Report No. 1509-MAS I LP The Economy of Mauritius A Basic Econonmic Report Annex Il-The Power Sector February 22, 1978 Country Programs Department II Eastern Africa Region FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Document of the World Bank This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the performance of their official duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed without World Bank authorization. MAURITIUS POWER SECTOR REVIEW Currency Equivalents 1 US$ a 6.7 Mauritian Rupees (Rs) I Mauritian Rupee = 100 Mauritian Cents (Mi) 1 Pound Sterling Rs 11.4 1 Mauritian Rupee US$0.149 Weights and Measures 1 Meter = 3.28 Feet 1 Kilometer (km) 2 = 0.0621 Miles 1 Square Kilometer (kmi) = 0.386 Square Miles 1 Kilovolt (kV) = 1,000 Volts 1 Kilowatt (kW) = 1,000 Watts 1 Kilowatt-hour (kWh) = 1,000 Watt-Hours 1 Megawatt (MW) = 1,000 Kilowatts 1 Gigawatt-hour (GWh) = 1 Million Kilowatt-Hours Abbreviations and Acronyms ADB = African Development Bank BADEA = Arab Bank for Economic Development of Africa CCCE - Caisse Centrale de Cooperation Economique (France) CDC = Commonwealth Development Corporation CEB = Central Electricity Board CWA = Central Water Authority EIB = European Investment Bank EPDC = Electric Power Development Consultants (U.K. Consultant) FNCB = First National City Bank (USA) GRNW = Grand River Northwest GRSE = Grand River Southeast MPFE = Ministry of Power, Fuel and Energy ODM = Overseas Development Ministry (U.K.) PCR = Preece, Cardew and Rider (U.K. Consultant) CEB's Fiscal Year January 1 - December 31 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY MAURITIUS POWER SECTOR REViEW Table of Contents Page No. I. INTRODUCTION . ...........................* .......... 1 II. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ........ . . . ................ ......... . 1 III. THE ENERGY SECTOR ...... *.............. 2 Energy ResourceEs . ..... .... . ....................... . 2 Energy Demand ............................. ... ....... 2 IV. POWER SUPPLY AN) DEMAND .....................*........ 3 Existing Faciliities .................................... ........ 3 Power Market ....... . ......... ...... .............. .. 3 Supply and Demaad . ................................ . 4 V. THE CENTRAL ELECTRICITY BOARD .................. 4 The Act ......* .**.*....................................... 4 Organization and Staffing .......................... 5 Training ...... ....................... ........ 5 Operations and Maintenance ................. ......... 5 Insurance ..... ................................................ 6 Accounts and Audit ........ 6 VI. PLANNING AND INVESTMENT ........ . . . . .................. ........ . 6 Power Market survey ...... ........................... 7 Generation .... .............. . . 7 Transmission and Distribution Program ..9 ... ........ 9 Investutents in the Power Sector .......... ......... 10 VII. FINANCIAL CONDI:TION AND PROSPECTS ................... 10 Past Performance ..................... 10 Financial Prospects ... ............... ..................... 12 Tariff Structure ..* .... .. .......... . ......................... 13 VIII. RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................. ..... 14 CEB's Operations ....... .... .............................. 14 Planning .... ........ o.....o........... o......................... 14 Finance ..... .*........ *..*............ *........................ 15 Tariffs ..... .o . -15 This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the performance of their official duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed without World Bank authorization. - 2 - LIST OF ANNEXES ANNEX 1 Existing Facilities 2 Generation and Sales 3 Central Electricity Board Organizational Structure 4 Projected Sales and Maximum Demand 5 CEB Interconnected System 6 Construction Program 7 Revaluation of Assets 8 Actual and Forecast Income Statements 9 Actual and Forecast Balance Sheets 10 Actual and Forecast Sources and Applications of Funds 11 Assumptions to the Financial Projections 12 March 1976 Tariffs - Domestic Block Type Tariff MAP IBRD 12246 I. INTRODUCTION 1.01 Diversification of the economy has been an important Government objective since independence in 1968. Mauritius has been particularly suc- cessful in attracting labor-intensive industries and developing the tourism industry. It is therefore not surprising that consumption of electricity has risen at a high rate over the past seven years. 1.02 Rapid growth of electricity consumption is likely to continue while Mauritius implements the Second National Development Plan. To fulfill the Plan's objectives, the electricity industry must undertake a large investment program. If electricit:y is to be made available at a price which consumers can afford, this program must be carefully selected according to economic criteria. Furthermore, while the Central Electricity Board is generally well run, it must continue to seek improvements in its operations. An important objective of the following report is to assist CEB in this task. 1.03 From the Bank's perspective, the objective of the report is essen- tially to develop suffi.cient sector knowledge to permit orderly preparation of the Second Power Project now scheduled for FY1979. The First Power lend- ing operation of the Bank in Mauritius was in 1963 for generation and trans- mission facilities (Loan 355-MAS). Most of the objectives of that lending operation were achieved, except on the financial side. The report draws the attention to these. 1.04 The report is based on the findings of a mission, consisting of Messrs. Tuncay and Heitner, which visited Mauritius in April 1976, and of a short updating visit in January 1977. II. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 2.01 Except for limited hydroelectric resources, for which there is competition with other users such as irrigation and bagasse, a by-product of sugarcane processing, Mauritius has no indigenous sources of energy. Diesel generation based on imported fuel accounts for about 70% of total electricity generation, and its share is expected to increase in the future. 2.02 Domestic use accounts for 40% of total electricity consumption. Practically the whole population lives in areas supplied by electricity and about 80% actually has access to electricity. This is essentia:Lly due to the high commitment of the Government and the Central Electricity Board (CEB) for rural electrification. Commercial and industrial use account together for about 46% of total consumption and their share is rising. The balance of 14% is for irrigation and miscellaneous services. 2.03 The Central Electricity Board is a generally well managed utility. Its main weaknesses lie in generation planning, and financial performance. Some areas of its operations also require strengthening. - 2 - 2.04 A summary of recommendations appears at Chapter VIII. The main ones are that: (i) CEB should improve its planning activities (Power Market Surveys, Financial Planning, etc.); (ii) the Government should undertake, on behalf of all water users, a study to determine how the water resources of the island should be allocated to various users on the basis of cost and benefits; (iii) incentives should be found to increase production of elec- tricity from bagasse from existing and possibly new plants; (iv) appropriate remedial measures be taken to restore financial health to CEB; and (v) de- clining block tariffs, with their promotional characters, be abolished in favor of tariff structures which reflect the long-term marginal cost-of supply. III. THE ENERGY SECTOR Energy Resources 3.01 Mauritius has no known fossil fuel resources. The main indigenous sources of commercial energy are: (i) hydroelectric power, on the Grand River Southeast (GRSE) and Grand River Northwest (GRNW); and (ii) bagasse, a by- product of sugar processing, which is burnt in generating plants located on sugar estates. 3.02 Although the annual rainfall on the island is one of the highest in the world, the number of suitable hydroelectric sites is limited by the following factors: (i) small catchment areas; (ii) juxtaposition of a good storage volume with a good head is not often available; and (iii) there are many, old-established water-rights on the available water resources, mostly for irrigation purposes. 3.03 The largest catchment on the island is that of GRSE. It is orien- ted toward the prevailing wind so that it obtains the maximum advantage from orographic rainfall, and it is an area where demand for water from other users is noticeably less than elsewhere. Energy Demand 3.04 The energy crisis has encouraged offshore oil exploration but so far no deposits of any significance have been discovered. Meanwhile, im- ports of refined oil products - there is no refinery on the island - have in- creased from 115,000 tons in 1973 to 135,000 tons in 1976, while the cost of these imports increased from about US$15 million to US$25 million. The share of oil products in total imports now approximate 15%. Mauritius also imports coal, albeit in small quantities (about 1200 tons per annum ). - 3 - 3.05 Commercial energy requirements in 1976 aggregated to about 285,000 tons of coal equivalenlt 1/. Eighty-five percent of these were met by imported oil, 8% by hydroelectric generations and 7% by burnt bagasse. 3.06 The share of electricity in total energy consumption has increased from 28% in 1970 to 32t in 1976. This trend is expected to continue, and reach 34% in 1980. IV. POWER SUPPLY AND DEMAND Existing Facilities 4.01 The Central Electricity Board (CEB) is in charge of most electri- city generation and all electricity distribution on the island. CEB has about 90 MW of power generating facilities, of which 64 MW are thermal, and the balance hydro. Further, 16 sugar estates own and operate private generating plants based on process steam and bagasse, and two small hydroelectric stations with a combined capacity of 15 MW. 4.02 CEB, has an extensive 66, 22 and 6.6-kV network covering the whole island. At present overhead lines measure about 3,500 km, and underground 2 cables about 100 km, a relatively high density for an island of 1,850 km Annex 1 gives a detai:Led description of CEB's facilities. Power Market 4.03 CEB's sales more than doubled between 1965 and 1975, with an aver- age growth rate of 7% per annum. The growth has been particularly rapid since 1970 with an average 11% growth rate per annum. The mix of energy sales is as follows: 40% go for domestic sales, 23% for commercial sales -and-20% for industrial sales;- the balance goes essentially for irrigation. A discernible trend since 1970 has been the more rapid growth of commercial and industrial sales which increased their combined market share from 38.5% in 1970 to 46% in 1975. Annex 2 shows CEB's annual GWh generation and sales in the 1970-1975 period. 1/ Ton of coal equivalent (TEC) 1 TEC = 7 x 10 Kcal 1 Ton fuel oil = 1.37 TEC 1 GWh = 330 TEC 3 1 m natural gas = 1.3 TEC - 4 - 4.04 The number of domestic consumers at end-1975 was approximately 109,000. Currently, 98% of the total population of 860,000 lives in areas with an electricity supply and about 80% of the population actually uses electricity. This remarkable achievement is essentially due to the high priority given to rural electrification by the Government and the CEB. It is anticipated that, by end-1978, the whole population of the island will have access to electricity. 4.05 The specific monthly consumption per connection, while low (about 56 kWh per month), has increased steadily from the 1970 level, when it was 46 kWh per month. The growth in specific consumption does not fully reflect the improvement in the standard of living which has taken place because the bulk of new consumers has been from the lower income groups. Supply and Demand 4.06 Rapid growth in electricity demand over the last decade was not matched by a corresponding growth in power generation facilities. Maximum demand occurs around December, when firm capacity is low. Of the 26 MW of hydro capacity, only 6 MW are firm in December because this is just prior to the rainy season. Also, by December, the generating plants using bagasse have been closed down. Consequently, CEB relies heavily on its diesel plants. The capacity of such plants was 51 MW in 1975 to meet a maximum demand of 54 MW in the same year. 1/ The shortage of capacity has led to load shedding and somewhat deteriorated the industrial development of Mfauritius. In taking future policy decisions, the CEB and Government should fully take into account the dangers of underestimating the importance of infrastructure investment. V. THE CENTRAL ELECTRICITY BOARD The Act 5.01 The Central Electricity Board, a statutory body, was established in December 1952, through the acquisition by Government, and consolidation of several private undertakings. Since July 1956, CEB has been the sole public supplier of electricity and has had the full responsibility to operate and develop the integrated electric power system on the island. 5.02 The Board of Directors consists of eleven members, i.e., the Chair- man, the General Manager, four representatives of the Government and Para- statals, two representatives of consumer groups, and three representatives from the private sector. The Governor appoints all the non-ex-officio mem- bers of the Board by delegation of MPFE. 1/ Two 6.5 MW diesel sets were subsequently commissioned at end-1976, thus alleviating the current shortfall of generating capacity. -5- 5.03 The CEB Ordinance of 1963 gave broad powers to the Board in running the Corporation; the Board in turn can delegate the necessary powers to the General Manager. Although the degree of autonomy of the CEB, as provided for in its Ordinance, was not unreasonable, it causes concern to the Government so that in April 1976, the Act was amended by adding to the Board's member- ship two representatives of the Government, and the General Manager of the Central Water Authority (CWA). Further, the Minister in charge (now the Minister of Power, Fuel and Energy) can give "general directions" to the Board, with which the Board has to comply. Organization and Staffira 5.04 The Organization Chart of the CEB is in Annex 3; CEB has seven main departments, four of which-deal with Operations and one each for Transmission and Distribution Planning, Accounts and Personnel. The important function of Generation Planning is Et direct responsibility of the management and while the two Generation Engineers participate in the generation planning works, they are mostly occupied by the day-to-day operation of the thermal, and hydro- electric plant. 5.05 At end-1975 CE.B's staff stood at 1500, with one-third being quali- fied personnel and the rest manual workers 1/. The size of the staff seems about right when compared with CEB's scope of activities. Like many operat- ing concerns in Mauritius, CEB's management has been preoccupied, over the last two years with an unusual level of labor unrest, caused mainly by a rate of inflation which had outpaced wage increases. CEB's management was able to deal with these problems effectively by creating a Personnel Department, and placing a competent person in charge. Training 5.06 With assistance from the French Government, Electricite de France (EDF) set up a vocational training school in 1974. An EDF engineer presently runs the school, but it is expected that a Mauritian engineer, after initial training in France, will take over the management of the school during 1977. Instructors are Mauritians who have been trained in France by EDF. This program has been very successful and combines theoretical courses with practical training. At present about 60 apprentices participate in the program. At the upper echelons, CEB sponsors students for courses abroad and at the University of Mauritius. CEB's training program appears satis- factory. Operations and Maintenance 5.07 Although system control activities need some improvement (parti- cularly in the areas of system frequency and voltage control and reactive load supply), operation and maintenance of power plants and transmission 1/ Semi-skilled or unskilled workers who work in transmission/cdistribution construction and in security services as guards. - 6 - system are good. Since fuel consumption of the Board represents about 15% of the island's total requirements, big efforts have been made to reduce diesel oil consumption, which is expensive, and increase consumption of inexpensive residual oil in electricity generation. CEB has successfully modified diesel engines burning light oil to burn heavy fuel oil (residual oil) and has reduced fuel expenses substantially. Insurance 5.08 CEB's plant is not presently insured against fire, flood, explo- sion or cyclones. Further, no reserve exists (funded or not) against such damages. While the Government has come to CEB's rescue after major natural catastrophies (such as cyclone Gervaise in February 1975, see para. 7.05), CEB ought to undertake a study on the merits of a coverage of generating plant and transmission and distribution assets against major disasters, and to determine whether a commercial insurance is preferable or not to a funded reserve. In any event, the cost of protection against unexpected damages should be borne by CEB (and therefore indirectly by electricity consumers) and not by Government. The present situation, where there is neither a commercial insurance nor a funded reserve, is unsatisfactory. Accounts and Audit 5.09 CEB's accounts are well maintained and reports are prepared promptly. Performance, as measured by inventory levels and accounts receiv- able, has been good. On the other hand, the budgeting process and cost control mechanisms could be improved; on the first item above, CEB's budgets have proven systematically optimistic, essentially because of overestimation of high assumption regarding hydroelectric power production and underestima- tion of costs. As a result, CEB's requests for tariff increases to meet its financial objectives (see para. 7.10) have proved to be too low in several instances. 5.10 CEB's accounts are audited annually by De Chazal du Mee & Co., a local audit firm with links to Coopers and Lybrand. The scope of the audit appears generally satisfactory. CEB's audited accounts are not qualified. VI. PLANNING AND INVESTMENT 6.01 CEB is in charge of planning for the whole power sector in Mauritius. Except for multipurpose projects with an electrical component, CEB is fully in charge of constructing power facilities. CEB relies for much of its planning on its consultants, Preece, Cardew and Rider (PCR), a U.K. firm; PCR has provided assistance to CEB in various aspects of planning for including financial planning. CEB, however, has not been - 7 - always satisfied with the quality of the assistance offered, and ought to develop in the future its own planning capacity, particularly in the areas where the required expertise is not excessively specialized. 6.02 In March 1976, PCR completed a 10-year program for the Development of Generation, Transmission and System Control Facilities. This report was used as a basis for the discussions which the IBRD mission of April 1976 had with CEB and Government officials on the subject of power sector plan- ning in Mauritius. Power Market Survey 6.03 PCR completed a detailed Power Market Survey in February 1975. Its conclusions were still, considered valid by PCR in early 1976 1/, and were therefore used to prepare the Generation and Transmission Development plans. The forecasts of Energy Sales and Maximum Demand over the 1977 - 1983 period appear at Annex 4. 6.04 The methodology used by PCR consists in analyzing the trends for each category of consumers, without any econometric studies, or sensitivity analyses. The main assumptions have been that: (i) the annual growth rate in domestic sales will gradually decline from 14% in 1975 to 8.5% in 1980; (ii) the annual growth in commercial sales will gradually decline from 9.1% ia 1975 to 7.5% in 1982 (due mainly to saturation); and (iii) the annual growth in industrial sales will gradually decline from 14.9% in 1975 to 10.7% in 1983 (due mainly to satura- tion). Demand forecasts for very large industries, such as the fertilizer factories, were included on the basis of current plans, on an individual basis. 6.05 PCR also anticipated that the morning peak, now 89% of the evening peak, will gradually approach the evening peak. This phenomenon is mostly due to the faster growth rates of the industry and tourism markets, and will have serious repercussions on power system operations and planning. Generation 6.06 Generation projects, now being implemented, and for which financing has been secured, are as follows: (i) two 6.5 MW diesel sets for the Fort Victoria power station to be commissioned during 1977; and (ii) two 12 MW diesel units to be commissioned during 1978 at the St. Louis power station. 1/ The actual 1976 results and the 1977 budget are broadly in line with the 1975 survey. - 8 - 6.07 CWA is now implementing a multipurpose irrigation/water supply/ hydroelectric power project at Baptiste Guibies; the project has been affected by long delays, substantial cost overruns and the hydroelectric plant (8 MW) will not provide any firm capacity during the dry season. Commissioning is not expected until 1980 at the earliest. CEB and CWA have so far not reached agreement on sharing and the costs purchase price of electric power from CWA. 6.08 PCR's generation development program of March 1976 has not been prepared on the basis of economic least cost solutions taking into consider- ation all possible alternatives; it is essentially a fully oil-based devel- opment, expected to meet CEB's requirements up to 1986; hydroelectric possibilities, or coal-based units have not been considered. The report recommends: (i) a 12 MV gas turbine (1976); (ii) a 12 diesel set at St. Louis (1978); and (iii) two 12 MW diesel sets at a new power station at Mer Rouge (1979); a further 48 MW would be added to Mer Rouge by 1986. 6.09 PCR's proposal was altered by CEB on the following grounds: (i) the gas turbine was uneconomic; (ii) one should assume, for planning purposes, two consecutive years of drought extending from November to January; (iii) de-rating of the nominal capacity of the St. Louis power station from 14 MW to 8 MW; (iv) firm capacity of the hydroelectric station set out at 8 MW (vs. 25 MW of installed capacity); (v) two 6 MW sets at Fort Victoria could be out of service at any one time on account of maintenance and/or mechanical failure (their availability record has proven poor so far); and (vi) The proposed site for the new thermal plant at Mer Rouge is not suitable at this stage because it would be more economical to extend the existing of St. Louis station, which is located near Port Louis. 6.10 CEB's generation program, as modified, is as follows: in addition to the two 12 MW diesel sets at St. Louis (1977/78) (para. 6.06): (a) one 12 MW diesel set at St. Louis (1979); and (b) the 15 MW Quatre Soeurs Hydroelectric Project (1980). Development beyond 1980 and until 1986 will be through two additional 12 MW sets at St. Louis and the Diamamouve hydro- electric project (upstream of Quatre Soeurs), around 1982. Annex 5 shows the forecast of Maximum Demand and, Installed and Firm Capacity. 6.11 The feasibility study for the Quatre Soeurs Hydroelectric Project (para. 6.10) was prepared by Engineering Power Development Consultants (EPDC), U.K. Consultant, in 1976. The consultant has prepared tender documents - 9 - for all the major components of the project, and all bids are expected to be made by September 1977; the intention is, at that time, to review the merits of the project, on the basis of actual tenders, and decide with the Government and the interested lender (BADEA) whether to go ahead or not. 6.12 As was mentioned earlier (para. 3.03), while the island enjoys ample rainfall, there is competition for water use between irrigation, domestic and industrial consumption and hydroelectric power. The problem is complicated further by l:he existence of water rights dating, in some cases, back to the eighteenth century. In view of the already large investment in hydroelectric plant and the two hydroelectric projects now contemplated (Baptiste/Guibies and Quatre Soeurs), it would be useful to determine how water would be allocated on the basis of economic criteria alone. In the short run, it would then be possible to establish the opportunity costs of allocating water between competing uses on a different basis. Thus, the cost of allocating wate:r in a given way to a particular use is the value at the margin of that wate:r in the most valuable alternative use. In the longer term, pricing policies Eor water use can be developed which will bring about a greater equality of the marginal value of water in alternative uses, sub- ject to any social or other constraints. 6.13 The following observations can be made on CEB's generation planning procedures: (i) generation development plans should be based on economic least cost solutions taking into account all possible alternatives; (ii) the planning figure for firm capacity and average energy of hydro- electric plants should be revised by incorporting the results of recent observations (see also para. 7.10); (iii) in view of the high oil prices, the CEB should study whether methods (e.g., increasing generating 'capacity, changing pricing arrange ments, giving CEB an increased control over the day-to-day operation of bagasse-based generating plants) can be found which are mutually beneficial to CEB and sugar producers, to increase production of electricity from bagasse (a contact is expected to be signed soon regarding the operation of a sugar estates' plant during inter-crop season); and (iv) a small generation planning unit should be created in the CEB (para. 5.04), and should concentrate its activities on the economics of generation on the island, and the identification of sequences of least-cost solutions. Transmission and Distribution Program 6.14 A long-range construction program for transmission, primary and secondary distribution has been prepared by PCR in the March 1976 report. It covers the future development of the transmission system from 1977 onwards to meet the steadily increasing demand. By 1981/82, the capacity of the transmission system would be sufficient to cope with the anticipated loads into the 1990s. Thus, after 1982, the program is mainly confined to adding transformers and switchbgear to the proposed 66/22 kV substations. - 10 - 6.15 This program was appropriately modified by CEB due mainly to the changes in the generation construction program (para. 6.09). CEB's trans- mission and distribution program now includes the constructin of about 100 km of 66 kV, 22 kV and lower voltage overhead lines and cables, and about 250 MVA of transformer capacity with related equipment for the proposed substations between 1976 and 1983. Investments in the Power Sector 6.16 CEB's construction program appears at Annex 6. The total cost of the program, over the 1977-1980 period, has been estimated at Rs 439 million (US$65 million), of which Rs 271 million is for Generation and Rs 131 million for Transmission and Distribution projects. 6.17 CEB's policy has been to secure external financing for Generation projects. Recent projects have been: Project Financing Source Years Fort Victoria Units 3, 4, 5, 6 O.D.M. 1972 - 75 Fort Victoria Units 7, 8, 9, 10 E.I.B. 1975 - 77 St. Louis - First two 12 MW units CCCE/FNCB 1976 - 77 CWA has obtained a loan from ADB to finance the Baptiste/Guibies scheme (para. 6.07), and a BADEA loan is expected for the Quatre Soeurs hydroelectric scheme under the conditions described in para. 6.11 above. Transmission and Distribution schemes have usually been financed through borrowings from Gov- ernment and internal resources. VII. FINANCIAL CONDITION AND PROSPECTS Past Performance 7.01 CEB's financial objectives, as stated in the Act, are to maintain tariffs sufficiently high to cover: (i) the cost of production (including depreciation and interest charges); (ii) the amounts needed for the redemp- tion of loans (to the extent that such amounts exceed the provision for depreciation); and (iii) allocations to reserves. 1/ Under a covenant of IBRD loan 355-MAS, CEB is required to earn 8% on its net operating assets, and is bound to consult with IBRD prior to incurring any new long-term debt, if the anticipated debt coverage ratio will be less than 1.5. 1/ The amount was not specified. - 11 - 7.02 Neither the legislation in Mauritius nor the IBRD loan agreement required CEB to revalue its assets, and so far CEB's management has requested tariff increases predicated on an 8% rate of return on historical costs. Mauritius has experienced, however, considerable inflation between 1970 and 1975 - the General Erice Index rose by 78%. Under such circumstances, an 8% rate of return on historical costs means much less in real terms; in March 1976, PCR suggested that, on a replacement cost basis, CEB's assets are understated by 50%, and that a rate of return target of 12% is "not at all excessive". 7.03 At end 1976, CEB undertook a revaluation of assets exercise, by applying the average Cost of Living Index to its assets since 1964. The exercise concluded that CEB's net operating assets were understated by Rs 102 million (US$15.2 million), or 46%. Under such circumstances, an 8% rate of return on the basis of historical costs is equivalent to less than 4% in real terms, or alternatively, an 8% rate of return in real terms would be equivalent to at least 17% on an historical cost basis. Annex 7 shows the methodology used by CEB to revalue its assets. 7.04 CEB's Income Statements during the past three years appear at Annex 8. While in 1973 and 1974, CEB was able to earn about 5% on net operating assets (on the basis of historical costs), it was unable to generate reasonable surpluses to finance its construction program: during those two years, on the average, only 11% of the construction program was self financed. The balance was essentially financed by way of loans and Government grants/soft-loans. 7.05 In 1975, CEB suffered exceptional losses, attributable to cyclone "Gervaise" which hit the island in February. The loss of sales alone has been estimated at 23 GWh, or Rs 7 million (12% of annual sales), to which must be added the cost of rehabilitating the plant. Thus CEB ended 1975 with a net loss of Rs 9.3 million. The Government assisted with a grant of Rs. 2.4 million, an interest free loan of Rs 2.4 million, and resche- duled debt to the extent: of Rs 9.6 million (Government has promised to cover entire CFB losses-MR 4.8 million). CEB's construction program in 1975, which was substantially higher than in earlier years (Rs 23.5 million vs Rs 10.1 million and Rs 15.2 mill]ion in 1973 and 1974 respectively) was mainly financed by soft-loans and Bank overdrafts (to the extent of Rs 6.7 million or 28% of the construction progran). While 1975 cannot be considered as a "normal" year, it highlights the need for CEB to create a reserve against damages caused by cyclones. The reserve should cover the loss of revenues and the rehabilitation of operal:ing plant (see para. 5.09). 7.06 As the Balance Sheets indicate (Annex 9), CEB's year-end financial position deteriorated.considerably between 1972 and 1975. The current ratio decreased from 1.5 in 1972 to 0.7 in 1975, while the debt/equity ratio increased from 35:65 to 45:55 in the same period. 1/ CEB's working capital 1/ The relatively low debt/equity ratio is due to the large amount of grants and soft loans received from Government essentially to finance rural electrification. - 12 - went down from Rs. 4.5 million at end 1972 to a negative Rs 10.1 million at end 1975, and was essentially used to meet CEB's current obligations, and to finance construction. As a result, CEB has had increasing liquidity problems during the period under review, and ended 1975 with practically no cash resources and a Bank overdraft of Rs. 12.4 million (US$1.9 million). 7.07 Apart from the cyclone (para. 7.05), the underlying reason for the unsatisfactory performance of the CEB during the 1973-1975 period was that tariff increases in 1974 and 1975 have not been sufficient to cover the rapid increase in operating costs, particularly fuel and labor. For instance, the unit cost of thermal generation more than doubled between 1973 and 1975; 1/ as 1974 and 1975 were dry years, the impact of the increase in fuel prices was even bigger. Labor costs have increased substantially in Mauritius during the past few years; the CEB estimates that the cost of unskilled or semi- skilled (for construction of transmission facilities) about 45% since July 1973, while at the upper echelons the increase has been of the order of 15%. Against this background, tariffs have been increased by about 50% between 1973 and 1975. This increase was clearly insufficient, and tariffs were increased by a further 19% in March 1976. Financial Prospects 7.08 Financial projections for the period 1977 - 1980, jointly prepared by IBRD and CEB, and their supporting assumptions appear at Annexes 8 - 11. The forecast is based on the tariff introduced in March 1976, and indicates that CEB's financial performance will deteriorate further, unless electricity tariffs are increased. As the target-outlined in IBRD Loan 355 MAS is no longer relevant (paras. 7.01 - 7.03), one could select one of the two follow- ing financial targets: (i) CEB should finance from internal sources, not less than 30% of its construction program. This would imply that CEB ought to generate during the 3 years 1977 - 1979, a surplus of Rs 103 million (US$15.4 million). This in turn implies extra revenues of the order of Rs 175 million, equivalent to an average 60% tariff increase; or (ii) should earn 8% on its net operating assets on a revalued basis. This implies an average Operating Income of Rs 39.6 million per annum over the next three years, against a Rs 22.1 million deficit in the forecast (after restating depreciation). The increase in average annual revenues should therefore be of Rs 61.7 million, a 60% tariff increase. Thus, both methods indicate that a 60% increase over the existing tariffs is called for. 7.09 CEB increased its tariffs by 30% in June 1977 and intends to in- crease another 30% in 1978; an immediate 60% tariff increase is considered to be excessive essentially on political grounds. The need for a quick tariff increase is highlighted further by the facts that: (i) the bulk of incremental sales of CEB will have to be met from thermal sources; and (ii) the level of 1/ CEB is protected through a fuel price escalation charge against an increase in oil prices. However, it is not applicable to the common domestic tariff, which accounts for 40% of total energy sales. - 13 - investment in the sector wLll increase substantially, to the tune of about Rs 110 million per annum, against an average of Rs 14.4 million in the 1970-1975 period. 1/ 7.10 While the CEB has aimed in the past to meet the financial cove- nants embodied in the IBRD Loan (para. 7.01), tariff increases have usual- ly failed to meet the expected targets essentially because of optimistic forecasts of: (i) costs; and (ii) hydroelectric generation. While inflation has been unusually high in Mauritius in recent years (para. 7.02), more realistic assumptions will be needed in the preparation of budgets and financial forecasts. As far as hydroelectric generation is concerned, it has been recommended elsewhere (para. 6.12) that these figures be updated to reflect past experience. 7.11 Under a covenant: of Loan 355-MAS, the Bank is to be contacted if CEB is to incur new debt, while its debt coverage ratio has been below 1.5. The Bank has been lenient in authorizing, on the basis of assurances, a borrowing from EIB. The financial performance of CEB in 1976 hardly improved, while prospects for 1977 are slightly better. A less flexible attitude on the Bank's side is called for in the future. Tariff Structure 7.12 CEB's existing tariffs appear at Annex 12. The domestic tariff, which accounts for 40Z of energy sales, is characterized by a declining block energy charge: the first block of 10 kWh is priced at M1 80-86 per unit (USe 12-13), while all consumption beyond 60 kWh is priced at Mi 23 per unit (USe 3.5). The result is a sharp reduction in the charge per unit, as consumption rises, and thus the tariff is highly promotional. Indeed, the last block (at Mi 36) hardly covers the price of fuel. CEB's promotional policy works not only through the tariff, but also by encourag- ing the sale of electrical appliances by keeping their prices low. 7.13 As no additional sources of hydroelectric power or steam units using bagasse are likely to be commissioned before 1980, all the addition- al demand will have to be met from thermal sources (para. 7.09). In the long-run, since the potential for hydroelectric power is very limited in Mauritius, thermal electricity will represent an increasing proportion of total consumption. Under such circumstances it would be inappropriate to maintain promotional electricity tariffs in Mauritius. A flat domestic tariff, or even increasing blocks, might well represent a structure better geared to the social and economic objectives of the Government. The ultima- te structure of the appropriate tariff requires CEB to undertake further study. 1/ This also underlines the fact that in the 1970-75 period, the construc- tion program was insiufficient in relation to CEB's future requirements (see also para. 4.015). - 14 - 7.14 Concerning the commercial, industrial, and irrigation tariffs consideration ought to be given to the introduction of time-of-day tariffs, as well as seasonal tariffs based on long-term marginal costs of supply. 1/ Such tariffs ought to increase load factors of the CEB which is now relatively low (about 50%); they should also reflect the fact that the pattern of supply varies seasonally, and that investments for capacity are essentially needed when the sugar estates are not pro- ducing power, and when the availability of hydroelectric power is low. VIII. RECOMMENDATIONS 8.01 The recommendations listed in this chapter have been discussed in more detail in the body of the report. These are key factors for the efficient operation of the utility, and the successful development of the sector. CEB's Operations 8.02 It is essential, particularly for industrial consumers, to improve the reliability of supply (para. 4.06). The existing system control center needs improvement in the areas of instrumentation, as well as active and reactive load dispatching and switching techniques. A special training program, on modern load dispatching techniques should be arranged. 