Mozambique - Water Services and Institutional Support Project

Page 1 INTEGRATED SAFEGUARDS DATASHEET APPRAISAL STAGE I. Basic Information Date prepared/updated: 04/10/2007 Report No.: AC2842 1. Basic Project Data Country: Mozambique Project ID: P104566 Project Name: Water Services and Institutional Support Project Task Team Leader: N. Jane Walker Estimated Appraisal Date: April 23, 2007 Estimated Board Date: July 19, 2007 Managing Unit: AFTU1 Lending Instrument: Specific Investment Loan Sector: Water supply (100%) Theme: Access to urban services and housing (P) IBRD Amount (US$m.): 0.00 IDA Amount (US$m.): 15.00 GEF Amount (US$m.): 0.00 PCF Amount (US$m.): 0.00 Other financing amounts by source: BORROWER/RECIPIENT 0.00 Africa Catalytic Growth Fund (ACGF) 15.00 15.00 Environmental Category: B - Partial Assessment Simplified Processing Simple [] Repeater [X] Is this project processed under OP 8.50 (Emergency Recovery) Yes [ ] No [X] 2. Project Objectives The development objective of the project is to increase access to water in the cities of Beira, Nampula, Quelimane, and Pemba under the delegated management framework and an institutional and regulatory framework established for smaller cities and towns. 3. Project Description The project will finance the following three components: (A) investments and continuing support in the four cities under the responsibility of FIPAG; (B) capacity building, institutional and operational support to DNA for AMU, PWBs, and SWAp; and, (C) operational support to CRA with respect to expanded regulatory responsibility for smaller towns and cities. Component A: Investments and continuing support in 4 Cities under the responsibility of FIPAG (US$22 million). Under component A, the project will support an improvement of water supply access from the construction of approximately 370 kilometers of network resulting in 10,000 new connections in the four cities. These investments will take advantage of the increased production capacity achieved under NWDP II and will improve service coverage in the FIPAG towns. Specifically, this will: (a) expand and extend the networks and distribution through limited investments in small Page 2 works in Pemba, Nampula, Quelimane, and Beira, operated and managed by a private operator; (b) provide physical investments to improve the operational efficiency in the urban cities currently under the responsibility of FIPAG; and (c) support follow-on private operator contracts in the four cities to consolidate gains under NWDP II. Component B: Capacity building, institutional and operational support to DNA (US$5.5 million). Component B is divided into 2 sub-components- Component B1 and B2. Under Component B1, small towns and cities will be piloted with the creation of an Asset Management Unit (AMU) under DNA. The AMU is modeled on the delegated management model in that it will be empowered to manage assets, plan and oversee the execution of investments, and engage third party operators in smaller cities and towns. The AMU will facilitate the creation of Provincial Water Boards (PWBs). Both the AMU and the PWBs will be supported under the project with capacity building, institutional support, and operational costs. The AMU will be closely linked with investment funding under the proposed MCC project and therefore will be piloted in the four Northern provinces. The pilot provinces will be selected from Zambezia, Cabo Delgado, Niassa and Nampula. Eventually it is expected that the model will be rolled out nation wide once the new institutions are well established. Specifically, sub-component B1 will establish and operationalize the AMU and PWBs. This component will: (a) adapt the proven sustainable institutional and regulatory modalities for secondary cities under an AMU based on the delegated management model proven in the experience from FIPAG cities where FIPAG can act as mentor; (b) ensure that the appropriate regulatory, policy, and institutional framework will be developed and tested as the delegated management model is scaled up via pilot projects; (c) build the capacity of the sector players, including DNA, district and local governments, municipalities, public and private sector, and small scale providers; (d) promote small scale private sector participation in service delivery; and, (e) provide operational subsidies during the transition period to support O&M. Component B2 will support the preparation of the SWAp in the rural water sub-sector. The project will co-ordinate with other donors to provide capacity building and institutional support with respect to development of the SWAp approach for rural areas - small piped and non-piped systems. The African Development Bank, among other donors, is supporting this effort significantly. The Bank's value added will be to provide support in preparing the medium-term expenditure framework to facilitate the implementation of the sector policy and, to the extent possible, support the preparation of common guidelines for all future investments in the sector regardless of the source of financing. Sub-component B2 will provide for the implementation of Sector Policy via support to the preparation of the SWAp. This will: (a) provide resources to complement a donor- wide initiative lead by DNA to develop a strategy to scale up the demand driven community participatory model for village piped systems and non-piped systems; and, (b) complement, as necessary, measures already underway to mitigate the risks from HIV/AIDS in DNA (see Annex 14 for further elaboration on DNA and FIPAG HIV/AIDS Policy). Page 3 Component C: Capacity, Institutional and operational support to CRA (US$2.5 million). Under component C, the project will support the development of regulatory frameworks to cover the smaller towns and cities as the AMU is set-up and expanded via the PWBs. The project will continue operating cost support to CRA as well as TA, and additional operating support at provincial level as the new regulatory models are rolled- out to meet the needs of these new agencies. This component will: (a) provide resources to complement CRA's expanding work on extending regulatory frameworks and oversight to smaller cities and towns; and, (b) provide continuing operational support, capacity building, and technical assistance to CRA. 4. Project Location and salient physical characteristics relevant to the safeguard analysis Four cities: Beira, Nampula, Quelimane, and Pemba 5. Environmental and Social Safeguards Specialists Mr Mohamed Arbi Ben-Achour (AFTS1) Mr John A. Boyle (AFTS1) 6. Safeguard Policies Triggered Yes No Environmental Assessment (OP/BP 4.01) X Natural Habitats (OP/BP 4.04) X Forests (OP/BP 4.36) X Pest Management (OP 4.09) X Physical Cultural Resources (OP/BP 4.11) X Indigenous Peoples (OP/BP 4.10) X Involuntary Resettlement (OP/BP 4.12) X Safety of Dams (OP/BP 4.37) X Projects on International Waterways (OP/BP 7.50) X Projects in Disputed Areas (OP/BP 7.60) X II. Key Safeguard Policy Issues and Their Management A. Summary of Key Safeguard Issues 1. Describe any safeguard issues and impacts associated with the proposed project. Identify and describe any potential large scale, significant and/or irreversible impacts: The project will finance network extensions, and civil works will be comprised of trench excavations, laying of pipes and accessories, and back-filling including testing and commissioning. Environmental and social safeguards issues are expected to be minor and limited to construction impacts and, perhaps, some land or right of way acquisition. The likelihood of large scale, significant and/or irreversible impacts is considered to be nil. 2. Describe any potential indirect and/or long term impacts due to anticipated future activities in the project area: None. Page 4 3. Describe any project alternatives (if relevant) considered to help avoid or minimize adverse impacts. Final design of the network extensions will consider alternative alignments to avoid or minimize adverse environmental and social 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. FIPAG has a robust Environmental Management System (EMS), and has prepared a Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF). FIPAG has a well-developed capacity, and demonstrated track record, for employing these instruments to avoid or minimize adverse safeguards issues. 5. Identify the key stakeholders and describe the mechanisms for consultation and disclosure on safeguard policies, with an emphasis on potentially affected people. Key stakeholders are the municipal authorities, and neighborhood leaders and residents, where the network extensions will be constructed. The former were consulted in preparing the RPF. The EMS and RPF were disclosed through FIPAG offices and Infoshop. Final design of the extensions, and the construction plan and schedule, will be discussed and agreed with all stakeholders before they are finalized. B. Disclosure Requirements Date Environmental Assessment/Audit/Management Plan/Other: Date of receipt by the Bank 03/15/2007 Date of "in-country" disclosure 04/02/2007 Date of submission to InfoShop 04/02/2007 For category A projects, date of distributing the Executive Summary of the EA to the Executive Directors Resettlement Action Plan/Framework/Policy Process: Date of receipt by the Bank 03/10/2007 Date of "in-country" disclosure 04/02/2007 Date of submission to InfoShop 04/02/2007 * If the project triggers the Pest Management and/or Physical Cultural Resources, 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/GP 4.01 - Environment Assessment Page 5 Does the project require a stand-alone EA (including EMP) report? Yes If yes, then did the Regional Environment Unit or Sector Manager (SM) review and approve the EA report? Yes Are the cost and the accountabilities for the EMP incorporated in the credit/loan? Yes OP/BP 4.12 - Involuntary Resettlement Has a resettlement plan/abbreviated plan/policy framework/process framework (as appropriate) been prepared? Yes If yes, then did the Regional unit responsible for safeguards or Sector Manager review the plan? Yes The World Bank Policy on Disclosure of Information Have relevant safeguard policies documents been sent to the World Bank's Infoshop? Yes Have relevant documents been disclosed in-country in a public place in a form and language that are understandable and accessible to project-affected groups and local NGOs? Yes All Safeguard Policies Have satisfactory calendar, budget and clear institutional responsibilities been prepared for the implementation of measures related to safeguard policies? Yes Have costs related to safeguard policy measures been included in the project cost? Yes Does the Monitoring and Evaluation system of the project include the monitoring of safeguard impacts and measures related to safeguard policies? Yes Have satisfactory implementation arrangements been agreed with the borrower and the same been adequately reflected in the project legal documents? Yes D. Approvals Signed and submitted by: Name Date Task Team Leader: Ms N. Jane Walker 04/10/2007 Environmental Specialist: Mr John A. Boyle 04/10/2007 Social Development Specialist Mr Mohamed Arbi Ben-Achour 04/10/2007 Additional Environmental and/or Social Development Specialist(s): Approved by: Sector Manager: Mr Jaime M. Biderman 04/10/2007 Comments: