[All] Concerns for Pickering Nuclear and Funding schemes

[Lanteigne]

Hi folks
There is a VERY important case is happening regarding Chevron vs. Indigenous Equadorians that flagged this:  Chevron Canada & Chevron Corp are by law, two seperate companies but Chevron Canada was not authorized to spend money and make decisions independently which is why it flags concerns of fraud. A Toronto Star article states; 

He noted that Chevron Canada cannot make independent decisions because its policies require it to ask executives at Chevron Corp. for permission to spend any significant amount of money. The Canadian company even had to seek approval from its parent in California to lease its head office in Calgary, Lenczner said.

“Other than day-to-day operations, Chevron Canada has no significant authority to engage in its core and fundamental business. Every step ... has required (outside) approval,” he told a three-judge panel.
Benjamin Zarnett, representing Chevron Canada, argued the two companies are distinct and separate. “Corporations are separate legal entities even if they’re part of a group. It’s not an economic reality, but it’s a legal reality,” Zarnett said.
Full article here: https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2018/04/18/chevron-canada-should-pay-for-pollution-in-ecuador-ontario-court-told.html
When it comes to Pickering Nuclear it is absolutely critical to find out these 3 things:
1. What COMPANY is making the application with the CNSC?2.What COMPANY owns the asset?3.What COMPANY is collecting the tarrifs?4. Are there any US based COMPANIES linked to the funding structure?
Recently the FERC ruled a company cannot claim tax benefits on a Master Limited Partnership. Firms like Enbridge were transferring plans that had no Canadian taxes on it to US based firms claiming tax write offs there. Here is an article about this: http://business.financialpost.com/commodities/energy/pipeline-selloff-deepens-as-dbrs-warns-enbridge-subsidiarys-credit-rating-could-significantly-weaken

Another fault recently flagged is that pipeline firms like Enbridge projected the taxes they would owe based on over estimated values for the costs of both oil and natural gas. For years they collected far more tariffs from customers than was reasonably allowed and now they have to pay it back: https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/US-Pipeline-Companies-Face-Hefty-Overcharge-Payback.html

So we need to ask: are these situations repeating with the Nuclear Power sector? Does the price of the tarrifs today match up with current costs of energy or are people being over taxed?
The reason I ask this is because oil and gas firms also own nuclear interests as noted in this Forbes article which states: 
>From the 1950s through the early 1980s big oil and chemical companies like Union Carbide, Exxon, Chevron, Conoco and even U.S. Steel mined uranium in South Texas. Not only did they find a lot of the stuff while hunting for oil and gas, but the federal government, amid the Cold War, even required that they also run tests in every oil and gas well to check for the presence of uranium. https://www.forbes.com/sites/christopherhelman/2013/01/23/fracking-for-uranium/#d09762f7c5be
I suspect they used the same flawed funding models and if the FERC made it's ruling that you can't claim the taxes on MLP's, the need is there to revisit the funding structure supporting Pickering and Darlington.
I'll take a look into this further at my end and I'll make a submission to the CNSC about this. Either way, heads up! 
Louisette Lanteigne700 Star Flower Ave.Waterloo Ont.N2V 2L2 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://gren.ca/pipermail/all_gren.ca/attachments/20180502/4393efa6/attachment.html>