ERC asks DTI to substantiate its Omnibus Petition
The Energy Regulatory Commission (ERC) directed the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) to supplement the allegations in its Omnibus Petition praying, among others, for the modification of the existing approved lifeline programs of the Distribution Utilities.
In a letter addressed to Director Victorio Dimagiba of the DTI, the ERC’s OIC General Counsel, Maria Corazon Ginez, asked the DTI to clarify and allege in its Omnibus Petition: (1) the legal capacity and authority of the Department of Trade and Industry - Bureau of Trade Regulation & Consumer Protection (DTI-BTRCP) to file the petition on behalf of the consumers; (2) the details of the proposed lifeline programs, the rate impact thereof on the subsidized and on the subsidizing class, the basis for the determination of the lifeline threshold, and justifications for adoption of such programs; (3) the details, legal basis, and justification of the prayer for the ERC to direct MERALCO to buy from the WESM at peak hours; the mechanics for the same; the benefit of such proposal to the consumers in terms of lower power rates; (4) the details, legal basis, mechanics, and justification of the prayer for the preferential treatment for poor households and power-intensive industries in the distribution of the TRANSCO charges by MERALCO; (5) the legal basis, benefit, and rate impact of prohibiting MERALCO from charging system loss as a separate item; and (6) the legal basis and details of the proposal for the ERC to peg MERALCO’s rates at VECO, CEBECO, and DALIGHT’s rates, including justification for departing from the “cost of service” principle in rate-setting as enshrined in the EPIRA.
In addition to these directives, the ERC asked the DTI to publish its Omnibus Petition in compliance with the Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) of the EPIRA and the Supreme Court decisions on the matter.
“Much as the ERC would want to expedite its action on this petition, there are procedural requirements that the DTI has to comply with; otherwise, it may not be able to discharge its burden of proof during the hearings. Also, it is important for DTI to comply with the procedure in the EPIRA IRR, which as interpreted by the Supreme Court, is mandatory.” ERC Chairman Rodolfo B. Albano Jr. explained.
Under
Section 6, Rule 3 of the ERC Rules of Practice and Procedure, the ERC shall
return any petition received which is not in substantial compliance with its
rules or any applicable statutes. Once returned, the petitioner may re-file
the same after complying with all the requirements.
February 19, 2008