METHANE RECOVERY FROM WASTE MANAGEMENT PROJECT …€¦ · Important parts of this document have...

12/18/2009 of 181

METHANE RECOVERY FROM WASTE MANAGEMENT PROJECT

SAFEGUARDS FRAMEWORK AND ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLANS FOR FIRST YEARS INVESTMENTS

LAND BANK OF THE PHILIPPINES FINAL DRAFT

DECEMBER 18, 2009

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

wb20439

Typewritten Text

E2285 v2

12/18/2009 of 181

CARBON FINANCE SUPPORT FACILITY SAFEGUARDS FRAMEWORK MANUAL December 14, 2009 FOREWORD This Safeguards Framework Manual of the Carbon Finance Support Facility (CFSF) was developed to serve as LANDBANK‘s guidebook in the developing and implementing of Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) projects under the CFSF. Developed during the preparation of the pilot projects under the CFSF through the assistance of the World Bank, specifically, the methane recovery from the livestock wastewater treatment and municipal solid waste management projects, the applicability, sufficiency, appropriateness and/or clarity of the requirements and processes that are presented and described herein will be tried out during the actual implementation of the projects. This Manual will, therefore, be subjected to further refinement / improvement as lessons are learned and experiences are drawn during the actual CDM project implementation. TABLE OF CONTENTS Integrated Environmental and Social Safeguards Framework

1. Environmental Safeguards Framework 2. Resettlement and Compensation Framework 3. Rules on Land Use Conversion

EMPs (for first year‘s projects)

12/18/2009 of 181

INTEGRATED ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL SAFEGUARDS FRAMEWORK (IESSF) Figure IESSF-1 illustrates the Integrated Environmental and Social Safeguards Framework (IESSF) for the CFSF. This Annex has 4 sub-annexes:

Sub-Annex 1, Environmental Safeguards Framework (ESF) Sub-Annex 2, Resettlement and Compensation Framework (RCF), covering

involuntary resettlement and indigenous peoples Sub-Annex 3, Rules on Land Use Conversion

12/18/2009 of 181

Sub-Annex 1 ENVIRONMENTAL SAFEGUARDS FRAMEWORK (ESF) Contents Acronyms

1. PURPOSE OF THE FRAMEWORK 2. CLEAN DEVELOPMENT MECHANISM (CDM) PROJECT PREPARATION

2.1 Timing of Environmental Impact Assessment in CDM Project Preparation 2.2 Environmental Safeguards Procedures for CDM Project Preparation

2.2.1 Overview of Project Categories Requiring Environmental Clearance 2.2.2 Technical Procedures for Environmental Categorization and EA

Report Preparation 2.2.3 Levels of Project Review

2.3 Delineation of Roles and Responsibilities 2.4 Public Disclosure

3. MONITORING AND FOLLOW-UP 3.1 Overview of Monitoring 3.2 LBP PMO Document Monitoring 3.3 DENR procedures 3.4 Internal implementation and monitoring of the EMP

ATTACHMENTS ESF-1 LBP Credit Policy Issuance No. 2009-002 ESF-2 Environmental Category and Initial Documentary Requirements of

Projects / Main Facilities Commonly Implemented with CDM ESF-3 Recommended Format for Project Description ESF-4 Recommended Format for an IEE Report ESF-5 Recommended Format for an EIS ESF-6 Sample Environmental Management Plan for a Methane Recovery CDM

Project FIGURES Figure ESF-1 Schematic Presentation of EA Preparation for Major Projects

12/18/2009 of 181

Acronyms BP Bank Policy CDM Clean Development Mechanism CFSF Carbon Finance Support Facility CNC Certificate of Non-coverage CPI Credit Policy Issuance DAO DENR Administrative Order DENR Department of Environment & Natural Resources DOH Department of Health DPD Detailed Project Description EA Environmental Assessment ECA Environmentally Critical Areas ECC Environmental Compliance Certificate ECP Environmentally Critical Projects EHIA Environmental Health Impact Assessment EIA Environmental Impact Assessment EIS Environmental Impact Statement EIARC Environmental Impact Assessment Review Committee EMB Environmental Management Bureau EMP Environmental Management Plan EMR Environmental Monitoring Report EPMD LBP - Environmental Program and Management Department ESF Environmental Safeguards Framework FI Financial Intermediary FS Feasibility Study IEE Initial Environmental Examination ISO International Standards Organization LBP Land Bank of the Philippines LC Lending Centers LGUs Local Government Units NCP Non-Covered Projects NOL No Objection Letter OP Operational Policy PD Project Description PENRO Provincial Environment & Natural Resource Office PIU Project Implementation Unit PoA Program of Activity PMO Project Management Office WB World Bank MOA Memorandum of Agreement

12/18/2009 of 181

PURPOSE OF THE FRAMEWORK This Environmental Safeguards Framework (ESF) provides specific instructions and methodologies for use by the Project Implementation Units (PIUs) of Project Owners and the implementing agencies of the Carbon Finance Support Facility (CFSF). The provisions of this framework are consistent with the Corporate Environmental Policy of the Land Bank of the Philippines (LBP) and the WB‘s environmental directives to support environmental protection and promote sustainable development, while mitigating carbon credit risks, e.g., under-delivery of carbon credits, and other risks arising from different types of operational non-compliance. The framework is composed of discussion on the overall procedures and arrangements; and sample documents and technical guidelines on the preparation of the environmental safeguard reports. Important parts of this document have been extracted from the DENR DAO 2003-30 Revised Procedural Manual. In the case that any discrepancies would exist with the current DENR regulations, the latter will prevail. The ESF proposed methodology is mainly based on, and combines, the following guidelines and documents:

LBP‘s Environmental Policy Relative to Credit Delivery (CPI 2009-002) Attachment

ESF-1

Presidential Decree No. 1586, establishing the Philippine Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) System, 1978)

Presidential Proclamation No. 2146 (Critical Projects / Areas) Administrative Order No. 42 by the Office of the President, describing categories

of projects and areas subject to the EIS system; DENR Administrative order No. 2003-30: Implementing Rules and Regulations

(IRR) for the Philippines EIS System (2003); and its August 2007 Revised Procedural Manual for DAO 2003-30, as prepared by DENR;

World Bank environmental safeguard guidelines, in particular on Environmental Assessment (Operational Directive 4.01), Indigenous People (Operational Directive 4.10) and Involuntary Resettlement (Operational Directive 4.12);

2. CLEAN DEVELOPMENT MECHANISM (CDM) PROJECT PREPARATION 2.1 Timing of Environmental Impact Assessment in CDM Project Preparation The basic approach in the preparation of environmental assessment report is to have it simultaneous, closely coordinated, and integrated with the preparation of the main project environmental assessment report and CDM project feasibility study. In doing this, all environmental aspects and impacts will be included right from the beginning to facilitate the proper selection of project alternatives that will bear the minimal amount of environmental risk or negative environmental impact. Projects, i.e., either the main project or the CDM project, covered by the Philippine EIS System shall prepare an environmental assessment (EA) report. The type of the EA report may vary from PD, IEE, IEE checklist, or EIS, depending on the project‘s environmental category. Nevertheless, projects under the Methane Recovery from Waste Management Project will require the preparation of an Environmental

12/18/2009 of 181

Management Plan (EMP) regardless of coverage under the Philippine EIS System tp satisfy the World Bank OP 4.01 safeguards requirements. Attachment ESF-2.

Project Description (PD); Attachment ESF-3

Initial Environmental Examination (IEE) Checklist; IEE Report; Attachment ESF-4

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). Attachment ESF-5 Environmental Management Plan (EMP). Attachment ESF-6

If the proposed CDM project involves procurement of equipment intended for environmental infrastructure, an Environmental Management Plan (EMP) for the operations phase shall be prepared ahead of the scheduled delivery to inform the procuring entity of the mitigating measures of potential negative environmental impacts. Should the main project has long been existent before the CDM project is proposed and it is covered by the Philippine EIS System, the main project‘s ECC has to be provided to LBP to form part of the CDM documentation. On the other hand, a number of CDM projects have already been constructed before they are enlisted under the CFSF. If the project‘s EA Report and EMP were previously prepared, all available related environmental assessment on the project previously conducted prior to construction will be provided by the Project Owner for review and the inadequacies are to be supplied as necessitated, e.g., an Environmental Management Plan (EMP), which will be used solely for the CDM project preparation. Attachment ESF-6. The timing of environmental assessment preparation may not only cover projects, which have to prepare Feasibility Study (FS). In the event a project prepares a Detailed Project Description (DPD), a separate, appropriate environmental assessment shall be conducted prior to engineering design. The assessment of predicted environmental impacts shall be the basis for the Project Owner and the design consultants in the selection of appropriate project alternatives. The procedure, indicating the scheduling and coordination of the EA activities for major / complex infrastructure projects, is schematically presented below. Figure ESF-1

12/18/2009 of 181

Figure ESF-1 Schematic Presentation of EA Preparation for Major Projects

2.2 Environmental Safeguards Procedures for CDM Project Preparation 2.2.1 Overview of Project Categories Requiring Environmental Clearance DENR Administrative Order No. 30 series of 2003, the implementing rules and regulations of the Philippine EIS System or Presidential Decree No. 1586, provides guidelines on environmental compliance for various types of undertakings. The EIS law also gives emphasis on the need to secure an Environmental Compliance Certificate (ECC) prior to project construction. The two major classifications of project or undertaking identified by Presidential Proclamation No. 2146 that the DENR requires an ECC from are:

Environmental Critical Projects (ECPs); and Projects located in Environmental Critical Areas (ECA).

MOA with the Project Owner

Specifying the need for the issuance of

ECC prior to project physical

implementation

Feasibility Study Phase Environmental Assessment Phase

Hiring of consultants

Inventory and evaluation of the proposed

project and existing infrastructures

Scoping and Assessment of Environmental

and Social Baseline conditions

Pre-feasibility Study Analysis of Environmental Impacts and

drafting of EMP

Public Consultations and participatory

selection of Alternatives

Financial Analysis and Detailed

Engineering Design

EIS/IEE finalization and processing of

ECC/CNC and WB EA clearance if

applicable

Project Implementation (Construction and

Operation)

Compliance Monitoring of ECC and EMP

12/18/2009 of 181

Projects that are within these two major classifications shall prepare EA reports / safeguards document (PD, IEE Checklist, IEE, or EIS) based on the DENR operational criteria and procedures. The type of EA report can be determined and shall be based on four (4) environmental categories prescribed by the Philippine EIS system:

Group I Environmentally Critical Projects (ECPs) with significant potential to cause negative environment impacts;

Group II Projects that are not environmentally critical in nature, but which may cause negative environmental impacts because they are located in Environmentally Critical Areas (ECAs);

Group III Non-environmentally critical project in non-environmentally critical area;

Group IV Co-located project under one or more proponents/locators which are located in a contiguous area. The co-located project may be an economic zone or industrial park, or mix of projects within a catchment, or any geographical, political or economic unit of area; and

Group V Unclassified projects or projects not listed in any of the groups. This is an interim category wherein the projects under it will eventually be classified into their appropriate groups after DENR evaluation.

As stated under DAO 2003-30, all projects located in ECA are classified as Group II and exhibit at least one of the following qualification criteria.

Areas declared by law as national parks, watershed reserves, wildlife preserves, and sanctuaries

Areas set aside as aesthetic, potential tourist spots Areas which constitute the habitat for any endangered or threatened species of ;

indigenous Philippine wildlife (flora and fauna) Areas of unique historic, archeological, geological, or scientific interest. Areas

which are traditionally occupied by cultural communities or tribes Areas frequently visited and or hard-hit by natural calamities (geologic hazards,

floods, typhoons, volcanic activity, etc.) Areas with critical slope Areas classified as prime agricultural lands Recharged areas of aquifers Water bodies Mangrove Areas Coral Reefs

Further, the Environmental Enhancement and Environmental Mitigation projects, such as pollution control devices or facilities required under the ECC conditions of the main project covered under Groups I and II, are also classified under Group II. The recommended EA Report is the PD should the Project Owner wants to secure a Certificate of Non-Coverage (CNC), though it is not required under the CFSF. 2.2.2 Technical Procedures for Environmental Categorization and EA Report Preparation Attachment ESF-2 of the Framework shows the DENR thresholds, the corresponding environmental category, and the EA documentary requirements for types of projects commonly implemented with CDM. The projects listed in Attachment ESF-2 are lifted

12/18/2009 of 181

from Annex 2-1b of DAO 2003-30 and from Annex D of LBP CPI 2009-002, taking into consideration other types of projects not listed in DAO 2003-30 but is part of the earlier version of the EIS procedural manual, DAO 96-37. For projects not included in Attachment ESF-2, determination of coverage by the Philippine EIS System shall be based on the following criteria: a. Location. The activity must conform to existing and duly approved

land use plan of the area. b. Technology / Process The activity must employ the use of appropriate technology

that will not require the use of toxic and hazardous materials; will not produce or require the disposal of waste materials that can poise serious health hazards; or; will not generate significant amount of organic or solid wastes.

c. Size The activity / structure must not occupy a floor area of

more than 1,000 m2 in an urban area or 1.0 hectare in a rural area.

d. Emission and effluent. The effluents or discharges of the activity must conform to

emission and effluent standards established by the DENR e.g. RA 8749 or DAO 00-81; DAO 34 & 35 series of 1990, regardless of quantity, volume or amount.

e. Environment-related hazards and risk of accidents f. The nature of the activity shall not pose significant (cumulative) environmental impact as determined by the EMB or DENR regional offices. An activity that passes ALL criteria shall be considered as outside the purview of the Philippine EIS System. All projects to be funded under the Methane Recovery from Waste Management Project will require an EMP at a minimum, unless a full EA is required per Table ESF-1, in order to comply with the World Bank OP 4.01. 2.2.3 Levels of Project Review 2.2.3.1 DENR Review The DENR Review will only apply if the proposed CDM project requires an ECC, which is still to be secured from DENR, in order to be implemented. Otherwise, if the ECC has already been issued to the project, this level of review will be bypassed and the CDM project‘s EMP will be provided for the conduct of WB and LBP reviews. In case an ECC is required, the project must undergo project level and agency review to ensure that the necessary environmental safeguards are considered. As a basic requirement for ECC, projects have to successfully pass the DENR screening system. Screening of projects is typically performed at the regional offices of DENR-EMB for Group II projects and at the EMB central office for Group I projects. The regional offices may also review EIS for certain types of projects where there exist

12/18/2009 of 181

qualified professionals to constitute an Environmental Impact Assessment Review Committee (EIARC). 2.2.3.2 WB Review The WB will also conduct an appraisal review on safeguard documents of the projects, such as the EMP and other EA documents as may deemed necessary. Moreover, the WB will also conduct a subproject appraisal review on safeguards documents and provide clearance of these documents. 2.2.3.3 LBP Review LBP, being an ISO 14001 certified institution, will establish a Project Management Office (PMO) under the LBP‘s Environmental Program and Management Department (EPMD) to primarily implement the safeguards activities. Part of this activities will be to exercise environmental due diligence by keeping records of project EA reports, feedbacks / technical information (which may include but not limited to environmental performance history, issuance of related environmental permits and rights, notice of violations, dumpsite closure plan, authority to close, etc.), and ECCs / CNCs. Environmental safeguards documents may undergo substantive review by the PMO environmental engineer or the LBP-EPMD, particularly if pressing environmentally critical issues exist. The conduct of review by PMO / LBP-EPMD is part of its oversight function and task enumerated in the LBP CPI 2009-002 to verify that projects are in compliance to environmental standards and regulations. As the LBP CPI 2009-002 primarily requires environmental assessment of the projects covered by the Philippine EIS system and collaterals which are part of the project or used as project site only, the environmental assessment will be extended and conducted to CDM projects (which are usually not covered by the Philippine EIS system) for this purpose. This type of review performed by either the PMO or WB is entirely independent and does not conflict with the nature of evaluation the DENR performs. 2.3 Delineation of Roles and Responsibilities 2.3.1 General Overview It is the responsibility of the Project Owner to carry out the necessary EA required by the ESF, and to obtain the necessary environmental clearances for each project before starting with the construction. Environmental sound practices have to be incorporated into the project design and implementation, and potential negative impacts will have to be mitigated to acceptable levels / standards. In case the project has already been constructed before the Project Owner expressed their interest to enlist under the CFSF, the Project Owner should present their ECC, EA document (if still available) and EMP to check if environmental impacts related to CDM project implementation are addressed. In the event that some impacts have not been considered in the original EA, the EMP will be revised to reflect the mitigation measures to be added. Screening of social safeguards should be integrated into the process of the EA. Refer to the Resettlement and Compensation Framework (RCF). Sub-Annex 2 of the Integrated

Environmental and Social Safeguards Framework

12/18/2009 of 181

The success of an environmental safeguards screening is dependent on adequate baseline environmental data, technical expertise, good planning, management support, and coordination with key players and decision makers. The Project Owner, with the assistance from the LBP-PMO, must provide the safeguards team with:

a clear and concise statement of work including the expected technical and procedural standards to be met;

available background information; EA documents standards; indicative schedule of project construction and implementation; budgetary allocations (i.e., cost estimates); and, procedures for post-review and comment, to include consolidation and

clarification of comments by the Project Owner before delivery to the EA team. The Project Owner is responsible for the quality and accuracy of the information in the EA document, as well as the transmission of the EA process i.e. interagency coordination, scoping, public hearings, document review at their level, and general oversight. LBP shall require projects to comply with existing environmental laws. Therefore, a PMO is established within the LBP, which will include the environmental expertise to guide and provide Project Owners‘ PIUs and their consultants with the necessary assistance in carrying out the EA and attaining environmental compliance to the conditions and statement of the ECC/EMP. WB staff will advise and support the PMO in carrying out its responsibilities. Within the WB, operational staff will provide information to the PMO and ascertain whether policy requirements have been met. 2.3.2 Reviewing Process The roles and responsibilities of the Project Owner, LBP and WB are determined to define the extent of task each institution must do so that the progress of a project is kept in the right track. Table ESF-2 Copies of EA report must be prepared in draft form for presentation and comment by the Sangguniang Bayan / Panlungsod / Panlalawigan of LGUs or by the Board of the private owned project. Any amendment or additional information on the draft EA report, as agreed during the presentation, should be included in the final EA report and must be submitted to the DENR and PMO for review. The extent of review performed by PMO/LBP-EPMD is substantive in nature to ensure that appropriate mitigating measures and institutional responsibilities are not left out in the report. It is also imperative for the LBP to perform such review so that credit risks as a result of non-compliance to environmental regulatory requirements are addressed by the Project Owner. The Project Owner is responsible for the quality and accuracy of the information in the EA document, as well as the transmission of the EA process (i.e., interagency coordination, scoping, public hearings, document review at the level of the LGU Sanggunian or Board of private owned project), and general oversight. Any costs

12/18/2009 of 181

associated with the government EA process, i.e., filing and processing fee of EA report, cost of review, and cost of environmental monitoring shall be shouldered by the Project Owner. 2.4 Public Disclosure 2.4.1 Conduct of Public Consultation The process of EA sometimes requires the Project Owner to conduct a public consultation at their own expense. On the other hand, registration of a proposed CDM project always requires the conduct of CDM stakeholder consultation to address the concerns of the public affected by the project. For a start-up project, i.e., both the main and proposed CDM projects are yet to be constructed and both requires consultation, a public consultation for EA and CDM can be conducted simultaneously, with thorough consideration on the following:

As much as possible, all possible entities that may be affected with the implementation of the project, e.g., receptors / local stakeholders, indigenous people, should be invited;

The manner at which the consultation is conducted. It should be open, transparent, and easily understood by the local stakeholders. In most cases, the local dialect is used as the medium of communication; and,

Information materials related to the proposed project are recommended to be provided to the stakeholders before the consultation proper, enough to give them time to understand the nature of the proposed project. These could also be written in a dialect that is understood by many.

Particular attention should be given to the concerns of women and indigenous people if they are present in the area.

In case only the proposed CDM project is yet to be constructed or has already been constructed prior to the CDM registration, a CDM stakeholder consultation should be conducted. During the CDM stakeholder consultation, the following should be compiled to form part of the Project Design Document:

Contact Information of the stakeholders who attended the consultation proper Minutes of the Consultation Summary of issues, concerns and Project Owner‘s responses transpired during

the consultation 2.4.2 WB Policy on Disclosure of the ESF and EA Reports For financial intermediary (FI) operations or sector investment operations that are expected to have projects which, for environmental screening purposes, are classified as Category A or B under OP/BP 4.01, Environmental Assessment, each identified participating FI or the responsible project entity provides the WB, before the beginning of formal project appraisal, with an assessment of the institutional mechanisms or framework in place for conducting the EAs and/or preparing the EMPs for such Category A or B projects. The framework will be publicly disclosed and available through the WB InfoShop, Knowledge for Development Centers (KDCs) and LBP.

12/18/2009 of 181

After these assessments have been officially received by the WB, and before the WB begins formal project appraisal, the assessments are publicly available at the concerned LBP Lending Center. EA reports for such Category A or B projects are publicly available after they have been officially received by the WB‘s Bank Disclosure of Social Safeguards Reports. 3. MONITORING AND FOLLOW-UP 3.1 Overview of Monitoring To ensure the sustainability of the project, the long-term and accountable implementation of the safeguards will be one of the obligations under the Emission Reduction Purchase Agreement (ERPA), and hence, will be monitored by LBP and will form part of the annual Emission Reduction (ER) monitoring report. For guidance, WB will supervise the safeguards implementation. On top of the monitoring of CDM parameters (as discussed in the CDM Operations Plan), projects that are covered by the Philippine EIS System are required by DAO 2003-30 to conduct regular self-monitoring of parameters indicated in the project‘s EMP. The Project Owner must satisfy this requirement by submitting an Environmental Monitoring Report (EMR) on a semi-annual frequency, i.e., within January and July of each year, to the concerned DENR-EMB regional office. A copy of the submitted EMR must be provided to the PMO for reference and review purposes. If a separate EMP was prepared to address the potential impacts of the proposed CDM project, a separate EMR must be prepared and submitted solely to the PMO on a semi-annual basis. The primary purpose of compliance monitoring is to ensure the implementation of sound and standard environmental procedures as defined during the project preparation. Specifically, it aims to:

Monitor project compliance with the conditions set in the ECC; Monitor compliance with the EMP(s) and applicable laws, rules and regulations;

and Provide a basis for timely decision-making and effective planning and

management of environmental measures through the monitoring of actual project impacts vis-à-vis the predicted impacts in the EIS / IEE.

There are also instances (critical environmental aspects) that the ECC sets the conditions for the activities to be monitored and the monitoring schedule. 3.2 LBP PMO Document Monitoring When such need arises, the submission of EA document shall be monitored to keep track of the pace of processing the ECC so that project physical implementation is not prolonged. This activity shall serve as a barometer that will push the agency responsible to work on the needed deliverables.

3.3 DENR Procedures All projects covered by the Philippine EIS System which have been issued an ECC shall be subjected to periodic monitoring by the DENR, i.e., compliance and impact monitoring in accordance with established procedures and protocols. Within the framework of the Philippine EIS System, the responsibilities of monitoring projects are lodged with the

12/18/2009 of 181

EMB regional offices to which the latter can request for the assistance of the Provincial Environment & Natural Resource Office (PENRO). As a minimum requirement in compliance monitoring, DENR-EMB shall focus on the following:

Status of proponent's delivery of commitment made in its EMP (or, in the case of lEE Report, the Summary Matrix of Impacts.);

Effectiveness of the committed EMP in mitigating project's environmental impacts; and,

Meeting the terms and conditions of the ECC. 3.4 Internal Implementation and Monitoring of the EMP The PIU of the Project Owner shall monitor compliance with the conditions of the ECC and its delivery of commitments made in its EMP, and carry out the requisite data collection during construction and operational phases. Semi-annual EMR shall be submitted to DENR/EMB and the PMO, including:

Presentation of the collected data; Discussion on the compliance or non-compliance to the EMP and ECC; Conclusions and recommendations; and Photos of environmental monitoring and adherence to mitigating measures.

If any irregularities are observed, the PMO will report its findings to the PIU and discuss the measures to be taken.

12/18/2009 of 181

Attachment ESF-1 LBP Credit Policy Issuance No. 2009-002 CREDIT POLICY ISSUANCE (CPI)

CPI No. : 2009-002

Subject : REVISED ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY RELATIVE TO CREDIT DELIVERY

Remarks : Amendment of CPI No. 2004-002 entitled ―Environmental Policy Relative to Credit Delivery‖

A. RATIONALE

Credit Policy Issuance (CPI) No. 2004-002 entitled ―Environmental Policy Relative to Credit Delivery‖ is hereby revised to enhance its effectiveness and ensure the achievement of the Bank‘s corporate environmental policy. Hence, identification, monitoring and mitigation of credit risks arising from the adverse impact on the environment of projects financed by the Bank as well as the identification of the environmental benefits of said projects shall be conducted. B. SCOPE AND COVERAGE All projects financed by the Bank and the collaterals being offered as security shall be covered by this issuance. However, only projects covered by the Philippine Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) System and only collaterals which are part of the project or used as project site shall require an environmental assessment. C. DEFINITION OF TERMS (See Annex A) D. ACRONYMS (See Annex B) E. STATEMENT OF POLICY

1. The Lending Units (LUs) shall ensure that all projects of loan clients or

borrowers shall conform to environmental protection regulations and requirements. Non-compliance with applicable environmental laws and regulations shall be considered a condition of default. (See Annex C)

2. To determine the accounts/projects needing environmental assessment, these shall be classified per the Revised DENR Administrative Order No. 2003-30 as updated by DENR Memo Circular 2007-002, as follows:

a) GROUP I – Environmentally Critical Projects (ECPs) with significant potential

to cause negative environment impacts; b) GROUP II – Projects that are not environmentally critical in nature, but which

may cause negative environmental impacts because they are located in Environmentally Critical Areas (ECAs);

c) GROUP III – non-environmentally critical project in non-environmentally

critical area;

12/18/2009 of 181

d) Group IV – Co-located project under one or more proponents/locators which

are located in a contiguous area. The co-located project may be an economic zone or industrial park, or mix of projects within a catchment, or any geographical, political or economic unit of area; and

e) Group V – Unclassified projects or projects not listed in any of the groups.

This is an interim category wherein the projects under it will eventually be classified into their appropriate groups after DENR evaluation.

Per DAO 2003-30, projects that were operational or implemented prior to 1982

are not covered by the Philippine EIS System unless it is modified or expanded after 1982 and met the threshold of Group I or II.

Annex D provides the matrix of projects with the corresponding group based

on the Philippine EIS System.

3. For new account/project, an initial environmental assessment (IEA) to identify its potential aspects/impacts to the environment as well as its benefits shall be conducted. The environmental assessment shall not be limited to the object of financing but shall include the entire facility or business operation within the same or contiguous area. This shall be conducted as follows:

a) For Field Unit / Lending Center (LC) Accounts/Projects, the LC shall

designate an Environmental Assessor from the Loan Administration Unit (LAU). The Environmental Assessor shall prepare and submit a copy of the IEA Checklist/Report to the Environmental Program & Management Department (EPMD) for further review/validation/reference. The IEA Checklist may also serve as reference of the AO in preparing the Credit Facilities Proposal (CFP). (See Annex E)

b) For Head Office Accounts, an IEA Checklist and/or Environmental

Compliance Report (ECR) shall be prepared by the EPMD in accordance with the schedule stipulated in item E.6.

4. The AO shall indicate in the Environmental Impact Section of the CFP the

following: a) Project Group/Category based on the Philippine EIS System; b) The Environmental Due Diligence conducted by the Project, which shall

emphasize the proponent‘s effort to mitigate potential and significant environmental impacts of the project; and

c) The Environmental Benefits resulting from the project and its environmental initiatives. (See Annex F)

5. The Environmental Compliance Certificate (ECC) shall be a pre-release

requirement for all covered projects. In lieu of the ECC, a proof of filing of application with the DENR and other authorized agencies of the government may be allowed, subject to the approval of next higher loan approving group, with the Investment and Loan Executive Committee (ILEC) as the highest approving authority. Provided further that: the project is not under Group I (ECP), it is not within a protected / contested area, and the proponent commits

12/18/2009 of 181

to provide resources through a Deed of Undertaking should the approved ECC require additional mitigating measures as part of its conditionalities.

For projects classified as Group III, a Certificate of Non-Coverage (CNC) from the DENR-EMB and an ECR from the EPMD shall not be required for the approval of the loan.

6. For new accounts, the EPMD shall conduct an environmental assessment and

shall prepare/issue an Environmental Compliance Report (ECR) based on the following conditions/schedule:

a) For projects under Group I, ECR shall be a pre-release requirement; b) For new projects under Groups II & IV, ECR shall be required one (1) year

after the initial release of loan; c) For existing projects under Groups II & IV, ECR shall be required within six

(6) months from the date of initial loan release; d) For projects operational prior to 1982 which have significant impact to the

environment and / or have had expansion / modification after 1982, ECR shall be required within six (6) months from the date of initial loan release.

To facilitate the issuance of the ECR, the concerned LU will request EPMD for the conduct of environmental assessment at least 2 months before the due date. Timeframe for ECR preparation shall be as follows: maximum of five (5) working days for desk assessment, and ten (10) working days for site assessment. (See Annexes G & H)

7. Compliance with the submission of the pre-release documentary requirements specified in Items E.5 & E.6 as well as with the applicable environmental laws & regulations required during the operation of the project shall be incorporated in the Loan or Credit Line Agreement.

8. To determine the degree of assessment and prioritize monitoring of

accounts/projects, the EPMD shall devise an environmental risk rating tool to classify accounts/projects according to their significance and potential to adversely affect the environment. (See Annexes I & J)

9. The AO shall monitor compliance of the account/project with applicable

environmental laws and regulations until such time that it is fully paid. To guide the AO and facilitate monitoring of compliance, the EPMD shall conduct annual Environmental Performance Monitoring & Audit for projects/accounts earlier issued with ECR. EPMD shall also issue reminder/list of projects with pending environmental requirements to concerned LU. (See Annexes K & L)

10. The EPMD shall conduct roadshows/trainings for LU personnel to effectively

implement this environmental policy, in coordination with the Credit Policy and Risk Management Department and Organizational Development Department.

