Santos-Guarujá Tunnel: hurdles and changes characterized project in the last decade

The submerged tunnel extends from the Macuco area in Santos to Vicente de Carvalho (photo) in Guarujá (Vanessa Rodrigues/Arquivo AT)

Announced again in February this year, now in a partnership between the State and Federal governments, the Santos-Guarujá submerged tunnel project has faced a series of obstacles over the past ten years that have impeded its progress. From debates about its feasibility to the cancellation of a bidding, the execution of the project was continually delayed. However, this time, the project, which had its first scope in 1927 —almost 100 years ago— has an additional push to become a reality.

According to port consultant Ivam Jardim, the key factor favoring the project now is the support from various levels of government. Jardim notes that there is collaboration among municipal, state, and federal levels. “This cooperation is a significant advancement for the project, reflecting the consensus on its importance for regional development and urban mobility improvement”, he says.

Port engineer Rodrigo Paiva points out that the change in the project's location has also accelerated the process. “There has been progress, and now, the usual stages of any project of this scale need to be completed. They are not easy, but today, they are surmountable. I believe this is largely due to the change in the project's location”, he emphasizes.

Despite the advancements, experts warn that there are still obstacles to overcome before the start of construction, which is expected in the second half of 2025. One issue is the disagreement between the state and federal governments regarding the proposed routes.

“While the Ministry of Ports and Airports (MPor) prefers a route without expropriations, the State Government is licensing another one”, Jardim explains. One factor causing this divergence is how the Light Rail Vehicle (VLT) will operate in the tunnel. The inclusion of this modal in the submerged connection was added to the project and reported by A Tribuna on May 7 of this year.

For the consultant, these uncertainties in project could make potential investors move away at the time of the auction. “It is crucial for the involved parties to align their expectations and resolve these disagreements to ensure investor confidence and the success of the project” Jardim points out.

Bridge proposal On February 5, 2019, then-Governor João Doria approved the construction of a 7.5-kilometer bridge between the two cities. Previously, in 2010, former Governor José Serra had inaugurated a model of a bridge and spent R\$ 1.3 million on the basic project. In both cases, the ideas failed.

Forecast According to Governor Tarcísio de Freitas (Republicanos), the contract for the Santos-Guarujá submerged tunnel works will be signed in 2025. However, the start of the interventions requires approval from the State Environmental Council (Consema) and the issuance of the Preliminary License (LP) by Cetesb. On June 12, the governor and Santos Mayor Rogério Santos (Republicanos) met in São Paulo to discuss the matter.

As reported by A Tribuna , after the meeting, the environmental impact study was submitted to Cetesb, which is currently under review. The bidding process should open with the LP next year, aiming to attract investors with legal certainty. The tunnel, which will be jointly constructed by the State and Federal governments, is expected to cost at least R\$ 6 billion in public funds. The dry connection will cover 1.5 km, including a submerged tunnel of 870 meters. The structure will consist of precast concrete modules.

Financing impasse was an obstacle in 2014 From euphoria to frustration, A Tribuna has recorded all the times the tunnel was discussed since 1927. However, it is evident that in the last ten years, the dry connection has come closer to reality, even halting the port for necessary studies. Yet, it was only an illusion.

For example, ten years ago, expectations were high for the start of construction. At that time, it was hoped that the works would begin in 2015, funded by the State. As reported by A Tribuna , in April 2014, the State Environmental Council (Consema) authorized Cetesb to issue the Preliminary License (LP), a document necessary for the project to be bid.

However, in July of that year, the tunnel bidding was canceled due to a financing obstacle. A month later, the now-defunct state-owned company Dersa, responsible for the project, announced that the total cost of the project —due to inflation— had increased by R\$ 688 million. The final price jumped to R\$ 3.2 billion at the time, a 27% increase.

According to A Tribuna , on August 22, 2014, the increase was comparable to the amount the São Paulo Government had planned to spend on a previous bridge project, which was estimated at R\$ 700 million.

The expectations for starting tunnel construction in 2015, however, were curtailed. In January, the State Court of Auditors (TCE) ordered the suspension of the bidding to “avoid possible irregularities” present in the bid document. After reviewing the documents, the agency instructed Dersa to correct the bid document to open a new bidding process.

The economic crisis Brazil faced at the time hindered the opening of a new bidding process, as the Federal Government was forced to implement resource cuts. The State needed authorization from the National Treasury Secretariat (STN) to increase its debt by R\$ 7 billion, of which R\$ 1.3 billion was required for the tunnel execution.

With this uncertainty, a geological survey was completed in September 2015 after a year and a half of studies. The research was conducted by the company Alphageos Tecnologia Aplicada. Samples of sediments from the area where the tunnel is to be built were collected at more than 60 meters deep.

In 2019, the project gained momentum when it was included in the privatization plan for the Port of Santos. At that time, the tunnel was to be part of a package of concessions involving the privatization of the Port’s administration. However, concerns about the management of port infrastructure, along with political resistance, created new obstacles.