This came as Sen. Tessie Aquino-Oreta bared that the PEA had a new project, which it was hiding from the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee, on the controversy-ridden President Diosdado Macapagal Boulevard (PDMB) that was again awarded to JD Legaspi Construction Co. (JDLCC).
Rachel Pastores of the Public Interest Law Center, the same firm that handles the plunder charges against PEA officials for their alleged involvement in the overpriced PDMB project, said that the latest scam involves the health service program for PEATC employees.
"Essentially, payments were made to the private company even before the contract was approved," Pastores told The STAR.
Pastores said PEATC released in 2001 checks amounting to P2 million to Lacson and Lacson Insurance Brokers Inc., while the contract took effect only in 2002.
She said that PEA chairman Ernest Villareal, also the concurrent PEATC chairman, allegedly approved the checks, facilitated the payments and signed the approval of the disbursement vouchers.
She claimed that the PEATC contract with Lacson and Lacson Insurance Brokers did not undergo the usual bidding process as it was supposedly a "negotiated contract."
Pastores admitted, however, that the case against Villareal and other PEATC officials is not yet airtight and that PILC is still in the process of gathering more information and documents.
Meanwhile, Oreta charged that the PEA board is hiding from the Senate Blue Ribbon panel a bigger additional project awarded to JDLCC connected to the PDMB.
The additional work involved the widening of the two-lane one-kilometer Bay Boulevard from Roxas Boulevard to the Government Service Insurance System building to be undertaken by JDLCC amounting to P281,703, 812.93.
At a press conference, Oreta presented transcripts of a PEA board meeting last March 2 where they approved through Resolution 3197 the widening of Bay Boulevard and authorized the general manager, Benjamin Cariño, to enter into a supplemental agreement with JDLCC for the project.
Oreta noted that PEA officials never mentioned anything about the P281-million Bay Boulevard project at the last Senate hearing of the PDMB controversy.
"Is the PEA taking the Senate for a ride? Why are the officials withholding information about the Bay blvd. project?" she asked.
She pointed out that at the last hearing, PEA officials mentioned only the additional works and variations worth P252.92 million which, when added to the original PDMB project cost of P584.36 million, would add up to P837.28 million.
"Once the Bay blvd. is constructed, the total project cost would be P1.119 billion, or 91 percent above the original project cost," she said.
She pointed out that the P281 million is even bigger than the P252 million in additional work and other expenses earlier uncovered by the Blue Ribbon headed by Sen. Joker Arroyo.
She noted that the amount is almost 50 percent of the original project cost of P584 million.
"The PEA should explain why the construction of this Bay blvd.. portion would require a staggering P281.7 million when it will only involve the widening of an existing two-lane road," Oreta said.
She recalled the earlier claim of PEA director Sulficio Tagud that the PDMB project would cost P1.1 billion.
"During the Blue Ribbon hearing, senators were perplexed why PEA secured loans worth P1.3 billion when they identified projects worth only P837 million. Now, we know that the total cost is P1.19 billion, the sum of P837 and P281 million," she said.
The PEA got a P1-billion loan from the GSIS and P300 million from the Land Bank of the Philippines for the PDMB project.
Oreta said PEA officials decided against a public bidding for the P281-million new project and award it outright instead to JDLCC.
"This indicates that PEA officials are abusing the rules and regulations of PD 1594 and are using them as a convenient justification to overprice the contract," Oreta contended.
In a related development, retired armed forces chief of staff Gen. Diomedio Villanueva formally assumed yesterday his post as acting PEA general manager.
He told The STAR in a telephone interview that among his immediate responsibilities is to ensure the continuous and smooth operation and activities of PEA.
"The agency has existing contracts. Important measures have to be undertaken so that PEA’s assets are protected," he explained.
He went to the PEA office in Makati City yesterday after a briefing by Public Works Secretary Simeon Datumanong, also PEA acting chairman.
In another development, the general manager of the Ninoy Aquino International Airport (NAIA) Terminal 3 admitted yesterday that there was no assurance that airlines would transfer to the spanking new airport facility at its soft opening on Dec. 15.
Guillermo Cunanan said that the transfer of the country’s flag carrier, the Philippine Air Lines, remains a big question.
Moises Tolentino, vice president for communications of the Philippine International Airport Terminals Co. said some 14 technical requirements have to be done by Piatco and the Manila International Airport Authority before airline companies would transfer to NAIA-3.
He identified the more important requirements as the construction of the access road between Terminals 2 and 3, the transfer of the fuel depot, establishment of the Meralco transmission lines at the Villamor water supply, and the alleged cracks on NAIA 3’s apron, or the space where airplanes park.
Meanwhile, the MIA-NAIA Association of Service Operators (MASO) filed last Monday a petition before the Supreme Court seeking to nullify the concession agreement between the Department of Transportation and Communications (DOTC) and Piatco.
MASO officials led by Perfecto Yasay, former chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, said that the organization decided to take legal action since the government is "taking too long" to make up its mind on how to resolve the controversy.
"The entire DOTC-Piatco contract is highly illegal and government should rescind the contract to avoid legal traps set by Piatco," Yasay said.
They contended that unless the Piatco contract is declared null and void, and a new agreement is forged, government will "surely be a big loser."