Morocco - Oil Pollution Management Project

Document of The World Bank FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Report No: 20558 IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETION REPORT (28651; 28608) ON A GRANT FROM THE GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT TRUST FUND IN THE AMOUNT OF SDR 4.1 MILLION EQUIVALENT TO THE KINGDOM OF MOROCCO FOR AN OIL POLLUTION MANAGEMENT PROJECT JUNE 12, 2000 INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT GROUP MIDDLE EAST AND NORTH AFRICA REGION This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the performance of their official duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed without World Bank authorization.  CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS (Exchange Rate Effective ) Currency Unit = Moroccan Dirham (MD) 10.7Dirham = US$ 1 US$ 1.312 = 1.00 SDR FISCAL YEAR January 1 December 31 ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS CRCP Comite Regional Pour Coordination du Projet DP Direction des Ports (Algeria) GEF Global Environment Facility GET Global Environment Trust Fund IBRD International Bank for Reconstruction and Development MARPOL International Convention for Prevention of Pollution from Ships MDH Moroccan Dirham MOD Moroccan Dirham ODEP Office d'Exploitation des Ports (Morocco) OMMP Office de la Marine Marchande et des Ports PPA Project Preparation Advance NCP National Contingency Plan RCP Regional Contingency Plan RVP Regional Vice President SDR Special Drawing Rights SSEPE Sous-Secretariat d'Etat charge de la Protection de l'Environnement Vice President: Jean-Louis Sarbib Country Manager/Director: Christian Delvoie Sector Manager/Director: Jean-Claude Villiard Task Team Leader/Task Manager: Fathi Ben Slimane  FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY CONTENTS Page No. 1. Project Data 1 2. Principal Performance Ratings 1 3. Assessment of Development Objective and Design, and of Quality at Entry 2 4. Achievement of Objective and Outputs 4 5. Major Factors Affecting Implementation and Outcome 5 6. Sustainability 7 7. Bank and Borrower Performance 7 8. Lessons Learned 8 9. Partner Comments 9 10. Additional Information 9 Annex 1. Key Performance Indicators/Log Frame Matrix 10 Annex 2. Project Costs and Financing 11 Annex 3. Economic Costs and Benefits 13 Annex 4. Bank Inputs 14 Annex 5. Ratings for Achievement of Objectives/Outputs of Components 15 Annex 6. Ratings of Bank and Borrower Performance 16 Annex 7. List of Supporting Documents 17 Map IBRD 25218R This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the performance of their official duties. Its contents may not be otherwise disclosed without World Bank authorization.   Project ID: P005347 Project Name: MEDITERRANEAN POLLUTION CONTRO Team Leader. Fathi Ben-Slimane TL Unit: MNSID ICR Type: Core ICR Report Date: M 5, 2000 1. Project Data Name: MEDITERRANEAN POLLUTION CONTRO L/C/TF Number: 28651; 28608 CountryIDepartment. MOROCCO Region: Middle East and North Aftica Region Sector/subsector: VP - Pollution Control / Waste Management KEY DATES Original Revised/Actual PCD: 04/15/93 Effective: 05/20/94 05/20/94 Appraisal: 08/10/93 MTR: 10/30/96 10/30/96 Approval. 04/06/94 Closing. 12/31/99 12/31/99 Borrower/Implementing Agency. GOVERNMENT OF MOROCCO/ODEP Other Partners: STAFF Current At Appraisal Vice President. Jean-Louis Sarbib Caio Koch Weser Country Manager: Christian Delvoie Daniel Richie Sector Manager: Jean-Claude Villiard Daniel Richie Team Leader at ICR: Fathi Ben-Slimane Fathi Ben-Slimane ICR Primary Author. Fathi Ben-Slimane 2. Principal Performance Ratings (HS=Highly Satisfactory, S=Satisfactory, U=Unsatisfactory, HL=Highly Likely, L=Likely, UN=Unlikely, HUN=Highly Unlikely, HU=Highly Unsatisfactory, H=High, SU=Substantial, M=Modest, N=Negfigible) Outcome: S Sustainability: L Institutional Development Impact: M Bank Performance: S Borrower Performance. S QAG (if available) ICR Quality at Entry: Project at Risk at Any Time: No  3. Assessment of Development Objective and Design, and of Quality at Entry 3.1 Original Objective: The primary objectives of the project were to reduce the quantity of petroleum hydrocarbons entering the international waters of the Mediterranea, and to comply with MARPOL 73/78 Convention requirements. The project also achieved, among other objectives, development of a comprehensive and integrated system for the management of oil pollution caused by marine sources, thus ensuring commonality of approaches and methodologies, prorroting exchange of information and coordination, enhancing monitoring capability among the countries in the region for preventing and combating oil pollution, and improving the quality of the marine environment. The above objectives were successfully attained and deemed to be appropriate and in line with the government's intemational commitment to monitor compliance with international conventions related to marine