INTEGRATED SAFEGUARDS DATASHEET APPRAISAL STAGE

Transcription

1 Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized I. Basic Information Date prepared/updated: 04/06/2011 INTEGRATED SAFEGUARDS DATASHEET APPRAISAL STAGE Report No.: Basic Project Data Country: Liberia Project ID: P Project Name: Emergency Monrovia Urban Sanitation Project (EMUS) - Additional Financing Task Team Leader: Ventura Bengoechea Estimated Appraisal Date: Estimated Board Date: April 7, 2011 Managing Unit: AFTUW Lending Instrument: Emergency Recovery Loan Sector: Solid waste management (100%) Theme: Other urban development (100%) IBRD Amount (US$m.): 0.00 IDA Amount (US$m.): 4.00 GEF Amount (US$m.): 0.00 PCF Amount (US$m.): 0.00 Other financing amounts by source: BORROWER/RECIPIENT Environmental Category: B - Partial Assessment Repeater [] Is this project processed under OP 8.50 (Emergency Recovery) or OP 8.00 (Rapid Response to Crises and Emergencies) [ ] No [] 2. Project Objectives The project development objective (PDO) is to increase access to solid waste collection service in Monrovia. This would be achieved through: (a) investments in selected areas of the primary collection system to expand service coverage at the household level; (b) investments in the secondary collection system to collect, haul and dispose waste captured through primary collection; (c) a public education campaign on handling and disposal of solid waste; and (d) technical assistance to the Monrovia City Corporation (MCC) to enhance municipal capacity for proper revenue administration, financial management, and management of the solid waste service. The Project Developmental Objective of the original project will remain unchanged. 3. Project Description The project aims to scale up ongoing activities in solid waste management (funded under an earlier emergency IDA operation, see below) and includes the following components: Component 1: Solid waste collection and disposal - increased funding under the additional financing

2 Component 2: Technical assistance to MCC Component 3: Development of sanitary landfill cells - additional component under the additional financing Initial emergency assistance to the Government of Liberia for sanitation services was provided in 2006 under the Emergency Infrastructure Project Supplemental Component (EIPSC). The EIPSC funded a one-time citywide clean-up campaign and the introduction of a simple collection system for about 30% of daily generated waste. Solid Waste collection continued to be funded under the EIP project until EMUS began funding collection in December, of 2009 without any interruption in service. The EMUS project builds on activities initiated under EIPSC but will fund collection on a four-year declining basis. During this time, the Government is expected to put in place a financing mechanism to assume the full operating cost of collection by the end of year four. It is expected that a combination of municipal and central government financing will generate the required funds. The EIPSC project also funded construction of cell zero and cell one at the Whein Town landfill. It was envisioned that EIPSC would subsequently fund the completion of the sanitary landfill at Whein Town. However, due to limited funds under the project, construction of additional landfill cells will have to be done under the EMUS project, which necessitates this additional financing to the EMUS project. The proposed additional financing responds to the Government s concern that interruption in service delivery may compromise the fragile public faith in publicly delivered services. It also will assist the Government s objective to start building capacity at the Monrovia municipality - the institution responsible for solid waste service provision. Component 1: Solid waste collection and disposal (USD 14.4 million) Sub-component 1.1: Primary collection (USD 0.4 million). This sub-component will provide TA to strengthen the primary collection system and increase the number of households served by door-to-door collection. It will: (i) improve Community Based Enterprises (CBEs ) managerial and operational capacities to provide service to households; (ii) assist MCC to strengthen its supervision capacity and oversight of primary collection; and (iii) create an environment that will enable MCC to track and report on CBEs performance based on an easy to use database system. Primary collection in Monrovia was initiated in 2007 as a pilot project with funding from the International Labor Organization (ILO). It is estimated that only around 5,000 households in Monrovia are benefitted from it. The collection is based on the franchising model and the city is divided into zones serviced by CBEs. The EMUS project has enhanced the basic model piloted under the ILO and the MCC has recently awarded contracts for collection in 11 zones within Monrovia, in addition to a larger Central Monrovia primary collection area.