8.03 CEB ought to study on merits of insurance coverage of generating plant against major disasters, and to determine whether a commercial insurance is preferable to funded reserve (para. 5.09). In any case, Government should not bear these costs in the future. 8.04 Strict cost control systems should be implemented (para. 5.10). Planning 8.05 CEB should undertake itself some of the planning now done by con- sultants which is not very specialized in nature (e.g. Financial Planning, Power Market Surveys) (para. 6.01). 8.06 A Generation Planning Unit should be created within CEB (para. 5.04). 8.07 The following improvements in Generation Planning procedures are called for (para. 6.13): (i) generation development plans should be based on economic least cost solutions taking into account all possible alternatives; 1/ A time-of-day tariff option now exists for domestic consumers, but few have chosen it as the financial incentive was not sufficient. It also applied to the irrigation tariff, but such sales represent a small proportion of the power market (about 7%). - 15 - (ii) the planning figure for firm capacity and average energy of hydroelectric plants should be revised by incorporating the results of recent observation; (iii) the Government should undertake, on behalf of all water users, a study to determine how the water resources of the island should be allocated to various users including hydro on the basis of economic costs and benefits; and (iv) in view of the high oil prices, the CEB should study whether methods, (e.g. increasing generating capacity, changing pricing arrangements, giving CEB an increased control over the day-to- day operation. of bagasse based generating plants), can be found which are mutually beneficial to CEB and sugar producers, to increase production of electricity from bagasse. Finance 8.08 CEB should earn 8% on its net operating assets, on a revalued basis (paras. 7.02 - 7.04); or generate from internal funds not less than 30% of its construction program (para. 7.08). Both methods call for a 60% increase over the tariffs implemented in March 1976. Tariffs 8.09 Declining block tariffs are promotional and should be replaced with tariffs which reflect the long-range incremental costs of supply to various consumer groups (paras. 7.13 - 7.14). April 4, 1977 ANNEX 1 Page 1 of 5 MAURITIUS POWER SECTOR REVIEW Existing Facilities 1. Generation 1.01 Power is generated by diesel, hydroelectric and thermal (steam) plant, the diesel units being entirely owned by CEB. Two hydroelectric plants and seven steam plants are owned by various sugar estates who sell surplus power to CEB. Chese sale agreements are reviewed from time to time. a. Diesel Generation 1.02 Diesel generai:ion is confined to two stations, both close to Port Louis, the capital, Fort: Victoria and St. Louis. At end 1976 the total installed capacity was 62.5 MW of which 14.4 MW was at St. Louis and 48 M4W at Fort Victoria. Set sizes and manufacturers are as follows: Sizes of Diesel Plant Set # Ft. Victoria mw St. Louis MW 1 Fiat 5.5 Mirless 1.6 2 Fiat 5.5 " 1.6 3 Mirless 6.0 " 1.8 4 " 6.0 " 1.8 5 it 6.0 " 1.9 6 " 6.0 " 1.9 7 " 6.5 " 1.9 8 " 6.5 1.9 TOTAL 48.0 TOTAL 14.4 1.03 All engines burn heavy fuel (1,000 seconds) except St. Louis Nos. 1 and 2 sets. Generation is at 11 kV at Fort-Victoria and 6.6 kV at St. Louis. The two stations are interconnected by four 66-kV cables, two of which have recently been uprated from 22 kV to operate at their nominal voltage. b. Hydroelectric Power 1.04 Hydro potential of the GRSE and GRNW are being used both for irrigation and electric power. The installed hydroelectric capacity at the end of 1976 was 25.74 MW. The size of the sets are as follows: ANNEX 1 Page 2 of 5 Size of CEB's Hydroelectric Plant Unit Size in MW Tamarind Falls: Nos. I and 2 0.5 3 and 4 2.0 5 3.0 Magenta: No. 1 0.94 Reduit: Nos. 1 and 2 0.15 3 0.30 Eau Bleue: Nos. 1 and 2 2.0 Cascade Cecile: No. 1 1.0 La Ferme: No. 1 1.2 Ferney: Nos. 1 and 2 5.0 1.05 Only the Tamarind and Eau Bleue schemes have significant reservoirs capable of supplying power towards the system daily peak demand. The rest of the hydro stations have little firm supply capability, though they do permit economies of diesel fuel. The operation of the existing hydroelectric sets is not, perhaps, as flexible as might be anticipated, since almost all are run-of-the-river stations with minimum storage capacities. The only plant with substantial storage, Tamarind Falls, is required to operate primarily to fit the needs of irrigation. c. Thermal Generation (steam) 1.06 A number of sugar estates process sugarcane and use considerable quantities of steam in the process. The steam is produced in boilers burning bagasse (the residue from processed sugarcane) and part of the steam is used to generate electric power. Some of the power is sold to CEB at favorable prices (average selling price is about Me 8 (US4 1.2) per kWh). Although there is a good working relationship between CEB and the estate owners, control of the sugar estates generation does not lie with CEB. Furthermore, should the bagasse ever be used in considerable quantities as a raw material for other products, such as paper and animal food, the amount of power exported from the sugar estates will fall. The generation of electricity at the estates is dependent upon the sugar harvest, so that power is exported only between July and December. 2. Transmission/Distribution System 2.01 For many years, 22 kV was the main transmission system voltage but with the increase in demand in recent years, the 22-kV network is being overlayed with a 66-kV system. Eventually, 66-kV will become the main trans- mission voltage with the 22-kV networks split and used as radial feeders. The distribution feeders system consists of a 6.6-kV network in the urban and industrial areas but in the rural area distribution is at 22-kV. ANNEX I Page 3 of 5 a. 66-kV Transmission System 2.02 At present, the only 66-kV feeders in operation are those inter- connecting the Fort Victoria and St. Louis power stations and the double circuit overhead line between St. Louis and Wooton Substation. However, it is intended that the overhead lines between St. Louis and Nicolay Road (double circuit), and between Wooton substation and the Ferney hydroelectric station (single circuit), will be uprated from 22-kV to 66-kV, for which they were originally designed. This will provide a main transmission tie between the west and south-west of the island. It is intended to construct a similar link to the ncrth of the island by interconnecting Nicolay Road with F.U.E.L. (a sugar estate), via Belle Vue. All the 66-kV substations are outdoor single bus using 1,500 MVA minimum oil circuit breakers. The system is solidly grounded and the sub-stations continuously manned. b. 22 kV System 2.03 At present the 22 kV system is the main transmission system throughout the island; it is also used for distribution in rural areas. The back bone of the net:work is the 22-kV feeders which form a ring around the island; this is strengthened at present by a tie between Wooton and Ferney, currently operat:ed at 22 kV, although insulated for 66 kV. 2.04 Most of the 22 kV feeders have "T" branch connections supplying rural loads; pole mounted automatic reclosing circuit breakers are used on many of these to improve service. The majority of the 22-kV overhead lines are supported on pre-stressed concrete poles manufactured by CEB. 2.05 In general all the 22 kV substations are outdoor using minimum oil circuit breakers rated at 440 MVA. Minor substations and "T" connec- tions are protected by pole mounted fuses. The system is solidly grounded although increasing generating plant may require the use of resistance grounding, especially in the vicinity of St. Louis. c. 6.6 kV Distribution System 2.06 The 6.6-kV distribution system consists almost entirely of overhead lines using pre-stressed concrete poles made by CEB. The 6.6 kV substations are predominantly of indoor construction using metal clad bulk oil switch- gear. d. System Relay Protection 2.07 Extensive use has been made in the past of inverse definite minimum time over-current and ground fault protection on the feeders throughout the island. However, the overlapping loop connections of the system have led to selectivity difficulties which are being solved by the limited application of distance relays on the important circuits. Under frequency relays have also been applied to some ciLrcuits in an effort to maintain important feeders in the event of loss of generating capacity. ANNEX I Page 4 of 5 3. System Operation 3.01 The 66 kV, 22 kV and 6.6 kV networks are monitored from a "system control center" located at Curepipe utilizing VHF radio network which extends over the whole island. All 66 kV, major 22 kV substations and generating stations are continuously manned and operated by instructions from the con- trol center at Curepipe. 