DOE seeks to invoke mandate on projects of national significance

MANILA, Philippines - The Department of Energy (DOE) has sought the assistance of the National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA) to invoke its mandate which allows it to identify projects of national significance to ensure that another Pandacan depot incident will not happen in the future.

The DOE, during the time of former Energy Secretary Raphael Lotilla and being reiterated by incumbent Energy Secretary Angelo Reyes, had already requested NEDA to use its power over these oil facilities and declare them as projects of national significance so that local government units (LGUs) will not intervene over any national-related projects which include vital oil facilities.

Such a move will also assure that all declared national projects by NEDA would not be subjected to local government ordinances.

“In case NEDA will issue this declaration, it will apply to future oil facilities. It will not apply to Pandacan,” a DOE official, who requested anonymity, said.

The official said “our concern is that similar instances will happen in other places wherein local governments will use re-zoning to relocate vital facilities such as oil warehouses and refineries.”

Petron Corp. president Eric Recto, for his part, said they are now eyeing several relocation sites in greater Manila area for possible relocation of the soon-to-be-dismantled Pandacan oil depot.

Recto said while there is a pending Manila ordinance that may supersede the Supreme Court order, they would have to look for alternative locations.

“The government is also caught in a difficult position, but it’s also tough to rely on government at this point on that. I think we need to, like I said keep on thinking of the word ‘practical,’ for all practical purposes we need to prepare for it. And if there are other solutions that become available - well then good, but right now we’re dealing and having to live with what the Supreme Court decided,” Recto added.

He said they may also need more time to relocate the facilities and thus may ask for reconsideration on the time frame of relocation.

“I think six months is a very difficult time frame for us to move. I think we need to be practical about it and I think we would need to flag to the authorities that in the event a deadline is approaching and we’re unable to meet the deadline that we need to ask for an extension,” he added.

But Recto reiterated that at present, there is no replacement for Pandacan as the best site for the oil facility.

“Nothing can duplicate Pandacan, I think it goes without saying - the access, stability, the convenience - everything - then nothing can beat Pandacan, which is an ideal place for the oil companies to have their storage facilities,” he said.

According to Recto, this is an issue that the National Government should be able to address.

“That’s an issue that we at Petron and others are very concerned about - the precedent this sets and it’s something other industries should also be concerned about. What do we do about it? Well, I think I’d leave that to the individual companies. But I’m not afraid to say that it is an issue that worries us and should worry others as well,” he said.

Oil companies warned that the at least 11,500 additional trucks needed per month to transport fuel now coming in Pandacan will be biggest physical proof.

Industry sources said national policy through the DOE must apply.

Reyes pointed out that the DOE is awaiting the new comprehensive plan of oil companies which will provide a detailed relocation strategy.

“The interest of the DOE is to prevent any interruption in the supply and any increases in prices. That’s our concern. The Supreme Court even noted in their decision that they did not want any crisis or they don’t want to trigger a crisis in the oil supply and prices. So that’s what we are concerned about. And we, of course, will support and follow the Supreme Court decision. And we will ask the oil companies to update their relocation plan,” the Energy chief said.

In a Supreme Court decision on the Pandacan depot, it was noted that Manila Ordinance 8027 can be repealed by a subsequent ordinance allowing the depot to stay.