Research tender: develop pre-tensioning guidelines for anti-spin (asp) cable bolts in mining

{"closingDate":"06 July 2026","closingTime":"11h00","briefingSession":"{\"date\":null,\"time\":\"11:00 am\",\"venue\":null,\"is_compulsory\":false}"}

{"name":null,"email":"[email protected]","phone":null,"department":"of Mineral and Petroleum Resources (DMPR) on mine health and safety","address":"al and other"}

Returnable Documents: Submission of fully completed Invitation to Bid (SBD 1) Comply Do Not comply, Fully completed SBD 6.1 (Preference Claim Form), Comply Do Not comply, Bidder must complete the detailed pricing Schedule (SBD Comply Do Not comply, 10 YEARS IN ROCK ENGINEERING (CV STATING NUMBER OF YEARS, 4 CRITERIA 4: QUALIFICATIONS OF THE ROCK ENGINEER 15, QUALIFICATIONS OF THE ROCK ENGINEER (ATTACH QUALIFICATION,

• Less than Honours degree or no qualification = 0 points

1.1 Introduction to the mine health and safety council

The Mine Health and Safety Council (MHSC) is a national public entity (Schedule 3A) established in

terms of the Mine Health and Safety Act, No. , as amended. The MHSC is mandated to advise

the Minister of the Department of Mineral and Petroleum Resources (DMPR) on mine health and safety

(MHS) issues in the mining industry, relating to the development and implementation of the MHSC annual

MHS research programme, reviewing and development of MHS legislation and dissemination

(knowledge and technology transfer) of MHSC research outcomes to improve MHS conditions in the

South African Mining Industry (SAMI).

Ground control remains a critical aspect of underground mining and civil tunnelling operations, where the

stability of excavations depends heavily on the appropriate design and implementation of reinforcement

systems. Among these, cable bolts especially anti-spin (ASP) cable bolts have gained prominence for

their ability to provide long-term and deep-seated support in weak and jointed rock masses (Hutchinson

& Diederichs, 1996). The ASP feature allows for controlled tensioning without inducing cable rotation,

making them suitable for pre-tensioned applications in complex ground conditions.

Pre-tensioning enhances the immediate load-bearing capacity of support systems and helps to minimize

displacement by actively clamping rock blocks before significant deformation occurs (Tannant, 1999).

However, determining the appropriate pre-tension force is highly dependent on the rock mass quality, as

over-tensioning in good ground can lead to unnecessary costs or anchor failure, while under-tensioning

in poor ground can result in ineffective support (Villaescusa, 2004). Despite the widespread use of cable

bolts in underground excavations, there is currently no universal guideline that defines optimum pre-

tension levels for different rock mass conditions, particularly with ASP designs.

Empirical methods like the Rock Mass Rating (RMR) system (Bieniawski, 1989) and the Q-system

(Barton et al., 1974) have been used extensively in ground support design, but their application to the

specific tensioning requirements of cable bolts is often generalized. Site-specific variations in geological

structure, in-situ stress, water inflow, and excavation geometry further complicate the design process.

Therefore, developing a systematic approach to defining pre-tension requirements based on quantified

ground conditions is essential to improve the safety, reliability, and cost-efficiency of support systems in

the South African mining industry and other similar geological environments.

This research aims to fill the gap by proposing a structured framework for selecting pre-tension values

for ASP cable bolts based on rock mass classification, verified through analytical models and field trials.

The outcome is expected to contribute to better ground control practices and reduced ground-failure

incidents in variable mining conditions.

2. Part a: the contract

2.1 Context of this procurement

The MHSC seeks to appoint a service provider to develop practical, evidence-based pre-tensioning

guidelines for ASP cable bolts across a range of rock mass conditions, to support improved ground

support performance and mine health and safety outcomes.

2.2 Contract period

The duration of this project is expected to be 18 Months.

Note: The 15 months will be allocated towards the project work.

The 3 months will be allocated to MHSC administrative duties, such as project initiation,

contracts, and project closeout.

2.3 Detailed specifications/scope of work

The service provider will be required to undertake the following as part of the scope of work:

2.3.1 Conduct national and international review of literature on current pre-tension practices and

performance of ASP cable bolts.