pollution. They were clear and realistic with regard to the national and regional agreement ( "Union du Maghreb Arabe- UMA).As a consequence, a framework for a comprehensive national and regional approach to the management of oil pollution has been developed through enhancement of personnel capability to assess and monitor oil pollution, enactment of national oil spill confingency planning and response capabilities (NCP), drafting of regional contingency plan (RCP), purchase of standardized equipment to combat pollution, and initiation of a cost recovery system. Cost recovery at the port level was achieved through adeiquate tariff restructuring, and at the national level by enactment of environmental funds, a law regarding fees and penalties, and the polluter-pay principle. The project was designed to enhance the country's capacity to implement its environmental action plan, which aims in particular to fight pollution, protect the marine environment and beaches, and encourage the parficipation of the environmental agencies and others entities in efforts to protect the environment. In this regard, the preparation of the project called for great attention and commitment from the government to identify the most appropriate and most representative agency, "Office d'Exploitation des Ports" (ODEP), to implement the project and represent the country in the regional common effort. No specific technical risk was identified during preparation, except the risk related to the government's willingness to maintain its cooperation with the other recipients, Algeria and Tunisia, to enforce the preparation and adoption of a NCP ancl the cooperative agreement, to enforce regulations dealing with marine pollution problems, and to implernent adequate cost recovery system. This risk was mitigated by: (a) the commitment of the three governrents to follow up on the preparation study and implement study recommendations related to the above aspects, and the project components as defined in para. 3.3; (b) the national and regional benefits resulting from project implementation, especially the investments carried out for coastal and ports protection; (c) enactment of an NCP, preparation of an advanced draft of a Regional Contingency Plan (RCP), and an agreement signed by the three port authorities on a joint cooperation for combating accidental oil spills; and (d) comprehensive project preparation and implementation carried out with the cooperation of local authorities through a regional committee for project implementation (CRCP). The intensive Bank follow-up effort has ensured maximum success of project implementation during the various stages of the project, and contributed to achieving its objectives. 3.2 Revised Objective: NA 3.3 Original Components: The project consists of two main components: (a) national elements; and (b) regional elements. (a) National Elements. The national elements included: 1- Physical elements: (i) construction or rehabilitation of sheds to store equipment for combating oil spills (floating booms, dispersant, skimmer heads, accessories, etc); (ii) provision of oil spill response and cleanup equipment and dispersant, -2-  and oil spill response training; (iii) rehabilitation of the deballasting station located in the port of Mohammedia to receive and handle ballast waters and bilge waters; 2- Institutional element: (i) Oil spill National Contingency Plan; (ii) Monitoring and compliance: The regulatory mechanism included two elements: (i) monitoring capability; and (ii) an environmental management framework. (b) Regional Elements. Preparation and implementation of a program designed to provide a multilateral framework within which the activities referred to in (a) are developed within a common approach: (i) Regional oil spill environmental sensitivity and contingency plans; and (ii) Training. The project was the first experience in its kind in the region. In that sense it was innovative in its design and conception. The physical as well as the institutional components of the project were designed in close consultation with the executing agency, and local and regional authorities. All components and activities were carried out satisfactorily, and were the key factors in strengthening the country's capacity to handle oil pollution. The project as such increased the awareness of the environmental authority to the threat of oil pollution and is considered the most important vehicle for abiding by intemational regulations and enforcing their implementation. Physical components successfully implemented included the construction of sheds, and purchase of oil spill response and cleanup equipment and dispersant. Training on operating the equipment was included in the purchase contracts. Regarding the modernization of treatment facilities and recycling of oily residues, the deballasting station in Mohammedia was rehabilitated to meet MARPOL standards for treating ballast