Fabian Velez | 00:50
Fiequela rodo paa fundamental sera ta dando blas and noon dami more theocion. Can I order any?
Yeah, I say so that this so our sen. But. I don't know. People. But. Check out that Yama. I sp.
Speaker 2 | 05:38
[Laughter].
One.
Fabian Velez | 07:17
In star and a fri. Conlo Mar.
Speaker 2 | 07:22
I was very excited for the thing that happened. So yeah, I just understand that what it's coming over or is going to be we're going to have some people participating in the as, right? So you're gonna be the only two.
Speaker 3 | 07:46
Correct? And we have somebody joining. Yeah.
Speaker 2 | 07:48
Sorry thank so okay still yeah there's no.
We met this morning with the at won't be okay but what we're trying to do is to basically have their in because eventually everything that really is and we get itg by him so they were picking in their minds around the age.
Gets you fantastic.
Speaker 4 | 08:43
Yes, but what is gonna be here? He said. He said it's ten. Okay? He just called.
Speaker 3 | 08:50
So? Yeah.
Speaker 4 | 08:55
And.
Fabian Velez | 09:31
Yes. See?
Speaker 4 | 09:39
Take advantage of.
Speaker 2 | 10:23
They were dealing with the temporary generation see.
Speaker 4 | 10:28
91. But you love those people you [Laughter].
Speaker 3 | 10:32
All these people didn't initially.
Speaker 2 | 10:36
Send us when we have the after number.
Speaker 3 | 10:47
And.
Speaker 2 | 10:48
It see here. [Laughter].
Speaker 4 | 10:53
I don't think so. No, I don't think it's a technical meeting.
Speaker 2 | 10:57
Yes.
How about those elections in the year.
Speaker 3 | 11:15
Interesting won't marwise than wait for it. [Laughter].
Speaker 4 | 11:21
Okay, that.
Speaker 2 | 11:24
No the guy who was elected mayor and basically... It's like retired, left right there.
Speaker 3 | 11:40
Even if you disagree with me... I wish.
Fabian Velez | 11:44
To keep.
Speaker 3 | 11:44
Wish him the best and we'll see how he is about.
Speaker 2 | 11:48
Probably you'll buy one of the supermarkets.
Speaker 3 | 11:55
His ideas haven't worked very well in other phs.
Speaker 4 | 12:04
That that's a story.
Speaker 2 | 12:06
Yes, see, I was born in the United States.
Speaker 3 | 12:15
No, I don't think so. I think he was born... Then I... Yeah, it was more decent. He was born when he's.
Speaker 2 | 12:32
I think he was born in Uganda.
Speaker 5 | 12:34
Or is... parrots.
Speaker 3 | 12:34
Or something like that. That's right. Yeah, come down.
Speaker 2 | 13:04
Tas.
He. I mean that I think.
Speaker 4 | 13:40
I think that answer.
Speaker 2 | 13:44
I to clear the country and ended up there some word.
Fabian Velez | 13:54
Like some. They hear you.
I never see that.
Speaker 3 | 14:25
Would you mind if I made that of the CO? [Laughter] Yeah, are you sure? No, don't be sorry.
Speaker 5 | 14:40
Enough lu.
Speaker 2 | 15:08
I can do.
Speaker 5 | 15:10
I.
and Sal. Yeah, we have a lamb for recom trio. But organize say but to.
Speaker 2 | 15:35
I.
Fabian Velez | 15:39
S like to move forward as we are here to answer that is a big question and immediately can be if we have time of awards in the migre it the detail.
But for now, we're just going to go with the fifty. I'm like you, doing time to explain their project. Our plan to accomplish the project.
Speaker 2 | 16:13
Have you been affected by the government shutdown in any way.
Speaker 3 | 16:18
I think it happened from the airports at DIA where I was coming from the airport was on lines at least it was GA rates so it was better on Monday. On Monday, the lines were 3 hours long. Monday morning. 3h same as Sunday.
So I think they same Monday Tuesday when there should be pay I think the weekend should be again.
Speaker 2 | 16:42
That they're saying that they're not going to have enough air flos.
Speaker 3 | 16:48
Do. that's scary. I always like some cool [Laughter] you want to thank you so much you'll be done in New York flying New Jersey it easy slide on air traffic. I mean they... I think they have the airport 60% capacity just because then they can make you sleep really easy to fly over there.
Fabian Velez | 17:14
[Laughter] Specializing.
Speaker 3 | 17:21
And now it's too little long.
Speaker 2 | 17:30
When we have them here right now is a lot of lottery planes.
Fabian Velez | 17:36
Manager. One thing David said he will take any.
Speaker 2 | 17:39
Jas Amer used to be a former baby and now.
Speaker 3 | 17:46
In C they so now.
Fabian Velez | 17:54
The UNM that we talked about earlier. Okay. Perf.
Speaker 4 | 17:59
The base left that became the low st.
Speaker 3 | 18:02
Yes.
Speaker 2 | 18:05
But in a lot of places they were able to.
Speaker 3 | 18:25
So many miles away offshore it is.
Speaker 2 | 18:28
Offshore. Yeah.
Speaker 3 | 18:30
Sure it's not. I thought it was suff sorry.
Speaker 5 | 18:36
But no.
Speaker 2 | 18:38
That wasn't based basically it was. There it was an aqu for target practice.
Speaker 3 | 18:45
And this was a.
Speaker 2 | 18:45
Very small starting from...
They will bring down the F-35 to... They have a squal.
Fabian Velez | 19:12
Good afternoon I that I hearing.
Good afternoonhe with Loom system operation again your time today. Nice to see you again. Good afternoon. Mohammed is some man. I talk more versus stranger will move.
Speaker 2 | 20:00
You really have a lot of talk down here, right? So, Tapo.
Speaker 3 | 20:08
I think. Yeah, or they're coming in. They're down here now, so the ship will come in tomorrow.
Speaker 2 | 20:14
Okay, so I understand that we are putting either out of GAs or getting close.
Fabian Velez | 20:16
Manager from a.
Speaker 3 | 20:28
The storm passed up and the second state here. So they're... I didn't... I can't remember. They're here and now we're here tonight. But the schedule cra.
Fabian Velez | 20:54
As I said before, the Dal team is sending their product for cost support from the Federal.
Speaker 2 | 21:09
The large newspaper in the... Yeah, I'll mention Paul this morning. So you know what we're going to do into this energy as well? Well, it is the biggest concerning commitment. It is a double epments.
Speaker 3 | 22:20
Probably call it.
Speaker 2 | 22:29
Interesting call. We couldn't get together in terms [Laughter].
Speaker 3 | 22:38
Sign there.
Speaker 2 | 22:40
There are some different SLAs on that we were discussing with...
We started to have basically we had a meeting this morning with the FO. Block regarding some issues and one of the support that they were paying. So we had a meeting. I know that you're not speaking to him with Kevin and Iran and everyone's from ARA because we want that AA thing to be there.
So it was... It was convened by the force of media. And the reason being is that there was some allegation, certain information was confidential, and they would discuss the information with us. So that's why they are being thrown off. They were not worse. They showed up. They were making on the meeting that since the IP has been built and filed, the information was confused and blah. Let's get everybody together and quick.
By the way, it was a public meeting, so he was... I think that's where somebody else from here who was there... Car... [Laughter] So basically, from RA, RAF... Yeah, and basically, we... I think the big tick is energy, and energy is... I know that Energis has a contract with you. Basically, what they say is that once he's up, consing whatever year it is, it will reduce the consumption of... I was... I don't have the exact numbers, but it will be possible and maybe one in five and six.
So, Mat, has that dropped the numbers down from 40 something? I don't have the exact numbers. It's really low. I would say, well, obviously, it would be after a year, but we don't know that.
So basically, what really would happen with the... Basically, the biggest tickets renewal wars is an issue. But forget about renewals. We know where renewables are that we may need to start energies and the themes, and you know that the team contract runs up to December 2020. We are ready to request FEMA, and the way that... What's stay at make FEMA in the fms.
Fabian Velez | 25:13
[Laughter].
Speaker 3 | 25:28
Can you explain that just purely ren that to FEMA up to 2027 like yeah, I was Stephen have you say I guess because I mean they're prep persons.
Speaker 2 | 25:38
Okay it's prepa assets. Remember those were phone that we bought from you because we got it from... But he should have an expiration date, and as a matter of fact, originally, it was December 31, 2005, and then we extended it to 2027.
