EPS and Serbian Advance party in discussion over state owned energy company business operation and management

, News Serbia Energy


Electric Power of Serbia (EPS) directors board and Serbian Advance Party ( SNS) clashed recently in Serbian medias over EPS management and business policy in past years. EPS is confused on SNS media conference on bad business, corruption and mismanagement of the company assets. Investments, overhaul and modernization, as well as the electricity trade as one of the hot topics and accusations against the EPS management.

According to the EPS press statement, SNS media conference and its statements are full of assumptions and accusations which are not true.

On procurement accusations EPS replied that EPS energy system with all its companies on annual base realized around 10.000 public procurements. All contracts are available for public investigation and insights, and only 2% of public procurement are cancelled on annual basis.

EPS confirms that they signed several Memos and Protocols of cooperation with foreign companies and countries with aim to attract new investors in Serbian energy sector. These are not obligatory contracts and does have financial obligations.

The claim that EPS is asking for 80% price increase for electricity is already explained and denied in official statements.. Few months ago World bank report indicated that electricity price should increase for 40-80% and these are the basis for media interest.

EPS is denying firmly the accusations on SNS that some Serbian tycoon companies Rudnap Group and EFT are getting commission from electricity and financial transaction in energy trading. All electricity trading is undergoing thru the official public procurement procedure and law regulation and with best price as criteria. No complaints or remarks are recorded in this area.

EPS is preparing its annual plans in line with middle term plans. Also the programs of many political parties in Serbia are based exactly in this EPS long term and middle term plans.

The accusation and claims that investment funds allocated to modernization of the power gen facilities are miss-managed are not true as well as the claim that this 2 BNEUR invested in this modernization would generate added value and electricity for export if invested in new facilities. If EPS did not invested in facilities overhauls and modernization the supply of electricity would be endangered as most of the power plants units and power gen facilities are older than 39 years.

There with such an approach EPS secured the supply of electricity to all its consumers, both households and industry.

As an example EPS explains that only TENT B3 and Radljevo coal mine project, new power gen facility project will require 3,5 BNEUR.

Source: EPS