Thursday, October 16, 2008 Water district cites law for 'water use fee' By Carlo P. Mallo
THE fees being demanded by the Davao City Water District (DCWD) from a beverage company operating in the southern part of the city are provided for under the law, said a high-ranking executive of DCWD.
A member of the Davao City Council raised a proposal during Tuesday's session to probe the water utility for allegedly demanding payment of production assessment fee in exchange for its issuance of a "certificate of no opposition."
"We are not opposing their operation and even of their wells where they will source their water, as we do not have pipes linking to their site of operation," Imelda Magsuci, spokesperson and finance manager of DCWD, said in an interview Wednesday.
"But the law provides that they have to pay the production assessment fee," she added.
Magsuci cited Section 39 of Presidential Decree (PD) 198 otherwise known as the Provincial Water Utilities Act of 1973, to wit:
"Production Assessment - In the event the board of a district finds, after notice and hearing, that production of ground water by other entities within the district for commercial or industrial uses is injuring or reducing the district's financial condition, the board may adopt and levy a ground water production assessment to compensate for such loss. In connection therewith, the district may require necessary reports by the operator of any commercial or industrial well. Failure to pay said assessment shall constitute an invasion of the waters of the district and shall entitle this district to an injunction and damages pursuant to Section 32 of this Title."
"PD 198 is our bible, it is the handbook of all water districts," Magsuci said.
In a statement, the water utility firm said: "Interbev Philippines Inc. was applying for water permit for its water wells located in Lower Binugao, Toril, Davao City. The DCWD issued certificate of no opposition."
"Why? The District cannot as yet supply the water requirements of Interbev; no pipelines linking yet to the establishment of Interbev," the statement said.
DCWD cited Section 31 of PD 198 as its legal basis wherein it states that: "Section 31. Protection of Waters and Facilities of the District. A district shall have the right to:
(a) Commence, maintain, intervene in, defend and compromise actions or proceedings to prevent interference with or deterioration of water quality or the natural flow of any surface, stream or ground water supply which may be used or useful for any purpose of the district or be a common benefit to the lands or its inhabitants. The ground water within a district is necessary to the performance of the district's powers and such district is hereby authorized to adopt rules and regulations subject to the approval of the National Water Resources Board governing the drilling, maintenance and operation of wells within its boundaries for purposes other than a single family domestic use on overlaying land. Any well operated in violation of such regulations shall be deemed in interference with the waters of the district.
(b) Require a developer or builder of any structure within the service areas of the district to extend or connect its pipeline facilities to the district facilities whenever such development or structure is within one hundred meters of existing district facilities or whenever the district is willing to extend its facilities within one hundred meters of said development or structure. For the purpose of this section, development shall include the subdivision of land for any purpose other than agricultural purpose, and structure shall mean any building or facility to be used for residential, commercial or industrial purposes."
DCWD added that it can compel an establishment to avail of its water services whenever such establishment is within the reach of its existing facilities. However, it admitted that it cannot provide for the supply needed by Interbev.
"The principles of fair play - If Pedro cannot supply Juan with a basic necessity of life; Pedro should not stop Juan from pursuing means of obtaining that basic necessity that he cannot supply," the statement of DCWD reads.
The issue arose from a letter of Interbev Philippines addressed to the City Planning and Development Office (CPDO), which was read aloud by Councilor Danilo Dayanghirang during Tuesday's session.
Interbev, in its letter, said "it is not agreeable or in conformity" to the condition imposed by DCWD stated in the certificate.
The Certificate of No Opposition is one of the requirements of the CPDO for the issuance of a Zoning Clearance needed for the proposed site development of the company's plant in Barangay Binugao, Toril, Davao City.
Dayanghirang was reportedly questioning the capacity of DCWD to demand fees from a private company and was quoted saying: "It is not right for them to do that. It is the local government, which has the right to collect fees and taxes. After all, it is the city that owns these resources."
The councilor added that the fees being collected by the water utility will only be an additional burden would discourage investors from doing business in Davao City.
"They are asking for fees for the use of water but they are not even paying the city their obligation for the utilization of its water," Dayanghirang said, chiding the water utility.
