National Economic and

Development Authority
00*".

Structuring
Public-Private
Partnerships
(PPPs)
June 2009
Australian Government
AusAID

Australian Government
AusAID

Philippine-Australia
Partnership for Economic
Governance Reforms (PEGR)

Structuring
Public-Private Partnerships
(PPPs)

2009

National Economic and

Development Authority

Message
The Philippines has achieved modest economic growth in the past decade. Its
potential to achieve high growth is limited largely by lack of infrastructure.
Infrastructure is key to the Philippines attaining a high sustainable and inclusive
growth. To ensure efficiency and effectiveness in infrastructure investments, the
NEDA sought the support of the Australian Agency for International Development
(AusAID)-assisted Partnership for Economic Governance Reforms (PEGR) to
develop a set of guidelines and a toolkit on value analysis and structuring publicprivate partnerships (PPP).
Thus, under PEGR's Reform Agenda (RA) 006-07 entitled "Institution
Strengthening of NEDA and Other Oversight Agencies on Value Engineering,
Contract Preparation and Performance Monitoring of Infrastructure Projects," two
handbooks have been produced: the Value Analysis Handbook and the Handbook
for Structuring PPPs.
The Value Analysis Handbook presents the theory and techniques applied in
conducting a value analysis to a project. Value Analysis or Value Engineering is
one of the tools being explored by the government to achieve a value for money in
major development projects, optimize infrastructure expenditures, and increase the
efficiency and effectiveness of infrastructure projects.
The handbook for Structuring PPPs shall primarily serve as guide for the
implementing agencies and LGUs on allocating its responsibilities vis-a-vis of
the private proponent on a PPP project. Structuring a PPP entails allocating
risks between the public and private proponent which is important in assessing
contingent liabilities.
We hope that with these two handbooks the quality of project development will be
improved and thus increasing the likelihood of achieving project objectives.

ROLA DO G TUNGPALAN
NEDA Deputy Director-General

Message
The Australian Government is pleased to support the Philippine Government's
Public Private Partnerships (PPP) program, the centerpiece of the Aquino
Administration's development plan to foster more exclusive economic growth,
accelerate poverty reduction, and boost private sector participation in the economy.
We hope that this handbook serves as a useful resource in assisting government
agencies, local government units, and private proponents to rigorously assess
quality and cost efficiencies infrastructure investments to deliver improved valuefor-money outcomes.
This is an important initiative jointly undertaken by the National Economic and
Development Authority and Australian Agency for International Development and
will contribute to maximising the effective and efficient use of public funds and the
preparation of High quality infrastructure projects.

TI TRA
Minister Counsellor
Australian Agency for International Development

Acknowledgement
The need for assessing and improving infrastructure development specifically the
conceptualization, preparation, evaluation, and implementation of an infrastructure project
through value for money (VfM) strategies was inspired by Ruben S. Reinoso, Jr., Assistant
Director-General and concurrent Director of the Infrastructure Staff (IS) of the National
Economic and Development Authority (NEDA). Through the direction of ADG Reinoso
and IS Assistant Director Kenneth V. Tarnate, the Social Infrastructure Division (SID)
of IS, headed by its Chief, Engr. Elmer H. Dorado, led the preparatory works for the
conduct of a study on VfM strategies and strengthening the capacity of the government
in handling projects particularly those under Official Development Assistance (ODA) and
public-private partnerships (PPPs).
The Australian Agency for International Development (AusAID), through the facility
of the Philippines-Australia Partnership for Economic Governance Reforms (PEGR),
had been very supportive in making the study on "Institution Strengthening of the
National Economic Development Authority (NEDA) and other Oversight Agencies on
Value Engineering, Contract Preparation and Performance Monitoring of Infrastructure
Projects" a reality and a success by providing the financial assistance and ensuring that study
objectives, expected outputs and timelines are met by the engaged consultants. Special
thanks are given to the PEGR counterparts for the study, Ian Porter (Facility Director) and
Hector Florento (Governance Advisor), for being actively involved in this endeavour.
The Castalia Strategic Advisors, the consulting team engaged by AusAID, had been
perseveringly accommodating and helpful in ensuring that concerns and expectations of
the government were deliberated and properly addressed.
The following groups/stakeholders, among others, were involved in the study through
participation in trainings/workshops which helped in formulating and improving the study
outputs and recommendations: NEDA Build-Operate-Transfer (BOT) Group, Office
of the President (OP), Government Procurement Policy Board (GPPB), Department of
Budget and Management (DBM), Department of Finance (DOF), Department of Public
Works and Highways (DPWH), Department of Transportation and Communication
(DOTC), BOT Center (renamed as PPC Center), Department of the Interior and Local
Government (DILG), Light Rail Transit Authority (LRTA), Philippine Ports Authority
(PPA), Toll Regulatory Board (TRB), National Power Corporation (NPC), National
Transmission Corporation (TransCo), National Electrification Administration (NEA),
Manila International Airport Authority (MIAA), Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage
System (MWSS), and Metropolitan Manila Development Authority (MMDA). Our partners
from the private sector had been enthusiastic in sharing their relevant experience and
valuable insights which were crucial to the attainment of this activity's outputs.

The technical staff of other IS divisions: Communications Division, Power and

Electrification Division, Transport Division, and Water Resources Division, had actively
participated by sharing their sector-specific knowledge, skills, and experiences in every
consultation meetings, roundtable discussions, trainings/workshops and case studies/pilottesting, and by providing their valuable comments and recommendations to all documents
and reports submitted to NEDA. The technical staff of SID composed of Arch. Geronimo
S. Samoza, Engr. Dulce Agnes S. Marquez, Engr. Maria Genelin L. Licos, Ms. Ramakrishna
J. Villanueva, Mr. Omercaliph M. Tiblani and Mr. Rocky E. Dejan, had collectively put their
time and effort towards the completion of this undertaking.
The NEDA Staffs include the Administrative Staff (AdS), Agriculture Staff (AS),
Information Technology Coordination Staff (ITCS), Legal Staff (LS), Project Management
Staff (PMS), Public Investment Staff (PIS), Social Development Staff (SDS), and Trade,
Industry and Utilities Staff (TIUS), had been supportive by participating in meetings and
trainings and providing their inputs for the refinement of draft reports and other documents
formulated under the study.
Lastly, much gratitude to the NEDA generals, Sec. Ralph G. Recto, DDG Rolando G.
Tungpalan, DDG Nestor R. Mijares, DDG Margarita R. Songco, and DDG Augusto B.
Santos for their unwavering support and utmost guidance in conduct and implementation
NEDA-initiated studies and activities such as this, Reform Agenda 006-07 "Institution
Strengthening of the National Economic Development Authority (NEDA) and Other
Oversight Agencies on Value Engineering, Contract Preparation and Performance
Monitoring of Infrastructure Projects" .

Table of Contents

Acronyms and Abbreviations
Executive Summary
1 Introduction
2 Prepare and Plan Transaction
2.1 Steps to Follow
2.2 Example
3 Set Objectives and Constraints
3.1 Definition
3.2 Principles to Follow
3.3 Steps to Follow
3.4 Example
4 Allocate Functions
4.1 Definition
4.2 Principles to Follow
4.3 Steps to Follow
4.4 Example
5 Determine Payment Method
5.1 Definition
5.2 Principles to Follow
5.3 Steps to Follow
5.4 Example
6 Allocate Risks
6.1 Definitions
6.1.1 Categorizing Project Risks
6.1.2 Managing Risk
6.2 Principles to Follow
6.2.1 Key principles for allocating risks
6.2.2 Generic risk allocation matrix
6.3 Steps to Follow
6.4 Example
7 Market Test
8 Application of Guidelines to Unsolicited Projects
8.1 Step 1: Prepare and Plan Transaction
8.2 Step 2: Set Objectives and Constraints
8.3 Steps 3, 4 and 5: Allocate Functions, Set Payment Method
and Allocate Risks
8.4 Step 6: Market Test

iv
vi
1
3
3
13
16
16
17
18
19
21
22
25
29
31
34
34
41
41
44
47
47
49
55
58
59
62
79
85
89
93
93
93
94
94

Appendices
Appendix A Case Studies
A.1 Transport Airport
A.2 Transport Mass Transit
A.3 Bulk water supply
A.4 Information Technology
A.5 Solid Waste Management
Appendix B References

95
95
108
118
127
138
149

Tables
Table 4.1: Allocation of Functions for Existing and New Assets 24
Table 4.2: BOT Law Contractual Arrangements

28

Table 4.3: Function Allocation Options

32

Table 4.4: Comparison of Options

32

Table 6.1: Definition of Key Risk Concepts

48

Table 6.2: Risk Categories for BOT-PPP Projects

50

Table 6.3: Generic Preferred Risk Allocation Matrix

64

Table 6.4: Risk Management Report Outline

79

Table 6.5: Risk Assessment Table Outline

83

Table 6.6: Example Section of Risk Assessment Table

Mass Transit Silver Line Project

86

Table 6.7: Example Section of Risk Management Report

Mass Transit Silver Line Project

88

Table A.1: Preliminary Risk Allocation Matrix - Airport Project 98

Table A.2: Preliminary Risk Allocation Matrix - Mass Transit Project 111
Table A.3: Preliminary Risk Allocation Matrix Bulk Water
Supply Project

119

Table A.4: Preliminary Risk Allocation Matrix Information 129

Technology Project
Table A.5: Preliminary Risk Allocation Matrix Solid Waste
Management Project

ii

140

Figures
Figure 0.1: BOT-PPP Structuring Steps

vii

Figure 2.1: Steps to Prepare and Plan Transaction

Figure 2.2: Sample Stakeholder Map

Figure 2.3: Stakeholder Map

14

Figure 2.4: Sample Workplan

15

Figure 3.1: Steps for Defining Objectives and Constraints

18

Figure 4.1: Examples of Allocation of Functions

24

Figure 4.2: Steps for Allocating Functions

29

Figure 4.3: Template for Developing Function Allocation Options 30

Figure 5.1: Common Payment Methods

34

Figure 5.2: Steps for Defining Payment Method

41

Figure 5.3: Payment Method

46

Figure 6.1: Risk Management Process

55

Figure 6.2: Optimal Total Project Risk Allocation

58

Figure 6.3: Steps for Allocating Risks

79

Figure 6.4: Risk Prioritization Matrix

82

Figure 7.1: Steps to Market Test Transaction

89

Boxes
Box 5.1: Subsidy Design Options

36

Box 5.2: Options for Regulation of Natural Monopolies

40

Box 6.1: Risk Management Process Definitions

55

Box 6.2: Trade-Offs Between Risk Allocation Principles

61

Box 6.3: The Generic Preferred Risk Allocation Matrix A Description 63

Box 6.4: Structured Brainstorming Process

80

Box 7.1: Project Finance Structures

90

iii

Acronyms and Abbreviations

BIA Beach International Airport
BLT Build-Lease-Transfer
BOO Build-Own-Operate
BOOT Build-Operate-Own-Transfer
BOT Build-Operate-Transfer
BOT-PPP Build-Operate-Transfer Public-Private Partnership
BOT Law Republic Act No. 6957 as amended by Republic Act No. 7718 - the main
legislation dealing with public-private partnership
BT Build-Transfer
BTO Build-Transfer-Operate
CAA Civil Aviation Authority
CAO Contract-Add-Operate
DOT Develop-Operate-Transfer
CRITP Civil Registry Information Technology Project
DBM Department of Budget and Management
DBO Design-Build-Operate
DBOF Design-Build-Operate-Finance
DBOL Design-Build-Operate-Lease
DENR Department of Environment and Natural Resources
DOF Department of Finance
DOTC Department of Transportation and Communications
DROF Design-Rehabilitates-Operate-Finance
EDSA Epifanio de los Santos Avenue, Manila, Philippines
EPIRA Electric Power Industry Reform Act (of 2001)
ERC Energy Regulatory Commission
GOPA Global Partnership for Output-Based Aid
GOCC Government-Owned and Controlled Corporation (Philippines)
ACAO International Civil Aviation Organization
ICC Investment Coordination Committee
(a NEDA Board inter-agency committee)
IFC International Finance Corporation
iv

IRR

(i) Implementing Rules and Regulations

(ii) Internal Rate of Return

LGU

Local Government Unit

kWh

Kilowatt-hours

LRT

Light Rail Transit

LWUA

Local Water Utilities Agency

MAMC Metropolitan Authority of Metro City

MCWD Metropolitan City Water District
MoT

Ministry of Transport

MRT-3

Manila Metro Rail Transport Line 3

MTA

Metropolitan Transport Authority

MWSS

Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage System

(Manila and environs)

NCRA

National Civil Registry Agency

NEDA National Economic and Development Authority

NPC

National Power Corporation

NWRB National Water Resources Board

O&M

Operations & Maintenance

OBA

Output-based Aid

PFI

Private Finance Initiative (UK)

PhP

Philippine Peso

ppd

Passengers per day

PPIAF

The Public-Private Infrastructure Advisory Facility; a multidonor technical assistance facility created to help governments
in developing countries improve the quality of infrastructure
through partnerships with the private sector

PPP

Public-Private Partnership

ROO

Rehabilitate-Own-Operate

ROT

Rehabilitate-Operate-Transfer

SPV

Special Purpose Vehicle

Executive Summary
These Guidelines describe the steps that implementing agencies in the Philippines
could follow to structure Build-Operate-TransferPublic-Private Partnerships
(BOT-PPP). The Guidelines are for use by implementing agencies in structuring
BOT-PPPs.
Implementing agencies should follow six steps for structuring a BOT-PPP. The
steps are:
Prepare and plan the transaction
Set objectives and constraints
Allocate functions to parties
Set method of payment to the private party
Identify, assess and allocate risks to parties, and
Market the transaction
These steps are illustrated in Figure 1. The first step is to prepare and plan
the transaction. This includes assigning a transaction structuring team and
retaining transaction advisors these transaction team and advisors will be
directly responsible for structuring the transaction and will report to a person or
committee that has the authority to make structuring decisions. This first step
also includes developing and launching a stakeholder consultation plan, as well
as a transaction preparation plan this plan will identify the tasks needed to
progress the transaction to financial closure.
The second step is to set the objectives that the implementing agency is seeking
to achieve with a BOT-PPP arrangement and the constraints that exist for this
arrangement. These objectives and constraints will guide the decisions on how
to allocate functions and risks among the implementing agency and the private
sponsor.
The third step is to decide which of the project development and implementation
functions will be assigned to the private firm and which will be assigned to
the implementing agency or other government agencies. The allocation of
functions and risks is closely related. However, it is not always the case that
a party that is allocated a function will bear the full risk of performing that
function. Allocation of functions and risks is also generally done on the basis of
the same principlesthat is, allocate to the party that is best placed to perform
the function or manage the risk.
A key component of designing a BOT-PPP arrangement is to determine how

vi

Develop and
Launch
Stakeholder Plan

Prepare and
Plan
Transaction

ssign Structurin
Team

Set Objectives
a Constraints

dentify Individua
Objectives end
Constraints

dentify Common
Objectives and
Constraints

Build Consensus
on Objectives and
Constraints

Allocate
Functions

dentify Relevant
Functions

Develop Options
for Allocation
Functions

Analyze Options
vs Principles

Set Payment
Method

Specify Service
Standards
Estimate Costs

Allocate Risks

Identify Risks

Market
Transaction

Prepare
Transaction
Teaser

etain Transaction
Advisors

<

Choose Preferred
Option

Determine Tariffs
Determine
Analyze Financial
Willingness to Pay Viability payment Amount
or Subsidy

Check
consistency

Adjust Based on
Market Feedback

Develop
Transaction Plan

Assess Risk

Allocate Risks

Market Test
Advertise a
Transaction
'Register InvestorsII'
Structure

Draft Contracts
& Bidding
Documents

< Bidding,
Evaluatbn, &
Negotiation

Figure 0.1: BOT-PPP Structuring Steps

Develop Risk
Mitigition
Strategies

Market Test
Contract

the private firm will be paid for performing the functions that it will undertake.
The fourth step will address this issue. The allocation of options chosen
should be consistent with the nine options described by the BOT Law and
its implementing rules and regulation. The BOT Law does allow for other
contractual arrangements, however, these are subject to the approval of the
President of the Philippines.
The fifth step is to allocate risks. This involves identifying and assessing risks,
and deciding how to allocate those risks between the implementing agency and
the private firm. The allocation of risks resulting from this step will need to
be reconciled with the allocation of functions and payment method selected.
These three structuring components are closely related. In fact, the transaction
structure will need to be subject to several iterations before it can reach a
workable balance between allocation of functions and risks, as well as payment
method. The arrow in Figure 0.1 with the label "check consistency" illustrates
this iterative process.
Having designed a transaction structure that the implementing agency thinks
will meet its objectives, the implementing agency would need to market the
transaction with private firms that may be interested in bidding for it. To this
end, the implementing agency would prepare a short prospectus that describes
the opportunity, advertise the opportunity and ask interested private firms
to register their interest. The implementing agency would market test with
registered private firms the proposed structure and identify elements of the
transaction that need adjustment to increase the interest of private firms and
competition for the transaction. The agency must ensure that any adjustments
are consistent with the objectives of the implementing agency. Testing the
market and adjusting the transaction structure is also an iterative process
as illustrated by the arrow labeled "Adjust Based on Market Feedback" in
Figure 0.1.
After developing a market structure that has been market tested, the implementing
agency will draft the relevant contracts and bidding documents. A set of
model contracts and a contract drafting tool have been prepared by NEDA to
assist implementing agencies prepare these documents. This draft documents
would once more be subject to review and comments from private firms. The
implementing agency will decide which comments are worth addressing and
which are not.

viii

1 Introduction
The Government of the Philippines wants to improve how Build-OperateTransfer Public-Private Partnerships (BOT-PPPs) are structured, and in
particular how risks associated with these BOT-PPPs are managed. Lessons
learned from more than 61 BOT-PPPs in the country suggest that there is room
for improvement. This document "PPP Structuring Guidelines" guides
government agencies to improve how BOT-PPP projects are structured and
their risks managed.
The existing process for approving BOT-PPP projects is set in the BOT Law, its
implementing rules and regulations, as well as in the Investment Coordination
Committee Guidelines. None of these documents comprehensively define
the steps that implementing agencies should follow when structuring a BOTPPP, and in particular how implementing agencies should manage the risks
associated with these projects. The absence of clear guidance on these issues
explains why the level of detail and the quality of the structuring work varies
greatly from project to project. The lack of guidance on how to structure a
BOT-PPP project also makes it more difficult for the National Economic and
Development Agency (NEDA) and Investment Coordination Committee (ICC)
to review project proposals from implementing agencies. NEDA has identified
this lack of guidance as an important gap in BOT-PPP project development and
developed these Guidelines to fill that gap.
These Guidelines were designed to fill this gap. They describe the steps that
implementing agencies could follow to structure a BOT-PPP. The Guidelines
are complemented by sample bidding documents and contracts developed by
NEDA and reflect the principles presented in these Guidelines.
The Guidelines are for use by implementing agencies and oversight/evaluating
agencies or approving entities in structuring a BOT-PPP. Ideally, implementing
agencies will use these Guidelines at a stage in the project life-cycle in which a
decision has been made to develop a project through a BOT-PPP, but the BOTPPP arrangement has not yet been selected. This would generally be the case in
projects that are before or at the feasibility stage and have not been submitted
to ICC for approval.
Structuring a BOT-PPP means, in the context of these guidelines, deciding:
How functions related to the development and implementation of the
project' (design, finance, build, operate, maintain, transfer) are allocated
between the private and public parties
Development and implementation of project means all the steps needed to take the project from the
feasibility study up to the point in which contract is terminated

 How the private firm will be paid for undertaking the functions allocated
to it
How risks associated with undertaking these functions or payments to
the private firm are allocated between the private and public parties and,
more generally, managed.
The Guidelines establish steps that implementing agencies should follow to
structure a BOT-PPP these steps are:
Prepare and plan the transaction.
Set objectives and determine constraints
Allocate functions to parties.
Set payment method to the private party
Identify, evaluate and allocate risks to parties, and
Market the transaction.
These Guidelines describe in detail the work that an implementing agency will
need to undertake during each of these steps. It also provides implementing
agencies with additional sources of information that is relevant to each step.
The Guidelines are organized in seven sections, including this introduction.
Section 2 provides guidance on how implementing agencies should
prepare and plan the transaction structuring, including a plan for
managing stakeholders
Section 3 guides implementing agencies on how to set objectives and
determine constraints
Section 4 provides guidance on how functions can be allocated between
private and public organizations
Section 5 guides implementing agencies on how to set the payment
method to the private firm
Section 6 describes how implementing agencies could allocate and
manage risks in BOT-PPPs, and
Section
7 guides implementing agencies on how to market the transaction.

Each of these sections, except sections 2 and 7, is organized in four subsections that:
Define the scope
Set out the principles that apply
Provide guidance on how the step should be carried out
Illustrate how the step could be applied to a specific type of BOT-PPP
transaction.
Five types of BOT-PPP transactions have been used as examples in these
Guidelines these transactions are described in Appendix A. These Guidelines
can also be used to help implementing agencies assess if an unsolicited PPP
projects is well structured or not. Specific guidance on how to apply these
Guidelines to unsolicited projects is presented in Appendix A.
2

2 Prepare and Plan Transaction

An implementing agency's first step in structuring a BOT-PPP should be to
prepare and plan how the transaction will be managed. This includes assigning
a BOT-PPP structuring team and retaining transaction advisors. The structuring
team and transaction advisors will be directly responsible for structuring the
BOT-PPP and will report to a person or committee that has the authority to
make structuring decisions. The first responsibilities of this team should then
be to develop and launch a stakeholder management plan and to develop a
transaction preparation workplan, identifying the tasks needed to take the
transaction to financial closure.
This section first describes, in Section 2.1, each of these elements of preparing
and planning a BOT-PPP transaction. Section 2.2 then presents some examples
on how these steps could be followed.
2.1 Steps to Follow
Figure 2.1 illustrates the steps that implementing agencies should follow to
prepare and plan a BOT-PPP transaction.
Figure 2.1: Steps to Prepare and Plan Transaction
Assign
Structuring
Team

Retain
Transaction
Asvisors

Develop and Fo.

Develop
Launch StakeTransaction
holder Plan
Plan

These four steps are described in turn below:

Step 1: Assign Structuring Team
The implementing agency should assign a team to structure the BOT-PPP.
This team will report to a committee or people that have the authority to
make decisions on the structure of the BOT-PPP. The structuring team will be
responsible for managing the BOT-PPP transaction from concept to closure.
In many cases the people that are part of this structuring team will also have
a role in managing the BOT-PPP contract. These people, by being part of the
structuring team, will have acquired a deep understanding of the contract and
will be well placed to supervise its implementation.
Usually this structuring team will be led by the head of the planning department
or division of the implementing agency and will include members from the
engineering, legal and finance divisions. The head of the planning division is
well placed to coordinate the efforts and inputs from other divisions. The head
of the planning division also typically has direct access to key decision makers
3

such as the head or board of the implementing agency which is generally

the level ultimately responsible for making all BOT-PPP structuring decisions.
For example, within the Department of Transportation and Communications
(DOTC), the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Project Development
could be well placed to lead the structuring team. In a smaller department or
Government Owned and Controlled Corporation (GOCC) like the Metro Cebu
Water District, the general manager would be best placed to lead this team.
The structuring team should include members with the following skills:
Finance degree in finance, including courses in accounting, corporate
and project finance, with more than 10 years' experience in financial
analysis, forecasting financial statements, corporate finance or project
finance
Legal law degree, with more than 10 years' experience in drafting laws
and regulation and preparing contracts
Economics degree in economics, with more than 8 years' experience in
economic analysis of projects; ideally with experience or understanding
of key concepts on economic regulation
Engineering degree in the relevant engineering field, with more
than 10 years' experience in feasibility studies or design of relevant
infrastructure assets, as well as experience in operation and maintenance
of these assets.
Useful information on how to select this team can be found in chapter 9 of the
"Practitioner's Guide Part Two: How to Develop a Partnership" published by
Partnerships Victoria. The link to this document is:
http://www.partnerships.vic.gov.au/CA25708500035EB6/WebObj/
Practitioners Guide 3-PartTwo/$File/Practitioners%20Guide3%20-%20Part%
20Two.pdf
Step 2: Retain Transaction Advisors
The implementing agency should seek the support of specialized transaction
advisors. Experience with several successful and failed BOT-PPP transactions
in the Philippines and elsewhere has consistently shown the importance of
competent transaction advisors. Transaction advisors will generally include a
team of financial, technical, regulatory and legal advisors typically under the
lead of an investment bank.
Transaction advisors are generally paid a retainer and a success fee. The retainer
is paid by the implementing agency and the success fee by the winning bidder.
The size of the retainer and success fee vary with the size of the deal, and in
some cases could be up to one percent of the total project cost. For example, in
4

a project that involves building a facility worth US$200 million, the cost of the
transaction advisor could be US$2 million, split at US$0.5 million for the retainer
fee and US$1.5 million for the success fee. Implementing agencies usually find it
difficult to find the funds to cover the retainer of the transaction advisor. There
are facilities available at multilateral agencies that could provide grants to cover
the cost of advisors. One of these facilities is the Public-Private Infrastructure
Advisory Facility (PPIAF) their website, with information on how to apply for
grants, is http://www.ppiaforg/content/view/48/77/.
One of the barriers that implementation agencies face when trying to retain
transaction advisors is the lack of funds available to pay these advisors, as well
as the need to follow a lengthy and bureaucratic procurement process that could
delay the transaction process and also deter the interest of first-class advisory
firms. Governments in other countries have adopted different types of solutions
to these problems. Some examples include:
Colombia Colombia created a type of PPP unit Gerencia de
Participacion Privada en Infraestructura that has dual role of
supporting the development of PPP related policies and engaging and
managing transaction advisors for specific deals. This unit has received
funding from the Inter-American Development Bank (IADB) under
three consecutive loans of around US$13 million each. The unit has
been in place since 1996 and has delivered good results. The funds from
the IADB loan are managed by the United Nations
Development Program (UNDP) this means that UNDP is responsible
for all the procurement and contracting process of advisors, and make
payments to advisors based on instructions from the implementing
agency. More information on this program can be found on the
following weblink
http://wwwAnp.gov.co/PortalWeb/Programas/
Transporteviascomunicacionese nergiaminena/
ParticipacicinPrivadaenProydeInfraestructura/Participacionprivada
eninfraestructuraPPCIII/tabid/667/Default.aspx
Indonesia The National Development Planning Agency (BAPPENAS)
in Indonesia established with support from the Asia Development
Bank a US$26.5 million Infrastructure Project Development Facility
(IPDF). The purpose of this facility to pay for the cost of transaction
advisors. The expected outcome is well structured PPP contracts. This
facility was not worked very well in that the volume of transaction
that they have supported is well below expectations. More information
on the ADB loan supporting IPDF can be found on this weblink
Imp: / /pid.adb.org/pid/LoanView.htm?projNo=40009&seqNo=01&typeCd=3
5

Implementing agencies should retain transaction advisors even in the case of

unsolicited proposals. In fact, implementing agencies would need the most
support when they are negotiating an agreement with an unsolicited proponent.
Implementing agencies need competent legal and technical advisors to help
identify the flaws and risks of the proposed project and agreement. For example,
the MCWD retained the International Finance Corporate (IFC) to advise on
negotiations with the unsolicited proponent of a bulk water supply project.
With the support of IFC, MCWD drafted a completely new version of the
bulk water supply and agreed on much better technical and financial terms. The
revised agreement was approved without delay by NEDA-ICC.2
The transaction advisory team should be led by an international firm that has a
track record in:
Acting as lead transaction advisor to government clients for greenfield
or brownfield infrastructure projects of a comparable scale and
complexity, and in relevant sectors
Acting as financial advisor to private sponsors on the development,
financing, construction, or expansion of projects in the relevant sector
Advising governments or private clients in the Philippines.
A helpful indicator of relevant experience is the firm's presence within the top
20 financial advisors on merger and acquisition deals in Asia-Pacific league
tables, published by Thomson Financial.
The lead transaction advisor should include in its proposed team firms with
legal, technical, and regulatory expertise related to the project. These firms may
be international or Philippines-based or a combination of the two. Each firm
should be able to demonstrate its corporate experience as well as that of the
proposed expert team members in developing, building, or financing projects
in the relevant sector.
Useful guidance on how to hire and manage a transaction advisor can be
found on the PPIAF published "Guide for Hiring and Managing Advisors for Private
Participation in Infrastructure". The link to this document is: http://www.ppiaforg/
documents/fulltoolkit.pdf
If the implementing agency has limited experience structuring transactions, it
is common practice in other countries to retain a second, smaller group of
transaction advisors. These advisors can provide a second, objective opinion on
the advice of the lead transaction advisor. Transaction advisors that are paid on
a success fee basis have a strong incentive to close the transaction in shortest
2 This transaction did not proceed to Swiss Challenge and closure for other reasons

The transaction preparation workplan should be prepared by transaction advisors,

drawing on their experience in other transactions and on the experience with
similar transactions in the Philippines. The steps proposed in these Guidelines
will also be useful in preparing the workplan. The plan should be reviewed and
approved by the structuring team at the implementing agency, and by the person
or committee at the implementing agency that is overseeing the transaction. The
plan should be updated periodically; major changes to the timeline or resources
should be approved by the person or committee overseeing the transaction.
2.2 Example
This section describes how the four steps described in Section 2.1 can be applied
to the mass rapid transit transaction described in Appendix A.2.
The Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) of the City of MyCapital
is interested in implementing a new light rail line along a 17 km stretch of one
of MyCapital's busiest thoroughfares. The new line is also known as the Silver
Line and will be located in MyCity's densely built west side. MTA is interested
in implementing the Silver Line project using a BOT-PPP for the provision
of infrastructure only, since it is already leasing rolling stock for the rest of
the system. Hence, the Silver Line light rail PPP project will involve financing,
designing, constructing and maintaining the new rail line.
The line is expected to serve a demand of about 300,000 passengers per day
(ppd) at start-up. This demand is expected to reach 500,000 ppd within 10 years,
and stabilize at 600,000 ppd by year 15 for the remainder of the concession
period. The Silver Line is expected to significantly relieve traffic congestion on
the road corridor, and consequently reduce average travel time for transit users
by 30 percent.
Step 1 The transaction structuring consists of the following staff from MTA:
head of planning department (as team leader), one manager from the legal
department, one manager from the engineering department, one manager from
the finance department and three analysts. This team reports directly to the
General Manager of MTA. Given the scale and importance of this project, the
Mayor of MyCapital has the ultimate authority to decide on the structure of the
transaction.
Step 2 MTA applied and received a grant from donor agency to pay for the
retainer of a transaction advisor. A competitive selection process was followed
using the procurement rules of the donor to select a transaction advisor. The
transaction advisory firm is led by an international investment bank, has a team
of international and Filipino lawyers, international and local engineers, as well
as experts in other relevant areas like ridership forecasts.
13

Step 3
Step 3.1 The implementing agency and its transaction advisors developed
the following stakeholder map based on their analysis.
Figure 2.3: Stakeholder Map

A
High
Keep
Satisfied

Mayor

Manage
Closely
(raid of MTA

leri
uvaeonswnersi

Power
Monitor
(minimum effort)

Keep Informed

Civil soc ety

Low

groups
Do'

Low

High

Step 3.2Stakeholder Management Plan

Stakeholder
Name

Communications
Key Approach

Interests and
Issues

Current
Status

Desired
Support

Actions and
Communications

Major

One-on-one
meetings

Reduce travel
time

Strong
Supporter

High

Meet once a
month; report
progress

Fares charged
to passengers
Limit fiscal
impact
Head of
MTA

One-on-one
meetings

Avoid losing
control over
transport

Opposes
project

Do not
block

Use Major and

civil society to
pressure for
support

Head of
Civil Society
Group

One-on-one
meetings/press/
workshops

Reduce travel
time
Keep fares low

Strong
supporter

Medium

Keep
informed of
progress

Head of
Bus Driver
owner
Association

Press/workshops

Avoid job /
revenue loss

Opposes
project

Do not
block

Use Major and

civil society
support to
obtain support

14

Step 4 The transaction advisor prepared a transaction workplan, of which a portion is illustrated in Figure 2.4
Figure 2.4: Sample Workplan

10

Task Name

Organization
Responsible

Transaction
Advisor

Identify stakeholders

Define objectives & constraints

Review feasibility study

Define additional technical work Advisor

Structuring
team
Transaction
Advisor
Transaction

Level of
Effort
(Days)

Cost
(PhP
mil(

Mar 2009

Risk of Delays

Risk Mitigation Measure

Wide search at transaction

outset

New & important stakeholders

emerge

10

Objectives &constraints change Educate decision-makers on

what to expect from transaction
as new information emerges

all se 315 322

Mil

15
3

Additional technical work

needed

IIII

3 Set Objectives and Constraints

With a structuring team assigned and transaction advisors retained, the next
step is to set the objectives that the implementing agency and stakeholders want
to achieve, and the constraints affecting the transaction. These objectives and
constraints will guide structuring decisions.
Clearly articulating and agreeing on objectives and constraints at the start allows
all stakeholders to work towards the same result. It also provides a framework
for choosing between options and resolving disputes about design. For example,
agreeing that a BOT-PPP should reduce the life cycle costs of a project would
serve as a basis for deciding in favor of a BOT-PPP option that integrates
construction and operation of an asset, rather than one in which the private
firm is responsible for construction and the implementing agency is responsible
for operations.
To help implementing agencies identify stakeholders and set objectives and
constraints, this section is organized as follows:
Section 3.1 defines what these Guidelines mean by objectives and
constraints
Section 3.2 lists the principles that implementing agencies should follow
to prepare and plan the transaction structuring process
Section 3.3 describes the steps suggested for setting these objectives
and constraints, and
Section 3.4 presents some examples
3.1 Definition
Definition: Objective means the result that the implementing agency and stakeholders
want to achieve with a BOT-PPP arrangement.
Constraints means restrictions including legal, political and others that would influence
the choice of BOT-PPP arrangement
When using these guidelines, implementing agencies will probably have already
decided to develop the project as a BOT-PPP, but will need to decide which
specific BOT-PPP arrangement to use. The most appropriate BOT-PPP design
depends on the objectives set by the implementing agency.
The objective sought in doing a project as a BOT-PPP may be a sub-objective
of the broader objective of doing the project. For example, the objective sought
with a greenfield road project could be to reduce travel time between two points
16

in a cost-benefit justified and least cost way. Building the road may contribute
to the sub-objective to 'reduce travel time'; building a road versus building a
railroad may contribute to the objective; while the decision to do a BOT-PPP
may contribute to the sub-objective of 'in a cost-benefit justified and least cost
way' objective. On the other hand, the objective sought with developing this
road under a BOT-PPP arrangement could be to reduce the life-cycle cost of
this road whilst ensuring that the reduction in travel time objective is achieved.
Implementing agencies should also set at the start the constraints such as legal
or regulatory requirements or institutional capacity issues or political realities
that narrow the choices of BOT-PPP arrangements. For example, the Electric
Power Industry Reform Act (EPIRA) of 2001 establishes that the National
Power Corporation (NPC) is no longer allowed to enter into power purchase
contracts with Independent Power Producers. This legal provision excludes
BOT-PPPs for power generation entered into by NPC. Likewise political
constraints should be considered when structuring the BOT-PPP arrangement.
These might include things like avoiding price increases or job losses.Ignoring
these constraints will only delay or obstruct the structuring process of a BOTPPP arrangement.

3.2 Principles to Follow

When setting objectives and constraints, implementing agencies should consider
the following principles:
Set clear and well articulated objectives and constraints for example:
Clearly defined objective minimize life-cycle cost of project
Poorly defined objective: minimize project costs
Avoid setting conflicting or duplicate objectives for example, defining
an objective of minimizing life-cycle costs and of increasing efficiency
could be duplicative. On the other hand setting objectives of both
maximizing revenue to government and minimizing costs to consumers
may create a conflict, with the result that the objectives set no longer
can provide a clear guide to design
Identify the relative importance among the objectives and constraints
in other words, which objectives and constraints are more important
than others, and which less so
Set objectives and constraints that represent the consensus of key
stakeholders stakeholders would at least include various levels of
Government and representatives from the users or beneficiaries of the
project.

17

3.3 Steps to Follow

Implementing agencies should follow the steps outlined in Figure 3.1 to set
objectives and constraints.
Figure 3.1: Steps for Defining Objectives and Constraints
Identify
Individual
Objectives and
Constraints

Identify
Common
Objectives and
Constraints

Build Consensus
on Objectives
and Constraints

Each of these three steps is described in turn below:

Step 1: Identify Objectives and Constraints of Key Decision Makers
The transaction advisors will work with key decision makers to identify the
objectives they seek to achieve with the project and the constraints the think
would affect the implementation of the project. Most of this information would
have already been obtained from Step 3.1.3 of the stakeholder consultation plan
described in section 2.
This information will be tabulated in a matrix with three columns and one row
for each decision maker. The second column of the matrix will list the objectives
and the third the constraints.
Step 2: Identify Common Objectives and Constraints
The information presented in the matrix described in step 1 will be reorganized
to identify objectives and constraints that are common to decision-makers. A
new matrix with three columns and one row of each objective and constraint
will be used. The second column will list the name of the decision makers that
indicated their preference for that objective or constraint, and the third column
will indicate the apparent level of importance (high, medium or low) of that
objective based on how many decision-makers referred to it.
Step 3: Build Consensus on Objectives and Constraints and Relative
Importance
The implementing agency and transaction advisor will organize a workshop
with the main objective of reaching consensus on the objectives and constraints
and their relative importance.
The output of the workshop would be a statement of objectives and
constraintsusually presented as a one or two page document with a clear and
succinct description of the objectives and constraints, their relative importance
and the stakeholders that were consulted to reach consensus on these.

18

3.4 Example
This section describes how the three steps described in section 3.3 can be applied
to the mass rapid transit transaction described in Appendix A.2.
The Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) of the City of MyCapital
is interested in implementing a new light rail line along a 17 km stretch of one
of MyCapital's busiest thoroughfares. The new line is also known as the Silver
Line and will be located in MyCity's densely built west side. MTA is interested
in implementing the Silver Line project using a BOT-PPP for the provision of
infrastructure only, since it is already leasing rolling stock for the rest of the
system. Hence, the Silver Line light rail PPP project will involve the financing,
designing, constructing, and maintaining of the new rail line.
The line is expected to serve a demand of about 300,000 passengers per day
(ppd) at start-up and this demand is expected to reach 500,000 ppd within
10 years and stabilize at 600,000 ppd by year 15 and through the end of the
concession period. The Silver Line is also expected to significantly relieve traffic
congestion on the road corridor, and consequently reduce average travel time
for transit users by 30 percent.
Step 1 the key decision makers in this case are the Major and the Head of
MTA. Their individual objectives and constraints are:
Stakeholder Name

Objectives

Constraints

Major

Risk transfer to private

sector

Charge fares that are

slightly higher than what
buses charge

Minimize the whole-of-life

cost of the system
Head of MTA

Maximize quality of service

Limit supervision by MTA

Steps 2 and 3 given that there are only two decision-makers and that the Major
has authority over the Head of MTA, the objectives and constraints established
by the Major are set as those that should be used to drive the structuring of the
PPP.
Some of the commonly used objectives pursued with a BOT-PPP include:
Risk transfer to the private sector stakeholders might want to do a BOTPPP to allocate some of the risk to a private firm which can better
manage these risks at least cost and substantially reduce the overall cost
of the project
Minimize whole-of-life costing stakeholders might also want to do a
BOT-PPP to minimize life-cycle costs by fully integrating under
the responsibility of one party design and construction costs with
19

ongoing service delivery, operational, maintenance and refurbishment

costs
Innovation stakeholders could also seek to use a BOT-PPP to introduce
private sector innovation. Innovation is more common in BOT-PPP
arrangements which focus on output specifications, providing wider
opportunity and using competition as an incentive for bidders to
develop innovative solutions in meeting these specifications
Maximize asset utilization a certain BOT-PPP arrangement might also
be preferred by the Government if it maximizes the utilization of an
asset by generating opportunities for revenue beyond the government
or user payment stream and this is used, in part, to reduce the cost of
services to government or end-users
Minimize public sector borrowing by accessingprivate finance stakeholders might
see a BOT-PPP as a way of taking infrastructure BOT-PPP projects off
the government's balance sheet. This is possible in projects in which
users pay the full cost of service or in countries in which government
accounting rules do not classify government payment obligations under
a PPP as a long-term liability
These objectives, as discussed in section 3.2, are a subset of the broader
objectives sought with project. The project objectives are more generally to
build an asset or provide a service in a cost-benefit and least cost way. These
objectives contribute to developing the project in cost-benefit and least-cost
way.
Some example of common constraints include:
Minimize or avoid increases in prices to end-users some stakeholders,
particularly those who are more directly concerned with the interest of
end users, would advocate minimizing increasing prices paid by endusers
Maximize ownership of national private firms foreign ownership rules in
the Philippines limit the type of private firms that could be eligible as
private partners
Minimize loss of jobs stakeholders could also have strong views,
particularly in the concessions of existing services, about minimizing
the job losses or changes in employment conditions that could result
from the PPP
Minimize the time until the project is commissioned it is also common for
politicians to demand that BOT-PPP projects are structured and
implemented as soon as possible and ideally within their term at
government or as soon as possible to resolve a crisis or relieve a bottleneck.
Clearly understanding these objectives and constraints will provide an effective
framework for structuring the BOT-PPP.
20

Allocate Functions

The process of implementing an infrastructure project can be broken into a

number of jobs, or functions. These include design, construction, financing,
operations and maintenance. Once objectives are clear, a good next step is to
decide which functions should be given to the private partner, and which retained
by a government agency. This section provides guidance to implementing
agencies on how to make this allocation.
The allocation of functions and risks is closely related. Most functions have a set
of risks associated with them. For example, if the private firm is responsible for
designing and constructing an asset, it should logically bear the risks associated
with that function.However, it is not always the case that a party that is allocated
a function will bear the full risk of performing that function. There are situations
for example construction of tunnels in which a private firm is responsible for
doing the construction, but will not bear the full risk of delays or cost overruns
because it cannot entirely control that risk.
Allocation of functions and risks is also generally done on the basis of the
same principles that is, allocate to the party that is best placed to perform
the function or manage the risk. Some PPP practitioners prefer to decide how
functions are allocated based on how risks are allocatedthat is, they allocate
risks first and then functions.Others prefer to allocate risks and functions in
parallel. These Guidelines suggest allocating functions first, then allocating risks
and then verifying that the allocation of functions and risk is consistent. If
inconsistent, the allocation of functions and risks would be revised to make
it consistent. While these steps for allocating functions and risks is longer, it
does provide a clearer approach that better suits PPP practitioners with limited
experience. More experienced practitioners could follow this approach or decide
to follow a different one.
To provide guidance on the allocation of function, this section is organized in
four subsections as follows:
Section 4.1 defines what these Guidelines mean by functions and list the
most common functions related to the development and implementation
of infrastructure projects
Section 4.2 lists the principles that implementing agencies should follow
to allocate functions between private firms and implementing agencies
Section 4.3 describes the steps suggested for allocating these functions,
and
Section 4.4 presents some examples
21

4.1 Definition
These Guidelines use the following definition for functions:
Definition: Functions means the discrete actions or groups of actions that need to be
carried out for a project to be implemented
The most common functions to develop and implement an infrastructure
project are:
Design (D) field work to obtain data (for example, topographical,
geological or hydrological measurements); sizing facilities and equipment;
defining construction material, techniques and specifications; preparing
construction-ready drawings; and preparing detailed cost estimates.
Design is also referred in some cases as "engineering" work
Build (B) construction of civil works, assembly or installation of
electromechanical equipment, and testing and commissioning of entire
facility
Operate and Maintain (0) operation and maintenance of facilities.
Can also include management and administrative functions related to
the operation and maintenance of the facilities
Finance (F) raising the money to pay for the projectthat is, getting
cash up front from investors and lenders to buy the equipment and
build the infrastructure
These functions could be combined in different ways to form commonly known
BOT- PPP arrangements such as:
O&M operations and maintenance contract
DBO design, build and operate
DBOF design, build, operate and finance
These combinations of functions also have relationships with commonly used
BOT-PPP terms. These four refer to a BOT-PPP in which the private firm raises
capital to build or rehabilitate an asset that it has designed and that it will operate
during the life of a contract. Difference in usage of these terms is historical.
Concessions have generally referred to an operation that collects revenue from
the public, whilst BOOTs generally refer to an operation that collects revenue
from a government buyer. Also, many concessions have been used with existing
assets, while BOOTs are generally used for new assets.
The above description of the functions assumes that the party that finances the
project will also own (0) it. This assumption holds in most BOT-PPP projects
because the ownership of the project is used as recourse or collateral to the debt
raised for financing the project. The description also assumes that the ownership
of the project will be transferred (i-) to the implementing agency at the end of
the BOT-PPP contract. There are contracts however, in which the ownership
22

will remain with the private firm these types of contracts are called to as BuildOperate-Own (BOO). Several of the power plants that have been developed
under contract to the National Power Corporation (NPC) are BOO contracts.
It is also possible to find projects in which the private firm will need to
rehabilitate (R) an existing asset, rather then build a new one. That type of
contract is called DROF. In other cases the private firm will need to rehabilitate
and expand an existing asset. The MWSS concession contracts could be
considered one of these cases. The concessionaires are required to rehabilitate
and expand the existing water distribution network this type of contract would
be generally called ROT
There are also projects in which the implementing agency finances the asset and
the private firm leases (L) the asset from the implementing agency. An example
of this could include a mass rapid transit system that is financed by DOTC with
a loan from a multilateral bank and the system is designed, built, operated and
leased (DBOL) by the private firm.
The term operate is also generally understood to also include maintenance. It
is generally good practice to have the same party do both functions. There are
projects in which the private firm is doing the operation and the implementing
agency maintenance or vice versa, or in which the nature of the project does not
require operation, but only maintenance. Toll roads are examples of projects in
which the maintenance function is more significant than operations these are
generally also referred to as DBOFs.
Not all the combinations of the functions listed above can be considered BOTPPP contracts. For example, a design-build (DB) contract is not a BOT-PPP
because the private firm does not provide a public service or makes an asset
available for the implementing agency to provide that service.
Likewise, not all O&M contracts are BOT-PPPs. For example, management
contracts in which the private firm takes over the operation and maintenance of
an existing asset, but is not required to invest in this asset, is considered a BOTPPP because the private firm will use the asset to provide a public service. On
the other hand, a contract in which maintenance of an asset is out-sourced to a
private firm would not be considered a BOT- PPP.
Table 4.1 presents how some the combination of the four basic functions
described above relate to common BOT-PPP arrangements. The table makes
a distinction between BOT-PPPs for existing and for new assets. Within new
assets it distinguishes between government and privately financed assets. Each
check mark represents the function that applies to each BOT-PPP arrangement.
The two smaller check marks represent functions that only apply to minor
capital works.
23

Table 4.1: Allocation of Functions for Existing and New Assets

thartacement
Contract
I Design
Build

EXi66113 ANS%

NOW Assets

Lease Affeniape

Goyemment
Privately Finamed
Financed -DBO(L)
DBOF

1 Finances

Each of these and other combinations involve allocating different degrees

of risk to the implementing agency and to the private firm. Under the first
two combinations management and lease/affermage contracts the risks
transferred to the private firm are less than those in the other three combinations.
For example, on a management contract the private firm will not have capital
at risk and will be paid if and when it satisfactorily provides management
and operation services. In contrast, on a Design, Build, Operate and Finance
(DBOF), the private firm will not only be responsible for building the facility
to specifications, on time and within budget; but it will also be responsible for
operating and maintaining that facility for the duration of the contract. In this
case, its payment will only be made when the facility is operated and maintained
according to pre-set standards.
Figure 4.1 below shows how functions have been allocated in some examples of
BOT-PPP in the Philippines.
Figure 4.1: Examples of Allocation of Functions
Rehabilitate
and expand

MWSS

MRT-3

Concessions

,
gn
Build
_9
Operate')
t Finance

It

Casec.nan

V-

Debt and equity

guaranteed by GoP

24

The Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage System (MWSS) concessions are

two contracts one for the east zone and another for the west zone of Metro
Manila that give the right to two private firms one for each zone to provide
water supply services to users residing in these zones. The contracts allocate
to the private parties responsibility for designing, financing, rehabilitating,
expanding, operating and maintaining water distribution assets in Metro Manila.
The concessionaires derive their remuneration from payments made by endusers of water supplied by the concessionaires.
The Phase 1 of the Manila Metro Rail Transport Line Three project (MRT-3)
involves building a 17-kilometer mass transit system running along Epifanio de
los Santos Avenue (EDSA). The BOT-PPP contract for this project allocates
to the private firm the functions of designing, financing and building the
system. The Government 'leases' the system from the private firm, and operates
and maintains the system. The private firm will transfer the system to the
Government at the end of the contract.
The Casecnan Multipurpose project was developed to supply water for irrigation
and to generate electricity from a hydroelectric plant. The project includes an instream dam, a tunnel from the dam to the Pantabangan Reservoir, a hydroelectric
generation facility with a capacity of 150 MW, a switchyard, and a tailwater
discharge into the Pantabangan Reservoir. The private party is responsible for
the design, finance, construction, operation and maintenance of these facilities.
The Government pays the private firm for water available for irrigation use, as
well as for the electricity generated from the hydroelectric plant.
4.2 Principles to Follow
When deciding how to allocate functions between the private party and the
implementing agency, the implementing agency should decide on the allocation
that maximizes value for money. To reach this decision the implementing agency
should decide:
Which party is best placed to undertake these functions
What benefits can be obtained from combining functions.
The party best placed is that which, if assigned the function, will maximize value
for money on that particular function. How can implementing agencies decide
which party is best placed to maximize value for money of a particular function?
First, by identifying which factors affect the ability of a party to maximize value
for money when undertaking a function; and second by identifying which party
has most of these factors. There are many factors that could influence a party's
ability to maximize value for money, but three of the most important are:
25

 Relevant expertise to perform the function having the relevant

expertise means having performed this function before in a comparable
project, and having done as good or better than expected
Incentives to maximize value for money when performing the function
this means having credible reasons for making choices that will
reduce the cost of achieving the benefits expected from that function;
or performing that function at the expected cost, but increasing the
benefits expected from the function
Accountability for performing the function this means having
responsibility for reporting about past or future actions and decisions
with respect to performing the function, to justifying them, and to
suffering consequences in the case of eventual underperformance of
the function.
The implementing agency could use these and other factors to decide what
specific functions are allocated to what party. Having done that, the implementing
agency would need to decide if there are benefits to combining functions. For
example, after considering the three factors listed above the implementing
agency could conclude that the private party is best placed to design, build and
operate. Based on this analysis the implementing agency might decide to have
three separate contracts with the three separate private firms to undertake these
functions. This might not be the arrangement that maximizes value for money.
To decide if the functions should be combined, the implementing agency should
consider if combining them would lead to:
Minimizing life-cycle costing this would favor allocating the
construction, operation, and/or maintenance functions to the same
party
Maximizing innovation this would involve allocating to the private
firm functions where their expertise and incentives could maximize the
opportunities for innovation
Maximize asset utilization this would involve allocating to the
private firm the function of operating an asset if the private firm can
use that asset to extract other sources of revenue that maximize the
utilization of the asset
Section 4.3 describes how these principles could be applied.
One function that is worth considering in more detail is the allocation of the
finance (F) function. In many cases the government decides to allocate this
function to the private party because the government doesn't have the funds
to finance the project. This is particularly the case when governments are
26

going through a difficult fiscal period. This might not be a valid reason. Private
financing would only be possible if the private party is able to recover the capital
invested and a return on this capital from users of the services provided by the
project or from the Government. That is, someone would have to pay the private
party. Because someone would have to pay, the government could logically also
be responsible for financing the project.
For example, a water district might decide to enter into a BOT contract with a
private firm to provide bulk water supply, and might do so because it believes
the water district doesn't have the ability to directly finance the bulk water
treatment facility. If the water district enters into the BOT contract it will need
to pay, during the life of the contract, the private firm a price per cubic meter
that is sufficient to cover the cost of privately financing the project. Without
this payment the BOT contract will not be viable. If on the other hand the
water district goes to a bank and raises a loan to pay for the capital cost of the
treatment facility, the water district will also need to pay, during the life of the
loan, an amount sufficient to service the loan. This means the original reason to
pursue the BOT was not a valid one.
A better reason to allocate the finance function to the private firm is to make the
risk- transfer real, and so achieve accountability. If the private firm has capital
at risk that could only be recovered by providing reliable treated bulk water to
the water district, then the private firm would have strong incentives to deliver
on its contractual obligations. The incentives would be weaker if the private
firm doesn't have capital at risk. With that said, there are times when the PPP
structure can create additional risk that makes private finance too expensive
that is, the private sector premium for risk-bearing is greater than the benefit to
government of the private finance.
Relevant provisions of the BOT Law
The BOT Law provides for nine specific contractual arrangements or schemes
that the Government and private sector can enter into for the implementation of
an infrastructure or development project, and which represent several options
for allocation functions between the implementing agency and the private firm.
These are:
Build-and-transfer
Build-lease-and-transfer
Build-operate-and-transfer
Build-own-and-operate
Build-transfer-and-operate
Contract-add-and-operate
27

 Develop-operate-and-transfer
Rehabilitate-operate-and-transfer
Rehabilitate-own-and-operate
For each of these specific contractual arrangements, the law provides a
definition which provides for the main obligations of the private proponent and
the Government. In addition, the BOT Law allows parties to enter into other
contractual schemes, subject to the approval of the President of the Philippines.
Table 4.2: BOT Law Contractual Arrangements
Scheme

Role of Private Proponent

Role of Government

Build-andtransfer (BT)

Finances and constructs

infrastructure or development
facility
Turns over ownership of facility
to government after project
completion

Acquires ownership of facility

after construction
Compensates project
proponent at agreed
amortization schedule

Build-LeaseTransfer (BLT)

Finances and constructs facility

Turns over project to government
after completion under lease
arrangement
Turns over ownership of facility to
government after lease period

Compensates proponent for

lease of facility at agreed term
and schedule
Acquires ownership of facility
after lease period

Build-OperateTransfer (BOT)

Undertakes financing,
construction, operation and
maintenance of facility for a fixed
term
Collects tolls, fees and other charges
to recover investment plus profit
Transfer ownership of facility after
BOT term to government entity

Provides franchise and

regulates activities of BOT
contractor
Acquires ownership of facility
at the end of BOT term
May opt to share in the
profits of the BOT proponent

Build-OwnOperate (BOO)

Finances, constructs, owns,

operates and maintains facility in
perpetuity
Collects tolls, fees, rentals, and
other charges to recover
investments and profits
May assign operation and
maintenance to a facility operator

Provides authorization and

assistance in securing approval
of BOO contract
Can opt to buy the output/
service provided by the BOO
operator

Build-TransferOperate (BTO)

Finances and constructs facility

on a turn-key basis (assumes
cost overrun, delay, specified
performance risks)
Transfers title of facility to
implementing agency after
commissioning
Operates the facility for
implementing agency under an
agreement

Assumes ownership of facility

after commissioning
Allows private proponent to
receive compensation for the
following:
Proponent's investment
costs and reasonable return
Operating charges

28

Scheme

Role of Private Proponent

Role of Government

Contract-AddOperate (CAO)

Adds to an existing facility which

the proponent is renting and
operates expanded project for an
agreed franchise period

Collects rental payment from

private proponent under
agreed terms and schedule
Re-acquires control over
rented property/facility at the
end of lease term normally
including improvements
thereon

DevelopOperateTransfer (DOT)

Has the right to develop adjoining

property of an infrastructure
to enjoy external benefits that
the primary investment creates
(such as higher property values or
commercial development rights)

May opt to share in the

financial benefits of the
investment
Re-acquires ownership of
properties turned over to
investor after concession
period

RehabilitateOperate
Transfer (ROT)

Takes over operation and

maintenance of an existing
facility for a franchise period
and/or imports existing facility
for refurbishing, erecting and
maintaining it within the host
country
Transfers ownership of a facility or
equipment to government after
franchise period

Provides franchise to ROT

company
May opt to share in the profits
of the ROT company
Re-acquires ownership of
facility equipment after
franchise period

RehabilitateOwn-Operate
(ROO)

Takes over an existing facility

to refurbish and operate with
no time limitation imposed on
ownership
Can continue to operate the
facility in perpetuity

Turns over existing facility

to ROO proponent, with
franchise to operate
May opt to share in the
income of ROO company

4.3 Steps to Follow

The steps that implementing agencies can follow to allocate functions is
illustrated in the diagram below and described in the text that follows.
Figure 4.2: Steps for Allocating Functions

fj( Allocate
Functions

Identify
Relevant
Functions

Develop Options
for Allocation
Functions

29

Analyze
Functions vs
Principles

Choose
Preferred

Options

Implementing agencies would follow four steps to allocate functions:

Step 1: Identify Relevant Functions
This involves using the list of functions presented above to identify those
functions that are relevant to the specific project. For example, a project that
involves building a treated bulk water supply facility, the functions needed to
develop and implement this facility include: design, build, finance, operate and
maintain, and, depending on who finances the facilities, own and transfer.
Step 2: Develop Options for Allocating Functions
The implementing agency and its advisors would develop a set of options (at
least three) that represent distinct allocations of functions between the private
firm and the implementing agency, and different combination of functions.
A template similar to that presented in Figure 4.3 could be useful in defining
these options.
Figure 4.3: Template for Developing Function Allocation Options

Option 1

Design

Private''

Principle
Private
Public

Expertise

Incentives

Accountable

\ Total

10

Design

Public

2
3

Build

(Operate
(Finance)
(Finance 1
(Finance

To develop the options, the implementing agency and its advisors will first
confirm the principles that should govern this allocation. The principles
suggested in section 4.2 are considered best practice and should be followed
unless there is a valid reason not to do so. The implementing agency and its
advisors will then develop a table for each function assessing how allocating the
function to each party responds or not to the desired principle.
For example, in the case illustrated in Figure 4.3 the table of the left corresponds
to the design function. Each row lists the principles that should be used to
allocate that function. For each principle and party, the table shows a score
1 means that is responds very poorly to the principle, or not at all; and 5
30

means that it fully responds. For example, the numbers in the table to the left of
Figure 4.3 suggest that the public party has more relevant expertise in the design
function than the private party. There will logically be different opinions among
the members of the structuring team and the transaction advisors on how each
allocation responds or not to the principles. The most prevalent opinions would
be used to develop various function allocation options.
Step 3: Evaluate Options vs Objectives
The implementing agency would then analyze the extent to which each option
responds to the BOT-PPP objectives and constraints identified as part of the
work described in section 3.
Step 4: Choose Preferred Option
The implementing agency would then rank the options according to how they
respond to the objectives and constraints. During the ranking, it is important
to keep in mind the relative importance of the objectives and constraints. The
first ranked option would be the preferred option. If more than one option
is closely ranked, the implementing agency would keep these options in the
shortlist of preferred options.
4.4 Example
This section describes how the steps described in the previous section would be
applied to the mass rapid transit transaction described in appendix A.2.
The Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) of the City of MyCapital
is interested in implementing a new light rail line along a 17 km stretch of one
of MyCapital's busiest thoroughfares. The new line is also known as the Silver
Line and will be located in MyCity's densely built west side. MTA is interested
in implementing the Silver Line project using a BOT-PPP for the provision of
infrastructure only, since it is already leasing rolling stock for the rest of the
system. Hence, the Silver Line light rail PPP project will involve the financing,
designing, constructing, and maintaining of the new rail line.
The line is expected to serve a demand of about 300,000 passengers per day
(ppd) at start-up and this demand is expected to reach 500,000 ppd within
10 years and stabilize at 600,000 ppd by year 15 and through the end of the
concession period. The Silver Line is also expected to significantly relieve traffic
congestion on the road corridor, and consequently reduce average travel time
for transit users by 30 percent.
Step 1 the relevant functions are: finance, design, construct, own, operate and
maintain the facilities needed to provide mass rapid transit services.
31

Step 2 identify options on allocating functions: these are presented in

Table 4.3.
Table 4.3: Function Allocation Options
Option 1 - Outsource
Operations
MTA

Private

Option 2 - DBO
MTA

Private

Option 3 - DBOF
MTA

Private

Design

Build

Operate

Finance

Step 3 assuming that the objectives set are to minimize life-cycle costing and
maximize innovation, the table below presents a qualitative comparison of the
three options presented above.
Table 4.4: Comparison of Options
Option 1 Outsource
Operations

Option 2 DBO

Option 3 DBOF

Minimize lifecycle costing

2
Separation of design
and operation
supports does not
support life-cycle
costing,

4
Integration of design
and operation
supports life-cycle
costing, but public
financing could limit
incentives to private
party to minimize
costs

3
Integration of design
and operation supports
life-cycle costing, but
high construction risk
makes private financing
very costly

Maximize

1
Limited space for
innovation given

4
Creates opportunity
for innovation by

5
Maximizes opportunity

public sector control

of design

transferring design to
private firm

for innovation by transferring design to private

firm and creating
incentives for efficiency

innovation

Score

1= worst; 5 = best; 3 = intermediate

Step 4 based on the comparison presented above, the allocation of functions

proposed under a DBO or DBOF would be most responsive to the objectives
established for allocating functions. The Mayor knows that the investment
needed to implement this project is quite significant and could have an important
32

impact on the balance sheet of the Government. On the other hand the Mayor
also knows that requiring the private firm to invest capital will significantly
increase their incentives to deliver good services; and that the increased cost of
private financing could significantly increase the total cost of the project. After
considering these options, the Mayor decides to split the financing of the project
in two. The city will finance the cost of the civil works, and the private firm will
finance the cost of the rest of the system. As such the preferred allocation of
functions is as follows:
MTA

Private

Design

Build

Operate

Finance

Civil Works

Rest of system

33

5 Determine Payment Method

A key component to designing a BOT-PPP arrangement is to set how the private
firm will be paid for performing the functions that it will undertake. This section
provides guidance to implementing agencies on how to set the payment method
for the private firm. The section is organized into four subsections, as follows:
Section 5.1 defines what these Guidelines mean by payment method
Section 5.2 describes the principles that implementing agencies should
follow to decide on the appropriate payment method
Section 5.3 describes the steps suggested for selecting a payment
method
Section 5.4 presents one worked example on how to apply these steps
to specific case.

5.1 Definition
These Guidelines use the following definition for payment method in the
context of a BOT-PPP arrangement:
Definition: Payment method means who pays, how much they pay, and on the basis of
what product or output the payment is made
Three common payment methods in which end users, government or a
combination of the two pay the private firm for services provided are
presented in Figure 5.1, and described thereafter.
Figure 5.1: Common Payment Methods
Implementing
Agency

Implementing
Agency
Service
Availability
payment

Service

Availability

Subsidy
grant

4r
Private Firm

Private Firm

Fares
Tariffs
Tolls

Private Firm

Fares
Tariffs
Tolls

Services

Services

End-users

34

End-users pay tariffs, fares or tolls

End-users pay directly for services delivered by the private firm. Under this
model, these payments are intended to be enough to cover the full cost of
providing the services.
Examples in the Philippines are the toll road concessions and the MWSS
water concession contracts. In the toll road concessions, drivers pay tolls at
defined locations along the road, usually depending on vehicle type and distance
travelled. Tolls are set at a level that allows the private firm to recover the cost
of building or rehabilitating the road and to cover operating and maintenance
costs. In the MWSS concessions, water customers pay a tariff for the services
they receive usually a monthly fixed charge and a volumetric tariff.
Government Buyer
The Government pays directly to the private firm an amount sufficient to cover
the full cost of the services provided by the private firm. This government
payment could be made on the basis of services delivered by the private firm or
on the basis of the private firm making an asset available. 'Government Buyer'
PPPs include the power purchase agreements between NPC and independent
power producers (which include capacity payments based on availability and
energy payments based on electricity generated).
Internationally, the UK Private Finance Initiative (PFI) contracts in which a
government agency makes payments to a private firm based on the private firm
making an asset available or providing servicesare other good examples. The
Research Paper 01/117 of the House of Commons in the United Kingdom
"The Private Finance Initiative" describes UK PFI contracts. The paper can be
found on the following link:
http: / /www.parliament.uk/ commons /lib /research / rp2001 / rp01 -117.pdf
The types of infrastructure that are often thought of as inherently end-user pays
(like highways) can also be done as government-pays, and these governmentpays models can be done on the basis of 'availability' payments or shadow tolls.
Typically, shadow toll and availability payments are in the form of a mediumto long-term concession, whereby a private contractor receives payments over
time for the successful construction and operation of the facility from a public
sponsor. The user is not responsible for a payment.
In the case of shadow toll roads, the amount of payment is a function of a
theoretical toll rate per vehicle. Revenue minimums and maximums are set in
many cases, limiting exposure to traffic risk to the operator and the government's
exposure to increased subsidy. Revenues on road availability payment schemes
35

are generally a function of satisfactory operations, maintenance and capital

reinvestment. In the shadow toll model, the road user has no price incentive to
use another road.
Criteria used by governments for choosing this funding method have included
more efficient project delivery and operations versus traditional means, lack of
alternative free roads, political unwillingness to charge users directly, insufficient
traffic for a user paid toll to be feasible and a lack of appetite in local financial
markets to invest in user-paid roads. While availability payments have no traffic
risk, they have other types of exposure.
Once construction is complete, satisfactory operation and maintenance (O&M)
remains the primary risk in availability payment structures. Thus risk is generally
seen as manageable since these costs tend to be smaller and more predictable,
though financial margins can be partially eroded. Additionally, predictable and
limited mandatory capital expenditures allow for more highly leveraged financial
structures. As a result, high levels of unanticipated capital cost can rapidly eat
into margins.
The state of Texas in the US is currently exploring the availability payment
model for 87 potential toll projects, and the proposed Port of Miami toll
tunnel in Florida would use the same approach. More discussion on availability
payments can be found in the "Global Toll Road Rating Guidelines" produced
by Fitch Ratings. These guidelines can be found on the following link http://
www.ibtta.org/files/PDFs/07/020Fitch/020Toll/020RoadV020Rating%20
Guidelines.pdf
Government part-payment
Under a government part-payment model, end-users pay tariffs, fares or tolls,
but these are set at a level below that required for cost-recovery. The government
also provides a subsidy, designed to make up the difference between revenues
from end-user payments and costs. The subsidy can be designed in several
different ways, as described in the box below.
Box 5.1: Subsidy Design Options
When designing the subsidy arrangements for a BOT-PPP transaction
the implementing agency should consider the following questions:
What is the policy objective that the government is trying to
achieve with the subsidy?
Who will benefit from the subsidy?
What will be the amount of the subsidy?
How will the subsidy be paid?
36

Guidance on how to think about these questions is provided below.

What policy objective?
The first step is to decide the objective the government is trying to
achieve with providing a subsidy. This objective will influence how the
subsidy is designed. The most common practice is to give a subsidy to
provide or increase access to a public service at prices affordable to endusers. In general a subsidy would only be justified if providing the public
service has a positive net economic benefit. For example, the government
might decide to provide subsidies to build a mass rapid transit system in
order to help passengers travel faster, whilst maintaining fares at prices
that are similar to existing forms of public urban transport. The mass
rapid transit system has a positive net economic benefit because the
present value of the social benefits of the system including reduction
in travel time, reduction in vehicle operating and maintenance costs or
reduction of environmental pollution is greater than the present value
of the economic costs of building the system.
Who will benefit from the subsidy?
The answer to this question depends on the policy objective as well
as the feasibility of discriminating subsidy beneficiaries. For example,
the Government of the Philippines wants to improve the reliability of
the electricity supply in off-grid areas, whilst maintaining the cost of
generation in these areas at a socially acceptable level. To this end, the
Government introduced a subsidy scheme Missionary Electrification
Component of the Universal Charge that is administered by the
Power Assets and Liability Management Corporation (PSALM). The
subsidy is provided only to off-grid areas that is, it is not provided to
on-grid areas. Within an off-grid area, all end-users receive the subsidy.
As such, the price of electricity generation that an end-user pays in an
off-grid area is equal to the price paid by an end-user in another off-grid
area. This means that consumers are discriminated based on being off
or on-grid.
Rather than setting the price at below cost-recovery levels to all endusers similar to the off-grid generation scheme in the Philippines
the government might want to discriminate among end-users within
an area. For example, if the policy objective is to benefit the poor,
the government might decide to set the price at affordable levels only
to those classified as poor; and at cost-recovery levels to the rest. In

37

this way only the poor would benefit from the subsidy. Discriminating
between end-users based on wealth could be difficult in practice.
Household, neighborhood or town level income data in the Philippines
is generally unavailable or unreliable. Other options could be used for
discriminating end-users based on proxies of wealth. life-line blocks
are used in water supply or electricity to discriminate between prices
charged to low and high income end-users. For example, a water utility
or its regulator could use empirical data to establish that low income
consumers use on average less than 10 cubic meters per household
per month. To discriminate these users, the water utility would set a
tariff below cost recovery for the first 10 cubic meters per month of all
consumers, and a above cost recovery tariff for all consumption above
10 cubic meters per month.
Whichever approach is selected for discriminating end-users should
be cost-benefit justified. That is, the cost of implementing this
discrimination should be less than the benefits of discrimination.
What will be the amount of the subsidy?
A subsidy is needed because the present value of the revenue from the
fares passengers are willing to pay is less than the present value of the
social benefits that the projects creates; and of the financial cost of
the system. The optimal subsidy to make this system financially and
therefore as a BOT-PPP is viable is the difference between the present
value of the financial costs of the system and the present value of the
revenue resulting from the fares passengers are willing to pay.
One option for setting the value of subsidy in a BOT-PPP is to use
competition to set the level of subsidy needed to make the system
financially viable. Private firms competing to be awarded a BOT-PPP
contract would be asked to bid the amount of subsidy required given
a price to end-users pre-set by the implementing agency. The firm
requiring the lowest subsidy will be awarded the contract. We understand
that is the approach proposed for the LRT-1 extension.
A similar approach was used to set the subsidy for off-grid areas. In that
case bidders were asked to bid their true cost of generation on a PhP/
kWh basis. The subsidy per kWh was simply calculated by subtracting
the true cost rate from the socially acceptable rate set by the government.
In situations where competition is not possible, the implementing
agency will need to agree on the cost of service with the private firm.

38

How to pay the subsidy?

The simplest approach would involve an implementing agency paying
the subsidy upfront to the private firm that is, as the capital works are
being built. Under this approach however, the private firm will have less
incentives to meet service provisions or asset maintenance standards
over the life of the contract.
A better approach would involve converting the subsidy into an
annualized amount and linking the disbursement of that amount to the
private firm meeting service provision or asset maintenance standards.
This approach will ensure that subsidies are only paid once service
outputs are delivered this is generally called output-based aid (OBA).
Further information on output-based aid can be found on the website
of the Global Partnership for Output-Based Aid (GPOBA). Some of
the key advantages of OBA are:
Increased transparency through explicit subsidies, and tying
these subsides to defined outputs
Increased accountability of service providers by paying them
after they have delivered an agreed output
Increased sustainability by linking on-going subsidies to
sustainable service
Improved monitoring of results since payments are made
against agreed outputs.
As described in the website, GPOBA also provides grants for funding
the work of advisors that can assist implementing agencies in designing
BOT-PPP transactions that have an output-based aid component.
Setting Prices to be Paid
So far this section has discussed various approaches to paying the private firm
for performing the functions that it will undertake. This sub-section discusses
how to set the prices that will be paid to the private firm. It might be a good idea
in some cases to let the private firm charge the prices that the market of endusers will bear. This approach works when the private firm has the incentives to
set prices at levels that allow the private firm to recover the cost of providing
services as well as earning a risk-adjusted return on the capital invested. These
incentives exist when the private firm competes with other private firms to
provide services to the same group of consumers. Competition will ensure that
private firms set their prices at levels that are enough to cover their costs, but not
too high to encourage customers to switch to another provider.
39

Competition among private firms is not possible in many infrastructure

services, particularly those that use a network to provide services. These
services are natural monopolies that is, the cost of providing services with
one network is lower than the cost of providing services with more than
one network. Prices charged by natural monopolies are generally regulated to
ensure that providers are able to recover their cost of providing service, but
do not abuse their 'monopoly power'. Implementing agencies have choices
on various approaches to economic regulation. The box below discusses two
of the most common options.
Box 5.2: Options for Regulation of Natural Monopolies
BOT-PPP arrangements are often based on contract. This box looks at
good regulatory design for contract-based BOT-PPP arrangements in
which end-user are paying some or all of the cost of the services they
get.
BOT-PPP arrangements can help increase efficiency, invest in
infrastructure, and in general, improve service. At the same time, private
providers may seek to charge tariffs above cost, skimp on investment,
and provide inadequate service. Economic regulation is intended to
ensure that the drive for profits leads to lower costs and better service,
not higher tariffs and worse service.
There are two distinct traditions in the regulation of private sector
participation in infrastructure arrangements: the French, and the
Anglo-American. In the Anglo-American tradition, the private provider
is regulated by an independent Government agency. This regulator
controls the provider's prices and services. The regulator uses its
judgment to set tariff and service standards at levels which it believes
will best serve the public interest.
In the French, contract-based tradition, the service standards and prices
will be stipulated in the contract. Mixing the two traditional designs
can cause problems. Both traditions harness private management and
capital to serve the public interest, but do so in different ways.
Around the world, BOT-PPP arrangements for water supply and toll
roads have generally followed the French, contract-based model for
regulation that is, all provisions for service standards and tariffs would
be set on the contract itself. The choice of a regulatory approach will
need careful scrutiny, but it is fair to say that in water supply and toll
roads contract-based regulation has worked relatively well.

40

Implementing agencies can find additional guidance on different forms

of regulation on the following links:
http://www.regulationbodyofknowledge.org/
http:/ /v1e.worldbank.org/bnpp/en/publications /energy-water/
explanatory-notes-key-topics-regulation-water-and-sanitation-services
http://www.ppiaforg/content/view/64/97 /
5.2 Principles to Follow
In deciding which payment method should be adopted for a BOT-PPP contract,
implementing agencies can consider the following principles:
Ensure that the private firm recovers the costs of undertaking the
functions assigned to it, including the cost of bearing the risk of
undertaking these functions
When socially acceptable, set prices paid by end-users at or as close as
possible to the full long-run marginal cost of providing the services
they receive
Use payment method to create strong incentives to the private firm to
meet service or asset maintenance standards
Make payment method consistent with selected risk allocation choice
(as discussed in section 6).
5.3 Steps to Follow
The steps that implementing agencies can follow to set the payment method
are presented in the diagram below and are described after the diagram.
Figure 5.2: Steps for Defining Payment Method

Define
Payment
Method

Specify Service
Standards and
Estimate Costs

Determine
Willingness
to Pay

Analyze
Financial
Viability

Determine Tariffs,
Payment Amount
of Subsidy

Step 1: Set Service Standards and Estimate Costs

At this stage, in the process of preparing the project, the implementing
agency should have a reasonable idea of the standards or specifications that
the proposed project should achieve. These standards could include quality of
service standards (for example, travel time, hours of electricity supply, quality
or water and so on), or asset availability specifications (for example, availability
of a power plant to be dispatched or maintenance conditions of a road). The
41

standards or specifications would determine the capital investment and operating

and maintenance costs that are needed to meet the desired level of service.
Sections 5.1 and 5.2 of the "Approaches to Private Participation in Water Services
a Toolkit" produced by the World Bank present useful guidance on how to
think about setting standards and specifications and their cost implications.
http://www.ppiaforg/documents/WaterToolkit.pdf)
Most likely, initial cost estimates would be available from the feasibility studies.
The implementing agency would need to, if necessary, update these estimates and
adjust them to make them consistent with a more efficient implementation of the
project through a BOT-PPP arrangement. This adjustment will require making
a judgment on the savings that could be expected from a BOT-PPP project
delivery in relation to a public sector delivery of the project. The information
presented by the National PPP Forum Benchmarking Study, Phase II "Report
on the performance of PPP projects in Australia when compared with a
representative sample of traditionally procured infrastructure projects" could
be useful to give the implementing agency a basis for making this judgment.
www.infrastructureaustralia.gov.au/publications / files /N ationalPPP_Forum_
Benchmarking_study_Ph2_deco8.pdf
The implementing agency will also need to make adjustments that reflect the
allocation of functions as described in Section 4.
Step 2: Determine Demand for Services and Willingness to Pay
Cost of service estimates inform implementing agencies on how much it will
cost to provide services that meet the given standards and specifications. The
next step is to check whether there is enough demand from end-users for these
services at this cost.
This demand assessment is generally done through surveys with end-users.'
These surveys will ask end-users if they are prepared to pay a certain price for
a certain type of service.
Demand assessments are one of the most critical elements of BOT-PPP
transaction structuring.' The information from this assessment will be useful
to appropriately size the facilities to meet demand, or to identify the amount of

3 Another approach to carry out this assessment is to analyze what people pay for similar service in a
comparable location
4 Demand assessments might be less informative when the Government is structuring a BOT-PPP for a
providing services which end-users will not pay for example, hospitals, schools or prisons. In these cases the
information on demand for these services is less critical. End-users will want to receive a service for which
they don't need to pay. The decision on quantity and quality of services will be driven by how much budget is
the government willing to allocate to develop the project.

42

subsidy needed to meet the difference between cost and tariffs.

The feasibility study of the project will generally have an indication of the
expected demand for the services that the project will provide, and some
assumptions or survey data on how much users of those services are willing
to pay for those services. In many cases the data and assumptions are outdated
and in need of updating and refinement. To this end, the implementing agency
will need to engage a specialized market or demand forecasting consultant. The
consultant should have extensive experience preparing or reviewing demand
forecasts for the specific service that the project will provide. In large-scale
projects for example those with a total investment of more than PHP 10
billion, the implementing agency could consider retaining a second market
advisor that can verify the forecasts of the first advisor. Overestimated demand
forecasts can add a significant cost to the implementing agency in the long-term.
Step 3: Analyze Financial Viability
The implementing agency and its advisors will develop a financial model that
will forecast the financial statements of the company that will undertake the
project. The financial model will calculate the internal rate of return and net
present value of the project based on the cost, demand and price information
obtained from the previous two tasks. Useful guidance on how to carry out
financial analysis can be found on the "Body of Knowledge on Infrastructure
Regulation" developed by PPIAF. This guidance material can be found on the
following weblink http://www.regulationbodyofknowledge.org/03/narrative/
If the financial model shows that the internal rate of return of the project
is negative or below that of risk-comparable investments, the implementing
agency will need to understand what is driving this result. One possible cause is
that the project is oversized in relation to demand that is, there is insufficient
demand for the services that will be offered by the project. If there is not
enough demand that is, if not all potential end- users are willing to pay the
price needed to recover the full cost of service, the implementing agency could
have two options. One is to reduce the quantity or quality of service pr6vided
and therefore cost of service to scale-down the project to meet demand. The
other option is to provide subsidies that cover the difference between tariffs
acceptable to end-users and the cost of service (see Box 5.1). The paper on "A
demand-driven design for irrigation in Egypt Minimizing risks for both farmers
and private investors" produced by PPIAF presents an example of how demand
information and financial analysis was used to determine the right size of an
irrigation system. This paper can be found on the following weblink http:/ /
www.ppiaf.org/content/view/432/485/

43

Step 4: Determine Tariff, Payment Amount or Subsidy

The financial analysis will provide useful information on the appropriate balance
between service standards, tariffs and subsidies. To determine the appropriate
tariff, government payment amount or subsidy, the implementing agency may
will follow these steps:
Set tariffs at the lowest level that end-users are willing to pay or the
tariff that recovers the full cost of service in BOT-PPPs in which
end-users are not paying, the tariff that the government will be paying
may be set at a level that is sufficient to cover the full cost of service
Set subsidy, if any, to cover difference between tariff and the full cost
of service.
The full cost of service, tariff that consumers are willing to pay, and subsidy will
be initially estimated using the financial model of the project. Competition for
the award of the BOT-PPP could be used to reveal better information on costs,
and therefore to fine tune the tariff, or the full cost of service, or the subsidy.
5.4 Example
This section illustrates how to work out the payment method, using a mass
transit system example described in appendix A.2.
The Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) of the City of MyCapital
is interested in implementing a new light rail line along a 17 km stretch of one
of MyCapital's busiest thoroughfares. The new line is also known as the Silver
Line and will be located in MyCity's densely built west side. MTA is interested
in implementing the Silver Line project using a BOT-PPP for the provision of
infrastructure only, since it is already leasing rolling stock for the rest of the
system. Hence, the Silver Line light rail PPP project will involve the financing,
designing, constructing, and maintaining of the new rail line.
The line is expected to serve a demand of about 300,000 passengers per day
(ppd) at start-up and this demand is expected to reach 500,000 ppd within
10 years and stabilize at 600,000 ppd by year 15 and through the end of the
concession period. The Silver Line is also expected to significantly relieve traffic
congestion on the road corridor, and consequently reduce average travel time
for transit users by 30 percent.
Step 1 the mass rapid transit system (light rail) needs to meet the following
standards:
Minimum capacity: 600,000 passengers per day
Minimum travel speed: 50 miles/hour

44

Civil works are estimated to cost US$750 million dollars. Operating and
maintenance costs for the infrastructure were estimated at US$10 million in year
one of operations and increasing based on exchange rate, inflation, electricity
prices.
The allocation of functions analysis suggested the following allocation.
Private

MTA
Design

Build

Operate

Finance

Civil Works

Rest of system

Step 2 a model developed by an independent consultant forecasted the

following demand
Year

Passengers per year

(million)

2011

108

2012

114

2013

120

2014

128

2015

135

2016

144

2017

150

2018

160

2019

170

2020

175

2021

180

2022

190

2023

198

2024

212

2025

216

2022 - 2031

216

This ridership forecast was developed using a transport model and a field survey.
Interviewees were informed that the proposed fare per passenger per trip was
PhP 25. A second consultant was retained by MTA to review these ridership
estimates. This consultant was of the opinion that, although the forecast was
45

developed using a sound process and model, the forecasts should be adjusted
downwards by 25 percent during the first five years in response to evidence of
several Greenfield mass rapid transit systems in which actual demand during the
first five years had been less than forecasted.
Step 3 a financial model was developed to forecast the financial statements of
the private company that will develop the mass rapid transit system. The model
assumed that all capital works would be financed by the Government using a
loan from a multilateral development bank, and that the rolling stock, signaling,
control and other equipment would be financed by the private firm. Initially
the model assumed that the private firm will pay MTA the amounts needed
to service the debt from the multilateral. The first run of the model showed
that with a fare of PhP 25 per passenger per trip and the downward adjusted
ridership, the project will get a negative IRR that is, the project was not
financially viable. After attempting to run various scenarios of reducing system
capacity and analyzing the impact on costs, ridership and IRR, the implementing
agency decided that it will keep the originally specifications (alignment, capacity
and travel time) of the system and pay a subsidy that will make the project
financially viable.
Step 4 the private firm will receive part of its
payment from fares charged to passengers, and
the rest from a subsidy from the Government.
The implementation agency ran once again the
financial model to determine the amount of the
subsidy that will make the project financial viable.
It found that the fares paid by passengers are
sufficient to cover all operating and maintenance
costs, all capital cost of purchasing and financing
rolling stock, signaling and all other equipment,
and part of the cost of building and financing
the civil works. Based on this finding the
implementation agency decided to adopt the
payment method illustrated in Figure 5.3.

Figure 5.3: Payment Method

MTA

Concession Fee

Private Firm

Fares

Services

Passengers

Under this method the private firm will charge

passengers a fare of PhP 25 per passenger per trip and will pay MTA a concession
fee equal to the difference between the full cost of the system and the revenue
from passengers. MTA will use the concession fee and its own resources to pay
back the loan from the multilateral bank to finance civil works.
To maximize the amount of the concession fee that the BOT-PPP contract
will be awarded using a competitive selection process and the firm offering the
highest concession fee will be awarded the contract.
46

Allocate Risks

As discussed in Section 4, most functions have a set of risks associated with

them. Once the project functions have been allocated and a payment method
determined, the next step is to decide how project risks should be allocated.
Risks may be allocated to the private party or retained by the implementing
agency. Some risks can also be transferred to users of the service, or to third
parties such as insurance providers. Allocating risk efficiently is a key part of
achieving value for money by implementing a project such as a BOT or PPP.
This section provides guidance to implementing agencies on how to make this
allocation.
The risk allocation that results from this process should then be verified for
consistency with the allocation of functions. If inconsistent, the allocations of
functions and risks should be revised so they are consistent.
This section is organized in four subsections, as follows:
Section 6.1 defines what these Guidelines mean by risk and describes
key risk concepts related to the development and implementation of
infrastructure projects
Section 6.2 lists the principles that implementing agencies should follow
to allocate risks between private firms and implementing agencies
Section 6.3 describes the steps suggested for allocating risks
Section 6.4 presents some examples.
6.1 Definitions
To allocate risk we first have to understand risk in the context of infrastructure
PPPs. The efficient allocation of risk that is, allocation according to the principles
described in Section 6.2 below is one of the primary reasons why BOT-PPP
projects can achieve value for money in the provision of infrastructure. Hence,
these Guidelines use the following definitions for risk and risk allocation:
Definitions:
Risk is the possibility of deviation in the actual project outcome that is, the benefits
and costs accruing to each party with an interest in the project from the expected, or
5 Many researchers distinguish between risk and uncertainty after Frank Knight's work (1921). Risk in
Knight's sense exists when the probabilities of different outcomes are susceptible of measurement,
and uncertainty exists when they are not. As Irwin (2007) points out, in most real cases probabilities are
unknown, and yet people can always assign a subjective probability, and makes the case that the distinction
may not matter in practice. Following Irwin's convention, we use the term risk to refer to both Knightian
risk and Knightian uncertainty.
47

most likely outcome.' Risk can include the possibility of unexpectedly good, as well as
unexpectedly bad, outcomes.
Risk allocation in a PPP project is the process of determining which risks should be
allocated to the private firm, which risks should be retained by an implementing agency,
and which risks should be shared in a defined way or transferred to a third party, to
achieve better value for money.
The notion of value for money and other key risk concepts used or applied
throughout these Guidelines are defined in Table 6.1 below.
Table 6.1: Definition of Key Risk Concepts
Concept

Definition

Value for Money

The optimum combination of whole-of-life costs and quality

(or fitness for purpose) of the good or service to meet the user's
requirement. Value for money is not a selection based on the lowest
cost bid. For additional guidance on assessing Value for Money
use the following link: http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/d/vfm_
assessmentguidance061006opt.pdf.

Total project risk

Total project risk is the possibility of unpredictable variation in the total

value of the project, taking account not only of the value of the project
company but also of the value accruing to customers, the government, and
other stakeholders.

Risk event

A risk event is an event whose occurrence affects total project valuethis

could be a particular outcome of a continuous variable that is different
from its expected value, such as the exchange rate, or a one-off event, such
as an earthquake

Risk type

A particular risk type is the possibility of variation in project outcome

arising from the occurrence of a particular risk event. Table 6-2 lists various
types of risks faced by BOT-PPP projectsexamples include demand risk,
or natural disaster risk.

Materialize

A risk materializes when a risk event occurs, with a consequent impact on

the project outcome.

Probability of loss, or
likelihood of risk event

Measure of how likely it is that a certain risk event will occur. It is often
expressed as a percentage, but it may also be expressed qualitatively (for
example, rare, unlikely, possible, likely or almost certain)

Value or severity of
loss (if event happens)

The size of the loss associated with a specific risk event, regardless of
the event's probability of occurrence. Again, this can be expressed either
quantitatively (as a cost), or qualitatively, relative to the other project risks
(for example, insignificant, minor, moderate, major or extreme)

Expected value of loss,

or expected cost of risk

The size of the loss associated with a specific risk event, times the event's
probability of occurrence.

Risk management

A continuous process for systematically identifying, analyzing, controlling,

mitigating and monitoring risk throughout the life cycle of a project using a
cost-benefit justified strategy.

Sources: Castalia, H.M. Treasury (UK), Irwin (2007)

48

6.1.1 Categorizing Project Risks

Risks in a PPP infrastructure project are usually identified by reference to
different project phases and/or risk categories. Typical PPP project phases are:
Bid phase
Negotiation with preferred bidders
Construction phase
Operational phase
Transfer of asset
Risks may materialize in each and every project phase. The risks that project
parties may face during the first two project phases are generally process-related.
Since these phases occur prior to contract signature, the associated risks cannot
be handled in the contract. Implementing agencies should nonetheless consider,
and where possible mitigate, their exposure to these risks. Risks that occur
after contract signature (that is, after negotiations with the preferred bidder are
concluded) can be handled in the contract.Deciding how to handle these risks
along with allocating functions is the essence of PPP structuring.
These Guidelines use eleven generic risk categories to classify PPP project risks.
Each risk category may apply to a particular project phase, or across several
project phases. These risk categories form the basis for risk allocation and are
defined and illustrated in Table 6-2.

49

Table 6.2: Risk Categories for BOT-PPP Pro'ects

Risk

Definition

Example(s)

Comment on Nature of Risk

Pre-contract
risks

The risk that the procurement

process will experience any
of the following: (a) failure
to attract sufficient qualified
bidders and/or responsive
offers; or (b) prolonged and
expensive negotiations; or (c)
collapse of negotiations.

Risk that an international procurement process

for a LRT BOT project fails to attract qualified
bidders because of poor project opportunity
marketing and/or poorly prepared bidding
documents

Pre-contract risks are often associated with poor

project preparation, which may result from lack of
implementing agency experience or capacity. These risks
can be mitigated by careful transaction preparation and
management. This includes establishing a competent
transaction team, hiring experienced transaction
advisors and setting a schedule commensurate with
project complexity.

Site Risk

The risk that the project

land will be unavailable or
unable to be used at the
required time, in the manner
or at the cost anticipated,
or that the site will generate
unanticipated liabilities,
with the result that the
contracted service delivery
and/or projected revenues are
adversely affected

Risk of delays in acquiring the right of way

for a toll road because of legal, title, or
resettlement-related difficulties

Site risk encompasses all risks to do with land

required for the project, including site suitability,
problems in acquiring land, environmental liabilities
and requirements for planning and other approvals.

Risk that the design,

construction or commissioning
(start-up) of the facility are
carried out in a way which
results in cost overruns (in
the design, construction, or
operations), and/or poor
service delivery.

Design risk risk that the baggage handling

system at a privately operated airport is
poorly designed, resulting in lost, misrouted
or delayed baggage, and the consequent
user dissatisfaction

Design,
construction
and
commissioning
risk

Risk that the geological composition of a

tunnel site will vary significantly with tunnel
depth, and result in higher construction costs
Risk that during construction of a dam,
important archaeological remains are
found, preventing or delaying construction
completion

Construction risk risk that the pavement

sub-base on a road is not compacted to
specifications, resulting in early pavement
failure
Commissioning risk risk that a new
wastewater treatment technology will not
work and that the treatment plant will
not operate to the specified performance
standards

Site risk is greatest during project inception and

construction. Its importance decreases in the
operational phase. However, environmental risk may
materialize during the operational phase if previously
unidentified problems come to light, or the project
operation itself pollutes or contaminates the area.
The consequences if design, construction or
commissioning risks materialize may include
delays and/or cost increases in those project
phases. Consequences may also include design or
construction flaws which render the infrastructure
inadequate for effective service delivery, either
immediately or over time.
These are the core risks of the development phase
and are among the most likely risks to materialize.

Risk
Sponsor and
financial risk

Definition
Sponsor risk is the risk that:

Where the Special Purpose

Vehicle (SPV) created by the
private partners to contract
with the government is unable to fulfill its contractual
obligations, government will
be unable to enforce those
obligations, or recover
compensation or remedy
from the sponsors for loss
sustained as a result of the
SPV's breach
The private partner(s) is, for
security or other probity
reasons, inappropriate or
unsuitable to be involved
in, or connected with, the
delivery of a project, and
in so being may harm the
project.

Example(s)
Sponsor risk risk that a the private partner
SPV goes bankrupt and is dissolved only after
25 percent of the construction works have been
executed, and that the compensation available
from performance bonds is insufficient to cover
remaining construction costs, not to mention
the associated delays and court costs

Financial risk risk that a private party that has

Financial risk is the risk that
financed a project with a very high proportion
investors and lenders will not
provide or continue to provide of debt faces bankruptcy due to a sudden
funding to the project
change in interest rates
Financial parameters (such
as interest rates, tax rates)
will change prior to the
private firm fully committing
to the project, potentially
adversely affecting price
The financial structure of
the project is not sufficiently
robust, meaning the project
is vulnerable to financial
risk factor shocks during the
project, such as interest or
tax rate changes

Comment on Nature of Risk

Sponsor risk can be difficult to assess prior to the start

of the project. Since the SPV is a legal entity created to

act on behalf of the project consortium, the SPV itself
has no historical financial or operating record which
government can assess. The government must therefore
rely on the historical performance of the consortium
members to assess the ability of the SPV to fulfill the
project obligations.

The SPV is supported by a complex web of financial

arrangements (including investors and lenders who
rely on the project's ability to provide a return on
investment), which are subject to conditions that must
be fulfilled before financing can be drawn down. Good
practice in contract design is to make financial closure
a condition precedent to contract effectiveness and
to have a date by which financial closure needs to
be reached as a bid bond is called. To minimize risk
of bankruptcy, some contracts set maximum debt to
equity ratios.

Risk

Definition

Example(s)

Comment on Nature of Risk

Operating risk

The risk that the process for

delivering the contracted
service or facility function will
be adversely affected in a way
which prevents the private
firm from delivering the
contracted services or facility
function according to the
agreed specifications and/or
within the projected costs

Risk that a privately operated LRT system relies

on a local supplier for spare wheels, for which
quality decreases. Wheels crack early on and
have to be replaced twice as often, resulting
in incidents, higher maintenance costs, and
reduced profits

Operating risks typically relate to production and

functioning, availability and quality of inputs, quality
and efficiency of management and operation,
maintenance and upgrade requirements.

Demand risk

The risk that the demand for a

service or the use of a facility
will vary from forecast levels,
generating less revenue from
users than expected.

Risk that, under a transit system where the

compensation mechanism to the private
partner is a function of ridership demand,
actual ridership is well below the forecast,
resulting in a significant loss to the private
partner.

Demand risk arises in the operating phase of the project

when the contracted services or facility are offered to
the end-user. This end user may be the Government
(for example, a hospital or school project), government
on behalf of consumers (for example, water treatment
plants), or the public directly (for example, a road or
mass transit). Wherever payment for service is volumebased and therefore depends on the level of usage, the
project is exposed to market forces and their inherent
risks.

Network and
interface risk

Network risk is the risk that

the network(s) needed for
the private partner(s) to
deliver the contracted service
or facility functions will be
removed, not adequately
maintained or otherwise
changed in a way that: (a)
hampers the delivery of the
contracted services or facility
function; (b) affects the quality
of the specified outputs; or
(c) affects the viability of the
project.

Network riskrisk that a privately operated

LRT line in an LRT network relies in a second
line (publicly or privately operated) for
passenger transfer, and the service in the
second line is poor or unsynchronized with
the first one, affecting performance and
demand
Interface riskrisk that a telecoms PPP plans
to transmit data traffic on a government
agency's internal network, but the agency
changes the configuration of its network
after the contract is signed

Network and interface risks relate to the points of

intersection between the project infrastructure
or services and other privately or governmentcontrolled networks or services. These risks have
unique characteristics for each different project, and
therefore require some flexibility in applying the
principles of risk allocation.
Network risk arises where the contracted services
or facility function are linked to, depend on or are
otherwise affected by certain other infrastructure,
inputs and services (collectively referred to as a
network)
Interface risk occurs where a private partner(s) and
government both provide services from within or in
relation to the same infrastructure facility

The consequences of operating risks materializing

are that the costs of running the facility exceed
projections and therefore diminish projected returns
and/or that the facility will not perform to the
required standards.

Risk

Definition

Example(s)

Comment on Nature of Risk

Industrial
relations risk

The risk of any form of

industrial action (for example,
strikes, lockouts, work bans,
work-to-rules, blockades,
go-slow action, etc.) occurring
in a way which, directly or indirectly, negatively affects commissioning, service delivery or
the viability of the project.

A labor strike that causes delays in obtaining

supplies, construction, and/or in service
delivery, leading to increased costs, reduced or
lost revenue to the private partner, and possibly
a contractual liability to pay liquidated damages
to government.

Industrial relations risk may realize in both construction

and operational phases of the project, but is usually
highest during construction.

Legislative and
government
policy risk

Risk that the government

will exercise its powers and
immunities (including but
not limited to the power
to legislate and determine
policy), in a way that adversely
impacts the project.

Risk that the implementing agency will not

have the power to enter the contract or its
ability to do so will be limited
Risk that Government will be immune from
legal action (sovereign risk)
Risk that Government will use its power to
propose or alter legislation, in a way that
adversely impacts the project
Risk that relevant government actors will
grant or refuse to grant statutory consents in
a way that adversely impacts the project
Risk that Government will adopt or change
policy in a way that impacts the project's
operation or alters the relationship
between the project and competing public
infrastructure
Risk that statutory regulators will exercise
their powers to adversely affect the project
Risk that Government will require changes
in service specifications or will interfere with
the private partner's business operation in a
way that adversely impacts the project.

The election of a new government may increase the risk

of changes in legislation or of changes in government
policy, or willingness to honor the contract. These are
some of the most critical factors that the private sector
considers when entering a PPP.

Risk

Definition

Example(s)

Comment on Nature of Risk

Force majeure
risk

Risk that a specified event,

entirely outside the control
of either party, will occur and
will result in a delay or default
by the private firm in the
performance of its contractual
obligations. Force majeure
events traditionally fall into
two categories: acts of God
and political events.

Acts of God risk of storms, lightning,

cyclones, earthquakes, natural disasters,
actions of the elements, tidal waves, floods,
droughts, landslides, mudslides and nuclear,
chemical and biological contamination
Political Events risk of civil riots, rebellions,
revolutions, terrorism, civil commotion,
insurrections and military and usurped
power, malicious damage, acts of a public
enemy and war (declared and undeclared)

Force majeure events can be divided into those that

can be insured, or foreseen and mitigated against by
taking reasonable care, and those that cannot.
These "insurable" and "uninsurable" force majeure
risks are typically handled differently in a BOT-PPP
agreement.
The events that could be insured or mitigated may
vary by project. Individual contracts must therefore
expressly define events that will constitute insurable
or uninsurable force majeure events, even where the
starting point is apparently very broad.

Asset
ownership

Risk that events such as

technological change,
construction of competing
facilities or premature
obsolescence will occur, with
the result that the economic
value of the asset may vary,
either during or at the end of
the contract term, from the
value upon which the financial
structure of the project is
based.

Risks that half-way during the contract term

because of technological changes, the 32-bit
servers of a privately operated centralized
database of intellectual property records
cannot run a new or updated version of the
database software which requires 64-bit
machines
Risk that at the end of the concession period
for the same intellectual property records IT
project, the entire system has to be replaced,
rendering it of null residual value to the
government

In accordance with the "whole of life" principle, the

premise in these guidelines is that these risks are
to be allocated to the private partner. However, this
risk allocation may need to be adjusted for individual
projects, depending on government requirements
for the particular site and/or the facility and the plan
for its operation at the end of the contract term. If
Government decides at the outset that it needs the
site and/or facility whether because the asset is
an integral part of a public network, is integrated
with other government operations, is critical for
Government's own service delivery or simply to
preserve a strategic site it must ensure that the
project structure delivers it into government hands at
an appropriate point, at an acceptable price and in an
acceptable condition. If the facility is to revert to, or to
be transferred to government at the end of the contract
term, the Government is potentially exposed to residual
value risk.

6.1.2 Managing Risk

Risk allocation is an integral part of a broader risk management process,
as illustrated in Figure 6.1. This risk management process comprises five,
inter-dependent steps: (1) identification; (2) assessment (quantification or
measurement); (3) allocation; (4) mitigation; and (5) monitoring. In general
terms, the first two steps identify exposure to risks, while the last three manage
that exposure. This broad risk management process (or its variants) is applied
by many different types of organization to manage many different types of risk.
Box 6.1 below defines and briefly explains each of these steps in the context of
BOT-PPP projects in infrastructure.
Figure 6.1: Risk Management Process
DEVELOP STRATEGY TO MANAGE EXPOSURE
RISK
IDENTIFICATION

RISK
RISK
ASSESSMENT ALLOCATION

)1

RISK
MONITORING

li

10

This section of these Guidelinesentitled "allocating risks"in fact addresses

several steps of this risk management process. When structuring a BOT-PPP,
the implementing agency needs to identify, assess and allocate project risks.
It also needs to develop cost-benefit strategies for mitigating and monitoring
those risksin particular the risks that the government will bear under the
proposed contract. Sections 6.2 and 6.3 describe the principles and steps that
implementing agencies should follow in doing so.
Each of these steps is defined and explained in further detail in the box below.
Box 6.1: Risk Management Process Definitions
The risk management process consists of the following five steps:
Step 1: Risk Identification
The first step in risk management is to identify potential risks. There are
two common approaches to identifying project risks during the project
structuring process:
Comparison with risk checklists risk checklists are lists of risks
that typically apply to PPP infrastructure projects. Checklists
may be general or sector-specific.

55

 Using expert knowledge Experts in each aspect of a project

(such as experts in civil construction works, installation and
operation of electromechanical equipment, law, regulation or
financing) can be consulted to help identify project risks.
These approaches are not mutually exclusive. Using a general checklist
cannot substitute for detailed consideration of the risks of a particular
project by experts. Conversely, the risk checklist can be used to inform
and structure brainstorming by relevant experts.
Step 2: Risk Assessment
The next step after risks have been identified is to assess the nature
of each identified risk. In particular, the likelihood of occurrence and
severity of loss of risk events should be estimated to give a measure
of overall risk importancewhether by quantitative or qualitative
measures, or a combination of the two.
This information helps inform risk allocation and management. Firstly,
understanding the possible cost of a risk helps prioritize risk allocation
and management effort. The size and nature of the possible cost could
also affect each party's willingness to accept a risk.
Step 3: Risk Allocation
Allocating project risk means apportioning responsibility for bearing
the costs, or benefits, that result from each identified project risk
materializing. Risks in a PPP project may be allocated to one of the
parties to the PPP contract, or shared between those parties. Some risks
may also be transferred to third parties, such as the users of the service.
This allocation is achieved in the PPP contract, by including terms that
define who will bear each risk and by what mechanism. Mechanisms by
which the government and private parties to the contract can bear risk
include minimum purchase agreements, guarantees (such as minimum
traffic guarantees or exchange rate guarantees), defined compensation
mechanisms and performance bonds. Mechanisms by which risk can be
contractually transferred to service users include indexation of prices
or tolls to risk factors.
BOT-PPP project risks are usually allocated with the aim of ensuring
the project provides value for money. The principles by which risks
should be allocated to achieve this aim are discussed in detail in Section
6.2.
Step 4: Risk Mitigation
Risk mitigation is the taking of positive actions by a party to improve
their ability (or reduce their cost) to control, anticipate and respond to,
56

or absorb the risk. Risk mitigation strategies could include, but are not
limited to:
Reducing the level of uncertainty around key variables. For example,
undertaking detailed geological surveys before constructing a
tunnel to enable better design and construction planning, and
reduce the severity and likelihood cost overruns
Passing risks through to third parties who can control them at a lower cost.
This creates a chain of risk bearers, each best placed to control
the particular risk. The contracting party still retains primary
liability, but is able to control the risk at a lower cost by passing
it on through sub-contracts. For example, a private firm could
contract with a builder who would bear construction risks, and
a facility operator who would bear operating risks
Using financial market instruments. The cost of bearing inflation,
interest rates and foreign exchange rate risks could be offset by
using financial market (hedging) instruments
Passing risks on to consumers through higher prices. If the level or
allowed change in user charges is not specified in the contract,
cost resulting from the materialization of risks could be passed
on to project users by increasing these charges
Diversification of project portfolios. A buffer against the effects
of a risk materializing can be developed through a diversified
project portfolio (see definitions in Table 6.1).
Sometimes risk mitigation requires contributions from both parties
for example, the private party could undertake detailed studies to reduce
construction cost uncertainty, but the implementing agency must allow
them time to do so as part of the contract agreement.
Risk mitigation is a fundamental consideration in risk allocation, because
an ability to mitigate a particular risk may lead a party to accept a risk it
would otherwise not accept.
Likewise, knowledge of the mitigation options available to the other
party might make it appropriate to insist on the risk being allocated to
that party or paying a smaller premium.
This means possible mitigation strategies open to each party should be
identified as part of the risk allocation process. Once risks have been
allocated, implementing agencies also need to develop their own costbenefit justified risk mitigation strategies.
Step 5: Risk Monitoring
After risks have been allocated and a contract with a private partner
has been signed, the implementing agency needs to establish a risk
57

monitoring process. This typically involves tracking risk factors and

other possible indicators of the likelihood of occurrence and potential
severity of risk events.
Risk monitoring is important to continually re-assess exposure to each
identified risk, and to adjust risk mitigation plans accordingly. For
example, if a risk event is becoming more likely to occur, it may be
worth taking more action to mitigate the effect of that risk event.
Risk monitoring also helps identify and therefore to assess, allocate
if necessary, and mitigate new, unforeseen risks that emerge during
project implementation.
6.2 Principles to Follow
PPPs are about achieving value for money by transferring or allocating project
risks traditionally borne by the public sector to a private partner. Where this
private partner is better able than the government to mitigate or absorb the risk,
this risk transfer can reduce the overall cost of risk in the project, and improve
value for money.
Optimal risk allocation is therefore the apportionment of risk between public
and private parties to a PPP contract (and third parties such as service users)
that minimizes the total cost of risk bearing to the project, maximizing value for
money. This is very different from maximum risk transfer to the private sector,
a common misperception about PPPs that implementing agencies should avoid.
A private party will ultimately charge the cost of risk bearing to the buyer of the
service (that is, the government or users). There would be no value for money
in paying the private party for bearing a risk that another party (the government
or an insurance company) could bear at a lower cost. The concept of optimal
project risk allocation is illustrated in Figure 6-2.

Value for Mone

Figure 6.2: Optimal Total Project Risk Allocation

optimal

Risk Transferred to Private Partner

Source: Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development.
"Public-Private Partnerships: In Pursuit of Risk Sharing and Value for Money". June 2008.

58

Section 6.2.1 describes the principles by which risk should be allocated to achieve
this optimal risk allocation. Section 6.2.2 then presents a generic risk allocation
matrix, providing guidance to implementing agencies on how these principles
should be applied in practice.
6.2.1 Key principles for allocating risks
To achieve optimal risk allocation, each identified risk should be allocated to the
party that is:
Best able to control the likelihood of the risk event occurring
Best able to control the impact of the risk on project outcomes for
example, by anticipating the risk event or by reducing its potential cost
Able to absorb the risk at lowest cost.
These principles are described in turn below. In general, the three principles for
allocating risk are followed from top to bottom that is, a risk is allocated to the
party best able to absorb it only if the likelihood and impact of the risk cannot
be controlled by any party. However, this is not always the case these principles
may sometimes need to be traded off against each other to maximize overall
value for money, as described in Box 6.2.
To these three risk allocation principles, we can add a fourth that applies to
risk management more generally, and by extension is important to take into
consideration when allocating risk:
Risk mitigation strategies should be cost-benefit justified
This fourth principle is also discussed in this subsection.
Principle 1: Allocate risk to the party best able to control the likelihood
of the risk event occurring
This principle says that a risk should be allocated to the party that has most
influence over it so that party bears the cost of the risk if it turns out badly, or
gets the benefit if it turns out well. This gives that party the incentive to invest
the appropriate amount of effort and resources in minimizing the likelihood of
the risk event occurring, reducing the overall level of project risk and increasing
value for money.
The ability to control a risk is often associated with a function that is also allocated
within the contract, as described in Section 4. This means that functions and
associated risks should be allocated together. For example, a private contractor
may be responsible for detailed project design and construction. In that case,
that contractor is best able to control most elements of construction costs
6 Following Irwin, Timothy C. Government Guarantees: Allocating and Valuing Risk in Privately Financed
Infrastructure Projects. Washington, D.C.: The World Bank. 2007

59

through its choice of materials and construction techniques and its effectiveness
at managing the construction process.
The private contractor may also be better-placed to make these decisions because
of its greater expertise and experience in design and construction. This suggests
the private party should bear most of the risk of construction cost over-runs.
On the other hand, the government party to the contract is usually better-placed
to control the behavior of a Government-owned regulator. Contracts often
therefore include compensation mechanisms should the regulated tariff not be
allowed to follow a specified path such as in the toll road concessions in the
Philippines.
Principle 2: Allocate risk to the party best able to control the impact of
the risk on project outcomes
Even where a risk cannot be controlled, one party may be better-placed to
control the impact of the risk on project outcome, by assessing or anticipating
and responding to the risk factor. Allocating risk to this party reduces the overall
level of project risk and increases value for money.
Again, the ability to respond to a risk factor may be determined by the allocation
of project functions, suggesting the allocation of functions and risks should be
consistent. For example, while no party can control the risk of an earthquake,
if the private firm is responsible for project design and construction, it could
choose to use techniques to reduce the damage should an earthquake occur.
Another example is the ability of each party (public or private) to assess or
anticipate project demand. Even if no party can control demand, allocating
demand risk to the party better able to assess it along with the project design
function would encourage better decisions about optimum project size.
Principle 3: Allocate risk to the party able to absorb the risk at lowest cost
The cost and likelihood of most risks can at best be only partly controlled; some
cannot be controlled at all. In these cases, the remaining risk should be allocated
to the party able to absorb that risk at lowest cost. Unlike the other principles,
this does not lower the overall level of project risk, but it does lower the overall
cost of bearing that risk, and so improves value for money. A party's cost of
absorbing a risk depends on:
The extent to which the risk is correlated with the party's other assets
and liabilities in other words, the more diversified those assets and
liabilities are, the lower the cost of risk bearing. For example, demand
for infrastructure services like toll roads or electricity may depend on
60

the strength of the local economy, as does the government's tax revenue.
If the private party is an international investor, their cost of bearing
demand risk may be lower. Private insurers specialize in diversifying
particular types of risks, so risks for which private insurance policies
are readily available should usually be ultimately allocated to a private
insurer
The ability of and cost to the party of passing the risk on to others for
example, if prices are not specified in the contract but are controlled
by one of the parties, that party would be able to absorb some risks by
passing on some or all of the associated cost increases on to the users
of the service. Alternatively, private firms may be more practiced at
buying derivatives to protect it from changes in fuel prices. This can also
be thought of as the ability of the party to improve the diversification
of its assets and liabilities
The ability of the party to spread risk among other, ultimate risk bearers
that is, the lenders or shareholders (for a private firm) or taxpayers
(for a government). The ability of governments to spread risk among
all taxpayers means they are often viewed as having a lower cost of riskbearing than most private firms
The extent to which the party will tolerate risk that is, the degree of
the party's risk aversion. For example, low income users of a service may
be more risk averse than the average taxpayer, or average private firm
shareholder.
The private party's cost of risk-bearing is captured in the higher return or
risk premium demanded by that party for taking on a riskier project. These
risk premiums are determined in investment markets, by investors (shareholders
or lenders) comparing the opportunity to other possible investments. The
government's cost of risk-bearing is more difficult to quantify directly, which
can result in implementing agencies accepting too much project risk.
Box 6.2: Trade-Offs Between Risk Allocation Principles
In general, the three principles for allocating risk are followed from top
to bottom that is, a risk is allocated to the party best able to absorb it
only if the likelihood and impact of the risk cannot be controlled by any
party. However, this is not always the case. For example, if one party is
somewhat better able to control the likelihood of a risk event occurring
but has a much higher cost of absorbing the risk than a second party, the
risk allocation that maximizes value for money may be for the second
party to bear the risk, or for the risk to be shared between parties.

61

This trade-off can justify contractual provisions like termination

payments. For example, if the project fails the government might limit
the private consortium losses at 20 percent of the asset value by giving
an 80 percent termination payment in the event of contractor default.
The private consortium is generally better able to control and anticipate
the risk of project failure than the government. However, its cost of
absorbing that risk may be high, unless it consists only of international
companies with a very large portfolio of projects.
This means the risk premium the private consortium would add to the
project cost for bearing the full risk of project failure could be higher
than the total cost of risk-bearing, if the Government shares the default
risk through a termination payment clause.
Principle 4: Risk mitigation strategies should be cost-benefit justified
As described in Box 6.1, risk mitigation strategies are ways in which parties
can improve their ability or reduce their cost of controlling, responding to or
absorbing a risk. These could include undertaking various studies to better
understand and reduce the variability in costs, or using hedge instruments to
make financial risks less costly to absorb. Understanding the availability of
risk mitigation strategies to each party is an important consideration in risk
allocation. Once risks have been allocated, implementing agencies also need to
develop their plan for mitigating project risksin particular, the risks they will
accept under the proposed structure.
This principle says the benefits of any risk mitigation strategy, measured in terms
of avoiding future losses, should exceed the costs of the strategy. Understanding
the expected losses of a risk event is therefore important for defining how much
cost should be incurred in managing that risk. In the example of conducting
a detailed geological survey before constructing a tunnel to reduce the risk of
construction cost overruns, the survey would only be justified if the reduction
in expected loss from the risk is greater than the cost of the study.
6.2.2 Generic risk allocation matrix
These principles have been brought together in the generic risk allocation matrix
that describes the preferred allocation of PPP infrastructure project risks in
general, along with the rationale for the generic preferred risk allocation position.
Box 6.3 describes this risk allocation matrix, which is presented in Table 6.3
below. The preferred allocation of risks described in the generic matrix should
be considered by implementing agencies as an integral part of the risk allocation
principles, and as a reference when allocating risks.
62

Box 6.3: The Generic Preferred Risk Allocation Matrix A

Description
The generic risk allocation matrix consists of six columns and eleven
groups of rows (one group for each risk category). The information in
the columns has two main purposes:
To define the preferred allocation for each specific project risk; and
To describe the rationale for the preferred risk allocation and the type
of analysis that agencies will have to develop, should they decide to
propose an alternate risk allocation structure.
The columns in the matrix are:
Risk: States the risk in question.
Definition: Defines the risk in more detail.
Preferred Allocation: States the preferred government allocation
of the risk as one of three choices: (i) private partner; (ii)
government; and (iii) shared
Rationale: Describes the basis or justification for the government's
preferred allocation.
Possible Mitigation Strategies: Describes measures that could be
taken to mitigate or reduce the risk to either the public or private
partner.
Allocation Instrument: Describes the instrument that could be used
to reflect the Government's preferred risk allocation in the PPP
agreement (for example, contract clause, payment mechanism,
guarantee, etc.)

63

Table 6.3: Generic Preferred Risk Allocation Matrix

Risk

Definition

Preferred
Allocation

Rationale

Possible Mitigation
Strategies

Allocation Instrument

Pre-contract risks
Existing
structure
(refurbishment /
extensions)

Risk that the

procurement process will
experience any of the
following: (a) failure to
attract sufficient qualified
bidders and/or responsive
offers; or (b) prolonged
and expensive negotiations; or (c) collapse of
negotiations.

Government

Government does not have a

partner yet at this stage, so it has
no option but to bear this risk.

Careful preparation and

management of the procurement process
Ensure that the agency's
procurement team is experienced and competent
Establish a procurement
schedule commensurate
with project complexity

Since there is no agreement

yet signed with any other
party, there is no specific
allocation instrument, but
the lack of recourse to any
sort of compensation.

Existing
structure
(refurbishment/
extensions)

Risk that existing

structures are inadequate
to support new improvements, resulting in
additional construction
time and cost

Private

Private sector can manage costeffectively if proper due diligence

of existing structure is conducted.

Private firm will pass to

builder which relies on
expert testing and due
diligence
Give private firm enough
time to do site studies

Contract clause requiring

private partner to provide
performance bond

Site conditions

Risk that unanticipated

adverse geological conditions (geotechnical risk)
are discovered which
cause construction costs
to increase and/or cause
construction delays

Private except
when complex
geological conditions are present
AND project is
governmentsolicited, private
to absorb only up
to a specific cost
amount, after
which government assumes

Private sector can manage costeffectively if site study effort is

moderate and enough time is
provided to bidders.
Complex structures on linear infrastructure (road, rail, pipeline)
may require more thorough
and detailed geotechnical
studies (for example, long
tunnels and long span bridges
in unstable terrain), that may
not be reasonably completed
within the bidding period or
may be too expensive for bidders to conduct at the bidding
stage without some cost sharing.

Private firm will pass to

builder which relies on
expert testing and due
diligence
Give private firm enough
time to do site studies
Reimburse part of bidding
cost to encourage bidders
to prepare their own site
studies

Contract clause requiring

private partner to provide
performance bond
Contract clause stipulating the
conditions and mechanism to
compensate private sector for
agreed-upon portion of cost
over runs on technically
complex structures (for
example, tunnel cost overrun
guarantee).

Site risk

of
tri

Rationale

Possible Mitigation
Strategies

Allocation Instrument

Definition

Preferred Allocation

Permits and
approvals

Risk that necessary

approvals (for example,
environmental
license, environmental
management plan,
construction permit)
may not be obtained
or may be obtained
only subject to unanticipated conditions
which have adverse
cost consequences
or cause prolonged
delay

Private if and when:

Permits and approvals have
been obtained prior to the
submission of proposals by
potential bidders, and later
modified at the request of
successful bidder.
Government if and when:
Permits and approvals have
not been obtained prior to
bidder proposal submission
private is responsible
to manage the process,
though.

When Private:
Private is better informed
about the rationale for its
request
When Government:
Government is better
informed and positioned
to influence the speed
of the approval process,
particularly in situations
that are complex or
sensitive.

Government to obtain
in advance of the bidder
proposal submission stage
the requisite permits and
approvals, which would
allow the private firm
to achieve a measure of
pre-contractual certainty
and an early start to the
approval process.

Contract clause stipulating

the schedule to obtain
permits and approval
and stipulating liquidated
damages payable to private
partner in case of delays

Environmental
liabilities
existing prior to
project

Risk that project

site is contaminated
requiring significant
remediation expenses

Private, except when:

Project was solicited by the
government; and
Cost and time required to
conduct a full due diligence
(site study) for each bidder
are such that the project
would be significantly
delayed or would deter
potential serious bidders
in such case, some risk
sharing along the lines of
geotechnical site risk could
be a solution

When Private:
Private sector can manage
cost-effectively if site study
effort is moderate and
enough time is provided to
bidders.
When Shared:
Sites where site study
effort may not be
reasonably completed
within the bidding period
or may be too expensive
for bidders to conduct at
the bidding stage without
some cost-sharing.

Private firm will pass to

builder which relies on
expert testing and due
diligence
Give private firm enough
time to do site studies
Reimburse part
of bidding cost to
encourage bidders to
prepare their own site
studies

Contract clause requiring

private partner to provide
performance bond
Contract clause stipulating
the conditions and
mechanism to compensate
private sector for agreedupon
portion of remediation
expenses.

Environmental
liabilities created
during operation

Risk that the use of

the project site over
the contract term has
resulted in significant
environmental
liabilities (clean up
or rehabilitation
required to make the

Private, if and when:

Environmental license
and environmental
management plan has
been approved prior to
submission of proposals

Private partner is able

to manage the use of
the asset and attend
to its maintenance
and refurbishment
the environmental
requirements known at
the proposal stage

During procurement
private partner must
demonstrate financial
capacity or support
to deliver the site in
the state required by
government at the end
of the contract

Contract clause defining

what constitutes
environmental liability and
the mechanism to estimate
the private partner's
liability and pursue
payment

Risk

Risk

Definition

Preferred Allocation

Rationale

site fit for future

anticipated use)

Environmental license and

management plan have not
been approved prior to
submission of proposals
liability is limited to
amount estimated in
proposal
Government, if and when:
Environmental license and
management plan have
not been approved prior
to submission of proposals
liability for any excess
over investor's proposed
estimate.

Government is better able

to manage environmental
requirements not known
to bidders at the proposal
stage

Government to require
sinking funds if it is to
resume the site and its
use is liable to result
in significant clean up/
rehabilitation cost

Contract clause requiring

the establishment of cleanup/ rehabilitation sinking
fund

Cultural heritage

Risk of costs and

delays associated
with archaeological
and cultural heritage
discoveries

Government to assume risk

on government preferred
site
Private partner to assume
risk on private partner
preferred site

Government generally has a

better understanding of
procedures, and is usually in
best position to manage this
risk

Research cadastral records

and obtain expert advice

Contract clause defining risk

and stipulating site availability schedule and liquidated
damages payable in case of
delays

Availability of
site

Risk that tenure/

access to a selected
site which is not
presently owned
by government
or private partner
cannot be
negotiated.
Risk of costs
and delays in
negotiating land
acquisition

Government to assume risk

on government preferred
site private partner may
remain responsible for
managing the process
Private to assume risk on
private partner preferred
site

If government preferred site:

Government has a
better understanding of
procedures, has special
powers of acquisition
and use of land for
infrastructure and is
usually in best position to
manage
Government is in better
position to negotiate
where policy discourages
use of compulsory
acquisition power
If private preferred site:
Private partner is in control
of site selection

Research cadastral
records and obtain
expert advice
If government, preferred
site:
Complete land
acquisition prior to
proposal stage
If private preferred site:
Oblige bidders to
secure access prior to
contract signing

Contract clause stipulating

site availability schedule
and liquidated damages
payable in case of delays

Possible Mitigation
Strategies

Allocation Instrument

Risk

Definition

Preferred Allocation

Rationale

Possible Mitigation
Strategies

Allocation Instrument

Design, construction and commissioning risk

Design

Risk that the design

of the facility is
substandard, unsafe,
or incapable of delivering the services at
anticipated cost and
specified level of service (often resulting
in long term increase
in recurrent costs and
long term inadequacy
of service)

Private private partner will

be responsible except where
an express government
mandated change has caused
the design defect

Private partner has more

experience, knowledge and
control over the variables
that determine the quality of
the design (i.e. experience,
competent staff, etc.)

Ensure that the feasibility study is available in

advance of the procurement process
to adequately inform the
design process
Incorporate strict experience and competency
requirements in the
procurement process
Private partner may
transfer risk to builder/
architects and other
subcontractors while
maintaining primary
liability; government has
the right to abate service
charge payments where
the risk eventuates
and results in a lack of
serviceit may ultimately
result in termination
where the problem cannot be suitably remedied

Contract clause requiring

performance bond
Contract clause stipulating
liquidated damages

Construction

Risk that events occur

during construction
which prevent
the facility being
delivered on time and
on cost

Private, except when:

The event is one for which
relief as to time or cost or
both is specifically granted
under the contract, such as
force majeure or government intervention
In situations where the
technical or geological
complexity (for example,

Private partner has more

experience, knowledge
and control over the
variables that influence
construction cost and
control over construction
process (i.e. schedule,
equipment, materials and
technology, etc.) this
assumes that private

Incorporate strict experience and competency

requirements in the
procurement process
Ensure that feasibility
study is available well in
advance of the procurement process
Private firm generally
will enter into a

Contract clause requiring

performance bond
Contract clause stipulating liquidated damages
contract clause
Contract clause providing
partial cost overrun
guarantee for complex
structures

cI

Risk

Commissioning

00

Definition

Risk that either

the physical or
the operational
commissioning tests
which are required to
be completed for the
provision of services
to commence cannot
be successfully
completed

Preferred Allocation

Rationale

Possible Mitigation
Strategies

tunnels) prevents from

having sufficient and
reliable information to
measure risk, the government may assume part of
the risk

partner has enough information to estimate costs

and start operations on
schedule and as planned.
A possible exception is in
contractually agreed upon
situations that classify as
force majeure or government intervention.

fixed term, fixed price

building contract to
pass the risk to a
builder with the
experience and
resources to construct so
as to satisfy the private
firm's obligations under the
contract

Private partner is in control

of the design and construction process and its inputs,
and therefore better positioned to manage this risk

Incorporate strict experience and competency

requirements in the procurement process

Contract clause requiring a

performance bond
Contract clause stipulating
liquidated damages (until all
physical and operational commissioning tests passed)

Private although government will assume an

obligation to cooperate and
facilitate prompt public
sector attendance on
commissioning tests

Allocation Instrument

Design, construction and commissioning risk

Interest rates
pre-completion

Risk that prior to

completion local
currency interest
rates may move
adversely

Government

Government has more

experience and information
regarding the factors
influencing local currency
interest rates and is in better
position to manage risk

Construction loan interest

rate hedging instrument
(if and when available)

Contract clause defining

mechanism to compensate
private for interest rate
changes during construction

Interest rates
post-completion

Risk that after

completion interest
rates may move
adversely

Private

Private partner in control of

selecting and arranging longterm financing

Interest rate hedging

instruments (such as
interest rate swap from
IFC)
Arrange financing using
a mix of foreign and
local currency

Contract clause holding

government harmless

Allocation Instrument

Definition

Preferred Allocation

Rationale

Possible Mitigation
Strategies

Exchange rate

Risk that during

operation, exchange
rates may move
adversely, affecting
the private partner's
ability to service
foreign denominated
debt and obtain its
expected profit

Shared
Government to assume
part of it by allowing total
or partial indexing of
payments to exchange rate
Private to assume
remainder

Private partner is in
control of selecting and
arranging local and foreign
currency mix for long-term
financing
Government has more
experience and information regarding the factors
that influence exchange
rates

Private to partially
mitigate by partly
financing the project in
local currency
Private to establish
Foreign Exchange
Liquidity Facility to cover
part of the potential
mismatch between
project's local currency
revenues and foreign
currency debt
Government to partly
transfer risk to users by
allowing payment
indexing to exchange
rate

Contract clause requiring

establishment of a Foreign
Exchange Liquidity Facility
Tariff or payment adjustment contract clause

Currency
convertibility
and profit
repatriation

Risk that local

currency cannot
be converted into
foreign currency as a
result of government
restrictions

Government

Government has more

experience and information
regarding the factors that
influence currency
convertibility

Purchase partial risk

guarantee from an
International Financing
Institution

Contract clause stipulating

that private partner can
benefit from the guarantee to
compensate for losses related
to currency
convertibility and
repatriation of profits

Inflation

Risk that value of

payments received
during the term is
eroded by inflation

Shared
Government to assume
part of it by allowing total
or partial indexing of
payments to inflation
Private to assume remainder
risk through the methodology adopted to maintain
value

Government has more

experience and information
regarding the factors that
influence inflation

Government to transfer
part of it to users by
allowing total or partial
indexing of payments to
inflation rate
Government to ensure
its payments do not
overcompensate for
inflation and to avoid
any double payment for
after costs adjustments
(for example, changes in
exchange rate)

Contract clause defining

payment adjustment
mechanisms

Risk

Risk

Definition

Preferred Allocation

Rationale

Possible Mitigation
Strategies

Allocation Instrument

Financing
unavailable

Risk that when

debt and/or equity
is required by the
private firm for the
project it is not
available then and
in the amounts and
on the conditions
anticipated

Private

Private partner is responsible

for arranging finance

Government requires
all bids to have fully
documented financial
commitments with minimal
and easily achievable
conditionality

Contract clause requiring firm

letters of credit from reputable financial institutions

Sponsor risk

Risk that the

private partner is
unable to provide
the required
services or becomes
insolvent
Risk that the private
partner is later
found to be an
improper person
for involvement
in the provision of
these services
Risk that financial
demands on the
private partner
exceed its financial
capacity causing
corporate failure

Government

If this risk materializes, there

is no private partner to transfer the risk to

Ensure project is financially remote from external financial liabilities

Ensure adequacy
of finances under loan
facilities or sponsor
commitments supported
by performance bond
Ensure adequacy of
finances through the
use of non financial
evaluation criteria and
due diligence on private
partner

Contract clause requiring

a performance bond and
letters of credit
Contract clause requiring
minimum liquidity and
debt ratios

Further finance
required due
to government
action

Risk that by reason

of a change in law,
policy or other event
additional funding is
needed to rebuild,
alter, reequip etc the
facility which cannot
be obtained by the
private firm (resulting
in no funding available
to complete further
works required by
government)

Government takes risk that

private finance is unavailable
however, private partner
to assume best endeavors
obligation to fund at agreed
rate of return with option
on government to pay via an
increase in fees over the
balance of the term or via a
separate capital contribution

Government has more

information and is better
positioned to manage risk

Government to satisfy
itself as to likelihood
of need arising, likely
criticality if it does arise,
and as to financial capacity
of private to finance and
(if appropriate) budget
allocation if government is
required to fund it

Contract clause of best

endeavors obligation by
private to fund with option
on government to compensate via fee increase or
capital contribution.
Contract clause providing
a buy-out (put) option or
termination with compensation for private should
finance not be obtained
and facility cannot be
further operated

^4

Definition

Preferred Allocation

Rationale

Possible Mitigation
Strategies

Change in
ownership

Risk that a change in

ownership or control
of the private firm
results in a weakening
in its financial
standing or support
or other detriment to
the project

Shared
Government risk as to the
adverse consequence of a
change if it occurs;
Private firm risk that its
commercial objectives may
be inhibited by a restrictive
requirement for government consent to a change

If change occurs, the

ability of private partner to
manage risk is diminished
Private partner would
have to accept requirement to sign agreement,
hence if condition is not
acceptable, it could walk
away from project

Government requirement for its consent

prior to any change in
control.
Private firm will seek
to limit this control to
circumstances where
substantive issues are of
concern such as financial
capacity and probity

Contract clause requiring

government consent prior to
any change in control, and
providing ability to influence
or prevent change only in
specific circumstances

Refinancing
benefit

Risk (upside) that

at completion or
other stage in project
development the
project finances can
be restructured to
materially reduce
the project's finance
costs

Private partner to benefit;

Government to share in
limited circumstances (i.e.
symmetrical risk allocation
and super profits)

Similar to interest rate risk

private partner has
control over its choice of
long term financing
if downside burden is
placed on private partner,
same principle applies to
upside (symmetrical risk
allocation)

Government to assure
itself that likely benefit
has been factored into
competitive bids to avoid
the risk that the private
firm will be allowed to
earn super profits from the
project

Contract clause spelling

out circumstances where
government is to share and at
what rate

Tax changes

Risk that before or

after completion the
tax impost on the
private firm, its assets
or on the project, will
change

Private, if and when:

Tax increases or new
taxes arising from general
changes in tax law
Government, if and when:
Tax increases or new taxes
arising from discriminatory
changes in tax law

General changes in tax law

affect all businesses in the
country
The government is in
better position to
influence specific discriminatory tax law changes
affecting the project

Private partner to incorporate in project due diligence financial returns of

the private partner should
be sufficient to withstand
general tax law changes

Contract clause providing

compensation terms for
discriminatory changes in
tax law
Contract clause providing
a buy-out (put) option
or termination with
compensation for private
partner when no other
compensation mechanism
is available

Risk that required

inputs cost more than
anticipated, are of
inadequate quality
or are unavailable in
required quantities

Private, except when:

Government controls
inputs (for example, water
catchment)

Private partner is in control

of the selection of inputs.

Private partner may

manage through long
term supply contracts
where quality/quantity
can be assured;

Contract clause imposing

penalties for breach of
specific and well defined
performance and quality
specifications.

Risk

Operating risk
Inputs

Risk

Definition

Preferred Allocation

Rationale

Possible Mitigation
Strategies

Allocation Instrument

Private partner can

address to some extent
in its facility design

Contract clause on
compensation to private
for issues attributable to
government-supplied inputs

Maintenance and
Refurbishment

Risk that design and/

or and construction
quality is inadequate
resulting in higher
than anticipated
maintenance and
refurbishment costs

Private

Private partner is in control

of design and construction
processes

Private firm to manage

through long term subcontracts with suitably
qualified and resourced
sub-contractors

Contract clause imposing

penalties (and possible
termination) for not
meeting specific and well
defined performance,
level of service, and quality
specifications
Contract clause requiring
performance bond from
private

Changes in output specification

outside agreed
specification
range

Risk that government's

output requirements
are changed after
contract signing
whether pre or post
commissioning
Change prior to
commissioning
may require a
design change
with capital cost
consequences
depending on the
significance of
the change and
its proximity to
completion;
Change after
completion may
have a capital cost
consequence or a
change in recurrent
costs only (for
example, where an
increase in output
requirements can
be accommodated
within existing
facility capacity)

Government

Government is in better position to manage and mitigate

the occurrence of the risk

Government to minimize
the chance of its specificadons changing and, to the
extent they must change,
it will ensure the design is
likely to accommodate it
at least expense; this will
involve considerable time
and effort in specifying the
outputs up front and
planning likely output
requirements over the
term

Contract clause of best

endeavors obligation by
private to fund with option
on government to cornpensate via fee increase or
capital contribution
Contract clause providing
a buy-out (put) option or
termination with compensation for private, should
finance not be obtained
and change makes project
unviable

Risk

Definition

Operator failure

Risk that a subcontract operator may

fail financially or
may fail to provide
contracted services to
specification (failure
may lead to service
unavailability and
a need to make
alternate delivery
arrangements with
corresponding cost
consequences)

Technical
obsolescence or
innovation

Risk of the contracted service and

its method of delivery
not keeping pace,
from a technological
perspective, with
competition and/or
public requirements
Private partner's
revenue may fall
below projections
either via loss of
demand (user pays
model) payment
abatement
(availability model)
and/or operating
costs increasing;
Government
may not receive
contracted service
at appropriate
quantity/quality

Rationale

Possible Mitigation
Strategies

Allocation Instrument

Private

Private partner is fully

and primarily liable for all
obligations to government
irrespective of whether it has
passed the
risk to a subcontractor

Government to carry out

due diligence on principal
subcontractors for probity
and financial capacity and
commission a legal review
of the major
subcontracts including the
guarantees or other assurances taken by the private
partner; if failure does
occur the private partner
may replace the operator
or government may require
operator replacement

Contract clause imposing

penalties (and possible
termination) for not
meeting specific and well
defined performance,
level of service, and quality
specifications
Contract clause requiring
performance bond from
private

Private except where

contingency is anticipated
and government agrees to
share risk possibly by funding
a reserve

Private partner is able to use

its expertise and know-how
to minimize this risk

Government to develop
detailed, well-researched
output specifications
Private partner to
develop detailed, wellresearched design
solution
Private partner may
have recourse to
designer, builder or their
insurers
Private partner to
arrange contingency/
reserve fund to meet
upgrade costs subject to
government agreement
as to funding the reserve
and control of reserve
funds upon default;
Both partners to
monitor obligations in
the contract

Contract clause imposing

penalties (and possible
termination) for not
meeting specific and well
defined performance, level
of service, and
quality specifications
Contract clause defining
the condition required of
the facility at the end of
the term
Contract clause requiring
performance bond from
private
Contract clause specifying
mechanism to establish
a reserve fund (private,
public- private, public)

Preferred Allocation

Risk

Definition

Preferred Allocation

Rationale

Possible Mitigation
Strategies

Allocation Instrument

Demand risk
Demand risk

Risk that operating

revenues falls below
forecast as a result
of decrease service
volume (i.e. traffic
volume, water
or power consumption) attributable to
an economic downturn, tariff
increases or change
in consumer habits

Private, except when:

Uncertainty in demand
forecast is such that
providing an availability
payment element and/
or a minimum revenue
guarantee is necessary to
attract private investment
(for example, greenfield
toll road), in which case,
the government will
share in the risk through
an availability payment
or a minimum revenue
guarantee.

When demand can be

estimated with relative
certainty, the private partner is in a better position
to mitigate risk through
commercial management
practices
Where government is the
primary off-take it has
better information to
manage risk

Government and private

to perform independent market demand
analyses commensurate
with project scale and
characteristics
Where users pay private
partner will ensure robust financial structure
and financier support
Adequate debt coverage
Adequate reserves
Credit enhancement,
insurance

Contract clause stipulating

the availability payment or
mechanism to establish
minimum revenue
payments

Non-technical
losses (tariff
avoidance)

Risk of a portion of
users or customers
not paying or evading
payment for
service, leading to a
shortfall in cash flows

Private, except when:

There is limited scope for
private to stop service
or pursue payment (for
example, service delivery
or payment collection is
controlled by government)

Private sector has better

access to information needed
to identify non- paying users
and stop/continue service
to them.

Private firm to incorporate

measures (technological,
business processes, and
otherwise) to identify
non-paying customers and
prevent and deter nonpayment.

Contract clause giving the

ability to private partner to
stop service to non-paying
customers and stipulating the
mechanisms available to
collect payment.

Government, where the

change discriminates against
the project

Government is in control
of complementary network
management

Government to conduct
thorough network planning
process when developing
project concept

Contract clause defining what

constitutes unfair discrimination against the project and
specifying mechanisms to compensate private (for example,
liquidated damages)

Network and interface risk

Withdrawal of
support network

Risk that, where

the facility relies on
a complementary
government network,
support is withdrawn
or varied adversely
affecting the project

Rationale

Possible Mitigation
Strategies

Allocation Instrument

Definition

Preferred Allocation

Changes in
competitive
network

Risk that an existing

network is extended/
changed/re-priced so
as to increase competition for the facility

Private, except when:

Changes are discriminatory against the project
Competition is government-subsidized (for
example, a competing
toll-free road on the same
corridor)

Government manages network allowing it to

influence the materialization of network risk and its
consequences

Government to conduct
thorough network planning when developing
project concept
Private firm to review
likely competition for
service and barriers to
entry prior to enter
agreement
Private firm will seek
compensation against
change which unfairly
discriminates against
the project by government subsidizing competition (existing or new)

Contract clause to provide

private partner with noncompete protections and
compensation mechanisms

Interface (1)

Risk that the delivery

of core services in
a way which is not
specified/anticipated
in the contract
adversely affects the
delivery of contracted
services

Private, except when:

Changes involve discriminatory to the project
government to provide
compensation

Government manages core

service activities allowing it
to influence the materialization of interface risk and its
consequences

Government to conduct
thorough system planning when developing
project concept
Upfront assessment (by
both government and
the private partner) of
likely interface issues
Continuous review and
monitoring and development of a communications strategy in respect
of delivery of the two
related services

Contract clause to specify

the extent of core services
and the way in which they
will be delivered so that
only manifest and adverse
changes and deficiencies
can trigger this risk
Contract clause defining
compensation mechanism
for private partner

Interface (2)

Risk that the delivery

of contracted services
adversely affects the
delivery of core services in a manner not
specified/anticipated
in the contract

Private

Private firm manages contracted service activities

Upfront assessment (by

both government and
the private partner) of
likely interface issues
Continuous review and
monitoring and development of a communications strategy in respect
of delivery of the two
related services

Contract clause requiring a

performance bond and
specifying liquidated damages

Risk

cn
cn

Risk

Definition

Preferred Allocation

Rationale

Possible Mitigation
Strategies

Allocation Instrument

Industrial relations risk

Industrial relations

Risk of strikes or
industrial action
causing delay and
cost to the project

Private

Private partner has better information about and control

over the causes of industrial
action

Private partner (or its

subcontractors) manage
project delivery and
operations

Contract clause requirement

payment of liquidated
damages to government

Legislative an d government policy risk

Approvals

Risk that additional

approvals required
during the course of
the project cannot be
obtained

Private, except when:

Government has initiated
the change requiring
approval

Government is in better position to manage and mitigate

the occurrence of the risk

Private to
anticipate requirements

Contract clause to specify

private partner compensation
mechanism (for exam-ple,
liquidated damages)

Changes in law/
policy

Risk of a change in
law/policy of government only, which
could not be anticipated at contract
signing and which
has adverse capital
expenditure or
operating cost
consequences for
the private firm

Private, if and when:

Changes occur in general
law and are not project or
service specific
Government, if and when:
Changes are discriminatory
and directed specifically
and exclusively at the
project or the services

General changes in law

affect all businesses in the
country
Government is in better
position to influence
specific discriminatory tax
law changes affecting the
project

Private partner to incorporate in project due

diligencefinancial returns of the private partner should be sufficient
to withstand general
law/policy changes
Government to monitor
and limit (where possible)
changes which may have
these effects or consequence on the project
Government to require
the private firm to effect
the change in a way
that the financial effect
on government is minimized (for example, pay
on a progressive scale);
Government to pass
through to end users

Contract clause allowing

compensation to private in
a pre-specified
Contract clause to allow
pass through to end users

Definition

Risk
Regulation

Preferred Allocation

Rationale

Possible Mitigation
Strategies

Allocation Instrument

Risk that where there

is a statutory regulator
involved there are
pricing or other
changes imposed
on the private firm
which do not reflect
its investment
expectations

Private, except when:

Tariffs or payments are
pre-specified in the
contract

The private partner has the

ability to undertake its own
assessment of the regulatory
system

Private firm to assess

regulatory system and may
make appropriate
representations

Contract clause to specify

whether payment will be
subject to regulator or not,
and if not, specify mechanism
to set and adjust tariffs.

Risk that inability

to meet contracted
service delivery (pre
or post completion) is
caused by reason of
force majeure events

Private takes risk of loss or

damage to the asset and
loss of revenue when risk
is insurable (for example,
earthquake, floods, fire,
and drought)
Government takes some
risk of service discontinuity both as to contracted
service and core service
when risks are uninsurable
(i.e. terrorism acts, war,
civil unrest, etc.)

Private partner can buy

insurance from the
marketplace commercial
Government is better
positioned to manage
uninsurable risks

Private to purchase
insurance for insurable
risks
If uninsurable, private
firm may self-insure by
establishing reserve
funding;
If uninsurable government to establish contingency for alternate
service delivery

Contract clause to expressly define events that

will constitute acts of God
and political force majeure
events
Contract clause to relieve
private from consequences
of service discontinuity;
Contract clause to require
that if insurable, private
must ensure availability of insurance proceeds
towards asset repair and
service resumption and
government is to be given
the benefit of insurance for
service disruption costs

Private firm will take the

risk of loss of value on
termination

Private firm has more

knowledge of the underlying
causes of default and can
identify risk earlier than
government

Only serious breaches by

the private firm to lead
to termination
Private partner to be
given time and opportunity to remedy
defaults by the private
partner which may lead
to termination

Contract clause clearly

establishing specific
contract breaches leading
to termination
Contract clause to define
options for remediation of
default
If and when necessary,
contract clause to

Force majeure risk

Force
majeure risk

Asset ownership risk

Default and
termination

Risk of 'loss' of the

facility or other assets
upon the premature
termination of lease
or other project
contracts upon
breach by the private
firm and without
adequate payment

Risk

Definition

Preferred Allocation

Rationale

00
00

Residual value
on transfer to
government

Risk that on expiry or

earlier termination of
the services contract
the asset does not
have the value
originally estimated
by government at
which the private
partner agreed to
transfer it to government

Private

Private partner can incorporate lifecycle maintenance,

refurbishment, and performance requirements into
the design facility, and can
manage these process during
the term of the contract

Possible Mitigation
Strategies

Allocation Instrument

If termination occurs
pre- completion government may (but need not
to) make payment for
value in the project on a
cost to complete basis;
If termination occurs
post completion the
private partner may
receive fair market value
less all amounts due to
government
Government to require
step in rights to ensure
access and service
continuity until ownership/control issues are
resolved

define method to establish

compensation to private in
case of termination
(pre and post-completion)

Government to impose
on the private maintenance and refurbishment
obligations,
Government to ensure
an acceptable maintenance contractor is
responsible for the
work, commission
regular surveys and
inspections;
Government may require
private to establish a
dedicated sinking fund
to accumulate funds sufficient to bring the asset
to agreed condition and/
or (if required) obtain
performance bonds to
ensure the liability is
satisfied

Contract clause specifying

the conditions in which
assets are to be transferred
to the government at the
end of the term
Contract clauses stipulating
the performance indicators
and frequency of monitoring of these indicators
Contract clause requiring
the creation of a sinking
fund to cover the cost of
bringing the facility up to
the desired standard

6.3 Steps to Follow

Implementing agencies should follow the steps shown in Figure 6-3 to identify,
assess, and allocate project risks.
Figure 6.3: Steps for Allocating Risks

EIK

Allocate
Risks

Identify
Risks

Assess
Risks

Allocate
Risks

1101.-

Develop Risks
Mitigation
Strategies

Each of these steps is described in turn below. The end result of this process
should be a draft risk management report, following the structure outlined in
Table 6.4. This is similar in structure to the preferred risk allocation matrix
presented in Table 6.3, but includes project-specific informationin particular,
the severity and likelihood and therefore the priority attached to each risk.
Table 6.4: Risk Management Report Outline
Risk
(1)

Definition
(2)

Proposed
Allocation
(3)

Rationale
for
Allocation
(4)

Severity
of impact,
likelihood of
occurrence
and priority
(5)

Mitigation
Strategy
(6)

Allocation
Instrument
(7)

States the
proposed
allocation of
the risk as
one of three
choices:
(i) private
partner; (ii)
government;
and (iii)
shared

Describes
the basis or
justification
for the
proposed
allocation

States the
severity of
impact (as
insignificant
to extreme),
likelihood of
occurrence
(as rare
to almost
certain) and
priority (from
low to high)

Describes
measures
that and
could be
taken to
mitigate
or reduce
the risk
to either
the public
or private
partner.

Describes the
instrument
that could
be used to
reflect the
Government's
preferred risk
allocation
in the PPP
agreement

Risk Category
States the
riskin
order of
stated
detail
priority
within each
category

Defines
the risk
in more
detail

This draft risk management report should then be compared with the allocation
of functions and payment method described in Sections 4 and 5, and adjusted
if necessary. The final version of this risk management report should form part
of the project proposal documents.
Step 1: Identify Risks
The implementing agency would start by identifying the risks that should be
included in the risk management report. The generic risk allocation matrix
presented in subsection 6.2 (Table 6.3) can be used as a template to develop
a preliminary list of risks for the project in question. Agencies would then
convene a structured brainstorming session among experts in fields relevant to
79

the project, to produce a comprehensive list of major project risks that includes
a short and concise definition of each risk. This process is described in Box 6.4
below. The comprehensive risk list then forms the basis of the risk assessment
step.
Box 6.4: Structured Brainstorming Process
Structured brainstorming is a frequently used technique in risk
identification. It can be defined as a systematic process of liberally
generating a large volume of ideas from a diverse group of experts
by stimulating their individual creativity. The principle of structured
brainstorming is that a group of experts of different competences
and backgrounds will view the project from different perspectives and
therefore identify more, and possibly other, risks than individuals or a
more heterogeneous group.
Unlike unstructured brainstorming, where participants contribute ideas
as they occur to them, structured brainstorming provides specific rules
for participants to follow in order to make the generation of ideas more
systematic and to ensure even participation, regardless of personality
and/or ranking.
How to do it
The goal of structured brainstorming is to generate ideas. Before the
exercise commences, it is very important that participants understand
the importance of postponing judgments until after the brainstorming
session is completed.
Write the problem or topic on a blackboard or flipchart where all
participants can see it
Write all ideas on the board and do as little editing as possible
Number each idea for future reference
Solicit one idea from each person in sequence
Participants who don't have an idea at the moment may say "pass."
A complete round of passes ends the brainstorming session
The result of a brainstorming session is a list of ideas. Implementing
agencies can find additional guidance on how to conduct a structured
brainstorming session on these links:
http:/ /www.mitre.org/work/ sepo/toolkits /risk/procedures /brainstorming.html
http://www.siliconfareast.com/brainstortning.htm

80

The following internet sites provide references that can also be used to help
identify risks in infrastructure PPPs:
Concessions in general:
http://rru.worldbank.org/Documents/Toolkits/concessions_
fulltoolkit.pdf
Highways:
http://rru.worldbank.org/Documents/Toolkits/Highways/
Ports:
http://www.ppiaforg/documents/toolkits/Portoolkit/Toolkit/index.
html
Urban Buses:
http://www.ppiaforg/documents/toolkits/UrbanBusToolkit/assets/
home.html
Water:
http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTSDNETWORK/Resources/
Appr oachestoPrivateParticipationWaterServices.pdf
Waste Management:
http://rru.worldbank.org/Documents/Toolkits/waste_fulltoolkit.pdf
Step 2: Assess Risks

The implementing agency would then assess each identified risk, to understand:
The likelihood of occurrence and severity of the associated loss
The ability of each party to control, anticipate and respond to or absorb
the risk along with the possible risk mitigation strategies by which they
would do so.
At this stage, the likelihood of occurrence and severity of the associated loss of
each risk would be assessed in a qualitative way. The purpose of this assessment
is to prioritize effort in allocating risks and defining risk mitigation strategies.
The severity of the loss may also impact the parties' ability to absorb the risk.
A quantitative analysis of risk would require estimating the probability of loss,
the value of loss and hence the expected value of loss (probability times value).
A qualitative analysis mirrors this approach, by characterizing the likelihood of a
risk event occurring and the severity of the loss if the risk occurs. For example,
likelihood can be characterized in a simple way, such as: (i) almost certain; (ii)
likely; (iii) possible; (iv) unlikely; and (v) rare. Consequence can be characterized
as: (i) insignificant; (ii) minor; (iii) moderate; (iv) major; or (v) extreme. These
characterizations can then be combined, to define the overall level of priority of
the risk, as illustrated in Figure 6.4.
81

Figure 6.4: Risk Prioritization Matrix

SEVERITY OF IMPACT

Moderate

Major

Extreme

HIGH

VERY HIGH

VERY HIGH

PRIORITY

PRIORITY

PRIORITY

HIGH

VERY HIGH

PRIORITY

PRIORITY

Minor

MEDIUM-

MEDIUM-

HIGH

HIGH

PRIORITY

PRIORITY

MEDIUM-

MEDIUM-

MEDIUM-

LOW

HIGH

HIGH

PRIORITY

PRIORITY

PRIORITY

MEDIUM-

MEDIUM-

MEDIUM-

MEDIUM-

LOW

LOW

HIGH

HIGH

PRIORITY

PRIORITY

PRIORITY

PRIORITY

MEDIUM-

MEDIUM-

MEDIUM-

LOW

LOW

HIGH

HIGH

PRIORITY

PRIORITY

PRIORITY

PRIORITY

MEDIUM-

MEDIUM-

MEDIUM-

LOW

LOW

HIGH

PRIORITY

PRIORITY

PRIORITY

Insignificant

Almost

LIKELIHOOD OF OCCURRENCE

certain

Likely

Possible

Unlikely

Rare

LOW
PRIORITY

LOW

LOW

PRIORITY

PRIORITY

HIGH
PRIORITY

MEDIUM-

The implementing agency should also assess the ability of each party to control,
anticipate and respond to or absorb each risk, as well as the possible risk
mitigation strategies, by which this ability could be improved. Risk mitigation
strategies that are clearly not cost-benefit justified should be excluded, following
Principle 4 described in Section 6.2.
Risk assessment is typically carried out through a similar process to that
described above for identifying the risk. The list of risks identified under
step 1 can be used as a starting point, while the preferred risk allocation matrix
(Table 6-3) can also provide useful inputs. Brainstorming and consultations can
be structured around completing a project risk assessment table. This table can
then be used as the basis of the risk allocation step, and to complete the risk
allocation report (which will contain much of the same information). Table 6.5
provides an example outline of a risk assessment table.

82

Table 6.5: Risk Assessment Table Outline

Risk

Definition

Severity
of
Impact

Probability
of
Occurrence

Priority

Party best placed to:

Control

Anticipate
and
respond

Absorb

Possible
Mitigation

Strategies

Risk Category
Risk
Type

While the assessment of the likelihood and severity of risks at this stage is
qualitative, ultimately it is important for the government to quantify as far as
possible the risk to which it will be exposed through a PPP project. Quantitative
analysis of high- priority risks to be borne by the government will be an
additional step, once the proposed risk allocation is complete.
The following links provide additional information on approaches to assessing
PPP project risk:
The Victorian Managed Insurance Authority Guide for Developing and
Implementing your Risk Management Framework:
http://www.vmia.vic.gov.au/skillsEDIT/clientuploads/48/VMIA_
Ris10/020Managemene/020Guide_3/020Implementing%20e/020
risk%20managemen0/020framework.pdf
The report Feasibility Evaluation Model for Toll Highways, found on
the following link:
http://swutc.tamu.edu/publications/technicalreports/467502-2.pdf
Step 3: Allocate Risks
The implementing agency's next step would be to allocate each risk. Risks within
each overall category should be considered in order of their level of priority,
as designated during risk assessment (and documented in the risk assessment
table). This helps focus attention on appropriate allocation of the highestpriority risks.
Risks should be allocated according to the principles described in Section
6.2. Following the order of those principles, the implementing agency would
generally first allocate any risk that can reasonably be controlled by either party
(or both) to the party best able to control it. If a risk cannot be controlled directly,
it should generally be allocated the party best able to anticipate and respond to
it. Risks that cannot be controlled or responded to should be allocated to the
party best able to bear the risk. As also described in Section 6.2, these principles
may weigh against each otherdeciding on the overriding factor may require
83

judgment based on experience on the part of the implementing agency and its
advisors. The availability of possible risk mitigation strategies could affect the
relative ability and cost of parties to manage each risk.
The generic preferred risk allocation matrix and the project risk assessment table
together provide the basis for carrying out this allocation. In general, following
the generic preferred risk allocation should be consistent with the risk allocation
principles. However, project-specific characteristics captured in the project
risk assessment table may suggest deviating from the generic preferred risk
allocation.
The implementing agency should also identify the risk allocation instrument
that could be used to reflect the chosen risk allocation in the PPP agreement (for
example, contract clause, payment mechanism, guarantee, etc.). Again, this can
be informed by the preferred risk allocation matrix, backed up by the experience
of the structuring team and advisors.
As risks are allocated, the implementing agency can gradually complete a first
version of the draft risk management report (as outlined in Table 6.4), drawing
on the information in the project risk assessment, and capturing each risk
allocation decision. Particular care should be taken in describing the rationale for
allocating any risks that have not followed the generic preferred risk allocation.
Step 4: Develop Risk Mitigation Strategies
Once risks have been allocated, the risk allocation process and draft risk
management report are almost complete. The final step is to develop the relevant
risk mitigation strategies, given the proposed risk allocation.
In general, this means refining the possible risk mitigation strategies identified
under the risk assessment step. Some of these will no longer be relevant, if
the party for whom the possible strategy could have been an option has not
been allocated the associated risk. At this stage, particular emphasis should be
placed on how the implementing agency will mitigate risks it has been allocated.
Each possible risk mitigation strategy should be assessed as far as possible for
its expected costs and benefits. The implementing agency should also note
wherever their support would be needed to mitigate a risk that has been allocated
to the private party. For example, this could include ensuring the procurement
process puts enough emphasis on the private party's technical understanding of
the proposed project.
As the possible risk mitigation strategies are refined and developed, the
implementing agency can complete the final columns (6 and 7) of the draft risk
management report.
84

6.4 Example
This section presents examples of the four steps in the risk allocation process
applied to the mass rapid transit case study presented in Appendix A.2. In our
mass rapid transit case study, the MTA is interested in implementing the Silver
line project using a BOT-PPP for the provision of new rail infrastructure. Each
of the risk allocation steps is described below
Step 1: Identify Major Risks after conducting a structured brainstorming
exercise like the one described in Box 6.4 the structuring team identified all
major risks for the mass transit project, including those listed in the first column
of Table 6.6: permits and approvals, construction, inflation, and demand risks.
Step 2: Assess Risks the severity of impact and the probability of occurrence
of each risk was assessed, in order to attach a priority. The team also identified
the party that would be best able to control, respond to or absorb each risk, as
well as possible risk mitigation strategies. This risk assessment was documented
in the section of the risk assessment table shown in Table 6.6.
Step 3: Allocate Risks Based on their risk assessment, the team allocated the
risks as follows:
Risks associated with policies and permits approvals were allocated to
MTA, based on its better capacity to control those risks
Construction
risks were allocated to the private party, based on the

private party's greater experience and knowledge of construction

techniques and control over construction planning (the importance of
ensuring that the private party does indeed have the appropriate level of
experience was acknowledged)
Inflation risk generated some confusion the team thoroughly analyzed
historical inflation-related project problems on prior similar projects,
but concluded that neither the agency nor the private partner had much
ability to control or respond to it. However, MTA was considered best
placed to anticipate inflation, and had the best mitigation strategies
available, given its ability to pass inflation-related cost increases on to
usersthis was also consistent with the generic preferred risk allocation
matrix (Table 6.3)
Demand risk was allocated to MTA, based on its control of price and
of possible competing systems.

85

Table 6.6: Example Section of Risk Assessment Table Mass Transit Silver Line Project
Definition

Severity
of Impact

Probability
of
Occurrence

Priority

Minor

Unlikely

Major

Party best placed to:

Control

Anticipate
and respond

Medium-Low

MTA

MTA

Possible

MediumHigh

Private

Private

Major

Likely

High

None

MTA

Moderate

Possible

MediumHigh

MTA

MTA

Possible Mitigation Strategies

Absorb

Site risk
Risk that building permit
from local authorities is
delayed

Obtaining prior approval from relevant

local authorities [any party]

Design and construction risk

Risk that events occur
during construction which
prevent infrastructure
availability from being
delivered on time and on
cost

Undertaking detailed studies prior

to construction to obtain better
information on construction costs [any
party]
Ensuring competence of private party
in controlling risk of construction cost
overruns through rigorous procurement
process [MTA]

00

CN

Sponsor and financial risk

Risk that inflation
increases at a higher than
expected rate

MTA

Passing cost increases on to users

[MTA, since controls prices and receives
revenues]
Hedging against inflation rates [any
party]

Market risk
Risk that ridership demand
on the line is lower than
expected

Carrying out detailed demand studies to

improve estimates of expected demand
and make sure required system capacity
is commensurate [any party]

Once these risks had been allocated, the team used example contracts and drew
on their own experience to propose the risk allocation instrument that should
be used to accomplish the allocation. The risk allocation and the supporting
analysis were documented in the draft risk management report, as shown in
Table 6.7.
Step 4: Develop Risk Mitigation Strategies Having allocated the risks,
the team refined the possible strategies for mitigating the risks identified
during risk assessment. Since risks associated with permits and approvals
were allocated to the MTA, the MTA would be responsible for mitigating
the risk of delays by obtaining prior approvals from local authorities. To
mitigate construction-related risks, the MTA would incorporate strict
experience and competency requirements for investors in the procurement
process. The possible mitigation strategy of hedging against inflation increases
was rejected as unlikely to be cost-benefit justified. These mitigation strategies
were noted in column 6 of the risk management report, which was now complete.
Appendix Table A.2 presents a comprehensive risk management report for the
Silver Line Mass Rapid Transit project. Other tables in Appendix A present a set
of comprehensive risk management reports for additional infrastructure project
cases in different sectors. These four additional examples were completed using
the guidelines presented in this section and are the following:
Transport airport (Appendix Table A.1)
Bulk water supply (Appendix Table A.3)
IT and communications (Appendix Table A.4)
Solid waste collection and disposal (Appendix Table A.5)

87

Table 6.7: Example Section of Risk Management Report Mass Transit Silver Line Project
Risk I
(1)

Definition
(2)

Allocation
(3)

Rationale
(4)

Severity of impact, likelihood

of occurrence
and Priority
(5)

Mitigation Strategies
(6)

Allocation
Instrument
(7)

Risk that
building permit
from local
authorities is
delayed

MTA

MTA is best placed to

influence the decision
of other government
officials that issue
these permits and
approvals

Minor

MTA should obtain, prior to

bidding, building approval
in principle from local
authorities

Contract clause stipulating deadline by which

building approval is
granted and defining
remedies in favor of
private firm in case of
delay

MTA to incorporate strict

experience and competency requirements in the
procurement process

Contract clause
requiring performance
bond
Contract clause stipulating liquidated damages
Availability payment
upon delivery of
availability provides
an incentive for early
completion

Major

MTA to transfer part of it to

users by adjusting retail
rates by inflation

Likely

MTA to ensure its payments

do not overcompensate for
inflation and to avoid any
double payment for after
costs adjustments (for
example, changes in
exchange rate)

Contract clause
defining payment
adjustment
mechanisms

Site risk
Permits and
approvals

Unlikely
Medium-Low
Priority

Design and construction risk

Construction

00
00

Risk that events

occur during
con-struction
which prevent
infrastructure
availability
from being
delivered on
time and on
cost

Private, except
when:
The event is one
of force majeure
or government
intervention

Private partner has

more experience,
knowledge and
control over the variables that influence
construction cost and
control over construction process (i.e.
schedule, equipment,
materials and technology, etc.)

Major
Possible
Medium-High
Priority

Sponsor and financial risk

Inflation

Risk that inflation increases

at a higher than
expected rate

Shared
MTA to assume
part of it by
allowing total or
partial indexing
of availability
payment to
inflation

MTA has more experience and government

information regarding
the factors that
influence inflation

High Priority

Private to assume
remainder risk
(if any)
Market demand risk
Demand risk

Risk that ridership demand

on the line is
lower than

MTA

Private firm has no

influence or control of
ridership demand

Moderrate
Possible
Medium-High

MTA to carryout demand

studies to determine if
forecasted demand is
consistent with the
_, .. , .

Contract clause
stipulating fixed
payments for making
infrastructure available

Market Test

The transaction structure will have better chances of succeeding if it is a

commercially attractive investment opportunity. Many attempts to implement
PPP transactions have failed because, whilst being responsive to the interests
and objectives of the government, the transaction structure is not commercially
attractive.
To cover this issue, implementing agencies should engage with private firms that
may be interested in the transaction. The process that is involved in this dialogue
is presented in Figure 7.1.
Figure 7.1: Steps to Market Test Transaction

M arket
FLIII,a(1101

Prepare
Transaction
Teaser

Advertise
and Register
Investors

Market Test
Transaction
Structure

Market Test
Contract

The first step is to write a short (1 or 2 page) teaser that describes the basic
features of the project and of the transaction structure that results from the five
steps in the structuring process.
The implementing agency would place an advertisement in papers with
circulation in locations where target private firms are located, and in journals
that circulate among practitioners in the industry. The advertisement will ask
interested firms to register their interest with the implementing agency. This
registration is independent of the bidding process that will be followed to award
the PPP contract. This bidding process will need to follow all applicable laws
and regulations.
The implementing agency and its advisors will engage with prospective bidders
to explain in more detail the key features of the transaction and to request their
feedback on the proposed structure and indication of their preliminary interest
in the transaction.
Implementing agencies should require prospective bidders to involve prospective
lenders during these initial discussions. At this early stage in the process it is
unlikely that the prospective bidder will have a clear idea of which bank will be
providing debt to the project, but in most cases bidders will have relationships
with banks that they will consider as candidates for providing debt. It is therefore
reasonable to demand that bidders involve representatives from one or more
of these banks in the consultation about the project structure. Having lenders
involved from this early stage will reduce the risk that substantial changes are
89

needed to the contract during the period leading to financial closure. Banks will
usually provide debt in the form of a 'project finance' loan.
A more detailed discussion on project finance deals is presented in the box
below
Box 7.1: Project Finance Structures
Project finance is the financing of long-term infrastructure projects based
on a financial structure where debt and equity used to finance the project
are repaid with the cashflows of the project. Usually, a project financing
structure involves a number of equity investors, known as sponsors, as
well as a syndicate of banks that provide loans to the project. The diagram
below illustrates a simplified version of the typical structure of a project
finance deal.
Implementing Agency

BOT contract

Users

Price

Shareholders
Agreement

Special
Purpose
Company

Loan
Agreement

Sponsors

Lenders

EPC

O&M
Contract

Contract

Operating
Company

Construction
Company

The sponsors will usually create a special purpose company for the
development, construction and operation of the project. The shareholders
of this company are the sponsor or sponsors of the project, and their
percentage ownership in the company is proportional to the equity that
they invested in the company. The special purpose company shields other
assets owned by the sponsor from the detrimental effects of a project
failure. The special purpose company has no assets other than the project.
The company will have a Managing Director or Chief Executive and a
limited number of staff.
The special purpose company will be the legal counterpart to the BOT
contract signed with the implementation agency. This means that the
90

company is responsible for meeting all the obligations stipulated in the

contract. The company will normally enter into contracts with specialized
firms for construction, and operation and maintenance of the project. The
common practice is to have an Engineering, Procurement and Construction
(EPC) contract with a construction contractor. This EPC contract will
normally pass all construction risks to the contractorincluding risks of
cost over-runs or delays.
Operations and maintenance of the project are also usually outsourced to a
specialized firm through an Operations and Maintenance (O&M) contract.
This type of contract will generally transfer to the specialized firm all risks
related to operations and maintenance of the project.
If the project is expected to charge end-users for the services it provides
(for example, in the case of a toll road), the special purpose company will
collect payments from end-users and will use that revenue to cover its costs.
The company will raise the capital needed to develop and build the project
as a mixture of debt and equity. During the development phase it is
common that all capital contributions are made by sponsors in the form
of equity injections. When the project is fully developedmeaning that the
BOT, EPC and O&M contracts are executed and all permits securedthe
company will secure the capital needed to pay for the construction of the
project. Generally around 60 to 80 percent of this capital is financed with
`project finance loans' and the remaining amount with equity.
The loans are most commonly non-recourse loans, which are secured by
the project assets and paid entirely from project cash flow, rather than
from the general assets or creditworthiness of the project sponsors. The
financing is typically secured by all of the project assets, including the
revenue-producing contracts. Project lenders are given a lien on all of these
assets, and are able to assume control of a project if the project company
has difficulties complying with the loan terms.
This means that lenders need to carefully analyze and understand the
underlying project risks when deciding if they are going to lend and at what
terms. Their analysis will usually follow a similar process to that outlined
in section 6 of these Guidelines. They will start by identifying the risks
borne by the project companyusing a matrix similar to that presented in
Section 6.2.2 (Table 6.3). They will then identify which of the risks borne
by the project company have the highest expected lossthat is, highest
probability of occurring and highest value if it occurs. Risks like delay in
the construction of the project, construction cost over- runs, downturn in
91

demand, adverse price adjustments, and severe fluctuations in exchange rate

would generally be of particular importance. The lenders will review how
the project company is planning to manage these risks. For example, they
would want to know if construction risks are being adequately transferred
to the EPC contractor and if the contractor has the financial capacity to
bear this risk, and in particular to pay liquidated damages if they experience
delays.
By having the implementing agency follow a similar risk analysis process
to that used by lenders, and using similar resourcessuch as the sectorspecific risk allocation matricesit is likely that PPP projects will be
structured in a way that makes them responsive to the objectives of the
government, and at the same time attractive to sponsors and lenders. It
is possible however that sponsors and lenders, based on their analyses,
conclude that risks allocated to them are unacceptable. Whilst sponsors
and lenders could charge a premium on the capital that they provide to
cover their risk exposure, they might find it unattractive, in relation to other
options for investing their capital, to that level of risk in one project. This
type of views about the level of risk of the project will emerge during the
consultations with prospective bidder and lenders. In some cases it might
be necessary for the implementing agency to reconsider the allocation of
risk resulting from the application of Step 5 in the structuring process to
accommodate feedback received during these consultations.
Based on this feedback the implementing agency and its advisors will decide
whether and what components of the transaction structure to adjust. At this
point the implementing agency is ready to proceed to preparing the bidding
process, including drafting bidding documents and contracts.

92

8 Application of Guidelines to Unsolicited

Projects
Implementing and oversight agencies can also use these Guidelines to assess
if an unsolicited project has been well structure or not, or to identify the
key areas of the proposed structure that need to improve. The sections that
follow describe how each step of the structuring process can be applied to an
unsolicited project.

8.1 Step 1: Prepare and Plan Transaction

The objective of this step is to make sure that there is clarity on who will do
what during the transaction preparation and what are the actions that will take
the transaction from concept to closure. A key part of this step is to develop
and launch a consultation action plan. In the case of an unsolicited proposal,
the implementing agency would benefit from applying most of the sub-steps
described in the Guidelines. More specifically, the implementing agency should:
Assign an internal team to review the unsolicited proposal, negotiate
with the unsolicited proponent, request all the necessary approvals and
prepare and launch the Swiss Challenge
Retain specialized advisors that will support its work. This type of
specialized advice is crucial during the negotiations with the unsolicited
proponent
Have a clear plan for consulting with stakeholders. Parts of this
consultation should be done by the unsolicited proponent, particularly
the parts that relate to consulting with prospective users
Prepare a plan for taking the unsolicited proposal from the stage of
being reviewed and approved by the implementing agency, to the
stage in which the Swiss challenge has been completed and a contract
becomes effective

8.2 Step 2: Set Objectives and Constraints

This second step aims to set the objectives that the implementing agency is
seeking to achieve with a PPP arrangement and the constraints that exist for this
arrangement. These objectives and constraints will guide the decisions on how
to allocate functionsand risks among the implementing agency and the private
sponsor.
In the case of an unsolicited proposal, the implementing agency should carry
out this step in full as described in section 3 of these Guidelines.
93

8.3 Steps 3, 4 and 5: Allocate Functions, Set Payment Method and Allocate Risks
The objective of these steps is to determine the key terms of the PPP structure
that is, what functions will be transferred to the private partner, how would the
private partner be paid for performing these functions and how would the risks
associated with the project will be allocated between the private party and the
government. One of the key outcomes of these steps is a risk matrix similar to
that presented in Table 6.4.
The proposal submitted by the unsolicited proponent will have a set of key
terms implied in it. The implementing agency will want to verify if the terms of
the unsolicited proposal are consistent with those derived from applying Steps 3
to 5, or to understand what are the main differences, and if these differences are
justified or not. To this end, we suggest that implementing agencies carries out
in full steps 3 to 5 as described in these Guidelines and that they use the result
of this work to analyze the terms implied by the unsolicited proposal.

8.4 Step 6: Market Test

The objective of this step it to test with prospective bidders if the terms of
the unsolicited proposal are reasonable or if they need to be adjusted. The
implementing agency will greatly benefit from strong competition for this
contract. The chances of competition will increase if prospective challengers
are consulted before the implementing agency and the unsolicited proponent
reach final agreement on the terms of the contract.
To this end, implementing agencies should carry out in full step 6 in the
structuring process. This step could be carried out in parallel to Steps 3 to 5, but
will need to be completed after step 5 is completed.

94

Appendix A Case Studies

This appendix presents a short narrative with the basic information on the five
case studies that are used as examples at various parts of the guidelines. Each
of the examples also presents a risk allocation matrix completed following the
principles outlined in Section 6. The five case studies are the following:
Transport airport
Transport mass transit
Bulk water supply
IT and communications
Solid waste collection and disposal
A.1 Transport Airport
Project Description
The Civil Aviation Administration (CAA) of MyCountry is interested in
structuring a PPP arrangement for the MyBeach International Airport (BIA).
More specifically, the project will involve financing, upgrading, operating and
maintaining BIA's facilities to accommodate air traffic growth forecasts and
meet International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) standards.
The airport currently handles 353,000 passengers and 6,000 aircraft movements
per year. These figures could grow significantly over the next 10 years to about
700,000 passengers and over 8,500 aircraft movements per year. The estimated
investment required to meet this increase in demand and meet ICAO standards
includes:
Airport runway rehabilitation and expansion - $13.0 million
Passenger terminal rehabilitation and expansion - $7.0 million
New refrigerated cargo facilities construction - $7.0 million
The Project will be developed and procured following the solicited proposal
process prescribed under BOT Law and its Implementing Rules and Regulations
(IRR).
Project Rationale
MyCountry, an island nation in the South China Sea, is emerging from a major
financial crisis and now it seems to be on its way to economic recovery (4.40
percent GDP growth in 2003). As a result of economic growth and the growing
popularity of the country as tourism destination, air traffic is expected to
continue to grow significantly, particularly at BIA in the remote beach resort
island of MyBeach. However, the government has not been able to keep up
95

with the cost of funding the air infrastructure system, which is ageing and
soon will be in need of massive investment. Despite major financial difficulties,
the country has reached a comfortable level of political stability and is getting
the attention of foreign investors. The MyCapital international airport in
MyCountry's main island generates enough revenues for the government to
subsidize the ongoing operation of BIA and of other minor domestic airports
in the archipelago. However, this revenue is not sufficient to cover badly needed
capital investment throughout the airport system, and particularly at BIA, which
has seen international air traffic increase significantly in the last few years.
Despite the recent and expected future growth in air traffic, BIA revenues are
simply not expected to cover its operational costs.
Given the precarious situation of the overall airport system, BIA is not in a
position to capitalize on growth in tourism and opportunities to boost exports
of local produce via air cargo in coming years. For this reason the government is
evaluating various alternatives to correct the present situation and to be prepared
to face major challenges ahead.
Civil Aviation Administration (CAA)
MyCountry's civil air transport system is controlled and regulated by the CAA.
The CAA has been established as an independent agency that no longer is under
the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Transport (MoT). The director of the CAA
is appointed by the country's president with the consent of the legislative body
to serve for a 5-year period.
The CAA has a fairly simple structure. The agency is divided into six main
divisions: Administration and Personnel, Airports, Budgeting and Finance,
Operations, Safety & Security, and Foreign Affairs and Consumer Protection.
The director is supported by a Legal Division, which also provides legal advice
to all divisions.
CAA is an agency that depends entirely on the government allocation of funds
and does not have financial autonomy. All revenues collected by CAA (for
example, landing fees, rental payments for use of airport facilities by airlines,
cargo companies, and others, concessions revenues, etc.) are channeled to the
Treasury Department of the Ministry of Finance. Consequently, major financial
constraints that affect the government trickle down to the CAA.
Regulatory Framework
The government has established that under a concession agreement, the
regulatory oversight would remain the government's responsibility. However,
it is understood that the concessionaire will be able to retain advisory status
96

concerning policy formulation directly affecting airport operations. The

concessionaire would be entitled to receive two different revenue streams:
Fixed revenue an availability payment paid by CAA upon delivery of
availability of all improvements.
Variable revenue from:
Airside charges (for example, aircraft landing fees, passenger airport
fees, fuel sales) which would be set by the concessionaire, but in line
with the regional pricing mandate (agreement signed by MyCountry
with neighboring countries)
Landside charges (for example, rental of airline offices and
counters, rental of commercial space, parking) would be negotiated by
concessionaire with tenants (airlines, cargo operators, and businesses).
The concession agreement would confer special rights to the government, such
as approval rights for all major investments considered by the concessionaire,
that may affect the provision of air operations, particularly navigation services,
security and telecommunications.

97

Table A.1: Preliminary Risk Allocation Matrix - Airport Project

Risk
(1)

Definition
(2)

Allocation
(3)

Rationale
(4)

Severity of impact,
likelihood of occurrence and Priority
(5)

Mitigation Strategies
(6)

Allocation Instrument
(7)

Careful preparation and

management of the
procurement process

Since there is no agreement

yet signed with any other
party, there is no specific alinstrument, but the
lack of recourse to any sort
of compensation.

Pre-contract risk
Existing
structure
(refurbishment/
extensions)

00

00

Risk that the procurement process will

experience any of the
following:
(a) failure to attract
sufficient qualified bidders and/or responsive
offers; or (b) prolonged
and expensive negotiabons; or (c)collapse of
negotiations

Government

Risk that existing

runway base and subbase are inadequate
to withstand increased
traffic and require
re-construction (as opposed to rehab.)

Private

Risk that area where

runway expansion is
to take place present
significantly different
(weaker) geological
conditions than terrain
around existing runway

Private

Government does not

have a partner yet at
this stage, so it has
no option but to bear
this risk.

Ensure that the agency's

procurement team
is experienced and
competent
Establish a procurement
schedule commensurate
with project complexity

Site risk
Existing
structure (refurbishment/
extensions)

Site
Conditions

Private sector can

manage cost-effectively
if proper due diligence
of existing structure is
conducted.

CAA to commission expert testing of

pavement structure
prior to procurement
initiation.

Contract clause requiring

private partner to provide
performance bond

CAA to give private firms

enough time to study
own site and construction plans
Site study effort is
moderate (runway expansion no more than 1
km long) and cost is not
prohibitive for bidders

Private partner to rely

on expert testing and
due diligence
CM to give private firm
enough time to conduct
own site studies

Contract clause requiring

private partner to provide
performance bond

Risk
(1)

Allocation
(3)

Definition
(2)

Risk that construction

license for runway
expansion may be delayed by a municipality
whose mayor opposes
the project

Government

Environmental liabilities
created during operation

Risk that aviation fuel

storage tanks corrode
and spill, resulting in
significant environmental liabilities

Private

Cultural
heritage

Risk that an archaeological discovery is

made in area where
runway is to be
expanded

Government

Permits and
approvals

Rationale
(4)

Severity of impact,
likelihood of occurrence and Priority
(5)

Mitigation Strategies
(6)

Allocation Instrument
(7)

CAA to actively pursue

negotiations with
municipality
stress the benefits
of the project to the
population

Contract clause stipulating

schedule for CM to obtain
license and defining liquidated damages payable to
private partner in case of
delays

Private partner is
able to manage the
use, maintenance and
refurbishment of the
asset according to the
approved environmental management plan

During procurement
private partner to
demonstrate financial
and technical capacity
or support to deliver
the site in acceptable
condition at the end of
the contract

Contract clause defining

what constitutes environmental liabiity and the
mechanism to estimate the
private partner's liability and
pursue payment

CAA has a better understanding of procedures,

and is in best position
to manage risk

CM to research
cadastral records and
obtain expert advice
prior to proposal submission by bidders

Contract clause defining

risk and stipulating site
availability schedule and
liquidated damages payable
by CAA in case of delays

Private partner has

more experience,
knowledge and control
over the variables that
determine the quality
of the design.

Incorporate strict experience and competency

requirements in the
procurement process

Contract clause defining

performance standards and
periodic monitoring by CM,
as well as penalties for not
meeting standards

Permits and approvals

may not be obtained
prior to proposals due
date
CM is better informed
and positioned to influence the municipality

Design, construction & commissioning risk

Design

Risk that the design

of the new passenger
terminal facility layout
and baggage handling
equipment do not
meet international
level of service (IATA)
and security standards

Private - except
where an express
government
mandated change
has caused the
design defect

Private partner may

transfer risk to builder/
architects and other
subcontractors while
maintaining primary
liability

Contract clause requiring

performance bond
Contract clause stipulating
liquidated damages payable
to CAA
Contract clause to stipulate
government compensation
for CM-originated change

Allocation

Severity of impact,
likelihood of occurrence and Priority

Mitigation Strategies
(6)

Allocation Instrument

Risk
(1)

Definition
(2)

Construction

Risk that events occur

during construction
which prevent the airport new terminals and
runway being delivered
on time and on cost

Private, except
when: The
event is one of
force majeure
or government
intervention

Private partner has

more experience,
knowledge and control
over the variables that
influence construction
cost and control over
construction process
(i.e. schedule, equipment, materials and
technology, etc.)

CAA to incorporate strict

experience and cornpetency requirements
in the procurement
process

Risk that either the

physical or the operatonal commissioning
tests for the new
refrigerated terminal
and the new passenger
terminal baggage
handling equipment
cannot be successfully
completed

Private
although CAA
will assume an
obligation to
cooperate and
facilitate prompt
public sector
attendance on
commissioning
tests

Private partner is in
control of the design
and construction
process and its inputs,
and therefore better
positioned to manage
this risk

Incorporate strict experience and competency

requirements in the
procurement process

Contract clause
requiring a performance
bond

Private

Private partner in
control of selecting and
arranging long- term
financing

Interest rate hedging instruments (for example,

interest rate swap from
IFC)

Contract clause holding

government harmless

(3)

Rationale
(4)

(7)

(5)

Commissioning

Contract clause requiring

performance bond
Contract clause stipulating
liquidated damages
Contract clause providing
partial cost overrun guarantee for complex structures

Contract clause stipulating

liquidated damages (until
all physical and operational
commissioning tests passed)

Sponsor and financial risk

Interest rates
post-completion

Risk that after completion interest rates may

move adversely

Arrange financing using

a mix of foreign and
local currency
Exchange rate

Risk that during operation, exchange rates

may move adversely,
affecting the private
partner's ability to

Shared
CAA to assume
part of it by
allowing

Private partner is in
control of selecting
and arranging local and
foreign currency mix for
long-term financing

Private to partially mittgate by financing part

of the project in local
currency

Contract clause requiring

establishment of a Foreign
Exchange Liquidity
Facility Fee adjustment
contract clause

Risk
(1)

Definition
(2)

Allocation
(3)

service foreign denominated debt and obtain

its expected profit

total or partial
indexing of aircraft landing
fees and
passenger
terminal fees
to exchange
rate
Private to
assume
remainderpossible pass
- through to
terminal
tenants

Rationale
(4)

Private can negotiate

commercially with
terminal tenants
Government has more
experience and inorf
mation regarding the
factors that infl
fluence
exchange rates

Severity of impact,
likelihood of occurrence and Priority
(5)

Mitigation Strategies
(6)

Allocation Instrument
(7)

Private to establish
Foreign Exchange
Liquidity Facility to cover
part of the potential
mismatch between
project's local currency
revenues and foreign
currency debt
Government to transfer
part of it to users by
allowing total or partial
indexing of payments to
exchange rate

Currency
convertibility and profit
repatriation

Risk that local currency

cannot be converted
into foreign currency
as a result of government restrictions

Government

Government has more

experience and information regarding the
factors that influence
currency convertibility

Purchase partial risk

guarantee from an
International Financing
Institution

Contract clause stipulating

that private partner can
benefit from the guarantee
to compensate for losses
related to currency convertibility and repatriation of
profits

Inflation

Risk that value of availability payment, landing fees and passenger

terminal fees received
during the term is
eroded by inflation

Shared

Government has more

experience and information regarding the
factors that influence
inflation

CAA to transfer part of

it to users by allowing
total or partial indexing
of payments to inflation
rate

Contract clause defining

payment adjustment
mechanisms

Private has some room

to pass through some
of the risk to terminal
commercial users

CAA to ensure its

payments do not
overcompensate for
inflation and to avoid
any double payment for
after costs adjustments
(for example, changes in
exchange rate)

CAA to assume
part of it by
inflation
Private to
assume remainder risk
through the
methodology
adopted to
maintain value

Risk
(1)

Definition
(2)

Allocation
(3)

Rationale
(4)

Severity of impact,
likelihood of occurrence and Priority
(5)

Mitigation Strategies
(6)

Allocation Instrument
(7)

Financing
unavailable

Risk that when debt

and/or equity is
required by the private
firm for the project it
is not available then
and in the amounts
and on the conditions
anticipated

Private

Private partner is responsible for arranging

finance

Government requires
all bids to have fully
documented financial
commitments with minimal and easily achievable conditionality

Contract clause
requiring firm letters of
credit from reputable
financial institutions

Sponsor risk

Risk that financial demands on the private

partner exceed its
financial capacity causing corporate failure

Government

If risk materializes,
there is no private
partner to transfer the
risk to

Ensure project is financially remote from external financial liabilities

Contract clause requiring a

performance bond and
letters of credit

Ensure adequacy of
finances under loan
facilities or sponsor
commitments supported
by performance bond

Contract clause requiring

minimum liquidity and debt
ratios

Ensure adequacy
finances through the
use of non financial
evaluation criteria and
due diligence on private
partner
Tax changes

Risk that before or

after completion the
tax imposed on the
private firm, its assets
or on theproject, will
change

Private, if and
when:
Tax increases
or new taxes
arising from
general
changes in tax
law
Government,
if and when:

General changes in tax

law affect all businesses
in the country
CAA is in better positon to influence specific discriminatory tax
law changes affecting
the project

Private partner to
incorporate in project
due diligence - financial
returns of the private
partner should be sufficient to withstand
general tax law changes

Contract clause giving CAA

step-in rights in case of
bankruptcy of private firm

Contract clause providing

compensation terms for
discriminatory changes in
tax law
Contract clause providing a
buy-out (put) option or terurination with compensation
for private partner when no
other compensation mechanism is available

Risk
(1)

Definition
(2)

Allocation (3)

Rationale
(4)

Severity of impact,
likelihood of occurrence and Priority
(5)

Mitigation Strategies
(6)

Allocation Instrument
(7)

Tax increases
or new taxes
arising from
discriminatory changes
in tax law (for
example, new
tax on airport
operations)

Operating risk
Maintenance
and Refurbishment

Risk that design and/or

construction quality is
inadequate resulting in
higher than anticipated
maintenance and
refurbishment costs

Private

Private partner is in
control of design and
construction processes

Private firm to manage

through long term subcontracts with suitably
qualified and resourced
sub-contractors

Contract clause imposing

penalties (and possible
termination) for not meeting
specific and well defined
performance, level of
service, and quality
specifications
Contract clause requiring
performance bond

Operator
failure

Risk that the aviation

fuel supplier may fail
financially or may fail
to provide contracted
services to specificalion (leading to service
unavailability and a
need for alternate
delivery arrangements
with corresponding
cost consequences)

Private, except
when:
Fuel supply
or availability
of fuel in the
country is controlled by the
government

Private partner is fully

and primarily liable
for all obligations to
government
ff
I uel supply is
controlled by the
government, CAA is
better positioned to
manage risk

CAA to carry out due

diligence on principal
subcontractors for
probity and financial
capacity and commission a legal review of
the major subcontracts

Contract clause imposing

penalties (and possible
termination) for not meeting
aviation fuel quality and
availability specifications
Contract clause requiring
performance bond
Contract clause stipulating
that in case of failure the
private partner may replace
the supplier or government
may require it

Risk
(1)

Definition
(2)

Allocation
(3)

Rationale
(4)

Severity of impact,
likelihood of occurrence and Priority
(5)

Mitigation Strategies
(6)

Allocation Instrument
(7)

Contract clause stipulating

that CM is to provide a fixed
availability payment

Market demand
Demand risk

User payment
avoidance

Risk that operating

revenues falls below
forecast as a result of
decrease in passenger
or cargo traffic volume
attributable to an economic downturn, tariff
increases or change in
consumer habits

Shared through
a revenue mix
of availability
payments and
traffic-derived
revenue

Recognizing that airport

landside and airside revenues are not enough
to cover operational
costs (and much less
capital costs), the availability payment partially
shields the private partner from this risk.

CAA and private to perform independent market demand analyses

Risk of a portion of
users (airlines, passengers, and other
tenants) not paying
or evading payment,
leading to a shortfall in
cash flows

Private

Private sector has the

ability to control and
refuse service to nonpaying users

Private partner to agree

with airlines to have
passenger fees collected
at the time of ticket
purchase.

Contract clause giving the

ability to private partner to
stop service to non-paying
customers and stipulating
the mechanisms available to
collect payment.

Government

CAA's Operations
Division is in control
of national air traffic
control

Government to set up a
sinking fund to be used
to maintain and update
the national air traffic
control system

Contract clause specifying

mechanisms to compensate private (for example,
liquidated damages) for
temporary disruptions and
for long term reductions
in air traffic resulting from
equipment obsolescence.

Government

Competition is government- sponsored and

subsidized

CAA to conduct thorough network planning

when developing project
concept
Private firm to review
likely competition for
service and barriers

Contract clause to provide

private partner with noncompete protections, assurances of international air
traffic rights, and compensation mechanisms

CAA to require bidders

to demonstrate robust
financial structure and
financier support

Network and interface risk

Withdrawal
of support
network

Risk that the CAA's national air traffic control

system breaks down
Risk that the CAA's national air traffic control
system becomes obsolete and airlines start
avoiding MyCountry as
a destination

Changes in
competitive
network

Risk that the government removes the

designation of BIA as
an international airport
to favor the MyCapital
airport as MyCountry's
only international

CAA is in a position to
influence or prevent
the materialization
of risk

Risk
(1)

Definition
(2)

Allocation
(3)

Rationale
(4)

Mitigation Strategies
(6)

Allocation Instrument
(7)

to entry prior to enter

agreement

airport, depriving BIA

of high paying international aircraft and
passengers.

Interface (1)

Severity of impact,
likelihood of occurrence and Priority
(5)

Private partner to seek

compensation against
change which unfairly
discriminates against
the project

Government
Risk that airport competitiveness for cargo
traffic (and demand)
is affected by the inability of Immigration
Services and National
Customs Administration to sufficiently staff
inspection facilities,
resulting in long delays
for passenger and
goods clearance.

Government manages
Immigration Services
and Customs Administration, activities,
putting CAA in a much
better position to manage the risk

Upfront assessrrient
(by CM, Immigration
Services , Customs
Administration and
private partner) of likely
interface issues with
customs agency
Continuous review and
monitoring and development of a communications strategy regarding
the operations of CM,
Customs and private
partner

Contract clause to specify

the circumstances that
constitute risk and merit
compensation (for example,
staffing levels, clearance
time)
Contract clause defining
compensation mechanism
for private partner

Industrial relations risk

Industrial
relations

Risk of a strike by airport or airline staff

Private, if airport
or airline staff

Risk of a strike by air

traffic controllers

Government, if
air traffic controllers

Private partner has

better information
about and control over
the causes of airport or
airline strike
CM has better information about, and control over, the causes of
air traffic control staff

Private partner (or its

sub-contractors) manage project delivery and
operations

Contract clause defining

circumstances and requiring
payment of liquidated
damages to CM

CM manage air traffic

control

Contract clause defining

circumstances and requiring
payment of liquidated
damages to private partner

Risk
(1)

Definition
(2)

Allocation
(3)

Rationale
(4)

Severity of impact,
likelihood of occurrence and Priority
(5)

Mitigation Strategies
(6)

Allocation Instrument
(7)

Legislative and government policy risk

Changes in
law/policy

Risk of a change in law/

policy of government
(after the contract has
been signed), requiring
new, highly sophisticated and expensive,
security equipment to
be deployed at airports

Government

Government has more

information about
the likelihood and
consequences of such
a change

Government to monitor
and limit (where possible) changes which
may have these effects
or consequence on the
project

Contract clause allowing

compensation to priva..e
in a pre-specified manner
or requiring CAA to pay for
such changes

Regulation

Risk that Regulatory

Commission, as a
result of a regional
pricing mandate
change, imposes a
decrease in BIA's
airside fees that
significantly affects the
financial returns to the
private partner

Private

The private partner has

the ability to undertake
its own assessment of
the regulatory system
and the regional pricing
policies and history

Private partner to assess regulatory system

and make appropriate
representations

Contract clause specifying

that tariffs are subject to
regulatory changes in
accordance with the
regional mandate and the
Regulatory Commission.

Private to buy
insurance and
take risk
of loss or damage
to the asset and
loss of revenue
(insurable risks)

Private partner can

buy insurance from the
marketplace

Private to purchase
insurance for insurable
risks

Force majeure risk

Force
majeure

Risk that runway suffers structural damage

as a result of an earthquake, stopping all air
traffic for days

Contract clauses to:

Expressly define events that
will constitute acts of God
and political force majeure
events
Relieve private from
consequences of service
discontinuity;
Require that if insurable,
private must ensure availability of insurance proceeds
towards asset repair and
service resumption and CAA
is to be given the benefit
of insurance for service
disruption costs

Risk
(1)

Definition
(2)

Allocation
(3)

Rationale
(4)

Risk of private partner

going bankrupt and
stopping work in the
facility prior to completion, to a point that the
contract is terminated

Private partner
to take the risk of
loss of value on
termination

Private partner has

more knowledge of the
underlying causes of
default and can identify
risk earlier than government

Severity of impact,
likelihood of occurrence and Priority
(5)

Mitigation Strategies
(6)

Allocation Instrument
(7)

Only serious breaches

by the private partner to
lead to termination

Contract clause clearly

establishing specific contract
breaches leading to terminaton

Asset ownership risk

Default and
termination

1-A
0
1

Private partner to be
given time and opportunity to remedy
defaults by the private
partner which may lead
to termination
CAA to require step in
rights to ensure access
and service continuity
until ownership/control
issues are resolved

Contract clause to define

options for remediation of
default

A.2 Transport Mass Transit

Project Description
The Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) of the City of MyCapital
is interested in implementing a new light rail line along a 17 km stretch of one
of MyCapital's busiest thoroughfares. The new line is also known as the Silver
Line and will be located in MyCity's densely built west side. MTA is interested
in implementing the Silver Line project using a PPP for the provision of
infrastructure only, since it is already leasing rolling stock for the rest of the
system. Hence, the Silver Line light rail PPP project will involve the financing,
designing, constructing, and maintaining of the new rail line over a 20 year
period.
The line is expected to serve a demand of about 300,000 passengers per day
(ppd) at start-up and this demand is expected to reach 500,000 ppd within
10 years and stabilize at 600,000 ppd by year 15 and through the end of the
concession period. The Silver Line is also expected to significantly relieve traffic
congestion on the road corridor, and consequently reduce average travel time
for transit users by 30 percent.
The scope of the infrastructure investment required includes:
Construction of 17 km of elevated double track (including track, power,
electrical/mechanical systems, and signaling & communications)$600.0 million
Construction of two terminals, 10 intermediate stations, one depot
and other related maintenance and operation facilities (including land)$350.0 million.
The scope of services to be provided by the private partner include:
Design and development
Construction, test, integration and commissioning, and safety
Maintenance and renewals
The MTA will be responsible for managing key project interfaces, including:
Physical and functional interfaces: civil works, existing stations and
terminals on other lines, control center
Operational: central control, timetabling, and safety
The private partner would be compensated through availability payments that
will be initiated only after availability is delivered, providing an incentive to
open the line as fast as possible. Payments are to be adjusted on the basis of
an agreed upon definition of availability that allows for facility maintenance
and rehabilitation. MTA to absorb demand risk with a commitment to pay for
108

infrastructure renewal costs above specified tonnages (i.e. traffic exceeding

forecast, accelerating wear and tear of facility).
The Project will be developed and procured following the solicited proposal
process prescribed under the BOT Law and its Implementing Rules and
Regulations (IRR).
Project Rationale
As a result of a booming economy, and as many capitals in the developing world,
MyCapital has experienced an exponential population growth. The government
has not been able to keep up with the cost of funding urban infrastructure
and the provision of transit services. The lack of infrastructure investment,
coupled with the ever increasing motorization of the population, has resulted
in a serious congestion and air pollution problem. The average commute for
workers in the services sector, MyCity's most important economic engine, has
increased from 30 minutes to over two hours in the last seven years.
The MTA is responsible for managing a light rail transit system consisting
of 4 lines with a total length of 50 km. The system has been operating with
relative efficiency for about 15 years, as MTA has been able to cover the cost
of maintaining, replacing and adding rolling stock through a combination of
fare collection revenue and an annual allocation from the national budget that is
calculated based on the number of passengers moved per year. However, under
this funding arrangement MTA has not been able to fund the up-front cost of
the expansion of the infrastructure network.
Besides being one of MyCity's busiest thoroughfares, the corridor where the
Silver Line is to be located is one of the newest, and has a wide median and
enough right-of-way to accommodate the proposed elevated double track. The
proposed Silver Line corridor is currently served by an assortment of unregulated
old buses, vans, and informal taxi providers. This arrangement worked relatively
efficiently when traffic volumes on the corridor were not substantial. However,
unregulated providers currently "compete" against each other for passengers
on the street, resulting in an inefficient, unsafe, and highly polluting operation.
The corridor has also been the preferred location in MyCity (and possibly in the
region) for call centers. However, if a more sustainable transportation system
is not implemented on this important corridor, the status of MyCity as the call
center location of choice will likely be severely hampered.
Metropolitan Transportation Authority
MyCity's public transport system is regulated by the MTA. The MTA is an
autonomous municipal agency, with its own independent budget, funded
109

through a combination of licensing fees, fare box revenue collection, and a

direct allocation of transit operations funds from the national budget. The MTA
regulates the licensing of private taxis and bus routes operating in the city, and
has the right to confiscate vehicles of unlicensed public transportation service
providers. However, given the severe limitations that MTA faces in expanding
transportation infrastructure and services, it has rarely penalized informal or
unlicensed transportation service operations. The MTA also operates the city's
light rail network and a limited publicly-owned bus system. The director of
the MTA is appointed by the Mayor of MyCity's with the consent of the City
Council to serve for a 3-year period.
The MTA has a fairly simple structure. The agency is divided into seven main
divisions: Administration and Personnel; Budgeting and Finance; Legal; Planning;
Light Rail Operations and Maintenance; Bus System Operations and Maintenance;
and Licensing.
Regulatory Framework
The MTA is responsible for issuing taxi and bus service licenses, regulating transit
and taxi fares, and major bus routes. However, the Silver Line infrastructure
concessionaire is to be insulated from fare policy as its compensation will be
through an agreed-upon availability payment. In case of traffic exceeding the
forecast (as measured by tonnage per kilometer), MTA is to provide additional
compensation for increased maintenance and rehabilitation costs (as measured
by an agreed upon formula).

110

Table A.2: Preliminary Risk Allocation Matrix - Mass Transit Project

Rationale
(4)

Severity of
impact, likelihood
of occurrence and
Priority
(5)

Mitigation Strategies
(6)

Allocation
Instrument
(7)

Private partner to rely on

expert testing and due
diligence

Contract clause requiring

private partner to provide
performance bond to cover delay in constructions
milestones or commercial
operations date

Definition
(2)

Allocation
(3)

Risk that area where

the elevated track
foundation and
stations will be
built to support the
structure, presents
significantly different
(weaker) geological conditions than
expected during
feasibility stage

Private

Permits and
approvals

Risk that building

permit from local
authorities is delayed

MTA

MTA is best placed to

influence the decision
of other government
officials that issue these
permits and approvals

MTA should obtain, prior

to bidding, building approval in principle from
local authorities

Contract clause stipulating

deadline by which building
approval is granted and
defining remedies in favor
of private firm in case of
delay

Environmental liabilities
created during operation

Risk of chemical spills

in depot maintenance area.

MTA

MTA will be responsible

for rolling stock maintenance

Ensure that MTA operations and maintenance

staff are experienced
and/or receive adequate
training

Contract clause defining

what constitutes environmental liability and who
is responsible for each
liability identified.

Private partner has more

experience, knowledge
and control over the variables that determine the
quality of the design

Incorporate strict experience and competency

requirements in the
procurement process

Contract clause defining

performance standards
and periodic monitoring by
MTA, as well as penalties
for not meeting standards

Risk
(1)

Pre-contract risk
Site
conditions

The size of the area

where the foundation
will be located is relatively small, and located
on the median of an
existing road, for which
geotechnical studies
already exist.

MTA to give private firm

enough time to conduct
own site studies during
bidding stage

Site study effort is

moderate; its cost will
likely to be small

Availability payment upon

delivery of infrastructure
provides an incentive for
early completion

Design, construction & commissioning risk

Design

Risk that the design

of the infrastructure
(track, electrical/
mechanical,
communications) do
not meet technical

Private except
where an express
government
mandated change
has caused the
design defect

Risk
(1)

Definition
(2)

Allocation
(3)

Rationale
(4)

specifications needed
for the system to
operate and integrate
with existing lines.

Severity of
impact, likelihood
of occurrence and
Priority
(5)

Mitigation Strategies
(6)

Allocation
Instrument
(7)

Private partner may

transfer risk to builder/
engineers and other
subcontractors while
maintaining primary
liability

Contract clause
requiring performance
bond Contract clause
stipulating liquidated
damages payable to MTA
Contract clause to
stipulate government
compensation for MTAoriginated change

Construction

Risk that events

occur during
construction which
prevent infrastructure availability from
being delivered on
time and on cost

Private, except
when:
The event is one
of force majeure
or government
intervention

Private partner has more

experience, knowledge
and control over the
variables that influence
construction cost and
control over construction
process (i.e. schedule,
equipment, materials
and technology, etc.)

MTA to incorporate strict

experience and competency requirements in the
procurement process

Contract clause requiring

performance bond
Contract clause stipulating
liquidated damages
Availability of payment
upon delivery of infrastructure provides an incentive
for early completion

Commissioning

Risk that either

the physical or the
operational cornmissioning tests for
the infrastructure
and systems cannot
be successfully
completed

Private, except
when:
When failure
is attributed to
deficiencies in
MTA's rolling stock
operation

Private partner is in
control of the design and
construction process and
its inputs, and therefore
better positioned to
manage this risk

Incorporate strict experience and competency

requirements in the
procurement process

Contract clause requiring

performance bond
Contract clause stipulating
liquidated damages
(until all physical and
operational commissioning
tests passed)
Availability of payment
upon delivery of infrastructure provides an incentive
for early completion

Sponsor and financial risk

Interest
rates postcompletion

Risk that after completion interest rates may

move adversely

Private

Private partner in
control of selecting and
arranging long- term
financing

Interest rate hedging

instruments (for example,
interest rate swap from IFC
Arrange financing using
a mix of foreign and local
currency

Contract clause holding

government harmless

Risk
(1)

Definition
(2)

Allocation
(3)

Exchange rate

Risk that exchange

rates move adversely,
affecting the private
partner's ability to
service foreign denominated debt and
obtain its expected
return on capital

Shared
MTA to assume
part of it by
allowing total or
partial indexing
of availability
payment to
exchange rate
Private to
assume
remainder

Currency
convertibility
and profit
repatriation

Risk that local

currency cannot
be converted into
foreign currency as a
result of government
restrictions

Government

Inflation

Risk that inflation

increases at a higher
than expected rate

Shared
MTA to assume
part of it by
allowing total or
partial indexing
of availability payment to
inflation
Private to assume remainder
risk (if any)

Mitigation Strategies
(6)

Allocation
Instrument
(7)

Private to partially
mitigate by financing part
of the project in local
currency
Private to establish Foreign Exchange Liquidity
Facility to cover part of
the potential mismatch
between project's local
currency revenues and
foreign currency debt
Government to transfer
part of it to users by
allowing total or partial
indexing of payments to
exchange rate

Contract clause requiring

establishment of a Foreign
Exchange Liquidity Facility

Government has more

experience and informabon regarding the factors
that influence currency
convertibility

Purchase partial risk

guarantee from an
International Financing
Institution

Contract clause stipulating

that private partner can
benefit from the guarantee
to compensate for losses
related to currency convertibility and repatriation
of profits

Government has more

experience and informalion regarding the factors
that influence inflation

MTA to transfer part of

it to users by adjusting
retail rates by inflation
MTA to ensure its payments do not overcompensate for inflation and
to avoid any double payment for after costs adjustments (for example,
changes in exchange rate)

Contract clause defining

payment adjustment
mechanisms

Rationale
(4)

Private partner is in
control of selecting
and arranging local and
foreign currency mix for
long-term financing
Government has more
experience and informaon regarding the factors
lion
that influence exchange
rates

Severity of
impact, likelihood
of occurrence and
Priority
(5)

Foreign exchange adjustment to rates in contract

clause

Risk
(1)

Definition
(2)

Allocation
(3)

Rationale
(4)

Severity of
impact, likelihood
of occurrence and
Priority
(5)

Mitigation Strategies
(6)

Allocation
Instrument
(7)

Financing
unavailable

Risk that when debt

and/or equity is required by the private
firm for the project it
is not available then
and in the amounts
and on the conditions
anticipated

Private

Private partner is
responsible for arranging
finance

Government requires
all bids to have fully
documented financial
commitments with minimal and easily achievable
conditionality

Contract clause requiring

firm letters of credit from
reputable financial institutions

Sponsor risk

Risk that financial

demands on the
private firm exceed
its financial capacity
causing bankruptcy

Government

If risk materializes, there

is no private firm to
transfer the risk to

Verify financial strength

and track record of shareholders of private firm
During bidding stage,
reject those with a weak
financial profile
Required periodic financial reporting by private
firm

Contract clause requiring

a performance bond and
letters of credit
Contract clause giving MTA
step-in rights in case of
bankruptcy of private firm

Tax changes

Risk that before or

after completion
the tax rate on the
private firm, its
assets or on the
project, will change

Government

Private firm has no

influence over change in
tax law

Seek guarantee from

national government for
changes in law

Contract clause providing

compensation terms for
changes in tax law
Contract clause providing
a buy-out (put) option
or termination with
compensation for private
partner when no other
compensation mechanism
is available
Performance undertaking
from national government
covering termination
payment due to change in
tax law

Risk
(1)

Definition
(2)

Allocation
(3)

Rationale
(4)

Severity of
impact, likelihood
of occurrence and
Priority
(5)

Mitigation Strategies
(6)

Allocation
Instrument
(7)

Operating risk
Maintenance
and Refurbishment

Risk that design

and/or construction
quality is inadequate
resulting in higher
than anticipated
maintenance and
refurbishment costs

Private

Private partner is in
control of design and
construction processes

Private firm to manage

through long term
subcontracts with
suitably qualified and resourced sub-contractors

Contract clause imposing

penalties (and possible
termination) for not
meeting specific and well
defined performance,
level of service, and quality
specifications
Contract clause requiring
performance bond
Contract defining performance regime, based on
system availability and
reliability, is the basis of
the payment stream

Operator
failure

Risk that the

infrastructure works
(i.e. track, power,
electrical/mechanical, signaling and
communications),
terminals, stations,
or any of the associated facilities fail to
operate according to
specifications

Private, except
when:
Failure is caused
by MTA action

Private firm is able to

influence and control the
operations of all assets
and facilities

Private firm to require

warranties from contractors and suppliers

Contract clause imposing

penalties (and possible
termination) for not meeting service specifications,
with availability payment
based on the performance
of the system during
revenue operation
Contract clause
requiring performance
bond

MTA

Private firm has no

influence or control of
ridership demand

MTA to carryout demand

studies to determine
if forecasted demand
is consistent with the
required capacity of the
plant

Private firm to develop

operating manuals and
recruit based on the
experience managers
operators

Market demand risk

Demand risk

Risk that ridership

demand on the line is
lower than expected

Contract clause stipulating

fixed payments for making
infrastructure available

Risk
(1)

Payment risk

Definition
(2)

Risk of MTA not

making availability
payments to private
firm on time or for
the full amounts,
including buyout and
termination payment

Allocation
(3)

Rationale
(4)

Severity of
impact, likelihood
of occurrence and
Priority
(5)

Mitigation Strategies
(6)

Allocation
Instrument
(7)

Shared

MTA has direct influence

and control over this risk,
but if it is incapable of
paying, the residual risk
will be borne by private
party

Private will carry out

detailed credit analysis of
MTA prior to bidding
MTA to introduce, if
needed, credit enhancement instruments such
as escrow or revenue
accounts.

Contract clause defining

mechanics of credit
enhancement instruments.

Network and interface risk

Withdrawal
of support
network

Risk of power
outages, preventing
train operations

Private

Private partner is in
control of design and can
incorporate in design
auxiliary power units

Conduct due diligence of

power conditions on the
network

Contract clause specifying

mechanisms to compensate MTA for temporary
disruptions

Interface

Risk that trains will

not work on new
infrastructure and/
or that power, mechanical/ electrical
systems, communications systems will not
be compatible with
existing MTA systems

Private

Private has control

and influence over
infrastructure design and
an obligation to meet
technical specifications
provided by MTA

MTA to provide bidders

the exact specifications of
the rolling stock, power,
mechanical and electrical
systems required for its
trains to operate

Contract clause imposing

penalties (and possible termination) for not meeting
service specifications, with
availability payment based
on the performance of the
system during revenue
operation

Private, if private
firm staff MTA, if
MTA staff

Private partner has

better information
about and control over
the causes of strike by
its own staff
MTA has better information about, and control over, the causes of
strike by its own staff

Private partner (or its

sub-contractors) manage
project delivery and
operations

Contract clause defining

circumstances and
requiring payment of
liquidated damages to MTA
Contract clause defining
circumstances and requiring payment of liquidated
damages to private partner

Industrial relations risk

Industrial
relations

Risk of a strike by
private firm staff
Risk of a strike by
MTA staff

Allocation
(3)

Definition
(2)

Risk
(1)

Rationale
(4)

Severity of
impact, likelihood
of occurrence and
Priority
(5)

Mitigation Strategies
(6)

Allocation
Instrument
(7)

Legislative and government policy risk

Changes in
law/policy

Risk of a change in
law/policy of government (after the contract has been signed),
requiring new, highly
sophisticated and
expensive, security
equipment to be deployed at train stations
and terminals

MTA

Government has more

information about the
likelihood and consequences of such a change

Seek a guarantee from

the national government

Contract clause allowing

compensation to private in
a pre-specified manner or
requiring MTA to pay for
such changes

Private to buy
insurance and
take risk of loss
or damage to the
asset and loss of
revenue (insurable
risks)

Private firm can buy

insurance from the
marketplace

Private to purchase insurance for insurable risks

Contract clauses to:

Expressly define events
that will constitute acts
of God and political
force majeure events
Relieve private from
consequences of service
discontinuity;
Require that if insurable,
private must ensure
availability of insurance
proceeds towards asset repair and service
resumption and MTA is
to be given the benefit
of insurance for service
disruption costs

Force majeure risk

Force
majeure

Risk that facilities

suffer structural
damage as a result
of an earthquake
or another natural
disaster, stopping the
operations of trains
or causing disruption
of operation

Risk
(1)

Definition
(2)

Allocation
(3)

Rationale
(4)

Private firm to take

the risk of loss of
value on
termination

Private firm has more

knowledge of the underlying causes of default
and can identify risk
earlier than government

Severity of
impact, likelihood
of occurrence and
Priority
(5)

Mitigation Strategies
(6)

Allocation
Instrument
(7)

Only serious breaches

by the private partner to
lead to termination
Private partner to be given time and opportunity
to remedy defaults by
the private partner which
may lead to termination
MTA to require step in
rights to ensure access
and service continuity
until ownership/control
issues are resolved

Contract clause clearly

establishing specific contract breaches leading to
termination
Contract clause to define
options for remediation of
default

Asset ownership risk

Default and
termination

Risk of private firm

going bankrupt and
stopping work in
the facility prior to
completion, to a
point that the
contract is
terminated

A.3 Bulk water supply

Project Description
The Metropolitan City Water District (MCWD) is interested in structuring a
BOT-PPP arrangement to supply of up to 40,000 cubic meters per day of
bulk potable water to the MCWD distribution system. The Project will involve
financing, designing, constructing, owning, operating and maintaining raw water
abstraction, treatment and transmission facilities intended to extract and treat
raw water from the river located in the Nearby Municipality. The estimated
investment requirement is PhP 3 billion.
The Project will be developed and procured following the solicited proposal
process prescribed under BOT Law and its Implementing Rules and Regulations
(IRR)
Project Rationale
Metro City currently experiences an acute water shortage problem. At present,
MCWD serves approximately 40% of demand in Metro City, with the rest being
served by informal suppliers and self-supply. This is largely due to inadequacy
of funds available for investment, and limited viable sources of bulk water.
Upon implementation, the Project will involve the first development of a major
surface water source in the Metro City area and will increase the water available
to MCWD by about 25%.
Metro City Water District
MCWD is one of the best performing government-owned water utilities in the
Philippines, and charges a cost-recovery tariff, reports net profit and collects
100A of revenues billed. MCWD's unaccounted for water is only 32%, lower
than most water utilities in the region.
MCWD's net profit margin is about 10% and return on assets is about 3%. It has
outstanding debt of about PhP 1.3 billion and a strong debt servicing record.
Regulatory Framework
The National Water Regulatory Board (NWRB) is responsible for regulating
retail and bulk water tariffs. NWRB is responsible for the issuance, renewal and
revocation of water permits. The Local Water Utilities Agency (LWUA) has the
right to review tariffs charged by water utilities that have outstanding loans with
it. As MCWD's outstanding debt with LWUA has been retired recently, LWUA
regulatory powers with respect to MCWD have diminished. Rules for retail ratesetting are prescribed by PD 198 and provide for cost recovery.
119

Table A.3: Preliminary Risk Allocation Matrix Bulk Water Supply Project
Risk
(1)

Definition
(2)

Allocation
(3)

Mitigation Strategies
(6)

Allocation
Instrument
(7)

Site study effort is moderate (area covered by

abstraction, treatment
and transmission works
is less than lkm2) and
therefore cost of site
study is small

Private partner to rely on

expert testing and due
diligence

Contract clause requiring

private partner to provide performance bond
to cover delay in constructions milestones or
commercial operations
date

MCWD is best placed

to influence the decision of other government officials that
issue these permits
and approvals

Water permit should be

obtained by MCWD prior
to bidding. MCWD should
obtain, prior to bidding,
building approval in
principle from local
authorities

Contract clause stipulating deadline by which

building approval is
granted and defining
remedies in favor of
private firm in case of
delay

Private firm is able to

manage the abstraction of water, and
use, maintenance and
refurbishment of the
asset according to the
approved environmental management
plan

During procurement private firm to demonstrate

financial and technical
capacity to comply with
environmental regulations

Contract clause defining

what constitutes environmental liability and
the mechanism to
estimate the private
firm's liability and pursue
payment

Private partner has

more experience,
knowledge and control over the variables
that determine the
quality of the design

Incorporate strict experience and competency

requirements in the
procurement process

Contract clause defining

performance standards
and periodic monitoring
by MCWD, as well as
penalties for not meeting
standards

Rationale
(4)

Severity of
impact, likelihood
of occurrence and
Priority
(5)

Pre-contract risk
Site
conditions

Permits and
approvals

Environmental liabilities
created during operation

Risk that area where
Private
abstraction structure,
water treatment plant
and transmission pipe
presents significantly different (weaker) geological
conditions than expected
during feasibility stage

MCWD
Risk that water permit
from NWRB or building
permit from local authorities is delayed

Private
Risk of over abstraction of
water from river to the extent that it has significant
environmental damage; or
risk of damage to storage
tanks of waste from

MCWD to give private

firm enough time to
conduct own site studies
during bidding stage

Design, construction & commissioning risk

Design

Risk that the design of

the facilities do not meet
technical specifications
needed to meet the water
supply standards (capacity
and quality)defined for
the plant

Private except
where an express
government
mandated change
has caused the
design defect

Private partner transfer

risk to builder/architects

Risk
(1)

Definition
(2)

Allocation
(3)

Rationale
(4)

Severity of
impact, likelihood
of occurrence and
Priority
(5)

Mitigation Strategies
(6)

Allocation
Instrument
(7)

and other subcontractors while maintaining

primary liability

Contract clause requiring

performance bond
Contract clause stipulating liquidated damages
payable to MCWD
Contract clause to stipulate government compensation for MCWDoriginated change

Construction

Commissioning

Risk that events occur

during construction
which prevent abstraction
works, treatment plant or
transmission line being
delivered on time and
on cost

Private, except
when:

Risk that either the physical or the operational

commissioning tests for
the abstraction works,
treatment plant of transmission line cannot be
successfully completed

Private partner has

more experience,
knowledge and
control over the
variables that influence construction
cost and control over
construction process
(i.e. schedule, equipment, materials and
technology, etc.)

MCWD to incorporate
strict experience and
competency requirements in the procurement process

Private although
MCWD will assume an obligation
to cooperate and
facilitate prompt
public sector attendance on commissioning tests

Private partner is in
control of the design
and construction
process and its inputs,
and therefore better
positioned to manage
this risk

Incorporate strict experience and competency

requirements in the
procurement process

Private

Private partner in control of selecting and

arranging long-term
financing

Interest rate hedging

instruments (for example,
interest rate swap from
IFC)

. The event is
one of force
majeure or
government
intervention

Contract clause requiring

performance bond
Contract clause stipulating liquidated damages

Contract clause requiring

a performance bond
Contract clause stipulating liquidated damages
(until all physical and
operational commissioning tests passed)

Sponsor and financial risk

Interest rates
post-completion

Risk that after completion

interest rates may move
adversely

Contract clause holding

government harmless

Risk
(1)

Definition
(2)

Allocation
(3)

Rationale
(4)

Severity of
impact, likelihood
of occurrence and
Priority
(5)

Mitigation Strategies
(6)

Allocation
Instrument

(7)

Arrange financing using

a mix of foreign and local
currency
Exchange rate

Risk that exchange rates

move adversely, affecting
the private partner's
ability to service foreign
denominated debt and
obtain its expected return
on capital

Shared
MCWD to
assume part of
it by allowing
total or partial
indexing of bulk
water rate to
exchange rate
Private to
assume remainder

Private partner is in
control of selecting
and arranging local
and foreign currency
mix for long-term
financing
Government has more
experience and information regarding the
factors that influence
exchange rates

Private to partially
mitigate by financing part
of the project in local
currency
Private to establish
Foreign Exchange Liquidity Facility to cover part
of the potential mismatch
between project's local
currency revenues and
foreign currency debt
Government to transfer
part of it to users by
allowing total or partial
indexing of payments to
exchange rate

Contract clause requiring

establishment of a
Foreign Exchange
Liquidity Facility
Foreign exchange adjustment to rates in contract
clause

Currency
convertibility and profit
repatriation

Risk that local currency

cannot be converted
into foreign currency as
a result of government
restrictions

Government

Government has more

experience and information regarding the
factors that influence
currency convertibility

Purchase partial risk

guarantee from an
International Financing
Institution

Contract clause
stipulating that private
partner can benefit
from the guarantee to
compensate for losses
related to currency
convertibility and
repatriation of profits

Inflation

Risk that inflation

increases at a higher than
expected rate

Shared
MCWD to assume part of
it by allowing
total or partial
indexing of
rates to inflation
Private to
assume remainder risk

Government has more

experience and information regarding the
factors that influence
Inflation
Private has some
room to pass through
some of the risk to
terminal commercial
users

MCWD to transfer part

of it to users by adjusting
retail rates by inflation
MCWD to ensure
its payments do not
overcompensate for
inflation and to avoid
any double payment for
after costs adjustments
(for example, changes in
exchange rate)

Contract clause defining

payment adjustment
mechanisms

Risk
(1)

Definition
(2)

Allocation
(3)

Rationale
(4)

Severity of
impact, likelihood
of occurrence and
Priority
(5)

Mitigation Strategies
(6)

Allocation
Instrument
(7)

Financing
unavailable

Risk that when debt and/

or equity is required by
the private firm for the
project it is not available
then and in the amounts
and on the conditions
anticipated

Private

Private partner is
responsible for arranging finance

Government requires
all bids to have fully
documented financial
commitments with minimal and easily achievable
conditionality

Contract clause requiring

firm letters of credit
from reputable financial
institutions

Sponsor risk

Risk that financial demands on the private firm

exceed its financial capacity causing bankruptcy

Government

If risk materializes,
there is no private
firm to transfer the
risk to

Verify financial strength

and track record of shareholders of private firm
during bidding stage and
reject those with a weak
financial profile

Contract clause requiring

a performance bond and
letters of credit

Required periodic financial reporting by private

firm

Tax changes

Risk that before or after

completion the tax rate
on the private firm, its
assets or on the project,
will change

Government

Private firm has no

influence over change
in tax law

Seek guarantee from

national government
changes in law

Contract clause giving

MCWD step-in rights in
case of bankruptcy of
private firm
Contract clause requiring
minimum liquidity and
debt ratios
Contract clause providing
compensation terms for
changes in tax law
Contract clause providing
a buy-out (put) option
or termination with
compensation for private
partner when no other
compensation mechanism is available
Performance undertaking from national
government covering termination payment due to
change in tax law

Risk
(1)

Definition
(2)

Allocation
(3)

Rationale
(4)

Severity of
impact, likelihood
of occurrence and
Priority
(5)

Mitigation Strategies
(6)

Allocation
Instrument
(7)

Hydrology and raw water quality risk

Hydrology
risk

Raw water
quality
deterioration

Whomever define
the source of water,
location of intake
point and capacity of
the plant should bear
this risk because they
have the choice of the
key factors that mitigate hydrology risk

Private firm or MCWD

to manage by carrying
out in-depth hydrology
studies and analysis and
by incorporating safety
factors when choosing
the capacity of the plant

If private firm bearing

risk, contract clauses
stipulating all payment
on a liquidated damages
in case volume of water
treated is below that
required by MCWD
If MCWD bearing risk,
contract clauses specifying fixed payments based
on capacity available,
and variable on actual
water produced

Risk that the quality of
Shared
water at the riveris at
level below it is treatable
by the treatment plant

Private firm nor

MCWD have direct
control over the
quality of raw water,
but both should have
some incentive to
perform best efforts
to avoid a damage in
quality event

Private firm should periodically test the quality

of raw source and take
action to restrict access
to the river in the vicinity
of the plant
MCWD to work with
river basin administration authorities to take
actions to control level
of contamination of the
river

Contract clauses that

define raw water quality
standards and the level
below which it will be
considered an event
of deterioration in raw
water quality
Contract clause that
splits cost of inability of
private firm to produce
water in the event the
quality of raw deteriorates

Risk that design and/or

construction quality is
inadequate resulting in
higher than anticipated
maintenance and
refurbishment costs

Private partner is
in control of design
and construction
processes

Private firm to manage

through long term subcontracts with suitably
qualified and resourced
sub-contractors

Contract clause imposing

penalties (and possible
termination) for not
meeting specific and well
defined performance,
level of service, and
quality specifications
Contract clause requiring
performance bond

Risk that the flow of water

in the river, at any given
time, is insufficient to
meet the needs of the
private firm

Private, if private
define source of
water, location
of intake and
capacity of plant
MCWD, if private
define source of
water, location
of intake and
capacity of plant

Operating risk
Maintenance
and Refurbishment

Private

Risk
(1)

Operator
failure

Definition
(2)

Risk that the abstraction

works, treatment plant or
transmission lines, or any
of the associated facilities
fail to operate according
to specifications

Allocation
(3)

Rationale
(4)

Severity of
impact, likelihood
of occurrence and
Priority
(5)

Mitigation Strategies
(6)

Allocation
Instrument
(7)

Private, except
when:
Failure is caused
by MCWD action

Private firm is able to

influence and control
the operations of all
assets and facilities

Private firm to require

warranties from contractors and suppliers
Private firm develop
operating manuals and
recruit experienced
managers and operators

Contract clause imposing

penalties (and possible
termination) for not
meeting service specifications
Contract clause requiring
performance bond

MCWD

Private firm has no

influence or control
of demand for bulk
water

MCWD to carry out

demand studies to
determine if forecasted
demand is consistent
with the required capacity of the plant

Contract clause stipulating fixed payments for

making capacity available
and variable payments
for actual volume of
water treated

Market demand risk

Demand risk

Risk that demand for bulk

water falls expected levels

Network and interface risk

Interface

Risk that MCWD's distribution system is unable

to accept all or part of the
water from the private
firm's transmission pipe

MCWD

MCWD has control

and influence over
the availability and
capacity of the distribution system

MCWD to analyze existing capacity of distribution network to accept

water from treatment
plant and to develop a
plan for rehabilitating
and expanding the network in case it is needed,
as well as financing the
investments related to
that expansion and
rehabilitation

Contract clause defining

fixed capacity payments
to private firm, and
variable payment at a
predefined volume in
case of interface risk

Industrial
relations

Risk of a strike by private

firm staff
Risk of a strike by MCWD
staff

Private, if private
firm staff
MCWD, if MCWD
staff

Private partner has

better information
about and control
over the causes of
strike by its own staff

Private partner (or its

sub-contractors) manage
project delivery and
operations

Contract clause defining circumstances and

requiring payment of
liquidated damages to
MCWD

Definition
(2)

Risk
(1)

Allocation
(3)

Rationale
(4)

Severity of
impact, likelihood
of occurrence and
Priority
(5)

Mitigation Strategies
(6)

Allocation
Instrument
(7)

Industrial relations risk

Contract clause defining
circumstances and
requiring payment of
liquidated damages to
private partner

MCWD has better

information about
and control over the
causes of strike by its
own staff
Legislative and government policy risk
Changes in
law/policy

Risk of a change in law/

policy of government (after the contract has been
signed), requiring new,
highly sophisticated and
expensive, water testing
equipment

MCWD / national
government

Government has more

information about
the likelihood and
consequences of such
a change

Seek a guarantee from

the national government

Contract clause allowing

compensation to private
in a pre-specified manner or requiring MCWD
to pay for such changes
Performance undertaking from national
government

Regulation

Risk that NWRB imposes

changes to bulk water
rates or service specifications define in contract

MCWD

Private firm has no

control or influence
over the NWRB

MCWD to seek a legal

opinion from the NWRB
prior to bidding on the
terms of the contract

Contract clause specifying compensation to

private firm in case of
regulatory decisions that
have an adverse effect
on cashflow of private
firm.

Private to buy
insurance and take
risk of loss or
damage to the
asset and loss of
revenue (insurable
risks)

Private firm can buy

insurance from the
marketplace

Private to purchase insurance for insurable risks

Force majeure risk

Force
majeure

Risk that facilities suffer

structural damage as a
result of an earthquake or
another natural disaster,
stopping treatment of
water for days

Contract clauses to:

Expressly define events
that will constitute acts
of God and political force
majeure events
Relieve private from
consequences of service
discontinuity;

Risk
(1)

Definition
(2)

Allocation
(3)

Rationale
(4)

Severity of
impact, likelihood
of occurrence and
Priority
(5)

Mitigation Strategies
(6)

Allocation
Instrument
(7)

Require that if insurable,

private must ensure
availability of insurance proceeds towards
asset repair and service
resumption and MCWD
is to be given the benefit
of insurance for service
disruption costs
Asset ownership risk
Default and
termination

Risk of private firm going

bankrupt and stopping
work in the facility prior
to completion to a point
that the contract is
terminated

Private firm to
take the risk of
loss of value on
termination

Private firm has more

knowledge of the
underlying causes
of default and can
identify risk earlier
than government

Only serious breaches

by the private partner to
lead to termination
Private partner to be given time and opportunity
to remedy defaults by
the private partner which
may lead to termination
MCWD to require step in
rights to ensure access
and service continuity
until ownership/control
issues are resolved

Contract clause clearly

establishing specific
contract breaches
leading to termination
Contract clause to define
options for remediation
of default

A.4 Information Technology

Project Description
The National Civil Registry Agency (NCRA) of MyCountry is interested in
structuring a PPP type arrangement to implement an information technology
solution to automate and improve the efficiency and integrity of the civil
registration process. The project cost is estimated at about US$80 million and
the proposed Build-Transfer-Operate contract is expected to last anywhere
between 10 and 12 years. The private partner will be expected to finance, design,
implement, operate and maintain the system. The project, entitled Civil Registry
Information Technology Project (CRITP), consists of four phases:
Design, develop, install, successfully test, integrate, operate and
maintain the CRITP in compliance with the technical requirements and
specifications agreed upon in the contract, at its own cost
Provide at least one system hardware upgrade during the course of the
contract
Automating the process of issuing, authenticating, and certifying civil
registration documents through the creation of a series of linked
databases
Converting more than 50 million paper documents into microfilm, and
over 120 million microfilmed documents into digital format
Establishing CRITP service offices nationwide. These offices are to be
linked by Wide Area Network to the NCRA central facility in MyCapital,
and will enable office staff to search, issue, authenticate and certify civil
registration documents electronically
Developing application and support systems that will run the CRITP.
Under the BTO agreement, the private partner is to deliver the completed CRITP
system to NCRA, including converting existing documents to digital format.
The NCRA provides an automated civil registration service to consumers. The
contract will require NCRA to:
Collect user fees and subsequently remit a percentage of the fee to
the private partner. The remainder of the fee accrues to NCRA and is
automatically remitted to the National Treasury
Provide a minimum number of support staff for system implementation,
designate regional coordinators, and hire frontline customer service
staff on behalf of the private partner
Project Rationale
The NCRA is the agency of the MyCountry government responsible for
collecting, compiling and providing civil registration data and legal documents.
It maintains a national archive of civil registration documents and is the primary
128

outlet for citizens to request copies of these legal documents. The NCRA
archiving and retrieval processes are largely manual, with warehouses of paper
documents and an overworked staff that led to significant delays in the issuance
of citizen's document requests. Additionally, demand for civil registration
documents has significantly increased driven by a significant number of
MyCountry citizens who have emigrated abroad seeking work opportunities.
In response to the increased demand, delays, and increasing concerns about
the authenticity of civil registry documents, the NCRA decided to embark on
a computerization project aimed at improving the efficiency and integrity of
the civil registration process. After several requests for national government
investment in NCRA's computer systems which were met only by small sums
that the agency deemed insufficient, NCRA management made the decision to
pursue a privately financed overhaul of the agency's technology systems to meet
the growing demand for documents.
After conducting a feasibility study and with technical assistance from the
National Information Technology Center (NITC), NCRA chose to pursue a
BTO agreement. NCRA wanted to make sure that the system was reliable and
properly-maintained in the short term, and that NCRA staff gained the technical
capacity to operate the system in the long term. A BTO structure was chosen
because the nature of the documents is sensitive. The NCRA preferred to have
ownership of the system and the database as soon as it was completed, to allay
any concerns that would arise if a private company actually had ownership of
the system that stores these sensitive documents.
National Civil Registry Agency
The NCRA is a national government agency that collects revenue from user
fees for processing civil registry documents (i.e. birth, death and marriage
certificates). Since NCRA revenue is sent straight to the National Treasury, the
agency's operational budget depends on annual national budget allocations.
NCRA revenue for services is very reliable, and demand for its services is fairly
inelastic, given the increased demand for authenticated civil registry documents,
and the monopoly status that the NCRA enjoys. NCRA currently operates
from a central facility in MyCapital and has established agreements with local
governments in the rest of the country to process user requests locally, in
exchange for a fee.
Regulatory Framework
NCRA is responsible for setting rates for civil registry document issuance,
certification and authentication. There are no rules or guidelines on how NCRA
would set these standards and tariffs.
129

Table A.4: Preliminary Risk Allocation Matrix Information Technology Project

Risk
(1)

Definition
(2)

Allocation
(3)

Rationale
(4)

Severity of
impact, likelihood of
occurrence
and Priority
(5)

Mitigation Strategies
(6)

Allocation Instrument
(7)

Pre-contract risk
Site
conditions

Risk that unanticipated

adverse site conditions (for
example, building where
systems are to be located)
are discovered which cause
implementation costs to
increase and/or cause
construction delays

Private

Private sector can

manage cost- effectively if allowed to conduct
a site visit during the
bidding stage and if
all the site plans are
provided to him/her

Allow private firm enough

time to visit site studies
and obtain site plans

Contract clause requiring

private partner to provide
performance bond

Permits and
approvals

Risk that necessary approvals (for example, to access

personal confidential records)may not be obtained
or may be obtained only
subject to unanticipated
conditions which have
adverse cost consequences
or cause prolonged delay

NCRA

NCRA is better informed and positioned

to influence the
speed of the approval
process, particularly
in situations that are
complex or sensitive

NCRA to obtain in advance

of the bidder proposal submission stage the requisite
permits and approvals,
which would allow the
private firm to achieve a
measure of pre-contractual
certainty and an early start
to the approval process

Contract clause stipulating

the schedule to obtain
permits and approval
and stipulating liquidated
damages payable to
private partner in case
of delays

Environmental liabilities
created during
operation

Risk that the use of the

project site over the
contract term has resulted
in significant environmental liabilities (clean up or
rehabilitation required to
make the site fit for future
anticipated use)

Not
applicable

Cultural
heritage

Risk of costs and

delays associated with
archaeological and cultural
heritage discoveries

Not
applicable

Risk
(1)

Availability
of site

Definition
(2)

Risk that tenure/access to

a selected site which is not
presently owned by government or private partner
cannot be negotiated.
Risk of costs and delays in
negotiating land acquisition

Allocation
(3)

Rationale
(4)

Severity of
impact, likelihood of
occurrence
and Priority
(5)

Mitigation Strategies
(6)

Allocation Instrument
(7)

Not
applicable

Design, construction and commissioning risk

Design

Risk that the design of the

system is substandard, or
incapable of delivering the
services at anticipated cost
and specified level of service (resulting in long term
increase in recurrent costs
and long term inadequacy
of service)

Private private
partner will be responsible except
where an express
government mandated change has
caused the design
defect

Private partner has

more experience,
knowledge and control
over the variables that
determine the quality of the design (i.e.
experience, competent
staff, etc.)

Incorporate strict experience and competency

requirements in the
procurement process
Ensure that terms of
reference require a
thorough requirements
analysis and the development of a concept of
operations prior to full
scale deployment
Ensure all stakeholders
provide input into the
requirements analysis

Contract clause requiring performance bond

Contract clause
stipulating liquidated
damages
Contract clause
requiring NCRA
approval of concept
of operations prior to
full scale deployment

Construction

Risk that events occur during system development

and deployment which
prevent the system being
delivered on time and on
cost

Private, except
when:
The event is one
for which relief as
to time or cost or
both is specifically
granted under
the contract, such
as force majeure
or government
intervention (for

Private partner has

more experience,
knowledge and control
over the variables that
influence system
development and
implementation cost
and control over development and implementation process (i.e.
schedule, equipment,

Incorporate strict experience and competency

requirements in the
procurement process
Ensure that terms
contract clause of reference require a thorough
requirements analysis
and the development of
a concept of operations
to full scale deployment

Contract clause requiring performance bond

Contract clause
stipulating liquidated
damages to protect the
government

Risk
(1)

Commissioning

Definition
(2)

Risk that either the system

commissioning tests which
are required to be completed for the provision
of services to commence,
cannot be successfully
completed

Mitigation Strategies
(6)

Allocation Instrument
(7)

Private partner is in
control of the design
and construction
process and its inputs,
and therefore better
positioned to manage
this risk

Incorporate strict experience and competency

requirements in the
procurement process

Contract clause requiring a performance

bond

Government has more

experience and information regarding the
factors influencing local
currency interest rates
and is in better position
to manage risk

Construction loan interest

rate hedging instrument
(if and when available)

Allocation
(3)

Rationale
(4)

example, customs
agency preventing
importation of
equipment)

technology, etc.) this

assumes that private
partner has enough information to estimate
costs and start operations on schedule and
as planned.
A possible exception is
in contractually agreed
upon situations that
classify as force majeure or government
intervention.

Private
although NCRA
will assume an obligation to cooperate and facilitate
prompt public
sector attendance
on commissioning
tests

NCRA

Severity of
impact, likelihood of
occurrence
and Priority
(5)

Ensure that proposed

approach follows a
systems engineering
approach with key
milestones for system
validation, system
verification and system
testing plan

Contract clause
stipulating liquidated
damages (until all
system commissioning
tests have passed)

Sponsor and financial risk

Interest rates
pre-completion

Risk that prior to completion local currency interest

rates may move adversely

Contract clause defining

mechanism to compensate private for interest
rate changes during
system development

Risk
(1)

Interest rates
post-complebon

Definition
(2)

Risk that after completion

interest rates may move
adversely

Allocation
(3)

NCRA

Rationale
(4)

Private partner in control of selecting and

arranging long-term
financing

Severity of
impact, likelihood of
occurrence
and Priority
(5)

Mitigation Strategies
(6)

Interest rate hedging instruments (for example,

interest rate swap from
IFC)

Allocation Instrument
(7)

Contract clause holding

government harmless

Arrange financing using

a mix of foreign and
local currency
Exchange rate

Risk that during operation,

exchange rates may move
adversely, affecting the
private partner's ability to
service foreign denominated debt and obtain its
expected profit

Shared
NCRA to
assume part of
it by allowing
total or partial
indexing of
payments to
exchange rate
Private
to assume
remainder

Private partner is in
control of selecting
and arranging local
and foreign currency
mix for long-term
financing
Government has more
experience and information regarding the
factors that influence
exchange rates

Private to partially mittgate by financing part

of the project in local
currency
Private to establish Foreign Exchange Liquidity
Facility to cover pa of
rt
the potential
al mismatch
between project's local
currency revenues and
foreign currency debt

Contract clause requiring establishment of

a Foreign Exchange
Liquidity Facility
Tariff or payment
adjustment contract
clause

NCRA to transfer part

of it to users by allowing total or partial
indexing of payments to
exchange rate
Currency
convertibility
and profit
repatriation

Risk that local currency

cannot be converted into
foreign currency as a result
of government restrictions

NCRA

Government has more

experience and information regarding the
factors that influence
currency convertibility

NCRA to purchase partial

risk guarantee from an
International Financing
Institution

Contract clause
stipulating that private
partner can benefit
from the guarantee to
compensate for losses
related to currency
convertibility and repatriation of profits

Risk
(1)

Definition
(2)

Allocation
(3)

Rationale
(4)

Inflation

Risk that value of payments received during the

term is eroded by inflation

Shared
NCRA to
assume part of
it by allowing
total or partial
indexing of
payments to
inflation
Private
to assume
remainder risk
through the
methodology
adopted to
maintain value

Government has more

experience and information regarding the
factors that influence
inflation

NCRA to transfer part of it

to users by allowing total
or partial indexing of payments to inflation rate
NCRA to ensure its payments do not over compensate for inflation and to
avoid any double payment
for after cost adjustments
(for example, changes in
exchange rate)

Contract clause defining

payment adjustment
mechanisms

Financing
unavailable

Risk that when debt and/

or equity is required by the
private firm for the project
is not available then and
in the amounts and on the
conditions anticipated

Private

Private partner is responsible for arranging

finance

NCRA requires all bids to

have fully documented
financial commitments
with minimal and easily
achievable conditionality

Contract clause requiring

firm letters of credit
from reputable financial
institutions

Sponsor risk

Risk that financial demands

on the private firm exceed
its financial capacity causing bankruptcy

NCRA

If risk materializes,
there is no private firm
to transfer the risk to

Verify financial strength

and track record of shareholders of private firm
during bidding stage and
reject those with a weak
financial profile
Require periodic financial
reporting by private firm

Contract clause requiring

a performance bond and
letters of credit
Contract clause giving
NCRA step-in rights in
case of bankruptcy of
private firm
Contract clause requiring
minimum liquidity and
debt ratios

Severity of
impact, likelihood of
occurrence
and Priority
(5)

Mitigation Strategies
(6)

Allocation Instrument
(7)

Risk
(1)

Definition
(2)

Allocation
(3)

Rationale
(4)

Severity of
impact, likelihood of
occurrence
and Priority
(5)

Mitigation Strategies
(6)

Allocation Instrument
(7)

Risk that before or after

completion the tax rate on
the private firm, its
assets or on the project,
will change

NCRA

Private firm has no

influence over change
in tax law

Seek guarantee from

national government
changes in law

Contract clause providing

compensation terms for
changes in tax law
Contract clause providing
a buy-out (put) option or
termination with compensation for private partner
when no other compensation mechanism is available
Performance undertaking
from national government
covering termination
payment due to change in
tax law

Maintenance
and Refurbishment

Risk that design and/or system quality is inadequate

resulting in higher than
anticipated maintenance
and refurbishment costs

Private

Private partner is in
control of design and
construction processes

Private firm to manage through long term

subcontracts with suitably
qualified and resourced
sub-contractors

Contract clause imposing

penalties (and possible termination) for not
meeting specific and well
defined performance,
level of service, and quality specifications
Contract clause requiring
performance bond

Operator
failure

Risk that the system,

communications, or any
of the associated facilities
fail to operate according to
specifications

Private,
except when:
Failure is caused
by NCRA action

Private firm is able to

influence and control
the operations of all
assets and facilities

Private firm to require warrarities from contractors

and suppliers
Private firm to develop
operating manuals and
recruit experienced
managers and operators

Contract clause imposing

penalties (and possible
termination) for not meeting service specifications
Contract clause requiring
performance bond

Tax changes

Operating risk

Risk
(1)

Definition
(2)

Allocation
(3)

Rationale
(4)

Severity of
impact, likelihood of
occurrence
and Priority
(5)

Mitigation Strategies
(6)

Allocation Instrument
(7)

Market demand risk

Demand risk

Risk that demand for

civil registry certifications
or authentications falls
expected levels

Private

Service is a monopoly
for which demand is
well established, and
significant improvements in service delivery are likely to result
in increased demand
growth

As part of the feasibility

study, NCRA is to carryout
demand studies to determine if forecasted demand
is consistent with system
capacity

Contract clause stipulating

private partner is not to
receive any compensation
from NCRA beyond its
share of the user fees.

Payment risk

Risk of a portion of users

or customers not paying
or evading payment for
service, leading to a shortfall in cash flows

Private,
except when:
User has made
payment to local
government and
local government
will not convey
payment

Service is to be
provided to users
only against payment,
making unit avoidance
impossible

NCRA to guarantee payments from local government units

Contract clause defining

mechanics of unpaid or
missing user fees.

NCRA

NCRA is in a better
position to influence
the actions of local
governments

NCRA to establish firm

agreements with municipal
administrations to participate in the program

Contract clause defining

compensation mechanism for private partner
(for example, liquidated
damages)

Private, if private
firm staff
NCRA, if NCRA
staff

Private partner has

better information
about and control over
the causes of strike by
its own staff

Private partner (or its

sub-contractors) manage
project delivery and operations

Contract clause defining

circumstances and requiring payment of liquidated
damages to NCRA

Network and interface risk

Withdrawal
of support
network

Risk that local government

units unilaterally decide to
stop processing requests
from users in their localities (for example, demand
higher share of fee, etc.)

Industrial relations risk

Industrial
relations

Risk of a strike by private

firm staff
Risk of a strike by NCRA
staff

Risk
(1)

Definition
(2)

Allocation
(3)

Rationale
(4)

Severity of
impact, likelihood of occurrence and
Priority
(5)

Mitigation Strategies
(6)

Allocation Instrument
(7)

Contract clause defining circumstances and

requiring payment of
liquidated damages to
private partner

NCRA has better

information about,
and control over, the
causes of strike by its
own staff
Legislative and government policy risk
Changes in
law/policy

Risk of a change in law/

policy of government (after
the contract has been
signed), mandating the
opening of CRITP outlets in
every town with a population of over 50,000

NCRA / national
government

NCRA has more

information about
the likelihood and
consequences of such
a change

Seek a guarantee from the

national government

Contract clause allowing

compensation to private
in a pre-specified manner
or requiring NCRA to pay
for such changes
Performance undertaking
from national government

Regulation

Risk that national government imposes limits on

NCRA user fee increases

NCRA

Private firm has no

control or influence
over national government policy

NCRA to seek a guarantee

prior to bidding on the
terms of the contract

Contract clause specifying

compensation to private
firm in case of regulatory
decisions that have an
adverse effect on cashflow
of private firm.

Private

Private firm to buy

insurance and take
risk of loss or damage
to the asset and loss
of revenue(insurable
risks)

Private to purchase insurance for insurable risks

Contract clauses to:

Expressly define events
that will constitute acts
of God and political
force majeure events
Relieve private from
consequences of service
discontinuity;

Force majeure risk

Force majeure

Risk that a facility or equipment in the system suffers

irreversible damage as a
result of hurricane flood or
another natural disaster,
stopping service provision
for days

Private to incorporate
redundancy and backup
mechanisms in the system

Risk
(1)

Definition
(2)

Allocation
(3)

Rationale
(4)

Severity of
impact, likelihood of occurrence and
Priority
(5)

Mitigation Strategies
(6)

Allocation Instrument
(7)

Require that if
insurable, private must
ensure availability of
insurance proceeds
towards asset repair
and service resumption
and NCRA is to be given
the benefit of insurance
for service disruption
costs
Asset ownership risk
Default and
termination

Risk of private firm going

bankrupt and stopping
work in the system prior to
completion, to a point that
the contract is terminated

Private firm to
take the risk of
loss of value on
termination

Private firm has more

knowledge of the
underlying causes of
default and can identify risk earlier than
government

Only serious breaches by

the private partner to lead
to termination
Private partner to be given
time and opportunity to
remedy defaults by the
private partner which may
lead to termination
NCRA to require step in
rights to ensure access and
service continuity until
ownership/control issues
are resolved

Contract clause clearly

establishing specific
contract breaches leading
to termination
Contract clause to define
options for remediation
of default

A.5 Solid Waste Management

Project Description
The Metropolitan Authority of Metro City (MAMC) is interested in structuring
a BOT- PPP type arrangement to collect and dispose solid waste from defined
area of Metro City. The Project will involve, financing, designing, constructing,
owning, operating and maintaining the equipment and facilities to:
Provide door to door waste collection services
Consolidate waste at transfer station
Transport waste from transfer station to landfill
Manual recovery of recyclable material
Final disposal into landfill
The Projects would require a total investment of PhP 1 billion.
The Project will be developed and procured following the solicited proposal
process prescribed under BOT Law and its Implementing Rules and Regulations
(IRR)
Project Rationale
MAMC is the sole authority responsible for the management of solid waste
generated in Metro City. However, due to lack of funding, MAMC is unable to
meet waste collection schedules, is not collecting waste at all in some areas of
the city, and its current disposal system is overloaded and unable to adequately
handle the current load. Waste is littered by the residents in open plots and
various sites around the city. It is estimated that approximately 60,000 80,000
tons of solid waste is littered in Metro City.
Street sweeping is being performed manually by sweepers and the waste is stored
at the pick up points which may be called filth heaps. Tractor trolleys are used to
lift the wastes from these filth heaps manually, which is then taken to the nearest
disposal site. Due to indiscriminate littering of solid waste, many streets are not
cleaned completely. The area is quite congested and waste collection sweepers
use small, hand-held brooms for sweeping and wheel barrows for collecting
the sweepings. There are no steps taken to treat the waste, resulting in organic
materials, hazardous and dangerous items finding their way onto open areas. The
current practice is extremely dangerous for the general population and ecology.
Other major cities in the Philippines have used BOT-PPPs to successfully
address similar challenges and Metro City wants to follow the examples of those
cities. MAMC wants to start trialing this approach in a defined area of 1,500Ha
in Metro City. If successful the approach could be expanded to cover the rest
of the city.
139

Metropolitan Authority of Metro City

MAMC is responsible for collection, transportation and disposal of solid
waste in Metro City. MAMC is a department of the Government of Metro
City. MAMC's budget is approved by the city government and it also receives
revenues from collecting solid waste handling fees from end-users. MAMC's
invoicing systems are outdated and of the few invoices issued, less than 30
percent are paid.
The Sanitary section within the Food and Sanitation Department of MAMC
perform these tasks with a total of 200 employees including a Food and Sanitary
Inspector, eight Sanitary Supervisors, eighty one Workers and fourteen Support
Staff. Out of this total workforce, seventy two employees are directly involved
in the task of collection, transportation and disposal of waste. MAMC is the
Implementing Agency of the Project.
Regulatory Framework
MAMC is responsible for setting solid waste management standards and tariffs.
There are no rules or guidelines on how MAMC would set these standards and
tariffs.

140

Table A.5: Preliminary Risk Allocation Matrix Solid Waste Management Project
Risk
(1)

Definition
(2)

Allocation
(3)

Mitigation Strategies
(6)

Allocation Instrument
(7)

Private partner can

manage cost- effectively, since site study
effort is likely to be
moderate (landfill to be
co-located in an area
where MAMC is already
operating a landfill)
Construction of transfer
stations is relatively
simple

Private firm will pass to

builder which relies on
expert testing and due
diligence
Give private firm enough
time to do site studies

Contract clause requiring

private partner to provide
performance bond

MAMC is best placed to

influence the decision
of other government
officials that issue these
permits and approvals

Environmental license for

landfill, environmental
management plan for
landfill and service, and
preliminary construction
permit have already been
obtained by MAMC prior
to bidding.

Contract clause stipulating

deadline by which construction permit, environmental
license and environmental
management plan, will
be granted and defining
remedies in favor of private
firm in case of delay

Environmental license
and environmental
management plan
have been approved
prior to submission of
proposals
Private partner is able

During procurement
private partner must demonstrate financial capacity
or support to deliver the
site in the state required
by government at the end
of the contract

Contract clause defining

what constitutes environmental liability and the
mechanism to estimate the
private partner's liability
and pursue payment (only
for the section)

Rationale
(4)

Severity
of impact,
likelihood of
Occurrence
and Priority
(5)

Pre-contract risk
Site
conditions

Permits and
approvals

Environmental liabilities
created during operation

Risk that unanticipated
Private
adverse geological conditions are discovered
at the site selected for
landfill and/or at the
transfer station sites,
which cause construction costs to increase
and/or cause construction delays

Risk that environmental
MAMC
license, environmental
management plan, and
construction permits
may not be obtained or
may be obtained only
subject to unanticipated conditions which
have adverse cost
consequences or cause
prolonged delay

Risk that the use of the
Private
section of the landfill
used by the private
sector over the contract
term results in significant
environmental liabilities
(remediation required
to make the site

Risk
(1)

Definition
(2)

Allocation
(3)

fit for future anticipated

use)

Availability
of site

Risk that tenure/access

to a selected transfer
site, not presently
owned by government,
cannot be negotiated
(landfill site is already
city owned and operated)
Risk of costs and delays
in negotiating land
acquisition

MAMC

Rationale
(4)

Severity
of impact,
likelihood of
Occurrence
and Priority
(5)

Mitigation Strategies
(6)

Allocation Instrument
(7)

to manage the use of

the asset and attend to
its maintenance and refurbishment according
to the environmental
requirements known at
the proposal stage

MAMC to require sinking

funds to cover the cost of
closing the landfill when it
reaches capacity.

of the landfill operated by

the private partner)
Contract clause requiring
the establishment of a landfill closing sinking fund

MAMC has a better

understanding of
procedures, has special
powers of acquisition
and use of land for
infrastructure and is
usually in best position
to manage
Government is in better
position to negotiate
where policy damages
use of compulsory
acquisition power

MAMC to complete land

acquisition for transfer
stations prior to proposal
stage

Contract clause stipulating transfer station site

availability schedule and
liquidated damages payable
to private partner in case
of delays

Private partner has

more experience,
knowledge and control
over the variables that
determine the quality of the design (i.e.
experience, competent
staff, etc.)

Incorporate strict experience and competency

requirements in the procurement process
Private partner maintains
primary liability; and
government has the right
to abate service charge
payments where the risk
eventuates and results
in a lack of service it
may ultimately result in
termination where the
problem cannot be suitably remedied

Contract clause requiring

performance bond
Contract clause stipulating
liquidated damages, service
charge abatements, or
termination for substandard performance.

Design, construction and commissioning risk

Design

Risk that the design

of the service (landfill
facility, the door-to-door
waste collection routes,
and the consolidation
and transfer process) are
substandard, unsafe, or
incapable of delivering
the services at anticipated cost and specified
level of service

Private

Risk
(1)

Definition
(2)

Allocation
(3)

Rationale
(4)

Severity
of impact,
likelihood of
Occurrence
and Priority
(5)

Mitigation Strategies
(6)

Allocation Instrument
(7)

Construction

Risk that events occur

during construction of
landfill or transfer sites
which prevent the
facility being delivered
on time and on cost

Private

Private partner has

more experience,
knowledge and control
over the variables that
influence construction
cost and control over
construction process.

Incorporate strict experience and competency

requirements in the procurement process
Ensure that a feasibility
study is available well in
advance of the procurement process

Contract clause
requiring performance
bond
Contract clause stipulating
liquidated damages

Commissioning

Risk that either the

physical or the operational commissioning
tests which are required
to be completed for the
provision of services (for
example, disposal into
landfill) to commence,
cannot be successfully
completed

Private

Private partner is in
control of the design
and construction
process and its inputs,
and therefore better
positioned to manage
this risk

Incorporate strict experience and competency

requirements in the
procurement process

Contract clause requiring a

performance bond
Contract clause stipulating
liquidated damages until
system is fully operational

Sponsor and financial risk

Interest rates
post-completion

Risk that after completion interest rates may

move adversely

Private

Private partner in
control of selecting and
arranging long-term
financing

Interest rate hedging instruments (for example, interest rate swap from IFC)
Arrange financing using a
mix of foreign and local
currency

Contract clause holding

government harmless

Exchange
rate

Risk that during operation, exchange rates may

move adversely, affecting the private partner's
ability to service foreign
denominated debt and
obtain its expected
profit

Shared
MAMC to assume
part of it by allowing
total or partial indexing of payments to
exchange rate
Private to assume
remainder

Private partner is in
control of selecting
and arranging local and
foreign currency mix for
long-term financing
Government has more
experience and information regarding the
factors that influence
exchange rates

Private to partially
mitigate by financing part
of the project in local
currency
Private to establish Foreign Exchange Liquidity
Facility to cover part of
the potential mismatch
between project's

Contract clause requiring

establishment of a Foreign
Exchange Liquidity Facility
Tariff or payment adjustment contract clause

Risk
(1)

Definition
(2)

Allocation
(3)

Rationale
(4)

Severity
of impact,
likelihood of
Occurrence
and Priority
(5)

Mitigation Strategies
(6)

Allocation Instrument
(7)

local currency revenues

and foreign currency debt
MAMC to transfer part
of it to users by allowing
total or partial indexing
of payments to exchange
rate
Currency
convertibility and profit
repatriation

Risk that local currency

cannot be converted
into foreign currency as
a result of government
restrictions

MAMC

Government has more

experience and information regarding the
factors that influence
currency convertibility

Purchase partial risk

guarantee from an
International Financing
Institution

Contract clause stipulating

that private partner can
benefit from the guarantee
to compensate for losses
related to currency
convertibility and
repatriation of profits

Inflation

Risk that value of payments received during

the term is eroded by
inflation

Shared
MAMC to assume
part of it by allowing
total or partial indexing of payments to
inflation

Government has more

experience and information regarding the
factors that influence
inflation

MAMC to transfer part

of it to users by allowing
total or partial indexing of
payments to inflation rate

Contract clause defining payment adjustment

mechanisms

Private partner is
responsible for
arranging finance

MAMC requires all bids

to have fully documented
financial commitments
with minimal and easily
achievable
conditionality

Private to assume remainder risk through

the methodology
adopted to maintain
value
Financing
unavailable

Risk that when debt

and/or equity is required
by the private firm for
the project it is not available then and on the
conditions anticipated

Private

MAMC to ensure its

payments do not overcompensate for inflation
and to avoid any double
payment for after costs
adjustments (for example,
changes in exchange rate)
Contract clause requiring
firm letters of credit from
reputable financial institutions

Risk
(1)

Definition
(2)

Allocation
(3)

Rationale
(4)

Severity
of impact,
likelihood of
Occurrence
and Priority
(5)

Mitigation Strategies
(6)

Allocation Instrument
(7)

Sponsor risk

Risk that the private

partner is unable to
provide the required
services or becomes
insolvent
Risk that financial
demands on the private
partner exceed its financial capacity causing
corporate failure

MAMC

If this risk materializes, there is no private

partner to transfer the
risk to

Ensure adequacy of
finances under loan
facilities or sponsor cornmitments supported by
performance bond
Ensure adequacy of
finances through the use
of non financial evaluation
criteria and due diligence
on private partner

Contract clause requiring

a performance bond and
letters of credit
Contract clause requiring
minimum liquidity and debt
ratios
Contract clause giving
MAMC step-in rights in case
of bankruptcy of private
firm

Tax changes

Risk that before or after

completion the tax rate
on the private firm, its
assets or on the project,
will change

MAMC

Private firm has no

influence over change
in tax law

Seek guarantee from

national government

Contract clause providing

compensation terms for
changes in tax law
Contract clause providing
a buy-out (put) option or
termination with compensation for private partner
when no other compensation mechanism is available
Performance undertaking
from national government
covering termination
payment due to change in
tax law

Risk that design and/or

construction quality is
inadequate resulting in
higher than anticipated
maintenance and
refurbishment costs

Private

Private partner is in
control of design and
construction processes

Private firm to manage

through long term
subcontracts with suitably
qualified and resourced
sub-contractors

Contract clause imposing

penalties (and possible
termination) for not
meeting specific and well
defined performance,
level of service, and quality
specifications
Contract clause requiring
performance bond from
private

Operating risk
Maintenance
and Refurbishment

Risk
(1)

Operator
failure

Definition
(2)

Risk that the waste

collection service, the
transport service or
waste disposal process,
may fail to meet specification

Allocation
(3)

Rationale
(4)

Severity
of impact,
likelihood of
Occurrence
and Priority
(5)

Mitigation Strategies
(6)

Allocation Instrument
(7)

Private,
except when:
Failure is caused by
MAMC action

Private firm is able to

influence and control
the operations of all
assets and facilities

Private firm to require

warranties from contractors and suppliers
Private firm to develop
operating manuals and
recruit experienced
managers and operators

Contract clause imposing

penalties (and possible termination) for not meeting
service specifications
Contract clause requiring
performance bond

Market demand risk

Demand risk

Risk that demand for

waste disposal falls
below expected levels

MAMC

Although the volumes

of waste produced in
Metro City are certain
and relatively easy to
predict, residents are
not used to paying
for the service and
revenue collection will
likely continue being
an issue.
MAMC will pay private
partner directly based
on the volume of
waste collected and
processed

MAMC to carry out

demand studies to
determine if forecasted
demand is consistent with
the required capacity of
the location/system

Contract clause stipulating

fixed payments for making
system available and variable payments for actual
volume of waste disposed

Fee avoidance

Risk of a portion of users

or customers not paying
or evading payment for
service

MAMC

MAMC is in better posibon to improve overall

collection effectiveness
for the service.
Private partner will only
be managing a pilot
project in a limited secbon of Metro City

Initiate a campaign to
reduce the amount of
customers with arrears
and a public awareness
campaign to increase
the number of paying
customers

Contract clause stipulating

a compensation mechanism
(fixed and variable payment) clearly independent
from fees collected from
users

Risk
(1)

Payment risk

Definition
(2)

Risk of MAMC not making payments to private

firm on time or for the
full amounts, including
buyout and termination
payment

Allocation
(3)

Rationale
(4)

Severity
of impact,
likelihood of
Occurrence
and Priority
(5)

Mitigation Strategies
(6)

Allocation Instrument
(7)

Shared

MAMC has direct

influence and control
over this risk, but if it
is incapable of paying,
the residual risk will be
borne by private party

Private will carry out

detailed credit analysis of
MAMC prior to bidding
MAMC to introduce, if
needed, credit enhancement instruments such as
escrow or revenue
accounts.

Contract clause defining

mechanics of credit enhancement instruments.

MAMC

Government manages
core service activities
allowing it to influence
the materialization of
interface risk and its
consequences

MAMC to analyze existing

capacity of landfill to accept projected additional
waste and to develop a
plan for expanding the
landfill in case it is needed, as well as financing
the investments related to
that expansion
Upfront assessment (by
both MAMC and the
private partner) of likely
interface issues
Continuous review and
monitoring

Contract clause to specify

the extent of Metro City
Sanitary section services
and the way in which they
will be delivered so that
only manifest and adverse
changes and deficiencies
can trigger this risk
Contract clause defining
compensation mechanism
for private partner

Private, if private
firm staff
MAMC, if MAMC
staff

Private partner has better information about

and control over the
causes of strike by its
own staff
MAMC has better
information about, and
control over, the causes
of strike by its own staff

Private partner (or its

sub-contractors) manage
project delivery and
operations

Contract clause defining

circumstances and requiring payment of liquidated
damages to MAMC
Contract clause defining
circumstances and requiring payment of liquidated
damages to private partner

Network and interface risk

Interface (1)

Risk that the use of the

landfill by Metro City's
Sanitary section results
in the landfill filling up
sooner than expected
(during the life of the
BOT-PPP), and causing
the private partner to
use an alternate location
(additional miles driven
moving of equipment,
etc.), adversely affecting
its business.

Industrial relations risk

Industrial
relations

Risk of a strike by private

firm staff
Risk of a strike by MAMC
Sanitary department
staff at landfill or
transfer stations

Risk
(1)

Definition
(2)

Allocation
(3)

Rationale
(4)

Severity
of impact,
likelihood of
Occurrence
and Priority
(5)

Mitigation Strategies
(6)

Allocation Instrument
(7)

Legislative and government policy risk

Changes in
law/policy

Regulation

A
00

Risk of a change in law/

policy of government
(after the contract has
been signed), requiring
new, highly sophisticated
and expensive methods
to close landfill

MAMC / national
government

Risk that National

Environmental Protecdon Agency (NEPA)
imposes more stringent
landfill regulations that
elevate the cost of waste
disposal

MAMC

Private firm has no

control or influence
over the NEPA

MAMC to seek a legal

opinion from the NEPA
prior to bidding on the
terms of the contract

Contract clause specifying

compensation to private
firm in case of regulatory decisions that have an
adverse effect on cashflow
of private firm.

Private to buy insurance and take risk

of loss or damage to
the asset and loss of
revenue (insurable
risks)

Private firm can buy

insurance from the
marketplace

Private to purchase insurance for insurable risks

Contract clauses to:

Government has more

information about
the likelihood and
consequences of such
a change

Seek a guarantee from the

national government

Contract clause allowing

compensation to private in
a pre-specified manner or
requiring MAMC to pay for
such changes
Performance undertaking
from national government

Force majeure risk

Force
majeure

Risk that landfill integrity

is compromised as a
result of an earthquake
or a flood, requiring
extensive repairs and
stopping service for days

Expressly define events that

will constitute acts of God
and political force majeure
events
Relieve private from
consequences of service
discontinuity;
Require that if insurable,
private must ensure
availability of insurance
proceeds towards asset repair and service resumption
and MAMC is to be given
the benefit of insurance for
service disruption costs

Definition
(2)

Allocation
(3)

Rationale
(4)

Risk of private firm going

bankrupt and stopping
work in the facility prior
to completion, to a point
that the contract is
terminated

Private firm to take

the risk of loss of
value on termination

Private firm has more

knowledge of the
underlying causes of
default and can identify
risk earlier than government

Risk
(1)

Severity
of impact,
likelihood of
Occurrence
and Priority
(5)

Mitigation Strategies
(6)

Allocation Instrument
(7)

Asset ownership risk

Default andtermination

Only serious breaches by

the private partner to lead
to termination
Private partner to be
given time and opportunity to remedy defaults by
the private partner
MAMC to require step in
rights to ensure access
and service continuity
until ownership/control
issues are resolved

Contract clause clearly

establishing specific contract breaches leading to
termination
Contract clause to define
options for remediation of
default which may lead to
termination

Appendix A References
1. Victorian Department of Treasury and Finance (2001). Risk Allocation and
Contractual Issues (Partnerships Victoria Guidance Material). Melbourne.
2. Victorian Department of Treasury and Finance (2001). Public Sector
Comparator Technical Note (Partnerships Victoria Guidance Material).
Melbourne.
3. Victorian Department of Treasury and Finance (2001). Practitioner's Guide
(Partnerships Victoria Guidance Material). Melbourne.
4. Aldrete, R., McCullough F, Tucker, R. (2005) "Feasibility Evaluation Model
for Toll Highways". Technical Report for the Southwest Region University
Transportation Center - Texas Transportation Institute. College Station.
January 2005.
5. Ministry of Finance of the Czech Republic, PPP Unit (2003). "Standardized
PPP Risk Provisions". Prague.
6. Departamento de Planeacion Nacional, Republic of Colombia (2001). "State
Contractual Risk Management Policy for Private Sector Participation in
Infrastructure". Documento CONPES 3107. Bogota.
7. Irwin, T. (2007). "Government Guarantees: Allocating and Valuing Risk in
Privately Financed Infrastructure Projects." The World Bank. Washington
DC.
8. International Standards Organization (2007). "Software Life Cycle
ProcessesRisk Management". ISO/IEC 16085. Definition 3.12.
9. Victorian Managed Insurance Authority (2008). "Guide for developing and
implementing your risk management framework: Risk Management in the
Victorian Public Sector". Melbourne.

150

NEDA sa Pasig

12 Saint Josemaria Escriva Drive,

Ortigas Center, Pasig City 1605
P.O. box 419, Greenhills
Tels. 631-0945 to 64
www.neda.gov.ph