The Government’s announcement that it will next month go to market for 200 megawatts (MW) of renewable electricity generation capacity is welcome after the several hiccups and delays in its renewable programme.
However, there are several issues that require clarity from the energy minister, Daryl Vaz, before the Generation Procurement Entity (GPE), the body charged with overseeing bids for national power projects, puts out its request for proposals (RFP). These include the strategic and/or policy basis upon which this RFP will rest, what data informs it, and whether the 200 MW will represent new or replacement capacity.
Mr Vaz suggested that the Holness administration, in going to market at this time, is not driven solely by its policy framework, but that it is also responding to pressure from potential investors.
“There is a pent-up demand and frustration by existing renewable companies and also international companies, who have been knocking on the door for years,” Mr Vaz said in Parliament last week, in disclosing the planned April RFP.
It is curious, and requires explanation, that the minister, and the Government, would be willing to proceed without completing its own review of the energy sector. At least, it has given no indication that it has done so.
It is recalled that last July when he pulled the plug on a parliamentary committee’s review of the island’s Electricity Act, Mr Vaz argued that the war in Ukraine had so changed the global energy dynamics that Jamaica had to re-evaluate the assumptions that informed the information and analysis upon which the exercise rested.
Up to that point, the Government’s declared policy was that by 2030, half (an aggressive expansion of the original target of 30 per cent) of the island’s electricity (and 20 per cent of all energy) would be generated from renewable fuels – compared to approximately 13 per cent at present. Jamaica imports more than 20 million barrels of fossil fuel annually to help meet its energy demand.
The Office of Utilities Regulation , whose regulatory remit includes the electricity sector, recently estimated that it will require US$1.2 in investment to meet the current 2030 target – the installation of 530 gigawatt hour of capacity in seven years’ time.
In the absence of the outcomes of the review upon which Mr Vaz embarked in September, and/or an update of the Government’s 2020 Integrated Resource Plan for the electricity sector – which was promised for the end of last year – it is not clear whether the administration still expects electricity consumption to grow at the rate it projected three years ago, or if it will outpace the expected peak growth rate of less than two per cent a year into the mid-2030s.
Neither is it known what are the technical and pricing parameters and other assumptions that will inform the GPE’s RFP, including whether the authorities consider electricity storage technology sufficiently well advanced, and their cost-competitiveness at a point that renewables can figure in the mix of the 20 per cent peak of demand (around 660 megawatts) that the electricity supplier must maintain as reliable reserves. Having that reserve in renewables would lessen the need for this back-up to be built around fossil fuels.
These are discussions on which all stakeholders should have an opportunity to weigh in before irrevocable decisions are made.
CONTROVERSIAL PROVISION
Additionally, despite his cryptic remark that the 200 MW would be open to international tender and not be subjected to any first-right-of-refusal arrangement, it remains uncertain whether it is new capacity or an intended bypass of a controversial provision of the Electricity Act of 2015, for whose removal independent power generators had lobbied.
Under the law, Jamaica Public Service Company (JPS) – ‘the sole buyer’ – which enjoys a monopoly on the transmission, distribution and supply of electricity, has first-right-of-refusal for the replacement of its own generation capacity that has technically reached obsolescence. But the cost of the replacement capacity, which ultimately works through to what consumers pay for electricity, must be on the basis of an ‘avoided cost’ established by the authorities – the cost JPS would have in investment, amortisation and operation if it did not make the investment. If JPS’s (or whoever is the single buyer) price exceeds the authorities’ avoided cost, which is to be reviewed biennially, the replacement is supposed to fall to open bidding.
This matter is relevant at this time because JPS has 171.5 megawatts of generating capacity that is now technically up for replacement, to which the law would obviously apply. Little, though, has been publicly said about how either the company or the Government intends to proceed. It is unlikely that the Electricity Act, its review having foundered in the legislature, could, at this point, be gutted of the provision.
Given the timeline declared by Mr Vaz, the period is short before the GPE issues its RFP. He has much to do before then, assuming this deadline can be kept.
A $6.15m judgment has been awarded by the High Court against Trinidad and Tobago company, Davis Ecolife Ltd which failed to deliver on a contract with the National Data Management Authority (NDMA) though it collected an advance.
A release today from the Attorney General’s Chambers said that on 2nd February 2023, High Court Judge, Gino Persaud granted judgment against Davis Ecolife Ltd in an application brought by the NDMA through the Attorney General’s Chambers.
NDMA is responsible for data processing and information systems in the Public Sector. The release said that Davis Ecolife Ltd by way of letter dated 7th November 2018 held itself out to be the sole distributor and creators of the Eco Pod building system, a system that combines
energy efficient building systems with solar technology.
On the 30th November 2018, the National Procurement and Tender Administration Board granted its approval for the contract provision of two Eco Pods for NDMA to be awarded to Davis Ecolife Ltd. for the tendered/corrected sum of US$66,941.
On the 4th December 2018, NDMA executed a written agreement with Davis Ecolife Ltd at an agreed price of US$66,941 for the supply of the two prefabricated enclosures (Eco Pods) to house ICT hubs to be installed at two sites identified by NDMA.
On the 22nd January 2019, a deposit of US$28,449.54 equivalent to $6,159,325 was paid to Davis Ecolife Ltd. by way of wire transfer.
The agreement had a completion date of 25th January 2019, however, Davis Ecolife Ltd. failed and/or neglected to perform the contract in accordance with the agreed completion date.
On the 31st January 2023, NDMA through the Attorney General’s Chambers filed
an Amended Fixed Date Application seeking the following reliefs:
a. A Declaration that the Respondent breached the contract executed on the 4th
December 2018;
b. Damages in excess of $100,000 for breach of contract;
c. A Declaration that the Respondent has been unjustly enriched in the sum of
$6,159,325 as money had and received;
d. An Order for Restitution from the Defendant in the sum of $6,159,325, constituting an advance payment made by the Claimant to the Defendant for which there were no works done;
e. Interest in accordance with Section 12 of the Law Reform Miscellaneous Act, Chapter 6:02, Laws of Guyana;
f. Such further or other Orders as the Court deems just and reasonable;
g. Costs.
The release said that the Trinidadian Company failed to file an Affidavit in Defence to the Application and failed to attend court on two occasions. The Court therefore granted judgment
in the sum of $6,159,325 and costs in the sum of $500,000 in favour of NDMA.
NDMA was represented by Attorney General Anil Nandlall SC,
and Teakaram Singh, State Counsel. Davis Eco Life Ltd was initially represented by Attorney-at-law, Javed Shadick and thereafter by Marissa Nadir, Attorney-at-law. Both
Attorneys withdrew their appearances in the matter, the release said.
Years after a decision was taken to relocate the Guyana Geology and Mines Commission’s offices (GGMC) to the controversial building at High and Princes streets in Werk-en-Rust, Georgetown, rehabilitation has commenced in preparation for this, Minister of Natural Resources Vickram Bharrat has confirmed.
Stabroek News understands that the GGMC started work on retrofitting the building in the latter half of 2022. There was no announcement and the relevant authorities are tightlipped on the sum to be spent on the remedial work.
Bharrat, while responding to questions from this newspaper on the sidelines of the International Energy Conference last week, said there was a commitment to follow through with the 2012 PPP/C government cabinet’s decision. He noted that the agency had outgrown its office space at Brickdam, Georgetown, and had been forced to rent properties around the city to house departments of the minerals extracting regulatory body.
“The building is being completed now by GGMC for GGMC. This [new] building is large and has good enough space,” he said.
When completed, given its size, the subject minister said, the Guyana Gold Board will also be located on the property. He explained the objective was to have all the services of the GGMC in one strategic and central location.
