r es i rict ed pcr : mya 12004 asian development bank … · pcr : mya 12004 asian development bank...

R ES I RICT EDPCR : MYA 12004

ASIAN DEVELOPMENT BANKse for

PROJECT COMPLETION REPORT

OF THE

SEDAWGYI HYDROPOWER PROJECT

[LOAN NO. 395 - BUR(SF)]

MYANMAF

August 1989

V(Volt)kV (kilovolt)A(ampere)W(watt)kW (kilowatt)MW (megawatt)MVAr (megavar)kVA (kilovolt-ampere)Wh (watt-hour)kWh (kilowatt-hour)GWh (gigawatt-hour)

Load FactorSystems losses

Plant factor

Currency Unit = Kyat (K)K1.00 100 pyasUS$1.00 K6.90 (at appraisal)

K7.02 (at project completion)

ELECTRICAL TERMINOLOGY

= Unit of voltage1,000 volts

= Unit of current= Unit of power

1,000 watts1,000,000 watts

= 1,000,000 Volt-ampere-reactive= 1,000 VA

Unit of energy= 1,000 Wh (usual "unit" of electrical energy)= 1,000,000 kWh

ratio of average power demand to maximum power demandenergy losses incurred in power system networks andequipnent

= ratio of actual capacity utlization of the plant toits maximum possible capacity utilization

ABBREVIATIONS

EPC - Electric Power Corporation (now MEPE)ID - Irrigation DepartmentMAF - Ministry of Agriculture and ForestsMI - Ministry of Industry IIMEPE - Myanmar Electric Power Enterprise (fonnerly EPC)OPEC - Oil Producing and Exporting CountriesOSF - OPEC Special FundsTIC - Technical Implementation Committee

El - Elevation- Full Reservoir Level

ha - hectares

Notes:

(i)The fiscal year of the Government of Myanmar and the Electric PowerCorporation ends on 31 March.

(ii) Throughout this Report '$" refers to U.S. dollars.(iii)On 1 April 1989 the Electric Power Corporation (ER) was renamed

Myanmar Electric Power Enterprise (MEPE). However, in this ProjectCompletion Report (PCR) the use of EPC will be retained for consistencyarid ease of cross reference to the Appraisal Report and thecomplementary PCR prepared in Gotober 1988 on Loan 266-BUR(SF):Sedawgyi Multipurpose Dam and Irrigation Project.

R: MYA 036

PROJECT COMPLETION RERT

OF THE

SEDAWGYI HYDROFOWER PROJECT[Loan No. 395 - BUR(SF)]

IN

August 1989

Note: This report was prepared by a Bank Mission consisting of Tay Sin Yan(Senior Project Engineer, Mission Leader), Edwin Hourihan (FinancialAnalyst) and Ms. Cristina C. Meimban (Senior Assistant, LoanAdministration) which visited Myanmar from 29 June to 9 July 1989.

Page

(ii)(iii)

(iv)

11

45

6678

9101111121314

1616

(1)

TABLE OF (X)NTENTS

MAPS: 1. Sedawgyi Hydropower Project - Location Map2. Myarimar National Grid System

BASIC DATA

I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION

A. Objectives, Rationale and ScopeB. Implementation Arrangements

II. PROJECT HISTORY

A. Preparation and AppraisalB. Implementation

III. EVALUATION OF IMPL171ENTATION

A. Project ComponentsB. Project CostsC. Project ScheduleD. Engagement of' consultants and

procurement of goods and servicesE. Performance of consultants/contractors/suppliersF. Conditions and CovenantsG. DisbursementsH. Environmental ImpactI. Project BenefitsJ. Performance of Borrower and Executing AgencyK. Performance of the Bank

IV. CONCLUSIONS ANT) RECOMMENDATIONS

A. ConclusionB. Recommendations (Project Related and General)

(ii)

Map 1

100°E

/7/

(/

MYANMAR

NATIONAL GRID SYSTEM

(iii)

Map 2

/ : (

( I Z\ Shw,bo1 Laahi.

,'

s Fahm

•Ny.w'g'nw

A\ Mand&.y,hy*yO

,. e •'J Hikha

i):

' L Kyunch.wi Pakokkui Kind,

S Taungyi

5.1, Ilk 3: ka1,u,

Mas..y Bali. Ciluimi No 1Mw,

4..w\ Yw. fLI La.$Ii,---

Ky.ww,

oiii. 1 A!

r r

To

QMyslisung

O.iku

P.thsin'IMyiun9my$

Miwlemyifl

\/ 0

LEGENDI \Diwii

_________ 230kv Transmission Line 11

132kv Transmission Line

132kv Transmission Line (Under implementation)

_________ 66kV Transmission Line çSubstation o

3J'

A Steam Turbine Power Station

• Gas Turbine Power Station

ci Gas Turbine Power Station (under Implementation)

• Hyd& Power Station

o i-$yd.I Power Station (under Implementation)

-- international Boundary(not necessarily authoritative)

92°E

0 100 200 300

Kilometers

1

A.1.2.3.4.5.

6.

B.1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

Union of Burma395-BUR(SF)Sedawgyi Hydropower ProjectUnion of BurmaElectric Power Corporation(EPC) 1/$14,600,000

15 January 197927 January 1979

08 March 197914 March 1979

24 April 1979

19 June 1979

17 September 197902 October 1979None

30 June 198430 June 1988Three11 July 1988

(iv)

10.

1/

BASIC DATA SHEILoan Identification.CountryLoan No.Project TitleBorrowerExecuting Agency

Amount of Loan

Loan Data

- Date Started- Date Completed

Loan Negotiations- Date Started- Date Completed

Date of Board Approval

Date of Loan Agreement

Date of Loan Effectiveness- In Loan Agreement- Actual- No. of Exiensions

- In Loan Agreement- Extended- No. of Extensions- Actual

Terms of Loan- Interest Rate : 1 per cent (Service

Charge)- Maturity : 40 years- Grace Period : 10 years

- Interest Rate 6 per cent- Maturity : 25 years- Grace period : 5 years

Disbursements- Date of InitialDisbursement : 12 May 1980

- Date of Final Disbursement 11 July 1988- Total Disbursements $14,010,000- Amount Cancelled $590,000

Local COSt_(Financedj- Amount NIL- Percentage of Local Costs -- Percentage of Total Costs : -

Now called the Myanmar Electric Power Enterprise. (MEPE)

(v)

C. ata

1. pjcLçp ($ million)Foreign ExchangeLocal Currency

Total

2. Financpg Plan ($ million)Borrower FinancedBank FinancedOSF-Financed

Total

3. Cost Breakdown by ProjectCçponjJ4jpiflion)

a. Power Station(i) Civil Works

(ii)Generating plant & equip.mci. power stationauxiliaries, crane,eth. and installation

(iii)Consulting Services(iv)Contingencies (10%)(v)Custom Duties & Taxes(vi)Price Escalation

Sub-Total for Itom A

b. Substati(i) Equipnent mci. trans-

formers & switchgear& installation

(ii)Contingencies (10%)(iii)Custom duties & taxes(iv)Price Escalation

Sub-Total for Item B

c. Transmission Line(i)Materials & Erection(ii)Contingencies (10%)(iii)Custom duties & taxes(iv)Price Escalation

Sub-Total for Item C

d. Distribution Eguiinent(i)Equip. & Erection(ii)Contingencies (10%)(iii)Custom duties & taxes(iv)Price Ecalation

Sub-total for Item D

Total for Items A, B, C and D

AppraisalEstimate

16 .60011.90028.500

11 .90014.6002.00028.500

1.000

9.7300.3151.1054.6403.910

20.700

1.3500.1300.6000.4202.500

2.0000.1950.6000.6353.800

0.8000.0800.4000.2201.500

28.500

Actual

15.74813.38229.130

13.38214.0101.738

29.130

2.981

13.4110.5482.852

19. 792

3.469

1.052

4.521

1.273

0.591

1.864

2.046

0.907

2.953

29.130

01 Jul 79

31 Mar 80

May 80

Jun 83

Apr 83

Jun 83

(vi)

4. Project_Data

(a) Date of Contract withConsultant for EngineeringServices

(b) Completion of EngineeringDesigns

(c) Equip. and Supplies Dates- First Procurement- Last Procurement- Completion of Equiinent

Installation

(d) Start of Operations- Beginning of Start-Up- Completion of Tests

& Ccinissioning

(e) Other Milestones- Reallocation of Loan Proceeds- Consultancy Contract Revision- Date of Cancellation of

Unutilized Loan Balance

Actual

03 Mar 80

Jun 80

26 May 8318 Jun 87

Aug 88

Mar 89

Jun 89

22 Jul 8523 Jan 86

11 Jul 88

(vii)

D. Data on Bank Missions

Date 1/Type of Mission From To

Appraisal 15 Jan 79 27 Jan 79

Loan 25 Feb 79 01 Mar 79Negotiation

Review (1) 24 Sep 80 01 Oct 80

Review (2) 17 Mar 81 25 Mar 81

Disbursement (1) 29 Nov 82 01 Dec 82

Review (3) 05 Jun 83 10 Jun 83

Review (4) 28 Oct 84 02 Nov 84

Disbursement (2) 13 Nov 84 21 Nov 84

Review (5) 15 Oct 85 18 Oct 85

Disbursement (3) 27 Jun 86 09 Jul 86

Disbursement (4) 13 Nov 86 29 Nov 86

SLA 13 Jun 88 15 Jun 88

Project 29 Jun 89 09 Jul 89Completion

No. of No. of SpecializationPersons Mandays of Members

5 65 Project EngineerFinicial AnalystCountry OfficerCounselTraime-Fimncial

Analyst

1 5 Country Officer

2 16 .Pmj.EngirerFinicial Analyst

2 18 Project EngineerFinacial Analyst

2 6 Sr. ProjectSpecialist JControl Officer

1 6 Project Engineer


1 18 Sr. ProjectEngineer, CRL


3 36 Control OfficerFojat cialistProject Engineer

2 30 Project SjxcialistControl Officer

1 3 Sr. Proj. Ergirer

3 30 Sr. Proj. ErgirierFin&icial AnalystSr. Assistant

1] Excludes travel time.2] Covered other projects in Myannar.

I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION

A. Objectives, Rationale and Scope

1. Objectives

1. The Project was designed to provide additional power generation capacityto meet the projected demand of the power system of Myaninar from 1983/84. Itwas determined to be the least-cost alternative and the only available hydro-resource capable of implementation by the set deadline, taking into considerationthe status of preparedness of other potential hydro schemes. The Project wasalso intended to provide improved reliability of power supply to the Nandalayarea, which was supplied solely by the Lawpita hydropower station through a 400km transmission line. This line passes through hilly and forest areas and isexposed to frequent damage, especially during the rainy season.

2. Rationale

2. The Government's Third Four-Year Plan (FY1978/79-1981/82) gave highpriority to the construction of power generation and transmission facilities.The Project, which is the power component of the Sedawgyi Multi-PurposeDevelopment Scheme, is an integral part of EPC's power development plan, and wasconsidered important for the economic and social development of the Project areaand also for contributing to the development needs of the country's power systembeyond 1983/84.

3. The Project was designed to permit the generation of power at a lowercost when compared with meeting the same demand through the construction ofalternative diesel or oil-fired thermal power stations. It was also to providea much needed power supply to the Mandalay area, which was considered essentialto support the steady growth of industrialization in the area and for meetingthe considerable suppressed demand of consumers for domestic, commercial,industrial and other purposes.

3. Scope

4. The Project primarily consisted of the construction of a hydropowerstation of 25 MW (2 x 12.5 MW) capacity at the toe of the Sedawgyi Dam, on theright bank of the Chaungmagyi River, complete with an associated step-upsubstation (See Map 1). The Project also included the construction of a 132 kVsingle-circuit transmission line from the power station to the existing Mandalaysubstation; distribution equipment for reinforcement of the distribution systemin Mandalay; and the provision of office equipment, accounting machines andconsulting services.

B. Implementation Arrangements

1. Financing

5. The Government approached the Bank and the OPEC Special Fund (OSF)to finance the major part of the foreign exchange cost of the Project. OSF agreedto co-finance $2.0 million needed to meet part of the foreign exchange cost ofthe Project with the Bank.

2

6. The Bank's loan of $14.6 million from the Special Funds resourceswas granted for a period of 40 years, including a grace period of 10 years, andwith a service charge of 1 per cent per annum. The Borrower was the Union ofMyanmar. The Borrower agreed to provide the Electric Power Corporation (EPC)the local currency funds needed for the Project, facilities, services, land andother resources on a timely basis and as required to ensure the successfulcompletion of the Project.

7. The proceeds of the loan were relent to EPC, which was the majorExecuting Agency, 1/ at a 6 per cent rate of interest and a 25 years repaymentperiod, including a grace period of 5 years.

2. Consulting Service

8. The Irrigation Department (ID) 2/ was responsible for the designand construction supervision of the civil works for the dam and the power stationfoundation. ID engaged an Indian firm of consultants to provide the design andconstruction supervision services following the Bank's Guidelines on the Use ofConsultants. EPC which was responsible for the construction of the power stationengaged the same consultants to: (i) prepare designs and bid documents for theelectrical and mechanical works in the power station and substation; (ii)evaluate bids; and (iii) provide engineering supervision and technical assistanceduring construction, equipment installation and commissioning tests at the worksite. The design and construction of the transmission lines and distributionsystem were undertaken by EPC and no consulting services were involved.

3. Procurement

9. The Electric Power Corporation was responsible for the procurementof all goods and services for the Project, with the exception of the civil worksfor the power station, which was undertaken by ID on force account. Procurementof goods financed out of the loan was undertaken in accordance with the Bank'sGuidelines for Procurement. Wherever feasible, bid packages were grouped intoa size appropriate for international competitive bidding and each contractestimated to cost $150,000 equivalent, or more, was awarded on the basis ofinternational competitive bidding. Contracts involving less than $150,000equivalent were awarded on the basis of international shopping.

4. Project Implementation Organization

10. The Electric Power Corporation was primarily responsible forimplementation of the Project excepting the civil works of the power station,which were constructed by ID along with the construction of the Sedawgyi damunder the Irrigation Project.

1/ The funds required by Irrigation Department (ID) - the other Executing Agency- for power station civil works were provided by the Government throughbudgetary allocation.

2/ Loan Agreement, Side Letter No. 4, para 3 of Loan No. 266-BUR(SF): SedawgyiMultipurpose Dam and Irrigation Project, approved in June 1976.

11. In order to ensure coordination of action between EPC, ID and otherGovernment agencies involved in the implementation of the Multi-Purpose Scheme,a high-level Technical Implementation Committee ( TIC )!! was established. Sincethe Project and the Irrigation Project were interrelated, and because themajority of works at the Sedawgyi Dam were being undertaken by ID on forceaccount, the original organization for Project implementation under theIrrigation Project was essentially continued with respect to the Project.Accordingly, ID retained responsibility for both Projects, and directresponsibility for construction of the civil works at the dam, includingresponsibility for construction of the civil works for the power station. Forthis purpose, a Project Director had been appointed by ID. To ensuresatisfactory implementation of the power station civil works by ID however, EPCprovided experienced engineers at the Project site to assist, coordinate andsupervise such works.

12. The Electric Power Corporation was directly responsible for themechanical and electrical works at the power station including the installationof the generating plant and equipment and the step-up substation (with theassistance and under the supervision of the equipment suppliers), theconstruction of the transmission line, and the augmentation of the distributionfacilities at Mandalay. EPC established a Project Office 2/ at the Project site,headed by a full-time Project Manager. The Project Manager had directresponsibility for those components of the Project for which EPC was responsibleand was assisted by a number of full-time qualified staff.

1/ Membership of the TIC comprised eight Director Generals of GovernmentDepartments and four Managing Directors of Government corporations andenterprises, including EPC.

2/ Loan Agreement, Schedule 6, para 2(b).

4

II. PROJECT HISTORY

A. Preparation and Appraisal

1. Preparation

13. The Sedawgyi Hydropower Project is an integral part of the SedawgyiMulti-Purpose Development Scheme which envisioned irrigation, agriculture, watersupply and power development, utilizing the waters of the Chaungmagyi River byconstruction of a storage dam and related facilities. The preparatory work forthe Multi-Purpose Scheme was carried out in 1969 by a team of Russian engineers.This was updated in 1974 by the Irrigation Department (ID) within the Ministryof Agriculture and Forests (MAF). Following a Government request for Bankfinancing, a Fact-Finding Mission to Myanmar in early 1975 concluded that whilethe Scheme was technically sound and economically viable, the designs and costestimates required review. Accordingly, a technical assistance grant wasapproved in April 1975 1/ for such a review by a consulting firm.

14. The review was completed by the Consultants in August 1975 andtheir recommendations - which included changes in the layout and design of thedam and spillway, design of the power station and assessment of the Irrigationand power benefits - were accepted by the Government and the Bank. These formedthe basis for appraisal of the Multi-Purpose Scheme by the Bank in September1975. At that time, the Government requested Bank financing for the entireforeign currency requirements of the Scheme. However, in view of the size offinancing required in relation to the Bank's lending for Myanmar for that year,Bank financing was restricted to the foreign currency cost of the irrigation andagricultural components of the Scheme. A loan of $45.9 million was approved bythe Bank on 22 June 1976 for the Sedawgyi Multi-Purpose Dam and IrrigationProject,2/ which included the dam, powerhouse foundation, irrigation works andagricultural development. It was the Government's intention at that time to seekfinancing for the power component of the Multi-Purpose Scheme - which constitutesthe SedawgyI Hydropower Proj ect3/ from other sources and to undertake itsconstruction simultaneously with the construction of the dam.

2.

15. Despite its efforts, the Government was not able to obtainassistance from multilateral or bilateral sources for the entire foreign currencyfinancing needed for the Project. In April 1978, the Government requested theBank to consider financing the hydropower component of the Project, which wasincluded in the Third Four-Year Plan (FY1978/79 to FY1981/82) a d was accordedthe highest priority. In response to this request, a Fact-Finding Missionvisited Myanmar from 24 October to 3 November 1978 and determined that theProject was well suited for Bank financing but some changes in the scope and

1/ T.A. No. 138 for $49,000, approved by the President on 2 April 1975.2/ Loan No. 266-BUR(SF)3/ Throughout the report, the SedawgyI Hydropower Project is referred to as "the

Project", the Sedawgyi Multi-Purpose Dam and Irrigation Project as "theIrrigation Project" and the Sedawgyi Multi Purpose Development Scheme as "theMulti-Purpose Scheme".

5

additional studies wereConsultants, the Project15-27 January 1979.1!

necessary. On completion of the studies by thewas appraised by a Mission which visited Myanmar from

B. Implementation

16. The proposed Bank loan of $14.6 million was approved by the Bankon 24 April 1979. Loan signing took place on 19 June 1979. The loan becameeffective on 2 October 1979 which was about two weeks after the due date of 17September 1979 provided for in the Loan Agreement.

17. Following the approval of the Bank loan, the Project's co-financier,the OPEC Special Funds (OSF) approved a loan (Opec Loan 135-P) for $2.00 millionon 25 June 1979. The Loan Agreement was signed on 27 July 1979.

18. The promising pace of this start was unfortunately not sustainedand a four-year period of relative inactivity followed before the award, on 26May 1983, of the first contract (Lot I) for major plant and equipment coveringthe turbine generator and auxiliaries.

19. The original loan closing date was set for 30 June 1984 and as itbecame obvious that the Project could not be completed before that date, theGovernment applied on 22 March 1984 for the loan closing date to be extended bytwo years to 30 June 1986.

20. Another two years of painfully slow progress followed the firstaward of contract and the final major contract (Lot II) for electrical equipmentfor substations was awarded only on 5 June 1985. In the meantime the closingdate of the loan was extended for the second time at the request of the Borrowerto 31 December 1987.

21. On 7 December 1987 the Bank again extended the closing date of theloan at the request of the Borrower for the third and final time to 30 June 1988,making this loan one of the longest under implementation (nine years and twomonths from loan approval and eight years nine months from loan effectiveness).In spite of the extended loan closing, the Project was in fact not physicallycompleted before the last loan closing date of 30 June 1988.

22. Physical completion was achieved only a year later in June 1989 butthe project account was closed with the final disbursement on 11 July 1988through the expediency of payment of retention monies due to contractors againstirrevocable Bank guarantees. A chronology of events is shown in Appendix 1.

23. The final loan amount disbursed was $14,009,891 and the undisbursedbalance of $590,109 was cancelled.

1/ Two-and-a-half years after Loan 266-BUR(SF) was approved for the SedawgyiMultipurpose and Irrigation Project.

6

III. EVALUATION OF IMPLEMENTATION

A. Project Coniponents

24. The Project consisted of : -(1) Construction of a hydropower station of 25 MW (2 x 12.5 MW) capacity at

the toe of the Sedawgyi Dam, on the right bank of the Chaunginagyi River;(ii) Construction of an 11 kV to 132 kV step-up substation (switchyard);(iii) Construction of a 65 km long, 132 kV single- circuit transmission line

from the power station to the existing Mandalay substation;(iv) Provision of distribution equipment for reinforcement of the distribution

system in Mandalay; and(v) Provision of office equipment, accounting machines and consulting

services.

25. The Project was implemented without any substantial change inproject components, except for the deletion of the electronic data processingsystem. Appendix 2 shows the salient technical features of the Project as built.Figure 1 of Appendix 3 shows the general layout of the dam and appurtenances,while Figure 2 shows a cross section of the power house.

B. Project Costs

26. According to EPC's record the total cost of the Project was$26,241,000 made up of $15,748,000 in foreign currency costs and $10,493,000 inlocal currency costs 1/, well within and close to the appraisal estimates of$28,500,000, $16,600,000 and $11,900,000 respectively. EPC however did notinclude an amount of 21,789,000 Kyats (equivalent to $2,889,000) local costexpended by ID in undertaking the civil works for the power station. If thisamount is taken into account, the local cost would increase to $13,382,000 andthe total cost to $29,130,000 which represents a cost overrun of 2.21 per cent.

27. A detailed comparison of the appraisal cost estimates against theactual expenditures is shown in Appendix 4. It will be seen that the actual costof individual items did not tally very well with the appraisal estimates. Theestimated costs of civil works, switchyard, and distribution equipment weresubstantially exceeded. Custom duties and taxes for the power station componentand the cost of the transmission line were however very much below appraisalestimates.

28. Overall, the actual total project cost agrees ell with theappraisal estimate in spite of the substantial delay in project implementation.The inferences are that the appraisal estimate was very much on the high sideand had the Project been implemented on schedule there would have been asubstantial cost underrun.

29. Specifically in respect of the power station component of theProject, the cost per kW installed is computed to be at $792 compared with $800per kW calculated at appraisal. 2/

1/ Includes disbursements against the OPEC loan of $2 million.2/ Both calculations exclude the shared cost of the dam.

7

C. Project Schedule

30. The Sedawgyi Hydropower Project [Loan 395-BUR(SF)] is an integralpart of the Sedawgyi Multi-Purpose Development Scheme which combines the SedawgyiMulti-Purpose Dam and Irrigation Project (Loan 266-BUR(SF)] as the complementarycomponent. The project schedule of one is interwoven with the other and inparticular the construction progress of the power station component is entirelydependent on the construction progress of the dam and the power stationfoundation. In reviewing the construction progress of the Project, it isnecessary therefore to go back to review the construction progress of the damin order to understand how the latter affected the schedule.

31. Appendix 5 shows part of the implementation schedule 1/ of Loan 266-BUR(SF) superimposed on that of Loan 395-BUR(SF) [The Project]. An examinationof the schedule of Loan 266-BUR(SF) will show the following significant initialdelays.

DATES Delay inActivity Projected Actual Months

1. Consultants commence Nov 76 Nov 77 12work

2. Award of contract for Dec 76 Jul 78 19construction equipment

3. Commencement of Nov 77 Feb 79 16construction of dam

32. The delays in the engagement of consultants and the procurement ofconstruction equipment were largely due to ID's lack of experience in therecruitment of international consultants, as well as lengthy and cumbersomeGovernment procedures in approving procurement.

33. Apart from the initial delays, during the preparation of detaildesigns based on data from extensive geological investigations and topographicalmapping carried out after appraisal, the consultants found it necessary topropose certain essential major design changes2/ involving the height andcomposition of the main dam as well as realignment of its axis. Changes werealso necessary to the design of the spillway, the number of saddle dams and thelocation and elevation of the power station with consequent increase in thelength and diameter of the penstocks. These changes, which resulted in asubstantial increase in the quantities of works and the need for additionalconstruction equipment, contributed to the delay in finalizing designs as wellas in commencement and progression of construction works. As a result of thesedelays commencement of work on the dam was delayed by about 16 months and workon the power station foundation did not start until January 1981.

34. The same pattern of initial delay and inordinately lengthyprocurement procedure was also evident under Loan 395- BUR(SF). Although theBank allowed the same consultants for Loan 266-BUR(SF) to be engaged for the

1/ Abstracted from PCR for Loan 266-BUR(SF): Sedawgyi Multipurpose Dam andIrrigation Project, issued in October 1988.

