Project Part B-2 Feasibility Study of Tanjung Priok Port Toll Road Access Aditya Nugroho

FEASIBILITY STUDY OF TANJUNG PRIOK PORT TOLL ROAD ACCESS

(LIFE CYCLE COST ANALYSIS)

CE 5207 PAVEMENT NETWORK MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS

ADITYA NUGROHO

HT083276E

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SINGAPORE

2010

1

Department of Civil Engineering

CE 5207 Pavement Network Management System

1.0 DETERMINE NUMBER OF LANES OF PROPOSED TOLL ROAD ACCESS

Based on traffic survey data which conducted in the previous month (part B-1), max lane capacity are obtained with total flow of 606 truck

(hr/lane) or with converted to the Passenger Car Unit thus the max lane capacity is 1.576 (pcu/hr/lane)1. To determine number of lane needed,

the initial annual traffic of vehicles was derived by export and import of container boxes at the Tanjung Priok port (see Appendix 1).

Based on total export and import from the 6 years historical data (Appendix 1), the maximum container boxes throughout the year are chosen

in this analysis (Export = 1.511.187 and Import = 1.371.749). It should be noted that in this analysis number of transhipment container box are

neglected. In addition the assumption of flow direction are developed by consider, export is belong from the city to port and import from port

to the city. Thus initial traffic of base year only for truck traffic (assuming container box equivalent to 20 ft. Therefore 2 box equal to 1

container truck).

In order to get accurately estimation number of lanes during period of analysis (20 years), following procedures are employed:

Traffic growth 1% per annum;

Converted all truck traffic which obtained from the container boxes into PCU;

Due to highest mixed traffic flow of private car in total traffic flow, therefore in determining number of lanes, I am consider peak hour

traffic in this analysis;

Back-calculation of yearly traffic (AADT) into hourly traffic by employed maximum monthly, daily and hourly expansion factor.

(Data was obtained from primary rural road of the USA with assuming that the traffic characteristic is similar with toll road in

Indonesia)

1 Noted that the heavy truck factor is found 2.6 in Singapore freeway based on study by Fan (1990).

2



Table 1. 1 Traffic Projection of Truck

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

City to port 755.593 763.149 770.781 778.489 786.273 794.136 802.078 810.098 818.199 826.381

Port to city 685.875 692.733 699.661 706.657 713.724 720.861 728.070 735.351 742.704 750.131

Total 1.441.468 1.455.883 1.470.442 1.485.146 1.499.997 1.514.997 1.530.147 1.545.449 1.560.903 1.576.512

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

City to port 834.645 842.992 851.421 859.936 868.535 877.220 885.993 894.852 903.801 912.839

Port to city 757.632 765.209 772.861 780.589 788.395 796.279 804.242 812.284 820.407 828.611

Total 1.592.277 1.608.200 1.624.282 1.640.525 1.656.930 1.673.500 1.690.235 1.707.137 1.724.208 1.741.450

Since the truck traffic has been projected with growth of 1% p.a during period of analysis, thus the number of PCU is needed to determine

number of lane. Following is traffic projection of PCU unit with converted all truck traffic with PCU factor.

Table 1. 2 Traffic Projection of PCU

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

City to port 1.964.543 1.984.188 2.004.030 2.024.070 2.044.311 2.064.754 2.085.402 2.106.256 2.127.318 2.148.591

Port to city 1.783.274 1.801.107 1.819.118 1.837.309 1.855.682 1.874.239 1.892.982 1.911.911 1.931.030 1.950.341

Total 3.747.817 3.785.295 3.823.148 3.861.379 3.899.993 3.938.993 3.978.383 4.018.167 4.058.349 4.098.932

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

City to port 2.170.077 2.191.778 2.213.696 2.235.833 2.258.191 2.280.773 2.303.581 2.326.616 2.349.883 2.373.381

Port to city 1.969.844 1.989.543 2.009.438 2.029.532 2.049.828 2.070.326 2.091.029 2.111.940 2.133.059 2.154.390

Total 4.139.921 4.181.321 4.223.134 4.265.365 4.308.019 4.351.099 4.394.610 4.438.556 4.482.942 4.527.771

3



From the above PCU unit figure, therefore the number of lanes can be calculated by employed Back-calculation procedures with taking

maximum monthly, daily and hourly expansion factor in the analysis.

Initial AADT from city to port direction (1.964.543/365 = 10.765)

Initial AADT from port to city direction (1.783.274/365 = 9.771)

Base capacity = 1.576 (pcu/hr/lane)

Maximum Monthly Expansion Factor = 0,521 in August

Maximum Daily Expansion Factor = 5,724 in Friday

Maximum Hourly Expansion Factor = 12,85 at 4:00-5:00 p.m.

Table 1. 3 Estimation Number of Lane during Period of Analysis per Flow Direction

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Traffic vol (pcu/day)

To port 5.382 5.436 5.490 5.545 5.601 5.657 5.713 5.771 5.828 5.887

To city 4.886 4.935 4.984 5.034 5.084 5.135 5.186 5.238 5.290 5.343

Max ADT in month

To port 10.331 10.434 10.538 10.644 10.750 10.858 10.966 11.076 11.187 11.299

To city 9.378 9.471 9.566 9.662 9.758 9.856 9.954 10.054 10.154 10.256

Max ADT in day

To port 12.634 12.760 12.888 13.016 13.147 13.278 13.411 13.545 13.680 13.817

To city 11.468 11.583 11.698 11.815 11.934 12.053 12.173 12.295 12.418 12.542

Max hourly traffic

To port 983 993 1.003 1.013 1.023 1.033 1.044 1.054 1.065 1.075

To city 892 901 910 919 929 938 947 957 966 976

No of lane (n) required

To port 0,62 0,63 0,64 0,64 0,65 0,66 0,66 0,67 0,68 0,68

4



To city 0,57 0,57 0,58 0,58 0,59 0,60 0,60 0,61 0,61 0,62

Total lane required

To port 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00

To city 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

Traffic vol (pcu/day)

To port 5.945 6.005 6.065 6.126 6.187 6.249 6.311 6.374 6.438 6.502

To city 5.397 5.451 5.505 5.560 5.616 5.672 5.729 5.786 5.844 5.902

Max ADT in month

To port 11.412 11.526 11.641 11.757 11.875 11.994 12.114 12.235 12.357 12.481

To city 10.359 10.462 10.567 10.672 10.779 10.887 10.996 11.106 11.217 11.329

Max ADT in day

To port 13.955 14.095 14.236 14.378 14.522 14.667 14.814 14.962 15.112 15.263

To city 12.668 12.794 12.922 13.052 13.182 13.314 13.447 13.582 13.717 13.855

Max hourly traffic

To port 1.086 1.097 1.108 1.119 1.130 1.141 1.153 1.164 1.176 1.188

To city 986 996 1.006 1.016 1.026 1.036 1.046 1.057 1.067 1.078

No of lane (n) required

To port 0,69 0,70 0,70 0,71 0,72 0,72 0,73 0,74 0,75 0,75

To city 0,63 0,63 0,64 0,64 0,65 0,66 0,66 0,67 0,68 0,68

Total lane required

To port 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00

To city 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00

As shown in the table above, it is clear that for the entire period analysis, the proposed Tanjung Priok port toll road project only required 1

lanes per flow direction. However given the fact that the toll road consist mixed traffic flow between private car and truck, therefore the toll

road characteristic of proposed project will be setup on 4 lanes divided dual carriageway (2 lanes per flow direction).

5



2.0 ESTIMATION OF PAVEMENT SERVICE LIFE DURING ANALYSIS PERIOD

Establish alternative pavement design strategies for the analysis period and determine performance periods is needed to maintain some

preestablished minimum acceptable level of service for some specified time. Pavement Design Strategy is the combination of initial pavement

design and necessary supporting maintenance and rehabilitation activities.

In this pavement design strategy, cumulative number of truck passes is using as a function of Pavement Service Life (PSL) and the agency

still keep existing 4 lanes till the end of service life period without construct any new lanes. Truck traffic is assume will take only 2 outer

lanes, with 80% truck traffic taking the outermost lane. Therefore, the service life of the entire road is also assume same as the outermost lane

for both directions. However in order to get accurately estimating of PSL, following procedures are employed:

Total number of truck passes is 0,5 x 106 (cumulative traffic);

Develop equation to solve 20% share of trucks in total traffic volume;

Determine rehabilitation periods based on PSL (truck passes) when reach minimum acceptable level of service.

