|
|
Change Your Life! |
Uncertainty clouds 450MW Meghnaghat power plant |
|
News |
April 28, 2000
Dhaka, Apr 27 (UNB)- Uncertainty clouds the proposed 450MW Meghnaghat power plant as the implementing agency AES repeatedly declined to take over the project site developed by Chinese experts. CWHEC completed the works of developing the site by November 15 last year and the Power Development Board (PDB) asked AES to take over it from January 3 this year. But the American energy giant refused to take over the site complaining that it was so poorly prepared that installation of machinery would be impossible. It also complained that the site was not free from earthquake risks. PDB dismissed AES allegations of poor development of the site and again asked the US company to take over it and start installation work of the power plant, scheduled to be completed by February 2, 2002. Early last week, project consultant Mott McDonald issued the takeover certificate to the developers, CWHEC. Thereafter, PDB issued the final notice on April 17 asking the AES to immediately undertake the project work. But AES refused again and informed PDB on April 21 about poor site development. The US firm blamed PDB for delaying the makeover beyond the time specified in the contract. Referring to the AES letter, the power board reopened the final notice on April 23 and asked them to take over the site by April 24 failing which the contract would be terminated. In its last and final notice the Board said: “We further repeat that your allegation of material breach on the part of BPDB is false and baseless which is only alleged by you to achieve some illegal gain. “For your information, please take note that the BPDB is not responsible for any delays in the implementation of the project rather the project company will be liable for not taking delivery of the Demised Premise and the access road…… causing delay in implementing the project.” Talking to UNB, PDB chairman Qumrul Islam Siddique squarely blamed the Americans for dilly-dallying in implementing the project on schedule. “AES resorted to dilly-dallying tactics only to gain some more advantages out of the contract,” he said. The power board boss said raising fictitious defects in the site preparation works AES was trying to raise the power tariffs. He accused that the company was trying to back out from its original offer of supplying certain volume of electricity to PDB at zero tariffs. Meanwhile, PDB also reminded AES to pay Tk 5,33,33,344 immediately on account of initial development. It was due within seven days of possession date, which was fixed January 3. The PDB further asked AES to pay the first semi-annual installment of rent immediately which was due on January 3, the date fixed for taking over possession of the site. It also charged 4 per cent interest on the outstanding amount. |