6-1
Chapter 6
The IEE Review Process
An Initital Environmental Examination (IEE) is a document
required of proponents that describes the environmental impacts,
and mitigation and enhancement measures, of projects or
undertakings located in an ECA. The IEE replaces the Project
Description (PD) required under DAO 21, series of 1992. The
purposes of the IEE includes the following:
� identify all potential environmental issues/impacts
associated with the project type relative to the ECA location;
� identify all significant environmental impacts (SEIs);
� resolve all significant environmental impacts within the
scope of the IEE; and
� recommend additional studies or an EIS to resolve
outstanding issues or impacts.
The IEE is linked to the EIS to resolve unsettled and complex
environmental issues. In such cases, the IEE provides the focus
and tasks to be performed in the EIS and develops the background
for these issues.
As mentioned in Chapter 5, DENR has developed a system to make
the EIA review process as systematic and transparent as possible.
The scheme adopted, as enunciated under DAO 96-37, is a two-stage
EIA review process. For IEE submissions, the first stage is a
procedural review to be conducted by the Screening Officer of
DENR RO (EMPAS). The second stage is a substantive review to be
performed by the EMPAS.
I. Procedural Review
Under Section 20 Article III of DAO 96-37, upon receipt of
the IEE, the DENR shall determine the completeness of the
documents submitted by the proponent. If the documents are
found to be incomplete or in need of revision, the same
shall be immediately returned to the proponent for
completion or revision. Similar processes and criteria are
applicable in the case of the IEE.
II. Substantive Evaluation
DAO 96-37 provides that upon passing the procedural review,
the IEE documents is accepted for substantive evaluation by
the EMPAS in order to assess the quality of the IEE.
Similar procedures or criteria for EIS are applicable.
Is Scoping required for IEE?
Scoping is not mandatory in the preparation of an IEE. Depending
on the proponent�s assessment and knowledge of the IEE
requirement, he may or may not go through the scoping process.
However, it is to the advantage of the proponent to initiate a
scoping meeting with DENR-RO to guide him in establishing the
range of actions to be undertaken, and alternatives and impacts
to be examined.
What can be gained from holding a scoping meeting with DENR-
RO?
A scoping session with the DENR-RO will enable the client to
familiarize himself with the requirements and processes of
doing an IEE. Specifically, DENR-RO can help the proponent
during the scoping meeting can determine the following:
� environmental issues that may arise from the project using
as references available Scoping Guidelines for Projects in ECAs
� Where there are no available scoping guidelines, DENR-RO may
refer to or cite important environmental impacts or issues raised
in similar projects reviewed by the DENR to guide the proponent.
� identify affected parties and other government agencies that
have jurisdictions over the project. For instance, when the
project deals with land conversion, the Department of Agriculture
(DA) and the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) are the
important national government agencies to be consulted. The
affected parties would include the LGUs and local communities.
� discuss the contents of the IEE and answer general questions
related to review and evaluation requirements.
� provide references on other sources of data or studies
relevant to the project in accordance with established policies
and procedures as may be prescribed by the DENR RED.
� provide a list of accredited IEE preparers (both local and
national) which may be tapped by the proponent to undertake the
IEE.
The scoping also helps the proponent make a decision whether
to:
� go through with the IEE with the knowledge that most issues
or impacts will be settled within its scope; or
� voluntarily proceed to EIS preparation knowing fully well
that the project may have significant environmental issues that
cannot be dealt with exhaustively in the IEE.
The decision of a proponent to proceed directly to EIS
preparation for a project sited in an ECA (but not
considered an ECP) should be guided by any or a combination
of the following factors:
� size of the project;
� fragility of the project site;
� project components and production process; and
� to some extent, capital investment.
Chapter 2 discusses in details the type of project in ECAs
that are required to proceed to the preparation of an EIS
even though a project is not classified as ECP.
If the proponent opts to immediately prepare and submit an
EIS in lieu of an IEE, the provisions on the procedural flow
of the EIS as discussed in Chapter 5 shall apply. The DENR
Regional Office shall assume the role of reviewing and
validating the submitted EIS. Furthermore, the RED shall
decide on the issuance or denial of an ECC.