The equation to solve 20% share of truck already setup as (0.2X * 2,6 + 0,8X * 1). Noted that 2,6 is truck factor and 1 consider as PCU. Thus

with solving the equation we can get number of X is 1,32 which will be calculate with the traffic projection of PCU. Table 2.1 shows the

traffic composition calculation which done by Excel sheet during period of analysis (20 years). This calculation also shows cumulative of

truck passes at 80% outermostlane which will be useful in order to determine rehabilitation period of proposed toll road.

6



Table 2. 1 Traffic Composition per Flow Direction

Yearly 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

City to port

1. Truck 297.658 300.635 303.641 306.677 309.744 312.842 315.970 319.130 322.321 325.544

80% outermostlane 238.126 240.508 242.913 245.342 247.795 250.273 252.776 255.304 257.857 260.435

Cumulative of truck passes 478.634 721.547 466.889 714.684 464.957 717.733 473.037 730.893 491.329

Remaining truck flow 221.547 214.684 217.733 230.893

20% 59.532 60.127 60.728 61.335 61.949 62.568 63.194 63.826 64.464 65.109


Remaining truck flow 57.723

2. Car 1.488.290 1.503.173 1.518.204 1.533.387 1.548.720 1.564.208 1.579.850 1.595.648 1.611.605 1.627.721

Port to city

1. Truck 270.193 272.895 275.624 278.380 281.164 283.976 286.815 289.684 292.580 295.506

80% outermostlane 216.154 218.316 220.499 222.704 224.931 227.181 229.452 231.747 234.064 236.405


Remaining truck flow 154.970 102.605 59.238 25.049

20% 54.039 54.579 55.125 55.676 56.233 56.795 57.363 57.937 58.516 59.101



2. Car 1.350.965 1.364.475 1.378.120 1.391.901 1.405.820 1.419.878 1.434.077 1.448.418 1.462.902 1.477.531

Total

1. Truck 567.851 573.530 579.265 585.057 590.908 596.817 602.785 608.813 614.901 621.050

2. Car 2.839.255 2.867.648 2.896.324 2.925.287 2.954.540 2.984.086 3.013.927 3.044.066 3.074.506 3.105.252

Total traffic 3.407.106 3.441.177 3.475.589 3.510.345 3.545.448 3.580.903 3.616.712 3.652.879 3.689.408 3.726.302

7



Yearly 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

City to port

1. Truck 328.800 332.088 335.408 338.763 342.150 345.572 349.027 352.518 356.043 359.603

80% outermostlane 263.040 265.670 268.327 271.010 273.720 276.457 279.222 282.014 284.834 287.683

Cumulative of truck passes 754.368 520.038 288.365 559.375 333.095 609.553 388.775 670.789 455.623 743.306

Remaining truck flow 254.368 20.038 59.375 109.553 170.789 243.306

20% 65.760 66.418 67.082 67.753 68.430 69.114 69.805 70.504 71.209 71.921



2. Car 1.643.998 1.660.438 1.677.042 1.693.813 1.710.751 1.727.858 1.745.137 1.762.588 1.780.214 1.798.016

Port to city

1. Truck 298.461 301.446 304.460 307.505 310.580 313.686 316.823 319.991 323.191 326.423

80% outermostlane 238.769 241.157 243.568 246.004 248.464 250.949 253.458 255.993 258.553 261.138


Remaining truck flow 223 230.952 230.364 239.815 259.506

20% 59.692 60.289 60.892 61.501 62.116 62.737 63.365 63.998 64.638 65.285



2. Car 1.492.306 1.507.229 1.522.302 1.537.525 1.552.900 1.568.429 1.584.113 1.599.954 1.615.954 1.632.113

Total

1. Truck 627.261 633.533 639.869 646.267 652.730 659.257 665.850 672.508 679.234 686.026

2. Car 3.136.304 3.167.667 3.199.344 3.231.337 3.263.651 3.296.287 3.329.250 3.362.542 3.396.168 3.430.130

Total traffic 3.763.565 3.801.201 3.839.213 3.877.605 3.916.381 3.955.545 3.995.100 4.035.051 4.075.401 4.116.155

