos/ton 7.0 a 25.0 13.20 12.00 7.20 6.00 I 25.1 a 50.0 26.40 .80 N 15.60 13.20 .t>- N .1 a 100.0 31.20 27.60 21.60 19.20 I 1/ Valid only for meat carrier; the fee for other cargo units is higher, - approximately by 40 peroent~ SOURCE: Supreme Decree No. 15523 of June 2, 1978.  'I .. Table SD-e ESTIMATED PRICES OF AIRCRAFT COMPONENTS . - (In thousands of US$) TYPE OF AIRCRAFT ENGINES P~RS ERSEIu!':GE SUM Douglas: C-47 20.0 6.5 46.5 73.0 DC- 3 20.0 6.5 49.0 75.5 :-54 42.0 16.7 7C.0 .7 DC- /'" 0 70.0 22.0 46.0 133.0 Curtiss: C-46 36.0 9.5 84.5 130.0 Convair: 440 35.5 10.5 73.0 119.0 404 .0 10.5 75.0 120.5 SOURCE: Insurance companies. -243-  Table 50-9 PAY LOADS OF AIRCRAFT USED FOR NON-REGULAR TRANSPORT Values in kg TYPE OF AIRCRAFT AT SEA LEVEL PLAINS MOUNTAINS 82: 8-54 8,700 6,5 40 3,850 n::- 6 11,700 8,790 4,430 ~'",1 ~ ss: c-4S 6,350 4,770 2,770 r: 440 5,350 3,920 1,740 404 5,00:) 3,785 1,965 SOURCE: Working Paper 35a. -244-  'II ,. " Table 50-10 il Cl.ass 1 USE OF AASANA AIRPORTS, 1979 LANDINGS Class 2 Class 3 Class 4 PASSENGERS (OOOs) Int1. Dom. FREIGHT (tons 000) '. lit 'III LA PAZ REGION La Paz 1,607 4,783 4,233 3,294 170.9 472.4 34.8 ,. San Borja 3 73 701 2,970 6.3 3.8 II Oruro 1 55 316 3.5 0.9 • 4 other air- ports Total 1,610 49 4,906 77 5,066 617 7,197 170.9 3.6 485.8 0.2 39.7 '.;I III SANTA CRUZ REGION AI Santa Cruz 1,166 3,544 767 10,986 99.6 416.6 8.3 San Ignacio de 12 4 30 953 6.9 0.1 II Velazco Concepci6n 4 5 338 6.1 0.1 " fl Asunci6n 165 4.8 0.1 4 other air- 17 25 89 2,547 1.1 0.6 • ports '!I Total 1,195 3,577 891 14,989 99.6 435.5 9.2 /I COCHABAMBA REGION Cochabarnba 73 3,324 5,637 5,056 30.0 435.6 9.7 '. II Sucre 460 74 779 78.0 0.4 Tarija Yacuiba 1 18 1 104 47 983 374 32.4 6.6 0.3 0.1 "'• . "~ 2 other air- 1 2 378 564 12.1 0.1 ports Total 75 3,805 6,240 7,756 30.0 564.7 10.6 TRINIDAD REGION iii Trinidad 2 975 1,168 17,062 111.6 5.5 '~ Guayaramerin 1 82 1,903 20.8 0.4 Riberalta 20 337 2,692 14 .6 1.2 6 other air- 39 151 12,784 11.4 8.3 '. ports Total 2 1,035 1,738 34,441 158.4 15.4 . " Total 2,882 13,323 13,935 64,383 300.5 1,644.4 74.9 ===== ====== ======= -===.-= -=-=- ======== ====== SOURCE: Working Paper 35b. -245- '~ t, Table 5D-11 LANDING FEES ($b) CATEGORY OF AIRPORT 1 2 3 4 Maximum Gross Weight - 7 tons, international 420 350 280 240 domestic 134 109 84 59 7.1-18 tons, international, per ton 56 49 42 35 domestic, per ton 19 16 12 8 18.1-80 tons, international, per ton 67 65 62 60 domestic, per ton 34 30 26 23 80.1-150 tons, international, per ton 80 80 78 75 domestic, per ton 50 45 40 35 Over 150 tons, international, per ton 92 86 83 80 domestic, per ton 70 60 50 45 Meat Carriers: Maximum Gross Weight 7-25 tons, per ton 13 12 7 6 25.1-50 tons, per ton 26 23 16 13 50.1-100 tons, per ton 31 28 22 19 Air Taxis: pay a fixed tariff of $b 58 which includes air navigation charges. SOURCE: Working Paper 35b. -246-  Table 50-12 COSTS FOR FREIGHT SERVICE (pesos) OTHER WAREHOUSE