Published May 14, 2017, 10:00 PM By Myrna M.
Velasco
http://business.mb.com.ph/2017/05/14/ngcp-wants-settlement-of-row-acquisitions-at-end-of-concession/
Private concessionaire National Grid
Corporation of the Philippines (NGCP) has communicated to government that it
will just agree to account its project right-of-way (ROW) acquisitions by the
end of its 25-year concession agreement with the National Transmission
Corporation (TransCo) as underwritten by the privatization move of the Power
Sector Assets and Liabilities Management Corporation (PSALM).
In a letter to PSALM and TransCo,
NGCP President Henry T. Sy, Jr. stipulated that “transfer of title to the
properties acquired by NGCP shall be made at the end of concession period,”
with him citing Section 15.01 or the “Reversion Events” provision of their
Concession Agreement.
He explained that specified CA
proviso which lays the conditions for the eventual takeover of PSALM or its
nominee-entity of the transmission assets, would cover “properties, documentary
rights, intellectual properties, easement, or rights-of-way whose titles or
ownership belong to, or in the name of TransCo.”
Sy, nevertheless, stipulated that
such “may not extend to those properties/right-of-way acquired by NGCP under
its own name pursuant to its power of eminent domain under the franchise.”
It must be noted that TransCo and
PSALM earlier wrote NGCP and called its attention on the inventory of ROW
acquisitions and having them titled under TransCo’s name.
NGCP, however, is disputing the
government’s demand, stressing that “TransCo cannot ‘retain’ title over
properties acquired by NGCP in its own name since these properties are not
owned and not titled in TransCo’s name in the first place.”
Sy argued that Section 5.06 of the
Concession Agreement speaks of two scenarios: “First, NGCP acquiring
documentary property rights under its own name if granted eminent domain powers
(which is claimed to be so under its franchise); and second, NGCP acquiring
documentary property right in TransCo’s name as TransCo agent if NGCP is not
granted eminent domain.”
The NGCP chief further indicated “it
would appear that properties and rights acquired under NGCP’s own name as
Concessionaire are not contemplated under Section 5.06, since this provision
used the word ‘retain’. Certainly, TransCo cannot ‘retain’ title over
properties acquired by NGCP in its own name since these properties are not
owned and not titled in TransCo’s name in the first place.”
TransCo President Melvin A. Matibag
has yet to respond to NGCP’s official correspondence, but he already sounded
off that the government would not agree to such interpretation of the CA’s
provision as well as on the portended arrangement.
“That is not correct, because if you
would look at the end of the concession agreement… that anytime, NGCP cannot
own any portion or any asset that belongs to the government through TransCo,”
he stressed.
Matibag said they shall contest that
proposition because the cost of these ROW acquisitions may have already been
part of the pass-on costs in the transmission charges applied for by NGCP at
the course of its operations of the transmission assets.
“That can’t be the case – because in
the end, there might be ‘double recovery,’ that may have already been inputted
into their tariff…effectively, it’s the consumers who will be suffering from
additional charges,” the TransCo chief executive added.
The government’s concession deal
with NGCP kicked off January 2009 and will be culminating in year 2034 –way
beyond the corporate life of privatization firm PSALM, hence, the turnover of
assets may likely be bequeathed to another government entity.
No comments:
Post a Comment