2/ For details please refer to Appendix 6.

8

Project; nonetheless the consultancy contract was signed only in March 1980 about9 months behind the original target of June 1979.

35. In the meantime a country-wide shortage of construction materialsincluding diesel fuel, cement and reinforcing steel, occurred between 1980 and1984. Preference for supply of whatever limited quantities of such materialsavailable was given to the contractor of another dam project 1/ who could payforeign exchange for such materials. This had the debilitating effect of slowingdown construction progress on the Sedawgyi dam and stretching out theconstruction period beyond all estimates made during appraisal. Thus, the Multi-Purpose Scheme which envisioned a construction period of 7 years (June 1976 -June 1983) was in fact not completed until March 1988 over a construction periodof nearly 12 years.

36. Because of the slow progress on the construction of the dam andpower station, EPC appeared to have also correspondingly slowed down theimplementation of the power component of the Project. Thus the tender documentsfor Lot I: Electrical and Mechanical Equipment for Power Station were notfinalized and issued until 27 January 1982 some 22 months after the appointmentof consultants and the contract was not awarded until another 16 months lateron 26 May 1983. On the average tenders were floated some three years behindschedule and took 18 months from the start to award of contract.

37. At the beginning of 1986, during the course of construction of thepower station and the erection of the water turbine, a delay of 7 to 8 monthswas occasioned by an error in erection planning on the part of the consultants.The construction of the power house could not proceed until the spiral casingof the water turbine was welded because of inadequate spacing between the spiralcasing and the powerhouse floor beams. The seriousness of this delay wassomewhat mitigated by the fact that the construction of the dam itself was wellbehind schedule and was not completed until some two and a half years later InMarch 1988.

38. Two events which followed in late 1987 and 1988 did have a seriousimpact on the timely completion of the power plant. First, in December 1987,during the final stage of erection of the switchyard equipment, it was discoveredthat all eight insulator bushings of the step-up transformers had cracked duringtransit. Replacements took eight months to arrive. When the replacementbushings were fitted and the power plant finally made ready for testing andcommissioning, the peace and order situation in Myanmar deteriorated. Six monthswere lost before the testing and commissioning program could be resumed in March1989.

D. Engagement of Consultants and Procurement of Goods & Services

1. Engagement of Consultants

39. In consideration of: (i) the close coordination required betweenthe civil and electrical/mechanical works in the power station; (ii) theefficiency and economy in Project implementation which would be achieved; and(iii) the delay in Project implementation which would otherwise occur if theconstruction of power station civil works were not undertaken simultaneously withthe civil works of the Irrigation Project, the Government and EPC proposed to

1/ The Kinda Multipurpose Dam Project whose construction was contracted to aforeign contractor.

9

retain the same firm of consultants which had been engaged for the ongoingIrrigation Project to provide the services for the hydropower component as well.

40. The Bank approved this proposal and accordingly a contract with theconsultants was negotiated and signed on 3 March 1980. The use of the sameconsultants for the two complementary projects which were so intimately relatedwas not only desirable but necessary and probably represents one of the fewpositive features of project formulation.

41. The consultants were to provide the following services:(i) Preparation of specifications and tender documents and rendering

assistance in finalizing contract awards for procurement of allelectrical and mechanical equipment;

(ii) Preparation of detail designs and construction drawings, and(iii) Provision of construction supervision and assistance in all technical

matters.

2. Procurement of Goods and Services

42. Goods and services under the Project were procured by internationalcompetitive bidding under five groups viz:-

1. Lot 1 - Electrical and Mechanical Works for the Power Station. ThisContract, awarded to a contractor from Japan, was for the supply,erection, supervision and commissioning of power station equipment.

2. Lot II - Substation Equipment and Installation.This Contract for supply, erection and testing of auxiliaryequipment for power station switchyard and Mandalay substation wasawarded to a contractor from the Federal Republic of Germany.

3. Materials for 132 kV Sedawgyi-Mandalay Transmission Line.Three contracts for the supply of:(i) lattice steel towers and accessories (ii) A.C.S.R. conductorsand accessories and (iii) insulators and accessories were awardedunder this group.

4. Distribution Equipment.Under this group three contracts were also awarded for the supplyof: (i) three complete substations (ii) underground cables andaccessories and (iii) overhead lines and accessories.

5. Office Equipment and Accounting Machines.This group resulted in eight relatively minor contracts for cashreceipting machines, drafting machine, instruments andstationery, and other office equipment.Details of these contracts are shown in Appendix 7.

43. The proposed acquisition of an electronic data processing systemwas abandoned due to the tendered price greatly exceeding the appraisal estimateand also because the Bank could not approve EPC's recommendation to award thecontract to the second lowest evaluated bidder.

E. Performance of Consultants/Contractors/Suppliers

1. Performance of Consultants

44. The Appraisal Mission estimated that the total man-months ofconsulting services required for the Project was 42, of which approximately halfwould be in the field and the other half in the home office.

10

45. The consultancy services contract, eventually negotiated and signed,called for a total of 82 man-months, almost twice the number of man-monthsoriginally estimated. Due to the long delay in project implementation theconsultancy contract was revised in January 1986 to increase the man-monthprovision to 108, consisting of 64.5 man-months of home office services and 43.5man-months in the field.

46. Up to June 89 the number of man-months expended by the consultantswere 68.6 in the home office and 55.9 in the field making a total of 124.5.The cost was however kept within the value of the contract revised in January1986.

47. The detailed engineering designs of electrical and mechanical worksfor the power station, switchyard and related structures were carried out in theconsultants' home office in Delhi. For construction supervision and co-ordination services the consultants assigned a number of personnel to the sitefor various durations, as required, to render assistance to EPC's projectengineers. EPC reported some delays in the receipt of final design/drawings fromthe consultants' home office which, to some extent caused delays in the startof works at the power station, but this failure did not cause any overall delayin the completion of the Project. The error in the planning of construction ofthe water turbine spiral casing and the power house floor beam and columns (seepara 37) did however contribute to the overall delay. Except for these lapses,the consultants carried out their obligations under the terms of referencesatisfactorily and maintained good working relationship with the Executing Agencyand the contractors. The final documentation of the Project, prepared in fivevolumes by the consultant's field manager, was comprehensive and well done.

2. Performance of Contractors and Suppliers

48. Of the two major contracts, the contract for the manufacture,supply, erection and commissioning of the main power generating plant wasexecuted well and in accordance with the terms of the contract. The thoroughnessand care with which the contractor checked and cleaned out the system prior tocommissioning the power generating units were highly commendable.

49. In the case of the contract for the supply, installation and testingof equipment for the power station switchyard and the Mandalaysubstation, there were some delays in the supply of goods to match the executionof works at site, especially the replacement of the damaged transformer bushingswhich took an excessively long time to accomplish (see para 38).

50. Considering how badly the implementation of the Proje t was delayed,it is to the credit of all the contractors involved, especially the maincontractors, that they all honored their contractual obligations and contributedtowards bringing the Project to a successful, though belated, conclusion.

F. Conditions and Covenants

51. The Borrower and the Executing Agency have generally complied(albeit late in many cases) with most of the conditions and covenants, with theexception of two. The first concerns a convenant requiring the Borrower to causeEPC and the Irrigation Department to enter into an agreement acceptable to theBorrower and the Bank, prior to the commissioning of the power station, toprovide for the utilization of the water of the reservoir for irrigation andpower purposes, for the sharing of the costs of the operation and maintenanceof the dam and for the compensation by EPC to the Irrigation Department for a

11

reasonable share of the construction cost of the dam. 1/ No such agreement hadbeen entered into. The Irrigation Department is currently bearing the fulloperation and maintenance costs of the dam and no decision has been taken, norlikely to be taken, on sharing the construction cost of the dam by EPC.

52. The second area of non-compliance 2/ was the inadequate tariff whichwas in force until November 1988. The level of tariff until that time providedless than one half the agreed level of self-financing of new investment and forFY1985/86 did not cover even the financing of debt service. In addition, thetariff studies as required by the Project Agreement, which were conducted by EPCprior to the tariff increases and structural changes in 1981 and 1988, were notentirely satisfactory in that they did not: i) incorporate progressive tariffsto encourage energy conservation; ii) give consideration to the marginal costof supply when setting the demand charge; and iii) provide a lifeline tariff forthe lowest level of consumers. The average tariff level was increased by 50per cent form K0.3 to K0.47 at the same time as the new tariff structure wasintroduced on 1 November 1988. (see Appendix 13). This new tariff level whichis about $0.07 at the official rate of exchange 3/ is projected as adequate tocover operating expenses, debt service and to finance about 24 per cent ofestimated investment during the next two years.

53. The status of compliance with the various loan covenants is givenin Appendix 8.

G. Disbursement

54. At appraisal it was envisaged that the loan amount of $14.6 millionwould be disbursed by the third quarter of 1983 over a period of about four anda half years. As it turned out, disbursement covered a period of about eightyears from the first quarter of 1983 to early 1989. Practically no disbursementwas made in the first five years between 1979 and 1983, apart from a small amountof some $62,500 to the consultants. The last Iisbursement was made on 11 July1988. The total amount disbursed was $14.01 million and the unutilized balanceof $0.59 million was cancelled. The portions of disbursements as envisagedduring appraisal are shown against actual in Appendix 9.

55. The manner in which the loan proceeds were allocated and the actualutilization under the various categories are shown in Appendix 10. It will benoted that the loan proceeds were reallocated once during the course of projectimplementation, on 22 July 1985, to better cater for the pattern of actualutilization.

H. Environmental Impacts

56. The construction and operation of the hydropower plant and itsassociated switchyard have had little, or no, impact on the environment. It isthe construction of the associated dam and the consequential creation of thereservoir which has the potential to cause environmental effects. The keyenvironmental aspects 4/ investigated by the PCR Mission on Loan 266 BUR(SF):Sedawgyi Multipurpose Dam and Irrigation Project were: (i) land use/erosion!sedimentation due to encroachment on watershed forests; (ii) fisheries

1/ Loan Agreement, Schedule 6, para 3.2/ Project Agreement, Schedule 1, paras 2 and 3.3/ Approximately $0.01 at the exchange rates in the parallel market.4/ Suggested for investigation by the Bank's Environmental Unit.

12

development and reduction of downstream fisheries; (iii) difficulties ofresettlement of farmers displaced from the reservoir; and (iv) soilsalinizationm, or water logging.

57. The PCR Mission on Loan 266-BUR(SF) reviewed these aspects with theofficials of the Government and was advised that: Ci) encroachment on thewatershed (and related impacts) was not a problem as the area had been designatedreserved forest; (ii) the impact on downstream fisheries was insignificant; and(iii) all displaced farmers from the reservoir were resettled in the Projectarea.

58. The Mission reviewed the design of the dam and appurtenances andfound that the dead storage of the reservoir had been carefully designed takinginto account the siltation over the life of the Project. Fishery developmentin the reservoir has started and fishing rights will be auctioned, which meansthat the reservoir fishery will be well managed. The Mission also found thatthere were no soil salinization or water logging problems.!! in summary, thePCR Mission for Loan 266-BUR(SF) concluded that any adverse impacts of the damand reservoir on the environment were relatively insignificant.2/

59. The other component of the Project that would have some impact onthe environment is the 132 kV transmission line from the power station toMandalay. This line covers a relatively short distance of 65 km and is strungacross relatively flat terrain which, for most of the way, is used foragricultural purposes, especially rice cultivation. No clearance of forest wasinvolved and the farmers are allowed to continue with their rice cultivationalong and under the power line and the towers. Thus no loss of livelihood 3/anda very minimum encroachment on natural systems were brought about by theconstruction of the transmission line.

60. The last component, reinforcement of the distribution system inMandalay, involves the augmentation of existing facilities in an urbanizedsetting. As such, even less encroachment on the environment has been caused bythe work undertaken.

I. Project Benefits

61. Unit No. 1 was put into commercial operation on 24 May 1989 and UnitNo. 2 on 12 June 1989. Both the units have been tested to ten per cent overloadand have performed very satisfactorily, without any problems, sincecommissioning.

62. The two units now consistently generate in excess £ 20 MW, mostof it being supplied via the 132 kV transmission line to the load centre inMandalay (see Map 2). Apart from supplying Mandalay, the power station alsosupplies about 1 MW to 1.5 MW via a 33 kV line to Shwebo, a township of about400,000 people located some 70 km north of Sedawgyi. In addition, two coloniesof about 450 families of ID and EPC employees engaged in the operation of thedam and the power station are also supplied with power by the Project.

1/ However, considering the time lag in the environmental effects/response ofsuch problems, further attention has to be paid to the environment around theProject area.

2/ Ref. para 74 of PCR on Loan 266-BUR(SF), October 1988.3/ In fact, the Project has provided employment as well as housing at the power

station for 76 local inhabitants.

13

63. Appendix 11 is a summary of the operation record of the Sedawgyipower station for June 1989. It is significant to note that in spite of theirnewness the two generating units were in operation for 86.4 per cent of the time,giving a station plant factor of 56.7 per cent and a load factor of 48.8 percent. These are commendable figures, although it is too early to conclude fromone month's operating record whether the Project will consistently achieve theannual output and hence confer the benefits envisaged during appraisal.

64. However, on a qualitative basis, the commissioning of the Projecthas already brought about a number of discernable benefits as related in thefollowing paragraphs.

65. Mandalay formerly suffered from load shedding of 6 MW to 8 MW overthe evening peak period and the quality of supply in terms of frequency andvoltage regulation was poor. With the commissioning of the Sedawgyi plant, loadshedding has been eliminated and the quality of supply has vastly improved. TheSedawgyi units were able to operate on full load and supply Mandalay on theirown when the other source of supply to Mandalay, from the Thazi substation inthe south, was completely disrupted on the 12th and 15th of June 1989 due to amajor fault in the transmission system.

66. With the supply available from Sedawgyi, EPC has resumed consumerconnections from a waiting list of 43,000 consumers in Mandalay. It programmed4,200 new consumers for connection by the end of FY1990. Similarly it isenvisaged that the number of consumers given supply via the 33 kV Shwebo linewill shortly be increased from some 3,500 to 7,000 and ultimately 10,500.

67. It is also noted that another 132 kV transmission line is beingconstructed with Yugoslavian aid to supply about 10 NW to a gold mine at Kawlimsome 210 km north of Sedawgyi (See Map 2).

68. A financial internal rate of return has been recalculated by thePCR Mission for the Project at 12.7 per cent. (Appendix 12). This return isslightly less than the 13.6 per cent calculated at the time of appraisal. Thelower FIRR was mainly caused by the longer than expected construction period.No economic Intended rate of return has been calculated as the price distortionsincluded in the cost of the major local components i.e. cement, steel and fuel,over the twelve-year construction period, makes the use of the standardconversion factor impractical.i/

J. Performance of Borrower and Executing Agency

69. This Project suffered a serious Implementation delay of five years.The Executing Agency (EPC) was not responsible for the initial delays in theappointment of consultants and procurement of construction equipment for thecommencement of work on the dam and the power house foundation, which were theresponsibilities of the Irrigation Department (ID). However, EPC took an equallylong time to appoint its own consultants and was tardy in initiating tendersand deciding on award of contracts.

1/ The Standard Conversion factor used by the World Bank is 0.8.

14

70. One of the main causes of the delay seemed to be the way the Projectwas managed from a centralized and relatively high level of the Borrower. TheExecuting Agencies appeared to have been subject to extremely cumbersome andtime-consuming approval procedures in their effort to implement the Project.Failure to take actions to avert the shortage of essential construction materialssuch as diesel fuel, cement and reinforcing steel dealt a severe blow to theprogress of the Project. Not only was import of these materials in short supplynot permitted by the Borrower; the greatly reduced/curtailed supplies availablein the country were diverted to another project for extraneous reasons. (Seepara 35).

71. The other major cause of delay was the construction of the dam byID on force account. Had the construction been contracted out on a competitivebasis there would have been a lot more incentive and a much greater sense ofurgency to complete the Project earlier.

72. The high-level Technical Implementation Committee (TIC) which wasset up to ensure co-ordination of action between EPC, ID and other Governmentagencies involved in the implementation of the Multipurpose Scheme appeared tohave been ineffectual even though its members were high level officials and wasreported to have met on no less than 44 occasions during the course of theProject.

73. Finally, the failure of EPC to check materials on arrival led tothe cracked insulators on the step up transformers remaining undetected forseveral months until the crucial last moment when it became impossible to avertthe delay involved in securing replacement. (See para 38).

74. Apart from the foregoing shortcomings the Project was executed bythe Executing Agencies with a high degree of technical competence as is evidentby the satisfactory operation of both the dam and the power plant sincecommissioning.

K. Performance of the Bank

75. The Appraisal Mission for Loan 395-BUR(SF) appraised the Projectin January 1979 more than two-and-a-half years after Loan 266-BUR(SF) wasapproved (on 22 June 1976) for the Sedawgyi Multipurpose Dam and IrrigationProject. At the time of appraisal of the Project, the Mission would have beenaware that there was a delay of 12 months in the appointment of consultants forLoan 266-BTJR(SF), a 19 months' delay in the award of contract for constructionequipment and, more significantly, the construction of the dam had not evenstarted when it was projected to have started more than a year nreviously, inNovember 1977. The Mission would certainly have known that the consultants forLoan 266-BUR(SF) had found it necessary to make major changes to the design ofthe dam and such changes would have obvious implications for the progress ofimplementation and the timely completion of the Project. In spite of all thesefacts, no attempt was made to change the project completion date of June 1983.This allowed barely four years for the Project to be implemented which wasobviously inadequate 1/ based on the available evidence. As it turned out theProject took 10 years to complete, more than twice as long as expected. Thescheduling of the appointment of consultants by June 1979 and the commencementof the tendering process by November of the same year both reflect unrealistic

1/ The difficulty of stipulating a completion target is recognised, given thatit depends largely on the completion of the preceeding dam project.

15

expectations on the part of the appraisal Mission. In reality the former wasnearly a year late and the latter more than two years behind schedule.

76. The number of man-months of consulting services required wasunderestimated at appraisal and the cost estimates of most of the projectcomponents were also way off the mark (although the final total project costturned out to be close to the total estimated cost). The stretched implementationperiod and the volatile equipment market during that time contributed to theensuing discrepancy.

77. The Bank monitored the physical and financial progress of theProject through regular Review Missions, of which six were mounted during thecourse of the Project.1/ It promptly acted on request of extension of loanclosing dates and rendered assistance to resolve issues whenever necessary, butit was unable to exercise any Influence to cause the Project to be implementedmore expeditiously.

1/ See Item D of Basic Data Sheet.

16

IV. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.

A. Conclusions.

78. The Project implementation was unsatisfactory insofar as timelyimplementation was concerned. However, the Project was implemented fortuitouslyclose to the cost estimated during appraisal. Technically the Project appearsto be a success as is shown by the untroubled operation of the generating units.It is too early to judge whether the Project will realize and confer the fullbenefits envisioned at appraisal, but even at this early stage indications arethat the Project will vastly improve the quality of the electricity supply toMandalay, bring about electrification to areas now not served with electricityand help to promote industrial activities in the northern provinces of Myaninar.

B. Recommendations

1. Project Related

(i) Future Monitoring

79. It is recommended that the operation of the power station and itsimpacts on the availability and quality of power supply in the Mandalay Divisionshould continue to be monitored by requiring EPC to submit annual statistics ongeneration at the Sedawgyi power station as well as statistics on distributionsystem operation and on consumers in the Mandalay Division. If necessary, afollow up Review Mission should also be mounted after a year or two.

(ii) Covenants

80. The Bank should take up with the Borrower its failure to comply withthe covenant stipulated in Paragraph 3 of Schedule 6 of the Loan Agreement whichrequires EPC and ID to enter into an agreement for the sharing of the costs ofthe construction and the operation and maintenance of the dam. This is importantin order to more truly reflect the cost of electricity generation and help insetting a more realistic tariff rate.

(iii) Further Actions or Follow-up and AdditionalAssistance

81. As the Project has just been commissioned and is operating verysatisfactorily, no further action or additional assistance appears necessary atthis stage. However, in the course of continuing monitoring of the operationof the power station and the distribution system in the Mandala' Division asoutlined in (1) above, the need for certain follow-up actions and additionalassistance may emerge. It is possible that there may be a future requirementfor assistance to provide funds for spare parts for the power station and foradditional distribution equipment to upgrade and expand the distribution systemin the Mandalay Division to enable more consumers to be served efficiently. Theupgrading of the distribution system is also important from the point of viewof reducing system losses.

(iv) Timing of PPAR Preparation

82. It is recommended that preparation of PPAR not be undertaken beforethe Project has had between three to five years of operation. This is to enablea better assessment of whether the Project is in fact capable of consistently

17

producing the design output and conferring the benefits envisaged duringappraisal.

2. General

(v) Project Appraisal

83. The Project demonstrates very clearly the pitfall of rushing intoa hydropower project without adequate geological investigations. In fact theProject should not have been formulated at all without such basic data on whichthe cost, the implementation period and the very viability of the Project (bothtechnical and economic) depended. A substantial technical assistance or aseparate engineering loan should have been given to enable the Project to beproperly investigated, engineered and costed before appraisal. Ideally in thesecircumstances, the technical assistance should include the preparation of thebidding documents, based on the detailed design undertaken so that bidding cantake place immediately upon loan approval without any waste of time.

84. The capability of the Executing Agency (EPC) to undertake theimplementation of the Project efficiently was unfortunately masked by theoverwhelming delay on the construction of the dam under the IrrigationDepartment. There is, however, evidence to show that EPC, on its own, would havein any case suffered delays on account of cumbersome and bureaucratic procedures,especially in approving procurement. It is recommended that Appraisal Missionspay special attention to this aspect of project implementation and considerincluding as a loan covenant a limit on the time taken for appointment ofconsultants and award of key contracts. Failure to adhere to the covenant shouldresult in the suspension of the loan.

(vi) Project Implementation

85. This Project also clearly demonstrates the unsuitability ofadopting the force account method to undertake major projects except by well-organised, experienced and capable executing agencies. Had the contract for theconstruction of the dam been awarded on a competitive basis to a privatecontractor (especially a foreign contractor), the Project would almost certainlyhave been completed very much earlier. This is borne out by the KindaMultipurpose Project which was very similar to the Sedawgyi Project and was beingconstructed at about the same time. The dam construction was undertaken by aforeign contractor and was completed in five years instead of the nine yearsneeded for the Sedawgyi dam.

APPENDIX

19

21

24

25

26

27

28

29

31

41

43

44

45

50

18

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

Chronology of Events

Salient Technical Features of the Project

(a) Figure 1. General Layout ofDarn and Appurtenances

(b) Figure 2. Cross Section of Power House

Project Costs- Estimated vs Actual

Implementation Schedule- Projected vs Actual

Design Changes on Dam & Power StationFoundation

Major Contract Packages

Compliance with Loan Covenants

Disbursement- Projected vs Actual

Loan Proceeds Allocation& Utilization

Plant Operational Pecord

Financial Analysis

Electricity Tariffs

19

IPage 1

CHRONOLOGY OF EVENTS

16-27 January 1979

07 February 1979

14 February 1979

08 March-14 March 1979 -

24 April 1979 -

19 June 1979 -

25 June 1979 -

27 July 1979

02 October 1979

03 March 1980

02 July 1981 -

27 January 1982

26 May 1983

- 06 June 1983

27 September 1983

22 March 1984

16/17 January 1985

Visit to EPC by Bank's Appraisal Mission.

The Government formally requested OSF to co-finance the Sedawgyi Hydropower Project.

OSF confinned its agreement in principle toprovide US$ 2 million for the SedawgyiHydropower Project.

Loan negotiations for Bank loan.

The Bank approved a loan of US$14,600 million.

The Loan Agreement was signed.

OPEC Loan 135-P for US$ 2.0 million wasapproved.

OPEC Loan Agreement was signed.

Bank loan became effective.

EPC signed consultancy contract retainingWAP(X)S of India, the same consultants engagedon the on-going Sedawgyi Multipurpose Dam andIrrigation Projects.

Bank approved first bidding documents: Lot 1,Hydraulic Turbines, A.C. Generators.

Bid for Hydraulic Turbines and A.C. Generatorsand Auxiliaries floated.

Award of Lot 1 Contract covering TurbineGenerator and Auxiliaries.

Bid for 132 kV single circuit Transmission Linematerials were floated.

Bid for Switchboard equipnent were floated.

Borrower requested for an extension of' loanclosing date from 30 June 1984 to 30 June 1986.

Award of contract for equipnent for 132 kVtransmission lines.

(Reference in text: page 5, para 22)

20

Page 2

05 June 1985

07 December 1987

31 December 1987

13 January 1988

04 February 1988

11 July 1988

2 December 1987

August a 1988

September!October 1988

March 1988

04 May 1989

24 May 1989

12 June 1989

- Award of contrct for Lot II : ElectricalEquipient for substations.

- Bank approved 3rd extension of loan closingdate from 31 December 1987 to 30 June 1988 asa special case subject to EPC's confirmationthat:1) no further extensions will be requested;(ii) that any amount outstanding under Bankfinanced contracts as of 30 June 1988 will befunded by EPC.

Borrower requested OPEC for an extension ofloan closing date to 30 June 1988.

- OPEC Fund approved extension of closing dateto 31 June 1988.

- Ministry of Energy confirmed that no furtherextension of loan will be requested.

- Value date of final disbursement.

- Undisbursed balance of US$ 590, 108.93 wascancelled. Final loan amount isUS$14,009,891.07.

- High voltage (132 kV) bushings of step-uptransformer banks found damaged.

- Replacement 132 kV bushings arrived on site.

- Civil disturbances in Myarimar.

- Commencement of testing and commissioningprogram on plant.

- 132 kV transmission lines from Sedawgyi toMandalay commissioned.

- Unit 1 put on commercial operation.

- Unit 2 put on commercial operation.

21

SALIENT TEQINICAL FFA'llRES OF TIE IROJECP

Top of Dan EL 431.0 ft

Reseroir

Maxiinuu %ter Level. EL 425.0 ftFull Ièsvoir Leel EL 419.5 ftDeal Storage Level EL 365.0 ftLi Storage 0.279 m. aeft

Appendix 2Page 1

Pemtaks

Nunber of PeistocksLergth of PistockDianeter of PermtcekCentre Line Elevation ofPerstcckElevation of PEnStOCk Sill

Pertok Gates

_T: g-

Dtne

Por Hoise

SizeTyçeLoutNo. ath Size of gEneratingunitsEXY Crane

Design HeedMax. FadMm. IadNormal SpeedRuraway eelMax. 'Iil Water LevelMm. T3.il Water LevelNormal Tail Water Lewl

2 tbs.150 ft14 ft

EL 346.0 ftEL 339.0 ft

2 Ms.

1 set (of 4 lvee)

1 F& - 30 Tcns (Capacity)

184 x 79 ftsurfacxConventicnal

2bs., 12.5MWeath50 T/10 lbn

VerticB,l Shaft, adjustableblale Kaplan (2 Nca.)

92.63 ft Output 13055 kW113.38 ft 14174 kW51.68 ft " 3900kW250 rpn687 rpnEL 352 ftEL 306.12 ftEL 308.70 ft

Tyçe of G,vning Eltro-Rydxau1ic GormrCabinet Pctitcr Type

Design discIar 1825.5 cu ft/senMax. I'dn1UliC thrust 175 tcnsPreesure oil system 24.5 to 25.0 kg/cm2ConreeseJ Air System 39 kg/cm2Shaft glaid system Water Lutricatei Chrthn Rirg TypePenniihle Speed Rise 35%Penniible Prcmsure Rise 40%


Draft Tuin

Nunber of Guide VanesNunber of Stay VaresServonotors for Guide VanesServonotor for Rurrier VanesWeighted Average EfficiicyCentre Line of RumerCoolirg €ter &ipplyCritical SigiaDraft Tub? twatering SstenStat iai Thainage SystemBeth Cover [kaina,ge System

Draft Tub? (te

cy_cr;apç

Gerrator

I-

Cool irg

Rating

22 Appendix 2Page 2

Eliw Type

20 Nos20 Nos2 !'bs1 I'b.88.3%EL 293.0 ftTaiped f mm each enstock0.412 Ibs Punpa2 tbs Punps2 I'.bs Submersible Punps

1 set of 2 thte lv for one unit

15 Torm ELectrieafly operated

Vertical Shaft, Rotating Field, totally closth,3 phase, 50 qycles A. C. Symhxonws nerathr -semi-unbmfla ¶Irpe

Self Cooling (with air wolers, 'ater 000led)

(1) 13888 kVA, 0.9 PF, 11000 Volts 729 anps.(ii) 1527 kVA, 0.9W, 11000 Volts (at lOX

Overlcad 1R), 802 anps.

Speed 250 rpm

Type of stator wirdirg Dotble Star, lap wurd

Type of Pxc itati on Static Eitation System Enployirg ThyristorConverter

Excitaticn Voltage 160 Volts

No. of Poles 24 Nos.

Fire I-hzard Protecticn 002 Fire Extinguishing System Fnplqvirg ThyristorConverter

Braking System Air Presmare at 15 kg/cni

Jacking System Oil punp at 62 kg/cm2

Inertia Constant 438.6 (tcn-ufl

Short circuit Ratio 1.28

Thrust Bring below rotor, sFherical thjuntth pivoted type with8 Ibs pad

Guide Bearings 2 Ibs (14per & &ie combined with Thrust Bearirg)

23 Appendix 2Page 3

Slip rings

Number of BrushesNeutral Erthirg Transformer

Outdoor Switchyard

Type and Voltage

Type of 132 KV/33 kV Breakers

Type of 132 kV/33 kVisolators

Lightning Piotection

Fire protection of maintransformer

Potential transformersbusbar.

Power Transformers

(i) Main Step-up

( ii) DistributirnTransformer

( iii) Isolating Transformer

( iv) Station Transformer

Wave Trap & CVT

Evacuatim of Ibwer

132 kV Line

33 kV Line

11 kV line

Tail }.ce Chennel

Lergth

Width

2 s

20 Nos11000/220 Volt single phase10 KVA rating loaded with 0.600 ha resistor

132 kV Single basbar system

Oil Minimum 3 Phrase auto-recloser and also singlephase auto-recloser for 132 kV feeder.

Hard operated with aid without earth switch.

(i) Overhead shield wire and lightning arresterfor switchyard equipma-its

(ii)Lightning arresters for Main Banks (2 Nos.)of Transformers & 11/33 kV Transformer.

Fire walls between each sirgle phase unit & 11/33KV transforner.

3 Single phase units on each phase of 132 kV

5100 WA Single Phase 11/ 132 kV3

ON AN Cooled - 6 Nos with me spare

5000 WA, 11/33 kV, 3 PhaseOn An Cooled - 1 lb

5000 WA, 11/11 kV, 3 PhaseON AN Cooled - 1 hb

500 kVA, 11/0.4 kV, 3 phaseON AN Cooled - 2 Nos

For PLCC and protective gear

Sirgle circuit 132 kV line of about 65 km long upto Mandalay primary substation.

Single circuit 33 kV line to Shes.bo

2 Mss. - For local and nearby areas

280 ft

77 ft

SEDAWGYI MULTIPURPOSE DAM AND IRRIGATION PROJECT

GENERAL LAYOUT PLAN FOR DAM AND APPURTENANCES

A.—J0 50 100 200 300

(t H•

M.tsr$L)


U,

p 1 1•

icm.

x

LONGITUDINAL SECTION THROUGH PENSTOCK AND POWERHOUSE(SECTION C - C)


26Appendix 4

PROJECT COST ESTIMATE VS ACTUAL

(In US$'000)

Appraisal Actual c/

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------=-----------------------------------------------

Foreign Local Total Foreign Local Total

Cost Cost Cost . Cost Cost Cost : Variance

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. Power Station

(i) Civil worts 160 840 1,000 . 9 2. 2,889 2,981

(ii) Electrical A Mechanical Equip. 8,550 900 9,450 8,999 3,699 12,698

(iii) Office equip. t acctg. machines 280 - 280 245 468 713

(iv) Consultant services 250 65 315 494 54 548

(v) Contingencies (10 per cent) 920 185 1,105

(vi) Custom duties and taxes a/ - 4,640 4,640 . 2,852 2,852

(vii) Price escalation hi 2,090 1,820 3,910

Sub-total for Iten A 12,250 8,450 20.100 . 9.830 9 962 19 792 - 4 39X

1,075

105

170

1,350

1,645

160

295

2,100

700

70

130

900

16,600

B. Switchyard

(i) Transformers and switchgear

incl. transportation and

installation

(ii) Contingencies (10%)

(iii) Customs duties and taxes

(iv) Price escalation

Sub-total for Item B

C. Transmission Line

(i) Materials Incl. transportatation

and erection

(ii) Contingencies (10 per cent)

(iii) Price Escalation

Sub-total for Item C

D. Distribution Equipment

(i) Equipment b/, transportation and

erection

(ii) Contingencies (10 per cent)

(iii) Custoi duties and taxes a/

(iv) Price escalation

Sub-total for item 0

Total Project Cost

275 1,350 2,977

25 130

600 600

250 420

1,150 2,500 : 2,917

355 2,000 . 914

35 195

340 635

1,700 3,800 . 914

100 800 2,027

10 80

400 400

90 220

600 1,500 2,027

11,900 28,500 . 15,748

492 3,469

1,052 1,052

1,544 4,521 : + 80.84%

359 1,273

591 591

950 1,864 : - 50.95%

19 2,046

90. 907

926 2,953 . + 96.89%

13,382 29,130 + 2.21%

a/ Customs duties and port and other charges at 25 -28 per cent of landed cost of equipment; and commodity

and service tax at 30 per cent of landed cost of equipment (see para. 35, footnote 2 of text).

b/ Price escalation has been provided at the rate of 7 per cent per annum on foreign cost and 10 per cent per annum on local cost.c/ To nearest $1,000.


OJECT IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE

I I I I ILOAN 286 BUR(SF) LOAN 395 BUR(SF)I I I IAPPRAISAL

t9.26 5.5 15-27 Jan 79 I I IBOARD APPROVAL — 22 Jun 76 24 Apr 79

I9 Jun 79 A Award of Contract

T TenderLOAN SIGNING 28Jul76

LOAN EFFECTIVENESS L020179 M Manufacture

I __ L________ 0 DeliveryCOP4SULTANTSCOMMENCEWORK +22Novll V 'Mar8O E Erection

Commissioning

A ppraisal ScheduleINVESTIGATION & DESIGN I:::: intermittent Activity

PROCURE CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT T A 0 __________ Actual

— _I - - ____ ____ ____ -A

CONSTRUCT DAM & POWER STATION I _____ : ______ ______

- I - U

LPOWER STATION CIVIL WORKS - = _____

T A M S CGENERATING PLANT _____ ____ ____

T A E C

T A M S CSWITCHYARD ' ' ____ c:z:•T A E C

A M E CTRANSMISSION LINE _____ _____ c::: .

1 A S C

A M S CDISTRIBUTION _____ c:::: ::

T A S C

0 U

£XL() *U k ELU RZ&u zUu Z&U £• LU ZLU____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ Z 00 I0 Z 0 U UU*.0 1,oO ,40

1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989

CD

l-.>4

U,


cl-mi

28Appendix 6

DESIGN CHANGES IN DAM ANDFOWER STATION FOUNDATION

Dam and Appurtenances

Elevation of Top of Dam 129.88 in a/ 131.40 mLength of Main Dam:Earth-filled 1,026 m 840.85 mRock-filled 178.35 mConcrete including spillway 258 m 236.89 m

Total 1,284 m 1,256.09 mMaximum Height of Main Dam:

Earth-filled 39 m 40.55 mRock-filled - 25.91 mConcrete 30.5 m 40.55 m

Saddle Dams:Number - 2Length of Right Saddle Dam - 68.60 inMaxitniini Height of Right Saddle Dam - 6.10 inLengLh of Left Saddle Dam - 53.35 mMaximum Height of Left Saddle Dam - 9.45 m

Reservoir:Maximum Water Level (MWL) - 129.57 inFull Reservoir Level (FRL) - 127.90 mDead Storage/Maximum Drawdown - 111.28 m

Level (MDDL)Live Storage - 349.3 million

Item Appraisal Actual

Spiliway: 140 m 109.76 mLengthCrest Elevation 118.3 m 117.23 mNumber and size of gates 9 of 12.2 m 7 of 12.2 m

x7.6m xll.13mDesign inflow (10,000 year flood) 9,000 cum/sec 8,499 cum/secDesign outflow - 6,671 cum/secEnergy dissipation arrangement Flip bucket Stilling Basin

Power Station Foundation:Number of pens Lock - 2Length of penstock 40.5 m 45.73 mDiameter of penstock 4.0 m 4.27 mDesign Discharge through - 49.6 cum/sec

each penstockElevation of penstock sill - 103.35 m

Irrigation Sluice:Number of sluice - 2Sill, elevation - 104.27 mCapacity of each sluice at MDDL - 35.4 cum/sec

Diversion Sluice (Plugged):Number/size - 6/2.43mx3.05mSill elevation - 93.29 in

a/ Based on datum revised in 1978. 129.6 m (in Appraisal Report) based onoriginaI datum.

(Reference in text: page 7, para 33).

