Moody's announces completion of a periodic review for a group of North American Projects

New York, September 29, 2022 -- Moody's Investors Service ("Moody's") has completed a periodic review of the ratings -and other ratings that are associated with the same analytical units for the rated entity(entities) listed below.

The review was conducted through a portfolio review discussion held on 22 September 2022 in which Moody's reassessed the appropriateness of the ratings in the context of the relevant principal methodology(ies), recent developments, and a comparison of the financial and operating profile to similarly rated peers. A possible outcome from periodic reviews is a referral of a rating to a rating committee.

This publication does not announce a credit rating action and is not an indication of whether or not a credit rating action is likely in the near future. Credit ratings and outlook/review status cannot be changed in a portfolio review and hence are not impacted by this announcement.

Key Rating Considerations

The principal methodology used for the rated entities listed below was Construction Risk in Privately Financed Public Infrastructure (PFI/PPP/P3) Projects published in July 2019. Please see the Rating Methodologies page on https://ratings.moodys.com for a copy of this methodology.

Key rating considerations on a forward-looking basis may include but are not limited to the following summarized below.

Construction Risk in Privately Financed Public Infrastructure (PFI/PPP/P3) Projects

Construction Risk Allocation: Metrics may include but are not limited to construction contract terms, availability of compensation or time relief, allocation of risks to sponsoring government, sponsor government support for construction requirements.

Construction complexity: Metrics may include but are not limited to size, depth, and location of the construction site; knowledge of site conditions; complexity of the structure to be constructed; method of construction expected; testing requirements to meet operating performance standards; complexity of the systems to meet performance standards; length of commissioning period; clarity of performance standards in operations; constraints in access to construction site; environmental or regulatory limits to construction; complexity of construction workarounds; limitations effect on critical path.

Construction Consortium Experience, Readiness and Resilience: Metrics may include but is not limited to constructor experience in the local jurisdiction, experience in the local geography; experience with the type and size of the project; experience with other public-private projects; track record of consortium members working together; construction risk mitigation strategies; exposure to sub-contractor credit risk; identification and availability of subcontractors; strength of expected profit margin and contingencies; quality of budget build-up; construction cost assumptions and cost hedging; size of the project relative to the constructor.

Resilience of project to schedule overrun: Metrics may include but are not limited to length of time for construction; length of overrun available without default; flexibility to accelerate construction if needed; amount of float built into the construction schedule; sufficiency of liquidity to support schedule overruns.

Constructor replacement risk: Metrics may include but are not limited to complexity of the project to accept a replacement; complexity of design; availability of suitable replacements; strength of component members of joint venture constructors; expected cost increases for replacement; mitigants to sub-contractor loss, pricing of the construction contract, quality of liquid security available for replacement.

• CBHP Limited Partnership

• Crosslinx Transit Solutions Gen. Partnership

• Dexter Nova Alliance GP

• EllisDon Infrastructure WPHC Gen Partnership

• Fengate PCL Progress Partners MBR LP

• Gilcrease Developers LLC

• I-4 Mobility Partners Opco LLC

• LA Gateway Partners, LLC

• Mosaic Transit Partners General Partnership

• Oakland Corridor Partners LLC

• Plenary Infrastructure DC LLC

• Plenary Justice Miami LLC

• Prince George's County Ed. & Comm. Partners

• Purple Line Transit Partners LLC

• Red River Valley Alliance, LLC

The principal methodology used for the rated entities listed below was Operational Privately Financed Public Infrastructure (PFI/PPP/P3) Projects Methodology published in June 2021. Please see the Rating Methodologies page on https://ratings.moodys.com for a copy of this methodology.

Key rating considerations on a forward-looking basis may include but are not limited to the following summarized below.

Operational Privately Financed Public Infrastructure (PFI/PPP/P3) Projects Methodology

Complexity of Project Operations and Performance Regime: Metrics may include but are not limited to the complexity of the operating and maintenance requirements, complexity of the obligations throughout the asset lifecycle, strength, and clarity of the payment mechanism for revenue recovery, and aspects of the interface with sub-contractors.

Strength of Contractual Arrangements and Relationships and Operational Approach: Metrics may include but are not limited to the robustness of the sub-contract package terms for fixed maintenance and operations; robustness of contract arrangement to manage lifecycle requirements, adequacy of budgeting for fixed maintenance requirements; adequacy of the plan to manage lifecycle requirements; quality of the relationship among key parties; exposure to deductions and other penalties from poor performance, strength of the project off-taker.

Performance and Quality of Sub-Contractor: Metrics may include but are not limited to the track record of performance and strength of the sub-contractor, available security.

Financial Position: Metrics may include but are not limited to minimum and average debt service coverage; absolute fund balance and cash position; budget flexibility; revenue trends; relationship between inflows and outflows, breakeven ratios, risks associated with the need to refinance; additional structure protections and reserves; creditor controls.

• Acces Recherche Montreal L.P.

• Access Justice Durham Ltd

• Access Prairies Partnership

• Access Roads Edmonton Ltd.

• AHA Access Health Abbotsford Ltd.

• AHV Access Health Vancouver Ltd.

• Alberta PowerLine Limited Partnership

• Blackbird Infrastructure 407 Gen Partnership

• Boreal Health Partnership

• CBHP Limited Partnership

• Collectif Sante Montreal S.E.C

• Crosslinx Transit Solutions Gen. Partnership

• Denver Transit Partners, LLC

• Dexter Nova Alliance GP

• East End Crossing Partners LLC

• EllisDon Infrastructure RIH Gen Partnership

• EllisDon Infrastructure WPHC Gen Partnership

• Fengate PCL Progress Partners MBR LP

• FTG Fraser Transportation Group Partnership

• KEENAN FORT DETRICK ENERGY, LLC

• KentuckyWired Infrastructure Company, Inc.

• LA Gateway Partners, LLC

• Mosaic Transit Partners General Partnership

• Mountain View Partners GP

• Oakland Corridor Partners LLC

• Plenary Health Vaughan LP

• Plenary Infrastructure DC LLC

• Plenary Justice Miami LLC

• Portsmouth Gateway Group, LLC

• Prince George's County Ed. & Comm. Partners

• Purple Line Transit Partners LLC

• Red River Valley Alliance, LLC

• Sea-to-Sky Highway Investment Ltd Partnership

• SGTP Highway Bypass Limited Partnership

• Shield Infrastructure Partnership

• Societe en commandite CE Sebastopol

• SSL Finance Inc. / SSL Financement Inc.

• Windsor Essex Mobility Group GP

The principal methodology used for the rated entities listed below was Generic Project Finance Methodology published in January 2022. Please see the Rating Methodologies page on https://ratings.moodys.com for a copy of this methodology.

Key rating considerations on a forward-looking basis may include but are not limited to the following summarized below.

Generic Project Finance Methodology

Size and Market Profile: Metrics may include but are not limited to scope of operations as measured by operating revenue or usage volume (such as annual ridership or traffic volume) and service area population, network, project or facility size, physical limitations on types of services which can be provided and ease of expansion; strategic positioning exhibited by pricing power, competitive profile including proximity to competing facilities and sustainability of such competitiveness, monopoly position, essentiality of an asset to users, ability to generate demand based on strength and size of service area; capital investment funding and flexibility, diversity as measured by ratio of single largest revenue source to operating revenue; charter renewal risk, ownership and affiliation; service area wealth, economic diversity, income, size and growth rate as measured by data provided by the US Bureau of the Census, Bureau of Labor Statistics and commercial data vendors (where applicable).

Operating Performance and Risk: Metrics may include but are not limited to annual revenue, 3 year average operating margin, 5 year compound growth rate of operating revenue, stability and predictability of revenues, diversity of revenue from various payors/contributors/ operations; size and trend of operating cash flow margin or EBITDA; service area trend and utilization data, fixed costs as a portion of operating expenditures; measures of historic and expected usage measured by standard deviations of year over year; length of time in operation of asset; historic demand and revenue trends, demonstrated ability and willingness to raise rates and/or economic regulation; complexity of relevant technology; availability of cash flow to fund capital needs, operating performance relative to industry norms; quality of operator & experience with the asset type; strength and commitment of sponsor & likelihood of operational and financial support; protections in the concession and regulatory framework; restrictions on business activities, use of debt and revenue distributions.

Financial Position, Policy and Ownership: Metrics may include but are not limited to amount of cash & investments; days cash on hand; ratio of total cash and investments to operating expenses; debt service coverage; level of self-support; budget flexibility, operating cash flow margin, liquidity to demand debt, liquidity reserves or contractual arrangements. Assessments may include but are not limited to an Issuer's desired capital structure / credit profile, and its adherence to its commitments and our views on the ability of the company to achieve its targets, an assessment of the likelihood and potential negative impact of M&A or other types of balance-sheet-transforming events, and the likelihood of uncontracted financial support being provided by owners; and the protective terms of debt documentation including but limited to restrictions on business activities, use of debt and revenue distributions; and control and liquidity afforded to creditors.

Debt Affordability: Metrics may include but are not limited to size and scope of multi-year CIP (capital improvement plan) relative to condition of assets that will rely on debt for funding; ratio of total cash and investments to debt and/or interest payments; ratio of debt to operating revenue; debt service coverage and ratios; ratio of debt to cash flow and to operating revenue; interest coverage metrics and concession life coverage ratios; debt and debt equivalents.

• Annapolis Mobility and Resilience Project

• Arizona IDA (Lincoln South Beltway Proj.)

• Brooklyn Events Center, LLC

• Caledonia Generating, LLC

• Cameron LNG, LLC

• Carousel Center Project, NY

• Cheniere Corpus Christi Holdings, LLC

• DTE Energy Center, LLC

• First Nations ETF Limited Partnership

• FLNG Liquefaction 3, LLC

• Gemini HDPE LLC

• Heldrich Center Hotel/Conference

• Jets Stadium Development, LLC

• Limetree Bay Terminals, LLC

• Louisville Arena Authority, Inc.

• Meridian Spirit ApS

• Metropolitan Detroit Area Hospital Svcs, Inc.

• MJ Garden III LLC

• Noorda College of Osteopathic Medicine, LLC

• North West Redwater Partnership

• ParkUToledo Inc.

• Philadelphia Project Finance, LLC

• Poseidon Resources (Channelside) LP

• Provident Group - EMU Properties LLC

• Queens Ballpark Company, LLC

• Sabine Pass Liquefaction LLC

• Sacyr Plenary Utility Partners Idaho LLC

• UMM Energy Partners, LLC

• University Circle Incorporated (UHHS Parking)

• Venture Global Calcasieu Pass, LLC

• Yankee Stadium LLC

The principal methodology used for the rated entity listed below was Government-Related Issuers Methodology published in February 2020. Please see the Rating Methodologies page on https://ratings.moodys.com for a copy of this methodology.

Key rating considerations on a forward-looking basis may include but are not limited to the following summarized below.

Government-Related Issuers Methodology

Assigning a Baseline Credit Assessment (BCA): The majority of Government-Related Issuers (GRIs) begin with an assessment of the GRI's standalone strength (i.e. BCA) – its ability to service and repay outstanding debt without recourse to extraordinary support from the supporting government - using the published sector-specific methodology that is most suitable for the predominant activities of the GRI. Our assessment of standalone strength includes any day-to-day support received from the government that can be clearly distinguished from extraordinary support. Support mechanisms, such as an obligation of the government to ensure the GRI's solvency and liquidity, are reflected in the BCA when they are legally or contractually documented.

Government uplift: The GRI's ratings include any uplift due to systemic support and typically focus on three structural factors and three factors explaining the level of the government's willingness to provide support. Structural factors address the legal and quasi-legal aspects of the government's relationship with the GRI and include: (1) guarantees, (2) ownership level and (3) barriers to support. The factors underlying willingness consider the softer connections between the two entities and include (4) the likelihood of government intervention, (5) political linkages and (6) economic importance. Support is determined using a joint default analysis framework which considers an estimate of the likelihood of extraordinary support, an assessment of the credit quality of the supporting government, and default correlation between the two entities.

GRIs without a BCA: In limited instances, it is not possible or meaningful to assign a BCA. The GRI is so inextricably linked to the government that a meaningful standalone BCA cannot be derived. In such cases, a top-down analytical approach is used that chiefly considers the ability and willingness of the government to provide timely support, instead of the usual bottom-up approach of starting with the BCA and then considering uplift towards the government's rating.

• North West Redwater Partnership

The principal methodology used for the rated entity listed below was Regulated Electric and Gas Networks published in April 2022. Please see the Rating Methodologies page on https://ratings.moodys.com for a copy of this methodology.

Key rating considerations on a forward-looking basis may include but are not limited to the following summarized below.

Regulated Electric and Gas Networks

Revenue Generation and Recovery Cost Framework: Metrics may include but are not limited to monopoly status; rate setting flexibility; strength of customer base and service area as measured by resource base, population, wealth, economic diversity, and growth projections; length and quality of customer contracts and contractor credit quality; scale; market framework and market diversification; structural and creditor protections; and ownership model.

Cost Recovery: Metrics may include but are not limited to transparency and timeliness of rate setting process by governing board or regulatory body including support for setting appropriate rates and charges to service debt; exposure to potential rate shocks; cash flow predictability.

Generation and Procurement Risk: Metrics may include but is not limited to ability to meet power supply commitments; the fuel mix; power price hedging; the diversity, cost and reliability of power supply sources; exposure to additional debt needs or regulatory risk; scale and complexity of the capex programme.

Competitiveness: Metrics may include but are not limited to market position, average system retail rate relative to regional peers or state average and material cost pressure that could lead to higher rates.

Financial Position, Policy and Ownership: Metrics may include but are not limited to corporate financial policy, days cash on hand; debt service coverage ratio measured by debt service and other fixed charges by net revenue, adjusted debt ratio of debt and ANPL (adjusted net pension liability) to net assets and working capital; ratio of debt to cash flow; interest coverage metrics and debt to asset metrics. Assessments may include but are not limited to an Issuer's desired capital structure / credit profile, and its adherence to its commitments and our views on the ability of the company to achieve its targets, an assessment of the likelihood and potential negative impact of M&A or other types of balance-sheet-transforming events, and the likelihood of uncontracted financial support being provided by owners; and the protective terms of debt documentation including but limited to restrictions on business activities, use of debt and revenue distributions; and control and liquidity afforded to creditors.

• DATC HOLDINGS PATH 15, LLC

This announcement applies only to Rated Entities with EU rated, UK rated, EU endorsed and UK endorsed ratings. Rated Entities, with Non EU rated, non UK rated, non EU endorsed and non UK endorsed ratings may be referenced herein to the extent necessary, if they are part of the same analytical unit.

Please see the Issuer page on https://ratings.moodys.com for each of the ratings covered, most updated credit rating action, rating history, and Credit Rating action Press Release including the rating rationale and factors that could lead to a rating upgrade or downgrade.

Releasing Office:
Moody's Investors Service, Inc.
250 Greenwich Street
New York, NY 10007
U.S.A.
JOURNALISTS: 1 212 553 0376
Client Service: 1 212 553 1653