DPE Quarterly Reports; SAA & Transnet employees submissions, with Deputy Minister

This premium content has been made freely available

Public Enterprises

14 October 2020
Chairperson: Mr K Magaxa (ANC)
Share this page:

Meeting Summary

The Committee was briefed by the Department of Public Enterprises (DPE) on its third and fourth quarter financial performance reports and service delivery performance of state-owned companies. The Department informed Members of the Committee that the third quarter performance for 2019/20 was 77% and the Department reported 22 indicators for the quarter and of the 22, 17 targets were achieved. The fourth quarter performance for 2019/20 was 77% with 26 indicators for the quarter, and 20 indicators were achieved. The meeting took place on a virtual platform

The Committee expressed its displeasure with the underperformance of the Department. Members of the Committee found it unexplainable that shareholder contracts had not been signed; something which would make it difficult to measure performance.In terms of state-owned companies, the Committee was of the view that issues presented by the Department were not new, especially the non-payment of salaries, which is one of the major concerns for the Department. The Committee also found it concerning that there was no consequence management when targets were not met in state-owned companies.

The Committee also considered submissions from the employees of South African Express Airways, as well as submissions from former employees of Transnet who were unfairly dismissed and allowed the Department to respond to their grievances.

Meeting report

Opening remarks: Chairperson

The Chairperson welcomed the Portfolio Committee and wished Members a successful last term of Parliament for the year 2020. He urged the Committee Members to remain vigilant in their protective measures against the COVID-19 pandemic even though the number of infections is on the decline in the country. Although the main agenda issue of the meeting was to receive a briefing on the third and fourth quarterly performance by the Department of Public Enterprises, the Committee had been put under a lot of pressure by the employees and former employees of some of the State-Owned Enterprises (SOEs) to voice out their grievances. The workers were invited to the meeting to voice out those grievances to the Department.

The Chairperson advised that the Portfolio Committee is not the Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration (CCMA) and that structures that deal with issues of labour and employment, where workers could voice out their dissatisfaction or complaints about their employers are available. However, if there are issues that are put at the Committee’s disposal to follow and investigate as part of their oversight, the Committee has to attend to those issues.

2019/20 Quarter Three and Four Performance: DPE

Mr Phumulo Masualle, Deputy Minister of Public Enterprises, introduced the presentation and allowed the Director-General to proceed.

Mr Kgathatso Tlhakudi, Director-General, Department of Public Enterprises, said that the third quarter performance for 2019/20 was 77% and the Department reported 22 indicators for the quarter. Of the 22, 17 targets were achieved. The fourth quarter performance for 2019/20 was 77% with 26 indicators for the quarter, and 20 indicators were achieved. The Department received an unqualified audit for the current financial year and the Auditor-General would provide a presentation of that outcome in due course. Some of the targets that were not achieved by the Department included the development of the Green Paper for the SOE Bill, the report on the social impact assessment of State-Owned Companies (SOCs’) CSI programmes, as well as reports on the implementation of Alexkor’s proposed shareholding optimal structure, among others.

In terms of the financial performance, the Department was able to achieve 99% of the expenditure targets, with the total expenditure excluding payments for financial assets and transfers made to SOCs at the end of March reaching 87.1%. The spending included amounts paid to ESKOM, SAA, DENEL and SAX for working capital and settlement of government guaranteed debts. The spending on compensation of employees and goods & services was lower than the budget as a result of unfilled posts and non-implementation of the development of the Green paper for the Shareholder Management Bill.

In terms of the performance of the SOEs, SAFCOL’s shareholder performance improved in the previous year after a decline of two consecutive years but due to COVID-19, there was a decline in the quarter one overall performance. The Company is in the process of finalising a COVID-19 scenario plan that would assist in minimising the risk of the pandemic’s impact for the remainder of the year, which will be presented to DPE in the next quarter. DENEL had a difficult Q1 and Q2 for the 2020/21 financial year due to a combination of factors, including COVID-19 and liquidity challenges. DENEL was unable to meet all its financial obligations such as payment of full salaries from May 2020 to date, due to the weak financial position and reduced cash from operations. Alexkor’s financial position remained dire, with the COVID-19 pandemic worsening the already struggling performance and despite the eased restrictions of level 1, operations struggled to scale up. TRANSNET was significantly impacted by the depressed economic climate and COVID-19, especially due to the low customer demand. ESKOM is faced with financial, operational and structural challenges and struggles especially with liquidity and municipal arrear debt. ESKOM has also been impacted by COVID-19, including the number of infected employees and contractors, as well as the impact on production across the capital expansion programme due to Lockdown. SAA is under business rescue and the creditors have agreed on the business rescue plan that was presented by the Department but the implementation would be slightly delayed although the funding was secured.

