INTEGRATED SAFEGUARDS DATASHEET APPRAISAL STAGE Report No.: 41808 Date preparedlupdated: December 10, 2007 I. Basic Information 1. Basic Project Data Country: Nigeria Project ID: P098638 Additional Project ID (ifany): Project Name: NG-Lagos Landfill Gas & Composting carbon operation, associated with the Lagos Metropolitan Development & Governance Project [ Task Team Leader: Deepali Tewari Estimated Appraisal Date: January 18,2006 Estimated Board Date: July 6, 2006 Managing Unit: AFTU2 Lending Instrument: Sector: Urban Theme: Climate Change IBRD Amount (US$m.): IDA Amount (US$m.): $200mil GEF Amount (US$m.): PCF Amount (US$m.): Other financing amounts by source: Environmental Category: B (Partial Assessment) Is this a transferred project Yes [X] No [ l Simplified Processing Simple [ X] Repeater [ ] Is this project processed under OP 8.00 (Rapid Response to Crises Yes [ l I No [ l ( and Emergencies) 2. Project Objectives: The carbon operation (P098638) is envisaged under the Lagos Metropolitan Development and Governance project (P071340). The Project objective for LMDGP is to increase sustainable access to basic urban services through investments in critical infrastructure. Progress towards achieving the objective of the project will be measured through (i) increase in the percentage of population with access to safe water in the selected 9 slums; (ii) reduction in the percentage of households reporting flooding in the LGs where the selected drainage basins lie; (iii) increase in the percentage of generated garbage in Lagos that arrives for disposal at landfills; and (iv) reduced deviation between actual expenditures and the approved budget. The landfill gas component will support the achievement of objective (iii) above and the carbon revenues will support objective (iv) above. 3. Project Description: The Project has the following components: A. Infrastructure: US$160.89 million Al. Upgrading (US$39.77m); A2. Drainage (US$62.64m); A3. Solid Waste (US$58.48m) B. Public Governance and Capacity Building: US$7.9 million B1. Public Finance Management Reforms (US$5.0 million) (a)Updating Public Finance Legislation; (b)Consolidating the MTEF Approach; (c)Improving Budget Execution and Treasury Management; (d)Consolidating the IFMIS; B2. Leadership, Policy Dialogue and Governance (US$1.6 million); B3. Economic Intelligence and Service Delivery Monitoring (US$1.3 million) C. M&E; Urban Policy Dialogue; Communications and Coordination: US$3.75 million A. Infrastructure: US$160.89 nzillion Al. Urban Upgrading: US$39.77 million: This component will build the capacity of the Lagos State Urban Renewal Authority (LASURA) to assess, develop, plan and coordinate the execution of a city-wide upgrading program through the execution of the upgrading subprojects in nine of the largest slums identified in 1995: Agege, Ajegunle, Amukoko, Badia, Iwaya, Makoko, Ilaje, Bariga, and IjeshatedoIItire. These slums cover 760 hectares and are estimated to be home to over 1 million people. The component will also (i) support LGs in developing O&M systems and activities to strengthen maintenance of tertiary infrastructure; (ii) technical assistance (TA) for LASURA to support development of a city-wide upgrading program; (iii) TA for Ministry of Physical Planning to develop policies for the prevention of future slums; (iv) support to LGs to deliver a HIVIAIDS awareness campaign; and (v) Conflict Resolution. A2. Drainage: US$62.64 million: The drainage component will develop a long-term technical solution to flooding. It will support: (i) the highest priority civil works investments to mitigate flooding; (ii) the establishment of an efficient GIS database management system using satellite imagery with relevant GIS software; (iii) a rational reassessment of drain designs to develop a prioritized construction program; (iv) a deferred maintenance program to clear the large volumes of solid waste, silt, and vegetation which has built up over the years in the absence of adequately funded drainage maintenance programs; (v) the development of a routine maintenance program to mitigate the extensive flooding that annually plagues the city; (vi) technical assistance and training to the ODS; and (vii) Conflict Resolution. A3. Solid Waste Management: US58.48 million: Solid waste activities will be unbundled to segregate collection, transfer, and disposal activities; and initiate private sector participation in transfer and disposal activities. The project will finance (i) civil works for the upgrading of six transfer stations, and two landfill sites; (ii) communal depots; (iii) technical assistance to L A W A develop appropriate solid waste collection routes, contract instruments for private sector collection, and contract instruments for the management of transfer stations and landfills with contracts for disposal and transfer being financed by IDA; (iv) an Information, Education and Communication Campaign to raise awareness on solid waste issues in the city; (v) a HIVIAIDS awareness campaign on project sites; (vi) technical assistance to support LASEPA and MoE to enable them to better discharge their functions; and (vii) evaluations of the overall functioning of the solid waste management system in Lagos thrice during implementation. B. Public Governanceand CapacityBuilding: US$7.9million This component will support public finance and budget reforms, and the institutionalization of information systems and consultative mechanisms to achieve the following: the establishment of credible priorities and targets for State interventions; to make the State budget an effective management tool that ensures adequate allocation of resources to meet targets; and to develop and institutionalize the use of performance indicators. B]. Public Finance Management Reforms (US$5.0 Million). To support budget preparation and expenditure management reform, the Project will finance: (i) An update of the Public Finance Legislation; (ii) Consolidation of the MTEF; (iii) Improve Budget execution and Treasury Management; (iv) Consolidation of the IFMIS for implementation by ministries responsible for the provision of economic infrastructure and social services. 32. Leadership and Policy Dialogue (US$1.6 million): The Project will support additional institutional reforms and capacity building initiatives (some of which are already identified), including records management, public expenditure tracking in specific sectors, leadership training, city-wide consultative forums around specific metropolitan growth and poverty related issues, and enhancement of LG performance. B3. Economic Intelligence and Service Delivery Monitoring (US$1.3 million). The project will support the Office of Statistics to undertake data collection and analysis growth and poverty reduction in support of MEPB's role for M&E. Thedatawill help agencies plan and prioritize expenditures, monitor outcomes, and measure their performance. , C. M&E; Urban Policy Dialogue; Communications and Coordination: US$3.75 million This component will finance systematic monitoring of processes and intermediate results of LMDGP; knowledge management to strengthen metropolitan policy dialogue, and communications to inform and educate all stakeholders on the potential benefits of LMDGP; and operating costs. 4. Project Location and salient physical characteristics relevant to the safeguard analysis: The project is located in Lagos. The parent project envisaged a landfill gas collection, flaring and composting operation. All safeguards and disclosure requirements for the carbon operation are covered under the process agreed and undenvay under the parent project including a Resettlement Policy Framework (RF'F) that was prepared and disclosed. In the event that the upgrading and landfill related activities created temporary impacts on a limited number of households, the recommendations in the RF'F will be used for preparation of the RAP which will be disclosed in-country and at the Info shop prior to the commencement of civil works. There is therefore, no need to prepare a separate EA document, as the existing EA under the parent project has adequate measures to manage the risks from the installation of a gas collection system with vertical wells, flaring equipment and electricity generators. The potential environmental impacts are most likely to be small-scale and site-specific, typical of a Category B project. Mitigation measures planned for the waste collection points, transfer stations and the landfills to cover possible leacheate contamination and leakage are well covered in the already disclosed EA prepared for the parent project, and it is this measure that will be applicable here. 5. Environmental and Social Safeguards Specialists on the Team: Africa Eshogba-Olojoba (AFTEN) Paul A. Francis (AFTCS) 6. Safeguard Policies Triggered (please explain why) Yes No Environmental Assessment (OPIBP 4.01) X Impacts are likely to be small-scale and site specific. The parent project EA will be applicable here. Natural Habitats (OPIBP 4.04) X Forests (OPIBP 4.36) X Pest Management (OP 4.09) X Physical Cultural Resources (OPIBP 4.11) X Indigenous Peoples (OPIBP 4.10) X Involuntary Resettlement (OPIBP 4.12) X Safety of Dams (OPIBP 4.37) X Projects on International Waterways (OPIBP 7.50) X Projects in Disputed Areas (OPIBP 7.60) X 11. Key Safeguard Policy Issues and Their Management A. Summary of Key Safeguard Issues 1.Describe any safeguard issues and impacts associated with theproposed project. IdentzJj,and describe anypotential large scale, signzficant and/or irreversible impacts: The parent project envisaged a landfill gas collection, flaring and composting operation. All safeguards and disclosure requirements for the carbon operation are covered under the process agreed and undenvay under the parent project. The potential environmental impacts are most likely to be small-scale and site- specific typical of a Category B project. Mitigation measures planned for the waste collection points, transfer stations and the landfills to cover possible leacheate contamination and leakage are well covered in the already d~sclosedEA prepared for the parent project. No large scale or irreversible impacts are envisaged. 2. Describe any potential indirect andlor long term impacts due to anticipated future activities in the project area: There are no long term or potential negative direct or indirect impacts. It is expected that by capturing and flaring landfill gases. This project will contribute towards the reduction of GHG. 3. Describe any project alternatives (if relevant) considered to help avoid or minimize adverse impacts: NIA 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: The Borrower has demonstrated that it has the capacity to adequately address safeguard policy issues as evidence from its record of implementation of the Lagos Urban Transport Project over the last four years. The Project Coordinating Unit (PCU) is staffed with a qualified environmental and social specialist responsible for following up safeguards issues as and when they arise during project implementation 5. Identzjj the key stakeholders and describe the mechanismsfor consultation and disclosure on safeguard policies, with an emphasis onpotentially affected people: Ministries environment and physical planning, LASEPA, local government officials are LAWMA are the key stakeholders here. Mechanisms for consultation and disclosure for the parent project applies here. B. Disclosure Requirements Date Environmental AssessmentlAudit/Management Planlother: Was the document disclosedprior to appraisal? Yes (the parent project) Date of receipt by the Bank 06/13/2005 Date of "in-country" disclosure 06/20/2005 Date of submission to InfoShop 06/28/2005 For category A projects, date of distributing the Executive Summary of the EA to the Executive Directors Resettlement Action PlanIFrameworWPolicyProcess: Was the document disclosedprior to appraisal? Yes (the parent project) Date of receipt by the Bank 0611312005 Date of "in-country" disclosure 06/20/2005 Date of submission to InfoShop 0612812005 Indigenous Peoples PlanIPlanning Framework: Was the document disclosed prior to appraisal? NIA Date of receipt by the Bank NIA Date of "in-country" disclosure NIA Date of submission to InfoShop NIA Pest Management Plan: Was the document disclosed prior to appraisal? NIA Date of receipt by the Bank NIA Date of "in-country" disclosure NIA Date of submission to InfoShop NIA * If the project triggers the Pest Management andlor Physical Cultural Resources policies, the respective issues are to be addressed and disclosed as part of the Environmental AssessmentlAuditlor EMP. If in-country disclosure of any of the above documents is not expected, please explain why: C. ComplianceMonitoring Indicators at the Corporate Level (to befilled in when the ISDS is finalized by theproject decision meeting) OPIBP 4.01 - Environment Assessment Does the project require a stand-alone EA (including Yes [ X ] No[ 1 N/A [ 1 EMP) report? If yes, then did the Regional Environment Unit or Sector YES Manager (SM) review and approve the EA report? Are the cost and the accountabilities for the EMP YES incorporated in the creditlloan? OPIBP 4.04 - Natural Habitats Would the project result in any significant conversion or Yes [ ] No [ X I N/A [ l degradation of critical natural habitats? If the project would result in significant conversion or NIA 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[ 1 N/A [X ] issues? Is a separate PMP required? Yes [ 1 No[ 1 NIA [X ] If yes, has the PMP been reviewed and approved by a NIA safeguards specialist or Sector Manager? Are PMP requirements included in project design? If yes, does the project team include a Pest Management Specialist? OPIBP 4.11 - Physical Cultural Resources Does the EA include adequate measures related to Yes [ 1 No[ 1 NIA [X ] cultural urouertv? Does the creditlloan incorporate mechanisms to mitigate I NIA I - the potential adverse impacts on physical cultural resources? OPIBP 4.10 Indigenous Peoples - Has a separate Indigenous Peoples PlanPlanning Yes [I 1 No[ 1 N/A [X ] Framework (as appropriate) been prepared in consultation with affected Indigenous Peoples? If yes, then did the Regional unit responsible for X safeguards or Sector Manager review the plan? If the whole project is designed to benefit P,has the X Idesign been reviewed and approved by the Regional I I Social Development Unit? OPIBP 4.12 - Involuntary Resettlement Has a resettlement pladabbreviated pladpolicy Yes [X ] No[ 1 N/A [ 1 framework/process framework (as appropriate) been prepared? If yes, then did the Regional unit responsible for YES I safeguards or Sector Manager review and approve the I 1 plardpolicy framework~processframework? OPIBP 4.36 - Forests IHas the sector-wide analysis of policy and institutional I Yes [ ] No[ 1 NIA [ X ] / issues and constraints been carried out? Does the project design include satisfactory measures to NIA overcome these constraints? Does the project finance commercial harvesting, and if NIA so, does it include provisions for certification system? OPIBP 4.37 Safetv of Dams - Have dam safety plans been prepared? Yes [ 1 No[ 1 N/A [X ] Have the TORSas well as composition for the NIA independent Panel of Experts (POE) been reviewed and approved by the Bank? Has an Emergency Preparedness Plan (EPP) been NIA prepared and arrangements been made for public awareness and training? OPIBP 7.50 - Projects on International Waterways Have the other riparians been notified of the project? Yes [ 1 No[ 1 NIA [ X ] If the project falls under one of the exceptions to the NIA 1notification requirement, has this been cleared with the I 1 Legal Department, and the memo to the RVP prepared and sent? What are the reasons for the exception? Please explain: NIA Has the RVP approved such an exception? NIA OPIBP 7.60 - Projects in Disputed Areas Has the memo conveying all pertinent information on the Yes [ ] No[ l 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 X referred to in the OP? The World Bank Policy on Disclosure of Information Have relevant safeguard policies documents been sent to Yes [X ] No[ 1 N/A [ 1 the World Bank's Infoshop? Have relevant documents been disclosed in-country in a YES 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 [ X ] No[ 1 N/A [ 1 responsibilities been prepared for the implementation of measures related to safeguard policies? Have costs related to safeguard policy measures been YES included in the project cost? Does the Monitoring and Evaluation system of the YES project include the monitoring of safeguard impacts and measures related to safeguard policies? Have satisfactory implementation arrangements been YES agreed with the borrower and the same been adequately reflected in the project legal documents? D. Approvals