THE Energy Regulatory Commission (ERC) said on Tuesday it has addressed the concerns of National Association of Electricity Consumers for Reforms (Nasecore) regarding line rental charges prior to the filing of a complaint at the Office of the Ombudsman.
The consumer group led by Pete Ilagan said in its filing before the OMB against ERC Chairman Francis Saturnino Juan and four commissioners that the agency permitted the hidden and unverified integration of line-rental charges into consumer electricity bills.
The ERC, however, said it had already responded to Nasecore’s concerns on this issue before the Ombudsman complaint was filed last July 13 and August 4. It said that the collection of these charges, particularly in the Visayas, were halted last August 13 and the ERC established accurate calculation methods for future billing.
‘The law places the power to review the commission’s actions with the Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court and we welcome that scrutiny,’ said Juan. ‘We take consumer concerns seriously. That us why we have already answered Nasecore’s questions in writing, in detail, not once but twice.
‘We remain confident that our processes are grounded in law, and we are ready to have that record examined by appropriate body,’ said Juan.
Additionally, the ERC noted that the Independent Electricity Market Operator of the Philippines (Iemop) must audit market settlements dating back to June 26, 2021, to evaluate the financial impact on utilities and determine necessary refunds.
Line Rental, officially known as Bilateral Line Loss and Congestion Cost (Bilateral LLCC), is a standard feature of the Wholesale Electricity Spot Market (WESM) rather than a fee invented by regulators or utilities. It serves as a settlement adjustment accounting for value loss and price differences when electricity is transmitted from generation points to consumption areas, functioning as part of the total trading amount paid for energy delivery.
While the ERC acknowledged Nasecore’s consumer advocacy, the agency maintained that some of the group’s demands exceed the legal authority of any single stakeholder.
Juan said the Commission is bound by its own rules to protect certain information from being disclosed outside the proper, legal processes. The ERC, he stressed, rejects deadlines set by outside groups as grounds for criminal or administrative complaints, emphasizing that its decisions must be tested through official records, the law, and the courts.
‘This does not close the door on Nasecore’s concerns. The group remains free to raise specific, documented questions about any utility’s charges, to participate as an intervenor in the Commission’s public rate and confirmation proceedings, or to seek judicial review of any ERC action before the Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court, as provided by law. These channels remain fully open, and the Commission will continue to engage Nasecore through them in good faith,’ Juan said.