INTEGRATED SAFEGUARDS DATASHEET APPRAISAL STAGE Report No.: 85991 Date prepared/updated: March 5, 2014 I. Basic Information 1. Basic Project Data Country: Afghanistan Project ID: P149410 Additional Project ID (if any): Project Name: CASA-Community Support Project (CASA-CSP) Task Team Leader: Naila Ahmed Estimated Appraisal Date: March 6 2014 Estimated Board Date: March 17 2014 Managing Unit: SASDL Lending Instrument: Investment Project Financing Sector: Livelihood & Rural Development Theme: Transmission and Distribution of Electricity (70%); Irrigation and drainage (10%);Other social services (10%); Water supply (10%) IBRD Amount (US$m.): IDA Amount (US$m.): GEF Amount (US$m.): PCF Amount (US$m.): Other financing amounts by source: ARTF US $ 40 million Environmental Category: B with partial assessment Is this a transferred project Yes [ ] No [x ] Simplified Processing Simple [ x] Repeater [ ] Is this project processed under OP 8.00 (Rapid Response to Crises Yes [ ] No [x] and Emergencies) Project Objectives: The proposed Project Development Objective is to provide access to electricity or other social and economic infrastructure services to communities in the project area in order to strengthen community support for CASA-1000 transmission line. Project Description: The project consists of four components and an unallocated category, which if applied will be allocated across all four components. The key features of each component are as follows: COMPONENT 1: Community Grants for sub-projects ($18.9 million) The component will provide grants directly to communities to fund economic infrastructure sub- projects. Preference will be given to power-sector sub-projects. However where they already exist (estimated 30% of communities have access to power along the COI), or in cases where a power sub-project is not technically feasible given the terrain and resources in the locality, then communities can use their grant to fund other investment sub-projects for their own rural and social development. The grant amount will be calculated (following the same arrangements under NSP), by the number of families in a community at the rate of US$ 200 per family, but with a maximum ceiling. For CASA-CSP the ceiling will be US$ 30,000 per community, since the average grant per community in NSP III in these 6 Provinces for power sector subprojects is US$ 27,000 and this has been used as the basis for estimating the funds needed for this component. COMPONENT 2: Community mobilization (US$ 7.77 million) The objective of this component is to engage communities to increase the shared prosperity associated with the CASA-1000 transmission line which will pass through their villages, by facilitating community participation in sub-project planning, implementation and Operations and Maintenance. This is expected to create the conditions for smooth construction of the CASA- 1000 transmission line, while ensuring sustainability of CSP sub-projects and maximizing the development outcomes for the rural poor. To enable CDCs to perform their roles, ‘Facilitating Partners’ will be contracted to build capacity and ownership through (i) participatory planning of community development priorities; (ii) community governance and accountability systems and processes, and mechanisms for conflict resolution; (iii) community participatory monitoring of work being implemented in the localities; (vi) basic bookkeeping and contracting for management of community-implemented investment schemes; and (vii) communication with subnational and national government and contractors building the CASA-1000 transmission line. It will also cover the Facilitating Partner costs as per the NSPIII arrangements, which includes the basic facilitation cost per CDC and additional allowances in-case of insecurity, remoteness and seasonality for a period of 3 to 4 years work. COMPONENT 3: Project Implementation Support (US$ 3.2 million). CSP will adopt a cost sharing mechanism with NSP, with regards to operational expenditures (excluding FP costs). As CSP will use the NSP implementation arrangements which include staffing and systems for financial management, procurement, project management, monitoring, etc at the central and provincial level, it will be difficult and inefficient to link specific cost elements to the CSP. Since the inception of NSP, the share of operational expenditures to the overall NSP funding has been around 8%. For simplicity and efficiency, CSP will have a funding allocation of 8% of the overall grant towards operational expenditures. While operational expenditures will be pre-financed from NSP funds, CSP will reimburse the NSP Operations Fund float account cumulatively up to 8% of total CSP funding till the end of the project in a gradual manner. Any incremental operating costs on account of CSP will be absorbed within that 8%. (i) Sub-component 3 (a): Third Party monitoring (US$1.5 million): Given the nature of this project, technical requirements and the limitations on conducting regular field visits due to security restrictions, the services of a TPM will be sought. Primarily to monitor (on a sample basis) FP engagement with communities, financial monitoring of grants, physical and quality checks of sub-project implementation etc is regularly reviewed, and any delays or issues are addressed on an ongoing and timely basis. COMPONENT 4: Communications & Outreach (US$ 930,000). This component will finance a strong communications campaign and information-sharing activities directed to relevant stakeholders within the Provinces with a special emphasis on outreach to communities in the project areas. A multi-media communications strategy will be at the core of information sharing efforts, designed with the aim of ensuring that information on the project’s implementation progress and impacts is conveyed to interested members of Government, civil society and the citizenry more broadly. To ensure that CSP communities living in the CASA-1000 corridor are effectively reached, the communications strategy will take into account their infrastructure access, literacy rates, and language. In addition, it will also ensure that feedback loops (perception surveys, community participatory monitoring and grievance handling mechanisms) between the corridor communities and the implementing agencies are put in place and regularly utilized. (See Annex: Communications plan) The Unallocated funds category (US$7.7 million) will cover additional costs across the four components to cover among other implementation costs: a) Any increase in the number of communities: Since the route of the Afghanistan transmission line will be finalized only after the High Voltage Direct Current (HVDC) Line contractor is in place, there may be a change in the number of districts or communities. Funds will therefore be set aside as part of project contingencies so that more communities than anticipated can be supported; b) To cover additional communities in High Risk Areas: Given the unique nature of work in HRAs and based on lessons learnt from NSP, the CSP may include communities outside of the COI, to ensure that equity issues caused by lack of coverage to all communities in the district does not lead to political risks or social conflicts. The final numbers for HRAs will be determined after a detailed identification process takes place by NSP. 4. Project Location and salient physical characteristics relevant to the safeguard analysis: The project will benefit all those communities that live along a 2 kilometer ‘Corridor of Influence’ each side of the CASA-1000 transmission line. It is expected that there will be approximately 700 communities spread over 23 districts in 6 provinces, with a total of over 152,000 families along the corridor of influence (COI), which is planned to follow the main highway from Sher Khan border in Imam Sahib, Kunduz, via Doshi and Salang, Kabul to Torkham in Nagarhar. Overall in the six Provinces namely – Parwan, Kunduz, Baghlan, Laghman, Nangarhar and Kabul only 33% of communities along the COI have access to power either through connection to the electricity grid, micro-hydro power, solar or other power sources. However the coverage ranges from 0 – 100% between the 23 districts. For on-grid connections in three provinces (Kunduz, Baghlan and Parwan) 10%-30% of the population has connection to the electricity grid, while less than 10% of the population in two provinces (Laghman and Nangarhar) is connected to the grid. The range of connection to the grid for the Kabul population was estimated to be around 50 percent. It is important to note that the communities along the corridor of influence (COI) cannot be directly supplied with electricity from the CASA 1000 transmission line, being of a high voltage. 5. Environmental and Social Safeguards Specialists on the Team: Mr Obaidullah Hidayat : Environmental Specialist, SASDI Abdul Mohammad Durani: Social Development Specialist, SASDS 6. Safeguard Policies Triggered (please explain why) Yes No Environmental Assessment (OP/BP 4.01) x The safeguard for Environmental Assessment (OP/BP 4.01) is triggered for this project because the civil work may include the structures like weir, intake structure, spillway, canal, supper passages, gravel trap, settling basin, foreabay, penstock, power house, tailrace canal, or other community infrastructure like schools, clinics, community centers, which may have some environment and social adverse impacts on land and environment. Natural Habitats (OP/BP 4.04) x This project is funding community infrastructures and is not expected to cause impact to critical and natural habitats based on the nature of the project investments. Sub-projects will be screened and ESMPs will be prepared Forests (OP/BP 4.36) x The project will not include any plantation activity or commercial logging .However, some sub-projects may require limited tree cutting during construction and maintenance of the right of way. This will be taken care of in the context of OP 4.01 and in the preparation of ESMPs and therefore OP/BP 4.36 is not triggered. Pest Management (OP 4.09) x The OP 4.09 is not triggered as the project will neither finance the procurement of fertilizers/pesticides nor create conditions which may lead to increased use of pesticides. Physical Cultural Resources (OP/BP 4.11) X The subprojects are all of limited scale and based on community selection, followed by a screening process which would rule out known physical cultural heritage sites. The ESMF contains Chance Find procedures. Indigenous Peoples (OP/BP 4.10) x The ESIA and the UNHabitat Social Assessment of Community Benefit Sharing options across the communities in the COI revealed that there are no indigenous communities in the project area. Involuntary Resettlement (OP/BP 4.12) X No involuntary land acquisition is expected under the project, but Operational Policy 4.12 is triggered, since limited land acquisition in connection with certain sub-projects cannot be ruled out. Previous experiences from NSP shows, that land requirements for subprojects tend to be very limited, and primarily managed through voluntary or through community compensations. Safety of Dams (OP/BP 4.37) x The project will not be financing any new dam construction or making any modifications to existing dams. The assets financed under the project are not expected to be at risk for extensive damage in case of dam failure. Projects on International Waterways (OP/BP 7.50) x No sub-project will impact on international waterways Projects in Disputed Areas (OP/BP 7.60) x The project does not operate in disputed territory 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: It is expected that the subprojects implemented by the communities through CSP, utilizing NSP implementation modalities, will remain with limited adverse impacts on social and environmental aspects. Due to small infrastructure work under component-1, the CSP project’s environmental category is B. Sub-projects may have small scale adverse impacts on air, water, and noise pollution, from infrastructure works, excavation of material, soil disposal, and quarry operations. These impacts will be localized and temporary in nature, and kept minimal through the application of mitigation measures in the site specific Environmental and Social Management Plan (ESMP). The project will predominantly fund the power sector sub-projects including the micro-hydropower (MHP) and connection to the nearby grid, but not limited to this. The project may also fund other minor public infrastructure including access, health and education etc. based on the community demand and available/feasible services in the selected areas. For all these categories, experience from NSP shows a limited adverse impact, which can be avoided or mitigated through screening, proper planning and application of Environmental and Social Management Plans. . No involuntary land acquisition is expected under the project, but Operational Policy 4.12 is triggered, since limited land acquisition in connection with certain sub-projects cannot be ruled out This will take place through either willing buyer-willing seller, voluntary donations or through mutually agreeable community compensation, the guidelines for which are included in the Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF), building on NSP-III experiences and utilizing NSP implementation modalities. The ESMF contains procedures for recording land acquisition, restoration of housing, and compensation for loss of land and livelihood by project-affected families, all of which is done in a consultative and mutually agreeable manner and in compliance with OP 4.12. In case of land requirements exceeding 100 sqm, or individual livelihood impact on affected households exceed 10%, voluntary donations are not permissible. In such cases procedures of willing buyer-willing seller will apply or formal land acquisition as per the Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF), developed under CASA1000 by the GoIRA and cleared by the World Bank will apply. The CSP RPF is based on the CASA1000 RPF and adjusted to CSP Independent third party monitoring of ESMF implementation is part of CSP design. The safeguard for Environmental Assessment (OP/BP 4.01) is triggered for this project. The Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) for NSP-III has been adjusted to the CASA CSP utilizing NSP implementation modalities. Building on the project structures currently existing in MRRD, CSP will: - Provide terms of reference for social and environmental focal points in the PMUs and Facilitating Partners (FPs)and provide necessary capacity building - Provide a terms of reference to M&E officers to specifically monitor safeguard issues; - CDCs will appoint community safeguard focal points who will be trained by FPs to facilitate and monitor the ESMP - CSP will document and share any feedback from communities on social and environmental issues with the Bank. CDC representatives and their relationship with existing water users associations (Mirabs) will be effective for environmental and social mitigation as well as structures maintenance. The environmental and social safeguards (ESS) unit will be responsible for overseeing the implementation of ESMF. In addition, ESS focal points will also be appointed at FPs field offices and CDCs level to ensure proper implementation of safeguards. 2. Describe any potential indirect and/or long term impacts due to anticipated future activities in the project area: The project is category B project, which consists of a great number of micro and small subprojects. These subprojects will be chosen also according to an agreed social and environmental framework, so that adverse environmental and social impacts will be avoided or minimized. According to CASA-CSP design, only subprojects which are public goods can be supported which will reduce the risk of elite capture or unequal access to investments. Special attention is paid in the project design to O&M to ensure sustainability of subprojects. 3. Describe any project alternatives (if relevant) considered to help avoid or minimize adverse impacts: Since CASA1000 is a high voltage transmission line, the communities potentially suffering negative impact from the construction of the transmission line are unable to derive direct benefit from it in the form of access to power and therefore the Commuity Suport Project was designed. Since a transmission line has a limited spatial, negative impact, it was not deemed economically feasible nor necessary to address the full districts en route CASA1000 – and it would not have been justifiable from a point of view of regional or social equity nationwide either, as CASA1000 trasverses relative accessible and serviced areas. Likewise, the CSP has to be distinguished from NSP III in order not to be considered as an additional block grant to th communities in the COI, as that would raise issues of equity across NSP which is a program of national coverage. Identify the key stakeholders and describe the mechanisms for consultation and disclosure 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: Ministry of Rural Rehabilitation and Development (MRRD) has over the years gained considerable experience and improved capacity in managing proper implementation supervision and monitoring of safeguard issues in projects. MRRD has been implementing several World Bank funded project such as NSP, Afghanistan Rural Access Project (ARAP), Afghanistan Rural Enterprise Development Project (AREDP), and has long history of working with donors. MRRD has established an ESS unit consisting of social and environment safeguard specialists and has national and international staff to manage the environmental and social concerns from both the managerial and technical perspectives. The ESS unit at MRRD maintains close relation with Facilitating Partners (FPs) to monitor the implementation mechanism for safeguard requirements. The environmental and social management framework (ESMF) for the screening of all subprojects under CSP has been adjusted based on the existing ESMF for NSP, which means