Manila Bulletin
by Rey G. Panaligan
January 11, 2014 (updated)
Manila, Philippines – The Manila Electric Company (Meralco) has filed its own petition with the Supreme Court (SC) against the other stakeholders in the power industry which, it claimed, should be blamed for its P4.15-per-kilowatt-hour rate increase.
Lawmakers, at the same time, assailed as “blackmail” the alleged warning of “rotating blackouts” made by Meralco due to the Supreme Court’s temporary restraining order (TRO) on the firm’s implementation of increased power rates.
In its petition with the SC, Meralco named as respondents the Philippine Electricity Market Corp. (PEMC) which operates the Wholesale Electricity Spot Market (WESM), the National Grid Corporation of the Philippines (NGCP), and several power producers.
Meralco’s petition, which was accepted by the SC and treated as a third-party complaint, stated that it merely collected the generation charge and other pass-through charges for the relevant power firms as well as for the national and local governments concerned.
The power producers named in Meralco’s complaint are the First Gas Power Corp., South Premiere Power Corp., San Miguel Energy Corp., Masinloc Power Partners Co. Ltd., Quezon Power (Phils.) Ltd. Co., Therma Luzon Inc., Sem-Calaca Power Corp., FGP Corp., 1590 Energy Corp., AP Renewables, Inc., Bac-Man Energy Development Corp./Bac-Man Geothermal, Inc., First Gen Hydro Power Corp., GNPower Mariveles Coal Plant, Ltd. Co., PANASIA Energy Holdings Inc., Power Sector Assets & Liabilities Management Corp., SN Aboitiz Power, Strategic Power Development Corp., Trans-Asia Power Generation Corp. and Vivant Sta. Clara Northern Renewables Generation Corp.
SC Spokesman Theodore Te said Meralco, with the filing and acceptance of the petition, would now become a petitioner in a third-party complaint
But Meralco will remain as respondent in the two cases filed against the P4.15 per kilowatt hour rate increase that had been stopped by the SC in a temporary restraining order (TRO) issued on December 23, 2013.
•SC Lauded
At the House of Representatives, members of the Makabayan bloc criticized Meralco even as other House members lauded the High Court’s directive for the inclusion of the Philippine Electricity Market Corporation (PEMC) and several power plants in the twin petitions against the power rate hike imposed last month by Meralco.
ACT Party-list Rep. Antonio Tinio, one of the SC petitioners, immediately instructed their lawyer to file a memorandum to implead those the High Court named.
Rep. Elpidio Barzaga Jr. (NUP, Cavite) called the SC ruling for the inclusion of power producers as an “initial victory” for the Meralco customers who have strongly opposed the unprecedented electricity rates hike.
Bayan Muna Reps. Neri Colmenares and Carlos Zarate accused Meralco and the power generators of “blackmailing” electricity consumers into accepting higher power rates.
Meralco has warned of rotational blackouts if it can no longer pay for generation and transmission charges as a result of the Supreme Court’s temporary restraining order on the rate hike.
Last week the Philippine Independent Power Producers Association (PIPPA) president Luis Miguel Aboitiz claimed that because of the TRO the unpaid power generators might not have enough cash to pay for the fuel of its peaking plants.
“This is clear blackmail. Meralco and Aboitiz are trying to circumvent the Supreme Court temporary restraining order with this threat,” Colmenares said.
“What is obvious is that the problem was caused by government’s flawed policy of totally abandoning the power sector at the hands of private corporations through the Electric Power Industry Reform Act (EPIRA). If only the government had constructed more power plants or rehabilitated them like the Agus and Pulangui power plants earlier and not wait for the plants to be privatized first, then power rates would be lower,” he added.
•Collusion Claim
Meanwhile, Barzaga explained that by impleading all parties involved in the production and sale of power, the truth to the claims of collusion between them and the Energy Regulatory Board will determined.
A collusion in the imposition of higher power rates was suspected to be going on among the ERC, Meralco and power producers in a bid to impose a P4.15 per kilowatt-hour rate hike last December.
PEMC is the operator of the Wholesale Electricity Spot Market (WESM).
Barzaga explained that power producers are behind the spike in power rates and the SC was just establishing the logic of alleged collusion.
Had the TRO not been issued by the SC, more than five million Meralco customers would have been billed an additional P2.41 per kilowatt-hour last December, P1.21 per kilowatt-hour next month, and P0.53 per kilowatt-hour in March.
•Amend Petition
Earlier, the SC directed the two petitioners against Meralco’s rate increase to amend their petition and to include as respondents several power producers and PEMC.
According to the SC, it will delve deeper into allegations of “collusion with vested oil interests in their profiteering activities” with the Energy Regulatory Board (ERC) in connection with the restrained P4.15 per kilowatt-hour rate increase.
To be included as respondents in the cases, aside from PEMC, are the SEM Calaca Power Corp., Masinloc Power Partners Corp., Therma Luzon, Inc., San Miguel Energy Corp., South Premiere Power Corp., and Therma Mobile, Inc. which have power supply agreements with Meralco.
The SC pointed out that while the petitioners in the two cases have alleged “collusion” in their petitions, they failed to implead the power producers as necessary parties “for a complete determination or settlement of the claim subject of the action.”
It also said that “the petitioners alleged that ‘a very high ceiling price was revealed at P62 per kilowatt hour sold at the WESM, while normally the price is way below this on the average in the spot market’ but failed to implead the PEMC, which was incorporated as WESM’s governance arm, as a necessary party.”
According to the SC, the Rules of Court provide that a necessary party is “one who is not indispensable but who ought to be joined as a party if complete relief is to be accorded as to those already parties, or for a complete determination or settlement of the claim subject of the action.” (With a report from Madel Sabater Namit)
OSG Motion Denied
At the same time, the SC denied the motion of the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) that it be excused from the filing of a comment in behalf of the ERC and the Department of Energy (DOE) both of which are respondents in the two cases.
“The motion by the OSG is denied. Accordingly, public respondents (ERC and DOE), through the OSG, are required to file and serve a comment on the petitions on or before January 17, 2014 by personal service, and attend the initial preliminary conference on January 13, 2014,” the SC said.
Palace Assurance
Malacañang yesterday assured that the government is making efforts to ensure continuity of power service despite threats of rotating brownouts.
“Tungkulin ng pamahalaan na pangalagaan ang kapakanan ng mga mamamayan [It is the duty of the government to ensure the welfare of its people],” Presidential Communications Operations Office (PCOO) Secretary Herminio Coloma, Jr. said.
Coloma, however, said it is also the duty of those in the power industry to do what is just and reasonable.
“Tungkulin din ng Meralco at ng lahat ng kompanya sa industriya ng kuryente na gawin ang narararapat upang tiyaking makatatanggap ng ganap na serbisyo ang mga mamamayan [It is the duty of Meralco and all companies in the power industry to do what is just and ensure reasonable service to the people],” he said.
He said the government will be coordinating with the power industry to make this goal achievable. source
No comments:
Post a Comment