30May86S

29

Appendix 7Page 1

MAJOR CONTRACT' PACKAGES

CONTRACF

DATE OFCONTRACT

CONTRACrOR VALUE

AWARD(US$)

Lot I - Electrical & Mechanical Works for Power Station

SupIy, erecti, To Menka Käisha $8,998,566 +testing and Kyats 870,000conniissioning ofturbinegenerators,cranes, drafttube gates, etc.

Lot II - Substation Eguiiient

Supply, erection Starkstrom $2,976,976 +and testing of Anlagen Kyats 301,775aux. equip. for Gesselschaft CkiHlpower station (FRG)switchyard andMandalaysubstation.

132 kV Sedawgy-Mandalay Single Line Transmission Line

i) supply of Hyundai Corp. $398,739lattice tower (KOR)accessories

ii) supply of Kinsho Matachi $106,123H.V. Lines Corp. (JAP)insulators &accessories

iii) Supply of Mitsui & Co. Ltd. $409,267ACSR conductors (JAP)& galvanizedsteel wires

Distribution_Eguipnent

i ) Supply of Toyo Mka }isha $1,441,19133/llkV&11/0.4 (JAP)kV substations

26May83

26May83

16Jan85

16Jan85

17Jan85


MAJOR OONTRACF PACKAGES

CXWFRACFCX)NTRAC CC*ITRAC'IDR VALUE

3June86$493,850

30May86$92,549

$245,060

5March86 to18June87

$250,000

03 March 80Revised to

$500,000

23 Jan 86

30

Appendix 7Page 2

DATE OFAWARD

ii) Supply of Marubeni Corp.underground (JAP)cables andaccessories ToyoMenka Kaisha(JAP)

iii) Supply of Kinsho Matachioverhead lines Corp. (JAP)and accessories

Office Equipent and Accounting Machines

Eight Contracts Five Companies

Consulting Services

Water & PowerConsultancyServices (Irdia)ltd.

31

Appendix 8

COMPLIANCE WITH LOAN COVENANTS

COMPL I ANCEREFERENCE /COVENANT

LOAN AGREEMENT

Section 4.02. The Borrower shallmake available or cause to be madeavailable, promptly as needed and onterms and conditions acceptable tothe Bank, the funds, facilities,services, lands and other resourceswhich are required, in addition tothe proceeds of the Loan, for thecarrying out of the Project and forthe operation and maintenance of theProject facilities.

Section_4.03. (a) In the carryingout of the Project, the Borrowershall cause competent and qualifiedconsultants and contractorsacceptable to the Borrower and theBank to be employed to an extent andupon terms and conditionssatisfactory to the Borrower and theBank.

Section 4.03. (b) The Borrowershall cause the Project to becarried out in accordance withplans, design standards,specifications, work schedules andconstruction methods acceptable tothe Borrower and the Bank. TheBorrower shall furnish or cause tobe furnished to the Bank, promptlyafter their preparation, such plans,design standards, specifications andwork schedules, and any materialmodifications subsequently madetherein, in such detail as the Bankshall reasonably request.

Complied with except fordelay in the supply ofdiesel and constructionmaterials during theperiod FY1980/84 whenthere were nationalshortages of these items.

Complied with. The Bankagreed to the engagementof WAPCOS (India) whichwas also the consultantfor the Sedawgyi Multi-Purpose Dam andIrrigation Project -LoanNo. 266-BUR(SF).

Complied with.

Sec 4. (a) The Borrower Generally complied with.shall ensure that arrangements are It is the practice of themade, satisfactory to the Bank, for Government to self insureinsurance of the Project facilities the permanent Projectincluded in Part A of the Project. facilities.


Appendix 832

Page 2

REFERENCE/COVENANT COMPLIANCE

Section 4.05. (b) The Borrowerundertakes to iisure or cause to beinsured the goods to be imported forPart A of the Project and to befinanced out of the proceeds of theLoan against hazards incident to theacquisition, transportation, anddelivery thereof to the place of useor installation, and for suchinsurance any indemnity shall bepayable in a currency freely usableto replace or repair such goods.

Section 4.06. (a) The Borrowershall maintain or cause to bemaintained records adequate toidentify the goods and servicesfinanced out of the proceeds of theLoan, to disclose the use thereof inthe Project, to record the progressof the Project (including the costthereof) and to reflect inaccordance with consistentlymaintained sound accountingpractices the operations andfinancial condition of EPC and, tothe extent relevant to the Project,of the Irrigation Department, andany other agencies of the Borrowerresponsible for carrying out of theProject and operation of the Projectfacilities, or any part thereof.

Section 4.06. (b) The Borrowershall ensure that separate Projectaccounts are maintained by theIrrigation Department in respect ofPart A of the Project. Suchaccounts and related financialstatements shall be auditedannually, in accordance with soundauditing principles, by auditorsacceptable to the Bank. Promptlyafter their preparation but in anyevent not later than six (6) monthsafter the end of each related fiscalyear, the Bank shall be furnished(a) certified copies of such auditedfinancial statements and (b) thereport of the auditors relatingthereto, all in the Englishlanguage.

Complied with.

Complied with.

Complied with.

33 Appendix 8

Page 3

REFERENCE /COVENANT COMPLIANCE

Section 4.07. (a) The Borrower shallfurnish or cause to be furnished tothe Bank all such reports andinformation as the Bank shallreasonably request concerning (i)the Loan, and the expenditure of theproceeds and maintenance of theservice thereof; (ii) the goods andservices financed out of theproceeds of the Loan; (iii) theProject; (iv) the administration,operations and financial conditionof EPC and, to the extent relevantto the Project, of the IrrigationDepartment, and any other agenciesof the Borrower responsible forcarrying out of the Project andoperation of the Project facilities,or any part thereof; (v) financialand economic conditions in theterritory of the Borrower and theinternational balance of paymentsposition of the Borrower; and (vi)any other matters relating to thepurposes of the Loan.

Section 4.07. (b) The Borrower shallfurnish or cause to be furnished tothe Bank quarterly reports on thecarrying out of the Project and onthe operation and management of theProject facilities. Such reportsshall be submitted in such form andin such details and within such aperiod as the Bank shall reasonablyrequest and shall indicate, amongother things, progress made andproblems encountered during thequarter under review, steps taken orproposed to be taken to remedy theseproblems and proposed program ofactivities and expected progressduring the following quarter.

Complied with.

Complied with. However,the quality of thequarterly report was notgood.

The Sedawygi hydropowerstation commenced fulloperation on 12 June1989. Operation of thestation was inspectedduring the PCR Mission inJuly 1989 and foundsatisfactory.

See comments on para 2 ofSchedule 1, of theProject Agreement.

34 Appendix 8

Page 4


Section 4.09. The Borrower shallensure that the Project facilitiesare operated, maintained andrepaired in accordance with soundadministrative, financial,engineering, and maintenance andoperational practices.

Section 4.10. The Borrower shalltake all action which shall benecessary on its part to enable EPCto perform its obli gations under theProject Agreement, including theestablishment and maintenance oftariffs as stipulated in paragraph2 of Schedule 1 to the ProjectAgreement, and shall not take orpermit any action which wouldinterfere with the performance ofsuch obligations.

SCHEDULE 6

Para 1. Executing Agencies. TheIrrigation Department shall act asthe Project Executing Agency forPart A of the Project, and shallhave overall responsibility forsupervision and control of theentire Project. EPC shall act asProject Executing Agency for PartsB and C of the Project. EPC shallalso provide experienced engineersat the Project site as required toassist the Irrigation Department inthe executing of' Part A of theProject.

Complied with. TheProject Construction Unitheaded by a ProjectDirector was establishedand located at theIrrigation Departmentbuilding in Mandalay.

35Appendix 8

Page 5


Para 2. Project Offices and Staff.The Borrower shall ensure that,during the implementation of theProject:(a) With respect to Part A ofthe Project, the IrrigationDepartment shall maintain theProject Construction Unit which hasbeen established in accordance withParagraph 3 of Side Letter No. 4 tothe Irrigation Loan Agreement. Alsowith respect to Part A of theProject, MAF shall maintain theProject Unit established inaccordance with Paragraph 3 ofSchedule 5 to the Irrigation LoanAgreement, and the full-time ProjectManager appointed in accordance withParagraph 2 of Side Letter No. 5 tothe Irrigation Loan Agreement. TheProject Construction Unit shall bedirectly responsible, under thecontrol of the Project Director, forthe civil works for Part of theProject. The Project Unit, underthe control of the project Manager,shall have final responsibility forcoordinating all actions withrespect to the Project.

Complied with. TheProject Construction Unitunder the project managerwas maintained during thelife of the project.

Generally complied with.The committee was formedbut was unable to obtainpriorities for the supplyof cement and diesel fuelduring the period FY1980-84 in spite of regularmeetings with high levelgovernment officials.This problem wassubsequently resolved andthe Project obtainedadequate supplies fromlate 1984.

Not complied with. Noagreement has beenentered into. ID isbearing full 0 & M costof the dam. No decisionhas been taken on sharingconstruction cost of thedam between ID and EPC.This should be followedup by the Bank as thecosts need to bereflected in LPC's recordto properly set tariffs.

36 Appendix 8

Page 6


b) With respect to Parts B andC of the Project, EPC shallestablish a Project Office, at theProject site, by October 1979. TheProject Office shall be headed by afull-time Project Manager at leastof the rank of executive engineer.The Project Manager shall report tothe Project Director appointed bythe Irrigation Department. TheProject Office shall also include anadequate number of sufficientlyqualified full-time staff to ensurethe successful and timely completionof Parts B and C of the Project.

(c) The Technical ImplementationCommittee, established in accordancewith paragraph 2 of Side Letter No.4 to the Irrigation Loan Agreement,shall be maintained to ensure thecoordination and cooperation of alldepartments, agencies andcorporations of the Borrowerconcerned with the implementation ofthe Project.

Para 3. EPC shall be responsiblefor operation and maintenance of theProject facilities. In this regard,the Borrower shall cause EPC and theIrrigation Department to enter intoan agreement, acceptable to theBorrower and the Bank, prior to thecommissioning of the power station,providing inter alia, for theutilization of the water of thereservoir for irrigation and powerpurposes, for the sharing of thecosts of the operation andmaintenance of the dam and for thecompensation by the EPC to theIrrigation Department for areasonable share of the constructioncost of the dam.

Delayed compliance. EPCestablished a projectoffice in 1983 andmaintained the officethroughout the project.

Appendix 8Page 737


Para 4. In the event that anysubstantial changes in the croppingpattern and/or irrigation releasesfrom the Sedawgyi dam are proposedwhich could affect the firm powergeneration at the dam, the Borrowershall review and discuss thepossible effects on both croppingand power generation withappropriate representatives of theIrrigation Department and EPC toensure that the changes proposedwill provide for optimal economicbenefits for the relevant areas, andshall provide the Bank the relevantstudies in sufficient time to givethe Bank an opportunity to commentthereon before such changes areadopted.

Section 2.03. (b) Except as theBank may otherwise agree, all goodsand services to be financed out ofthe proceeds of the Loan shall beprocured in accordance with theprovisions of Schedule 4 andSchedule 5 to the Loan Agreement.

Section 2.08. (c) Promptly aftercompletion of the Project, but inany event not later than six monthsafter the closing date forwithdrawals from the Loan Account orsuch later date as the Bank mayagree for this purpose, EPC shallprepare and furnish to the Bank areport, in such form and in suchdetail as the Bank shall reasonablyrequest, on the executing andinitial operation of the Project,its cost and the benefits derivedand to be derived from it, theperformance by the Borrower of itsobligations under the LoanAgreement, the performance by EPC ofits obligations under this ProjectAgreement, and the accomplishment ofthe purposes of the Loan.

Complied with. To datethere has not been achange in croppingpatterns nor are anyplanned which willmaterially affect theflow required to generatepower. The final designannual output is 4 GWhhigher than the 130 GWhin the appraisal report.

Complied with.

Delayed compliance as thereport was received on26 June 1988 which is 12months after closing ofthe loan.

38 Appendix 8

Page 8


Section 2.09. (a) Except as the Bankmay otherwise agree, EPC shall haveits accounts and financialstatements (balance sheet, statementof income and expenses and relatedstatements) audited annually, inaccordance with sound auditingprinciples, by auditors acceptableto the Bank, and shall, promptlyafter their preparation but in anyevent not later than twelve (12)months after the close of the fiscalyear to which they relate, furnishto the Bank (a) certified copies ofsuch audited financial statementsand (b) the report of the auditorsrelating thereto, all in the Englishlanguage. EPC shall furnish to theBank such further informationconcerning such accounts andfinancial statements and the auditthereof as the Bank shall from timeto time reasonably request.

Section 2.09. (b) In addition toannual audited financial statementsreferred to in paragraph (a) of thisSection, EPC shall furnish to theBank, within nine (9) months afterthe end of each fiscal year,unaudited annual financialstatements on its operations forsuch fiscal year.

Section 2.13. Except as the Bankmay otherwise agree, EPC shall applythe proceeds of the Loan to thefinancing of expenditures on PartsB and C of the Project in accordancewith the provisions of the LoanAgreement and this ProjectAgreement, and shall ensure that allgoods and services financed out ofsuch proceeds are used exclusivelyin the carrying out of Parts B andC of the Project.

Delayed compliance.Audited financialstatements for FY87 werereceived three months inarrears in June 1988.Audited statements forFY88 are expected inAugust 1989. Additionaldelays have been causedby the retirement of theold Financial Directorand the appointment of anew one.

Delayed compliance.Unaudited statements forFY88 were received inApril 1989.

Complied with.

Partial compliance. Aninternal tariff reviewwas done in 1980/81 andthe tariff structure andrate changes wereintroduced on 1 September1981. A further reviewwas made in 1988 and arestructure of thetariffs and an averageincrease of 50% wasintroduced on 1 November1988. Assets have notbeen revalued but a studyis now in progress to doso. The study completionis anticipated byDecember 1989.

Delayed compliance.Tariff levels have beenlower than necessary toprovide a reasonableself-financing ratiountil the latestincrease. From FY85 theSPR has been:FY85 6.6% AuditedFY86 (7.4%) AuditedFY87 4.0% AuditedFY88 8.6% UnauditedFY89 5.5% EstimatedFY90 24.3% ProjectedBased on new tariff

Appendix 8Page 939


PROJECT AGREEMENT

1. Tariff Study. EPC shallundertake a complete review of itstariff structure, taking intoconsideration, inter alia,simplification, cross subsidizationand social factors, and to cover aten-year period. The study shallinclude a revaluation of assets andshall be completed, and a report onthe study, in English, shall befurnished to the Bank for review andcomments by March 1980.

2. Tariff Rates. Upon completionof the tariff study described inparagraph 1, EPC shall review thefindings of the study, inconsultation with the Bank, andshall take action as necessary toset and maintain its rate8 at levelswhich are consistent with soundbusiness, financial and publicutility practices and which shallprovide revenues sufficient:(a) to cover operating,

maintenance, depreciation andother costs in connection withelectric supply;

(b) to cover debt amortization; and(c) to finance a reasonable

proportion of EPC's capitalexpenditures.

The Bank shall be informed withrespect to any changes in suchtariffs.

Partial compliance. EPChas undertaken continuousupgrading of its systemsand procredures but stillrequi res subs tantialimprovement. EPC hasalso started a programunder an IDA credit tocomputerize the billingfor at least 50,000 ofits consumers bySeptember 1990.

Complied with.

Appendix 8Page 1040


3. Auditing and AccountingProcedures. EPC shall implement aprogram, acceptable to the Borrowerand the Bank, by 31 March 1981, forcorrecting deficiencies in itsauditing and accounting system,including its billing, collectionand auditing procedures.

4. Accounts Receivable. EPC shallreduce its accounts receivable tonot more than three months' salesequivalent by the end of fiscal year1979-1980 and shall maintain thislevel of accounts receivablethereafter.

ppendix 9

Page 1

PROJECTED VS ACTUAL DISBURSEMENT OF LOAN

(US$}

PROJECTED ACTUALI S ----------------------------------------------ISS I I S• Tear ' ADS OPEC ' TOTAL ADS • OPEC TOTALI I S I I S I S

Loan ' Loan ' Loan Loan 'I I S I I p 5 5

II III I___ IS• I I I S --------------II I I I I I• I I I S I I

I S I I I1979-80 1 500,000 Z3.4 of F.E. , ,p,I I

Expenditure of ' I II I

I I I I II I

Electrical & ' I I II I I

I I I I I1980-81 l 4 700,000 Mechanic&1 ' 62,500 ' - ' £2,500I I

I p $ II I

Vorksfor I l S( 6,200,0001

• p I I II

' Power Station l I I

p 5 I

I I I I I

1981-82 5,200,000 ' including ' ' I I

• p I I I

'111,400,000] Generating ' I I

S S I I SI I

Unitn I I P I• I S I S I I I1982-83 • 2 200,000 ' I I I

I I I I I I I II I S I I I'[13,600,0001 , , , • ,• I

I I I I I I I II I S I I I I I1983-84 1,000,000 ' I

• g5,4gg ' -• • • 995,496I S I

I I I'114,600,0001 , , [1,057,1161I I• I I I S S I II I I I 5 •

1984-85 - I1,34,338 689,371 I

2,023,709

I II I I12,392,3341S I I I

I I I I I I I• $ I I S I S I

1985-86 ' I I3,865,695 : 847,027 ' 4,712,722I I I I

(6,258,0291 ' '

I I II I I I I I pS I I I I I S

1986-87 ' l '' 3,361,719 28,574 3,390,353I I

I $ II I S(9,619,8091 ,S p 5 I

I I I I I II I I I S p I

1981-88 ' I I1,975,140 113,518 , 2,148,658S I I I

I I I I I• • tll,594,948JI I I I I I I

I p p I I I

1988-89 ' ' ' 2,414 943 - l2,414,943I I I I S I

I I S I• , 14,009,891]

I

$ II I S I I II S S I S I S

SI SIS -II I I S p I I

:TotaP ' 14,600,000 , 2,000,000 :16,600,000 14,009,891 1,738,490 15,748,381

Source: EPC

Note : Figures in parenthesis are cuiulative figures.

(Reference in text: page 1]., para 54)

42Appendix 9

Page 2

PROJECTED vs ACTUAL DISBURSEMENT

16

14

12

10

. 8

6

4

2

0

YEA A


43

Appendix 10

LOAN PROCEEDS ALLOCATION AND UTILIZATION

US $

Original 22 July 1985: Actual Balance of Loan

Sr. Category Allocation Re-Allocation Utilization A.ount Cancelled

(1) : (2) (3) (2-3)

I Civil Works for 160,000 160,000 92,264 67,736

Power Station

II Electrical & 6,550,000 6,000,000 7,260,076 (-) 998,566

Mechanical Works

for Power Station *2,000,000 *2,000,000 *1,738,490

III Substation Equipient 1,075,000 2,000,000 2,976,916 (-} 976,976

& installation

IV Trans.ission Line & 3,000,000 2,870,000 2,941,720 (-) 71,720

Distribution Facilities;

Equipient & Installation

V Office Ruipient & 280,000 180,000 245,060 (-} 65,060

Accounting Machines

VI Consultants' Services 250,000 500,000 493,795 6,205

VII Unallocated 3,285,000 2,890,000 - 2,890,000

Total: 16,600,000 16,600,000 15,748,381 851,619

Indei: tOPEC SPECIAL FUND LOAN


8,340.58

5,106.34

3,234.24

7,541.00

615.89

42.17

58.32

8,257.38

43.80

39.40

22/3.5

12. 5/3 .0

12. 5/3 .9

48.8%

641. 06

354.36

995.42

56.7%

16,971.44

44.82

MWh.

'I

'I

'p

'p

'p

'p

'p

'p

MW

H

pp

7'

hrs.

'I

hrs.

Mcuft.

Mcuft.

44

ppendix 11

PLANT OPERATIONAL RE(X)RD

For the Month of June 1989

1. Total Units generated

2. Units generated by Unit No. 1

3. Units generated by Unit No. 2

4. Units sent out to Mandalay Feeder (132 kV)

5. Units sent out to Shwebo Feeder (33 kV)

6. Units sent out to MEPE Feeder (11 kV)

7. Units sent out to I) and Dam use (11 kV)

8. Total units sent out (4+5+6+7)

9. Station use

10.Loss

11.Max. and Mm. load of Mandalay Feeder

12.Max. and Mm. load of Unit No. 1

13.Max. and Mi load of Unit No. 2

14.Stationload factor

15.Running hours of Unit No. 1

16.Running hours of Unit No. 2

17.Total Running hours (15 + 16)

18.Station Plant factor

19.Total water discharged by MEPE

20.Total water discharged by ID


45

Appendix 12Page 1

FINANCIAL ANALYSIS

A. The following assumptions are used in the financial analysis:

1) The life of the Project is taken as 35 years conunencing June 1989.This is the same as the time of appraisal.

ii) All prices are expressed in 1989 constant US$. Local costs areconverted to US$ at the average rate prevailing during the year inwhich the expenditure was incurred. Both foreign and local costswere then converted to 1989 constant US$ using the manufacturingunit values for foreign costs and the implicit GDP deflator forlocal costs as shown on page 4 of this appendix.

iii) The Power Project cost used in the analysis included i) the directcost of the Project for generation; ii) the transmission facilitiesfrom the Project to the Mandalay substation; and iii) theexpenthture incurred by the Irrigation Department on the powerhousefoundation and the allocation of a portion of the dam cost. Thedistribution reinforcement in Mandalay is also included as a projectcomponent as it is considered necessary to economically market thepower provided by the project. In addition, the cost of connectionsfor the projected 4,200 new consumers is included.

iv) The cost of the dam allocated to the project is based on the"priority of use method". At the time of appraisal this wasestimated at 16% of the total dam cost but based on the estimatesincluded in the Project Completion Report for the SedawgyiMultipurpose Dam and Irrigation Project [Loan No. 266-BUR(SF)] ofOctober 1988, this allocation is reduced to 5%. The basic reasonfor this reduction to 5 per cent is that there was a major revisionin the design of the dam whereby the additional cost attributableto power generation was reduced as a proportion of the total cost.As the total cost of the dam tripled, the allocation in currenttenis using the 5 per cent rate ($3.26 million) was only slightlylower than the estimated $3.56 million using the 16 per centallocation rate.

v) The disbursements for the dam and powerhouse foundations wereincurred by the Irrigation Department. Details of theseexpenditures are included in the tables following the FIRR analysis.


46

Appendix -Page 2

vi) Operation and maintenance of the power station and transmission lineis taken as 1% of the foreign cost and 5% of the local cost. Thehigher percentage used for the local cost is due to the majordistortions in the prices of local materials, particularly, cement,steel and fuel at. the time of construction. For distribution,operations and maintenance is calculated at 5% of total cost.

vii) Net generation is calculated at the Mandalay substation and includes1 per cent station use and 2 per cent transmission losses totiandalay.

viii) Bulk sales are to the steel mill on the transmission line to Maymgo.System losses on these sales are calculated at 4 per cent. Othersales are at low voltage and include system losses at 30 per centreducing to 20 per debt over a five year period cosnencing inFY1990

ix) The tariff benefit is based on the tariff schedule introduced on1 November 1988.

B. Based on the above assumptions, the FIRR of the project is 12.7 per centcompared to 13.6 per cent at the time of appraisal. A sensitivity analysis hasbeen done for the level of generation, system loss at the distribution level,tariff, cost of operations and maintenance and increased allocation of darn costs.As the operation and maintenance cost estimate is based on the 1989 price levelsand adjusted by a factor of five for distortions arising from controlled pricesof local inputs to the Project and the additional rainfall data gathered overthe 12-year construction period has confined the generation estimates, the majorrisk is seen as the tariff level not being maintained in real terms. The resultsof the sensitivity analysis are given in the table below.

FIRR SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS

Base Case10% reduction in generation10% increase in 0 & M cost10% increase in system loss

at distribution level 1/Allocation of darn cost

increased from 5% to 16%20% reduction in tariffs 2/

FIRR

12.7%11 .6%12.5%12.3%

10.4%

10.3%

S .I.

0.0

0.3

0.9

1/ Increase in the system loss from the present level.2/ Reduction is due to tariff not being maintained in real terms.

YOIr

"77

In'

1979

1980

In'

12

1983

'904

'"5

In'

I'll

1901

198?

