Showing posts with label Hydro Quebec. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Hydro Quebec. Show all posts

06 November 2009

Fire cost NALCOR $18 million in lost revenue

A fire at Churchill Falls last November cost the province’s energy corporation a total of $18 million in lost revenue in late 2008 and early 2009 under the Guaranteed Winter Availability Contract (GWAC) with Hydro-Quebec.

NALCOR Energy released updated information in response to a request from your humble e-scribbler.

The fire occurred November 3, 2008 in a cable shaft at the Churchill Falls generating station and caused what a NALCOR spokesperson described in an e-mail as “extensive damage”.  Damage knocked two of the plant’s 11 turbines out of action and reduced overall generating capacity by a reported 1,000 megawatts.

According to the spokesperson,

This contributed to the decrease in GWAC revenue to Nalcor Energy in 2008 of $8.4 million and year-to-date 2009 of $9.6 million. No penalties [for non-performance] apply under GWAC.

One of the turbine/generation units was back in action by February 2009.  Repairs to the second unit were completed over the summer.

Under the GWAC,  Churchill Falls Labrador Corporation [CFLCo] agrees to supply Hydro-Quebec with a set amount of power during HQ’s high demand winter season apparently in addition to that supplied under the 1969 contract.  The power is used in Quebec. 

GWAC is one of several elements of a 1998 deal that included the recall and resale of a block of 130 megawatts of power and a new shareholders agreement for CFLCo between majority shareholder Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro and minority shareholder Hydro-Quebec.  

In the recall component of the deal, NL Hydro recalled a block of power under the 1969 contract and then resold it to Hydro Quebec at new, higher rates.

The recall element of the agreement has now been replaced by a new deal to wheel upwards of 800 megawatts of Churchill Falls power to the United States through Quebec.  Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro pays Hydro Quebec’s transmission corporation $19 million annually in fees for wheeling the power under terms set down by Quebec’s provincial energy regulatory board.

NL Hydro gets  about the same net price for its power under the wheeling deal with Emera and Hydro Quebec as it did selling the power directly to Hydro Quebec. 

Note that some of the links on GWAC are no longer active. They seem to have disappeared in a series of routine redesigns of websites in the provincial government and in the development of the new NALCOR website.

-srbp-

29 October 2009

Williams fears wheeling partner will bail, too

New Brunswick Tory Opposition leader Danny Williams said today that New Brunswickers should rise up and oppose the plan to sell NB Power to Hydro-Quebec.

Williams, who is also Premier of Newfoundland and Labrador, said that "if [Quebec also] acquires P.E.I. and Nova Scotia [power], we will find ourselves in a situation where one province will have energy control of the entire Maritime provinces. It will be attempting to strand Newfoundland and Labrador. So good, cheap, competitively priced energy, can't be offered to that whole region.”

Williams is worried that HQ might also buy Nova Scotia Power?

Of course, that would be the  Nova Scotia Power that is owned by the same company  - Emera – that Williams is paying to sell electricity from Churchill Falls into New York state. 

Yes that’s right.  While Williams was frothing about the negative impact of the NB Power deal on Lower Churchill power sales to the United States, he is already selling power through Quebec and happily agreed to pay $19 million annually to do so. 

So much for blocking the Lower Churchill, right?

And now Williams is concerned that Emera will bail on him in favour of selling their Nova Scotia subsidiary to HQ.

Things must be getting really bad for Williams if he believes that even his business partners are abandoning him.  That’s on top of reports that have his party organizers blaming Trevor Taylor, the former member of the provincial legislature, for Williams’ loss in the Tuesday by-election.  Talk about clubbing the fans.

Next thing you know he’ll be accusing his campaign donors of screwing him over too.

-srbp-

The NB Power/Hydro-Quebec Memorandum of Understanding

The Governments of Quebec and New Brunswick unveiled the deal today that will see Hydro-Quebec buy most of the assets of NB Power.

The full text of the memorandum of understanding is available online.

Key points of the deal (quoted from the official news release):

  • Under the terms of the MOU, Hydro-Québec would acquire most of the assets of NB Power for an amount equivalent to NB Power's debt, $4.75 billion. The utility's debt would thereby be completely eliminated.
  • As a pre-condition to the negotiations, New Brunswick has established a revised rate structure to benefit New Brunswickers. It is estimated by New Brunswick to have a value to ratepayers of about $5 billion. The proposed transaction would have no impact on Hydro-Québec's electricity rates in Quebec.
  • NB Power would continue as a separate, New Brunswick entity, headquartered in Fredericton, and would use the existing name and corporate identity. Hydro-Québec would offer employment to all employees of NB Power at the time of closing, and respect the collective agreements in place.
  • The nuclear generating facility at Point Lepreau (after completion of the plant's refurbishment), the hydro facilities, the peaking power plants and the transmission and distribution assets of NB Power are part of the proposed transaction. Hydro-Québec would not assume any liabilities with respect to the Point Lepreau refurbishment project.
  • Thermal generation facilities at Coleson Cove and Belledune would continue to be owned and operated by the Province of New Brunswick, and would supply electricity to Hydro-Québec under the terms of tolling agreements.

The upside for the New Brunswick provincial government appears to be that it offloads a debt pig while guaranteeing stable rates for residential consumers and lower- and hence more attractive  - rates for industrial consumers.

The one curious part of the MOU is that Hydro-Quebec continues to operate the company as if it were a Crown corporation in that it will pay no taxes of any kind to the provincial government. 

Interestingly, Premier Shawn Graham acknowledged the role played  by his predecessors Frank McKenna and Bernard Lord in laying the ground work for the disposal of NB Power. 

Lord’s successor as Tory party leader has been opposed to the deal since before he knew what it was about. 

-srbp-

Eating his own

Newfoundland and Labrador Premier Danny Williams is tearing strips, not off New Brunswick Premier Shawn Graham or Hydro-Quebec but his own deal with Hydro-Quebec from last April.

Williams attacked the deal in a letter to Graham:

Despite our expectation of regulatory fairness [ in wheeling electricity across Quebec], Nalcor Energy has encountered obstacles in Quebec. Nalcor has been forced to lodge four complaints with the regulatory authority in Quebec about the tactics being used by Hydro Quebec Transenergie that serve to delay and inhibit our progress.

Under an agreement announced in April 2009, the provincial government’s energy corporation sells power to unidentified customers in New York state.  The power is wheeled along transmissions lines in Quebec under what is known as the open access transmission tariff.   NALCO pays Hydro-Quebec $19 million a year to wheel the power.  The figure was not released by NALCO or the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador.

