Pasig Marikina

DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC
JAPAN INTERNATIONAL
WORKS AND HIGHWAYS
COOPERATION AGENCY
REPUBLIC OF THE
PHILIPPINES
THE DETAILED DESIGN

OF
PASIG-MARIKINA RIVER CHANNEL
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (PHASE III)
FINAL REPORT
VOLUME-II
MAIN REPORT
FEBRUARY 2013
GE
CR(3)
12-207
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC
JAPAN INTERNATIONAL
WORKS AND HIGHWAYS
COOPERATION AGENCY
REPUBLIC OF THE
PHILIPPINES
THE DETAILED DESIGN

OF
FINAL REPORT
VOLUME-II
MAIN REPORT
FEBRUARY 2013
COMPOSITION OF FINAL REPORT
VOLUME-I : SUMMARY
VOLUME-II : MAIN REPORT

STRUCTURAL CALCULATION OF
VOLUME-III-1 :
PASIG RIVER
STRUCTURAL CALCULATION OF
VOLUME-III-2 :
LOWER MARIKINA RIVER
QUANTITY CALCULATION OF
VOLUME-IV-1 :
PASIG RIVER
QUANTITY CALCULATION OF
VOLUME-IV-2 :
LOWER MARIKINA RIVER
VOLUME-V : COST ESTIMATE
EXCHANGE RATES USED IN THE REPORT:

PHP 1.00 = JPY 1.968
USD 1.00 = JPY 80.940 = PHP 41.123
(Monthly Average in November 2012 of Central Bank of the Philippines)

MARIKINA Br.
DELPAN Br. NAGTAHAN Br.
LAMBINGAN Br.
MANGAHAN
FLOODWAY
C-5 Br.
Proposed NAPINDAN
Backfill Site CHANNEL
PROJECT LOCATION MAP
i
THE DETAILED DESIGN
OF
FINAL REPORT
Vol.-II MAIN REPORT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PROJECT LOCATION MAP.......................................................................................... i

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ...................................................................... xi
CHAPTER 1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION .....................................................................1.1

1.1 Background of the Project ....................................................................................1.1
1.1.1 Master Plan of Flood Control for Pasig-Marikina River ................................1.1
1.1.2 The Overall Project (PMRCIP).......................................................................1.2
1.1.3 PMRCIP Phase I .............................................................................................1.2
1.1.4 PMRCIP Phase II............................................................................................1.3
1.2 PMRCIP Phase III.................................................................................................1.3
1.2.1 Review of the Existing Study .........................................................................1.3
1.2.2 Policy Considerations of the Basic Design.....................................................1.4
1.2.3 Objective of the Detailed Design Study..........................................................1.4
1.2.4 Scope of the Detailed Design Study ...............................................................1.4
1.2.5 Scope of Construction Works in the Preparatory Study .................................1.5
CHAPTER 2 NATURAL CONDITIONS.....................................................................2.1

2.1 Topographic Survey..............................................................................................2.1
2.1.1 Objectives and Scope of the Topographic Survey..........................................2.1
2.1.2 Methodology of the Topographic Survey .......................................................2.1
2.2 Geology.................................................................................................................2.7
2.2.1 Objective of the Geotechnical Study ..............................................................2.7
2.2.2 Scope and Methodology of the Geotechnical Study.......................................2.7
2.3 Results of the Survey ............................................................................................2.9
2.3.1 Topography and Geology of the Survey Area ................................................2.9
2.3.2 Engineering Properties of Soils ....................................................................2.10
2.3.3 Test Results on Dredging Materials..............................................................2.12
2.3.4 Recommendation for Construction ...............................................................2.15
CHAPTER 3 BASIC DESIGN OF RIVER AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT.....3.1

3.1 Summary of Basic Design of Pasig River Improvement Works ..........................3.1
3.1.1 Review of Improved Areas .............................................................................3.1
3.1.1.1 Classification of the Pasig River Improvement Plan in Phase III.............3.1
3.1.1.2 Correlation between Result of Schmidt Hammer Test and Damage ........3.2
3.1.1.3 Possible Causes of Deterioration of Revetment........................................3.3
3.1.1.4 Improvement Areas for Phase III..............................................................3.5
iii
3.1.2 Basic Design of Steel Sheet Pile Revetment in Pasig River...........................3.8
3.1.3 Basic Design of Harbor ................................................................................3.18
3.1.4 Review of Foot Protection ............................................................................3.21
3.1.5 Basic Design of Reinforced Concrete Floodwall .........................................3.24
3.1.5.1 Design Condition ....................................................................................3.24
3.1.5.2 Design Calculation of the Floodwall ......................................................3.26
3.2 Summary of Basic Design of Lower Marikina River Improvement ..................3.27
3.2.1 Scope of Basic Design of Lower Marikina River Improvement ..................3.27
3.2.1.1 Design Condition ....................................................................................3.27
3.2.1.2 Design Range in Lower Marikina River.................................................3.27
3.2.2 Site Investigation ..........................................................................................3.28
3.2.3 Basic Design of Dike ....................................................................................3.31
3.2.3.1 Arrangement of Design Conditions ........................................................3.31
3.2.3.2 Study of Basic Structure of Dike ............................................................3.32
3.2.3.3 Study of Dike Form and Location ..........................................................3.32
3.2.3.4 Qualitative Study of Dike Structure .......................................................3.33
3.2.4 Basic Design of Reinforced Concrete Flood Wall .......................................3.33
3.2.5 Basic Design of Dredging.............................................................................3.35
3.2.5.1 Dredging Section ....................................................................................3.35
3.2.5.2 Dredging Centerline................................................................................3.36
3.2.5.3 Design Dredging Soil Volume................................................................3.36
3.2.6 Backfill Site Plan ..........................................................................................3.37
3.2.7 Study of Boundary Bank ..............................................................................3.40
3.2.7.1 Comparison of Materials for Boundary Bank ........................................3.40
3.2.7.2 Purpose of Boundary Bank and Arrangement ........................................3.40
3.2.7.3 Details of Boundary Bank ......................................................................3.40
3.2.8 Prevention of Piers Foot Protection Method ................................................3.41
3.3 Summary of Basic Design of Drainage Works...................................................3.44
3.3.1 Summary on Drainage Facilities ..................................................................3.44
3.3.2 Existing Drainage Facilities..........................................................................3.45
3.3.3 Drainage Planning ........................................................................................3.47
3.3.4 Basic Design of Drainage Facilities .............................................................3.54
CHAPTER 4 DETAILED DESIGN OF RIVER AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS .... 4.1

4.1 Result of Design for Pasig River ..........................................................................4.1
4.1.1 Change in the Detail Design Stage .................................................................4.1
4.1.2 Steel Sheet Pile (Revetment) ..........................................................................4.1
4.1.2.1 Design of Revetment Works for Pasig River ...........................................4.1
4.1.2.2 Details of Design Method .........................................................................4.2
4.1.2.3 Parameters of Material............................................................................4.14
4.1.2.4 Design Criteria........................................................................................4.17
4.1.2.5 Sliding.....................................................................................................4.17
4.1.2.6 Overturning.............................................................................................4.18
4.1.2.7 Result of Design Calculation of Each Type of Revetment for Pasig River .....4.19
4.1.3 Drainage Facilities ........................................................................................4.25
4.2 Result of Design for Lower Marikina River.......................................................4.28
4.2.1 Changed in Detailed Design Stage ...............................................................4.28
4.2.2 River Structure..............................................................................................4.33
4.2.2.1 Design Concept.......................................................................................4.33
iv
4.2.2.2 Design Summary.....................................................................................4.34
4.2.2.3 Revetment Components ..........................................................................4.37
4.2.2.4 Immediate Settlement and Consolidation Settlement of Dike................4.51
4.2.2.5 Seepage of Dike ......................................................................................4.53
4.2.2.6 Foot Protection of Bridges ......................................................................4.53
4.2.2.7 Dredging and Disposal............................................................................4.55
4.2.3 Drainage Facilities ........................................................................................4.59
4.2.3.1 General....................................................................................................4.59
4.2.3.2 Detailed Design of Drainage Facilities ...................................................4.59
4.2.3.3 Detailed Design of Sluiceway.................................................................4.61
CHAPTER 5 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL CONSIDERATIONS..................5.1

5.1 EIA Study for the Backfill Site.............................................................................5.1
5.1.1 Purpose and Background ................................................................................5.1
5.1.2 Laws and Regulation.......................................................................................5.1
5.1.3 The EIA Study Works.....................................................................................5.2
5.2 Quality of Sediment to be Dredged ......................................................................5.5
5.2.1 Purpose and Background ................................................................................5.5
5.2.2 Sampling Procedure ........................................................................................5.5
5.2.3 Analytical Procedure.......................................................................................5.7
5.2.4 Results of River Sediment Quality Analyses and Evaluation of the
Investigations Results .....................................................................................5.9
5.2.5 Results of Soil Quality Analyses and Evaluation of the Investigations Results
.......................................................................................................................5.11
5.2.5.1 Results of Soil Quality by Elutriate Test ................................................5.11
5.2.5.2 Results of Soil Quality by TCLP Test ....................................................5.13
5.2.6 Evaluation and Consideration of the Results for the Construction Phase ....5.14
5.3 Tree Inventory Survey ........................................................................................5.14
5.3.1 Purpose and Background ..............................................................................5.14
5.3.2 Laws and Regulations ...................................................................................5.15
5.3.3 Methodology .................................................................................................5.16
5.3.4 Tree Inventory Survey ..................................................................................5.16
5.3.5 Results and Discussion .................................................................................5.17
5.4 Promotion of Reducing Poverty and Consideration of Gender Aspects.............5.19
5.4.1 Purpose and Background ..............................................................................5.19
5.4.2 Related Organizations and Laws and Regulations........................................5.19
5.4.2.1 Related Organizations.............................................................................5.19
5.4.2.2 The Presidential Commission for the Urban Poor ..................................5.20
5.4.2.3 National Anti-Poverty Commission........................................................5.20
5.4.3 Creating Job Opportunity and Offering Job Training during the Phase III
Construction Work........................................................................................5.21
5.4.4 Consideration of Gender Aspects in the Affected Area................................5.22
5.5 Land Acquisition and Resettlement Action Plan ................................................5.22
5.5.1 Agency Responsibility for Compensation and Resettlement........................5.22
5.5.2 Public Participation and Consultation, Stakeholder Participation ................5.23
5.5.3 Definition of Informal Settlers and Resettlement Eligibility........................5.26
5.5.4 Entitlement Matrix ........................................................................................5.27
5.5.5 Cut-Off Date .................................................................................................5.28
v
5.5.6 Institutional Organization for Implementation of Land Acquisition and
Resettlement Action Plan .............................................................................5.28
5.5.7 Schedule for Implementation of Resettlement Action Plan .........................5.30
CHAPTER 6 CONSTRUCTION PLAN.......................................................................6.1

6.1 General..................................................................................................................6.1
6.1.1 Basic Planning Condition ...............................................................................6.1
6.1.2 Contract Packages of Phase III .......................................................................6.1
6.1.3 Scope of Work ................................................................................................6.1
6.2 Construction Planning Method .............................................................................6.2
6.2.1 Construction Conditions .................................................................................6.2
6.2.2 Available Working Days ................................................................................6.3
6.2.3 Available Work Hours ....................................................................................6.4
6.2.4 Tidal Levels ....................................................................................................6.4
6.2.5 Site Condition .................................................................................................6.5
6.3 Resources ..............................................................................................................6.7
6.3.1 General............................................................................................................6.7
6.3.2 Labor...............................................................................................................6.7
6.3.3 Materials .........................................................................................................6.7
6.3.4 Construction Equipment .................................................................................6.9
6.3.5 Procurement Plan............................................................................................6.9
6.4 Construction Method ..........................................................................................6.10
6.4.1 General..........................................................................................................6.10
6.4.2 Steel Sheet Pile Pilling and Reinforced Concrete Floodwall .......................6.11
6.4.3 Drainage Works ............................................................................................6.15
6.4.4 Parapet Wall and Step Type Parapet Wall....................................................6.16
6.4.5 Dredging .......................................................................................................6.16
6.4.6 Bridge Pier Protection...................................................................................6.35
6.4.7 Dike with SSP Revetment ............................................................................6.37
6.4.8 Sluiceway......................................................................................................6.45
6.4.9 Supplementary Notes....................................................................................6.47
6.5 Construction Schedule ........................................................................................6.51
6.6 Quality Control Management .............................................................................6.52
6.6.1 General..........................................................................................................6.52
6.6.2 Staffing .........................................................................................................6.52
6.6.3 System and Procedures .................................................................................6.53
6.6.4 Control of Non-Conformance.......................................................................6.53
6.6.5 Subcontractors ..............................................................................................6.53
6.6.6 Amendments .................................................................................................6.53
6.6.7 Testing of Materials ......................................................................................6.54
6.6.8 Quality of Materials and Samples.................................................................6.54
6.6.9 Quality Records and Reports ........................................................................6.54
CHAPTER 7 COST ESTIMATE ..................................................................................7.1

7.1 Cost Estimation Conditions ..................................................................................7.1
7.2 Basic Conditions of Cost Estimate .......................................................................7.1
7.2.1 Price Level ......................................................................................................7.1
7.2.2 Exchange Rate ................................................................................................7.1
7.2.3 Currency for Cost Estimates ...........................................................................7.1
vi
7.2.3.1 Local Currency Portion.............................................................................7.1
7.2.3.2 Foreign Currency Portion .........................................................................7.2
7.2.4 Reference Guidelines/Manuals .......................................................................7.2
7.3 Methodology of Cost Estimate .............................................................................7.2
7.3.1 Direct Cost ......................................................................................................7.3
7.3.1.1 Labor Cost.................................................................................................7.3
7.3.1.2 Material Cost.............................................................................................7.3
7.3.1.3 Equipment Cost.........................................................................................7.4
7.3.2 Indirect Cost....................................................................................................7.4
7.3.2.1 Overhead Expenses...................................................................................7.4
7.3.2.2 Contingencies............................................................................................7.4
7.3.2.3 Miscellaneous Expenses ...........................................................................7.4
7.3.2.4 Contractor’s Profit Margin........................................................................7.5
7.3.2.5 Value Added Tax (VAT) ..........................................................................7.5
7.4 Composition of Project Cost.................................................................................7.5
7.4.1 Construction Cost............................................................................................7.5
7.4.2 Consulting Services Cost ................................................................................7.5
7.4.3 Compensation Cost .........................................................................................7.6
7.4.4 Administrative Cost ........................................................................................7.6
7.4.5 Physical and Price Contingencies, and Price Escalation ................................7.6
7.4.5.1 Physical Contingency................................................................................7.6
7.4.5.2 Price Contingency and Price Escalation ...................................................7.6
7.5 Estimated Construction Cost.................................................................................7.6
CHAPTER 8 PROJECT EVALUATION .....................................................................8.1

8.1 Evaluation of the Project.......................................................................................8.1
8.2 Technical Evaluation of the Project ......................................................................8.1
8.3 Social and Environmental Evaluation of the Project ............................................8.1
8.3.1 Assessment of Project Impacts .......................................................................8.1
8.3.2 Social and Environmental Mitigation Measures and Monitoring during Phase
III Construction Stage .....................................................................................8.4
CHAPTER 9 STUDY ON PLAN OF OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE ............9.1

9.1 General..................................................................................................................9.1
9.1.1 Purpose of Operation and Maintenance..........................................................9.1
9.1.2 Necessity of Operation and Maintenance Plan ...............................................9.1
9.1.3 Scope of Operation and Maintenance Plan.....................................................9.1
9.1.4 Approach for Operation and Maintenance......................................................9.1
9.1.5 River Basin Conditions and Facilities of Phase III Project.............................9.2
9.1.6 Facilities along the Channels of Pasig River and Lower Marikina River.......9.3
9.1.7 Organizational Setup for O&M ......................................................................9.3
9.2 MMDA’s Organization for Flood Control............................................................9.4
9.2.1 MMDA Organization on Flood Control .........................................................9.4
9.2.2 Major Task of Work of Operation and Maintenance Division 1 ....................9.7
9.3 Personnel of FCSMO............................................................................................9.7
9.4 Equipment for O&M.............................................................................................9.7
9.5 Budget ...................................................................................................................9.8
9.6 Operation Plan of the Phase III Project.................................................................9.9
9.6.1 General............................................................................................................9.9
vii
9.6.2 Flood Observation System..............................................................................9.9
9.6.3 Flood Warning System .................................................................................9.10
9.7 Maintenance Works ............................................................................................9.11
9.7.1 General..........................................................................................................9.11
9.7.2 Target for Maintenance.................................................................................9.11
9.7.3 Patrol and Inspection ....................................................................................9.11
9.7.4 Details of Maintenance Works .....................................................................9.12
9.7.5 Coordination with Flood Mitigation Committee, Disaster Risk Reduction and
Management Council and Barangays ...........................................................9.13
9.7.6 Resources Requirement for O&M ................................................................9.15
CHAPTER 10 ASSISTANCE IN NON-STRUCTURAL MEASURES CONDUCTED..............10.1

10.1 General..............................................................................................................10.1
10.2 Public Information Campaign and Publicity ....................................................10.1
10.2.1 Scope of ICP under the Detailed Design Study of Phase III Project..........10.1
10.2.2 Conducted Information Campaign and Publicity .......................................10.1
10.3 Establishment of Flood Mitigation Committee (FMC) for Pasig-Marikina River Basin ..10.5
10.3.1 Necessity of FMC .......................................................................................10.5
10.3.2 Scope of Work for Assistance in Establishment of FMC...........................10.5
10.3.3 Steps for Establishment of FMC.................................................................10.5
10.3.4 Comments of Standing Members on DPWH’s draft MOA........................10.6
10.3.5 Finalization of MOA incorporating Comments and Signing on MOA ......10.6
10.3.6 Summary of MOA for Establishment of FMC ...........................................10.6
10.3.7 Organization Meeting for Establishment of FMC ......................................10.7
10.4 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION ...............................................10.7
10.4.1 Conclusions.................................................................................................10.7
10.4.2 Recommendations.......................................................................................10.8
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2.3.1 Elevation Map of Pasig-Marikina River .................................... Fg 2.1

Figure 2.3.2 Topographic Map of Pasig-Marikina River ............................... Fg 2.2
Figure 2.3.3 Geological Map of Pasig-Marikina River .................................. Fg 2.3
Figure 2.3.4 Schematic Geological Section and Soil Classification and
Distribution along Pasig-Marikina River.................................... Fg 2.4
Figure 2.3.5 Dredging Material Distribution Map of Marikina River............ Fg 2.5
Figure 2.3.6 OCR............................................................................................ Fg 2.6
Figure 2.3.7 qu histogram of Guadalupe Formation....................................... Fg 2.6
Figure 2.3.8 Soil Distribution of Sampled Dredging Materials...................... Fg 2.7
Figure 2.3.9 Stabilization Test Result (1/2) - (2/2)......................................... Fg 2.8
Figure 3.1.1 Schmidt Hammer Test Result (1/2) – (2-2)................................ Fg 3.1
Figure 3.1.2 Broken Condition of Priority III (1/3) – (3/3) ............................ Fg 3.3
Figure 3.1.3 Improved Area Plan (1/6) – (6/6) ............................................... Fg 3.6
Figure 3.3.1 Catchment Area and Land use in Pasig River (1/8) – (8/8) .... Fg 3.12
Figure 3.3.2 Catchment Area and Land Use in Lower Marikina River (1/3) – (3/3) Fg 3.20
Figure 4.1.1 General Layout Plan (1/6) – (6/6) .............................................. Fg 4.1
Figure 4.1.2 Typical Cross Section of Revetment (1/2) – (2/2) ..................... Fg 4.7
Figure 4.1.3 Standard River Structural Details (1/6) – (6/6) .......................... Fg 4.9
viii
Figure 4.1.4 Typical Drawing of Drainage Facility in Pasig River (1/2) – (2/2) . Fg 4.15
Figure 4.2.1 General Layout Plan(Lower Marikina River) .......................... Fg 4.17
Figure 4.2.2 River Centerline (Horizontal Alignment)................................. Fg 4.18
Figure 4.2.3 Longitudinal Profile.................................................................. Fg 4.19
Figure 4.2.4 Length of SSP Cut off Wall (1/9) – (9/9) ................................. Fg 4.20
Figure 4.2.5 Typical Drawing of Sluiceway in Lower Marikina River........ Fg 4.25
Figure 5.2.1 Sampling Station of Soil Location ............................................. Fg 5.1
Figure 5.5.1 Institutional Organization for Implementation of Land Acquisition
and Resettlement Action Plan..................................................... Fg 5.2
Figure 6.4.1 Working Ship Diagram Example ............................................... Fg 6.1
Figure 6.4.2 Lambingan Yard Layout Plan .................................................... Fg 6.2
Figure 6.4.3 Marikina West Bank Yard Plan.................................................. Fg 6.3
Figure 6.4.4 Marikina Middle Bank Yard Plan .............................................. Fg 6.4
Figure 6.4.5 Marikina East Bank Yard Plan ................................................... Fg 6.5
Figure 6.4.6 Disposal Site Yard Plant Plan..................................................... Fg 6.6
Figure 6.5.1 Details of Program for Pasig River ............................................ Fg 6.7
Figure 6.5.2 Details of Program for Marikina River ...................................... Fg 6.8
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2.3.1 Summary of Ground Water..........................................................Tb 2.1

Table 2.3.2 Summary of Dredging Soil Stabilization Test.............................Tb 2.2
Table 3.3.1 Hydraulic Calculations for Pasig River (1/5) – (5/5)...................Tb 3.1
Table 3.3.2 Probable Discharge for Sluiceway in Lower Marikina River Area ......Tb 3.6
Table 3.3.3 Probable Discharge and Dimension of Collector Pipe for Lower
Marikina River Area ...................................................................Tb 3.7
Table 3.3.4 Probable Discharge and Dimension of Box Culvert and U-ditch for
Lower Marikina River Area........................................................Tb 3.8
Table 3.3.5 Comparison of Types of Gates ....................................................Tb 3.9
Table 4.1.1 Dimension of Manhole in Pasig River.........................................Tb 4.1
Table 4.1.2 Dimension of Junction Box .........................................................Tb 4.2
Table 4.1.3 Comparison of Flap Gate Types ..................................................Tb 4.3
Table 4.2.1 Second Final Comparison Table on the Shapes of Dikes and Drainage ...Tb 4.4
Table 4.2.2 Final Comparison Table on the Types of Dike............................Tb 4.5
Table 4.2.3 Dimension of Manhole in Marikina River...................................Tb 4.6
Table 4.2.4 Calculation of Creep Distance .....................................................Tb 4.7
Table 4.2.5 Dimension of Box Culvert...........................................................Tb 4.8
Table 4.2.6 Dimension of Breast Wall............................................................Tb 4.9
Table 4.2.7 Dimension of Wing Wall...........................................................Tb 4.10
Table 5.1.1 Result of Technical Scoping ........................................................Tb 5.1
Table 5.1.2 Result of Public Scoping............................................................Tb 5.11
Table 5.1.3 Environmental Management Plan (EMP)..................................Tb 5.15
Table 5.1.4 Environmental Monitoring Plan (EMP) ....................................Tb 5.24
Table 5.5.1 Schedule for Implementation of Resettlement Action Plan.......Tb 5.26
Table 5.5.2 Procedure for Land Acquisition.................................................Tb 5.28
Table 6.2.1 Work Obstructions along Pasig River .........................................Tb 6.1
Table 6.2.2 Work Obstructions along Marikina River ...................................Tb 6.3
Table 6.2.3 Height of Bridges.........................................................................Tb 6.4
Table 6.3.1 Work Monthly Equipment List for the PMRCIP Phase III Project ......Tb 6.5
ix
Table 6.3.2 Work Monthly Equipment List - Breakdown of Work for the
PMRCIP Phase III Project ..........................................................Tb 6.7
LIST OF ANNEXES
Annex 1 Signed MOA for Establishment of FMC ......................... ANNEX- 1.1
x
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS
Government Institutions and Organizations
AASHTO : American Association of the State Highway and Transportation Office

ACEL : Association on Carriers and Equipment, Inc.
ACI : American Concrete Institute
ASTM : American Society for Testing Materials
BOC : Bureau of Construction, DPWH
BOD : Bureau of Design, DPWH
DENR : Department of Environmental and Natural Resources
DOLE : Department of Labor and Employment
DPWH : Department of Public Works and Highways
EMB : Environmental Management Bureau, DENR
FMC : Flood Mitigation Committee
GOJ : Government of Japan
GOP : Government of the Philippines
ICC-CC : Investment Coordinate Committee - Cabinet Committee
JBIC : Japan Bank for International Cooperation (formerly OECF)
JGS : Japan Geological Society
JICA : Japan International Cooperation Agency
LGU(s) : Local Government Unit(s)
LLDA : Laguna Lake Development Authority
LWUA : Local Water Utility Administration
MCGS : Marikina Control Gate Structure
MERALCO : Manila Electric Company
MWCI : Manila Water Company, Inc.
MWSI : Maynilad Water Services, Inc.
MWSS : Metropolitan Water Supply and Sewerage System
NAMRIA : National Mapping and Resources Information Authority
NCR : National Capital Region
NEDA : National Economic and Development Authority
NHCS : Napindan Hydraulic Control Structure
NHRC : National Hydraulic Research Center
NIA : National Irrigation Administration
PAGASA : Philippine Atmospheric, Geophysical and Astronomical Services
Administration
PMC : Price Monitoring Committee
PMO : Project Management Office, DPWH
PMO-MFCP : Project Management Office for Major Flood Control Projects, DPWH
PMRCIP : Pasig-Marikina River Channel Improvement Project
PRRC : Pasig River Rehabilitation Committee
SSS : Social Security System
STEP : Special Term Economic Partnership
UP : University of the Philippines
USEPA : United States Environmental Protection Agency
Others
ASD : Allowable Stress Design

BAC : Bids and Awards Committee
BOQ : Bill of Quantities
CAD : Computer Assisted Design
CARI : Contractor’s All Risk Insurance
DAO : DENR Administrative Order
xi
D/D : Detailed Design
DHWL : Design High Water Level
D.O. : Department Order
EAM : Average End Method
ECC : Environmental Compliance Certificate
EIA : Environmental Impact Assessment
EIS : Environmental Impact Statement
EMP : Environmental Management Plan
EMoP : Environmental Monitoring Plan
F/S : Feasibility Study
GDOP : Geometric Dilution of Precision
GPS : Global Positioning System
ICB : International Competitive Bidding
ICP : Information Campaign Policy
IEE : Initial Environmental Examination
IRR : Implementing Rules and Regulation
JIS : Japanese Industrial Standards
JV : Joint Venture
L/A : Loan Agreement
MHHW : Mean Higher High Water
MLLW : Mean Lower Low Water
MP : Master Plan
MSHHW : Mean Spring Higher Water Level
MSL : Mean Sea Level
MVFS : Marikina Valley Fault System
NBCP : National Building Code of the Philippines
NESC : National Electrical Safety Code
NSCP : National Structure Code of the Philippines
O&M : Operation and Maintenance
ODA : Official Development Assistance
PMRCIP : Pasig-Marikina River Channel Improvement Project
PNS : Philippine National Standards
P/Q : Prequalification
RA : Republic Act
RAP : Resettlement Action Plan
R/D : Record of Discussion
ROW : Right of Way
SAPROF : Special Assistance for Project Formulation
SBD : Sample Bidding Document
SPD : Sample Prequalification Document
TAC : Technical Advisory Committee
TCLP : Toxicity Characteristic Leading Procedure
TTS : Telegraphic Transfer Selling
TWG : Technical Working Group
VAT : Value Added Tax
Units of Measurement
mm : millimeter
cm : centimeter
m : meter
km : kilometer
g, gr : gram
kg : kilogram
t, ton : metric ton
xii
m2 : square meter
ha, has : hectare, hectares
km2 : square kilometer
l,lt.,ltr : liter
m3 : cubic meter
s, sec : second
m, min. : minute
h, hr : hour
y, yr : year
MW : megawatt
mm/hr : millimeter per hour
m/s : meter per second
km/hr : kilometer per hour
mg/l : milligram per liter
m3/s : cubic meter per second
m3/s/km2 : cubic meter per second per square kilometer
% : percent
ppm : parts per million
xx : symbol of multiplication (times)
, : Inequality sign (e.g. A B means that value A is less than or equal to value B.)
<,> : Inequality sign (e.g. A<B means that value A is less than value B.)
Y, Y, JPY : Japanese Yen
P, P, PHP : Philippine Peso
$ : US Dollar
xiii
The Detailed Design of Pasig-Marikina River Channel Improvement Project (Phase III)
CHAPTER 1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
1.1 Background of the Project
The Pasig-Marikina-San Juan River System, with a total catchment area of 621km2, runs
through the center of Metro Manila and empties into Manila Bay. It drains 16 cities and
one (1) municipality with a total population of over 11 million as of 2010. Bank overflow
from these three (3) major waterways contribute largely to the flood disasters experienced in
Metro Manila over the last 25 years from 1986 to 2010. In particular, one of the most
devastating floods was brought about by Tropical Storm Ondoy on 26 September 2009.
Dumping a record rainfall of 453mm/day according to PAGASA, Ondoy brought a huge
volume of flood discharge along the Pasig-Marikina River that resulted to massive loss and
damage to life and property.
A Master Plan (MP) of flood control for the Pasig-Marikina River that included drainage in
Metro Manila was prepared in 1952. Implementation of the structural works started in 1970,
consisting mainly of river walls and revetments along Pasig River. Later, the Mangahan
Floodway was completed in 1988, which diverted flood waters from Marikina River to
Laguna Lake at the design flow capacity of 2,400m3/s.
However, even with the completion of Mangahan Floodway, flooding continued to be a

perennial problem in Metro Manila. This prompted the Department of Public Works and
Highways (DPWH) to update the master plan for flood control and drainage improvement.
The “Study on Flood Control and Drainage Project in Metro Manila”, including a Feasibility
Study (F/S) on the channel improvement of the Pasig-Marikina River, was carried out from
January 1988 to March 1990, with technical assistance from the Japan International
Cooperation Agency (JICA).
1.1.1 Master Plan of Flood Control for Pasig-Marikina River
The updated Master Plan of flood control of Pasig-Marikina River is premised on a 100-year
return period. It proposed the construction of the Marikina Control Gate Structure (MCGS)
at the existing Mangahan Floodway and the Marikina Multipurpose Dam. The design flood
discharges are as shown in Figure R 1.1.1.
SAN JUAN
RIVER
750
MCGS STO. NIÑO
MANILA 1,300 650 550 500 2,900 2,400 1,500 2,100

BAY
2 ,4 0 0
800
MARIKINA
95
35
DAM
NAPINDAN MANGAHAN NANGKA
RIVER FLOODWAY RIVER
Figure R 1.1.1 Plan of the Pasig-Marikina River Renovation Works

(100-Year Return Period Probable Discharge)
1.1
1.1.2 The Overall Project (PMRCIP)
Though a Special Assistance for Project Formation (SAPROF) Study commissioned by

JICA in 1998, the “Pasig-Marikina River Channel Improvement Project (PMRCIP)” was
proposed to be implemented with financial assistance from the Japanese Official
Development Assistance (ODA), according to the following phases:
Phase I: Detailed Design for the Overall Project from Delpan Bridge to
Marikina Bridge (29.7km)
Phase II: Construction Stage I: Channel Improvement Works for Pasig River
from Delpan Bridge to Napindan River (16.4km)
Phase III: Construction Stage II: Channel Improvement Works for Lower
Marikina River including Construction of Marikina Control Gate
Structure (MCGS) from the Junction with Napindan River to
Mangahan Floodway (7.2km)
Phase IV: Construction Stage III: Channel Improvement Works for Upper
Marikina River from Mangahan Floodway to Marikina Bridge (6.1km).
1.1.3 PMRCIP Phase I
The Detailed Design (D/D) of the overall project was carried out from October 2000 to
March 2002. Assuming a 30-year flood, the design flood discharge distribution of the
PMRCIP is as shown in Figure R 1.1.2.
SAN JUAN
RIVER
700
MCGS STO. NINO

MANILA 1,200 600 550 500 2,900
BAY
2,400
0
35
95
NAPINDAN MANGAHAN
RIVER FLOODWAY
Figure R 1.1.2 Design Flood Distribution for Pasig-Marikina River Channel

Improvement Works (30-Year Return Period Probable Discharge)
1.1.4 PMRCIP Phase II
The implementation of the Phase II Project was financed under the 26th JICA Yen Loan
Package - Special Term Economic Partnership (STEP) Loan. The construction works under
1.2
the two (2) contract packages (1-A and 1-B) were commenced in July 2009. The original
target completion is by June 2012. However, this may be extended to May 2013 due to
additional works in the Malacañang area.
Before the completion of the Phase I, locally funded flood control projects such as revetment
rehabilitation, linear parks and drainage improvement works were introduced by the Pasig
River Rehabilitation Commission (PRRC), Local Government Units (LGUs) and other
concerned agencies. These developments necessitated the review and revision of the
proposed works prior to the commencement of the Phase II project. Additional survey works
were carried out from January to July 2008 in order to resolve the following technical issues:
・ Revision of proposed revetment and drainage works in line with Linear Park
Development and present structural conditions
・ Revision/Modification of proposed works to meet the loan condition (STEP) from
the general untied loan condition
・ Study on alignment of Upper Marikina River
・ Necessity and implementation schedule of Phases III and IV
1.2 PMRCIP Phase III
1.2.1 Background of PMRCIP-III
The tremendous damage brought about by Tropical Storm Ondoy in September 2009
provided the push to complete the whole scheme of the Pasig-Marikina River Channel
Improvement Project (PMRCIP). JICA funded the Preparatory Study carried out from
September 2010 to October 2011 to formulate Phase III of PMRCIP. The existing river
improvement Plan was reviewed to reflect current river basin development, recent flood
conditions and probable impacts of climate change. As a result, the scope and phasing of
PMRCIP was proposed to be revised as shown in Table R 1.2.1.
Table R 1.2.1 Modified Project Components based on the Preparatory Study

Implementing Length to be Improved
Items of Work
Phase (Design Discharge)
II (Construction Pasig River Channel Improvement (1) 13.1km on both banks
Stage I) (from Del Pan Bridge to Napindan Channel) (1,200/600m3/s)
III Lower Marikina River Channel Improvement 5.4km channel length
(Construction (from Napindan Channel to downstream of MCGS) (550m3/s)
Stage II) Pasig River Improvement (2) 9.9km on both banks
(Sections not covered by Phase II) (1,200/600m3/s)
IV Upper Marikina River Channel Improvement &
7.9km
(Construction Marikina Control Gate Structure (MCGS)
(2,900m3/s)
Stage III) (from MCGS to Marikina Bridge)
Phase III (Construction Stage II) was proposed to be implemented immediately after Phase
II. It will involve riverbank improvement works covering 9.9km sections of Pasig River not
covered by Phase II as well as the 5.4 stretch of the Lower Marikina River Channel from the
immediate vicinity of the Napindan Hydraulic Control Structure (NHCS) to the section just
before Mangahan Floodway. Dredging works in Lower Marikina River were also proposed
to improve flood conveyance.
1.3
JICA dispatched a contact mission on December 5-8, 2011 to pave the way for the
preparation of the Detailed Design Study for Phase III through a grant from JICA. The
Record of Discussions (R/D) was executed on 07 December 2011. The Loan Agreement to
implement PMRCIP Phase III was subsequently signed on 30 March 2012 between JICA
and the Government of the Philippines (GOP).
1.2.2 Policy Considerations of the Basic Design
The following policy considerations lay the ground work for the formulation of the Detailed
Design of PMRCIP Phase III:
Item Particulars
(1) JICA Loan (dated 30th March 2012) : Loan Amount: JPY 11,836 million,
Special Terms for Economic Partnership
(STEP)
(2) ICC-CC Approved Project Cost : PHP 7,948.41 million
(3) Construction Period : Three (3) years
(4) Contract Package for Civil Works : Two (2) separate Contract Packages
(Pasig River and Lower Marikina River)
(5) Procurement of Civil Works : International Competitive Bidding with
Contractors Prequalification (ICB with P/Q)
(Single-stage: Two envelop bidding)
(6) Involuntary Resettlement : 58 informal households (204 people) and
60 structures along the Pasig River
(Based on the Preparatory Study in 2011,
to be updated in this Report)
(7) Environmental Considerations : Environmental consideration for noise,
vibration, dust, pollution and traffic
hindrance.
(8) Adequacy/Accuracy of Output of : Liability of the JICA Consultant
Detailed Design Study
1.2.3 Objective of the Detailed Design Study
The objective of the Detailed Design Study for the PMRCIP Phase III is to prepare the basic
design, detailed design, cost estimate of the Project and tender documents for the
construction of civil works.
1.2.4 Scope of the Detailed Design Study
The Detailed Design Study encompasses the two (2) river stretches identified below:
(1) Pasig River from Del Pan Bridge to Napindan Hydraulic Control Structure
(NHCS); and
1.4
(2) Lower Marikina River between NHCS and 5.4km before the Rosario Weir of
Mangahan Floodway.
Specifically, the Detailed Design Study covers the following items:
(1) Review and confirmation of the existing flood control plan

(2) Review of the Detailed Design (2002) and the Design Review of Phase I (2008)
(3) Additional surveys on the present natural conditions
(4) Formulation of the basic design (Definitive Plan)
(5) Preparation of the detailed design of the proposed facilities
(6) Preparation of construction plan and cost estimate
(7) Preparation of prequalification documents and tender documents
In addition, the following services are part of the Detailed Design Study and will be
submitted under separate cover along with the Detailed Design Report (except (1), O&M
plan.
(1) Preparation of Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Plan

(2) Conduct of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Study on the Proposed
Disposal Site for Dredged/Excavated Materials
(3) Assistance to DPWH in the organization and identification of tasks and
responsibilities of the proposed Flood Mitigation Committee (FMC)
(4) Conduct of Information Campaign and Publicity (ICP) activities
1.2.5 Scope of Construction Works in the Preparatory Study
The scope of construction works in Phase III in Preparatory Study is shown in Table R 1.2.2
below.
Table R 1.2.2 Scope of Phase III Construction Work in Preparatory Study

Length to be Improved
Construction Work
(Design Discharge)
Construction Area I: Pasig River Channel Improvement
(Remaining sections which require rehabilitation between Del Pan Bridge
and Napindan Hydraulic Control Structure) 9.9km on both banks
*The sections were damaged due to Typhoon ‘Ondoy’ and others after (1,200/600m3/s)
the commencement of Phase II construction work. Excluded from
Phase II section
Construction Area II: Lower Marikina River Channel Improvement
(From Napindan Hydraulic Control Structure to downstream of MCGS)
1) Dredging of Riverbed: 612,000m3
5.4 km channel length
2) Dike: 1,814m (Three (3) locations)
(550m3/s)
3) River Wall: 337m (One (1) location)
4) Boundary Bank: 7,063m
5) Bridge Pier Protection: four (4) existing bridges
* Above works will be re-evaluated in detailed design study
1.5
CHAPTER 2 NATURAL CONDITIONS
2.1 Topographic Survey
2.1.1 Objectives and Scope of the Topographic Survey

(1) Objectives
The main purpose of the topographic survey is to produce the topographic and
hydrographic maps for the design, cost estimation, and establishment of concrete
control points for reference during the construction stage.
(2) Scope of Work
The scope of work includes as follows:
(a) Marikina River (about 5.4km):

・ Establishment of control points for both banks
・ Control traverse and control leveling for control points
・ Cross section survey for planned dredging
・ Hydrographic survey of the river
・ Topographic survey for both banks
・ Correction for existing topographic map
・ Position, elevation and dimension survey for outlet of drainage
(b) Pasig River (about 9.9km):
・ Establishment of control points for planned construction area
・ Control traverse and control leveling for control points
・ Hydrographic survey for the planned construction area
・ Topographic survey for the planned construction area
・ Correction for existing topographic map
・ Position, elevation and dimension survey for outlet of drainage
(c) Backfill Site Survey:
・ Control point survey
・ Spot height survey
2.1.2 Methodology of the Topographic Survey

(1) Coordinate System and Datum Level
The survey coordinates system and datum level used for the survey and mapping
were the same as those used for the Pasig-Marikina River Channel Improvement
Project (Phase II), as shown in Table R 2.1.1.
2.1
Table R 2.1.1 Coordinates System and Datum Level for the Survey
Coordinate System Philippine Transverse Mercator Zone III
Spheroid Clarke1866
Semi major Axis : 6378206.4m
Inverse Flatting : 294.9786982
Origin Central Meridian : just 121 degree East
Latitude : just 0 degree (on the equator)
False Northing : 0.000 m
False Easting : 500,000.000 m
Scale factor : 0.99995
Datum Level DPWH MLLW:
DPWH MLLW = NAMRIA MLLW + 10.000 m
NAMRIA MLLW = NAMRIA MSL – 0.475 m
DPWH : Department of Public Works and Highways
MLLW : Mean Lower Low Water Level
NAMRIA: National Mapping and Resource Information Authority
MSL : Mean Sea Level
(2) Work Procedures

(a) Establishment of Control Points
At first, the control points were strategically established in visible locations

adjacent to the other control points where these would be easy to find as
reference for control survey, topographic survey and hydrographic survey works.
These control points will remain until construction stage. The control points are
shown in Table R 2.1.2.
Table R 2.1.2 Control Points

Location Station Northing (m) Easting (m) Elevation (m)
Pasig River JP1 1614305.61 497916.36 12.110
Pasig River JP2 1614190.59 497997.54 12.005
Pasig River JP3 1614171.35 497895.61 12.251
Pasig River JP4 1613731.83 498543.88 12.240
Pasig River JP5 1613735.77 498654.43 12.148
Pasig River JP6 1613717.09 498808.11 12.013
Pasig River JP7 1614473.80 500364.47 13.221
Pasig River JP8 1614370.03 500849.79 13.533
Pasig River JP9 1614215.97 500102.50 12.808
Pasig River JP11 1613754.24 501491.90 13.512
Pasig River JP12 1614090.19 501078.84 12.708
Pasig River JP13 1613350.07 501038.76 13.093
Pasig River JP14 1612730.82 501084.63 13.404
Pasig River JP15 1613244.66 501509.09 13.333
Pasig River JP16 1613171.22 501639.77 13.591
Pasig River JP17 1613220.09 501827.68 14.493
Pasig River JP18 1612388.68 501740.87 13.590
Pasig River JP19 1612282.94 501916.03 13.563
Pasig River JP20 1612064.62 502446.85 12.808
2.2
Location Station Northing (m) Easting (m) Elevation (m)

Pasig River JP21 1611795.54 502817.80 13.741
Pasig River JP22 1611137.42 504151.52 15.004
Pasig River JP23 1611294.87 504462.14 14.240
Pasig River JP24 1611187.03 505122.35 14.432
Pasig River JP25 1611022.29 505548.62 16.046
Pasig River JP26 1610828.61 506271.15 14.676
Pasig River JP27 1610551.54 506575.62 14.329
Pasig River JP28 1610372.02 506730.24 14.609
Pasig River JP29 1610351.44 506969.38 24.436
Pasig River JP30 1610244.00 506896.47 23.070
Marikina River JM1 1610062.76 507218.87 15.675
Backfill Site JD1 1607189.75 510607.51 14.086
Backfill Site JD2 1607005.52 510316.78 13.792
Backfill Site JD3 1607332.66 510800.32 15.609
Backfill Site JD4 1607222.99 510559.40 12.488
Backfill Site JD5 1607148.39 510228.70 13.583
Backfill Site JD6 1607257.94 510266.52 13.010
Backfill Site JD7 1607379.91 510114.55 13.018
Backfill Site JD8 1607520.14 509925.99 13.514
Backfill Site JD9 1607385.44 509832.84 13.238
Backfill Site JD10 1607627.51 510099.31 13.604
Backfill Site JD11 1607668.17 510362.99 12.748
Backfill Site JD12 1607545.13 510611.10 13.503
(b) Control Traverse
Closed or closed-loop traverse method were used to confirm the accuracies of

control points. Total station and data logger were used and raw field data were
submitted the same day after observation. The control points were surveyed
using Global Positioning System (GPS) with at least five (5) tracking satellites
per site. The traverse survey accuracies are shown on Table R 2.1.3.
2.3
Table R 2.1.3 Traverse Survey Accuracies

TRAV RELATIVE
LOCATION CONTROLS LENGTH N. ERROR E. ERROR LEC
ERSE ERROR
JP1-JP2-JT1-JT2-JT3-JT4-JT5-JT6
Pasig River 1 869.207 0.036 0.029 0.0463 1/18,773
-JT7-A2_1-A2-A1
A2-A1-JT100-JP4-JP5-JP6-JT16-J
Pasig River 2 1171.433 -0.076 -0.015 0.078 1/15,018
T17-B1-B2-B3-B4-B5-A2-A1
JP2-JP1-JP3-JT8-JT9-JT10-JT11-J
Pasig River 3 T12-JT13-JT14-JT15-JT15A-A2-A 1194.299 0.069 0.074 0.1012 1/11,801
1
Pasig River 4 N1-N2-JP9-JP7-JP7A-N1-N2 1174.893 -0.013 -0.005 0.0138 1/85,137

Pasig River 5 PR8-PR7-JP8-JP12-JP10 1117.395 0.002 -0.012 0.0119 1/93,899
PR7-PR8-JT101-JT102-JT103-JP1
1-JT18-JT19-JP13-JT20-JT21-JT2
Pasig River 6 3607.91 -0.075 -0.061 0.0966 1/37,349
2-JT23-JT24-JT25-JT26-JT27-JT2
8-JT29-JP14-JT30-JP15-JP16-JP17
Pasig River 7 JP18-JP19-JT31-JT31A-JP20-JP21 1389.071 -0.049 0.007 0.0498 1/27,893
Pasig River 8 JP18-JP19-JP20-JT32-JP21-JP19 2261.992 -0.112 0.037 0.1179 1/19,186
JP22-JP23-JT33-JT34-JT35-JT36-J
Pasig River 9 P24-GP1-GP2-GP2A-JP25-JT37-J 2920.155 0.223 0.088 0.24 1/12,167
T38-JT39-JP26-JT41-JP27-JP28
Pasig River 10 JP27-JP28-JP29-JP30 606.814 0.009 -0.06 0.0603 1/10,063

Marikina
11 JM3-JM2-JT50-JT501-JM3-JM10 531.75 -0.012 -0.003 0.0128 1/41,543
River
Marikina
12 JM10-JM3-JM2-JM1 519.322 0.014 0.004 0.0146 1/35,570
River
JM3-JM10-JT606-JT604-JT603-JT
Marikina
13 602-JT601-JT520-JT521-JM4-JM1 1565.67 -0.007 0.044 0.0448 1/34,948
River
1
Marikina 525-JT526-JT527-JT528-JT529-JT
14 2302.43 0.033 -0.004 0.0336 1/68,525
River 530-JT531-JT532-JT533-JM7-JM1
2
Marikina
15 537-JT538-JT703-JT704-JM9-JM1 1682.17 -0.078 -0.017 0.0794 1/21,186
River
3
16 2054.653 -0.053 0.039 0.0663 1/30,990
River 557-JT558-JT559-JT560-JT561-JT
562-JM14-JM15
17 1724.744 -0.059 0.009 0.0599 1/28,794
River 516-JT517-JT518-JT519-JT555-J
M9-JM13
PR11-PR12-JT54-JT53-JT52-JT51
Pasig River 18 1372.934 -0.05 -0.068 0.0844 1/16,267
-JT50-JT49-JP18-JP19
2.4
(c) Leveling
Leveling was done by forward and backward round method starting from a
known control point and connected to another known point. The traverse survey
accuracies are shown on Table R 2.1.4.
Table R 2.1.4 Leveling Survey Accuracies
LEVEL DIFFERENCE
LOCATION CONTROLS
RUN OF 2 RUNS
Pasig River 1 GM21-JP1-JP2-JT1-JT2-JT3-JT4-JT5-JT6-JT7-B8 0.007
GM19-JP3-JT8-JT9-JT10-JT11-JT12-JT13-JT14-JT15-A1-JT100-A2-JP4-
Pasig River 2 -0.002
JP5-JP6-JT17-B15
Pasig River 3 BM CIMA 18A-JP7-25J -0.006
Pasig River 4 BM CIMA 18A-N2-N1-JP9-25O8 -0.002
Pasig River 5 PR7-JP10 0.005
Pasig River 6 PR7-JP12-JP11-JT19-PR75D 0.003
Pasig River 7 PR7-PR8-JP8-25-25A 0
PR11-PR12-JP15-JT19-JP13-JT20-JT21-JT22-JT23-JT24-JT25-JT26-JT2
Pasig River 8 -0.015
7-JT30
Pasig River 9 PR11-JP17-JP16-JP14-JT29-JT28-JT27 0.004
Pasig River 10 GMQ1-JP19-JP18-TP12 -0.006
Pasig River 11 JP18-JT49-JT50-JT51-JT52-JT53-JT54 0.028
Pasig River 12 BM GM Q1-JP21-JT32-JP20-JT31-MMA3056-ADD05 -0.008
BM GM
Pasig River 13 0.017
Q1-JP22-JT34-G1-JT35-JP24-JT1001-JT1002-JP25-JP28-JP30-C1
BM GM
Pasig River 14 0.011
Q1-JP23-JT33-G2-JT37-JT38-JT39-JT40-JP26-JT41-JP27-JP29-C1
Marikina
15 NP2-JM1-GM48M 0.003
River
Marikina
16 GM48M-JT501-JT500-JM2-JM3-JM10-C1 -0.012
River
Marikina
17 JM10-JT606-JT604 0.001
River
Marikina
18 BM GM 49M-JM4-JM11-BM GM 49M -0.001
River
Marikina
19 BM GM 49M-JT520-JT602-JT604-JT603-JT601-ADD06 0
River
Marikina
20 MA1-JT520-JT522-JT521-MA13 0.002
River
Marikina MA13-JT523-JT701-JT525-JT526-JT527-JT528-JT529-JM6-JT530-JT531
21 0.014
River -JT532-JT533-JM12-JM7-MA2
Marikina MA2-JT534-JT535-JT536-JM8-JT537-JT702-JT538-JT703-JT04-JT705-
22 -0.004
River MA3
Marikina
23 JT538-JT700-JT513-JT512-JT511-MA3 0.005
River
MA3-JM9-JM13-JT550-JT551-JT514-JT515-JT516-JT517-JT518-JT519-J
Marikina
24 T554-JT553-JT552-JT555-JT556-JT557-JT558-JT559-JT560-JT561-JT56 -0.003
River
2-JM14-JM15-MA10-MA4
Backfill Site 25 PUMPING STATION 15.5-JD2-JD1-JD3-ABUTMENT -0.005
Backfill Site 26 JD1-JD4-JD5-JD6-JD7-JD8-JD9 0.002
Backfill Site 27 JD8-JD10-JD11-JD12-JD3 0.001
2.5
(d) Cross-Section Survey and Hydrographic Survey
River cross-sections were surveyed using supersonic echo sounder at less than
20m intervals. Cross-checking of survey lines was done for the hydrographic
survey. Calibration for the supersonic speed in the water was done at the
beginning and the end of each day at the deepest location and in the different
river environs and results were recorded as sounding data. Shallow areas of the
river were surveyed using total stations or GPS.
(e) Topographic Survey
The following objects, land marks and topographic features were surveyed and
recorded using total stations and GPS on a day to day basis:
・ walls, fences, abutments, piers, culverts and other structures
・ pavement edge, road shoulder, embankment, ditches, drainage
・ electricity lines, water pipe and optic fiber lines
・ trees, electricity poles, telephone poles, streetlights
・ soil investigation points such as bore holes
(f) Correction of Existing Plan Map
The existing digital plan map was corrected by direct field measurements. The
location of buildings, house structures, roads, etc., was verified one by one
through actual physical checking and double-checking against the printed digital
map. The dimension and location were measured relative to other surrounding
objects.
(g) Backfill Site Survey
The Backfill Site was surveyed through spot height survey method using total
station and data logger or GPS. The raw field data were submitted as electronic
data based on day to day observations.
(h) Survey for Outlet of Drainage
All the outlets of drainages were marked and numbered on both sides of
Marikina River and the planned construction area along Pasig River. The
position and elevation of outlet pipe bottoms were surveyed using total station
and dimensions were measured with measuring tape then recorded. Total station
and data logger were used to electronically store and submit raw field data and
observation on a day to day basis.
(i) Quality Assurance
Accuracy of data was checked by connecting with GPS survey and total station
traverse survey for horizontal controls, and by comparing with multiple leveling
observations for vertical controls. Mutual accuracy was confirmed by
connecting the given points of this survey with those of the previous
Pasig-Marikina River Channel Improvement Project (Phase II). Reference back
target check for topographic survey and drainage outlet survey were carried out
at appropriate intervals to confirm the stability of total station and accuracy of
2.6
the observation. Leveling observations in this survey were also checked against
data acquired from the tidal observatory.
2.2 Geology
2.2.1 Objective of the Geotechnical Study
The objective of the geotechnical study is to investigate the sub-surface conditions, the
engineering properties of the soil for design and the quality of riverbed materials for
embankment. The results were used as inputs in preparing the detailed design of civil works
structures PMRCIP Phase III. Specifically, the results were used to: (i) confirm the
sub-surface layers and estimate the soil modulus required for the design of river
improvement works and (ii) identify the appropriate stabilization method to improve the
quality and usability of riverbed sediments from Lower Marikina River as embankment
materials after dredging.
2.2.2 Scope and Methodology of the Geotechnical Study
The scope of the geotechnical investigation includes review of secondary data, in situ tests,
core sampling and laboratory analysis. The methods are shown on the flow chart in Figure
R 2.2.1 and described below:
Figure R 2.2.1 Flow of the Geological Survey

(1) Geological features and Soil Modulus for River Improvement Works
(a) Review of Existing Data
Previous survey data and laboratory results were analyzed along with new
borehole logs from 28 boreholes in Pasig River area and 29 boreholes in Lower
Marikina River area. From these, the subsurface condition was confirmed, the
longitudinal geological sections of Pasig-Marikina River basin were
reconstructed, the stratification and distribution of soil layers were updated and
the soil modulus was calculated.
2.7
(b) In situ Test
The following in situ tests were carried out:

a. Standard Penetration Test (SPT) was carried out for each borehole up to 1m
depth of soil in accordance with ASTM D1586.
b. Groundwater Level Survey, taken daily at every working hole.
c. Thin-walled (Shelby) tube sampling for silt and clay layer in accordance
with ASTM D1587.
(c) Laboratory Tests
The following laboratory tests were carried out for every borehole.
a. Japanese Unified Soil Classification for Engineering Purposes
b. Classification System, ASTM D2487
c. Specific gravity of soil solids, ASTM D854
d. Moisture Content of Soils, ASTM D2216
e. Particle Size Analysis of Soils, ASTM D422
f. Liquid Limit of Soils, ASTM D4318
g. Plastic Limit and Plasticity of Soils, ASTM D4318
h. Unconfined Compression Test, ASTM D2166
i. Unconfined Compressive Strength of Rock Cores, ASTM D2938
j. Unit Weight Analysis, ASTM C29
k. Consolidation Test, ASTM D2435
(2) Evaluation of Marikina River Bed Sediment

(a) Sampling
Sampling of riverbed was carried out at various depths at 1 km intervals along

Lower Marikina River. Sediment samples were analyzed in the laboratory for
both engineering properties and toxicity levels.
(b) Laboratory Test
Six typical samples of riverbed sediments were mixed with cement and lime in
varying proportions. Cone penetration test was then performed on the samples to
evaluate the best stabilization method that will enable transport and use of
dredged soils as embankment materials during construction. Table R 2.2.1
shows the soil stabilization methods used while Table R 2.2.2 shows the
proportion of stabilizing agent used with each sample.
The design strength for the target backfill site is over 200kN/m2. This is in
accordance with the Japan Road Association Guideline (refer to Table R 2.2.3).
2.8
Table R 2.2.1 Summary of Soil Stabilization Methods

Procedure Method Remarks
Use Test Method A (Section 7: 4.75mm sieve)
Mixing percentage is as shown in Table-a
Use Portland Cement and Quick Lime
1 Mixing ASTM D558
Compaction method is D698
Mix in natural water content condition without drying
or moistening
Use Method-A (101.6mm diameter mold, 3 layers,
2 Compaction ASTM D698 blows per layer: 25)
Do not reuse soils
3 Curing JGS 0811 Curing 24 hours and 7days wrapping with polythene
Calculate the Cone Index by the result of Cone
4 Strength Test JIS A1228
Penetration Test
Report Cone Index of each stabilizing materials and
5 Report
each mixing ratio
Table R 2.2.2 Stabilizer Percentage per Soil (1m3)

Sample No. Case 1 Case 2 Case 3
Percentage Wt. (kg) 50 100 150
Weight Ratio 1:30 1:15 1:10
*(Assuming soil unit weight is 1.50t/m3)
Table R 2.2.3 Required Cone Penetration Strength for Construction Machine

(Guideline of Earth Works, Japan Road Association, 2009)
Ground Minimum qc
Construction Machine
Pressure (kN/m2) (kN/m2)
Super swamp bulldozer 15-23 200
Swamp bulldozer 22-43 300
Normal bulldozer (15t Class) 50-60 500
Normal bulldozer (21t Class) 60-100 700
Scrape dozer (super swamp type) 41-56 (27) 600 (400)
Dragged scraper (small size) 130-140 700
Self-propelled scraper (small size) 400-450 1,000
Dump truck 350-550 1,200
2.3 Results of the Survey
2.3.1 Topography and Geology of the Survey Area
The Pasig-Marikina River Basin is located in the southern part of Luzon Island. Marikina
River flows due south to its confluence with the Napindan Channel. It runs parallel with the
west side fault of the Marikina Valley Fault System. Pasig River flows due west starting
from this confluence and empties into Manila Bay.
(1) Topography
Pasig River has a very mild slope of 1/17,000; in contrast, Marikina River has a
relatively steep slope of 1/9,000. The lowland elevation is less than 10m above sea
2.9
level with slightly higher intermediate areas of about 10-30m elevations (Figure
2.3.1).
From the mouth of Pasig River going upstream, Pasig-Marikina River Basin is
topographically divided into: Swamp, Delta, Sandbar/Spit, Floodplain, Natural levee,
Central Hill/Plateau, and Marikina lowland （Figure 2.3.2).
(2) Geology
The geologic map of Pasig-Marikina River basin is shown in Figure 2.3.3. The new
borehole logs confirmed the lithology of the study area, which consists of Guadalupe
Formation in the higher portion and unconsolidated alluvial sediments in the
lowlands. The distribution of subsurface rock formations is shown in Figure 2.3.4.
The detailed borehole log data and the general geology of the area are presented in
detail in Volume III of the Detailed Design Report.
The new borehole log results also confirmed and updated the soil layer classification
(Table R 2.3.1) and distribution as shown in the dredging material distribution map
of Marikina River (also shown in Figure 2.3.5). Moreover, the borehole log results
yielded updated information on the condition of water table as described in Table
2.3.1.
Table R 2.3.1 Layer Classification

Soil Classification
Age
Formation Lithic
F Embankment
As1 Sand, Gravel
HOLOCENE Ac1 Clay, Silt

unconsolidated
As2 Sand, Gravel
QUATERNARY
Ac2 Clay, Silt
D Silt, Sand
PLISTOCENE Guadalupe Formation

GF tuff,sandstone,mudsto consolidated
ne
2.3.2 Engineering Properties of Soils

(1) Engineering Properties of Clayey Soils
Soils from the target design sections of the Study area are typically soft,
unconsolidated and poorly compacted. This was confirmed by the laboratory results,
which describe soil engineering properties that are characteristic of clay or clayey
materials as listed below. The soil engineering properties are discussed in detail in
Volume III of the Detailed Design Report.
・ Unit weight = 1.3-2.0g/cm3 in the Pasig River; 1.6-1.9g/cm3, concentrated near

1.7gf/cm3 in the Marikina River
・ Unconfined compression strength: qu < 0.1kg/cm2 to 1.0kg/cm2 in Pasig River; <
0.1kg/cm2 near the surface and 0.1-0.5kg/cm2 elsewhere in Marikina River
・ OCR < 1.0 to 2.0 in Pasig River; around 1.5 in Lower Marikina River.
2.10
・ OCR generally increases with depth in Pasig River, which indicates a delayed
consolidation process (Figure 2.3.6).
・ OCR in diluvium layer in Lower Marikina River indicates that vertical load has
not been imposed in a long term.
・ Initial void ratio = 1.0 to 2.0, which is slightly bigger than expected of generally
soft clayey soils. This indicates that subsidence by imposed vertical load would
be small.
・ Cv = 10-3 to 10-4cm2/sec
(2) Soil Modulus

The Soil Modulus was derived statistically from the laboratory results and is
summarized below.
Strength Modulus: (Figure R 2.3.1)

Right Bank: C = 5.9N
Left Bank: C = 6.6N
Mean (Both Banks): C = 6.0N
Upper limit of N (representative value) = 50
Unit Weight:
Sandy soil, clay, gravel (F) = 17.0 kN/m3
Clay, silt (AC1 and AC2) = average of measured values
Sand, Gravel (AS1 and AS2) = 18.0kN/m3
Modulus of Consolidation:
Consolidation data shows typical e-log curve and P-mv curve of AC1 and
DC.
Figure R 2.3.1 Relationship of N value and C(qu/2) in Pasig River
2.11
(3) Hardness of Guadalupe Formation

The results of the core compression test of Guadalupe Formation along Pasig River
area are shown in Figure 2.3.7. The results in terms of strength, qu, are presened in
Table R 2.3.2
Table R 2.3.2 qu of Guadalupe Formation

Mean 44.3
Median 35.0
Mode 45.5
Standard Deviation 32.2
Maxima 3.8
Minima 147.0
Sample Number 21
(4) C14 Dating Result

Carbon C14 dating results confirmed that the exact geological age of the
unconsolidated sand, silt and clay layers (AC2 and DC) is Holocene, while the
consolidated mudstone layer of the Guadalupe Formation (GF) is Upper Pleistocene
(Table R 2.3.3).
Table R 2.3.3 Result of C14 dating of Borehole Sample
Sample No Layer 14C Date

BHLP-04 out 21.5ｍ AC2 8025±30
BHLP-04 in 21.5ｍ AC2 8000±30
BHLM-08 45.0ｍ GF 44600±540
BHLM-08 20.0ｍ DC 8235±30
2.3.3 Test Results on Dredging Materials

(1) Natural Condition of Riverbed Sediments
Figure R 2.3.2 shows the average thickness of the sludge layer in Lower Marikina
River. This shows that the sludge gets thicker going downstream, as follows: 0 to
1km, 85cm; 1 to 2km, 46cm; 2 to 3km, 54cm; 3 to 4km, 31cm; 4 to 5km, 7cm and 5
to 5.5km, 15cm.
Figure R 2.3.2 Distribution of Sludge Thickness in Marikina River (13

June 2012)
2.12
Samples were classified into four soil types, namely: Sludge, Clay, Sandy clay and
Sand according to their properties (Table R 2.3.4). The soil distribution in the
dredging area is shown in Figure 2.3.8.
Table R 2.3.4 Samples of Dredging Soil Stabilizing Test

Sample No. S-5 S-15 S-25 S-34 S-45 S-55
Station 0+400 1+300 2+200 3+000 4+000 5+000
sandy sandy
Soil Type clay sludge sand sand
clay clay
3
Unit Weight g/cm 1.380 1.540 1.310 1.570 1.870 1.800
Moisture Content % 69 54 37 54 26 33
Fine Particle Content % 67 24 23 94 16 18
(2) Result of Dredging Soil Stabilization Test

(a) Strength of Material
For stabilization test, Quick Lime (CaO : 87.3%) and Portland Cement(Type 1P)
were applied as stabilizers because these materials are common in Philippines.
The results of the stabilization test are fully discussed in the Geological Report.
The response of the samples to the cone penetration test strength in relation to
varying stabilizer proportion and curing period is summarized in Table 2.3.2
and Figure 2.3.9.
In summary:
・ Sludge and Clay; The lime volume need to gain the strength of qc =
400kN/m2 is 150 to 200kg/m3, while the cement volume needed is 67kg/m3
after one day curing
・ Sandy clay; The strength after one day of curing increases from 66kg/m3 to
126kg/m3 in lime, but is limited to 35kg/m3 to 47kg/m3 in cement.
・ Sand; Both in the quicklime and cement, one day curing strength indicates
over qc>3,000 kN/m2 by the minimum ratio of 50kg/m3. In the dry state
without stabilizers qc shows more than 1,500 kN/m2 .
・ The increase in strength of material in proportion to curing period is obvious
in cement but not in lime. Lime, however, seems to be more effective than
sludge and clay samples.
Riverbed sediments in Lower Marikina River can be classified into 3 types. The
stabilizing character of these soils is shown in Table R 2.3.5..
2.13
Table R 2.3.5 Dredging Soil Classification by Stabilizing Character

Soil Type Amount of
Stabilizing Pattern Soil type combination MC(Moisture FC（Fine Particle Dredging Soil
Sample No. Content) % Content） % m3
cement 75kg or sludge
A 5,34 54-69 67-94 262,249
quick lime 200kg sludge +clay
cement
sludge+clay+sand
50kg(minimum)
B sludge+sandy clay 15,24 48-54 24-25 303,189
or quick lime
sandy clay
120kg
sludge+sand
C no stabilize 45,55 26-33 16-18 306,114
sand
(b) pH of Stabilized Soils
The pH of soils stabilized for both quick lime and cement is over 11.0 and peaks
near 12.0 (Table R 2.3.6). The pH increases proportionately with the stabilizer
volume and reaches the peak near 12.0. The minimum pH is 10.5, for S-45
sample, which does not need stabilizing. These shows that stabilized soils are
highly alkaline.
Table R 2.3.6 pH of Stabilized Soils

sample (station No.) S-5 (0+400) S-15 (1+300) S-25 (2+200)
stabilizer Origin Lime Cement Origin Lime Cement Origin Lime Cement
weight kg/m3 0 50 100 150 300 50 100 150 0 50 100 150 50 100 150 0 50 100 150 50 100 150
soil type clay sandy clay sandy clay
natural unit weight g/cm3 1.380 1.540 1.310
condition moisture content % 69 54 37
fine particle content % 67 24 23
pH 7.10 11.25 11.93 11.98 11.87 10.90 10.91 11.67 7.26 11.68 11.85 11.83 10.47 10.95 11.35 7.34 11.45 11.75 11.87 10.82 10.95 11.13
- 11.85 11.87 11.79 11.88 10.89 11.55 11.24 - 11.45 11.76 11.77 10.83 10.95 11.56 - 11.40 11.77 11.89 10.87 11.12 11.39
average 7.10 11.55 11.90 11.89 11.88 10.90 11.23 11.46 7.26 11.57 11.81 11.80 10.65 10.95 11.46 7.34 11.43 11.76 11.88 10.85 11.04 11.26
sample (station No.) S-34 (3+000) S-45 (4+000) S-55 (5+000)

stabilizer Origin Lime Cement Origin Lime Cement Origin Lime Cement
3
weight kg/m 0 50 100 150 300 50 100 150 0 50 100 150 50 100 150 0 50 100 150 50 100 150
soil type sludge sand sand
3
natural unit weight g/cm 1.570 1.870 1.800
condition moisture content % 54 26 33
fine particle content % 94 16 18
pH 7.53 11.88 11.85 11.87 11.89 10.86 10.80 11.34 7.56 11.37 11.92 11.73 10.90 11.41 11.42 7.59 11.81 11.95 11.95 11.20 11.32 11.34
- 11.80 11.87 11.90 11.91 10.89 11.14 11.21 - 11.57 11.92 11.90 11.00 11.02 11.51 - 11.80 11.91 11.94 10.91 11.29 11.40
average 7.53 11.84 11.86 11.89 11.90 10.88 10.97 11.28 7.56 11.47 11.92 11.82 10.95 11.22 11.47 7.59 11.81 11.93 11.95 11.06 11.31 11.37
(c) Permeability of the Compacted Sandy Soils
Compacted sandy soils showed very good permeability of 4.76*10-6

~5.50*10-6m/s, as shown in Table R 2.3.7.
Table R 2.3.7 Result of Compacted Sandy Sediment Permeability Test

No. Hydraulic Conductivity (m/s)
1 5.50×10-6
2 4.76×10-6
3 5.00×10-6
Average 5.09×10-6
2.14
(d) Mixing Test of Clayey Soils and Sand Soils
Table R 2.3.8 shows that mixing with clay and sand would be effective at the
ratio of 25:75(IV), where both FC and MC are the same as the sample with the
desired strength (400kN/m2) without stabilization.
Table R 2.3.8 Mixing Test Result

Test No. Unit I II III IV V
Ratio (S-5:S-45) % 100:0 75:25 50:50 25:75 0:100
Moisture Content % 67.6 60.4 52.6 39.5 27.8
Fine Particle Content % 78 58 47 24 7
2.3.4 Recommendation for Construction
The followings are proposed to be observed during construction:
・ FC and MC tests should be carried out for cost saving and safety measures. The testing
frequency should be done more than once, preferably once in the morning and once in
the afternoon for every 1000 m3 or whenever change in the soil type is observed. (This is
considered for the cost estimation.)
・ To shorten the testing time, it is suggested to use the microwave oven method for MC
(ASTM 4643) and the fine fraction content method (JIS A 1223) for FC.
・ To reduce the stabilizing cost, if possible, it is suggested to keep the FC and MC low by
mixing sand with sludge or clay.
・ When necessary to mix several stabilizers or soils, the mixing plants should be used to
ensure mixing quality. (This is considered for the cost estimation.)
2.15
CHAPTER 3 BASIC DESIGN OF RIVER AND DRAINAGE

IMPROVEMENT
3.1 Summary of Basic Design of Pasig River Improvement Works

3.1.1 Review of Improved Areas
3.1.1.1 Classification of the Pasig River Improvement Plan in Phase III
The areas for improvement under Phase III were identified in the Preparatory Study for
Phase III based on agreement with the DPWH and on existing site conditions as shown in
Table R 3.1.1.
Table R 3.1.1 Potential Areas of Phase III (Pasig River)
Bank Station Length of
No. Location
(Right or Left) Sta. Sta. Bank (m)
1 R 2+283 2+540 350 Manila City
2 L 2+406 2+651 258 Manila City
3 R 2+550 2+950 400 Manila City
4 L 2+850 3+076 238 Manila City
5 R 3+160 3+280 108 Manila City
6 R 3+300 3+400 91 Manila City
7 L 3+480 3+560 82 Manila City
8 R 3+645 3+753 105 Manila City
9 R 5+030 5+217 171 Manila City
10 R 5+270 5+410 164 Manila City
11 R 5+543 5+630 102 Manila City
12 L 6+119 6+219 101 Manila City
13 L 6+248 6+269 27 Manila City
14 R 6+350 6+510 150 Manila City
15 L 6+360 6+515 166 Manila City
16 L 7+344 7+439 96 Manila City
17 R 7+518 8+220 632 Manila City
18 R 8+220 8+500 280 Manila City
19 R 8+510 9+341 827 Manila City
20 R 9+430 9+722 301 Manila City
21 R 9+750 9+790 41 Manila City
22 R 9+810 9+950 202 Manila City
23 R 10+957 11+263 320 Mandaluyong City
24 L 11+500 11+628 128 Makati City
27 L 12+024 12+173 149 Makati City
29 L 13+806 14+442 636 Makati City
33 R 15+196 15+246 50 Pasig City
34 L 15+236 15+424 188 Makati City
35 R 15+410 15+439 29 Pasig City
36 L 15+443 15+547 104 Makati City
37 R 15+477 15+505 28 Pasig City
38 R 15+505 16+469 970 Pasig City
39 L 15+747 15+870 123 Makati City
40 L 15+965 16+562 597 Makati City
41 R 16+469 16+722 253 Pasig City
042 R 16+776 16+828 52 Pasig City
Total 9,923
3.1
The areas identified under the preparatory study in Phase III were then classified into 3
priority groups to identify which areas need urgent repair works (refer to Table R 3.1.2).
Table R 3.1.2 Potential Classification of Areas for Improvement in Phase III
Priority I: Flood prone area spreads widely from 2 km downstream of the end of Pasig
River, which is around the Makati-Mandaluyong Bridge. This group of
Potential Areas is located in the wide flood prone area.
(Area Nos. 1, 3, 8, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27)
Priority II: Potential Areas located in the narrow flood prone area on both banks between
Makati-Mandaluyong Bridge and the end of Pasig River where congested
houses and roads exist, or, Potential Areas are located at the channel curves
more damaged by attack of flood of Typhoon Ondoy.
(Area Nos. 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 28, 32, 38, 40, 42)
Priority III: At present, urgent rehabilitation works are not necessary because there is no
critical floodwater attack at these Potential Areas and relatively high inland.
On the other hand, from the PRRC environmental aspect, improvement works
are necessary.
(Area Nos. 29, 30, 31, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 39, 41)
Note: PRRC has no schedule for improvement as of June 2011.
Both Priority I and II areas should be improved based on the previous study. On the other
hand, Priority III should be examined by additional field surveys using the Schmidt
Hammer Test to classify whether the area is to be improved or not.
3.1.1.2 Correlation between Result of Schmidt Hammer Test and Damage

The Schmidt Hammer Test results conducted by the Study Team on Priority III areas are
shown in Table R 3.1.3. The damaged conditions in Priority 3 revetment are also
described in Figure 3.1.2.
Test date: June 20th to 21st and July 11th, 2012
Table R 3.1.3 Schmidt Hammer Test Results
Cracked Width Cracked Width
Wall Bank Test Point f'c (MN/m2) Wall Bank Test Point f'c (MN/m2)
(mm) (mm)
1 10.50 Broken 26 6.90 3.0
2 32.20 Broken 27 27.60 19.0
3 28.60 2.5 28 19.80 4.0
4 17.40 Broken E Right 29 22.80 Broken
5 23.00 3.0 30 14.60 2.5
6 28.20 Broken 31 19.80 None
7 32.80 Broken 32 40.60 4.0
A Left 8 17.20 5.0 33 20.30 4.0
9 28.40 1.0 F Right 34 23.60 Broken
10 21.60 6.0 35 22.20 Broken
11 22.40 4.0 36 11.10 Broken
G Right
12 16.60 5.0 37 28.40 Broken
13 14.20 2.0 H1 Right 38 28.30 2.5
14 23.50 4.0 H2 Right 39 25.30 Broken
15 38.00 6.0 40 19.50 7.0
16 24.10 Broken 41 13.80 None
17 22.90 None 42 18.80 None
B Left
18 29.30 Broken 43 23.70 None
I Right
19 37.80 None 44 18.30 16.0
20 22.60 None 45 24.90 4.0
C Left 21 27.00 Broken 46 18.00 None
22 30.00 6.0 47 32.20 Broken
23 20.90 Broken Maximum 40.60 19.00
D Left 24 19.80 Broken Minimum 6.90 1.00
25 15.70 Broken Average 23.09 5.26
3.2
The minimum compressive strength of plain concrete Class-C is f’c=16.5MN/m2. Test

points 1, 13, 25, 26, 30, 36 and 41 from the above table indicate an f’c value under
16.5MN/m2. In some of these test points, the wall have been apparently broken (test points
1, 25, 36).
In some test points (13, 26, 30 and 41), the damage is superficial and allowable at this
moment. But future calamities may cause to develop the damage of the existing structures
and to eventually collapse; hence, repair works are necessary.
Moreover, the results of the investigation show that the problem is mainly caused not only
by low compressive strength of concrete but also by foundation.
3.1.1.3 Possible Causes of Deterioration of Revetment
The possible causes of the deterioration of the revetment include sliding, weak traction,
overturning and horizontal displacement caused by hydrodynamic forces, earth pressure
and water pressure. These are analyzed and described in “The Dynamic Design of the
Revetment”.
The progressive deterioration of the revetment is evidenced by cracks and settling of the
revetment surface caused by the caving in of the backfill; deformation of the revetment
caused by the scouring of foundation; cave-in and collapse caused by the scouring of the
backfill sand during flooding; sliding failure caused by the decrease in strength of the
backfill during floods; cracks caused by the erosion and weathering of the concrete wall;
and settling of the backfill on top of the revetment. In addition, other factors may be
contributing to the deterioration of the revetment, including growth of vegetation, water
pressure from the river flow, rainfall, ship-generated waves, earth quake, weathering,
normal wear and tear.
With the considerations mentioned above and on the basis of recent field investigation, the
following observations and assumptions are summarized below:
・ It is expected that revetment having low compressive strength showing initial

signs of damage will eventually collapse after a series floods.
・ Even revetments with high compressive strength show signs of damage and most
of them have already collapsed.
・ Most parts of the revetment walls at the riparian part have already been broken.
・ Numerous cracks over one millimeter wide are noted on the revetment walls that
were constructed with no reinforcement.
・ Most of the revetments where the lower portion is broken have their upper
portions also broken.
・ Heavy damages mostly occur at the upstream and downstream of convex river
alignments.
・ The impact of waves generated by the frequent passage of navigating vessels is a
serious factor that contributed to the deterioration of the revetments as indicted in
below.
3.3
The photos in Photo R 3.1.1 were taken during field investigation and shows waves
generated by high-speed boats cruising through the Pasig River.
Photo R 3.1.1 Waves Generated by Navigating Water Crafts

Destruction of the revetment progresses in the following sequence.
Step 1; Initial Condition - Cracks develop on the concrete surface of the revetment.
Step 2-1; Wave Damage - The impact of waves by watercraft destroys the river edge.
Step 2-2; Invasion by Plants - Growth of vegetation opens the cracks of the walls wider.
Step 3-1; Collapse by Floods - With the initial damages caused by the 3 factors
mentioned above, the wall will eventually collapse when the next flood occurs.
Step 3-2; Collapse by Rain - Rainwater seepage into the cracks and gaps will lead to its
eventual collapse.
As field evidence shows, any scale of flood and heavy rainfall causes total collapse
of the revetments due to the present condition of these structures, which poses
damage to life and property.
Therefore, the sections, where revetments are already in the Step 2-1 state of
deterioration, need urgent repair to prevent disaster. Repair is also needed to
prevent additional damage from waves generated by navigating vessels.
Furthermore, where the revetments are already broken need repair to eliminate
potential danger to life and property.
To this end, the following countermeasures are considered:
・ Coutermesure-1: The revetment around should be constructed of strong
materials, such as reinforced concrete or steel.
・ Coutermesure-2: To prevent the initial cracks, the concrete should be reinforced
with at least temperature reinforcement.
3.4
3.1.1.4 Improvement Areas for Phase III

Table R 3.1.4 summarizes the results of field investigation and the corresponding
recommendations on the necessary repair works along Pasig River.
Table R 3.1.4 Priority-III Results of Assessment of Necessary Repair Works

Area Extent of Concrete Assessment
Present Use Urgency Necessity
No. Damage Strength Point
A
Large(5) 13%(1) Residential(5) Very Urgent(5) 16 points 1
No.29
B
Large(5) 0%(0) Park(3) Very Urgent(5) 13 points 1
No.34
C
No.36
D
No.39
E
Small(1) 29%(2) Others(1) Not Urgent(1) 5 points 3
No.30
F
Medium(3) 0%(0) Park(3) Urgent(3) 9 points 2
No.31
G
Medium(3) 50%(3) Factory(1) Urgent(3) 10 points 2
No.33
H
No.35 No-Wall(5) 0%(0) Others(1) Urgent(3) 9 points 2
&37
I-1
Small(1) 13%(1) Factory(1) Not Urgent(1) 4 points 3
No.41A
I-2
Large(5) 13%(1) Factory(1) Urgent(3) 10 points 2
No.41B
(Assessment Point)
Extent of Damage: Large; No wall = 5points, Medium =3points, Small =1point
Concrete Strength: +Roundup (%×5points/100, 0), % = under 16.5MN/m2 observation places/
measurement places
Present Use: Residential =5points, Park =3points, Factory& Others =1point
Urgency: Very Urgent =5points, Urgent =3points, Not Urgent =1point
Necessity: 1=over 12points, 2=over8points, 3=under/equal 8points
Note: Shaded areas in the above table are excluded from the improved areas in accordance with
discussions with the DPWH. The reasons are the damages of both the Area E and the Area I-1
are small and the urgencies of those are not urgent. In addition, the Area G is excluded
because the existing revetment is a private revetment.
Considering budgetary constraints, it is highly recommended to repair the walls, as
categorized, according to the level of necessity.
・ Necessity-1: The area is highly recommended for repair= A to D
・ Necessity-2: The area is also recommended repair= F,G, H, I-2
・ Necessity-3: The area is recommended for repair only if there is available
budget= E, I-1
(1) Additional Improvement Areas for Phase III

The field survey was conducted jointly by the Study Team and DPWH on July 19th,
2012. After a series of discussions, the DPWH recommended to include additional
areas, herein referred to as “New Areas Proposed by DPWH” (Table R 3.1.5 ).
These areas need further investigation to identify the urgency of improvement and
find the appropriate way to improve where necessary.
3.5
Table R 3.1.5 Areas Proposed by DPWH

Station DPWH Basic Design
No. Bank Location/Owner
Start End Recommendation Decision
(New) Extend
Right Estero de Quiapo,
1 2+550 2+575 (New) Extend RCF Reinforced Concrete
Bank Manila
Floodwall (RCF)
(New) RCF:
Arroceros (New) SSP :
Left Re-investigation of
2 2+651 2+695 Pumping Station, Re-investigation at
Bank Foundation at Low
Manila Low Tide
Tide
(New) RCF
Left Chevron Gas (New) SSP Check the Foundation
3 7+494 7+580
Bank Station, Manila (New) RCF (New) RCF
Check Ground High
Continue SSP (New) Continue SSP
Right Marcelo Steel,
4 8+500 8+510 (Demolish the (Demolish the Existing
Bank Manila
Existing Pier) Pier)
Continue (Might be
Right Pascual Shipyard, (New) RCF
5 9+722 9+750 RCF,
Bank Manila Confirm to the Owner
Reinvestigation)
Right Mabini Jetty, (New) RCF
6 10+140 10+178 (New) RCF
Bank Manila Confirm to the Owner
Flying V/ Antonio
Left (New) RCF
7 10+230 10+340 Loo/ Chan, (New) SSP
Bank Confirm to the Owner
Manila
(New) RCF
(New) RCF
Left Check the Ground
8 10+405 10+470 Ocampo, Manila (New) Repair the
Bank High
Revetment
(New) Repair
Experience during the implementation of Phase II indicated that it was difficult to
get an agreement with the stakeholders. But the owners have changed their minds
afterword.
(2) Over-all Total Improvement Areas for Phase III
The improvement areas are shown in Table R 3.1.6 based on the results of the
discussions with the DPWH; the As-Built and As-Staked drawings under Phase II;
and the above-mentioned study results. The specific locations are shown in Figure
3.1.3.
In the detailed design stage, some areas may be excluded because of the budget
constraint. The fundamental plans of the reconsideration are following;
・ Priority-1 and -2 Groups: Improvement Areas and
・ Priority-3 Group and Additional Areas: After the consideration of the priority
order of each area, some of these areas might be excluded if the total project
cost exceeded the limit.
3.6
Table R 3.1.6 Improvement Areas for Phase III

Channel Bank Station Length of
No. Administration
(Left or Right) Start End Bank (m)
I. Priority – I & -II Groups
1 R 2+283 2+540 350 Manila City
2 L 2+406 2+651 258 Manila City
3 R 2+550 2+950 400 Manila City
4 L *2+855 *3+071 **228 Manila City
5 R 3+160 3+280 108 Manila City
6 R 3+300 3+400 91 Manila City
7 L 3+480 3+560 82 Manila City
8 R *3+648 3+753 **104 Manila City
9 R 5+030 5+217 171 Manila City
10 R 5+270 5+411 165 Manila City
11 R *5+547 5+630 **98 Manila City
12 L 6+119 6+219 101 Manila City
13 L 6+248 6+269 27 Manila City
14 R 6+350 *6+508 **148 Manila City
15 L *6+376 *6+482 **106 Manila City
16 L 7+344 *7+443 **100 Manila City
17 R *7+516 8+220 **634 Manila City
18 R 8+220 8+500 280 Manila City
19 R 8+510 9+341 827 Manila City
20 R 9+430 9+722 301 Manila City
21 R 9+750 9+790 41 Manila City
22 R 9+810 9+950 202 Manila City
24 L 11+500 11+628 128 Makati City
25 R *11+610 *11+655 **46 Mandaluyong City
27 L 12+024 12+173 149 Makati City
28 R *13+578 14+397 **819 Mandaluyong City
38 R 15+505 16+469 970 Pasig City
40 L 15+965 16+562 597 Makati City
42 R 16+776 16+828 52 Pasig City
Sub-Total 8,005
II. Priority – III Groups *1
29 L 13+806 14+442 636 Makati City
34 L 15+236 15+424 188 Makati City
35 R 15+410 15+439 29 Pasig City
36 L 15+443 15+547 104 Makati City
37 R 15+477 15+505 28 Pasig City
39 L 15+747 15+870 123 Makati City
41B R 16+667 16+722 55 Pasig City
Sub-Total 1270
III. Additional Areas *2
1A R 2+550 2+575 88 Manila City
2A L 2+651 2+695 45 Manila City
3A L 7+494 7+580 79 Manila City
4A R 8+500 8+510 10 Manila City
5A R 9+722 9+750 29 Manila City
6A R 10+140 10+178 40 Manila City
7A L 10+230 10+340 106 Manila City
8A L 10+405 10+470 92 Manila City
Sub-Total 489
TOTAL REPAIR AREA 9,764
IV. Excluded Area *3
33 R 15+196 15+246 50 Pasig City
41A R 16+469 16+667 198 Pasig City
Sub-Total 528
Notes:* Corrected station of the Phase-III As-Staked Plan based on the As-Built Plan from Phase II.
**Adjusted length of bank based on the corrected station of Phase-III As-Staked Plan.
*1: The areas are classified as the improved areas of the Priority-III.
*2: The areas are added by the filed survey jointly conducted by the Study Team and DPWH on
July 19th, 2012.
*3: The areas are excluded as the improved areas of the Priority-III (No.30=Area-E, No.33=Area-
G, No.41A=Area-I-1). (Refer to Table R 3.1.4)
3.7
3.1.2 Basic Design of Steel Sheet Pile Revetment in Pasig River

(1) Block Segmentation and Design Condition of Repair Area
Field investigation was conducted on the design area of the revetments indicated in
Table R 3.1.6. Repair methods, which will be applied to the areas considering the
construction case of Phase II, are shown in Figure R 3.1.7.
Table R 3.1.7 Applied Repair Methods
Condition of Existing Revetment of Repair
No. Applied Repair Methods
Area
The existing revetment is in good condition Reinforced Concrete Floodwall (Parapet Wall) is
but the top elevation is lower than the constructed on top of the existing revetment.
required (Design Flood Level + 1.0 m free
board). Construction of additional upper
structure is necessary.
1
The existing revetment has required Revetment is restored by putting back-fill materials and
elevation but the surface concrete is already repairing the broken surface of concrete.
broken and the back-filling material is
corroded.
No existing revetment, the existing Steel sheet pile revetment is constructed and additional
revetment has been deteriorated, or the upper structure is also installed on the top to satisfy the
existing revetment has been broken required design elevation (Design Flood Level + 1.0m
substantially. free board).
3
Upper
Structure
Steel Sheet
Pile
Revetment
Steel sheet pile revetments are suitable for Pasig River for the following reasons:
・ Reduction of river cross sectional area is minimal due to installation of vertical
revetment
・ Required construction period is shorter since provision of temporary coffer
dam, drainage and drying around construction area are not necessary.
・ Required elevation of revetment is achieved easily with the installation of
upper structure
・ Various adverse field conditions such as restrictive geological features,
underlying hard rock formation, and water depth for the dock, are addressed by
adjusting the scale and length of the steel sheet piles.
3.8
The type and length of steel sheet pile are designed appropriately in consideration
of design conditions. It is also necessary to set block segmentation because the
design condition is different for each location.
For the block segmentation of the repair areas, the following condition should be
considered:
・ Geotechnical condition (result of drilling survey),
・ Topographic condition (ground height of rear side, existing revetment, etc.),
・ Existing harbors (enough water depth for the docking of ships), and
・ For long repair sections, division into suitable lengths is applied.
Based on the above, the result of block segmentation of repair areas is listed in
Table R 3.1.8 and Table R 3.1.9. Furthermore, these segmentations will be
reviewed in the detailed design stage in consideration of the results of topographic
survey of river cross section and drilling test conducted at riverbank.
3.9
Table R 3.1.8 Block Segmentation of Steel Sheet Pile Revetment Area (Right Bank)
3.10
Table R 3.1.9 Block Segmentation of Steel Sheet Pile Revetment Area (Left Bank)
(2) Design Condition of Steel of Steel Sheet Pile Revetment

Design calculations of the steel sheet pile revetment are implemented according to
the flowchart shown in Figure R 3.1.1.
Design Condition - Soil
- Load
Environmental Pressure - Material
like Earth Load and Residual (SSP, Concrete)
Water Pressure etc.
Caslculation of level of Imaginary

Riverbed
Calculation of Displacement and

Stress Intensity of SSP
Assumption of Scale of SSP
Calculation of Necessary
Penetration Depth
Calculation of Bending Moment
Checking of 　NG
Stress Intensity
　OK
Calculation of Displacement
Checking of NG
Displacement
　OK
Design of Detail Parts
Construction Volume,
Construction Plan, Construction
Cost
Figure R 3.1.1 Flow Chart of Design of Steel Sheet Pile Revetment
3.11
Table R 3.1.10 shows the design condition of the steel sheet pile revetment.
Table R 3.1.10 Design Condition of Steel Sheet Pile Revetment
Item Design Condition
Concrete: Reinforced/Prestressed 24.0 kN/m3
Material Unit
Concrete: Plain 23.5 kN/m3

Weight
Mortar 21.0 kN/m3

Structural Steel 77.0 kN/m3
Cast Iron 71.0 kN/m3
Water 9.8 kN/m3
Quality of soil Loose sandy soil
Damp or wet
Soil Condition
18 kN/m3
Weight
condition
Unit
Saturated condition 20 kN/m3

Submerged condition 10 kN/m3
N-value Measurement value with standard penetration test
Angle of Internal Friction = 15+ 15N 45°： for N 5
Cohesion C=0
Steel Type SYW295
Normal Condition：180 N/mm2
Allowable Bending Stress
Seismic Condition：270 N/mm2
Normal Condition：50mm
Allowable Displacement
Steel Sheet Pile
Seismic Condition：75mm
Moment of Inertia 100%
Hat-shape
Section Modulus 100%
Section Efficiency
Moment of Inertia 100%
U-shape
Section Modulus 80%
Young’s Modulus of Elasticity 2.0×105 N/mm2
Corrosion Allowance 2mm（1mm for each side）
Refer to Figure R 3.1.2
Level of Coping concrete
(design condition in Phase II is applied)
[Water Level in Rear Side]
Rear Side Ground Level Top of Coping concrete
Water Level in Rear Side: Top of Coping concrete
Rear Side Ground Level < Top of Coping concrete
Water Level Condition
Water Level in Rear Side: Rear Side Ground Level
[Water Level in Front Side]
Normal Condition：Mean Low Water (MLW) EL.10.10m
Seismic Condition：Mean Water level (MWL) EL. 10.60m
Horizontal Seismic Coefficient kh=0.20
Normal Condition：10 kN/m2
Surcharge
Seismic Condition ：5 kN/m2
Cross sectional shape of riprap is designed such that necessary active earth load is secured
(refer to Figure R 3.1.2 and Figure R 3.1.3).
Delpan Br. Ayala Br. Nagthan Br. Zamola Br. Lambingan Br. Mandaluyong Br. C5 Br.
(STA.0+705) (STA.3+092) (STA.5+010) (STA.6+300) (STA.9+905) (STA.12+776) (STA.16+850)
(F.Santiago) (Pandacan) (Napindan)
EL+13.00
EL+12.7 EL+12.8
EL+12.6
EL+12.4 Coping EL+12.0
Coping Coping
EL+12.00 EL+12.0
Coping EL+11.8 EL+11.9
EL+11.6 EL+11.1
EL+10.89 avaraged water level line
EL+11.00
EL+10.70 EL+10.70
EL+10.77 EL+10.60
EL+10.50 (10.2+0.5) (10.2+0.5)
(10.0+0.5) (10.1+0.5)
EL+10.10 EL+10.10
EL+10.00
(9.6+0.5) (9.6+0.5)
Figure R 3.1.2 Design elevation of Coping Concrete and Riprap
3.12
Top of Coping concrete
Riprap (class-B)
Top of Riprap
Top of Riprap (construction)
(design)
Imaginary Riverbed
Passive
Angle
Steel Sheet Pile
Width of Riprap
Topographic Cross Section
Figure R 3.1.3 Design Method of Necessary Width of Riprap
(3) Design of Steel Sheet Pile Revetment Structure

There are four types of revetment that are applicable for the repair of Pasig River,
as shown in Table R 3.1.11. Based on the comparison of the four types,
“Cantilever Steel Sheet Pile + Foot Protection Works” is recommended. This type
is most appropriate and in uniformity with the on-going works under Phase II.
3.13
Table R 3.1.11 Comparison of Revetment Structure

Construction Case-1: Cantilever Steel Sheet Pile Case-2: Cantilever Steel Sheet Pile Case-3: Tie Rod Steel Sheet Pile Case-4: Concrete Block Retaining Wall with Steel Sheet
Method + Foot Protection (On going Phase II) (Scouring Depth = 2m) (Scouring Depth = 2m) Pile Base + Foot Protection
General Drawing
- Wide shape steel sheet pile, Type-IIw, L=9.5m

- Wide shape steel sheet pile, Type-IIw, L=10.5m - Hat shape steel sheet pile, Type-10H, L=15.5m - Concrete block retaining wall, H=3.1m (1:0.5)
Structural Anchor sheet pile, Type-IIw, L=5.5m
Riprap V=2m3 H-450*250*12*18, L=15.0m Steel sheet pile, Type-IIw, L=5m
Variables Tie rod 32mm @2.4m, L=9.0m
Parapet H=1.9m Parapet H=1.9m L-type retaining wall, H=1.7m
Parapet H=1.9m
- Many in Japan, especially for harbors and low water channel of
Adaption for - Actually used in on going Phase-II, many in Japan in the case of - Many in Japan, especially for medium and small size rivers
Project
◎ (Shallow places of water depth) in large cities ○ large river, such as Arakawa river, because of required wide ○ - Most general revetment foot medium and small size rivers ◎
gabion and concrete block
space
- Even if the corrosion protection for sheet pile, quality of the
Durability for ・No problem due to corrosion protection for sheet pile and the ・No problem due to corrosion protection for sheet pile and the ・No problem due to concrete block and corrosion protection of
Brackish Water
○ ○ corrosion treatment about the tie rod parts still remain as the △ ○
other's concrete structures other's concrete structures sheet pile
problem due to site treatment.
Environmental - Not so good about the biological system because of no-porous - Not so good about the biological system because of no-porous - Not so good about the biological system because of no-porous - Not so good about the biological system because of no-porous
Aspect
△ △ △ △
revetment revetment revetment revetment
Effect against
River Navigation
- Approaching berthing is difficult because of the riprap. △ - Approaching berthing is easy because of no-riprap. ◎ - Approaching berthing is easy because of no-riprap. ◎ - Approaching berthing is difficult because of the riprap. ◎
- It is actually impossible that additional land-acquisition is

Land Required - The smallest land requirement than the others ◎ - The smallest land requirement than the others ◎ needed due to the anchor sheet pile and the tie rod. × - Wider land use due to the inclination of the wall △
Effect against - Wider obstruct against the river sections because of the
- A little obstruct against the river sections ◎ △ - A little obstruct against the river sections ◎ - A little obstruct against the river sections ◎
River Section additional H-beam
- It is necessary that scouring places should be maintained - It is necessary that scouring places should be maintained - It is necessary that frequent maintenances are needed because of
Maintenance and
Repair
- No problem ◎ because of no foot protection. (However, that might be difficult × because of no foot protection. (However, that might be difficult × the broken points by ship generated waves. In addition, the repair △
by the present system actually.) by the present system actually.) is expensive due to temporary cofferdam.
- Relatively easy due to dumping and leveling the riprap under Temporary cofferdam and dewatering are necessary. Especially,
Workability ○ - Easy due to no under-water construction ◎ - Not so easy due to the construction of the tie rod △ △
the water control for dewatering is difficult because of basically 24 hours.
Sheet Pile Costs 163,400 Sheet Pile Costs 414,100 Sheet Pile Costs 90,700 Basement Costs 54,700
Riprap Costs 4,400 Vertical Wall 5,800 Anchor Sheet Pile 52,500 Concrete Block Wall 24,300
Vertical Wall 5,800 Tie Rod 54,000 Cofferdam & Dewatering 153,200
Cost 　　 Vertical Wall 5,800 Riprap Costs 4,400
1 4 2 3
(Peso/m) L-Type Parapet Wall 6,500
Total Costs 　　 173,600 Peso/m Total Costs 　　 419,900 Peso/m Total Costs 　　 203,000 Peso/m Total Costs 　　 243,100 Peso/m
- The most expensive because of the heavy weight of the steel - Expensive because of the temporary cofferdam and the
- Inexpensive because of no temporary cofferdam - Expensive because of the anchor pile and tie rod
caused by the high self support wall dewatering
- The cost is more expensive than Case-1's. Furthermore, it is necessary

- The most of the evaluations, especially including the cost, are better - The most expensive method. In addition, It is impossible that adequate - The cost is more expensive than Case-1's. In addition, the durability for
to acquire the additional lands for the anchor sheep pile and the tie rod.
than the others and the damages of the barges are not so serious maintenances for the scouring places by the no foot protection will be the ship generated waves is weak point and the maintenance & repair are
(Even if the foot protection is considered, the cost is more expensive
Evaluation problems. conducted. still problems.
than Case-1 and the additional land-acquisition is still remained.)
◎: Selection △ ×： Difficulty of Land-Acquisition △

Symbol Legend - ◎:Very Good, ○:Good, △:Fare, ×:Poor or Problem
3.14
(4) Design Calculation of Steel Sheet Pile Revetment

The type and scale of steel sheet piles of each segment listed in Table R 3.1.8 and
Table R 3.1.9 are designed based on the aforementioned design condition. Results
of design calculation are shown in Table R 3.1.12 and Table R 3.1.13.
Table R 3.1.12 Results of Design Calculation of Steel Sheet Pile Revetment
(Right Bank)
Station Designed Parapet
Length of
Bank (m) Length of
from to SSP H-BEAM
SSP (m)
2+283 2+341 65 SSP-VL - 12.5
3+160 3+280 108 SSP-IVw - 12.0
3+648 3+753 104 SSP-IVw - 10.0
5+030 5+217 171 SSP-10H 400x200x9x22 12.5
5+270 5+411 165 SSP-10H 400x200x9x22 13.5
5+547 5+630 98 SSP-VL - 12.0
6+350 6+508 148 SSP-VIL - 12.5
8+220 8+250 30 SSP-10H 400x200x9x22 12.5
8+250 8+510 260 SSP-VL - 11.0
8+510 8+800 286 SSP-10H 400x200x9x22 12.5
8+800 9+150 350 SSP-IVw - 10.5
9+150 9+200 50 SSP-10H 650x250x12x28 18.0
9+200 9+341 141 SSP-IVw - 10.5
9+430 9+722 301 SSP-IVw - 11.0
9+750 9+770 20 SSP-25H - 9.5
9+770 9+790 21 SSP-10H 500x250x12x28 15.5
9+810 9+830 29 SSP-10H 500x250x12x28 15.5
9+830 9+950 173 SSP-IVw - 11.0
10+957 11+263 320 SSP-25H 1000x300x16x32 20.0
11+610 11+655 46 SSP-10H 400x200x9x22 14.0
11+787 11+802 15 SSP-IVw - 11.0
13+578 13+700 122 SSP-IVw - 10.5
13+700 13+800 100 SSP-IVw - 10.0
13+800 14+000 200 SSP-IVw - 10.5
14+000 14+100 100 SSP-IVw - 10.0
14+100 14+250 150 SSP-VL - 10.5
14+250 14+397 147 SSP-10H 400x200x9x22 12.0
14+837 14+944 107 SSP-10H 450x250x12x28 14.5
14+985 15+072 87 SSP-10H 450x250x12x28 13.0
15+410 15+439 29 SSP-10H 800x250x16x28 17.0
15+477 15+505 28 SSP-10H 450x200x12x25 14.0
16+776 16+828 52 SSP-25H - 9.0
3.15
Table R 3.1.13 Results of Design Calculation of Steel Sheet Pile Revetment

(Left Bank)
Station Designed Parapet
Length of
Bank (m) Length of
from to SSP H-BEAM
SSP (m)
2+406 2+651 258 SSP-IVw - 12.5

2+855 3+071 228 SSP-IVw - 12.0
6+119 6+219 101 SSP-IVw - 10.0
6+248 6+269 27 SSP-IVw - 9.5
6+376 6+482 106 SSP-25H - 9.0
7+344 7+443 100 SSP-VL - 11.0
11+500 11+628 128 SSP-10H 400x200x9x22 12.0
12+024 12+173 149 SSP-10H 900x250x16x28 19.0
13+806 14+442 636 SSP-VIL - 11.0
14+442 14+442 192 SSP-10H 450x200x12x25 12.5
15+236 15+424 188 SSP-IVw - 9.5
15+443 15+547 104 SSP-VIL - 11.0
15+747 15+870 123 SSP-VIL - 11.5
15+965 16+562 597 SSP-10H 400x200x9x22 12.0
(5) Design of Upper Structure

The DFL of Pasig River ranges from EL. 12.10m to EL. 14.05m. Hence, the
necessary top elevation of revetment is set between EL. 13.10m and EL. 15.05,
which includes 1.0m freeboard.
Upper structures above the concrete coping are constructed considering inland
terrain, land use condition and request from residents. Type of upper structure is
designed based on the flow chart in Figure R 3.1.4 considering a vertical wall,
inclined wall or combination of them (refer to Figure R 3.1.5).
START
rear side terrain or existing (1)

wall at rear side is higher than Yes
upper structure
necessary elevation (DFL + not necessary
1.0m free board)
　No
SSP revetment and rear side

Yes (2)
terrain is close in all span of
vertical wall
the segment
　No
average elevation gap between

top of coping and developed Yes (3)
elevation of rear side is less vertical wall
than 60cm
　No
(4) vertical wall +

inclined wall
Figure R 3.1.4 Flow Chart for Selection of Upper Structure
3.16
(2) vertical wall is installed (steel sheet pile revetment and rear side terrain is close)
(1) upper structure is not necessary (rear side terrain is higher than necessary elevation)
(3) vertical wall is installed (elevation gap between top of coping concrete and
developed elevation of rear side is less than 60cm) (4) inclined wall and vertical wall are installed (other case of (1), (2) and (3))
Figure R 3.1.5 Typical Section of Each Type of Upper Structure
3.17
3.1.3 Basic Design of Harbor

(1) Inventory of Harbor Revetments
Information regarding the detailed locations of harbor areas has been verified with
the Coast Guard and PPA, but the negotiations with the stakeholders about the
harbors have not been completed. As of the latest inventory, the required water
depth of harbor areas has also been provided during the preparatory study as shown
in Table R 3.1.14.
Table R 3.1.14 Design Condition of Harbor Areas in Preparatory Study
PHASE III: HARBOR AREA
Elev. Of Depth of Foundation Length of
Location Bank Station
Riprap Water (m) Type Pile Length (m) Bank (m)
27 Leftbank 12+024～12+173 8.500 2.100 Revetment (SP with H-Beam) 19.00 149.00
19C Rightbank 9+150～9+200 8.600 2.000 Revetment (SP with H-Beam) 18.00 50.00
21B Rightbank 9+770～9+790 8.600 2.000 Revetment (SP with H-Beam) 15.50 21.00
22A Rightbank 9+810～9+830 8.600 2.000 Revetment (SP with H-Beam) 15.50 29.00
23 Rightbank 10+957～11+263 8.700 1.900 Revetment (SP with H-Beam) 20.00 320.00
TOTAL HARBOR AREA 569.00
From the table above, the design water depth from the existing riverbed is basically
2.0m. Designed sections of harbor in preparatory study are shown in Figure R
3.1.6.
STA. 12+050 STA. 9+150
STA. 9+810 STA. 11+100
Figure R 3.1.6 Typical Sections of Harbor Revetment Designed in the Preparatory

Study
3.18
In addition, information regarding Ferryboat Stations, which was provided by

PRRC is shown in Table R 3.1.15. From the latest Phase III Plan, one station
(No.6 Lambingan Station) is near the proposed repair area but this will not cause
any problem because the revetment repair will not be conducted right on the ferry
station.
Table R 3.1.15 List of Ferryboat Stations, from PRRC, 2012
No. River Station Address Condition Owners Note
1 Plaza Mexico Station Intramuros Metro Manila Operational Govement-PRRC
2 Escolta Station Muelle del Banco Nacio Bonondo, Manila City M.M. Operational Govement-PRRC
3 Lawton Station A. Villegas St. Ermita, Mnila City M.M. Operational Govement-PRRC
4 PUP Station Anonas St. Sta. Mesa, Manila City M.M. Operational Govement-PRRC
5 Pasig Sta. Ana Station 2467 E. Pedoro Gil St. Sta. Ana Manila City, M.M. Operational Govement-PRRC
6 River Lambingan Station 1500 MEF. MANALO St. Punta Sta. Ana M.M. Operational Govement-PRRC
7 Hulo Station 764 Coronado St. Hulo, Makati M.M. Operational Govement-PRRC
8 Valenzuela Station A. Bonificio Valenzuela, Makati M.M. Operational Govement-PRRC
9 Guadalupe Station JP RIZAL St. Guadalupe Nuevo, Makati City M.M. Operational Govement-PRRC
10 San Joaquin Station 44 BE San Bernardo St. San Joaquin Pasig City M.M. Operational Govement-PRRC
11 Riverbanks Brgy. Barangka Riverbanks, Marikina City Non-Operational Govement-PRRC Affected by Ondoy
12 Rosario Brgy. Rosario, Pasig City Non-Operational Govement-PRRC
Marikin
13 Kapasigan Brgy. Kapasigan, Pasig City Non-Operational Govement-PRRC
a
14 River Maybunga Dr. Sixto Antonio Ave. Brgy Maybunga, Pasig City Non-Operational Govement-PRRC
15 Unisphere - Non-Operational Unisphere Holdings
16 Eastwood - Non-Operational Eastwood Properties
Note: The Gray Cell Station is located in Phase III.
(2) Detailed Structural Design of Harbor Revetments

Three types of structural detail for the harbor are listed below. The appropriate
design to adopt will be on case-by-case basis, depending on water depth. The
estimated construction cost, required water depth, and standard structural drawing
of harbor revetment is shown in Table R 3.1.16.
Case 1: Water depth is 2m, Cantilever Type Steel Sheet Pile Structure
Case 2: Water depth is 4m, Cantilever Type Steel Sheet Pile Structure
Case 3: Water depth is 6m, Tie Rod Type Steel Sheet Pile Structure
It shall be noted that the design water depth has to be set on present riverbed level
or set as shallow as possible because the cost becomes expensive when water depth
exceeds 2m. On the other hand, application of tie rod support shall be studied if
there is ample easement space for supporting piles because tie rod support is more
reasonable and cheaper than cantilever steel sheet pile in case the bed is deep.
3.19
Table R 3.1.16 Standard Structure of Harbors for Typical Water Depth

Water Depth & Case-0: No-Consideration for Water Depth Case-1: Water Depth H=2m (for Boat)
Type Cantilever Steel Sheet Pile Cantilever Steel Sheet Pile
General
Drawing
- Hat shape steel sheet pile, Type-10H, L=15.5m

- Hat shape steel sheet pile, Type-25H, L=9.5m
H-500*250*12*28, L=15.0m
Structural Riprap V=2m3
Riprap V=2m3
Variables Parapet H=1.9m
Parapet H=1.9m
Sheet Pile Costs 102,500 Sheet Pile Costs 414,600

Riprap Costs 4,400 Riprap Costs 4,400
Cost Vertical Wall 5,800 Vertical Wall 5,800
(Peso/m) 　　
Total Costs 112,700 Peso/m Total Costs 424,800 Peso/m
- Main assumed water depth for harbors in Pre-Study for Phase-III

Characteristics - Inexpensive because of the shallow water depth
- Enough depth for boat which is used to crossing the river
Water Depth & Case-2: Water Depth H=4m (for Barge/ Ferry Boat) Case-3: Water Depth H=4m (for Ship)
Type Cantilever Steel Sheet Pile Tie Rod Steel Sheet Pile
General
Drawing
- Hat shape steel sheet pile, Type-25H, L=21.5m - Wide shape steel sheet pile, Type-IVw, L=16.0m
H-900*300*16*32, L=21.0m Anchor sheet pile, Type-IIw, L=5.5m
Structural
Riprap V=2m3 Tie rod f50mm @2.4m, L=12.5m
Variables
Parapet H=1.9m Riprap V=2m3
Parapet H=1.9m
Sheet Pile Costs 920,900 Sheet Pile Costs 265,200
Riprap Costs 4,400 Anchor Sheet Pile 50,900
Vertical Wall 5,800 Tie Rod 40,000
Cost
　 Riprap Costs 4,400
(Peso/m)
Vertical Wall 5,800
　Excavation & Restoration 100,000
Total Costs 931,100 Peso/m Total Costs 466,300 Peso/m
- Additional land space is required.
- Very expensive because of the high wall height. Therefore, it is need that - It is necessary that the mentioned above land should be purchased by the
comparison between cantilever type and tie rod type which requires the authority due to ensure the adequate river management.
Characteristics additional space. - One part of Phase-II was adapted to charge to the land owner based on
- This water depth sturucure was partially adapted in on going Phase-II his requirement.
(Sta.6+613 to Sta.6+782, Water depth H=2.8-4.8m, with foot protection) (Sta.10+146.8 to Sta.10+230, Water depth H=3.1m, without foot
protection)
3.20
3.1.4 Review of Foot Protection

(1) Review Condition of Foot Protection
Foot protection works are placed at foot of the steel sheet pile to stabilize the
revetment. Riprap as foot protection was constructed in Phase II but this has caused
to damage some barges.
Therefore, a review of the appropriate foot protection method shall be conducted by
considering its adverse effect on river navigation.
Enumerated below are the comments from DPWH concerning the design method of
foot protection used in Phase II.
・ No problem with respect to river cross-section constriction.
・ There is a claim that damage to a barge was caused by the accidental collision
with the foot protection,
・ Re-examine other new technologies and structural methods of foot protection.
Hence, the above-mentioned points should be considered in the review of foot
protection method.
(2) Review of Structural Method for Foot Protection
Four (4) types of revetment structures are compared as shown in Table R 3.1.17,
namely:
Case-1: Riprap (On-going Phase II)
Case-2: Galvanized Gabion Mattress
Case-3: Geotextile Gabion Bag (Bottle Unit)
Case-4: Geotextile Gabion Mattress
Of these four types, Case-1 is selected due to least cost, adaptability to the project,
durability against saline water, environmental safety, adjustability to riverbed
deformation, low maintenance and repair cost, and workability.
The impact on river navigation, particularly the alleged damage to navigating
barges, could be addressed by providing appropriate signboards.
In the following meetings, the basic concept for the river navigation and the
countermeasure, which is the river navigation signboard, are explained and
confirmed.
・ July 10th, 2012: Coordination Meeting with DOTC, PPA and PRRC.
・ August 1st, 2012: Pasig River Ferry Service Project- Briefer by DPWH Flood
Control and Discussion with Attendees, DOTC, DPWH, MMDA, PRRC and
PPA.
3.21
Table R 3.1.17 Comparison of Foot Protection

Construction Case-3: Geotextile Gabion Bag for Foot
Method
Case-1: Riprap (On going Phase II) Case-2: Galvanized Gabion Mattress Case-4: Geotextile Gabion Mattress
Protection (Bottle Unit)
Photography/
General Drawing
- Dry boulder riprap (300-400mm in diameter) - Geotextile gabions mainly made form polyethylene
- Cage made of steel wires, which are galvanized because of - Geotextile gabion bags made of the recycled polyester form PET
- Standard method of foot protection in Philippines - It is used for alternative method in stead of gabion with retaining the
countermeasures for brackish water bottles
Abstract of the - No serious issue of workability and functionality based on the ongoing characteristics of the gabion.
- It is desirable not to use this at the places of the strong acidity and high - Due to the high strength chemical fibers, it is possible to be used at the
Method Phase II - Due to the high strength chemical fibers, It is possible to be used at the
salinity. low pH area and river mouth without rusting.
- Relatively expensive because of transportation form other islands low pH area and river mouth without rusting.
- Use in the locations where boulders and driftwood must be careful. - Use in the locations where boulders and driftwood must be careful.
- use in the locations where boulders and driftwood must be careful.
Material Fieldstone Gravel (Class-B) Galvanized Wire Geotextile: Recycled Polyester Geotextile: Polyethylene
General Allowable
Velocity
Va = 5.0m/s > 3.0m/s（OK） ◎ Va = 6.0m/s > 3.0m/s (OK) ◎ Va = 4.3m/s > 3.0m/s (OK) ◎ Va = 6.0m/s > 3.0m/s (OK) ◎
Adaption for
Project
Many projects especially in Philippines ◎ Many in Philippines and Japan, but a few in brackish water ◎/△ Recently increasing in Japan ○ Not many compared with Case-3 due to expensive cost △
- Based on the result of Phase I investigation, the average
chloride value of 1617 (ranged from 80 to 6000) mg/L in dry
- No problems of the fieldstone - No problems of the fieldstone
Durability for season is higher than 450 mg/L which is allowable content
- No problems of the fieldstone ◎ △ - No issue about the bags due to the result against 3% sodium ◎ - No issue about the bags due to the result of sodium chloride and ○
Brackish Water without the wire courting.
chloride test approved by Public Works Research Center other tests
- Because the salinity varies depending on the sampling depth,
deep-water parts still remain of particular concern.
- For zinc used in rust prevention treatment, report (less than 30 - Hazardous substances, such as environmental hormones, do not
- Hazardous substances, such as environmental hormones, do not
mg/L) has been made of setting environmental standard form the contain because it is made form recycled PET bottles and
Environmental contain because It is made form high strength chimerical fibers.
Aspect
- No problems of the fieldstone ◎ Ministry of the Environment in Japan. △ polyester fibers. ○ ○
- because of the small mesh size, It is easier than Case-2 to
- Because of the large mesh size, it is difficult to greening by - Because of the small mesh size, it is easier than Case-2 to
greening by plants.
plants. greening by plants.
- It is concerned about mal-function for foot protection due to

Followability
spaces between each others caused by deformations of riverbed. - It is possible to follow the deformation of the riverbed because - It is concerned about mal-function for foot protection due to
against Riverbed - It is possible to adjust the deformation of the riverbed. ◎ △ of the flexible material bags. ◎ spaces between each others caused by deformations of riverbed. △
- The wire diameter of gabion in Philippines is generally thinner
Deformation
than Japan's one, so it is easier to follow the deformation.
- The request for changing foot protection method form the river
Effect against - Less influences against river navigation due to weak strength of - Less influences against river navigation due to flexible bag and - Less influences against river navigation due to flexible gabion
River Navigation
navigation's stakeholders, because barges have been damaged by △ the cage and small size particles of fill materials ◎ small size particles of fill materials ◎ cage and small size particles of fill materials ◎
contact.
Maintenance and
Repair
- Easy due to dumping and leveling on the top layer ◎ - Relatively not so easy for repair due to dry work needed △ - easy due to additional setting on the top of geotextile bag ○ - Relatively not so easy for repair due to dry work needed △
Site
- Only rough leveling - Need for elaborate leveling before construction - Only rough leveling due to good flexibility - Need for elaborate leveling before construction
Preparation
Workability
Mechanized
- Possible - Manual set on the site and backfill by the manual and machine - Possible - Manual set on the site and backfill by the manual and machine
Construction
◎ △ ○ △
Under Water - Basically dry work condition - Basically dry work condition
- Possible - Possible
Execution - Coffering or diver is required for some cases. - Coffering or diver is required for some cases.
Construction
- Speedy due to dumping and leveling mainly by backhoe - Relatively slow due to the man-power construction - Relatively fast due to mainly mechanized construction - Relatively slow due to the man-power construction
Speed
Material Costs 8,000 Material Costs 24,000 Material Costs 34,000 Material Costs 94,000
Cost
Const. Costs　　　　9,000 1 Const. Costs　　　 25,000 2 Const. Costs　　　 19,000 3 Const. Costs　　　 25,000 4
(Peso/m)
Total Costs 　　 17,000 Peso/m Total Costs 　　 49,000 Peso/m Total Costs 　　 53,000 Peso/m Total Costs 　　 119,000 Peso/m
- The improvement for the river navigation is well, but the cost is greatly - The improvement for the river navigation is well, but the cost is more
- The most of the evaluations, especially including the cost, are better
more expensive than the Case-1. In addition, the durability against the expensive than the Case-1 and the Case-2. However, it is still possible to - The cost is most expensive than the others. Structure life is longer than
than the others and the damages of the barges are not so serious
Evaluation brackish water is questionable. Therefore, it is difficult to select this be adapted in the partial areas, such as foot protections about the piers the Case-2.
problems.
method. because of the characteristics.
◎: Selection △: Third Place ○: Second Place △: Fourth Place
Symbol Legend - ◎:Very Good, ○:Good, △:Fare, ×:Poor or Problem
3.22
(3) Calculation of Riprap Diameter

Stability of the riprap is checked using the following equation,
V02
Dm1'
E12 2g(ρs /ρ w 1)
Where:
Dm = Average Diameter (m)
Vo = Representative Velocity (m/s)
Vo = 1× 2×Vm (Average Velocity)
= 1.35x0.90x2.315 = 2.951 = 3.0m/s
g = Gravitational Acceleration (m/s2)
ρS = Stone Density, ρS /ρW = 2.5 (Approximately)
E1 = Experimental Coefficient for Disturbance
(Ordinarily 1.20, Big Disturbance 0.86)
Standard specifications for riprap materials are shown in Table R 3.1.18.
Table R 3.1.18 Diameter of Riprap Materials
Unit Weight of Stones = 2.5 t/m3 (g/cm3)
Minimum Maximum 50% Weighting
Class Weight Radius Weight Radius Weight Radius Diameter
(kg) (cm) (kg) (cm) (kg) (cm) (cm)
A 15 11.3 25 13.4 20 12.4 24.8
B 30 14.2 70 17.9 50 16.8 33.7
C 60 17.9 100 21.2 80 19.7 39.4
D 100 21.2 200 26.7 150 24.3 48.6
(Riverbed Slope = Level)

Dm1’=3.02/{1.22×2×9.8×[2.5-1]}=0.213m
1 1
K ＝1.000
tan θ2
tan 2 0
cosθ 1 - cos 0 1 -
tan 2φ tan 2 41
Dm1=K×Dm1’=100×0.213 = 21.3cm
Therefore, Average Diameter Dm = 21.3cm
Riprap material = Class-B (33.7cm)
(Riverbed Slope = 1:2)

Dm1’=3.02 / {1.22×2×9.8×[2.5-1]}= 0.185m
1 1
K ＝1.368
tan θ
2
tan 2 26.6
cosθ 1 - cos 26 .6 1 -
tan 2φ tan 2 41
Dm1=K×Dm’=1.368×0.213=29.1cm
Therefore, Average Diameter Dm = 29.1cm
Riprap material = Class-B (33.7cm)
3.23
(4) River Navigation Signboard

For safety in river navigation, watercrafts such as barges should not be allowed
within at least 7.8m of the foot protection works.
River navigation signboard sized 0.80m square (Figure R 3.1.7) should be
attached where they are visible, instructing all watercraft to stay at least 7.8m
away from the revetment.
The decision to use these signboards will be finalized in a meeting between the
DPWH and the Philippines Coast Guard (PCG).
Note: 7.8m is a tentative agreement originated from a meeting with the Study Team and
PCG and it was originally based on the width of barges.
Figure R 3.1.7 Signboards for Safe Navigation of Pasig River
3.1.5 Basic Design of Reinforced Concrete Floodwall

3.1.5.1 Design Condition
In accordance with the specifications for repair as earlier shown, the reinforced concrete
floodwall will be repaired under Phase III. This will be constructed where the elevation
of top of coping concrete is not sufficient (i.e., DFL + 1.0m free board), even if the the
foundation of the existing revetment is still in good condition. The features and design
conditions of Type-II and Type-IV reinforced concrete floodwalls are shown in Table R
3.1.19.
The figures of Type-II and Type-IV reinforced concrete floodwalls are shown in Figure
R 3.1.8. The general sections of each type of floodwall are shown in Figure R 3.1.9.
The most suitable type of floodwall will be designed and apllied based on thorough
evaluation of existing site conditions.
3.24
Table R 3.1.19 Type and Design Condition of Reinforced Concrete Flood wall
Item Floodwall (Type-II) Floodwall (Type-IV)

Demolish the existing pavement of the Install the anchor bars on the existing
revetment - rear road section to lay the retaining wall or existing revetment. Lay
foundation of the floodwall the concrete parapet wall on top of the
retaining wall by jointing the reinforcing
bar to the anchor bars.
Construction
Method
Load Cases Normal, Seismic, Wind, and Flood Condition

Material Unit Weight Same with the design of concrete revetment
Seismic Coefficient k=0.20
Wind Load qs=1.5kN/m2
Design Flood Level Highest Flood Water Level＋1m
Friction Coefficient f = 0.6 (assumed leveling concrete is installed before
Against Sliding constructing of the floodwall)
Floodwall（Type-II） Floodwall（Type-IV）
Design 2
Surcharge Normal：4.79kN/m Normal：10kN/m2
Condition
Seismic：2.40kN/m2 Seismic：5kN/m2
Overturning Necessary diameter and quantity
Eccentricity should not of reinforcing bar is calculated
exceed 1/3 of the base and designed hence the floodwall
Calculation of Stability width. is connected with foundation or
Condition Sliding top of retaining wall by anchor
SF 1.2 bars.
Bearing Capacity
SF=3
Reinforced concrete floodwall (Type-I) with handrail was recommended in Phase II.
However PMO requested to modify this to type-III during construction, inasmuch as the
former has not been constructed at all. It is deemed that floodwall Type-I will not be
adopted in Phase III.
Furthermore, Type-III is the same section as Type-II and it is used in the case of the
exsiting concrete block structures. Therefore, no calculation of the Type-III is conducted
in the basic design, because the structural safety of the Type-III is equal to/ better than
Type-II.
3.25
Figure R 3.1.8 General Sections of the Floodwall
3.1.5.2 Design Calculation of the Floodwall

The floodwall types enumerated below are recommended in Phase III. The result of
design calculations is shown in Figure R 3.1.9.
・ Reinforced concrete floodwall (Type-II) with 1m wall height
・ Reinforced concrete floodwall (Type-IV) with 1m wall height
(Type-II Drawing) (Type-IV Drawing)

Figure R 3.1.9 Cross Sections of Reinforced Concrete Floodwall based on Design
Calculation
3.26
3.2 Summary of Basic Design of Lower Marikina River Improvement

3.2.1 Scope of Basic Design of Lower Marikina River Improvement
3.2.1.1 Design Condition
Outline of revetment structures against flood along Lower Marikina River and
accompanying facilities were put into execution in this Basic Design.
The conditions or prerequisites in Basic Design are as follows:
The centerline of river follows the design in Phase I in 2002 is to be adopted.
With reference to the sections of revetment structures and the types of structures,
outputs in Phase I in 2002 and the Feasibility Study in 2010 (refer to Figure R
3.2.1) should be given serious consideration, however, they should be reviewed
depending on the change of situations, such as expansion of ranges of houses into
the river and new construction and so on, and the result of geological survey and
so on.
Figure R 3.2.1 Standard Cross Section of River

・ Design river bed level and design high water level (DHWL) in Phase I in 2002 is
to be adopted.
・ Pasig City is planning to build roads along whole river sides of Lower Marikina
River, and Basic Design follows its planning. An elevation of roads is uniformly
15.0m.
・ Centerline of dredging shall be reviewed because of large change of river bed,
such as progress of sedimentation of soil more than 1.0m, new bridge
construction, change of water route and so on.
・ In order to process dredge earth and sand effectively, perform the basic design
about a temporary soil storage site and a soil disposal site. However, in this time,
a final agreement with the landowner about lot lease of Laguna soil disposal site
has not been reached yet.
3.2.1.2 Design Range in Lower Marikina River

The items of design and study with their contents implemented in the Basic Design are as
shown in Table R 3.2.1 and Table R 3.2.2.
3.27
Table R 3.2.1 Design Items and Contents

Design Item Bill of Quantities Contents
Whole river Proposal of an alignment of river
1 Alignment of revetment 5,400m×2
line revetment along a river
Design of Revetment Study of basic structures at dike
2 3 sections 1,890m
(Dike Structure） sections and their design
Whole river Design of an alignment for dredging
3 Dredging 5,400m
line and sections
Study of jetties for soil
Temporary Soil Storage transportation , muck pits, a sand
4 Napindan 1 set
Site basin, temporary soil storage facilities
and so on
Design of a backfill site, a jetty and
5 Backfill Site Laguna 1set
so on
Whole river Comparison of dehydrate tubes for
6 Boundary Bank 5,400m×2
line dredging soil and study of locations
Foot Protection around Study of protection method and its
7 5 places
Piers design
Table R 3.2.2 Site Investigation Items and Contents

Study Items Bill of Quantities Contents
Study of hazard evaluation for both
Evaluation of Existing Whole River
1 5,400m×2 sides against flood and ranges of
Revetment line
installation of revetments
Evaluation of stability Investigation on a wall in Rizal High
2 1 place
of new-built wall School
3.2.2 Site Investigation

(1) Evaluation of Existing Revetment
The review of the Preparatory Study in 2010 was made in consideration of the
change of land forms etc. based on the site reconnaissance investigation and
hearing conducted on the whole areas along Lower Marikina River from a view
point of flood protection. Evaluated areas are shown in Figure R 3.2.2.
Evaluation items are as follows:
・ Flood area and flood water level
・ Condition of land use and building (house and factory)
・ Flood Duration at 2009 ( Typhoon Ondoy)
・ Experience of flood from river
・ Evacuation center, distance and time
・ Existence of wall
3.28
Figure R 3.2.2 Hazard Evaluation of the Sections along Lower Marikina River
3.29
(2) Site Investigation on Built Wall

The floodwall in Rizal High School, which location was shown Figure R 3.2.3,
was built by Pasig City was investigated and evaluated. It was found that the wall
is located at a high ground elevation, and it can withstand flood pressure in the
view point of structural stability.
(a) Site Investigation on Existing Floodwall
Site investigation on the existing floodwall was made as follows;
Site : a ground of Rizal High School on river side in Caniogan Barangay of
Pasig City (refer to Figure R 3.2.3)
Date : June 6, 2012
Lower Marikina River Wall location in Rizal High School

Figure R 3.2.3 Location of Rizal High School
(b) Section
▽15.705
▽14.754
▽ DHWL 14.200
Figure R 3.2.4 Section of Wall in Rizal High School
3.30
(c) Wall Structure

The wall is an inverted T-shaped reinforced structure with a height of 1.60m
from ground, and 0.2m in thick. Foundation is estimated to be 0.60m in depth
in Philippines Standard Code and also estimated to touch on an existing slope
wall from sizing up of location. A distance of 30cm between both walls
would lead to that of a foundation would be 0.25m~0.30m thick and
0.80~0.90m wide. And there is a opening section on the side of wall. Cross-
Section of the floodwall was shown in Figure R 3.2.4.
(d) Evaluation as structure
The wall is planned by Pasig City after Typhoon Ondoy in 2009, and the
construction completed in 2011. Therefore conditions of concrete and wire
net fence are well and no damaged portion can be seen at the moment. The
wall is designed mainly to set the net, and it can be estimated to stand up the
water pressure as an inverted T-shaped wall in a structural view point.
The height of this wall has cleared the height which added margin quantity
Fb to the design high water level. Moreover, it is necessary to work on a
certain measure about an opening section.
3.2.3 Basic Design of Dike

3.2.3.1 Arrangement of Design Conditions
(1) General
About the design criteria arranged in the Basic Design Report (I), the Design
Criteria of the Philippines and Japan were compared and they were reconfirmed.
In the process of comparison, the following main conditions were determined.
・ Calculation method shall be Allowable Stress Method. (ASM)
・ Seismic force, wind load, etc. are with the standard of the Philippines about
that out of which the characteristic of the area in the Philippines comes.
・ About the strength of material, it carries out according to the standard of the
supply country. (Example: Japan in case of steel)
(2) Lower Marikina River

Geological condition of Lower Marikina River features a higher rate of cohesive
soil and lower N values than Pasig River. Although liquefaction does not occur,
generating of consolidation settlement is expected. Side resistance must also be
weak, therefore it must be the structure which suited revetment form at it.
Alignment of revetments shall be as smooth as being able to reduce the friction by
a flood. Since there is a possibility that the dredge consists of new sediments on a
surface according to a flood, evaluation of a soil property shall be performed
carefully. Moreover, the dredging volume shall be considered as the quantity
which carried out extra embankment in the dredging, and was considered as the
thing near an actual construction situation. Structures shall be the one that
maintenance services can be reduced.
3.31
3.2.3.2 Study of Basic Structure of Dike

The bank inhibited the influence by scouring, corrosion, penetration, sucking, etc. to the
550m3/s plan flood discharge with probability of 30 years, and determined specifications,
such as top width, a paste slope, and a berm, so that the stability of the bank could be
secured.
Moreover, since the flow velocity at the time of a flood is about 2.0m/s, the revetment as
paste side protection shall be installed. In addition, in consideration of residents'
movement, about 3.00m width on the land side of the present way shall be planned to
keep so that not only under construction but after construction can secure the width.
Existing roads consist of double 0.20m concrete walls with nets and 5.60m concrete
pavement between them. Residents are requiring to keep 3m road within concrete
pavement, so the range which can be used for the Dikes is 2.80m.of the rest.
3.2.3.3 Study of Dike Form and Location

(1) Review of Former Idea
This bank bears the dual functions of flood prevention, and also as road of Pasig
City, and therefore needs to be designed in consideration of both functions. To
meet this idea, the former proposal shown in the Phase I in 2002 (Figure R
3.2.5) is necessary to be reviewed and improved.
Figure R 3.2.5 Former Idea

Since the present bank proposal can secure only a 4m wide road to dike top, it is
not the functional recovery to the 6-m road for which Pasig City asks. Therefore,
change of form is needed in order to secure the width of street of 6m. Moreover,
when the paste toes at the land side are set as a lot border, lot width required for
bank construction will exceed 10m at least, and the necessity of reducing this will
also be required from the point of securing cross sectional area.
Moreover, maintaining exchange of the place of residence of the right and left
(the direction of north and south) of the bridge which the present road has
achieved as another side of functional compensation and functional recovery is
raised. For the purpose, the alignment of revetment needed to be planned in the
form which connects the right and left of a bridge, therefore the original plan was
changed, and revetment alignment was moved inside the abutments of a bridge.
3.32
(2) The reason for not adopting a both-sides embankment bank

Penetration and consolidation settlement of the foundation occur as a
phenomenon which the foundation ground under a bank gives to a bank. It is
thought that Lower Marikina River has much cohesive soil or quality of silt, and
its water permeability is small. However, it is very weak: whose N value is about
1~2, and when carrying out the embankment of the banking to this poor subsoil, a
possibility of subsidence of banking arising, and losing stability and producing
large slide destruction. These are considered synthetically and the both-sides
embankment bank is not adopted.
3.2.3.4 Qualitative Study of Dike Structure

As solution to the functional compensation in consideration of the policy which
suppresses the increase in the bank lot by dike top extension as much as possible, while
securing the lot of a 6-m road at a level with dike on top of a concrete block wall, in
order to secure the 1.00m margin quantity Fb, the method of preparing a parapet wall on
top of a concrete block wall is considered to be best which decreases lot width. Over
Lower Marikina River whole stretch, the height of concrete block wall top is made into
the level of 15.00m which is higher than a plan high-water level, and considering
convenience in construction.
The following three forms of the new bank are considered in the new proposal. All serve
as the form where the parapet wall is prepared on top of the concrete block wall.
・ Idea of Concrete Block Retaining Wall
・ Idea of Steel Sheet Pile
・ Idea of Inverted T-shaped Wall
Comparative examination of each proposal showed that the concrete block wall is in
conformity to poor subsoil with lowest cost and therefore considered as most suitable.
3.2.4 Basic Design of Reinforced Concrete Flood Wall

The concrete block retaining wall was designed as a reinforced concrete flood wall.
(1) Height of Dike
Top of the concrete block retaining wall set to 15.00m higher than a design high-
water level (14.036~14.636), set the parapet wall height to 80cm and the parapet
top to 15.80m to exceed the 1.00m free board from a Design High Water Level.
(2) Revetment Section
Figure R 3.2.6 shows the standard section of the concrete block wall. The base
concrete (foundation) is considered to be reinforced concrete and is made to
support with an impervious wall and IIw steel sheet pile to serve as wall support.
The slope of shore protection is set to 0.5:1, and 4.0m maximum as specified by
the DPWH. The concrete block retaining wall was considered as the mortar type,
where the parapet wall of reinforced concrete is constructed in the upper part.
3.33
Figure R 3.2.6 Standard Drawing of Concrete Block Wall

(3) Base Structure
Since the Lower Marikina River coast cannot secure bearing power as it is
directly in a weak zone, it needs to be supported with a steel sheet pile. Let the
steel sheet pile be a 10-m friction pile. The foundation was 70cm in height so that
25.0cm could be secured from top of a steel sheet pile by the coping concrete of a
steel sheet pile, and considered as reinforced concrete structure which set the
breadth to 60.0cm.
Since the base setting depth at the present condition of the stream bed is in a quite
low position and is not influenced by erosion, it aims at 1.0m or more. However,
since it is steel sheet pile structure, and by constructing the gabion mattress for
prevention of scouring to all of the base concrete, even if it is set at least 50cm or
more, scouring problem would not arise. The steel sheet pile was used as
common IIw type with the concrete block wall.
(4) Laying Blocks
Concrete blocks set in a depth of 35cm, and a concrete strength of 350kg/m2 or
more is used for it. A thickness of backfill concrete is 15cm. 16.5MN/m2 concrete
will be used for filling and backfill concrete.
(5) Expansion Joint
Expansion joint is of asphalt joint filler, and is planned to set at and interval of
10.20m in consideration of an interval of steel sheet piles.
(6) Drainage Works
One weep hole of φ50mm is set in 2.0~3.0m2. However they are not set under a
front water level.
3.34
(7) Parapet Wall

The parapet wall should serve both as top concrete and the head adjustment
concrete of a block, and minimum thickness is 20cm and it considered it as the
reinforced concrete structure which sets parapet height to 80cm.
(8) Partition Wall
Thickness of partition wall is 30cm, and is installed at the edge and medium of
block walls, where partition wall is set at an interval of maximum 51m (10.2m×5
blocks). Thickness of partition wall in up-and-down direction is set to thickness
of backfill +10cm.
(9) Road Pavement
The 6.00-m road as functional compensation is prepared. Pavement composition
of the road is made into 28cm concrete pavement based on directions of DPWH
in the 2012 fiscal year, and performed 5cm asphalt paving on it. The super
elevation is made into 1.5%, and lowered the land side. The other design
standards of the pavement are shown in Table R 3.2.3.
Table R 3.2.3 Thickness of Cement Concrete Slab etc.
Design of Cement Concrete
Slab Interval of
Design of Tie bar Dowel Bar
Design Contraction
Pavement Thickness (Lateral) (Longitudinal)
Bending Joint
of Slab
Strength
16×600
16×600
Public 21.0 MPa 28cm 45m 40cm
40cm interval
interval
(10) Guardrail
The guardrail for fall prevention was planned in the road shoulder.
(11) Foundation Embedment
Since bounding stones were few in the rivers, the gabion mattress is used for root
hardening of the front of the foundation. The size of the gabion mattress is set to
0.50m x 1.00m x 2.00m, and was planned by 3 rows (1 m x 3= 3 m) from the
foundation.
(12) Steel Sheet Pile
The steel sheet pile for base concrete support was considered as IIw type, and
was made into the length of 10m in which the perpendicular support as a friction
pile is possible.
3.2.5 Basic Design of Dredging

3.2.5.1 Dredging Section
Dredge section is planned as a low waterway which passes the maximum flow with
recurrence interval of once in 30 years, the bottom width shall be 40m based on a section
with side slope of 3:1 as shown in Figure R 3.2.7.
3.35
Figure R 3.2.7 Dredging Standard Section
3.2.5.2 Dredging Centerline

A dredge takes the bottom width of 40m as a low-water channel centering on a dredge
center line. The dredge center line is considered as the center line between the planned
revetment structures of both banks, and in order that to reduce resistance by running
water and more flows, it was taken as smooth alignment.
3.2.5.3 Design Dredging Soil Volume

(1) Calculation of Soil Volume
The volume to be dredged is based on the new cross sections taken at 50m
intervals. A calculation result is as follows. It differs largely from 600,000m3 as
the result of former investigation in 2002. It is because the deposition of earth and
sand is increasing beyond an average of 1.0m quantity grade. Especially the
increase by the side of the upper stream is remarkable.
・ Pure Soil Volume ： 970,280 m3
・ Extra Dredging Volume ： 195,529 m3
・ Dredging Volume ： 1,165,809 m3
(2) Extra Dredging

Extra dredging (refer to Figure R 3.2.8) of 50cm thick at bottom and 2.0m wide
at side as sandy soil are adopted.
Figure R 3.2.8 Extra Dredging
3.36
3.2.6 Backfill Site Plan

(1) Temporary Soil Storage Site Plan
Dredging works are carried by barges from a dredge point to a temporary soil
storage site. Then, soil is carried at a soil disposal site, with a part undergoing
only drying, and the other part undergoing the process of lime or cement pre-
mixing method of consolidation. Although negotiation with the present owners of
the land is still in process, the temporary soil storage site is planned at Napindan
and the soil disposal site is planned at Laguna near the mouth of Napindan River
(Refer to Figure R 3.2.9).
(2) Storage Facilities
Facility planning at the temporary soil storage site has been formulated as to the
availability of 2.8ha to be used now. The arrangement plan is shown in Figure R
3.2.9. About the stabilizing treatment storage part, it was presupposed as a
primary storage facility that two sets of the pits (8m x 8m x 2sets) and two
independent types (8m x 8m) are formed. Moreover, it presupposed the 30m * 8m
mound that a maximum of 17 plans are prepared as secondary soil storage, and
drainage canals for rain and outflow earth and sand are planned with trenches of
3m in width and 1m in height excavated between mounds.
Figure R 3.2.9 Plan Drawing of Napindan Temporary Soil Storage Site
(3) Temporary Pier

Piers with 50m long and 6m wide are installed at soil gathering and carrying out
places. In this case, superstructures and approach slopes are fundamentally
planned to be installed on land except that bearing piles are driven beside the wall
on river side to reduce occupied areas on both rivers.
3.37
(4) Study of Backfill Site

(a) Basic Conditions
Study of the backfill site was made according to following items as basic
condition
・ Classification of soil: Dredged soil after stabilized treatment
・ Necessary capacity: about 890,000m3 (Disposal soil volume 810,000m3,
covering t=20cm 80,000m3)
・ If extra dredging occurs, the amount of part reclamation will increase.
・ Site Area: 478,000m2 (47.8 ha) is planned.
・ Site Condition: grass field
・ Maximum embankment height of dredged material is decided to 3.0 m
by a circle slide method.
(b) Arrangement Plan

A soil disposal site banks with the dredged soil which undergone stabilizing
treatment, and also consists of a carrying-in road, roads in site, settling basins,
drainage installation, fences, an observation wells, temporary piers, etc. The
arrangement plan is shown below in Figure R 3.2.10.
Figure R 3.2.10 Plan Drawing of Backfill Site

Rain is drained from the north-south side which is the topmost peg in a site
through the ground waterway which has arranged the water collected with the
trench along with the inner side of banking of a solid waste retaining structure
based on geographical feature conditions. A settling basin is established in the
end in the site which is low-order, the water which does not contain a part for
3.38
sand will be poured to the drainage canal by the side of the Bicutan-Banglad road
outside a site, and it processes. Trenches are made into a bottom 1m width grade,
and are arranged at a 40 m interval.
Carrying in of soil crosses the temporary bridge through Bicutan-Banglad road
side, and decided to carry in from the southeast side.
(5) Storage Structure (Embankment)
A storage structure (embankment) is made into the banking slope by the local
generating material which gave the stable gradient 2:1. A top width of
embankment shall be 3.00m and uses the existing road for drainage canal
maintenance management in the Bicutan-Banglad road side. The circumference of
the site constructed the zone stake by the precast, and secured security distance
with banking 2m.
(6) Carrying-in and Site Road
The carrying-in road of earth and sand was 4.0m in width, and it planned it so that
10-cm-thick gravel paving might be performed in the range of 3.0m. A carrying-
in road makes the maximum vertical slope 8%. About the site road, the 1.00-m
road shoulder was established in a passing width of 4.0m, it was referred to as
6.0m in full width, and 20-cm gravel paving was planned about a 4.0-m portion.
About a site road, a safe fence is prepared in both the road-shoulders portion.
Moreover, a turnout is installed if needed.
(7) Embankment (Mound) Plan
Disposal soil are carried from site roads, and it is banked in the form of mound
between trenches.
(8) Sand Basin
Sand basin is planned in consideration of the reclamation of a cell method as a
RC tank with a 7.4m of longitudinal width, 40.4m breadth and maximum height
of 4.0m. We divided the settling basin into 3 blocks, and decided to store sand in
2 blocks of the beginning. It was determined that the internal width of a settling
basin will secure about 2 times waterway width.
(9) Drainage
In order that backfill soil may perform solidification processing by cement, the
penetration drain system by under drain form does not make a meaning.
Therefore, it was based on drainage by a ground waterway.
(10) Fence
People's invasion in a disposal site was avoided and the 2.0m or more-high fence
was planned around the solid waste retaining structure to serve also as the splash
prevention of soil (earth and sand).
(11) Temporary Jetty
Although referred to as 10m x 48m, the form of the temporary pier was planned,
so that an about 30m approach part might be prepared. A temporary jetty is
formed, which uses an H beam as a bearing pile. Although the position in which a
temporary jetty is installed is carried out the right-bank side once near the project
planning site on the right bank of a Napindan river, when use there is difficult,
suppose that it prepares in the left-bank side on the opposite shore.
3.39
(12) Bench Mark

Bench marks are planned to the both ends of the road for maintenance
management beside [by the side of southeast] a drainage canal.
(13) Observation Well (Water environmental monitoring system)
Two observation wells is planned at the lowest places at site and one is planned at
northwest side and the highest portions.
3.2.7 Study of Boundary Bank

3.2.7.1 Comparison of Materials for Boundary Bank
In order to reduce dredged spoil fundamentally in boundary banking and to consider it as
an aid of future full-scale banking construction, basic composition of banking is used as
the tube which can perform the Bag-filling Dehydration Method where a dehydrating
action occurs and can convert dredged spoil into a good soil property, and suppose it that
cover soil of the surface is carried out.
There are two kinds of tube which are Japanese-made Eco-Tube and U.S. Geotube, for
which comparative examination was performed. Eco-Tube was adopted as a result of the
said comprehensive examination.
3.2.7.2 Purpose of Boundary Bank and Arrangement

Boundary banks are set so that a public-and-private boundary is clarified, and is installed
for the purpose of a certain amount of flood prevention as banking. Moreover, making it
get used with a future road, or the material in the case of banking construction and a part
is also putting into the idea, and it uses the dried dredged spoil sand. Boundary banks are
installed in the part except the part which cannot be installed like the places where new
revetments are planned by this basic design in the Lower Marikina River, and also the
places where houses, factories, or other institutions etc are.
3.2.7.3 Details of Boundary Bank

(1) Form of Boundary bank
Cover soil of the boundary bank is based on 30cm. The size of the bag of an Eco-
Tube was based on 23m in length with the peripheral length of 4m in the general
part (Refer to Figure R 3.2.11) .
Figure R 3.2.11 Boundary Bank Section with Eco Tube
3.40
(2) Height of Bank

In the Lower Marikina River, the public-and-private boundary lines in a 3-m rule
are mostly located in heights of a design high water level (DHWL) on the land.
Therefore, banking height is made into the height which took margin
quantity :Fb=1.00m into consideration from the design high water level (DHWL)
from a viewpoint of the flood prevention as a role of banking.
(3) Estimation of Filling Soil Volume etc.
Basically with a fundamental expansion of 130% and dehydrating on the basis of
55% (Reduction ratio is 45%), treatment sediment volume was calculated for the
amount of grounds with assumption shown in Table R 3.2.4.
Table R 3.2.4 Estimation Method of Filling Volume
Calculated
Item Remarks
Amount
Filling Volume per a bag (Conversion to
20m3
ground volume) (A)
Expansion Ratio 130%
Filling Volume per a bag (Conversion to
26m3 (A)×Expansion ratio (130%)
Ground volume) (expansion conversion)
Reduction Ratio 45%
Filling Volume per a bag (after (A)×(100 – Reduction ratio) / 100
11m3
dehydration) Reduction ratio 45%
Bank area 12.55m2 (3.82+10.12) / 2×1.80
Total bank area 15.960m2 (4.00+11.20)*1/2*2.10
Surface area 3.41m2 15.96-12.55
Embankment volume at 1,000m (B) 12,550m3 Bank Area×1,000m
(B) / (100 – Reduction ratio)×100%
Ground Volume at 1,000 (C) 22,818m3
Reduction ratio45%
Transportation Volume at 1,ooom 29,663m3 (C)×Expansion ratio (130%)
(4) Setting Range and Quantities

Setting of range and quantities, ground soil volume and ecotube bags, are
estimated and shown below.
Total Construction Distance : 10,800 m
Ground Volume : 128,585 m3
Nos of Bag (4.0mx23.0m) : 6,430 bags
3.2.8 Prevention of Piers Foot Protection Method

(1) Selection of Protection method of Piers
In order to prevent surrounding scouring of a bridge pier, when the height of basic
top of a bridge pier has come out from 2m or less above a river bed, it is
necessary to install foot protection on the upper and lower sides of stream.
As a foot protection, Riprap and Geotextile Gabion Bag (Bottle Unit) were
selected with as high evaluation as the 1st place and the 2nd place as a candidate
of bridge pier protection method using the result of Table R 3.1.17.
Next, we examined whether it would be suitable to protection of the bridge pier.
Foot Protection needed to be correctly installed in the dredging section beside
3.41
bridge piers, so we added the comparison from that viewpoint (refer to Table R
3.2.5).
Table R 3.2.5 Selection of Foot Protection for Pier
Riprap Bottle Unit
The work progress control is not The work progress control is easier
easier than Bottle Unit, than Riprap due to relatively small and
particularly on the slope under the homogeneous diameter of the stone and
Work Progress Control
water, due to large and flexible bag.
inhomogeneous diameter of the
boulder.
There is a possibility of doing Damage is not done in order to install
Impact on Pier
damage at the time of installation. the bag of polyester using a crane
There is a possibility of damage There is less possibility of damage
caused by the hitting of boulder to caused by the hitting of stone to barge
barge. (Refer to 3.1.4 (1) ) Since than Riprap, because of flexible bag
Safety of Navigation the existing piers is close to the and relatively small diameter of the
ship course, the consideration stone.
must be given to this selection,
particularly.
Evaluation × ○
As a result, the optimal Geotextile Gabion Bag (Bottle Unit) for protection of a
bridge pier was selected because it had advantages on easiness of work progress
control impact on piers and ship cruise.
(2) Range of Foot Protection around Piers
Range of foot protection works around the piers of Sta. Rosa Bridge, Old Vargas
Bridge, New Vargas Bridge, Sandoval Bridge and Rosario Bridge after from the
following calculation shown in Table R 3.2.6. The range of scouring is about
4~6m (3m is a temporary value), there is also a level difference of the design river
bed by dredge from foundation , and planning of foot protection is being made in
consideration of more widely encountered values than the following calculation
range.
Table R 3.2.6 Range of Scouring
Width of Piers Range of
Scouring(assumed β=L) Selected Range
Bridge Name D (m) H (m) (From Edge of
Column Column L=1.45・D
Foundation)
(Foundation) (Foundation) L=1+2.9・D /(H・tanθ)
Sta. Rosa 1.50 6.50 2.79 3m or more
Vargas(Old) 1.50 (8.00) 8.00 (10.00) (5.95) 5.02m 6m or more
Vargas (New) Unknown Unknown
Sandoval 1.50 (4.10) 6.50 (7.40) (5.95) 2.79m 6m or more
Rosario 1.40(2.40) 7.05(27.05) (3.48) 1.45m 4m or more
θ：Angle of repose under water（Average 30°）
(3) Foot Protection Method with Bags (Bottle Unit)

Bottle unit method is the one that install a bag material in an exclusive form, fills
material in it, ties up the neck with a rope, and moves and install it in a required
place. Construction on land side is possible, and its setting work is also simple.
Completed form is 1700mm in diameter, 550mm in height, and 300mm in
3.42
perimeter height, and weight packs 50~100mm of broken stone into 1 ton.
Therefore, when they installed, they are set to an average height of 425mm, and
bridge piers shall be stacked with two layers of bags. Layouts of the bags are
shown in Figure R 3.2.12.
Figure R 3.2.12 Foot Protection Works with Bags (Bottle Unit)
3.43
3.3 Summary of Basic Design of Drainage Works

3.3.1 Summary on Drainage Facilities
(1) Pasig River
The target areas for the detailed drainage design of Pasig River under Phase III
have an aggregate length of 7.0km. These involve the stretches along Pasig River
left from construction works in Phase II, which require Steel Sheet Pile (SSP)
improvement works. A total of 777 existing sanitary and storm sewer outlets has
been identified within these stretches.
Aside from allowing the unimpeded outflow of inland runoff, the drainage
improvement plan aims to prevent or minimize backflow from these outlets
during high flood stages of the Pasig River. Backflow is prevented by providing
flapgates.
The number of outlets is minimized to reduce cost. For this purpose, the number
of outlets, the geological characteristics, the network of existing outfalls and
maintenance are considered. To reduce the number of outlets, collector pipes and
U-ditches parallel to the sheet pile alignment are provided.
The proposed drainage facilities are summarized as shown in Table R 3.3.1.
Table R 3.3.1 Summary of Drainage Facilities for Pasig River

Proposed Facility Quantity Dimension
172 RCP Locations 300mm ~ 1220 mm
Outlet
8 RCBC Locations 1570mm x 800mm, 1600mm x 1600mm
Manhole 231 Locations Varying dimensions
Collector Pipe:
RCP 500 m 300mm ~ 910 mm 1/
RCBC 210 m 800mm x 800mm
PVC 910 m 100mm ~ 300mm
Steel 55 m 100mm ~ 300mm
U-Ditch 4490 m W300mm x H300mm (min)
Flap Gate 39 Locations 300mm and 910 mm
1/
The minimum of 300mm dia. indicated above is used only for roof and sanitary flows where
the catchment area is too small. See Sub-section 3.3.1 (1) for explanation.
(2) Lower Marikina River

The target areas for the detailed drainage design of Lower Marikina River under
Phase III have an aggregate length of 1.8 km. These areas correspond to three
linear park stretches along the Lower Marikina riverbank, namely, Kapasigan (left
bank, 419m), Brgy. Ugong (right bank, 593m) and Rosario (left bank, 810m).
These involve the construction of flood dikes with principal components
consisting of cantilever steel sheet piles, earth embankment, asphalt paved
maintenance road, concrete block slope protection, concrete parapet wall resting
on the pile cap, and a drainage system.
The drainage system, which is an integral part of the dike structure, consists of
sluiceways and collector pipes to drain inland runoff, and lateral ditch to drain the
intervening area between the dike and the private property line.
3.44
Similar to the Pasig River, the number of existing outlets for the Lower Marikina
River is also minimized to reduce cost by providing collector pipes to direct the
flows into the sluiceway.
For the dike sections, 10 sluiceways with provision for new drainage outlets are
proposed. The locations of proposed sluiceways are determined in consideration
of the locations of existing drainage outlets as well as topographic features. The
proposed sluiceways in basic design stage are shown in Table R 3.3.2. In detail
design stage the length of dike become shorter, therefore the quantities and
dimensions of drainage facilities are reviewed in Chapter4.
Table R 3.3.2 Proposed Sluiceway for Marikina River
Sluice Sluice
Station Number
Number Dimension (m)
STA. 1+104 (Left Bank) MSL-1 1- Barrel 1.40 x 1.40
STA. 3+945 (Left bank) MSL-3 2- Barrel 1.20 x 1.20
STA. 2+950 (Right Bank) MSR-1 1- Barrel 1.20 x 1.20
STA. 3+157(Right Bank) MSR-2 1- Barrel 1.40 x 1.40
STA. 3+258 (Right Bank) MSR-3 1-Barrel 2.00 x 1.60
STA. 3+438 (Right Bank) MSR-4 1- Barrel 1.50 x 1.50
Note: MSL: Marikina Sluiceway Left Bank
MSR: Marikina Sluiceway Right Bank
3.3.2 Existing Drainage Facilities
Ocular inspection/investigation was conducted before planning and designing the
drainage facilities. Documents and drawings regarding the existing drainage lines and
facilities were collected prior to the site inspection/investigation.
(1) Data Collection
Documents, drawings and reports were collected from the following:
・ DPWH
・ MWCI
・ Mandaluyong City
・ Report on “The Study on the Existing Drainage Laterals in Metro Manila in
the Republic of the Philippines”, August 2000
(2) Site Investigation

(a) Conduct of Field Investigation
The Site Investigation of existing drainage lines and facilities was conducted
from 28 May 2012 to 30 June 2012. The following main items were
considered in the field investigation.
(b) River Side
・ Field investigation was carried out along the river during sunny days/fair
weather conditions when most of the outlets are visible which allows the
observer to see whether water flows out from the outlet or not.
3.45
・ Such observation is not possible during rainy days/adverse weather

conditions.
(c) Land Side

・ Consideration of land use around existing outfalls and pipes, for example,
residential area, road, vacant area, etc., were noted.
・ Point of origin of existing pipes coming for example from a catch basin,
manhole, septic tank, house or building, conduit, etc., were noted.
・ Type of usage of the pipes, for example rainwater or wastewater
(3) Extent of Site Investigation

The extent of investigation is as follows:
・ Pasig River: the Stretch of remaining SSP gaps left from Phase II (about
7.0km).
・ Marikina River: Stretch of dike (about 1.82km) and parapet wall segments
(about 0.34km)
(4) Results of Site Investigation

(a) Pasig River
A total of 777 existing outlets were confirmed as discharging directly into the
Pasig River as summarized in Table R 3.3.3. Each outlet is being used as
point of disposal for various purposes such as those coming from downspouts,
wastewater as well as services for the delivery or withdrawal of other liquids.
In case of outlets less than 150mm, most of these are used for wastewater
disposal. For outlets more than 300mm, these are used for rainwater and
wastewater (combined).
Table R 3.3.3 Existing Pipes in Pasig River
Box Culvert Steel
Bank RCPC PVC Total
U-ditch Pipe
Right 156 288 34 20 498
Left 124 117 18 20 279
Total 280 405 52 40 777
(b) Marikina River
A total of 87existing outlets were confirmed as directly discharging into the
Lower Marikina River where the dikes are proposed. This is summarized in
Table R 3.3.4. Each outlet is also used as point of disposal, same as those on
the Pasig River. Several outlets are no longer functioning due to siltation.
Table R 3.3.4 Existing Pipes in Marikina River
Bank RCPC PVC Box Culvert Steel Pipe Total
Right 31 2 1 0 34
Left 38 6 9 0 53
Total 69 8 10 0 87
3.46
3.3.3 Drainage Planning

(1) Basic Planning Conditions
(a) Design Scale
The Technical Standards and Guidelines for Planning and Design, Volume II:
Urban Drainage, March, 2002 (referred herein as “Guideline”) sets the design
return period for drainage facilities at 5 to 10 years. Before this Guideline
was published, the “Special Assistance for Project Formulation” (SAPROF),
JICA, 1998, also stated that the design scale for main drainage and pumping
station is 10 years. Existing main drainage systems and facilities including
those constructed in PMRCIP-Phase II comply with this Guideline.
However, in lieu of these earlier guidelines, there was a DPWH
Memorandum issued on June 2011 where Item 1b of the said Memorandum
specifies the following to wit:
“1. The minimum flood return periods to be used for the design . . . . . . . .
b. Culverts
i. Box 25-year flood with sufficient freeboard to contain the 50-
year flood.
ii. Pipe 15-year flood with sufficient freeboard to contain the 25-
year flood.”
Although freeboard, such as that of a pipe culvert, is not normally considered
in closed conduit design, it is understood to mean that there should be enough
allowance, in terms of cross-sectional area, to contain the next higher
magnitude flood.
Along this line of reasoning, it is therefore enough to consider only the higher
magnitude flood (i.e., 25-year for pipe) instead of the lower 15-year
magnitude for pipe, as the latter would be of no significance.
In this regard, the design is conducted in accordance with the said
memorandum.
(b) Minimum Size of Drainage Pipes
For storm runoff from the catchment, conduit size varies depending on the
design discharge. In most cases, however, maintenance considerations govern
the size of the conduit.
For the collector conduit that gathers the inland runoff of several parallel
pipes from the catchment, the DPWH Memorandum of June 2011specifying
the allowable minimum diameter of 0.91m, will govern. In addition, a
minimum dimension of 0.80m x 0.80m box culvert would be adopted where
they are more suitable.
In the case of roof and sanitary flows, however, a smaller diameter is adopted
as the discharge is too small. Although this is also categorized as collector
pipe, it is deemed that a smaller diameter ranging from 200 to 300 mm would
be adopted.
3.47
(c) Land Use

Another aspect of the drainage planning is the consideration of land use.
PMRCIP Phase I adopted a land use prevailing about 10 years ago which was
also adopted in the review design of Phase II. Data gathered in Phase III
reveals the following land use/zoning information (Table R 3.3.5):
Table R 3.3.5 Summary of Available Land Use 1/

City/LGU Land Use Issued
Manila Year 2005
Mandaluyong Year 2006
Makati Year 2011
Pasig No year (document issued is a proposed Zoning Map)
Marikina Year 2000 (document issued is a Zoning Map)
1/
These maps are on file
(d) Design Discharge

(i) Rational Formula
Peak discharge is proportional to the runoff coefficient, rainfall intensity
and drainage area in accordance with the Rational Formula as shown
below.
CIA
Q
360
Where:
Q = Design discharge (m3/sec)
C = Runoff coefficient
I = Rainfall intensity (mm/hr)
A = Drainage area (ha)
According to the Manual for River Works in Japan, the rational formula
is applied in case the catchment area is less than 200km2. Almost all
drainage catchment areas in Phase III are less than 0.1km2 with a
maximum catchment area of 0.9km2. Therefore, design discharge is
calculated using the rational formula.
(ii) Runoff Coefficient
The runoff coefficient, C, for various land use types, are shown in Table
R 3.3.6. These were adopted in accordance with the “DPWH Design
Guidelines”.
Table R 3.3.6 Runoff Coefficient, C, for Land Use Type
Description of Area C
Business (Downtown areas) 0.80
Industrial or Residential (with small garden) 0.65
Apartment or Residential (single unit) 0.50
Residential (suburban, with large garden) 0.35
Where multiple land use is found within a drainage area, the runoff
coefficient for each sub-area was determined by taking the weighted
average C value in proportion to the drainage area size as shown below:
3.48
A1C1 A 2C2 ......A N C N

C
AT
Where:
C1 ~ CN = values of C for each sub-drainage area
A1 ~ AN = sub-drainage areas
AT = total drainage area
(iii) Rainfall Intensity

The 15-year and 25-year rainfall intensity probability have not been set
in “The Preparatory Study for Pasig-Marikina River Channel
Improvement Project (Phase III)”, JICA, 2011, hence, additional
calculation was done based on new data for Port Area, Manila as
recorded by the PAGASA.
The general rainfall intensity formula for Port Area rainfall, using the
Kimijima type equation, is shown below. Coefficients of the equation
for different return periods are shown in Table R 3.3.7.
a
IX n
T C b
Where:
Ix = rainfall intensity for given return period (mm/hr)
Tc = time of concentration (min)
a, b and n are regression constants
Table R 3.3.7 Coefficients for the Kimijima Rainfall Intensity Formula

Port Area
Return Period
a b n
2 935.4 3.57 0.64
5 1,279.5 3.98 0.65
10 1,474.2 4.02 0.65
15 1,665.4 4.37 0.66
20 1,746.3 4.38 0.66
25 1,808.7 4.39 0.66
30 1,860.6 4.41 0.66
50 2,001.7 4.42 0.66
100 2,193.8 4.45 0.66
Time of concentration (Tc) is the sum of inlet time (Ti) and drain flow
time (Td) as defined by the following formulas.
Tc Ti Td
Ld
Td
V 60
Where:
Tc = time of concentration (min)
Td = drain flow time (min)
Ti = inlet time (min)
3.49
Ld = length of drain (m)

V = flow velocity along drain (m/sec)
Inlet time (Ti) is measured as the travel time of a water particle from the
drainage divide to a point where a well defined channel starts. Suggested
values of inlet times for different land use types are shown in Table R
3.3.8.
Table R 3.3.8 Minimum Inlet Time, Ti, for Land Use Type
Description area Inlet Time (min)
High population density area 5
Low population density area 10
Average population density area 7
Note: Use 7 minutes minimum for this project.
With all of the above parameters known, the rainfall intensity, Ix, for
any given return period is calculated using above equation. Alternatively,
Ix could be calculated with the use of Figure R 3.3.1, which shows the
relationship of rainfall intensity, duration and frequency (RIDF) in
graphical format.
350
2193.8
I100
300 T 0.66 4.45
2001.7
I50
T 0.66 4.42
250 1808.7
I 25
T 0.66 4.39
1746.3 1665.4
I 20 I15
Intensity, mm/hr
T 0.66 4.38 T 0.66 4.3696

200
1474.2
I10
T 0.65 4.0200
1279.5
150 I5
T 0.65 3.9800
935.4
I2
T 0.64 3.5700
100
50
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120
Time, min
Figure R 3.3.1 Rainfall Intensity-Duration-Frequency Curves

(Port Area, Manila: 1906-1939, 1950-2005)
(iv) Catchment Area

Each of the sub-drainage areas draining into river is determined from a
topographic map. (Most of the drainage areas are flat, hence, additional
references are considered such as flow directions of existing drains,
existing roads as well as other man-made structures that are possible
indications of drainage boundaries.
3.50
Maps of the sub-drainage areas tributary to the whole stretch of the

Pasig River and Lower Marikina River are shown in Figures 3.3.1 and
3.3.2.)
(v) Design Discharge
The design discharge of each outlet is calculated based on these
conditions and consideration, the design discharge of each outlet is
calculated and shown in Table 3.3.1 and 3.3.2.
(2) Drainage Planning for Pasig River
(a) Target Area
The Pasig River channel improvement consists of Steel Sheet Pile (SSP)
works, parapet works and revetment repair works. For parapet and revetment
repair works, the construction procedure will not affect the existing drainage
system. Therefore, the target area for drainage planning for Pasig River will
focus only on SSP segments.
However, In case, installing new parapet wall or renders an existing drain not
to function properly, new outlet should be installed.
Under Phase III, the number of target existing outlets has increased
remarkably as smaller diameter PVC pipes have to be considered. In the
original drainage planning of Phase I and Design Review Stage of Phase II,
the minimum diameter of the outlet is basically 300mm. Outlets less than
300mm were considered as illegally installed such that they have been
excluded from the previous plan. The plan in Phase II was to seal off these
outlets and that the owners must connect them to public manholes or inland
drainage lines.
When the construction of Phase II started, LGUs deemed that it is the
responsibility of the owner to redirect their sanitary outlets draining into the
Pasig River towards existing sanitary lines inland as a matter of public
responsibility. The Consultant, LGU and DPWH have commonly agreed on
this arrangement. However, numerous complaints from residents suddenly
cropped up as most of the owners do not have the financial capacity to
redirect their pipeline to existing manholes or drainage lines.
(b) Drainage Planning
The drainage plan is to allow the unimpeded outflow of inland runoff and
prevent or minimize backflow from the Pasig River through these outfalls
during high river stage. The number of outlets shall be minimized by
providing a collector pipe and/or U-ditch as well as manholes to gather flows
from existing outlet pipes and direct them to a common manhole located with
lowest elevation and to be disposed ultimately to the Pasig River. A flap gate
is proposed at the main outlet as in Phase II to stem backflow at high river
stage.
For the integration of these outlets into the collector pipe, consideration of
the existing outlet elevation and amount of discharge had to be examined.
A typical system to collect the discharges is shown in Figure R 3.3.2.
3.51
River
River
Figure R 3.3.2 Drain Collection System (Pasig River)

There are many instances of small diameter pipes used as sanitary sewer from
households. In Metro Manila, the combined system has been in use for some
time which discharges effluents directly into the Pasig River without passing
through a residential septic tank. Basically the sanitary code dictates that
sanitary effluents must not discharge directly into rivers.
Sewerage facilities, including septic tanks, are not provided under Phase III
of the PMRCIP. In the future when Manila Water Co., Inc. (MWCI) shall
provide its own sewerage system in the area, houses near the riverbank have
to connect to this system.
(c) Design Discharge
Based on these conditions and considerations, the design discharge of each
outlet is calculated. The results of hydraulic calculation are shown in Table
3.3.1.
3.52
(3) Drainage Planning for Marikina River

(a) Target Area
The target area for drainage planning in Lower Marikina River consists of
1.82 km of dike segments. The target area is shown in Figure 3.3.2.
(b) Drainage Planning
The basic concept is to allow the unimpeded outflow of inland runoff through
the sluiceways and prevent or minimize backflow during high river stage by
providing flap gates at the downstream ends of the conduits.
As mentioned beforehand, the number of outlets has to be minimized by
providing a collector pipe to gather flows from existing outlet pipes and
direct them to the sluiceways and to be disposed ultimately to the Lower
Marikina River. A typical system of drainage in Lower Marikina River is
shown in Figure R 3.3.3. Drainage planning for each area is described in
following page.
Figure R 3.3.3 Drain Collection System (Lower Marikina River)
3.53
(i) Sta. LM 0+950 – 1+350 (Left Bank)

This area is located on the left bank at the upstream and downstream
side of the Vargas Bridge. There are two main outlets on both sides of
the Vargas Bridge that have large catchments. Furthermore, the outlets
are located at lower elevations so that the sluiceways shall be located at
these two locations.
The summary of proposed sluiceways is shown in Table 3.3.2.
There are also minor outlets that shall be connected to the collector pipe
along the liner park. The catchment area and location of proposed
sluiceways are shown in Figure 3.3.2.
(ii) Sta. LM 2+880 – 3+610 (Right Bank)
This area is located on the right bank at the upstream and downstream
sides of the Alfonso Sandoval Bridge. The catchment area and location
of proposed sluiceways are shown in Figure 3.3.2.
There are 3 catchment areas Furthermore, downstream of Alfonso
Sandoval Bridge is a huge RC pipe with 1600 mm diameter and this
outlet has a large catchment area.
Catchment areas and proposed sluiceway are summarized in Table 3.3.2.
(iii) Sta. LM 3+825 – 4+650 (Left Bank)
Station LM 3+825 to LM 4+650 has a linear park. The location of
existing outlets and proposed sluiceways, The catchment area and
location of proposed sluiceways are shown in Figure 3.3.2..
There are several houses along the linear park from LM 3+825 to LM
4+400. A factory occupies the riverbank boundary from LM 4+400 to
LM 4+650. The catchment area is divided into 4 catchments. The
catchment areas served and proposed sluiceways are summarized in
Table 3.3.2.
(c) Design Discharge
The design discharge of each outlet is calculated based on the above
conditions and considerations, the design discharge of each outlet is
calculated. The results of hydraulic calculation are shown in Table 3.3.2.
And design discharge of collector pipe, box culvert and U-ditch is also shown
in Table 3.3.3 and Table 3.3.4.
3.3.4 Basic Design of Drainage Facilities

(1) Basic Design of Drainage Facilities for Pasig River
(a) Size of Conduit
The Manning’s Formula and Continuity Equation, as shown below, were
used to calculate the flow capacity of the outlets (in accordance with the
DPWH “Guidelines”).
1
V R 2 / 3 S 1/ 2
n
3.54
Q A V
Where,
Q = Discharge (m3/sec)
V = Velocity (m/sec)
A = Area of Cross Section (m2)
n = Roughness coefficient
R = Hydraulic radius (m)
S = Flow gradient or longitudinal slope
Manning’s coefficient of roughness for different materials, as shown in
Table R 3.3.9 was applied in accordance with DPWH Guidelines.
Table R 3.3.9 Roughness Coefficient
Roughness
Type
Coefficient
PVC Pipe 0.010
RC Pipe 0.013
In-situ Concrete 0.015
(b) Slopes and Velocities

Based on the guideline, the maximum velocity considered is 3.0m/sec for
safe to avoid scouring by water flow and with a minimum of 0.8m/sec to
avoid siltation or sedimentation.
(c) Pipe Connection
The pipe-top connection method, as found in the Guidelines, is adopted. In
this method, the tops of the upstream and downstream ends of the pipes are
aligned as illustrated in Figure R 3.3.4.
Figure R 3.3.4 Pipe-Top Connection Method
(d) Manhole Spacing

Manholes are normally located at changes in grade or alignment, at the
junctions of laterals, and at points for maintenance. As a rule, maximum
spacing of manholes should be 50m for easier maintenance. However, a
Memorandum from the DPWH Secretary as mentioned beforehand states that
the minimum spacing of manholes/inlets shall be 20m. Clarification with the
DPWH-BOD indicates that this is adopted only for drainage lines on a
straight alignment.
3.55
In Phase III, the manhole spacing of minimum 20m shall be adopted, except
in cases where a change in alignment may require a shorter manhole distance.
(2) Basic Design of Drainage Facilities for Marikina River
Basic design for pipes and manholes is the same as Pasig River. Hence, in this
sub-section, especially basic design of sluiceways specifically for Lower
Marikina River is mentioned.
(a) Type of Sluiceway
Soft soil layers underlie the Lower Marikina River area. Based on residual
settlement calculations indicated in sub-section 4.2.3.3, residual settlement at
all sluiceway site exceeds 5cm. According to “Guideline of flexible
Sluiceway” in Japan (November 1998, Japan Institute of Construction
Engineering), when residual settlement is more then 5cm, rigid type
sluiceway cannot follow the ground displacement and flexible type should be
adopted.
In this design, it is not possible to ignore the effect of ground deformation
especially with the placement of a new embankment dike. In the case where
piles are used under the sluiceway, the common observation is that the
sluiceway does not settle evenly with the embankment dike. This usually
results to a hollowing under the sluiceway, as shown in Figure R 3.3.5,
which gives the dike an uneven, undulating surface. This type of design,
therefore, shall not be adopted. Instead, the flexible type sluiceway which can
allow the effect of settlement shall be adopted.
Uneven settlement
Embankment relative settlement

between box and ground
hollowing
According to the previous
study, relative if settlement
between box and ground
exceed 10 cm, hollowing is
more likely to occur
Figure R 3.3.5 Effect of Uneven Settlement with Sluiceway on Pile
(b) Cross-Section Shape

Preferably, a square cross section made of cast-in-place concrete shall be
adopted for the following reasons:
It is more difficult to make cast-in-place concrete circular culvert.
Pre-cast concrete pipes are available but there would be problems on
water-tightness on the joints and longitudinal deformation if the
bedding is not properly constructed.
In case of steel pipe, welding is needed on the joint. This type is
inferior to the concrete type on the aspect of construction.
3.56
(c) Type of Gate

The floodgates for the Lower Marikina River require the following functions:
Water-tightness, to avoid backwater entering into land area during flood.
Drainage, to dispose water from the landside into the river at normal
condition
The types of gate that can satisfy these required functions are classified as
hinge type and slide type. For the sluiceway, the slide type gate is usually
used, as there is less concern about complete gate closure due to
accumulation of sediments. However, this type needs manual operation.
Some hinge types have automatic operation feature similar to the flap gate,
which was used in the Pasig River under Phase II. The flap gate has more
advantages over the slide gate on the aspect of operation.
This study considered two types as follows.
First Option : Flapgate
Second Option : Slide gate
Based on Table 3.3.5 comparison of the total running cost (i.e., initial cost
plus O&M) between Type 1 and Type 2 show that the former is cheaper.
Hence, the Flap Gate shall be adopted.
3.57
CHAPTER 4 DETAILED DESIGN OF RIVER AND DRAINAGE

IMPROVEMENTS
4.1 Result of Design for Pasig River

4.1.1 Change in the Detail Design Stage
The following items are the changes in the detail design stage.
(1) River Structures
・ Revetment structure and specifications (alignment, modulus, length and
origin-destination) were partially changed due to the survey results and the field
investigations. For instance, steel sheet pile revetment was converted to RCF
revetment at Right2+283-341 and RCF revetment was modified to steel sheet pile
revetment at Right9+722-750. In addition, RCF revetment was added at Left
6+269-6+323 and Right2+950-3+100 because of the lower existing revetment than
the required wall height.
・ Basically the slope of the riprap was “1:1.0” in accordance with Phase II. However,
the some riprap slopes of the steep riverbed portions were converted to “1:1.5” based
on the results of the slope stability.
(2) Drainage Facilities
・ Regarding shape of manholes, the shape was circular in the basic design stage.
However, in the detail design stage, rectangular shape is adopted based on the
DPWH’s past practice. In Phase II, rectangular shape is used as well.
・ Regarding manhole covers, in the basic design stage, circular and steel type which is
used in sewerage facilities was considered. However, in the detail design stage,
rectangular and concrete type is adopted based on the DPWH’s past practice. In
Phase II, rectangular and concrete type is used as well.
4.1.2 Steel Sheet Pile (Revetment)

4.1.2.1 Design of Revetment Works for Pasig River
The list of areas to be improved was decided in accordance with the results of site
investigation, the total project cost and subsequent discussions with the DPWH. The final
improved areas are shown in Table R 4.1.1.
4.1
Table R 4.1.1 Final Improved Areas for Pasig River

Channel Bank Station Length of Channel Bank Station Length of
No. Foundation Type No. Foundation Type
(Right or Left) Start End Bank (m) (Right or Left) Start End Bank (m)
1. Steel Sheet Pile
1 Left 2+419 2+694 278.8 SSP 30 Right 14+835 14+943 125.8 SSP
7 Left 7+326 7+444 121.3 SSP Sub-Total 6734.6
8 Left 7+494 7+514 19.4 SSP 2. Reinforced Concrete Floodwall and Repair
9 Left 11+500 11+628 128.5 SSP 1 Left 2+392 2+419 26.5 Repair
11 Left 13+806 14+272 454.7 SSP 3 Left 6+245 6+249 4.4 R.C. Floodwall
13 Left 15+443 15+548 113.1 SSP 5 Left 7+326-A 7+326 6.7 R.C. Floodwall
16 Right 3+649 3+753 98.9 SSP 8 Left 10+405 10+434 30.2 R.C. Floodwall
17 Right 5+046 15+223 153.7 SSP 9 Left 10+439 10+477 40.8 R.C. Floodwall
18 Right 5+262 5+414 170.9 SSP 10 Left 10+477 10+497 18.7 Repair
19 Right 5+545 5+639 103.3 SSP 11 Left 14+287 14+440 152.0 Repair
20 Right 6+337 6+510 151.2 SSP 12 Right 2+283 STA.A 250.4 R.C. Floodwall
21 Right 8+222 9+341 1048.9 SSP 12 Right STA.A STA.C 37.3 Repair
22 Right 9+430 9+792 380.0 SSP 13 Right STA.D 3+100 625.5 R.C. Floodwall
23 Right 9+814 9+947 187.8 SSP 13 Right 3+410 3+492 88.2 Repair
24 Right 10+956-A 11+263 327.9 SSP 13 Right 7+516 8+219 612.7 R.C. Floodwall
25 Right 11+610 11+653 43.7 SSP 14 Right 10+140 10+179 43.5 R.C. Floodwall
26 Right 11+788 11+803-A 19.9 SSP 15 Right 15+494 16+472 979.7 R.C. Floodwall
27 Right 13+578 13+801-B 226.7 SSP 16 Right 16+840 16+843 2.9 R.C. Floodwall
28 Right 13+804-A 14+225 448.6 SSP Sub-Total 3,212.1
29 Right 14+234 14+395-A 174.0 SSP Total Length (m) 9,946.7
4.1.2.2 Details of Design Method

(1) Loads
SSPs are designed against the loads enumerated below:
・ Earth pressure
・ Hydraulic pressure
・ Seismic load
・ Surcharge load
Earth pressure is computed using a Coulomb’s formula for lateral earth pressure,
both for active and passive pressure.
Hydraulic pressure is hydrostatic pressure from the riverside daily water level, and a
residual water pressure occurring from the landside after flood. A height of residual
water is taken as same level of top of coping maximally in consideration of
installation of drainage holes at the bottom of walls constructed on the coping.
Seismic load is expressed as an increase of earth pressure. An earth pressure
coefficient during earthquake is also computed using a Mononobe-Okabe’s formula
revising Coulomb’s formula, where a horizontal seismic coefficient, kh, equals to
0.20.
Surcharge load is live load which acts from upper position on land side above the
head of SSPs. Surcharge load due to vehicle traffic shall be 10kN/m2 in Normal
Condition and 5kN/m2 in Seismic Condition. For the area where pedestrians occupy,
the surcharge load shall be 5kN/m2.
4.2
Soil and other above the coping concrete shall be added to the surcharge load where a
ground height is higher than the coping (refer to Figure R 4.1.1).
Figure R 4.1.1 Flow Chart of Design Work of SSP Revetment

(a) Earth Pressure in Normal Condition
Earth pressure acting on movable walls is calculated by the following
Coulomb’s formula:
q
h
Pa
Pav
Pah
N
N
Figure R 4.1.2 Active Earth Pressure

q
h
Pph
Ppv
Pp
N
N
Figure R 4.1.3 Passive Earth Pressure

For Sandy Soil:
Pa = Ka h + Ka q
Pp = Kp h + Kp q
For Clayey soil
4.3
Pa = Ka h - 2c Ka + Ka q
cos 2 ( θ)
Ka 2
sin( δ)sin( α)
cos cos(θ δ) 1
2
cos( δ)cos(θ α)
Pp = Kp h + 2c Kp + Kp q
cos 2 ( θ)
Kp 2
sin( δ)sin( α)
cos cos(θ δ) 1 -
2
cos( δ)cos(θ α)
Earth pressure acting on fixed walls is calculated by the following formula:
Ps = Ks h + Ks q
Where,
Pa = active earth pressure (kN/m²)
Pp = passive earth pressure (kN/m²)
Ps = earth pressure at rest (kN/m²)
= unit weight of soil (kN/m³)
Ka = coefficient of active earth pressure
Kp = coefficient of passive earth pressure
Ks = coefficient of earth pressure at rest (Ks = 0.5)
h = earth depth to acting point of earth pressures Pa, Pp and Ps (m)
c = soil cohesion (kN/m²)
q = surcharge in Normal Condition (kN/m²)
= internal friction angle of soil (degree)
θ = angle between back side surface of wall and vertical plane (degree)
α = angle between ground surface and horizontal plane (degree)
δ = angle of wall friction (degree)
(b) Earth Pressure in Seismic State

Lateral earth pressure due to earthquake is calculated by the Mononobe-Okabe
formula based on the Coulomb’s theory in consideration of seismic factor.
Pea= Kea h – 2c Kea + Kea q’
cos² ( - o - )
Kea =
²
sin( + ) sin( - - o )
cos o cos² cos( + o + ) 1+
cos( + o + ) cos( - )
Pep=Kep h – 2c Kep + Kep q’
cos² ( - o + )
Kep =
²
sin( - ) sin( + - o )
cos o cos² cos( - o + ) 1
cos( - o + ) cos( - )
4.4
Where,
Kea = coefficient of active earth pressure
Kep = coefficient of passive earth pressure
q’ = surcharge in Seismic Condition (kN/m²)
θo = angle expressed below (degree)
Kh
tan o =
1 - Kv
Where,
Kv = seismic coefficient in vertical direction
Kh = seismic coefficient in horizontal direction
(c) Hydraulic Pressure

Hydraulic Pressure
Hydrostatic pressure acting on the structure is calculated by the following
formula:
P = w h
Figure R 4.1.4 Hydraulic Pressure on Wall

Where,
P = hydrostatic pressure at “h” (kN/m²)
H = water depth (m)
w= unit weight of water (9.8kN/m³)
Dynamic Hydraulic Pressure due to Earthquake

Dynamic water pressure caused by earthquake acting on the wall structure
facing on one side only is calculated by the following Westergaard’s
formula:
Pp =Kp h + Kp q
7
P = Kh w b H²
12
2
hg = H
5
4.5
H
P
hg
Figure R 4.1.5 Dynamic Water Pressure on Wall

Where,
P = dynamic water pressure caused by earthquake (kN)
Kh = coefficient of horizontal earthquake factor
w= unit weight of water (kN/m³)
b = width of wall structure (m)
H = water depth (m)
hg = dynamic water pressure acting depth caused by earthquake (m)
(d) Seismic Load

Seismic load is basically computed using Seismic Coefficient Method. Seismic
coefficient Kh shall be one-half (1/2) of the acceleration coefficient (Kh = A/2 =
0.4/2 = 0.2).
(2) Calculation Case

SSP revetments are designed under following two cases:
・ Normal Condition: an active earth pressure and a residual active load (10kN/m2
as surcharge) are acting from the land side.
・ Seismic Condition: a seismic active earth pressure is acting from the land side,
where a half of residual active load of Normal Condition (5kN/m2) is applied.
(3) Structural System and Analysis

SSP is designed as a cantilever member supported by soil below an imaginary
riverbed (refer to Figure R 4.1.6).
4.6
Figure R 4.1.6 Sheet Pile Loads Diagram

The depth of sheet pile embedment from the riverbed, ld, is determined using the
following formula:
ld = x + 3/
Where,
X = distance from a design river bed to a level where passive earth pressure becomes
equal with the active earth pressure
= (KH D / 4Es I)0.25
KH = coefficient of lateral soil reaction
D = width of sheet pile considered
Es = modulus elasticity of sheet pile material
I = moment inertia of the sheet pile per width considered
(4) Formula of Maximum Moment and Displacement

Formulae to analyze maximum moment and displacement of SSP (Chang’s
Formulae) are as follows:
4.7
For Maximum Moment

M MAX M m
where ,
M : Bending Moment on the I maginary Riverbed
2
1 2 h0 1 1 1
m exp tan
2 h0 1 2 h0
M MAX : Maximum Bending Moment ( kN m ) ( t m )
Kh B
4 (m 1 )
4 E I
K h : Coefficien t of lateral soil reaction ( kN / m 3 ) ( kg / cm 3 )
B : Unit Calculatio n Width 1 .0 m 100 cm
E : Young Modulus 2 .0 10 ( kN / m 2 )
8
2 .1 10 6 ( kg / cm 2 )
I : Geometric Moment of Inertia ( m 4 )
h0 : Dist ance between I maginary Riverbed and point of applicatio n force
For Displacement
1 2 3
where ,
: Deflection at top of Steel Sheet Pile ( m ) ( cm )
1 : Deflection on I maginary Riverbed ( m ) ( cm )
1 h0 P
3
2 E I
2 : Deflection by Incline ( m ) ( cm )
1 2 h0 P H
2
2 E I
3 : Deformatio n by Bending of Sheet Pile ( m ) ( cm )
B H3 2 B H3
3 i i Pi qi
6 E I E I
H : Height of Steel Sheet Pile from I maginary Riverbed to Top
P : Total Lateral Force ( kN ) ( t )
i : Ratio of Force Po int to Total Height from imaginary riverbed
Q i : Deformatio n Coefficien t
(5) Characteristics of SSP

Employed SSP Revetment
The type of sheet pile shall be determined in consideration of the stress and
displacement in each section not to meet an allowable stress and displacement
against outer loads. SSPs consist of Hat-shape SP-10H and SP-25H, and U-shape
SP-IA to SP-VIL. In case that the calculated stress and/or displacement SSP
revetment are/is not less than the allowable value, combined SSP with H-Beam shall
be applied to secure the strength of SSP revetment and not to meet an allowable stress
and displacement.
4.8
Section Efficiency
As shown in Table R 4.1.2. A 20% reduction of stiffness (e.g., Moment of Inertia of
Area: I x 0.8) is applied to U-shape SSP. This reduction is caused by the joint
efficiency of U-shape SSP during bending load. On the other hand, there is no
reduction of the stiffness for Hat-shape SSP due to their connecting structural
characteristic between SSPs.
Table R 4.1.2 Moment of Inertia of Area and Efficient Ratio in SSP Wall
Classification of Efficient Ratio of Sectional Factor
Item
Calculation Hat-shape U-shape
Calculation of
Full cross section is effective (100%)
Penetration Depth
Moment of
Inertia of Area Calculation of
Full cross section is effective 80% of full cross
Dispalcement and
(100%) section is effective
Sectional Force
Sectional
Stress Calculation Full cross section is effective (100%)
Factor
Source: Cantilever Steel Sheet Pile Design Manual, 2007 Dec.
Structure
When SSP with H-Beam is employed as SSP revetment, welding structure is to be
applied.
Type and Properties of SSP and H-Beam
As mentioned previously, SSP should conform to SYW295 specified in JIS A-5523
or equivalent with minimum yield strength (Fy) of 295MPa. General specifications
of SSP of SYW295 defined in JIS A-5523 are shown in Table R 4.1.3.
Table R 4.1.3 Properties of SSP
Per 1.0m
Type of Dimension (mm) Per 1.0m (original condition)
(after corrosion)
SSP A I Z Weight I’ Z’
W H t
(cm2) (cm4) (cm3) (kg/m) (cm4/m) (cm3/m)
U-Shape
SP-IA 400 85 8.0 113.0 4500 529 89 3420 402
SP-IIW 600 130 10.3 131.2 13000 1000 103 10500 810
SP-IIIW 600 180 13.4 173.2 32400 1800 136 27500 1530
SP-IVW 600 210 18.0 225.5 56700 2700 177 49900 2380
SP-VL 500 200 24.3 267.6 63000 3150 210 57300 2870
SP-VIL 500 225 27.6 306.0 86000 3820 240 79100 3510
Hat-Shape
SP-10H 900 230 10.8 122.2 10500 902 96 8300 713
SP-25H 900 300 13.2 160.4 24400 1610 126 20000 1320
Source: Steel Sheet Pile Association Data
Applicable combinations of SSP and H-Beam, and expected values of strength of
combined SSP are shown in Table R 4.1.4.
4.9
Table R 4.1.4 Combinations of SSP and H-Beam

Per 1.0m
Original condition After corrosion
SSP H-Beam Weight
I Z I’ Z’
(kg/m2)
(cm4/m) (cm3/m) (cm4/m) (cm3/m)
400x200x9x22 114000 3250 95900 2820 202
450x200x12x25 145000 4070 128000 3580 226
450x250x9x22 154000 4160 131000 3630 225
450x250x12x28 177000 5050 152000 4500 261
500x200x12x25 180000 4480 154000 3950 232
500x250x12x28 212000 5560 183000 4960 266
550x200x12x28 213000 4920 182000 4330 237
550x250x12x28 252000 6090 217000 5430 271
600x200x12x28 262000 5720 226000 5070 252
SP-10H 600x250x12x28 295000 6640 255000 5920 276
650x200x12x28 305000 6220 262000 5510 257
650x250x12x28 342000 7200 296000 6420 282
700x200x12x28 353000 6780 304000 6020 264
700x250x12x25 375000 7330 323000 6480 275
750x250x12x25 429000 7900 369000 6980 281
750x250x14x28 462000 8730 401000 7810 305
800x250x16x28 537000 9710 467000 872 324
850x250x14x25 563000 9470 486000 8390 305
900x250x16x28 681000 11200 593000 9990 338
450x250x12x28 228000 5890 198000 5250 290
500x250x12x28 268000 6380 233000 5690 295
550x250x12x28 312000 6900 271000 6160 301
600x250x12x28 360000 7440 314000 6640 306
600x300x12x28 396000 8410 345000 7530 330
650x250x12x28 414000 8010 360000 7140 311
700x250x14x28 484000 8950 422000 8010 329
700x300x14x28 529000 10000 463000 9010 353
750x250x14x28 548000 9590 479000 8580 335
SP-25H 750x300x14x28 600000 10700 526000 9650 359
750x300x16x32 649000 11900 573000 10800 391
800x250x16x28 632000 10600 553000 9530 354
800x300x14x28 676000 11500 593000 10300 365
800x300x16x32 732000 12800 647000 11600 398
850x250x16x28 709000 11400 621000 10200 361
850x300x16x32 821000 13600 726000 12400 405
900x250x16x28 792000 12100 694000 10900 368
900x300x16x32 917000 14500 811000 13100 412
1000x300x16x32 1130000 16300 998000 14800 426
Source: Steel Sheet Pile Association Data
4.10
(6) Geotechnical Conditions

Detailed geotechnical condition on the basis of drilling test results shall be applied to
the design calculations of SSP revetment.
The general soil classification of Pasig River is shown in Table R 4.1.5.
Table R 4.1.5 The General Soil Classification of Pasig River
Soil Classification
Age
Formation Lithic
Artificial s oils as embankment and buried soils. The mean N value of F is

F Embankment
mostly less than 15 partly over 20 in Pasig river area.
Sand layer characterized by the distribution in the surface ground. In lower

Pasig area, AS1 is mainly originated by a natural levee and Delta plane.
AS1 Sand, Gravel
The mean N value of AS1 is mostly less than 10 in lower part of Pasig river,
mostly over 20 in middle to upper part of Pasig river.
Soft clayey soils sometimes alternating with AS1, distributed under AS1 in
the mouth of Pasig River area, which originated by Delta front deposit. AC1
HOLOCENE AC1 Clay, Silt
distributes in the surface ground in the middle to upper stream of Pasig
River . The mean N value of AC1 is less than 3~5 in Pasig .
QUATERNARY
Sandy soil distributes in relatively deeper part as of beneath AC1. In lower
AS2 Sand, Gravel Pasig area, there is thick distribution under AC2. The mean N value of AS2
is 10~20 in lower part of Pasig river, partly over 20 in upper part.
Slightly soft clayey soil distributed under 10m depth from sea level in the
area from the mouth to 5km upstream of Pasig River containing organic
AC2 Clay, Silt
portions and tuffacious portions characteristically. The mean N value of AC2
is 12~17, partly less than 8 in Pasig river area.
Guadalupe Formation
Soft rock layer mainly consisting of lapili-tuff and tuffacious sandstone
PLISTOCENE GF tuff,sandstone,mudstone
correlated to Guadalupe Formation. The N value of GF is over 50 all areas.
volcanic conglomerate
Selection of geotechnical conditions for design calculation based on the drilling test
result implemented in/around design section shall take the following viewpoints into
account for proper design of SSP revetment:
・ drilling test result conducted in river or on bank with higher elevation shall be
selected for better estimation of actual active earth pressure from landside,
・ drilling test result with typical geotechnical formation of the design section shall
be selected as much as possible, and
・ drilling test result with lower N-value shall be applied for the design of safety
structure if there are multiple results with typical geotechnical formation in a
design section.
Sandy soil
In consideration of result of geotechnical laboratory test, design method of Phase-II
and generally used formula to calculate internal friction angle from N-value of sandy
soil, cohesion of sandy soil shall net be considered, and then internal friction angle of
sandy soil for design calculation shall be set as below:
Internal friction angle = 27° 15+ 15 N 45°
Clayey soil
Relation between cohesion and N-value of clayey soil on the basis of laboratory test
result is shown in Table R 4.1.7.
4.11
Figure R 4.1.7 Relation between N-value and Cohesion in Sandy Soil

In consideration this relation and generally used cohesion value applied from
N-value of clayey soil, internal friction angle of clayey soil shall not be considered,
and then cohesion of clayey soil shall be set as below:
Cohesion (kN/m2) N 4 : 6.0 x N
5 N 8 : 25
9 N 15 : 50
15 N 30 : 100
30<N : 200
Where, N: N-value
(7) Loads at Top of Coping Concrete

Following acting loads at the top of coping concrete shall be considered in structural
calculation:
・ Horizontal loads
Earth pressure and surcharge in Normal Condition
Seismic force due to coping concrete itself and walls installed on the top of
coping concrete additionally in Seismic Condition only
・ Moments in Normal Condition
Moment due to earth pressure and surcharge as active
Moment due to weight of walls installed on the top of coping concrete as
passive
・ Moments in Seismic Condition
Moment due to earth pressure, surcharge and horizontal force of the coping
concrete and walls by seismic movement as active
Moment due to weight of walls installed on the top of coping concrete as
passive
4.12
(8) Design Method of Parapet Walls

Loads
Minimum wind pressure to be used in this project shall be computed by the following
formula:
P = Ce Cq qs I
Where,
P = Design wind pressure
Ce = Combined height, exposure and gust factor coefficient as given in NSCP
Vol. I, Table 2-J
Cq = Pressure coefficient for the structure or portion of structure under
consideration as given in NSCP Vol. I, Table 2-K or from Figures 2.3B
to 2.3F
Qs = Wind stagnation pressures at height of 10 meters as specified in NSCP
Vol. I, Fig. 2.3A
I = Importance factor as specified in NSCP Vol. I, Table 2.2D
Load Combination
All structures shall be designed for the largest stresses resulting from the worst
combination of loads that may act on the structure at any given condition.
For safety reasons, each component of the structure shall be in proportion to bear all
combinations of these forces:
Normal Condition : D + L + I + E +H + U +F
Seismic Condition : D + Ee + V + U + De
Wind Condition : D+E+H+U+F+W
Flood Condition : D+E+H+U+F
Where,
D = dead load
L = live load
I = impact/dynamic effect of live load
E = earth pressure
H = hydrostatic pressure
U = uplift
W = wind load on structure
V = seismic load
F = flowing water pressure
Ee = earth pressure due to earthquake
De = dynamic water pressure due to earthquake
4.13
4.1.2.3 Parameters of Material

The design parameters for design calculation of revetments are enumerated in Table R
4.1.6.
Table R 4.1.6 Parameters of Material for Design Calculation of Revetments
Concrete: Reinforced/Prestressed 24.0 kN/m3
Material Unit
Concrete: Plain 23.5 kN/m3

Weight
Mortar 21.0 kN/m3

Cast Iron 71.0 kN/m3
Water 9.8 kN/m3
Damp or Wet Condition 18 kN/m3
weight
Unit
Saturated Condition 20 kN/m3

Sandy Soil
Submerged Condition 10 kN/m3

Measured value by standard penetration test
N-value
while drilling survey
Angle of Internal Friction = 27° 15+ 15N 45°
Cohesion (kN/m2) 0
weight
Unit

Soil Condition
Measured value by standard penetration test

Clayey Soil
N-value
while drilling survey
Angle of Internal Friction 0°
N 4: 6.0 x N
5 N 8 : 25
Cohesion (kN/m2) 9 N 15 : 50
15 N 30 : 100
30<N : 200
Quality of Soil dense sandy soil
Embanked Soil

weight
Unit

N-value 15
Angle of Internal Friction 30°
Cohesion (kN/m2) 0
4.14
Table R 4.1.7 Parameters for Design Calculation of SSP Revetments

Moment of Inertia of Area 100%
Hat-shape
Sectional Factor 100%
Section Efficiency
Moment of Inertia of Area 80%
U-shape
Sectional Factor 100%
SSP
Young’s Modulus of Elasticity 2.0×105N/mm2

Refer to Figure R 4.1.8
Level of Coping Concrete (design condition in Phase II and elevation of existing coping
are applied)
[Water Level in Landside]
Landside Ground Level Top of Coping concrete
Underground Water Level: Top of coping concrete
Landside Ground Level < Top of coping concrete
Water Level Condition Underground Water Level: Landside Ground Level
[Water Level in Riverside]
Normal Condition：Mean Low Water (MLW) EL.10.10m
Seismic Condition：Mean Sea Level (MSL) EL. 10.60m
Horizontal Seismic Coefficient kh=0.20
Normal Condition：10 kN/m2
Surcharge
Seismic Condition ：5 kN/m2
Cross sectional shape of riprap is designed such that necessary active earth pressure is
secured (refer to Figure R 4.1.8 and Figure R 4.1.9).
Delpan Br. Ayala Br. Nagthan Br. Zamola Br. Lambingan Br. Mandaluyong Br. C5 Br.
(STA.0+705) (STA.3+092) (STA.5+010) (STA.6+300) (STA.9+905) (STA.12+776) (STA.16+850)
(F.Santiago) (Pandacan) (Napindan)
[Left Bank only]

in consideration of existing coping height of SSP Revetment
15+870
15+443
STA.
STA.
STA. 3+160
STA. 3+300
EL+13.00 EL+13.0
EL+12.8 EL+12.8
EL+12.7
EL+12.6 Coping 0
EL+12.4 Coping Coping EL+12.0
Coping EL+12.2
EL+12.00
EL+11.6 EL+11.1
EL+10.89 avaraged water level line
EL+11.00 EL+11.0
EL+10.70 EL+10.70
EL+10.77 EL+10.50 EL+10.60
(10.2+0.5) (10.2+0.5)
(10.0+0.5) (10.1+0.5)
EL+10.10 EL+10.10
EL+10.00
(9.6+0.5) (9.6+0.5)
modifiedtop elevation of riprap

Distance from bottom of
coping to top of riprap EL+11.60 - EL+10.10 = 1.50m EL+11.80 - EL+10.10 = 1.70m EL+11.80 - EL+10.50 = 1.30m EL+11.90 - EL+10.60 = 1.30m EL+12.00 - EL+10.70 = 1.30m EL+12.00 - EL+10.70 = 1.30m
Figure R 4.1.8 Design Elevation of Coping Concrete and Riprap
4.15
Top of Coping Concrete
Riprap (class-B)
Top of Riprap
Top of Riprap (construction)
(design)
Imaginary Riverbed
Angle of Passive
Rupture Steel Sheet Pile
Width of Riprap
Topographic Cross Section
Figure R 4.1.9 Design Method of Necessary Width of Riprap

In consideration of viewpoints, geotechnical conditions for each design section are selected
as shown in Table R 4.1.8.
Table R 4.1.8 Applied Geotechnical Conditions to Each Design Section
[Left Bank] [Right Bank]
Station Applied Boring Log Station Applied Boring Log
No. No.
from to Boring No. on/off shore from to Boring No. on/off shore
1 2+419 2+550 ABL-1 on 1 3+649 3+753 ABR-8 off

2 2+550 2+694 ABL-4 off 2 5+046 5+100 ABR-9 off
3 2+854 2+950 ABL-6 off 3 5+100 5+223 ABR-11 off
4 5+262 5+340 Bh-R16 off
4 2+950 3+072 BPLL-10 off
5 5+340 5+414 ABR-14 off
5 3+160 3+300 BHLP-4 off
6 5+545 5+639 BH-R18 off
6 6+116 6+219 ABL-9 on
7 6+337 6+510 ABR-17 on
7 6+249 6+269 BH-L5 off 8 8+222 8+250 ABR-28 off
8 6+376 6+482 BHLP-01 on 9 8+250 8+400 ABR-29 off
9 7+326 7+444 ABL-13 off 10 8+400 8+510 BPRL-28 off
10 7+494 7+514 ABL-13 off 11 8+510 8+650 ABR-32 off
11 11+500 11+628 BPLL-38 on 12 8+650 8+800 ABR-35 off
12 12+024 12+173 BLR-8 off 13 8+800 8+900 ABR-37 off
13 13+806 13+900 BLR-11 off 14 8+900 9+000 ABR-38 on
14 13+900 14+000 BLR-12 off 15 9+000 9+150 ABR-40 off
15 14+000 14+150 BLR-14 off 16 9+150 9+200 ABR-42 off
17 9+200 9+341 ABR-43 off
16 14+150 14+250 BLR-16 off
18 9+430 9+550 ABR-45 off
17 14+250 14+272 BLR-17 off
19 9+550 9+650 ABR-46 off
18 15+236 15+315 BPLL-50 on 20 9+650 9+723 ABR-48 off
19 15+315 15+424 BPLL-50 on 21 9+723 9+750 BPRL-32 off
20 15+443 15+548 BLR-21 off 22 9+750 9+770 ABR-50 on
21 15+747 15+870 BLR-24 off 23 9+770 9+830 ABR-50 on
22 15+965 16+150 BLR-25 off 24 9+830 9+947 ABR-53 off
23 16+150 16+200 BLR-27 off 25 10+956 11+050 BPRL-36 off
24 16+200 16+300 BPLL-53 on 26 11+050 11+150 BHUP-10 off
25 16+300 16+450 BLR-30 off 27 11+150 11+263 BHUP-12 off
26 16+450 16+552 BLR-32 off 28 11+610 11+653 AR-42 off
27 16+552 16+564 BLR-33 off 29 11+788 11+803 BPRL-39 on
30 13+578 13+700 BRR-2 off
31 13+700 13+802 BDP-7 on
32 13+802 13+914.5 BRL-3 on
33 13+914.5 14+000 BRR-6 off
34 14+000 14+100 BRL-4 on
35 14+100 14+200 BDP-8 on
36 14+200 14+300 BR-7 on
37 14+300 14+350 BPRL-47 on
38 14+350 14+395 BPRL-47 on
39 14+835 14+943 BRR-15 off
40 14+983 15+075 BRR-17 off
41 15+409 15+441 BHUP-20 on
42 15+476 15+494 BHUP-20 on
43 16+667 16+724 BRR-22 off
44 16+760 16+840 BPRL-55 on
4.16
4.1.2.4 Design Criteria

Based on the design considerations of Phase II, Design Criteria is set as below.
(1) Allowable Stress and Displacement of SSP and SSP with H-Beam
Allowable stress of SSP for design calculation shall be 180 (235) N/mm2 in SYW295
(SYW390). In this design, 180N/mm2 as allowable stress of SSP shall be applied
since SYW295 is more general and reasonable as the material of SSP.
Allowable stress of H-Beam as structural steel in SM490 that is specified and
required in technical specification is 185N/mm2. Therefore, allowable stress of
combined SSP with H-Beam shall be as 185N/mm2 because dominant structure
against load (tensile stress) from landside in the combined SSP is H-Beam portion
installed at landside of combined SSP.
In Seismic Condition, allowable stress is increased by 50% as the load happens
transiently in nature, then the applied allowable stress in Seismic Condition is set as
270N/mm2 for SSP and 277.5N/mm2 for SSP with H-Beam.
Aside from the strength requirement, SSP sections are determined from the
displacement limit of 50mm in Normal Condition. For Seismic Condition as
mentioned beforehand, a maximum allowable displacement is increased by 50%. To
meet this requirement, steel pile sections shall be designed to be adequately stiff that
the maximum displacement in Normal Condition is not more than 50mm, and 75mm
in Seismic Condition.
(2) Required Conditions and Safety Factors for Design of Parapet Walls
Proposed structures should be adequately designed for and be safe from the
following conditions.
4.1.2.5 Sliding
Minimum safety factor against sliding should be as follows:
Total Vertical forces x f
SF
Total Horizontal Force
SF 1.5 : in Normal Condition
SF 1.2 : in Seismic and Wind Condition
SF 1.0 : in Flood Condition
where f is as follows:
Concrete to rock base ; f = 0.7
Concrete to boulder or cobble base ; f = 0.6
Concrete to sandy base ; f = 0.6
Concrete to clayey base ; f = 0.5
4.17
4.1.2.6 Overturning
For stability of structures against overturning, the following conditions should be satisfied:
b M b
e : in Normal Condition
2 N 6
b M b
e : in Seismic, Wind and Flood Condition
2 N 3
Where,
b = width of base (m)
M = total moment about point A (kN-m)
N = total vertical forces (kN)
e = eccentricity (m)
Resultant
A
e
b/2 b/2
Figure R 4.1.10 Point of Resultant Force
4.18
4.1.2.7 Result of Design Calculation of Each Type of Revetment for Pasig River
Results of design calculation of each type revetment are described in the following Tables
and Figures.
In addition, the general layout plan, the typical cross section of revetment and the standard
river structural details are shown in Figure 4.1.1, Figure 4.1.2 and Figure 4.1.3 respectively
as the results of the revetment design.
(1) SSP
Final design results are also shown in Table R 4.1.9 and Table R 4.1.10.
Table R 4.1.9 Design Results of SSP Revetment in Each Section (Left Bank)
Section Designed SSP Revetment Result of Design Calculation
EL. of
No. Z0 Stress (N/mm2) Dsiplacement (mm)
Design Length
from to Bank Riverbed
Type 3 Normal Seismic Normal Seismic
(cm ) (m)
(EL. m) (acceptable) (acceptable) (50) (75)
1 2+419 2+550 L 9.6 IVW 2700 11.0 67 (180) 90 (270) 35.17 50.05
2 2+550 2+694 L 9.6 IVW 2700 11.5 77 (180) 99 (270) 45.22 62.90
3 2+854 2+950 L 9.6 VL 3150 12.0 70 (180) 91 (270) 45.62 63.84
4 2+950 3+072 L 9.6 IVW 2700 12.0 73 (180) 92 (270) 46.62 61.08
5 3+160 3+300 L 9.6 25H 1610 9.0 69 (180) 96 (270) 28.74 42.46
6 6+116 6+219 L 10.0 IIIW 1800 10.0 76 (180) 103 (270) 40.51 58.56
7 6+249 6+269 L 10.0 VIL 3820 12.5 69 (180) 107 (270) 42.72 72.08
8 6+376 6+482 L 10.1 VL 3150 11.0 76 (180) 111 (270) 42.63 66.49
9 7+326 7+444 L 10.1 VIL 3820 12.0 66 (180) 98 (270) 40.09 61.52
10 7+494 7+514 L 10.1 VIL 3820 12.0 68 (180) 100 (270) 41.11 63.39
11 11+500 11+628 L 10.2 VL 3150 11.0 81 (180) 116 (270) 46.54 70.68
12 12+024 12+173 L 8.2 10H + 750x250x12x25 902+5390 16.5 103 (185) 126 (278) 44.11 54.41
13 13+806 13+900 L 10.2 10H + 450x250x9x22 902+2490 13.0 103 (185) 145 (278) 40.86 58.10
14 13+900 14+000 L 10.2 10H + 600x200x12x28 902+3630 14.5 105 (185) 158 (278) 42.48 64.25
15 14+000 14+150 L 10.2 10H + 450x200x12x25 902+2320 12.5 90 (185) 166 (278) 29.48 60.53
16 14+150 14+250 L 10.2 IVW 2700 10.0 78 (180) 118 (270) 36.56 57.83
17 14+250 14+272 L 10.2 10H + 400x200x9x22 902+1760 11.5 116 (185) 194 (278) 37.10 65.31
18 15+236 15+311 L 10.2 VIL 3820 11.0 81 (180) 136 (270) 39.37 71.41
19 15+311 15+424 L 10.2 VIL 3820 11.0 68 (180) 115 (270) 32.12 59.92
20 15+443 15+548 L 10.2 10H + 450x250x12x28 902+3070 13.0 102 (185) 168 (278) 41.61 70.56
21 15+747 15+870 L 10.2 10H + 450x250x9x22 902+2490 13.5 95 (185) 159 (278) 35.32 64.46
22 15+965 16+150 L 10.2 10H + 400x200x9x22 902+1760 12.0 94 (185) 153 (278) 31.70 55.46
23 16+150 16+200 L 10.2 10H + 400x200x9x22 902+1760 12.5 102 (185) 169 (278) 36.94 67.52
24 16+200 16+300 L 10.2 10H + 400x200x9x22 902+1760 12.5 106 (185) 168 (278) 37.91 65.70
25 16+300 16+450 L 10.2 10H + 400x200x9x22 902+1760 13.0 103 (185) 178 (278) 38.65 72.60
26 16+450 16+552 L 10.2 10H + 400x200x9x22 902+1760 12.5 91 (185) 154 (278) 32.03 59.46
27 16+552 16+564 L 10.2 25H + 850x250x16x28 1610+7240 19.0 91 (185) 146 (278) 45.11 72.99
4.19
Table R 4.1.10 Design Results of SSP Revetment in Each Section (Right Bank)
Section Designed SSP Revetment Result of Design Calculation
EL. of
No. Design Z0 Length Stress (N/mm2) Dsiplacement (mm)
from to Bank Riverbed
Type 3 Normal Seismic Normal Seismic
(cm ) (m)
(EL. m) (acceptable) (acceptable) (50) (75)
1 3+649 3+753 R 9.6 IVW 2700 11.0 84 (180) 105 (270) 44.85 59.20
2 5+046 5+100 R 10.0 VL 3150 12.0 62 (180) 94 (270) 38.92 64.94
3 5+100 5+223 R 10.0 VIL 3820 12.5 66 (180) 90 (270) 41.86 61.62
4 5+262 5+340 R 10.0 VIL 3820 13.0 53 (180) 81 (270) 36.53 61.33
5 5+340 5+414 R 10.0 VIL 3820 13.0 60 (180) 92 (270) 38.83 65.28
6 5+545 5+639 R 10.0 10H + 450x200x12x25 902+2320 14.0 97 (185) 148 (278) 45.02 69.06
7 6+337 6+510 R 10.1 VL 3150 12.0 65 (180) 88 (270) 43.3 62.39
8 8+222 8+250 R 10.1 10H + 550x250x12x28 902+3940 15.0 90 (185) 112 (278) 43.66 54.73
9 8+250 8+400 R 10.1 VIL 3820 12.0 66 (180) 99 (270) 39.39 63.44
10 8+400 8+510 R 10.1 10H + 450x250x9x22 902+2490 13.5 110 (185) 151 (278) 44.71 61.74
11 8+510 8+650 R 10.1 VIL 3820 12.5 63 (180) 96 (270) 39.34 65.21
12 8+650 8+800 R 10.1 10H + 400x200x9x22 902+1760 13.0 112 (185) 139 (278) 46.89 58.09
13 8+800 8+900 R 10.1 VIL 3820 11.5 78 (180) 119 (270) 44.53 71.14
14 8+900 9+000 R 10.1 VIL 3820 12.0 73 (180) 107 (270) 43.87 68.49
15 9+000 9+150 R 10.1 VIL 3820 12.0 63 (180) 96 (270) 36.81 60.07
16 9+150 9+200 R 8.1 10H + 650x250x12x28 902+4850 16.5 100 (185) 127 (278) 47.39 64.03
17 9+200 9+341 R 10.1 IVW 2700 10.5 81 (180) 121 (270) 39.29 64.16
18 9+430 9+550 R 10.1 VIL 3820 12.5 64 (180) 98 (270) 40.83 66.06
19 9+550 9+650 R 10.1 VIL 3820 12.0 64 (180) 98 (270) 38.59 61.89
20 9+650 9+723 R 10.1 VIL 3820 12.0 64 (180) 98 (270) 40.10 63.28
21 9+723 9+750 R 10.1 10H + 400x200x9x22 902+1760 12.5 104 (185) 161 (278) 37.00 60.18
22 9+750 9+770 R 10.1 VIL 3820 12.0 67 (180) 103 (270) 38.99 64.46
23 9+770 9+830 R 8.1 10H + 600x250x12x28 902+4390 15.5 105 (185) 127 (278) 47.65 60.19
24 9+830 9+947 R 10.1 VIL 3820 12.0 64 (180) 99 (270) 38.87 64.22
25 10+956 11+050 R 8.2 10H + 500x200x12x25 902+2650 14.0 117 (185) 156 (278) 46.91 65.65
26 11+050 11+150 R 8.2 10H + 750x250x12x25 902+5390 18.0 97 (185) 147 (278) 42.57 70.16
27 11+150 11+263 R 8.2 10H + 650x200x12x28 902+4020 15.0 115 (185) 138 (278) 46.55 56.42
28 11+610 11+653 R 10.2 IVW 2700 11.0 77 (180) 124 (270) 41.21 72.72
29 11+788 11+803 R 10.2 VIL 3820 11.5 71 (180) 112 (270) 39.41 68.30
30 13+578 13+700 R 10.2 IVW 2700 11.0 70 (180) 121 (270) 36.40 67.54
31 13+700 13+802 R 10.2 IVW 2700 10.0 73 (180) 122 (270) 33.63 60.37
32 13+802 13+900 R 10.2 VIL 3820 11.5 75 (180) 100 (270) 44.81 60.35
33 13+900 14+000 R 10.2 VIL 3820 12.0 59 (180) 109 (270) 32.76 69.21
34 14+000 14+100 R 10.2 IVW 2700 10.0 67 (180) 109 (270) 29.52 50.95
35 14+100 14+200 R 10.2 IIIW 1800 8.5 105 (180) 162 (270) 43.44 69.47
36 14+200 14+300 R 10.2 VL 3150 10.0 74 (180) 126 (270) 35.00 65.18
37 14+300 14+350 R 10.2 10H + 400x200x9x22 902+1760 12.0 76 (185) 203 (278) 23.24 69.65
38 14+350 14+395 R 10.2 10H + 500x250x12x28 902+3500 13.5 91 (185) 166 (278) 32.88 66.13
39 14+835 14+943 R 10.2 IVW 2700 10.0 72 (180) 114 (270) 31.55 52.44
40 14+983 15+075 R 10.2 10H + 400x200x9x22 902+1760 11.5 97 (185) 178 (278) 30.17 58.36
41 15+409 15+441 R 10.2 10H + 450x250x9x22 902+2490 11.5 76 (185) 208 (278) 21.20 63.73
42 15+476 15+494 R 10.2 IVW 2700 9.5 82 (180) 142 (270) 33.58 61.28
43 16+667 16+724 R 10.2 VIL 3820 11.0 69 (180) 121 (270) 36.07 69.50
44 16+760 16+840 R 10.2 10H + 450x250x9x22 902+2490 13.0 79 (185) 158 (278) 26.14 61.14
4.20
(2) Parapet Wall Type-II, III
[Parapet Wall Type-II] [Parapet Wall Type-III]

Figure R 4.1.11 Typical Cross Section of Parapet Wall Type-II, III
Table R 4.1.11 Standard Dimensions of Parapet Wall Type-II, III

Range
H (m)
B (m)
D (m)
t1(m)
t2(m)
t3(m)
Hw
(m)
0.30 0.50 0.36 0.20 0.30 0.36 0.20

0.40 0.60 0.38 0.20 0.30 0.38 0.20
0.50 0.70 0.40 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.20
0.60 0.80 0.45 0.20 0.30 0.42 0.20
0.70 0.90 0.50 0.20 0.30 0.44 0.20
0.80 1.10 0.60 0.30 0.30 0.46 0.30
0.90 1.30 0.75 0.40 0.30 0.48 0.40
1.00 1.40 0.85 0.40 0.30 0.50 0.40
1.10 1.60 0.95 0.50 0.30 0.52 0.50
1.20 1.75 1.10 0.55 0.30 0.55 0.55
1.30 1.90 1.20 0.60 0.30 0.56 0.60
1.40 2.10 1.40 0.70 0.30 0.58 0.70
1.50 2.20 1.60 0.70 0.30 0.60 0.70
1.60 2.30 1.60 0.70 0.40 0.72 0.70
1.70 2.40 1.60 0.70 0.45 0.79 0.70
(3) Parapet Wall Type-IV and Vertical Wall
[Parapet Wall Type-IV] [Vertical Wall]

Figure R 4.1.12 Typical Cross Section of Parapet Wall Type-IV and Vertical Wall
4.21
Table R 4.1.12 Standard Dimensions of Parapet Wall Type-IV and Vertical Wall
Reinforcement
Height Range Thickness
BAR A BAR B BAR C
SPACING
SPACING
SPACING
HW (m)
HS (m)
t1 (m)
t2 (m)
(mm)
(mm)
(mm)
(mm)
(mm)
(mm)
DIA
DIA
DIA
0.0~1.5 0.0~0.5 0.20 t1 + HW*0.1 12 250 12 250 12 300
0.0~1.5 0.5~1.0 0.20 t1 + HW*0.1 12 250 12 250 12 300
0.0~1.5 1.0~1.5 0.20 t1 + HW*0.1 12 250 12 250 12 300
(4) Inclined Wall
Figure R 4.1.13 Typical Cross Section of Inclined Wall
Table R 4.1.13 Standard Dimensions of Inclined Wall

Reinforcement
Height Range
BAR A BAR B BAR C BAR D BAR E BAR F
HW (m)
H (m)
SPACING
SPACING
SPACING
SPACING
SPACING
G (mm)
(mm)
(mm)
(mm)
(mm)
(mm)
(mm)
(mm)
(mm)
(mm)
(mm)
(mm)
DIA
DIA
DIA
DIA
DIA
DIA
SPACIN
0.0~1.5 0.5~2.0 16 250 16 250 12 300 12 250 12 250 12 -

1.5~2.5 2.0~3.0 16 125 16 125 12 300 12 125 12 125 12 -
2.5~2.75 3.0~3.25 16 125 16 125 12 300 12 125 12 125 12 -
2.75~3.0 3.25~3.5 20 125 20 125 12 300 12 125 12 125 12 -
4.22
(5) L-type Parapet Wall
[L-Type Parapet Wall] [L-Type Parapet Wall-SE]
Figure R 4.1.14 Typical Cross Section of L-type Parapet Wall
Table R 4.1.14 Dimensions of L-Type Parapet Wall
Table R 4.1.15 Standard Dimensions of L-Type Parapet Wall-SE
4.23
(6) Slope Stability of Riprap

The slope stability of the riprap about the steep riverbed portion should be verified to
confirm the adequate riprap slopes which were fundamentally based on Phase II. The
result is shown in Table R 4.1.16.
Table R 4.1.16 Slope Stability Result of Riprap
Case-1: Riprap Slope 1.0 Case-2: Riprap Slope 1.5 Portion of the
No. Bank Station
Factor of Safety Judgment Factor of Safety Judgment Slope 1.5
1 2+600 1.133 NG 1.239 Safe 2+419-2+694
2 2+931 0.914 NG 1.215 Safe
2+854-3+072
3 3+050 1.102 NG 1.346 Safe
4 14+200 1.184 NG 1.386 Safe 14+150-14+272
Left
5 15+236 1.203 Safe - - -
6 15+300 1.229 Safe - - -
7 15+350 1.352 Safe - - -
8 16+042 1.174 NG 1.457 Safe 16+000-16+100
9 5+100 1.531 Safe - - -
10 6+415 1.016 NG 1.215 Safe
6+337-6+510
11 6+471 0.955 NG 1.215 Safe
12 8+600 1.085 NG 1.622 Safe 8+550-8+700
13 9+000 1.201 Safe - - -
Right
14 9+100 1.419 Safe - - -
15 9+750 1.168 NG 1.510 Safe 9+723-9+792
16 13+700 1.524 Safe - - -
17 13+914.5 1.049 NG 1.416 Safe 13+804-13+952
18 16+667 1.468 Safe - -
Note: Allowable Factor of Safety > 1.20
4.24
4.1.3 Drainage Facilities

The main components of the drainage system (Figure R 4.1.15) consist of U-ditch,
collector pipe, manhole and flap gate. The flap gate is optional, which is used only at
locations where the DHWL is higher than the existing ground inland.
Figure R 4.1.15 Components of the Drainage Outlet in Pasig River

(1) U-Ditch
The U-ditch is designed to collect discharges from sanitary outlets, roof drains and
surface runoff from the easement. Regarding sanitary and roof drains, quantity of
discharge is calculated by assumed ¾ full flow. Regarding easement drain, the
quantity of discharge of the existing pipe is calculated by the rational formula. The
U-ditch cross section area is calculated by total of both discharge.
A minimum rectangular U-ditch size of 0.3m x 0.3m and a maximum of around 0.3m
x 0.6m is adopted.
(2) Reinforced Collector Pipe
In order to reduce the number of outlets, collector pipe would be installed using
reinforced concrete pipe basically. When many PVC pipes have to be connected to a
4.25
collector pipe, installing manholes for each PVC pipes is uneconomical. In this case,
box culvert should be applied instead of reinforced concrete pipe culvert.
(3) Manhole and Outlet
Basic dimensions and clearances of the manhole is designed based mainly on the size
of the outlet pipe.
For maintenance access purposes, a manhole opening on the top slab is designed with
not less than 0.60m x 0.60m. The cover is made of reinforced concrete instead of
solid iron or iron grilles to prevent from vandalization. In addition, deformed steel
bars are used as ladder rungs are provided for maintenance access for manholes
deeper than 1.0m.
(a) Structural Calculation of Manhole
(i) Design Condition
The design conditions are shown in Table R 4.1.17.
Table R 4.1.17 Design Condition of Manhole in Pasig River
Concrete Reinforced 24.0 kN/m3
Weight
Unit
Material
Concrete Plain 23.5 kN/m3

Water 9.8 kN/m3
Soil Condition
Quality of Soil
18.0 kN/m3
Unit Weight
Damped and Wet Condition
Saturated Condition 20.0 kN/m3
Submerged Condition 10.0 kN/m3

[Inside water level]
Bottom Elevation of Manhole
[Outside water level]

Water Level Condition Ground Level – 0.9m*
* The Pavement elevation is around 13.600
and the top elevation of coping concrete is
12.7000. Hence, Outside water level is
assumed ground level – 0.9m.
Surcharge on the Ground 10 kN/m2
T-2 *
Live load on Top Slab * Passenger vehicle and small truck which
weighs less than 2 t is assumed
(ii) Results of Calculation

The dimension of manholes based on the results of structural calculation are
shown in Table 4.1.1. And the detail of calculation is indicated in
Vol.III-1.
(4) Junction Box
Junction Boxes are installed to properly connect a U-ditch to a manhole or outlet.
4.26
(5) Structural Calculation of Junction Box

Design Condition is same as manhole. The calculated dimensions based on the
results of structural calculation are shown in Table 4.1.2. And the detail of
calculation is indicated in Vol.III-1.
(6) Flap Gate
Flap gate is provided at outlets where DHWL is higher than the inland ground
surface elevation.
Material for the flap gate leaf and frame is made of Fiberglass Reinforced Polyester
(FRP) with Stainless Steel fastener and hinges.
Shown in Table 4.1.3 is a comparison of the three types of flap gate materials based
on their characteristics. These are the most common types that are commercially
available.
4.27
4.2 Result of Design for Lower Marikina River

4.2.1 Changed in Detailed Design Stage
Changed in Detailed Design Stage is as summarized in Table R 4.2.1.
Table R 4.2.1 Changed in Detailed Design for Lower Marikina River
Item Basic Design Detailed Design Reason for Change
(1) River Structure
Sub-section : 3.2.1 Design Condition
Utilization of river Based on latest Readjustment of river centerline based
a River Centerline centerline of Phase I in survey results on the latest survey results in 2012
2002
Sub-section : 3.2.1.2 Design Range in Lower Marikina River
BP, EP and Based on Preparatory Based on latest Readjustment of construction area based
b Length of Each Study for PMRCIP-III survey results on the latest survey results in 2012
Section
Sub-section : 3.2.4 Basic Design of Reinforced Concrete Flood Wall
EL+15.0 m along dike height is As a result of meeting with DPWH and
c Height of Dike whole stretch of the adjusted based on the LGU, dike height is revised based on the
dike DFL at each section DFL at each section
Revetment and Concrete Block SSP Revetment, Modified revetment and dike structure
d Dike Structure Revetment, Width of Width of crest: 3.0 m based on the result of discussion with
crest: 6.0 m DPWH and LGU
e Boundary Wall None Width: 0.3 m, Addition to boundary wall based on the
Height: 1.0 m result of meeting with DPWH and LGU
Although road specification for dike
crown was required as public road in
f Railing Guardrail (Corrugated Concrete Handrail basic design, the specification is decided
beam) (Bamboo railing) as maintenance road during the
coordination meeting with DPWH and
LGU
Sub-section : 3.2.5.3 (2) Extra Dredging
0.5 m on the bottom No consideration of In view of the past dredging work in
g Extra-Dredging and 2.0 on the slope of extra-dredging Philippine, extra-dredging is not
dredged line considered
Sub-section : 3.2.6 (1) Temporary Soil Storage Site Plan
Confluence of Lower It is expected to be difficult to agree with
Napindan Marikina River and the land owner. The dredged material is
h Temporary Napindan Channel, None directly carried by barge to the backfill
Staging Area covering 5.95 ha site without use of Napindan Temporary
Staging Area
Sub-section : 3.2.6 (4) Study of Backfill Site
i Area of Backfill 47.8 ha 45.0 ha Revision of area of backfill site based on
Site the latest survey results in 2012
4 catchment point for
Backfill Site 2 catchment point for surface drainage (2 Revision of the backfill site drainage
j Drainage surface drainage at the locations at the system based on the latest survey results
System middle of backfill site middle of backfill in 2012 and modified construction plan,
site, 1 location at east like a carrying-in route
and west respectively
Revised backfill site outlet based on the
k Backfill Site Concrete Box Culvert RC Pipe latest survey results in 2012 and
Outlet mitigation of subsidence due to own
weight
Length: 48 m, Length: 108 m, Due to direct transport of dredged
Temporary Jetty Width:10 m, at the Width:12 m, at the material in connection with the repeal of
l at Backfill Site Laguna Lake side of C6 Lower Marikina the Napindan Temporary Staging Area,
bridge River side of C6 the location and size of temporary jetty
bridge is revised
4.28
Item Basic Design Detailed Design Reason for Change

(1) River Structure
Sub-section : 3.2.7 Study of Boundary Bank
During the basic design stage, eco-tube
was planned to be used as a measure to
contain heavy metals and marker for
government property boundary. However,
Boundary Dike Boundary Marker the results of analysis of riverbed
m Boundary Dike (Eco-tube) (Concrete Post) sediments along Lower Marikina River
showed that detection of heavy metals
does not exceed the DENR Standard. In
view of economical and constructional
advantage, concrete boundary marker was
adopted during the meeting with DPWH
Sub-section : 3.2.8 (3) Foot Protection Method with Bags (Bottle Unit)
n Foot Protection for FBU-10 type SBU-10 type To obtain information from supplier in
Pier relation to overseas-oriented product
Sub-section : 3.3.3 (3) Drainage Planning for Marikina River
MSR-1 Installation at Deleted Revision of dike/revetment area
Sta. 2+950
MSL-2 Installation at Installation at Sta. Revision of dike/revetment area
Sta. 1+333 1+323
Installation at Installation at Sta. Coordination with Construction Plan
MSL-4 Sta. 4+233 4+221 (Driving SSP for seepage cutoff wall
under the existing bridge)
Installation at Installation at Sta. Coordination with Construction Plan
MSR-3 Sta. 3+258 3+255 (Driving SSP for seepage cutoff wall
under the existing bridge)
(1) River Structure

There are changes made in the Basic Design which have been reflected in the
Detailed Design due to several design conditions. These changes are as follows.
(a) River Centerline
Under time pressure, the past topographic survey result which was conducted
during Phase I in 2002 was used for the Basic Design. It was found out in the
topographic survey which was conducted during Phase III in 2012 that riverbed
aggradation has resulted due sedimentation, landfill is changing due to culture,
and a number of residential and commercial establishments are increasing and
expanding along the banks of the Lower Marikina River and so on. Hence, new
river centerline is decided on the basis of the latest survey results.
(b) BP, EP and Length of Each Section
In Detailed Design, BP, EP, and length of each section are changed for the
following reasons.
・ A more suitable treatment to terminate the dike was explored. Therefore
shortening or extension of the dike due to change in the location of BP and
EP was considered.
・ Many houses are within the projected lines of the proposed dike. To avoid
them the locations of some BP or EP are changed.
・ Regarding end treatment of dike, the end of the linear park was adopted due
to the existence of walls.
4.29
(c) Height of Dike

In the Basic Design, the top elevation of dike was set to 15.00m uniformly along
the Lower Marikina River following the road plan of Pasig City. However there
is a large difference between (DHWL+Fb) which leads to high increment of
cost.
In subsequent deliberations with Pasig City, it turned out that uniform elevation
is not necessary. For this reason, an agreement with the city was obtained
wherein the margin of safety is still attained for the DHWL.
(d) Revetment and Dike Structure
The former proposal during the Basic Design consisted of concrete block
retaining wall with steel sheet pile and gabion mattresses, 6m concrete paved
road and earth slope. Through discussions with the DPWH and Pasig City to
solicit further improvement of the design, it was found out that a 6m road is not
necessary.
The main points of reexamination are as follows.
・ The most suitable structure should be adopted such as reduction of dike
width as well as other measures so as not to reduce the river cross sectional
area of flow. Therefore concrete block retaining wall and steel sheet pile
were compared. In both comparisons, the height of parapet wall is kept at
0.80m.
・ The road width in the Basic Design is 6.0m, however the road width of 3.0m
for vehicle maintenance management is adopted. Pavement is made simple
by adopting gravel instead of concrete. The road dike, however, allows for
future widening to 6m road.
・ Since a flatter earth side slope of the dike would occupy larger space, this
was changed to a concrete block retaining wall where the side slope is
steeper and occupies lesser space.
(e) Boundary Wall
As a result of coordination meting with DPWH and LGU, the wall with the
meaning as a boundary of ROW was prepared in the part of the low wall by the
side of the private house of the linear park of the present condition.
(f) Railing
Since passing of 6m width common vehicles was considered in the basic design,
the guardrail was planned. However, it became only passing of the vehicles for
maintenance management in detailed design.
As this road prepared stairs and a child can put it in freely, DPWH asked for
installation of a rail to prevent a child falling from walls just in case. And,
concrete railing that imitated the bamboo which gave priority to the prevention
from a fall of people over vehicles was provided by specification of DPWH.
(g) Extra-Dredging
Although extra-dredging with thickness of the bottom: 50cm, and side thickness
of the slope: 2.0m according to the Japanese River Earthwork Manual was
adopted in the basic design, as a result of the talks with DPWH and as it
informed that accounting for extra dredging is not performing in the Philippines,
4.30
we decided to omit extra-dredging in design drawings and quantity calculation

in the detailed design.
However, in the execution scheme, the allowable extra-dredging is calculated
according to the standard of DPWH from the necessity of considering it as the
plan which saw the allowable extra-dredging in actual construction.
(h) Napindan Temporary Staging Area
Approval of land use for temporary soil storage near the confluence of Lower
Marikina and Napindan River could not be obtained from the owner of a piece of
land in Brgy. Sta. Rosa. Hence, a 45-ha lot located at the mouth of Laguna Lake
in Brgy. Napindan shall be made as a site for premixing and ultimately as
backfill site for the dredged soil.
(i) Area of Backfill Site
A backfill site area of 47.8ha was planned during the basic design stage.
However based on the latest result of survey, the Backfill Site of 45ha was
planned during the detailed design stage.
(j) Backfill Site Drainage System
In the basic design, in order to carry in the earth and sand which carried out
intermediate treatment from the Laguna lake side (upstream side) of a bridge, it
was considered as the system with which the whole site is backfilled from the
center of a plan place. Therefore, drainage facilities were prepared in the center
of site on canal side for maintenance management.
However, in the detailed design, the position of the ground of intermediate
treatment was established in the end of site on the southeast side near the jetty
which changed the position, the carry-soil of embankment was written with
starting from there, and a large change arose from the changed carry-soil plan in
the layout planning of facilities.
Moreover, since a request went up from residents that rainfall water from outside
could be discharged to the existing maintenance drainage canal, and the drainage
at the time of construction is also taken into consideration, the outlets were
provided in the both ends by the side of the southeast and northeast of a project
site.
Drainage of the site was made to process by one each of a block of the east and
west which produced as a result of improving a national highway.
In these results, a large change of the drainage system arose.
(k) Backfill Site Outlet
In the basic design, outlets were a concrete box type.
However, settlement would be expected if weight is large, and road heights
around site has to be lowered, RC pipe was adopted in the detailed design.
(l) Temporary Jetty at Backfill Site
In the basic design, a 48m-jetty for loading of dredging soil in Laguna Backfill
Site was planned for one earth carrying barge in which intermediate treated
dredging soil in Napindan Site is carried out.
4.31
However, since it was changed into performing intermediate treatment in

Laguna and frequent arrival at a shore of the convoy of a backhoe was assumed,
it changed into 108 m as a space at which the earth carrying barge (1000DWT
class) of at least three boats can arrive at a shore.
Moreover, width changed 10 m of a basic design into 12 m so that the turn of a
10-t damp truck might be attained.
Since the planned position of the jetty was changed into the upper stream side
from the lower stream side of a bridge at that time, a length of 30 m is not
required for an approach part, and it changed into 6 m required in order to
straddle a revetment wall.
(m) Boundary Dike
During the basic design stage, eco-tube was planned to be used as a measure to
contain heavy metals and marker for government property boundary. However,
the results of analysis of riverbed sediments along Lower Marikina River
showed that detection of heavy metals does not exceed the DENR Standard. It
shows that eco-tube is no longer appropriate for the measure against heavy
metals.
Moreover, installation only as a boundary marker turned out to be too expensive.
As a result of coordination meeting with DPWH, concrete posts is adopted as
boundary markers in a 50-m interval instead of eco-tube.
(n) Foot Protection for Pier
Although the Bottle Unit was due to use the FBU-10 type of 1.7 m in width and
0.425m in average height at the beginning, this type has the information on the
exclusive use only for domestic, and it changed it into the type of
overseas-oriented SBU-10 type of 1.6 m in width and 0.400 m in average height.
Regarding drainage facilities, in the detail design stage, the location and number of
sluiceway was changed due to the following reasons, and the final location is shown
in the Table R 4.2.2.
・ The beginning point of dike in Section II is changed from Right Bank
STA.2+880 to Right Bank STA.3+33.6.
・ Location of MSL2 in basic design is near the existing wall of Rizal high school,
and the construction would affect to it.
・ Location of MSL4 in basic design is near the pier of Rosario Bridge, and it is
impossible to pile SSP for seepage cutoff wall.
・ Location of MSR3 in basic design is near the Alfonso Sandoval Bridge, and
there is problem about vertical clearance in piling the SSP with flexible joint
would affect to it.
4.32
Table R 4.2.2 Change of the Sluiceway Location

Location/ Station
Sluiceway Number Side
Basic Design Detail Design
MSL-1 1+104 1+104
MSL-2 1+333 1+323
MSL-3 Left 3+945 3+945
MSL-4 Bank 4+233 4+221
MSL-5 4+406 4+406
MSL-6 4+503 4+503
MSR-1 2+950 Unnecessary
MSR-2 Right 3+157 3+157
MSR-3 Bank 3+258 3+255
MSR-4 3+438 3+438
Note: Bold type means the location/station changed from basic design stage.
4.2.2 River Structure

4.2.2.1 Design Concept
This chapter consists of the detailed design of shore protection structures, dredging as well
as the design of appurtenant facilities which aims to reduce flood damage along Lower
Marikina River.
Figure R 4.2.1 Extent of Design for Lower Marikina River
4.33
4.2.2.2 Design Summary

(1) Summary of Results of Detailed Design
Table R 4.2.3 Design Activities
Design Item Quantities Scope of Design
Alignment of Whole river
1 5,400m Design of river centerline.
River Centerline stretch
Alignment of Whole river,
2 5,400m×2 Design of river alignment.
revetments both banks
Design of
3 revetments and dike 3 sections 1,821m Design of dikes and related facilities.
structures
Design of dredging works along the
4 Dredging Whole river 5,400m
river alignment.
Foot Protection Design of foot protection with bottle
5 Bridges 4 bridges
around Piers unit bags.
Design of backfill site, including
Brgy. 1set
6 Backfill Site drainage facilities, internal road
Napindan 45ha
network, etc.
Whole river, Determination of location and design of
7 Boundary Markers 71 units
both banks boundary markers.
(2) Determination of Centerline

Alignment of new centerline of Lower Marikina River was determined by the
concept that the centerline must be located along the line that flood water might flow
at maximum discharge and velocity, and must be positioned where the river flows
smoothly to maximize the effect of dredging. (New Alignment of River Centerline,
Refer to Figure 4.2.2.)
Centerline
Figure R 4.2.2 Typical River Cross Section
(3) Profile of Lower Marikina River

Profile of Lower Marikina River is shown in Figure 4.2.3.
(4) Improvement Work Area
Improvement Works Area of Lower Marikina River is shown in Figure R 4.2.3 and
sectional location, length and structure are shown in Table R 4.2.4.
4.34
Table R 4.2.4 Improvement Work Area

STA Length
Section Side of River Structure Remarks
BP EP (m)
SSP + Concrete Block
1 0+921 1+338 Left 419
and Gravity Walls
2 3+033 4+621 Right 595
and Gravity Walls
3 3+898 4+670 Left 807
and Gravity Walls
4.35
Figure R 4.2.3 Area of River Improvement Work
4.36
4.2.2.3 Revetment Components

(1) General
The revetment basically consists of three main components: steel sheet piles, earth
embankment and concrete block retaining walls behind the dike. Figure R 4.2.4
shows the standard dike section for the Lower Marikina River.
Dike Shape is decide by the following concepts.
・ Vertical revetment structure consisting of steel sheet pile is adopted to maximize
river cross-section of flow.
・ ROW is set at the edge of linear park to have a space for drainage facilities and
the dike structure can be approached on the land side. At least 2.0m of road is
kept for movement of residents.
・ Road width of 3.0m is decided to satisfy minimum requirement for maintenance
of dike.
・ Basically, wall at land side is made of concrete hollow blocks to reduce the
vertical force on the ground.
Figure R 4.2.4 Standard Drawing of Dike
4.37
(2) Steel Sheet Pile (SSP)

(a) Type of Steel Sheet Pile Revetment
Steel Sheet Pile Revetment is adopted for the river side. The type of steel sheet
pile is HAT-Shape SP-25H, with 0.70m in width x 0.80m in height reinforced
pile coping.
Properties of the HAT-Shape SP-25H are shown in Table R 4.2.5.
Table R 4.2.5 Properties of Steel Sheet Pile
W h t A I Z Weight I’ Z’
Type of SSP
(mm) (mm) (mm) (cm2) (cm4) (cm3) (kg/m) (cm4) (cm3)
HAT-Shape Per Piece Per 1.0 meter
SP-25H 900 300 13.2 160.4 24,400 1,610 126 20,000 1,320
Note: I’, Z’ : Values after considering corrosion depth of 2mm (1mm for each side)
(b) Elevation of Sheet Pile Revetments
Elevations of top of parapet walls and sheet pile copings are determined based
on the DHWL. The top elevation of parapet wall and pile coping is shown in
Table R 4.2.6.
Elevation: top of parapet wall DHWL + Fb (1.00m)
Top of pile coping (Top of parapet wall) – 0.80m※
Elevation of DHWL is at the elevation of upper and elevated edge of each
section.
※
TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES FOR DESIGN OF FLOOD CONTROL
STRUCTURES (DPWH)、1.4.2 Floodwall
Table R 4.2.6 Determination of Elevation of Tops of Structures
Top of
Top of
BP DHWL DHWL Pile
Section STA Parapet Remarks
Ep (m) +1.00m Coping
Wall(m)
(m)
BP 0+921 14.138 15.138 15.200 14.400
1
EP 1+338 14.185 15.185 15.200 14.400
BP 3+033 14.373 15.373 15.500 14.700
2
EP 3+621 14.438 15.438 15.500 14.700
BP 3+898 14.469 15.469 15.600 14.800
3
EP 4+670 14.555 15.555 15.600 14.800
(c) Result of Structural Calculation

Calculation of the adequacy and stability of steel sheet piles is based on the
following assumptions (refer to Figure R 4.2.5).
・ The maximum height of steel sheet pile from existing ground on river side is
around 2.40m at Sta. 4+250. However, 3.00m of exposed length is adopted
evenly for every steel sheet pile because of expected scouring in the future.
Sta. 1+325 is located on land side where scouring is not expected, so 1.50m
of exposed length is adopted for structure calculation and stability analysis.
・ LWL is obtained as water level increasing by 1/9000 inclination from the
surface water level of 10.10m at Sta. 0+000.
4.38
・ Cohesive force is obtained by the equation C = 6N (kN/m2), where N is

N-value.
・ Seismic force in the air and under water is 0.20.
・ Points for calculation are selected as representative of the sections in
consideration of geologic profile.
・ Residual Water Levels (RWL) are 2/3 of differences between DWHL and
ground water level.
400
400
Figure R 4.2.5 Calculation Model for Steel Sheet Pile

The results of calculation are shown in Table R 4.2.7.
Table R 4.2.7 Results of Calculation of Steel Sheet Piles
Mmax Stressσ Horizontal Embedment
Section STA State
(kmm/m) (N/mm2) Deformation(mm) Depth(m)
Normal 85.80 65 29.8 6.23
1+100
Seismic 85.00 64 29.53 6.23
Normal 108.33 82 38.17 6.33
1 1+325
Seismic 145.34 110 57.40 6.83
1+325 Normal 19.00 14 4.07 5.88
D=1.50 Seismic 22.43 17 5.15 6.17
Normal 66.48 50 22.02 5.99
3+170
Seismic 49.35 37 15.74 5.99
Normal 111.45 84 49.32 7.47
2 3+240
Seismic 82.97 63 30.32 6.48
Normal 77.18 58 33.01 7.32
3+450
Seismic 96.85 73 43.17 7.59
Normal 74.32 56 27.99 6.68
4+050
Seismic 62.02 47 20.99 6.13
Normal 77.12 58 33.06 7.33
4+250
Seismic 95.53 72 42.86 7.59
3
Normal 64.60 49 22.18 6.18
4+400
Seismic 60.94 46 20.75 6.18
Normal 78.22 59 33.60 7.33
4+500
Seismic 96.89 73 42.38 7.46
Allowable Value Normal 180 50
Allowable Value Seismic 270 74
4.39
(d) Length of Steel Sheet Piles

Length of steel sheet piles is checked with its safety factor calculated by circular
slip method. (Refer to Figure R 4.2.6).
Figure R 4.2.6 Model of Circular Slip in case of Steel Sheet Pile

Calculation by the slip circle method is implemented to confirm the safety, 1.20,
of steel sheet piles against sliding. Results were shown in Table R 4.2.8
confirming that every case was satisfied with the required safety factor. After
above mentioned checking, the steel sheet pile lengths are decided for every
section and shown in Table R 4.2.9.
Table R 4.2.8 Results of Lengths of Sheet Pile
Length in
Safety factor in
Section Structural Adopted Length
STA Circular Slip Calc.
Calculation (m)
(Fs >1.20)
(m)
1+100 9.00 2.566 9.00
1 1+325 9.40 1.224 9.50
1+325 D=150 7.30 2.123 7.50
3+170 8.60 2.220 9.00
2 3+240 10.00 1.689 10.00
3+450 10.20 1.749 10.50
4+050 9.30 3.484 9.50
4+250 10.20 3.772 10.50
3
4+400 8.80 3.019 9.00
4+500 10.10 2.274 10.50
4.40
Table R 4.2.9 Schedule of Steel Sheet Piles Type 25H

STA Length Pile Length
Section
From To (m) (m)
0+922.40 1+200.00 283.80 9.0
1 1+200.00 1+253.20 54.10 9.5
1+253.20 1+335.10 80.20 7.5
3+033.00 3+144.90 119.10 9.0
2 3+144.90 3+246.65 97.20 10.0
3+246.65 3+621.20 387.00 10.5
3+898.00 4+211.10 331.70 9.5
4+211.10 4+270.00 60.20 10.5
3
4+270.00 4+395.20 124.70 9.0
4+395.20 4+665.20 289.20 10.5
Total 1827.2
The other components of steel sheet pile are designed and shown as follows;
(e) Expansion Joint
Coping : Joint Sealant and Cork Filler at an interval of 10m
Parapet Wall: Cork Filler, Joint Sealant and Water Stop at an interval of 20m
Construction Joint with Joint Sealant at an interval of 5m
(f) Rotation Angle and Minimum Radius of Steel Sheet Piles
Rotation angle at a joint (refer to Figure R 4.2.7) is within 4 degrees in
HAT-Shape steel sheet pile. Therefore R=15.00m of minimum radius when
driving is adopted in Lower Marikina River.
Figure R 4.2.7 Rotation Angle at Joint
(3) Concrete Block Retaining Wall

(a) Shape of Concrete Block Retaining Wall
Shape of Concrete Block Retaining Wall is shown in Figure R 4.2.8 and its
dimensions are shown in Table R 4.2.10.
4.41
Figure R 4.2.8 Concrete Block Wall
Table R 4.2.10 Properties of Concrete Block Retaining Wall

Foundation Slope Thickness Thickness of Steel Sheet
Height Thickness
Height H1 Length of Laying Backfilling Pile
H (m) a (mm)
(mm) L (mm) Concrete C (mm) D (mm) SP-10H
1.50 300 1677 350 100 300 457 ―
1.75 300 1957 350 100 300 478 ―
2.00 300 2236 350 100 300 501 ―
2.25 700 2516 350 100 300 524 2.00m
2.50 700 2795 350 100 300 546 2.00m
A concrete block retaining wall and a gravity wall classify use with height
Concrete Block Retaining Wall: Total height 1.80m or more
(H:150m+Base Height:0.30m).
Gravity Wall : Total height 1.50m or less
(b) Stability Analysis of Concrete Block Retaining Wall
Stability analysis of the concrete block retaining was made against overturning,
sliding and bearing capacity. Result of the analysis was shown in Table R 4.2.11,
confirming every height case was satisfied with stability.
Table R 4.2.11 Result of Stability Analysis
Overturning Sliding Bearing Capacity
Allowable
Height Resultant Middle Weight of
Allowable Bearing
H (m) Force Third Fs Wall
Fs Capacity
Xh (m) X’ (m) (kN/m)
(kN/m)
2.50 1.516 1.683 1.77 1.50 37.80 64.7
2.25 1.365 1.558 1.92 1.50 34.86 64.7
2.00 0.996 1.233 2.36 1.50 26.09 31.5
1.75 0.863 1.108 2.64 1.50 23.15 31.5
1.50 0.737 0.983 3.00 1.50 20.22 31.5
1.25 0.616 0.858 3.44 1.50 17.27 31.5
1.00 0.508 0.733 4.08 1.50 14.34 31.5
4.42
(c) Result of Analysis of Circular Slip

Circular Slip Method is also applied to analyze stability of the concrete block
retaining wall.
If the safety factor is below 1.20, blocking with steel sheet pile shall be adopted.
It will be installed under a base concrete.
Without SSP
With SSP
Figure R 4.2.9 Model in Analysis of Circular Slip of Concrete Block Retaining Wall
Results of analysis of circular slip (refer to Table R 4.2.12)show that two types
of concrete block retaining wall are required: with (wall height 2.0m or less) and
without (wall height 2.25m or more) steel sheet piles. Type of Steel Sheet Pile
adopted for blocking is Sp-10H L=2.00m.
Table R 4.2.12 Results of Analysis
With Steel Sheet Pile
Without Pile
Wall Height SP-10H L = 2.00m
(m) Mr Md Fs = Mr Md Fs =
(kNm) (kNm) Mr/Md (kNm) (kNm) Mr/Md
1.00 36.3 16.9 2.148 ― ― ―
1.50 44.8 31.3 1.431 ― ― ―
2.00 74.3 61.6 1.206 ― ― ―
2.25 93.0 81.8 1.137 667.1 389.4 1.713
2.50 98.8 94.2 1.049 677.7 445.2 1.522
Note: allowable safety factor = 1.20
4.43
(d) Base Concrete Structure

Base Concrete without Steel Sheet Pile: Type A
Base Concrete with Steel Sheet Pile : Type B (Friction Pile, L=2m)
(e) Embedment of Base Concrete
After demolition of existing concrete slab, foundation of concrete block
retaining walls shall be set on the hard gravel layer under the slab of the linear
park.
(f) Laying Blocks
Concrete blocks which weight is more than 350kg/m2 is set at a depth of 35cm.
A 10 cm thick backfill concrete with 16.5MN/m2 strength will also be provided.
(g) Steel Sheet Pile for Base Concrete
Properties of HAT-Shape SP-10H are as shown in Table R 4.2.13.
Table R 4.2.13 Properties of Steel Sheet Pile
W h t A I Z Weight I’ Z’
Type of SSP
(mm) (mm) (mm) (cm2) (cm4) (cm3) (kg/m) (cm4) (cm3)
HAT-Shape Per Piece Per 1.0 meter
SP-10H 900 230 10.8 122.2 10,500 902 96 8,300 713
Note: I’, Z’ : Values after consideration of corrosion depth of 2mm (1mm for each side)
(h) Drainage Works
Weep holes of 50mm dia. are set at 2.0~3.0m2 interval (staggered). These shall
be set above normal water level.
(i) Partition Wall
Thickness of partition wall is 0.30m, and is installed at the edge and middle of
block walls. The partition wall is set at an interval of 50m (10.0m×5 blocks).
(j) Schedule of Concrete Block Retaining Wall
Locations, lengths, height, elevations and types of base concrete of the concrete
block retaining wall are shown in Table R 4.2.14.
4.44
Table R 4.2.14 Schedule of Concrete Block Retaining Wall

Stations Base
Length L Height H Elevation
Section Concrete
BP EP (m) (m) EL (m)
Type
0+921.2 0+932.3 8.1 1.75 14.33 A
0+934.2 0+975.0 40.0 1.75 14.33 A
0+975.3 1+024.4 50.0 1.75 14.33 A
1+024.7 1+074.8 50.0 1.75 14.33 A
1
1+076.7 1+126.6 50.0 1.50 14.33 A
1+126.9 1+177.0 50.0 1.50 14.33 A
1+177.3 1+277.9 50.0 1.50 14.33 A
1+228.2 1+247.0 20.0 1.50 14.33 A
3+092.8 3+142.8 50.0 1.75 14.63 A
3+144.7 3+197.2 50.0 1.75 14.63 A
3+197.5 3+249.9 50.0 1.75 14.63 A
3+251.8 3+269.8 18.0 1.75 14.63 A
3+272.0 3+315.8 50.0 1.75 14.63 A
3+316.9 3+366.9 50.0 1.75 14.63 A
2
3+367.2 3+418.2 50.0 2.00 14.63 A
3+418.5 3+448.4 30.0 2.00 14.63 A
3+450.7 3+490.3 40.0 2.00 14.63 A
3+490.7 3+540.7 50.0 2.25 14.63 B: SP 2.0.
3+542.6 3+594.0 50.0 2.25 14.63 B: SP 2.0
3+595.9 3+606.4 10.0 2.25 14.63 B: SP 2.0
3+898.0 3+918.9 25.0 2.00 14.73 A
3+920.8 3+966.0 50.0 2.00 14.73 A
3+967.9 4+015.2 50.0 2.50 14.73 B: SP 2.0
4+017.1 4+064.6 50.0 2.50 14.73 B: SP 2.0
4+066.5 4+115.2 50.0 2.25 14.73 B: SP 2.0
4+115.5 4+165.5 50.0 2.00 14.73 A
4+167.4 4+217.4 50.0 2.00 14.73 A
4+219.3 4+269.3 50.0 2.00 14.73 A
3
4+271.2 4+321.2 50.0 2.00 14.73 A
4+323.1 4+321.2 50.0 2.00 14.73 A
4+374.7 4+373.1 50.0 2.00 14.73 A
4+445.0 4+415.0 40.0 2.00 14.73 A
4+486.9 4+536.9 50.0 2.00 14.73 A
4+538.8 4+588.8 50.0 2.00 14.73 A
4+590.7 4+640.7 50.0 2.00 14.73 A
4+642.6 4+670.0 30.0 2.00 14.73 A
Total 1,551.1
4.45
(k) Schedule of Partition Wall

Dimensions and section no. of the partition wall on every height are shown in
Table R 4.2.15.
Table R 4.2.15 Schedule of Partition Wall
Section Nos.
Height Area Thickness Volume
Section Section Section Total
(m) (m2) (m) (m3)
1 2 3
1.50 1.64 0.30 0.492 3 3
1.75 1.91 0.30 0.573 2 3 5
2.00 2.20 0.30 0.660 3 2 5
2.25 2.72 0.30 0.816 1 1
2.50 3.02 0.30 0.906 0
(4) Gravity Wall

(a) Type of Gravity Wall
Two types of gravity wall for the back of dike are used: front surface inclined
and back surface inclined.
Front surface inclined type is used for the edges of sections where the
differences between ground surface and top of dike are small. Back surface type
is limited for use around Sta. 4+420, where there is no space between dike and a
building.
(b) Front Surface Inclined Type (Normal Type)
Stability analysis calculation on the gravity wall is done under the following
condition.
・ Properties of dike soil used for calculation are: unit weight=18.0kN/m3,
internal friction angle = 30°, bearing capacity of ground=50kN/m2.
(Refer to Figure R 4.2.10)
・ Seismic state is not considered in the calculation.
・ The side slope of the front surface is 0.5 to 1, and top width = 0.50m for a
height of 1.50m. And a top width is 0.3m where a wall height is 1.00m.
Results of stability analysis of the gravity wall is shown in Table R 4.2.16
showing that the walls satisfied with safety against turnover, sliding and bearing
capacity.
Figure R 4.2.10 Gravity Wall
4.46
Table R 4.2.16 Results of Calculation of Stability Analysis

Turnover Sliding Bearing Capacity
Height (m) (Fs) (kN/m2)
e Allowable Fs Allowable q max q min Allowable
H=1.00 0.025 0.133 1.68 1.50 22.10 15.05 50.00
H=1.50 0.066 0.208 2.10 1.50 36.27 18.82 50.00
(c) Gravity Wall at around Sta. 4 + 420
For the 30m section at about Sta. 4+420 where the building and the end of a bank are
close, a back surface inclined gravity wall as shown in Figure R 4.2.11 was
provided. Stability analysis of this type of wall is shown in Table R 4.2.17 .
Figure R 4.2.11 Back Surface Inclined Gravity Wall

Table R 4.2.17 Results of Calculation of Stability Analysis
Turnover Sliding Bearing Capacity
Height (m) (Fs) (kN/m2)
e Allowable Fs Allowable q max q min Allowable
H=1.80 0.18 0.23 1.95 1.50 75.37 9.73 91.29
(d) Result of Analysis of Circular Slip

Applied gravity walls also were checked with circular slip method. The result of
the analysis was shown in Table R 4.2.18 confirming that every height of the
wall satisfied the allowable safety factor 1.20. After the above mentioned study,
dimensions of the gravity wall in every construction section was decided and
Table R 4.2.18 Results of Analysis
Wall Height Side of Inclined Mr Md Fs = Allowable
(m) Surface (kNm) (kNm) Mr/Md Fs
1.00 Front 50.0 22.6 2.21 1.20
1.50 Front 80.8 49.0 1.65 1.20
1.80 Back 132.2 75.4 1.75 1.20
4.47
Table R 4.2.19 Schedule of Gravity Walls

STA Dimension
Length Top
Section Wall Height EL (m)
From To Top Width (m)
(m) Elevation
(m)
0+921.2 0+927.6 1.50 0.50 6.80 14.264
1+247.0 1+297.0 1.50 0.50 50.00 14.33
1
1+297.0 1+328.2 1.00 0.30 30.00 14.33
1+335.1 1+337.8 1.50 0.50 1.90 14.33
3+039.8 3+045.5 1.50 0.50 8.60 14.63
2
3+047.4 3+087.4 1.50 0.50 40.00 14.63
4+415.0 4+445.0 1.80 0.50 30.00 14.73
3
4+670.0 4+670.0 1.00 0.30 3.00 14.73
(5) Maintenance Road

(a) Road Class
Road on top of the dike shall be primarily for dike maintenance and secondly for
access of residents.
(b) Road Geometry
Width of Road : New road width is 3.0m.
(c) Cross Slope : 2% of gravel pavement
(d) Component of Pavement
The maintenance road has two major structural components, namely:
・ The base course with thickness of 20cm consisting of gravel.
・ Asphalt pavement with thickness of 5cm laid over the base course
(6) Other Revetment Details

(a) Connecting Method of Dike to Existing Houses
Connecting the end of the dike directly to an existing house is not suitable
because of the action due to earth pressure from the dike. HAT-Shape 25H type
steel sheet piles are driven 1.50m away from a house to avoid adverse vibration
due to driving. Therefore a gap between the house and steel sheet piles is
considered. This gap is to be protected with lean concrete revetment to seal off
from floods. (Refer to Figure R 4.2.12).
4.48
Figure R 4.2.12 Attaching Method of Dike to Existing House

(b) Boundary Markers
Boundary markers are provided to clarify the boundaries between DPWH and
private properties at an interval of 50m along alignments of boundary line.
(Refer to Figure R 4.2.13) Number of installation of the boundary markers are
summarized to every bank and section as shown in Table R 4.2.20.
Figure R 4.2.13 Boundary Marker

Table R 4.2.20 Summary of Boundary Piles
STA
Side Number Remarks
From To
0+700 0+900 3
1+700 2+000 7
Left Side
2+300 3+650 28
3+850 4+800 5
0+800 1+400 13
2+050 1
Right Side 2+600 2+750 4
2+850 3+00 4
3+950 4+200 6
Total 71
4.49
(c) Steps on Concrete Block Slope

Steps on the concrete slope are to be provided at 22 points of convenient
locations for residents to communicate with other residents. The steps are made
of cast-in-place concrete with effective width of 1.50m. This width is allocated
to two-way traffic considering that a person requires 0.75m of walking space.
Gradient of slope is about 30 degree (0.571:1). This is the usual slope wherein
people could go up and down safely. (Refer to Figure R 4.2.14) Heights and
lengths are adjusted to the locations and decided as shown in Table R 4.2.21.
Figure R 4.2.14 Profile and Front View of Steps

Table R 4.2.21 Summary of Steps
Section Sta. H(m) L(m) n
0+933 1.50 2.48 7
1
1+075 1.50 2.46 7
3+048 0.90 1.34 3
3+144 1.35 2.18 6
3+250 1.50 2.46 7
2 3+272 1.20 1.90 5
4+449 1.75 3.02 9
3+540 1.60 2.74 8
3+595 1.35 2.18 6
3+920 2.10 3.58 11
3+967 2.30 3.86 12
4+016 2.30 3.86 12
4+065 2.10 3.30 11
4+166 1.50 2.46 7
4+218 1.35 2.18 6
3 4+270 1.50 2.45 7
4+322 1.50 2.45 7
4+374 1.20 1.90 5
4+486 1.50 2.45 7
4+538 1.60 2.74 8
4+590 1.75 3.02 9
4+642 1.50 2.74 8
(d) Concrete Railing Type-4

U.S. Code (ASTM F 1292:1999): Standard Specification for Impact Attenuation
of Surfacing Materials within the Use Zone of Playground Equipment shows
4.50
that an impact exceeding HIC (The Head Injury Criterion) 1000 has a possibility
to cause injury to a human head.
With the review of dike structures, railings shall be required to be installed on
the places where there are some possibilities of exceeding HIC 1000. From the
buffering effect of grass sodding level, a limitation of drop height shall be 1.50m,
and it shows clearly that retaining walls shall provide handrails for prevention of
drop accident, especially by children, if a difference of height between top of
wall and design ground exceeds 1.50m.
Handrail was designed as concrete-made to place in the sections as shown in
Table R 4.2.22.
Table R 4.2.22 Schedule of Concrete Railing
STA Length
Section Remarks
From To (m)
2 3+374.7 3+479.4 100.0
3 3+902.5 4+104.0 212.0
Total 312.0
(e) Boundary Wall to Linear Park

New boundary walls are installed instead of the walls at the edge of the linear
park removed by construction. The size of a boundary wall is used as a concrete
wall 0.30m in width, and 1.00m in height. The sections to install are as shown in
Table R 4.2.23.
Table R 4.2.23 Schedule of Boundary Walls
STA Length
Section Remarks
From To (m)
1 0+928 1+330 408.0
2 3+041 3+614 546.0
3 3+906 4+462 723.0
Total 1,677
4.2.2.4 Immediate Settlement and Consolidation Settlement of Dike

(1) Consolidation Settlement of Dike
Consolidation settlement is obtained from the settlement calculation based on the
result of geotechnical survey.
(2) Immediate Settlement and Side Deformation
3m width of embankment in shape of rectangular is adopted for calculation
4.51
Table R 4.2.24 Results of Immediate Settlement

Immediate Settlement
Side Defor-
Boring H q Em S
Section STA mation
No. (m) (kN/m2) (kN/m2) at Center (m)
(m)
1 1+100 BHML-2 1.40 25.2 4,751 0.019 -0.0017
3+170 BHLM-24 1.60 28.8 3,823 0.012 -0.0024
2
3+450 BMRW-8 1.70 30.6 2,244 0.022 -0.0043
4+050 BHLM-14 2.30 41.4 3,481 0.019 -0.0038
3
4+400 BHLM-17 1.70 30.6 2,957 0.017 -0.0033
(3) Consolidation Settlement

Cc method is adopted to consolidation settlement as follows;
Where, S : consolidation settlement (m)

Consolidation Time
t = Tv*d2 / Cv
Where, t : time until consolidation index U
Results of Consolidation Settlement is shown in Table R 4.2.25.
Table R 4.2.25 Results of Consolidation Settlement
Consolidation Settlement Residual
q
Section STA Layer Settlement t Settlement
(kN/m2) Cv (m3/day)
S (m) (day) (m)
AC 0.027 0.02015 168
1 1+100 25.2 DC 0.004 0.02893 359
Total 0.031 0.050
AC 0.078 0.02044 283
3+170 28.8 DC 0.007 0.10124 253
Total 0.085 0.097
2
AC 0.063 0.01500 712
3+450 30.6 DC 0.012 0.10352 991
Total 0.075 0.097
AC 0.134 0.04422 113
4+050 41.4 DC 0.011 0.05715 182
Total 0.145 0.164
3
AC 0.089 0.06351 155
4+400 30.6 DC 0.004 0.08788 473
Total 0.093 0.110
The above-mentioned consolidation settlement calculation result is used for Quantity

Calculation of embankment.
4.52
4.2.2.5 Seepage of Dike

Calculation of seepage is done with Lane’s Creep Theory as shown below.
Creep distance L = v + 1/3 * h (Refer to Figure R 4.2.15)
= (7.90+1.30)*2 + 5.40*1/3 = 20.20m
Where, L : creep distance (m)
v : incremental vertical creep distance (=7.90m *2: sheet pile)
(=1.30m *2:Base)
h : incremental horizontal creep distance (=5.40m)
Difference H = 14.486 – 12.826 = 1.660m
Creep ratio : 8.5 (very fine sand or silt)
L (Creep distance) / H (Difference of water head) = 20.20 / 1.66
= 12.2 > 8.5 .OK (No seepage)
As a result of above, there is no problem with the seepage of dike.
Figure R 4.2.15 Creep Distance
4.2.2.6 Foot Protection of Bridges

(1) Necessity and Method of Foot Protection Works
The river regimen will change after dredging as the level of river bed will lower
considerably. Every pier will undergo instability of foundation due to deep
excavation near the pier. Therefore the protection for all piers against scouring shall
be necessary.
(2) Selection of Protection Method for Piers
In order to prevent scouring around the existing bridge piers and abutments,
especially when the top of bridge pier foundation has protruded above riverbed, foot
protection works is proposed. Foot protection works using the Bottle Unit is selected
based on Table R 3.2.5. Basic concept of foot protection in Lower Marikina River is
to keep the present condition without large-scale re-creation.
4.53
(3) Range of Foot Protection around Piers.

