CLARK FREEPORT – The chairman of the Clark International Airport Corp. (CIAC) committee bidding out the a new terminal project at the Diosdado Macapagal International Airport (DMIA) here denied yesterday claims that the project that could cost no less than $100 million is being rushed before the term of Pres. Arroyo ends on June 30.
In an interview with Punto, CIAC vice president Romeo Dyoco, chairman of the joint venture special committee (JVSC), said the awarding of the project is likely to be overtaken by the pending administration of Sen. Benigno Aquino III, who is expected to be proclaimed in the May 10 polls presidential race.
“We are not rushing, but we are neither sitting on our asses. We are just proceeding normally and the next administration will still have the privilege of scrapping, pursuing or modifying it (progress in the project awarding),” he stressed.
This, amid controversies on which of the two only bidders is really qualified to undertake the project to be financed and then operated by the bidding winner under a joint agreement with CIAC.
The bidders include the Philco Aero consortium which includes a Korean firm and the Malaysian consortium led by Bristeel Overseas Venture, Inc. (BOV). San Miguel Corp. (SMC) recently joined the Philco Aero consortium.
Only recently, five members of the CIAC board leaned towards accepting the proposal of Philco Aero, while two others were against it. One board member, however, asked that bidding on the project be deferred until the Aquino administration has taken over, Dyoco said.
“We went back to Stage 1 of the selection process after the Kuwaiti firm Al Mal which was already in the Stage 2 was scrapped, “he recalled.
The Kuwaiti firm had wanted not only to construct the new terminal, known as Terminal 2, but also take over the existing terminal or Terminal 1, and this prompted controversies that eventually led Pres. Arroyo to scrap its proposal.
The CIAC initially cited a ballpark $100-million cost of Terminal 2. BOV had offered to provide $150 million instead amid upgrades it proposed, while Philco Aero to spend even more or $177 million, he noted.
But Dyoco explained that while the board members seemed to favor Philco Aero over BOV for Stage 2 processing, it will take time before it is finally awarded the project. He said that under Stage 2, Philco Aero would still have to face other interested parties who would be given 45 days within which to challenge the firm’s offer.
“If a challenger makes a better offer, we will ask it to put up or shut up,” he said.
Altogether, the processes required leading to the final awarding of contract would go beyond June 30, the end of the term of Pres. Arroyo, he stressed.
This, even as CIAC executive vice president Alex Cauguiran and CIAC board member Jesus Nicdao, in a formal letter to CIAC chairman Nestor Mangio, said that Philco Aero “ceased to exist at the time the CIAC board accepted its proposal.
Cauguiran and Nicdao cited Philco Aero’s letter dated last Dec. 15 saying that members of its consortium agreed that their “obligations herein will expire if the project is not awarded to our consortium on or before March 31, 2010 unless extended by mutual agreement.”
The two said no extension was ever done and that Philco Aero also never established its financial capability as well as track record and experience to undertake and operate the project.
In his letter responding to Cauguiran and Nicdao, Dyoco denied that the Philco Aero consortium has ceased to exist. He cited “continuous communication provided by Philco Aero group informing us of changes in their consortium.”
“In a letter dated May 10, 2010, Philco Aero announced acquisition by the San Miguel Corp. (SMC) of 60 percent of the outstanding equity of the Philco Aero and as a consequence, SMC shall take a more active role in the development of the DMIA Terminal 2 project,” Dyoco said.
He also said that the question on the capability of Philco Aero to undertake the project has not yet been tackled, as this would be put under scrutiny only after the consortium if finally given the go signal to undergo the Stage 2 process. Under this stage, BOV can also again challenge the offer of Philco Aero, he added.
In an interview with Punto, CIAC vice president Romeo Dyoco, chairman of the joint venture special committee (JVSC), said the awarding of the project is likely to be overtaken by the pending administration of Sen. Benigno Aquino III, who is expected to be proclaimed in the May 10 polls presidential race.
“We are not rushing, but we are neither sitting on our asses. We are just proceeding normally and the next administration will still have the privilege of scrapping, pursuing or modifying it (progress in the project awarding),” he stressed.
This, amid controversies on which of the two only bidders is really qualified to undertake the project to be financed and then operated by the bidding winner under a joint agreement with CIAC.
The bidders include the Philco Aero consortium which includes a Korean firm and the Malaysian consortium led by Bristeel Overseas Venture, Inc. (BOV). San Miguel Corp. (SMC) recently joined the Philco Aero consortium.
Only recently, five members of the CIAC board leaned towards accepting the proposal of Philco Aero, while two others were against it. One board member, however, asked that bidding on the project be deferred until the Aquino administration has taken over, Dyoco said.
“We went back to Stage 1 of the selection process after the Kuwaiti firm Al Mal which was already in the Stage 2 was scrapped, “he recalled.
The Kuwaiti firm had wanted not only to construct the new terminal, known as Terminal 2, but also take over the existing terminal or Terminal 1, and this prompted controversies that eventually led Pres. Arroyo to scrap its proposal.
The CIAC initially cited a ballpark $100-million cost of Terminal 2. BOV had offered to provide $150 million instead amid upgrades it proposed, while Philco Aero to spend even more or $177 million, he noted.
But Dyoco explained that while the board members seemed to favor Philco Aero over BOV for Stage 2 processing, it will take time before it is finally awarded the project. He said that under Stage 2, Philco Aero would still have to face other interested parties who would be given 45 days within which to challenge the firm’s offer.
“If a challenger makes a better offer, we will ask it to put up or shut up,” he said.
Altogether, the processes required leading to the final awarding of contract would go beyond June 30, the end of the term of Pres. Arroyo, he stressed.
This, even as CIAC executive vice president Alex Cauguiran and CIAC board member Jesus Nicdao, in a formal letter to CIAC chairman Nestor Mangio, said that Philco Aero “ceased to exist at the time the CIAC board accepted its proposal.
Cauguiran and Nicdao cited Philco Aero’s letter dated last Dec. 15 saying that members of its consortium agreed that their “obligations herein will expire if the project is not awarded to our consortium on or before March 31, 2010 unless extended by mutual agreement.”
The two said no extension was ever done and that Philco Aero also never established its financial capability as well as track record and experience to undertake and operate the project.
In his letter responding to Cauguiran and Nicdao, Dyoco denied that the Philco Aero consortium has ceased to exist. He cited “continuous communication provided by Philco Aero group informing us of changes in their consortium.”
“In a letter dated May 10, 2010, Philco Aero announced acquisition by the San Miguel Corp. (SMC) of 60 percent of the outstanding equity of the Philco Aero and as a consequence, SMC shall take a more active role in the development of the DMIA Terminal 2 project,” Dyoco said.
He also said that the question on the capability of Philco Aero to undertake the project has not yet been tackled, as this would be put under scrutiny only after the consortium if finally given the go signal to undergo the Stage 2 process. Under this stage, BOV can also again challenge the offer of Philco Aero, he added.
