Enmax suit seeks action on disputed power deals

CALGARY In a new lawsuit, Enmax is ramping up its electricity dispute with the NDP government, accusing the province of interfering with Alberta’s Balancing Pool, an arm’slength agency.

The utility, owned by the City of Calgary, also insists the independent agency has the ability to cancel money-losing power agreements at the heart of its conflict with the province — a move that could save consumers up to $336 million.

The Notley government and Enmax have been at loggerheads for more than a year over the issue of how to best manage power purchase arrangements (PPAs).

Enmax filed a legal action with Court of Queen’s Bench in midJuly, suing the Balancing Pool, the provincial agency responsible for handling the power contracts. It wants the Balancing Pool to complete its assessment of Enmax’s return of the PPAs for the Keephills and Battle River power-generating units.

Under Alberta’s deregulated power system, PPAs were created to give buyers such as Enmax the right to buy electricity from powergenerating plants and resell it to consumers. Alberta’s electricity prices slumped badly in the past two years and the contracts have been losing millions of dollars.

Enmax contends the NDP government triggered an opt-out clause within the deals by hiking the province’s carbon levy on large industrial greenhouse gas emitters.

Under the agreements, if the government changes the law and makes the deals unprofitable — or more unprofitable — buyers can hand the PPAs back to the Balancing Pool, which must pass along losses to consumers.

After several PPAs were returned last year, the organization posted more than $2.5 billion in operation losses and needed a government loan.

In its lawsuit, Enmax says the Balancing Pool is supposed to assess and verify the termination of any PPAs and participate in arbitration if the two sides disagree.

While provincial rules requires this to happen “within a reasonable period of time,” Enmax says it’s waited 14 months for a final response.

“The Balancing Pool has failed to act in a manner that is responsible and efficient as required under the (legislation),” says the statement of claim.

Statements of claim include allegations that have not been proven in court.