2.3.2 Characterise common rock mass types in the SAMI using RMR and Q-system.

2.3.3 Design and perform laboratory pull-out and shear tests using ASP cable bolts in simulated

rock masses.

2.3.4 Implement field trials in at least three different underground operations representing

different rock mass conditions (weak, moderate, strong).

2.3.5 Collect in-situ data on axial load, displacement, ground response, and support performance

under different pre-tension levels.

2.3.6 Determine the correlation between rock mass condition (quality and stress) and required

pre-tension for optimal performance.

2.3.7 Develop a pre-tensioning guideline/manual for ASP cable bolts under various rock mass

conditions.

2.3.8 Conduct a hybrid stakeholder workshop in Gauteng (hosted by the service provider) with

relevant stakeholders to solicit inputs.

2.4 Expected reseach outcomes

The expected outcomes of the research are as follows:

2.4.1 A report on the literature review.

2.4.2 A report on the characterised common rock mass types in SAMI.

2.4.3 A report on the laboratory pull-out and shear test.

2.4.4 A report on the implemented field trials.

2.4.5 A report on in-situ data an axial load, displacement, ground response and support

performance.

2.4.6 A report on the correlation between rock mass quality and required pre-tension.

2.4.7 A pre-tension guideline/manual for ASP cable bolts.

2.4.8 A report on stakeholder workshop.

2.4.9 Draft report.

2.4.10 Final report.

3. Part b: the pricing

Pricing instructions

1. Applicable currency: All prices shall be quoted in South African Rand (R).

2. Completion of pricing schedule: Bidders shall complete the pricing schedule in full,

inserting all the information required therein.

3. Price Quotation Basis: total prices quoted must be inclusive of all applicable taxes

including VAT, less all unconditional discounts, plus all costs to deliver the services and/or

goods. Where imported goods/services are to be used, and pricing is subject to exchange

rate fluctuations, the exchange currency against the Rand must be stipulated, as well as the

exchange rate at the time of bidding. The portion of the bid price subject to exchange rate

fluctuations must be stated.

4. Submission of pricing: bidders must submit their pricing proposals with the technical

proposal. The pricing folder must be clearly labelled as such.

BID PRICE SCHEDULE (SBD 3.1 Firm Unit Prices)

The following Schedule of Prices must be completed by the Tenderer. The total price must include

everything necessary to complete the terms of the Specifications or scope of work.

Activities as per expected project outcome estimated price

Project initiation R

A report on the literature review. R

A report on the characterized common rock mass types in the SAMI. R

A report on the laboratory pull-out and shear test. R

A report on the implemented field trials. R

A report on in-situ data an axial load, displacement, ground response and R

support performance.

A report on the correlation between rock mass quality and required pre- R

tension.

A pre-tension guideline/manual for ASP cable bolts. R

A report on stakeholder workshop. R

Draft report. R

Final report. R

Total exc VAT r

VAT (15%) r

Total inc VAT r

TOTAL BID PRICE (VAT Inclusive): R..........................................................

Prices quoted are fully inclusive of all costs including applicable taxes and disbursements

and other overheads. (Please note that all prices quoted should be inclusive of Value Added

Tax (VAT) and Price fluctuations the duration of the contract. Where applicable the price

should include Supply, Delivery, Maintenance, and any other costs relating to this bid.

Price changes whether because of CPI, PPI, industry extensions or expansions will be allowed

in terms of the signed contract by both parties.)

4. Part c: bid selection process

4.1 Bid preparation and submission

4.1.1 Number of bid documents: 1 X Original and 2 X copies of the same original (Hard

copies) – Three.

4.1.2 Number of bid documents: 1 X (Electronic Copy) of the original document in PDF

(USB) – One.

4.1.3 Number of Bid documents: 1 X pricing proposal (Hard copy) – One.

NB: Both technical proposal and pricing proposal must be submitted separately (two

envelope system).

4.2 Bid closing

4.2.1 There shall be no public opening by the MHSC of the bids received.

4.2.2 There shall be no discussions with any enterprise until evaluation and

adjudication of the proposal has been complete.

4.2.3 Any subsequent discussions shall be at the discretion of MHSC. Unless specifically

provided for in the proposal document, bids submitted by means of telegram,

telex, facsimile or similar means shall not be considered by MHSC.