WAREHOUSE REGION SALARIES LABOR COSTS COSTS COSTS OTHER COSTS TOTAL COSTS La Paz 786,835 3,618,896 Braniff Lufthansa LAB & others 4,405,731 Santa Cruz 491,772 2,261,810 Braniff Lufthansa LAB & others 2,753,582 Cochabamba 393,417 1,809,482 Braniff Lufthansa LAB & others 2,202,899 I I'>J 4:>- Trinidad 295,063 1,357,052 Braniff Lufthansa LAB & others 1,652,115 .......J I 1,967,087 9,047,240 11,014,327 ========= --------- --------- ---------- Note: The costs were extracted from the accounts for 1976-1977 and National Budget 1979. SOURCE: Working Paper 35b. ... "" "' ... ,,, :a ;6 ~" '* ,i·  Table 50-13 AIRPORT ADMINISTRATION (pesos) ADMlNISTPATION MA!N'rEN7-\NCE IMPROVEMFNT OTHER IAOOR REX2Irn OOSTS MATERIALS SAlARIES COSTS COSTS DEPREX:IATION OOSTS 'IDrAL COSTS I.a. Paz 268,351 142,419 1,695,098 683,940 547,083 1,517,933 6,173,094 11,027,918 Santa Cruz 202,537 187,863 613,251 427,463 21,242 920,416 2,861,522 5,234,294 Cochabanba 303,862 113,222 772,291 341,970 3,592 669,927 3,812,617 6,017,481 Trinidad 162,497 131,656 396,997 256,478 70,628 1,725,447 1,780,412 4,524,115 I IV 'lbtal 937,247 575,160 3,477,637 1,709,851 642,545 4,833,723 14,627,645 26,803,808 .&:>0 00 I SOURCE: Working Paper 35b.  Table 50-14 COSTS OF RUNWAY OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE (pesos) MAIN'l'ENANCE COSTS OF o)STS OF, RENT OF HEAVY 'J.'O'INJ REG~ O)STS SUPPLIES SAI.A.RIES DEPRECIATION .HATERIALS EQJIft.1ENT COSTS La Paz 4,102,162.18 1,438,303.05 853,842.52 38,033.91 6,911.80 89,406.83 6,528,660.29 Santa Cruz 2,563,851.36 184,427.92 100,024.76 13,525.45 302.48 33,937.89 2,896,069.86 COchabamba 2,051,081.10 497,280.77 258,195.23 20,288.19 7,122.69 2,833,967.98 I TrWdad 1,538.310.81 337,277.12 79,388.16 6,762.71 362.97 2,117,082.14 4,079,183.91 '" 01:>0 ~ I 'lbtal 10,255,405.45 2,457,288.86 1,291,450.67 78,610.26 14,699.94 2,240,426.86 16,337,882.04 SOURCE: working Paper 35b • iiW, 4·;j; .po< .,.JIiiI, . . . . r.t- ••.• *:iI k • • • *."!I .-Y~ II .. '"  Table 5D-15 COSTS OF AIR NAVIGATION (pesos) ADMINISTRATION ~ OTHER IAOOR ROOION SAIARIES COSTS COSTS DEPRECIATION COSTS MA.TERIALS 'lU1'AL COSTS La Paz 1,588,588.48 877,861.46 364,188.27 7,682,748,56 7,306,404.96 634,205.26 18,453,996.99 Santa Cruz 997,476.65 548,663.41 227,617.67 4,801,717,85 4,587,700.61 396,378.29 11,559,554.48 Cochabamba 988,821.29 438,930.73 182,094.13 3,841,374.28 4,547,891.96 317,102.63 10,316,215.02 I "-l Vl Trinidad 951.599.07 329,198.05 136,570.60 2,881,030.72 4,376,695.57 237,826.97 8,912,920.98 0 I 'lbtal 4,526,485.49 2,194,653.65 910,470.67 19,206,871.41 20,818,693.10 1,585,513.15 49,242,687.47 SOURCE: Working Paper 35b.  