You are on page 1of 21

PROJECT SUMMARY

(REVISED DRAFT AS OF OCT. 10, 2001) Project Identifiers 1. Project name: Philippine Enabling Activity: 2. GEF Implementing Agency: UNDP Initial Assistance to the Philippines to Meet Its Obligations Under the Stockholm Convention on POPs 3. Country: 4. Country eligibility (a country is Philippines eligible if it has signed the Stockholm Convention): The Philippines signed the Stockholm Convention on 23 May 2001. 5. Name of GEF national operational focal point and date the endorsement letter was signed (a copy of the letter is attached as Annex 1): Atty. GREGORIO V. CABANTAC, Undersecretary for Environment & Natural Resources, Legal, Lands and International Affairs, DENR SUMMARY OF PROJECT OBJECTIVES, ACTIVITIES, AND EXPECTED OUTCOMES 6. Project objective: The objective of the project is to create sustainable capacity and ownership in the Philippines to meet their obligations under the Stockholm Convention, including initial preparation of a POPs Implementation Plan, and broader issues of chemicals safety and management as articulated in Chapter 19 of Agenda 21. The Implementation Plan describes how the Philippines will meet its obligations under the Convention to phase-out POPs sources and remediate POPs contaminated sites in the country. 7. Project activities:

A. Establish Enabling Activity Project Co-ordinating Mechanisms; B. Capacity Building in support of project implementation; C. Assess National Infrastructural and Institutional Capacity; D. Prepare Initial POPs Inventories; E. Set Objectives and Priorities for POPs and POPs Reduction and Elimination Options; F. Prepare draft Implementation Plan for meeting Philippines obligations under the Stockholm Convention ; G. Review and Finalization of Implementation Plan.
8. Project expected outcomes: A. B. C. D. E. Enabling Activity project coordination mechanisms established; Necessary capacity built to support successful project implementation; Broad assessment of national POPs infrastructural and institutional capacity; Initial POPs inventories prepared; Agreed country objectives and priorities for POPs and POPs elimination and reduction;

F. Draft Implementation Plan for meeting country obligations under the Convention; G. Final Implementation Plan integrating views from government and other stakeholders. 9. Estimated total budget (in US$ or local currency): US$500,000.00 + PhP 4,395,000 (Government Contribution in kind) 10. Amount being requested from the GEF (in US$ or local currency): US$500,000.00 INFORMATION ON INSTITUTION SUBMITTING PROJECT BRIEF 11. Information on the organization in the country submitting the proposal: The ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT BUREAU was originally created as a Staff Bureau of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources on July 10, 1987 by virtue of Executive Order No. 192 from the merger of two environmental agencies namely: the National Environmental Protection Council and the National Pollution Control Commission. Functions of the Bureau include the management and control of toxic chemicals and hazardous wastes which is embodied in the provisions of Republic Act 6969, otherwise known as the Toxic Substances and Hazardous and Nuclear Wastes Control Act. The Act was designed to respond to the increasing problems associated with toxic chemicals and hazardous wastes. With the recent passage of RA No. 8749 also known as the "Philippine Clean Air Act of 1999", the EMB was converted to a Line Bureau to be more effectively enforce and implement relevant policies on environmental management. One of the significant provisions of the Act, relative to POPs, is the banning of incineration to address the adverse effects of combustion fumes emitted like dioxin an furans through the burning of domestic, hospital and hazardous wastes. 12. Information on the proposed executing organization (if different from above. The grant has to be executed by an organization in the requesting country): 13. Date the proposal was submitted to a GEF Implementing/Executing Agency: October __, 2001 14. Date the proposal was submitted to the GEF Secretariat: 15. Date the proposal was approved: October __, 2001 October __, 2001

INFORMATION TO BE COMPLETED BY IMPLEMENTING AGENCY: 16. Project identification number: 17. Implementing/Executing Agency contact person: Implementing Agency: UNDP Andy Hudson, Principal Technical Advisor on International Waters, UNDP-GEF Tim Boyle, Regional Manager, RBAP, UNDP-GEF Tim Clairs, Regional Coordinator, RBAP, UNDP-GEF Clarissa Arida, Programme Manager, UNDP Manila Executing Agency: EMB-DENR Ms. Angelita Brabante Officer-In-Charge, Environmental Quality Division Environmental Management Bureau, DENR

PROJECT DESCRIPTION PHILIPPINE ENABLING ACTIVITY: INITIAL ASSISTANCE TO MEET ITS OBLIGATIONS UNDER STOCKHOLM CONVENTION ON PERSISTENT ORGANIC POLLUTANTS (POPS) BACKGROUND:

THE

The Philippines is one of the early signatories to the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs). The main salient feature of the Convention is to protect human health and environment through measures, which will reduce and/or eliminate the emissions and discharges of POPs. The Government of the Philippines (GoP) has long recognized the problems attributed to toxic chemicals and hazardous wastes. As early as 1990, the Philippine Congress enacted Republic Act No. 6969 or the Toxic Substances and Hazardous and Nuclear Wastes Control Act. This Act mandates the regulation, restriction or prohibition of the importation, manufacture, processing, sale, distribution, use, and disposal of chemical substances and mixtures that present unreasonable risk and/or injury to health and the environment. It also deals with the entry, storage and disposal of hazardous wastes. Another landmark legislation was passed in 1999 which is Republic Act 8749 entitled Philippine Clean Air Act. Two basic rules in the Implementing Rules and Regulations of the Clean Air Act (DENR Administrative Order 2000-81) govern POPs. Rule XLI provides for the development of an inventory list of all sources of POPs in the country and the design of a national government program on the reduction and elimination of POPs. Again in Rule XXVIII, Section 1 provides for the ban on incineration, as a response to address the adverse effects of combustion fumes emitted by the burning of domestic, hospital and hazardous wastes. Instead, it advocates the non-burn technology as an alternative. (See Annex 2 for the present state of POPs management in the Philippines). Although priority has been given these two laws, implementation suffered a major setback due to the scarcity of resources, both financial and administrative. In 1996, realizing the threat posed by POPs, the EMB-DENR sought the assistance of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) to look into possible strategies in the management of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB). An expert mission was dispatched by the UNDP to conduct an assessment of PCB waste management and land contamination in the country. Considering the short-term study, the report confirmed that there was no reliable, established information on PCB inventories in the Philippines and had no suitable, approved treatment and disposal for PCB wastes. Just recently, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the Industrial Technology Development Institute of the Department of Science and Technology (ITDI-DOST) entered into an agreement in the implementation of the Asia Toolkit Project of UNEP Chemicals to establish releases inventories of dioxins and furans in selected Asian countries. This project is expected to complement with the enabling activity on POPs. The output of the UNEP initiated project will be an input to the inventory activity to be undertaken in the enabling activity. In March 2001 a GEF-supported PDF-B global project with UNDP was approved and is executed by the United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO). The project preparation aims to develop a full project proposal that would demonstrate the viability of available non-combustion technologies for use in the destruction of obsolete POPs stockpiles and the cleanup and remediation of POPs contaminated soils or sediments in countries with developing economies and economies in transition. The participating countries are the Philippines for Asia and Slovakia for Eastern Europe. Similarly, implementation of this project in the Philippines will complement the enabling activity being proposed. The technology to be adopted will be an important input in the development of the

implementation plan to be drawn up under the enabling activity to the destruction of POPs stockpiles in the country. The financial assistance being accorded to developing countries by the Stockholm Convention through the Global Environment Facility (GEF), specifically to enable them initially meet their obligations under the Convention, is highly needed at this point by countries like the Philippines. Moreover, the support being sought will not only help the Philippines comply with their commitments to the Convention but, likewise, enhance the groundwork needed to fully implement country level regulations. PROJECT OBJECTIVES: The objective of the project is to create sustainable capacity and ownership in the Philippines to meet their obligations under the Stockholm Convention, including initial preparation of a POPs Implementation Plan, and broader issues of chemicals safety and management as articulated in Chapter 19 of Agenda 21. The Implementation Plan describes how the Philippines will meet its obligations under the Convention to phase-out POPs sources and remediate POPs contaminated sites in the country. DESCRIPTION
OF PROPOSED ENABLING ACTIVITIES AND THE EXPECTED OUTCOMES:

Activity A. Establish Enabling Activity Project Co-ordinating Mechanisms 1. Identify and confirm national institution/unit to serve as Focal Point; 2. Identify, sensitize and agree on initial responsibilities amongst government agencies for Implementation Plan preparation; 3. Identify and sensitise key stakeholders (civil society, academic, public interest NGOs, and private sector) and agree on their respective roles and responsibilities; 4. Establish country Implementation Plan co-ordinating committee including major stakeholder classes; 5. Assess capacities and needs of Focal Point and national co-ordinating committee to oversee Implementation Plan preparation (technical, communication, human resources, etc.); 6. Prepare detailed project workplan; 7. Organise broad-based stakeholder inception workshop(s) to introduce and review project plan and implementation arrangements. 8. Establish a roster of national consultants on POPs. Expected Outcomes: 1. Focal point institution confirmed and established; 2. Respective IP responsibilities agreed among government agencies; 3. Stakeholders sensitized and roles agreed upon; 4. Country IP plan coordinating committee established including broad stakeholder representation; 5. Capacity assessment of focal point and national coordinating committee completed; 6. Project work plan prepared; 7. Stakeholder review and discussion of project work plan and implementation arrangements completed. 8. A roster of national consultants on POPs. Activity B. Capacity Building in support of project implementation

1. Provide focal point/Coordinating Committee with linkages to external sources of technical expertise (national, regional and/or international). 2. Provide information, training, equipment and administrative support to Focal Point and/or Coordinating Committee based on assessment in Activity A.5. 3. Conduct public awareness and education campaign among various stakeholders on POPs through the development of IEC materials and conduct of fora. Training and expertise needs could be provided by national, regional and/or international expertise through linkages in Activity B.1 or by POPs Capacity Building Support mechanisms to be established under the GEF Enabling Activities. Outcomes: 1. Focal point and coordinating committee have access to necessary levels of technical expertise; 2. Focal point and coordinating committee have necessary capacities for project implementation. 3. Various stakeholders would have increased awareness and developed basic information and understanding about POPs. Activity C. Assess National Infrastructural and Institutional Capacity 1. Identify government agencies and other institutions with responsibilities for POPs management activities and assess effectiveness of existing institutional arrangements; 2. Assess effectiveness of legislative, regulatory and enforcement infrastructure and its capacity to achieve Convention compliance; 3. Assess capacity to establish Best Available Techniques (BAT) and Best Environmental Practices (BEP) for POPs source categories; 4. Assess socio-economic impacts caused by POPs exposure in humans and the environment; 5. Assess socio-economic implications of POPs reduction and elimination; including the need for enhanced local commercial infrastructure for distributing benign alternative technologies, products and practices; 6. Assess POPs monitoring and R&D capacity. Outcomes: 1. 2. capacities; 3. 4. 5. reduction/elimination; 6. level. Activity D. Assessment of national institutional capacities for POPs management; Assessment of national POPs legislative, regulatory and enforcement Assessment of national BAT and BEP capacities; Assessment of national POPs socio-economic impacts; Assessment of socio-economic implications

of

POPs

Assessment of national POPs monitoring and R&D capacity at national

Prepare Initial POPs Inventories Establish and train as necessary task teams responsible for preparing inventories of various POPs categories; 2. Prepare initial inventories of POPs production, unintentional sources, distribution, use, import and export; 3. Prepare initial inventory of obsolete POPs stocks, POPs-containing articles in use and contaminated sites;

1.

4. 5.

Prepare initial inventory of POPs releases to the environment; Prepare initial inventory of POPs presence, levels and trends in humans and the environment; 6. Prepare initial assessment of opportunities for disposal of obsolete stocks in accordance with provisions of Article 6 of the Convention; 7. Review existing POPs country specific exemptions and assess options for their termination; 8. Conduct independent expert review of initial national POPs inventories; Outcomes: 1. Task teams have necessary skills to conduct POPs inventories. 2. Initial inventories of POPs production, unintentional sources, distribution, use, import and export; 3. Initial inventories of obsolete POPs stocks, POPs-containing articles in use and POPs-contaminated sites; 4. Initial inventories of POPs releases to the environment; 5. Initial inventories of POPs levels and trends in humans and the environment; 6. Initial assessment of opportunities for disposal of obsolete POPs stocks; 7. Review of existing POPs country specific exemptions and initial proposals for their termination; 8. Independent expert review of initial national POPs inventories completed. Activity E. Set Objectives and Priorities for POPs and POPs Reduction and Elimination Options 1. Determine national objectives for reduction and elimination of POPs releases; 2. Develop criteria for prioritising POPs and options to reduce and eliminate releases, taking into account health, environmental and socio-economic impacts, including magnitude of releases and exposed populations, the availability of alternatives, and other considerations (e.g. costbenefit, economic instruments, etc.); 3. Organize multi-stakeholder review of prioritisation criteria and solicitation of stakeholder input on application of criteria; 4. Conduct exercise to prioritise POPs and POPs reduction/elimination options, including stakeholder review.

Outcomes: 1. Agreed national objectives for reduction and elimination of POPs releases; 2 Agreed critiera for prioritizing POPs and options to reduce and eliminate POPs releases; 3 Stakeholder input on prioritization criteria received and integrated; 4. POPs and POPs reduction/elimination prioritization exercise completed. Activity F. Prepare draft Implementation Plan for meeting (countrys) obligations under the Stockholm Convention Establish task teams to develop plans for addressing specific POPs taking into account priorities established in (E); Identify barriers (legal, institutional, financial, technical, etc.) to effective phase-out or reduction of POPs sources and uses, and remediation or disposal of POPs stocks; Identify actions to remove barriers to effective implementation of POPs phase-out, release reduction and remediation measures under the Convention; Identify actions for information exchange, public education, communication & awareness raising;

1. 2. 3. 4.

5. Identify capacity building actions as required, including institutional strengthening, training, equipment, legal and regulatory measures, enforcement, monitoring, etc.; 6. Identify actions to enable termination of country-specific exemptions (if any); if not, prepare report to Convention justifying continuing need for exemptions; 7. Determine needs for transfer of technology and know-how and/or enhanced use and development of indigenous knowledge and alternatives; 8. Identify and estimate costs of needed investments; 9. Based on 1-7, prepare draft Implementation Plan including specific action plans for unintentional by-products, PCBs and, where appropriate, for DDT and other POPs as prioritised; 10. Establish targets, time frames for their achievement, and measurable indicators of success; 11. Prepare initial cost estimate for draft Implementation Plan, including incremental costs. Outcomes: 1. POPs Implementation Plan task teams established; 2. Barriers to POPs phase-out, reduction, remediation and disposal identified; 3. Barrier removal actions identified; 4. Awareness raising and information exchange mechanisms identified; 5. Necessary capacity building activities identified; 6. Actions towards termination or continuation (as required) of countryspecific exemptions identified; 7. Technology and know-how transfer needs identified; 8. Investment costs identified and estimated; 9. Draft Implementation Plan; 10. Implementation Plan targets, time frames and indicators identified; 11. Initial cost estimate for Implementation Plan prepared. Activity G.

1. 2.
review;

Review and Finalization of Implementation Plan Organise briefing for high level government officials on draft Implementation Plan; Disseminate draft Implementation Plan and supporting information to stakeholders for

3.

Organise stakeholder workshop(s) to review draft Implementation Plan towards goal of consensus; 4. Prepare final version of initial Implementation Plan based on above review and comment process; 5. Secure government, private sector, donor and other resource commitments to financing of Implementation Plan. Outcomes: 1. High level briefing of government on Implementation Plan completed; 2. Draft Implementation Plan broadly disseminated to stakeholder communities; 4. Stakeholder workshops completed and consensus built on Implementation Plan; 5. Final Implementation Plan prepared integrating review process; 6. Preliminary government, private sector, donor and other commitments to financing Implementation Plan secured. ENABLING ACTIVITY IMPLEMENTATION PLAN The following implementation plan indicates the estimated time required to complete each major enabling activity.

DURATION OF PROJECT (IN QUARTERS): ACTIVITIES Completion of major activities A. Establish Enabling Activity Project Co-ordinating Mechanisms; B. Capacity Building in support of project implementation; C. Assess National Infrastructural and Institutional Capacity; D. Prepare Initial POPs Inventories; E. Set Objectives and Priorities for POPs and POPs Reduction and Elimination Options; F. Prepare draft Implementation Plan for meeting Phils. obligations under the Stockholm Convn; Review and Finalization of Implementation Plan. PROJECT BUDGET Component1 A. Establish Enabling Activity Project Co-ordinating Mechanisms Technical assistance (local) National Consultant (Policy & Coordination) Technical Assistant Finance Asst Admin Support (2) Workshops/meetings Inception Workshop Support to Phil. Ratification on POPs Convention Stakeholders Workshop Travel Local Travel Others (specify) Project Implementation Supplies Sub-total B. Capacity Building in support of project implementation Technical assistance (local) National Consultant (Capacity Needs Assessment) Technical Assistant Sub-contract on Public Awareness Campaign Training Participation to Capacity Building Support for Enabling Activity at International/Regional Level Equipment Set of Computer Network which includes 1 main server and 3 work stations including accessories. Multimedia Projector

Q1

Y1 Q2 Q3

Q4

Q1

Y2 Q2 Q3

Q4

Number of Units

Unit Cost (US$)

Cost (US$)

8 mm 12 mm 24 mm 24mm 1 one-day 1 one-day 1 three-day -

2,500 700 400 400 1,000 1,000 3,000 -

20,000 8,400 7,200 9,600 1,000 1,000 3,000 2,000 5,000 57,200

2 mm 12 mm 6 mos 1 set 1 unit

2,500 700 20,000 5,000

5,000 8,400 25,000 25,000 20,000 5,000

Component Photocopier Workshops/meetings Capacity & Needs Assessment Workshop Travel Duty Travel to Participate at International Training Sub-total C. Assess National Infrastructural and Institutional Capacity Technical assistance (local) Technical Assistant Sub-contract on Capacity & Needs Assessment Technical assistance (International) International Consultant Workshops/meetings Meetings with various agencies/institutions Travel Local Travel to meetings, data gathering Others (specify) Data gathering supplies Sub-total D. Prepare Initial POPs Inventories Technical assistance (local) National Consultant (POPs Inventory) Technical Assistant Sub-contract on POPs Inventory Technical assistance (International) International Consultant Training Training on POPs Inventory Equipment Portable Monitoring/Inventory Equipment Supplies (see justification in Annex 3) Workshops/meetings Pre/Post Inventory Workshops Travel Local Travel for inventory & data gathering Sub-total E. Set Objectives and Priorities for POPs and POPs Reduction and Elimination Options Technical assistance (local) National Consultant (POPs Policy) Technical Assistant Sub-contract on POPs Strategic Planning Technical assistance (International) International Consultant Workshops/meetings Multi-stakeholders Review/Consultation Workshops

