laiban briefing

MWSP III (LAIBAN DAM PROJECT)MWSP III (LAIBAN DAM PROJECT)MWSP III (LAIBAN DAM PROJECT)MWSP III (LAIBAN DAM PROJECT)27 October 2009

PRESENTATION OUTLINE

• Project Background

– MWSSP III, Laiban Dam, Other Water Sources

• Current Water Situation in Metro Manila

– Demand Supply Gap, Angat Dam, the NEED for Laiban

• The Laiban Dam Project Proposal

– Technical Description– Technical Description

• Design Considerations, Facilities

– Project Activity Schedule

– Implementation Framework

– LARP

– Environment Assessment

– PROJECT COST

MWSP III IDENTIFIED

WATER SOURCES

Marikina River Basin

Kaliwa Basin

Kanan Basin

Umiray Basin

Laguna Bay

Taal LakeTaal Lake

Pampanga River

Calamba-Sta.Rosa

Groundwater

Marikina Groundwater

MWSP III PROJECT SELECTION

SOURCE YIELD (MLD)

Remarks

Kaliwa River (Laiban Dam) 1,909 Most economic source (1987)

Marikina River 1,280 Socially unacceptable (1987)

Kanan River 3,170 Only after Kaliwa (transbasin)

Umiray River

(UATP to Angat)

777 Implemented 1998, to undergo rehab,

additional source (190 MLD)

Laguna Bay (entire lake) 2,592 Pollution control measures before exploitation

for water supply

Laguna Bay (eastern portion only) 1,782 Requires 1.95 m dike in the bay (1992)

Pampanga River 2,592 Pumping cost energy relatively high

Taal Lake 864 Not recommended due volcanic hazard

Calamba-Sta. Rosa Groundwater 190 For local supply only

Lower Marikina Groundwater 130 For local supply only

ANGAT DAM

UMIRAY Transbasin

STUDY ON WATER RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT FOR

METRO MANILA (JICA, 2003)

Kanan Dam No. 1Kanan Dam No. 1

Kanan Low DamKanan Low Dam

Laiban High DamLaiban High Dam

Laiban Low DamLaiban Low DamKaliwa Low DamKaliwa Low Dam

Agos DamAgos Dam

Source Combination

Scheme Capacity (MLD)

Stage 1 Stage 2 Total

1 Laiban Dam+Kanan No. 2 Dam 1,803 3,310 5,110

2 Kaliwa Low Dam + Agos Dam (550)/0 3,000 3,000

Water Sources for Metro MANILA

Estimated Yields (Capacities)

2 Kaliwa Low Dam + Agos Dam (550)/0 3,000 3,000

3 Agos Dam Alone 1,500 1,500 3,000

4 Laiban Dam + Agos 1,830 1,500 3,330

5 Kaliwa Low Dam + Kanan No. 2 Dam

(550)/290 3,310 3,600

*based on Nippon-Koie/NJS Study, 2003

No Source Combination Stage 1

Cost

US $M

Capacity

MLD

Stage 1

Commis-sioning Date

1 Laiban Dam+Kanan No. 2 Dam 804 1,830 2015

Stage 1 Cost and Commissioning Dates, Water

Sources for Metro MANILA

2 Kaliwa Low Dam + Agos Dam 529 550 2012

3 Agos Dam Alone 1,071 1,500 2017

4 Laiban Dam + Agos 807 1,830 2015

5 Kaliwa Low Dam + Kanan No. 2 Dam

529 550 2012

*based on Nippon-Koie/NJS Study, updated to 2005 prices by SKM

The 2005 MWSS StudyThe 2005 MWSS StudyThe 2005 MWSS StudyThe 2005 MWSS Study

• “the Laiban Dam + Kanan Dam has until now beenrecommended to be the priority combination amongoptions already studied due to the higher yield, lowest unitdevelopment cost and higher elevation”

• Considerable works have been done for Laiban Dam• Considerable works have been done for Laiban Dam

– FS conducted in 1979

– DE done in 1980

– Construction of diversion tunnel completed in 1984

– Plan was reviewed, updated in 1997, 2000, 2007

– The original plan from the headworks to the water treatment plant remain unchanged