3 Sub-component 1.2: Secondary collection (USD 13.7 million). This sub-component will finance the construction of two transfer stations, and transportation of municipal solid wastes from the collection areas to transfer stations/disposal site and from transfer stations to disposal site as required. Secondary collection covering about 30% of produced waste in Monrovia has been introduced under the EIPSC project. Through the collection program, private contractors operate up to eight skip trucks to collect waste from up to 120 communal skip containers. In addition, the contractors occasionally use their own vehicles to collect waste around the skip containers. The city is divided into three lots and through a competitive bidding process, private firms were awarded the contracts for collection and disposal. A third party Engineer supervises all project activities. A local NGO has been working with communities to explain the collection system. All waste is disposed of at Whein Town site, the completion of which is the focus of this additional financing. Original developments at Whein Town were done on an emergency basis and in order that the open dump-site within city limits (Fiamah site) could be closed and capped without halting the newly re-established routine collection of waste. Development of additional cells at Whein Town will be done with additional environmental safeguards, described below. Two small transfer stations are in the process of being built under the subcomponent. Large trucks will transport the waste from the transfer stations to the landfill, while smaller size trucks hauling smaller volumes will serve the city-areas and transport waste to the transfer stations. The number of collection areas around town will be increased beyond the current number to allow increased service coverage. The aspects of Component 1 that could have adverse environmental and social impacts are the construction and operation of two small waste transfer stations in Monrovia and the continuing operation of the Whein Town Landfill. These have been addressed in the original EMUS project safeguards section. Sub-component 1.3: Public education campaign (USD 0.3 million). The sub-component will consist of a public awareness campaign (PAC), which will seek to encourage Monrovia residents to use the solid waste collection services; it will also sensitize citizens about the impact of unsafe handling and use of waste. This will be achieved by a combination of communication techniques (i.e. radio, town hall meetings, jingles) on the benefits of using the collection systems and hazards of unsafe handling of waste. This sub-component will help to increase awareness and use of the solid waste services. Solid waste management is a relatively new concept in Monrovia following years without regular collection. Presently, the majority of the population handles waste by burning, disposing it in drains, rivers, using it to reclaim land on which to build homes. Component 2: Technical assistance to MCC (USD 4.9 million)

4 This component aims to strengthen the capacity of MCC for proper revenue administration, financial management, and technical oversight related to the provision of solid waste services in Monrovia. Sub-component 2.1 (USD 1.0 million): Financial and Organizational Management TA. This sub-component will provide TA for financial and organizational audit and governance improvement. The financial and organizational audit include TA to carry out financial and organizational diagnostics of MCC in order to: (i) overhaul the revenue administration system, redesign procedures, introduce revenue accounting; develop a database of commercial entities; (ii) strengthen the budgeting process; develop a proper accounting system and the generation of accounting reports; and (iii) develop organizational flow charts, HR assessment tools, manuals and policies. The governance improvement would include TA on policy options and assistance to develop the MCC Charter. Sub-component 2.2 (USD 3.9 million): Project Implementation and Technical Supervision. It is envisaged that a small unit (Project Implementation Unit (PIU) would be established first to address project management and procurement issues, and that over a period of time this unit will also build the capacity of the line departments. FM functions under the project will be handled by the Project Financial Management Unit (PFMU) already established at the MOF. During mid-tern review of the project, the MOF and the Bank will re-assess the systems and may consider transferring the financial management responsibilities to MCC. Other than the PIU, the Design and Supervision Engineer will be located at the MCC premises, work closely with staff of the Sanitation Department and as such, provide on-the job training. Component 3: Development of Sanitary Landfills (USD 2.3 million): The proposed additional financing will fund construction of landfill disposal cells at the current disposal site at Whein Town, Monrovia. This was not envisaged under the original EMUS project. Instead, some support for landfill cells was provided under the Emergency Infrastructure Project Supplemental Component (EIPSC), implemented by UNDP. Currently, available funds under EIPSC have been largely expended, while available disposal space at Whein town is inadequate to accommodate incoming waste. As a result, unless new cells are developed, Monrovia would run out of safe disposal options. This component will fund the development of cells 2-5 in accordance with appropriate environmental safeguards. EIPSC will fund the final development of leachate ponds and administrative buildings at Whein Town. The total project, including the additional financing of 4.0 million, will amount to USD 22.4 million: Component I 1.1 Primary Collection (USD 0.4 million) 1.2 Secondary Collection (USD 13.7 million) 1.3 Public Awareness Campaign (USD 0.3 million) Sub-total: USD 14.4 million

5 Component Financial and Organizational Management (USD 1.0 million) 2.2 Implementation and Technical Supervision (USD 3.9 million) Sub-total: 4.9 million Component Development of Sanitary Landfills (USD 2.3 million) Audit, Training, Operating Costs (USD 0.5 million) Contingency (USD 0.3 million) 4. Project Location and salient physical characteristics relevant to the safeguard analysis Project activities will be located in Monrovia. 5. Environmental and Social Safeguards Specialists Mr Thomas E. Walton (EASNS) Mr Antoine V. Lema (AFTCS) 6. Safeguard Policies Triggered No Environmental Assessment (OP/BP 4.01) Natural Habitats (OP/BP 4.04) Forests (OP/BP 4.36) Pest Management (OP 4.09) Physical Cultural Resources (OP/BP 4.11) Indigenous Peoples (OP/BP 4.10) Involuntary Resettlement (OP/BP 4.12) Safety of Dams (OP/BP 4.37) Projects on International Waterways (OP/BP 7.50) Projects in Disputed Areas (OP/BP 7.60) II. Key Safeguard Policy Issues and Their Management A. Summary of Key Safeguard Issues 1. Describe any safeguard issues and impacts associated with the proposed project. Identify and describe any potential large scale, significant and/or irreversible impacts: EMUS was originally a Category B project and required only EMPs, since two small solid waste transfer stations were the only infrastructure it was financing. Because the new component involves construction of new cells and a new leachate treatment system at the Whein Town Landfill, the EMUS Additional Financing has been classified as Category A, requiring a full ESIA. The borrower prepared an ESIA for the Whein Town landfill in 2008 in connection with the Emergency Infrastructure Supplemental Credit (P103276). This ESIA includes an ESMP that was updated in July 2010 and is included the Operations Manual. It was reviewed by the Bank and disclosed in December 2008 and is being used for EMUS and the proposed additional financing. The EMP that

6 includes an operations manual for the landfill has been updated and disclosed. No additional land acquisition is involved as the new cells can be accommodated within the existing site boundaries which are uninhabited. The main impacts of the additional financing are beneficial: provision of additional space for waste disposal so that progress in expanding waste collection and improving sanitation in Monrovia can continue, and improvement in the quality of the facilities and operations of the landfill, including management of potential adverse environmental and social impacts. A collateral benefit is improved water supply to nearby villages; by drilling a deep well for the communities as compensation for springs that were on the site and as a safeguard against possible leachate contamination, MCC has provided an alternative to local shallow wells, all of which evidenced unhealthy bacteria counts unrelated to the landfill during the project s baseline monitoring. The potentially significant adverse impacts are possible degradation of the quality of surface water or groundwater. There are seasonal wetlands and small streams near the landfill, and groundwater is used for local water supply. The site is partially underlain by the Paynesville Sandstone, which is a water bearing formation of regional importance. Leachate contamination in this formation would constitute a significant adverse impact of regional scale, Other potential impacts are fires caused by gas from biodegradation of the waste, odors, flies, vermin, increased truck traffic, blowing trash, and visual impact. 2. Describe any potential indirect and/or long term impacts due to anticipated future activities in the project area: The main indirect impact that could occur is in-migration of scavengers that derive part or all of their livelihood from collection and sale of recyclable materials. In the long term, the landfill will be closed, and closure will involve installing an impermeable cap, re-vegetating the site, maintaining the leachate treatment system in operation, and continuing the water quality monitoring program. Eventually, low-intensity uses of the site will be possible - e.g. recreational open space or agriculture. 3. Describe any project alternatives (if relevant) considered to help avoid or minimize adverse impacts. The feature of the landfill that was the subject of alternatives analysis was the design of the liner for the cells and the facultative leachate treatment ponds. A number of options were considered, including compacted clay, compacted clay with bentonite, and synthetic geomembrane. The alternative selected was membrane of high-density polyethylene (HDPE) sheeting; although it is the most expensive of the options, it will provide the most reliable protection for the groundwater. 4. Describe measures taken by the borrower to address safeguard policy issues. Provide an assessment of borrower capacity to plan and implement the measures described. As explained above, the borrower prepared an ESIA for the landfill in 2008 and disclosed it in connection with the Emergency Infrastructure Project Supplemental Credit (P103276). The ESIA included an EMP, and it remains on file in the InfoShop and in effect for EMUS and its proposed additional financing. During the implementation of EMUS, the then-embryonic Project Implementation Unit (PIU) for solid waste

