Uruguay: Pension Funds and. Latin Infrastructure Quarterly 1. The Project Bond Evolution: Port of Paita Case Study. Infrastructure.

Transcription

1 XXXXXX XXXXX Latin Infrastructure Quarterly 1 Infrastructure Quarterly Gianluca G. Bacchiocchi The Canadian Way The Project Bond Evolution: Port of Paita Case Study Health PPPs Uruguay: Pension Funds and Infrastructure

2 12 Latin Infrastructure Quarterly Deals Infrastructure financing in Latin America has developed rapidly over the last 6 years. What was generally limited to syndicated bank and multi- and bilateral lending, government funding and insured project bonds, infrastructure financing has evolved to rely on the capital markets like never before, even without the support of traditional credit enhancers. In the past, especially before the 2008 market meltdown, when the capital markets were accessed to finance Greenfield and Brownfield projects, internationally placed bonds were either wrapped by credit enhancers, or involved the securitization of payments coming from a central government that were not tied to the completion of the project or operating risk. Only once the project was completed could a project bond that relied on the cash flows of the particular project be issued without credit enhancement in the capital markets. In the latter case, the original debt that was incurred for the construction of the project was refinanced with bonds that a provided longer tenor with fixed interest rates (if US dollar based) and perhaps even lower interest rates. Just recently, however, on April 18, 2012, the first Rule 144A/Reg S project bond was issued for a Latin American Brownfield project before construction and without credit enhancement. This landmark project bond was issued by Terminales Portuarios Euroandinos Paita S.A. (the Issuer ) for the expansion of the Paita Terminal Port in the region of Piura, Peru (the Port ). The notes (the Notes ), which are due in 2037, raised $110,025,000, carry a fixed interest rate of 8.125%, and were rated BB- by Fitch and BB by Standard & Poor s. This article provides an overview of the transaction, and explores some of the key structuring issues that had to be overcome in order to complete the first successful Rule 144A/Reg S project bond with full demand, operating and construction risk for a Latin American project. The Issuer The Issuer operates, maintains and develops the Port, which is the second largest coastal port in Peru based on twenty-foot equivalent units ( TEUs ), and the largest coastal port in the northern region of Peru in terms of container volume. Its operations are carried out pursuant to a 30 year design, build, finance, operate and transfer concession granted by the Government of Peru (the Concession ) in September The Issuer derives its revenues from tariffs charged for the provision of certain standard services to users of the Port which are required under the Concession, including, among others, the loading and unloading of cargo, cargo movement and weighing, and from fees charged for the provision of any special services to users of the Port not required under the Concession, including, among others, stevedoring, reefers, shiftings and late arrivals. The Issuer is 50% owned by Cosmos Agencia Marítima S.A.C. ( Cosmos ), a subsidiary of Andino Investment Holding S.A. ( AIH ), 40% owned by Tertir Terminais de Portugal S.A. ( Tertir ), a subsidiary of Mota-Engil, SPGS, S.A. ( Mota-Engil ), and 10% owned by Mota-Engil Peru S.A., a subsidiary of Mota- Engil and formerly known as Translei S.A. ( Mota-Engil Peru and together with Cosmos and Tertir, the Sponsors ). The Project Bond Port of Paita Case Study Evolution: by Gianluca G. Bacchiocchi, Esq.

