Three of the island’s major private sector organisations are again expressing disappointment at the recent decision by the Office of Utilities Regulation (OUR) to further delay the bid process for the 360 Megawatt Generating Project.

The organisations have also expressed alarm at the decision by the OUR to also remove the requirement for an up-front bid bond to be posted at the same time as submission of the bid.

In a joint news release yesterday, the Jamaica Chamber of Commerce (JCC), Jamaica Manufacturers’ Association (JMA) and the Private Sector Organisation of Jamaica (PSOJ), said that they were alarmed at these latest developments, which have come just two working days before the previous July 29 deadline.

According to the organisations, “the bid bond serves the critical purpose of mitigating against (i) the presentation of frivolous, unrealistic, initially-low bids that upon award require further negotiation with the OUR, and/or (ii) the presentation of apparently attractive bids, devoid of substance, that lack the appropriate due diligence and serious consideration, on the part of the sponsor and investors, that would only come after award.

“A removal of the bid bond requirement with bid submission is therefore an invitation for mischievous bid behaviour, delays and false promises. In fact for a project of this size, any bidder that is reluctant to provide a substantial bid bond must be viewed with some skepticism,” the statement said.

The private sector organisations said that they are cautioning the Government against fostering an environment that incentivises these kinds of strategies in such an important project that is needed urgently for the country’s economic growth.

According to the groups, the up-front provision of a substantial bid bond is a normal procedure in major infrastructural bids in Jamaica and worldwide, and this current move does not follow best practices, adding that while they reluctantly accept that the delay seems to be a foregone conclusion, they are strongly urging that the bid bond requirement be reinstated immediately, in order to ensure that transparency and credibility is maintained throughout this process.

The Jamaica Observer;

Three of the island’s major private sector organisations are again expressing disappointment at the recent decision by the Office of Utilities Regulation (OUR) to further delay the bid process for the 360 Megawatt Generating Project.

The organisations have also expressed alarm at the decision by the OUR to also remove the requirement for an up-front bid bond to be posted at the same time as submission of the bid.

In a joint news release yesterday, the Jamaica Chamber of Commerce (JCC), Jamaica Manufacturers’ Association (JMA) and the Private Sector Organisation of Jamaica (PSOJ), said that they were alarmed at these latest developments, which have come just two working days before the previous July 29 deadline.

According to the organisations, “the bid bond serves the critical purpose of mitigating against (i) the presentation of frivolous, unrealistic, initially-low bids that upon award require further negotiation with the OUR, and/or (ii) the presentation of apparently attractive bids, devoid of substance, that lack the appropriate due diligence and serious consideration, on the part of the sponsor and investors, that would only come after award.

“A removal of the bid bond requirement with bid submission is therefore an invitation for mischievous bid behaviour, delays and false promises. In fact for a project of this size, any bidder that is reluctant to provide a substantial bid bond must be viewed with some skepticism,” the statement said.

The private sector organisations said that they are cautioning the Government against fostering an environment that incentivises these kinds of strategies in such an important project that is needed urgently for the country’s economic growth.

According to the groups, the up-front provision of a substantial bid bond is a normal procedure in major infrastructural bids in Jamaica and worldwide, and this current move does not follow best practices, adding that while they reluctantly accept that the delay seems to be a foregone conclusion, they are strongly urging that the bid bond requirement be reinstated immediately, in order to ensure that transparency and credibility is maintained throughout this process.

The Jamaica Observer;

The Office of Utilities Regulations (OUR) yesterday gave energy firms more than one month’s extension to July 29 to submit final proposals for the 360-megawatt project.

The original date was June 17 for the companies vying for the project, including Armorview Holdings, Azurest-Cambridge, Energy World International Limited, the Jamaica Public Service Company and Optimal Energy.

The OUR is also extending the time frame to select the highest ranked entities from July 12 to August 29. The agency will subsequently finalise negotiation of the project agreements by November 21.

Construction of the plant is expected to begin January 20, 2014, while commissioning of the new capacity is set for two years later on January 2016.