Discussion

Ms J Tshabalala (ANC) wanted to know about the study that was referred to in slide five of the presentation and what it was about, as well as its cost and who would fund it. The study was deferred to 2020/21 financial year and led to the delayed conclusion of the bids evaluation.She also wanted to know why the shareholder compacts were not signed for quarter three and quarter four and what plans were made by the Department to correct the issue, as well as the comments from the Auditor-General on the issue.

Ms Tshabalala asked the Department to provide the Committee with the proposed shareholding optimal structure for Alexkor and the reasons for not implementing the structure besides the financial position of the company. She also asked for the current balance sheet for Alexkor and the extent to which the Department could guarantee that the matter would be addressed. She agreed with the Director-General that SAA and SA Express need intervention from Treasury and asked for more details on the rescue strategy that the Department was working on.

She was concerned about the quarter 3 and quarter 4 performance and the targets that were not reached by the Department and wanted to know whether the Department really went back to the drawing board after COVID-19 came, based on what would have been budgeted for and financed. She wanted to know whether the Department did a re-structuring of its targets based on the COVID-19 budget re-adjustments that were made.

Mr G Cachalia (DA) said that the Committee looks at very important issues in terms of the economy of the country and have frankly reached the tipping point.He said that he had listened and read the presentation before the meeting and it had many plans but not enough progress. Since 1994, the country plowed R178 Billion in bailouts intoSOEs and this brought the country into a parlous state.He wanted to know where the R10.5 Billion that would be going into SAA would come from because Treasury had clarified that fiscus would not be able to shoulder this.

He also wanted to know where the working capital for DENEL was going to come from, as there had been no commitment from the Minister or from the Treasury on funding DENEL.

Mr Cachalia was happy that there had been some progress in terms of unbundling in ESKOM and expressed that there is a need for a clear commitment to specific timelines without delays because without unbundling happening, there would be no further space for investment of private-public partnerships. He asked about the progress on incentivizing power generation by private citizens, as this could assist significantly in terms of solar for private citizens.

Ms O Maotwe (EFF) said that she was not surprised by the under performance of the Department as it is led by people who are not capable at all.The Department did not achieve a single target in quarter 3 and quarter 4 and their reasons for deviation show that they had been sleeping throughout the Lockdown period. She found it inexplicable that the Shareholder contracts were not signed, which meant that there would be no way that the Department could measure their performance. The Department provided no reasons for the deviations in implementations for the SOEs, including SAA and SA Express. She said that the Department is hopeless and should not continue to use COVID-19 as the reason for its failures because the pandemic affected the whole world. Measures should have been put in place to work around the pandemic. She added that issues presented by the Department were not new, especially the non-payment of salaries at SAA and SA express, as the companies had presented their problems in the first quarter.

She wanted to know what the Department had really done to try and change these situations.In January, the CEO of ESKOM said that the mines should generate their own electricity and on 7 October, the CEO said the best way to increase SA’s energy security is to bring more private producers onto the national grid. The CEO was basically selling the State-Owned Entity to private investors because they were unable to keep it afloat. Ms Maotwe wanted to know what the Department would do about the CEO, as he publicly proclaimed that he would sell ESKOM. She also wanted to know what the Department is doing with regards to the allegations about the executives of the SOEs that are harassing the whistleblowers of misconduct in the respective SOEs.

Mr S Gumede (ANC) agreed that some of the concerns about the SOEs that were raised by the Department in their quarter 3 and quarter 4 reports were issues that had been raised before and that the Department had indeed failed in improving those situations. He wanted to know why the Department struggles to fill the outstanding posts, as it is part of the reasons why the compensation targets are never reached at full capacity in the Department’s reports. He also wanted to know how SAFCOL managed to achieve R1 million in profits in the first quarter and whether the same strategy could be implemented in the following quarters in order to grow the profits up until they reach a Billion Rands.

Mr Gumede also asked how much the Global Containerised Trade of 14% would affect TRANSET and the extent to which the company is prepared to deal with the situation. He was also concerned about the amount of debt in ESKOM and urged that the unbundling process is given a chance.

 Lastly, he wanted to know what is preventing the Department from assisting SA Express and asked whether the cost containment is not affecting the operations of ESKOM.

Ms C Phiri (ANC) said that since the beginning of the Sixth Administration, the Committee had been asking the Department about the consequence management actions that they have undertaken with regards to the SOEs because they always present unmet targets and irregularities.

Secondly, she wanted to know what happened to the strategic plan for DENEL and the investor that was said to be the potential funder of the plan, as it was promised that DENEL would be back on its feet and running in the current financial year. Lastly, she asked the Deputy Minister and Director-General to promise to restore the pride of South Africa by devising a plan for reviving SAA before the end of the current month.

Response

Deputy Minister Masualle said that South Africa is currently going through a very deep economic slump, which has also impacted government resources across the board to the extent that even legitimate requests for funding have not really emerged to the satisfaction of those making them.As such, DPE has knocked at Treasury looking for support for some of theSOEs that are going through difficulties. Some of these difficulties may have been a result of maleficence over many years within the SOEs and some difficulties may have been market related,such as COVID-19, which sometimes may seem to be used as an excuse.The others are affected by geopolitical developments, for example at DENEL, one of the issues was the over-exposure in terms of clients in the Middle East, which was very volatile and at times was always a subject of international gatherings which expressed human rights concerns issues, so a combination of factors have impacted the space in trying to find support for the SOEs.

DPE engaged with the Treasury on working to finding an answer to where the R10.5 billion to rescue SAA would come from, including through engagement with the markets, particularly banks and other funding agencies to look at how they could come to the party because fiscus by itself has exhausted its ability to be able to meet this obligation. From the level of the government, DPE is certain and can say that the solution to the issue will be found by the end of the month and the Medium Term Budget Policy Statement (MTBPS) will have a pronouncement regarding the issue. The timing of this was all sequenced to suggest that as the first allocation is made available, the other stages will come into play as the entity is rising again.

Similarly, with regards to DENEL, the issue was in ensuring that all the units in the Company are fully operational and for that purpose, operating capital is needed. There had been allocations made to DENEL, as some were made to provide for some of the maturing debts from the past year. DPE engaged a number of avenues, including rescheduling of some of the debt maturity dates, as well as engaging the Treasury with the view to somewhat looking afresh at some of the conditions that were attached to some of those applications.That process will only be final once it is reverted back to the legislature that is Parliament for finality.

With regards to Alexkor, DPE reached the point that the continued arrangement that currently exists is unsustainable.Without there being a valid fundamental overhaul including bringing in expertise in that environment, it could not continue as usual and DPE would have to provide more details in that respect in due course. DPE had to deal with issues of governanceat Alexkor, which had completely collapsed and looked at some of the corruption that was embedded in the functioning of the entity over many years.

Perhaps with more strategic capacity, the Department of Mineral Resources and Energy could assist DPE to deal with that in a sustainable way going forward. DPE has been working to make sure that there is a regime that is embraced throughout the system and the oversight mechanism over the SOEs is predictable but the DPE are attempting to improve on these matters. What has led the SOEs to find themselves in debt, in particular ESKOM, was that their services were not paid for in many instances and inproviding these services, loans had to be made. They could not service the loans and eventually the fiscus could no longer fund the loans/services which resulted to the entity going back to the people so that the power costs could be paid.

Mr Tlhakudi clarified that the report that was tabled in the meeting covered quarter 3 and 4 of 2019/20, meaning it covered up to March 2020 but because it is now the beginning of quarter 3 of 2020-2021, DPE also included information of whatever transpired in the last two quarters in the report. That is where there might have been a mix-up in information because COVID-19 really did affect proceedings of plans in the year from the end of the fourth quarter. Unfortunately, the pandemic has affected countries all over the world and has affected the SOEs in receiving revenue. He added that the Department had actually done well under trying circumstances by achieving 77% and if it were not for some of the targets that they consciously held back, the performance of the Department would be well above 80%. The shareholder compacts have to do with how the target is bundled in the APP, for example if the Department has seven entities, seven shareholder contracts should be signed.But, if there are two entities where one is going into business rescue and the other into liquidation and both are becoming incapacitated in the process, it becomes difficult to conclude on the targets intended to achieve.

 Mr Tlhakudi asked to submit a document that indicates a breakdown of the statutory performance targets, including corporate plans, shareholder compact targets etc, to show how the Department has performed in order to give the Committee members a greater appreciation of the situation.He added that if Ms Maotwe had the information on incidences of whistleblowers being victimised, the DPE would be happy to accept the information so that the situation could be dealt with.On the SOE Bill, the DPE consciously held back on the process because the cost of that was at about R20 Million in terms of the work that needed to be done.

In terms of SAFCOL’s performance, leadership has been instrumental in the stability of the entity since 2018 on the board level after the CEO was appointed at the end of 2017 and that big step went a long way in getting the business to start picking up. The collection of R1 million in profits was the fruits of those basics that were at play in the entity and the DPE look forward to seeing the same benefits and starting to manifest in the other entities.In terms of the legal matters at SA Express, in order for DPE to be able to meet the request that the employees had made, there are legal impediments to providing the funding that is required.SA Express had been assisted in the past before it went into business rescue, as there was a R300 million allocation, followed by a R1.25 billion in the previous year. The cost containment effort at ESKOM was to drive down some of the inefficiencies, such as the cost of procuring the primary energy. With regards to consequence management, Mr Tlhakudi requested to bring a comprehensive report that would explain the set of actions taken by the Department on issues relating to corruption and misconduct on SOEs. 

Follow up questions

Ms Maotwe said that the Department did not respond to the issue of the ESKOM CEO and his remarks regarding bringing private people on board. She wanted to know what the board meetings yielded for the third and fourth quarters in the previous year and in the current year and what was done differently, as the presentation was exactly identical from the one presented in the previous year. She added that the Director-General should not have asked her to bring forward the names of the whistleblowers from ESKOM because he knew who they are from the previous meetings and wanted to know what the Department had done about the issue.

MsTshabalala asked the Department to require more information from ESKOM about the meters that were installed and the areas that they were installed in. She also asked for an explanation of the impact on the revenue shortfall on ESKOM. She agreed with slide 50 of the presentation on the application of funding the MTF process on SAA and added that slide 54 on the progress in forensic investigations and measures to strengthen anti-corruption was crucial, as it gives SIU proclamations from TRANSNET, DENEL, ESKOM and SAA under the supervision of the Department. She felt that it was important to flag and highlight to people that the issue of corruption is being dealt with. She then asked when the approved corporate plan for Alexkor should be expected.She said that Ms Maotwe was out of order by saying that the Department was sleeping on the job, as those comments were unwarranted.

Consideration of submission from the employees of South African Express Airways

Mr Shainil Giyapersad, an employee of SA Express Airways, said that the employees of the company found themselves in an unpleasant predicament where their salaries have been outstanding from February and March. In response to this, the Department made numerous agreements with other departments as well as theMinister of Public Enterprises and the Director-General but up to date, there was very little progress in addressing the matter. The airline was said to be having its final liquidation hearing on 28 October and about 691employees had been left destitute in the interim, with very little support and they had not received support as much as employees from SAA had received.

Mr Giyapersad felt that it was unfair that SA Express Airways was not supported equally as other SOEs. The Department assisted the employees with their UIF funding made available by government, but the funding was not sufficient to cover the expenses of the employees at large. The funding arrived months later and when it did, it had to be paid back to banks because of debts acquired over the months. The allegation by the Department was that they provided the entity with a R1.2 billion bailout for the financial year 2019/20 but the money was ringfenced to be paid for government guaranteed debt and was very little because nothing entered into the company's account for capitalisation of the enterprise. There were numerous cases in the Zondo Commission but there were very little prosecutions.The entity was afforded an amount of R164 million in the budget and that amount was used to pay the lessors for the airplanes to be returned so that process of liquidating the company and disposing of the assets would begin. Another problem was that the employment contracts were temporarily suspended as of the end of April and the UIF department held employees responsible for theTERS amounts that they had to pay back before they would able to qualify for UIF.It is difficult to secure employment in the present economy, as aviation globally has been affected by the lockdown and there are very few job opportunities. Not only are the careers badly affected but also the ability to secure employment, which has caused uncertaintyabout the future.The Department made numerous media statements regarding the future of the employees and that they would chart a way forward for them so that they could at least have some closure as to whether they will continue with their careers and whether the company would be rescued but nothing came to fruition.

Response by DPE

Mr Tlhakudi sympathised with the employees of SA Express Airways and added that a similar situation was unfolding at SAAand other SOEs, as employees had not been receiving their full salaries.Eachof the entities experienced different levels of damage from the mismanagement and corruption that happened, which is the reason that the Department is working to bring people to account for the damage across the public entities.DPE had engaged with an employee’s representative group from SA Express as to how communication would be disseminated to the rest of the employees. It is an area that the Department would look into. The Department had also been engaging with the Human Rights Commission to try and find a solution for situation at SA Express and other SOEs.The biggest hurdle that needed to be overcome was that when these businesses get into trouble there is a legal hurdle that the state needs to overcome if it were to seek to provide assistance to the entities. The state cannot step in without attracting liabilities from the other creditors of SA Express. The role of SA Express in transforming the industry cannot be denied and there are a lot of black pilots that were produced by the entityand government would like to be able to retain those pilots and give an opportunity to more going forward, but in order to be able to do so, the state has to overcome COVID-19.

Discussion

Ms Maotwe said that the Department was not really helpful, as the Human Rights Commission matter was not forwarded there by the Department but was taken there through the protesting of the employees themselves.The Department must take the employees seriously and should not have people working without being paid.

Mr Cachalia said that the comments from the from the DG and the Deputy Minister were frankly a cold comfort to the employees. The DPE as the representative of the shareholder is responsible for the state of these bankrupt enterprises, as complete corruption and mismanagement grew and festered under the government's leadership.The state must actually hold his head in shame regardless of the protection provided by limited liability.

Ms Tshabalala empathised with the situation at SA Express and added that the Committee was not happy with the state of affairs and how things had unfolded in the SOE. She expressed hope that the situation would be turned around as soon as possible and added that the situation in the entity was a result of corruption and mismanagement. Public servants need to be incorruptible, dedicated and committed to the functioning of the SOEs.

Mr Gumede said that it was highly unlikely that SA Express would be absorbed into SAA, as the liquidation date is closing in. He said that the only thing that they could do about the matter at this stage was to empathise with the employees.

Ms Phiri said that the Deputy Minister and the Director-General need to do something about the issue of the UIF-TERS debt that was raised by the employees of SA Express.

The Chairperson said that the challenges that the Department is facing in the SOEs were not created by the current administration and that everyone in the sixth Parliament seek to rescue the situation that they found. There is the Zondo Commission, Hawks and National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) trying to also play their part in taking to task those individuals that played a particular destructive role in destroying these entities.He added that Members of Parliament are not in their platform to demonstrate to people how their individual political parties would handle matters better.Members have to understand these issues in their realness and try to provide a solution and a way out so that at the end of the day the people who are victims of maladministration and corruption such as SA Express workers can be assisted.Corruption and maladministration destroy the country and the administrative capacity of the state. The DG said that there is a process of trying to engage and find a solution to this matter and for the Members of Parliament, as people who play an oversight role having listened to the workers and the Department, they need to put pressure on the Department so that they can resolve this matter as early and as humanly possible.In the next meeting with the Department, they need to show how the matter has been resolved.

Deputy Minister Masualle said that the DPE was sympathetic to the plight of the SA Express employees and to that effect the DPE were the ones who tried opening another avenue to help sustain the employees when everything else hit rock bottom even though the avenue was insufficient. In the amount of R10.5 Billion, there is a request which is, part of that R10.5 Billion is aimed at addressing the plight of employees at SAA but MrCachalia referred to it as some vanity project, where on the one hand he did not see the need for but on the other hand, because there were employees in front of him, he found a reason to lambast the DPE for not doing much to deal with the plight of the employees.Those double standards need to be exposed for what they are, opportunism.DPE has explored other avenues to try and equate the employees at SAA with those at SA Express but that needed to go through the legal provisions.