PROJECT PROFILE PROJECT PROFILE PROJECT PROFILE PROJECT PROFILE PROJECT PROFILE PROJECT PROFILE PROJECT PROFILE PROJECT PROFILE –––––––– LAIBAN DAMLAIBAN DAMLAIBAN DAMLAIBAN DAMLAIBAN DAMLAIBAN DAMLAIBAN DAMLAIBAN DAMPROJECT PROFILE PROJECT PROFILE PROJECT PROFILE PROJECT PROFILE PROJECT PROFILE PROJECT PROFILE PROJECT PROFILE PROJECT PROFILE –––––––– LAIBAN DAMLAIBAN DAMLAIBAN DAMLAIBAN DAMLAIBAN DAMLAIBAN DAMLAIBAN DAMLAIBAN DAM

� The Project is a multi-purpose development: itwill provide a water supply of 1,950 MLD; it willalso provide a 25MWhydropower plant.

� It will become the second major source ofwater supply for Metro Manila, after Angat Dam.

� A 113-meter high dam will be constructed to

� The Project is a multi-purpose development: itwill provide a water supply of 1,950 MLD; it willalso provide a 25MWhydropower plant.

� It will become the second major source ofwater supply for Metro Manila, after Angat Dam.

� A 113-meter high dam will be constructed to� A 113-meter high dam will be constructed toutilize the Kaliwa River Basin in Tanay, Rizal.

� Kaliwa River basin is situated east of MetroManila and drains a mountainous watershed ofabout 28,000 hectares on the slope of SierraMadreMountains.

� A 113-meter high dam will be constructed toutilize the Kaliwa River Basin in Tanay, Rizal.

� Kaliwa River basin is situated east of MetroManila and drains a mountainous watershed ofabout 28,000 hectares on the slope of SierraMadreMountains.

6000

8000

10000

12000

M L D

300 MLD

MSW III-3(650)KANAN (3200)

MWWS Demand-Supply Projections (2000)

0

2000

4000

1990

1995

2000

2005

2010

2015

2020

2025

2030

2035

Year

M L D

UATP (800)MSW III-1(650)

MSW III-2(650)

MWSP III, Agos River Pre-FS, 2000

•• CoversCovers thethe NCRNCR ((1717 townstowns andand

cities)cities);; 55 inin RizalRizal andand 66 inin CaviteCavite

•• TotalTotal ServiceService AreaArea ofof 11,,940940 sqsq kmkm

•• 11,,400400--MWCIMWCI

•• 540540--MWSIMWSI

•• PopulationPopulation inin thethe ServiceService Area,Area, 1414

MillionMillion

MWSSMWSSMWSSMWSSMWSSMWSSMWSSMWSS

MillionMillion

•• ServedServed PopulationPopulation ofof aboutabout 99

MillionMillion

•• AngatAngat RiverRiver 33,,200200MLDMLD

•• UmirayUmiray 800800MLDMLD

•• SumSum--agag 190190MLDMLD

•• GroundwaterGroundwater 9090MLDMLD

UMIRAY RIVER ANGAT

RESERVOIR

IPO DAM

LA MESA TREATMENT

PLANT NO. 1

LA MESA TREATMENT

PLANT NO. 2

BIGTI

SETTLINGBASIN

9 CMS

70 CMS

46 CMS

MWSS Existing

Water

Supply

SystemN I A

3 Tunnels

5 Aqueducts

4,480 MLD4,000 MLD (UMIRAY, (UMIRAY,

ANGAT, IPO)ANGAT, IPO)

900 MLD 900 MLD

CAPACITYCAPACITY

)

PLANT NO. 1

BALARA TREATMENT

PLANT NO. 2

BALARA TREATMENT

PLANT NO. 1

SAN JUAN

RESERVOIR

LA MESA

RESERVOIR

BAGBAG

RESERVOIR

TO DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMTO DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM

1,500 MLD 1,500 MLD

CAPACITYCAPACITY

470 MLD 470 MLD

CAPACITYCAPACITY

1,130 MLD 1,130 MLD

CAPACITYCAPACITY

380 MLD, La Mesa

IPO DAM

ANGAT DAM

BUSTOS DAM

(NIA)

