Taguig court halts Meralco's contract auctions

MANILA, Philippines — A Taguig court on Friday extended the temporary restraining order against electricity concessionaire Manila Electric Co.'s (Meralco) scheduled auction of contracts to supply 1,000 megawatts of additional power.

In a three-page order dated August 2, Taguig City Regional Trial Court Branch 267 extended the halt order to 20 days from the previous 72 hours, ordering Meralco to pause its competitive bidding selection process.

Besides the bidding process, order also covers "receipt of bids, the awards, and the implementation of any award," the court's order states.

The restraining order was extended following the court's evaluation of the affidavits and testimonies provided by the petitioners, which is composed of Malampaya gas operators. Meralco also did not present any witness or evidence for the hearing.

The electricity concessionaire divided the 1,000-megawatt auction into two, scheduling one for 400 megawatts on August 2 and the other for 600 megawatts on September 3.

The halt order issued by the Taguig Regional Trial Court on July 31, which was extended for 20 days in the August 2 decision, applied to both bidding processes.

The court's directive stemmed from a petition for injunction filed by members of the Malampaya consortium. This consists of Prime Energy, UC 38 LLC, Prime Oil and Gas Inc. and the Philippine National Oil Company-Exploration Corp.

TRO to cause 'higher power rates,' says Meralco

In a statement, Meralco said the 20-day stoppage affects its efforts to secure the most cost-effective power supply for their customers.

"We are reviewing the court's order and consulting with our legal counsel to determine our next steps. This includes evaluating potential delays in the bidding process, which could, unfortunately, lead to higher power rates for our customers," Jose Valles, Meralco's head of regulatory management, said.

"It is also important to clarify that power plants utilizing Malampaya gas are not excluded from participating in the bidding process. On the contrary, they are among the prospective bidders who have shown interest in submitting their offers," Valles added.

In issuing the company's view on the order, it avoided discussing the merits of the case "in line with the principle of sub judice," he said.