F. LIST OF ANNEXES

A - Definition of Terms B - Acronyms

12/18/2009 of 181

C - Environmental Permitting Requirements D - Project Groups and Required Environmental Documents Based on the

Philippine EIS System E - IEA Checklist / Report F - Matrix of Environmental Impact, Mitigating Measures and Benefits per

Activity/Type Industry G - G.a Flowchart on Environmental Assessment of New LBP Field Unit

Accounts G.b Flowchart on Environmental Assessment of New LBP Head Office Accounts

H - ECR template I - I.a Initial Environmental Risk Rating Score Sheet

I.b Latest Environmental Risk Rating Score Sheet J - Environmental Due Diligence System (Summary of Procedure based on

Risk Rating) K - Flowchart on Environmental Performance Monitoring & Audit of Existing Term

Loans L - EPMAR template

G. EFFECTIVITY All issuances/orders that are inconsistent herewith are deemed superseded or amended accordingly. These guidelines shall take effect immediately.

(Sgd.) GILDA E. PICO President and CEO

12/18/2009 of 181

ATTACHMENT ESF-2: Environmental Category and Initial Documentary Requirements of Projects / Main Facilities Commonly Implemented with CDM

Project Category

Group I (Environmentally Critical Projects (ECPs) with significant

potential to cause negative environmental impacts in both

ECAs and Non-ECAs

Group II (Projects that are not environmentally critical in nature,

but which may cause negative environmental impacts because they

are located in Environmentally Critical Areas (ECAs) / Non-ECPs in

ECAs

Group III - A1 (Projects intended to directly

enhance environmental quality or address

existing environmental problems)

Group III - A2

Projects not falling under other categories OR unlikely to cause adverse environmental effects ECP/ECA projects operational prior to 1982

Environmental Documents Required by EPMD

Environmental Compliance Certificate (ECC)


Certificate of Non-coverage (CNC) (Optional)

A. Agriculture, Fishery and Forestry

1. Agricultural Projects Livestock projects

● Piggery / Cattle / Goat Raising

EIS: equal to or greater than 5,000 heads

less than 100 heads IEE CHECKLIST: equal to or greater than 100 heads but less than 5,000

heads

● Poultry / Birds EIS: equal to or greater than 100,000

birds

less than 10,000 birds

(Note: The term poultry/birds covers all avian species regardless whether these are ostrich, quails, ducks or fighting cocks. While the term head of pigs refer to individual heads of pigs and not the sow level.)

IEE CHECKLIST: equal to or greater

than 10,000 birds but less than 100,000 birds

IEER: equal to or greater than 100 hectares but less than 1,000 hectares

2. Agricultural Services

Agricultural processing facilities (except coconut)

EIS: equal to or greater than 50,000 MT less than 5,000 MT

IEER: equal to greater than 5,000 MT

but less than 50,000 MT Rice mill IEE CHECKLIST: greater than 1 ton/hr equal to or less than 1 ton/hr

12/18/2009 of 181

Project Category



ECAs and Non-ECAs




ECAs




Group III - A2






Animal products processing EIS: equal to or greater than 10,000 Kg daily production capacity

less than 500 Kg daily production capacity

● fish/meat processing IEER: equal to or greater than 500 Kg

but less than 10,000 Kg daily production capacity

● canning ● slaughter houses ● Etc.

B. Manufacturing 1. Food and Related Industries

Sugar Mills EIS: equal to or greater than 50,000

MT annual production capacity

IEER: less than 50,000 MT annual production capacity

Fruit and vegetable processing

EIS: equal to or greater than 500 Kg daily processing capacity

(including candy, chocolate manufacturing,

etc.) IEER: less than 500 Kg daily

processing capacity

Processing of dairy products

EIS: equal to or greater than 100,000 L (liquid)

OR

equal to or greater than 100,000 Kg (solid) monthly production capacity

IEER: less than 100,000 L (liquid) OR less than 100,000 Kg (solid) monthly

production capacity

Coconut processing plants EIS: equal to or greater than 25,000 MT per month production capacity

12/18/2009 of 181

Project Category



ECAs and Non-ECAs




ECAs




Group III - A2






IEER: less than 25,000 MT per month production capacity

Other types of food processing industries to include: other food by-products, additives, beverage manufacturing (excluding beer), etc.

EIS: equal to or greater than 50,000

MT annual production capacity (finished product)

IEER: less than 50,000 MT annual production capacity (finished product)

2. Distilleries and Fermentation Industries

Distillation and Fermentation Plants EIS: equal to or greater than 50,000 MT annual production capacity

● including beer production, bioethanol production IEER: less than 50,000 MT annual

production capacity

C. Environmental Protection 1. Waste Management Projects

All types of facilities / devices intended to

prevent emissions and/or discharges beyond

allowable limit

Sanitary landfill for domestic wastes only

EIS: greater than 1,000 MT daily capacity

IEE CHECKLIST: equal to or less than

1,000 MT daily capacity

Materials Recovery Facilities IEE CHECKLIST: with composting facilities (see category of composting) Material segregation only

12/18/2009 of 181

Project Category



ECAs and Non-ECAs




ECAs




Group III - A2






Domestic wastewater treatment facility EIS: equal to or greater than 5,000

cubic meters daily capacity less than 30 cubic meters daily

capacity IEER: less than 5,000 cubic meters daily capacity

Compost/fertilizer making IEE CHECKLIST: equal to or greater than 15 MT daily capacity less than 15 MT daily capacity

D. Power Plants and Power Facilities

Geothermal facilities equal to or greater than 50 MW generating capacity

equal to or greater than 1 MW but less than 50 MW generating capacity

less than 1 MW generating capacity

Hydropower facilities equal to or greater than 30 MW rated capacity

equal to or greater than 5 MW but less than 30 MW rated capacity less than 5 MW, Run-of-river

system

Renewable energy projects such as ocean, solar, wind, tidal power except waste-to-energy and biogas projects

EIS: equal to or greater than 100 MW

rated capacity

less than 5 MW rated capacity IEER: equal to or greater than 5 MW but less than 100 MW rated capacity

Power Barge IEE CHECKLIST: greater than 1 MW but less than 10 MW

equal to or less than 1 MW

Waste-to-energy projects including biogas projects

EIS: equal to or greater than 50 MW equal to or less than 1 MW

IEER: less than 50 MW but greater than 1 MW

Wind farms / Wind projects IEE CHECKLIST: equal to of greater than 5 MW but less than 100 MW

less than 5 MW

12/18/2009 of 181

Attachment ESF-3 RECOMMENDED FORMAT for PROJECT DESCRIPTION I. INTRODUCTION II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION

A. Project Rationale B. Proposed Project Location C. Description of Project Operations

1. Process Flow 2. Material and Energy Balance 3. Production capacity and descriptions of raw materials, by-products, products and waste materials

D. Description of Project Phases 1. Pre-construction/Operational phase 2. Construction phase 3. Operational phase 4. Abandonment phase

E. Project Capitalization and Manpower Requirement III. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN (discussion of the residual management scheme among others)

A. Air B. Water C. Land

IV. ATTACHMENTS (It should be noted that CNC applications does not require any other attachments aside from those needed to provide additional information or details on project descriptions. Specifically, barangay clearances or permits, LGU endorsements, and similar documents are not required.)

12/18/2009 of 181

Attachment ESF-4 RECOMMENDED FORMAT for an IEE REPORT I. TABLE OF CONTENTS II. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY III. INTRODUCTION

A. Project Background B. EIA Process Documentation C. EIA Methodology D. EIA Team E. EIA Study Schedule

IV. PROJECT DESCRIPTION

A. Project Rationale B. Project Location C. Project Information D. Description of Project Phases

1. Pre-Construction / Operational Phase 2. Construction Phase 3. Operational Phase 4. Abandonment Phase

V. DESCRIPTION OF ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING AND RECEIVING ENVIRONMENT

A. Physical Environment B. Biological Environment C. Socio-Cultural, Economic and Political Environment D. Future Environmental Conditions without the Project

VI. IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND MITIGATION

A. Summary Matrix of Predicted Environmental Issues/Impacts and their Level of Significance at Various Stages of Development B. Brief Discussion of Specific Significant Impacts on the Physical and Biological Resources C. Brief Discussion of Significant Socio-Economic Effects / Impacts of the Project

VII. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN

A. Summary Matrix of Proposed Mitigation and Enhancement Measures, Estimated Cost and Responsibilities B. Brief Discussion of Mitigation and Enhancement Measures C. Monitoring Plan D. Contingency Plan (if applicable) E. Institutional Responsibilities and Agreements

VIII. BIBLIOGRAPHY / REFERENCES

12/18/2009 of 181

Attachment ESF-5 RECOMMENDED FORMAT for an EIS I. TABLE OF CONTENTS II. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

A. Brief Introduction B. Brief Description of Methodology and Profile of EIA Team C. Scope and Limitation of the EIA Study D. Brief Project Description E. Brief Description of Baseline Environmental Conditions F. Matrix of Issues and Impacts Raised During the Scoping and Consultations G. Matrix of Major Impacts, and Mitigation/Enhancement Measures with Summary Discussion H. Matrix of Environmental Management Plan with Summary Discussion I. Matrix of Environmental Monitoring Plan with Summary Discussion J. Proposal of Environmental Guarantee and Monitoring Fund Scheme (when applicable) K. Summary of Process Documentation Report, and L. Summary of Commitments, Agreements (or both) and Proofs of Social Acceptability

III. INTRODUCTION

A. Project Background B. EIA Approach and Methodology C. EIA Process Documentation D. EIA Team E. EIA Study Schedule

IV. PROJECT DESCRIPTION

A. Project Rationale B. Project Alternatives C. Project Location D. Project Information E. Description of Project Phases

1. Pre-Construction / Operational Phase 2. Construction Phase 3. Operational Phase 4. Abandonment Phase

V. BASELINE ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS

A. Physical Environment 1. Geology and Geomorphology 2. Hydrology and Hydrogeology 3. Pedology and Land Use 4. Water Quality and Limnology 5. Meteorology 6. Air and Noise Quality 7. Oceanography

B. Biological Environment 1. Terrestrial Flora and Fauna

12/18/2009 of 181

2. Marine Biology C. Socio-Cultural, Economic and Political Environment

VI. FUTURE ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS WITHOUT THE PROJECT VII. IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND MITIGATION

A. Physical / Chemical Effects 1. Land 2. Water 3. Air

B. Biological/Ecological Effects 1. Terrestrial Flora and Fauna 2. Aquatic Flora and Fauna

C. Aesthetic and Visual Effects D. Socio-Cultural and Economic Effects

1. Population 2. Labor and Employment 3. Housing and Social Services 4. Infrastructure and Public Utilities 5. Health and Education 6. Culture and Lifestyle 7. Livelihood and Income 8. Archeological / Anthropological / Historical Sites

E. Mitigation and Enhancement Measures F. Residual and Unavoidable Impacts

VIII. ENVIRONMENTAL RISK ASSESSMENT (WHEN APPLICABLE) IX. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN

A. Construction / Contractors Environmental Program B. Social Development Program C. Contingency / Emergency Response Plan D. Risk Management Program E. Abandonment Plan (when applicable) F. Environmental Monitoring Plan

X. ENVIRONMENTAL GUARANTEE AND MONITORING FUND PROPOSAL XI. COMMITMENTS AND AGREEMENTS XII. BIBLIOGRAPHY / REFERENCES

A. Attachments or Annexes B. List of EIS Preparers (with specified field of expertise) C. Original Sworn Accountability Statement of Key EIS Consultants D. Original Sworn Accountability Statement of Proponent E. Photos (or plates of proposed project site, impact areas and affected areas and communities) F. Process Documentation Report G. Scoping Report H. Summary of Proof of Social Preparation Process Conducted

12/18/2009 of 181

All projects or undertakings covered by the EIS System and classified by the Department of Health (DOH) as Health Sensitive Projects or located in Health Sensitive Areas shall include a chapter on Environmental Health Impact Assessment (EHIA). The EHIA Chapter shall contain, among others, the following information:

Health and Sanitation Information of the Affected Community Environmental Health Impact Analysis/Assessment Proposed Control and Mitigating Measures for the Environmental Health Impacts

Identified.

12/18/2009 of 181

Attachment ESF-6 SAMPLE ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLANS for METHANE RECOVERY CDM PROJECTS OUTLINE OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR A LANDFILL GAS FACILITY AT A SANITARY LANDFILL OR CLOSED DUMPSITE I. OVERVIEW OF THE PROJECT AND PURPOSE OF DOCUMENT

I.1. Location and Area I.2. Environmental Management Plan of the Methane Recovery and Combustion

Project

II. DUE DILIGENCE ON THE SANITARY LANDFILL OR DUMPSITE II.1. Overview of the ECC II.2. Overview of the Landfill Design or Dump Closure Plan II.3. Waste Acceptance II.4. Waste Composition II.5. Overview of the Baseline

II.5.1. Baseline Vegetation II.5.2. Site Geology II.5.3. Climate II.5.4. Hydrology II.5.5. Air

II.6. Impacts and Mitigation of the Impacts of the SLF or Dump Closure

III. METHANE RECOVERY AND COMBUSTION PROJECT IMPACT IDENTIFICATION AND MITIGATION III.1. Construction Phase

III.1.1. Solid Wastes Generation III.1.2. Dust Generation III.1.3. Noise Generation

III.2. Operation Phase III.2.1. Safety and Emergency III.2.2. Burning of the LFG III.2.3. Solid Wastes Generation III.2.4. Odor Generation III.2.5. Noise Generation

IV. PUBLIC CONSULTATION AND DISCLOSURE V. ANNEXES Annex V.A. Observed Vegetation at the Project Site Annex V.B. Water Quality Sampling Results Annex V.C. Summary of Laboratory Analysis Results for Groundwater Samples Annex V.D. Air Quality

12/18/2009 of 181

OUTLINE OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR A PIGGERY WASTEWATER SYSTEM I. BRIEF PROJECT INFORMATION

I.1. The Piggery Farm I.2. Farm Location I.3. Environmental Considerations in the Area I.4. Existing Wastewater Set-up I.5. Compliance with Environmental Requirements

II. METHANE RECOVERY II.1. Project Activity II.2. Wastewater and Gas Generation

II.2.1. Wastewater II.2.2. Biogas

III. MANPOWER AND PROJECT COST III.1. Manpower III.2. Project Cost

IV. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN IV.1. Construction Phase

IV.1.1. Solid Wastes Generation IV.1.2. Health and Safety

IV.2. Operation Phase IV.2.1. Wastewater Generation, Effluent, Surface Water and Groundwater

Contamination Monitoring IV.2.2. Air Pollution from Burning the Biogas IV.2.3. Sludge Generation IV.2.4. Odor Generation IV.2.5. Noise Generation IV.2.6. Health and Safety

V. MATRIX OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VI. PUBLIC CONSULTATION VII. INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENT AND CAPACITY BUILDING

VII.1. Information, Education and Communication Campaign VII.2. Validation of the Project‘s Environmental Performance

VII.2.1. Multi-partite Monitoring Team VII.2.2. Monitoring and Follow-up VII.2.3. Institutional Arrangement of LBP

VIII. ACCOUNTABILITY STATEMENT IX. ANNEX

12/18/2009 of 181

Sub-Annex 2 RESETTLEMENT AND COMPENSATION FRAMEWORK (RCF) Contents Acronyms

INTRODUCTION 1. DEFINITION OF TERMS 2. OVERRIDING DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVE 3. INSTITUTIONAL AND LEGAL FRAMEWORK

3.1. Institutional Framework 3.1.1. The World Bank (WB) 3.1.2. Land Bank of the Philippines (LBP) 3.1.3. Local Government Unit (LGU) 3.1.4. External Monitoring Agency (EMA) 3.1.5. Affected Communities

3.2. Legal Framework 3.2.1. Government of the Philippines (GOP) Regulations 3.2.2. World Bank Policies 3.2.3. GOP and WB Policies, and Framework for SSLDIP

4. COMPENSATION AND OTHER ENTITLEMENTS 5. MODES OF ACQUIRING PRIVATE ASSETS 6. APPLICATION OF THE PARTICIPATORY PROCESS

6.1. Project Preparation Stage 6.1.1. Pre-Feasibility 6.1.2. Feasibility 6.1.3. Finalization of the RP and the Technical Design

6.2. Project Implementation Stage 6.3. Post Project Implementation Stage

7. GRIEVANCE PROCEDURES 8. COSTS AND BUDGETS 9. INDIGENOUS PEOPLES AND INDIGENOUS CULTURAL COMMUNITIES

ATTACHMENTS RCF-1 Compensation Table RCF-2 Terms of Reference for an Independent Appraiser RCF-3 Elements of a Full Resettlement Plan RCF-4 Elements of an Abbreviated Resettlement Plan RCF-5 Terms of Reference for an External Monitoring Agency RCF-6 Elements of an Indigenous Peoples Plan TABLES Table RCF-1 GOP Laws and Orders on Land Acquisition Table RCF-2 Roles and Responsibilities

12/18/2009 of 181

Acronyms CA Commonwealth Act CFSF Carbon Finance Support Facility BIR Bureau of Internal Revenue DENR Department of Environment and Natural Resources DP Displaced Person EMA External Monitoring Agency EO Executive Order FPIC Free and Prior Informed Consent GOP Government of the Philippines ICC Indigenous Cultural Community IP Indigenous People IPP Indigenous People‘s Plan LBP Land Bank of the Philippines LCE Local Chief Executive LGU Local Government Unit M&E Monitoring & Evaluation NCIP National Commission of Indigenous Peoples NGO Non-Government Organization OP Operational Policy PCUP Presidential Commission for the Urban Poor PD Presidential Decree PhP Philippine Peso PIU Project Implementation Unit PMO Project Management Office PO People‘s Organization RA Republic Act RCF Resettlement and Compensation Framework RIC Resettlement Implementation Committee ROW Right-of-Way RP Resettlement Plan SSLDIP Support for Strategic Local Development and Investment Project WB World Bank

12/18/2009 of 181

INTRODUCTION This Resettlement and Compensation Framework (RCF) shall serve as guideline in the preparation of Resettlement Plans (RPs) and other related documents to be required by the Land Bank of the Philippines and the World Bank from Project Owners, the Local Government Units (LGUs), public utilities and private operators providing local infrastructure services. 1. DEFINITION OF TERMS Compensation means payment in cash or in kind for an asset to be acquired or affected by an infrastructure project at replacement cost (as defined below). Cut-off Date is the date prior to which the occupation or use of the project area makes residents / users of the project area eligible to be categorized as affected persons. The cut-off date coincides with the commencement of the census of affected persons within the project area boundaries. Persons making claims based on subsequent occupation after the cut-off date are not eligible for claims for compensation and other entitlements. Displaced Person (DP) includes any person or persons, household (sometimes referred to as project affected family), a firm, or a private or public institution who, on account of the acquisition of assets in a project, would have their right, title or interest in all or any part of a house, land (e.g., residential, agricultural, and industrial, including pasturelands, fishponds, communal forest, etc), fish pens, communal fishing grounds, annual or perennial crops and trees, or any other fixed or moveable asset acquired or possessed, in full or in part, permanently or temporarily, and who might suffer income or business loss as a consequence thereof. Eligible DPs may fall under any of the following three groups:

a) Those who have formal legal rights to land including customary and traditional rights; b) Those who do not have formal legal rights to land at the time of the cut-off date but have a claim to rights to such land or assets; and c) Informal settlers and who satisfy the condition for eligibility to compensation as provided in the definition of ‗cut-off-date‘ in 2.c above

Non-eligible DPs include those making claims based on subsequent occupation after the cut-off date. External Monitoring Agency (EMA) is the entity designated by Project Owner to monitor the implementation of its Resettlement Plan. Financial Assistance is the cash amount given to tenants/settlers/occupants of severely affected land on top of cash payment/compensation of their crops and other fixed assets actually damaged by a project. It will also be given to owners of land acquired under Commonwealth Act 141 for the area of the affected portion subject to Section 112 thereof, which grants government easement right over a 60-meter wide corridor. Financial assistance will be determined based on applicable laws, in consultation with stakeholders and relevant government agencies, and thus given to:

Marginally and severely affected structures used for business, with or without title to the land, to cover for income loss;

Marginally and severely affected farmlands, fishponds and fishpens that are not covered by any acceptable proof of ownership, including portions of property acquired through CA 141, Section 112, to cover for improvements introduced to make the property productive;

12/18/2009 of 181

Severely affected farmlands, fishponds and fish pens that are covered by a title or other acceptable proof of ownership (e.g. ancestral claim, usufruct, ancestral land claim, etc.);

A displaced person (DP) who holds full title, tax declaration or some proof of traditional ownership (such as usufruct when the DP belongs to an indigenous community), to the land where his/her severely affected dwelling stands and who has to shift elsewhere; and

An informal settler who has to shift elsewhere for food subsidy. Independent Shops are commercial stalls, such as groceries, vulcanizing shops, tailoring shops, beauty parlors, market stalls, hotels, movie houses, and similar establishments that serve as the owner‘s principal source of income. Sari-sari stores, i.e., variety shops that are usually attached to a dwelling unit, may fall in the same category of independent shops. Indigenous People (IPs) or Indigenous Cultural Communities (ICC) refer to a group of people or homogenous societies identified by self ascription and ascription by others, who have continuously lives as organized community on communally bounded and defined territory and who have, under claims of ownership since time immemorial, occupied, possessed customs, traditions and other distinctive cultural traits, or who have through resistance to political, social and cultural inroads of colonization, nonindigenous religions and culture, became historically differentiated from majority of Filipinos. ICC/ IPs shall likewise include people who are regarded as indigenous on account of their descent from the populations which inhabited the country, at the time of conquest or colonization, or at the time of inroads of non-indigenous religions and cultures or the establishment of the present state of boundaries, who retain some or all their own social, economic, and political institutions, but who may have been displaced from their traditional domains or who may have resettled outside their ancestral domains. Informal Settlers (a.k.a. informal dwellers or squatters) are persons who have occupied lands where they have no legal title of, tax declaration that can be perfected into a title, or those who are not covered by customary law (e.g., possessory rights, usufruct) or other acceptable proof of ownership. Informal settlers who are not professional squatters are eligible for compensation for lost assets and incomes, including entitlements. Land Acquisition means the process whereby a person/institution acquires all or part of the land needed by the project including Government land for public purpose. When compelled by Government, it is called expropriation. Marginally Affected land or structure means less than 20% of the land or structure is affected and where the remaining unaffected portion is still viable for continued use. Professional Squatters, the term applies to persons who have previously been awarded home lots or housing units by the Government but who sold, leased or transferred the same to settle illegally in the same place or in another urban area, and non-bona fide occupants and intruders or lands reserved for socialized housing. This definition excludes individuals or groups that simply rent land and housing from professional squatters or squatting syndicates

12/18/2009 of 181

Project refers to an individual project (i.e., CDM Project Activity) under a Program of Activity, managed and coordinated by the Land Bank of the Philippines (LBP)‘ Carbon Finance Support Facility Rehabilitation Support means additional assistance given to DPs whose source of income is severely impacted by the loss of productive assets, incomes, employment or sources of living, thereby requiring them to engage in some other income-earning activities. Rehabilitation support is intended to supplement payment of compensation and financial assistance as provided in 2.b. and 2.e for acquired assets in order to achieve full restoration of living standards and quality of life. The specific rehabilitation support to be given may be in the form of special skills training, project-related employment micro-credit and other self-help socio-economic measures. Relocation means the physical shifting of DPs from their pre-project place to a new place of residence. Replacement Cost is the amount needed to replace an asset without deduction for the costs of transaction. The computation of replacement cost is the value determined by an independent appraiser hired by the Project Owner or by a court of law as compensation for:

Agricultural lands, fishponds and fish pens based on productive value or residential land based on market value (for properties with similar location attributes);

Houses and other related structures based on current market prices of materials and labor without depreciation and deductions for salvaged building materials;

Crops based on current market value; Trees and other perennials based on the estimates of the Department of

Environment and Natural Resources or those of the independent appraiser‘s Other fixed assets such as mosques, churches, burial grounds, community wells,

barangay halls and health centers based on replacement cost or cost of mitigating measures; and

Businesses based on opportunity loss and business current market prices of materials and labor without depreciation and deductions of salvaged materials.

Resettlement Action Plan (RAP) / Resettlement Plan (RP) refers to all measures to be taken by the Project Owner in consultation with the community or the DPs and approved by the Lender, to mitigate any adverse social and economic impacts that are direct consequences of the acquisition of assets; and the provision of other entitlements, income restoration assistance, and relocation, as needed. Rental Allowance is cash assistance given to house tenants of affected structures who will have to find a new place on account of the project, for the period between project site clearing and transfer to their new home but not exceeding a period of three (3) months. Severely Affected Land / Structure means 20% or more of the land or structure is affected or when less than 20% is affected, the remaining portion is no longer viable for use.

12/18/2009 of 181

Squatting Syndicates as defined by RA 7279 refers to groups of persons who are engaged in the business of squatter housing for profit or gain. Project Owner could be a Local Government Unit (LGU, i.e., a City, Municipality or Province) or a public utility or private sector group providing local infrastructure services. 2. OVERRIDING DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVE In the design and implementation of the projects, efforts must be exercised to ensure that all adverse impacts of acquisition of assets and properties are fully mitigated and that displaced persons (DPs) are benefited and are not worse off. Toward this end, the following fundamental measures will be ensured:

Effect on income and resources will be avoided or minimized in assets acquisition that result in displacement of people;

No demolition of assets and/or entry to properties will be done until a DP is fully compensated, except when a court of law grants a Writ of Possession to the Project Owner for the subject property in expropriation cases as explained in Section 5 of this Framework;

DPs are provided with sufficient compensation and assistance for lost assets, income sources, and livelihood that will assist them to improve, or at least maintain, their pre-project standard of living;

Special attention is paid to affected vulnerable groups, such as poverty groups, the handicapped, women-headed households, people with weak or absent tenure rights, etc.; and

All project stakeholders, including DPs, are consulted and are encouraged to participate in varying practicable ways in the design, implementation and operation of the project.

3. INSTITUTIONAL AND LEGAL FRAMEWORK 3.1 Institutional Framework The key players and their roles and responsibilities in resettlement planning, implementation and monitoring are presented below. Table RCF-2 in Section 6 breaks down the roles and responsibilities of other participants in the resettlement planning, implementation and monitoring process. 3.1.1 The World Bank (WB) The WB will review this Resettlement and Compensation Framework (RCF) to ensure its compliance with OP 4.12 and OP 4.10. It will agree with the Land Bank of the Philippines on the adoption of the RCF as the set of guidelines on social safeguards for the Project. The WB will review all Full RPs and first three (3) Abbreviated RPs prepared under the Project. 3.1.2 Land Bank of the Philippines (LBP) Through its Lending Centers, assisted by the PMO, the LBP will review all project RPs, whether full or abbreviated, to check its compliance with the agreed RCF. 3.1.3 Project Owner The Project Owner could either be the Local Government Unit (LGU, i.e., a City, Municipality or Province), a public utility group or a private sector group providing local infrastructure services. Through its PIU, the Project Owner will be responsible for the

12/18/2009 of 181

overall planning, implementation, coordination and monitoring and evaluation of land acquisition and resettlement activities under the project:

It will ensure that RPs are prepared, implemented and monitored and evaluated in accordance with the agreed RCF.

The Project Owner will set up a Resettlement Implementation Committee (RIC) for the implementation of the RP. The specific responsibilities of the RIC include:

- Assist the PIU in validating the list of DPs and inventory of affected assets and in finalizing the compensation and other entitlements due to the DPs; - Assist in the conduct of public information campaign and consultation and help to ensure the participation of the public, especially the DPs; - Assist the PIU in the payment of compensation and other entitlement to DPs; - Receive complaints and grievances from DPs and other stakeholders and act on them accordingly; - Maintain a record of all public meetings, complaints, and actions taken to address complaints and grievances; and - In coordination with concerned government authorities, assist in the enforcement of laws / ordinances regarding encroachment into the project site or its ROW.

The PIU Head will designate a staff to work closely with the RIC. The Project Owner may engage the services of a Consultant, a Resettlement Specialist, to provide technical support to the PIU on resettlement planning.

The Project Owner will ensure that sufficient budget and resources are provided to the PIU for resettlement planning and implementation.

The Project Owner will be responsible for encouraging the active participation of stakeholders, particularly the displaced and host communities, in resettlement planning, implementation and M&E.

3.1.4 External Monitoring Agency (EMA) The EMA, engaged by the Project Owner, will monitor the effectiveness of resettlement activities in all stages of the project. Special efforts will be made to ensure good community relationships, for better reception of the project and for a clear understanding of its objectives. The EMA will submit periodic reports on the implementation process and make recommendations regarding identified issues and concerns. 3.1.5 Affected Communities It is also the responsibility of affected communities, particularly the DPs and host community/ies, to participate in consultations and in resettlement planning, implementation and M&E. 3.2 Legal Framework 3.2.1 Government of the Philippines (GOP) Regulations This RCF is anchored on the principle derived from the Bill of Rights of the Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines, which states:

in Article II, Section 9, “Private property shall not be taken for public use without just compensation.”

12/18/2009 of 181

in Article III, Section I, “No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law, nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of the laws.”

This RCF, hereinafter referred to as Framework, shares the same concern for due process and the right to just compensation for everybody. Adverse impacts by a project must be avoided or minimized, with the appropriate resettlement measures, and that DPs are given the opportunity to share project benefits with the rest of the population, are the guiding principles of this Framework. Other relevant GOP laws and orders pertaining to land acquisition and compensation shall be adopted and observed by the Project Owner. Table RCF-1 3.2.2 World Bank Policies

OP 4.12, December 2001, on Involuntary Resettlement, providing the guidelines for the resettlement of project-affected population to assist DPs in their efforts to improve their incomes and living standards, or at least restore them to predisplacement levels. This policy is triggered when there is involuntary taking of land and other assets, or when involuntary restriction of access to legally designated and protected areas results in adverse impact on the livelihoods of the displaced persons. Only direct economic and social impacts resulting from ―taking of land‖ are covered.