The 360MW project, which is expected to introduce LNG to the fuel, is the primary means by which Government plans to slash energy costs by about one-third. In the process, it will replace old generating units, some of which were commissioned four decades ago.

business@gleanerjm.com

Read more:

The Office of Utilities Regulations (OUR) yesterday gave energy firms more than one month’s extension to July 29 to submit final proposals for the 360-megawatt project.

The original date was June 17 for the companies vying for the project, including Armorview Holdings, Azurest-Cambridge, Energy World International Limited, the Jamaica Public Service Company and Optimal Energy.

The OUR is also extending the time frame to select the highest ranked entities from July 12 to August 29. The agency will subsequently finalise negotiation of the project agreements by November 21.

Construction of the plant is expected to begin January 20, 2014, while commissioning of the new capacity is set for two years later on January 2016.

The 360MW project, which is expected to introduce LNG to the fuel, is the primary means by which Government plans to slash energy costs by about one-third. In the process, it will replace old generating units, some of which were commissioned four decades ago.

business@gleanerjm.com

Read more:

The Jamaica Energy Council (JEC) is to hold talks on the selection process for the three bidders for the construction of a 360-megawatt generating plant.

Phillip Paulwell, minister of science, technology, energy and mining, has directed that the agenda for the next meeting, scheduled for Friday, May 17, include a presentation by the Office of Utilities Regulation (OUR) on the process for selecting the enterprise for the plant.

The announcement of the meeting follows a request from Opposition Spokesman on Industry Gregory Mair, who told the minister that a meeting was necessary to ensure “transparency and good governance“.

Mair requested that at the meeting of the JEC, the OUR be asked to explain the process by which it would engage the three bidders and if it would consider the late proposal, and if so, why.

Mair said also that the OUR must be made to state whether the 30 days would be sufficient to make a final decision and on what basis a bid would be selected as the winning proposal.

Mair said he also expected that the OUR would defend the winning proposal before the JEC board prior to the final recommendation being sent to Cabinet.

“This, in my opinion, will allow the private sector, the Opposition, and other stakeholders to understand the procedure and participate in this critical national project and, as such, ensure that we are all satisfied that the process was transparent, fair, and that all stakeholders are supportive of the final recommendation going to Cabinet,” Mair said.

Read more:

THE viability of the Jamaica Public Service Company (JPS) has been questioned, with the light and power company in breach of loan covenants that could see creditors demanding immediate repayment of up to US$430 million ($42.4 billion).

It’s a financial situation that has led to JPS Chief Executive Kelly Tomlin volunteering to a 10 per cent pay cut, as the company works with lenders and shareholders on a short-term solution, and talks with the Office of Utilities Regulation (OUR) about new tariff guidelines.

TOMLIN… our goal is to electrify 100 per cent of Jamaica.

 

“Given the macroeconomics that we are facing and given the regulatory environment, our lenders are now saying that they don’t believe they can give us any further waivers,” Tomlin told the Jamaica Observer yesterday.

Auditors noted in JPS’s annual financial statements that the company has, since March 2012 — a month before Tomlin’s appointment — not been compliant with a condition included in long-term loan agreements with international development financial institutions, requiring the firm to maintain a 3:1 Debt to Earnings before Interest Tax Depreciation and Amortisation (EBITDA) ratio.

The violation provides the lenders with the option of issuing notices of default and declaring all principal and interest amounting to US$430 million, as at December 31, 2012, as immediately payable, stated the auditor’s notesaccompanying the power company’s 2012 financial results.

Should the respective lenders exercise their right to demand the repayment of this amount, it would cast significant doubt about the company’s ability to continue as a going concern, without the support of the shareholders or other third parties, the statement said.

Tomlin said yesterday that the company is in talks with creditors for an extension of the waivers while it works with the OUR and shareholders.

JPS in its annual tariff submission to the OUR blamed the breach on “significant under-recovery of fuel costs” experienced in 2011 and 2012, including more than US$30 million last year alone. Against this background, the firm said its “continued viability… will be dependent on a change to the regulatory approach in relation to the recovery of fuel costs.”

