Inside The Redacted Tariffs Report Fuel Clause Mismanagement: The GEBE Discrepancies  Draining St. Maarten’s population

GREAT BAY--The Parliament of St. Maarten has received a redacted version of the long-awaited RAC-BTP report examining the island’s electricity and potable water tariffs. The report, commissioned by the government and prepared by Bureau Telecommunication and Post (BTP) and its counterpart in Curacao (RAC), is the product of months of research into the pricing structure, fuel clause application, and broader supply chain of St. Maarten’s utilities.

In a formal handover to Prime Minister Luc Mercelina on August 12, 2025, BTP confirmed that this version has been carefully edited to remove any confidential business or manufacturing information belonging to third parties. The agency stressed that protecting such information is both a legal and ethical obligation, citing the Landsverordening openbaarheid van bestuur (LOB) and the governance principle of zorgvuldigheidsbeginsel, which requires government bodies to exercise due care in safeguarding sensitive data.

The updated report has been delivered exclusively to the Prime Minister’s Cabinet, with BTP noting that the decision to release it to the public lies solely with the Prime Minister as the contracting authority. The Prime Minister in turn submitted the redacted document to Parliament at the request of the Chairlady of Parliament MP Sarah Wescot-Williams.

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐫𝐞𝐩𝐨𝐫𝐭

Between pages 13 and 39 of the report, a troubling picture emerges about the application of the fuel clause at GEBE and the actual build-up of fuel costs charged to consumers. The findings point to a pattern of misapplication, poor oversight, and a lack of transparency that has allowed significant discrepancies to go unaddressed for years.

𝐇𝐨𝐰 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐅𝐮𝐞𝐥 𝐂𝐥𝐚𝐮𝐬𝐞 𝐖𝐚𝐬 𝐒𝐮𝐩𝐩𝐨𝐬𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐨 𝐖𝐨𝐫𝐤

The fuel clause exists to pass on fluctuations in fuel prices directly to consumers. It’s a mechanism designed to ensure that GEBE’s operational costs for fuel are recovered without turning into an arbitrary revenue stream. The clause allows GEBE to adjust tariffs based on the actual cost of fuel purchased to generate electricity.

The application, however, deviated significantly from this principle. Instead of calculating charges based on real, verifiable costs, the report finds that:

• Fuel cost figures often lacked supporting documentation from suppliers.

• Price calculations included unexplained markups.

• Discrepancies existed between the invoiced fuel amounts and what was recorded in GEBE’s internal accounts.

• Historical “true-up” adjustments, meant to reconcile overcharges or undercharges, were either absent or done without clear methodology.

The result was vague pricing structure that left both consumers and regulators guessing how much of their bill truly reflected actual fuel costs.

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐅𝐮𝐞𝐥 𝐂𝐨𝐬𝐭 𝐁𝐮𝐢𝐥𝐝-𝐔𝐩: 𝐖𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐍𝐮𝐦𝐛𝐞𝐫𝐬 𝐖𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐖𝐫𝐨𝐧𝐠

According to the report: "It is also noted that the result of the electricity fuel clause calculation of GEBE is not always applied to the actual invoices. Furthermore, it can be noted that no independent third party is overseeing and/or supervising the current procedure. The calculations are executed by GEBE and subsequently invoiced to the consumer. It is currently even difficult or impossible to publicly find an overview of the current tariffs for electricity and potable water."

From procurement to consumer billing, the fuel cost build-up process suffered from weak controls. The investigation reveals:

1. 𝐒𝐮𝐩𝐩𝐥𝐢𝐞𝐫 𝐈𝐧𝐯𝐨𝐢𝐜𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐆𝐚𝐩𝐬 – Fuel suppliers sometimes billed for volumes or prices inconsistent with shipping documentation. Internal verification was either minimal or non-existent.

2. 𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧 & 𝐇𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐂𝐨𝐬𝐭𝐬 – Additional charges for transportation, storage, and conversion were applied inconsistently, sometimes appearing inflated without market-based justification.

3. 𝐈𝐧𝐯𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐲 𝐌𝐚𝐧𝐚𝐠𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐅𝐚𝐢𝐥𝐮𝐫𝐞𝐬 – Stock levels were not properly tracked, leading to situations where billed quantities of fuel could not be reconciled with usage data from generation units.

4. 𝐂𝐚𝐥𝐜𝐮𝐥𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐈𝐧𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐢𝐞𝐬 – Different departments within GEBE used varying formulas to determine the per-kWh fuel adjustment rate, creating opportunities for compounded errors.

5. 𝐍𝐨 𝐈𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐩𝐞𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐑𝐞𝐯𝐢𝐞𝐰 – The lack of periodic third-party audits meant that discrepancies persisted for years, with no formal mechanism to catch and correct them.

𝐈𝐦𝐩𝐚𝐜𝐭 𝐨𝐧 𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐮𝐦𝐞𝐫𝐬

Because the fuel clause adjustments are passed directly onto consumers, any error or inflation in the cost build-up directly increased household and business energy bills. The lack of transparency meant that customers could not challenge the charges with any credible evidence, and the absence of independent oversight made it difficult for the government to intervene effectively.

𝐊𝐞𝐲 𝐑𝐞𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐝𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬 𝐟𝐫𝐨𝐦 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐑𝐞𝐩𝐨𝐫𝐭

The recommendations are extensive and go beyond just fixing the fuel clause. They address structural, procedural, and governance weaknesses within GEBE’s operations. Every recommendation listed in the report between pages 13 and 39 is summarized below:

𝐄𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐛𝐥𝐢𝐬𝐡 𝐚 𝐓𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐬𝐩𝐚𝐫𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐅𝐮𝐞𝐥 𝐂𝐨𝐬𝐭 𝐕𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐟𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐜𝐞𝐬𝐬

•Implement strict documentation requirements for all fuel purchases.

•Mandate supplier invoices to be cross-verified with shipping and delivery records before payment.

•Require monthly reconciliations of fuel stock levels against generation usage.

𝐒𝐭𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐚𝐫𝐝𝐢𝐳𝐞 𝐅𝐮𝐞𝐥 𝐂𝐥𝐚𝐮𝐬𝐞 𝐂𝐚𝐥𝐜𝐮𝐥𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐌𝐞𝐭𝐡𝐨𝐝𝐨𝐥𝐨𝐠𝐲

•Adopt a single, approved formula for calculating the per-kWh fuel adjustment rate.

•Ensure that this formula is published and made publicly accessible for consumer review.

𝐈𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐩𝐞𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐎𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭

•Appoint an independent auditor to review the fuel cost build-up process quarterly.

•Publish summary findings to improve public trust.

𝐈𝐧𝐯𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐲 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐒𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐚𝐠𝐞 𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐭𝐫𝐨𝐥𝐬

•Install automated monitoring systems for fuel tanks to prevent discrepancies between invoiced and actual fuel volumes.

•Track losses during transportation or storage and assign responsibility for cost recovery.

𝐈𝐦𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐯𝐞 𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐜𝐭 𝐌𝐚𝐧𝐚𝐠𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭

•Negotiate clearer supplier contracts that define allowable charges and penalties for inaccurate invoicing.

•Introduce competitive bidding for fuel supply to ensure pricing fairness.

𝐆𝐨𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐧𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐑𝐞𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐦

•The Supervisory Board should adopt stricter oversight over tariff adjustments, requiring detailed justifications before approval.

•Create a compliance function within GEBE dedicated to ensuring adherence to regulatory requirements.

𝐏𝐮𝐛𝐥𝐢𝐜 𝐂𝐨𝐦𝐦𝐮𝐧𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧

•Provide consumers with plain-language explanations of how the fuel clause affects their monthly bills.

•Issue quarterly public reports on the status of the fuel clause account, including any surpluses or deficits.

𝐇𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐥 𝐑𝐞𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐜𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧

•Conduct a full review of past fuel clause charges over at least the last five years.

•Refund or credit consumers where overbilling is proven.

𝘉𝘛𝘗 & 𝘙𝘈𝘊 𝘯𝘰𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘪𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘳𝘦𝘱𝘰𝘳𝘵:

𝘐𝘵 𝘪𝘴 𝘵𝘰 𝘣𝘦 𝘳𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘨𝘯𝘪𝘻𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘵𝘢𝘳𝘪𝘧𝘧𝘴 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘦𝘭𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘳𝘪𝘤𝘪𝘵𝘺 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘱𝘰𝘵𝘢𝘣𝘭𝘦 𝘸𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘳 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘤𝘶𝘳𝘳𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘭𝘺 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘢𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘦𝘭𝘺 𝘳𝘦𝘨𝘶𝘭𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘰𝘯 𝘚𝘪𝘯𝘵 𝘔𝘢𝘢𝘳𝘵𝘦𝘯. 𝘛𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘦 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘬𝘦𝘩𝘰𝘭𝘥𝘦𝘳𝘴 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘢𝘤𝘤𝘶𝘴𝘵𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘢 𝘤𝘦𝘳𝘵𝘢𝘪𝘯  𝘪𝘯𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘮𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘳𝘦𝘱𝘰𝘳𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘶𝘤𝘵𝘶𝘳𝘦 𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘴𝘰𝘯 𝘸𝘩𝘺 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘪𝘯𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘮𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘳𝘦𝘲𝘶𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘴 𝘱𝘰𝘴𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘬𝘦𝘩𝘰𝘭𝘥𝘦𝘳𝘴 𝘳𝘦𝘲𝘶𝘪𝘳𝘦𝘥 ‘𝘢𝘥 𝘩𝘰𝘤’ 𝘦𝘧𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘵𝘴 𝘰𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘪𝘳 𝘴𝘪𝘥𝘦 𝘪𝘯 𝘰𝘳𝘥𝘦𝘳 𝘵𝘰 𝘧𝘰𝘭𝘭𝘰𝘸 𝘶𝘱. 𝘐𝘵 𝘪𝘴 𝘦𝘮𝘱𝘩𝘢𝘴𝘪𝘻𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘤𝘦𝘳𝘵𝘢𝘪𝘯 𝘳𝘦𝘲𝘶𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘥𝘦𝘵𝘢𝘪𝘭𝘦𝘥 𝘪𝘯𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘮𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘩𝘢𝘴 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘣𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘦 𝘢𝘷𝘢𝘪𝘭𝘢𝘣𝘭𝘦 𝘪𝘯 𝘢 𝘵𝘪𝘮𝘦𝘭𝘺 𝘮𝘢𝘯𝘯𝘦𝘳 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘦𝘷𝘢𝘭𝘶𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯. 𝘛𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘪𝘯𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘮𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘳𝘦𝘮𝘢𝘪𝘯𝘴 𝘳𝘦𝘭𝘦𝘷𝘢𝘯𝘵 𝘥𝘶𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘦𝘹𝘦𝘤𝘶𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘳𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘥 𝘯𝘦𝘹𝘵 𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘱𝘴.

𝘞𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘳𝘦𝘨𝘢𝘳𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘦𝘷𝘢𝘭𝘶𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘣𝘢𝘴𝘦 𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘦, 𝘪𝘵 𝘪𝘴 𝘵𝘰 𝘣𝘦 𝘯𝘰𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘢𝘯 𝘪𝘯-𝘥𝘦𝘱𝘵𝘩 𝘢𝘯𝘢𝘭𝘺𝘴𝘪𝘴 𝘪𝘴  𝘳𝘦𝘲𝘶𝘪𝘳𝘦𝘥. 𝘚𝘶𝘤𝘩 𝘢𝘯𝘢𝘭𝘺𝘴𝘪𝘴 𝘳𝘦𝘲𝘶𝘪𝘳𝘦𝘴 𝘮𝘰𝘳𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘩𝘦𝘯𝘴𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘪𝘯𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘮𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘳𝘦𝘨𝘢𝘳𝘥𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘩𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘰𝘳𝘪𝘤 𝘤𝘰𝘴𝘵𝘴  𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘤𝘰𝘴𝘵 𝘥𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘭𝘰𝘱𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘴 𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘳 𝘢 𝘤𝘦𝘳𝘵𝘢𝘪𝘯 𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘪𝘰𝘥 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘪𝘮𝘦, 𝘢𝘴 𝘸𝘦𝘭𝘭 𝘢𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘣𝘶𝘥𝘨𝘦𝘵𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘨𝘪𝘤 𝘱𝘭𝘢𝘯𝘴  𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘱𝘢𝘯𝘺 𝘪𝘯 𝘰𝘳𝘥𝘦𝘳 𝘵𝘰 𝘴𝘢𝘧𝘦𝘨𝘶𝘢𝘳𝘥 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘶𝘪𝘵𝘺 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘦𝘯𝘩𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘦 𝘪𝘵𝘴 𝘴𝘦𝘳𝘷𝘪𝘤𝘦𝘴. 𝘎𝘌𝘉𝘌 𝘪𝘯𝘥𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵  𝘴𝘶𝘤𝘩 𝘢𝘯 𝘦𝘷𝘢𝘭𝘶𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘩𝘢𝘴 𝘣𝘦𝘦𝘯 𝘪𝘯𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘯𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺.  

𝘞𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘳𝘦𝘨𝘢𝘳𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘢𝘭𝘭 (𝘲𝘶𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘦) 𝘥𝘢𝘵𝘢 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘪𝘯𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘮𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘶𝘴𝘦𝘥 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘦𝘷𝘢𝘭𝘶𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯, 𝘪𝘵 𝘪𝘴 𝘵𝘰 𝘣𝘦 𝘯𝘰𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘦𝘹𝘱𝘭𝘪𝘤𝘪𝘵𝘭𝘺 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘴𝘦 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘣𝘦𝘦𝘯 𝘢𝘶𝘥𝘪𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘣𝘺 𝘢𝘯 𝘢𝘤𝘤𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘵𝘢𝘯𝘵. 𝘐𝘯 𝘰𝘳𝘥𝘦𝘳 𝘵𝘰 𝘴𝘢𝘧𝘦𝘨𝘶𝘢𝘳𝘥 𝘳𝘦𝘭𝘪𝘢𝘣𝘪𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘺  𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘵𝘢𝘳𝘪𝘧𝘧𝘴, 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘥𝘢𝘵𝘢 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘪𝘯𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘮𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘶𝘴𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘤𝘢𝘭𝘤𝘶𝘭𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘵𝘢𝘳𝘪𝘧𝘧𝘴 𝘸𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘯𝘦𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘣𝘦 𝘷𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘥𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘥  𝘣𝘺 𝘢𝘯 𝘢𝘤𝘤𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘵𝘢𝘯𝘵.

‍