10-12
                         Chapter 10
                              
   Administrative Appeals, Fines, Penalties and Sanctions




Section  1.0 of Article VI:    Appeal to the Office  of  the
Secretary

      Any  party aggrieved by the final decision of the  RED
may,  within 15 days from receipt of such decision, file  an
appeal  with  the Office of the Secretary.  The decision  of
the Secretary shall be immediately executory.

NOTES:

      Final  decisions of the  RED  may be appealed.   These
decisions  include those relating to the  issuance  or  non-
issuance  of  an  ECC,  and  the  imposition  of  fines  and
penalties.   Resort  to courts prior  to  availing  of  this
remedy would make the appellant�s action dismissible on  the
ground of non-exhaustion of administrative remedies.

      The  right to appeal must be exercised within 15  days
from  receipt  by  the  aggrieved party  of  such  decision.
Failure to file such appeal within the requisite period will
result  in the finality of the RED�s decision, which can  no
longer be disturbed.

      An  appeal shall not stay the effectivity of the RED�s
decision, unless the Secretary directs otherwise.

      The  right  to  appeal does not prevent the  aggrieved
party  from  first resorting to the filing of a  motion  for
reconsideration with the RED, to give the RED an opportunity
to re-evaluate his decision.

      A  proponent whose ECC application is denied may  also
choose to file a new ECC application.  The filing of  a  new
application  shall,  however,  result  in  the   waiver   of
proponent�s  right  to file a motion for reconsideration  or
appeal from the order denying its original application.  The
EMB  or  Regional Office can not refuse to  accept  the  new
application and may only deny said application if it appears
that said application does not differ significantly from the
first  application or if the EIARC determines that  the  new
application is still environmentally unacceptable.

Section 2.0 of Article VI:    Grounds for Appeal

      The grounds for appeal shall be limited to grave abuse
of  discretion  and serious errors in the findings  of  fact
which  would  cause  grave  or  irreparable  injury  to  the
aggrieved   party.    Frivolous   appeals   shall   not   be
countenanced.

NOTES:

How is an appeal made?

      Within  fifteen (15) days from receipt of the decision
sought  to  be  appealed, the aggrieved party  must  file  a
Notice  of Appeal with the Records Office of the EMB or  the
Regional  Office,  as the case may be,  copy  furnished  the
Records  Office of the DENR and non-appellant  stakeholders.
Such  Notice of Appeal, which may be in the form of a letter
or  a pleading, should clearly state the basic terms of  the
Order  being appealed from, the grounds for the appeal,  and
the fact that the notice is being made within the prescribed
period.   A  certified  true  copy  of  the  decision  being
appealed  from should be annexed to said notice  of  appeal.
Other  documents  supporting the appeal, such  as  proof  of
service of the Notice to concerned parties,  should likewise
be annexed to the Notice.

       Upon  a  prima  facie  finding  that  the  appeal  is
meritorious,  the Secretary shall issue an  Order  requiring
the EMB or Regional Office to forward the relevant documents
to the DENR (Office of the Secretary), and the non-appellant
stakeholders to file their comments to the appeal.

      Based on the documents provided by the appellant, non-
appellant  stakeholders, and those elevated by  the  EMB  or
Regional  Office, the Secretary shall render a  decision  on
the appeal.

      While  the  remedy  of  appeal is  made  available  to
aggrieved  parties, such appeal must not  be  frivolous,  it
should  have adequate basis.  DAO 96-37 limits these grounds
to grave abuse of discretion and findings of fact that would
cause  grave  or irreparable injury to the aggrieved  party.
Any appeal must, therefore, allege the existence of any,  or
both, of these grounds, and be supported by facts that  tend
to establish any, or both, of these grounds.




      Examples of these grounds would include, but would not
be limited to, any of the following situations:

1.   Valid  issues  and concerns raised by the  stakeholders
     were  not  addressed  in  the  final  EIS  or  IEE,  or
     agreements  and  understanding  between  proponent  and
     stakeholders were not incorporated in the EIS or IEE;

2.   The  proponent or preparer did not meet all  the  legal
     requirements nor follow the required procedures of  the
     EIS  System.   For example, the LGU concerned  was  not
     informed  or  consulted about the project, as  required
     under the Local Government Code.;

3.   There  are  erroneous claims and inaccurate information
     that  were  made part of the findings of the  submitted
     EIS or IEE;

4.   The RED, despite having knowledge of the violations  or
     illegal  practices of the proponent or the preparer  in
     the conduct of the EIS or IEE, still issued an ECC;

5.   The  RED's decision was not based on the EMPAS  report,
     except in cases when the RED has information that  runs
     counter to the findings of the EMPAS; and

6.    The  EIS  or  IEE  was not done by  an  accredited  or
eligible preparer.

Section 3.0 of Article VI:Who May Appeal

      The  proponent or any stakeholder, including  but  not
limited to, the LGUs concerned and affected communities, may
file an appeal.

NOTES:

      The  right  to appeal is not limited to the proponent,
but  to  any  stakeholder.  Stakeholders are  defined  under
Section 3(dd), Article I of DAO 96-37 as follows:

     �persons who may be significantly affected by  the
     project  or undertaking, such as, but not  limited
     to,  members  of  the  local community,  industry,
     local  government  units (LGUs),  non-governmental
     organizations  (NGOs), and people�s  organizations
     (POs).�
                         ARTICLE IX
                              
               FINES, PENALTIES AND SANCTIONS
                              
COMMENTS:

      The  penalties provided in DAO 96-37 apply to projects
which  are  covered by the EIS System.  Those which  do  not
fall  within  the  EIS  System and later  discovered  to  be
environmentally damaging shall be covered by the  provisions
of Presidential Decree No. 984, the Pollution Control Decree
of  1976,  Republic  Act No. 6969, the Toxic  and  Hazardous
Substances   Act,  and  other  relevant  laws,   rules   and
regulations.



Section 1.0 of Article IX:    Administrative Investigation

      Penalties  shall  be  imposed after  an  investigation
wherein the respondent shall be given notice and afforded an
opportunity to be heard.  The investigation report  prepared
by the hearing officer shall include the following matters:

               a.    a  brief  background  of  the  project,
               including  previous violations  committed  by
               the respondent, if any;

               b.    the  provision  of  law  or  rules  and
               regulations,   ECC   conditions,    or    EMP
               provisions violated;

               c.    findings of fact, including the results
               of  any  measurement, sampling or  monitoring
               activities conducted either by the  EMB,  the
               DENR    Regional    Office,   DENR-accredited
               research  institutions,  or  academic  and/or
               technical   organizations  and  the   results
               obtained   and   the  corresponding   adverse
               impacts caused by the violations; and

               d.    the  recommended amount of fine  to  be
               imposed.


NOTES:

      Draft  orders  for  signature of  the  Secretary,  EMB
Director,  or  the  RED should always be accompanied  by  an
investigation report, to which should be annexed a  copy  of
the  report embodying the findings of fact.  Otherwise,  the
Secretary, EMB Director, or the RED would not have  adequate
basis  to  decide  on the recommendation.  Moreover,  proper
documentation  of the process leading to the  imposition  of
fines  and  penalties  will  facilitate  administrative  and
judicial review of the Secretary or RED�s decision.

      Respondent�s opportunity to be heard does not  require
the  conduct  of  an actual hearing, unless the  nature  and
magnitude  of the offense would call for such hearing.   The
exchange  of notices and explanations between the  DENR  and
the  respondent  would,  in most cases,  be  sufficient  for
purposes of complying with the due process requirements.



Section 2.0    Submission of Report to  EMB Director/RED

      The  report shall be submitted to the EMB Director  or
the RED, as the case may be, for appropriate action.

NOTES:

       Recommendations  for  the  imposition  of  fines  and
penalties  for  projects which are environmentally  critical
shall  be  submitted to the EMB Director.  A  recommendation
may,  however, also be submitted directly to the  Secretary,
since  the  EMB Director is the Secretary�s alter  ego  with
respect   to  the  EIS  System.   Recommendations  for   the
imposition  of  fines and penalties for  projects  found  in
environmentally  critical areas should be submitted  to  the
RED  under whose territorial jurisdiction the project falls.
In  case  the  Secretary, EMB Director, or the  RED  is  not
available,  then  the person who assumes his  responsibility
during  his  absence  would have authority  to  receive  and
review the recommendation.



Section 3.0    Decision of the EMB Director/RED

      The  EMB  Director or the RED shall issue  a  decision
based  on  the  investigation report  within  15  days  from
receipt of the  report.




Section 4.0    Appeal to the Secretary

      The  decision of the EMB Director or the  RED  may  be
appealed to the Secretary within 15 days from receipt  of  a
copy of the decision.

Section 5.0    Cease and Desist Order (CDO)

      The  EMB  Director or the RED may issue  a  Cease  and
Desist  Order (CDO) in order to prevent grave or irreparable
damage  to  the  environment.  Such CDO shall  be  effective
immediately.  An appeal or any motion seeking  to  lift  the
CDO shall not stay its effectivity.

NOTES:

     A CDO is usually issued when the respondent establishes
or  operates  a  project without an ECC.  Violation  of  ECC
conditions,     EMP     rules    and    regulations,     and
misrepresentations in the EIS or IEE and  related  documents
may  also warrant the issuance of a CDO in order to  prevent
grave or irreparable damage to the environment.

      A  CDO should, in most cases, be issued only after due
investigation.  However, when there is high risk of grave or
irreparable  damages to the environment, the Secretary,  EMB
Director, or RED may decide to issue a CDO together with the
Notice of Violation.

Procedures:

Once  a violation has been identified, EMB or DENR-RO  shall
undertake the following:

�     give  WRITTEN notice to the respondent proponent about
  the   alleged  violation,  and  give  the  respondent  the
  opportunity  to  explain in writing within an  appropriate
  period (usually seven (7) to thirty (30) days) why it should
  not be imposed the proper penalty, which notice is usually
  called a Notice of Violation or Show Cause Order;

�      investigate   the   matter   and,   based   on   such
  investigation, as well as the explanation submitted by the
  respondent, if any, prepare a report which shall include the
  following:

     a.a   brief   background  of  the  project,   including
       previous  violations committed by the respondent,  if
       any;
     
     b.the  provisions of law or rules and regulations,  ECC
       conditions, or EMP provision violated;
     
     c.findings  of  fact,  including  the  results  of  any
       measurement,   sampling   or  monitoring   activities
       conducted  either  by  the  EMB,  the  DENR  Regional
       Office,    DENR-accredited   research   institutions,
       academic   and  technical  organizations,   and   the
       results   obtained  and  the  corresponding   adverse
       impacts caused by the violations; and
     
     d.the  recommended  amount of fine to  be  imposed,  as
       well as other appropriate recommendations (filing  of
       court case, issuance of CDO, etc.)
     
      The  report  may,  in most cases,  be  based  on  site
inspection and verification, as well as documents  submitted
by respondent and other concerned parties.

�     submit  the report  to the Secretary, the EMB Director
  or the RED, as the case may be, for appropriate action;

�     the  Secretary, EMB Director or the RED shall issue  a
  decision based on the investigation report within 15  days
  from receipt of the report.

      The  decision of the EMB Director or the  RED  may  be
appealed to the Secretary within 15 days from receipt  of  a
copy of the decision.

      Should the decision of the Secretary, EMB Director, or
the  RED  not be complied with by respondent, the Secretary,
EMB Director, or the RED may issue another order reiterating
the contents of the first order, and imposing more stringent
fines  and penalties.  Non-compliance with the orders issued
by the Secretary, the EMB Director, or the RED constitute an
offense  separate and distinct from the offenses subject  of
the order.





Section 6.0    Scope of Violations

NOTES:

      The  imposition  of penalties under  this,  and  other
relevant  sections does not prevent the DENR  from  imposing
other  fines and penalties under other applicable provisions
of  law,  such as Presidential Decree No. 705,  the  Revised
Forestry Code, Presidential Decree No. 984, Republic Act No.
6969,  and other relevant laws, rules, and regulations,  nor
from filing criminal actions, if appropriate.

      Violations  under  the EIS System  are  classified  as
follows:

          a.     Projects   which  are  established   and/or
          operating without an ECC

                Any  project  or  activity  which  has  been
          classified  as  environmentally  critical   and/or
          located   in  an  environmentally  critical   area
          established and/or operating without a  valid  ECC
          shall  be  ordered closed, through a CDO,  without
          prejudice  to its applying for an ECC pursuant  to
          the  process  outlined  in this  Order  after  the
          payment   of  a  fine  of  P50,000.00  for   every
          violation.
          
NOTES:

     Section 4 of Presidential Decree 1586 explicitly states
that  no  person, partnership or corporation shall undertake
or  operate any environmentally critical project or  project
located  in  an environmentally critical area without  first
securing an ECC.  Pendency of an ECC application before  the
EMB  or Regional Office will not excuse any respondent  from
the  aforequoted  provision.   Moreover,  possession  of   a
certificate of non-coverage issued under DENR Administrative
Order  No.  21,  Series of 1992 is not an  adequate  defense
against the imposition of fines and penalties under DAO  96-
37, since several heretofore exempted or exemptible projects
under the former DAO are now covered under DAO 96-37.

      Respondent has the burden of proving that its  project
is not covered by the EIS System under DAO 96-37.

      Payment by respondent of the P50,000.00 fine will  not
justify  the  continuation  or   resumption  of  development
activities or operation, since only the eventual issuance to
respondent   of  an  ECC  will  authorize  such  development
activities  or  operations.  The fine is  simply  the  basic
penalty that, in certain instances, may be reinforced by the
issuance of a CDO.

       While  a  respondent  who  is  found  violating  this
provision may still apply for an ECC, its ECC shall  not  be
acted  upon  until it ceases development and operations  and
pays all the fines imposed upon it.  Such proponent must  be
aware, however, that its operations prior to the issuance of
an  ECC  in its favor may be taken against it and result  in
denial its ECC.

          b.    Projects Violating ECC Conditions, EMP Rules
          or Regulations

                Projects violating any of the conditions  in
          the  ECC,  EMP or rules and regulations pertaining
          to  the EIS System shall be punished by suspension
          or  cancellation of its ECC and/or a  fine  in  an
          amount   not  to  exceed  P50,000.00   for   every
          violation of an ECC condition, or the EMP, or  the
          EIS  System rules and regulations.  The suspension
          or  cancellation  of  the ECC  shall  include  the
          cessation of operations through the issuance of  a
          CDO.

NOTES:

      Violation  of one condition in the ECC is  an  offense
separate   and  distinct  from  the  violation  of   another
condition.   Thus,  it is possible for a  respondent  to  be
subject  to a fine of more than P50,000.00 if more than  one
(1) ECC condition is violated.

      Failure to pay the fine imposed by the Secretary,  EMB
Director or the RED constitutes an offense separate from the
original  offense that brought about the imposition  of  the
original  fine  and  may warrant the imposition  of  another
fine, and/or the issuance of a cease and desist order.

          c.    Misrepresentations in the IEE/EIS  or  other
          documents

                Misrepresentations in  the  IEE/EIS  or  any
          other   documents  submitted  by   the   proponent
          pursuant  to this Order shall be punished  by  the
          suspension  or cancellation of the  ECC  and/or  a
          fine  in  an  amount not to exceed P50,000.00  for
          every  misrepresentation.  The proponent  and  the
          preparer  responsible  for  the  misrepresentation
          shall be solidarily liable for the payment of  the
          fine,  without  prejudice  to  the  withdrawal  of
          accreditation of the preparers involved.

NOTES:

      All  misrepresentations, whether  material  or  minor,
constitute  violations under DAO 96-37, on the  theory  that
full  disclosure  in  the EIS or  IEE  is  the  key  to  the
effective  use of the EIS System as a planning,  management,
and regulatory tool.

      Solidary  liability means that the proponent  and  the
preparer  may  each be held liable for the  payment  of  the
fine.

      It should be noted that the sum of P50,000.00 is fixed
if  the  violation falls under the first paragraph  of  this
section.   In case of violation of ECC conditions, the  EMP,
or  EIS rules and regulations, the sum of P50,000.00 is  set
as  the  maximum  amount  of  fine  per  violation  and  can
therefore be appropriately reduced at the discretion of  the
Secretary, the EMB Director, or the RED.  The amount of fine
in  the latter case shall consider the circumstances of each
case, i.e., impact of the violation on the environment.

