CSP Project Power Purchase Agreements: The … a...CSP Project Power Purchase Agreements: The...
17
CSP Project Power Purchase Agreements: The Landscape and Key Deal Points To Obtain A Financeable PPA Presented to the 4 th Annual Concentrated Solar Power Summit USA 24 June 2010 Todd Glass Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, PC
Transcript of CSP Project Power Purchase Agreements: The … a...CSP Project Power Purchase Agreements: The...
CSP Project Power Purchase Agreements: The Landscape and Key Deal Points
To Obtain A Financeable PPA
Presented to the 4th Annual Concentrated Solar Power Summit USA
24 June 2010
Todd GlassWilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, PC
DOC#5049157
An Overview
• Key Elements of CSP Project Deals• A Common CSP Project Structure• A Few Observations about Utilities, RFOs/RFPs,
Form PPAs, the RPS Markets, and Results to Date• Key PPA Deal Points to Make Your PPA:
– Practically feasible– Commercially viable– Approvable, and – Financeable
DOC#5049157
Key Elements of CSP Project Deals - 1
• Allocating the benefits . . . – the energy output (amount and price)– environmental attributes (i.e., renewable energy credits
(RECs))– tax credits, accelerated depreciation, and other benefits– ancillary services– residual value– utility credits and other potential goodies– buy-out potential at the end of the contract* * NOT LESS THAN FAIR MARKET VALUE
DOC#5049157
Key Elements of CSP Project Deals - 2
• Other key deal points:– Ownership– Term– Site/Location/Security– Financing terms– Conditions precedent– Regulatory status– Property and other taxes– Insurance– O&M duties and costs
ULTIMATE QUESTION:Is the project financeable?
• . . . and the risks and costs:– Construction– Performance– Insolation– Creditworthiness/security– Diminution of
environmental attributes– Scheduling/Imbalances– Equipment failure/
warranties– O&M– Removal costs/site
restoration– Change in law risk
DOC#5049157
A Basis PPA Structure – Utility Buys Energy and RECs
UtilityOwner/Project
Company
EPCContractor
Debt
Equity(tax benefits)
Landowner
Energy + PPA
$$$
$$$ EPCContract
Engineering, Procurement, Construction Services
$$$ Lease
RECsTypical Project Finance
Documents$$$
$$$
ROI
Debt Payments
DOC#5049157
A Few Observations about Utilities, RFOs/RFPs, Form PPAs, the RPS Markets, and Results to Date
See CPUC updated table of RPS projects:http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/NR/rdonlyres/A02EAAD2-7C72-4C3D-B4E5-92DEC4237672/0/RPS_Project_Status_Table_2010_June.XLS. CPUC RPS Quarterly Report on June 22, which is available here:http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/NR/rdonlyres/66FBACA7-173F-47FF-A5F4-BE8F9D70DD59/0/Q22010RPSReporttotheLegislature.pdf
• Utilities have signed hundreds of PPAs to comply with RPS requirements; more than 50 utility scale solar PPAs in the US
• Yet very few utility-scale solar projects have been financed (< 5)
• Utilities now seem to be focusing on utility-owned and distributed generation PV projects and financing schemes
• What are independent evaluators doing?
DOC#5049157
A Few Observations about Utilities, RFOs/RFPs, Form PPAs, the RPS Markets, and Results to Date
• Using significant market power (oligopsony), utilities are creating RPS RFO/RFP programs that are onerous and difficult for CSP and other utility scale solar developers
• Form PPAs (and utility negotiators) are pushing more and more risk onto developers (e.g., SCE’s Buyer Curtailment, PG&E’s CAISO availability standards)
• From Chinese PV manufacturers to unsophisticated new developers willing to sign anything, competition is driving PPA contract prices down significantly -- to the point of slim or even negligible returns
• The results:– Fewer PPAs– Unfinancable PPAs– RPS compliance penalties?
DOC#5049157
Key PPA Deal Points - 11. Conditions Precedent
– None, except for PUC approval and perhaps ITC availability (placed in service after 2016)
2. Development Schedule – Key Milestones Only: CSD, GCSD, COD and GCOD– Progress Reporting: fine, but pass thru to EPC Contractor– Extensions: Force Majeure, transmission upgrades (outside control)
3. Development Security/Delivery Term Security/Counterparty Credit– Development Security: ~$30-50/kW of installed capacity– Delivery Term Security: ~$233-350/kW of contract capacity – Know thy seller/buyer (do you have a European bank?)
4. Interconnection; Point of Delivery– Utility scale issues relating to schedule, cost, who pays– POD should be a physical location, not some ephemeral, potentially moving
point on the CAISO system (e.g., P-Node)
DOC#5049157
Key PPA Deal Points - 25. Term
– 20 year is typical; 25 years is better for utility scale projects– No termination rights, except for default, long-term FM events– Buy-out options (FMV, valuation, terms of buyout can be difficult)
6. Energy Product Parameters– Energy ($/MWh)– TOD Factors/Seasonal Pricing– Storage, Shaping and Capacity Payments (utilities say that energy price
usually includes capacity/resource adequacy attributes) – Test power/initial operating period– No separate price for capacity . . . yet
7. COD vs Placed in Service– PPAs generally define and use “commercial operation date”, but IRS’s
placed-in-service date does not equal “commercial operation date” in all cases (IRS follows a 5-factor test); define COD equal to PIS
– Caution: Provision in PPA which provide that the COD is deemed to be a certain number of days after notice/testing/etc.
DOC#5049157
Key PPA Deal Points - 38. Performance Guarantees
– Insolation Risk & Production Guarantees: Bottom line: 24 month rolling, 70-80%, excluding FM, curtailments, and forced outages
– Capacity Guarantees are coming in the form of CAISO’s New Availability Requirements
9. RECs, Environmental Attributes, GHG Emission Reductions– Lots of possibilities, but usually sold as part of the energy– Note: compliance risk and costs borne by Seller– CPUC’s recent TREC Decision 10-03-21 is wreaking havoc on CA market
and fundamental understanding of RECs10. Governmental Charges/Taxes
– Buyer should bear federal, state, local sales, use, real property, personal property taxes, duties, assessments, public benefit charges, etc. (but not income taxes), but utilities do not usually do so
DOC#5049157
Key PPA Deal Points - 4
10. Good Industry Practice, Force Majeure, and Destruction of System– Good Industry Practice, NOT Good Utility Practice– FM: expressly include volcanic eruption, require actual notice of FM event,
and allow for contributing factors leading to a FM event– If project is completely destroyed, Seller should have option of whether to
rebuild; if Seller does not rebuild, PPA is terminated; ROFO perhaps, but no ROFR
11. Assignment/Financing Consents, Cooperation and Assurances– Buyer must agree to not unreasonably withhold, condition, or delay
consents, estoppels, certificates, opinions of counsel, provided the foregoing does not materially change rights, benefits, or burdens.
DOC#5049157
Key PPA Deal Points - 5
12. Change in Law; Costs of Compliance– Change in law should not be a FM event– Price and whole PPA must be fixed regardless of change in law– Costs of Compliance:
Seller must bear the following burdens/costs for term of PPA: WREGIS requirements, GHG Emissions reporting requirements, Green Attributes requirements, Resource Adequacy benefits, and PIRP/EIRP costs.
Most of these laws and programs are still under development and are subject to change; what if it becomes costly or impossible to comply?
Answer: meaningful, financeable compliance caps and no default for commercially reasonable efforts to comply
– New Buyer Curtailment Provisions demonstrate how utility imposed open-ended commitments can make projects unfinanceable.
DOC#5049157
PUC Nevada Solution - 1 On March 22, 2007, the PUC of Nevada resolved this question of
risk correctly and thereby enabled Nellis AFB Solar Project to be financed by MMA Renewable Ventures:
DOC#5049157
PUC Nevada Solution - 2
• Application of Nevada Power Company . . ., Docket No. 07-01035 (PUC Nevada Order, March 22, 2007)
DOC#5049157
The California PUC Solution - 1• 1. STC [Standard Term and Condition] 1: CPUC Approval• “CPUC Approval” means a final and non-appealable order of the
CPUC, without conditions or modifications unacceptable to the Parties, or either of them, which contains the following terms:
– (a) approves this Agreement in its entirety, including payments to be made by the Buyer, subject to CPUC review of the Buyer’s administration of the Agreement; and
– (b) finds that any procurement pursuant to this Agreement is procurement from an eligible renewable energy resource for purposes of determining Buyer’s compliance with any obligation that it may have to procure eligible renewable energy resources pursuant to the California Renewables Portfolio Standard (Public Utilities Code Section 399.11 et seq.), Decision 03-06-071, or other applicable law.
DOC#5049157
The California PUC Solution - 2• 3. STC 6: Eligibility• Seller, and, if applicable, its successors, represents and warrants that
throughout the Delivery Term of this Agreement that: (i) the Project qualifies and is certified by the CEC as an Eligible Renewable Energy Resource (“ERR”) as such term is defined in Public Utilities Code Section 399.12 or Section 399.16; and (ii) the Project’s output delivered to Buyer qualifies under the requirements of the California Renewables Portfolio Standard. To the extent a change in law occurs after execution of this Agreement that causes this representation and warranty to be materially false or misleading, it shall not be an Event of Default if Seller has used commercially reasonable efforts to comply with such change in law.
Order Instituting Rulemaking to Implement the California Renewables Portfolio Standard Program, CPUC Docket 04-04-026, Decision 07-11-025 (November 16, 2007)
