Metro Manila generates 2,000 million m3 of wastewater every day. Without adequate
sewerage facilities, only around 17% of this volume gets treated before being discharged into water channels in and around the metropolis (World Bank 2012, p.1). Sewerage and sanitations systems comprise of individual septic tanks, public toilets, communal septic tanks, sewage and septage treatment facilities, desludging and recycling of sludge and effluent.
Sanitation services offered by the concessionaires involve the cleaning up of septic tanks and the construction of septage treatment plants for the treatment of sludge (World Bank 2012, p.2). The two water utilities offer septic tank siphoning services to its customer, the cost of which is incorporated in the customer’s monthly invoice and billed as environmental charge. This fee constitutes 20% of the customer’s total bill (World Bank 2013, p.32). The water utilities usually coordinate with the local barangay on the schedule for desludging services. Should the resident miss this, emergency septic tank cleaning for a fee may be scheduled with the water utilities. Sewerage services, on the other hand, involve the
construction of separate sewer lines that bring wastewater to STPs for treatment before disposal in the nearest waterway or recycled for other use (Kearton et al. 2013; World Bank 2005).
The original performance targets of the concessionaires for sewerage and sanitation services required the implementation of a large, highly centralised sewerage treatment system with separate sewer lines systems in Metro Manila. It was envisioned that septic tanks would be phased out as individual households would be directly connected to the sewerage network. The original population targets for sanitation and sewerage services coverage in each service area are shown in Table 4.3. As sewerage coverage increased, the sanitation targets decreased because the original CA worked on the assumption that all households would eventually be connected to the sewer system (Tetra Tech & Berkman 2013; CTI Engineering International Co. 2009).
Table 4.3 Sewerage service coverage targets for East and West service areas
Concessionaire 2001 2006 2011 2016 2021 MWSI Sewerage 16% 20% 21% 31% 66% Sanitation 43% 46% 43% 39% 27% MWCI Sewerage 3% 16% 51% 52% 55% Sanitation 38% 32% 27% 24% 19%
*% of water served population
Source: Preparatory Survey for Metro Manila Sewerage and Sanitation Improvement, 2009
After the concessions were awarded, it became apparent that it would be challenging to implement these targets. Metro Manila is one of the most densely populated metropolises in the world and there is a shortage of suitable land for the proposed centralised treatment plant. In 2001, Manila Water’s actual coverage in 2006 for sewerage was at 1.3% and sanitation at 9%. Maynilad, on the other hand, met its sewerage target of 16% in 2006, mainly because two of the three existing STPs were located in the West zone and were upgraded and rehabilitated under the Manila Second Sewerage Project (MSSP). The MSSP was a World Bank funded project entered by the Philippine government in 1996. This dropped to 10% in 2007 as water service connections increased, which is the denominator for sewerage coverage. Also, the sewerage program was suspended during the period between 2003 and 2007 as the company went through debt restructuring, rebidding and eventually, was awarded to a new operator (Tetra Tech & Berkman 2013; CTI Engineering International Co. 2009).
During the first rate rebasing exercise in 2003, the government agreed to revise the 1997 performance targets for sewerage to ensure affordable tariffs and overcome
implementation constraints. The concessionaires were allowed to implement a
decentralised sewerage strategy, which involved the construction of small STPs of at least one per city. The existing drainage system would be converted into combined sewerage- drainage system. This was cheaper to implement compared to separate sewer lines because it would utilise the existing drainage system to catch the wastewater from the households and storm run-off going into the drainage (Kearton et al. 2013, p.18).
Interceptor boxes on junctions of the drainage pipes would be installed, which would divert the untreated wastewater to interceptor lines leading to the STPs. Under this system, individual household connections to the sewer lines are no longer necessary. At a later stage, these systems could be gradually converted to separate systems (GO-2014-004) (Tetra Tech & Berkman 2013, pp.2–17). As combined sewer systems were new to the Philippines, the World Bank provided technical and financial assistance to ensure viability of such systems in the Philippine context (World Bank 2012; Tetra Tech & Berkman 2013). The first STP with the combined sewer systems was the Pineda STP in Pasig City completed in 2008 by Manila Water (Pham & Kuyama 2013; Olchondra 2011).
In 2009, with sewerage coverage at barely 10% of the service area and with the contract almost halfway through, the concessionaires anticipated that cost recovery would result to higher tariffs for consumers. It is estimated that the capital cost of sewerage infrastructure in Metro Manila, would be at least US$250 per capita, which would be a substantial amount to entirely recover through tariffs (World Bank 2013, p.2). In 2009 and 2010, Manila Water and Maynilad’s contracts were respectively extended for another 15 years to allow the concessionaires to accelerate and double the investment for sewerage and sanitation and to support the development of new water sources. The extension also gave the concessionaires a longer investment recovery period, thus trimming future tariff increases for its customers (Go 2009; Go 2010). As a result of the contract extension, the concessionaires committed to double their capital investments in sewerage and sanitation and increase coverage target to 100% by 2037, from 55% for Manila Water and 66% for Maynilad under the original CA expiry in 2022 (Tetra Tech & Berkman 2013; CTI
Engineering International Co. 2009). Table 4.4 shows the sewerage and sanitation services targets under the original CA, the 2008 business plans and the CA extension.
Table 4.4 Original and revised sewerage service coverage targets
Year
Manila Water Maynilad
1997 CA % 2008 Rate Rebasing % of households* CA Extension % 1997 CA % 2008 Rate Rebasing % CA Extension % 2001 3% 16% 2006 16% 20% 2011 51% 144,300 hh (16%) 21% 13% 11% 2016 52% 154,775 hh (14%) 31% 29% 31% 2018 63% 2021 55% 278,175 hh (22%) 66% 39% 66% 2025 100% 2026 76% 2031 88% 2036 100%
Note: Sewerage coverage given as percentage of water-served population
Source: 2013 MWSS Master Plan, update of 2005 Master Plan, 2008 MWCI Business Plan, 2008 MWSI Business Plan
*The 2013 Master Plan did not provide a comparable breakdown for Manila Water’s 2008 sewerage targets.
As of December 2011, it was reported that Manila Water’s service coverage was at 13% of the population with a treatment capacity of 128 mld while Maynilad Water was at 6% of service area population with a treatment capacity of 468 mld (Kearton et al. 2013, p.37).