4.2.4 All bids shall close on the specified date and time as stipulated in the bid document.

4.2.5 Bids received after closing time and date will be classified as LATE and will not be

considered.

4.2.6 Bids submitted in any other manner other than the specified address (tender

box) shall not be accepted.

4.3 Administrative compliance (returnable documents)

Administrative compliance/responsiveness will be tested based on returnable documents

submitted and signatures on the Bid documents.

At this stage the verification is to review bid responses for purposes of assessing

compliance and governance with RFB requirements, whereby a bidder will be

disqualified if they do not fully comply, it must be determined what documents are

required to be returned by Bidders.

Bids will be verified for compliance with the procedural requirements of the bid, which entails

the completion and/or submission of the returnable documents and schedules specified in

the Returnable Documents and Schedules Checklist below. No award will be done without

complete provision of returnable documents and any schedules.

Returnable documents are categorized as follows:

Submission of fully completed Invitation to Bid (SBD 1) Comply Do Not comply

Substantiation: The bidder must submit the fully completed and signed SBD1 (Invitation to Bid)

Fully completed and signed Bidders’ Disclosure form (SBD Comply Do Not comply

4)

Substantiation: The bidder must submit the fully completed and signed Bidders Disclosure

(Sbd 4)

Fully completed SBD 6.1 (Preference Claim Form), Comply Do Not comply

Substantiation: The bidder must submit the fully completed preference claim form, points must be

correctly claimed and the points for the specific goals must be supported by a valid B-BBEE

certificate or a certified sworn affidavit. Bidders should ensure the points are correctly claimed for the

specific goals and information is captured correctly and information is true. False information may

result in the bid being disqualified.

Bidder must complete the detailed pricing Schedule (SBD Comply Do Not comply

3)

Substantiation: The bidder must submit and attach to the bid response fully completed pricing

Schedule (SBD 3)

The recommended bidder, where applicable, will be requested to sign and complete

the SBD 7 contract form upon award.

Submission of fully completed Contract Form (where Comply Do Not comply

applicable)

Substantiation: The bidder must submit and attach the fully completed and signed and initialled

SBD 7 (Contract form)

4.4 Mandatory compliance – central supplier database

Bidders are required to be registered on the Central Supplier Database (CSD) of National

Treasury prior to submitting their bid (open tenders). Failure to being registered on the CSD

and failure to submit the requested proof of registration on CSD information will lead to

disqualification. (Please provide proof of registration on the Central Supplier Database). Only

suppliers who are registered with the Central Supplier Database (CSD) will be considered for

this bid. Bidders who are not registered on CSD, will be disqualified.

4.5 Mandatory compliance – tax status verification

Bidders are required to submit their tax compliance status with their bid in the form of a Tax

Verification PIN from SARS or CSD supplier number which must be captured in the SBD 1.

MHSC only conducts business with bidders whose tax matters are in order. Failure to comply in

terms of tax obligations will render your bid non-responsive and disqualified. It is the responsibility

of the bidder to ensure they are tax compliant at time of submitting their response.

4.6 Protection of personal information act, (popia)

MHSC adheres to the Protection of Personal Information Act, (POPIA) requirements

regarding personal information which came into effect 1 July 2021. As MHSC, we are committed

to protecting your privacy and ensuring that personal information collected is used properly,

lawfully, and transparently.

4.7 Occupational health and safety

The service provider acknowledges that he is fully aware of the provisions of the Mine Health and

Safety Act .MHSC promotes a culture of occupational health and safety in the mining

industry. The service provider acknowledges that he is fully aware of the provisions of the OHS

Act and that he is an employer in his own right with duties and responsibilities as

prescribed in the Act.

5. Part d: bid evaluation process

The evaluation process will be conducted in various stages. To move to the next stage of evaluation,

the previous stage of evaluation must have been fully complied with.

5.1 Required experience

The service provider must have at least 5 years of experience in conducting applied research and the

project team must have members with expertise in the following areas:

5.1.1 A minimum of 10 years’ experience in rock engineering with underground mining.

5.1.2 A minimum of 5 years’ experience in geology.

Note: Bidders are to ensure that the team members used in the proposal must be the same team to

execute the project. In instances whereby the team members resign, it is the bidder’s responsibility to

ensure they replace those resources with resources of the same expertise and experience.

Reference

Barton, N., Lien, R., & Lunde, J. (1974). Engineering classification of rock masses for the design of

tunnel support. Rock Mechanics, 6(4), 189–236.

Bieniawski, Z. T. (1989). Engineering rock mass classifications: A complete manual for engineers and

geologists in mining, civil, and petroleum engineering. Wiley.

Hutchinson, D. J., & Diederichs, M. S. (1996). Cable bolting in underground mines. BiTech Publishers.

Tannant, D. D. (1999). Cable bolting in underground mines. Society for Mining, Metallurgy and

Exploration (SME).

Villaescusa, E. (2004). Geotechnical design for underground mining. Australian Centre for

Geomechanics

5.2 Evaluation process

The evaluation process will comprise of the following phases:

• Phase 1: Mandatory Evaluation.
• Phase 2: Functionality Evaluation.
• Phase 3: Pricing and Specific goals Evaluation.

5.2.1 Mandatory evaluation phase 1

• Verify that mandatory requirements are met as per the bid document.
• The bidder must indicate its compliance / non-compliance to the requirements and should

substantiate its response/s with supporting evidence. If more space is required to justify

compliance, please ensure that the substantiation is clearly cross-referenced to the relevant

requirement.

• Failure to comply with Mandatory Requirements will lead to the bidder being disqualified, and

not considered for further evaluation.

Mandatory requirements comply / not

Comply

Chamber of Mines Certificate in Rock Mechanics (COMCRM)

Certificate to be attached

5.2.2 Technical / functionality evaluation phase 2

Evaluate the bid responses in line with the evaluation criteria detailed under paragraph

“Technical / Functionality evaluation. Bidders must achieve [70%] in this phase for their bid to

progress to the next phase of evaluation.

The tender will be evaluated in accordance with PPPFA in line with the following functional criteria

using the 80/20 preferential procurement principle.

NO criteria weighting

1 criteria 1: company experience 5

Experience of the service provider / collaborator in applied

Research or consulting (company profile stating number of

Years in applied research or consulting must be attached):

• Greater than 5 years’ experience in applied research / consulting = 5 points
• 5 years’ experience in applied research / consulting = 3 points
• Less than 5 years’ experience or n company profile attached or number of

years not included = 0 points

2 criteria 2: reference letters 5

Signed and verifiable reference letters on valid letter heads

With contactable details from organisations where previous

Related research work was conducted by the service

Provider (attach verifiable reference letters):

• 5 or more reference letters that meet all criteria as stipulated above = 5 points
• 4 reference letters that meet all criteria as stipulated above = 4 points
• 3 reference letters that meet all criteria as stipulated above = 3 points
• Less than 3 reference letters that meet all criteria as stipulated above = 0

points

• No reference letter = 0 points

NO criteria weighting

Note: Letters that do not meet all the criteria as stipulated above will not be

considered, and will qualify for 0 points

3 20

Criteria 3: team member experience in rock engineering

Experience of at least one team member with a minimum of

10 years in rock engineering (cv stating number of years

Of experience must be attached):

• More than 10 years’ experience in rock engineering = 5 points
• 10 years’ experience in rock engineering = 3 points
• Less than 10 years’ experience = 0 points

4 criteria 4: qualifications of the rock engineer 15

Qualifications of the rock engineer (attach qualification

Certificates):

• Master’s Degree or above= 5 points
• Honours degree =3 points
• Less than Honours degree or no qualification = 0 points

5 criteria 3: team member experience in geology 10

Experience of at least one team member as a geologist with a

Minimum of 5 years experience in the mining sector (cv stating

Number of years of experience must be attached):

• Greater than 5 years’ experience as a geologist = 5 points
• 5 years’ experience as a geologist = 3 points
• Less than 5 years’ experience as a geologist = 0 points

6 criteria 4: qualifications of the geologist 10

Qualifications of the geologist (attach qualification

NO criteria weighting

Certificates):

• Master’s Degree or above= 5 points
• Honours degree = 3 points
• Less than Honours degree or no qualification = 0 points

8 criteria 8: quality of the project proposal (methodology, 35

Project scope and project schedule)

The project proposal must address the following four

Certificates):

• Master’s Degree or above= 5 points
• Honours degree = 3 points
• Less than Honours degree or no qualification = 0 points

8 criteria 8: quality of the project proposal (methodology, 35

Project scope and project schedule)

Requirements:

1. Clearly defined methodology (design/approach to be taken, participants,

datasets, study sites, instruments, procedures, etc).

