RP24 Volume 15

REPUBUC OF THE PHIUPPINES DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS AND HIGHWAYS PROJECT MANAGEMENT OFFICE FOR IBRD Public Disclosure Authorized Co

NATIONAL ROAD IMPROVEMENT AND MANAGEMENT PROJECT - PHASE I (NRIMP-I) DETAILED ENGINEERING DESIGN AND PREPARATION OF BIDDING DOCUMENTS FOR REHABILITATION OF

SURIGAO-DAVAO COASTAL ROAD (CW-RU-1.4B)

Public Disclosure Authorized MARIHATAG-LIANGA-BAROBO SECTION

RESETTLEMENT ACTION PLAN (RAP) (Volume 216) MAIN TEXT Public Disclosure Authorized

APRIL 2002

DKATAHIRA & ENGINEERS INTERNATIONAL

Public Disclosure Authorized in association with

lialCrow HALCROW GROUP LIMITED TECHNIKS GROUP CORPORATION

DCCD ENGINEERING CORPORATION MULT14NFRA KONSULT, INC. RESETTLEMENT ACTION PLAN (RAP)

NATIONAL ROADS IMPROVEMENT AND MANAGEMENT PROGRAM PHASE I(NRIMP-1)

MARIHATAG-LIANGA-BAROBO SECrION

VOLUME I

APRIL 2002

KATAHIRA & ENGINEERS INTERNATIONAL

0; -; 9 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Volume I (Main Text) Page

Executive Summary

1. Rationale 1

2. Objectives 1

3. Methodology 2

3.1 Institutional Collaboration 2 3.2 Data and Sources 2 3.3 Population 3 3.4 Analytical Tools 3

4. Public Consultation Proceedings 3

5. Resettlement Action Plan 4

5.1 Project Description 4

5.2 The Local Government Units 6 5.2.1 Marihatag 6 5.2.2 San Agustin 7 5.2.3 Lianga 8 5.2.4 Barobo 8 5.2.5 San Francisco, Agusan del Sur 9

5.3 Socio-Economic Profile of Project Affected Families 10

5.3.1 Demography 11 5.3.2 Economy 16 5.3.3 Level of Living 17

5.4 Project Impacts 20

5.4.1 Impacts on Land 20 5.4.2 Impacts on Structures 20 5.4.3 Loss of Income 21 5.4.4 Impact on Land Improvements 21

5.5 Compensation Package 21

5.5.1 Entitlements 21 5.5.2 Affected Structures 21 5.5.3 Land Improvements in Absentee Landholdings 22 5.5.4 Compensation Matrix 22 5.5.5 Value of Land Improvements in Absentee Landholdings 31 5.5.6 Compensation Matrix for Residents PAFs 31 5.5.7 Compensation Package and RAP Implementation Cost 32 5.5.8 Total RAP Cost 34 5.5.9 RAP Cost by Municipality 34

6. Implementation Schedule 37

6.1 MOU and Establishment of Committees 37 6.2 Training-Orientation on RAP Implementation 37 6.3 Validation of RAP Report 38 6.4 Public Inforrmation Campaign 38 6.5 Finalization of the Compensation Package 38 6.6 Public Meeting/Disclosure 38 6.7 Cut-of Date 38 6.8 Payment 38 6.9 Handing Over the Site for Civil Works 38

7. Monitoring and Evaluation 39

Appendix A. Public Consultations

1. Orientation on the Resettlement Action Plan (RAP) For Surigao-Davao Coastal Road, DPWH-XTII Regional Office, Butuan City, Agusan del Sur, January 3, 2001

2. Orientation on the Resettlement Action Plan (RAP) For the Surigao-Davao Coastal Road, DPWH Tandag, Surigao del Sur, January 5, 2001

3. Public Consultation on the Resettlement Action Plan (RAP) for the Surigao-Davao Coastal Road Marihatag Municipal gym, Surigao del Sur, January 23, 2001

4. Public Consultation on the Resettlement Action Plan (RAP) for the Surigao-Davao Coastal Road Lianga Municipal Hall, Surigao del Sur January 23, 2001

Appendix B. List of PAFs and Summary of Compensation Appendix C List of Perennials

Volume II (Appendix)

Appendix D Composite Profile of Marginally Affected PARs

Appendix E Composite Profiles of Severely Affected PAFs

Appendix F Questionnaire LIST OF TABLES

Table No.

5.1 Road Length by Segment and by Type of Road, Surigao del Sur, 2001

5.2.1 Road Classification by Type of Pavement in Marihatag, Surigao del Sur, 2001

5.2.2 Road Classification by Type of Pavement in San Agustin, Surigao del Sur, 2001

5.2.3 Road Classification by Type of Pavement in Lianga, Surigao del Sur, 2001

5.2.4 Road Classification by Type of Pavement in Barobo, Surigao del Sur, 2001

5.3 Distribution by Type of Respondents and by Municipality, Surigao del Sur, 2001

5.3.1a Mean Age by Type of Respondents by Municipality, Surigao del Sur, 2001 5.3.1b Level of Educational Attainment by Municipality, Surigao del Sur, 2001

5.3.1c Distribution by Household Size and by Municipality, Surigao del Sur, 2001

5.3.1d Distribution by Household Structure and by Municipality, Surigao del Sur, 2001

5.3.2a Primary Occupation by Municipality, Surigao del Sur, 2001

5.3.2b Mean and Median Income by Source and by Municipality, Surigao del Sur, 2001

5.3.3 Level of Amenities by Municipality, Surigao del Sur, 2001

5.4 Extent of Impact on Structures by Municipality, Surigao del Sur, 2001

5.5.1 Compensation Entitlement Matrix

5.5.2 Compensation Package for Resident PAFs by UJse of Structure and other Entitlements, RAP, Surigao del Sur, 2001 5.5.3a Estimated Compensation Package for Marginally Affected Structures by Municipality, Surigao del Sur, 2001

5.5.3b Estimated Compensation Package for Severely Affected Structures by Municipality, Surigao del Sur, 2001

5.5.3c Estimated Compensation Package for Crop Improvements by Municipality, Surigao del Sur, 2001

6 RAP Implementation Schedule by Activity, Surigao del Sur, 2001 NRIMP-RAP: Marihatag-Lzanga-BaroboRoad

Resettlement Action Plan: Marihatag-Lianga-Barabo Road

Executive Summary

1. Development interventions such as physical infrastructures undoubtedly result in significant positive impacts to the community and the residents both in terms of economic and social activities. However, it is equally true that any development intervention results in some negative externalities. In the case of road infrastructure projects, the obvious negative consequence would be in terms of the social costs associated with environmental damage and human dislocation.

The Department has promulgated the social policy framework and specific guidelines for the imnplementation of projects under NRIMP. The framework and specific guidelines are operationalized in the Policy Framework for Land Acquisition Resettlement and Rehabilitation in general, and in the principles outlined for the Resettlement Action Plan (RAP), in particular. The said framework is anchored on the philosophy that the adverse impact of NRIMP should be avoided, minimized and/or mitigated to ensure that the Project Affected Persons (Pips) will not be worse off, if not, benefit from the project. Implicit in the framework are elements of just disturbance compensation based on fair market value and replacement cost, participatory process through local consultations, and intemal/external monitoring to ensure proper and effective implementation of the projects. In order to operationalize the, policies and principles outlined earlier, it is necessary to conduct rigorous and systematic assessment of the project areas based on acceptable standards in research methods and analysis.

2. In general, the objective of the RAP is to assess the extent of disturbance that NRIMP project will cause to local settlers and to provide the structure for RAP including the logistical requirements for implementation. Specifically, the objectives of RAP include: to set up a process to allow for public consultations with PAPs on the NRIMP projects; to determine the number and geographically locate the PAPs and assess the extent of disturbance; to estimate, based on current market value and replacement cost, the disturbance compensation; to provide the operational mechanisms for timely RAP implementation including total budgetary allocations; and to formulate the terms of reference for intemal and external monitoring of RAP implementation.

3. RAP preparation and implementation is designed as a collaborative effort among three key institutions, DPWH, the LGUs, and the consulting firm. To ensure smooth implementation and effective coordination among these institutions, a series of orientation and public consultations were organized.

The basic inputs for RAP preparation include primary and secondary data. Secondary data about the overall social and economic situation obtaining in the communities along the project sites were generated through municipal documents. Further, secondary data were also generated pertaining to j1 NRIMP-RAP Marihatag-Lianga-BaroboRoad

assessed values of land improvement including structures and productive crops. Secondary data pertaining to the technical description of the project design were used in the linear acquisition and mapping. The determnination of the compensation matrix for each of the affected households and the total compensation package is fairly straight forward. Valuation of structures affected by the Project was based on the concept of Replacement Cost. Values were determined based on the estimated quantity of materials needed to put up a structure similar to the one that will be demolished due to the Project and monetized using the current prices of materials as per records of the District Engineer's Office. Similarly, valuation of agricultural and other biological land improvements were based on the assessed value provided for by the District Engineer's Office. In special cases where additional entitlements were required, valuation schemes based on the principles outlined in the LARR Policy were adopted.

4. To ensure that the implementation of RAP will be done smoothly, it was embodied in the policy framework of NRIMP to undergo a series of public consultation. The public consultation was done at two levels. The consultation process was done at the municipal level and at the barangay level.

5. The Marihatag-Lianga-Barobo Road segment under NRIMP I is part of the long term development of the Surigao-Davao Coastal Road. However; for Phase I of NRIMP, the Surigao Sur Contract Package is only one of the three which includes Bacuag - Claver Road in Surigao del Norte and Mati-Manay in Davao Oriental.

The Marihatag-Lianga-Barobo-San Francisco road section comprises of three segments stretching to about 75.7 kilometers. Marihatag-Lianga segment stretches for about 40.3 kilometers and is mainly paved with gravel (29.8 km) and PCC (10.5 km). About 16.5 kilometers of the gravel pavement are in good or fair condition whiles the remaining 13.3. kilometers are in either bad or very bad condition. A higher proportion (65%) of the PCC pavement is still in either good or fair condition while the remaining portion is either in bad or very bad shape.

The shortest segment of the Project is along Lianga-Barobo route stretching to roughly 15.2 kilometers. Except for at least fair-conditioned PCC pavement across 3.7 kilometers, the entire segment is paved with gravel where the condition ranges from bad to very bad.

The entire length (20.2 kma) of the Barobo-San Francisco segment is paved with PCC by locally funded project. The entire stretch is only about 6.1 meters wide which is short of the standard 6.7 meters. The improvement of the section would mainly be road widening. Hence, this section originally included in the project was subsequently removed from implementation. Deletion of this section from the project remarkably reduces the number of PAFs.

The design of the proposed civil works across all the two road segments, in general follow, the old road center line. Re-alignments were minor; hence the NRIMP-RAP Marrhatag-Ltanga-BaroboRoad iii

expected impact of the construction will fall within the established road right of way (ROW). There will be no land acquisitions in any of the three segments.

6. Across the entire stretch, from Marihatag to Barobo, the modal ethnic origin of the PAFs is Bisaya which accounts for 51.5 percent. The next significant (46.6%) group is categorized as others and this group generally refers to the ethno-linguistic affiliation indigenous to the area which is "Kamayo". These two groups account for practically all of the respondents (98.1%).

While the respondents can be characterized as relatively young, the level of education is very low. The modal level of educational attainment is high school graduate where the proportion is estimated at 27.7 percent. But this is exactly same as those whose level of education is elementary graduate. Further, in cumulative terms, close to 60 percent of the respondents failed to complete high school education.

The modal household size is about 6. About half of the respondents (50.6%) cluster about the household sizes ranging from 4 to 6. At the lower end, there are about 12 percent whose household size is between 2 and 3 and about 20 percent has household sizes ranging from 8 to 10. At the extremes, one household have only one member and four have 11 family members.

7. The modal primary occupation among the household respondents is business operations. However, this statistic has to be taken in proper perspective considering the fact that most of these business operations are ordinary sari- sari stores. About 25.3 percent of the respondents are engaged in business operations.

However, a considerable proportion of the PAFs are still engaged in the production of traditional agricultural crops (41.0%). Their places of residence are along the highway, but their farms are, most often than not, in the areas away from the highway.

8. The project design for the entire Marihatag-Lianga-Barobo section of NRIM- Phase I generally followed the center line of the existing road pavements. There were a few cases where realignments were made; however, these realignments are within the existing Right of Way (ROW) as established by the District Engineer's Office in Tandag Surigao del Sur. Hence, there are no land acquisitions in this particular section of the road improvement project

Of the total 127 structures, about 28 will be severely affected and 103 will be marginally affected.

The most common use of the structures affected is residential. Structures used both for residential and commercial purposes are also fairly common comprising about 59.1 percent of those affected by the project, Also affected by the project are a considerable number of commercial structures, public structures and utilities, and in addition, other structures such as churches and fences. NRIMP-RAP: Marihatag-Lianga-BaroboRoad iv

In some cases, particularly if the structures are used for commercial purposes, income loss will also be a significant consequence of the road improvement projects. The proportion of the structures used fully or partially for commercial purposes will provide an indicative extent of the income loss. Based on the LARR policy, income loss is estimated on the basis of foregone earnings of the commercial establishment during the construction period not exceeding the equivalent income for thirty days.

Within the area of affected structures particularly those which are residential, there are agricultural improvements that will be affected by the project. The most common crops are coconuts and fruit trees. However, the bulk of the disturbance on agricultural crop improvements are along the less settled areas of the road where lands are cultivated but the farmers are non-residents in that specific area. In such cases, the census was done to merely locate the specific crop improvements and value the crops in terms of the current prices available at the District Engineers' Office.

9. There are no land acquisitions in the Marihatag-Lianga-Barobo road improvement project. Hence, the compensation entitlements are limited, as the case maybe, to affected structures, crops and other improvements and disturbance compensations such as foregone income and subsistence allowance for PAPs.

10. The total compensation package for 103 marginally affected structures is estimated at roughly PhP997,877. This compensation package includes replacement costs to structures, crop improvements within the vicinity of the structure, and foregone earnings for structures used fully or partially for commercial purposes.

11. There are about 28 severely affected structures with an estimated total entitlements of PhP1,045,267. This package is spread across the four municipalities and by types of structures.

12. All in all, about PhP269,898 will be required to compensate for the damages to agricultural crops, forest trees and other improvements.

13. In addition to the compensation package to the PAFs, RAP implementation will entail overhead and logistical costs. This cost covers the management of the implementation process, honoraria to field personnel and committee members, maintenance and operating expenses and financial administration, among others.

14. The following is the summary of the total estimated cost of the RAP including the cost of implementation:

Compensation Package

Marginally Affected Structures PhP 977,877 NRIMP-RAP Marihatag-Lianga-BaroboRoad v

Severely Affected Structures PhP 1,045,967

Impact on Improvements PhP 269,898

Management Cost - PhP 127,430.64

Price Contingencies PhP 318,576.60

External Monitoring and Post-Implementation Evaluation $2,000

Total PhP 2,569,851.24 and, $2,000

As summarized, the total cost of the RAP is PhP and USD2,000.

15. The underlying principle of the LARR Policy Framework, in general, and the RAP in particular, is to provide mitigating measures to at least ensure that the PAFs will not be worse off as a consequence of the road improvement project. It is for this reason that the survey instrument was designed to capture the critical aspects of the PAFs social and economic conditions to provide the benchmark for future assessments in the context of monitoring and evaluation. ANPIM,P-R P - D-i4A_[iXA[2thTA NRIMP-RAP: Marrhatag-Lwanga--BaroboRoad 2

Specifically, the objectives of RAP include:

2.1. to set up a process to allow for public consultations with PAPs on the NRIMP projects;

2.2. to determine the number and geographically locate the PAPs and assess the extent of disturbance;

2.3. to estimate, based on current market value and replacement cost, the disturbance compensation;

2.4. to provide the operational mechanisms for timely RAP implementation including total budgetary allocations; and

2.5. to formnulate the terms of reference for internal and external monitoring of RAP implementation.

3. METHODOLOGY

3.1. Institutional Collaboration

RAP preparation and implementation was designed as a collaborative effort among three key institutions, DPWHI, the LGUs, and the consulting firm. To ensure smooth implementation and effective coordination among these institutions, a series of orientation and public consultations were organized.

On the one hand, orientation programs were organized to enable DPWHI and LGU staff members who will be involved in RAP preparation and imnplementation to appreciate the philosophy and principles behind the RAP. On the other hand, public consultations were designed to inform settlers along the sites about the project and the expected consequences to the community and the households.

3.2. Data and Sources

The basic inputs for RAP preparation include primary and secondary data. Secondary data about the overall social and economic situation obtaining in the communities along the project sites were generated through municipal documents. Further, secondary data were also generated pertaining to assessed values of land improvement including structures and productive crops. Secondary data pertaining to the technical description of the project design were used in the linear acquisition and mapping.

Primary data were also generated through actual Project Affected Persons (PAPs) and key-informants. The field work was conducted from January to February 2001. Attributes of PAPs at the household level were generated through the administration of a structured survey instrument and through complete enumeration of the identified PAPs. 3 NRIMP-RAP. Marihatag-Lianga-BaroboRoad

For instance, technical Critical primary data were also solicited from key-informants. of Project Affected Families (PAFs) information was required to determine the number limits were solicited from the and the extent of disturbance. Right of Way (ROW) Office. appropriate key-informants at the District Engineer's

3.3. Population no choice but to have a complete Because of the nature of the problem, there was structures and improvements within enumeration of all affected population including all the construction limit of the project design.