3 Deals The Port The Port was built in 1966 and renovated in The Port was managed by Empresa Nacional de Puertos, S.A. ( ENAPU ), an entity owned and controlled by the Government of Peru, from its construction until October 7, 2009, when the Issuer took over operations in accordance with the Concession. The Port s operations are focused on exports, which represented approximately 71% of its total activity in 2011, 99% of which consisted of container shipments. The main exports shipped through the Port are fish, fishmeal, fish oil, mangos, coffee and bananas. The main imports shipped through the Port are solid bulk products, such as fertilizers and grains, and liquids, such as soy oil. The Concession Pursuant to the Concession, the Issuer has the right to operate and maintain the Port s existing facilities and is required to design, construct, operate and maintain a new container pier and, depending on the level of utilization of the Port, make certain other improvements, including the installation of additional port equipment and reinforcement of the existing jetty pier. The Issuer is also required to provide the standard services, but is entitled to collect fees for any other services that are provided to users of the Port. Pursuant to the Concession, the Ministry of Transport and Communications of the Republic of Peru (Ministerio de Transportes y Comunicaciones de la República del Perú) (the Grantor ) provides the Issuer with a minimum annual income guarantee ( IMAG ) pursuant to which the Grantor will pay the Issuer the shortfall between the revenues collected by the Issuer for a particular calendar year and the minimum annual guaranteed income for that year (which amount increases each year that it is available). An IMAG can be an important consideration for a financing, especially if it is sized to cover debt service during the life of the debt service and is paid quickly once a shortfall determination has been made. However, in this transaction it was not given any consideration by the rating agencies because it was not sized Latin Infrastructure Quarterly 13 to cover the debt service on the notes according to their model, and because the bulk of the IMAG was only available for a period of 15 years, beginning one year after the completion of Stage 1 (described below), whereas the Notes would be outstanding for approximately 7 additional years. One final consideration regarding the IMAG for this transaction was relevant: it is paid 12 to 13 months after the fiscal year in which a shortfall determination has been made, and not on a monthby-month basis, meaning that it does not cover demand volatility during a year, but rather such volatility had to be mitigated by a debt service reserve. The Concession may be terminated prior to its original expiration date for the following reasons, among others: (a) mutual agreement of the parties, (b) unilaterally by the Grantor for reasons related to public interest, (c) by the non-breaching party upon a breach of the other party s material obligations, or (d) at the Issuer s option in case of force majeure or acts of God that affect the completion of the Issuer s contractual obligations under the Concession for a period of 6 months and produce losses of over 60% of the Port s operational capacity. The Issuer is required to invest approximately $293 million in the Port (the Works ) in four stages, so long as certain demand levels are reached at the Port. Stage 1 of the Works, with an estimated total cost of $130 million, is required to begin immediately and consists of the construction of a new terminal, which will have a 300 meter berth and 13 meter depth and a container yard of 12 hectares, and the installation of three gantry cranes at the Port ( Stage 1 ). Stage 2 of the Works is required to be completed within 18 months of the Port achieving container volume of 180,000 TEUs per year, and involves the purchase of additional port equipment with an estimated cost of approximately $19.3 million ( Stage 2 ). Stage 3 of the Works is required to be completed within 18 months of the Port achieving container volume of 300,000 TEUs per year, and involves the reinforcement of the existing jetty pier, its support area and the purchase of additional port equipment, with an estimated cost of approximately $19.8 million ( Stage 3 ). The remaining investment of approximately $123,000,000 ( Stage 4 ) is at the Issuer s discretion for the operation of the Port, but must be completed according to the following schedule: by the 5th year of the Concession $5,000,000 of Works are to be completed, by the 10th year an additional $10,000,000 of Works are to be completed, by the 15th year an additional $10,000,000 of Works are to be completed and by the 20th year the remainder of the additional Works are to be completed. The Concession requires the Issuer to set aside and transfer to a special trust (the Additional Investments Trust ) each year, for the first 20 years of the Concession, amounts required to complete the Stage 4 Works according to a schedule that ensures that adequate funds will be available to complete these Works in accordance with the above timing. As compensation for the Concession, the Issuer is required to pay two fees on a monthly basis. The first fee is paid to the Grantor, and is equal to 2% of the net monthly income of the Issuer from providing standard and special services at the Port. The second fee is paid to the regulator of the Port, the Peruvian Public Transport Infrastructure Regulatory Agency (Organismo Supervisor de la Inversión en Infraestructura del Transporte de Uso Público) (the Regulator ), which is currently equal to 1% of net annual income received from standard and special services at the Port. In addition, the Issuer must make a contribution every year to the Port of Paita Social Fund in the amount of U.S.$195,858, which funds are intended to promote sustainable development in the Paita Province. Construction and Equipment Works All the construction Works that are intended to be completed with the proceeds of the financing (the Construction Works ) include the construction for the Stage 1 Works and certain Stage 4 Works. These Construction Works are to be completed by Mota-Engil Peru, with the support of Mota-Engil, Engenharia e Construção S.A. (collectively, the Contractors ), pursuant to a fixed price engineering, procurement and construction services contract (the EPC Contract ). The Contractors, pursuant to the