While Williams is now slamming the deal – making it sound as if there was no wheeling agreement at all -  back in April, he was positively giddy with excitement at what he termed an “historic” agreement:

“This is truly a historic and momentous occasion for the people of our province, as never before have we been granted access through the province of Quebec with our own power…”.

There is no obvious explanation for Williams sudden attack on his own project nor is there any explanation for his claims that Hydro-Quebec is blocking or trying to block NALCOR’s access to markets.  The April deal proves there is no real obstacle.

What makes the latest tirade all the more bizarre is that in a scrum with reporters two days ago, Williams acknowledged  that there was no obstacle to getting power to markets in the United States.  In the same scrum, he said Hydro-Quebec might be trying to do just that. 

His disdain for the sale of NB Power to Hydro-Quebec is apparently based on losing the race for new markets for hydroelectricity.

-srbp-

28 October 2009

Williams miffed that HQ beat him to market again

In his written reply to Shawn Graham released today, Newfoundland and Labrador Premier Danny Williams reveals that his government energy corporation was in discussions to sell power to New Brunswick from the still largely conceptual Lower Churchill project.

But Hydro Quebec – with as much power as the Lower Churchill may one day offer already under construction -  evidently beat Williams to the punch.

The real  source of Williams’ frustration at news of a deal to sell NB Power to Hydro Quebec is buried after six lengthy paragraphs of irrelevant frothing:

One of the potential impacts of Hydro Quebec’s dominance may be the premature cessation of current, good faith discussions between Nalcor Energy and NB Power to sell competitively priced Lower Churchill power to New Brunswick and jointly advance the long term, mutual interests of both of our provinces in conjunction with Nova Scotia and P.E.I. These discussions have not yet reached an advanced stage, so it is not possible to quantify the benefits that might be lost to our two provinces and all of Atlantic Canada if discussions are terminated. If New Brunswick narrows down its range of alternatives to a single-window with Hydro Quebec, full information may not be available to evaluate the opportunities that other alternatives may bring. I would reiterate that our province feels compelled to look into the potential of anti-competitive behaviour on the part of Hydro Quebec given the potential monopoly that could exist as the result of an agreement between them and NB Power. [Emphasis added]

The revelation that Williams had been beaten to the market by Hydro Quebec is almost as astonishing as word last month from Williams energy minister that he had been working for five years, making secret offers for Hydro-Quebec to take an ownership stake in the Lower Churchill project. 

Williams criticises the Churchill Falls deal in the Graham letter but, according natural resources minister Kathy Dunderdale, Williams was willing to set the issue to one side in exchange for Hydro-Quebec buying a piece of the Lower Churchill.

In 2006, Williams rejected a proposal from Ontario Hydro and Hydro-Quebec to jointly develop the Lower Churchill.  Williams said the province would go-it-alone.  He made no reference at the time to efforts to lure Hydro-Quebec into another deal, as Dunderdale revealed.

Hydro-Quebec already had significant hydro projects in the works and added about 4,000 megawatts of wind energy to its mix of new project.

The Lower Churchill proposal currently undergoing environmental review consists of transmission through Quebec and a line to bring power from the project to eastern Newfoundland.  There is no proposal in public to run the power to New Brunswick.

The Lower Churchill project  - estimated to cost between $6.0 and $9.0 billion – has no confirmed markets.  An opening to Rhode Island apparently fell apart because power could not be delivered at a marketable price.  That isn’t what the energy minister told the public.

-srbp-

27 October 2009

Shawn to Danny: sod off, mate

New Brunswick Premier Shawn Graham sent Newfoundland and Labrador premier Danny Williams a polite letter on Wednesday telling him to keep his nose out of the NB Power talks and stick to running his own province.

image

Graham also repeats the point that others have made, namely that any suggestion that the grid through new Brunswick might be somehow closed or restricted as a result of any deal with Hydro-Quebec is without merit or foundation. Click that image, by the way, and you’ll get the whole letter, courtesy of cbc.ca/nb.

Stunning.  Not.

Incidentally, there’s also no small irony in Williams’ comments warning about New Brunswick selling off its natural resources to Hydro-Quebec.

In September natural resources minister Kathy Dunderdale revealed some details about Danny Williams’ previously secret offers to Hydro-Quebec to take an ownership stake in the Lower Churchill.

labradore offers chunks of the transcript of Dunderdale’s interview. So much for “despicable.” 

Those Dunderdale comments were all the more stunning in light of Williams’ previous position about demanding redress for the Churchill Falls contract before there would be any deal on the Lower Churchill.  According Dunderdale, Williams was willing to set the whole issue of the odious 1969 contract to one side in the interest of giving Quebec a fair return on its investment in the new project.

-srbp-

26 October 2009

NL and the NB Power story: the facts

For the benefit of those who keep using the Premier’s comments on the NB Power story, here is what is really going on, in the words of natural resources minister Kathy Dunderdale:

We know that if you come in here as an equity player that you have to have a good return on your investment. And we want you to have a good return on your investment. But it also has to be a good deal for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. Now we have been with that message back and forth [i.e. to Hydro-Quebec] for five years. No, sir. No, sir. There is no takeup on that proposal.

Yes.

That’s right.

Danny Williams wants Hydro-Quebec to have a good return on its investments.

In this case, it was a good return in exchange for owning a piece of the Lower Churchill.

So what is the pseudo-racket all about?

It might all be irrelevant by tomorrow evening.

-srbp-

25 October 2009

Kremlinology 10: Ah to be a Tory in Gander in October, when the dogs are fit to wag

When the political going gets tough, what better way to handle it than to launch a phoney jihad against a completely imaginary enemy over a completely imaginary dispute:

The Premier is gearing up for another fight on the national stage. Danny Williams says Hydro Quebec continues to try and block this province from developing the Lower Churchill, now refusing to sign onto a water management agreement for the Churchill River in Labrador.

For starters, Danny Williams is only pissed at Hydro-Quebec because they aren’t willing to take the ownership of the Lower Churchill he offered then. It’s not that they are so interested in the LC and Danny that they are blocking him, it’s really bothering him that Hydro-Quebec just isn’t interested at all.

And that’s after five years of desperately trying:

[Natural resources minister Kathy] Dunderdale told VOCM Open Line show host Randy Simms on Friday morning that over the past five years, the Williams administration “got a path beaten to their [Hydro Quebec’s] door” in an attempt to have HQ become what Dunderdale described as an “equity partner” in the Lower Churchill.

