January 8, 2018
THE Department of
Energy (DoE) will ask the Supreme Court
(SC) for guidance after the issuance of a new department circular that
seeks to restart the stalled rules calling for greater competition in retail
electricity sales.
“We are going to
petition, make a manifestation before the court that there are two circulars
that [Energy Secretary Alfonso G. Cusi] has signed and what will the effect be
if it will be rendered moot already on the side of the DoE,” said Energy
Undersecretary Felix William B. Fuentebella.
He said the department
had been talking to the Office of the Solicitor General on the matter to
“clarify” the DoE’s representation before the high court or whether the agency
will handle the petition on its own.
However,
the Energy Regulatory Commission (ERC) is set to wait it out until the Supreme
Court decides whether to lift the temporary restraining order (TRO) on
provisions on retail competition and open access (RCOA).
Philippine
Electricity Market Corp. (PEMC), the governance arm of the country’s wholesale
electricity spot market (WESM), is likely to wait for lifting of the TRO.
Towards the end of last
year, the DoE signed a new circular that will reverse contentious provisions of
a previous circular as well as resolutions from the ERC requiring contestable
customers — or those whose electricity consumption for the past 12 months has
reached the thresholds set by the regulator — to move away from being part of
the captive market of a distribution utility.
The switch to a
licensed retail electricity supplier is meant to allow greater participation
from new players, thus spurring competition and lowering power costs. RCOA is
called for under Republic Act No. 9136 or the Electric Power Industry Reform
Act of 2001 (EPIRA), the law that restructured the power sector, as well as its
implementing rules and regulation.
The new circular will
also allow the ERC to continue issuing licenses to retail electricity
suppliers, which was among the provisions placed on TRO as sought by a number
of educational institutions and a business group. The TRO was issued by the
high court in February.
ERC Chairperson Agnes
T. Devanadera said there is indeed a conflict between the DoE’s two circulars,
specifically the mandatory provision in the old rules, which the new one set
aside in favor of voluntary compliance.
“It’s a
fact that they have issued a circular but the Supreme Court (SC) case is also a
fact so do I have a say there? None. SC does),” she said, adding that the
subject circular is already with the court.
“So all matters,
whether direct or allied matters, we will defer to the SC. We are represented
by the solicitor general,” she said.
Francis
Saturnino C. Juan, PEMC spokesperson, said the electricity market operator
remains uncertain about what is required of it under the new circular.
“While we have already
the DoE circular, when we were discussing the circulars, we would need
additional guidance and clarifications if we are expected already to implement
at least in terms of the customer switching as the CRB (central registration
body),” he said.
Mr. Juan said PEMC is
dependent on the ERC as far as determining which customers fall under the
contestable market.
“Even if we want to
implement RCOA, the switching, who will be the contestable customers? We can’t
for sure determine that ourselves,” he said. — Victor V. Saulon
No comments:
Post a Comment