Dumaluan to comply with Cease and Desist Order

Embattled Panglao Mayor Doloreich Dumaluan last week formally manifested that he will comply with the cease-and-desist order (CDO) issued against him by the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR). Dumaluan made the formal offer in a manifestation that he made before the Region 7 Environmental Management Bureau (EMB). The manifestation, dated Sept. 5, was filed before the EMB-7 in connection with the case lodged against Dumaluan for operating the Dumaluan Beach Resort without an environmental compliance certificate (ECC). The case is docketed as EIA case no. VII-2006-04-007. In his manifestation, Dumaluan noted that a motion for reconsideration was filed last July 12 on the EMB 7 resolution dated June 21. “Without, however, withdrawing, setting aside and/or vacating the said Motion for Reconsideration, the undersigned hereby manifests that he voluntarily complies and abides by the terms and conditions set forth in the (CDO), thereby, rendering the same moot and academic,” the manifestation said.

The resolution issued by DENR 7 OIC Regional Director Alan Arranguez issued the CDO against further implementation of the project aside from a P50,000 penalty and fine against Dumaluan who is the project proponent. In his order, Arranguez also suspended the application for the ECC which was being processed by the resort. According to the facts of the case, Dumaluan filed his application for the issuance of an ECC for his resort project last May 8, 2003. On May 29, 2003 , the said application was returned to the proponent due to the lack of indorsements from the local government unit of barangay Bolod and proof of ownership.

More than a year later, the Office of the Regional Director issued a notice of violation against the proponent for implementing a project without an ECC. Dumaluan resubmitted his ECC application on Aug. 19, 2004 but it was returned to him for lack of proof of ownership and a detailed environmental management plan and the cost of its implementation. Dumaluan resubmitted an application on Nov. 16, 2004 but the documents were again lacking. On Dec. 28, 2004 , the ECC was approved and Dumaluan was informed about the approval with the corresponding penalty that he must pay before it will be released to him. Nearly a year later, Dumaluan sent a letter requesting for reconsideration of the penalty imposed because he had already applied in 1998 before the DENR but this was lost in their possession.

Dumaluan was made to commit in a technical conference to submit a motion for reconsideration; to pay the penalty if the motion is found to be without merit and that in case of failure to pay the penalty, the ECC will be suspended or revoked. Last Jan. 18, the DENR 7's chief of legal and environmental education division required the chief of the Environmental Impact Assessment Division (EIAD) to comment on Dumaluan's motion for reconsideration. Engr. William Cuñado recommended that the reduced penalty should be imposed and could not be waived because project proponent started the project implementation before the filing of his ECC application. On April 21, a resolution found that Dumaluan violated section 4 of PD 1586 for implementing his project without an ECC. Dumaluan however refused to receive the resolution when it was served on May 5.

Last June 14, a memorandum was sent to the regional director that a three-storey building constructed by Dumaluan encroached on a portion of the 20-meter easement zone. The memorandum also recommended that it be referred to the legal division for complimentary action in view of the violation. The memorandum was also in connection with the inventory of septic tanks constructed within the 20-meter salvage zone in Panglao.

In its review of the case, the DENR found that Dumaluan violated the provisions of PD 1586 and meted a penalty to be paid within five days from the receipt of the resolution. According to records, Dumaluan voluntarily committed during the Dec. 15, 2005 technical conference to pay the penalty if his request for reconsideration is found to be without merit. Dumaluan had also committed that in case of failure to pay the penalty, the ECC which is pending release will be suspended or cancelled.

The records however showed that Dumaluan failed to pay the penalty imposed despite the time given to him to settle the obligation. Arranguez noted that pursuant to DENR DAO 2003-30 and section 11.2 of MC No. 01, the failure to pay the fine imposed constitute an offense “separate from the original offense that brought about the imposition of the original fine”.

l