The building, which was originally built at a cost of $600 million for the government in 2008, has been shrouded in controversy. It was never occupied because of a series of construction-related problems.
The 65,000-square ft facility was initially intended to house the Ministry of Labour, whose offices are also scattered throughout the city. A former construction worker had said that the building was more than 70 percent completed when work stalled; interior finishes and general painting being among the final things to be done.
“I know we heard a whole host of comments about white elephant and waste of money,” Bharrat said, “but the building is structurally sound because we did all of that test…”
Asked what type of construction was being carried out, Bharrat explained, “The flooring is [replaced with a] steel flooring. One of the issues people had was the design in which it was casted there wasn’t much beam or post. I was told by the engineer it wasn’t a mistake, it was a design but we are not accustomed to seeing…”
He added that they had to retrofit the ceiling because when the channels and conduits for the air-conditioning were installed there was little headspace between the floor and ceiling.
A source had publicly stated in 2013 that the building’s foundation contained sub-standard material and that the contractor, Kishan Bacchus Construction Company, had carried out work on the foundation and on the interior of the building that were in excess of contractual specifications.
It was also said that the ceiling of the building was improperly designed and as a result the placement of air vents and roofing would have resulted in limited vertical space and the situation would need to be rectified. It should be noted, however, that Kishan Bacchus Construction Company only secured the contract after the initial contractor had backed out of the project. It is unclear if anyone has ever been penalised for the substandard work done.
The complex, which is constructed on a plot of land that housed the former Guyana Broadcasting Corporation, was halted during the first quarter of 2011, three years after construction had commenced.
Authorities had decided to place the centralised services of the Guyana Revenue Authority (GRA) at the building and the body was expected to take up occupancy of the complex in September 2010. This was never followed through and GRA went on to occupy the former CLICO building on Camp Street.
In 2014, subsequent to the announcement by cabinet that GGMC would take up residence in the building, the project was put on hold due to contention over the award of the contract for the completion of the building.
This newspaper had reported a source saying there had been many objections after the GGMC recently awarded the contract to a company with links to the firm that had allegedly produced substandard work on the building and which had its contract terminated. After a series of complaints, the GGMC board made a decision to put the contract on hold and review it.
A forensic audit into the National Industrial and Commercial Investments Limited (NICIL) had found that $350 million in public funds was spent on the construction of the building.
NICIL’s former executive director Winston Brassington, subsequently stated that no law was broken in the entity’s funding of the ill-fated project. The funding for the project was approved at the parliamentary level.
Rickford Vieira, former commissioner of the GGMC, in August 2015 had told this publication that no decision was taken on the building.
After the APNU+AFC coalition assumed the reins of government in 2015, a team headed by then minister of Public Infrastructure David Patterson was scheduled to visit and investigate the defects in construction. The visit was a part of a ministerial assessment of government properties.
Following the visit, that ministry set about examining ways to make the complex safe for occupation, then Minister of Natural Resources, Raphael Trotman, had said in 2016.
Trotman had said the structure “stands out as an embarrassment” for the past administration because over $700 million was spent and the building was no closer to being occupied.
He said the Guyana Forestry Commis-sion and the GGMC had together put over $400 million into the building, with an expectation that they would be able to occupy it.
In January 2017, the APNU+AFC government had announced that the Ministry of Social Protection would spend over $1 billion on repairs to the building. No work was ever undertaken, however. The ministry had planned to relocate all of its offices to that building in 2018 and as such had earmarked $1 billion in the 2017 Budget for repairs.
As of June 2017, the Ministry of Social Protection invited qualified contractors to tender for the completion of the administrative building at an estimated cost of $750 million and the construction of revetments, parking area, and driveway for the office building at an estimated cost of $130 million.
It is unclear what occurred after the invitation for bids was issued as no work was ever undertaken.
he Government will, in the 2023/24 fiscal year, focus on operationalising the National Identification System (NIDS) project.