4 14 Latin Infrastructure Quarterly Deals EPC Contract, are required to provide a performance guaranty in an amount equal to 10% of the total compensation to be paid under the EPC Contract and a quality guarantee in an amount equal to 1.5% of the total compensation to be paid under the EPC Contract. Other than these guarantees provided by the Contractors, no other guarantees are provided to the Issuer for the Construction Works. The equipment Works that are to be completed with the proceeds of the financing (the Equipment Works ) include all of the cranes required for the Stage 1 Works and two additional mobile cranes that qualify as Stage 4 Works. The Equipment Works will be completed under two separate sale and installation contracts. The Stage 1 Equipment Works will be completed by Liebherr Container Cranes Ltd. and the Stage 4 Equipment Works will be completed by Liebherr Werk Nenzing GMBH. Both supply contracts require the suppliers to provide the Issuer with letters of credit to support the completion of their obligations under the supply contracts and to support the advance payments required to be made by the Issuer under them. Supervision of the Works The Issuer entered into a construction and equipment installation supervision contract (the Construction Supervision Contract ) with Bureau Veritas del Peru S.A. (the Supervisor ) to supervise the construction of the Construction Works and the installation of the cranes, and to coordinate these Works to ensure timely completion of the Issuer s obligations under the Concession Agreement. The Notes carry a fixed interest rate of 8.125% throughout the life of the Notes and fully amortize over a period of 25 years In addition, the Issuer entered into a contract (the Independent Engineer Agreement ) with R. Rios J. Ingenieros (the Independent Engineer ), which is acting as the independent engineer on behalf of the bondholders, and with Citibank, N.A., as bondholder trustee (the Indenture Trustee ), pursuant to which the Independent Engineer provides, for the benefit of the Indenture Trustee on behalf of the bondholders, all services contemplated to be performed by the Independent Engineer under the various transaction documents. These services include, among others, reviewing and authorizing payments for the Construction Works and Equipment Works and monitoring the progress of construction under the EPC Contract, and the installation and assembly of the cranes. In addition, the Independent Engineer was requested to prepare an independent engineer s report, that was attached to the offering circular for the Notes. Because the financing is pursuant to a project bond, rather than a traditional loan transaction, the Independent Engineer will also be required to re-test the Issuer s debt service coverage ratio upon the occurrence of certain events and provide approvals or disapprovals with respect to certain actions of the Issuer under the transaction documents, such as changes to budgets, the Issuer s three-year capital plan and the implementation of any major Works. These additional actions are significant in a project bond, since the Issuer will not know the identity of the bondholders to discuss these actions with them, and bondholders, unlike lending institutions, tend to be passive investors, holding the bonds without getting involved in decision-making, unless facing a significant change or an event of default. In this transaction, not all approval rights were given to the Independent Engineer, which is normal for a project bond. In those situations where the Independent Engineer was not given approval rights and the bondholders are required to approve certain actions (other than an event of default scenario), the bondholders will be deemed to have approved such actions unless a certain percentage (usually a majority) of the bondholders have responded within a set amount of time after receiving the applicable approval request notice, disapproving of the action. This deemed approval approach prevents bondholders who fail to respond to an approval request from keeping the Issuer from going forward with necessary changes, even though these bondholders would have agreed with the request if they had responded. The assumption is that only bondholders that disagree with a certain action will be motivated enough to respond to an approval request. In an event of default scenario, the bondholders will be required to give actual instructions to the Indenture Trustee. The Notes The Notes, which are senior secured obligations of the Issuer, were issued pursuant to a New York law-governed indenture and indenture supplement (collectively, the Indenture ). The Notes carry a fixed interest rate of 8.125% throughout the life of the Notes and fully amortize over a period of 25 years; however, during the first 5 years only interest is paid on the Notes. The long tenor and fixed interest rate are probably the biggest advantages the Issuer achieved by issuing a project bond, rather than entering into a traditional loan. Even though the Notes were rated BB- by Fitch and BB by Standard & Poor s, which classifies the Notes as high yield bonds, the Issuer was still able to obtain an attractive long term fixed interest rate due to the structure, low interest rate environment, stable country risk (Peru currently has a foreign debt rating of BBB by both Fitch and S&P) and the demand for long-term fixed income.