Section 17.0 of Article III Submission of IEE
The proponent shall submit at least ten (10) legible copies
of the IEE and a complete electronic file in computer diskettes
to the EMPAS for review. The EMPAS may require the proponent to
submit additional copies as necessary.
The proponent shall likewise furnish a copy of the EIS to
the concerned PENRO, CENRO and the Municipal/City Mayor where the
project is proposed to be located.
NOTES:
� The IEE should conform to the annotated IEE outline and
other prescribed procedural and substantive criteria. It should
also include informations and analyses as agreed upon in the
Agreed Scope under the Formal Scoping Report, if applicable.
� Additional copies for the PENRO, CENRO and LGUs shall be
destributed only after the IEE submissions had undergone and
passed the procedural review.
� IEE submissions in diskette form must conform to the format
prescribed herein.
Upon approval of the Agreed Scope as contained in the Formal
Scoping Report in case a scoping session was conducted, the
next step is the preparation and writing of the IEE
document. The IEE should conform to the annotated IEE
outline (see Annex 6-A for the annotated outline) and must
satisfy prescribed procedural and substantive criteria as
listed in the review checklist (see discussions in
succeeding sections for details) In case no scoping
sessions was conducted, the proponent may refer to the
appropriate scoping guidelines, review checklist and other
relevant materials for reference.
To avoid wasting paper, the proponent shall submit only one
(1) copy for procedural review. The proponent shall submit
the required number of copies only after passing the
procedural review.
Under Section 17, Article III of DAO 96-37, the proponent
shall submit ten (10) copies of the IEE. The DENR-RO
(EMPAS) may require the proponent to submit additional
copies as necessary.
In addition, the proponent shall furnish the following
offices with a copy of the IEE as required under the DAO:
� Office of the PENRO - the proponent shall provide the PENRO
who has jurisdiction over the project site with a copy of the
IEE. When the project site covers several provinces, then the
PENROs of these provinces shall each be provided with a copy of
the IEE;
� Office of the CENRO - the proponent shall provide the CENRO
who has jurisdiction over the project site with a copy of the
IEE. When the project site covers several districts or area,
then the CENROs of these districts or areas shall each be
provided with a copy of the IEE; and
� Office of the Municipal or City Mayor - - the proponent
shall provide the Mayor of the municipality or city who has
jurisdiction over the project site with a copy of the IEE. When
the project site covers several municipalities or cities, then
the Mayors of these municipalities or cities shall each be
provided with a copy of the IEE. The copy shall be submitted to
the respective MPDO or Planning Officer. Likewise, for project
covering several municipalities, the Provincial Governor shall be
provided a copy of the IEE through the PPDO.
In order to ensure that the copy that will be received by
these offices already passed the procedural review, the
copies intended for these recipients should bear the
�RECEIVED� stamp of DENR-RO (EMPAS) concerned before they
are distributed to the appropriate office or person. Copies
of proofs of receipt or acknowledgment receipts shall be
submitted to DENR-RO (EMPAS) within fifteen (15) days of the
acceptance or receipt of the IEE submissions by the DENR-RO
(EMPAS) concerned.
The proponent shall also submit to DENR-RO (EMPAS), along
with the hard copy reports, two (2) sets of a complete
electronic file of the IEE in computer diskettes. The
following are required for the computer file:
� file to be copied in 3.5 high density diskettes formatted in
DOS Version 5.0 or Window-based and readable using IBM or
equivalent compatible PCs;
� a written listing of filenames and their contents;
� indicate computer software and versions used for word
processing (such as Word Perfect Version 3, Microsoft Word
version 3 or later version) and quantitative analyses or tables
(such as Lotus 123 release 3, Excel or Quattro Pro).
For projects or activities where an IEE Report Checklist is
available, the same procedures and criteria shall apply.
Likewise, the required number of copies for submission shall
also apply.
Section 19.0 of Article III Contents of the IEE
Subject to the EIS Procedural Manual, an IEE shall at least
contain the following basic items:
a. A brief of the environmental setting and receiving
environment, including the primary and secondary impact areas;
b. A brief description of the project or undertaking and its
process of operation;
c. A brief description of the environmental impact of the
project or undertaking, including its socio-economic impact;
d. A matrix of mitigation and enhancement measures;
e. A documentation of the consultative process undertaken, when
appropriate;
f. A brief discussion of indigenous peoples' concerns and
possible socio-economic, political and cultural impacts of the
proposed project or undertaking on such people for projects or
undertakings located in ancestral lands or domains, as defined
under DAO No. 2, series of 1993, or subsequently by law, of
indigenous communities;
g. A brief discussion of gender issues for projects or
undertakings with significant impact on women;
h. A brief discussion of the relationship among population,
development, and the environment for projects or undertakings
with significant impact on population; and
i. Accountability Statements of the preparer and the proponent.
NOTES:
The IEE must conform to the annotated outline as povided in Annex
6-A. Likewise, the contents of an IEE must include the required
information and analyses as contained in the agreed scope if
applicable. The procedural and substantive review checklist
(Annexes 6-B and 6-C) may also be used as reference in the
preparation of the IEE. The general format of the annotated
outline is presented below:
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 socioeconomic
effects/impacts of the project including:
1. discussion of indigenous people�s concerns and possible
socioeconomic, political and cultural impacts of a project or
undertaking in ancestral lands or domains, as defined under DAO 2
series of 1993, or subsequently by law, of indigenous
communities.
2. discussion of gender issues if projects will have
significant impacts on women.
3. discussion of relationship among population, development and
environment for projects with significant impact on population.
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. Recommendations
A. list of resolved issues
B. list of partially resolved issues
C. new issues arising from the IEE that have been resolved
IX. Bibliography/References
Attachments or Annexes
� List of EIS Preparers with specified field of expertise
� Original Sworn Accountability Statement of Key IEE
Consultants
� Original Sworn Accountability Statement of Proponent
� Process Documentation Report
� Maps/photos/plates/diagrams/sketches
The outline for an IEE is similar to that of an EIS except
for the depth and detail of discussion. The IEE is intended
as a tool to determine the need for further studies such as
those undertaken in the preparation of an EIS. Furthermore,
IEE are generally prepared based on secondary data.
The annotated outline is not applicable for projects or
activities where an IEE Report Checklist is available.
Section 20.0 of Article III. Initial Review of IEE Document
Upon receipt of the EIS, the EMPAS shall determine the
completeness of the documents submitted by the proponents. If
the documents are found to be incomplete or in need of revision,
the same shall be immediately returned to the proponent for
completion or revision.
NOTES:
� The Initial Review of the IEE documents, otherwise known as
Procedural Review, determines the completeness and order of
presentation of information contained in the IEE. The review is
based on the results of the scoping activities if conducted, DENR
scoping guidelines for that particular project, and the
Procedural Review Checklist.
� The Screening Officer of the DENR RO (EMPAS) shall be
responsible for the procedural review of the IEE submitted by the
proponent and for making recommendations on the acceptance and
non-acceptance of the document.
The EIA Review Process is a critical component of the EIA
process since this is the activity upon which the decision
to grant or deny the issuance of an ECC to a particular
project, is determined. It is here where the fate of a
project lies. Hence, it is very important that the process
observes proper procedures and is conducted with utmost
proficiency.
The steps for Procedural Review are as follows:
1. Upon completion of the IEE study, the proponent shall submit
one (1) set of IEE document for procedural review by the DENR RO
(EMPAS) concerned.
2. Upon receipt of the IEE documents, the Screening Officer
shall immediately determine its completeness and order of
presentation of information. The Screening Officer shall use the
Procedural Review Checklist as the basis of screening.
Immediate determination shall mean completion of
Procedural Review not later than two (2) working day
after submission.
3. The Screening Officer shall accomplish three (3) sets of the
Procedural Review Checklist. One copy shall be given to the
proponent, one copy shall be retained by the Screening Officer,
and one copy shall be kept as File Copy of the EIA
Division/Unit/Section concerned.
� The receiving officer shall indicate, through a check/tick
mark under the YES, NO or NOT APPLICABLE column, the presence or
absence of a particular information required. For a check/tick
mark under the NOT APPLICABLE column, the basis or justification
shall be cited under the REMARKS column.
� If the IEE documents are complete, they will be formally
accepted. The proponent will be notified of the acceptance by
furnishing him a copy of the procedural form duly signed by the
Screening Officer.
� If they are incomplete, the IEE documents shall be returned
to the proponent for revision and/or submission of the missing
requirement. The reason for non-acceptance shall be stated in
writing at the appropriate place in the form.