3.4. Analytical Tools perspective, there was need to In order to put the Resettlement Action Plan in proper This can be done by employing characterize the communities affected by the project. and primary data pertaining to the descriptive statistical analysis of both secondary involved the use of the standard respective communities. Specifically, the analysis measures of central tendencies, dispersions and distributions. each of the affected households and The determination of the compensation matrix for forward. Valuation of structures the total compensation package was fairly straight of Replacement Cost. Values were affected by the Project was based on the concept needed to put up a structure determined based on the estimated quantity of materials the Project and monetized using the similar to the one that will be demolished due to Engineer's Office. Similarly, current prices of materials as per records of the District improvements were based on the valuation of agricultural and other biological land Office. In special cases where assessed value provided for by the District Engineer's based on the principles outlined additional entitlements were required, valuation schemes in the LARR Policy were adopted. actual values was accomplished by The mechanical routine of generating summary of using standard application software. simple algorithmic instructions for the computers determined by employing simple The cost component of RAP implementation was budget planning.

4. PUBLIC CONSULTATION PROCEEDINGS smoothly, it was embodied in the To ensure that the implementation of RAP will be done consultation. The public policy framework of NRIMP to undergo a series of public level and at the Barangay level. consultation was done at two levels. i.e. at the municipal stage of the RAP preparation. Two orientation meetings were conducted at the earlier The first was conducted at the Both meetings were facilitated by the Chief of EIAPO. NRIMP-RAP: Marihatag-Lianga-BaroboRoad 4

DPWH CARAGA Regional Office in Butuan City and the second was at the Surigao del Sur District Engineer's Office in Tandag. A series of public consultations followed. Local government officials from the affected Barangays and their respective municipal officials were invited to a public consultation. In Surigao del Sur, two public consultations conducted were facilitated by the Consultant. The first consultation was conducted in Marihatag Surigao del Sur and the second was in Lianga, Surigao del Sur.

Appendix A outlines the highlights of the proceedings in both orientation meeting and public consultations. The orientation meetings were basically centered on the introduction of NRIMP and the LARR Policy Framework because the audience was the implementers of RAP. Consequently, most of the discussions clustered about issues relating to the role of the DPWH Regional and District staff members. In contrast, because the audience of the public consultations was the potential PAFs, issues revolved around compensation and entitlements.

5. RESETTLEMENT ACTION PLAN

5.1. Project Description

The Marihatag-Barobo-San Francisco Road segment under NRIMP I is part of the long- term development of the Surigao-Davao Coastal Road. However, for Phase I of NRIMP, the Surigao Sur Contract Package is only one of the three which includes Bacuag - Claver Road in Surigao del Norte and Mati-Manay in Davao Oriental.

Figure 5.1. Marihatag-Barobo-San Francisco road section of NRIMP - I, Surigao del Sur, 2001. NRIMP-RAP: Marihatag-Lianga-BaroboRoad 5

The Marihatag-Barobo-San Francisco road section comprises of three segments stretching to about 75.7 kilometers. Table 5.1 outlines the specific conditions obtaining in each of the segments.

Table 5.1. Road length by segment and by type of road, Surigao del Sur, 2001.

Segment ~~~~~~~Lengthby Type Total Segment ~ Condition IL-ngth Gravel Earth

______n_g______... I --j7.-.l...... -.. . Y.7 .-17..p.-7..---v.

-~- impassable _ _ _ _ f i j

______G ood/F i ~ 3.7 ~~13.

- - jIMP assable

Barobo - San Ba/.Bd 1 0.2 0

Francisco *--

Totu l ..... --'I , 4.- 2...... j'-

Marihatag-Barobo segiment stretches for about 40.3 kilometers and is mainly paved with gravel (29.8 Ian) and PCC (10.5 kmn). About 16.5 kilometers of the gravel pavement are in good or fair condition whiles the remaining 13.3. kilometers are in either bad or very bad condition. A higher proportion (65%) of the PCC pavement is still in either good or fair condition while the remaining portion is either in bad or very bad shape.

The shortest segment of the Project is along Lianga-Barobo route stretching to roughly 15.2 kilometers. Except for at least fair-conditioned PCC pavement across 3.7 kilometers, the entire segment is paved with gravel where the condition ranges from bad to very bad.

The entire stretch (20.2 kmn) of the Barobo-San Francisco segment had been paved with PCC by the locally funded project and subsequently removed from NRIMP Project -in February 2002. Therefore, total road length of this road section has shortened to 55.5 km and corresponding number of ]PAFs also reduced from the originally surveyed result. NRIMP-RAP: Marzhatag-Lianga-BaroboRoad 6

The design of the proposed civil works across all three road segmients, in general follow the old road center line. Re-alignments were minor; hence the expected impact of the construction will fall within the established road right of way (ROW). There will be no land acquisitions in any of the three segments.

5.2. The Local Government Units

5.2.1. Marihatag

The Marihatag-Barobo-San Francisco road improvement project actually traverses the five municipalities of Marihatag, San Agustin, Lianga, Barobo in Surigao del Sur and San Francisco, Agusan del Sur.

Marihatag, Surigao del Sur, is a relatively poor municipality whose residents mainly derive income from agricultural enterprises. It consists of 12 barangays spread across 342 square kilometers of land area. Seven of the 12 barangays are coastal; however, these barangays account for only about 21 percent of the total land area. The remainder is accounted for by the 5 in-land barangays.

The level of physical Table 5.2.1. Road classification by type of pavement in infrastructure investment in Marihatag, Surigao del Sur, 2001. Marihatag is very minimal. The total road length is only Classification Length Pavement about 51.17 kilometers Concrete Earth Gravel (Table 5.2.1.). Expressed National 15.71 l 15.71 in density (the ratio of road Provincial 12.0 1 12.0 0.90 length to total land area), the Barangay 18.35 16.00 level is only about 150 Total 51.17 4.21 | 31.25 15.71 meters per square kilometer l of land area. Source: MPDO, Marihatag, Surigao del Sur.

The picture is more dismal if the density is examined by classification of pavement. National road segments are paved only with gravel and the density is very low at 45 meters per square kilometer.

The total road length paved with earth, stretches across provincial (12 km) and barangay (16 km) roads which, in terms of density, is roughly 90 meters per square kilometer. Concrete pavement is only about 4.21 kilometers along municipal roads. In terms of density, this translates to only 12 meters per square kilometer of area.

The road improvement project starts at station 1350+065, about a kilometer south of the town proper. Since most of the barangays in Marihatag are in-land, the Project affects only three barangays, namely, Arorogan, Antipolo and Amontay. NRIMP-RAP: Marihatag-Lianga-BaroboRoad 7

5.2.2 San Agustin

San Agustin, Surigao del Sur is the adjacent town south of Marihatag. Like Marihatag, the bulk of the land area is characterized as forests. However, most of the residents are still dependent on agriculture. The estimated total population (1995) is about 13,700 in an area of about 277 square kilometers.

The municipality is composed of thirteen barangays spread across 5,449 hectares (54.4 kilometers square) or roughly 20 percent of the total land area. The remaining 80 percent are forest lands. However, of the thirteen barangays, there are only 6 that are affected by the road improvement project: Otieza, Sto. Niiio, Buatong, Salvacion, Buhisan, and Gata.

Relative to the town of Table 5.2.2. Road classification by type of pavement in San Marnhatag, San Agustin l Agustin, Surigao del Sur, 2001. better off in terms of the , overall attributes of its road infrastructures. The Classification Length Pavement total road length is about Concrete Earth Gravel 58.8 kilometers. While its National 17.600 1.000 17.6 concrete pavement is only Provincial 3.600 3.6 concretepavement Municipal 6.570 1.000 ____ 5.57 about 2 kilometers, the Barangay 31.065 7.095 23.970 gravel road is relatively Total 58.835 2.000 7.095 49.740 extensive with pavement of about 49.7 kilometers. At the same time, the length of earth pavement is only about 7 kilometers.

In density terms, the total road network translates to about 212 meters per square kilometer. For gravel road pavement, the density is about 179 meters per square kilometer. The length of concrete pavement, in density terms, translates into an insignificant 7 meters per square kilometer.

Six of the thirteen barangay in San Agustin are being traversed by the national road network section which is under the proposed road improvement project including Otieza, Santo Nino, Buatong, Salvacion, Buhisan, and Gata.

These six barangays account for about 10.74 percent of the total land area. Considering that the total land area covered by the barangays is only 20 percent of the total land area of the municipality, then practically, the six barangays cover about half of the land area allocated for all the political units in the municipality. NRIMP-RAP: Marzhatag-Lianga-BaroboRoad 8

5.2.3 Lianga

Geographically, Lianga is situated at the middle of the of the entire Surigao del Sur province. In 1997, the total population of the municipality was about 30,814 in a total land area of roughly 25,330 hectares or 253 square kilometers.

Like the rest of the other municipalities in Surigao del Sur, Lianga is predominantly agricultural. More than half (57%) of the total land area is devoted to the production of traditional and subsistence agricultural crops. There is no established commercial production of high value crops, livestock and poultry.

The total road length and quality, compared to the Table 5.2.3. Road classification by type of pavement in Lianga, other municipalities in the Surigao del Sur, 2001. north, are relatively better. The types of pavement are Pavement mainly gravel (92 km) and Classification Length Concrete Earth Gravel concrete (9 km) and the total National 25.00 4.00 21.00 road length is high at about Provincial 4.20 4.20 101 kilometers. Municipal 14.80 5.00 9.80 Barangay 5.70 57.00 Hence, there are about 400 Total 101.00 9.00 92.00 meters of paved road (either concrete or gravel) per square kilometer area in the entire municipality of Lianga: 363 meters of gravel road and about 35 meters of concrete pavement. I

Among the towns affected by the road improvement project, Lianga has the longest stretch along the coastline; hence, by characterization of the Surigao-Davao coastal road, the town has the highest number of affected barangays. Out of the thirteen barangays in the entire municipality, nine will be affected which covers Anibongan, Banahao, Baucawe, Diatagon, Ganayon, Manyayay, Payasan, San Isidro, and St. Christine.

5.2.4 Barobo

In terms of the government units, the municipality of Barobo hosts the largest number. While the total land area of the town is only about 23,300 hectares, even lower than that of Marihatag and that of Lianga, the number of barangays is 21. The total number of residents is about 35,550 (1997) in a total land area of roughly 23,300 hectares or 233 square kilometers.

About three quarters of the total land area are devoted to agricultural crop production, which implies that the municipality is still primarily agricultural. Specifically, most of the agricultural lands (86%) are cultivated for the production of coconut. NRIMP-RAP: Manhatag-Lianga-BaroboRoad 9

Among the four municipalities in Surigao del Table 5.2.4. Road classification by type of pavement in Barobo, Sur being traversed by the Surigao del Sur, 2001. road improvement project, Barobo has the highest road Pavement length and a relatively lower Classification Length Concrete Earth Gravel total land area except in National 22.500 15.100 7.400 relation to the municipality Provincial 38.200 .100 34.300 of Lianga. The total road Municipal 7.405 .527 4.583 length is about 225 Barangay 157.350 .701 150.789 kloenthrs Thsi oe Total 225.455 16.428 197.072 kilometers. This iS more than twice the road length of Lianga and four times the road lengths of both Marihatag and San Agustin. The concrete pavement is roughly 16.5 kilometers and the gravel road network is quite extensive at a length of about 197 kilometers.

The total road length translates to about 967 meters per square kilometer of land area: 70 meters of concrete pavement and 845 meters of gravel road. It is also worth noting that of the extensive read network in the municipality, there are no earth road pavements.

Only 5 of the 21 barangays in the municipality are affected by the road improvement project, namely Wakat, Amaga, Tambis, Bahi, and Camp Bagang.

5.2.5. San Francisco, Agusan del Sur

The Barobo-San Francisco segment of the road improvement plan for the Surigao-Davao Coastal Road is already paved with concrete. However, because the contract package extends to the rotunda of the town proper, the expected PAFs would still be significant. This is despite the fact that only three barangays are covered in the road improvement project.

Relative to the municipalities in Surigao del Sur, San Francisco is a developed town. While the main source of income among residents is still agricultural production, a significant sector of the community is engaged in the production of high value commercial crops such as rubber, banana, and palm oil. Further, a significant contribution to the economy is derived from enterprises involving processing and manufacturing which are clear indications of a vibrant and progressive economic environment. Furthermore, the municipality is a host to about a dozen "pawnshops" which, again, are indicators of the fact that the general level of economic activity in the municipality is already high.

The total- population of the municipality is about 49,200 (estimated based on the 1990 Census of Population) spread across 27 barangays. While the road improvement project covers only the three barangays along the national road leading to Barobo, the significance of the impact is quite substantial because the proposed improvement NRIMP-RAP- Marihatag-Lianga-BaroboRoad 10

includes widening and full-depth reconstruction of most of the existing concrete pavements, and the pavement toward the rotunda is, in both sides, already laden with structures.

5.3 Socio-Economic Profile of Project Affected Families

Table 5.3. Distribution by type of respondents and by municipality, Surigao del Sur, 2001.

Municipality

Respondent Marihatag San Lianga Barobo San Total Augustin Francisc 0 Husband 7 9 17 1 N/A 34 (5 5%) (7.1%) (13.4%) (0.8%) (26.8%) Spouse 5 11 23 0 N/A 39 (3.9%) (8.7%) (18.1%) (0.0%) (30.7%) Child 2 1 3 0 N/A 6 (1.6%) (0.8%) (2.4%) (0.0%) (4 7%) Parents 0 1 2 0 N/A 3 (0.0%) (0.8%) (1.6%) (0.0%) (2.4%) Other 1 0 0 0 N/A 1 (0.8%) (0.0%) (0.07%) (0.0%) (0.8%) Not 9 9 26 0 N/A 44 Applicable (7.1%) (7.1%) (20.5%) (0.0%) (34.6%) Total 24 31 71 1 0 127 (18.9%) (24.4%) (55.9%) (0.8%) (100.0%7o)

The total number of affected structures is 127. However, some affected structures are either public or private whose owners are non-residents; hence, there are no valid types of respondents. Among 127 affected structures 24 structures are public utilities and 20 are non-residents. Therefore, the total number of households with valid type of respondents is 83.

Majority (30.7%) of the respondents are the female spouses while 26.8 percent are the husbands. The rest of the other respondents are spread across children, parents, and sometimes other members of the extended family.

The three municipalities of Lianga, San Augustin, and Marihatag account for the majority (99.2%) of the PAFs with proportions of about 55.9, 24.4 and 18.9 percent respectively. The remainder is shared by Marihatag (0.8%). NRIMP-RAP. Marihatag-Lianga-BaroboRoad 11

5.3.1. Demography

As raised in the previous section, there are only 83 cases with valid types of respondents and hence, the only cases where socio-economic characterization is possible. In most characterization, therefore, the number of cases with valid responses is 83.

Across the entire stretch, from Marihatag to Barobo, the modal ethnic origin of the PAFs is Bisaya which accounts for 51.5 percent. The next significant (46.6%) group is categorized as others and this group generally refers to the ethno-linguistic affiliation indigenous to the area which is "Kamayo". These two groups account for practically all of the respondents (98.1%).

The Project Affected Families (PAFs) are relatively young. The mean age of the male household heads is 44.6 years while the female spouses have the same average age of 44.6 years, too. Across all municipalities, the average age is only about 46.7 years, composing of 46.4 in Marihatag, 46.5 in San Augustin, 46.2 in Lianga, and 76.0 in Barobo (Table 5.3.1a).

Table 5.3.la. Mean age by type of respondent by municipality, Surigao del Sur, 2001 Municipality

Respondent Marihatag San Lianga Barobo San Total Augustin Francisco

Husband N 7 9 17 1 N/A 34 Mean 453 44.9 44.3 76.0 44.6 Spouse N 5 11 23 0 N/A 39 Mean 42.2 46.7 44.1 44.6 Child N 2 1 3 0 N/A 6 Mean 64.0 33.0 40.0 46.8 Parents N 0 1 2 0 N/A 3 Mean 73.0 66.5 68.6 Other N 1 0 0 0 N/A 1 Mean 40.0 40.0 Total N 15 22 45 1 83 Mean 46.4 46.5 46.2 76.0 46.7

While the project affected families (PAFs) can be characterized as relatively young, the level of education is very low. The modal level of educational attainment is high school graduate and elementary graduate where the proportion is estimated at 27.7 percent (Table 5.3.1.b). In cumulative terms, close to 60 percent of the respondents failed to complete high school education. NRIMP-RAP Marlhatag-Lianga-BaroboRoad 12

Table 5.3.1b. Educational attainment of the respondents by municipality, Surigao del Sur, 2001 Municipality Man hatag San Lianga Barobo San Total Respondent Augustin Francisco

Elementary. 1 4 7 N/A 12 Undergraduate 1.2% 4.8% 8 4% 14.5% Elementary. 8 6 9 N/A 23 Graduate 9.6% 7.2% 10 8% 27.7% High School 2 5 6 1 N/A 14 Undergraduate 2.4% 6.0% 7.2% 12% 16.9% High School 2 6 15 N/A 23 Graduate. 2.4% 7.2% 18.1% 27.7% Vocational 0 N/A 0 Undergraduate. Vocational 0 N/A 0 Graduate. College 2 4 N/A 6 Undergraduate 2.4% 4.8%8 7.2% College 1 2 N/A 3 Graduate. 1.2% 2.4% 3.6% None. 2 N/A 2 2.4% 2.4% Total 15 22 45 1 N/A 83 18.1% 26.5% 54.2% 1.2% 100.0%

Table 5.3.1c indicates the household size across the various municipalities covered by the road improvement project. The modal household size is about 6. About half of the respondents (50.6%) cluster about the household sizes ranging from 4 to 6. At the lower end, there are about 12 percent whose household size is between 2 and 3 and about 20 percent with household sizes ranging from 8 to 10, at the higher end. At the extremes, one household has only one member while four have 11 family members.