waters. The main national element was the development and implementation of oil spill National Contingency Plan (NCP). The plan incorporates the concept of risk assessment to identify and prioritize key actions to be taken at both the port and national levels. The monitoring element, including auditing of sea waters through sample analysis of oil content, was carried out by selected national laboratories. A baseline of data and measuring locations needed to assess the project's impact on improving the quality of sea water was established in designated areas agreed upon with the Bank. Reports on the findings of the analysis have been produced every six months. The environmental management element has strengthened the technical elements of port and national regulations, by developing mechanisms for cost recovery and financial sustainability. The regional element included two major elements: the RCP and training. The RCP intends to serve as a template to link the national plans of the three countries. Elements of the RCP and the NCP include appropriate responses to protect sensitive coastal resources, and potential for transport of spilled product to other local or foreign ports. These plans include linkage of equipment and manpower to regional needs and identification of external sources of assistance. Part of this task has consisted of ensuring that equipment purchased under the project is the same in the three countries, and training courses and simulation exercises have been undertaken jointly. These have further promoted the concept of a regional approach to spill response. A joint cooperation agreement was signed among the ports of Algiers, Arzew, Bejaia and Skikda (Algeria), ODEP (Morocco), and "Office de la Marine Marchande et des Ports" (OMMP - Tunisia), defining the conditions and procedures for using all available equipment and personnel to combat accidental oil spills. The cooperation agreement identifies responsibilities in case of accidental oil spills regarding exchange of information, mobilizing of equipment, actions by each party, etc. Training needs have been provided for those responsible for combating oil spills and for controlling -3-  navigation traffic, deballasting stations, and oil terminals. Three main groups participated in the program: Level I includes management personnel of port enterprises, supervising officers managing the civil protection function, and those responsible for coordination of the intervention in case of an accidental oil spill. Level II includes port officers and civil protection staff responsible for organizing and managing the protection of coastal siles. Level IlIl includes ground staff of the port enterprises and assistant civil protection officers likely to be managing the cleanup of sites or to put the equipment into operation. Training was carried out on a regional basis so as to familiarize the personnel with working together using the same equipment ancl procedures. Training that was carried out locally made the fullest use of existing vocational and technical institutions and facilities. 3.4 Revised Components: There was no revision in project components. 3.5 Quality at Entry: No review was done. 4. Achievement of Objective and Outputs 4.1 Outcome/achievement of objective: The project achieved all its objectives regarding regional cooperation, standardization of approach, and strengthening of national and regional capacity to handle oil pollution and comply with the MARPOL requirements regarding the discharge of oil into the Mediterranean. The most important outcomes are: (i) prevention as well as preparedness to combat oil spills systems are in place, (ii) enactment of a NCP, (iii) preparation of an advanced draft FICP, and (iv) joint training carried out for regional staff from the three particpating countries on operating the contingency plan and preventing and cleaning up oil spills. Bi-annual reports on sea water analysis (oil content in the water) have been satisfactory and regularly provided, and effluent from deballasting stations do not exceed 15 ppm. Cooperation is considered highly satisfactory. CRCP members meet regularly and have been able to handle regional procurement, and have succeeded in ensuring continuous coordination among involved administrations in their respective countries. The project has contributed to efficient cooperation among concemed administrations and within the region to prevent and control oil pollution. The development of a sub-regional working group and organization for joint training has contributed to enhancing marine pollution management through development of a common approach and mechanisms. The project has improved the country's capabilities to deal with accidental oil spills and has provided equipment and facilities to collect and treat oily ballast and bilge waters, thus reducing hydrocarbon contamination in the Mediterranean. The project has created the foundation for permanent cooperation in the region in terms of monitoring and compliance auditing, state of marine pollution reporting, and a common approach to spill response. It has also potentially met the GEF objective of protecting international waters, and is responsible for the re-refining of recovered oily materials in concert with local and national waste management programs. Its well-identified components have helped to strengthen and enhance port and national regulations, regulatory mechanisms, and the linkage between environmental monitoring and management. 4.2 Outputs by components: All originally identified components have been completed satisfactorily. Because of cost savings, additional means identified in the feasibility study have been procured. The regional components have been completed to the satisfaction of all concerned parties, including training and procurement of standardized equipment and dispersant for combating oil spills. One exercise simulating oil spills to test new equipment and the NCP was organized during project implementation, at the port of Mohammedia. The project is closed on December 31, 1999. The detailed list of equipment procured and total personnel trained are in Annex 7. 4.3 Net Present Value/Economic rate of return: The project provides significant, although not quantified, economic benefits through provision of - 4-  environmental benefits. While formal economic and financial returns analysis (environmental economic benefit, and financial retums were not required for projects of the pilot phase) have not been attempted for the SAR and the ICR, it is widely recognized that pollution impacts all aspects of the marine economy, from fishery to recreation. Maintenance of and improvements to the existing coastal marine environmental are necessary for the continued success of the coastal fishery and tourism, a major industry in Morocco and neighboring countries. Further, methods and protocols for improving the quality of the marine environment, as achieved by the project, will serve as a model for establishing similar facilities in other Mediterranean ports. The development of a generic oil spill contingency and response led the Govemment of Morocco to implement the plan on a nationwide basis for all ports. Further, the govemment plans to organize annual oil spill response exercises at the national level, thereby continuing to enhance the skills of port authority staff to respond to oil spills. 4.4 Financial rate of return: No formal FRR has been attempted for the SAR and the ICR. The project was based on the need to address potential negative environmental impacts of discharged ballast and bilge waters, as well as accidental oil spills, on the southwestem part of the Mediterranean, and the lack of resources to tackle this issue of global importance. Given the competing demands of the various sectors on their national budgets, the Maghreb countries were reluctant to, on their own, allocate funds to combat the problem of marine pollution. The availability of grant funds reinforced the governments' commitment to participate in reducing the risk of marine pollution. Pollution funds have been set up, and decrees and laws regarding fees and fines to be paid by polluters have been revised and enforced. A model for recovering the operating and investment cost of the deballasting station has been developed for port authorities. Proposals for port tariff adjustments to progressively cover the cost of environmental protection are being made at the beginning of each fiscal year. 4.5 Institutional development impact: The GOM undertook several actions during preparation and implementation of the project, including the creation of a pollution fund and enactment of the NCP, and the creation of specialized department in the Ministry of Environment and ODEP dealing with marine and land based pollution. 5. Major Factors Affecting Implementation and Outcome 5.1 Factors outside the control of government or implementing agency: Only one factor that partially affected implementation of the joint training program is worth mentioning. It is related to the security issue in Algeria, which delayed the training scheduled to take place in Algiers by almost a year. A joint effort undertaken by the Bank and Algerian authorities to overcome the security issue reassured the consultant that it would be safe to carry out the delayed sessions. The training was completed in June and September 1999. 