Published
January 8, 2017, 10:00 PM by Myrna M. Velasco
Applying proceeds from
divestment of assets, state-run Power Sector Assets and Liabilities Management
Corporation (PSALM) has effectively trimmed down power sector debts and
liabilities to P538 billion as of last year from the monstrous
pre-privatization level of P1.241 trillion, according to data from the company.
The firm noted that
prior to privatization, or around year 2003, the power sector’s long-term debts
and financial obligations under build-operate-transfer (BOT) contracts had been
massive, but that had already been reduced by P702.6 billion as of mid-2016.
Currently though, PSALM
is worried about the significant bearing “of the changes in foreign exchange
rates,” given that chunk of its credit facilities are denominated in foreign
currencies, primarily in US dollars.
“This makes the company
very vulnerable to varying exchange rates,” it stressed.
The breakdown of
remaining debts as of last year had been as follows: P158.02 billion or
51.50-percent are in US dollars; P28.16 billion or 9.18-percent in Japanese
yen; and P120.64 billion or 39.32-percent are Philippine peso-denominated debt
accounts.
At the passage of the
Electric Power Industry Reform Act (EPIRA) in 2001, the power sector’s
outstanding financial obligations had been at P830.7 billion — comprising of
P319.1 billion (or $6.1 billion) long-term debts; and P511.6 billion (or 10.4
billion) BOT lease obligations.
The amount swelled
further due to some additional indebtedness incurred to fund debt payments as
well as capital outlay for National Power Corporation (NPC) assets that were
being delayed on the divestment block.
That was compounded by
its assumption of obligations from the debts write-off of the electric
cooperatives. And at the time that PSALM formally assumed NPC’s debts and
liabilities in 2008 via an Operation and Maintenance Agreement (OMA), total
obligations had still been at a whopping P904.8 billion.
Nevertheless, the
company emphasized that “with the privatization of some of its IPP plants, (it)
saw a collective reduction in its losses by foregoing the corresponding costs
of operating these plants that were more than their generated incomes.”
No comments:
Post a Comment