The Screening Officer shall determine the completeness
of the submitted document. Preliminary judgment may be
made on the presentation and/or adequacy of the
information contained in the IEE. No final judgement
shall be made on the accuracy or adequacy of the
information in the IEE.
4. If the IEE document has complied with all the requirements
prescribed in the checklist, the proponent shall submit ten (10)
copies of the documents.
The proponent shall pay the necessary amount (see
Chater 11) before submitting the required number of
copies to the EMPAS of the DENR RO concerned.
In the case of IEE Report Checklist submissions, the
determination of its completeness will be on insuring
that all questions, matrix or checklist had been
answered.
All IEE submissions not going thorugh the said standard
procedures shall not be considered as applications and,
therefore, shall not be used as basis for recommendation on
the issuance or denial of the Environmental Compliance
Certificate (ECC).
Section 21.0 of Article III: Substantive Review by the EMPAS
Within 15 days from the date of submission, the EMPAS shall
conduct substantive review of the IEE in accordance with the
review criteria set forth in the EIS Procedural Manual. The
EMPAS shall validate the IEE through methods deemed appropriate
such as, but not limited to, ocular, inspections/site visits,
studies conducted by experts and relevant institutions and shall
consider the process documentation report in the validation of
the IEE. The EMPAS shall endeavor to complete the substantive
review of the IEE within 30 days from receipt thereof.
NOTES:
The EMPAS shall evaluate the IEE document based on its
compliance to the review criterion contained in the
Substantial Review Checklist (Annex 6-C). The EMPAS shall
evaluate the EIS in terms of the following general criteria:
� completeness of information - the documents should provide
the required level of detail in accordance with the prescribed
outline and checklist.
� clarity of presentation - the document should be easily
understood by the reviewers and comprehensible for decision-
making
� appropriateness - this will be measured in terms of the
conformity of the IEE document to technical standards and/or
mechanisms of implementation
� accuracy and precision in information or assessment - this
will be gauged in terms of the adherence of the IEE document to
the standard method of data gathering, modelling and analysis
selected
� degree of consistency - the document should be entirely
consistent in terms of its findings, assessment or analysis and
recommendations such that no statement in the IEE will contradict
another statement within the document.
� responsiveness - this will be measured in terms of how the
document addressed valid issues and concerns of stakeholders and
other interested parties
The EMPAS, in the course of substantial review, may employ
methods such as the following:
� Site visits or occular inspections including walk-throughs
� conduct additional samples or studies to validate some
technical parameters or information.
� informal consultations to validate socioeconomic impacts and
social acceptability.
The DENR-RO may utilize the PENRO or CENRO in the conduct of
a site visit by notifying it and requiring a report (or
feedback), in writing, on any findings relative to the
specific areas to be validated. The PENRO or CENRO submits
the findings to the DENR-RO and the EMPAS determines whether
the inspection warrants additional information, a revised
IEE submission, or no action at all.
The EMPAS, depending on the magnitude and complexity of the
project, may assign the substantive review to an individual
or convene a technical committee for such purposes.
Based on Section 21 of Article III, the EMPAS should
endeavor to complete the substantive review within thirty
(30) days. In order to fulfill the intention of this
section, the following approaches or mode of implementations
shall be adopted whenever practical and appropriate:
� The EMPAS, as deemed necessary, may recommend a public
consultation to be conducted to collect public comment on the
proposed project or validate social acceptability.
The EMPAS shall be responsible for documenting the
entire review process. The meetings should be recorded
on tape for transcription.
� The EMPAS compiles the written comments or clarifications
arising from the evaluation, including those from the validation
and public consultation. A request in writing will be made to
the proponent to address the comments and provide additional
information to adequately evaluate the project. If the
information required are not very substantive and clarificatory
in nature, the EMPAS may just arrange for a meeting with the
proponent to answer questions and clarify matters verbally.
Additional informations requirement are intended to
provide elaborations or clarifications of some
aspects of the EIA Study. Normally, a request for
additional information is only done once. Should
additional AI be necessary, the reviewer should
first obtain the concurrence of the RTD-EMPAS.
Section 22.0 of Article III: EMPAS Report
Within 15 days from completion of review, including
public consultations and hearings, the EMPAS shall submit a
report to the RED. The EMPAS may recommend the issuance or
non-issuance of the ECC, or the preparation of the EIS.
