MANILA — Bayan Muna urged the Supreme Court to take a second look at its own ruling allowing power distributor Meralco to impose a staggered rate hike totaling P22.64 billion.

In a motion for reconsideration filed on Wednesday, Bayan Muna, along with fellow Makabayan bloc members Gabriela, Act Teachers and Kabataan party-list groups, asked the high court to reverse its 6-5 ruling upholding the Energy Regulatory Commission’s (ERC) 2013 decision to approve the rate hike without conducting any hearing.

The SC had ruled that the ERC did not commit grave abuse of discretion because it merely followed the Electric Power Industry Reform Act of 2001 (EPIRA Law) and the Guidelines for the Automatic Adjustment of Generation Rate and System Loss Rates by Distribution Utilities (AGRA Rules) which exempted certain rate adjustments from prior notice and hearing.

• SC affirms 2013 ERC order allowing staggered P22.64-B Meralco power rate hike

“The Majority did not see anything wrong with how the ERC exercised (or failed to exercise) its powers,” the Makabayan's motion read.

The petitioners argued there were exceptions to the exemption invoked by the high court — “good causes” and “public interest” according to the AGRA Rules — which supposedly would have allowed the ERC to investigate first the basis for the rate hike.

Meralco was supposed to impose an additional charge of P9.1070 kWh in the December 2013 billing of its customers but wrote the ERC for permission to impose only a P7.90/kWh increase and collect the remaining P3 billion in its February 2014 billing.

The ERC instead approved the rate of P7.67/kWh for the December 2013 billing, an additional P1.00/kWh increase in the February 2014 billing and the balance due the next month.

The ERC said the rate hike would still be subject to a “post-verification” to check if there was over-recovery or under-recovery.

The commission approved Meralco’s staggerred rate hike on December 9, 2013, only four days after Meralco’s request. According to the petitioners, it took the regulatory body only one working day to approve the letter.

“The ERC closed its eyes to the glaring exceptionality of the circumstances attending the MERALCO letter, to the great prejudice of the millions of captive power consumers,” they argued.

“[T]he rule being invoked resulted in the (i) deprivation of the right of the consumers to question the pass-on charge, being that it is the highest recorded and well as tainted with market abuse, and (ii) impaired the ERC’s own power to regulate the power players in light of the extraordinary situation that has great economic impact presented to it,” they added.

Beyond following the rules literally, the petitioners urged the high court to look at the facts surrounding the issue.

“This is not just a question whether or not the ERC failed to exercise its vast power as a regulator. Ang nakasalalay rito ay ang interes din ng ating mga mamamayan na overburdened na and ngayon nga ay napipintong magpasan sila ng dagdag na taas-kuryente,” former Bayan Muna Rep. Carlos Zarate said, shortly after the filing at the SC.

“Hindi mo pwedeng i-unplug or i-disconnect ang factual milieu kung bakit tumaas ang presyo ng kuryente (noong) 2013. Hindi ito just an ordinary pass-on charge,” he added.

The motion pointed out that the unusually high rate hike was a result of several power generation plants shutting down despite the scheduled shutdown of the Malampaya operations for more than a month.

As a result, Meralco was supposedly compelled to buy expensive power from the Wholesale Electricity Spot Market (WESM).

Out of the P4.15/kWh increase in generation charge, according to the petitioners, a big chunk or P2.38 came from electricity sourced from WESM.

The motion alleged that a House energy committee hearing later revealed that the spot price during that period skyrocketed to P33.22/kWh from only P13.74/kWh prior to the Malampaya shutdown.

A high price ceiling was also allegedly set because one of the power generation companies was supposedly allowed to make “highly irregular bids of P62/kWh” which drove prices up.

The petitioners claimed that the Philippine power industry is essentially a monopoly in the case of Meralco, or an oligopoly with only five families controlling 80 percent of the power generation sector.

“[N]oong panahon na ‘yun, ang dahilan ng pagtaas at pagsipa ng presyo ng kuryente ay hindi lamang ang scheduled shutdown ng Malampaya. Kundi nakita namin dito, talagang sinamantala ng mga energy oligarchs, ng mga generation companies,” Zarate said.

“During that period, nakita rin natin, sabay-sabay nag-shutdown ang mga generation plants that resulted doon sa pagnipis kunwari ng supply ng kuryente in November of 2013, na s'ya namang ginawa nilang dahilan kung bakit tumaas daw ang presyo sa spot market. At nagresulta ito sa pagsipa,” he added.

The petitioners accused the ERC of failing in its duty to regulate anti-competitive behavior.

“Because of ERC’c dereliction or failure to perform its positive duty, the consumers were denied the opportunity to participate in the proceedings before the ERC. And because the ERC hastily approved the MERALCO’s request for the staggered billing of the increase, consumers were prevented from substantially intervening, opposing, or commenting in the rate hike. For ultimately, it would be the consumers who will pay for this pass-on charge,” the petition said.

“Electricity is a basic commodity without cheap substitute. Filipinos will need to consume or use electricity for normal survival. They may employ power-saving mechanisms and techniques, but in the end, they will still use electricity, regardless of power cost in the market,” it added.

Meralco has yet to announce its plans for the P22-billion power rate hike, which was suspended due to an indefinite TRO imposed by the Supreme Court.

The power distributor recently announced a decrease of 71 centavos/kWh for the month of July following an order from the ERC to refund P21.8 billion after validating its tariff for July 2015 to June 2022.

FROM THE ARCHIVES:

Watch more News on iWantTFC