After considering the calculation result and DPWH direction, designed range of the
foot protection works is shown, with Vargas Bridge as example, in Figure R 4.2.16.
Range of foot protection works around pier was shown, together with its calculation
method, in Table R 4.2.26.
Table R 4.2.26 Range of Scouring (Foundation)
Width of Piers Range of Scouring Selected Range
Bridge Name D (m) H (m) L=1+2.9D (From Edge of
L=2.51D Foundation)
Foundation Foundation /(H*Tanθ)
Sta. Rosa 1.50 8.50 3.77 1.89 4m or more
Vargas (PC) 8.00 10.00 20.08 5.02 6m or more
Vargas (Steel) 8.00 8.00 20.08 6.03 6m or more
Sandoval 4.10 7.40 10.29 3.78 6m or more
Rosario 2.40 27.05 6.02 1.45 6m or more
: Angle of repose under water (Average 30°)
1/ Collection Papers of Japan Society of Civil Engineers, 415-7-12, Statistical Design Method about Weight and Construction Width of
Anti-Scour Block around Pier Protection”, Katsuya OKADA etc.
Range of transition of dredging is to be prepared in the range of 10 m or more from a bridge

pier edge about the direction of the flow of a river as directions of DPWH besides the range
according to the above-mentioned calculation about the range of foot protection.
Figure R 4.2.16 Foot Protection at Vargas Bridge
4.54
(4) Bags (Bottle Unit) for Foot Protection Works

Foot protection works with bags (Bottle Unit) consist containing the stones in a bag
and tying the neck of the bag with a rope (refer to Figure R 4.2.17). A typical bag:
product number SBU-10, is 1.60m in diameter, 0.48m in height, and 0.32m in
perimeter height. A pack of 0.05~0.10m of crushed rock weighs about one (1) ton.
Bridge piers will be stacked with two layers of these bags within selected ranges.
Capacity of a bag is approximately 0.5~0.62m3.
Figure R 4.2.17 Bottle Unit

Maximum velocities that Bottle Unit SBU-10 can bear are shown in Table R 4.2.27.
The design flood velocity in Lower Marikina River is 1.0~2.0m/s, therefore Bottle
Unit of SBU-10 type 1t can bear it in both case of single and group.
Table R 4.2.27 Maximum Velocity for moving of Bottle Unit
SBU-10
Type
Single Group
1t about 2.8m/s or less about 4.2m/s or less
(5) The notes on construction

It is necessary to consider the following points during the construction for foot
protection of existing piers.
・ Foot protection work with swiftness and precision for protection of the existing
piers promptly after the dredging
・ Not to obstruct the traffic of other vessels/barges in terms of construction
management
・ Not to damage the existing bridges/piers in view of stability of the existing
facilities
4.2.2.7 Dredging and Disposal

(1) Dredging
(a) Dredging Section
The dredging section shall be a low waterway with bottom width of 40m and
side slope of 3H:1V to accommodate the 30-year flood. Dredging Standard
Section was shown in Figure R 4.2.18.
4.55
Figure R 4.2.18 Dredging Standard Section

(b) Dredging Centerline
The dredge centerline follows the river centerline. A smooth alignment is
designed to reduce flow resistance.
(c) Calculation of Volume
The calculation is based on the cross sections taken at 50 m interval.
The volume increased by 260,000m3 compared to that of 2002. This is attributed
to new silt deposition, which has significantly increased the depth beyond an
average of 1.0~1.5m
Pure Soil Volume = about 872,000m3
(This volume is a value extruded the reduction of volume around bridges.)
(2) Backfill Site

Dredging soil is carried to the premix site via the landing jetty, and is treated and
distributed over the backfill site.
・ Classification of soil: dredged soil after stabilization treatment in backfill
site
・ Required disposal capacity: about 872,000m3. An average embankment
height is about 2.10m.
・ Site area : 450,000m2 (45.0ha) is available: east side 29.1ha and west side
15.9ha.
・ Site condition: low-lying grassland
・ Maximum embankment height of dredged material is decided to 3.0m by
circle slide method.
(b) Arrangement Plan

The backfill site has the following facilities: settling basins, drainage facilities,
observation-wells, etc.
(c) Drainage Facilities
External drainage is provided along the outer circumference, and internal
drainage along the existing outer drainage channels.
External drainage collects water from outside the backfill site and conveys it to
the drainage canal leading to the existing Pumping Station.
4.56
Internal drainage collects water due to rainfall over the backfill site and conveys
it to the external drainage line. RC pipes with a diameter of 910mm are installed
to convey the discharge.
An existing drainage canal beside the backfill site shall serve as the main
channel to convey the runoff. River bed level is 10.00m―LWL of this channel is
10.50m― Management Water Level (MWL) is 11.70m―and HWL is 12.00m.
Therefore main drainage pipes are designed at the height over these MWL:
11.70m or HWL:12.00m.
Gradients of land are almost 1/1000, therefore, design gradients for most of
drainage pipes and channels have to follow this gradient.
(d) Rainfall Intensity and Design Rainfall
Discharge
10-year rainfall intensity is adopted for the calculation of drainage facilities.
On inner side of the backfill site, Bricks Experimental Formula for obtaining QR
is to be selected for very flat area like reclamation area.
QR : Design Rainfall Discharge (m3/sec)
QR = R・C・A・6√(S/A) (Bricks Experimental Formula)
Where;
t : time of concentration (60minutes is selected because of flat area)
R : Rainfall Intensity in 10 years
r = 1474.2 / (t0.65 +4.02) = 1474.2 / (600.65 +4.02) =80.4mm/hr
R = (80.4 mm/hr) = 0.223 (m3/sec・ha)
S : Grand Gradient (S/1000=1/1000)
However, on the outer side of the backfill site, Standard Rational Formula is
adopted for drainage facilities. Areas that affect outer canal assumed to be about
100m from the canal.
QR : Design Rainfall Discharge (m3/sec)
QR = R・C・A (Standard Rational Formula)
(e) Size of Canal and Number of Pipe
After the above-mentioned study, dimensions of the designed canals and pipes
are shown in Table R 4.2.27 and Table R 4.2.29.
4.57
Table R 4.2.28 Discharge of Canal

Design Discharge
Case Area (ha) Discharge Section of Canal of Canal
(m3/s) (m3/s)
Case 1 28.65
2.19 2.46
East Canal I=1/1000
Case 2 15.64
1.32 1.54
West Canal I=1/1000
Case 3 7.00
1.09 1.19
Outer Canal I=1/1000
Table R 4.2.29 Number of Pipe

Discharge
Design Diameter
per One Adopted
Case Area (ha) Discharge of Pipe Number
Pipe Number
(m3/s) (m)
(m3/s)
Case 1
28.65 2.19 0.91 1.49 1.47 2
Outlet 1
Case 2
15.64 1.32 0.91 1.49 0.89 1
Outlet 2
Case 3
7.00 1.09 0.91 1.49 0.73 1
Outlet 3,4
4.58
4.2.3 Drainage Facilities

4.2.3.1 General
As shown in Figure R 4.2.19, the main components of the drainage outlet consist of U-ditch,
collector pipe, manhole and sluiceway. Flap gate is provided at the downstream end of the
sluiceway to prevent backflow against design flood.
The quantities and dimensions of proposed drainage facilities are summarized in Table R
4.2.30.
Table R 4.2.30 Summary of Drainage Facilities for Lower Marikina River

Proposed Facilities Quantity Dimension
Sluiceway/Outlet 9 locations 1.0m x 1.0m ~ 2.0m x 1.6m
Manhole 54 locations Varying dimensions
Collector Pipe Length= 680 m 910 mm,1070mm
Box culvert Length= 400 m W0.8m x H0.8m ~ W1.8m x H1.5m
U-ditch Length= 1700m W0.3m x H0.3m ~ W1.2m x H1.2m
Flap Gate 10 units 1.0m x 1.0m ~ 2.0m x 1.6m
Figure R 4.2.19 Components of the Drainage Outlet in Lower Marikina River
4.2.3.2 Detailed Design of Drainage Facilities

(1) U-Ditch
U-ditch is designed to accommodate runoff from the dike surface. It is also
constructed at the downstream end/edge of a sub-catchment where there is no
existing surface drain to collect the discharge and direct the flow to the nearest
manhole.
(2) Collector Pipe and Box Culvert
In order to reduce the number of sluiceway, collector pipe and box culvert would be
installed similar to that of the Pasig River.
4.59
In Section II, there are also instances where several existing parallel pipes spaced at
about 6m are used to drain the catchment. Providing a series of manholes to connect
these drain pipes perpendicular to the collector conduit would be costly and the
construction procedure is difficult. Instead, it is deemed that the collector conduit
would be constructed as a box culvert such that all the existing drain pipes are
punched through the wall of the culvert for ease of construction.
(3) Manhole
At the connection point of pipes and outlets, manholes would be installed. The detail
of manhole is already mentioned in Sub-section 4.1.3 .For Lower Marikina River,
the same concept is applied.
(a) Structural Calculation of Manhole
The design conditions are shown in Table R 4.2.31. The determined dimension
based on the results of structural calculation is shown in Table 4.2.3. Details of
structural calculations are shown in Vol. III-2.
Table R 4.2.31 Design Condition of Manhole
3
Concrete Reinforced 24.0 kN/m
Weight
Unit
Material

Water 9.8 kN/m3
Soil Condition
Quality of Soil
18.0 kN/m3
Unit Weight
Damped and Wet Condition

[Inside water level in rear side]
Bottom Elevation of Manhole
[Outside water level]
Water Level Condition
Ground Level – 0.9m*
* The minimum difference between GWL
and Ground level (MSR-3, BHLM-25)
Surcharge on the Ground 10 kN/m2
T-2 *
Live load on Top Slab * Passenger vehicle and small truck which
weighs less than 2 t is assumed
(4) Sluiceway
The size of the sluiceway conduit is based on the expected runoff of the catchment.
However, a minimum dimension of 1.0m x 1.0m is adopted if the calculated size
based on the expected runoff is less than 1.0m x 1.0m for maintenance
considerations.
In the case of Lower Marikina River, the dimension of box culvert is more than 1.0m
x 1.0m. FRP flapgate which is more than 1.0m x 1.0m doesn’t have enough
marketability. Sluiceways should not become weak point of dikes and the gates
require enough water tightness and durability as sluiceway structure. Hence,
aluminum flapgate is adopted for the Lower Marikina River.
4.60
4.2.3.3 Detailed Design of Sluiceway

(1) Location of Sluiceway
Sluiceways are preferably located at straight alignments, with due consideration to
ground level, land use and the presence of existing pipes. Other criteria and
considerations are shown in Table R 4.2.32.
In this detailed design stage, the stretch length of dike is changed. Sluiceway No.
MSR1, which was tentatively considered during the Basic Design Stage, is found to
be unnecessary.
Table R 4.2.32 Locations of New Sluiceways and Outlets
Sluiceway Location
Verification
Number /Station
MSL-1 1+104 ・ The Existing pipe elevation is lower than the others.
・ The culvert is a main drainage line with existing
dimension of W1.5×H1.4, which is larger than the
other existing outlets.
MSL-2 1+323
・ New outlet location keeps enough distance from
existing structure, which is the wall of Rizal high
school.
・ The ground level is lower than the other location in the
MSL-3 Left 3+945
area.
Bank ・ The existing pipe elevation is lower than the others.
・ The existing pipe is larger than the others.
MSL-4 4+221
・ New outlet location keeps enough distance from the
pier of Rosario Bridge.
・ The existing pipe comes from a factory, and the
MSL-5 4+406
dimension is as large as nearly 1.0m.
・ The existing culvert is a main drainage line with
MSL-6 4+503 dimension of W1.1×H0.9, which is larger than the
others.
MSR-1 - ・ Not necessary
MSR-2 3+157 ・ The existing pipe elevation is lower than the others.
・ The existing pipe elevation is lower than the others.
・ The culvert is a main drainage line with existing
MSR-3 Right 3+255 dimension of 1.6m.
Bank ・ New outlet location keeps enough distance from the
pier of Alfonso Sandoval Bridge.
・ The ground level is almost same in this area.
MSR-4 3+438 ・ This sluiceway will be located around the center of
this area
(2) Elevation of Sluiceway and Outlet

The elevation of the sluiceway and outlet is determined to minimize height of breast
wall and excavation volume based on the following condition.
Existing pipe elevation
The elevation of the new sluiceway and outlet should be lower than the outlet of
existing pipes to be able to completely drain the area.
4.61
Mean water level

Under normal condition, the elevation of the sluiceway outlet should be higher than
the Mean Water level.
Mean water level is assumed from MWL at 0.0km in Lower Marikina River and
slope of HWL in Lower Marikina River. MWL at 0.0km in Lower Marikina River (at
its confluence with the Pasig River) is assumed at EL 10.600.
The elevations of the sluiceways are shown in Table R 4.2.33.
Table R 4.2.33 Proposed Elevation of Sluiceways
Verification, E.L.m
Sluiceway Proposed Mean Elevation Based
Location/Station Existing
Number Elevation, m Water on Ground Height
Elevation 1/
Level
MSL-1 1+104 10.800 10.723 11.020 10.800
MSL-2 1+323 11.200 10.748 11.340 11.500
MSL-3 Left 3+945 11.100 11.038 12.030 11.100
MSL-4 Bank 4+221 11.190 11.070 12.030 11.190
MSL-5 4+406 11.230 11.090 13.510 11.230
MSL-6 4+503 11.200 11.100 11.600 11.200
MSR-2 3+157 11.060 10.951 11.720 11.000
Right
MSR-3 3+255 10.970 10.962 10.970 10.700
Bank
MSR-4 3+438 11.090 10.982 13.020 10.500
1/
Considers 0.5m height of Breast wall above the box culvert
Note: Bold type means the value mainly considered at each site.
(3) Determination of the Dimension of Box Culvert

The dimensions of box culverts, which satisfy the design discharges, are shown in
Table R 4.2.34. The dimension is determined based on varied flow calculation. The
calculation results are shown in Vol. III-2.
Table R 4.2.34 Proposed Dimension of Sluiceways
Design Dimension of Proposed
Sluiceway
Location/Station Discharge Existing Outlet Dimension
Number
(m3/sec) (m) (m x m)
MSL-1 1+104 4.52 W2.00 x H0.55 1.4 x 1.4
MSL-2 1+323 5.72 W1.50 x H1.40 1.5 x 1.5
MSL-3 Left 3+945 6.25 φ 0.45 2 x 1.2 x 1.2
MSL-4 Bank 4+221 7.27 W1.80 x H1.50 1.6 x 1.6
MSL-5 4+406 0.97 φ 0.90 1.0 x 1.0
MSL-6 4+503 3.27 φ 0.80 1.2 x 1.2
MSR-2 3+157 4.70 φ 0.45 1.4 x 1.4
Right
MSR-3 3+255 9.24 φ 1.60 2.0 x 1.6
Bank
MSR-4 3+438 4.80 No pipe 1.5 x 1.5
(4) Ground Settlement

The sluiceway should allow the effect of ground settlement; hence, the use of the box
section should consider the effect of ground settlement. The residual settlement of
the ground is the arithmetic summation of immediate settlement and consolidation
4.62
settlement. It is the distribution of the residual settlement that must be considered

after installing the box culvert on the base level.
(a) Considering Pre-load Effect
Based on the construction plan, the dikes would be constructed first. The dikes
will then be excavated temporarily for the construction of the sluiceways. The
embankment work will proceed in parallel with the revetment work. It would
take more than three months to complete the embankment work in every stretch
of dike. Considering these conditions, the ground will undergo the pre-load
effect. Duration of embankment works for considering pre-load effect is shown
in Table R 4.2.35.
Table R 4.2.35 Duration of Embankment Works
Section Bank Location Days
Section I Left Sta. LM 0+921~Sta. LM 1+338 95 days
Section II Right Sta. LM 3+033~Sta. LM 3+621 105 days
Section II Left Sta. LM 3+899~ Sta. LM 4+679 105 days
Regarding cohesive soil, pre-load effect should be considered with enhancing
the modulus of deformation of ground. And consolidation settlement during the
embankment work should be deducted from the total settlement.
(b) Immediate settlement
Immediate settlement is calculated with the aid of the following formula, on the
assumption that the ground is elastic.
n 1
3a i qi ai 0.75 x x x x
Sx = log sin tan 1.0 1+ log 1 + + 1 log 1
i=1 Em π H π ai ai ai ai
Where,
S = Immediate Settlement on xi , m
qi = Load of Embankment, tf/m2 or kN/m2
Em = Modulus of Deformation of the ground, tf/m2 or kN/m2
2ai = Load width, m
H = Depth for considering the effect of immediate settlement, m
n = Number of uniform load
x = Distance from the center of the ach uniform load, m
Location for Calculation
Figure R 4.2.20 Calculation Model for Immediate Settlement
4.63
B 2h n tanθ L
log
L 2h n tanθ B
Em= n
1 B 2h i tanθ L 2h i 1 tanθ
log
i 1 Emi L 2h i tanθ B 2h i 1 tanθ
Where,
Em = Converted modulus of deformation of the ground, in B L considering
several layers, kgf/cm2 or kN/m2
B = Load width, m
L = Load Length, m
hn = Depth for considering the effect, more than 3 times of load width, m
hi = Depth to the bottom of each layer, m
Emi = Modulus of deformation of the ground of the layer i, kgf/cm2 or kN/m2
θ = Angle of load distribution, θ = 30°
h1 E1
h2
hn Em
E2
En
(a) Conditon of Each layers (b) Condition of

Converted Layer
Figure R 4.2.21 Converted Modulus of Deformation in Case of Each Layer Having

Different Depth
Table R 4.2.36 shows the maximum immediate settlement on each sluiceway.
Details of calculations are shown in Vol. III-2.
Table R 4.2.36 Immediate Settlement
Sluiceway Immediate Settlement
Location/Station Boring
Number (cm)
MSL-1 1+104 BHLM-02 4.9
MSL-2 1+323 BL-9 10.3
MSL-3 Left 3+945 BHLM-14 9.8
MSL-4 Bank 4+221 BMLM-09 12.4
MSL-5 4+406 BHLM-17 5.2
MSL-6 4+503 BHLM-10 9.8
MSR-2 3+157 BMLM-24 10.5
Right
MSR-3 3+255 BHLM-25 10.2
Bank
MSR-4 3+438 BMRW-8 12.8
(c) Consolidation Settlement

Consolidation settlement is calculated wherein the vertical stress in the ground is
increased by the weight of the embankment and is the summation of the
settlement of each silt layer.
4.64
In case that the boring, which is used in the calculation model, has no previous
consolidation test data, the test data near this boring would be applied in this
study.
Table R 4.2.37 shows the maximum consolidation settlement of each sluiceway.
Details of calculations are shown in Vol. III-2.
Table R 4.2.37 Consolidation Settlement
Sluiceway Borehole Consolidation Settlement
Location/Station
No. Number (cm)
MSL-1 1+104 BHLM-02 3.7
MSL-2 1+323 BL-9 1.0
MSL-3 Left 3+945 BHLM-14 6.0
MSL-4 Bank 4+221 BMLM-09 0.8
MSL-5 4+406 BHLM-17 2.6
MSL-6 4+503 BHLM-10 4.0
MSR-2 3+157 BMLM-24 4.6
Right
MSR-3 3+255 BHLM-25 8.8
Bank
MSR-4 3+438 BMRW-8 9.3
(d) Residual Settlement

Residual settlement is the summation of immediate and consolidation settlement.
The allowable amount of residual settlement should not be greater than 30cm
without considering the camber of the embankment. Table R 4.2.38 shows the
maximum residual settlement on each sluiceway.
Table R 4.2.38 Residual Settlement
Sluiceway Location Borehole Residual Settlement
No. /Station Number (cm)
MSL-1 1+104 BHLM-02 8.6
MSL-2 1+323 BL-9 11.3
MSL-3 Left 3+945 BHLM-14 15.8
MSL-4 Bank 4+221 BMLM-09 13.2
MSL-5 4+406 BHLM-17 7.80
MSL-6 4+503 BHLM-10 13.8
MSR-2 3+157 BMLM-24 15.1
Right
MSR-3 3+255 BHLM-25 19.0
Bank
MSR-4 3+438 BMRW-8 22.1
From the above results, the residual settlement does not exceed 30cm. Therefore
any countermeasure against ground deformation is not required. Since the
residual settlement exceeds 5cm, the sluiceway design must be such that it
follows the deformation of the ground.
(5) Structural Details
(a) Sealing Works
Sealing works is essential to avoid the adverse effect of piping and migration of
soil particles.
4.65
(i) Horizontal Direction

The proposed dikes are supported by SSP. The SSP also acts as horizontal
seepage cutoff wall. For the horizontal direction, enough length of path
against percolation could also be developed. Therefore the horizontal
length of SSP should be determined by excavation line.
(ii) Vertical Direction
Regarding the vertical direction of seepage, the required creep length is
distributed by the steel sheet piles which are installed at the wing wall,
breast wall and See page cut off wall.
In this project, the length of SSP for sealing is decided considering the
following:
・ When there is a thin layer of clayey soil under the subgrade and sandy soil
layer is below the clayey soil, seepage would flow through the porous
sandy soil layer. Sealing would not be effective.
・ When there are alternate layers of sandy and clayey soil and SSP is driven
down to deep clayey soil layer (Ac2), sealing would be most effective.
The required length is calculated based on Lane’s Creep Theory as
expressed by the following formula:.
H /3 V
C
ΔH
Where:
C : Creep Ratio (Table R 4.2.39)
H = Horizontal path length of percolation of main body and wing
wall(m)
V = Vertical path length of percolation of sheet pile for sealing (m)
ΔH = Hydraulic head or the difference between headwater and
tailwater (m)
Water level condition is shown in Table R 4.2.40. At HWL, the time
difference in water level on the landside and the sluiceway is small. Hence,
full flow on the sluiceway is always assumed.
Table R 4.2.39 Creep Ratio
Material Ratio1/
very fine sand or silt 8.5
fine sand 7.0
medium sand 6.0
coarse sand 5.0
fine gravel 4.0
medium gravel 3.5
coarse gravel including cobbles 3.0
boulders with some cobbles and grave 2.5
soft clay 3.0
medium clay 2.0
hard clay 1.8
very hard clay or hardpan 1.6
1/
"Design of Small Dams", US Bureau of Reclamation (USBR), 1974, p.341
4.66
Path Length of Percolation

Ordinary in Vertical Direction
water level
Figure R 4.2.22 Path of Percolation in Sluiceway

Table R 4.2.40 Water Level Condition
River Side Land side
Water Level HWL Full Flow of Sluiceway
The length of each SSP based on calculation is shown in Table R 4.2.41.

Creep distance at each SSP and verification of SSP length is shown in
Table 4.2.4 and Figure 4.2.4.
Table R 4.2.41 Length of SSP Cut off wall
Length of SSP (m)
Sluiceway
Breast Wall Seepage Cut Breast Wall Remarks
No. Wing Wall
in River Side 1/ Off Wall in Land Side
MSL1 2.00 6.10 2.00 5.50
MSL2 2.00 4.00 2.00 2.00
MSL3 2.00 7.05 2.00 7.00
MSL4 2.00 7.14 2.00 7.50
MSL5 2.00 6.68 2.00 6.50
MSL6 2.00 6.65 2.00 4.50
MSR2 2.00 6.56 2.00 6.00
MSR3 2.00 6.52 2.00 6.50
MSR4 8.20 6.59 2.00 2.00
1/
SSP of Breast wall in the river side is made by cutting the SSP for revetment,
hence, the length is from underside of bottom slab to bottom edge of SSP
(b) Flexible Joint and SSP with Flexible Joint

In order to make sluiceway to allow for the effect of ground settlement, flexible
joint and SSP with Flexible Joint are applied.
(i) Flexible Joint
Flexible joint should be installed at the following location.
・ Between box culvert and wing wall
・ Between box culvert and manhole
Capability of joint for settlement and expansion is 100mm based on the
results of structural calculation. Detailed structural calculations are shown
in Vol. III-2.
4.67
(ii) SSP with Flexible Joint

In order to allow for the difference of the settlement between sluiceway
location and the dike around sluiceway, SSP with Flexible Joint should be
installed. Based on the difference of settlement, capability of SSP with
flexible joint which is shown in Table R 4.2.42 should be applied. Detailed
calculations are shown in Vol. III-2.
Table R 4.2.42 Capability of SSP with flexible joint
Breast Wall Seepage Cut Breast Wall
Sluiceway
in River Side Off Wall in Land Side Remarks
No.
(mm) (mm) (mm)
MSL1 100 100 100
MSL2 100 100 100
MSL3 100 100 100
MSL4 200 200 200
MSL5 100 100 100
MSL6 100 100 100
MSR2 100 200 100
MSR3 100 200 100
MSR4 200 200 200
Note: Capability of SSP with flexible joint is the difference of settlement.
(c) Box Culvert

The design conditions are shown in Table R 4.2.43.
Table R 4.2.43 Design Condition of Box Culvert

Concrete Reinforced 24.0 kN/m3
Unit Weight

Material

Water 9.8 kN/m3
Quality of Soil
Condition
Damped and Wet Condition 18.0 kN/m3

Weight
Unit

Soil

Normal: 10 kN/m2
Surcharge on the Ground
Seismic 5 kN/m2 1
Live load on Top Slab T-25
1/
Seismic Condition is Considered only in calculation of longitudinal direction.
The dimensions based on the results of structural calculation are shown in
Table 4.2.5. Detailed structural calculations are shown in Vol. III-2.
4.68
(d) Breast Wall

The Breast wall should be considered as cantilever with the end fixed on the
box culvert. The design conditions are shown in Table R 4.2.44. And the
detail of calculation is indicated in Vol.III-2. Material unit weight and soil
conditions of backfill are the same as previous assumptions, hence, they are
omitted.
Table R 4.2.44 Design Condition of Breast Wall
[Water Level in Front]
<Normal Condition>
Low Water Level
<Seismic Condition>
Low Water Level
Water Level Condition [ Water Level in Back Side]
<Normal Condition>
RWL = LWL + 2/3(HWL – LWL)
<Seismic Condition>
Ordinal Water Level
Higher level of MWL or Ground Water Level in Bore hole
<Normal Condition>
10 kN/m2
<Seismic Condition>
5 kN/m2

(e) Wing Wall
The design conditions are shown in Table R 4.2.45. Material unit weight
and soil conditions of backfill are same as previous assumptions, hence,
they are omitted.
Table R 4.2.45 Design Condition of Wing Wall
[Outside water Level]
<Normal Condition>
Residual Water Level
<Seismic Condition>
Ordinal Water Level
Water Level Condition Higher level of MWL or Ground Water Level in Bore hole
[Inside Water Level]
<Normal Condition>
Low Water Level
<Seismic Condition>
Low Water Level
<Normal Condition>
10 kN/m2
<Seismic Condition>
5 kN/m2
4.69

4.70
CHAPTER 5 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL

CONSIDERATIONS
5.1 EIA Study for the Backfill Site

5.1.1 Purpose and Background
In June 1998, an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) was prepared to apply for the
Environmental Compliance Certificate (ECC) for the PMRCIP, which was issued in
December 1998 with the condition that another ECC shall be secured for the Backfill Site
for dredged material. The validity of the ECC was confirmed by the Department of
Environment and Natural Resources – Environmental Management Bureau
(DENR-EMB) on March 7, 2008, before the Phase II project commenced construction.
However, to confirm and address the gap coming from the additional requirements of the
JICA Guidelines for Environmental and Social Considerations revised in April 2010, the
Supplemental EIS was conducted in 2011 by the Preparatory Study.
In this D/D Study, the EIA study has been implemented to acquire another ECC for the
Backfill Site with the construction components of the jetty area and the access road..
Application for applying ECC documents are submitted to DENR on December 2012.
ECC was issued on February 4, 2013.
5.1.2 Laws and Regulation

The process of EIA and the related organization are detailed in the Supplemental EIS
(2011) and are same as the current ones according to DENR.
The EIS was prepared in accordance with the Revised Procedural Manual of
Administrative Order 2003-30 (DAO 2003-30) of the DENR. DAO 2003-30 is the
Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) of Presidential Decree No. 1586 or the
Philippine Environmental Impact Statement System (PEISS).
The study was also guided by the relevant laws and regulations of the Philippines, and
relevant environmental policy issuances of the DENR, including the following:
・ DENR MC 2011-005 Incorporating Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) and Climate

Change Adaptation (CCA) concerns in the Philippine EIS System
・ DENR MC 2010- 14, Standardization of Requirements and Enhancement of Public
Participation In the Streamlined Implementation of the Philippine EIS System
・ DENR MC 2010-002, Clarification to DENR Memorandum Circular No. 2010-14
and other EIS System Policy Issuances
・ RA 8749, Philippine Clean Air Act of 1999, and its IRR
・ RA 9003, Ecological Solid Waste Management Act of 2000, and its IRR
・ RA 9275, Philippine Clean Water Act of 2003, and its IRR
・ RA 6969, Toxic Substances and Hazardous and Nuclear Wastes Control Act
・ RA 7972 and BP 220 on housing and subdivision development projects
・ PD 984, Pollution Control Law
・ PD 1067, Water Code of the Philippines of 1976
・ DOH AO 2007-012, Philippine National Standards for Drinking Water of 2007
・ DAO 1990-35, Revised Effluent Regulation of 1990
5.1
・ DAO 1990-34, Revised Water Usage and Classification/Water Quality

・ DAO 2003-27, Procedural and Reference Manual for Self-Monitoring Reports
・ DAO 2004-36, Revised Procedural Manual on Hazardous Waste Management
・ DAO 2007-01, Establishing the List of Threatened Species and their Categories, and
the List of other Wildlife
・ DAO 2007-24, Amending DAO 2007-01 Establishing the List of Threatened Species
and their Categories, and the List of other Wildlife
・ EMB MC 2010-004, Guidelines on the Use of ECA Map
・ Philippine Occupational Safety and Health Standards
・ DOLE DO 13, s. 1998, The Guidelines Governing Safety and Health in the
Construction Industry
5.1.3 The EIA Study Works

During this Study, DPWH has conducted EIA Study for the Backfill Site with support of
JICA Study Team. DPWH submitted the Project Description to DENR-EMB on
September 7, 2012. On September14, in order to decide the TOR of survey items, the
technical scoping of DENR was conducted at the EIA Review Committee whose
members composed of EIA experts outside of DENR. The outcome is attached in Table
5.1.1. Then the public scoping was held on September 25, where Taguig City officials,
Barangay leaders, and the concerned residents attended. The requests from the
participants and the responses by DPWH-PMO are summarized in Table 5.1.2. The TOR
of EIA Study was revised as requested during these two scoping meetings, which is
Table R 5.1.1 Revised TOR of EIA Study
Category Survey Items/Remarks Quantity
Installation of Groundwater 4 wells
Monitoring Wells
Groundwater Quality Survey ・ All the parameters listed in PD856 4 samples
Fresh Water Quality Survey ・ Color, Temperature, pH, DO, BOD, TSS, 3 samples
TDS, MBAS, Oil/Grease, Nitrate as N,
Phosphate as P, Phenol, Total Coliform,
Chloride as Cl, Copper, As, Cd, Cr6+, CN,
Pb, Total Hg, Organophosphate, Turbidity,
Salinity, EC
Terrestrial Survey ・ Flora 1 location
・ Fauna
Air Quality Survey ・ TSP, Pb, SOx, NOx 4 stations
Noise Survey ・ 4 stations
Traffic Survey ・ 1 location
Aquatic Biota ・ Phytoplankton 2 stations
・ Zooplankton
・ Macro Benthic organism
・ Nekton (Fish)
・ Aquatic Flora
Social Survey (Initial) ・ 1 location
Social Economy Survey ・ Census Tagging 100 respondents
Public Consultation ・ Feedback of EIA Study results 1 time
Acquisition of a ECA map 1 copy
Workshop for training DPWH staff ・ Regarding EMP and EMoP 1 event
Technical Scoping ・ Project briefing 1 for each
・ Site visit
5.2
Category Survey Items/Remarks Quantity

・ Technical scoping meeting
・ EIA review meeting
・ Scoping report
・ EIA Review Committee Funds
Public Scoping ・ For the people residing in the primary and 1 time
secondary impacted area
・ For land owners within the proposed
Backfill Site 1 time
Newspaper advertisement/public ・ Advertisements on both English and 3 consecutive
notices Tagalog newspapers weekends
EIA Report Preparation ・ Including EMB filing cost 1
The Backfill Site, indeed, composes of about 50 private lots. Thus, DENR required
DPWH to attach to the EIS the authorization of backfilling from all of the land owners
within the proposed Backfill Site. The percentage of authorization DPWH obtained is
about 62% although DPWH placed the advertisements on the newspapers three times for
the public notice. Furthermore, DPWH has been able to defiled with all of the land
owners.
DPWH submitted the draft EIS to DENR on December 6, requesting for the ECC with the
condition that DPWH shall obtain all the authorizations from the land owners before
commencing the Phase III construction work. The EIA Review Committee of DENR is
conducted on December 14. DPWH modified the EIS in accordance with the
recommendation of DENR. Finally ECC was issued by DENR on February 4, 2013.
The major findings of EIA Study are presented in the Table R 5.1.2. Based on the results
of EIA Study, EMP and EMoP are proposed. The proposed EMP and EMoP are shown in
Tables 5.1.3 and 5.1.4 respectively.
5.3
Table R 5.1.2 Key Findings of the Results of EIA Study.

Category Findings
Land ・ No endangered species were found within the site.
・ The official land use classification of this site is socialized housing zone.
・ The project site is either within or near three types of ECA: areas hard-hit by
natural calamities (project site), tourism area, and water bodies for domestic and
wildlife/fishery support (Laguna Lake) but is not a protected area.
・ Most of the lots within the project site are privately owned.
Soil ・ Clay materials underlie the ground surface down to depths of 10 to 11 meters.
Characteristics/ Particle sizes are fairly uniform.
Classification
Soil/Sediment ・ All the results of the leaching tests for both river sediment and soil of the Backfill
Quality Site were below the criteria.
Flooding and Flood ・ Low-lying areas of the Pasig-Marikina-Laguna Lake watershed are at high risk
from high water flows and river overbanking during heavy rains or typhoons. The
Project site belongs to the high risk areas.
Groundwater ・ The groundwater samples did not pass the PNSDW standards for color, odor,
Quality taste, aluminum, iron, manganese, TDS, and all the microbiological parameters;
E. Coli, HPC, and Fecal coliform.
・ The groundwater is not used for drinking in this area.
Surface Water ・ Both the canal and Labasan Creek are highly contaminated with organic wastes as
Quality manifested in the very low DO, high BOD and very high coliform bacteria.
・ Other parameters are within the guideline values of DAO 1990-34 for Class C
waters.
Aquatic biota ・ The most dominant species of aquatic plants in Napindan River and Labasan
Creek is water hyacinth.
・ The high density of Euglena, a green alga, in Labasan Creek suggests moderate to
high nutrient content or abundance of organic matter in the water.
・ There were no endangered aquatic species identified in the three sampling sites.
Air Quality ・ The concentrations of all the parameters measured-TSP, Lead, SO2, NO2- were
lower than the DENR standard.
Noise ・ Ambient noise levels around the project sites throughout the day are naturally
high and exceeded the NPCC allowable limits for residential and commercial
areas.
Demography ・ There are 25 households within the 45ha backfill site, 21 households were
covered by the survey; 4 households have no occupants at the time of survey.
・ At the time of survey, there were twenty-three households at the jetty site and the
area that will be occupied by the access road.
Economic ・ The 58 HH members residing in the 45-ha backfill site are economically active.
Activities Income sources include wholesale/retail trade, manufacturing,
community/social/personal services, agriculture, fishing and construction.
・ Of the residents at the jetty and access road sites, 85 are economically active.
Primary sources of income include community, social and personal services;
transport, storage and communication; construction, fishing, wholesale, retail
trade; construction; forestry and agriculture.
・ Monthly income ranges from PhP1,001 to PhP25,000.
Knowledge and ・ The residents of the 45-ha backfill site and jetty site are aware of the project and
Perception about they are willing to be temporarily relocated when the project starts. Should their
the Project houses be affected, they are willing to be paid compensation for the damages of
materials etc. If they are to be permanently relocated, they would still be
amenable, but a specific area should be designated as relocation site.
・ During the consultation with the market vendors, the group leader stated that with
relocation, their main source of livelihood will be affected. The respondents stated
that if possible, the relocation should be in the market area only. It will be difficult
for them to totally leave the place. As for fishing, they need to be near the river.
The market vendors are generally amenable with the relocation as long as they
continue their businesses.
5.4
5.2 Quality of Sediment to be Dredged

Dredging the whole stretch of Lower Marikina River is one component of Pasig-Marikina
River Channel Improvement Project (PMRCIP) Phase III. As part of the preparation for
its implementation and for the selection of proper site for disposal of the dredged
materials, the JICA Study Team has conducted sampling and analysis of the riverbed
sediments and surface water of the Lower Marikina River. The purpose of this survey was
to confirm in advance if the sediment is contaminated with toxic heavy metals as well as
toxic inorganic and organic substances before the Phase III construction work begins.
This is also to establish methodology on the proper disposal of the dredged/excavated
materials based on the results of the analysis. If the dredged/excavated materials are not
contaminated with toxic substances, then it would be safe to dispose them to any viable
site available. However, if the dredged/excavated materials are contaminated, then these
materials should be disposed in a sanitary landfill instead.
A proposed 45-hectare area located in Barangays Napindan and Ibayo-Tipas in Taguig
City was sighted as most economically viable site for the dredged materials in terms of
proximity and accessibility. The proposed site will be filled or backfilled with the
dredged materials to increase area elevation of up to 1 meter to 2 meters. In order to
establish baseline data of the existing soil quality of the proposed site, a soil quality
analysis was also conducted for soils within the 45-hectare property.
Leaching procedure such as TCLP (toxicity characteristic leaching procedure) test and
Elutriate test were conducted for the collected sediment and soil samples. The TCLP
extracts and Elutriate extracts were then analyzed for presence of toxic substances such as
heavy metals, cyanides, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB), and organophosphorus
pesticides (OPP). As the results of sediment analysis, all toxic substances were found
below the criteria. Therefore, riverbed sediments of Lower Marikina River are considered
safe and not hazardous.
5.2.2 Sampling Procedure

(1) Sediment Sampling
Sampling procedures for river sediment and river water are summarized in the
previous report, Basic Design II. For the chemical substances detected above the
standards, additional tests were conducted. The procedures will be documented in
the report on environmental and social consideration.
(2) Soil Sampling
Ten (10) soil samples were collected on August 23, 2012 from 10 identified
locations within the proposed backfill site with the use of a suitable soil auger or
hand auger and/or shovel. Soil sampling was carried out by taking composite
samples from 0 to 1-meter depth using soil auger. If a sampling station is watery
and it is impossible to use a soil augur, sampling was done by grabbing surface
soil using a shovel. The soil samples are then transferred into a pre-labelled
sample container and sealed tightly to ensure that no moisture leakage or
cross-contamination will occur. The samples were stored in coolers and sent to a
laboratory for analysis. Sample identification, location, depth, and other pertinent
data were recorded including map, drawing, etc.
5.5
The soil sampling locations with the geographic coordinates and sampling
descriptions are listed in Table R 5.2.1 below. The soil sampling locations is
shown in Figure 5.2.1.
Table R 5.2.1 Soil Sampling Type and Locations
Sampling Location/ Geographical Coordinates Type of Sampling Sampling Station
Stations Lat_WGS84 Long_WGS84 Description
Watery vacant lot near
Grab at surface using
Stn-1 14°31'53.2" 121°05'33.4" dump site of plastic
shovel
wastes
Composite soil sample Vacant lot with a
Stn-2 14°31'51.9" 121°05'44.0" of a fill material using backfilled soil of oily
scoop appearance
Composite soil sample
Stn-3 14°32'00.0" 121°05'42.4" from 0 to 1-meter depth Vacant lot
using an auger
Stn-4 14°32'03.3" 121°05'35.9" from 0 to 1-meter depth Ricefield
using an auger
using an auger
using an auger
Grab at surface using Watery vacant grassy
Stn-7 14°32'10.4" 121°05'39.8"
shovel lot
Stn-8 14°32'09.8" 121°05'38.7"
shovel lot
Stn-9 14°32'09.6" 121°05'41.6"
shovel lot
Grab at surface using Vacant lot at back of
Stn-10 14°32'02.6" 121°05'56.0"
shovel junkshop
5.6
5.2.3 Analytical Procedure

Analytical methodologies for this study include:
Leaching Test for Sediment: Elutriate Test and TCLP Test.
Analytical Methods of Water Quality
Sediment samples taken from 60 sampling stations were analyzed through Leaching test
by both Elutriate test and TCLP (Toxicity characteristic leaching procedure) test.
The Elutriate Test is an extraction method used to predict the potential release of
contaminants from sediment at the point of dredging the riverbed sediments; and at
confined disposal area, when the dredged material touches with water or rain. This was
originally developed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to simulate a situation that
occurs during the dredging operation by testing if the target parameters will be leached
out in the process. The test procedure includes sample preparation, sample
homogenization, sample sieving, quartering, shaking, moisture content determination,
filtration, digestion and analysis. The volume of elutriate sample needed for chemical
analyses will vary depending on the number and types of analyses to be conducted. For
this project, Elutriate Test covers the following parameters: Cadmium (Cd), Hexavalent
Chromium (Cr6+), Lead (Pb), Total Mercury (T-Hg), Arsenic (As), Free Cyanide (CN-),
Organophosphate Pesticides (OPP) and Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCB).
The TCLP Test, on the other hand, is an extraction method for chemical analysis that
simulates leaching in a landfill. It aims to determine if the waste to be disposed of is
characteristically hazardous or not, or whether these wastes need further treatment before
disposal. The extraction procedure is as shown in the USEPA Method for Evaluating
Solid Waste (SW-846) - Method 1311. TCLP comprises of four fundamental procedures:
sample preparation, sample leaching, preparation of leachate for analysis, and leachate
analysis. The parameters of leachate analysis include Cadmium (Cd), Total-Chromium
(T-Cr), Lead (Pb), Total Mercury (T-Hg), and Arsenic (As).
A summary list of parameters and the corresponding methods of analysis are listed in
Table R 5.2.2.
5.7
Table R 5.2.2 Parameters and Analytical Methodologies Applied

Sediment and Soil Quality Water
Parameters Analytical Method Analysis Quality
Elutriate Test TCLP Test Analysis
Arsenic (As), mg/L SDDC Spectrophotometer
Arsenic (As), mg/L Gaseous Hydride AAS
Cadmium (Cd), mg/L Flame AAS
Lead (Pb), mg/L Flame AAS
Mercury (Hg-total), mg/L Manual Cold Vapor AAS
Copper (Cu), mg/L Flame AAS
Cyanide (CN-free), mg/L Ion Selective Electrode
Hexavalent Chromium Diphenylcarbazide
(Cr6+), mg/L Colorimetric Method
Chromium (T-Cr), mg/L Flame AAS
Polychlorinated Biphenyls
EPA 8082A
(PCB), µg/L
Organophosphate Pesticides,
EPA 8141
µg/L
Total Coliforms, MPN/100 Multiple Tube Fermentation
mL Technique
pH (on site) Electrometric Method
Temperature (on site), °C Laboratory and Field Method
Color (apparent), PCU Visual Comparison
Turbidity, NTU Nephelometric
Conductivity, µS/cm Conductimetry
Dissolved Oxygen (onsite),
Membrane Electrode Method
mg/L
Biological Oxygen Demand,
Azide Modification Winkler
mg/L
Total Dissolved Solids,
Gravimetry
mg/L
Colorimetry - Chloroform
MBAS (Surfactants), mg/L
Extraction
Chloroform Extraction -
Phenols, mg/L
Colorimetry
Total Suspended Solids,
Gravimetry
mg/L
Oil and Grease, mg/L Petroleum Ether Extraction
Chloride, mg/L Argentometric Method
Cyanide (free), mg/L Ion Selective Electrode
Nitrate – N, mg/L Brucine
Phosphate – P, mg/L Stannous Chloride Method
Salinity as NaCl, mg/L Titrimetry by Calculation
Note: The symbol “/” means to be targeted substances for each category of analysis.
The soil samples from the disposal site will also be analyzed for leaching characteristics
by both Elutriate Test and TCLP Test. The parameters shall be the same as with the
sediment samples.
Particle Size Distribution Test (PSD) was also undertaken for the riverbed sediment
samples. The water content or percent moisture content shall be used for a calculation on
a dry basis.
Trial treatment of sediment samples with cement and lime has also been conducted to
determine which mixing ratio is the most effective to convert dredged muck/sediments
5.8
into suitable filling materials. For this purpose, the treated samples were again analyzed
by leaching tests to examine the effectiveness of cement/lime mixing treatment for
containing the contaminants after the material is disposed. It should be noted that even if
the quality of raw sediment is safe, the mixture might be contaminated due to the
contribution from cement/lime mixed. Also another purpose was to double check if the
analytical results are still below the criteria after the mixing treatment to stabilize
sediment physically.
As for water quality analysis, the water samples from Lower Marikina River were tested
for these parameters: Copper (Cu), Cadmium (Cd), Hexavalent Chromium (Cr6+), Lead
(Pb), Total Mercury (T-Hg), Free Cyanide (CN-), Arsenic (As), and Organophosphate
Pesticides (OPP), plus basic parameters including Color, Temperature, pH, Dissolved
Oxygen (DO), Biological Oxygen Demand (BOD), Total Suspended Solids (TSS), Total
Dissolved Solids (TDS), Surfactants, Oil/Grease, Nitrate as N, Phosphate as P, Phenol,
Total Coliforms, Chloride as Cl, Turbidity, Salinity, and Electrical Conductivity .
5.2.4 Results of River Sediment Quality Analyses and Evaluation of the

Investigations Results
The surveys intend to obtain information on the current pollution load. This is a factor
being considered in deciding on the appropriate methodology to be used in the proposed
riverbed sediment dredging and excavation works. The results of the first surveys
revealed that sediment is not contaminated with hazardous chemical substances for all the
parameters except for cyanide and chlorpyrifos. For cyanide and chlorpyrifos which
exceeded the standards, re-sampling, treatment with cement, and/or retesting was
conducted to confirm whether the detections were true or error. All the additional test
results showed below the standard. The details of the additional test results will be
summarized with the procedures in the report on environmental and social consideration.
According to PRRC, who leads the regular environmental monitoring activities for Pasig
River watershed including LOWER MARIKINA RIVER, it has the same understanding
for the water and sediment qualities. Additionally, MMDA says that the companies
located on the riversides conduct dredging of sediment on a regular basis. Thus, even if
contaminants accumulated with sediment in the past, the contaminated sediment was
already removed. The sediment sampled in the upstream of LOWER MARIKINA
RIVER is mostly sandy. Contaminants are much less likely to be adsorbed on sand.
Therefore, the detection of the contaminants in sediment taken in the upstream is
considered probably due to an analytical error.
Water depth and sediment height were measured during the sampling. Figure R 5.2.1
shows the results of water depth and sludge height measurement along Lower Marikina
River.
5.9
Figure R 5.2.1 Water Depth and Sludge Height Measurement along Lower
Marikina River
5.10
5.2.5 Results of Soil Quality Analyses and Evaluation of the Investigations Results
Similar to the riverbed sediments, the existing soil at the proposed backfill site was also
analyzed for heavy metal contamination as well as PCBs and OPPs through leaching tests,
Elutriate and TCLP. The purpose of the analyses is to establish baseline data at the
proposed disposal or backfill site of the dredged materials and to evaluate any toxic
characteristics at the proposed site.
5.2.5.1 Results of Soil Quality by Elutriate Test

The soil quality analysis of heavy metals, cyanide, hexavalent chromium, PCBs and
OPPs in the Elutriate extracts of the 10 soil samples were completed on September 21,
2012. The Elutriate test results were evaluated based on DAO 34 standards for Class C
freshwater. The results of the analysis are presented in the following Tables:
Table R 5.2.3 Results of Analysis for Inorganic Chemicals in Elutriate Extracts of
Soil Samples from the Backfill Site
Sampling As Cd Pb T-Hg CN- Cr6+
Sampling Type
Location (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L)
MDL* 0.01 0.01 0.04 0.0001 0.02 0.004
Class-C River3 0.05 0.01 0.05 0.002 0.05 0.05
Effluent to
0.2 0.05 0.3 0.005 0.2 0.1
Class-C inland4
S-1 Grab at surface ND ND ND ND ND ND
S-3 Deep at 1-m ND ND ND ND ND ND
Notes:
ND – not detected or below MDL
*MDL – Method Detection Limit
Source:
CRL Environmental Corporation (Results of Laboratory Analyses);
DAO 90-34 Water Quality Criteria;
DAO 90-35 Table 1 Effluent Standards (maximum limits for the protection of public health):
Discharge limit from new/proposed industry to Inland water (Class C).
5.11
Table R 5.2.4 Results of PCB Analysis in Elutriate Extracts of Soil Samples from
the Backfill Site
Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs), µg/L
Sampling
Aroclor Aroclor Aroclor Aroclor Aroclor Aroclor Aroclor Aroclor Aroclor
Location
1016 1221 1232 1242 1248 1254 1260 1262 1268
S-1 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND
MDL 0.5 1.0 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5
DLR 0.5 1.0 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5
Class-C
- - - - - - - - -
River3
Effluent to
0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003
Class-C4
Notes:
ND = Not Detected (below DLR for PCB)
MDL = Method Detection Limit
DLR = Detection Limits for Reporting (MDL x Dilution Factor)
Source:
1. CRL Environmental Corporation (Results of Laboratory Analyses);
2. DAO 90-34 Water Quality Criteria;
3. DAO 90-35 Table 1 Effluent Standards (maximum limits for the protection of public health): Discharge limit from
new/proposed industry to Inland water (Class C).
5.12
Table R 5.2.5 Results of OPP Analysis in Elutriate Extracts of Soil Samples from
the Backfill Site
Organophosphorus Pesticides (OPPs), µg/L
Bolstar (Solprofos)
Tetrachlorvinphos
Parathion, methyl
Azinphosmethyl
Sampling
Trichloronate
Fensulfothion
Chlorpyrifos
Coumaphos
Stations
Demeton-O
Mevinphos
Demeton-S
Dichlorvos
Tokuthion
Malathion
Disulfoton
Ethoprop
Diazinon
Fenthion
Merphos
Phorate
Ronnel
Naled
S-1 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND
Reporting
2.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Limit
Class-C
Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil
River3
Effluent to
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Class-C4
Notes:
ND = Not Detected
DLR = Detection Limits for Reporting (MDL x Dilution Factor)
Source:
2. DAO 90-34 Water Quality Criteria;
3. DAO 90-35 Table 1 Effluent Standards (maximum limits for the protection of public health): Discharge limit from
new/proposed industry to Inland water (Class C).
As the results of analysis, concentrations of arsenic, cadmium, lead, mercury, cyanide,

hexavalent chromium, PCBs, and OPPs in the elutriate extracts are not detected, or below
the method detection limit of the laboratory instrument used. Hence, the proposed
disposal or backfill site is free from the subject toxic contaminations analyzed.
5.2.5.2 Results of Soil Quality by TCLP Test

The TCLP extracts of the soil samples taken from the backfill site were analyzed for toxic
heavy metals such as arsenic, cadmium, lead, mercury, and chromium. The results of
analyses are presented in Table R 5.2.6. Results showed that the concentrations of these
contaminants are not detected or below the standards. This means that the existing
backfill site is free from toxic contaminants and leaching of these contaminants from
existing soils may not occur.
5.13
Table R 5.2.6 Results of Analysis for Inorganic Chemicals in TCLP Extracts of Soil
Samples from the Backfill Site
Sampling As Cd Cr-total Pb Hg-total
Sampling Type
Location (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L)
MDL 0.001 0.01 0.03 0.04 0.0001
DAO2004-362 5 5 5 5 0.2
USEPA-TCLP
5 1 5 5 0.2
Regulatory3
S-1 Grab at surface 0.005 ND ND ND 0.003
S-2 Grab at surface 0.002 ND ND ND ND
S-3 Deep at 1-m 0.003 ND ND ND ND
Notes:
ND = Not Detected (below MDL / Reporting Limit/s)
Source:
2. DAO2004-36 - Procedural manual Title III of DAO 92-29 “Hazardous Wastes Management”;
3. US EPA.
5.2.6 Evaluation and Consideration of the Results for the Construction Phase
Throughout a series of tests of the riverbed sediments in Lower Marikina River and
confirmatory retest in some sampling stations, all concentrations of heavy metals and
other inorganic and organic toxic substances analyzed were generally not present in
concentrations that are considered harmful to humans. All the concentrations are less than
the regulatory levels set by the Government of the Philippines. This indicates that the
sediments along Lower Marikina River are not hazardous and no significant levels of
toxicity will occur in the river water during dredging. The sediment to be dredged from
this stretch of Lower Marikina River is also considered safe for the use for embankment
or for land reclamation purposes.
5.3 Tree Inventory Survey

The Philippine Government through the Department of Public Works and Highways
(DPWH) intends to implement the Phase III of the Pasig-Marikina River Channel
Improvement Project. Like in Phase II, the construction of different flood-control
structures along the riverbanks will unavoidably alter or destroy some of the existing
physical and natural features of the riverbanks which include trees and other crops. By
law, legitimate owner or claimant of the tree/s to be cut from a privately-owned land must
also be given due compensation. Further, the actual cutting of trees also requires some
amounts for their removal. Important tree species such as those belonging to the
classification of heritage tree, endangered, premium and or banned tree species shall in as
much as possible be spared from cutting. Tree Inventory Survey therefore is necessary in
5.14
order to get detailed data as basis for budget allocation and in order to comply with the
laws of the land in so far as removal/cutting of trees is concerned.
5.3.2 Laws and Regulations

Presidential Decree No. 953, dated 06 July 1976, authorizes among others the DENR to
issue a cutting permit for trees to be removed from the public areas like riverbanks for
public works. Pursuant to PD 953, DENR Secretary Jose L. Atienza, Jr., issued a
Memorandum dated 27 November 2009 attaching the “guidelines and procedures on the
planting, maintenance and removal of trees and other vegetation in urban areas and in
areas affected by government infrastructure projects”. It provides the following
conditions:
(1) cutting of trees or other vegetation may be allowed in public and private places that
shall be unavoidably affected by infrastructure projects such as construction or
widening of roads and bridges, port areas, building construction, etc”,
(2) when the place or area where trees shall be cut is along the banks or rivers and
creeks, the issuing authority for a cutting permit is the concerned DENR Regional
Executive Director,
(3) requires that for every tree cut, there would be a need to replace the same with
some seedlings ranging from 10-50 pieces per tree depending upon its diameter,
and
(4) all cut trees and parts thereof cut from public places for public works shall be
turned over to the nearest DENR Office for disposition provided however that
trees cut from private places shall belong to the land owner.
Executive Order No. 23 issued on 01 February 2011 by the current President of the
Republic of the Philippines Benigno S. Aquino, III declares a moratorium on the cutting
and harvesting of timber in natural and residual forests and creating the Anti-Illegal Task
Force. Section 2, item 2.2 states that “the DENR is likewise prohibited from issuing
/renewing tree cutting permit in all natural and residual forests nationwide, except for
clearing of road right of way by the DPWH”. It also emphasizes that all logs derived from
such cutting permits shall be turned over to the DENR for proper disposal.
On 30 April 2012, the DENR issued a Memorandum No. 196 suspending the processing
of all requests for cutting permits. On 22 June 2012, the DENR issued another
Memorandum clarifying the content of Memorandum 196, among others, the cutting
permits not covered by suspension are those:
(1) Naturally growing trees within the private/titled property;
(2) Planted trees within public forest/timberland and private lands; and
(3) Tree cutting activities covered by exemptions provided in the Memorandum from
Secretary dated 20 October 2012 regarding “similar activities” of Section No. 2,
item 2.2 of EO 23.
The same Memorandum states that all requests for tree cutting permits referred to item B
include :
(1) appropriate justifications that tree cutting can no longer be avoided, and
(2) possible options to minimize the impact/damage to the environment.
It also stated that the request shall be processed at the field/regional offices and shall be
properly endorsed by concerned regional Executive Director to the Office of the
Secretary through the Forest Management Bureau.
5.15
5.3.3 Methodology
One (1) Tree Inventory Survey Team was organized composed of a forester,
surveyor/atuoCAD operator, recorder, and a laborer. As a rule, through a pre-arranged
meetings, the Team made a prior coordination with different agencies/offices such that of
the concerned LGUs, DENR and DPWH. Collection of available documents such as rules
and regulations including written procedures/guidelines related to the inventory and/or
cutting of trees has been conducted.
In the absence of any existing written guidelines, the JICA study Team came up with its
own procedure by incorporating important information/conditions gathered from the
LGUs and DENR. Among others, the procedure provides that the inventory of trees shall
be done only in areas along the riverbanks with an approved structural alignments and
only after proper marking of the alignments including ROW and working space, and if
possible seek a representative from the LGUs to join in the actual conduct of tree
inventory. Trees and other crops has to be identified, recorded and marked with paint. The
survey team shall submit detailed tally sheets indicating the designated reference number
of trees, species, diameter in cm, height in meter, specific location and claimant, and the
estimated required cost.
5.3.4 Tree Inventory Survey

The conduct of tree inventory survey and the preparation and tabulation of the required
reports were completed in two (2) months. It started in September 26, 2012 and by
November 26, 2012, the tabulated reports have been signed/approved by the DENR and
DPWH. Preparation and submission however of the Narrative reports including various
supporting documents is done by the 2nd week of December 2012. Outlined below is the
summary status of the Tree Inventory Survey:
(1) Location
Within the area which may be affected by the construction works of flood-
control engineering structures as part of the Pasig-Marikina River Channel
Improvement Project, Phase III.
Manila City - Brgy. Nos. 306, 384, 647, 650A, 663A, 644,636, 628,
836, 838, 621, 865, 888, 894, 897, 896, 900, 905, 903,
902, 201, & 899
Mandaluyong - Brgy. Mabini-Rizal, Namayan, Vergara, Barangka
Ibaba, Barangka Itaas, Barangka Ilaya & Buayang
Bato
Makati City - Brgy. Olympia, Valenzuela, Guadalupe Viejo,
Guadalupe Nuevo, Cembo & West Rembo
Pasig City - Brgy. Pineda, Bagong-Ilog, Kapasigan, Caniogan,
Ugong & Rosario
(2) Coordination
Coordinating the Tree Inventory Survey works through meetings with Manila
City, Mandaluyong City, Makati City & Pasig City were done on October 17,
September 24, September 19, and October 10, 2012, respectively. Coordination
5.16
meetings with the DENR-NCR-FMS were also conducted on September 21 and

October 11, 2012.
(3) LGU’s Representatives
・ Manila City - Juancho Capuchino/ Rod Legaspi/Jojo Montecillo
・ Makati City- Jun Petancio/Fernando Paraiso/Noel Casasola
・ Mandaluyong City- Jonathan Cruz
・ Pasig City - Teresita Francisco/Cristy Enriquez
(4) Trees Inventoried:

Table R 5.3.1 Trees/Crops Inventoried
Total Breakdown
No. Orna- Dead/
LGUs Trees^ Malung- Banana Papaya
(Trees/ mental Cut^^
(No.) gai (No.) (No.) (No.)
Crops) (No.) (No.)
Manila 544 541 5 0 0 8 0
Mandaluyong 43 43 0 0 0 0 0
Makati 443 344 57 7 13 11 11
Pasig 340 340 0 0 0 0 0
Grand Total 1,380 1,268 62 7 13 19 11
^: includes palms (coconut, other palms, bamboos);
^^: died/cut about a month after the conduct of inventory.
Of the 1,380 trees/other crops, only 1,268 pieces were identified to be subjected
for the replacement of seedlings in case cutting is to be push through. The rest
were included in the inventory as the same as found growing within the approved
structural alignments where there are individuals claiming to have actually
planted the trees. The Malunggai, a vegetable tree, and most of the ornamental
plants can be planted and grown easily through cuttings compared to most of the
trees which will require seedlings and careful tending.
5.3.5 Results and Discussion

Below is the table showing the dominant species counted.
5.17
Table R 5.3.2 Dominant Species

Manila Mandaluyong Makati Pasig Total
Top Species
No. % No. % No. % No. % No %
1. Balete 82 15% 6 14% 43 13% 29 9% 160 13%
2. Bo 7 1% 6 14% 16 5% 2 1% 31 2%
3. Ipil-Ipil 148 27% 7 16% 29 8% 18 5% 202 16%
4. Aratelis 32 6% 3 7% 30 9% 6 2% 71 6%
5. Narra 18 3% 0 0% 17 5% 3 1% 38 3%
6. Coconut 25 5% 2 5% 14 4% 63 19% 104 8%
7. Alagao 22 4% 0 0% 7 2% 1 0% 30 2%
8. Is-is 18 3% 0 0% 9 3% 0 0% 27 2%
9. Labnog 31 6% 0 0% 15 4% 3 1% 49 4%
10.Tuba-Tuba 18 3% 1 2% 3 1% 0 0% 22 2%
11. Neem 31 6% 2 5% 2 1% 2 1% 37 3%
12. Palm 28 5% 3 7% 0 0% 2 1% 33 3%
13. Kawayan 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 18 5% 18 1%
14. Mangga 5 1% 1 2% 8 2% 47 14% 61 5%
15. Bangkal 1 0% 0 0% 0 0% 53 16% 54 4%
16. Guyabano 1 0% 0 0% 2 1% 14 4% 17 1%
17. Mahogany 3 1% 0 0% 41 12% 6 2% 50 4%
13. Others^ 71 13% 12 28% 108 31% 73 21% 264 21%
Total 541 43 344 340 1,268
^: refer to the total of other species with low population
It is apparent that Balete tree, Ipil-Ipil and Aratelis are the dominant tree species found
naturally growing along the stretch of Pasig_Marikina River.
(1) Important Tree Species
Of all the tree species identified and marked, only Narra and Molave Trees belong
to the category of premium or banned species as listed by the DENR. There are 38
Narra and 2 Molave Trees in the area investigated.
(2) Cost to be allocated for Phase III
The overall cost including seedling and compensation to be needed during Phase
III was calculated. The seedling cost and compensation cost for tree cutting
estimated are PhP 2,030,500 and PhP1,678,231 respectively. Additionally, the
cutting work requires PhP170,690. As a result, the estimated overall cost to be
allocated for Phase III is PhP3,879,421.
The details of each are tabulated below.
Seedling cost for the replacement of cutting trees is summarized in the Table R
5.3.3.
Table R 5.3.3 Seedling Cost
No. of Cost
City No. of Trees^
Seedlings-Replacement (PhP)
Manila 541 14,070 878,000.00
Mandaluyong 43 1,210 82,000.00
Makati 344 8,360 443,500.00
Pasig 340 9,390 627,000.00
Total 1,268 33,030 2,030,500.00
5.18
Table R 5.3.4 presents the summary of compensation cost for trees.

