INTEGRATED SAFEGUARDS DATA SHEET RESTRUCTURING STAGE Note: This ISDS will be considered effective only upon approval of the project restructuring Public Disclosure Copy Report No.: ISDSR1047 Date ISDS Prepared/Updated: 15-Sep-2014 Date ISDS Approved/Disclosed: 22-Sep-2014 I. BASIC INFORMATION 1. Basic Project Data Country: Ukraine Project ID: P095337 Project Name: Urban Infrastructure Project (P095337) Task Team Tamar Sulukhia Leader: Estimated 28-Feb-2007 Estimated 28-Aug-2007 Appraisal Date: Board Date: Managing Unit: GWADR Lending Specific Investment Loan Instrument: Sector: Water supply (40%), Energy efficiency in Heat and Power (20%), Wastewater Collection and Transportation (15%), Wastewater Treatment and Disposal (15%), Solid waste management (10%) Theme: City-wide Infrastructure and Service Delivery (75%), Climate change (25%) Is this project processed under OP 8.50 (Emergency Recovery) or OP 8.00 (Rapid Response to Crises and No Public Disclosure Copy Emergencies)? Financing (in USD Million) Total Project Cost: 140.00 Total Bank Financing: 140.00 Financing Gap: 0.00 Financing Source Amount Borrower 0.00 International Bank for Reconstruction and Development 140.00 Total 140.00 Environmental B - Partial Assessment Category: Is this a No Repeater project? 2. Current Project Development Objectives The Project objective is to assist the Utilities in implementing Business Plans that lay out the financial, operational changes and investments needed to move toward sustainable operations. Page 1 of 7 Proposed New PDO (from Restructuring Paper) The Project objective is to assist the Utilities in implementing Business Plans that lay out the financial, operational changes and investments needed to move t Public Disclosure Copy oward sustainable operations. 3. Project Description There are 14 participating cities included in the project: Cherkassy, Drogobych, Kamyanets- Podilskyi, Kolomya, Nova Kakhovka, Kharkiv, Boryspil, Slovyansk , Chernihiv, Ivano-Frankivsk, Kalush, Kremenchuk, Novograd-Volynskii, and Odessa. Project includes 4 Parts: Part A: Institutional Strengthening. The component finances preparation and implementation of the business plans for water and wastewater utilities, including setting performance targets. Part B: Rehabilitation Investments. The component finances carrying out selected rehabilitation of infrastructure works and replacement and upgrading of equipment needed for selected water and wastewater utilities. Part C: Energy Efficiency Investments. The component finances upgrading of equipment and related infrastructure with more energy efficient facilities in selected municipal utilities. Part D: Project Management. The component supports the MInistry of REgional Development, Construction, Housing and Communal Services in overall implementation and coordination of the Project at the central level, including financial management, procurement, monitoring and evaluation, public information and training and related operating costs. It also supports the utilities in implementation and coordination of the Project at the local level, including financial management, procurement, monitoring and evaluation, public information and training and operating costs. Public Disclosure Copy 4. Project location and salient physical characteristics relevant to the safeguard analysis (if known) Investment is being considered for the following cities: Cherkassy, Drogobych, Kamyanets- Podilskyi, Kolomya, Nova Kakhovka, Kharkiv, Boryspil, Slovyansk, Chernihiv, Ivano-Frankivsk, Kalush, Kremenchuk, Novograd-Volynskii, Odessa. All project works will take place at the footprint of existing utilities/infrastructure/networks. 5. Environmental and Social Safeguards Specialists Alexei Slenzak (GENDR) Klavdiya Maksymenko (GSURR) 6. Safeguard Policies Triggered? Explanation (Optional) Environmental Assessment OP/ Yes BP 4.01 Natural Habitats OP/BP 4.04 No Forests OP/BP 4.36 No Page 2 of 7 Pest Management OP 4.09 No Public Disclosure Copy Physical Cultural Resources OP/ No BP 4.11 Indigenous Peoples OP/BP 4.10 No Involuntary Resettlement OP/BP No 4.12 Safety of Dams OP/BP 4.37 No Projects on International Yes Waterways OP/BP 7.50 Projects in Disputed Areas OP/BP No 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 Restructured project. Identify and describe any potential large scale, significant and/or irreversible impacts: Environment The investment component addresses emergency investments to mitigate health and environmental risks posed by water and wastewater management systems, and investments involving efficiency and sustainability issues, as well as health and environmental risks. This component is categorized into the following types of investments/works: Public Disclosure Copy i. rehabilitation of water distribution systems, including piping, elevated reservoir, equipment for rehabilitation work and leak detection, and installation of water meters; ii. rehabilitation of water intakes and water preparation facilities including wells and water intake facilities, sedimentation, filtration, and disinfection system; iii. rehabilitation of sewerage systems, including sewer pipes, pumping station, equipment for rehabilitation work and vacuum truck; and iv. rehabilitation of sewage treatment plants, including grit removal chambers, sedimentation tanks, biological reactors, and sludge dewatering equipment. Since all investments are rehabilitation, the environmental issues associated with their implementation are minor, short-term, and primarily limited to the facility site (except for movement of equipment and materials to/from the site). These issues are primarily: dust, noise, disposal of waste material and/or older equipment, possibly traffic disruption (depending upon specific location), worker safety (e.g. welding operations, work on height) etc. All these issues are being addressed by good engineering and construction practices. Social Page 3 of 7 A comprehensive social assessment was conducted. The majority of respondents were highly concerned about the quality of the environment. Water supply was a priority but sanitation issues Public Disclosure Copy were key to not only safe water for the wider community but also to regional and international environmental issues. The use of recreational facilities on beaches, riverbanks and even in some cases lakes was curtailed as a result of sewage polluting these areas. At project appraisal stage, twenty percent of the respondents reported serious health problems related to water supply and sanitation, including gastric-intestine and kidney disorders (kidney stones). On the issue of confidence in local institutions and social capital, residents of cities were satisfied. NGOs responded more often as neutral. In Odessa, respondents were more positive recognizing constraints that hampered the intentions of public officials. In all three cities, the merits of user groups and NGOs as advocates had appeal. The role of the media was seen as more important in Odessa and not very important in the other two communities. In general most users in Ukraine were dissatisfied with the water services they received and noted problems with wastewater drainage. Health concerns were widespread. Major pollution factors cited for the Black Sea were (i) inadequate wastewater treatment and disinfection, (ii) uncontrolled construction works without any urban development master plan, and (iii) the overall poor technical quality of the city water supply and sanitation network. Improved regional collaboration was cited as a need. 9 utilities participating in the project have developed "Customer Service Programs." In part this was a local contribution of the utilities to the project, but specialized consultation, training, and workshops were be supported under the project as part of their overall business and strategic planning. These programs include periodic monitoring of user satisfaction by means of customer Public Disclosure Copy satisfaction surveys whereby users periodically rank services by standardized criteria. This builds on the initial examples of the focus groups used in the social assessment but offers an institutionalized and sustainable mechanism for user input. Unfolding social issues and concerns could also be addressed on a recurrent basis by such programs. Flexible solutions were advocated on a community specific basis. 2. Describe any potential indirect and/or long term impacts due to anticipated future activities in the project area: Long term impacts are positive in nature including improved water supply and sanitation services, which in turn leads to improved health conditions for the population in the service areas. 3. Describe any project alternatives (if relevant) considered to help avoid or minimize adverse impacts. Not applicable. 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. Environmental The environmental analysis includes an Environmental Assessment (EA) that examines the current baseline situation, describes what rehabilitation activities are proposed, and identifies any Page 4 of 7 significant impact arising from the proposed rehabilitation investments. Qualified local firms are conducted this analysis. Public Disclosure Copy As indicated above there is no significant impact, but in order to minimize impact and contain impact from the rehabilitation process, the EA includes an Environmental Management Framework (EMF) that consists of: (a) a mitigation plan, and (b) a monitoring plan identifying monitoring roles/responsibilities of various parties to check the compliance of project implementation with the mitigation plan. The EMF is consistent with environmental assessment policies and procedures of both the Government of the Ukraine and the World Bank. The EMF describes procedures and responsibilities for key elements of the environmental assessment process, namely: screening, EA document content, review and approval, consultation, disclosure, and implementation arrangements for safeguard supervision. Both the EA and Environmental Framework Documents, Completed September 23, 2005, and approved has followed World Bank procedures for disclosure and stakeholder consultations. The Final EA Consultations/Disclosures began on September 8, 2005 and ran through November 29, 2005. Social A social assessment was carried out by MAMA-86, a local NGO with experience in water and urban infrastructure issues. Methodological review has been provided by the Institute of Sociology in Kiev. Assessment instruments included: - Household Surveys - Focus Groups - Informant interviews Public Disclosure Copy The assessment addressed user priorities and social capital issues related to building the sustainable monitoring system for social impact that will be used by utilities. The development of Offices of Consumer Relationâ–˛ within the utilities facilitated the monitoring process and creation of a user-oriented culture within the utilities. Additionally an information/education program was be developed for administration by the utilities throughout project implementation. The project did not cause any permanent or temporary physical or economic displacement. 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 include: (i) at the central level the Ministry of Finance, and the Ministry of Regional Development, Construction, Housing and Communal Services, and (ii) at the local level the 14 participating municipalities, the respective utilities, and the offices of civic groups and such NGOs. The Project Team carried out extensive consultation throughout the preparation process with the stakeholders at the central level as well as key local officials. The consultation process used with both the Environmental Assessment and the Social Assessment included disclosure and consultation with representatives of all local stakeholders. Agency responsibilities for environmental mitigation and monitoring were identified in the EMPs. Consultation at the local Page 5 of 7 level followed the model used for the Social Assessment and be carried out by the respective utilities through their customer service offices which will one of the targets of capacity building under the project. User responses is being monitored by the utilities using a customer feedback Public Disclosure Copy system. B. Disclosure Requirements Environmental Assessment/Audit/Management Plan/Other Date of receipt by the Bank 23-Sep-2005 Date of submission to InfoShop 26-Oct-2005 For category A projects, date of distributing the Executive Summary of the EA to the Executive Directors "In country" Disclosure 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 Practice Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] Manager (PM) review and approve the EA report? Public Disclosure Copy Are the cost and the accountabilities for the EMP incorporated Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] in the credit/loan? 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 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? Page 6 of 7 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 [ ] Public Disclosure Copy 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 Task Team Leader: Tamar Sulukhia Approved By Regional Safeguards Name: Agnes I. Kiss (RSA) Date: 15-Sep-2014 Coordinator: Practice Manager/ Name: Date: Manager: Public Disclosure Copy Page 7 of 7