LAHORE: The Pakistan Muslim LeagueNawaz government`s plan to end, or substantially reduce, loadshedding by 2018 has suffered its first jolt as the project management of the 1,410MW Tarbela extension acceleration plan now terms it `no longer physically possible` and has asked the Water and Power Development Authority (Wapda) to develop a post-abortion (acceleration plan) risks management strategy.

The impending failure on the extension acceleration plan, which was supposed to bring 1,410MW online by June 2017, is likely to rob the government of political mileage that it wanted to draw by containing the menace of loadshedding and the nation of the benefit of low-cost hydel generation next summer.

In a letter to all concerned, project manager Fidencio Mendez said: `The acceleration is no longer physically possible given the current circumstances surrounding the project, including that no agreement (how to implement the acceleration plan) was reached either with the electro-mechanical contractor or the civil works contractor.

Now the failure to contractually bind the contractor despite promising to pay it over Rs5 billion more (as cost of acceleration) has come back to haunt the authority and the country.

`This (my) opinion also aligns with the remarks included in our weekly and fortnightly progress reports. Please note that this is an independent opinion based on the risks previously identified and conveyed to the client (Wapda) through correspondence and should not be interpreted as instruction or determination. In case the client decides to abort the acceleration, then, as previously advised, a strategy for managing the postabortion risks needs to be developed to get an agreed schedule and avoid `time at large` scenario by having an agreed memorandum of understanding,` wrote the project manager.

In another letter, the manager maintained that as `Wapda is still considering different options, including formal abortion of the acceleration plan, the engineer is bound to verify the contractor`s claims (and continue paying hefty amounts) unless Wapda `for-mally aborts` the acceleration plan` The two letters were written in the last week of June and Wapda referred the case to its central contract cell (CCC) for its further opinion.

The CCC replied: `The decision on abortion of the acceleration plan should be taken on a top priority basis and since huge contractual issues are likely to arise, the contract section of the project needs to be strengthened.

Further explaining, the CCC said: `It is apparent that substantial delay in achievement of the targets amounts to non-completion of units (project) by due dates. In such case, the engineer`s certification of milestones is not understandable and has placed the employer (Wapda) in an awkward position.

When the CCC`s comments were referred to the member (Water), who is technically in charge of the project, he remarl(ed: `Considering the above started situation, decision regarding the acceleration programme is urgently required to avoid further complications. The project authorities have been instructed to finalise their analysis and recommendations at the earliest for the consideration of the authority.

`This is a criminal act, to say the least, said a former head of the CCC. He said Wapda had conceived the plan of pulling back completion date by eight months from February 2018 to June 2017 and agreed to pay the contractor $50 million (or over Rs5bn) for acceleration. All this was done without bringing it all in writing. To add further to national misfortune, it had already paid Rs2.5bn and has now concluded that acceleration plan is no more possible.

The CCC`s former head said the authority needed to answer some basic questions: Who was verifying the contractor`s claims against which Rs2.5bn has been paid? What is the mechanism for recovering this amount? Why everything was not brought in written form? All these issues should be part of an inquiry that should be conducted to see how this stupendous failure had been achieved, he added.

When Wapda was asked about the fate of the project and its future handling, it said: `The questions asked based on the issue about which any comment at this stage by Wapda may compromise its position later on and result in financial implications.

`Wapda has a policy of taking the public into conHdence on its projects by issuing press releases from time to time. If any development happens on the issue, it will be discussed in the authority`s meeting and the decision will be communicated to media as per policy.mally aborts` the acceleration plan` The two letters were written in the last week of June and Wapda referred the case to its central contract cell (CCC) for its further opinion.

The CCC replied: `The decision on abortion of the acceleration plan should be taken on a top priority basis and since huge contractual issues are likely to arise, the contract section of the project needs to be strengthened.

Further explaining, the CCC said: `It is apparent that substantial delay in achievement of the targets amounts to non-completion of units (project) by due dates. In such case, the engineer`s certification of milestones is not understandable and has placed the employer (Wapda) in an awkward position.

When the CCC`s comments were referred to the member (Water), who is technically in charge of the project, he remarl(ed: `Considering the above started situation, decision regarding the acceleration programme is urgently required to avoid further complications. The project authorities have been instructed to finalise their analysis and recommendations at the earliest for the consideration of the authority.

`This is a criminal act, to say the least, said a former head of the CCC. He said Wapda had conceived the plan of pulling back completion date by eight months from February 2018 to June 2017 and agreed to pay the contractor $50 million (or over Rs5bn) for acceleration. All this was done without bringing it all in writing. To add further to national misfortune, it had already paid Rs2.5bn and has now concluded that acceleration plan is no more possible.

The CCC`s former head said the authority needed to answer some basic questions: Who was verifying the contractor`s claims against which Rs2.5bn has been paid? What is the mechanism for recovering this amount? Why everything was not brought in written form? All these issues should be part of an inquiry that should be conducted to see how this stupendous failure had been achieved, he added.

When Wapda was asked about the fate of the project and its future handling, it said: `The questions asked based on the issue about which any comment at this stage by Wapda may compromise its position later on and result in financial implications.

`Wapda has a policy of taking the public into conHdence on its projects by issuing press releases from time to time. If any development happens on the issue, it will be discussed in the authority`s meeting and the decision will be communicated to media as per policy.