Table R 5.3.4 Cost for Compensation for Trees
Private Lands Public Lands Total
LGUs/Cities No. of No. of Trees
Value (PhP) Value (PhP) Value (PhP)
Trees Trees (No.)
Manila 329 193,641.37 225 239,845.13 554 433,486.50
Mandaluyong 5 50,084.00 38 55,505.30 43 105,589.30
Makati 125 183,031.95 318 291,227.98 443 474,259.93
Pasig 242 428,625.37 98 236,269.90 340 664,895.27
Total 701 855,382.69 679 822,848.31 1,380 1,678,231.00
Table R 5.3.5 summarizes the overall cost for tree cutting to be allocated for
Phase III.
Table R 5.3.5 Summary of the Overall Cost of Tree Cutting needed for Phase III
Seedlings- Cost (PhP)
LGUs/City Replacement
Seedlings Cutting Compensation Total Cost (PhP)
(No.)
Manila 14,070 878,000.00 55,010.00 433,486.50 1,366,496.50
Mandaluyong 1,210 82,000.00 5,750.00 105,589.30 193,339.30
Makati 8,360 443,500.00 60,240.00 474,259.93 977,999.93
Pasig 9,390 627,000.00 49,690.00 664,895.27 1,341,585.27
Total 33,030 2,030,500.00 170,690.00 1,678,231.00 3,879,421.00
5.4 Promotion of Reducing Poverty and Consideration of Gender Aspects

The Phase III construction work may affect not a few residents, especially vulnerable
people such as the poor, residing along the river alignment and in the backfilling site
where the construction work is planned. When those poor people lose their lands, houses,
and/or livelihoods, they are likely placed in a severer situation than the other project
affected people.
In this regard, this section describes the governmental framework of anti-poverty
measures and also addresses the job opportunities and the job training program for their
livelihoods expected to be supported by the government.
5.4.2 Related Organizations and Laws and Regulations

5.4.2.1 Related Organizations
There are several governmental organizations addressing anti-poverty issue, which
include:
・ The Presidential Commission for the Urban Poor (PCUP)
・ National Anti-Poverty Commission (NAPC)
・ Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD)
5.19
On the other hand, LGUs implement the related policies and offer the support by
cooperation with the governmental organization such as DSWD.
5.4.2.2 The Presidential Commission for the Urban Poor

Executive Order No. 82 (1986) requires creating the PCUP and stipulates its functions
and responsibilities. Executive Order No. 111 (1986) directs all concerned governmental
agencies in cooperation with the PCUP to participate in tri-sectoral dialogues and
activities in response to the concerned of the urban poor. Executive Order No. 69 (2012)
was established to strengthen the Presidential Commission for the Urban Poor.
PCUP is the organization tackling urban poor matters in coordination with other agencies.
PCUP stipulates the clear vision, mission, and goals in accordance with 10-point
covenant of the President with the urban poor. The items of presidential covenant relative
to this project include:
・ No eviction without due process
・ Provide support for area upgrading and in city resettlement
・ Jobs
・ Post Ondoy rehabilitation programs
・ Participation and stakeholdership
The vision of PCUP is “to be a society where the poor are empowered, economically
productive and actively participating in the poverty reduction program and sustainable
development of the country.”
The mission is to undertake:
・ improved coordination and monitoring for the speedy implementation of
government programs and policies for the urban poor;
・ enhanced accreditation of legitimate urban poor organizations for purposes of
representation and policy formulation.
The seven goals of PCUP can be seen in its website.
5.4.2.3 National Anti-Poverty Commission

The National Anti-Poverty Commission (NAPC) was created by virtue of Republic Act
(RA) 8425, otherwise known as the "Social Reform and Poverty Alleviation Act," which
took effect in June 1998. RA 8425 institutionalizes the government's Social Reform
Agenda (SRA), which enjoins NAPC to strengthen and invigorate the partnerships
between the national government and the basic sectors.
NAPC published “National Anti-Poverty Program (2010-2016).” The centerpiece of this
program is “Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program (4Ps)” which is a human development
program of the national government that invests in the health and education of poor
households.
Pantawid Pamilya has dual objectives:
Social Assistance - to provide cash assistance to the poor to alleviate their immediate
need (short term poverty alleviation); and
5.20
Social Development - to break the intergenerational poverty cycle through

investments in human capital.
Pantawid Pamilya helps to fulfill the country’s commitment to meet the Millennium
Development Goals.
This program aims to construct a carefully designed framework maximizing the
convergence of economic programs and local initiatives.
The program thrusts related to this project are the following:
(1) Focus on the poorest of the poor
Anti-poverty interventions are focused towards expanding access of the poor to
basic social services, especially education, health and family planning services;
providing risk mitigation; and expanding social protection programs so poor
households can cope better with economic, social and natural disasters. These will
also entail the expansion of economic and social opportunities for the poor so they
can increase their incomes and build their assets.
(2) Focus on poorest areas
NAPC will focus on the poorest regions and provinces so that those who are
especially in need of public support can be provided with the mechanisms to
improve their lives. NAPC will incorporate projects that address the
vulnerabilities of the poor and marginalized, especially those affected by social
conflict and environmental disasters, into the anti-poverty programs.
(3) Environmental aspects of the anti-poverty strategy
Specific programs should be designed to reduce the impacts of environmental
changes on the poor, who suffer disproportionately from climate change.
JICA Study Team visited NAPC and interviewed Mr. Joseph M. Aquino, Senior
Technical Officer about the framework and policy of the anti-poverty issue. According to
him, NAPC organizes the technical working group (TWG) which is the
intergovernmental committee with several sub-working groups. NAPC also coordinates
stakeholders such as LGUs, representatives of basic sectors, NGO, and/or project
affected people. TWG summarized the activities into the report, which are planned to be
established as an Executive Order. One of the focused issues of TWG is to resettle the
people living near the riverside to safer location and to provide them with their houses,
because NAPC specifies riverside as high risk area of flooding for the poor.
5.4.3 Creating Job Opportunity and Offering Job Training during the Phase III
Construction Work
DPWH, the proponent of this project, has the policy (RA 6685) to preferentially employ
the project-affected people and/or the residents living near the planned project site, if they
have necessary skills for the position.
On the other hand, in order to understand the policy and the support of LGUs, the Study
Team visited Department of Social Welfare and Development of Taguig City where the
backfilling site is located. The Administrative officer has informed the study team that the
City offers a free training program for women in terms of livelihood and in partnership
with the Technical Education and Skills Development Authority (TESDA). The program
aims to train qualified women to run and manage simple micro-business with great
5.21
income. A free Starter Kit is provided (no CASH) to the participants to enable them to
start the business and augment their livelihood. Monitoring by DSWD is conducted to
check if the participants are succeeding or failing. Aside from that, the City also offers
free livelihood trainings to all interested and qualified residents of Taguig City also in
partnership with the Technical Education and Skills Development Authority (TESDA).
In terms of health services, the City has provided free medical and dental services, free
consultation with Medical Doctors, free medicines, and free wheelchairs and walking
sticks to disabled poor patients. In case that a patient cannot go to hospital, doctor’s home
visit service is provided by free. Furthermore, the variety types of scholarship programs
are also available to qualified students and residents of Taguig City. The Pantawid
Pamilyang Pilipino Program (4Ps) which is mandated by the National Government
through the DSWD is also implemented in the City.
5.4.4 Consideration of Gender Aspects in the Affected Area

Poor households headed by female, elderlies, and persons with physical disabilities are
likely to be affected the most by the implementation of projects. In particular, the loss of
present livelihood and income sources may cause severe economic displacement leading
to impoverishment of these particularly vulnerable groups.
The results of the socio-economic survey among potentially affected families of this
project showed that 12.6% of all the households are headed by women. Moreover, among
the female working population of the resettling PAPs, more than 65% have incomes
below the poverty threshold. The National Statistical Coordination Board (NSCB)
defines the “poor” as having a monthly income below Php7,017 for a family of five
(2009). This is the minimum amount necessary to meet basic needs including those for
food, housing, education and health. Special attention shall be given to restore the income
base and/or provide new livelihoods to these women after resettlement, in order to
prevent them from becoming more impoverished in the new place of residence.
It needs mentioning that the PMRCIP Phase III includes non-structural measures such as
the organization of the inter-agency Flood Mitigation Committee. The FMC will plan and
implement community-based Flood Warning System, Information Campaign and
Publicity (ICP), and other related flood hazard mitigation measures. Specific target
groups of such activities would include women and children.
5.5 Land Acquisition and Resettlement Action Plan

5.5.1 Agency Responsibility for Compensation and Resettlement
Makati City and Pasig City have on-going relocation activities for the informal settlers
living on the danger areas (10 m river easement) based on RA 7279 and in compliance
with the Supreme Court’s continuing mandamus to clean up Manila Bay. These
resettlement programs include the informal settlers living within the project’s work area
along the Pasig and Lower Marikina Rivers.
Pasig City, on July 5, 2011, and Makati City, on October 30, 2012, confirmed that these
LGUs shall undertake the resettlement and clearance of the work areas within their
jurisdiction before the commencement of the construction work, which is expected in
September 2013. Therefore, at the Inter Agency Meeting between DPWH, concerned
agencies and LGU as shown in Table R 5.5.1, it was decided that informal settlers in these
cities are not covered by the resettlement plan under this project. However, DPWH shall
5.22
compensate all affected formal settlers from the four (4) concerned LGU for their lost
assets. It shall also coordinate with the Manila LIAC, PRRC and NHA to resettle the
informal settlers from Manila.
There were no informal settlers residing on public land within the work areas in
Mandaluyong City.
Table R 5.5.1 Agency Responsibility for Compensation and Resettlement
LGUs Formal Settler Informal Settler
Manila DPWH Manila LIAC/PRRC/NHA/DPWH
Mandaluyong DPWH Not Applicable
Makati DPWH Makati
Pasig DPWH Pasig
5.5.2 Public Participation and Consultation, Stakeholder Participation

Prior to the commencement of the Census Tagging Survey, the Information Campaign
meetings regarding the benefit and process of the Phase III Project were held in the 6
barangays, and were attended by the barangay officials and all interested residents and
concerned parties.
Comments raised by the participants were mainly about the area to be affected by the
project, the timing of the commencement of the construction works and livelihood
assistance programs for the residents along the river, the request for the control of
dumping of wastes in the river, and the necessity of water level monitoring in the area
including the backfill area
DPWH answered that the construction works and the livelihood assistance program
would be started in 2013, and that DPWH, MMDA and concerned LGU will be made
member to solve any issues arise from the Project, including the water monitoring at the
outlet of the backfill site toward the Napindan river .
5.23
Table R 5.5.2 Public Consultations in 2012 for Project Introduction and

Resettlement
Barangay / Contents of
Comments from
No. Date No. of the Correspondences
Participants
Participants consultation
In the sustainability
activity of PMRCIP II
Project, we are
coordinating with LGU
and Barangay to organize
Brgy 900, What will be the sanction a group “The
894, Manila to those residents Pasigandahan River
1 Fri. Sep. 28
/ 41 clearing/throwing Patrol” volunteer to
participants Information garbage in the river. assist the LGU/Brgy. to
campaign stop the influx of
and publicity Informal Settlers
(ICP) about Families (ISF) and
the Project, prevent the throwing of
including the garbage to the river.
flood control This Project is for
Is San Juan River that
objectives Pasig-Marikina River
also causes flooding in
and the only. We understand that
Brgy 896, our area, included in the
possible there is separate project
897, Manila Project?
2 Wed. Oct. 10 activities for San Juan River.
/ 46
during the Will be confirmed when
participants How far from the dike,
operation the Detailed Design is
and are the areas to be
completed in December
maintenance affected by the project?
2012.
phase. When will the Project be
Next year.
started?
Somebody continue
Brgy West To the Barangay Office
dumping waste near the
Rembo, concerned with waste
3 Thu. Oct. 11 Pasig River. Where can
Makati / 40 management.
we bring up the matter?
participants
Will there be training in Details will be explained
bag making (during the during the launching of
operation phase)? the Program.
Brgy. 1) I welcome the project
1)
Napindan, because the value of land
Introduction
1 Fri. Nov. 23 Taguig City will increase in the area Noted with appreciation.
of the
/ 50 and many investors will
Project
participants come in.
2) Ms. Santiago,
Design/Plan 2) The backfilling area DPWH-PMO, answered
of backfill serves as catch basin for that where will be a
works the Pumping Station. If Multi-Party Monitoring
filled-up by 2 m, it will Team headed by the
cause flooding in the DENR, and all affected
surrounding residential Barangays will be made
area. member to solve any
issues arise from the
3) Proper management of Project.
the Pumping Station is Ms. Santiago also
crucial to avoid the mentioned the possibility
flooding in the area after that part of the dredged
the backfill. material may be used in
other low area.
5.24
Besides the meetings with the barangays and residents, following meetings with officials
from Project-related institutions were held to formulate the policy framework for the
resettlement.
Prior to the each above meetings, the Study Team met and consulted nine times with
DPWH-PMO and ESSO to monitor the progress of DPWH, and to share and discuss the
information and concerns related to the D/D phase of the Phase III Project.
Table R 5.5.3 Inter-Agency Meetings and Workshop in 2012
No. Date Inter-Agency Meetings
DPWH-ESSO, IROW, PMO-MFCP I, PRRC, MAKATI-SWD, JICA Study
1st May 29
Team
nd
2 June 28 DPWH-ESSO, IROW, PMO-MFCP I, PRRC, JICA Study Team, PMRCIP II
rd DPWH-ESSO, IROW, PMO-MFCP I, PRRC, MAKATI-SWD, JICA Study
3 July 30
Team, PMRCIP II
4th August 30
Team, PMRCIP II
5th September 26
Team, NHA
DPWH-ESSO, IROW, PMO-MFCP I, PRRC, MAKATI-SWD, MAKATI-CEO,
6th November 6
JICA Study Team, PMRCIP II, NHA
DPWH-ESSO, IROW, PMO-MFCP I, PRRC, MAKATI-CEO, JICA Study
7th November 27
Team, PMRCIP II, NHA
No. Date Resettlement Policy Framing Workshop
DPWH-PMO-MFCP I, DPWH-IROW, DPWH-ESSO,
Legal Officer DPWH,
PCUP,
OIC, West Sector-NHA, Community Relation Chief-NHA
1 October 9
SWD -Makati City, OIC-Survey & Land-Makati City
Urban Settlement Office-Manila City
Social Welfare Officer -Manila City
JICA Study Team
No. Date Consultation with Manila LIAC
DPWH-PMO-PMRCIP, PMRCIP II-DPWH
DSI, DPS, Manila City, USO, Manila City
SCDS City Engineer Office, Manila City
1 October 5 NHA-NCR-West
PCUP
DOE, MMDA
JICA Study Team
5.25
Table R 5.5.4 Meetings with DPWH-PMO/ESSO for Monitoring and Discussion

Date Office Purpose of the Meeting
DPWH-ESSO, PMO-MFCP I, Coordination regarding Resettlement Activities to
April 26
JICA Study Team be conducted by December
DPWH-ESSO, IROW, Coordination regarding Resettlement Activities to
April 30
PMO-MFCP I, JICA Study Team be conducted by December
DPWH-ESSO, PMO-MFCP I,
May 23 Monthly Progress Monitoring and Discussion
JICA Study Team
DPWH-ESSO, PMO-MFCP I, Monthly Progress Monitoring and Discussion with
June 21
JICA Study Team the PMO for the month of June
DPWH-ESSO, IROW,
July 23 PMO-MFCP I, JICA Study Team, Monitoring of July Activities
PMRCIP II
DPWH-ESSO, IROW,
August 22 Work Schedule for RAP update
PMO-MFCP I, JICA Study Team
September DPWH-ESSO, JICA Study Team Preparation of the Census Tagging and
19 Socio-Economic Survey
September DPWH-ESSO, JICA Study Team Preparation of the Census Tagging and
25 Socio-Economic Survey
Reports on the outcome of the 6th Inter-Agency
November 9 DPWH-ESSO, JICA Study Team
Meeting and other matters
Starting from July 2013, community preparation meetings will be organized in each
barangays where relocation of PAFs is planned. In addition, the preparation and
negotiation with the landowners regarding land acquisition will be started in July 2013.
This Land Acquisition and Resettlement Action Plan will be finalized with information
obtained from below meetings
Information such as following shall be the additional information.
1. Proceedings of Public Consultation Meetings for Resettlement
1-1. List of Venues and Dates of Orientation Meetings and Public Consultations
1-2. Questions, Issues, and Concerns rose during the Meetings and Consultations,
and Responses to Them
2. Proceedings of Information Campaign on Land Acquisition
5.5.3 Definition of Informal Settlers and Resettlement Eligibility

During the 7th Inter Agency Meeting on Resettlement, held on November 27, 2012, it
was confirmed that only the informal settlers living on the public land shall be eligible for
resettlement and/or resettlement assistance.
Informal settlers living on privately owned lot shall be under the care of the lot owner in
case the settlers are to be affected by the project.
Formal settlers whose land parcels are to be affected by the project shall be justly
compensated in accordance with the standard procedures adopted by the DPWH-IROW,
with which, the DPWH firstly offers the price based on the zonal value, secondly the price
assessed by an independent assessor as market value, thirdly the negotiation of request
price presented by the owner, and finally the DPWH shall ask the judgment of the court, if
the two parties could not reach an agreement.
5.26
Table R 5.5.5 Category of PAPs and Resettlement Eligibility
Land Structure Payment PAP Resettlement

Land Tenurial Status
title ownership of rent Category eligibility
Land title holder ○ ○ - FS ×
Structure owner on private
lot w/ consent of land
× ○ - IS ×
owner(Residing / Not
Private residing)
lot Renter (Land, Structure,
× × ○ Renter ×
Room) on private lot
Sharer/care-taker (Land, Sharer/
× × × ×
Structure) on private lot care-taker
Structure owner on private
lot w/out consent of land × ○ × IS ×
owner
Structure owner on public
× ○ - IS ○
land (Residing)
Structure co-owner on public
× ○ - IS ○
Public land (Residing)
land Absentee
Structure owner on public
× ○ - house ×
land (Not residing)
owner
Renter/sharer/care-taker on
× × ○/× IS ○
structure on public land
○:YES, ×: NO FS: Formal Settler, IS: Informal Settler
5.5.4 Entitlement Matrix

During the 7th Inter Agency Meeting on Resettlement, and follow-up discussions with
the attending institutions, the policies on compensations and other forms of resettlement
assistances were decided as follows.
There are two (2) decisions which are unique compared to the regular operation of
resettlement activities in Metro Manila.
The first is that renters and rent-free occupants (sharers) on public land shall be included
in the list for pre-qualification for NHA resettlement housing program, with the same
priority as the structure owners. In usual operation, the priority for resettlement is given to
the structure owner first; renters and sharers will be next in priority and can be resettled
only when vacant slots are available.
The second is that those whose structures are to be marginally affected may chose either
to apply for resettlement or to remain in the same structure. DPWH usually compensate
for the lost portion of the structure, and does not assist resettlement of the owner. This
time, the marginally affected PAPs have the option to resettle under the PRRC, which is
determined to clear the 10-m river-easement of informal settlers, in compliance with the
Supreme Court mandamus concerning Manila Bay.
Those two (2) conclusions were reached among NHA, PRRC, and DPWH, by
compromise, so that the project would facilitate the clearance of danger areas at the same
time contribute optimum benefit to the project affected population.
5.27
5.5.5 Cut-Off Dates

The structure tagging for the structures to be located within the work area of the project,
and the census of the residents and owners of those structures were conducted in October
and November 2012.
The cut-off dates for the eligibility of the compensation and other assistances described in
the Entitlement Matrix are defined as the starting date of the tagging and census work.
The following table is the list of the cut-off dates to be used for the compensation and
resettlement activities in 2013.
Table R 5.5.6 Cut-Off Dates by Barangay
Cut-Off Date Barangay City
2012-10-05 900 Manila
2012-10-08 894 Manila
2012-10-12 896 Manila
2012-10-12 897 Manila
5.5.6 Institutional Organization for Implementation of Land Acquisition and

Resettlement Action Plan
The Land Acquisition and Resettlement Action Plan will be implemented by DPWH
(vis-à-vis land acquisition) and Manila LIAC/PRRC (vis-à-vis resettlement of ISFs from
Manila), in coordination with concerned agencies and institutions shown in Figure R
5.5.1 .
Representatives of the PAPs shall be invited as one of the POs (Peoples’ Organization)
during LIAC meetings that concern resettlement involving the PAPs.
LIAC is the central decision-making, coordinating and consultative body, a pool of
manpower, resources and expertise of concerned local government units and national
government agencies, as well as the working group that implements and/or causes the
carrying out of the various activities, plans, programs and projects regarding resettlement.
LIAC members gather periodically, attend all open dialogues, and observe all demolition
works to secure the right of the affected families/persons as well as to prevent rough
conflicts.
5.28
Chair (Mayor)
Secretariat
Sub-Committee Sub-Committee Sub-Committee Sub-Committee Sub-Committee

1 2 3 4 5
Beneficiary Selection,
Relocation and Social Legal and
Name Awards and Resettlement
Dismantling Preparation Security
Arbitration
* Resettlement * Information * Census and Tagging * Legal support * Identification of
options dissemination operation * Security during resettlement site
* Relocation * Adequate * Validation of census actual * Acquisition and
package consultation list of affected movement development of
* Alternative * Community households * Pease and order site
programs assemblies * Formulation of Code * Coordination with
* Work plan and * Orientation of of Policies receiving LGU, if
budget for leaders * Census claims Off-city
Roles
movement of resolution * Provision of basic
families * Pre-Qualification of utilities and
* Actual Households against community
dismantling and NHA Alpha listing facilities
transfer * Final list of qualified
* Issuance of 30-day households
Dismantling
Notice
* IROW-PMO * LGU-Chair * LGU-Chair * PNP-Chair * DPWH/ PRRC
DPWH-Chair * Brgy. * Brgy. chairpersons * City legal officer -Chair
* LGU Engineering chairpersons * DSWD * Brgy. * POs/NGOs,
* LGU Social * PCUP * PCUP chairpersons Representatives of
Welfare and * POs/NGOs, * POs/NGOs, PAFs
Development Representative Representatives of * DoH
* LGU Public s of PAFs PAFs * DepEd
Service * DepEd * IROW-PMO * Power / water
* CHR * PMO-MFCP I DPWH providers
Members
* PRRC
* PCUP
* POs/NGOs,
Representatives
of PAFs
* Dep. of Health
(DoH)
* National Police
* Private sector
Note: CHR : Commission on Human Rights, PCUP : Presidential Commission for the Urban Poor
Figure R 5.5.1 Organization Chart of Manila LIAC

Specifically, the LIAC shall:
a. Serve as the local clearing house of all relocation and resettlement
activities, and resolve issues and concerns that may arise in the actual
conduct of census and tagging operations and dismantling operations, as
well as in the planning and development of resettlement sites;
b. Facilitate the orderly, peaceful and humane relocation of the ISFs
occupying the affected areas;
c. Ensure that all qualified families are relocated to acceptable, secure, and
affordable resettlement sites that are provided with basic utilities,
facilities and services;
d. Enable all project stakeholders to participate in planning and
implementing the program through a coordinative and integrated
multi-sectoral approach; and
5.29
e. Monitor the implementation of plans, programs and projects as well as

the operations of the subcommittees under it.
5.5.7 Schedule for Implementation of Resettlement Action Plan

During the 7th Inter Agency Meeting on Resettlement, held on November 27, 2012, the
draft schedule for implementation of resettlement action plan was discussed. The results
are shown in Table 5.5.1.
Community preparation for resettlement shall be started in July 2013, physical
resettlement to start in August, and the clearance of the work area shall be finished in
September 2013. An implementation procedure is shown in Table 5.5.2 and Figure R
5.5.2.
Monitoring of the resettlement procedure and the livelihood condition after the relocation
is the responsibility of DPWH, and the monitoring of the living condition shall continue
until one year after the completion of the project, which is currently expected in 2016.
5.30
Responsible 2013
2014 2015 2016 2017
Organization 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
1 Construction supervision consultant to be assigned DPWH
2 Construction work for PMRCIP Phase III DPWH
Verification of eligibility of PAFs for NHA resettlement DPWH/LIAC/NHA
3
Master list submission from DPWH to LIAC and NHA (LIAC includes
Pre-qualification results out from NHA. PRRC)
Mid-Term Election(2013.5.13)
45-days moratorium of major public activities before and after the election, as well as
45-days transition period of governance after the election will be observed.
PRE-RESETTLEMENT PHASE
Coordination and implementation of the 3 consecutive Open
4 DPWH/LIAC
Start preparation
Dialogue with attendance of LIAC= Finalization of Resettlement Action Plan
ESSO monitoring starts
1st meeting
2nd meeting
3rd meeting
Issuance of 30-days notice for demolition and clearance LIAC
RAP authorization by DPWH
5 DPWH
Submission to JICA
6 Grievance redress regarding the eligibility decision DPWH/LIAC
Decision of PAFs regarding the choice or acceptance of compensation, resettlement and/or
PAF/
7 assistances
DPWH/LIAC
DPWH-PMO will record the addresses of relocatees for monitoring.
Preparation of necessary documents and funding by PAFs and LGUs for demolition, relocation,
8
and financial assistance
PHYSICAL RESETTLEMENT PHASE
9 Resettlement Activities Monitoring at Project Site DPWH/LIAC
Voluntary demolition by PAFs PAF
10
Payment of compensation before physical relocation, resettlement DPWH/LIAC
Demolition of structures by DPWH/City Engineering Dept. with the attendance of the affected
settler(s) and LIAC members PAF
11
DPWH, in coordination with other related institution, provide man power and equipment to DPWH/LIAC
clear and level the site of demolition
Demolition of structures PAF
12
Payment of compensation, resettlement DPWH/LIAC
13 Grievance redress regarding the physical resettlement activities DPWH/LIAC
After demolition and clearing the affected area, the Barangay Police patrols/monitor the cleared DPWH/LGU/
14
area to prevent the returnees(turn-over of responsibility will be done lot by lot) Barangay
POST-RESETTLEMENT PHASE
Monitoring at resettled locations
15 DPWH/PRRC/ NHA
End (1 yr after the project completion)
Livelihood rehabilitation program to be provided or introduced based on the monitoring results Funded by : DPWH
16 (Customary continues for 2 yrs after resettlement. Later the period, receiving LGU shall be the Coordinated by : NHA
responsible institution for assistance) Operated by : Various
17 Grievance redress regarding the post resettlement activities DPWH/LIAC
Figure R 5.5.2 Resettlement Schedule
5.31
CHAPTER 6 CONSTRUCTION PLAN
6.1 General
6.1.1 Basic Planning Condition
The following are the basic planning conditions for the construction work:
(1) The project is to be financed by Japanese Official Development Assistance
(ODA) Yen Loan under the Special Terms for Economic Partnership (STEP).
(2) In accordance with the Sample Bidding Documents, which is the basis for ODA
Loan, the Employer’s obligations include but not limited to securing right of
access to and possession of all parts of the site and all the required permits,
licenses or approvals necessary, before the Commencement Date.
(3) Selection of civil works contractor shall be through International Competitive
Bidding (ICB).
(4) Construction period is three-years for each package.
(5) There will be two (2) contract packages, one for Pasig River and one for Lower
Marikina River.
6.1.2 Contract Packages of Phase III
The construction area for Phase III consists of priority sections selected from remaining
potential areas in the Phase II project along the stretch of Pasig River in addition to the
Lower Marikina River, as shown in Table R 6.1.1.
Table R 6.1.1 Phase III Construction Area

Name of Package From To Distance (km)
Improvement of Pasig River
Immediate Vicinity
(Selected Sections of Potential Delpan Bridge 9.9*
of NHCS
Areas)
Immediate Vicinity
Improvement of Lower of Napindan Downstream of
5.4
Marikina River Hydraulic Control Rosario Weir
Structure (NHCS)
*Selected sections of Pasig River included.
6.1.3 Scope of Work
(1) Main Structures for Construction
The improvement works aim to mitigate flood damage caused by channel

overflow. Main civil works include the construction of new revetments and
parapet walls, improvement and heightening of existing revetments, and drainage
works along the Pasig River. Aside from the above works, dredging works for the
Lower Marikina River, dike and sluiceway will be carried out. Basically, the
6.1
construction material for the dike shall be purchase from the nearest source, but if
it is possible, the suitable dredged material will be used.
(2) Construction Length of Major Works
The construction works for Phase III covers the some of stretches of Pasig River
and Lower Marikina River as shown in Table R 6.1.2 below.
Table R 6.1.2 Main Civil Works of Phase III Project

River Main Civil Works Length (m)
Revetment Works with Steel Sheet Pile 6,735
Pasig
Parapet Wall (including repair works) 3,212
Dredging of Riverbed 5,400
Lower Marikina Dike with Revetment (Steel Sheet Pile Foundation) 1,821
Bridge Pier Protection Works 4 bridges
The new dike with revetment and the repair of the existing damaged revetment
works also include concrete works, strengthening works, earthworks and other
appurtenant works. In addition, drainage works require reinforced concreting
works, earthworks and other appurtenant works. Bridge pier protection involves
net packed riprap works following the same procedure as the other repair works.
The volume of these main construction works for Pasig River and Lower
Marikina River are as estimated in Table R 6.1.3.
Table R 6.1.3 Volume of Main Construction Works of Phase III

Item Unit Pasig River Lower Marikina River
Steel Sheet Pile/ H-Beam t 17,896 2,432
Concrete m3 11,922 5,375
Rebar t 757 217
3
Excavation m
52,909 20,438
(incl. Riverbed Excavation )
Dredging (design) m3 0 871,552
3 40,518 24,268
Backfill (Common/Sand) m
3 0 565,438
Improved Dredging Soil m
3 64,571 0
Riprap / Rock fill m
Drainage Outlet Location 180 9
6.2 Construction Planning Method
6.2.1 Construction Conditions
The climate at the project area is dominated by rainy season from May to October and dry
season for the rest of the months. The total rainfall from May to October accounts for
about 80% of the annual rainfall.
6.2
6.2.2 Available Working Days
In determining the number of working days available for construction activities, the
following factors are considered:
・ Normal Workweek
・ Public Holiday
・ Rainfall
・ Type of Activity
The normal workweek consisting of six (6) working days is adopted for developing the
program of work. The following public holidays are excluded from the working
calendar:
National Public Holidays Date
New Year’s Day January 1
Maundy Thursday One day in March or April
Good Friday One day in March or April
Labor Day May 1
Independence Day June 12
National Heroes Day August 30
All Saints Day November 1
Bonifacio Day November 30
Christmas Day December 25
Rizal Day December 30
Total Number of Public Holidays 10 days
In addition, seven (7) special holidays may be declared as non-working holidays by the
President on account of special events; thus, the total number of non-working days may
add up to 17 days.
The time lost due to rainfall is based on the rainfall data and the number of rainy days on
record at the Science Garden Station of PAGASA in Quezon City, for the period
1987-1998. It is, therefore, anticipated that the effect of rain on different types of
construction activity will vary.
The schedule of time losses for the key activities due to weather condition is as
summarized in Table R 6.2.1.
Table R 6.2.1 Average Number of Rainy Days at the Project Site

Month J F M A M J J A S O N D Total
Rainfall
over 0.42 0.25 0.42 0.92 4.33 8.00 11.92 11.92 11.33 6.25 3.50 2.75 62.00
10mm
Rainfall
over 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.67 1.50 2.50 2.58 2.17 1.42 0.42 0.33 11.67
50mm
Source : Science Garden Station of PAGASA (1987-1998)
6.3
The ratio of rainy days per year is :

62 0.17
365
The number of rainy days on Sundays and Public Holidays are :
52 17 0.17 11.73 days
Therefore,
Rainy days on weekdays are :
62 11.73 50.27 days 51 days
Rainfall of more than 50 mm will cause a 1 day suspension for
structure excavation, backfilling , slope protection, drainage work and pavement work .
The suspension days for such works above are :
11.67 12 days
The total number of working days available annually for different activities is established
by incorporating all assessed time losses into the eight (8) items shown in the following
Table R 6.2.2:
Table R 6.2.2 Workable Days

Rainy Day Available
Public Suspension
Work Items Sundays on Working
Holidays Days
Weekdays days
Structural Excavation 52 17 51 12 233
Dredging 52 17 51 245
Embankment/Backfill 52 17 51 12 233
Concrete Works 52 17 51 245
Revetment Works 52 17 51 245
Repair Works 52 17 51 245
Drainage Works 52 17 51 12 233
Road Works 52 17 51 12 233
6.2.3 Available Work Hours
All construction schedules are based on an 8-hour work-day for usual works, and a
10-hour work-day for dredging and its consequent works such as pre-mixing,
intermediate dredged soil transfer and backfilling works.
6.2.4 Tidal Levels
Since some works are controlled by tidal conditions in Manila Bay, tidal levels at Manila
Bay are considered in the construction plan.
Table R 6.2.3 Tidal Levels of Manila Bay

Items Tide Level
Mean Spring Higher High Water Level (MSHHW) EL. +11.40 m
Mean Higher High Water Level (MHHW) EL. +11.10 m
Mean Water Level EL. +10.60 m
Datum Line / Mean Lower Low Water Level EL. +10.00 m
6.4
6.2.5 Site Condition
(1) Method of Approach for Each Construction Site
The major civil works along the Pasig River stretch are revetment including
drainage work and river wall. Construction site can be approached from the
riverside and landside depending on the actual site conditions. In these works,
there would be some difficulties in approaching from landside due to inadequate
width, lack of access and obstruction on approach roads. Based on the ongoing
Phase II, most of the works are approached from the river side because of the
above problems.
The major civil works along the Lower Marikina River stretch are dredging
including bridge pier protection and dike with revetment and drainage facilities.
Since the channel of Lower Marikina River is shallow, dredging works shall be
started by the contractor for the deepening(shallow/widening) of the channel to
make the river navigable and to increase the draft passage of the construction
vessels. This preparatory work will ensure unhampered passage and access of
the dredger including loading vessels to and from the construction site.
The three stretches of dikes along Lower Marikina are planned to be approached
from the access road, since this is highly possible. Thus, the structural works
need not wait for dredging operations nor depend on riverside access to be able
to proceed according to the construction schedule.
(2) Obstructions at Construction Site
Pasig River is one of the major navigable rivers flowing through Metro Manila.
It is used for various industrial, commercial, agricultural and other private
purposes. For this reason, there are many existing river structures and facilities
occupying both sides of the river, which might become obstructions during the
construction work. Regarding the ongoing Phase II project, the PRRC conducted
a sonar survey of Pasig River during the PRRC’s dredging operations. However,
the survey was confined only to the middle part of the river channel up to about
15 meters away from each river bank. Therefore, the area from each river bank
to 15m within the riverbed channel was left to be undertaken during the
implementation of the Phase II Project.
The typical obstructions observed were boat stations, abandoned barges and
mooring facilities. There are also many types of mooring facilities noted along
the riverside, such as jetty, oil and water pipelines, loading equipment and
mooring posts, which are either private or government-owned. Abandoned
barges and ships shall be towed by the contractor in coordination with the
Philippine Ports Authority (PPA). Negotiations must be done by the
implementing office (DPWH-PMO MFCP I) prior to the commencement of
construction work. Moreover, garbage materials shall be hauled by MMDA.
Except for garbage hauling, the cost of the above clearing activities is included
in the project cost based on the ratio of civil works. Major obstructions against
ship works are as listed in Table 6.2.1 and 6.2.2 except for simple debris
mounds. And Table 6.2.3 shows Height of Bridges which working ships pass
under.
6.5
Through this present Study, there are One(1) submerged water pipeline crossing
Pasig river and three (3) submerged water pipelines crossing Marikina River.
General information and treatment principles are as shown on Table R 6.2.4 .
Table R 6.2.4 Submerged Water Pipelines across Marikina River

Sta EL(m) OD (mm) Dredge Design Embankment Design
Pasig River
Nothing special is considered for
16+430 Unknown 1500 － SSP design but the investigation
cost is considered.
Lower Marikina River
Sounding work is required. No special design is required,
1+550 Unknown 1800 The dredge may be revised because the area is out of the
based on the sounding result. embankment range.
SSP design is amended, because
No special design is required,
the pipeline is assumed to be
because the depth looks deep
shallow at the embankment point.
3+067 EL+1.0 1050 enough; however, sounding
Sounding confirmation is
confirmation is required
required before SSP driving
before dredging.
work.
SSP design is amended, because
the pipeline is assumed to be
Sounding work is required.
shallow at the embankment point.
4+263 EL+12.0 750 The dredge may be revised
Sounding confirmation is
based on the sounding result.
required before SSP driving
work.
(3) Backfill Site
During Phase I, the Detailed Design Stage (D/D), five (5) locations were
evaluated as potential backfill site for excess excavated materials. Two (2) of
them were finally selected and proposed as final backfill sites considering
hauling distance; namely, the Rizal Laguna Lakeshore Road and Reclamation
Project (RLLRRP) Area and the Calzada Area. At present, through an additional
study, one more site is being considered to be more realistic. The site is located
near the west corner of Napindan Laguna junction, north of Laguna Ring Road,
and belongs to the barangays of Napindan, Ibayo-Tipas, and Ligid-Tapas in
Taguig City.
There is also an option for dumping the dredged materials offshore in Manila
Bay. However, this option is not feasible for the PMRCIP Phase III Project due
to high cost, the unpredictable coastal and offshore current weather patterns in
Manila Bay area, and the difficulty of documentation to prepare the construction
plan.
(4) Pre-Mixing Site
Pre-mixing will improve the strength as well as the suitability of dredged

materials during transportation and reclamation. For this purpose, a site between
Lower Marikina River and Napindan Channel is being considered as the
pre-mixing site in this Phase III basic design study stage, although negotiation
among parties concerned reveal that there seems to have little possibility that the
6.6
site is available. Therefore, in this present study a comparative study between

the two (2) identified sites is done, pre-mixing sites are compared with each
other in relation to the backfill area, i.e., at a middle point along the navigation
way and just at the back side of dredging vessel.
(5) Compensation for Lots and Structures Affected by the Project
Since the construction work will be at the river side, there will be no land
acquisition involved in the PMRCIP Phase III Project. Compensation for
structures, if any, will be based on the number of houses affected as determined
in the RAP.
(6) Implementing Agencies
The overall responsibility for overseeing the construction work is with the
DPWH-PMO Flood Control Project and the Flood Mitigation
Committee (FMC), which is proposed to be created. Close coordination between
these parties, will ensure the smooth implementation of the Phase III Project.
6.3 Resources
6.3.1 General
Most of the construction materials, including aggregates, cement, formwork materials,

and construction machinery and equipment will be procured generally in Metro Manila or
the nearby provinces. On the other hand, steel materials for revetment, geo-textile bags
for pier protection and special driving equipment to penetrate hard core strata (Guadalupe
Formation) shall be imported from Japan.
6.3.2 Labor
All classes of labor identified above are available in Metro Manila and the surrounding
areas.
6.3.3 Materials
(1) Shaped Steel Materials and Sheet Piles
Main steel materials for the construction of revetment shall be imported from
Japan. However, some shaped steel materials for temporary use are available in
the Philippines. Based on the ongoing Phase II Project, Hat Type SSP and
H-beam are imported from Japan, directly.
(2) Reinforcing Bar
Reinforcing bars are available in the local market.
(3) Ready-Mixed Concrete
Ready-mixed concrete is available in Metro Manila. However, it might not be

possible to supply some sites with ready-mixed concrete due to lack of access
from the main roads. In such situations, middle sized concrete batching plant
6.7
barge(s), together with concrete pump with a capacity of 30m3/hour, shall be

provided. Other barges will be needed, to supply concrete aggregates, cement
and water to these batching plant barges.
(4) Dike Embankment Materials
Dike Embankment materials can be purchased from suppliers in Metro Manila.

As far as possible, dredged materials of good quality shall be utilized.
(5) Filling Materials
Filling and backfilling materials are to be selected from excavated materials;

otherwise, these are to be purchased. Most filling materials can be purchased
from suppliers in Metro Manila.
(6) Rock Materials
Rock materials are to be used for riprap, wet stone masonry and repair of
existing flood dike. Suppliers for small volume of works can be found easily in
Metro Manila. On the other hand, big volume of rocks can be sourced from the
Bataan area, which is about 50 km from the construction site.
(7) Soil Improvement Admixture
Cement or quick lime is proposed as soil improvement material. These can be

purchased from suppliers in Metro Manila. It should be noted that procurement
of quick lime may require a few months lead time.
(8) Other Construction Materials
Gabion cages, welded wire fabrics, etc., to be used for the permanent works are
available in Metro Manila and nearby provinces.
(9) Imported Materials
Materials for the steel sheet piles for revetment such as corrugated steel sheet
piles and H-beam, are to be imported from other countries, specifically, Japan.
In addition, flap gates to be installed at designated drainage outlets are to be
imported from Japan to ensure the quality and durability. The costs of these
materials are estimated as imported materials. The list of materials to be
imported is given in Table R 6.3.1 .
Table R 6.3.1 List of Materials Imported for PMRCIP Phase III

Materials Purpose
Steel Sheet Pile and H-beam For revetment foundation
Flap Gate For drainage outlet
Net Gabion For foot protection of existing bridge foundation
6.8
6.3.4 Construction Equipment
The major categories of construction equipment required for the works are classified and
explained as follows:
Earthmoving equipment
Pile driving/drilling/extracting equipment
Equipment for on-water works
Equipment for concrete works
Lifting equipment
(1) Earthmoving Equipment
For excavation, dredging and hauling, backhoe, dredger, barges, wheel loader,
bulldozer or dump trucks are to be utilized. Besides, tire compactor is a must for
dike embankment.
(2) Pile Driving/Drilling/Extracting Equipment
Pile driving works shall utilize crawler crane, vibro-hammer, water-jet unit,
generator, truck crane, backhoe with special low-head arm for piling and barge
for on-water works.
(3) Consideration for On-Water Works
Appropriate number of barges, tugboats, anchor boats and watch boats are to be
utilized for on-water works. Crawler crane are to be set on a barge when
construction is approached from the river side.
(4) Equipment for Concrete Works
Concrete pump, transit mixer, movable mixing batch and internal vibrator are to
be adopted for concrete works.
(5) Lifting Equipment
Crawler crane or truck mounted crane is to be used for the loading/unloading of

materials.
Table 6.3.1 shows work monthly equipment list, and Table 6.3.2 shows breakdown of
work monthly equipment list.
6.3.5 Procurement Plan
Procurement procedures should be managed so as not to delay site works. The main
materials and equipments to be procured are as listed in the following tables.
6.9
Table R 6.3.2 List of Materials for Procurement

Materials Places of Procurement Remarks
Shaped Steel Material & Consider the duration of roll-order, transportation
Japan
Steel Sheet Pile and assembly welding.
Consider the duration of fabrication and
Flap Gate Japan
transportation.
Re-bar Philippines
Concrete Philippines
For dike, backfill and boundary bank, soil is to be
Soil Philippines procured only when good dredged soil is not
available.
Bolder & Gravel Philippines
Quick lime may need a few to several months of
Soil Improvement
Philippines lead time to procure; with ordinary normal cement,
Admixture
this will be not be a problem.
Gabion Mattress,
Normal Geo-textile
Philippines
Material and Welded
Wire Mesh
Net Gabion Japan
Table R 6.3.3 Equipment for Procurement

Equipment Procured from Remarks
Vibro-hammer Philippines
Water-jet Injection Unit Japan Consider the duration of transportation.
Cranes of 50t to 80t
Philippines
Class
Barges of 300DWT to
Philippines
1000DWT
Tugboat Philippines
Anchor Boat Philippines
Watch Boat Philippines
Backhoe Philippines
Wheel Loader Philippines
Bulldozer Philippines
Dump Truck Philippines
Sealed-Type Dump Here, Philippines means conversion of usual dump
Japan or Philippines
Truck trucks.
Consider the duration of transportation and in-site
Pre-Mixing Unit Japan
installation.
Consider the duration of transportation and
In-Site Batching Mixer Japan/Other countries
mounting on barge.
6.4 Construction Method
6.4.1 General
In this Section, the major works are identified for the PMRCIP Phase III Project and the
construction procedures are explicitly explained. The major civil works along the Pasig
River are SSP revetment works, drainage works and parapet walls. On the other hand, the
Lower Marikina River works contain dredging, bridge pier protection, dike and sluice
gate works.
6.10
6.4.2 Steel Sheet Pile Pilling and Reinforced Concrete Floodwall
Two (2) types of revetment have been considered for implementation along Pasig River;
namely, corrugated steel sheet pile (SSP) and SSP combined with H-beam. The
construction procedures of the SSP and the SSP combined with H-beam type are almost
similar.
(1) Steel Sheet Pile Pilling
SSP piling works are basically executed from the riverside. Some methodology
for pile driving are considered such as vibro-hammer, vibro-hammer with
water-jet, earth-auger piling and clear-method for hard layer strata. The
“vibro-hammer with water-jet” is recommended for this project in consideration
of hard foundation (SPT value is around 150) and size of combined SSP hat type
plus H-shaped beam type. Table R 6.4.1 below shows the comparison between
these drivers.
Table R 6.4.1 Comparison of SSP Drivers

Vibro-Hammer Earth-Auger
Driver Vibro-Hammer Clear-Method
with Water-jet, Piling
Pre-boring plus
Driving Vibration plus Pre-boring plus
Vibration Vibration or
Mechanism Water Jet Hydraulic Insert
Hydraulic Insert
Base Machine Crane Crane Rig Type Crane Special Machine
Available N (SPT)
N<50 N<180 Up to Rock Up to Rock
Value
Bridge passage It is available only
requires for SSP less than
PMRCIP Phase II
dismantling and 600mm in width;
Note construction
re-erection of the nevertheless, it has
adopted it.
rig; besides, it is merit for piling
dangerous work. beneath bridges.
Evaluation Not Applicable Good Not Applicable Possible
According to the Japanese “Standard for Cost Estimate on Harbor Works,

Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism, 2010” (Ref. 1), the
Vibro-Hammer with Water-jet is able to pile 45 pile per day for 25Hat Type SSP
and 37 pile per day for H400 beam. Thus, the suitability of 20piles per day is
simply estimated for the combination of the two types. However, only 70% of this
value, i.e., 14 piles or 12.6m per day, is adopted, in consideration of frequent SSP
alignment variations on site and the observed progress of work using this method
during the Phase II project construction work.
There are special sections in the SSP drive: one section is for underwater pipeline
bridges and four sections are for under high voltage electricity. At the section
under bridge, the same method as the Lower Marikina River mentioned later
which uses the low-head attached backhoe and 15kW vibro-hammer may be
adopted,. At the sections under high voltage electricity, all equipment are required
to keep the clearance of 3m from the cable, the same as in Phase II, and the work is
planned with 90kW vibro- hammer of 3.5m in length that is available to GF layer
and 2.5m length lifting equipment. The lengths of SSP segment are shown on
Figure R 6.4.1.
6.11
SSP Segment Length Under Bridge or High Voltage Electricty on Pasig River
Sta. R9+943 Sta. R13+780 Sta. R14+370

(Bridge, TL=12.0, by Backhoe) (HVE, TL=10.0, By Crane) (HVE, TL=13.5, By Crane)
▽EL+22.800 (=25.8Cable-3.0Clearance)
Hook 2.5
Pre-Final
Hook 2.5 Initial
Vibrator 3.5 Instalation
Final Paint Final Install 2.5

▽EL+17.206 & Vivration & Welding ▽EL+16.800
Pre-2nd-Final
Vibrator 3.5 Instal
4.906 > 2.635 2.635 > 1.0+1.5 Weld
1.5 Paint 2.0
▽EL+14.571 ▽EL+14.600 4.0
Drive Initial
1.0 1.5 1.0 1.5 Instal 6.0
2.0 2.5
▽EL+12.400(Final EL) ▽EL+12.400(Final EL)
▽EL+12.300 2.5 2.5
2.5 2.5 ▽EL+11.600(Barge Board) 1.5 2.5 ▽EL+11.600(Barge Board)
4.700 1.0 1.5 2.5 2.5
▽MWL+10.600 ▽EL+10.571 ▽MWL+10.600 ▽MWL+10.600 3.5
possible or 2.5 2.5 4.0
▽EL+9.600 2.5 2.5 sligth drive 2.5 ▽EL+9.600(Paint Line) 2.5 3.0 ▽EL+9.600(Paint Line)
2.5 2.5 2.5
▽EL+8.600 2.5 2.5
2.5
2.5 2.5 2.5 3.0
▽EL+6.600 2.5 4.0
3.5
3.0 3.0 5.5
2.5 3.5
2.5 3.5
3.5 6.0
3.0
▽EL+0.300
Sta. R15+010 Sta. R16+660

(HVE, TL=11.5, By Crane) (HVE, TL=11.0, By Crane)
▽EL+23.300 (=26.3Cable-3.0Clearance) Hook 2.5
Hook 2.5
Initial
Vibrator 3.5 Instalation
Initial
Vibrator 3.5 Instalation ▽EL+18.900
▽EL+17.300
4.5 4.5
7.0
7.5
▽EL+12.400(Final EL) ▽EL+12.400(Final EL)
▽EL+11.600(Barge Board) ▽EL+11.600(Barge Board)
▽MWL+10.600 4.0 ▽MWL+10.600 4.0
▽EL+9.600(Paint Line) ▽EL+9.600(Paint Line)

6.5
7.0
7.5 7.0
Figure R 6.4.1 SSP Segments for Peculiar Sections in Pasig River
(2) Reinforced Concrete Floodwall
Reinforced concrete wall on SSP is constructed from river side and/or land side,
depending on each site’s field condition. This work is usually executed together
with drainage works. The construction method is as shown in Figure R 6.4.2 .
6.12
SSP Pilling
(Preceding Work)
Side Wall
Temporary Fabrication of
Fabrication of
Drainage Outlet
Manholes
Layout of
Backfill 1
Drainage Pipe
Fabrication of the Dismantle of the

Lower Part of Coping Concrete Temporary
Manholes Cofferdam
Layout of Lower
Backfill 2
Collector Pipe
Temporary Layour of Higher Fabrication of

Inclined Wall
Cofferdam Collector Pipe Manholes' Top
Cut-off SSP for

Backfill 3 Final
Outlet Space
Parapet &
Pavement
Figure R 6.4.2 Work Procedure for Reinforced Concrete Floodwall
The construction method consists of the following steps:
(1) Temporary Drainage: Water in the gap between SSP stretch and existing
land is drained with pump.
(2) Backfill 1: The gap is backfilled up to the lowest manhole bottom with
proper compaction.
(3) Fabrication of lowest part of manholes: The lowest part of manholes,
bottom and sidewall, is fabricated based on the lower collector pipe
layout.
(4) Layout of lower collector pipes: Lower collector pipes are laid through
sleeper set, collector pipe set, collar ring concreting and concrete bed.
After the curing period, on-going drain will be diverted into these new
collector pipes and manholes.
(5) Coping Concrete: During steps (3) to (4) above, coping concrete of SSP
top is fabricated.
(6) Temporary Cofferdam: For the outlet work, temporary cofferdam with
steel structure (for shallow water) or SSP (for deep water) is set before
outlet portion, and then inner water is drained.
(7) Cut-off SSP for Outlet Space: Top of the SSP revetment is cut and
removed.
(8) Fabrication of Outlet: RC structure is fabricated.
6.13
(9) Layout of Drainage Pipe: Drainage pipe between outlet and final manhole
is laid through sleeper set, collector pipe set, collar ring concreting and
concrete bed. After the curing period, existing drain will be diverted into
these new drainage pipe and outlet.
(10) Side Wall Fabrication of Manhole: During steps (8) and (9) above, side
walls of manholes are fabricated for use in the higher collector pipes.
(11) Dismantling of Temporary Cofferdam
(12) Backfill 2: The gap is backfilled until the higher collector pipe level with
proper compaction.
(13) Layout of Higher Collector Pipe: Higher collector pipes are laid in the
same way as the lower ones. After the curing period, existing drain will be
diverted into these new collector pipes and manholes.
(14) Fabrication of Manhole Top: During step (13), top portion of manholes is
fabricated.
(15) Inclined Wall: During step (13), river side inclined wall is fabricated.
(16) Backfill 3 Final: It will be backfilled up to the final height.
(17) Parapet and Pavement: Parapet and Pavement are fabricated.
6.14
6.4.3 Drainage Works
Drainage works will consist of outlet, drainage pipe, manhole, collector pipe, and
junction manhole(s). There are several structural types and dimensions of existing
drainage outlets along the Pasig River. The design concept is the same as adopted in
Phase II. Structural measures are provided in this study based on the necessity. In
addition, flap gate will be provided to prevent inland area from inundation due to adverse
effects of reverse flow especially if the ground elevation is lower than the design flood
level.
The procedure of constructing the outlet structure, manhole and other appurtenant works
as mentioned above is explained in detail in accordance with the flow chart shown in
Figure R 6.4.3 . A typical section of the drainage outlet works is shown in Figure R
6.4.4 .
Figure R 6.4.3 Flowchart of Drainage Facilities Construction
6.15
Figure R 6.4.4 Typical Section of Drainage Outlet Works
6.4.4 Parapet Wall and Step-Type Parapet Wall
Reinforced concrete flood walls without SSP support are also planned. There are two
types: one is the parapet wall with subsurface foundation portion, and the other is the
step-type parapet wall which is fabricated on existing concrete after surface treatment.
Both structures are mostly constructed on land, but can be constructed on the waterway, if
inevitable.
6.4.5 Dredging
(1) Main Characteristics of the Dredging Works in the Project
・ Dredging work is expressed in mass volume. The planned dredge volume is

approximately 872,000m3 excluding the expected overcut volume of around
194,000m3 in the case of backhoe dredge or around 408,000m3 in the case of
pump dredge. A simple calculation of daily average or a period of 3 years
assuming 240 days of available work days each year yields approximate
1,200m3, the practical maximum daily volume which is around 1.5 to 2.0
times of this is estimated volume. Thus, careful consideration should be
given to measures that will mitigate potential profit congestion and other
environmental impacts due to dredging, transport and backfill of riverbed
materials.
・ The area to be dredged in Lower Marikina River is 5.4km long and 40m
wide at full depth. Also, both side slopes have steep gradients of about 1:3.
The design depth is 3.50m at the most downstream end and 2.24m at the
most upstream end. The average calculated dredge depth is around 4.5m,
which means that the present channel is too shallow and needs to be dredged
ahead to allow unimpeded access by the work barges.
6.16
・ The flood during Typhoon Ondoy in 2009 brought most of the sediment,
including garbage and debris. However, an in-depth study of the garbage
and debris characteristics is rather difficult. This aspect should be taken into
account in the selection of construction method.
・ In the previous study, JICA investigated the possibility of heavy metal

contamination of riverbed sediments. The results were published in the ‘EIA
Supplementary Report (JICA, September 2011)”, which confirmed that
heavy metal content was way below environmental threshold levels. In July
2012, the present Detailed Design Study conducted new sampling at 100-m
interval along the 5.4km stretch of Lower Marikina River. Laboratory
results again showed that the possibility of contamination with heavy metals
is nil. Thus, both past and ongoing JICA studies showed that dredging
works were least likely to cause environmental problems on site and at the
final backfill area due to heavy metal contamination.
・ At this stage, the final backfill site is identified to be the 450,000m2

low-lying area located west of the outflow of Napindan Channel from
Laguna Lake mouth. This implies that it is advisable to fully utilize both the
Marikina River and the Napindan Channel as navigation route for sediment
transport so as to avoid causing heavy traffic in the case of land route. Also,
the possibility of backfill offshore of Manila Bay was also considered but
was judged to be unfeasible during the JICA Preparatory Study.
・ The navigability of the Napindan Channel has been confirmed through site
survey and water depth survey in this study.
6.17
(2) Selection of the General Dredging Scheme

(a) Dredging Equipment
Dredging equipment usually includes suction barge, backhoe and grab-bucket.
Dredging equipment and back up facilities should be carefully selected. Table
R 6.4.2 below shows the comparison between dredging equipment and their
applicability in the Phase III Project.
Table R 6.4.2 Comparison of Dredging Equipment with Back-up Facilities and

their Applicability in the Phase III Project
Dredger Suction barge Backhoe Grab-Bucket
Cycle time for one dredge is
longer than that of a backhoe,
Applicable if there is a suitably The unit capability is small
and larger bucket is
sized suction barge. A long but this may be solved by
General Features necessary to address this
transportation pipe and a large increasing the number of
constraint. Usually it is more
sedimentation pond are a must. units.
effective for deep and huge
dredge.
*Most suitable for sand.
* Suitable for sand. *Suitable for sand.
*Not suitable for cohesive soil
* Suitable for cohesive soil. * Suitable for cohesive soil.
Suitability for Soil because of sedimentation
* Suitable for rock and gravel * Suitable for rock and gravel
Type issue.
(Usually bucket is attached (Usually bucket is attached
*Not suitable for rock or
depending on soil type) depending on soil type)
gravel.
The practical limit for pipe
length is around 2 km; for
longer lengths, a booster pump
and effective management
Dredged soil
technique is necessary. A float By Dredged Soil Barge By Dredged Soil Barge
Transport
type pipe is a nuisance to
navigation and problematic to
maintain; thus a bridge type
installation is recommended.
Large sedimentation pond is
Sediment Pond Not needed Not needed
necessary.
Impossible, because the
Dredge under Impossible to reach areas
dredger needs to be dismantled Possible
Bridges under the bridge.
to be able to pass the bridge.
Another backhoe dredge unit is Another backhoe dredge unit
“ Not needed
required. is required.
Garbage and
Vulnerable No problem No problem
Debris
Allowable Overcut Large Small Medium
（m3） (408,000) (194,000) (232,000)
Turbidity problems may Turbidity problems may
Environmental Turbidity problem is less than occur but not expected to be occur but not expected to be
Impact other methods worse than the original worse than the original
turbidity of the river. turbidity of the river.
Foul odor may be observed Foul odor may be observed
during transport on a dredged during transport on a dredged
Odor No odor soil barge although this soil barge although this
problem is temporary and not problem is temporary and not
so critical. so critical.
Pipe leakage can affect the
Pipe Leakage No concern No concern
neighboring site
The larger the allowable The lesser the allowable The larger allowable overcut
Remarks on
overcut volume, the greater the overcut volume, the lesser volume, the larger general
Overcut
general impact expected. the general impact expected. impact expected.
6.18
(b) Comparison of Dredging Schemes

Table R 6.4.3 below compares the different dredging schemes that are
considered to be technically feasible for use in the Phase III Project.
In this table, Case 1 to Case 3 shows the dredging with backhoe. In these
cases sandy dredged soil will be conveyed directly to the unloading pier near
Laguna Lake, then transferred onto dump truck and carried into the final
backfill point for reclamation. Clayey or fine soil will be pre-mixed at the
backfill site (Case 1), at a middle point on navigation root (Case 2), or at the
back side of dredging ship (Case 3). Case 4 is dredging with a Suction barge
with five (5) booster pumps at maximum along the rivers and directly
pumped out at the backfill area, which is used as a sedimentation pond site.
The table shows that the latest case is less economical, thus further
explanation is omitted.
Figure R 6.4.5 illustrates the fleet of Case 1 to 3. Figure 6.4.1 indicates the
diagram showing that the fleet has enough ships and boats for operation. The
required strength level for pre-mixed soil is 200 in cone penetration index
after 24 hours of mixing in consideration of both quality and reduction of
improvement admixture. This required level realizes the handling easiness
for dump truck carriage and reclamation workability. In Case 1, it is judged
that only short distance carriage is available from pre-mixing plant to a site
and the soil is reclaimed after 24 hours of curing on site.
6.19
Table R 6.4.3 Comparison of Dredging Schemes

Item Case 1 Case 2 Case 3 Case 4
Fine Fine Sandy Fine Sandy
Dredged Soil Sandy Soil None Selective
Soil Soil Soil Soil Soil
Location of Backfill Middle Dredging
None None None None
Pre-Mix Site Point Site
Soil Volume (m3) 656,000 314,000 656,000 314,000 656,000 314,000 970,000
Dredging Work
Backhoe Backhoe Backhoe Backhoe Backhoe Backhoe Suction barge
Scheme
Pre-Mixing after On Plant
None None None None None None
Dredge Barge
Soil By Barge By Barge By Barge By Barge By Barge By Barge Continuous
Transportation 1 1 1 1 1 1 Transportation
Pre-Mixing at On Plant
Middle Point Barge
Soil By Barge By Barge By Barge By Barge By Barge By Barge Continuous
Transportation 1 1 2 1 1 1 Transportation
By Sealed
Transportation to By Dump By Dump By Dump By Dump By Dump Continuous
Dump
the Final Site Truck Truck Truck Truck Truck Transportation
Truck
Pre-Mixing at
At Site None None None None None None
Backfill Site
Additional By Dump
Transport Truck
Levee and
By By By By By By
Reclamation Sedimentation Ponds
Bulldozer Bulldozer Bulldozer Bulldozer Bulldozer Bulldozer
are necessary
Sub-Total
1,676 272 1,760 272 1,801 272 2.215
(Million ¥)
Allowable
Overcut Volume 131,200 62,800 131,200 62,800 131,200 62,800 408,000
(m3)
Overcut Cost
335 54 352 54 360 54 932
(Million ¥)
Sub-Direct Cost
2,011 327 2,112 327 2,161 327 3,147
(Million ¥)
Total Direct Cost
2,338 2,439 2,488 3,147
(Million ¥)
Possibility of Mud
spillage, large over cut
Environmental
None None None None None None volume and causing
Issue
nuisance for navigating
vessels
Maintenance in Reclamation with soft
Service Stage material
Plant
barge
occupies Pump Vulnerability to
part of the garbage and debris.
Other Issues None None None None None
river Technical difficulty in
during pump Operation
constructi
on period
Comprehensive
Most Favorable Favorable Favorable Unfavorable
Evaluation
Note: The volume of overcut will be different in each of the above schemes. Therefore, the total cost depends on the total
volume of dredged volume plus the overcut, and corresponding costs are compared. The same unit price of dredged
volume is used for the overcut.
6.20
Figure R 6.4.5 Composition of Backhoe Dredging Fleet
(3) Treatment of Overcut
Overcut is excess dredging over the design line and frequently becomes a
controversial issue in dredging work. In this section, the allowable overcut
volume and its effect is discussed.
(a) Effect of Overcut
An overcut have the following effects:
Allowance for over excavation to ensure that the design limit line for
dredging work is achieved:
・ Overcut simply addresses the accuracy issue on underwater inherent in
dredging works.
Actual work volume:
・ When the overcut volume is big, other aspects of dredging work such
as backfill, land preparation, selection of construction equipment and
6.21
construction duration are affected and therefore calls for proper

judgment.
Payment limit:
・ There is no general rule on the payment of overcut. Obviously,
however, when overcut involves a volume to the extent that other
related aspects of actual work are affected, these need to be considered
rationally.
Allowable overcut volume against structural safety:
・ It is implicit that the allowable overcut volume could sometimes
implicate safety of structures. In this project, dredging and overcut
around bridge piers must be carefully considered.
(b) Overcut Design Criteria

The overcut design criteria of DPWH is as follows
・ Vertical allowance: 0 to 200mm overcut is allowed.
・ Side allowance: DPWH Design Guidelines prescribe that “All
dredging slopes shall be to the specified gradient and within the limits
specified on the approved Plans,” but does not give explicit value.
Figure R6.4.6 Schematic View of Overcut Allowance
The overcut volume estimated in accordance with the DPWH criteria does
not clear indicate a standard. In this calculation, side allowance of 80cm is
derived from the average of Philippine-Japan allowance ratio of 0.2m is to
0.5m.
Table R 6.4.4 Overcut Volume in the Case of Backhoe Dredge

In Accordance with
Bottom Depth = 0.2ｍ Side Width = 0.8ｍ Total
DPWH Criteria
Volume (m3) 43,200 34,318 77,518
Ratio (%) 4.4% 3.5% 8.0%
In accordance with
Bottom Depth = 0.5ｍ Side Width = 2.0ｍ Total
Japanese criteria
Volume (m3) 108,000 85,795 193,795
Ratio (%) 11.1% 8.8% 20.0%
Note: The ratio in table is the ratio to net required volume of 872,000 cum
Based on the Japanese “Standard for Cost Estimate on Harbor Works,
Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism, 2012,” the
allowable bottom and side overcut width are as shown below in Table R
6.22
6.4.5 and Table R 6.4.6 , respectively. This applies when water depth is less
than 5.5m under the same condition as this project.
Table R 6.4.5 Bottom Overcut Volume in the Case of Backhoe Dredge

Material Dredger Bottom Over Cut Remarks
Soil Pump 0.6ｍ Water depth < 5.5m
Soil Grab Bucket 0.5m Water depth < 5.5m
Soil Backhoe 0.5ｍ Water depth < 5.5m
Table R 6.4.6 Side Overcut Volume in the Case of Backhoe Dredge

Material Dredger Side Over Cut Remarks
Soil Pump 6.5ｍ
Soil Grab Bucket 4.0m
Soil Backhoe 2.0ｍ
(4) Dredging, Transportation and Pre-Mixing
Below is the description of the basic construction methods for backhoe dredging
with pre-mixing work at the backfill site of Case 1. Pre-mixing site differs in the
case of Case 1 and Case 2, and additional description is covered for these cases
hereunder. Figure 6.4.1 shows the sample of working ship diagram and Figure
6.4.2 to Figure 6.4.6 show the yard and plant plan of each sites.
(a) Description of General Conditions
・ Total Volume of Net Dredge of
Materials: 872,000m3 (Along 5.4 km length)
・ Channel Shape: 40m wide with 1 by 3 slope, both sides
・ Volume of Each Soil: Sandy Soil: 306,0000m3, Fine Soil: 566,000 m3
・ Unit Weight of Each Soil: Sandy Soil: 1.85 ton/m3; Fine Soil: 1.60t/m3
・ Design Riverbed Elevation: From EL + 6.500 to EL +7.756m
・ Tidal Level : MSHHWL = EL+11.400m
: MHHWL = EL+11.100m
: MSL = EL+10.475m
: MLLWL = EL+10.000m
・ The Lowest Bridge in Pasig River : EL+14.470m
・ The Lowest Bridge in Marikina River : EL+17.051m
・ The Lowest Bridge in Napindan Ch. : EL+17.000m
(b) Dredge Work 1 (for Sandy Soil)

The total dredging volume of sandy soil is estimated to be 306,000 cubic
meters, and continuous distribution is expected upstream from Sta. 2+800.
Sandy soil is dredged with backhoe, transported on a soil barge directly to the
pier in Laguna Lake and transferred onto dump trucks, and then carried to the
backfill site (the same for Case 1, 2 and 3).
Composition of Work Ship Fleet
The composition the fleet for sandy soil dredge is as follows:
6.23
・ Backhoe with 1.0cm bucket, 25-ton : 4

Two (2) backhoes are mounted on a flat barge as specified below:
・ Flat Barge of 1000DWT : 2
These will be used both as backhoe base and carriage vessel for dredged
material. Standard size of 1000DWT is around 36m*16m*2.7m, with
full draft of 2.5m and vacant draft of 0.5m. Each flat barge is arranged
with 6.0m backhoe working area on one side, and 9m width space for
dredged materials and 1m width aisle on the other side. The space for
dredged materials is 9m wide and 34m long. It is separated with a 2.0m
wall erected on deck surrounded by 1m wide aisle for three directions.
Two spats are also equipped for the purpose of positioning during
dredging.
・ Tugboat of 500PS : 3
Standard draft is 2.0m. Two are for towage, and one remains at dredging
site for tender service.
・ Anchor and Commute Boat of 200PS : 1
Standard draft is 1.5m.
・ Watch Boat of 16PS : 2
Two boats of 16PS will keep watch on the safety of other ships upstream
and downstream of the dredging barge.
The general dredging scheme is illustrated in Figure R6.4.7 and Figure

R6.4.8. Dredging work will be carried out using two (2) backhoes on a flat
barge. After full loading, the flat barge with backhoe is tugged to the staging
area. Here, unloading will be carried out using the other two backhoes
onshore with some support of backhoes on board. The actual performance of
tugboat and flat barge are reflected in this plan.
Figure R6.4.7 General Dredging Scheme, Front Dredging
6.24
Figure R6.4.8 General Dredging Scheme, Side Dredging
Cycle Time
Duration of dredging for one flat barge Td is calculated with the full volume
of 513m3 for 1000 DWT barge and hourly dredge volume capacity of
backhoe with 45m3 (“Civil Engineering Work Estimation Standard, Japan”);
Td = 513 / (2* 45) = 5.71h
On the other hand, the following activities are done simultaneously:
Carriage of dredged material to the unloading pier in Laguna Lake, assuming

the length of 10.2 km which is the average of maximum and minimum
distance of 11.4km and 9.0km for sandy portion and carriage speed of
7.4km/h:
Tg = 10.2 / 7.4 = 1.38h
Unloading will be done with two backhoes operating at a capacity of

520m3/7m3/h≒74m3 per hour shift (“Civil Engineering Work Estimation
Standard, Japan”). Two backhoes will operate onshore and one on board.
Tu = 513 / (2* 74)) = 3.47h
Return trip to the dredge point is as the same as the go trip:
Tr = 10.2 / 7.4 = 1.38h
Total hour is:
6.25
Tt = 1.38 + 3.47 + 1.38 = 6.23h > 5.71h (Dredge time)
This means that the critical activity is not dredging work, and the dredge work
efficiency is 5.71/6.23= 0.917, or daily dredging ability is 0.917 * 45 * 2 *
10hour = 825/m3 day. The total duration on sandy soil of 306,000m3 dredging
is estimated to be 371 working days.
(c) Dredge Work 2 (for Fine Soil)
The total dredging volume of fine soil is estimated to be 566, 000 m3.
Composition of Work Ship Fleet
Table R 6.4.7 shows the work ship fleet for fine soil.
Table R 6.4.7 Work Ship Fleet for Fine Soil

Case 1 Case 2 Case 3
Item (Pre-Mix at Backfill (Pre-Mix at Middle (Pre-Mix at Dredge
Site) Point) Site)
2(Front)+4(Backward) 1(Front)+4(Backward)
1000DWT Flat Barge 2
=6 =5
1.0m3 Backhoe for
4 4 2
Dredging
3(Front)+3(Backward) 2(Front)+2(Backward)
500PS Tug Boat 3
=6 =4
200PS Anchor Boat 1 (Front) 1 (Front) 1 (Front)
20PS Watch Boat 2 (Front) 2 (Front) 2 (Front)
1000DWT for Pre-Mix
None 1 (Middle) 1 (Front)
Plant
1000DWT FB * 1
Combo for Pre-Mix
None None 500PS Tug * 1
Transport
20t Mill Lorry * 4
1.0m3 Backhoe * 2 1.0m3 Backhoe * 2
1.0m3 Clam Backhoe *
Backhoe for Unloading 0.6m3 Telescopic 0.6m3 Telescopic
2
Backhoe *1 Backhoe *1
Cycle Time
In the following investigations, unit wet of fine soil is assumed to be 1.55/ m3
mainly for Case 1. Dredging time of 613m3 onto the 1000DWT barge with
two backhoes of 45m3 per hour is:
Td = 613 / (2* 45) =6.81h
On the other hand, the following activities are done simultaneously:
Carriage of dredged material to the unloading pier in Laguna Lake, assuming

the average distance of 8.7km from maximum and minimum distance of the
site of 11.4km and 6.0km, respectively, and carriage speed of 7.4 km/h:
Tg = 8.7/ 7.4 = 1.18h
Unloading will be done with two backhoes operating at a capacity of 74m3/h

(Japan Guidelines, 2011). Two backhoes will operate onshore and one on
board:
6.26
Tu = 613 / (2* 74)) = 4.14h
Return trip to the dredge point is the same as the go trip:
Tr = 8.7/ 7.4 = 1.18h
Total hour is:
Tt = 1.18 + 4.14 +1.18 = 6.51h < 6.81h (Dredge time)
This means that the dredging time is the critical activity. The total duration on
fine soil of 566,000m3 is estimated to be 629 working days.
(d) Pre-Mixing Work
The purpose of pre-mixing is to improve fine soil to make it suitable for land
transportation and reclamation by admixing with admixture such as cement
and quick lime. The required soil quality after pre-mixing and curing depends
on the usage of soil, as follows:
For Reclamation : qc > 200 kN/m2 (24 hours)
For in Site Road : qc > 1200 kN/m2 (24 hours)
Where; qc : cone penetration index (kN/m2)
Figure R6.4.9 and 6.4.10 show the general layout of the pre-mixing plant
inland (Case 1) and on-barge (Case 2 and 3) respectively. The pre-mixing
process begins from the first soil pit, vibratory screen for garbage removal, a
middle pit, admixture mixer in sequence and auxiliary equipment such as
admixture silo/feeder and a generator. For on-barge plant, some variations are
adopted to reduce the necessary area; for example, mounting vibratory screen
on the inlet of the admixture mixer, using dredging barge as well as the first
soil pit. Table R 6.4.8 shows an example of pre-mixing plant with effective
capacity of 70m3/hour. The total electricity demand for this set is assumed to
be 280kVA, and is operational with a usual generator.
Table R 6.4.8 Equipment for Pre-Mixing Plant

