INTEGRATED SAFEGUARDS DATASHEET RESTRUCTURING STAGE Report No.:66696 Date prepared/updated: 11/09/2011 I. Basic Information 1. Basic Project Data Country: Uganda Project ID: P093856 Additional Project ID (if any): P073089 & P111366 Project Name: Sustainable Environment and Carbon Finance Project Task Team Leader: Martin Fodor Estimated Appraisal Date: Estimated Date for signing Carbon Emission Reduction Purchase Agreement: July 21, 2009 Managing Unit: AFTEN Lending Instrument: Funds from Community Development Carbon Fund will purchase ERs as generated through municipal solid waste management through composting Sector: Water, sanitation and flood protection (Solid waste management) (100%) Theme: Climate change (33%) Pollution management and environmental health (67%) IBRD Amount (US$m.): IDA Amount (US$m.): GEF Amount (US$m.): CDCF Amount (US$m.): 2,719,405 (ERPA) Other financing amounts by source: Environmental Category: C Is this a transferred project Yes [ x ] No [ ] Simplified Processing Simple [ ] Repeater [ ] Is this project processed under OP 8.00 (Rapid Response to Crises Yes [ ] No [X] and Emergencies) 2. Project Objectives: This carbon offset operation corresponds to the investments under IDA project P073089 and its Additional Financing P111366. The overall goal of this Carbon Finance project is carbon sequestration through municipal solid waste management through composting. It is estimated that the overall project will generate on average 83,700 metric tonnes CO2 equivalent per annum for the first 7 year crediting period. 3. Project Description: The project will provide access to carbon markets to the National Environmental Management Authority (NEMA). The Composting projects are implemented by the individual urban 1 authorities. Each of these compost projects is considered a CDM Programme Activity (CPA). The urban authorities transfer their CER rights to the NEMA in lieu of the investments received for the CPA. NEMA sells the CERs to the CDCF. The Memoranda of Understanding signed between the urban authorities and NEMA has provisions for sharing of financial benefits accruing from the sale of emission reductions. The NEMA is the Coordinating/Managing Entity (C/ME) for all the CPAs under the Programme of Activities (POA), which currently includes 8 CPAs (except Mbarara, which is expected to be registered in early 2012). All 9 sites, as described below, are included in ERPA. The carbon project is a component of an investment project P073089 and its Additional Financing P111366.There will be no additional investment for this carbon component. Urban population has been increasing at over 3.8 % per annum in Uganda, with urban population accounting for 12 % of the total population in 2002. One of the significant environmental concerns of the growing urban areas has been the management of municipal solid wastes. So far as disposal of municipal solid waste is concerned, the common practice in Uganda is to dispose the wastes in landfills (controlled and uncontrolled dumpsites). These landfills generate and emit significant amount of methane to the atmosphere. Through its activities the project recovers the organic matter (80 % of the waste is organic in nature in Uganda) from municipal solid waste, which degrades as compost and reduces considerably methane emissions. Urban authorities (municipalities and towns) generating up to 70 tons per day (TPD) of organic waste receive support to improve collection efficiency and process the wastes at existing landfill sites. Selection criteria reflect considerations of scale (with towns generating 50-70tpd waste over the next 5 years), collection capacity (with towns demonstrating ability to collect and dispose of some of their current waste stream), land availability (having available a suitable site of at least 8 acres in extent that is or could be licensed by NEMA), and political will and commitment. A total of 9 urban authorities (selected using the above criteria and due diligence fact-finding inspections by the NEMA and the World Bank teams) participate in the project: Mbale, Mbarara, Lira, Soroti, Jinja, Kabale, Mukono, Kasese, and Fort Portal. Each of the 9 town / municipal councils handles from about 25 tons of waste per day up to 100 tons of waste per day, this quantity can increase through improved collection and due to the urban population growth. Based on a standard composting plant of 70 tons per day, typical waste handled would be about 25,550 tons per annum, resulting in the production of about 5,000 tons of compost per annum and the generation in average of 8,370 ton of emission reduction per year. The urban local body undertakes improvement of its waste collection systems within the municipal area with National Environment Management Authority (NEMA) support. The wastes collected are transported to the compost facilities, which, in most cases, are located adjacent to the landfills/ solid waste disposal sites, where the wastes would usually be disposed off in the absence of the program. The incoming waste is aerobically composted in a composting facility. The facility is covered with a roof to avoid run-off and excess leachate generation due to rainwater percolation through the wastes. The leachate from the waste is collected in a covered tank and used for wetting the windrows. The mature compost is screened using simple manual 2 sieving equipment, which would be upgraded as required in future. The compost produced is used by farmers or municipal services, recyclables are removed and sold, and the rejects from the process are disposed of at the landfills/disposal sites. 4. Project Location and salient physical characteristics relevant to the safeguard analysis: Carbon generating activities are undertaken on licensed landfill sites of the following urban authorities: Mbale, Mbarara, Lira, Soroti, Jinja, Kabale, Mukono, Kasese, and Fort Portal. 5. Environmental and Social Safeguards Specialists on the Team: Ann Jeannette Glauber (AFTEN) Mary Bitekerezo (AFTCS) 6. Safeguard Policies Triggered Yes No Please note that the ISDS for this Carbon Finance activity does not trigger safeguards policies. Rather, the safeguards aspects are addressed through the parent project (PO73089) Environmental Assessment (OP/BP 4.01) X Natural Habitats (OP/BP 4.04) X Forests (OP/BP 4.36) X Pest Management (OP 4.09) X Physical Cultural Resources (OP/BP 4.11) X Indigenous Peoples (OP/BP 4.10) X Involuntary Resettlement (OP/BP 4.12) X Safety of Dams (OP/BP 4.37) X Projects on International Waterways (OP/BP 7.50) X Projects in Disputed Areas (OP/BP 7.60) X 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: The Community Development Carbon Fund resources will help promote sustainable municipal solid waste management in Uganda. Thus, the project is conceived and designed to have significant positive environmental and social impacts. The project will not result in any potential large scale, significant or irreversible impacts. The carbon offset operation corresponds to the investments under P073089 and no additional investment will be needed. All necessary safeguards have been conducted under the parent project and disclosed under the same. 3 2. Describe any potential indirect and/or long term impacts due to anticipated future activities in the project area: No negative long-term impacts are anticipated due to project activities. 3. Describe any project alternatives (if relevant) considered to help avoid or minimize adverse impacts: N/a 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: Strong capacity exists for safeguard issues - the project is managed by experienced technical staff in the national environmental management agency, who deal with the national environmental safeguards in their daily work, mainstream them as part of the core activities, and have received the Bank safeguards training. 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 communities surrounding project sites. They are consulted in the course of preparing safeguards instruments under the related Specific Investment Loan (SIL) operation in accordance with the requirements of the Government of Uganda and the World Bank. Additional consultations are held by the urban authorities with the following objectives: (i) to ensure that stakeholder concerns are incorporated in project design and planning; (ii) to increase public awareness and understanding of the project; and (iii) to formulate community benefit plans with direct involvement of the communities. B. Disclosure Requirements Date Environmental Assessment/Audit/Management Plan/Other: Was the document disclosed prior to appraisal? n/a Date of receipt by the Bank n/a Date of "in-country" disclosure n/a Date of submission to InfoShop n/a For category A projects, date of distributing the Executive n/a Summary of the EA to the Executive Directors Resettlement Action Plan/Framework/Policy Process: Was the document disclosed prior to appraisal? n/a Date of receipt by the Bank n/a Date of "in-country" disclosure n/a Date of submission to InfoShop n/a Indigenous Peoples Plan/Planning Framework: 4 Was the document disclosed prior to appraisal? n/a Date of receipt by the Bank n/a Date of "in-country" disclosure n/a Date of submission to InfoShop n/a Pest Management Plan: Was the document disclosed prior to appraisal? n/a Date of receipt by the Bank n/a Date of "in-country" disclosure n/a Date of submission to InfoShop n/a * If the project triggers the Pest Management and/or Physical Cultural Resources policies, 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 4.01 - Environment Assessment Does the project require a stand-alone EA (including Yes [ ] No [ x ] N/A [ ] 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 4.04 - Natural Habitats Would the project result in any significant conversion or Yes [ ] No [ x ] N/A [ ] degradation of critical natural habitats? If the project would result in significant conversion or degradation of other (non-critical) natural habitats, does the project include mitigation measures acceptable to the Bank? OP 4.09 - Pest Management Does the EA adequately address the pest management Yes [ ] No [ ] N/A [ x ] issues? Is a separate PMP required? Yes [ ] No [x ] N/A [ ] If yes, has the PMP been reviewed and approved by a safeguards specialist or Sector Manager? Are PMP requirements included in project design? If yes, does the project team include a Pest Management Specialist? OP/BP 4.11 – Physical Cultural Resources Does the EA include adequate measures related to Yes [ ] No [ ] N/A [ x ] cultural property? 5 Does the credit/loan incorporate mechanisms to mitigate the potential adverse impacts on physical cultural resources? OP/BP 4.10 - Indigenous Peoples Has a separate Indigenous Peoples Plan/Planning Yes [ ] No [ ] N/A [ x ] Framework (as appropriate) been prepared in consultation with affected Indigenous Peoples? If yes, then did the Regional unit responsible for safeguards or Sector Manager review the plan? If the whole project is designed to benefit IP, has the design been reviewed and approved by the Regional Social Development Unit? OP/BP 4.12 - Involuntary Resettlement Has a resettlement plan/abbreviated plan/policy Yes [ ] No [ ] N/A [ x ] framework/process framework (as appropriate) been prepared? If yes, then did the Regional unit responsible for safeguards or Sector Manager review and approve the plan/policy framework/process framework? OP/BP 4.36 – Forests Has the sector-wide analysis of policy and institutional Yes [ ] No [ ] N/A [ x ] issues and constraints been carried out? Does the project design include satisfactory measures to overcome these constraints? Does the project finance commercial harvesting, and if so, does it include provisions for certification system? OP/BP 4.37 - Safety of Dams Have dam safety plans been prepared? Yes [ ] No [ ] N/A [ x ] Have the TORs as well as composition for the independent Panel of Experts (POE) been reviewed and approved by the Bank? Has an Emergency Preparedness Plan (EPP) been prepared and arrangements been made for public awareness and training? OP/BP 7.50 - Projects on International Waterways Have the other riparians been notified of the project? Yes [ ] No [ ] N/A [ x ] If the project falls under one of the exceptions to the notification requirement, has this been cleared with the Legal Department, and the memo to the RVP prepared and sent? What are the reasons for the exception? Please explain: Has the RVP approved such an exception? OP/BP 7.60 - Projects in Disputed Areas 6 Has the memo conveying all pertinent information on the Yes [ ] No [ ] N/A [ x ] international aspects of the project, including the procedures to be followed, and the recommendations for dealing with the issue, been prepared Does the PAD/MOP include the standard disclaimer referred to in the OP? The World Bank Policy on Disclosure of Information Have relevant safeguard policies documents been sent to Yes [ ] No [ ] N/A [ x ] 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 Yes [ ] No [ ] N/A [ x ] 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? D. Approvals Signed and submitted by: Name Date Task Team Leader: Martin Fodor (AFTEN) 11/09/2011 Environmental Specialist: Ann Jeannette Glauber (AFTEN) 11/09/2011 Social Development Specialist Mary Bitekerezo (AFTCS) 11/09/2011 Additional Environmental and/or Social Development Specialist(s): Approved by: Regional Safeguards Alexandra Bezeredi (AFTOS) 11/11/2011 Coordinator: Comments: Sector Manager: Idah Z. Pswarayi-Riddihough (AFTEN) 11/13/2011 Comments: 7