DOE drops ‘overlapping’ renewable energy contracts in Benguet

BAGUIO CITY, Philippines — The Department of Energy (DOE) has voided three renewable energy service contracts that interfere with the operations of the American-era hydroelectric power plants owned by the city government.

In a DOE resolution, Energy Secretary Alfonso Cusi said the run-of-river plants to be put up by Goldlink Global Energy Corp. along the Asin River in Tuba town, Benguet pro¬vince, were too close to Baguio’s plants in Barangay Asin.

Goldlink applied and was granted four hydro energy service contracts in 2013 and 2014 without disclosing their impact on Baguio’s much older plants, Cusi said.

Goldlink, formed in 2012, had asserted that its service contracts were acquired in good faith and its plants were distinct from the Asin facilities, which were not operational.

Permit required

The 3.2-megawatt Asin plants were built in the 1920s to power up this city that was designed and built as the alternate site for the American colonial government during summer.

The Baguio Water District and a contracted operator, Aboitiz-owned Hydroelectric Development Corp., had ope¬rated the Asin plants until their contract lapsed in 2006.

Baguio had then reacquired the plants. Years later, Baguio was beset with legal problems, among them royalty claims from Ibaloy residents at Barangay Nangalisan in Tuba where the plants are located.

The Energy Regulatory Board also required Baguio to secure a permit for power generation.

In 2015, Baguio awarded the plants’ maintenance and operation to Kaltimex Energy Philippines, but the city government had been fighting with the contractor over its failure to start the project.

Goldlink had bid to operate the plants but was disqualified, after which it pursued its own power projects, according to the DOE resolution.

Baguio challenged Goldlink’s service contracts in 2015 when it learned that the power firm’s projects could destabilize the Asin plants.

Cusi, in the resolution, said “Goldlink committed serious misrepresentation,” which warranted the cancellation of its service contracts over sections of the river flowing through Sitio Sallapan, Nangalisan and Tadiangan.

He said the company either omitted or hid the fact that its future plants’ overlap with the Asin facilities.

The DOE treated the Asin River as a “frontier area,” or a body of water with potential as a power source but which the agency had no technical information yet for development, Cusi said. —Vincent Cabreza