28,000-30,000 has

releases thru auxiliary turbinesreleases thru

main turbinesANGAT DAM

DIKESPILLWAY

direc

tion o

f flow

Inflow from Umiray Angat Transbasin Tunnel

IPO DAM

BICTI STILLING BASIN

3 tunnels

LA MESA DAM

6 aqueducts

La Mesa Treatment Plants 1 & 2

BalaraTreatment Plants 1 & 2

IPO DAM

MWSS ProjectionsJICA STUDY, 2001

MWSS DEMANDMWSS DEMANDMWSS DEMANDMWSS DEMANDMWSS DEMANDMWSS DEMANDMWSS DEMANDMWSS DEMAND--------SUPPLY SITUATIONSUPPLY SITUATIONSUPPLY SITUATIONSUPPLY SITUATIONSUPPLY SITUATIONSUPPLY SITUATIONSUPPLY SITUATIONSUPPLY SITUATION

Latest Water Demand UpdateLatest Water Demand Update6,000

7,000

8,000

9,000Projected Demand (MLD)

Angat Dam + GW sourcesAngat Dam + GW sources

Umiray TransbasinUmiray Transbasin

MWSS Projections

SumSum--ag River Sourceag River Source

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

Year

Projected Demand (MLD)

MWSS Demand Variations

0.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

1.00

1.20

1.40

1.60

1.80

00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 00

Time

ADD Ratio

2008 14.578 Million

2010 14.894 Million

2015 15.937 Million

2020 16.962 Million

2025 18.001 Million

MWSS FRANCHISE AREA

TOTAL POPULATION*

* Based on NSO projections

Service Population Water Production (MLD) 20071

(sq.km) Served (M) Billed Volume NRW Total

MWSI (West) 540 8.1 780.33 1,513.04 2,293.37

MWCI (East) 1,400 5.3 1,023.81 354.16 1,377.97

TOTAL 1,940 13.4 1,804.14 1,867.20 3,671.34

* Based on NSO projections

1MWSS’ service Quarterly Service Performance Information (QSPI). Figures based on plant production

and do not reflect conveyance losses through Angat, Ipo and eventually to the WTP’s.

Main Dike

Angat Dam

Spillway

NPC’s Report, 1988

The JICA Study, 1989

EDCOP’s/T&TI’s Dam Safety

Review, 2001

MWSS’ Engineering and Geological

Report on Angat

MWSS’ Dam and Dike Safety

PAST WORKS RELATED PAST WORKS RELATED

TO THE ANGAT HYDRO TO THE ANGAT HYDRO

PLANT SAFETYPLANT SAFETY

Ipo Dam

Evaluation, 2002 (NZ assisted)

PHIVOLCS/USGS Joint Study, 2000

Based on the USBR’s SEED Criteria,both the Angat Dam and Main Dikeare rated CONDITIONALLY

POOR*

** AA potentiallypotentially damdam safetysafety deficiencydeficiency isis recognizedrecognized forfor unusualunusual loadingloading conditions,conditions, whichwhich maymayrealisticallyrealistically occuroccur duringduring thethe expectedexpected lifelife ofof thethe structurestructure.. CONDITIONALLYCONDITIONALLY POORPOOR maymay alsoalsobebe usedused whenwhen uncertaintiesuncertainties existexist asas toto criticalcritical analysisanalysis parameters,parameters, whichwhich identifyidentify aa potentialpotentialdamdam safetysafety deficiencydeficiency;; furtherfurther investigationsinvestigations andand studiesstudies areare necessarynecessary..

ORIGINAL PROJECT DESIGN (1983)

• Headworks

– LAIBAN Dam (113 meters; MaxWL=270 m; MinWL=237 m: Max

Q = 4,885 CMS, Bottom Outlet, Elev ±187, 300 CMS)

– Twin multi-level intakes; one-intake for Kanan

– 3.2 dia, 7.8 km tunnel, concrete-lined

– 3.2 dia.,4.0 km tunnel, steel pipeline– 3.2 dia.,4.0 km tunnel, steel pipeline

– 2.7 m dia., 1.8 km steel-lined tunnel (with surge shaft and

adit leading to powerplant

• Hydropower Station (30 MW)

– With by-pass to Pantay Creek to Laguna Lake (Morong)

• Treatment works

– 3 phase development (800 MLD), 2 CWR’s 50 ML

ORIGINAL PROJECT DESIGN (1983) -contd

• Distribution System

– Waterways from Pantay Treatment Plant to Cogeo

Reservoir (3.2 m dia x 1.2 km pressure pipeline, 3.6 m dia x

6.9 km of concrete-lined tunnel)

– Service reservoirs at Cogeo, Phase 1-120 ML, and 60 ML at

CapitolCapitol

– Pressure control station at Mayamot

– Pumping station at La Mesa, 160 MLD for higher north

– 44 km of 2,000 to 2,600 mm dia trunk mains from Cogeo to

south and La Mesa pumping station

– ± 158 km pipelines, 300 to 1,500 mm dia, and secondary

distribution including 583,000 service connections – all

phases

2006 Estimated Project Cost (MWSS Study)

Project Components Cost (Php M)Headworks (dams, tunnels etc.) 13,060.00

Treatment Plant 3,254.00

Distribution System 9,951.00

Environmental & Watershed

Management

90.00

Management

Resettlement 7,417.00

Right-of-way 2,651.00

Indirect Costs (Eng’g., Taxes,

Contingencies, etc)

64.00

IDC and front-end fee 5,560.00

TOTAL 47,928.00

MWSS Total Expenditures To Date for LAIBAN DAM

Description Amt (Php M)

� Before MWSS Privatization:

(FS, Detailed Engg., Diversion tunnels, partial

land acquisition, and other pre-construction

activities)

690.00

� After MWSS Privatization: 65.00� After MWSS Privatization:

a) (Review/Updating of documents including

preliminary resettlement planning), year 2001 -

-------------------------------------------------- 36.00M

b) Technical review & assess tender docs for

construction, year 2006-2007 ---------- 24.00M

c) Further geological investigation at damsite

(on-going) -------------------------------------5.00M

65.00

TOTAL 755.00

LAIBAN DAM – Technical Considerations

• Dam Design – compliant to ICOLD standards,

also referred to USBR and US Corps of Eng’rs

– Philippine Fault (Infanta segment; Digdig &

Bondoc Peninsula)

– West Valley Fault (Marikina Fault)– West Valley Fault (Marikina Fault)

– Slopes of the dam is at 1.5:1, just like that of Angat

Main Dam

– Concrete Faced Rock-filled Dam (CFRD)

– Dam designed to withstand extreme events (PMF,

MCE)

LAIBAN DAM – Technical Considerations

• Tunnels and Waterways Design

– Tunnels (3 segments, 14.65 km, Tunnels 1 and 2

follow original alignments)

– Pipeline (or Tunnel ??) expected to cross the West

Valley FaultValley Fault

– Geology dictates whether conventional “drill and

blast” or use of TBM would be practicable in

specific tunnel sections; also the need for lining.

– Tunneling activity is in the “critical path”

Case 1

M = 8.0

R = 20 km

PGA = 0.41 g

PGAR = 0.25 g

Source: JICA Study, 2003

Case 2

M = 8.2

R = 20 km

PGA = 0.43 g

PGAR = 0.26 g

LAIBAN DAM – Technical Considerations(Reservoir Area – Limestone Formation)

• “Based on the results of the geologic mapping, majority of the

limestone bodies investigated within the reservoir area may

not have major impact/s on the designated reservoir water

level of 270 masl except the one located along the bank oflevel of 270 masl except the one located along the bank of

Lenatin River which is about 1 km upstream of the proposed

dam site.” - Geotechnical Investigation for Laiban Dam Project

(Laiban Dam Limestone Project, April 2008)

• “Considering the size of the dam’s catchment area, it is very

unlikely that the water that is lost will find itself exiting into

another drainage basin. It is possible that the water flows

back into the river farther downstream.” - EDCOP/BERGS

Geological Report, November 2008

• Dam and Headworks

– 113 meter high dam, CFRD

– Twin Intakes (Laiban + Kanan)

– Reservoir and Watershed

– Access Roads

LAIBAN DAM PROJECT – Facilities

– Access Roads

– 22.5 CMS (1,950 MLD) flow

– Operating levels (max. 270 m; min. 235 m)

– PMF, 3,702 CMS

– Seismic consideration, 0.4 g PGA

• Raw Water Conveyance

– Tunnel 1, 7.8 km total

• 3.2 m dia concrete-lined section, 7.5 km

• 2.7 m dia steel-lined section, 300 meters

– Pipeline 1, 4.0 km, 3.2 m dia.