7 management has been fully established and staffed by MCC. Its staff includes an environmental engineer to oversee environmental management in solid waste collection and disposal. The PIU is supported by an engineering consulting firm to assist with landfill design, preparation of bidding documents, and supervision of construction. During 2010, the engineering consultants prepared an Operations Manual for the landfill, and the manual includes a more detailed ESMP that reflects the design of the new cells and improved leachate treatment system. The manual and ESMP are included in the bidding documents for the new cells. Four wells were drilled during two new groundwater monitoring wells upgradient and down-gradient from the landfill, one for water supply at the site, and one for community water supply. Based on the two rounds of water quality testing that have been completed (August and December, 2010), the water supply wells meet drinking water standards and the monitoring wells show no evidence of groundwater contamination. Samples of the influent and effluent of the leachate treatment ponds collected on the same two occasions show that the treatment system is robust, reducing the ammonia concentration in the leachate, for example, by 60% in August and 95% in December. MCC acquired an unoccupied and rarely used site for the landfill during implementation of EIPSC in a commercial transaction with a single owner, and a RAP was therefore not required. The land is sufficient to accommodate the new cells, and so a RAP is not needed for the proposed additional financing. (The abbreviated RAPs that have been previously disclosed for EMUS pertain to the solid waste transfer stations.) 5. Identify the key stakeholders and describe the mechanisms for consultation and disclosure on safeguard policies, with an emphasis on potentially affected people. The key stakeholders are the people of Monrovia and the group of persons living near the landfill. They were consulted extensively during preparation of the ESIA, and both the landfill operators and the consulting engineer established ongoing communications then with the local community that have continued to this day. Local citizens raised concerns about their needs for water supply, protection of water resources, health care, transportation, health and safety, odors and vermin, and employment. Most of these concerns have been addressed in the EMP for the landfill. All parties have agreed on the importance of continuing communication during the life of the landfill, and Bank missions to supervise EMUS have confirmed that the operating contractors and PIU are maintaining liaison with the community. During 2010, there has been extensive consultation with a subgroup of stakeholders - the scavengers or "reclaimers" as they prefer to be called, that visit the landfill. One product of the consultation is a detailed socio-economic survey based on interviews with 48 of the reclaimers. As a result of the survey and consultations, MCC decided to allow reclaimers to continue to work at the landfill, provided that they use the safety equipment MCC is providing and follow agreed rules that, among other things, prohibit reclamation activity near heavy equipment that is spreading, compacting and covering waste. The livelihoods of the reclaimers are thus not adversely affected, risks to their health and safety are reduced, and the valuable service they provide by reducing the volume of waste being placed in the landfill can continue.

8 B. Disclosure Requirements Date Environmental Assessment/Audit/Management Plan/Other: Was the document disclosed prior to appraisal? Date of receipt by the Bank 12/03/2008 Date of "in-country" disclosure 03/31/2009 Date of submission to InfoShop 03/03/2011 For category A projects, date of distributing the Executive Summary of the EA to the Executive Directors Resettlement Action Plan/Framework/Policy Process: Was the document disclosed prior to appraisal? Date of receipt by the Bank 10/15/2009 Date of "in-country" disclosure 10/31/2009 Date of submission to InfoShop 04/05/2011 Indigenous Peoples Plan/Planning Framework: Was the document disclosed prior to appraisal? Date of receipt by the Bank Date of "in-country" disclosure Date of submission to InfoShop Pest Management Plan: Was the document disclosed prior to appraisal? Date of receipt by the Bank Date of "in-country" disclosure Date of submission to InfoShop * If the project triggers the Pest Management and/or Physical Cultural Resources, the respective issues are to be addressed and disclosed as part of the Environmental Assessment/Audit/or EMP. If in-country disclosure of any of the above documents is not expected, please explain why: C. Compliance Monitoring Indicators at the Corporate Level (to be filled in when the ISDS is finalized by the project decision meeting) OP/BP/GP Environment Assessment Does the project require a stand-alone EA (including EMP) report? If yes, then did the Regional Environment Unit or Sector Manager (SM) review and approve the EA report? Are the cost and the accountabilities for the EMP incorporated in the credit/loan? OP/BP Involuntary Resettlement Has a resettlement plan/abbreviated plan/policy framework/process framework (as appropriate) been prepared?

9 If yes, then did the Regional unit responsible for safeguards or Sector Manager review the plan? The World Bank Policy on Disclosure of Information Have relevant safeguard policies documents been sent to the World Bank s Infoshop? Have relevant documents been disclosed in-country in a public place in a form and language that are understandable and accessible to project-affected groups and local NGOs? All Safeguard Policies Have satisfactory calendar, budget and clear institutional responsibilities been prepared for the implementation of measures related to safeguard policies? Have costs related to safeguard policy measures been included in the project cost? Does the Monitoring and Evaluation system of the project include the monitoring of safeguard impacts and measures related to safeguard policies? Have satisfactory implementation arrangements been agreed with the borrower and the same been adequately reflected in the project legal documents? N/A D. Approvals Signed and submitted by: Name Date Task Team Leader: Mr Ventura Bengoechea 04/06/2011 Environmental Specialist: Mr Thomas E. Walton 04/06/2011 Social Development Specialist Mr Antoine V. Lema 04/06/2011 Additional Environmental and/or Social Development Specialist(s): Approved by: Regional Safeguards Coordinator: Ms Alexandra C. Bezeredi 04/06/2011 Comments: Sector Manager: Mr Junaid Kamal Ahmad 04/06/2011 Comments: