Failed Bidding For MRT3 Maintenance, A Sign of Inefficiency? #ExpertWriter

Failed Bidding For MRT3 Maintenance, A Sign of Inefficiency? #ExpertWriter

After a long squabble of MRTC and DOTC for the management and operation of MRT3-EDSA, it came to the point that the riding public was very much disgusted with the government ways of solving this issue. Even from the onset of this Build-Lease-Transfer (BLT) Agreement, failure seems to be founded in all direction, by which, series of negative images of people handling this MRT3 contracts are doomed.

The DOTC Secretary Jun Abaya still showing what seems to be his forte in dealing with this MRT3 train system problems. He dictated the mandate of being a leader, but lacks the knowledge of how to give solutions for this never-ending MRT3 saga.

The MRT Holdings and MRTC are more likely the thing of the past. Trying to help the ailing MRT3 train system by which, Robert Sobrepena opened-up his way in uniting with the government for this purpose.

The Senate hearing who conducted the findings of MRT3 story, never give the true worth of eliminating the problems and giving constructive solutions. Instead, the DOTC still, continuing its high hopes of deciphering series of their moves to put forward the MRT3 development.

Another facet of this movement is to perform the bid of companies who are interested in dealing with MRT3 maintenance; interested bidders include DMCI Holdings Incorporated, Miescorrail Incorporated of the Manila Electric Company, Busan Metro of Korea, the joint venture of Mosa - Inekon of Czech Republic, and SMRT International Pte. Ltd.

The government deferred the bids submission twice, last October 13 and 28 of 2014 in which failure showed overtime for DOTC. Interested companies for this bidding cannot comprehend the DOTC’s ruling. Some of the concerns raised by prospective bidders were the amount of penalties to be imposed by the government on the maintenance contractor for certain violations, plus the key performance indicators (KPIs) to be delivered. In fact interested businessmen knew the dilapidated situation of MRT3 platform and yet, the new rulings for bidders are far more realistic in nature.

There’s no doubt that the DOTC Secretary Jun Abaya was not able to project the outcome of this failed bidding that constitute the effectiveness of his decision-making strategy; how and when to do such positive moves while he’s busy promoting the presidential bid of Mar Roxas. Why not concentrate fully for the transportation problems especially the MRT3 and LRT which needs constant monitoring and development?

The government must review the terms of reference for the 3-year maintenance contract due to the issues raised by the prospective bidders which is set to republish the new terms and conditions. And, rebidding ensues this month as what the DOTC reported. It prefers a longer maintenance contract to replace the current maintenance provider Autre Porte Technique Global Incorporated (APT) and its local partner, Global Incorporated.

The longer this bidding process for the selected maintenance provider, the longer it takes to facilitate the movement of the MRT3 development. The The Department of Transportation and Communications DOTC Secretary should maintain the efficiency and effectiveness of his mandate to instill the train system for the good of the riding public and the Filipinos as a whole.

Read More

MRT3 Shutdown Is An Excellent Option #ExpertWriter

MRT3 Shutdown Is An Excellent Option #ExpertWriter

First and foremost, the government’s vision and mission: to give total services and safe commuter’s system to the riding public. Being the elected leaders of our country, we need to think, cooperate and extend help to our government and to give them ways on how to address the problems nationwide especially the MRT3-EDSA. We don’t have to add negative elements to the dilapidated situation of our train system, but to think positively and spread the goodness to all. It’s within the context of our society that our Filipino image is built through characters, attitude and patriotism. How can we put forward to the future when our sentiments and loyalty always the same, same old ways in judging our leaders?

Remember, that each leader or President has its own personality, vision and mission in life especially in the political arena. We must help our leaders not to put negative aspect of their leadership into a pendulum-type of decision-making attitude.

In this case of MRT3 problems, even since the conception and until now, the story goes on and on while the riding public is not comfortable with the outcome of negotiations of The Department of Transportation and Communications DOTC to its private business partners the MRT II Holdings represented by MRTC’s Manager Robert Sobrepena. The public are in constant fear of their lives when using the train system along EDSA. Moreover, the breakdowns showed that it needed renovation for longer lifespan of the operations. Likewise, both partners, the DOTC and MRTC are not in good relationship with each other that made this chaotic situation to its extreme limits.

To ease passengers' suffering caused by recurring breakdowns of the Metro Rail Transit 3 (MRT3), its key stakeholders are in agreement over a possible temporary shutdown of the line. The private shareholder of the Metro Rail Rail Transit Corporation, the concessionaire of the MRT3, agrees, then, this is the time that the DOTC should come into the open to compromise things to be done for the good of everybody. "If safety is a clear issue, we have to shut down the rails," Transportation Secretary Joseph Emilio Abaya said in an interview with ABS-CBN on Thursday, October 9.

The MRT3 shutdown is possible for this stage because of its old-age train system and accessories. First thing the DOTC should do is to sit down with the MRTC’s Bob Sobrepena for possible compromise agreement with MRTC together with MRT II Holdings. Let the agreement starts to be positive that both parties can gain substantial business revenues. The government operates MRT3 under a build-lease-transfer (BLT Agreement) contract with Metro Rail Transit Corp (MRTC), which is majority owned by privately-held MRT II Holdings. This agreement must be followed by both parties to put forward the MRT3 operations and management to its clear destination in the modern future. But always, there’s specific time frame for every moves to be successful.

The next moves of the PPP as partnership, should appoint an expert leader to oversee the whole operations and management from planning up to the actual renovation and monitoring.

Another facet’s the riding public along EDSA through designated and scheduled buses to augment the volume of commuters each hour. This should be managed and monitored by an expert leader just for this purpose.

Likewise, the new MRT3 should be new and improved that could accommodate the volume of the riding. As much as possible, the planned MRT3 extension must be carried out after the renovation.

In addition, the DOTC and MRTC must bid for an expert maintenance and engineering providers for a longer period of time agreements. The purpose is to have a clear responsibility for their jobs as well as enthusiasm in maintaining the country train system.

The operations and management of the new renovated MRT3 should have strict but fair standard operating procedures to all staff and management. The rules and regulations of MRT3 should be implemented at all times to have high productivity for all employees.

In my observation, the MRT3 operations have lots of tellers but short in management people to monitor the daily operation. Likewise, their visibility in the front end is not known, instead, maybe, at the back office?

The DOTC and MRTC should move faster now for MRT3 renovation to avoid the same problems in the future.

Read More

Senate Investigation On MRT3 Have Positive Results? #ExpertWriter

For the longest time, MRT3 has been subjected to public hearing after the derailment last August 13, 2014. Senate was looking into the constant train breakdowns which caused the riding public to question the management of MRT3. Is it the DOTC, as what the majority of Filipinos believed to be at fault? Or, the MRTC who built up this project along with DOTC?

Really, if an ordinary Filipino doesn’t know the facts behind the MRT3-EDSA train project, it’s always Secretary of DOTC Jun Abaya will be haunted by these nightmares every day. The people behind MRTC didn’t have the courage to talk openly, while the DOTC was at the forefront of controversies.

From the onset of Vitangcol case up to this Senate probe, the future of MRT3 is like a roller coaster, or, a derailed roller coaster?

It’s not easy to manage the MRT3 train system, every manager knows that, but if the management doesn’t have the expertise to run the operations, then, it’s a disaster. If the DOTC and MRTC have divided notions of what the MRT3 management’s all about, then, more disasters may follow.

An Accession Undertaking and an Assignment and Assumption Agreement was executed which gave MRTC all rights and obligations to the Project agreements during the debt repayment period and establish MRTC as the Project borrowing entity.

The government on the other hand was among the entity to develop with MRTC by the BLT Agreement which governs their relationship in building the said MRT3 Project. As all the terms in those prior agreements were superseded by the provisions of the BLT Agreement.

Build-Lease-Transfer Agreement is a form of project financing, wherein a private entity receives a concession from the private or public sector to finance, design, construct, and operate a facility stated in the concession contract. This enables the project proponent to recover its investment, operating and maintenance expenses in the project.

So, this BLT Agreement is under the MRTC and DOTC to provide the riding public the total services needed to operate the train system at MRT3-EDSA. Why all of the sudden, breakdowns started to appear at all angles, wherein the DOTC or MRTC cannot give solutions to these problems?

Is it because in October 2012, the maintenance contract was awarded to PH Trams and CB&T? And, in September 2013, the contract was awarded to APT & Global Inc. by the DOTC and will expire on Sept. 5, 2014, and another bid will be held?

Maybe because the latest company that the DOTC was approved didn’t have the proper expertise to run the maintenance problems at MRT3, or, the train system’s old and needed changes?

Secretary Jun Abaya had the expertise to manage the MRT3? In addition, the MRTC had the knowledge of all the DOTC’s transactions?
More questions could be asked for these people who are managing the MRT3 in which, more and more Filipinos were affected by this roller coaster decision-making. Nevertheless, it’s the DOTC that suffered more than the MRTC, in the eyes of the public.

The Senate hearing could be the wakeup call for DOTC people to prioritize the welfare of the riding public than their revenues. It’s their duty to extend their time to study, learn, and apply the proper ways to manage the train system.

Hoping for Senator Grace Poe and other Senators to build bridges with DOTC head Jun Abaya in continuing the total services to be given to Filipinos; if the plan of the government to acquire the MRT3 management. At least, if the buyout will push through, the government will give much full attention to these problems of MRT3-EDSA.

Read More

Two Dragons Are Fighting For MRT3-EDSA? But Why And Who Is The Winner? #ExpertWriter

Two Dragons Are Fighting For MRT3-EDSA? But Why And Who Is The Winner? #ExpertWriter


As the story of the Department of Transportation and Communications (DOTC) and Metro Rail Transit Corp. (MRTC) continues, and while other problems evolved continuously, still, the train system continued its never-ending breakdowns. Even the Inspection Audit of Train experts from Hongkong had nothing to give much positive solutions from the two “Dragons” fighting each other.

How could the train operation be properly managed when DOTC and MRTC were throwing “Dragon’s Fire” with each other? The riding public, employees, media and ordinary people in the Philippines and abroad cannot fathom what’s going on behind the deal of this MRT3-EDSA Project.

“The government is looking at striking a compromise with MRTC within the third quarter to allow the government to buy back full ownership of the 17-kilometer mass transit system along EDSA. The agreement involves the buyout of MRTC’s shares in MRT3. The government will allot P55 billion to P56 billion to buy out the private owners of the Metro Rail Transit Line 3 (MRT 3),” Transportation Secretary Joseph Emilio Abaya said.

Well, of course, because of the complex story behind this project, the government wanted a buyout to elevate the train system operations and maintenance, to augment with the devastated management image through the DOTC.

Another problem the government’s facing: MRTC filed an arbitration case in Singapore against the Philippine government in January 2009 due to failure to pay equity rentals in a timely manner, while another case was filed against the government recently over the decision of the DOTC to award a P3.8 billion contract to CNR Dalian Locomotive & Rolling Stock Co. of China for the supply of 48 brand new light rail vehicles for MRT3.

The government requires the arbitration blessing from Singapore Court, and the DOTC is confident in the completion of the planned buyout as the government has enough seats in the board of MRTC. Until when, this blessing be given?

Since 2009, the DOTC-MRTC relationship was already becoming damaged and MRTC filed an arbitration suit against the Philippines in Singapore because of the delayed rental payments.

The government said it has paid MRTC P35.2 billion since 2000. Throughout that time, MRTC did not acquire new coaches or upgraded key systems of the line, like the crucial signaling and ticketing systems because, it said, the government did not pay its rent promptly.

The following year, President Aquino issued orders to expand the MRT-3 capacity by buying new coaches but the build-lease-transfer agreement gives the owners, MRTC, the right of first refusal.

The government must remember always that this MRT3 Project were agreed upon through Build-Lease-Transfer (BLT) Agreement in 1997 that didn’t allowed MRTC to do its job of choosing the M&O contractor for this EDSA rail line.

According to Wikipedia, The BLT Agreement was signed by DOTC and Metro Rail on August 8, 1997 and amended on October 16, 1997; it constitutes a restatement of similar agreements dating back to the first such contract, which was signed on November 7, 1991. That agreement was restated on April 22, 1992, and the restated agreement was supplemented on May 6, 1993, and amended on July 28, 1994 and May 1996. Another restatement was signed on October 3, 1996. All the terms in those prior agreements were superseded by the provisions of the BLT Agreement.

The BLT Agreement governs the relationship between Metro Rail and DOTC during the Project’s two major phases, construction and revenue service. During the construction phase, Metro Rail was obliged to construct the Project (Phase 1) and to complete that construction by a certain date (the “Date Certain”). The construction was to be accomplished in accordance with the specifications and drawings approved by the DOTC and the completed system capable of achieving certain capacity requirements.

Metro Rail was also obligated to provide all equipment that was to be used in the system, including the rail vehicles. The DOTC’s obligations during the construction phase included granting Metro Rail access to the Project site (including relocating squatters and other persons from the Depot area) and ensuring that certain work to be performed by the Department of Public Works and Highways (“DPWH”) was completed properly and on time. In addition, the DOTC accepted the responsibility for certain events that could delay completion of the system. Should such events occur, DOTC would be responsible for paying the costs of the event and the delay it causes, and the date by which Metro Rail is obliged to complete construction would be adjusted.

After completion, Metro Rail was obligated to lease the system to DOTC, who would operate the system, with Metro Rail providing the maintenance. DOTC was required to make payments of Rental Fees to Metro Rail, and these were broken down into several different portions. One significant part was intended to repay the loans taken out to finance the Project (“Debt Rental Fees”).

Robert John Sobrepena, was Metro Rail's Chairman and CEO, overseeing all aspects of the Project from Financing to Construction and turn over. Laurence Weldon, President and Chief Operating Officer, oversaw all aspects of construction of the Project. Mr. Weldon was previously connected as project manager of the Los Angeles “Blue Line” Rapid Transit Project before July 1995. In Manila he was supported by Carlos 'Karl' Quirino, Chief Financial Officer, Robert Ball, Vice-President of Technical Services, William Lathrop & Walter Mergelsberg of the Project Management Team and Harry Redstone and their teams for the engineering aspects of the Project.

Remember Robert John Sobrepena, the Chief Executive of Camp John Hay's private operator of CJHDevCo in Baguio, wherein the state-run Bases Conversion and Development Authority (BCDA) filed malversation charges against him?

Really, the knots between these contracts will be of the same disgusted attitude towards him. He fought the “Dragons” with all his might, but he cannot survive for long because of his captivity in a “Dragon’s Lair.” The fighting continued its negative setback for DOTC through the Aquino Administration which also damaged the MRTC image.

The Filipino people wanted a properly managed train system in MRT3-EDSA, but how, when the two Dragons were fighting each other?

Read More