You are on page 1of 2



Potential Impacts Per Envtl Sector Sampling & Measurement Plan Parameter to be Monitored Method Frequency Location Lead Person Annual Estimated Cost EQPL MANAGEMENT SCHEME EQPL RANGE

Key Environmental Aspects per Project Phase PRE-CONSTRUCTION PHASE Environmental Aspect # 1 (shown with a sample entry in succeeding columns) Environmental Aspect #2 CONSTRUCTION PHASE Environmental Aspect #1 Environmental Aspect #2 III. OPERATION PHASE Environmental Aspect #1 Environmental Aspect #2 IV. ABANDONMENT PHASE Environmental Aspect #1 Environmental Aspect #2 II.



Water Quality: Siltation

Total Grab sampling; RA9275 lab Suspended Solids (TSS) analysis method


Indicate coordinates/ Description of station

Project PCO

P500/sample * 2 bottles/ station/wk * 52 wks/yr = P52,000


Quality Performance Level Alert or Red Flag : early warning Action Level : point where management measures must be employed so as not to reach the regulated threshold or limit level, or to reduce deterioration of affected environmental component to pre-impact or optimum environmental quality o Limit Level : regulated threshold of pollutant (standard that must not be exceeded); point where emergency response measures must be employed to reduce pollutants to lower than standard limit. 2 NOTE: Sections on EQPLs to be filled out only if EQPLs are willing to be committed by the Proponent at the pre-ECC stage. Otherwise, Proponent may opt to have EQPLs established post-ECC and mutually agreed upon among Proponent, EMB and other MMT members. Otherwise, only the LIMIT Level shall be the reference for regulatory compliance. This means that environmental management measures are formulated not to exceed this regulated threshold. o o

At the FS/pre-ECC stage Impacts Management Plan (IMP), only the 3rd or limit level is required to be the reference for regulatory compliance in the EMB system of management and monitoring of Environmental Quality Performance of the project. The commitment for the two lower levels and corresponding measures may be formulated post-ECC: the alert or warning and action levels may be subjectively set at a certain percentage lower than the limit level or standard, particularly for situations where the baseline or current environment of the project already has a critical level of the specific parameter of concern or is sensitive to such parameter at levels proven or observed to be lower than the set national standard. These two pre-standard levels may be self-formulated or with the MMT during technical skill building workshops with the community-based MMT members for appropriate utilization of the MMTs indigenous knowledge in identifying quasi/pseudo-indicators of environmental quality status and relating these to quantitative concentrations/measures of the parameters, e.g. a certain color of the water or air may be determined to be equivalent to a range of concentrations of a certain parameter; a change in color of the leaf from green to yellowish or white may be considered indicative of the effect of a certain range of concentration of salts/brine or other chemicals; an examination of the phloem/xylem of a tree wherein dried leaves and blackened/burned bark give the impression of a dead tree may show the tree is still alive and capable of recovery, particularly if with assistance from the Proponent and/or community; a rotten egg smell of the air may be correlated with a certain range of concentration of hydrogen sulfide, etc These indicators all serve as an aide to monitoring and validation of the Proponent or the MMT as a whole, and can then provide adequate time and strategy for the Proponent to take measures to prevent the worsening of certain environmental conditions even before these reach the limit or standard levels. Once the Environmental Quality Performance Levels (EQPLs) are formulated with the MMT and consequently approved by the EMB, the Proponent can then include these in its semi-annual Compliance Monitoring Report (CMR); the MMT can then validate performance thru its Compliance Monitoring and Validation Report (CMVR); and the EMB can then make an evaluation of performance of both Proponent and MMT thru its Compliance Evaluation Report (CER).


ANNEX 2-20