that MRRD staff are already used to implementing ESMF requirements.. The CSP will staff safeguards positions in the project unit, within Facilitating Partners, and within CDCs. The staff will have specific terms of reference and trainings to ensure their effectiveness. FPs and PMU staff will be trained in all aspects of the ESMF, and refresher trainings will be provided at least once per year. Focal Officer (s) for implementing, monitoring, and reporting of the ESMF will be appointed. The CSP ESS unit will ensure that FPs include environmental safety requirements for their supervising engineers. Moreover, the communities will receive training on ESMF and the community participatory monitoring approach shall be extensively used in implementation of the mitigation measures, and a third party monitoring of ESMF/ESMPs implementation is an integral part of the design. Emphasis will be placed on raising awareness about social and environmental issues among all the stakeholders in line with the Operation Manual as well as ESMF, and development of proper monitoring and reporting mechanism for compliance with the ESMF, incl. all required documentation in case of voluntary land acquisition or land acquisition against community compensation are followed by CSP and FP staff. Independent third party monitoring of ESMF implementation is part of CSP design. 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 of the CASA CSP are the communities within the Corridor of Influence , civil society organizations of the areas as well as institutional stakeholder across several sectors. Consultations along COI have taken place in form of (i) Social Assessment of Community Benefit Sharing, conducted by UNHabitat along the whole COI, (ii) the widespread consultations in connection with preparations of CASA1000, incl. (iii) consultations on the ESMF and RPF (similar to CSD RPF) which have been consulted in Kunduz, Kabul and Jalalabad during January 2014, and publicly disclosed in three languages. The implementation of CSP is based upon participatory decisions making and implementation, including extensive training of FPs and CDCs on ESMF requirements, based on existing practice under NSP in these communities. Hence, these communities are all familiar with the ESMF requirements under NSP, which are being followed under CASA-CSP. B. Disclosure Requirements Date Environmental Assessment/Audit/Management Plan/Other: Was the document disclosed prior to appraisal? Yes Date of receipt by the Bank 23/02/2014 Date of "in-country" disclosure 23/02/2014 Date of submission to InfoShop For category A projects, date of distributing the Executive Summary of the EA to the Executive Directors Resettlement Action Plan/Framework/Policy Process: Yes, RPF developed for CASA1000 adjusted to CSP and applicable in case of acquisition above 100 sq.m Was the document disclosed prior to appraisal? Yes Date of receipt by the Bank 23/02/2014 Date of "in-country" disclosure 23/02/2014 Date of submission to InfoShop Indigenous Peoples Plan/Planning Framework: N.A. 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: N.A. 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 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 [X] No [] N/A [ ] EMP) report? EMPs will be prepared for sub-projects. 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 Yes 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 No degradation of other (non-critical) natural habitats, does the project include mitigation measures acceptable to the Bank? This project is funding community infrastructures and is not expected to cause impact to critical and natural habitats based on the nature of the project investments. Sub-projects will be screened and ESMPs will be prepared. 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? ESMF includes Chance Find procedures Does the credit/loan incorporate mechanisms to mitigate Yes – unallocated funds would be the potential adverse impacts on physical cultural used. 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? Here are no Indigenous People within the COI as per the studies conducted. 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 [ X ] No [ ] N/A [ ] framework/process framework (as appropriate) been prepared? This will take place through either willing buyer-willing seller, voluntary donations or through mutually agreeable community compensation, the guidelines for which are included in the Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF), building on NSP-III experiences and utilizing NSP implementation modalities. The ESMF contains procedures for recording land acquisition, restoration of housing, and compensation for loss of land and livelihood by project-affected families, all of which is done in a consultative and mutually agreeable manner and in compliance with OP 4.12. In case of land requirements exceeding 100 sqm, or individual livelihood impact on affected households exceed 10%, voluntary donations are not permissible. In such cases procedures of willing buyer-willing seller will apply or formal land acquisition as per the Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF), developed under CASA1000 by the GoIRA and cleared by the World Bank will apply. The CSP RPF is based on the CASA1000 RPF and adjusted to CSP Independent third party monitoring of ESMF implementation is part of CSP design. If yes, then did the Regional unit responsible for Yes 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 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 [ X ] No [ ] N/A [ ] 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 [ ] N/A [ ] 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 Signed and submitted by: Name Date Task Team Leader: Naila Ahmed 3/5/2014 Environmental Specialist: Obaidullah Hidayat 3/5/2014 Social Development Specialist Abdul Mohammad Durani 3/5/2014 Additional Environmental and/or Social Development Specialist(s): Approved by: Regional Safeguards Francis V. Fragano Coordinator: Comments: Sector Manager: Shobha Shetty 3/5/2014 Comments: