Akelco’s Silence Does Not Serve Best
On March 28, 2008, Atty. Romeo P. Inocencio filed with the Energy Regulatory Commission, Pasig City an “Urgent Motion/Supplemental Manifestation in the Matter of the Petition for Approval of the Inclusion to Akelco’s Retail Rate of Costs From the 5 – MW and 12.5 – MW Electric Power Purchase Agreements (“EPPA”) as Amended With Mirant Global Corporation.”
Atty. Inocencio is the counsel for the Oppositors SP Member Ramon Gelito and Franklin Quimpo against the implementation of the Amended EPPA between Akelco and Mirant Global Business Power Corporation. Atty. Inocencio is also a co-oppositor in ERC Case No. 2005 – 013 RC.
According to Inocencio, the Amended EPPA has been immediately implemented by Akelco which resulted to the “paying excessive and exorbitant electricity rates to Global Business Power Corporation”.
In his urgent motion, Inocencio pointed out that for the 10 month period of May 2007 to February 2008, Akelco was not able to consume the contracted 4,000,000 Kwh a month. for the same period of 10 months. Akelco consumed 2,835,200 Kwh only or an average of 283,520 Kwh per month at an average cost of P40.00 per Kwh.
Incocencio furnished copies of his urgent motion six other offices like the Tañada, Vivo, Tan and Follosco, Morallos & Herce Law offices. Akelco was also furnished a copy.
Moreover, Akelco has also filed with the ERC an “Application for Approval of Over-all Tariff Adjustment”. If this application is approved, the cost of electricity in Aklan will increase as follows: For residential – P0.72 per Kwh; for Small Commercial – P0.13 per Kwh; for public buildings – P0.83 per Kwh; for street lights – P4.40 per Kwh; and for large commercial – P0.95 per Kwh.
It appears that this application for approval of over-all tariff adjustment with the ERC has no imprimatur from the Board of Directors of Akelco. There was also no consultation made by Akelco with the consumer – members who have been believing they own Akelco.
Who Owns Akelco?
Is consultation necessary between the seller and the buyers of any public utility commodity especially on goods, the distribution and marketing of it is a monopoly? The seller must agree how must it may sell his commodity while the buyers must also agree how much to buy that commodity like electricity.
There are several vital information surrounding Akelco that its consumer-members must know because it affects their economic condition and even social life.
It was for these reasons that the “Kapehan Sa Aklan” decided to discuss “Koryente” on April 12, 2008. However, the most concerned officials and authority on Akelco affairs begged off not to attend because they have prior commitment. Mr. Chito Peralta, general manager and Mr. Paterno I. Ibarreta, chairman, Board of Directors, Akelco were not able to attend.
Only the oppositors in ERC Case No. 2005 – 013RC attended like Atty. Romeo Inocencio, Hon. Rodson Mayor and Mr. Franklin Quimpo. Their sides were presented but the Akelco side was not.
In the spirit of fair play and transparency, Mr. Chito Peralta and Mr. Ibarreta were again invited for the April 19 Kapehan in the hope to hear their points. However, the Kapehan Advisory Council did not hear any word from them after that invitation was served.
In Akelco’s application with ERC for general rate adjustment, it only revealed the existing rates, the proposed rates, and the rate differences. It also revealed the existing revenue of P126,016,058.72 per month while the proposed revenue is P211,823,571.37 which is about double the existing.
Akelco proposed to spend the proposed revenue for the following expenses like personal services, operation and maintenance, Debt Service and for reinvestment. Akelco needs to pay its quarterly loan obligation at P5,144.669.00 or a total of 20,395,020 annually. These are the Akelco matters Kapehan Sa Aklan must discuss for the information of its consumer members who are deemed Akelco owners.
GBPC 4M KWH Contract
Going over the 10 month record of May 2007 to February 2008 of Akelco as found in its website, Akelco has not distributed or consumed the monthly minimum energy take off of 4 million Kwh for that 10 month period. It has only consumed 2,835,200 Kwh. And Akelco paid the amount equivalent to the minimum energy take off of 4 million a month. Why does Akelco pay for the energy it has not made use of and passes the cost of payment to its consumer members?
But that is stipulated in the Amended EPPA. These are the things the consumer members long to know why through the tri media program Kapehan Sa Aklan.
The approval of the Amended EPPA between Akelco and GBPC was done at the time when Mr. Chito Peralta was at the helm of Akelco. It was also approved by ERC upon the BOD Akelco and Mr. Chito Peralta’s recommendation. He therefore has the obligation to answer Akelco consumer members’ questions. /MP
Atty. Inocencio is the counsel for the Oppositors SP Member Ramon Gelito and Franklin Quimpo against the implementation of the Amended EPPA between Akelco and Mirant Global Business Power Corporation. Atty. Inocencio is also a co-oppositor in ERC Case No. 2005 – 013 RC.
According to Inocencio, the Amended EPPA has been immediately implemented by Akelco which resulted to the “paying excessive and exorbitant electricity rates to Global Business Power Corporation”.
In his urgent motion, Inocencio pointed out that for the 10 month period of May 2007 to February 2008, Akelco was not able to consume the contracted 4,000,000 Kwh a month. for the same period of 10 months. Akelco consumed 2,835,200 Kwh only or an average of 283,520 Kwh per month at an average cost of P40.00 per Kwh.
Incocencio furnished copies of his urgent motion six other offices like the Tañada, Vivo, Tan and Follosco, Morallos & Herce Law offices. Akelco was also furnished a copy.
Moreover, Akelco has also filed with the ERC an “Application for Approval of Over-all Tariff Adjustment”. If this application is approved, the cost of electricity in Aklan will increase as follows: For residential – P0.72 per Kwh; for Small Commercial – P0.13 per Kwh; for public buildings – P0.83 per Kwh; for street lights – P4.40 per Kwh; and for large commercial – P0.95 per Kwh.
It appears that this application for approval of over-all tariff adjustment with the ERC has no imprimatur from the Board of Directors of Akelco. There was also no consultation made by Akelco with the consumer – members who have been believing they own Akelco.
Who Owns Akelco?
Is consultation necessary between the seller and the buyers of any public utility commodity especially on goods, the distribution and marketing of it is a monopoly? The seller must agree how must it may sell his commodity while the buyers must also agree how much to buy that commodity like electricity.
There are several vital information surrounding Akelco that its consumer-members must know because it affects their economic condition and even social life.
It was for these reasons that the “Kapehan Sa Aklan” decided to discuss “Koryente” on April 12, 2008. However, the most concerned officials and authority on Akelco affairs begged off not to attend because they have prior commitment. Mr. Chito Peralta, general manager and Mr. Paterno I. Ibarreta, chairman, Board of Directors, Akelco were not able to attend.
Only the oppositors in ERC Case No. 2005 – 013RC attended like Atty. Romeo Inocencio, Hon. Rodson Mayor and Mr. Franklin Quimpo. Their sides were presented but the Akelco side was not.
In the spirit of fair play and transparency, Mr. Chito Peralta and Mr. Ibarreta were again invited for the April 19 Kapehan in the hope to hear their points. However, the Kapehan Advisory Council did not hear any word from them after that invitation was served.
In Akelco’s application with ERC for general rate adjustment, it only revealed the existing rates, the proposed rates, and the rate differences. It also revealed the existing revenue of P126,016,058.72 per month while the proposed revenue is P211,823,571.37 which is about double the existing.
Akelco proposed to spend the proposed revenue for the following expenses like personal services, operation and maintenance, Debt Service and for reinvestment. Akelco needs to pay its quarterly loan obligation at P5,144.669.00 or a total of 20,395,020 annually. These are the Akelco matters Kapehan Sa Aklan must discuss for the information of its consumer members who are deemed Akelco owners.
GBPC 4M KWH Contract
Going over the 10 month record of May 2007 to February 2008 of Akelco as found in its website, Akelco has not distributed or consumed the monthly minimum energy take off of 4 million Kwh for that 10 month period. It has only consumed 2,835,200 Kwh. And Akelco paid the amount equivalent to the minimum energy take off of 4 million a month. Why does Akelco pay for the energy it has not made use of and passes the cost of payment to its consumer members?
But that is stipulated in the Amended EPPA. These are the things the consumer members long to know why through the tri media program Kapehan Sa Aklan.
The approval of the Amended EPPA between Akelco and GBPC was done at the time when Mr. Chito Peralta was at the helm of Akelco. It was also approved by ERC upon the BOD Akelco and Mr. Chito Peralta’s recommendation. He therefore has the obligation to answer Akelco consumer members’ questions. /MP
No comments:
Post a Comment