Item Dimensions in Plane Remarks
Soil Pit 1 8m * 8m
Backhoe 1 1.0m3 clam type
Vibratory Screen 5m * 5m
Soil Pit 2 8m * 8m
Backhoe 2 1.0m3 clam type
admixture mixer 9m * 4m
Outlet Conveyer 9m * 2m
Admixture Silo 2.5m OD 50ton class
Generator 4m * 1.4m 300 kVA
6.27
Figure R6.4.9 General Layout of the Pre-Mixing Plant Inland (Case 1)
Figure R6.4.10 General Layout of the Pre-Mixing Plant On-Barge

(Case 2 and 3)
In Case 3, the pre-mixing plant barge travels with the dredging barge and it
requires passage under bridges. It means that the plant has the elevation limit
of around 7m including freeboard of barge, and it requires some
consideration for equipment arrangement such as adaptation of low-head
admixture silo, but is judged to be practicable. Another note for the case is the
6.28
supply of admixture in the river. For this aspect, it is planned that admixture
will be transported with a few mill lorry on a 1000DWT barge.
In Case 2, the pre-mixing plant is moored at a certain position, and has no

need to pay attention on the height. The supply of admixture is planned to be
achieved from near shore.
(e) Unloading Pier
General Description
Unloading pier for soil is to be constructed along the west bank of Napindan
Channel and north of the ring road at the outlet from Laguna Lake. The length
is 108m and enables three (3) 1000DWT barges, one is for sandy soil and the
other for fine soil, moor simultaneously. The berth for sandy soil is available
for fine soil and the other vice versa. The width is 12m and enables 10t class
dump truck to divert direction on it. The pier will be connected to the backfill
site with a new temporary road so that the dump trucks have no need to go
through the ring road. Figure R6.4.11 shows the general plan of the pier.
Figure R6.4.11 General Plan of Dredged Soil Unloading Pier
For sandy soil unloading, two backhoes with 1.0m3 bucket are used, with the
support of two backhoes on a barge for soil hauling. Two frame structures
along the sandy soil berth are garbage screens. They are used for soil that
contains a lot of garbage. Garbage weight is planned on the basis of 20kg/m3
for 1/3 of whole sandy soil. For fine soil unloading, two 1.0m3 clam backhoes
are used in Case 1 with the support of two other backhoes on a barge. For
6.29
Cases 2 and 3, one telescopic backhoe is used for hauling as well as other two
1.0 m3 bucket backhoes for unloading, since no backhoe is mounted on any
barge.
Elevation of Pier and Moored Barge
The elevation of the unloading pier is decided to be EL+15.000 in

consideration of water level. In this consideration, the water level of
EL+10.475 which is the same as that of MSL as low water and EL+13.000 as
high water for the water level of Laguna Lake is adopted. In accordance with
the Phase I Detail Design Report in March, 2002, the average of annual
maximum water level of Laguna Lake is EL+12.340m, and the number of
year when the maximum water level surpass EL+13.000m is 6 years through
51 years of 1949 to 1999. The elevation of Ring Road is around EL+14.0m
(Figure R6.4.12). These data and the support of on-board backhoes indicate
that there is no difficulty in unloading work.
Table R 6.4.9 Dredged Soil Carrier and Pier Platform Height

Water Level and Load Difference from
Location Elevation
Conditions Platform Level (m)
High Level (+13.000)
& Light Load Wall Top (+2.00) EL+17.200 +2.200
(+2.20) = (15.200)
High Level(+13.000)
& Light Load On Board(+0.000) EL+15.200 +0.200
(+2.20) = (15.200)
Low Level (+10.475)
With Full Load Wall Top (+2.00) EL+12.675 -2.325
(+0.20) = (10.675)
Low Level (+10.475)
With Full Load On Board(+0.000) EL+10.675 -4.325
(+0.20) = (10.675)
6.30
Figure R6.4.12 Suitability of Backhoe
(f) Carriage to the Final Backfill Site

Dredged Soil loaded onto 10ton dump trucks at the Laguna pier is carried to the
final backfill site via the entrance 0.2km west from pier, and average distance
to the site is 0.8km.
“Civil Engineering Work Estimation Standard, Japan” shows that a 10ton

dump truck can carry 100m3 of soil in 0.7day in no DID. This ability can be
translated into hourly rate:
Qh = (100 / 0.7) / 7 = 20 m3/h
The quantity of dump trucks is calculated to fulfill the unloading capacity of

two backhoes for one berth:
N = 148 / 20 = 7.4; then eight (8) dump trucks are necessary.
For the quantity of dump trucks for distribution of pre-mixed soil in Case 1, the
average carriage distance is estimated to be 0.8km and the carriage capacity of
dump trucks is in the same category as the above case; namely, 20m3/h. To
keep the pay out from the plant, which is in the same place as the front dredging
and is 90m3/h, the required quantity of dump trucks is:
N = 90 / 20 = 4.5; then five (5) dump trucks are necessary.
6.31
(5) Embankment Works

(a) General Explanation on Present and Design Features of the Site
Present Features
Backfill site (“the Site” hereunder) has a total area of 450,000m2 more or less.
and has rectangular in shape with 800m in east-west direction and 600m in
north-south direction. Figure R6.4.13 illustrates the present situation of the
Site.
The south and west edges of the Site are bordered with small banks. The west
bank faces a natural creek and the water of this creek is drained through the
Labasan Pumping Station in Laguna Lake. There is an open outlet at the
middle of this west bank, and it lets the water freely go in and out between the
creek and the Site. The south bank lies along a small channel outside and the
Ring Road over it. The water of this south channel is also drained through the
above-mentioned pump station. The Site and the south channel are connected
with some concrete conduit pipes; the water of the channel can also go in and
out from the Site. The elevation of these banks is around EL+12.5m, and
ground surface elevation in the Site is around EL+11.5m.
The north and east edges of the Site are bordered with neighboring residential
areas, which elevation is the same level as the south and west embankment.
The width of the eastern residential area is around 100 to 200m, and there is a
drainage channel at the eastern edge of the area just at the toe of the Napindan
Channel parapet wall. The drainage system flows into the eastern edge of the
above-mentioned south stream. No other drainage system can be found in this
area, and thus it is supposed that around half of water run-off from this area
runs into the Site. The north residential area spreads out northward to a
considerable length. There is no apparent drainage system in the neighboring
area to the Site, thus water run-off from the area within 100m from the Site
has large possibility to run into the Site.
There is another road which runs on the south-north direction as the bank at
the center of the Site, but the western and eastern portions are connected with
one concrete conduit pipe and it allows the free flow of water between both
sides.
Figure R6.4.13 Illustration of Present Features
6.32
Design Features after Completion
Embankment height is planned to be around 2.0m on to the present surface of

EL+11.5m, and the ground surface will surpass the present levee crown and
residential area which is around EL+12.5m. The run-off from the northern
and eastern residential areas will be drained through ditch along the board,
which is connected to the western creek and southern channel at the edges. To
keep the size of drainage economical, the run-off from the Site is planned to
be drained not through this channel but directly into the western creek and
southern channel.
Figure R6.4.14 Illustration of Completion Design
(b) Basic Condition and Work Procedures of the Embankment

Embankment work is planned based on the following conditions and
principles:
・ To keep the drainage from northern and eastern residential areas free: For
this purpose, same kind of channel as the final design is planned also for
the construction period.
・ To keep the run-off from the Site not flowing into the above-mentioned
channel: For this purpose, small embankment is planned along the
above mentioned channel.
・ To monitor the drain water from the Site and to neutralize it when
necessary: The water from the Site may be very alkaline because of the
pre-mixing admixture. For this purpose, all drain water from the Site
shall be gathered into settlement ponds before the existing outlet at
western bank, and be flowed into the creek through temporary control
sluice gate. Another measure is to set small embankment or something
like this along all periphery of the Site during whole work period,
keeping all run-offs to the control gate.
・ The location of the soil unloading pier is planned so that soil
transportation does not affect the traffic of the Ring Road. The lesser
transportation distance to the pre-mixing plant is better. A short distance
from the pier is also preferable for early development of the basic yard;
6.33
thus, the pre-mixing plant is planned to be located at the south-east

corner of the Site. For the supply of admixture lorry and plant equipment,
one temporary bridge is planned directly from the Ring Road to this base
yard.
・ One fundamental scheme of the embankment is two steps in height. This
scheme gives the landowner an impression and relief that their land is
equally embanked, and also enables the contractor to monitor the soil
volume, original height and settlement, and reflect those data back to the
finishing plan. Another scheme is from east to west and also from south
to north in plan. This scheme fits the whole drainage schemes.
・ In detail, temporary roads shall precede the general embankment. The
temporary road will have 12m width for direction of diversion. The
above-mentioned small embankment along boundary shall be
additionally counted. Branch roads will be laid down at the interval of
120m. The top elevation of the temporary road will be around 1m higher
than the original surface, and embankment between roads shall be around
20cm lower than the roads to promote natural dehydration.
・ 21t class bulldozers with hourly capacity of 85m3 (“Civil Engineering
Work Estimation Standard, Japan”) will be used for embankment. The
calculated one day volume with 10 hour work becomes 850m3for one.
Planned work distance of bulldozers is 60m, which is half of the
temporary road intervals and within the acceptable limits of the bulldozer
work range.
・ During the embankment, water spray shall be carried out so that the dust
from the site never affects the neighboring residential area.
・ Tree cutting, grubbing and weeding shall be done before all the
embankment work throughout in the Site. Removal, curing and
replanting of trees shall be done in accordance with the environmental
requirement and instructions.
・ 27,000m3 of surface soil, which is equivalent to 20% of area times 30cm in
thickness, shall be previously removed, then kept during embankment, and
finally provided to those who require it.
Figure R6.4.15 Embankment 1 – Initial Works
6.34
Figure R6.4.16 Embankment 2 – Lower Eastern Area
Figure R6.4.17 Embankment 3 –Lower Western Area
6.4.6 Bridge Pier Protection
(1) General Description
Bridge pier protection work using net gabion bag (Bottle Unit) should be carried
out soon after dredging work. Net with cobblestone should be placed around the
bridge piers and each weight becomes approximately 1 ton.
(2) Work Equipment
The following equipment will be used for the work:
・ Mini-crane of 2T Class: 1
This will be mounted on the barge and used for installing the net gabion bag.
Both fixed type and movable type are available, but need to fit the barge
adequately to prevent it from falling.
・ Backhoe of 0.45m3 Bucket: 1
This will also be mounted on the barge and used to support the crane work.
6.35
・ 300DWT Flat Barge: 1

This will be used as a floating work base and carrier for pre-fabricated
geo-textile gabion bag.
・ 500PS Tugboat:1
This will be used for towing the barge.
・ 200PS Anchor Boat: 1
This will be used for anchorage boat. It is necessary as watch boat.
・ 16PS Watch Boat: 2
The boats will be on the lookout for incoming boats from both upstream and
downstream.
(3) Work Procedure
Pre-fabrication of
Net Gabion
Bag
Fleet Towage to
Site
Positioning of
Fleet
Installation of
Net Gabion
Bag around
Bridge Pier
Survey &
Modification
Figure R6.4.18 Work Procedures for Bridge Pier Protection
Pre-fabrication of Bottle Unit: Boulders will be packed onto a bottle unit

either on land or on barge. If packed on land, require additional crane to load
them on the barge.
Fleet Towing to Site: A barge with 2 mini-cranes, backhoe and bottle unit will
be towed to the site by a 500PS tugboat.
Positioning of Fleet: Anchors will be settled with anchor boat, and the barge is
positioned with anchor wire and spud on it. Care must be taken to ensure that
suspended anchor wires do not become a nuisance to navigating vessels.
Installation of Bottle Unit around Bridge Pier: Bottle Unit will be installed one
after another with 2t class mini-crane. Suspension wire or rope from the bag
should not to be removed until final position is decided, and marked with a
buoy.
6.36
Survey and Modification: After setting all bags, the final position is surveyed
and inspected by the Engineer. No further position modification will be made
without the Engineer’s approval. Then remove the ones marked with a buoy.
6.4.7 Dike with SSP Revetment
(1) Planning Conditions

(a) Location and Main Features of Dikes
The proposed location and main features of levees are listed in Table R
6.4.10 . The total length is 1,821m. Figure R6.4.19 shows a general section.
Table R 6.4.10 Location and Main Features of Dikes

No. １ 2 3
STA 0＋921 ~ 1＋338 3＋033 ~ 3＋621 3＋898 ~ 4＋679
Length 419m 595m 807m
Side Left Right Left
HWL EL +14.138 ~14.185 EL +14.373 ~14.438 EL +14.469 ~14.556
Freeboard 1.0m 1.0m 1.0m
Parapet Top EL EL +15.200 EL +15.500 EL +15.600
Bank Crown EL EL +14.400 EL +14.700 EL +14.800
Present Surface EL EL +11~ 13 EL +11~ 13 EL +11 ~ 13
Size of Type 25H Type 25H Type25H
Steel Sheet Pile L = 7.5 ~ 9.5m L = 9.0 ~ 10.5m L = 9.0 ~ 10.5m
Distance from Full
17 ~ 20m 20 ~ 30m 8 ~ 27m
Depth Water
Others Bridge Underpass Bridge Underpass Bridge Underpass
Figure R6.4.19 General Section of SSP Dyke
(b) Other Conditions

Levee Crown Width : net width of 3.0m
Crown Edge Slope : 0.5 to 1.0 (for land side)
Steel Sheet Pile (SSP) : Type-25H, B = 900mm, w = 113kg/m
6.37
Top EL ≒ Top of Dike - 400mm

Length = 7.5-10.5m
STP value N of Foundation ： N <40
(2) Construction Plan

(a) General
The dike works will be carried out from the land side for the following
reasons:
・ Embankment height is expected to reach 3m and has the possibility of

settlement due to consolidation. To avoid this defect, pre-loading with
early embankment will be done at the earliest of implementation.
・ Working within the river channel will require enough water depth for
the barges. This may not be possible during the initial stages of
dredging work. Dredging will be carried out from downstream and
working upward, ensuring that water depth is adequate for the dredger.
On the other hand, dikes will be constructed in two (2) locations
upstream of Lower Marikina River. Thus, the levee work, including
gate and subsequent sluice work will constitute an extremely critical
part of the Project. Hence, it is recommended to separate the dike work
from the dredging work so as to rationalize the total construction plan.
・ The three sites have adequate proper lengths of 419m, 595m and 807m
respectively and each has proper road access. The length of the SSP is
assumed to be around 7.5m to 10.5m and will have no problem with
hauling truck transportation.
(b) Access to Dike and Site

Each site can be accessed from the land side but still some difficulties are
expected. Alternative access routes are also introduced below.
Portion No. 1 (0+921~1+338, L=419m), Left Side
Large trucks can access via a road located east of Vargas Bridge. However,
large vehicles will have difficulty turning the corner for this road. The area
adjacent to this corner may be reclaimed and widened to allow large vehicles
to change direction. There is another road 150m west of this bridge; it can
allow access by small cars but not large trucks.
Portion No. 2 (3+033~3+621, L=595m), Right Side
There is no existing access to this site for any vehicle. There is one route on
the east side of Alfonso Sandoval Bridge that leads to the center of the site but
this is too narrow, only around 2m, and also has a 50cm step, so that three
properties are removed to make access. Another access road can be provided
which will pass through an area of a plant next to the bridge, and another
small portion of a private property, which is used for backyard poultry-raising.
It is further recommended to use this area as a work yard for all three dike
sites.
6.38
Another consideration of riverside access should be given to this site, because

the site is not far from the upstream dredge start point, which is set at around
Sta. 3km, and it means that ships can operate at the site a few months after
dredge commencement. For riverside work, the disadvantage is that the
distance from the levee to the stream is very long, around 30m, which
situation is completely different from Pasig River, and ship works may
require over-dredge of 20m width leading to 70.000m3 additional dredging
volume with problems both in construction period and cost. Other alternative
is to make a small bay dredged and a jetty on a certain portion in order to
unload equipment and materials. This case seems rather moderate. The
difference between this and landside access is cost up by a bay, jetty and
unloading and loading with a large size crane, but the fundamental
construction scheme is the same as that of from landside access.
Portion No. 3 (3+898~4+679, L=807m), Left Side
The site can be accessed by large trucks via a road west of Rosario Bridge.
This space passing under the bridge is highly recommended as a work yard.
There may be some difficulties unloading long materials such as SSP; hence,
it is advisable to use a crane during night shifts or else provide a temporary
work yard by the river side.
(c) Work Procedures
The work procedures for dike construction are as shown in Figure R6.4.20.
6.39
Landside
Tree Cut & Consolidation of
Demolish and
Fencing One (1) Year
Drainage
Parapet Wall,
Access Road Manhole and
Concrete Railing &
Preparation Conduit
Pavement
SSP Work U-Ditch for

Embankment
Preparation at Landside
Overlay
Bridge Portion Drainage
SSP Piling at Embankment

Bridge Portion Compaction
SSP Piling at Embankment

General Portion Density Test
3*30cm
Concrete Block
SSP Coping
Retaining Wall
at 90cm
Figure R6.4.20 Work Procedure for SSP Dike Construction
1) Clearing, Grubbing and Perimeter Fencing: Install fence at the

boundary of the construction site after tree cutting and clearing.
2) Access Road Preparation: Prepare access roads to the sites, including
the widening of present road area by embankment at steep corners to
enable turning of construction vehicles at the corner.
3) SSP Work Preparation at Bridge Portion: As the preparation for SSP
works at bridge portion, pile temporary SSP or small temporary
cofferdam, in response to the site conditions, and then excavate the
surface downward to the working stage. One 3B pump is to be provided
for drainage.
4) SSP Piling at Bridge Portion: First of all, install SSP at bridge portion.
These SSP shall be driven piece by piece. A backhoe of 1m3 is to be
used as base machine, which is as the same as in the Phase II work, and
SSP is to be driven with 15kw vibro-hammer mounted at the top of the
backhoe. The required clearance for vibro-hammer is 2.635m and the
same figure is used in this planning. Alignment of SSP piece and
general procedure is illustrated in Figure R 6.4.21. Temporary SSP or
small cofferdam is removed after this work.
6.40
5) SSP Piling: After the bridge portion, general portion SSP in both sides
shall be driven successively with 40kw vibro-hammer. A 25-ton class
truck crane shall be used as a base machine, and the present promenade
or expanded temporary road from it is to be used as working stage. SSP
will be hauled from stockyard to the driving point one by one using
small vehicles such as rails with track trailers. Figure R 6.4.22 shows
the rotation radius of the 25-ton class truck crane, and it is 4.41m
(=3.10+2.62/2) as clearly shown. This value is small enough compared with
the minimum promenade width of 6.1m, 5.9m and 4.9m for western, middle
and eastern site promenade width respectively. Table R 6.4.11 shows the
lifting capacity of the 25-ton class truck crane in the case of no outreach
extension against a few boom lengths. The left columns show the case
of forward lifting and the right ones show the case of all direction lifting.
The expected lifting radius is less than 5.0m and it can be read that it has
4.0ton capacity. This value is larger than the 3.0ton of expected
vibro hammer or 1.5ton of SSP 25H with 12m in length.
6) SSP Coping: After cutting and leveling SSP top, rebar arrangement,
formwork and concreting shall be implemented. Cross-section of the
coping is around 0.6m2 and unit length of coping work is around 20 or
30m.
7) Landside Demolition and Drainage: Old linear park pavement shall be
demolished and temporary drainage shall be installed along the river
axis. Large size pump(s) for flood season and small size pump(s) for dry
season drainage shall be provided at each sluiceway point.
8) Manhole and Conduit: Fabricate manholes and conduits. Procedures are
basically the same as those in Pasig River, i.e., fabricate manholes at
first then put sleeper, lay down conduit pipes, cast collar concrete and
shot-bed concrete.
9) Embankment Works: One layer is to be laid with thickness of 35cm to
45cm; this thickness shall become less than 30cm after compaction.
Embankment material shall be carried to the site by dump trucks and
laid at site by using a 15t class bulldozer. Dump trucks shall approach
the unloading point directed by a guide worker whenever there is not
enough space for U-turn. The planned unit length of Embankment is
100m.
10) Embankment Compaction: Compaction work shall be carried out using
a 20t class tire roller.
11) Embankment Density Test: After compaction, density shall be
confirmed with RI test. Test frequencies are one for every 100sm. After
success in all tests, next overlay can be commenced.
12) Concrete Block Retaining Wall: For every 90cm of embankment, block
retaining wall at landside shall be fabricated by concrete partition wall
erection, concrete block positioning, gravel backfilling between
partition wall and embankment, and concrete pouring into the void
behind blocks. After completion of each block type wall, the next step
embankment is re-started.
6.41
13) Consolidation: One (1) year period shall be allowed for consolidation
after embankment completion. Sluiceway works, which is described in
a later section, shall be done during the latter half of this period.
14) Parapet Wall, Concrete Railing and Pavement: After the consolidation
period, parapet, concrete Railing and both concrete and asphalt
pavement works shall be carried out.
15) U-Ditch for Landside Drainage: After the consolidation period, a
concrete U-ditch for landside drainage shall be provided.
Illustration of SSP Construction Procedure under Bridges
Procedure shows an example of Middle Bank under Alfonso Sandoval Bridge
Final Stage Final-1 Stage Final-2 Stage
▽EL+16.938 Brideg Bottom ▽EL+16.938 Brideg Bottom ▽EL+16.938 Brideg Bottom
Backhoe Crow
2.638 Install & Paint 2.638＞1.5＋1.0 Install Drive
▽EL+14.300 ▽EL+14.300 ▽EL+14.300
1.0
1.5
1.5
1.5
2.5
▽EL+10.000 Surface 2.5 ▽EL+10.000 Surface ▽EL+10.000 Surface
▽EL+9.600 Paint L ▽EL+9.600 Paint L ▽EL+9.600 Paint L
2.5
2.5
4.5
4.0
▽EL+2.300 ▽EL+2.300 ▽EL+2.300
Final-3 Stage Final-4 Stage Final-5 Stage

▽EL+16.938 Brideg Bottom ▽EL+16.938 Brideg Bottom ▽EL+16.938 Brideg Bottom
Install & Paint Drive Down Install

▽EL+14.300 ▽EL+14.300 ▽EL+14.300
▽EL+13.438 ▽EL+13.438
▽EL+10.000 Surface ▽EL+10.000 Surface ▽EL+10.000 Surface

▽EL+9.600 Paint L ▽EL+9.600 Paint L ▽EL+9.600 Paint L
Pile Length
West Bank Middle Bank East Bank
▽EL+18.936
▽EL+18.160
▽EL+16.938
2.2 ▽EL+16.301
▽EL+15.736
4.936 2.638 > 2.635 3.760 2.2 ▽EL+15.525
1.7 ▽EL+14.960
▽EL+14.036 ▽EL+14.300 ▽EL+14.400
▽EL+14.000 1.0 1.7
2.0 2.0 1.5 1.7 ▽EL+13.260
1.7 2.2
2.2 2.0 ▽EL+12.036 1.5
1.5 2.0 2.0 2.0
▽EL+11.000 ▽EL+11.036 2.0 ▽EL+11.260
2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
2.0 2.0 2.5 ▽EL+10.200 ▽EL+10.200
▽EL+10.000 2.5 2.0 2.0 2.0
2.0
2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
2.0 2.0
2.5 2.0 2.0 2.0
2.5 2.0
2.0 2.0
2.0
4.3 4.3
3.8
4.3 3.8 4.3
4.2 4.3
4.3 3.7 3.8
3.8
▽EL+2.300 ▽EL+2.400
▽EL+2.000
Figure R 6.4.21 Illustration of SSP Segment at Bridge Portion
6.42
Figure R 6.4.22 Minimum Length for Rotation – 25ton Truck Crane
Table R 6.4.11 Lifting Capacity of 25ton Truck Crane
6.43
(d) Efficiency of Main Works

Work efficiencies shall be in accordance with “Civil Engineering Work
Estimation Standard, Japan.”
1) General SSP Driving
Work efficiency of SSP driving in general portion is to be 20 piles, or 18.0m,

per day in accordance with the requirement in p297 of “Civil Engineering
Work Estimation Standard, Japan” for 25H type of 12m drive into N<50
strata.
2) SSP Driving under Bridges
One pile is to be divided into 5 pieces at most at bridge portions. The work
efficiency is to be calculated in accordance with Japanese “Estimate Standard
for Vibro-Hammer Works, Vibro Hammer Method Engineering Association,
2007.” Page 9 of this book stipulates 7 pile per day in the case of one splice
for the same given other conditions. This description can be read that one
splice treatment requires at most 8.0/7=1.14h. If the splices are four (4), then
the work time becomes 1.14h*4=4.56h (or 0.57days) and this time is used in
the scheduling. Furthermore some portions need painting at site. It is assumed
that primer, body and finish painting requires 10hour curing time, thus 5 day
work is divided for in-site paint including pre- and after-works.
3) Embankment
The following work efficiency of main equipment shall be adopted:

15ton bulldozer: 690m3/day
20ton tire roller: 1,330m3/day
6.44
6.4.8 Sluiceway
(1) General
(a) Location and Main Features of Sluiceway
The location and main features of the sluiceway are as shown in Table R
6.4.12 . Total number of the sluiceways are 9.
Table R 6.4.12 Location and Main Features of Sluiceway
Sr. No. Size EL Bank No. STA
MSL-1 1-1.4×1.4 10.80 1-West 1+104
MSL-2 1-1.5×1.5 11.20 1-West 1+323
MSR-1 cancelled cancelled cancelled cancelled
MSR-2 1-1.4×1.4 11.06 2-Middle 3+157
MSR-3 1-2.0×1.6 10.97 2-Middle 3+255
MSR-4 1-1.5×1.5 11.09 2-Middle 3+438
MSL-3 2-1.2×1.2 11.10 3-East 3+945
MSL-4 1-1.6×1.6 11.09 3-East 4+221
MSL-5 1-1.0×1.0 11.23 3-East 4+406
MSL-6 1-1.2×1.2 11.20 3-East 4+503
(b) Access to Each Site
The same access road to the dike works will be used to access each sluiceway
site. Therefore, in order to carry materials to each site, trucks and vehicles will
pass on the top of dike.
(c) Other Conditions
As for the consolidation period of dikes and commencement date of sluiceway
construction, it is assumed that the embankment requires 105 calendar days
and it is carried in equal speed. The consolidation result on this assumption
shows that there is no harmful affect afterward by the construction of
sluiceway.
(2) Construction Planning
Sluiceways shall be constructed after the completion of dike embankment.

Temporary pipes shall be provided in each sluiceway to divert water during
embankment construction. These pipes will be abandoned after construction.
Sluiceway is to be constructed after the removal of soil embankment and then

filled again. The construction work should be done during the dry season,
because of temporary removal of the soil embankment
(b) Work Procedure
The work procedure for sluiceway works is shown in Figure R6.4.23 and as
described below.
6.45
Removal of
Embankment 1
Installation of
SSP
Removal of
Embankment 2
Ground
Preparation
Fabrication of
Sluiceway
Embankment
Figure R6.4.23 Work Procedure for Sluiceway
1) Removal of Embankment 1: Two (2) backhoes has to be used to remove

the embankment. One backhoe shall work on the access side and the
other is on the opposite side. The first excavation is to stop at the highest
elevation of the watertight SSP.
2) Installation of SSP: The SSP has to be piled using a proper guide.
Longer SSPs shall be driven to the final depth of this stage, but shorter
SSPs shall be driven step by step in the next excavation stage.
3) Removal of Embankment 2: The embankment has to be excavated
down to the bottom level. Installation of all the shorter SSPs may also
be allowed at this stage.
4) Ground Preparation: Cutting and leveling of the SSP top, gravel and
leveling concrete has to be carried out next.
5) Fabrication of Sluiceway: Sluiceway has to be fabricated in the
following order: bottom slab, side wall, top slab and appended portions.
6) Embankment: After completion, the sluiceway structure has to be filled
with embankment materials. This work has to be carried out in the same
manner as the dike. One layer of embankment should be less than 30cm
and properly compacted. Soil density shall be verified with R test for
every layer.
6.46
6.4.9 Supplementary Notes
(1) Laws and Regulations
Table R 6.4.13 Laws, Regulation and Governmental Documents

Item Responsible
Short Name Full Title Publication
No. Person
A Decree Instituting a Labor Code http://www.ilo.
Labor Code: thereby Revising and Consolidating org/dyn/travail/doc
Labor Code of the Labor and Social Laws to Afford s/1131/
１ Philippines, Protection to Labor, Promote Labor%20Code%2 President
Presidential Decree Employment and Human Resources 0of%20the%20Phi
No. 442, as Amended Development and Insure Industrial lippines%20-%20
Peace Based on Social Justice DOLE.pdf
Occupational Safety
and Health in the By Department
Guidelines Governing Occupational http://ncr.dole.gov.
Construction of Labor and
２ Safety and Health in the Construction ph/fndr/mis/files/D
Industry: Employment
Industry O_13.pdf
Department Order (DOLE)
No. 13 Series of 1998
Guidelines for the implementation of http://www.bwc.d
Ditto: Published
DOLE D.O. No. 13, Series of 1998, on ole.gov.ph/userfile
３ DPWH Dept. Order Internal
Occupational Safety and Health in the s/file/DO%2013-9
No. 56-2005 Document
Construction Industry 8.pdf
http://ja.scribd.co
Ditto: m/doc/83313490/ Published
Standard Specifications for Public
4 DPWH Internal REVISED-DPWH Internal
Works and Highways, 2004
Document -Standard-Specific Document
ation
Ditto:
Manual on Construction Supervision of Prepared under
5 DPWH Internal
Flood Control Project JICA support
Document
http://www.emb.g
Water Pollution: By Department
Revised Effluent Regulation of 1990, ov.ph/laws/water%
DENR of Environment
6 Revising and Amending the Effluent 20quality%20man
Administrative Order and Natural
Regulations of 1982 agement/dao90-35.
No. 35, Series of 1990 Resources
html
Noise: Amendments to Article 1 (Noise Official Gazette,
Ministry of
NPCC Memorandum Control Regulations) Chapter IV, Rules Vol. 76, No. 40,
7 Human
Circular No. 002 and Regulations of the National page7545-7547.
Settlements
Series of 1980 Pollution Control Commission (1978) October 6,1980
Vibration: Providing for the Revision of Republic http://www.lawphi
Presidential Decree Act No. 3931, commonly known as the l.net/statutes/presd
8 President
No. 984, August 18, Pollution Control Law, and for Other ecs/pd1976/pd_98
1976 Purposes 4_1976.html
Air Pollution:
An Act Providing for a Comprehensive http://emb.gov.ph/ House of
Clean Air Act of 1999
9 Air Pollution Control Policy and for ECA%20Center/R Representatives
(Republic Act No.
Other Purposes A8749.pdf and Senate
8749)
http://www.lawphi
Waste Management:
l.net/statutes/presd
10 Presidential Decree Philippine Environmental Code President
ecs/pd1977/pd_11
No. 825
52_1977.html
Traffic Rule in An Act Creating the Metropolitan
Manila: Manila Development Authority, http://www.mmda. House of
11 MMDA Act of 1994 Defining its Powers and Functions, gov.ph/Legal-Matt Representatives
(Republic Act Providing Funding thereof and for ers/RA7924.html and Senate
No. 7924) Other Purposes
Collected.
Truck Ban in Further Amending MMC Ordinance
(Summary
Manila: No. 78-04, as Amended by MMA Metro Manila
12 Introduction can be
Metro Manila Council Ordinance No. 19, S. 1991 RE: Truck Council
seen through FAQ
Ordinance No. 5 Ban
of MMDA HP.)
6.47
Item Responsible
Short Name Full Title Publication
No. Person
An Act Establishing the Philippine
Entity for Coast
Coast Guard as an Armed and
Guard: http://www.lawphi
Uniformed Service Attached to the House of
Philippine Coast l.net/statutes/repac
13 Department of Transportation and Representatives
Guard Act of 2009 ts/ra2010/ra_9993
Communications, thereby Repealing and Senate
(Republic Act _2010.html
Republic Act No. 5173, as Amended,
No. 9993)
and for Other Purposes
http://www.coastg
uard.gov.ph/index.
php?option=com_
Pasig River Safety: PASIG RIVER SAFETY, SECURITY, content&view=arti Memorandum
14 Memorandum AND THE GOVERNANCE OF ITS cle&id=93:memor by Coast Guard
Circular No. 05-07 ECOSYSTEM andum-circular-no Admiral
-05-07-&catid=38:
circulars&Itemid=
38
Pasig River Safety:
Guidelines to Vessel Transiting Presidential
15 Standard Operating Not Found
Malacañang Restricted Area (MRA) Security Group
Procedure No. 04
The fundamental law on labor in the Philippines is listed as the No. 1 Code in the
table above. Pursuant to this Code, No. 2 “Guidelines Governing Occupational
Safety and Health in the Construction Industry” was issued by the Department of
Labor and Employment (DOLE). This Department Order of DOLE includes
fundamental principles and penalty for the implementation of safety and health in
construction works, and also describes that “the cost of labor and equipment for
the safety and health shall be independently estimated from other construction
items”. The No. 3 document was published in pursuant to the No. 2 order and
seems to be the internal order of DPWH, providing the same stipulation on “the
cost of labor and equipment for the safety and health.” DPWH also published
No. 4 documents and holds the No. 5 document, both of them containing safety
provisions.
Effluent from industry shall conform to No. 6 “Revised Effluent Regulation of

1990, Revising and Amending the Effluent Regulations of 1982,” and it is the
same as prescribed for the effluent in this project. Noise shall conform to No. 7
“Amendments to Article 1 (Noise Control Regulations) Chapter IV, Rules and
Regulations of the National Pollution Control Commission (1978).” No. 8
“Providing for the Revision of Republic Act No. 3931, Commonly Known as the
Pollution Control Law, and for Other Purposes” provides all aspects of the
pollution though there is no concrete regulation value for vibration, Air pollution
is regulated by No. 9 “An Act Providing for a Comprehensive Air Pollution
Control Policy and for Other Purposed,” but it mainly describes the national
policy for atmosphere improvement and regulations for that purpose, and does not
directly concern the dust at the backfill site in this project. Waste shall generally
confirm to No. 10 “Philippine Environmental Code,” which has no classification
between house and industrial waste, except for hazardous wastes.
The law governing law on the transportation and traffic in Metropolitan Manila is
No. 11 “An Act Creating the Metropolitan Manila Development Authority,
Defining its Powers and Functions, Providing Funding thereof and for Other
Purposes” that provides that MMDA has control over “transport and traffic
management” and, eventually, all large projects in Metropolitan Manila are
6.48
required to submit their traffic plans and get approval from MMDA. Real control
of MMDA is however limited to the national roads only. City and barangay roads
are controlled by each city and barangay concerned, in view of autonomy, and
discussions on road restriction are done with the concerned authority. It is said
that reporting one (1) week beforehand is preferable in the case of MMDA for
those discussions. One issue that needs caution in Metropolitan Manila is that
some sections of main roads have time restriction on trucks in accordance with
No. 12 “Metro Manila Council Ordinance No. 5” that fundamentally bans the
transfer of trucks of over 4.5 tons from 6AM to 9AM and 5PM to 9PM that has
been amended frequently with some exemptions such as national flag projects, so
that the recent situation is recommended to be confirmed from MMDA.
Traffic safety regulation of the river is derived from the No. 13 “Philippine Coast
Guard Act of 2009” that provides that PCG is established under DTOC in order to
enforce regulations in accordance with all relevant maritime conventions, treaties
or instruments and national law at sea within the maritime jurisdiction of the
Philippines. The act also provides that, subject to the approval of the Secretary of
the DOTC, this department can issue and enforce rules and regulations for the
promotion of safety and life and property at sea on all maritime-related activities.
No. 14 “PASIG RIVER SAFETY, SECURITY, AND THE GOVERNANCE OF
ITS ECOSYSTEM” has been issued by PCG admiral, stipulating that its authority
derives from item No. 13 and others, and declaring that PCG “shall spearhead the
promotion of safety, security of transportation, … of the Pasig River and its
tributaries,” and is deemed to be the legislative standard of the PCG’s river traffic
control. A stretch from Ayala Bridge to Pandacan Bridge is designated as
Malacañang Restricted Area (MRA) because of presidential area and regulated
for ship and vessel traffic by No. 15 “Guidelines to Vessels Transiting
Malacañang Restricted Area” issued by the Presidential Security Group, which is
under the Office of President.
(2) Safety Issues
・ General Safety Management: shall conform to the general provisions and

specifications of the contract, and the local safety regulations are generally
imposed on the Contractor through them.
・ Peculiar Safety Issue: is the electricity cut-off prevention during SSP
driving both for high and low voltage lines. For high voltage line, the
construction adopts a 3-meter net clearance which is the same as that
adopted for the Phase II works. For low voltage lines and other cables, it is
required for the Contractor to negotiate with the concerned entity and take
proper measures, and for the Employer to make necessary support for this
implementation.
・ Evacuation of Fleet during Storm: is planned to be moved to the nearest
rather wide portion of the river and moored in line along flow direction, then
let the crew remove trees and floating objects to prevent piling up all days
and night. This principle is also adopted in the Phase II project.
6.49
(3) Other Issues and Measures
(a) Electricity Cut-off
Electricity cut-off sometimes happens in Manila. The supply of electricity is

planned to be fundamentally by generators, because this scheme is flexible
both in site and time, and also not vulnerable to commercial electricity cut-off.
The base yard at Lambingan adopts commercial electricity for its office part
and laboratory, but it needs to provide emergency generator because the
laboratory needs permanent power source for curing facilities, thus generator
of 50kW is planned including office electricity.
(b) Water Cut-off
It is assumed that there is little possibility that water cut-off affects

construction works. Works that require water as material include water-jet for
SSP drive and batching of concrete at site. The water in such cases is stocked
on the barge, therefore, no problem is supposed. A water tank shall be
provided at the Lambingan base yard to supply water to those kinds of barges.
(c) Traffic Congestion
In this project, many of works vulnerable to traffic congestion are planned to

be implemented from river side. For example, SSP drive and drainage works
carried out from river side along Pasig River, dredge work and soil
transportation along Lower Marikina River are typical. Furthermore, soil
transportation from unloading jetty to the backfill area is separate from
transportation in the Lake Ring Road, and this ensures the independence of
traffic between the public and project construction work.
Embankment and sluiceway works at Marikina are supposed to be a little

vulnerable to traffic congestion, and embankment overlay is one of the most
vulnerable works in them, because materials supplied is in large volumes.
One measure is to make buffer action by stocking material at site, but this is
both expensive and space demanding and not recommendable. Nighttime
work is an alternative, but it needs another consideration of noise at night.
Concreting works also get affected by traffic congestion especially on quality.
Work at night and batching at site or on barge with pump transfer are
alternative measures, but the latter is possible only when the concrete volume
is not so large. The embankment and concrete works will begin several
months after work commencement so that the observation at site is to be
reflected in the selection of countermeasures.
The road of 200m between the unloading jetty and backfill area is literally
narrow for traffic. The present situation allows only one-way traffic, so that
widening it to a two-way traffic is inevitable for back and forth transport. An
alternative to this method is to use a temporary bridge between near the Ring
Road point and another road just north of the Ring Road and make a circular
one-way route, but it needs further consideration as to the existing small
market.
6.50
6.5 Construction Schedule
For planning purposes, the total work is arranged in accordance with the up-to-date
drawings and the construction planning under Phase II. The whole program is derived
from all component works.
Each of the scheduled activities carefully considers labor, equipment and resources most
appropriate for the method employed in a given condition. Major equipment items are
selected based on the equipment capacity quoted from the publication of the Association
of Carriers and Equipment Lessors, Inc. (ACEL - Equipment Guidebook of 2009,
Edition 24). Labor requirements are assessed using a mix of current productivity rates
and the rates recorded on similar overseas projects. Unit construction schedules for each
work item has been analyzed and fixed.
The construction schedules for the Pasig River and the Lower Marikina River are as
shown in Table R 6.5.1 and Table R 6.5.2 , respectively. The construction could be
completed in three (3) years. Detailed program for Psig river and Lower Marikina river is
indicated in Figure 6.5.1 and 6.5.2.
Table R 6.5.1 Construction Schedule for Pasig River
6.51
Table R 6.5.2 Construction Schedule for Lower Marikina River
6.6 Quality Control Management
6.6.1 General
The Contractor shall be responsible for ensuring that the Works comply with the specified
requirements. It shall also maintain an effective and adequately documentation system of
Quality Management necessary to satisfy the Contract requirements. The Contractor shall
see to it that with each procedure only acceptable work is delivered to the Employer.
The Engineer shall inspect the Contractor’s system of Quality Management, monitor its
implementation and instruct any modification when he considers it is necessary.
6.6.2 Staffing
For the duration of the Works, The Contractor shall employ accredited Quality Control
Engineer, and sufficient staff to carry out the inspections, testing, etc., required by the
Contract. These staff shall have no involvement in other functions such as programming
or managing the Works and shall be employed solely on quality assurance functions.
6.52
6.6.3 System and Procedures
The Contractor shall:
implement a quality system which complies with the requirements of ISO 9001
and includes a Quality Manual and Procedures as required by ISO 9001;
provide a Quality Plan which encompasses the planning requirements of
ISO 9001 and the requirements set out in the Specifications;
within 28 days of the Commencement Date, submit three controlled copies of the
current edition of the Quality Manual and the first edition of the Quality Plan to
the Engineer for approval;
review the Quality Plan monthly and revise it when necessary to address changes
in the construction process and promptly submit the revised Quality Plan to the
Engineer for approval; and
review the Quality Manual, if necessary, and promptly submit any revision to the
Engineer for approval.
6.6.4 Control of Non-Conformance
A “Non-Conformance Report” is a report issued by the Contractor when a

non-conformance with the contract specification occurs. The report must summarize in
what manner the non-conformance does not comply with the contract specification and
shall attach relevant inspection and test records. It must also include the Contractor's
proposed disposition (e.g., accept as is, rework or replace).
In the event of a non-conformance related to the Specification and the Contractor does not
take appropriate action when informed, the Engineer shall issue a Corrective Action
Request (CAR) to the Contractor. The Contractor shall respond by issuing a
Non-Conformance Report which shall indicate the proposed method of disposition.
The Contractor shall review and analyze the cause of all non-conformances and develop a
plan of corrective action to minimize the likelihood of recurrence. Details of such
corrective action shall be entered in a non-conformance report.
6.6.5 Subcontractors
The Contractor shall be fully responsible for the integration of all subcontractors' quality
systems into its own system, or alternatively for the subcontractor to work within the
Contractor's Quality Plan.
The Contractor shall be the single point of responsibility for the production,
implementation and auditing of the quality system required under the Contract.
6.6.6 Amendments
The Engineer may at any time instruct the Contractor to amend the Quality Manual or
Quality Plan. The Contractor shall thereupon promptly amend the Quality Manual or
Quality Plan and resubmit it to the Engineer for approval.
6.53
6.6.7 Testing of Materials
The Contractor is responsible for ensuring that the testing, inspection and examination
necessary to verify conformance with the Contract is undertaken.
The Contractor shall provide, maintain and operate until the completion of the Works a
laboratory complete with furnishings, fixtures and equipment sufficient to carry out all
required quality control testing. Alternatively, the Contractor may nominate a
commercial testing laboratory where the testing can be carried out. Such an alternative
laboratory shall only be used with the specific approval of the Engineer.
The laboratory shall be provided within 56 days of the Commencement Date and the
Contractor shall utilize the services of the BRS of DPWH for testing until the laboratory
is operational.
6.6.8 Quality of Materials and Samples
Before placing any order for materials for incorporation in the Works, the Contractor
shall submit to the Engineer for information the names of the firms supplying materials
giving the origin, manufacturer's specification, quality, weight, strength and description.
When requested, the Contractor shall provide such samples and test certificates as the
Engineer may require.
6.6.9 Quality Records and Reports
The Contractor shall maintain a system of records that provides objective evidence that
the requirements of the Contract have been met. The Contractor shall ensure that
subcontractors’ records pertinent to the Contract are included in this system.
All applicable records shall be available for audit and review by the Engineer during the
period of the Contract and for at least certain years after the date of Taking-Over.
The Contractor shall provide a monthly quality report to the Engineer containing the
following:
Identification of all work in progress; and
Details of all actions taken on the Quality System since the last monthly report.
6.54
CHAPTER 7 COST ESTIMATE
7.1 Cost Estimation Conditions
The following are the conditions for cost estimation:
・ Type of Scheme: Japan’s ODA Loan Scheme (STEP: Special Terms for
Economic Partnership),
・ Procurement Conditions: Prime contractors must be Japanese firms.
Subcontractors may be from any country.
・ Procurement of Goods and Services under STEP: Not less than 30% of the total
amount of contracts (excluding consulting services) must be from Japan or
provided by Japanese firms.
・ Procurement Method: International Competitive Bidding (ICB).
・ Contract Method: Unit-Cost Contract with Bill of Quantities (BOQ)
7.2 Basic Conditions of Cost Estimate
7.2.1 Price Level
The cost estimates are updated on the price level as of November 2012.
7.2.2 Exchange Rate
Exchange rates are referred to the monthly average in November 2012 of Central Bank of
the Philippines.
1.0 PHP = 1.968 JPY
1.0 USD = 80.940 JPY = 41.123 PHP.
7.2.3 Currency for Cost Estimates
The project cost component shall consist of foreign currency and local currency portions.
Philippine Peso shall be used for both the local and foreign currency portions.
The classifications of foreign and local portions are as given below.
7.2.3.1 Local Currency Portion

・ All Labor Costs
・ Cost of construction material and equipment lease locally procured;
・ Value Added Tax (VAT)
7.1
7.2.3.2 Foreign Currency Portion

・ Cost of construction materials, equipment and services procured from Japan and/or
third countries
7.2.4 Reference Guidelines/Manuals
The cost estimates are referred to the following guidelines/manuals indicated below:
DPWH Department Order No. 72, Series of 2012 (Amendment to D.O. 29 Series
of 2011 Re: Revised Guidelines on the Preparation of Approved Budget for the
Contract)
DPWH Department Order No. 71, Series of 2012 (Guidelines for the
Establishment of Construction Materials Price, Standard Labor and Equipment
Rental Rates Data Base)
DPWH Department Order No. 03, Series of 2010 (Guidelines on the Acquisition
of Motor Vehicles for Use in Infrastructure Project Supervision)
DPWH Department Order No. 46, Series of 2007 (Application of Daywork and
Provisional Sum Items in Contract Management)
Civil Engineering Work Estimation Standard for Ministry of Land, Infrastructure,
Transport and Tourism of Japan
Ports and Harbors Work Estimation Standard for Ministry of Land, Infrastructure,
Transport and Tourism of Japan
7.3 Methodology of Cost Estimate
Costs for construction works are essentially estimated on the unit price basis. The
construction cost consists of direct cost and indirect costs. The direct cost consists of
equipment, material and labor costs. Indirect cost includes overhead expenses,
contingencies, miscellaneous expenses, contractor’s profit margin and VAT.
Labor Cost
Steel Sheet Pile Works Material Cost
Equipment Cost
Direct Cost
Labor Cost
Concrete Works Material Cost
Equipment Cost
BOQ　ITEM
Overhead Expenses
Construction Cost
Contingencies
Indirect Cost Miscellaneous Expenses
Contractor’s Profit Margin
Value Added Tax (VAT)
Figure R 7.3.1 Composition of Construction Cost
7.2
Composition of the unit price as well as production rates are basically referred to the past
construction records in the Philippines and on the approved cost estimate report by the
DPWH, such as the Pasig-Marikina River Channel Improvement Project, Phase I and
Phase II. Moreover, the adopted unit price is verified by the unit price analysis from
DPWH as well as from Japanese estimation standards.
The composition of unit price is as described below.
7.3.1 Direct Cost
7.3.1.1 Labor Cost
The labor rates are estimated based on the minimum labor rate approved by the
Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) – National Capital Region (NCR). The
labor wages used in the cost estimates include leave, bonus, Social Security System (SSS),
Phil Health, Pag-ibig Fund, and all other mandatory benefits, all in accordance with the
Labor Code of the Philippines.
7.3.1.2 Material Cost
In accordance with the “DPWH Department Order No. 72, Series of 2012,” allowance for
waste and/or losses shall not exceed 5% of materials requirement.
On the other hand, the “Manual on Design and Cost Estimates for JICA Preparatory Study,
March 2009” mentions the allowance as follows:
・ Re-Bars : 8%
・ Form : 7%
・ Unreinforced Concrete : 6%
・ Reinforced Concrete : 6%
Based on DPWH Department Order No. 72, the allowance adopted in this project is 5%.
The costs of construction materials and supplies including the delivery cost to the site
were obtained mostly from local suppliers in Metro Manila. Material procurement from
Japan is considered if Japanese technology is applied, including transportation cost from
Japan to the site.
The costs for locally produced and supplied materials cost were estimated based on the
quarterly updated report by the Price Monitoring Committee (PMC) of DPWH, and on
the obtained quotations from the three (3) or more suppliers or distributors.
7.3
7.3.1.3 Equipment Cost
The hourly-operated rental rates issued by the Association of Carriers and Equipment
Lessors, Inc. (ACEL) through its Equipment Guidebook are presently applied for DPWH
projects. This book as well is being used in this Project for the equipments considered in
the unit price analysis.
For the special equipment and machinery, such as water-jet machine and drilling
equipment for hard soil strata, their operation costs have been estimated with reference to
the “Depreciation Estimate Table of Construction Machinery and Equipment” by the
Japan Construction Mechanization Association (JCMA).
In accordance with DPWH Department Order No. 72, Series of 2012, “Mobilization and
Demobilization shall be treated as a separate equipment cost. The amount shall not exceed
1% of estimated direct cost”. This percentage of the estimated direct cost has been
referred in this project.
7.3.2 Indirect Cost
The computation of indirect cost has been referred to “DPWH Department Order No. 72,
Series of 2012” as well as the past yen-loan-financed project, as prescribed below:
7.3.2.1 Overhead Expenses
Overhead expenses range from 5 to 8% of the estimated direct cost, which includes
Engineering and Administrative Supervision, Transportation Allowance, Office
Expenses (for office equipment, power and water consumption, and maintenance),
Premium on Contractor’s All Risk Insurance (CARI), Financing Cost (Premiums on Bid
Security, Performance Security, Surety for Advance Payment and Warranty Bond for one
(1) year).
7.3.2.2 Contingencies
Contingencies range from 0.5 to 3% of the estimated direct cost. These include expenses
for meetings, coordination with other stakeholders, billboards, stages during ground
breaking and inauguration ceremonies, and other unforeseen events.
7.3.2.3 Miscellaneous Expenses
Miscellaneous Expenses range from 0.5 to 1% of the estimated direct cost. These include
laboratory tests for quality control and plan preparation.
7.4
7.3.2.4 Contractor’s Profit Margin
Contractor’s Profit Margin shall be 8% and 10% of the estimated direct cost for projects
costing above five (5) million pesos and for projects of up to five (5) million pesos,
respectively. As a result of the cost estimate, the computed direct cost exceeded to five (5)
million pesos. Hence, the Contractor’s Profit Margin shall be 8%.
7.3.2.5 Value Added Tax (VAT)
VAT component shall be 12% of the sum of Estimated Direct Cost, Overhead Expenses,
Contingencies, Miscellaneous Expenses and Contractor’s Profit Margin.
The percentages of the Estimated Direct Cost regarding, Overhead Expanses,

Contingencies, Miscellaneous Expenses and Contractor’s Profit Margin are as given in
the table below.
Table R 7.3.1 Indirect Cost List by Estimated Direct Cost

Indirect Cost (%)*
Overhead, Total Indirect
Contractor’s
Estimated Direct Cost Contingencies, Cost excluding
Profit Margin
Miscellaneous VAT (%)*
(%)*
Expenses (%)*
Up to 5 Million Pesos (MP) 12 10 22
Above 5 MP up to 50 MP 9 8 17
Above 50 MP up to 150 MP 7 8 15
Above 150 MP 6 8 14
* Percentage of Estimated Direct Cost
7.4 Composition of Project Cost
Project Cost consists of construction cost, consulting services cost, compensation cost,
administration expenses, and contingencies.
7.4.1 Construction Cost
The composition of Construction Cost is as stipulated in Section 7.3 . Each item quantity
in the BOQ shall be multiplied by the unit price derived. The sum of the estimated direct
cost and the indirect cost is the construction cost of the Project
Imported materials are counted as STEP materials.
7.4.2 Consulting Services Cost
The Consulting Services Cost is composed of construction supervision cost excluding

detailed engineering design cost.
7.5
7.4.3 Compensation Cost
Compensation Cost consists of land acquisition, resettlement, structural improvement and

tree cutting are estimated based on the outsourcing survey results.
7.4.4 Administrative Cost
In accordance with the internal regulations of DPWH, the administrative cost is computed
at three and a half percent (3.5%) of the total of construction cost, consulting services cost
and compensation cost.
7.4.5 Physical and Price Contingencies, and Price Escalation
7.4.5.1 Physical Contingency
The physical contingency for unforeseen conditions is assumed at about five percent (5%)
of the sum of construction cost, consulting services cost and compensation cost.
7.4.5.2 Price Contingency and Price Escalation
The annual inflation rates applied for the price contingency are:
・ 4.0% for local currency portion
・ 1.6% for foreign currency portion
7.5 Estimated Construction Cost
The estimated construction cost is referred to “1.4 Summarization of Construction Cost”

in “VOLUME-V COST ESTIMATE”.
7.6
CHAPTER 8 PROJECT EVALUATION
8.1 Evaluation of the Project
Project evaluations are based on the technical, social and environmental point of view, the
results of which proved the viability of the project. Economic evaluation was conducted
during the Preparatory Study (2011) and will not be included in this report.
8.2 Technical Evaluation of the Project
The typical structures being proposed including the revetment with steel sheet pile, parapet
wall, and drainage facilities were already done during Phase II project implementation.
Therefore it can be said that the facilities are proven feasible for the particular river
conditions in this project.
The utilization of dredged sediment as earth embankment materials was given careful
consideration and is now recommended, on the basis of new sampling and laboratory
analysis undertaken in this D/D Study. Results of this recent water quality and sediment
study showed that none of the samples exceeded the DENR standard for heavy metals.
The critical path of this project involves the construction of the steel sheet pile revetment
works for Pasig River and dredging works for Marikina River. The target completion is
within three (3) years.
The proposed improvements are basically common flood control structures in the
Philippines. The project management agency (DPWH-PMO-MFCP I) will conduct a regular
inspection and monitoring of the construction, operation and maintenance activities.
8.3 Social and Environmental Evaluation of the Project
8.3.1 Assessment of Project Impacts
Overall, the project will generate significant socio-economic benefits by reducing potential
flood damages on individual households and business sectors in Metro Manila where
approximately 33 percent (33%) of the country’s GDP is generated.
The involuntary resettlement of people who will be affected by the construction of the river
structures will be minimized by restricting the extent of river works, as far as possible,
within the publicly owned land and avoiding damage to existing houses and other
improvements.
The sampling and analysis of riverbed sediments was done at 100 m intervals along the
Lower Marikina River. The purpose is to evaluate whether or not the sediments to be
dredged are contaminated. Preliminary results of the Study have confirmed that as far as
heavy metals is concerned, the levels detected were way below the threshold criteria.
8.1
Table R 8.3.1 below shows the temporary or short-term environmental impacts identified
during the 1998 Master Plan Study and reviewed in this Study. The negative environmental
impacts are predicted and summarized below for further consideration of their mitigation.
The project site is either within or near three types of Environmentally Critical Area (ECA):
areas hard-hit by natural calamities (project site), tourism area, and water bodies for
domestic and wildlife/fishery support (Laguna Lake), while this area is not included in the
National Integrated Protected Area System (NIPAS).
Table R 8.3.1 Assessment of Negative Impacts

Negative
Impact
Items Explanations
EIS This
(98) Review
Resettlement is necessary along the Pasig River. The number
Involuntary
1 － A of resettlement is under investigation. Survey is also being
Resettlement
conducted for the backfill site.
Local Economy such
There are no negative impacts expected due to construction
2 as Employment and － D
activities.
Livelihood, etc
Land Use and Since project area is already urbanized, no negative impacts
3 Utilization of Local － D might be anticipated for change in land use and utilization of
Resources local resources.
Social Institutions
Since construction activities are limited to the narrow strips
such as Social
along the river in urban environment, no negative impacts on
4 Infrastructure and － D
existing community activities or services could be
Local Decision -
anticipated.
making Institutions
Several infrastructures such as covered courts and ferry
stations are recognized within the work areas.
Social Environment:
River navigation might be affected slightly during the

Existing Social
construction phase, but will be greatly improved after the
5 Infrastructures and D B
dredging work of the Lower Marikina River.
Services
Use of existing liner parks along the Lower Marikina River
will be affected due to the construction work of revetment
and the re-construction of pavement.
Livelihood of general low income people is not dependent on
Poor, Indigenous and
6 － D resources from the rivers, such as fish and drinking water.
Ethnic People
Also, no Indigenous and Ethnic People were identified.
Residents in the project affected area do not think
Misdistribution of
7 － D construction work is a problem for their daily life according
Benefits and Damage
to the interview conducted.
Cultural heritage,
No cultural heritage sites or spiritually important places are
8 historical and religious － D
identified in the project affected areas.
sites
Local Conflicts of No negative impact on local conflict could be predicted based
9 － D
Interest on the information of Phase II Project.
Water Usage or Water
There are no people who depend on river water for drinking
10 Rights and Communal － D
water, irrigation, etc.
Rights
Inadequate sanitation during construction will be a major
11 Sanitation － B
cause of disease and dirty the area.
Hazards (risk) Almost no demand is anticipated for commercial sex workers
12 Infectious Diseases － D who are potentially HIV positive and might spread the
such as HIV/AIDS disease, based on the result of Phase II Project.
In the construction, dredging of river bed and filling
Topography and
13 － D low-lying area with dredged materials are planned. However,
Environment
Geographical Features
such works are conducted in the limited scale.
Natural
During the construction, no soil erosion which affects on

14 Soil Erosion － D
wide area by earth excavation might occur.
No changes in volume, flow direction, lowering water level,
15 Groundwater － D
etc., for groundwater are anticipated.
8.2
Negative
Impact
Items Explanations
EIS This
(98) Review
Revetments are planned to be constructed along the existing
river banks. Although the channel will be deepened by the
Hydrological dredging, there is no change in normal water level because
16 － D
Situation dredged section is within tidal affected area of Manila Bay.
Natural Environment
Thus, no change in hydrological situation is anticipated by

the project.
No damage to coastal zone is anticipated since the site is far
17 Coastal Zone － D
from coastal zone.
Construction works will damage some terrestrial flora, which
Flora, Fauna and
18 － D can be naturally revived in time. No endangered or concerned
Biodiversity
species are identified in the construction affected area.
19 Meteorology － D Not affected or least likely affected by the construction work.
Dike will be heightened to small extent in a part of the
20 Landscape － D
construction area, where the view might be limited slightly.
21 Global Warming － D Not affected or least likely affected by the construction work.
Exhaust and fumes from construction machinery will add
pollutants to the air, but the pollution will be very light,
temporary, and localized, and it will not be as significant an
issue as the already heavily polluted air in Metro Manila
Area. As Phase II project monitoring results show that
22 Air Pollution D B
exhausts from machineries and vehicle used for the
construction works are likely just infusing with the existing
air pollution in the area. More dust will be generated due to
construction activities such as spreading and backfilling at
the backfill area especially during dry season.
Dredging may cause temporary pollution by temporary
23 Water Pollution B B
increase of suspended solids and increase turbidity.
The results of sediment analysis of this Study showed below
the criteria. Thus, basically no soil/groundwater
24 Soil Contamination D D contamination will occur at the disposal site. However, Cr
Pollution Measures
(VI) might be eluted from cement when treating sediment

with cement.
In the project construction period, generation of garbage,
Wastes (including
25 B B demolished structures, dredged material (about 900,000 m3),
Dredged Material)
etc. are expected.
During construction period, construction activities could
generate noise and vibration to surroundings, but the
pollution will be very light, temporary and localized, and it
will not be as significant an issue as the already existing ones
26 Noise and Vibration B B
in the Metro Manila area. Phase II project monitoring results
show that the machineries and vehicle used for river channel
improvement work least likely aggregate already existing
noise and vibration.
No ground subsidence was reported in Phase II. Also, the
27 Ground Subsidence － D same result is expected for Phase III. No ground water
extraction is planned in the construction.
During the sediment sampling of this Study, almost no odor
28 Offensive Odor C D
was felt from sediment.
Since the dredging works remove polluted sediments of river,
29 Bottom Sediment － D
no pollution of bottom sediments is predicted.
In the project construction period, construction related
30 Accidents － B
accidents might occur.
A: Significant impact, B: Slight impact, C: Unknown, D: Few impact. －：Not Applicable
*EIS (1998) did not use JICA’s method to evaluate the impact using “A, B, C and D”. Evaluation results of EIS (1998)
were converted to JICA’s method.
8.3
8.3.2 Social and Environmental Mitigation Measures and Monitoring during Phase
III Construction Stage
Table R 8.3.2 summarizes the possible impact mitigation measures that will be considered
against the predicted negative environmental impacts relative to the Phase III construction
works. The EIS on the backfill site was submitted to DENR on December 6 ,2012 and ECC
was issued on February 4, 2013.
Table R 8.3.2 Mitigation Measures for Negative Impacts during Phase III
Construction Works
Impact
Items Mitigation Measures
Evaluation
The resettlement of and compensation for Project Affected
Involuntary People (PAP) will be implemented according to the
1 A
Resettlement Resettlement Action Plan prepared in accordance with JICA
Guidelines/World Bank’s safeguard policies.
Local Economy such Hire local construction workers first in priority in
2 as Employment and D coordination with construction contractor and Barangay
Livelihood, etc captains.
Land Use and
3 Utilization of Local D Not necessary
Resources
Social Institutions
such as Social
4 Infrastructure and D Not necessary
Local Decision -
making Institutions
Sufficient community consultations and careful phasing of
construction works will be necessary to minimize the
negative impacts on the public structures within the work
areas and their functions.
Make a good coordination with Coastal Guard, related LGUs
Social Environment
and Barangays on operations time between the barges, ferry,

Existing Social
and boats and construction equipment so that the negative
5 Infrastructures and B
impacts on river navigation from dredging activities and
Services
construction operation will be minimized.
During construction of revetment and re-construction of
pavement along the Lower Marikina River, temporary access
will be provided for the residents, based on the consultation
with related LGUs, Barangays and local residents ahead of
time.
Poor, Indigenous and
6 D Not necessary
Ethnic people
Misdistribution of
7 D Not necessary
Benefit and Damage
Cultural heritage,
historical and
8 D Not necessary
religious sites
Recreational area
Local Conflicts of
9 D Not necessary
Interest
Water Usage or
10 Water Rights and D Not necessary
Communal Rights
Install sanitary facilities at each construction site and conduct
11 Sanitation B the cleaning and disposal of them regularly by construction
contractor.
Hazards/ Risk;
Hold seminars for educating construction workers by a
12 Infectious Diseases D
construction contractor.
such as HIV/AIDS
8.4
Impact
Items Mitigation Measures
Evaluation
Topography and
13 D Not necessary.
Geographical Features
Natural Environment For small scale of erosion, excavation works should be
14 Soil Erosion D conducted properly in accordance with the design of civil
works for stability.
Groundwater quality should be monitored at least for Cr6+
15 Groundwater D
and pH at the backfill site.
16 Hydrological Situation D Not necessary
17 Coastal zone D Not necessary
Flora, Fauna and
18 D Not necessary
Biodiversity
19 Meteorology D
Not necessary
20 Landscape D
Not necessary
21 Global Warming D
Not necessary
Air quality is monitored as the same as Phase II especially at
the backfill site. Fumes and exhaust from machinery and
equipment used for Project can be reduced or prevented by
properly installed and maintained mufflers and filters. CO2
level is suppressed by frequent and timely changing of
22 Air Pollution B
machine/engine oil and stopping excessive idling of
engines. Hosing of ground/cover-sheets are done during
earth work in order to prevent dust from dispersing into the
air. Regular water sprinkling using tank lorries to exposed
areas at the backfill site especially during dry weather.
Due to rapid flowrate of Marikina River water, erosion
control measures such as putting of steel sheets, gabions, or
watertight eco-grab techniques during dredging may be
difficult to implement, thus, regularly monitoring on
turbidity and other regulated parameters will be conducted
instead.
23 Water Pollution B
The final measure is to ensure that the contractor uses; (i)
good construction practices (ii) that major excavation work
are scheduled during the low flow season and (iii) that a Site
Soil Protection and Rehabilitation Program is included
within the Contract Documents and is the Contractor’s
responsibility
Pollution
For dredged materials, cement will be added to stabilize the

fine dredged sediments. The dredged materials were found
24 Soil Contamination D to be free from leached contaminats, however leaching from
dredged materials at disposal/backfill site will still be
monitored during and even after the implementation phase.
Generated solid wastes/sediments are taken care of
according to Republic Act 9003. Construction debris and
work related garbage are transported to the construction
contractor’s office unit, separated properly, and received for
25 Waste B
disposal by a licensed treater. Eco-tube or cement-base
pre-mix method for solidification can be used properly as
mentioned above. Create a waste monitoring plan and
manage the waste based on the plan.
Noise and vibrations are reduced by using machines
installing mufflers/noise reduction devices. If necessary,
construction work that generates nuisance noise and
26 Noise and Vibration B
vibration should be operated during less
noticeable/affective times. Inform and get understanding
from the residents who may be affected.
27 Ground Subsidence D Not necessary
28 Offensive Odor D Not necessary
29 Bottom Sediment D Not necessary
Inform the concerned people of off-limit or dangerous area
on bulletin boards or via Information, Education and
30 Accidents B
Campaign (IEC) Educate workers and residents on the
environment and safety of the construction workplace.
A: Significant impacted, B: Slight impact, C: Unknown, D: Few impact. －：Not applicable.
*EIS(1998) did not use JICA’s method to evaluate the impact using “A, B, C and D”. Evaluation results of EIS
(1998) were converted to JICA’s method.
8.5
CHAPTER 9 STUDY ON PLAN OF OPERATION AND