Should the EMPAS recommend the issuance of the ECC, the
report, which shall begin with a brief description of the
project or undertaking, shall discuss:
a. environmental impacts and corresponding costed mitigation
and enhancement measures of the project or undertaking;
b. key issues/concerns;
c. proponent�s response to issues;
d. compliance with review criteria, technical/substantive
content and social acceptability requirements, and
e. the acceptability of the proposed EMP.
NOTES:
Within 15 days from the completion of the review, the EMPAS
through the RTD-EMPAS submits a report to the RED. The
report shall contain the results of the review or evaluation
and the EMPAS�s recommendation with respect to the issuance
or non-issuance of an ECC including the appropriate
conditions, or the preparation of an EIS.
The EMPAS� recommendation will be carefully weighed and
guided by the following considerations:
� Is the project explicitly or implicitly within the priority
of the LGUs for the area�s development?
� Is it compatible with the municipal/provincial/regional
framework plan, regional/local investment plan and other approved
development plans affecting the project area and its larger
environment?
� Is it compatible with existing or proposed environmental and
resource management plans for the area?
� Is it consistent with locally enacted laws or ordinances?
� Will the social benefits far outweigh the negative
environmental impacts the project will create?
� Are there new information obtained by the EMPAS, such as
position papers or letters from stakeholders and other external
sources or influence groups, in support or against the project?
If the EMPAS finds that the IEE has substantially addressed
all the significant impacts and relevant issues by way of
mitigation and enhancement measures, it shall recommend the
issuance of the ECC. The report shall include a summary
description of the project or undertaking presenting the
following:
� a brief project description;
� summary matrix of significant project impacts and mitigation
enhancement measures;
� summary of key issues or concerns plus the proponent=s
response to the issue(s) raised;
� EMPAS evaluation of the proponent=s response to the
different issue(s) raised;
� a review summary based on the technical and substantive
review criteria;
� report on compliance with social acceptability requirements;
� over-all findings of the review or evaluation;
� recommendations; and
� necessary conditions to be attached to the ECC
The RTD-EMPAS shall prepare, together with the ECC issuance
recommendation, the ECC document. Basic conditions that
are standard for all ECC are the following:
� scope of the operations (limitations)
� construction or installation of an adequate waste treatment
facility
� emissions or discharges conforming with DENR standards
� monitoring measures
� demonstration of social acceptability
� all other permits should be secured before beginning
operation
� applicability of the ECC in case of transfer of ownership.
Additional conditions may be attached to the ECC depending
on its appropriateness and relevance. Examples of these
conditions are the following:
� specific mitigating measures
� safety measures including appropriate emergency response and
contingency plans
� additional environmental studies (if necessary)
� employment preference for local residents
If it has been determined by the EMPAS that some significant
impacts have not been resolved by the IEE and that
additional studies would be needed to fully address them, an
EIS will be recommended for the proposed project. The RTD-
EMPAS shall prepare the justification for the recommendation
together with a draft letter of notification for the
proponent to prepare and submit an EIS.
An EIS may be recommended in the following instances:
� significant environmental impacts have not been adequately
addressed by proposed mitigation and enhancement measures
� strong public opposition or low social acceptability
� high public risk
� use of highly pollutive substances producing toxic/hazardous
wastes
� significant socio-cultural impacts
If the IEE has been evaluated as not having satisfied the
substantive requirements, the EMPAS may recommend the denial
of ECC. In case of an ECC denial recommendation, the
following will be contained in the report to the RED:
� identification of specific issues and comments that have not
been satisfied by the proponent; and
� draft letter to inform proponent of ECC denial.
The 15-day timeframe for the EMPAS Report submission include
the time necessary for the RTD-EMPAS concerned to review and
evaluate the EIARC Report and other supporting or pertinent
documents.
Section 23.0 of Article III: Decision on the IEE
Within 15 days from the receipt of the EMPAS report, unless
circumstances warrant a longer period of time, the RED may:
a. either grant or deny the issuance of the ECC; or
b. decide that an EIS is further required, in which case he or
she shall inform the proponent of such decision.
NOTES:
The EMPAS report is submitted to the RED for final decision.
The RED reviews and evaluates the report or recommendations.
The RED may follow or disregard the recommendation of the
EMPAS depending on his evaluation of larger concerns that
may have implications on the social and environmental
context relative to the judicious utilization, development
and conservation of the country�s natural resources.
The RED will make a decision within 15 days from receipt of
the EMPAS report, unless circumstances warrant a longer
period, to:
� either grant or deny the issuance of the ECC; or
� decide that an EIS is further required.
A letter will be sent to the proponent informing it of the
RED�s decision. If ECC is granted, the same shall be issued
to the proponent copy furnished the concerned PENRO, CENRO,
LGUs and other institutions. (see Chapter 5 for details on
release or transmittal of ECC).
If the RED decides that an EIS is required, the proponent
will be informed of the decision in writing. The RED will
then determine the following:
� whether the IEE process was sufficient for scoping purposes
or not.
� If the RED deems a new scoping is necessary, the guidelines
for formal scoping as outlined in Chapter 4 shall apply. The
responsibilities for scoping would be lodged to the EMPAS and the
Regional EIARC to be constituted for the project.
� If the RED decides to forego scoping, the IEE serves as the
scoping report. The proponent however, may at his discretion,
volunteer to go through the formal scoping process.
� The EIS process and content shall follow the same
requirements provided for in the EIS procedural flow discussed in
Chapter 5.
In situations where the RED is unable to constitute the
regional EIARC because of limited number of persons who are
willing and technically capable to serve as members, or for
other compelling reasons, the RED may seek assistance from
the EMB. The EMB can lend technical support by accessing
its pool of reviewers to assist the Regional EIARC.
As soon as the Regional EIARC is convened, the RED shall
endorse the EIS to them for the substantive review. EMB
shall closely coordinate with the DENR RO for processing
of EIS on projects in ECAs.
Section 24.0 of Article III: Issuance of ECC pursuant to Section
23, Artilce III
In granting or denying the issuance of the ECC, the RED
shall take into account the social and environmental cost
implications relative to the judicious utilization, development
and conservation of the country�s natural resources.
x x x
Section 31.0 of Article III: Issuance of ECC pursuant to Section
30, Artilce III
Within 15 days from receipt of the Regional EIARC Report,
unless circumstances warrants a longer period, the RED shall
either grant or deny the issuance of an ECC. In granting or
denying the issuance of the ECC, the RED shall take into account
the social and environmental cost implications relative to the
judicious utilization, development and conservation of the
country�s natural resources.
NOTES:
The 15-days timeframe for the decision of the RED includes
the time necessary for the requisites staff works.
In order to ensure higher rate of compliance with ECC
conditions, the proponent may be advised by the office
concerned to initiate activities for compliance with these
conditions. For example, the proponent may initiate the
finalization and execution of the MOA for the establishment
of the EGF. The proponent may also be required to obtain
some permits at this stage to allow for compliance with some
specific ECC conditions.
Section 32.0 of Article III: Transmittal of ECCs Issued Pursuant
to Section2 29.0 and 30.0, Article III
In the event that an ECC is issued pursuant to Sections 29.0
or 30.0, Article III, the RED provide the Offices of the
Undersecretary handling the environment, the EMB, PENRO, CENRO,
and the Municipality/City Mayor a copy of the ECC within ten (10)
days from the date of such issuance.
NOTES:
The ECC and other pertinent documents shall be transmitted
to the RTD-EMPAS by the RED within the prescribed timeframe.
Some of the conditions may be required for compliance before
the release of the ECC. Examples of such cases would be the
submission of the signed and notarized MOA establishing the
MMT or EMF before the release of the ECC.
Before the release of any ECC, the RTD-EMPAS shall number
the ECC in accordance with the prescribed format. (see
Chapter 8 for more details)
ECC without the requisite numbers of the DENR RO
concerned shall not be considered valid.
The following offices shall be provided copies of the
numbered ECC within 10 days from the date the ECC is
available for release to the proponent:
� Office of the Undersecretary for Environment and Programs
Development
� Office of the Director, Environmental Management Bureau with
copy furnished to the Chief, EIA Division
� PENRO(s) concerned
� CENRO(s) concerned
� LGU(s) concerned (Municipality/City Mayors and Provincial
Governnor, whenever applicable)