3.02 Voltage control and stability problems are experienced particularly when the hydroelectric or sugar estate generation is in operation. Some hydro machine inertias have been increased by originally designed fly-wheels in an attempt to eliminate these problems. Additionally a 3 MVAR capacitor bank has been installed at St. Louis to improve the system performance. Transient faults on the island are largely due to blown foliage which is rendered conducting by the prevailing damp condition during particular seasons. MAURITIUS POWE RCT(k TO EVIEW Statistical Data on CEB's Power System Calendar Year 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 System Capacity- Hydro Capacity MW 15.74 15.74 15.74 15.74 15.74 25.74 25.74 25.74 25.74 25.74 25.74 Thermal Capacity MW 28.40 28.40 28.40 28.40 28.40 28.4u 2O.40 28.43 32.8O 38o.1 50.51 Total CEB 44.14 44.14 44.14 44.14 44.14 44.14 54..14 54.14 58.55 64.45 76.25 Sugar Estates Plants MW 14.20 14.20 15.20 17.20 19.35 19.35 19.65 19.65 15.05 15.05 15.05 Total Country 58.34 58.34 59.34 61.34 63.49 63.49 73.79 73.79 73.60 79.50 91.30 Maximum Demand MW 26.7 29.2 29.9 31.0 31.7 33.1 33.8 39.0 42.9 46.4 53.7 Staff Number of Staff Employed 1,318 1,301 1,285 1,242 1,251 1,260 1,283 1,323 1,355 1,485 1,490 Network Length of Overhead Lines km 1,650 2,150 2,300 2,383 2,477 2,576 2,677 2,839 3,030 3,191 3,300 Length of Cables km 30 40 48 40 41 69 73 84 92 97 103 Distribution Transformer Capacity MVA 51.1 56.3 59.3 62.2 63.9 66.5 70.0 76.0 89.6 99.7 110.0 Transmission Transformer Capacity MVA 93.7 94.2 95.7 98.7 101.6 116.9 120.2 125.2 205.3 206.7 210.0 Total Transformer Capacity MVA 144.8 150.0 155.0 160.9 165.5 183.4 190.2 201.2 294.9 306.2 320.0 LnX 0 Fh Lu ANNEX 2 MAURITIUS POWER SECTOR REVIEW Generation and Sales (GWh) Generation 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 - Hydro 50.9 50.3 68.1 73.6 40.2 56.2 Thermal 62.8 73.3 72.8 89.1 144.3 151.2 Total CEB 113.7 123.6 140.9 162.7 184.5 207.4 Purchases 22.3 24.7 23.4 24.2 24.1 16.7 Total Generation 136.0 148.3 164.3 186.9 208.6 224.1 Station Losses 2.1 2..6 2.6 2.8 2.9 4.7 Total Sent-out 133.9 145.7 161.7 184.1 204.7 220.1 Network Losses 24.7 25.2 26.5 30.8 35.6 35.6 Total Sales 109.2 120.5 135.2 153.3 173.1 184.5 Sales Domestic 45.8 49.4 55.1 61.2 70.0 74.2 Commercial 23.3 26.1 31.6 36.3 40.0 39.8 Industrial 18.8 20.8 24.6 28.5 35.1 44.5 Irrigation 5.5 8.6 7.7 11.4 13.7 13.1 Other 15.8 15.6 16.2 15.9 14.3 12.9 Total 109.2 102.5 135.2 153.3 173.1 184.5 Number of Consumers Domestic 82,762 85,948 91,092 97,497 103,905 109,358 Commercial 9,520 9,736 10,044 10,356 10,592 10,692 Industrial (general) 1,458 1,516 1,688 1,899 2,074 2,222 Industrial (iffigation) 46 52 59 71 85 103 Others 124 133 138 146 92 107 Total Consumers 932910 97,385 103 O21 1O9a969 116 748 122 482 Tariff Average Revenue M¢ per kWh 21.64 21.14 20.99 20.77 28.82 31.18 Average Revenue US¢ per kWh 3.33 3.25 2.23 3.19 4.43 4.77 1/ The loss of sales attributed to cyclone Gervaise (February 1975) has been estimated by CEB at 23 GWh. MAURITIUS POWER TRANSMISSION PROJECT CENTRAL ELECTRICITY BOARD ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE MINISTER OF -OER FU-EL ENRGY |OAR- OF DIRECTORS GENERA MANAGER GENERAL MANAGER GEEAIO ENINEE ER-SO ENGINEER TGSEGIEITASINOICR D's lauTlo.E. I CO"IL A T PE,,SONNEL INTERNAL SECRETORY ITOERMALI I~~~(-RTERNI OATRIOTIO IAIENGINEE ETIETN ENGINEERO ENGINEER OTT IEEE AURIFTR OPERAION MAINTNANCE PLANING N10 CENGTCIONERL AOUTT MECEANIGALENGIN-E- SEl-ORE CGINEER ASSISTONTTRANSU GOOISTA LNNNG ASSISTANT CMUER.- OEPUTY ACCOANTANT ASST PERSONNELOTFICER A S-PERINTENOENT CI-ILb SURVEYS -ISTO ENGINEER CONT EWNGIEER CIA LENINEER C-IEF SAPERINTENDENT EAG OF PROFESSIONAL ST LOGIN SENIOR ENGINEER MAJOR S-STATION SENIOR ASSISTANT SENIOR COMMERCIAL ECANICOL AOAYANT FORMATION CENTER bEC.ONICAL ENAIEE STATION ENGIEER P ANNING ENGINEER SUPERINTEN0ENT STORE SUPERINTENOENT PRINCIPAL PERSONNEL NS-FRINTENNEST SENIOR ENGINEER NYNTEMCDNTROL OASTA-NGRNINEERS SENIORIASST ENGINEER PRINCIALASSY ACCEUNANT SOT EMPLOYMENTS CORT VITRAELECTRICAL ENGINEER .METERS LARRATORY INCOME INUSUTRIAL SENIOR ELECTRICAL ENG AITANTSOE.INTENDENN GISTR ICT ENGINEERS ASST ENGINEER PRINCIPALANNT ACCOONTANT RELATIONS TRANSIRIRT ENG STATION FOREEN OLE PEANT SALES b SERVICE E-FENDITORES PRINCIPALPERSNNNEL ERIET ENG CLER- SUPERINRENDENT & EMLTERE EMPLOYEE ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~ol SEnk-I.Es 15013 MAURITIUS POWER SECTORKREFVIEW Projected Sales & Maximum Demand GWh Industrial HMS 1/ Commer- Gene- Irri- Mauri- Yearly Energy Maximum Load Years Domestic cial ral gation tius Others Total Growth Generated Demand Factor (% GWh MW M% 1977 99.2 52.1 75.0 16.0 7.9 1.0 251.2 11.0 300 66 52 1978 109.1 56.4 84.9 20.5 7.0 1.0 278.9 10.7 332 73 52 1979 119.2 60.9 95.5 25.0 7.0 1.0 308.7 8:6 367 80 52 1980 129.5 65.6 106.8 25.0 7.0 1.2 335.1 8.4 398 87 52 1981 140.7 70.5 119.0 25.0 7.0 1.2 363.4 8.3 430 94 52 1982 152.6 75.8 132.1 25.0 7.0 1.3 393.8 8.1 465 101 52 1983 165.6 81.5 145.2 25.0 7.0 1.4 425.7 8.1 500 109 52 1/ Communications Base. May 1976 MAURITIUS POWER SECTOR REVIEW CEB INTERCONNECTED SYSTEM INSTALLED AND FIRM CAPACITY AND MAXIMUM DEMAND MW 200 190 ul 18C ... _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ E LU0 - O U) ),a: Lu 3 a ~~~~~~~~~z 60 t l I ^ z VZ Su L 170~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 150 cI -r- 170 N -- r-___-_ __ _ _ ___ L 6~~~~~~~~0 _z MAIMU EAD_ISALDCPC _ _ _ ~~ ~ / _ _ _ __ _ _ _- - NTALE AAIYO HEMLPAT LS U) r' I 130 - )--- - ______C_ _ __ _ _ _ _ 130 .- A _ __ . .__ i ~~~~0 0 120 < - 97- - _979 ,980 _98_ _982 _983 _ 110 YAR - - - - - z z t~ 110~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~a _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ~~~ ~~0 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ < I- 0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 9L'L 50 ______________ MAXIMUM DEMAND ______________ ~~~INSTALLED CAPACITY ___ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~V.A., INSTALLED CAPACITY OF THERMAL PLANTS PLUS I ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~-~~~~~~~~~ ~~~FIRM CAPACITY OF HYDRO PLANTS (INCLUDINGRERVS ______________ j ______________ - FIRM CAPACITY (EXCLUDING RESERVES) _______ 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 ~~~~~~~~~~1981 1982 1983 YEARS x I." wo,Id Ba.k-i6252 MAURITIUS CENTRAL ELECTRICITY BOARD CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM (Rs Millions) 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 GENERATION THERMAL F. Victoria Sets 7 & 8 Civil Works - - - - - "I it it M & E 4.2 - - of i" 9 & 10 Civil Works 1.2 - - " i " M & E 9.3 9.3 - New Station (At.St.Louis) Civil Works 2.0 3.4 2.8 " 12 MW Sets No.1 and 2 - 56.6 - "I "I " 12 MW Sets No. 3 - - 30.4 - - Other Works 0.9 4.0 1.0 0.8 0.7 O/Heads 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.4 Sub Total 17.9 73.6 34.6 1.2 1.1 GENERATION HYDRO Quatre Soeurs & Diamamouve 6.3 20.9 45.9 50.5 37.0 Minor Works 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.5 O/Heads 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.4 Sub Total 7.6 22.3 47.5 52.2 38.9 TRANSMISSION Lines 6.9 4.7 1.7 1.0 11.0 Substations 2.3 3.3 11.3 1.3 8.8 Sub Total 9.2 8.0 13.0 2.3 19.8 DISTRIBUTION Primary 6.2 10.0 10.7 11.0 16.0 Secondary 4.0 6.0 7.3 7.8 9.1 Overhead Charges 1.9 2.1 2.3 2.5 ?.R Sub Total 1,.1 18.1 20.3 21_.3_ 279. Commercial 3.7 4.1 4.9 5.6 6.3 Non-operational Buildings, Furniture & Equipment .3 .7 1.0 1.4 2.0 Vehicles 1.3 1.1 1.1 .9 .7 Rodrigues Branch 1.8 .2 .1 .1 .1 System Control - 6.2 .4 - - GRAND TOTAL 53.9 134.3 122.9 85.0 96.8 April 20, 1976 MAURITIUS CENTRAL ELECTRICITY BOARD Revaluation of Assets (Rs Thousands) AT HISTORICAL COSTS Average AT 1975 PRICES Cross Deprecia- Net Cost of Conversion Gross Deprecia- Net Assets tion Assets Living Index Factor Assets tion Assets Fixed Assets as of December 31, 1964 94,605 18,014 76,591 100.3 2.10 198,670 37,830 160,840 Additions during 1965 8,859 4,099 4,760 102.1 2.06 18,250 8,444 9,806 1966 5,922 4,249 1,673 104.7 2.01 11,903 8,541 3,362 1967 5,286 4,721 565 106.6 1.98 10,467 9,348 1,119 1968 3,310 4,889 (1,579) 114.1 1.85 6,124 9,044 (2,920) 1969 2,407 5,059 (2,652) 116.7 1.81 4,356 9,156 (4,800) 1970 2,660 5,175 (2,515) 118.5 1.78 4,734 9,211 (4,477) 1971 20,689 5,532 15,157 118.9 1.77 36,620 9,792 26,828 1972 6,926 5,984 942 125.3 1.68 11,637 10,053 1,584 1973 11,475 6,416 5,059 142.2 1.48 16,982 9,495 7,487 1974 14,811 7,090 7,721 183.6 1.15 17,033 8,154 8,879 1975 20,632 7,924 12,708 210.7 1.00 20,632 7,924 12,708 Total 197,582 79,152 118,430 357,408 136,992 220,416 Source: CEB September 1976 ANNEX 8 MADRITIUS CENTRAL ELECTRICITY BOARD Actual and Forecast Income Statements (Rs '000) Actual Estimate Forecast Year Ending December 31 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 Sales (MWh) Domestic 61,178 69,987 74,250 89,400 96,000 107,000 119,000 129,000 Commercial 36,294 39,970 39,836 47,900 51,000 58,000 61,000 66,000 Industrial 28,510 35,093 44,472 61,690 71,000 82,000 94,000 106,000 Irrigation 11,352 13,747 13,062 17,700 17,000 19,000 24,000 23,000 Others 15,936 14.301 12.899 7.310 10.000 8,000 6.000 6.000 Total MWh 153.270 173,098 184,519 224.000 245,000 274.000 304,000 330,000 Average Revenue per Unit (cents) Domestic 25 29 29 35 36.5 36.5 36.5 36.5 Commercial 21 32 36 42 43.5 43.5 43.5 43.5 Industrial 18 30 33 35 36.8 36.8 36.8 36.8 Irrigation 11 19 22 24 24.5 24.5 24.5 24.5 Others 18 27 29 35 36.0 36.0 36.0 36.0 Average Revenue per Ubiit 21 29 31 36 37.2 37.2 37.2 37.2 Sales Revenues (Rs '000) Domestic 15,048 20,139 21,690 31,290 35,040 39,055 43,435 47,085 Commercial 7,626 12,870 14,490 20,118 22,185 25,230 26,535 28,710 Industrial 5,040 10,383 14,477 21,592 26,128 30,176 34,592 39,008 Irrigation 1,260 2,653 2,864 4,008 4,165 4,655 5,880 5,635 Others 2.866 3.848 3.687 2.992 3.600 2.880 2.160 2,160 Total Sales 31,840 49,893 57,208 80,000 91,118 101,996 112,602 122,598 Cyclone Grant 2,400 Other Operating Income 700 759 780 800 848 895 925 955 Total Revenues 32,540 50.652 60.388 80.800 91.966 102.891 113.527 123,553 Operating Expenses Generation 10,179 23,776 30,890 41,700 51,925 66,302 83,640 102,437 Purchases 909 908 1,135 1,900 1,920 1,920 1,920 1,920 Transmission & Distr. 3,729 4,830 5,155 6,400 7,168 8,028 8,992 10,071 Administrative Expen. 6,509 8,531 17,029 12,900 14,448 16,182 18,124 20,298 Depreciation 6,646 7,363 8,190 9,200 11.885 18.131 20,590 22,538 Total Oper. Exp. 27,972 45,408 62.399 72.100 87.346 110.563 133.266 157,264 Operating Income 4.568 5,244 (2.011) 8,700 4.620 (7,672) (19739 (33,711) Non-Operating Income Interest Charges 6,139 6,806 8,354 10,000 17,655 28,302 38,106 48,705 Less: Interest Capi- talized 320 200 354 300 3,100 8.036 11.892 15.392 Interest Charged In the Year 5.819 6.606 8,000 9,700 14.555 20,266 26,214 33.313 Net Income (244) (449) (9,257) (300) (9.165) (27.091) (45,021) (65,999) Ave. Net Assets in Operation 96,246 102,688 113,660 139,405 186,787 273,229 337,919 363,555 Rate of Return 4.7% 5.1% (1.8%) 6.2% 2.5% (2.8%) (5.8%) (9.3%) April 20, 1976 ANNEX 9 CENTRAL ELECTRICITY BOARD Actual and Forecast balance Sheets Actual Estimate Forecast December 31 3.972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 ASSETS Fixed Assets Plant in Service 1il,429 163,154 178,321 200,651 247,201 316,501 450,101 484,601 544,401 Less: Accumulated Depreciation !L7.722 64.368 71,731 79.921 89.121 101.006 119.137 139,727 162,265 Net Plant in Service 93,707 98,786 106,590 120,730 158,080 215,495 330,964 344,874 382,136 Work in Progress L1.854 10,268 10,330 11.450 18,800 83,800 73.100 123.600 160,600 Total Fixed Assets 1015561 109.054 116,920 132.180 176,880 299.295 404.064 468.474 542.736 Loans 1.737 1.637 1.562 1.397 1.232 1.067 902 737 572 Current Assets Cash 5 23 7 14 800 880 968 1,065 1,171 Accounts Reezivable 5,821 7,432 9,877 11,442 16,000 18,393 20,578 22,705 24,711 Materials and Supplies 7,945 7,581 13,411 15,669 17,549 19,655 22,014 24,655 27,614 Other Current Assets 274 Total Current Assets 14.045 15,036 23,295 27.125 34.349 38.928 43,560 48,425 53.496 TOTAL ASSETS 121.343 125.727 141,777 160.702 339,290 448.526 517,636 596.804 EQUITY AND LIABILITIES Equity Governmnt Grants/Soft Loans 50,338 49,405 48,274 47,671 48,911 47,830 46,683 45,147 43,621 Retained Earnings/Reserves 20,313 20,069 19,620 10,363 10,063 898 (26,193) (71,214)(137,213) Contributions - 1,286 2,466 2.466 5,234 6,442 7,607 8,852 10.181 Total Equity 70.651 70.760 70.360 60,500 64,208 55,170 28,097 (17,215) (83,411) Soft Loans Government Cyclone 3,540 3,127 2,714 470 4,288 3,875 3,462 2,809 2,156 Consolidation - 00 9,600 9.600 9 504 9.408 9,312 Total Soft Loans 3,540 3.127 2,714 10.070 13.888 13.475 12,966 12,217 11,468 Long-Term Debt New Borrowings - - - - 39,000 175,100 311,200 427,300 578,400 IBRD 23,881 22,248 20,519 18,696 16,777 14,763 12,606 10,354 7,959 Government 2,250 3,731 3,809 4,159 4,943 5,710 7,069 7,860 9,075 ODA 4,592 4,868 11,844 15,098 15,952 15,257 14,512 13.712 12,855 EIB - - - - 13,400 13,400 12,842 11,725 10,608 Others 6,844 6,080 9.106 10.699 8,244 7,030 6,306 5.626 4,894 Total Long-Term Debt 37.567 36,927 45,278 48,652 98.316 231,260 364,535 476,577 623.791 Current Liabilities Accounts Payable 7,009 9,359 17,571 24,722 35,882 39,218 42,761 45,890 44,789 Bank Overdrafts 2,410 5,386 5,687 12,360 - - - - - Others 166 168 167 167 167 167 167 167 167 Total Current Liabilties 9,585 14,913 23,425 37.249 36.049 39,385 42,928 46.057 44,956 TOTAL EQUITY 4 LIABILITIES 121,343 125,727 141.777 160.702 212,461 339,290 448,526 517.636 596,804 April 20, 1976 ANNEX 10 MAURITIUS CENTRAL ELECTRICITY BOARD Actual and Forecast Sources and Applications of Funds (Re '000) Four Actual Estimate Forecast Years Summary Years Ending December 31 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1977 - 1980 Internal Sources of Funds Operating Income 4,568 5,244 (2,011) 8,700 4,620 (7,672) (19,739) (33,711) (56,502) Depreciation 6.646 7,363 8,190 9,200 11.885 18.131 20.590 22,538 73,144 11.214 26 6.179 17.900 16.505 10,459 851 (11.173) 16,642 Deductions Increase in Working Capital other than Cash (1,379) 64 (3,328) (4,722) 1,163 1,001 1,639 6,066 9,869 Interest Charged to Operations 5,819 6,606 8,000 9,700 14,555 20,266 26,214 33,313 94,348 Principal Payments 4,924 5,143 5,118 8,191 11,546 12,167 13,423 13,989 51,125 Loans Repayments )00 (75) (165) (165) (165) 1 16 (165 ) (660) 9.264 11,738 9,625 13,004 27,099 33.269 41,111 53,203 154,682 Balance of Funtda Available for Investment 1.950 869 (3.446) 4,896 (10,594) (22,810) (40,260) (64,376) (138,040) Construction Program 10.139 15,229 23,450 53,900 134,300 122,900 85.000 96,800 439,000 Balance to be Financed 8,189 14,360 26,896 49,004 144,894 145.710 125.260 161.176 577.040 Financed by: Contributions 1,286 1,180 - 2,768 1,208 1,165 1,245 1,329 4,947 Govt. Grants/Rural Elec. 736 602 1,150 3,000 900 900 600 700 3,100 Special Cyclone Soft Loan - - 9,600 - - - - - Long-Term Borrowings: Government 1,590 248 350 1,120 1,150 1,850 1,400 2,000 6,400 Cyclone Soft Loan - - 2,400 - - - - - - ODA 276 6,976 3,254 1,502 - - - - eIB - - - 13,400 - - - - - Other 336 4,124 2,722 660 946 1,036 1,180 1,228 4,390 Non-Operating Income 1,007 913 754 700 770 847 932 1,025 3,574 Bank Overdrafts 2,976 301 6,673 (12,360) - - - - - New Loans - - - 39,000 140,000 140,000 120.000 155,000 555,000 TOTAL 8.207 14,344 26.903 49,790 144,974 145,798 125.357 161,282 577,411 Cash Increase/Decrease 18 (16) 7 786 80 88 97 106 371 April 20, 1976 ANNEX 11 Page 1 of 4 MAURITIUS POWER SECTOR MEMORANDUM Assumpl:ions to the Financial Projections 1. Income Statement 1.01 The GWh sales forecast is based on the 1975 PCR report. Average revenue per unit for each category of consumers were based on the new tariff of March 1976. The forecast does not assume a tariff increase until 1980. 1.02 The cost of generation was based on the following plant/load forecast 1/ (GWh): Source 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 Hydro 73 73 73 73 73 Thermal 172 196 229 264 295 Purchases 24 24 24 24 24 Total 269 293 326 361 392 The cost of thermal generation is expected to average Rs 0.23 per unit in 1976 (including fuel and labor), and was assumed to increase by 10% per annum thereafter. The :ost of hydroelectric production was taken at Rs 2.125 million in 1976 (CEB budget) and was assumed to increase by 10% per annum thereafter. The cost of purchases was assumed to remain Rs 0.08 per unit throughout the forecast period, since the CEB has long-term contracts with the sugar estates. 1.03 The 1976 figures for Transmission and Distribution, and Adminis- trative Expenses were obtained from the budget; both items were assumed to increase by 12% per annum thereafter. 1.04 The CEB depreciates its assets along the following lines: Thermal Assets: 20 years Hydroelectric Assets: 50 years Transmission/Distribution Assets: 50 years Other Assets: 10 - 15 years The depreciation schedule appears at page 4 of this Annex. 1.05 A detaile schedule of interests repayment on the existing loans was prepared by the CEB. New borrowings were assumed to be at 8%, and amortized over 10 years. 1/ System losses are assumed to represent 16 - 17% of generation and purchases. ANNEX 11 Page 2 of 4 Balance Sheets 2.01 CEB's construction program appears at Annex 6. Gross assets and accumulated depreciation are stated at historical costs. 2.02 CEB's cash requirements were estimated at two weeks of total payroll. 2.03 Accounts receivable were estimated to remain equivalent to 47 days of sales, plus a provision for CEB's loans to its own staff. 2.04 Materials and supplies were assumed to increase by 12% per annum. 2.05 Government Grants/soft loans are made essential for rural electri- fication. These loans carry an interest rate of 2% during the first five years, and 4% for the subsequent thirty-five years. Principal repayment amount to 1% per annum of the original loan during forty years, so that these loans contain a substantial grant element. 2.06 Both for Cyclones Carol (1960) and Gervaise (1975), the CEB has obtained from the Government interest-free loans as well as grants. The Gervaise grant/loan amounts to Rs 4.8 million (US$0.7 million), and the loan is repayable over 10 years including a 3-year grace period. 2.07 The CEB has obtained "indus-trial loans" from the Government; these at present carry a 7% interest rate, and are repayable over 10 years. These are geared to finance financially viable projects. 2.08 The IBRD loan (Loan 355-MAU) was made in 1963 to finance the first two 6-MW units at Fort Victoria and transmission lines. It carried an interest rate of 5-1/4%, and will be fully repaid in 1983. The outstanding amount of the loan is shown on CEB's books at the historical exchange rates, and at present exchange rates, is understated by approximately 50% (this is because of the devaluation of the Rs in terms of the currencies of dis- bursement). The exchange loss is carried annually in the P&L Account. 2.09 The CEB obtained two loans from ODM in 1972 and 1974, totalling LStg. 1.25 million carrying interest rates of 7-1/4% and 8-1/2% respectively, to finance four 6-MW units at Fort Victoria. The Government is carrying the foreign exchange risk on these loans. 