INTEGRATED SAFEGUARDS DATA SHEET APPRAISAL STAGE Report No.: ISDSA6196 Public Disclosure Copy Date ISDS Prepared/Updated: 26-Dec-2013 Date ISDS Approved/Disclosed: 26-Dec-2013 I. BASIC INFORMATION 1. Basic Project Data Country: Nepal Project ID: P143036 Project Name: Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Improvement Project (P143036) Task Team William D. Kingdom Leader: Estimated 09-Dec-2013 Estimated 18-Mar-2014 Appraisal Date: Board Date: Managing Unit: SASDU Lending Specific Investment Loan Instrument: Sector(s): Water supply (80%), Sanitation (20%) Theme(s): Rural services and infrastructure (80%), Decentralization (20%) Is this project processed under OP 8.50 (Emergency Recovery) or OP No 8.00 (Rapid Response to Crises and Emergencies)? Financing (In USD Million) Total Project Cost: 82.00 Total Bank Financing: 65.00 Public Disclosure Copy Financing Gap: 0.00 Financing Source Amount BORROWER/RECIPIENT 10.30 International Development Association (IDA) 65.00 Local Communities 6.70 Total 82.00 Environmental B - Partial Assessment Category: Is this a No Repeater project? 2. Project Development Objective(s) The development objectives of the project are to: (i) Increase sustainable access to improved water services and promote improved sanitation and hygiene practices in rural areas; and (ii) Develop and implement a long-term support mechanism to promote the sustainability of water supply schemes in selected Districts. Page 1 of 11 3. Project Description Component 1 – Access to Improved Water Supplies and Promote Improved Sanitation & Hygiene Practices will include: (i) physical investment for new water supply systems, (ii) improved sanitation Public Disclosure Copy units at community level (health facilities, schools, etc.), (iii) hygiene education and awareness building to complement the physical infrastructure and improve health outcomes, and (iv) expansion and rehabilitation of schemes in five districts selected for Component 2. This will, in general, follow the approach adopted under the earlier Bank supported Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Projects (RWSSP I and II). In those Districts selected for Component 2, the Component 1 activities will expand beyond the construction of new schemes and will develop and establish approaches for demand responsive and sustainable investments in: 1. Water system rehabilitation – where schemes have deteriorated and need investment. 2. Water system expansion – where increases in the size of a community has not been matched by system expansions. Component 2 – District Level Institutional Strengthening, will support technical assistance and capacity building in five districts to improve institutional arrangements and strengthen the linkages among the key agencies during planning, implementation and post construction. The goal is to improve long term scheme sustainability which has been identified as a critical weakness in the sector in a number of recent sector studies, joint reviews and workshops. Component 3 – Technical Assistance/Capacity Building and Project Management, will finance incremental project management and administration costs for Components 1 and 2 as well as a variety of financial and safeguards audits, miscellaneous capacity building activities and sector studies. Component 4 – Contingency Emergency Response, In case of an adverse natural event that causes a major disaster, the government may request the Bank to re-allocate project funds to support emergency response and reconstruction. This component would draw resources from the unallocated Public Disclosure Copy expenditure category and/or enable the government to request the Bank to re-categorize and reallocate financing from other project components to partially cover emergency response and recovery costs. This component may also be used to channel additional funds that may become available to respond to the emergency. 4. Project location and salient physical characteristics relevant to the safeguard analysis (if known) The project will be implemented in 55 out of 75 districts of Nepal. Villages will be selected on the basis of requests for WASH services through the district’s planning process and will be subject to the selection criteria for financing under the Fund Board’s approach. Component 1 of the project will be open to villages across the country, in all regions - mountain, hills and the terai - but project resources will be weighted towards those Districts with lower levels of access to water supply and sanitation thus addressing current inequities in service provision and building a platform for shared prosperity. 60% of investment will be directed to the 20 Districts with the lowest coverage levels. The districts participating in Component 2 have been selected on the basis of their institutional capacity (the Minimum Conditions- Performance Management scores of the districts for FY 2012/13), the size of the districts (excluding districts that were too large or too small), and the scale of major rehabilitation requirements (per NMIP) so that rehabilitation and expansion models can be tested in these districts. Page 2 of 11 The schemes to be funded under the project will be community-based, demand driven and small in nature, and they will be scattered in large geographical areas across the country. For example, the Public Disclosure Copy larger schemes may serve around 130 household and may use around 0.7-0.8 liters per second (lps) for gravity flow type. However, for schemes serving larger villages and using ground water, the extraction may be as high as 5 lps and can be from several underground sources. The project will be scattered in the terai, hill and mountain regions with typical environmental issues pertaining to such sub-projects. Some of the adverse impacts that may be encountered include the risk of flash floods, groundwater contamination, and water quality in the terai region, and landslides, depletion of water source, pollution water source, deforestation in the hill and rugged mountain regions. No involuntary resettlement is expected under the project. Further, by virtue of its design, the project will provide significant benefits to women, indigenous people, and other vulnerable groups. Experiences from the implementation of RWSSP I and II have shown that the adverse environmental and social impacts of schemes supported under RWSSIP would be minor/simple and can be easily addressed through planning, design and management by the users/community. The project as a whole is categorized as Category B, while several of individual schemes to be supported by the project are likely to be Category C. 5. Environmental and Social Safeguards Specialists Drona Raj Ghimire (SASDI) Bandita Sijapati (SASDS) Annu Rajbhandari (SASDI) 6. Safeguard Policies Triggered? Explanation (Optional) Environmental Assessment OP/ Yes The project supports small scale demand driven BP 4.01 water supply schemes using surface sources such Public Disclosure Copy as small spring or stream or ground water. Typically these schemes serve 50 to 130 households (through public taps or tube-wells/ wells). The project will also support rural sanitation such as latrines in schools and health posts. Water quality (pollution at source and transmission), drainage around taps/ wells (risk of disease vector), scheme damage by floods & landslides, depletion of source, competing use of source etc are potential environmental issues. Natural Habitats OP/BP 4.04 Yes 20% of the total landmass of Nepal is defined as protected area. The proposed sub-projects with water source inside the core protected area or in critical natural habitat will not be eligible for implementation. The ESMF will have screening provision for natural habitat and provide guidance for avoiding and mitigation of adverse impacts per the policy requirements. If the alignment of the distribution and transmission line traverses Page 3 of 11 through the buffer zone or adjacent to the boundary of the protected area, environmental screening as per ESMF will check potential risk, Public Disclosure Copy required safeguard document and mitigations will be prepared, as well as permit from the competent authority will be obtained. Forests OP/BP 4.36 No There will be no commercial logging and clearing of forests. Some springs located in community forest may be used as a source: in which case impacts will be assessed and mitigation measured employed (under EA OP/BP 4.01). Pest Management OP 4.09 No Project will not use pesticides Physical Cultural Resources OP/ No The project will support small scale activities in BP 4.11 rural areas which is unlikely to impact physical cultural resources. Past experience from RWSSP I and II also did not encounter this issue. Indigenous Peoples OP/BP 4.10 Yes The precise location for each schemes are not known, but given that indigenous peoples are interspersed throughout the country, this policy has been triggered to ensure that there are no negative impacts on IPs. Besides mitigating the negative effects, the project seeks to specifically benefit disadvantaged groups, including the IPs. The ESMF developed for the project includes a Vulnerable Communities Development Plan Public Disclosure Copy (VCDP) which includes measures for mitigating negative effects, if any, and enhancing project benefits to vulnerable groups, including the IPs. The VCDP is in line with the government and World Bank’s policies on indigenous and other marginalized groups, and also includes measures to ensure broad community support through culturally-appropriate consultation. Involuntary Resettlement OP/BP No There were no cases of involuntary resettlement 4.12 in RWSSP I and II and none are expected in the current project. In cases where land is required for water supply and sanitation schemes, it will be done in public lands, on a voluntary basis or mutually agreed sale. As done in RWSSP II, land donations and their voluntary nature will be recorded in a memorandum of understanding. Also, a negative list of projects has been developed in the ESMF to ensure that land donation does not cause adverse impacts Page 4 of 11 including loss of livelihood to the donating households. In the case of private sale, the land purchased by the community will be registered Public Disclosure Copy under the ownership of the WUSGs. Safety of Dams OP/BP 4.37 No No dam construction will be supported nor any investments dependent on the operation of a dam. Projects on International Yes All water from Nepal flows to India. Hence the Waterways OP/BP 7.50 policy is triggered. Scheme will use small quantities of water from local sources like streams, spring, and ground water which is unlikely to affect quantity and quality of water in the downstream riparian country. The World Bank, on behalf and at the request of the Government of Nepal, submitted Riparian Notification to the Governments of India and Bangladesh as lower riparian states, and to the Government of China as an upper riparian state on December 24, 20013. Projects in Disputed Areas OP/BP No No activities will be supported in disputed areas. 