Our Bay, In Trouble, Right Now

The water quality in Subic Bay is at an alarming condition—this seemed to be what one can reasonably conclude from the preliminary data gathered by Berkman Systems Inc (BSI). The data was presented to the SBMA Governance Committee and other stakeholders recently.

First, a backgrounder.

BSI is the company contracted by the SBMA to prepare a Programmatic Environmental Performance Report and Management Plan (PEPRMP) for the Subic Bay Freeport (SBF). According to DENR Order No. 2003-30, a PEPRMP is a “documentation of actual cumulative environmental impacts of co-located projects with proposals for expansion. The PEPRMP should also describe the effectiveness of current environmental mitigation measures and plans for performance improvement.”

The failure to secure the PEPRMP by the SBMA was one reason why the DENR, early in 2009, revoked its 2006 MOA with SBMA. The MOA previously gave SBMA the power to issue environmental permits inside the Freeport. It was originally intended to devolve certain authorities to manage and protect the environment inside the SBF.

The DENR has since taken over the enforcement of environmental laws inside the Freeport.

The preparation of the PEPRMP was bid out by the SBMA in October 2010. The scope of work included the collection of primary data such as air and water quality and flora and fauna and the determination of the environmental carrying capacity of the entire Subic Bay Freeport. The close to P7 million contract was awarded to BSI in September 2011.

The study which will run for nine months covering both wet and dry seasons already started last February 2012 and expected to be completed by October this year.

Now, the preliminary results.

BSI conducted many samplings in the rivers and the bay. Thirteen rivers around the bay, both upstream and downstream, were checked for water quality. The results are upsetting!

The level of Coliform, a bacteria commonly used as an indicator of the sanitary quality of water, is unbelievably high. As comparison, the DENR Water Quality Standard for total Coliform is 1,000 MPN/100mL (Most Probable Number of Coliform per 100 mL) whereas the average downstream Coliform level in all 13 rivers is more than 800,000 MPN/100mL!

Try to wrap your head around that number! I sure hope the preliminary data from the rivers are wrong.

Fortunately, the bay itself is big enough to disperse the Coliform flowing to it. The study showed that the average Coliform from 24 sampling stations within the bay averaged only to 65 MPN/100mL.

Our bay is still safe from Coliform and still good for swimming, at least in areas far from the river mouths. Whew!

For heavy metals, three elements—Cadmium, Lead, and Mercury—have exceeded the standards.

The Cadmium level average from the water samples from the downstream end of 13 rivers is 0.12 mg/L while the DENR Standard is 0.01. It looks too miniscule to care about until you mathematically calculate what it means—1200% beyond the standards! The average from marine water samples from 23 locations, on the other hand, is not as bad but is still 260% higher.

For Lead, the rivers’ water samples average is 0.135 mg/L compared to the 0.05 DENR standard. For marine water samples, I am happy to say that the average is better than the DENR standard.

For Mercury, the average from both the water samples from the rivers and the bay were better than the standard. But wait... the Mercury levels from sediment samples tell a different story.

Based from the NOAA-ERL standard (US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration-Effects Range Low), the average Mercury level from river sediments is 147% higher. For the marine average from the bay itself, the Mercury level from 23 sampling stations showed that it is 533% higher than NOAA-ERL’s. Ugh!

That’s not the worst of it.

Various fishes were caught from the rivers and the bay to test for toxic residues. From the rivers of Mataain, Malawaan, Binictican, and Agusuhin, seven varieties of fish were caught and tested. The standard used was Australia’s National Health and Medical Research Council‘s (NHMRC) Maximum Residue Limits (MRL) where the limit for Mercury is 0.03 mg/Kg.

Guess what the average Mercury level from fishes caught from the four rivers was? It’s 76 times above the standard! For marine fish samples, it is 51 times beyond the MRL standard. These data will need to be re-validated.

Now, what to do?

Simple: cleanup, enforce, sustain. But, this is easier said than done. The alarming levels of Coliform, Cadmium, and Mercury will be very difficult and very expensive to fix. It will require tons of money, it will require political will from LGUs around the Bay, it will require cooperation from all stakeholders.

The money part would seem to be the most difficult, but it is actually not. According to Republic Act 9275, otherwise known as the Philippine Clean Water Act of 2004, donations in support and maintenance of water quality management programs are tax-deductible and exempt from donor’s tax.

What does this mean? Well, in simple terms, you can donate part of your tax payments for the water-quality program instead. At least that’s how I understand it. And if all locators, residents, and other stakeholders would do it, we would have all the money we need, at least to start.

The political will from LGUs and cooperation from all stakeholders is another story altogether. But, that’s something up for discussion on another day.

For now, just keep in mind that our precious Subic Bay is in trouble, and we need to do something about it, soon. It is, fortunately, still safe for recreational purposes as long as you don’t go “agitating” the sediments.

Oh yeah, you’d better ask first where the fish was caught before you buy it, too.

(SBFCC Newsletter Volume 17 Issue 9)