To this end, focus will be placed on getting the National Registration and Registration Authority and the National Identification and Registration Inspectorate up and running.
Both are the primary institutions through which the services related to the NIDS will be delivered.
This was outlined by the Minister of Finance and the Public Service, Dr Nigel Clarke as he answered questions from the Opposition Spokesman on Finance, Julian Robinson, during the recent sitting of the Parliament’s Standing Finance Committee that examined the 2023/24 budget.
Robinson wanted to know when Jamaicans will begin to receive the NIDS card and when a full-scale public education campaign will be rolled out.
Clarke said coverage will be expanded for enrollment activities to begin during the fiscal year and a number of post offices will be modified as additional enrollment sites.
“We’re going to tender for 19 post offices across Jamaica to be modified as NIDS enrollment sites,” he shared.
Under the programme, the implementation of the NIDS card will continue as well as Operation Birthright for needy Jamaicans to receive free birth certificates to enable them to enroll in the NIDS. At the same time, the digitisation and indexing of the civil records at the Registrar General’s Department will continue.
Additionally, the project requires continued work with the Passport, Immigration and Citizenship Agency “to implement electronic ID, the e-passport and to enable e-gates at our major international airports,” Clarke said.
The project will also continue to personalise public engagement around the identification card and the strengthening of security and privacy controls around the card.
Regarding the public education campaign, Minister with responsibility for information, Robert Morgan, reminded that the NIDS project is being run jointly by the Government of Jamaica and the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB).
“There are particular approaches to the procurement procedure that has to take place; there was a procurement process for a supplier to deal with the public education campaign in the last quarter of last year. The procurement process is being finalised currently along with the IDB for final approval with the supplier,” he explained.
“I suspect that within this quarter the public education efforts will start before the rollout of the sites,” he added.
While 19 sites will be part of the procurement process, there will be 24 sites overall.
Integrity Commission Director of Investigation (DI) Kevon Stephenson has chided former principal of the Bethlehem Moravian College, Yvonne Clarke, for allegedly breaching the Government’s procurement rules when she awarded a $7.4-million contract to Gayrol Smith for transportation services on September 20, 2016.
In a report to Parliament, Stephenson indicated that the then Office of the Contractor General (OCG) investigated the procurement process, which led to the award of contracts by the St Elizabeth-based college to three contractors, including Smith. The other two are Atlas Protection Limited and Décor Spaces.
The probe commenced in November 2016 after the OCG received an anonymous letter of complaint.
However, in discussing the conclusions of the probe, Stephenson said that the college utilised the limited tender procurement methodology to award a contract to Smith.
He concluded that because the Bethlehem Moravian College failed to obtain the required National Contracts Commission (NCC) certificate from Smith, it breached Section 1.3.1 of the Government of Jamaica Handbook of Public Sector Procurement Procedures.
Stephenson argued that this made the procurement process undertaken by the college irregular.
“The DI recommends that the principal and the procurement committee of the Bethlehem Moravian College ensure that potential government contractors possess and present the requisite documentation, which qualifies them to participate in procurement opportunities offered by [Bethlehem Moravian] as prescribed by the GOJ Handbook of Public Procurement Procedures,” the report said.
Stephenson said that his recommendation was based on the breach of procurement rules “observed in relation to the award of contract to Mr Gayrol Smith by Mrs Yvonne Clarke, former principal, on behalf of the Bethlehem Moravian College, wherein the bidder did not provide an NCC certificate at the time of bid submission”.
The DI also concluded that there is no evidence to support allegations that there was an irregularity in the award of a contract to Atlas Protection Limited for the provision of Security Services at Bethlehem Moravian.
The DI also cleared the college of alleged wrongdoing in the award of a contract to Décor Spaces for the provision of consulting services.
Stephenson said that Bethlehem Moravian utilised the direct contracting procurement methodology under urgent circumstances for the award of a contract to Décor Spaces, which was in accordance with government guidelines.