5 Deals For those that are not familiar with project bonds, the Indenture contains all of the various covenants and representations and warranties of the Issuer and the events of default, similar to a loan agreement. Most of the covenants, representations and warranties and events of default are similar to what would have been negotiated in a traditional loan agreement; however, there are some key differences. As mentioned above, the approval rights have been modified to reflect the different protocols for approving various actions, which includes giving greater rights to the Independent Engineer and using deemed approvals when bondholders are required to weigh in. In addition, greater flexibility was given to the Issuer before approvals are required. This was accomplished by giving more materiality carve-outs and increasing certain dollar thresholds. Another significant difference from a traditional project finance loan transaction is that the Issuer is not required to abide by the Equator Principles. This is not the case in all project bonds, especially if the arrangers and initial purchasers of the bonds are also Equator Principles Financial Institutions ( EPFIs ). Two key factors that are generally discussed when determining whether an issuer of a project bond must comply with the Equator Principles are, first, whether the potential investors require compliance and, second, if the initial purchaser is an EPFI, whether its internal policy requires compliance for a project bond. In order to give the Issuer maximum flexibility to finance future Works within the same structure, the Indenture for this transaction allows for future series of pari passu notes to be issued to finance such Works. Even though the Issuer is required pursuant to the transaction documents to set aside monies for future investments at the Port, the ability to anticipate Works before the money has been set aside, so long as certain conditions precedent are met, such as debt service coverage ratios, allows the Issuer to choose when it makes the most economic sense to complete additional Works. In addition to providing flexibility, the ability to issue additional series of pari passu notes under the same indenture also alleviates the need to enter into intercreditor agreements, since all of the waterfalls, voting rights and collateral rights are already contemplated in the payment and guarantee trust agreement (discussed below), the Indenture and any future indenture supplements for all potential series of notes issued by the Issuer pursuant to the Indenture. Although the Notes are expected to remain outstanding for 25 years, they are subject to the following redemption events: (a) optional redemption with a make-whole premium for the life of the Notes, (b) withholding tax redemption, (c) change of control of the Issuer and (d) mandatory redemption upon the occurrence of certain events of default. Security Latin Infrastructure Quarterly 15 The Notes are secured equally by first priority liens and ratably on a pari passu basis by (a) a pledge of all of the capital stock of the Issuer held directly or indirectly by AIH and Mota-Engil pursuant to a shareholder pledge agreement, (b) a mortgage over the Concession, (c) a perfected beneficial and/or security interest in substantially all of the Issuer s assets, granted pursuant to a Peruvian payment and guarantee trust agreement (the Payment and Guarantee Trust Agreement ) entered into between the Issuer and Citibank del Perú S.A., as Peruvian trustee (the Peruvian Trustee ), and (d) an unconditional and irrevocable pledge, assignment and transfer to the Indenture Trustee pursuant to the Indenture, for the benefit of the bondholders and all other secured parties, of a security interest in all of the Issuer s rights, title and interest in, to and under any other assets. Since most of the security is subject to Peruvian law, Citibank del Perú S.A. was appointed by the Indenture Trustee and the Issuer as sub-collateral agent pursuant to a subcollateral agency agreement to act on behalf of the Indenture Trustee with respect to all Peruvian collateral. In addition, the Notes also have the benefit of a debt service reserve account equal to 6 months of debt service. Payment and Guarantee Trust The Payment and Guarantee Trust Agreement is the key security agreement for the transaction. All of the cash flows of the Issuer from the Concession, including all revenues from services and insurance proceeds, are deposited in a revenue account and flow through the accounts established by the Payment and Guarantee Trust Agreement pursuant to a waterfall that terminates with the excess cash flow account. In addition, all payments to the Issuer for operations and maintenance costs (including setting aside monies in a reserve account for operations and maintenance) and Construction Works are made by the Peruvian Trustee, as well as payments required to be made to the Grantor, the Regulator and the Port of Paita Social Fund under the Concession. The Peruvian Trustee is also required to set aside the debt service required for the Notes and any future series of notes, as well as any amounts required to top up the debt service reserve account, both of which are transferred to the Indenture Trustee for application pursuant to the Indenture. With respect to future Works, the Peruvian Trustee is required to begin setting aside monies required for Stage 2 Works in a separate trust account (the Stage 2 Trust Account ) once container volume at the Port reaches 160,000 TEUs per year. The schedule of the amounts to be set aside each month, which is based on the financial model s projections for the Port at closing, is expected to ensure Another significant difference from a traditional project finance loan transaction, is that the Issuer is not required to abide by the Equator Principles

6 16 Latin Infrastructure Quarterly Deals that sufficient monies will be set aside to complete the Stage 2 Works once the Port has achieved container volume equal to 180,000 TEUs per year. Similarly, with respect to the Stage 3, the Peruvian Trustee is required to begin setting aside monies required for Stage 3 Works in a separate trust account (the Stage 3 Trust Account ) once container volume at the Port reaches 260,000 TEUs per year. The schedule of the amounts to be set aside each month, which is based on the financial model s projections for the Port at closing, is expected to ensure that sufficient monies will be set aside to complete the Stage 3 Works once the Port has achieved a container volume equal to 300,000 TEUs per year. With respect to the Stage 4 Works, the Peruvian Trustee is required to set aside monies immediately according to a schedule set forth in the Concession agreement that ensures that sufficient monies are set aside to complete the Stage 4 Works when required, as described above. The Peruvian Trustee transfers these monies to the trustee of the Additional Investments Trust on a yearly basis, or earlier if required to complete such Works. The requirement of the Issuer to both (a) make significant additional investments at the Port pursuant to the Concession and (b) reserve for future Works according to a schedule mandated by the Concession, with respect to Stage 4, and the schedules set forth in the Payment and Guarantee Trust Agreement, with respect to Stage 2 and Stage 3, added complexity and leverage to the structure, but it also provided assurance to investors that the structure accommodates all future investment obligations of the Issuer under the Concession. All equity contributions required to be made by the Sponsors pursuant to a sponsor support agreement are deposited, after passing through a separate escrow account set up for tax purposes, into an equity proceeds account maintained by the Peruvian Trustee. The Notes raised approximately 68% of the amounts needed for the Construction Works, Equipment Works and to fund various transaction accounts. The Sponsors equity contributions cover the balance and are supported by letters of credit that can be drawn upon by the Peruvian Trustee and deposited into the equity proceeds account. The Sponsors were required to make equity contributions on or prior to the issuance of the Notes to pay for their contribution with respect to (a) the costs for Equipment Works, (b) up-front payments for the Construction Works, (c) the required balance of the operations and maintenance reserve account, (d) the required balance of the debt service reserve account, (e) an up-front amount to be set aside for the Additional Investments Trust and (f) and other costs being funded and pre-funded on the issuance date of the Notes. After the issuance date of the Notes, the Sponsors are required to make periodic equity contributions to pay for Construction Works and any other costs required to be paid for by equity contributions, such as certain Equipment Works and certain operating and maintenance costs. One of the most significant aspects of this project bond is that the construction risk was not fully mitigated, which is the first time this has been accomplished for a Latin American Rule 144A/Reg S project bond. Demand Risk As with any project with demand risk, there is always a possibility that demand may decrease and result in lower revenues at the Port than originally anticipated. Since the Port is mostly export oriented, the main drivers for demand are agricultural and oceanic output in the Port s area of influence, which can be affected by, among other things, climate change, including El Niño, floods, droughts, plagues and natural disasters. In addition, demand can be affected by macroeconomic factors and competition. An independent traffic consultant, APOYO Consultoría S.A.C., provided a traffic study of the Port that incorporated weather and macroeconomic factors to predict potential demand volatility at the Port. This traffic study was a very important component for the rating process and for creating the financial model. Because of the long tenor of the Notes, it was important to consider structural elements that could provide liquidity if demand is negatively impacted at the Port over the life of the Notes. A debt service reserve is a typical enhancement for moderate demand volatility. However, in order to address significant demand volatility, the Issuer was given the following additional liquidity: if demand decreases and either (a) container volume drops below 160,000 TEUs per year before 18 months have passed after it reaches 180,000 TEUs per year (i.e., when the Stage 2 Works must be completed) or drops below 260,000 TEUs per year before 18 months have passed after it reaches 300,000 TUEs per year (i.e., when the Stage 3 Works must be completed), as applicable, or (b) the Issuer reasonably believes that it will not achieve container volume of 160,000 TEUs per year or 260,000 TEUs per year, as applicable, within 1 year of the date predicted for achieving such volume levels in the financial model on the closing date (collectively, Demand Events ), the Issuer is allowed to tap into the Stage 2 Trust Account or the Stage 3 Trust Account, as applicable, for debt service and also to suspend deposits into the applicable account until a new date agreed upon with the Independent Engineer. The Issuer must first demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Independent Engineer that a Demand Event has occurred before the Issuer will be given these rights. Since the Stage 2 Works and Stage 3 Works only need to be performed once the required volume levels are reached, this additional liquidity benefits both the bondholders and the Issuer without compromising the Issuer s obligations under the Concession.

7 Deals Operating Risk The Issuer enjoys the benefit of the global and local experience of its joint venture partners in operating ports and providing related logistical services. In addition, before the bond offering, the Issuer was able to operate the port for 2 and 1/2 years to create a positive track record that could be analyzed by both the rating agencies and the bondholders. These factors, along with a reserve account for operating and maintenance, were able to significantly mitigate the operating risk to the satisfaction of the rating agencies and the bondholders. Construction Risk Based on the report provided by the Independent Engineer, the Construction Works and Equipment Works are not complex and can be completed within the timetable established by the Issuer. Also, the EPC contractor, which agreed to do the Construction Works pursuant to the EPC Contract that includes a performance guarantee and quality guarantee, has significant construction experience in Peru. In addition, the supply contracts for the Equipment Works are with reputable suppliers of cranes who agreed to provide performance guarantees pursuant to the supply contracts. These factors, along with the involvement of the Supervisor and the Independent Engineer, helped to considerably reduce the construction risk of the project, although construction risk was still a factor. One of the most significant aspects of this project bond is that the construction risk was not fully mitigated, which is the first time this has been accomplished for a Latin American Rule 144A/Reg S project bond. The key reason the project bond was able to proceed with construction risk is that, as a Brownfield project, the Port has been generating revenues for years, including the most recent 2 and 1/2 years pursuant to the Concession, which allows bondholders to be paid, whether or not construction is completed on time. There still is the risk of a default under the Concession due to the construction, but not having to rely on the construction of a project to be completed for revenues to be gen- erated was a very important consideration for bondholders. Negative Carry Probably one of the most challenging aspects of a non-refinancing project bond is how to address negative carry, which is the interest paid on bond proceeds that cannot be fully deployed since the construction will occur over a period of time. In a number of project bonds, this issue has been addressed by issuing variable funding notes. In this transaction, it was decided that for obtaining the best execution, only one series of regular upfront funded notes would be issued. However, since the negative carry incurred by the Issuer will be amortized over 25 years, its impact will be minimized. Since issuers tend to focus on the all-in costs of the transaction, the all-in costs will not be significantly impacted by negative carry so long as the bonds they issue are expected to have a long tenor. Conclusion As project bonds have evolved, especially over the last 6 years, sponsors now have more options available to them, even if some traditional lending options are less accessible due to the current banking crisis in Europe. Although the capital markets may be unfamiliar territory for some sponsors, the advantages that project bonds provide sponsors, namely long term financing at fixed rates (if US dollar based) and potentially lower interest rates, can significantly outweigh the disadvantages, namely obtaining consents from bondholders, difficulty analyzing construction risk and negative carry, which as the Paita Port project bond demonstrates, can be readily addressed. If this was a Greenfield project, it is unlikely that the construction risk would have been left completely unmitigated for a project bond, but as bond investors and rating agencies become better at analyzing infrastructure projects and governments get better at structuring concessions, project bonds will continue to evolve in Latin America and perhaps Greenfield project bonds with construction risk may someday become a reality. Latin Infrastructure Quarterly 17 Gianluca G. Bacchiocchi is a partner at DLA Piper and focuses his practice on representing sponsors, issuers and underwriters in cross-border capital markets transactions with Latin America, including project bond financings, public and private issuances of asset-backed securities, private issuances of future-flow backed securities and high-yield debt issuances. Mr. Bacchiocchi also assists sponsors, borrowers and lenders with project and infrastructure financings, publicprivate partnership transactions, general secured and unsecured lending arrangements and international debt restructurings. He has been named a leading capital markets and banking and finance lawyer by Chambers Latin America. Transactions handled by Mr. Bacchiocchi have received a number of awards from IFLR, Project Finance and Latin Finance, including most recently the Latin American Water Infrastructure Deal of the Year 2010 Award from Project Finance and the 2011 Americas Project Finance Deal of the Year Award from IFLR. Mr. Bacchiocchi is fluent in Italian, Portuguese and Spanish.