Now, we are first implementing it to make it permanent because, according to whatever FEMA equals, just to 2003, based on the conversation that we had and the governor's office with FEMA, it will be extended. It will be made permanent over.
Yeah, but it hasn't been built yet. So we feel good with 2027 because before 20: 37, that product will be.
Speaker 3 | 26:26
So that's.
Speaker 2 | 26:27
That won't be anything. So what needs to be taken into consideration are the events after December 31st and again, the big ticks. So we approved because last week the amendment to the contract. Now we are so that the team can go to the pre-A4 and know that they have a phone parking place with you
that's.
Speaker 3 | 26:53
The numbers for 68 to the 5.
Speaker 2 | 26:56
To the 05:30. Basically, that's the number for 78 to 528. But the big issue is that they are trading from XOC to G. So the DTO will be the one that we will be capable of... It was proven everything possible.
Fabian Velez | 27:10
[Laughter].
Speaker 2 | 27:11
We don't think we should have any issues with the B.
So I think that the prices are really good. I know the prices that you have with them, but obviously the SM20 is that once again, the consumption of... Once again, K and Kossu will be back. And Kossu.
Fabian Velez | 27:27
And.
Speaker 2 | 27:29
Yeah. So what? New Minds forecasts that for year three, but I don't know if you have the numbers in front of you, but it goes down from 40 something to 20.
Fabian Velez | 27:50
See? Well.
Speaker 2 | 27:50
So obviously, it was that and because obviously we will be able to confirm the 40 take or pay on the visa safety for the first two years. And then at year three we have an issue because it is impossible for us to... Take or pay for the 40 getting the forecast although we all think New Mills forecasts are wrong. We have in front of
two.
Speaker 3 | 28:18
Of the what's his name? Physicians and we talked to privacy. He was waiting.
Speaker 2 | 28:24
Wait yeah.
Speaker 3 | 28:25
I know what you like because he was pretty out specifically like, "I wish for everybody in the island that energy gets built." Both SS... I think there's a... that's not bad.
Speaker 2 | 28:42
Yeah. but anyhow, the options that we are handling is that I think we need to confirm with you guys is that make it the 40 in the first two years. And then they look and sit down at the year at that time. The IP must be approved. We will go for the fact that Anvisa got the status of Anvisa. The terms must be remedied by that time.
So we will be in a better position after a year. But the other option that we were discussing is that look at the Anvisa project. And it means some kind of... I don't know, rap down if you want to call it something like that.
If then there is a project that comes in base in our evaluations, we don't think that in the next three years and will be completed.
Fabian Velez | 29:24
[Laughter].
Speaker 2 | 29:30
We are looking at very short... Yeah, [Laughter] we're talking about five years at least.
So I think by 2028, I think we will be able to start the structure of the power plant, but that will be in place and proscom in. So those are the issues that we are having with that. But at the end of those ways, very steadfast that absorption he goes on the side of that and he has work us instead of Lums.
But how can we put it up the contract having those workers those by Buma? So that's the way we want to keep for want to... I know you like want to, but we want to find a way in the contract in the language to be able to do something if the forecast is not consumed by the...
Because remember, we're speaking about hundreds of millions of dollars. So it's impossible for us to have an independent... And then for any reason, Lu is correct we will disp. So we need to work on that regard.
That's the forecast compars. [Laughter] I must assume that you have seen it before. But if you take 2028 down to 25,9, and the base 29 by 33, even to 18. The last year, the previous year of the hundred. So.
Do you have that information? Can you share it with them? I don't see see.
Speaker 4 | 31:11
I just want to make sure that the rest of the information from it's not subject to the NDA and we signed. But at least that table I can ask maybe we'll verify no. S yeah, I think it's important to know that we received this weeks ago and then we did several meetings with the and what the assumptions were because we even saw these numbers we had based the SAP pay and reasonableness in the behind the certification.
Fabian Velez | 31:36
What that mean?
Speaker 4 | 31:51
So we assumed that they have not taken into consideration the TED and other things. So we did in our asking them specifically based to take into consideration that the tangents will be available among other assumptions.
And they came by saying that they had taken that. So.
Speaker 2 | 32:07
But I think the atmosphere that based on the today's meeting the.
Speaker 3 | 32:18
What's the stone on each 30 he refer reach 18:37.
Speaker 2 | 32:29
You have no idea. Can you hear?
Speaker 4 | 32:35
Seen a meeting with eight hundreds downstair.
Speaker 2 | 32:48
So we'll basically what can we put in the contract that the covers. You see, it goes down from 66 to 29, so I don't.
Speaker 3 | 33:01
See if anything, our quantity renewable. Yes. I mean, we know the Arabs, I think as off 570%. [Laughter].
Speaker 2 | 33:14
And I don't see the premises and the forecasting. It's wrong. It's simply wrong, but obviously boils, you know, very hard procedure in terms of even though we don't think it's wrong, what can we do about it?
So we need to find its own way out because once and at least we are speaking about hundreds of billions of dollars. So we cannot agree on a 40 take or pay when you go 29, 25, 23, 21. Is it possible on the other side? We don't want to assume that you have... And you say, "Okay, you want to go the take or pay route, for example." Then the volume is keeping going at 60, 70, and you tell me, "Now you take a 20 million take or pay." Now you got to go for pay. Now we don't have that.
So it pulls up in that position that we don't really see. How do you think we can work out these ones?
Speaker 3 | 34:17
But I mean, the FBS have to be positional, much rather than understanding that this forecast is unrealistic. I mean, I think anybody who looks at this, even from a volume perspective, but all of somebody that's in here, it's clearly another so click.
I'll be certain for you guys. Like the non-negotiable terms that we received today, we like you're asking for a lower price, lower acre bag access to the terminal and the position. Which means even if I wanted to, it's physically impossible. We're negotiating your contract and we can stop respectfully. I always yeah, I got it.
But this is yeah.
Speaker 2 | 35:05
Definitely.
Speaker 3 | 35:06
Like if you say the TER bank needs to be 25, maybe FBS can work with that there's certainly that you're talking about the tolling there's certainly that you're talking about the pricing of say with [Laughter].
Speaker 2 | 35:25
With pricing and once again, we need the price to improve. I know that that's a position that was expressed, we have our instructions, we know what we negotiated with you, in the beyond the 785 totally.
Speaker 3 | 35:43
Where is in the st the pipeline deliver at 650. Is that coming from you or is it coming from.
Speaker 2 | 35:52
It's coming from both.
Speaker 3 | 35:53
It's coming from both.
Speaker 2 | 35:54
The EU and work and basically really with you we are discussing with thee as you know to grant the three young. That the granted in Puerto Rica and that's one of the he always convinced that there should be a pipeline that connects five segments and one.
Speaker 3 | 36:14
And I'm not res.
Speaker 2 | 36:16
Yeah, there should be. So basically, the PO 20 is, let's assume that the OE approves the project. Should the pricing be less with a pipeline? I really think so that it was negotiated with you, well.
Speaker 3 | 36:33
If you like, just you understand what we're in the process of reading. The ocean of crises is missing. I've actually had a difficult.
Speaker 2 | 36:43
I'm difficult actually.
Speaker 3 | 36:45
That on the pipeline fee. So, the two places it's going to hit us directly is like we negotiate the contract and we talk about price and we're talking about seventy-five, we're talking about pricing. We then... Yeah, brand and your request said there's political pressure to keep the pricing on the sciences, which we frankly didn't want to do.
I went around to get that done to then say, "Now that's applicable, everything's delivered. Video pipeline. On day one, we applied the San Juan. Gus would apply without a Sare hero.
Speaker 2 | 37:16
Here I would put the.
Speaker 3 | 37:17
I like that it's a renegotiation of the price and that's a retrial on the way I see this. Look, there's a logistics adder in this contract that is intended to be a pastor. We don't want... I don't want any money training, but I don't want to lose money training.
So you have to price at fifty dollars and deliver that goes away. So there is a reduction in cost, but a reading go in and say, you know, that's pretty much it's a faith. Gave the 06:50 and 7905. And then you say down, you say, I need that price.
Speaker 2 | 37:53
I had to. I like I got.
Speaker 3 | 38:00
So E is in non-emotional terms. So essentially, I think the position you're saying is that you take your me that I'm not about that's what you mentioned the same definitely that's what you say that. So I guess essentially, I think what you're saying is last market beta sales. I don't think the words are Chinese letters. They showed up in the markets, but I think that's at least for you. Sure, they have the right information.
Fabian Velez | 38:15
[Laughter].
Speaker 3 | 38:30
You guys are saying please take care of leave that's the where I those are.
Speaker 2 | 38:37
No, we just discussed one pricing, I'll take care of that. Leave that solution, I'll take care of that. Where are the other four 434.
Speaker 3 | 38:50
I mean, they're all non-negos you're calling, no questions. I mean, if these are truly non-negotiable, I'm gonna see you in the hotel. I see.
Speaker 2 | 39:09
Okay. What are the other items in the we have.
Speaker 4 | 39:13
45 million.
Speaker 3 | 39:17
Saur was the question that you.
Speaker 4 | 39:20
We discussed entirely after seeing they thought that it was unreasonable that the GA's price could be on top of the 45 of the AS, but you eliminated the shortfall as well as the environmental, which was the draft, the original draft, and therefore we think the original down both.
Speaker 2 | 39:40
Frankly, I don't understand that one. Has that one ever been Yes.
Speaker 4 | 39:44
Okay.
Speaker 2 | 39:46
And you.
Speaker 4 | 39:47
So basically, they put an EM on the line. Relea is 45 million, and the reason that was established was that beyond that, the VOP and the COP were out of that $45 million. So that had to be paid on top of the $45 million, including environmental issues that arose from any as...
So the way that it is restructured in the language, it says that they are responsible beyond the $45 million for the GA payments, the ISO towns, and they eliminated the shortfall issues and the environmental.
So we believe that those will be included to represent everybody in the same way.
Speaker 3 | 40:40
So I think what you're asking is to have an unlimited viability, right? Essentially, that's what you're asking because.
Speaker 2 | 40:48
It was machine. It was agreed like that in the country in the rehab.
Speaker 3 | 40:53
Make sure [Laughter] was taking a lot of people's times and money. But I think you're right generally able to capture the standard form and generally.
Fabian Velez | 41:11
No.
Speaker 3 | 41:11
And CARs are fraud like those we. That's the standard.
Okay, I think what you're trying to do is half, and you need to be able to cut for, like, you know, short. So. And you're second to your point. The last point in the story, you said that's millions of dollars, right? Same with DP or TP, it's bad advice for both.
Like I think it's bad advice for you guys but to us, but I think coming in with a limited liability cap for even you guys for pay or for class or shortfalls. No one signs up for limited liabilities. I mean, no one does.
I mean, that means... I know. Let's say, for some reason.
Fabian Velez | 41:55
2.
Speaker 3 | 41:55
For the next seven years, that's shortfalls. How much money are they talking about? Billions of dollars. Same with you guys, how much is that pay per pay bill? You just have some output assuming you want to use the 40, that's 39, you... I don't know the number, but that's the limit I really got for you or us.
Fabian Velez | 42:05
He.
Speaker 3 | 42:13
And I think that, I don't know, I've never seen... I mean, at least you haven't ever signed up for a found which has no PA, but I get it for fraud, and that's the thing that I get.
We can discuss that, smart.
Speaker 2 | 42:30
So let me... He... I want to understand.
Speaker 3 | 42:47
I want to.
Speaker 2 | 42:48
Take it piece by piece. So basically, if we get to the place where we need to source people the fuel and we need to get more than ten of the fuel, it will cover a hundred percent of the increased costs, right?
Fabian Velez | 42:57
Bless it.
Speaker 2 | 43:01
That one is not neces.
Speaker 3 | 43:03
Okay.
Speaker 2 | 43:04
So I want to understand what kind of liability we're talking about, but that would not be included in the cap 5.
Speaker 3 | 43:15
No, it is included. It is, but it's not what you're when you're trying to lose carbon out of it. I mean, it can go more than 4500.
Speaker 2 | 43:26
What I'm saying is that if it exceeds the $45 million, right, we wouldn't be able to do that. That's right, but that's a new change, right? That wasn't included in the version you're putting. Enough is correct?
Speaker 3 | 43:39
Well, it was both, so we have you take your base. It's captain your side. This we have a sharp fee at short payment that's captain mer, so we're both capped. What I think you said is it would be unreasonable for us to ask for a chat on our DOP parents, and you will be uncapped. Take. We're saying we're both capped because neither one of us wants to set.
Speaker 2 | 44:09
I can put a tab on the shortfall, or alternatively, view that obviously, that's a big issue. Pricing is a big issue. But I'll think I need to see what the animals are playing. This is it you of regarding that one. I feel good about that conversation. We but putting a cap on the alternatives we cost after we agreed to up to over 100% of the cost.
That's a break. That's the second one. Let's go to the third one.
Speaker 4 | 44:55
We see we have ongoing changing OFS.
Speaker 2 | 45:01
And I don't know what the language at the end is. Could we draft... We did in a way that changes laws. We go to about 50%. Assuming risk of each one. Something like that.
Speaker 3 | 45:17
You're proposing to the general. Okay, yeah, but that's not what you're not in your emotional terms.
Speaker 2 | 45:23
I that's I know what.
Speaker 3 | 45:26
All means I think you guys would
Fabian Velez | 45:28
I.
Speaker 3 | 45:30
Yeah, that's your proposal, okay? And turning that prior, you listen in the is.
Fabian Velez | 45:34
First.
Speaker 2 | 45:40
Okay, so basically we got the cap, that's an issue, we have the price that's an issue with you. I need to work with it. And the change is something that we can work out which
Speaker 4 | 45:52
The going to not just the wording but the introduction again of the change of the law because I believe that the draft three years ago had been taken.
Speaker 3 | 46:05
Yeah, I think that we see it in the same market, I think priority-wise, let's say. And I think great, I think the ten-year pays to be clear that it's just the amount, not anything else. Yeah.
Speaker 2 | 46:26
Yes. Yes. At least that might be right but we have I [Laughter] confirms right but we don't have anything with the clauses with the graft and he's.
Fabian Velez | 46:37
[Laughter].
Speaker 2 | 46:54
[Laughter].
Speaker 4 | 46:55
See anything other than that, and I saw that the ramp of the person was there obviously, but the minimum being 40 and the top being 50.
Speaker 3 | 47:06
That the... Okay, so that's where I was going.
Speaker 2 | 47:12
Okay, yeah.
Speaker 3 | 47:13
So mentioned my name, sir. I just didn't go back and take a bit because that support there's not contracts like I wish I could say it was. I wish I decided it's two dollars more expensive than five.
Speaker 2 | 47:33
So somebody... Can we expect to win some kind of language speaking the forty but how the priorities to get together after the third year to review the book? Do you see what I mean? We as use of the number. We don't have any number we need to 25, 26, 27. Fine, the Foy keep the for the problem is you once you go to 28 that you go 29, 20, 09:29 to 25.
Speaker 3 | 48:01
That's the I start the fourth year.
Speaker 2 | 48:05
So exactly. Yeah, it's just a way that we can review. Do we, all of us assume that.
Speaker 3 | 48:11
What you're sorry to drop is a calendar? Years. Is that like bread by years, like July first?
Speaker 2 | 48:17
I don't know the answer, but I think that those are fiscal year, right?
Speaker 3 | 48:22
So fiscal year first June.
Speaker 2 | 48:27
Thirty exactly, Cisco, yeah, yes, exactly.
Speaker 3 | 48:31
Do you mind checking that?
Speaker 2 | 48:32
Okay, I will.
Speaker 3 | 48:33
I again I point to point.
Speaker 2 | 48:39
Because once again, we all know that I think that LUMS numbers is wrong. Like how can I sign a contract? We have a new MIS operator for good work.
Speaker 3 | 48:50
So I mean, we've got to move... That's always a little bit of a problem. We've been down here, it's like there's such conflicting information, and it's paralysis. There's never been long-term allergy. Security is worried, and it's because of these accusations. It isn't so somebody's got to change up...
The LNG industry... I can't have a take-or-pay contracting and it's for 40 years for 3 years, and then in year 3, it's like we'll figure out how it's changing. I'm not going to think that risk to an are going to that they're going to price it smalls.
Speaker 4 | 49:35
I think that everybody agrees at least on the side of FI and PA that these are not going to come in so soon. Do you think something may be viable? Is this put some wording like maybe a grand possibility, particularly for
a it's not a rundown situation particularly to M Visa, and that maybe you would be more comfortable because we all think that it will be coming into the equation. If it really doesn't do and affect the NER BA, then it's way like that.