MAINTENANCE
9.1 General
9.1.1 Purpose of Operation and Maintenance
Even if the flood control facilities have been completed, the facilities become old and
damaged by flowing water, heavy rainfall, man-made, dumping garbage, illegal
encroachment, siltation, erosion, scouring during long time.
The Operation and Maintenance (O&M) is an important component of the Flood Control
Project to achieve and maintain project purposes. Inadequate maintenance of the
completed flood control works will lead to an increase in the risk of flooding.
The purposes of O&M are itemized below:
(1) For public safety
(2) To promote public welfare
(3) To use waterways appropriately
(4) To flow floods in safety without any obstruction
(5) To ensure that the facility is operated according to the planning/design
(6) To extend the useful life of the facilities constructed
(7) To protect the environmental landscapes
9.1.2 Necessity of Operation and Maintenance Plan
The O&M Plan gives the guideline to ensure the effective, efficient and sustainable
operation and maintenance. The O&M Plan may target 5-year duration. The said
established Plan should be reviewed and revised based on the accomplishment of O&M
activities. In addition, annual action plan for O&M should be prepared based on the
established O&M Plan.
9.1.3 Scope of Operation and Maintenance Plan
The object of O&M Plan is the channels and facilities which are to be
improved/constructed under the Phase III Project. Existing facilities which were
constructed previously under the several projects including Phase II Project are basically
not considered. The O&M Plan for Phase II will be prepared under the Consulting
Services of Phase II. The O&M Plan in considering both Phase II and III should be
prepared when the Phase III is completed
9.1.4 Approach for Operation and Maintenance
In order to ensure purpose of flood control, target for maintenance of channel and
facilities shall be set up, considering the required functions of facilities, appropriate use
of river area, and good river environment, etc.
To achieve the target, the present conditions of river area and facilities are to be
confirmed through patrol and inspection. Based on the patrol and inspections conducted,
operation and maintenance works should be carried out.
9.1
9.1.5 River Basin Conditions and Facilities of Phase III Project

(1) River Basin Conditions
The following table shows the present conditions of river basin and channels
taking into O&M account:
Table R 9.1.1 Conditions of Pasig-Marikina River
Item Description
2
1 Natural a) Basin Area: 635km (20％ in Metro Manila）
Condition of b) Climatologic Region: Type I (Rainy Season from May to October. Dry Season from
November to April)
River Basin
c) Annual Rainfall: 3,000mm in mountain area and 2000mm in low-land area.
2 Natural/Social a) Topography
Conditions Topographic features along the Pasig River compose of reclaimed land, sand
bar/spit, delta, flood plain and hill from downstream and area along the Marikina
along River River featuring flood plain area, natural levee and mountain area.
Channel b) Geology
Areas Volcanic pyroclastic sediment Guadalupe Formation and alluvial deposits consisting
of clay, sand and gravel.
c) Vegetation
There are only few trees in the river areas.
d) Population in Metro Manila：over 11million
e) Number of City/Municipality in Metro Manila：16 Cities and 1 Municipality
f) Cities along the Stretches to be Improved: 7 cities – Manila, Makati, Mandaluyong,
Pasig, Quezon, Marikina, and San Juan
g) River Bank Area: Urban congested areas
3 Features of a) Pasig River
River - 700m River Mouth up to Delpan Bridge: Utilization as wharves for port of Manila
- River Channel Length to be Improved: 17.1km
Channels - Average Channel Slope: 1/10,000
- River Width: 60m to 250m
- Channel Depth: 6m to 12m
- Utilization for Navigation
- Many Factories with Wharves
- 11 big-scale and 6 small scale pumping stations along the river to discharge inland
rainwater
b) Marikina River
- River Channel Length to be Improved up to Marikina Bridge: 13.3km
- Average Channel Slop: 1/5,000
- River Width:70m-200m
- Channel Depth: 4m to 9.5m
- Natural levees on both banks
- No Utilization of Channel except for few Wharves and Drainage
4 River a) Pasig River
Environment PRRC has been conducting riverbank development. Environmental Preservation Areas
with 10m easement along the whole stretch of Pasig River have been developed into
continuous linear parks, river-walks and promenades. Also, improvement of the water
quality of the river is initiated by PRRC.
b) Marikina River
City Governments of Pasig and Marikina have undertaken the beatification along the
banks of Marikina River as parks. Relocation of informal settlers along the river has
being carried out.
9.2
9.1.6 Facilities along the Channels of Pasig River and Lower Marikina River
The following facilities are to be constructed under the Phase III Project:
Table R 9.1.2 Types of Structures to be Constructed under Phase III Project
River Structure Type Remarks
1. Pasig River 1) Steel Sheet Pile Revetment a) Steel Sheet Pile only
b) Steel Sheet Pile with H-beam
c) Painting for Corrosion
Protection
2) Floodwall Reinforced Concrete
3) Riprap Stone
4) Stone Masonry Revetment Repairing Existing Stone Masonry
Revetment
5) L-type Retaining Wall (Parapet Wall)
6) Concrete Block Pavement
7) Drainage Facilities Drainage canal and outlets along
Floodwall and Pavement
2. Lower Marikina 8) Dredging Channel deepening
River 9) Steel Sheet Pile Revetment Steel Sheet Pile only
10) Floodwall Reinforced Concrete
11) Dike Embankment Slopes to be Covered by Steel
Sheet Pile Revetment and
Concrete Block Wall
12) Concrete Block Retaining Wall Land side for Protection of Dike
Embankment
13) Asphalt Pavement Top of Dike
14) Foot Protection of Bridge Pier Bottle Unit
15) Drainage Facilities Box/Pipe Culverts and Open
Canal along Dike Embankment
9.1.7 Organizational Setup for O&M

(1) Agreement between DPWH and MMDA on O&M
A Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) was executed in July 9, 2002 between
DPWH and MMDA which was supplemented by issuance of the Guidelines for
the Transfer of Flood Control Responsibilities in Metro Manila in August 2002.
These documents stipulate the institutional commitments for the transfer of
responsibilities from the DPWH to the MMDA for the operation and maintenance
of the completed flood projects.
MOAs for implementation of Phases II and III stipulates that after completion of
the Project and its acceptance by DPWH, it will be turned over to the MMDA and
all necessary measures shall be undertaken to ensure its proper and efficient O &
M management. Above concern was confirmed by MOA between DPWH,
MMDA, and PRRC on January 2012.
9.3
In order to confirm the coordination, DPWH and MMDA shall enter into a
supplemental MOA on O&M including the following information during the
implementation of the Phase III Project, at least one (1) year prior to the
completion;
(a) Specification of demarcation of the roles and responsibilities and a
coordination framework between DPWH and MMDA on O&M of the
structures.
(b) O&M Manual including explanation of specific activities/works and
necessary budget for the budget for the next ten (10) years.
9.2 MMDA’s Organization for Flood Control

The MMDA was established under the Office of the President in 1994, pursuant to
Republic Act No. 7924. The total number of MMDA personnel is 7,140 in total, covering
16 cities and 1 municipality of Metro Manila.
The MMDA-Flood Control and Sewerage Management Office (FCSMO) is responsible
for flood control. Its mandates include the formulation and implementation of policies,
standards, programs and projects for an integrated flood control, drainage and sewerage
system.
9.2.1 MMDA Organization on Flood Control
Figure R 9.2.1 Organization Chart of MMDA-Flood Control and Sewerage

Management Office
The Division 1 of FCSMO oversees and supervise the operation of eleven (11) Flood
Control District Offices; five (5) of which have jurisdiction over the Phase II and Phase
III Projects, as shown in below Table R 9.2.1.
9.4
Table R 9.2.1 List of Flood Control District Offices

No. Flood Control District Areas Covered
Along the Pasig-Marikina River Channel
1 North Manila Tondo, Binondo and Sta. Cruz in Manila City
2 Central Manila Sampaloc and Sta. Mesa in Manila City
3 South Manila Ermita, Malate, Paco, Sta. Ana, San Andres,
Port Area, and Intramuros in Manila City
4 First East Metro Manila Pasig City and Marikina City
5 First South Metro Manila Pasay City and Makati City
Other Areas
6 First Quezon City 1st and 2nd Congress Districts in Quezon City
7 Second Quezon City 3rd and 4th Congress Districts in Quezon City
8 Second East Metro Manila San Juan City, Taguig City and Pateros
Municipality
9 Second South Metro-Manila Las Pinas City, Paranaque City and Muntinlupa
City
10 First North Metro-Manila Malabon City and Navotas City
11 Second North Metro-Manila Caloocan City and Valenzuela City
Figure R 9.2.3 shows locations of areas covered by the above five district offices along
the Pasig-Marikina River. As a example, the following chart (Figure R 9.2.2) shows an
organization of First East Metro Manila Flood Control District Office.
Figure R 9.2.2 Organization of Flood MMDA Control District Office

(1st East Metro Manila)
9.5
Figure R 9.2.3 Locations of Areas Covered by MMDA
Flood Control District Offices
9.6
9.2.2 Major Task of Work of Operation and Maintenance Division 1

The Operation and Maintenance Division 1 of FCSMO for Drainage, Floodway and
Waterways is directly responsible for operation and maintenance of the facilities to be
constructed under Phase III of the Project.
The major task of the Operation and Maintenance Division 1 is the protection of
roads/streets of Metro Manila from the inundations and flooding. Specially, this involves
the following works:
(a) Dredging and cleaning of waterways
(b) Removal of siltation of drainage Main
(c) Removal of clogging and siltation of drainage laterals and waterways due to
indiscriminate dumping of garbage which obstruct the free flow of water.
(d) Repair of drainage mains and laterals
(e) Construction of drainage intakes/outlets
9.3 Personnel of FCSMO

The total number of personnel of the FCSMO is about 1,294, which comprises 18% of
MMDA’s total workforce, as shown in Table R 9.3.1.
Table R 9.3.1 Personnel of FCSMO

Skilled
Technical Office Laborers Total
Workers
160 140 320 674 1,294
The MMDA Personnel are categorized by employment status, as below:
Table R 9.3.2 Personnel of FCSMO by Employment Status

Daily Basis Daily Basis
Permanent Total
(long period) (short period)
Total 95 658 541 1,294
(Source: Flood Control & Sewerage Management Office of MMDA, as of Jan.2011)
9.4 Equipment for O&M

The equipment of FCSMO are managed by the Equipment Management Division. As of
July 2012, this Office has 152 equipment including the major ones identified in Table R
9.4.1. Of these equipment, 115 are operational and 37 need repair.
9.7
Table R 9.4.1 List of Equipment Owned by MMDA-FCSMO

Equipment Type No. of Unit
1 Dump Truck 2 ton 5
5 Cargo Truck 6W 4
6 Wing Van 10W 4
7 Water Truck 6W 4
8 Vacuum Truck 6W 8
9 Sewer Jet 6W 2
10 Jet Washer 1
11 Sreco Flushing Machine 4W 3
12 Sreco Bucket Machine 2W 2
13 Pumper Truck 6W 4
14 Backhoe/Excavator 28
15 Crane 13
16 Dredger 2
17 Boom Truck/ Wrecker 1
18 Truck Tractor 2
19 Tug Boat 2
20 Generator Set 20,25,45.65KVA 4
21 Hooklift Truck 4
22 Service Vehicle 23
23 Others (Trailer, etc.) 6
9.5 Budget
The annual revenue of MMDA are derived from the following:
・ The General Appropriations Act, otherwise known as the National Budget;
・ The Internal Revenue Allotment (IRA) from the National Budget
・ Five percent (5%) of the total annual gross revenue from each LGU under the
jurisdiction of MMDA
・ Levies, impositions and charges for various services rendered
Table R 9.5.1 shows the annual budget of MMDA:
Table R 9.5.1 Budget Allocation of MMDA
(Unit: million pesos)
Year 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
a) National Budget 1,772 1,800 2,075 979 1,374
b) IRA 262 165 198 211
Total 2,034 1,965 2,273 1,180 1,374
Source: DBM Website
9.8
Table R 9.5.2 shows the budget allotted for Flood Control and Sewerage Management
Office in the recent years:
Table R 9.5.2 Budget of FCSMC
Year 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Budget 568 560 629 559 551
Source: MMDA Flood Control and Sewerage Management Office
9.6 Operation Plan of the Phase III Project

9.6.1 General
Operation of the Phase III project is defined as monitoring, analyzing and evaluating the
performance of improved channels and constructed facilities. MMDA will coordinate
with DPWH in order to conduct monitoring, analysis and evaluations about a benefit of
the project.
9.6.2 Flood Observation System

(1) EFCOS
DPWH has established the observation network of rainfall and water levels in the
Pasig-Marikina River Basin by 2011 (EFCOS: Effective Flood Control Operation
System). At present, EFCOS composed of the following facilities is managed by
the MMDA.
Table R 9.6.1 Facilities of MMDA-EFCOS
Type of Facilities Name of Facility
Rosario Master Control Station, Barangay Mangahan, Pasig
1 1- Master Control Station
City
(1) DPWH Central Office
(2) DPWH-NCR Head Office
2 4- Monitoring Station
(3) PAGASA
(4) Napindan HCS
3 1- Relay Station Antipolo Relay Station
(1) Boaso-Boso
(2) Mt. Campana
(3) Aries
4 7- Rain Gauge Station (4) Mt. Oro
(5) Nangka
(6) Science Garden (PAGASA)
(7) Napindan HCS
(1) Montalban
(2) Nagka
(3) Sto. Nino
(4) Rosario Weir (Marikina River)
(5) Rosario Weir (Laguna Lake)
5 11- Water Level Gauge Station (6) Napindan HCS (Marikina River)
(7) Napindan HCS (Laguna Lake)
(8) Pandacan
(9)Fort Santiago
(10) San Juan
(11) Angono (in Laguna Lake)
9.9
(2) PAGASA
PAGASA-KOICA Project aims to construct a flood forecasting and warning
system in Pasig-Marikina River basin to supplement the EFCOS project. The
result of observation data can be also used for O&M.
9.6.3 Flood Warning System

Flood Warning System (Flood Level) for the Pasig-Marikina River was established by
the PAGSA as follows:
(1) Alert (Yellow Color)
If water has been rising continuously beyond this level, there is possibility of
flooding in low-lying areas.
(2) Alarm (Orange Color)
If water has reached this level, residents should prepare for possible evacuation
due to threat of flooding.
(3) Critical (Red Color)
If water has reached this level, serious flooding is expected.
Table R 9.6.2 Flood Warning Water Levels along Pasig-Marikina River

(PAGASA)
(EL.m)
Water Level Station Alert (Yellow) Alarm (Orange) Critical (Red)
1 Wawa Dam 24.40 25.00 25.60
2 Montalban 22.40 23.00 23.60
3 Burgos 22.40 23.00 23.60
4 San Mateo-1 17.10 17.70 18.30
5 Nangka 17.10 17.70 18.30
6 Mindanao 28.00 29.00 30.00
7 Tumana Bridge 17.10 17.70 18.30
8 Sto. Nino 14.40 15.00 16.00
9 Marcos Highway 13.00 14.10 14.90
10 Rosario JS 12.50 13.20 13.80
11 Rosario LS 12.50 13.20 13.80
12 Napindan-1 10.90 11.90 12.90
13 Napindan-2 10.90 11.90 12.90
14 San Juan School 11.00 11.50 12.00
15 Pandacan 11.00 11.50 12.00
16 Port San Tiago 11.00 11.50 12.00
9.10
9.7 Maintenance Works

9.7.1 General
Maintenance works for completed project are defined as evaluating facility function
according to the planning/design, extending the useful life of the facilities constructed,
and repairing works of facilities damaged/deteriorated.
9.7.2 Target for Maintenance

The targets for maintenance of flood control facilities are set up to prevent the
deterioration or damages caused by flooding, earthquake, or vandalism after completion
of the facilities which result in the decrease in function of facilities.
Item Maintenance Target
a) Flow Capacity of Channel
It is essential to secure the required channel sections for design
discharges.
1 Flow Capacity of Channel
b) Design Elevation of Floodwall
To upkeep the design elevation of Floodwall which is basic
element to secure the flow capacity.
Channel fluctuation such as lowering riverbed, scouring,
Channel Fluctuation
2 deposition does not affect the stability of revetment, floodwall,
bridge pier protection, drainage facilities, etc.
3 Floodwall To secure function of facilities from deterioration and
4 Revetment/ Riprap deformation.
5 Bridge Pier Protection
6 Drainage Facilities
To secure the river area from illegal encroachment, activities, etc.,
7 To Secure River Area
necessary action should be taken.
9.7.3 Patrol and Inspection

Maintenance activities begin with patrol and inspection of present river features and
facilities. Periodical inspections to grasp the present condition are basic requirement for
sustaining the benefit to be derived from the Project (Phase III). Damages without urgent
rehabilitation will hamper effective operation and thereby endanger the stable river
condition and increase the vulnerability against further flood damage.
9.11
The following activities to obtain the present status of rivers should be done:
Items Description
a) Rainfall, Water Levels, Discharge for every flood (PAGASA and MMDA-EFCOS)
Collection of
a b) Conduct of River Topographic Survey (basically once a 5-year and once a big flood
Data/Information
occurred)
a) Frequency of the patrols by car, boat or foot shall be at least once a month.
b Patrol b) During flooding period, patrol shall be undertaken to obtain overview of function condition
of facilities and flood flow condition.
Through the inspections, identification of places/facilities where maintenance and repair works
are required shall be inventoried.
a) Dry Season: conduct of overall inspection
c Inspection b) Flooding: flow direction, velocity, critical channel section, etc., by eye-observation
c) After Flood: channel scouring, sedimentation, bank erosion, debris, flood survey including
level marked and extended flooded area
d) After Earthquake: check of conditions of structures
Information obtained through the patrol and inspection shall be reported and recorded. These
d Record/Report
records are important basic data for future O&M activities. Reports shall be submitted to FMC.
9.7.4 Details of Maintenance Works

Items to be carefully inspected on each facility are described as follows. Based on the
detailed inspections, necessity of maintenance/repair works should be judged and carried
out.
(1) Secure Channel Flow Capacity (Scouring/Erosion/Deposition/Vegetation/
Man-Induced Causes of Flooding
Reduction in the flood carrying capacity of the river channels may be caused by
accelerated watershed erosion and associated sediment accumulation in the rivers.
Accelerated erosion occurs due to the removal of natural vegetation cover
cultivation. This erosion causes sedimentation in rivers. Sedimentation in rivers
results in heightening river beds and this raises the risk of floods.
If deposition in channels affects considerably on designed flow capacity, removal
of deposition/sedimentation should be considered.
Decreasing the surface roughness of a channel may be accomplished by removing
vegetation and natural or man-made obstructions, re-shaping the channel cross
section, and construction of surface liners. Heavy brush was cleared from river
bank and the manning roughness coefficient was reduced.
Watershed changes such as deforestation, agricultural development and urban
development can accentuate flooding problems by increasing the magnitude of
flood discharges. The occurrence of informal settler housing along river channels
and floodway may obstruct the flow. Garbage, litter, and debris resulting from
indiscriminate dumping of these materials into channels raises flood levels by
obstructing the flow in ditches and urban drainage conduits. The MMDA
coordinated with FMC should discuss these problems and seeking solution.
(2) Concrete Structures (Floodwall, Parapet Wall, Drainage Facilities, etc.)
Reinforced concrete structures should be checked on such as crack (width and
extent), material deterioration (fall, expose of re-bar, leakage of water), movement
(sliding, turnover, sinking, deformation).
9.12
(3) Steel Sheet Piling Revetment

Corrosion of materials, opening of structural joint, deformation, scouring, etc.,
should be checked.
(4) Riprap (Revetment Protection)
Riprap is planned to protect revetment from scouring. Washed-out, sinking and
scouring should be carefully observed during inspection.
(5) Bridge Pier Protection
After floods, occurrence of scouring should be carefully inspected to know
maximum depth and extent.
Flapgates open and close automatically by the difference in water level between
inside and outside. When the small garbage is left behind and in front of the gate,
the gates cannot keep enough water-tightness, and needs to be monitored and
cleaned periodically.
In case there is small difference between outlet or sluiceway elevation and normal
water level, sedimentation is likely to occur in outlets and manholes behind
outlets. Periodical monitoring and cleaning is required.
After flooding, garbage and sediments are likely to be left. Hence monitoring and
cleaning is required as well.
Regarding drainage pipes and U-ditches behind the dike or river wall, in order to
prevent to be blocked by garbage and sediments, these facilities also should be
monitored carefully
9.7.5 Coordination with Flood Mitigation Committee, Disaster Risk Reduction and
Management Council and Barangays
(1) Flood Mitigation Committee for Pasg-Marikina River Basin
The Flood Mitigation Committee (FMC) to be created shall conduct the monitor
of the O&M activities in accordance with the O&M Plan and its Manual to ensure
the proper O&M and also to facilitate the coordination among the GOP agencies
and LGUs concerned.
(2) Coordination with Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council
When floods occurs, the MMDA-FCSMO, as a responsible organization for
O&M, should coordinate well with Disaster Risk Reduction and Management
Councils of National Government, Rizal Province Government in Region IV, and
Local Government Units such as Manila, Makati, Mandaluyong, Pasig, Quezon,
Marikina, San Juan in Metro Manila and Cainta and Taytay in Rizal Province,
namely:
9.13
(a） Utilization of Equipment and Materials for Flood Fighting

(b） Information of Heavy Equipment owned by Private for Flood Fighting
(c） Information of flood water levels
(d） Others
Flood fighting is one the activities embodied in Presidential Decree No.1566,
dated June 11, 1978. This decree calls for “Strengthening the Philippine Disaster
Preparedness”. The objective is to save lives, prevent needless suffering, protect
property, and minimize damages during disaster and calamities such as the
occurrence of earthquake, floods, volcanic eruptions, tidal waves, conflagrations,
and others.
A follow-up to this law is the “Philippine Disaster Risk Reduction and
Management Act of 2010”, dated July 27, 2009, strengthening the Philippine
disaster risk reduction and management system providing for the national disaster
risk reduction and management framework and institutionalizing the national
disaster risk reduction and management plan, appropriating funds therefore and
for other purposes.
At the national level, National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council
(NDRRMC) highest policy making body, and as the highest allocator of resources
in the country to support the efforts of the lower level councils in the system. The
NDRRMC is headed by the Secretary of the Department of National Defense
(DND) as Chairperson with the following 42 Vice Chairperson and members:
Secretary of Central Government Agencies, Red Cross, representative of private
organization and so on.
At the regional level including Metro Manila (National Capital Region), the
Regional Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council (RDRRMC)
coordinates the activities of all national government agencies assigned to a
particular administrative region. The Metro Manila DRRMC (MMDRRMC) shall
be responsible in ensuring disaster sensitive regional development plans, and in
case of emergencies shall convene the different regional line agencies and
concerned institutions and authorities. The RDRRMC shall be composed of the
executives of regional offices and field stations at the regional level of the
government agencies. The civil defense officer of OCD who is or may be
designated as Regional Director of the OCD shall serve as Chairperson of the
MMDRRMC.
At the local government level, the Provincial/City/Municipal Disaster Risk
Reduction and Management Council (PDRRMC, CDRRMC, and MDRRMC)
shall be organized as a Local Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council
(LDRRMC). Number of Members is 18 to 22 and Chairperson is a chief of Local
government.
(3) Coordination with Communities (Barangays)
The flood control facilities to be constructed under the Phase III are located in the
following 42 Barangays, as shown in Table R 9.7.1 below.
9.14
Table R 9.7.1 Barangays Affected by Phase III

City Barangay City Barangay City Barangay
Manila(21) No. 306 No. 903 Makati(5) Olympia
No. 384 No. 905 Valenzuela
No. 647 No. 900 Guadalupe Viejo
No. 659 No. 896 Cembo
No. 663-A No. 897 West Rembo
No. 644 No. 894 Pasig(9) Pineda
No. 636 No. 888 Bagong Ilog
No. 628 Mandaluyong(6) Namayan Ugong
No. 836 Vergara Santa Rosa
No. 621 Barangka Ibaba San Jose
No. 838 Barangka Itaas Kapasigan
No. 865 Barangka Ilaya Caniogan
No. 899 Buayang Bato Maybunga
No. 901 Rosario
No. 902 Quezon(1) Ugong Norte
At the community level, MMDA is expected to perform roles and responsibilities in

corporation with: each Barangay:
(1) Barangay takes an active role in monitoring and reporting to the O&M
implementing body all illegal activities undertaken within the project, such as:
(a) Construction of illegal structures
(b) Throwing of garbage
(c) Detrimental utilization of maintenance road and its facilities
(d) Illegal parking
(e) Removal of sign boards
(f) Displacement of construction materials
(g) Wastewater disposal
(h) Other related activities causing damage to the facilities
(2) Initiate/Spearhead Barangay level program in instilling awareness and in-depth
responsibility to the residents in the basic ways of caring for the river
environment.
(3) Cooperate in monitoring/reporting the water level during flood time at their
respective areas.
(4) Assist the implementing body in the evaluation of damages caused by the flood
through their eye-witness account.
9.7.6 Resources Requirement for O&M

(1) General
After completion of the Phase III, necessary personnel, equipment, materials and
budge for O&M during initial ten (10) years are studied. Except dredging work,
facilities are constructed using concrete and steel materials. Generally, O&M cost
will increase due to gradual deterioration and damages.
9.15
(2) O&M Personnel

Necessary personnel will be arranged in the office for Flood Control in MMDA
for part-time base working.
(a) 1-Chief Engineer
(b) 1-Engineer as a staff
(c) 1-Administrative Staff
(d) 1-Drivers
(e) Foreman/Labor Force as required
(3) O&M Equipment
As listed in Section 9.3.2(4), necessary O&M equipment are all available in the
MMDA such as dredger, tag boat, back hoe, crane, etc.
(4) O&M Materials
The necessary construction materials to be used for O&M in minimum are cement,
sand, stone materials, re-bar, selected soil, etc.
(5) Estimated Annual O&M Budget Requirement for Initial Ten (10) Years
Annual budget for O&M is estimated at PHP3.5 million for initial ten (10) years,
as follows:
(6) Cost for Personnel
Staff No. Months Days Monthly Salary (PHP) Amount (PHP)

Chief Engineer 1 1 50,000 50,000
Engineer 1 1 35,000 35,000
Administrator. 1 1 20,000 20,000
Driver 1 1 15,000 15,000
Foreman 1 1 15,000 15,000
Labors 10 25 500 125,000
SUB-TOTAL 260,000
(7) Cost for Materials

Quantity Unit Unit Price Amount (PHP)
Fuel 10,000 Liter 43 430,000
Cement 500 Bag 220 110,000
3
Sand 500 m 700 350,000
3
Aggregate 500 m 900 450,000
Rebar 1,000 kg 40 40,000
3
Gravel 500 m 900 450,000
3
Stone 500 m 600 300,000
3
Selected Soil 500 m 1,000 500,000
Miscellaneous 1 L.S. 610,000 610,000
SUB-TOTAL PHP3,240,000
9.16
CHAPTER 10 ASSISTANCE IN NON-STRUCTURAL

MEASURES CONDUCTED
10.1 General
In the JICA Preparatory Study conducted in 2010/2011, the following non-structural
flood mitigation measures have been proposed to be implemented together with
structural flood mitigation works:
(1) Information Campaign and Publicity (ICP)
(2) Building Website
(3) Preparation and Delivery of Hazard Map of Pasig City
(4) Establishment of Flood Mitigation Committee (FMC)
During this Detailed Design Study for the Phase III, the implementation of above (1)
and (4) are proposed. The results of implementation are described in the following
sections.
10.2 Public Information Campaign and Publicity

10.2.1 Scope of ICP under the Detailed Design Study of Phase III Project
The activities to be conducted on Information Campaign and Publicity (ICP) during the
Detailed Design Study from April to December 2012 are as follows:
(1) Formulation of Campaign Work Plan
(2) Conceptualize, Design and Produce Information Materials
(3) Conduct Community-based Explanatory Discussion
(4) Public Hearing
(5) Caravan Operation involving Schools, Government Officials, Barangay
Officers, etc.
(6) Development of Community-based Project Motivators.
(7) Establishment of Community-based Information Centers.
(8) Undertake Mass Media Exposure and Public Relation Activities
(9) Continuous Linkages with National/Local Government Units.
10.2.2 Conducted Information Campaign and Publicity

The ICP activities conducted are summarized as follows. Moreover, the detailed results
have been reported in the By-monthly Progress Reports and Service Completion Report
(January 2013).
(1) Collection of Data/Information on ICP and Review of ICP Conducted in the
Previous Phases I and II and Preparation of ICP Work Plan
The study reports, work plans and results of ICP conducted during Phases I
and II have been collected and reviewed. Formulation/preparation of ICP Plan
based on these collected data/information and baseline survey for target areas
of Phase III.
10.1
(2) Preparation of ICP Staff and Materials

The ICP Team composed of the following 7 experts: JICA Experts (Japanese
and Local), Media Specialist (Local), Community Organizer (Local), Graphic
Artist, Videographer/Production Assistant and Encoder.
The following ICP Materials were prepared:
(a） Pamphlet (both English and Tagalog versions)
(b） Poster with 2012/2013 Calendar
(c） Project Description on Tarpaulins (medium and big sizes)
(d） Video and Power Point Presentation Materials
(3) Conduct Community-based Explanatory Discussion, Development of

Community-based Project Motivators, Development of Community-based
Information Centers and Public Hearing
Before conducting caravan operations, the ICP Team carried out
community-based discussions for setting meetings, with Barangay
Officials/School Teachers who are proposed to be Project Motivators. On the
other hand, several information centers were also established at Barangay
Halls and Schools. Through the coordination for meetings for Caravan
Operations, project presentation and explanatory discussion were conducted
with Barangay officials.
Public Hearings have been conducted in the Continuous Linkages with
national agencies/local government units and Caravan Operation for
Government Officials, Barangay Residents and School Students, etc., as an
Open Forum.
(4) Continuous Linkage with National/Local Government Units
Several ICP meetings using ICP materials for continuous linkage with offices
of national/local government units were held. These meetings include public
consultation meetings for proposed disposal area as shown in the following
table:
10.2
Table R 10.2.1 Conducted ICP Meetings with National/Local Government Units

Date
Purpose Participant Venue
(Participants)
LGU-Taguig (City Planning &
Information May 22 (Tue.) Taguig City
1 Development, City Local
Dissemination (17) Hall
Housing Office)
8 LGUs-Pasig, Mandaluyong,
Taguig, Makati, Marikina,
Manila, Quezon, & San Juan. DPWH
6 National Government June 26 (Tue) Multipurpose
Public Information
2 Agencies - Phil. Coast Guard, Hall, 5/F
Dissemination
DND, MMDA, NHA, PPA, (67) DPWH
PRRC. Central Office
13 Private Sectors.
1 – NGO.
NCR
DPWH-National Capital
Information July 10 (Tue.) Director’s
3 Region (NCR)
Dissemination (20) Conference
District Engineers
Room
LGU-Taguig Officers
Information July 23 (Mon.) Taguig City
4 (Administrator, City Planning,
Dissemination (9) Hall
DRPMO)
Information Assistant General Manager for Aug. 2 (Thu.) MMDA Office
5
Dissemination Operation (11) in Makati City
Information Manila City Councilors, Brgy Aug. 3 (Fri.) Manila City
6
Dissemination Chairmen and its Officials (45) Hall
Taguig Napindan
Nov. 23 (Fri.)
7 (Public Consultation Brgy Napindan & Ibayo Tipas Elementary
(50)
for Disposal Area) School
In particular, the project dissemination held on June 26, 2012 at DPWH
Central Office has presented the overall Project and Phase III Project to the
concerned national government agencies, local government agencies, private
sectors, and NGOs. This is actually a kick-off meeting for ICP caravan
activities.
(5) Caravan Operations involving Schools, Government Officials, Barangay
Officers
After a Kick-off project dissemination meeting on June 26, a total of forty (40)
Caravan Operation meetings of ICP have been held from July to November for
Barangay Officials and Barangay People at the directly affected forty two (42)
Barangays along the Pasig River and Lower Marikina River in Cities of
Manila, Mandaluyong, Makati, and Pasig, including 3 schools. In the caravan
meetings, the necessity of immediate organization and activation of the Flood
Mitigation Committee (FMC) for the Pasig-Marikina River Basin has publicly
been informed.
10.3
Table R 10.2.2 Conducted Caravan Operation Meetings

No. of Questions/
City Barangay Date Venue Participant Opinions in Open
Forum
1 Pasig Ugong July 21 (Sat.) Brgy Hall 182 10
2 - do - Rosario July 21 (Sat.) Brgy Hall 100 9
3 - do - Maybunga July 24 (Tue.) Brgy Hall 67 4
4 - do - Pineda July 24 (Tue.) Brgy Hall 107 5
5 - do - Caniogan July 25 (Wed.) Brgy Hall 65 10
6 - do - Kapasigan July 25 (Wed.) Brgy Hall 120 2
7 - do - Sta. Rosa July 31 (Tue.) Brgy Hall 125 4
8 - do - San Jose Aug. 1 (Wed.) Brgy Hall 70 3
9 Mandaluyong Namayan Aug. 4 (Sat.) Brgy Hall 65 2
10 - do - Buayang Bato Aug. 13 (Mon. Brgy Hall 51 6
11 - do - Barangka Itaas Aug. 14 (Tue.) Brgy Hall 91 7
12 - do - Barangka Ibaba Aug. 22 (Wed.) Brgy Hall 122 6
13 - do - Barangka Ilaya Aug. 22 (Wed.) Brgy Hall 63 5
14 Makati Guadalupe Nuevo Sept. 5 (Wed.) Brgy Hall 55 4
15 - do - Olympia Sept. 6 (Thu.) Brgy Hall 52 4
16 - do - Guadalupe Viejo Sept. 11 (Tue.) Brgy Hall 47 2
17 Manila 899 Sept. 12 (Wed.) Brgy Hall 40 3
18 Makati Cembo Sept. 13 (Thu.) Brgy Hall 38 -
19 Manila 901 Sept. 13 (Thu.) Brgy Hall 48 6
20 Makati Valenzuela Sept. 14 (Fri.) Brgy Hall 40 5
21 Manila 903 Sept. 17 (Mon.) Brgy Hall 38 3
22 - do - 902 Sept. 17 (Mon.) Brgy Hall 43 -
23 - do - 905 Sept. 18 (Tue.) Brgy Hall 35 4
24 - do - 621 Sept. 24 (Mon.) Brgy Hall 46 1
25 - do - 628 Sept. 24 (Mon.) Brgy Hall 38 -
26 - do - 636 Sept. 25 (Tue.) Brgy Hall 42 -
27 - do - 644 Sept. 25 (Tue.) Brgy Hall 42 1
28 - do - 865 Sept. 27 (Thu.) Brgy Hall 42 2
29 - do - 643 Sept. 27 (Thu.) Brgy Hall 33 2
Cardinal Sin
30 - do - 900/894 Sept. 28 (Fri.) 51 3
Village
31 - do - 836 Sept. 29 (Sat.) Brgy Hall 30 2
Multi-purpos
32 - do - 838 Oct. 3 (Wed.) 30 2
e Hall
33 - do - 663-A Oct. 3 (Wed.) Sacred Heart 51 4
34 - do - 896/897 Oct. 10 (Wed.) 896 Hall 46 2
35 Makati West Rembo Oct. 11 (Thu.) Brgy Hall 40 4
36 Pasig Bagong Ilog Oct. 11 (Thu.) Brgy Hall 25 2
37 Manila 306 Oct. 17 (Wed.) Brgy Hall 31 -
Sub-Total for Barangays 37 2,211 129
Amado T. Reyes Elementary School,
38 Oct. 19 (Fri.) School 40 5
Mandaluyong
39 Pasig City Science High School Nov. 8 (Thu.) School 39 6
40 Pitogo High School, Makati Nov. 9 (Fri.) School 47 11
Sub-Total for Schools 3 126 22
Total 40 2,337 151
10.4
10.3 Establishment of Flood Mitigation Committee (FMC) for Pasig-Marikina

River Basin
10.3.1 Necessity of FMC
In the course of JICA Preparatory Study for Phase III Project, it has been confirmed the
necessity of immediate implementation of the next Phase III. Moreover, it is recognized
that non-structural measures in and/around the areas to be protected by the
Pasig-Marikina River Channel Improvement Project (PMRCIP) are indispensable to
achieve alleviation of flood damages, especially by floods beyond the design scale,
together with the creation of the Flood mitigation Committee (FMC).
It is necessary for DPWH, MMDA, PRRC and the concerned city governments of
Manila, Makati, Mandaluyong, Pasig, Quezon, Marikina and San Juan to create a FMC,
to act as the coordination body in handling issues relating to project implementation as
well as operation and maintenance and controlling land encroachment and disorderly
land development, including the issuance of requests to the responsible agency/agencies
on the necessary measures to be taken whenever flood disasters occur.
The DPWH, MMDA and PRRC have already agreed to the creation of FMC in the
MOA for implementation of Phase III dated on January 27, 2012.
10.3.2 Scope of Work for Assistance in Establishment of FMC

To attain the agreement among the DPWH, MMDA, PRRC and LGUs concerned on
creation of FMC, the Study Team assist the DPWH in the matters of discussions,
explanation paper, information campaign, coordination meetings, workshops, etc. Scope
of Work for assistance in the establishment of FMC is summarized:
a) Elaboration in the details of FMC
b) Consultation with the government agencies and LGUs concerned
c) Drafting the prospectus for FMC
d) Conducting Workshops and/or seminars on the creation of FMC
10.3.3 Steps for Establishment of FMC

The following steps have been taken to establish the FMC for the Pasig-Marikina River
Basin:
1） Review of JICA Preparatory Study on Establishment of FMC.
2） Elaboration in the Details of FMC.
3） Preparation of Minutes of Agreement (MOA) for Establishment of FMC
proposed by DPWH (draft MOA).
4） Request for Comments of Standing Members on draft MOA for Establishment
of FMC (Concerned National Agencies/LGUs).
5） Consultation with Standing Members of FMC.
10.5
6） Comments from Standing Members.

7） Finalization of MOA for Establishment of FMC incorporating Comments on
draft MOA.
8） Organization Meeting for Establishment of FMC.
9） Signing on final MOA for Establishment of FMC.
Detailed activities of assistance in establishment of FMC are reported in the Monthly
Progress Reports and Service Completion Report (January 2013).
10.3.4 Comments of Standing Members on DPWH’s draft MOA

Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) for establishment of FMC for Pasig-Marikina
River Basin was initially drafted by the JICA Study Team and submitted for review and
comments of DPWH on May 28, 2012. After some comments/clarifications on the draft
MOA, the Secretary approved draft MOA on July 9. Then, copies of draft MOA were
transmitted from DPWH to the standing members composed of MMDA, PRRC and
LGUs (Manila, Mandaluyong, Makati, Pasig, Quezon, Marikina, and San Juan)
concerned for their comments on July 11 and 12. As the result of their review and
evaluation on draft MOA by the legal section and concerned other offices of the
standing members, there were no comments except minor comments of PRRC and
Makati City.
10.3.5 Finalization of MOA incorporating Comments and Signing on MOA

The MOA as finalized incorporating comments of standing members was submitted to
DPWH for perusal and signatures of the Secretary and Witnesses on November 22,
2012, thence to the counterpart signatories for the MMDA, PRRC and LGUs concerned.
DPWH Secretary has signed the MOA on Dec. 3, 2012 as a Chairperson of FMC. Then,
Chairman of MMDA has signed as a Co-chairperson. After their signing, all signatories
including witnesses have signed on January 24 2013. (refer to ANNEX 1 for the signed
MOA).
10.3.6 Summary of MOA for Establishment of FMC

The contents of signed MOA including functions, roles and responsibilities of FMC are
itemized as follows:
1） Facilitate and assist in the PMRCIP implementation.
2） Facilitate and assist in monitoring the O&M activities.
3） Facilitate and assist in the introduction and operation of non-structural measures.
4） Facilitate and assist in the resettlement and acquisition of right-of-way for the
Project.
10.6
5） Monitor, coordinate and take necessary actions for illegal activities

(encroachment, disorderly land development, etc.).
6） Set-up a “Query Window” for the Project implementation.
7） Enhance/strengthen the publicity and awareness on the flood mitigation
activities.
8） Convene meeting once every three months or as necessary.
9） DPWH shall act as Chairperson in implementation of the Project and MMDA
shall take the chairmanship for O&M.
10） Observer members shall participate in the meetings as required and provide
information, comments and solutions.
11） FMC operation expenses required for holding meetings, activities of the
Secretariat and Query Windows. Shall be allocated from the DPWH and MMDA
budgets.
12） Functions, roles and responsibilities of each standing member are stipulated.
10.3.7 Organization Meeting for Establishment of FMC

The Organization Meeting of the FMC was convened on December 6, 2012 at Bayview
Park Hotel along Roxas Boulevard in Manila City. All standing members with a total of
38 participants attended, including the representatives of JICA Philippines. The major
agenda items in the program of the Organization Meeting are as follows:
1） Presentation of Phase III Project Summary (JICA Study Team)
2） Accomplishment of ICP under Phase III Project (JICA Study Team)
3） Summary of Proposed FMC (JICA Study Team)
4） Necessity of Declaration of “Flood Control Area” (JICA Study Team) and
Status of Easement along Upper Marikina River Declared by Marikina City
(LGU-Marikina)
5） Open Forum
10.4 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

10.4.1 Conclusions
The exigency of a coordination body to handle issues relating to the implementation of

the PMRCIP has been recognized by the DPWH, MMDA and PRRC by initiating the
proposed creation of a Flood Mitigation Committee (FMC) in the MOA for the
implementation of PMRCIP (Phase III) dated January 27, 2012. The creation of the
FMC for Pasig-Marikina River Basin through a MOA, January 24 2013. among
DPWH, MMDA, PRRC and the City Government of Manila, Mandaluyong, Makati,
Pasig, Quezon, Marikina and San Juan attest to the firm resolve of these agencies to
facilitate the smooth and efficient implementation of the whole PMRCIP.
(1) The FMC will essentially provide the avenue for a common basis for
understanding floods and flood mitigation approaches which advocate
comprehensive structural and non-structural flood plain management.
10.7
(2) The FMC will also provide a forum for long-term coordination and well-informed
efforts in the resolution of Right-of-Way problems and related concerns that
exacerbate flooding conditions in the Pasig-Marikina River Basin.
10.4.2 Recommendations
In order to provide enabling environment for the efficient and sustainable operation of
the FMC, the followings, among others as may be deemed necessary, are submitted for
consideration:
(1) Immediate establishment of the FMC Secretariat with support staff and related
facilities for the timely activation and long-term operation of the FMC.
(2) For the FMC to identify and articulate policy issues for consideration and
appropriate action of the concerned authority, for instance: construction of
Marikina Control Gate Structure (MCGS), construction of Marikina Dam, etc.
(3) For the FMC to deliberate on the extent of the river area to be recommended in
the Declaration of Flood Control Area in accordance with the Water Law or
Promulgation of City Ordinance as deemed appropriate.
(4) To provide a course of action for the committee, the proposed schedule of FMC
Activity shown in the Figure R 10.4.1.
a) Preparatory Stage – February to June 2013:
Organize a Working Group between DPWH and MMDA to:
Discuss the membership (regular and alternate) of the Committee
Prepare the FMC Road Map/Action Plan
Identified role and responsibility
b) Initial Operation Stage – July to December 2013
Initial Operation Stage will be concentrated to:
Regular Meeting of the Committee
Approval of the Road Map/Action Plan
Schedule of Annual Activity
- Budget Requirement
- Manpower Requirement
- Meeting Schedule, etc.
Joint Inspection of Target Areas in each City
Manila, Makati, Mandaluyong, Pasig, Quezon, Marikina and San Juan
10.8
(c) Full Operation Stage (Jan.2014-)
(Election Period)
Figure R 10.4.1 Proposed Schedule of FMC Activity
10.9
Figure 2.3.1 Elevation Map of Pasig-Marikina River
Fg 2.1
Figure 2.3.2 Topographic Map of Pasig-Marikina River
Fg 2.2
Figure 2.3.3 Geological Map of Pasig-Marikina River
Fg 2.3
Figure 2.3.4 Schematic Geological Section and Soil Classification and Distribution
along Pasig-Marikina River
Fg 2.4
Figure 2.3.5 Dredging Material Distribution Map of Marikina River
Fg 2.5
Figure 2.3.6 OCR
‘qu kgf/cm2
Figure 2.3.7 qu histogram of Guadalupe Formation
Fg 2.6
Figure 2.3.8 Soil Distribution of Sampled Dredging Materials
Fg 2.7
Figure 2.3.9 Stabilization Test Result (1/2)
Fg 2.8
Figure 2.3.9 Stabilization Test Result (2/2)
Fg 2.9
K BARAN
PAR GKA IL
R AYA LIN
SL INEA EAR P BUAYA
NG BA
IT AA ARK TO PARK
AN GK A
B AR
B RID PE
Figure 3.1.1 Schmidt Hammer Test Result (1/2)
GE
D A LU
7 8 9 10 11 32 BS
6 12 30 31 33
BS 13 28 29 34
5 14 27 35
4
G UA
15
3 FS
BS 2
1
GUADALUP
E NUEVO
PARK
36
37
16
17
18
38
19
39
20
21
22
Fg 3.1
23
24
25
SCHMIDT HAMMER TEST LOCATION
COMPLETED PHASE II
PHASE III (PRIORITY 1 & 2) - SSP
PHASE III (PRIORITY 1 & 2) - RCF OR REPAIR
PHASE III (PRIORITY 3)
SCHMIDT HAMMER TESTING POINT
LEGEND:
FERRY STATION/COAST GUARD

NOTE :
PASIG RIVER BOAT/BANCA STATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 4 OF ANNEX "A" OF THE REVISED IMPLEMENTING RULES
AND REGULATIONS OF R.A. 9184, APPROVAL BY THE AUTHORIZED DPWH OFFICIALS
R E V I S I O N S
OF DETAILED ENGINEERING SURVEYS AND DESIGN UNDERTAKEN BY CONSULTANTS
NOTE : NEITHER DIMINISHES THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE LATTER FOR THE TECHNICAL
NO. DESCRIPTION APPROVED DATE
INTEGRITY OF THE SURVEYS AND DESIGN NOR TRANSFER ANY PART OF THAT
*1 - ALL STATIONS ARE RECKONED AT CLOF RIVER
RESPONSIBILITY TO THE APPROVING OFFICIALS.
*2 - LENGTHS SHOWN ARE LINEAR METRES UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED
*3 - FIGURES GOVERN OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS
PACKAGE 1B
JICA CONSULTANT FOR DETAILED ENGINEERING DESIGN REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES PROJECT & LOCATION SHEET CONTENTS SHEET NO.
DESIGNED BY: CHECKED BY: SUBMITTED BY: REVIEWED BY: RECOMMENDING APPROVAL : APPROVED BY:
PASIG-MARIKINA
RIVER CHANNEL 1/2
SCHMIDT HAMMER
IMPROVEMENT TEST RESULTS
EIJI MOKI TOSHIKI KAWAKAMI SHUJI KAKU PERFECTO L. ZAPLAN, JR. PATRICK B. GATAN GILBERTO S. REYES RAUL C .ASIS ROGELIO L. SINGSON PROJECT (PHASE III),
STRUCTURAL ENGINEER I THE CHECKER TEAM LEADER CHIEF, HYDRAULIC PROJECT DIRECTOR DIRECTOR UNDERSECRETARY SECRETARY METRO MANILA
DIVISION, BOD PMO - MFCP I BOD FOR TECHNICAL SERVICES
BUAYA
NG BA
TO PARK
31 32 33 BS
28 29 30 34
27
Figure 3.1.1 Schmidt Hammer Test Result (2/2)
35
FS
GUADALUP
E NUEVO
PARK
36
37
16
17
18
38
19
39
20
21
22
23
24
Fg 3.2
25
BS
BS
COMPLETED PHASE II
PHASE III (PRIORITY 1 & 2) - SSP 40
41
PHASE III (PRIORITY 1 & 2) - RCF OR REPAIR 42
43 44 45
46
PHASE III (PRIORITY 3) 47
E
DG
RI
5B
C-
SCHMIDT HAMMER TEST LOCATION
LEGEND:

NOTE :
R E V I S I O N S
PACKAGE 1B
PASIG-MARIKINA
RIVER CHANNEL 2/2
SCHMIDT HAMMER
IMPROVEMENT TEST RESULTS
PERFECTO L. ZAPLAN, JR. PROJECT (PHASE III),
EIJI MOKI TOSHIKI KAWAKAMI SHUJI KAKU PATRICK B. GATAN GILBERTO S. REYES RAUL C .ASIS ROGELIO L. SINGSON
WALL A-LEFTBANK
L=650 M.
K BARAN
PAR GKA IL
AR AYA LIN
LINE EAR P
AA S ARK
KA IT
AN G
B AR
B RID PE
Figure 3.1.2 Broken Condition of Priority III (1/3)
GE
D A LU
7 8 9 10 11
BS 6 12 13
5 14
4
G UA
15
3
2
1 17 1819 20 21 22
14 1516 23 24
13
12
11
9 10
8
4 567
12 3
PHASE III-PRIORITY 3 WALL A

Fg 3.3
COMPLETED PHASE II
LEGEND:

WALL A
NOTE :
R E V I S I O N S
NOTE : OF DETAILED ENGINEERING SURVEYS AND DESIGN UNDERTAKEN BY CONSULTANTS
NO. DESCRIPTION APPROVED DATE NEITHER DIMINISHES THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE LATTER FOR THE TECHNICAL
*1 - ALL STATIONS ARE RECKONED AT CLOF RIVER INTEGRITY OF THE SURVEYS AND DESIGN NOR TRANSFER ANY PART OF THAT
PACKAGE 1B
PASIG-MARIKINA PHASE III-PRIORITY 3
RIVER CHANNEL WALL A PLAN (PHOTOS 1/3
IMPROVEMENT OF CRACKED &
PROJECT (PHASE III), BROKEN WALLS)
EIJI MOKI TOSHIKI KAWAKAMI SHUJI KAKU PERFECTO L. ZAPLAN, JR. PATRICK B. GATAN GILBERTO S. REYES RAUL C .ASIS ROGELIO L. SINGSON
NK
WALL G-RIGHTBANK
L=50 M.
WALL H1-RIGHTBANK
L=22 M.
WALL H2-RIGHTBANK
36 L=28 M.
37
16
17
18
38
19
39
20
21
22
34 23
36 24 WALL G
25 WALL B
W
AL L=
L 1
B- 90 M
LE
FT .
BA
NK
Fg 3.4
WA L=1
LL
C-L 11 M.
EFT
BA N
K
WALL H1
WA L =1
L L D 1 0 M.
-LEF
TBA
NK
PHASE III-PRIORITY 3 WALL B,C,D,G,H1,&H2
COMPLETED PHASE II
PHASE III (PRIORITY 1 & 2) - RCF OR REPAIR WALL C WALL H2
LEGEND:

NOTE :
R E V I S I O N S
PACKAGE 1B
WALL D
RIVER CHANNEL WALL B,C,D,G,H1&H2 2/3
IMPROVEMENT PLAN (PHOTOS OF
PROJECT (PHASE III), CRACKED & BROKEN
STRUCTURAL ENGINEER I THE CHECKER TEAM LEADER CHIEF, HYDRAULIC PROJECT DIRECTOR DIRECTOR UNDERSECRETARY SECRETARY
WALLS)
METRO MANILA
W AL L
L=280 M. F-R
L=11 IGHTBAN
WALL E-RIGHTBANK BUAYA 5 M. K
NG BA
TO PA
RK
49
31 32 33 BS
28 29 30 34
27 35
FS
GUADALUPE NUEVO PARK

PHASE III-PRIORITY 3 WALL E & F
W AL
L I-RIG
HTBA
L =2 4
NK WALL E
2 M.
Fg 3.5
40
41
42
43 44 45
46
47
WALL F
E
DG
RI
5B
C-
PHASE III-PRIORITY 3 WALL I
COMPLETED PHASE II
LEGEND:

NOTE :
R E V I S I O N S
PACKAGE 1B WALL I
RIVER CHANNEL WALL E,F&I PLAN 3/3
IMPROVEMENT (PHOTOS OF CRACKED &
PROJECT (PHASE III), BROKEN WALLS)
0+
70
5(
PRRC LINEAR PARK
DE
LP
AN
D RI D
B
E GE
L
P )
A
N
+ PE-4 RK
IR
P A TY R PA
R E AL L m
R 3 T W .5 9 8 EA MO
D IF
E
AP 2 9
0
L LIN IE D
L =5 P W
AR L=
Figure 3.1.3 Improved Area Plan (1/6)
MODIFIE +
P NA 5.4 T
0 4 m Y PE-3
D PARA
PET W PA
IR
R E P E -4
CIO w it h
H -B
SP
(S x
L=802.5 ALL TY
NA EA =9 0
BRIDGE
13m PE-3 R 3 TY 9 2 m M
L =8 (S x= 1
2)
P W 2 7.2 O
L= NC 0 .0 7
44m 60) +
BA
VW
QU
EL,TYPE-4
LL TYP E-4 SP
PARAPET WA D (S
x=
IN
L=223.664m E -2 G
L PE L O E -4 L = 3 15
MUELLE DE ELW TYSTO P 79m TY P 81 0 )
TA
LL R3
LA INDUST .75 + V
MU P + L =10.7 WA RE
0+
RIA PARK ET 0 W
LRT
PA
RA P 83m
MA
IR
+ PA .9 L=
11 + P W
70
FS FS P A IR L =3 11 5.5
RK
-R E 1 9 T YP
5(
JO
R3 m E-4
ET
DE
FS
NE
PARAPET WALL TYPE-1
R 3 W 3.5
LP
+ HANDRAIL TYPE-4 PW
PA
P =4
R E TY P 79 m
S
AN
L
R4 REPAIR TY
PA E -
IR
S TA
R
PE
IR 4
L=118.404m
BR
-2
BR
TYPE-3
+
HR TYPE-4 ,
WALL w MO
RAPET
ID
/ D
IED PA 5.788m L = STO IFI
ID
PARAPET WALL TYPE-2 MODIFIED PW TYPE-3
GE
MODIF L=18 170.796
m
ST
25 P E D
PARAPET WALL TYPE-4 L=27.820m PE-4 L=
G
.8 LO P
AI
RAIL TY
)
L=98.218m 88 G W
R
PW TYPE-4 ND
E
TYPE-4 STAIR HA m TY
MODIFIED PW TYPE-3 + HANDRAIL P
FOR STAIR
L=240.555m L=50.590m L=14.371m
E -4 E-
T SA w/ HR-4
PW
TY P 3
Fg 3.6
NTIA FS
L =12
.725
G O
ND LINE
HA
R
L =1 A IL
AR PAR PW TYPE-2
STAIR
R PARK
7 1.0 TY P K PW TYPE-4 +
MAESTRANZA LINEAR PARK INEA
0 0 m E -4 HR TYPE-4 w/ STOP LOG
RIO L
L=56.950m L=17.415m
LLE DEL
MUE
COMPLETED PHASE II (AS-STAKED)

PHASE III (SSP)
GENERAL LAYOUT PLAN PHASE III (RCF OR REPAIR)
LEGEND:

BOAT/BANCA STATION NOTE :
PURSUANT TO SECTION 4 OF ANNEX "A" OF THE REVISED IMPLEMENTING RULES

R E V I S I O N S
PA OF DETAILED ENGINEERING SURVEYS AND DESIGN UNDERTAKEN BY CONSULTANTS
S IG NOTE : NEITHER DIMINISHES THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE LATTER FOR THE TECHNICAL
R IV INTEGRITY OF THE SURVEYS AND DESIGN NOR TRANSFER ANY PART OF THAT
ER *1 - ALL STATIONS ARE RECKONED AT CLOF RIVER RESPONSIBILITY TO THE APPROVING OFFICIALS.
PACKAGE 1A
SHUJI KAKU
TEAM LEADER
JICA CONSULTANT
PASIG-MARIKINA
RIVER CHANNEL 1/6
IMPROVEMENT GENERAL LAYOUT PLAN
PROJECT (PHASE III),
PRRC LINEAR PARK
MO
D IF
IE D
L =5 P W
5.4 T
0 4 m Y PE-3
BRIDGE
+VW
L=54.428m.
QU
SP
(S RAISE D WALL (RW) L =3
8
x= PA
RA INV . .859
IN
L = 3 15 + H P E T L-TY m.
81 0 ) 18
TA
. ) W
R3
2 m (RW + MV AN P L= x
RE .75 + V
5m ) D R W A LL E
0 W . 56 L (S
LRT
PA
52 A L = 1 1. 0m A IL ,(
SP
TY ILP W
MA
L = IR + m (L 0
L= D W cm ³/ 424.9 0. PE )
11 P W 2 700 = 3
5.5 SE S x= N G T H
RK
NAGTAHAN BRID
1 9 T YP I S P E
m E-4 RA L
ET
7m I R
FS R3
R 3 W 3.5
.1 TA
-R
PW EP L
17 / S
PA
P =4
R E TY P 79 m
A IR
L= w
L
TY
PA E -
PW
RK
PE
IR 4
M
-2
+
,
M 9
w
/ OD 94.
L = STO IFI 61
ST
25 P E D
.8 LO P . VW
AI
6 m ) )+ M
GE
88 G W
m TY . 1 3 9 0 2 0 0CG
= MV /m
P 87 44 x = 35 CG
³
E- 1 S
41 W
.1
T H ) + cm
3 82 L= P( Sx=
M V NG 5 m 00
.4
S(
RK
L E 1 1 . =2 7
AM
GENERAL LAYOUT PLAN BE
= x
QU
(L P S
PA
H-
m. )+M V
S
it h
34 5 00 h
I N LI
L=1 x=3 2 ) wit
R
w
W
TA NK
EA
CG
(S 0
.40
-S P
N
AM =9
0m ) +
STAIR
LI
9 .0 .0m
x
AN AR
W
-BE P(S
SG
0 m + MV
= 3 = 10
S
AG K
T H (L
-P
35 .0 .0 m)
NG ³/m
US
G
CG
hH
L E 0 cm
AN
0
STAIR
1
w it
TIN
80
NG m (L
AÑ
=1
=1
E
Sx
L E cm ³/
AC
TH
SP
CG
AL
w it
0
h
=1 8
L = P(S (S
M
H-
16 x= x= 4
S AM
BE
Sx
5. 9 0 46
01 2
VW
W
SP
M
7 m ) 0)+V
MV
m )+M
2 . 500 h
UE
it
0m ) +
L = S x= 2 ) w
5 .6 m
LL
1 0 0 .0
.
M =9 0
3
Fg 3.7
90
= =1
EA x
W
TH (L
-B P(S
DE
(
19
N G ³ /m
S
L
STAIR
L E 0c m
RI
hH
80
O
7
0 2 .5
=1
wit
L =1 W
LI
Sx
R4 CG MP
GE
R
N
SP
L = E PA
EA
29
.17 IR .11m
MO L=68.24 L=36 W
ID
1 MP 5
5 .1 3
R
D IF PW TY m VW
IE D L =2 0 0 )+M
PA
PE-2 L=136.200m
BR
L=140.400m 8
P
L= W T SP(Sx=1610cm³)+VW L=125.464m x=1
CG S P (S
)
SP(Sx=2 700cm³)+VW
RK
760
11 SP(Sx=180 0cm³)+PW2
MO .88 YP E
- BE x = m .
2m -3,P
A
=1
CKFILL
(S x )
D IF
A M 9 02
h H S P ( S 5.3 0
W2
OM BA
AL
IE D
PW RAND 31.44
1
L=
L=
H -B
TY
AY
PE
S P M +V
EA
-3
L = =9 0 ( S x =
L = ,PW
(S W
63 2 )
6.0
x
21 2
L=
.23 wit 76 0
SP
m
3 . =1 6
wit
4
60
(S
m
x
.
h
1
10
RA
cm
IS
)
LEGEND: L= ED
³)
33 W
.2 AL
6m L
BOAT/BANCA STATION
PHASE III (SSP)
NOTE :
PHASE III (RCF OR REPAIR)
N
K EXCAVA TIO
ATION
RIVER BANK EXCAV
RIVER BAN
NOTE :

R E V I S I O N S
S IG NEITHER DIMINISHES THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE LATTER FOR THE TECHNICAL
ER
PACKAGE 1A
SHUJI KAKU
TEAM LEADER
JICA CONSULTANT
PASIG-MARIKINA
RIVER CHANNEL GENERAL LAYOUT PLAN 2/6
IMPROVEMENT
Fg 3.8
LEGEND:

BOAT/BANCA STATION COMPLETED PHASE II (AS-STAKED)
PHASE III (SSP)
NOTE :

NOTE :

R E V I S I O N S
S IG
R IV
ER
GENERAL LAYOUT PLAN NO. DESCRIPTION APPROVED DATE NEITHER DIMINISHES THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE LATTER FOR THE TECHNICAL
PACKAGE 1A
SHUJI KAKU
TEAM LEADER
JICA CONSULTANT
PASIG-MARIKINA
RIVER CHANNEL 3/6
GENERAL LAYOUT PLAN
IMPROVEMENT
Fg 3.9

PHASE III (SSP)
GENERAL LAYOUT PLAN
LEGEND:
FERRY STATION/COAST GUARD NOTE :

PASIG RIVER
BOAT/BANCA STATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 4 OF ANNEX "A" OF THE REVISED IMPLEMENTING RULES
R E V I S I O N S
NOTE : NO. DESCRIPTION APPROVED DATE NEITHER DIMINISHES THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE LATTER FOR THE TECHNICAL
*1 - ALL STATIONS ARE RECKONED AT CLOF RIVER RESPONSIBILITY TO THE APPROVING OFFICIALS.
SHUJI KAKU
PACKAGE 1B TEAM LEADER
JICA CONSULTANT
PASIG-MARIKINA
IMPROVEMENT
M
(P A N
UM DA
PI LU
N Y
G O
ST NG
AT D
IO R A
N ) IN
A G
E
PR
O
JE
CT
K BARAN
PAR GKA IL
E AR AYA LIN BUAYA
S LIN EAR P
ARK NG BA
IT AA TO PARK
N GK A
B AR A
B RID PE
GE
D A LU
BS
BS
G UA
BS
BS
FS
FS
GUADALUP
E NUEVO
PARK
Fg 3.10

PHASE III (SSP)
GENERAL LAYOUT PLAN
LEGEND:

NOTE :
R E V I S I O N S
SHUJI KAKU
JICA CONSULTANT
PASIG-MARIKINA
RIVER CHANNEL 5/6
GENERAL LAYOUT PLAN
IMPROVEMENT
BUAYA
ARK NG BA
TO PARK
B RID PE
GE
D A LU
BS
G UA
FS
GUADALUP
E NUEVO
PARK
BS
Fg 3.11
BS

PHASE III (SSP)
E
DG
GENERAL LAYOUT PLAN
RI
5B
C-
LEGEND:

NOTE :
BOAT/BANCA STATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 4 OF ANNEX "A" OF THE REVISED IMPLEMENTING RULES
R E V I S I O N S
S IG NOTE :
ER *1 - ALL STATIONS ARE RECKONED AT CLOF RIVER
SHUJI KAKU
JICA CONSULTANT
PASIG-MARIKINA
IMPROVEMENT
Figure 3.3.1 Catchment Area and Land use in Pasig River (1/8)
Fg 3.12
Fg 3.13
Fg 3.14
Fg 3.15
Fg 3.16
Fg 3.17
Fg 3.18
Fg 3.19
Figure 3.3.2 Catchment Area and Land Use in Lower Marikina River (1/3)
Fg 3.20
Fg 3.21
Fg 3.22

Pasig Marikina

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Pasig Marikina

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Pasig Marikina

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

What is the purpose of the detailed design study?

What is the purpose of the detailed design study?

What are the volumes of the final report?

What are the volumes of the final report?

DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC

THE DETAILED DESIGN

THE DETAILED DESIGN

VOLUME-II : MAIN REPORT

EXCHANGE RATES USED IN THE REPORT:

(Monthly Average in November 2012 of Central Bank of the Philippines)

DELPAN Br. NAGTAHAN Br.

PROJECT LOCATION MAP

PROJECT LOCATION MAP.......................................................................................... i

CHAPTER 1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION .....................................................................1.1

CHAPTER 2 NATURAL CONDITIONS.....................................................................2.1

CHAPTER 3 BASIC DESIGN OF RIVER AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT.....3.1

CHAPTER 4 DETAILED DESIGN OF RIVER AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS .... 4.1

CHAPTER 5 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL CONSIDERATIONS..................5.1

CHAPTER 6 CONSTRUCTION PLAN.......................................................................6.1

CHAPTER 7 COST ESTIMATE ..................................................................................7.1

CHAPTER 8 PROJECT EVALUATION .....................................................................8.1

CHAPTER 9 STUDY ON PLAN OF OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE ............9.1

CHAPTER 10 ASSISTANCE IN NON-STRUCTURAL MEASURES CONDUCTED..............10.1

Figure 2.3.1 Elevation Map of Pasig-Marikina River .................................... Fg 2.1

Table 2.3.1 Summary of Ground Water..........................................................Tb 2.1

Annex 1 Signed MOA for Establishment of FMC ......................... ANNEX- 1.1

Government Institutions and Organizations

AASHTO : American Association of the State Highway and Transportation Office

ASD : Allowable Stress Design

CHAPTER 1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

1.1 Background of the Project

However, even with the completion of Mangahan Floodway, flooding continued to be a

1.1.1 Master Plan of Flood Control for Pasig-Marikina River

MCGS STO. NIÑO

MANILA 1,300 650 550 500 2,900 2,400 1,500 2,100

Figure R 1.1.1 Plan of the Pasig-Marikina River Renovation Works

1.1.2 The Overall Project (PMRCIP)

Though a Special Assistance for Project Formation (SAPROF) Study commissioned by

1.1.3 PMRCIP Phase I

MCGS STO. NINO

Figure R 1.1.2 Design Flood Distribution for Pasig-Marikina River Channel

1.1.4 PMRCIP Phase II

1.2 PMRCIP Phase III

1.2.1 Background of PMRCIP-III

Table R 1.2.1 Modified Project Components based on the Preparatory Study

1.2.2 Policy Considerations of the Basic Design

1.2.3 Objective of the Detailed Design Study

1.2.4 Scope of the Detailed Design Study

(1) Review and confirmation of the existing flood control plan

(1) Preparation of Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Plan

1.2.5 Scope of Construction Works in the Preparatory Study

Table R 1.2.2 Scope of Phase III Construction Work in Preparatory Study

CHAPTER 2 NATURAL CONDITIONS

2.1 Topographic Survey

2.1.1 Objectives and Scope of the Topographic Survey

(a) Marikina River (about 5.4km):

2.1.2 Methodology of the Topographic Survey

(2) Work Procedures

At first, the control points were strategically established in visible locations