OP 4.10, July 2005, on Indigenous Peoples, requiring all projects that are affecting indigenous peoples to engage these people in a process of free, prior, and informed consultation; and to prepare an Indigenous Peoples Development Plan that will ensure these people to receive social and economic benefits that are culturally appropriate and gender and ―inter-generationally‖ inclusive.

3.2.3 GOP and WB Policies, and Framework for LBP-CFSF Where there is a discrepancy in the resettlement and compensation standards of the existing laws in the Philippines and of the standards of the WB, the Project Owner will comply with whichever is the higher standard. Table RCF-1 GOP Laws and Orders on Land Acquisition Law /Order Provisions Executive Order 1035 (1985)

Requires the conduct of: • Feasibility study • Public Information Campaign • Parcellary survey • Assets inventory Other features include • Land acquisitioned, based on fair market value to be negotiated between owner & appraiser • Resettlement / relocation of tenants, farmers & other occupants • Financial Assistance to displaced tenants, cultural minorities & settlers equivalent to the average annual gross harvest for the last 3 years & not less than P15,000 per ha. • Disturbance compensation to agricultural lessees equivalent to 5 times the average gross harvest during the last 5 years • Compensation for improvements on land acquired under CA 141. Government has power to expropriate in case agreement is not reached.

Supreme Court Ruling (1987)

• Defines just compensation as fair & full equivalent for the loss sustained, taking into account improvements, location, capabilities, etc. • The value given by the appraiser can only serve as a guide for negotiation. The objective is to enable the DP to replace affected assets at current market price.

12/18/2009 of 181

Law /Order Provisions DPWH DO 142 (1995)

Aims to avoid unnecessary delays in civil works. • Inclusion of parcellary plans & cost estimates for ROW acquisition in detailed engineering stage. • EO 1035 & MO 65 will still be followed in matters relating to the acquisition and compensation of private properties

RA 6389 • Provides for disturbance compensation to agricultural leases equivalent to 5 times the average gross harvest in the last 5 years.

RA 7279, Urban Development and Housing Act of 1992

>Provides guidelines for resettlement of persons living in danger areas, e.g., riverbanks, shorelines, & waterways or areas where government infrastructure projects are about to be implemented. Guidelines cover the provision of basic services & facilities in resettlement sites, livelihood support, meaningful participation & adequate social preparation for the affected households, close coordination between sending & host LGUs, grievance redress and related aspects. •Danger areas as enumerated in Article VII, Section 28 of RA 7279 includes Waterways but not specifically water/pipeline Right-of-Ways (ROW). The 2002 Bignay Incident of Manila Water showed that waterlines are potential danger areas. • Relocation involving court eviction cases shall be undertaken by the local government, agencies involved (in this case the MWSS) within forty-five (45) days from service of notice of final judgement by the court. • Informal settlers who built their house on or before the affectivity date (March 28, 1992) are entitled to all benefits and considerations prescribed in the said act. All those exempted or not covered by the said act will be dealt with accordingly (see Section 5.a).

RA 8368 (1997)

• Repealed PD 772 of 1975, which penalized squatting and similar acts. • All pending cases under the provisions of PD 772 are consequently dismissed

RA 8371 (1997) • Aims at ensuring that owners of real property acquired for NG infrastructure projects

• Protects & recognizes rights of indigenous cultural communities on their ancestral lands.

RA 8974 (2000) • Aims at ensuring that owners of real property acquired for NG infrastructure projects are promptly paid just compensation. It also provides for the compensation of affected improvements & structures at replacement cost (without depreciation & inclusive of labor costs for reconstruction) & the arrangement of independent appraisers for a more accurate determination of the market values of lands and improvements. Section 5 provides for standards in the determination of the fair market value of land: • SECTION 5. Standards for the Assessment of the Value of the Land Subject of Expropriation Proceedings or Negotiated Sale — In order to facilitate the determination of just compensation, the court may consider, among other well established factors, the following relevant standards: i. The classification and use for which the property is suited; ii. The developmental costs for improving the land; iii. The value declared by the owners; iv. The current selling price of similar lands in the vicinity; v. The reasonable disturbance compensation for the removal &/or demolition of certain improvements on the land & for the value of improvements thereon; vi. The size, shape or location, tax declaration & zonal valuation of the land; vii. The price of the land as manifested in the ocular findings, oral as well as documentary evidence presented; and viii. Such facts & events as to enable the affected property owners to have sufficient funds to acquire similarly-situated lands of approximate areas as those required from them by by the government, & thereby rehabilitate themselves as early as possible.

Commonwealth Act 141 (CA 141), Public Lands Act (1936)

• Institutes classification & means of administration, expropriation and disposition of alienable lands of the public domain. • Under Section 112, lands awarded for Free Patent are ―subject to a right of right-of way not exceeding sixty (60) meters in width for public highways, railroads, irrigation ditches, aqueducts, telegraph and telephone lines and similar works as the Government or any public or quasi-public service or enterprise, including mining or forest concessionaires, may reasonably require

NCIP Administrative Order No. 3, Series of 2002

• stipulates the processes necessary for securing FPIC from IP communities and EO 132 designating PCUP as clearing house for the conduct of demolition and eviction since both have bearing on actions related to IPs and RP

12/18/2009 of 181

4. COMPENSATION AND OTHER ENTITLEMENTS The following guidelines will be applied to mitigate the effects of involuntary resettlement:

Only those DPs found to be residing in, doing business in, or cultivating land, or having rights over resources within, the project area as of the cut-off date (e.g., date of start of census surveys) are eligible for compensation for lost assets (i.e., land, structures and other fixed assets) and for other assistance. DPs will be compensated for affected land, based on their tenure status, e.g., legitimate owner, lessee, etc. Proof of ownership shall include full title, tax declaration of settlers in public land, possessory rights or usufruct, ancestral land claims, among others. However, in cases where a tax declaration over assets that are inalienable or those that cannot be titled as prescribed by law (e.g., river easement, forest reserve) is the only proof of ownership, only structures and other improvements found therein should be compensated.

The Project Owner shall compensate the DPs for land, structures and other fixed assets at ―replacement cost‖ as defined in Section 1.

DPs losing all of their lands and structures (e.g., farmland, house), or incurring partial loss but where the remaining assets and properties are determined by competent authorities as not viable anymore for continued use will be paid full compensation for the entire asset at replacement cost. The compensation for the entire asset at replacement cost may be given in cash or in kind. The Project Owner will assume ownership of the said asset upon payment of full compensation thereof.

In the case of DPs whose assets are ―marginally affected‖ as defined in Section 1, compensation for the affected assets will be paid in cash.

Informal setters who are affected by the project and who are not ―professional squatters‖, as defined Section 1, are entitled to compensation at replacement cost for affected structures and other losses but not for land.

Swap for ―severely affected land‖ as defined in Section 1 will be in the form of land of equivalent productive value and/or characteristics at a location acceptable to the DPs, or if replacement land is not available, cash representing the current replacement value of the land. Replacement of residential and agricultural lands will be as close as possible to the land that was lost. All replacement lands for residence, commerce and agriculture will be provided with secured tenure status.

In addition to compensation for crops or property acquired or damaged by the project, the Project Owner will provide the following resettlement assistance to eligible DPs:

- “Financial assistance‖ to tenants/settlers/occupants as provided in Section 1. - Rental allowance for house tenants of affected main structures who will have to find a new place on account of the project, equivalent to the period between project site clearing and transfer to their new home but not to exceed a period of three (3) months. - Transportation assistance (in cash or in kind, depending on the mutual agreement of the DP and the Project Owner) to DPs who are relocating, including displaced shanty dwellers in urban areas who opts to go back to their places of origin (e.g., province) or to shift to government relocation sites.

Granting of rehabilitation support in the form of special skills training, project-related employment, micro-credit or other self-help socio-economic support to

12/18/2009 of 181

DPs who are severely affected due to the loss of productive assets and/or their primary source of income and which will require them to engage in some other income earning activities. If needed, the Project Owner will coordinate closely with concerned government agencies that have the mandate and the expertise to undertake the needed rehabilitation assistance.

Rehabilitation support will also be granted to severely affected vulnerable groups such as indigenous groups, single parent households, the handicapped, the elderly, etc., who have the least capacity to cope with the adverse social and economic impacts of development projects.

For married couples, payment of compensation and other entitlements (i.e., financial assistance and rehabilitation support) will be given in the names of both husband and wife.

Where relocation is considered necessary, the lot owner of the proposed relocation site will also be entitled to compensation for his/her land, and depending on his/her choice, the compensation may be in cash or in the form of replacement land, of the same value, within or outside the relocation site.

The Project Owner shall provide the relocation site for residential or commercial purposes with such basic services as electricity, water, drainage, sewer system, road system, etc.

Plans for the acquisition of land and other assets will be carried out in consultation with the DPs who will receive prior information of the compensation, relocation and other assistance available to them.

Any acquisition of, or restriction on access to resources owned or managed by DPs as a common property, e.g., communal forest, communal farm, or communal fishing ground, will be mitigated to ensure access of those DPs to equivalent resources on a continuing basis, where feasible, or other alternative measures to be determined in consultation with the DPs.

Resettlement programs will include adequate institutional arrangements to ensure effective and timely design, planning, consultation and implementation of compensation and resettlement. The Project Owner will ensure effective coordination with relevant agencies for the RP preparation and implementation.

The resettlement transition period will be minimized and the acquisition of assets, compensation, resettlement and rehabilitation for a segment/section or phase (except where long-term rehabilitation measures, such as vocational training recommended) will be completed at least one (1) month prior to the initiation of preparation for construction work under the respective segment/section or phase thereof.

Entitlements and compensation for the types of loss shall be guided by the Compensation Table in this Framework. Attachment RCF-1

Technically, all informal settlers found to be at the project site at the time of the census, will be entitled to a specific compensation depending on the laws and standards being enforced at the beginning of the project. All possible means to alleviate the DPs will be exhausted to restore of not even improve their level of living to the pre-resettlement level. 5. MODES OF ACQUIRING PRIVATE ASSETS Private assets, e.g., land, structures and other improvements, will be acquired for the project through:

12/18/2009 of 181

Donation and/or grant of ROW; negotiated purchase; expropriation; usufruct; or, lease agreement

In the case of donation, meetings held regarding land donation/s will be documented. For donated land/s, documentation of donation must be signed by all legal owners, must note the total land area from which portion needed by project is taken, and must state the legal tenability of the donation (e.g. no lien, occupants in affected portion). An assessment report on the donor‘s economic viability will also be needed. In the case of negotiated purchase, the Project Owner will offer as the purchase price an amount equal to the replacement cost of the assets, as determined by an independent appraiser using internationally accepted procedures. Attachment RCF-2 The Project Owner may exercise negotiated sale of required properties. The offer to purchase should be given in writing and the property owner is given 15 days within which to accept the amount offered as payment for his/her property. If the property owner agrees, he or she will issue to the Project Owner a written permit to enter the property. A contract of sale will be subsequently executed between the property owner and the Project Owner. If negotiations fail, the Project Owner shall initiate expropriation proceedings (through the concerned LGU if Project Owner is not the LGU). Upon filing of the complaint, and after due notice to the defendant/property owner, the concerned LGU shall immediately deposit with the court or a court-appointed depository the amount equivalent to the sum of (1) one hundred percent (100%) of the value of the condemned property based on the current BIR zonal valuation and (2) an amount equal to the replacement cost of the improvements and/or structures. The Project Owner should then apply for a Writ of Possession to enable project construction. If the property owner contests the compensation payment, the Court will determine the just compensation to be paid to the owner within sixty (60) days from the date of the filing of the expropriation case. When the decision of the Court becomes final, the Project Owner will pay the owner the difference between the amount already paid and the just compensation determined by the Court (see Implementing Rules and Regulations, RA 8974, Section 14). The DP will receive the additional payment within one (1) month following the decision of the court. The Project Owner may resort to the imposition of an Easement of Right-of-Way provided for under the Philippine Civil Code. In such cases, a ROW easement agreement will be executed by the property owner and the Project Owner, whereby the former will grant the latter the right to use the affected portion of the lot, as ROW, but the owner retains ownership of the said portion of the lot. In these cases, the Project Owner will pay the owner the value of the affected portion of the lot based on an independent appraiser carried out according to internationally accepted norms. In addition, the Project Owner shall compensate the property owner at replacement cost for any improvements and/or structures on the land affected by the ROW. The Project Owner will enter the

12/18/2009 of 181

easement area after the provision of the full payment for the easement to the property owner. The ROW easement agreement will be immediately registered with the Registry of Deeds. The Project Owner may also acquire a property through Usufruct. The property owner retains the naked ownership of the land, while the Project Owner enjoys the benefit of the use of land. The Project Owner and the property owner will execute a usufruct agreement. The agreement will cover the rights and responsibilities of the two parties, including the duration of the usufruct. The Project Owner may also acquire lands through lease agreements with the rightful property owner. The Project Owner and the property owner will execute a Lease Contract. The contract will cover the rights and responsibilities of the two parties, including the duration of the lease. All land transaction should be registered with the Registry of Deeds for annotation in the title of subject property. 6. APPLICATION OF THE PARTICIPATORY PROCESS The participatory process shall commence as early as during the project preparation stage and shall continue through to post-implementation evaluation. Key stakeholders will have valuable roles to play in each of the activities in the process. Table RCF-2

6.1 Subproject Preparation Stage 6.1.1 Pre-feasibility

The PIU will conduct a preliminary meeting with the Local Chief Executive and the Council about the project and its components:

- Explain the general concept of the project; - Discuss and explain the requirements of the project and its perceived impacts; - Present tentative schedule of activities; - Create awareness and appreciation about the project; - Identify various project stakeholders; - Present the CFSF RCF; and - Discuss the composition of the RIC.

Other target participants to this meeting are:

- Heads of LGU departments relevant or attached to the PIU; and - Captain/s of the affected Barangay/s

General Orientation of the Community Before undertaking any survey activity in the community, the PIU will conduct a thorough barangay meeting to orient and ensure that the community understands the nature and extent of the proposed project, as well as the rights and entitlements of those who may be affected or displaced as a result of the project. Awareness of the project will hasten the data-gathering process and ensure quality of data. The RCF will also be discussed for the communities to have an appreciation of the processes and procedures. The RCF will be publicly posted / disclosed and will be available to the community if they want to discuss it further with the community members.

12/18/2009 of 181

Community orientation will be facilitated by barangay officials and assisted by the PIU to ensure correctness of information to be relayed to each member of the community. The agenda for this community orientation could be:

- Project overview including overall objectives and merits; - Identification and discussion of the likely impacts of the project; - Activities to be undertaken, including the project schedule; - Roles of the community with regards to the long-term sustainability; - the Resettlement and Compensation Framework; and - Other matters.

Social Assessment The PIU will conduct an assessment of the positive and negative impacts of the project especially to the affected community, identifying all types of possible risks involved. This will be most critical in deciding whether to push through the project or not. Often, projects though initially conceived as beneficial may in turn have to adverse socio-economic, environmental and cultural impacts, which are easily overlooked. The assessment will be carried out with the participation of various stakeholders (through consultations, focused group discussions and key informant interviews) especially those that will be adversely affected from the project and the concerned barangay. Where IP settlements / communities are affected, assessment activities should be coordinated with the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP) prior to the field investigation. Results of such investigation will form part of the assessment. For special concerns, specifically those related to waste pickers, a Social Development Plan forms part of the social assessment. Attachment RCF-7 6.1.2 Feasibility

Draft RP Preparation Based on the results of the Social Assessment, a full-blown socio-economic survey of the DPs, including an inventory and valuation of affected assets, will be conducted to arrive at an appropriate Resettlement Plan (RP). The RP should include the amounts and the process to be used in the payment of compensation to the DPs. A separate survey should be conducted for cultural minorities especially when they are not closely attached to the mainstream society. In such cases, a separate RP should be prepared for the group. (Refer to Section 9 of this Framework.) The RCF applies to all resettlement impacts, regardless of the number of people involved or the level of severity experienced. However, the level of details contained in the RP will vary according to the target group, complexity, scale, and severity of resettlement. A full RP will be required where 200 or more persons are affected. If less than 200 persons are affected, an abbreviated RP may be prepared. Attachments RCF-3

and RCF-4

A separate social assessment for the potentially displaced waste pickers from abandoned dump sites shall also be done if any are affected by the project. The output of this social assessment shall be used in the preparation of a Resettlement Process for Displaced Waste Pickers (RPWP). See Attachment RCF 4 for guidance Presentation of the Draft RP / RPWP

12/18/2009 of 181

Upon completion of the draft RP, the PIU will present it to the Local Chief Executive and Council, heads of LGU departments relevant or attached to the PIU and captain/s of affected barangay/s with a view that a consensus will be achieved. Community Consultation Community consultation should be conducted continuously until a RP / RPWP acceptable to the DPs is arrived at. All aspects of the project should be known to the affected community and if necessary, leaflets and brochures be distributed for greater information coverage. Affected communities will also be informed on the mechanics and procedures for consultations, grievance redress mechanism, and the overall resettlement program. For indigenous groups, the NCIP will be tapped to lead the consultations and to have a more in depth analysis of the socio-cultural implications of the project. All proceedings and consultations will be recorded and form part of the RP. 6.1.3 Finalization of the RP and the Technical Design All suggestions and relevant information introduced by the DPs should be included in the RP / RPWP. The PIU will again meet the Local Chief Executive and Council, heads of LGU departments relevant or attached to the PIU, captain/s of affected barangay/s and selected members of the community, particularly the People‘s Organization (PO) leaders, Purok leaders or other recognized leaders representing the DPs to orient them with the results of all studies and assessments made to ensure that the project will proceed as agreed upon. A copy of the final RP and the technical design will be given to each affected barangay for reference purposes to ensure all procedures and agreements are included and met.

Setting up of RIC The RIC will be established to assist in RP implementation, to be composed of:

- Head of UPAO, - if applicable, a Commissioner of the National Commission of Indigenous Peoples, - PIU, particularly its Resettlement Specialist - Representative of the Barangay of affected communities (DP and host) - Representative of the DPs in each affected barangay (to be elected by simple majority by DPs present in a meeting to be held for the purpose); - If applicable, leader/s or elder/s of each affected IP group; - Representative of a non-government organization (NGO) or people‘s organization (PO) actively operating in the project area (to be elected by simple majority by DPs present in a meeting to be held for the purpose)

The RIC will be headed by either the head of UPAO, or if applicable, a Commissioner of the NCIP. The RIC will meet regularly to record milestones and update the members on the progress of the RP. The following items may also be included in the agenda:

- Designation of specific assignments; - RP / RPWP timetable; - Submittals to PCUP; and - Others matters.

12/18/2009 of 181

The RIC will have to work closely with the PCUP, as the government‘s clearing house of resettlement for the urban poor to ensure that the RP is properly implemented. They can also assist the PIU in accomplishing the requirements for the Certificate of Compliance to be issued by the PCUP before any clearing operation takes place. For the RPWP, the head of the Social Welfare Unit shall be the head.

6.2 Project Implementation Stage

Participation in the Implementation Whenever possible, DPs will be contracted in the implementation of various activities in the project. Monitoring of the RP The PIU, assisted by the RIC will enlist the participation of the DPs in the internal monitoring of the RP. Representation of the DPs in the monitoring of the implementation will provide a more accurate reading of the community‘s feelings and reactions. The internal monitoring will focus specifically on the following:

- Seeing to it that the RP is implemented as designed and approved; - Verifying if funds for implementation are provided by the Project Owner in a timely manner and in amounts sufficient for their purposes and that the funds are used in accordance with the provisions in the RP.

In addition to the internal monitoring, an independent External Monitoring Agency (EMA) will be hired by the Project Owner, to carry out a separate M&E program of the RP. This agency may be an NGO, an academic research institution, an independent consulting firm, with qualified and experienced staff or a combination of these. Criteria for selecting the appropriate agency shall be based on competence, experience and general advocacy of the group. The selection process will undergo the usual procurement procedures. Attachment RCF-5

6.3 Post Project Implementation Stage

Evaluation of the RP / RPWP Implementation Upon completion of the RP implementation, a body composed of representative from PIU (preferably its Resettlement Specialist), RIC head, DP representatives, and representatives from relevant NGO and PO will be formed to evaluate the different stages of the RP preparation and implementation, and the various processes and methodologies used. Areas for improvement and best practices will be identified for future use. The EMA will give its independent evaluation of the RP and its implementation. All recommendations and comments will be documented and archived for future reference. 7. GRIEVANCE PROCEDURES Accessible grievance mechanisms will be established for the DPs and their communities, and any host communities receiving them. It aims to address disputes that may arise from the resettlement. Grievances will be handled through negotiations and are aimed at achieving consensus. Complaints will pass through two stages before they may be elevated to a court of law as a last resort.

12/18/2009 of 181

Grievance Redress shall have the following level: Level 1 A party lodges complaint or grievance to the RIC. After proper

investigation of facts presented, the RIC will provide a written response within fifteen (15) days upon receipt of the complaint.

Level 2 If the complaint / grievance cannot be resolved at the level of the RIC, the case shall be formally referred to the PIU, which will act / decide on the complaint within fifteen (15) days. The PIU shall inform the RIC on the actions taken and progress of the case.

The RIC shall document all grievances, discussions, recommendations and resolutions in writing (or written when received verbally) at all grievance level. DPs will be exempted from all administrative and legal fees incurred pursuant to the grievance redress procedures. Resorting to courts prior to availment of this complaint and grievance process will make the appellant‘s action dismissible on the grounds of non-exhaustion of administrative remedies. Details of grievance redress procedures are provided in the Operational Manual for Resettlement Planning and Implementation provided by the PCUP. 8. COSTS AND BUDGETS The Project Owner will be responsible for providing needed resources for all activities related to the RP planning and implementation, including the operation of the RIC. Each RP / RPWP will include detailed cost estimates for compensation and relocation of DPs, if that be the case, with a breakdown by category of DPs, agricultural, residential and business lands; houses, structures and other fixed assets affected; transport assistance when shifting DPs; etc. Cost estimates will make adequate provisions for contingencies. Table RCF-2 Roles and Responsibilities Subproject Stage Participatory

Activities Participants Responsible Office/

Institution Subproject Preparation

Pre-Feasibility Study

Preliminary meeting within LGU for the overview of the proposed subproject

Local Chief Executive (LCE) & Council, PIUattached units, affected barangay captain/s,

PIU &/or its Consultant, a Resettlement Specialist (RS)

General orientationmeeting, barangay level, preparatory to conduct of technical, social & environmental studies

PIU, concerned barangay officials, DPs, affected communities


Pre-Feasibility Study Conduct of Social Impact Assessment

PIU, DPs, affected communities


12/18/2009 of 181

Subproject Stage Participatory Activities

Participants Responsible Office/ Institution

Feasibility Study RP preparation, census & socio-eco survey

Community heads, concerned barangay DPs

PIU &/or its RS, Community heads

LGU draft RP orientation

LCE, LGU Council, , PIUattached units, affected barangay captain/s officials

PIU &/or its RS

Feasibility Study Community consultation on draft RP

Community heads, DPs, affected communities Affected barangay officials,

PIU &/or its RS

Finalization of RP and Technical Design

RP finalization Community heads PIU &/or its RS

Final RP orientation for LGUs, DPs & affected communities

LCE, LGU Council, PIUattached units, affected barangay officials, community heads, DPs, affected communities

PIU &/or its RS

Implementation Setting up of LRIC

LGU Council, affected barangay officials, community heads, DPs, affected communities, UPAO head &/or NCIP Commissioner

LGU Council Chairman (Vice-Mayor) or his representative, PIU &/or its RS

Implementation of RP LRIC

Affected barangay officials, DPs Participants

PIU &/or its RS &

Internal monitoring of RP implementation

LRIC, PIU, community heads, DP

LGUs and Community Heads,

External Monitoring EMA EMA Post-Implementation Evaluation of RP,

processes and methodologies

LRIC, DP reps, EMA, PIU, reps of relevant NGO and PO

PIU &/or its RS & EMA

9. INDIGENOUS PEOPLES AND INDIGENOUS CULTURAL COMMUNITIES In cases where indigenous peoples (IPs) and indigenous cultural communities (ICCs) will be affected, prior to the preparation of the RP, the Project Owner must secure a Free and Prior Informed Consent (FPIC) or a consensus of all members of the Indigenous Peoples and Indigenous Cultural Communities. This will be determined in accordance with their respective customary laws and practices, free and obtained after the Project Owner‘s full disclosure of the intent and scope of the activity, in a language and process understandable to the concerned communities.

12/18/2009 of 181

A Certificate of FPIC is issued by the concerned IPs/ICCs through an authorized representative (usually the Commissioner of the National Commission of Indigenous Peoples or NCIP). The certificate will be obtained upon signing of a Memorandum of Agreement by and between the Project Owner and the respective IPs/ICCs. Which agreement must be written in a language understandable to the IPs/ICCs. Signatures or thumb marks must be affixed on each page of the document signifying consent or rejection. In case of rejection, the IPs/ICCs shall state in the document of rejection whether or not they shall entertain alternative proposals of similar nature. Any alternative proposal shall be subject to another FPIC of the IPs/ICCs in accordance with the foregoing procedures and requirements. As mentioned in the earlier part of this policy, that if necessary, a separate RP with an Indigenous Peoples Plan (IPP) will be developed for IPs/ICCs to ensure appropriateness and minimize negative socio-cultural impacts. Attachment RCF-6 Full consultation, consent and participation will be sought after to foster a cooperative environment and strengthen cultural relationships. It will be ensured that same social and economic benefits will be granted to such groups, recognizing their rights and privileges to their ancestral domains / lands as defined in Chapter 3 of RA 8371. In order to have a meaningful consultation and participation, the following steps will be adhered to:

information dissemination shall be in the local / tribal language; a tribal leader / representative from NCIP and an NGO representative working

with the group or an expert in the history, practices and traditions will always be present in all discussions with clusters of IPs; and

all meetings will be recorded and shared with the concerned IP group. If IPs are part of the mainstream society, same information as the other will be gathered from the group. In addition, a social impact assessment will be conducted and the following information will be collected:

HH ownership of economic and productive assets; annual income form primary and secondary employment opportunities; economic information of community (brief information of economic and natural

resources, production, and livelihood systems, tenure systems, etc.); social information of community (brief information of kinship, value system, types

of social organization of formal / informal groups, etc.); potential impact of project on basic social services (water supply, health clinics,

and schools); and potential impact of project on the social and economic livelihood.

Community participation and consultation activities shall be done in coordination withh the NCIP, the government agency mandated by law to oversee and protect the interests of IP/ICC. Grievance redress mechanisms to be developed will be in a manner familiar to the indigenous group. Such framework will be developed in close coordination with IP/ICC tribal elders and tribal leaders in collaboration with the NCIP. The RIC will include one of the commissioners of the NCIP (preferably the commissioner assigned to the region where the proposed project will be undertaken), and an indigenous group leader or elder from every tribe/group to represent their respective

12/18/2009 of 181

tribe. The NCIP Commissioner who is a member of the RIC will automatically be the Chairperson of the committee. 10. RESETTLEMENT PROCESS FOR WASTE PICKERS PLAN (RPWPP) A. Screening The Methane Recovery from Waste Management triggers the loss of income of waste pickers from closed dumpsites when the closure of the dumpsite which is the livelihood source of waste pickers:

Is done contemporaneously with the MRWM project; Directly and significantly related to the MRWM; and, Necessary to the achievement of the objectives as set forth in project

documents. B. Contents of RPWP plan When such occurs, then a Resettlement Process for displaced people shall be prepared. This document defines:

(1) the basic objectives and principles to be applied by implementing teams in individual subprojects; (2) basic procedural steps for the preparation of individual RPWP; (3) eligibility criteria for participants; (4) follow-up, monitoring and evaluation arrangements; and, (5) institutional organization and funding arrangements.

Its annexes include:

(1) a basic overview of waste pickers and their situation; (2) a review of the national and local legal and institutional framework regarding informal waste sector inclusion; (3) a sample survey questionnaire; and, (4) a menu of possible integration, upgrading and social assistance strategies.

C. Objectives The goals of the RPWPP plan are:

(1) to identify, mitigate, and compensate any negative impacts on informal livelihoods caused by a subproject; and

(2) to improve, where possible, the conditions of the affected group (i.e., socio-economic, health, environmental, organizational, public image and self-esteem, etc.), using as a minimum standard full restoration of conditions prior to intervention.

Specific objectives are:

(1) to inform affected waste pickers of the potential characteristics of the planned intervention, technical stages of its design and construction, time schedules, parties involved, and the team responsible for its design and implementation;

(2) to inform waste pickers on the methodologies and results of any studies or actions to be carried out with regard to them;

(3) to reduce any concerns or doubts they may have with regard to the intervention;

12/18/2009 of 181

(4) to explain project benefits and the manner in which all stakeholders will share in them;

(5) to minimize the interference of external agents with economic or political interests who might impinge upon the interests of the affected groups;

(6) to introduce the social management team to them; and (7) to establish effective and responsive communication channels to respond to their

concerns in a clear and continuous manner (including the establishment of a local office, with a locale and hours of operation defined in mutual agreement with them).

D. Core Principles In preparing the Resettlement Process for Waste Pickers Plan, the practice of the below listed principles must be discussed:

1) engage waste pickers as active participants in the entire process; 2) begin with adequate studies; 3) develop broad partnerships (including the private sector and local government); 4) develop a comprehensive strategy; 5) involve existing federal programs; 6) upgrade and integrate existing activities; 7) when eliminating one income-generating activity, offer viable alternatives; 8) offer real choices (including the element of timing); 9) take advantage of existing experiences, lessons learned, and available experts;

and experiment with new approaches.

E. Strategy The strategy should be comprehensive and aimed at improving both the waste pickers‘ professional situation and quality of life. It should encompass the full range of technical, economic, social, environmental, and public health dimensions, and adequately address their specific needs and concerns, as well as the technical, financial and environmental requirements of a safe and environmentally and financially sustainable SWM system. This demands a combination of solid data collection and analytical work, as well as an ongoing and open exchange with the waste pickers themselves. F. Institutional Arrangement The Resettlement Process Waste Picker‘s Plan should clearly define the specific roles and responsibilities of each key local stakeholder group (i.e., waste pickers, municipal authorities, NGOs, PSPs, end-users, etc.). It should identify, based on an adequate stakeholder analysis and participation process, the main local needs for capacity building, institutional reform and targeting, and propose specific measures to address these. It should include an assessment of the risks and benefits of each proposed action, possible alternatives to them, and the reasons for the choices made. Special attention should be given to potential conflicts between winners and losers, due to any changes in the status quo.1 Finally, the Plan should include a timetable and budget, specifying all resources needed, funding sources, and procurement, financial management and accounting arrangements.

12/18/2009 of 181

E. Monitoring and Evaluation The M and E of the RPWPP plan shall specicfy the (1)institutional roles and responsibilities with regard to monitoring,(2)the types of indicators to be used; (3)the arrangements and timelines for measuring them; (4) the types of data to be collected and collection methodology to be employed; (4)the means by which and timeline according to which results will be reported to stakeholders; (5)the specific monitoring and evaluation procedures; and (6) the agreed reporting arrangements.

12/18/2009 of 181

Attachment RCF-1 COMPENSATION TABLE Type of Loss Application Entitled Person Compensation / Entitlement 1. Arable Land Actual area needed by the

project and the remaining land is still economically viable

Category A - Owners with full title, tax declaration or who are covered by customary law (e.g. Possessor‘s rights, usufruct) or other acceptable proof of ownership

For the portion of land needed: Cash compensation at replacement cost for the land

as determined by a licensed independent appraiser using internationally recognized valuation standards

Subject to the provisions set forth in Section 5 of RA 8974.

Cash compensation for perennials of commercial value as determined by the DENR or concerned appraisal committee.

DP will be given sufficient time to harvest crops on the subject land.

Category B - DPs without title, tax declaration, or are not covered by customary law or other acceptable proofs of ownership

For the portion of the land needed: DP will be given time to harvest crops. Cash compensation for perennials of commercial

values as determined by DENR or the concerned appraisal committee.

Financial assistance to make up for land preparation, Php 150/m2.

Remaining land becomes economically not viable (i.e. DP losing >20% of land holding or even when losing <20% but the remaining land is not economically viable anymore)

Category A Cash compensation at replacement cost for the land as determined by a licensedindependent appraiser using internationally recognized valuation standards, or, if feasible, ‗land for land‘ will be provided (a new parcel of land with an equivalent productivity, located at an area acceptable to the DP & with long-term security of tenure.

Subsistence allowance, Php 15,000/ha. DP will be given time to harvest crops. Cash compensation for perennial of commercial

value as determined by the DENR or concerned appraisal committee

If relocating, DP to be provided free transportation Rehabilitation assistance (skills training and other

development activities), Php 15,000, will be provided in coordination with other government agencies if the present means of livelihood is no longer viable & DP

12/18/2009 of 181

Type of Loss Application Entitled Person Compensation / Entitlement will have to engage in a new income activity.

Category B Financial assistance equivalent to the average annual gross harvest for the past 3 years but not less than Php 15,000.

DP will be given sufficient time to harvest crops. Cash compensation for perennials of commercial

value as determined by DENR or concerned appraisal committee

Financial assistance to make up for land preparation, Php 150/m2.

If relocating, DP to be provided free transportation. Rehabilitation assistance, Php 15,000, will be

provided in coordination with other government agencies if present means of livelihood is no longer viable & DP will have to engage in a new income activity.

Category C – Agricultural lessees

As per RA 6389 and EO 1035 Disturbance compensation equivalent to 5 times the

average gross harvest on land holding during the 5 preceding years but not less than Php 15,000.

Rehabilitation assistance, Php 15,000. Temporary use of land All DPs Compensation to be provided for loss of income

during the period, standing crops, cost of soil restoration & damaged structures.

2. Residential land &/or Commercial land

Actual area needed by the project and the remaining land is still viable for continued use

Category A For the portion of the land needed: Cash compensation at replacement cost for land as

determined by a licensed independent appraiser using internationally recognized valuation standards.

Subject to the provisions set forth in Section 5 of RA 8974.

Cash compensation for perennials of commercial value as determined by the DENR of the concerned appraisal committee.

Remaining residential or commercial land becomes not viable for continued use

Category A Cash compensation at replacement cost for and as determined by a licensed independent appraiser using internationally recognized valuation standards.

Subject to the provisions set forth in Section 5 of RA 8974, or if feasible, ‗land for land‘ will be provided in terms of a new parcel of land of equivalent

12/18/2009 of 181

Type of Loss Application Entitled Person Compensation / Entitlement productivity, at a location acceptable to DP, & with long-term security of tenure. The replacement land should be of acceptable size under zoning laws or a plot of equivalent value, whichever is larger, in a nearby resettlement with adequate physical, social infrastructure. When the affected holding is larger in value than the relocation plot, cash compensation will cover the difference in value.

Cash compensation for perennials of commercial value as determined by the DENR of concerned appraisal committee.

If relocating, DP to be provided free transportation Temporary use of land All DPs Compensation to be provided for loss of income

during the period, standing crops, cost of soil restoration and damaged structures.

3. Main structures (e.g. house, shops etc)

Structure with or without a building permit, partially affected and the remaining structure is still viable for continued use.

Owners of structure with full title or tax declaration to the land or those who are covered by customary law

Compensation in cash for affected portion of the structure including the cost of restoring the remaining structure as determined by the concerned appraisal committee with no deduction for salvaged building materials.

DPs that have business affected due to partial impact on the structure are entitled to a subsistence allowance for the loss of income during the reconstruction period. (to be computed by RIC).

Owners of structures, including shanty dwellers in urban areas, have no title or tax declaration to the land or other acceptable proof of ownership.

Compensation in cash for affected portion of the structure including the cost of restoring the remaining structure as determined by the concerned appraisal committee with no deduction for salvaged building materials.

Shanty dwellers in urban areas opting to go back to their place of origin or to be shifted to government relocation sites will be provided free transportation.

DPs that have business affected due to partial impact on the structure are entitled to a subsistence allowance for the loss of income during the reconstruction period. (to be computed by the RIC).

Professional squatters will not receive compensation but they can collect their salvaged materials.

Renters of structures Given 1 month notice on the schedule of demolition.

12/18/2009 of 181

Type of Loss Application Entitled Person Compensation / Entitlement including renters of shanty dwellings in urban areas

If shifting is required, DP is given transitional allowance equivalent to 3 months rent of a similar structure within the area.

For house tenants renting outside of, or within the ROW, and who have to transfer elsewhere, free transportation will be provided.

Renting shanty dwellers in urban areas who opt to go back to their place of origin in the province or be shifted to government relocation sites will also be provided free transportation.

4. Independent shops Shops with or without building permit, partially affected and the remaining structures are still viable for continued use.

Owners of structure with or without full title of tax declaration to the land or those who are covered by customary law.

Compensation is cash for affected portion of the structure, including the cost of restoring the remaining structure as determined by the concerned appraisal committee with no deduction to salvaged building materials.

As determined by the RIC, DPs will be entitled to transitional allowance to cover for their computed income loss during the demolition and reconstruction of their shops, but not to exceed a month period.

Renters (tenants) of affected shops

As determined by the RIC, shop renters will be entitled to a transitional allowance to cover for their computed income loss during the period that their business is interrupted.

Entire shop affected or when the remaining structure becomes not viable for continued use with or without building permit

Owners of structure with or without full title of tax declaration to the land or those who are covered by customary law.

Compensation in cash for the entire structure at replacement cost as determined by the concerned appraisal committee without deduction for salvaged building materials.

Subsistence allowance of Php 15,000 to each DP. Free transportation if relocating Rehabilitation assistance in the form of skills training

and other development activities and equivalent to Php 15,000 will be provided in coordination with other government agencies if the present means of livelihood is no longer viable and DP will have to engage in a new income activity.

Professional squatter will not receive any compensation but they can collect their salvageable materials.

Renters (tenants) of affected Given 3 months notice on the schedule of demolition

12/18/2009 of 181

Type of Loss Application Entitled Person Compensation / Entitlement shops As determined by the RIC, shop renters will be

entitled to a transitional allowance to cover for their computed income loss during the period that their business is interrupted, but not to exceed a 3-month period.

5. Other fixed assets or structures

Loss of, or damage to, affected assets, partially or entirely

DPs Cash compensation for affected portion of structure including cost of restoring remaining structure, as determined by the concerned appraisal committee, with no depreciation or deduction for salvaged building materials.

6. Electric and/ or water connection

Loss of, or damage to, affected assets, partially or entirely

DPs Compensation to cover cost of restoring the facilities

7. Public facilities

Loss of, or damage to, public infrastructure

Concerned agencies Compensation in cash at replacement cost to respective agencies

Attachment RCF-2 SAMPLE TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR AN INDEPENDENT APPRAISER The Independent Appraiser will play a key role during the Land Acquisition Assessment process. It will be hired by the Subproject Proponent. Criteria for selecting the appropriate agency shall be based on competence, experience and general advocacy of the group. The selection process will undergo the usual procurement procedures. The licensed independent appraiser should use internationally recognized valuation standards to assess replacement cost and cash compensation for affected lands. More specifically the Independent Appraiser may be tasked to perform any of the following: 1. Inspection and identification of the property

Conduct title plotting to determine the configuration of the property and if there are any discrepancies from the technical description of the title

Survey of immediate neighborhood for present conditions and improvements Title Verification Owner Verification Background information

2. Right-of-Way verification 3. Zonal classification of land 4. Zonal valuation for the area 5. Preparation of appraisal report to include the following:

Summary of property valuation Complete description and details of the property Photographs of subject property Location and vicinity plan

MARCELA FARMS INC. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT REPORT METHANE RECOVERY PROJECT FROM THE BIOGAS DIGESTER

of 181

Attachment RCF-3 ELEMENTS OF A FULL RESETTLEMENT PLAN1Para. 2-21, Annex A of OP 4.12 The scope and level of detail of a Resettlement Plan (RP) vary with the magnitude and complexity of resettlement. The RP is based on up-to-date and reliable information about the:

proposed resettlement and its impacts on the displaced persons and other adversely affected groups; and

legal issues involved in resettlement. A full RP covers the elements below, as relevant. When any element is not relevant to project circumstances, it should be noted in the RP. Elements of a Full Resettlement Plan A. Project Description

General description of subproject & identification of subproject area

B. Potential Impacts

Subproject component or activities that give rise to resettlement Zone of impact of such component or activities Alternatives considered to avoid or minimize resettlement Mechanisms established to minimize resettlement, to the extent possible, during subproject

implementation

C. Objectives

Main objectives of the resettlement program

D. Socio-Economic Studies

Findings of socio-economic studies to be conducted in the early stages of subproject preparation & with the involvement of potentially displaced people, including the ff:

Results of a census survey covering: - current occupants (with gender and age disaggregation) of affected area to establish basis

for design of resettlement program & to exclude subsequent inflows of people from eligibility for compensation & resettlement assistance

- standard characteristics of displaced HHs, including description of production systems, labor, HH organization; & baseline information on livelihoods (including, as relevant, production levels & income derived from both formal & informal economic activities) & standards of living (including health status) of the displaced population

- magnitude of expected loss, total or partial, of assets, & extent of displacement, physical or economic;

- information on vulnerable groups or persons (para. 8, OP 4.12), for whom special provisions may have to be made

- provisions to update information on DP's livelihoods & standards of living at regular intervals so that the latest information is available at the time of their displacement

Other studies describing the ff: - land tenure & transfer systems, including an inventory of common property natural

resources from which people derive their livelihoods and sustenance, non-title-based usufruct systems (including fishing, grazing, or use of forest areas) governed by local recognized land allocation mechanisms, & any issues raised by different tenure systems in subproject area

- patterns of social interaction in affected communities, including social networks & social support systems, & how they will be affected by the subproject

- public infrastructure & social services that will be affected - social & cultural characteristics of displaced communities, including description of formal &

informal institutions, e.g., community organizations, ritual groups, NGOs that may be relevant to the consultation strategy & to designing & implementing the resettlement activities


of 181

E. Legal Framework

Findings of an analysis of the legal framework, covering: Scope of the power of eminent domain & nature of compensation associated with it, in terms of

both valuation methodology & timing of payment Applicable legal & administrative procedures, including a description of remedies available to DPs

in the judicial process & the normal timeframe for such procedures, & any available alternative dispute resolution mechanisms that may be relevant to resettlement under the subproject

Relevant law, including customary & traditional law, governing land tenure, valuation of assets & losses, compensation, & natural resource usage rights; customary personal law related to displacement; & environmental laws & social welfare legislation

Laws & regulations relating to the agencies responsible for implementing resettlement activities Gaps, if any, between local laws covering eminent domain & resettlement & WBs resettlement

policy, & the mechanisms to bridge such gaps Any legal steps necessary to ensure the effective implementation of resettlement activities under

the subproject, including, as appropriate, a process for recognizing claims to legal rights to land—including claims that derive from customary law & traditional usage (WB OP 4.12, para.15 b)

F. Institutional Framework

Findings of an analysis of the institutional framework covering the ff: Identification of agencies responsible for resettlement activities & NGOs that may have a role in

subproject implementation Assessment of the institutional capacity of such agencies & NGOs Any steps that are proposed to enhance the institutional capacity of agencies & NGOs responsible

for resettlement implementation.

G Eligibility

Definition of DPs & criteria for determining their eligibility for compensation & other resettlement assistance, including relevant cut-off dates

H. Valuation of, and Compensation for, Losses

The methodology to be used in valuing losses to determine their replacement cost; and a description of the proposed types and levels of compensation under local law and such supplementary measures as are necessary to achieve replacement cost for lost assets.

I. Resettlement Measures

Description of packages of compensation & other resettlement measures that will assist each category of eligible DPs to achieve the objectives of the policy (WB OP 4.12, para. 6). In addition to being technically & economically feasible, resettlement packages should be compatible with the cultural preferences of the DPs, & prepared in consultation with them.

J. Site Selection, Site Preparation, and Relocation

Alternative relocation sites considered and explanation of those selected, covering: Institutional & technical arrangements for identifying & preparing relocation sites, whether

rural or urban, for which a combination of productive potential, locational advantages, & other factors is at least comparable to the advantages of the old sites, with an estimate of the time needed to acquire & transfer land & ancillary resources

Any measures necessary to prevent land speculation or influx of ineligible persons at selected sites

Procedures for physical relocation, including timetables for site preparation & transfer Legal arrangements for regularizing tenure & transferring titles to resettlers

K. Housing, Infrastructure, and Social Services

Plans to provide (or finance resettlers' provision of) housing, infrastructure (e.g., water supply, feeder roads), & social services (e.g., schools, health services); plans to ensure comparable services to host populations; any needed site development, engineering & architectural designs for these facilities

L. Environmental Protection and Management

Description of boundaries of relocation area; & assessment of environmental impacts of the proposed resettlement & measures to mitigate & manage these impacts (coordinated as


of 181

appropriate with the environmental assessment of the main investment requiring the resettlement) M. Community Participation

Involvement of resettlers & host communities, including: Description of strategy for consultation with & participation of resettlers & hosts in design

& implementation of resettlement activities Summary of views expressed & how these were taken into account in preparing the RP Review of resettlement alternatives presented & choices made by DPs regarding options

available to them, including choices related to forms of compensation & resettlement assistance, to relocating as individuals, families or as parts of pre-existing communities or kinship groups, to sustaining existing patterns of group organization, & to retaining access to cultural property (e.g. places of worship, pilgrimage centers, cemeteries)

Institutionalized arrangements by which DP can communicate their concerns to subproject authorities throughout planning & implementation, & measures to ensure that such vulnerable groups as indigenous people, ethnic minorities, the landless, & women are adequately represented

N. Integration With Host Populations

Measures to mitigate the impact of resettlement on any host communities, including: Consultations with host communities & local governments; Arrangements for prompt tendering of payment due the hosts for land or other assets

provided to resettlers Arrangements for addressing any conflict that may arise between resetlers & host

communities Any measures necessary to augment services (e.g., education, water, health, &

production services) in host communities to make them at least comparable to services available to resettlers

O. Grievance Procedures

Affordable & accessible procedures for third-party settlement of disputes arising from resettlement; such grievance mechanisms should take into account availability of judicial recourse & community & traditional dispute settlement mechanisms

P. Organizational Responsibilities

Organizational framework for implementing resettlement, including identification of agencies responsible for delivery of resettlement measures & provision of services; arrangements to ensure appropriate coordination between agencies & jurisdictions involved in implementation; & any measures (including technical assistance) needed to strengthen implementing agencies' capacity to design & carry out resettlement activities; provisions for the transfer, to local authorities or resettlers, of responsibility for managing facilities & services provided under the subproject & for transferring other such responsibilities from the resettlement implementing agencies, when appropriate.

Q. Implementation Schedule

Implementation schedule of all resettlement activities from preparation through implementation, including target dates for the achievement of expected benefits to resettlers & hosts & terminating the various forms of assistance. Schedule should indicate how resettlement activities are linked to the overall implementation of the subproject.

R. Costs and Budget

Tables showing itemized cost estimates for all resettlement activities, including allowances for inflation, population growth, & other contingencies; timetables for expenditures; sources of funds; & arrangements for timely flow of funds, & funding for resettlement, if any, in areas outside the jurisdiction of LGUs.

S. Monitoring and Evaluation

Arrangements for monitoring of resettlement activities by the implementing agency, supplemented by independent monitors as considered appropriate, to ensure complete & objective information; performance monitoring indicators to measure inputs, outputs, & outcomes for resettlement activities; involvement of DPs in the monitoring process; evaluation of the impact of resettlement for a reasonable period after all resettlement & related development activities have been completed; using the results of resettlement monitoring to guide subsequent implementation.


of 181

Attachment RCF-4 ELEMENTS OF AN ABBREVIATED RESETTLEMENT PLAN2 2 Para. 22, Annex A of OP 4.12 An abbreviated plan covers the following minimum elements:

A. Census survey of displaced persons and valuation of assets B. Description of compensation and assistance C. Consultations with displaced people about acceptable alternatives) D. Institutional responsibility for implementation and procedures for grievance redress E. Arrangements for monitoring and implementation F. Timetable and budget


of 181

Attachment RCF-5 SAMPLE TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR AN EXTERNAL MONITORING AGENCY A. Introduction Monitoring and evaluation of resettlement is an integral part of the project cycle, and one of the requirements of RP that the implementing agency and project proponent will appoint an independent, qualified, and unbiased entity that could be a social science institute, an NGO, a specialist consulting firm or combination of these to conduct the external monitoring and evaluation. The external monitoring agency must ensure that the provisions of the RP are adhered to, examine available data and information systems, and obtain complete and objective information. More specifically, the tasks of external monitors are: 1. Review and verify all existing data, data bases and information systems including census of families to be relocated; the data files for each relocated family and their entitlements, the census of families completed post relocation, and the Project Management Office data base on affected families. 2. Verify the results of internal monitoring being carried out and any other agencies involved in implementing the RP and providing entitlements to DPs, and suggest improvement to those systems. 3. Assess whether the resettlement objectives, as set out in the RP, have been met, with respect to living conditions and livelihood. 4. Ascertain whether the resettlement entitlements were appropriate to meeting the objectives of the RP, and whether the objectives were suited to affected families‘ conditions. 5. Obtain data and assess the social impacts of resettlement (before and after conditions) and the effectiveness, impact and sustainability of the resettlement process in social terms. 6. Review the viability of housing schemes for DP‘s affordability to meet costs. Obtain data and assess the economic impacts of resettlement, including environmental cost/benefit analysis, and the effectiveness, impact and sustainability of the resettlement process in economic terms. 7. Review systems for management and financial monitoring of the RP, audit internal management data relating to the RP and recommended improvements. 8. Make recommendations regarding the implementation of the RP and draw lessons as a guide to future resettlement policy making and planning. 9. Prepare and agree with PMO on a detailed work program that includes meetings, reports and schedules. 10. Confirms if DPs maintained their standard of living. 11. Review the absorptive capacity of relocation sites.


of 181

12. Identify total number of households that are entitled to benefits and determine if they are receiving entitlements. 13. Disaggregate data by gender and age to determine gender intergenerational impacts. B. Methodology Data Base Establishment The implementing agency is developing a system for recording information about settler families and their entitlements. This database will be used to record basic information, determine whether affected persons are relocated to secure and affordable socialized formal housing sector; the receipt of entitlements under the RP; whether livelihood and living standards have been restored or enhanced or not; and that an orderly and peaceful relocation of informal households has taken place. The data will include benefit monitoring and evaluation indicators. Quantitative data from the annual survey will be analyzed and interpreted in conjunction with data obtained during quarterly monitoring including qualitative data. C. Ex-post Survey and Evaluation The EMA will conduct one ex-post evaluation survey, at least one year after relocation. This evaluation will assess the achievement of the resettlement objective, the change in living standards and livelihood and progress in the restoration of the economic and social base of relocated families. D. Sampling Size The EMA shall develop a methodology approved by the Project Proponent and Implementing Agency to determine appropriate sample size to ensure coverage of all relocation / resettlement sites. Data will be disaggregated by gender. E. Expertise Required Expertise required will include:

A sociologist / resettlement specialist with expertise in all areas of social research methodology, including consultation techniques and large-scale survey design and implementation, and a thorough understanding of issues of urban poverty. This person will be likely to act as team leader.

An economist A financial monitoring specialist A database specialist A community development specialist

The team should be able to conduct the monitoring and evaluation in an objective manner, incorporating a wide rage of viewpoints, to work closely with their counterparts and undertake training and capacity building in monitoring and evaluation. The team will also include necessary technical and administrative support staff such as statistical experts, field community / survey staff and office support staff. F. Reporting


of 181

The EMA will provide copies of comprehensive monitoring reports together with recommendations to improve implementation of the RP to the Project Proponent and Implementing Agency one week after the above stated reports are due. The EMA will set up a gender-disaggregated database for monitoring and evaluation building upon the pre- and post-relocation census data and the project‘s internal record-keeping system. This will be done as early as possible. The database will be used to measure the impact of relocation, and change at the resettlement sites post relocation as the intended social and economic development takes place including appropriate benefit indicators. The database will also be used to monitor the receipt of entitlements by affected families and verify that the application of entitlements is appropriate and conforms to the RP. G. Quarterly Monitoring The EMA will conduct quarterly monitoring for as long as relocation activities are in progress. This is to ensure that conditions for resettlement as contained in the RP are being followed and to verify the results of internal monitoring and the receipt of the entitlements. Specifically, quarterly monitoring will examine the resettlement budget and time frame, the entitlements provided, consultation with affected people and stakeholders and the application of grievance redress mechanisms. This ongoing monitoring will also assess broader social and economic impacts and benefits. It will specifically address issues and needs of both relocated families and families yet to relocate, including a commentary on the rate of relocation and implementation of the RP. Information required will be obtained from the internal monitoring database, including information form entitlement files of families receiving assistance, reports from the site management offices, and participatory rapid appraisal to allow wide public participation including focus group discussions and key informant interviews. In addition to DPs, respondents should include POs, NGOs, PIU, concerned LGUs (host and affected) and staff of the other implementing agencies. H. Annual Survey The EMA is required to undertake an annual, sample survey of the relocated families, which will be undertaken in conjunction with every fourth quarter monitoring. This survey will be independent from the census to be undertaken by the Project Proponent and Implementing agency. The EMA‘s survey will compare ―before and after‖ social and economic conditions and reassess the needs of resettled families.


of 181

Attachment RCF-6 ELEMENTS OF AN INDIGENOUS PEOPLES PLAN The Indigenous Peoples Plan (IPP) is prepared in a flexible and pragmatic manner, and its level of detail varies depending on the specific project and the nature of effects to be addressed. The Subproject Proponent should ensure the integration of the IPP into the subproject design. The IPP includes the following elements, as needed: A. A summary of the information referred to in Annex A, paragraph 2, (a) and (b) of WB Policy. B. A summary of the social assessment. C. A summary of results of the free, prior, and informed consultation with the affected IPs‘ communities that was carried out during subproject preparation and that led to broad community support for the subproject. D. A framework for ensuring free, prior, and informed consultation with the affected IPs‘ communities during subproject implementation (Section 9 of this Framework) E. An action plan of measures to ensure that the IPs receive social and economic benefits that are culturally appropriate, including, if necessary, measures to enhance the capacity of the LGU.


of 181

Sub-Annex 3 RULES ON LAND USE CONVERSION Lifted from DAR-AO 1 Series of 2002, Comprehensive Rules on Land Use Conversion. Contents Acronym 1. FRAMEWORK 2. COVERAGE

2.1. Applicability of the Rules 2.2. Areas Non-Negotiable for Conversion 2.3. Areas Highly Restricted from Conversion 2.4. Priority Development Areas and Projects 2.5. Lands within Strategic Agriculture and Fisheries Development Zone (SAFDZ)

3. PROCEDURES 3.1. Criteria for Conversion 3.2. Who May Apply for Conversion 3.3. Documentary Requirements


of 181

Acronyms CARP Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program DA Department of Agriculture DAR Department of Agrarian Reform DENR Department of Environment and Natural Resources EO Executive Order LGU Local Government Unit NIA National Irrigation Administration NIPA National Integrated Protected Areas System RA Republic Act SAFDZ Strategic Agriculture and Fisheries Development Zone


of 181

1. FRAMEWORK Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) Administrative Order (AO) No.1 Series of 2002, or the Comprehensive Rules on Land Use Conversion, which was promulgated:

pursuant to: - Sections 65 and 49 of RA 6657, or the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law of 1988, - Sections 4 (j) and 5 (l) of EO 129-A, or the Reorganization Act of the DAR - pertinent provisions of RA 8435, the Agriculture and Fisheries Modernization Act, and - EO-45-2001, "Prescribing Time Periods for Issuance of Housing-Related Certifications, Clearances and Permits, and Imposing Sanctions for Failure to Observe the Same‖; and

in order to provide effective means of evaluating applications for land use

conversion.

2. COVERAGE Article II, DAR-AO 1-2002

2.1 Applicability of Rules Section 3, DAR-AO 1-2002

These guidelines shall apply to all applications for conversion, from agricultural to nonagricultural uses or to another agricultural use, such as:

Conversions into residential, commercial, industrial, institutional and other nonagricultural purposes;

Development into other types of agricultural activities, such as livestock, poultry, and fishpond, the effect of which is to exempt the land from Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) coverage;

Conversions into non-agricultural use other than that previously authorized; or Conversion of agricultural lands or areas that have been reclassified by the LGU,

or by way of a Presidential Proclamation, to residential, commercial, industrial, or other non-agricultural uses on or after the effectivity of RA 6657 on 15 June 1988, pursuant to Section 20 of RA 7160, and other pertinent laws and regulations, and are to be converted to such uses.

However, for those reclassified prior to 15 June 1988, the guidelines in securing an exemption clearance from DAR shall apply. 2.2 Areas Non-Negotiable for Conversion Section 4, DAR-AO 1-2002

An application involving areas non-negotiable for conversion shall not be given due course even when some portions thereof are eligible for conversion. The following areas shall NOT be subject to conversion:

Lands within protected areas designated under the National Integrated Protected Areas System (NIPAS), including mossy and virgin forests, riverbanks, and swamp forests or marshlands, as determined by the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR);

All irrigated lands, as delineated by the Department of Agriculture (DA) and/or the National Irrigation Administration (NIA), where water is: - available to support rice and other crop production, and - not available for rice and other crop production but are within areas programmed for irrigation facility rehabilitation by the government;


of 181

All irrigable lands already covered by irrigation projects with firm funding commitments, as delineated by the DA an/or NIA; and

All agricultural lands with irrigation facilities. 2.3 Areas Highly Restricted from Conversion Section 5, DAR-AO 1-2002

The areas / projects classified as highly restricted from conversion include: Irrigable lands not covered by irrigation projects with firm funding commitment; Agro-industrial croplands, or lands presently planted to industrial crops that

support the economic viability of existing agricultural infrastructure and agro-based enterprises;

Highlands or areas located in elevation of 500 m or above and which have the potential for growing semi-temperate or high value crops;

Lands issued with notice of land valuation and acquisition or subject of a perfected agreement between the landowner and the beneficiaries under the Voluntary Land Transfer (VLT) / direct Payment Scheme (DPS) under the CARP; and

Lands within an Environmentally Critical Area (ECA) or those involving the establishment of an Environmentally Critical Project (ECP).

Applications for conversion under this sub-section shall require, apart from the standard requirements, an Environmental Compliance Certificate (ECC), which the applicant must secure from the DENR prior to application, or prior to commencement of actual land development (for housing projects). The Presidential Agrarian Reform Council (PARC) Land Use Technical Committee (PLUTC) shall participate in the deliberations when the application involves land that is highly restricted from conversion and with an area larger than 5 ha, except housing projects covered by EO 45-2001. 2.4 Priority Development Areas and Projects Section 6, DAR-AO 1-2002

In accordance with RA 7916, EO 124-1993, and EO 258-2000, the following are priority development areas for land conversion:

Specific sites in Regional Agri-Industrial Centers / Regional Industrial Centers (RAIC / RIC) identified by the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) and the DA pursuant to EO-124-1993.

Tourism Development Areas (TDA) identified by the Department of Tourism (DOT) pursuant to EO 124-1993.

Agricultural areas intended for Eco-Zone Projects endorsed by the Philippine Economic Zone Authority (PEZA), pursuant to RA 7916.

Agricultural land, owned by the government, to be converted for projects of national interest, as certified by the proper government agency.

Agricultural land proposed to be developed as sites for processing plants of agricultural products, as certified by DA.

Sites intended for telecommunication facilities endorsed by the National Telecommunications Commission.

Housing projects are priority development projects for land conversion that shall follow the fast-tracking scheme prescribed under EO 45-2001. When the application involves a


of 181

mixed use of housing and non-housing projects, the application shall not enjoy the privileges of housing projects unless at least 80% of the land applied for conversion shall be used directly and exclusively for housing. 2.5 Lands within Strategic Agriculture and Fisheries Development Zone (SAFDZ) Section 7, DAR-AO 1-2002

For lands within SAFDZ, the following rules apply: All irrigated lands, irrigable lands already covered by irrigation projects with firm

funding commitments, and lands with existing or having the potential for growing high-value crops included within the SAFDZ shall be subject to a conversion moratorium for a period of 5 years from 10 February 1998 to 9 February 2003.

During the effectivity of the moratorium, conversion may be allowed with respect to only 5% of said lands within SAFDZ upon compliance with existing laws, rules and regulations.

The maximum of 5% of lands eligible for conversion to non-agricultural use from the total SAFDZ area shall be jointly determined by the DA and DAR, upon the recommendation of the Regional and National SAFDZ Committees pursuant to Rule 9.5.2 of DA-AO 6-1998, or the IRR of RA 8435.

After the expiration of the conversion moratorium, conversion may be allowed on a case-to-case basis, subject to existing laws, rules and regulations on land use conversion.

3. PROCEDURES Article III, DAR-AO 1-2002

3.1 Criteria for Conversion Section 8, DAR-AO 1-2002

Conversion may be allowed if the land subject of application is not among those considered non-negotiable for conversion as provided in Section 2.2 hereof.

Conversion may be allowed in accordance with Section 65 of RA 6657, when: - the land has ceased to be economically feasible and sound for

agricultural purposes; or - the locality has become urbanized and the land will have a greater

economic value for residential, commercial, industrial, or other non-agricultural purposes.

Conversion of lands within SAFDZ, as provided in Rule 9.5.2 of DA-AO-6-1998, shall take into account the following factors:

- The conversion of land use is consistent with the natural expansion of the municipality or locality, as contained in the approved physical framework and CLUP.

- The area to be converted in use is not the only remaining food production area of the community.

- The land use conversion shall not hamper the availability of irrigation to nearby farmlands.

- The areas with low productivity will be accorded priority for land use conversion.

- Sufficient disturbance compensation shall be given to farmers whose livelihood are negatively affected by the land use conversion as provided for by existing laws and regulations.

When the agricultural land which is the subject of the application for conversion has been acquired under RA 6657, its conversion shall be allowed only if the


of 181

applicant is the agrarian reform beneficiary thereof, and after he has fully paid his obligation as required under Section 65 of RA 6657.

3.2 Who May Apply for Conversion Section 9, DAR-AO 1-2002

Owners of private agricultural lands or other persons duly authorized by the landowner;

Beneficiaries of the agrarian reform program after the lapse of 5 years from award, reckoned from the date of the issuance of the Certificate of Landownership Award (CLOA) and who have fully paid their obligations and are qualified under these Rules, or persons duly authorized by them; and

Government agencies, including government-owned or controlled corporations, and LGUs which own agricultural lands as their patrimonial property.

3.3 Documentary Requirements Section 10, DAR-AO 1-2002

The applicant shall submit in 6 copies the documentary requirements enumerated below in 6 separate bound folders, as follows:

1 original set and 5 photocopy sets with Table of Contents and page numbers of all documents including photographs, sequentially numbered, except for maps and development plans which shall likewise be in 6 copies but shall be submitted in 6 separate envelopes with contents properly labeled on each envelope.

Of the 6 folders,

- 2 will be transmitted to the Municipal Agrarian Reform Officer (MARO), containing therein only the filled-up application form and documents ―D‖, ―E‖ and ―Z‖ hereunder.

- The remaining 4 folders shall contain all documents enumerated hereunder that are applicable.

The arrangement of documents shall follow the sequence of the enumeration below, with the requirement referred to as ―A‖ being the first document after the Table of Contents: A. Official receipt showing proof of payment of filling fee and inspection cost B. Official receipt showing proof of posting of bond C. Duly accomplished application for conversion subscribed and sworn to before a notary public or any person authorized to administer oaths D. True copy of the Original Certificate of Title (OCT) or Transfer Certificate of Title (TCT) of the subject land, certified by the Register of Deeds not earlier than thirty (30) days prior to application filing date In case of untitled land, the following shall be required in lieu of a title:

D.1 Certification from the DENR Community Environment and Natural Resources (CENRO) that the landholding has been classified as alienable and disposable; and D.2 Certification from the DENR CENRO (for administrative confirmation of imperfect title) or the Clerk of Court (for judicial confirmation of imperfect title) that the titling process/proceedings have commenced and there are no adverse claimants.


of 181

E. True copy of the Certificate of Title of the subject land as of 15 June 1988 and all successor Titles until the present Title referred to in ―D‖, if applicable. F. True copy of the current Tax Declaration covering the subject property G. Project feasibility study H. Joint venture agreement or any other business arrangement on the use of the land between the landowner and the developer or between the EP/CLOA holders and the developer (if the land was awarded under the agrarian reform program). I. Narrative description of the development plan describing in detail the activities, program components, phasing, schedule, work and financial plan, all dully certified by a licensed engineer, architect, or land use planner. J. Proof of financial and organizational capability of the developer to develop land, including the following information:

J.1 Statement of project cost and availability of potential funding sources for the development of the proposed project; J.2 Profile of the developer; J.3 Most recent financial statement, not later than the year before application, duly authenticated by a certified public accountant; and J.4 If the developer is a corporation or partnership, a copy of its Certificate of Registration and recent General Information Sheet for the immediate preceding year, certified by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). If the land is to be used for socialized housing by the LGU under EO 124-1993, a Sanggunian Resolution appropriating funds for the project and authorizing the LGU to undertake the same shall be required: provided, further, that if the socialized housing shall be undertaken by other government agencies e.g. National Housing Authority and the like, a board resolution approving the project and appropriating funds therefore shall likewise be submitted.

K. Socio-Economic Benefit-Cost Study of the proposed project L. Photographs, of size 5R, using color film and taken on the landholding under sunlight. The applicant shall attach the pictures to a paper background and the photographer who took said pictures shall sign on the said paper background to certify the authenticity of the pictures. On each background paper shall be written a short description of each picture. The picture shall consist of:

L..1 At least 4 photographs taken from the center of the landholding: 1 facing north, 1 facing east, 1 facing south and 1 facing west L.2 At least 1 photograph per corner, taken from each corner of the landholding‘s borders


of 181

L.3 At least 2 photographs each for all distinct man-made structures existing on the land taken from opposite angles L.4 At least 2 photographs of each of the front view of the required billboards. The applicant shall set aside the second copy of said billboard photographs for submission to the MARO; and L.5 Sufficient number of photographs of the most conspicuous landmarks from the nearest barangay center and leading to and from the ingress and egress routes at the subject landholding, for the purpose of assisting the ocular inspection team in locating the site.

M. Affidavit / Undertaking in a single document of the applicant stating:

M.1 The number and names of farmers, agricultural lessees, share tenants, farm workers, actual tillers, and/or occupants in the landholding; if there are no such persons, a statement attesting to such fact; M.2 That the applicant has paid or shall pay disturbance compensation to persons mentioned in ―M.1‖. M.3 That the applicant has erected the required number of billboards and undertakes not to remove, deface or destroy said billboards and that he shall repair or replace the same when damaged, until after the approving authority disposes of the application with finality; M.4 That the applicant has not undertaken and shall not undertake premature development prior to issuance of a Conversion Order; M.5 That he authorizes DAR to forfeit his bond when he undertakes any premature development within the area before or after filing of the application for conversion; and M .6 That he has not commenced any action or filed any claim involving the same land in any court, tribunal or quasi-judicial agency.

N. MARO Certification O. HLURB Regional Officer Certification on the actual zoning / classification of the land P. Department of Agriculture (DA) Certification Q. DENR Certification R. ECC, if it is within an Environmentally Critical Area or it will involve Environmental Critical Project Sub-Annex 1, Environmental Safeguards Framework

S. Special Power of Attorney (SPA) if applicant is not the registered owner


of 181

T. Notarized Secretary‘s Certificate of Board Resolution, if applicant is a corporation or cooperative U. Concurrence letter of mortgagee/individual/entity, if applicable V. Government Agency Endorsement letter if involves Priority Development Area W. Land Ban Certification, if applicable X. PARO Certification, if applicable Y. Vicinity Map / Lot Plan Z. Directional Sketch Map AA. Development Plan Map BB. Topographic Map


of 181

Environmental Management Plans for First Year’s Projects 1. Marcela Farms Wastewater Biogas Project 2. Biotech Farms Wastewater Biogas Project 3. Bulacan Landfill Gas Facility


of 181

Environmental Management Plan Marcela Farms Wastewater Biogas Facility


of 181

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. BRIEF PROJECT INFORMATION ....................................................................... 79

I.1 THE PIGGERY FARM .................................................................................. 80

I.2 FARM LOCATION ........................................................................................ 82

I.3 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS IN THE AREA ........................ 83

I.4 EXISTING WASTEWATER SET-UP........................................................... 84

I.5 COMPLIANCE WITH ENVIRONMENTAL REQUIREMENTS ................ 84

II. METHANE RECOVERY ....................................................................................... 86

II.1 PROJECT ACTIVITY .................................................................................... 86

II.2 WASTEWATER AND GAS GENERATION ............................................... 89

II.2.1 Wastewater ....................................................................................... 89

II.2.2 Biogas .............................................................................................. 89

III. MANPOWER AND PROJECT COST ................................................................... 90

III.1 MANPOWER ................................................................................................. 90

III.2 PROJECT COST ............................................................................................ 90

IV. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN...................................................... 91

IV.1 CONSTRUCTION PHASE ............................................................................ 91

IV.1.1 Solid Wastes Generation .................................................................. 91

IV.1.2 Health and Safety ............................................................................. 91

IV.2 OPERATION PHASE .................................................................................... 93

IV.2.1 Wastewater Generation .................................................................... 93

IV.2.2 Air Pollution from Burning the Biogas ............................................ 94

IV.2.3 Sludge Generation ............................................................................ 95

IV.2.4 Odor Generation............................................................................... 95

IV.2.5 Noise Generation ............................................................................. 96


V. MATRIX OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN ...................... 98

VI. PUBLIC CONSULTATION……………………………………………………….

VII. INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENT AND CAPACITY BUILDING ......... Error!

Bookmark not defined. VII.1 INFORMATION, EDUCATION AND COMMUNICATION CAMPAIGN

....................................................................................................................... 103

VII.2 VALIDATION OF THE PROJECT’S ENVIRONMENTAL

PERFORMANCE ............................................ Error! Bookmark not defined.

VII.2.1 Multi-partite Monitoring Team ......... Error! Bookmark not defined.

VII.2.2 Monitoring and Follow-up ................ Error! Bookmark not defined.

VII.2.3 Institutional Arrangement of LBP ................................................. 104

VIII. ACCOUNTABILITY STATEMENT ................................................................... 106

IX. ANNEX.................................................................................................................. 107

IX.1 TEST REPORT ............................................................................................. 108


of 181

I. BRIEF PROJECT INFORMATION Proponent : MARCELA FARMS INC. Business Address : Brgy. Lourdes, Cortes, Bohol President / CEO : Marlito C. Uy Project : Methane Recovery and Combustion from the Biogas Digester Project Location : Brgy. Lourdes, Cortes, Bohol Project Type : Livestock Project PSIC : A 02 – Farming of Animals (project is a component) Contact Persons on the Environmental Assessment Report Marcela Farms Farm Manager : Florentino Balboa Contact No. : 038-5001377 PCO : Arnel Terec Contact No. : 0917-3042261 LANDBANK PLG : Noemi P. Dela Paz Designation : Vice President Contact No. : (632) 405-7340 Fax No. : (632) 528-8523 EPMD : Prudencio E. Calado III Designation : Acting Head Contact No. : (632) 405-7339 Fax No. : (632) 528-8484


of 181

I.1 THE PIGGERY FARM

The livestock of Marcela Farms Inc. is a farrow to finish piggery farm with an existing sow level of 3,758 heads. The estimated hog population is 37,580 heads if one (1) sow produces ten (10) piglets. Marcela plans to expand their farm to 4,360 sows in 2010 which will have an estimated total hog population of 43,600 heads. The Standing Pig Population (SPP) for the 4,360 sows is as follows:

Pig Type SPP, heads Weight, kg Sows 4,360 220 Wean 7,373 5 Finish 7,373 25 Nursery 18,433 90

Pigpens are already being constructed for the expansion. There will be a total of eight (8) pigpens for gestating sows, lactating sows, boars, feeder pigs and nursery pigs. The floors of each pigpen are slatted and perforated which allows the wastes to be flushed to the canal underneath. The farm occupies an area of 165,884 square meters located at Brgy. Lourdes, Cortes, Bohol. It existed since 1995. Photos of the piggery farm:

The pigpen buildings


of 181

On going development inside the pigpen buildings

Final set-up of a pigpen


of 181

I.2 FARM LOCATION

The piggery farm of Marcela Farms is located at Brgy. Lourdes, Municipality of Cortes in the Province of Bohol. The geographical coordinates at one point is at latitude 9o41‘21.45‖ and longitude 123o52‘15.20‖. The area of the farm is 165,884 square meters covered by Tax Declaration Nos. 3-006-00102, 93-006-00112, 1606-217, 93-006-00110, 93-006-00138, 93-006-00161, 93-006-00162, 93-006-00163, 93-006-00164, 93-006-00160 and 93-006-00151, Original Certificate of Title Nos. 78564, 78566, 77337, 79999 and 75279, and Deed of Sale Nos. 3583, 3762 and 3774. Below are maps of the project site.


of 181

I.3 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS IN THE AREA

In the early stage of the piggery farm, the vicinity of the project site was idle, with no human developments. The area was undeveloped occupied by natural vegetation of grasslands and trees in an undulating terrain. Residents were not visible then by the naked eye from the farm. However, as time passed, little by little the residents settled in. There are now more or less 10 residential houses in a hundred meters. Farm workers also migrated near the area. The residents in the vicinity may get affected by the environmental impacts of the piggery farm, especially, the foul odor and contamination of the wastewater. Bacong Creek is situated one (1) kilometer away, north of the project site. The creek is continuous, average of four (4) meters wide flowing from south-east to north-west that discharges to the Bohol Strait. Contamination of the creek is unlikely to occur considering the distance and the permeability property of the soil. Bacong Creek is classified as Class D pursuant to DENR Administrative Order No. 1992-34. Marcela Farms will manage a thirty (30) hectares banana plantation adjacent west of the piggery farm. Marcela Farms plans to discharge its treated effluent and sludge to the plantation. Moreover, the farm relies on groundwater, as this is being utilized for drinking and for other utilities. There are three (3) groundwater wells in the vicinity, each are situated about 200 meters from the location of the anaerobic digesters. Based on the latest Test Report conducted by a water testing laboratory, the water source is not contaminated (refer to Annex VII.1).


of 181

I.4 EXISTING WASTEWATER SET-UP

Manure in the pigpens is washed with water and discharged into to eight (8) cement reactors. Overflow from the reactors flows into an anaerobic lagoon. The anaerobic lagoon stores the wastewater for an indefinite period.. It was constructed in 1996 with a capacity of around 105,000 cu.m. Flow Diagram:

Design Parameters:

Reactors Quantity /

Unit

Dimension (m) Capacity (cu.m.) Length Width Depth

Closed reactors 8 20 3 3 180 Anaerobic lagoon 1 ≈ 125 ≈ 56 15 105,000

I.5 COMPLIANCE WITH ENVIRONMENTAL REQUIREMENTS

An Environmental Compliance Certificate (ECC) was secured from the Environmental Management Bureau (EMB) Region VII on January 29, 2004 for a 2,500 sow level and a total hog population of 25,000 heads in an area of 165,884 square meters land. Concerns raised during the public consultation were 1] odor issue, 2] health hazards and 3] local employment. The concerns were resolved by Marcela Farms and the stakeholders as evidence of the approved ECC. Marcela Farms likewise secured a Discharge Permit (DP) from EMB Region VII in compliance with Republic Act No. 9275 or known as the Philippine Clean Water Act. The latest DP was issued on January 7, 2009 which allows Marcela Farms to discharge to Bacong Creek with a wastewater volume not to exceed 54,000 cu.m per year. Despite the Discharge Permit, the farm does not discharge their effluent in the creek considering its distance, but instead, the farm currently stores them in lagoons within the farm premises. Marcela Farms analyzed the water sourced from a deep well. Based on the latest Test Report conducted by a water testing laboratory, the water source is not contaminated (refer to Annex VII.1) The farm installed a 280KW gas engine to combust the methane. Marcela Farms will be securing a Permit to Operate (PTO) at EMB Region VII in compliance with Republic Act No. 8749 or known as the Philippine Clean Air Act of 1999.

8 units of Closed Reactors Anaerobic Lagoon

Influent


of 181

Permit Reference No. Date Secured Validity Conditions

ECC 07 04 01-29 0051 116-A

Jan. 29, 2004 No expiration

1. Sow level – 2,500 heads 2. Hog population – 25,000

heads 3. Pigpens – 36 units 4. Land area – 165,884

sq.m. DP DP-09-A-

071216-002 Jan. 7, 2009 Jan. 30,

2010 1. Volume discharge to

creek – 54,000 cu.m.


of 181

II. METHANE RECOVERY

II.1 PROJECT ACTIVITY

The main components of the methane recovery project are as follows: a. Anaerobic digester (with liner and cover) b. Gas engine c. Flaring equipment d. Sludge drying bed e. Gas collection pipes f. Iron piling scrubber g. Aeration and settling ponds Design Parameters:

Component Quantity Capacity / Specifications Remarks

Anaerobic digester 2 20,000 & 63,000 cu.m. Set-up is parallel Bottom Liner and Cover

1 mm thick HDPE

Gas engine 3 280 KW each 1 unit is already installed

Flaring equipment To be used to burn the methane when the gas engine will not be utilized

Sludge drying bed Sludge drying will only be 20cm high

Gas collection pipes 117mm diameter PE Iron pilling scrubber To remove hydrogen

sulfide Aeration and settling ponds

Final containment of the effluent prior to discharge to the banana plantation.

Wastewater from the flushing of the wastes will be discharged to the anaerobic digester. Gas trapped in the digester will flow to the collection pipes directed to the gas engine. An iron piling scrubber will be placed at the end of the pipe to remove hydrogen sulfide prior to combustion. When the gas engines are not in use, the gas shall be diverted for flaring. Overflow from the anaerobic digesters will be discharged to an open lagoon. The treated effluent shall be used to irrigate the 30 ha. banana plantation. Based on information from the Department of Agriculture and FAO, bananas typically require about 2,000 to 2,500 mm of rainfall per year. Hence, for a 30 hectare banana plantation, it would need about 62,000 cu.m. of water per month. On the other hand, the wastewater is generated at the rate of 500 cu.m. daily, and the average annual rainfall in


of 181

the area is 1,639 mm/yr. Further, the evapotranspiration rate of bananas is approximately 6 mm per day. Considering the rate of water inflow and utilization of the plantation, it is theoretically verified that the water requirement of the plantation is partially met by the rainfall water and wastewater combined. Solids shall be flushed into the anaerobic digester and form sludge. Perforated drain pipes had been installed in the bottom of the digester to collect the sludge and pump it to the sludge drying bed. Sludge shall be used as fertilizer to the 30 ha. banana plantation. Diagram of the Methane Recovery Project


of 181

Photos of the Anaerobic Digesters:

The anaerobic digester with HDPE cover. Biogas is already trapped inside.

On going development of the other anaerobic digester. HDPE lining had already been placed and wastewater is being filled inside. HDPE material will be used to cover the digester


of 181

II.2 WASTEWATER AND GAS GENERATION

II.2.1 Wastewater

The wastewater of Marcela Farms is estimated at 0.01137 cu.m. per pig per day. With a total hog population of 43,600 heads, the wastewater generated is estimated at 500 cu.m per day. Design considerations of the two (2) anaerobic digesters are as follows:

Parameters Digester 1 Digester 2 Total

Volume (cu.m.) 22,500 53,000 75,500 No. of pigs (heads) 11,733 18,433 30,166 HRT (days) 169 253 - - -

II.2.2 Biogas

Based on the pig waste properties, biogas production for the anaerobic digesters are as follows:

Parameters Digester 1 Digester 2 Total

Estimated methane production (ft3/day)

41,000 74,890 115,890

Power Output (kW) 122 223 345 Energy Output (kWh/day) 2,925 5,349 7,821 Methane Reduction (MT/yr) 237 433 670 CO2 Reduction (MT/yr) 4,977 9,093 14,070


of 181

III. MANPOWER AND PROJECT COST

III.1 MANPOWER

The manpower requirement of the previous operation without the methane recovery project was two (2) personnel while with the methane recovery project is two (2) engineers and six (6) workers. Manpower summary: Baseline Scenario Project Activity

Manpower Requirement

2 personnel for maintenance

6 personnel for maintenance 2 engineers

III.2 PROJECT COST

The cost of the methane recovery project is as follows:

Detail Costing (Php)

Construction / Investment Cost of the methane recovery project

24,881,000.00

Annual maintenance of the methane recovery project

1,582,000.00

Total 26,463,000.00


of 181

IV. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN

IV.1 CONSTRUCTION PHASE

IV.1.1 Solid Wastes Generation

Impact Identification The set-up and installation of perforated plastic for the flooring, corrugated metal sheet for the ceiling, materials such as metal bars and panels for partitioning and the plastic containers for the feeding system in the pigpens had generated various solid wastes from small pieces to bulk spoils that include scrap plastics, scrap metal sheets bars, scrap wood, fractured hollow blocks and other construction debris. Solid wastes improperly managed can be easily dumped on the ground. Waste is a nuisance to Marcela Farms. The regular hygiene of the workers / laborers generated human wastes. Besides foul odor, the wastes carry harmful bacteria. The wastes can contaminate the working area and the ground soil. Prevention / Mitigation A solid wastes storage area had been provided by the contractor. Recyclable wastes was recovered and used or sold to junk buyers. Wastes were disposed to the municipality‘s garbage collector once a week. The existing toilet facility of the piggery farm was used by the contractor‘s workers / laborers. It has a facility for women and a separate facility for men. It accommodated all the sanitation needs of the workers and the septic tank was adequate to receive the domestic wastewater generated. Monitoring The storage area of the solid wastes was regularly inspected by the project engineer once a week to ensure that the wastes were properly managed and stored. The project engineer ensured that the wastes did not accumulate in the area. For the toilet facility, if the water is not immediately discharged into the bowl during flushing, the septic tank is desludged. The project engineer reports his activities to the PCO.

IV.1.2 Health and Safety

Hazard Identification


of 181

The placement of the one (1) mm HDPE cover in the anaerobic digester increased the generation of biogas. Likewise, the trapped gas increased the risk of escaping to the atmosphere and the potential to catch fire that may lead to explosion if the gas is exposed to heat. The existing flare equipment is a hazard since it is exposed and its nozzle‘s orientation is horizontal. Prevention / Mitigation The Project Engineer ensured that the HDPE cover is not damaged nor has any holes before installing it on the anaerobic digester. Equipment that are sources of heat had been kept at a safe distance away from the methane recovery project especially from the anaerobic digester. Marcela Farms shall enclose the flaring equipment and re-orient the nozzle vertical with an elevated height. It shall have a windshield and an auto ignition system. Workers operating the gas engines and flaring equipment shall wear personal protective. Monitoring The project engineer inspected the HDPE cover and the collection pipes for leaks after installation. The PCO shall observe the operator of the gas engine and the flaring equipment if safety protocols are observed.

IV.1.3 Noise Generation

Impact Identification Construction works and the use of heavy equipment generated noise. Noise is a nuisance to the employees and workers. It can impair the hearing senses of a person if he/she is overexposed to noise beyond the allowable levels. Prevention / Mitigation Workers assigned in noisy areas of the construction activity wore earplugs. They were also not overexposed by allowing the workers to leave the area once in a while and the heavy equipment were not operated continuously for long hours. Monitoring The project engineer inspected the area daily and measures the noise levels using a Sound Meter Level.


of 181

IV.1.4 Traffic Congestion

Impact Identification The heavy equipment transported to the project site caused slowing of the traffic flow in major and barangay roads. Prevention / Mitigation Traffic enforcers were assigned at the intersections and at the entrance roads leading to the project site. Appropriate traffic signage were also placed. The heavy equipment were parked inside the project site and not on public roads. Monitoring The project engineer daily observes the traffic flow in the area. He provides recommendations to Marcela Farms if traffic congestion occurs.

IV.2 OPERATION PHASE

IV.2.1 Wastewater Generation

Impact Identification Liquid waste that shall be generated from the washing of the pigpens shall be directed and treated in the Wastewater Treatment Facility (WTF) of Marcela Farms. Improper flushing of the wastes may not enter the WTF and will contaminate the ground soil and percolate to the ground water. Effluent may still be pollutive after treatment. Thus, discharge may still contaminate the soil and ground water. Prevention / Mitigation Wastes shall be daily flushed in a precise manner to prevent water wastage and shall ensure that the wastes shall be directly discharged to the two (2) anaerobic digesters. Maintenance of the facility shall be done regularly. The effluent from the final stage of the treatment process should be within the allowable standards of the DENR. To ensure that there will be no contamination from the treated effluent, the finishing and settling ponds shall be properly closed to disallow the discharge of wastewater anywhere except to the banana plantation. .Marcela Farms shall utilize the impounded water to irrigate their 30 ha banana plantation. They have also the option to discharge the treated effluent to Bacong Creek based on the issued DP. Monitoring


of 181

The Pollution Control Officer (PCO) shall inspect monthly the WTF and the drainage system for any leaks. Wastewater sampling at the final pond shall be conducted at least once a year. Parameters to be monitored compared with the Surface Waters Class D Effluent Standards of DENR Administrative Order No. 1990-35, as stipulated under Republic Act No. 9275 or known as the Philippine Clean Water Act of 2004, are as follows:

Parameter Unit Standard

BOD mg/L 120 COD mg/L 200 TSS mg/L 1,500 Fecal Coliforms MPN/100ml 500 pH - 6.0-9.0 Color PCU - Result of monitoring shall be reported by the PCO to the farm manager with recommendations for improvement of the effluent, if necessary. Groundwater quality will also be monitored in terms of its bacteriological characteristics and nitrates content to conform to the Philippine National Standard for Drinking Water.

IV.2.2 Air Pollution from Burning the Biogas

Impact Identification The combustion of the biogas using the three (3) gas engines each at 280KW may still result in incomplete combustion and generate carbon monoxide. Prevention / Mitigation The three (3) gas engines shall each have an air pollution control device to minimize the generation of carbon monoxide. The gas engines shall also be provided with a muffler and smoke stack to reduce carbon concentrations. An iron piling scrubber was placed at the collection pipe to remove hydrogen sulfide before combusting the biogas. The equipments should be regularly maintained by the O&M crew to generate efficient electricity. Monitoring Particulate matter and carbon monoxide shall be analyzed at least annually from the gas engines to determine the level of the pollutants. The concentration should be within the Emission Standards set by the DENR under Republic Act No. 8749 or known as the Philippine Clean Air Act of 1999, as follows:


of 181

Parameter Unit Concentration

Particulates mg/Ncm 200 Carbon Monoxide mg/Ncm 500 The PCO shall report the air sampling results with recommendations, if appropriate, to the farm manager.

IV.2.3 Sludge Generation

Impact Identification Accumulation of sludge in the anaerobic digesters will affect the methane generation process. Although the amount of generation of sludge is slow, accumulated sludge may create anaerobic conditions and generate methane. Sludge dumped anywhere may contaminate the ground soil and its leachate may percolate to the ground water. Prevention / Mitigation The perforated drain pipes installed in the bottom of the anaerobic digesters shall collect the sludge and pump it to the sludge drying bed. The sludge shall not be more than 20cm high to minimize methane generation. Sludge shall be applied to the 30 ha. banana plantation. Monitoring The PCO shall monthly inspect the amount of sludge in the sludge drying bed to ensure that the sludge is not accumulating and not more than 20 cm high.

IV.2.4 Odor Generation

Impact Identification Pig wastes consisting of manure and urine generate an odorous smell. Urine gives off ammonia which has a distinct odor that can irritate the skin, eyes, throat and lungs. It can also cause coughing and burns2. Wet pig manure also generates foul odor. Thus, insufficient washing of the wastes from the pigpens will generate foul odor that shall be a nuisance to the laborers and the employees of Marcela Farms. Biogas is composed of methane, carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, hydrogen, nitrogen and hydrogen sulfide. The intentional production of biogas from the anaerobic digester will also increase the potential of release of the gas to the atmosphere. Hydrogen sulfide is an odorous gas (similar to the smell of rotten eggs) that shall be a nuisance to the workers and employees of Marcel Farms.

2DOH, Health Advisory on Ammonia, March 30, 2006


of 181

Prevention / Mitigation Good housekeeping is the practical way in eliminating the foul odor. Sufficient water should be used in washing / flushing the wastes in the pigpens. At least once a day the pigpens shall be cleaned. Since the biogas and the wastewater have a distinct odor, the WTF, HDPE cover and the drainage system shall be well maintained for possible leaks. The O&M crew shall ensure that the wastewater continuously flows to the anaerobic digesters and to the finishing and settling ponds without any interruptions. Monitoring The PCO shall inspect the WTF and the methane recovery project for leaks. A methane monitoring system shall be installed in the facility to continuously monitor methane generation.


Impact Identification The source of noise in the methane recovery project is the gas engines when it is being operated. Prevention / Mitigation The gas engines had been placed in an insulated room away from the farm‘s office and pigpens to avoid disturbance during operation. Mufflers and shock absorbers were installed to minimize the noise. Engine operators shall wear earplugs during maintenance of the equipment. Monitoring During the operation of the gas engines, the PCO shall determine if the noise generated is at a tolerable level using a Sound Level Meter.


Hazard Identification Trapped biogas in the two (2) anaerobic digesters, including those collected in the pipes, have the potential to escape to the atmosphere and pollute the air quality if there are leaks. In addition, methane, hydrogen and carbon monoxide (which are among the components of the biogas) are combustible. There is a potential that the biogas will catch fire and/or explode if exposed to heat.


of 181

Prevention / Mitigation The PCO shall ensure that the HDPE cover and the gas collection pipes are not damaged. Leaks shall immediately be sealed. Equipments that are sources of heat shall be kept at a safe distance away from the methane recovery project especially from the anaerobic digester. Workers operating the gas engines and flaring equipment shall wear personal protective. Monitoring The PCO shall monthly inspect the HDPE cover and the collection pipes for leaks. He shall observe also the operator of the gas engine if safety protocols are observed.


of 181

V. MATRIX OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN

Project Phase / Env’t

Aspect

Env’t Component Likely to be

Affected

Potential Impact

Implementation Arrangements Monitoring Plan

Prevention / Mitigation

Schedule Respon-sible Entity

Cost Reporting to

Monitoring Method

Parameters to be Monitored

Schedule Responsible Entity

Cost Reporting to

Construction Phase

Solid Wastes Generation

Set-up and installation of equipment / facilities in the pigpen.

Marcela Farms

Solid wastes posed nuisance to Marcela Farm

Solid wastes shall be regularly disposed to the Municipality‘s garbage collector.

Solid wastes was disposed at least once a week.

Workers P5,000.00 for the trash bins.

Project engineer

Visual inspection

Solid wastes in the storage area.

Once a week

Project engineer

Pollution Control Officer (PCO)

Hygienic practices

Ground soil

Ground water

Generate human wastes that will contaminate the ground soil and ground water.

Existing toilet facility of Marcela Farms was utilized.

Toilet facility had been provided

Workers

Project engineer

Visual inspection


Once a week

Project engineer



of 181

Placement of the 1mm HDPE cover in the anaerobic lagoons

Air quality Health

and safety

Increase the risk to pollute the air quality.

Biogas may catch fire that may lead to explosion.

Ensure the HDPE cover is not damaged.

Heat sources shall be kept away from the Project.

Before installation of the HDPE cover

Project engineer

P 735,000.00 for the HDPE cover

PCO Observation

Leaks in the HDPE cover

Two weeks after placement of the cover

Project engineer

Farm manager

Open flare Health and safety

Hazard to employees

Enclose the flaring equipment and install vertical nozzle with windshield.

Operation phase

PCO Farm manager

Visual observation

Flaring area Within the month after installation

Farm manager

Marcela Farms

Operation Phase Wastewater Generation

Washing of the pig wastes.

Ground soil

Ground water

Liquid wastes will contaminate the ground soil and percolate to the ground water.

Wastewater is directed to the Wastewater Treatment Facility (WTF).Maintenance of the WTF.The final pond shall be closed to disallow

Daily flushing of wastes to the WTF.

Monthly maintenance

Laborers

Operati

on and Maintenance (O&M) crew

P10,875,591.30 for the construction of the biogas facility P3,500.00 for maintenance cost.

The laborers and O&M crew shall report to the PCO

Visual inspection of the pig wastes.

Effluent wastewater sampling

Wastes in the pigpens BOD,

TSS, pH and color

Daily Yearly

PCO

P30,000.00 per year for wastewater sampling

Farm manager


of 181

discharge of the treated effluent anywhere except to the banana plantation.

Health and Safety

Biogas trapped in the 2 anaerobic digesters and collection gas pipes

Air quality

Health and safety

Leaks will release the biogas and pollute the air quality.

Biogas will catch fire that may lead to explosion when exposed to heat.

Regular maintenance of the HDPE cover and the collection gas pipes. Heat sources shall be kept at a safe distance away from the biogas facility Personal protective equipment shall be used by the engine operators

Weekly Operation & Maintenance (O&M) crew

P3,500.00 for maintenance cost.

PCO Methane monitoring system

Methane Monthly PCO Farm manager

Emission of Air Pollutants

Combustion of

Air quality Incomplete combustion of

Installation of a

Was consider

Farm manager

P3,500.00 for

O&M shall report to

Point source air

PM and CO Yearly PCO P30,000.0

Farm manager


of 181

the 3 units gas engines

biogas will release carbon monoxide.

muffler, smoke stack and other air pollution control device/s

Maintenance of the gas engines

ed during the installation of the gas engines.

Quarterly maintenance

O&M

crew

maintenance cost.

the PCO emission test

0 / emission test

Flaring when gas engines are not in use

Air quality Incomplete combustion of biogas will release carbon monoxide.

Systematic flaring operation

Maintenance of the flaring equipment.

During non-operation of the gas engines

Gas engine operator


PCO Visual inspection

Status of the flaring equipment

Quarterly PCO Farm manager


Operation of the 2 anaerobic digesters

Ground soil

Ground water

Sludge will be generated that will produce leachate and contaminate the ground soil and percolate to the ground water

Sludge shall be placed in the sludge drying bed. Piled sludge shall not be more than 20cm high.

Yearly or as the need arises.

Marcela Farms

P400,000.00 for the sludge drying bed

Visual inspection

Sludge Weekly PCO Farm manager

Odor Generation

Pig Marcela Foul odor from Good Daily Laborers PCO Sense of Amount of Weekly PCO Farm


of 181

wastes Wastew

ater

Farms the pig wastes will be a nuisance

housekeeping practices will be observed

Regular washing of the pigpens

Ensure continuous flow of the wastewater in the treatment system

washing of the pigpens

smell pig wastes manager


of 181

VI. PUBLIC CONSULTATION

As part of the CDM requirements, a Stakeholders‘ Consultation was conducted at the Coralandia Resort and Restaurant on February 22, 2008, where it was attended by representatives of the community living near the piggery farm and those that have administrative, social or political interest in the project or its vicinity. Information on the project, as well as the climate change and CDM were discussed. This has been a venue where stakeholders‘ comments and concerns were solicited, considered and addressed.

VII. INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENT ON MONITORING AND VALIDATION

VI.1 CAPACITY BUILDING ON IEC

LBP will establish partnerships with donors and universities to provide technical support/training and outreach to assist the piggery owners establishing their monitoring and reporting system for the EMP and the anaerobic digesters focusing on environmental performance/compliance on the EMP, proper quality controls; troubleshooting on monitoring issues; and in undertaking calibration of the biodigester system.

VI.2 MONITORING OF ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE

To ensure the sustainability of the project, the long-term and accountable implementation of the environmental safeguards will be one of the obligations under the Emission Reduction Purchase Agreement (ERPA), and hence, will be monitored by LBP and will form part of the annual Emission Reduction (ER) monitoring report. For guidance, WB will supervise the safeguards implementation.

An Environmental Monitoring Report (EMR), which shall include the review of the proponent‘s Self Monitoring Report, shall be prepared on a semi-annual frequency, i.e. January and July of each year, to be submitted to the EMB regional office concerned and a copy of the submitted EMR must be provided to the PMO for reference and review purposes.

The primary purpose of compliance monitoring is to ensure the implementation of sound and standard environmental procedures as defined during the project preparation. Specifically, it aims to:

Monitor project compliance with the conditions set in the ECC; Monitor compliance with the EMP(s) and applicable laws, rules and regulations; and Provide a basis for timely decision-making and effective planning and management

of environmental measures through the monitoring of actual project impacts vis-à-vis the predicted impacts in the EIS / IEE.


of 181

VI.2.1 INSTITUTIONAL SET-UP OF THE MONITORING SYSTEM

The operation and management of the PoA will be led by LBP in their role as technical and financial intermediary and the group in charge of organizing and ensuring compliance with the rules under the PoA. Thus, LBP has established an Environment and Social Safeguard Framework to make sure that all projects under the PoA (e.g. Marcela Farms, etc.) will follow an agreed standard framework to address the project‘s environmental aspects/impacts.

The diagram below illustrates how the monitoring plan will be implemented:

LBP, being an ISO 14001 certified institution, will establish a Project Management Office (PMO) under the LBP's Environmental Program and Management Department (EPMD) to primarily implement the safeguards activities. For this purpose, the Environmental Program Management Unit (EPMU) will serve as the project's PMO. Part of this activities will be to exercise environmental due diligence by keeping records of project EA reports, feedbacks / technical information (which may include but not limited to environmental performance history, issuance of related environmental permits, notice of violations, dumpsite closure plan, etc.), and ECCs / CNCs. Environmental safeguards documents may undergo substantive review by the PMO environmental engineer or the LBP-EPMD, particularly if pressing environmentally critical issues exist. The conduct of review by PMO / LBP-EPMD, particularly of the Environmental Review and Assessment Unit (ERAU), is part of its oversight function and task enumerated in the LBP CPI 2009-002 to verify that projects are in compliance to environmental

DOE verification

Data aggregation, ER Calculation, cataloging CPAs

Land Bank Lending Centers

Pig farms manager

Training and Outreach

Pig farms manager

Pig farms manager Aggregated PoA data

Land Bank - EPMD

DOE verification



Pig farms manager


Pig farms manager

Pig farms manager Environmental Performance

Report and Aggregated PoA

data Land Bank EPMD -


of 181

standards and regulations. ERAU is currently manned by four (4) regular personnel of LBP, whose primary function is to implement the LBP CPI 2009-002. As the LBP CPI 2009-002 primarily requires environmental assessment of the projects covered by the Philippine EIS system and collaterals which are part of the project or used as project site only, the environmental assessment will be extended and conducted to CDM projects (which are usually not covered by the Philippine EIS system) for this purpose. This type of review performed by either the PMO or WB is entirely independent and does not conflict with the nature of evaluation the DENR performs.


of 181

VIII. ACCOUNTABILITY STATEMENT

This is to certify that all the information in this Environmental Assessment Report for the Methane Recovery and Combustion Project of Marcela Farms, Inc. are accurate and complete to the best of our knowledge, and that an objective and thorough assessment of the Project was undertaken in accordance with the dictates of professional and reasonable judgment. All the commitments contained herein including the Environmental Management Plan shall be strictly complied. In case of any deviation, the same shall be of interest in environmental protection and sustainable development. Marcela Farms, Inc. shall be held responsible for any liabilities and/or penalties arising from the Methane Recovery and Combustion Project. In witness whereof, we hereby set our hands this ________ day of _______ at _________________. ____________________________ __________________________ Pollution Control Officer Farm Manager ______________________________ President SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO before me this _____ day of _________________, affiant exhibiting his / her _________________________ No. issued at __________________________ on ______________________. Doc. No. ___________ Page No. ___________ Book No. ___________ Series of ___________


of 181

IX. ANNEX

VII.1 TEST REPORT

BIOTECH FARMS INC. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT REPORT METHANE RECOVERY PROJECT FROM THE BIOGAS DIGESTER

of 181


of 181

Environmental Management Plan Biotech Farms Wastewater Biogas Facility


of 181

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. BRIEF PROJECT INFORMATION ....................................................................... 79

I.1 THE PIGGERY FARM .................................................................................. 80

I.2 FARM LOCATION ........................................................................................ 82

I.3 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS IN THE AREA ........................ 83

I.4 EXISTING WASTEWATER SET-UP........................................................... 84

I.5 COMPLIANCE WITH ENVIRONMENTAL REQUIREMENTS ................ 84

II. METHANE RECOVERY ....................................................................................... 86

II.1 PROJECT ACTIVITY .................................................................................... 86

II.2 WASTEWATER AND GAS GENERATION ............................................... 89

II.2.1 Wastewater ....................................................................................... 89

II.2.2 Biogas .............................................................................................. 89

III. MANPOWER AND PROJECT COST ................................................................... 90

III.1 MANPOWER ................................................................................................. 90

III.2 PROJECT COST ............................................................................................ 90

IV. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN...................................................... 91

IV.1 CONSTRUCTION PHASE ............................................................................ 91

IV.1.1 Solid Wastes Generation .................................................................. 91


IV.2 OPERATION PHASE .................................................................................... 93

IV.2.1 Wastewater Generation .................................................................... 93

IV.2.2 Air Pollution from Burning the Biogas ............................................ 94

IV.2.3 Sludge Generation ............................................................................ 95

IV.2.4 Odor Generation............................................................................... 95

IV.2.5 Noise Generation ............................................................................. 96


V. MATRIX OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN ...................... 98

VI. INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENT AND CAPACITY BUILDING ......... Error!

Bookmark not defined. VI.1 INFORMATION, EDUCATION AND COMMUNICATION CAMPAIGN

....................................................................................................................... 103

VI.2 VALIDATION OF THE PROJECT’S ENVIRONMENTAL

PERFORMANCE ............................................ Error! Bookmark not defined.

VI.2.1 Multi-partite Monitoring Team ......... Error! Bookmark not defined.

VI.2.2 Monitoring and Follow-up ................ Error! Bookmark not defined.

VI.2.3 INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENT OF LBP ........................... 104

VII. ACCOUNTABILITY STATEMENT ................................................................... 106

VIII. ANNEX.................................................................................................................. 107

VII.1 TEST REPORT ............................................................................................. 108


of 181

X. BRIEF PROJECT INFORMATION Proponent : BIOTECH FARMS INC. Business Address : KCC Mall of Marbel, Koronadal City, South Cotabato President / CEO : Wilfredo I. Chiang Project : Methane Recovery and Combustion from the Biogas Digester Project Location : Barangay San Vicente, Banga, South Cotabato Project Type : Livestock Project PSIC : A 02 – Farming of Animals (project is a component) Contact Persons on the Environmental Assessment Report Biotech Farms Farm Manager : Faustino Cordura Contact No. : 09178884568 PCO : Contact No. : LANDBANK PLG : Noemi P. Dela Paz Designation : Vice President Contact No. : (632) 405-7340 Fax No. : (632) 528-8523 EPMD : Prudencio E. Calado III Designation : Head Contact No. : (632) 405-7339 Fax No. : (632) 528-8484


of 181

I.6 THE PIGGERY FARM

The livestock of Biotech Farms, Inc. is a farrow to finish piggery farm with an existing sow level of 1,831 heads. The estimated hog population is 18,310 heads if one (1) sow produces ten (10) piglets. Based on the farms‘ Environmental Compliance Certificate issued by the Department of Environment and Natural Resourecs on 2001, Biotech is allowed to operate up to 4,000 sow level, which will have an estimated total hog population of 40,000 heads. The Standing Pig Population (SPP) is as follows:

Pig Type SPP, heads Weight, kg Sows 2,000 200 Wean 3,667 5 Finish 3.667 20 Nursery 9,534 90

There are twenty one (21) buildings of the piggery farm used for gestating sows, lactating sows, boars, feeder pigs and nursery pigs. The floors of each pigpen are slatted and perforated which allows the wastes to be flushed to the canal underneath. The farm occupies an area of 281,931 square meters located at Brgy. San Vicente, Banga, South Cotabato. Photos of the piggery farm:

The pigpen buildings


of 181

Set-up of a pigpen

I.7 FARM LOCATION

The piggery farm of Biotech Farms is located at Brgy. San Vicente, Municipality of Banga in the Province of South Cotabato. The area of the farm is 281,931 square meters covered by Transfer Certificate of Title Nos. T-90235, T-90234, T-8576, T-29920, Homestead Patent No. V-4681 and Lot No. 1702 Pls-214-D-9. Below are maps of the project site.


of 181


of 181

I.8 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS IN THE AREA

Sensitive area The creek near the piggery farm is the only potential receptor that may be affected by the operation of the project, through wastewater discharge. This flowing creek is located less than a kilometer from the project site, with approximate width of 2 meters. Human Settlement There are no informal settlers in the project site. Thus, families are not affected nor will there be any relocation or resettlement.

I.9 EXISTING WASTEWATER SET-UP

Manure in the holding tank located below the pigpens pigpens is washed with water and discharged into to eight (8) cement reactors. Overflow from the reactors flows into an anaerobic lagoon. The anaerobic lagoon stores the wastewater for an indefinite period.. It was constructed in 1996 with a capacity of around 105,000 cu.m.


of 181

Flow Diagram:

Design Parameters:

Reactors Quantity /

Unit Dimension (m) Capacity

(cu.m.) Length Width Depth

open reactors 8 8 7 4 224

I.10 COMPLIANCE WITH ENVIRONMENTAL REQUIREMENTS

An Environmental Compliance Certificate (ECC) was secured from the Environmental Management Bureau (EMB) Region XII on October 23, 2001 for a 4,000 sow level in an area of 281,931 square meters land. Biotech Farms likewise secured a Discharge Permit (DP) from EMB Region XII in compliance with Republic Act No. 9275 or known as the Philippine Clean Water Act. The latest DP was issued on May 23, 2005 which allows Biotech Farms to discharge a wastewater volume not to exceed 30.0 cu.m per day. The farm currently has a 250 KVA diesel engine, a 75 KVA diesel engine and a 500 KVA diesel engine, each provided with muffler and silencer. The operation of these equipment is supported with a valid Permit to Operate (PTO) issued by EMB Region XII on May 23, 2005 in compliance with Republic Act No. 8749 or also known as the Philippine Clean Air Act of 1999. Once a gas engine that will utilize the methane is installed, Biotech Farms will secure the PTO of the same. Permit Reference No. Date Secured Validity Conditions

ECC 12 01 10 19-190-116

October 23, 2001

No expiration

5. Sow level – 4,000 heads 6. Land area – 281,931

sq.m. DP 05-WDP-C-

1263-004 May 23, 2005 March 14,

2010 2. Volume discharge– 30.0

cu.m. per day 3. BOD based load – 3.6

kg/day PTO 05-POA-C-

1263-010 May 23, 2005 March 14,

2010 1. Regular submission of

emission sampling test report

8 units of open reactors

Influent

creek


of 181

XI. METHANE RECOVERY

II.3 PROJECT ACTIVITY

The main components of the methane recovery project are as follows: a. Prefiltration using perforated screen b. Equalization Tank c. Micro-sieve Solid/Liquid Separator d. Gravity Press Sludge Drying Bed e. Biogas Digester f. Clarifier g. Aquatic Reed and Water Hyacinth Wetlands h. Biological Disinfection Lagoon i. Generator set Design Parameters:

Component Quantity Capacity / Specifications Remarks

Prefiltration using perforated screen

Equalization Tank Micro-sieve Solid/Liquid Separator

Gravity Press Sludge Drying Bed

Biogas Digester volume of 6,000 m3 hydraulic retention time of thirty (30) days

Clarifier Aquatic Reed and Water Hyacinth Wetlands

Biological Disinfection Lagoon

Generator set An average flow of 200 cubic meters per day of pig wastes is conveyed from the farm through the main canal system where it flows by gravity to the pre‐filters using perforated stainless sheets to initially remove the straws, sacks and other debris, which tend to disrupt the pumping workability. The pig wastes then flows by gravity to the equalization tank with a capacity of 200 cubic meters. The equalization tank buffers the day‐to‐day fluctuations in wastewater flow rates and allows the daily wastewater volume of 200 cubic meters to be loaded uniformly into the digester. Sludge recovery to the equalization tank is also provided by mere turning of an isolation valve.


of 181

From the equalization tank, the wastewater is pumped to the stainless micro‐sieve solid/ liquid separators to attain the maximum recovery of the pig hairs and the cellulosic component of the pig wastes which would otherwise accumulate inside the digester, forming scum cover on the water surface and interfering in the separation of the biogas and reducing the actual hydraulic retention time of the digester, thereby reducing the biogas production. A sludge recycle is provided in the digester to improve its treatment efficiency by recycling the mesophillic bacteria and by hydraulic mixing of the digester‘s contents. The recovered solids are conveyed to a sludge processing area while the liquid portion is conveyed by gravity to the anaerobic biogas digesters with a volume of 6,000 m3 or a hydraulic retention time of thirty (30) days. The overflow from the digester is conveyed by gravity to the clarifier to remove the settleable solids before conveying it to the wetland system. The action of the aquatic reed/water hyacinth system reduces the residual total suspended solid (TSS) and the residual biochemical oxygen demand(BOD)/chemical oxygen demand(COD) and aerates the wastewater to a quality that is within the norms for effluent standards set by the DENR. The treated wastewater is conveyed to a disinfection lagoon, which will eventually be recycled to the pig houses for flushing. A zero‐wastewater discharge is the ultimate objective of this WTF. Diagram of the Methane Recovery Project


of 181


of 181

II.4 WASTEWATER AND GAS GENERATION

II.2.1 Wastewater

The wastewater of Biotech Farms, Inc. is estimated at 0.01 cu.m. or 3 gallons per pig per day. With a total hog population of 20,000 heads, the wastewater generated is estimated at 200 cu.m per day. The biogas digester has a diameter of approximately 36 meters and allowable water level of up to 6 meters. It will be concrete walled, circular type of digester, which will be lined and covered with HDPE to prevent leakage of wastewater into soil and to capture the methane gas generated in the digester. The rest of the process equipment such as the clarifiers, equalization tanks and solid/liquid separator will be constructed using concrete and will be waterproofed to prevent leakage of wastewater to the soil.

II.2.2 Biogas

Based on the pig waste properties, biogas production for the anaerobic digesters are as follows:

Parameters Digester 1

Estimated methane production (ft3/day)

55,000

Power Output (kW) 160 Energy Output (kWh/day) 3,927 Methane Reduction (MT/yr) 318 CO2 Reduction (MT/yr) 6,674


of 181

XII. PROJECT COST

The cost of the facility is approximately PhP 40 million.


of 181

XIII. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN

IV.3 CONSTRUCTION PHASE


Impact Identification The set-up and installation of the anaerobic digester and other process tanks of the wastewater treatment facility shall generate various construction spoils from small pieces of scrap wastes to bulk sizes that include scrap plastics, scrap metal sheets bars, scrap wood, fractured hollow blocks, etc.. Solid wastes improperly managed can be easily dumped on the ground. Waste is a nuisance to Biotech Farms, Inc. The regular hygiene of the construction workers / laborers shall generate human wastes. Besides foul odor, the wastes carry harmful bacteria. The wastes may contaminate the working area and the ground soil. Prevention / Mitigation A solid wastes storage area shall be provided by the contractor. Recyclable wastes shall be recovered and used or sold to junk buyers. Residual wastes shall be disposed to the municipality‘s garbage collector once a week. The existing toilet facility of the piggery farm shall be used by the contractor‘s workers / laborers. The facility separates the women and the men. The septic tank is adequate to receive the wastes of the contractors. However, if the need arises, a temporary toilet facility may be used such as a ―portalet‖. Monitoring The storage area of the solid wastes shall be regularly inspected by the project engineer once a week to ensure that the wastes are properly managed and stored. The project engineer will ensure that the wastes shall not accumulate in the area. For the toilet facility, regular desludging shall be conducted once clogging is observed.


Impact Identification


of 181

Construction works and the use of heavy equipment will generate noise. Noise is a nuisance to the employees and workers of the farm. It can impair the hearing senses of a person if he/she is overexposed to the noise above the allowable level. Prevention / Mitigation Workers assigned in noisy areas of the construction activity shall wear earplugs. The workers shall be rotated once in a while to avoid continuous exposure. Heavy equipment shall not be operated continuously for long hours. Monitoring The project engineer shall inspect the area daily and measures the noise levels using a Sound Meter Level.

IV.1.7 Traffic Congestion

Impact Identification The heavy equipment and transportation vehicles shall slowdown the traffic flow in major and barangay routes Prevention / Mitigation Traffic enforcers shall be assigned at intersections and at the entrance road leading to the project site. Appropriate traffic signages shall be placed. Heavy equipment shall only be parked within the project site and not on public roads. Monitoring The project engineer shall daily observe the traffic flow in the area. He shall provide recommendations to Biotech Farms if traffic congestion occurs.

IV.4 OPERATION PHASE

IV.2.7 Wastewater Generation

Impact Identification Liquid waste that shall be discharge from the pigpens shall be directed and treated in the Wastewater Treatment Facility (WTF) of Biotech Farms. If there are leaks, the wastewater may not fully enter the WTF and will contaminate the ground soil and percolate to the ground water. The effluent may still be pollutive after treatment. Thus, discharge may still contaminate the soil and ground water.


of 181

Prevention / Mitigation The tanks will be constructed out of concrete material and will be ensured that leakage of the wastewater is prevented through installation of impermeable liners or application of waterproofing material. Maintenance of the facilities shall be conducted whenever necessary. All leaks shall be sealed. The effluent from the last lagoon of the eight (8) open lagoons shall be closed to prevent discharge to the creek. The treated effluent in the last lagoon shall be used in the farm such as for cleaning and washing. Monitoring The Pollution Control Officer (PCO) shall inspect monthly the WTF and the drainage system for any leaks. Wastewater sampling shall be conducted at the last lagoon at least once a year. Parameters to be monitored compared with the Surface Waters Class D Effluent Standards of DENR Administrative Order No. 1990-35, as stipulated under Republic Act No. 9275 or known as the Philippine Clean Water Act of 2004, are as follows:

Parameter Unit Standard

BOD mg/L 120 COD mg/L 200 TSS mg/L 1,500 pH - 6.0-9.0 Color PCU - Result of monitoring shall be reported by the PCO to the farm manager with recommendations for improvement of the effluent, if necessary. Groundwater quality, particularly on the coliforms and nitrates content, will also be monitored on semi-annual basis. The proponent will identify and establish at least two (2) monitoring wells, i.e., upstream and downstream groundwater flow.

IV.2.8 Air Pollution from Burning the Biogas

Impact Identification The combustion of the biogas using the 375 KW gas engine will release carbon monoxide. Prevention / Mitigation The gas engine shall have an air pollution control device to minimize the generation of carbon monoxide. The gas engine shall also be provided with a muffler and smoke stack


of 181

to reduce carbon concentrations. To prevent the biogas from damaging the engine, an absorbent material shall be used to remove hydrogen sulfide prior to combustion. The equipments shall be regularly maintained by the O&M crew to generate efficient electricity. Monitoring Particulate matter and carbon monoxide shall be analyzed at least annually from the gas engines to determine the level of the pollutants. The concentration shall be within the Emission Standards set by the DENR under Republic Act No. 8749 or known as the Philippine Clean Air Act of 1999, as follows: Parameter Unit Concentration

Particulates mg/Ncm 200 Carbon Monoxide mg/Ncm 500 The PCO shall report the air sampling results with recommendations, if appropriate, to the farm manager.

IV.2.9 Sludge Generation

Impact Identification Sludge collected in the solid separator tank shall be piled. Piled sludge may result to anaerobic conditions and generate methane. Wet sludge dumped anywhere may contaminate the ground soil and its leachate may percolate to the ground water. Prevention / Mitigation The sludge collected from the solid separator tank shall be deposited in a sludge drying bed. The sludge shall not be more than 20cm high to prevent methane generation. Sludge shall be used as fertilizer in vegetation areas. Monitoring The PCO shall monthly inspect the amount of sludge in the sludge drying bed to ensure that the sludge is not accumulating. He shall ensure that the piled sludge is not more than 20 cm high.


Impact Identification Pig wastes consisting of manure and urine generate an odorous smell. Urine gives off ammonia which has a distinct odor that can irritate the skin, eyes, throat and lungs. It


of 181

can also cause coughing and burns3. Wet pig manure also generates foul odor. Foul odor is a nuisance to the laborers and the employees of Biotech Farms. Biogas is mainly composed of methane, carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, hydrogen, nitrogen and hydrogen sulfide. The intentional production of biogas from the anaerobic digester will also increase the potential of release of the gas to the atmosphere. Hydrogen sulfide is an odorous gas (similar to the smell of rotten eggs) that shall be a nuisance to the workers and employees of Biotech Farms. Prevention / Mitigation The WTF and the drainage system shall be well maintained especially for possible leaks. The O&M crew shall ensure that the liquid waste will continuously flow in the WTF up to the last lagoon for proper treatment. Monitoring The PCO shall inspect the WTF and the methane recovery project for leaks. A methane monitoring system shall be installed in the facility to continuously monitor the levels of methane.


Impact Identification The source of noise is the gas engine when it is being operated. Prevention / Mitigation The gas engine shall be placed in an insulated room away from the farm‘s office and pigpens to avoid disturbance during operation. Shock absorbers shall be installed to minimize the noise. Engine operators shall wear earplugs during engine operation. Monitoring During the operation of the gas engines, the PCO shall determine if the noise generated is at a tolerable level using a Sound Level Meter.


Hazard Identification Trapped biogas in the anaerobic digester, including those collected in the pipes, have the potential to escape to the atmosphere and pollute the air quality if there are leaks. In addition, methane, hydrogen and carbon monoxide (which are among the components

3DOH, Health Advisory on Ammonia, March 30, 2006


of 181

of the biogas) are combustible. There is a potential that the biogas will catch fire and/or explode if exposed to heat. Prevention / Mitigation The PCO shall ensure that the HDPE cover and the gas collection pipes are not damaged. Leaks shall immediately be sealed. Equipments that are sources of heat shall be kept at a safe distance away from the methane recovery project especially from the anaerobic digester. Workers operating the gas engines and flaring equipment shall wear personal protective. Monitoring The PCO shall monthly inspect the HDPE cover and the collection pipes for leaks. He shall observe also the operator of the gas engine if safety protocols are observed.


of 181

XIV. MATRIX OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN


Aspect


Affected

Potential Impact




Cost Reporting to

Monitoring Method



Cost Reporting to

Construction Phase


Set-up and installation of the anaerobic digester and other process tanks.

Biotech Farms

Solid wastes shall pose nuisance to Biotech Farms

Solid wastes shall be regularly disposed to the Municipality‘s garbage collector.

Once a week.

Workers P5,000.00 for the trash bins.

Project engineer

Visual inspection


Once a week

Project engineer


Hygienic practices

Ground soil

Ground water

Generate human wastes that will contaminate the ground soil and ground water.

Existing toilet facility of Biotech Farms shall be utilized.

Toilet facility of Biotech Farms is existing

Biotech Farms

Project engineer

Visual inspection


Once a week

Project engineer



of 181

Closed anaerobic lagoon

Air quality Health

and safety

Increase the risk to pollute the air quality.

Biogas may catch fire that may lead to explosion.

Ensure the HDPE cover is not damaged.

Heat sources shall be kept away from the Project.

Before installation of the HDPE cover

Project engineer

P 735,000.00 for the HDPE cover

PCO Observation

Leaks in the HDPE cover

Two weeks after placement of the cover

Project engineer

Farm manager

Open flare Health and safety

Hazard to employees

Enclose the flaring equipment.

Operation phase

PCO Farm manager

Visual observation

Flaring area Within the month after installation

Farm manager

Biotech Farms

Operation Phase

Wastewater Generation

Leaks from the WTF.

Ground soil

Ground water

Liquid wastes will contaminate the ground soil and percolate to the ground water.

Maintenance of the WTF.The final pond shall be closed to disallow discharge of the treated effluent anywhere.

Daily flushing of wastes to the WTF.

Monthly maintenance

Laborers

Operati

on and Maintenance (O&M) crew

P40 Million for the construction of the biogas facility P3,500.00 for maintenance cost.

The laborers and O&M crew shall report to the PCO

Visual inspection of the pig wastes.

Effluent wastewater sampling

Groundwater sampling and monitoring

Wastes in the pigpens BOD,

TSS, pH and color

Coliform

and nitrates

Daily Yearly Semi-

annual

PCO

P60,000.00 per year for wastewater and groundwater sampling and testing

Farm manager

Health and Safety


of 181

Biogas trapped in the anaerobic digester and collection gas pipes

Air quality

Health and safety

Leaks will release the biogas and pollute the air quality.

Biogas will catch fire that may lead to explosion when exposed to heat.

Regular maintenance of the HDPE cover and the collection gas pipes. Heat sources shall be kept at a safe distance away from the biogas facility Personal protective equipment shall be used by the engine operators

Weekly Operation & Maintenance (O&M) crew


PCO Methane monitoring system

Methane Monthly PCO Farm manager

Emission of Air Pollutants

Combustion of the 375KW gas engine

Air quality Incomplete combustion of biogas will release carbon monoxide.

Installation of a muffler, smoke stack and other air pollution control device/s

Maintenance of the gas engines

Was considered during the installation of the gas engines.

Quarterly maintenance

Farm manager

O&M

crew


O&M shall report to the PCO

Point source air emission test

PM and CO Yearly PCO P30,000.00 / emission test

Farm manager

Flaring Air quality Incomplete Systemat During Gas engine P3,500 PCO Visual Status of the Quarterly PCO Farm


of 181

when gas engines are not in use

combustion of biogas will release carbon monoxide.

ic flaring operation

Maintenance of the flaring equipment.

non-operation of the gas engines

operator .00 for maintenance cost.

inspection flaring equipment

manager


Operation WTF

Ground soil

Ground water

Sludge will be generated that will produce leachate and contaminate the ground soil and percolate to the ground water

Sludge shall be placed in the sludge drying bed. Piled sludge shall not be more than 20cm high.

Yearly or as the need arises.

Biotech Farms

P400,000.00 for the sludge drying bed

Visual inspection

Sludge Weekly PCO Farm manager

Odor Generation

Pig wastes

Wastewater

Biotech Farms

Foul odor from the pig wastes will be a nuisance

Good housekeeping practices will be observed

Ensure continuous flow of the wastewater in the treatment system

Operation Laborers PCO Sense of smell

Amount of pig wastes

Weekly PCO Farm manager


of 181


of 181

XV. PUBLIC CONSULTATION A public consultation on the EMP and project was undertaken as part of the finalization of the documents. Details are provided in Annex 1.

XVI. INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENT ON MONITORING AND VALIDATION

VI.3 CAPACITY BUILDING ON IEC

LBP will establish partnerships with donors and universities to provide technical support/training and outreach to assist the piggery owners establishing their monitoring and reporting system for the EMP and the anaerobic digester focusing on environmental performance/compliance on the EMP, proper quality controls; troubleshooting on monitoring issues; and in undertaking calibration of the biodigester system.

VI.4 MONITORING OF ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE

To ensure the sustainability of the project, the long-term and accountable implementation of the environmental safeguards will be one of the obligations under the Emission Reduction Purchase Agreement (ERPA), and hence, will be monitored by LBP and will form part of the annual Emission Reduction (ER) monitoring report. For guidance, WB will supervise the safeguards implementation.

An Environmental Monitoring Report (EMR), which shall include the review of the proponent‘s Self Monitoring Report, shall be prepared on a semi-annual frequency, i.e. January and July of each year, to be submitted to the EMB regional office concerned and a copy of the submitted EMR must be provided to the PMO for reference and review purposes.

The primary purpose of compliance monitoring is to ensure the implementation of sound and standard environmental procedures as defined during the project preparation. Specifically, it aims to:

Monitor project compliance with the conditions set in the ECC; Monitor compliance with the EMP(s) and applicable laws, rules and regulations; and Provide a basis for timely decision-making and effective planning and management

of environmental measures through the monitoring of actual project impacts vis-à-vis the predicted impacts in the EIS / IEE.

VI.2.1 INSTITUTIONAL SET-UP OF THE MONITORING SYSTEM

The operation and management of the PoA will be led by LBP in their role as technical and financial intermediary and the group in charge of organizing and ensuring


of 181

compliance with the rules under the PoA. Thus, LBP has established an Environment and Social Safeguard Framework to make sure that all projects under the PoA (e.g. Biotech Farms, etc.) will follow an agreed standard framework to address the project‘s environmental aspects/impacts.

The diagram below illustrates how the monitoring plan will be implemented:

LBP, being an ISO 14001 certified institution, will establish a Project Management Office (PMO) under the LBP's Environmental Program and Management Department (EPMD) to primarily implement the safeguards activities. For this purpose, the Environmental Program Management Unit (EPMU) will serve as the project's PMO. Part of this activities will be to exercise environmental due diligence by keeping records of project EA reports, feedbacks / technical information (which may include but not limited to environmental performance history, issuance of related environmental permits, notice of violations, dumpsite closure plan, etc.), and ECCs / CNCs. Environmental safeguards documents may undergo substantive review by the PMO environmental engineer or the LBP-EPMD, particularly if pressing environmentally critical issues exist. The conduct of review by PMO / LBP-EPMD, particularly of the Environmental Review and Assessment Unit (ERAU), is part of its oversight function and task enumerated in the LBP CPI 2009-002 to verify that projects are in compliance to environmental standards and regulations. ERAU is currently manned by four (4) regular personnel of LBP, whose primary function is to implement the LBP CPI 2009-002. As the LBP CPI 2009-002 primarily requires environmental assessment of the projects covered by the Philippine EIS system and collaterals which are part of the project or used as project site only, the environmental assessment will be extended and conducted to CDM projects (which are usually not covered by the Philippine EIS system) for this purpose. This type

DOE verification



Pig farms manager


Pig farms manager

Pig farms manager Aggregated PoA data

Land Bank - EPMD

DOE verification



Pig farms manager


Pig farms manager

Pig farms manager Environmental Performance

Report and Aggregated PoA

data Land Bank EPMD -


of 181

of review performed by either the PMO or WB is entirely independent and does not conflict with the nature of evaluation the DENR performs.

LBP, being an ISO 14001 certified institution, will establish a Project Management Office (PMO) under the LBP's Environmental Program and Management Department (EPMD) to primarily implement the environmental safeguards activities. For this purpose, the Environmental Program Management Unit (EPMU) will serve as the project's PMO. Part of this activities will be to exercise environmental due diligence by keeping records of project EA reports, feedbacks / technical information (which may include but not limited to environmental performance history, issuance of related environmental permits, notice of violations, etc.), and ECCs / CNCs. Environmental safeguards documents may undergo substantive review by the PMO environmental engineer or the LBP-EPMD, particularly if pressing environmentally critical issues exist. The conduct of review by PMO / LBP-EPMD, particularly of the Environmental Review and Assessment Unit (ERAU), is part of its oversight function and task enumerated in the LBP CPI 2009-002 to verify that projects are in compliance to environmental standards and regulations. ERAU is currently manned by four (4) regular personnel of LBP, whose primary function is to implement the LBP CPI 2009-002. As the LBP CPI 2009-002 primarily requires environmental assessment of the projects covered by the Philippine EIS system and collaterals which are part of the project or used as project site only, the environmental assessment will be extended and conducted to CDM projects (which are usually not covered by the Philippine EIS system) for this purpose. This type of review performed by either the PMO or WB is entirely independent and does not conflict with the nature of evaluation the DENR performs.


of 181

ANNEX I: STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION ON THE CLEAN

DEVELOPMENT MECHANISM OF THE WASTE-TO-ENERGY SYSTEM OF

BIOTECH FARMS

The Farm at Carpenter Hill

Brgy. Carpenter Hill

Koronodal, South Cotabato

December 15, 2009

I. Attendees

NAME COMPANY /

REPRESENTATIVE OF

DESIGNATION

Helen D. Jalandoon Brgy. Secretary, Malaya &

MISA, IA Sec.

Secretary

Ronilo B. Agudo Brgy. Council, Malaya Brgy. Captain

Melinde T. Daanoy Brgy. Council, San Vicente Brgy. Captain

Leonida G. Abadonio Brgy. Council, San Vicente Brgy. Kagawad

Merlinda M. Villareal Brgy. Council, San Vicente Brgy. Kagawad

Perlita Macadise Brgy. Council, San Vicente Brgy. Kagawad

Romerico Gorpli Brgy. Council, San Vicente Brgy. Kagawad

Artemio Bulbeque Brgy. Council, San Vicente Brgy. Kagawad

Madeline Celiz Brgy. Council, San Vicente Brgy. Kagawad

Geraldine Hinampas Brgy. Council, San Vicente Brgy. Kagawad

Rolando Danasco Bo. 6 Banga, South Cotabato Brgy. Kagawad

Vilma Daanoy Brgy. Council, San Vicente Brgy. Kagawad

Grace Alfane Brgy. Council, San Vicente Brgy. Kagawad

Dr. Harold Eslabon Biotech Farms, Inc. Farm Veterinarian

Wilson Trojilo DENR-EMB 12 Chief, EIAMD

Joel Comidoy DENR-EMB 12 Chief, EIA Section

Rodney Guillema Municipal Health Office Sanitary Inspector / PCO

Butch Cordura Biotech Farms, Inc.

Melvin Cabance LandBank – EPMD

Merlyn C. Jarell LandBank – Koronadal LC Account Officer

Prudy Calado LandBank – EPMD

The attendance sheet is attached as Annex A.

II. Opening of the Consultation Meeting

Before the formal start of the consultation meeting, the environmental film about climate

change entitled “SIGNOS- Banta ng Nagbabagong Klima” was shown to promote the

participants awareness on climate change.

At about 2:00 P.M., Biotech Director Butch Cordura formally started the meeting by

welcoming all the participants and appreciating their presence.


of 181

III. Overview of Climate Change, Kyoto Protocol, Clean Development Mechanism

(CDM), & LANDBANK Carbon Finance Support Facility (CFSF)

Mr. Prudy Calado of LANDBANK presented the overview of Climate Change, Kyoto

Protocol, CDM & CFSF. Among others, Mr. Calado emphasized that the consultation

was conducted as part of the requirements of Biotech’s application to be an eligible

project under the CDM. Under the CDM, Biotech can earn carbon credits or CER by

mitigating the emission of methane from pig waste of the establishment and operation of

a biogas digester which also improves its existing wastewater management system.

IV. Environmental Management Plan (EMP)

The Biotech’s EMP was presented by Engr. Melvin Cabance also from LANDBANK.

For easy understanding of the EMP, Engr. Cabance identified the four major

environmental aspects of the pig farm and biogas digester operation that needs to be

mitigated/managed, as follows: a) pig manure, b) odor, c) wastewater, d) biogas. He was

able to get the confirmation of the participants that these are indeed the environmental

aspects that should be addressed by Biotech. The DENR representative also suggested the

inclusion of solid wastes and hazardous wastes as the other environmental aspects to be

addressed.

Among the environmental aspects identified, the participants expressed concern on the

foul odor particularly on certain period of the day around 7pm and the wastewater which

was partly being discharged to a nearby creek. Thus, Engr. Cabance enumerated a

number of mitigating measures to address these aspects. He also emphasized the need for

monitoring on the implementation of the EMP. The DENR-EMB representative

requested the barangay representative to coordinate with the DENR should they

encounter concern/problem on odor and wastewater. He emphasized the need for the joint

conduct of assessment by DENR & the barangay council on the said concerns as these

require technical expertise in analyzing the problem/complaint.

A brangay kagawad raised a concern that permit applications are not being consulted at

the barangay level. Some of their constituents alleged that money was involved in the

issuance of the permits since the permit was approved immediately by the DENR without

consulting the stakeholders. The DENR representative explained that some of the permits

are required at a national level. The application of said permits is directly submitted to the

DENR for processing. Only a barangay resolution is required, as in the case for the

processing of an ECC. The DENR encouraged that if there is a complait, the complainant

may file his/her concern at the DENR and the DENR will address the issue, which may

be through conducting an investigation together with the complainant, if necessary.

Mr. Cordura initially clarified said concerns raised by the stakeholders, but he opted to

present the proposed CDM project of Biotech to fully address the concerns. On the issue

of wastewater being discharged to the river which was alleged to be pollutive due to the

dark coloring of the water, Mr. Cordura explained that they had been treating the

wastewater prior to discharge to the river. He also mentioned that the river have many

tributaries. The piggery farm of Biotech may not only be the one discharging to the river,


of 181

but rather there may be other activities in the area that may contribute to the coloring of

the river. The DENR representative advised the participants that they may conduct

wastewater sampling and investigate the area during the coloring of the river to determine

its source. The DENR should only be notified at once.

V. Biotech Farms Inc. CDM Project Overview

First, Mr. Cordura presented Biotech’s existing set up of the farm focusing on the

wastewater management system wherein the wastewater is treated in an 8-chamber open

lagoon system and then discharged to a river/creek. After which, he presented the new

design of the farm’s biodigester which is a highly-improved version of the existing

system. Among the basic features of the new system are the following:

a) pre-filter

b) equalization tank

c) solid waste separator

d) closed anaerobic digester – with 6,000 cubic meter capacity at 30 day retention

period.

e) clarifier

f) Utilization of the existing 8 lagoons

g) treated water of the end pond which will be recycled back to the farm for cleaning

h) 375 kw power generation system

Mr. Cordura emphasized that under the new design, the issue on odor and wastewater

discharge will be properly addressed since the biogas will be captured thereby reducing

odor and at the same time there will be no wastewater to be discharge since this will be

recycled/re-used. The participants greatly appreciated the plan to recycle the treated

wastewater and that there will be no discharge to the river. Mr. Cordura also invited the

stakeholders (including the critics of Biotech and the barangay council) to visit the

project in January 2010 to see for themselves the progress of implementation. He

mentioned that they committed to DENR Secretary Atienza to make the project as a

model in the region for other farms to see and learn. Hence, they will plan to set up a

small educational area in the farm.

The barangay council representatives expressed their appreciation to Biotech

management for being open/transparent in addressing their concerns. For his part, Mr.

Cordura suggested that the DENR should also be invited during the barangays’ general

assembly to help clarify their concerns.

Mr. Cordura further mentioned that by April 2010, the digester will be completed while

the generator set will be commissioned in June 2010. Subsequently, a barangay kagawad

inquired if they can also benefit from the electricity generated by the farm. Mr. Cordura

mentioned that since the farm’s requirement is about 260 KW only, approximately 50

KW can be shared with the nearby barangays at low cost.


of 181

The barangay representatives appreciated the conduct of the consultation and further

mentioned that they can now explain to their constituents what the project is all about.

Having no other issues raised, the consultation was adjourned atfer the expression of

appreciation from all stakeholders present. The consultation ended at around 4:30 PM.

Prepared by;

MELVIN E. CABANCE PRUDENCIO E. CALADO III Senior Environmental Officer Head, Environmental Program and Management Dept.


of 181

XVII. ACCOUNTABILITY STATEMENT

This is to certify that all the information in this Environmental Assessment Report for the Methane Recovery and Combustion Project of Biotech Farms, Inc. are accurate and complete to the best of our knowledge, and that an objective and thorough assessment of the Project was undertaken in accordance with the dictates of professional and reasonable judgment. All the commitments contained herein including the Environmental Management Plan shall be strictly complied. In case of any deviation, the same shall be of interest in environmental protection and sustainable development. Biotech Farms, Inc. shall be held responsible for any liabilities and/or penalties arising from the Methane Recovery and Combustion Project. In witness whereof, we hereby set our hands this ________ day of _______ at _________________. ____________________________ __________________________ Pollution Control Officer Farm Manager ______________________________ President SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO before me this _____ day of _________________, affiant exhibiting his / her _________________________ No. issued at __________________________ on ______________________. Doc. No. ___________ Page No. ___________ Book No. ___________ Series of ___________

Environmental Management Plan Bulacan Landfill Gas Facility


of 181

OVERVIEW OF THE PROJECT AND PURPOSE OF DOCUMENT ........................ 143

I.1 LOCATION AND AREA............................................................................. 143

I.2 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN OF THE METHANE

RECOVERY ................................................................................................. 144

AND COMBUSTION PROJECT ......................................................................... 144

II. DUE DILIGENCE OF THE SANITARY LANDFILL ........................................ 146

II.1. OVERVIEW OF ECC HISTORY ................................................................ 146

II.2. OVERVIEW OF THE DESIGN ................................................................... 146

II.2.1. Components of the SLF ................................................................. 146

II.2.2. Operating Conditions: .................................................................... 147

II.3. WASTE ACCEPTANCE.............................................................................. 148

II.4. WASTE COMPOSITION ............................................................................ 149

II.5. OVERVIEW OF THE BASELINE .............................................................. 150

II.5.1. Baseline Vegetation ....................................................................... 150

II.5.2. Site Geology................................................................................... 150

II.5.3. Climate ........................................................................................... 150

II.5.4. Hydrology ...................................................................................... 151

II.5.5. Air .................................................................................................. 153

II.5.6. Human Settlement .......................................................................... 153

II.6. IMPACTS AND MITIGATION OF THE SLF ............................................ 154

II.6.1. Construction Phase......................................................................... 154

II.6.2. Operation Phase ............................................................................. 156

III. METHANE RECOVERY AND COMBUSTION PROJECT .............................. 158

IMPACT IDENTIFICATION AND MITIGATION ............................................. 159

III.1. CONSTRUCTION PHASE .......................................................................... 159

III.1.1. Solid Wastes Generation ................................................................ 159

III.1.2. Dust Generation ............................................................................. 160

III.1.3. Noise Generation ........................................................................... 160

III.2. OPERATION PHASE .................................................................................. 161

III.2.1 Safety and Emergency ................................................................... 161

III.2.2 Burning of the LFG ........................................................................ 162

III.2.3 Solid Wastes Generation ................................................................ 162

III.2.4 Odor Generation............................................................................. 163

III.2.5 Noise Generation ........................................................................... 163

V. PUBLIC CONSULTATION AND DISCLOSURE .............................................. 169

V. ANNEXES ............................................................................................................. 171

Annex V.A. Observed Vegetation at the Project Site ......................................... 172

Annex V.B. Water Quality Sampling Results .................................................... 173

Annex V.C. Summary of Laboratory Analysis Results for Groundwater Samples

174

Annex V.D. Air Quality ...................................................................................... 175


of 181

I. OVERVIEW OF THE PROJECT AND PURPOSE OF DOCUMENT

The proposed project is a Methane Recovery and Combustion Project that will complement the existing landfill operations of the Sanitary Landfill (SLF) of VGP Group, Inc. The forty (40) hectares SLF is located at Brgy. Minuyan, City of San Jose Del Monte in the Province of Bulacan. The geographical coordinates at one point is 14o50‘22.63‖N and 121o4‘16.91‖E. This document is being prepared to highlight the project‘s primary objective which is to eliminate the emission of an estimated 2,777,035 tons of CO2 equivalent for ten (10) years (2011 until 2020). Methane recovered shall be converted to electricity and will be used for the energy requirements of the SLF operations. Excess methane recovered will be flared to minimize the emission of greenhouse gas into the atmosphere. Operation of the Methane Recovery and Combustion Project may inspire the neighboring municipalities and cities in improving their solid waste management and to draw lessons for replication elsewhere in the Philippines. It will also raise public awareness about methane recovery within the context of Philippines‘ climate change response strategy. An Environmental Management Plan for this Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) Project has been prepared to address the significant environmental impacts during project operations.

The purpose of this document is to meet World Bank requirements for environmental and social safeguards for the CDM project landfill gas project. The sanitary landfill project including the landfill gas facility was subject to an EIA process and approved Environmental Compliance Certificate, which formed the basis of this assessment. In accordance with World Bank requirements and to properly delineate the landfill gas project which is the subject to World Bank financing and the sanitary landfill, this document is structured into two sections (i) due diligence of the sanitary landfill and (ii) a detailed EMP for the landfill gas facility.

I.1 LOCATION AND AREA

The Methane Recovery and Combustion Project is located at Brgy. Minuyan, City of San Jose Del Monte in the Province of Bulacan. The geographical coordinates at one point is 14o50‘22.63‖N and 121o4‘16.91‖E. The location of the Methane Recovery and Combustion Project vis-à-vis the SLF is shown below.


of 181

I.2 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN OF THE METHANE RECOVERY AND COMBUSTION PROJECT

The Methane Recovery and Combustion Project is a component of the SLF where the landfill gas (LFG) is recovered and utilized as energy. The LFG consists mainly of methane, carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, nitrogen and hydrogen sulfide. These gases are considered as air pollutants. To prevent


of 181

dispersion to the atmosphere, hydrogen sulfide will be filtered out from the gas stream using an absorption media while the rest of the gases shall be combusted to generate electricity. The management plan to address the negative environmental impacts of the Methane Recovery and Combustion Project are discussed under Item. III of this report.


of 181

II. DUE DILIGENCE OF THE SANITARY LANDFILL

II.1. OVERVIEW OF ECC HISTORY

The SLF Project of the VGP Group, Inc. located at New Town Development Area, Brgy. Minuyan, City of San Jose Del monte, Bulacan. has been issued an Environmental Compliance Certificate (ECC by the DENR-EMB Region III on December 23, 2008. The ECC covered the development and operation of a SLF including a Materials Recovery Facility, composting, recyclable and residual waste handling component with a capacity of not to exceed two hundred (200) metric tons of municipal waste per day in an area of four hundred thousand (400,000) square meters.

On July 31, 2009, the previously issued ECC was amended increasing the capacity of the SLF from two hundred (200) metric tons of municipal waste per day to two thousand (2,000) metric tons of municipal waste per day still in the same area of four hundred thousand (400,000) square meters. Industrial wastes shall not be accepted in the SLF.

An Environmental Management and Monitoring Plan for the SLF operation has been stipulated as condition of the ECC and shall be continuously complied by the project proponent.

II.2. OVERVIEW OF THE DESIGN

The SLF shall have an area of forty (40) hectares divided into six (6) phases. The SLF is an area-fill type with a designed capacity of nineteen and 10/100 (19.10) years. It has a maximum waste acceptance rate of 3,000 tons per day. The airspace of the SLF shall be 17,100,000 million cu.m. with a maximum depth of 70 meters. Phase 1 had already been developed and is accepting waste. The capacity of Phase 1 is estimated at six (6) months assuming a disposal rate of 2,000 tons per day.

II.2.1. Components of the SLF

The following are the main components of the SLF: a. Materials recovery facility b. Liner system c. Leachate Collection and Treatment System d. Gas Collection and Management System (Methane Recovery Project) e. Groundwater Monitoring Well System f. Daily Soil Cover g. Final Capping System h. Site Infrastructure

Entrance gate


of 181

Perimeter fence Surface run-off drainage system Administrative buildings Parking area for trucks Parking area for light vehicles Truck washing bay Maintenance shop Fuel storage and supply

II.2.2. Operating Conditions:

Component Description

Liner System The liner systems consist of, from top to bottom: 600 mm thick protective soil cover; filter geotextile; 300 mm layer consisting of rounded gravel on the floor

and sideslopes; 1.5 mm double textured high density polyethylene

(HDPE); geomembrane liner; geosynthetic clay liner (GCL); and, finished subgrade.

Leachate Collection and Treatment System

A leachate storage / equalization pond with a minimum volume of 8,750 m3 will provide adequate leachate storage during initial (Phase 1) operations of the landfill. This will be augmented with the construction of a 100 m3 per day (cmd) Leachate Treatment Plant (LTP) during the 2nd year of operation. One future pond of equal size will be constructed on the 2nd to 3rd year of landfill operation. The suggested area for each of the leachate storage pond is approximately 0.375 hectares (~25m x ~150m) The size of the leachate storage pond (LSP) and the treatment rate of LTP were evaluated based on anticipated leachate generation. Predicted monthly leachate generation from the Hydrologic Evaluation of Landfill Performance (HELP) model simulations resulted in a LTP treatment rate of 100 cmd for Phase 1. The allotted area for the Phase 1 leachate storage pond is approximately 3,750 m2 with a depth of 3 meters and 2H:1V side slopes. The minimum volume of the Phase 1 LSP is approximately 8,750 m3. The volume in conjunction with the specified LTP treatment rate will accommodate leachate flows during peak months of leachate generation for Phase 1, provided that cover operations are satisfactory and the LTP is operating accordingly. Further, a floating cover system and pump can be designed to keep direct rainfall separate from leachate.

Gas The GCMS will consist of four major components: landfill gas


of 181

Collection and Management System (GCMS)

collection, conveyance, treatment and monitoring. The landfill gas can be either flared or used as fuel for power generation.

Groundwater Monitoring Well System

Seven (7) groundwater monitoring wells will be installed: three (3) upstream and four (4) downstream of the site. Initial hydrogeological studies indicate a groundwater depth of about 60 meters

Daily Soil Cover

At the end of each operating day, a 6-inch soil cover will be applied over the waste mass. When some areas are not used for an extended period of time, a thicker soil cover, about 12 inches thick would be applied. In addition to the daily soil cover, temporary HDPE covers would also be used intermittently especially during days when waste volumes are unusually high. Excavated soil during the landfill development phase will be used as the soil cover. Based on the initial estimates, the available soil cover at the site is 7,500,000 m3. Soil cover

required, m3 Available soil

cover, m3 Source

Phase 1 360,000 1,750,000 Stockpiled soil within the area, excavated soil from future landfill phases

Phase 2 588,000 1,150,000 Phase 3 590,000 1,150,000 Phase 4 730,000 1,150,000 Phase 5 810,000 1,150,000 Phase 6 560,000 1,150,000 TOTAL 3,638,000 7,500,000

Final Capping System

The final capping system of the landfill will be about 1.5 meter thick consisting of (from top to bottom): 300 mm vegetative layer, 600 m soil cover, non-woven geotextile, 1.0 mm thick HDPE liner, 300 mm compacted clay layer and 300 mm foundation soil layer

II.3. WASTE ACCEPTANCE

The proposed SLF initially aims to provide long-tem disposal solution for the City of San Jose Del Monte, Bulacan, which currently has a waste generation rate of 95 MTPD. Its design allows the SLF to accept additional waste from its neighboring Metro Manila cities such as Quezon City and Caloocan City, which have current waste generation rates of 1,260 MTPD and 642 MTPD, respectively. By 2013, the SLF is expected to operate fully at 2,000 MTPD, which translates to an annual acceptance rate of 730,000 tons.The estimated projected waste to be accommodated will be 13.5 million tons in 2029.


of 181

The projected waste intake of the SLF is as follows:

Year Tons Deposited

2009 7,650 2010 182,500 2011 365,000 2012 547,500 2013 730,000 2014 730,000 2015 730,000 2016 730,000 2017 730,000 2018 730,000 2019 730,000 2020 730,000 2021 730,000 2022 730,000 2023 730,000 2024 730,000 2025 730,000 2026 730,000 2027 730,000 2028 730,000 2029 730,000

TOTAL 13,512,650

II.4. WASTE COMPOSITION

San Jose Del Monte City has no on-site waste composition data. However, since the site is adjacent to the vicinity of Metro Manila and a portion of the wastes of Metro Manila will be disposed in the SLF project, the waste composition of Metro Manila was considered. The waste composition for the SLF:

Waste Type Composition (% by weight)

Biodegradable Food wastes 42.40 Paper wastes 14.61 Wood wastes 6.77 Garden 6.36 Textile wastes 3.07 Non-biodegradable wastes Plastic wastes 14.73 Metal wastes 5.06 Others 4.08 Glass wastes 2.09


of 181

Rubber and Leather 0.82 Total 100.00

II.5. OVERVIEW OF THE BASELINE

II.5.1. Baseline Vegetation

Vegetation at the project site is characterized by the abundance of grasses and shrubs (refer to Annex V.A.). Observed avian species include Pipit-puso (Nectarinia jugularis), Tisuk (Megalurus timoriensis), Bato-bato (Geopelia striata). Maria Capra (Rhipidura javanica), Tarat (Lanius cristatus), Layang-layang (Hirundo tahitica), and Maya (Passer montanus).

II.5.2. Site Geology

The project site is underlain by highly weathered Alat Conglomerate. Surface manifestation and geotechnical boreholes drilled to 20 mbgs at the landfill area describe this weathered rock formation as a mixture of subrounded, cobble to boulder sized gravels of older volcanic and metavolcanic rocks in a brown to gray clay matrix. Interbeds of grey medium to coarse grained conglomeratic sandstone and grayish brown plastic clay were intercepted in some of the boreholes from 9.0 to 20.0 mbgs.

II.5.3. Climate

Meteorology

The proposed SLF project site is located in a Type I climate region based on the Modified Coronas Classification of the Philippine Climate. A Type I Climate is characterized by two pronounced seasons: dry from December to May, and wet from June to November. Typically, the maximum rain periods are observed from June to September.

Rainfall

The maximum and minimum monthly rainfalls were recorded in August (526.8 mm) and February (8.9 mm) respectively. The months of July to September has the most number of rainy days (range of 2-4 days). The total annual rainfall was 2,532 mm. The total number of rainy days is 153 (about 43% of the year). The highest daily rainfall was recorded on June 7, 1967 (334.5 mm).

Relative Humidity

Relative humidity is expressed in percentage of water vapor present in air using psychrometric charts with the dry- and wet-bulb temperatures as input. The


of 181

annual average relative humidity is 77 percent with July to November as the most humid months of the year (average RH = 83%).

II.5.4. Hydrology

Surface water and groundwater hydrology investigations were conducted on April 14 and 17, 2008 to determine hydrological baseline conditions in the around the vicinity of the project site. The investigations involved surface water discharged measurement, well inventory, interviews with local residents, and surface water groundwater sampling for laboratory physico-chemical analysis. Field data were supported by secondary published and unpublished information from private and government agencies such as the National Water Resources Board (formerly the National Water Resources Council) and the Bureau of Research and Standards (BRS) of the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH). Flooding The present site with its moderate relief is not prone to flooding. The creek that drains the project site is intermittent. In addition, overflowing of the creek is unlikely to happen owing to the relatively small catchment area. However, with the development of the area, surface runoff would increase during intense storms. Of more importance is the project site‘s susceptibility to rill and gully erosion as observed on bare surfaces. Catchment Areas There is no existing river that drains the project area; however, the proposed landfill is located on a gully that serves as conduit for overland flow or direct runoff during prolonged rainfall or rainy months of the year. The catchment areas of these natural drainage waterways are between 0.6-1.0 square kilometers and can be described as undulating grassland with moderate gully slopes. Elevation ranges from 80 to 100 masl.

About 1.5 km west of the project area at the Cattle Creek Golf Course is an unnamed creek with the headwaters emanating at Barangay Sto. Niño, San Jose Del Monte. The creek flows in a south-southwest direction towards the golf course before discharging to the Sto. Cristo River. The creek, reckoned at its discharge point, has a drainage area of about 3.6 sq km. The Sto. Cristo is one of the major rivers in Bulacan Province. Its headwaters originate at the Mounts Balaghag, Katitingo and Balabac (elevation 790 meters above sea level) some 10 k m east of the project area. The river flows westward and is approximately 700 m south of the project area at its nearest approach. Downstream of the project area, the river continues its westward flow towards the town of San Jose Del Monte where it becomes the Santa Maria River and then changes its course to southerly direction towards the town of Balagtas before emptying to Manila Bay. The Santa Maria River has an estimated annual runoff of 200 million cubic meters (MCM), and a Mean Annual Flood (MAF) of 139 cubic meters per second (cms).

Surface Water


of 181

The laboratory results for Sto. Cristo River (refer to Annex V.B.) were compared with the Water Quality Criteria for Class C. All parameters conformed to the standard values except for DO at SW1 where it is lower by 30%. This can be attributed to a continuous BOD source/s at the station (the BOD at SW1 is the highest among the stations). The possible cause of the decrease in DO is due to the discharges of domestic waste from the neighboring community and the nearby poultry farm.

Groundwater

The hydrogeologic units in the exploration areas are classified according to the occurrence and movement of ground water as: (1) aquifers where ground water movement is intergranular; (2) aquifers where groundwater movement is through solution channels.

Aquifers where groundwater movement is intergranular are associated with unconsolidated to semi-consolidated alluvial deposits. The groundwater potential of this aquifer is dependent on the extent sorting and degree of consolidation of the sedimentary deposits. The sedimentary Alat Conglomerate and the Lambak Formation are hosts to these aquifers.

Ground water in massive igneous rocks occurs in highly fractured zones or sufficiently leached or weathered zones. In the project area, this aquifer is hosted by the Alagao Volcanics and Kinabuan Formation.

Carbonate rocks are aquifers where groundwater movement is through secondary structures such as fractures and solution channels. The productivity of wells tapping these aquifers depends largely whether these structures are interconnected. The Buenacop Limestone represents this aquifer in the project area.

Well Inventory

Six wells (three shallow and three deep wells) were inspected on 15 April 2008. The three deep wells are located inside the property while the three shallow wells are adjacent the property. The shallow wells consist of a dug well, a hand-pump well and an abandoned well. The dug well (GW1) is about 12.0 m deep while the other shallow well (GW2) which is about 50.0 m away from Sto. Cristo River is about 9.0 m deep. The Three deep wells are dedicated for the existing golf course. One (1) operational deep well (GW3) which is powered by a diesel engine is used to irrigate and maintain the golf course is not operational but is also programmed to irrigate the golf course. The third deep well which is outside the golf course and downstream of the proposed project is totally abandoned. All of the deep wells are provided with pump house. It is reported that these wells are roughly 240 m deep with groundwater level at about 36.0 mbgs. The location of the wells are as follows:

Well ID

Location Coordinates Type of Well and Status


of 181

GW1 Outside the fenced property and about 250 meters north northwest and upslope of proposed landfill site

14o50‘37‖ 121o04‘18‖ Dug well use as standby domestic water; about 12 meters deep.

GW2 Just outside and near the entrance of the fenced property, about 400 m south and down slope of proposed landfill site.

14o50‘17‖ 121o04‘21‖ Shallow well use for domestic water supply; about 9.0 m deep.

GW3 Within the golf course inside the fenced property about 1.7 km west of the proposed landfill site.

14o50‘24‖ 121o03‘15‖ Operational deep well for irrigation of golf course.

GW4 Near the northwest corner of the fenced property about 2.5 km west of the proposed landfill site.

14o50‘42‖ 121o02‘14‖ Deep well; non-operational; water supply source for irrigation of golf course.

GW5 Inside the fenced property; about 1.0 km southwest and downslope of the proposed landfill side

14o50‘08‖ 121o03‘53‖ Abandoned deepwell.

Results of the groundwater sample analyses (Annex V.C.) showed that the pH of GW1 (6.24) sample taken from the dug well is below the minimum DAO 94-26A pH standard of 6.5. The total hardness of GW2 (359 mg/L) sample exceeded the DAO 94-26A maximum level of 300 mg/L. For heavy metal concentrations, the manganese concentration of GW2 (0.62 mg/L) sample exceeded the DAO 94-26A maximum level of 0.5 mg/L. Bacteriological test results showed that the fecal coliform level at GW1 (350 MPN/100mL) and GW2 (2 MPN/100mL) samples exceeded the DAO 94-26A standard value of 0 MPN/100mL. All other remaining groundwater quality parameters were within the DAO 94-26A standards.

II.5.5. Air

Ambient air quality was measured on April 4-5, 2008. The ambient TSP, SOX, and NOX were measured in identified locations at the site by a DENR-accredited third party monitoring firm. Methods for sampling and analysis conformed to methods prescribed in Sec. 1(b) Rule VII Part II of the Clean Air Act IRR. The resulting ambient air TSP concentration was compared with the National Ambient Air Quality Guidelines Values (NAAQGV) prescribed in Table 1, Rule VII Part II of Clean Air Act IRR. Annex V.D. shows the ambient air quality report.

II.5.6. Human Settlement


of 181

The project site is free from any human settlement. There will be no household families that will be affected or relocated due to the development of the project.

II.6. IMPACTS AND MITIGATION OF THE SLF

II.6.1. Construction Phase

Physical Environment

Development of the SLF altered the topography of the area which may affect the natural surface drainage and cause flooding, erosion and sedimentation of Sto. Cristo River. Earth moving activities will result in the modification of the terrain. Geologic processes on the present condition of the terrain may cause slumping and landslides to the landfill cells. Slope stabilization shall be conducted in areas where deep trenches had been excavated. Loose earth materials shall be piled on the down slope side of steep terrains. Silt traps, sediment control dams and siltation ponds shall be provided. Re-vegetation shall be implemented on denuded areas and along the construction sites, where applicable. Dust Dust emissions result from the various construction activities of site development, operation of heavy equipment and construction of the SLF and its support structures. Dust will affect the workers in the area. To mitigate dust, regular water spraying will be conducted in the area where land development activities are being conducted. Soil compaction of loose soil and re-vegetation will likewise minimize dust dispersion. Noise Noise from the operation of the heavy equipment may affect the workers and their working condition. Thus, barriers in the working area shall be provided especially for vibrating equipment. Affected workers shall be required to use earplugs. The community is not unlikely to be affected by the SLF since they are situated around 2 kilometers away from the SLF site. Night construction activity will also be restricted. Safety and Health Hazards To address the sanitation needs of the construction workers within the construction site, they will be provided with temporary sanitary facilities and proper spoils management. On the other hand, safety issues will be addressed through provision of safety paraphernalia and personal protective equipment to the workers. To further enhance safety, construction safety protocols and good housekeeping practices will be observed and strictly implemented. A solid waste


of 181

management system for contractors will likewise be formulated and implemented. Employment

VGP Group, Inc. shall give qualified local residents priority in employment during the development of the SLF. If workers are lacking, workers shall be hired in neighboring cities, thus, transient workers from other barangays or neighboring cities may increase due to the development of the SLF. The total manpower requirement during the construction phase is 95. The breakdown of the manpower is presented below:

Personnel Description Number Project Management

Project Director 1 Construction Management Group Construction Manager 1 Resident Engineer 1 Electrical Engineer 1 Sanitary Engineer 1 Civil Engineer 1 Project Coordinator 1 Contractor‘s Manpower Project Manager 1 Project Supervisor 1 Safety Engineer 1 Electrical Engineer 1 Sanitary Engineer 1 Geodetic Engineer 1 Survey Team 4 QC/QA Engineer 2 Laboratory Technician 3 General Foreman 1 Leadman 2 Equipment Checker / Spotter 2 Electrician 2 Timekeeper 1 Helper/Laborer 20 Service Driver 2 Heavy equipment operators 15 Dump truck drivers 20 Chief Mechanic 1 Helper Mechanics 3 Security Guards 4

TOTAL 95


of 181

II.6.2. Operation Phase

Leachate Leachate from the stored wastes may contaminate the ground soil and the groundwater. Geomembranes will be placed on the bottom of the SLF to prevent leakage of the leachate that may cause soil contamination. Perforated pipes will be installed in the wastes to collect the leachate and direct it to a leachate treatment plant for proper treatment. Geomembranes will also be used as a final cover to minimize infiltration of rainwater that adds up to leachate production. Groundwater monitoring wells shall be constructed to determine groundwater contamination from leachate. The parameters to be monitored are nitrates. Odor The malodorous odor of the wastes shall be primarily controlled by placing daily soil cover on the waste. Deodorizers will also be applied on the open solid wastes piled in the cells to further control the odor. Aside from the proper covering of the cells, the operation of the leachate treatment facility and the gas collection and treatment system shall also be implemented. Trees shall be planted along the periphery of the project site to act as a buffer to absorb and reduce malodorous odor. Noise Noise from the operation of the heavy equipment may affect the workers and their working condition. Heavy equipment and trucks shall be operated on a proper schedule. Maintenance of noise reducing devices such as mufflers shall be conducted. Affected workers shall be required to use earplugs.

Traffic

The operation of the SLF would entail traffic impacts along Ipo Road and other access roads near the site due to increase in number of vehicles, particularly of garbage trucks plying the said roads. To address this concern, a traffic impact assessment will be conducted and incorporated into the design. Temporary stops of the solid waste collection trucks along route will be prohibited. Garbage trucks shall only transport during nighttimes. It will be ensured that there will be adequate staging / waiting area for trucks inside the premises of the SLF. To lessen the trucks for disposing the wastes, the garbage trucks used have a bigger capacity compared to normal dump trucks which is 1 garbage truck is equivalent to (number) normal dump trucks.

Employment

VGP Group, Inc. shall give qualified local residents of San Jose del Monte, especially from Barangay Minuyan Proper, Minuyan II and Citrus, employment priority during the operation of the SLF. However, skills required by the project may not be available locally. Hence, migrants might be needed by the project,


of 181

though this is reserved as a last option after the proponent has thoroughly exhausted all means to locate qualified residents. The total manpower requirement during the operational phases is 48 as presented below:

Personnel Description Number Operation

Site Manager 2 Supervisor 4 Operators 8 Laborers 20 Security 5 Accounting Staff 6 Maintenance 3

TOTAL 48

Influx of Scavengers/Waste Pickers

VGP Group, Inc. shall implement strict security in the SLF. Only qualified and authorized waste pickers shall be allowed to collect recyclable wastes, thus, they shall be considered as hired workers. With proper implementation, the influx of waste pickers in the site shall be controlled.

Proliferation of Rodents/Flies

Waste compaction and daily soil cover shall be observed as uncovered waste provides ideal breeding grounds for rodents, flies and other vermin, which are potential vectors of diseases.


of 181

III. METHANE RECOVERY AND COMBUSTION PROJECT

The basic concept of the Project is to extract the LFG, generate electricity and flare the excess LFG. LFG collection shall entail a vacuum system in the waste mass to extract the gas. The main components of the system are as follows: a. LFG Collection System

The Project will employ a combination of vertical extraction well, horizontal trench collectors and horizontal LFG collection / conveyance piping system. The design of this system will employ condensate sumps within the collection system to reduce the impacts of excessive liquid and condensation within the horizontal sections. Horizontal collection piping will be progressively installed during the filling of new cells and designed to minimize damage during filling operations. Together with an intermediate cover system, this collection system will increase LFG capture (collection efficiency) during the period leachate drainage within the cells. These LFG extraction wells and trenches will be connected to a main manifold pipe that will carry the LFG to the blower facility. Condensation which forms in the collection system pipe work will be controlled by either self-draining condensate traps back to the landfill, or pumped through a force main to a central location for treatment. b. Active LFG Collection

A pressure gradient is created in the wells or trenches, thereby forcing the removal of gas from the landfill. The effectiveness of an active LFG collection system depends greatly on the design and operation of the system, and on the methane generation capability of the landfill waste. An effective LFG collection system should be designed and operated to: Handle all of the recovered LFG; Effectively collect LFG from all areas of the landfill; Provide the capability to monitor and adjust the operation of individual

extraction wells and trenches; and Minimize air intrusion through the landfill cover and into the refuse.

c. LFG Extraction Equipment

The collection components (vertical or horizontal) will lead to control valves along a piping network, which will convey the LFG to an equipment compound, comprising condensate removal ―knockout‖ vessels, centrifugal blowers or exhausters, and fuel conditioning for the engines. An absorption media to remove hydrogen sulfide shall be placed at the end of the piping network before the combustion and flaring system.. d. LFG Flaring System


of 181

The project will utilize an enclosed flare system (also known as ground flare) with a refractory lining to reduce heat loss and enable sustained operation at higher temperatures, for improved destruction efficiency. The flare will meet local (and relevant international) standards, combusting the LFG in a controlled environment, with a minimum residence time, thus maximizing the destruction of methane and other potentially harmful constituents before discharging them safely to the atmosphere. e. Monitoring and Control Systems

The facility‘s monitoring and control systems will be linked by telemetry to an off-site supervisory control and data acquisition monitoring location which will allow for real time performance monitoring, systems control, error logging, analysis, and reporting. In addition, monitoring points and valves will be installed at each wellhead and other locations to allow for manual measurements and fine-tuning of individual wells and components to optimize performance of the collection system. f. LFG Fueled Electricity Generators

The project will utilize the LFG as fuel for the generation of electricity, with subsequent sales to the local utility grid, if applicable.

The Methane Recovery and Combustion Project shall achieve emission reductions, computed as follows:

Year tCO2-e/yr

2011 29,164 2012 88,787 2013 204,681 2014 258,585 2015 300,234 2016 333,253 2017 360,111 2018 382,497 2019 401,574 2020 418,149

TOTAL 2,777,035

IMPACT IDENTIFICATION AND MITIGATION

III.1. CONSTRUCTION PHASE

III.1.1. Solid Wastes Generation



of 181

Installation of the Methane Recovery and Combustion Project shall generate solid wastes. Improper management of the wastes shall be a nuisance to the workers and the working condition of the SLF. Prevention / Mitigation The solid wastes shall be placed in the MRF component of the SLF for proper segregation. The recyclable wastes shall be recovered and shall be sold to junk buyers. Monitoring The project supervisor shall inspect the MRF on a daily basis to ensure that the wastes are properly segregated and disposed. The surrounding area shall be inspected for possible dumping of wastes. The project supervisor shall report to the project coordinator of the construction team for any findings.

(8) Dust Generation

Impact Identification The installation of the gas collection pipes and the combustion system shall disperse dust to the atmosphere. Dust will increase the level of particulate matter in the environment on a short term basis. It may affect the workers. Prevention / Mitigation Sprinkling of water shall be conducted as often as necessary in dry and loose soil areas. Construction activities shall be controlled to avoid excessive generation of dust. Monitoring The project supervisor shall daily inspect the area where the pipes are being installed and observe occurrence of fugitive dust. If dust poses a nuisance to the workers, he shall report the findings to the project coordinator.

III.1.2. Noise Generation


Construction activities generate noise. Noise is a nuisance and may harm the health of the workers if they are overexposed beyond the allowable limit. Prevention / Mitigation


of 181

Workers assigned in noisy areas should wear appropriate protective equipment particularly earplugs. Heavy equipment shall have noise reduction devices and shall be operated systematically. Noise levels shall be maintained within the prescribed values of PD 984 as follows:

Category Daytime Morning/Evening Nighttime

C 70 65 60 Monitoring The project supervisor shall monitor on a daily basis the noise levels in the working area using a Noise Level Meter. He shall record the readings and compare results with the allowable limit.

III.2. OPERATION PHASE

IV.2.13 Safety and Emergency

Impact Identification Leaks of the LFG may occur from the SLF and the collection pipes. LFG may escape to the atmosphere and pollute the air quality. In addition, methane and carbon monoxide, which are among the components of the LFG, are combustible. They have the potential to catch fire and/or cause explosion if exposed to heat. Prevention / Mitigation Maintenance of the SLF and the gas collection pipes shall be regularly conducted. Heat sources shall be kept at a safe distance away from the facility. Appropriate personal protective equipment shall be worn by the workers handling the combustion and flaring equipment. Fire fighting equipment and signage shall be placed in strategic locations. Monitoring A monitoring well and control system for the LFG shall be installed and linked by telemetry to an off-site supervisory control and data acquisition for real time performance monitoring, systems control, error logging, analysis and reporting. Sound alarms shall notify the workers in case of LFG leaks. Among the parameters to be monitored are the particulate matter and carbon monoxide which shall be compared with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards of Republic Act No. 8749 or known as the Philippine Clean Air Act of 1999, to wit:

Parameter Standard Averaging Time

Particulate Matter 150ug/Ncm 24 hours Carbon Monoxide 10ug/Ncm 8 hours


of 181

National Ambient Air Quality Guideline

IV.2.14 Burning of the LFG

Impact Identification Burning and flaring of the LFG will release particulate matter to the atmosphere. In addition, oxygen is required for burning. Incomplete combustion occurs when the oxygen is exhausted. Under this condition, carbon monoxide is generated, which is an air pollutant. Prevention / Mitigation The flaring system will be in an enclosed area with refractory lining to reduce heat loss and enable sustained operation at higher temperatures, for improved destruction efficiency. The combustion and flaring equipment shall meet the requirements of the Republic Act No. 8749 for Source Specific Air Pollution Standards:

Parameter Standard

Particulate Matter 200mg/Ncm Carbon Monoxide 500mg/Ncm

National Emission Standards for Source Specific Air Pollutants

The engines shall be provided with an air pollution control device to minimize the generation of particulate matter and carbon monoxide. The smoke stacks shall be elevated to encourage natural dilution. The equipments shall be regularly maintained by the maintenance crew to generate efficient electricity. Monitoring Levels of particulate matter and carbon monoxide shall be analyzed from the combustion engines at least once a year. The pollutants shall be compared to the Point Source Emission Standards under Republic Act No. 8749.


Impact Identification The employees shall generate the usual domestic solid wastes such as food leftovers, papers, plastics and empty bottles.



of 181

Domestic solid wastes shall be placed in the MRF for proper segregation. The recyclable materials shall be separated from the general wastes and shall be reused / recycled, whenever applicable. Only the residual wastes and biodegradable wastes shall be disposed in the SLF.



LFG is composed of methane, carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, nitrogen and hydrogen sulfide. The intentional production of LFG from the SLF will also increase the potential of release of the gas to the atmosphere. Hydrogen sulfide is an odorous gas (similar to the smell of rotten eggs) that shall be a nuisance to the employees if there are leaks in the SLF. Prevention / Mitigation Proper maintenance of the facilities shall be regularly conducted to avoid leaks. The combustion and the flaring facilities shall be placed in an enclosed area to trap any escaping LFG. Monitoring The monitoring well and control system shall be used to monitor LFG in the area. Sound alarms shall notify the workers in case of LFG leaks.


Impact Identification The source of noise of the Methane Recovery and Combustion Project is the operation of the combustion engines. Noise may be a nuisance to the workers of the SLF. Prevention / Mitigation The combustion engines shall be provided with mufflers. Office buildings shall be made of sound proof material to prevent disturbance to the employees. Earplugs shall be provided to the workers located in noisy areas of the facility. Monitoring The PCO shall daily monitor the noise levels using a Sound Level Meter and compare the values indicated in the table below/

Category Daytime Morning/Evening Nighttime

C 70 65 60


of 181

MATRIX OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN


Aspect


Affected

Potential Impact




Cost Reporting to

Monitoring Method



Cost Reporting to

Construction Phase

Solid Wastes Generation Installati

on of the gas control recovery system and the combustion facility.

Activities of the workers

Ground soil

Ground water

Improper management of the wastes such as dumping non biodegradable wastes on the ground shall be a nuisance. Biodegradable wastes may contaminate the ground soil and percolate to the ground water.

The solid wastes shall be placed in the Materials Recovery Facility (MRF) for proper sorting and storing.

Only residual and biodegradable wastes shall be disposed in the Sanitary Landfill (SLF)

Daily Workers / Laborers

Project Supervisor

Visual observation

Solid wastes in the MRF

Once a week

Project Supervisor


Soil Displacement Piling of

soil

Air quality

Surface water

Employe

Soil particles may disperse to the

Water shall be sprinkled to the soil.

Daily sprinkling

Workers / Laborers

Project Supervisor

Visual observation

Area of the piled soil

Weekly Project Supervisor

Project Coordinator


of 181

cover es atmosphere during strong winds.

Soil displaced may reach the creek which is 1.5 kilometers away.

Scattered soil may be a nuisance to VGP

Provide siltation ponds around the piled soil.

Operation Phase LFG generation Producti

on of LFG

Air quality

LFG leaks from the SLF and collection pipes will be released and pollute the atmosphere

LFG is susceptible to fire that may lead to explosion.

Regular maintenance of the facility.

Heat

sources shall be kept away from the SLF

Weekly Maintenance crew

Supervisor Sense of smell

SLF area Weekly PCO Supervisor

Burning of Air quality Incomplete Installatio Was Site VGP Supervisor


of 181

the LFG combustion of the LFG will generate carbon monoxide, which is an air pollutant

n of a muffler, smoke stack and other air pollution control device/s

Maintena

nce of the combustion facility

considered during the installation of the combustion facility.

Weekly

manager

Mainte

nance crew

PCO

Point

source air emission test

PM and

CO

Yearly

PCO

P30,000.00 / emission test

Solid Wastes Generation Employe

es

Ground soil

Ground water

Employees will generate solid wastes such as food leftovers, papers, plastics and empty bottles. Non biodegradable wastes will not degrade and shall remain in the area for several years. Biodegradable wastes will generate foul odor, contaminate the ground soil and percolate

The solid wastes shall be placed in the MRF for proper segregation. Recyclable wastes shall be sold. Only residual and biodegradable wastes shall be disposed to the SLF.

Daily Laborers

PCO Visual inspection

Solid wastes in the MRF.

Weekly PCO Supervisor


of 181

to the ground water.

Odor Generation LFG

leaks from the SLF and the collection pipes

Employees

Nuisance to the employees.

Good housekeeping shall be conducted.

Deodorizer is used during spreading of the wastes in the SLF.

Maintenance

Daily Employees PCO Ambient air emission test

H2S When necessary

PCO P30,000.00 for the emission test

Supervisor

Noise Generation Operatio

n of the combustion facility

Employees Excessive noise due to operation of the combustion facility.

Provided with noise absorbers.

Was considered already during construction / installation

Project Manager

PCO Sense of hearing

Noise level At the same time when air emission is analyzed.

PCO Supervisor


of 181


of 181

V. PUBLIC CONSULTATION AND DISCLOSURE

The conduct of Information Education and Campaign is a required activity under DAO 2003-30. This is to provide information about the project and identify the stakeholders that will be affected by the project. The study team conducted the IEC for the direct impact barangays of Minuyan Proper (April 9, 2008) and Citrus April 9, 2008) through project presentations and briefings to the barangay officials and some residents. Leaflets were developed specially for the project. The language used in the information brochures (comics style) was in Tagalog for easier comprehension of affected stakeholders. Information on the details of the project and the benefits that would be derived from its implementation were discussed (i.e. efficient solid waste management, economic opportunities, environmental protection through implementation of CDM component, etc.) A Socio-Economic Survey was conducted on May 9-13, 2008 in the direct impact barangays. This survey instrument enlisted residents to be directly affected by the project. A 95% confidence level and 4.85% margin of error was used in estimating the sample size resulting to 409 households of the total 10,375. The total number of households for the three direct impact barangays (Minuyan Proper, Minuyan II and Citrus) was projected from the 2000 census using the annual growth rate of2.3%. On May 29, 2008, a public scoping was held as part of the EIA process in the clubhouse of Cattle Creek Golf Course and Country Club in Minuyan Proper, San Jose Del Monte. It was attended by the EIA Review Team, DENR-EMB Region III personnel, SJDM City officials and residents of the seven (7) barangays adjacent to the Newtown development Area. Several fora were also conducted wherein relevant issues on the construction/operation of the Sanitary Landfill and MRF components were discussed. The Environmental Impact Assessment Report is a public document. Access to the said EIA for reference may be available upon request from the project proponent:

VGP GROUP, INC. 10th Floor, Manilabank Building 6772 Ayala Avenue, Makati City

Telephone No.: Fax No. :


of 181


of 181

V. ANNEXES


of 181

Annex V.A. Observed Vegetation at the Project Site

Local Name Scientific Name Occurrence Acacia Robinia pseudo-Acacia, L. O Bayabas Psidium guajava Linneus O Blade grass Graminae sp. A Carabao grass Axonopus compresus Linneus A Kaimito Chrysophylium cainito O Ipil Intsia bijuga Colebrook O Kakawate Glyricidia sepium O Kamoteng kahoy Manihot esculetum O Kawayan Bambusa vulgaris O Langka Arterocarpus heterophyllus O Makahiya Mimosa pudica Linneus A Malunggay Moringa oleifera Lamarck O Manga Mangifera indica O Napier grass Penniselum purpureum A Niyog Cocos nucifera O Papaya Carica Papaya O Saging Musa X paradisiacal L. A Talahib Saccharum spontaneum A Talangaw/cogon Imperata cylindrical A

Note: O – Occasional; A - Abundant


of 181

Annex V.B. Water Quality Sampling Results

Parameter SW1 SW2 SW3 SW4 SW5 DENR-

AO No. 34, Class C

pH, unit 7.13 7.28 7.53 7.60 7.78 6.5-8.5 Temperature, °C

27.5 29.7 30.3 30.9 30.7 (a)

DO, mg/L 3.3 6.1 7.8 7.7 8 5.0 minimum

BODs, mg/L 7 <2 4 3 5 --- COD, mg/L 20 10 10 10 25 --- TSS, mg?L 3 5.5 4 12 12 (b) Oil and Grease, mg/L

<0.62 <0.62 <0.62 <0.62 <0.62 2

Phenols, mg/L

<0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02

Total Phosphorus as P, mg/L

42 41 41 40 45 ---

Hex. Chromium, mg/L

<0.008 <0.008 <0.008 <0.008 <0.008 0.05

Ammonia, mg/L

<0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 ---

Mercury, mg/L

<0.001 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 0.002

Cadmium, mg/L

<0.002 <0.002 <0.001 0.002 <0.002 0.01

Copper, mg/L

<0.007 <0.007 <0.007 0.008 0.009 0.05 ©

Lead, mg/L <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.05 Fecal Coliforms, MPN/100mL

2,400 790 1,300 790 3,500 ---


of 181

Annex V.C. Summary of Laboratory Analysis Results for Groundwater Samples

Parameter GW1 GW2 GW3 DAO 94-26A

Limits pH, unit 6.24 6.78 8.10 6.5 – 8.5 Odor, TON 1 1 1 Unobjectionable Taste, FTN 1 1 1 Unobjectionable Color, PCU <4 5 7 5 Turbidity, NTU

2 2 2 5

TDS, mg/L 346 484 272 500 Sulfate, mg/L

18 33 11 250

Cholride, mg/L

21 44 5.9 250

Total Hardness as CaCO3, mg/L

253 359 24 300 as CaCO3

Mercury, mg/L

<0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.001

Cadmium, mg/L

<0.002 <0.002 <0.002 0.003

Chromium, mg/L

<0.03 <0.03 <0.03 0.05

Copper, mg/L

<0.04 <0.04 <0.04 1.0

Iron, mg/L <0.08 0.15 0.13 1.0 Lead, mg/L <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 Manganese, mg/L

<0.03 0.62 <0.03 0.50

Zinc, mg/L <0.01 0.08 <0.01 5.0 Fecal Coliform, MPN/100mL

350 2 <1.1 0


of 181

Annex V.D. Air Quality


of 181

METHANE RECOVERY FROM WASTE MANAGEMENT PROJECT …€¦ · Important parts of this document have...

Documents

Transcript of METHANE RECOVERY FROM WASTE MANAGEMENT PROJECT …€¦ · Important parts of this document have...