– Tunnel 2, 1.8 km, 2.7 m dia., steel-lined

• With headrace and surge tank

• Pantay Hydropower Plant

– 25 MW Capacity, 2 x 12.5 MW Francis Turbines (by-pass provided)

• Water Treatment Plant– Conventional Treatment facility

– 2,400 MLD capacity

• Treated Water Conveyance Facilities– Pipeline No. 2, 5 km, 3.2 m dia.

– Tunnel No. 3, 5 km, 3.6 m dia.


– Tunnel No. 3, 5 km, 3.6 m dia.

• Storage Facilities, Pump Station, Pressure Control Station– Antipolo Reservor, 20 ML

– Taytay Reservoir, 120 ML

– Antipolo Pumping Station, 110 MLD capacity

– Taytay Pressure Control Station

• Trunk Mains, River Crossings and Off-take

Points

– Trunk Main from Taytay to Pasig, along Ortigas

Extension to Dr. Sixto Antonio Drive, 11.8 km,

2.2m dia

– 1 river crossing, Marikina River


– 1 river crossing, Marikina River

– Trunk Main from Taytay to SLEX, through C-5/C-6

alignments, 14.5 km, 3.2 m dia

– 4 river crossings – Marikina River, Antipolo,

Pasig, Taguig

– 4 Measurement Points

PROJECT FACILTIES

LAIBAN DAM PROJECT

PANTAY WTP2400 MLD Cap.

ANTIPOLO 20 MLD RESERVOIR & 111 MLD cap.

PUMPING STATION

PANTAY POWER HOUSE 25 MW Francis Turbines

INTAKE STRUCTURES

HEP

P

PUMPING STATION

TAYTAY PRESSURE CONTROL STATION

TAYTAY120 MLD RESERVOIR

PASIG

SLEX

metering point

metering points

• Project Costs to be updated to reflect:

– Current materials, labor and equipment costs

– Contractual arrangements (EPC)

– CPI’s

– Available, verified and validated quantities –

LAIBAN DAM PROJECT – PROJECT COST

– Available, verified and validated quantities –especially for major work items

• Derived and/or updated unit costs are to be compared with existing, valid and actual construction costs in various on-going jobs in the Philippines as well as in similar, overseas projects

LAIBAN DAM PROJECT

PROJECT COST COMPONENTS

CONSTRUCTION (DIRECT) COST

LARP

ENVIRONMENTALENVIRONMENTAL

INDIRECT COST (engineering,

supervision, management &

administration, contingencies)

TAXES AND DUTIES

Past Works Total Cost LARP Design Q Power

Original, 1983,

Electrowatt, Renardet

P 10.5 B

(USD 400 M)

257 families

(P 990 M)

22 CMS

(1,900 MLD)

30 MW

(1 unit)

Electrowatt,Renardet, P 21.93 B 3,000 families 22 CMS 30 MW

LAIBAN DAM PROJECT

Comparative Features & Costs

LAIBAN DAM PROJECT

Comparative Features & Costs

Electrowatt,Renardet,

1997

P 21.93 B

(USD 828 M)

3,000 families

(P 3,304 M)

22 CMS

(1,900 MLD)

30 MW

(2-15 MW)

GHD, Renardet, ISSI,

PERTCONSUL, 2000

P 31.91 B

(USD 747 M)

+3,000 families

(P 4,502 M)

22 CMS

(1,900 MLD)

30 MW

(2-15 MW)

Daruma, Norconsult

2007

P 47.55 B

(USD 951 M)

4,413 families

(P 15,170 M)

21 CMS

(1,814 MLD)

25 MW

(2-12.5 MW)

LAIBAN DAM PROJECT – SCHEDULE

PHASE 1Proposal

Preparation

PHASE 2Contract

Negotiation

PHASE 3Planning &

Organizing

project update

proposal preparation

proposal evaluation

negotiation

competitive challenge

organization of JV, project company

government approvals/permits

off-take agreement

PHASE 4

Construction

PHASE 5

Operations

award of projectoff-take agreement

financial closure

tendering

LARP, ROW, entry permits

EPC mobilization

construction activities

commissioning

post construction

operational and occupancy permits

operations – treated bulk water supply;

power supply

• Project to be implemented through the Corporate

Joint Venture scheme, EO 423, 30 April 2005, in

accordance with NEDA Guidelines on JV Agreements

• The Proponent

LAIBAN DAM PROJECT – Implementation

Framework

• The Proponent

• JV Agreement between The Proponent and MWSS

• The JV Partners (Proponent and MWSS) shall

organize a Project Company

• ± 90% of the equity shares to be subscribed by the

Proponent, remaining ± 10% by MWSS

LAIBAN DAM PROJECT -LARP

• An instrument to mitigate adverse impacts caused by

dislocation, loss of houses, assets, livelihood and

social disintegration

• LARP addresses of both IP and non-IP families

• Further validation shall be done during the final • Further validation shall be done during the final

technical design phase of the project in order to

cover all issues that will be raised by affected

persons (AP’s) and affected families (AF’s)

• Important underlying principle – the quality of life

offered by LARP “with the project” should be equal or

better than “without the project”

LAIBAN DAM PROJECT -LARP Objective

To ensure just compensation and peaceful and effectiveresettlement of the households/families to be affected by theproject.

These include:

1. AFs whose land and properties will be directly1. AFs whose land and properties will be directlysubmerged by the dam;

2. AFswhowill be at “risk” with the operation of the dam;

3. AFs who will be affected by the construction of otherfacilities of the project like pipes and water treatmentplant (WTP) and

4. AFs in San Ysiro who will be affected by the relocation offamilies from Tanay, General Nakar and Antipolo.

AF = affected families

FLOW

KALIWA RIVER

DAMAREA OF WATERSHED = 28,000 HAS

DARAITAN

MADILAY-DILAY

Diversion Tunnel

KALIWA WATERSHED (28,000 has.)

FLOW

LIMUTAN RIVER LENATIN RIVER

INTAKE

CAYABU

STA. INES

TINUKAN

SAN ANDRES

MAMUYAO

LAIBAN

KUYAMBAY

STO.NIÑO

FLOODING OF 7 BGYS. IN TANAY AND 0NE IN GEN. NAKAR

BGY. STA. INESAF=474

BGY. MAMUYAOAF=323

BGY. STO. NINO

BGY. LIMUTANAF=390

PROJECT IMPACT

Source: DENR

BGY. CAYABUAF=175

BGY. STO. NINOAF=318

BGY. SAN ANDRESAF=423

BGY. LAIBANAF=720

BGY. TINUKANAF=290

BGY. DARAITAN591

Area

(hectares)

MWSS

Property

1,507

Proposed Resettlement Site in San Ysiro, Antipolo City as proclaimed underProclamation No. 2480Issued on Jan 26, 1986

Parcel 4

Parcel 1

Parcel 2Parcel 1 887

Parcel 2 360

Parcel 3 379

Parcel 4 1,291

Total 4,424

MWSS Titled PropertyLot 1 = 232 hectares

Lot 2 = 1,275 hectares

Total = 1,507 hectares

Parcel 2

Parcel 3

Affected Barangays Type of Impact/Recommended Action Proposed Measures to avoid/minimize impacts

(i) Tanay, Rizal • Proposed Dam Site

• Laiban • To be submerged/for relocation

• San Andres • To be submerged/for relocation

• Cayabu • To be submerged/for relocation

• Sto. Nino • To be submerged/for relocation

LAIBAN DAM PROJECT – Affected Barangays, Impacts and

Mitigation Measures

• Sto. Nino relocation

• Tinucan • To be submerged/for relocation

• Mamuyao • To be submerged/for relocation

• Sta. Inez

• will not be submerged

• To be indirectly affected, will have access problem

Will not be included for relocation

Provide access to San Ysiro, the relocation site

• Daraitan

• will not be submerged

• Risk area incase of flooding and dam break, originally proposed for relocation


Installation of early warning mechanism and monitoring system to monitor status of dam during inclement weather

Affected Barangays Type of Impact/Recommended Action Proposed Measures to avoid/minimize impacts

(i) Gen. Nakar, Quezon

• within the Kaliwa Watershed

• will not be submerged, but will be indirectly


Mitigation Measures

• Lumutan

but will be indirectly affected Lack of access to resources/market)

• Existing road link is only through Brgy. Sta. Inez

• No existing road network to Gen. Nakar ( proposed for relocation)


Improve existing access to Sta Inez and then access to San Ysiro, the relocation site

(i) Antipolo, Rizal Proposed Water Treatment Plant (WTP )

• Barangay Pantay

Site of the treatment plant, families to be displaced ( proposed to be relocated )

Displacement of • Minimal movement of existing


Mitigation Measures

• San Ysiro

Displacement of current settlers, loss of access to farm production and losses on structures, and crops/trees, if movement is done on current land use and properties and assets

• Minimal movement of existing structures/properties

• Identify sites that are not occupied by current settlers within the 4,440 hectares to be used for resettlement and facilities to be established based on the physical development plan that will be prepared.

Project Affected Families (updated)

LAIBAN DAM PROJECT – LARP

Proposed Resettlement Package and Compensation

• OPTION 1 – Outright compensation for AP’s/AF’s

• OPTION 2 – Resettlement Assistance of:

– 30 sq meter house, single detached– 30 sq meter house, single detached

– 240 sq meter home lot

– 5,000 sq meter farm lot

– Compensation for lots, structures, fruit and

permanent trees

– Other assistance packages on livelihood,

employment, capacity building

• Land Acquisition Cost/Compensation

– Farm & home lots, structures, permanent trees,

fruit trees

LAIBAN DAM PROJECT

LARP Budget Components

fruit trees

• Resettlement Cost (San Ysiro)

– Development cost, housing units, community

facilities, etc.

• Other Costs & Contingencies

– Training, services

LAIBAN DAM PROJECT LAIBAN DAM PROJECT -- EIAEIADENR RequirementsDENR Requirements

• ECC Amendment

• Environmental Performance Report and • Environmental Performance Report and

Management Plan

• Environmental Impact Statement

-- Environmental Compliance CertificateEnvironmental Compliance CertificateECC issued by NEPC – August 18, 1986

ConditionCondition ParticularsParticulars

11 Implementation of biological controls against malaria and other insect Implementation of biological controls against malaria and other insect

related diseases in the project area related diseases in the project area

22 Implementation of epidemiological monitoring planImplementation of epidemiological monitoring plan

33 Establishment of microEstablishment of micro--seismic monitoring centersseismic monitoring centers

44 Implementation of submitted resettlement plan and commitmentsImplementation of submitted resettlement plan and commitments

55 Provision of assistance to displaced minorities in terms of livelihood Provision of assistance to displaced minorities in terms of livelihood

opportunitiesopportunities

66 Conformance with Alternative 3 relative to sludge disposalConformance with Alternative 3 relative to sludge disposal

77 Formulation and establishment of contingency plans and warning systemFormulation and establishment of contingency plans and warning system

88 Implementation of measures to minimize soil erosion of the quarried Implementation of measures to minimize soil erosion of the quarried

areas and riverbanksareas and riverbanks

99 Mitigating measures on air, water and noise pollution.Mitigating measures on air, water and noise pollution.

• Conduct of EIS

• Site Scoping, Public Consultations, Public

Hearing

– Land use, flora & fauna, reservoir & watershed,

geology & hydrogeology, hydrology, air, noise, etc.

LAIBAN DAM PROJECT – Environmental

geology & hydrogeology, hydrology, air, noise, etc.

• Environmental Impact Sampling & Study

• ECC Application & DENR Review

• EIS Consultancy Cost (other related studies, etc.)

QUESTIONS . . .

CLARIFICATIONS . . . CLARIFICATIONS . . .

DETAILS . . . . .

laiban briefing

Documents