2.10 In 1975, and 1976 CEB obtained two loans from EIB at 9-7/8% to finance four 6-MW sets at Fort Victoria. The two loans amount to Units of Accounts 4.00 million, and are repayable over 15 years, including a 3-year grace period. In 1976, CEB borrowed also US$3.3 million from CCCE, and US$2.2 million from FNCB for two 12-MW diesel units for the St. Louis Power Station; the respective terms of these loans are 6% over 12 years, and 7.2% over 5 years. ANNEX 11 Page 3 of 4 2.11 The CEB has obt:ained various other loans from local pension funds and Bank carrying interest rates of 7 - 9% as well as consumer advances, which are usually interest free except for those of the sugar estates (8%). MAURITIUS ~~~ANNEX 11 MAURITIUS Page 4 of 4 CENTRAL ELECTRICITY BOARD DEPRECIATION SCHEDULE (Rs million) PARTICULARS 1977 1978 1979 1980 Assets in operation as at 31.12.76 10.472 10,735 10.735 10,735 Additions in 1977 Generation Thermal 73.6 .425 3.680 3.680 3.680 Hydro 22.3 .014 .028 .028 .028 Transmission & Distribution 26.1 .522 1.044 1.044 1.044 Commercial 4.1 .135 .270 .270 .270 System Control 6.2 .310 .620 .620 .620 Non Operational 0.7 .007 .014 .014 .014 Rodrigues 0.2 Vehicles 1.1 134.3 Additions in 1978 Generation Thermal 34.6 .865 1.730 1.730 It Hydro 47.5 .016 .032 .032 Transmission & Distribution 33.3 .666 1.332 1.332 Commercial 4.9 .163 .326 .326 System Control .4 .020 .040 .040 Non Operational 1.0 .010 .020 .020 Rodrigues .1 - - - Vehicles 1.1 - - - 122.9 Additions in 1979 Generation Thermal 1.2 .030 .060 "1 Hydro 52.2 .017 .034 Transmission & Distribution 23.6 186 372 Commercial 5.6 Non Operational 1.4 .014 .028 Vehicles 0.9 Rodrigues 0.1 - 85.0 Additions in 1980 Generation Thermal 1.1 .027 Hydro 38.9 019 Transmission & Distribution 47.7 .954 Commercial 6.3 .209 Non Operational 2.0 .020 Vehicles 0.7 - Rodrigues 0.1 _ 96.8 11.885 18.131 20.590 22.538 April 20, 1976 ANNEX 12 Page 1 of 7 MAURITIUS CENTRAL ELECTRICITY BOARD March 1976 Tariffs Domestic Block Type Tariff Tariffs 110, 120, 130, 140 Initial 10 kilowatt hour units per month to be at the rate of 80 cents per unit Next 20 kilowatt " " " " " " 38 "t " Next 30 kilowatt " .. .. if it " 31 o f " All additional units ............ ....... 23 " " " Monthly Minimum Charges shall be: For a total connected load: of 300 watts or less Tariff 110 Rs 4.00 of 301 to 3,000 watts incl. Tariff 120 12.50 of 3,001 to 10,000 " " Tariff 130 19.00 in excess of 10,000 watts Tariff 140 30.00 Tariff 150 (Domestic Day Block Type and Night Tariffs) Day Tariff: Between 07.00 hours and 21.00 hours Initial 10 kilowatt hour units per month to be at the rate of 86 cents per unit Next 20 kilowatt " " " 46 It St Next 30 kilowatt " " " 31 " " " All additional units ............... .... 23 " Night Tariff: Between 21.00 hours and 07.00 hours All kilowatt hour units to be at the flat rate of 21 cents per unit. MONTHLY MINIMUM CHARGE The Monthly Minimum Charge shall be Rs 25.00 ANNEX 12 Page 2 of 7 Fuel Cost Adjustment Clause The Night kWh rate of 21 cents in Tariff 150 would be subject to a Fuel Cost Adjustment Clause as set out below: "For every 5.0 cents variation in the price paid by the Board for its heavy oil fuel above or below Rs 2.86 per Imperial Gallon, the rate in respect of the above tariff shall be varied by an amount of 0.3933 cents x R, where R is the ratio of kWh generated by the Board's Thermal Stations to the total kWh generated and purchased by the Board in the calendar month preceding that in which the account is submitted". ANNEX 12 Page 3 of 7 SCHEDULE I COMMERCIAL CONSUMERS Tariff 210 - Flat Rate Tariff Tariff available to Commercial Consumers Running Charge ., . ... ... 51 cents per kWh Minimum Charge ... ... Rs 8.00 per month per kilowatt or fraction thereof of the total connected load subject to a minimum of Rs. 8.00 per month. Tariff 211 - Maximum ])emand Tariff Tariff available to Commercial Consumers whose total connected load exceeds 15 kW: Demand Charge ... ... Rs 22.00 per KVA of Maximum Demand subject to a minimum of 15 KVA, together with a Running Charge ... ... ... 28 cents per kWh Minimum Charge ... ... ... A sum equal to the highest demand charge paid in any one of the preceding six months of account. INDUSTRIAL CONSUMERS Tariff 310 - Flat Rate Tariff Tariff available to a:Ll Industrial Consumers Running Charge ... ... ... 48.5 cents per kWh Minimum Charge ... ... ... Rs 10.50 per month per kilowatt or fraction thereof of the total connected load, subject to a-minimum of Rs 10.50 per month. ANNEX 12 Page 4 of 7 Tariff 311 - Maximum Demand Tariff Tariff available to industrial consumers whose total connected load exceeds 15 kW: Demand Charge ... ... Rs 18.50 per KVA of Maximum Demand, subject to a minimum of 15 KVA, together with a Running Charge ... ... ... 26 cents per kWh Minimum Charge ... ... ... A sum equal to the highest demand charge paid in any one of the preceding six months of account. SCHEDULE II BULK CONSUMERS Tariff 410 Demand Charge ... ... ... Rs 22.00 per KVA of Maximum Demand, together with a Running Charge ... ... ... 28 cents per kWh Minimum Charge ... ... ... A sum equal to the highest demand charge paid in any one of the preceding six months of account or Rupees 310 whichever is the greater. SCHEDULE III Tariff 411 - Industrial Consumers on a restricted hour supply Running Charge ... ... ... 46 cents per kWh INDUSTRIAL CONSUMERS BLOCK TARIFF Tariff 412 Tariff applicable to sugar factories which require standby supply for starting the factory and for emergency supply, during the crop season. Initial 20,000 kWh per month at 45 cents per kWh Next 20,000 " " " " 35 cents " " All additional units per month at 30 " " " ANNEX 12 Page 5 of 7 Minimum Charge - For a month or fraction thereof. For up to and including 500 KVA standby Rs 450 For 501 to 1000 KVA standby Rs 750 For 1001 to 1500 KVA standby Rs 1,150 For 1501 to 2500 KVA standby Rs 1,500 The KVA for minimum monthly charge will be based on the installed capacity of the import transformers. The supply above 2,500 KVA would be subject to a separate agreement with the Board. Period of Agreement The period covered by this tariff is from 1st June to 31st December of each year. SCHEDULE IV TARIFF APPLICABLE TO TOWN AND CITY COUNCILS AND VILLAGE COUNCILS FOR STREET LIGHTING PURPOSE Tariff 510 Unmetered Flat Charge 35.5 cents per kWh, based on the number of hours of use and the total wattage of the lamps installed. Minimum Charge (Applicable after Based on the wattage of lamps a cyclone or drought) connected, or 25% of the amount paid during the month preceding the cyclone or drought, whichever, is the highest. SCHEDULE V PUMPING FOR OVERHEAD - IRRIGATION Tariff 511 For electricity su!pply available 21-1/2 hours per day. Not available for 2-1/2 hours during the evening peak. First 50 kWh per month per kilowatt installed at 37 cents/kWh Next 50 kWh per month per kilowatt installed at 25 cents/kWh All additional kWh at 23 cents per kWh. ANNEX 12 Page 6 of 7 Maximum Average Price per kWh The Maximum average price per kWh payable by consumers on this tariff in any one month of account shall not in any case exceed 28.5 cents provided pumping under full load exceeds 200 hours/month. Cost of kWh on Peak Hours (evening) Any kWh consumed during peak hours will be recorded separately and will be charged for at a flat rate of 62 cents per kWh. Period of Agreement All consumers on Tariff 511 will by contract remain on this Tariff for a period of not less than one year. Peak Hours The peak hours applicable for this tariff are as follows: Winter Period - lst April to 30th September 5:30 p.m. to 8.00 p.m. Summer Period - lst October to 31st March 6.00 p.m. to 8.30 p.m. FLAT TARIFF 512 FOR PUMPING FOR ANY PURPOSE Tariff 512 : For electricity supply available 21-1/2 hours per day. Not available for 2-1/2 hours during the evening peak. Running Charge : 29 cents per unit. Cost of kWh on Peak Hours (evening) Any kWh consumed during peak hours will be recorded separately and will be charged for at a Flat Rate of 62 cents per kWh. Period of Agreement All consumers on Tariff 512 will by contract remain on this Tariff for a period of not less than one year. Minimum Charge: Not applicable. Peak Hours The peak hours applicable for this tariff are as follows: Winter Period - 1st April to 30th September 5:30 p.m. to 8.00 p.m. Summer Period - 1st October to 31st March 6.00 p.m. to 8.30 p.m. ANNEX 12 Page 7 of 7 SCHEDULE VI Tariff 610 Tariff applicable to Temporary supply (unmetered consumption) for: (i) Decorative Lighting (ii) Illuminations of Streets (iii) Power for Public Address System (iv) Other similar purposes 1. (a) Cost : 62 cents per unit (b) The consumption shall be calculated as follows: Connected load in kW x number of hours per day x number of days. 2. Connection and disconnection fees (including labor and transport) Rs. 20.- for each service. 3. In cases where requests for temporary supply are received from applicants whose premises are not connected to the network, it will be for the applicant to provide the material. 4. All charges calculated in accordance with paragraphs 1 and 2 shall be paid in advance. SCHEDULE VII Full Cost Adjustment: Clause The kWh rates in the above tariffs would be subject to a Fuel Cost Adjustment Clause as set out below: "For every 5.0 cents variation in the price paid by the Board for its heavy oil fuel above or below Rs 2.86 per Imperial Gallon, the rates in respect of the tariffs below shall be varied by an amount of 0.3933 cents x R, where R is the ratio of kWh generated by the Board's Thermal Stations to the total kWh generated and purchased by the Board in the calendar month preceding that in which the account is submitted". Tariff 211 The kWh rate of 28 cts/kWh Tariff 311 The kWi rate of 26 cts/kWh Tariff 412 The kWh rate of the 3rd Block of 30 cts/kWh Tariff 511 The kWI rate of the 2nd Block of 25 cts/kWh and the kWh rate of the 3rd Block of 23 cts/kWh. MAURITIUS TANZANIA ,AGAOEGA CENTRAL ELECTRICITY BOARD ISLDS 20-00, AREA OF ELECTRICITY SUPPLY AMOZAMIQUE t /r .Saowlt-Lp Areas … Mararerys W- ISLAND Moin Rocrds Secondory Roods 1 /d0 Other Reeds Ef Mountoinous Areas N D I A N O C E A N Dtstrict Baundaries T-____________T__________D__ Proa-sed E-snfir, . ,w C.E B. Hydro Stotion ""' A CE.B Thermal Station o Saga, Estate Hydra Station O Sugar Estate Steena Station AM SSES O 22 Iks Switching Station arid Maolr Substation ~PSI ue G66 hk Substation '22 kv Transrnission Line \ 5 -- 66 kv Tronsm-ssioa Lmre (.srki.g at 22kv) Terre 66 kv Transmission Line R.u,L 66 Ire Tr-oaswiinn Lire - Proposed ArIICOLAYL FuSture Development 1978 FORT VICT0R/A 0 2 'ib < X' 9' 2030,~ ~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~01' oJ tSE< X 7 e zc v " H. E 57-30~~~~~5 W5 ' I -