You are using an outdated browser and your browsing experience will not be optimal. Please update to the latest version of Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox. Install Microsoft Edge

August 19, 2020

PTIT Focus: Extension of the Schedule of Operation Date to Distribute Power to the Commercial Network Due to Force Majeure

Subscribe to Updates
Petroleum Institute of Thailand: PTIT Focus

On 28 November 2018, the Energy Regulatory Commission (ERC) passed a resolution to extend the Schedule of Operation Date (SCOD) due to force majeure. Subsequently, the ERC issued the Notification Regarding Methods of Considering the Extension of SCOD to Distribute Power to a Commercial Network Due to Force Majeure. However, the notification did not stipulate specific types or sizes of power plants under energy purchase agreements.

Under the notification, a force majeure  event that can be a justification for the extension of SCOD must be a force majeure  event as defined under the Civil and Commercial Code, and as set out under the regulations regarding power purchases and power purchase agreements. Accordingly, a force majeure  event is one in which the occurrence, or consequences, could not be prevented even though the victim (or near-victim) took appropriate care as might be expected from him or her in that situation and in such condition.

Force majeure  also refers to government actions. These could include changes in energy policies or in the law that result in the project owner, the project sponsor, or the Electricity Sales Department being unable to comply with any provision of the regulations regarding power purchase agreements, as well as seizure of the project, assets or any rights, shares, or benefits from the contracted energy producer by a government entity. Also covered are blockades or other acts of war; uprisings, rebellions, disturbances, and strikes; as well as accidents such as earthquakes, storms, fires, floods, and unusually bad weather conditions. Also considered force majeure  would be accidental disruptions to the power distribution system caused by accident. All of these scenarios could severely impact the project or the performance of the energy producer’s duties under the power purchase agreement.

Furthermore, when determining force majeure, both the nature of the facts and the circumstances must both be considered, and the following factors must be met: (1) The party claiming force majeure  must not have been the cause (or have contributed to) the facts or circumstances resulting in that party’s inability to comply with regulations regarding energy purchase agreements. (2) The party claiming force majeure  must have taken appropriate care as might be expected from them in that situation and in those conditions, despite the facts or circumstances of the events that occurred being unforeseeable or unpreventable, or beyond the party’s control. (3) The party claiming force majeure  must have made attempts to satisfy the energy purchase agreement. (4) The party claiming force majeure  must have made efforts to mitigate the possible impacts as appropriate for a person in that situation and in those conditions.

When determining the extension of a SCOD for distributing power to a commercial network due to force majeure, the factors must include the project’s preparedness under four areas: the preparedness of the property, the preparedness of the technology, the preparedness of the source of investment funds, and the preparedness of obtaining approvals under the relevant laws and regulations. The determination of the extension of the SCOD must also be such that the extension is only as is necessary and suitable, and must take into account the significance and impact of the force majeure  event. Officials must also periodically report to the Energy Policy Executive Committee and the National Energy Policy Council.

In conclusion, force majeure  is a general legal basis wherein a contracting party is unable to perform their duties under the agreement due to a force majeure  event, whereby that party is not held to be at fault for the inability to perform their duties. Nevertheless, the extent to which force majeure  can be used in determining the extension of the SCOD must be considered in accordance with the factors stipulated in the notification referenced above, including the combined nature of the facts and circumstances, as well as the preparedness of the project with regard to the four areas described above. This notification serves as a guideline to be used at the discretion of the government authorities in extending the SCOD in a manner that displays good governance, and following it will result in the highest fairness for commercial operators and other persons affected by the extension of the SCOD.

 

This article first appeared in the August 2019 edition of PTIT Focus, the Petroleum Institute of Thailand’s monthly newsletter. The article was published in both English and Thai. 

Related Professionals

Industries

Energy

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

April 8, 2021
On March 24, 2021, the Prime Minister of Vietnam issued Decision No. 12/2021/QD-TTg issuing regulations on oil spill response. One of the more notable changes is the introduction of templates for oil spill response plans.
Read More
February 23, 2021
As many are already aware, following the change of government in Myanmar on February 1, 2021, a draft Cyber Security Law was proposed which attracted widespread criticism. However, less attention has been paid to significant amendments to two existing laws, some of which have a similar effect to parts of the draft Cyber Security Law. In other words, while the draft Cyber Security Law has not progressed further and is under public scrutiny, significant elements of it have found their way into law in Myanmar by other routes. Because these amendments are already law, it is very important that individuals and businesses in Myanmar understand their implications. Amendments to the Law Protecting the Privacy and Security of Citizens The Law Protecting the Privacy and Security of Citizens (2017), or the “Privacy Law,” was amended on February 13, 2021, less than two weeks after the military government came into power. These amendments chiefly address the power of the government to conduct searches, seizures, and arrests; to extend detention without judicial oversight; and to carry out broad surveillance and investigation activities that could intrude on individual privacy. The amendments accomplish this by suspending various sections of the Privacy Law for as long as the State Administration Council (the military body now governing Myanmar) is in power. The suspended sections include the following: Section 5: Search, seizure, and arrest without civilian observation The relevant part of Section 5 of the Privacy Law states, “The responsible authorities shall … when acting in accordance with existing law, not enter into a person’s residence or a room used as a residence, or a building, compound or building in a compound, for the purpose of search, seizure, or arrest, unless accompanied by minimum of two witnesses who should comprise Ward or Village Tract Administrators…”. The suspension
Read More
February 22, 2021
Following the recent imposition of sanctions on Myanmar individuals and companies by the US, the UK and Canada have now imposed new sanctions. As with the US sanctions, these new measures impact UK and Canadian citizens and companies, and non-UK and non-Canadian companies and citizens with interests in those jurisdictions. The EU has indicated that it is planning to issue similar sanctions in the near future. New UK Sanctions In addition to the 16 individuals already sanctioned by the UK government, on February 18, 2021, the UK government announced that three individuals have been sanctioned for serious human rights violations and are now subject to asset freezes and travel bans. The full list of Myanmar individuals and companies sanctioned by the UK is available on the website of the Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation. Breaches of UK financial sanctions are criminal offences punishable in the UK by up to 7 years imprisonment and heavy fines. New Canadian Sanctions Also on February 18, timed to coincide with the UK sanctions, new Canadian sanctions were imposed on nine individuals. As with the UK, Canada already had a number of individuals in the Myanmar military on its sanctions list, and the new additions bring the total number of individuals sanctioned by Canada to 54. All assets of these individuals in Canada are now frozen, and they are banned from travelling to Canada. Canadian businesses or entities may not do business with any of the 54 individuals. Full details of the impact of the sanctions are available on the Government of Canada’s website, as is a database of the Myanmar individuals and companies subject to them. Breach of Canadian sanctions carries with it up to 5 years’ imprisonment in Canada and/or a large fine. Other Countries The EU is reportedly drawing up sanctions
Read More
February 18, 2021
As you will no doubt know, on February 1, 2021, the Myanmar military declared a state of emergency in Myanmar for a period of one year. State Counsellor Daw Aung Sang Su Kyi was detained, as were the president and various significant political and civil leaders. Min Aung Hlaing, commander-in-chief of the Tatmadaw (Myanmar armed forces) has installed himself as chairman of the State Administration Council, the current administration. New sanctions The reaction of the Biden administration has been swift. On February 10, 2021, President Biden issued Executive Order 14014, which provides bases to impose sanctions on individuals and companies deemed by the US to, among other things: operate in the defense sector of Myanmar; be responsible for policies that undermine democratic processes in Myanmar; have taken actions to undermine democratic processes or institutions, or prohibit, limit, or penalize the exercise of free speech, in Myanmar; or be a spouse or child of the foregoing. On the next day, February 11, the US Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), imposed sanctions under the new executive order on ten individuals—including General Min Aung Hlaing—and three companies, including Cancri Gems & Jewelry Co, Myanmar Imperial Jade Co, and Myanmar Ruby Enterprise.  All such individuals and companies have now been designated on the US list of specially designated nationals (SDNs). Effect of sanctions As a result of such sanctions, the property of these individuals or companies that is located in the US or is under the possession or control of US companies and citizens is frozen, and US companies and citizens are generally prohibited from dealing deal with any such property.  Reportedly, roughly USD 1 billion of funds belonging to the individuals and companies blocked on February 11 are located in the US and thus now frozen. The SDN list As many
Read More