Dunderdale described the Lower Churchill “piece” as a “win-win” for Hydro Quebec. She said that despite efforts by the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador there was “no take up [from Hydro Quebec] on the proposal.”

But the biggest thing you have to consider on this water rights agreement thingy is that if the two parties – NALCO and Churchill Falls-Labrador Company – can’t reach and agreement on their own, the whole thing will be settled legally and finally by the public utilities board.

No big public, hair-mussing fuss required.

Danny Williams knows this because that’s what he amended the law to say in preparation for just such an event.

Well, okay first the provincial government tried to screw with the contract – as someone else tried in the 1980 water rights case - but they got caught red-handed in that little bit of tomfoolery.

While Williams and his ministers tried to downplay it at the time, they were caught so far in the wrong they even had to call an extremely rare emergency session of the legislature to deal with the mess created by someone’s childish legalistic game.

Anyway, that’s another story.

CFLCO not interested in the deal on water rights Williams wants?

Well that’s no problemo.

The whole thing just falls along according to amendments made to the Electrical Power Control Act in 2007 by none other than Danny Williams’ own administration.

The public utilities board – headed by Williams’ new buddy Andy Wells – just imposes a deal on the two sides:

5.5 (1) Where 2 or more persons to whom subsection 5.4(1) applies fail to enter into an agreement within a reasonable time, one or more of them may apply to the public utilities board to establish the terms of an agreement between them.

(2) Where an application is made to the public utilities board under subsection (1), the board shall establish the terms of an agreement for the purpose of achieving the policy objective set out in subparagraph 3(b)(i).

(3) An agreement established by the public utilities board under subsection (2) is binding on the persons named in the agreement.

Poof.

Job done.

Pas de sweat.

And lookit, the company involved here isn’t Hydro-Quebec, it’s the Churchill Falls-Labrador Corporation. That’s the company in which the provincial government’s energy company – NALCOR - owns a 65% stake.

And if you are still not convinced this is all yet another case of Tory dog-wagging, just consider that this evil foreign demonio Hydro-Quebec hates Williams so much and is working so hard to block the Lower Churchill they were will to sign a deal allowing energy from Labrador wheel across their province.

Wheel power and they make millions off the wheeling charges. Gee, that’s really putting obstacles in the way of the Lower Churchill. Yep, what better way to block the Glorious Lower Churchill project than demonstrating that Danny Williams can wheel power through Quebec to some other market than Quebec without any obstacles.

So what is all Danny Williams’ puffed chest really about?

Not even Ed Martin - the head of the provincial government’s energy company - seems to know.

But if one Ed doesn’t, maybe your humble e-scribbler can offer some easy suggestions on what issues are causing the provincial Conservatives to go hunting for a distraction:

- The by-election in the Straits is really not going well at all for the Tories. Then there’s Terra Nova to fight where the Tories haven’t even got a candidate yet and the Liberals wound up having two to pick from. Eight cabinet ministers in one day and four trips by the premier Hisself don’t seem to be working on the voters, at least not the way it is supposed to work.

Very frustrating when the old tricks don’t work any more.

- It’s really, really, really painful to make one decision and then be forced to make another. Think Danny Williams and the whole lab and x-ray thing. Jerome Kennedy confessed just this past week to what some of us have known all along: the decision to chop service was made by the entire cabinet.

That’s why they all stuck so hard to the line about “improvements.

That’s why they resisted changing their minds right up until the point they had no choice.

That’s why they tried desperately for weeks to try and blame someone else for the shag up rather than the people who actually shagged up.

It really bruises the ego to lose.

- And that’s on top of a string of “losses” including the Gros Morne one. Again, as much as they tried to downplay it, the whole emergency session of the legislature must have deeply embarrassed cabinet.

- There’s also the ongoing embarrassment of Paul Oram coupled with his decision to up and run when the going got tough. A cabinet minister resigns hot on the heels of another, thereby creating a mini-crisis in the government? Not a way to make the leader feel cheery. Paul Oram took himself off a raft of Tory Christmas card lists with his poorly executed exit.

- Unflattering comparisons to Roger Grimes? Lighten up a bit, people. It’s a joke.

- Let’s not forget the admission that the provincial Conservatives haven’t been doing such a fine old job of managing the public purse as they’d claimed. The word Oram used was “unsustainable.” Finance minister Tom Marshall said much the same thing.

- Then there’s the revelation that the government’s satisfaction rate ain’t what it was purported to be by the government’s own pollster. Between the opposition and local media, three recent CRA polls – never released publicly before – show that the people of Newfoundland and Labrador told CRA one thing but CRA told the public something else. The truth is sometimes painful but it does come out.

- Then there is the ongoing frustration of the Lower Churchill. As a story in the Telegram noted [not available online], NALCO has to go back and answer a whole bunch of questions for the environmental review on the Lower Churchill and that is now behind schedule. That’s on top of the lack of partners (see above), lack of markets - think Rhode Island - and the huge embarrassment to the government of being forced to abandon their original plan of slinging power lines through a UNESCO World Heritage Site.

On the whole it has been a very rough patch for the ruling Conservatives, at least from their perspective over the last six weeks and a bit more.

And what better place for provincial Conservatives to engage in some traditional Tory dog-wagging than the annual convention in Gander.

After all, that’s where ABC was born, at a time – as the House spending scandal broke in 2006, among other things – when things didn’t look all that rosy for provincial Tories in the short term.

Come to think of it, Loyola Sullivan packed it in not long after that, as did Paul Shelley and a few others.

Hmmm.

-srbp-

24 October 2009

$10 billion for NB Power

A deal is close according to the Globe and Mail that would see Hydro-Quebec buy all of NB Power for $10 billion.

But the Globe story contains some of its characteristic shit reporting in the sub-head: “blocking access of other provinces' utilities to U.S. markets”.

There’s more the same drivel farther down the story but don’t buy most of it because it just isn’t true.

This sale can’t block access for anyone to NB’s power grid.  It can’t, not if NB Power and HQ want to keep selling power into the US.

And from the looks of it at least one statement could be completely false:  “Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro has complained to regulators in Quebec and the United States that Hydro-Québec's transmission arm is not providing it fair access to U.S. markets.”

You see Danny Williams has bitched alright, but he was bitching because he couldn’t get HQ to buy into the Lower Churchill. 

