Castle RidgeWho is to blame?

written and reported byDuncano

PuraSuyat

INTRODUCTION

Philippines is disaster-prone as a country– Nearby the Pacific

Ring of Fire– Often visited by

typhoons and earthquakes Aerial map of Antipolo, including the

surrounding cities and municipalities

Case Topic

Chino and Tina Arceo and their four-year old daughter live in a townhouse located at Castle Ridge, Antipolo. After two days of heavy rains, the ground on which their townhouse was situated started to give way. Their townhouse and two more others collapsed into the side of the ridge, with the Arceos luckily able to escape with bruises in their bodies. The AJZ developer claims that they had secured an Environmental Compliance Certificate (ECC) for the townhouse development and had implemented their plan well. AJZ claims that it should be the DENR who should be liable for issuing the ECC in the first place.

Key Issues:

Is the DENR liable? If so, what are its liabilities?

Is it possible to find the developer liable as well?

Location Profile

Antipolo City, Rizal Generally hilly and

mountainous Within the scope of the

Laguna Lake Development Authority (LLDA)

Declared as an Environmentally Critical Area (ECA)

A geohazard map showing the susceptibility of cities and municipalities to certain environmental calamities

The Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) System and the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Process

PD 1586 – “Establishing an Environmental Impact Statement System, Including Other Environmental Management Related Measures”

Scope– Category A; The Environmentally Critical Projects (ECPs)– Category B; ECPs with minor effects or non-ECPs located

at ECAs– Category C; Projects intended to directly enhance

environmental quality or address existing environmental problems not falling under Category A and B

– Category D; Projects unlikely to cause adverse environmental impacts

Categories A and B are required to secure an ECC.

It is optional for projects under Category C to obtain an ECC but they are required to submit a Project Description.

Projects under Category D may secure a Certificate of Non-Coverage however, the Environmental Management Bureau (EMB) may require such projects to provide additional environmental safeguards as it may deem necessary.

Summary Flowchart of the EIA Process

The EIS System and the EIA Process

Monitoring responsibilities– Primary responsibility belongs to the project proponent– Multipartite Monitoring Team (MMT)

Established by the project proponent Composed of representatives of the proponent and of

stakeholder groups, including representatives from concerned LGUs, locally accredited NGOs, and from relevant government agencies

For projects which are not ECPs but within ECAs, the EMB Regional Offices have the option to require the formulation of MMTs. However, if proponent is not required to form an MMT, they are still required to submit a semi-annual monitoring report to the EMB, in which case, the proponent may commission third party experts to undertake monitoring on its behalf.

The EIS System and the EIA Process

Monitoring responsibilities– Multipartite Monitoring Teams’ duties

Validate project compliance with the conditions stipulated in the ECC and the Environmental Management Plan (EMP)

Validate proponent’s conduct of self-monitoring Receive complaints, gather relevant information to facilitate

determination of validity of complaints or concerns about the project and timely transmit to the proponent and EMB recommended measures to address the complaint

Prepare, integrate and disseminate simplified validation reports to community stakeholders

Make regular and timely submission of MMT reports based on the EMB-prescribed format

The EIS System and the EIA Process

Monitoring responsibilities– Environmental Management Bureau’s duties

The EMB shall be primarily responsible for the over-all evaluation/audit of the Proponent’s monitoring and the MMT validation

Agencies Involved

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES (DENR)

ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT BUREAU (EMB)

HOUSING AND LAND USE REGULATORY BOARD (HLURB)

Agencies Involved DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL

RESOURCES (DENR)– EO 192 (1987) – “Providing for the Reorganization of the

Department of Environment, Energy and Natural Resources, Renaming it as the Department of Environment and Natural Resources, and for other Purposes”

– Primary government agency responsible for the conservation, management, development, and proper use of the country’s environment and natural resources, specifically forest and grazing lands, mineral resources, including those in reservation and watershed areas, and lands of the public domain, as well as the licensing and regulation of all natural resources as may be provided for by law in order to ensure equitable sharing of the benefits derived therefrom for the welfare of the present and future generations of Filipinos

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES (DENR)

– Policy making and implementing body when it comes to environmental plans and programs

Agencies Involved

Environmental Management Bureau (EMB)– National authority responsible for pollution prevention and

control, and environmental impact assessment– Used to be a supporting body of the DENR until its

establishment as an independent enforcement authority in 2002

– Sets air and water quality standards and monitors ambient and point source pollutants. It manages hazardous and toxic wastes under the Toxic Substances, Hazardous and Nuclear Waste Control Act and implements the Philippine Environmental Impact Assessment

Environmental Management Bureau (EMB)- Mandated to implement PD 1586 (Environmental Impact

Statement System)- Issue permits, clearances under PD 1586 and monitor compliance

to said law- Develop and implement a research and development program in

support of the ff: Environmental and Compliance Monitoring; and study of existing and potential environmental problems and issues

- Promote public information and education to encourage participation of an informed citizenry in environmental quality planning and monitoring

Agencies Involved

Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board (HLURB)- Declared as the planning, regulatory and quasi-judicial

instrumentality of government for land use development (EO 648, Series of 1981)

- Register and license subdivision and condominium projects, farm lots, memorial parks, and columbaria.

- Monitor development and construction of registered/licensed projects.

Related Cases

Principe v. Fact-finding and Intelligence Bureau G.R. No. 145973 January 23, 2002

Balicas v. Fact-finding and Intelligence Bureau, G.R. No. 145972, March 23, 2004

Killed more than 50 people and destroyed more than 300

homes

Three-day continuous rainfall was the main cause of the

landslide

Situated in Antipolo

Issue: whether the incumbent DENR officers are liable for

issuing the ECC

Related Cases

Principe v. FFIB (2002)– Antonio Principe, then Regional Executive Director of the

DENR was dismissed from office by the Ombudsman for his alleged gross neglect of duty to monitor and inspect the project, as it was incumbent upon petitioner to conduct actual monitoring and enforce strict compliance with the terms and conditions of the ECC as the signing and approving authority of the ECC issued to Philjas

– RULING: The Court ruled that Principe cannot be held guilty of neglecting a duty, which is not even his to begin with. The responsibility of monitoring housing and land development projects is lodged with the HLURB, who is the sole regulatory body for housing and land development.

Related Cases Balicas v FFIB (2004)

– Balicas was dismissed from office as the DENR senior environmental management specialist assigned in the province of Rizal for gross neglect of duty, finding that the monitoring and inspections she conducted were inadequate for its scant frequency, doubting that she cannot sweepingly claim that that there was no violation of ECC compliance and that she had done what is necessary in accordance with the regular performance of her duties. The Ombudsman also held that it was incumbent upon her to foresee the possible erosion of the adjacent mountain. The Cherry Hills incident, as held by the Ombudsman, is a living witness of her incompetence for her position.

– RULING: A more specific monitoring duty is imposed on the HLURB as the sole regulatory body for housing and land development.

– Sec. 4 of PD 1586 enumerated the duties of the HLURB in connection with environmentally critical projects requiring an ECC

Related Cases

Balicas v FFIB (2004)– Presidential Decree No. 1586, Section 4– Duties of the HLURB (then Ministry of Human Settlements)

in connection with environmentally critical projects requiring an ECC

“the Ministry of Human Settlements [now HLURB] shall:

1. Prepare the proper land or water use pattern for said critical project(s) or area(s)

2. Establish ambient environmental quality standards;3. Develop a program of environmental enhancement or protective

measures against calamitous factors such as earthquake, floods, water erosion and others”…

Related Cases

In sum, both cases, as adjudicated by the Supreme Court, held that the duty to monitor housing projects located at ECAs is vested upon the HLURB and not the DENR. The DENR regional offices cannot be held liable just because they are the body tasked to issue ECCs. Once the ECC has been issued, it is the duty of the HLURB to monitor such projects, pursuant to PD 1586.

Conclusion Having studied the EIS System including its implementing rules

and regulations and applying the doctrines laid out by the Supreme Court in the two cases relating to the Cherry Hills accident, the researchers therefore conclude, as discussed earlier, that AJZ cannot blame the government for a duty he (the developer) is mandated by law to perform. ECC is not a permit, which if granted, will lose its importance. Yes, the ECC is required by law before the project can push through but compliance with the ECC does not end upon its issuance. The ECC is a set of conditions which the proponent, AJZ, has to comply with for as long as the project is subsisting. Failure of the developer to provide for a monitoring team is considered as a violation of the ECC conditions. It is possible that AJZ failed to carefully monitor the project, even after the issuance of the ECC.

Summary In a housing project like in this case, it is not just the developer and the

executive branch of the government (DENR) that should be checked upon for possible liabilities. Other government agencies also play a role in the processing, approval and monitoring of such projects to ensure strict compliance with the requirements and the rules and regulations applicable.

The State enacted PD 1586 to categorize projects into critical and non-critical and to identify the location as being a critical area or not.

The requirements and conditions set forth in every project would depend on its category and location. In the case at bar, the area where the townhouse is located is categorized as a critical one although the project itself is non-critical making it fall under Category B of the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) System.

Summary

Upon the issuance of the Environmental Compliance Certificate (ECC), constant monitoring for compliance of the conditions set forth in it should be done to ensure that standards are met when it comes to safety and environmental concerns.

Though the Cherry Hills case pointed out that the HLURB is the sole regulatory board for housing and land development and therefore is mandated to strictly monitor such projects, the incident happened before the issuance of DENR Administrative Order No. 2003-30. In the said administrative order, it pointed out that it is required for the project proponent to establish a monitoring team immediately after the issuance of the ECC. The monitoring team must submit semi-annual monitoring reports on specific parameters indicated in the project’s environmental management plan.

Summary

Without any other facts about the timeframe when the case topic occurred, therefore assuming that the incident happened just recently, it is the researchers’ conclusion that even if the HLURB may be held liable as decided in the Cherry Hills tragedy, the developer cannot solely blame the government for the incident just because it (DENR) issued the ECC. Constant monitoring of the developer is the basis for the evaluation of the EMB-DENR when deciding if the conditions of the ECC are being met.