Document of The World Bank

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Public Disclosure Authorized Rqut No. 4935

PROJECT COMPLETIONREPORT Public Disclosure Authorized YUGOSLAVIA

MOINTENEGROEARTHQUAKE REHABILITATION - HIGHWAYS

(LoAN 1759-YU) Public Disclosure Authorized

February 13, 1984

Europe, Middle East and North Africa

Public Disclosure Authorized Regional Office

docuuneuthas a restsieleddbuulo. ad my be sedby reciideteAly in thepeufoace of Idherofficiaddui ltbcfuteas may notothewise be discosedwithou Would Bak authornaizolm.I FOR OMCIAL USE ONLY

YUGOSIAVIA

LOAN 1759-YU - PROJECT caOPLETION REPORT

1VN O EARTHQUEE REHILITATION - HIGHWAYS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page llo.

Preface ...... Basic Data Sheet ...... ii Hihight . .s...... v

I. INTRODUCTION ...... 1

II. PROJECT PREPARATION, OBJECTIVES AND CONTENT...... 2

III. PROJECT IPLMEENTAIIONMD CDS ST...... 3

IV. INSTrTUTIONAL AND OPERATIONAL DEVELOPMENT .. . 4

V. ECONOMICJUSTIFICATION...... 5

V1. COMWSIONS AID LESSOS LEARNE...... 5

Tables

1. Project Status by Link ...... 7 2. Rehabilitation: Comparison of Actual Costs and AppraisalCost Estimates ...... 9 3. Schedule of Disburse seuts...... 10

Annex Borrower Comments...... 11

Maps IBRD 14473 IBERD14474 IBRD 14475

TtAsdocument hes a resUicwd dbvfttkm may be used by recipients only in th peformance of thir offixid dutueslIs ntents may not othrwie be diskod witbout World Bmakauthonatn YUGOSLAVIA

LOAN 1795t-YU - PROJECT COMPLETION REPORT

NONTENEGROEARTHQUAKE REHABILITATION - HIGHWAYS

PREFACE

The following is a Project Completion Report of the Earthquake Rehabilitation Project - Highways in Yugoslavia. The project focussed entirely on restoring earthquake damaged highway facilities and structures to a level suitable for the safe and expedient operation of traffic on the basic road network in Montenegro. A loan (Loan 1759-YU) of Us$21 million was made for the project on September 18, 1979.

The attached Project Completion Report (PCR) was prepared by the EHENA Transportation Division I with the assistance of the Borrower. It reviews the extent of the project in a comprehensive manner.

In accordance with the revised procedures for project performance audit reporting, this Completion Report was read by the Operations Evaluation Department (OED) but the project was not audited by OED staff. The draft Completion Report was sent to the Borrower and its agencies. Their comments have been reproduced as an annex.

. - ii -

PROJECT PERFORMANCEAUDIT BASIC DATA SHEET

YUGOSLAVIA: MONTENEGROEARTHQUAKE REHABILITATION - HIGHWAYS

LOAN 1759-YU

OTHER PROJECT DATA

Item Original Plan Revisions Actual

First Mention in Files -- 4/15179 Government's Application - - 5/31/79 Negotiations 8/79 8/13/79 Board Approval 9/79 9/18/79 Loan Agreement Date 9/79 -- 9/21/79 Effectiveness Date 12/79 -- 12/19/79 Closing Date 12/82 12/31/82

Borrower Self-Managing Republic Community of Interest for Roads of the S.R. of Montenegro, Titograd

Executing Agency The Investment Bank of Titograd Fiscal Year of Borrower January 1 - December 31 Follow-on Project Name: None

MISSION DATA

Month/ No. of No. of Date of Items Year Weeks Persons Manweeks Report

Identification - - Preparation 5/79 1 1 1.0 6/79 Preappraisal - - -

Appraisal 7/79 0.6 1 0.6 8/79

Total 1.6 1.6

X Supervision I 5/80 0.6 2 1.2 5/80 Supervision II 9/80 0.8 2 1.6 10/80 Supervision III 6/81 1 3 3.0 7/81 Supervision IV 2/82 1 3 3.0 4/82 Supervision V 5/82 0.4 2 0.8 7/82 Supervision VI and Completion 9/82 0.4 3 1.2 11/82

Total 4.2 10.8 - iii -

PROJECT PERFORMANCEAUDlT BASIC DATA SHEET

YUGOSLAVIA: MONTENEGROEARTHQUAKE REHABILlTATION - HIGHWAYS

LOAN 1759-YU

CUMULATIVEESTIMATED AND ACTUAL DISBURSEMENTS (US$ millions)

FY80 FY81 FY82 FY83-

(i) Estimated 6.5 12.1 18.0 21.0 (ii) Actual 4.9 7.5 12.7 21.0 % of (ii) to (i) 75 62 71 100

Country Exchange Rates

Name of Currency Yugoslav Dinar (DIN)

Yeara/

1980 US$1 = 24.91 1981 US$1 = 35.51 1982 US$1 = 51.32

a/ The Yugoslav dinar has been floating since July 12, 1978. Therefore, exchange rates shown are period average exchange rates. - iv -

PROJECT PERFORMANCEAUDIT BASIC DATA SHEET

YUGOSLAVIA: MONTENEGROEARTHQUAKE REHABiLITATION - HIGHWAYS

LOAN 1759-YU

Appraisal Expectation Actual

Total Proj. Cost (US$ Mil.) 63.6 63.6 Overrun (X) - - Loan Amount (US$ Mil.) 21.0 21.0 Disbursed 21.0 21.0 Cancelled - - Repaid )- 0.88 Outstanding Al - 20.13 Date Physical Components Completed 09/82 09/82 2roportion of Time Overrun (X} b/ - - Economic Rate of Return (Z) c-

a/ Per 10/31/1983 b/ Emergency work undertaken with set unit prices. c/ Because of the nature of the project, individual economic rates of return (EMs) for each sub-project were not developed (para. 5.01).

. v

YUGOSLAVIA

LOAN 1759-YU - PROJECT COMPLETION REPORT

MONTENEGROEARTHQUAKE REHABILITATION - HIGHWAYS

HIGHLIGHTS

The project was the result of a devastating series of earthquakes occurring during April and May 1979 along the Adriatic coastline of the Republic of Montenegro in Yugoslavia. During this period earth tremors of strong intensity were felt in most of the area of Hontenegro, the southeastern parts of the Republic of , the Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina,as well as the northern part of .

The physical consequences of the earthquake were most evident along the total length of the Montenegrin coastline in a belt 10 to 12 Km wide. In this area over 100 people were killed and about 500 injured. deavy damage was sustained by the Titograd-Barrailroad, the Port of Bar and about 560 km of the Montenegrohighway network.

The Bank loan of $21 million, which helped finance the rehabilitationof the damaged roads, provided some retroactive financing of the most urgent rehabilitationefforts necessary to restore traffic service to the network and to provide emergency works necessary to protect the existing facilities from furtherdamage.

A federal law providing local funds by contributionsfrom the other republics/provinces was enacted (SFRY Official Gazette No. 36 of July 27, 1979). Even so, there was a nine-month slowdown (August 1981 to ;=ay1982) due to a shortage of local funds.

The project required a relatively low supervision effort in the field (12.4 manweeks) as the project was problem-free and supervision was always undertaken concommitantlywith other on-aing projects.

The Bank's flexible approach in agreeing to emergency repair or rehabilitation works being carried out on the basis of contracts with unit * rates agreed in advance by all contractorsproved to be very expedient. YUGOSLAVIA

LOAN 1759-YU - PROJECT COMPLETION REPORT

MONTENEGROEARTHQUAKE REHABILITATION - HIGHWAYS

I. Introduction

1.01 On April 15, 1979, at 7.19 a.m. local time, a devastating earthquake measuring IX on the modified Mercalli Intensity Scale (MCS) with an epicenter near , hit the Adriatic coastline of Montenegro, Yugoslavia. Five more earthquakes of over VII MCS, as well as hundreds of lesser aftershocks, struck the same area thereafter, with the last quake of VIII MCS occurring on May 24, 1979. Earth tremors of strong intensity were felt in most of Montenegro, the southeastern parts of S.R. Croatia, the S.R. Bosnia-Herzegovina, and northern Albania during this period.

1.02 The physical consequences of the earthquake were most evident along the total length of the Montenegrin coastline in a belt 10 to 12 km wide. In this area over five hundred people were injured and one hundred killed as a result of the quakes. The casualties could well have been much higher except for the fact that the major shock was preceded by one of lesser intensity which served as a warning, that April 15 was not a business day (it was a Sunday) and that the major tourist season was not yet underway.

1.03 The earthquake seriously damaged the basic infrastructure of the area. The basic transport system, schools, hospitals, houses, hotels, industrial plants, apartment buildings, cultural-historical monuments, the water supply system, and the electric and telegraph-telephone grid were all extensively and heavily damaged. Over 12,500 of the approximately 60,000 housing units in the area were destroyed and a further 12,000 heavily damaged. Over 4,000 industrial buildings, schools, hospitals, hotels, etc., were completely destroyed and about 3,000 more severely damaged. The total area of these 7,000 structures amounts to about 1.25 million square meters. About one fourth of Montenegro's classified road network system, which totals some 3,000 km of roads, was heavily damaged, including almost the entire length of the Adriatic highway situated in Montenegro and almost all the other main roads (approximately 600 km total) in the area. The Republic's main rail line, its main port and the area's airport were also heavily damaged. The ancient cities of Kotor, and Herceg-Novi, which are important cultural and tourist attractions, were all heavily damaged.

1.04 The earthquake dealt a devastating blow to the tourist industry, coming just before the season was to start in an area which contained more than 90 percent of the Republic's 125,000 tourist beds. The damage to the roadway network and the railway from Titograd to Bar as well as to the airport at resulted in a situation immediately after April 15, 1979 in which the only possible communication between the Montenegrin coast and the rest of the country was by radio and helicopters. Although land communication was partially restored within a few days, and largely maintained even after subsequent earthquakes, economic activity was severely curtailed. More than 5,000 people who would ordinarily be employed in the tourist industry were without work.

1.05 Overall the economic consequences of the earthquakes were critical to Montenegro which is one of the least developed regions in Yugoslavia. This lag in development'has been due in large measure to the topography which not only makes communication to and within the region difficult and costly to build and maintain but which also dictated the historical development of the main terrestrial transport links to the north and east of the region. However, during the last two decades the Government has made major efforts to improve transportation facilities with particular emphasis on the Adriatic Highway along the coast, a major highway linking the Adriatic Coast and the Port of Bar with Titograd, the Capital of S.R. Montenegro, as well as with eastern Yugoslavia, the Belgrade-Bar railway and a modern port at Bar. Except for the highway link from Titograd to the coast, which was built with the financial assistance of USAID, these transportation facilities were components of Bank financed projects. All were heavily damaged in the earth quakes.

1.06 The Government of Yugoslavia requested the Bank to provide financial assistance for the rehabilitation of the earthquake damage in S.R. Montenegro. The Government's request emphasized the extremely high cost of restoring the physical damage as well as the losses to the economy of the Republic as a result of the damage to the tourist facilitiesand the industries in the region of Bar. A federal law was enacted for providing funds for reconstruction (published in the Official Gazette of SFRY on July 27, 1979). This legislation specifies interim contributions to be deposited by each of the Republics and Autonomous Provinces into a Reconstruction Fund (Fund) established by S.R. Montenegro. These interim contributions amounting to Din 5 billion (US$267.4million) were paid into the Fund in equal installments at the end of August, October and December 1979. The law also provided that the total contributions to the Fund would be determined, on the basis of the final damage estimates. Provision was also made for equal contributions to be provided monthly in 1980, and that these, and any further contributions which may subsequently be provided, would be increased by an amount equal to the increase in the Consumer Price Index for the preceding year. In addition to its direct financial contribution, SFRY undertook to service the domestic and foreign debt of enterprises struck by the earthquakes and provide supplementary financing for social services.

II. Project Preparation,Objectives and Content

2.01 An immediate action program was put into operation by the Republic's maintenance Enterprise, Crnagoraput, to open damaged sections to restricted flows of traffic. This operation was too large for one enterprise to handle and arrangements were made to employ additional maintenance enterprises from other republics. Several highway contractors working in Montenegro were also mobilized to assist in restoring traffic services disrupted by the April 15 and May 24 earthquakes. -3-

2.02 The Roads Organizationof Montenegro provided overall planning and coordinationof the rehabilitationeffort, with considerableassistance from the Design Institutes of Belgrade and Zagreb.

2.03 The proposed project was appraised by missions which visited Yugoslavia in May/June and July 1979. The primary objective of the project consisted entirely of remedial works necessary to preserve or restore the damaged road facilities, with the exception of realignments where restoration was not physically feasible or economically the least cost solution, and for the replacement of structures which had been damaged beyond repair. The objective was to limit further economic loss to the existing road netwerk by preventing further physical deterioration and to help restore normal economic activity in the region. The roads included for works under the project have a total length of about 560 km, of which 360 km are primary roads and 200 km are secondary (regional)roads.

2.04 The estimated cost of rehabilitation was 1,190 million dinars (US$63.6 million), including duties and taxes which amount to about 12Z of the total. The foreign cost component was estimated to be 33X (US$21 million) of total cost. The cost estimates included a provision for price escalationbased on an annual escalation rate over a three year period of 12X for local costs and 7% for foreign costs. Although rehabilitation works had been identified for the cost estimates, the scope of the civil works could not be precisely quantified due to the widespread nacure of the works as well as the additional damage caused by recurring quakes, rock and earth slides, altered drainage courses and the onset of the rainy season. For these reasons it was deemed prudent to include a physical contingencyof 20%.

III. Project Implementationand Cost

3.01 The loan was approved by the Bank Board of Directors on September 18, 1979. It was signed on September21, 1979 and became effective on December 19, 1979. The loan was made to the Self-Managing Republic Community of Interest for Roads of the Socialist Republic of Montenegro, Titograd, in the amount of US$21 million and guaranteed by the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. Supervisionof the reconstruction works was carried out by the Borrower and the Investment Bank of Titograd was the fiscal agent for the project and the liaison agent between the Borrower and the Bank. Retroactive financing, not to exceed US$5 million, was used to finance the emergency works described in para 2.01.

3.02 The emergency works were costed on the basis of unit rates agreed between the Borrower and its Maintenance Enterprise, "Crnagoraput", prior to the commencement of the fiscal year. These rates are negotiated annually by the highway administration which follows costs and market prices systematically to ensure that the negotiated prices are reasonable. Maintenance Enterprises from other Republics agreed to work for the same unit prices. The emergency works were diverse and limited in scope and their locations so scattered that aggregation into packages of sizes suitable for conventionalcontract bidding and award was not practical and would have imposed unacceptabledelays on the rehabilitationprogran. -4-

The MaintenanceEnterprises concerned in the emergency work program were all competentcontractors and had all been prequalifiedfor participationin the Tenth Highway Project (Loan 1678-YU). Standard civil works contracts were executed and the Bank's disbursementswere made against contractor invoices submitted by the Borrower supplemented by proper documentation.

3.03 Rehabilitation works of a less urgent nature which required more detailed design and were not subject to additional damage due to rainfall or run-off, were contracted on the basis of internationalcompetitive bidding procedures. The thrust of the project was solely directed toward road rehabilitationand did not include provisions for maintenance,equipment, or training. The works performedon this loan did not overlap or conflict with civil works financed under the Tenth Highway Project.

3.04 The total cost of the project involving Bank financing is USt63.6 million, which corresponds to the appraisal estimates, some works currently being completed entirely with local funds. However, there are major variations from link to link between actual costs and appraisal estimates. Table 1 shows the actual amounts paid on the large number of individualcontracts which covered a wide range of rehabilitationand repair works under the project. Table 2, which presents a link-by-linksummary of the appraisal cost estimates compared to the actual final costs indicates that there are cost overruns or underruns greater than lOX on eleven of the fifteen links and greater than 30Z in about half the cases. The major reasons for these discrepancies is the difficulty in making detailed cost estimates for a wide variety of construction activities scattered over a large area. In addition, the quakes caused changes in water courses and substrata bearing services were altered. Cracks in pavement, retaining walls and cut and fill slopes were subjected to erosive effects by the elements which added to the rehabilitationcosts. Surface and sub-surface changes were not easily evaluated and this contributed to the problem of estimatingthe costs with any degree of accuracy. In spite of this problem, sufficient funds were available to complete the rehabilitation of the damaged links and put them back in operation in the system.

3.05 The loan was disbursed on the basis of 33 percent of total expenditures, the percentage representing the estimated foreign exchange componentof the civil works. Disbursementson this project were slow for a nine month period from August 1981 to May 1982 due to a shortage of local funds, but then picked up throughout the remainder of 1982 and the project was completely disbursed on schedule by December 1982 (Table 3). During the period of the loan, the dinar exchange rate depreciated from 21 dinars per UStl.O0 to 67 dinars per US$1.00.

IV. Institutionaland OperationalDevelopment

4.01 The overall objective of the project, which was to restore traffic service to the basic road network, protect the existing facilities from further damage and rehabilitatethe damaged areas, has been achieved. The development of the basic road network in recent years has been a major factor in opening up this less developed region and integrating it more -5- closely with major Yugoslav and international market centers, thus stimulating national and international trade and enhancing employment and economic development. The improved road network was a major component of the infrastructureserving the important and growing international tourist trade which has developed along the Adriatic coast of Montenegro in recent years. The road network in the Titograd-Bar corridor also serves a large industrial and mining complex, which is a key sector of the economy. Because of the special nature of the loan, there were no provisions for institutionaldevelopment included in this project. However, one result of the earthquake was a review by the Montenegrin authoritiesof the structural design code to take account of higher seismic load factors.

V. Economic Justification

5.01 Because of the nature of the project, individual economic rates of return (ERs) for each subproject were not developed since the rehabilitation works in several sectors are critically interdependent for the restoration of vital components of the economy as a whole. Consequently, these investments must be treated as an integrated investment package, the benefits accruing from them being the resultant increase in production and income in the various economic sectors from their depressed levels following the earthquake. This quantificationcannot be carried out. However, most of the roads in the rehabilitation program have heavy traffic flows in excess of 1,000 vehicles/day and without the restoration of the basic roadway network the economy of S.R. Montenegrowould not only stagnate but, in fact, would retrogress. The rehabilitationprogram repaired the existing network which could not function as a result of earthquake damage. In particular, the rehabilitationof the road network was necessary to provide the traffic service to carry goods and services needed for the restoration of other sectors of the economy. Several of the damaged roads had been built with Bank assistance (Loans 334-YU and 678-YU). All of the roads included in the rehabilitationprogram are critical elements of the basic road network described in the Montenegro Highway N4asterPlan (1979 to 1985) prepared for the Tenth Highway Project (Loan 1678-YU) and are therefore considered,prima facie, economicallyjustified.

VI. Conclusionsand Lessons Learned

6.01 The ability of the highway authorities to react so rapidly and efficiently to this natural disaster is indicative of their institutional capabilities. The land connections to neighboring Republics were restored within two or three days on a make shift basis and rehabilitation was immediately started throughout the Republic. It was apparent that considerable teamwork between Republics, contractors and Maintenance Enterprises was being exercised at all levels and that administrative procedureswere reduced to a minimum. -6-

6.02 Most emergency works were too widely scattered and too limited in scope to be aggregated into sizes suitable for conventional contract bidding. The Bank's flexible approach (para. 3.02) in agreeing to emergency repair and rehabilitationworks being carried out on the basis of contracts with unit rates, established in advance and agreed by all contractors, proved to be very expedient.

6.03 Normally the Council of Republican and Provincial Road Organizations (CRO) acted as a fiscal agent in multi-republic highway loans. At the request of the Borrower, the Bank agreed, as an exception for this single Republic loan, to the appointment of the Investment Bank of Titograd as fiscal agent (para. 3.01) in lieu of CRO. In retrospect, this arrangementproved satisfactory,and expedited transmissionof documents for quicker loan disbursements. -7- -

Table 1 ____stsFPage 1

63z.c6t Can~ta £ppmst- a" 7-b11. Paid to llo. Lik OItractor on. Custeret 3:L.t. _.t U.Iattim. 2/31/83

arL maXA C-0Ouzss1c 7.792.090 W0002 an06upu?-uTTAaD 05-19w/-7 C 1.636.86 1.06.56 1.66.86 063 COMAGORMUrT-T1Z0CRD05-610/1-0 c 314.600 406.200 1.200 06093 C335685107-TlUGa;as-I/I-i c 5.41.13 14.611.168 14.691.16 00097 m-SAlAazvo 05-2"0/1-1 C -I.AO0.00 33*.05.5n2 35.535.57z 00157 1Uf-558365 06-48612 C 10.330.060 19.350.000 W.30.009 OU61 C 6-TIIOCMA 05-694/11 c _ 5.930.0U0 15.90.66u.n.o:o.oo

5 49.592.000 76*341.096 76.551.80 _00 _IlK9-in 2>. moos ?@CuAD-TL10GmD 03-1902/2-79 c 23.05s.90 n.h55.Iso 23.63S.950 60006 osM9 GRAD 05-6/L-0 C. 560.7M4 703.037 66607 T2UG*D-flZ0GIhD 0=5-1.533fl-0 C 9."95.1 12.214.124 12.214.124 0llXI 8UgSiCZ=LUmj 05-127112-10 C 1.793.70 2.331.510 2.331.610 0u66e SUOUMKOG%Z9IW2O-r 0-W/-8L C 3.969.36 9.949.860 9..49.so6 oo0w ?l76G368-TZ1Z0CIh 05-n91/2-6 C 49.560.000 49.540.600 49.5e0.000 O663L SMOKO 612D13z-oucr 03-202/2 c 23.270.000 23.270.066 23.270.000

1.385.723 12I.86.72l 121.188.721 00009 D651L311T02-EAIUXA11 us.776.000 O0010 IUMAVUE-2TWOC 03-1902/6-79 c 15.021.948 15.0n.ga io..94 o00ll co" mu-stoic 03-190219-79 c 11.476.522 11.47.522 11.475.322 60012 10?-U8Eo 05-1862J-9 6 13.42c.070 13.z24.070 13.424.070 06013 Cox 0aIIJT-TIIOm 03-41011-0 C 420.655 54.865 6.830 00014 ITOCImAD-220GM W-114211-6 c 36.60.660 7n.eoD.6oo 75.1c00.6 o060u .3036VU-Dovm 03-44412-10 C 4.799.e66 6.239.750 4.239.750 O0601 C nWA06SAIUT-MM 03-15611-SO C . 4.6.940 6.005.922 6.003.922 06073 W0?-SIO 05- 462116-51 C 6.36.00 17.7"9.618 17.799.618 O608 C3J=WJAUr-TnIDGIAD 05-920/1-81 C 1.262.678 3.074.U27 3.D76.137 60096 C855102-T1100810 05-2661/11-1 C 14.490.000 35.879.336 3.679.336 66130 1220G8AD-1106A 05-491I-3 c z.306.06012.500.066 L2.300.000 66131 CfA00APUr-Tr70AD 03-49s110 C 35.60.000 35.e00.066 33.e10o.60

178.66.670 233.175.133 233.175.153

0ooo1SANIMu-321SA-SOM 206.43.000 6o601 ISD Gm 0oaI511-Ci 03-190213-79 C 3.603.420 3.603.420 3.403.420 sDOU c6 mu-sLtIoc 05-190213-79 C 7*706.306 7.76.360 7.710.360 66020 C3510OL55U14Z0GRAO Wm-190Z16-79 C U.28.070 11.278.075 11.27W.075 66021 C33408A-UZIC 0&-1211II-a0 C 31.000.060 48.166.600 48.100.000 66674 IUT-SARAJEVO 05-112/16-81 C 4.296000 11.753.172 11.753.172 00O66 SONSODC*Z0115VO-CE 65-916/O1-81 C 6.S50.56 16.1 3.1 U6.758.661 6610 C311460A*16-?LIOCRAD 03-20811-1 c 18.50e.060 41.048.799 41.666.759 60132 TntlmCAD-TUDOCAD 05-494/2-2 c * 15.750.00 15.750.000 15.730.000 60l33 15USD CAszUSZVO-CT 0s-202/3 c 16see00.e0 1seeoD 6 .300.000100 121,036.378 172.320.390 172.320.396

6020a IUPTAN!m02 2s.357.000 66013 C3UUIAGI6AT-?ZSreAD 03-1902/6-79 c 5,750.30s 3.758.309 5.758.309 06021 CUUmNOR?F-TrIOCRAD 03-610/L-0 C I.546.139 12.461.e80 12.451.990 00101 C3IUmRA,U-TrIOGRAD 65-20811-SI C 1.2850.060 36.606.138 31..005.138 310136 CRI625612-TfCRAD 0--494/9 c 22.30-.000 22.300.000 350.49.448 74.528.427 74.532.4z7

0002 t0UtR-WOJCL-RAODUWCZ 11.428.6000 eo02s SUKO CAZDIS_VO-C 05-190213-79 c 3,064.128 3.064U.1 3014.128 am?i CRAMIP6T-UTOCRAD 01-610/1-80 C 4.933.503 6.413.653 6.413.653 60075 S1USMDCAZONS?VO0C2 03-1271/2-30 C 2.411.250 3.131.625 3,134 .125 00676 Pgl-SALAJEV 03-462116-41 C 3.127.170 6.533.648 5.5.648 60o16 T?I2CZA-TIOCRA0 03-494/2-1 c 1u,4w-.000 13.400.000 13.400.066 26,916.051 31.348.954 34.3U.915

00029' III D4CMCe 05-190218-79 C 6 39.590 6.399.590 6.399.590 c030 CIOU- tfOS-T OSuAf03-610/1-86 c 5.385.656 7.001.352 7.001.352 06077 ?A2ZUIIK 1T-BUG 03-462/11-8 c 6.232.800 17.D97.437 17.2976143 0o090 cUWD0r -UCR5D 05-920/1-61 C 429.*57 1.411.793 1.411.793 00102 CR05WA?-TITOCRAl 05-28Bl/l-61 c 10.540.066 51.623.715 34.623.715 66w35 WARIAUS ru-rEW e5-503/3 c 13.350.000 13.05.060 13.850.000 42,817.503 80.583.87 80.583.u7

031 IeUIOVAC-7-6LC5 - 120.602.000 00032 66A51-SKO?J1 05-1962/1-79 C 63,32.786 6.30.781 8.302.781 60033 TZ0C3A0D-220018 03-1902/2-79 C 17.052.740 &7.032.740 17.032.750 06036 1_ 0 CazDsTro-0 05-1962/3-79 C 3,68.17n 3.6.172 3.66L.1n 06035 CUUa opUTrU?cAD05-1902/6-79 c 9.123.560 9.123.540 9.123.560 0603 CRAm001PU?-tTOTCRrD 05-610/1-60 C 5,610.607 7.39.509 7.592.529 0078 Tr12GC5D-?rIGRAD 05-462/11-81 C 7.974S.91 21.t17.2 21.617,126 002 c.COMMPB-TIsOCRA 05-920/1-81 c 2.069.376 51.1 6 5.165.9S7 MM096 =PAD -TC#UOP-ITOCRWD05-921/14U c 25.550.D00 64.502.033 64.402.933 00103 CIUAWI*Pn-TLTOGM 05-2070/1-81 C 30.150.060 ODOi.r. .73 6.089.473 00139 20SCRADIUL-IEW 05-1256/4 C 143.800.60 115.o00.060 143.100.600 00110 TITUCUA-71T26CAD 03-494/2-5 c 27.,38.060 27.53e.00z 27.350.000 001W1 CUl2tAPLf-TICRAD 05-494/15 C Z.3,S 0O000 33.150.000 33.450.000 60142 Cuma.6tApff-TimmucS 05-494/3 . 33,t3U.22' 35.730.000 13.730.000 352.218.752 17.771.2952 47.771.295

vitbat c.atlgm36u_ BESTCOPY AVAIABLE BT COPYAVAILABLE Table I !gh w usaaT.mnuATEw Page 2 Lo 1739-lU

Y amItted FUSE Sol- Contract Coupstad AppraIsl 3Du lucIuflq Paid to LnLCstCtrlctb v.. Catracts Latist. A.0-t EacalsI.. 12/31/82

oes?7 oTSVAC-9m ocuo-' tOC e038 TU0G30DlIOUCD 03- 19U22-f79 c 89.43.730 8,.9.730 1.3.730 00039 C M-T-IUCRAD OS-110210-79 C 28.0.4147 18,094,147 1U.094.167 00040 C8D 0-1011-0 C 5.692.439 7.400.430 7,400.430 ON@U Cn -Wurr GAD o5-aZ4015-o/I C - *,4 z,eo 7.sa400oz 7.ss.02 00042 C -T bD 0s-1439J1-n C ,9S13,926 8s8103 1V53,103 00o03 m V-SAaaIzO os-4a/I-8c c 9.016965 11.n22.056 t.2nz.os4 60044 OCRAIU-350 0423120W 0 C 29.3,000 353.19.774 35,019.774 eo0s mnTGcaAD-riocRAD 05-4421- C1C 10,141,000 27.745.320 27.74u5.3o 50004 c -nrucAao 03-653/1-U1t c 3,006,000 7.3su.06 7,3 8064 oew5 CU f 05-208211-61 C 1, 750o0 44.935,075 .435.073 00143 CEUKJA-WLG 01-1362 C 13473.000 134.780,000 134.70.000 00ee4 --- _ r-flloC8a 05-494114 C. 30.150.000 30.150,000 30,150.000 OOt" c r-TIOCRAD 03-49W/12 c 15.970.600 15.970.000 15.970W000 00144 r- CRAD 05-494/2 c 21.340.000 24.30.000 2.340.000

35.321.,07 406.286,701 40.25.701

00046 3*DSLXC-lUDV A-KIoVAC 91,217o00O 00017 cArm-szorc 03-1902/l-79 C 15.8513S60 13.831.860 1z.8s1.360 00048 T UrnoRAD-Tr1OCRAD 05-1902/2-79 c 13.736.300 1.786.300 15.736.300 0009 SA CUAUI PnT-ac 03-1902/4-79 c 3&gm,o800 3199,80 O9Dom 34m 0 o0000 CUASUAUUrnTlUMAD 05-LO026-79 c 53.11,W4 5.611804 3,611 4 SOOSn ImIUCTIuJ 05-1271/2-50 C 1.918,100 2.494.414 2.494.414 00079 aaflAIU Fir-n-Lc 03-4ll4-l c 7,783Z303 21,536643 21t,596,43 0009L m faD 05-9201-81 c 9,243,251 23,319,991 23,319,"1 00106 C_AIrMUnTolCuAD 05-2079/1-61 c 35,750.000 00.054.902 60.054.902 *o-36 ISUSSDUSALCA 03-12613 C 12.300,00 U2,00.000 12.50.000 0D017 PhKI2ArUS PUTW-C 03-502/2 c 2.750.000 23.750.000 28.750.000 Q12 3 hr-OcAD 05-494/16 c 38.930.000 33.950.000 309.30.00

17,1W67,00 2599135.74 259.13.714

coo uaIS&U-C8ASW 21,514.006 0S3 CLa GRA-UZSIC 03-1902/5-79 C 5353,."8 5.553.40 35.53,480 003 PU2811 3IB-SaiaJUO 03-1902/7-79 C 7 137 050 7.151,050 u1,7 050 -aSSS Ctl rA?T-rioCUD 0315-l0ll-0 c 1,872,186 2,133,842 2,433,842 00036 51J001-0m3VU1K 05-444/2-80 c 9.735.01w 12.653.512 12.655.312 u0037 cam GDS0l-STC 05-7211/2-0 c 21503,592 3,234,66 3,254,69 00081 Cll W-suISIC 05-4vl7-81 C 21,306,017 538630,952 533638.9Z 0oon0r082 r0sPT-fl20R3D 03-783/1-81 c 136IS4,20 39,9663652 39.966,65z 00152 Camul i-mcc 05-49413-2 c u.2WODo L3m2J0oo 13.2Doouoo 00133 UUACO8&APfl-rflTCRAD 05-49416 C 11.330.000 11.150WOm 11,350.000

18347.555 134,212.157 154.212,.1

ODsO TnyTmADC x n..7o2o000 00095 Q3U6D m7P102-TrT0CAD03-92111-1 c 10,39D,OD0 26.150,374 264150.376 0O098 m-0A1*W 05-2000/1-81 C 31n.50Doo 835.150,179 85,150.179 00149 mUJmaPw-n RauaD 05-494/7 c 13.19D.O00 13.190.000 15.190.000

37.030.00 126,490.553 126.490.553

00039 TrTOCAD-E0LA828 79.578.000 00040oTEOCAD-TrIUoCR 05-190/2-79 C 9,995680 9,"96, 9,996,68 0006l C13 03-EISIC 05-190/5-79 C 1,976,250 * 1,976,25D 1,976,250 00062 CRUASAPf-TI2WAA 03-1902.1/6-79n C 2342.,4 2.42.1U0 28.,42.UO 00063 UUSOEAVur-TllOC8AD 053-10/1-8 c 7,501.121 9.751437 9.713.147 00064 r=6 05-1240/5380 C 9,64s5.39 1W.093,467 10,963,467 O00 cOemMOT-TItOCRaD 05-462/13-81 C 32.301.000 8.8386480 86,3"84,0 00055 CRJDAWtII-TITORXA 05-35/1-31 c 5.39.000 15.341.044 15.341,044 00106 CmAGOIRAP m-TrlOCR4D05-2092/1-81 c 17,830,DO0 43.244.753 43,24.756 0147 CjISIAPtr-TITOCRAD 03-491/13 c 37.87D.000 37.870,00D 37,870,000 00168 C TUAGOM-TfTlC8AD05-494/8 C 32,250.000 32.250,000 32,250.00o

1.631.220 278.022.994 278.022.994 00063T1JZmCA-nlUJ-IDPU 31,780,00 00064 TnIOC UeTZtK 01-190l2-79 c 683,3640 5.8330 an3 530 13U~~CWGQAP060-fltOCRMO03-1902/6-79 C6,333,244 4,53,24 6,332 0007 00047 c ssc a ssw- c 551 X 55S.^551.2" 6 00068 CJIAWRAMI"fllOCGAD 05-610/1-80 C 1,44f,4 1,909.302 1.,909,02 00067 S1341 cAZzoIUSTVO-CT 05-918/1-81 c 14,874.502 37.126,025 37,726,023 co155 CRXJW8APOT-TlTOCRaA 05-494/3 C 20,653.000 20.630,000 20,630.000 ooWn 93431 GM20STI7-CM 035-202/4 c 1u,uo.oow 1u.aoo.ooo ln.ooo.oo

G4.230,00 87.322.11 7.322.131

0004 W1P14.3W-LDII 22.076,000 00070 - mTOCAD-flIUCRAD 03-1902/2-79 c 3.317.700 5.347700 5.347.700 00071 CU1690r-fIUC3AD 05-60L/1-80 c 27t.91 363,338 363,338 00072 ITSOCZAD-flIOCRID 0-17462/1-30 C 9.09.100 11.2.8830 11,823.830 00083 CUIASDNAST-TrfOCRAD 05-835/1-81 c 3.3000 13.503,600 13.503.600 eogS Cua8APUr-TrIOCRAD 03-92/1-IL c L.149,709 4,399,377 4399.377 00107 CUAGOIAPUT-TfCLTAD 05-2062/1-81 c 13S,40.000 36.039,604 36,039.604 00139 CSUkAWAT-TXrOChAD 0o.494,4 C 17,600.000 174.00,000 17.600.0

33,324.000 89.282.g 89.22,449

CbAlO VrDAL 8.560,000 1.824,2351452 2,63.085,334 2.43.035.334

j/ VIbot ct tqucm Table 2

YUGOSLAVIA

LOAN 1759-YU - PROJECT COMPLETION REPORT

MONTENEGRO EARTHQUAKE REHABILITATION - HIGHWAYS

Rehabilitation: Comparison of Actual Costs

and Appraisal Cost Estimates

Dinar (000)/ US$ (million)

Appraisal Final Appraisal Final Cost Road Section Est. Cost Est.l/ Cost-3/ Overrun Z

_. Debeli Brijeg-Kamenari 202,360 233,175 10.820 5.615 -52 2. Kamenari-Risan-Kotor 143,789 172,320 7.689 4.149 -46 3. Kotor-Lepetane 34,530 74,528 1.847 1.794 -3 4. Lepetane-Tivat-Radinovici 24,507 80,584 1.311 1.940 +48 5. Radinovici-Budva-Petrovac 123,242 259,916 6.591 6.258 -4 6. Petrovac-Bar- 176,454 447,771 9.436 10.782 +14 7. Petrovac-Virpazar-Titograd 148,303 406,287 7.931 9.783 +23 8. Titograd-Kolasin 107,518 278,023 5.750 6.695 +16 9. Titograd- 30,740 126,491 1.644 3.046 +85 10. Cetinje-Budva 70,848 121,885 3.787 2.935 -23 11. Risan-Grabovo 29,067 154,212 1.554 3.713 +139 12. Kotor-Trojica-Radinovici 15,440 34,547 0.826 0.832 +1 13. Trojica-Cetinje-Lovcen 42,93? 87,522 2.297 2.107 -8 14. Virpazar-Ostros-Vladimir 29,827 89,282 1.596 2.150 +35 15. Cetinje-Cevo-Niksic 10,528 76,542 0.563 1.843 +227

TOTAL 1,190,090 2,643,085 63.642 63.642 0

1/ Included physical contingencies and price escalation. 2/ Appraisal exchange rate (US$l = YD 18.70) 31 Weighted exchange rate (US$1 = YD 41.53); some works are still being financed by local costs. -10-

Table 3

YUGOSLAVIA

LOAN 1759-YU - PROJECT COMPLETION REPORT

KONTENEGROEARTHQUAKE REMBILITATION - HIGHWAYS

Schedule of Disbursements

Accumulated Disbursements (US$ million)

IBRD Fiscal Year Actual Appraisal Actual as a and Quarter Disbursements Estimate Z of Estimate

1979-80

December 31, 1979 0 3.5 0 March 31, 1980 4.9 5.0 98 June 30, 1980 4.9 6.5 75

1980-81

September 30, 1980 4.9 8.0 61 December 31, 1980 6.3 9.4 67 March 31, 1981 7.5 10.8 69 June 30, 1981 7.5 12.1 62

1981-82

September 30, 1981 8.1 13.8 59 December 31, 1981 8.1 15.0 54 March 31, 1982 8.1 16.5 49 June 30, 1982 12.7 18.0 71

1982-83

September 30, 1982 16.2 19.5 83 December 31, 1982 21.0 21.0 100 - 11 -

61118 YU IBANKA

61118 YU IBANKA RET 921 26.01 1984

INBAFRAD WASINGTON ATTENTION: MR SHIV S.A KAPUR XX

WE HAVE RECEIVED XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX SUBJECT: LOAN 1759-YU WE HAVE RECEIVED A DRAFT OF THE COMPLETION REPORT ABOUT THE PROJECT OF THE REPAIR WORKS AFTER EARTHQllAKE IN MONTENEGRO-YUGOSLAVIA/ HIGHIAYS/ LOAN 1759-YLIJ YOu SENT IN DEC 1983

WE APPRAISE THE REPORT IS STAEE SATISFACTORY AND WE HAVE NO COHMENTNS CONCERNING THE SAME

YOURS SINCRELY

BOGOLJUD CULAFIC REPUCLICAN SELF- MANAGING INTEREST COMUNITY FOR ROADS TITOGRAD

61118 YU IBANKA

=01261408

NNNN IBRD-14473

e UY G O S LA V I A U.Y W NI - ( Montenegro BOSNIA- EARTHQUAKEREHABILITATION PROJET SEISMICIMPACT OF APRIL15, 1979 EARTHQUAKE H1LERCEGO VINA . __ . I - - - ~~~~~~~~~~~Pavedroadh 7- to %\ , -- Gr oadh 'ouu.i/ vlwdn.ca. _ Rcilway ( f.{3cepanS>q % PUEVL iTl- -Autonomous province boundary ) ..) \ \ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~Repubkibounidaries . / , . s _._ Ilnrermaonalboundkry b( i V i \ MCS(Modified MnecalliScale)

b 0

~-~-Pa3hwVoda *.-.. SERBIA

iU 6'%Ilo poi I t ilUt POIJE

to""'~~~~t 'I"t Sevni

tv Gor N X 4k|nGar IVANGM RA d

'_ r r ------.- Aor,jevica

*rm& L , I 'eBScti6 -'--t!

;O", Mu KOSOVO

Mt v .~~~~~~~~~~~~ 7 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ---

,tt' 5 e d a .^.a.W - 0Nib~ 00\ a - , -..law f-at IBROlIhA lORD184Th . ~~YUGOSLAVIAY0 U GS L A V I Aua t Mon.oegro EARTHQUAKEREHABILITATIO PROJECT BOSNIA- ! -7t% Y. LINKSDAMAGED BY EARTHQUAKE HERCEGOV/NA *A _ _ I..m_ N. I - - - ~~~~~~~~~~Pondroad& "N,, ~~~~~~. ---- … Gra~~~~C"velmd NN // 1 i damud briiqu.d

0/ X ) > tTtike *.- -Republicbounder... ./ ln:t_._wInotionolbounday

t~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I TW % .. / c iti.0die('-t2S ' '' 0'\,_ SER81A

NSse ICmmuijc.J OKJ r ~ ~~~ 2.ljI Dpd.cb 0 l - c \_

P1*- i r 0 ItN <-A~~~~~~to i- Fe% %I POUE--

.< \,c 2 t, ,r

XRM {/ 0 ~~~~~~~~~~~~A L B A N I Ax-

t | ~~A d ';0:_ 1~~~~~P4A IBRD 144I5 Y U GO SL A V I A JULY I Montenegro EARTHQUAKEREHABILITATION PROJECT BOSNIA TRAFFICFLOW HE R CEGO V/NA 197tcriffic flow Vehclmspr 24 hours

SXUIrA Interregionalroads '~ - r ioRegionalroads

C PUEvLJ ~~~blieRailwayTrIica\ -.- Autonomousprovince boundlary 4;;;/ ) *_ t \ \ - -~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Republicboundaries t 4~~~~~~~~~~~~ _._ I-|~~~~lter"ofionol boundary b { t or X

Plufiws~~~~~~~~~~~lc / ^'F l A Diurdw~~~~~~~~iudicciTrorsi I~~~~~~~~~~~~SRI

Kl_ac jBaeiawvPolje . rOUE JELO P_

i~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~i

YuGOSLAV0 IA % VIa ~ ~ ~ KOSOV

0 70 &19r At ~ y lcS%..5-t%r-r4g-r d~ 4 -o

Han /N ~ - r nL Kula