Anything does come in and it doesn't affect the conditions at that time. Then we commit towards that and then we review where it's not there's something like and.
Speaker 2 | 50:21
You know, I don't know.
Speaker 3 | 50:25
Yeah, I know. Yeah, and you're what I'm to Alex and Brad, I said to you, I think sometimes ideas like that, which are trying to find a path. I agree it's good, sorry like that, but then ultimately it gets brought in so much we're seeing it's a 60 point like back whatever.
Yeah, you went down at 61, and now here we come from an online and then you're asking for the same price for everything. So? So although I like your idea, but I think where you're not... Where this is going to end up. Unfortunately, that's what I don't think you should consider it because then the next question the board is going to read actually the discussion from that starting year one, and it should be just 25.
So you know it just whatever the next is that's a problem. I think with this negotiation, sometimes guys, we have come to a place in Atom and then boom, it's rotting. We're seeing Tolling shift her axis with so much rot and then like... Well, and I think we reached out to a stable three times now to try to get a phone on the phone and have them not showing either. That's super.
Speaker 2 | 51:53
By the way. Atom line.
Fabian Velez | 51:58
When you make break. W.
Speaker 2 | 52:06
For the first 40 years, and maybe it's gonna be 40 for the next four. I don't know. But if it so happens that 40 is 45, can we somehow get through our highly numbers for that three?
Speaker 3 | 52:28
Darkly the different type of come through ins and to have the flexibility that's relatively bad is mean. Remember where we started this.
Speaker 2 | 52:46
That's. And when you're saying that talking about the 650 and Palo Alto by fine eventual if we get it. You said that anyway, we're not going to be paying the full amount because you're not going to be using the drugs.
Somehow you gave me a number if you're not using you're using the pipe and you're not using drugs to deliver, but we got that number.
Speaker 3 | 53:24
We got that now it's.
Speaker 2 | 53:26
Like two million something like that.
Speaker 3 | 53:28
It's not a big amount it's 02:50 it's 28 cents it's twenty cents.
Speaker 2 | 53:38
Yeah it goes finally. I'm going to... So I think it's more than not there, so 20% production.
Speaker 3 | 53:54
Okay. So we need to take the number.
Speaker 2 | 53:58
They can actually go, deportative price, you know, just discuss that and that was.
Speaker 3 | 54:05
The that's okay.
Speaker 4 | 54:12
Next we have the force majeure and OB, which may go back and forth again. And we actually... No, but we did have the version that we submitted to the PB. Let's see, this changed to Lisa. Yeah, for my Coast Guard and government approval to change.
Speaker 3 | 54:42
Yeah, you guys made the changes based on the agreed person twice. One was the removal of foreign actions including carbons or REA, and to add it is expansive, which we tried to accommodate. We use it and delete it. Expansive meaning of LNG standards which was undefined, so we tried to define it in a new point 1.3.
So we rejected that. We tried to accommodate the question-defined term, and then the other... We now are going permits, we just Stripe us as a customer. So, I know we talked about this a lot.
I don't know, I'm not much to say. I think our specifics. Yes, again, I think having said pricing taker pay this specific provision of the fit, we need to talk about on Laman. Those are the four things and everything else is less likely that we get to do those four things.
But those are the matters that deal very matters.
Speaker 2 | 55:52
He is, frankly. Do you want to say something about the fourth of year?
Speaker 5 | 56:01
Sorry I wasn't new. Maia covered the explanation of the... Can you hear me?
Speaker 3 | 56:10
Yes, well.
Speaker 5 | 56:12
Yeah, basically, Maia covered the explanation of the Fort Marri are correctly and again, once again, we circle back to the stakeholders and basically we saw the change. We saw what?
Speaker 2 | 56:26
I think I'm asking you something. Yes.
Speaker 3 | 56:29
Go ahead. Who are the stakeholders? When you say stakeholders, do you mean... yes.
Speaker 5 | 56:35
FOMB and P3, especially in P3F1, is more of an oversight, but P3 and the governor of Puerto Rico, remember that the government of Puerto Rico has been looking at our contract and giving us follow-up.
So again, our role is oversight and just trying to bring the parties to good faith negotiations, but the terms are specific given to us, and those terms have been very clear that, "Unforeseen my EOR or the carve-out of the permitting, especially with the Coast Guard, is not to be considered a force majeure and that even affects, for example, a little bit later in our analysis on the tolling agreement, basically, you're putting a responsibility on the ship to ship that emanates from this Coast Guard."
So, this Coast Guard issue is something that is in the forefront, basically, it's been clear that, once again, force majeure EOR should not be considered the Coast Guard or any other permitting or any other defaults on the terminal and so forth.
Speaker 3 | 58:02
So you're saying if we sign this contract, and the US Coast Guard calls us and says, "There are no more LNG importations allowed into San Juan Bay." I'm on the hook for deficiency payments in perpetuity, and that's not enough.
Speaker 5 | 58:22
Think think that is a great expression. Alex of Gorge, you're bringing it to the extreme. So, what I and that is something that, yeah, it could happen. It's the worst and best case scenarios, of course. Best-case scenarios, we don't have any problem. Worst-case scenarios, Coast Guard... I'm sorry, look, did I interrupt you?
Speaker 2 | 58:42
Not me. Was what? Yeah, it was me. But obviously, besides being on the hook, it will be a cost for terminations. So we can all agree it doesn't mean that you have to pay me anything, and I don't have to pay you anything. It just would be a POs, and I don't see how not getting a permit from an agency in this case, the Coast Guard, should be considered a force majeure. Why? Complying with the law should be considered a force major.
Speaker 3 | 59:16
I think two points. First, I think you mentioned you will be a determination in your scenario. No one actually, we will be in the FOP because you're saying it's not a but they're not.
Speaker 2 | 59:30
But let's not.
Speaker 3 | 59:31
Look he's not a friend. That's your position. So we'll win the book for 70 years and as year as for the Muslim society.
Speaker 2 | 59:41
So not having the permits is not all for termination of the contract.
Speaker 5 | 59:50
Yes, it is. Yes, it is again, team, and I, when I say team, for I and this analysis comes, of course, from a point of. And FOMB kind of stated. Real if you have the access. If we were to negotiate with any other person who would take this type of contract and would have entered the facilities and would have to comply with permits, we wouldn't...
When I say we, the government of Puerto Rico in a contractual way would still determine that this is not a force majeure because again, the permitting is an issue of compliance by the operator by the seller and has to be sure that the seller is going to provide that service and is able and up to it.
So again, I know it's an issue and it's right there. Basically, we're not talking about the Coast Guard saying right now you cannot use the facilities. The Coast Guard is talking right now of. Of, in complemento the noncompliance. Noncompliance with issues, you know.
Speaker 3 | 01:01:14
So again talked about this there'll be very specific in the language right now, on the contrary, I believe it says we failed to obtain a permit due to our fault. That is not fair. That's in the context it's favored by a party to obtain or grow any approval or permit or permission of any government authority if the party failed to act as original ruling operator. fair.
Speaker 2 | 01:01:45
I that's that.
Speaker 3 | 01:01:46
Is not mean time. That's why you release RFM. Well, because of our fault, then that's not a fair. You have to, that's what I'm saying. But I think we have to because service scenarios even has to complying with the law the authority reject a permit and you know that that's the problem.
Speaker 2 | 01:02:06
One is the close that you talks.
Speaker 3 | 01:02:09
I think and the 11.2 point two mark. But again we talked about this and that's why there of time we have to save you. If you believe that, then call it out and I think you guys have, right? So Frankie, did you.
Speaker 2 | 01:02:26
Review that? Go ahead.
Speaker 3 | 01:02:27
I was just gonna say. I think that's why my example. Will that sound extreme? Highlights the FM issue. Because in our ability to control the permanent situation. And Frankie, like I'm I don't have it in front of me.
But this is not different from the battery contract and I don't believe it's different than its logo contracts. Like this is all this is market standard. We're not making aggressive decisions.
Yeah, I think, I don't know, I'm from but look at you guys have the exact language in your contexts here. So I think we're not asking for anything outside of the market. But I'm of these calls speaking on contact with Ze and Pray and I'm very likely to see your about.
But again it is obvious one time so I think that sort of this issue.