But…

According to Ed Martin, Williams right-hand on any of a number of issues, there is no problem whatsoever with Hydro-Quebec.  Thus it would be very odd if the company Martin runs was doing things – as the Globe reports -  like filing formal complaints alleging some pretty serious unfair market practices against HQ. 

All they have actually done is pursue a tariff through Quebec which they duly got.  Your see – Shawn and Rheal take note – NL Hydro has already been wheeling power into the United States across lines in Quebec in a deal touted by none other than …wait for it…Danny Williams Hisself.

Notice there is no further detail on that in the Globe story.  That’s a pretty good clue that Rheal Seguin and and Shawn McCarthy just didn’t do their homework.   Instead, they seem to have opted for a half-backed paraphrase of an equally a half-baked version of the old Danny story and not rely on what Danny’s energy minister said. 

In the process, the bitching morphed into a complaint filed with a Canadian or American utility regulator.  Look farther on in the story and that’s exactly what they do, and as you can see they got the bitching story and the bit about the alternate transmission line wrong too.  That’s what you get for quoting Liz’s thumbs and not doing any real research.

There’s also another completely asinine comment about HQ getting greater access to the US as a result.  If the guys at the Globe even bothered to check their facts, they’d know that HQ already owns capacity on the grid through New Brunswick. The story has been out there since the spring. That’s definitely not the motivation for this deal.

The upside to this story is that New Brunswickers will shed a 90-year-old chronic debt pig and retire in the process what the Globe describes as 40% of public debt in one fell swoop.

Let’s just hope that while about half the story appears to be complete fiction, the bit about New Brunswickers shedding their debt burden turns out to be true.

-srbp-

23 October 2009

Competitive Advantage versus the Albania Solution

New Brunswick and Quebec have some interesting common energy interests, not the least of which is New Brunswick’s electricity interconnection with the United States.

No surprise therefore that the two provinces are talking about co-operation, possibly including the sale of some of NB Power’s assets to Hydro-Quebec.

What  parts of the New Brunswick company might be of interest to Quebec aren’t clear.  One thing is certain, though:  the nuclear division is mired in cost over-runs on the up-grade for the Point Lepreau site.  That might well make it a huge liability for NB Power in any broader sale.

The one competitive advantage the province has is its transmission lines and a strong, continuing relationship with New England customers.  By contrast, Newfoundland and Labrador can’t even figure out if they are still working with Rhode Island.

Expect a local talking point that heads somewhere close to the giant conspiracy theory floated earlier by the Premier.

What you get by putting the real stories together is that NB Power is considerably more attractive than a fanciful project in Labrador that is both far from market and far from existing. A recent Telegram report by Rob Antle [not online] noted that the project is behind schedule in delivering detailed answers as part of the environmental review process.

On top of that it can’t be discounted that political tirades by the current administration have poisoned the relationship with other provinces.  things are evidently so bad that even a willingness by Danny Williams to completely abandon his “redress” position and offer Hydro-Quebec an ownership stake in the Lower Churchill didn’t get even a sniff of interest from the Quebec Crown corporation.

Isolation is not good for Newfoundland and Labrador’s long term interest. The New Brunswick-Quebec connection demonstrates that pretty clearly.

-srbp-

10 September 2009

Hydro Quebec not an issue: Ed Martin

A few days before Danny Williams tried to blame Hydro-Quebec for delays and problems in the Lower Churchill project, NALCO chief executive Ed Martin was singing the same old song about what a great project he had and how any day now he’d be ready to start talking to prospective customers about a sale.

He’s been saying that for three years.

But here’s part of what you’ll find in the August 31 Toronto Star:

Martin doesn't see the Quebec issue as a major stumbling block, as regulation requires the province to allow access to its grid in return for a set tariff. Hydro Quebec and Nalcor are just working out the details.

That’s the exact opposite of the line Danny has been pushing for a week or so, now.

You can also notice in this piece that  - according to Martin - the project will be financed at least in part by oil revenues.  Some of those are flowing now from White Rose, but others won’t be along for the better part of the next decade.

Ed Martin is going to have to pull off some neat financial tricks if he plans to pay for a $10 to $14 billion project  Danny Williams said will be pushing power in 2015 when the cash Martin is counting on won’t start showing up at his front door until around 2020. 

But anyway…

Ed needs to talk to Danny or vice versa.  Basically these guys are on two completely different pages about this project. 

Then again, Danny and others seem to be on different pages quite a bit lately, including with himself over Hydro-Quebec and an ownership stake in the Lower Churchill.

Rest assured though, that as much as Danny Williams and his team appear to be all over the map, there is a piece of paper somewhere with the word plan written on the top of it.

At least that’s what he felt compelled to tell the local board of trade the other day after a local newspaper editor pointed out the decidedly errat…mercuri…caprici…ummm…errr… impulsive way the provincial government tends to be. 

Well, he said “slaphappy” too, but let’s use impulsive because it is a bit friendlier than most of the words that come to mind.

-srbp-

09 September 2009

Churchill Falls reversion fails for second time

The Newfoundland and Labrador government  is making quick changes to a 2008 law after lawyers for the Churchill Falls (Labrador) Corporation  - CF(L)Co – raised questions about the impact of the bill on the company’s 1961 lease and rights to all property related to Churchill Falls.

Lawyers for CF(L)Co raised the issue with the provincial government’s  NALCOR Energy company during talks on water management for the proposed Lower Churchill project. 

The changes were tabled Tuesday in an emergency sitting of the House of Assembly.

It appears that - reminiscent of the 1980 water rights reversion bill - the 2008 bill stripped CF(L)Co of its lease.

In the original 2008 bill - Energy Corporation of Newfoundland and Labrador Water Rights Act - the Lower Churchill River is described as including “all waters that originate within the Churchill River catchment area and all rivers that naturally flow within the catchment area or from diversions into the catchment area.”

Clause three of the then stated that

any property in and rights to the use and flow of water, previously conferred by a grant, lease, licence or other instrument or under a statute of the province, or vested in, acquired by or accruing to a person by whatever means relating to the Lower Churchill River are extinguished.  [Emphasis added]

By combining the two clauses, the new bill effectively cancelled the 1961 Churchill Falls lease.  The 2008 law also blocked rights holders from any legal action and stripped them of  any entitlement to compensation.  

The bill became law on June 4, 2008.  There is no indication when cabinet issued the license to the energy corporation, now known as NALCOR Energy.

The changes introduced in Tuesday’s emergency session make it plain that the 2008 water rights law applies only to the Lower Churchill and that, for absolute certainty,  the 2008 bill “ excludes the area described in Appendix A to The Churchill Falls (Labrador) Corporation Limited (Lease) Act, 1961, and all waters while they are in that area.”

Emergency sessions are rare

For its part, the Williams administration is downplaying the session and the hasty changes.  In a news release, Dunderdale said that the act was never intended to cover Churchill Falls.

But the very fact the session was called to deal with one set of amendments to one bill suggests the issues involved are far from routine and that the legal implications of the water rights bill would be significant if left unamended.

Emergency or special sessions occur very rarely and usually only deal with extraordinary issues like war or labour disputes that threaten public health and safety.

Ordinarily – and if the implications of the bill were considered inconsequential or inadvertent -   CF(L)Co and NALCOR could simply have made routine amendments in the regular fall sitting a condition of an overall deal on water rights management on the Churchill River. 

Interestingly, the provincial government also tried to downplay the water rights bill in 2008, even to the point of making apparently misleading statements in the legislature.

In June 2008,  natural resources minister Kathy Dunderdale told the House of Assembly that the bill was needed since government had decided against using the  Lower Churchill Development Corporation as the vehicle to develop the Gull Island and Muskrat Falls power projects. 

But the 2008 water rights bill didn’t repeal the 1978 Lower Churchill Development Act, nor did it remove the LCDC option for development of the Lower Churchill.  The 2008 bill merely extinguished previously existing rights, leases, grants and licenses. 

Deja vue

This marks the second time since 1975 that a Progressive Conservative administration in Newfoundland and Labrador has found itself in hot water over legislation related to Churchill Falls.

In 1980 Brian Peckford’s administration introduced the Upper Churchill Water Rights Reversion Act.  The bill expressly cancelled the 1961 lease.  A subsequent legal challenge by creditors led to a landmark decision by the Supreme Court of Canada that ruled the 1980 statute was illegal. 

One of the influential factors in that case was public comments by politicians that identified the real purpose of the bill as being to undo the 1969 Churchill Falls agreement.

If the 2008 water rights bill effectively expropriated the Churchill Falls complex, it would be the second such move by the Williams administration in 2008.  In December 2008, the Williams administration moved to seize assets of Abitibi, Enel and Fortis including hydro-electric generating facilities

Confusion reigns in hydro policy

Revelation of the 2008 water rights ploy is the fourth Lower Churchill-related blockbuster news in a week.

On Friday, natural resources minister Kathy Dunderdale revealed that the provincial government had been trying unsuccessfully for five years to interest Hydro Quebec in an ownership stake in the Lower Churchill project. 

Dunderdale told Open Line Show host Randy Simms and his audience that the provincial government proposed to “set the Upper Churchill [issue] to one side.”

This move came despite commitments by Premier Danny Williams that there would be no Quebec involvement in the Lower Churchill without redress for the appalling 1969 deal that sees Hydro Quebec buy electricity at better than 1/30th the cost for which it is sold to consumers.    Williams has repeatedly railed against the 1969 deal as an example of a resource give-away by previous provincial governments.

The offer of an ownership stake to Hydro Quebec also flies in the face of Williams’ 2006 commitment to develop the Lower Churchill without any outside help:

"It's an opportunity for us to get back some of what we've lost on the Upper Churchill, and the fact that we're going to do this alone is significant," Williams said in an interview.

The Dunderdale revelation came after Williams accused Hydro Quebec of doing everything possible to block the Lower Churchill project. 

Williams also said last week that  his government would no longer plan to string hydro lines from the Lower Churchill through a UNESCO World Heritage site.

-srbp-

04 September 2009

Williams miffed Hydro Quebec rejecting ownership stake in Lower Churchill

Far from going it alone on the Lower Churchill or seriously pursuing a transmission route around Quebec,  the Williams administration has been working fervently to get Hydro Quebec on board as a co-owner  of the Labrador project. 

Those efforts have been in vain, according to natural resources minister Kathy Dunderdale.

Dunderdale  told VOCM Open Line show host Randy Simms on Friday morning that over the past five years, the Williams administration “got a path beaten to their [Hydro Quebec’s] door” in an attempt to have HQ become what Dunderdale described as an “equity partner” in the Lower Churchill.

Dunderdale described the Lower Churchill “piece” as a “win-win” for Hydro Quebec.  She said that despite efforts by the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador there was “no take up [from Hydro Quebec] on the proposal.”

The new version of events offered by Dunderdale is at odds with media reports this week of Premier Danny Williams’  speech to the Canadian Energy Forum meeting in St. John’s last Wednesday.  Williams reportedly accused Hydro Quebec of protecting its own interests and of blocking efforts to develop the Lower Churchill. 

However, Dunderdale’s comments fit with a more careful reading of  Williams’ remarks at the energy forum.

On Wednesday, Williams accused  Hydro Quebec of blocking the Lower Churchill project by not being interested in it at all.  Instead, the Quebec Crown corporation was pursuing other projects – like La Romaine – which Williams said was inferior to the Lower Churchill:  Williams is quoted by the Telegram in a Friday story [not online] as saying “La Romaine is not as good a project as the Lower Churchill.” 

Hydro Quebec is pursuing several projects within Quebec, including alternative sources of energy to hydro, all of which are aimed at boosting Hydro Quebec’s portfolio of capacity by more than 4500 megawatts. 

That was known at the time Williams made the decision in 2006 to “go it alone” on the Lower Churchill.  He also Williams attacked the other projects in 2006.  At that time, he claimed that those projects would get to market before the Lower Churchill and hence would beat out his pet project.  In 2006, Williams vowed to continue in spite of competition.

Friday marked the first time, however, that there was public acknowledgement the provincial government was actually trying to lure Hydro Quebec into an ownership position.

This week also marked the first time Williams linked a possible Hydro Quebec financial stake in the Lower Churchill to the 1969 Churchill falls contract.   Williams told the forum that as a result of Hydro Quebec’s exorbitant profits from Churchill Falls, “the very least I would expect Hydro-Quebec to co-operate with us to the fullest on getting the Lower Churchill through.” 

Previously,  Williams has consistently tied any negotiations with Hydro Quebec over the Lower Churchill with “redress” for the 1969 contract.  That’s inconsistent with offering Hydro Quebec an ownership stake in the new project.

Williams also said that Hydro Quebec had filed procedural applications in an effort to stall a hearing by the Quebec energy regulator - Regie de l’energie – into an objection filed by NALCOR/Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro over a regulatory issue. 

