Published
By Myrna M. Velasco
The Supreme Court has upheld the authority of the Energy Regulatory Commission
(ERC) on its move to enforce “substitute pricing” for the Wholesale Electricity
Spot Market (WESM) when the first act of market manipulation in 2006 was
alleged to have been committed by state-run Power Sector Assets and Liabilities
Management Corporation.
The affirmation of the
regulatory body’s police power over imposition of price control at the spot
market was rendered in a ruling recently issued by the high court.
To recall, the ERC had to lower settlement prices in the WESM employing
time-of-use (TOU) rates for the questioned two billing months following investigation
on alleged market manipulation precipitated by PSALM – which in a particular
trading day had driven up rates because of the high-priced bids of the
state-run firm’s trading teams.
The TOU rates were
instituted as “substitute prices” in place of the actual WESM settlement prices
that should have been higher.
On August 30, 2006 in
particular, the market surveillance committee of the spot market operator
Philippine Electricity Market Corporation (PEMC) pinned down that the three
trading teams of PSALM made roughly similar or identical offers on specified
trading intervals – and these price offers hovered at the scale of P10 per
kilowatt hour (kWh); a far cry from the P3.00 per kWh level which prevailed as
spot settlement prices in previous billing months.
And based on the investigation result of PEMC at that time, the trading teams
of PSALM that were separately representing the Pagbilao, Sual and Ilijan plants
were established to have been “bidding in such a manner that caused the market
clearing price to rise above competitive levels.”
Given the sudden spike
in spot prices, the ERC eventually decided to enforce substitute pricing so the
final rate that shall be billed to consumers won’t be as prohibitive – and such
statute or mandate for ERC stands until this time, especially in critical times
when there are fresh round of price manipulation allegations at the spot
market.
With the SC ruling, ERC
Chairperson Agnes T. Devanadera stressed that the regulatory body is “happy
that the Supreme Court appreciated the real intention behind ERC’s action when
it imposed price controls for the spot market back in 2006.”
The target of that regulatory act of the Commission then, she explained, was
“to protect the consumers from unusually high market prices.”
Fundamentally, the
country’s ultimate court validated that the ERC “has been vested with delegated
police power under the Electric Power Industry Reform Act (EPIRA), which
provides that in the exercise of its investigative and quasi-judicial powers,
it may act against any participant or player in the energy sector for violation
of any law, rule or regulations and penalize abuse of market power.”
Devanadera reiterated “the Supreme Court’s ruling is very much appreciated as it confirms and validates the efforts of ERC in protecting the consumers as they are affected by the rates.”
Devanadera reiterated “the Supreme Court’s ruling is very much appreciated as it confirms and validates the efforts of ERC in protecting the consumers as they are affected by the rates.”
No comments:
Post a Comment