Coal plant project ‘not done deal’

SUBIC BAY FREEPORT—Heeding the sentiments of stakeholders, officials of the Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority (SBMA) said the construction of a 600-megawatt coal-fired power plant here was no longer “a done deal.”

SBMA Chair Roberto Garcia said the community and the free port stakeholders, who participated in an consultation process last year, “rejected it unanimously.”

The results of the social acceptability process (SAP) for the project were submitted to President Aquino this week.

SBMA officials also said they have been reviewing its contract with RP Energy Inc. (RPEI), the consortium composed of Aboitiz Power,  Manila Electric Co. and Taiwan Cogen Corp., which is constructing and managing the plant.

‘Disadvantageous’

In its present form, the contract approved earlier by the previous SBMA board of directors was “highly disadvantageous to the government,” Garcia said.

“We are questioning [the project] on economic terms because [RPEI is] only going to pay SBMA P1 million a year, and that’s not right. It would cost more to rent an apartment in Manila,” he told a recent roundtable discussion with Inquirer editors.

SBMA and RPEI have been renegotiating those terms for six months, but “up to now, they cannot give us a figure,” he said. “As far as we are concerned, there is no basis to go forward [with negotiations],” he said.

In various consultations his agency held around the country last year, Energy Secretary Rene Almendras had cited the benefits of the Subic plant for the Luzon grid.

But Garcia said the SBMA “also wants to protect the environment.”

The SAP was conducted from Dec. 7 to 9. But RPEI representatives did not participate in the SAP.

The SBMA report given to Mr. Aquino noted “a clear rejection of the coal-fired [power plant] project,” and said environmental experts had found the RPEI environmental impact assessment study “deficient.”

Garcia, however, said the proponents could still submit documents to establish why a coal-fired plant would be essential inside the free port.

“If there are mitigating measures [to the damage the coal plant will cause] and if they will say that it can be done, [RPEI should] present that also,” he said.

SBMA Director Philip Camara, who led the SAP, said the results of the consultation “will be adopted by the board, with the effect that these concerns of various stakeholders [would remain a factor should RP Energy proceeds to fulfill its requirements], if they want to pursue the project.”

For the board, the results of the SAP mean Philippine clean air standards are not enough to fulfill the environmental requirements of the SBMA master plan, Camara said.

He said the state environment standards “are not sufficient to attract wellness, tourism, leisure investors into the free port zone.”

“We’re considering adopting the World Health Organization standards, which is the global standard. Under the law [Republic Act No. 7227], SBMA can adopt standards and regulations to ensure that air, water and forest are protected,” he said.

“The previous [protocols] made projects, such as a coal-fired power plant inside the free port, very attractive. However, with the reforms that the new [SBMA] board is undertaking, [this has changed],” he said.

Reforms

He cited reforms in the coverage for SBMA certificates of registration and tax exemption (CRTE).

“The board changed the process of issuing the CRTE, [which may disqualify] RP Energy … If they are not holders of CRTE, they cannot import capital equipment on that basis. Their status will revert to a free port enterprise which is not qualified to avail of tax exemptions,” he said.