Section 7.0    Administrative Authority/Sanctions

          a.   DENR personnel are not allowed to participate
          in  any manner whatsoever, directly or indirectly,
          in  the  preparation of the EIS, or IEE,  or  from
          soliciting   favors   from   proponents   or   any
          stakeholder   to  facilitate  or  influence   DENR
          personnel  or EIARC members in the evaluation  and
          decision-making   process.   Violation   of   this
          provision  shall  result  in  the  imposition   of
          administrative   sanctions   and   penalties    in
          accordance   with  Civil  Service  laws,   without
          prejudice to criminal proceedings under the  Anti-
          Graft and Corrupt Practices Act and other relevant
          laws.

NOTES:

      The  essence of this provision is that DENR  personnel
should  not  profit from performing their usual duties  with
respect   to  the  EIS  System.   Assisting  proponents   by
answering  their  queries however,  will  not  constitute  a
violation of this provision.

          b.    DENR  personnel who shall  fail  to  perform
          their  duties  during  the periods  stated  herein
          shall  submit an explanation in writing  to  their
          immediate superior, copy furnish the Secretary and
          the  proponent, setting forth the reason for  such
          failure.    Should  said  explanation   be   found
          unsatisfactory  by  the superior,  said  personnel
          shall be subject to the appropriate administrative
          sanctions  and penalties in accordance with  Civil
          Service laws.

NOTES:

      Failure  of  DENR  personnel to perform  their  duties
during the periods stated in DAO 96-37 will not entitle  the
proponent to issuance of an ECC.  The personnel who fail  to
perform  their duty within the period provided in DAO  96-37
however,  will  be subject to the appropriate administrative
sanctions and penalties.

Section 8.0    Records-keeping  and  Accountability  of  the
               DENR for Submitted Documents

      The  DENR,  pursuant to Article  II,  Section  7,  and
Article  II,  Section  28  of  the  1987  Constitution,  and
Executive  Order  No. 87, Series of 1993, shall  ensure  the
implementation of the Government�s policy and  accessibility
and transparency at every phase of the EIS process.

      The EMB/EMPAS shall be responsible for records-keeping
of  all  documents submitted by the proponents applying  for
ECCs.   All  documents generated during  the  processing  of
applications shall be considered public documents.  The DENR
shall set up an orderly and systematic procedure for filing,
retrieving,  and providing public access to all  EIA-related
documents.  No employee of the DENR may release any document
without a written request and proper authorization from  the
head or duly authorized officer of the corresponding office.


NOTES:

How can a person obtain access to EIS-related documents?

1.   The  requesting  party must submit  a  written  request
     addressed  to  the EMB or the DENR- RO (EMPAS)  stating
     the  title  of  the  document(s)  and  purpose  of  the
     request.

2.   The  request  letter is received by the  EIA  or  EMPAS
     personnel who refers the letter to the Records Unit  or
     the person concerned.  If the document is unfamiliar to
     the  Records  Unit, the EIA personnel checks  with  the
     Document  Tracking  Database System (DTDS),  the  index
     card or the log book.

3.   Once the requested document is verified to be available
     in  the  files, this is retrieved by the EMB  or  EMPAS
     personnel  in charge of records-keeping or  filing  and
     given to the requesting party.  If it is not available,
     then  a  verbal  response is given  to  the  requesting
     party.

4.   The  requesting party cannot bring the document outside
     the  premises of the Regional Office (EMPAS) or the EMB
     (EIA Division), but may review the document inside  the
     EMPAS  Office  or  the  Office  of  the  EIA  Division.
     Photocopying  may only be done within the building,  in
     the presence of a DENR employee.

How  can a proponent inquire about the status of his or  her
ECC application?

1.   The  requesting party or proponent states the title  or
     name of his or her project and the date of submission.

2.   The  EMB  or  EMPAS personnel refers  to  the  Document
     Tracking  Database System (DTBS) in  the  computer  and
     then provides the requesting party a verbal response.

3.   For  other EIS-related inquiries, the requesting  party
     can  just  state his or her queries verbally while  the
     EMB personnel operates the DTBS.




Back to Phil. EIS Table of Contents
Hosted by www.Geocities.ws

1