Number of Units 1 unit 1 one-day -

Unit Cost (US$) 3,000 1,000 -

Cost (US$) 3,000 1,000 10,000 102,400

12 mm 6 mos 2 mm -

700 19,000 -

8,400 20,000 38,000 1,000 2,000 5,000 74,400 10,000 8,400 37,500 38,000 2,000 53,800 9,000 2,000 160,700

4 mm 12 mm 12 mos 2 mm 1 two-day 1 set 3 three-day -

2,500 700 19,000 2,000 53,800 3,000 -

3 mm 12 mm 1.5 mos 1 mm 3 two-day

2,500 700 19,000 2,000

7,500 8,400 7,500 19,000 6,000

Component Travel Local Travel for the Workshop Others (specify) Supplies needed for the workshop Sub-total F. Prepare draft Implementation Plan for meeting (countrys) obligations under the Stockholm Convention Technical assistance (local) National Consultant (POPs Policy & Imp. Plan) Technical Assistant Workshops/meetings Multi-stakeholders Review/Consultation Meetings Travel Local Travel for the Workshop Others (specify) Supplies needed for the workshop Sub-total G. Review and Finalization of Implementation Plan Workshops/meetings National Multi-stakeholders Conference(s) Travel Local Travel to disseminate the draft IP Others (specify) Printing of the draft final POPs IP, supplies Sub-total Total Cost of Enabling Activities

Number of Units -

Unit Cost (US$) -

Cost (US$) 2,000 5,000 55,400

3 mm 12 mm 6 one-day -

2,500 700 1,000 -

7,500 8,400 6,000 1,000 5,000 27,900

4 one-day 1,000 pcs

1,500 10

6,000 6,000 10,000 22,000 500,000

GOVERNMENT COUNTERPART (IN-KIND) Personnel (4 Technical and 1 Admin staff PhP125,000/mo) Office Space (PhP 20,000/mo) Utilities (Telephone, electricity, water, etc. PhP10,000/mo) Supplies and Materials (PhP 5,000/mo) Office furniture including cabinets Office Equipment (Computers/printers, fax machine, copiers, aircon) Total (Exchange Rate at PhP53 1US$) PhP 3,000,000 480,000 240,000 120,000 135,000 420,000 -----------------PhP 4,395,000 US$ 82,925

TOTAL PROJECT COST:

GEF Contribution Government Counterpart (In-Kind)

US$

500,000 82,925 ------------------US$ 582,925

Summary of Project Budget (GEF Assistance) Component Philippine Enabling Activity: Initial Assistance Under the Stockholm Convention on POPs Technical assistance (local) National Consultants Policy & Coordination Capacity Needs Assessment POPs Inventory POPs Policy & Implementation Technical Assistant (3) Finance Asst. (1) Admin Support (2) Sub-contract on Public Awareness Campaign Sub-contract on Capacity & Needs Assessment Sub-contract on POPs Inventory Sub-contract on POPs Strategic Planning & Drafting of Implementation Plan on POPs S ub-total (37.4%) Technical assistance (international) International Consultant (Capacity Assessment) International Consultant (POPs Inventory) International Consultant (POPs Reduction & Elim) Sub-total (19.0%) Training Participation to Capacity Building Support for Enabling Activity at International/Regional Level. Training on POPs Inventory Sub-total (5.4%) Equipment Set of Computer Network which includes 1 main Server and 3 work stations including accessories. Portable Monitoring/Inventory Equipment Multimedia Projector Photocopier Sub-total (20.4%) Workshops/meetings Inception Workshop Support to Phil. Ratification on POPs Convention Stakeholders Workshop Capacity & Needs Assessment Workshop Meetings with various agencies/institutions Pre/Post Inventory Workshops Multi-stakeholders Review/Consultation Workshops Multi-stakeholders Review/Consultation Meetings National Multi-stakeholders Conference(s)

Number of Units

Unit Cost (US$)

Cost (US$)

20 mm (8) (2) (4) (6) 72 mm 24 mm 24 mm 6 mos 6 mos 12 mos 1.5 mos

2,500

50,000

700 300 400 -

50,400 7,200 9,600 25,000 20,000 37,500 7,500 207,200

2 mm 2 mm 1 mm

19,000 19,000 19,000

38,000 38,000 19,000 95,000 25,000 2,000 27,000 20,000 53,800 5,000 3,000 81,800 1,000 1,000 3,000 1,000 1,000 9,000 6,000 6,000 6,000

1 two-day

2,000

1 set 1 set 1 unit 1 unit

20,000 61,300 5,000 3,000

1 one-day 1 one-day 1 three-day 1 one-day 3 three-day 3 two-day 6 one-day 4 one-day

1,000 1,000 3,000 1,500 3,000 2,000 1,000 1,500

Component Sub-total (6.8%) Travel Local Travel Duty Travel to Participate at International Training Sub-total (5.0%) Others (specify) Project Implementation Supplies Printing of the draft final POPs IP, supplies Sub-total (6.0%) Grand Total

Number of Units -

Unit Cost (US$) -

Cost (US$) 34,000 15,000 10,000 25,000 20,000 10,000 30,000 500,000

1,000 pcs

10

ANNEX 1 GEF OPERATIONAL FOCAL POINT ENDORSEMENT

Annex 2 Present State of POPs Management in the Philippines BACKGROUND The evident hazards associated with persistent organic pollutants (POPs) have long been recognized and the magnitude or extent of damage they bring about has increased over the years. Strong scientific evidence reveals that overexposure to certain POPs cause serious immune and metabolic effect, neurologic defects, reproductive anomalies, cancer and other abnormalities in both humans and animals. POPs are highly toxic substances that remain in the environment for long periods, thus, categorized as persistent. They become more concentrated over time as they go up the food chain, and can spread thousands of kilometers from the point of emission. Due to enormous threats posed by POPs to human health and the environment, the international community has responded to address this significant issue and come together to adopt a legally binding instrument, known as the Stockholm Convention on POPs to implement international action on certain POPs. Its salient feature is to protect human health and environment through measures, which will reduce and/or eliminate the emissions and discharges of POPs. There are three basic goals that orchestrate the Convention. First is to ban the manufacture and use of newly developed or developing chemicals with POP characteristics. Second is the elimination of existing POPs starting with a list of 12 chemicals known as the Dirty Dozen, which consist mostly of pesticides (9), PCBs and the other two are combustion by products, dioxins and furans. The third is to initiate action for the destruction of all existing stockpiles of POPs without resorting to incineration. Around 90 countries have signed the Convention on May 23, 2001. The Philippines is one of the early signatories to the Stockholm Convention.

REGULATORY FRAMEWORK Republic Act 6969 The Philippine government, in the past, has undertaken various steps that demonstrate its concern for POPs. However, the management and control of POPs in the country is manifested through the policies and regulations created to control and manage toxic chemical and hazardous wastes. As early as 1990, the Philippine Congress enacted the R.A. 6969 known as the Toxic Substances and Hazardous and Nuclear Wastes Control Act. It describes the regulatory and administrative framework currently in place in the Philippines for the management of toxic chemicals and hazardous wastes, which included POPs. This Act was promulgated in recognition of the considerable and increasing problems associated with toxic chemicals and hazardous and nuclear wastes. The objectives of the Act were to provide the basis for:

management of the import, manufacture, transport, storage and handling of toxic chemicals; management of the generation, storage, transport and disposal of hazardous and nuclear wastes; and protection of public health and the environment from the risks posed by toxic chemicals and hazardous wastes. The Act relies for its effective implementation on subsidiary rules, regulations, orders and guidelines formulated to further define the roles of the specific agency mandated to implement the Act, as well as, various concerned stakeholders. DENR Administrative Order 29 The Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR), the government department responsible for the implementation of RA 6969, issued DENR Administrative Order 29 (DAO29), Implementing Rules and Regulations of RA 6969, in 1992. DAO 29 comprises a number of Titles: Title I: Title II: Title III: Title IV: Title V: General Provisions and Administrative Procedures Toxic Chemical Substances Hazardous and Nuclear Wastes Common Provisions Prohibited Acts and Penalties

The main Title relevant to POPs management and control is Title II Toxic Chemical Substances. PCBs, obsolete stockpiles, and other related hazardous materials are discussed in Title III, Table 1. The provisions of DAO 29 Title II includes:
a) Philippine Inventory of Chemicals and Chemical Substances (PICCS), an inventory of chemical substances which are stored, imported, exported, used, processed, manufactured or transported in the country. The PICCS database was based on nominations of chemicals by industry and published in 1995. A process for updating is likewise provided for.

b)

