Fil C. Sionil Nobody wants to be in the shoes of Metropolitan Manila Development Authority (MMDA) General Manager Jojo Garcia right now. Though not mandatory, the MMDA dry run prohibiting provincial buses from using EDSA to decongest the main thoroughfare went kaput. Inconvenience experienced by commuters and private vehicle owners is an understatement, with EDSA likened to a long stretch of parking lot. The gridlock trickled down to the inner streets of the metropolis, the alternative routes to escape the chaos at EDSA. This happened despite the participation of only 24 out of 3,600 provincial buses. Indeed, Mr. Jojo is in such strenuous situation, grappling with the ire from all corners – the commuters, the bus operators – compounded by the legal entanglement opposing the ban. Though, it’s a noble undertaking to decongest EDSA, the level of effectiveness based on the outcome of the dry run was dry! It wasn’t only the passengers of provincial buses who grumbled. So did for the city slickers, who endured long hours to reach their homes. During the first quarter of the year, MMDA had already disclosed the plan to exclude provincial buses from entering EDSA, instead using Valenzuela and Sta. Rosa as terminal hubs for the north and the south, respectively. Buses would unload in Valenzuela and Sta. Rosa as interim common terminals The Land Transportation Franchising Regulatory Board (LTFRB) issued Memorandum Circular 037 signed by Chairman Martin Delgra III on August 1, six days before the dry run, opening applications for the issuance of new certificate of public convenience to operate point-to-point (P2P) bus routes to serve passengers from Sta. Rosa and Valenzuela to Metro Manila. Complete with a fare matrix, seven new routes were opened for 30 P2P units plying each route. The memo, which LTFRB described as “in support to the program of MMDA,” aimed “to provide effective interconnection between different transport modes and services, and in order to augment the demand of Public Utility Vehicles that will ferry the passengers from one terminal to another.” All told, that’s 270 new P2P franchises. That means an additional number of vehicles allowed to traverse EDSA. Passengers, on the other hand, have to shell out incremental cost, ranging from a low of P33 to as high as P126, depending on the distance. All the bus operators received the LTFRB memo on the day it was signed. It was a Thursday. Unknown to many, the bus firms wanting to operate P2P were required to submit bid documents Monday, August 5, and no later than 3:00 p.m. The list of the documentary requirements to bid for these franchises was quite long, including the list of buses – make, model, chassis number, engine number; five-year financial projection and viability; drawings of the bus interior coming from manufacturer; opening of a new bank account and deposit to show the company can fully fund the operations of this new service; proof showing the bus unit has GPS, Wifi, CCTV and dash cams; and copies of garage/terminal for the P2P buses, the TCT, lot plan, and vicinity map. If the bus operator missed the deadline and/or failed to submit even one just document required, the firm was disqualified. One of the conditionalities of award was for a company/entity to have these bus units ready already. Who could bid on Thursday and produce the units on a Monday? Based on prevailing market price, a bus unit cost between P8 million and P10 million. No bus manufacturer can supply 30 units that fast. It takes three months, on the average, to order and deliver a unit. LTRFB, at the Senate committee on public services hearing chaired by Sen. Grace Poe held Tuesday admitted there were no P2P bidders. Seriously, it is administratively impossible to secure all necessary documents on just a day’s notice. Where do we go from here? Let’s watch how the wheels turn. Talk back to me at [email protected]