What The Return Of Nuclear Power Plant Construction Means For Municipal Investors

by: Columbia Threadneedle Investments

By Chad Farrington, CFA, Head of Municipal Bond Credit Research and Senior Portfolio Manager

The builder constructing the first new nuclear power plants in the U.S. in more than 40 years recently filed for bankruptcy protection. What does this mean for the project's completion, and, on a broader scale, the municipal market?

The U.S. nuclear power industry is currently comprised of 99 nuclear reactors in 30 states, supplying approximately 20% of the country’s electricity needs.1 These facilities are held by both investor-owned utilities and municipal or public power utilities. The public power utility sector as a whole is viewed as a relatively safe and secure sector of the municipal market due to the stable demand for electricity and the ability of public power utilities to recover cost burdens through electricity rate increases to customers.

A combination of factors, including nuclear accidents at Three Mile Island in 1979 and Chernobyl in 1986, health and safety concerns and cost overruns due to regulatory issues and construction delays, led to a discontinuation in nuclear plant construction in the U.S. for decades. Now rising fossil fuel prices and concerns regarding greenhouse gas emissions over the past several years have fueled what many believed to be a nuclear renaissance in the U.S. and other countries around the globe.

Westinghouse’s role in nuclear renaissance

Westinghouse Electric Company, a subsidiary of Japan’s Toshiba Corporation and the largest builder of nuclear power plants in the world, is the lead construction contractor of the first nuclear plants to be built in the U.S. in nearly 40 years: Plant Vogtle in Georgia and Virgil C. Summer in South Carolina.

Substantial cost overruns and delays have led to massive financial losses for Westinghouse and the eventual Chapter 11 bankruptcy filing on March 29. The result is a heightened degree of uncertainty about the projects' future and an increase in the perceived riskiness for municipal bonds and the public power utilities involved with the projects.

Bond issuers exposed to Westinghouse

Six municipal bond issuers have varying degrees of exposure to these nuclear projects.2 Given their ownership interests in the facilities, the following four municipal bond issuers have already incurred substantial costs and issued debt to finance the construction.

  • South Carolina Public Service Authority (Santee Cooper) is 45% owner of the Summer project.

  • Oglethorpe Power is 30% owner of the Vogtle project.

  • Municipal Electric Authority of Georgia (MEAG) is 22.7% owner of Vogtle.

  • City of Dalton, GA is 1.6% owner of Vogtle.

Since the following two issuers have agreed to purchase power, they may experience financial pressure as costs are passed along to all participants:

  • Jacksonville Electric Authority (JEA) is a purchaser of Vogtle plant power under a 20-year contract that includes responsibility for construction cost overruns.

  • PowerSouth is a purchaser of Vogtle plant power under a similar 20-year contract.

Who pays for cost overruns?

Prior to the Westinghouse bankruptcy filing, the various project owners benefited from a fixed-price construction contract provided by Westinghouse, thereby shielding the municipal utilities from substantial cost overruns. Westinghouse, however, is likely to reject this contract in bankruptcy court and attempt to shift the burden of future cost overruns to the project owners, with likely negative impacts to the credit quality and ratings of the various owners. The project owners benefit from a limited guarantee provided by Toshiba, but Toshiba’s tentative financial footing calls into question the potential benefit of the guarantee.

To continue the project or not to continue

The public utility owners are now in the process of deciding whether or not to complete the project. The decision will impact the future cost burden, the need to raise additional debt and the magnitude of any future electricity rate increases to customers.

Municipal utilities benefit by having autonomous rate-setting ability, which means that the electricity rates the utilities charge to their residential, commercial and industrial customers are set by the utilities themselves and do not need approval from a regulatory body. Thus, plant construction cost overruns potentially can be recouped through higher electricity rates charged to customers.

This ability to raise rates fairly easily is one of the reasons public power is generally a high-quality, stable sector of the municipal market. Therefore, although the bond prices of the municipalities with exposure to these projects could further weaken, ultimate repayment is not likely to be an issue.

Bottom line

We believe that some credit ratings fallout from the Westinghouse bankruptcy is likely. However, we remain confident that the public power utility sector as a whole is a relatively safe and secure sector of the municipal market because of the stable demand for electricity and the ability of public power utilities to recover cost burdens through electricity rate increases to customers.

1 Source: Nuclear Energy Institute, 2016; https://www.nei.org/Knowledge-Center/Nuclear-Statistics/US-Nuclear-Power-Plants
2 Source: Barclays Municipal Research, April 2017

© 2017 Columbia Management Investment Advisers, LLC. All rights reserved.

With respect to mutual funds and Tri-Continental Corporation, investors should consider the investment objectives, risks, charges and expenses of a fund carefully before investing. To learn more about this and other important information about each fund, download a free prospectus. The prospectus should be read carefully before investing.

Investors should consider the investment objectives, risks, charges, and expenses of Columbia Seligman Premium Technology Growth Fund carefully before investing. To obtain the Fund's most recent periodic reports and other regulatory filings, contact your financial advisor or download reports here. These reports and other filings can also be found on the Securities and Exchange Commission's EDGAR Database. You should read these reports and other filings carefully before investing.

The views expressed are as of the date given, may change as market or other conditions change and may differ from views expressed by other Columbia Management Investment Advisers, LLC (CMIA) associates or affiliates. Actual investments or investment decisions made by CMIA and its affiliates, whether for its own account or on behalf of clients, may not necessarily reflect the views expressed. This information is not intended to provide investment advice and does not take into consideration individual investor circumstances. Investment decisions should always be made based on an investor's specific financial needs, objectives, goals, time horizon and risk tolerance. Asset classes described may not be suitable for all investors. Past performance does not guarantee future results, and no forecast should be considered a guarantee either. Since economic and market conditions change frequently, there can be no assurance that the trends described here will continue or that any forecasts are accurate.

Columbia Funds and Columbia Acorn Funds are distributed by Columbia Management Investment Distributors, Inc., member FINRA. Columbia Funds are managed by Columbia Management Investment Advisers, LLC and Columbia Acorn Funds are managed by Columbia Wanger Asset Management, LLC, a subsidiary of Columbia Management Investment Advisers, LLC.

Columbia Threadneedle Investments is the global brand name of the Columbia and Threadneedle group of companies.

NOT FDIC INSURED · No Bank Guarantee · May Lose Value

About this article:

Expand
Want to share your opinion on this article? Add a comment.
Disagree with this article? .
To report a factual error in this article, click here