Philippine Priority Chemical List (PCL) is a list of chemicals which deemed to pose potentially unreasonable risks to workplace or public health or the environment. PCL is a more restricted list than the PICCS and requires submission of a Biennial Report and Registration as Hazardous Waste Generator. The initial list currently contains 28 chemicals and chemical groups. Some POPs chemicals are included in this list. Manufacturers, importers and users of PCL

chemicals are subject to more stringent reporting procedures an compliance monitoring. c) Pre-manufacturing and Pre-importation Notification (PMPIN) is a process of prior notification to DENR of plans to manufacture or import new chemicals. New chemicals are defined as chemicals not listed on the PICCS, or new chemicals entering the Philippine territory for the first time. Chemical Control Orders (CCOs) may be issued to specifically control high priority chemicals with potentially serious health or environmental risks. A CCO may regulate the manufacture, import, export, transport, storage distribution or use of the chemical, impose a phase-out plan or ban the chemical if justified. The chemicals currently subject to CCOs or with draft CCOs are: Ozone Depleting Substances DENR Administrative Order 1000/18 Cyanide DENR Administrative Order 1997/38 PCBs (draft CCO prepared) Asbestos DENR Administrative Order 2000/02 Mercury (draft CCO prepared) DENR Administrative Order 1997/37 Republic Act 8749 In June 1999, another landmark legislation was enacted into law by the Philippine Congress, the Philippine Clean Air Act (CAA). Some of the salient features of this act mandates action to address POPs and also incorporates a provision (Section 20) calling for a ban on incineration The particular provision further defines incineration as the burning of municipal, bio-medical and hazardous wastes, which emits poisonous and toxic fumes. DENR Administrative Order 2000-81 (Draft) Similar to the implementation of RA 6969, the DENR, as the lead implementing government department, has currently drafted DAO 2000-81 which serves as the Implementing Rules and Regulations. Two basic rules in the Implementing Rules and Regulations of the Clean Air Act (DENR Administrative Order 2000-81) govern POPs. Rule XLI provides for the development of an inventory list of all sources of POPs in the country and the design of a national government program on the reduction and elimination of POPs. Again in Rule XXVIII, Section 1 provides for the ban on incineration, as a response to address the adverse effects of combustion fumes emitted by the burning of domestic, hospital and hazardous wastes. Instead, it advocates the non-burn technology as an alternative. Presidential Decree No. 1144

d)

The Presidential Decree No. 1144 was promulgated creating the Fertilizer and Pesticide Authority (FPA). The FPA is the regulatory agency governing fertilizers and pesticides utilization in the country. It is mandated to assure the agricultural sector of adequate supplies of fertilizer and pesticide at reasonable prices and to protect the farmers and the public from the potential risks attributed in the use of fertilizers and pesticides. The Philippines, through the FPA, is one of the many countries in the Asia and Pacific region that adapts pesticide regulations in accordance with the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and other internationally recognized regulatory agencies. It employs an appropriate registration scheme for pesticide management in the country. However, due to strained and very limited human and financial resources and the weak institutional infrastructures have jeopardize the implementation, monitoring, enforcement and improvement of pesticide laws and policies. CONTAMINATED LAND MANAGEMENT The Philippines has currently no legislation, policies, guidelines or other forms of control that specifically provides for the assessment, remediation or management of contaminated land. The effective control of contaminated land and associated health and environmental hazards and risks relies on use of other legislation such as RA 6969 and Presidential Decree 1586 namely the Philippine Environmental Impact Assessment regulation. Existing controls on toxic chemical and hazardous wastes, however, have some effect on limiting the occurrence of land contamination, while programs for monitoring and controlling effects on marine and freshwaters or groundwater also lead to management of land-based contamination source. The EMB-DENR does not have staff with significant experience or training in most aspects of contaminated land management, whether of PCBs or other chemical contaminants. PCBS AND PCB WASTES MANAGEMENT Currently, there is no reliable, established information on PCB inventories in the Philippines. The notification process as stipulated in DAO 29 Title II does not include PCBs held in in-service electrical equipment. However, it is recognized by the government that to be able to come up with an appropriate management strategy for PCB and PCB-containing materials, an understanding of the current and likely future inventories is necessary. Likewise, the Philippines, at present, has no suitable, approved treatment or disposal facilities for PCB or PCB waste materials. Concentrated PCB oil and contaminated mineral oils used as rinseate in decommissioning of transformers have in the past been exported for high temperature incineration overseas. Also, no regulated standards or adopted guidelines for PCB concentrations in the soil environment are available. However, an interim guideines for handling PCBs and PCB containing materials is being imposed for spills decontamination.