Majority of the respondents can be characterized to be in a nuclear household, that is, all the members of the family are direct dependents of the couple. Across all municipalities, nuclear households account for 57.8 percent (Table 5.3.1d). However, a significant proportion (39.8%) of the total household respondents is extended. This implies that as the household matures, members are unable to establish households of their own and are therefore forced to live in their parents' or relatives' households. This is often associated with the lack of economic opportunities in the community. NRIMP-RAP: Marnhatag-Lianga-BaroboRoad 13

Table 5.3.1c. Distribution by household size and by municipality, Surigao del Sur, 2001 Municipality

Household Marihatag San Augustin Lianga Barobo San Francisco Total Size

1 0 0 1 0 N/A 1 1.2% 1.2%

2 1 2 3 1 N/A 7 1.2% 2.4% 3.6% 1.2% 8.4%

3 0 1 2 0 N/A 3 1.2% 2.4% 3.6%

4 2 2 4 0 N/A 8 2.4% 2.4% 4.8% 9.6%

5 2 2 8 0 N/A 12 2.4% 2.4% 9.6% 14.5%

6 4 7 11 0 N/A 22 4.8% 8.4% 13.3% 26.5%

7 3 3 4 0 N/A 10 3.6% 3.6% 4.8% 12.0%

8 1 2 5 0 N/A 8 1.2% 2.4% 6.0% 9.6%

9 2 2 4 0 N/A 8 2.4% 2.4% 4.8% 9.6%

10 0 0 0 0 N/A 0

11 0 1 3 0 N/A 4 1.2% 4.8%

12 0 0 0 0 N/A 0

Total 15 22 45 1 0 83 18.1% 26.5% 54.2% 1.2% 100.0% NRIMP-RAP: MarLhatag-Lianga-BaroboRoad 14

Table 5.3.1d. Distribution by household structure and by municipality, Surigao del Sur, 2001. Municipality Single Nuclear Extended Joint Total

Marihatag 0 8 7 0 15 9.6% 8.4% 18.1%

San Augustin 0 14 8 0 22 16.9% 9.6% 26.5% Lianga 2 25 18 0 45 2.4% 30.1% 21.7% 54% Barobo 0 1 0 0 1 1.2% 1.2% San Francisco N/A N/A N/A N/A 0

Total 2 48 33 0 83 2.4% 57.8% 39.8% 100.0%

Table 5.3.1e shows the number of affected households including tenants by locality, ethnicity, and severity of the impact. The major ethno-linguistic group is Bisaya (51.5 %), followed by Kamayo (46.6 %). The number of severely PAFs of Bisaya and Kamayo is 14 an-d 13 respectively.

Many Bisayas have migrated to Mindanao island. Kamayo are linguistically related to the Tausug and Butuanon, and belong to the Meso and Central Philippine family of languages. There are four PAFs belonging to other linguistic groups.

Bisaya is not Indigenous People. Kamayo is registered Indigenous People in the Philippines. The population of Kamayo in the area is estimated at 122,350 in 1994; 115,850 in Surigao del Sur, 6,500 in Agusan del Norte. Christianity is the religion of Kamayo. Kamayo had migrated from surrounding areas of Davao to Surigao del Sur, and Augsan del Norte in the 18 th centuries.

Original Kamayo has its own dialect, however the Kamayo PAPs along the Project Road is not classified as Indigenous People since they have been mingled with Bisayas and not compose of homogeneous societies. NRIMP-RAP: Marnhatag-Lianga-BaroboRoad 15

Table 5.3.1e Number of Affected Household by Ethnicity, Locality, and Severity No. of Project Affected Families (PAFs) Municipality Barangay Visaya Kamayo Others No. of PAFs Marginal Severe Marginal Severe Marginal Severe Marihatag Arorogan 1 0 7 0 0 0 8 Antipolo 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 Amontay 5 2 2 1 0 0 10 Otieza 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 San Augustin 0 Buhisan 0 0 4 0 0 Buatong 0 4 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 Salvacion 1 1 1 0 0 0 3 Gata 1 0 9 4 0 0 14 Campanubay 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lianga Manyayay 5 0 0 0 0 1 Diatagon 6 4 2 0 0 0 St. Christine 6 5 0 0 1 0 0 6 Ganayon 2 7 1 3 0 0 13 Banahaw 3 0 4 1 1 0 9 Payasan 6 0 2 0 0 0 Baucawe 8 1 0 2 0 0 0 3 Anibongan 4 2 2 0 0 0 8 Barobo Wakat ______I 0 0 0 Total . 39 1 14 35 13 1 1 103 NRIMP-RAP: Marihatag-Lianga-BaroboRoad 16

5.3.2 Economy

The modal primary occupation among the household respondents is farming. Project Affected Families (PAFs) who reported to engage in farming comprise about 41.0 percent (Table 5.3.2a). Their places of residence are along the highway, but their farms are, most often than not, in the areas away from the highway.

A considerable proportion of the PAFs, though, are still engaged in business operation (25.3 %). However, this statistic has to be taken in proper perspective considering the fact that most of these business operations are ordinary sari-sari stores.

Apparently, business and farming account for the primary occupation of majority of the PAFs. The rest are distributed across other occupations ranging from housekeeping (9.6%) to hired work, either farm work or skilled/unskilled labor (6.0%). What is interesting to note is the statistic indicating that about 9.6 percent of the respondents are without any form of primary occupation.

Table 5.3.2a. Primary occupation by municipality, Surigao del Sur, 2001. Municipality

Respondent Manhatag San Lianga Barobo San Francisco Total Augustin

Farmer 12 6 16 0 N/A 34 14.5% 6 0% 19.3% 41 0% Hired Farm - 0 0 0 N/A Workers Sklled 0 1 2 0 N/A 3 Labor 1.2% 2.4% 3 6% Unskilled 0 0 2 0 N/A 2 Labor 2 4% 2.4% Professional 0 1 0 0 N/A 1 Employee 1.2% Professional 0 0 0 0 N/A 0 Practice Business 1 5 15 0 N/A 21 Operator 6 0% 25 3% House 2 2 4 0 N/A 8 Keeper 2.4% 2.4% 9 6% Hunter/ 0 0 0 0 N/A 0 Gatherer OFW 0 0 0 0 N/A 0

Others 0 3 3 0 N/A 6 3.6% 36% 60% None 0 4 3 1 N/A 8 4.8% 3.6% 1.2% 9 6% Total 15 22 45 1 0 83 18.1% 26.5% 54.2% 12% 1000% NRIMP-RAP Marihatag-Lianga-BaroboRoad 17

Given the various primary occupations outlined above, in Table 5.3.2b. Mean and median annual income by source and terms of the annual total by municipality, Surigao del Sur, 2001. income, PAFs from San Marihatag San Lianga Augustin, on the average, I Augustin earned the highest total income Farm Income estimated at PhP91,992. The Mean 12,864 10,310 4,917 other municipalities have Median 12,864 3,050 0 estimated average total income Non-Farm Income ranging from as low as Median 9,360 83,682 20,610 PhP22,224 in Marihatag to Total Income about PhP34,091 in Lianga. Mean 22,224 91,992 34,091 Median 23,520 45,863 20,610 It is interesting to note that I while the average total income among the PAFs is relatively high, the median across the various sources is consistently lower than the mean which indicates a certain degree of in- equality. Marihatag is an exception because in said municipality, the median which is estimated at about PhP23,520 is higher than the mean. While this municipality is characterized as more egalitarian, it also belongs to the poorer municipalities.

For instance, while the average total income is about PhP91,992, the median is only PhP45,863. This implies that half of the total PAFs have incomes of, at most, only PhP45,863. This pattern is also true for both non-farm and farm income sources. The median non-farm income is only PhP36,500 while the mean is about PhP81,682. The scenario is worse for non farm income. The median is practically nil. This implies that half the population has zero farm income.

5.3.3. Level of Living

The modal type of dwelling among the PAFs across all municipalities is Semi-parmanent (55.5%, Table 5.3.3). Temporary dwelling account for about 32.9 percent. However, the dominance of temporary dwellings is only true to the municipalities of Lianga It must be noted that about 3.5 percent of the PAFs are living in shanties.

Almost half of total PARs have access to electricity. About 55.5 percent of the total household respondents were able to have access to electrical power. However, across municipalities, there is a glaring pattern of inequitable access. The higher percentage of PAFs with access to electrical power is only in the municipalities of San Augustine and Lianga. Very few PAFs of Marihatag has access to electricity.

Majority of the PAFs, in aggregate terms, have access to potable water through piped systems. It is also worth noting that about 14.5- percent of the PAFs source their water requirements form either rain or springs.

The modal fuel type used is wood (72.9%). LPG and charcoal is used as cooking fuel second to wood, which account 11.6%, respectively. NRIMP-RAP: Marihatag-Lianga-BaroboRoad 18

About 50 percent of the respondents are using either semi flush or flush toilet facilities. However, the proportion of those who are still using the antipolo system is still considerably high at roughly 33.2 percent. NRIMP-RAP: Marihatag-Lianga-BaroboRoad 19

Table 5.3.3. Level of amenities by municipality, Surigao del Sur, 2001.

Type of house Municipality Manhatag(%) San Augustin(%) Lianga(%) Total(%) Permanent 0.0 3.5 3.5 7.1 Semi-Permanent 14.8 25.8 14.8 55.5 Temporary 3.5 3.5 25.8 32.9 Shanty 0.0 3.5 0.0 3.5 Total 18.4 37.1 44.5 100.0

Lighting Municipality Manhatag(%) San Augustin(%) Lianga(%) Total(%) Electricity 3.5 22.3 29.7 55.5 Kerosene 14.8 11.0 14.8 40.6 Petromax 0.0 3.5 0.0 3.5 Total 18.4 37.1 44.5 100.0

Water system Municipality Marihatag(%) San Augustin(%) Lianga(%) Total(%) Rain 0.0 3.5 0.0 3.5 Spring 0.0 3.5 7.4 11.0 Dug Well 0.0 3.5 0.0 3.5 Artesian Well 3.5 0.0 3.5 7.1 Pump Well 3.5 0.0 3.5 7.1 Piped Water 11.0 25.8 29.7 66.5 Others 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total 18.4 37.1 44.5 100.0

Municipality Manhatag(%) San Augustin(%) Lianga(%) Total(%) Wood 19.1 19.1 34.7 72.9 Charcaol 0.0 4.0 7.6 11.6 LPG 0.0 7.6 4.0 11.6 Kerosene 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Others 0.0 4.0 0.0 4.0 Total 19.1 34.7 46.2 100.0

Type of house Municipality Manhatag(%) San Augustin(%) Lianga(%) Total(%) Open Pit 0.0 3.5 0.0 3.5 Antipolo 14.8 7.4 11.0 33.2 Semi Flush 0.0 22.3 22.3 44.5 Flush 0.0 3.5 0.0 3.5 None 3.5 0.0 11.0 14.5 Total 18.4 37.1 44.5 100.0 NRIMP-RAP: Marihatag-Lianga-BaroboRoad 20

5.4 Project Impacts

5.4.1. Impacts on Land

The project design for the entire Marihatag-Barobo-San Francisco section of NRIM-Phase I generally followed the center line of the existing road pavements. There were a few cases where realignments were made; however, these realignments are within the existing Right of Way (ROW) as established by the District Engineer's Office in Tandag Surigao del Sur. Hence, there are no land acquisitions in this particular section of the road improvement project.

5.4.2 Impacts on Structures

Based on the RAP Census, 127 structures will be affected by the road improvement project: 28 are structures which would be severely affected by the road improvement project and 99 will be marginally affected. The cut-off date is 13 March 2001.

In both severe and marginally affected structures, the common use are residential, commercial, and commercial/residential (structures used for both residential and commercial purposes). The other structures used as public infrastructures, public utilities and other uses such as walkways and school fences, are categorized as marginally affected.

The proportion of the three categories in the marginally affected structures is estimated at about 59.1 percent. The remaining proportion is distributed across public infrastructures and other uses. By municipality, the most number of severely affected structures_is located in Lianga with a total number of about 17 PAFs accounting for roughly 60.7 percent. San Augustin accounts for the second highest number with an estimate of about 7 PAFs. The remaining severely affected PAFs is spread across Marihatag (4).

In contrast, Lianga hosts the most number of marginally affected PAFs with an estimate of 42. Marihatag and San Augustin comes second with about 16 PAFs, respectively. Barobo has one (1) PAF. See Table 5.4. for the number of PAFs by extent of impact on structures and municipality. NRIMP-RAP: Marihatag-Lianga-BaroboRoad 21

Table 5.4. Extent of impact on structures by municipality, Surigao del Sur, 2001. i ~~~~~~~~Impact Marginal c Severe I 2 R R C2 Other Public R' R/C C' Other Public Total Infra/ Infra/ 4 Utilities4 Utilities Marihatag 6 0 1 10 4 3 0 0 n/a n/a 24 San 8 2 3 3 8 3 4 0 n/a n/a 31 Augustin Lianga 17 8 8 8 12 9 3 6 n/a n/a 71 Barobo 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 n/a n/a. San n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Francisco Total 31 11 12 21 24 15 7 6 n/a n/a 127 R=Residential Structure, RJC=Residential cum Commercial Structure, C=Commercial Structure, Public Infra/Utilities=Public Infrastructure

5.4.3 Loss of Income

In some cases, particularly if the structures are used for commercial purposes, income loss will also be a significant consequence of the road improvement projects. The proportion of structures used fully or partially for commercial purposes will provide an indicative extent of the income loss. Based on the LARR policy, income loss is estimated on the basis of foregone earnings of the commercial establishment during the construction period not exceeding the equivalent income for thirty days.

5.4.4 Impact on Land Improvements

Within the area of affected structures particularly those which are residential, there are agricultural improvements that will be affected by the project. The most common crops are coconuts and fruit trees. In cases such as these, improvements are assessed and valued using the current prices as provided by the District Engineers Office, Department of Public Works and Highways.

5.5 Compensation Package

5.5.1 Entitlements

There are no land acquisitions in the Marihatag-Barobo-San Francisco road improvement project. Hence, the compensation entitlements are limited, as the case maybe, to affected structures, crops and other improvements and disturbance compensations such as foregone income and subsistence allowance for PAFs.

5.5.2 Affected Structures

Based on the guidelines, if the total floor area affected exceeds 20 percent of the total floor area of the structure, the impact is considered severe. In such cases, the whole structure will NRIMP-RAP Marihatag-Lianga-BaroboRoad 22 be acquired and estimated for payments. However, in the implementation of the survey, field workers were given the prerogative to deviate from the rigid 20 percent cut-off to allow for special cases for considerations. For instance, it will not require 20 percent of damage for light structures and shanties to destroy the stability of the structure; hence, judgments are made at the field where even at less 20 percent, some structures were considered to be severely affected. There are also cases where mitigation measures can be suggested to spare huge and expensive structures. All structures are within the ROW as established by the DPWV. Hence, entitlements are on the basis of their being owners or tenants of structures. In this case, entitlements are patterned in the schedule outlined in Table 5.5.1.

5.5.3 Land Improvements in Absentee Landholdings

During the course of the RAP Survey, valuable land improvements along the roads were determined to be affected by the road improvement project. However, in cases where the landowners or tenants are non-settler in the area, it was deemed appropriate for practical purposes, to simply locate the specific improvement along the road section and attach the corresponding value based on the current prices as provided for by the District Engineers Office, Department of Public Works and Highways.

5.5.4 Compensation Matrix

In line with the aforementioned objectives and principles of resettlement (Chapter 3) and the legal framework (Chapter 4), the matrix below will be used in the settlement of claims for compensation for lost assets of PAPs. Unless otherwise indicated, payment of compensation and other entitlements and the extension of assistance will be given to PAP households, not individuals. NRIMP-RAP: Marzhatag-Lianga-BaroboRoad 23

Table 5.5.1. Compensation Entitlement Matrix Type of Application Entitled Person Loss Compensation Compensation Amount LI Arable Land Actual area needed Owners with full title, For the portion of the land needed: N/A by the road project tax declaration or who + Cash compensation equivalent to zonal value + 10% (AO 50) None and the remaining are covered by + Topping-up supplemental assistance equivalent to the difference land is still customary law (e.g. between the zonal value + 10% and the fair market value in the economically viable possessory rights, area as established by the independent appraiser to be hired by the usufruct) or other project acceptable proof of +Cash compensation for perennials of commercial value as ownership deternuned by the DFNR or the concerned appraisal committee +PAP will be given sufficient time to harvest crops on the subject land

PAPs without title, tax For the portion of the land needed: N/A declaration, or are not +PAP will be given sufficient time to harvest crops covered by customary +Cash compensation for perennials of commerctal value law as (e.g., possessor determined by the DENR or the concerned appraisal committee rights, usufruct) or + Financial assistance to make up for land preparation in the other acceptable proof amount of PhP150 per square meter of ownership

Remaining land Owners with full title, +Cash compensation equivalent to zonal value +10% (AO become tax 50) or, N/A declalatlon or who if feasible, 'land for land' will be provided in terms economically not of a new are covered by parcel of land of equivalent productivity, at viable (i.e., a location acceptable PAP customaty law (e.g., to PAP, and with long-term security of tenure. losing >20% of possessory rights, +Topping-up supplemental assistance equivalent to the difference land holding or usufruct) or other between the zonal value + 10% and the fair market value in the even when losing acceptable proof of area as established by the independent appraiser to be hired by the <20% but the ownership project remaining land is +Subsistence allowance of PhPI5,000 not economically +PAP will be given sufficient time to harvest viable anymore) crops +Cash wmpensation for perennials of commercial value as determined by the DENR or the concerned appraisal committee +If relocating, PAP to be provided free transportatLon +Rehabilitation assistance (skills training and other development activities) equivalent to PhPI5,000 will be provided in coordination with other government agencies if the present means of livelihood is no longer viable and the PAP will have to engage in a new income activity NRIMP-RAP: Marihatag-Lianga-Barobo Road 24

PAPs without title, tax +Financial assistance equivalent to the average annual gross declaration, are not harvest for the past 3 years but not less than PhP15,000 covered by customary +PAP will be given sufficient time to harvest crops law (e.g., possessory +Cash compensation for perennials of commercial value as rights, usufruct) or determined by the DENR or the concerned appraisal committee other acceptable proof +Financial assistance to make up for land preparation in the of ownership amount of PhP150 per square meter +If relocating, PAP to be provided free transportation +Rehabflitation assistance (skills training and other development activities) equivalent to PhP15,000 will be provided in coordination with other government agencies if the present means of livelihood is no longer viable and the PAP will have to engage in a new income activity

Agricultural lessees As per RA 6389 and EO 1035: N/A +Disturbance compensation equivalent to five times the average of the gross harvest on the land holding during the five preceding years but not less than PhP15,000. +Rehabilitation assistance (skills training and other development activities) equivalent to PhP15,000 will be provided in coordination with other government agencies if the present means of livelihood is no longer viable and the PAP will have to engage in a new income activity

Temporary use of All PAPs +Compensation to be provided for loss of income during the land period, standing crops, cost of soil restoration and damaged structures NRIMP-RAP: Marihatag-Lianga-BaroboRoad 25

Type of Application Entitled Person Compensation Compensation Amount Loss PhP 2 Residential Actual area needed Owners with full title, For the portion of the land needed N/A land and/or by the road project tax declaration or who +Cash compensation equivalent to zonal value +10% (AO 50) Commercial and the remaining are covered by +Topping-up supplemental assistance equivalent to the difference land land is still viable customary law (e.g., between the zonal value +10% and the fair market value in the for continued use possessory rights, area as established by the independent appraiser to be hired by the None usufruct) or other project acceptable proof +Cash compensation for perennials of commercial value as acceptable proof of determined by the DENR or the concerned appraisal committee ownership

Remaining Owners with full titley +Cash compensation equivalent to zonal value +10% (AO 50) or, residential or tax declaration or who if feasible, 'land for land' will be provided in terms of a new commercial land are covered by parcel of land of equivalent market value, at a location acceptable becomes not viable customary law (e.g., to PAP, and with long-term security of tenure. The replacement for continued use. possessory rights, land should be of acceptable size under zoning laws or a plot of usufruct) or other equivalent value, whichever is larger, in a nearby resettlement area acceptable proof of with adequate physical and social infrastructure. When the ownership affected holding is larger in value than the relocation plot, cash compensation will cover the difference in value. +Topping-up supplemental assistance equivalent to the difference between the zonal value +10% and the fair market value in the area as established by the independent appraiser to be hired by the project +Cash compensation for perennials of commercial value as determ'ine by the DENR or concerned appraisal committee +If relocating, PAP to be provided free transportation

Temporary use of All PAPs +Compensation to be provided for loss of income during the N/A land period, standing crops, cost of soil restoration and damaged structures

3 Main Structure, with or Owners of structure +Compensation in cash for affected portion of the structure, Structures without a building will full title or tax including the cost of restoring the remaining structure, as (e.g., house, permit, partially declaration to the land determined by the concerned appraisal committee with no house cum affected and the or those who are deduction for salvaged building materials. shop) remaining structure covered by customary +PAPs who have business affected due to partial impact on the is still viable for law (e.g., possessory structure are entitled to a subsistence allowance for the loss of 64 PAFs continued use. rights, usufruct) or income during the reconstruction period. (Such will be verified other acceptable proof and computed by the Municipal Resettlement Implementing 42 PAFs of ownership committee or RIC). NRIMP-RAP: Marihatag-Lianga-BaroboRoad 26

Owners of structures, +Compensation in cash for affected portion of the structure, R = 31PAFs including shanty including the cost of restoring the remaining structure, as Affected structure 132,784 dwellers in urban areas, determined by the concerned appraisal committee with no Income loss N/A have no title or tax deduction for salvaged building materials Relocation N/A declaration to the land +Shanty dwellers in urban areas who opt to go back to their place Rehabilitation N/A or other acceptable of origin in the province or be shifted to government relocation Improvement 3,245 proof of ownership sites will be provided free transportation Sub-total 136,029 +PAPs who have business affected due to partial impact on the R = 31 PAFs structure are entitled to a subsistence allowance for the loss of income during the reconstruction period. (Such will be verified R/C = 11 PAFs R/C = 11 PAFs and computed by the municipal Resettlement Implementing Affected structure 81,449 Committee or RIC). Income loss 51,457 +Professional squatters will not receive compensation but they can Relocation N/A collect their salvageable materials. Rehabilitation N/A Improvement 48 Sub-total 132,954

Renters (tenants) of +Given 3 months notice on the schedule of demolition R = N/A leased affected +If shifting is required, PAP is given transitional allowance structures, including equivalent to one month rent of a similar structure within the same renters of shanty area R/C = N/A dwellings in urban +For house tenants renting structures outside of, or within the areas ROW, and who have to transfer elsewhere, free transportation will be provided R = N/A +Renting shanty dwellers in urban areas who opt to go back to R/C = N/A their place of origin in the province or be shifted to government relocation sites will be provided free transportation Entire structure Owners of structures +Compensation in cash for the entire structure at replacement cost affected OR when with full title or tax as determined by the concerned appraisal committee without the remaining declaration to the land deduction for salvaged building materials. structure becomes or those who are +Inconvenience allowance of PhP10,000 per PAP. not viable for covered by customary +PAPs who have business affected due to the severe impact on the continued use, with law (e.g., possessory structure are entitled to a subsistence allowance for the loss of or without a rights, usufruct) or income during the reconstruction period. (Such will be verified building permit other acceptable proof and computed by the RIC). 22 PAFs of ownership +If relocation is necessary, free transportation will be provided NRIMP-RAP: Marihatag-Lianga-BaroboRoad 27

+Rehabilitation assistance in the form of skills training and other development activities and equivalent to PhP15,000 will be provided in coordination with other government agencies if the present means of livelihood (e.g., house cum shop) is no longer viable and the PAP will have to engage in a new income activity

Owners of structure, +Compensation in cash for the entire structure at replacement cost including shanty R 15 PAPs as determined by the concerned appraisal committee without Affected structure dwellers in urban areas, deduction for salvaged 492,281 building materials. Income loss N/A have no title or tax +Shanty dwellers in urban areas who opt to go back to their place Relocation N/A declaration to the land of origin in the province or be shifted to government relocation Rehabilitation N/A or other acceptable sites will be provided free transportation Improvement 1,134 proof of ownership +PAPs who have business affected due to the severe impact on the Sub-total 493,415 structure are entitled to a subsistence allowance for the loss of R = 15 PAFs income during the reconstruction period. (Such will be verified R/C = 7PAFs R/C = 7 PAFs and computed by the RIC). Affected structure 255,139 +If relocation is necessary, free transportation will be provided Income loss 26,100 +Rehabilitation assistance in the form of skills training and other Relocation 500 development activities and equivalent to PhP15,000 will be Rehabilitation 105,000 provided in coordination with other government agencies if the Improvement present means 167 of livelihood (e.g., house cum shop) is no longer Sub-total 386,906 viable and the PAP will have to engage in a new income activity +Professional squatters will not receive compensation but they can collect their salvageable materials NRIMP-RAP: Marihatag-Llanga-BaroboRoad 28

Typeof Application Entitled Person Compensation Loss Compensation Amount PhP Renters (tenants) of +Given 3 month notice on the schedule of demolition R = N/A leased affected +PAP is given transitional allowance equivalent to one month structures, including rent of a similar structure within the same area renters of shanty +For house tenants renting structures outside of, or within the R/C = N/A dwellings in urban ROW, and who have to transfer elsewhere, free areas transportation will be provided +Renting shanty dwellers in urban areas who opt to go back R = N/A to their place of origin in the province or be shifted to R/C = N/A government relocation sites will be provided free transportation +Rehabilitation assistance in the form of skills training and other development activities and equivalent to PhP15,000 will be provided in coordination with other government agencies if the present means of livelihood (e.g., house cum shop) is no longer viable and the PAP will have to engage in a new income activity 4 Independent Shops, with or Owners of structure +Compensation in cash for affected portion of the structure, 12 PAFs shops without building with or without full including the cost of restoring the remaining structure, as Affected structure 129,120 (structures) permit, partially title or tax declaration determined by the concerned appraisal committee with no Income loss 82,022 affected and the to the land or those deduction for salvaged building materials. Relocation N/A remaining structures who are covered by +As determined by the RIC, PAPs will be entitled to Rehabilitation N/A 18 PAFs are still viable for customary law (e.g., transitional allowance to cover for their computed income Improvement 1,190 continued use. possessory rights, loss during the demolition and reconstruction of their shops, Sub-total 212,332 usufruct) or other but not to exceed a 1 month period. 12 PAFs acceptable proof of ownership

12 PAFs NRIMP-RAP: Marihatag-Lianga-BaroboRoad 29

Renters (tenants of +As determined by the RIC, shop renters will be entitled to a N/A affected shops transitional allowance to cover for their computed income loss during the period that their business is interrupted N/A

Entire shop affected Owner of structure +Compensation in cash for the entire structUre at replacement 6 PAFs OR when the with or without full cost as determined by the concerned appraisal committee Affected structure 66,468 remaining structure title or tax declaration without deduction for salvaged building materials. Income loss 9,000 becomes not viable to the land or those +Subsistence allowance of PhP15,000 to each PAP Relocation N/A for continued use, who are covered by +Free transportation will be provided if relocating Rehabilitation 90,000 with or without a customary law (e.g., +Rehabilitation assistance in the form of skills training and Improvement 178 building permit possessory rights, other development activities and equivalent to PhP1S,000 Sub-total 165,646 usufruct) or other will be provided in coordination with other government 6 PAFs acceptable proof of agencies if the present means of livelihood is no longer viable ownership and the PAP will have to engage in a new income activity +Professional squatters will not receive compensation but 6 PAFs they can collect their salvageable materials NRIMP-RAP: Marlhatag-Lianga-Barobo Road 30

Type of Application Entitled Person Compensation - Compensation Amount Loss PhP Renters (tenants) of Given 3 month notice on the schedule of demolition N/A affected shops +As determined by the RIC, shop renters will be entitled to a transitional allowance to cover for their computed income N/A loss during the period that their business is interrupted, but not to exceed a 3 month period. +If shifting, either permanently or temporarily is required, shop renters are entitled to free transportation +Rehabilitation assistance in the form of skills training and other development activities and equivalent to PhP15,000 will be provided in coordination with other government agencies if the present means of livelihood is no longer viable and the PAP will have to engage in a new income activity.

5 Other fixed Loss of, or damage +Compensation in cash for affected portion of the structure, 21 PAFs assets or to, affected assets, including the cost of restoring the remaining structure, as Affected structure 67,598 structures partially or entirely determined by the concerned appraisal committee, with no Income loss 3,000 depreciation nor deduction for salvaged building materials. Relocation N/A 21 PAFs Rehabilitation N/A Improvement 1471 Sub-total 72,069

6 Electric and/or Loss of, or damage +Compensation in cash for affected portion of the structure, N/A water to, affected assets, including the cost of restoring the remaining structure, as connection partially or entirely determined by the concerned appraisal committee, with no depreciation nor deduction for salvaged building materials. N/A

7 Public facilities Loss of, or damage +Compensation in cash at replacement cost to respective 24 Public Infrastructures to, public agencies. Affected structure 412,576 24 PAFs infrastructure (e.g., Income loss N/A public water tanks, Relocation N/A tram lines, bus stop Rehabilitation N/A sheds, loading Improvement 11,917 platform, public Sub-total 424,493 health center, barangay center, electric or telephone lines, etc.) _ NRIMP-RAP: Marihatag-Lianga-BaroboRoad 31

Hence, there are only two distinct types of PAFs in relation to affected structures: marginally affected owners; and severely affected owners. Additional entitlements depending on the attributes of the PAFs are provided for as outlined in the entitlement matrix in the LARR Policy.

5.5.5. Value of Land Improvement in Absentee Landholdings

On the basis of the first cluster of crop improvements, banana and coconut are the most common valuable crop improvement in areas along the highway. In terms of the broader classifications, fruit trees and forest trees also account for a considerable number of the affected improvements on the land. As mentioned earlier, the value of crop improvements was estimated based on the location.

All in all, about PhP269,898.70 will be required to compensate for the damages to agricultural crops, forest trees and other improvements. The total package is allocated for the entire stretch of the Marihatag-Barobo road improvement project.

5.5.6. Compensation Matrix for Resident PAlEs

Based on the LARR policy the compensation entitlements are summarized in Table 5.5.4. At this point it is deemed appropriate to outline the basic assumptions adopted to operationalize the entitlements provided for under the Policy.

1. Replacement Costs of Structures

The affected structures were mainly categorized as residential, commercial, commercial/residential, public infrastructures, public utilities and other types of structures. The structures, based on the linear acquisition survey were evaluated as to whether the impact is severe or marginal following the guidelines in the LARR Policy and the appropriate cost entitlements were estimated using the replacement cost concept.

2. Land Improvements

In most cases, other valuable improvements within the home lot were also affected. These improvements were also valued to form part of the total compensation package for the PAFs. Valuation of other structures was done on the basis of the replacement costs concept and valuation of crop improvements was done on the basis of the current market value.

3. Income Loss

In cases, commercial structures owners and tenants were entitled to a compensation of foregone income as a projected consequence of the implementation of the road improvement project. Income losses were determined as equivalent to the estimated average monthly gross sales of the commercial enterprise. 4.Relocation Allowance NRIMP-RAP: Marzhatag-Ltanga-BaroboRoad 32

Renters of severely affected structures were expected to be dislocated from their current dwellings. Hence, as provided for in the LARR policy, these PAFs were entitled to a relocation allowance equivalent to their respective monthly rental.

5. Rehabilitation Allowance

One of the more serious potential consequences of road improvement projects is the complete dislocation of commercial enterprises due to severe impact. As provided for in the Policy, owners or renters of severely affected commercial structures are provided with a rehabilitation allowance of PhP15,000.

5.5.7. Compensation Package and RAP Implementation Cost

Table 5.5.2 summarizes the compensation package for the PAFs based on the extent of impact, type of structures and the additional compensation entitlements. In addition to the compensation package to the PAFs, RAP implementation costs that includes costs of stake-out/demarcation and validation of impacts, payment of allowances and per diem to the concerned EIAPO staff and DPWH regional and district personnel, participating municipal staff, barangay officials and MRIC members are added up in Table 5.5.7. Administration costs represent 6.0 % of the total of compensation costs. The cost estimates for RAP implementation also include a provision for contingencies equivalent to 15.0% of the total compensation costs. External Monitoring and Post implementation Evaluation costs $2,000.

Table 5.5.2: Estimated Resettlement Cost

.. s - .~ MAoti rNT

F; DESCRIPTIONNo of RATE~~~~~~~~~~~)~Peso- ',~-',_-DESCRIP`TI0N,__-,iFiH UpaTT Counierpart ~ S > t ,, <, HH~~~~S. - Pi E''N,rFl>- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~F~iind~

Compensation for Land and Structures and other fixed assets Land (as per ILA estimates) - Agricultural - Residential/Commercial

Structures (Residential and Shops) 84 M2 1,157,241

Other Fixed Assets: - Private waiting shed, fences, etc. 21 67,598

Public facilities 24 412,576

Repair cost: Pernnanent structures - HH S Permanent Temporary HH 33 NRIMP-RAP Marthatag-Lzanga-BaroboRoad

Table 5.5.2 Continued ... AMOUNT AMOUNT Peso USD* No. of HHs RATE QUANTRTY DESCRIPTION UNIT PfUNUITTif (Counterpart Fund) "L an Fund)______

No. - Electric posts relocation 19,350 _ Land improvement Crops/Trees M2 - Arable crops - Numb vanable 269,898 - Trees/Perennials 189 er 1,926,663 Sub-Total 171,579 Transitional allowance to cover income 28 HH loss for partially and severely-affected house cum shops and partially-affected independent shops Allowance (severely- Subsistence - - affected titled land, severely-affected - HH shop owners with/without title to the land) - Allowance (severely- - H 10,000 Inconvenience . affected house owners with land uitle) 15,000 - - Financial Assistance (severely-affected - HH settlers, de facto owners of agricultural land, etc.) 15,000 - 195,000 Rehabilitation Assistance (severely- 13 HH affected PAPs who have to engage in a new income activity) Variable - - Land Preparation Assistance - M2 (marginally-affected de facto owners of . agricultural land) 15,000 - - Disturbance Compensation (lessees) - HH 500 - 500 Rent Allowance (severely-affected house I HH tenants) 1,000 (for - - Material Transport Allowance to HH fuel of Relocating PAPs DPWH truck) t ,; . . - . ~ , 2,023,844 Sub-Totalf: - . -. - .- ~ r Relocation Area (site development & Lump access road) Sum External Monitoring and Post- Lump 2,000 Sum implementation Evaluation 100,000.00 Fee of Independent Land Appraiser 2- - *...-. . -.- ___ . 2,123,844 TOTAL - 127,430.64 Management cost 6% - 318,576.60 15% Price contingencies GRAND TOTAL 2,569,851.24 2,000 -. .-- -- _ NRIMP-RAP: Marihatag-Lianga-BaroboRoad 34

5.5.8. Total RAP Cost

The following is the summary of the total estimated cost of the RAP including the cost of implementation:

Compensation Package

Marginally Affected Structures PhP 823,527 Severely Affected Structures PhP 813,888 Income Loss PhP 171,579 Relocation Allowance PhP 500 Rehabilitation Allowance PhP 195,000 Land Improvements PhP 19,350 Impact on Improvements PhP 269,898

Management Cost PhP 127,430.64

Price Contingencies PhP 318,576.60

External Monitoring and Post-Implementation Evaluation $2,000

Total PhP 2,569,851.24 and, $2,000

As summarized, the total cost of the RAP is PhP and USD2,000.

5.5.9. RAP Cost by Municipality

As a matter of policy, RAP implementation will be done by the DPWH District Engineers Office in collaboration with the local government units through the Municipal RAP Implementing Committee (MRIC). Hence, there is the need to outline the total compensation package by municipality.

1. Marginally Affected Structures

The total compensation package for 99 marginally affected structures is estimated at roughly PhP977,877 (Table 5.5.3a). This compensation package includes replacement costs to structures, crop improvements within the vicinity of the structure, and forgone earnings for structures used fully or partially for commercial purposes. NRIMP-RAP Marnhatag-Lianga-BaroboRoad 35

Table 5.5.3a. Estimated compensation package for marginally affected structures by municipality, Surigao del Sur, 2001.

Municipality |Respondent Marihatag San Lianga Barobo San Total Respondent Augustin Francis (Peso) co Residential N 6 8 17 0 N/A Sum 8995 43415 83620 136,030 Residential/ N 0 2 8 1 N/A Commercial Sum 9599 107157 16198 132,954 N l ______Sum Commercial N 1 3 8 0 N/A Sum 25456 40251 146624 212,331 Others N 10 3 8 0 N/A Sum 11846 28769 31454 72,069 Public N 4 8 12 0 N/A Infrastructure Sum 21878 86792 315823 424,493

Total (Peso) 68,175 208,826 684,678 16,198 0 977,877

The bulk of the compensation accrues to the owners of marginally affected commercial or residential/commercial structures with a combined estimated costs of PhP481,315.The remaining cost estimate of PhP496,562 is spread across the other uses including residential, public facilities and other structures.

By municipality, Lianga will have the higher compensation package estimated at about PhP684,678. The second to Lianga is San Augustin that will have PhP 208,826.

2. Severely Affected Structures

There are about 28 severely affected structures with an estimated total entitlements of PhP1,045,967 (Table 5.5.3b). This package is spread across the three municipalities, by types of structures. NRIMP-RAP - Marlhatag-Lianga-BaroboRoad 36

Table 5 5 3b. Estimated compensation package for severely affected structures by municipality, Surigao del Sur, 2001.

Municipality

Respondent Marihatag San Lianga Barobo San Total Augustin Francisco

Residential 3 3 9 0 N/A 79,548 72,780 341,086 0 0 493,414

Residential/ 0 4 3 0 N/A Commercial 146,583 240,323 0 0 386,906

Commercial 0 0 6 0 N/A 165,646 165,646 Others N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0

Public N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0 Infrastructure Total 79,548 219,363 747,055 0 0 1,045,966

By municipality, Lianga account for the highest compensation, PhP747,055. The second to Lianga is San Augustin, which will have PhP219,363 for the severely affected PAFs. Marihatag accounts for the lowest with a total compensation package of only PhP79,548 in this category.

Commercial structures, either full or partial, account for more than half of the total compensation package. The compensation package for pure commercial structures is estimated at PhP165,646 while the estimated package for Commercial/Residential is roughly PhP386,906.

3. Crop Improvements

As mentioned earlier, the value of crop improvements was estimated based on the location. Table 5.5.3c is simply a summary of all the types of crop improvements and number of owners in a specific location.

All in all, about PhP269,898 will be required to compensate-for the damages to agricultural crops, forest trees and other improvements.

The highest compensation package for crops and other agricultural improvements accrues to Lianga with an estimated amount of about PhP165,35370. Marihatag comes next with an estimated compensation of PhP 53,765.00. San Augustin has the lowest compensation of PhP 50,780.00. NRIMP-RAP: Marihatag-Lianga-BaroboRoad 37

Table 5.5.3c. Estimated compensation package for crop improvements by municipality, Sungao del Sur, 2001

Municipality Barangay No. of Owner Compensation Amount

Marilhatag Arorogan 12 5,125.00 Antipolo 23 33,965.00 Amontay 15 14,675.00 Sub-total 53,765.00 San Augustin Pongtud 5 4,875.00 Otienza 8 4,850.00 Kauswagan 3 8,665.00 Buhisan 2 1,300.00 Bautong 4 3,930.00 Salvation 6 11,000.00 Gata 10 16,160.00 Sub-total 50,780.00 Lianga Mananay 21 28,485.00 St. Christine 3 4,350.00 Ganayon 18 40,748.00 Banahao 10 12,113.20 Bana-as 1 617.50 Payasan 9 5,280.00 Baucawe 22 39,140.00 Anibongan 17 34,620.00 Sun-total 165,353.70 Total 189 269,898.70

6. IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE

The implementation of the RAP follows as soon as the World Bank concurs with the salient features of the RAP as endorsed by the GOP through DPWH/IBRD-PMO. After the approval of the RAP Report, implementation will be managed by the EIAPO with the supervision of the IBRD-PMO. 6.1. MOU and Establishment of Committees

Table 6 outlines the fundamental steps, procedures and schedule of the activities required for the implementation of the RAP. To set up the structural basis for the implementation of RAP, the institutionalization of the roles of the various stakeholders in the project will have to be operationalized. This can be done through the signing of a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the DPWH and the Local Government Units. The MOU will pave the way for the establishment of the various committees required for the implementation of RAP, namely; the municipal-based Resettlement Implementation Conmmittee (RIC) and the Grievance Comrnittee.

6.2. Training-Orientation on RAP Implementation

Because the concept and the process are relatively new even to the DPWH bureaucracy, there is need to orient the District Offices and the counterpart members of the Local NRIMP-RAP Marihatag-Lianga-BaroboRoad 38

Government Units (LGUs) on the RAP Implementation procedures. This process will be conducted by the EIAPO.

6.3. Validation of RAP Report

With the assumptions that the implementing mechanisms for the RAP at all levels have been established, then all the stakeholders can participate in the collaborative work of validating the RAP Report prepared by the consulting Firm. Validation will involve cross checking of the identified PAFs, the accuracy of the linear acquisition, and validation of entitlements and compensation.

6.4. Public Information Campaign

As soon as the validating team finds the RAP Report to be satisfactory or is in compliance with the standards set in the LARR Policy Framework, then a public information campaign can be launched to reiterate the existence of the project and to allow the PAFs to prepare the necessary supporting documents, if needed, for the compensation to be made possible.

6.5 Finalization of the Compensation Package

Subject to modifications in response to changing price conditions, the compensation package will then be finalized to determine the amount to be paid for each individual PAF. Once completed, PAFs will be asked to fill up some forms to indicate their concurrence to the compensation package and to the terms and conditions of the compensation.

6.6 Public MeetingfDisclosure

In a public forum, PAFs will be made aware of their entitlements as a consequence of project disturbance. At this point in time, PAFS will also be informed of the schedule of payments and the schedule of civil works to allow the PAFs to prepare for their reorganization or relocation and to harvest any standing agricultural crops.

6.7. Cut-off Date

As provided for in the policy, only structures existing on or before March 13, 2001 will be entitled to the compensation package.

6.8. Payment

Payment will have to be done in a public place. Hence, the RIC should coordinate with the LGU officials to ensure that PAFs within their areas of jurisdiction are made aware of the schedules of payments.

6.9. Handing Over the Site for Civil Works

One month before the scheduled start of civil works, RAP implementation shall have been completed. This means that PAFs have been paid, reorganized or relocated, and all the stakeholders in the implementation process have performed their tasks in accordance to the DPWVH Resettlement Policy. NRIMP-RAP. Marihatag-Lianga-BaroboRoad 39

Table 6. RAP implementation schedule by activity, Surigao del Sur, 2002.

Activity Week 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1. MOU & Establishment of Committees 2. Training/Orientation 3. Validation 4 Pubhc Information Campaign 5. Finalization of Compensation Package = _ _ - 6. Public Hearing/Disclosure 7. Payment _ 8. Hand Over of Site

7. MONITORING AND EVALUATION

The underlying principle of the LARR Policy Framework, in general, and the RAP in particular, is to provide mitigating measures to at least ensure that the PAFs will not be worse off as a consequence of the road improvement project. It is for this reason that the survey instrument was designed to capture the critical aspects of the PAFs social and economic conditions to provide the benchmark for future assessments in the context of monitoring and evaluation.

The instrument was also designed to capture the salient attributes of the PAFs and their affected properties to ensure that the monitoring and evaluation team can validate as whether or not the determination of the entitlements and the estimation of compensations are along the principles outlined in the LARR Policy Framework.

The PAFs profile, the entitlements and the estimated compensation packages presented in the earlier sections are mere summaries of the raw data structured in a standard database format. Electronic copies of the database are provided for to facilitate the monitoring and evaluation of the RAP implementation and impact. NRIMP-RAP: Marihatag-Barobo-SanFrancisco Road

APPENDIX A

PUBLIC CONSULTATION NRIMP-RAP. Marihatag-Barobo-SanFrancisco Road

Appendix A. Public Consultations

1. Orientation on the Resettlement Action Plan (RAP) for the Surigao-Davao Coastal Road, DPWH-XIII Regional Office, Butuan City, Agusan del Sur, January 3, 2001

1.1 Participants

Mr. Benedicto Pepito, Provincial Agent, Bislig Ms. Anastacia Salas, Engineer II, Bislig Ms. Evelyn Beray, Engineer II, Regional Office Ms. Ma. Theresa Diola, Computer Operator II, Regional Office Ms. Vilma Migrifno, Engineer II, Regional Office Mr. Samson Hebra, Engineer IV, Regional Office Mr. Roldan Pedrozo, Special Investigator, Tandag Ms. Criste Navida, Project Manager, EILAPO-DPWH Ms. Sol Abasa, Engineer III, EIAPO-DPWH Ms. Charlene Blando, Engineer III, EIAPO-DPWH Mr. Jun Castanieto, Design Consultant Ms. Razel BautistaDesign Consultant Dr. Prudenciano Gordoncillo, Design Consultant

1.2. Briefing on the National Roads Improvement and Management Program and Resettlement Action Plan (RAP)

Engr. Criste Navida, the Project Manager, presented an overview of the National Roads Improvement and Management Program (NRIMP) and its overall objectives. The principles of the Resettlement Policy were also discussed. Engr. Charlene Blando and Engr. Sol Abasa discussed the concept and process of implementing the Resettlement Action Plan (RAP).

Also included in the discussion are the requirements of the project and its likely impacts. The implementing units of RAP and their respective duties were also briefly explained. Dr. Gordoncillo on the other hand, presented the tentative schedule of activities for the public consultation and provided the questionnaires to be used in the survey proper.

A-1 NRIMP-RAP: Marihatag-Barobo-SanFranacsco Road

1.3. Highlights/Issues Raised

The following are the issues/clarifications raised by the attendee during the orientation:

1.3.1 Settlement of claims for the compensation for lost assets of PAPs. Engr. Navida assured the attendees that the PAPs will be fairly compensated as mandated in the Administrative Order 50. Tapping assistance, in addition to zonal value + 10% will be provided to affected landowners of residential, commercial, or agricultural lands.

1.3.2. Responsibility of the district and regional offices in the actual payments for the PAPs. Engr. Navida reiterated that the funds will be released only upon the request of the District Engineering Office. The District Engineering Office, through the Regional Office, must comply with the requirements and submit to the Head Office the list of PAPs together with the approved vouchers. The funds will be released as soon as the Head Office receives the abovementioned requirements.

1.3.3. Cut-off date of the project for the affected areas. It was clarified in the orientation that the cut-off date is the date of commencement of the census of affected persons within the project's area boundaries. Those who are not covered in the census are not entitled to claim for any compensation.

1.3.4. Incentives for the DPWH staff to be involved in the project. Engr. Navida assured the group that monetary incentives will be given to the DPWH staff who will be involved in the RAP implementation.

A-2 NRIMP-RAP: MarLhatag-Barobo-SanFrancisco Road

2. Orientation on the Resettlement Action Plan (RAP) for the Surigao-Davao Coastal Road DPWH Tandag, Surigao del Sur January 5, 2001

2.1. Participants

Mr. Romeo Momo, District Engineer Ms. Glendyl Casinsinan, Assistant Engineer Mr. Jay Laurente, Assistant Engineer Ms. Arlene Buniel, Accountant III Ms. Anjie Ytac, Instrumentman Mr. Roldan Pedrozo, Special Investigator I Ms. Aurelia Javier, Engineer III Mr. Nicolas Alameda, OIC-Assistant District Engineer Ms. Ma. Theresa Diola, Computer Operator II, Reg'l Office Ms. Evelyn Beray, Engr. II, Reg'l Office Ms. Criste Navida, EIAPO Ms. Sol Abasa, EIAPO Ms. Charlene Blando, EIAPO Mr. Jun Castafiero, Design Consultant Ms. Razel Bautista,Design Consultant Dr. Prudenciano Gordoncillo, Design Consultant

2.2. Briefing on the National Roads Improvement and Management Program and Resettlement Action Plan (RAP)

Engr. Criste Navida, Chief ELAPO, presented an overview of the National Roads Improvement and Management Program (NRIMP) and its overall objectives. RAP, its concept and process of implementation were also discussed. Also included in the discussion are the requirements of the project and its likely impacts. The implementing units of RAP and their respective duties were also briefly explained. Dr. Gordoncillo on the other hand, presented the tentative schedule of activities for the public consultation and provided the questionnaires to be used in the survey proper.

2.3. Highlights/Issues Raised

2.3.1. Linear mapping specifics. District Engr. Momo clarified as to who will make the design and who will determine the construction limits and center lines for the said road project. Engr. Navida assured that the Design Consultant will provide the needed manpower for the said activities but still, assistance from the District Engineering Office will be needed. The District Engineer in turn, assured the Project Manager of their support.

2.3.2. Settlement of claims for the compensation for lost assets of PAPs. Engr. Navida assured the attendees that the PAPs will be fairly compensated as mandated in the Administrative NRIMP-RAP: Marihatag-Barobo-SanFrancisco Road

Order 50. Tapping assistance, in addition to zonal value + 10% will be provided to affected landowners of residential, commercial, or agricultural lands.

2.3.3. Cut-off date of the project for the affected areas. It was clarified in the orientation that the cut-off date is the date of commencement of the census of affected persons within the project's area boundaries. Those who are not covered in the census are not entitled to claim for any compensation.

2.3.4. Incentives of the DPWH staff to be involved in the project. Engr. Navida assured the group that monetary incentives will be given to the DPWH staff who will be involved in the RAP implementation.

A-4 NRJMP-RAP: Marihatag-Barobo-SanFrancisco Road

3. Public Consultation on the Resettlement Action Plan (RAP) for the Surigao-Davao Coastal Road Marihatag Municipal Gym, Surigao del Sur January 23, 2001

3.1. Participants

Name Designation/Position Address

Bernardo Pontillo Municipal Councilor Poblacion, Marihatag Juan Salgado Municipal 'Councilor Poblacion, Marihatag Richard Yu Municipal Councilor Poblacion, Marihatag Eupacito Alvizo Municipal Councilor Poblacion, Marihatag Neofolo Mires Municipal Councilor Poblacion, Marihatag Jaime de Castro Municipal Councilor Poblacion, Marihatag Ricky Campos Municipal Councilor San Agustin Alex de Guzman Municipal Councilor San Agustin Ceferino Perez Jr. Municipal Councilor San Agustin Aniceto Orbelen ABC President Poblacion, Marihatag Joaquin Oktubre Brgy. Captain Arorogan, Marihatag Prudencio Campos Jr. Brgy. Captain Amontay, Marihatag Romanito Salingas Brgy. Captain Gata, San Agustin Wenefredo Morgado Brgy. Captain Hornasan, San Agustin Emilita Follar Brgy. Captain Pongtod, San Agustin Rustico Corvera Brgy. Captain Kauswagan, San Agustin Vergilio Ronpello Brgy. Captain Salvacion, San Agustin Adelito Orbita Municipal Cooperative Officer Poblacion, Marihatag Nap Salonga Municipal Engineering Officer Poblacion, Marihatag Ferdinand Lerog Municipal Engineer Poblacion, Marihatag Prisco Concia Municipal Assessor Marihatag Elpedio Lamela Poblacion, Marihatag Pat Mercader NGO Poblacion, Marihatag Judalyn de Castro MSWD Poblacion, Marihatag L. Avila Clerk Poblacion, Marihatag Avila Lagrama Clerk Poblacion, Marihatag Jocelyn Judo Clerk Poblacion, Marihatag Victoria Buentora Clerk Poblacion, Marihatag Elena Yagong Poblacion, Marihatag E. de Jesus Clerk IV Poblacion, Marihatag Imelda Orbeta Board Secretary Marihatag Eliza Magauano Poblacion, Marihatag Leund Apo Marihatag Alex Asersturo Agricultural Technican Marihatag Arlindo Salinas Administrative Officer II San Agustin Feliciano Paraylo Jr. San Agustin Fn Campos DPA-II San Agustin

A-5 NRIMP-RAP: Marnhatag-Barobo-SanFrancisco Road

Sol Abasa Engineer III EIAPO-Manila Dr. Prudenciano Gordoncillo Design Consultant Manila Jun Castanleto Design Consultant Manila Evelyn Beray Engr. II DPWH-XIII Roldan Pedroso Spl. Investigator DPWH-Tandag Jay Laurente Engineering Assistant DPWH-Tandag Julius Trinidad Engineering Assistant DPWH-Tandag Mena Escalona Design Consultant Manila Razel Bautista Design Consultant Manila

3.2. Consultation Proper

Part of the process to finalize the draft Resettlement Action Plan (RAP) is to conduct a public consultation where the public officials and the affected population meet and discuss the project and its likely impacts. This was done to ensure that the community understands the nature and extent of the project. A consultation implies sharing of ideas, which help in better understanding of the issues arising in the said activity. Such gatherings help disseminate information from project officials to the affected population. It provides accurate information to the affected population and also dispels fears and misconception, thus providing the foundation for collaboration between the affected population and the project officials.

One week before the scheduled date for public consultation, letters of notice were sent to the mayors of the municipalities within the project's boundaries, informing them of the public consultation to be conducted by the Design Consultant from the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH). The letters were also faxed to the District Engineers in Tandag and Surigao City.

Dr. Prudenciano Gordoncillo, facilitated the public consultation. He presented the project including its objectives and merits to the public. The concept, as well as the process of implementing the Resettlement Action Plan was also briefly explained. The roles and responsibilities of the DPWH, the LGUs and the Community were further identified during the consultation. The public was also informed of the schedule of survey in their respective municipalities.

3.3. Highlights/Issues Raised

3.3.1. Source of funds. It was clarified during the consultation that the project was funded by the World Bank and not by the local government.

3.3.2. Role of LGUs in RAIP implementation. LGU members including the Mayor, Barangay Captains, NGOs and/or POs will be part of the RAP Implementation Committee (RIC). They will assist the IBRD-PMO in validating the list of PAPs and also assist in the public information campaign and public consultation. The LGU members will also assist the

A-6 NRIMP-RAP MarLhatag-Barobo-San Francisco Road

District Engineering Office in the payment of compensation to PAPs. Engr. Sol Abasa, however, clarified they are not entitled to receive monetary incentives from the project.

3.3.3. Claims for the compensation for lost assets of PAPs. The consultant assured the public that all PAPs residing in, doing business, cultivating land, have rights over resources within the project area will be eligible for compensation for lost assets. PAPs who own private lands must show title, tax declaration or any proof to show ownership of the lands. Public physical infrastructure such as waiting sheds, electric posts, water pipes, irrigation system, etc., which will be affected by the project are entitled for compensation. It was also cleared in the consultation that the-PAPs who lives within the road right of way will be compensated only for the affected structures and not for the land. The DPWH will be responsible for the payments for the lost assets.

3.3.4. Scope of the project's road construction. The road project will improve and rehabilitate gravel roads and convert it to Portland Cement pavement. Existing roads that needs repair will also be rehabilitated. Deteriorating bridges will also be replaced. Also included in the project is the improvement of shoulders, drainage and/or canal.

3.3.5. Materials to be used in the road construction. Mr. Ricky Campos, Municipal Councilor of San Agustin, inquired as to the source of gravel to be used by the project for road construction. He proposed that gravel should be sourced from his area to add income to their municipality. Engr. Sol Abasa, however, further clarified the issue will be decided upon by the contractor who will win in the bidding.

3.3.6. Inquiry on the scheduled date for civil works. Engr. Sol Abasa informed the public that civil works will probably start by July, 2000.

A-7 NRIMP-RAP: Marihatag-Barobo-SanFrancisco Road

4. Public Consultation on the Resettlement Action Plan (RAP) for the Surigao-Davao Coastal Road Lianga Municipal Hall, Surigao del Sur January 23, 2001

4.1. Participants

Name Designation/Position Address

Matias Caybot Municipal Councilor Poblacion, Barobo Normanito Orillameda Municipal Councilor Poblacion, Barobo Ricardo Ho Municipal Councilor Poblacion, Lianga Enrique Layno Municipal Councilor Lianga Oliver Egypto Municipal Councilor Lianga Zaldy Juanba Municipal Engineer Lianga Moises Moreno Sr. Brgy. Captain Payasan, Lianga Arcampo Querada Brgy. Captain Manyayay, Lianga M. Martizano Brgy. Captain Diatagon, Lianga Marcos Morgado Jr. ABC President Lianga G. P. Babalson Brgy. Councilor Diatagon, Lianga Ulysses Urbiztondo Municipal Engineer Poblacion, Lianga Fernando Sumaylo MPDC Poblacion, Barobo Angelo Obenza Draftsman Poblacion, Barobo Ma. Teresa Saligumba LRCO-II Poblacion, Barobo Allan Poam MPDC Lianga Sol Abasa Engineer III EIAPO-Manila Dr. Prudenciano Gordoncillo Design Consultant Manila Razel Bautista Design Consultant Manila

4.2. Consultation Proper

Part of the process to finalize the draft Resettlement Action Plan (RAP) is to conduct a public consultation where the public officials and the affected population meet and discuss the project and its likely impacts. This was done to ensure that the community understands the nature and extent of the project. A consultation implies sharing of ideas, which help in better understanding of the issues arising in the said activity. Such gatherings help disseminate information from project officials to the affected population. It provides accurate information to the affected population and also dispels fears and misconception, thus providing the foundation for collaboration between the affected population and the project officials.

One week before the scheduled date for public consultation, letters of notice were sent to the mayors of the municipalities within the project's boundaries, informing them of the public consultation to be conducted by the Design Consultant and the Engineers from the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH). The letters were also faxed to the District Engineers in Tandag and Surigao City.

A-8 NRIMP-RAP: Marihatag-Barobo-SanFrancisco Road

Dr. Prudenciano Gordoncillo, facilitated the public consultation. He presented the project including its objectives and merits to the public. The concept, as well as the process of implementing the Resettlement Action Plan was also briefly explained. The roles and responsibilities of the DPWH, the LGUs and the Community were further identified during the consultation. The public was also informed of the schedule of survey in their respective municipalities.

4.3. Highlights/Issues Raised

4.3.1. Claims for the compensation for lost assets of PAPs. The consultant assured the public that all PAPs residing in, doing business, cultivating land, have rights over resources within the project area will be eligible for compensation for lost assets. PAPs who own private lands must show title, tax declaration or any proof to show ownership of the lands. Public physical infrastructure such as waiting sheds, electric posts, water pipes, irrigation systems, etc., which will be affected by the project are entitled for compensation. It was also cleared in the consultation that the PAPs who lives within the road right of way will be compensated only for the affected structures and not for the land.

4.3.2. Construction of Bridges. Dr. Gordoncillo informed the public that part of the project includes the rehabilitation of deteriorating bridges and drainages.

4.3.3. Actual payments for the lost assets. It was reiterated that the DPWH will be responsible for the payments for the lost assets. An independent appraisef will be hired by the project to determine the replacement cost of the affected land (agricultural and residential), crops and structures. Replacement cost for the affected structures will be based on the current market value of materials and labor if the same were to be re-constructed with no deductions for salvaged building materials. The value of the affected crops will also be based on the current market value. Seven days upon payment, the affected structure will be demolished. The owner of the structure will be the one to demolish his property upon the presence of the DPWH officials.

A-9 APPENDIX B

LIST OF PAFs SUMMARY OF COMPENSATION APPENDIX B LIST OF PAFs AND SUMMARY OF COMPENSATION A) Municipality: Marihatag

Marginally Affected PAFs Severely Affected PAFs No. Res No. Family Name Giveo Name Type of Loss Severity Reloc t improvement I Replacement ItprovementC Replacement Total Cost _. _. Cost lnmeLoss Cost Cost ocome T 1 _ _ _-.Loss Cs 1) Barangay: Arorogan 1 9 Santoya Tereso Others M 0 00 0 00 259 00 0 00 1,925 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 2,184 00 2 11 Camaylongan Lina R M 0 00 000 18 00 0 00 2,310 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 2,328 00 3 13 Pontillo Luminado Others M 0 00 0 00 123 00 0 00 442.50 0 00 0 00 0 00 565 50 4 14 Salgado Ernesto Others M 0.00 0 00 29000 000 325 00 000 000 0 00 615 00 5 15 Celes Carmelita R M 0.00 0 00 0 00 0 00 590 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 590 00 6 16 Barunday Eufemio Others M 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 1,621 13 0 00 0 00 0 00 1,621 13 7 17 LGU Waiting Shed Public Infrastructure M 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 6,215 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 6,215 00 8 19 LGU Waiting Shed Public Infrastructure M 0 00 0.00 0 00 0 00 4,098 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 4,098 00 9 20 Borja Lucresio Others M 0 00 0 00 96 00 0.00 395 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 491 00 10 30 Galler Rodrigo Others M 0 00 0 00 105 00 000 2,625 76 0 00 0 00 0 00 2,730 Subtotal 76 0.00 891.UU 0.00 20,547.39 0 0.00 0.00 21,438 39 12)Barangay: Antipolo 1 1 11| 32 Atrez |Grace R S 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 26,99906 26,99906 Subtotal 0.00O0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00k| 0.00U| 26,999.06 26,999.06 3) Barangay: Amontay ______I 12 55 Pandlihng Diomsio Others M 000 000 000 000 1,45000 000 000 000 1,45000 13 57 LGU Waiting Shed Public Infrastructure M 0 00 0 00 0 00 000 3,075.00 0 00 0 00 0 00 3,075 00 141 59 Raray Estelita R M 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 1,315 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 1,315.00 15 61 Avila Floriano R S 0.00 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 42,285 76 42,285 76 16 62 Eyog Jocelyn R M 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 1,208 75 0 00 0 00 000 1,208 75 17 66 Galvano Others M 000 000 000 000 34750 000 000 000 34750 18 68 Retino R M 0 00 0 00 96 00 0 00 395 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 491 00 19 74 Salinas Rosalia Others M 0.00 0 00 000 000 92050 000 000 000 92050 20 76 Salinas Unday Others M 0.00 000 000 0.00 92050 000 000 0 00 92050 21 78 Laurente Arturo R S 000 000 0.00 0.00 0 00 0.00 000 10,263 50 10,263 50 22 104 Plaza |Perin R M 0 00 0 00 I 1,406 00I 0 00 1,655 94 | 0 00 0 00 0 00 3,061 Subtotal 94 0.00 | 1,502.00 | 0 1,288.19 0.00 0.00 52,549.26 65,339.45 4) Barangay: Otieza 101 Irrigators Assn. [Public Infrastructure M 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 8,490 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 8,490 00 24 108 IClimaco Gregorin C ] M 0.00 0 00 0.00 22,500 00 2,955 95 000 - 0 001 0 00 . 25,455 95 Subtotal 0.00 0.00 0.00 22,500.00 11,445.95 0.00 0.00 [ 0.00 33,945.95 Subtotal for Marihatag | 0.00 0.00 2,393.00 22,500.00 43,281.53 0.00 0.00 [ 79,548.32 147,722.85 APPENDIX B LIST OF PAFs AND SUMMARY OF COMPENSATION B) Municipality: San Augustin

IRelocation Rehabilitation ( Marginally Affected PAFs Severely Affected P'AFs No. ResNo.+ Family Name Given Name Type of Loss Severity | Cost Cost Improvement n j Replacement Improvement| l L.| Replacement Total

1) Barangay: BuhisanF 25 120B3tonio Federico R 0 00Go0 0 00 0.00 7,741 B| 00 0 0 7715 i-, 121 IOsorio F-elic-is ima C M 0 00 0 0000 450 0 300 0|nT00 000 7,500 on- 7 122 |Avila (orgonio C M 000 000 00 000,0 32039 0 00 0 0.00 Co r Vi 6,203 C/R M 000 0.00 480 2,250 ,29.32 0 00000 0C00 _ RuSnbtotal 6 427 32 0.00 0.00 - 48.0 9,75.0 17,991.29 0. 0.00 0.00 27,789.29 2)Barangay: Buatong 1 1 1 13311 aiti-ngShed- Public Infrastructure | 0 00 0 00 ------a 00 1917 21 0 .0 00 19,167 42 30 138 Brgy hall Others Publicinfrastructure M 000 000 000 -000000 8,4 0 | | 00 , Alegre 841 Adriano R 0. 00 0T 000 000 |0 149T03 M00 6,3700 14T4Corvera Rarilou 0 0 0.00 000 0 00 |000 000 | 18,0B720 00 | 8,7120 0W T147|LOU Waiting Shed ublic lnfrastructure D M.0000 -0.0020 6 ,65 j -00 0 T00 |0 w - V0a 37002506 Subtotal 0.00 00 0 30,313.98 - 14900 0.00 54,941.03 j 8,404.01 3)Barangay: Salvacion f i -TI1 15 aqui in |Celerina | R |0 M |0 O|OOl 120 ooo 9,53978T Q00| zzoooln ( -- 9701-78 35 167 |absentee j Othera |o M0.00m | 000 0700 | 0 | -0 8,102-26n-| 0000 |0.00 | 0226 169 Camino lTrinidad I CIR |I S°1 0.00 | °° 6,000 00 3T39 25, 00 Subtotal- j-- -IVI j foo j 162.00 j76- 0 j 7,642.04j 18.00 j 6,000.00 | 4,513.39 | 43,335.04 4) Barangay : Gata _ _ _ _ I I___I_i_ 37 184 lWaiting shed Public i Infrastructure M 000 000 000 a000 10,44840 0 00 0 00 0 00 10,448 40 38 186 Waiting shed Public Infrastructure M 00T 000 0 00 0,00 7,239.44 000 0 00 0 00 7,239 44 39 188 Gomez Juliana C/R | 0 00 15,00000 0.00 0.00 000 000 600 00 | 12,061 46 27,661 00 40 200 Jimenez Charbto R | 0.00 000 0.00 000 000 000 000 17,69028 17,69028 41 202 Gomez Silvacion Others M 0.00 0 00 0 00 3,000 00 14,242 82 0.00 0 00 0 00 17,242 82 42 215 Gulle Damiana C M 0.00 000 24200 3,30000 23,088.82 0 00 000 000 26,630 82 43 217 Gulle Luzmindo C|R M 000 0.00 000 1,500.00 1,672.00 000 000 0 00 3,17200 44 221 Biltones Domingo C/R S 000 15,000.00 0 00 000 0.00 000 4,50000 25,156 88 44,656 88 45 222 Badilla Edgardo R M 000 000 292.00 000 5,10000 000 000 000 5,39200 46 223 Ocoy Crisanto C/R S 0.00 15,000 00 0 00 0.00 0 00 0 00 10,500.00 23,233 62 48,733 62 47 225 Mereno Teodolo | R M 000 0.00 5400 000 2,199.07 0 00 0 00 0 00 2,253 07 48 226 Abaflo Virginia Others M 000 000 000 000 3,423 82 0.00 000 000 3,423 82 49 227 Gomez Camdo R M 0 00 000 0.00 0.00 12,476.30 0 00 0 00 0.00 12,476 30 50 228 LGU Waiting Shed Public Infrastructure M 0.00 000 0 00 0.00 16,543.18 0 00 0 00 0.00 16,543 18 52 233 Bubungan Nilda R | M 00 0.00 60000 0.00 1,67000 0 00 0 00 0 00 2,270 00 54 241 Santa Esteban R i 0.00 000 0.00 000 | 1,19800 0 00 0 00 000 | 1,198 0 55 245 Agultar Mercedita R M 0 00 0 00 18 00 0 00 1 2,364 00 0 00 0 00 000 2,382 00 56 247 LGU Waiting Shed Public Infrastructure. M 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 | 9,10940 | 000 0 00 0 00 9,109 40 Subtotal 0.00 4 .000l 110,775.25 0 O T.010-0.00 | 7,142.24 t 258,523.03 _ 15) Barangay: Campanubay I I 1 1_ 1_ I _ I _ 1 51 232 LGU Waiting Shed Public Infrastructure M | 000 | 000 I 000 I 0.00 | 13,13744 000 000 000 13,13744 Subtotal 0.00 0.00 I 0 I 0 0 ! 13,137.44 O0.000| 0.00 | 0.00]| 13,137.44 Subtotal for San Augustin 1 0.003 60,000.00 1,416.001 17,550.00 ! 189,860.00] 167.00 21,600.00 137,596.66] 428,188.81 APPENDIX B LIST OF PAFs AND SUMMARY OF COMPENSATION

C) Municipality: Lianga______1 RelocaionRhabiliation Marginally Affected PAFs Severely Affected PAI s No RsN. FniyNm Give Nm Type of Loss Severity Res No. Family Impoveen Replacement Improvemet IRepla-cem-en-t Total GiveoName Name I ~~~~~ ~~~~~~~CostCost Cmposeet Income Loss cost Cost Icm os Cs

1) Barsngay~~Manyayay______Public R ~~M 000 0 000 0 00 6,853 94 0 00 0 00 00 6,853 9

59 282 Ebdalin Foredo RM 0 00 0 00 107 00 0 00 2,-977 12 0 00 0 00 ~ 0 00 3,084 12 60 2894 lIloFlix CS 6000 15,000 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 11,548 00 26,548 00 61 286 BaleleVictoria C/P. M ~~~~~~~~~0 00 ~ ~~~~~0.000 00 18,857 00 14,443 12 0 00 0 00 0 00 23,300 00 62 288 BaleteFernando Others M ~~~~~~~~00 0 00 ~~~~~00 00 I 0 00 2207 00 0 00 0 00 000o 2,207 00

63 29 ortun Pedrito RM 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 2,571 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 2,571 00 64 29 mLnboson Saturnina C S 0 00 15,000 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 10,506 38 25,506 38 629 Dolera Patricia CM 0 00 0 00 0,00 12,722 00 1,778 31 0 00 0 00 0 00 14,500.00 ______66 24Rbe _ _11_ _ 569 62______Gloria CM 0 00 0.00 0 00 10,500.00 115 2000 67 29 eDJesus 00 0 00 22,070 00 Virgilio C S 0 00 15,000 00 0 00 000o 0 00 160 00 68 27 oera Erlinda C 2,250 00 3,755 94 21,165 94 M 0 00 0,00 435 001 11,250.00 64,768 14 1 0 00 ___0 00_ I0_ __ _00 76,453 00 Subtotal uuo0 U(bUWUwDLZ.UU4J.U 3W/.U I T _ZTT- 63 69 310 FPlaza Ma Corazon P. 5 . 0 00 0 00 0 00 0001 0 00 0 001 35,171 941 35,171 94 70 3121 Barameda Bernandita C/P. M 0 0 00 0 00 -19,500 00 14,876 50 0 00 0 00 0 00 34,376 50 71 314 Delan Jovencia P. M 0 0 00 0 00 000 5,738 38 0 00 0 00 0 00 5,738 38 72 316 Pedraverde Epifania R. M 0 0 00 0 00 000 2,263.441 0 00 0 00 0 00 f 2,263 44 73, 323 IPedraverde Sopio P. M 1 0 0 00 0 00 - 000 8,680 52 0 00 0 00 0 00 ~ 8,680 52 - 'ubtotal ______I.0 3;I7 ~ ~ U ~ U i ~ 7 9 ~ 7 14) Barangay: Ganayon______* 75 349 ILGU Waiting Shed Public Infrastructure M 0 00 0.00 261 00 0 00 14.528 98 0 00 0 00 0 00 14,789 98 76 353 iSanchez Felipe C 5 0 00 15,000 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 3,000 00 16,142 10 34,142 10 77 358 1Entero Fermina Others M 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 3,367 25 0 00 0 00 0 00 .3,367 25 78 361 Villegas Wilma C 5 0 00 15,000 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 22,965 24 37,965 24 79 367 Avila P.omeo C/PR M 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 2.149 06 0 00 0 00 0 00 2,149 06 811 369 Sazarits Celso P. 5 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 575 00 0 00 118,766 50 119.341 SO 81 371 Campos Milagros R. S 0 00 0 00 0.00 000 000 0.00 0 00 45,325 08 45,325 08 82 377 Day Care Center Public Infrastructure M 0 00 0.00 0 00 0 00 136,939 36 0 00 0 00 0 00 136,939 3-6 83 386 Brital Vicente P. 5 0 00 0 00 0 00 000o 0,00 119 00 0 00 36,729 04 36,848 04 84 388 Pedroso Samuel P. M 0 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1,821 38 0 00 0 00 000 -1,821 3 *85 390 Sanchez Francisco C/P. 5 500 00 15,000 00 0.00 0 00 0 00 149 00 0 00 74,437 34 90,086 34 86 392 Tejero Graciano P. 5 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 14,172 75 14,172 75 87 394 Gomez FEdita C/P. 5 000 15,000 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 4,500 00 65,715 10 85,215 10 88 396 Dagami Dioleto C/P. 5 0 00 15,000 00 0 00 0 00 00 0 0 5,2 0 65,213 8938Cerefio P.osalina P. S 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 255 00 0 00 78,539 90 78,794 90 - utitotal _mw 73BTTUU~U-0--- 7 -Br, w.I-OT -- T79W --7-U0-6W 522,814.35 765,979.3 APPENDIX B LIST OF PAFs AND SUMMARY OF COMPENSATION

C) Municipality: Lianga Name'Given Name f Relocation I Rehabilitation I ~~~~~~~~~~~MarginallyAffected PAFs Severely Affected PAFs No.IRes No. Family Nm GieNae Type of Loss Severity Ceosatio Cohbiltato ImprovemeintRelcmn mpomntRpaeet Tti j j ______j I [ j ______jCCoatCostcoeelLcem enCost proCoat n JR eplmcem ent TCost 5) Barsangay. BanshawCot IcmLos Cs sm tnoeLo ot 90) 425 ITapar RednaI M ~ 0.00 0 0 T47 W__U0 3.517 26 000-T ~ oW000 000 376~626 9Ta 427 Fenarancaczna K ~ m* ~ 0 Uu U Ti0UTI0 qW131-E9jU- ~ T1i r__JUc ~ ffrjr -r VL arisen471 Myr~~~~~Lneia Uthers U.UU -Oi Du U0uD o urwu 37fuf 140 U3T1 9- 3 .alingan ;taarign K mS u0f - -OJj *fTj rucon 'eeaT~UU TUFijrr r-jJ- j o j ~ tUh )ri 01J. T0T0 0 fU1Tt 9- -- 4U-Aansa dies15u -Wt f0 -w --- n ------W3Wi * 44T- i ejero KUC-. 14Ks M ~j 01X fuO - 59g3u u urj 9b80 uu waiting Sheei Public_i ra ecae 1u- * U 1J O795r ------rJJu- - -i-ior- ~~9U83W .ini-no ~ ~ ~ ~ ~Fcerico - m ------5r0310ThUt1 ------UIF ------= ---- eo,euc ff

6) Btarangay : i'ayasan .05.u 5j J7Wll]:n I M larLcna .u Ag-us in 7CW - -- -0*Ju0 7510TUjUU-yjj * --r5 neccni uerman ~ J1f 3gJ 0h 10 U0 h0nTUT~ -- TJ -- TnU930r 4TY cequina TFF5ce Km 1TuUtJ00T1T U JIFY1i Manngadiao hm K I U0 1TUO------T0 Aosentee K 00u UUU0 ---- g0 ---- Vff0 i3,9923 Umila ,.ceismt* - iJ8yeot *UUO ------trUOw,4 Y 6Wf1 -tjt .TUU j1U79 101 WTI L(uu waiting Othedc rubtic intrastructure m~* YOU1 .lIO.J1 OTT4T33T- -n-i _YJU-TsTz2T8-

~~48Uacing e k'ublic Inirasiraciure *~~~~~~~~~~~~~-VWu*u0.lzv.u 5z43.z MUTU0 ,63 7) Barangay: Btaucawe ______T1 b*5UWU aiting Shed F~ublic inirastructure WU0 1T0U0u- u Tf 58 sc0watng sing C 5s- -- Verasracu--TT0rf 71-12 57TT8alug aEfn-aMeo ~ tTJjI 7 ~T D-3T_jubtalanc Kret fj UTr Urmia05 U ----- 0----U W----0-W __f-5 W---- W- --- U 8) Barangay Aecibongan TL~ ae0tuon teicresca 11t10 ~ 0 I U 0JU-oo------,22 -TL*3 eruok I Wb 5'ublic infrastructare m **-ff0 --- OTI 0--lTOhT---- 272T3 ------o T. 59 e -roeno c'rFco ~*~-.i-iu O73 r-- UT1U 5D0 -Wmot-f00 -ut u -TI3 U ntowa ueoc 3T LU U Waitifig-SReTi i'UbiiC Intrastructure JU* .I1 *l2teem Sc . *583em ruSt~~~~~~nbiccerncrastmatue .. 115551Te-* UI1JU 1?22 56T TemaC me--cg-V'bi nentscae -T2U f1 **fr .13jj 1ff *Y 75 0 -KY-uo -ix 27Y UU 0 01W f0J 2T1J ft WoO-u 21T0MhUMraoMrjt TTh -578 MoPabatiigUna 0U UT ---- 59guJe --ffIjt T2tc 578 onec~ean a n.lemd .. einat, fljj U*0 fU Suliratal~ uTYTJ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~rtli nfatutue- -27WU

SubtotalfrLag50.0 10.00 .0 1,062.00 p1,929.0 578,68703 13200 1,O.0 9,428 ,31726 APPENDIX B LIST OF PAFs AND SUMMARY OF COMPENSATION

D) Municipality Barobo I

Marginally Affected PAFs Severely Affected PAFs No. Res No. Family Name Given Name Type of Loss Severity eloaton Rehabilitation pIs I ReplaCtement Improvement I Replacement Total ~~~~ ~ ~~~~Cost ~~~~~~CostCmpoveet IIncome Lossi Cost I cost Income Loss Cost 11 larangay : acat_____I tIII 1271 595 WRidocto Dioscoro C/R M 0 00 0 00 000 4,500 00 11,697 84 0 00 0 00 O00 16,197 84 Subtotal 0.00 0.00 0.00 4,500.00 11,697.84 0.00 0.00 J 0.00 16,197.84 Grand Total 500.00 195,000.00 17,87100 136,479.00 823,526.40 1,479.00 35,100.00 813,887.79 2,023,842.15 APPENDIX C

LIST OF PERENNIALS SUMMARY OF UNACCOUNTED PROJECT-AFFECTED PERSONS (PAPs) WITH TREES AND PERENNIALS

A. MARIHATAG, SURIGAO DEL SUR

1) Arorogan 4 5,125.00 2) Antipolo 33,965.00 3) Amontay 14,675.00 P 53,765.00

B. SAN AGUSTIN SURIGAO DEL SUR

1) Pongtud 4 4,875.00 2) Otienza 4,850.00 3) Kauswagan 8,665.00 4) Buhisan 1,300.00 5) Buatong 3,930.00 6) Salvacion 11,000.00 7) Gata 16,160.00 P 50,780.00

C. LIANGA, SURIGAO DEL SR . . _

1) Manyayay - 28,485.00 2) Diatagon 3) St. Christine 4,350.00 4) Ganayon 40,748.00 5) Banahao 12,113.20 6) Ban-as 617.50 7) Payasan 5,280.00 8) Baucawe 39,140.00 9) Anibongan 34,620 00 4 165,353.70

GRAND TOTAL 4 269,898.70 UNACCOUNTED PROJECT-AFFECTED PERSONS (PAPs) WITH TREES AND PERENNIALS for A) MARIHATAG, SURIGAO DEL SUR

1) BRGY. AROROGAN, MARIHATAG

Number of Total Amount Name Particular Nunit Unit Cost Amount Payale Units Payable Coconut Tree 1 p 300.00 P 300.00 _P 1. Bonracio Alagon Banana hills 4 75.00 300.00 700.00 Tambis 1 100.00 100.00 2. Iluminado Pason Banana hills 2 75.00 150.00 150.00 3. Felix Gascon Banana hills 3 75.00 225.00 225 00

4. Rufino Lago Banana hills . 2 75.00 150.00 350.00 Cacao 2 100.00 200.00 5. Faustino Salgado Coconut tree 1 300.00 300.00 750.00 Banana hills 6 75.00 450.00 6. Dulcesimo Cansio Tambis 1 100.00 100.00 100.00 7. Caridad Terante Coconut Tree 1 300.00 300.00 300.00 8. Emiterio Sanchez Jackfruit 1 200.00 200.00 200.00 9. Basilio Salgado Banana hills 2 75.00 150.00 250.00 Tambis 1 100.00 100.00 10. Gerry Salgado Banana hills 4 75.00 300.00 500.00 Jackfruit 1 200.00 200.00 11. Cresencio Lago Coconut trees 2 300.00 600.00 600.00 12. Epifanio Espidang Coconut trees 3 300.00 900.00 1 000.00 Tambis 1 100.00 100.00 _ TOTAL P 5,125.00 UNACCOUNTED PROJECT-AFFECTED PERSONS (PAPs) WITH TREES AND PERENNIALS for A) MARIHATAG, SURIGAO DEL SUR

2) BRGY. ANTIPOLO, MARIHATAG

Name Particular Number of Unit Cost Amount Total Amount Units Payable 1. Eustaquia Robles Banana hills 6 P 75.00 P 450.00 P 450.00 2. Mauro Camaylongan Banana hills 16 75.00 1,200.00 1,800.00 Coconut trees 2 300 00 600.00 3. Lucresio Borja Coconut trees 14 300.00 4,200.00 4,200 00 4. Icasiano Ontillo Coconut trees 3 300.00 900.00 1,350.00 Banana hills 6 75.00 450.00 5. Herman Avila Coconut trees 5 300.00 1,500.00 1,500.00 6. Leonisio Dalman Coconut trees 2 300.00 600.00 600.00 7. Leon Cubil, Jr. Coconut trees 6 300.00 1,800.00 2,775.00 Banana hills 13 75.00 975.00 Coconut trees 5 300.00 1,500.00 1,500.00 Banana hills 7 75.00 525.00 525.00 Coconut trees 3 300.00 900.00 9 Gaudencio Garcia Banana hills 5 75.00 375.00 1,400.00 Camansi tree 1 125.00 125.00 10. Leonor Mereno Banana hills 8 75.00 600.00 600.00 11. Tiburcio Millan Coconut trees 3 300.00 900.00 900.00 12. Rodrigo Penaranda Pomelo 1 175.00 175.00 250.00 Guyabano 1 75.00 75 00 13. Wilfredo Corvera Banana hills 7 75.00 525.00 525 00 14. Antonio Alicante Coconut trees 3 300.00 900.00 900.00 15. Fortunato Ramirez Falcata trees 12 220.00 2,640.00 4,440.00 Coconut trees 6 300.00 1,800.00 16. Jose Pandiling Banana hills 5 75.00 375.00 1,275.00 Coconut trees 3 300.00 900.00 17. Consurcia Orcullo Banana hills 3 75.00 225.00 225 00 18. Jose Agupitac Pomelo 2 175.00 35000 850.00 Mango 1 500.00 500.00 19. Pedro Layno Banana hills 5 75 00 375.00 375.00 20. Arthur Garcia Banana hills 5 75 00 375.00 375.00 Jackfruit 1 200 00 200.00 21. Silvino Avila Mango 1 500 00 500.00 4,525.00 Coconut trees 11 300.00 3,300.00 Banana hills 7 75.00 525.00 22. Dionesio Ines Coconut trees 5 300.00 1,500.00 2,400.00 ,Banana hills 12 75 00 900 00 23 Rosita Evangelio Banana hills 3 75.00 225.00 225 00 TOTAL P 33,965.00 UNACCOUNTED PROJECT-AFFECTED PERSONS (PAPs) WITH TREES AND PERENNIALS for A) MARIHATAG, SURIGAO DEL SUR

3) BRGY. AMONTAY, MARIHATAG

Name Particular Number of Unit Cost Amount Total Amount Name ParticularUnits Payable 450.00 1. Montano Campos Banana hills 6 PF 75.00 PR 450 00 P 2. Florenda Canial Banana hills 4 75.00 300.00 300.00 3. Mercedes Lozada Coconut trees 7 300.00 2,100.00 2,325.00 Banana hills 3 75.00 225.00 Banana hills 9 75.00 675.00 1,000.00 4. David Lamela Tambis 1 100.00 100.00 Guyabano 3 75.00 225.00 5. Agelarda Paturgo Guava 1 75.00 75.00 175.00 Tambis 1 100.00 100.00 6. Carmelita Sanchez Guava 1 75.00 75.00 75.00 7. Prudencio Campos, Jr. Banana hills 2 75.00 150.00 450.00 Coconut tree 1 300.00 300.00 8. Iglicerio Avila Banana hills 14 75.00 1,050.00 1,050.00 00 9. Carlos Osorio Banana hills 10 75.00 750.00 750 1,200.00 10. Sammy Plenos Banana hills 16 75.00 1,200.00 2,700.00 11. Silverio Cacho Coconut trees 9 300.00 2,700.00 12. Nerio Cacho Coconut trees 5 300.00 1,500.00 Mango 2 500.00 1,000.00 13. Pedriano Cacho Mango 1 500.00 500.00 500.00 14. Felix Eco Coconut trees 2 300.00 600.00 600.00 600.00 15. Lino Cacho Coconut trees 2 300.00 600.00 TOTAL p 14,675.00 UNACCOUNTED PROJECT-AFFECTED PERSONS (PAPs) WITH TREES AND PERENNIALS for B) SAN AGUSTIN, SURIGAO DEL SUR

1) PONGTUD, SAN AGUSTIN

Name Particular NUnit | Unit Cost Amount PayAmoblunt

1 Iluminado Baybay Coconut tree 1 P 300.00 P 300.00 P 300 00 2. Oceano Baybay Coconut trees 2 300 00 600.00 600.00 3. Eduardo Baybay, Jr. Coconut trees 6 300 00 1,800.00 1,800 00 4. Lopeciano Alameda Coconut trees 3 300.00 900.00 975.00 Banana hill 1 75.00 75 00 5. Petronilo Pal Banana hills 16 75.00 1,200.00 1,200.00 TOTAL p 4,875.00

2) OTIEZA, SAN AGUSTIN

Name Particular Number of Unit Cost Amount Total Amount

1. Gaudencia Iglesia Banana hills 5 p- 75.00 P 375.00 P 375.00 2. Letecia Orcullo Coconut tree 1 300.00 300.00 600.00 Banana hills 4 75.00 300.00 3. Perfecto Avila Coconut tree 1 300.00 300.00 300.00 4. Sagrada Gonzaga Coconut tree 1 300.00 300.00 300.00 5. Rosita 0. Avila Coconut trees 3 - 300 00 900.00 900.00 6. Rubenciano Garay Coconut trees 4 300.00 1,200.00 1,200 00 Guava 1 75.00 75.00 7. Wilfredo Pontillo Tambis 2 100.00 200.00 675.00 Cacao 1 100.00 100.00 Banana hills 4 75.00 300.00 8. Nerio Samson Mango 1 500.00 500.00 500.00 TOTAL p 4,850.00

3) KAUSWAGAN, SAN AGUSTIN

Name Particular Number of Unit Cost Amount Totale Units Payable

1. Isabelita Alameda Coconut trees 2 P 300 00 P 600 00 P 900 00 Banana hills 4 75.00 300.00 Coconut trees 2 300.00 600.00 600.00 Banana hills 2 75.00 150.00 150 00 Coconut trees 20 300 00 6,000.00 Banana hills 5 75.00 375.00 3. Rustico F. Corvera Falcata 1 220 00 220 00 7,015.00 Jackfruit 1 200.00 200.00

_Gemilina 1 220 00 220.00 TOTAL P 8,665.00 UNACCOUNTED PROJECT-AFFECTED PERSONS (PAPs) WITH TREES AND PERENNIALS for B) SAN AGUSTIN, SURIGAO DEL SUR

4) BUHISAN, SAN AGUSTIN

Nam Particular Number of Unit Cost A t Total Amount Name Particular Units moun Payable

Coconut tree 1 p- 300.00 P 300.00 P 1. Capitolina Plaza Banana hill 1 75.00 75.00 - 575.00 Papaya 1 50.00 50.00 Guava 2 75.00 150.00 Banana hill 1 75.00 75.00 2. Rudencio Corvera Guava 2 75.00 150.00 725.00 Mango 1 500.00 500.00 TOTAL P 1,300.00

5) BUATONG, SAN AGUSTIN

Name Particular Number of Unit Cost Amount Total Amount

1. Iriberta Samson Banana hills 2 P 75.00 P 150.00 R 150.00 2. Isidro Corvera Banana hills 8 75.00 600.00 2,580.00 Gemilina 9 220.00 1,980.00 , Banana hills 4 75.00 300.00 3. Quezon Campos Papaya 5 50.00 250.00 750.00 Tambis 2 100.00 200.00 4. Amador Alegre Banana hills 6 75.00 450.00 450.00 TOTAL p 3,930.00

6) SALVACION, SAN AGUSTIN

Name Particular Number of Unit Cost Amount Total Amount Units Payable 1. Justito Simplicio Coconut trees 2 P 300.00 Pl 600.00 P 825.00 Banana hills 3 75.00 225.00 2. Babilas Campos Coconut trees 2 300.00 600.00 600.00 3. Macleon Pandiling Mango 2 500.00 1,000.00 1,000.00 Banana hills 8 75.00 600.00 600.00 4. Ernesta Dumagan Banana hill 1 75.00 75.00 375.00 Coconut tree 1 300.00 300.00 5. Nestor Germano Coconut trees 18 300.00 5,400.00 5,800.00 Jackfruit 2 200.00 400.00 , 6. Jusintino Santa Coconut trees 3 300.00 900.00 1,800.00 Banana hills 12 75.00 900.00 TOTAL P 11,000.00 UNACCOUNTED PROJECT-AFFECTED PERSONS (PAPs) WITH TREES AND PERENNIALS for B) SAN AGUSTIN, SURIGAO DEL SUR

7) GATA, SAN AGUSTIN

Name Particular Number of Unit Cost Amount Total Amount Units Payable 1. Cornelio Santa Bamboo groove 3 P 220 00 P 660.00 P 660.00 2. Benjamen Libosana Star apple 1 175.00 175.00 250.00 Guava 1 75.00 75.00 Coconut trees 22 300.00 6,600.00 7,470.00 3. Fajulio Jimenez Banana hills 2 75.00 150.00 Mango 1 500.00 500.00 Mahogany 1 220.00 220.00 Coconut tree 1 300.00 300 00 1,150.00 4 Crnstobal Guile Jackfruit 1 200.00 200.00 Mango 1 500.00 500.00i Banana hills 2 75.00 150.00 X Banana hills 3 75.00 225.00 500.00 5 Marcelina Abano Star apple 1 175.00 175.00 Tambis 1 100.00 100.00 6 Menisa Gomez Banana hills 6 75 00 450.00 450.00 7 Loreto Alvarez Banana hills 7 75.00 525.00 525.00 8 Sulbet Orcullo Banana hills 4 75.00 300 00 300.00 9 Dionesio Ines Banana hill 1 75.00 75.00 75.00 Coconut trees 9 300.00 2,700.00 4,780 00 Falcata 3 220.00 660.00 10 Sandy Guerero Banana hills 14 75.00 1,050 00 Cacao 1 100.00 100.00 Pine tree 1 220.00 220.00

-Nipa land 70 sq.m. - - 50.00 TOTAL 4 16,160.00 UNACCOUNTED PROJECT-AFFECTED PERSONS (PAPs) WITH TREES AND PERENNIALS for C) LIANGA, SURIGAO DEL SUR

1) MANYAYAY, LIANGA

Number of Total Amount Name Particular Units Unit Cost Amount Payable 220.00 1 Dominador Sajor Falcata tree 1 p 220.00 P 220 00 P Guava 1 75.00 75.00 850.00 2Renato de Castro Jackfruit 3 200.00 600.00 Cacao 1 100 00 100.00 Guyabano 1 75.00 75.00 100.00 3 Florencio de Castro Nipa land 140 sq.m. 100.00 4 Editha Acero Banana hills 8 75.00 600.00 600.00 5 Cedula Abapo Coconut trees 16 300.00 4,800.00 4,800.00 Banana hils 12 75.00 900.00 5,520.00 6 Trinidad S. Canon Mahogany 15 220.00 3,300.00 Manguim 4 220.00 880.00 Gemillina 2 220.00 440.00 Banana hills 25 75.00 1,875.00 3,590.00 7Federico Abulencia Cacao 1 100.00 100.00 Guava 1 75.00 75.00 Bamboo groove 7 220.00 1,540.00 600.00 1,260.00 *8 Melvin Escol Coconut trees 2 300.00 Falcata 3 220.00 660.00 Banana hills 5 75.00 375.00 2,095.00 9 Dominador Picador Coconut trees 5 300.00 1,500.00 Falcata 1 220.00 220.00 10 George Macawill Bamboo groove 1 220.00 220.00 295.00 Banana hill 1 75.00 75.00 1,500.00 11 Jesus Orillaneda Coconut trees 5 300.00 1,500.00 600.00 12 David de Castro Coconut trees 2 300.00 600.00 Coconut trees 1 300.00 300.00 975.00 13 Edtha Acer Mango 1 500.00 500.00 Tambis 1 100.00 100.00 Guava 1 75.00 75.00 450.00 14 Juanito Ebol Banana hills 6 75.00 450.00 440.00 15 Ricaredo de Castro Falcata 2 220.00 440.00 150.00 16 Rosalinda ronquillo Macopa 1 150.00 150.00 Guava 3 75.00 225 00 725.00 17 Carina Baradilo Coconut trees 1 300.00 300.00 Jackfruit 1 200.00 200.00 Bamboo groove 2 220.00 440.00 590.00 Banana hills 2 75.00 150.00 900.00 19 Santiago Doelra Coconut trees 3 300.00 900.00 Coconut trees 4 300.00 1,200.00 2,300.00 20 Ireneo Rstor Bamboo groove 5 220.00 1,100.00 525 00 21 Dra. Editha Resus Banana hills 7 75.00 525.00 TOTAL P 28,485.00 UNACCOUNTED PROJECT-AFFECTED PERSONS (PAPs) WITH TREES AND PERENNIALS for LIANGA, SURIGAO DEL SUR

2) DIATAGON - NONE 3) CHRISTINE, LINAGA

Name Particular Units Unit Cost Amount Total Aeount Coconut trees 6 p 300.00 R 1,800.00 P 2,250.00 Banana hills 6 75 00 450 00 2 Celirino Martizano Coconut trees 1 300.00 300.00 300.00 3 Servillano Simbajon Coconut trees 6 300 00 1,800.00 1,800.00

TOTAL P 4,350.00

4) GANAYON, LIANGA

Name Particular Number of unit Cost Amount Total Amount Units Payable Falcata 6 220.00 P 1,320.00 -P 5,070.00 Guava 75.00 75.00 1 Romualdo Susi Guyabano 75.00 75 00 Banana hills 4 75.00 300 00 Coconut trees 11 300.00 3,300.00 2 Rodulfo Uriarte Banana hills 2 75.00 150.00 4,150.00 Coconut trees 6 300.00 1,800.00 Falcata 10 220.00 2,200.00 3 Alfredo Lemas Banana hills 2 75.00 150.00 150.00 4 DaderaSuapa Mango 1 500 00 500.00 675.00 4 Daderna Sulapas Caimito 1 175.00 175.00 Coconut trees 22 300.00 6,600.00 6,925.00 5 Gertrudes Sanchez Pomelo 1 175.00 175.00 Banana hills 2 75.00 150.00 Coconut trees 10 300.00 3,000.00 3,575.00 6 Editha Acero Mango 1 500 00 500.00 Guyabano 1 75.00 75.00 7 Cecilia Young Banana hills 4 75.00 300.00 300 00 8 Artemio Gomez Banana hills 6 75.00 450 00 1,650.00 Coconut trees 4 300.00 1,200 00 9 Nicoemos C Coconut trees 2 300.00 600.00 628.00 Nipa land 40 sq.m. 28.00 Mango 2 500.00 1,000 00 1,750.00 10 Clementino Corvera Banana hills 2 75.00 150.00 Coconut trees 2 300.00 600.00 11 Innocencia Mejores Coconut trees 2 300.00 600.00 600.00 12 Maria R. Samchez Coconut trees 1 300.00 300.00 300.00 13 Pamfilo Bunotan Coconut trees 19 300.00 5,700.00 5,700.00 14 Esmerqalda Sandico Coconut trees 6 300.00 1,800.00 1,800.00 15 Sulpicio Saracin, Jr. Coconut trees 2 300.00 600.00 600.00 16 Benvenido Bala-an Coconut trees 12 300 00 3,600 00 3,675.00 Banana hill 1 75 00 75 00 |- _ Coconut trees 2 300 00 600 00 800 00 17 Lolan Pocon Jackfruit 1 200.00 200.00

18 Artemio Mejares Coconut trees -8 300.00 2,400 00 2,400 00 ______I-- 1- n Tr)TA1 W An 7,dA nn UNACCOUNTED PROJEC-AFFECTED PERSONS (PAPs) WITH TREES AND PERENNIALS for C) LIANGA, SURIGAO DEL SUR

5) BANAHAO, LIANGA

Name Particulars Number of Unit Cost Amount Payable

1. Gloria Patalinghog Coconut trees 4 p 300.00 P 1,200.00 P 1,218.20 Nipa land 25 sq. m. __18.20 2. George Suarez Coconut trees 5 300.00 1,500.00 1,500.00 3. Pablito Camino Nipa land 250 sq. m. - 175.00 175.00 4. Luzviminda Bobis Banana hills 9 75.00 675.00 975.00 Coconut tree 1 300.00 300.00 5. Juanito Adanza Mango 1 500.00 500.00 500.00 6. Leoncito Sarmen, Sr. Coconut trees 3 300.00 900.00 2,600.00 Mango 3 500.00 1,500.00 Jackfruit 1 200.00 200.00 7. Alfredo R. Sarmen Mango 1 500.00 500.00 575.00 Guyabano 1 75.00 75.00 8. Raymundo Moreno Pomelo 1 175.00 175.00 3,575.00 Mango 2 500.00 1,000.00 Gemelina 7 220.00 1,540.00 Papaya 1 50.00 50.00 Guava 1 75.00 75.00 Manglum 3 220.00 660.00 Banana hill 1 75.00 75.00 9. Nemesia Cifra Cacao 1 100.00 100.00 700.00 Coconut tree 2 300.00 600.00 10. Victor Campos Falcata 1 220.00 220.00 295.00 Banana hill 1 75.00 75.00 ___ 12____3___0_ Total 4 12,113.20

6) BAN-AS, LIANGA

Name Particulars Number of Unit Cost Amount Total Amount Units Payable 1. Raymundo Moreno Banana hills 8 p 75.00 P 600.00 P 617.50 Nipa land 25 sq. m. - 17.50 Total P 617.50 UNACCOUNTED PROJEC-AFFECTED PERSONS (PAPs) WITH TREES AND PERENNIALS for C) LIANGA, SURIGAO DEL SUR

7) PAYASAN, LIANGA

Number of Total Amount Name Particulars Nunit Unit Cost Amount Payale Units Payable 1. Cresencio Lonio Banana hills 7 p 75.00 P 525.00 P 525.00 2. Florencio Curada Palm tree 1 220.00 220 00 220.00 3 LGU-Payasan Gemilina 13 220.00 2,860.00 2,860.00 4. Eden Cambalon Guyabano 1 75.00 75.00 75.00 5. Rizalino Delfin Guava 1 75.00 75.00 75.00 6. Pacita Limit Mango 1 500.00 500.00 800.00 Calamansi 1 125.00 125.00 Star apple 1 175.00 175.00 7. Cresenciano Salinas Coconut tree 1 300.00 300.00 300.00 '8. Pacifico Layno Guava 1 75.00 75.00 200.00 Guyabano 1 75.00 75.00 Papaya 1 50.00 50.00 9. Nona Salinas Banana hills 3 75.00 225.00 225.00 Total P 5,280.00 UNACCOUNTED PROJEC-AFFECTED PERSONS (PAPs) WITH TREES AND PERENNIALS for C) LIANGA, SURIGAO DEL SUR

8Js BAUCAWE

Name Particulars Number of Unit Cost Amount TotaP Amount

P 750.00 P 750.00 -k Sonito Layno, Sr. Banana hills 10 FP 75.00 2. Ricaredo Layno, Sr. Coconut trees 21 300.00 6,300.00 6,750.00 Banana hills 6 75.00 450.00 1 -ibradaLayno Coconut trees 3 300.00 900.00 900.00 odesto Viasanta Coconut trees 18 300.00 5,400.00 5,400.00 l 2 /7enico Gascon Coconut trees 3 300.00 900.00 900.00 dela ruz Coconut trees 7 300.00 2,100.00 2,100.00 rn nida Coconut trees 7 300.00 2,100.00 2,100.00 300.00 4,800.00 5,315.00 s pacifico Taldo Coconut trees 16 . Atipo 2 220.00 440.00 _ Guyabano 1 75.00 75.00 600.00 Cresenciano Salinas Coconut trees 2 300.00, 600.00 l o. F'ab o Cotiangio Banana hills 6 75.00 450.00 1,350.00 Coconut trees 3 300.00 900.00 900.00 1 1; i Udito Alvizo Coconut trees 3 300.00 900.00 300.00 12. MeniIco Alvizo - Coconut tree 1 300.00 300.00 sBanana hills 4 75.00 300.00 600.00 Coconut tree 1 300.00 300.00 i4- pedro Orbeta Banana hills 12 75.00 900.00 1,400.00 Coconut tree 1 300.00 300.00 Jackfruit 1 200.00 200.00 =15.Mortaflo Alv:zo Banana hills 5 75.00 375.00 375.00 Sampiano Banana hills 4 75.00 300.00 400.00 Cacao 1 100.00 100.00 ~Bemedios Cueta Coconut tree 1 300.00 300.00 525.00 Banana hills 2 75.00 150.00 Guyabano 1 75.00 75.00 __ 1,500 00 18.genito Trirnidal Coconut trees 5 300.00 1,500.00 600.00 675.00 1. o Coconut trees 2 300.00 Banana hill 1 75.00 75.00 20. ELigenlo de Castro Coconut trees 5 300 00 1,500.00 1,500.00 21. L-ucita LaYr~ Coconut trees 8 300.00 2,400.00 2,400 00 22. Modesta Villasanta- Coconut trees 8 300.00 2,400.00 Total R 39,140.00 UNACCOUNTED PROJEC-AFFECTED PERSONS (PAPs) WITH TREES AND PERENNIALS for C) LIANGA, SURIGAO DEL SUR

9) ANIBONGAN

Name Particular Nunber of Unit Cost Amount Total Amount 1 Lucita Layno Coconut trees 10 p 300.00 P 3,000.00 P 3,000.00 Garcia Falcata 1 220.00 220.00 4,120.00 2 Gregorio Garcia Coconut trees 13 300.00 3,900 00 Coconut trees 23 300.00 6,900.00 8,620.00 3 Norberto Morgado Coconut trees 5 300.00 1,500.00 Falcata 1 220.00 220.00 4 SantiagoLim Banana hills 3 75.00 225.00 525 00 4 Santiago Urn Coconut trees 1 300.00 300.00 5 Dioscoro Mejores Tambis 1 100.00 100.00 100.00 6 Artemia Moreno Jackfruit 1 200.00 200.00 200.00 7 Balbino Curato Mango 2 500.00 1,000.00 1,900.00 7__Balbino____Curato __ Coconut trees 3 300.00 900.00 Coconut trees 1 300.00 300 00 820.00 8 Nuerlie P. Anasco Falcata 1 220.00 - 220.00 - -- Banana hills 4 75.00 300 00 Banana hills 1 75.00 75.00 375.00 9 Genoniva Pontillo Coconut trees 1 300.00 300.00Pllo Coconut trees 13 300.00 3,900.00 5,000.00 10 Almario C. Bulawit Bamboo groove 1 220.00 220.00 Falcata 4 220.00 880.00 11 Sixto Malinao Coconut trees 3 300.00 900.00 2,325.00 Banana hills 19 75.00 1,425.00 12 Eleuterio T. Molarto Coconut trees 1 300.00 300 00 300.00 Atipo 1 150.00 150.00 675.00 13 Urbiztondo Banana hills 7 75 00 525.00 14 Andrew Narnan Coconut trees 2 300.00 600.00 600.00 Coconut trees 4 300.00 1,200.00 1,860.00 15 Emeliora Morgado Falcata 3 220.00 660.00 16 Sixto Malinao Coconut trees 4 300.00 1,200.00 1,200.00 17 Nelson Bade Coconut trees 10 300.00 3,000.00 3,000.00

TOTAL P2 34,620.00