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: Key Environmental issues Public Disclosure Copy The main impacts associated with the project implementation are water quality and pollution at sources (surface runoff, animal, etc.), microbiological contamination, arsenic in ground water source, drainage around tap stands (risks of vector-breeding), seepage around wells (which in turn may pollute groundwater), damage of the scheme intakes and/ or other components by landslides or erosion in the hills and/or by floods, and depletion of the source especially in the dry season. In addition issues related with sanitation and hygiene will be mainly related with latrine/ septic tank effluents and biological water pollution due to leaves, insects, algae, etc. in the scheme components, The depletion of the water source and sustainability of the schemes will be one of the significant impacts for which alternatives for water source and mitigation measures needs to be clearly indicated in scheme’s design and environmental management plan. Key Social issues One of the main social issues relating to the project is the risk of exclusion of vulnerable groups, particularly ethnic minorities and low caste groups. Nepal is ethnically and socially diverse but despite the diversity, minority ethnic groups (IPs) and low caste groups (also known as Dalits) have often be unable effectively to participate in and benefit from development interventions. There is a risk of continued exclusion of these groups if effective measures are not taken from the Page 5 of 11 beginning. Further, in the rural communities of Nepal, women play a significant role in the management of water supply and sanitation but also suffer disproportionately from the effects of poor drinking Public Disclosure Copy water and sanitation. However, social norms have discouraged and even actively excluded women from openly participating in development planning and implementation across most subjects – including water and sanitation. There is thus a need to develop measures to enhance the participation of women in RWSSIP and also ensure that they are able to benefit from the project. Finally, on the issue of land acquisition, under RWSSP I and II, there were no cases of involuntary resettlement and it is highly unlikely that there would be any under this project. Similarly, land acquisition also does not seem to have been a problem in the past since any requirements for land was managed through public lands, voluntary donation or mutually agreed sale. 2. Describe any potential indirect and/or long term impacts due to anticipated future activities in the project area: The design element of the project draws from the experiences of RWSSP I and II, and hence, indirect and/or long-term impacts due to future activities are not anticipated. Further, the nature of the project, that is, small-scale and demand driven water supply schemes, suggests that the possibility of adverse effects in the long-term would be unlikely. Finally, the project will be dispersed throughout the country thus any type of location-specific impacts of the sub-project activities is unknown prior to project implementation. To minimize and mitigate any such risks, the ESMF developed for the project includes procedures and guidelines on screening of sub- projects, identification and mitigation of adverse environmental and social impacts, and measures to mitigate the possible risks. 3. Describe any project alternatives (if relevant) considered to help avoid or minimize adverse impacts. No project alternatives were considered because as a community-based and demand-driven project, the precise nature of the social and environmental impacts cannot be ascertained prior to project implementation. However, each sub-project (schemes) will be subjected to screening as per the provision made in the ESMF. Based on the screening, alternatives for water source, alignment Public Disclosure Copy of the pipe lines, stability of the terrain etc. will be sought to ensure the sustainability of the project. In addition, the past experience suggests problems of source depletion thus requiring alternative measures for augmentation of the dry season flow (e.g., rain water harvesting) to be investigated. The schemes source or transmission inside the core protected area and/or critical natural habitat will not be eligible for implementation and alternative for such schemes will be considered. The ESMF developed for the project includes simple procedures to be used at the community level to screen project alternatives for their economic viability, level of priority, cost-effectiveness, and social and environmental impacts. 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. A project-level Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) has been developed as a basic guideline for the effective management of the social and environmental aspects of the project. The ESMF includes: (i) basic parameters (e.g., screening checklists) for the identification and understanding of the social and environmental impacts of the individual schemes during the pre-feasibility phase and other phases of the scheme implementation; (ii) guidelines and measures for enhancing and sustaining the positive environmental and social benefits of the project; and (iii) Page 6 of 11 measures for avoiding, minimizing, or mitigating negative environmental and social impacts, if and when they are identified. Public Disclosure Copy In addition, based on the experience of RWSSP I and II, social and environmental issues that were of particular concern in the past have already been integrated as part of the overall project design. More specifically, these measures include: Environmental Issues • Environmental Management Plan (EMP) will be prepared for each scheme during the implementation phase which will be further incorporated in design and estimate of the scheme and implemented accordingly during the implementation phase. The EMP will give the mitigation measures for source protection, surface drainage improvement, protection of pipelines and fencing of structure etc. • Water Quality testing: The provision of water quality test for the proposed water sources three times in the scheme cycle during prefeasibility, development phase and after implementation of the scheme will be made in the ESMF. The test results will be shared with SO’s and communities. Suitable mitigation measures will be incorporated in the design and EMP to address the problems in the implementation phase. Furthermore, for issues like arsenic content, the ESMF will have provision for arsenic testing and awareness and training program for the local communities. • Supervision and Monitoring: The ESMF requires regular supervision and periodic monitoring of environmental and social aspects. While regular supervision and monitoring will be done by SOs and SAs, Fund Board will carry out periodic monitoring. Fund Board will appoint an Environmental and Social Manager for overall oversight and management social and environmental aspects in the project. • On the Sanitation and hygiene component the ESMF has proposed mitigation measures like awareness programs, provision of soak pit and provision of drainage system etc. Gender Issues: Efforts to ensure women are effectively included in project will be two-fold and Public Disclosure Copy involve: • Gender Mainstreaming in all project structures and activities and benefits o The ESMF includes guidelines for increasing opportunities for women under the project o Requirement for Water User Committees to include at least 33% women, and encourage WUCGs to nominate women in key positions o Trainings and awareness-raising activities on gender to make the Board, project staff, SOs, local government institutions, etc., aware and sensitive to the equity and efficiency impacts of gender based discrimination. o Disaggregation of all monitoring information by gender. • Addressing Women’s Special Needs o A major impact of the project would the reduction in time that women spend collecting water. Under the Jeevika program, funds and capacity building opportunities will be made available to women wishing to use this newly available time to engage in income generating activities. Vulnerable Groups: The project will continue to focus on ensuring that vulnerable groups, including indigenous groups are able to benefit from the project, and will seek to proactively encourage the participation of poorer households, socially disadvantaged caste groups, disabled, and certain vulnerable ethnic groups. To achieve this, the following measures will be taken: • The ESMF includes a section on Vulnerable Community Development Plan that includes, Page 7 of 11 guidelines for identifying vulnerable groups, methods for engaging them in consultation, and measures to ensure that they are not only adversely affected by the project but are able to benefit from it Public Disclosure Copy • Selection of schemes under the project will be based on the districts’ planning process but be informed by HDI scores and Disadvantaged Groups (DAG) Mapping. • The manuals of the Fund Board will be reviewed and revised, and incentive structure built in for SOs and NGOs to focus on unreached areas • Guidelines for the design of water supply and sanitation schemes will incorporate technical design elements that are disability-friendly • Information campaigns and communication plans related to the project will emphasize the use of local language • Through the Jagaran program, third-party monitoring of the schemes will be carried out to provide timely feedback, including on the experiences of vulnerable groups, and hold the project staffs, SOs, etc., accountable to the community. • The MIS for the project will continue to disaggregate beneficiary information so that project support to the vulnerable groups is easily monitored, and corrective actions taken if required. Land Acquisition: Any form of involuntary resettlement is not expected in the project. In cases where land is required for water supply and sanitation schemes, it will be done in public lands, on a voluntary basis or mutually agreed sale. As mentioned in the ESMF, the following guidelines will be observed while acquiring land for the water and sanitation schemes under the project: • There will be no involuntary resettlement under the project • In cases where land is required for water supply and sanitation schemes, it will be availed by using public land, mutually agreed sale or voluntary land donation. Land donations and their voluntary nature will be recorded in a memorandum of understanding. • In cases of private sale, the land purchased will be registered under the ownership of the WUSGs • The negative list of projects included in the ESMF to ensure that land donation does not Public Disclosure Copy cause adverse impacts including loss of livelihood to the donating households, will be observed. Further, to ensure due diligence on social and environmental concerns related to the project, the guidelines and procedures that are identified in the ESMF will also be internalized in the operational manual developed for the project. The Fund Board which is responsible for the implementation of Component 1, where both the environmental and social safeguards issues are central, has significant experience through RWSSP I and II in the planning and implementation of the measures described above. However, because the schemes are decentralized, ensuring that the support organizations, NGOs, etc., working at the community level are also equally adept would be a key. To address this, the Fund Board, together with the MoUD will be required to carry out a series of trainings and capacity building workshops for these organizations as well as local government bodies on the importance of safeguards issues, including the ESMF. In addition, fulltime staff that will provide social and environmental oversight at the project level is necessary. Besides, for better and sustained social and environmental performance and compliance, even after project completion, establishment of a dedicated environmental and social unit within the Fund Board can be explored during implementation. 5. Identify the key stakeholders and describe the mechanisms for consultation and disclosure Page 8 of 11 on safeguard policies, with an emphasis on potentially affected people. The key stakeholders for the project are community members and local government organizations. During the preparation of the ESMF, various agencies were visited and issues and options Public Disclosure Copy discussed. Besides, draft ESMF was presented and discussed in a workshop organized in Kathamndu on December 13, 2013. The participants at the workshop included a wide range of stakeholders including government agencies, NGOs working in the WASH sector, community representatives, etc. Feedbacks from the consultations have been incorporated in the draft ESMF, which was disclosed, along with Nepali translation of the Executive Summary, in the client’s website (http://www.rwss.org/downloads.php?mainid=15) on December 15, 2013. During implementation, all the project documents, including the ESMF will be disclosed in the Fund Board and the MoUD’s website. In addition, during project implementation, the Fund Board and the MoUD will jointly review and revise the communication plan developed for RWSSP II to emphasize greater engagement, consultation and disclosure about project benefits and impacts to community members. B. Disclosure Requirements Environmental Assessment/Audit/Management Plan/Other Date of receipt by the Bank 15-Dec-2013 Date of submission to InfoShop 16-Dec-2013 For category A projects, date of distributing the Executive Summary of the EA to the Executive Directors "In country" Disclosure Nepal 15-Dec-2013 Comments: The ESMF was disclosed in the country on December 15, 2013, with Executive Summary both in English and Loacal Language. The ISDS is updated regarding the OP7.5 Riparian Notification sent on December 24, 2013. Public Disclosure Copy Indigenous Peoples Development Plan/Framework Date of receipt by the Bank 15-Dec-2013 Date of submission to InfoShop 16-Dec-2013 "In country" Disclosure Nepal 16-Dec-2013 Comments: 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 OP/BP/GP 4.01 - Environment Assessment Does the project require a stand-alone EA (including EMP) Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] report? If yes, then did the Regional Environment Unit or Sector Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] Manager (SM) review and approve the EA report? Page 9 of 11 Are the cost and the accountabilities for the EMP incorporated Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] in the credit/loan? Public Disclosure Copy OP/BP 4.04 - Natural Habitats Would the project result in any significant conversion or Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] degradation of critical natural habitats? If the project would result in significant conversion or Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] degradation of other (non-critical) natural habitats, does the project include mitigation measures acceptable to the Bank? OP/BP 4.10 - Indigenous Peoples Has a separate Indigenous Peoples Plan/Planning Framework Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] (as appropriate) been prepared in consultation with affected Indigenous Peoples? If yes, then did the Regional unit responsible for safeguards or Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] Sector Manager review the plan? If the whole project is designed to benefit IP, has the design Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] been reviewed and approved by the Regional Social Development Unit or Sector Manager? OP 7.50 - Projects on International Waterways Have the other riparians been notified of the project? Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] If the project falls under one of the exceptions to the Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] notification requirement, has this been cleared with the Legal Department, and the memo to the RVP prepared and sent? Has the RVP approved such an exception? Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] The World Bank Policy on Disclosure of Information Public Disclosure Copy Have relevant safeguard policies documents been sent to the Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] World Bank's Infoshop? Have relevant documents been disclosed in-country in a public Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] 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 [ ] NA [ ] responsibilities been prepared for the implementation of measures related to safeguard policies? Have costs related to safeguard policy measures been included Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] in the project cost? Does the Monitoring and Evaluation system of the project Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] include the monitoring of safeguard impacts and measures related to safeguard policies? Have satisfactory implementation arrangements been agreed Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] with the borrower and the same been adequately reflected in the project legal documents? III. APPROVALS Page 10 of 11 Task Team Leader: Name: William D. Kingdom Approved By Public Disclosure Copy Regional Safeguards Name: Francis V. Fragano (RSA) Date: 26-Dec-2013 Advisor: Sector Manager: Name: Ming Zhang (SM) Date: 26-Dec-2013 Public Disclosure Copy Page 11 of 11