That’s a bizarre way to describe things, though.  Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro is one of several interveners in a decision on transmission rates for 2009.  NL Hydro filed its notice seeking intervener status at the last minute.  But since the rate hearings affect more companies than NL Hydro and NL Hydro is one of a dozen interveners, it’s hard to see how a routine regulatory process is part of a plot to frustrate the Lower Churchill.

What’s more, Williams’ claim flies in the face of successful efforts by NL Hydro to wheel power through Quebec.  Hydro started the process in 2006.   In early 2009, Hydro announced successful completion of a deal  with Hydro Quebec’s transmission arm to wheel power through Quebec to markets in the United States.  

Efforts to cut a deal with Hydro-Quebec while claiming something else are only the latest in a series of erratic moves and claims by the provincial government since 2003.

In 2006, Williams rejected out of hand a proposal from Hydro Quebec and Ontario’s Energy Financing Company to finance the Lower Churchill.  The proposal came in response to a called for expressions of interest issued by the Williams administration.  Under the proposal, Ontario and Quebec would buy the power and cover the costs of upgrading transmission facilities within the provinces and across the provincial boundaries.  The proposal also included flexible options on financing the construction of the two generating dams at Gull Island and Muskrat Falls.

Williams tossed that proposal and several others aside in favour of what he characterised at the time as going it alone.

In 2006, Williams said publicly that investors should look to the Lower Churchill instead of projects Quebec because Quebec is politically unstable.  Williams later apologised because people found the comment offensive but he did not retract his comments about Quebec’s political climate.

Williams has also sought financial support from others despite the “go-it-alone” claim. In successive federal elections, Williams has raised the idea of federal loan guarantees with federal party leaders.  He has also tied federal financial support for the Lower Churchill as some apparent form of compensation for having to run transmission lines around Gros Morne national park.

The erratic public positions don’t stop there. 

In 2008, natural resources minister Kathy Dunderdale indicated the provincial government was considering a law suit against the federal government over the 1969 contract.  Later in the day, the provincial government backtracked.

In early 2009, an official with NL Hydro hinted that the provincial government was considering financing options other than the “go-it-alone” version.  Little did the people of Newfoundland and Labrador know what the other options were.

-srbp-

01 September 2009

Curiouser and curiouser!

Even in the Land Through the Looking Glass that is Newfoundland and Labrador these days, a news release about an emergency session of the House of Assembly to deal with an amendment to  a single piece of legislation is very odd, indeed.

As the official version puts it:

In the course of negotiating a water management agreement for the Churchill River, CF(L)Co advised Nalcor that it felt aspects of the Energy Corporation of Newfoundland and Labrador Water Rights Act infringed upon its water rights lease for the Churchill Falls development. This was not the intent of the act, and government has agreed to amend it so as to avoid any ambiguity.

First of all, one must realise, of course, that NALCOR is the parent of Churchill Falls (Labrador) Corporation or CFLCo.  It holds 65% of the shares, in fact, and the two companies are not completely separate entities.  They are rather closely and intimately connected, in fact.

Second of all, one must also note that the section of the Electrical Power Control Act 1994 requiring a water management agreement came into effect this past January. 

In 2007, the current administration introduced this amendment in the legislature requiring two companies trying to generate hydro from the same river to come to some agreement on water sharing have one imposed by the public utilities board.   For whatever reason the current administration did not give it force of law until early 2009.

Third of all, the original lease that CF(L)Co holds has been around since 1961.  its provisions are well known to a host people inside and outside the provincial government.   in fact, given the history of the lease, it’s probably one of the most well studied and well-understood pieces of legal documentation existing anywhere in Canada.

And that’s the really odd thing.

Well, aside from the oddity of the company effectively negotiating with Itself, and then notifying Itself in the course of negotiations that Itself had a problem with something Itself had been party to previously because that infringed on something else Itself had also been party to much earlier.

You see, there is nothing that would have been noticed during the negotiation of a water management agreement for the Churchill River since January 2009  involving NALCOR, Energy Corporation, Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro or CF(L)Co or whatever name the Crown version of Sybil is using at the moment that wasn’t painfully obvious to NALCOR,  Energy Corporation Hydro or CF(L)Co or Sybil, as she then was, when the provincial government introduced the changes to the EPCA, 1994 in 2007 and then introduced the Energy Corporation of Newfoundland and Labrador Water Rights Act in early 2008.

What seems to be up for discussion here is something  your humble e-scribbler pointed out back in February

If that weren’t enough, changes to the Electrical Power Control Act – passed in 2007 but only quietly implemented after the expropriation in December 2008 – ensures that NALCO can enforce its control over future developments through the Public Utilities Board.

If one takes the implication from a set of Hydro Quebec questions about the Lower Churchill environmental assessment, the proposed water management regime appears to require that Churchill Falls be run in such a way as to maximize the generation at the Gull Island and Muskrat Falls dams under all contingencies. 

This might adversely affect CF(L)Co and some of its contractual arrangements to supply power.  It would also seem to go against several sections of the original lease.

If the government news release is clear – and that is by no means obvious – then the emergency session of the legislature is likely to be about passing an amendment that removes the last clause of the water rights act.  That’s the one that requires a water management agreement be reached or that one be imposed by the public utilities board.

What’s so interesting – if that’s the case – is that this is coming in an emergency session and not simply held for the fall sitting.  An amendment to the legislation could have been made later on with the requirement to produce the amendment being made a condition of any water management agreement.

There must be some sort of threat at work here, something much more significant than the prospect of an agreement between  “Nalcor Energy or its subsidiary and CF(L)Co”.  Incidentally, CF(L)Co is a subsidiary of NALCOR. 

Rather, there might not be much hope of a deal at all in the near term.  Instead,  CF(L)Co  - perhaps at the insistence of one of its shareholders – is protecting its interests and ensuring that the legal problems inherent in the EPCA amendment and the water rights act be eliminated now, without question or condition.

And if it was anything else, like say a repeat of the old water rights reversion act, then the thing would have been trumpeted in news conference held by the Premier.  Something says he just wouldn’t be able to resist the temptation to grandstand against any slight. 

Nope.  This is something government is trying to downplay, somewhat.

But rest assured:  emergency sessions like this one don’t happen every day and they sure as heck don’t come for a routine amendment, even if it is one intended merely to avoid “ambiguity”.

There’s something big behind this.

And it may not be pretty for the Lower Churchill project.

-srbp-

30 July 2009

Paying not to produce electricity

A drop in electricity demand in North America will see Hydro Quebec paying some of its suppliers not to produce electricity in the next year, according to le devoir.

Selon les documents déposés devant la Régie par la société d'État, ses surplus d'approvisionnements s'établissent à 11,3 TWh pour l'année prochaine. Le chiffre inclut les volumes d'énergie différés par le passé. De ce volume important, Hydro-Québec souhaite désormais soustraire les 4,3 TWh de la centrale de Bécancour. «Notre contrat avec TCE nous permet de payer pour la non-livraison d'électricité», a commenté Guy l'Italien, porte-parole d'Hydro-Québec. «Cette option nous coûte, dans le contexte actuel, moins cher que si nous décidions de prendre possession de l'électricité pour la revendre sur le marché.» La Société n'a pas été en mesure hier d'indiquer si des clauses similaires étaient présentes dans ses contrats d'approvisionnement avec d'autres de ses fournisseurs.

HQ is looking to shutter a natural gas generator operated by TransCanada Energy and pay the company $250 million under the terms of the contract between the two companies.

In the near term, HQ may also wind up with a significant surplus of generating capacity as it looks to bring the La Romaine and other projects on stream.  HQ will go ahead with the megaprojects since it has the capital and will look to recover its costs over a very long time span.

A drop in energy demand and competition from other electricity generators will likely also lessen the chances the provincial government’s cherished Lower Churchill project will find favourable capital arrangements.  The $6.0 to $9.0 billion project remains chronically about two to three years behind schedule in its most recent iteration. 

The project also doesn’t have a single customer to date outside consumers on the island portion of province.  They would be – in effect – forced to subsidise the massive project by virtue of having an infeed line strung to the Avalon peninsula even though demand on the island could be met through other less costly means.   Other than that, there are no signed power purchase agreements.

Interestingly, as demand has lessened, interest in the project has increased, particularly within the Maritime provinces.  Federal cabinet minister Peter Mackay and Prime Minister Stephen Harper recently toured the proposed dam sites by helicopter.

Of course, weakening demand and a proponent jammed up for cash and pushed along by its own hyper-torqued rhetoric might create a much better circumstance for energy buyers looking to strike a favourable long term deal.  That’s very similar to the situation that led Brinco to sign a disastrous deal with Hydro Quebec in 1969, with the backing of the provincial government.

-srbp-

h/t to Claude Boucher.

19 June 2009

Meanwhile across the border…

The Government of Quebec is advancing plans to develop the Petit Mecatina river, according to a government news release issued Thursday. The project feasibility study is expected this year.

Media reports in early June indicated that the project had been modified to involve two generating stations from the original four.  This would accelerate the development but it is unclear if the other stations could be developed subsequently in order to maximise the power flow.  The headwaters of the river are in Labrador.

The La Romaine project recently received the go ahead.  Both are part of a plan to make Quebec the key source of hydro-electric power in North America. Some 4500 megawatts of power are expected to flow from a series of new projects started by Hydro-Quebec in its 2006-2010 plan.

The La Romaine project caused a political stir in Newfoundland and Labrador over claims by some in the province that the project would lead to a re-drawing of the border between the two provinces and that the La Romaine would adversely affect portions of Labrador.

While it initially dismissed concerns, the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador submitted a brief to the environmental panel detailing its concerns.

-srbp-

05 April 2009

Wheeler deal numbers and stuff

1.  Five year sale of 130 megawatts (MW), 2004-2009:  $46 million annually. [See Note 1]

2.  Price (per kilowatt hour) for the five years:  4.0 cents per KWH.

3.  Two year deal to sell 130 MW of power to Emera:  Minimum $40 million annually.

4.  a.  Price for Emera deal (low;  $40 million for 130 MW):  3.5 cents per KWH

b.  Price for Emera deal (high;  $80 million for 250 MW): 3.6 cents per KWH [See Note 2]

5.  Cost of wheeling (paid to Hydro Quebec Transenergie):  $19 million.

6.  Cost of wheeling:  1.6 cents per KWH.

7.  Average consumer electricity price, New York, 2008:  16.9 cents per KWH. [21.125 Canadian cents per KWH at 25% exchange rate]

8.  Average consumer electricity price, New York, June to Sept 2008:  19.825 cents per KWH. [See Note 3]

nyfig19.   According to a cabinet minister familiar with the details of the 1998 Guaranteed Winter Availability Contract (GWAC), Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro considered wheeling the power in 1998 but decided against it since the price earned and the wheeling costs were considered too high. 

The figure at left shows pricing trends to 1999 for New York State. (Source: US EIA)

The information released thus far covers wheeling costs to the New York border. 

Additional wheeling costs would apply for each transmission system through which the power is wheeled before delivery to the final consumer. 

Emera is a broker, not a New York state energy retailer.

10.  The GWAC is apparently still in place.  This requires Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro to operate the plant at Churchill falls at peak efficiency to deliver at least 682 MW to Hydro Quebec during the winter months.  This amount may have been increased under this deal to 800 MW to replace the power that was sold to Quebec from 1998 to 2009 as part of the GWAC but which will now be wheeled to New York.

----------------------------

Note 1:  Values in Canadian dollars.  American prices in American dollars, except as noted.

Note 2:  130 megawatts is equivalent to 1.1388 billion KWH.  250 MW is equivalent to 2.19 billion KWH.  The figures at Line 4 are derived by simply dividing the revenue by the power output.  Since Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro did not release sufficient detail it is unclear if the revenue figures correspond to the power output or not. 130 megawatts at the higher price yields a price of 7.0 cents per KWH.

Note 3:  Source:  New York Energy Research and Development Authority

03 April 2009

Wheeling deal

Running a block of 130 megawatts of power through Quebec will cost Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro $19 million annually over the course of a five year deal with Hydro Quebec Transenergie.

The wheeling arrangement facilities the sale of the power to American markets.  The sale in the Untied States is brokered through Emera.  The Emera deal is for a duration of two years.  Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro is expected to net between $40 million and $80 million annually.

A previous deal to sell the same block of power directly to Hydro Quebec netted the Newfoundland and Labrador provincial energy company $46 million a year over a five year period. According to Le Devoir, Quebec sold the block on the American spot market.

In effect that would mean the deal announced Thursday merely replaces Hydro-Quebec with Emera as the broker. Hydro-Quebec still earns money on the project through its transmission arm and ultimately through its share of Churchill Falls Labrador Corporation, which generates the power.

Quebec energy minister Claude Bechard described the deal as win-win since it shows Newfoundland and Labrador had accepted the rules of the market instead of seeking special access to the Americans and a federal subsidy for a transmission line through Quebec.

«C'est aussi une bonne nouvelle pour le Québec en ce sens qu'on sait que Terre-Neuve voulait que le fédéral subventionne une ligne, voulait avoir des conditions spéciales pour exporter de l'énergie aux États-Unis. Donc, ils viennent d'accepter, si on veut, les règles du marché.»

Le Devoir said the deal includes a block of 800 megawatts of power for Quebec and 300 MW for Newfoundland and Labrador.  Out of the 300 MW, Newfoundland and Labrador will ship 130 MW to the United States after satisfying local demand with the other 170 MW.

However, under the 1969 Churchill falls deal, Hydro-Quebec purchases the lion’s share of Churchill Falls power – more than 5200 MW – at a fixed cost of fractions of a penny per kilowatt hour.

This arrangement of 800 MW for Hydro Quebec seems to be an increase in the amount guaranteed for winter availability (GWAC) in Quebec under a special 1998 agreement.   Under the original 1998 deal, Hydro Quebec received a guarantee on delivery of 682 megawatts during winter months and the Churchill Falls power plant would be operated at peak performance during the inter months to guarantee the additional power.

Winter is the peak demand time for Quebec.  American peak demand is in the summer.

A news release at the time suggested it was a long-term contract valued at $1.0 billion. [link corrected;  amount corrected]  The wheeling arrangement may have involved more complex negotiations than it first appeared.  The news release on Thursday about the Emera deal contained few facts.

Details of the GWAC deal have been removed from the provincial government website.  The Hydro website now archives news only as far back as 2002. A search of the site for guaranteed winter availability contract using the sites own search engine returned no results. A google search for the same term yielded several hits, all of which have been apparently removed from the Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro website.

-srbp-

Hydro inks electricity deal with Emera

State-owned energy company Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro has inked a two-year deal with Emera to for the latter to broker the sale of up to 250 megawatts of power from Churchill Falls into the north-eastern United States.

On the face of it, the deal looks like an arrangement to sell power on the spot market instead of the guaranteed purchase arrangement it replaces.

Premier Danny Williams said the agreements mean the province will get the “lion’s share” of the profits from the sale of the power. He said the $40 million to $80 million per year expected for the province comes after HQ and Emera Energy take their cuts.

Williams told members of the media today that, as the price of energy goes up, the revenue for the province will also increase.

By the same token, as prices go down so too would revenue, presumably.No details of the financing were released outside of estimates that Hydro would receive between $40 million and $80 million annually for the power, depending on electricity prices, the available power and the load capacity on the grid at the time of sale.

A separate five year agreement with Hydro Quebec Transenergie, owner of the Quebec energy transmission grid, facilitates the sale. News media reports have been erroneously playing up the Quebec angle on the story even though that aspect was pretty straightforward.  Since the American federal energy regulator established a free markets policy in 1992, Canadian electricity markets have had to adopt what is known as an open access transit tariff for electricity that allows power to be wheeled competitively across the province at rates set by the provincial electricity regulators.

Quebec Transenergie didn’t have much choice, provided the existing grid could handle the load. by the same token it’s unclear what New Brunswick premier Shawn Graham meant when he stated that he would not stand by and allow energy to be wheeled through his province at the expense of development in his province.  New Brunswick will have to abide by the same free market rules as other energy-producing provinces if it wants to sell power into the United States.

Interestingly, the sale is being handled by Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro, although the power is generated by Churchill Falls Labrador Company.  While Hydro used to be the CFLCo parent, the two are now sister companies within the provincial umbrella energy corporation.

The power deal appears to replace a similar arrangement with Hydro Quebec known as the guaranteed winter availability contract.  First signed in 1998, the GWAC saw Hydro recall 130 megawatts of power from Churchill Falls under the terms of the 1969 CFLCo development agreement and then re-sell the power to Hydro Quebec at a defined price far above the pernicious terms of the 1969 deal.

The original three-year GWAC contract was renewed for a further three years in 2001 and then for five years by the current provincial government. The five year deal expired on March 31, 2009. The five year deal generated $46 million revenues annually.

The GWAC was a way of forestalling a possible bankruptcy by CFLCo since the 1969 agreement returned insufficient revenue to keep the company solvent over time. The original news release, linked above contained a background presentation but this has disappeared from the provincial government website.

The original GWAC became the subject of some controversy with accusations arising from then opposition energy critic and current Hydro board chairman John Ottenheimer.

It is unclear from Thursday’s announcement if the GWAC and the related shareholder’s agreement within CFLCo have expired, been replaced or will be honoured in some other way. CFLCo is owned by Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro (65.8%) and Hydro Quebec (34.2%).

That information might change the claim today that Hydro captures the “lion’s share” of the revenues from the Emera deal.

Also unclear at this time is the status of the 225 megawatts of power from Churchill Falls that currently flows to western Labrador through Twin Falls Power Company.  Twin Falls was a joint venture of the two iron ore companies in western Labrador and BRINCO.  The power plant was shut down and TwinCo received a guaranteed price on a block of Churchill Falls power.  That agreement expires in 2014.

-srbp-

07 March 2009

Romaine clears environmental review

The Romaine hydro project in Quebec cleared the joint federal-provincial environmental review panel on Friday.

In making its decision, the panel noted that it worked within the legal boundary between Quebec and Newfoundland and Labrador:

Par ailleurs, elle a évalué les effets environnementaux du projet selon le tracé de 1927 du Conseil
privé et ne se prononce aucunement sur la validité de cette frontière entre le Québec et Terre-Neuve-et-Labrador.

Quel shock for the League of Professional Victims.

For those whose French isn’t that good here’s a rough (not literal) translation:

In addition, it evaluated the environmental effects of the project according to the boundary set in 1927 by the Privy Council and does not come to a conclusion at all about the validity of this border between Quebec and Newfoundland and Labrador.

It comes to no conclusion since it had no grounds on which to question the whole issue. So much for the twaddle pushed by the League that somehow this decision would see the federal government endorse a border change. Apparently only one private individual appeared before the committee to recommend that the border be erased altogether.

There is extensive discussion of the environmental issues, including the potential impact on migratory caribou herds. The panel recommends that the Quebec ministries involved develop a plan with the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to protect the caribou.

-srbp-