Speaker 2 | 01:03:19
Could you please verify 2.2 .2.
Speaker 3 | 01:03:35
Let's not point 2.3 if we claim it you our move funds is I think by eleven when to talks about this specifically. Well, again. That's how we came to an agreement. Is it spoken the second time.
Speaker 5 | 01:03:53
Rec that was rejected by the board.
Speaker 2 | 01:04:07
Let me be clear with you. So I want to be.
Speaker 3 | 01:04:08
Clear on this one. That's me that's crazy. They just referred to contract TOS that's no act, that's prejudicial.
Speaker 2 | 01:04:19
That's so... Let me get back, obviously, every company must need to comply with the terms of the contract, and obviously, not complying with the terms of the contract should not be considered a force majeure. I think we all agree on that.
But then what you're saying is that is precisely what the contract says. Frankly, could you take a look at that.
Speaker 5 | 01:04:44
Please? I am right now looking at it. I am right now looking at it and the provision that they are referring to. Give me just one second, please. Okay. So the original wording was cut out from
11.1 to 11.1.1. So the reintroduction of a... It says 11.2, right? Notwithstanding the foregoing provisions on.
Speaker 2 | 01:05:58
Give Jake a chance to get there.
Speaker 3 | 01:06:00
You're going down to me there, 11.2, Jake, 11.2. Can you sue me a little bit? Sorry, so it's a little more.
Speaker 5 | 01:06:20
You introduced a wording that... Again, I think we're not that but the reason, nobility, and the prudent operator.
Speaker 2 | 01:06:34
.2 You later will be the first line of 11.2. Very thank you, go ahead.
Speaker 5 | 01:06:44
Not the 11.2 is notwithstanding the foregoing provisions and 11.1. The financial shall not be events of force majeure events arising out of market decline, make market failure, industry, bla. 11.2.2. The failure by a party to obtain or withdraw of any authorization, approval, permit or permission of any government authority because the party claiming for force majeure failed to act as a reasonable and prudent operator in connection with the efforts to obtain or maintain such authorization, approval, permits or permissions. I like the wording.
I think it's... But again, I don't know if the amplitude of the reasonable and prudent operator is there's the issue.
Speaker 3 | 01:07:40
I think if therefore this one reactor... Like we invited them to you guys who are available all day today and tomorrow, you want to come, fine. I think I need to understand. We need to understand.
Why are your Japanese customers every GA market? Prepa has signed this market to all contracts we feel so I'm why we deleted the one frankly.
Speaker 2 | 01:08:09
Take note of this one and let's ask FO and B specifically if this cost is included or not in the Bunkercy contract that was approved two or three days ago.
Speaker 5 | 01:08:25
I am going to send this right now.
Speaker 2 | 01:08:28
One. Maybe the whole class. Let's compare it with one. Ask them to compare with the one that was approved for BUC, perfect.
Speaker 3 | 01:08:41
Yeah, I think we should do all... I think the question right... All United contract NC contracts do it and you tell us. I think just ask me one but okay.
Speaker 2 | 01:08:54
That's a good idea. I have no idea.
Speaker 3 | 01:08:55
I think, and again, I think it's even less depressing. It's like, what's what? Let's fix the problem. What is what they're trying to call, right? If you're saying, well, any... You're going to claim in families or ladies and their departments, I agree, you should not be a fan.
That's why you have this, right? Or this is a new one. I don't think this is remarkable. We added to cover your request if we're negligent at all or with misconduct at all in any family events, not just for anything.
Fabian Velez | 01:09:24
No.
Speaker 3 | 01:09:24
We cannot call it. We cannot call it right?
So I'm trying to solve the problem here. What is the issue like even and I believe I don't I haven't seen the bankruptcy but I think 90% of the contracts or if I'm not hand we will have this fine but anyway they don't like why are we trying to what why is the rejection that's what we're you know we're trying to solve here. Wow.
And we'll solve.
Speaker 5 | 01:09:51
And solve understand the... I understand your rationale. I understand the rationale of again, all of this arises basically on previous issues that the government does not want to make sure that it does not happen again. Again, I think that the wording is not wrong wording.
I think it's correct wording. But again, we are not at the end of the day.
Speaker 3 | 01:10:21
This person I know... I'm just saying that's what I'm trying to say. That's why we insisted it be present here several times. I apologize, guys, because of the same reason we wanted about productiv, they didn't show up.
So I think, frankly, yeah, because my point is not only to ask him if it was including just the justice contract. I think what should be going on is law and then too, why are you leaving? Why are you not accepting any change?
Speaker 2 | 01:10:48
Are you speaking to them thanks to form me or not coming later on so you don't... Because of it. Yeah, don't think they're going to be present because they have an issue. The issue is that since they're to be the ones passing judgment, on the contrary, they can't be involved in the negotiations.
So basically, they go to us using... I agree with that, but they can say that's going up to you.
Speaker 4 | 01:11:24
I have a question. Do you think that maybe this might be an issue because of the ship-to-ship transfer? Pretty good. And the fact that they understand that we are... This is what we understand that... He was advised that they could not do this shape.
And they brought the shape longer than was supposedly invaded the channel and then launched the ship after authorization and therefore made. They are made under the rem.
Speaker 3 | 01:11:53
Every second from me here in details that they should be going to think about it and get a solution like sac.
Speaker 4 | 01:12:05
Because that is the... They grasp something specifically towards that particular.
Speaker 3 | 01:12:11
Alright I'm driving until they tell me what the issue is and they can just come back. So I'm... Like, our issue is the backlink, but we will have to talk about if you come back and write attribute the pack like what does that mean? I like... We need to get really work for us. Compare to the wars and you can spend really much just sentences I.
Speaker 4 | 01:12:38
With that, the resistance has always been on leaving in that's a government post guard so they always do. I understand your position.
Speaker 3 | 01:12:53
You can read this like that's all right because if you position like you get talk about because you're lazy, negligent you didn't act that you didn't have to like he's saying like, "Yeah, NC cannot go be calling, that's my reach."
I think Beha is going to be on our reach and that's why I would like to be in the room to understand why.
Speaker 5 | 01:13:15
Is it real?
Speaker 2 | 01:13:16
Conceptually? Everyone is... It really the settler should comply with the permits and law they agree why and if you say it's corporate, that's why the Brits everybody say no, it's not, but we don't know why that's a problem, right?
Right now, the only thing that we can do is that you provide us with your position. As possible, I will go back to them because we're not assuming in a position as basically what we're Yeah.
Speaker 3 | 01:13:49
I don't see you guys sitting here, but I'm sitting... It's pretty good.
Speaker 2 | 01:13:59
Okay, we know where we are going for my was okay.
Speaker 4 | 01:14:02
So we discuss that. Okay, this one's I know is the big issue, this is the oversight.
Speaker 2 | 01:14:11
We go yeah.
Speaker 3 | 01:14:13
So there's some dogs, but they are overlaying. Yeah, the axxes and dogs.
Speaker 4 | 01:14:19
Yeah, there's certain things and aspects that are... We can see if the contract and then we saw the value of the term sheet. So obviously in the contract we see that sides move from misconduct and as well you were having an environment that anyone who accesses the data even has to have a shape to shape transferred.
Then if we go to the term sheet, well, obviously there's a lot of issues. We have a lot of questions there, but these are the most important ones to solve with the Islamic. Because when you say miscellaneous and then you have so many cases there that when you come to negotiation, the third party maybe you are then pumped with a silly thing that will obviously put a stone on the path of being able to access the tar.
Speaker 2 | 01:15:06
Let me tell you what. What? Basically, they are ter... What they're saying is that in the event that.
Speaker 3 | 01:15:15
For any reason.
Speaker 2 | 01:15:16
Whatsoever, you're not able to deliver GAs, they're willing to talk about maybe whatcholship, period. And it's not gonna be because you're going to GAs to the area and tomorrow it's going to be they imagine could have given discuss term week weeks where then the world of Puerto Rico should be in possession without the envy. The only limitations being the term sheet that's going to be there for the whatever company costs in. They know exactly what they have to comply with and what will be the cost so that they can come in for whatever that is necessary in order to provide. Gasping for... They want this to be as open as possible because what they're saying is that we're going to be in a position where we've run out of GAs, we're not able to provide it for whatever reason, and we cannot break it in another compound by the cast. That so should be something that is as clear as possible that there's no limitations either that those that apply to the general industry.
Speaker 3 | 01:16:36
So now that we started... So I'm going to hold up the full A term sheet unless I participate. So, the idea is if we FS for somebody to toll the facility without interrupting.
Fabian Velez | 01:16:46
Rily. Exclude. Or need to do.
Speaker 3 | 01:17:04
I need to have you need to have... Sorts.
So you need to either be able to have a sort and do SDS transfers. Sorton or a storage. And so the only way that you think about it... If he could ever be in a position to be delibering under our five-six contract is the most contract and have a set supplier to use the journal. We should note much more storage.
Speaker 2 | 01:17:29
Let me... I'm an expert in the... Basically, it will be just one sort, so I can see it, and I mean it will go one chip, and there's only two of them. Do we have a ship on the birth, or we don't? So there is no...
You explain that to me as a matter of fact for you that there's not enough space over there to have two chips at the same time. You really want to explain that? Yeah. So how can you put a condition in the tolling agreement when you yourself know it's impossible to fight? Was everyone ever paid two chips over there?
Fabian Velez | 01:18:12
9.
Speaker 3 | 01:18:12
There was for us that's what we get, that's what... Prior to 20, prior to earlier.
Speaker 2 | 01:18:22
Yeah. They didn't use to have the whole right.
Speaker 3 | 01:18:26
Correct. And so that's what I'm saying is I can't just use the example, let's say I have my five, six months for ten years and I can't have ship operations for you to be able to access that facility, I would have to remove my share. I would have to go into default under my five, six contract. You would then have to bring another ship, and then you know I can't... Without the ability to do re-ship transfer coming on, I or she... I can't hold.
Speaker 2 | 01:19:03
But maybe I don't understand it correctly, but at least I was assuming that's... I assume we finish this contract so you have 5,600 ATMs. You either supply both of them with one chip or you don't. You don't have the other... Quite one of them. I'm not there, so when I'm speaking about not having the available, I'm speaking about not having a ST on the birth.
Speaker 3 | 01:19:30
Sure. So maybe still separate this into two components. I think there's the NP is unable, unwilling to deliver an L chap tolling arrangement, and there's the I'm happy to offer you tolling arrangements for the long term even when we're able to supply on if I could use ship in CHA.
So there's been two snacks. There's the "Hey, I can't deliver on GE. You guys get told. So excited." But then there's the second part of that is if there's onshore storage constructed off-course and as I have divisions, then I will say even if I can supply LNG, I will give you the right to use the facility.
But I can't... It's impossible to have two suppliers in there at the exact same time without SDS or options.
Speaker 2 | 01:20:18
I think like that you as we are right now.
Speaker 3 | 01:20:21
Yes.
Speaker 2 | 01:20:22
There's one chip and there's no such... So it should just be one. It either is any if he C or anybody else, and if he is not able to supply it for a period of time, it can be for whatever the CAS is used.
But what Alex is speaking of is the reality of the tolling fee. Once we have the ship permit from the TER and we have the own inline storage that we'll have, right?
Speaker 3 | 01:20:51
So then you can hold the facility totally independently if I am still explaining out.
Speaker 2 | 01:20:58
Okay, thanks. No, and that would be obviously nice to have, but I understand that the main concern of the F1B is that you don't have to cheat there if you're any more to provide CAS for whatever reason.
Then we need to bring in a chip to basically provide GAs to plan. That I really have to have. So that that's a scenario where you're not there or you're there, we have a ship that has no GAs. I have a very specific.
Speaker 3 | 01:21:38
But I think what we're saying is... But that would be... I'm not doing it because I'm trying not to eat it because why will I not have GAs? It's just.
Speaker 2 | 01:21:47
Because somebody does. Donald Trump sank your two ships by mistake. And now you have to get all the ships. Three months after those three ships, we are cash here or you're unable to pay us if those are examples.
Speaker 3 | 01:22:02
So any of their positions for any reason, not just because I did a purpose.
Speaker 2 | 01:22:11
Right? Yeah, because maybe you didn't do it in purpose. And he could be... And he would be ass.
Speaker 3 | 01:22:18
And you have access to a channel any time.
Speaker 2 | 01:22:22
You are not able to do that. You are not able to buy that. Let's say, for example, you are not able to play by your producer.
Fabian Velez | 01:22:31
But for an now.
Speaker 2 | 01:22:31
I brought one. And they're cheap. I will pay you a utility. Then while the CSV seems to me, I have the cast I need to supply.
Okay, once we finish this one, you get out, you go ahead. I think the diverse permanently, it would be well, you weren't able to survive it.
Speaker 3 | 01:22:57
Can you see? Can you go up to the language they drafted? I thought it was a lot broader than that, but we don't have it here, right?
Fabian Velez | 01:23:02
Remember this app now.
Speaker 3 | 01:23:03
Not permanently. I don't know where you drop it. I still don't understand what permanent access
Sorry.
Speaker 2 | 01:23:13
And why we're finding that. I think you guys.
Speaker 3 | 01:23:18
Put in drop. I don't know if you don't mean.
Speaker 2 | 01:23:25
Permanent access in the sense that whenever that happens, what happens, okay? In that sense.
Speaker 3 | 01:23:32
No wait, I don't like permanent access. It means the race of... Let me if you want... Something, yeah, it doesn't yeah.
Fabian Velez | 01:23:43
[Laughter].
Speaker 2 | 01:23:55
If you want to erase very quickly, do it. I don't want to get... I don't want to take control of you from the terminal. I don't think.
Speaker 3 | 01:24:03
A lot with it might be worse after March. You're saying sorry guys, okay.
Speaker 2 | 01:24:10
Sales do whatever you want, based on that.
Speaker 3 | 01:24:14
I think we send you a drop. I think you guys are writing. I don't know, I think we can discuss it internally. I think it's important, so I to say now I think.
Speaker 2 | 01:24:27
I have okay, do I what.
Speaker 3 | 01:24:29
I want... Yes, I understand.
Speaker 2 | 01:24:31
Okay and what I want you to do is not be able to supply the GAs we bring to the company. No, you go either the company pays. So even once the company is paying the toll, obviously the GA of that chip is used. You tell me what I have the ass.
Okay, once this one is finished, the one is gone and you're coming back. Well, you can supply that. You can stay there for the next seven years. No, we south. For example.
Speaker 3 | 01:24:59
Our air is we cannot use it out to be ships and somehow this provider can bring achship though it's a gray area whether they can bring us in. You're saying they're still going to bring it because of this product.
Speaker 2 | 01:25:18
Tells you why it would be a.
Speaker 3 | 01:25:20
Because they somehow they say this law doesn't apply to them but it applies to 20 feet.
Speaker 2 | 01:25:25
But I don't see that happen if a law applies if a law is.
Speaker 3 | 01:25:31
Always interpreted to a race one you know, but they interpret them away like the are not like black and white, you know, like but first of the white they like, you know, they read it and they're like but first of all, you know, these providers tell me to bring it.
So we're gonna do it. And then that has backs into our terminal that you know that we can get penalized. Let's your scenario. You will bring.
Speaker 2 | 01:25:56
The re let step by step. First of all, I'm not gonna get up in the morning when they says anything is not able to bring the test. You are the ones that are going to notify us. And I think that's stated in the contract, right? You are the ones that are going to tell us we are not be able to bring that.
So that would open a process that it wouldn't happen by the next day a few days. So we can open and seeency. We go to the market and we find a ship that. Okay.
Speaker 4 | 01:26:32
That's nice, but we don't want to be able to do... Which is what I'm coming with, the part that says they can supply. Then I negotiate with them. So you want to have... And I think that's a concept whether you want to permit or not. You can put the name which we know how to develop on that, but we want to have a solution to solve an issue that can go away immediately.
But then you want to be able to have a contract in place that, if for any reason, you cannot supply a mark with a... of contact, we have somebody that can be there. We don't have to go out. We got to do something crazy.
If no time... We have benefited and there's already.
Speaker 2 | 01:27:16
For all that. So we find the company must be in contact with you because obviously if you're going to have that the next day, they will be there without you knowing. You are the ones that are in charge of the operations of the bur. Some kind of coordination that's happening.
How were the reasons that the company is able to supply the GAs and you're not? I don't know exactly the situation, but you are not able to pay your produce. You go to the pharmacy proceedings and your supply tells us we are not going to supply you anymore GAs. Something like that. I do see in the scenario that you were describing, David, and a scenario in which, because of the low one of them, they will be able to supply because we are not going to get into the details of why. Yes, and why not? That would be up to you. You still have control of the very...
So I find that's why you're most working with you guys. So I don't see how I can get total... For example, having to get to your terminal tomorrow without coming with you. You won't be in charge of that.
Speaker 3 | 01:28:32
Per your premise that we will owe you short forms.
Speaker 2 | 01:28:42
Yes, we do. Because, yes, once again, you will be the one to notify me that you are not going to be able to fly. It won't be neat. At least that's why I understand.
Fabian Velez | 01:28:58
The largest study was st. In c.
Speaker 3 | 01:29:03
That's one that works beside. So let's say, let's talk to turn on me. Okay, what I want to just clear is that I think assuming these are FO&B comments, I think FO&B is confusing. Failure to supply during what I'll call the first period versus the holding access and rights are permanent access and destruction that so and so... I think we've been very clear.
But if SDS are enabled or we were operating the right sense to be consultants that scribe out there, I still want to make sure that it's clear.
Because it's not. I willfully to fall on day one, ship operations happen, and you guys... That's not what we're trying to do. Then I think that's what I think this is like. Hey, they're going to willfully default in six months and SDS operation is to approve, so therefore we can't.
So I will have the condition of the second version. I will tell you this.
Speaker 2 | 01:30:14
You know that probably the access to the terminal has been talked about that when we get into the agreement that the owner announced they of the access to the love F01B has been precise. I don't want to use... I don't want to make a mistake regarding the word and last time you met because I think you were straightforward to then forget about it. We're not going to be... If we are not able to fly, the agreement will be in effect and do work, and I think they are... I don't want to use the wrong word, but I think that they. I don't know if you got this look like they are trying to establish that we didn't agree on that what we were and what we did.
I just... I don't know why. I don't know why they want to have... What were the words that I used at one time? We want to find out if they were lying.
Are you crazy?
Fabian Velez | 01:31:28
Mar.
Speaker 2 | 01:31:29
We're not lacking, we do. Do you want to have theater work?
That's fine. Yeah, find it. We would, but... As long as I know and as far as I know, we wanted to be clear on what I just stated to you a couple of minutes ago. We were able to supply the GAs. We're going to find somebody who does that. You notify the person you were not going to be able to... We will notify the survivor we have. It will be got over here. You coordinate and the operation would be easy, right? As long as you are not able to supply it. Once you're able to supply it, Dale is done, you're gone.
If it's coming back.
Speaker 3 | 01:32:06
That's all. Then for our questions, should we be doing it where it's why again you need to finish all the loading the ship.
Fabian Velez | 01:32:10
[Laughter].
Speaker 3 | 01:32:14
Yes, of course. Even if the ship is massed in ten days, I got to remember something.
Speaker 2 | 01:32:24
No, I'm going to answer you. Once we have that tee over there we have to pay for it.
Speaker 3 | 01:32:29
Second question. You want this in under FM scenarios. We have a fan. You want to access to our bed when we have the fan? No one likes doing it because we couldn't get GAs. You know.
Speaker 2 | 01:32:44
Like will add it, but I think I should be able to load it once again in coordination with you.
Speaker 4 | 01:32:56
There are certain things you do.
Speaker 2 | 01:33:03
You see, a scenario in which you won't be able to supply for as. And anybody else could be up to well.
Speaker 3 | 01:33:17
Here's like, yeah, sorry.
Speaker 2 | 01:33:21
I'm thinking as sorry they say that explosion in one place that you're operating in that place and the T is going and then another you can have another route going for the play. So be like that.
Speaker 3 | 01:33:38
Got the next one.
Fabian Velez | 01:33:46
Broken.
Speaker 3 | 01:33:48
On the tolling agreement of firm sheet. So you could convince me both ways. But I really think, like, in the ship's AR worlds, everybody uses basically the same form of shos in an L and tolling world that every supplier and every terminal is a very different bras.
And so I'm conscious of the fact that a term sheet or some lesser version or contract probably I want to go to give you language that doesn't restrict either, frankly, gives you the ability to say supplier tech components in terms agreement. You figured out I'm going to be. I am fine. Generally it's here like if we include language, that's fairly as forceful as it can be for us to use commercially reasonable best efforts, whatever that means on the remainder of the year.
Fabian Velez | 01:34:40
Right now.
Speaker 3 | 01:34:51
I think if we say we sat here and spent probably another month negotiating a calling agreement and stable it to the back of this agreement, you would send it to total. So I just want to be like our official time and gives you.
Speaker 2 | 01:35:10
And if you ask me, I don't know why it was requested. I would say that was requested by...
Yeah.
Speaker 4 | 01:35:22
The questions that were asked in each of the instances of the D talking.
Fabian Velez | 01:35:26
Want.
Speaker 4 | 01:35:28
Can you please send me.
Speaker 3 | 01:35:34
For us to have any language in the tone in the contract we like? I think we'll have to see what the content and then and if.
Speaker 2 | 01:35:48
It was for me, we wouldn't even.
Speaker 3 | 01:35:49
Decide.
Speaker 2 | 01:35:50
This it was the 49 women was gonna be put in the current frame once it started. It's a matter of getting together with them and then I would be even in both in the West.
Speaker 3 | 01:36:03
That's four other parties have negotiated the other. Yeah, before me I got.
Fabian Velez | 01:36:15
See? Right. I'm here.
Speaker 3 | 01:36:20
As are very well we between the two straightly mark the guys as here. So if you guys have a marked up to hear comments.
Speaker 2 | 01:36:32
Please we all I want you on their sense and as far as we can go. In the this morning meeting we were discussing with them, we asked them send the comments. I have no equs work you got incorporated. They send us a series of questions, and so with the questions and from the question, you can conclude what the accounts will be.
So we can send you our accounts. We don't have them. What we have is their questions. So you can do by the POs are typical linguistics.
Speaker 3 | 01:37:13
Like the a file s is so. So that's a.
Speaker 2 | 01:37:17
I have a right on that.
Speaker 3 | 01:37:22
I actually for us to come to any understanding of what we're going to mean the DSA and to then I think until we get thec from me you will get it then you'll get questioned some comment you.
Speaker 2 | 01:37:37
You will get what we get nothing else nothing more would I have a lot to have clear comments. Of course.
Speaker 5 | 01:37:49
I think it. Yes. I wanted to let you know and NF team and the reconstant that Fabyang sent out already the request on clarification on the language for.
Speaker 2 | 01:38:10
Surprising to what the main issue that we have this horse is take or pay and he's been toing sa many feet. Whatever we have, I want them to have the same information that we have so we can conclude this. We can go longer with this. We need... No.
Speaker 3 | 01:38:26
I mean, why did do they understand? Like. I mean, it's $200,000 a day. He, like, unnecessary. Yeah, I mean, I can't fathom it. I mean, since we did this, there's a lot of me. It's I don't know, it's $20 million 25 million dollars, $30 million in this.
And I don't mean we got some things we can talk about it to figure out, find out. But I don't think it's a shocking like I don't think we're going to end in a twenty five million dollar benefits for it's got the next one is oversight like we don't have to talk about I so your excluent language whose language is represent.
Speaker 4 | 01:39:22
That's what we have, and I would suggest somebody for me we have.
Speaker 3 | 01:39:27
So I think here's the point I want to make to you because we see it, right? I see it sometimes with big questions on staff, sending the questions to us because we can be forced to who or whomever we only should not be handed.
So, we're perfectly clear that we are, that we are the organization conflict of interest policy manual and the language. But I think it's resting on the same thing that has to be to the OCA manners profusing it. I agree.
I think the PRI has authority to whichever company to come in. I agree with that, but I don't see that in practice. We get questions from NTA about our inputs that is being sent by to Kana and to us. She is sent to us that should not be involved in there. It looks bad on all of us.
I don't know why you guys do it. There must be a reason why, but I agree. It should not be oversing or.
Speaker 2 | 01:40:37
We the language.
Speaker 3 | 01:40:44
I don't think the language concept.
Speaker 2 | 01:40:46
I don't know, but why has to be involved? It doesn't.
Speaker 4 | 01:40:50
That's.
Speaker 3 | 01:40:52
I think the... From Ka Falls emailing us about something you asked him to get from us on these disputes on these short books that you're putting here and which I agree with. But you guys do the thing. I... In this program. In this country.
Speaker 2 | 01:41:16
In the class that we are going to agree beta will be out of everything beta will be part of any in this book. That's right. I think you're saying and I agree with being both we simple out. Obviously I don't know why.
Speaker 5 | 01:41:38
Frankly I don't know why. I'm sorry.
Speaker 2 | 01:41:40
One point and insane and see the country for some reason was kept in charge of the tenancy contract. I don't understand why it should be done at the beginning. The same man who was learning on the ten...
So in NXB we did. Speedily have to make a request for information to ANA regarding the tals. But I think Hea's answer was we are not going to handle that, it will be charged right?
Speaker 5 | 01:42:06
Well there was no... It was that point real quick. I'm sorry because I think we had... But I think we were resolved. Okay, so yesterday I uploaded a request for P3 on the official transfer. Of course, I used because again, the nature of the contract is different in the way that it was previously set up before. B3. So what I did was basically I justified the transfer from PA to P3:00 am from PDA to the 3PPO of S15 and 6.
So we can have it beforehand before this contract comes in. So that transition on contract management will be as seamless as possible. And then we reiterate in that communication should go out to P3. I'm not occupied with that because it's been a very hectic morning.
But we do have that communication ready for P3. It should be coming out sooner than later.
Speaker 3 | 01:43:14
One friendly one.
Speaker 2 | 01:43:18
Once we signed this contract and we have the oversight with three of the government. Obviously nobody but the government decides who the agency in track would be. Migrain needs to... It would be out of the future period.
Speaker 5 | 01:43:35
Right? Yeah, no, I mean, it's an OCI. So it's the nature of an OCI. For me, 800 is not the nature of, for example, the three B bill. So it's hard to work around.
But this instance of this OCI that has been present, but we have not, how do you call it, grabbed the bull by the horns now? We grab it since now. So when this contract comes in, we already have that pathway of already being in a San 15 and 6.
Speaker 3 | 01:44:23
I think this point is... I think we have re-conception. I think, in my opinion, you guys are not doing what the OC said, but it's okay. But I agree. I mean, generally, this is not an issue. They're not a bigger issue than we SE will work on.
But what market? What is being proposed?
Speaker 2 | 01:44:41
Do you think they're not doing it in the way that they right now?
Speaker 3 | 01:44:44
When there's a conflict, when there's always a conflict and an issue dispute between Prepa and us, you guys are still using Kana to behave with us and other skills because I mean, I asked why.
Speaker 5 | 01:45:00
Why because. Okay, so we on and we cannot enter on some one-five and six dispute because we are not contract managers. So basically, we do not and we do not enter and FAS out any information that we have solicited. Hata has been basically on the NGS PA on the extensions of the and some instances where the three has asked us for information.
But we have not, we don't have any visibility again on that contract. That's what we're trying to obtain right now.
Speaker 3 | 01:45:42
Last point you talked about it is pricing the... yeah.
Speaker 2 | 01:45:49
Let me speak that I will be.
Speaker 3 | 01:45:54
The next step. Do you guys mind if we just take five minutes, stand right, and then we'll come down and watch the rest of the.
Speaker 5 | 01:46:29
For.
Fabian Velez | 01:46:30
Okay. Bo, get a with a mut.
All of. Fa. Comitas. Went EO.
Is point of island.
Who? The future. Another disagreeable number.
You.
Will it come for you?
Speaker 3 | 01:54:15
Back on Friday and hopefully.
Speaker 2 | 01:54:18
Okay, let's meet tomorrow while we will try to get it for you tomorrow. Okay.
Speaker 3 | 01:54:23
But I think we need to learn how you can... If you can, it's okay. But I think you guys need to know today where from get pres. Because I think if FO and B if FO is not present tomorrow, then I think we're going to take the position that it's better for us to do a markup in our position.
And I would be happy to do it, but I think I'm fair. No offense.
Speaker 2 | 01:54:49
At the end of the day, the last call is from the guys, they just listen.
Speaker 3 | 01:54:59
Listen they're listening. But Donald's... They're not.
Speaker 2 | 01:55:03
Participating in that con. But you've got to make a good explanation for that. We will try to get them in. We will try to get them in the meeting with us. Not just listening. We will have an answer for you today. To let you know if there will be
something. We don't want this to... Yeah, we don't want to drive this any up.
Speaker 3 | 01:55:40
Yeah, you know, I just I'm the est way everybody is starting. We say.
Speaker 2 | 01:55:47
I say with you. I'm not going to speak with them. I'll stay with you only if you want to talk something. I know you can feel that I don't have any good feelings about it. So I'll stay with you.
Speaker 3 | 01:56:02
Yeah, I don't know at all. I'll say the inter next bottle here. If not me.
Speaker 2 | 01:56:14
I must. If we don't.
Speaker 3 | 01:56:17
If we're not close, I mean, West is like we're just going to wait for the which.
Speaker 2 | 01:56:25
I will tell you and I will be very careful. Yeah. And obviously, we want to grow this as soon as possible, so.
And we have the... Be sure about that you send this message to us. Those are the direct instructions of the bird now, yes. So the governor wants to have this done. You have no idea.
Believe me, you have no idea about the kind of fights and slatters that the governor is having as we speak. Because I think... I don't want to say it on purpose. Very certainly looks like.
Speaker 3 | 01:57:13
I don't say it.
Speaker 2 | 01:57:15
Yeah, certainly it looks like, and when you see people wait for the next... For me, sometimes I think that would be.
Speaker 3 | 01:57:24
A better answer.
Speaker 2 | 01:57:25
But obviously, that pretty closely goes against our wishes.
Speaker 3 | 01:57:29
I don't. I mean, I don't wish to do that.
Speaker 2 | 01:57:32
But we're... I'm telling you, I've been president of the meeting, and when the owners are there, you are going to close this. Forget about that, and you're going to go where we will. And they get dragging very...
The worst part is that they say everywhere, including Washington, that we are the ones stopped in the process.
Speaker 3 | 01:57:56
So I can't believe that mon $2 billion.
Speaker 2 | 01:58:00
No, it's crazy.
Speaker 3 | 01:58:03
I actually have professionals.
Speaker 2 | 01:58:06
Yes.
Speaker 3 | 01:58:06
It'll be a cross-scholars bill for $450, yeah, and 200, yes, FTR, yeah, quite a case, yeah, that's true, and this... I mean, that's crazy.
Speaker 2 | 01:58:24
You have no idea how they spoke of that. I'm not really well-like, not. And I have so many arguments to me again with F. So I was very happy with them. Not today. Last week they put my program and sent me out of the meeting. It was last week and I said, "No, forget about it."
We are trying obviously to make a mistake. It has been done in both parts. It's been some mistake from NP and some say from us where we're trying to figure out the relationship we are trying to have.
So you see what you see, the way that we try to handle the two boxes and fires. So we are really trying to do whatever it is, our hands to make it work better, but it's spacy, and I can tell you how. What do you mean? You won't be present with me? How do you expect to get closer to this? No, discuss it with them and then they send it to us and you're crazy.
It's crazy.
Speaker 4 | 01:59:42
I think we pull out and talk together. But we did send them an ESS letting them know that they like to have a discussion with you and that you are considering for a lot of discussion that the PV deal is available to me then prior to the...
So we get to put them up today not to speak to discuss. So yeah, so I'm sorry. Okay, well, I'm trying.
Speaker 3 | 02:00:20
You're here so that's the whole... You see here I think he's working on it separately to talk to a massive leader and no family keeper. Yeah. He's openly discussing. Always will.
Speaker 2 | 02:00:35
Try to get at least one six book.
Speaker 3 | 02:00:45
I think we have two points. One is totaling like us, like AC I think. The rest I think is UA 1B like you know we're fan, right?
Speaker 2 | 02:00:58
You and I think about two minutes, two or three minutes in our park price. This break it from you on our side easily. So those are the two main needs we obviously have to and FM, but I think we can go that other pricing take a paying a plan and chasing flow that's.
Speaker 5 | 02:01:42
Thank you very much. I'm sorry. I couldn't.
Speaker 3 | 02:01:45
Let.
you go.
Speaker 2 | 02:01:55
Yeah. Channel, you're knowing what plan? Yeah, I was the... The assumption is nothing of our expect.
Fabian Velez | 02:02:28
That's BA Alexi Yong. Alexi O, yeah. MBN blo power.
One two by.