VIRTUAL LANDFILL? An aerial shot of the area reclaimed by two companies investigated by the Laguna Lake Development Authority.
For the past six years, parts of Laguna Lake have served as a dumping ground for Metro Manila’s garbage, thanks to two companies that have illegally reclaimed a total of 47 hectares, according to the Laguna Lake Development Authority (LLDA).
LLDA Administrator Jaime Medina said he had ordered the closure of the sites reclaimed by IPM Construction and Development Corp. and Level Up Construction and Development Corp., two of Metro Manila’s biggest garbage collection contractors.
The two firms are facing criminal and administrative charges for allegedly using collected garbage as backfill material and concealing it with soil.
IPM has sought a restraining order in court, saying the LLDA action violated its right to due process.
The company maintained that the site in question was used only as parking space for heavy equipment. It also questioned the on-site tests conducted by the LLDA to support its allegations.
Citing aerial photos and a time-lapse sequence of satellite images in a briefing on Tuesday, Medina said the two firms had been dumping trash since 2012 on an illegally-reclaimed portion of Laguna de Bay in Barangay Calzada, Taguig City.
“This will be the first time that this was done as proof that the government is serious in stopping illegal reclamation and environmental degradation on Laguna Lake,” he said, referring to the charges faced by the two firms.
Possible Metro-wide effect
LLDA officials conceded that the order stopping the two firms’ operations in Taguig may affect garbage collection in Metro Manila. Medina, a former mayor of the municipality of Pateros, said IPM and Level Up are under garbage collection contracts with the city governments of Manila, Quezon City, Pasay and Taguig.
Details regarding their individual contracts were not immediately available, but LLDA officials said local governments pay about P1,000 for every metric ton of garbage hauled.
The agency has since fenced off and taken over the reclaimed areas—37 ha under IPM and 10 ha under Level Up. It also seized heavy equipment, including IPM’s 161 dump trucks, 50 backhoes and bulldozers and four cranes; and Level Up’s 21 dump trucks and four mini-dump trucks.
The LLDA chief said they were gathering evidence against five more firms that may have illegal reclamation projects along the lake’s shoreline.
Viewed from another angle, the reclaimed land along C-6 Road in Barangay Kalsada, Taguig City. —Photos courtesy of LLDA
Fishing ban mulled
The agency is also considering a fishing ban in the vicinity, citing tests that showed high levels of toxic chemicals like inorganic phosphate as well as fecal coliform in the water near the reclaimed areas.
“The reclaimed site appears to contain garbage mixed in soil that can contribute to the degradation of the lake water quality. The very large reclamation also affects the hydrology of the lake,” said LLDA general manager Jaime Medina in a statement.
John De Guzman, LLDA chief legal officer, said they would also file a petition for the Writ of Kalikasan and order the permanent closure of all firms found to be conducting illegal reclamation on the lake.
‘Grave injury’
In a statement, IPM lawyer Jade Lapinig said the firm had sought a temporary restraining order from the Court of Appeals on June 26, two weeks after the LLDA issued a cease and desist order.
“As of today, LLDA personnel are still there. They have full control of the ingress and egress (to and from) the facility. They only allowed us to station (a limited number of) security guards,” Lapinig said in a text message Wednesday, adding that IPM employees and equipment needed approval from the LLDA before they could enter or leave the facility.
IPM denied violating the Clean Water Act and the Solid Waste Management Act, and maintained that the company had used its Taguig facility to park its trucks and equipment that were due for repairs.
LLDA’s on-site tests to confirm whether garbage was buried on the site were done only on the same day it issued the closure order, and the tests also yielded negative results, it added.
The order “gravely violated” IPM’s right to due process and “caused (it) grave injury,” the company stressed.