Province settles expropriation with Enel, Sun Life and others

Compensating a group of companies involved in the Star Lake affected by the Abitibi expropriation will wind up costing the taxpayers of this province more than the original project cost to build a decade ago.

Natural resources minister Shawn Skinner announced on Monday that provincial government will pay $32.8 million to Enel while Nalcor will assume responsibility for a $40 million loan from Sun Life and other companies.

That’s $72.8 million for a project that originally cost $51 million to build in 1998 according to Enel’s website:

The Star Lake Hydroelectric Project is an 18 MW remotely operated hydroelectric facility with a 173 million cubic meter capacity storage reservoir. The project provides electricity to Newfoundland’s integrated grid, which is sold to Newfoundland & Labrador Hydro.

Construction of Star Lake began in May 1997 and was completed in October 1998 for a total cost of $51 million (CAN).

From the earliest stages of the project, environmental considerations were considered in its development and have been instrumental in the technical design. The facility was conceived using environmentally friendly materials and equipment such as biodegradable hydraulic oil for its intake gate system and an oil-free hydrostatic bearing for the turbine unit. An underground penstock was also designed and implemented in order to avoid obstructing migration routes of the Buchans Plateau caribou herd.

An artificial brook trout incubation and rearing facility is also onsite. It is designed to produce up to 100,000 fingerlings (young fish). These fingerlings are intended for annual introduction to Star Lake to ensure that the lake's brook trout population is maintained.

Skinner is quoted in the news release as saying that this is a “a fair settlement and the most appropriate action for the province to take.”

The provincial government is still in talks with Fortis on compensation for that company on another project affected by the 2008 expropriation bill.

Nalcor has already assumed responsibility for a $59 million loan related to Fortis’ former hydro interests.

- srbp -

Dunderdale confirms Bond story on Fortis and Enel

As you read here on Friday, the provincial government is handing back property seized in December 2008 to Fortis and Enel.

NTV ran the story on Sunday complete with a quote from Premier Kathy Dunderdale.

Dunderdale’s comments give some credence to the idea this expropriation wasn’t about any supposed broken promises by AbitibiBowater.

Maybe it was all about a spurned bid for Abitibi shares in Star Lake.

Maybe it was something else.

Slowly but surely the whole story is emerging.

- srbp -

Fortis and Enel getting special treatment from Williams gov under expropriation bill

At least two of companies whose long-term power purchase agreements were ripped up under the December 2008 expropriation bill will still get all their cash under long-term power purchase arrangements, according to natural resources minister Kathy Dunderdale.

Abitibi is not included in the arrangements, apparently.

Dunderdale told the House of Assembly on Thursday that:

…we made a commitment to both of those companies [Fortis and ENEL] that regardless of what happened with Abitibi, at the end of this process we would ensure that they were kept whole, that they were properly compensated for fair market value for the assets. The PPAs that they have with Abitibi would also be honoured, Mr. Speaker.

Dunderdale said that the provincial government’s energy corporation  - NALCOR  - is still discussing arrangements with the two companies. The power purchase arrangements date from 1997 and 2001. The exact duration is currently unknown to your humble e-scribbler but would typically be in the range of 20 to 30 years.

ENEL partnered with Abitibi on the Star Lake project to supply electricity to Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro. Bill 75 seized all the generating and transmission assets of the Star Lake partnership and revoked all the agreement related to it, as listed at Annex E of Bill 75. 

Dunderdale made no reference to the other companies also affected by the seizure:

• Clarica
• Sun Life Assurance
• Mutual Life Assurance
• Standard Life Assurance, and
• Industrial Life Assurance.

Fortis – the other company Dunderdale discussed – was a partner in the Exploits Hydro Partnership.  Under a long-term power-purchase agreement, Exploits partnership sold power to Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro.

Dunderdale also admitted what Bond Papers readers already knew:  the provincial government is paying for a long-term loan for the Exploits partnership.  The outstanding balance on the loan is $59 million.  The provincial government paid the 2009 instalment.

The hydro-electric assets are likely the only ones seized in 2008 that could generate any reliable revenue to offset the costs of environmental clean-up at former Abitibi sites in the province.  Payment of loans and royalties to the companies other than Abitibi as if the expropriation never happened would significantly reduce any revenue NALCOR could gain from the assets.

Dunderdale’s admission today could also further undermine any legal cases the provincial government is pursuing.  One of the problems government faced in recent Quebec court decisions on the Abitibi bankruptcy protection proceedings is that its environmental clean-up actions appeared to be aimed solely at Abitibi and were not part of the routine administration of provincial environmental laws.

Dunderdale’s admission makes it pretty clear that the government is treating some of the companies affected by the expropriation very differently from Abitibi.

Colouring the expropriation as aimed solely against Abitibi could also colour the move and undermine any defence of Abitibi’s NAFTA challenge.

-srbp-

Abitibi “intended to go bankrupt”': Williams

Newfoundland and Labrador Premier Danny Williams today said that the expropriation of assets belonging to three companies was a “very deliberate move” and that as a result of the expropriation of assets belonging to three separate companies, the provincial government can now “use the value of these assets to deal with the environmental liability which we would have been responsible for because they [AbitibiBowater] intended to go bankrupt in the first place.”

Williams made the comments in Question Period during an afternoon sitting of the House of Assembly.

He said that AbitibiBowater “would have walked away from their responsibilities”.  Williams said the paper company would have gone bankrupt, sought creditor protection or “done what they were in the process of doing and that was trying to sell off those assets to somebody else.”

That’s the first time Williams has linked the expropriation to a failed bid by the provincial government to buy one of those assets, a hydro project at Star Lake which was not supplying power to the mill at Grand Falls.

In another answer to questions from opposition leader Yvonne Jones, Williams described the mill at Grand Falls and the two houses associated with it as “the most valuable piece of real estate in Grand Falls”.  He did not explain why the provincial government intended to expropriate all the other assets and leave  AbitibiBowater with the most valuable piece of real estate in Grand Falls when he had earlier described the expropriation as seizing the valuable assets to forestall their being sold off.

Those assets would have been lost to an irresponsible company that did not give a darn about the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, the people of Central Newfoundland and Labrador. They would not - they would have walked away from their responsibilities. They either would have gone into consumer protection, they would have gone bankrupt or they would have done what they were in the process of doing, and that was trying to sell off those assets to somebody else.

While Williams has been careful in previous statements and made no comments during debate on the expropriation bill, his most recent remarks could weigh heavily against the province’s efforts to fight off a NAFTA challenge and to push the environmental liabilities onto AbitibiBowater.

Williams comments raise the prospect that the expropriation was not done  - as he originally suggested  - because AbitibiBowater breached a 1905 lease.  In a statement to the legislature before his natural resources minister introduced the expropriation bill, Williams said:

Abitibi has reneged on the bargain struck between it and the Province over the industrial development of the Province’s timber and water resources for the benefit of the residents of the Province.

Mr. Speaker, having said that, we cannot as a government allow a company that no longer operates in this Province to maintain ownership of our resources.

-srbp-

Dunderdale on Abitibi/Fortis/ENEL expropriation: Oops!

An obviously stressed natural resources minister Kathy Dunderdale admitted to the House of Assembly yesterday that there were problems with the provincial government’s hasty seizure of  assets belong to AbitibiBowater, Fortis and ENEL.

The paper mill itself – originally supposed to be left out of the deal – wound up being left in.  As a result, taxpayers are stuck with a potentially major environmental liability.

CBC puts the Premier’s reaction to the shag-up this way:

Outside the legislature, Premier Danny Williams told reporters he's embarrassed by the turn of events, but he can live with them.

"It was something I wasn't happy with when it happened, but it was an innocent mistake that was made by an official in the department," Williams said. "As simple as that."

That’s bad enough, except adding the mill when you explicitly wanted to leave it out isn’t the only shag up in the whole confiscation.

According to a court decision in Quebec where Abitibi is working through a bankruptcy protection proceeding with its creditors, the Williams administration also forgot to pick up a few of the Abitibi assets in the province that should have been seized as well in the Chavez-esque sweep.

The Legal Genius(es) behind the whole fiasco left out the port facilities at Botwood and the former mill site in Stephenville.

Abitibi closed the mill at Stephenville closed in 2005 after a prolonged battle with the provincial government that included threats by the Premier to expropriate Abitibi’s assets:

"If there's an interested party that can have that mill up and running, we'd be interested in talking to them," Williams said Monday.

"If that requires expropriation, then that's something we'd certainly consider."

In the end no other buyers emerged and the mill closed despite the Premier’s 2003 election commitment that the mill would not shut down on his watch.

-srbp-

Fortis/ENEL Expropriation, one year later

Outside the legislature on Wednesday, Premier Danny Williams had this to say about the legal and financial problems that are still hanging around after last December’s seizure of assets by the government under a hastily compiled expropriation bill.

The expropriation will come with a purchase price, but Williams said he now plans to deduct the cost of severance and environmental cleanup from the final amount.

"So, if the possible environmental exposure and, or, the severance were X amount, and the amount that the assets were valued at were substantially less, well, then obviously there would be no payments of cash from the government," Williams said.

One of the great unreported facts of this expropriation – unreported by the conventional media, that is – is that the expropriation didn’t just affect AbitibiBowater.

Nope.

Included in the seizure were assets of Newfoundland and Labrador-based Fortis Inc and an Italian company called ENEL. 

The former was involved in a hydro project that supplied power to the former Abitibi mill at Grand Falls-Windsor and sold the rest to the provincial energy corporation.

The latter was involved in a hydro project at Star Lake that had absolutely nothing to do with supplying anything to the mill.  The Star Lake generating plant was built in response to a call for proposals by the province’s energy corporation about a decade ago. The plant supplied power to the grid to reduce emissions from the diesel plant at Holyrood.

Now if you take the Premier’s comments at face value you get a truly amazing thing and one that is unlikely to be swallowed that easily by the companies involved.

If there are any environmental liabilities related to the Abitibi mill, it would be quite a stretch to suggest that ENEL and Fortis somehow have any responsibility for them given that their operations were not for running the mill.  ENEL has got a real case in this respect, one would suppose.

By the Premier’s construction a company like ENEL could undertake legitimate business activities based on a government contract entered into in good faith by all parties only to find itself, in less than a decade, not only without the assets it paid for but without any compensation whatsoever for the government seizure.

And the excuse for stiffing them is that they somehow gained a liability for something they had no responsibility for in the first place.

This is one of those moments where you’d wonder if the Premier would be quite so calm about it all if someone were trying to pull the same stunt on him.

Meanwhile, one wonders if the rapprochement between the provincial Conservatives and their federal cousins might possibly have something to do with trying to get Ottawa to protect the Newfoundland and Labrador treasury from the fall-out of last year’s seizure.  The federal government has to deal with the international repercussions – like the NAFTA challenge Abitibi filed – but there doesn’t seem to be anything stopping the feds from recovering their costs once the international bits are settled.

Of course, all of this really makes a mockery of recent efforts by the provincial government to win sympathy for its case against Hydro-Quebec.

If the Americans really started to care about it all anyway, might those same New York financiers who supposedly listened sympathetically to the luncheon speech a couple of weeks ago feel quite so favourably disposed to the Premier’s cause if they got the full story on how Fortis and ENEL got screwed over by the Premier’s seizure?

This expropriation business is a long way from settled and the bills are a long way from being paid.  Something says some of the bills won’t be settled in cash, either. 

Payback will be a mother.

-srbp-

Chamber concerned seized central hydro assets gain for provincial government, loss for region

The Exploits Regional Chamber of Commerce is very concerned about the benefits from seized hydroelectric assets going somewhere other than the region of the province in which they are located, according to the Grand Falls-Windsor Advertiser.

The chamber estimates that based on electricity used by AbitibiBowater (54 megawatts), savings to Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro in excess of $70 million annually are being realized.

The chamber wrote the CEO of Nalcor in May to try and meet to discuss how the Exploits region could benefit from being adjacent to the source of the power. While the letter was copied to local MHAs and members of the provincial Ministerial Task Force set up to deal with the closure of the mill, Nalcor has not responded.

NALCOR is the provincial government energy company which took control of the assets earlier this year.  They were seized by the government from three companies:  AbitibiBowater, ENEL and St. John’s-based Fortis.

-srbp-

Missing bits

From a CBC story in which, among other things, Danny Williams brushes off the NAFTA issue in the Abitibi repo job:

The Newfoundland and Labrador's expropriation does not include the mill itself, although the government will take over a hydroelectric power plant at Star Lake, which sells power to the provincial grid. The government has said it will compensate AbitibiBowater for the Star Lake plant.

People should read more.

The expropriation bill seized all hydro assets AbitibiBowater held in central Newfoundland but they went beyond that.

They seized hydro assets  - way more than Star Lake - belonging to other companies and those companies are named in the expropriation bill:

• Fortis (Exploits River Hydro Partnership involves Central Newfoundland Energy, a subsidiary of Fortis Generation)
• Clarica Life Insurance (now owned by Sun Life)
• Enel North America

All have likely lawyered up pretty tight.  An e-mail inquiry by your humble e-scribbler to Sun Life netted a nil response.  The company’s public affairs department wouldn’t even confirm what involvement the company had in the hydro project in the first place.  As dumb as that kind of response is, that’s how you can tell the lawyers are on the job and bums are really tight:  a company won’t even confirm information that is currently in the public domain. 

There was no hope they’d offer any remarks on the substance of the dispute.

But seriously, people should read more and maybe pursue a bit more of these stories.

Like how does Beth Marshall’s husband Stan, Stan the Fortis Man feel about Danny frigging over his investments? Stan’s been known to have a blunt opinion or two.

Like is Enel – or any other company partnered with Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro – reconsidering its investment based on the expropriation? 

Or has anything been expropriated beyond the Abitibi bits, which would be contrary to the law, and which would have the effect of strengthening Abitibi’s case that the expropriation was discriminatory?

Or have they really all lawyered up, which is a sign of a much bigger dispute and much bigger problem than you’d think if you got all your news from, say voice of the cabinet minister.

Maybe if Lorraine Michael and others hadn’t been so flattered that Danny had deigned to let them in on such historic action – “socialist” action, as Lorraine proudly declared it in the legislature – that they turned off their brains, they might have noticed the sweeping nature of the expropriation bits of the bill. 

Nope.  If people paid attention to some of the details other stories might emerge, one’s that have more to do with the current issue than the pap being spewed from all manner of organs and orifices.

Like for instance, they might have found the inadvertent humour in this comment from the Premier:

"You know I'm a lawyer of over 30 years, so blowhard, five-page letters that get sent to everybody in the country mean nothing to me. I know the law."

Sometimes the five page blows only get sent to one party, but the point is still the same.  Knowing the law is something else though.

And that’s where people might want to separate the bluster from the evidence.  You see, for all the praise he gives himself, Danny Williams record in court  - with decisions rendered by judges  - isn’t that good.  Well, not if the two prominent cases that have been adjudicated in the past five years are to be considered. 

In Henley v. Cable Atlantic, the Premier lost badly in a case he didn’t have to even fight.  He elected to dispute a contract with a guy hired to help with the sale of his old cable company to Rogers. The guy  eventually got paid in full but not until Danny Williams shelled out for expensive lawyers to fight the case  - in a losing cause – through two Ontario courts. The bill at the end must have been double what it would have been if Williams hadn’t been so bloody minded at the start.  SO if the guy is will to waste his own cash on a loser, imagine what he’d do when he was playing with other peoples’ money.

Enter Ruelokke v. Newfoundland and Labrador, in which the provincial government – in a brief that surely was approved by the province’s top legal beagle if not written by him – argued that a clause that said the final decision by an appeal tribunal was binding on the parties actually meant that none of it could be reviewed by a court.

That got laughed out of court just on the English comprehension alone.  The rest of the evidence was an unflattering portrait of an administration that was all over the map when it came to the whole business of finding a boss to run the offshore regulatory board.

Then there’s the 2005 offshore deal in which the government started out looking for a federal transfer that doubled offshore revenues forever.

They settled for $2.0 billion in cash.

Then there’s the Hebron deal.  it could be worth $10, $20 or $28 billion depending on which hyper-inflated estimate you wanted to take at the announcement. (Yes, they settled for two billion in cash on the other one)   Guaranteed flat 1% royalties up front for the companies, a higher royalty rate tied to the price of oil (above an amount it flows;  below – nothing),  a give away of historic proportions on the construction side, a deal in which the companies  - alone - have a decade to decide whether or not to build the project.

You get the point.

-srbp-