A quarter of the electricity that JPS transmits is lost to heat and theft, with the majority due to the latter. JPS contends that the challenge of substantially reducing leakages is socio-economic and largely outside of its control. In its submission to the OUR, JPS urged “regulatory acceptance of that fact” and called for a more holistic approach to combat electricity theft, including social intervention projects.

JPS is asking the OUR to allow the full pass-through of fuel costs on light bills as of the effective billing date of the Annual Adjustment Determination — July 1, 2013. The company said it is essential to ensuring the viability of the utility, given the context that in a typical year, its return on profit “is not likely to be more than two to three per cent of the total cost of electricity, against the background of what it deems as unfair penalties as they relate to the recovery of fuel costs.

The company noted that the losses penalty increases as sales shrink, given that the losses are calculated as a percentage of sales, and increases as the price of oil goes up. JPS reported a 63 per cent decline in annual net profit to US$12.9 million on flat sales last year.

The fuel penalty actually represented four per cent of the cost of fuel, thereby virtually eliminating all of the operating profit of the utility in 2012, the company said in its submission.

According to the light and power company, if approved, this measure would result in “a marginal increase in the average residential customer’s bill of less than 0.5 per cent or $16 per month”.

JPS suggests that customers stand to benefit substantially over the medium term, through a vibrant and viable JPS that can support generation expansion to significantly lower cost and invest in the network to improve service and reliability.

The successful implementation of a sustainable loss reduction programme, aimed at regularising 10,000 – 15,000 households per annum, will ultimately also result in a substantial reduction in the cost of electricity for all, said the company in its submission.

“The problem is everybody is willing to help if they see light at the end of the tunnel, but with this particular regulatory framework, there can be no light at the end of the tunnel because we seriously do not know how to stop crime, and that’s what we are being asked to do,” Tomlin said yesterday.

“We are giving power to everybody; that’s our goal, to electrify 100 per cent of Jamaica, but we all know 100 per cent of Jamaica cannot afford electricity,” she argued.

Meanwhile, Tomlin said that the company has independently executed a number of cost-cutting measures in the face of severe budget constraints.

“Customers don’t want us to reduce our capital budgets, or else you will experience more and more outages. But we have had redundancies and we are doing what we can,” Tomlin said, revealing that, in addition to her 10 per cent pay cut, other executives have volunteered to give up their vacation.

“We are asking everybody to give,” she said. “Unfortunately, our charitable contributions have also been severely slashed.”

Read more:

Callum
Callum

THE EDITOR, Sir:

I must thank Winsome Callum of the Jamaica Public Service Company (JPS) for her response (‘Don’t mislead the public, Mr Montague’,Gleaner, April 9, 2013) to my calls for her company to share in the sacrifices the whole nation is being called to undertake. The call was made on March 6, 2013 for her company to reduce electricity rates by 10-12 percentage points.

Two recommendations were then made.

1) For JPS to use the recommended Office of Utilities Regulation rates, as contained in the current request for proposal (RFP), for alternative energy solutions. JPS is suggesting a rate of US$0.2672 per kilowatt-hour. If you add the US$0.11 per kilowatt-hour, for transmission and distribution, you would get US$0.3772 per kilowatt-hour. JPS charges approximately, US$0.40 per kilowatt-hour.

A decrease in its rates to match the OUR rates would be welcomed by all JPS customers.

2) The Government was also asked to reduce the so-called guaranteed 17.5 per cent profits. The writer claims there are no such guaranteed profits.

Therefore, could JPS consider publishing the terms and conditions of the licence?

Would the JPS also consider engaging the OUR and see how best it could bring the rates in harmony? Noting that alternative energy solutions are more expensive?

I am well aware that JPS is one of our best corporate and compassionate citizens and will take into account the feeling of merciless exploitation, that many of its customers feel when we get our monthly bills.

I am also heartened by the openness of the company for dialogue and anxiously await an invitation so to do.

In the meantime, all of Jamaica would be so happy if the JPS announce a cut in its rates.

JPS, we are depending on you to help in whatever way you can to advance Jamaica.

ROBERT MONTAGUE

Chairman, JLP

Read more: