SC expands list of respondents in power rate hike row
INQUIRER FILE PHOTO
MANILA, Philippines – The Supreme Court on Friday granted a petition by the Manila Electric Company (Meralco) to include power suppliers and generation in the complaints against them following their decision to increase power rates.
In a resolution, the high court ordered the following power suppliers to file their respective comments on the petitions filed by the Makabayan Bloc, National Association of Electricity Consumers for Reforms (Nasecore) and Anakpawis et. al.: Philippine Electricity Market Corporation, First Gas Power Corporation, South Premiere Power Corporation, San Miguel Energy Corporation, Masinloc Power Partners Co. Ltd., Quezon Power (Phils.) Ltd. Co., Therma Luzon Inc., Sem-Calaca Power Corporation, FGP Corp., and National Grid Corporation of the Philippines.
Meralco, in their comment with counter-petition said it esd important that they be included as respondents to the case because they would be adversely affected if the high court would declare as unconstitutional the provision in the Electric Power Industry Reform Act of 2001 which allows the automatic pass through of generation costs and other pass through adjustments.
It pointed out that with the restraining order issued by the high court, it was not able to recover generation and pass through charges thus deferring payments to several power suppliers.
At the same time, the high court also ordered the following GenCos to submit their comment with the high court: 1590 Energy Corporation, AP Renewables, Inc., Bac-Man Energy Development Corporation/Bac-Man Geothermal, Inc., First Gen Hydro Power Corporation, GNPower Mariveles Coal Plant, Ltd. Co., PANASIA Energy Holdings Inc., Power Sector Assets & Liabilities Management Corporation, SN Aboitiz Power, Strategic Power Development Corporation, Trans-Asia Power Generation Corporation, and Vivant Sta. Clara Northern Renewables Generation Corporation.
Article continues after this advertisementMeralco said the new rate adjustment was brought about by the rise in generation charge.
Article continues after this advertisementThe power distribution firm said that to allow the PEMC and GenCos to collect from Meralco the full amount of the Wholesale Electricity Spot Market (WESM) billings for the increase in generation charge “would be grossly unjust, inequitable, and very unfair” not only to Meralco but to its consumers as well.
“[S]uch generation charges are purely pass-through charges and therefore, revenue neutral to Meralco,” Meralco stressed.
The high court issued a 60-day temporary restraining order (TRO) in December, preventing Meralco from collecting the rate increase.
Meralco pointed out that while they were restrained from increasing consumers’ billings, the GenCos were not covered by the same TRO and were imposing the increased generation charge on them.
This will seriously “impair and damage” the distribution firm’s “financial and credit position and continued operations,”Meralco stressed.
Meralco said it has received demand letters from NGCP, P111.3 million; AES Masinloc, P436.6 million; San Miguel Energy Corp., P8.080 million; and South Premiere Power Corp., P856.7million.
“Because of Meralco’s constraint to pay the outstanding and succeeding bills beyond the P5.6673 per kilowatt-hour price because of this Honorable Court’s TRO, Meralco will, in the succeeding months effectively be unable to buy power if the result will cause the pass through generation charge to exceed P5.6673 per kWh,” Meralco said.
Related Stories:
Include 6 firms, ERC in Meralco case–SC
SC includes power market regulator, independent power producers in suit