Consideration of submission from former employees of Transnet

Mr Arthur Mendi, a former employee of TRANSNET in the Port of Richards Bay, said that he was unfairly suspended from work because he questioned some of the corrupt activities that occurred in the workplace. He said that the matter was escalated to the then CEO, who initiated a forensic investigation on the matter within TRANSNET in 2019. When the investigations were concluded in the year, TRANSNET executives and management were not at liberty to disclose the information on the forensic outcomes to prove Mr Mendi’s case that he did not practice any form of misconduct in the workplace. He requested the Committee to intervene in the issue by communicating with TRANSNET to provide the forensic reports.Mr Mendi had tried all other avenues before seeking the help of the Portfolio Committee, including the Chairperson of the Board, the group CEO, the Legal Department, as well as the previous Acting COO.

Mr Wonderboy Kamnqa, one of the 12 former employees of TRANSNET in the Port of Ngqura who were unfairly dismissed, said that they were dismissed without a fair trial, without committing any form of misconduct and had not received any form of warning whatsoever.He said that the matter brought suffering and pain in their lives. What led them to being dismissed from work was favoritism, nepotism and racism from the supervisor in their department. They had reported the issues to the then General Manager (GM) and told him that they were scared to speak out on the matters because they were afraid that they would be victimized or given written warnings and he promised them that such would not happen. After three months, it was the same supervisor that victimised them and did not want to speak to them because of the colour of their skins. They reported the supervisor to management and were told that the matter would be resolved by the end of the following day. The supervisor would then in the following week arrive early to hand them suspension letters.After their dismissal, they went to their Union, which assisted them to have a hearing with management and during the hearing they managed to record on a phone a conversation where three officials were devising a strategy of how to get rid of them. The officials were the Presiding Officer, the E.R. Officer and the manager whom they had reported their matter to. The Union ended up not referring the matter to the Bargaining Council, which the employees felt that it was done deliberately, as the Union had met with the E.R. Officer. The employees wrote letters and emails to TRANSNET management and submitted evidence that they had not committed misconduct and a forensic report was commenced, but up to date there had been no way forward. Mr Kamnqa asked the Portfolio Committee to assist them in resolving the matter.

Response by DPE
Mr Tlhakudi asked that the Department would be given until next week to collect the facts from the employees so that they could be able to liaise with TRANSNET, to see if the cases are still within their system and to provide a comprehensive report to the Committee.

The Chairperson agreed to give the opportunity to the Department. He then thanked the workers that came forward with the information and reassured them that they would see to it that the matters are resolved.

Mr Gumede said that there was a story that was not reported in the TRANSNET submissions, wherea contractor or a representive of a particular contractor had a discussion with a Minister and a decision was taken that the compensation would be R20 Million but it was not paid because a legal person in TRANSNET did not sign.The matter went to court and the court said there was nothing that they could do if the legal person in the company had not signed.

The Chairperson said that the issue raised by Mr Gumede was a different issue from the ones discussed in the meeting.

Adv L Mpumlwana (ANC) requested that the Department also add the issue raised by Mr Gumede in their report in the next week.

The Chairperson said that the issue has had a written response from the Minister of DPE and agreed with Adv Mpumlwana that it should be added in the report. He allowed the representatives of the Department as well as the employees to leave the meeting and moved on to the next item of the meeting.

Consideration and adoption of fourth term programme

The Committee will be briefed by the Board of DENEL on 21 October on financial governance challenges facing the company. On the28 October, the Committee will be briefed by the Department of Public Enterprises on its Annual Report and Financial Statements for the 2019/20 financial year. On 4 November, the Committee will be briefed by the DPE on the outcomes of forensic investigations at Alexkor and on the progress made in implementing a turnaround strategy. On 11 November, the Committee will be briefed by the DPE and Business Rescue practitioners on the progress made in restructuring State-Owned Aviation Assets. On 18 November, the Committee will be briefed by ESKOM on the financial statements for the 2019/20 financial year. From 2 - 5 December, the Committee will do oversight visits to Alexkor.

Ms Tshabalala proposed that the programme should include a presentation on the forensic investigation by the Department to demonstrate the measures taken to combat corruption.She also proposed that the Committee put the first AG report on PPE corruption next week.

The Chairperson agreed with Ms Tshabalala and asked for a mover and seconder for the adoption of the programme.

Ms Tshabalala moved for the adoption of the fourth term programme with amendments and Adv Mpumlwana seconded the adoption.

The meeting was adjourned.


 

Download as PDF

You can download this page as a PDF using your browser's print functionality. Click on the "Print" button below and select the "PDF" option under destinations/printers.

See detailed instructions for your browser here.

Share this page: