Nasecore president Pete Ilagan said they would wage a bigger campaign to seek the support of other consumer and cause-oriented groups, business groups and leaders of local government units within Meralco’s franchise area.
"We are happy that FDC and PCWF supported our motion for production of documents that we filed last Nov. 10. The PCWF also adopted in to our opposition to the provisional authority issued by the ERC (Energy Regulatory Commission) that allowed Meralco to increase its rates by 12 centavos per kilowatthour," Ilagan said.
PCWF filed its manifestation before the ERC last Dec. 11, joining Nasecore in its opposition to the provisional authority and motion for production of documents.
In their manifestation, PCWF said that Meralco’s petition does not contain valid justification for the grant of a provisional authority, much less the approval of its proposed rate adjustment.
The PCWF noted that "any capital expenditure by Meralco goes into the computation of its rate base and that thereafter, the legal return-on rate base must be determined after proper valuation and appraisal."
"To make its customers advance the needed capital for Meralco’s project would be doubly injurious to its customers as they are bound to subsequently pay for the cost of these projects through their monthly billings despite the fact that they financed the same in the first place," the PCWF added.
FDC, through its secretary general Lidy Nacpil and legal counsel Romeo Dolleton, likewise filed a motion for production of documents adopting Nasecore’s similar motion.
They also requested the ERC to direct Meralco to produce its updated financial statement, taking into account the Supreme Court decision disallowing income tax as deductible operating expense and a list of all assets that Meralco acquired as of Dec. 31, 2002.
"Three local government units had already contacted us and requested copies of documents related to Meralco’s petition. We expect more groups and LGUs to support our fight against Meralco’s petition," Ilagan said.