From the above table it is clear that the service life of pavement in City to Port direction is deteriorate in the year 3. In addition, to keep high

serviceability of pavement condition rehabilitation is needed in every two year (see Figure 2.1). However, in the most of cases it is rarely

found that the agency need to rehabilitate the pavement road every two year (10 times rehabilitation during period of service life). This

situation may be appear because the number given for PSL (total number of truck passes) is very low (0,5 x 106 ).

8



Pavement life (20 years)

Service life

3 years

0,5 x 106Pavem

en

t co

nd

itio

n

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

Figure 2. 1 Pavement Service Life of lane per flow direction (City to Port)

Pavement life (20 years)

Service life

3 years

0,5 x 106Pavem

en

t co

nd

itio

n

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

Figure 2. 2 Pavement Service Life of lane per flow direction (Port to City)

Similar with direction from City to Port, based on Figure 2.2 the service life of pavement from Port to City is deteriorated at the end of year 3,

then need to rehabilitate for next following year (every two years) with 9 time rehabilitation during period of service life.

9



3.0 LIFE CYCLE COST ANALYSIS (LCCA) OF TOLL ROAD

In this term project, the economic indicators that use for LCCA is Net Present Value, sometimes called Net Present Worth (NPW). NPV is the

discounted monetary value of expected net benefits (i.e., benefits minus costs). In theory NPV is computed by assigning monetary values to

benefits and costs, discounting future benefits (PVbenefits) and costs (PVcosts) using an appropriate discount rate, and subtracting the sum

total of discounted costs from the sum total of discounted benefits.

3.1 Project Cost Estimation

The construction cost for the proposed Tanjung Priok toll road project was based on study Yogyakarta-Solo toll road by Japan International

Cooperation Agency (JICA) study on Trans Java Toll Road (2007). Table 3.1 below summarize all the construction cost required for the

entire study.

Length of road 12 Km

Number of lanes is 4 (2 lanes per direction) dual carriageway

Pavement type: Portland Cement Concrete

Table 3. 1 Toll road project cost

Description Unit Unit cost per

lane Km Total cost

Original construction cost original cost US$441.525 US$21.193.200

Annual maintenance cost 5% of original cost US$22.076 US$1.059.660

Salvage value 20% of original cost US$88.305 US$4.238.640

Rehabilitation cost 40% of original cost US$176.610 US$2.119.320

10



3.2 LCCA calculation

Analysis period for the LCCA calculation has been setup as 20 years period. In this term project the LCCA calculation only consider from

Agency point of view, while calculation for the User cost are neglected.

Discount rate 8%

Salvage value $4.238.640.

Inflation rate during period of analysis was neglected.

Table 3. 2 Life Cycle Cost Analysis

Capital Costs: 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Construction Costs $21.193.200

Maintenance Costs $1.059.660 $1.059.660 $1.059.660 $1.059.660 $1.059.660 $1.059.660 $1.059.660

Rehabilitation Costs City to Port Direction (1)

$2.119.320

$2.119.320

$2.119.320

Rehabilitation Costs Port to City Direction (2)

$2.119.320

$2.119.320

$2.119.320

Salvage Value

NPV Calculations: 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Construction $21.193.200

Maintenance Costs (P/F) $981.167 $908.488 $841.192 $778.882 $721.187 $667.766 $618.301

Rehabilitation Costs (1)

$1.682.385

$1.442.374

$1.236.603


$1.682.385

$1.442.374

$1.236.603

Salvage Value

Present Value $21.193.200 $981.167 $908.488 $4.205.961 $778.882 $3.605.934 $667.766 $3.091.507

Capital Costs: 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Construction Costs

Maintenance Costs $1.059.660 $1.059.660 $1.059.660 $1.059.660 $1.059.660 $1.059.660 $1.059.660 $1.059.660

Rehabilitation Costs City to Port Direction (1)

$4.238.640

$2.119.320 $2.119.320

$2.119.320

11



Rehabilitation Costs Port to City Direction (2)

$2.119.320

$2.119.320 $2.119.320

Salvage Value

NPV Calculations: 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Construction

Maintenance Costs (P/F) $572.501 $530.094 $490.828 $454.470 $420.806 $389.635 $360.773 $334.049


$2.120.375

$908.940 $841.611

$721.546


$1.060.188

$908.940 $721.546

Salvage Value

Present Value $57 2.501 $3.710.657 $490.828 $2.272.350 $1.262.417 $389.635 $1.803.865 $334.049

Capital Costs: 16 17 18 19 20

Construction Costs

Maintenance Costs $1.059.660 $1.059.660 $1.059.660 $1.059.660 $1.059.660

Rehabilitation Costs City to Port Direction (1) $4.238.640

$2.119.320

$2.119.320

Rehabilitation Costs Port to City Direction (2) $2.119.320 $4.238.640 $2.119.320

Salvage Value $4.238.640

NPV Calculations: 16 17 18 19 20

Construction

Maintenance Costs (P/F) $309.305 $286.393 $265.179 $245.536 $227.348

Rehabilitation Costs (1) $1.237.219

$530.358

$454.696

Rehabilitation Costs (2) $618.609 $1.060.716 $454.696

Salvage Value $909.393

Present Value $2.165.133 $286.963 $1.856.252 $245.536 $1.136.741

Net Present Value $51.049.867

As can be seen from the table above, the LCCA was done by Excel sheet solver. Therefore by summing all the equivalent present values of

each year’s costs plus adding salvage value in the analysis, NPW for this project is negative (-$51.049.867).

12



4.0 TOLL RATE CALCULATION

In order to recover all capital cost that occured during period of analysis, therefore determine toll rate for vehicles are needed as revenue

(benefits) of Port’s toll road project. In this analysis the toll rates is assumed constant throughout period of analysis. Geometric series of

equation are develop to make convenience in analysis of toll rate. Following factor are consider in the present worth equation of toll rate:

Traffic growth 1%;

Discount rate is 8%;

The truck toll rates is assume two times more than private vehicle;

Initial traffic of passenger car and truck.

20 20

V V

1 1

(1 ) (1 )P r + T r = -$51.049.867

(1 ) (1 )

n n

pv tvn nn n

r rx x

i i

Where,

n : period of analysis Pv : Private vehicle (PCU) rtv : Toll rate for truck vehicle (2 times than rpv)

r : traffic growth Tv : Truck vehicle

i : discount rate rpv : Toll rate for private vehicle

By calculating in the Excel solver, the toll rate for each vehicles already found: US$1.218 for Passenger car and US$2.436 for Truck

vehicle. Following cashflow shows the cost recovery for toll road project.

13



Table 4. 1 Project Cost Recovery Cashflow

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Traffic

Truck 567.851 573.530 579.265 585.057 590.908 596.817 602.785 608.813 614.901 621.050

Car 2.839.255 2.867.648 2.896.324 2.925.287 2.954.540 2.984.086 3.013.927 3.044.066 3.074.506 3.105.252

Toll revenue

Truck $1.383.071 $1.396.902 $1.410.871 $1.424.979 $1.439.229 $1.453.621 $1.468.158 $1.482.839 $1.497.668 $1.512.644

Car $3.457.677 $3.492.254 $3.527.177 $3.562.448 $3.598.073 $3.634.054 $3.670.394 $3.707.098 $3.744.169 $3.781.611

PV Revenue

Truck $1.280.621 $1.197.618 $1.119.995 $1.047.402 $979.515 $916.028 $856.656 $801.132 $749.207 $700.647

Car $3.201.553 $2.994.045 $2.799.987 $2.618.506 $2.448.788 $2.290.070 $2.141.640 $2.002.830 $1.873.017 $1.751.617

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

Traffic

Truck 627.261 633.533 639.869 646.267 652.730 659.257 665.850 672.508 679.234 686.026

Car 3.136.304 3.167.667 3.199.344 3.231.337 3.263.651 3.296.287 3.329.250 3.362.542 3.396.168 3.430.130

Toll revenue Truck $1.527.771 $1.543.048 $1.558.479 $1.574.064 $1.589.804 $1.605.702 $1.621.759 $1.637.977 $1.654.357 $1.670.900

Car $3.819.427 $3.857.621 $3.896.197 $3.935.159 $3.974.511 $4.014.256 $4.054.399 $4.094.943 $4.135.892 $4.177.251

Present value Truck $655.235 $612.766 $573.049 $535.907 $501.173 $468.689 $438.311 $409.902 $383.334 $358.489

Car $1.638.087 $1.531.914 $1.432.624 $1.339.768 $1.252.932 $1.171.723 $1.095.778 $1.024.755 $958.336 $896.222

Net Present Value of project $51.049.867 Total PV of toll revenue $51.049.868

From the table above it is clear that total present value of toll revenue for truck is $14.585.676 and for passenger car is $36.464.191 thus the

total present value of toll road revenue is $51.049.868. This result maybe appear because of round off from the excel sheet.

14



5.0 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Life Cycle Cost Analysis was done for 20 years period analysis. It is clear that in order to recover capital cost that occured during service life

period the toll rate should be US$1.218 for Passenger car and US$2.436 for Truck vehicle. In more detail the toll rate can be determine in

per Km, thus for passenger car is $0,101 and for truck vehicle is $0,203 per Km. From the toll rate calculation is clearly explained that the toll

rate given in this study is slighly highest from the current toll rate if we converted to Indonesian currency (1 USD : Rp. 9.365) thus the toll

rate will be Rp. 950/Km for passenger car and Rp. 1.901/Km for truck. Although the agency facing problem in pavement service life design,

where rehabilitation activity mostly occured in every two year in both direction. However, this situation can be overcome by increasing

annual maintenance cost, therefore the standard Pavement Service Life can be maintain at the high serviceability level of service. In addition

it is possible to construct new lanes with setup 80% truck traffic will share 50% of lane distribution at 2 outerlanes and increasing standard of

PSL.

REFERENCES

H. S. L. Fan (1990). Passenger car equivalent for vehicles on Singapore expressways. Transportation Research Part A, Vol 24 A No 5 pp

391-396.

Transportation Research Board. Highway Capacity Manual .Washington, D.C., 2000, ISBN 0-309-06681-6.

Japan International Cooperation Agency (2007). The Study on Public-Private Partnership (PPP) Scheme for Trans Java Toll Road in

the Republic of Indonesia (Final Report). Directorate General of Highways, Ministry of Public Works.

Fwa. T, F and Sinha. C, Kumares (1991). Pavement performance and Life Cycle Cost Analysis. Journal of Transportation Engineering,

Vol. 117 No 1

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transportation_Research_Board

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/0309066816

15



APPENDIX I

Export – Import Container Boxes

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

JICT Terminal

Export 450.970 509.941 447.458 488.465 545.654 603.395

Import 551.185 623.261 546.894 597.012 666.910 737.483

Total 1.002.155 1.133.202 994.352 1.085.477 1.212.564 1.340.878

Koja Terminal

Export 164.234 197.357 156.379 176.150 215.508 212.729

Import 200.730 241.214 191.130 215.295 263.399 260.002

Total 364.964 438.571 347.509 391.445 478.907 472.731

Conventional Terminal

Dom 403.745 556.044 689.111 664.671 641.383 695.063

Int'l 217.401 299.408 371.060 357.900 345.360 374.264

Total 621.146 855.452 1.060.170 1.022.571 986.743 1.069.327

Total

Export 1.018.948 1.263.342 1.292.948 1.329.286 1.402.545 1.511.187

Import 969.317 1.163.883 1.109.083 1.170.207 1.275.669 1.371.749

Grand Total 1.988.265 2.427.225 2.402.031 2.499.493 2.678.214 2.882.936

Source: PT. Pelindo II (Indonesia Port Corporation) http://www.inaport2.co.id/

http://www.inaport2.co.id/

Project Part B-2 Feasibility Study of Tanjung Priok Port Toll Road Access Aditya Nugroho

Documents

Transcript of Project Part B-2 Feasibility Study of Tanjung Priok Port Toll Road Access Aditya Nugroho