5.2 Factors generally subject to government control: The project included several elements to be implemented directly through ODEP (national components) as the implementing agency, and through ODEP as a member of the CRCP (regional components, including training, studies, and procurement of standardized equipment). This made the project complex and difficult to implement. Several factors thus affected the project. (a) Factors that had a positive influence on the project included: (i) GOM and ODEP already had an established regulatory regime and institutional setup. Building on this, the Govemment of Morocco is now implementing a strategy with actions that will reduce the risk of major environmental hazards and stop major causes of pollution. It has formulated a comprehensive institutional and legal framework that permits better environmental management and law enforcement, as well as enhancing institutional cooperation at the national and regional levels. The - 5 -  overall objective of the policy and strategy consists of strengthening coordination among state and private institutions at the regional and national levels, in order to improve environmental management and tackle environmental problems, defining incentives and encouraging implementation of pilot environmental projects locally and natioiiwide, and strengthening and enhancing institutional cooperation at the national and regional levels, in order to gain better control over activities that affect the environment. (ii) To be able to implement all provisions of MARPOL 73/78, both current and proposed, GOM recognized the need to improve the efficiency of existing facilities for waste treatment and reception, and the need to purchase environmental monitoring and cleanup equipment, and develop oil spill contingency and response plans and training. (iii) Through this project, Morocco has established a long and fruitful working relationship within the institutions and agencies in charge of environment, and with the two other participating countries, through establishment of the CRCP and the mutual agreement for cooperation among port authorities. This established relationship has created deep trust and confidence within the country's institutions and among the countries in the region, which was critical to the project's success and made implementation smoother. (b) There were also some less positive factors: (i) All aspects of maritime pollution prevention and combat require considerable investments to meet requirements set by international conventions, many of which conflict with the demands of continuing economic growth. This competition for funds means that investments in environmental improvements are still difficult to promote. (ii) While the port authorities had responsibility for providing waste reception facilities, the cost of running such facilities make it difficult to implement cost recovery principles for investments and operations. 5.3 Factors generally subject to implementing agency control: The well-structured and well-managecl implementing agency, ODEP, with significant experience in dealing with Bank projects, made project preparation and implementation a successful undertaking. 5.4 Costs and financing: The project was estimated to cost US$6.3 million equivalent, including physical and price contingencies, of which US$5.6 million equivalent wias in foreign currency and US$0.7 million equivalent in local currencies. The actual figures at closing were as follows: US$6.7 million equivalent, of which US$5.5 million and US$1.2 million were in foreign and local currency respectively. The increase in local currency shows the government effort and willingness to expend its investment in oil pollution prevention and control activities. Changes in foreign currency is due to the variation of the exchange rate between SDRs and US dollars. A summary of project oasts is given below and details are given in Annex 2. The above costs are net of taxes and customs duties, as the government waived taxes and duties on all items procured under the project. The costs reflect actual prices using the prevailing exchange rate during project implementation. The foreign exchange cost of the project was financed through SDR 4.1 million, equivalent to US$5.6 million; concessional funding was secured from GET core funds, and the local exchange cost (MDH1 1.0, equivalent to US$1.2 million) was financed by the implementing agency. 97 percent of the grant was disbursed ty the closing date. The balance of .09SDRmillion was canceled. The balance was due to savings incurred during implementation because of the regional procurement process followed to purchase standardized equipment for the three participating countries, and because of the more favorable international competition and price market. - 6 -  6. Sustainability 6.1 Rationale for sustainability rating: The existing institutions in Morocco, including the implementing agency, have the capacity and the skills to operate and maintain the facilities and equipment provided under the project. In addition, the project provided training to implement and operate the national and regional contingency plans. Technical assistance was geared toward developing mechanisms to achieve financial sustainability for the facilities and regional organizations. The government and the executing agency are implementing study recommendations to cover investment and operating