Table 5D-16 COSTS FOR .PASSENGER SERVICE (pesos) OTHER LABOR REGION SALARIES COSTS MATERIALS TOTAL COSTS La Paz 1,143,675.19 5,260,.112.47 271,802.26 6,675,589.92 Santa Cruz 379,365.53 1,744,818.26 169,876.41 2,294,060.20 I Cochabamba 303,492.28 1,395,853.95 135,901.13 1,835,247.36 "-> IJ1 I-' Trinidad 227,619.04 1,046,889.68 101,925.84 1,376,434.56 I Total 2,054,152.04 9,447,674.36 679,505.64 12,181,332.04 ============ ------------- ------------- ---------- ---------- ============= SOURCE: Working Paper 35b. o.M!. iiiib-,pi • • jI.. JdI • P!6.iii"dI •• ~.Iii.:Ji." iJij'- • • " Ii: a.,a s'it  TRble 5D-17 COSTS OF SERVICES TO AIRCRAFT IN THE AIRPORT (pesos) .... W\INTENANCE ADMINISTRACIOO aIHER I.AOOR AIRPORl'S SMARIES COSTS DEPRE:X:IATIOO COSTS COSTS rorAL COSTS La Paz 3,260,615.97 30,199.91 191,019.10 585,240.98 14,996,571. 48 19,063,647.44 Santa Cruz 263,402.82 365,775.61 1,211,470.24 1,840,648.67 eochabanba 133,274.10 292,620.49 612,968.40 1,038,862.99 I Trinidad 104,868.84 219,465.36 482,323.91 806,658.11 N (JI N I 'lbtal 3,762,161.73 30,199.91 191,019.10 1,463,102.44 17,303,334.03 22,749,817.21 SOURCE: Working Paper 35b.  APPENDIX 5E OTHER ASPECTS OF TRANSPORT COSTS  Appendix 5E OTHER ASPECTS OF TRANSPORT COSTS TABLES Number Page 5E-l Costs and/or Prices 254 5E-2 Price and Cost Indices 255 5E-3 Actual 'Transportat'ion Costs for Various 256 niaffieter Crude Oil Pipelines, 1977 -253-  Table 5E-l COSTS AND/OR PRICES YEARS 19-- SOC"roR UNITS ..!Q.. ~ .E-...£...§L ~ ...§.L ..£L .£!L ..!L .2Q.... .2L ..IL ...1l... ....2L 2L .2L ..JL .2L 79 Manual labor $b/day 17 18 19 19 20 21 23 34 34 35 35 37 64 75 75 86 96 98 100 100 Mechanical equip. $b/day 660 660 680 700 730 900 1050 1300 1300 1400 1400 1500 2250 2700 3400 3900 4570 5000 5390 6100 other materials $b/ton 15001500 1500 1520 1530 153015501600 1600 1680 2350 3000 3700 4520 5550 6350 8000 95001050011750 Fuel $b/barrel 35 36 33 36 32 33 29 25 32 33 34 34 59 83 304 269 279 300 296 460 Construction tb::>usand $b/day 70 70 70 80 90 90 100 120 120 130 150 160 230 280 350 400 480 540 590 660 SOURCE: W'brking Paper 40. I "" U1 A I  Table 5E-2 PRICE AND COST INDICES YEAR.S 19-- SEX.:"IOR 60 61 62 ~~~~~..§!L~2L~..E...-2L..2L~~..:J.L..2!L..1L Manual labor 0.17 0.18 0.19 0.190.20 0.21 0.23 0.35 0.35 0.36 0.36 0.38 0.65 0.76 0.76 0.88 0.98 1.00 1.02 1.02 Mechanical equip. 0.13 0.13 0.14 0.14 0.15 0.18 0.21 0.26 0.26 0.28 0.28 0.30 0.45 0.54 0.68 0.80 0.95 1.00 1.07 1.30 other materials 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.17 0.17 0.18 0.24 0.31 0.40 0.47 0.58 0.67 0.84 1.00 1.10 1.23 Fuel 0.12 0.12 0.11 0.12 0.11 0.12 0.10 0.08 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.20 0.30 1.01 0.90 0.90 1.00 0.98 1.53 I IV Construction 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.15 0.17 0.17 0.18 0.22 0.22 0.24 0.28 0.30 0.42 0.52 0.65 0.74 0.89 1.00 1.09 1.22 c..n c..n Cost of l1viJlg' 0.16 0.18 0.19 0.19 0.22 0.25 0.28 0.31 0.47 0.33 0.34 0.36 0.38 0.50 0.82 0.88 0.92 1.00 - I SOOIa: ~kiJlg' Paper 40 • ii> .. .. .,. ...... ... '" .. • _ 6_" • • _."" • ..... 41':1 .... . . ~ ~ .,. ... .. 'iIIi  Table 5E-3 AC'IUAL TRANSPORTATION COSTS FOR VARIOUS DIAMETER CRUDE OIL PIPELINES, 1977 . PIPELINE DIAMETER DISTANCE TRANSPORTATION COST TAANSPQRTATICN COST 3-kIn) (inches) (km) (pesos per m3 ) (pesos per 100 m Camiri-Santa Cruz 4.5 271 31.26 11.54 Camiri-Cochabamba 6.625 523 169.60 32.43 I Santa Cruz-Sica Sica-Arica 10-12 971 88.23 9.09 tv V! 0\ I SOURCE: Informe Estadistico 1978 (Statistical Report, 1978) Gerencia Industrial YPFB, Cochabamba, 1978.  APPENDIX 6A ROAD USER CHARGES  Appendix 6A ROAD USER CHARGES TABLES Number 6A-l Maintenance Costs/Vehicle-Kilometer - Paqe 258 6A'-2 Breakdown of Maintenance Costs 259 6A-3 Tax Revenues from the Sale of 260 Hydrocarbons 6A-4 Municipal Taxes on Vehicles 261 -257-  Table 6A-1 MAINTENANCE COSTS/VEHICLE-KILOMETER (1977 $b) YEAR EXPENDITURES TRAFFIC INDEX (Million $b) (Million veh-km) ( $b/veh-km) 1975 230.22 711.75 0.32 1976 252.97 839.50 0.30 1977 326.53 912.50 0.36 1978 353.66 1,022.00 0.35 1979 365.14 1/ 1975/1978 1,174.86 3,485.75 0.34 !/ The data on vehicle traffic for 1979 were still being revised. SOURCE: "Historical Data of TPD", National Road Service, Technical Management of Planning. -258-  Table 6A-2 BREAKDOWN OF MAINTENANCE COSTS (percent) ITEM FIXED SITM - Personal services 26.80 25.71 52.51 - Construction materials 0.22 6.70 6.92 - Fuel and lubricants 1.46 5.83 7.29 - Tires, spare parts and equipment accesories 1.49 6.31 7.80 ,~ - Other supplies (paper and office material) 1.22 0.54 1. 76 - Trips and per diem 0.83 2.04 2.87 - Other costs 1/ 2.69 4.22 6.91 - Financial costs 5.36 0.19 5.55 - Depreciation of fixed facili- ties and office equipment 0.63 0.11 0.74 - Depreciation of road equipmentO.94 6.71 7.65 Sum 41.64 58.36 100.00 , " 1/ Communications, power, publications, taxes, rent for housing and equipment, various fees, etc. SOURCE: Annual Balances of the National Road Service. " -259-  Table 6A-3 TAX REVENUES FROM THE SALE OF HYDROCARBONS ($b millions) YEAR 12,5 % TAX ON GASOLINE 3% TAX ON DIESEL l.l SUM. 1970 25.44 1.41 26.85 1971 25.93 1. 53 27.46 1972 27.65 1. 75 29.40 1973 35.40 2.56 37.96 1974 38.83 3.04 41. 87 1975 47.44 4.24 51. 68 1976 70.69 8.25 78.94 1977 75.45 10.25 85.70 1978 81.37 11. 64 93.01 1979 101. 99 13.21 115.20 1980 Y 220.00 175.00 395.00 y Estimated figures; the new scale of prices in force since December 3, 1979 is taken into account as well as the amendment introduced on the tax on diesel that has been increased from 3 percent to 12.50 percent. SOURCE: "Ten Years of Petroleum Statistics in Bolivia", National Hydrocarbons Company, September, 1980. -260-  Table 6A-4 MUNICIPAL TAXES ON VEHICLES ($b millions) PRIVATE SERVICE PUBLIC SERVICE YEAR VEHICLES VEHICLES SUr-L 1974 5.92 .7 n 6.E2 1975 9.81 .99 10.80 1976 1~.3G ~.O9 21.45 1977 13.36 1. 88 15.24 1978 20.98 2.98 23.9E 1~7~ !/ 21.t12 3.n3 24.45 !/ Amounts subject to approval. SOURCE: Department of Contribution of the La Paz Municipality, July 1980. .. -261-  APPENDIX 68 FINANCIAL ANALYSIS OF AASANA  Appendix 6B FINANCIAL ANALYSIS OF AASANA TABLES Number 6B-l Revenues from Landing Fees, In-Flight 263 Protection and Other Fees, 1977-1980 6B-2 Revenues and Fees on the Use of 264 Airport Facilities 6B-3 Investments in Aeronautical Infrastructure 265 6B-4 Revenues from Landing Fees and In-Flight 266 Protection and Others, 1980 6B-5 Revenues from Landing Fees and In-Flight 267 Protection and Others (Percent) -262-  Table 6B-1 REVENUES FROM LANDING FEES 1 IN FLIGHT PROTECTION AND OTHER FEES ($b Millions} Period: 1977-1980 1/ SERVICES AND/OR FEES 1977 1978 1979 1980 Y Revenues from Operation: - From landing 43.08 56.20 63.63 65.45 - From route and in Flight Protection 7.77 10.36 15.13 19.37 - From Communications 1. 94 1. 85 1. 56 1. 37 - From Apron 1/ 1.18 1. 94 1. 95 1. 35 - From Publicity .34 .22 0.92 0.98 - From Rent of Stand 2.68 2.47 2.96 1. 72 - From Airport Use: a) Domestic passengers 5.61 7.87 10.76 10.12 b) International Pass. 12.07 14.71 17.57 22.54 - From tolls 0.48 0.56 0.63 0.84 Subtotal 75.15 96.18 115.11 123. 74 Revenues from other Sources 0.51 0.53 than Operation i/ Total 75.66 96.71 1/ Only from the first semester of 1980. 2/ Includes surcharqes on night and holidays services. "!/ Only from surrogation. !I not Includes debit notes of passed years, sale of materials in use, etc. SOURCE: General Balance and Financial Status of AASANA, years 1977 and 1978; Statistics Division (AASANA),' years 1979 and 1980. -263-  Table 6B-2 REVENUES AND FEES ON THE USE OF AIRPORT FACILITIES (Percent) Period: 1977 - 1980 FEES k~D SERVICES PERCENT Aircraft Services: 70.74 • - From Landing !I 52.89 - From Route and Flight Protection 15.65 - From Communications 1.11 - From Apron (surrogated) ~/ 1. 09 Passenger Fees: 26.40 - Domestic Flights 8.18 - International Flights 18.22 Other Fees and Services: 2.96 /I - Publicity 0.79 - Rent of Stand 1. 39 - Toll 1/ 0.68 Sum 100.00 !I Includes surcharges on night and holidays services. !/ Comprises only surrogation revenues • .~/ In the access road to the airport (vehicles). SOURCE: Working Paper 157. -264- /I /I  Table 6B-3 INVESTMENTS IN AERONAUTICAL INFRASTRUCTURE ($b Millions) Period: 1975-1979 ITEMS 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 Studies 2.14 19.09 23.77 17.73 17.15 Construction and Improve- ment Works 104.90 59.54 42.19 110.46 32.30 Complementary Facilities (Buildings, walls,etc) 6.07 5.55 14.08 11. 77 Facilities for the Control of Air 0.35 0.92 6.76 3.32 15.10 Transit Sum: 113.46 85.10 86.80 131.51 76.32 Internal Source 108.98 85.10 86.80 86.90 62.77 External Source 4.48 44.61 13.55 SOURCE: "Programming and Implementation of Projects on Aeronautical Infrastructure", period 1975-1979, Plmmtnq Department of AASANA (Table 1 of Appendix II), complemented with the relative investments on the airports of Sucre (Alto Tucsupaya) and Cobija (under construction). -265-  Table 68-4 REVENUES FROM LANDING FEES AND IN FLIGHT PROTECTION AND OTHERS ($b Millions) Period: By Semester (1980) IN ROUTE PA~~ENr;ERS STANDS AIRPORTS LANDINGS SF.RV~ ,COMMUNlc... .Internatlo~ u.uomeSt:rc... RENT PUBLICITY SUM La Paz 30,141. 49 13,488.50 190.79 12,265.25 2,533.70 986.49 772 .17 60,378.39 Santa Cruz 16.167.69 2,633.32 97.24 6,665.25 2,332.22 334.67 24.57 28,254.96 Cochabamba 6,288.97 97.57 512.23 2,019.50 2,438.80 49.23 20.09 11,426.39 Trinidad 1,806.72 1. 24 636.57 76.43 2,520.96 Riberalta 159.98 4.85 81. 88 22.72 269.43 Sucre 1,149.39 10,07 424,06 29,08 1,612.60 Tarija 122.66 0.39 185.81 308.86 Guayaramer!n 134.65 2.36 116.78 253.79 Santa Ana 81.27 31.28 14.56 2.75 129.85 San Borja 187.63 4.71 35.96 0.69 228.99 Oruro 45.56 86.04 19.91 151.51 Yacuiba 40.97 5.97 37.51 84.45 I Cobija 41. 58 1. 66 25.51 68.75 ""' '" Camiri 64.36 6.51 58.79 129.66 '" I Apol0 6.01 6.01 Ascenci6n de Guarayos 10.99 4.10 27.92 43.01 Magdalena 14.60 10.12 24.72 Concepci6n 12.19 .90 4.81 34.13 52.03 San Ignacio de Velasco 10.11 12.05 40.01 62.17 San Ignacio de Moxos 32.66 .90 0.50 20.68 54.74 Rurrenabaque 7.31 22.66 29,91 San JoaquHn 11.10 4.19 13.75 29.04 San Javier Robor~ San Jos~ Puerto SuArez 13.11 O. Bl 7.96 21.88 Reyes 22.73 22.73 Potos! 8.36 25.10 17.96 51. 42 Sum 56,553.35 16,221.19 1,012.91 20,950.00 9.159.98 1,502.06 816.83 106,216.32 SOURCE: Statistics Department,AASANA, September 1980 .-. .. .. .. II> ,Ii .' Iii .. ,iii . . .. .•• II! ;II ., . II! ,. .. . II • Iii. \I> • "', " III • 18(.  Table 6B-5 REVENUES FROM LANDING FEES AND IN FLIGHT PROTECTION AND OTHERS (Percent) Period: By Semester (1980) IN ROUTE ~~~~EN~EPS STANDS AIRPORTS LANDINGS SERVICE COMMONIC. International PUBLICITY __SUM _ _ Ik,unestic J.Y;NI La Paz 28.38 12.70 0.18 11. 55 2.39 0.93 0.73 56.86 Santa Cruz 15.22 2.48 0.09 6.28 2.20 0.32 0.02 26.61 Cochabamba 5.92 0.09 0.48 1. 90 2.30 0.05 0.02 10.76 Trinidad 1.70 0.60 0.07 2.37 Riberalta 0.15 0.01 0.08 0.02 0.26 Sucre 1. 08 0.01 0.40 0.03 1.52 Tarija 0.12 0.17 0.29 Guayaramer!n 0.13 0.11 0.24 Santa Ana 0.08 0.03 0.01 0.12 San Borja 0.18 0.03 0.21 I w Oruro 0.04 0.08 0.02 0.14 0\ "-oJ I Yacuiba 0.04 0.01 0.04 0.09 Cobija 0.04 0.02 0.06 Camiri 0.06 0.01 0.06 0.13 Apolo 0.01 0.01 Ascenci6n de Guarayos 0.01 0.01 O. 03 0.05 Magdalena 0.01 0.01 0.02 Concepci6n 0.01 0.03 0.04 San Ignacio de Velasco 0.01 0.04 0.06 San Ignacio de Moxos 0.03 0.02 0.05 Rurrenabaque 0.01 0.02 0.03 San Joaqu!n 0.01 0.01 0.02 San Javier 0.01 Robor~ San Jos~ Puerto Sulirez 0.01 0.01 Reyes 0.02 0.02 PotosI 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.05 Sum 53.25 15.27 0.95 19.73 8.62 1.41 0.77 100.00 SOURCE: Statistics Department, AASANA, September, 1980.  APPENDIX 6C FINANCIAL ANALYSIS OF RAIL TRANSPORT  Appendix 6C FINANCIAL ANALYSIS OF RAIL TRANSPORT TABLES Number Page 6C-l Revenues from Operation 269 6C-2 Revenues from Operation (Percent) 270 6C-3 Operating Expenses 271 6C-4 Total Expenses 272 6C-5 Utilization Indices 273 -268  Table 6C-l REVENUES FROM OPERATION 1/ .($b millions) Period: 1976/1979 Andean System: ITEM/YEAR 1976 1977 1978 1979 Passengers 48.20 51. 04 50.60 50.72 Cargo 285.38 351. 88 405.87 412.74 Baggage and Parcels 6.94 7.29 9.50 10.21 Complementary Cargo Servo 25.64 31,21 18.54 34.42 Sum 366.16 441.42 484.52 508.09 Eastern System: ITEM/YEAR 1976 1977 1978 1979 Passengers 23.73 29.62 34.15 30.17 Cargo 188.72 195.70 205.55 201.98 Baggage and Parcels 6.23 8.23 11.31 14.92 Complementary Cargo Servo 11. 63 20.77 18.30 24.46 Sum 230.32 254.32 269.31 271.53 !/ Does not include revenues from other sources than operation: Sale of radiotelephone and electricity services to third parties, repair and maintenance of client's wagons and sale of material not in use. SOURCE: "Appendix I: Revenues by Items in the Andean and Oriental Systems, Period: 1976/1979". -269-  II Table 6C-2 REVENUES FROM OPERATION ·1/ (percent) Period: 1976/1979 SYSTEMS ITEM Andean Eastern Passengers 11 29 11 44 - First Class and similar 7.36 7 ,,59 - - - Second Class Fares sold during the trip Various services 3 .57 0.31 0.05 3.31 0.39 0.09 '. - Surcharges 0.06 Cargo: 88.71 88.56 - Exports a) Minerals 16.32 1.73 b) Other products 3.55 16.81 - Imports 45.83 46 .. 16 - Local Transport a) Minerals 1.43 b) Other products 13.53 12.71 - Baggage and parcels 1.88 3 .. 91 , - Complementary services a) Stay of wagons '* 1.42 1,,67 b) Warehouses and storage 0.15 0 .. 07 c) Use of sidings 0,83 0-.46 I - Rent of rolling stock 1,87 1.94 - Various services 4 .. 16 2,67 - Surcharges and discounts on (2.26) o .43 cargo Sum 100.00 100.00 1/ Idem as footnote on Table 6C-l. SOURCE: Appendix I:"Revenues by Item in the Andean and Eastern Systems, Period 1976/1979". " -270-  Table 6C-3 OPERATING EXPENSES ($b millions) Per!od: 1977/1979 Andean System DEPARTMENT 1977 1978 1979 Administration 53.32 84.49 86.64 Traffic and movement 90.05 97.68 110.53 Haulage 78.44 52.82 64.06 Workshops 48.51 63.95 65.56 Track and works 62.75 118.31 113.41 Signalling and Teleccmnunications 8.30 10.78 13.79 Sum 341.38 428.04 454.00 Eastern System DEPARTMENT 1977 1978 1979 Administration 32.75 43.89 47.57 Traffic and movement 44.82 45 .. 60 52.53 Haulage 21.51 24.44 29.14 Workshops 27.35 31.60 29 .• 46 Track and works 47.08 59.35 79.83 Signalling and Teleccmnunications 2.77 4.51 3.12 Sum 172.28 209.48 241.65 SOURCE: "Normalized" accounts of Balances of the Fiscal Year of the Andean and Eastern Systems, Period 1976/1979. (Appendix II). -271-  II II Table 6C-4 TOTAL EXPENSES ($b millions) Perfod. t 1977/1979 ANDEAN SYSTEM 1977 1978 1979 Operating costs 341.38 428.04 454.00 Financial obligations 27.88 38.15 93.44 Yearly charges for renewal: - Track and works 62.66 53,65 62.62 - Equipment 54.02 55.83 72.42 Sum 485.94 575.68 682.49 EASTERN SYSTEM 1977 1978 1979 Operating costs 176.28 209.48 241.65 Financial obligations 31.02 46.89 73,04 Yearly charges for renewal: - Track and works - Equipment 37.06 26.33 33.16 30.71 . 44 02 38.06 Sum 270.68 320.33 396,77 SOURCE: "Normalized"accounts of Balances of the Fiscal Year of the Andean and Eastern systems"'"'(Appendix II} " and yearly Charges for Renewal, Department of • Costing and Planning of ENFE, , .. -272-  Table 6C-5~ UTILIZATION INDICES (in 1977 $b/gross hauled ton-lon) Period: 1976/1979 Andean System ITEM 1976 1977 1978 1979 Operating Costs 0,373 0.339 0.360 0.336 Total Expenses 0.522 0.483 0.485 0 .. 505 Income 11 0.440 0.438 0 .. 408 0.376 Eastern System ITEM 1976 1977 1978 1979 Operating Costs 0 .. 316 0.256 0 .. 262 0.289 Total Expenses 0~443 0.393 0~400 0.474 Income 11 0.419 0.370 0.337 0.324 1/ Does not include taxes imposed on tariffs and that are granted to the Railroads Social Security Board and to the Complementary Board. -273-  TABLE OF ABBREVIATIONS $b Bolivian Pesos- SUS 1.00 = $b 25.00 (1981) SUS 1.00 ::: $b 20.00 (1977) ADT Average Daily Traffic AADAA Customs Administration AASANA National Airport Administration ADEPTA Association of Private Air Transport Firms COMIBOL National Mining Company COMIXTA Bolivian-Argentinian Joint Commission CNT National Transport Center CEPAL Economic Commission for Latin America CODETAR Tarij~ Department Development Corporation COFADENA National Development Corporation of the Armed Forces CORDEBENI Beni Department Development Corporation CORDECO Cochabamba Department Development Corporation CORDECH Chuquisaca Department Development Corporation CORDECRUZ Santa Cruz Department Development Corporation CORDEOR Oruro Department Development Corporation CORDEPANDO Pando Department Development Corporation CORDEPAZ La Paz Department Development Corporation CORDEPO Potosi Department Development Corporation DGCP General Directorate of Port Captaincies DGMM General Directorate of Merchant Marine DGTA General Directorate of Road Transport DGTTA General Directorate of Air Transport and Aerial Works DPC Directorate of Planning and Coordination ENFE National Railroad Company FNB Bolivian Navy GNP Gross National Product GEOBOL Bolivian Geological Service GDP Gross Domestic Product HDM Highway Design and Maintenance Standards Model IBRD International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (The World Bank) IBTA Bolivian Institute of Agricultural Technology lOB Interamerican Development Bank INE National Statistics Institute INALCO National Cooperatives Institute INTAL Institute of Latin American Integration IRR Internal Rate of Return LAB Lloyd Aereo Boliviano LAC Lineas Aereas Canedo LAI Linea Aerea Imperial LPG Liquid Petroleum Gas LINABOL Bolivian Shipping Line MTCCA Ministry of Transport, Communications and Civil Aeronautics NPV Net Present Value NTS National Transport Study SHN Hydrographic Service of the Navy SN Structural Number (Used in Road Pavement Design) SN Modified Structural Number SNC National Road Service SNT National Transit Service TAM Transportes Aereos Militares UNDP United Nations Development Programme USAID United States Agency for International Development YPFB National Hydrocarbons Company