1990

1!91

1992

irn

1994

1995

'99'

1991

'9"

'9"

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2000

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

7014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

5,853

7,856

8,00l

8,147

0,293

8,438

8,430

8,438

8,438

0,438

8,436

8,438

0,438

8,438

8,438

8,438

2,438

8,438

2,438

8,438

8,438

8,438

8,439

8,430

8,438

8,436

8,436

9,438

8,438

8,430

(742)

(1, 1511

(560)

(787)

(2,5791

(7,313)

(7,763)

(5,707)

(3,625)

(5,008)

4,097

6,300

6,926

7,071

7,217

7,363

7,363

7,363

7,363

7,363

7,363

7,363

7,363

7,363

7,363

7,363

1,363

7,363

7,363

7,363

7,363

7,363

7,363

1,363

7,363

7,363

7,363

7,363

7,363

7,363

P(D

(D

POOJECT CAPITOL COOT OPERATION*OMINTENANCETotal

Wydro Pr,j.ct lIstrIlitios Capital Statios I Total

Lust Rstufacsust Cussuurs Cost Truosiuslo. Distributios 0611

54

,,rn

587

742

1,151

787

2,579

7,512

2,603

3,462

4,843

224

742

1,151

580

787

2,579

7,313

7,751

5,624

3,462

4,845

704

400

12

163

163

163

197

211

211

211

211

211

211

211

211

211

211

211

211

211

211

211

211

211

211

211

"I

211

211

211

211

211

211

211

211

211

12

163

563

163

1,052

1,076

I ,076

1,076

1,076

1,076

1,016

1,076

1,016

1,076

1,016

1,076

1,076

1,076

1,076

1,076

1,076

1,076

1,01&

1,076

1,076

l,076

1,016

1,076

1,076

1,076

1,076

l,076

1,076

1,076

24,278

3,260 480 35,53!

239

3,021

400

400

RENEF ITS

9t 1*11 Ottur

G.osratiss Sale Salts Tarilf Not Funds

6* 8* 8* 80.efIt Flos

PROJECT FINANCIAL ANALYSIS(Conatant of 1989 USS '000)

97.5 40.0 39.7

130.0 40.0 64.2

130.0 40.0 66.0

130.0 40.0 61.9

130.3 40.0 69.6

130.0 40.0 71.4

130.0 40.0 71.4

130.0 40.0 71.4

130.0 40.0 71.4

130.0 40.3 71.4

130.0 40.0 71.4

130.0 40.0 11.4

130.0 40.0 11.4

130.0 40.0 71.4

130.0 40.0 71.4

130.0 40.0 71.4

130.0 40.0 71.4

130.0 40.3 71.4

130.0 40.0 71.4

130.0 40.0 71.4

130.0 40.0 71.4

130.0 40.0 71.4

130.0 40.0 71.4

130.0 40.0 71.4

130.0 40.0 71.4

130.0 40.0 11.4

130.0 40.0 71.4

130.0 40.0 71.4

130.0 40.0 71.4

130.0 40.0 71.4

12.72

PROJIC1 FINANCIAL COSTS

TOTM. i77 1918

Imsual avera99 sica.q. rat; 7.11 7.16IWY 73.00 *5.90F0ri99 escsLat1 factor 2.01 1.75Isplicit OW deflator 92.90 93.50local socalatles factor 1.54 1.33

CALC(LATI00 PR PROJECT CORlI II QiIT IOLLMS

Total di,bursae.ts Opt Kyati 15,U3ICE 10,493IC 15,749

Total Ii torrid 0 26,242Tues and duty tsclud.d Is ICE 5,403

'.34

Ilatributiss rofafercesant Kyats 6,474

ICE 931

IC 2,122Total I; currant $ 2,95*

Tszes aid duty tucluded to ICE 694

1979 1980 1911 1992 INS 19*4 1985 1986 1981 *988 1989 1990

6.39 6.39 6.29 6.78 1.62 7.86 8.17 8.43 7.18 4.58 6.12 6.40

95.10 104.30 104.80 103.30 100.10 9tOO 100.00 118.30 *30.80 140.30 144.90 143.701.54 1.41 1.40 1.42 1.44 1.41 1.47 1.24 1.12 1.05 1.00 1.02

SLID 100.00 104.40 107.90 110.10 112.20 113.50 118.00 119.20 121.90 124.00 130.001.26 1.24 1.19 1.15 1.13 1.11 1.09 1.05 1.04 1.02 1.00 0.95

1,493 1,564 1,4U 3,491 4,501 14,503 12,938 11,028 8,074 14,814 1,500

234 249 216 414 572 1,774 1,533 1,534 1,227 2,430 234

63 995 2,024 4,713 3,390 2,149 2,415

234 312 216 484 1,54* 3,79* 6,240 4,926 3,376 4,845 234

0 21 0 0 342 694 1,617 1,143 731 828 0

"74930

192 1,829192 2,759

694

Total In; distribitlos Kyst; 41,969 1,493 1,564 1,466 3,691 4,501 14,503 12,938 4,354 8,074 14,884 1,500

rituforcessat ICE • 9,544 734 249 216 484 572 1,774 1,535 606 1,221 2,430 234

IC 13,727 0 63 0 0 995 2,024 4,520 1,541 2,149 2,415 0

Total 1. currant $ 73,291 234 312 216 484 1,541 3,798 6,056 2,16* 3,376 4,845 234

Tans aid duty iscluded I. ICE 4,709 S 21 0 0 342 694 1,617 470 737 828 0

Allocated Ores lrriat1os lystu 18,491 194 2,404 1,453 1,610 1,7M 1,395 1,113 1,576 4,029 2,038 1,144 (233) 0 0

lepartiest ICE 2,534 27 336 227 252 2*1 206 144 200 493 242 160 (35) 0 0

Ft 3,0)3 773 195 99 3)0 67 53 167 1,269 26 47 0 0 0Total Is cu-root $ 5,547 36 1,109 422 351 591 273 199 347 1,762 267 204 (35) 0 0

Tacos sad duty jactuded Is ICE 784 2 201 51 26 SI 17 14 43 330 1 12 0 0 0

Total Pour Project Kyate *1,460 194 2,404

ICE 12,091 27 336

IC (4,744 9 773Total I. currest$ 28,831 36 1,109

Tact; and duty tucluded to ICE 5,493 2 201

CALC(.4T ION W P011ER PROJECT COSTS II 1989 COISTAIIT DOlLARS

Total Pour Project ICE 13,055 34 445

IC 21,113 II 1,353

Total 1989 US 1 34,23* 54 1,799

Tan; and duty ticludsd In ICE 6,892 S 352

1,453 3,103 3,330 2,041 4,004 6,077 18,532 14,976 5,500 7,842 14,884 1,500

227 4*5 530 422 630 773 2,267 1,171 166 1,192 2,430 234

195 99 373 47 53 1,162 3,292 4,544 1,608 2,149 2,415 0

422 585 902 409 683 1,935 5,560 6,323 2,374 3,341 4,845 234

51 26 102 11 14 385 1,024 1,623 482 737 828 0

285 602 629 485 710 854 2,471 1,868 797 1,213 2,430 224

301 140 Sn 95 75 1,725 4,536 5,645 1,806 2,250 2,415 0

5*1 742 1,151 580 787 2,579 7,3)3 7,512 2,603 3,462 4,845 224

7* 34 143 25 20 571 1,505 2,016 541 772 820 0

0Qm.

I-i.

PROJECT FINANCIAL COSTS

1977 197$ 1979 1980 1981 1992 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1981 1989 1990

CIUTI0I CF IIIIIIIUTI01 W&wuI O1TS

IistrlWti. rotaforsanant It 6,942947

cc 2,293Total 1989 (18$ 3,261Tun aid daty 84clsdsd I. RE 779

o 6,943

o 967

239 2,054

239 3,021779

•isstswrs 81 18811*7188 ueuin

Caistrictia. .quijtai.t RE (694)

FE 31,464Total currant $ 30,773

ha aid ipfllny RE 29,482

FE 4,195Total currant 1 34,377

Total di. cost RE 30,784

FE 36,344Total current $ 43,151

84 9 15 20 45 161 389 73 139 78 U,10915,459 2,937 1,401 5,978 1,170 865 1,173 1,285 440 761

15,543 2,946 1,416 5,999 1,215 1,024 1,542 1,351 579 839 (1,709)

499 2,549 3,385 4,147 3,619 3,124 2,383 2,031 2,765 2,284 1,673 1,002173 962 581 223 (U 199 2,165 187 70 169074 2,548 4,347 4,748 3,842 3,298 2,582 4,196 2,952 2,356 1,942 1,002

499 2,432 3,394 4,112 3,639 3,149 2,544 2,420 2,838 2,425 1,751 (707)175 15,459 3,899 1,982 4,201 1,334 1,044 3,339 1,472 510 930 0474 18,091 7,293 4,164 9,840 4,503 3,601 5,738 4,310 2,935 2,681 (707)

C*LCIUTIOI OF ILLOCATION TI TiE PIIJECT

Allocatud di. cost 51

1,439 25 132 170 209 182 III 127 121 142 121 98 (351FE 1,119 9 773 (95 99 310 47 53 167 74 26 47 0

Total current $ 3,258 34 400 343 308 492 225 190 288 214 147 134 (351

Pour boise fowidatiess FCE 311 3 7 17 II 30 5 36 21 114 40FE 1,195 1,195

Total currest $ 1,504 3 7 17 II 30 5 34 1,214 1(4 60 0

Total allocation (ran lrrtatia. k,art.eat hid. tins sad duty

Total local currency IC 11,491 194 2,404 1,453 1,410 1,744 1,395 1,113 1,574 4,029 2,039 1,146 (233)Tue. and duty FCE 261 784 2 201 51 26 II Il 14 43 330 7 12 0Otber local costs FCE 1,750 25 (33 ill 226 200 182 132 151 163 235 148 (35)Total local cost; FCE 2,534 27 334 227 252 281 204 (46 200 493 242 160 (35)Furaiqe coat cc 3,013 9 773 195 99 310 47 53 167 1,269 26 47 0

Total currant $ 3,547 36 1,109 422 351 391 273 199 347 1,742 247 206 (35)

OQ(D

I-,.(J'x

I'.,

ILCTRI CITY 1*1! FF!

'EFFECTIWE I SEPTEMBER 1981)

CAPAC1T' :FIXEO CHARGESCHARGES : I.E. METER

COIISIJMEF : ENEPG'' CHARGES: (IYAT PER : MAINTENANCEC.ATEGOF:, : ,:p*A. PER I}Il.' :HORSE POWER): (KYATS)

1 :Geter1 F'urpce :First E>cess 100 KwH 46 - :Sir1e Phase:E'cess 42 : :Three Phase

:['n.?tic Power :FirsF E.:cess 50 kwH 29 : :Single PhaseFu,cjoori Onl y:E..ce.s 19 : :Three Phase

3 :'.il Foer :FIat. Rate 25 : 1 :Single Phase

4 ItJj:tti1 -------:tH --Three Phasea: Raroor, :per I-il of ia<ithua demand

(Miniiuu of 50 kID

17 : - :Three Phase15:

----------------------------------------- ---------------------------------Outside Parcic.c.n :Miriiaiu of 2000 (IwH)

:First. E.cess 200 KwH 25 : 1:Ecess 20 :

5 :L;rge Industrial :Flat Pate 12 - :Three Phase

___________________________________________________________________-------

Ejil-.a, Rangoon :First. E<cess 40 KwH

per kW cf tnax i mum demand(Miniuni of 50 kW) 40 1 - :Thre. Phase

:E.cess 24------------------------------------------------------------------

b; uut.side Fan.c'ori : (Miruirauôi o SuO K','H):First Excess 500 KwH 54 : -:E>cess 44 : :Three Phase

----------------------------------------------------------------------------treet. Li ght : (Mlnim'JIl of 40 KwH)

:40 Watts - Kyats 8 : -:Everi additional:10 Watts - Kyat.s 2 : -

T€pc.r.ai-y Licht Ir.; :For i,et.ered c:nr.ect. ions :s .ae as Get-er al Purpose : - : -

(EFFECTIVE 1 I1OVEIIGER 1988)

CAPACITY :FIXEO CHARGESCHARGES : I.E. METER

ENERGY CHARGES : ci..(AT PER :MAI1ITENANCE(PIRS PER KWH) :HORSE P011ER): (KVRTS)

1 :Flat Pate 50 : - :Sinigle Fi-lase 2B : : :Three Fhaze 5

I :Flat. Rate 50 : - :Sirgle Phase 23 : : :Three Phase 5

6 :Flat Rate : 1 :Single Phase 8:Thr€e Phase 15

12 : : : Three Phase 15

25):(Minimum df 2000 KwH)):Flat Rate 45 1 :Three Phase 25

15):

25 :(Minicrium of 4 Million KwH:Flat Pate 40 : 1 :Three Phase 25

25):(Minimum of 2000 KwH)):Flat Rate 45 : 1 :Three Phase 25

15):

:(Minimum 40 Watts) : - : -:40 Watts Kyats 8:Every additional:10 Watts Kyats 2:For metered connections : - : -:Same as General Purpose

For metered connect ior,s

:same as General Purpose : - : -

UiC

m

0

Li

r es i rict ed pcr : mya 12004 asian development bank … · pcr : mya 12004 asian development bank...

Documents