Final Report

Framework Contracts beneficiaries 2009 – Lot 4 Contract 2012/284032

Evaluation of EU energy funding in Liberia and recommendations

Final Report

August 3rd, 2012

This project is funded by the European Union A project Implemented by MWH

The content of this report is the sole responsibility of MWH and can in no ways be taken to reflect the views of the European Union. This report is prepared solely for the use and benefit of the Contracting Authority. It is the result of an independent review, and neither MWH, nor the authors accept or assume any responsibility or duty of care to any third party

NAME Final report rd VERSION This version submitted on August 3 includes comments and clarifications further to the presentation of results held on July 24th 2012 in Monrovia th VERSION HISTORY - June 6 : Substantive Draft Report - May 11th 2012 : Preliminary Draft report

PREPARED BY : Roger Gaillard Laurence Wilhelm FINAL REVIEW : Laurent De Block 03.08.2012

ii Contract 2012/284032

Table of Contents

1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... 12

2 CONTEXT OF THIS REPORT ...... 20

3 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION...... 21

4 BRIEF COUNTRY CONTEXT ...... 23

5 SECTOR CONTEXT ...... 24 5.1 Assessment of the sector policy ...... 24 5.2 Electricity Sector Context ...... 24

6 LIBERIA ELECTRICITY CORPORATION (LEC) ...... 26 6.1 Organization ...... 26 6.2 Corporate assets ...... 27 6.3 Tariffs ...... 27 6.4 Customers connections and types ...... 30 6.5 Applied tariffs (as of May 2012) ...... 35

7 INITIAL APPROACH AND OBJECTIVES OF THE EU INTERVENTIONS ...... 36

8 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF THE EVALUATION MISSION ...... 38

9 EVALUATION ...... 42 9.1 Projects selected for the evaluation ...... 42 9.1.1 Implementation of the Monrovia Grid Rehabilitation Project ...... 44 9.1.2 Status of the Monrovia Grid Rehabilitation Project to date ...... 45 9.2 Approach for data collection ...... 50 9.3 Limitations ...... 50 9.4 Follow-up of the end-users survey ...... 52 9.4.1 Results and findings of the Household End User survey ...... 52 9.4.2 Results and findings of the Enterprise End User survey ...... 62 9.4.3 Conclusions ...... 65 9.5 Evaluation Criterions ...... 66 9.5.1 Past evaluations ...... 66 9.5.2 Relevance of the EU interventions ...... 67 9.5.3 Efficiency ...... 72 9.5.4 Implementation effectiveness ...... 75 9.5.5 Impacts ...... 77 9.5.6 Sustainability ...... 78 9.6 Conclusions to the evaluation...... 79

10 RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 85 10.1 Approach to Recommendations ...... 85

Final Report – August 2012 3

10.2 Current situation of the Electricity Sector ...... 85 10.2.1 Other Donors interventions and programmes ...... 85 10.2.2 Synthesis of donors interventions in the electricity sector ...... 92 10.2.3 Demand projections ...... 94 10.3 Options for future power generation ...... 98 10.4 The hydropower potential in Liberia ...... 98 10.4.1 General ...... 98 10.4.2 The Mont Coffee project ...... 98 10.4.3 The Via and St Paul Rivers possible projects ...... 100 10.4.4 The Via Reservoir project ...... 102 10.5 Final recommendations ...... 103 10.5.1 Orientation of EU future interventions ...... 104 10.5.2 Pro-poor approach ...... 106 10.5.3 The way forward ...... 106 10.5.4 Actions for supporting the Via Reservoir project development ...... 107 10.5.4.1 Sequence of future actions ...... 107 10.5.4.2 Funding arrangements ...... 108 10.5.4.3 Terms of Reference for Pre-studies and Studies ...... 108 A. Reconnaissance Study ...... 108 B. Detailed Feasibility Study of the Via Reservoir Project ...... 111

11 COMMENTS AND CLARIFICATIONS FURTHER TO THE PRESENTATION OF THE REPORT ON JULY 24TH 2012 ...... 117

12 ANNEXES...... 119 12.1 List of persons met during the evaluation ...... 119 12.2 List of consulted documents and bibliography ...... 121 12.3 Survey Methodology ...... 126 12.3.1 Data and Document Collection ...... 126 12.3.2 Methodology ...... 127 12.3.3 Schedule for the survey and survey team ...... 133 12.3.4 Problems faced during the survey ...... 134 12.4 Survey Data ...... 135 12.4.1 Household Socio Economic Characteristics ...... 135 12.4.2 Energy : household behaviour practices and expenditures ...... 140 12.4.3 Impacts of electricity on household living conditions perception by customers ...... 152 12.4.4 Willingness to get connected to lec grid and affordability ...... 153 12.4.5 Households expenditures: budget effort by level of income and category of respondents ...... 154 12.4.6 Advantages and disadvantages of energy source according to its use : respondents key judgments ...... 157 12.5 Household Survey Questionnaire ...... 160 12.6 Enterprise Survey Questionnaire...... 168 12.7 Attendance list to the presentation of results – July 24th 2012 ...... 173 12.8 Slides of the presentation on the 24th of July 2012 at the EU delegation in Monrovia ...... 175

4 Contract 2012/284032

List of figures

Figure 1 : LEC organisation chart 26

Figure 2: Breakdown of Eu funded assets and LEC registered assets 27

Figure 3: Breakdown of customer base - LEC data March 2012 31

Figure 4: Analysis of data from LEC 33

Figure 5: Analysis of data from LEC 33

Figure 6: Analysis of data from LEC 34

Figure 7: Analysis of data from LEC 34

Figure 8 : Map of the survey areas in Greater Monrovia 53

Figure 9 : LEC households : impacts on living conditions 56

Figure 10 LEC customers : advantages of LEC current and service provided 63

Figure 11 : Disadvantages of LEC current and service provided 64

Figure 12: Planned interventions of donors in the electricity sector 94

Figure 13: Evolution of electricity demand : low and high growth scenarios 96

Figure 14: Graph of demand projections 97

Figure 15: Graph of demand projections (log) 97

Figure 16: Via reservoir project 102

Figure 17: World Bank energy mix model up to 2040 103

Figure 18: Impacts of electricity on household living conditions by category of impact 152

Figure 19: Household average monthly spending by category of expenditures 155

Figure 20 : Household average monthly spending by category of expenditures 156

Figure 21: Household average monthly spending by category of expenditures (IPP) 156

Figure 22 : Household average monthly spending by category of expenditures (own generator) 156

Figure 23 : Household average monthly spending by category of expenditures (wo electricity) 157

Final Report – August 2012 5

List of tables

Table 1: Lec customer base...... 30 Table 2: Project log frame ...... 38 Table 3: LEC equipment funded by the EU ...... 41 Table 4: Identified EU contracts ...... 42 Table 5: Project Components as of October 2010 ...... 46 Table 6: Limitations to the evaluation ...... 50 Table 7: Household distribution per survey area and per urban pattern ...... 52 Table 8: Household monthly total expenditures by category of respondents ...... 59 Table 9: Household monthly expenditure by category of expenditure ...... 60 Table 10: Critical issues from the past evaluation ...... 66 Table 11: Human Development index ...... 68 Table 12: Indicators for doing business ...... 68 Table 13: Relevance of the project ...... 70 Table 14: Project efficiency ...... 73 Table 15: Project effectiveness ...... 75 Table 16: Project Impacts ...... 77 Table 17: Sustainability ...... 78 Table 18: Evaluation synthesis ...... 84 Table 19: Norway funded projects ...... 87 Table 20: AFDB projects by sector ...... 89 Table 21: Funding of CLSG interconnexion project ...... 89 Table 22: Synthesis of donor interventions in the electricity sector ...... 92 Table 23: Scenarios for future demand up to 2040 ...... 95 Table 24: Demand projections from various institutions and consultants ...... 96 Table 25: IHA principles ...... 105 Table 26: End user survey sample: Households distribution by location and urban pattern ...... 135 Table 27: Households distribution by sex of household head and by location ...... 135 Table 28: Households distribution by sex of household head and by location (%) ...... 135 Table 29: Households distribution by marital status of household head and by location ...... 136 Table 30: Households distribution by marital status of household head and by location (%) ...... 136 Table 31: Average Household size by location...... 136 Table 32: Dwelling Occupation status of household by location ...... 137 Table 33: Dwelling Occupation status of household by location (%) ...... 137 Table 34: Number of years the household is in the dwelling by location ...... 137 Table 35: Type of wall of household dwelling by location ...... 138 Table 36: Type of wall of household dwelling by location (%) ...... 138 Table 37: Type of roof of household dwelling by location ...... 138 Table 38: Type of roof of household dwelling by location (%) ...... 139 Table 39: Main source of drinking water of households by location ...... 139 Table 40: Main source of drinking water of households by location ...... 139 Table 41: Does your house get electricity (on grid or off grid) ...... 140

6 Contract 2012/284032

Table 42: Does your house get electricity (on grid or off grid) ...... 140 Table 43: Source of electricity of household by location ...... 140 Table 44: Source of electricity of household by location ...... 141 Table 45: Electricity sources : when did your household get this electricity source (s) ...... 141 Table 46: Electricity sources : when did your household get this electricity source (s) ...... 141 Table 47: Satisfaction of customers with the electricity supplier (LEC,IPP) service: ...... 142 Table 48: :Satisfaction of customers with the electricity supplier (LEC,IPP) service (%): ...... 142 Table 49: LEC Reasons for Satisfaction ...... 142 Table 50: LEC Reasons for Satisfaction (%) ...... 142 Table 51: 142 Table 52: LEC Reasons of Disatisfaction ...... 143 Table 53: Reasons of Satisfaction IPP service ...... 143 Table 54: Reasons of satisfaction IPP service ...... 143 Table 55: Reasons of Dis satisfaction IPP service ...... 143 Table 56: Reasons for Dis satisfaction IPP service ...... 144 Table 57: Usages of Electricity whatever the source (grid or off grid) by order of priority ...... 144 Table 58: Usages of Electricity whatever the source (grid or off grid) by order of priority ...... 144 Table 59: LEC customers : Connection expenditures for customers having paid 50 USD of connection fees (pre payment meter) ...... 145 Table 60: LEC customers Connection expenditures for customers having paid 115 USD of connection fees (conventional meter) ...... 145 Table 61: LEC customers Electricity Monthly expenditure ...... 146 Table 62: LEC customers Average Annual electricity consumption per capita equivalent ...... 146 Table 63: LEC customers : Average Annual electricity consumption per capita and gender of head of household equivalent...... 146 Table 64: IPP Connection expenditures for customers ...... 147 Table 65: IPP Customer Electricity Monthly expenditure ...... 147 Table 66: IPP Customer Average Estimated Electricity Consumption Per Capita equivalent : ...... 147 Table 67: IPP Customer Estimated annual average electricity consumption per capita : ...... 148 Table 68: Estimated cost paid by IPP customer per kWh ...... 148 Table 69: Average Electricity consumption per capita: household with own generator ...... 149 Table 70: Average Electricity expenditures and cost of kWh of households with own generator ... 149 Table 71: Average Monthly Household and Per capita Electricity expenditure by location ...... 150 Table 72: Respondents without electricity: Average Monthly Household Lighting expenditure by location ...... 150 Table 73: Average monthly lighting expenditures (apart electricity spending) by category of respondents ...... 151 Table 74: Average monthly cooking spending by category of respondents ...... 151 Table 75: Monthly household energy spending by category of energy expenditures and by Quartile ...... 152 Table 76: Willingness to get connected to LEC grid per category of respondents ...... 153 Table 77: Willingness to get connected to LEC grid per category of respondents ...... 153 Table 78: Can you afford the costs – connection, upgrading or new wiring of the house, miscellaneous ...... 153

Final Report – August 2012 7

Table 79: Can you afford these costs : connection, upgrading or new wiring of the house, miscellaneous ...... 153 Table 80: If credit was available, average monthly affordable payment ...... 153 Table 81: Household monthly total expenditures by location ...... 154 Table 82: Household monthly total expenditures by category of respondents ...... 154 Table 83: Household monthly total expenditures by category of expenditures and by level of income ...... 155

8 Contract 2012/284032

List of Acronyms and Abbreviations

ACP African, Caribbean and Pacific

AfDB African Development Bank

AIDCO EuropeAid Cooperation Office

AU African Union

CE Commission européenne

CRIS Common Relex Information Services

CSP Country Strategy Paper

DAC Development Assistance Committee

EC European Commission

ECHO European Commission Humanitarian Aid

ECOWAS Economic Community of West African States

EDF European Development Fund

EIB European Investment Bank

EPP Emergency Power Programme

EU European Union

EUR Euro

FA Financing Agreement

FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations

FD Financing Decision

FED Fonds européen de développement (see EDF)

GDP Gross Domestic Product

GoL Government of Liberia

GTZ Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit (German Technical Cooperation) ha hectare

HDI Human Development Index

HIV/AIDS Human Immunodeficiency Virus / Acquired Immuno Deficiency Syndrome

HQ Headquarters

HR Human Resources

HV/MV High Voltage / Medium Voltage

Final Report – August 2012 9

ICB International Competitive Bidding

IDA International Development Assistance

IMF International Monetary Fund

IR Inception Report

JICA Japan International Cooperation Agency

JNA Joint Needs Assessment

KfW Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau (German Financial Cooperation) km Kilometre kV Kilo Volt

LBR Liberia

LDC Least Developed Countries

LEC Liberia Electricity Company

LISGIS Liberia Institute of Statistics and Geo-Information Service

LRDC Liberian Reconstruction and Development Committee

LTTA Long-term Technical Assistance

LWSC Liberia Water and Sewage Company

M Million

MDG Millennium Development Goals

MoF Liberian Ministry of Finance

MPEA Liberian Ministry of Planning and Economic Affairs

MT Metric ton

M&E Monitoring and Evaluation

N/A Not applicable

NAO National Authorising Officer

NEPAD New Partnership for Africa’s Development

NGO Non-Governmental Organisation

NIP National Indicative Programme

ODA Official Development Assistance

OECD Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development

OJ Official Journal of the European Union

OLAS On-line Accounting System

10 Contract 2012/284032

PCRCBP Post Conflict Rehabilitation and Capacity Building Programme

PCRD Post Conflict Rehabilitation and Development

PIA Project Implementation Agreement

PMU Project Management Unit

PRS Poverty Reduction Strategy

ROM Results Oriented Monitoring

SIDA Swedish Development Agency

SMEP Small and Micro-Enterprise Programme

SOE State-Owned Enterprise

SSR Sub-Saharan Region

STTA Short-Term Technical Assistance

TA Technical Assistance

TAP Technical and Administrative Provisions

TF Trust Fund

ToR Terms of Reference

UN United Nations

UNDP United Nations Development Programme

UNEP United Nations Environment Programme

UNHCR United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees

UNICEF United Nations Children’s Fund

UNMIL United Nations Mission in Liberia

UNSC United Nations Security Council

USA United States of America

USAID United States Agency for International Development

US$ US Dollar

VRA Volta River Authority

WB World Bank

WHO World Health Organization

WTO World Trade Organization

Final Report – August 2012 11

1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Context, Objectives and Scope of the Evaluation

In February 2012 the EU launched an International Competitive Bidding for recruiting under the Framework Contract procedures consultants for evaluating its funding and corresponding interventions in the electricity sector in Liberia and to formulate recommendations on its future interventions. The contract was awarded to MWH (formerly Montgomery Watson Harza) which started activities in Monrovia on April 11th. The team comprises Mrs Laurence Wilhelm, Socio- Economist, Mr Roger M. Gaillard, Energy Specialist (Team Leader) and Mr Laurent De Block, Project Manager. This final reports includes comments and clarifications further to the presentation of results held on July 24th in Monrovia.

The EC originally committed to an electricity support program in Liberia under the EDF 8 Financing Agreement of July 13th 2001. This programme was launched in a war and unrest period and its implementation, without a National Indicative Programme in place was governed by Art.225 emergency procedures of the revised Lomé IV convention. The overall objective was to assist the reintegration of returnees and displaced population in order to minimize the risk of further conflicts. Considering the lack of impact of previous interventions, after the war, the EU launched a management/reorientation study on the electricity supply in Monrovia.

As a result, an important objective of the interventions was to achieve/contribute to poverty reduction: through the rehabilitation of the electricity grid and providing incentives for private participation in generation, as well as distribution to end users, it was expected that the majority of the population from Monrovia could have access to electricity and that as a consequence, the end- user price would drop significantly.

The ultimate objective of this evaluation pertaining to the above described interventions, in addition to the judgement through the usual standard criterions applicable, is to formulate motivated recommendations concerning the best mix of future EU interventions in the energy sector in Liberia.

The general scope of the evaluation mission as stated in the Terms of Reference was threefold:

- Assessment of the impact that the project has made in the life of the beneficiaries and the communities; - Assessment of the effectiveness, efficiency and sustainability of the project interventions; - Lessons which can be drawn for guiding future EU interventions.

12 Contract 2012/284032

Synthesis of Evaluation Findings and Results

The synthesis of the evaluation is illustrated in the following table. Globally, the interventions and associated results/impacts and outcomes are ranging from Satisfactory to Good. For each criterion, the most important factor which positively or negatively supported or affected the marking is introduced in the third column.

E: A: Excellent B: Good C: Satisfactory D: Poor Unacceptable

Monrovia Grid Rehabilitation Reintegration for returnees and displaced people and Post conflict Project rehabilitation and capacity building (Institutional Aspects Excluded) programmes

Criterion Marking Remarks Marking Remarks

Supporting factors: Project is a Relevance B response to a critical and C emergency situation

Supporting factors: High standard of construction. Contract at cost reflecting Efficiency B B market risk patterns Appropriate and proven technologies.

Supporting Factors: HT and MV equipment in operation Marking under the ROM performed in 2010 Effectiveness B Deterrent factors: Connections C to customers through LV equipment came at the end of the project

Deterrent factor: Connections to customers were not Impacts C C included at the beginning of the project

Supporting factors: High Sustainability A standard of construction. B Appropriate technologies.

Supporting factors: Leading role of EU. Coordination with Coherence A other donors. NA Complementarities of programmes

Supporting factors: End-users survey shows that the project Consistency B satisfies the expectations and NA aspirations of population in various domains

Final Report – August 2012 13

The Liberian Electricity Sector and its Future Development

Contextually and under the current legislation, the Liberia Electricity Corporation is responsible for the generation, transmission, and distribution of electricity. Before the civil crisis, the total installed electricity capacity of LEC was approximately 191 megawatts (MW), while that of concessionaires was 212 MW. Today (2012) capacity is less than 30 MW. The key indicator that translates the tangible results/impacts achieved by the interventions of donors (including the EU) is the number of customers who are finally connected to the grid as illustrated in the tables and charts embedded in this report. The global number of connections was 2’403 in October 2010 (the major part being 1’096 residential and 1’171 commercial) then 5’313 in October 2011 reaching 5’710 at end of March 2012 with a good stake (1’728) of connexions through prepaid meters. LEC has a target of 40’000 customers for June 2015.

For the next coming years, the involvements and commitments of donors from the international community will satisfy the needs in the fields of generation, transportation and distribution/connections resulting from the expected growth rates of the demand. This statement is backed-up by the analysis of the assumptions and the various scenarios outlined by various parties for assessing the future demand. In other words, the sector is “crowded” enough by financing partners for covering the development of the electricity sector and for satisfying the demand up to 2020. After this date, new projects in the fields of generation, transport and distribution will require additional support by LEC, the Government and the donors. The following graph illustrates the concentration of actions from donors in various projects in the electricity sector during the period 2012 – 2020.

Time Line (Years) 2008 2010 2012 2015 2020 2025

Mount Coffee Rehab. (Norway, KfW) 64 MW Generation EU (Monrovia Grid Rehab project) JICA HFO Plant 10MW MW

Multi donor ( 5 – 10 MW ) Transport MW from CLSG EU (Monrovia Grid Rehab CLSG project) Multidonors (WB, AfDB, BEI, Distribution KfW)

EU (1'400 units) LEC Plans

Connections WB (GOBPA) 16'000 Units

EU (Cross Border project) Rural Electrification USAID (Small IPP’s)

Arcelor Mittal Private IPP’s 450 MW (Generation) Other Miners (200 MW)

Rubber Wood Plant 36 MW

14 Contract 2012/284032

project, both implemented under the WAPP. IPP’s essentially running with diesel generators will also continue to provide electricity to customers not-yet hooked to the national grid. IPP’s are however an intermediate solution, which had justification during the period when emergency actions were the privileged alternatives until the national utility can resume its activities. IPP’s should be gradually decommissioned when reaching their lifespan as long as access to the national grid for more affordable electricity of better quality (services and reliability) is increased.

On the longer term, given the uncertainties on the trend of fossil fuel costs (oil barrel WTI at US $104.68 at the date of April 27th, 2012) for the future, but reasonably assuming that they will continue to increase, it will be legitimate and wise to consider other sources of energy, preferably of renewable and more environmentally friendly nature, to achieve a better balanced mix of future generation capacities in Liberia.

Recommendations and the Way Forward

The final recommendations resulting from the evaluation process and the appraisal of the electricity sector patterns, as detailed in the relevant chapters of the report are based on the following statements of facts: i) The future peak demand from the electric system (Monrovia Grid and interconnections) will realistically range from 40 to 80 MW at the 2017 horizon and could reach 110 MW, 130 MW and 160 MW at the horizons 2020, 2025 and 2030 respectively. ii) The model results obtained at the completion of the Liberia Energy Options Study (WB 2011) indicate that the most economic options for expanding the interconnected power system at the level of approximately 100MW (the next 8 years) is a mix of hydropower generation composed of the rehabilitation of the Mt. Coffee hydropower plant, the Saint Paul River development, and possibly the Mano hydropower project identified in another river basin (belonging to the three countries: Liberia, Sierra Leone and Guinea), and an addition of thermal power produced by diesel power generation, HFO, and the WAPP CLSG regional interconnection line iii) The sector is relatively crowded by the international community of donors for supporting and financing the contemplated new generation capacities with the corresponding transport, transmission and distribution components up to 2020. iv) The end-users survey realised under the present evaluation (see below) confirms the willingness of the majority of the Monrovia population to get connected to the LEC grid. The majority of the users also confirmed that they are ready to pay for the connection fees and for the quantity of electricity consumed. This willingness is mainly motivated by the wish to have electricity of good quality (stability and continuity of supply is dominating) at an affordable cost. However, given the patterns of the current consumption, the relatively high poverty level of the population and the other categories of expenses it has to afford (transport is frequently the main item of household expenditure); the demand growth will remain modest. The figure of 100MW of installed capacity for the Monrovia Grid at the horizon of 2020 is therefore realistic.

Final Report – August 2012 15

v) Preparing and designing hydropower schemes require complex and long studies and surveys, specifically since the river basins of Liberia have not been object of investigations during the last two decades because of the wars and conflicts. vi) On the long term, hydropower could generate energy with the lowest levelized cost compared to other sources like fossil fuels.

According to preliminary studies (Stanley Consultants), one of the first actions which could make sense is the creation of a reservoir on the Via River (a confluent to the St Paul River) upstream of the Mount Coffee hydropower plant. Such a reservoir regulation effect on the river flow would drastically increase the dependable capacity of the Mount Coffee power plant which is very low, given the seasonal regime of the St Paul River. Currently (and when rehabilitated), while delivering nearly its full capacity during the rainy season, the power plant can only deliver less than 10 MW of power during the dry season. Then by implementing other reservoirs/dams and power plants along the St Paul River an ultimately fully equipped cascade could assure nearly a yearly average of 2’700 GWh of energy.

It is recommended that this initiative starts with the mobilization of funds to conduct and update an appraisal of the hydraulic potential of the river, an assessment of the environmental patterns of the affected area, a diagnosis of exiting and historical data in the sectors of hydrology, geology, seismicity and in general all domains concerned by large hydropower schemes projects. The global cost of such a Reconnaissance Study is estimated at 150’000 Euros.

The next action must comprise additional surveys and studies for the preliminary assessment of the complete cascade, the estimates of costs, the economic computations and the appraisal of the cumulative impacts that a complete cascade would generate. The global cost of such a Detailed Feasibility Study is estimated at 2’000’000 Euros. The outlines of the Terms of Reference for both studies are included in the main report.

In summary, the recommended 2 studies are amounting respectively:

 150’000 Euros for the Reconnaissance study

 2’000’000 Euros for the detailed feasibility study

At their completion, a set of tender documents for the execution of the project through International Competitive Bidding will be available. It is recommended that in view of the further implementation phase and in order to continue its support to the development of renewable energy in Liberia the EU should earmark additional resources under the EDF 11 envelope.

Such resources would ideally amount to 40 to 60 million Euros for contribution to the capital cost of the project. They may be utilized in various ways (blending effect through loan interest subsidies,

16 Contract 2012/284032

guarantees, investment, funding TA and construction supervision activities…) the aim being that they can trigger a leveraging effect for the mobilization of resources from other donors and investors for a project which is worth several hundred millions dollars (current estimate 220 Millions).

End Users Survey

Aside of the evaluation of the EU interventions, the Consultant was in charge of conducting an End Users survey for measuring the behaviour patterns (Willingness and Affordability To Pay) of the Monrovia population towards the access to and the use of electricity. The survey was also covering some commercial customers.

The broad objective of the survey was to assess the main patterns in behavior, expenses, attitude towards energy use in various segments of the population, enterprises and institutional services. More specifically, the aim was to assess:

1. the impacts the access to LEC electricity grid has on the life of the beneficiaries as well in the communities,

2. the willingness to pay and affordability to get connected to LEC grid of those households and other units who are not yet connected.

3. the perceptions of the results and achievements of the project (EU funded Grid Rehabilitation activities) by the beneficiaries and their degree of appropriation.

The Household End Users Survey was conducted in six sites (survey areas) throughout the capital selected with reference to specific representativity criteria according to the objectives of the survey: these sites are Stephen Tolbert in Barnersville, New Georgia Estate in the community of the same name, Neezoe and Police Academy in Paynesville city, Clara Town in Bushrod Island, and Jallah/Saye Town in Central Monrovia. They cover the three types of urban patterns and land use in which the majority of the population of Monrovia is concentrated today. The following results and findings are derived from the interviews of 354 households, as illustrated and summarized in the following charts.

Survey results for households: Impact of being connected to LEC on living conditions

Final Report – August 2012 17

Survey results for Commercial Customers: Advantages for being connected to LEC

More specific conclusions are the following :

 If the tariffs applied by LEC are among the highest in the world (estimated at 0,578 USD/kWh), those applied by small private operators (estimated at 1,2 USD/kWh) or by auto- production with small generator sets (estimated at 1,9 USD/kWh) are even more exorbitant. Unfortunately many households and most companies not connected to the LEC grid have no choice but to pay such tariffs.

 The willingness to be connected to the electricity network is very strong among the households and the small enterprises. The capacity to pay is an important issue for a major part of the households as well as for small companies. The poor population of the districts in downtown area and in the peri urban zones however doesn’t have the financial capacity to pay the first connection and electrical wirings expenses up-front; the decision and strategy to accelerate the installation pre-payment meters and facilitate access to credit to finance these costs is essential.

 The feeling of satisfaction concerning electricity was dominant among all households interviewed: 62% of customers are entirely satisfied, 11% are dissatisfied and 27 % mixed. The reasons for discontent are mostly problems with the quality of service provided by LEC. For those households equipped with conventional meter, they particularly quote problems of metering and billing; those equipped with pre paid meters complained wasting time to find scratch card sellers. The customer service is not yet well developed, especially in the peri urban areas of Barnersville and Gardnersville. For small enterprises the major problems raised were the irregularity of current, the outages and their negative impacts on economic activity.

18 Contract 2012/284032

programme of its sub station, initiated during EPP 1 and EPP 2, financed partly by the European Union, had in its targets to allow the extension of the network in these zones characterized by a very rapid urbanization. Eventually, the last rider of the Monrovia Electricity Grid Rehabilitation Project covered the provision for resources for the delivery and installation of 2’600 prepaid meters in low income neighborhoods, in particular in Jallah Town and Saye town, located in Central Monrovia. This specifically targeted the final beneficiaries and thus was very relevant.

Final Report – August 2012 19

2 CONTEXT OF THIS REPORT

The team comprises Mrs Laurence Wilhelm, Socio-Economist, Mr Roger M. Gaillard, Energy Specialist (Team Leader) and Mr Laurent De Block, Project Manager at MWH who assures the contract administrative and financial management.

The activities started on April 11th with a first mission which lasted till May 15th 2012 and allowed for submission of a substantive draft report.

A second mission was held during July 2012 by the Team Leader for the presentation of the results on July 24th. This final report includes comments and further clarifications resulting from this presentation.

20 Contract 2012/284032

3 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION

In such circumstances, the overall objective was to assist the reintegration of returnees and displaced population in order to minimize the risk of further conflicts. The obvious aim of improving access to clean water, sanitation and electricity was to anchor such populations in a better living environment avoiding them to fall back into unrest and degraded living conditions.

This approach was mainly motivated by the humanitarian and emergency dimensions of the situation and was therefore fully relevant and pertinent to needs, problems and issues to be addressed at this point in time. The main aim of the infrastructure component (water and electricity) was to develop the facilities so that they are eventually managed as autonomous and self-sustainable entities. Under existing funds (EDF 8) of the Financing Agreement a management study outlining various reform scenarios was prepared. A strategy focusing on delivering services to the most vulnerable populations and, at the same time, attracting private sector participation in more commercially viable parts of the business, was retained as the best suited for sustainable delivery of electricity.

Technical assistance to define the detailed implementation modalities of the strategy, to draft the new legal framework and to oversee the implementation of rehabilitation works was put in place. However, delays occurred in the starting of the rehabilitation works and as the Financing Agreement was to end in March 2006, the remaining time period was too short to proceed to the implementation of the electricity rehabilitation and reform program. Therefore a new Financing Agreement was necessary to complete the program using funds from the 9th EDF. One of the main lessons learnt during this initial period was that since its creation, even if the Liberia Electricity Corporation (LEC) had received international funding through technical assistance, management contracts and investment support to keep it running, it hardly managed to operate in a financially and economically sustainable manner. Weak management, lack of incentives and poor recovery of operating costs continued to deteriorate the infrastructure and revenue base, and led to poor performance. During the war period of 2001-03, the EU supported the electricity sector through technical assistance and investment support. While the support allowed the company to operate, it did not create a sustainable business model for the continuous delivery of services once the funding ended. In fact, electricity supply via the utility halted shortly after the project ended.

Considering the lack of impact of previous interventions, the EU launched after the war a management/reorientation study on the electricity supply in Monrovia which stated as main issues: i) Overstaffed inefficient public body, widely subject to political influence ii) Absence of a management committed to providing a service iii) A very high level of revenue leakage and iv) A total lack of public funding for rehabilitation. Since LEC stopped providing electricity, independent private producers were supplying power to neighbourhoods in a sustainable manner. It was therefore obvious that a new approach was needed with a combination of investment support and revenue generation opportunities for private producers based on incentives, good governance and private participation.

An important objective of the interventions was to achieve/contribute to poverty reduction: through the rehabilitation of the electricity grid and providing incentives for private participation in generation,

Final Report – August 2012 21

as well as distribution to end users, it was expected that the majority of the population from Monrovia could have access to electricity and that as a consequence, the end-user price would drop significantly. Ultimately, while materialized by equipment (generation, transport, distribution, metering), works and technical/management services, the EU funds target was the less commercially viable areas to reach the poorest areas of town where publicly funded provision of (electricity) service was most needed.

Electricity is a vital input for income generation in the nowadays modern world including on the African continent; hence the interventions were designed to have positive multiplier effects on productive activities, employment and economic development, this last also encompassing collateral aspect like security, education, health and gender as some of the crosscutting objectives. Surveys and specific studies performed by various institutions members of the UN organization have demonstrated that in the less developed countries, there is a close correlation (no causation) between the per-capita average yearly electricity consumption and the progress of some of the Human Development Indexes like infant mortality rate, access rate to safe drinking water, life expectancy and literacy rate. Results of surveys performed on countries which have gone through the development sequence from less developed to emerging countries, show that when the per- capita consumption reaches 1’000 kWh per year (approximately 60% of the world population have less and average in Sub-Saharan Africa is approximately 400 kWh), when people have only risen above desperate poverty to a stable if rudimentary standard of living, the literacy rate increases to 50% and the rate of access to safe drinking water to nearly 40%. When reaching the threshold of 2’000 kWh per year, which is close to the world average, and relates to a society that is a mix of modern technological dynamism and traditional agricultural life, the same indicators increase to 85% and 90% respectively.

The ultimate objective of this evaluation, in addition to the judgement through the usual standard criterions applicable, is to formulate motivated recommendations concerning the best mix of future EU interventions in the energy sector in Liberia.

22 Contract 2012/284032

4 BRIEF COUNTRY CONTEXT

Liberia covers an area of 111’369 sq.km and has currently a population of 3’887’886. It has boundaries with Guinea 563 km, Cote d'Ivoire 716 km, Sierra Leone 306 km and a coast line of 579 km. Its GDP (Purchasing Power Parity) was estimated at US$ 1’836 billion for 2011. GDP growth was estimated at 6.9% in 2011, a constant increase from 5.6% in 2010 and 4.6% in 2009. Current impediments to growth include a small domestic market, lack of adequate infrastructure, high transportation costs, poor trade links with neighbouring countries and the high dollarization of the economy. Liberia used the United States dollar as its currency from 1943 until 1982 and continues to use the U.S. dollar alongside the Liberian dollar. Liberia is a low income country heavily reliant on foreign assistance for revenue. Civil war and government mismanagement destroyed much of Liberia's economy, especially the infrastructure in and around the capital, Monrovia. Liberia has the distinction of having the highest ratio of direct foreign investment to GDP in the world. Richly endowed with water, mineral resources, forests, and a climate favourable to agriculture, Liberia has been a producer and exporter of basic products, primarily raw timber and rubber and is reviving those sectors. Local manufacturing, mainly foreign owned, has been small in scope.

Re-elected president in 2011, Ellen Johnson Sirleaf has taken steps to reduce corruption, build support from international donors, and encourage private investment. Embargos on timber and diamond exports have been lifted, opening new sources of revenue for the government. The country reached its Heavily Indebted Poor Countries initiative completion point in 2010 and nearly $5 billion of international debt was permanently eliminated. This new status will enable Liberia to establish a sovereign credit rating and issue bonds. Liberia's Paris Club creditors agreed to cancel Liberia's debt as well. Rebuilding infrastructure and raising incomes will depend on generous financial and technical assistance from donor countries and foreign investment in key sectors, such as infrastructure and power generation providing that the institutional framework is conducive enough.

Since 2006, Liberia has made noticeable progress in the areas of political rights, civil liberties, and freedom of the press. Liberia is ranked 20th out of 53 African countries in the 2010 Mo Ibrahim index of Participation and Human Rights. Despite the opposition-led Legislature, the Government has been successful in implementing significant reforms. Furthermore, the Government has been promoting national healing and national unity through, for example, the establishment of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, as well as through “inclusive governance” to ensure that all ethnicities have voice and representation. The security situation is generally stable albeit fragile and vulnerable to political instability in the region, with a sizeable United Nations (UN) peace-keeping force of more than ten thousand soldiers and police remaining on the ground until at least September 2012.

Liberia has made also significant progress in achieving post-conflict economic stabilization and its development agenda as set in the PRS paper. The long-term vision currently being developed by the country is to attain middle-income status by the year 2030. Despite the global financial crisis has also adversely impacted Liberia’s economic performance particularly in 2009, slowing economic growth, reducing employment in the rubber sector, and delaying investments in iron ore mining the economy has performed well during 2008-2010 with real Gross Domestic Product (GDP) growth rates averaging close to 6.0%, though much lower than the double-digit growth rates envisaged under the PRS.

Final Report – August 2012 23

5 SECTOR CONTEXT

5.1 ASSESSMENT OF THE SECTOR POLICY

The EU interventions in the electricity sector in Liberia were initiated when the Result-Focused Transition Framework (RFTF) of 2003, based on the Joint Needs assessment undertaken by the United Nations (UN) and the WB under the guidance of the National Transitional Government of Liberia (NTGL), stipulated the relief and recovery development actions for Liberia. One of the nine sector clusters addressed was Infrastructure that includes power. The NTGL has empowered a Special Executive Committee on Electricity (SECE) to launch, coordinate, and supervise a sector reform process. While the NTGL through SECE has endorsed the EC proposed strategy through a Memorandum of Understanding signed on November 23rd, 2004, it had not at this stage issued a holistic sector policy statement addressing electricity sector reform in general and the provision of electricity throughout the country.

At the date of end 2004 a sector approach was not feasible since none of the defining components were in place. There was no overall strategic framework for the country's development (a Poverty Reduction Strategy was to be prepared with the assistance of the IMF). There were no sector policy document adopted by the government and there was no medium term expenditure framework in place. Moreover, the country was still in a crisis situation, in transition from humanitarian to development assistance and under Art.255 emergency procedures. Hence a project approach was chosen to best address urgent needs on the ground, while also working with the national counterparts in defining a sector policy and a new legal and regulatory framework.

5.2 ELECTRICITY SECTOR CONTEXT

The most critical infrastructure gap in Liberia now is in the power/electricity sector. The wars left the electricity system in Liberia in extremely bad conditions; the grid was destroyed and there was no publicly provided power at all by the late 1990s. The Comprehensive Peace Agreement, reached in 2003, had ended 14 years of civil war, but the deleterious effects of this conflict had forced the Liberian Electricity Corporation (LEC) to stop generating electricity a year later. It is only in September 2006 that with the donation of a 1 MW generator for Krutown sub-station with the assistance of the Volta River Authority (VRA) - Ghana’s utility, LEC resumed delivery of commercial electricity service to downtown Monrovia.

A the same period, the European Commission (EC), the World Bank, and the US Government (USG) were already conducting infrastructure projects in water and roads in Liberia, and showed interest in cooperating on power. Beginning discussions in February of 2006, this group signed a Memorandum of Understanding with the Government of Liberia at the end of March, initiating the Emergency Power Program (EPP). The Government of Liberia (GOL) provided sites, supply support, and administrative budget for the Liberian Electricity Corporation (LEC). The EC’s funding contribution was for the purchase of generators and construction of distribution networks. This construction was actually carried out by VRA, under a contract with the EC.

Based on the very early results of the EPP in Liberia, the government of Norway decided to grant $7.8 million for further emergency generation in Monrovia. The original donors – the EC, the World Bank, and the US and now Norway formed a new coalition with the government of Liberia in

24 Contract 2012/284032

December 2006. This new program, named EPP II was totalling $25 million of aid, including $1.8 million of in-kind and budget support from the government of Liberia.

This emergency assistance financed by the above group of several donors allowed increasing capacity incrementally to 13.8 MW in early 2010 and then to 22.6MW by March 2011. The data available in the various reports issued at that period were stating that the cost of generation was about US$ 0.32/kWh (World Bank, Afteg 2011); this should be compared with average generation costs in Africa of US $0.18/kWh (World Bank AICD 2009). To date (April – May 2012), the Management Board of LEC has maintained the rate of US $ 0.54 per kWh. Generation capacity will need to be increased in small increments as new connections are installed – ideally, perhaps 5MW for each increment. Studies have been carried out to determine the optimal plan for increasing capacity. Highly simplified, the main conclusions of these studies as prospective trend are as follows:

- In the immediate future, diesel will remain the main source of additional capacity – at a levelized cost of about US0.32/kWh nevertheless subject to the price fluctuation - increase – of oil on the international market. - As soon as the supply of heavy fuel oil (HFO) can be re-established units using HFO will be preferred (2x5 MW HFO Generators announced to be funded by JICA). The benchmark levelized cost of this source of power has been estimated at US$ 0.16/kWh. - Starting around 2015–2016, two new sources should be available and would play a large role: i) Power supplied by the West Africa Power Pool (WAPP) through a transmission line interconnection between Côte d’Ivoire, Liberia, Sierra Leone, and Guinea (CLSG) should be one of the feasible alternatives. The expected cost ranges from US$0.11 to 0.17 per kWh, depending on the mix of supply from Guinea and Côte d’Ivoire, respectively (with Guinean supply expected to come on stream only sometime after 2020) ii) Hydropower from Mount Coffee (see section on Mt. Coffee) – levelized cost of phase one estimated at US$ 0.10/kWh. - In the longer term (beginning, say, in 2020), there could be substantial further potential in Liberia from hydropower. There are no recent studies, but based on studies carried out in the 1970s and 1980s, there is great potential for both large and small hydropower plants. But there is considerable uncertainty over what the cost would be (depending on the project structure and the associated costs for collateral infrastructures like access roads, long HV evacuation lines) and how it would compare with other sources. - IPPs around Monrovia, Bio fuel plants – e.g., wood-fired – may also be an optimal choice for the longer term. Studies are needed to explore this further.

Final Report – August 2012 25

6 LIBERIA ELECTRICITY CORPORATION (LEC)

Under the current legislation, the Liberia Electricity Corporation is responsible for the generation, transmission, and distribution of electricity. More precisely, LEC has the legal mandate to “engage in the development, generation and transmission of electrical energy, the manufacture, construction and installation of electrical equipment and devices related thereto, and the distribution and sale of said electrical energy and related electrical equipment and devices, to cities, towns and the public in general for heating, lighting, and power purposes.” The ownership of LEC restricted to the Government, which did not have the ability to provide enough capital to enable the utility to discharge its mandate fully deprived the corporation to extend services to the majority of the population as dictated by the policy established in 2009

Before the civil crisis, the total installed electricity capacity of the LEC was approximately 191 megawatts (MW), while that of concessionaires was 212 MW. Outside Monrovia there were three radial lines extending into the countryside and 11 small off-grid power systems operated by LEC to supply electricity to cities and towns located along the coast and in rural areas. The installed capacity of the rural electrification program was 13 MW and distribution lines stretched 90 miles, with an additional 26 miles of low-voltage service lines. The small isolated rural systems were powered by plants ranging from 300 kilowatts (kW) to 1300 kW. There is no generation capacity outside of Monrovia beyond privately-owned generators and scattered donor-funded pilot projects. A number of Government agencies, community organizations and private sector establishments in rural locations in several counties have been able to receive diesel generators and solar power systems through USAID, the United Nations Development Programme, and some NGOs.

6.1 ORGANIZATION

The Liberia Electricity Corporation organization is illustrated in the chart below. Under the Management Contract, this organization is likely to evolve and change to adapt to circumstances and match with the objectives and challenges resulting from the agreed development and investment plans.

Figure 1 : LEC organisation chart

26 Contract 2012/284032

6.2 CORPORATE ASSETS

Further to the implementation of the management contract, LEC finance department established the registry of all assets of the company starting from the years 2005 for the furniture and buildings and 2009 for the electrical components. The small data base that they have built shows that the whole assets are valued in 2011 at US $ 67.280 Million. The assets corresponding to equipment and supplies funded by the EU are totalling US $ 32.539 million or 48.36 % of the company registered assets, the rest having been funded by other donors (USAID, Norway) and the corporation itself. This significant percentage illustrates the strong and continuous engagement of the EU in the Liberian electricity sector since 2006. The breakdown of the EU funded assets shows that the main part was for Transformers (37.2%), Transmission lines (23.92%) and Distribution lines (14.72%). The rest (24.16%) is covering equipment like generators, poles, connections and meters, safety and information systems associated to generators and substations. The charts below illustrate the EU funded significant part of the LEC current registered assets.

Breakdown EU funded assets (US $ 32.539 LEC Registered Asset (2011) Million)

80'000

Poles 4.42% 60'000 Transformers Connections

37.20% 3.95% Thousands M eters 40'000 0.09% 67'280 S & I 0.24%

US $ US 20'000 SI Generators 32'540 34'740 8.33% Distribution Lines Sub stations 0 14.78% 0.83% Generators Total Funded by EU Not Funded by EU Total Registered 6.24% assets (2011) Transmission Lines Assets 23.92% Figure 2: Breakdown of EU funded assets and LEC registered assets

6.3 TARIFFS

Under the covenants /clauses of the Management Contract, LEC must define an approach to a Tariff Model for guiding its commercial strategy for the years to come. LEC has therefore proposed to retain a flat rate tariff based on the revenue requirements calculation of the Average Retail Tariff defined in the relevant clause of the Management Contract. However some adjustments were introduced to account for current realities.

Large stable regulated utilities with a long history of customer behaviour and a wealth of reliable load and cost data can implement recognized good practice for the setting of their tariffs. This is obviously not the situation prevailing at LEC which is just emerging from years of poorly managed operations. Computations of cost-reflecting tariffs are complex and require detailed analysis of large amounts of reliable data.

Final Report – August 2012 27

The standard sequence of actions/measures for preparing the adequate conditions for cost-reflective tariffs that good practice recommends to follow are:

1. Development of a detailed asset register (Finally established and audited in 2011) 2. Computation of per kW (capacity) and per kWh (energy) costs associated with each asset class 3. Analysis of records on properly segmented operating and maintenance, administration and customer service costs and their separation into fixed and variable components 4. Allocation of those costs to per kW and per kWh categories, or in the case of customer service to numbers of customers 5. Computation of a total revenue requirement to cover all the identified costs – including an allowable return on the fixed asset base 6. Allocation of all these costs to individual customer classes

However, given that LEC has a very limited asset base (total worth US $ 67 million), has not the capacity to finance new assets (which would only develop under donor’s grants arrangements) and is pushed to aggressively connect low-income customers, a proper cost of service analysis is not relevant. Instead, LEC needs a more practical approach suitable for a small utility, based on a simplified revenue requirements approach targeting near full cost recovery and effectively near breakeven operations on an accounting basis.

The proposed adopted tariff policy recognizes that this is very unusual in a developing country situation where tariffs are typically set more on a combination of affordability considerations and social, economic and often political considerations. However it is certainly prudent as it gives LEC a much greater chance of quickly achieving financial sustainability, and it takes into account the inability of the Government of Liberia to support LEC with large subsidies. LEC supports this approach as both rational and practical and the proposed Tariff Calculation is based on such considerations. As a result of these given existing fundamentals LEC concluded that for the time being, it would be not feasible to apply tariffs derived from cost allocation based on economic principles with different prices by voltage level and consumption pattern. Therefore, LEC proposes in the interim (at least until end of 2012) to maintain the system of flat rate tariffs with an additional fuel cost (being the major part of the production cost) adjustment being passed through to the consumer. Differentiated tariffs will certainly be considered when lower cost non-petroleum (hydropower, interconnections with sub-region network) generation becomes available.

The methodology retained within the frame of the Management Contract stipulates that the Average Retail Tariff is the sum of six components expressed in $US/kWh:

1. Value added on distribution (VAD) – that comprises all LEC costs except generation costs defined in 2. below 2. plus the cost of generation delivered at the busbar – in the case of LEC currently generating all its own power, comprising fuel, O&M and depreciation of generation assets, and in the case of power purchases from an IPP any associated capacity and energy payments 3. plus any applicable taxes – assumed to mean any taxes that are not collected and remitted to the Government like GST (Gross Sales Tax) 4. plus other extraordinary costs 5. less any subsidy received by LEC 6. plus a reserve for capital investment of 0% of revenues in year 1, 2% in year 2, and 4% thereafter

28 Contract 2012/284032

The Average Retail Tariff was set contractually at $0.42/kWh (when the fuel price is at US $2.83 per gallon) at the commencement of the MC and is required to be adjusted quarterly, thirty days in advance, at least by the following factors:

1. the fuel component of the generation cost by international fuel price benchmarks defined in Schedule 5 of the MC 2. the VAD for changes in LEC’s (presumably) distribution O&M costs, reductions in losses (presumably both technical and non-technical and cash collections), and Liberian inflation

A separate note for a Request for Change in Methodology concerning the Fuel Price Adjustment, justified by the market price volatility/increase was introduced recommending the following changes to the fuel component of generation in order to minimize LEC’s exposure to changes in fuel price:

1. monthly, instead of quarterly adjustment 2. adjustment based on actual delivered fuel price to LEC, not on international benchmarks 3. no Board approval required for the monthly adjustment as it is fixed by a simple formula

Other clarifications/adjustments relating to depreciation principles, allocations of cost of losses etc… are under discussion for “fine-tuning” the methodology for tariff setting.

The tariff policy proposed by LEC stated that it is now appropriate (mid 2012) to update the Average Retail Tariff Calculation methodology, and establish a Standard Operating Procedure for Tariff Calculation, making it fully transparent so that both the source data and the build-up of the final tariff is clear, incorporating explicitly the requirements of the MC, and addressing any ambiguities.

Final Report – August 2012 29

6.4 CUSTOMERS CONNECTIONS AND TYPES

The key indicator that will translate the tangible results/impacts achieved is the number of customers who are finally connected to the grid. It was not easy for the evaluation team to obtain reliable data on the evolution of the customer base for the last years and specifically before the entering into force of the Management Contract in July 2010. What appeared through various available reports and documents shows that the global number of connections was 2’403 in October 2010 (the major part being 1’096 residential and 1’171 commercial) then 5’313 in October 2011. Thus concurs with the LEC reports stating that the target of 5’000 customers will be reached even before august 2012 in its Quarterly Progress Report for the period December 2011 to March 31, 2012 – May 1st 2012 which reflects the most updated situation of the corporation activities. Data are reported in the following table.

Table 1: Lec customer base

Year 2011 Year 2012

Number of Customers Months Jul. Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar.

Total customers previous month 4'659 4'965 5'079 5'158 5'313 5'414 5'446 5'398 5'604

New Connections 309 117 99 198 104 42 13 198 104

Disconnections -74 -35 -56 -64 -49 -53 -100 -62 -46

Reconnections 71 31 37 21 46 43 39 70 48

Total Connections at End Month 4'965 5'078 5'159 5'313 5'414 5'446 5'398 5'604 5'710

Customer Breakdown

Residential 2'581 2'650 2'692 2'854 2'927 2'948 2'711 2'645 2'183

Commercial 2'141 2'181 2'219 2'213 2'239 2'252 2'073 1'888 1'635

Government of Liberia 104 108 110 109 110 112 114 117 118

Non-Governmental Organisations 35 35 34 36 36 34 34 33 30

Public Corporations 5 5 6 6 6 6 6 6 6

LEC 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8

Tax exempt 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

Prepay Customers 89 89 87 85 86 84 450 905 1'728

At the date of March 2012, the total number of customers is 5’710 with the break down as per the attached table and the corresponding graphs. The number of prepay customers has been multiplied by 4 from the beginning of 2012.

30 Contract 2012/284032

Breakdown per Category of Customers

Prepay Customers 30.26% Public Corporations Residential 0.11% 38.23% Tax exempt 0.04% LEC 0.14% Non Govermental Organisations 0.53% Goverment of Liberia 0.021 Commercial 28.63%

Figure 3: Breakdown of customer base - LEC data March 2012

Analysing the data and their graphic illustration, the following comments can be made. However taking into account that the size of the data bank and the number of registered parameters are still relatively modest, corresponding to only a few months of records, it is not possible to derive clear trends or projections and the following observations and conclusions must be considered with caution.

1. Growth Rate of the Customer Base

The highest growth rate of connection was recorded during the period October 2010 – October 2011 (12 Months) at 242 new connected customers per month. However, the average rate decreased down to 194 per month when considering the overall period October 2010 – March 2012 (17 months). Over the last 7 months July 2011 – March 2012, the average rate was only 82 new connections per month, with a noticeable low figure in December 2011 and January 2012. A reasonable average figure of 150 to 200 new customers/connections per month was the actual rate these recent years. This very far from the figures of 720 or 950 connections per month for 38 months needed for achieving the targets of respectively 32’000 or 40’000 customers at the date of June 2015. The actual rate for the near future will strongly depend on the working force, staff and equipment that LEC can mobilize and operationally on the prudent approach required concerning the management of demand/load versus the available actual generation capacity.

2. Growth Rate of Prepay Customers

When analysing the evolution of the Prepay Customers during the same time patterns, their total number remained unchanged at approx. 87 until January 2012, when their cumulative number rocketed at 450. Then their number was doubled every month for reaching the total of 1’728 in March 2012. This focus by LEC on the installation of new prepaid meters can explain the low growth rate of “purely” new customers during the same period.

3. Evolution of Breakdown per category

Final Report – August 2012 31

The data provided by LEC (Management Contract monthly report) show that the changes in the breakdown patterns of the customers’ base mainly occurred in the repartition between Residential and Commercial customers. Both their number decreased. However at the same time the number of prepay customers increased approximately by the same number, obviously corresponding to the changes effected by replacing conventional meters by prepaid meters.

4. Evolution of revenues (billed kWh) per main categories of customers

Since the beginning of 2012, the part of revenues billed for prepay customers has significantly increased against a decrease of revenues from “traditional” residential and commercial customers, thus corresponding to the increase of the number of customers equipped with prepaid meters. As the available data are not detailing the repartition of new prepay customers between the residential and commercial categories, it is not possible to draw conclusions concerning the evolution of customers of the low income type. Nevertheless the following paragraph intends to draw at least a qualitative conclusion on the evolution of the customer base towards more customers of the low income type.

5. Evolution of customers of low income type

This type of customers is certainly embedded in the residential category. Given the fact that the decrease of residential customers with conventional meters was sharper than the decrease of commercial customers also with conventional meters, it can be reasonably concluded that the switch from conventional meters to prepaid meters was oriented towards residential customers. Given that the prepaid customers have an average monthly consumption of approximately 50% of residential customers with conventional meters or 25% of commercial customers with conventional meters, and with observing that the number of prepay customers has nearly doubled two times (multiplied by approx. 4) between January and March 2012 (450 to 905 up to 1’728) the fact that the average unit and total consumption of prepay customers has not progressed at the same pace inclines to conclude that the major part of the “new” prepaid customers are of the low income class. Despite this assessment has to be cautiously taken, this deserves to be pointed out as reflecting the materialization of one important objective of the donors’ interventions, including the EU– in line with the government policy – which was to provide access to the poorest.

6. Commercial customers

The number of commercial customers remained stable for several years. It has decreased during the first 2012 quarter certainly due to connections which have been transformed for prepaid meters. Their average monthly consumption as well as the revenues generated for this category of customer has not shown dramatic changes allowing to observe a trend. The reasonable conclusion is that the stability of the characteristics for this type of consumers translates also the stability of the sector. In other words, commercial activities are neither dynamic nor declining.

32 Contract 2012/284032

Evolution of the Customers'base per category

3'500 3'000 2'500 2'000 1'500 1'000

500 Number of Customers of Number 0 Jul. Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Months

Residential Commercial Prepay Customers

Figure 4: Analysis of data from LEC

Customers Number /Prepaid Customers

2'000 5'710 5'800 5'604 5'600 5'414 5'446 5'398 1'500 5'313 5'400 5'159 5'078 5'200 1'000 4'965

1'728 5'000

Prepaid

Customers Customers Number Number of 4'800 500 905

4'600 Total number of 89 89 87 85 86 84 450 0 4'400 Jul. Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Months

Prepaid Customers Total Connections at End Month

Figure 5: Analysis of data from LEC

Final Report – August 2012 33

Billed kWh Breakdown per main customers (March 2012) Prepay Customers 10.96% Residential 26.70%

Goverment of Liberia 24.23%

Commercial 38.11%

Residential Commercial Goverment of Liberia Prepay Customers

Figure 6: Analysis of data from LEC

Breakdown of billed kWh per main categories of customers

100% 2'500'000

80% 2'000'000

60% 1'500'000

40% 1'000'000 $ US

20% 500'000

0% 0 Jul. Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Months

Residential Commercial Goverment of Liberia Prepay Customers Total

Figure 7: Analysis of data from LEC

34 Contract 2012/284032

6.5 APPLIED TARIFFS (AS OF MAY 2012)

For the quarter 3, the tariff calculated under the new tariff model was reviewed by the Board of Directors who decided to leave the tariff unaltered at 0.54 US$/kWh. Fuel prices during the quarter increased once again by 11 cents per gallon from 4.20 to 4.31 US$/Gallon. Although this increase can legitimately be passed through into the tariff, given the low affordability of the tariff by the customers, the Board opted not to do this. It was decided instead that a presentation to the Honourable President of Liberia will be made to request a special privilege for LEC waiving ALL government taxes and duties on fuel in order to mitigate the impacts on the final tariffs. Globally, LEC reports normal progress on the fronts of the various actions and projects under its responsibility. On the aspects of human resources and training, LEC reports that delays occurred in the implementation of training activities due to changes in the origination of funds. This aspect is of prime importance as there is a close correlation between the availability of appropriate skilled personnel and the achievement of activities planned for the continuation of substantive progress in the quality of services by the utility. This is particularly true as far as establishment of new connections to new customers is concerned.

The number of new connected customers is the ultimate indicator for all donors for measuring the impacts and outcomes of their respective supports to the sector. The EU funding was mainly allocated for HV and MV parts of the electrical system. In spite they are necessary links of the electricity supply chain, investments towards this specific equipment obtain the maximum of their added value when LV systems and electricity supply to customers are materialized. In this regard, it is strongly suitable that LEC regularly reports on the progression of the connected customers’ base so that appropriate corrective actions can be implemented timely when delays are observed in the achievement of planned targets.

On the side of power generation, the peak load was 8.6MW essentially the same as in February 2012 and Fuel efficiency remained the same as last month at 12.8kWh/US gallon. (Equivalent to 0.2957 litres per kWh or approx. 247 grams of fuel per kWh assuming a density of 835 grams per litre).

On financial aspects, the Monthly Status Report for March 2012 submitted by LEC, states that revenues were $1,672k for the sale of 3.16GWh (Slightly lower than the February output of 3.27 GWh), thus corresponding to an average revenue of US $ 0.529 per kWh. Total monthly losses after adjustments also increased from 22.7% to 27.1% in March. 104 new customers were energized in March bringing the year to date total to 1,184. With connection materials finally on site, contractors mobilized and placement of poles in the seven targeted low-income communities progressed well.

Final Report – August 2012 35

7 INITIAL APPROACH AND OBJECTIVES OF THE EU INTERVENTIONS

The Government of Liberia has neither the funds nor the capacity to implement a sector reform program without international assistance. The EC has taken the lead in the water and electricity sector given its comparative advantage due to its historic presence in these sectors in Liberia. However, it was clear that other donors will need to come forward if a more holistic sector strategy was to be implemented. The WB financed a sector assessment but decided not to finance rehabilitation.

At the formulation phase of the project (Year 2003) the main stakeholders were the Government through its duly empowered Special Executive Committee on Electricity (SECE) and the Ministry of Lands, Mines and Energy; the future regulatory body; the Liberian Electricity Company (LEC) that provided electricity in the past; future private electricity producers, transmitters and distributors; businesses and public bodies based in Monrovia, as well as the population of the city. The primary target group comprises people living in the poorest areas of Monrovia who will benefit from provision of services in their neighbourhoods at more affordable prices due to the EU funded infrastructure. Businesses throughout the city will see their overhead charges decrease due to lower electricity prices. It was also expected that electricity producers, transmitters and distributors connecting to the publicly funded parts of the networks will be able to charge prices allowing them a reasonable rate of return on their investments.

The policy and strategy were retaining compulsory advance payment of metered electricity at each level to ensure that customers as well as distribution concessionaires have direct financial interest to keep revenue leakage and loss levels as low as possible. It was envisaged that concessions would be competitively awarded. Former management and employees of the utility were a potential source of staff and expertise and well placed to provide their services to concessionaires. Should these arrangements successfully materialize, the Government would enjoy both improved infrastructure and financial benefits through royalties and concession renewal fees. Such funds can then be used to subsidise disadvantaged populations and/or extend service to remote and rural areas. SECE had the responsibility to oversee the reform process, while the Ministry may take action in policy matters. The creation of a new regulator was to be set up to oversee the newly privatised and liberalised sector.

At the time of the design of the interventions (Year 2003) consumers and business were facing very limited supply of electricity at very high prices. This situation, despite noticeable improvements, still prevails to date, mainly due to the lack of service provision through the electricity grid in the city. Instead, where available, power is provided by privately owned generators and resold at inflated prices to “captive” customers. The causes of the situation are multiple as shown by the management study performed at the initiation of the project. First of all the war, lack of maintenance and looting have damaged most of the generation, high and medium voltage electricity transmission network, as well as the distribution network in the city. Second, even in peaceful times, the state-owned public utility LEC suffered from poor management, over staffing, lack of funding and high revenue leakage. It operated at loss despite a series of fund injections by international donors. Third, no incentives and monitoring structures were in place to prevent electricity theft at the lower levels of the networks (customers connecting to neighbours grid etc.) which further exuberated the financial difficulties of the operator. Finally, policy, regulation and operations rested in the same body, namely LEC, which led to political influence and conflicts of interests.

36 Contract 2012/284032

The overall objective guiding the intervention is to reduce poverty through improved living conditions and an environment conducive to economic growth. Electricity is a basic need for the population and an essential input for businesses; hence the purpose of the project is to give access to the population and business of Monrovia to more affordable electricity. The project goals were to be achieved primarily through investment into restoring electricity transmission. In addition, secondary activities were to provide technical assistance to enable the liberalisation and privatisation of the sector.

Final Report – August 2012 37

8 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF THE EVALUATION MISSION

The general scope of the evaluation mission as stated in the Terms of Reference is threefold:

- Assessment of the impact that the project has made in the life of the beneficiaries and the communities - Assessment of the effectiveness, efficiency and sustainability of the project interventions - Lessons which can be drawn for guiding future EU interventions.

The topics of the general scope are then broken-down in more detailed activities under several judgment/evaluation criteria: relevance, efficiency, effectiveness, impact and sustainability in compliance with accepted standards as they are retained by the Development Assistance Committee (DAC) of the OECD, (Quality Standards for Development Evaluation -) the Commission of the European Communities having taken part in the work of the OECD for the establishment of these standards.

The basic synthetic document which initially fixed the intended objectives, expected impacts outputs and outcomes of the project is the log frame established at the preparation stage. However, worth to note that intervention logic is defined as a set of hypothetical cause and effect linkages that describe how an intervention is expected to attain its global objectives. These causes and effects are fair assumptions at the time of conceiving the intervention.

The project log frame is reproduced hereafter. This is the most updated available version which incorporate the amendments which were introduced as a result of long delays in the launching of the project as well as riders (addendum) issued for overall budget adjustments/increases. Broadly said, the overall objective of the project to improve living conditions of the population (more customers connected to the national grid) and the project purpose to give access to the population and business in Monrovia, have only started to materialize at the end of 2011 with today (April – May 2012) first measurable results. This is not to state that the project has failed, but the project scope itself as well as particular circumstances along the project implementation process are plausible reasons for this deviation. The current evaluation objective is also to provide explanations and when pertinent, fair justifications.

Table 2: Project log frame Project description Indicators Verification Assumptions Overall Objective: Improved living Human development Poverty reduction conditions indicators through improved Improved safety Number of crimes living conditions and Increased business reported during night environment activities in the Business registry and conducive to growth sector and else tax statistics Increased job levels National employment in the sector and statistics else Project Purpose: Coverage increases Inspection of network Peace and stability Give access to the from <10% of coverage in a population and population having representative sample of

38 Contract 2012/284032

Project description Indicators Verification Assumptions business of Monrovia access to electricity areas to more affordable to at least 50% electricity Average of business and consumer end- Business and consumer user price drops by price benchmarks at least 30% throughout the city Project Results: Direct results: Final acceptance of Completion report and Governance High Voltage works for authorisation for final environment permits transmission electricity transmission and payment under works for continuous grid rehabilitated distribution grid contract spending of EC Mixed-ownership Holding company Registration document funds holding company set owning transmission of company EC funded assets up for transmission network are protected from network ownership incorporated looting and asset Medium Voltage stripping distribution grid rehabilitated in Paynesville, Congo- Contract document with town and Sinkor generation and Improved revenue and Tenders held and distribution expenditure contracts signed concessionaires management with generation and Contract document with Indirect results: distribution transmission operating Concessions and Private concession(s) concessionaires company other contract for generation Tender held and awarded in a awarded contract signed with transparent and A company recruited a company to competitive manner to operate the High operate Input prices such as Voltage transmission transmission grid fuel remain stable grid Adoption of allowing for Private concession for electricity law and sufficient operating distribution secondary margin concessions awarded legislation Improved revenue Legal and regulatory collection (less framework for funds diversion) due liberalisation to improved mgmt. completed Competitive Sector regulator set up environment allows for efficiencies to be passed on to consumers New government has sufficient capacity to oversee liberalisation and

Final Report – August 2012 39

Project description Indicators Verification Assumptions privatisation process Project Activities: Input and Budget: Primary Results: Primary Activity: EUR 13 million: Award of work contract Government meets Investment into the Works contract by 03/2006 (under initial conditionalities rehabilitation of the EUR 0.2 million: suspension clause) Security situation electricity grid Technical permits carrying out a) Works Assistance necessary works b) Supervision of works Secondary results: Investment in High New democratically Voltage transmission elected government in the entire city in place and ready Investment in Medium Award of TA contracts to adopt legislation Voltage distribution in as necessary necessary for up to 6 areas Programme Estimates liberalisation and Secondary Activity: EUR 0.2 million: privatisation Institutional and Programme Government logistical support Estimate (private provides funds and a) Institutional indirect personnel for support and studies decentralised regulator enabling sector operations) Sufficient private reform sector investor b) Logistical support: EUR 0.2 million: interest in TA for finalisation of evaluation generation and legal and regulatory EUR 0.2 million: distribution framework audit Successful tender TA for launching the for company to award of concession operate the contracts transmission grid Project Evaluation and Sufficient private Audit sector interest in distribution

First, what appears when analysing the components of the project and more specifically the scope of supply object of the International Calls for Bids (ICB) (funding decision 19 186) is that they do not comprise Low Voltage equipment and material for the physical connections of the end users to the grid. The main components of the initial contract are equipment for the High Voltage HV (transport of electricity) and for the Medium Voltage MV (distribution of electricity) part of the system. There was no provision for equipment relating to the Low Voltage LV (supply of electricity). Electric systems are however complex and all equipment, from generation to final delivery (passing through HV transport, MV distribution, Control and Instrumentation etc…) are all indispensable elements of the entire electricity supply chain.

The table below, built from the LEC data base of registered assets (Year 2011) evidences the dominance of HV and MV components in the scope of supplies and works. The dominance is in

40 Contract 2012/284032

terms of capital value and does not obligatorily reflect the relative or absolute importance of the given component within a comprehensive electric system.

Table 3: LEC equipment funded by the EU

Equipment type Value Percentage The delivery and commissioning of the components Euros under the original contract were therefore fully

Generators 2'028'862 6.24% pertinent and of full relevance in terms of targeting end users. Very fortunately, on February 24th, 2011 a Transmission Lines 7'783'208 23.92% sixth rider (addendum) amounting Euros 692’976 Distribution Lines 4'808'653 14.78% was signed for extending the contract of the implementing company (ELTEL) and among other Transformers 12'104'788 37.20% items, specifically provides for wiring and installation Poles 1'437'632 4.42% of 2’600 prepaid meters and associated connections fixtures. With this addendum, which is currently (may Connections 1'286'761 3.95% 2012) under implementation at various places in Meters 30'337 0.09% Monrovia, the ultimate purpose of the project “Give access to the population and business of Monrovia to S & I 78'915 0.24% more affordable electricity” is practically achieved. SI Generators 2'711'508 8.33%

Sub stations 269'189 0.83%

Total Funded by EU 32'539'853

Final Report – August 2012 41

9 EVALUATION

9.1 PROJECTS SELECTED FOR THE EVALUATION

Under the 3 funding decisions covering the EU interventions in Liberia, the team could broadly identify a total number of 19 individual operations/contracts for services, works and supplies as illustrated in the following table.

Table 4: Identified EU contracts

EU reference Title Contract End date Contracting Amount Number/Contract Date of of Party in Euros signature activities

1 FED/2005/195-691 Technical September March 31st, Republic of 400’000 (EC) Assistance for 12th, 2005 2006 Liberia rehabilitation of the electricity grid in Monrovia

2 FED/2006/190-478 Technical November December Louis Berger 1’619’800 (EC) Assistance for 22nd, 2006 31st, 2009 SAS management and supervision of electricity and water rehabilitation in Liberia

3 FED/2006/190-523 Emergency power June 12th, September Republic of 1’829’534 (CL) programme network 2006 19th, 2007 Ghana (VRA?)

4 FED/2006/190-524 Emergency power June 12th, August 2nd, Republic of 893’654 (CL) programme for 2006 2007 Ghana (VRA?) selected neighbourhoods in Monrovia

FED/2006/190-527 Emergency Power August June 7th, Jacobs Gibb 189’655 Programme 30th, 2006 2007 LTD Coordinator

5 FED/2008/195-875 ELTEL electricity February May 29th, ELTEL 4’282’584 (EC) grid rehabilitation in 21st, 2008 2011 Network TE Monrovia AB

6 FED/2008/195-876 Electricity grid February May 29th, ELTEL 6’500’000 (EC) rehabilitation in 20th, 2008 2011 Network TE Monrovia AB

7 FED/2009/208-898 Addendum N01 to May May 31st, ELTEL 2’217.417 (EC) ELTEL contract 14th,2009 2011 Network TE

42 Contract 2012/284032

AB Addendum N02 47’000

Addendum N04 42’240

Addendum N06 692’876

8 FED/2009/228-260 Addendum No.4 to December May 31st, Louis Berger 238’950 (EC) LTTA for 12th, 2009 2011 SAS management of water and electricity rehabilitation

9 FED/2010/247-939 Technical and October Application 78’810 (CA) contractual review 18th 2011 Européenne of the electricity grid de rehabilitation project Technologies in Monrovia

10 FED/2003/195-645 Supply contract for October December GEPCO 41’899 procurement of 30th, 2003 12th, 2003 Gasoil gasoil for the Liberia Electricity Corporation

11 FED/2003/195-648 Framework contract October January European 29’990 with ECO. 20th, 2003 14th, 2004 Consultants Consultancy to Organisation assist THE LEC SPRL Liberia Electricity Corporation

12 FED/2003/195-651 LPRC Supply December June 4th, 75’610 Contract 70’000 9th, 2003 2004 Gallons Gasoil procurement for LEC

13 FED/2003/195-651 Electricity March 23rd, January SWECO 83’955 Management Study 2004 31st, 2006 International AB

14 FED/2003/195-661 Framework contract April 5th, June 23rd, Pohl 66’504 for the study of New 2004 2004 Consulting & Electricity Act in Associates Liberia GMBH

15 FED/2004/195-668 Study for the April 30th, June 30th, European 42’310 Development of a 2004 2004 Consultants Regulatory Organisation Commission in the SPRL electricity sector

16 FED/2004/195-674 Rural Towns June 28th, September European 72’580

Final Report – August 2012 43

Electricity 2004 4th, 2004 Consultants Production and Organisation Distribution Study SPRL

17 FED/2004/195-679 Restoring Street December November Republic of 46’166 Lights in Monrovia 30th, 2004 30th, 2005 Liberia Impress Account

18 FED/2004/195-681 Technical March July 9th, Application 94’532 Assistance to assist 23rd, 2005 2005 Européenne LEC de Technologies

19 FED/2004/195-684 Long term June 13rd, March MVV 105’246 assistance in 2005 31st, 2006 Consultants electricity and Engineers GMBH

Most of them are old projects executed during the period 2003 - 2007 covered under the 2 first funding decisions. These projects are completed and they have been closed. Nevertheless an audit was commissioned in 2008 covering some of the corresponding projects, the period subject for audit ranging from 1st January 2005 to 1st February 2008. The auditor report states that the Programme Estimates and Implementation reports were not on file and copies were not made available for the audit team to review. This led to identify ineligible expenditures due to the absence of appropriate documents and various irregularities in the management and implementation of the programme/projects.

The purpose of the current evaluation being not for digging in depth in the administrative aspects of the interventions, and given that older projects have been audited and even evaluated [(Reference to the 2010 evaluation of all EC interventions (all sectors) covering the period 1999-2008 mandated by The Joint Evaluation Unit for: EuropeAid Cooperation Office (AIDCO), Directorate General for Development and Directorate-General External Relations)] , the current evaluation has focused on the most recent interventions completed or to be completed in the very near future. Thus concerning essentially the interventions under the funding decision 19 186 and the important contract implemented by ELTEL for the Rehabilitation of the Monrovia Electricity Grid, as they are shaded in the above table.

9.1.1 Implementation of the Monrovia Grid Rehabilitation Project The tender for the works and supplies relating to the Monrovia Grid Rehabilitation Project was originally prepared in October 2005 targeting the 13th of January 2006 for submission of proposals by the bidders. However the Procurement Notice for publication was then re-scheduled for 1st November 2005 to be published on the internet together with the Tender on 1st December 2005. Respecting the 90 days submission period, bids would be received on 1st March 2006, go through the evaluation and contract notification aiming to mobilise the selected candidate by end of March 2006. Finally the dead line for tendering in the published Works procurement notice (2006/S 56- 057777 dated 22nd March 2006) was 10th of July 2006. A site Visit was held on the 24th of May 2006. In June 2006 deadline for submission of tenders was extended to September 2006 and the public opening scheduled for the 14th September 2006. Two bids were received. Both bids were well over the budget requiring realignment of the finances. After negotiations with the EU Delegation in

44 Contract 2012/284032

Ivory Coast (NAO function) the evaluation was finalised in March 2007 (period of 6 months). The tender was then cancelled on the 27th April 2007 (via notice 2007 2007/S 74-089506) due to no valid bid received and permit for “Negotiated Procedure” was applied by authorization from EC/Ivory Coast.

A contract with ELTEL was eventually signed in March 2008; broadly two years after the initial tender notice date. One reason for this delay was stated in progress reports as a “delay in EC signing the long agreed contract amendment” for ELTEL that would “result in commissioning of the work being delayed until at least the end of March 2009”. The works started very slowly, and three years after signing the financing agreement, merely 18% of the planned 12.6 km of medium voltage lines and none of the planned 26.8 km of high voltage lines had been built or renovated. However, progress reports suggest that the work has progressed well since then and by February 2010, all of the medium voltage lines had been built and 70% of the high voltage lines had either been built or reconstructed. The project was finally commissioned for the majority of its component during the fourth quarter of 2010.

9.1.2 Status of the Monrovia Grid Rehabilitation Project to date The company Louis Berger was commissioned by the EU Delegation for the supervision of the project. They issued a final report at the date of October 2010, detailing the status of the various works and supplies under the contract of ELTEL. According to the supervising engineer and based on a comprehensive tour of the project sites by the evaluation team in April- May 2012, the scope of works and supplies is fully implemented in compliance with high standards and the statement that in the opinion of the LB team leader, “EC and LEC have received a very high quality functional electricity distribution system sufficient to meet Monrovia’s requirements for at least five years”.

The only reservation is relating to the capacity of the step-up transformer (66/22kV) at Bushrod premises which is/will not be adequate to distribute power from the new generators which may come in addition to the 15 currently in operation (not all at the same time). With the route of the 66 kV HV line running along the northern part of the city, no immediate expansion of the 66kV system would be economically justified.

Tables below indicate components of the completed project at the date of October 2010.

Final Report – August 2012 45

Table 5: Project Components as of October 2010

Monrovia 22kV Circuits

Route Acceptance Circuit Conductor Length (m) Certificate

From To

120mm² Bushrod Freeport 2,888 03 AAAC Bare

120mm² Freeport Vai Town 1,773 04 AAAC BLX

New 120mm² Ashmun Street 406 011 Bridge AAAC BLX

Monrovia New Bridge Cable 95mm² Cu 473 011

120mm² Freeport Flour Mills 530 05 AAAC BLX

Flour 120mm² New Georgia Junction 2,869 06 Mills AAAC Bare

Flour 120mm² New Georgia Junction 995 06 Mills AAAC BLX

Lynch 120mm² Capitol 1,313 01 Street AAAC BLX

120mm² Capitol Third Street Sinkor 2,061 02 AAAC BLX

Congo 120mm² Paynesville 3,327 07 Town AAAC Bare

Newport 120mm² Mamba Point Hotel 134 08 Street AAAC Bare

Newport 120mm² Mega Compound 250 09 Street AAAC Bare

Benson 120mm² EC Office 176 010 Street AAAC Bare

46 Contract 2012/284032

Monrovia 22kV System

22kV 66/22kV Substations Status Panels

Bushrod 5 Commissioned

Krutown 6 Commissioned

Capitol 7 Commissioned

Paynesville 5 Commissioned

22/0.415kV Pole Mounted Substations Quantity Status

Connected to distribution system. 18 Commissioned

Training substation 1 Used for training

22/0.415kV Ground Mounted Substations Quantity Status

Connected to distribution system. 4 Commissioned

Monrovia 66kV System

66kV Circuits Status

Construction complete, energised and Bushrod - Krutown commissioned 12 October 2010.

Construction complete, energised and Bushrod – Stockton Creek commissioned 12 October 2010.

Construction complete, energised and Stockton Creek - Capitol commissioned 12 October 2010.

Construction complete. Insufficient electrical clearance from a partially demolished building at Red Light / Paynesville has precluded energising the entirety of the line. Section from Stockton Creek - Paynesville Red Light Junction to Paynesville 66/22kV substation has not been energised. Protection system is commissioned but not proved by energising the complete line to Paynesville.

Stockton Creek Switching Site Commissioned.

66kV Substations Status

Construction complete, substation Bushrod commissioned 12 October 2010. (66/22kV transformer on soak)

Construction complete, substation Krutown commissioned 12 October 2010. (66/22kV

Final Report – August 2012 47

transformer initially energised. Re-energising requires resolution of system protection characteristics)

Construction complete, substation commissioned 12 October 2010. (66/22kV Capitol transformer initially energised. Re-energising requires resolution of system protection characteristics)

Construction complete. Tested. 66/22kV transformer to be energised from Congo Town on 14 October 2010. 66kV line from Bushrod / Paynesville Stockton Creek cannot be energised until completion of building demolition at Red Light / Paynesville.

Telephone communication between substations. Commissioned

Spares, Test and Safety Equipment A lump sum of EUR 25,000 was included in the contract for provision of test and safety equipment. ELTEL have indicated the actual cost for test and safety equipment is considerably greater than the contract price but considering that all the items were essential ELTEL did not claim for additional money. The following items were to be supplied to LEC by ETEL during November 2010.

Substation Spares Quantity

Lamps and bulbs (lot) 1

Fuses and MCB (lot) 1

66kV Overhead Line Spares Quantity

OPGW joint box 2

150mm2 AAAC quick joint 3

Suspension insulator string 5

Tension insulator string 5

Wooden poles 3

HV LP insulator 5

22kV Overhead Line Spares Quantity

Wooden poles 5

LP insulators 5

Tension insulators 5

Quick joints AAAC 120mm² 3

Preformed ties (set) 1

48 Contract 2012/284032

Guy wires and anchors (set) 1

HV fuses (Set) 1

LV fuses (Set) 1

66kV and 22kV Line Safety Equipment Quantity

Grounding equipment 3-ph.(steel tower) 4

Grounding equipment 3-ph.(wood poles) 6

Grounding equipment 3-ph. 8

HV Voltage indicator (with test set) 2

Insulated rod/stick 10

MV Voltage indicator (with test set) 2

66kV and 22kV Test Equipment Quantity

Insulation tester "Megger" 1

Relay tester "Sverker" 1

Multimeter with test probes 2

Phase rotation meter 3

MV Phasing tester 2

Infra Red Imager 1

General Tools and Equipment Quantity

Pole climbing shoes, set 5

Linesman tool belt and set 10

Lug-all block, 1,5ton 3

Tirfor incl. 20m wire 1

Come-along for conductor types, set 2

Lifting sling and snatch block 5

Torque wrench 3

Cutter for all types of conductors used 2

Safety belt & helmet 10

Pole climbing shoes, set 5

Vacuum Cleaner 4

Final Report – August 2012 49

9.2 APPROACH FOR DATA COLLECTION

The most obvious source of data, documents and information pertaining to the EU operations in the electricity sector is the CRIS. However due to the fact that the migration of all data related to older projects from the previous system (OLAS) was not totally effected, the access to the relevant material was therefore not totally exhaustive. Nevertheless, the EU programme Manager did his utmost in order that the team could receive hard and soft copies of administrative, financial and operational documents. The operations under the funding decision for the Monrovia Grid Rehabilitation project as the most recent ones are also the most appropriately documented.

Through the Web, the team performed also an extensive identification of documents of relevance to the sector, its policy and the operations (past, current and planned) by the members of the international donor’s community. Reports, sector studies, appraisal documents were invaluable tools for appraising the prevailing context, the actions in progress as well as the projections for the future. Thanks to the well opened public information disclosure policies of the majority of donors, updated and accurate data of various natures were made available.

Interviews and meetings have been held with the main actors of the electricity sector in Liberia. Official as well as informal discussions have also taken place in order for the team to appraise the prevailing socio-economic situation of Liberia and specifically acquaint with the situation of the electricity sector. Such interviews and discussions allowed collecting data and quantitative indicators as well as qualitative information useful for the performance of the evaluation. A list of the persons met is in Annex 1 and the bibliography in Annex 2.

9.3 LIMITATIONS

On the aspect of access to data and information and their acceptable level of accuracy, when carrying out this evaluation, the team had to face with and respond to a number of constraints, as laid out here after.

Table 6: Limitations to the evaluation Constraint Response by the evaluation team First interventions having By cross checking various documents and reports available from occurred in early 2003 the different sources the team could partly retrace the history of said availability of e-copies of operations. Nevertheless, as it appeared that they were few in relevant documents in CRIS relation with the electricity sector, the impossibility to conduct a was limited. valid ex-post evaluation to date has no significant influence on the conclusions and recommendations expected from this mission. Low access to hardcopy The team received the full support from the EU Programme documents, and in particular Manager who took over the administration of the old portfolio financial data, for older EC- thus obtaining an acceptable quantity of information recorded in financed programmes (e.g. CRIS. Second Rehabilitation programme; EDF8 Reintegration Programme)

50 Contract 2012/284032

The availability of The team arranged meetings with the most important donors Government and beneficiary active in Liberia for open discussions also seizing the opportunity (LEC) data on donor’s to take knowledge of their current operation and future/planed cooperation was low. interventions. The indicators and data A detailed analysis of the data and indicators was conducted in deriving from the order to assess possible trends even with limited long historical Management Contract records with the main aim to determine the tangible results on the monthly and quarterly reports ground: customers’ access, improvement of living conditions, and are only available for the improvement of business/productive activities. recent months. The data base is therefore limited, thus not allowing to perform valid statistical commutations Availability and reliability of Agencies in charge of statistics and compilation of various data from the government indicators (LISGIS, MoF) have not up dated and processed data agencies is uncertain. History for reflecting the current prevailing conditions. Extensive of data is too short for consultation of data banks on the Internet, recent economic deriving significant trends. reports allowed to assess the situation with a relatively good accuracy. Volatility of scenarios for In spite of noticeable differences for the scenarios depending on future demand/load due to their respective authors’ perception and methodologies, the the inaccuracy or absence of evaluation retained the most probable scenario as standing the baseline parameters midway of the extremes corresponding to Low Growth and High Growth approaches.

Final Report – August 2012 51

9.4 FOLLOW-UP OF THE END-USERS SURVEY

This chapter reports the findings of the End Users Survey which was carried out in Monrovia from May 2nd to May 9th 2012, as part of this evaluation. The broad objective of the survey was to assess the main patterns in behavior, expenses, attitude towards energy use in various segments of the population, enterprises and institutional services. More specifically, the aim was to assess:

4. the impacts the access to LEC electricity grid has on the life of the beneficiaries as well in the communities,

5. the willingness to pay and affordability to get connected to LEC grid of those households and other units who are not yet connected.

6. the perceptions of the results and achievements of the project (EU funded Grid Rehabilitation activities) by the beneficiaries and their degree of appropriation.

The following sections report, first, the results of the household survey and second those of the enterprises. The Methodology followed in this survey is presented in detailed Appendixes, as well as the questionnaires used.

9.4.1 Results and findings of the Household End User survey Urban context

The Household End Users Survey was conducted in six sites (survey areas) throughout the capital selected with reference to specific representativity criteria according to the objectives of the survey: these sites are Stephen Tolbert in Barnersville, New Georgia Estate in the community of the same name, Neezoe and Police Academy in Paynesville city, Clara Town in Bushrod Island, and Jallah/Saye Town in Central Monrovia. They cover the three types of urban patterns and land use in which the majority of the population of Monrovia is concentrated today. The following results are derived from the interviews of 354 households. See Table 7 and Figure 8 below.

Table 7: Household distribution per survey area and per urban pattern

Survey Area Nbr of HH % Urban pattern Sites/ Communities/ interviewed Neighborhoods  Clara Town  Jallah- Saye Town 85 24% Unplanned « Low income Bushrod Island communities »; densely central populated neighborhoods Central Town  Neezoe  Police Academy 138 39% Unplanned (organic) popular peri urban Paynesville -North of Somalia Drive neighborhoods ; low density of Road and West of Tubman Bvd population  Stephen Tolbert  New Georgia 131 37% Planned (grid pattern) peri urban Barnesville /New Georgia both neighborhoods ; medium to high density located north of Somalia Drive Road

Total 354 100%

52 Contract 2012/284032

Figure 8 : Map of the survey areas in Greater Monrovia

Demography and living conditions

Demography

On average, the household size of the interviewees consists of 6.4 members, a figure significantly higher than the average 4.8 members of the household size in Monrovia ( 2008 National Census). The reason is the high percentage of households of peri urban type selected for the End Users Survey sample; their families are much larger than those of households in densely populated low income neighborhoods of central Monrovia and Bushrod Island (the figure in these neighborhoods is 4.3 members on average); indeed, if the dependency ratio is on average1.2 for all households, it ranges from 1.4 in Neezoe and Police Academy to 0.7 in Clara Town.

Among the sample, 21% of households are headed by females (widowed, divorced or single with children) ranging from 34% (Stephen Tolbert) to 17% (Neezoe, Police Academy, Jallah Town). The overall mean age of household heads for sampled households is 37 years old. The mean percentage of households headed by members’ 60-years-of-age or above is 5%.

Housing and Living Conditions

A small majority (57%) of the households declared ownership of their dwelling units. Only 8% of the households reported neither ownership nor payment of rent for their current dwelling units—meaning that they are either housed by well-wishers/friends/relatives or declared themselves as caretakers. Most “free occupants” live in Clara Town. It is also in this type of low income “slum” settlement that overcrowding and multi sharing of the dwelling between several households are observed. On the

Final Report – August 2012 53

contrary, households in the peri urban areas are always the sole occupants of their dwelling irrespective of their tenure status, owner or renter.

Renters can be found in every neighborhood; on average they account for 35% of the sampled households; they are mostly representative of the household tenure status in the densely populated areas of Clara Town and Jallah Town (renters accounting for 53% of the respondents in these sites). The majority of LEC customers’ households and those equipped with a generator are owners of their houses while the majority of all renters are of the category of households without any access to electricity.

Levels of rents are closely correlated with income, size of the family and neighborhood environment. LEC customers and households with their own generator, irrespective of their location, pay on average USD 60 for the monthly renting of their dwelling, as those without electricity don’t pay more than about USD 20; the lowest costs rentals are observed in Clara Town and Jallah Town.

Concrete (hollow blocks) is the dominant construction material, accounting for about 90 % of households in central Monrovia low income neighborhoods as well in the two estate housing settlements (Stephen Tolbert and New Georgia); in the peri urban neighborhoods of Police Academy and Neezoe, however, mud bricks for walls still account on average for 30% of the responses. Roofing materials doesn’t vary as zinc material accounts on average for 97% of the sampled households in all neighborhoods.

Owners’ households of the peri urban sites in Paynesville (Neezoe and Police Academy) also characterized themselves by the shortness of the time they have lived in their actual dwelling -on average for 9 years - while respondents of the two low income settlements and the estate housing sites have lived there for many years already – on average 17 years -. The same differences between lengths of rentals are observed in the case of the renters: they have spent on average 3 years in their dwellings in Police Academy and Neezoe, and about 7 years in the other survey areas. This is a distinctive indication of the rapid urbanization process which develops in these peri urban neighborhoods

Overwhelming majority (95%) reported having access to improved drinking water (piped water/ standpipe, borehole with hand-pump, protected wells). However this access has a high cost in monetary terms and /or in time spent on this activity: on average 21% of all households have to buy water from water sellers, in particular in Jallah Town where they are 53% to do so. Some 5% of households (in Neezoe and Police Academy) draw water from wells, most of them being unprotected. The rest of the households have access to hand pumps (on average 59%), sometimes to piped water indoor or on neighbor’s yard (15%). The majority of hands pumps are found in the peri urban areas; most often financed by NGO’s projects. Very few have been installed in Clara Town or in Jallah Town. Safe water access and sanitation are crucial needs faced by the majority of urban households in Monrovia, in particular in the low income neighborhoods of central Monrovia and Bushrod Island.

Access to electricity and electricity use

Among the survey areas, three have been electrified during the last two years by LEC - Stephen Tolbert, New Georgia and Jallah Town-; the area of Clara Town is in process of electrification and two areas - Police Academy and Neezoe - are not yet connected to LEC grid.

Four categories of households are identified according to the type of access to electricity (grid or off grid): households connected to LEC grid (the sample is of 87 households), those supplied with

54 Contract 2012/284032

electricity by a private “current seller” called Independent Power Producer (“IPP”) (46 households), owners of an electric generator (67 households) and finally households having access to no source of electricity (154 households).

68% of the LEC household customers in the areas of New Georgia, Stephen Tolbert and Clara Town were connected to the grid in 2012 and 32% in 2011. They are thus very recent customers.

The IPP current sellers have developed since a few years mainly in neighborhoods with high density of population: like any supplier of electricity, they indeed look for a network of customers large enough in the immediate vicinity of their generator so as to make their business profitable. In Clara Town, Jallah Town and New Georgia, 20% to 40% of the households are connected to an IPP’s grid and it has been so for several years (40% of these households got connected between 2008 and 2010).

In peri-urban zones that are not densely populated, the IPPs are not frequent; the only means to get electricity is to own an electric generator; that concerns around 30% of the households, those whose with the highest incomes.

In these peri-urban areas of Paynesville City, 65% on average of the households are thus without access to electricity; they are approximately only 30% without access to electricity in the other surveyed areas.

The use of electricity is identical for all households with access to electricity (grid or off grid); their priorities are the following: 85% of the interviewees quote lighting in first use, 70% mention entertainment appliances (TV/radio) as a second priority/use and 58% only quote ventilators in third use. Only 33% of the respondents quoted in the other uses (charger of telephone, computer and miscellaneous)as the fourth use. Only one household has an electric cooker but used sparingly:

Whatever the survey areas or the level of income of interviewees, charcoal is the primary source of cooking energy.

LEC customer: connection costs, spending and consumption, perception of LEC service

Connection costs

Households equipped with conventional meters (in 2011) paid USD 115 connection fees, including USD 50 for connection and USD 65 in advance on consumption (or deposit). Households which have been equipped with prepaid meter on the other hand paid no more than USD 50 for connection fees. The installation of prepaid meters allowed the removal of advance on consumption fees. The additional costs incurred by some households mainly consist of expenses for installation within the house - around USD 50 for wiring, labor cost, switches for a single circuit and approximately twice - USD 115 - for the households having installed several circuits.

Monthly electricity expenditure and consumption

On average, the electricity bill of households of the sample amounts to USD 42 per month. Differences are observed in various neighborhoods and depend on the living standard: the majority of the bills amounting less than USD 20 per month are paid by households located in Clara Town; more than one third of the households of New Georgia and Stephen Tolbert pay monthly bills amounting to more than USD 40.

As a whole this level of bills indicates an extremely limited/low consumption; at the cost of USD 0,578/kWh (USD 0.54 tariff per kWh plus taxes) The average monthly electricity consumption of

Final Report – August 2012 55

these recently connected households is 73 kWh, meaning 131 kWh per person and per year. It should also be noted that the electricity consumption of households headed by a woman is definitely lower than that of households headed by a man, probably reflecting a lower level of income for women heading a household (given that the average size of their household in the sample is not lower than that of a household headed by a man).

Appreciation of the service provided by LEC

62% of the interviewed households are entirely satisfied with the service provided by LEC, 11% expressed dissatisfaction and nearly a third are both satisfied and disgruntled. The main reason of satisfaction is to – finally – have permanent access to electricity (24 hours a day). It is indeed the greatest improvement compared to the former situation; obviously for households which did not have access to electricity, but also for those which were connected to an IPP network of or which owned their own electric generator. In these two cases (see hereafter), the hours during which they could use electricity were very limited.

The reasons for dissatisfaction are primarily the irregularity of the supply currently provided by LEC; brownouts are frequent, so are outages seemingly, specifically in off-centered neighborhoods in the north of Somalia Drive Road. It is noted that the reason “expensive electricity” is quoted only by 16% of the disgruntled households. A quarter of the disgruntled households is not satisfied with the system of payment and billing: the households equipped with a prepaid meter consider, depending on the neighborhood, that they have difficulties obtaining prepaid card easily ( the network of salesmen needing to be developed gradually) and among those which were equipped with conventional meters, the main reason for dissatisfaction is the billing amount (flawed meters readings and sometimes apparently, exaggerated bills ).

Impact of electricity on households living conditions: perceptions by customers Figure 9 : LEC households : impacts on living conditions

All households interviewed underline the beneficial impact of connection to the LEC electrical grid on their living conditions. Regarding their new spending patterns, the issues highlighted by interviewees suggest that the change is more qualitative than quantitative. 27% of the households stress that the main positive impact is safety – the feeling of safety increases considerably with the ability of having lighting at night (bulb on the house porch); besides, this feeling is even stronger in neighborhoods where streetlights were installed even before the electrification of households.

56 Contract 2012/284032

The second by order of importance of the beneficial impacts relates to the improvement of family life and children conditions of studies (in overall 24% of the households); households’ investments in children school enrollment indeed needs to be highlighted and result in important financial sacrifices (see hereafter household expenses). 7% of the households are satisfied to finally be able to use the totality of their electrical appliances (this generally consists of one or two additional bulbs, one television set and a radio, a fan, rarely a refrigerator). 3% are satisfied to save money: generally, households which were equipped with electric generators. Globally, it can be noted that only 19% of households stated that they bought or want to buy more electrical appliances; finally 12% of households consider the development of an economic activity (very often related to the preparation and the sale of food; it often relates to households headed by a woman).

The impact of connection to the electrical grid on the level of consumption of these households appears moderate and the declarations of interviewees confirm the results of the quantitative analysis of their consumption. The financial constraints of these households are very strong: they are hereafter detailed in the section relating to the analysis of the total expenditure of the surveyed households’ budget.

IPP customer: connection costs, spending and consumption, perception of IPP service

Connection costs

They appear reduced and mainly consist in, the wiring of the residence, depending on answers; the average expenditure is approximately of USD 42 by household. This amount appears underestimated in the results. According to interviews conducted in the survey areas IPP also require customers to pay a small amount of money for “the recording”; many of them also require an advance/deposit on consumption.

Monthly electricity expenditure and consumption

The billing system used by IPPs covers two main models. The monthly payment based on the amperage provided which represents a ceiling of consumption: the customer can subscribe for 1 amp, 2 amps, 3, 4 etc. The price is USD 40 per amp and per month in all neighborhoods surveyed and the bill is a multiple of this amount depending on the number of amps provided. It is the most widespread system and it concerns the majority of IPPs’ customers. The second model consists in a “daily” (at night actually) or a weekly billing, for “a certain number of electrical installations”: they are almost exclusively electric bulbs, and generally the households having this type of billing are modest households only equipped with 2-3 bulbs. The electricity is exclusively provided at night: the most frequent time slot is from 7 pm to 6 – 7 am, that is to say on average 11 hours per day. In Clara Town, according to the answers from the households, the number of hours is definitely lower (between 5 and 6 hours per night).

The average expenditure is USD 40 in Clara Town, Jallah Town and Neezoe; it is almost twice in New Georgia (USD 70), area where the average level of income of households is higher.

By computing the number of hours of current provided /the average number of hours during which the electricity consumption of the household is effective and the number of amps subscribed, it is possible to estimate the household’s consumption. The determined theoretical average per person consumption is 10.9 kWh per month, meaning, 131 kWh per year. In reality, households consume electricity only during a few hours at night. Also, the determined actual consumption only rises to a little more than 90 kWh per person and per year, which is very low. For this actual consumption, the price per kWh paid by household ranges from USD1,4 to USD 0.9 depending on the areas of survey

Final Report – August 2012 57

– the highest price being in Clara Town. On average the IPP customers of the sample pay USD 1,2/kWh which is more than twice the LEC price.

Evaluation of the service provided by IPPs

The interviewees are in majority (63%) dissatisfied with the service provided by their IPP: “the current is unstable and above all, it is only provided at night”. For those who are satisfied, the main reason is, at least, that the IPP is in their neighborhood the only provider of basic current for minimum lighting of households of all categories of incomes. For a majority of households, it is indeed much cheaper to be connected to an IPP, despite all the drawbacks of using this kind of supplier, than to operate its own electric generator… as the operation and maintenance costs are high. All households of this category wish to be connected to the LEC grid.

Households with their own generator: spending and consumption

67 households owning an electric generator were questioned about their consumption and spending. The generators are of a low capacity for the majority of them: on average they are 2.7 kVA in capacity and operate no more than 4 hours a day. Their lifetime is limited and the period of depreciation is short. In surveyed neighborhoods almost all households use an electric generator for their domestic use. Electrical appliances of these households are far more diverse than those of more modest households connected to IPPs. In general households owning an electric generator own a TV set.

On average, calculated over the year and per person, consumption remains however very moderate; that is to say 110 kWh approximately. The evaluation of electricity consumption evidences clear differences between neighborhoods: the annual average consumption per person in Stephen Tolbert, a “wealthy” neighborhood is 140 kWh while it is only 80 kWh in Clara Town, a “low income” neighborhood.

Fuel and maintenance costs are heavy and recurring. Adding up the depreciation, maintenance and regular expenditures, the expenses incurred by households for the operation of their generator are close to USD 4 per day. On average, these households pay their kWh USD 1.9 which is 3.3 times the price of one kWh from the LEC network. It is then obvious that these households would all wish to be connected to the LEC network.

Households without electricity: lighting expenditures

This category of household is primarily equipped with low consumption lamps (Chinese lamps) working with batteries. There are very few urban households that rely solely on candles for their lighting. Rather, it is noticeable that the candles are still used as emergency lighting. Batteries expenses are high; given the poor quality of those available on the market they must be renewed frequently. On average, lighting expenses for households without electricity amount to USD 4 per month.

All sampled households: cooking fuel

As noted before, all households of the sample use charcoal as cooking fuel. Average monthly household expenditure for charcoal amounts to USD 12,7.

58 Contract 2012/284032

Willingness to get connected and affordability

Households that are not connected to the LEC grid were questioned about their willingness to be connected and their ability to pay the related connection expenses. Without surprise all (100%) interviewees owning an electric generator and those buying electricity from an IPP answered that they were willing to become customers of LEC and that they were able to pay the connection expenses. For these two categories of households, the installation and wiring expenses will generally be low. On the contrary, in the case of households with no access to electricity, nearly all of them will have to pay connection fees plus wiring expenses, which in total amounts approximately to USD 100 per household. It is to be noted that 90% of these households wanted to be connected but 30% of them specified that they did not have the financial capacity to pay these expenses.

When questioned about their monthly repayment capacity, these households answered that they were able to pay USD 17 on average, but the median answers amounted to USD 10 monthly. It is to be noted that it precisely represents the amount of repayment contemplated by LEC over 5 months to facilitate most modest households’ access to electricity. Consequently, they will have to bare the installation expenses in their residence.

Level of financial effort per category of consumers: household budget expenses

A detailed analysis of the levels of expenditure was carried out for each main category of expenses, following different categories of consumers - LEC customers, IPP customers, households with their own generator, households without electricity - and quartiles (determined using the total number of households) in order to measure the financial effort these households are prepared to make. The levels of expenditure are used as a proxy of the level of households’ incomes.

By area of survey: the average amount of expenses for the whole interviewees is of 422 USD per household and per month; the median amount of total expenses is relatively close and amounts to 372 USD. It is in the area of Neezoe that the poorest households according to the level of their expenses were identified (between 80 USD and 183 USD for Q1) and in the area of Stephen Tolbert that the households with the highest monthly level of expenses (maximum USD 1227) were identified.

By category of consumers: households without electricity are those with the lowest median level of expenses and households connected to LEC are those with the highest median level of expenditure.

Table 8: Household monthly total expenditures by category of respondents

All LEC IPP Own Without respondents customers customers generator electricity

USD USD USD USD USD

Average 422 508 426 542 323

Median 372 437 427 514 288

Q1 266 333 296 356 194

Q2 372 437 427 514 288

Q3 535 642 506 684 408

Q4 1227 1227 751 1072 953

Final Report – August 2012 59

By main category of expenses:

Three categories of expenses account for 63% of households’ total monthly expenses: see Table below.

Table 9: Household monthly expenditure by category of expenditure

Quartile Food Mobility Ener Water Rent School/ Medical Commu Various Total Total care gy education nication % USD*

Q1 53% 7% 12% 2% 2% 5% 6% 6% 5% 100% 188

Q2 43% 9% 13% 2% 2% 8% 6% 8% 8% 100% 316

Q3 37% 12% 12% 2% 2% 11% 6% 9% 8% 100% 447

Q4 32% 16% 11% 2% 2% 11% 8% 8% 10% 100% 743

% on total 37,5% 12,6% 11,6% 2,3% 2,0% 9,9% 7,0% 7,8% 9% 100,0%

Average 158,5 53,4 49,2 9,9 8,6 41,9 29,5 33,0 38,2 422,4 on total USD

*calculated on average of expenditure in the quartile

Food is obviously the major expenditure: if this category accounts on average for 38% of household’s total monthly expenditure, this percentage is 53% for Q1 households and of 32% for Q4 households.

Mobility: transportation costs represent the second expenditure: on average 13% of the total expenses. This is representative of the financial effort of households living far from the main centers of employment (private or public employees).

. Transports accounts for only 7% (USD 14 per month on average) for Q1 households against 16% (USD 120 per month on average) for Q4 households.

. The poorest households which hardly move no matter the area of survey considered are among the formers.

. When they live in off-centered areas, households with modest to average levels of income (Q2 with Q4) dedicate a significant portion of their income to mobility: this is the main problem pointed out by households living in neighborhoods in the north of Somalia Drive Road (Stephen Tolbert or New Georgia) or in Paynesville (Academy Police and Neezoe). These are indeed the households that make the highest effort for their children education; often the expenses for children’s mobility are as important as those of parents’ because these children attend secondary schools or colleges located in the center of Monrovia. It is also in these expenditure quartiles that are the largest number of employees of the formal private sector or the public sector whose places of work are more often located in the town center.

60 Contract 2012/284032

. The comparative advantage in cost of mobility for households living in the “low income neighborhoods” of the town center - Jallah Town or Clara Town is clearly shown when compared to the mobility budget of peri-urbans households.

Energy is the third category of expenditure. It covers the expenditure for lighting and cooking. This category also accounts for 12% on average of the households’ total monthly expenditure and it should be noted that this percentage remains almost identical for all quartiles.

This category represents an expenditure of USD 20 per month for the households of Q1 – households which are almost all in the category “without electricity”, some being customers of IPPs – the main part of this amount being devoted to purchase the energy required for cooking.

The energy category represents an expense ranging from USD 41 to USD 54 for households of Q2 and Q3 – the related households are mainly customers of IPPs and LEC and some own a generator – in the last Q4 quartile, the energy category for lighting and cooking represents an average expense of USD 80 per month for the households in Q4 – this relates to households having an electric generator and the wealthiest LEC households customers.

The other significant categories of expenditures are education, telecommunication and health care (each one representing between 7% and 10% of the total average expenses for the whole households). The remainder - rent, water, miscellaneous social expenses – approximately accounts for only 13% on average of all of the sample households’ expenses.

Three types of behavior can be identified:

. It clearly appears that for the households of quartiles Q3 and Q4 to pass from the statute of an IPP customer especially from that of electricity producer (owners of an electric generator) to that of LEC customer several alternatives are possible: - The expected benefit can be a definitely higher electricity consumption (24 hours a day, all electrical appliances of the household can be used) for a constant level of expenses. These are the households that also state that they want to buy more electrical appliances and invest in an economic activity that requires a greater consumption of electricity. - But for others, taking into account their priorities - other incompressible expenses and financial efforts essentially directed toward objectives of mobility (supporting of professional investment) and investment in the education of descendents - the choice will rather be to save on the energy bill and transfer the savings to these other expenses. In this case, consumption hardly increases.

. For low to middle income households, customers of IPPs (Q2), connection to the LEC network represents considerable savings: these households will reduce their average electricity expenses by a 2 factor: they are those who will be able to move from the monthly USD 40 that they pay for the subscription of one amp with an IPP to a monthly electricity bill of USD 20-25; and this by consuming the same quantity (either approximately 35 kWh by household and per month).

. For the poorest, being connected to the LEC network represents an additional expenditure: from USD 5 on average of lighting expenses, the expenditure will necessarily increase and approximately reach USD 15 per month as shown in our sample. It is in this group that can be identified the largest number of household heads stating that they conduct petty trade as main activity (generally on large neighboring markets - Red Light in Paynesville or Douala

Final Report – August 2012 61

Market in Bushrod Island). It is also this group expressing the strongest concern relating to their ability to pay connection expenses and regular electricity consumption expenses/bills.

This confirms the advantages of the prepayment meter which allows these households to better manage their expenses and to cover them as their cash income become available. It also confirms the advantages of a deferred payment of initial connection expenses.

However, for this group of poor households, the average consumption obviously remains very low. Extremely important expenditure like food, often those of water, rental expenses are incompressible expenditure which have priority over that of lighting.

9.4.2 Results and findings of the Enterprise End User survey Because of various limitations during the process of the survey (cf methodology section) the sample of the economic and social units is almost totally constituted of economic and commercial enterprises; only one school agreed to answer the questions. These companies all are located along Somalia Drive Road at the crossroads of Chicken Soup Factory; Stephen Tolbert Community and Zota Community.

The number of questioned units and whose results are exploitable amounts to 36: 20 are connected to LEC grid, 8 have their own generator for their supply in electricity and 6 are without electricity.

This sample is composed of a private high school and for the remainder, a majority in the trade sector – commercial enterprises represent 75% of the sample, those in services and production being the 25%. They are very small companies/entities. The leading managers are rather young - on average 35 years and most are men (75%).

In majority these units are settled in individual building (54%) while 25% develop their activity in premises including their housing; two thirds of these companies have been tenants of their buildings for 6 years on average. They are built in concrete (95%); only the craftsmen carpenters operate in buildings built out of precarious materials. The service companies have on average 2 employees, those in trade a little less than 1.5 employees and those of artisanal production on average 6. The school employs 10 people including 8 teachers.

All the companies supplied by LEC grid were connected in 2012. Those with their own generator acquired it already in 2006, and more recently for others in 2009, 2010 and 2012. 4 of these companies use electricity only for lighting, all the others have several other types of appliances or electrical equipment (freezers, ventilation, radio, electric tools etc.).

16 on the 20 units connected to the LEC grid are equipped with prepaid meters, the others with conventional meters. The cost of connection is on average 115 USD, the range being from 80 USD to 285 USD for the highest amounts. Expenses for wiring equipment and manpower are significant.

Their average monthly bill amounts to USD 140 and their median expenditure is 74 USD. The consumption which corresponds to this amount is 240 kWh in the average case and of 124 kWh for the median expenditure. Three quarters of these companies, including the school, declare that their expenditure of electricity accounts for approximately 25% of their turnover; this share amounts to 33% of the turnover of the two larger electricity consumers of the sample.

These companies are as a whole very satisfied to be connected to LEC grid.

Most of them are however expressing a mix of satisfaction and dissatisfaction on certain aspects The economic criteria are obviously dominant: the first reason for satisfaction is the possibility of

62 Contract 2012/284032

having current permanently (24h over 24h), then comes as a second by set of priorities the economies which they can now make compared to the former situation (electric generator); finally the control of consumption for some of them equipped with a pre-payment meter is considered a plus. For 15% of the companies the possibility of longer opening hours in the evening for commercial or service activities is also a plus.

These companies are located along the road of Somalia Drive Road, at places where street lights were installed since the end of 2011 by LEC. They state to benefit doubly from the improvement of the commercial environment thanks to the public lighting and that of their own unit attracting more customers. Figure 10 LEC customers : advantages of LEC current and service provided

It should however be stressed that these small enterprises mention the following problems:

. At first the irregularity of the current which strongly penalizes them - inopportune cuts, outages -: “LEC current is most often fluctuating; Current goes off unnoticed, unstable current; current shut down whenever there is rain”;

. High price of LEC electricity.

. The system of payment is not adapted to the operation of their business : “prepaid is good for household not for business; “difficult to get prepaid card”. On the contrary, some would prefer to have prepayment meters instead of being billed (billing and metering problems, defective meter) in an inaccurate way.

. Finally there are those mentioning that the LEC does not have any real service where customers could go for their complains or for addressing various issues; they complain also about the high transport expenses incurred for multiple displacements when it is necessary to go to LEC head office in West Point to solve problems.

Final Report – August 2012 63

Figure 11 : Disadvantages of LEC current and service provided

For the units having their own electric generator the same problems as those described above in the case of households: high costs of the maintenance of the generator, fuel consumption, repairs. On average the monthly expenditure amounts to USD 170 (from USD 95 to USD 385 according the size of the units) for approximately 5,5h per day. The managers unanimously declare that this system has one main disadvantage “high operation costs”.

As for the units (craftsmen) with the “Chinese lamps” for lighting, they recognize that this lighting system is of a very moderate cost and “it is the only affordable for the time being”.

These small enterprises were questioned on the three main problems which they face: for those which are connected to the network, the cost of electricity is quoted at first, then the small base of customers, the security and the transport costs of the goods from the port to their premises. For those which are not connected (owning a generator), the major problems are that of the electricity cost and the difficulty to access credit, finally, for the carpenters, tailors and mechanics and small traders who have neither electricity from the network nor generator; the main problem is obviously the access to electricity and then, the high cost for rental.

Concerning the willingness to be connected to LEC grid, the majority of the enterprises express their will to be connected. Several of them tried to register already at LEC but they had to wait because the progress in constructing new installations in the area is very slow. They state all to have the capacity to pay the connection and installation expenses for their enterprises. Only two (the carpenter and a tailor) on the 16 units express a refusal due to the high costs of the connection, wiring and consumption.

Concerning the impact on their economic activity if connected to LEC grid, they mention in first an appreciable increase of the number of customers, in particular in the evening (45%), safety (25%), a better management of products and goods (for pharmacies and other salesmen of health products), a greater comfort (!) “no more stress associated with operating the electric generator”.

64 Contract 2012/284032

9.4.3 Conclusions  If the tariffs applied by LEC are among the highest in the world (estimated at 0.578 USD/kWh), those applied by small private operators (estimated at 1.2 USD/kWh) or by auto- production with small generator sets (estimated at 1.9 USD/kWh) are even more exorbitant. Unfortunately many households and most companies are constrained to pay such tariffs when they are not connected to the LEC grid.

 The feeling of satisfaction concerning electricity was dominant among all households interviewed: 62% of customers are entirely satisfied, 11% are dissatisfied and 27 % mixed. The reasons for discontent are mostly problems with the quality of service provided by LEC. For those households equipped with conventional meter, they particularly quote problems of metering and billing; those equipped with pre paid meters complained wasting time to find scratch card seller. The customer service is not yet well developed, especially in the peri urban areas of Barnersville and Gardnersville. For small enterprises the major problems raised were the irregularity of current, the outages and their negative impacts on economic activity.

 The geographical targeting - Northern zone of Monrovia and Eastern districts – The interventions financed by the European Union within the framework of EPP 2 and the Monrovia Electricity Grid Rehabilitation Project were perfectly relevant as these neighborhoods comprise the major part of the population of the town of Monrovia. However, as the low voltage grid has not been developed by other actors as expected, large peri urban neighborhoods of Paynesville still don’t have access to the grid, even if the rehabilitation programme of its sub station, initiated during EPP 1 and EPP 2, financed partly by the European Union, had in its targets to allow the extension of the network in these zones characterized by a very rapid urbanization. Eventually, the last rider of the Monrovia Electricity Grid Rehabilitation Project covered the provision for resources for the delivery and installation of 2’600 prepaid meters in low income neighborhoods, in particular in Jallah Town and Saye town, located in Central Monrovia. This specifically targeted the final beneficiaries and thus was very relevant.

Final Report – August 2012 65

9.5 EVALUATION CRITERIONS

9.5.1 Past evaluations In 2010 an evaluation of all EC interventions (all sectors) covering the period 1999-2008 was mandated by The Joint Evaluation Unit for: EuropeAid Cooperation Office (AIDCO), Directorate General for Development and Directorate-General External Relations. The report on findings was issued in December 2010. The evaluation considered EC assistance during the periods of the EDF8 and 9 (from a variety of instruments), but also considered choices made by the EC to disburse aid under the EDF10, including most of the interventions object of the evaluation performed by the team in April – May 2012 and specifically the last funding decision 019-186 pertaining to the Monrovia Electricity Grid Rehabilitation Project which is the culminating point of EU engagements in the Electricity sector in Liberia

For the older contracts (Contracts covered Technical Assistance, supplies (gasoil at the period 2003- 2004), supervision and monitoring services, equipment and works.) implemented on the period 2003 to 2006), the evaluation findings were underlining the lack of proper staffing of the EU delegation in Monrovia for assuring the proper instruction and processing of the interventions. In fact a full-fledged Delegation was installed in Monrovia only in September 2010. Prior to this date, interventions were under the responsibility of the EU delegation in Abidjan.

The most critical issues identified under the evaluation which are relevant to the interventions in the electricity sector are reported in the following table:

Table 10: Critical issues from the past evaluation

Reason for low performance Effect - Impact Suggested Recommendation

Low organisational capacity of A fraction of the money that had Link resource the EU during 2005 - 2006 been promised to the Liberian commitments to Government effectively contracted. operational resources

Conjunction of administrative The rebuilding of electrical and Improve coordination water infrastructure in Monrovia and information system delays of prior years, and the was also affected by these delays; within the EU system overall difficult conditions for many of the intended projects to delivering aid in make lasting improvements to the Liberia capitals infrastructure started only with 2-3 years of delay.

Understaffing of the EU office in Difficulty to respond to the Link operational operational demands that the large resources to resource Monrovia aid portfolio had placed on the commitments organisation, leading to unfulfilled

expectations among the commission’s main partners.

Disconnection between fund The design of the EC cooperation Re-enforcement of the

66 Contract 2012/284032

commitments and provision of strategy and the commitment at appraisal and operational resources political level for large scale preparation phases of support during Liberia’s post-war the projects with years did not sufficiently consider enlarged dialogue with the very limited implementation future executing and capacity of the EU’s own beneficiary agencies Delegation in Liberia during those years.

Unrealistic anticipation of risks The European Commission’s Strengthen procedures and other post conflict procedures and mechanisms for and mechanisms that constraints design, planning and can help to adequately implementation did not adequately anticipate the particular

take into account the difficult risks and constraints of conditions, vagary, risks and working in Liberia, and operational constraints of Liberia’s in post-conflict countries post conflict environment. in general.

Shortcomings reduced the full The EC could successfully provide Improve monitoring, potential of the EC actions some relevant and important supervision and impulses for Liberia’s stabilisation, oversight and refocus

but only in a relatively small support on most number of cases. The EC’s vulnerable and contributions lagged significantly marginalised behind its actual potential and populations. value-added for assisting post- Better use of the ROM conflict societies and its missions and reports commitment to focus support on the most vulnerable, marginalised populations.

9.5.2 Relevance of the EU interventions As per the evaluation standards, Relevance measures “the extent to which an intervention’s objectives are pertinent to needs, problems and issues to be addressed”. The following table and graph illustrate the evolution of the Human Development Index (HDI) in Liberia since 1980. To date, Liberia's HDI is 0.329, which places the country a rank 182 out of 187 countries with comparable data. The HDI of Sub-Saharan Africa as a region increased from 0.365 in 1980 to 0.463 today, placing Liberia below the regional average. As appearing on the graph, the index most significant increases (despite modest) started from the year 2006, which corresponds to the concentration of efforts by the international community and the new elected government for restoring the institutions and the basic infrastructure. There was a slight decrease in 2008 and since then the trend is positive but very slow. It would be hazardous to conclude that there is a causality link between the index increase and the specific interventions of the EU in the electricity sector. Nevertheless, their contribution to the improvement in the living conditions of the population (mostly in the Monrovia area – 48.2% of the Liberia’s population lives in urban areas) cannot be disputed.

Final Report – August 2012 67

Table 11: Human Development index

Human Development Index

Year Liberia Low human Sub- World development Saharan Africa

2011 0.329 0.456 0.463 0.682

2010 0.325 0.453 0.460 0.679

2009 0.320 0.448 0.456 0.676

2008 0.328 0.443 0.451 0.674

2007 0.319 0.437 0.445 0.670

2006 0.298 0.430 0.438 0.664

2005 0.300 0.422 0.431 0.660

2000 0.306 0.383 0.401 0.634

1985 0.332 0.334 0.374 0.576

1980 0.335 0.316 0.365 0.558

An interesting observation which is derived from the data relating to the indicators for Doing Business (IFC – World Bank) shows that getting electricity is still a bottleneck with one rank lost between 2011 and 2012. Numbers of days and procedures and the cost for access (connection) have not changed since 3 years. On the contrary, the rank relating to the aspect of starting a business has drastically and positively improved in 2011. Thus demonstrates the emergence of a dynamic momentum resulting from a better institutional and legal framework conducive for more productive initiatives and activities.

Table 12: Indicators for doing business

Getting Starting a Getting Electricit Ease of Starting Starting a Starting a Getting Business - Getting Electricity y - Cost Doing a Business - Business Electricity Year Cost (% of Electricit - (% of Business Business Procedure - Time - Time income per y - Rank Procedure income Rank - Rank s (number) (days) (days) capita) s (number) per capita)

2007 .. .. 10 68 563.9 ......

2008 .. .. 10 68 489.6 ......

2009 .. .. 6 31 100.2 ......

2010 .. .. 5 20 85.6 .. 4 586 5,066.0

2011 155 71 5 20 88.3 152 4 586 5,294.1

2012 151 35 4 6 68.4 153 4 586 4,455.2

68 Contract 2012/284032

Expected or facilitated access to electricity is certainly one of the important favourable parameters. Nevertheless the reality remains that since the rehabilitation of parts of the Monrovia electricity grid, the rate of connection installation is still low. As a result of what was observed during the appraisal of LEC capabilities and the visits made in various areas of the city several reasons can be articulated:

1. LEC lacks the tools, personnel and equipment (vehicles, hauling equipment) to install the LV part of the system at a pace commensurate with the challenging objective assigned to them of several thousands of new connections within the coming months. (Under the Management Contract, LEC must connect at least 33,000 plus 9’000 additional new customers by 30 June 2015). 2. LEC is constrained by the need for a prudent management of the customer base growth and the actual capacities of the transmission system (HV and MV) and installed/available generation capacity. 3. The cost of connection to be borne by LEC (said to be in the tune of US $ 1’000 per connection), before it is amortized by the customer connection fee has an important impact on LEC’s financial situation.

Remedies for addressing these issues (resulting in the low rate of connection installation) are closely linked with the future investment plan that LEC will implement for the next years. The execution of this plan closely depends on the availability of adequate financial resources from LEC revenues, from the government and from donors. This is to say that there is necessity of a well coordinated mainstreaming of the actions and initiatives of all parties. LEC will remain the ultimate “implementer” of the planned programmes and projects. To properly discharge this role, LEC needs support and capacity re-enforcement at various levels: HR, equipment and tools, operations and management organization, financial support and facilitation which can be globally provided through adequately designed Technical Assistance, Training and Knowledge Transfer.

The following table is a synopsis of the immediate and first observations and findings “from the ground” that the evaluation team gathered during its activities. Such table is established for the 5 usual evaluation criterions namely: Relevance, Effectiveness, Efficiency, Impacts and Sustainability.

Final Report – August 2012 69

Table 13: Relevance of the project

Relevance and quality of the Project

Sub Component Correspondence with Observations Comments and the Project Log frame Suggestions

Documentation and Award of work contract The team had access The responsibility for reports from the project to a large volume of issuing the project documents and implementation reports. The technical documentation and aspects were relatively reports was obviously easy to assess for the passed on to the most recent projects, implementation but difficult to identify agencies and the for the older projects. contractors.

The administrative background of older projects was only fragmentary in the CRIS.

The initial project identification and definition documents are of good standards. They allowed to issue tenders and bids internationally. The subsequent contracts did not lead to claims or recourses except the older ones for which ex-post audits determined irregularities.

Socio-economic and Improved living To date (April- May There is no doubt that environmental context conditions 2012) the prevailing any initiative to in the Project area conditions observed in improve Monrovia’s Improved safety Monrovia are those of electrical power supply Increased business a poorly developed infrastructure was activities in the sector country, aggravated by highly relevant at the and else destruction and beginning of the deterioration which interventions which Increased job levels in happened during the took place in a post- the sector and else years of wars and conflict situation. conflicts.

70 Contract 2012/284032

In the sector of The project did not electricity, obvious originally comprise LV improvements were components for visible immediately connecting new after the emergency customers until an interventions which addendum to the allowed a limited contract provides number of customers resources for 2’600 to be connected as prepaid meters well as the restoration targeting low income of some street communities lightings.

The results of the end- Socio-economic users survey indicators have conducted under the improved since the evaluation scope beginning of the confirm that the Project, but some have willingness to pay and deteriorated, like the the level of affordability indicator “getting to cover costs for electricity” which lost 1 connections and rank between 2011 supply of electricity and 2012. exists. The population (interviewed households) also declared that they would prefer LEC services for more reliability in the power supply and an easier management/predictab ility/control of their expenses.

Relevance regarding New democratically The interventions are Interventions were a Ministry of Energy and elected government in fully aligned with the first set of urgent Poverty Reduction place and ready to strategic objective 1 actions responding to Strategies adopt legislation stated in the PRS needs in a post conflict necessary for which is to extend grid situation. Further liberalisation and electricity throughout actions will have to privatisation. Monrovia and its closely align with the environs and the subsequent goals and Government provides principal objective of strategic objectives of funds and personnel the National Energy the PRS and the for regulator. Policy which is to National strategies Sufficient private sector ensure universal which target quality investor interest in access to modern and access (modern generation and energy services in an energy), low carbon distribution. affordable, sustainable type (renewable) and

Final Report – August 2012 71

and environmentally- least coast alternatives Successful tender for friendly manner in (affordability) options company to operate order to foster the for the next phases of the transmission grid. economic, political, and development of the Sufficient private sector social development of electricity sector at the interest in distribution. Liberia. scale of the country. Expectations for the private sector participation were too ambitious.

Initial project Secondary Activity: Proposing this activity The objective was identification and initial Institutional and within the scope of the premature and over formulation logistical support interventions was well optimistic. The aligned with the corresponding a) Institutional support Government own activities were not and studies enabling objectives and policies implemented. sector reform. as stated in the PRS Preparation phase of b) Logistical support: and the draft National the project should have Energy Policy. TA for finalisation of better integrated legal and regulatory lessons and framework. experiences gained from failures in other TA for launching the countries in the region. award of concession contracts.

9.5.3 Efficiency As per the evaluation standards, efficiency measures “the extent the desired effects are achieved at a reasonable cost”. It also covers the appraisal of achieved results with reference with those targeted in the project log frame.

The Financing Agreement (FA) was signed on June 1st, 2006 but the Works Contract was awarded to ELTEL only in March 2008 mainly due to the fruitless international bidding process. Works on the sites started effectively around November 2008 and about 17 months after the awarding of the contract, only about 25% of the entire work was completed mainly due to a long mobilization period imposed by the actual prevailing circumstances. Then the works progressed well under an efficient management and efficient cooperation with local subcontractors, using appropriate local resources and demonstrating a flexible and innovative approach.

Unfortunately on the institutional aspects slow progress were made regarding the TA activities supporting good governance at MLME and LEC as they were foreseen in the Financial Agreement. Such technical assistance was and remains very important to support the government organizing the sector in view of its liberalisation and privatisation. The expected target that private participation would take interest in the investment, construction and operation in the sector was globally missed. Looking backward, the project objectives were also expected to produce Indirect results listed in the initial project log frame like i) Private concession(s) for generation are awarded ii) A company is

72 Contract 2012/284032

recruited to operate the High Voltage transmission grid and iii) Private concession for distribution concessions is awarded.

These expectations were highly ambitious, not to say unrealistic. Given the prevailing conditions in most of the West African countries where privatization or concessioning of electricity generation or transportation projects have not yet produced success stories but rather dramatic failures, it was over-optimistic to target such results in a post-conflict and still fragile country. The construction of a conducive institutional environment takes a long time. It is however certainly the approach for the future, as private sector participation in the electricity sector could bring additional investments, management and operational skills and could improve the overall performance of the industry/services,. Before contemplating such a favourable context, strict prerequisites and appropriate fundamentals are necessary. There is still a long way to go for Liberia where the materialization of the basic first parameters is constantly delayed, like the finalization and adoption of the Electricity Law and the setting up of an Electricity Regulatory Entity/Authority.

Table 14: Project efficiency

Project Efficiency (Status of results)

Sub Component Correspondence with Observations Comments and the Project Log frame Suggestions

Input Delivery Inspection of network Due to the emergency Re-enforcement of coverage in a situation at the time of preparatory phase quality, representative sample preparing the project and more detailed evaluation of areas. defining its components activities and in the and corresponding country dialogues are Business and budgets, the basic data essential. consumer price were not totally accurate benchmarks and needed to be guessed to some extent. throughout the city.

Cost Control Supervision of works The first part of the The process for the ICB interventions was was long and delayed for Final acceptance of dominated by an mainly reasons, thus works for transmission emergency character fostering the perception of and distribution grid which involved that high risk. activities were to be expedited quickly, thus eventually not optimizing

costs.

The second part costs were the response of market to an ICB, supposed to reflect the real costs and a reasonable portion of contingencies and risk premium.

Final Report – August 2012 73

Activity Management Supervision of works Execution and The appointment of an implementation delegated experienced company for to other agencies for the a Management Contract “emergency part” of the within the National Utility project. was pertinent.

Then assignment of an Reliable data and Engineer as Owner’s information are only Delegate for the physical generated since the MC part of the rehabilitation is in place. project

Contractual Award of work contract Works under the ELTEL Works and installations achievements by 03/2006. contract fully performed in accordance implemented and with high standards Final acceptance of commissioned in complying with the state works for transmission December 2011. of the arts. and distribution grid. Despite delays in the Final report by the bidding phase, works Owner’s Engineer has no were performed with high reservation. Award of TA contracts professional standards. as necessary. No major deviation in the implementation calendar.

Results obtained Private concession(s) On the aspects of Private The results on the versus expected for generation Sector participation and technical aspects are fully results awarded. A company “unbundling” of achieved through the recruited to operate the operations in the delivery and installation electricity sector by on site of all works and High Voltage allocating concessions, services covered by the transmission grid there are no tangible contracts. results Private concession for distribution concessions awarded The results on the No Regulatory Entity in institutional aspect Legal and regulatory place and fully targeting the concession framework for operational of parts of the electricity system were not liberalisation completed achieved. The Energy Law is Sector regulator set up drafted but has not yet been adopted. Adoption of laws and the

creation of a Regulatory Entity needed for drawing interest of private investors, operators and concessionaires are delayed.

74 Contract 2012/284032

9.5.4 Implementation effectiveness Effectiveness measures the extent to which objectives set are achieved as well as the mechanisms, specifically relating to coordination with stakeholders, which contributed to the achievements. Historical reports confirms the EC staff were formally part of a large number of coordination mechanisms and donor – GoL coordination platforms over the years, i.e., between 2004 and 2008. In some areas, such as GEMAP / economic governance or the rehabilitation of the electricity grid, the Commission seems to have adopted the leading or at least one of the leading roles. However in the later years (2007 / 2008) the ability of the EC to remain active in important coordination mechanisms became limited. In 2007, the EC was not able anymore to participate in coordination meetings as important as the workshops accompanying the elaboration of the Governments Poverty Reduction Strategy (PRS).

Table 15: Project effectiveness Project Effectiveness Sub Component Correspondence with Observations Comments and the Project Log frame Suggestions Stakeholders Logistical support: Strong leadership and Post-conflict and fragile coordination TA for finalisation of legal guidance by the EU at the states require support and regulatory inception of the and guidance during the framework. programme in 2003 faded delicate period when New democratically away the next years, institutions as well as elected government in certainly hampering a infrastructures are to be place and ready to adopt proactive role and the rebuilt. Such legislation necessary for adjustment of actions with accompaniment is also a liberalisation and the rapidly evolving unique opportunity for privatisation. situation. founding new and Adoption of electricity law unbiased basements for and secondary legislation. the legal and regulatory frameworks. Information Improved living conditions The first interventions During the end-users management and Improved safety were quickly understood survey (April - May 2012) dissemination Increased business by the public as the prime the perception of activities in the sector and beneficiary of the project information on the time Perception of results else like revamping of frame as well as the Increased job levels in the streetlights and electricity financial/economic sector and else generation facilities. aspects of the projects It is not obvious that the was still volatile in the targeted groups have public opinion. been duly informed of the There is still a big subsequent phases to discrepancy between the come further. reality and what the public perceives ,as for example on the costs and tariffs, formalities, obligations and rights as customers. Beneficiaries globally perceive positive results but are not always individually affected.

Final Report – August 2012 75

Delivery of Outputs Give access to the The material outputs in The scope of the population and business terms of emergency intervention fortunately of Monrovia to more interventions and incorporated equipment affordable electricity. delivery/installation of and works for LV Coverage increases from equipment are realized, connections. <10% of population despite observed delays. It was fortunate that other having access to As stated at many places donors also supported the electricity to at least 50% in the evaluation report, electricity sector, thus Average of business and the physical creating synergies which consumer end-user price delivery/access of today translate into the drops by at least 30%. electricity to beneficiaries measurable increase of Business and consumer and target groups is only the customer basis. price benchmarks tangible since To date, the data bank of throughout the city. approximately one year. records which could make possible the measurement of quantitative parameters is too small for deriving meaningful results. On the other hands, statistics and their quality are not of a sufficient standard. Appropriation, New democratically A promising dynamic Today, the framework participation and elected government in momentum was observed which would have made commitments of place and ready to adopt during the first phases of the sector attractive for legislation necessary for the interventions with the other participants is still in beneficiaries and liberalisation and government focusing on its infantile stage. The Authorities privatisation the preparation of electricity law has not Government provides policies, strategies and been passed and the funds and personnel for the associated drafted creation of an Electricity regulator documents for revamping Sector Regulatory the overall sector. Agency/ Authority is staked.

76 Contract 2012/284032

9.5.5 Impacts “Impacts” is a general term used to describe the effects of an intervention on society. They can be either positive or negative and foreseen or unforeseen. Initial impacts are called results, whilst longer-term impacts are called outcomes.

Table 16: Project Impacts Impacts Sub Component Correspondence with Observations Comments and the Project Log frame Suggestions Results (direct) Final acceptance of works The complete scope of Good or acceptable for transmission and actions, works relating to quality of the contractors distribution grid. the electricity grid and the agencies in rehabilitation including charge of the content of addendum has implementation been materialized. Good control framework imposed by the formalities, conditionalities, rules and Holding company owning regulations driving EU transmission network As already stated this interventions. incorporated. result was not achieved Over-optimistic objective Improved revenue and not matching the reality expenditure management The National Utility of the prevailing situation situation is stabilized but still very fragile. The installation of a Management Contract was a must for achieving this result Results (Indirect) Private concession(s) for Indirect results have not The institutional generation awarded been materialized arrangements (laws, A company recruited to regulations) have not operate the High Voltage been put in place to date transmission grid Private concession for distribution concessions awarded Legal and regulatory framework for liberalisation completed Sector regulator set up Outcomes Improved living conditions Figures initially articulated The agencies in charge of Improved safety in the log frame cannot be statistics and follow-up of Increased business assessed due to the lack socio-economic progress activities in the sector and of compilation of are still weak and not in else necessary data by the position to release valid Increased job levels in the governmental agencies and reliable indicators. sector and else Coverage Nevertheless, the End- increases from <10% of users survey allowed to population having access obtain a rather good to electricity to at least indication of the 50% population positive

Final Report – August 2012 77

Average of business and perception of the benefit consumer end-user price from access to electricity drops by at least 30% in their everyday life: more security, access to more efficient appliances, longer time for children to study, small business opportunities.

9.5.6 Sustainability Sustainability measures the extent to which positive effects are likely to last after the intervention has terminated. In this respect, works and equipment installed for contributing to delivering electricity to the target groups and beneficiaries have been erected according to very good standards. The HV and MV parts of the Monrovia grid are dimensioned for satisfying the services expected from the utility for the 4 to 5 years to come. Thanks to other donors’ interventions aiming at accelerating the installation of new customers’ connections, the sustainability of the EU interventions in the electricity sector is undisputable. The quality of the executed works (achieved by the contractors under the adequate supervision of engineers commissioned by the EU) recognized by all parties also guaranties a longer lifespan of equipment. The technologies selected for the LV part of the grid (prepaid meters) will also limit theft, tempering and illegal connections hence resulting in lower operation costs for the utility. With abstraction of the administrative and time management misfortunes at the inception of the programme/project, the approach has an interesting potential for replication. First in other urban centres in Liberia when they are incorporated into the future HV national/regional grid, but also for any other country with similar patterns like: Post conflict or post disaster status, institutional fragility.

Table 17: Sustainability Sustainability Sub Component Correspondence with Observations Comments and the Project Log frame Suggestions Capacity of actors High Voltage and LEC has gained LEC staff have acquired transmission electricity experience in installation skills for works and grid rehabilitated works and their operations activities. maintenance. Combination of donors’ Local companies sub- interventions, contractors to ELTEL accompanied with the have benefited entering into force of the experience and Management Contract equipment. has imposed a new As an example, at the corporate culture of rigor end of its contract, ELTEL and discipline and donated the tools, accountability. equipment and vehicles to the local sub- contractor. Economic feasibility Average of business and LEC can better manage Due to the fuel price and financial consumer end-user price its financial standing. increase, tariff decrease sustainability drops by at least 30% The costs of connections could not be significant as well as the cost of but was at least electricity will decrease contained.

78 Contract 2012/284032

when the number of consumers increases through the effect of scale. Replication potential Give access to the At the scale of Liberia, the Neighbouring countries in population and business project approach could be Western Africa with to more affordable replicated for other urban electricity sector similar electricity centres in the country, patterns could be Improved living when the backbone of a candidates for replication. conditions HV national transportation (Guinea, Guinea Bissau, Improved safety grid is in place. Sierra Leone …) Increased business activities in the sector and else Increased job levels in the sector and else

9.6 CONCLUSIONS TO THE EVALUATION

Further to the evaluation activities and analysing the history of the evolution of the EU intervention logic, the findings lead to the following broad conclusions.

The EU interventions in the electricity sector occurred under 3 cycles of EDF. From 1999 to 2005, EC cooperation objectives reflected the dominant needs of Liberia’s population and, after the appointment of a transitional Government in 2003, were also consistent with the GoL’s newly defined policy priorities. Then, the European Commission repeatedly adjusted its cooperation objectives and modalities for Liberia to reflect changes in the political circumstances and security situation in the country during this period. The early years of EC assistance were clearly focused on the rehabilitation of basic services and infrastructure in Liberia, coupled with support to the reintegration and rehabilitation of displaced people and ex-combatants.

The CSP (Country Strategy Paper) for the EDF9 however shifted towards adopting a more development oriented approach, in particular with its support to education. Still, compared to the development emphasis of the latter part of the EDF9, the EDF10 strategy took a step back and returned to an approach that was more geared towards the satisfaction of immediate needs, in particular to fill any possible rehabilitation gap while the international community was in the meantime transitioning away from humanitarian assistance.

The evaluation report dated December 2010 already brought answers and conclusions to the basic judgment criterias applicable for measuring the impacts of the interventions. These answers and conclusions are still valid as of today. According to the 3 criterias i) Increased access to electricity in urban and rural EC supported areas ii) Increased number of working streetlights and public lighting and iii) Increased number of hours of electricity supply per day, the evaluation/judgment conclusions state that the contribution of the European Commission to increasing access to electricity in Monrovia consisted of a number of earlier small scales, but politically important installations of generator powered electricity loops and associated streetlights and significantly delayed works on a larger portion of Monrovia’s electricity distribution network. In 2006, the European Commission was able to finance three small, generator powered electricity grids (in Congo Town, Kru Town, Paynesville suburb) in time to serve as showcases of progress after the election of President Johnson-Sirleaf. These networks were inaugurated around the annual celebrations of Liberia’s Independence Day, and therefore served as important, albeit largely

Final Report – August 2012 79

symbolic, signs of progress in Monrovia. As of May 2007, a total of 535 street lights had been installed in connection with these three isolated loops. It is not known, how many of these street lights were still operating at the end of 2008. EC support of the larger scale rehabilitation of Monrovia’s electricity grid experienced significant delays of about three years, counting from the initial launching of the first tender for the works in March 2006 until the start of actual construction in May 2009. Reasons behind the delays were difficulties in finding enough interested parties to respond to the tender, lengthy evaluations of the received bids and negotiations between the EC office in Monrovia and the Delegation in Ivory Coast on the application of “negotiated procedures” for the award of the contract. Upon start of the construction in early 2009, the works seem to have progressed well, and as of February 2010, the biggest part of the EC-financed work on the electricity grid was completed. Long assessment periods (e.g. the evaluation of PMC took over 2 years to be finalized) and the overburdened bureaucratic procedures have caused severe delays and could have been prevented if a more efficient steering structure would have been in place. The complicated and time-consuming set-up, comprising of the LEC, the donor steering committee, the board of the LEC and the ministry has complicated the communication and caused delays for necessary decision making processes. Ahead of the 2005 elections, the European Commission supported the rehabilitation of streetlights under the “Street light Project” of the Reintegration Programme for Returnees and Displaced People. In comparison to the intended scale of the rehabilitation the sustained success was small: out of 226 lights that were supposed to be repaired, only 87 were in fact worked on. Within months of completion, only 38 of these lights were still working. The EU support for the rehabilitation of the electricity infrastructure is valued as timely, but upcoming crisis and unpredictable changes in the security situation have hampered the implementation of the reconstruction efforts. Parts of the EC commitment for installing power lines from the EPP I and II was not fulfilled, so USAID took over the responsibility and completed the installations. Despite the no fulfilment, the professional capacities of EU contractors were rated very positive by LEC authorities.

For the ease of understanding the modulation of the conclusions towards different perspectives, the EU interventions can be broken down in two batches:

1. The first series of interventions comprising the Post-Conflict Rehabilitation and Capacity Building Programme (PCRCBP) and the Reintegration Programme for Returnees and Displaced People in Liberia. Under these two programmes, the contribution of the European Commission for increasing access to electricity in Monrovia consisted of a number of earlier small scales, but politically important installations of generator powered electricity loops and associated streetlights. The 5 aspects of relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, impacts and sustainability were globally evaluated as satisfactory in reports issued further to appraisal missions and specifically the findings of the 2010 Country Level Evaluation of EC support to the Republic of Liberia. The current evaluation purpose is not to re-evaluate those interventions. However, the global satisfactory results relating to the 5 usual criteria certainly translate particular circumstances where needs are so huge that any interventions driven by emergency and humanitarian considerations are likely to achieve expected objectives. At least, those interventions had the merit to trigger other supports from other donors and to impulse the process of rebuilding infrastructure in a post conflict environment. In such circumstances restoring the operations of public services was paramount for also restoring the confidence of populations within a complex reconciliation process. Nevertheless and for the good sake of drawing lessons from these past interventions it is worth to point out some

80 Contract 2012/284032

of the weaknesses which were identified in the implementation and performances of the programmes.

a. Complex administrative procedures (including tender and procurement regulations) have limited the operational flexibility of the European Commission. b. Monitoring and evaluation (M&E) of the effects of EC support on peace consolidation and conflict prevention has been erratic, which has constrained the ability of the European Commission to adjust its cooperation strategy with regard to these issues appropriately and in a timely manner. c. The EU support has not enough strengthened the capacities for policy design and implementation in the sector, this remains a high priority when there is a massive lack of adequately trained staff (engineers, technicians). The lacking capacity ultimately also threatens the possibility of adequately maintaining the investments, and thus the sustainability of the initial achievements. d. During the period 2003 to 2007 the demands that planning and implementation of EC assistance have placed on the EC in Monrovia have overburdened and overwhelmed the organisational and human resources of the EC office and later the EU Delegation in Monrovia. e. The lack of strong coordination in planning and programming among implementers of EC funded programmes led to duplications, overlap and even competition, thus reducing efficiency of interventions.

2. The second series of interventions in the electricity sector were performed under the Monrovia Electricity Grid Rehabilitation Project. Theses interventions are the specific objects of the current evaluation. The major part of the project was mainly composed of works and supplies for the HV and MV parts of the electric system. The bidding procedures for these works were originally started in October 2005 targeting the 13th of January 2006 for submission of proposals by the bidders. After various adjustments and delays in the internal instruction of the project within the EU system, the dead line for tendering in the published Works procurement notice (2006/S 56-057777 dated 22nd March 2006) was 10th of July 2006. It was then cancelled in 27th April (via notice 2007 2007/S 74-089506) due to no valid bid received. It took almost 2 years after the signing of the Financing Agreement (June 1st 2006) to have a signed works contract in March 2008, mainly due to the fruitless results of the International Competitive Bidding (ICB), the necessity for a rider to adjust budgets and costs and finally to apply the negotiated procedure Financing Agreement (FA) was signed on 01/06/2006. The Work on the ground started effectively around November 2008. The second part of the intervention was for supporting the liberalisation of the electricity sector and private investment. It has not been achieved, and therefore there has been no need to activate the TA support to the commercialization of power generation and its distribution. The objectives under these TA with expecting the rapid involvement of private players in the sector were however too ambitious. Given the lessons drawn from the numerous attempts made in West African countries (Guinea, Senegal, Mali …) to liberalize the sector and invite private participation which drastically failed, the approach was unrealistic. On the 5 standard aspects guiding evaluation, the findings lead to the following conclusions.

Final Report – August 2012 81

a. Relevance When appraising to what extent the intervention was relevant in respect to needs, problems and issues identified in target groups, the delivery of works under the contract only partly satisfied this criterion. The initiative to improve Monrovia’s electrical power supply infrastructure was highly relevant as a means to contribute towards the project’s Overall Objective (OO). However, the intervention as initially designed was not in line with the Project Purpose (PP) which is to allow the public access to affordable electricity, as the intervention was restricted to High Voltage (HV) and Medium Voltage (MV) distribution network, and its substations. Out reaching end users together with tangible impacts on their living conditions was therefore depending on other donors and more specifically the Low Voltage (LV) distribution network needed to be funded by non-EU projects. Fortunately, within the frame of constant adjustments of the EU intervention logic for matching actual circumstances, a rider (No.6) covering the provision for resources for the delivery and installation of 2’600 prepaid meters was signed.

b. Effectiveness As far as achieving the objectives of the project, the first objective and results relating to delivery of electricity to the population is achieved, however with delays and at a slow pace due to various reasons explained in other parts of the report. The second objective of improving the institutional environment allowing for a strong participation of private partners in the development of the Liberian electricity sector is not achieved.

c. Efficiency On the aspect of improving access to electricity for populations and the associated effects on their living conditions, the programme achieved these results at a cost which can be qualified reasonable. Despite the results of the tendering process were fruitless requiring direct negotiations with the selected contractor within a final budget increased through riders, the contract amount was reflecting the market and the level of risks for operations in Liberia. All parties also recognized that the works were executed according to very high standards, thus assuring that a status of best value for money was achieved.

d. Impacts Globally, the impacts of the project are positive in terms of immediate results evidenced by the increasing number of connections to the grid and served population. They still need a period of consolidation for allowing significant changes for various indicators for measuring tangible outcomes. The end-users survey performed during May 2012 provides qualitative indicators that the populations have perception, expectations and aspirations in line with what improved access to electricity could satisfy. The aspects of security, better education for children thanks to lighting, better comfort and possible opportunities for initiating new productive activities are amongst those cited by the interviewees. During the survey, the sentence pronounced by an household keeper stating that “ electricity gives me the feeling of resurrecting “ is self explanatory.

e. Sustainability There is few doubts that the positive effects and results describe above will vanish after the programme is achieved. On the contrary, the project had a trigger effect, with other donors providing support to other sub-components of the electricity sector (like described in the part of the report relating to other donors interventions) and specifically assisting LEC in recovering an acceptable standard of operation. This however implies that for the

82 Contract 2012/284032

future, a particular vigilance on the progress of LEC towards better financial and operational achievements will be required. The ability for LEC to pursue its successful reorganization is a key parameter for assuring that the results and outcomes under the project are sustainable.

In addition to the 5 standard criterions, there are two additional aspects which are worth to be commented as follows:

f. Coherence The project, on the part of the grid rehabilitation works is coherent as it did not contradict other interventions by other donors. On the contrary, by having assumed a leading role in the electricity sector in Liberia during the first years after the end of conflicts and wars, the EU impulsed other’s actions within a logic of complementarities. This coordinated approach, which deserves to be pursued and improved allowed other donors to support and initiate programmes and projects beyond the sole perimeter of the capital Monrovia: rural electrification, renewable energy, bio-mass management, off grid small power plants, consumption management programmes, national and regional interconnections are examples illustrating the on going activities in the electricity/energy sector at the country scale.

g. Consistency Last but not least, in addition to the usual evaluation criterions, the aspect of consistency of the project deserves to be underlined. Positive spill-over on other economic, social or environmental policy areas are qualitatively perceived through the results of the end- users survey.

Evaluation synthesis table on next page

Final Report – August 2012 83

Evaluation illustrated synthesis

In order to illustrate the results of the evaluation, the following table is built by allocating a mark for each evaluation criteria according to the following legend.

Table 18: Evaluation synthesis

E: A: Excellent B: Good C: Satisfactory D: Poor Unacceptable

Monrovia Grid Rehabilitation Reintegration for returnees and displaced Project people and Post conflict rehabilitation and (Institutional Aspects Excluded) capacity building programmes

Criterion Marking Remarks Marking Remarks Supporting factors: Project Relevance B is a response to a critical C and emergency situation Supporting factors: High standard of construction. Contract at cost reflecting Efficiency B market risk patterns B Appropriate and proven technologies. Supporting Factors: HT and MV equipment in operation Marking under the ROM performed in Deterrent factors: 2010 Effectiveness B Connections to customers C through LV equipment came at the end of the project Deterrent factor: Connections to customers Impacts C were not included at the C beginning of the project Supporting factors: High Sustainability A standard of construction. B Appropriate technologies. Supporting factors: Leading role of EU. Coordination with other Coherence A donors. NA Complementarities of programmes Supporting factors: End- users survey shows that the project satisfies the Consistency B expectations and NA aspirations of population in various domains

The illustration above shows that globally, the Monrovia Electricity Grid Rehabilitation project has satisfied the majority of targeted objectives and standard evaluation criterions.

84 Contract 2012/284032

10 RECOMMENDATIONS

10.1 APPROACH TO RECOMMENDATIONS

The recommendations detailed below are based on the activities conducted during the evaluation mission, the documents and data collected and the interviews and meetings held with the various parties intervening in the Liberia electricity sector development. They are also backed-up by the results and findings of the end-user survey which had the twofold purpose of measuring the direct impacts of EU interventions on the beneficiaries as well as allowing to assess the validity and realism of projections made concerning the future trends in the electricity consumption in Liberia (mostly the Monrovia area and through the interconnections which are planned in the near future) and the corresponding needs in terms of generation capacities and overall development of the electric system.

Recommendations are built in the light of observations made during the mission as well as detailed analysis of data and information and various computations performed in order either to assess the validity of some assumptions or to found the own opinions of the evaluation team. The recommendations and the suggested actions are part of a dynamic process to be unrolled during the next coming years. As a consequence, the recommendations specifically take into account the current situation of the electricity sector in Liberia, the status and development plans of the national utility - Liberia Electricity Corporation -, the involvements of other donors interventions through their announced operations in the sub-sectors of generation, distribution and access identified for satisfying the needs up to the year 2015. Finally, recommendations are considering the place that the hydropower potential can or must take within the most adequate future mix of sources which could improve the electrical autonomy of the country and reduce its expenses for the procurement of fossil fuels on the international market.

One observation which is overarching the approach to recommendations is that for the next coming years, the involvements and commitments of donors from the international community will satisfy the needs in terms of generation, transportation and distribution/connections resulting from the expected growth rates of the demand. This statement is backed-up by the analysis of the assumptions and the various scenarios outlined by various parties for assessing the future demand. In other words, the sector is “crowded” enough by financing partners for covering the development of the electricity sector and for satisfying the demand up to 2020. After this date, new projects in the fields of generation, transport and distribution will require additional support by donors.

10.2 CURRENT SITUATION OF THE ELECTRICITY SECTOR

10.2.1 Other Donors interventions and programmes The evaluation team held several meetings with the donors (bilateral and multilateral) identified as active in the sector of electricity. Nevertheless, some of them have no representation office in Monrovia or have not focused on this sector either as a result of donors’ coordination aiming at avoiding redundant interventions or have not retained Liberia as a country of concentration for their aid.

The description of donors’ interventions below only refers to the electricity sector though they may be active and strongly involved in Liberia in other domains.

Final Report – August 2012 85

The description of, past, current and future interventions reflects the situation and the accuracy of information available at the date of April – May 2012. The calendar for the actual implementation of new projects, specifically in the field of new generation capacities must be considered as tentative and subject to further changes as a result of different constraints embedded in the respective donors’ agendas and procedures. Nevertheless the prospects for the next five years (up to 2017) can be considered valid and reliable for assessing the situation of the Liberia Electricity sector at the same term.

The World Bank Group

The World Bank portfolio at the end of 2010 consisted of 12 projects totalling $226 million in commitments. Disbursement was at $101 million or 46 percent, with a disbursement ratio in fiscal year 2010 of 20%. The average project age is 2 years. Six projects are in their final year of implementation and 2 projects are in their first year of implementation. The sectorial distribution is as follows: Infrastructure at $164.4 million (primarily transport); Social Protection at $26.3 million, economic and public sector governance capacity building at $19 million; Agriculture at $7 million; and Health at $8.5 million. Projects were rated as satisfactory or moderately satisfactory on development objective and implementation progress in 2009, with ratings for procurement and financial management generally lagging behind. Main challenges were: (i) projects were prepared rapidly without appropriate capacity pre-building and; (ii) project staff lack familiarity with Bank fiduciary policies and procedures. The World Bank proposed to provide more in-depth training on fiduciary issues as well as increase Bank staff capacity to support project procurement on an on- going basis, by placing full-time procurement staff in-country.

In the specific sector segment relating to access to electricity (in the Monrovia area) the World Bank, on December 2011, acting as administrator for the Global Partnership on Output-Based Aid (GPOBA), has approved a grant of US$10 million to connect about 80,000 people (equivalent to approx. 17’000 households) to Monrovia’s electricity grid, raising the electricity access rate in Liberia’s capital from 0.6 percent to 8 percent. GPOBA funding will supplement capital allocations from various donors to install connections, initially targeting 21 priority low-income neighbourhoods. The scheme will be implemented by the Liberia Electricity Corporation (LEC). The project will help make access to electricity more affordable by subsidizing the cost of connection and more inclusive by explicitly targeting the poor. GPOBA will pay LEC a capital subsidy of US$ 595 for each connection installed (reminder: Current connection cost for LEC is approx. US$ 1’000). The connections made through the output-based aid (OBA) scheme will increase LEC customer base and secure resources for further investments in access programs.

Also, the utility will be able to speed up its goal to reduce tariffs and subsequently energy expenditure for Liberian households. In its plans, strategy and projections, LEC estimates that for every 10,000 new customers it acquires, tariffs will reduce by US$0.03-0.04. Ultimately, the savings made by households will help make more spending available for other commodities and education thus achieving the objective of improving the living conditions of the population and opening opportunities for re-allocation of the saved resources to productive activities or other socio-economic improvements like better access to health and education services and reduction of gender inequalities. LEC will receive the subsidy payment in two phases and in accordance with the OBA approach, only after independent verification of household connections. 80 percent will be paid after a connection in a priority neighbourhood is made and verified; and the remaining 20 percent will be paid upon verification of proof of three months satisfactory service delivery to target households. The GPOBA project is part of the Liberia Electricity System Enhancement Project (LESEP). The scheme

86 Contract 2012/284032

will be financed jointly by GPOBA (US$10 million), the Government of Norway (US$5.8 million), and user contributions (US$0.8 million). As a reminder, LESEP is funded through a US$29 million grant from the Government of Norway, a US$10 million IDA credit from the World Bank and US$2 million grant from the World Bank’s Africa Renewable Energy Access (AFREA) program. The World Bank will also continue through LESEP to support the five-year management contract signed in July 2010 with Manitoba Hydro International (MHI).

In the field of regional interconnection potentially bringing additional power to the Liberian grid, the WB is also participating Cote d’Ivoire, Liberia, Sierra Leone and Guinea (CLSG) Interconnection Project implemented by the WAPP. During the preparation phase of the project, the WB provided a Project Preparation Advance of US$1.95 million to support among others, the establishment of the Special Purpose Company (SPC) which was a necessary prerequisite for the proper structuring of such an multinational project. The WB (IDA) will then participate in the funding of the project implementation with US$ 136.63 million.

KfW

The only potential intervention identified under KfW (Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau - German Financial Cooperation) refers to a pledge to participate to the Mount Coffee Rehabilitation project (Phase 1) with a grant of US$ 25 million, officially announced to the Ministry of Lands, Mines and Energy on 09 December 2011.

KfW also supported the Pre-investment studies fully funded by EU-Africa Infrastructure Trust Fund through EIB (1.55 Million) for the Cote d’Ivoire, Liberia, Sierra Leone and Guinea (CLSG) Interconnection Project implemented by the WAPP. KfW will then participate to the CLSG project with US$ 43.43 million of grant to Liberia.

Norway

The Norwegian Government focused its support to Liberia’s energy sector early in 2007 through funding to the Emergency Power Program (EPP) II. The cooperation was expanded in 2010 when Norway entered into 4 cooperation agreements related to electricity generation, distribution and transmission, energy planning and institutional development. Around NOK 50 million were donated for procuring and installing 7 MW of diesel generators and a small grid for distributing the power. In 2010 Norway entered into the following cooperation agreements with the Liberian Government (GOL).

Table 19: Norway funded projects

Project Objective Cost Time Frame NOK Million

Project Gaps Financial support to LEC to procure and install 3 81.9 2010 – 11 MW new capacity and expand the distribution network in Monrovia

LEC Rebuild LEC and strengthen electricity services in 86 2010 – 15 management Monrovia through a 5 year management contract

with Manitoba Hydro International

Final Report – August 2012 87

(MHI) as LEC Operator

Investment Financing of the annual investments plans of LEC 203 2010 – 15 (LEC Operator) to reach the goal of 33,000 new funding connections by 2015

Institutional Strengthening of Ministry of Lands, Mines and 51.4 2010 – 15 Energy (MLME) through an institutional cooperation cooperation with Norwegian Water Resources

and Energy Directorate (NVE).

In addition, Norway has announced that a grant for US$ 70 million will be made available for the rehabilitation of the Mount Coffee hydropower plant.

JICA

The Japan International Cooperation Agency activities in Liberia can be traced from 2007. They were managed from their office in Ghana until the opening of a Field Office within the premises of the UNCHR building in Monrovia . . They were concentrated on the medical/health sector and the restoration of urban facilities through various initiatives. As far as the energy/electricity sector is concerned, JICA announced the launching of Basic Study for Rehabilitation of Monrovia Power System. In the framework of this study, JICA will implement a basic study to see the possibility to implement the Rehabilitation Project of Monrovia Power System which would cover the addition of a 2x5MW Heavy Fuel Oil Operated Diesel Engine Plant at LEC Bushrod main generation facilities. The project would also comprise equipment for a substation, MV/LV transformers, and equipment for HV line extension.

JICA conducted a survey mission at the beginning of 2012 for identification purposes and discussions with LEC and the Government. The corresponding amount of financing is not yet available but a budget of US $ 30 million is articulated. The time frame for implementation can be anticipated at the 2013 horizon depending on the procedures for completing the transaction. Government of Japan Cabinet approval is expected in October 2012. JICA continues to have a strong concern about the completion of the off-loading and storage facilities for HFO at the Bushrod premises for assuring the fuel supply of the projected plant. Bidding documents for rehabilitation of the HFO storage infrastructure at Bushrod Island are being finalized under funding from the World Bank, and bidding process for conduct of an ESIA for these facilities is underway.

African Development Bank

The African Development Bank operations in Liberia are guided by the Liberia Joint African Development Bank/World Bank Assistance Strategy 2008-2011 (JAS) and Eligibility to the Fragile States Facility approved in December 2008. The overarching aim of the JAS is to support Liberia’s transition from post conflict recovery to long-term development. The strategy was articulated around the following two pillars: Pillar I “Rebuilding core state functions and institutions” and Pillar II “Jump- starting and facilitating pro-poor economic growth”. The JAS was designed to support Liberia’s first full Poverty Reduction Strategy (PRS) April 2008 - June 2011, which is built around four pillars: (i) Peace and Security, (ii) Economic Revitalization, (iii) Governance and Rule of Law, and (iv)

88 Contract 2012/284032

Infrastructure and Basic Services, with gender equity, peace-building, environmental sustainability, HIV/AIDS, children and youth, and Monitoring & Evaluation (M&E) cross-cutting themes.

Bank assistance under the JAS was framed in terms of two pillars: (i) Rebuilding core state functions and institutions; and (ii) Jump-starting and facilitating pro-poor economic growth. The second pillar encompasses improved access to key infrastructure services, improved agricultural and natural resource management in a way that generates pro-poor growth; and improved business and investment climate.

At the time of the last portfolio review performed by the bank in early 2011 there were ten (10) on- going projects at different stages of implementation with a total approved amount of UA 68.33 million (Approx. US $ 106.7 million). The following table provides the projects list by sector. Altogether, the Water & Sanitation sector (Infrastructure) accounted for 48%, Social Sector 23%, Agriculture (and Emergency)19%, Private Sector 6% and Multi-sector 5%.

Table 20: AFDB projects by sector

The electricity sector was not Sectors Project title covered. As a result of debt relief Water Monrovia (Watsan) & 3 Counties and the improvement of its debt &Sanitation Liberia Water Sector Reform indicators from high to low risk of Urban Water Supply & Sanitation Project debt distress, Liberia now Monrovia Water Supply Rehab (DFID) Social Labour-Based Public Works Project qualifies for 100% ADF (Africa Development Fund) loans. Agriculture Agricultural Sector Rehab. Project (ASREP) Emergency Assistance (caterpillar Liberia’s indicative performance- infestation) based allocation under ADF 12 is Private Sector Access Bank Liberia (Technical Assistant) UA 36.75 million. Proposed FSF Liberia Bank for Development & Investment (Fragile State Facility) Multi-sector Institutional Support Project (ISP) supplemental support is UA 52.43 million and available FSF targeted support amounts to UA 4.7 million. Indicative total resources available are therefore UA 94 million (US $ equivalent 146.8 million) for the period 2011-2012. Under these earmarked resources, since 2011, the Bank (with other donors - see detailed herein) has actively engaged in the Cote d’Ivoire, Liberia, Sierra Leone And Guinea (CLSG) Interconnection Project implemented by the WAPP West African Power Pool. The total cost of the project is estimated at US $ 493.92 million with the breakdown per donor and beneficiary country as follows:

Table 21: Funding of CLSG interconnexion project

Donor Amount in US $ Million Beneficiary country AfDB 190.30 Liberia: 34.38 Ivory Coast 51.76 Sierra Leone 41.44 Guinea 62.72 World Bank 136.63 Liberia EIB 105.47 Sierra Leone KfW 43.43 Liberia Contribution by Countries Governments 18.07 4 beneficiary countries

Final Report – August 2012 89

USAID

USAID is active in Liberia since decades. Its involvement in the electricity sector started with the advent of peace in late 2003. USAID sought to support the comprehensive peace agreement with the objective to transition from emergency assistance to reintegration/recovery and democratization programs. In the electricity/energy sector, this assistance was developed through 3 operations:

The Emergency Power Program (EPP). The aim was the reestablishment of electricity services and streetlights to portions of Monrovia. USAID was a participant to this GOL and multi-donor effort. In 2009, USAID shifted its emphasis from response to emergency conditions to sustainable development. USAID programs was concentrated on establishing a stable democracy, changing the culture of impunity, systematic corruption and poor governance, closing severe gaps in access to quality education and health care, expanding economic opportunity through agricultural enterprise and natural resources management, and helping to rebuild essential infrastructure and sources of renewable energy.

The Liberia Energy Assistance Program (LEAP). In 2006, the USAID began helping the post-war Government create a national energy policy, including a strategy to reach the most underserved. In two years, LEAP showed the benefits of low maintenance solar technologies at 19 sites in schools, clinics, small businesses, and public buildings supported by other USAID programs.

The Liberia Energy Sector Support Program (LESSP) to be implemented from September 27, 2010 to September 26, 2014. The corresponding budget is US $ 18.962 Million. LESSP’s primary goal is to increase access to sustainable, affordable clean energy and electricity for rural and urban communities and commercial operations in Liberia. The scope of work is a mix of institutional support and specific electricity generation pilot projects as well as support for increasing the number of connected customers in urban as well in rural areas. The ultimate objective is to benefit the citizens of Liberia through strengthened economic development and improved access to social services, resulting from access to electricity.

Key components of the LESSP are:  Strengthening the capacity of the Ministry of Lands, Mines and Energy (MLME);  Supporting the Rural Renewable Energy Agency (RREA) with technical and management training;  Strengthening the management capacity of the Liberia Electricity Corporation (LEC);  Improving the enabling environment for private sector participation and investments;  Promoting clean energy development in Liberia with four pilot hydropower and biomass electric power projects;  Supporting energy regulatory, policy and legislative changes that will improve the private investment climate in Liberia for clean and renewable energy development;  Strengthening the capabilities of local government, civil society and the private sector in managing, operating, monitoring and regulating renewable energy projects;  Increasing Liberia Electric Corporation’s (LEC) customer base from about 1’500 to about 2’500 within year one of the program and at an accelerated rate thereafter; At the current date (April – May 2012) the on-going activities of the USAID programs are reflected in the monthly report issued in April 2012. They are classified according to 3 objectives:

90 Contract 2012/284032

Objective 1: Strengthen the GoL’s Capacity to Implement Plans for Rural Electrification as Expressed in the National Energy Policy. The objective will be achieved through the implementation of capacity building (training and courses) and institutional support activities. The Energy Law Review and draft ERB (electricity Regulatory Board) Action Plan have been circulated for comment. An expert is re-examining the energy law review and draft ERB Action Plan for comment.

Objective 2: Establish Commercially-Viable Pilot Plants that Provide Renewable Energy Services to Population Centers in Bong, Lofa and Nimba Counties. The objective is currently materialized through the implementation of Hydropower Pilot Projects. The preparation of RFPs for transmission and distribution line equipment and electro-mechanical and hydro-mechanical equipment for Wayavah Falls Micro Hydropower Project is in progress. Additional surveys along the penstock alignment on the Mein River and Weave Falls sites were carried out and some changes in the project layout are being made. Based on this the detailed engineering design and drawings for Mein River project will begin soon. Flow measurements of the Mein River and Wayavah Falls continued on a regular basis including gauge readings downstream of the lower Kpatawee Falls. The Sorlumba Community Electric Cooperative Society has been formally incorporated. The RFP for the importation of the SVO (Straight Vegetable Oil) generator has been finalized and the two RFPs for civil and electrical works are being prepared. Concerning the Cocopa biomass projects, issues relating to the continuity of the concession may delay the possibility to develop the project in the immediate future.

Objective 3: Collaborate with International Donors for the Expansion of Monrovia’s Power Distribution Network. This activity is currently on hold as requested by USAID. According to USAID, orientations will be given in September 2012, following the USAID mid-term LESSP project review which is planned for July/August 2012.

Other prospective projects

It is also worth to quote other prospective projects which may be materialized in Liberia.

Arcelor Mittal needs a 450 MW capacity for processing the iron ores from its concession. The project has remained at a status quo since 2008, corresponding to the worldwide crisis and he declining demand for steel in China and other growing economies. The ArcelorMittal decision to pursue this project and the possible timeframe is not known.

Another project supported by Buchanan Renewable Power Inc. (BRP) could provide 36 MW of capacity with a rubber wood chips fuelled plant. The US Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC) has approved a loan of up to US$112 million for the project with the remaining amount funded by equity. However, the negotiations for the agreements are complex and protracted. To minimize risk, BRP reportedly demanded a "lockbox" arrangement in the Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) under which revenues earned by the LEC are paid directly into an escrow account from which BRP is paid first. Attorneys and advisors to the GOL are concerned the arrangement with the proposed stringent “security package” would discourage other potential investors in the power sector. The GOL is also concerned by the "affordability" of the power compared to long-term hydroelectric power. As a consequence, there are strong uncertainties concerning the materialization of this project in the near future.

Final Report – August 2012 91

10.2.2 Synthesis of donors interventions in the electricity sector The following table illustrates the compilation of information relating to the various interventions, initiatives, projects and programmes announced by the various donors present in Liberia. For the purpose of assessing the future structure of the national electrical system, only the projects comprising physical works in the sub-sector of generation, distribution and access are listed, keeping in mind that the same group of donors is also implementing support on the institutional, legal, regulatory and capacity building aspects.

Table 22: Synthesis of donor interventions in the electricity sector

Name Project Sub-sector Units Capacity Location Cost Financiers Status Description (US$m)

Liberia Expansion of Distribution Urban 33'000 Monrovia 48 NORAD, On-going Electricity Monrovia’s Generation households GPOBA, IDA System distribution Enhancement network; project (LESEP) Rehabilitation of HFO storage/offloading facilities; Generation overhaul; Capacity building of LEC

Liberia Establishment of Rural Rural 9'000 Lofa, Bong 3 AFREA TF On-going Electricity Rural and Electrification households System Renewable Enhancement Energy Agency. project (LESEP) Provision of micro-hydro, solar energy to off-grid users

Rural Energy Development of Rural Rural 4'000 Lofa 2 EU Funding Master Plan Liberia's rural Electrification households secured and SSMP energy master plan; Pilot rural SSMP

Cross Border Cross Border Rural Population 130'000 Nimba, 11.7 WAPP(50%) Funding Rural Rural Electrification Grand EU (50%) secured Electrification Communities (25’000 Ghede and Electrification househol Maryland project (Côte ds) counties d'Ivoire - Liberia)

Buchanan Biomass energy Generation MW 31 - 35 Kakata 170 BR, OPIC, Planned Renewable plant using rubber Mr.McBain Energy wood chips

The Liberia Four pilots to Rural Rural Lofa, Bong, 6 USAID Funding Energy Sector create micro-grids Electrification households Nimba secured Support in rural areas Program based on biomass (LESSP) and hydro sources

Diesel Additional Generation MW 3 Bushrod 2 NORAD Complete Generators

92 Contract 2012/284032

Name Project Sub-sector Units Capacity Location Cost Financiers Status Description (US$m) generators for (Monrovia) Monrovia

Diesel Additional Generation MW 10 Bushrod 6 USAID Complete Generators generators for (Monrovia) Monrovia

HFO-fired Additional Generation MW 10 - 20 Bushrod 15-30 JICA Planned generation generators for (Monrovia) plant Monrovia

WAPP CLSG Cote d'Ivoire, Transmission Kms 510 Yekepa - 494 EIB, EU, IDA, Funding Liberia, Sierra Buchanan - KfW secured

Leone, Guinea Mt. Coffee - (CLSG) Weat Monrovia- MW 100 Africa Power Pool Foya Through (WAPP) interconn interconnection ection and sub-stations

Mt. Coffee HEP Rehabilitation of Generation MW 64 St John 162 Norway, KfW, Funding pre-war hydro- River EIB, (AfDB, Pledges electric plant of WB) received Mount Coffee

Foya River New hydro- Generation MW 50 Foya River 143 Funding HEP electric plant (border unsecured Liberia/ Sierra Leone)

St. Paul River New hydro- Generation MW 198 St Paul 879 Funding HEP1B and 2 electric plants River unsecured

Even if this provides a relatively realistic picture of what will be the situation after 3 to 4 years from to date (May 2012), the actual materialization of targets will closely depends on 4 factors:

1. Political and socio-economic stability and consolidation of progress achieved to date in Liberia in the sectors of governance and re-enforcement of the institutional framework. 2. Economic growth to continue resulting in an increasing number of potential customers (demand) willing to access, pay and use electrical energy of good quality and at affordable price. 3. Respect of funding commitments from donors and proper arrangements for minimizing delays and administrative constraints in the various stages of the projects implementation. (Timely readiness of reports, realistic dates of their respective Boards acceptance, well and timely monitored procurement process, regular Monitoring and Evaluation activities, proper support with Technical Assistance and capacity building programme). 4. LEC as the only entity to implement and finally operate the projects is the key player for the success of all contemplated projects. Therefore LEC needs a drastic reinforcement of its capacities (human resources, tools and equipment, organization and management tools) together with capacity building and training program in order to leverage the full added-value of the current Management Contract. It is paramount that LEC can consolidate the relatively sound status that it has achieved to date, specifically on the aspect of prudent financial management.

Final Report – August 2012 93

The following table is a visual illustration of the planned interventions by donors in the sub- sectors of Generation, Transport and Distribution, Connections, Rural Electrification and private IPP’s for the coming years. It shows that there is a concentration of activities for the period 2012 – 2020 in all the sub-sectors. By cross checking with the demand projections, the economic growth forecasts as well as the capacities of LEC to implement plans at an appropriate pace, it can be concluded that the planed projects will meet the needs. This opens the door for opportunities to initiate approaches for the next period (2020 – 2025) and to prepare the ground for projects and developments specifically oriented towards more environmentally friendly technologies and the utilization of domestic or regional natural renewable resources like hydropower. Figure 12: Planned interventions of donors in the electricity sector

Time Line (Years) 2008 2010 2012 2015 2020 2025

Mount Coffee Rehab. (Norway, KfW) 64 MW Generation EU (Monrovia Grid Rehab project) JICA HFO Plant 10MW MW

Multi donor ( 5 – 10 MW ) Transport MW from CLSG EU (Monrovia Grid Rehab CLSG project) Multidonors (WB, AfDB, BEI, Distribution KfW)

EU (1'400 units) LEC Plans

Connections WB (GOBPA) 16'000 Units

EU (Cross Border project) Rural Electrification USAID (Small IPP’s)

Arcelor Mittal Private IPP’s 450 MW (Generation) Other Miners (200 MW)

Rubber Wood Plant 36 MW

10.2.3 Demand projections To be able to formulate proper recommendations, it is necessary to conduct an appraisal of the future environment of the sector and specifically to evaluate the future needs. A detailed analysis of various documents reporting on many possible scenarios was performed. The most recent report (2011) on the subject was issued by the World Bank and AFTEG in the report titled: Options for the Development of Liberia’s Energy Sector.

The table below illustrates the two scenarios which were considered for computing the future demand up to 2040.

94 Contract 2012/284032

Table 23: Scenarios for future demand up to 2040

Scenario 2010 2015 2020 2030 2040 Scenario 2010 2015 2020 2030 2040

Slow Growth High Growth

MW MW

Monrovia 18.66 34.30 41.98 63.15 127.28 Monrovia Grid 19.66 54.50 75.58 149.99 417.78 Grid

Other On- 0.37 1.70 2.51 5.00 9.54 Other On-Grid 0.44 3.97 5.09 12.06 28.60 Grid

Urban and Urban and 0.98 4.84 7.26 14.61 27.62 1.19 10.07 13.18 30.63 70.65 rural Off-Grid rural Off-Grid

Non Non Monrovia Monrovia 16.50 71.00 191.00 324.00 443.47 Industrial: Off- 16.50 121.00 341.00 574.00 770.47 Industrial: Grid Off-Grid

Non Non Monrovia Monrovia Industrial: Industrial: 0.00 0.00 59.00 91.00 132.12 0.00 50.00 109.00 216.00 232.12 Potential On- Potential On- Grid Grid

Total On-Grid 19.03 36.00 103.49 159.15 268.94 Total On-Grid 20.10 108.47 189.67 378.05 678.50

Total Off-Grid 17.48 75.84 198.26 338.61 471.09 Total Off-Grid 17.69 131.07 354.18 604.63 841.12

Grand Total 36.51 111.84 301.75 497.76 740.03 Grand Total 37.79 239.54 543.85 982.68 1'519.62

GWH GWH

Monrovia 117.46 216.80 268.70 553.18 1'114.95 Monrovia Grid 123.59 340.75 474.74 1'313.94 3'659.73 Grid

Other On- 2.98 14.46 21.51 43.29 82.99 Other On-Grid 3.89 34.82 44.56 105.64 250.53 Grid

Urban and Urban and 8.62 42.42 63.62 128.02 241.91 10.44 88.22 115.50 268.31 618.88 rural Off-Grid rural Off-Grid

Non Non Monrovia Monrovia 101.18 435.37 1'171.21 1'986.77 2'719.38 Industrial: Off- 101.18 741.97 2'091.01 3'519.77 4'724.54 Industrial: Grid Off-Grid

Non Non Monrovia Monrovia Industrial: Industrial: 0.00 0.00 361.79 558.01 810.15 0.00 306.60 668.39 1'324.51 1'423.35 Potential On- Potential On- Grid Grid

Total On-Grid 120.44 231.26 652.00 1'154.48 2'008.09 Total On-Grid 127.48 682.17 1'187.69 2'744.09 5'333.61

Total Off-Grid 109.80 477.79 1'234.83 2'114.79 2'961.29 Total Off-Grid 111.62 830.19 2'206.51 3'788.08 5'343.42

Grand Total 230.24 709.05 1'886.83 3'269.27 4'969.38 Grand Total 239.10 1'512.36 3'394.20 6'532.17 10'677.03

Final Report – August 2012 95

The graphic representation shows the evolution of the demand (Power and Energy) for the Low and High growth scenarios. Figure 13: Evolution of electricity demand : low and high growth scenarios

Demand Forcast (Energy) 2010 - 2040 Demand Forcast (Capacity) 2010 - 2040

10'677.03

1'600 9'000 1'519.62

6'532.17 1'200 982.68 6'000 M W Low Growth

GWh GWh 800 MW MW M W High Growth 3'394.20 4'969.38 543.85 GWh Low 740.03 Growth 3'000 400 3'269.27 GWH High 239.54 497.76 1'512.36 Growth 37.79 301.75 1'886.83 36.51 111.84 239.10 0 230.24 709.05 0 2010 2015 2020 2030 2040 2010 2015 2020 2030 2040 Years Years

The following table illustrates the demand projections performed by various institutions and consultants (Considering the On-grid generation only).

Table 24: Demand projections from various institutions and consultants

Years

MW 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040

Manitoba/WB (2005) 10 15 40 48 57 69 72 76 80

AETS/EU (2005) 21.5 25.9 31.1 37.3 44.8 53.8 64.6 77.5

COWI/IFC (2007) 34.8 38 51 102 124 153 191

Stanley Consultants/USTDA (2008) 69

LEC (2009) 38.2

World Bank Slow Growth (2011) 19 36 103.5 159.2 268.9

World Bank High Growth (2011) 20.1 108 190 378.1 678.5

Current situation 9

When plotted, the data provide the following graphs.

96 Contract 2012/284032

Figure 14: Graph of demand projections

Demand Projections (MW) Manitoba/WB (2005)

AETS/EU (2005) 800

700 COWI/IFC (2007) 600 500 Stanley Consultants/USTDA

400 (2008) MW 300 LEC (2009)

200 Current situation World Bank Slow Growth 100 (2011) 0 World Bank High Growth 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 (2011) Years Current situation

Over the period 2005 - 2040, the dispersion of projections is very wide, with quite diverging figures at the 2040 term.

When focusing on the 2005 – 2015 in the graph below (plotted with logarithmic function) the cloud of data displays a relatively coherent picture placing the demand within the range of 40 to 80 MW for the years 2013 – 2014. Nevertheless, the actual installed capacity (on the LEC grid) is only less than 10 MW, far below the projections. If the IPP’s and the “self supplied” customers currently off grid in Monrovia are taken into account as immediate demand (they are “consumed” by their direct customers), the current capacity within the city limits can be assessed in the tune of 20 -25 MW. Figure 15: Graph of demand projections (log)

Demand Projections (MW) Manitoba/WB (2005)

AETS/EU (2005) 120

100 COWI/IFC (2007)

80 Stanley Consultants/USTDA 60 (2008) MW LEC (2009) 40

20 Current situation World Bank Slow Growth (2011) 0 World Bank High Growth 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 (2011) Years Current situation

LEC estimates in the Electricity Master Plan prepared in 2011 that a base case scenario forecasts a peak demand of about 48 MW in June 2015. (Note: The above graphed data are relating to the On- Grid system therefore not including capacities which may be installed in other off- grid (LEC) locations in the country)

Final Report – August 2012 97

10.3 OPTIONS FOR FUTURE POWER GENERATION

At short term (until 2015 – 2017) generation capacities allowing to respond to the demand/load resulting from the new connections (planned to reach 30’000 in Monrovia in 2014 and an equivalent number in off-LEC grid rural areas) would be mainly thermal plants and the possible supply through the CLSG interconnection project and the Ivory Coast – Liberia Cross Border project, both implemented under the WAPP. IPP’s essentially running with diesel generators will also continue to provide electricity to customers not-yet hooked to the national grid. IPP’s are however an intermediate solution, which had justification during the period when emergency actions were the privileged alternatives until the national utility can resume its activities. IPP’s should be gradually decommissioned when reaching their lifespan as long as access to the national grid for more affordable electricity of better quality (services and reliability) is increased.

10.4 THE HYDROPOWER POTENTIAL IN LIBERIA

10.4.1 General Downstream of the Futa Djalon region, called the Water Reservoir of Western Africa, Liberia is endowed with an appreciable hydro potential estimated at 1’000MW of technically and economically feasible capacity. Apart from small or mini-hydropower plants, historically, the Mount Coffee hydropower scheme built in the sixties was the only project of significant size. It was however totally destroyed during the wars. The revamping of its nominal capacity of 64 MW is currently at the top of the priorities agenda of the Government. The rehabilitation of the Mount Coffee power station and the possible development of additional hydro capacities in the country are the object of numerous articles in the local press, which are often of frivolous nature, announcing totally unrealistic figures and calendars, thus leading to disproportionate expectations from the public.

10.4.2 The Mont Coffee project Currently (April – May 2012) the Mount Coffee Rehabilitation project is at the stage when various studies and surveys (Survey of existing civil structures, Dam Safety appraisal, Environmental Impacts Studies, preparation of Design and corresponding Tender Documents) have been performed by international consultants under the funding by various donors, the EU being one of them. Rehabilitating the Mount Coffee Hydropower Plant is part of a bigger plan in Liberia to regain power stability and financial benefits. The project is to answer to the Liberian people’s urgent electricity needs and also to produce power to neighbouring countries. The plan is part of the West African Power Pool (WAPP) CLSG Redevelopment sub programme. The aim is to reach the pre-war level of the power plant of 64 MW.

To prepare the ground for the Mount Coffee Hydropower Rehabilitation Project, a grant for project preparation studies was made available by the EU-Africa Infrastructure Trust Fund (ITF allocated a grant of €1.5 million in April 2010) to the WAPP secretariat on behalf of the Liberia Electricity Corporation. The studies include an environmental and social impact assessment and resettlement action plan, a detailed site survey, the preparation of a geotechnical baseline report outline, a dam

98 Contract 2012/284032

safety study, the preparation of a site survey and a design report. Once the plant is fully rehabilitated, Liberia could supply power not only for national consumption, but also to its neighbouring countries. The project could play a major role in post-conflict reconstruction through boosting trade and the economy and finally fighting poverty.

The scope of the contract was comprehensive enough to define the rehabilitation project up to a state where it can be tendered on the international market for execution. The phases of the contract were: Phase I - Feasibility Study Review and Definition of the Scope of Supply of Plant and Installation Services by the Contractor (a) Review of the Feasibility Study (b) Detailed site survey (c) Preparation of a Geotechnical Baseline Report Outline (d) The Dam Safety study (e) Preparation of a Site Survey and Design Report (f) Preparation of the “Employer Requirement - Scope of Supply of Plant and Installation Services by the Contractor” section of the Bidding Documents

Phase II - Presentation of Phase I outcome, Review by Donors and Validation Seminar (a) Presentation of Phase I outcome to Liberian Actors in Liberia (b) Review (by LEC, WAPP and Donors) (c) Phase I Validation Seminar in Liberia or at WAPP headquarters

Phase III - Preparation of Bidding Document (a) Execution of additional Geotechnical Investigations, if any (b) Preparation of the draft Functional Bidding Document (c) Preparation of final Geotechnical Baseline Report (d) Presentation of the draft Functional Bidding Document to Liberian Actors in Liberia (e) Review (by LEC, WAPP and Donors) (f) Preparation of the final Functional Bidding Document

Phase IV - Assistance during Bidding Process (a) Participation to the pre-bid conference and site visit (b) Preparation of the replies to request for clarifications (c) Assistance during Bid Evaluation (d) Assistance during Contract Negotiation and Award

The estimate of the project cost is in the tune of US$ 190 million. This figure is rather on the high side for rehabilitating a capacity of 64MW (to possibly 80MW) where existing civil structures can be salvaged. The explanation is that this is the cost which could be resulting from a tender for a comprehensive EPC contract. However, parties responsible for the project argue that the actual cost could be less when the works are tendered in 4 or 5 different “technical” lots, increasing the competition amongst interested contractors and suppliers.

The financing of the project seems to be secured, most of the important donors having pledged amounts totalling more than the estimated cost. However, the government seems to retain the donors with the cheapest cost of finance and transaction. The Norwegians with US $ 70 million, the KfW with US $ 25 million are the preferred donors. The balance for more than US $ 100 million could

Final Report – August 2012 99

be mobilized from the Government Budget in yearly allocations matching the needs of the construction calendar. Providing that such financing arrangements are validated and executed in 2012 and assuming that the tender process is successfully conducted also in 2012, the energizing of the first unit could be expected at the earliest in 2015.

10.4.3 The Via and St Paul Rivers possible projects Considering that the Mount Coffee Rehabilitation project is now well on tracks and suitably supported by international/bilateral donors for coming on line in 2015, the next step is to pay attention to the harnessing of other hydro potential available on the Liberian territory.

Supporting the development of the hydropower potential of the St Paul River is the appropriate approach when preparing plans for medium and long terms horizons. This is justified by the long gestation period needed by hydropower projects for preparing necessary surveys, studies and technical documents in compliance with the recognized standards and good practices of the industry. Worth to note the importance of impact appraisal studies to be performed and mitigation measures properly designed, according to the international practices, which are a highly sensitive prerequisite for obtaining support from multilateral organizations and the full adherence of the civil society and NGO’s to the projects.

According to preliminary studies (Stanley Consultants), one of the first actions which could make sense is the creation of a reservoir on the Via River (a confluent to the St Paul River) upstream of the Mount Coffee hydropower plant. Such a reservoir regulation effect on the river flow would drastically increase the dependable capacity of the Mount Coffee power plant which is very low, given the seasonal regime of the St Paul River. Currently, while delivering nearly its full capacity during the rain season, the power plant can only deliver less than 10 MW of power during the dry season. Then by implementing other reservoirs/dams and power plants along the St Paul River an ultimately fully equipped cascade could assure nearly a yearly average of 2’700 GWh of energy.

The opportunity for creating a reservoir upstream of the Mount Coffee Power plant was already considered in the appraisals performed by the World Bank in May 1970 when the appraisal report stated: “The Mt. Coffee hydro-electric scheme, located on the St. Paul River 15 miles northeast of Monrovia was commissioned in 1967, with two generating units and an ultimate capacity for six. It was an expensive project requiring an investment of about US$29.1 million or US$855/kW installed which is a very high figure, but its full utilization depends on the construction of upstream water storage facilities to augment the flows of the St. Paul River during each year's dry season.”

Through old reports and appraisal documents issued in the seventies, it was possible to collect general information on the features of the St Paul River basin as they were identified by consultants’ missions in the past. Since then, several years of conflicts and wars have hampered any further on site investigations and surveys. The information provided below is however a fair illustration of the characteristics of the river basin.

The total drainage area above Mt. Coffee is about 21’000 km2. The basin is about 64 km wide and 322 km long. The river runs from the plateau region of southern Guinea and flows South-West to the Atlantic Ocean near Monrovia. The St Paul River is entering Liberia about 225 km from the coast at about 270 m above sea level, the first 48 km then drop over a series of rapids in relatively narrow canyons until joined by the Via River on the right hand side. From the Via confluence to Dobli Island the river flows in relatively narrow and sinuous channels. Minor rapids occur throughout this portion of the river. Downstream of Dobli Island, the river flows through an hilly area of low relief until at Mt Coffee, a series of rather sharp rapids drops the river in a short distance to near sea level at White

100 Contract 2012/284032

Plains, 19 km from the Atlantic Ocean. The rapids in the Mt Coffee area generate a head of nearly 30 high, about 23 m of which have been developed by the Mt Coffee project for generating electric power.

Other sites were also investigated in view of designing a cascade for harnessing the potential of the river.

Mecca Dam Site

This site on the St. Paul River is located approximately 38 km up-stream of Mt Coffee and about 65 km from Monrovia. Total possible storage volume is about 567 million cubic meters with a useful storage of about 370 million cubic meters. A power plant could be constructed at the foot of the dam and six 17 MW units ultimately installed could produce about 438 GWh per annum of which 275 GWh would be firm. The impact of the Mecca storage on Mt. Coffee would be to increase minimum flow in the dry season from 450 cu secs to about 2’800 cu secs or in an average year from 2’000 cu secs to about 4’000 cu secs.(records of 1967)

In addition to the Mecca site two other sites have been investigated: the Gbakrele and Palakole Dam sites.

Gbalwele Site (Via River). A tributary of the St. Paul River, the Via River above Gbakwele has a catchment area of about 3’400 km2 and a run-off of about 18% of the St. Paul River at Mt Coffee. With a useful storage of about 4’070 million cubic meters, the Via flows would have to be cut off early enough to ensure filling the reservoir. Run-off at Gbakwele is estimated at about 3’207 million cubic meters for the period mid-May to end of December. No water would be released during this seven-month period in most years. In the other 5 months water release would be limited to amounts required to firm up Mt. Coffee. Generation of prime power at Gbakwele does not appear to be practicable.

Palakole Site. The Tuma Creek, a tributary of the St. Paul, above Palatkole has a catchment area of about 270 km2. An average annual run-off of about 925 million cubic meters has been estimated. With a useful storage of about 740 million cubic meters, the Tuma flows would be cut off at about mid-May or earlier if possible and released to Mt. Coffee to cover peak-shaving requirements.

Final Report – August 2012 101

10.4.4 The Via Reservoir project Figure 16: Via reservoir project

The above figure illustrates what could be the possible cascade of dams and power plants which could be implemented within the St Paul River basin (Courtesy Stanley Consultants presentation March 2012). It assumes that the maximum possible heads and water volumes are theoretically exploited. Such a cascade, as per the computations performed by Stanley Consultants would harness a cumulative head of 216 m, a discharge of 510 m3/s which would generate 2’700 GWh per year (currently the yearly production by LEC is approximately 40 GWh) with a total installed capacity of 534 MW of with approximately 419 MW of dependable capacity. This is the ideal theoretical scheme, combining power plants and reservoirs allowing storage for regulating the rivers’ flows hence mitigating their seasonal regimes.

102 Contract 2012/284032

10.5 FINAL RECOMMENDATIONS

The final recommendations, as introduced in the above chapters of the report are based on the following statements of facts: i) The future peak demand from the electric system (Monrovia Grid and interconnections) will realistically range from 40 to 80 MW at the 2017 horizon and could reach 110 MW, 130 MW and 160 MW at the horizons 2020, 2025 and 2030 respectively. These figures concur with the findings of the evaluation team and the end-users survey results which show that future demand growth is closely tight to the transformation of the country economic framework and its ability to drain investments for fostering industrial development and productive activities. The demand from domestic customers/population will not constitute the biggest part of the load even if poverty decreases. A wise and reasonable assumption is that the required fundamentals for a strong economic take-off are not fully in place. The mining sector will remain an important but uncertain factor as it is tight to the worldwide economic situation and if regaining dynamism could become the trigger for a drastic change of the energy profile of the country. ii) The model results obtained at the completion of the Liberia Energy Options Study (WB 2011) indicate that the most economic options for expanding the interconnected power system at the level of approximately 100MW (the next 8 years) is a mix of hydropower generation composed of the rehabilitation of the Mt. Coffee hydropower plant, the Saint Paul River development, and possibly the Mano hydropower project identified in another river basin (belonging to the three countries: Liberia, Sierra Leone and Guinea), and an addition of thermal power produced by diesel power generation, HFO, and the WAPP CLSG regional interconnection line like it appears in the graph below. Figure 17: World Bank energy mix model up to 2040

Final Report – August 2012 103

iii) The sector is relatively crowded by the international community of donors for supporting and financing the contemplated new generation capacities with the corresponding transport, transmission and distribution components up to 2020. iv) The end-users survey confirms the willingness of the majority of the Monrovia population to get connected to the LEC grid. The majority of the users also confirmed that they are ready to pay for the connection fees and for the quantity of electricity consumed. This willingness is mainly motivated by the wish to have electricity of good quality (stability and continuity of supply is dominating) at an affordable cost compared to the cost of electricity provided either from own generator or from local IPP’s. These two aspects are those which will feed the growth of the domestic demand during the next years. However, given the patterns of the current consumption, the relatively high poverty level of the population and the other categories of expenses it has to afford (transport is frequently the main item of household expenditure), the demand growth will remain modest. The figure of 100MW of installed capacity for the Monrovia Grid at the horizon of 2020 is therefore realistic. v) Preparing and designing hydropower schemes require complex and long studies and surveys, specifically since the river basins of Liberia have not been object of investigations during the last two decades because of the wars and conflicts. vi) On the long term, hydropower could generate energy with the lowest levelized cost compared to other sources like fossil fuels.

10.5.1 Orientation of EU future interventions

The statements above fully motivate the recommendation that the EU, if it decides to pursue its support to the Liberia electricity sector, should take the lead in the initiative to develop the hydropower potential of the St Paul River basin. It is recommended that this initiative starts with the mobilization of funds to conduct and update an appraisal of the hydraulic potential of the river, an assessment of the environmental patterns of the affected area, a diagnosis of exiting and historical data in the sectors of hydrology, geology, seismicity and in general all domains concerned by large hydropower schemes projects.

The next action must comprise additional surveys and studies for the preliminary assessment of the complete cascade, the estimates of costs, the economic computations and the appraisal of the cumulative impacts that a complete cascade would generate. With the Via reservoir project considered the first project to be implemented thanks to its regulation function directly optimizing the other possible power plants of the cascade, including the Mount Coffee power station, the critical part of the study would be the final detailed design of the reservoir project with cost estimates, economic and optimization computations and the set of tender documents for the construction of the project. All activities and studies at all stages will encompass the five integrative perspectives: Environmental, Social, Technical, and Economical/Financial.

The outlines of the Terms of Reference for these actions and studies are provided in the next chapters. To the maximum possible extend, they are integrating and following the guiding principles of the Hydropower Sustainability Assessment Protocol (IHA) which considers the whole spectrum of aspects to be taken into account in the successive stages of assessment: Early Stage, Preparation Stage, Implementation Stage and Operation Stage. The establishment

104 Contract 2012/284032

of this protocol was co-financed by the EU and other donors The subjects to be assessed under each stage are listed in the following table.

Table 25: IHA principles

Final Report – August 2012 105

10.5.2 Pro-poor approach

Targeting poverty reduction obviously calls for approaches where direct impacts on the most vulnerable population can be achieved quickly. For decades, the aim of development was to maximise marketable production of goods. Nowadays the emphasis of “pro-poor development” is on expanding opportunities and strengthening human capacities to lead long, healthy, creative and fulfilling lives. Development is now about enabling people to have the “capabilities” to do and be the things that they have reason to value keeping in mind that poverty is defined as the deprivation of these basic capabilities. In the context of the project raising the question whether it is appropriate to invest for connecting poor households to the grid or if the funds would have more impacts if they were used to provide cheaper energy to the users is legitimate. However, there is no straightforward reply and the complexity of interactions, sometimes antagonistic, amongst numerous parameters does not allow drawing univocal or absolute conclusions.

In the case of Monrovia, the End-users survey showed that near 90% of interviewed people without electricity, hence the poorest people, are willing to be connected to the LEC grid, 71% of them also declaring that they will be in a position to afford the associated costs (connexion fee, wiring and electricity consumption). The motivation is essentially guided by the expectation to reach a better level of living standards and comfort with security, protection of the family unity and utilisation of more modern appliances perceived as the three major improvements by the interviewed population with respectively 27, 17 and 14%. Access to electricity for improving conditions for children to study longer in the evening and for adults to seize new business opportunities is also perceived as valuable plus by the householders.

Given these observations, it can be stated that the funds allocated by donors for the electricity sector (specifically for the capital Monrovia and for expansion of the LEC grid), together with the programmes and initiatives supported by various international organizations falls into a context where complementarities are effective at satisfying the requisites of a pro-poor approach. In other words, focusing on connecting poor population with for example the support for US $ 10 millions from the Global Partnership on Output-Based Aid (GPOBA) or deployment of rural electrification/generation initiatives (USAID, EU Cross border project) is not in contradiction with expanding the grid for supplying electricity to industries or residential districts where higher income customers can afford the costs and tariffs. It is also of paramount importance that the customer base of LEC, the national company, comprises a mix of customers with various buying powers. This will allow to eventually establish differentiated tariffs of a “pro-poor” type, without endangering the financial soundness of the corporation. In addition, thanks to the expected “economy of scale effect” LEC has already computed that by increasing the number of customers and the size of its generation capacity the tariffs would significantly drop. Despite this is a qualitative estimate - figures articulated by LEC should be taken with caution -, funding and investing in the electricity sector is one of the routes to produce and supply cheaper energy to users, including the poorest part of them.

10.5.3 The way forward

Supporting the development of the hydropower sector in Liberia and more specifically the harnessing of the St Paul River potential through the creation of the Via River reservoir project must be approached in two phases.

A first phase, comprising a Reconnaissance Study will allow to globally asses the sector and the potential of the St Paul River cascade with a performance of a diagnosis of what information is

106 Contract 2012/284032

currently available and what information and data require to be further detailed. At the completion of this first phase, the Terms of Reference for a next phase study will be finalized.

The second phase will be a comprehensive detailed feasibility study covering all aspects of the design of an hydropower project culminating with the complete set of tender documents allowing to secure the financing of the project and to launch an International Competitive Bidding (ICB) for the construction of the project.

10.5.4 Actions for supporting the Via Reservoir project development

10.5.4.1 Sequence of future actions

First Phase: Reconnaissance Study

It is estimated that this study will take 3 months, requiring 7 man-months of efforts by a team of experts comprising:  A Team Leader, hydropower and dam specialist;  An Economist for economic and financial computations, specialist in the sector of infrastructure and energy;  An Environmentalist for socio-environmental impacts appraisals, specialist of hydropower schemes and river basin management.

The global cost of the Reconnaissance study is estimated at 150’000 Euros.

Second Phase: Detailed Feasibility Study of the Via Reservoir Project

This comprehensive study, with the objective of launching the tenders for the construction of the project will take 18 months, allowing performing all the necessary surveys and on site investigations as well as the environmental and socio economic impacts appraisals. It will require 98 man-months of efforts of various experts of a project team suggested to comprise:  A team leader, hydropower and dam specialist;  A hydropower energy expert;  An hydrologist;  A geologist;  A civil engineer, specialist in dam design and construction;  A hydro-mechanical engineer specialist in hydro-equipment design;  A financial analyst expert in the energy sector;  A socio economist;  An environmentalist.  Various experts for short term assignments in various domains like: Topography, hydrology and flood computations, seismicity, geotechnical aspects and construction materials, dam safety monitoring, tender documents and construction contracts.

The global cost of the Detailed Feasibility Study is estimated at 2’000’000 Euros. This figure does not take into account the possible additional cost for security measures (escort to sites) if they are required depending on the actual circumstances.

Final Report – August 2012 107

10.5.4.2 Funding arrangements

The recommended 2 studies are amounting respectively:

 150’000 Euros for the Reconnaissance study

 2’000’000 Euros for the detailed feasibility study

Such resources would ideally amount to 40 to 60 million Euros for contribution to the capital cost of the project. They may be utilized in various ways (loan interest subsidies, guarantees, investment, funding TA and construction supervision activities…) the aim being that they can trigger a leveraging effect for the mobilization of resources from other donors and investors for a project which is worth several hundred millions dollars (current estimate 220 Millions).

10.5.4.3 Terms of Reference for Pre-studies and Studies

A. Reconnaissance Study The main objective of the reconnaissance study is to prepare the further stage of a more comprehensive and detailed study which will ensure that technically, environmentally, socially and financially viable hydropower developments through the implementation of a cascade of dams and power plants on the St Paul River may be recommended with a first project relating to the creation of a reservoir on the Via River. For the specific Via Reservoir project, the comprehensive and detailed study will be expected to broadly assess the appropriate investment (size, expected output, initial capital cost, interconnection to the grid, etc.), operational rules, organizational structures, revenue requirements, government incentives as appropriate, environmental and social management plans, to assess the economic and social benefits for Liberia, and to carry out a financial analysis from the operator’s perspective and to propose measures to manage the various risks.

The ultimate result of the Reconnaissance Study will be to finalize the Terms of Reference (ToR) for the next study. The ToR suggested in the next chapters are therefore tentative and indicative and will be fine tuned by the Consultant assigned for the Reconnaissance Study. For this Reconnaissance Study, the depth of the investigations, designs and estimates shall be limited to the degree of accuracy required for a clear delineation among the project possible alternatives considered, enabling the Consultant to make a substantiated recommendation as to the selected scheme to be retained for the creation of the Via River reservoir project.

For the Reconnaissance Study, the Consultant assignment shall be carried out in three (3) phases.

Phase I. Overall Assessment. The Consultant shall conduct an assessment of the St Paul River basin cascade project (including the Via River Reservoir and the existing/rehabilitated Mount Coffee hydropower

108 Contract 2012/284032

scheme). The assessment shall be performed in compliance with the Hydropower Sustainability Assessment Protocol (IHA). The Protocol offers a way of assessing the performance of hydropower in more than 20 sustainability topics. Assessments results will be presented in a standardised way, making it easy to see how existing facilities are performing and how new projects are being or can be developed. Through the performance of the assessment, the Consultant shall establish a diagnosis of all identified existing previous studies performed on the subject as well as domains where additional studies and surveys are needed for the further design stage of the projects on the cascade.

Phase II. Project definition This phase will focus on the definition of the Via River Reservoir project. Various aspects will need to be assessed in order to define and select the most appropriate alternatives. The aspects for which data are outdated, fragmentary or missing needing a diagnosis by the Consultant are relating to:

i. Topography: The Consultant will identify existing maps and will assess the needs for topographic surveys required for the next phases of the studies and for the project implementation. He will collect maps and data from various sources in order to perform a pre-assessment of the project area patterns within the St Paul River basin. The consultant will perform a reconnaissance and identification of access roads to the project site with appropriate description of areas where improvements are needed to allow the passage of vehicles and transportation of goods and equipment. He will illustrate the findings on maps of appropriate type. ii. Hydrology: The regimes of the rivers in the basin must be reassessed in order to establish a valid data base for the future computations of generation capacities, optimisation of storage works, dimensioning of future hydraulic structures, and selection of environmental flows and appraisal of climate change influence on the rivers regimes patterns. The Consultant will identify historic and existing data and Liberian agencies responsible for their recording and processing. He will issue recommendations concerning the needs for a further campaign for hydrological records and the implementation by the Liberian responsible agencies of the recording/gauging stations at the appropriate locations along the rivers. iii. Geology: The consultant will identify the possible sources of data and documents for the appraisal of the geological patterns of the river basin and at the sites of the various works (the Via Reservoir Dam). He will identify, collect and review existing documentation available at Government agencies, and among other things, to assess the completeness, adequacy, and usability and quality of investigations carried out in the past against good international practice. He will issue recommendations concerning the needs for a further campaign for geological surveys within the scope of the next studies. iv. Seismicity: The Consultant will identify, collect and review the existing seismic data in the region/zone/project area and propose means to improve the assessment of this aspect. v. Construction Materials: By performing a visit on the sites, the Consultant shall identify suitable location for construction materials. This shall cover locations of potential

Final Report – August 2012 109

quarries for sand, soils, dam core materials, rock and aggregates, etc. and preparation of indicative maps identifying the borrow areas. vi. Climate Change Impact Assessment: The Consultant shall review the trends in annual and seasonal water flow in the St Paul River basin during the past several decades, forecast changes in water flows as a result of climate change and global warming and take these into account while assessing the design flows and possible operating regime of a reservoir. The Consultant shall review the available global and regional climate models and studies carried out with relevance for the West African countries and assess the likelihood of variability in the flow regime of the St Paul and Via Rivers. The Consultant should also assess the possible positive aspects of the Via Reservoir Project in the context of climate change - flood control in the event of higher flows due to climate change, avoided carbon emission of the project contribution for power generation relative to similar-sized fossil fuel generation; the beneficial impact it would have on the sources of water into the river basin. vii. Hydraulic Studies: The Consultant will perform a preliminary assessment of the flood routing of the probable maximum flood through the Via reservoir to establish the discharge capacity of the spillway system , the operating rules of the reservoir, and the water levels downstream of the dam/spillway. The Consultant will also assess the aspects of solid transport of the river for determination of the reduction of the dead and useful reservoir/live storage/volume as a function of time and sedimentation rates. viii. Engineering aspects - Dam type: The Consultant shall propose the type of dam based on a design at the project definition level taking due consideration of the identified possible availability of construction materials and the various characteristics of the proposed site. He shall prepare design criteria, a brief memorandum illustrated with definition drawings. The determination of alternative layout and design shall include various dam types and height/reservoir capacity and mode of operation, reservoir and flow management, environmental mitigation and volume in the reservoir to absorb floods. The definition design and definition drawings shall cover all major components of the dam, spillway, intake, bottom outlets, tunnels and penstocks if any, river diversion during construction. ix. Environmental Aspects: The Consultant will list all potential issues which must be addressed in compliance with the guidelines, rules, regulations and good practices in the domain. He will specifically assess the needs for further surveys, impact studies and investigations required for complying with the safeguards and recommendations from the Multilateral Development Banks. (World Bank guidelines are accepted as the appropriate model). x. Institutional aspects: The Consultant will identify the institutional setup options for the project including establishment of a special purpose company through a public–private partnership or any arrangement compatible with the existing laws and regulations in Liberia. xi. Miscellaneous: The Consultant will take into account all other aspects not listed above but which may potentially affect the design and the feasibility of the Via Reservoir project.

110 Contract 2012/284032

At the completion of this definition phase the Consultant will issue a comprehensive report illustrating its findings together with the recommendations for the suitable design of the Via Reservoir project which will serve as a basis for the further detailed feasibility study.

Phase III. Terms of Reference for the Detailed Feasibility Study This last phase of the Reconnaissance Study will cover the preparation by the Consultant - in the light of its findings and after consultation with concerned parties in Liberia- of the detailed Terms of Reference for the Detailed Feasibility Study of the Via Reservoir project. The detailed feasibility study scope will include the complete set of documents and data allowing the launching of an International Competitive Bidding for the construction of the project. In the meantime, Donors and Financiers will base their decision for funding of the project on the results of the Detailed Feasibility Study.

An outline of these ToR is provided in the next chapter. This outline is tentative and indicative, derived from projects of similar nature executed in other countries. They will be adjusted and finalized by the Consultant under this Phase III of the Reconnaissance Study.

The ToR define the scope of works for a Consultant to conduct a detailed feasibility study for the Via Reservoir project based on the conclusions of the Reconnaissance Study. The detailed feasibility studies shall include, but not exclusively: a detailed description of the facility (civil works, mechanical and electrical installations, interconnection requirements) and a description of the expected output contribution by the Via Reservoir at the Mount Coffee (rehabilitated) power plant and a projection of generation at various power plants along the future cascade (MWs, MWh/year with base case and high and low scenarios), detailed cost estimates for main component and for operation and maintenance of the facility; capital structure and financing arrangements, construction and drawdown schedules; revenue requirements, environmental and social impact assessment and corresponding management plans; requirements for permits and licences; suggested organizational arrangements, and risk analysis. The ultimate deliverable of the Detailed Feasibility study will be a set of Tender Documents in the appropriate format acceptable by development financing institutions (DFI’s) allowing to launch an International Competitive Bidding process.

B. Detailed Feasibility Study of the Via Reservoir Project An outline of ToR for the Detailed Feasibility Study of the Via Reservoir Project is provided hereafter.

The Detailed Feasibility Study will comprise 2 Phases. Globally, it will require but not be limited to the following areas of expertise: (i) power sector management, (ii) hydropower planning, (iii) hydrological engineering, (iv) construction planning, (v) electrical engineering, and (vi) mechanical engineering (vii) financial analysis and structuring, (viii) economic analysis and evaluation, (ix) environmental assessment and management, (x) social development and safeguards, (xi) community development, (xii) legal and contractual aspects, (xiii) transfer of skills and know how.

Final Report – August 2012 111

PHASE I: Review of the Reconnaissance Study During Phase I which is a critical review of the results of the Reconnaissance Study the Consultant shall carry out the following assignment/tasks:

 Examine existing project documents and other available data when. Review the investments as previously estimated and revise the proposed configuration to reflect one that would be competitive, given the current electricity market and tariff structures in Liberia.  Conduct preliminary site investigations including hydrological, topographical, geological and geotechnical studies and survey of access roads to the project sites.  Develop preliminary layouts of hydraulic structures, electro-mechanical and electrical equipment and confirm selection of the main project characteristics such as dam type, storage capacity, storage area limits, additional energy production at the Mount Coffee power plant, reservoir management, etc.  Develop preliminary cost estimates based on major quantities and cost items.  Identify potential socio and environmental impacts, and proposed solutions.  Carry out/update the project economic and financial analysis at reconnaissance level.  Highlight the main risks facing the project, and possible mitigation measures.

PHASE II: Detailed feasibility and final design During this phase the Consultant will continue the site investigation works on the sites including major geotechnical investigations in order to finalize the design of the project. The Consultant will  Define all key structures and equipment in sufficient detail to obtain quantities for all items contributing more than about 10% of the cost of structures and equipment.  Provide a detailed initial cost estimate for: (i) the initial capital costs including access roads, transmission interconnection(s) to the grid if any; (ii) the implementation of the environmental and social management plans; and for (iii) the operations and maintenance of the proposed facilities.  Provide the base case estimate of the annual project output contribution at the Mount Coffee power plant (firm and average capacity and energy) over the project life/duration.  Establish projections of the project contribution for generation at other future power plants downstream along the St Paul River Cascade.  Estimate the reduction of greenhouse gas reduction estimate throughout the life of the project  Carry-out an-environmental and social impact assessment and a mitigation plans in compliance with the ESEE Project Environmental Management Framework and the Involuntary Resettlement Policy Framework, survey community interest groups regarding their use of water use practices.  Carry out a project economic analysis (Liberia’s perspective) and a financial analysis (project owners’ perspective) including capital, operating and maintenance costs and revenue streams required for cost recovery and return, and financing plans. The analysis shall also consider private sector arrangements for the construction and/or operation of the hydropower scheme (Via Reservoir operation for power generation at downstream power plants) through concessions under Design, Build, Operate and Own (DBOO). The

112 Contract 2012/284032

Consultant shall recommend a capital structure required to finance and implement the new hydro facility. Local and overseas partnerships shall be considered.  Determine the best organizational and institutional arrangements for hydropower management and ownership over the period of operation of the project.

The following paragraphs highlight key activities and products expected from the Consultant. It is however the responsibility of the consultant to define and carry out all activities necessary to ensure quality and timely delivery of the studies.

PHASE I KEY ACTIVITIES

 Task 1 - A hydrological report shall be prepared based on previous hydrological analyses and additional data relevant to the site shall be collected from the relevant government agencies. Historical flow data obtained from previous studies and the relevant government agencies shall be verified by on-site measurements over an agreed time period and via computer simulation modeling. These flow data shall also be considered in the power computation and the design of hydraulic structures. Flood flow, low flow and flow duration curve shall be computed by using different hydrological models. Sediment samples from riverbed shall be collected and mineralogical and particle size distribution analyses shall be carried out to find the type and percentage of mineral content and particle size distribution of the sediment. The quantity of sediment shall be estimated on the basis of sediment sampling data, if available, or with indirect methods. The expected maximum possible sediment particle that could be transported by flood shall be recorded during the field visits. Each component of the selected project alternative will be optimized under different flows.  Task 2 – Preliminary layouts of hydraulic structures, electro-mechanical and electrical equipment shall be developed and the selection of the main project characteristics such as installed capacity, energy production, capacity factor, etc shall be made.  Task 3 - Energy computation (on a monthly basis) for optimum dam capacity shall be carried out. All applicable deductions like environmental release of flow, estimated outage, internal energy consumptions, transmission losses if any etc. shall be deducted from the gross plant energy estimate(downstream of the Via Reservoir). Annual energy sales shall be calculated considering prevailing energy rates in Liberia.  Task 4 - The major socio-environmental impacts of the hydropower development during the construction and the operation phases shall be identified and appropriate mitigating measures shall be proposed.  Task 5 – A preliminary costing of the project shall be carried out based on major quantities and cost items and a preliminary economic analysis and financial analysis carried out to assess the economic and financial viability of the investment. The viability of the project shall be assessed based on criteria such as NPV, IRR, ROI and annual net cash flows or any other suitable financial analysis.

Final Report – August 2012 113

PHASE II KEY ACTIVITIES Once the economic and financial viability of the project has been ascertained through the pre- feasibility study and comments taken into account, the following additional tasks shall be carried out by the Consultant and the feasibility report will be prepared: The following paragraphs highlight key activities and products expected from the Consultant. It is however the responsibility of the Consultant to design and carry out all activities to ensure quality and timely delivery of the studies.  Task 1 – A more detailed geotechnical study, which shall include drilling, sampling, laboratory testing and factual reports, shall be prepared to determine the infrastructure requirements and related costs, based on the project layout. The project components of the selected option shall be designed with a degree of accuracy expected at feasibility stage reflecting the design concept and improving the accuracy of the cost estimates. Hydraulic calculations and structural sizing shall be carried out. Design methodologies and design criteria shall be set while designing the project components. The components of the project shall also be described and specified in general terms. Civil, hydro-mechanical, electromechanical, mechanical, electrical components and other structures of the project shall be developed. A construction schedule shall be prepared by sequencing and scheduling of the project activities. Resources availability and critical activities shall be taken into consideration while sequencing and scheduling the project activities. Infrastructure requirements during construction and operation shall be considered. Such infrastructure requirements and facilities may include site camps, offices, access roads, construction quarters, construction power, water supply and sanitation, communication, and transport.  Task 2 - Alternative functional layout designs shall be considered to identify the most appropriate one. A schematic layout for each alternative shall be prepared and its technical and financial aspects compared and ranked. The most appropriate alternative shall be selected for the design of the project components. Topographical, financial, environmental, geo-technical and construction issues shall be considered during the selection of the project layout. In addition, key schematic drawings for all major components like headworks, water ways, forebay, desilting basin, electromechanical equipment if any, power generation option for various operations at the dam site and single line diagram, transmission lines if any, project layout in appropriate scale shall be prepared.  Task 3 – A socio-economic and environmental assessment during the construction and the operation phases shall be carried out using the existing applicable Environmental and Social Frameworks. The physical, chemical, biological, cultural and socio-economic environment of the project affected area will be studied. This shall include a social and environmental management plan and a plan to monitor the implementation of the mitigation measures. The project structuring will take into account possible community and local communities, municipal government participation considering land rights allocation, local co-investment and labour contribution. Community participation is considered a key issue in order to incorporate local perception and sharing of costs and benefits for project construction and for long-term operation and maintenance.  Task 4 – An Economic and Financial analysis shall be performed to determine: (a) the economic benefits of the construction and operation of the project for Liberia; and (b) its

114 Contract 2012/284032

financial soundness for the project sponsors/owners. The key assumptions used for the economic and financial analysis will be clearly spelled out (in particular the basis for the various unit costs) and justified. In addition, the economic and the financial analysis shall include sensitivity analysis around the key input parameters to assess the impact of key parameter variations on the economic and financial viability of the project.  Task 5- An overall implementation plan which identifies the key steps, decisions and actions needed to implement the various recommendations of the study.  Task 6 – The Consultant will prepare the complete set of Tender Documents, including drawings and estimates of quantities necessary for launching an International Competitive Bidding complying with practices and rules of DFI’s.  Task 7 – The Consultant shall allow for capacity building and transfer of knowledge to Liberian staff from agencies and enterprises selected in due times so as to build effective hydropower development know how in three areas: hydropower scheme design, socio-environmental impact analysis and basic economic and financial analysis.

CONSULTING TEAM

GENERAL The successful candidate for this consultancy will be a firm. The assigned Consultant project team must possess expertise in mechanical, electrical, civil, structural, hydropower, topographical and geotechnical engineering, environmental and social impact assessments and management plans and in project economic and financial analysis. The team should have a proven track record of conducting feasibility studies for hydropower/dam projects. The Consultant may contract local companies to carry out certain components of the works, such as but not limited to geotechnical, and topographical work and other socio-economical surveys.

INDICATIVE LIST OF EXPERTISE REQUIRED

The following indicative list of experts is suggested: The consultant is fully responsible for the selection of the expertise required to satisfactorily carry out the contractual obligations. 1. Team Leader experienced in the hydropower and dam sectors 2. A hydropower energy expert 3. Hydrology Specialist 4. A Geologist 5. A civil engineer, specialist in dam design and construction 6. A hydro-mechanical engineer specialist in hydro-equipment design;

5. Environmental Specialist 6. Social Specialist 7. Economic and Financial Analyst (with experience in private sector investment and PPP arrangements) 8. Others experts and specialists that the Consultant will consider useful for the successful performance of the assignment.

Final Report – August 2012 115

The Consultant must possess the expertise and skills required to execute or supervise (if sub- contracted) under his full responsibility topographical studies, geotechnical analyses, socio- economic analyses, environmental analyses, civil/structural analyses and design. The Consultant must possess the expertise and skills to create, edit, format and update technical documents, in English, in a concise and clear manner.

116 Contract 2012/284032

11 COMMENTS AND CLARIFICATIONS FURTHER TO THE PRESENTATION OF THE REPORT ON JULY 24TH 2012

The report was presented to various development and funding partners on July 24th 2012 at the premises of the EU delegation in Monrovia. The list of attendance and presentation slides are included in appendix 12.7 and 12.8. Hereafter are various clarification and explanations in reply to questions or concerns raised by participants during the meeting.

Mount Coffee rehabilitation project

There is a concern that the design of the rehabilitation, like the unit capacity of the turbines as well as their type, the provisions for adding further units is adequately taking into account the contribution of the Via Reservoir and the entire future possible cascade of upstream power plants to the generation of energy. Such design should be developed in order that the Mount Coffee plant capacity fully takes benefit of the regulation effect of upstream reservoirs and hydropower plants installed in the medium and long terms.

Possibility of exporting energy to neighbouring countries systems

In case future installed hydropower capacity exceeds the load demand of Liberia, the opportunity to sell the surplus of energy to neighbouring countries could constitute a source of revenues for the country. However this will be closely depending on international agreements on tariffs, availability of a reliable regional network (the CLSG project is a first step for interconnecting the sub-region) which are aspects to be organized and managed through a strong regional cooperation amongst the concerned states. These are crucial prerequisites for decision for capital investment in the related projects.

Issue of large capacities required by mining operators

Currently, operators and investors operating in the mining sector (or large agro compounds) develop and install their own off-grid generation capacities. This is an obvious response to their main concern to have reliable and continuous power supply and to the current situation where the national grid is not reaching remote areas where these industries are usually settled. Incorporating such capacities and interconnecting them into an adequately developed national grid/system is a very long term vision which will need the mobilization of huge resources and a strong strategic and political will from the Government.

Demand projections

The report illustrates various scenarios which have been considered for projecting the demand at various horizons. Up to 2020, analyses have concluded that the demand will reach approximately 100- 120 MW on the LEC grid (therefore not including possible off-grid capacities installed at other locations or by other operators in the country). This figure is lower than what has been estimated by several consultants or partners but relatively close to the figure projected in the most recent study performed by the World Bank Group in November 2011. The motivated justifications enlightened in the report are of the various following natures: i) The future demand is essentially driven by the growth of access to electricity by the low and middle income customers in the Great Monrovia whose consumption remains low ii) despite an encouraging

Final Report – August 2012 117

economic annual growth rate, a drastic “take of” of the Liberian economy is not expected at the short term, the absence of critical and conducive ingredients/environment coupled with the uncertainties on the worldwide situation impeding a too optimistic vision iii) The national electricity company LEC faces absorptive capacity limitations which when coupled with a prudential (nevertheless adequate) development strategy do not allow a too rapid development of its generation, transportation and distribution system. The articulated target of achieving 87’000 customers/connections in the Great Monrovia in 2020 (96 months away from today) would require the installations of more than 800 connections per months. This is a challenging rate compared to those currently observed (1st semester 2012) ranging from 80 to 190 per month.

Climate change, hydrology and forest preservation

One participant rightly raised the issues of soil erosion and forest management prevailing in Liberia with an estimated 50% of the country forests and 40% of the country’s mass land under concessions. As logging operations (and mining activities) have an obvious impact on the hydrological cycle of the river basins where they are located, this aspect has to be carefully taken into consideration when designing the capacity of hydro-reservoirs (useful capacity and lifespan) and associated hydropower plants. It can already be confirmed that such aspects will be duly taken into consideration within the scope of the recommended Reconnaissance and Detailed Feasibility studies. Environmental issues as well as Climate Change issues are amongst the aspects already embedded in the guidelines, directives and safeguards (universally applied by MDB’s, as well as Private Funding Institutions - Equator Principles -…) that will be applied/followed when performing the EIAS

118 Contract 2012/284032

12 ANNEXES

12.1 LIST OF PERSONS MET DURING THE EVALUATION

Name Organization Function/Title Mrs. VASQUEZ European Union Delegation Head of Section Operations HORYAANS Paula Mr. KIRCHNAYR European Union Delegation Attaché, Programme Manager - Giorgio Infrastructures Mr. JASURA William Liberia Electricity Corporation Chief Financial Officer (LEC) Mr. BONAMPEKA Alain African Development Bank Country Program Officer (CPO) Pierre Mr. SHAHID Mohammad Liberia Electricity Corporation Chief Executive Officer (CEO) (LEC) Mr. KONAI Matthew Liberia Electricity Corporation Planning Manager (LEC) Mr. LEAY Joseph Liberia Electricity Corporation Project Manager Cross Border Rural (LEC) Electrification Project Mr. LARTEY Sammuel Energy Ventures (GH) LTD. Project Administrator. Cross Border Rural A. Communities Electrification Project Mr HETTINGER Patrick African Development Bank Senior Country Economist S. Mrs. STROUP Kristin K. Liberia Electricity Corporation Senior Project Manager (LEC) Mr. GULBRANDSEN Norwegian Water Resources Senior Advisor, International Section Thor Henning and Energy Directorate Mr. BROWN Russell C. Winrock International Chief of Party Mr. Parker David Winrock International Consultant/Advisor Mrs. LITTLEJOHN The World Bank Senior Operations Officer Coleen R. Monrovia Office Mrs. Hasselsten JENNY The World Bank Urban Development Specialist Monrovia Office Mr. Hady Sherif Centre for Sustainable Executive Director Energy Technology Mr. EDHOLM Gunnar ELTEL Networks TE AB Chief Engineer, Transmission International Mr. BORBODEE Peter Eleder of the Neezoe Neezoe Community/Paynesville Community Mr. DAVIS Thomas Director for Geo Information Liberia institute of Statistics & geo Systems Information Services LISGIS Mr. DAVIS Yacouba Lawyer Community Leader New Georgia Estate Community Mr. GRAY Victor Consumer New Service Liberian Electricity Corporation Department Mr. HARRIS Hannah Treasury Sayetown Development Association Mr. JACOBS David L. Chairman Claratown Township Mr. LIBERTY Edward T Director General Liberia institute of Statistics & Geo (Ph D) Information Services LISGIS Mr. LYNCH Jura A. Attorney at Law Chairman of the Stephen Tolbert Community Mr. MORRIS K. George Secretary general Sayetown Development Association Mr. NYAN Joseph Director for Data Processing Liberia institute of Statistics & geo

Final Report – August 2012 119

Information Services LISGIS Mr. DNEEHSAWZEH Member of the Council Claratown Township Paul Mr. SUAH Jackson Chairman for the Neezoe Neezoe Community/Paynesville Community Mr. SURWORGO Peter Block C Leader Sayetown Development Association

120 Contract 2012/284032

12.2 LIST OF CONSULTED DOCUMENTS AND BIBLIOGRAPHY

Year Author Title

2010 EU Country Evaluation Liberia

2011 Norad - Norplan Norwegian support to the Liberian energy sector - Baseline Study and RBM System

2011 World Bank - Afteg Options for the Development of Liberia’s Energy Sector

2009 World Bank – AICD Powering Up: Costing Power Infrastructure Spending Needs in Sub-Saharan Africa

2007 USAID Let there be light: the role of Electrification in Liberia’s Post-conflict stabilization

2006 EU Financing convention for Electricity Grid rehabilitation in Monrovia n°9493/LBR/EDF IX

2011 EU Briefing note on the Energy Sector in Liberia

2007 EU Addendum n°1 EC 06/07/2007

2009 EU Addendum n°2 EC 26/09/2009 and explanatory note

2010 EU Budget reallocation

2006 EU Tender Notice Electricity Grid rehabilitation

March 2012 Stanley Consultants Via Reservoir/Diversion System the Keystone to Dependable Hydropower on the St. Paul

May 2009 Liberia Government National Energy Policy an Agenda for Action and Economic and Social Development (Ministry of Lands, Mines and Energy)

February 2007 Liberia Government NATIONAL ENERGY SECTOR WHITE PAPER White Book

April 2008 Liberia Government Liberia Poverty Reduction Strategy (Period 2008 - 2011)

July 2010 UNDP (Consultant Report) United Nations Development Programme, Liberia Country Programme Action Plan (CPAP) Mid-Term Review 2008 - 2012

May 2008 UNDP UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT Assistance Framework for Liberia 2008 - 2012

January 2012 World Bank PROJECT PAPER on a proposed additional credit (US $ 22 million equivalent) and a proposed grant from the environment facility trust fund (GEF) (US $ 1.454 million)

Final Report – August 2012 121

for an electricity system enhancement project

October 2011 GPOBA - World Bank The Global Partnership on Output-Based Aid (GPOBA) Annual Report 2011

February 2011 International Resources Group LIBERIA ENERGY ASSISTANCE PROGRAM (LEAP) (IRG) for the USAID Final Report

April 2012 USAID Fact Sheet on the Emergency Power Program (EPP)

April 2012 USAID Fact Sheet on Liberia Energy Sector Support Program (LESSP)

February 2012 African Development Bank Project Concept Note. COTE D’IVOIRE, LIBERIA SIERRA LEONE AND GUINEA (CLSG) INTERCONNECTION PROJECT

April 2012 World Bank Cote d’Ivoire, Liberia Sierra Leone and Guinea (CLSG) Interconnection Project - Project Information Document (PID)

November 2010 European Commission Hydropower sustainability assessment protocol Environment LIFE program and International Hydropower Association (IHA)

May 1970 World Bank Appraisal of public utilities authority. Power Expansion Project

July 2008 County Development Monserrado County Development Agenda 2008 - 2012 Committee, in collaboration with the Ministries of Planning and Economic and internal affairs. Government of Liberia

2012 IFC - World Bank Doing Business 2012 data for Liberia

December 2011 West African Power Pool CLSG project environmental and social impact assessment (WAPP) study (Final Report Liberia Section)

December 2011 West African Power Pool CLSG Project Resettlement Action Plan (Liberia) (WAPP)

March 2011 African Development Bank LIBERIA Country Strategy 2008-2001 Mid-Term review, portfolio performance review

March 2011 Liberia Electricity Corporation LEC Tariff Policy

April 2011 Liberia Electricity Corporation LEC Electricity Master Plan

April 2012 Liberia Electricity Corporation March 2012 Monthly Report

May 2011 Liberia Electricity Corporation LEC Year 2 Investment Plan

122 Contract 2012/284032

April 2012 Liberia Electricity Corporation LEC Auditor's report and Financial Statements 2011

April 2012 Liberia Electricity Corporation LEC Fiscal Year 12Q3 Quarterly Progress

April 2012 The World Bank Liberia Infrastructure Policy Notes Prioritizing Investments for_ Diversification[1]

April 2009 Liberia Electricity Corporation Request for Prequalification (RFP) from LEC Liberia (for (LEC) and International Finance the selection of an utility operator - the “Operator” - for the Corporation (IFC) LEC under a management contract

April 2012 USAID (Winrock) LESSP March Monthly Progress Report

July 2011 USAID (Winrock) Sorlumba project Survey Report Final Socio-economic and Load Demand assessment survey for Sorlumba Biomass Electricity Project, Sorlumba Foyah Statutory District, Lofa County

May 2011 USAID (Winrock) Wayavah Falls project survey report Final. Report of load demand assessment & socio-economic survey conducted in Salayea district.

May 2011 USAID (Winrock) Mein River Project Survey Report. Final Report. Load Demand Assessment & Socio-Economic Survey For Proposed Mein Mini Hydropower Project Suakoko & Jorquelleh Districts, Gbarnga Bong County

July 2011 USAID (CSET for Winrock) Cocopa Project Final Survey Report Socioeconomic And Energy Baseline Survey Report On Cocopa & Its Nearby Towns In Nimba County

1983 Bremen The Open Door Policy of Liberia, an Economic History of Modern Liberia, FPM van der Kraaij

2010 AMCOW Water supply and sanitation in Liberia: turning finance into services for 2015 and beyond An AMCOW Country Status Overview 2010 The African Ministers Council on Water

2010 Backiny-Yetna, Prospere Poverty in Liberia: Level, Pro_le, and Correlates in 2007 World Bank September 2010 MPRA Paper No. 34415

2011 IDLO International Development Addressing Land Tenure Insecurity Through Community Law Organization Land Titling: A policy brief presenting the findings of the Community Land Titling Initiative in Liberia Policy Brief October 2011

2008 International Resources Group’s Let there be light the role of electrification in Liberia’s post (IRG) conflict stabilization Rick Whitaker Chief of Party in Liberia for the USAID Emergency Power Program and the Liberia Energy Assistance Program,

Final Report – August 2012 123

2011 Lookman Oshodi Housing and Urban Development in Monrovia Liberia Observer’s pers pective A visitation report August 2011

2009 MLME National Energy Policy an Agenda For Action and Economic and Social Development Ministry of Lands, Mines and Energy Monrovia, Liberia May 2009

2008 Montserrado County Development Agenda Republic of Liberia 2008 – 2012

2011 NORAD Norwegian support to the Liberian energy sector Baseline study and RBM system Norad Report 9/2011 Discussion

2011 Norwegian Refugee Council Beyond Squatter’s rights Durable solutions and NRC development induced displacement in Monrovia, Liberia, May 2011

2011 Republic of Liberia LISGIS Liberia Institute of Statistics and Geo information ServicesStatistical Bulletin, Monrovia, Liberia. December 2011

2008 Republic of Liberia Poverty Reduction Strategy April 2008

2009 Republic of Liberia LISGIS , 2008 National Population and Housing Census Final Results , Monrovia , Liberia

2011 Small Arms Survey Issue Brief Liberia Armed Violence Assessment Issue Brief Number 1 and 2 September 2011

2009 Timothy Kortu Urban Agriculture in and around Monrovia, Liberia, Urban Agriculture magazine, number 21,January 2009

2008 UNDAF United Nations Development Assistance Framework for Liberia 2008-2012

2010 UNDP Country Programme Action Plan (CPAP) Mid-Term Review 2008-2012

2006 UNDP/EPA First State of the Environment Report For Liberia, UNDP and Environmental Agency of Liberia

2008 UNHabitat Country programme Document, 2008-2009, Liberia

2009 UNHabitat/ Global Energy “Electrification for slum/low‐ income settlements in Liberia: Network for the Urban opportunities and Challenges”, Mr. Hady Sherif, Center for Settlements (GENUS) Sustainable Energy Technology, CSET, Liberia, in - Expert Group Meeting Promoting Energy Access for the urban poor in Africa: Approaches and Challenges in Slum

124 Contract 2012/284032

Electrification Final report- ; Nairobi, Kenya, October 2009

2010 Urcun Aude et al Gouvernance « non souveraine » et régulation des services de l’eau à Monrovia, Libéria, Revue Tiers Monde 2010/3 - n° 203

2011 USAID User guide: USAID poverty assessment tool for Liberia, January 2011

2008 USAID Liberia Fact Sheet The Emergency Power Programm 2008

2009 USAID Liberia Project fact EPP 2006-2009

2006 WFP/FAO,ECHO/GOL Liberia Comprehensive Food Security and Nutrition Survey (CFSNS)

2007 WFP/FAO,ECHO/GOL Liberia Market Review (LMR), VAM Vulnerability Analysis and Mapping, Strengthening Emergency Needs, Assessment Capacity (SENAC).

2008 World Bank Rice Prices and Poverty in Liberia, by Clarence Tsimpo Quentin Wodon, The World Bank Human Development Network Development Dialogue on Values and Ethics October 2008, Policy Research Working Paper 4742

2012 World Bank Liberia Preliminary results of the Willingness to pay Survey Annex 3 Willingness to Pay analysis Energy use and spending patterns Liberia

World Bank Liberia Preliminary results of the Willingness to pay Survey Combined WTP Findings 2 21 2012

2012 World Bank/IBRD Developing Public- Private Partnerships in Liberia; Zachary A. Kaplan, Peter Kyle, Chris Shugart, and Alan Moody

Final Report – August 2012 125

12.3 SURVEY METHODOLOGY

12.3.1 Data and Document Collection It was an asset for the project that a baseline sociological end-users survey was completed in October 2010 for the Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation within the framework of the Norwegian support to the Liberian Energy Sector (Norad – Baseline Study and RBM system, see bibliography). However, the original data from this survey couldn’t be found in Monrovia by the evaluation team, neither with the EU officer nor with the Norwegian representative of the Norwegian cooperation in Monrovia. Therefore the End User survey to be launched by the evaluation team could not anymore be a “follow up” survey as requested by the TORs but was designed as a genuine new End Users survey.

As a start, all relevant data were collected like: data on urban household characteristics and income levels, living conditions, targets of the Poverty reduction Strategy of the Liberian Government, socio economic context of Monrovia development, level of urban services, demographic data. All document used are listed in the Bibliography. Several working meetings were held with the National Statistical Institute officers at LISGIS (Liberian Institute for Statistics and Geo Information Systems) aimed at assessing the demographic data of the 2008 Census for the neighborhoods of Greater Monrovia – those data were provided to the Consultant by LISGIS. It allowed to finalize the size of the sample of the households survey in the various selected surveyed areas.

The Consultant team was informed that an in depth national consumer survey aiming at assessing the willingness to pay for electrical services was carried out in 2010-2011, financed by a separate Global Partnership on Output Based Aid grant. The survey covered a random sample of 479 households in Monrovia without access to grid electricity and 479 households connected to the LEC grid. Questions covered overall household use of energy, use and expenditure on various energy sources, and ownership and use of electric and non-electric appliances, as well as questions regarding household income and expenditure. The analysis of the data collected is not completed and consequently the final report not yet available. However some preliminary findings have been provided to the Consultant by the World Bank in Monrovia.

A survey on Electricity efficiency on a sample of LEC customers households in Monrovia – financed by USAID - was just starting during the evaluation mission time. Discussions about households behavior concerning electricity uses and types of appliances were held with the consultancy team in charge of the survey. Documentation on energy behavior of rural households was provided also to the team by Winrock International in charge of of USAID projects management/coordination in Liberia.

Several meetings were held with Manitoba Team in charge of the Management Contract of LEC: they were very useful for the understanding of LEC works and on-field equipment the various neighborhoods of Monrovia. A working tour of Monrovia neighborhoods was also organized with an officer of LEC Customer New Service during which several key installations were visited - Bushrod main station, Paynesville sub station, Old Congo sub station all around the city of Monrovia and also several places in northern Monrovia. Documentation was provided also by Manitoba on main themes of interest to the evaluation team. Unfortunately neither data on distribution of the number of actual LEC customers by location (neighborhoods) could be provided to the Consultant nor maps of the location of main clusters of customers.

126 Contract 2012/284032

12.3.2 Methodology

The survey was carried on 354 households and 36 enterprises/institutions. The methodology used is different for the two categories and presented in two separate sections.

End User Household survey methodology

The survey was organised according to the following steps: . Definition of the targets groups to be surveyed . Choice of the sample Size . Definition of the sampling strategy . Choice of the interviews techniques

Definition of the targets groups to be surveyed Through various interviews and documents consulted it became rapidly apparent that the electricity generation capacity in Monrovia comprises : i) public and private organizations’ own generators ii) private enterprises (often informal) generators distributing energy to households and other small enterprises on a “local grid” setup, called IPPs iii) private households’ own generators.

It was therefore decided to target 4 different groups of households in order to capture the different energy consumption patterns, expenditure strategies and behaviors concerning the impacts of electricity on their living conditions: those without electricity, those owning a generator, those whose electricity is supplied by IPPs and finally those connected to LEC electric grid. For the enterprise/social units’ component of the survey, 3 groups were selected: those connected to LEC grid, those with a generator and those without electricity.

Choice of the sample size

In order to analyze the behavior of these groups with respect to energy, the sample survey size was determined for 350 households as the focus of the survey was on households. This sample size is relevant for the analysis of socio economic trends in various social groups. The number of units in each targeted social group allows reliable calculations and results (especially quartiles) so as to capture socio economic stratification. The number of enterprises/social units was fixed to 30 as the outcomes sought were more qualitative than quantitative. The objectives were actually to capture the main problems and issues they face and to assess their perception of electricity impacts on their activity.

Sampling strategy

The End Users Household survey is a multistage sampling survey.The sampling strategy aimed at producing data that must be representative across the socio-economic, demographic and economic patterns of the Monrovia urban perimeter. The objective was to target Monrovia population most representative of the bulk of future LEC customers. Priority zones should be therefore representative of low to middle income groups. It was therefore decided not to include middle to high income social groups in the sample

Final Report – August 2012 127

First stage: selection of survey areas

Areas were selected according to the following criteria.

. Households connected to LEC grid:

They were to be found in zones or neighbourhoods of Monrovia recently electrified and, if possible, with infrastructures financed by the EU project. These areas should also allow targeting several social groups, from the lowest income level group up to middle class income level.

The two following types of areas were chosen:

i) The northern neighbourhoods of Monrovia; areas which have been supplied by the 66kV High Voltage Line constructed along the Somalia Drive Road. Very few areas have been electrified in these zones: however from 2011 LEC started to electrify some specific neighbourhoods - estate housing areas- offering the best opportunities for easily developing customers groups thanks to the density of their population and the presence of a variety of income social groups with a good percentage of low middle class.

Two survey areas were selected in these neighbourhoods: one in Stephen Tolbert neighbourhood, located in Barnesville Township and the second in New Georgia estate housing in New Georgia Township.

Stephen Tolbert is situated next to Somalia Drive Road (main asphalted road of the zone), in a commercial area (with Chicken Soup factory market). It can be characterized as a mainly middle income residential area. New Georgia is very far from Somalia Drive Road but connected to it by a good asphalted road. It is residential, with a few shops but not any real market place and characterized with a mix of low to middle income groups.

ii) The second category of area selected was a “low income area” in Monrovia which has been electrified very recently and equipped with the pre-paid meters of the Eltel contract : the survey area selected is in Jallah Town neighbourhood, Central Monrovia. It can be characterized as a mainly poor to very low middle income residential area; the poorest households are located in the area bordering the wetland. It is close to an asphalted road and benefits from all urban commodities of central town.

. For the group of households without electricity

For this group of households, areas should be representative of the two typical urban patterns and housing types where the largest part of the urban population lives in Monrovia: unplanned and not densely populated neighbourhoods of the peri urban areas and most densely populated slum areas in the central areas of the capital.

i) The two selected zones in the not densely unplanned areas were both in Paynesville city, which acounts today for more than 30% of the total population of Monrovia: one survey area was selected in Neezoe Community and the other in Police Academy Community. Neezoe and Police Academy are both exclusively residential and not connected to an asphalted road. The nearest commercial market place is a few kilometres away: it is the very important commercial centre of Red Light at the junction of Somalia Drive Road and Tubman Boulevard. These areas can be characterized as mainly poor to low middle income group. Both communities are not yet electrified; they are planned to be in the coming five years (according the Master Plan of LEC).

128 Contract 2012/284032

ii) The last selected area was Clara Town: a very densely populated slum type neighbourhood located on the south-western end of Bushrod Island, off the UN Drive. The LEC grid runs through the community, and some customers along the main line have been connected. The community is currently in the process of being electrified and households equipped with pre-paid meters. The community is characterized by mainly larger retail and trade businesses along UN Drive, and very poor to low middle income residential area off UN Drive. The poorer households are located in the area bordering the wetland.

Second stage; Distribution of the sample size among the survey areas’categories

The distribution was based on the estimation of the population of the survey area (demographic projections for 2012 calculated for each area based on the results of the 2008 Census). The ratio targeted was to interview about 10% of the estimated number of households in each of the selected areas.

Third stage; selection of households in each survey area

The final choice of the households was defined by judgmental sampling for households connected to LEC grid and by random sampling for the ones not connected. This methodology produced households data which are largely reliable as well as representative for urban Monrovia low to middle class income group.

The sample is given in the table below:

Table 1: End user survey: households distribution per Survey Area and per urban pattern

Survey Area Nbr of HH % Urban pattern Sites/ Communities/ interviewed Neighbourhoods  Clara Town 45 24% Unplanned « Low income Bushrod Island  Jallah- Saye Town communities »; densely central populated neighborhoods

40 Central Town

85  Neezoe 78 39% Unplanned (organic) popular peri urban Paynesville -North of Somalia Drive neighborhoods ; low density of Road  Police Academy population

60 and West of Tubman Bvd 138  Stephen Tolbert 71 37% Planned (grid pattern) peri urban Barnesville  New Georgia neighborhoods ; medium to high density

60 New Georgia

131 both located north of Somalia Drive Road

Total 354 100%

Figure : Surveys areas in Monrovia

Final Report – August 2012 129

The satellite images are inserted below with the selected areas contoured in red. Clara Town:

130 Contract 2012/284032

Jallah Town:

Stephen Tolbert:

Final Report – August 2012 131

New Georgia:

Police Academy

132 Contract 2012/284032

Neezoe

Interviews techniques

The Consultant has applied traditional survey methods using questionnaires and interviewing. A questionnaire with quantitative questions and some qualitative questions was prepared (see questionnaire in Annexe 10.5). Interviews with community leaders in each community were also carried out.

Enterprises and Social Units Survey

With respect to the group of enterprises and social units the methodology used was very different: it was chosen - considering the short time (one day) which could be devoted during the survey to this category of end users - to target units located only along the Somalia Drive Road in three areas: Stepehn Tolbert Junction, Chicken Soup factory Junction and Zota Community.

The number of enterprises/social units was fixed to 50 targeting 50% enterprises and 50% social units, as the outcomes were more qualitative than quantitative. The objectives were actually to capture the main problems and issues these entities face and to assess their perception of electricity impacts on their activity.

A specific questionnaire was prepared for these units (Appendix 10.6).

12.3.3 Schedule for the survey and survey team The preparation of the survey was carried out during the first two weeks of the evaluation mission: this period was devoted to intensive preliminary field work allowing to finalize the choice of the survey areas. During this period most of the working with geo information systems and statistical officers of LISGIS took place as well as interviews conducted with main actors of the energy sector.

The End Users Survey was conducted during 10 days mobilizing a team of 8 local surveyors for interviews of beneficiaries: 1 day was devoted to training of the surveyors, 1 day was necessary for pre test exercise in one neighborhood (Stephen Tolbert) and to analyse feed back from the pre test

Final Report – August 2012 133

to adjust the questionnaire and 8 days of survey in the various selected areas. 7 days were devoted to the households’ survey and one day to the enterprise units.

The quality of the survey was monitored through the coordination and supervision of the surveyors by a Field coordinator who was permanently in the field and who was responsible for the first stage of the quality check.

Data entry (two persons) was organized in such a way as to have each day’s set of questionnaire recorded the day after in order to enable a running review of the quality and profile of the information. This was the task of the Quality check data computer officer.

All Survey staff (surveyors, field coordinator, data entry and quality check) has been provided by the Centre for Sustainable Energy and Technology (CSET), we thank them for their cooperation in the survey.

12.3.4 Problems faced during the survey Problems occurred only with the enterprises/social units survey. Very few social units were located in the areas selected along Somalia Drive Road. The managers either refused to answer the same day and suggested another meeting day, and this was not possible, either the person which could be interviewed couldn’t answer to the questionnaire as having no knowledge on the matters questioned.

This is the reason why the final sample is constituted by enterprises only (only one school) and the size was limited to 36 units.

134 Contract 2012/284032

12.4 SURVEY DATA

12.4.1 Household Socio Economic Characteristics

Table 26: End user survey sample: Households distribution by location and urban pattern

Location Total Nbr % l % Urban patterns

Clara Town 45 13% unorganized grid of « Low

Jallah/Saye Town 40 11% 24% income communities »

Bushrod Island and Center of Monrovia

Neezoe 78 22% Un planned settlements of peri

Police Academy 60 17% 39% urban Monrovia : Paynesville North

and West

New Georgia 60 17% Planned grid of estate housing 37% Stephen Tolbert 71 20% North of Somalia Drive Road

354 100% 100%

Table 27: Households distribution by sex of household head and by location

Location Sex of Household Head

Nbr Male Nbr Total Female

Clara Town 36 9 45

Jallah/Saye Town 33 7 40

Neezoe 65 13 78

New Georgia 48 12 60

Police Academy 50 10 60

Stephen Tolbert 47 24 71

Nbr Total 279 75 354

Table 28: Households distribution by sex of household head and by location (%)

Location Sex of Household Head

Nbr Male Nbr Female Total Nbr

Clara Town 80% 20% 100%

Jallah/Saye Town 83% 18% 100%

Neezoe 83% 17% 100%

New Georgia 80% 20% 100%

Police Academy 83% 17% 100%

Stephen Tolbert 66% 34% 100%

Average on total 79% 21% 100%

Final Report – August 2012 135

Table 29: Households distribution by marital status of household head and by location

Location Marital Status

Nbr Single Nbr Married Nbr Nbr Total Nbr Divorced/ Widowed

Separated

Clara Town 6 36 1 2 45

Jallah/Saye Town 7 32 0 1 40

Nezzoe 8 62 2 6 78

New Georgia 9 47 2 2 60

Police Academy 10 48 1 1 60

Stephen Tolbert 17 46 3 5 71

Nbr Total 57 271 9 17 354

Table 30: Households distribution by marital status of household head and by location (%)

Location Marital Status

Nbr Single Nbr Married Nbr Nbr Total Divorced/ Widowed Nbr

Separated

Clara Town 13% 80% 2% 4% 100%

Jallah/Saye Town 18% 80% 0% 3% 100%

Nezzoe 10% 79% 3% 8% 100%

New Georgia 15% 78% 3% 3% 100%

Police Academy 17% 80% 2% 2% 100%

Stephen Tolbert 24% 65% 4% 7% 100%

Average Total 16% 77% 3% 5% 100%

Table 31: Average Household size by location

Location Household Household Nbr of Nbr Nbr size size persons=> children children Average Median 18 years <5 years >5 <18 years

Clara Town 5,7 5 3,3 1,8 0,6

Jallah/Saye Town 6,1 5 3,2 2,2 0,7

Nezzoe 6,5 6 2,8 2,7 1,0

New Georgia 6,8 6 2.9 2,5 1,4

Police Academy 6,9 6 2,9 2,9 1,1

Stephen Tolbert 6,6 6 2,8 2,6 1,2

Average for total 6,4 5,7 3,0 2,5 1,0

136 Contract 2012/284032

Table 32: Dwelling Occupation status of household by location

Location Owner Renter renter Free Caretaker Total Nbr private public Occupation

Clara Town 14 24 0 6 1 45

Jallah/Saye Town 17 21 0 2 0 40

Nezzoe 42 34 0 1 1 78

New Georgia 44 11 2 3 0 60

Police Academy 35 20 0 2 3 60

Stephen Tolbert 50 8 5 6 2 71

Nbr Total 202 118 7 20 7 354

Table 33: Dwelling Occupation status of household by location (%)

Location Dwelling Occupation status

Owner Renter Renter Free Caretaker Total Nbr private public Occupation

Clara Town 31% 53% 0% 13% 2% 100%

Jallah/Saye Town 43% 53% 0% 5% 0% 100%

Nezzoe 54% 44% 0% 1% 1% 100%

New Georgia 73% 18% 3% 5% 0% 100%

Police Academy 58% 33% 0% 3% 5% 100%

Stephen Tolbert 70% 11% 7% 8% 3% 100%

Average Total 57% 33% 2% 6% 2% 100%

Table 34: Number of years the household is in the dwelling by location

Location Length of occupation Nbr of years as…

Owner Renter Other

Clara Town 18,7 5,6 23,0

Jallah/Saye Town 17,0 6,5 15,0

Nezzoe 10,8 2,9 3,5

Police Academy 7,3 3,1 3,2

New Georgia 16,0 6,7 7,2

Stephen Tolbert 17,3 9,8 11,2

Average on Total 14,5 5,8 10,5

Final Report – August 2012 137

Table 35: Type of wall of household dwelling by location

Location Type of Wall

Nbr Nbr Mud Mud and Other Total Nbr Concrete/ Corrugated Bricks Wattle Iron Sheet ciment

Clara Town 42 2 1 0 0 45

Jallah/Saye Town 34 5 1 0 0 40

Nezzoe 46 0 29 3 0 78

Police Academy 43 1 15 0 1 60

New Georgia 54 4 2 0 0 60

Stephen Tolbert 67 3 0 1 0 71

NbrTotal 286 15 48 4 1 354

Table 36: Type of wall of household dwelling by location (%)

Location Type of Wall

Nbr Nbr Mud Mud and Other Total Nbr Concrete/ Corrugated Bricks Wattle Iron Sheet ciment

Clara Town 93% 4% 2% 0% 0% 100%

Jallah/Saye Town 85% 13% 3% 0% 0% 100%

Nezzoe 59% 0% 37% 4% 0% 100%

Police Academy 72% 2% 25% 0% 2% 100%

New Georgia 90% 7% 3% 0% 0% 100%

Stephen Tolbert 94% 4% 0% 1% 0% 100%

Average Total 81% 4% 14% 1% 0% 100%

Table 37: Type of roof of household dwelling by location

Location Type of Roofing

Nbr Nbr Zinc Nbr Total Nbr Concret Tarpaulin

Clara Town 1 44 0 45

Jallah/Saye 0 40 0 40 Town

Nezzoe 0 75 3 78

Police 2 58 0 60 Academy

New Georgia 2 58 0 60

Stephen 2 69 0 71 Tolbert

138 Contract 2012/284032

Nbr Total 7 344 3 354

Table 38: Type of roof of household dwelling by location (%)

Location Type of Roofing

Nbr Nbr Zinc Nbr Total Nbr Concret Tarpaulin

Clara Town 2% 98% 0% 100%

Jallah/Saye 0% 100% 0% 100% Town

Nezzoe 0% 96% 4% 100%

Police 3% 97% 0% 100% Academy

New Georgia 3% 97% 0% 100%

Stephen 3% 97% 0% 100% Tolbert

Total average 2% 97% 1% 100%

Table 39: Main source of drinking water of households by location

Location Main source of drinking water

Pipe or Pipe or pump Watersellers Private Hand Total pump outdoor (on well pump Nbr indoor neighbour's)

Clara Town 2 5 15 23 45

Jallah/Saye Town 4 4 21 11 40

New Georgia 2 3 12 3 40 60

Stephen Tolbert 4 4 20 2 41 71

Nezzoe 3 12 4 8 51 78

Police Academy 7 5 2 4 42 60

Nbr Total 22 33 74 17 208 354

Table 40: Main source of drinking water of households by location

Location Main source of drinking water

Pipe or Pipe or pump Watersellers Private Hand Total pump outdoor (on well pump Nbr indoor neighbour's)

Clara Town 4% 11% 33% 0% 51% 100%

Jallah/Saye Town 10% 10% 53% 0% 28% 100%

New Georgia 3% 5% 20% 5% 67% 100%

Stephen Tolbert 6% 6% 28% 3% 58% 100%

Nezzoe 4% 15% 5% 10% 65% 100%

Police Academy 12% 8% 3% 7% 70% 100%

Total average 6% 9% 21% 5% 59% 100%

Final Report – August 2012 139

12.4.2 Energy : household behaviour practices and expenditures

Electricity all sources

Table 41: Does your house get electricity (on grid or off grid)

Location Yes No Total

Clara Town 28 17 45

Jallah/Saye Town 33 7 40

Nezzoe 25 53 78

Police Academy 22 38 60

New Georgia 41 19 60

Stephen Tolbert 48 23 71

Total nbr 197* 157 354

*8 households have 2 sources of electricity: LEC and their own generator

Table 42: Does your house get electricity (on grid or off grid)

Location Yes No Total

Clara Town 62% 38% 100%

Jallah/Saye Town 83% 18% 100%

Nezzoe 32% 68% 100%

Police Academy 37% 63% 100%

New Georgia 68% 32% 100%

Stephen Tolbert 68% 32% 100%

Total average 56% 44% 100%

Sources of electricity

Table 43: Source of electricity of household by location

Location LEC LEC IPP Shared Own Solar Total neighbour generator generator

Clara Town 2 0 20 0 6 0 28

Jallah/Saye Town 23 3 7 0 2 0 35

Nezzoe 0 0 5 1 19 1 26

Police Academy 0 0 0 0 22 0 22

New Georgia 21 0 14 0 11 0 46

Stephen Tolbert 41 0 0 0 7 0 48

Total nbr 87 3 46 1 67 1 205

140 Contract 2012/284032

Table 44: Source of electricity of household by location

Location LEC LEC IPP Shared Own Solar Total neighbour generator generator

Clara Town 7% 0% 71% 0% 21% 0% 100%

Jallah/Saye Town 66% 9% 20% 0% 6% 0% 100%

Nezzoe 0% 0% 19% 4% 73% 4% 100%

Police Academy 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 100%

New Georgia 46% 0% 30% 0% 24% 0% 100%

Stephen Tolbert 85% 0% 0% 0% 15% 0% 100%

Total nbr 42% 1% 22% 0,5% 33% 0% 100%

Table 45: Electricity sources : when did your household get this electricity source (s)

Category of respondent 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007- 1990- Total Nbr 2000 1999

LEC (own) 56 26 5 87

LEC (neighbour) 3 3

IPP 5 17 19 1 1 3 46

Shared generator 1 1

Own generator 6 23 18 4 3 9 4 67

Solar 1 1

Nbr Total 70 67 43 5 4 12 4 205

Table 46: Electricity sources : when did your household get this electricity source (s)

Category of respondent 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007- 1990- Total Nbr 2000 1999

LEC (own) 64% 30% 6% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100%

LEC (neighbour) 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100%

IPP 11% 37% 41% 2% 2% 7% 0% 100%

Shared generator 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100%

Own generator 9% 34% 27% 6% 4% 13% 6% 100%

Solar 0% 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100%

Nbr Total 34% 33% 21% 2% 2% 6% 2% 100%

Final Report – August 2012 141

Comparison of customers’ perception of the quality of service provided by LEC or IPP

Table 47: Satisfaction of customers with the electricity supplier (LEC,IPP) service:

Category of respondent LEC IPP

Yes 52 17

No 9 23

Yes and No 23 6

Total respondents 84 46

na 3

Table 48: :Satisfaction of customers with the electricity supplier (LEC,IPP) service (%):

Category of respondent LEC IPP

Yes 62% 37%

No 11% 50%

Yes and No 27% 13%

Total respondents 100% 100%

Table 49: LEC Reasons for Satisfaction

Reasons of satisfaction Nbr

24hrs 28

Regular current 18

Stable current 9

Reduced cost 10

Payment of what is consumed 10

Total respondents 77

Table 50: LEC Reasons for Table 51: Satisfaction (%)

Reasons of satisfaction Nbr

24hrs 36%

Regular current 23%

Stable current 12%

Reduced cost 13%

Payment of what is consumed 13%

Total respondents 100%

142 Contract 2012/284032

Table 52: LEC Reasons of Disatisfaction

Reasons of disatisfaction

Costly 16%

Bill problem* 22%

Payment system ** 25%

Current not regular 38%

Total respondents 100%

* conventional meter ** pre paid meter and scratch card

Billing is too high

I don’t how the bill is calculate and I always receive heavy bill

To obtain chip is a problem, we need more selling places for the chip

Poor costumer service: shut down power without notification

LEC is not stable, buying the chips is hard

Getting the card is big problem

Conventional meter is very expensive

Table 53: Reasons of Satisfaction IPP service

Reasons of satisfaction Nbr

Basic lighting 7

Regular 3

On time and all the night 7

Total respondents 17

Table 54: Reasons of satisfaction IPP service

Reasons of satisfaction

Basic lighting 41%

Is there : less expesnive then own 18% genset

On time and all the night 41%

Total respondents 100%

Table 55: Reasons of Dis satisfaction IPP service

Reasons of disatisfaction Nbr

Costly 10

Final Report – August 2012 143

Only night 10

Current not regular 9

Total respondents 29

Table 56: Reasons for Dis satisfaction IPP service

Reasons of disatisfaction

Costly 34%

Only night 34%

Current not regular 31%

Total respondents 100% Usages of electricity all customers

Table 57: Usages of Electricity whatever the source (grid or off grid) by order of priority

All respondents :354

Usages 1st Use 2nd Use 3rd Use 4th Use 5th Use

Lighting 180 23 7 1 0

TV/Radio 16 147 33 11 3

Fans 5 21 123 12 1

Refrigeration 3 10 15 20 1

Cooking 0 0 0 1 1

Other appliances 5 8 32 70 25

Na 2 2 1 96 180

211 211 211 211 211

Table 58: Usages of Electricity whatever the source (grid or off grid) by order of priority

All respondents :354

Usages 1st Use 2nd Use 3rd Use 4th Use 5th Use

Lighting 85% 11% 3% 0% 0%

TV/Radio 8% 70% 16% 5% 1%

Fans 2% 10% 58% 6% 0%

Refrigeration 1% 5% 7% 9% 0%

Cooking 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Other appliances* 2% 4% 15% 33% 12%

Na 1% 1% 0% 45% 85%

100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

*mobile phone charger, laptop are the most frequently cited

144 Contract 2012/284032

LEC CUSTOMER: ELECTRICITY CONSUMPTION AND EXPENDITURES Cost incurred for connection

Table 59: LEC customers : Connection expenditures for customers having paid 50 USD of connection fees (pre payment meter)

Total Fee Wiring Breaker Transpor Other

tation

USD USD USD USD USD USD

Average expenditure/ respondents 92,7 50,0 64,1 15,6 19,4 48,9

Median expenditure/ respondents 72,5 50 50 15 22,5 40

Nbre of respondents 44 44 18 9 10 9

Average expenditure/all LEC customers 92,7 50,0 26,2 2,1 4,4 10,0 having paid 50 US$

100% 54% 28% 2% 5% 11%

Table 60: LEC customers Connection expenditures for customers having paid 115 USD of connection fees (conventional meter)

Total Fee Wiring Breaker Transpor Other

tation

USD USD USD USD USD USD

Average expenditure/respondents 184,3 115,0 114,5 40,0 16,2 30,7

Median expenditure/ respondents 155,0 115,0 102,5 40,0 15,0 25,0

Nbre of respondents 37 37 19 2 6 6

Average expenditure/ all LEC customers 184,3 115,00 60,76 1,30 2,22 4,98 having paid 115 US$

100% 62% 33% 1% 1% 3%

No customer in “low income communities”

Final Report – August 2012 145

LEC customers Electricity Monthly expenditure

Table 61: LEC customers Electricity Monthly expenditure

Location Nbr LEC Electricity Monthly Expenditure respondents Average Median <=20 >20 =40 >40

USD USD USD USD USD

Clara Town/Jallah/Saye Town 23 34,8 40,0 35% 48% 17%

New Georgia 18 46,7 40,0 22% 39% 39%

Stephen Tolbert 41 44,5 40,0 7% 56% 37%

All respondents 82 42,3 40,0 18% 50% 32%

n.a 5 LEC customers: electricity consumption

Table 62: LEC customers Average Annual electricity consumption per capita equivalent

Location Average Average Average Average Average Monthly Household Monthly Monthly Annual expenditure size electricity electricity electricity per expenditure consumption consumption household per capita per capita per capita

USD Nbr USD kWh* kWh

Clara Town/Jallah/Saye Town 34,8 5,6 6,21 10,75 129,0

New Georgia 46,7 7,2 6,49 11,22 134,7

Stephen Tolbert 44,5 7,1 6,27 10,84 130,1

Average on total 42,3 6,7 6,3 10,9 131,1

*0.578 US$/kWh LEC tariff = 0.54 US$/kWh + 0.07% taxes

Table 63: LEC customers : Average Annual electricity consumption per capita and gender of head of household equivalent

Head of household Average Average Average Average Average Monthly Household Monthly Monthly Annual expenditure size electricity electricity electricity per expenditure consumption consumption household per capita per capita per capita

USD Nbr USD kWh kWh

Women 38,0 6,5 5,8 10,0 120,4

Male 43,5 6,8 6,4 11,1 132,8

Average on total 42,3 6,7 6,3 10,9 131,1

146 Contract 2012/284032

IPP CUSTOMERS ELECTRICITY CONSUMPTION AND EXPENDITURES Cost incurred for connection

Table 64: IPP Connection expenditures for customers

Total Wiring Breaker

USD USD USD

Average expenditure/ respondents 44,4 42,7 5,0

Median expenditure/respondents 40,0 35,0 5,0

Nbre of respondents 23 22 16

Average expenditure/all IPP customers 22,2 20,4 1,7

IPP customer Electricity Monthly expenditure

Table 65: IPP Customer Electricity Monthly expenditure

Location Nbr Average Median <20 > 20 =40 >40 respondents USD USD USD USD USD

Clara Town 19 40,0 38,8 26% 53% 21%

Jallah Town/ 7 40,0 40,0 0% 100% 0%

SayeTown

Neezoe 5 40,0 40,0 0% 100% 0%

New Georgia 14 69,8 69,8 0% 21% 79%

All respondents 45 47,4 40,0 11% 56% 33%

n.a 1 IPP customer electricity consumption

Table 66: IPP Customer Average Estimated Electricity Consumption Per Capita equivalent :

Location Respon Average Average Theoretical Theoretical Average Theoretical Theoretical dents nbr of nbr of Daily Monthly Household Average Annual hours Amp Household Household size Monthly Electricity energy Electricity Electricity electricity Consump is consumption consumption Consump supplied ** tion per by IPP* tion per capita capita

Nbr Nbr Nbr kWh kWh Nbr kWh kWh

Clara Town 19 5,5 1,00 1,2 36,3 4,6 7.9 94.8

Jallah Town/Saye 7 11 1,00 2,4 72,6 5,9 12.3 147.6 Town

Neezoe 5 8,2 1,00 1,8 54,1 8,8 6.15 73.8

New Georgia 14 11,5 1,75 4,4 132,4 7,1 18.6 223.2

Final Report – August 2012 147

All respondents 45 8,5 1,19 2,2 66,5 6,1 10.9 130.8

n.a 1

*During night time always : from 6-7 pm to 12pm or 6-7 am according IPP by survey area and respondents answers

**Nbr of Amp x 220 Volt x Nbr hours

*** Estimation based on discussion with respondents

Nota : theoretical : as current being supplied during night, customers never consume the totality of their “amp” provision. IPP customers all complain about that.

Table 67: IPP Customer Estimated annual average electricity consumption per capita :

Theoretical Theoretical Respon Average Average Annual Estimated* Monthly electricity dents Average nbr of electricity Average Annual hours energy is Location Consumption electricity supplied by Consumption IPP* per capita Consumption

per capita

Nbr Nbr kWh kWh kWh

Clara Town 19 5,5 7,9 94,7 76

Jallah Town/Saye 7 11 12,3 147,7 89 Town

Neezoe 5 8,2 6,15 73,8 44

New Georgia 14 11,5 18,6 223,9 134

All respondents 45 8,5 10,9 130,8 92

n.a 1

*Calculation based on estimation of nbr of hours of daily electricity consumption by household: according respondents , the following data apply : 80% Clara Town , 60% JallahTown/Saye Town, Neezoe, New Georgia, all respondents = 70%

Table 68: Estimated cost paid by IPP customer per kWh

Location Nbr Estimated Multiplier respondents cost of kWh of LEC by IPP electricity cost

USD/kWh

Clara Town 19 1,4 2,4

Jallah Town/Sayz 7 0,9 1,6 Town

Neezoe 5 1,2 2,1

New Georgia 14 0,9 1,5

All respondents 45 1,2 2,1

n.a 1

148 Contract 2012/284032

OWN GENERATOR

Own generator customer Electricity Monthly expenditure

Table 69: Average Electricity consumption per capita: household with own generator

Location Respondents Average Average Average Daily Average Daily Average Average electricity electricity Monthly Annual rating of nbr of hours consumption consumption electricity electricity generator generator per household per capita consumption consumption running per per capita per capita day

Nbr kVa Nbr kWh kWh kWh kWh

Clara Town/Jallah/ 8 3 2,4 1,6 0,22 6,60 79,2

Saye Town

Neezoe 18 2,4 4,3 2,1 0,29 8,70 104,4

Police Academy 22 2,5 3,5 2,2 0,30 9,00 108,0

New Georgia 8 3 3,8 2,9 0,33 9,90 118,8

Stephen Tolbert 7 3,1 3,4 2,1 0,39 11,70 140,4

All respondents 63 2,7 3,6 2,1 0,3 9,0 108,0

n.a 4

Own generator customer Electricity Monthly expenditure

Table 70: Average Electricity expenditures and cost of kWh of households with own generator

Respondents Average Daily Average Daily Average daily Average Daily Average Multiplier of Household Household Household Household cost per LEC Location Fuel Repair/ total electricity kWh electricity expenditure maintenance expenditure consumption cost Cost

Nbr USD USD USD kWh USD

Clara Town/ 8 3 0,41 3,41 1,6 2,1 3,7

Jallah/Saye Town

Neezoe 18 3,1 0,41 3,51 2,1 1,7 2,9

New Georgia 22 4,2 0,58 4,78 2,9 1,6 2,9

Police Academy 8 3,6 0,51 4,11 2,2 1,9 3,2

Stephen Tolbert 7 3,8 0,35 4,15 2,1 2,0 3,4

All respondents 63 3,5 0,46 3,96 2,1 1,9 3,3

n.a 4

Final Report – August 2012 149

ALL ELECTRICITY SOURCES MONTHLY EXPENDITURES

Table 71: Average Monthly Household and Per capita Electricity expenditure by location

Location LEC IPP Own generator

Household Per Household Per Household Per capita capita capita

USD USD USD USD USD USD

Clara Town/Jallah 34,8 6,2 38,8 8,4 82,7 11,4 town

Jallah town/Saye 40,0 6,8 town

Neezoe 40,0 4,5 83,7 11,7

Police Academy 86,0 12,0

New Georgia 46,7 6,5 45,3 9,1

Stephen Tolbert 44,2 6,2 84,5 14,1

All respondents with 42,3 6,3 47.02 7,8 84.6 11,1 electricity

Nbr with electricity 204

OTHER ENERGY EXPENDITURES Lighting

Table 72: Respondents without electricity: Average Monthly Household Lighting expenditure by location

Location Lighting Total

Dry cell Candle battery

USD USD USD

Clara Town/Jallah 3,2 0,7 3,9 town

Neezoe 3,1 0,3 3,4

Police Academy 3,3 0,5 3,8

New Georgia 2,7 1,0 3,7

Stephen Tolbert 4,9 0,3 5,2

All without electricity 3,5 0,5 4,0

Nbr without 157

150 Contract 2012/284032

Table 73: Average monthly lighting expenditures (apart electricity spending) by category of respondents

Category of Lighting Total respondents Dry cell Candle Kerosene battery

USD USD USD USD

Withhout 3,5 0,5 4,0 electricity

Own genset 1,3 0,1 0,1 1,5

IPP 0,4 0,4

LEC 0,5 0,5

All respondents 1,8 0,2 2,0

Nbr respondents 354 Cooking

Table 74: Average monthly cooking spending by category of respondents

Category of Charcoal respondents USD

Without electricity 11,5

OWN genset 13,9

IPP 12,7

LEC 15,4

All respondents 12,7

Nbr respondents 354

Final Report – August 2012 151

HOUSEHOLD MONTHLY ALL ENERGY EXPENDITURES

Table 75: Monthly household energy spending by category of energy expenditures and by Quartile

All respondents : 354

QUARTILE ELEC LPG DIESEL GASO DRY CELL KERO CHAR CANDLE TOTAL BATTERY ENERGY TRICITY* LINE SENE COAL

USD USD USD USD USD USD USD USD USD

Q1 11 0 0 0 2 0 8 1 23

% on total Q1 48% 0% 0% 2% 10% 0% 37% 3% 100%

Q2 27 0 0 0 2 0 11 0 41

% on total Q2 67% 0% 0% 0% 5% 0% 28% 0% 100%

Q3 37 1 0 2 2 0 12 0 54

% on total Q3 68% 2% 0% 3% 3% 0% 23% 0% 100%

Q4 51 1 1 7 1 0 19 0 80

% on total Q4 64% 1% 1% 9% 1% 0% 24% 0% 100%

Average 31,4 0,4 0,2 2,4 1,8 0,0 12,7 0,2 49,2

on total

% on total 64% 1% 0% 5% 4% 0% 26% 0% 100%

*LEC, IPP, Own generator, solar households

12.4.3 Impacts of electricity on household living conditions perception by customers Figure 18: Impacts of electricity on household living conditions by category of impact

30% 27%

security 25% keep family home

children study longer 20% more appliances 17% buy TV and refrig 15% 14% improve business

work easy

10% 8% all appliances be used 8% 7% 7% saving increase 5% 5% health 3% 3% 2% others

152 Contract 2012/284032

12.4.4 Willingness to get connected to lec grid and affordability

Table 76: Willingness to get connected to LEC grid per category of respondents

Category of Without Own IPP Total respondents electricity genset/solar connected

Yes 142 64 46 252

No 15 0 0 15

Total 157 64 46 267

Table 77: Willingness to get connected to LEC grid per category of respondents

Category of Without Own IPP Total respondents electricity genset/solar

Yes 90% 100% 100% 94%

No 10% 0% 0% 6%

Total 100% 100% 100% 100%

Table 78: Can you afford the costs – connection, upgrading or new wiring of the house, miscellaneous

Category of Without Own IPP Total respondents electricity genset/solar

Yes 111 59 46 216

No 46 5 0 51

Total 157 64 46 267

Table 79: Can you afford these costs : connection, upgrading or new wiring of the house, miscellaneous

Category of Without Own IPP Total respondents electricity genset/solar

Yes 71% 92% 100% 81%

No 29% 8% 0% 19%

Total 100% 100% 100% 100%

Table 80: If credit was available, average monthly affordable payment

Expenses USD

Median 10,0

Average 17,2

Nbr 51 respondents

Final Report – August 2012 153

12.4.5 Households expenditures: budget effort by level of income and category of respondents

HOUSEHOLD MONTHLY TOTAL EXPENDITURES (proxy for income level)

Table 81: Household monthly total expenditures by location

AVERAGE MINIMUM Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 MEDIAN MAXIMUM

Urban pattern Location USD USD USD USD USD USD

« low income » CLARA TOWN 364 133 251 302 437 917 communities JALLAH SAYE 513 211 348 460 649 956 Bushod Island and TOWN center of Monrovia

Non grid peri urban NEEZOE 353 80 183 307 454 909 communities Paynesville POLICE ACADEMY 460 122 284 383 599 1072

Grid urban settlements NEW GEORGIA 434 108 287 396 526 1181 “estate housing » STEPHEN 443 103 268 378 564 1227 North Somalia Drive TOLBERT Road

Table 82: Household monthly total expenditures by category of respondents

All LEC customers IPP customers Own generator Without respondents electricity

USD USD USD USD USD

Average on 422 508 426 542 323 total

Median 372 437 427 514 288

Q1 266 333 296 356 194

Q2 372 437 427 514 288

Q3 535 642 506 684 408

Q4 1227 1227 751 1072 953

154 Contract 2012/284032

HOUSEHOLD MONTHLY SPENDING BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES

Table 83: Household monthly total expenditures by category of expenditures and by level of income

QUAR FOOD ENER WATER SCHOOL TRANS MEDI COMMU ENTER CONTRI SOCIAL RENT NEW HOUSE TRANS TOTAL GY FEES PORT NICA TAIN BU FESTIVI ASSET MAIN FER OF TILE* CAL MENT MONEY CARE TION TIONS TIES TE NANCE

USD USD USD USD USD USD USD USD USD USD USD USD USD USD USD

Q1 100 23 4 10 14 12 12 1 3 3 4 0 1 1 188

% on 53% 12% 2% 5% 7% 6% 6% 1% 2% 2% 2% 0% 0% 0% 100% total

Q2 135 41 8 26 30 20 25 4 9 8 6 1 0 3 316

% on 43% 13% 2% 8% 9% 6% 8% 1% 3% 3% 2% 0% 0% 1% 100% total

Q3 166 54 10 51 52 28 39 8 14 10 11 2 1 2 447

% on 37% 12% 2% 11% 12% 6% 9% 2% 3% 2% 2% 0% 0% 1% 100% total

Q4 235 80 18 82 119 58 57 16 30 21 13 3 1 10 743

% on 32% 11% 2% 11% 16% 8% 8% 2% 4% 3% 2% 0% 0% 1% 100% total

Average 158,5 49,2 9,9 41,9 53,4 29,5 33,0 7,3 14,1 10,5 8,6 1,7 0,7 3,9 422,4 on total

% on 37,5 11,6 2,3% 9,9% 12,6 7,0% 7,8% 1,7% 3,3% 2,5% 2,0% 0,4% 0,2% 0,9% 100,0 total % % % %

*average expenditures in each Quartile

Figure 19: Household average monthly spending by category of expenditures

All respondents : 354

1% 2% 5% Food Energy 8% Water House repair & maintenance 7% 38% Rent Transport School & education 10% Medical care Communication Entertainment Social contributions 13% Transfer of money 12%

3% 1% 2%

Final Report – August 2012 155

Figure 20 : Household average monthly spending by category of expenditures

LEC customers

1,0% 1,0% 7,0% Food Energy 8,0% Water 5,0% House repair & maintenance 35,0% Rent Transport School & education 10,0% Medical care Communication Entertainment 14,0% Social contributions 12,0% Transfer of money

2,0% 2,0% 3,0%

Figure 21: Household average monthly spending by category of expenditures (IPP)

1% 3% Food 5% Energy 8% Water House repair & maintenance 36% 7% Rent Transport School & education 9% Medical care Communication 11% Entertainment 15% Social contributions Transfer of money 2% 1% 2%

Figure 22 : Household average monthly spending by category of expenditures (own generator)

4% 1% 3% Food Energy 8% Water 33% House repair & maintenance 6% Rent Transport 9% School & education Medical care Communication 13% Entertainment 18% Social contributions Transfer of money

3% 0% 2%

156 Contract 2012/284032

Figure 23 : Household average monthly spending by category of expenditures (wo electricity)

1% 1% Food 6% Energy 8% Water House repair & maintenance Rent 44% 10% Transport School & education 10% Medical care Communication Entertainment 12% 5% Social contributions Transfer of money 1% 0% 2%

12.4.6 Advantages and disadvantages of energy source according to its use : respondents key judgments

Lighting  LEC

 Current is constant and 24h

 Lighting is bright and much better for study or work

 It provides light and makes my life comfortable

 There is no problem with LEC, when I come back home after my day work I feel now alive, I can watch films (DVD)

 Current is available for safety

 Power is affordable for me

 House has light, community has street light

 LEC is always available but it sometimes shut down power without information

 It gives light and families are happy, but sometimes it goes off unnoticed

 Light always on here

 Regular power/

 When there is rain LEC power shut down, take away current for few hours some days

 Current is constant, but using heavy appliances increase consumptions

 Own generator

 I see better at night that using candle of lantern or Chinese light

 It provides current for me, but is very expensive to operate

 Less risky than candle and kerosene but very expensive

Final Report – August 2012 157

 No actual advantages, the disadvantages are many: it is not safe not reliable

 Provide security at night

 Use it for lighting/ sometime it damage my appliances

 To provide light for the home, for security, very expensive to maintain, no security for the generator  IPP

 IPP is less costly than the genset

 Must paid for current not been use

 I use my appliances at night/when the current is off the areas is dark

 IPP is more effective and efficient in comparison of having its own genset

 IPP can sometime be poorly control, and cause problems for the users

 I don’t have control over the time my light stays on

 Prefer the IPP system to chinese lamp or own genset

 Provide light,but current not stable

 No maintenance of genset, IPP is irregular

 Makes the place clearer at night but current not available at all time

 Chinese lamps

 It gave me light and is affordable

 Doesn’t not cause fire

 Cheaper to get at time but lamp spoil quickly

 Very limited only provides light to a particular

 This is the only way for me getting light in my home

 No fire damage and we use it for our children study

 Light quick to get spoiled

 Produce light at night/too expensive

 Just provide light to some extent very quick to damage

 Source of light is weak, but it is not an efficient source of light

 It is long lasting and provides lights

 It does not damage the house like fire

 Risk is less, provide light at night but quick to damage

 Safety and less expensive

158 Contract 2012/284032

Cooking  LEC: Current is too expensive for use in cooking  IPP: Current of IPP is too expensive and too low  OWN GENERATOR: Too expensive  CHARCOAL

 Coal is one of best means of sources of cooking because it is less expensive

 It is less expensive, but unsafe to use it in the room

 The only mean of cooking now

 Can get access to coal easily for cooking/hard to determine quality

 Cheaper than any other, last longer, easily found around, difficult to light, went wet becomes problem

 It is time consuming, but less expensive

 Darken of pots, smoke,

 It causes lot of heat

 Easy to buy/ashes dirty the house/and smoke also

 It is the only source affordable for cooking for me..

Final Report – August 2012 159

12.5 HOUSEHOLD SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE

160 Contract 2012/284032

Final Report – August 2012 161

162 Contract 2012/284032

Final Report – August 2012 163

164 Contract 2012/284032

Final Report – August 2012 165

166 Contract 2012/284032

Final Report – August 2012 167

12.6 ENTERPRISE SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE

EUROPEAN UNION DELEGATION TO LIBERIA EVALUATION OF EC PROJECTS IN ELECTRICITY SECTOR IN LIBERIA END USER SURVEY MONROVIA April-May 2012 MWH International

SURVEY FORM N°

A IDENTIFICATIONS

A1 SURVEY: Date of interview: / 2012 Start at : End at:

A2 SURVEYOR Name:

A3 SURVEY ZONE Code Name of the survey zone: City/township/communities

A4 FIELD COORDINATOR Name:

A5 TYPE OF UNIT PRIVATE ECONOMIC ENTERPRISE = E SOCIAL INSTITUTION = I:

A6 RESPONDANT NAME:

A7 POSITION OF THE RESPONDANT: SENIOR MANAGER: SENIOR ADMINISTRATOR:

OTHER (specify) A8 SEX OF THE RESPONDANT MALE FEMALE Age (range)

A9 QUALITY CHECK: Date: Signature A10 ENTRY DATA Date: / 2012

168 Contract 2012/284032

B. UNIT GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS B1. SOCIAL SERVICES INSTITUTION B2. ENTERPRISE B3. Type of B4. Occupation B5.For how B6. Type of w all B7. Type of B8. Nbre of Nature of the institution Nature of the enterprise dw elling unit status long your I or E roofing employees is here ?

SPECIFY nature of establishment SPECIFY 1.Separate building 1.Ow ner Nbr of Years 1.Concrete/ciment 1.Concrete Nbre For school, specify type 1. Manufacturing 2. Part of 2. Renter 2.Corrugated iron 2.Zinc (elementary,…) 2. Service commercial complex 3.Free occupation sheet/zinc/tin 3.Tarpaulin 3.Trade 3. Part of other 3.Mud bricks 4.Thatch Specify nature of products: residential unit 4.Mud and Wattle 5.Other 4 .Part of OWN 5.Other residential unit 5.Other

………………………………………………………………….……………/………………………………………………….…………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. ……………………….. C. ELECTRICITY : ALL SOURCES D. ON GRID : CONNECTION COSTS TO LEC

C1. Do you have C2. Does your E/I get electricity C3. When did C4. If soon C5.What is D1. ACTUAL CUSTOMER/: What D2. FUTURE CUSTOMER What did electricity in your from …….? you had access connected with electricity used were the expenses you undergo LEC asked you to pay for your I/E? to this(these) LEC, w hen for in you I/E t? when you get connected to LEC future connection to LEC grid ? sources of approximatively ? ? electricity ?

1.Yes 2.No 1.Yes 2.No Year Year/month 1. Lighting only DETAIL ALL THE COSTS the WRITE the explanations the 2. Lighting AND customer has supported (fee, respondant got from LEC other deposit, poles, w irings, transport , 3. Other only tips,…

1.LEC (ow n) ……………………… If No 2.LEC (neighbour)

3.IPP

Go to C4 THEN to 3.Shared generator G1 4.Ow n generator

5.Solar

6.Storage car battery 7. Other

Final Report – August 2012 169

ON GRID: CONNECTION COSTS(continue) TO E. ON GRID: ELECTRICITY EXPENSES OTHER SUPPLIERS D3. What di you pay to get connected to your E1. How many E2.Who do you E3. Do you E4. On w hat E5. What is the supplier (ENUMERATE AND WRITE ALL EXPENSES hours per day pay for your receive a bill for basis are you billing period ? UNDERGONE BY THE CUSTOMER AT THE TIME IT GET do you receive electricity electricity billed ? CONNECTED) electricity from service ? services ? 1.Flat fee your suplier ? 2.Number of appliances IPP Nbr hours 1.LEC 1.Yes 4 .Amp 1.Day 2.IPP 2.No,Prepaid Precise Nbre 2.Week Electricity 3.Neighbour cards Amp 3.Month suppliers 4.Ow ner of the 3.No bill 5.Included in rent 4.Other house 4. Others 6.Other 5.Other 1.LEC (ow n)

2.LEC (neighbour)

3.IPP

3.Shared generator

SHARED GENERATOR 4.Other

E. (continue) E6. How much electricity did your E7. What w as E8.FOR ENTERPRISES ONLY I/E consume from [this sourceof your last Approximately, w hat is the electricity ] during 30 days of the electricity bill? proportion of electricity cost to last billing period? total cost of running business (ask as 1/10th, 1/4th, 1/3rd if easier)

Kilow att hours (kWh) Amount USD/LD 1.Less than 10% Calculate from bill.I If bill not available, 2.10-25% Electricity leave blank 3.25-33% 4.More OTHER suppliers than 33% 1.LEC (ow n)

2.LEC (neighbour)

3.IPP

3.Shared generator

4.Other

170 Contract 2012/284032

F. OFF GRID: OWN ELECTRICITY SUPPLY

F1.Is your F2. If Not does F3. % of use each F4. How old is F5. How much F6. How many F7. What fuel F8. How much F9. How much [genset, your [genset, your [genset, did it cost ? hours do you does it use ? do you pay do you pay for solar,….] solar,….] supply : solar,...] ? run the genset for the fuel the Repair AND suppplying Nbre of years ? AND for w hich for w hich electricity for ………………….. period? (w rite period ? your E/I only ? first the nbre of (w rite first the the period, then nbre of the period, the amount) then the amount) 1. Yes 1. Your I/E only F4bis. What is Amount USD/LD 1.Day 1.Diesel 1.Day 1.Month >>>> Go to F4. 2. Your I/E and the rating of 2.Week 2.Gasoline 2.Week 2.Year 1. ………/…………. 2. No >>>> your home your [….] 3. Month (/Day, 3.Other 3. Month USD/LD Go to F2. 3. Your I/E and 2…………/……… /Week, /Month) USD/LD another I/E 3…………/……… 4.Other GENSET ………………………………………………………………………… .…………/……………………………/ kVA…………………………………… ……/……………………………………………… ……/………………… ……/………………

………………………………………………………………………… …………/……………… ……………/Wp SOLAR ……………………………….……………………………….……………………………….……………………………….………………… STORAGE Volt/Amps C29.Battery BATTERY COST charging ………………………………………………………………………… …………/……………… ……………/…………… …………………… costs/30 days …………………… US$/LD$ G. OFF GRID : OTHER ENERGY SOURCES CONSUMPTION AND COSTSH. PERCEPTION BY CUSTOMERS FOR ALL ENERGY SOURCES G1.During the last 30 days,has G2. How much G3.Is this or G4.What is the % H1. What are the main advantages H1. What are the main disadvantages of your your I/E used one or several of did your these energy of this/these of your present energy source present energy source (Write the these energy sources ? establisment source(s) used energy (Write the name of the energy source name of the energy source -LEC, IPP, Ow n genset,…-: pay for that for : source(s)] used -LEC, IPP, Ow n genset,…-: then the then the answ er) enregy in the 1. Establishment for your answ er) last 30 days ? only establisment 2. Establisment and needs household 1.Yes 2. No Amount USD/LD 3. OtherNumber % LPG Diesel Gasoline Dry Cell Battery Kerosene Other

Final Report – August 2012 171

I. ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS SOCIAL ESTABLISHMENTS ENTERPRISES I1. Average I2. How much is your total cost I3.What are the 3 key problems I3. How much I3.How much I3.How much are I3.What are the 3 key problems number of per month ? faced by your I/E ? (list them w ere your are the sales the sales during faced by your I/E ? (list beneficiaries/ Amount USD/LD in order or priority) company sales during a "good" a "bad" month ? them in order or priority) service users/ last month ? month ? Amount USD/LD visitors per (monthly turnover) Amount USD/LD month? Amount USD/LD

(e.g. number of 1. Salaries students, church visitiors, patients to 2. Materials/ clinic, etc.) equipment Specify number and 3.Maintenance category

4. Rent ………………………………

5. Other ……………………………… G. FOR ALL I/E NOT CONNECTED TO LEC GRID :WILLINGNESS TO GET CONNECTED TO LEC GRID AND WILLINGNESS TO PAY G1. If your neighborhood is energized by LEC are you w illing to : 1. to sw itch from your IPP/ow n genset to LEC grid ? 1.Yes 2.No 2. to get connected to LEC grid ? 1.Yes 2.No G3. If yes w hy G5. If yes w hy

G4.IF no why G6.IF no why

G2. Can you afford to pay the connection fees (the surveyor give the amount) AND if necessary the w irings of your I/E ? 1. Yes 2. No

G3. Discussion w ith the respondant : LEC CUSTOMER: w hat have been the impacts on G4. Discussion w ith the respondant : "FUTURE"/WILLING TO BECOME LEC CUSTOMER: your I/E to get LEC electricity DESCRIBE HOW What w ill be/w hat w ould be the impacts on your I/E to get LEC electricity DESCRIBE HOW

172 Contract 2012/284032

12.7 ATTENDANCE LIST TO THE PRESENTATION OF RESULTS – JULY 24TH 2012

Final Report – August 2012 173

174 Contract 2012/284032

12.8 SLIDES OF THE PRESENTATION ON THE 24TH OF JULY 2012 AT THE EU DELEGATION IN MONROVIA