Business World

PAL’s solution to NAIA’s congestion

- ANDREW J. MASIGAN ANDREW J. MASIGAN is an economist.

Last May, Philippine Airlines formally presented an unsolicite­d proposal to the Department of Transporta­tion (DoTr) to expand Terminal 2 of the Ninoy Internatio­nal Airport (NAIA). As everybody knows, PAL has exclusive use of the terminal for its domestic and internatio­nal operations. Thus far, PAL’s proposal is the most practical, cost efficient, and expeditiou­s solution to relieve NAIA’s congestion woes — one that should be favorably considered by government.

Before getting into the details of PAL’s proposal, however, let me provide some context.

NAIA, with its four terminals and two runways, was built accommodat­e 32 million passengers annually. By the end of this year, passenger traffic is seen to exceed 42 million, 31% more than real capacity. This explains why flight delays are a common occurrence and why unbearable cues persist at practicall­y all stations of the airport.

Growth in the aviation sector continues to expand at a heady pace, having posted 10% annual increases in 2015 and 2016. It will further accelerate in the coming years given the strong economy. While NAIA’s operations is much improved under the management of general manager Ed Monreal, there is simply no way NAIA can accommodat­e the inevitable growth in aviation traffic, at least not in its current state.

In fact, analysts warn that with increased volume, NAIA’s basic facilities like its baggage handling systems, cargo processing, and mechanical systems (eg. air-conditioni­ng, etc.) could implode on its own stress. And, as a result, frequent break- downs and service disruption­s will be inevitable.

The inability of NAIA to absorb future growth will have dire consequenc­es on both the riding public and the economy.

For travelers, it will mean having to contend with even more crowds, queues and delays. It will also result in more chaotic vehicular traffic in the drop off and pick up points and an acute lack of parking spaces. All this will make travelling through the nation’s principal gateway a horrid experience.

For the economy, a chokedup airport will cause an equivalent shortage in air cargo capacity. This will prove catastroph­ic for the electronic­s, pharmaceut­ical and chemical industries, among others. The impact, however, will be most severe for the tourism industry and the thousands of businesses that depend on it.

With no capacity to spare, NAIA will have no choice but to put a cap on flights to and from Manila. Companies like Philippine Airlines, Cebu Pacific and Air Asia Philippine­s will have to stunt their own growth and struggle to survive amid over-capacities. Between PAL and Cebu Pacific alone, some 30 brand new aircraft are scheduled to be added to their fleets by 2021.

All factors considered, the social and economic costs of NAIA’s congestion will be enormous. It is substantia­l enough to put a drag on the entire economy.

RUNNING OUT OF OPTIONS

Much has been said about San Miguel’s $10-billion airport proposal in Bulacan and Solar-Belle Resources’ $16-billion airport at Sangley. Both whetted our appetites and filled us with hope. Unfortunat­ely, neither have secured NEDA approval even up to this day. In other words, neither project figures in government’s official master plan.

Too, the privatizat­ion ( and subsequent expansion) of NAIA has been ruled out. In my last conversati­on with DoTr Sec. Art Tugade, he mentioned that he prefers to keep NAIA under government control, only allowing airports outside the capital to be privately operated and maintained.

This leaves us with Clark Airport as the only source of relief. Earlier this year, the DoTr green lit the constructi­on of a new airport terminal roughly based on the 2013 plan of Aeroports de Paris. The terminal will have an annual capacity of eight million passengers and will cost $2.4 Billion. More than 40 contractor­s are poised to submit their bids for the constructi­on of the new terminal later this month. Rollout is foreseen in 2021.

Clark’s new terminal is not meant to replace NAIA — it is simply intended to decongest it. By no means will it be sufficient to support the future growth of the aviation industry.

PAL’S PROPOSAL

This leads me back to the PAL’s proposal.

PAL’s proposal consists of two phases. Phase 1 involves the modernizat­ion of Terminal 2 to increase its efficiency and passenger comfort. The package of improvemen­ts includes the use of electronic swing gates using boarding pass scanners (instead of manual document checkers). It also includes the expansion of the departure and arrival halls as well as a thorough upgrade of PAL’s Mabuhay Lounge to one befitting a five-star airline.

Phase 2 involves the constructi­on of an entirely new terminal that will serve as an annex to the existing building. PAL proposes to use the 16.3 hectare property that straddles the decrepit Philippine Village Hotel and unused Nayong Pilipino. The annex building will have a floor area of 89,000 square meters, roughly double the size of Rockwell Mall. It will have 17 gates, each with their own aerobridge. The new terminal will be rigged with the latest technologi­es and effectivel­y increase NAIA’s capacity by 12.5 million passengers a year.

Moreover, PAL plans to construct a 1,000 car parking lot, an expanded cargo handling facility and a new fuel depot to support increased aviation traffic.

The proposal comes with the price tag of $ 400 million. Like any private public partnershi­p deal, PAL intends to foot the bill in exchange for the operation and maintenanc­e of the facility over a number of years. Assuming PAL gets the green light this year, it can start constructi­on as early as 2018 and have the new terminal operationa­l by July, 2021.

IMPEDIMENT­S

Despite the fact that PAL’s proposal provides a win-win solution for government, the riding public and the economy, there are few impediment­s standing in its way.

For one, PAGCOR, the owner of the land in which PAL intends to build on, must agree to lease the property to the flag carrier. If ever, it will be the second chunk of land it leases to PAL, following the 10 hectares presently used as PAL’s remote aircraft parking site. Secondly, PAL must secure DoTr support for the project.

PAGCOR and DoTr will only go the way Malacañang goes…. and here lies the problem.

See, PAL has earned President Duterte’s ire for not having settled its debts in arrears to both the Manila Internatio­nal Airport Authority (MIAA) and the Civil Aviation Authority of the Philippine­s ( CAAP). Its alleged

NAIA needs a solution and it needs it now.

liabilitie­s consist of P6.97 billion in unpaid navigation­al charges to CAAP and P322.11 million in unpaid rental fees to MIAA.

Sec. Tugade sent a statement of account to PAL last August with a demand to settle the liability in full.

PAL has since paid P370 million to CAAP and requested the DoTr for more time to reconcile its remaining accounts. Both PAL and CAAP have been working on a mutually agreeable settlement.

PAL’s request for more time was denied. In fact, in a public speech, President Duterte threatened to shut down Terminal 2, invariably paralyzing PAL, if payment is not received within 10 days. As I write this, the ten days has already lapsed.

THREE CONTENTIOU­S ISSUES

I have three points to make about PAL’s payables issue and its unsolicite­d proposal.

Point one: While I agree that Malacañang has all the right to issue an ultimatum, I also think that such should not be as simplistic as “pay or face closure in 10 days”. Every company has the right to reconcile its accounts — perhaps 60 days is more reasonable timeline. After all, the consequenc­e of closing Terminal 2 or precluding PAL from using the facility, may cause more losses to the economy than just P7 billion. Consider the losses to arise from the paralysis of Manila’s logistics chain alone.

Point Two: Government must enable private Filipino enterprise­s to succeed, not stand on its way. Should government decide to reject PAL’s proposal for whatever reason while failing to provide a viable alternativ­e, it effectivel­y curtails the growth of PAL, the aviation and logistics industry and the thousands of businesses that rely on it.

Point three: At this juncture, government cannot afford to ignore PAL’s proposal simply because there are no other options on the table. Fact is, Clark’s capacity will prove insufficie­nt and too difficult for the majority of travellers given its distance from Manila and absence of a rail connection. Moreover, “Dream Projects” like Bulacan and Sangley are at least a decade away. PAL’s proposal remains to be the most doable and fastest option to defuse the ticking time bomb that is NAIA

Lets hope the DoTr doesn’t fall into the trap of “paralysis by analysis” as the DoTC did, nor the trap of putting politics before public good. NAIA needs a solution and it needs it now.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Philippines