The EMB-DENR, in 2000 has drafted the Chemical Control Order (CCO) specifically for PCBs. It is intended to be the principal instrument for the EMB-DENR to achieve effective control over PCB use and PCB waste disposal in the Philippines. Consultation on the draft CCO have been conducted but the final review will be done by the DENR Legal Office and the DENR Technical Working Group on POPs. PESTICIDES USE IN THE PHILIPPINES The use of pesticides in the countrys agriculture was heightened in the early 1970s through the rice production program called Masagana 99 which was encouraged by the development and promotion of high yielding varieties by the International Rice Research Institute (IRRI). This program provided a package of inputs that included certified HYV seeds, fertilizers and pesticides, complemented with irrigation support and farm extension works and later on, with crop insurance. It was during this time that the use of POPs in agriculture, particularly organochlorine pesticides, became widespread. Farmers often lack accurate knowledge about pests and their control, hence, underdosing and frequent applications were a general occurrence. Farmers usually obtain their knowledge and understanding about pesticide use from government technicians, pesticides sales agents, other farmers or neighbors, pesticide labels or through media. The instructions on pesticide labels may at times be too complicated for farmers to understand and apply, thus, at most, creating the problem of proper pesticide use. However, in recent years, a pattern of reduction is being seen with the continuous popular support for sustainable agriculture initiatives by various sector. Most farmers are aware that pesticides are hazardous but there is lack of awareness of exposure risks, particularly dermal exposure. Pesticide handlers are exposed heavily. In addition, the exposure of households in farming communities may occur due to spray drift from nearby fields. Also, the farmers practice of washing their sprayers near or in irrigation canals. Some use this water source for washing of hands and feet. The manner of disposal of pesticide left-overs, pesticide-contaminated containers and stockpiles of banned products also increased the risk of exposure to pesticides. Most pesticide handlers use backyards of open fields for disposal purposes while some sell these containers or throw them into nearby water bodies. Aside from one facility owned by a multinational corporation who incinerates pesticide wastes arising from their product lines, there are no other facilities in the country to properly dispose toxic and hazardous wastes including unwanted or obsolete stocks of pesticides.

ANNEX 3: JUSTIFICATION FOR EQUIPMENT PURCHASE UNDER POPs ENABLING ACTIVITY

The Philippine Government has requested, through the proposed GEF Enabling Activity on POPs, the purchase of portable monitoring equipment which intends to support the inventory tasks under the project. The portable equipment shall be for on-site analysis and sampling tools of various POPs in the environment, particularly for PCB contaminated sites and emissions of dioxins and furans from the existing hospital waste incinerators. Also, there have been reports on the proliferation of smuggled pesticides used in the agriculture sector already banned in the country (included in the List of POPs Dirty Dozen), and these reports cannot be validated due to inability of the government to identify them. With the equipment being requested, the enabling activity could identify continued use of these banned pesticides. At present, the Philippine Government, through the Department of Environment and Natural Resources, has no capability of detecting these POPs substances in the environment and the inventory activities may not be able to yield accurate information. For instance, the UNEPDOST project on Dioxins and Furans Inventory project uses the UNEP tool kit, which is primarily based on a questionnaire and database management providing some estimates for dioxins and furans. The emission factors used in the UNEP tool kit may not be able to provide realistic figures considering the local setting and technologies employed by these incinerators. With the acquisition of these equipment, the enabling activity will be able to augment, support or validate the results of the inventory being undertaken by the Department of Science and Technology and will be a substantial input to the inventory process to be undertaken under the POPs enabling activity. The UNEP-DOST project did not allocate budget for the purchase of these equipment. For the Global POPs project, with the purchase of these equipment, the enabling activity could very well support the project in the identification of stockpiles and contaminated sites required to be able to identify the most appropriate non-combustion technologies for the destruction of these POPs, PCB stockpiles in particular. Likewise the UNIDO-executed PDF-B project has no allocation for the acquisition of equipment. The cost allocation is also justifiable considering the high cost of consumables needed or to be used in the analysis. With the current economic situation in the country, the government, at this time cannot afford to purchase these. The proponent of this project wants to make sure that the activities to be undertaken under the EA project will be comprehensive and accurate and the National Implementation Plan to be derived are based on actual or realistic information. The following list of equipment is an initial list anticipated to be purchased under the EA project and maybe subject to change or additional equipment if warranted. List of Possible Equipment to be Purchased Under the Enabling Activity on POPs Method 5 (MM5) source sampler for dioxins and furans (1 Unit) (plus Accessories and Consumables)

Clor N Soil 50, PCB Test Kit (contaminated soil, several units, consumables) Clor N Oil 50, PCB Test Kit (to test transformer oil, several units, consumable) High-Sensitivity Electron Capture Detector (ECD) (to detect chlorinated compounds such contaminated PCBs and pesticides) Portable Field Gas Chromatograph (can be attached to the ECD for on site analysis, 1 unit, plus consumables)