National Electric Power Regulatory Authority

Islamic Republic of Pakistan

NEPRA Tower, Attaturk Avenue (East), G-511, Islamabad

6=°*ffeWz4 Ph: +92-51-9206500, Fax: +92-51-2600026
Registrar Web: www.nepra.org.pk, E-mail: registrar@nepra.org.pk

No. NEPRA/TRF-342/CPI IGCL-2016/13078-13080

July 28, 2017

Subject: Decision of the Authority in the matter of Application by China Power Flub
Generation Company (Private) Limited (CPHGCL) for Approval of Cost of
Dedicated Jetty alongwith Coal Transshipment Services [Case No.
NEPRA/TRF-342/CPHGCL-2016]

Dear Sir,

Please find enclosed herewith the subject Decision of the Authority (18 pages) in
Case No. NEPRA/TRF-342/CPEIGCL-2016.

2. The Decision is being intimated to the Federal Government for the purpose of
notification in the official gazette pursuant to Section 31(4) of the Regulation of Generation,
Transmission and Distribution of Electric Power Act (XL of 1997).

3. Order of the Authority's Decision shall be notified in the official Gazette.

Enclosure: As above

0-1
( Syed Safeer Hussain )

Secretary
Ministry of Water & Power
A' Block. Pak Secretariat
Islamabad

CC:
1. Secreta ry, Cabinet Division, Cabinet Secretariat, Islamabad.
2. Secreta ry, Ministry of Finance, `Q' Block, Pak Secretariat, Islamabad.
 Approval in the Matter of Coal Offloading Barge Jetty with CTS for CPHGCL

DECISION OF THE AUTHORITY IN THE MATTER APPLICATION BY CHINA

POWER HUB GENERATION COMPANY LIMITED FOR APPROVAL OF COST OF
DEDICATED JETTY ALONG-WITH COAL TRANSHIPMENT SERVICES

1.0 BACKGROUND

1.1 China Power Hub Generation Company Limited (hereinafter "the Applicant" or
CPHGCL) is setting up a 2 x 660 MW imported coal-fired power plant at Hub,
Baluchistan. For this purpose, CPHGCL was granted coal upfront tariff vide Authority's
Decision dated February 12, 2016.

1.2 The Authority in the upfront coal tariff dated 26th June 2014 admitted that for a large
scale coastal imported coal project, the construction of jetty would be indispensable. The
Authority included US$ 9.46/ton in the fuel price on account of common jetty facility. It
is also provided in Para 49 of the referred decision that in case the project company
constructs a dedicated jetty, the jetty cost including its O&M cost per ton will be subject
to adjustment on the basis of verifiable documentary evidence. The Authority, however,
directed that before requesting an adjustment in jetty cost, the petitioner will have to
thoroughly investigate into the possibilities of changing the design of jetty in a way that
least cost and reliable coal offloading facility is arrived through transparent competitive
process while taking on board the PPIB, Pakistan Navy, Pakistan Coast Guard, Ministry
of Ports and Shipping and clearance from all the relevant departments. In the review
decision dated 21st November 2014, the Authority further provided that the cost of
standalone jetty shall be determined and allowed by the Authority on case to case
basis subject to provision of verifiable documents to the satisfaction of the Authority. It
is also provided that the cost of dedicated jetty will be determined and fixed and
variable cost will be reflected under relevant tariff components i.e. capacity and energy
charges respectively.

1.3 While approving the upfront tariff in favour of CPHGCL, the Authority vide decision
dated February 12, 2017, decided that since the project is based on dedicated jetty, the
cost of common jetty facility shall be excluded from the price of coal and the cost of
dedicated jetty will be added to the respective components of tariff.

2.0 FILING OF APPLICATION FOR ADJUSTMENT

2.1 CPHGCL vide letter No. CPHC-NEPRA/KK-ZY/2016-0040, dated June 29, 2016,
submitted an application for adjustment of coal upfront tariff for optimal jetty design
including, as an integral part, a dedicated Coal Transhipment Services (CTS) for its 2 x
 Approval in the Matter of Coal Offloading Barge Jetty with CTS for CPHGCL

660 MW imported coal fired power project. CPHGCL also provided signed EPC contract
for coal offloading barge jetty. The salient features of the application are as under:

• The EPC price of the coal offloading jetty is US$ 192.47 million.
• The estimated non-EPC cost is US$ 37.90 million.
• Custom duties & cess, sinosure fee, interest during construction, financing fees
and charges will be increased to take into consideration the additional costs of
jetty.

• Annual Fixed O&M cost of US$ 4.16 million and variable O&M cost US$ 0.19/ton.
• Estimated annual fixed CTS cost of US$ 20.7 million, variable CTS O&M cost of
US$ 0.75/ton and CTS bunker cost of US$ 1.85/ton
• Levelized tariff of US Cents 0.8315/kWh has been calculated for the combined
impact of jetty project cost of US$ 293.23 million and CTS cost.
• Jetty project cost assumes US$ 62.86 million on account of cost of custom duties
& cess, sinosure fee, interest during construction and financing fees and charges.
• Due to the weather constraints of operating the barge jetty during the monsoon
months, a maximum shortfall quantity of 600,000 tons shall be handled at
alternative port (PKT/PQA).

• Port handling and inland transport charges of the shortfall quantity during the
monsoon months shall be considered as pass-through.

2.2 The Applicant requested the Authority to approve the following costs and components
relating to jetty and associated CTS:

i. Capital expenditure comprising of the EPC and non-EPC costs which will be added
to the project cost already allowed to the power project.
ii. Additional fixed O&M and the additional variable O&M together (including the
fixed and variable CTS costs) with the applicable indexations.
iii. The assumptions mentioned under Para 7.4 of the Application.

3.0 HEARING

3.1 In order to proceed with the application, the Authority decided to give an opportunity
of hearing to CPHGCL on 8th September 2016 in Marriot Hotel Karachi. Notices were
issued to all the stakeholders who were considered important in the matter.

2
 Approval in the Matter of Coal Offloading Barge Jetty with CTS for CPHGCL

3.2 The following issues were framed for the hearing:

i. Whether you have thoroughly investigated into the possibilities of changing the
design of jetty in a way that least cost and reliable coal offloading facility is
achieved?

ii. Whether the proposed EPC price is arrived through transparent and competitive
process?

iii. Whether consent/approval/NOC from relevant department has been taken while
finalizing jetty cost?
3.3 The hearing was participated by the representatives from CPHGCL, PPIB, Logmarin
Advisors (Italy), Royal Haskoning DHV, K-Electric, Engro Polymer& Chemicals, Lucky
Electric Power and RIAA Law. However, none of the stakeholders submitted any
comments in writing.

4.0 WHETHER YOU HAVE THOROUGHLY INVESTIGATED INTO THE

POSSIBILITIES OF CHANGING THE DESIGN OF JETTY IN A WAY THAT LEAST
COST AND RELIABLE COAL OFFLOADING FACILITY IS ACHIEVED?

4.1 According to CPHGCL, before moving to a dedicated Jetty solution, it evaluated in

detail the existing infrastructure available in terms of the capacity for handling coal at
Karachi Port, Port Qasim and the facilities proposed at Pakistan International Bulk
Terminal and the existing road network connecting these port facilities. For this
purpose, CPHGCL hired AA Associates and Engineering Consultant International
Private Limited to carry out a logistic study. The study concluded that 1.2 - 1.58 MTPA
of coal can be transported for the foreseeable future. However, significant investment
will be required in the current infrastructure keeping in consideration economic growth
and increase in traffic congestion.

4.2 Subsequent to analysing existing infrastructure, CPHGCL started detailed deliberations

with stakeholders and the Authority, and presented three options for dedicated
solutions; (1) Mother Vessel Jetty,(2) Barge Jetty with Offshore Lighter age Solution
(OLS), (3) Barge Jetty with OLS Outsourcing. During these deliberations, a fourth option
of offloading of coal at PIBT and transportation of coal to Site via Barging came into
discussion.

4.3 The Applicant submitted that while the Mother Vessel Jetty option is the most expensive
one, it offers least challenges in terms of operations. In this case, a vessel shall berth
along-side a fixed structure. However, due to the presence of hard rock base in the
coastal region, it's construction may not be suitable. In order to avoid exorbitant

3
 Approval in the Matter of Coal Offloading Barge Jetty with CTS for CPHGCL

dredging costs and achieve the desired 14 meter sea depth, Mother Vessel jetty's length
needs to be extended in to the sea by more than 4.8 km. A conveyor system has to be
designed to withstand sea conditions during Monsoon. This structure is likely to become
inoperable during Monsoon months, but yet offers the longest operation period during
the year (300 days) and may have the ability to handle up to 100,000 DWT vessel.
4.4 According to CPHGCL, Barge Jetty with OLS and Barge Jetty with OLS outsourcing
options are prevalent on ports and terminals servicing projects in remote locations
mostly in Indonesia, India and North East Australia. Shorter and more localized Jetty
handle barges which move goods from the unloading system. Despite being more
complex compared to the Mother Vessel Jetty solution, it offers scalability and reduced
capital costs. According to the Applicant, the option of Barge Jetty solution with OLS
outsourcing is of particular interest primarily because it requires lower capital cost and
better operational risk mitigations.
4.5 A cost breakup of the four aforementioned dedicated Jetty solutions, as provided in the
Application is reproduced below:

Option 2 Option 3 Option 4

(Barge Jetty with (Barge Jetty with (Barge Jetty with
Option 1 OLS Outsourced OLS) PIBT Barging)
Amounts in USD/MT (Mother Jetty- jetty- Jetty-
Vessel KPT- KPT- PIBT-
unloading unloading Unloading
road Road road
Jetty) at Site at Site at PIBT
(0.9MN (0.6MN (0.6MN
(
(2.7MN (3.0MN (3.0MN
MTPA) MTPA) MTPA)
TPA)
MTPA) MTPA)
Jetty Cost — Fixed* 26.36 21.96 14.36 14.36
Jetty Cost — Variable 0.65 2.91 0.61 0.61 -
Port Handling and Other Costs 4.00 4.00 9.00 9.00
Road Transport Cost 5.00 5.00 8.00
OLS Contractor Cost
8.75
Barging Cost from PIBT
5.50
Levelized Coal Handling Charges 27.01 26.44 23.65 29.79
Levelized Tariff (Cents/ kWh) 1.0825 1.0598 0.9480 1.1939
4.6 Regarding the option of Barging with PIBT, the Applicant was of the opinion that
barging for 80 — 90 nautical miles to the proposed Site shall be complicated and may
require significant investment in barges and tug boats. Further, the Applicant submitted
that barge unloading marine structure utilized in the barge with PIBT option shall be the
same as that in the Barge Jetty solution with OLS outsourcing. However, preceding
option may have higher operational cost due to PIBT terminal handling charges
(indicated as US$ 9/MT) and more diesel consumption by barges.

4
 Approval in the Matter of Coal Offloading Barge Jetty with CTS for CPHGCL

4.7 According to the Application, PIBT would not invest and manage a barge fleet, which
translates into higher capital cost requirements compared to the options of Barge Jetty
with OLS and Barge Jetty with OLS outsourcing. Given the size of the project, a
minimum of 8 barges will be required to transport coal. Further, according to the
Applicant, PIBT is non-committal about the potential vessel unloading & barge loading
charges. This, according to the Application requires design modification in the loading
cranes.

4.8 Given the above, the Applicant has concluded that the capital costs associated with this
option are significant, particularly when the Applicant is required to invest and
maintain a fleet of barges. Also, other challenges including longer distance, channel
traffic at PQA, port charges and uncertainty regarding barge loading made it evident to
the Applicant that this option is more complex and requires more capital and operation
costs.

4.9 After aforementioned evaluation, CPHGCL concluded that a Barge Jetty is more viable
compared to a mother vessel jetty. Therefore, the bidding process for the selection of the
EPC Contractor for the construction of Jetty was based on a Barge Jetty.

5.0 WHETHER THE PROPOSED EPC PRICE IS ARRIVED THROUGH TRANSPARENT

AND COMPETITIVE PROCESS?
5.1 In accordance with the provision of Upfront Coal Tariff, CPHGCL carried out the
bidding process for the selection of the EPC Contractor for the construction of the Jetty
of the said project. For this purpose, CPHGCL hired the following consultants:

Consultant Scope of Work

China Harbor Engineering Company Performed Pre-feasibility Study and marine
(CHEC) topography for the proposed site
Guangzhou Electric Design Institute (GEDI) Power Plant Feasibility with dedicated Jetty
China Second Harbor Engaged as a sub-contractor with GEDI to carry
out the feasibility study for Coal unloading jetty
AA Associates and Engineering Consultant Hired for the evaluation of the existing port
International Private Limited (ECIL) facilities, road conditions, trucking industry
capacity, and etc for the preparation of Logistic
Study
Techno — Consult International (TCI) Hired as an expert for data gathering specially
marine data
Hagler Baily Hired for environmental and social impact
assessment for the project
Royal HaskoningDHV Hired as the Owner's Engineer for the design,
feasibility and in bidding process for assisting in
selection of EPC Contract for jetty
Logmarin Advisors Consultant for Coal Transshipment Services

4-A 5
 Approval in the Matter of Coal Offloading Barge Jetty with CTS for CPHGCL

5.2 The detail of the bidding process is as under:

i) An advertisement was published on December 8, 2015, in the daily DAWN and Jang
newspapers.
ii) In response to the advertisement, fourteen (14) companies from United Kingdom,
China, Turkey, UAE and Pakistan expressed their interest in the project.
iii) The RFP was made available for seven days from the date of publication of the
advertisement till December 14, 2015.
iv) The RFP was issued to 7 companies for a prescribed fee.
v) The deadline for submission of RFP was set as January 18, 2016. The following three
companies submitted detailed technical and financial bids:
a) NWEPDI + NDRI ("NDRI");

b) China Harbour Engineering Company Ltd. ("CHEC"); and

c) China Machinery Engineering Corporation ("CMEC")

5.3 The details of bid evaluation are as under:

i) Bids were opened on February 1, 2016 in Karachi and were evaluated in two stages by
Royal HaskoningDHV (Owner's Engineer). The first stage was named High Level
Review, while the second stage was called Detailed Evaluation Report.
ii) Royal HaskoningDHV published a High Level Tender Evaluation report on April 13,
2016, wherein each bid was evaluated on the basis of General Review and Technical
Review. Royal HaskoningDHV awarded the following scores to the bidders:

Maximum Actual Score

Section Score CHEC NDRI CMEC
Available
General Information 17 16 14 9
Financial 4 2 4 2
Personnel 8 1 2 0
Project Experience 36 26 12 12
Initial Construction Strategy Review 6 6 3 2
Total 71 51 35 25
iii) The High Level Tender Evaluation report recommended NDRI and CHEC for the next
stage of evaluation.
iv) According to the Detailed Evaluation report published by Royal HaskoningDHV on
April 22, 2016, face to face meetings were held with the recommeired bidders in order

qat 6
 Approval in the Matter of Coal Offloading Barge Jetty with CTS for CPHGCL

to finalize/ improve on the design of the coal unloading jetty. After face to face
meetings, Royal HaskoningDHV produced Design Criteria document and Materials
and Workmanship Specifications for key maritime civil structures and quay
equipment for the Jetty EPC element to further support the original Jetty EPC bidders
RFP document. The recommended bidders were then invited to confirm/ modify their
proposals based on a Barge Jetty as set out in Option B in the RFP and also include a
variation of Option B that could facilitate a future use of coal berth using a vessel up to
48,000 DWT. However, this variation of Option B was not considered and was
solicited for cost comparison purposes only.
v) The resubmitted technical proposals based on Option B were then evaluated by Royal
HaskoningDHV and the following scores were awarded out of a maximum score of
155:

Bidder Score obtained

CHEC 107.5
NDRI 48.5
vi) Subsequently, the bids were commercially evaluated based on Commercial Credits
and Pricing Terms with each given equal weightage of 50% by a 4-member commercial
evaluation team. According to the Commercial Evaluation Report, the following total
prices were quoted by the bidders:

Quoted Price Gross up for WHT

Bidder
(USD Million) (USD Million)
CHEC 185.82 192.47
NDRI 194.85 202.73
vii) The results of commercial evaluation are as follows:

Bidders Commercial Credit Pricing Terms Total

CHEC 50 45 95
NDRI 27 35 62
viii) Based on the above evaluation, CHEC was recommended to be the preferred Jetty EPC
Contractor by the Commercial Evaluation Committee.
ix) Based on the evaluation of the bidders, on June 14, 2016, CPHGCL signed contracts
with China Harbor Engineering Company for Jetty Procurement and Construction
Contract for a value of USD 90.4 million and with Zhen Hua Engineering (a wholly
owned subsidiary of China Harbour Engineering Company) for Jetty Procurement and
Supply Contract for a value of USD 102.1 million. As per the Jetty Procurement and
Construction contract signed with China Harbor Engineering Company, the Time for
Completion has been defined as 27 months after the date of issuance of the Limited

7
(j)
4+
:1.)

Approval in the Matter of Coal Offloading Barge Jetty with CTS for CPHGCL

Notice to Proceed. It is pertinent to mention that the Jetty's COD shall occur a few
months prior to the COD of the power plant. Therefore, the effective period for
calculation of ROE and IDC of Jetty shall be 36 — 38 months instead of the agreed 27
months.

6.0 WHETHER CONSENT/APPROVAL/NOC FROM RELEVANT DEPARTMENT HAS

BEEN TAKEN WHILE FINALIZING JETTY COST?
6.1 CPHGCL along-with its Application has provided a provisional NOC from the Ministry
of Defense (MoD). The MoD vide letter dated October 28, 2016, provided provisional
NOC and permission to construct Barge Jetty subject to compliance of the following
conditions:
a) Establishment of a security regime in compliance of ISPS Code with specific
emphasis on Regulation 10 of Chapter XI-2 of Annex to International Convention of
Safety of Life at Sea, 1974 and Section 14 to 18 of Part A and B of ISPS code. More
specifically, this includes;
i. Establishment of Terminal Facility Security Organization
ii. Establishment of Terminal Facility Security Plan incorporation, physical security,
structural integrity, personnel protection system etc.
iii. Conduct of training, drills and exercises on Terminal Facility System
iv. Conduct of periodic Terminal Facility Security Assessment

b) Furnishing of documents/ certificates in compliance with ISPs Code six months prior
the commencement of commercial operations.
6.2 MoD has taken on board following organization in the process of issuing NOC:
1) Joint Staff Headquarter (JSHQ)
2) Naval Headquarter (NHQ)
3) Pakistan Maritime Security Agency (PSMA)
4) ISI
6.3 CPHGCL has also obtained a conditional environmental approval from the Balochistan
Environmental Protection Agency. Besides that, CPHGCL has also taken on board
CPPA, PPIB, Ministry of Water & Power and N 1DC.

7.0 DECISION OF THE AUTHORITY REGARDING EPC OF JETTY

7.1 In pursuance of Para 49 of the decision of the Authority in the matter of coal upfront
tariff dated June 26, 2014 and Para 106 of the review decision dated November 21, 2014
in the matter, an imported coal based power project opting for building a dedicated jetty

8
 Approval in the Matter of Coal Offloading Barge Jetty with CTS for CPHGCL

was required to ensure transparency and competitiveness in arriving at least cost coal
offloading jetty facility.

7.2 In view of that, the Authority noted that CPHGCL carried out detailed studies not only
for utilizing the existing infrastructure available at KPT, PIBT and PQA but has also
thoroughly investigated the possible designs for a dedicated coal unloading Jetty which
has led the Applicant to reach at a least cost solution. For this purpose, CPHGCL hired
both local and international consulting firms including Royal HaskoningDHV, a leading
international marine design consultant with vast experience in Pakistan including
Gadani Power Park and KPT expansion to strengthen the design evaluation process.
Royal HaskoningDHV presented all viable design options for a dedicated coal
unloading Jetty solution and after detailed deliberations, the most optimal and least cost
design solution, Barge Jetty with outsourced OLS, was opted. The capital cost of
building a mother vessel jetty is approximately three times of the capital cost of building
a barge jetty. Resultantly, the service cost of mother vessel jetty is approximately US$
553 million higher than the service cost of barge jetty with CTS over 30 years project life.

7.3 A number of energy import terminals (PIBT, Engro Elengy Terminal, Port Qasim Coal
Jetty, Pakistan Gasport Terminal, Sahiwal Coal Unloading Berth) have been setup.
Additional energy projects in Port Qasim have increased congestion in the Port Qasim
channel resulting in port delays for incoming and outgoing vessels. Moreover, Port
Qasim channel has depth of less than 12 meter which means that vessels with less than
50,000 tons can be used to import coal. In comparison, CPHGC Coal Transshipment
System has no draft restriction and can handle vessel size up to 186,000 tons which
would result in significant freight savings. It is important to note that Port Qasim
channel is surrounded by mangroves which make widening and dredging of existing
channel extremely difficult due to environmental impact. The major technical challenge
with construction of Mother Vessel Jetty was jetty length of 4.8 KM in open sea which
resulted in high capital cost and completion time of 48 months. Although Feasibility
Study proposed construction of 1.1 KM long breakwater but similar projects in the
vicinity Karachi Cargo Village (KPT Project completed in 2016 after 5 years delay) and
Gadani Power Park's Jetty Pre-feasibility study had estimated breakwater length of 2 -
2.5 KM. In view of these factors, Mother Vessel Jetty had extremely high cost overruns
and delay risk. On the other hand, Barge Jetty has a length of 1.1 KM and much shorter
construction period. In order to handle large coal vessels, Barge Jetty requires Coal
Transshipment System consisting of Panamax Floating Terminal, Barges and Tugboats,
which has higher service cost than Mother Vessel Jetty.

9
 Approval in the Matter of Coal Offloading Barge Jetty with CTS for CPHGCL

7.4 Port handling charges are in the range of US$ 4 per ton which shall be saved in the
instant case. , the proposed coal unloading solution is designed to utilize Capesize
vessels (having approximate capacity of 150,000 Tons) for the transportation of coal
compared to a Panamax sized vessel (having capacity of 50,000 — 75,000 Tons). Market
dynamics dictate that the larger the vessel, lower the freight per ton for coal shipment.
Therefore, in the instant case, there would be a saving of approx. USD 1.5/ Ton on
account of freight. The total saving on account of other cost and freight shall be USD 5.5/
Ton.

7.5 The Authority considers that CPHGCL has sufficed the requirement for a thorough
investigation into changing the design of jetty in a way that least cost and reliable coal
offloading solution is achieved. The Authority did not find any evidence that the
bidding process for selection of EPC bidder was not transparent and competitive. In
response to the advertisement for expression of interest, fourteen (14) companies from
different countries including, United Kingdom, China, Turkey, UAE and Pakistan
expressed their interest in project. CPHGCL hired an independent consultant to develop
RFP and to assist the entire process for the selection of the EPC Contractor for the
construction of the proposed dedicated coal unloading Jetty. After examining the
documents provided regarding the bidding process, it can be established that CPHGCL
and its consultant thoroughly evaluated each bid in the light of technical criteria and
subsequently awarded scores and published two evaluation reports. Consequently, the
recommended bidders were then evaluated on commercial basis and the lowest bidder
was awarded the contract. Further, it was observed that no negative comments
whatsoever, written or oral were received by the Authority challenging the bidding
process or pointing out defects in the same. The Authority also noted that CPHGCL has
fulfilled the requirement of taking all stakeholders onboard. Therefore, the Authority
considers that the EPC price has been arrived through a sufficiently competitive and
transparent process and therefore, the EPC price of US$ 185.82 million net of
withholding tax is being approved. Taxes, if any actually paid shall be treated as pass
through subject to provision of verifiable documentary evidence for the payment with a
maximum cap of US$ 6.65 million.

8.0 NON EPC COST

8.1 CPHGCL requested US$ 37.9 million on account of Non-EPC Cost. According to the
Applicant, the Non-EPC cost shall cover the entire development and oversight related
various costs including project administration, site security and surveillance,
Engineering consultancy, other consultancy, insurance during construction, Staff
9044ER R
10 7
NEPRA
""), AcKTHOR,
4,
%1
44, 0.°
 Approval in the Matter of Coal Offloading Barge Jetty with CTS for CPHGCL

Housing Colony, Jetty O&M Mobilization & Trainings, CTS Mobilization, Utilities
during Commissioning, Inventory Buildup Cost and Regulatory Expenses. The breakup
of the Non-EPC cost is provided hereuner:

Non EPC USD Million

Administration Expenses 13.63
Site Security and Surveillance 2.60
Design and Construction Management Fee 3.04
Other Consultancy 5.71
Insurance During Construction 2.16
Staff Housing Colony 1.90
Jetty O&M Mobilization & Training 2.20
CTS Mobilization 1.80
Utilities during Commissioning 1.74
Inventory Buildup Cost 2.22
Regulatory Expenses 0.89
Total 37.90

9.0 DECISION OF THE AUTHORITY REGARDING NON EPC COST

9.1 The Authority considers that the requested cost is substantially on the higher side.
Sufficient cost has already been provided to the Applicant under the upfront tariff to
cater for non-EPC related cost. Since the jetty project is not a standalone project, rather is
a project within a project, therefore, the Authority expects that the synergies between the
two projects shall further reduce non-EPC Cost. In view of the above, the Authority
considers that 5% of the EPC cost shall be a reasonable estimate for the incremental non-
EPC cost. Accordingly, USD 9.29 million is being approved on account of non-EPC cost.

10.0 OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE COST OF JETTY

10.1 For the smooth operations and maintenance of the Jetty, CPHGCL requested USD 4.16
million per annum and USD 0.19/Ton for fixed and variable O&M respectively.
CPHGCL has not provided any contract agreements for the O&M of the Jetty. The
requested O&M Costs were based on the figures provided in the feasibility study of the
Jetty. Further, the Application does not clearly identify whether the Applicant intends to
carry out O&M of the jetty itself or outsource it.

11
 Approval in the Matter of Coal Offloading Barge Jetty with CTS for CPHGCL

11.0 DECISION OF THE AUTHORITY REGARDING O&M OF JETTY

The requirement of Para 49 to ensure transparency and competitiveness in arriving at

least cost was not fulfilled by CPHGCL while requesting the O&M cost relating to jetty.
Therefore, the Authority directs the Applicant to carry out a transparent and
competitive bidding process for finalizing the O&M cost and re-submit the same for
approval of the Authority with the maximum cap of USD 4.16 million per annum and
USD 0.19/Ton for fixed and variable O&M respectively.

12.0 BIDDING PROCESS FOR THE COAL TRANSSHIPMENT SERVICES

12.1 As an integral part of the complete coal offloading solution, CPHGCL proposed Coal
Transshipment Services (CTS) in addition to the dedicated Jetty. According to the
information submitted by the Applicant, bidding process was carried out for selection of
the Coal Transshipment Services Provider. The details of the bidding process are as
under:

i. Feasibility Study was carried out by Logmarin Advisors for CTS.

ii. Logmarin Advisors also prepared the RFP for interested coal transshipers,
evaluated the bids received in the matter and recommended the successful bidder.

iii. An advertisement was published in the daily DAWN on April 7, 2016 for
Expression of Interest (EOI) for Trans-shipment service provider on Build, Own
and Operate (BOO) basis for a tenor of 10 — 15 years. Interested parties were
allowed until April 14, 2016 to submit EOIs.

iv. In response to the advertisement, complete EOIs from the following 7 companies
were submitted:

1. Augustea Holding SPA(Augustea)

2. C Transport Maritime S.A.M. (CTM)
3. Coeclerici Logistic SpA (Coeclerici)
4. Luis Dreyfus Armateurs SAS (LDA)
5. Raazip International Pvt. Ltd. (Raaziq)
6. Rocktree Logistics Pte. Ltd (Roctree)
7. SmitLamnalco Pakistan B.V. (Smit)

12
 Approval in the Matter of Coal Offloading Barge Jetty with CTS for CPHGCL

v. Subsequent to the lapse of the deadline for the submission of EOIs, China Harbour
Engineering Company requested an extension for submission for EOI which was
granted.

vi. Logmarin evaluated the EOIs based on pre-defined criteria and disqualified Raaziq
International due to lack of transshipping experience and ranked M/S Coeclerici
Logistic at the top.

vii. RFP was issued to the remaining 7 companies:

1) Augustea Holding SpA(Augustea)

2) C Transport Maritime S.A.M. (CTM)
3) Coeclerici Logistic SpA (Coeclerici)
4) Luis Dreyfus Armateurs SAS (LDA)
5) Rocktree Logistics Pte. Ltd (Roctree)
6) SmitLamnalco Pakistan B.V. (Smit)
7) China Harbour Engineering Company (CHEC)

viii. The bids were then evaluated in three steps and disqualified M/S Smit and M/S
LDA on the basis of inconsistency of their bids with the RFP.

• In the first step, bidders were ranked on the basis of the price quoted for
annual minimum guaranteed quantity of 2 million tons/ annum and M/s China
Harbour was found to be the worst amongst five (5) bidders.
• In the second step, bidders were ranked on the basis of the price quoted for
above the minimum guaranteed quantity and M/s Coeclerici Logistic was
found to be the most expensive amongst the four bidders, thus it was
disqualified on this basis.
• In the third step, the bidders were evaluated on the basis of service price
(including fixed cost, O&M and Bunker cost) quoted by the bidders and it was
found that Augustea's bid was the most competitive amongst the remaining
three (3) bidders.

ix. Finally, the three bidders i.e., Augustea, CTM & Rocktree were invited for contract
negotiations and were asked to submit updated proposals after taking into account
tax and cost optimization.

O
NEP" t 13
AUTHORITY
ti

11
43
'
 Approval in the Matter of Coal Offloading Barge Jetty with CTS for CPHGCL

x. All three submitted updated proposals which were then evaluated technically and
commercially by Logmarin. According to the "Overview of the Updated
Proposals" document dated September 2, 2016, the results are as under:

Capacity Fee [USD/day] Capacity Fee [USD/day]

2nd Hand Vessel 2nd Hand Vessel
15 Years 15 Years
Pre PPA COD Date Post PPA COD Date
• Assumed considering
91 days 50% CF and
remainin 0%CF

RockTree Augustea • CTM ■

RockTree,

Throughput Fee [USDA] Throughput Fee [USDA]

Pre PPA COD Date Post PPA COD Date
1.5 * BC discounted * BC discounted
to 0.25 USD 1.22 to 0.25 USD
above 2 mtpa above 2 mtpa
1.12

0.60 *
0.60 *

Augustea CTM RockTree Augustea CTM RockTree

• Otim u BC • O&M BC

xi. Based on the above comparison, CTM with the lowest contractual value overall
was declared as qualified.

xii. CPHGCL initiated contract negotiations with CTM. However, CTM, informed
CPHGCL vide letter dated October 26, 2016, that its board of directors have
decided to withdraw from the bidding process due to allocation of resources to
other shipping projects that shareholders are pursuing.

14
 Approval in the Matter of Coal Offloading Barge Jetty with CTS for CPHGCL

xiii. Accordingly, contract negotiations were undertaken with Augustea and CTS
agreement was signed between the parties on 10th March 2017 at the following
price post-COD for 15 years:

Agreed as
Description Units per CTS Indexation
Agreement
CTS Fixed
(Charter/ Capacity 80% of CF shall be indexed with
USD /day 52,000
US CPI annual
Fee)
1
100% of cost shall be indexed
CTS Variable O&M USD/Ton 0.43
with local CPI annually
100% of cost shall be indexed
Bunker Cost (Fuel) USD/Ton 0.79 monthly with Light Diesel Oil
price at Karachi

xiv. The CTS agreement also entitles the contractor the following prices for 6 months
or till COD, whichever comes earlier:

Agreed as
Description Units per CTS Indexation
Agreement
CTS Fixed
(Charter/ Capacity 80% of CF shall be indexed with
USD /day 26,000
Fee) US CPI annual
1
100% of cost shall be indexed
CTS Variable O&M USD/Ton 0.43
with local CPI annually
100% of cost shall be indexed
Bunker Cost (Fuel) USD/Ton 0.79 monthly with Light Diesel Oil
price at Karachi

13.0 DECISION OF THE AUTHORITY REGARDING CTS

13.1 In pursuance of Para 49 of the decision of the Authority in the matter of coal upfront
tariff dated June 26, 2014 and Para 106 of the review motion dated November 21, 2014 in
the matter, an imported coal based power project opting for building a dedicated jetty
was required to ensure transparency and competitiveness in arriving at least cost coal
offloading jetty facility. Since CTS is an integral part of the entire coal offloading
solution proposed by CPHGCL, therefore, in pursuance of the aforementioned decisions
of the Authority, competitive bidding was carried out for the selection of Coal
Transshipment Service Provider.

15
 Approval in the Matter of Coal Offloading Barge Jetty with CTS for CPHGCL

13.2 The Authority acknowledged that to reinforce the bidding process, CPHGC hired an
internationally reputable consultant, Logmarin Advisors not only to provide assistance
in the entire short-listing and selection process but also to carry out feasibility study and
prepare well-structured RFP documents in this regard. Resultantly, it was observed that
7 international companies submitted completed EOIs for the coal transshipment of this
complex project. The bids for CTS were also evaluated by Logmarin Advisors. The
Authority also recognized that CPHGCL required bidders to re-submit their bids after
taking into account detailed due diligence of local tax laws. The Authority has further
recognized that indexation of bunker cost (fuel cost) with the prices of Light Diesel Oil
reported by Pakistan State Oil (PSO) instead of any international index has simplified
the process and resulted in payment in Pakistani Rupee. It was also observed that
CPHGCL made all efforts to further negotiate the variable bid price quoted by the
selected bidder. Given the above, the Authority has considered the process for selection
of CTS contractor competitive and transparent and therefore approves CTS fixed fees of
US$ 26,000 and US$ 52,000/ day for pre and post COD periods respectively, CTS variable
O&M of US$ 0.43/ Ton and Bunker cost (Fuel) of US$ 0.79/Ton along-with the requested
indexations.

14.0 ORDER

14.1 The Authority has approved the following costs for coal offloading barge jetty along
with coal transshipment service in respect of the application filed by CPHGCL for its
2x660 MW imported coal based power plant located at Hub:

i) EPC cost of US$ 185.82 million net of withholding tax.

ii) Withholding taxes, if any actually paid shall be treated as pass through subject to
provision of verifiable documentary evidence with a maximum cap of US$ 6.65
million.

iii) Non-EPC cost of US$ 9.29 million.

iv) Custom duties & cess, sinosure fee, interest during construction, financing fees and
charges will be increased to take into consideration the additional costs of jetty.
v) The Applicant shall carry out a transparent and competitive bidding process for
finalizing the O&M cost and re-submit the same for approval of the Authority with
the maximum cap of USD 4.16 million per annum and USD 0.19/Ton for fixed and
variable O&M respectively.
vi) The following costs along-with indexations for CTS Post COD for 15 years:
 Approval in the Matter of Coal Offloading Barge Jetty with CTS for CPHGCL

Agreed as
Description Units per CTS Indexation
Agreement
80% of CF shall be
CTS Fixed
USD /day 52,000 indexed with US CPI
(Charter/ Capacity Fee)
annual
100% of cost shall be
CTS Variable O&M USD/Ton 0.43 indexed with local
CPI annually
100% of cost shall be
indexed monthly
Bunker Cost (Fuel) USD/Ton 0.79
with Light Diesel Oil
price at Karachi
vii) Following costs along-with indexations for CTS pre COD for a period of 6 months
or till COD, whichever comes earlier:

Agreed as
Description Units per CTS Indexation
Agreement
80% of CF shall be
CTS Fixed
USD /day 26,000 indexed with US CPI
(Charter/ Capacity Fee)
annual
100% of cost shall be
CTS Variable O&M USD/Ton 0.43 indexed with local
CPI annually
100% of cost shall be
indexed monthly
Bunker Cost (Fuel) USD/Ton 0.79
with Light Diesel Oil
price at Karachi

15.0 TERMS AND CONDITIONS

15.1 Following terms & conditions shall apply:

i) Due to the weather constraints of operating the barge jetty during the monsoon
months, a maximum shortfall quantity of 600,000 tons shall be handled at
alternative port (PKT/PQA).

ii) Port handling and inland transport charges of the shortfall quantity during the
monsoon months shall be considered as pass-through.

iii) No provisions of the Bareboat Charter Agreement, Transshipment Agreement or

Guarantee and Coordination Agreement shall be changed, amended or modified
without the prior written consent of the Authority.

17
 Approval in the Matter of Coal Offloading Barge Jetty with CTS for CPHGCL

iv) The reference insurance during operation shall be 1% of 70% of total capital cost of
power plant and Jetty.
v) For the next 15 years, the project company shall seek prior approval of the
Authority regarding Coal Transshipment Services and the cost shall not be higher
than the reference cost adjusted for applicable indexations.
vi) The above decision of the Authority shall be read with the approval of the
Authority in the matter of coal upfront tariff vide No. NEPRA/TRF-342/CPHGCL-
2016/2043-2045 dated February 12, 2016.

16.0 NOTIFICATION

16.1 The above Order of the Authority shall be notified in the official Gazette in accordance
with Section 31(4) of the Regulations of Generation, Transmission and Distribution of
Electric Power Act, 1997.

Authority

„cvt.A,
17
-17)
(Himayat Lillah-j<han) (Maj (R) Haroon Rashid)
Member Member

(Syed :Hassan . (Saif Ullah Chattha) )_ 7. 7 -..26-17

Member Vice Chairman

18

2_2- 17