New group enters fray for NAIA; SMC offer confirmed

MANILA, Philippines — The Philippine Airport Ground Support Solutions Inc. (PAGSS) has also expressed its intention to take over the Ninoy Aquino International Airport (NAIA), but the Department of Transportation (DOTr) said the door remains open to Megawide Construction Corp. despite recently having been stripped of its original proponent status (OPS).

Manila International Airport Authority (MIAA) general manager Ed Monreal said in a Senate hearing yesterday that PAGSS and conglomerate San Miguel Corp. (SMC) have each submitted their respective offers for NAIA.

Jeffrey Cheng-led PAGSS is a company engaged in ground handling services located at the NAIA.

PAGSS is part of the consortium that bagged the contract to operate and maintain the Clark International Airport in Pampanga, with partners Filinvest Development Corp., JG Summit Holdings Inc. and Singapore’s Changi Airport Philippines Pte. Ltd.

PAGSS also has an existing unsolicited proposal to operate and expand the Siargao Airport, also known as the Sayak Airport.

For its part, SMC president and COO Ramon Ang yesterday confirmed The STAR report that it is interested to operate and maintain NAIA.

Monreal, however, said the government has yet to reach out to these proponents who are next in line for the NAIA project, following Tuesday’s revocation of the OPS previously awarded to Megawide.

Transportation Secretary Arthur Tugade said the door remains open for Megawide, which has a P109-billion unsolicited proposal to upgrade and transform NAIA, increasing the current capacity of 30 million to 65 million passengers per annum over a strategic and phased approach.

“On December 4, the MIAA board arrived at a decision to revoke Megawide’s OPS. On Dec. 15, the decision to revoke was confirmed with the following caveat: that MIAA will continue with its ongoing rehabilitation and reconstruction program, giving emphasis to security and safety. The second caveat recognizing the procedural rights of Megawide in relation to the decision to revoke,” Tugade said.

“My reading on what happened on December 15 is the talks on the original proponent status of Megawide is not yet completely closed. If they want to appeal, in my opinion, they can appeal, while MIAA is undertaking its reconstruction and rehabilitation program,” he said.

Monreal said that since the decision to revoke Megawide’s OPS was a MIAA board decision, any move to re-award the OPS to the company would require a board approval.

“On the part of MIAA, since the OPS is a board action, should Megawide come up with a reconsideration, we will present it to the board so that the board can act on it favorably or not,” he said.

Megawide earlier said it would immediately file a motion for reconsideration for its proposal.

Officials of Megawide maintained their position that the company has already addressed and complied with the financial requirements of the National Economic and Development Authority–Investment Coordination Committee (NEDA-ICC).

Speaking on the reason behind the revocation of the OPS for the first time since the decision came out, MIAA cited the NEDA-ICC letter dated Nov. 19 as a factor.

“MIAA, on December 4, had a board meeting and in that meeting one of the board members requested for executive session to discuss the present OPS of Megawide. In the motion in the executive session, he manifested that the OPS status of Megawide be revisited because of the letter that has been received from NEDA and voting resulted to a majority decision to revoke Megawide consortium OPS,” Monreal said.

The NEDA letter dated Nov. 19 addressed to Tugade stated that the submitted unsolicited proposal and project documents of Megawide has been returned in view of the findings of the ICC Secretariat’s evaluation that the proponent’s equity position is insufficient to finance the equity requirement of the proposed project.