2. The proposed methodology must be feasible (number of participants or

accessibility of participants, accessibility of study sites, access to datasets,

data collection access, sample sizes, etc.).

outcomes, clear timelines, and costing.

(Attach project proposal as per the provided proposal

Template)

• The proposal sufficiently addresses all the four requirements = 5 points
• The proposal does not address all the four requirements = 0 points

Note: Proposals that reproduce the scope of work text verbatim, without

interpreting or translating it into a clear methodological approach, will not be

considered to have provided a valid methodology and will be scored = 0 points.

Total 100

5.2.3 Price and preference (specific goals) evaluation phase 2

• Bid price proposals are compared on an equal and fair basis, considering all aspects of

the bid pricing requirements. Qualifying bids are ranked on price and specific goals

points claimed in the following manner:

(i) Price - with the lowest priced bid receiving the highest price score as set out in the

Preferential Procurement Regulations 2022.

(ii) Preference - preference points are allocated in accordance with the Preferential

Procurement Policy Framework Act (Act ) and its Regulations 2022 as claimed in the

specific goals claim form (SBD 6.1) are added to the price ranking scores. The points for

specific goals must be supported by a valid B-BBEE certificate or certified sworn affidavit.

A maximum of 80 points will be allocated for price on the following basis:

80/20

Pt−Pmin⬚

Ps=80(1− ) Type equation here.

Pmin⬚

Where;

Ps = Points scored for price of tender under consideration

Pt = Price of tender under consideration

Pmin = Price of lowest acceptable tender

A maximum of 20 points will be allocated for specific goals on the following basis:

• The tenderer must indicate how they claim points for each preference point

system in line with the specific goals of the RFQ as outlined in SBD

6.1.

6. Part e: bid conditions

6.1 Conditions and instruction to the bidder

a) Response preparation costs: MHSC is NOT liable for any costs incurred by a bidder in the

process of responding to this Bid Invitation, including on-site presentations.

b) Counter Conditions: MHSC. draws bidders’ attention that amendments to any of the Bid

schedules must be completed in full. Should the total bid prices differ, or calculation errors be

identified, the one indicated on the price schedule shall be considered the correct price.

viii. Any bidder who has reasons to believe that the bid specification is based on a specific brand must

inform the MHSC before bid closing date.

ix. No service will be rendered, or goods delivered before an official MHSC Purchase Order has been

issued.

x. All questions regarding this bid must be forwarded to the designated email address within at least

24 hours after the bid has been issued.

xi. It is the responsibility of the bidder to ensure that its response reaches MHSC on or before the

closing date and time of the bid.

xii. The MHSC shall evaluate each responsive submission in terms of the method of evaluation stated

in the bid document.

xiii. if the MHSC amends this bid, the amendment will be publicized as the case maybe on the platforms

which the bid was published. No oral amendments by any person will be considered or

acknowledged.

xiv. The MHSC reserves the right to carry out site inspections or call for supporting documentation to

confirm any information provided by a Bidder in its bid. xv. Bidders may not make any alterations

or additions to the content of this bid document, except to comply with the instructions issued by

the MHSC.

Nb: please note that bid responses must be deposited in the tender box as bid

Clearly defined methodology (design/approach to be taken, participants, datasets, study sites, instruments, procedures, etc).

The proposed methodology must be feasible (number of participants or accessibility of participants, accessibility of study sites, access to datasets, data collection access, sample sizes, etc.).

The proposal must sufficiently address all items of the project scope provided in the project terms of reference.

The proposal must have a project schedule comprising all expected project outcomes, clear timelines, and costing. (ATTACH PROJECT PROPOSAL AS PER THE PROVIDED PROPOSAL TEMPLATE)

The proposal sufficiently addresses all the four requirements = 5 points

The proposal does not address all the four requirements = 0 points Note: Proposals that reproduce the scope of work text verbatim, without interpreting or translating it into a clear methodological approach, will not be considered to have provided a valid methodology and will be scored = 0 points. TOTAL 100 5.2.3 PRICE AND PREFERENCE (SPECIFIC GOALS) EVALUATION PHASE 2

Bid price proposals are compared on an equal and fair basis, considering all aspects of the bid pricing requirements. Qualifying bids are ranked on price and specific goals points claimed in the following manner: (i) Price - with the lowest priced bid receiving the highest price score as set out in the Preferential Procurement Regulations 2022. (ii) Preference - preference points are allocated in accordance with the Preferential Procurement Policy Framework Act (Act ) and its Regulations 2022 as claimed in the specific goals claim form (SBD 6.1) are added to the price ranking scores. The points for specific goals must be supported by a valid B-BBEE certificate or certified sworn affidavit. A maximum of 80 points will be allocated for price on the following basis

Points Allocation: 80 points

B-BBEE Details: ly completed Invitation to Bid (SBD 1) Comply Do Not comply

Substantiation: The bidder must submit the fully completed and signed SBD1 (Invitation to Bid)

Fully completed and signed Bidders’ Disclosure form (SBD Comply Do Not comply

4)

Substantiation: The bidder must submit the fully completed and signed Bidders Disclosure

(Sbd 4)

Fully completed SBD 6.1 (Preference Claim Form), Comply Do Not comply

Substantiation: The bidder must submit the fully completed preference claim form, points must be

correctly claimed and the points for the specific goals must be supported by a valid B-BBEE

certificate or a certified sworn affidavit. Bidders should ensure the points are correctly claimed for the

specific goals and information is captured correctly and information is true. False information may

result in the bid being disqualified.

Bidder must complete the detailed pricing Schedule (SBD Comply Do Not comply

3)

Substantiation: The bidder must submit and attach to the bid response fully completed pricing

Schedule (SBD 3)

The recommended bidder, where applicable, will be requested to sign and complete

the SBD 7 contract form upon award.

Submission of fully completed Contract Form (where Comply Do Not comply

applicable)

Substantiation: The bidder must submit and attach the fully completed and signed and initialled

SBD 7 (Contract form)

4.4 Mandatory compliance – central supplier database

Bidders are required to be registered on the Central Supplier Database (CSD) of National

Treasury prior to submitting their bid (open tenders). Failure to being registered on the CSD

and failure to submit the requested proof of registration on CSD information will lead to

disqualification. (Please provide proof of registration on the Central Supplier Dat

Supply Chain Management [email protected]

1. Introduction

1.1 Introduction to the mine health and safety council

The Mine Health and Safety Council (MHSC) is a national public entity (Schedule 3A) established in

terms of the Mine Health and Safety Act, No. , as amended. The MHSC is mandated to advise

the Minister of the Department of Mineral and Petroleum Resources (DMPR) on mine health and safety

(MHS) issues in the mining industry, relating to the development and implementation of the MHSC annual

guidelines for ASP cable bolts across a range of rock mass conditions, to support improved ground

support performance and mine health and safety outcomes.

2.2 Contract period

The duration of this project is expected to be 18 Months.

Note: The 15 months will be allocated towards the project work.

The 3 months will be allocated to MHSC administrative duties, such as project initiation,

contracts, and project closeout.

2.3 Detailed specifications/scope of work

2.3.1 Conduct national and international review of literature on current pre-tension practices and

performance of ASP cable bolts.

2.3.2 Characterise common rock mass types in the SAMI using RMR and Q-system.

2.3.3 Design and perform laboratory pull-out and shear tests using ASP cable bolts in simulated

rock masses.

2.3.4 Implement field trials in at least three different underground operations representing

different rock mass conditions (weak, moderate, strong).

2.3.5 Collect in-situ data on axial load, displacement, ground response, and support performance

under different pre-tension levels.

2.3.6 Determine the correlation between rock mass condition (quality and stress) and required

pre-tension for optimal performance.

2.3.7 Develop a pre-tensioning guideline/manual for ASP cable bolts under various rock mass

conditions.

2.3.8 Conduct a hybrid stakeholder workshop in Gauteng (hosted by the service provider) with

relevant stakeholders to solicit inputs.

2.4 Expected reseach outcomes

2.4.1 A report on the literature review.

2.4.2 A report on the characterised common rock mass types in SAMI.

2.4.3 A report on the laboratory pull-out and shear test.

2.4.4 A report on the implemented field trials.

2.4.5 A report on in-situ data an axial load, displacement, ground response and support

performance.

2.4.6 A report on the correlation between rock mass quality and required pre-tension.

2.4.7 A pre-tension guideline/manual for ASP cable bolts.

2.4.8 A report on stakeholder workshop.

2.4.9 Draft report.

2.4.10 Final report.

3. Part b: the pricing

terms of tax obligations will render your bid non-responsive and disqualified. It is the responsibility

of the bidder to ensure they are tax compliant at time of submitting their response.

4.6 Protection of personal information act, (popia)

MHSC adheres to the Protection of Personal Information Act, (POPIA) requirements

regarding personal information which came into effect 1 July 2021. As MHSC, we are committed

to protecting your privacy and ensuring that personal information collected is used properly,

lawfully, and transparently.

4.7 Occupational health and safety

Barton, N., Lien, R., & Lunde, J. (1974). Engineering classification of rock masses for the design of

tunnel support. Rock Mechanics, 6(4), 189–236.

Bieniawski, Z. T. (1989). Engineering rock mass classifications: A complete manual for engineers and

geologists in mining, civil, and petroleum engineering. Wiley.

Hutchinson, D. J., & Diederichs, M. S. (1996). Cable bolting in underground mines. BiTech Publishers.

Tannant, D. D. (1999). Cable bolting in underground mines. Society for Mining, Metallurgy and

Exploration (SME).

Villaescusa, E. (2004). Geotechnical design for underground mining. Australian Centre for

a) Due to changed circumstances, there is no longer a need for the services specified in

this bid.

b) Funds are no longer available to cover the total envisaged expenditure for the project.

c) No bids meet the required specifications.

d) There is a material irregularity in the bid process.

6.9 Financial payment

Payment will be made in accordance with section 38(1)(f) and 76(4)(b) of the PFMA and Treasury

Regulations 8.2.3 (within 30 days from receipt of invoice after completion of deliverables).

6.10 Due diligence

Where circumstances justifies it, MHSC reserves the right to conduct due diligence (interviews,

samples, presentations, site visits) with shortlisted bidders who meet the minimum qualifying score on

the functionality phase evaluation criteria, whereby bidders will present further information or provide

further proof to the evaluation committee. In these cases, MHSC may provide the areas of concern to

the short-listed bidders to address in their presentations.

6.11 Bid award

Awarding of tenders will be published on the National Treasury e-tender portal and MHSC’ website.

bid requirements and may take place without prior notice to the bidder:

• Bidder whose tax matters are not in order (Instruction Note /2018 Tax Compliance

Status will apply).

• Bidders who are not registered with the Central Supplier Database (CSD).
• submitted incomplete information and documentation according to the requirements of this RFB

document.

• submitted information that is fraudulent, factually untrue or inaccurate information.
• received information not available to other potential bidders through fraudulent means.
• failed to comply with mandatory and technical requirements as stipulated in the RFB document.
• misrepresented or altered material information in whatever way or manner.
• promised, offered, or made gifts, benefits to any The Mine Health and Safety Council (MHSC)

employee.

• canvassed, lobbied to gain unfair advantage.
• committed fraudulent acts; and
• acted dishonestly and/or in bad faith etc.

NB: it is the responsibility of the bidder to ensure the bid response is fully completed and signed

and all required documents are valid and submitted upon closing date. The bidder should

ensure that the tender register is also signed when submitting their bid at the tender box.

7. Part f: standard bidding documents

I CERTIFY THAT THE INFORMATION FURNISHED IN PARAGRAPHS 1, 2 and 3 ABOVE IS

ground conditions is essential to improve the safety, reliability, and cost-efficiency of support systems in

the South African mining industry and other similar geological environments.

associates do not warrant its accuracy or completeness. To the extent that MHSC is permitted by

law, MHSC will not be liable for any claim whatsoever and how so ever arising (including, without

limitation, any claim in contract, negligence or otherwise) for any incorrect or misleading information

contained in this document due to any misinterpretation of this document. MHSC makes no

representation, warranty, assurance, guarantee or endorsements to any provider/bidder concerning

the document, whether regarding its accuracy, completeness or otherwise and MHSC shall have no

liability towards the responding service providers or any other party in connection therewith.

6.3 Conditions and undertakings by bidder

duplicated. MHSC will accept NO liability regarding anything arising from the fact that pages are

missing or duplicated.