Red iron ore dust study: first-phase rapid assessment economic case and technical mitigation options

Closing: 3 November 2026 at 11:00.

No compulsory briefing session or site visit is stated.

Assignment duration: eight weeks from the inception meeting.

Deliverable milestones:

• D1 inception report: end of Week 1
• D2 interim progress briefing: end of Week 4
• D3 draft report: end of Week 6
• D4 stakeholder validation workshop: Week 7
• D5 final report and engagement pack: end of Week 8

Review and reporting cycle:

• Steering group reviews D1, D3 and D5; Freeport Saldanha returns consolidated comments within five working days of receipt.
• Written progress updates of no more than two pages every two weeks.

Indicative programme (Annexure C):

• Internal governance, problem statement and Terms of Reference approval: Weeks 1–2
• Data requests issued to TPT, TNPA, Transnet Group and municipalities: Weeks 1–2
• Stakeholder interviews: Weeks 2–4
• Service provider appointed: Weeks 2–3
• Rapid 80:20 analysis: Weeks 3–8
• Stakeholder validation workshop: Week 9
• Final report issued: Week 10
• Decision memorandum for Transnet Group, TPT, TNPA and the licensing authority: Weeks 10–11
• Go / no-go decision on a detailed second phase: Week 12

Enquiries

• Contact: Mr Dale Paulse
• Email: [email protected]
• Contact: Ms Lona Tshongweni
• Email: [email protected]
• Telephone: 087 095 0261

Address

3rd Floor

5 Canal Side

Century City

7441

Returnable documents — all must be submitted with the quotation; omitting any of them makes the response non-responsive:

• Proof of active registration on the National Treasury Central Supplier Database (CSD).
• A fully completed WCBD4 form.
• A valid B-BBEE certificate.

Disqualification and responsiveness risks:

• Any of the three required proofs missing.
• Replacing any key personnel without Freeport Saldanha's prior written approval.
• Failing to declare an actual or potential conflict of interest, including current or recent work for Transnet Group, TPT, TNPA, iron ore producers or suppliers of dust-control technology.
• Non-compliance with port access, safety and security requirements when conducting site observations.

Submission channel: the RFQ does not specify an email address, portal or physical delivery point; bidders should confirm the submission method with the Supply Chain contact before the closing date.

Evaluation basis: functionality, price and specific goals, applied under Freeport Saldanha's Supply Chain Management policy and the Preferential Procurement Policy Framework Act, 2000 and its regulations.

• Weightings, the minimum functionality threshold and the indicative budget are to be inserted by Supply Chain Management and are not stated in the RFQ.
• The applicable preference point system (80/20 or 90/10) is not specified.

Multi-criteria screening framework (Annexure D) used to rank sectors, commodities and activities affected by red dust:

• Dust sensitivity: 25%
• Economic value: 25%
• Strategic fit: 20%
• Feasibility: 15%
• Reputational and market risk: 10%
• Implementation dependency: 5%

Bidders must confirm the scoring scale and scoring direction for each criterion in the inception report.

Scope: a rapid, evidence-based, decision-oriented first-phase Red Iron Ore Dust Study for Freeport Saldanha and the Port of Saldanha, covering the economic case and technical mitigation options.

Objective: establish whether red iron ore dust materially constrains the economic, investment, operational and strategic potential of the zone and port, and identify practical mitigation options that unlock higher-value activity without undermining the core iron ore export function.

Approach: an 80:20 assessment proportionate to an eight-week timeframe; not a full engineering, environmental or commercial investigation.

Workstream 1 — Economic and Strategic Assessment:

• Define the economic and strategic problem for Freeport Saldanha, the port and the regional development agenda.
• Quantify economic and opportunity costs, including effects on investment attraction, investor confidence, existing businesses and priority sectors.
• Assess sector and commodity sensitivity: perishable exports, containerised cargo, sensitive manufacturing, ship and rig repair, renewable energy components and other cleanliness-sensitive activities.
• Assess operational and product-quality impacts: contamination risk, equipment and infrastructure effects, air-filtration requirements.
• Separate established evidence from stakeholder perceptions and issues needing further investigation.
• Establish the extent, severity and spatial distribution of the problem.

Workstream 2 — Technical Mitigation Assessment:

• Identify likely dust sources, generation points and pathways at a high level, focusing on port operations and transfer points; mine and rail stages only insofar as ore characteristics and in-transit losses affect Saldanha.
• Assess the role of location, prevailing wind and exposure characteristics, including whether some activities or sites are less exposed.
• Benchmark international and relevant local dust-management practice in comparable port, mining, bulk-handling and industrial settings.
• Screen practical mitigation options across the generation and transfer chain that reduce exposure or contamination without harming iron ore exports.
• Assess indicative cost, feasibility and effectiveness, including implementation requirements, dependencies, constraints, sequencing and responsible parties.

Integration and stakeholder work:

• Map institutional and stakeholder interfaces for implementation.
• Build an evidence base and engagement pack for Freeport Saldanha's dealings with stakeholders.
• Identify critical evidence gaps and recommend follow-on investigations.
• Provide recommendations and an implementation pathway covering immediate actions, medium-term interventions and possible future workstreams.
• Advise whether the evidence supports a detailed second phase and what that phase would require.
• Prepare and facilitate a stakeholder validation workshop.

Deliverables (within eight weeks of the inception meeting):

• D1 inception report (end of Week 1): refined methodology and work plan, comparator ports, stakeholder interview list, data request list, scoring approach, key risks and assumptions.
• D2 interim progress briefing (end of Week 4): baseline evidence pack, data gap register and emerging findings, presented to the steering group.
• D3 draft report (end of Week 6): answers the key questions and covers the Annexure A content requirements.
• D4 stakeholder validation workshop (Week 7): preparation, facilitation, presentation and a written workshop record.
• D5 final report and engagement pack (end of Week 8): incorporates steering group and workshop comments, includes an executive summary of no more than five pages and a close-out presentation.
• Reports in editable Microsoft Word and PDF; supporting data and models, including multi-criteria scoring and cost estimates, in editable Microsoft Excel.
• Full handover of all deliverables, data, models and working materials.

Scope boundary — in scope: economic and opportunity cost of red dust, sector and commodity sensitivity, technical diagnosis of sources and broad mitigation options from mine to ship, international benchmark review, high-level location and wind exposure considerations, and a stakeholder engagement strategy and evidence pack.

Scope boundary — out of scope for this phase: full container terminal feasibility study, detailed environmental impact assessment or strategic environmental assessment, detailed engineering design of dust suppression, extraction, enclosure or recovery systems, formal procurement of a private container terminal operator, full manganese health hazard assessment (flagged as a related future workstream), and any formal regulatory challenge or licence review unless later approved.

Study standards:

• Findings must distinguish measured evidence, reported incidents, stakeholder perceptions and assumptions; assumptions stated and gaps logged in a data gap register.
• Dustfall results must be compared with the National Dust Control Regulations, licence-specific limits and, where identifiable, thresholds relevant to sensitive sectors.
• Assessments must stay at an indicative level and must not amount to detailed engineering design, an EIA or a detailed business case.
• No new primary dust monitoring is required in this phase.
• Site observations inside the port require access permits and safety inductions from TNPA and/or TPT, with lead times allowed for.
• All information obtained is confidential and may be used only for this assignment; interviewee personal information must be handled in line with POPIA.
• The service provider must remain technology-neutral and may not use the assignment to promote proprietary products; market sounding of technology providers must not confer preferential access.
• All deliverables, data, models and working materials become Freeport Saldanha's property on completion and final payment.
• All engagements with Transnet Group, TPT, TNPA, licensing authorities and other public bodies must be coordinated with and agreed in advance by the Freeport Saldanha project manager.

Approach: a rapid 80:20 assessment delivered through two integrated workstreams, rigorous enough to be credible but proportionate to an eight-week timeframe. The methodology in Annexure A is indicative; bidders may propose an alternative provided it addresses all specifications and key questions.

Workstream 1 — Economic and Strategic Assessment: define the economic and strategic problem; assess economic and opportunity costs; assess sector and commodity sensitivity; assess operational and product-quality implications; separate evidence from perception; establish the extent, severity and spatial distribution of the problem.

Workstream 2 — Technical Mitigation Assessment: identify sources, generation points and pathways with emphasis on port operations and transfer points; assess location, wind and exposure effects; benchmark international and local practice; screen practical mitigation options; assess indicative cost, feasibility and effectiveness including implementation requirements, dependencies, constraints, sequencing and responsible parties.

Integration, stakeholder engagement and recommendations: map institutional and stakeholder interfaces; build an evidence base and engagement pack; identify evidence gaps and follow-on investigations; provide recommendations and an implementation pathway; advise on progression to a second phase; prepare and facilitate the stakeholder validation workshop.

Dust pathway analysis must consider, at a high level: ore characteristics at source such as moisture and fines content; rail transport including in-transit losses from loaded wagons; wagon handling and tippler operations; transfer points and conveyors; stockyards and reclaimers; ship-loading operations; and adjacent handling and operational areas.

Deliverables and timing:

• D1 inception report, end of Week 1: refined methodology and work plan integrating Components A to F, agreed comparator ports, stakeholder interview list, data request list, confirmed scoring scale and direction for each Annexure D criterion, key risks and assumptions.
• D2 interim progress briefing, end of Week 4: baseline evidence pack, data gap register and emerging findings presented to the steering group.
• D3 draft report, end of Week 6: answers the key questions and covers the required Annexure A content.
• D4 stakeholder validation workshop, Week 7: preparation, facilitation, presentation and written workshop record; venue and logistics to be provided by Freeport Saldanha.
• D5 final report and engagement pack, end of Week 8: incorporates steering group and workshop comments, executive summary of no more than five pages, standalone stakeholder engagement and advocacy pack, recommendations on immediate actions, medium-term interventions and future workstreams, a recommendation on whether to proceed to a detailed second phase, and a close-out presentation.

Project phases: inception; baseline evidence review; economic and sector sensitivity analysis; technical pathway review and benchmarking; options and implementation pathway; stakeholder validation; final reporting and handover.

Indicative programme (Annexure C): governance and problem statement confirmed Week 1; Terms of Reference approved Weeks 1–2; data requests issued Weeks 1–2; stakeholder interviews Weeks 2–4; service provider appointed Weeks 2–3; rapid 80:20 analysis Weeks 3–8; validation workshop Week 9; final report Week 10; decision memorandum Weeks 10–11; go/no-go decision on a second phase Week 12.

Key risks identified: scope creep into full container terminal feasibility; insufficient dust or sector-threshold data; delays in data from Transnet entities and other owners; resistance from TPT or TNPA; solutions proving costlier or less effective than expected; sensitive political or commercial implications including alternative port or Boegoebaai considerations; and investor expectations rising before evidence is tested.

Pricing format: a detailed, transparent fixed-price quotation in South African Rand, inclusive of VAT.

The quotation must include at least:

• Professional fees per deliverable (D1 to D5).
• Hourly or daily rates and the number of days allocated to each team member.
• Disbursements, including travel to Saldanha Bay and on-site engagements.
• Stakeholder validation workshop preparation and facilitation costs.
• Data acquisition or other third-party costs, where applicable.
• Hourly or daily rates for out-of-scope work.

Payment milestones (proposed, to be confirmed by Supply Chain Management):

• 20% on approval of D1
• 30% on approval of D3
• 50% on approval of D5

No bid security, performance guarantee, retention or turnover threshold is stated in the RFQ.

Eligibility documents — failure to provide any of these makes the response non-responsive:

• Active registration on the National Treasury Central Supplier Database (CSD).
• Fully completed WCBD4 form.
• Valid B-BBEE certificate.

Mandatory minimum requirements:

• Demonstrated experience in economic, investment or sector-opportunity assessments, preferably in port, logistics or SEZ environments.
• Demonstrated technical expertise in dust and air quality management for bulk materials handling, preferably at iron ore or other mineral export terminals.
• Company profile with at least three comparable assignments completed in the past five years, with client references.
• Familiarity with South African port governance and the air quality regulatory framework.
• Proposed core team of at least a project lead and integrator, an economist leading Workstream 1, a dust, air quality or bulk-handling engineering specialist leading Workstream 2, and supporting analysts as required, with CVs and time allocation for each member.
• Key personnel may not be replaced without Freeport Saldanha's written approval.
• Clear outline of the bidder's understanding of the assignment and its proposed approach, methodology and work plan, including how the two workstreams integrate; an alternative to the indicative Annexure A methodology is allowed if it addresses all specifications and key questions.
• Demonstrated experience in stakeholder engagement and facilitation at executive level.
• Demonstrated ability to deliver within the eight-week timeframe.
• Declaration of any actual or potential conflict of interest, including current or recent work for Transnet Group, TPT, TNPA, iron ore producers or suppliers of dust-control technologies.

Other compliance obligations:

• POPIA compliance for personal information of interviewees.
• Technology neutrality; no promotion of proprietary products and no preferential access for technology providers.
• Ownership of all deliverables, data, models and working materials transfers to Freeport Saldanha on completion and final payment.

Site access: observations inside the port require access permits and safety inductions issued by TNPA and/or TPT, and the service provider must allow for the associated lead times.

Compliance: the service provider must comply with all applicable health, safety and security requirements of the port environment.

Regulatory context: the Occupational Health and Safety Act, 1993 applies to the extent relevant to workplace dust exposure.

Dustfall standards referenced for comparison: National Dust Control Regulations, 2013 set 600 mg/m2/day for residential areas and 1 200 mg/m2/day for non-residential areas.

The study must compare available dustfall monitoring results against the National Dust Control Regulations, licence-specific limits and, where identifiable, thresholds relevant to sensitive sectors.

Regulatory framework the study must take into account:

• National Environmental Management Act, 1998 (NEMA).
• National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act, 2004 (NEM:AQA), including the atmospheric emission licensing regime for listed activities.
• National Dust Control Regulations, 2013: dustfall standards of 600 mg/m2/day for residential areas and 1 200 mg/m2/day for non-residential areas.
• National Ambient Air Quality Standards for particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5).
• National Ports Act, 2005, which establishes TNPA's role as port authority and landlord.
• Occupational Health and Safety Act, 1993, to the extent relevant to workplace dust exposure.

Study requirements:

• Compare available dustfall monitoring data against the National Dust Control Regulations, licence-specific limits and, where identifiable, thresholds relevant to sensitive sectors.
• Confirm the applicable atmospheric emission licence(s), the issuing licensing authority, and the associated conditions and monitoring obligations.
• No new primary dust monitoring is required in this phase.
• The assessment must remain at an indicative level and must not constitute an environmental impact assessment or strategic environmental assessment.
• Environmental and operational impacts must be assessed alongside the economic and investment consequences of visible dust deposition, contamination risk, product quality, operational disruption and reputational exposure.

Confidentiality: all information obtained during the assignment is confidential and may be used only for this study.

Data protection: personal information of interviewees must be processed in accordance with the Protection of Personal Information Act, 2013 (POPIA).

Independence: the service provider must remain technology-neutral and may not use the assignment to promote proprietary products or services; market sounding of technology providers must not grant preferential access.

Ownership: all deliverables, data, models and working materials become the property of Freeport Saldanha upon completion and final payment.

Key personnel: named team members may not be replaced without Freeport Saldanha's written approval.

Coordination: all engagements with Transnet Group, TPT, TNPA, licensing authorities and other public bodies must be agreed in advance with the Freeport Saldanha project manager.

Review and sign-off: the steering group reviews D1, D3 and D5; consolidated comments are returned within five working days of receipt.

Reporting: short written progress updates of no more than two pages every two weeks, covering progress, emerging findings, data received and outstanding, and risks requiring Freeport Saldanha's intervention.

Format: reports in editable Microsoft Word and PDF; supporting data and models in editable Microsoft Excel.

Payment: 20% on approval of D1, 30% on approval of D3 and 50% on approval of D5, subject to confirmation by Supply Chain Management.

Evaluation basis: functionality, price and specific goals under Freeport Saldanha's Supply Chain Management policy and the Preferential Procurement Policy Framework Act, 2000 and its regulations.

• Weightings, the minimum functionality threshold and the indicative budget are to be inserted by Supply Chain Management and are not stated in the RFQ.
• The preference point system (80/20 or 90/10) is not specified.

Annexure D multi-criteria screening framework for ranking affected sectors, commodities and activities:

• Dust sensitivity (visible dust, contamination, filtration load, cleanliness requirements): 25%
• Economic value (investment, cargo value, revenue, employment, value-add, local procurement): 25%
• Strategic fit (Freeport Saldanha priorities, port diversification, green port positioning, regional development): 20%
• Feasibility (likelihood the activity proceeds if dust is reduced to a realistic threshold): 15%
• Reputational and market risk (market confidence, consumer perception, investor willingness): 10%
• Implementation dependency (dependence on changes by TPT, TNPA, Transnet Group or regulators): 5%

Annexure A methodology components that bidders must cost and address:

• A: existing information review — TNPA planning material, port development framework references, previous dust studies, licence conditions, monitoring reports, complaints data, operational diagrams and prior benchmarking.
• B: economic and opportunity cost assessment — affected sectors and commodities, realistic volumes and investment values, employment and value-add potential, and non-financial strategic value such as investor confidence and green port positioning.
• C: sector sensitivity and multi-criteria screening — interviews with priority investors, exporters, logistics providers, ship and rig repair firms, wind component actors and food export representatives, scored using Annexure D.
• D: technical dust pathway review — major sources and transfer points, fines content and material handling practices, wind patterns and location exposure, separating operational from engineering interventions.
• E: international benchmark and solution scan — comparable bulk-handling ports and operators including examples from Australia, Brazil and China and relevant DP World terminals; emission controls, enclosure, spraying, extraction, filtration, compaction, briquetting and clean port practices.
• F: options and implementation pathway — quick wins, medium-term upgrades and major capital options, with cost ranges, implementation owners, potential revenue or savings, regulatory implications and engagement route.

Draft report (D3) must answer: economic activity and investment impact; sector and commodity sensitivity; benchmarks; practical mitigation measures; cost, benefit and implementation for each significant option; and the stakeholder case for action.

Draft report must also address: the current known and perceived impact on target sectors and port development potential; which activities are excluded outright, made more costly, or affected mainly by perception; what level of dust reduction would satisfy priority sectors without zero-dust assumptions; which measures deliver reductions of roughly 30%, 50% or 70% against a defined baseline; which solutions are operational, which need capital, and which could generate revenue or savings through recovered fines; and which governance, commercial, licence or regulatory levers could drive implementation.

Draft report components: baseline report; sector and commodity impact assessment ranked using Annexure D; opportunity cost estimate; technical options scan; international benchmark note; and a short list of priority interventions with indicative cost range, implementation complexity, owner, likely impact, risks and next step.