costs. Meanwhile, the legal and institutional framework, including an environmental fund, have been enacted and will provide the additional funds needed to operate and maintain the facilities and equipment supplied under the project. Furthermore, the project make the environmental authority aware of the threat posed by oil pollution. This has resulted into an additional investment financed through local funds, including port contingency plans, periodic testing of equipment, and periodic simulation exercises to test the NCP, and request from the countries in the South Mediterranean Sea (Algeria, Egypt, Libya, Morocco and Tunisia) to prepare and implement a follow project in the region. The development of a generic oil spill contingency and response led the GOM to implement the plan on a nationwide basis for all ports. Further, GOM held several national oil spill response exercises in Mohammedia and Tangiers. The evident success of this exercise (attended by representatives from REMPEC, CEDRE, Oil industry, MOIG) will shift the program to an annual series, thereby further enhancing the skills of port authority staff to respond to oil spills. 6.2 Transition arrangement to regular operations: Based on the foreseen results of the project and its highly satisfactory rating for development and implementation objectives, GEF provided funds to carry out a feasibility study to expand the benefit of the project to the south Mediterranean, which includes Algeria, Egypt, Libya, Morocco, and Tunisia. A PCD has been prepared and approved by the Bank management; however, the GEF Secretariat, in order to coordinate among international waters projects, decided not to go with the project until the final result of the ongoing studies in the straits of Malaca and Bosphoros are published. The first phase of the proposed project would consist of an institutional arrangement enabling the five countries and the oil industry to cooperate in protecting the Mediterranean and preventing oil spills. 7. Bank and Borrower Performance Bank 7.1 Lending: The Bank identified key issues and prepared the project in a timely fashion. The project was identified in December 1992 and appraised in August 1993, with the staff appraisal report issued in October 1993. The grant was approved on April 6, 1994 and made effective on May 20, 1994. 7.2 Supervision: Bank supervision was also efficient. Bank performance was enhanced by use throughout the project of the same team, consisting of a financial analyst and a port engineer. This provided a consistency of approach to the issue and an assurance that the project design would be successfully implemented. Further, team members had worked with the CRCP and other involved authorities and thus had established a successful working relationship. The project implementation was supervised on a regular site-visit basis, with supervision staff including the two key project staff and CRCP members. The annual average input of staff resources for supervision was 9 staff-weeks, which included various specialties (see annex 4). This was possible because supervision of three Bank-financed port projects was coordinated with supervision of this project. 7.3 Overall Bank performance: Overall, the Bank performance was satisfactory. Frequent supervision missions and contact with countries' authorities and CRCP members smoothed the path for sound project preparation and - 7 -  implementation. Borrower 7.4 Preparation: The strong involvement of the borrower during preparation phase of the project was one of the major aspects of project success. Its close follow-up of the feasibility study financed under a PPF grant contributed to the appropriate definition of project scope and components. In addition, its commitment to the regional activity was a cornerstone for the creation of the CRCP, which became the implementing body for the regional component of the project. 7.5 Government implementation performantce: With the exception of the approval of a final Regional Contingency Plan, borrower implementation of the national and regional components of the project was excellent and timely. The preparation of the final RCP draft experienced some delays due to difficulty in reaching consensus within each administration involved, but the final draft was completed before the dosing of the project. It will constitute the major step towards implementation of regional cooperation provision in the UMA treaty. 7.6 Implementing Agency: During 1994 and early 1995, the Moroccan authorities focused on facility design, equipment procurement, and training. Most procurement processes were well advanced by the first implementation supervision mission, and were essentially complete by the mid 1995. With respect to equipment procurement for the waste facilities, the borrower was able to obtain excellent prices through competitive bidding. With respect to monitoring equipment, ODEP has appropriate purchasing power through consolidated bid packages. This format generated competitive prices and savings have been made through joint training programs and joint procurement of equipment. 7.7 Overall Borrower performance: One of the key objectives of the project was to use successful application of various aspects as a model for other ports within Morocco. This objective was met and exceeded. The proposed oil spill contingency and response plan has been made the ,iesignated national model and is being introduced in other ports. Further, the successful development and implementation of the project components, both national and regional, provide a model for other countries to use as part of their efforts to manage and reduce ship and port wastes. As shown in Annex 7, covenants were generally met. The borrower's performance is evaluated as satisfactory. 8. Lessons Learned This project was funded mainly by a grant from GEF and was the first major funded project within GEF's "Pollution Reduction in Intemational Waters" category. It can be judged to have clearly met GEF criteria. The regional approach of the project has proven to have a high demonstration value. Through enhancing and upgrading national and regional standards, policies, and waste monitoring and rehabilitation of waste reception and handling facilities, the project has convinced GOM of the environmental benefit of the investments. This has triggered adoption of a multiport program to be implemented over the coming years, including a ship waste tracking system, port oil spill contingency and response plan for major Moroccan ports, and oil spill response training exercises for all ports and other relevant agencies. Further, GOM will be implementing a port fee schedule on a national basis with conjunction of environmental fund, provide a reserve fund for expanding existing facilities, construct new facilities, expand training, and purchase and rehabilitate response equipment. Success of the project can be attributed to both the borrower's and the Bank's approach to the project. The Bank utilized a multi-disciplinary team of a financial analyst, port engineer, and an environmental specialist. This provided consistency throughout, from design and appraisal to implementation. While - 8 -  several administrations and agencies were involved in the project, key leadership was provided by ODEP, ensuring a national consistency and regional coordination as active member of the CRCP. Port and coastal environmental management is inherently complex due to overlapping jurisdictions of different departments and ministries, port authorities, and private interests. If Tunisia, Algeria, and Morocco had not strongly committed themselves to the project and had not had existing efficient port institutions, and if they had not created the CRCP base upon which the project could be constructed, this project would have been much more difficult to implement. Replication and/or extension of this project to other countries can be successful, if there are established regulatory and management regimes suitable to the task. Alternatively, such regimes should be first established and stabilized. Management of ships and port wastes is only one aspect of port and coastal maritime environmental management. The success of a ship waste project can be further enhanced by (a) adoption of an environmental coastal zone and port management plan (a concept already being initiated by the Xiamen Special Economic Zone); (b) implementation of other pollution control activities (e.g., oil spill response); and (c) control and management of land-based sources of pollution. 9. Partner Comments (a) Borrower/implementing agency: The borrower prepared an ICR and sent his comments. Borrower's conclusions concur with those of the ICR. (b7) Cofinanciers: N.A. (c) Other partners (NGOs/private sector): N.A. 10. Additional Information 9-  Annex 1. Key Performance Indicators/Log Frame Matrix Outcome I Impact Indicators: Biannual report on sea water analysis (oil quarterly report Provided twice a year content in the water) Effluent from deballasting station not to international standard Intemational standards met exceed 15 ppm Enactment of national Contingency Plan condition for disbursement against Enacted on November 22, 1996 standardized equipment Preparation of Draft Regional Contingency draft finalized Drafted and discussed among national Plan committee members, and transmitted to other beneficiaries Training of technical and Management staff manager and operational staff training program abroad and local completed Annual meeting of the CRCP (Regional once a year twice a year, as much as the implementation Steering Committee) of the regional component needed. Output Indicators: Oily material treated NA 38,000 m3 treated and 3,300 tons of slops produced and sold Staff trained 112 203 Baseline data on oil content in sea water December 1994 Baseline provided December 1995, and monitoring reports provided twice a year Equipment purchased equipment purchased, delivered, tested and equipment tested, and training completed personal trained during project implementabon End of project - 10-  Annex 2. Project Costs and Financing Project Cost by Component (in US$ million equivalent) Storage sheds 0.20 0.15 0.95 Equipment to combat oil spills 4.07 3.12 0.74 Rehabilitation of Deballasting station 0.70 2.45 3.37 Training 0.22 0.28 1.36 Consultant services 0.10 0.29 2.9 Laboratory works 0.00 0.41 1 Total Baseline Cost 5.29 6.70 Physical Contingencies 0.26 Price Contingencies 0.75 Total Project Costs 6.30 6.70 Total Financing Required 6.30 6.70 Poject Costs by Procurement Arrangements (Appraisal Estimate) (US$ million equivalent) 1. Works 0.00 0.20 0.00 0.00 0.20 =.____________________ (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) 2. Goods 4.65 0.00 0.20 0.00 4.85 (4.30) (0.00) (0.20) 0.00) (4.50) 3. Services 0.00 0.00 0.25 0.00 0.25 training (0.00) (0.00) (0.20) (0.00) (0.20) 4. Rehabilitation 0.70 0.00 0.20 0.00 0.90 Deballasting station (0.60) (0.00) (0.20) 0.00) (0.80) 5. Miscellaneous 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.10 (0. 00) (0.00) (0. 10 ) (0.00) (0. 1 0) 6. Miscellaneous 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) Total 5.35 0.20 0.75 0.00 6.30 (4.90) (0.00) (0.70) (0.00) (5.60) Project Costs by Procurement Arran ements (Actual/Latest Estimate) (US$ million equivalent) Procurement ?4 07o4 I. Works 0.00 0.15 0.00 0.00 0.15 (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) 2. Goods 3.12 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.12 (3.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (3.00) - 11 -  3. Services 0.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.28 training (0.28) (0.00) (0.00) (0.0) (0.28) 4. Rehabilitation 2.45 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.45 Deballasting station (1.;38) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (1.88) 5. Miscellaneous 0.0 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.40 (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) 6. Miscellaneous 0.00 0.29 0.00 0.00 0.29 (0.00) (0.29) (0.00) (0.00) (0.29) Total 5.35 0.44 0.40 0.00 6.69 (5.16) (0.29) (0.00) (0.00) (5.45) Figures in parenthesis are the amounts to be financed by the Bank Loan. All costs include contingencies. 2'Includes civil works and goods to be procured through national shopping, consulting services, services of contracted staff of the project management office, training, technical assistance services, and incremental operating costs related to (i) managing the project, and (ii) re-ler,ding project funds to local government units. Project Financing bY Component (in US$ million equivalent) Construction of storage 0.20 0.15 0.0 75.0 0.0 sheds Rehabilitation Deballasting 0.70 0.20 1.88 0.57 268.6 285.0 0.0 station Equipment 4.50 0.25 3.02 0.12 67.1 48.0 0.0 Training 0.30 0.35 0.30 0.00 100.0 0.0 0.0 Consulting services 0.10 0.29 290.0 0.0 0.0 Laboratory works 0.40 0.0 0.0 0.0 -12 -  Annex 3: Economic Costs and Benefits N.A. -13-  Annex 4. Bank Inputs (a) Missions: Stag o df Project Cyl No of PernadScy * Pdoroaa; j (e~. 2 conmist~ IFMS etc.) Implementation De1'e1op1en Month/Year Cot Specialtys Obje0 Identification/Preparation 3 Financial Analyst, Port January 1992 Engineer, Environmnental Specialist Appraisal/Negotiation July 1993 3 Financial Analyst, Port Engineer, Environmnental Engineer January 1994 2 Financial Analyst, Port Engineer Supervision October 1994 2 Fin. Analyst, Port Egr HS HS April 1995 2 Fin. Analyst, Port Egr HS HS May 1996 2 Fin Analyst, Port Egr S HS October 1996 Financial Analyst S HS April 1997 Financial Analyst S HS December 1997 Financial Analyst S HS March 1998 2 Fin. Analyst/Economist HS HS October 1998 Financial Analyst HS HS June 1999 Financial Analyst HS HS ICR December 1999 2 Financial Analyst, HS HS Environmental Engineer (b) Staff Stage of Project(*- C Ac uatesttalt : _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ No. Staf w ee U ( OOO_ Identification/Preparation 14.2 39.6 Appraisal/Negotiation 13.0 38.3 Supervision 47.3 153.1 ICR 2.0 8.0 Total 76.5 239.0 - 14 -  Annex 5. Ratings for Achievement of Objectives/Outputs of Components (H=-High, SU=Substantial, M=Modest, N=Negligible, NA=Not Applicable) Rating Z Macro policies O H OSUOM O N * NA 0 SectorPolicies OH OSUOM ON * NA 0 Physical *H OSUOM O N O NA M Financial O H OSU*M O N O NA ? Institutional Development O H 0 SU O M O N 0 NA FEnvironmental * H OSUOM O N O NA Social I Poverty Reduction O H OSUOM O N * NA ER Gender O H OSUOM O N * NA El Other (Please specify) X Private sector development 0 H O SU O M 0 N 0 NA X Public sector management 0 H O SU O M 0 N 0 NA C1 Other (Please speciJf) - 15 -  Annex 6. Ratings of Bank and Borrower Performance (HS=Highly Satisfactory, S=Satisfactory, U=Unsatisfactory, HU=Highly Unsatisfactory) 6.1 Bank performance Rating