SFG3693 V1 REV Republic of Uganda MINISTRY OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENT INTEGRATED WATER MANAGEMENT AND DEVELOPMENT PROJECT WATER SUPPLY AND SANITATION PROJECT IN MAJANJI, LUMINO, BUHEHE, MASAFU, MASABA, DABANI, BUTEBA, MASINYA and SIKUDA SUB-COUNTIES; BUSIA MUNICIPALITY, BUSIA DISTRICT. UPADTED AND FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT APRIL 2018 Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project TABLE OF CONTENTS table of contents .........................................................................................................................................................................................................ii LIST OF FIGURES .................................................................................................................................................................................................... vii LIST OF TABLES...................................................................................................................................................................................................... vii LIST OF PLATES .....................................................................................................................................................................................................viii ACRONYMS..................................................................................................................................................................................................................ix EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................................................................................... x 1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................................................................................1 1.1 The Integrated Water Management and Development Project (IWMDP) .......................................................................1 1.2 Current Water Supply and Sanitation in Busia ............................................................................................................................3 1.2.1 Status of urban water supply .......................................................................................................................................................3 1.2.2 Status of urban sanitation facilities ...........................................................................................................................................3 1.3 The Feasibility Study .............................................................................................................................................................................3 1.4 Project Location .....................................................................................................................................................................................4 1.5 Need for an ESIA ....................................................................................................................................................................................5 1.6 Purpose of the ESIA...............................................................................................................................................................................5 1.7 The ESIA Process ....................................................................................................................................................................................5 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ...............................................................................................................................................................................7 2.1 Water supply system components...............................................................................................................................................7 2.2 Lake Intake infrastructure ..................................................................................................................................................................7 2.2.1 A water treatment plant infrastructure ...................................................................................................................................8 2.2.2 Treated water transmission main ..............................................................................................................................................9 2.2.3 Storage reservoirs at Buhehe and Dabani ............................................................................................................................ 10 2.2.4 Improved distribution network ................................................................................................................................................ 10 2.3 Onsite sanitation management facilities.................................................................................................................................... 10 2.4 Offsite sanitation management ..................................................................................................................................................... 11 3 POLICY, LEGISLATION AND REGULATIONS ............................................................................................................................................ 13 3.1 National policies and Laws on environmental and Social Impact assessment ............................................................. 13 3.2 Policies .................................................................................................................................................................................................... 13 3.3 Guidelines .............................................................................................................................................................................................. 13 3.4 Laws ......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 13 3.5 Regulations ........................................................................................................................................................................................... 13 3.6 Key Environmental Policies, Laws and Guidelines .................................................................................................................. 14 3.7 Key Social Policies, Laws and Guidelines. ................................................................................................................................... 18 3.8 Key International Environmental and Social Laws .................................................................................................................. 21 3.9 Legal, policy and regulatory framework for resettlement in Uganda .............................................................................. 21 3.9.1 Customary land .............................................................................................................................................................................. 21 3.9.2 Freehold land .................................................................................................................................................................................. 22 3.9.3 Public land........................................................................................................................................................................................ 23 3.10 World Bank Safeguard Policies ...................................................................................................................................................... 23 4 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL BASELINE ............................................................................................................................................. 25 Ministry of Water and Environment ii Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project 4.1 Socio-economic Environment ........................................................................................................................................................ 25 4.1.1 Demographic characteristics ..................................................................................................................................................... 25 4.1.2 Ethnic composition ....................................................................................................................................................................... 25 4.1.3 Age composition of the affected persons............................................................................................................................. 26 4.1.4 Religious affiliation ....................................................................................................................................................................... 26 4.1.5 Marital status .................................................................................................................................................................................. 26 4.1.6 Average household size .............................................................................................................................................................. 27 4.1.7 Education and literacy levels ..................................................................................................................................................... 27 4.1.8 Existence of vulnerable groups ................................................................................................................................................ 28 4.2 Household Economy .......................................................................................................................................................................... 28 4.2.1 Access to income ........................................................................................................................................................................... 28 4.2.2 Type of crops grown ..................................................................................................................................................................... 29 4.2.3 Household earnings ...................................................................................................................................................................... 30 4.2.4 Household expenditure patterns............................................................................................................................................. 30 4.2.5 Access to and utilization of fuel ............................................................................................................................................... 31 4.2.6 Ownership of communication and information technology (ICT) assets .................................................................. 31 4.2.7 Access and ownership of land .................................................................................................................................................. 31 4.2.8 Land tenure ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 32 4.2.9 Evidence of ownership and encumbrances on affected land ........................................................................................ 32 4.3 Access to health .................................................................................................................................................................................. 33 4.4 Access to water source ..................................................................................................................................................................... 35 4.5 Banking services .................................................................................................................................................................................. 35 4.6 Physical Environment ........................................................................................................................................................................ 36 4.6.1 Climate of Busia ............................................................................................................................................................................. 36 4.6.2 Topography of Busia .................................................................................................................................................................... 36 4.6.3 Geology and soils of Busia .......................................................................................................................................................... 36 4.6.4 Hydrology of the region of Busia ............................................................................................................................................. 37 4.7 Analysis of Lake Victoria water level variability ....................................................................................................................... 38 4.8 Lake Victoria water quality analysis ............................................................................................................................................. 40 4.9 Biological Environment ..................................................................................................................................................................... 40 4.9.1 Vegetation ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 40 4.9.2 Butterflies......................................................................................................................................................................................... 41 4.9.3 Herpetofauna.................................................................................................................................................................................. 41 4.9.4 Avifauna ............................................................................................................................................................................................ 42 4.9.5 Mammals.......................................................................................................................................................................................... 42 4.10 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................................................................. 43 4.11 Description of Project Sites ............................................................................................................................................................. 44 4.11.1 Raw water intake site ............................................................................................................................................................. 44 4.11.2 Water treatment plant (WTP) site ..................................................................................................................................... 46 4.11.3 Reservoir sites ........................................................................................................................................................................... 49 4.11.4 Water transmission and distribution mains ................................................................................................................... 52 4.11.5 Faecal sludge treatment plant (FSTP) site ....................................................................................................................... 52 4.12 Water Quality Analysis at the FSTP, at Okame Stream ......................................................................................................... 54 5 PUBLIC CONSULTATION AND DISCLOSURE ........................................................................................................................................... 56 5.1 Rationale ................................................................................................................................................................................................ 56 Ministry of Water and Environment iii Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project 5.2 Stakeholder Analysis.......................................................................................................................................................................... 57 5.3 Stakeholders’ views and concerns about the proposed project ........................................................................................ 57 5.3.1 Community position on the land ............................................................................................................................................. 60 5.3.2 Traffic and other minor accidents ........................................................................................................................................... 60 5.3.3 Increase of diseases and promiscuity .................................................................................................................................... 60 5.3.4 Physical cultural sites ................................................................................................................................................................... 60 5.4 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................................................................. 61 5.5 Disclosure of the ESIA ....................................................................................................................................................................... 61 6 ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES ...................................................................................................................................................................... 62 6.1 Siting and Design Alternatives ....................................................................................................................................................... 62 6.1.1 WTP siting and design alternatives ......................................................................................................................................... 62 6.1.2 FSTP siting and design alternatives ......................................................................................................................................... 63 6.1.3 WTP technology selection alternatives ................................................................................................................................. 65 6.1.4 FSTP technology selection alternatives ................................................................................................................................. 69 6.2 The “No Project” Alternative Project Justification .................................................................................................................. 71 6.2.1 Key benefits of the “No Project” option ............................................................................................................................... 71 6.2.2 Key benefits of improved water supply if project is implemented ............................................................................. 71 6.2.3 Key benefits of improved sanitation facilities if project is implemented .................................................................. 72 6.2.4 Conclusion on the ‘No Project’ option ................................................................................................................................... 72 7 ANALYSIS OF THE POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF THE PROJECT ............................................................................................................... 73 7.1 Social and Environmental Characteristics of Project Infrastructure................................................................................. 73 7.1.1 Social characteristics of project infrastructure ................................................................................................................... 73 7.1.2 Social and environmental characteristics of the intake works ..................................................................................... 73 7.1.3 Social and environmental characteristics of the WTP infrastructure ......................................................................... 73 7.1.4 Social and environmental characteristics of transmission infrastructure ................................................................. 77 7.1.5 Social and environmental characteristics of reservoir infrastructure ........................................................................ 78 7.1.6 Social and environmental characteristics of the FSTP infrastructure ......................................................................... 78 7.1.7 Social impacts of potential tariff changes ............................................................................................................................ 80 7.2 Environmental Assessment of Project Localities ..................................................................................................................... 83 7.2.1 Environmental Assessment of the intake Locality during construction ..................................................................... 83 7.2.2 Environmental assessment of the WTP locality during construction ......................................................................... 83 7.2.3 Environmental Assessment of the FSTP Locality ................................................................................................................ 83 7.3 Environmental Assessment of Support Facilities .................................................................................................................... 84 7.3.1 Environmental assessment of the FSTP service area ....................................................................................................... 84 7.4 Environmental assessment of the FSTP effluent disposal route ........................................................................................ 84 7.4.1 Assessment of infrastructure necessary for operating the FSTP .................................................................................. 85 7.5 Environmental Assessment of Project Area Informal Settlements ................................................................................... 85 7.6 Impact Assessment ............................................................................................................................................................................ 85 7.7 Analysis of Significant Positive Impacts ...................................................................................................................................... 87 7.7.1 Improved Public Health, Hygiene and Household Health Status ................................................................................. 87 Ministry of Water and Environment iv Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project 7.7.2 Improved living standard/well-being ..................................................................................................................................... 88 7.8 Analysis of Direct and Indirect Positive Impacts ...................................................................................................................... 89 7.8.1 Reduction of domestic violence ............................................................................................................................................... 89 7.8.2 Improved gender awareness ..................................................................................................................................................... 89 7.8.3 Employment .................................................................................................................................................................................... 90 7.8.4 Incomes and market for produce and products ................................................................................................................. 90 7.8.5 Economy ........................................................................................................................................................................................... 91 7.8.6 Skills and technology transfer ................................................................................................................................................... 91 7.8.7 Land and property compensation ........................................................................................................................................... 92 7.9 Analysis of Significant Construction Phase Negative Impacts ............................................................................................ 92 7.10 Analysis of Construction Phase Direct and Indirect Negative Impacts ............................................................................ 92 7.10.1 Loss of land and damage to property ............................................................................................................................... 92 7.10.2 Conflicts due to influx of labour ......................................................................................................................................... 93 7.10.3 Child abuse and early age pregnancies ............................................................................................................................ 93 7.10.4 Child Labour ............................................................................................................................................................................... 94 7.10.5 Increase in HIV/AIDS and STDs during the construction phase ............................................................................... 94 7.10.6 Loss of vegetation cover ........................................................................................................................................................ 95 7.10.7 Loss of fauna .............................................................................................................................................................................. 95 7.10.8 Erosion and loss of top soil ................................................................................................................................................... 96 7.10.9 Noise and vibration from vehicles ..................................................................................................................................... 96 7.10.10 Dust generation ........................................................................................................................................................................ 97 7.10.11 Exhaust emissions from vehicles ........................................................................................................................................ 97 7.10.12 Occupational health and safety at construction ........................................................................................................... 98 7.10.13 Solid waste generation .......................................................................................................................................................... 98 7.10.14 Human waste generation ...................................................................................................................................................... 98 7.10.15 Raw material extraction ........................................................................................................................................................ 99 7.10.16 Accidents ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 99 7.11 Analysis of Significant Operation Phase Negative Impacts ............................................................................................... 100 7.11.1 Degradation of source water quality ............................................................................................................................. 100 7.11.2 Degradation of FSTP effluent disposal route .............................................................................................................. 101 7.12 Analysis of Operational Phase Negative Direct and Indirect Impacts ........................................................................... 102 7.12.1 Sediment swirl up and transport ..................................................................................................................................... 102 7.12.2 Odour nuisance ..................................................................................................................................................................... 102 7.12.3 Occupational health and safety at operation ............................................................................................................. 103 7.12.4 Solid waste generation ....................................................................................................................................................... 103 7.12.5 Bio-solid generation ............................................................................................................................................................. 104 7.12.6 Pressure on existing utilities ............................................................................................................................................. 104 7.12.7 Accidents .................................................................................................................................................................................. 104 7.13 Analysis of Immediate, Long-Term and Cumulative Impacts ........................................................................................... 105 7.13.1 Immediate, long-term and cumulative positive impacts ........................................................................................ 105 7.13.2 Construction phase immediate, long-term and cumulative negative impacts ............................................... 106 7.13.3 Operation phase immediate, long-term and cumulative negative impacts .................................................... 107 7.14 Environmental and Social Analysis of Irreversible Impacts .............................................................................................. 107 8 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL MANAGEMENT PLAN .................................................................................................................. 108 Ministry of Water and Environment v Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project 8.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 108 8.2 Proposed Work Programs, Timing and Budget Estimates ................................................................................................ 108 8.3 Handling of Chemicals and Other Potentially Harmful Materials .................................................................................. 141 8.3.1 Design and management of chlorination storage and dosing areas ........................................................................ 141 8.3.2 Handling of chlorine during operation ............................................................................................................................... 141 8.3.3 Storage and handling of Alum during operation ............................................................................................................. 142 8.3.4 Storage and handling of lime during operation .............................................................................................................. 142 8.3.5 Storage and handling of polyelectrolytes during operation ....................................................................................... 142 8.3.6 Stakeholders to Be Involved In the Implementation of Each Action ....................................................................... 143 8.4 INSTITUTIONAL AND IMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENTS (adopted from IWMDP-ESMF, March 2018) ...... 143 8.4.1 Roles and responsibilities in the ESMP Implementation .............................................................................................. 144 8.4.2 Contractors Environmental, Social and health & safety SPECIALISTS/officers ..................................................... 147 8.5 CAPACITY BUILDING, TRAINING AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE ...................................................................................... 148 8.6 Stakeholder Consultations Concerning the Shared Use of Water Resources and Their Associated Catchments 149 8.7 Stakeholder Engagement Plan .................................................................................................................................................... 149 8.8 Monitoring and Evaluation........................................................................................................................................................... 152 8.9 Measures for Emergency Response to Accidental Events ................................................................................................ 152 9 A CHANCE FINDS PROCEDURE................................................................................................................................................................ 154 9.1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................................................ 154 9.1.1 Purpose of the CFP .................................................................................................................................................................... 154 9.1.2 Scope of CFP ................................................................................................................................................................................. 154 9.1.3 Definition of “Cultural Heritage” .......................................................................................................................................... 154 9.2 CHANCE FINDS MANAGEMENT PROCEDURE .................................................................................................................. 155 10 GRIEVANCE REDRESS MECHANISM ................................................................................................................................................ 161 10.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 161 10.2 Grievance Redress Committee (GRC) ....................................................................................................................................... 161 10.3 Proposed Mechanisms of Grievance and Appeals ............................................................................................................... 161 10.3.1 Reconciliatory Procedure ................................................................................................................................................... 161 10.3.2 Written Complaints to MWE ............................................................................................................................................ 162 10.3.3 Grievance Redress Procedure .......................................................................................................................................... 162 10.3.4 Legal Redress .......................................................................................................................................................................... 162 10.4 Proposed Process of Grievance Management ...................................................................................................................... 162 10.4.1 Lodging Complaint ................................................................................................................................................................ 162 10.4.2 Determining Corrective Action ........................................................................................................................................ 162 10.4.3 Meeting the Complainant .................................................................................................................................................. 162 10.4.4 Implementation of Corrective Action ............................................................................................................................ 163 10.4.5 Verification of Corrective Action ..................................................................................................................................... 163 10.4.6 Action by local leaders and contractors ........................................................................................................................ 163 10.4.7 Action by Grievance Redress Committee ..................................................................................................................... 163 10.5 Proposed Terms of Reference for Grievance Management Coordinator/Officer .................................................... 164 11 WATER SOURCE PROTECTION AND CATCHMENT MANAGEMENT PLAN .......................................................................... 165 12 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .................................................................................................................................. 171 Ministry of Water and Environment vi Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project 12.1 Conclusions ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 171 13 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................................................................................ 172 14 APPENDICES ............................................................................................................................................................................................ 175 14.1 APPENDIX 1: NEMA APPROVAL OF TOR .................................................................................................................................. 175 14.2 APPENDIX 2: LAKE VICTORIA WATER QUALITY REPORT .................................................................................................... 177 14.3 APPENDIX 3: PROJECT AFFECTED PERSONS ........................................................................................................................... 179 14.4 APPENDIX 4: MINUTES OF STAKEHOLDERS MEETINGS ...................................................................................................... 186 14.5 APPENDIX 5: WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT PLAN ....................................................................................................................... 224 14.6 APPENDIX 6: MAXIMUM PERMISSIBLE LIMITS FOR EFFLUENT DISCHARGE ............................................................... 229 14.7 Appendix 6: IFC Wastewater and Ambient Water Quality Guidelines ......................................................................... 231 14.8 Appendix 8: Water Quality Test Results at the proposed FSTP Site, on Okame Stream ........................................ 232 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Map of Busia District, including the Town Centre and Sub Counties. ............................................................................5 Figure 2: Location of key project infrastructure, including alternative sites. ................................................................................7 Figure 3: Proposed Intake Structures (Source: Fichtner and M&E, 2015c)....................................................................................8 Figure 4: Schematic layout of proposed WTP infrastructure. ...............................................................................................................9 Figure 5: Layout of proposed Busia Municipality distribution network. ...................................................................................... 10 Figure 6: Schematic of the FSTP process to be adopted. ...................................................................................................................... 12 Figure 7: Existence of vulnerable groups among the PAPs. ................................................................................................................ 28 Figure 8: Crops grown by the PAPs................................................................................................................................................................ 29 Figure 9: Mean monthly rainfall and potential ET in the project area. .......................................................................................... 36 Figure 10: Soil map of Busia District (source: NARO, Undated)........................................................................................................ 37 Figure 11: Lake Victoria and Kyoga drainage basins within the region of Busia. ..................................................................... 38 Figure 12: Frequency of occurrence of low water levels at Lake Victoria.................................................................................... 39 Figure 13: Frequency of occurrence of high water level at Lake Victoria. ................................................................................... 39 LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Summary of identified positive impacts. .................................................................................................................xiv Table 2: Summary of Immediate, Long-term and Cumulative positive impacts......................................................xiv Table 3: Summary of identified negative impacts. .................................................................................................................xv Table 4: Summary of characteristics of construction phase negative impacts.........................................................xvi Table 5: Summary of characteristics of operation phase negative impacts...............................................................xvi Table 7: Gender of the Household heads. .................................................................................................................................. 25 Table 8: Tribe of the PAPs. ............................................................................................................................................................... 25 Table 9: Age composition of the PAPs......................................................................................................................................... 26 Table 10: Religion of the PAPs........................................................................................................................................................ 26 Table 11: Marital status..................................................................................................................................................................... 27 Table 12: Household size. ................................................................................................................................................................. 27 Table 13: Education and literacy level........................................................................................................................................ 27 Table 14: Production activities ...................................................................................................................................................... 29 Table 15: HH incomes from various activities. ....................................................................................................................... 30 Table 16: Fuel used by the household......................................................................................................................................... 31 Table 17: ICT item ownership. ....................................................................................................................................................... 31 Table 18: Average land in areas owned by the PAPs. .......................................................................................................... 32 Table 19: Land tenure system and ownership........................................................................................................................ 32 Table 20: Evidence of ownership.................................................................................................................................................. 33 Table 21: Disease prevalence.......................................................................................................................................................... 33 Table 22: Knowledge about the causes and how HIV/AIDS can be avoided. ............................................................ 35 Table 23: Major source of water for domestic use. ............................................................................................................... 35 Table 24: Access to banking service. ........................................................................................................................................... 36 Table 25: Typical chemical coagulation sludge volumes.................................................................................................... 75 Ministry of Water and Environment vii Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Table 26: Impact Ranking according to the Rapid Impact Assessment Matrix ........................................................ 86 Table 27: Immediate, long-term and cumulative positive impacts. ............................................................................106 Table 28: Immediate, long-term and cumulative construction negative impacts.................................................106 Table 29: Immediate, long-term and cumulative operation negative impacts.......................................................107 Table 30: Technology analysis of coagulants/flocculants.................................................................................................. 65 Table 31: Technology analysis of filter types. ......................................................................................................................... 66 Table 32: Technology analysis of disinfection types. ........................................................................................................... 68 Table 33: Technology analysis of applicable FSTP types. .................................................................................................. 70 Table 34: Stakeholder Engagement Plan. ................................................................................................................................151 Table 35: Environmental and Social Management Plan ...................................................................................................109 Table 36: ESMP for the operational phase of the project in Busia. ..............................................................................126 Table 37: Minutes of the meeting held at Majanji, Busia District. ................................................................................186 Table 38: Minutes of meeting at Buhehe Sub County, Busia District. .........................................................................190 Table 39: Minutes of the meeting held at Namawumbi Village, Busia District.......................................................193 Table 40: Minutes of the meeting held at Buteba Sub County, Busia District. ........................................................196 Table 41: Meeting with stakeholders in Lumino Sub County, Busia District. .........................................................200 Table 42: Meeting with stakeholders in Dabani Sub County, Busia District............................................................203 Table 43: Minutes of meeting with stakeholders in Majanji Sub County. .................................................................206 Table 44: Minutes of meeting with stakeholders at Busia District Headquarters. ...............................................209 Table 45: Minutes of stakeholder meeting with Municipal Council Officials. .........................................................213 Table 46: Minutes of stakeholder’s meeting at Buteba Sub County. ...........................................................................217 LIST OF PLATES Plate 1: Lantana camara and Sodom apple (Solanum incarnum) dominating the vegetation at the proposed WTP in Maduwa A village, Majanji sub-county ......................................................................................................................................................... 41 Plate 2: Footpath and Crops at the WTP site. ............................................................................................................................................ 44 Plate 3: Cattle grazing at the shores of L. Victoria near the Intake .................................................................................................. 44 Plate 4: some of the trees at the vicinity of the WTP site. .................................................................................................................... 44 Plate 5: Homesteads at the vicinity of the WTP site. .............................................................................................................................. 44 Plate 6: Fishing birds at the proposed intake site at Lake Victoria, Maduwa A village, Majanji Sub County. ............... 45 Plate 7: Land use at the shore of Lake Victoria. ........................................................................................................................................ 46 Plate 8: Proposed WTP site in Maduwa A village, Majanji Sub County. ......................................................................................... 47 Plate 9: Reservoir 1 at Majanji Parish, Majanji Sub County................................................................................................................. 50 Plate 10: Proposed site for reservoir 2 and the booster station. ..................................................................................................... 51 Plate 11:: Proposed site for reservoir 3. ...................................................................................................................................................... 52 Plate 12: Palm spp at the proposed site ....................................................................................................................................................... 53 Plate 13: Acacia hokii at the proposed FSTP.............................................................................................................................................. 53 Plate 14: A cow drinking in Okame stream in vicinity of the site ..................................................................................................... 53 Plate 15: Piliostigma thonningii at FSTP...................................................................................................................................................... 53 Plate 16: Interviewing the Ag. Town Clerk Busia Municipal Council. ............................................................................................. 58 Plate 17: Meeting with PAPs at the proposed new intake site, Maduwa A village, Majanji sub-county.......................... 59 Plate 18: FGD with women at the proposed FSTP site in Okame-Abochet village.................................................................... 59 Plate 19: Proposed alternate WTP set-up site 2....................................................................................................................................... 62 Plate 20: Proposed new site for Busia FSTP at Okame-Abochet village, Buteba S/C .............................................................. 63 Plate 21: Proposed alternate site 2 for the FSTP...................................................................................................................................... 64 Ministry of Water and Environment viii Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project ACRONYMS AMSL Above Mean Sea Level CAO Chief Administrative Officer CFU Coliform Forming Units DWD Directorate of Water Development ECQ Hydrological Extreme Value EMMP Environmental Management and Monitoring Plan ESIA Environmental and Social Impact Assessment FSTP Faecal Sludge Treatment Plant GoU Government of Uganda GPS Global Positioning System HF Horizontal Flow IEC Information, Education and Communication IUCN International Union for Conservation of Nature IWMDP Integrated Water Management and Development Project LC Local Council MWE Ministry of Water and Environment NEMA National Environment Management Authority NFA National Forestry Authority NTU Nephelometric Turbidity Unit NURP Northern Uganda Reconstruction Program NWSC National Water and Sewerage Corporation PAPs Project Affected Persons PPE Personal Protection Equipment ppm Parts Per Million PtCo Platinum - Cobalt Scale; to evaluate pollution level in waste water RIAM Rapid Impact Assessment Matrix TSS Total Suspended Solids UBOS Uganda Bureau of Statistics UMEME Electricity Distribution Company in Uganda UTM Universal Transverse Mercator VF Vertical Flow WETSPRO Water Engineering Time Series Processing WMDP Water Management and Development Project WSS Water Supply and Sanitation WTP Water Treatment Plant WWTP Wastewater Treatment Plant g Microgram Ministry of Water and Environment ix Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Introduction The Government of Uganda (GoU) through the Ministry of Water and Environment (MWE), with financial assistance from the World Bank, under the proposed Integrated Water Management and Development Project (IWMDP) in planning to undertake Water and Sanitation sub-projects in small towns and rural growth centres. The Project will focus on three strategic areas: (i) delivering necessary WSS infrastructure and catchment management measures in targeted areas; (ii) supporting water related institutions (MWE, local government, and service providers) establish and consolidate operational efficiency and service quality in small towns and rural areas; and (iii) strengthening national and regional capacity to improve IWRM. The Project comprises four components here listed: Component 1 –WSS in Small Town & Rural Growth Centers which will cover Support to Small Town & Rural Growth Centers and Support to Refugee & Host Communities; Component 2 –WSS in Urban Large Towns; Component 3 – Water Resource Management and Component 4 – Project Implementation & Sector Support. Sub-components 1.1 - Support to Small Towns and Rural Growth Centers will be implemented by a MWE team at central level through the Department of Urban WSS (UWSSD) and RWSSD, with close collaboration with staff in WSDFs as well as district local governments. Existing MOU signed with Busia Municipal Council will be adopted to provide a framework for cooperation and the Municipality fulfilling their roles of community mobilization, land acquisition and fecal sludge management including management and regulation of public sanitation facilities. Busia and Mbale cluster (Butaleja, Busolwe, Budaka, Kadama, Tirinyi, Kibuku) including Namungalwe-Kaliro, Kyegegwa-Mpara-Ruyonza and Namasale will be financed under sub- component 1.1. The design review, feasibility study and detailed engineering design of Water Supply and Sanitation component for Busia was carried out under Water Management and Development Project. Busia Town Water Supply System (TWSS) is one of the projects that was designed under the previous WMDP but it was not funded. It is planned to be financed under the IWMDP. The ESIA for Busia TWSS was done in 2015 with NEMA approval and World Bank (WB) clearance secured in June 2016. However, three key changes in the site location of the Water Intake, Water Treatment Plant (WTP) and the Fecal Sludge Treatment Facility (FSTF) have since been made. The WTP is located in the same locality (Majanji Village) as the Water Intake. The new site for FSTF is in Okame-Abochet Village in Busia Municipality (land title is available). Given the above changes, it is therefore necessary to update the ESIA and RAPs of Busia WSS to incorporate the new sites before its implementation under IWMDP. This is aimed at undertaking site specific assessment and development of appropriate environmental and social mitigation measures to guide implementation. Project Description Given a design horizon of the ultimate year 2040, intermediate year of 2028 and 2016 as the initial year, the Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project will comprise of: - a. A water supply system and b. Sanitation management facilities (on-site and off-site). Ministry of Water and Environment x Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project The project intends to utilize Lake Victoria as the source of water, construction of a new intake station, a new raw water pumping main and water treatment works at Majanji Village, additional 1,720m3 elevated storage reservoir, and improvements in distribution network. Safeguards and source protection measures as well as sanitation improvements encompassing sludge management will also be included. The total estimated project cost is USD 6,004,825. A population of 70,482 and 97,033 has been designed for in the intermediate (2028) and ultimate (2040) years within Busia Municipality. Similarly, a population of 64,837 and 89,262 has been designed for in the en-route and satellite towns. A project maximal water demand of 6,363 m³/day, 9,100 m³/day and 12,988 m³/day was estimated for the initial, intermediate and ultimate year. Thus, in the design, the system was sized based on the water demand of 9,100 and 12,988 m 3/day. Water supply system components The water supply system will comprise: water intake infrastructure; a water treatment plant infrastructure; treated water transmission main; reservoirs; a booster station; and distribution mains. Onsite sanitation management facilities A public toilet facility with 8 stances has been proposed for Busia Municipality. Offsite sanitation management facility The offsite sanitation management (faecal sludge disposal) facility proposed for the project is a hybrid constructed wetland. The plant will comprise: solid/liquid separation in planted drying beds; pre- treatment of the liquid portion by vertical flow constructed wetlands; polishing treatment of the liquid portion by horizontal rock filters and final treatment of the liquid portion in natural wetlands. All the aspects described above are included in the Engineering Design of the Project. The biosolids shall be disposed of at Busia Municipal Council Waste Disposal Site located at Osapir Village. Currently, the site is secured, fenced and guarded. In addition, the dried biosolids shall be given free of charge to interested farmers for use in their fields as organic manure, to improve agricultural productivity of their land. ESIA Methodology The Busia ESIA report update was led by an individual environmental consultant, assisted by a multi- disciplinary team, MWE Safeguards and Engineering Staff, Busia District and Municipality Officials. The main scope of work that was undertaken as part of the Busia ESIA update involved onsite assessments of potential environmental and social impacts of the three new sites of Water intake, WTP, FSTF and proposing mitigation measures as appropriate, including informing the engineering design review to incorporate any salient features. A blend of consultative and onsite technical assessment activities was employed. Investigations and surveys focused on strategies to contribute to the mitigation of impacts of project activities on the environment and society, and accordingly embedded in the design of the Environmental and Social Management Plan (ESMP). Desk studies to review relevant available literature was carried out as part of Environmental Screening prior to field studies. Ministry of Water and Environment xi Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Qualitative and quantitative methods of research were used to gather information from stakeholders. These included but not limited to: interviews, in-depth interviews and focus group discussions. A questionnaire was used to guide community and public consultations. Hydrological analysis techniques, with a focus on determining extreme low and high lake water levels for the intake source, were employed. This was used in determining the sustainability of the project with respect to meeting demand and protection of infrastructure against floods. Standard methods for measurements of terrestrial vegetation, capturing and identification of butterflies, collection of herptiles, survey of birds, and recording of mammals were employed. The conservation status of the studied flora and fauna was then measured against the IUCN Red Listing. Policy, Legislation and Regulations Two frameworks in regard to policy, legislation and regulations have been reviewed i.e. World Bank environmental and social safeguard policies and Uganda national policy, legal and institutional framework. The following World Bank Environmental and Social safeguard policies are trigged by the project: Environmental Assessment OP/BP 4.01 because of the likely negative environmental and social impacts arising from the construction and operational activities of the proposed project; Natural Habitats OP/BP 4.04 because the intake is located in a wetland and along the shores of Lake Victoria; Physical Cultural Resources OP/BP 4.11 because construction excavations may unearth chance finds; and Involuntary Resettlement OP/BP 4.12 as a result of land intake and likely impact on livelihoods and economic displacement. However, there will be no physical displacement of Project Affected Persons. The main Ugandan national policies, laws and regulations that the project will guide project development and implementation are those that deal with water, environment, land, labour, child abuse and gender aspects. These include but not limited to: - the Water Act Cap 152; the National Environment Act Cap 153; the Land Act Cap 227; the Land Acquisition Act Cap 226; the Occupational Safety and Health Act No. 9, 2006; Employment Act, 2006; Workers’ Compensation Act 2000 and Child Act 2006. Description of the Project Host Sites Raw water intake site The raw water intake will be located in Lake Victoria at Majanji Village, Majanji Parish, Majanji Sub County (GPS coordinate: N 00014’36.8” E 033059’15.6”). The raw water mains will be supported by a pier bridge that will traverse at least 300 m into the lake. All the plants, butterflies, herptiles, and bird species recorded at the site are not listed in the IUCN Red List. Water treatment plant (WTP) site The WTP is located in the same locality (Majanji Village) as the Water Intake, in Majanji Parish, Majanji Sub-County (GPS coordinate: N 00014’38.5” E 0330 59’17.2”), the WTP site is on the land that belongs to members of Maduwa community. The site is boardered by L. Victoria in the south and small gardens of cassava, sweet potatoes in the north. The project has three reservoirs: Ministry of Water and Environment xii Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project a. Reservoir 1: located at Namundiri ‘A’ Village, Majanji Parish, Majanji Sub County (GPS coordinate: UTM 36N 0609923 E 0029247 N); b. Reservoir 2: to be located at Daha Village, Buhasaba Sub County (GPS coordinate: UTM 36N 0612546 E 00406655 N) and; and c. Reservoir 3: to be located at Dabani Sub County Headquarters (GPS coordinate: UTM 36N 0618235 E 0049811 N). The land at Reservoirs 1 and 2 is privately owned, and has been acquired from the owners based on willing buyer and willing seller, and also following the OP 4.12 and Government of Uganda procedure on land acquisition. No physical displacement has occurred. Meanwhile Reservoir 3 land is public government property (Dabani Sub County headquarters). All reservoir sites are located near built up environments, therefore their natural vegetation has been lost to either agriculture or settlements. Hence, all the biodiversity seen were those tolerant to staying in a built-up environment. Water transmission and distribution mains Transmission mains are about 23.4 km, with distribution mains at 44.6 km and are mainly on road reserves. Only crops and trees will be damaged, thus will have to be compensated for in line with OP 4.12 Bank Policy on Involuntary Resettlement. Faecal sludge treatment plant site The Faecal sludge treatment plant will be located at the new site in Okame-Abochet Village in Busia Municipality (land title is available), (GPS coordinate: UTM 36N 0624057 E 0056320 N). None of the plants, butterflies, herptiles, birds and mammals recorded is listed in the IUCN Red List. Public Consultation The communities consulted, including the key stakeholders, expressed support for the project since they expect it to accrue benefits such as provision of reliable, safe and clean water supply in Busia Municipal Council and its environs along the Sub Counties of Majanji, Lumino, Buhehe, Buteba and Dabani. However, public consultation and sensitization should continue during the disclosure and implementation period, in order to capture any emerging issues and continuously engage communities on project activities throughout implementation and operation phases. Project Impacts To harmonize positions of the multidisciplinary team on the assignment and reduce subjectivity in evaluating the significance levels of the identified potential environmental and social impacts of the project, there was need to use a method that is flexible, transparent and most importantly free from subjectivity. In this light, the Rapid Impact Assessment Matrix (RIAM) developed by Pastakia (1998) for EIA was suitably chosen. Positive impacts Table 1 below shows a summary of the identified positive impacts, including ranking and the project phase under which each impact will be achieved. Furthermore, as can be seen from Table 2, the benefits of improved public health, hygiene and household health status; improved living standard/well-being; employment; incomes and market for produce and products; and skills and technology transfer have all the characteristics of being immediate, long-term (permanent) and cumulative in benefit. The benefits accruing from improved gender awareness and the economy will Ministry of Water and Environment xiii Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project be long-term and cumulative but not immediate. On the other hand, the benefit of Land/property compensation will be immediate but temporary and non-cumulative. Table 1: Summary of identified positive impacts. Positive Impact Project Ran Description Phase k C O Improved public health, hygiene and household x  Significant positive +4 health status change Improved living standard/well-being x  +4 Significant positive change Reduction of domestic violence x  +2 Positive change Improved gender awareness   +3 Moderate positive change Employment   +3 Moderate positive change Incomes and market for produce and products   +3 Moderate positive change Improve the economy   +3 Moderate positive change Skills and technology transfer   +2 Positive change Land/property compensation  x +2 Positive change Key: C = construction phase; O = operation phase,  = applicable; x = not applicable. Table 2: Summary of Immediate, Long-term and Cumulative positive impacts. Positive Impact Immediate Long- Cumulative term Improved Public Health, Hygiene and Household    Health Status Improved living standard/well-being    Reduction of domestic violence    Improved gender awareness x   Employment    Incomes and market for produce and products    Economy x   Skills and Technology Transfer    Land/property compensation  x X Key:  = applicable; x = not applicable. Negative impacts Table 3 below shows a summary of the identified negative impacts, including ranking and the project phase under which each impact will be achieved. As can be seen from Ministry of Water and Environment xiv Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Table 4, all construction phase negative impacts will be immediate. However, the impact of loss of land and damage to property will be long-term (permanent) given that land portions will have to be permanently acquired for the benefit of the project. The impact of increase in HIV/AIDS and STDs, if not curtailed, can be cumulative. As can be seen from Table 5, all operation phase impacts will be immediate. Additionally, the impacts of degradation of water source, degradation of FSTP effluent disposal route and odour generation will also be long-term (permanent) and cumulative in effect. However, the impacts of occupational health and safety, solid waste generation, pressure on existing utilities and accidents will not be long-term. Lastly, the impact of sediment swirl up and transport will not be long-term nor cumulative. The IWMDP will support the MWE with source and catchment management measures to meet the project objectives, namely: provision of sufficient water and sanitation services of good quality to the Municipality. It is necessary to protect the lake and its catchment from pollution and to maintain a high retention potential of precipitation in the upper catchment. The FSTP site at Okame-Abochet Village, in Abochet Parish, Buteba sub-county has no natural wetland close by that can provide additional polishing to the FSTP effluent before it is discharged to the Okame stream. To mitigate direct discharge of phosphorous loads into the receiving Okame stream, the FSTP will include a vertical constructed wetland with phosphorus removing material followed by horizontal rock filters. Table 3: Summary of identified negative impacts. Negative Impact (Environmental or social Project Rank Description factor) Phase C O (Soil) Erosion and loss of top soil  -2 Negative change (Water Resources) Sediment swirl up and transport  -2 Negative change Degradation of source water  -2 Negative change Degradation of FSTP effluent disposal route  -2 Negative change (Flora and Fauna) Loss of vegetation cover  -1 Slight negative change Loss of fauna  -3 Moderate negative change (Air Quality) Noise and vibration from vehicles  -2 Negative change Dust generation  -2 Negative change Exhaust emissions from vehicles  -3 Moderate negative change Odour generation  -2 Negative change (Land Use) Land loss and damage to property  -1 Slight negative change Ministry of Water and Environment xv Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Negative Impact (Environmental or social Project Rank Description factor) Phase C O Raw material extraction  -2 Negative change (Population and Settlement) Conflicts due to influx of labour  -2 Negative change Child abuse and early age pregnancies  -2 Negative change Child labour  -2 Negative change Increase in HIV/AIDS and STDs  -3 Moderate negative change Occupational health and safety at  -2 Negative change construction phase Occupational health and safety at operation  -3 Moderate negative change phase Solid waste generation at construction  -2 Negative change Solid waste generation at operation  -2 Negative change Bio solid generation  -3 Moderate negative change Human waste generation  -2 Negative change Pressure on existing utilities  -2 Negative change Accidents   -3 Moderate negative change Key: C = construction phase; O = operation phase. Table 4: Summary of characteristics of construction phase negative impacts. Negative Impact Immediate Long term Cumulative Loss of land and damage to property   x Conflicts due to influx of labour  x x Child abuse and early age pregnancies  x x Child labour  x x Increase in HIV/AIDS and STDs  x  Loss of vegetation cover  x x Loss of fauna  x x Erosion and loss of top soil  x x Noise and vibration from vehicles  x x Dust generation  x x Exhaust emissions from vehicles  x x Occupational health and safety  x x Solid waste generation  x x Human waste generation  x x Raw material extraction  x x Accidents  x x Key:  = applicable; x = not applicable. Table 5: Summary of characteristics of operation phase negative impacts. Ministry of Water and Environment xvi Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Negative Impact Immediate Long-term Cumulative Degradation of source water    Degradation of FSTP effluent disposal route    Sediment swirl up and transport  x X Odour generation    Occupational health and safety  x  Solid waste generation  x  Pressure on existing utilities  x  Accidents  x  Key:  = applicable; x = not applicable. Conclusions The project will supply up to 82.4% and 78.8% of the people of Busia Municipality and Busia District respectively, the intermediate and ultimate years with sustainable and safe water within easy reach. Furthermore, the project will eliminate the reliance on the current piped water system, built in the period 1999 – 2000, that is intermittent, rationed and unreliable (refer to Fichtner and M&E, 2015a). With respect to sustainable environmental flows and requirements of other water users downstream of Lake Victoria, the project will abstract, at the maximum, 13,637 m 3/day (0.16 m3/s).This is about 0.04% of the minimal observed (381.88 m³/s) Lake Victoria outflow. Furthermore, the minimal observed Lake Victoria outflow has a return period of about 300 years. Thus, the effect of water withdrawal for the project on other water users is insignificant. The IWMDP and ongoing WDMP will support the MWE with source and catchment management measures to meet the project objectives, namely: provision of sufficient water and sanitation services of good quality to the Municipality. It is necessary to protect the lake and its catchment from pollution and to maintain a high retention potential of precipitation in the upper catchment. The FSTP site at Okame-Abochet Village, in Abochet Parish, Buteba sub-county has no natural wetland close by that can provide additional polishing to the FSTP effluent before it is discharged to the Okame stream. To mitigate direct discharge of phosphorous loads into the receiving Okame stream, the FSTP will include a vertical constructed wetland with phosphorus removing material followed by horizontal rock filters. The land for the project infrastructure has been acquired by Busia Municipality and in the sub- counties where some other project infrastructures will be established have given their land for the project so displacement of people is not envisaged. Furthermore, only portions of the private land has been acquired with the owners being left with enough land to carry on. Thus, physical displcament and/or resettlement is not envisaged but rather compensation for crops will be undertaken as costed in the RAP report for the project. The implementation of the ESMP for the project will cost an estimated total of UGX 500.2 million in total, including the cost of RAP that has been valued at UGX.300.2 million. In general, the construction phase is estimated at UGX.435.2 million and the operation phase at UGX 65 million. Ministry of Water and Environment xvii Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project During the ESIA study, consultations were conducted with relevant stakeholders. The MWE and other key implementation actors will liaise with stakeholders to ensure effective implementation of the proposed mitigation measures for the anticipated negative impacts. An Environmental and Social Management Plan (ESMP) has been developed for the Client, Contractor(s) and Operator to implement. Environmental concerns will be addressed through this plan so that environmental laws and policies will be complied with through the existing institutional frame works. Strict control and supervision of the Contractor by Ministry of Water and Environment and in close collaboration with Busia Municipality and District Authorities will ensure compliance with required mitigation measures. Ministry of Water and Environment xviii Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 THE INTEGRATED WATER MANAGEMENT AND DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (IWMDP) The Government of Uganda (GoU) through the Ministry of Water and Environment (MWE), with financial assistance from the World Bank, is implementing the Integrated Water Management and Development Project (IWMDP) in towns and rural growth centres. MWE is directly responsible for implementation of IWMDP in small towns and rural growth centres whereas the National Water and Sewerage Corporation (NWSC) is responsible for the same in large towns. The proposed IWMDP Project will support the GoU’s Vision 2040, which aims to transform Uganda into a modern and prosperous economy. The Second National Development Plan (NDP II), which is aligned with Vision 2040, focuses on promoting inclusive economic growth and achieving the United Nation’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), including SDG #6: Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all. The NDP II also identifies the following priority actions: (i) increasing the stock and quality of strategic infrastructure to accelerate the country’s competitiveness; (ii) engaging human capital development; (iii) strengthening mechanisms for quality, effective and efficient service delivery; and (iv) improving refugee management and host community development. Water is at the center of the NDP II, which highlights interventions focused on: (i) improving WSS services in priority, northern urban large towns envisioned as economic regional hubs; (ii) expanding WSS access to the poor and vulnerable in underserved areas, including refugee hosting districts; and (iii) strengthening water sector institutions to improve IWRM and service delivery. The Project will focus on three strategic areas: (i) delivering necessary WSS infrastructure and catchment management measures in targeted areas; (ii) supporting water related institutions (MWE, local government, and service providers) establish and consolidate operational efficiency and service quality in small towns and rural areas; and (iii) strengthening national and regional capacity to improve IWRM. The four components as described below: Component 1 –WSS in Small Town and Rural Growth Centers: This component will support small towns and rural growth centers that have met Project selection criteria and are located in various regions of the country and in refugee hosting districts located in the Northern Region (Yumbe, Arua, Adjumani, Moyo, Lamwo, and Kiryandongo). Component 2 –WSS in Urban Large Towns: This component will finance Project activities designed to improve WSS services in the municipalities of Mbale (Eastern Region) and Gulu (Northern Region) as well as nearby small towns. The activities include: (i) construction and rehabilitation of WSS infrastructure investments in Mbale; (ii) construction of a new water supply scheme for Gulu; (iii) construction supervision consultancies; and (iv) environmental and social management activities, including water source protection and community mobilization and sensitization. Component 3 – Water Resource Management: This component will finance Project activities designed to support implementation of catchment management measures in select sub-catchments as well as national efforts to mainstream IWRM into Uganda’s water sector program. Specific activities include: (i) implementation of catchment management interventions, such as soil and water conservation measures, river bank protection and restoration, and alternative livelihood for affected communities; (ii) TA to prepare a Water Resources Strategy for the Albert WMZ, CMPs in identified “hotspot” sub-catchments, and a national groundwater management study; and (iii) provisions to Ministry of Water and Environment 1 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project strengthen water resource monitoring and information systems, including implementation of the Water Information System (WIS 2.0) at the national level, installation of hydrologic monitoring systems, and rehabilitation of the National Water Quality Reference Laboratory. Apart from the national support to IWRM, this component will mainly support activities in the Upper Nile and Kyoga WMZs (where most of the WSS investments financed under this Project and the WMDP are located). This component will contribute to national, regional, and local stakeholder’s capacity to apply an IWRM approach to infrastructure development. Component 4 – Project Implementation and Sector Support: This component will finance activities designed to ensure effective and efficient Project implementation and coordination as well as institutional strengthening to support WSS service delivery reforms. Project management activities will include: (i) overall coordination of planning, monitoring and reporting, supervision, and oversight of all Project activities; (ii) training on Bank procedures related to procurement, environmental and social safeguards, and financial management (FM), and (iii) hiring a project support team (PST) comprised of key technical specialists (e.g. safeguards, monitoring and evaluation (M&E) and fiduciary specialists) to assist the Project implementing agencies (IAs). This component will ensure that the implementing agencies (IAs) have adequate inputs for Project oversight, reporting and implementation. The component will also support the financial and technical sustainability of the infrastructure investments by investing in the ongoing WSS service delivery reforms and regulatory framework. The proposed Busia WSS sub-project therefore falls under Component 1 –WSS in Small Town and Rural Growth Centers. Busia Town Water Supply System (TWSS) is one of the projects that was designed under the previous WMDP but it was not funded due to shortfall of funds. It is planned to be financed under the IWMDP. The ESIA for Busia TWSS was done in 2015 with NEMA approval and World Bank (WB) clearance secured in June 2016. However, three key changes in the site location of the Water Intake, Water Treatment Plant (WTP) and the FSTP have since been made. The WTP is located in the same locality (Majanji Village) as the Water Intake. The new site for FSTP is in Okame- Abochet Village in Busia Municipality (land title is available). Given the above changes, it is therefore necessary to update the ESIA and RAPs of Busia WSS to incorporate the new sites before its implementation under IWMDP. The updated Busia ESIA and RAPs will be disclosed both in-country by the MoWE and the World Bank at their Website Busia Municipality is the administrative centre of Busia District and is divided into 02 Divisions (Local Council III) – Eastern Division and Western Division. These are also divided into 08 Wards (Local Council II), which contain 25 Cells (Local Council I). It consists mainly of the administration centre (District Headquarters, Municipal Council Offices) a Hospital, Health Centres (grade III), lodges, milling plants, shops, secondary schools, primary schools, fuel stations, banks among others. The core of the municipality is in South West, South East and the Central parish where most of the commercial and administrative units are located. There is also a population surrounding the municipality that is in the 12 villages surrounding the municipality located in the parishes of Buchicha in Busitema Sub- County, Mawero in Buteba Sub-County, Busia and Nangwe both located in Busitema sub-county. In 2010, the population of Busia Town was 45,700. However, the data from the 2014 UPHC indicates that the population of Busia Municipality stands at 55,958 - an increase of 22.5% in 04 years (UBOS 2014). Ministry of Water and Environment 2 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project The project intends to utilize L. Victoria as the source of water, construction of a new intake station, a new raw water pumping main and water treatment works, additional 1,720m3 elevated storage reservoir, and improvements in distribution network. Safeguards and source protection measures as well as sanitation improvements encompassing sludge management will also be included. 1.2 CURRENT WATER SUPPLY AND SANITATION IN BUSIA 1.2.1 STATUS OF URBAN WATER SUPPLY The Water and Sanitation sector defines urban areas as those with population of 5,000 people and above (MWE, 2007). Busia Municipality, at a population of 55,958 (UBOS, 2014), can be categorized as a large town. Constructed in the period 1999 - 2000 under the Small Towns Water and Sanitation Project, Phase IIB- IDA, and currently under the management of JOWA Engineering Services Limited, Busia piped water system consists of seven (7) national grid powered boreholes, two (2) sumps (each with chlorine dozers), transmission lines, and a water distribution network. The sumps, each at 100 m3 capacity, serve as suctions for the high lift pumps that deliver water to the storage and distribution reservoirs. The sumps are basically ground level tanks constructed in reinforced concrete. Chlorination, the only water treatment provided, is carried out at the inlet to the sumps. Two storage and distribution reservoirs at 250 and 300 m 3 are provided. The reservoirs, constructed in pressed steel sections and elevated 12 m above ground, are securely fenced and provided with a gate. The water distribution system consists of approximately 9.3 km of uPVC and HDPE piping network and serves only twelfth (12) out of the twenty-five (25) villages within the Municipality. These are mostly in the core of the Municipality. Furthermore, the boreholes are overstretched, particularly in the dry seasons, as they have to operate 24 hours a day and still do not meet demand as they are pumped dry necessitating frequent rest periods for recharge. This is further aggravated by the fact that only five (5) boreholes are currently functional. 1.2.2 STATUS OF URBAN SANITATION FACILITIES Sanitation facilities within Busia Municipality depend largely on the level of service of water supply. The Municipality has no sewer system; thus, the population is served by onsite sanitation facilities, including pit latrines and waterborne toilets that are connected to septic tanks. Furthermore, there is no excreta disposal system in Busia District in that households and institutions simply abandon filled-up pit latrines as new ones are built. There are only five (5) public sanitation facilities within the Municipality, including one (1) in the Main Market Place, one (1) at the Fish Market, two (2) at Sophia Wholesale Market, and one (1) at the Taxi Park. Most of these toilets are not in very good shape and inadequate to cope with the number of users, including vendors/traders, nearby local communities and visitors. They are supervised by caretakers who charge UGX 200 per user. 1.3 THE FEASIBILITY STUDY The design review, feasibility study and detailed engineering design review, feasibility study and detailed engineering design of Busia Water Supply and Sanitation project have already been carried out. Ministry of Water and Environment 3 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project From the feasibility study, there are a total of 1660 piped water connection in Busia Municipality of which 1512 are household level (private connections), 115 are institutional (offices, lodges, schools, Police and Banks), 31 public stand posts, and 2 non-functional kiosks. The current piped water system can supply up to a maximum of 500 m³/day. This is far below the current Municipality demand that is at 4,292 m³/day. 1.4 PROJECT LOCATION The Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Facilities will be located in Busia District, south-eastern part of the Eastern region of Uganda (Figure 1). At 202 km by road from Kampala, and at an average elevation of 1,180 m AMSL, Busia is located approximately between 33°05’ E 00°10’ N and 34°01’ E 00°35’ N (Busia District Report, 2009; NEMA, 2004). Covering 730.9 km² in land size, Busia District is bordered by Tororo District to the north, Kenya to the east, Lake Victoria to the south, Namayingo District to the southwest and Bugiri District to the west. Administratively, Busia District is divided into three constituencies, each forming a representation in the Ugandan Parliament. These constituencies are Samia Bugwe North, Busia Municipality and Samia Bugwe South (FHRI, 2009). The Municipality, the administrative centre of Busia District, is divided into 2 Divisions (Local Council III offices) which in turn are divided into 8 Parishes (Local Council II offices). These parishes are further sub-divided into 25 villages (Local Council I). The Municipality consists of the district headquarters, municipal council offices, a hospital, health centres (grade III facilities), lodges, agro-processing plants, shops, schools (primary and secondary), fuel stations, banks, etc. (Fichtner and M&E, 2015a). Planned with a focus on the Municipality, the Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project will equally serve satellite towns in the Sub-counties of Majanji, Lumino, Buhehe, Masafu, Masaba, Dabani, Buteba, Masinya and Sikuda. The proposed satellite towns in the Sub-counties of Majanji, Lumino, Buhehe, Masafu, Masaba and Dabani are located between the proposed water source (Lake Victoria) and Busia Municipality. Meanwhile, the satellite towns in the Sub-counties of Masinya, Sikuda and Buteba border Busia Municipality to the North. Three key changes in the components of the system [Water Intake, Water Treatment Plant (WTP) and the Faecal Sludge Treatment Facility (FSTF)] have since been made. The WTP is located in the same locality (Majanji Village) as the Water Intake. The new site for FSTF is in Okame-Abochet Village in Busia Municipality (land title is available). Ministry of Water and Environment 4 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Figure 1: Map of Busia District, including the Town Centre and Sub Counties. 1.5 NEED FOR AN ESIA Section 19 (3) of the National Environment Act CAP 153 made an Environmental Impact Assessment mandatory for all projects or policies that may, are likely to or will have significant impacts on the environment so that adverse impacts can be identified, Avoided, reduced, mitigated or compensated for based on the mitigation hierarchy. The project falls under the Third Schedule of the National Environment Act which lists projects to be considered for ESIA. It involves activities out of character with its surroundings and major changes in land use as stated in Category 1 subsections (a) and (c) respectively. Furthermore, the World Bank’s OP 4.01 Environmental Assessment requires ESIA/ESMP to be undertaken for projects that are considered to pose negative environmental and social impacts. Since the proposed project activities are likely to pose site specific environmental and social risks and impacts, ESIA is required as per OP 4.01 policy requirements. 1.6 PURPOSE OF THE ESIA This ESIA report prepared following Uganda’s and the World Bank’s Environmental and Social requirements, sets out to identify potential environmental and social impacts of the proposed Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project, with a view of informing the final engineering design and recommending mitigation measures to be implemented during construction and operational phases of the project. 1.7 THE ESIA PROCESS This ESIA was carried out in line with requirements of the legal, policy and regulatory framework of Uganda as well as the World Bank (Error! Reference source not found.). In addition, this ESIA report was prepared with in consultation of the manual for EIA Guidelines for Water Resources Related Ministry of Water and Environment 5 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Projects in Uganda (MWE, 2011); Environmental and Social Management Framework for the Water Management and Development Project; and the World Bank´s general Environment Health and Safety Guidelines (EHSGs), with specific reference to the EHSGs for Water and Sanitation Projects. The World Bank policy requirements, in instances that they were more comprehensive, were addressed over and above the requirements of the regulatory framework of Uganda. In general, this ESIA study comprised: a. Review of relevant literature and secondary baseline data on legislation, policies and regulatory frameworks; bio-physical environments; and social settings. b. Field studies that included flora and fauna counts and categorisation, including receptor systems baseline data. Studies were carried out on species of birds, herptiles, butterflies, mammals and plants. The species numbers and types were used to determine the baseline environmental quality of the project sites as far as flora and fauna are concerned. Receptor systems baseline data studied include soils, water, air quality and noise. In general, the biodiversity status of the various sites was determined and will be used as monitoring indicators for the impacts of project activities on the respective sites. c. An inventory of activities in the neighbourhood that are likely to be affected by the development and operation of the proposed water supply and sanitation facilities. d. Consultations with stakeholders, including the neighboring local communities in the Sub Counties of Majanji, Lumino, Buhehe, Masafu, Masaba, Dabani, Buteba, Masinya and Sikuda; Busia District Local Government officials (District Environment Officer, District Engineer, Physical and Economic Planner); and lead agencies such as the Directorate of Water Resources Management (DWRM), Directorate of Environment Affairs (DEA), Directorate of Water Development (DWD) and National Water and Sewerage Corporation. Consultations were undertaken during the feasibility study, ESIA baseline data collection, and during the disclosure period when draft copy of the report will be presented to Busia District Officials and host communities as part of disclosure. e. The ESIA and the project feasibility study and detailed engineering designs were undertaken in parallel, so that all alternatives proposed are assessed for their environmental impacts. f. Prediction and analysis of environmental impacts resulting from the proposed project and proposing appropriate mitigation measures. g. Development of an Environmental and Social Management Plan. h. Compilation of an Environmental and Social Impact Statement (ESIA) and presentation to NEMA for review and approval, and to the World Bank for technical review and clearance Ministry of Water and Environment 6 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2.1 WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM COMPONENTS Given a design horizon of 2040, intermediate year of 2028, and 2016 as the initial year, the Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project will comprise of: a. A water supply system and b. Sanitation management facilities (on-site and off-site). Figure 2 below shows the location of the key project infrastructure sites, including alternate sites. Figure 2: Location of key project infrastructure, including alternative sites. A population of 70,482 and 97,033 capita has been designed for, respectively, in the intermediate and ultimate years within Busia Municipality. Similarly, a population of 64,837 and 89,262 has been designed for in the en-route and satellite towns. Project maximum water demands of 6,363; 9,100 and 12,988 m³/day were estimated for, respectively, in the initial, intermediate and ultimate years. Thus, in the design, the system was sized based on the water demand of 9,100 and 12,988 m3/day (Fichtner and M&E, 2015c). The water supply system will comprise the following components: 2.2 LAKE INTAKE INFRASTRUCTURE Based on hydrological and water quality analysis of three key surface water resources (Lake Victoria, River Sio and River Malaba) within Busia District (Fichtner and M&E, 2015a), Lake Victoria was selected as the most optimal water source for the project. Ministry of Water and Environment 7 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project The design team have drafted two options. Water will be abstracted either directly, via a submersible pump, (Figure 3 a) or via a dry-installed self-priming pump (Figure 3 b). The intake will be located at least 300 m into the lake so as to avoid shore debris that is normally stirred up by waves, in addition to safeguarding the intake valve against low water levels that may not permit abstraction. Thus, an access bridge (pier), extending into the lake, will be constructed. The intake works and raw water main have been sized at 12,988 m3/day, thus will meet the maximum daily supply of the ultimate year. Additionally, it will operate for a maximum of 22 hours/day to allow for repair and maintenance works. Bathymetric surveys will be undertaken as part of the final design review undertaken by the Contractor to determine the best depth for intake valve, taking into consideration the maximal intake valve height of 10.33m, with respect to the pier gauge in Jinja. This shall be reviewed and approved by the Supervision Consultant/Client. Figure 3: Proposed Intake Structures (Source: Fichtner and M&E, 2015c). 2.2.1 A WATER TREATMENT PLANT INFRASTRUCTURE The treatment works has been designed such that it consists of the following stages in a chronological order (Figure 4): aeration; pre-chlorination; coagulation/flocculation (dosing of aluminium sulphate, lime milk and polyelectrolyte); sedimentation; filtration; clear water basin; final chlorination; wash water and net water pumps. The water treatment works, with exception of the clear water tank, has been sized at the intermediate year (9,100 m3/day), thus a set of treatment works will have to be setup as a second phase to meet the daily supply of the ultimate year (12,988 m3/day). However, the clear water tank has been sized at the ultimate year. Additionally, it is assumed that it will operate 22 hours/day to allow for repair and maintenance works. Ministry of Water and Environment 8 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Figure 4: Schematic layout of proposed WTP infrastructure. Source: Fichtner and M&E, 2015b 2.2.2 TREATED WATER TRANSMISSION MAIN The treated water main will deliver water from the water treatment plant in Majanji through the enroute towns of Lumino, Masaba, Buhehe, Masafu, Dabani to Busia Municipality. It will consist of a two-stage system as illustrated below: a. Water will be pumped from the clear water tank at the WTP in Majanji to a storage tank at Daha Village, Buhehe Sub County. This section will be 12.5 km in length and will contain the entire project´s demand with the exception of Majanji town. Majanji town will have an independent system tapping off from the clear water tank. Additionally, tap offs on this pipeline will be made for the towns of Lumino, Masaba and Buhehe. b. In the second stage, water will be transmitted from Buhehe storage tank to Dabani reservoir in Dabani Subcounty Headquarters. This section will be 13.422 km in length and will have the demand for Masafu town, Dabani town, Busia Municipality, and the towns of Buteba, Masinya and Sikuda. Thus, a booster station will be located at Buhehe storage tank to deliver water to Dabani Reservoir. Additionally, a tap-off along the transmission line will be provided for Masafu town. The treated water main has been sized at the ultimate year whereas its pumps and the reservoirs to be supplied have been sized at the intermediate year, thus they will be expanded in the future to suit the ultimate year. Ministry of Water and Environment 9 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project 2.2.3 STORAGE RESERVOIRS AT BUHEHE AND DABANI Three storage reservoirs have been designed for the project. The first reservoir already exists and will be connected directly to the clear water tank at the WTP and will supply Majanji town. The second reservoir along the transmission line will be located at Butangasi Parish, Buhehe Sub County. It has been designed at 500 m³ in the intermediate and ultimate years. A booster station will be located next to it to augment supply to the third reservoir. The third reservoir, main storage tank for Busia Municipality, will be located at Dabani Sub County Headquarters. It will also be used as a main distribution tank for the towns of Dabani, Buhehe, Buteba, Masinya and Sikuda. The storage capacity of this reservoir will be at 1500 and 2500m³, respectively, the intermediate and ultimate year. 2.2.4 IMPROVED DISTRIBUTION NETWORK The distribution network, designed for the ultimate year, was focused on Busia Municipality (Figure 5). The design includes extensions to the peripheral areas of the Municipality and surrounding towns. Figure 5: Layout of proposed Busia Municipality distribution network. Source: Fichtner and M&E, 2015b. 2.3 ONSITE SANITATION MANAGEMENT FACILITIES The project proposes to build ten 5-stance toilets in schools, of which five will be for girls and the remaining five for boys. However, the schools to be provided will be jointly selected during execution of works by the Municipal Council, the Client and Site Management. Thirteen public toilets will also be built or rehabilitated in a number of public places, including market places, bus stops, administrative areas, hospitals and informal areas. The toilets will generally vary between 5 and 13- Ministry of Water and Environment 10 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project stances. The new and to be rehabilitated toilets will have hand-washing facilities and shower rooms for both male and women. 2.4 OFFSITE SANITATION MANAGEMENT The offsite sanitation management (faecal sludge disposal) facility proposed for the project is a hybrid constructed wetland (hybrid of vertical flow (VF) and horizontal flow (HF) constructed wetlands, Figure 6). Sized at 3,842 m3/annum (i.e. ultimate year faecal sludge production rate of the project area), the system consists of two VF and one HF system. Water percolates downward through the the liquid/solid separation media where it is collected at the bottom and then channelled to the next cell (percolate treatment medium) for further treatment. The downward flow of water in VF systems allows for much more oxygen rich (aerobic) conditions. A cesspool emptier (sludge emptying truck) will be employed in ferrying/transferring faecal sludge from the on-site sanitation facilities (latrines and septic tanks) to the FSTF, thus there will be no sewers. The cesspool emptier, assumed at 6 m3 capacity, will be emptied in 7 minutes at the FSTP. In general, the faecal sludge treatment plant will comprise: a. Solid/liquid separation with planted drying beds and retention of the solids component until stabilized. The planted drying beds are designed as parallel batch operated beds with alternative operating cycles of loading and resting. The final biosolids shall be disposed of at Busia Municipal Council Waste Management site located at Osapir Village, Abochet Parish, Buteba Sub-County, which is approximately 8 Km from Busia Town Center. The dried stabilized biosolids once found to be free of any contaminants, shall be given out to interested farmers, free of charge, to be used in their fields to improve agricultural productivity of their land. b. Pre-treatment of the liquid portion by vertical flow constructed wetlands. The water drained out of the planted drying bed is collected and drained to vertical constructed wetlands, which are batch operated vertical planted filters, with alternating periods of activity and inactivity. The longest recommended activity/inactivity cycle is 3 weeks: 1 week of feeding before a 2-week resting period. c. Polishing treatment of the liquid portion by horizontal rock filters. In a horizontal rock filter, the wastewater travels through a submerged porous rock bed, where the biomass is attached to the rock. The bed shall be emptied every 15 years. d. Final treatment of the liquid portion in natural wetlands. Ministry of Water and Environment 11 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Figure 6: Schematic of the FSTP process to be adopted. (Source: Fichtner and M & E, 2015a). Ministry of Water and Environment 12 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project 3 POLICY, LEGISLATION AND REGULATIONS 3.1 NATIONAL POLICIES AND LAWS ON ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT There are several environmental and social policies and laws that will apply to the proposed Busia WSSP. A list below provides applicable policies, laws and guidelines include: - 3.2 POLICIES a. Vision Uganda 2040 b. Draft National Environment Management Policy, 2014 c. National Water Policy, 1999 d. National Policy for the Conservation and Management of Wetland Resources, 1995 e. Uganda National Land Policy, 2013 f. National Health Policy, 2010 g. Uganda Forestry Policy, 2001 h. National Gender Policy, 1997 i. HIV/AIDS Policy, 1992 3.3 GUIDELINES a. EIA Guidelines, 1997 b. Environmental Impact Assessment Guidelines for water resources related projects, 2011 c. The Environmental Audit Guidelines for Uganda, 1999 d. The Guidelines for Occupational Safety and Health, Including HIV in the Health Services Sector 2008 3.4 LAWS a. The 1995 Constitution of Uganda (as amended) b. The National Environment Act, Cap 153 c. The Water Act, Cap 152 d. The Land Act, Cap 227 e. The Land Acquisition Act, Cap 226 f. The National Forestry and Tree Planting Act, 2003 g. The Uganda Wildlife Act Cap 200 h. The Public Health Act Cap 281 i. The Occupational Safety and Health Act No. 9, 2006 j. The Physical Planning Act, 2010 k. The Local Governments Act, Cap 243 l. The Employment Act, 2006 m. The Workers’ Compensation Act 2000 n. The Children Act Cap 59 o. The Prevention of Trafficking in Persons Act, 2009 p. The Penal Code Act Cap 120 3.5 REGULATIONS a. The Water Resources Regulations, 1998 b. Water (Waste Discharge) Regulations, 1998 c. The Water Supply Regulations, 1999 Ministry of Water and Environment 13 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project d. The Sewerage Regulations, 1999 e. The Environment Impact Assessment Regulations, 1998 f. The National Environment (Wetlands, River Banks and Lake Shores Management) Regulations, 2000 g. Environment (Waste Management) Regulations, 1999 h. The National Environment (Delegation of Waste Water Discharge Functions) Instrument, 1999 i. The National Environment (Standards for Discharge of Effluents into Water or on Land) Regulations, 1999 j. The National Environment (Noise Standards And Control) Control of Noise Regulations, 2003 k. The Employment (Employment of Children) Regulations of 2012 3.6 KEY ENVIRONMENTAL POLICIES, LAWS AND GUIDELINES The water source of the Busia WSS project is Lake Victoria. The Water intake and Water Treatment Plant will be located in Majanji Village, Majanji Parish, Majanji Sub County. As a result of the project the water quality of the lake at the intake point may deteriorate; the current volumetric potential of Lake Victoria will be lowered due to diversion / pumping of water for the purpose of this project. Since the implementation of the project will affect the Lake, the following laws will apply and guide project construction and operation phases. Law/Regulation/Guideline Key provisions and Relevancy The Constitutionof of the The implementation of the project will take into Republic of Uganda, 1995. consideration of the Constitution that provides for, inter alia, matters pertaining to land, natural resources (such as swamps, rivers and lakes) and clean environment. Principle XXVII of the Constitution declares that: a) Utilization of natural resources shall be managed in such a way as to meet the development and environmental needs of the present and future generations of Uganda, particularly taking all measures to prevent or minimize damage and destruction to land, air, and water resources resulting from pollution or any other kind of natural resource degradation. b) The state shall promote sustainable development and public awareness of the need to manage natural resources and to ensure that the utilization of the natural resources of Uganda shall be managed in such a way as to meet the needs of present and future generations. The Land Act Cap 227 The Act requires a person who owns or occupies land to manage and utilize the land in accordance with the Ministry of Water and Environment 14 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Law/Regulation/Guideline Key provisions and Relevancy environmental laws and other laws listed in Section 43 including the Water Act and National Environment Act. The National Environment Act The Act provides a list of projects in the third schedule for Cap 153 which an EIA is a requirement. It also provides for guidelines and regulations for undertaking an EIA and emphasizes public participation in the conduct of an EIA. Sections 19, 20 and 21 of the Act lay out the EIA process, and Sections 22 and 23 make it a requirement to undertake environmental audits and monitoring of on- going activities or projects under implementation. The Environment Impact Regulation 2 (2) provides that no developer shall Assessment Regulations, 1998 implement a project for which environmental impact assessment is required under the Act and under these Regulations unless the environmental impact assessment has been concluded in accordance with these Regulations. The EIA guidelines of 1997 The guidelines establish three major phases through which the EIA should be conducted namely; the Screening phase, the environmental impact study phase and thirdly, the decision-making phase. The Environmental Impact The guidelines under Section 3.4.1 requires that in order Assessment Guidelines for to avoid excessive abstraction or pollution of the available water resources related ground water resources, an assessment be carried out for projects, 2011 all those water use projects that are likely to impact on such groundwater resources in rural and small towns’ water supply projects. ESIA for this project has been conducted based on the above provisions of the Act, the EIA regulations and the guidelines followed. NEMA will issue an amended EIA certificate for the Busia WSSP after reviewing and approving the updated ESIA. The Water Act Cap 152 Under Section 18 (2) a person wishing to construct any works or to take and use water is required to apply to the director of the Directorate of Water Development for a permit to do so. The Water Resources The developer will be required, to apply for surface water Regulations, 1998 and construction permits from DWRM to abstract water from Lake Victoria. The Physical Planning Act, The Act regulates the approval of physical development 2010 plans and applications for development permission. Section 37 requires an applicant of a development permit to acquire environmental impact assessment certificate in Ministry of Water and Environment 15 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Law/Regulation/Guideline Key provisions and Relevancy accordance with the National Environment Act before he or she can be granted full approval to develop. Therefore, the development of the Busia WSSP is subject to the control of Physical Planning Authority of Busia Municipal Council as mandated under S.12 of the Act. The Water (Waste Discharge) Regulation 4 (1) require a person who wishes to discharge Regulations (1998) effluent or waste on land or into aquatic environment to apply for a waste discharge permit. The National Environment (the Regulation 3 and the schedule prescribe maximum Standards for Discharge of permissible standards limits for effluent or waste to be Effluent into Water or on discharged into water or on land. Land) Regulations of 1999 The water treatment plant and the faecal sludge treatment plant have to comply with the standards as specified in the Schedule of the Regulations. The functions of Executive Director NEMA under the Regulations are to ensure that an operator of a plant undertakes pre-treatment of effluent before discharge into any receiving environment. The powers to enforce this Regulation is delegated to the DWD now DWRM. The Waste Management The Regulations require waste disposal in a way that Regulations of 1999 would not contaminate water, soil, and air or impact public health. Regulation 5 requires a person who owns or controls a facility or premises, which generate waste to minimize the waste generated by adopting the following cleaner production methods and reduce toxic emissions and wastes. Regulation 14 requires any person who intends to operate a waste treatment plant or disposal site to apply to NEMA for a licence and Regulation 15 to carry out EIA before the plant is established and an operator of a waste treatment plant or disposal site to carry out an annual audit of the environmental performance of the site or plant and shall submit a report to NEMA. The Developer (MWE) will need to apply for a licence to operate the faecal sludge treatment in accordance with the Waste Management Regulations. The Local Government Act Cap Under Part 4 of the second schedule of the Act, the local 243 government is mandated to ensure the protection of wetlands, the protection and maintenance of local water resources inter alia. The Busia District Natural Resources/Environmental Officers shall in this respect monitor the project Ministry of Water and Environment 16 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Law/Regulation/Guideline Key provisions and Relevancy implementation to ensure that the project meets the environmental standards. The Wildlife Act Cap 200 The Act provides for sustainable management of wildlife. S.15 of the Act states that any Developer desiring to undertake any project, which may have a significant effect on any wildlife species, or community, shall undertake an environmental impact assessment in accordance with the National Environmental Act. This ESIA is carried out in line with this provision. Uganda Wildlife Authority (UWA) is the institutional body whose principal function is to ensure sustainable management of wildlife resources in Uganda. It shall monitor the implementation of conservational measures of the wildlife by the water project in Busia. The Public Health Act Cap 281 Section 7 provides local authorities with administrative powers to take all lawful, necessary and reasonable practicable measures for preventing the occurrence of, or for dealing with any outbreak or prevalence of, any infectious, communicable or preventable disease, to safeguard and promote the public health. Busia District /Municipal Council Authority will take measures, including if necessary, proceedings at law to ensure mitigation of the project impacts on public health within their Jurisdiction. National Environment (Noise Regulation 6 established permissible noise levels for a Standards and Control) facility. Regulation 12 requires that any owner or occupier Control of Noise Regulations, of premises whose works or activities are likely to emit 2003 noise in excess of the permissible noise levels shall apply to the Executive Director of NEMA for a license to emit noise in excess of the permissible levels. The project Developer will apply for the license from NEMA so as to comply with standards provided under the Regulations. The Water Treatment Plant (WTP) will discharge backwash water into Lake Victoria and dispose of water treatment sludge, which contains aluminium sulphate, a known toxic or hazardous waste. The faecal sludge treatment plant (FSTP) at Okame – Abochet Village, in Busia Municipality will release sewage effluent into the Okame stream, which will have excessive plant nutrients like nitrates, nitrites and phosphates; organic matter high in BOD 5 and COD; and pathogens. These will degrade the water quality of the downstream aquatic environment if not pre-treated before discharge. The Busia WSSP will have impacts on wildlife. The area has hippos that have a terrestrial range of 10 km in the dense wetland surrounding Lake Victoria. The water project will cause noise, vibrations, Ministry of Water and Environment 17 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project lights and fencing which will affect free movement, feeding, mating and health of wildlife. The wildlife Act will therefore guide managementof such wildlife by UWA. The project has impacts on public health, which though have been mitigated as given in the ESMP. The FSTP will discharge effluent that contains bacteria which may affect public health. The water project will cause noise, vibrations, and dust emission from excavation of foundations, trenches for transmission and distribution pipelines. These can potentially impact on public health hence their aspects will be guided by the following laws and regulations The Public Heal Act Cap. 281 and the National Environment (Noise Standards and Control) Control of Noise Regulations, 2003. 3.7 KEY SOCIAL POLICIES, LAWS AND GUIDELINES. The construction will require both unskilled and skilled labour. These require good Health and Safety systems to be put in place including provision and use of protection equipment (PPEs). Accidents such as fire out breaks at the WTP, falling from heights, electrical shocks, collapse of facilities at the various project facility sites and injuries may occur during the construction, operational and decommissioning phases of the project. Such Health and Safety issues of workers and the general public will trigger the following laws. Law/Regulation Key provisions and Relevancy The Employment Act No 6, The Act makes provisions for governing legal statutory instrument 2006 for the recruitment, contracting, deployment, remuneration, management and compensation of workers. It mandates Labour Officers to regularly inspect the working conditions of workers to ascertain that the rights of workers and basic provisions are provided and workers’ welfare is attended to. Further, it has provisions prohibiting forced labour, discrimination and sexual harassment at workplaces (Part II; Part IV), Providing for labour inspection by the relevant Ministry (Part III) and stipulating rights and duties in employment (weekly rest, working hours, annual leave, maternity and paternity leaves, sick pay, etc. (Part VI). The Developer shall be required to treat workers with fairness and without discrimination and in addition, Busia District Labour officers shall regularly monitor the Contractor’s compliance. The Occupational Safety and The Occupational Safety and Health Act, 2006 provides for, Health Act, 2006 general duties, obligations and responsibilities of employers, rights and responsibilities of workers and general safety requirements. Section 13 (1) a stipulates that it’s the responsibility of the employer to take, as far as is reasonably practical all measures for the protection of his or her workers and the general public from the dangerous aspects of the employer’s undertaking at his or her own cost. The employer should ensure, as far as is reasonably practical, that the working environment is kept free from any hazard due to pollution. Ministry of Water and Environment 18 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Section 19 requires an employer to provide adequate and suitable protective clothing and protective equipment to the workers of his or her undertaking. The Busia WSSP should adhere to occupational safety and health rules according to the mitigation measures suggested in this report such as workers be trained in health safety, given the PPEs and given access to a first aid kit. The project may have risk of using child labour at construction sites and therefore the underlying provisions have to be complied with. The following laws relating to protection from child labour will be applicable. Law/Regulation Key provisions and Relevancy The 1995 Constitution of Article 257 defines a child as any person below the age of 18 years. Uganda (as amended) (Also, Section 2 of the Children Act Cap 59 and the Prevention of Trafficking in Persons Act 2009) Article 34 (4) of the Constitution provides that Children are entitled to be protected from social and economic exploitation and shall not be employed in or required to perform work that is likely to be hazardous or to interfere with their education, to be harmful to their health or physical, mental, spiritual, moral and or social development. The Employment Act 2006 Section 32 prohibits employment of a child under the age of twelve years to be employed in any business, undertaking or work place. The Act permits a child of under the age of fourteen years to be employed on condition that work is light work and carried out under supervision of an adult aged over eighteen years and does not affect the child’s education. It also requires that the child is not employed in any employment or work which is injurious to his or her health, dangerous or hazardous or otherwise unsuitable and that a child does not work between the hours of 7 p.m. and 7 a.m. The person who employs such a child has to notify a labour officer in writing that the employment or work complies with the above conditions. The Employment of Children The Regulations also emphasize that a child employed under the Regulations of 2012 age of fourteen years shall not be employed in any business undertaking or workplace, except for light work carried out under Ministry of Water and Environment 19 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Law/Regulation Key provisions and Relevancy the supervision of an adult and where the work does not exceed fourteen hours per week. They prohibit employment of a child to do work which is injurious, dangerous, and hazardous or in the worst forms of child labour. Overtime work is prohibited for a child aged between fifteen to seventeen years and a child shall not be employed at night between the hours of 7.00 p.m. and 7.00 a.m. The Ministry of Water and Environment will work with the Ministry of Gender, Labour and Social Development to ensure prohibition of child labour by the contractors of the project. Women and child sexual abuse by contractors’ workers is a risk that needs to be managed especially at construction sites. Protection ought to be given to Children and women against sexual abuse and therefore the laws below will be applicable. Law/Regulation Key provisions and Relevancy The Penal Code Act Cap 120 Section 129 stipulates that any person who has sexual intercourse with a girl under the age of 18 is guilty of an offence and is liable to suffer death and also stipulates that any person who unlawfully and indecently assaults a boy under the age of 18 is guilty of felony. Section 131 prohibits procurement or attempting to procure a girl for the purpose of commercial sexual exploitation. (Also Regulation 5 of the Employment of Children Regulations 2012) Section 123 makes it an offence to have sexual intercourse with a woman without her consent and Section 132 prohibits procuring defilement of women and girls by threats or intimidation or false pretences or false representations or administration of drug, matter or thing with intent to stupefy or overpower. The Prevention of Section 8 prohibits recruiting a person below 16 years in any form Trafficking in Persons Act of employment for the purposes of exploitation or introducing or 2009 matching any person to another for purposes of sexual exploitation In Implementation of the project, the Ministry of Water and Environment will work with the Ministry of Gender, Labour, and Social Development to make sure that the women and children are not sexually exploited by the contractors. Busia District Labour Ministry of Water and Environment 20 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Law/Regulation Key provisions and Relevancy officers have a key role in monitoring compliance of the contractors. 3.8 KEY INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL LAWS The water source of the Busia WSS project is Lake Victoria, which is a trans-boundary water body that is shared by Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania. Uganda is a party to the Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community 1999 which provides for the promotion of a sustainable growth and equitable development of partner States including rational utilization of the region’s natural resources and protection of the environment. The EAC Protocol for Sustainable Development of Lake Victoria Basin, 2001 under Article 4 provides the principle of prior notification concerning planned measures whereby each of the Partner States shall notify other Partner States of planned activities within its territory that may have adverse effects upon those other States and the principle of Environmental Impact Assessment and Audit. Uganda is required to notify partner states of EAC through the Lake Victoria Basin Commission. The Rio Declaration 1992 principle 17 requires that environmental impact assessment, as a national instrument, shall be undertaken for proposed activities that are likely to have a significant adverse impact on the environment and are subject to a decision of a competent national authority. The Integrated Water Management and Development triggers World Bank’s Safeguar Policy OP 7.50 International Waterways and MWE will accordingly notify the Partner States and the riparian countries. The project is not anticipated to appreciably affect quality or quantity of water for other Nile riparian countries. 3.9 LEGAL, POLICY AND REGULATORY FRAMEWORK FOR RESETTLEMENT IN UGANDA The project involves construction of water supply and sanitation plants and transmission lines that required acquisition of land. This implied that the Central Government and Local Government had the responsibility to acquire land for the construction of the different project facilities (i.e. water intake, WTP, transmission and distribution mains and FSTP) which means compensation of Project Affected Persons (PAPs) in line with OP 4.12 and GoU compensation requirements. The different types of land tenure and the acquisition processes, under Uganda laws are given below. 3.9.1 CUSTOMARY LAND Most of the proposed land for the project in Busia is held under customary tenure. Land ownership is vested in the lineage and is allocated by a father to his sons, who in turn assign it to their wives and children for cultivation. The situation indicates that the youth and the women only have a user-right to the land and not ownership, which disadvantages a vulnerable group. Part of the land for the water intake and Water Treatment Plant belonging to Bwiire Barrack Enos (0.558 acres), the FSTP land owned by Adome Philip (2.000 acre), the land for the Dabani Reservoir belonging to the late Musungu Birenge, (0.289 acres) are all under customary ownership, and have already been acquired. Implementation of the project on this land will triggered the laws below. Ministry of Water and Environment 21 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Law/Regulation Key provisions and Relevancy The 1995 Constitution The Constitution restored recognition of the rights of those who held customary land (Article. 237 (3) (a) and (4)). The Land Act Cap 227 Section 3 (1) of the Act explicitly recognized that customary law should regulate this form of land tenure. It states that customary land tenure shall be governed by rules generally accepted as binding by the particular community. Anyone who acquires land in that community shall also be bound by the same rules except where such rules are repugnant to natural justice, equity and good conscience. The required land therefore shall be acquired as per the customary rules in the respective areas with the involvement of Local Council 1 chairpersons to verify ownership and women and the youths’ due their vulnerability. 3.9.2 FREEHOLD LAND In this project, part of land for the proposed water intake and the Water Treatment Plant in Majanji Village, Manjanji Parish, Majanji Sub County belong to Aggrey Awori (0.010 acres) with a freehold land title. Establishment of such project component on the freehold land will trigger the following laws. Law/Regulation Key provisions and Relevancy The 1995 Constitution of Article 237 (3) (b) provides that land in Uganda belongs to the Uganda citizens of Uganda and shall vest in them in accordance with the land tenure systems provided for in there under including freehold tenure The Land Act Cap 227 Section 2 provides for the different tenures of land including freehold. According to S.3 (2), the freehold tenure may involve either a grant of land in perpetuity, or for a lesser specified time period. The Act specifies that the holder freehold land has full power of ownership of it and as such, he may use it for any lawful purpose, dispose of it by will or transact it in any other way as he or she sees fit upon negotiation with the project developer. A search has to be done with the District Land Board to certify title to the required land for the Water intake and the WTP as under the Registration of Titles Act Cap 230 S.101. Ministry of Water and Environment 22 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project 3.9.3 PUBLIC LAND Part of the land for the Water Intake and the WTP (6.603 acres), land for the Majanji Reservoir (0.180 acres) and part of the transmission pipeline land (0.183 acres) in Majanji village, Majanji parish are occupied by the UPDF and registered under Uganda Land Commission. The land for Dabani Reservoir (0.537 acres) and part of the transmission pipeline land (0.103 acres) is held by Dabani Sub County in Dabani East Village. This is public land, which shall require public use by the water project. It requires the involvement into discussions by the MWE and the Ministry of Justice and constitutional affairs and Busia District Local Government. Where a government institution wants land that belongs to another government institution an application should be made to the Uganda Land Commission for change of use or shared use. 3.10 WORLD BANK SAFEGUARD POLICIES The Busia WSS Project will be funded by the World Bank, which has Environmental and Social Safeguard policies that are designed to avoid, mitigate, or minimize adverse environmental and social impacts of projects supported by the bank. The operational policies triggered in this project are summarized in below: Safeguard policies applicable to the sub-Project in Busia. Safeguard Policies Reason Triggered Environmental OP 4.01 is triggered as the project may have adverse environmental and Assessment OP/BP social impacts through its infrastructure activities, particularly civil works 4.01 for water supply and sanitation, water abstraction, establishment of faecal sludge treatment plant and be affected by discharge from the wastewater into the the stream and wetlands around Lake Victoria. In general, the project falls under Category B of the World Bank´s classification of projects requiring an ESIA/ESMP given that its potential adverse environmental and social impacts will be site specific, few if any are irreversible, and in most cases mitigation measures can be readily designed. Additionally, the World Bank Environment Health and Safety Guidelines (EHSGs), with specific reference to the EHSGs for water and sanitation projects, applies to the project. Natural Habitats OP 4.04 is triggered due to potential loss or degradation of natural OP/BP 4.04 habitats including, riparian and wetland habitats, through project planning, physical activities or use of water resources. Project includes activities in ecologically sensitive areas such as wetlands around Lake Victoria. Physical Cultural So far in this ESIA no PCRs like graves, shrines have been found above Resources OP/BP 4.11 ground in the project area. However, with excavations chance finds of archaeological / paleontological value may be found. Hence a chance finds procedure has been developed for this project; Involuntary OP 4.12 is triggered due to land acquisition at the water intake and WTP: Resettlement OP/BP freehold land belonging to Aggrey Awori (0.010 acres) and customary 4.12 land belonging to Bwiire Barrack Enos (0.558 acres). At the FSTP, land Ministry of Water and Environment 23 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Safeguard Policies Reason Triggered belonging Adome Philip (2.000 acres) has been acquired by Busia Municipal Council, and likewise the land belonging to the family of the late Musungu Birenge (0.289 acres) at the water reservoir will be acquired. Compliance will be ensured through the RPF and RAP which are prepared separately. OP 4.12 requires compensation at replacement cost as minimum. Projects on OP 7.50 is triggered since the project encompasses international waters International including the River Nile and Lake Victoria. Waterways OP/BP Compliance shall be ensured through the issuance of a Notification to the 7.50 Riparian by Government of Uganda. World Bank Policy on This policy is triggered since there is need for disclosure of information to Access to Information all the stakeholders. Compliance shall be ensured by disclosing the (July 1, 2010) information to all the stakeholders such as district technocrats, Municipal and Local council leaders, and communities among others during the consultation process and the information is accessible. Ministry of Water and Environment 24 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project 4 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL BASELINE 4.1 SOCIO-ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT 4.1.1 DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS In 2014 Busia District had a population of 325,527 (UBOS Population Census, 2014) compared to 225,008 in 2002 (UBOS Population Census, 2002). The district population growth rate was 3.08%. The majority of the people stay in rural areas (259,569) against 55,958 in urban areas. Since the project area covers nine out of the 14 sub counties in the district, the above statistics are a true reflection of the project area. In the socio-economic survey carried out, the majority of the project affected household heads in Busia are male (See Table 6 below). Male-headed households constituted 87.5% while female household heads accounted for 12.5%. However, female headed households are more vulnerable to such projects and impact on their livelihoods and the general welfare of their household members tend to be severe compared to their male counterparts. Table 6: Gender of the Household heads. Gender of the PAPs Percentage Male 87.5 Female 12.5 Total 100.0 4.1.2 ETHNIC COMPOSITION The socio-economic survey of PAP’s show only two tribes in Busia i.e. the Basamia 96.9% and the Iteso 3.1% are affected by the project. Busia District is a multi-ethnic society with the indigenous Basamia constitute 46%, followed by Bagwe at 25%. Busia being a border district (neighboring Kenya) has a transient population. According to the 2002 Census indigenous Ugandans constituted 98 percent of the population, while 2 percent were non- Ugandans. The majority were females. Immigrations were associated to education, marriage and economic purposes. Since only the indigenous Basamia and Iteso were the only ones affected by the project, this means they are the only ones who have access to land, crops and property in the project area. The other tribes are mainly in trade business since this is a border district. Table 7 shows the composition of the tribes in the project area. Table 7: Tribe of the PAPs. Ethnicity of the PAPs Percentage Musamia 96.9 Iteso 3.1 Total 100.0 Ministry of Water and Environment 25 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project 4.1.3 AGE COMPOSITION OF THE AFFECTED PERSONS Majority of the PAPs are aged 45 – 54 years with those above 55 years of age comprising of 31.3% respectively. PAPs aged between 35 and 44 years are only 21.9% while those aged 25 to 34 years were only 12.5%. Only one of the PAPs was aged 15-24 years. By implication, 31.3% of the PAPs in the affected area are above 55 years of age making them vulnerable to the proposed project activities. Also, the one aged between 15 - 24 years is likely to be affected by the project, see Table 8. Table 8: Age composition of the PAPs. Age composition of the PAPs Frequency Percentage 15-24 1 3.1 25-34 4 12.5 35-44 7 21.9 45-54 10 31.3 55+ 10 31.3 Total 32 100.0 4.1.4 RELIGIOUS AFFILIATION The socio-economic survey established the religions of the project affected persons. It was established that majority of the PAPs were protestants (53.9%) followed by Catholic (46.1%). Moslems and other forms of religious affiliation such as the born again, SDA and traditionalists were not encountered in the survey (see Table 9 below). Table 9: Religion of the PAPs. Religion of the PAPs Freq. % Catholic 15 46.1 Protestant 17 53.9 Muslim 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Total 32 100 4.1.5 MARITAL STATUS The marital status is a very useful variable in understanding the potential impact of the project on familial relationships and social capital. Majority (75%) of the HH heads that were surveyed in the project affected area are married. This means that the proposed water project will mainly affect the married people. The widowed (15.6%) are a vulnerable group and magnitude of the effect of the project on their standards of living and general welfare is likely to be high compared to the rest of the groups. Single and separated affected persons constitute 6.3% and 3.1% respectively (see Table 10). Ministry of Water and Environment 26 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Table 10: Marital status. Marital status Percentage Single 6.3 Married 75.0 Separated 3.1 Widowed 15.6 Total 100 4.1.6 AVERAGE HOUSEHOLD SIZE The survey found that the average HH size of the PAPs is 4.7 people, which is lower than the national average household size of 5.081. Table 11 below shows the percentage distribution of PAPs in the affected households across the male and female genders. The majority of the project affected households had HH sizes ranging between 2 - 5 people, followed by those with a size range between 6 -10. Very few HHs had more than 11 people. The bigger the HH, the higher the vulnerability and the likelihood of being affected by the project. Table 11: Household size. Gender Household size 1-5 people 6-10 people Above 11 people Total Males (%) 34.0 35.5 5.2 74.2 Female (%) 9.0 12.0 4.3 25.8 Total (%) 33.0 47.5 9.5 100 4.1.7 EDUCATION AND LITERACY LEVELS The results from the socio-economic survey indicated that majority of the PAPs in the project area had attained and completed primary education (75.0%) followed by those who had attained secondary education (9.4%) and diploma level (9.4%) Table 12 below. Those who reported to have no form of formal education were 6.3%. According to the Busia District Development Plan, there is still a high level of illiteracy and low educational attainment, which in return affects the success of development projects and innovations, because the level of labour productivity in the district is very low. Being illiterate, unable to read and write makes the PAPs more vulnerable given that they cannot explore the economic opportunities and their participation in decision making processes at the community level is minimal. This therefore implies that also their level of participation in the proposed project will be minimal and they could only offer support services. Table 12: Education and literacy level. Literacy level Freq. % Illiterate 2 6.3 Completed primary 24 75.0 Completed secondary 3 9.4 Diploma 3 9.4 Ministry of Water and Environment 27 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Total 32 100 4.1.8 EXISTENCE OF VULNERABLE GROUPS Vulnerable groups usually have limited production assets, which are likely to be impacted by new projects and innovations yet their level of resilience is very low. The socio-economic survey established the different vulnerable groups among the project affected HH heads and members. The vulnerability was examined in terms of marital status, age of the HH heads, and HH with members with disability and the chronically ill. 15.6% of the PAPs were widowed, 3.1% were child headed families while 48.4% were either disabled or chronically ill – see Figure 7 for details. The proposed project should therefore put in place mechanisms to meet the needs of vulnerable groups including improving on their livelihoods. Figure 7: Existence of vulnerable groups among the PAPs. 4.2 HOUSEHOLD ECONOMY The following sections present the household economy in terms of sources of livelihood. At a general level, people in the project area are living below the poverty line. The poverty condition is evidenced by low accessibility to social services, low household incomes, high unemployment levels and unskilled population due to the low levels of literacy. The sections present the socio-economic conditions of the PAPs at the different project facilities and along the proposed water project corridor among the sampled 33 of the affected households. 4.2.1 ACCESS TO INCOME In an effort to clearly understand access to income of the PAPs, the socio-economic survey examined the HH economy of the PAPs through establishing the different activities the PAPs are engaged in. According to Table 13 below, farming/livestock production was the main source of income and livelihood among the PAPs. It constitutes 75.0% of the major production activities among the PAPs. The other major production activities and sources of income are business/petty trade (9.4%) and civil service (9.4%). It was also established that 6.3% of the PAPs engaged in causal labour. No single affected HH head reported not to be employed in form of being a housewife, student or retired civil servant (see Table 13 below). Ministry of Water and Environment 28 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Table 13: Production activities Production activities/occupation Percentage Farming/animal rearing 75.0 Business 9.4 Civil servant 9.4 Causal labour 6.3 Total 100 4.2.2 TYPE OF CROPS GROWN The socio-economic survey established that over 75.0% of the PAPs carryout crop and livestock production on the affected land for their livelihood. According to the Figure 8 below, the main food crops grown are banana (22.9%), coffee (21.7%), cassava (16.9%), groundnuts (14.5%), maize (12.0%), beans (7.2%) and only (1.2%) reported growing fruits. Some of the affected HHs reported poor crop yields due to inadequate agriculture extension services, presence of pests and diseases, lack of rain and poor farming practices. The major cash crop grown in the project is coffee. Figure 8: Crops grown by the PAPs. Ministry of Water and Environment 29 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Cassava garden near the site for the proposed WTP in Maduwa A Village, Majanji sub-county, Busia district. 4.2.3 HOUSEHOLD EARNINGS Household income from farming among the PAPs is shown in Table 14. The data shows that majority of the HHs earn UGX 400,000 from farming annually. On average, the affected households earn 700,000 from farming annually. The maximum income from farming is UGX 4,000,000 while the minimum income is UGX 100,000 annually. This indicates that the affected households’ earnings are low to enable them access essential necessities and basic social services. Table 14: HH incomes from various activities. HH income Amount (UGX) Average 700,000 Mode 400,000 Minimum 100,000 Maximum 4,000,000 4.2.4 HOUSEHOLD EXPENDITURE PATTERNS Findings from the qualitative studies and community engagements show that household income is mainly expended on the major items including food, education expenses, medical expenses, airtime, transport, water, electricity and fuel. The implication is that the household expenditure patterns are consumptive and not investment based. Ministry of Water and Environment 30 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project 4.2.5 ACCESS TO AND UTILIZATION OF FUEL Among the project affected persons in Busia, it was found that the major source of fuel is firewood (81.3%), followed by using paraffin (18.7%). Interestingly no households in the affected areas reported using charcoal, solar and electricity. It was reported that firewood and paraffin are mostly used for as energy for cooking in the rural areas (see Table 15). Table 15: Fuel used by the household. Fuel type Frequency Percentage Firewood 26 81.3 Paraffin 6 18.7 Charcoal 0 0.0 Solar 0 0.0 Electricity 0 0.0 Total 32 100 4.2.6 OWNERSHIP OF COMMUNICATION AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY (ICT) ASSETS The socio-economic survey established the different assets owned by the affected households as proxy welfare indicators. It was established that most of the affected HHs own ICT assets. For instance, Table 16, below, 96.9% of the affected HHs owned radios while 93.5% of the affected HHs own mobile phones. No affected HHs owned fixed phones. By implication, radio announcements and mobile phone messages can be used to inform communities in project affected areas about the project including inviting them for meetings and to participate in the different project activities. In addition, all the affected HH members owned at least two pairs of clothes while 77.4% of the affected HHs owned a transport equipment. According to Table 16 below, majority of the households’ own bicycles, very few households owned motorcycles and vehicles. Table 16: ICT item ownership. Do you own the ICT item below Yes No Radio 96.9 3.1 Mobile phone 93.5 6.5 Fixed phone 0.0 100.0 Other items owned household members At least two sets of clothes 100.0 0.0 Own any transport equipment 77.4 22.6 4.2.7 ACCESS AND OWNERSHIP OF LAND All the PAPs (100%) indicated that they have access to land and all of them farm on the affected land, while (96.3%) reside on the affected land although not as a principal residence. The project will only take small land for each land take such that the residual land is adequate for the PAPs to continue carrying out their economic activities. The maximum acres of land owned is 20 acres while the minimum acreage is 0.10. Ministry of Water and Environment 31 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Table 17: Average land in areas owned by the PAPs. Ownership of land Land area (acres) Average 3.4200 Mode 2.00 Minimum 0.10 Maximum 20.00 4.2.8 LAND TENURE Land was identified as the key asset by all the persons affected because it is a key factor of production. It is the source of food, income, and residence. It also provides space for burial grounds. Although, land holdings differ from one village to the other, the average land size per household differed according to the location of the households. In Busia, it was reported that the major land tenure in the project affected area is freehold and customary tenure system (see Table 18 below). The socio-economic survey also found out that no one co-owned the land within the affected area. As a grievance resolution mechanism, community elders were reported to be playing important roles with regard to land disputes resolution through acting as mediators. Since land is mostly freehold, it can be used as a collateral to obtain a loan from the bank. However, those on customary land are somehow vulnerable because they cannot use it as collateral to obtain a loan from the bank for purposes of starting income generating activities. Customary land in Busia is regulated by customary norms and values and the boundaries under customary tenure are marked by trees, ridges and trenches. Table 18: Land tenure system and ownership. Type of land tenure Frequency Percentage Customary 6 18.7 Freehold 26 81.3 Total 32 100 Status of occupancy Land owner 32 100.0 Licensee 0 0.0 Co-tenant 0 0.0 Total 32 100 It is therefore important that, the project implementation pays attention to the existing land tenure systems, status of occupancy as well as other crucial issues regarding land ownership and compensation procedures within the regulatory framework of Uganda. Specifically, the management and control of land in Uganda is regulated by the 1998 Land Act, which recognizes four tenure systems i.e. customary, mailo, freehold, and leasehold. 4.2.9 EVIDENCE OF OWNERSHIP AND ENCUMBRANCES ON AFFECTED LAND The survey established the documentation and evidence of land ownership. Over 96.8% of affected landholdings reported to have no evidence of ownership of affected land in form of certificate of title. Only one household reported to have evidence of land ownership. In addition, all the affected households said they do not have a mortgage/lien on the owned land. It was also observed that in Ministry of Water and Environment 32 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Busia, there were no claims on affected land (See Table 19 below). Lack of evidence of land ownership is likely to become a major deterrent during compensation. The only evidence of land ownership was in form of agreement with their parents and family members. However, this shall be mitigated by convening meetings comprising of the Local Council 1 Executive and Clan / Family members of which minutes shall be taken and signed and will be evidence of ownership of the land due for compensation. Table 19: Evidence of ownership. Do you have evidence of land ownership Frequency Percentage Yes 1 3.2 No 31 96.8 Total 32 100 4.3 ACCESS TO HEALTH In the project affected area and like other rural communities in Uganda, the population in the proposed project area is affected by mainly malaria and stomach disorders. It was reported that 80.0% of the project affected persons are affected by malaria while 20.0% reported to be affected by stomach disorders. Ulcers is the major chronic illness suffered by affected households and it constitutes 66.7%. Other reported chronic illnesses included high blood pressure and HIV/AIDS. Very few households reported having members with disabilities. For instance, according to Table 20 below, only 2 of the affected households reported having disabled people while 2 households reported having household members with crossed eyes. Table 20: Disease prevalence. Diseases Frequency Percentage Common Diseases Malaria 26 80.0 Stomach disorders 6 20.0 Cough, flu 0 0.0 Headache 0 0.0 Sleeping sickness 0 0.0 Chronic illnesses Ulcers 6 66.7 Sickle cells 0 0.0 Cancer 0 0.0 Diabetes 0 0.0 Asthma 0 0.0 High blood pressure 1 11.1 Tuberculosis 0 0.0 HIV/AIDS 2 22.2 Ministry of Water and Environment 33 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Majanji Health center II located about 2km from the proposed WTP at Maduwa A village HIV/AIDS is also a big concern with a prevalence rate of 10% in the district. This is higher than the National prevalence rate of 6.8%. The main predisposing factors to HIV infection are mainly early, multiple and extramarital sexual relationships without the benefits of correct and consistent condom use, low awareness and poor access to condom outlets, community myths and misconceptions on HIV/AIDS issues, and inadequate treatment of STIs. Socio-economic factors such as poverty, migrant labour, commercial sex work, the low status of women, including over dependency on men, idleness, illiteracy and low formal education, stigma, discrimination, and substance abuse, especially alcoholism, have a big bearing to HIV infection. Busia District has unique features that have fuelled the epidemic. The business opportunities available along the Uganda – Kenya border was identified as one of the major factors presenting challenges to the health workers to control HIV transmission. Busia Municipal Council is also a hub for the long-distance travellers, particularly truck drivers (hauliers) who stop over in town on their way either from or to Kenya, and the commercial sex workers, who move between Kenya and other big towns along the main route to Kampala of which Busia is inclusive. In an effort to create community awareness about the spread and control of HIV/AIDS, the Ugandan Government together with various NGOs, both local and international, have come up with HIV/AIDS prevention and control interventions in the district. Such activities include: awareness creation through outreach programmes, drama, radio talk shows and routine counselling; condom distribution to communities and the private sector for disease prevention. This feeds into the medical services of Voluntary Counselling and Testing (VCT) and Routine Counselling and Testing (RCT). In testing knowledge about the disease, the survey found that having unprotected sex with infected persons was reported as the major cause of HIV/AIDS in the project area (41.9%), followed by the mother to child transmission (40.5%) and sharing sharp instruments (17.6%). Majority of the PAPs said that HIV/AIDS can be avoided through safe child birth (35.9%), using condoms (34.6%) and Ministry of Water and Environment 34 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project abstaining from sex (29.5%). This is a clear indication that the PAPs are very knowledgeable about HIV/AIDS, its causes and how it can be avoided. Table 21: Knowledge about the causes and how HIV/AIDS can be avoided. Questions on HIV/AIDS Frequency Percentage Knowledge on the causes of HIV/AIDS Unprotected sex with infected person 31 41.9 Mother to child transmission 30 40.5 Sharing sharp instruments 13 17.6 Infected blood transfusion 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Total 74 100 Knowledge on how HIV/AIDS can be avoided Using condoms 27 34.6 Safe child birth 28 35.9 Abstinence 23 29.5 Total 78 100 4.4 ACCESS TO WATER SOURCE Based on the socio-economic survey, it was found out that the major source of safe water for domestic use within the affected areas was the community borehole (74.3%). 2.9% of the PAPs draw water from the river and ponds/dams which contain water that is not suitable for domestic consumption. No affected households reported piped water as their main water source for domestic consumption (see Table 22). Table 22: Major source of water for domestic use. Water source Frequency Percentage River 4 11.4 Community borehole 26 74.3 Protected spring 4 11.4 Ponds/dams 1 2.9 Total 35 100.0 4.5 BANKING SERVICES The socio-economic survey established that majority of the affected HH do not have bank accounts which is a sign of poor saving culture. It was established that (83.7%) of the affected HH do not have bank accounts, only (18.3%) reported to have accounts in commercial banks. The project teams should encourage the PAPs to open up bank accounts where their compensation will be deposited. This could also be a safeguard to prudently invest the compensation money (see Table 23 below) Ministry of Water and Environment 35 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Table 23: Access to banking service. Do you have a bank account % Yes 6 18.7 No 26 81.3 Total 32 100 4.6 PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT 4.6.1 CLIMATE OF BUSIA The rainfall pattern in Busia District is typically bimodal, with the first rainy season extending from March to May and a longer rainy season from August to November, see Figure 9. The annual rainfall varies from a minimum of 1,080 mm to a maximum of 1,940 mm, with a mean of 1,514 mm (Busia District Report, 2009). It can be seen from Figure 9 that potential evapotranspiration varies between a maximum of 150 and a minimum of 115 mm/month. Figure 9: Mean monthly rainfall and potential ET in the project area. 4.6.2 TOPOGRAPHY OF BUSIA Busia District is a flat to mild sloping landscape with undulating plain topography. With only a few hills in some places, the highest altitude is noticed at Nebolola hills, Lumino Sub County, at about 1,193 m AMSL. Meanwhile the lowest altitude is in the valley of River Malaba at 1,000 m AMSL (Busia District Report, 2009). 4.6.3 GEOLOGY AND SOILS OF BUSIA Busia District is underlain by one major type of rock system: Pre-Cambrian rocks. This rock system is a basement that is rather complex and includes a variety of granites, gneisses, quartzite and small areas of other kinds of strong folded metamorphic rocks. The District is also characterized by the main out-crop of the Lunyo granite (NEMA, 2004). Ministry of Water and Environment 36 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Most soils in Busia District can be categorized as petric plinthosols, see Figure 10. Plinthosols are internationally referred to as ‘Groundwater Laterite Soils’. They are iron-rich mixture of clay mineral soils that are primarily found in the wet tropics and formed from basic rock as a result of accumulation of iron under hydromorphic conditions. The impenetrability of the hardened layer as well as the fluctuating water table that produces it restricts its use to grazing or forestry (Britannica online). The second largest soil group in Busia District can be categorized as lixic ferralsols and are defined by a fine-textured subsurface layer of low silt to clay ratio. They are formed on geologically old parent materials in humid tropical climates and occur on old but stable land surfaces. Thus, they are strongly weathered soils with low activity clays and low amounts of mineral nutrients. This makes the soils to have a low fertility and not suitable for agriculture, unless lime and fertilizer is added. The third and smallest soil group in Busia District are gleysols. These are wetland-based soils that, unless drained, are saturated with groundwater for long enough periods. They are found in depressions and low landscape positions with shallow groundwater. Are greyish/blueish in colour inside the soil horizons due to anoxic conditions but turn brownish/yellowish/reddish in colour at surfaces of soil particles as the iron in the soil gets oxidized. They are generally fertile soils with high content of organic matter. Figure 10: Soil map of Busia District (source: NARO, Undated) 4.6.4 HYDROLOGY OF THE REGION OF BUSIA Busia region is characterised by two distinct drainage basins, namely: Lake Victoria and Lake Kyoga drainage basins (Figure 11). The Lake Victoria drainage system flows southwards and consists of rivers such as Sio, Nasigombe, Nalioba, Namagenge, Nalwire and Namatu draining into Lake Victoria. The Kyoga drainage system flows northwards and consists of rivers such as Malaba, Kibimba and Lumboka draining into Lake Kyoga. Most streams are tributaries of River Malaba, including Solo, Okame - Abochet, Nakola, Tira and Osapiri (NEMA, 2004). Busia District is equally endowed with wetlands covering up to 174.08 km 2 of land. The Lake Victoria wetland system covers an area of 76.96 km2 mean while the Lake Kyoga system covers an area of Ministry of Water and Environment 37 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project 97.12 km2. The major wetlands in the district comprise the Lumboka, Malaba, Lake Victoria and Sio wetland systems. In a study undertaken for the Busia District Water Supply and Sanitation Project, groundwater was realized as a potentially viable option (Fichtner and M & E, 2015a). About 30% of the existing boreholes in and around the town area had yields above 5 m 3/h. This is in line with a study that was undertaken in 2010 by the Monitoring and Assessment Division of the DWRM during a National Water Resources Study (Nsubuga et al., 2014). The Lake Victoria and Lake Kyoga basins are among the top three drainage basins with the highest amounts of exploitable groundwater resource. This groundwater potential could partly be owed to the climate, topography, soils and geological formation of the region. The relatively high rains coupled with the relatively flat terrain and wetland systems gives ample time for groundwater recharge. Figure 11: Lake Victoria and Kyoga drainage basins within the region of Busia. (Source: NBI, 2012). 4.7 ANALYSIS OF LAKE VICTORIA WATER LEVEL VARIABILITY Based on lake Victoria water level records as provided by the DWRM, the "Agreed Curve" for Lake Victoria (J. V Sutcliffe et al., 2007) and subsequent analysis in WETSPRO (Willems, 2008) and ECQ (Willems, 1998) hydrological assessment tools, the frequency of occurrence of various extreme water levels (low and high) with respect to the gauge level at Jinja pier was assessed (Figure 12 and Figure 13). Low lake water levels may lead to water shortage that could negatively affect water availability for the project. However, the lowest water level so far registered at Jinja pier is 10.33 m. This corresponds to a return period of about 250 years, Figure 12. Thus, to ensure a continual water supply for the project, the intake level should preferably be located below this observed minimal low water level. Ministry of Water and Environment 38 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project High water levels could lead to flood conditions that may interfere with the operation of the WTP facility given that it will be constructed on to the lake shore. The highest water level so far registered at Jinja pier is 13.35 m. This corresponds to a return period of 10 years (Figure 13). Thus, the design team must ensure that the WTP facility is protected from floods by moving it to higher grounds or raising its foundation while taking the pier level at Jinja as reference. With respect to sustainable environmental flows and requirements of other water users downstream of Lake Victoria, the project will abstract, at maximal, 13,637 m 3/day (0.16 m3/s). This is about 0.04% of the minimal observed (381.88 m³/s) Lake Victoria outflow. Thus, the effect of water withdrawal for the project will not be significant on other water users. Figure 12: Frequency of occurrence of low water levels at Lake Victoria. Figure 13: Frequency of occurrence of high water level at Lake Victoria. Ministry of Water and Environment 39 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project 4.8 LAKE VICTORIA WATER QUALITY ANALYSIS Based on water sample picked at the intake site, Lake Victoria, Majanji Sub County, and sub sequent analysis (see Appendix 2) at the National Water and Sewerage Corporation, Central Laboratory, Bugolobi, Kampala, the following conclusion can be drawn: The Lake Victoria water is not suitable for direct consumption due to high levels of Total Suspended Solids (TSS), bacterial faecal coliform, water turbidity and apparent colour as per the Uganda Drinking Water Standard acceptable levels. However, all the other water quality parameters, including pH, conductivity, BOD, nutrients, etc. are within acceptable limits. The values of TSS, faecal coliform bacteria, turbidity and apparent colour were, respectively, 37 mg/L, 20 CFU/100 mL, 16.4 NTU and 173 PtCo as compared to the acceptable National Standard at, respectively, 0 mg/L, 0 CFU/100 mL, 10 NTU and 15 PtCo. However, based on the design and operating principle of the WTP to be set-up (refer to Fichtner and M&E, 2015a; Fichtner and M&E, 2015c), the above-mentioned water quality issues at Lake Victoria will be transformed to acceptable levels (potable water) as long as the facility is well constructed and operated. 4.9 BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT The role of flora and fauna investigations in Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) is to provide sufficient data to allow a complete identification, prediction and evaluation of potential impacts of proposed developments on the habitat of plants and animals and the environment in general. This is to ensure that that potential impacts, where identified, are avoided or reduced if at all possible. The status of vegetation, mammals, herptiles, birds and butterflies, including their habitats were studied for each of the Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project facility sites. These findings, discussed in the subsequent sub-sections, were incorporated in the Project Impacts and Environmental & Social Management and Monitoring Plan. 4.9.1 VEGETATION In general, the surveyed nine sites had 117 plant species recorded from 96 genera and 41 families. The plant species recorded were representative of four plant life forms, with respective individual species for each category as follows in a descending order of dominance: shrubs (46); herbs (32); trees (20); grasses (14); and five species for climbers. The plants occurred in different habitat types such as bushy vegetation, fallow lands, scrubland and the Cyperus-Vossia-Phragmites dominated marshes close to the Lake. There were no species of conservation concern as per the IUCN Red List. However, two invasive plant species were recorded, namely: Senna spectabilis and Lantana camara. The invasive plants displace native species through altered recruitments in natural ecosystems, and their spread is often triggered by disturbances in the ecological systems. Ministry of Water and Environment 40 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Plate 1: Lantana camara and Sodom apple (Solanum incarnum) dominating the vegetation at the proposed WTP in Maduwa A village, Majanji sub-county 4.9.2 BUTTERFLIES A total of 29 species grouped into 16 genera were identified. These were distributed among the 160 total specimens collected. The butterflies were further grouped into four families: 7 were Lycaenidae; 66 Pieridae; 61 Nymphilidae; and 26 Papilionidae. The 29-species identified in the project key facility sites represent about 2.3% of Ugandan known butterfly species. From all the sites surveyed, the intake and WTP sites at Majanji Sub County had the highest abundance and diversity of butterflies. On the other hand, the reservoir site at Dabani Sub County Headquarters had the least abundance. This low abundance could be attributed to anthropogenic activities that has greatly altered their habitat, hence reduction in their biodiversity. However, there were no species of conservation concern as per the IUCN Red List. 4.9.3 HERPETOFAUNA Fifty-one amphibian individuals belonging to five species (i.e. Amietophrynus kisolensis, Amietophrynus maculatus, Amietophrynus garmani, Ptychadena mascareniensis and Ptychadena anchietae), two families and two genera were recorded. However, the amphibians were recorded in only four of the eight surveyed sites i.e. the water intake, water treatment plant, faecal sludge treatment plant and alternative faecal sludge treatment plant. There was no significant difference in terms of species richness and abundance among these four sites as all sites had almost the same number of individuals. This is so because all the four sites are found in aquatic habitats though disturbed but provide relatively ideal habitats for amphibians, yet the other sites, especially the water reservoir sites, are found in human habitats that are severely altered with little vegetation cover for amphibians. Ministry of Water and Environment 41 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project A total of six reptilian species (i.e. Agama agama, Lygodactylus gutturalis, agama lionotus, Philothamnus battersbyi, Trachylepsis straita and Varanus niloticus ) belonging to five families and five genera were also recorded in six of the eight sites visited i.e. the water treatment plant, faecal sludge treatment plant, alternative faecal sludge treatment plant and the water reservoir sites. These sites were found within human settlements, farmland, abandoned structures and rocks that are suitable refugia for reptile survival. However, the abundance was low. This could be partly attributed to human disturbance through vegetation clearing during farming, construction and also partly due to man’s negative attitude towards the reptiles. None of the amphibian and reptiles recorded is of conservation concern with regard to IUCN Red List of threatened species. This is because the herpetiles recorded, though low in the project area, are abundant and wide spread in the immediate surroundings. In fact, the five and six amphibian and reptilian species recorded are far low when compared against the 98 and 150 amphibian and reptile species found in Uganda. Furthermore, the herpetofauna of the project area is very low when compared to the 25 and 58 amphibian and reptile species of Kakagame Forest reserve, a tropical forest found in Kenya and neighbours Uganda in the East. This low herpetofauna diversity of the project area can be attributed to the fact that most of the land within Busia project area is under farmland or any other intense human activity that does not allow high abundance of herpetiles. 4.9.4 AVIFAUNA A total of 319 individuals belonging to 41 species were recorded. However, this species record is far low when compared against Uganda’s 1,007 bird species. Furthermore, a value of 41 avian species is still low when compared to the 367 bird species found in Kakagame Forest reserve, Kenya. This disparity can be attributed to the fact that most of the project sites are found in altered habitats with intense human activities such as farming and settlements. Comparison with the IUCN Red List of threatened species indicates that none of the birds recorded is of conservation concern. 4.9.5 MAMMALS Twelve mammal species were recorded in the project area. These included one shrew species (African Giant Shrew), one species of hedgehog (Four-toed Hedgehog), six rodent species (Hinde’s Rock Rat, African Grass Rat, East African Mole Rat, Striped Grass Mouse, Pygmy Mouse, and Natal Multimammate Mouse), three bat species (Angolan Free-tailed Bat, Common Slit-faced Bat, and Banana Bat) and one species of a large sized mammal (Hippopotamus). The Intake, WTP and Majanji reservoir recorded the highest number of species (nine each), while FSTP option two, Dabani and Masaba reservoir recorded the lowest number of species (five each). FSTP option one recorded six mammal species. One threatened species (the Hippopotamus) was recorded at the Intake and WTP sites. The Intake and WTP lie in the Lake Victoria basin and it’s known to be rich in biodiversity although natural habitats are increasingly under threat from human settlements. The low species counts at the reservoir and FSTP sites can be attributed to increased farming activities in that the original habitats have been greatly modified. Ministry of Water and Environment 42 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project The unthreatened species found at the sites belong to genus Crocidura, order Rodentia, Bat families and are known to inhabit all vegetation types at all altitudes and have a diverse diet including animal foods, roots, fruits and seeds. Their habitats overlap those occupied by human beings and are therefore very adaptable species, thus their presence in the project area. When mammal species richness in the project area is compared to that in the closest protected areas of Mount Elgon and Kidepo, it is comparatively low as over 50 mammal species are found in the protected areas compared to 12 in the project area. Uganda is reported to have 330 mammal species; the project area therefore has low species richness due to the degraded nature of the habitats that support species that are adaptable to modified habitats. 4.10 CONCLUSION The impacts of the project on its forage ground are readily foreseeable and can be mitigated as discussed in Appendix 5. There are no IUCN red listed flora in the project area. However, there are two natural habitats. i. The Lake Victoria water body at the intake site; and ii. The permanent wetland system at the vicinity of the WTP site. As a minimum, the World Bank operational policy, OP 4.04 – Natural Habitats, requires that natural habitats be protected and maintained. The WTP site is not in but at the vicinity of a wetland system. Furthermore, the site is already converted given that it contains an abandoned intake works and crops, in addition to being bordered by an army barracks, a police barracks, a docking facility for boats, a fish factory and a communal fish cleaning and storage facility ( Error! Reference source not found. to Error! Reference source not found.). The intake works will be setup at least 300 m in the lake. The intake main (piping) has been designed in a way that it will access the lake through the already converted route to the docking site. Thus, no intake works will pass through the wetland. However, apart from location, intake velocity is a primary factor that affects the impingement of fish and other aquatic biota (EPA, 2000; EPRI, 2000). For most locations, a design intake velocity requirement should restrict the through-screen velocity to 0.15 m/s. Nonetheless, intake structures located at least 50 meters from the littoral zone of a lake or reservoir is not subject to a velocity standard. In general, most of the project footprint is on land. We do not expect fish to be impacted because there is already a water intake works in the project area. There was no reported fish kills due to water abstraction. However, fish and other biota will only be impacted only and only if the project discharges WTP effluents directly into source water. Nonetheless, these have been addressed in the ESMP. Ministry of Water and Environment 43 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Plate 2: Footpath and Crops at the WTP site. Plate 3: Cattle grazing at the shores of L. Victoria near the Intake Plate 4: some of the trees at the vicinity of the Plate 5: Homesteads at the vicinity of the WTP WTP site. site. 4.11 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT SITES 4.11.1 RAW WATER INTAKE SITE The intake facility will be installed in Lake Victoria at Majanji Village, Majanji Sub County ( Error! Reference source not found.). The installation point is privately owned, and the process of compensating the land owners is underway, also a permit for water abstraction will have to be acquired from the Directorate of Water Resource Management of the MWE. Soils are mainly brown lateritic gravel, with brown chalky material in some areas. The consistency of soils being medium dense. Key land use activities at the shore comprise subsistence farming (Cassava, Zea mays and sweet potato gardens) and settlements. A footpath exists for accessing the shoreline but a road will have to be constructed to access the intake point and WTP. The vegetation at the intake is dominated by the shrub Lantana camara with a few other specises like Fragmites at the shoreline of L. Victoria Ministry of Water and Environment 44 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project The site has been devoid of vegetation due to human disturbance especially cultivation of crops, there no species of ecological importance was observed. Plate 6: Fishing birds at the proposed intake site at Lake Victoria, Maduwa A village, Majanji Sub County. Ministry of Water and Environment 45 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Plate 7: Land use at the shore of Lake Victoria. 4.11.2 WATER TREATMENT PLANT (WTP) SITE The WTP facility will be constructed adjacent to the project’s water source at Majanji Village, Majanji Sub County (Error! Reference source not found.). The land at site is privately owned by the local community and the process of compensating them is already in the pipeline. The site is accessible by footpath going through homesteads and gardens. It is characterized by a bushy vegetation and scrubland dominated by Lantana camara and Soddom apple (solanum incarnum). Key land use activities in the neighbourhood comprise fishing, subsistence farming (Zea mays and Manihot esculenta, sweet potatoes) and settlements (homesteads) and a beach. Key biodiversity comprise of scattered trees including Grivelia robusta, Makhamia lutea, Fruit trees (Mangifera indica, Jackfruit). However, none of the species is of conservation concern with respect to the IUCN Red List. Ministry of Water and Environment 46 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Plate 8: Proposed WTP site in Majanji village, Majanji Sub County. (GPS coordinate: N00014’38.4” E 033059’17.2”), as viewed from the lake shore. Ministry of Water and Environment 47 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Google Map showing the location of the proposed WTP site for Busia WSS Ministry of Water and Environment 48 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project 4.11.3 RESERVOIR SITES 4.11.3.1 RESERVOIR SITE 1 Reservoir 1 located in Namundiri "A" Village, Majanji Parish, Majanji Sub County ( Error! Reference source not found.) has been adapted in that it already exists and will be connected directly to the clear water tank at the WTP. The land at site is government owned (Uganda Peoples Defence Forces), in addition to being accessible by road. Soils consists of brown lateritic gravel with no visible elevated groundwater. The site is generally flat with fallow/grazing land that transcends into bushy vegetation. Key land use activities in the neighbourhood comprise livestock grazing and settlements, including homesteads and a community fish handling facility (cleaning, sorting and storage). There are 18 (eighteen) plant species (Panicum spp, Hyparrhenia, Cycodon dactylon, Lantana camara, Ocimum gratissimum, Solanum incanum, Aspilia spp, etc.), 25 (twenty-five) butterfly species (Graphium Colonna, Danaus chryssipus, Colias electro pseudo heacte, Belanois aurota, Belanois rubrosignata, Eicochrysops hippochrates, etc.), 4 (four) reptilian species (Agama agama, Agama lionotus, Lygodactylus gutturalis, and Trachylepsis straita), 5 (five) bird species (African fire finch, African pied wagtail, Black-kite, Cattle egret and Mourning dove), and 9 (nine) mammalian species (Atelerix albiventris, Aethomys hindei, Arvicanthis niloticus, Tachyoryctes splendens, Mus minutoides, Mastomys natalensis). No amphibians were seen at the site perhaps due to the built-up environment. Additionally, none of the species of flora and fauna recorded is of conservation concern with regard to the IUCN Red List Ministry of Water and Environment 49 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Plate 9: Reservoir 1 at Majanji Parish, Majanji Sub County. (GPS coordinate: UTM 36N 0609923 E 0029247 N); to be adapted to the Busia Water Supply Project. 4.11.3.2 RESERVOIR SITE 2 Reservoir 2, to be located at Daha Village, Buhehe Sub County ( Error! Reference source not found.), will be constructed on 0.289 acres of land that is privately owned by the family of the late Busungu Birenge. The site is generally flat and is accessible by road. It is characterised by brown laterite soils with no visible elevated groundwater. The site is currently being utilized for crop farming. Key land use activities in the neighbourhood comprise crop farming (Zea mays, Sorghum bicolor, Manihot esculenta, and Phaseolus vulgalis) and settlements (homesteads). Key biodiversity comprise 8 (eight) plant species ( Cycodon dactylon, Bidens pilosa, Panicum maximum, etc.), 7 (seven) butterfly species (Junonia chorimene, Junonia oenone, Ypthima albida, Graphium antheus, Catopsilia florella, etc.), 1 (one) reptiles species (Lygodactylus gutturalis), 5 (five) bird species (African fire finch, African pied wagtail, Blue-napped mouse bird, Lemon dove, and Mourning dove), and 5 (five) mammalian species (Arvicanthis niloticus, Tachyoryctes splendens, Mus minutoides, Mastomys natalensis, and Pipistrellus nanus ). No amphibians were recorded and none of the species of flora and fauna recorded is of conservation concern with regard to the IUCN Red List. Ministry of Water and Environment 50 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Plate 10: Proposed site for reservoir 2 and the booster station. Daha Village, Buhasaba Parish, Buhehe Sub County (GPS coordinate: UTM 36N 0612546 E 00406655 N). 4.11.3.3 RESERVOIR SITE 3 Reservoir 3, to be located in Dabani East Village, Dabani Sub County, will be constructed on 0.537 acres of government owned land (Dabani Sub County Headquarters). The site, generally flat, is characterised by brown laterite soils with no visible elevated groundwater and is accessible by road. It is characterized by fallow land that transcends into bushy vegetation. Key land use in the surrounding comprise crop farming (Ipomoea batatas and Zea mays interspersed with trees of Eucalyptus grandis and Grevillea robusta) and settlements (home steads). Site biodiversity comprise plant species of Flueggea spp, Tithonia diversifolia and grasses of Cynodon dactylon, Brachiaria brizantha and Panicum maximum. Other biodiversity comprises 3 (three) butterfly species (Junonia chorimene, Junonia oenone and Eicochrysops hippochrates ), 4 (four) reptilian species (Agama agama, Agama lionotus, Lygodactylus gutturalis, and Trachylepsis straita), 5 (five) bird species (African pied wagtail, Black-kite, Lemon dove, Lizard buzzard, and Mourning dove), and 5 (five) mammalian species (Pipistrellus nanus, Mastomys natalensis, Mus minutoides, Tachyoryctes splendens and Arvicanthis niloticus). No amphibians were seen and none of the species of flora and fauna recorded is of conservation concern with regard to the IUCN Red List. Ministry of Water and Environment 51 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Plate 11:: Proposed site for reservoir 3. Location: Dabani Sub County Headquarters (GPS coordinate: UTM 36N 0618235 E 0049811 N). 4.11.4 WATER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION MAINS The pipe system to be employed is subdivided into raw water mains, treated water transmission mains and distribution mains. The raw water mains, connecting the intake system to the WTP, will be extended 300 m into the Lake Victoria. The treated water transmission main will be laid along road reserves (government land), specifically on the road connecting Busia Town to Majanji Sub County. However, the land belonging to the UPDF at the water intake, WTP and Dabani Sub County (see Error! Reference source not found. for details) will be acquired. Soils along these road reserves are typically laterite and gleysols, with gleysols being in wetland areas. Key land use activities along the road reserves is crop farming, bushland and a few buildings (kiosks). Occurrence of elevated groundwater levels can be seen in the wetland areas and at points where streams flow close to the road or where they cross roads. The distribution networks will also be laid along road reserves within Busia Municipality and the various informal settlements to be supplied with water. The soils are equally laterite and gleysols. Key land use activities along the road reserves comprise settlements and cropland. 4.11.5 FAECAL SLUDGE TREATMENT PLANT (FSTP) SITE The FSTP site, located at Okame-Abochet Village, in Buteba sub-county, is on 2.0 acres of land bought by the Municipality from Adome Philip. The site, accessible by road, has a mild gentle terrain that is drained by Okame-Amagoro stream and consists mainly of loam clay soils of loose – stiff consistency. There are no signs of elevated groundwater, in addition to being characterized by bushy vegetation. The nearby settlements are about 200m north of the site. The site is mainly used for animal grazing, collecting of fuelwood and palm leaves for making mats. Ministry of Water and Environment 52 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project The site is dominated by the plant species of Tithonia diversifolia, Acanthus pubescens, Ocimum gratissimum, Leonitis nepetifolia, and palm trees. However, none of these species is of conservation concern with regard to the IUCN Red List. Plate 12: Palm spp at the proposed site Plate 13: Acacia hokii at the proposed FSTP Plate 14: A cow drinking in Okame stream in Plate 15: Piliostigma thonningii at FSTP vicinity of the site Location: Okame-Abochet Village, Mawero Parish, Buteba Sub County (GPS coordinate: N 00 031’19.4” E 034006’48.1” ’19.4” E 034006’50.9”). Ministry of Water and Environment 53 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project 4.12 WATER QUALITY ANALYSIS AT THE FSTP, AT OKAME STREAM Water samples were collected at two different points, one at the discharge point (A2) and downstream of the discharge point (A1), on Okame Stream. The water samples were analyzed at the National Water and Sewerage Corporation, Central Laboratory, Bugolobi, Kampala and the Test Results of the Water Quality Analysis are contained in Appendix 8. The tests were measured against Uganda’s National Standards for Potable Water, which are within WHO standards. Based on the test results showed in the Table below, the following conclusions can be drawn: Parameters Units Okame Stream Busia Okame Stream Uganda National A2 Busia A1 Standards for Potable Water (Discharge Point) (Downstream of A2) Sample No. K895/2018/C/B K894/2018/C/B Bact: Escherichia coli CFU/100mL 635 402 0 Bact: Faecal CFU/100mL 820 700 0 coliforms Cholorophyll ‘a’ µg/L 0.02 0.03 Not specified Colour (apparent) PtCo 109 145 50 Electrical uS/cm 219 221 2500 Conductivity (EC) Nitrate-N Mg/L 0.05 0.08 45 pH (Physical- 7.53 7.51 5.5-8.5 Chemical) Total Nitrogen (TN) Mg/L 4 82 Not specified Total Suspended Mg/L 16 22 0 Solids (TSS) From the above test results, Okame Stream water showed complying physiochemical characteristics with exception of Total Suspended Solids and Colour. In addition, the bacteriological characteristics were also higher than the National Standards. However, all the other water quality parameters, including pH, conductivity, Nitrate concentration, etc. are within acceptable limits. The values of TSS, turbidity and apparent colour may be attributed to agricultural and farming activites indicated in the previous sections describing the current land-use. The faecal coliform bacteria can be attributed to low latrine coverage. The test results show need for catchment management and protection by Busia Local Governments, requiring regulation of agricultural activities along the lake shores. This can be jointly done with MWE and NEMA. Fortunately, the IWMDP will financially support such activities. The IWMDP will also Ministry of Water and Environment 54 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project include activites to sensitize the Communities on sanitation improvement activities to wade of the becteriologcial load on the water. Fortunately, there are no industries along the Okame Stream. Google map showing proposed site for Faecal Sludge Treatment Plant for Busia Municipality in Okame-Abochet Village, Buteba S/C Ministry of Water and Environment 55 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project 5 PUBLIC CONSULTATION AND DISCLOSURE 5.1 RATIONALE It is a prerequisite, for all category B World Bank funded projects, that project affected groups be consulted (refer to the World Bank Policy, OP/BP 4.01 – Environmental Assessment). It is also mandatory that individuals, groups and entities with a stake in any proposed project not only be informed but equally consulted for their views as regards likely impacts and any other concerns pertaining to the proposed project. At the same time, Ugandan laws and regulations also emphasise stakeholder participation in development projects (refer to: The National Environmental Act, CAP 153), Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations and Guidelines. Standard methods, qualitative and quantitative, for rapid collection of public information were employed. These included but not limited to the following: interviews; in-depth interviews; and Focus Group Discussions. Questionnaires guided the consultations. The agenda of the consultations varied depending on the purpose of the meeting. Nonetheless, the agenda included: opening prayer, self-introduction, communication from the Environmentalists (both from the MWE and the consultants), consultants’ dissemination of the purpose of the meeting, consultations and discussions, and closing remarks by the chair. The district level consultation meetings were conducted in English and the community level meetings were conducted in English with a local language translation. During the update of this ESIA report, additional stakeholder consultations were undertaken at Majanji Village in Majanji Sub-County at the Water intake and Treatment Works site, at new site for FSTF in Okame-Abochet Village in Busia Municipality and along the proposed transmission lines. These involved the project host communities, PAPs, local leaders, public servants, and District and Municipal Officials. Details of Public Consultations are given in Appendix 4. Table 24 below shows a summary of Stakeholders concerns. Table 24: Summary of Stakeholders Concerns. Stakeholder Issues of concern Environment Officer, Busia  Emphasize gender issues to contractors to give equal Municipality opportunities to women and men during construction phase.  Need to liaise with UNRA to mark the road reserve where transmission pipes will pass enroute to Busia Municipality from the source.  Regular sensitization of communities and workers on HIV/AIDS  Distribution of condoms at strategic location during construction to reduce STIs.  Need to establish artificial wetland near Okame stream to filter effluents from sewage before reaching the wetland. District Environment Officer, Busia  Sewage should be completely treated before being released into Okame stream.  Sewage treatment will reduce water borne diseases like cholera in Busia. Ministry of Water and Environment 56 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project  Provide employment opportunities to the local community especially unskilled labour.  PAPs should be properly compensated  Provision of safety equipment to workers  Increase in STIs due to migrant labour into the rural communities Community members, Okame-  Unpleasant scent from the sewage treatment Abochet village  Need employment during construction phase  Need to fence off the site to prevent children from accessing it  Connect the village to the electricity line that will supply the facility.  Increase of dust from the trucks felling sewage to the facility. Contractors’ workers. PAPs Maduwa A village, WTP  No construction should commence without compensation  PAPs should also be connected to the piped water scheme as an incentive  Disturbance of sources of income  Employment to the local youth  Extension of utilities like electricity, roads to the village.  Increase in HIV/AIDS due to influx of new people into the area. 5.2 STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS Stakeholders are defined as individuals, groups and entities that are affected by a development activity either directly or indirectly or those that may exert either positive or negative influence on the project. Those that are directly affected are known as primary stakeholders whilst those that are affected indirectly are known as secondary stakeholders. Stakeholders in any project will include individuals, various social groups, formal and informal agencies in the public, private and voluntary sector that includes NGOs/CBOs. The categories of stakeholders that were identified include technocrats at the district, Local Council Authorities at the different levels and residents within the vicinity of the proposed site. At the district headquarters, the technocrats that were consulted included the CAO, ACAO, District Planners, District Environmental Officer, District Water Engineer and District Community Development Officer. The Sub County officials – LCIII Chairpersons, Sub County Chiefs and Community Development Officers of Lumino, Buhehe, Majanji, Dabani, Buteba and Busia Municipality were consulted. At local level, the L.C. 1 Chair Persons of Majanji, Namawumbi B, Tiira, Osapiri, Okamye communities as well as residents within the Project Impacted Area (PIA) were consulted ( Error! Reference source not found. to Error! Reference source not found.). 5.3 STAKEHOLDERS’ VIEWS AND CONCERNS ABOUT THE PROPOSED PROJECT Ministry of Water and Environment 57 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Most of the stakeholders at various levels generally knew about the project and nearly all of them felt that, the water supply project was a good intervention in their area. The District, Municipality and Sub-county local governments had been consulted at almost all the stages of the project development. Findings from the community meetings and focus group discussions established that project affected communities had accepted the project although they were not so sure of the demarcation of the road reserves where the main pipes would pass and whether their private land would not be affected. Most of the meetings held endorsed the project. To those who welcomed the project it was perceived as a source of clean and safe water, as a source of employment and an opportunity to improve the social services like the road network for easy access, improvement of health and the elimination of water borne diseases. Below are some of their sentiments: - “Currently only 30% of the municipal population to access safe water and the project will increase it to 70%... and the project will reduce the water related borne diseases.” Municipal Council meeting. “… We want employment opportunities for our people, so that they can easily support the project….”Local Leader, Majanji meeting. ‘’The project should also start engaging the people early enough together with the local government officials concerned so that, people get prepared to receive the project in their respective communities because in a way, this will help to reduce on the compensation if we work together,’’ Local Leaders meeting at Majanji. Plate 16: Interviewing the Ag. Town Clerk Busia Municipal Council. Ministry of Water and Environment 58 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Plate 17: Meeting with PAPs at the proposed new intake site, Maduwa A village, Majanji sub- county. Plate 18: FGD with women at the proposed FSTP site in Okame-Abochet village. Ministry of Water and Environment 59 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project 5.3.1 COMMUNITY POSITION ON THE LAND Originally, a section of the community was not happy with the project but after engagements and council discussions, the issues have been resolved and the project has been embraced taking into account the benefits from the project. This is confirmed through engagements by the Sub-county officials (communication with Town Clek Busia Mr. Kateba 0772496926 and Sub County Chief Mr. Ojiambo James 0751820784). It is said that, the Sub-County Council sat and approved the project considering its many positive impacts and chronic water problems in the area. 5.3.2 TRAFFIC AND OTHER MINOR ACCIDENTS The residents of the area anticipated that traffic accidents are likely to escalate during construction phase. This is because heavy truck drivers tend to be very fast while ferrying heavy construction materials and also raise dust. This traffic may particularly pose a risk to the children and other residents from the community who are not used to heavy traffic volumes. Therefore, any kind of reckless driving may spark off accidents. As a mitigation measure, some stakeholders contended that drivers should be cautioned about over speeding. This being a rural area they should be extra careful and recommend that there should be community sensitization about the on-going project so that precaution is taken. 5.3.3 INCREASE OF DISEASES AND PROMISCUITY The stakeholders raised concern about the likely escalation of HIV/AIDS and STDs in the PIA and during the construction of the Busia Water Supply. They noted that the project workers who are usually unaccompanied youth and men will come to their area to work and might exploit the women and girls in the community due to high poverty levels in the PIA; the women are girls often give in get money from the men. “We might have an increase of the HIV infection in the area because of influx of people coming with the Contractor. There is need to sensitize communities about HIV,” Municipal Environmental Officer. Based on this it was agreed that communities and all the people working on the project be cautioned to be sensitive on the issues concerning HIV & AIDS and promiscuity. The workers should follow their ethical code of conduct; while the Contractor should work together with the local authority should sensitize people in the project area about HIV/AIDS and STDs and should offer basic HIV/AIDS prevention services like condom distribution and treatment of STI infections to the workers. 5.3.4 PHYSICAL CULTURAL SITES From the field visits and the stakeholder engagements held in the different project sites no graves or cultural or archaeological sites were seen during the detailed ESIA field trip or reported by the different stakeholders. However, the Contractor should take precautionary measures during excavations just in case there are chance finds. The Chance Finds procedure is elaborated in Chapter 9 below. Ministry of Water and Environment 60 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project 5.4 CONCLUSION The community and the key stakeholders have expressed support for the project since they expect it to accrue benefits such as provision of reliable safe and clean water supply in Busia Municipal Council and parts of other benefiting sub counties of Majanji, Lumino, Buhehe, Buteba and Dabani. The project will also promote development and employment creation for the community members during construction and access to safe and clean water. Despite the anticipated benefits, the project will have some negative social and economic impacts. It is recommended that the Contractor implements all the mitigation measures suggested in the ESIA report. To ensure that the project is managed perfectly to a logical conclusion, the Contractor should make the necessary budgetary provisions to ensure that mitigation commitments in the ESIA as well as in the RAP and monitoring programs stated herein are effectively implemented. In addition, public consultation and sensitization should continue during the disclosure period, in order to capture any other issues that could have been left out during the consultation exercise. It is further recommended that the MWE/ Busia District Local Government and/or Busia Municipality write to the PIA institutions formally to request for land for the project infrastructure. 5.5 DISCLOSURE OF THE ESIA According to Ugandan laws and the World Bank Safeguards Policies, it is a requirement for projects of this type to be publically disclosed. This is to allow stakeholders to have an input in the implementation of the project and influence the project design and reduce likely risks and impacts. This creates transparency and accountability for implementing stakeholders. The ESIA and RAP team’s consultation with the communities and key stakeholders were part of the disclosure process. The ESIA report will be submitted to NEMA for review. In turn NEMA will deposit it in public places like the district, municipality, public libraries, and invite the public to make comments. The comments will be collected and analysed by NEMA. If the comments are very serious NEMA will call a public hearing. The views of the public will be received and passed on to the Client to incorporate in the final ESIA. Once the final ESIA has incorporated the views of the public it will become a legal instrument when the ESIA certificate is issued. As part of The World Bank Policy on Disclosure of Information, the cleared ESIA report will be put on its Web site for public information. Ministry of Water and Environment 61 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project 6 ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES 6.1 SITING AND DESIGN ALTERNATIVES 6.1.1 WTP SITING AND DESIGN ALTERNATIVES 6.1.1.1 ALTERNATIVE SITE 1 – SELECTED SITE The location of the new site is given in Error! Reference source not found. and its detailed description is given in Section 4.11.2. The site is suitable for a WTP design given that the fairly steep terrain will avail gravity flow between treatment system components, thus minimizing operational energy cost. This site is privately owned and compensation of land owners is on-going, the site was selected because the previous one (UPDF Barracks) could not be obtained by the Municipality as the Owners (UPDF) had earmarked another project to be implemented at the same location. 6.1.1.2 ALTERNATIVE SITE 2 – REJECTED SITE Alternative site 2, Error! Reference source not found., is located in the same Parish and Sub County as alternate site 1. It is accessible by road and is privately owned, thus will have to be bought. It consists of brown lateritic gravel with no elevated groundwater. The site is characterized by low-lying grass. Main land use activities in the neighbourhood comprise bushland, crop farming, and settlements, including homesteads, a beach and a fish factory. The generally flat terrain implies extra energy will be required in moving water between treatment system components. Plate 19: Proposed alternate WTP set-up site 2. Ministry of Water and Environment 62 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Majanji Parish, Majanji Sub County (GPS coordinate: UTM 36N 0618817 E 0028201 N), as viewed from the lake shore. None of the species of flora and fauna recorded, except H. amphibious (hippopotamus), is of conservation concern in that they are of Least Concern category with respect to the IUCN Red List. In general, the decision for selection of the preferred site was based on anticipated cost of acquisition (short term) and higher cost of operation (long term) in favour of Site 1, at the UPDF Barracks. 6.1.2 FSTP SITING AND DESIGN ALTERNATIVES 6.1.2.1 ALTERNATIVE SITE 1 – SELECTED The new site, accessible by road, is shown in Plate 10 below. It consists of a mix of inorganic lean clay soils and fat clay soils of loose - very stiff consistency. The site, is owned by Busia Municipality and land land title has been appended, is generally mild in slope that gently extends towards a valley bottom that is drained by Okame -Abochet River. Crop farming is practiced as a key land use, with Zea mays (maize), Brassica oleracea (cabbages) and Solanum lycopersicum (tomatoes) as key crops. The nearest settlement is about 500 m off the site. Occurrence of elevated groundwater can be seen as one approaches the valley bottom, thus increased risk of groundwater contamination. No natural wetland bordering the river to be utilized for effluent discharge, thus direct discharge of phosphorous into receiving water will occur. It is also characterized by weedy species of Cynodon dactylon, Brachiaria brizantha, Cymbopogon nardus, Panicum maximum and enclaves of the shrubby Tithonia diversifolia. However, none of the species of flora and fauna recorded is of conservation concern with regard to the IUCN Red List. Plate 20: Proposed new site for Busia FSTP at Okame-Abochet village, Buteba S/C Ministry of Water and Environment 63 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project 6.1.2.2 ALTERNATIVE SITE 2 – REJECTED The location of this site is given in Error! Reference source not found. below. The site consists of a mix of inorganic lean clay soils and fat clay soils of loose - very stiff consistency. The site, privately owned and accessible by road, is generally moderate in slope that gently extends towards a valley bottom. Crop farming is practiced as key land use at the vicinity, with scattered settlements at least 300 m away from the site. Solo River, at the valley bottom drains the site. Occurrence of elevated groundwater can be seen as one approaches the valley bottom, thus increased risk of groundwater contamination. No natural wetland bordering the river and the FSTP site, thus direct discharge of effluent leading to increased phosphorous loads in the receiving water. The site is characterized by a bushy vegetation dominated by Tithonia diversifolia, Acanthus pubescens, Ocimum gratissimum, Leonitis nepetifolia and Afromomum anguistifolium , with some Acacia polycantha trees. However, none of the species of flora and fauna recorded is of conservation concern with regard to the IUCN Red List. A key challenge is that the neighboring communities have rejected the FSTP in their village (see Section 5.3.1 for details). Therefore, this site was not selected. Plate 21: Proposed alternate site 2 for the FSTP. Namawumbi Village (B), Busia Parish, Dabani Sub County at GPS coordinate: UTM 36N 0619220 E 0053204 N. 6.1.2.3 ALTERNATIVE SITE 3 – REJECTED Ministry of Water and Environment 64 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project The location of this site is given in Plate 7 and its detailed description is given in Section 4.4.5. No elevated groundwater, has clay soils which make effluent penetration difficult, thus minimal risk of groundwater contamination; 100% private land, thus must be bought. The site has a natural wetland bordering the stream, which would be used in the tertiary treatment of the effluent from the FSTP. The area is sparely populated. The nearest residents are 900m away. The recommended nearest distance for houses should be 700m. In general, the site is suited for the FSTP and there was no compliant from residents. This site was chosen as the best alternative for the location of FSTP at first but was rejected since it requires compensation for the land. 6.1.3 WTP TECHNOLOGY SELECTION ALTERNATIVES The type of treatment operation performed at a drinking WTP and treatment chemicals used depend largely on the contaminants present in the source water (EPA, 2011a). An analysis of the source water (Lake Victoria) quality indicate elevated levels of total suspended solids (TSS), faecal coliforms, turbidity, and apparent colour with respect to the Uganda Drinking Water Standard (see Section 4.8 for details). To transform the source water to a potable form, the key processes of coagulation/flocculation, sedimentation, filtration, and disinfection will have to be employed. Below is an analysis of the key technologies that could be adopted in the key processes of coagulation/flocculation, filtration and disinfection. 6.1.3.1 COAGULATION/FLOCCULATION Coagulants and flocculants that are added to raw water include metal salts (e.g. aluminium sulphate/chloride and ferrous sulphate/chloride) and polyelectrolytes. Below is an analysis of available options. Aluminium sulphate is the preferred option. Table 25: Technology analysis of coagulants/flocculants. Aluminium/Ferrous sulphate/chloride Polyelectrolytes Pros Offer the lowest price per unit weight and are Effective over a wider pH range than widely available, thus most commonly used; inorganic coagulants; can be applied at insoluble at normal drinking water treatment lower doses; produce smaller volumes of operating conditions, thus very little metal is more concentrated, rapidly settling floc; carried into finished product; generally, settles floc formed from use of a properly readily. selected polymer will be more resistant to shear, resulting in less carryover and a cleaner effluent; Cons Require corrosion-resistant storage and feed Several times more expensive in price per equipment; may alter the pH of water since unit weight than inorganic coagulants; they consume alkalinity, thus need for liming; selection of the proper polymer for the sludge exhibits poor compaction traits, application requires considerable jar ranging from 0.5 to 2 percent solids testing under simulated plant conditions, (ASCE/AWWA, 1997), thus difficult to followed by pilot or plant-scale trials; All dewater; sludge is biologically inert (inorganic) polymers must be approved for potable with little organic content and have little value water use by regulatory agencies. as a fertilizer/soil conditioner; large volumes Ministry of Water and Environment 65 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project of settled floc must be disposed of in an environmentally acceptable manner. 6.1.3.2 FILTRATION After solids settling, the source water passes through filters to remove finer particles and metals. Various types of filter media may be used by WTPs, including permeable fabric and porous beds (EPA, 2011a; EPA, 1995). Table 26 below is an analysis of the types of filters used by WTPs. In general, the multimedia filter should be considered as a first option with the rapid sand filter as a second and last option given their suitability as summarized in Table 26. For the project, the selected option is rapid sand filtration. Table 26: Technology analysis of filter types. Filter type Characteristic Pros/cons Slow sand filter Consists of a bed of fine sand Not suitable for high turbidity source waters; above a gravel layer and trap microorganisms that break down algae, underdrain system; used for bacteria, and other organic matter. low-flow rates. The source water for the project contains up to 16.4 NTU of turbidity. This is above the Uganda Drinking Water Standard of 10 NTU. The use of slow sand filters in the project will imply increase in dosing levels of alum so as to alleviate turbidity, with cost implications. Rapid sand Consists of a bed of sand above Gravity filtration is the most widely used form filter several layers of gravel in of water filtration in many countries. However, varying sizes. in rapid gravity filtration the particulate impurities are removed in or on the media, thus causing the filter to clog after a period. Clogged filters are cleaned by backwashing. Pressure filter Similar to rapid sand filters but Pressure filters have been found to offer lower the operation is housed within installation and operation costs in small a cylindrical tank and the water filtration plants. However, they are generally passes through the filter while somewhat less reliable than gravity filters. under pressure generated by a Their use is mainly confined to the treatment pump rather than by gravity. of water for industrial purposes. Diatomaceous Consists of a layer of Most suitable for low turbidity and low earth filter diatomaceous earth above a bacterial count source water; Coagulants and septum or filter element. filter aids are required for effective virus removal. The source water for the project contains up to 16.4 NTU and 20 CFU of, respectively, turbidity and bacterial faecal coliforms. These are above the Uganda Drinking Water Standards of, respectively, 10 NTU and 0 CFU. The use of diatomaceous earth Ministry of Water and Environment 66 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Filter type Characteristic Pros/cons filter in the project will imply increase in dosing levels of alum and chlorine, with cost implications. Multimedia Consists of layers of various Enhances the removal of tastes, odours, and filter sizes of gravel, high-density organic substances. Thus, lowering the garnet, sand, and anthracite amount of alum to be employed. However, coal. frequent backwashing may be required to remove clogs. Membrane Include ultrafilters and Designed to remove particulates smaller than filters microfilters; use pressure as 10 micrometers; WTPs using membrane the driving force. separation are typically smaller plants (serving less than 50,000 people) (EPA, 2011a), thus cannot be employed in the project with an ultimate year population of 186,295. 6.1.3.3 DISINFECTION Historically, chlorine was the disinfectant used, but more recently other chemicals such as chlorine dioxide, chloramines, and ozone have been used to purify water. Non-chemical methods of disinfection include heat and radiation (e.g. ultraviolet light (UV)). Table 27 below is an analysis of the key options that could be employed in the project. The application of UV disinfection for source water treatment is limited because turbidity and suspended solids that can render it ineffective (EPA, 1999c). Thus, UV has not been analyzed for the project. As can be seen from Table 27, ozone, the most efficient disinfectant, is not a persistent disinfectant, thus unsafe water consumption can occur in case of recontamination along transmission/distribution lines and reservoirs. It is also difficult to fulfil the legal limit for the formation of bromate during the process of ozonation, thus most WTPs tend not to employ ozonation. Chlorine and chloramines are more effective in secondary disinfection in comparison to chlorine dioxide (Less persistent chemical). Thus, chlorine dioxide may not be suitable for the project given the extent of piping systems. Lastly, though the combined residual from chloramines lasts longer than chlorine residuals, chloramines are not as effective as other germicidal agents. In general, chlorine is the key form of disinfectant employed in Uganda. This is similar to the US, a developed country, with up to 80% of WTPs employing free chlorine (EPA, 2011a). Ministry of Water and Environment 67 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Table 27: Technology analysis of disinfection types. Criteria Disinfectant Chlorine Chloramines Chlorine dioxide Ozone Persistency Persistent chemical (used locally Persistent chemical (used locally Less persistent chemical Non-persistent chemical (used and for transport across long and for transport across long (used locally and for locally at production plants). distances to the final consumers). distances). transport across long distances). Oxidant Chloramine > Chlorine > Chlorine dioxide > Ozone demand rate Disinfection Ozone > Chlorine dioxide> Chlorine > Chloramine efficiency NB: efficiency order can be changed by local conditions e.g. disinfectant consumption rate, biofilm protection, etc. Disinfection More than 500 by-products Nearly no halogenated organic Nearly no halogenated Nearly no halogenated organic by-products identified that are formed by by-products formed; negligible organic by-products; by-products; significant reaction reaction with organic matter; most reaction with organic matter, significant reaction with with organic matter leading to products are halogenated (Cl, Br, I) except halogen transfer to organic matter leading to no halogen transfer; some organics; most relevant organic nitrogen amines; some no halogen transfer; some halogenated by-products halogenated by-products are halogenated organic by- halogenated organic by- formed with excess of chlorine Trihalomethanes, Haloacetic acids, products formed with trace of products formed with used or chlorine formed in-situ; Haloacetonitriles, Haloketones, and chlorine or chlorine in excess; excess of chlorine used or main halogen by-product is Haloaldehydes; Trihalomethanes Ammonia is formed if used in chlorine formed in-situ. bromate; it’s difficult to fulfil the are regulated in Europe; Both excess, thus nitrite formed from legal limit for its formation, thus Trihalomethanes and Haloacetic bacterial oxidation of ammonia. many WTPs have replaced the Acids are regulated in the US. ozonation step. Ministry of Water and Environment 68 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project 6.1.4 FSTP TECHNOLOGY SELECTION ALTERNATIVES A number of domestic wastewater treatment technologies exist. These technologies tend to employ a combination of physical and biological techniques, in addition to being tailored to small or large- scale Person Equivalent (PE). Given that the project is targeted to a municipality (i.e. medium to large PE) in a developing country, a number of low cost treatment techniques could be employed, including activated sludge system, waste stabilization ponds, aerated lagoon system, and constructed wetlands. Reliable energy supply is a challenge in developing countries, Uganda inclusive, thus energy intensive wastewater treatment systems (see Table 28) such as activated sludge and aerated lagoons may not be sustainably operated. Waste stabilization ponds and constructed wetlands could be opted for given that they are low energy-based systems. Both waste stabilization ponds and constructed wetlands are simple to operate and have low maintenance cost, thus tailored to developing countries. However, constructed wetlands are poor in removing phosphorus, unless special materials are incorporated in the substrate. On the other hand, waste stabilization ponds encourage leaching (groundwater contamination in zones with elevated water level) and are not all that good in removing suspended solids and phosphorous. In general, waste stabilization ponds may not be the best option for the project given the elevated groundwater level at the various alternate sites (see Section 4.11.5). Constructed wetlands, vertical flow (VF) systems in particular, can be constructed with impervious materials, the challenge is that they are poor in removing phosphorous, thus they need to discharge into a natural wetland system prior to effluents accessing any receiving water body or include a phosphorus removel media to treat the effluent before discharging into a water body Ministry of Water and Environment 69 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Table 28: Technology analysis of applicable FSTP types. Criteria Activated sludge Waste stabilization Aerated lagoon Constructed wetlands (hybrid system ponds system system) Plant BOD removal Good (70 – 90%) Good (up to 95%) Good (80 to 90%) Good (up to 80%) performance FC removal Fair Good Good Good SS removal Good (90%) Fair Fair Good (up to 90 - 95%) Helminth removal Poor Good Fair Good Virus removal Poor Good Good Good Total N removal Good (70 – 80%) Good (up to 80%) Fair Good (up to 80%) Total P removal Good (80%) Fair (up to 50%) Poor Poor Prevention of groundwater Good Poor Good Good in VF systems; poor in leaching HF systems Economic Simple and cheap construction Poor Good Fair Fair in VF systems; good in HF factors systems Simple operation Poor Good Poor Good Land requirement Good Poor Fair Poor Maintenance costs Poor Good Poor Good Energy demand Poor Good Poor Good Sludge removal costs Fair Good Fair Fair Adapted from Arthur 1983, EPA 2002, Korkusuz 2004, IUPWARE 2012, and Youbin undated. Ministry of Water and Environment 70 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project 6.2 THE “NO PROJECT” ALTERNATIVE PROJECT JUSTIFICATION 6.2.1 KEY BENEFITS OF THE “NO PROJECT” OPTION a. The water resource potential of the proposed water supply source, Lake Victoria, would remain unchanged as water will not be extracted. b. Short-term impacts such as noise, dust generation, vibrations, etc., emanating from construction activities would be avoided. c. The loss of the relatively small amounts of agricultural land to the construction of water treatment works, faecal sludge treatment works, and storage reservoirs would be avoided. d. Temporary inconveniences emanating from construction activities within urban areas such as temporary road closure for pipeline crossings, would be avoided. e. The limited odour nuisance associated with well managed Faecal Sludge Treatment Plants would be avoided. f. The health risks associated with handling of harmful water treatment chemicals would be avoided. g. The associated dangers of releasing of wastewater directly into receiving water in case of treatment system failures would be avoided. 6.2.2 KEY BENEFITS OF IMPROVED WATER SUPPLY IF PROJECT IS IMPLEMENTED a. Easy access to potable water within homesteads at various levels – stand posts, yard taps and house connections; b. Reduction in incidences of diarrheal and other water borne diseases; this leads to reduction in mortality and morbidity, especially of children; c. Improvement in hygiene and sanitation from increased use of hand washing, personal hygiene and environmental sanitation; d. Reduction in hours spent searching for and fetching water from distant sources which would significantly increase the time allowed for other activities; this is expected to lead to better livelihood for women and the girl child, who are traditionally, responsible for fetching water; e. Reduction in domestic violence and abuse of women as people in the homestead compete for the little potable water; f. Reduction incidences of promiscuity which are often carried out in the guise of fetching water, some involving children; this leads to incidences of child abuse, domestic violence and early pregnancies; g. Possibility of improving the quality of life in the poor neighbourhoods of the town where the most vulnerable people live; these areas include Custom Road "A" Village, Central Ward and Eastern Division. The project will offer pro-poor preferential tariffs to these communities; h. Cleaner and more conducive environment for urban activities such as sports, markets, public places, etc.; i. Higher quality hotels, restaurants and entertainment places since the developers can erect and maintain high quality toilets; j. Employment opportunities at all stages of the project – from construction, operation and marketing of the services; this leads to increased skills transfers to the community; k. Increased revenue to the local authority and the country in general through the collection of taxes. l. Ministry of Water and Environment 71 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project 6.2.3 KEY BENEFITS OF IMPROVED SANITATION FACILITIES IF PROJECT IS IMPLEMENTED a. Reduced incidences of diarrheal and other water borne diseases; this leads directly to lower rates of mortality and morbidity, especially of children; b. Greater school attendance by the girl children since they are more comfortable with cleaner and safer toilets; this leads to increased gender awareness and improvement; c. Reduced costs for collection and disposal of faecal and other matter from homesteads; this leads to improved environmental sanitation and its attendant benefits; d. Cleaner and more conducive environment for urban activities such as sports, markets, public places, etc.; e. Higher quality hotels, restaurants and entertainment places since the developers can erect and maintain high quality toilets; f. Employment opportunities at all stages of the project – from construction, operation and marketing of the services; this leads to increased skills transfers to the community; g. Increased revenue to the local authority and the country in general through the collection of taxes. 6.2.4 CONCLUSION ON THE ‘NO PROJECT’ OPTION Busia Municipality and en-route growth centre residents are in urgent need of a sustainable water supply and sanitation facilities. The existing piped water supply system is operating below demand. The current sanitation systems are unreliable, in sorry state and sub-standard. If this is allowed to continue, not only will the residents be exposed to public health risks but development opportunities will continue to be stifled and curtailed. This certainly will have local, national and regional implications given that it’s the largest and most utilized transit town in connecting Uganda and some regions of Rwanda, South Sudan and D.R. Congo to the coast in Kenya. Secondary implications include continuing trends of water-related diseases, no direct or indirect employment opportunities associated with the project, and continuing degradation of the environment and water resources due to unplanned disposal of faecal sludge. In general, the minor benefits of the No-Project option are far outweighed by the benefits to be attained on implementing the Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project. Ministry of Water and Environment 72 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project 7 ANALYSIS OF THE POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF THE PROJECT 7.1 SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL CHARACTERISTICS OF PROJECT INFRASTRUCTURE 7.1.1 SOCIAL CHARACTERISTICS OF PROJECT INFRASTRUCTURE In all the project impacted areas, there will be increased number of people in the area consisting of workers and service providers, with some being new to the project area. These workers and service providers will typically range at 15 to 100 people at each project infrastructure site during the construction phase. Similarly, 50 to 100 workers and service providers are anticipated in the entirety of Busia at the operational phase. These people will bring increased incomes to the community, and there will be interactions with the locals. Consequences of social interactions will include labour relations; sale of products to the plant staff; social conflicts over any number of issues; intermarriages and similar relationships (which could lead to HIV/AIDS infections, pregnancies, etc.); increases in the prices of some items due to the increased purchasing power of the plant staff and increased opportunities for the locals for self-advancement. Business opportunities include improvement in hotels and lodging facilities, restaurants and bars for the benefit of the plant staff. Some of the people will be permanently located in the PIAs while a few will be short-term maintenance or delivery staff. Details of these analyses are given in subsequent sections of this Chapter. 7.1.2 SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE INTAKE WORKS The livelihood of the ecosystem in the lake at the intake works site (Figure 3) will be temporarily interrupted and the environ supporting them transformed. However, flora and fauna will readapt once construction works are accomplished. There will be increased noise to communities and settlements from the dry-installed pump, Figure 3 b, given that it will be stationed above the lake water surface as compared to the submerged pump. Thus, noise pollution to settlements. 7.1.3 SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE WTP INFRASTRUCTURE A key social issue will be noise generation from pumping stations that could be a nuisance to nearby settlements given that they will operate 22 hours a day. Environmental issues at the WTP are related to the treatment chemicals/methods being employed as discussed below. 7.1.3.1 ENVIRONMENTAL CHARACTERISTICS OF CHLORINATION Chlorine has been proposed as the disinfectant for the project, with a two stage application (i.e. primary and secondary). Primary disinfection will occur prior to sedimentation. Although no residuals are generated during this treatment step, the disinfectant used or disinfection by-products may be present in the WTP residual waste streams (e.g. filter backwash water) (EPA, 2011a). Secondary disinfection will occur at the end of source water treatment (at the finished drinking water clear tank). This disinfection step is used to maintain a disinfectant residual in the finished drinking water to prevent regrowth of microorganisms. The secondary disinfection process does not result in residuals generation; however, water from the clear well may be used to backwash filters. As a result, Ministry of Water and Environment 73 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project disinfectant added to the finished drinking water may become part of the filter backwash (EPA, 2011a). Chlorine is toxic to plant and animal life; the gas form has a density greater than air, thus gas leaks accumulate and present significant safety concerns. Properly engineered gas handling systems, adequate training and refresher training, or switching to a non-gaseous chlorine form like calcium hypochlorite reduce safety concerns. To humans, chlorine is an irritant to the eyes, nasal passages and respiratory system. Chlorine gas must be carefully handled because it may cause acute health effects and can be fatal at concentrations as low as 1,000 ppm (SDWF, Undated). Furthermore, the use of chlorine for disinfection of drinking water produces small quantities of halogenated methane compounds (e.g., trihalomethane). The halogenated methane compounds, known as disinfection by-products, are suspected to be carcinogens (Chlorine Chemistry Council, 2003). EPA limits the amount of total trihalomethanes in drinking water to 0.08 mg/L (EPA, 2008b). Free chlorine in backwash water is directly toxic to aquatic organisms and can react with naturally occurring organic compounds in receiving waters to form toxic compounds such as trihalomethanes. Chlorine dioxide, formed when chlorine (gaseous or liquid form) is mixed with sodium chlorite, has been used in some drinking water systems where an elevated pH (>7) of the processed water has reduced the effectiveness of chlorine (EPA, 2011a). As with chlorine, WTPs must safely handle chlorine dioxide. It must be generated when needed because it cannot be safely stored due to its explosive characteristics. Its reaction by-products or waste materials can be toxic, such as chlorite (ClO2, MCL 1.0 mg/L) and chlorate (Cl2O2) ions (EPA, 2008b). On the positive side, chlorine dioxide does not dissociate or disproportionate under normal drinking water treatment conditions, is a strong oxidant, and does not form halogenated disinfection by-products. Chloramines (or combined residual chlorine), formed when chlorine reacts with ammonia, have been demonstrated as disinfectants, but are not as effective as other germicidal agents (EPA, 2011a). The combined residual from chloramines lasts longer than chlorine residuals and can remain chemically stable in water from hours to days. Backwash water from chloramines is highly toxic to fish and other organisms which live in water. However, these substances are not found to be bio-accumulative (transfer up the food chain) (Environment Canada, 2002). The potential negative impacts of chlorine and its by-products in its various forms are well studied and mitigation measures to ensure chances of harming people and the environment are minimised, are readily available. Chlorine in its various forms is the most widely used disinfectant in the water treatment plants in Uganda. Its impacts would include corroding storage areas and it escaping into the atmosphere to deplete the ozone layer. However, the community would benefit from treated water which is safe to drink at all consumer points, which is the essential positive impact of the project. Options to replace chlorine are generally costly and require higher technologies for their application. None is able to give a residual disinfection capacity up to the consumers. These alternatives include ozone. 7.1.3.2 ENVIRONMENTAL CHARACTERISTICS OF ALUM AND LIME SLUDGE Aluminium sulphate, a coagulant that is irritating to skin, eyes, nose and mouth by contact (EPA, 2002) will be employed at the operational phase to remove turbidity. The coagulant sludge will Ministry of Water and Environment 74 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project consist of solids removed from the coagulated water, mainly hydroxide precipitates from the coagulant and material in the raw water (clay and sand, colloidal matter, microorganisms including algae and planktons, and other organic and inorganic matter present in the raw water) (EPA, 2011a). Alum sludge contains high moisture content (97 to 99.5%) and a low solids content. It generally settles readily but does not dewater easily. It is a most difficult sludge to treat because of several peculiar properties. Although alum sludge has high 5-day biochemical oxygen demand (BOD5) and chemical oxygen demand (COD), it usually does not undergo active decomposition or promote anaerobiasis. It is reported to have a total solids (TS) content of 1,000 to 17,000 mg/L (AWWA, 1969a), of which 75 to 95% is total suspended solids (TSS) and 20 to 35% is volatile solids (VS). The pH value ranges between 5 and 7 (Reh, 1978). The BOD 5 of alum sludge ranges from 30 to 150 mg/L. The COD values are high, ranging from 500 to 15,000 mg/L (AWWA, 1969a). Table 29 below shows typical and average chemical coagulation sludge volume generation rates with respect to average water treatment flow and water treatment design flow. Given an ultimate year WTP design capacity of 13,637 m3/day (3.64 MGD), the coagulant sludge production rate for the project will typically vary between 0.18 to 67.38 m 3/day with an average of 20.06 m3/day (i.e. 48 – 17,800 GPD with an average of 5,300 GPD). Table 29: Typical chemical coagulation sludge volumes. Key: MGD = Million gallons per day; GPD = Gallons per day. Source: EPA, 1993 as cited by EPA, 2011a. Lime sludge will be generated as a result of softening using lime (CaO) or lime/soda ash (Na 2CO3). As with coagulant sludge, lime sludge is removed from the water stream in the settling basin underdrain and in filter backwash wastewater. Sludge from the softening of surface water is a highly variable material. It consists mainly of calcium carbonate (85 to 95% total solids); magnesium hydroxide, aluminium, and other metals; clay and silt particles; minor amounts of unreacted lime; and inorganic and organic matter (EPA, 2011a). The volume of sludge produced from lime or lime-soda softening plants ranges from 0.3 to 6% of the water softened (AWWA, 1969b). The sludge will generally contain 85 to 95% solids, will be white in colour, with no odour, and low in BOD5 and COD (EPA, 2011a). It is usually stable, dense, and inert. It dewaters readily, depending on Ministry of Water and Environment 75 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project the ratio of calcium (Ca) to magnesium (Mg) and on the amount of gelatinous solids present in the sludge. In general, if discharged into water, the suspensions and dissolved solids in the sludge of alum and lime may: a. Settle to form bottom deposits in the receiving water, creating anaerobic conditions because of the oxygen demand exerted by microbial decomposition. Decomposition consumes oxygen and reduces the amount available for aquatic animals. Severe reductions in dissolved oxygen concentrations can lead to fish kills. Even moderate decreases in dissolved oxygen concentrations can adversely affect waterbodies through decreases in biodiversity (EPA, 2011a); b. increase turbidity in receiving waters, thus reducing light penetration through the water column, thereby limiting the growth of rooted aquatic vegetation that serves as a critical habitat for fish, shellfish, and other aquatic organisms; c. Provide a medium for the transport of other adsorbed pollutants, including nutrients, pathogens, metals, and toxic organic compounds, which accumulate in settled deposits. These settled suspended solids and other associated pollutants often have extended interaction with the water column through cycles of deposition, resuspension, and re- deposition. Metals are potentially toxic to phytoplankton and zooplankton and to higher aquatic plant and animal species, including fish. They have the potential for bioaccumulation and bio-magnification in aquatic food chains. Aluminium in particular is toxic in the aquatic environment to several fresh-water species of fish, invertebrates, bacteria, and algae at pH conditions less than 6 (EPA, ASCE, AWWA, 1996). d. Clog fish gills as a result of suspended solids. In severe situations, clogging of fish gills can result in asphyxiation; in less severe situations, it can result in an increase in susceptibility to infection; e. Contaminate receiving waters that serve as source waters for public and industrial water supplies; f. Alter the chemistry of natural waters to a degree that adversely affects indigenous aquatic biota, especially in the immediate vicinity of the effluent discharge. The use of aluminium sulphate in the water treatment plants in Uganda is widespread and it is the coagulant of choice in most cases. NWSC is experimenting with other chemical coagulants, which have a smaller environmental footprint. However, these are still in the experimental stages and could be adopted in the near future as a replacement of aluminium sulphate. These polymers are usually proprietary and must be sourced from specific vendors, who protect the technologies behind them, rendering them more expensive than aluminium sulphate. The more common polymers include: a. Cationic emulsions; b. Cationic powders; c. Anionic emulsions and d. Anionic powders. Ministry of Water and Environment 76 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Certain organic particulate emulsions are also used, though with only special situations such as emergencies, due to their cost. For the WMDP, the designers have prescribed aluminium sulphate as the coagulant and even with its negative impacts; it remains a most positive coagulant due to its widespread use in the country and therefore availability. The technologies for handling, applying it to water and disposing of sludge are all well known in the country. It remains the coagulant of choice. 7.1.4 SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL CHARACTERISTICS OF TRANSMISSION INFRASTRUCTURE 7.1.4.1 RAW WATER TRANSMISSION INFRASTRUCTURE The raw water transmission main, including the pier bridge, will modify the current habitat for aquatic flora and fauna along its route and the immediate environs. Thus, it can act as an obstacle to the free passage/movement of fauna and at the same time as a habitat to clinging flora and fauna. The pier and the intake works will create an obstacle to the shipping in the area, especially the small fishing boats that often navigate at night. These fishing boats might crash into the pier unknowingly and this may lead to injuries or even fatalities. The pier should therefore be lit and in the case of power failure, the side reflectors will be adequate to warn fishing boats of potential dangers. As the pier remains in place longer, the local fishing community will get familiar with the obstacle; however, chances are there that new boats in the area will not be aware of its presence in the water. Adequate warning signage and reflectors will be erected nearby. The pier can be used as a diving platform by children and even adults. Because it is constructed of metals which might be slippery when wet, the pier structure is not suited for this purpose since accidents can occur. Access to the pier will therefore be restricted by a manned or locked gate, with signage forbidding entry to unauthorized persons. The structure will also be surrounded with barbed wire to discourage people from mounting it from the lake. In case of accidents, the operators of the plant will ensure that trained personnel are always available to assist victims through first aid and evacuation to nearby health units. All staff who work in the plant will be provided with life jackets and will be trained in first aid and rescue. A first aid kit will be provided at the water works. Locals who are experienced swimmers will be drafted and given employment in the plant to support in inspecting the undersea structures and participate in emergencies. This is to ensure that they buy into the project and become part of it. The local beach management unit located at Majanji is an important stakeholder and will assist in sensitising the community on the scope of the project and its benefits as well as impacts that may affect them. There will be routine community meetings and the plant operator will seek to be represented in the BMU of Majanji. 7.1.4.2 TREATED WATER TRANSMISSION Ministry of Water and Environment 77 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project The distribution pipes will transmit safe water and its associated benefits much closer to the beneficiaries who include residents of Busia Municipality, particularly the urban poor and settlements along Busia - Majanji road. Thus, improving on public health and sanitation. Most of the treated water transmission mains and all of the distribution pipes will be buried underground. Thus, minimal disturbances to the habitat of flora and fauna, except during maintenance works as minor excavations will be carried out. The main social issue will be during the construction period when most impacts will be experienced. The social impacts are of a limited nature, are short term, are readily foreseeable and are avoidable or mitigated in accordance with the ESMP. To enhance the social benefits of the transmission mains, communities along the route will be provided with water supply services at various levels – house connections, yard taps and kiosks. Sensitisation of the community will also be done to ensure that they improve their hygiene and sanitation situation at the household and community levels. 7.1.5 SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL CHARACTERISTICS OF RESERVOIR INFRASTRUCTURE 7.1.5.1 SOCIAL CHARACTERISTICS The reservoirs in general are located on levelled ground (refer to section 4.11.3). Apart from the splashing of water as it falls into the tanks, and some limited vibration, the reservoirs are not intrusive. There will be some lighting in the structure (though this is not essential); a fence and gate will be erected to deter unauthorized entry and vandalism of project infrastructure. Maintenance teams will visit the sites occasionally and a guard will routinely monitor the tanks but will not be stationed on the site. These increased human presences in the area will have some social consequences as already discussed in Section 7.1.1. The tanks are built of robust materials and should last a long time until they are decommissioned and dismantled. Though exceptionally rare, a tank could collapse and present a flood situation to the low- lying areas surrounding it. To ensure this possibility of rupture of the tank does not harm the community, drainage channels will be constructed downhill to harmlessly take the water to nearby streams. These channels will be located on land acquired by the project and will be cleaned and maintained by the plant staff. To enhance community acceptance and ownership, local guards may be drafted in to carry out maintenance of the drains and for guard duties. 7.1.5.2 ENVIRONMENTAL CHARACTERISTICS Though disturbances will occur to flora and fauna at reservoir sites during the construction phase, mainly due to vegetation clearing and minor excavations, plants and animals will thrive again at the operational phase. 7.1.6 SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE FSTP INFRASTRUCTURE Ministry of Water and Environment 78 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project 7.1.6.1 ENVIRONMENTAL CHARACTERISTICS OF GENERATED NUTRIENTS Overall, the hybrid-constructed wetlands (i.e. two vertical flow and one horizontal flow system, Figure 6) are effective for the treatment of wastewater containing nitrogen (ammonia and nitrate), organics, and suspended solids (Vymazal, 2010). However, phosphorus removal is low (Vymazal, 2007). Removal of phosphorus occurs via ligand exchange reactions (phosphate displaces water and hydroxyls on the surface of aluminium, calcium and iron hydrous oxides), but is typically low unless special materials (e.g. granular slag) are incorporated in the substrate (Vymazal, 2010). For example, Korkusuz, (2004), experimented on the treatment of domestic wastewater in a cell of a vertical flow (VF) constructed wetland with wasted granular slag and gravel as media. He obtained, respectively, for both materials the removal of suspended solids (SS) 64% and 62%, COD 49% and 40%, NH 4+-N 88% and 58%, total nitrogen (TN) 41% and 44%, total phosphorus (TP) 63% and 9%, PO 43--P 60% and 4%. Therefore, the two vertical systems proposed in Project will be fitted with granular slag to achieve nearly 100 percent of phosphorus removal. This will attain the permissible discharge regulation of 10mg/l for Total Phosphorous and 5mg/l for phosphate Ugandan Regulation and IFC standard (Appendix 7). The proposed FSTP will also achieve permissible discharge limits for TSS, BOD, and TN. Traditionally, Uganda has been relying on natural wetlands in tertiary polishing of sewage effluents. However, this is no longer possible in the case of Busia because of the encroachment on natural wetlands, saturation of wetland substrate and climate change, which has reduced water flow in wetlands. Constructed wetlands were first experimented two decades ago in Uganda. In the last decade, proto types have been used in small experimental trials. However, the hybrid-constructed wetland designed for the Busia project will be a pilot full-scale constructed wetland system in Uganda. 7.1.6.2 SOCIAL CHARACTERISTICS OF GENERATED ODOUR The FSTP to be employed in the project, Figure 6, consists of up to two vertical flow (VF) cells that will be installed prior to the horizontal flow (HF) cell. Wastewater will flow vertically downwards in the VF systems through sand and gravel filters, with solids being retained above the filter horizons. Thus, anaerobic biogenic transformation of organic matter and nutrients that generate odour will occur deeper in the treatment profile. This therefore limits the release of generated odour to the atmosphere, thus minimizing the attraction and influence of flies and vermin. However, to optimally manage odour at the lowest possible cost, a minimum distance must be set between the FSTP facility and the nearest occupied building. The modified Warren Spring formulae may be employed. 1 . = (2.2 × ) 4 Where Rc = maximum complaints radius, m, to within a factor of 2; OE = odour emission rate, ou/s. A typical high odour emission rate in wastewater plants is about 710 ou/s/m 2 (UKWIRL, 2001). This corresponds to a maximum complaints radius of 20.61 m per m 2 of the FSTP facility. Similarly, a typical low odour emission rate in wastewater plants is about 0.3 ou/s/m 2. This corresponds to a minimum complaints radius of 0.2 m per m2 of the FSTP facility. In general, an average complaints radius of 10.4 m per m2 of the FSTP facility could be considered for the project. Ministry of Water and Environment 79 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project A well-managed odour and vermin control system will enhance acceptance by the community while these nuisances may lead to rejection of the FSTP by the community. Efforts will be expended to sensitise the community on the benefits of the FSTP and its benefits to the community. The benefits include reduction of solid waste; emptying of their pit latrines and septic tanks; provision of manure from the composting of waste; and generation of biogas. Most communities do not have large quantities of solid waste to dispose of but cumulatively, even the little that they produce can become a nuisance if not disposed of properly; thus a FSTP in the area would provide a disposal route, which the community can take advantage of. Their pit latrines are emptied occasionally; it is suggested that the impacted communities are given preferential tariffs when they bring in their pit latrine sludge for disposal at the plant. The compost sale should also be at a lower tariff. This will encourage the community to accept the project in their neighbourhood. The FSTP is expected to generate significant quantities of biogas. The biogas could be sold to the local community to reduce high dependence on wood fuel and charcoal for cooking and heating. To enhance acceptance of biogas use to the community, a demonstration unit could be set up at the FSTP housing unit nearby. Sale of biogas in cylinders or through pipelines should be built into the project and should benefit the community in the impacted area (at preferential tariffs) and schools and hospitals in the area. The operator shall engage an independent person to routinely audit the operations of the plant with a view to keep the community engaged, informed and to have the operations at a high level of efficiency. A community complaints procedure will be set up, requiring quick actions to control vermin outbreaks or flooding of the FSTP. Members of the community will be drafted in to a community association, which will be responsible for oversight of the operations of the FSTP and generation of benefits such as compost and biogas. 7.1.7 SOCIAL IMPACTS OF POTENTIAL TARIFF CHANGES The majority of the households in the project area prefer to pay for water delivered from yard taps and the revenue accruing to the system is substantial and adequate to cover the full costs of operation, maintenance and eventual expansion. This leaves only a minority to be in a position to meet the full costs of higher service levels. There is no obscurity in the implications of water services planning in such communities. It is complex. Professionals in water services planning should be aware of the problematic outcomes of having systems that operate only sub-optimally. This is especially because policy decisions regarding all service levels should be addressed adequately and at the same time. Where decisions regarding one service type mismatch the intentions of another, eruptive results are bound to increase the chance of systems failure. The reasons for this are very clear. Public taps and private connections in localized system draw water from the same sources, have no divergent quality differences and yet provide unequal convenience. To accord with economic principles of equity therefore, the marginal cost of production should be equated with the marginal revenue (benefits) of the system. Ministry of Water and Environment 80 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project In type community such as those in the project town, where private connections may eventually turn out to be competitive sellers of water with public taps, the financial viability of (and not the economic viability) of the system is greatly threatened. Therefore, policies regarding tariff, billing, collection, connection and sale of water should all be addressed exhaustively. It is understandable that economies of scale accrue to the system with higher private connections since they use large volumes of water and the marginal cost of production in the entire system tends to decrease. However, it is important to realize that when households with private connections turn out to sale water to other households that would have bought from public taps, the revenues of the system will certainly decline. Households with private connections will definitely have this initiative if they are charged a much lower rate per cubic meter than at the stand post. It would even be higher if they are charged fixed monthly rates. In either case, the marginal cost of the water they sell is lower than the marginal revenue (benefit) to them. These households would then continue to inflict "a double-edge sword" effect to the system. The cost of producing much water at the aggregate level by the system will rise and at the sometime revenues accruing to it are reduced (these are tapped by the selling households which eventually pay only little for the amount they would use at their household). It is difficult to estimate the number of households that will sale water once connected in the project, but the existence of households that sale water from private connections such as yard taps in town today it is definite evidence that more private connections will emerge when the water system improves its efficiency. It is therefore necessary to address this problem right from the beginning by: - a. Ensure adherence to the principles of charging according to the marginal cost of production. b. strict requirements of metering and restrain from flat monthly rates; c. strict management procedures of timely billing and collection; d. strict measures of disconnecting defaulters and recovery of money owed; e. sensitization of communities about the dangers of exposing the system to failure through unscrupulous water selling households and colluding with similar management staff; f. ensure continued operation of all outlets as planned/installed. If some outlets fall out of use due to some technical (or other) reason, the people initially served will be exposed to the complexity of the type community mentioned earlier and the overall effect to the system will be discouraging. The above suggestions are all aimed at attaining a solution where households should pay for all the water they use. It is important to note that emergence of households that benefit from the systems, in money terms, will bring about a rush for house-connections. Since this increases the volume of water to be produced, the technical capacity of the systems may be overblown. It is also easy to see how a laxity in addressing key policy issues at the public taps will undermine the sustainability of the system. If stand post water is provided freely (as a social service), the majority of households will collect their water from this service type. The system will have to draw on operations funds from the few private connections and soon the low-level equilibrium trap will Ministry of Water and Environment 81 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project be hit. The result will be a need for subsidy from either the Town authorities or the Government or close the systems. Similarly, very low tariffs at the stand-posts on the basis that they are low service levels will result in continued water vending. Vendors will find it easy to collect water from stand-posts at lower prices and sell to willing households at higher prices (as is the case today with point sources) in most towns country wide. The effect of this is manifested in households spending highly for water yet aggregate revenues to the system are at comparatively low levels. Another effect is that once vendors find this business lucrative, they will tend to dominate the queues at the stand-posts hence create crowding. In the case of Kumi, and Ngora, there is already an organized water vendors’ network in the towns taking advantage of the water supply systems inefficiency for a prolonged period. Effects of charging flat monthly rates for use of public taps are also numerous. First of all, it is difficult to establish a realistic rate reflective of every household's consumption. In the case that a common rate is adopted, some households will certainly be paying less than they consume while others pay more than they consume. The latter is however thought to consist of a minority since each user household will have an incentive to use as much water as possible (even for low value uses). In fact, the cost of using water above the quantities for which the tariffs were based is nil hence uses such as watering gardens will arise. Providing fewer outlets has diverse effects. Among these are: overcrowding (queuing), increase in time for collecting water, emergence of water vendors - who will in-turn want to dominate the public taps. Households with private connections will also start selling water to their neighbourhood. The biggest percentage (70.1%) of all the households covered during the study pay for the water they use. In analysis of preferred location for public taps, a distance of 100 meters was the mean desired distance. Currently household walk up to a mean distance of 0.59km and 0.67km in the dry and wet season respectively, to collect water. In order to minimize the chances of system failure, it is important to address policy issues aimed at reducing the above effects: a. All public taps should be metered so that it is easy for the collecting agency (Private operator) to account for the water sold. b. Households should be charged according to the amount of water consumed. Various approaches can be applied in volume metric charging. First the user household can pay on the per-jerry can basis. c. All public taps should adopt a similar charging mechanism. It is possible that if different towns are allowed to decide their modes of charging, some will prefer to charge flat monthly rates while others would devise other ways of collecting the money. This is mainly because the social setting of these towns is different. The effect of this is that public taps for which payment is fixed will attract many users as compared to those for which water is metered Ministry of Water and Environment 82 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project by the jerry can. Not only will this cause enforcement complexities on the part of the revenue collecting agency (private operator), but will also encourage sale of water from fixed monthly paying households to the neighbourhoods. d. It has been argued over time that water vendors should not be prohibited from using public taps. It is logical to argue this way since vendors provide an essential service but the effects of allowing vendors the freedom to sell water is often felt soon or later. Vendors have the capability and incentive to sabotage a public water system. They may continuously act in such a manner as to seek to destroy/vandalize public taps of their target markets. It is however useful to decide on formalizing any person's interest to sale water in a specific area. In this way such a person will be treated and subjected to respective conditions set for such a connection fees, the cost of a meter, hook-up cost and above all the tariff. His connection will operate side by side with the existing public taps and house connections. 7.2 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF PROJECT LOCALITIES 7.2.1 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF THE INTAKE LOCALITY DURING CONSTRUCTION A detailed baseline description of the intake locality is given in Section 4.11.1. A pier bridge extending at least 300 m into the lake, including intake facilities (valve(s), pump(s) and pipes), will be erected during the construction phase. These will comprise columns to support these structures. In general, the normal life cycle of aquatic flora and fauna will be disrupted within these localities during construction. However, the environmental impacts of the construction phase are readily foreseeable, of limited extent and of a short duration. Mitigation measures are well within the ability of contractors to implement, as stated in the ESMP. A key social impact is created by the increased number of people flocking to the area as workers and as jobseekers. Refer to Section 7.1.6 for a discussion of the potential impacts of increased number of people in the project area. 7.2.2 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF THE WTP LOCALITY DURING CONSTRUCTION A detailed baseline description of the WTP site is given in Section 4.11.2. At the construction phase, ground levelling and soil excavations will expose soils to erosion depending on site terrain and intensity of erosion agents (wind and surface water runoff). This can lead to direct siltation of the water source. However, the environmental impacts of the construction phase are readily foreseeable, of limited extent and of a short duration. Mitigation measures are well within the ability of the contractors to implement, as stated in the ESMP. The site of the WTP is in a sparsely populated area and there are no people living in the immediate project area, though a few are impacted – especially those whose land will be partly taken by the WTP. A social impact is created by the increased number of people flocking to the area as workers and as jobseekers. Refer to Section 7.1.6 for a discussion of the potential impacts of increased number of people in the project area. 7.2.3 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF THE FSTP LOCALITY Ministry of Water and Environment 83 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project A detailed baseline description of the FSTP site is given in Section 4.11.5. The gentle slope forming a valley that is drained by Okame - Amagoro stream at the FSTP site can be adapted in enhancing gravity flow between treatment compartments. A key challenge, however, is that the site does not have a natural wetland system between the proposed treatment plant locality and the receiving stream. Furthermore, the locality can pose a threat of water and aquatic pollution in case of system performance breakdown as there is no natural wetland to assimilate pollutant loads. 7.3 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF SUPPORT FACILITIES 7.3.1 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF THE FSTP SERVICE AREA The FSTP service area of the project is principally Busia Municipality. The wastewater to be collected from latrines will not only comprise organic materials but equally inorganic matter given that some homesteads tend to dump domestic solid wastes into pit latrines. FSTPs principally employ microbes to break down organic materials, thus any inorganic matter will not be treated. The inorganic matter must be removed from the FSTP once it is deemed safe to handle and disposed of into Busia Municipal Counsel waste disposal site located at Osapir Village, Abochet Parish, Buteba Sub-County, which is approximately 8 Km from Busia Town Center. The dried stabilized biosolids once found to be free of any contaminants, shall be given out to interested farmers, free of charge, to be used in their fields to improve agricultural productivity of their land. In general, community education and sensitization is crucial to ensuring optimal utilization of the FSTP. Collection and safe disposal of excreta will give a major boost to household hygiene and sanitation and reduce the incidence of diseases which are spread by flies and poor hygiene practices. To enhance the social and environmental impacts of the wastewater collection system, it is important to carryout community sensitization and to give reasonable tariffs on the basis of economies of scale. As more households join the system, there should be a concomitant tariff rebate given to the community. Social responsibility actions such as drama and sports activities should be organized to increase knowledge of the systems and attract new users. Ultimately, service levels may improve from pit latrines to septic tanks, or even to a small bore sewerage system, depending on the number of people included in the system. 7.4 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF THE FSTP EFFLUENT DISPOSAL ROUTE The leachate from the FSTP will be channeled through a drain into the nearby Okame - Amagoro stream. The leachate is estimated at an average daily flow of 8 m3/day. A detailed description of the impacts of the FSTP leachate on the receiving water body is given in Section 7.1.6. The communities along the route and those using the water from the stream may be exposed to nutrients, pathogen and odour nuisances if this system is not operated adequately. While the receiving water body is not potable at present, the incremental pollution from the leachate will only aggravate the problem. It is therefore important that the communities will be provided with water at household, or kiosk or yard tap level of service. Furthermore, they should be sensitized not to directly consume the water in Okame - Amagoro stream. The natural environment is quite effective in reducing BOD 5 and pathogens in the water through natural die off. This will be expected given the low discharge load expected from the FSTP leachate. Ministry of Water and Environment 84 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project The Streeter-Phelps equation will be used in monitoring the dissolved oxygen deficit along the stream using data that will be obtained from actual measurements. It is not possible to model the dissolved oxygen sag curve without actual input data. Data and observations by Water Quality staff of NWSC indicate that the high dissolved oxygen concentrations in natural waters in most Ugandan rivers will ensure that the degradation of wastewater in the river will be rapid. However, a strict monitoring program will be instituted to ensure that the stream is not damaged beyond what is acceptable in the NEMA Regulations. 7.4.1 ASSESSMENT OF INFRASTRUCTURE NECESSARY FOR OPERATING THE FSTP Given that cesspools will be employed in ferrying faecal sludge to the FSTP site, access roads are inevitable. The FSTP site, refer to Section 4.11.5, has an access road that is routinely maintained by Busia District Works Department. The challenge perhaps is that the road is murram based, thus could lead to increased dust generation to settlements and communities along the route. Most of the roads in the Municipality are earth roads and are maintained and improved by the Municipal Council, whose budget is not linked to the project. The project can however intervene with the drivers delivering faecal sludge to be careful not to spill the contents of their trucks carelessly and to be careful not to injure pedestrians and other road users. The infrastructure necessary for operating the FSTP will be located at the plant site. An office will be available at the central office; however, a guard will be stationed at the plant to deter unauthorized entry and to maintain a log of the faecal sludge deliveries and exit of compost manure and biogas. These infrastructures will have an insignificant environmental footprint. 7.5 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF PROJECT AREA INFORMAL SETTLEMENTS There are no informal settlements (communities that live in slums) at the localities that water and sanitation infrastructural facilities will be constructed. However, informal settlements will benefit from the project given that water distribution mains, including water kiosks, are to be extended into these settlements. These informal settlements are in Custom Road "A" Village, Central Ward and Eastern Division within Busia Municipality. The informal settlements will also benefit from the collection and disposal of faecal sludge from their pit latrines and from hygiene and sanitation sensitization that the IWMD Project will conduct, as well as from drama and sporting events organized to highlight public health and hygiene. They will also get a preferential pro-poor tariff for their yard taps and kiosks selling water and sewerage services. To enhance these positive impacts on the urban poor, targeted messages will be developed into information, education and communication (IEC) materials while a number of the men and women will be offered employment opportunities during the construction and operation phases of the project. 7.6 IMPACT ASSESSMENT Ministry of Water and Environment 85 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project One of the key components of an EIA is to identify impacts, for the various project phases, on physical/chemical, biological and socio-economic environments. Impacts, positive and negative, have been identified for the project with respect to construction and operational phases. To harmonize positions of the multidisciplinary team on the assignment and reduce subjectivity in evaluating the significance levels of the identified potential environment impacts of the project, there was need to use a method that is flexible, transparent and most importantly free from subjectivity. In this light, Rapid Impact Assessment Matrix (RIAM) developed originally by Pastakia (1998) for EIA was suitably chosen Table 30. Table 30: Impact Ranking according to the Rapid Impact Assessment Matrix No. Impact Rank Description of the Rank Rank 1 +5 Major positive A ‘major change’ will occur at a point when the condition change/impact extends to a regional/national boundary and is of major importance. Such a change would also be permanent, irreversible, though it could be non-cumulative. 2 +4 Significant positive The lower limits of ‘significant change’ can be taken, as the change/impact point when a condition is outside local boundaries but is of major importance, yet is temporary, reversible and non- cumulative. 3 +3 Moderate positive A condition of moderate change will lie between the limits change/impact of ‘change’ and ‘significant change’. 4 +2 Positive A condition of ‘change’ will occur up to a condition of local change/impact importance with significant magnitude, which is permanent, irreversible and cumulative. 5 +1 Slightly positive A condition that is local in importance and a slight change change/impact from the status quo yet is permanent, irreversible and cumulative, represents the upper limit of the ‘slight change’ condition. 6 0 No change/status Conditions that have neither importance nor magnitude will quo score a zero and can be banded together. Any condition in this band is either of no importance, or represents the status quo, or a no change situation. 7 -1 Slightly negative A condition that is local in importance, and a slight change change/impact from the status quo, yet is permanent, irreversible and cumulative, represents the upper limit of the ‘slight change’ condition. 8 -2 Negative A condition of ‘change’ will occur up to a condition of local change/impact importance with significant magnitude that is permanent, irreversible and cumulative. 9 -3 Moderate negative A condition of moderate change will lie between the limits Change/impact of change’ and ‘significant change’. 10 -4 Significant negative The lower limits of ‘significant change’ can be taken, as the change/impact point when a condition is outside local boundaries but is of Ministry of Water and Environment 86 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project No. Impact Rank Description of the Rank Rank major importance, yet is temporary, reversible and non- cumulative. 11 -5 Major negative A ‘major change’ will occur at a point when the condition change/impact extends to a regional/national boundary and is of major importance. Such a change would also be permanent, irreversible, though it could be non-cumulative. 7.7 ANALYSIS OF SIGNIFICANT POSITIVE IMPACTS 7.7.1 IMPROVED PUBLIC HEALTH, HYGIENE AND HOUSEHOLD HEALTH STATUS Based on socioeconomic surveys carried out by the ESIA team and prior studies undertaken by Fichtner Water & Transportation and M & E Associates Limited (refer to Fichtner and M & E, 2015a), it can be stated that the sanitation management facilities within Busia Town are rather rudimentary and largely depend on the level of service of water supply. The population is served by onsite sanitation facilities (pit latrines and waterborne toilets that are connected to septic tanks). Furthermore, there is no excreta disposal system in that households and institutions simply abandon filled-up pit latrines as new ones are built. This is a key challenge in the core of the Town as land for new developments is always a challenge. Most public sanitary facilities are not in good shape and inadequate to cope with the number of users, including vendors/traders, nearby local communities and visitors. The available number of toilet/latrine stances in schools are inadequate to serve needs and most schools do not have hand washing facilities. Toilet/latrine stances at key health facilities such as Dabani Hospital and Busia Health Centre Grade IV are in bad shape, inadequate and some have no hand washing facilities. Pits are supposed to be emptied and the sludge disposed of by suction trucks from Tororo Municipality given that it has a disposal facility. However, the truck owners generally charge exorbitant rates. In general, toilet facilities that require stable water supply are in poor state in most institutions and public places. Pit latrines and septic based systems face the key challenge of faecal sludge disposal especially when they are filled up. The proposed water and sanitation project will improve on the health and hygiene of the targeted population through the provision of a safe and reliable water supply, including human waste management facilities, thus reducing the risk of water contamination and the spread of pathogens that cause waterborne diseases. Up to 100% of the ultimate year population in Busia Municipality has been designed for with respect to safe water supply. A 79% coverage will be attained through the new water scheme, with the current groundwater-based scheme being utilized as a supplement. Thus, it is anticipated that 100% reduction in water borne diseases can be achieved through continual community education and sensitization on the value of safe water. Furthermore, the FSTP, to be treating up to 3,842m³ of faecal sludge per annum (i.e. 100% of the ultimate year faecal sludge production in Busia Municipality), will ensure timely and safe disposal of human waste given that it will be located in the project area. Thus, it is anticipated that 100% improvement in household Ministry of Water and Environment 87 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project sanitation can be achieved through continual community education and sensitization on the value of hygiene. The benefits that will accrue from improved public health, hygiene and household health status, will be immense in magnitude, permanent (as long as the project is sustainably managed) and cumulative in benefit, thus a significant (+4) positive change. Enhancement measures An awareness campaign on issues of public health, hygiene and sanitation are very critical. Hence sensitization is important. Hand washing should be encouraged. Body bathing, cleaning of clothes, utensils and dwelling areas, particularly toilets, will improve the public health of the project area. The sorting of solid waste at source and handling it over to waste collection providers for disposal at the municipality disposal sites will improve public health. 7.7.2 IMPROVED LIVING STANDARD/WELL-BEING The living standard and well-being of en-route communities and Busia Municipality residents, the key beneficiaries of the WMD project, will be improved during the operational phase of the project. At a population of 55,958 as per the 2014 National Census and taking an annual growth rate of 3.08% that was realized between the year 2002 and 2014 (UBOS, 2014), Busia Municipality is expected to have a population of 85,567 and 123,140 by, respectively, the intermediate (2028) and ultimate year (2040). A population of 70,482 and 97,033 has been designed for, respectively, in the intermediate and ultimate year. This means that 82.4 and 78.8% of the people of Busia Municipality will be supplied with sustainable safe water within easy reach in, respectively, the intermediate and ultimate year. However, a coverage of 100% can be achieved with the current groundwater-based supply scheme acting as a supplement. This will be a great achievement as compared to the current water supply scheme that achieved a coverage of 48% in the year 2010 (refer to MWE, 2010). Furthermore, the project will eliminate the reliance on the current system that is rather intermittent, rationed and unreliable (refer to Fichtner and M & E, 2015a). Settlements around the water intake and along transmission lines will equally be supplied with safe and readily available potable water. This will tremendously lower the reliance on the unsafe water sources such as springs, streams, rivers, wells and wetlands. Thus, improving on health and reducing water borne related disease like typhoid fever and cholera. There will be reduced conflicts with hippos and other wild animals, and reduced exploitation of women and the girl child, who currently fetch water from Lake Victoria, since water will be brought to their doorstep. The benefits that will be attained from improved living standards and well-being, will be immense in magnitude, permanent (as long as the project is sustainably managed) and cumulative in benefit, thus a significant (+4) positive change. Enhancement measures The operator of the project should supply water and sanitation services to the population at affordable tariffs for them to realize the benefits of the project, thus ensuring its sustainability. This Ministry of Water and Environment 88 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project will include on-time billing and keeping users up to date on the status and functionality of the various project facilities. Operation and maintenance of the facilities should be done in a professional manner to ensure sustainability of the services. 7.8 ANALYSIS OF DIRECT AND INDIRECT POSITIVE IMPACTS 7.8.1 REDUCTION OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE Statistics from the health facilities indicate that at least three women are reported to be battered by their husbands in different communities of Busia District every week (many more might not be reported). The interview with a Medical Officer at Dabani Health Facility in Busia, indicated that at least one woman is admitted daily to the hospital having sustained injuries as a result of being battered by her spouse. It was found that in some instances, women have been beaten to coma by their partners. Domestic violence cases are often reported to police (41%), Child disappearance (cases of missing children) are also very common (32%), followed by Child neglect (19%) and Child desertion (8%). In the African culture it is the duty of women and children to collect water. Lack of water in the house may lead to domestic violence where the husband beats up the wife or children. Whenever women and children go to collect water a suspicious husband or father may think the wife or children have been involved in promiscuity. This is if women or children spend unaccountable time at the water source. This may lead to domestic violence against the women or children. The project will bring water near to the household where a suspicious husband/father may be able to monitor the movement of his wife or children since it will be a short distance from home. In general, the impact reduction of domestic violence, though localized and reversible, will be moderate in magnitude, permanent (if the project is sustainably managed) and cumulative in benefit, thus a positive (+2) change. Enhancement measures The project should take water to every homestead in the project area. In informal settlements, public tap should be located within 100 m from the homestead. 7.8.2 IMPROVED GENDER AWARENESS Women, as a norm in most African culture, take lead roles in domestic activities, including water and sanitation programmes within homesteads. As of 2010, 88% of the people of Busia were served by point water sources (MWE, 2010). This figure must have increased given the fact that no piped water system has been built/improved on within Busia since the year 2000 and the population is growing at about 3.08% per annum (UBOS, 2014). The project will avail, at the operational phase, user friendly (tap water systems) as compared to most of the current water sources (wells, streams, springs, hand pumped boreholes, etc.) that are rather far from homes and water cannot be easily collected. Thus, if water quality, water availability and wastewater disposal improve, households will spend much less time and money on fetching water, storing it, purifying (boiling) it and disposing of wastewater. Women will spend shorter time in domestic chores and the time saved can be used productively in economic terms (e.g. through work which generates income). School girls will have the opportunity to concentrate on school programmes, rather than spend so much time fetching Ministry of Water and Environment 89 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project water. Moreover, fetching water is known as a soft path into juvenile delinquency as both boys and girls take that as a chance to conduct many activities outside the view of their parents. Bringing water close to the communities is foreseen to uplift the women and the girl child status in the various communities. In general, the benefits that will accrue from improved gender aspects, though localized, will be immense in magnitude, permanent (as long as the water facilities are sustainably managed) and cumulative in benefit, thus a moderate (+3) positive change. Enhancement measures The District Planning, Community Development and Water Management Teams should plan and budget for the extension and construction of tap water kiosks closer to informal settlements, especially where communities cannot individually afford tap water connections into homesteads. The District Community Development Team should also sensitize communities of the importance of having safe water, its ease of access and the liberty it gives women and children to have time for other productive activities. 7.8.3 EMPLOYMENT Employment opportunities will be available in a number of disciplines during the construction and operational phases. Not only will the skilled people be employed but also equally unskilled personnel will have opportunities. Additionally, local communities and the entire Ugandan economy will benefit. Temporary jobs will be created during the construction phase and permanent jobs when the water supply and wastewater disposal installations start operating. The building of installations creates new jobs or secures existing jobs within construction companies who will be awarded contracts. The operation of the supply and treatment installations will also secure existing jobs and create new ones. At a staff ratio of 6 per 1,000 connections (NWSC, 2010), the NWSC, the foreseen operator, will be able to employ between 15 to 25 people at the commencement of operations given the number of households that was at 13.683 in the year 2014 (refer to UBOS, 2014). Furthermore, up to 15 to 100 people will be temporarily employed, either directly or indirectly, per project site during the construction phase as discussed in Section 7.1.1. In general, the benefit of employment, though partly permanent and reversible, will be regional in context, moderate in magnitude and cumulative in benefit, thus a moderate (+3) positive change. Enhancement measures The communities showed enthusiasm with regard to job prospects during the meetings with the ESIA team at the various project component facilities. To manage conflicts and negative politics that could arise, especially during the construction phase, the contractors should give priority for employment to the local people within the project localities depending on their skills and training. Women should be given preferential opportunities and employees should be issued appointment letters with clearly spelt out and understandable terms of employment. The contractor must also ensure that workers are paid on time. Vulnerable groups like the youth and disabled should be given priority. 7.8.4 INCOMES AND MARKET FOR PRODUCE AND PRODUCTS Ministry of Water and Environment 90 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Incomes and market for products is foreseen to accrue at all the phases of the project. At the construction phase, local communities will generate income from the sale of food and sundries to construction workers. These will be provided by farmers and local entrepreneurs. Construction materials such as cement, iron bars, timber/wood, aggregates, sand, electro-mechanical equipment and pipes will be required, thus suppliers will earn an income. To operate and maintain the project facilities, the supply of materials and services will be required. Chemical companies, security services, and training providers will be required. In general, the benefits that will be attained from incomes and market for products, will be regional in context, moderate in magnitude, permanent and cumulative in benefit, thus a moderate (+3) positive change. Enhancement measures The Management Team of the various project phases should give priority to the local suppliers and service providers. 7.8.5 ECONOMY Benefits to the Ugandan economy are foreseen to accrue during the construction and operational phases. Income will be generated through tax remittances such as Value Added Tax (VAT), With Holding Tax (WHT), Pay as You Earn (PAYE), Local Taxes, etc. The income generated will not only go the National Treasury, but equally to the District Treasury, thus directly benefiting Pallisa District residents. In general, the economic benefits to be attained, though minor in magnitude, will be national in scope, permanent and cumulative in benefit, thus a moderate (+3) positive change. Enhancement measures During the construction phase, all contractors and sub-contractors should be registered tax payers with the Uganda Revenue Authority (URA) and should pay applicable taxes and remittances in a timely manner. The client should ensure that engineering designs, architectural drawings and site layout plans for the various project facilities be submitted to the Physical Planning Committee of Pallisa District Local Government for review and approval. NWSC, the foreseen operator of key project facilities, should obtain operational licenses from Pallisa District Local Government once the facilities are ready for commissioning. The Central Government through URA should ensure that project facilities operator makes timely submissions and routinely update their tax bases. 7.8.6 SKILLS AND TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER Skills and technology transfer is foreseen to take place in all phases of the project, though most importantly at the construction phase. The construction supervision will be carried out by an association of a local and a foreign company. Furthermore, it is anticipated that construction works will be sub-contracted to local companies. This will avail an opportunity for skills and knowledge transfer into the Ugandan economy. Ministry of Water and Environment 91 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project The operational phase will equally offer skills build-up, particularly for students through internships, with respect to the operation, management and maintenance of the various water supply and sanitation facilities. In general, the benefits that will be attained from skills and technology transfer, though localized, will be regional in context, moderate in magnitude, permanent to a large extent and cumulative in benefit, thus a positive (+2) change. Enhancement measures The terms of agreement as per the contract given to the construction supervision team should emphasis knowledge transfer and the Client (MWE) should monitor and ensure that the objective is met. 7.8.7 LAND AND PROPERTY COMPENSATION It is envisaged that there will be private land acquisition for the construction of the WTP at Namundiri "A" Village (Majanji Sub County), a reservoir at Daha Village (Buhehe Sub County) and the FSTP at Okame - Amagoro Village (Buteba Sub County). The other project facilities will be located on Government owned land, thus compensation will not be required but rather transfer of ownership. There will be loss of land in those sites to be acquired but the owners will be adequately compensated as per the World Bank Policy on Involuntary Resettlement and Uganda Laws on land and property acquisition. The essence of resettlement is that the affected persons are left better off as compared to their current status. A Resettlement Action Plan has been drafted, for the project, and will be implemented by the Client. In general, the benefits that will accrue from land and property compensation, though localized and temporary, will be moderate in magnitude and cumulative in benefit, thus a positive (+2) change. Enhancement measures A Resettlement Action Plan has been undertaken concurrently with this ESIA. It identified Project Affected Persons (PAPs). The World Bank Guidelines on Involuntary Resettlement and Ugandan laws on Compensation and Land Acquisition should be adhered to so that livelihoods are restored and improved by the project. 7.9 ANALYSIS OF SIGNIFICANT CONSTRUCTION PHASE NEGATIVE IMPACTS Based on a RIAM analysis of the anticipated negative impacts, there will be no significant (-4 or -5) negative impacts at the construction phase given that they are all short-term (temporary), readily foreseeable and mostly noncumulative. All the construction phase impacts, as discussed in subsequent Sections, are -1 to -3 in the environmental score, meaning that they are not significant. 7.10 ANALYSIS OF CONSTRUCTION PHASE DIRECT AND INDIRECT NEGATIVE IMPACTS 7.10.1 LOSS OF LAND AND DAMAGE TO PROPERTY PAPs, as summarized in Appendix 3, will have to involuntarily give-up their properties for the benefit of the project. These properties include land, perennial crops and trees. Ministry of Water and Environment 92 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Most of the land to be acquired for the project is government owned, with the exception of 0.568, 2.0 and 0.289 acres at the WTP, FSTP and Reservoir 2 respectively (refer to Section 4.11). This gives a total of 2.857 acres. The private land at the WTP and Reservoir 2 are utilized occasionally for subsistence farming, while the 2.0 acres at the FSTP site is used for grazing cattle. Furthermore, land owners will be adequately compensated as per the World Bank policy on involuntary resettlement and Ugandan laws on compulsory land acquisition. In general, the impact of agriculture land loss, though permanent in effect, will be localized, minor in magnitude and is reversible, thus a slight negative (-1) change. Mitigation measures The land to be permanently acquired for the project should be compensated for as per Ugandan laws on Compensation and Land Acquisition and in line with World Bank’s OP 4.12; those who will be temporarily affected, such as temporary excavations for water pipe laying, should be compensated for any damages; the RAP study/report that has been undertaken for the project should be utilized as a guide during the compensation exercise. 7.10.2 CONFLICTS DUE TO INFLUX OF LABOUR The project will attract labour into the project area. Like any other project with mass recruitments, the behavior of workers on and off the site, such as the use of abusive and vulgar language, destruction to property, lack of respect to the locals and engagement in sexual relations with underage girls and married women are bound to happen. Thus, a potential source of conflict. The impact of conflicts as a result of influx of labour, though localized, temporary, reversible and noncumulative, can be in immense in magnitude, thus a negative (-2) change. Mitigation measures Contractors should develop guidelines for behavioral conduct, including penalties (Workers’ Code of Conduct). Casual labour jobs should be prioritized for Local Residents to reduce the influx levels. Workers must be sensitized on proper social behavior and conduct with regard to community norms prior to starting work; workers should be sensitized to avoid engaging in sexual relations with underage girls and married women; in case of misunderstandings between workers and the local community, local leadership should always be sought as a first priority in solving these issues; similarly, in liaison with local leaders, contractors should prepare local communities – psychologically and otherwise – for the newcomers; efforts be focused on instilling attitudes of tolerance, support and understanding towards the newcomers in the local communities. This shall be achieved by requiring Contractors bidding for construction works to develop and implement Contractor’s ESMP which will among others have the following: a Labour-Influx Management Plan which will make provision for establishment of a separate Workers’ Grievance Committee, Workers’ Camp Management Plan, and so on. Community Grievance Redress Committees shall be established at different levels and mainly built on existing structures to increase their accessibility and acceptability by the Communities. These shall handle all project related complaints and be a bridge between the project and the host communities. It is also recommended that regular Monitoring by District Local Governments (Community Development Officers, Probation Officers, Gender Officers) and MGLSD. 7.10.3 CHILD ABUSE AND EARLY AGE PREGNANCIES Ministry of Water and Environment 93 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Given that workers will have higher disposable income earned from being employed on the project, temptations to engage in sexual acts with underage children, particularly the gild child, can occur. This may result in early pregnancies. One of the major consequences arising from this would be an increase in number of girl children dropping out of school. This may psychologically disorient the life of the child and her family. Furthermore, given that the project employees shall be recruited from many parts of the country and from different cultural and sexual backgrounds, it is possible that some of them introduce foreign sexual behaviors in the project area such as having sex with young boys. This is child molestation. The impact of child abuse and early age pregnancies, though immense in magnitude, will be localized, temporary, is reversible and will not be cumulative, thus a negative (-2) change. Mitigation measures Employers at both the construction and operation phase should have a strict employment code of conduct. At the induction of employees, the employer should emphasize that molestation of children especially the girl child is punishable by taking the culprit to court. An employer who tries to shield or cover up for the employee caught in the act will equally be prosecuted, according to the penal code. 7.10.4 CHILD LABOUR It is generally anticipated that local labour will be employed especially for casual activities. This anticipation is very high on the side of community leaders and members in the project areas. However, although this is a good gesture that is likely to improve household income, if not properly managed and coordinated could potentially result into recruitment of children to provide labour on the project. Child labour is condemned by all international conventions including those of the International Labour Organization (ILO) and the United Nations (UN) as well as the Ugandan laws. The impact of child labour, though moderate in magnitude, will be localized, temporary, is reversible and noncumulative, thus a negative (-2) change. Mitigation measures During construction and within the operational phase, the project implementation team should put a mechanism in place to identify the presence of all persons under the age of 18 and ensure that they are not employed on the project. 7.10.5 INCREASE IN HIV/AIDS AND STDS DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PHASE Like any other project with mass recruitments, influx of labour at the construction phase is bound to occur. Most often these workers will not come with their families and some may be single. This will encourage the formation of new social networks with the resident community, increasing the risk of prostitution and the spread of HIV/AIDS and STDs. Currently, HIV/AIDS prevalence rate in Busia stands at 10%. This is higher than the National prevalence rate of 6.8% (refer to Table 20). Ministry of Water and Environment 94 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project In general, the impact of increase in HIV/AIDS and STDs, though cumulative, will be largely localized/regional in context, moderate in magnitude, temporary and is reversible, thus a moderate (-3) negative change. Mitigation measures Sensitize workers on proper social behavior and conduct about community systems, HIV/AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases. HIV/AIDS policies be developed at workplace. Free HIV/AIDS testing, counselling and condom distribution be encouraged for both workers and local community. The pathways for transmission of HIV/AIDS and STIs are well known, foreseeable and can be mitigated. Social bonds are not readily controlled and the permanence of HIV/AIDS transmission makes this impact of social bonding both negative and also positive. Social bonds leading to lasting marriages and children occur in such situations; early pregnancies and sexual exploitation can also occur. It is therefore important to tackle the issue of social bonding with firmness and fairness, forbidding power relationships, which lead to exploitation of mostly women and children, while encouraging relationships that may lead to permanent situations. 7.10.6 LOSS OF VEGETATION COVER Vegetation clearance and removal will take place at the WTP, transmission mains and FSTP sites. The removal of trees will be minimal (only done when necessary) but will contribute to increase of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere (trees fix carbon dioxide from the atmosphere). All these will contribute to the greenhouse effect that causes global warming, thus climate change. The reservoir sites and pipeline routes are mainly covered by short grass that will rejuvenate on complication of construction works. In general, the impact of vegetation clearance at the WTP and FSTP sites, though permanent (at points that infrastructures will be erected), will be localized, minor in magnitude, is reversible and noncumulative, thus a slight (-1) negative change. Mitigation measures Limit clearance of vegetation to only localities required for development; if possible, avoid cutting of trees; landscape with grass & trees, with local plant species as the preferred biodiversity on completion of construction works. 7.10.7 LOSS OF FAUNA Vegetation clearance and excavations at the various construction sites may lead to the destruction of habitat for fauna. This will not only disrupt the natural lifecycle of various fauna but permanently destroy/alter their habitats, especially at the WTP and FSTP sites. This impact is however of a limited extent given the small sizes of the plots. H. amphibious (hippopotamus), an IUCN Red Listed animal, inhabits River Sio on the Uganda – Kenya border. Hippos can cover up to 10 km as grazing ground, thus utilizes part of the WTP periphery as feeding ground. The WTP will generate noise in addition to security lights that drive away most wild animals. However, there is no other direct impact on the hippos from the project, except maybe the increased presence of human beings in and around the pier, sometimes at night. Ministry of Water and Environment 95 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Furthermore, the constructed wetlands to be built at the FSTP site will not only alter the current fauna habitat but create a new one (wetland based). This will also introduce new flora and fauna at the site. In general, the impact of fauna loss (hippopotamus) at the WTP site, though localized, reversible and noncumulative, will be immense in magnitude and permanent, thus a negative (-2) impact. Mitigation measures UWA should be consulted prior to commencement of any works at the WTP site with regard to protection of the habitat of H. amphibious. A Wildlife Management Plan (Appendix 5) has been prepared for the project. It should be implemented by the Contractor during construction and the operator during the operation phase of the project. Clearance of fauna habitat (vegetation and soils) should be limited only to localities required for development; adhere to construction schedule so that work is completed on time; compensatory re- vegetation should be done once construction work is complete as part of landscaping and greening of the area so as to replicate the environment that was habited prior to construction works. 7.10.8 EROSION AND LOSS OF TOP SOIL The loss of top soil due to erosion of graded/levelled and excavated soil will take place at various sites depending on site slope and the extent of soil disturbance. These soils will be carried by runoff water and wind. Minor excavation works will take place at the reservoir sites; soils excavated along pipe routes will be used for backfilling. Thus, minimal loss of top soil at these localities. However, extensive site levelling and excavation works will take place at the WTP and FSTP sites given the requirements of the structures to be built. In general, the impact of loss of top soil, though moderate in magnitude and irreversible, will be localized, temporary and noncumulative, thus a negative (-2) change. Mitigation measures Limit clearance of vegetation to localities required for development; sites should be hoarded off before excavations and soil barriers erected; topsoil should be removed prior to carrying out excavations and saved for later rehabilitation work such as gardening of site; excess soil which will not be used for construction works shall be removed from the site in a timely manner and deposited at an approved site; abandoned quarries be used for the disposal of excessive quantities of excavated soil material; areas adjacent to the construction site should not be disturbed and care taken to minimize the area of impairment caused by on-site storage of construction materials and equipment; adhere to construction schedule so that work is completed on time. 7.10.9 NOISE AND VIBRATION FROM VEHICLES Noise and vibration will occur both on and off site. This will emanate from movement of trucks, excavation works, usage of equipment (compactors, generators, etc.), etc. The impact of noise and vibrations, though moderate in magnitude, will be localized, temporary, reversible and noncumulative, thus a negative (-2) change. Ministry of Water and Environment 96 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Mitigation measures Sites must be hoarded to curb noise impacts to neighboring communities; features to reduce noise generation and vibrations be fitted to motorized equipment; workers be provided with the necessary personal protective equipment (PPE) such as ear muffs as found appropriate; workers operating equipment generating noise levels greater than 80 dBA over long hours must be given earmuffs; movement of haulage vehicles be limited to day time since the noise impact will be less felt. 7.10.10 DUST GENERATION Construction dust can lead to lung and sight related health risks. Dust will be generated during excavation works, movement of haulage trucks, grading and levelling of ground surfaces, operation of stone crushers, etc. Acute Respiratory Infections, being the second leading cause of morbidity among all age groups in Busia (Busia District Abstract, 2009), could thus increase. In general, the impact of dust emissions, though moderate in magnitude, will be localized, temporary, reversible and is noncumulative, thus a Negative (-2) change. Mitigation measures Construction sites shall be hoarded off to restrict dust to within site boundaries; sprinkle water on vehicle pathways; PPE like dust masks shall be availed to workers whenever needed; loose materials like sand that are susceptible to dust generation during haulage be covered with tarpaulin; limit vehicle speed on murram roads. 7.10.11 EXHAUST EMISSIONS FROM VEHICLES Exhaust emissions from vehicles and machinery (e.g. generators) are expected to occur particularly at the construction phase. This will consist mainly of poorly burnt fuels and oils, including nitrogen oxides, carbon oxides, hydrocarbons, particulate matter, etc. Nitrogen oxides react with ammonia, moisture and other compounds to form nitric acid vapour and related particles. Small particles can penetrate lung tissue, thus worsening of respiratory diseases. Carbon monoxide is highly toxic and the most common type of fatal air poisoning in many countries (Omaye, 2002). Acute Respiratory Infections, being the second leading cause of morbidity among all age groups in Busia (Busia District Abstract, 2009), could thus increase. Carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas. It traps solar radiation being emitted from the earth, thus causing a rise in the earths’ temperature, which leads to global warming. The warming of the earth results in the changing of weather patterns leading to climate change. In general, the impact of exhaust emissions, though important to local/immediate surrounding and moderate in magnitude, will be temporary, is reversible and noncumulative, thus a moderate (-3) negative change. Mitigation measures Timely automobile maintenance be carried out to limit carbon emissions; workers operating/working near stationary emission emitting equipment/machinery (e.g. generators, excavators, etc.) be availed PPE (e.g. nose muffs); do not burn cleared vegetation. Ministry of Water and Environment 97 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project 7.10.12 OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY AT CONSTRUCTION Construction employees meet many occupational hazards at the workplace. Examples include repetitive stress injury, cumulative trauma, musculoskeletal disorders, etc. These are generally caused by work conditions that result from using the body in a repetitious way and end up causing injury or traumatizing the body. At times the work environment is poor. For example, low and high illumination; poor ventilation or windy conditions; noisy conditions; high or low humidity; poor working environmental conditions, etc. These usually may lead to accidents at the work place and/or low performance. The result is unhealthy workforce. The impact of occupational hazards, though immense in magnitude, will be localized, temporary, it is reversible and noncumulative, thus a negative (-2) change. Mitigation measures Prepare and approve occupational safety and health plan for all sites; the Contractor shall provide safety guidelines to all operations prior to start of work; wearing appropriate PPE, such as safety glasses with side shields, face shields, hard hats/helmets, and safety boots be required for all site staff; establish emergency entrances, exits and amenities; ensure access to first aid kits; ensure safe working heights through provision of work platforms, scaffolds and adequate supervision by ensuring regular inspection of formwork, false work and temporary supports before loading or pouring concrete; secure site boundaries with fences or hoardings as appropriate; install caution signage around the site to discourage the public from being close to the site, for example, “falling debris”, “keep off the site” etc. . The Client through the contracted Construction Supervisor (the Design Engineer) will continually monitor Contractors´ compliance with Health and Safety measures. 7.10.13 SOLID WASTE GENERATION Solid wastes, if not well managed, can lead to health and safety issues, including accidents, bad odour, harboring of vectors, parasites and other dangerous animals. The wastes to be generated at the construction phase include food remains, polythene bags, plastic bottles, papers, wrappings for components to be installed, excavated soil and left overs of construction materials (timber, aggregates, sand, bricks/blocks, steel bar cuttings, glasses, cement, etc.), etc. In general, the impact of solid wastes, though moderate in magnitude, will be localized, temporary, is reversible and noncumulative, thus a negative (-2) change. Mitigation measures Prepare site waste management plan prior to commencement of work, including appropriate waste storage areas, collection & disposal schedule; wastes be appropriately segregated into metallic, plastic, glass & biodegradable; waste bins be provided at appropriate points; re-usable wastes be sold or given away to interested parties; excavation material be used for site levelling/backfilling; wastes be disposed at only NEMA approved sites. 7.10.14 HUMAN WASTE GENERATION Poor management of human waste at construction sites can lead to health issues (e.g. cholera outbreaks), bad odour, environmental degradation (eutrophication), water contamination, etc. Up to 50 or more workers will be employed at the WTP and FSTP sites. Sanitary wastes will be an issue given that management facilities are currently non-existent. Ministry of Water and Environment 98 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project The impact of poor human waste management at the various construction sites, though it can be immense in magnitude, will be localized, temporary, is reversible and noncumulative, thus a negative (-2) change. Mitigation measures Prepare site human waste management plan prior to commencement of work; put in place mobile toilets for use by workers; workers be made aware of available sanitary facilities & their location; regularly inspect sites to identify sanitation non-conformances and ensure timely redress; construct water borne/mobile toilets instead of pit latrines; toilets be periodically emptied by licensed cesspool providers to designated facilities. 7.10.15 RAW MATERIAL EXTRACTION Construction raw materials such as aggregates and sand will have to be sourced locally or within the region. Mining activities lead to a number of impacts, including impacts on air quality, hydrology and water quality, ecology and biodiversity, social concerns, health and safety concerns, and resource issues. In general, the impacts of raw material extraction for the project, though it can be irreversible, will be largely localized, moderate in magnitude, temporary and noncumulative, thus a negative (-2) change. Mitigation measures Raw material extraction be carried out at NEMA approved sites; NEMA approved site management plan be prepared by contractors for each raw material extraction site; cover extracted loose raw materials with tarpaulin during transportation; do not overload vehicles to avoid accidents. 7.10.16 ACCIDENTS Accidents, minor, severe, major or fatal, can occur on or off site during the construction phase. These may emanate from traffic accidents, falling from heights, electrical shocks and electrocution, cuts, falling objects, bursting vessels, slipping or tripping, burns, entanglements, lifting and manual handling back injury, etc. The impact of accidents, though it can be immense in magnitude and irreversible (e.g. if fatal), will be localized, temporary and noncumulative, thus a moderate (-3) negative change. Mitigation measures In addition to the mitigation measures listed occupational health and safety (see above), the following should be adhered to: Prepare & approve site accident management plans; only trained and & experienced personnel be allowed to operate accident prone/high risk equipment and machinery; ensure good housekeeping and proper induction courses for employees; develop and distribute guidelines for working at heights, confined places, etc.; ensure proper wiring and installation to prevent electrical shocks; equipment be installed and operated properly to avoid bursting and explosions; employers should have an accident reporting and investigation mechanism. Ministry of Water and Environment 99 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project 7.11 ANALYSIS OF SIGNIFICANT OPERATION PHASE NEGATIVE IMPACTS 7.11.1 DEGRADATION OF SOURCE WATER QUALITY The WTP will be constructed adjacent to the water source for the project (Lake Victoria). The WTP will employ alum and lime in its treatment processes. Thus, the sludge will have to be disposed. Additionally, backwash (filter cleaning) wastewater will have to be disposed. The impacts resulting from the disposal of these WTP residuals in to source water have been elaborated in Section 7.1.3. The WTP is designed to treat backwash effluent, separate and thicken the water treatment sludge and return clarified backwash water into Lake Victoria. However, the clarified backwash water will continuously release residues of aluminum sulphate, suspended solids, chlorine and nutrients. Over the long term, these residues will form a sludge on the lake bottom but this is expected to be of minor significance owing to the large dilution effect of the lake. In general, the impact of WTP residuals, if discharged into source water, though localized and temporary, will be limited because of the dilution factor and non-cumulative in effect, thus a negative (-2) negative impact. There are no vulnerable aquatic species in the lake or in the wetland because of the dilution factor of Lake Victoria (the second largest fresh water lake in the world). It is anticipated aquatic biodiversity will not be affected. Mitigation measures Management of alum & lime sludge Do not discharge any sludge into Lake Victoria or any nearby water body. Adopt mechanisms that lead to: a. Pollution prevention & waste reduction (resource recovery) at the WTP as a priority; followed by b. residuals treatment and c. Safe disposal of wastes as a last option. Adopt the following pollution prevention & waste reduction mechanisms: - Optimize intake location to lower turbidity & suspended loads by siting and installing intake infrastructure at a deeper and clearer point of the lake profile; optimize solids settling using the pH in clarifiers and sedimentation tanks to reduce coagulant chemicals (alum coagulation has a minimum solubility at pH 6 (Tchobanoglous, et al., 2003). Thus, adjusting of pH (i.e. above 6) to keep optimal coagulation conditions might help to reduce waste products but still effectively treat the source water); reduce softening chemicals by monitoring source water hardness (WTPs remove calcium hardness to a level that meets the requirements of the customer. By monitoring the calcium content of the influent, WTPs might reduce the amount of chemicals needed to precipitate the required fraction of calcium hardness, thus resulting in a minimized level of residuals requiring additional treatment or disposal); recycle/reuse sludge where applicable. Adopt the following residuals treatment mechanism:  Utilize drying beds in separating solids and liquid at the WTP facility. Adopt the following safe disposal mechanisms: a. Contract a NEMA approved WTP residual handler to collect hazardous solid wastes for safe disposal; or Ministry of Water and Environment 100 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project b. Landfill solid wastes but not close to any surface or groundwater (residuals from WTPs are typically not hazardous (EPA, 2011a), thus can be landfilled). Those wastes that can be taken to the FSTP should be handled separately and transported to the FSTP. Management of backwash water Do not discharge backwash water into Lake Victoria or any nearby water body prior to de- chlorination; adopt mechanisms that lead to: a. Pollution prevention & waste reduction (resource recovery) at the WTP as a first priority; followed by b. Backwash water treatment; and Adopt the following pollution prevention & waste reduction mechanisms: a. Optimize the filter media by employing filter medium that ensure longer filter run times, thus infrequent backwashing while maintaining or improving on the finished water quality; b. Return backwash water to the head of the source water treatment plant for reuse. Adopt the following backwash water treatment mechanism: a. Dechlorinate the free or total combined chlorine residual remaining after disinfection through the addition of sulfur chemicals such as sulfur dioxide, sodium sulfite, sodium bisulfite, sodium metabisulfite, and sodium thiosulfate (NB: do not overdose with sulphite). Too much sulfite can result in sulfate formation, which suppresses oxygen content and lowers the pH of the treatment residuals (EPA, 2000b). 7.11.2 DEGRADATION OF FSTP EFFLUENT DISPOSAL ROUTE The FSTP will be designed to be effective in removing phosphorus (refer to Section 7.1.6). Increase in ambient phosphorus concentration above naturally occurring levels results in excessive growth of algae and other phytoplankton, thus development of eutrophic conditions. The receiving water body, Okame – Amagoro stream, is also being used by downstream communities (households) for domes activities, including domestic cleaning and watering animals. This could create resentment and ultimately rejection of the facility by the community. In general, the impact of degradation of FSTP effluent disposal route, though temporary and reversible, will affect areas immediately outside the local condition, will be slight in magnitude and cumulative in effect. Using granular slag as a substrate in the constructed wetland will remove phosphate from the effluent and the discharge of effluent into a natural wetland will further polish the effluent as recommended in the mitigations below. The impact is classified as negative (-2) impact because the volume of effluent into the receiving environment will below. Mitigation measures a. Employ media such granular slag to enhance phosphorous removal within the FSTP constructed wetlands (refer to Section 7.1.6). The FINAL Engineering Design will encompass this aspect. If media that enhance phosphorous removal will not be employed then do not directly release the FSTP effluent into the receiving water prior to channeling through a natural/created wetland. Wetlands are known to remove phosphates from effluents through sedimentation, flocculation, absorption, co-precipitation, cation and anion exchange, Ministry of Water and Environment 101 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project complexation, precipitation, oxidation/reduction, microbiological activity and plant uptake (Brezonik, 1993 and Matagi et al 1998). b. Prepare and approve an operation & maintenance manual for the FSTP; c. Ensure continual training and skills build-up of the FSTP staff with respect to sustainable operation of the FSTP. d. Ensure that affected communities are availed safe and sustainable water supply for domestic consumption through the project. This supply could be through household connections, yard taps or water kiosks. These communities should also be sensitized and educated on the benefits of safe water within easy reach. 7.12 ANALYSIS OF OPERATIONAL PHASE NEGATIVE DIRECT AND INDIRECT IMPACTS 7.12.1 SEDIMENT SWIRL UP AND TRANSPORT If installed too close to the lake bed, sediment swirl up and transport could occur through the intake valve of the intake facility. This could lead to increased turbidity at the intake locality, thus affecting the flora and fauna. Sediment transport through the intake main will lead to increased sedimentation sludge at the WTP, thus increased cost for sludge management. The impact of sediment swirls up and transport, though moderate in magnitude, will be localized, temporary, is reversible and noncumulative, thus a negative (-2) change. Mitigation measures The intake facility, including the suction valve, should be properly sited through sound bathymetric surveys so that the minimal distance, as per water pump manufacturer´s manual, during low water levels is kept between the intake valve and the lake bed; the maximal intake valve height, with respect to the pier gauge in Jinja, should be kept at 10.33 m (refer to Section 4.7); install the intake facility in such a way that the intake valve can be varied with respect to the lake bed (i.e. dynamic intake valve). 7.12.2 ODOUR NUISANCE Odour (bad smell) will be generated at the FSTP. This can be carried by wind to nearby settlements, thus unpleasant breathing environments. In general, the impact of odour nuisance, though localized, can be immense magnitude, will be permanent, irreversible and cumulative, thus a negative (-2) negative change. Mitigation measures As discussed in Section 6.1.2, a minimum distance of about 740 m should be maintained between the FSTP facilities and the nearest inhabited building. Nonetheless, the nearest settlement is about 900 m from the FSTP site. Frequently monitor the performance of the FSTP to ensure that clogging is remedied as soon as possible; keep the immediate surrounding of the FSTP tidy with short grass and enforce proper Ministry of Water and Environment 102 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project internal solid waste handling and disposal. Outbreaks of pollution due to system failure should be remedied immediately and the community informed if there will be a prolonged delay in repairs. 7.12.3 OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY AT OPERATION Chlorine, a toxic chemical, will be employed as the disinfectant during the operational phase of the WTP. Chlorine gas has a density greater than air, thus gas leaks accumulate and present significant safety concerns to persons handling it. A thorough discussion on the effects of chlorine has been elaborated in Section 7.1.3. In general, the impact of chlorine occupational hazards, though localized and temporary, can be immense in magnitude, irreversible and cumulative to some extent (e.g. id fatalities occur), thus a moderate (-3) negative change. Mitigation measures Written safe work practices be compiled for the WTP site to prevent chlorine leaks and spills and promote safety of all site personnel and visitors. The safe work practices should form the basis of on-site training for all plant operatives and supervisory personnel in exposure control, first aid, PPE, and emergency response. The training should be documented and upgraded during the operation phase. Current material safety data sheets, warning signs and other proprietary chlorine wall charts should be visible for use by site personnel and visitors. Written operating procedures should be followed by operators. The procedures should address the appropriate steps for evacuating and filling chlorine containers. Operators should wear appropriate PPE consisting of rubber gloves, apron and face shield or goggles, when changing cylinders. Site specific inspection and maintenance schedule should be created for all chlorine storage and handling equipment and associated safety equipment. Equipment and chlorine containers should be regularly monitored for leaks using ammonia leak detection kits. Line repair kits should be available. Site operatives should never repair a chlorine leak alone; there must always be backup. Leaks should be repaired using site specific emergency response procedures. 7.12.4 SOLID WASTE GENERATION The wastes that will be generated at the operational phase include food remains, polythene bags, plastic bottles, papers, containers for treatment chemicals (alum, lime, chlorine, etc.), wrappings for spare parts, etc. Wrappings/cylinders for treatment chemicals can be hazardous to humans and the environment if not safely disposed. In general, the impact of solid wastes, though localized, temporary and largely reversible, can be immense in magnitude and cumulative in effect, thus a moderate (-3) negative change. Mitigation measures Ministry of Water and Environment 103 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project As part of the Contractors’ ESMPs, Prepare operational site waste management plan for the FSTP & WTP facilities, including appropriate waste storage areas, collection & disposal schedules; wastes be appropriately separated into metallic, plastic, glass & biodegradable; waste bins be provided at appropriate points; re-usable wastes be sold or given away to interested parties; hazardous/toxic wastes (e.g. chlorine and alum containers be returned to supplier or given to a NEMA approved waste handler; other wastes be disposed of at only NEMA approved sites. 7.12.5 BIO-SOLID GENERATION Bio solid (manure) will be generated at the FSTP after thickening of faecal sludge. Though its removal will be carried out occasionally (i.e. once every 3 – 5 years), there is need to safely depose it. Faecal sludge manure tends to harbour pathogens, particularly eggs of worms /helminths, and if not safely disposed/reused can lead to heath issues. In general, the impact of bio solids, though localized, temporary and reversible, will be immense in magnitude and cumulative in effect, thus a moderate (-3) negative change. Mitigation measures Landfill bio solids at Busia Municipality Waste Disposal site at Osapir village in Abochet Parish, Buteba Sub-county, Busia District. In case reuse is required, then dose manure with lime to kill pathogens prior to supply of manure to farmers. Make farmers aware of the risks of poor handling of bio solids. Hand washing with soap be encouraged after handling. Protective gears such as hand cloves, boots, overalls and nose and mouth muffs be encouraged. 7.12.6 PRESSURE ON EXISTING UTILITIES Stable and sustainable electrical power supply will be required to optimally achieve demand target for the project. Utility consumption such as water pumping, lighting systems, WTP onsite laboratory operations, office work (computers for management and billing of water consumption), etc., will need sufficient and reliable power supply. The Ugandan national power grid is already faced with a high consumer base that it can only sustains through power rationing (load shedding). The intake facility and booster stations will operate 22 hours a day and the WTP at 24 hours a day. Thus, increased pressure on the already overloaded National Grid line is foreseen. The impact of increased pressure on existing utilities, though temporary and reversible, will regional in context, moderate in magnitude and cumulative, thus a moderate (-3) negative change. Mitigation measures Install standby generators at within the WTP site; options to use solar energy for lighting should be employed as this reduces demand on the national grid. 7.12.7 ACCIDENTS A pier bridge will be constructed up to 300 m into the lake. This will be utilized in accessing the intake facility during the operational phase. Local communities, fishermen and visitors normally use the locality that the pier will be built as navigation route. Thus, accidents (such boat collisions with the pier) can occur that could be minor, severe or even fatal. Ministry of Water and Environment 104 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Major chlorine gas leaks at the WTP can occur that could lead to injury or even death if not safely remedied on time. Drowning of domestic animals and visitors, children in particular, can occur at the FSTP site if proper measures are not undertaken. The impact of accidents, though localized and temporary, can be immense in magnitude, irreversible (e.g. if fatal) and cumulative in effect, thus a Moderate negative (-3) change. Mitigation measures At the intake The pier bridge, at the minimum, should be constructed with lighting systems that can enable navigators, fishermen and local community to clearly see it at night; install warning signs with reflective material when illuminated so that boats/ships coming close to it can easily see it; given that the pier bridge will be long (at least 300 m into the lake), passage ways could be incorporated underneath it so that small boats do not have to go round it. At the WTP In the event of a major chlorine gas leak: a. Utilize an approved contingency plan for the site as guide. b. The WTP Operator will contact the nearest Fire Department and remain on the scene. c. Shut down the water treatment process until the chlorine leak has been repaired. d. Do not attempt repair until the Fire Department & a qualified repairer are onsite. e. Use of signage to ward off un-authorized entry to the WTP. f. Control access to the WTP by use of fence and gated (manned) entry. At the FSTP Fence off the FSTP site; do not allow animals to graze within the site; do not allow children to play within the site or any persons to move within the site without the guidance of a staff member, and install appropriate signage to warn of un-authorized entry to the FSTP. 7.13 ANALYSIS OF IMMEDIATE, LONG-TERM AND CUMULATIVE IMPACTS 7.13.1 IMMEDIATE, LONG-TERM AND CUMULATIVE POSITIVE IMPACTS Table 31 below is a summary of the characteristics of the positive impacts identified and analyzed in Sections 0 and 7.8. it can be seen that the benefits of improved public health, hygiene and household health status; improved living standard/well-being; employment; incomes and market for produce and products; and skills and technology transfer have all the characteristics of being immediate, long- term (permanent) and cumulative in benefit. The benefits accruing from improved gender awareness and the economy will be long-term and cumulative but not immediate. On the other hand, the benefit of Land/property compensation will be immediate but temporary and non-cumulative. Table 31: Immediate, long-term and cumulative positive impacts. Ministry of Water and Environment 105 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Positive Impact Immediat Long- Cumulativ e term e Improved Public Health, Hygiene and Household Health    Status Improved living standard/well-being    Reduction of domestic violence    Improved gender awareness x   Employment    Incomes and market for produce and products    Economy x   Skills and Technology Transfer    Land/property compensation  x x Key:  = applicable; x = not applicable. 7.13.2 CONSTRUCTION PHASE IMMEDIATE, LONG-TERM AND CUMULATIVE NEGATIVE IMPACTS Table 32 below is a summary of the characteristics of construction phase negative impacts as identified and analyzed in Section 7.10. It can be seen that all impacts will be immediate. However, the impact of loss of land and damage to property will be long-term (permanent) given that land portions will have to be permanently acquired for the benefit of the project. Furthermore, the impact of increase in HIV/AIDS and STDs, if not curtailed, can be cumulative. Table 32: Immediate, long-term and cumulative construction negative impacts. Negative Impact Immediate Long term Cumulative Loss of land and damage to property   X Conflicts due to influx of labour  x X Child abuse and early age pregnancies  x X Child labour  x X Increase in HIV/AIDS and STDs  x  Loss of vegetation cover  x X Loss of fauna  x X Erosion and loss of top soil  x X Noise and vibration from vehicles  x X Dust generation  x X Exhaust emissions from vehicles  x X Occupational health and safety  x X Solid waste generation  x X Human waste generation  x X Raw material extraction  x X Accidents  x X Key:  = applicable; x = not applicable. 7.13.3 OPERATION PHASE IMMEDIATE, LONG-TERM AND CUMULATIVE NEGATIVE IMPACTS Ministry of Water and Environment 106 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Table 33 below is a summary of the characteristics of operation phase negative impacts as identified and analyzed in Sections 7.11 and 7.12. It can be seen that all impacts will be immediate. Additionally, the impacts of degradation of source water, degradation of FSTP effluent disposal route and odour generation will also be long-term (permanent) and cumulative in effect. However, the impacts of occupational health and safety, solid waste generation, pressure on existing utilities and accidents will not be long-term though they could be cumulative. Lastly, the impact of sediment swirl up and transport will not be long-term nor cumulative. Table 33: Immediate, long-term and cumulative operation negative impacts. Negative Impact Immediate Long-term Cumulative Degradation of source water    Degradation of FSTP effluent disposal route    Sediment swirl up and transport  x x Odour generation    Occupational health and safety  x  Solid waste generation  x  Bio solid generation X x  Pressure on existing utilities  x  Accidents  x  Key: = applicable; x = not applicable. 7.14 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ANALYSIS OF IRREVERSIBLE IMPACTS As discussed in Sections 7.10, 7.11 and 7.12, some of the project´s construction and operational activities can lead to severe injury or even fatalities of humans, flora or fauna, including the habitat that supports them, thus irreversible. The impacts of erosion and loss of top soil, degradation of source water during operation, prolonged exposure to high noise levels, exhaust emissions, occupational health and safety, and accidents can lead to severe injury or fatalities. Ministry of Water and Environment 107 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project 8 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL MANAGEMENT PLAN 8.1 INTRODUCTION This Environmental and Social Management Plan (ESMP) is aimed at ensuring that the proposed Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project is established in compliance with applicable legal frameworks, standards and industrial best practices. The ESMP (see Table 34 at the end of this Chapter) lists the requirements to ensure effective mitigation of impacts for all proposed project developmental and operational activities. For each project activity, the following information is analyzed: a. Likely impacts, including indicators; b. A description of the mitigation measures that should be undertaken; c. Frequency of monitoring; d. The responsible party; e. Relevant policies, legislation and regulatory framework; and f. Cost of mitigation and enhancement where applicable. 8.2 PROPOSED WORK PROGRAMS, TIMING AND BUDGET ESTIMATES See the ESMP in Table 34 and Table 35, next page. Ministry of Water and Environment 108 Updated by Individual Environmental Consultant, Nelson Omagor. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Table 34: Environmental and Social Management Plan N Enviro Impact Rank Mitigation measures Monitoring Frequ Relevant Estimate Responsibi Monitoring o nment Indicators ency policies, d cost of lity Institution al or of legislation & mitigatio s social monit regulatory n& factor oring framework enhance ment (UGX) PRE-CONSTRUCTION/CONSTRUCTION PHASE 1 Land Loss of land Slight  Use the RAP report  Records of clearly Quarte WB OP 4.12: UGX MWE WB; Use and damage negative as a guide to identified PAPs, rly Involuntary 300,149,6 MGLSD; to property change (- determining including Resettlement 17. The NEMA; 1) affected persons; vulnerable ; The Land cost of RAP District  Compensate for land individuals; Act, Cap 227; Community as per Ugandan laws  records of The Land Use Developme on Land Acquisition sensitization of Policy 2004; nt and in line with PAPs on WB & The Land Department World Bank’s OP National policies Policy, 2011. . 4.12; & laws related to  Those who will be involuntary temporarily affected resettlement; should be  records of compensated for targeted training any damages to their of PAPs with property and any respect to associated injurious financial affection during management, construction health, wealth Ministry of Water and Environment 109 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project N Enviro Impact Rank Mitigation measures Monitoring Frequ Relevant Estimate Responsibi Monitoring o nment Indicators ency policies, d cost of lity Institution al or of legislation & mitigatio s social monit regulatory n& factor oring framework enhance ment (UGX) activities, in line with creation & any Policy requirements other necessary of OP 4.12. knowledge and skills;  records of letters of agreement & payment details between PAPs & the Client;  Records of any complaints & doubts from PAPs. 2 Popula Conflicts due Negative  All Contractors to  Records of Quarte The UGX Contractors MWE; tion to influx of change (- develop & training/sensitiza rly Constitution 10,000,00 MGLSD; and labour 2) implement a Labour tions offered to of the 0 District Settle Influx Management workers/local Republic of Community ment Plan and Workers’ communities Uganda, Developme Camp & with regard social 1995. nt Accommodation issues; Department Management Plans  MGLSD approved . as part of C-ESMP community  All workers to sign action plan, employment including conflict Ministry of Water and Environment 110 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project N Enviro Impact Rank Mitigation measures Monitoring Frequ Relevant Estimate Responsibi Monitoring o nment Indicators ency policies, d cost of lity Institution al or of legislation & mitigatio s social monit regulatory n& factor oring framework enhance ment (UGX) contract including management at Code of Conduct construction site;  Establish a  number of cases Grievance of community Committee for fears/complaints Workers handled in  Casual workers be relation to cases employed from host reported; community to  The nature of reduce labour influx link/relationship  Sensitize workers on between community based contractors & social behavior and local government conduct; & community  sensitize workers to leaders. not engage in sexual relations with underage girls and married women;  Establish a Grievance Redress Committee to act as link between community and the Ministry of Water and Environment 111 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project N Enviro Impact Rank Mitigation measures Monitoring Frequ Relevant Estimate Responsibi Monitoring o nment Indicators ency policies, d cost of lity Institution al or of legislation & mitigatio s social monit regulatory n& factor oring framework enhance ment (UGX) project; local leadership should always be sought as a first priority in solving issues;  prepare both local communities psychologically and the new comers;  Efforts to be geared toward instilling attitudes of tolerance, support and understanding of labour immigrates by the local communities  Regular Monitoring by District Local Governments (Community Development Officers, Probation Officers, Gender Ministry of Water and Environment 112 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project N Enviro Impact Rank Mitigation measures Monitoring Frequ Relevant Estimate Responsibi Monitoring o nment Indicators ency policies, d cost of lity Institution al or of legislation & mitigatio s social monit regulatory n& factor oring framework enhance ment (UGX) Officers) and MGLSD 3 Negative  Develop a strict  MGLSD approved Quarte The UGX Contractors MWE; change (- employment code code of conduct rly Constitution 10,000,00 MGLSD; 2) of conduct to for protection of of the 0 District protect the girl the girl child at Republic of Community child; site; Uganda, Developme  Continuous  number of cases 1995. nt Sensitization of child abuse Department employees on lawfully handled . dangers of in relation to Child abuse molestation of cases reported; and early age children, especially  Complaints from pregnancies, the girl child. communities. including  All Workers to sign general GBV Code Conduct as part of their employment contract  Establish Workers Grievance Redress Committee  Project to cooperate with Local Ministry of Water and Environment 113 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project N Enviro Impact Rank Mitigation measures Monitoring Frequ Relevant Estimate Responsibi Monitoring o nment Indicators ency policies, d cost of lity Institution al or of legislation & mitigatio s social monit regulatory n& factor oring framework enhance ment (UGX) Authorities in maintaining law & order at the project host community  Engage CSO or Consultants to implement GBV- Action Plan 4 Negative  Develop a site  MGLSD approved Quarte The UGX Contractors MWE; change (- recruitment employee rly Constitution 5,000,000 MGLSD; 2) plan/code with recruitment code of the District respect to child at site; Republic of Community labour;  Trained & Uganda, Developme Child Labour  Ensure that the HR approved HR 1995. nt office monitors the officer at Department workforce with contractor´s . respect to child office; labour.  Complaints from  communities. 5 Increase In Moderat  Develop sustainable  MoH & MGLSD Quarte The Public UGX Contractors MWE; MoH; HIV/AIDS & e & proactive approved on site rly Health Act, 10,000,00 MGLSD; STDs negative HIV/AIDS policies at HIV/AIDS Cap 281. 0 District change (- workplace; management Health 3) plan; Inspectors; Ministry of Water and Environment 114 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project N Enviro Impact Rank Mitigation measures Monitoring Frequ Relevant Estimate Responsibi Monitoring o nment Indicators ency policies, d cost of lity Institution al or of legislation & mitigatio s social monit regulatory n& factor oring framework enhance ment (UGX)  Engage CSO or  records of Community Consultants to sensitization Developme implement GBV- programmes on nt Officers Action Plan, closely HIV/AIDS; working with the  Complaints from District HIV/AIDS local community focal point at the on social/sexual District Health behavior of Department. workers.  Sensitize workers on HIV/AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases;  Provide free HIV/AIDS testing, counselling and condom distribution to workers and local community. 6 Occupational Negative  Prepare and  MoH & MGLSD Daily The UGX Contractors MWE; MoH; health and change (- approve approved Occupational 10,000,00 MGLSD; safety 2) occupational safety occupational Safety and 0 District and health plan for safety and health Health Act, Health all sites; plan at sites; 2006. Inspectors. Ministry of Water and Environment 115 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project N Enviro Impact Rank Mitigation measures Monitoring Frequ Relevant Estimate Responsibi Monitoring o nment Indicators ency policies, d cost of lity Institution al or of legislation & mitigatio s social monit regulatory n& factor oring framework enhance ment (UGX)  provide safety  records of health guidelines to all & safety cases at operations prior to work place; start of work;  Firefighting  wear appropriate equipment in PPE; place;  establish emergency  Site hoarding & entrances, exits and caution signage amenities; in place.  ensure access to first aid kits;  secure site boundaries with fences or hoardings as appropriate;  Install caution signage. 7 Flora Loss of Slight  Limit vegetation  Extent of site Immed WB OP: 4.36 UGX Contractors MWE; and vegetation negative clearance to only clearance; iate Forests; The 20,000,00 NEMA; Fauna cover change (- localities required  extent of (befor National 0 District Alteration of 1) for development; landscaping; e Forestry and Environmen surface water  if possible, avoid  Number of trees works) Tree planting t Office. quality cutting of trees; planted. and Act; The during National Ministry of Water and Environment 116 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project N Enviro Impact Rank Mitigation measures Monitoring Frequ Relevant Estimate Responsibi Monitoring o nment Indicators ency policies, d cost of lity Institution al or of legislation & mitigatio s social monit regulatory n& factor oring framework enhance ment (UGX)  Landscape with local the Environment plant species on constr Act Cap 153. completion of uction construction works. phase  monitor water quality and aquatic ecology during construction and to monitor throughout life of the project to identify & manage any arising impacts. 8 Loss of fauna negative  Consult UWA prior  Letter of Immed WB OP: 4.04 UGX Contractors; NEMA; change (- to commencement approval from iate Natural 5,000,000 MWE. UWA; 2) of works at the WTP UWA as regards (befor Habitats; The District site with regard to development of e National Environmen protection of the WTP site; works) Environment t Office. habitat of Hippos;  UWA approved and Act Cap 153.  UWA approved Hippo habitat during Hippo habitat management the management plan plan; constr be implemented by  extent of site uction the MWE in clearance; phase collaboration with Ministry of Water and Environment 117 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project N Enviro Impact Rank Mitigation measures Monitoring Frequ Relevant Estimate Responsibi Monitoring o nment Indicators ency policies, d cost of lity Institution al or of legislation & mitigatio s social monit regulatory n& factor oring framework enhance ment (UGX) UWA and Busia  Extent of District Local landscaping on Government/ works Municipality completion. (Appendix 5);  secure site boundaries with fences & lights be maintained throughout the night at the WTP site to keep away any H. amphibious that might encroach;  Clearance of fauna habitat be limited only to localities required for development;  adhere to construction schedule so that Ministry of Water and Environment 118 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project N Enviro Impact Rank Mitigation measures Monitoring Frequ Relevant Estimate Responsibi Monitoring o nment Indicators ency policies, d cost of lity Institution al or of legislation & mitigatio s social monit regulatory n& factor oring framework enhance ment (UGX) work is completed on time;  Compensatory vegetation be planted once construction work is complete. 9 Soil Erosion and Negative  sites be hoarded off  Area of site Weekl The National UGX Contractors MWE; Loss of top change (- prior to excavations hoarded off; y Environment 10,000,00 NEMA; soil 2) and soil barriers  any gullies of soil during Act Cap 153. 0 District erected; erosion; the Environmen  topsoil be removed  soil erosion constr t Office. prior to excavation checks in place; uction works & saved for  covered phase site rehabilitation; stockpiles of  excess soil be loose soil; removed in a timely  Signs of siltation manner and of nearby water deposited at an bodies (Lake approved site; Victoria, rivers,  Adhere to streams, etc.). construction schedule so that Ministry of Water and Environment 119 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project N Enviro Impact Rank Mitigation measures Monitoring Frequ Relevant Estimate Responsibi Monitoring o nment Indicators ency policies, d cost of lity Institution al or of legislation & mitigatio s social monit regulatory n& factor oring framework enhance ment (UGX) work is completed on time. 10 Air Noise and Negative  Sites be hoarded to  Site hoarding in Daily The National UGX Contractors MWE; Quality vibrations change (- curb noise place; during Environment 10,000,00 NEMA; from vehicles 2) transmission;  silencers installed constr (Noise 0 District  Silencers be fitted in noise emitting uction Standards Environmen on motorized machines; works and Control) t Office. equipment;  earmuffs used by Regulations,  Provide workers workers on site; 2003 with ear muffs;  Record of  Movement of complaints from haulage vehicles be recipients; limited to day time.  Record of noise levels. 11 Dust Negative  Site be hoarded off  Complaints from Daily The National UGX Contractors MWE; MoH; generation change (- to restrict dust to the local during Environment 10,000,00 NEMA; 2) within site community; constr Act Cap 153; 0 District boundaries;  visible dust uction The Public Environmen  sprinkle water on emissions; works Health Act, t Office; vehicle pathways;  frequency of Cap 281; The District  provide dust masks water sprinkling Occupational Health to workers; on dusty areas; Safety and Inspectors.  materials  PPEs used; Health Act, susceptible to dust 2006 Ministry of Water and Environment 120 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project N Enviro Impact Rank Mitigation measures Monitoring Frequ Relevant Estimate Responsibi Monitoring o nment Indicators ency policies, d cost of lity Institution al or of legislation & mitigatio s social monit regulatory n& factor oring framework enhance ment (UGX) generation during  Tarpaulins on haulage be covered tracks carrying with tarpaulin; loose soils.  Limit vehicle speed on unsurfaced tracks. 12 Exhaust Moderat  Timely automobile  Records of Daily The National UGX Contractors MWE; MoH; emission e maintenance to automobile during Environment 10,000,00 NEMA; from vehicles negative limit carbon maintenance; constr Act Cap 153; 0 District change (- emissions;  visible gaseous uction The Public Environmen 3)  workers working emission from works Health Act, t Office; near stationary vehicles, Cap 281 District emission emitting equipment & Health equipment be machinery; Inspectors. availed nose/mouth  Records of muffs); complaints from  Do not burn cleared onsite workers & vegetation. neighboring communities. 13 Land Raw material Negative  Extract from NEMA  NEMA approval biannu The National UGX Contractors MWE; Use extraction change (- approved sites; letter & site al Environment 5,000,000 NEMA; 2)  NEMA approved site management Act Cap 153. District management plan plan for each raw Environmen be prepared; t Office. Ministry of Water and Environment 121 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project N Enviro Impact Rank Mitigation measures Monitoring Frequ Relevant Estimate Responsibi Monitoring o nment Indicators ency policies, d cost of lity Institution al or of legislation & mitigatio s social monit regulatory n& factor oring framework enhance ment (UGX)  cover extracted material loose materials with extraction site; tarpaulin during  Complaints from transportation; communities.  Do not overload vehicles to avoid accidents. 14 Popula Solid waste Negative  Prepare site waste  NEMA approved Daily The National UGX Contractors MWE; tion generation at change (- management plan; waste during Environment 5,000,000 NEMA; and construction 2)  wastes be management constr (Waste District Settle appropriately plan at site; uction Management Environmen ment segregated;  clearly labelled works ) Regulations, t Office;  waste bins be waste 1999; The District provided at management Public Health Health appropriate points; facilities; Act, Cap 281. Office.  re-usable wastes be  signs of sold or given away indiscriminate to interested littering; parties;  frequency of  biosolids Wastes be waste collection disposed at Busia and disposal; Municipal Council  availability of Waste Disposal Site approved waste in Osapir village. disposal site; Ministry of Water and Environment 122 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project N Enviro Impact Rank Mitigation measures Monitoring Frequ Relevant Estimate Responsibi Monitoring o nment Indicators ency policies, d cost of lity Institution al or of legislation & mitigatio s social monit regulatory n& factor oring framework enhance ment (UGX)  Biosolids once pre-  Complaints from treated, may be communities. given out to interested farmers as manure. 15 Human waste Negative  Prepare site human  NEMA approved Daily The National UGX Contractors MWE; generation change (- waste management site human waste during Environment 5,000,000 NEMA; 2) plan; management constr (Waste District  workers be made plan; uction Management Environmen aware of available  Status of sanitary works ) Regulations, t Office; sanitary facilities; facilities at site 1999; The District  regularly inspect (e.g. cleanliness, Public Health Health sites to identify flies infestation, Act, Cap 281. Office. sanitation non- hand cleaning conformances and facilities, etc.; ensure timely re-  Complaints from address; local  construct water communities. borne/mobile toilets;  Toilets be periodically emptied by licensed cesspool. Ministry of Water and Environment 123 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project N Enviro Impact Rank Mitigation measures Monitoring Frequ Relevant Estimate Responsibi Monitoring o nment Indicators ency policies, d cost of lity Institution al or of legislation & mitigatio s social monit regulatory n& factor oring framework enhance ment (UGX) 16 Accidents Moderat In addition to the  MGLSD approved Daily The UGX Contractors MWE; e mitigation measures accident during Occupational 10,000,00 MGLSD negative listed under impact No. management constr Safety and 0 change (- 6 above, the following plan; uction Health Act, 3) should be adhered to:  number of works 2006  Prepare & approve accidents site accident reported; management plans;  skill/training  only trained and & credentials of experienced workers personnel be operating or allowed to operate working at risk prone accident prone equipment/machine sites; ry;  presence of PPEs;  ensure good  Category of housekeeping and insured workers. proper induction courses for employees;  Equipment be installed and operated properly Ministry of Water and Environment 124 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project N Enviro Impact Rank Mitigation measures Monitoring Frequ Relevant Estimate Responsibi Monitoring o nment Indicators ency policies, d cost of lity Institution al or of legislation & mitigatio s social monit regulatory n& factor oring framework enhance ment (UGX) to avoid bursting and explosions. Ministry of Water and Environment 125 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Table 35: ESMP for the operational phase of the project in Busia. # Environme Impact Rank Mitigation Monitoring Frequenc Relevant Estimated Responsibil Monitorin ntal or measures Indicators y of policies, cost of ity g social monitori legislation & mitigation Institution factor ng regulatory & s framework enhanceme nt (UGX) OPERATIONAL PHASE 17 Water Degradation negative Management of  Educational Daily WB OP: 7.50 UGX Operator MWE Resources of source change (- alum & lime sludge training & during Projects on 20,000,000 (DWRM); water 2)  Do not experience of the operatio International NEMA. during discharge any management n Waterways; operation untreated team; The Water sludge into Lake  methods being Act Cap 152, Victoria or any employed, The Water nearby water including their (Waste body; efficiencies & Discharge)  adopt drawbacks, in Regulations, mechanisms pollution Statutory that lead to: prevention & Instrument Pollution waste reduction; 152-4 prevention &  fraction of total waste reduction residuals being (resource recycled; recovery) at the  availability of WTP as a first onsite waste priority; treatment followed by mechanisms; residuals Ministry of Water and Environment 126 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project # Environme Impact Rank Mitigation Monitoring Frequenc Relevant Estimated Responsibil Monitorin ntal or measures Indicators y of policies, cost of ity g social monitori legislation & mitigation Institution factor ng regulatory & s framework enhanceme nt (UGX) treatment; and  availability of safe disposal of NEMA approved wastes as a last waste disposal option. site(s); or Management of  Availability of a backwash water NEMA approved  Do not WTP waste discharge handler; backwash water  Complaints from into Lake communities. Victoria or any water body prior to de- chlorination;  adopt mechanisms that lead to: Chlorine use reduction & waste reduction (resource recovery) at the WTP as a first Ministry of Water and Environment 127 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project # Environme Impact Rank Mitigation Monitoring Frequenc Relevant Estimated Responsibil Monitorin ntal or measures Indicators y of policies, cost of ity g social monitori legislation & mitigation Institution factor ng regulatory & s framework enhanceme nt (UGX) priority; followed by backwash water treatment; and Safe disposal of backwash water (e.g. through recycling or de- chlorination). 18 Degradation negative  Employ media  Educational Daily WB OP: 7.50 UGX 0 Operator MWE of FSTP change (- that enhance training & during Projects on (DWRM); effluent 2) phosphorous experience of the operatio International NEMA. disposal removal within management n Waterways; route the FSTP as part team; The Water of the  phosphorous (P), Act Cap 152, Engineering BOD, TSS, and TN The Water Design; or content of the (Waste FSTP effluent Discharge)  prepare and with respect to Regulations, approve an the maximal Statutory operation & acceptable for Instrument maintenance direct discharge 152-4 in freshwater Ministry of Water and Environment 128 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project # Environme Impact Rank Mitigation Monitoring Frequenc Relevant Estimated Responsibil Monitorin ntal or measures Indicators y of policies, cost of ity g social monitori legislation & mitigation Institution factor ng regulatory & s framework enhanceme nt (UGX) guide for the systems within FSTP; the tropics;  Prepare and  P content in the execute Plan for receiving water water quality with respect to the maximal monitoring of acceptable in receiving freshwater stream systems within  ensure the tropics; continual  training and  presence of P skills build-up of removing the FSTP staff; materials within  The project the constructed should extend wetlands; piped water to  piped safe water the extended to communities at communities the vicinity of close to the FSTP the FSTP, site; including sensitization on Ministry of Water and Environment 129 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project # Environme Impact Rank Mitigation Monitoring Frequenc Relevant Estimated Responsibil Monitorin ntal or measures Indicators y of policies, cost of ity g social monitori legislation & mitigation Institution factor ng regulatory & s framework enhanceme nt (UGX) the dangers of  Complaints from consuming downstream polluted water. users.  Water quality monitoing program in place 19 Sediment Negative  Site intake  Minimal actual Monthly WB OP: 7.50 UGX Operator MWE; swirl up and change (- locality based height, with during Projects on 5,000,000 NEMA. transport 2) on respect to lake operatio International recommendatio bed, that can be n Waterways; ns by the attained by the The Water Feasibility Study valve in Act Cap 152, so that the comparison to Water minimal manufacture´s Resources distance, as per recommendation Regulations, water pump ; Statutory manufacturer´s  Maximal actual Instrument manual, during height, with 152-1. low water levels respect to Jinja is kept between pier gauge, that the intake valve can be attained and the lake by the intake bed; valve; Ministry of Water and Environment 130 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project # Environme Impact Rank Mitigation Monitoring Frequenc Relevant Estimated Responsibil Monitorin ntal or measures Indicators y of policies, cost of ity g social monitori legislation & mitigation Institution factor ng regulatory & s framework enhanceme nt (UGX)  Contractor to  signs of increased undertake turbidity and bathymetric sediment loads at survey to the intake valve determine ideal locality; depth for intake  Increased valve taking into sediment load in consideration raw water feed to the maximal the WTP as intake valve compared to height of water in 10.33m, with undisturbed respect to the localities but pier gauge in close to the Jinja; intake.  Install a dynamic intake valve. 20 Air Quality Odour Moderat  Maintain a  The distance Daily The National Operator MWE; generation e minimum between the FSTP Environment NEMA. negative distance of & the nearest Act Cap 153. change (- about 740 m occupied 3) between the building; Ministry of Water and Environment 131 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project # Environme Impact Rank Mitigation Monitoring Frequenc Relevant Estimated Responsibil Monitorin ntal or measures Indicators y of policies, cost of ity g social monitori legislation & mitigation Institution factor ng regulatory & s framework enhanceme nt (UGX) FSTP facilities  complaints from and the nearest communities; inhabited  The level of building; tidiness and  frequently availability of monitor solid waste performance of management the FSTP to facilities onsite. ensure that clogging is remedied as soon as possible;  Keep the immediate surrounding of the FSTP tidy. 21 Population Occupation Moderat  Prepare safe  Approved onsite Monthly The UGX Operator MWE; and al health e work practices standard Occupationa 10,000,000 MoH; Settlement and safety negative for the WTP to operating l Safety and MGLSD; change (- prevent procedures for Health Act, District 3) chlorine leaks storage and 2006. Health and spills and Ministry of Water and Environment 132 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project # Environme Impact Rank Mitigation Monitoring Frequenc Relevant Estimated Responsibil Monitorin ntal or measures Indicators y of policies, cost of ity g social monitori legislation & mitigation Institution factor ng regulatory & s framework enhanceme nt (UGX) promote safety handling of Inspectors of all site chlorine; . personnel and  approved site visitors; specific  train plant inspection and operators and maintenance supervisory plan; personnel in  documented safe exposure work practices; control, first  evidence of aid, PPE, and continual staff emergency training; response;  availability of  prepare PPE; material safety  records of repairs data sheets, and maintenance warning signs works; and other  records of proprietary periodic drills chlorine wall performed by charts; site personnel to  Regularly test readiness of monitor Ministry of Water and Environment 133 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project # Environme Impact Rank Mitigation Monitoring Frequenc Relevant Estimated Responsibil Monitorin ntal or measures Indicators y of policies, cost of ity g social monitori legislation & mitigation Institution factor ng regulatory & s framework enhanceme nt (UGX) equipment and warning chlorine instrumentation; containers for  Records of leaks. occupational safety hazards. 22 Solid waste Moderat  Prepare  NEMA approved Daily The National UGX Operator MWE; generation e operational site waste Environment 5,000,000 NEMA; at operation negative waste management (Waste District change (- management plan at site; Managemen Environme 3) plan for the  clearly labelled t) nt Office FSTP & WTP onsite waste Regulations, District facilities; management 1999; The Health  Segregate facilities; Public Office. wastes into  signs of Health Act, metallic, plastic, indiscriminate Cap 281. glass & littering at site & biodegradable; surroundings;  waste bins be  frequency of provided at waste collection appropriate and disposal; points;  availability of  hazardous/toxic approved waste wastes (e.g. disposal site; Ministry of Water and Environment 134 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project # Environme Impact Rank Mitigation Monitoring Frequenc Relevant Estimated Responsibil Monitorin ntal or measures Indicators y of policies, cost of ity g social monitori legislation & mitigation Institution factor ng regulatory & s framework enhanceme nt (UGX) chlorine and  Complaints from alum containers communities. be returned to supplier or given to a NEMA approved waste handler; Asbestos containing waste shall be managed following NEMA and World Bank Guidance Note on Asbestos materials handling and Disposal.  Other wastes be disposed at NEMA approved sites. Ministry of Water and Environment 135 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project # Environme Impact Rank Mitigation Monitoring Frequenc Relevant Estimated Responsibil Monitorin ntal or measures Indicators y of policies, cost of ity g social monitori legislation &mitigation Institution factor ng regulatory & s framework enhanceme nt (UGX) 23 Bio solid Moderat  Landfill bio  NEMA approved Quarterl The National UGX Operator MWE; generation e solids be bio solid land y Environment 5,000,000 NEMA; negative disposed off at filling site (Waste District change (- Busia MC Waste  Bio solid Managemen Environme 3) Disposal site stabilized and t) nt Office located at hygenized at the Regulations, District Osapir Village. FSTP site 1999; The Health  Dose manure  Farmers aware of Public Office. with lime to kill risks of reuse of Health Act, pathogens prior bio solids Cap 281. to supply of  Hand washing manure to with soap being farmers. practiced  Make farmers  Protective gears aware of the being used. risks of poor handling of bio solids.  Hand washing with soap be encouraged after handling. Ministry of Water and Environment 136 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project # Environme Impact Rank Mitigation Monitoring Frequenc Relevant Estimated Responsibil Monitorin ntal or measures Indicators y of policies, cost of ity g social monitori legislation & mitigation Institution factor ng regulatory & s framework enhanceme nt (UGX) Protective gears  such as hand cloves, boots, overalls and nose and mouth muffs be encouraged. 24 Pressure on Moderat  Install a standby  Frequency of load Biannual UGX Operator MWE existing e generator at a shedding; 25,000,000 utilities negative safe location  Energy options in change (- within the WTP place. 3) site;  Options to use solar energy for lighting should be. 25 Accidents Moderat At the intake At the intake Daily The UGX Operator MWE e  Prepare site  Approved site Occupationa 5,000,000 negative accident accident l Safety and change (- management management Health Act, 3) plan, including plan; 2006 opening and maintaining an Ministry of Water and Environment 137 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project # Environme Impact Rank Mitigation Monitoring Frequenc Relevant Estimated Responsibil Monitorin ntal or measures Indicators y of policies, cost of ity g social monitori legislation & mitigation Institution factor ng regulatory & s framework enhanceme nt (UGX) Accident Log by  lighting systems all Contractors; on the pier  provide lighting bridge; systems on pier  clearly marked bridge; and visible  install warning warning signs; signs with  records of reflective accidents; material when  Complaints from illuminated; communities &  Fence off the navigators. pier bridge to At the WTP prevent  Approved major children chlorine gas leak accessing it for contingency plan; diving into the  availability of lake. chlorine leak At the WTP repair kit; In the event of a  Qualification & major chlorine gas experience of the leak: WTP  Utilize an management approved team; Ministry of Water and Environment 138 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project # Environme Impact Rank Mitigation Monitoring Frequenc Relevant Estimated Responsibil Monitorin ntal or measures Indicators y of policies, cost of ity g social monitori legislation & mitigation Institution factor ng regulatory & s framework enhanceme nt (UGX) contingency  Records of major plan for the site gas leaks & how as guide; successfully  contact the handled. nearest Fire At the FSTP Department;  FSTP site fenced;  Shut down the  Records of water reported treatment incidents of process until animal or human the chlorine droning; leak has been  signs of domestic repaired. animals accessing At the FSTP the FSTP facility;  Fence off the  Children & FSTP site; visitors accessing  do not graze the FSTP facility within the site; without  children should authorization/gui not play within dance. the site; Ministry of Water and Environment 139 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project # Environme Impact Rank Mitigation Monitoring Frequenc Relevant Estimated Responsibil Monitorin ntal or measures Indicators y of policies, cost of ity g social monitori legislation & mitigation Institution factor ng regulatory & s framework enhanceme nt (UGX)  Visitors be guided by a staff member. Ministry of Water and Environment 140 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project 8.3 HANDLING OF CHEMICALS AND OTHER POTENTIALLY HARMFUL MATERIALS Chlorine, a harmful and toxic chemical, will be employed at the WTP during project operation. Thus, it must be safely handled to prevent any accidents, including health and safety issues. A full analysis of the harmful chemicals which are specific to the project (chlorine, aluminum sulphate, polyelectrolytes and lime) is given in Sections 7.1.3. Here we analyze the handling aspects of these chemicals. 8.3.1 DESIGN AND MANAGEMENT OF CHLORINATION STORAGE AND DOSING AREAS The following special storage and handling features should be utilized and maintained during the WTP operation. i. Storage and equipment rooms be equipped with doors, opening outward to the outdoors complete with panic hardware; ii. Viewing window into chlorine storage and equipment rooms for operator security; iii. Visual and audible emergency alarms at the chlorine room entrance; iv. Exhaust fans with a typical rating to air changeover every minute; v. A chlorine gas leak detector to generate alarms and attendant ammonia bottle to help locate a leak; vi. A drench shower located where it is easily accessible in case of emergency, with single turn (butterfly valve) water tap; vii. An emergency kit to repair leaking containers. For systems that use gas chlorination: i. Install alarm and safety systems, including automatic shutoff valves, that are automatically activated when a chlorine release is detected; ii. Install containment and scrubber systems to capture and neutralize chlorine should a leak occur; iii. Use corrosion-resistant piping, valves, metering equipment, and any other equipment coming in contact with gaseous or liquid chlorine, and keep this equipment free from contaminants, including oil and grease; iv. Store chlorine away from all sources of organic chemicals, and protect from sunlight, moisture, and high temperatures. 8.3.2 HANDLING OF CHLORINE DURING OPERATION Chlorine reacts violently with hydrogen, acetylene gases and solvents creating heat (EPA, 2011b). The reaction of chlorine with ammonia can create explosive compounds and gases that are toxic to breathe. Chlorine also reacts with metals. In the presence of water, chlorine can create a highly corrosive and dangerous acid mist. Therefore: i. Prepare and approve standard operating procedures for its storage and handling. ii. Never store chlorine gas and ammonia in the same building or area. iii. Keep chlorine isolated and in different rooms from the chemicals that it reacts with. iv. Chlorine storage areas, storage containers and process equipment and lines should be properly labelled and appropriate hazard warning should be posted in accordance with site specific operating procedures. Ministry of Water and Environment 141 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project v. Gas containers should be stored in separate or divided rooms separately from flammable materials and other chemicals such as ammonia and sulphur dioxide, if used elsewhere in the installation. vi. Containers should be stored and used above ground level and always in a vertical position. vii. Chlorine gas containers should be stored in marked areas shielded from external heat sources. viii. The protective hood should be kept secure on all unused containers and should only be taken off only when the container is being used. All containers in use should be secured in position by chains or other methods as appropriate. Gas containers should only be lifted with suitably rated and tested equipment and never by their protective hoods. ix. Empty cylinders should be clearly marked and segregated from unused cylinders. 8.3.3 STORAGE AND HANDLING OF ALUM DURING OPERATION i. Prepare and approve standard operating procedures for its storage and handling as the products Data Sheet. ii. Alum is readily soluble but the solution is corrosive to aluminum, steel and concrete so tanks of these materials need protective linings. iii. Though a weak acid, avoid all unnecessary contact with it, as a matter of good working practice. Wear rubber or PVC boots, apron and overclothing as necessary depending on the condition of handling. The occupational exposure limit is 2 mg per cubic meter for an 8-hour reference period. iv. Apply cold water to affected skin and eye areas. Move to fresh air, loosen clothing and seek medical attention in case of inhalation. Immediate medical attention should be sought for a person who has ingested the chemical and vomiting should not be encouraged. 8.3.4 STORAGE AND HANDLING OF LIME DURING OPERATION i. Prepare and approve standard operating procedures for its storage and handling as the products Data Sheet. ii. Ensure that bulk supplies of lime are pneumatically transferred to storage silos to prevent lime dust. iii. Delivery and use of bags of slaked lime can give rise to severe dust problems if care is not taken. The occupational exposure standard is 5 mg per cubic meter for an 8-hour reference period. Ensure that workers wear protective gears. iv. Enclose slurry storage tanks to avoid dust. v. The pump and feed lines should be emptied of all lime by rodding if necessary and flushed with clean water. This should be done when the lime dosing plant is taken out of use, say when a change of duty pump is made. 8.3.5 STORAGE AND HANDLING OF POLYELECTROLYTES DURING OPERATION i. Prepare and approve standard operating procedures for its storage and handling as the products Data Sheet. ii. Polyelectrolytes are not acutely toxic but care should be taken to avoid swallowing, contact with the eyes or prolonged contact with the skin. Always consult the Safety Data Sheet for the product in use for details of any health hazards involved. Ministry of Water and Environment 142 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project iii. Polyelectrolyte powder, dropped on a wet floor turns into a tough slippery jelly which is dangerous and difficult to clean up. Powder, if spilled, should be collected as dry material as far as possible before the area is washed liberally with (if possible) warm water. iv. Some polyelectrolytes may contain a small proportion of acrylamide for which the occupational exposure limit is 0.3 mg per cubic meter for an 8 - hour reference period. 8.3.6 STAKEHOLDERS TO BE INVOLVED IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF EACH ACTION The management and supervision of the ESMP is strictly the responsibility of the Ministry of Water and Environment as the Developer. During construction, the Contractor will be responsible for the day-to-day implementation of the ESMP. During the operation phase, the National Water and Sewerage Corporation (NWSC), who will take over management of the project, will be responsible for the implementation of the ESMP. The Developer, the Contractor and the Operator should employ an Environmentalist with relevant academic qualification and work experience. At the local level Busia District Local Government and Busia Municipal Council will be responsible for the day-to-day monitoring of the ESMP in their areas of jurisdiction. At the National level, two institutions i.e. the National Environment Management Authority (NEMA) and the Department of Occupational Safety and Health (DOSH) of the Ministry of Gender, Labour and Social Development will be involved. The role of NEMA is to monitor the project as per the Environment Act Cap 135 Section 7 and to approve external environmental compliance audits as per the Environmental Audit Regulations (1999). The role of DOSH is to issue permits and periodically inspect the project site. DOSH will issue workplace Certificates every six months it the project meets working conditions as set out in the Occupational Safety and Health Act 2006. The District and municipal councils will approve construction and occupancy permits in their area of jurisdiction. As a means of impartiality, local NGO’s or CBOs will be involved in the implementation of ESMP. Their role is to be neutral observers. They should have experience in environmental management and skills in conflict resolution. 8.4 INSTITUTIONAL AND IMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENTS (ADOPTED FROM IWMDP- ESMF, MARCH 2018) The Project will be implemented by MoWE and Busia Municipal Council and in support of de- concentrated regional entities (WMZs, WSDFs), Busia District local government and their partners (e.g. District Officers, private sector operators) to deliver outputs. To facilitate integration within the sector, MOU/MOUs outlining joint responsibilities will be signed between the MWE, Busia Municipality and entities responsible for specific activities (e.g. Districts). The Project’s primary stakeholders are the: a) MoWE through which the project will be implemented in coordination with its relevant departments (e.g. DWRM, DWD, DEA); ii) Busia local governments who will work with MoWE to develop catchment management plans and improve the framework for decentralized management of water resources; as well as to engage private operators to operate and manage small town water supplies; iii) and local communities and consumers who will participate in catchment based planning, and benefit from the outputs and outcomes of the project. The MWE currently has adequate Environmental and Social Safeguards staffing, which is summarized in the table below. Respective Busia District Local Governments and Busia Municipality have Ministry of Water and Environment 143 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Environment Officers and Community Development Officers who will be involved in project monitoring and supervision. Organization Department Environmental Social Specialists (No.) Specialist (No.) Ministry of Water Urban Water Supply and 14 22 and Environment Sanitation Department - DWD (including Decentralized Staff) Rural Water Supply and 12 15 Sanitation Department Water for Production 4 2 Department Water Utility and Regulation Ministry of Water Wetlands Management 20 1 and Environment Department - DEA Ministry of Water Department of water Albert – 1 Albert – 3 and Environment Resources Planning and - DWRM Regulation (Water Upper Nile – 1 Kyoga – 2 Management Zones) Victoria - 2 Victoria – 2 Upper Nile – 3 TOTAL - 4 TOTAL – 10 Note: All Contractors and Consultants shall be required to hire Environmental, Social and Health and Safety Officers on site for implementation of Environmental, Social and Health and Safety activities. This Commitment shall be included in Bidding Documents and Contracts. 8.4.1 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES IN THE ESMP IMPLEMENTATION The MoWE and Busia Municipal and District Local Governments are the implementing entities for Busia WATSAN Sub-project. The MoWE will coordinate with NEMA on ensuring that environmental and social issues are addressed effectively throughout the lifecycle of the Project. NEMA was established by an Act of Parliament (NEA) as the principal agency responsible for the management of the environment and was created as a result of the National Environmental Action Plan (NEAP) of 1994. Implementation of the different environmental issues is done through the relevant government institutions (Lead Agencies) within whose mandate the respective issues lie. Ministry of Water and Environment 144 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project The role of NEMA is to coordinate the input by all the different lead agencies and ensure compliance with the National Environmental Policy and Law. Implementation of the ESMF will involve multiple institutions at all levels as seen in Table below. Institutional roles and responsibilities for environmental management under the IWMDP Ministries and Mandates/Responsibilities Departments The Ministry of Water The Ministry of Water and Environment (MoWE) has the overall mission: and Environment to promote and ensure the rational and sustainable utilization, (MoWE) development and effective management of water and environment resources for socio-economic development of the country. The ministry has three directorates: Directorate of Water Resources Management (DWRM), Directorate of Water Development (DWD) and the Directorate of Environmental Affairs (DEA). MoWE shall take lead on implementation of the project and shall ensure all recommendations contained in the mitigation plan are implemented. Ministry of Local The Ministry is mandated to carry out a number of responsibilities in the Government-MoLG Local Government Act as follows: to inspect, monitor, and where necessary offer technical advice/assistance, support supervision and training to all Local Governments; to coordinate and advise Local Governments for purposes of harmonization and advocacy; to act a Liaison/Linkage Ministry with respect to other Central Government Ministries and Departments, Parastatals, Private Sector, Regional and International Organizations; and to research, analyze, develop and formulate national policies on all taxes, fees, levies, rates for Local Governments. Busia MC and Busia DLG fall under this Ministry and will be supervised and supported by MoLG. STATUTORY AGENCIES National Environment NEMA retains its mandatory role of coordination, supervision and Management Authority monitoring environmental issues. As for the implementation of the ESIA (NEMA) process, NEMA’s role will involve coordinating the review of the ESIAs of the planned interventions with relevant line agencies. Other lead agencies that would participate in the review are the Ministry of Local Government and local governments. Specifically, the Environmental Monitoring and Compliance Department of NEMA is responsible for the review and approval of ESIAs, post- implementation audits and monitoring of approved projects. Although project sponsors have a responsibility for monitoring their own activities, NEMA carries out its own monitoring largely through District Environmental Officers and environmental inspectors at NEMA's head office/ Lead Agencies. Ministry of Water and Environment 145 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Uganda Wildlife UWA in this case will have the role of monitoring the implementation of Authority (UWA) the ESMPs to specifically ensure that the provisions for mitigating the impacts across protected areas are implemented by the project. Specifically, in this project, UWA will provide support and guidance for management of Hippos. DIRECTORATES Directorate of The DEA is responsible for environmental policy, regulation, coordination, Environmental Affairs inspection, supervision and monitoring of the environment and natural (DEA) resources as well as the restoration of degraded ecosystems and mitigating and adapting to climate change. Directorate of Water The DWD is responsible for providing overall technical oversight for the Development (DWD) planning, implementation and supervision of the delivery of urban and rural water and sanitation services across the country, including water for production. DWD is responsible for regulation of provision of water supply and sanitation and the provision of capacity development and other support services to Local Governments, Private Operators and other service providers. Directorate of Water The DWRM is responsible for developing and maintaining national water Resources Management laws, policies and regulations; managing, monitoring and regulation of (DWRM) water resources through issuing water use, abstraction and wastewater discharge permits; Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) activities; coordinating Uganda’s participation in joint management of transboundary waters resources and peaceful cooperation with Nile Basin riparian countries. DISTRICTS District Environment The functions of the District Environment Officer is amongst others, advise Officer (DEO) the district Environment committee on all matters relating to the environment amongst others. District Environmental The functions of the District Environment Committees include: to act as a Committees forum for community members to discuss and recommend environmental policies and bye laws to the District Council and advise the District Technical Planning Committee, the District Council and NEMA on environmental management issues in the district. MUNICIPAL Municipal The functions of a Municipal Environment Officer include advising the Environmental Officer urban Environment committee on all matters relating to the environment and liaison with NEMA on all matters relating to the environment. The NGOs working in the sector are coordinated at the national level through UWASNET, Uganda Water and Sanitation NGO Network an NGOs umbrella organization, which has been largely funded by sector development partners through MoWE. They receive funding from the center in the form of a conditional grant Water Management at and can also mobilize additional local resources for water and sanitation District Level programs. Local Governments, in consultation with MoWE appoint and Ministry of Water and Environment 146 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project manage private operators for urban piped water schemes that are outside the jurisdiction of NWSC. COMMUNITY Beneficiary The Communities are responsible for demanding, planning, contributing a Communities cash contribution to capital cost, and operating and maintaining rural water supply and sanitation facilities. A water user committee (WUC), which is sometimes referred to as a Water and Sanitation Committee (WSC) should ideally be established at each water point. Being the primary beneficiaries of the project, the community will be made to participate fully in all aspects of the program including project identification, preparation, implementation, operation and maintenance. ROLES OF THE Contractors DURING PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION All contractors hired to undertake project civil works shall be required to develop a Contractor’s ESMP which will include among others the following aspects: the initial sub-project ESIA approved by both NEMA and World Bank, Health and Safety Management Plan, Traffic Management Plan, Waste Management Plan, Construction Camp and Equipment Yard Management Plan, Labour Influx Management Plan which shall also include Code of Conduct for Workers, Construction Materials Acquisition Due Diligence Procedure, etc. The Contractors shall hire the following key staff to undertake project implementation: Project Manager, Environmental Specialist, Sociologist, Health and Safety Officer. Their roles in terms of implementation of Environmental and Social Safeguard requirements among others shall include the following: PROJECT MANAGER  The Contractor shall employ a Project Manager who shall be charged with ultimate responsibility for implementation of C-ESMP and will therefore ensure that resources are duly provided.  The Project Manager shall be responsible and ensure staff are adequately inducted and trained at site regarding environmental and social management including emergency procedures. The same applies to sub-contractors.  The overall overseer on the contractors’ side for the implementation of CESMP. 8.4.2 CONTRACTORS ENVIRONMENTAL, SOCIAL AND HEALTH & SAFETY SPECIALISTS/OFFICERS The site environmental and social specialists shall have the following responsibilities:  Develop, implement and review environmental management systems and plans;  Develop other standalone documents (e.g. Waste Management Plan, Health and Safety Plan, Traffic Management Plan, Emergency Response Plan, etc.);  Advise the Project Manager on how to implement or address instructions issued by the Resident Engineer;  Provide leadership to ensure all contractor’s staff comply with CESMP;  Works with other Contractor’s staff to develop Site Specific method statements to address environmental and social aspects; Ministry of Water and Environment 147 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project  Notify the Engineers’ Environmental and Social Specialists of any non-compliance and seek guidance on achievement of compliance;  Work closely with service providers to ensure that issues of, employment act (2006) compliance, HIV/AIDS, Gender Based Violence (including Sexual Exploitation and Abuse) and other gender related issues are managed in a manner that meets national requirements and contract specifications;  Responsible for monitoring and reporting major defects and non-compliances and arranging for appropriate corrective actions;  Initiate and coordinate monitoring and auditing and prepare input into the Contractor’s Monthly Progress Reports;  Review work schedule with respect to environmental management and monitoring;  Monitor fuel delivery procedures regularly and check all equipment on site on a regular basis;  Train contractor’s staff in environmental objectives and procedures.  Supervise the implementation of the Environmental Management and Monitoring Plan and all the other required plans;  Address all environmental and social aspects attributed to the road works;  Ensure the site is kept tidy and litter is placed in bins;  Act in an environmentally and socially responsible manner always to reflect the contractor’s commitment and responsibility on environmental and social practices. 8.5 CAPACITY BUILDING, TRAINING AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE The goal of the IWMDP is to the maximum extent possible utilize existing institutional structures and capacity within the MOWE and NWSC to implement the Project. In order to successfully implement the guidelines and recommendations in the ESMF, it is important to ensure that target groups and stakeholders who play a role in implementing the ESMF are provided with the appropriate and continuous Environmental and Social Safeguards capacity development. In addition to the above-listed implementation structures and arrangements, the following personnel are proposed for each ESMP implementing stakeholder: - Ministry of Gender Labour and Social Development This Ministry will help guide implementation Occupational Health and Safety Officer and  management of general Social aspects. NGO or CBO  Representative with skills in environmental management and conflict resolution Directorate of Museums and Monuments. This Government entity will help coordinate implementation of the Chance Finds Procedure. It is the onus of each ESMP implementing stakeholder to ensure that all its personnel to be involved in implementation of this ESMP are adequately qualified and appointed based on their qualification and suitability for their respective roles. There will be regular refresher training provided under this ESMP for all Safeguards staff involved in project implementation, right from launch of civil works of the project. Client Assistance in Coordinating the ESIA with Relevant Agencies Ministry of Water and Environment 148 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project DWD through the Water Services Liaison Division (WSLD) will be responsible for implementing sub- component on Water and Sanitation Project in small towns and will assign adequate staff to implement, manage and monitor these tasks; and ensure that the incremental costs associated with project implementation are fully funded throughout the project duration. DWD will work closely with Water Sector Development Facility WSDFs who will support the day-to-day implementation and liaise with local governments in which the sub-projects are housed. These costs will be funded through a combination of project and in kind or cash contributions including core staff costs (existing and or new, full time or contract), consumables, logistics, fuel and communications. Key agencies the project will have to interact in order to implement the ESIA and ESMP are National Environment Management Authority for environmental audit compliance certificates, the Department of Safety and Health for Certificate to Register a Work Place and the Municipal Council to provide construction permits 8.6 STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATIONS CONCERNING THE SHARED USE OF WATER RESOURCES AND THEIR ASSOCIATED CATCHMENTS In this respect, MWE is currently broadening its Sector Wide Approach (SWAp) to include a comprehensive and coherent program of support for water resources, water supply and the environment across agencies. The Project will be aligned with the SWAp to strengthen the capacity for IWRM in the agencies implementing the project, including: DWRM – establishing functional WMZs; DWD – improving sustainability of urban water supply and sanitation in fast growing towns; DEA – enhancing environmental services in order to ensure sustainability. The Project will also closely coordinate with the Government and development partner members of the Working Group (WESWG), which is responsible for making important sector planning and budget decisions, vetting new project proposals, and advocating for policy and institutional reforms under the Joint Water and Environment Sector Support Program (JWESSP). The Bank will work with the WESWG members to harmonize approaches and coordinate activities, with a view to further integrating the WMDP within the JWESSP at mid-term. For example, WESWG and its structures will provide oversight of the project to improve alignment with the SWAP. 8.7 STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT PLAN The World Bank’s OP 4.01 requires the stakeholders and communities be informed of the ESIA implementation process. All stakeholders need to be kept informed during project implementation so as to accord the necessary support and advice. This consultation and public participation will be on-going process that will continue throughout the implementation of the ESIA. This will ensure that all affected individuals and households are well informed and adequately involved in the entire implementation of the ESIA process. Key stakeholders identified include but not limited to: -  Local Council and Community Members in Busia Municipality, Majanji, Buhehe, Dabani and Buteba Sub Counties;  Busia District Local Government;  Busia Municipal Council:  National Environment Management Authority;  National Water and Sewerage Corporation; and  NGO’s operating within Busia District among others. Ministry of Water and Environment 149 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project All the relevant stakeholders should be kept informed and up to date on issues pertaining to the project activities especially those, which affect them or where they have influence. Information sharing and disclosure can be done in the following ways:  Public meetings with local communities should be held to engage them to get their views how the project is impacting them. This strategy is central to the successful management of risks and impacts on communities affected by the project in addition to adding value to the acceptance of the project. To ensure this, regular public meetings will be organized paying special attention to vulnerable groups like the disabled, elderly, children especially the girl child and women. Their views should be considered in future plans.  The project will continue interact with National and Local Regulatory Authorities will conduct regular meetings with both national and local authorities to ensure that they are all always kept well informed. Some information to some of the central agencies can be channeled through submission of monitoring reports.  As a means of preventing conflict of interest Environmental Non-Government Organization (NGOs) or Community Based Organizations CBOs should be involved in the monitoring of the ESMP.  Consultation method whether by surveys, meetings, focus group discussions or key informant interviews should be documented and records kept. Among the things that should be documented include date and location of the consultation meetings, list of attendees, their affiliation and contact address. Proper minutes with action plans and follow up should be record. A stakeholder engagement plan whose purpose is to have an open productive working relationships, based on principles of transparency, accountability, accuracy, trust, respect and mutual interests with affected communities and other stakeholders should be developed by Ministry of Water and Environment and NWSC. A sample stakeholder engagement plan (Table 36) has been developed to ensure the full involvement of stakeholders. Ministry of Water and Environment 150 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Table 36: Stakeholder Engagement Plan. Target Group Tasks/Methods Frequency Responsibility Project Phase Project Affected Persons  Compensation; When required and in MWE/DWD/Contractor Construction  Working Group Meetings; accordance with the phase  Regular household visits law. Directly and Indirectly  Sensitization local communities on When required and in MWE/DWD/Contractor/NWSC All phases Affected Persons. health, safety, cultural and accordance with the environmental issues related to the law. project  Health promotion and awareness programmes on HIV/AIDS. Local and central  Provision of regular updates and Quarterly MWE/DWD/Contractor/NWSC All phases government agencies submission of monitoring reports to relevant agencies as required. Quarterly MWE/DWD/Contractor/NWSC All phases  Payment of attention to the licenses required for the project Every six months MWE/DWD/Contractor Construction  Internal Environmental Audit Phase  External Environmental Audit Annual MWE/DWD/Contractor/NWSC All phases Community Consultation  Continuous consultations with the As required MWE/DWD/Contractor/NWSC All phases community members.  Use Grievance Redress Mechanism to settle complaints NGO Organizations  Provide regular updates on the key As required MWE/DWD/Contractor/NWSC All phases project information Vulnerable groups  Identify support that may be required As required MWE/DWD/Contractor/NWSC All phases to ensure vulnerable people can access project benefits Ministry of Water and Environment 151 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project 8.8 MONITORING AND EVALUATION During construction, monitoring will be the responsibility of WMD Project Support Unit. NEMA and DOSH will periodically monitor the project as per their constitutional, legal and regulatory mandate. The major activities to be carried out during monitoring will include site inspection, review of grievances logged by stakeholders, and discussions with PAPs, construction workers and the local community who live near the project facilities in order to get neighborhood issues. The Local Councils (LC 1) of each project site, particularly the Chairman of the Environmental committee, should be involved during each site inspection. Community grievances should be discussed and solved at this level. It is recommended that the Project Support Unit should monitor the project every month by making a site inspection. As part of the evaluation strategy, two types of environmental audits are recommended i.e. internal and external audits. The Contractor with the supervision of the Project Support Unit should carryout quarterly internal environmental audits while an external annual environmental audit should be carried out by a NEMA registered and certified Environmental Auditor. During the operational phase environmental audits will be commissioned by NWSC the Operator. This should be in accordance with the Environmental Audit Regulations 2006. During the construction phase, the Construction Supervision Team (the Design Consultants) will compile concise monthly monitoring reports. At the end of each quarter, the Contractor will write an Internal Quarterly Environmental Audit Report. The Project Support Unit will review the reports and approve them. The Project Support Unit on behalf of MWE as the Developer should commission the annual external environmental audit report. It will be submitted to NEMA for a Compliance Certificate. During the operational phase, the NWSC should submit annual environmental audit reports to NEMA for approval. 8.9 MEASURES FOR EMERGENCY RESPONSE TO ACCIDENTAL EVENTS The Developer/Contractor/Operator should each prepare an Emergency Response and Preparedness Plan (EPRP). The EPRPs should preferably be prepared prior to start of construction works and updated according at the operational phase. The EPRP should assess the risks and impacts from project activities and set out the methods for dealing with emergencies arising during the construction or operation phases. Particularly attention should be paid to those potential effects on the workers, neighboring and wider communities. The EPRP will also set out the means by which these measures will be communicated to affected communities in a culturally appropriate manner. The EPRP should have Best Practices, which include working with local and national agencies like the fire brigade, police, hospitals, counter terrorism units etc. The following are key emergencies, which the project should be prepared to handle: - a. Fire b. Electricity shocks and electrocution c. Bomb threat d. Civil disturbance e. Hostage f. Terrorist incident g. Death of a worker on the project site h. Suicide Ministry of Water and Environment 152 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project i. Shooting or stabbing j. Disasters e.g. landslides, earth quake, lightening, collapse of excavation walls k. Large-scale hazardous material spill l. Mass casualties m. Health epidemics n. Rapture or leak of equipment o. Flooding Ministry of Water and Environment 153 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project 9 A CHANCE FINDS PROCEDURE 9.1 INTRODUCTION The project will involve excavations. There is a likelihood of discovering chance finds during excavation, which may be of archaeological and/or paleontological importance. This will trigger the World Bank Safeguard Policy on Physical Cultural Resources, OP 4.11, and the Uganda Historical Monument Act, 1967. The implementation of Chance Finds Procedure (CFP) should be a responsibility of the contractor. 9.1.1 PURPOSE OF THE CFP This CFP will serve the following purposes: - a. Translate commitments in the ESIA into implementation procedures that will protect physical cultural resources during construction of the project; b. Serves as a key tool the contractor can utilize to manage and monitor preservation of resources of cultural heritage significance and c. Provide transparency to stakeholders that commitments made in the ESIA in regard to preservation of finds of heritage value are actually being fulfilled. This CFP provides: - a. Responsibilities for implementation of the procedure; b. Impact management measures to be implemented; c. Verification, and d. Records and reporting requirements. The Objective of CFP Through its Contractor, MWE seeks to ensure that impacts on cultural heritage resources are minimized as far as possible. Thus, the overall objective of this CFP is to describe an approach and procedures to be undertaken by the contractor with regard to protection of chance finds encountered during project implementation. 9.1.2 SCOPE OF CFP This CFP sets out requirements for management of cultural heritage resources during project implementation. The focus of the procedure is primarily mitigation during earthworks at the project site. It is expected that earthworks will be undertaken at following sites, at which chance finds may be encountered. a. Wastewater/ sewage and sludge management facilities; b. Water pipelines and sewers; c. Borrow sites where gravel may be obtained (if any). 9.1.3 DEFINITION OF “CULTURAL HERITAGE” For purposes of this CFP, cultural heritage includes: a. Archaeological deposits and remains; b. Historical monuments, sites and buildings; c. Places of worship; d. Cemeteries and graveyards; and, e. Places associated with folklore, mythology (and traditions) and the location of historical and cultural festivals, events and rituals. Ministry of Water and Environment 154 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project f. Commitments This CFP is developed based on target areas and commitments given in Table 35 below: Table 35: Target areas and commitments Target area Commitment No Target area Commitment 1 Unidentified archaeological features This CFP will be implemented to fulfill requirements of Uganda’s Historical Monuments Act, 1967. 2 Early earthworks involving A specialist archaeologist from the Department of excavations Museums and Monuments in the Ministry of Tourism, (see Sec 1.4 above) Trade & Industry (MTTI) will be on site at the stage of commencing civil works entailing excavations and on call to come to site to investigate, inspect and retrieve any chance finds encountered. Retrieved chance finds will be submitted to the National Museum. Relationship to Other Project Documents This CFP should be implemented in conjunction with: - a. Contractor’s environment & social management plan; b. Project overall ESMP that specified project-wide requirements for environmental and social management; c. The ESIA report for this project and d. Resettlement Action Plan (RAP) that covers the framework and procedures to be followed during land acquisition for construction of the project. Uganda’s Historical Monuments Act, 1967 This CFP is to be executed in compliance with Uganda’s Historical Monuments Act, 1967. In this Act, sub-section 12(1) requires that any portable object discovered in the course of an excavation is surrendered to the Minister who shall deposit it in the Museum. Management of archaeological chance finds is a responsibility of the Department of Museums and Monuments in the Ministry of Tourism, Trade & Industry. 9.2 CHANCE FINDS MANAGEMENT PROCEDURE Personnel and Responsibilities This procedure is based on three recommendations below: - a. The Contractor will have a Socio-Environmental Officer (SEO) on the site during project construction. The contractor’s SEO will closely work with the developer’s socio-environmental staff to ensure compliance with national and financier’s requirements as well as implementation of this chance finds procedure. b. During ground opening and excavations, the developer will facilitate an Archaeologist from the Department of Museums and Monuments in MTTI to be on site and ensure that any chance Ministry of Water and Environment 155 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project finds encountered are managed according to requirements of The Historical Monuments Act, 1967. c. All construction staff involved in earthworks should be trained in basis skills of recognizing suspected chance finds and the procedure of notifying the SEO and Archeologist. Specific roles of persons to be involved in implementation of this procedure are outlined below. Role of the contractor’s Socio-Environmental Officer The SEO is required to: - a. Communicate contents and requirements of this plan to contractor; b. Sensitize workers to ensure that all are aware of their responsibilities in regard to protection chance finds; c. Inform the Archaeologist of any chance finds encountered on site; d. Coordinate inspection and monitoring by the MTTI Archaeologist. The SEO should keep in close contact with the archaeologist throughout the construction period; e. Implement measures recommended by the archaeologist for management of “chance finds” encountered; f. Conduct cultural heritage tool box talks to construction personnel as advised by the Archaeologist; and g. Maintain records (daily logs) related to archaeological finds during construction. Role of the MTTI archaeologist An archaeologist contracted (on a non-permanent basis) from the department responsible for museums and monuments in MTTI will have the following roles: - a. Archaeological monitoring of all earthworks; b. Advice/ guidance to the contractor with respect to halting construction activities if earthworks encounter chance finds; c. Conducting preliminary assessment of all previously unidentified archaeological features encountered and submission of these to the National Museum; d. Provision of advice on the significance and management of unidentified archaeological features encountered; e. Processing/ excavation of any unidentified subsurface archaeological features encountered in accordance with standard procedures recommended by the Department of Museums and Monuments; f. Maintain watching briefs during opening up site or deep excavations at any location during construction, with clear procedures for protection and documentation of any “chance finds” encountered; g. Maintain monitoring records of all unidentified archaeological features encountered; h. Develop a set of points to be discussed in “Tool Box” sessions to create awareness among construction crews on “chance finds”/ archaeological features. Note that as part of their sensitization, workers will be required to cease work if they encounter archaeological features and report to Contractor’s SEO, who will notify the Archaeologist; and i. Write a report for the developer upon completion of construction. This report will be submitted to the Supervising Consultant, Contractor, Developer and Department of Museums and Monuments. The report will summarize findings of archaeological monitoring, describing any features encountered and their preservation significance. Ministry of Water and Environment 156 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project The archaeologist will also undertake “Watching briefs” as the primary element of management and protection of cultural heritage during project construction. Watching briefs will consist of passive visual investigation during ground breaking at excavation sites. Objectives of the “watching briefs” should be to: - a. Record subsurface archaeological features discovered during earth-moving activities; b. Provide advice to the contractor on significance of subsurface archaeological features discovered; and c. Provide advice to the contractor on areas where ground disturbing activities may continue or where necessary need to be “worked around” or stopped. d. NWSC (2016). The following will be implemented during the “watching brief”: - a. Prior to commencing any construction activities, the contractor will give a brief to the archaeologist about site(s) they plan to excavate; b. The archaeologist will conduct a walkover to identify site’s archaeological sensitivity through characteristics such as soil type, topography, etc. and c. The archaeologist will witness/ observe site clearance, soil stripping and excavations for presence of subsurface archaeological features. Role of the Contractor The Contractor will be required to: - a. Heed advice from the Archaeologist in respect to halting earthworks when chance finds are encountered; and b. Provide cultural heritage tool box talks to construction crews as advised by the Archaeologist. General rule when Chance Finds are encountered Upon identification of suspected archaeological remains, the location must not be disturbed until it is inspected by the archaeologist from MTTI. Procedures In the event that genuine archaeological remains are encountered, the procedures to be adopted are described in the sections below. Human remains If encountered during earthworks, human remains must be handled with dignity and respect. If identified before disturbing the ground, such a location should be staked or flagged off to prevent additional disturbance. However, for uncemented graveyards, it may not always be possible to identify, distinguish and protect a burial ground from construction activities and therefore the following procedures will be followed if suspected human remains are found: - a. Work will immediately cease in affected location and contact the contractor’s SEO who will notify the MTTI Archaeologist; b. If the affected location is likely to be disturbed by other workers on site, an employee will be assigned to stand watch until the archaeologist arrives; c. Any exposed bones will be covered with plastic sheeting but not backfilled, until the archaeologist arrives to inspect the chance finds; Ministry of Water and Environment 157 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project d. If excavated fill has been loaded into a truck, it will be emptied at a suitable location for inspection by the archaeologist; and e. The contractor will resume work once the archaeologist’s inspection is completed and an instruction to recommence works issued. Artefact scatters The following procedures will be adopted when unanticipated artifact scatters are encountered: a. The contractor will immediately stop work at the location where finds are encountered and contact the SEO who will notify MTTI Archaeologist; b. The affected location will be staked or flagged off to prevent further disturbances; c. If excavated fill has been loaded into a truck, it will be emptied at a nearby secure location for inspection by the archaeological consultant; and d. The contractor will resume work only after the archaeologist has completed a site inspection and given the go-ahead for works to resume. Isolated artefact finds Due to their shape and colour, which often contrasts with the surrounding soil, artifacts are easy to identify by non-archaeologists during earthworks or other activities on site. Should an isolated artifact be observed, the following procedures will be adopted: - a. If the artifact is in imminent danger of being destroyed or damaged, it will be collected and its location marked with a flag; b. Whenever possible, the artifact will be left on the ground where it was found; c. The SEO will be notified that the location requires an archaeological inspection; d. The SEO will notify the archaeologist of the chance find; e. The SEO will ensure that other workers near the location are aware of the need to avoid disturbing the area until inspected by the archaeologist; and f. The archaeological consultant will inspect the affected location, after which the SEO will be advised that construction works can proceed. Historical remains All types of historic archaeological materials are subsumed within this category, including isolated historical artifacts. When historic remains or suspected historic archaeological remains are encountered the following procedures will be adopted: a. SEO will order cessation of work will and notify the archaeologist; b. The affected location will be staked or flagged off to prevent further disturbances; c. The archaeologist will determine if the materials encountered are of real historic significance; and d. The contractor will resume work only after the archaeologist issues instruction for the works to resume. If isolated historic or suspected historic archaeological artifacts are observed, the following procedures will be followed: a. If the artifact is in imminent danger of being damaged, it will be collected by the SOE and put in a bag (e.g. a Ziploc bag), along with any fragments thereof; b. If detached fragments are found, a label must be included with the date of the find and its position; c. Its depth and location must be marked with a stake or flag, Ministry of Water and Environment 158 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project d. Otherwise, whenever possible, the artifact mbe left on the ground at the location where it was found; and e. The SEO will notify the archaeologist, who will determine if an inspection is required. If no follow- up inspection is necessary, the archeologist will advise the SEO that construction can continue. TRAINING General awareness training will be provided by an archaeologist from MTTI to all construction crews and the contractor’s SEO. The training will incorporate information on cultural heritage, its significance, protection status of previously unidentified subsurface archaeological features in the area and construction activities that may destroy them. This awareness will be maintained through tool-box talks that should be regularly conducted with all construction crews. MONITORING Monitoring will be done by the contractor’s SEO with the principal objective being to provide assurance that: a. Project construction is compliant with this procedure; and b. Evidence is collected to demonstrate that commitments related to cultural heritage protection are being effectively met. Key performance indicators below will be utilized in the monitoring Key Performance Indicators The contractor’s SEO will undertake monitoring of chance finds management based on KIPs in Table 36. Table 36: Monitoring criteria No KIP/ measure Rationale Performance Monitoring target frequency 1 Conduct cultural heritage Ensures workers are aware of 90% Every 3 months awareness training cultural heritage in the area and the possibility of sub- surface resources to be encountered. 2 Number of “chance finds” Monitors effectiveness Zero Monthly damaged by managing chance finds construction activities Action Tracking All non-compliance with this procedure shall be followed up and corrective action taken. The contractor’s SEO is expected to maintain an action tracking system as part of archaeological monitoring. Cultural heritage management action tracking including close out of actions (solutions and preventive actions taken) will be reported quarterly by the contractor to the project developer. Ministry of Water and Environment 159 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project REPORTING AND RECORD KEEPING Records in sections below will be kept by indicated personnel. Archaeologist The archaeologist will report the following to the Contractor’s Socio-Environmental Officer: a. Daily log of activities on a weekly basis; b. Results of any assessments of “chance finds” as soon as the assessment is completed and c. A detailed report of field activities, findings and conclusions following a period of major earthworks. Contractor’s Socio-Environmental Officer The Contractor’s SEO will report the following to Frontier’s Socio-Environment Manager. a. Awareness records on cultural heritage resource among workers on a weekly basis; b. Bi-weekly report summarizing cultural heritage management activities; c. Action tracking system on a weekly basis; and d. Performance against key indicators (KPI). Ministry of Water and Environment 160 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project 10 GRIEVANCE REDRESS MECHANISM 10.1 INTRODUCTION Regardless of its scale, construction projects normally have disputes and grievances. These are likely to come from complaints about dust, flooding, blasting (noise, vibration, evacuation), lost access, dangers to life, damage caused to public roads from heavy machinery, deteriorating water quality and quantity, damage to property and crops, soil erosion and disruption of social cultural setting of the community. Timely redress of such grievances is vital for satisfactory construction implementation and resettlement in order for the project to be completed on schedule. There is need to ensure that procedures are in place to allow affected people to lodge a complaint or a claim without cost and with the assurance of a timely and satisfactory resolution of that complaint or claim. In addition, the project may have to make special accommodations for women and members of vulnerable groups particularly the girl child to ensure that they have equal access to grievance redress procedures. Such accommodations may include employment of women or members of vulnerable groups to facilitate the grievance redress process or to ensure that group representing the interests of women and other vulnerable groups take part in the process. 10.2 GRIEVANCE REDRESS COMMITTEE (GRC) In order to handle grievances at the project site, a Grievance Redress Committee (GRC) is proposed. It will be responsible for receiving and logging complaints and resolving disputes. The GRC will work with the MWE to resolve each grievance or dispute to ensure that redress actions are implemented. If affected persons are not satisfied the grievance redress structures, they will be entitled to seek redress through either the District Land Tribunals or Ugandan Courts of Law. It is important that the GRC be set up as soon as construction starts. Disputes can arise from construction activities and it is therefore important that the mediation mechanisms be available to cater for claim, disputes and grievances at the early stage. 10.3 PROPOSED MECHANISMS OF GRIEVANCE AND APPEALS In this regard, grievances are best redressed through Project Support Team for matters of coordination but actual resolutions undertaken by local government staff, political leadership or reputable leaders as identified by the communities; our observations revealed that most community members rely on their political and technical leaders. As first step MWE should appoint a Grievances Redress Co-ordinator within among the existing staff. This should be a preferably a Sociologist with the adequate experience in handling conflicts. 10.3.1 RECONCILIATORY PROCEDURE This is an informal mechanism that will be applied to reach a resolution whenever minor contradictions and disagreements that may occur. It will include an oral or written appeal to the Reconciliatory Committee based conflict resolution structure constituting of the Contractor/Operator Representative, LC I Chairman, LC I Women Secretary, LC I Disabled Persons Secretary and LC I Secretary for Defense. This approach is a mutual coordination mechanism to guarantee that mutual interests are served and disputes and contradictions are solved. Ministry of Water and Environment 161 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project 10.3.2 WRITTEN COMPLAINTS TO MWE When the complainant is dissatisfied and feels that a member of the Reconciliatory Committee has infringed upon his legal rights and interests or is dissatisfied with the decision made he or she can write to the MWE to lodge a written complaint. If the complainant cannot write the Grievances Redress Co-ordinator is required to write the person’s complaint. This complaint should be addressed within two weeks of receipt. 10.3.3 GRIEVANCE REDRESS PROCEDURE The Grievance Redress Committee will receive a written grievance or complaint. Preferably these should be those, which the Reconciliatory Committee has failed to handle. This Committee will dispense grievances/complaints as described below. 10.3.4 LEGAL REDRESS If the complainant feels dissatisfied with the administrative arbitration decision by the Grievance Redress Committee (GRC), the complainant will then seek legal redress in courts of law. If the complainant is not satisfied with the decision made above, he or she may lodge an appeal to the civil court. 10.4 PROPOSED PROCESS OF GRIEVANCE MANAGEMENT The ESMP recommends the following process, which should be adopted by the project support team: - 10.4.1 LODGING COMPLAINT The Grievance Management Coordinator/Officer will receive complaint from the PAP in the local language and complete a Grievance Form, which will be signed by the leader of the Local Grievance Management Committee and the PAP/complainant. This will then be lodged in the Grievance Log/Register provided by the Grievance Management Coordinator/Officer. 10.4.2 DETERMINING CORRECTIVE ACTION If in their judgment, the grievance can be solved at this stage and the Grievance Management Coordinator/Officer and a representative of an NGO/CBO will determine a corrective action in consultation with the aggrieved person. A description of the action; the time frame in which the action is to take place; and the party responsible for implementing the action will be recorded in the grievance database. Grievances will be resolved and status reported back to complainants within 30 days. If more time is required this will be communicated clearly and in advance to the aggrieved person. For cases that are not resolved within the stipulated time, detailed investigations will be undertaken and results discussed in the monthly meetings with affected persons. In some instances, it may be appropriate to appoint independent third parties to undertake the investigations. 10.4.3 MEETING THE COMPLAINANT The proposed corrective action and the timeframe in which it is to be implemented will be discussed with the complainant within 30 days of receipt of the grievance. Written agreement to proceed with the corrective action will be sought from the complainant (e.g. by use of an appropriate consent form). If no agreement is reached, the above step will be re-visited. Ministry of Water and Environment 162 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project 10.4.4 IMPLEMENTATION OF CORRECTIVE ACTION The Project or its Contractors/Operators within the agreed timeframe will undertake agreed corrective actions. The date of the completed action will be recorded in the grievance database. 10.4.5 VERIFICATION OF CORRECTIVE ACTION To verify satisfaction, the aggrieved person will be approached by the Grievance Officer to verify that the corrective action has been implemented. A signature of the complainant will be obtained and recorded in the log and/or on the consent form. If the complainant is not satisfied with the outcome of the corrective action additional steps may be undertaken to reach agreement between the parties. If additional corrective action is not possible alternative avenues maybe pursued. 10.4.6 ACTION BY LOCAL LEADERS AND CONTRACTORS If the Grievance Co-ordinator and NGO/CBO representative cannot solve the grievance, it will be referred to relevant parties such as local leaders, District Officers, NEMA, Valuer and MWE, for consultation and relevant feedback provided. 10.4.7 ACTION BY GRIEVANCE REDRESS COMMITTEE If the complainant remains dissatisfied and a satisfactory resolution cannot be reached, the complaint will be handled by the Grievance Redress Committee. A dedicated Grievance Committee will be established to assess grievances that arise from disputes. This will include the following members: - a. MWE Chair, b. IWMDP Project Coordinator, c. Resettlement Officer/Social Scientist Secretary, d. Project’s Environmental Focal Point, e. The Chair of the local community (LC I Chairman), f. A member of a recognized non-government organization, A Community Leader. This committee must have a quorum of at least two thirds persons. Decisions will be reached by simple majority. The Grievance Committee should be constituted for as long as no more grievances are lodged. Once the Grievance Committee has determined its approach to the lodged grievance, this will be communicated to the GO, who will communicate this to the complainant. If satisfied, the complainant signs to acknowledge that the issue has been resolved satisfactorily. If the complainant is not satisfied however, the complainant notes the outstanding issues, which may be re-lodged with the Grievance Committee or the complainant may proceed with judicial proceedings. The effectiveness of the GRM will be evaluated during the periodical performance reporting and as part of the Environmental Audits. The GRM should be assessed on the following parameters: - a. Number of complaints: b. Grievance issues by type and how they were resolved: c. Total received, total justified, d. Total resolved at various levels including the type of agreement reached, e. Total referred to legal system/courts of law, including clarification on who initiated (local leaders, PAP or MWE) the referral and subject matter. Ministry of Water and Environment 163 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project 10.5 PROPOSED TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR GRIEVANCE MANAGEMENT COORDINATOR/OFFICER In line with MWE’s resettlement policy framework, projects need to adopt appropriate measures that minimize the risks relating to constructing the water supply and sanitation project. Based on consultations with stakeholders in both districts, effective management of grievances strongly enhances the performance of projects through elimination of construction delays, proper expectation management and increasing community support for the project the current situation suggests that community members incur high transaction costs to ensure that their grievances are handled. Therefore, MWE will seek the services of a grievance management coordinator to support the existing framework in documenting, analyzing and engaging stakeholders on how to manage project related grievances as a way of minimizing to delays in works related to unresolved grievances. The roles and responsibilities of the grievance management coordinator will include: - a. to coordinate the work of the Grievance Committee, including calling and chairing scheduled meetings; b. help train Community and Local Government staff engaged in grievance management for land and crops; c. provide advice and assistance to such persons; d. monitor progress of grievances; e. inform Members of outcome of vote on whether or not to proceed to grievance; f. act as primary Association contact with lawyers and liaise with legal counsel regarding on going grievance issues; g. And report on informal disputes and grievances to MWE Project Implementation Unit on a regular basis. Training and Qualifications: Minimum of a relevant university degree with 5 years’ experience in grievance handling in rural communities with solid working knowledge of environment, resettlement and compensation issues in Uganda. Ministry of Water and Environment 164 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project 11 WATER SOURCE PROTECTION AND CATCHMENT MANAGEMENT PLAN The water catchment area and the water point source for the project are highly degraded. The main drivers of this degradation is population growth, poor agricultural practices, rapid urbanization, climate change, anthropogenic activities like pollution caused by solid waste, wastewater, open defecation and deforestation caused by land convention for agriculture and energy needs from fuelwood. To address these modern-day ills, there is an urgent to have water source protection measures and a catchment wide management plan for the project. Under a separate component of this project “Investment in Integrated Water Resources Development and Management Component,” a water source protection was given. The threats caused by anthropogenic activities, the hazards they are likely to cause and control measures are herewith outlined in Table 11.1. Additionally, catchment management plan was given and is outlined in Table 10.2. Table 11.1– Water Source Protection Measures at Water Source Water source protection Underlying cause Control measure challenge/ Sustaining Loss/ degradation of Enforce wetland policy to protect or regulate need water quality wetland belt (due to wetland and at agricultural encroachment) lake use. Enforce environmental abstractio thus undermining capacity to regulations (lake shore and wetlands). n point filter sedimentation and or stabilize the lake shore Promote wise use practices of bank. wetland resources. Demarcate and protect wetland/ lake shore protection zone. Use agro pesticides that find Improve capacity for safe handling and disposal their way into water at of agro- pesticides abstraction point Promote soils erosion control measures so as to reduce surface runoff Construct diversion trenches to trap and divert storm water or soil wash from Soil erosion/ surface uptake point erosion from gardens and along Promote soils erosion control measures to the access road resulting in reduce surface run off sedimentation/ silting and Poor human and livestock pollution. Restrict human and livestock waste disposal leading to access to abstraction and water contamination of water at the treatment Ensure safepoint disposal of human abstraction point waste (e.g. use of pit latrines) Market adjacent to the Relocate the market to safe proposed abstraction point location where effect of market on water can be minimal/ avoided. Ministry of Water and Environment 165 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Water source protection Underlying cause Control measure challenge/ Sand mining/ extraction Halt/ stop rock/ sand mining need within upstream wetlands or extraction activities. Sustaining Poor agricultural land uses in water the catchment that affect Promote Sustainable land management/ quantity hydrological system agricultural practices in the catchment (underground water) e.g., Regulate wetland use upstream through increased surface (agriculture +sand mining) runoff, exposing Declining high water tree/ vegetation Increase tree cover through table cover that affect appropriate afforestation or agroforestry hydrological system practices with appropriate tree species. (underground water) Maintain vegetation around Majanji abstraction point. Maintenance Insecurity water supply Fence/ provide protection of of infrastructure due to supply infrastructure. water vandalism and thefts supply Develop and apply conflict infrastructu mitigation/ management strategies. re Ensuring Population growth or adequate and concentration along supply Promote alternative water supply/ water equitable routes resulting into increasing harvesting/ water storage technologies. access to water demand Conflicts related to access Engage Stakeholders in piped water to piped water among current designing and monitoring the water supply and potential water users system. Develop and apply conflict mitigation/ management strategies. Sustaining Declining soil fertility and Promote sustainable land livelihoods over-all land productivity management practices (soil fertility management, control of soil loss, etc.) Promote technologies for enhancing land productivity (e.g. improved varieties of crops, disease and pest control, etc.) Conflicting or competing Zoning protection areas of the land (e.g., cultivate wetland wetland, lake and infrastructure edge) and water uses (e.g., Ministry of Water and Environment 166 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Water source protection Underlying cause Control measure challenge/ fishing near/ around the Empowering stakeholders to need abstraction point) plan for and manage their water sources (provision of incentives for protecting water source e.g., fishing gear that enables fishing activity in deep waters) Increase awareness on the relationship between land/ water use and water quality and water availability at Majanji Table 11.2 – Water Source Protection Measures at Sub-Catchment level Threat Hazard Control measure Ineffectiveness of The water sources are Multi-level institutional capacity building and sub- catchment contaminated, trainings management treatment costs and water source increase and safe water Supply water within the water protection availability is not source sub-catchment to ease cooperation of granted population (e.g. install Public Stand Post near WTP). measures Inform water users about why water costs are going up and link to their own polluting activities that are contributing to the problem. Implement a water quality monitoring programme. Reforestation with native species and water friendly trees Natural vegetation Vegetation removal removal (clear- affects the water Educational programs: cutting) for quality and quantity by promote use of solar power, biogas, eco-stoves, cultivation, timber modifying the chemical solar cookers, high efficiency stoves, and charcoal composition and by gasifier stoves to reduce production altering the water flow deforestation. dynamics in the sub- catchment Tree plantation for commercial use (timber and biomass production). Burning of vegetation Fire management and protection procedures. affects the water Bushfire management policy quality and quantity by Regular sub-catchment patrols Ministry of Water and Environment 167 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Threat Hazard Control measure Burning of modifying the vegetation chemical composition Educational programs and by altering the water flow dynamics in Habitat change monitoring the sub- Establishment of river bank catchment protection zones (30 m) and lake shore protection zone (200 m) Land use management and planning / Establishment of forested areas, Habitat fragmentation control activities near and inside them. reduces livelihoods Demarcate wetlands, enforce policy to protect available and drives / regulate wetland and lake use. Natural habitat the exploitation in the Promote good practices for fragmentation sub- sustainable use of wetland resources. catchment, in the wetlands and around Wildlife corridors to conserve river banks biodiversity. Agricultural counselling/advisors to promote contour bunds, Land degradation Land degradation strip cropping, crop rotation etc. for raising from wrong reduces agricultural infiltration rates agricultural yield available and drives Practices the Agro-forest (production of exploitation in the trees and of non-tree crops or animals on the sub- catchment and same piece of land). around river banks Establishment of river bank protection zones (30 m) and lake shore protection zone (200 m) Promote small irrigation schemes away from water sources Reforestation with native species and plantation of (native) fast growing herbs and shrubs Agricultural counselling/ Soil erosion modifies advisors to avoid that soil is left bare, to Soil erosion from the soil fertility and promote crop rotation and erosion control wrong agricultural reduces the land measures. Practices productivity; the runoff affects the water Use of riverine vegetation quality of the strips to slow runoff and prevent nutrient and receiving rivers and sediment load. streams Ministry of Water and Environment 168 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Threat Hazard Control measure Promote organic agriculture - starting from pilot farms. Agricultural Fertilizers and counselling/advisors chemicals used in agriculture can Control and regulate use of fertilizers and Pollution from contaminate the water pesticides. Use of riverine vegetation strips to slow agricultural activity resources thereby runoff and modifying the water prevent nutrient and sediment load. quality and posing risks for human health Establishment of sustainable Increase of the agricultural practices (support of NAADS), pressures on the Contamination of the support basic education attainment and natural water source in incentivize access to credit resources to densely populated (SACCOS) differentiate income in rural to counselling/advisors Agricultural obtain livelihoods areas areas Temporary fencing of pastures Building of alternative watering Overgrazing from Soil erosion and WS systems for livestock away livestock contamination with from water sources / Fence off faeces access to rivers and lakes / Construction of storage facilities for livestock Pollution from Chemical and Chemical and biological anthropic microbiological monitoring of the WS pollutants Activities can contaminate the WS Law enforcement on discharge limits from industries/ Regulation of extraction activities/ Ban on fish poisoning / Regulate Construction fish cage farming/ Provide and management waste of and faecal wastewater sludge treatment treatment at Busia plant for the fish TC landing and site town before disposal, thus reducing Majanji the contamination of soils and groundwater Improvement of solid waste collection and transportation in the sub- catchment area, especially urban areas (Busia TC) and in Majanji town (with particular attention to waste produced in the market) Ministry of Water and Environment 169 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Threat Hazard Control measure Construction and management of sanitary landfill for solid waste disposal (especially for Busia TC and Majianji) Awareness campaigns against waste dumping. Penalize residents for dumping waste in ditches and rivers. Improvement of drainage system to reduce runoff sediment transport in the sub- catchment area and implement treatment before discharge Awareness campaign especially in urban areasagainst and in road drainages open defecation and that drain into the lakeimprovement of private sanitation facilities in the sub- catchment area Construction of lined public Microbiological latrines to reduce contamination of contamination of the WS groundwater in the sub-catchment area spreading of infectious Poor sanitation diseases Improvement of sludge collection and disposal. Construction of sewer system and wastewater treatment plant in urban areas (Busia TC) and in Majanji town. Ministry of Water and Environment 170 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project 12 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 12.1 CONCLUSIONS The project will supply up to 82.4 and 78.8% of the people of Busia Municipality in, respectively, the intermediate and ultimate years with sustainable and safe water within easy reach. Furthermore, the project will eliminate the reliance on the current piped water system, built in the period 1999 – 2000, that is intermittent, rationed and unreliable (refer to Fichtner and M&E, 2015a). With respect to sustainable environmental flows and requirements of other water users downstream of Lake Victoria, the project will abstract, at the maximum, 13,637 m 3/day (0.16 m3/s). This is about 0.04% of the minimal observed (381.88 m³/s) Lake Victoria outflow. Furthermore, the minimal observed Lake Victoria outflow has a return period of about 300 years. Thus, the effect of water withdrawal for the project on other water users is insignificant. The WTP site, including the periphery, is a forage ground for the near threated Hippopotamus. The Contractor/Operator should implement the Wildlife Management Plan (Appendix 5) in conjunction with Uganda Wildlife Authority. This should be carried prior to start of construction works. Most of the land to be acquired for the project is now government owned, with the exception of the privately owned 0.568, 2.0 and 0.289 acres at, respectively, the WTP, FSTP and Reservoir 2 sites. Furthermore, only portions of the private land will be acquired with the owners being left with enough land to carry on. Thus, resettlement is not necessary but rather compensation will be undertaken as costed in the RAP report for the project. The World Bank Operational Policies, Indigenous Peoples OP/BP 4.10 and Projects in Disputed Areas OP/BP 7.60, are not triggered given that there are no indigenous peoples or disputed areas within the project domain. The implementation of the ESMP for the project will cost UGX 500.2 million in total, including the cost of RAP that has been valued at UGX 300.2 million. In general, the construction phase is at UGX 435.2 million and the operation phase at UGX 65 million. During the ESIA study, consultations were conducted with relevant stakeholders. The MWE and other key implementation actors will liaise with stakeholders to ensure effective implementation of the proposed mitigation measures for the anticipated negative impacts. An Environmental and Social Management Plan (ESMP) has been developed for the Client, Contractor(s) and Operator to implement. Environmental concerns will be addressed through this plan so that environmental laws and policies will be complied with through the existing institutional frame works. Strict control and supervision of the Contractor by Ministry of Water and Environment and in close collaboration with Busia Municipality and District Authorities will ensure compliance with required mitigation measures Ministry of Water and Environment 171 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project 13 REFERENCES 1. ASCE/AWWA (American Society of Civil Engineers/American Water Works Association). 1997. Water Treatment Plant Design, 3rd Edition. New York: McGraw-Hill. DCN DW00961. 2. AWWARF (American Water Works Association Research Foundation). 1987. Water Treatment Plant Waste Management. Prepared by Environmental Engineering and Technology, Newport News, VA for AWWARF, Denver, CO. Document Control Number (DCN) DW00186. 3. AWWA Sludge Disposal Committee. 1981. Lime Softening Sludge Treatment and Disposal. Jour. AWWA, 73:11:600 (Nov). 4. AWWA Research Foundation. 1969a. Disposal of Wastes from Water Treatment Plants - Part 1, Section 1, Report on What Is Known. Jour. AWWA, 61:10:541 (Oct). 5. Britannica online. www.britannica.com/science (accessed on 01 October 2015). 6. Brezonik, P. L. (1993). Chemical kinetics and process dynamics in aquatic systems. Lewis Publishers. Baco Raton Ann Arbor London Tokyo. 7. Busia District Report. 2009. Higher Local Government Statistical Abstract 2009/2010: Busia District. 8. Chlorine Chemistry Council, 2003. Drinking Water Chlorination: A Review of Disinfection Practices and Issues, Arlington, VA, February 2003. DCN DW00651. 9. EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). 2011a. Drinking Water Treatment Plant Residuals Management. Technical Report: Summary of Residuals Generation, Treatment, and Disposal At large Community Water Systems. EPA 820-R-11- 003. 10. EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). 2011b. Water Treatment Manual: Disinfection. An Ghníomhaireacht um Chaomhnú Comhshaoil, P. O. Box 3000, Johnstown Castle, Co. Wexford, Ireland. 11. EPA, 2008b. National Primary Drinking Water Standards (List of Drinking Water Contaminants and MCLs) (original document published in 2003, DCN DW00657), Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water, Washington, DC. Retrieved from http://www.epa.gov/safewater/contaminants/index.html Accessed April 2008 for updates. 12. EPA. 2002. Water Treatment Manuals: Coagulation, Flocculation & Clarification.Environmental Protection Agency. An Ghníomhaireacht um Chaomhnú Comhshaoil, P. O. Box 3000, Johnstown Castle Estate, Co. Wexford, Ireland. ISBN: 1- 84095- 090-0. 13. EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). 2002. Wastewater Technology Fact Sheet. Aerated, Partial Mix Lagoons. Office of water, EPA 832-F-02-008. 14. EPA, 2000b. Wastewater Technology Fact Sheet: Dechlorination (EPA 832-F-00-022). Office of Water, Washington, DC. DCN DW00678. 15. EPA, 1999c. Wastewater Technology Fact Sheet: Ultraviolet Disinfection (EPA 832-F- 99- 064), Office of Water Municipal Technology Branch, Washington, DC. DCN DW00677. 16. EPA, 1999d. Alternative Disinfectants and Oxidants Guidance Manual (EPA 815-R-99- 014), Office of Water, Washington, DC. DCN DW00647. 17. EPA, ASCE, and AWWA. 1996. Technology Transfer Handbook: Management of Water Treatment Plant Residuals (EPA 625-R-95-008). Office of Research and Development, Washington, DC. DCN DW03736. Ministry of Water and Environment 172 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project 18. EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). 1995. Water Treatment Manual: Infiltration. An Ghníomhaireacht um Chaomhnú Comhshaoil, P. O. Box 3000, Johnstown Castle, Co. Wexford, Ireland. 19. EPA, 1993. Large Water System Byproducts Treatment and Disposal Cost Document (EPA 811-D-93-002). Office of Water, Washington, DC. DCN DW00058. 20. FHRI (Foundation for Human Rights Initiative). 2009. Promoting Sustainable Access to Justice for Vulnerable Women and Children in Uganda. Report of the Baseline Survey: Busia District. 21. Fichtner and M&E. 2015a. Water Management and Development Project. Feasibility Study Report: Busia Municipality, Volume 1: Basic Report. 22. Fichtner and M&E. 2015b. Water Management and Development Project. Feasibility Study Report: Busia Municipality, Volume 2: Annexes. 23. Fichtner and M&E. 2015c. Water Management and Development Project. Final Design Report-Busia Municipality, Volume 1: Basic Report. 24. Francis N. W. Nsubuga, Edith N. Namutebi, Masoud Nsubuga-Ssenfuma. 2014. Water Resources of Uganda: An Assessment and Review. Journal of Water Resource and Protection, 6, 1297-1315. 25. George, 1995. Dennis B. George, et al. Alum Sludge in the Aquatic Environment [Project #319]. AWWARF, Denver, CO. DCN DW00449. 26. J. V Sutcliffe & G Petersen. 2007. Lake Victoria: derivation of a corrected natural water level series / Lac Victoria: dérivation d'une série naturelle corrigée des niveaux d'eau. Hydrological Sciences Journal, 52:6, 1316-1321, DOI: 10.1623/hysj.52.6.1316 27. MWE (Ministry of Water and Environment). 2010. Busia District Water Supply Profile. 28. MWE (Ministry of Water and Environment). 2007. Water and Sanitation Sector District Implementation Manual Version 1, Volume 1 – Main Report. 29. NBI (Nile Basin Initiative). 2012. Nile Equatorial Lakes Subsidiary Action Program. Feasibility Study and Preparation of an Integrated Watershed Management Program and Investment Proposal for Sio-Malaba-Malakisi Sub Basin. Investment Project Proposal. 30. NEMA (National Environment Management Authority). 2008. State of Environment Report for Uganda. National Environment Management Authority, Kampala. 31. NEMA (National Environment Management Authority). 2004. Busia District State of Environment Report. 32. NWDR (National Water Development Report): Uganda. 2006. Prepared for the 2 nd UN World Water Development Report: "Water, a shared responsibility". UNWATER/WWAP/2006/9. 33. NWSC (National Water and Sewerage Corporation). 2010. Annual report 2009 – 2010. Kampala, Uganda. 34. NWSC (National Water and Sewerage Corporation). 2008. Kampala Sanitation Program (KSP) - Feasibility study for sanitation master in Kampala, Uganda. 35. NWSC (National Water and Sewerage Corporation). 2016. Environmental and Social Impact assessment of Gulu Water Supply and Sanitation Project. 36. Omaye ST. 2002. Metabolic modulation of carbon monoxide toxicity. Toxicology, 180 (2): 139 – 150. 37. PastakiaM. R. Christopher. 2004. The Rapid Impact Assessment Matrix (RIAM) – A New Tool for Environmental Impact Assessment. VKI, Agern Alle 11, DK-2970 Hørsholm, Denmark. Ministry of Water and Environment 173 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project 38. Reh, C.W. 1978. Waste Disposal - Dimensions of the Problem. In: 20th Annual Public Water Supply Engineers' Conference, Water Treatment, Part III, University of Illinois, Urbana, IL, pp. 65-71. 39. SDWF (Safe Drinking Water Foundation). What is chlorination? www.safewater.org 40. Sotero-Santos, Rosana B., Odete Rocha, and Jurandyr Povinelli. 2005. Evaluation of water treatment sludges toxicity using the Daphnia bioassay. Water Research 39: 3909-3917. DCN DW00530. 41. Tchobanoglous, et al., 2003. George Tchobanoglous, Franklin L. Burton, H. David Stensel, Wastewater Engineering Treatment & Reuse, 4th edition. Metcalf & Eddy, Inc., New York: McGraw-Hill. DCN DW00871. 42. Tumeo, Mark A, 1992. Effects of Lime-Sludge Discharge on an Arctic River [Paper Number 92102]. American Water Resources Association. Issue Volume 28, Number 6, December 1992, pages 1083-1094. 43. UBOS. September 2014. National Population and Housing Census 2014 Provisional Results. Revised Edition. 44. UKWIRL (UK Water Industry Research Limited). 2001. Odour Control in Wastewater Treatment – Technical Reference Document. UKWIRL Project WW13/A. 45. Vymazal, J. 2010. Constructed wetlands for wastewater treatment. Water 2: 530-549. 46. Vymazal, J. 2007. Removal of nutrients in various types of constructed wetlands. The Science of the Total Environment 380: 48-65. 47. Willems, P. 2008. A time series tool to support the multi-criteria performance evaluation of rainfall - runoff models, Environ. Model. Softw. doi: 10.1016/j.envsoft.2008.09.005. 48. Willems P. (1998), 'Hydrological applications of extreme value analysis’, In: Hydrology in a changing environment, H. Wheater and C. Kirby (ed.), John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, vol. III, 15-25. 49. World Bank, 2015. Water and Sanitation for the Poor and Bottom 40% in Uganda: A Review of Strategy and Practice since 2006. 50. WRMD. 2004. The Year-Book of Water Resources Management Department (WRMD) 2002 - 2003. Entebbe. 51. Youbin Zheng, Siobhan Dunets and Eric Rozema. Constructed wetlands. Greenhouse and Nursery Water Treatment Information System. School of Environmental Sciences, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario, Canada. Ministry of Water and Environment 174 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project 14 APPENDICES 14.1 APPENDIX 1: NEMA APPROVAL OF TOR Ministry of Water and Environment 175 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Ministry of Water and Environment 176 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project 14.2 APPENDIX 2: LAKE VICTORIA WATER QUALITY REPORT Ministry of Water and Environment 177 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Ministry of Water and Environment 178 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project 14.3 APPENDIX 3: PROJECT AFFECTED PERSONS Land to be acquired S. No. Name of Claimant Village (Acres) Crops to be compensated Intake/Water Treatment Plant and Reservoir 1 1 UGANDA PEOPLES DEFENCE FORCES NAMUNDIRI - A 6.603 Mango 2 BWIRE BARACK ENOS NAMUNDIRI - A 0.558 Cassava 3 AGGREY AWORI NAMUNDIRI - A 0.01 4 UGANDA PEOPLES DEFENCE FORCES NAMUNDIRI - A 0.18 5 UGANDA PEOPLES DEFENCE FORCES NAMUNDIRI - A 0.183 Transmission Main 1 6 ANYANGO SUZAN BULWANDE Nsambya; Lira tree 7 BAHATI WANYAMA BULWANDE Nsambya 8 AUMA LUKA BULWANDE Acacia tree; Nsambya 9 WANDERA PATRICK BULWANDE Gravelia 10 XAVIER WANYAMA BULWANDE Eucalyptus trees 11 OUNDO STEVEN BULWANDE Acacia 12 WANYAMA MARGRET BULWANDE Jambula 13 OJIAMBO DOUGLAS BULWANDE Mango; Gum tree hedge 14 OGINGA BENEDICT BULWANDE Eucalyptus trees 15 OGENGA MILTON MAHOMBI Acacia 16 BWIRE JAMES MAHOMBI Umbrella tree; Nsambya 17 JOHN ORODI MAHOMBI Banan clumps; Nsambya 18 OUMA JANE MAHOMBI Acacia; Nsambya 19 KWOBA SAMSON MAHOMBI Nsambya 20 OSINYA CHRISTINE MAHOMBI Nsambya Ministry of Water and Environment 179 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Land to be acquired S. No. Name of Claimant Village (Acres) Crops to be compensated 21 ONYANGO ALEX MAHOMBI Banana clumps; Nsambya 22 OMONDI LONIC BUKEMU Nsambya 23 NGWENO JACKSON BUKEMU Tamarine 24 WABWIRE JOHN ONYANGO BUHENYE - B Lira tree; Nsambya 25 SOMBI SAM BUHENYE - B Nsambya 26 NAJABI BWIRE BUHENYE - B Nsambya 27 OJIAMBO JOHN BUHENYE - B Nsambya 28 OKUKU PATRICK BUHENYE - B Lira trees 29 TO BE IDENTIFIED BUHENYE - B Acacia; Nsambya 30 NAFULA SCOVIA BUHENYE - B Acacia; Nsambya 31 WERE AIDAH BUHENYE - B Nsambya 32 ODWOR WILBER BUHENYE - B Pawpaw; Acacia; Nsambya 33 MAKOHA GRACE BUHENYE - A Nsambya; Mutuba 34 OUNDO SILAS BUHENYE - A Mango; Nsambya; Mvule 32 WANDERA VICENT BUHENYE - A Eucalyptus tree 33 BARASA AGUNDA RANDARI BUMALA Musizi; Mvule; Lira tree; Nkoba tree 34 LUHONI ANDREW ONYACHI BUMALA Acacia 35 OUMA ODIMBE BUMALA Mvule 36 WANDERA MOSES BUMALA Mvule; Lira tree; Acacia 37 ONYANGO SIKALA JUSTIN BUMALA Lira tree; Umbrella tree 38 WANGIRA EKAKA LUMINO - I Gravelia; Eucalyptus; Nsambya 39 MESSAGE PENTACOSTAL CHURCH LUMINO - I Mvule; Musizi; Umbrella tree; Chi apple; Lira 40 WANDERA ORTON LUMINO - I Sembula 41 GLORY PALACE NUR & PRI LUMINO - I Nsambya; Gum Tree hedge Ministry of Water and Environment 180 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Land to be acquired S. No. Name of Claimant Village (Acres) Crops to be compensated 42 MAJONI OBAYI LUMINO - I Mango 43 SYAMBI NGWENO LUMINO - I Mutoma (Mutumba) 44 ONGWEN OKUMU/NGWEN LUMINO - II Mvule 47 OUMA TAME LUMINO - II Mango 48 OKOCHI MOTOHA LUMINO - II Mutumba 49 OYULA SEDURAK LUMINO - II Mango 50 AJAMBO MARY LUSISIRA LIRA 51 MUKHULA OCHIMI LUSISIRA Musizi 52 OKOCHI ISAAC LUSISIRA Mutumba 53 NAMISI SIMON MASA LUSISIRA Nsambya; Birowa 54 OPONDO JANET LUSISIRA Mutumba; Gum tree hedge; Mvule; Lira 55 MASIGA ROMAN LUSISIRA Mutumba 56 NAFULA BEATRICE LUSISIRA Acacia 57 KITIMBO JAMES LUSISIRA Mango 58 WAFULA CHARLES VINCENT LUSISIRA Mvule; Nsambya 59 MANGENI PETER LUSISIRA Mango 60 OMUMENYA LUSISIRA Nsambya 61 NAMUSYA LUSISIRA Mango 62 NYENGENYA CHARLES LUSISIRA Mango; Banana 63 JUMA JOSEPH LUSISIRA NSAMBYA 64 NEKESA JESICA LUSISIRA Lira tree; Acacia 65 LEONIDA MAKOHA WANDERA MUNDAYA Mugavu; Mutumba 66 OSOSO HENRY MUNDAYA Gum tree hedge; Lira 67 JAMES OUMA WANYAMA MUNDAYA Musizi Ministry of Water and Environment 181 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Land to be acquired S. No. Name of Claimant Village (Acres) Crops to be compensated 68 OGUTU AFANDE HUTALE Mvule 69 WANYAMA RONALD SIGALAME - B Acacia; Gum tree hedge 70 BUTANGASI PRI. SCH SIGALAME - B Gum tree hedge; Barbed wire 71 OSORE FRED BUSEKIRA Pine 72 ST. ELIZERBETH SSS BUSEKIRA Mutumba 73 ACENO DOREEN BUSEKIRA Nsambya 74 CHARLES JUMA BUSEKIRA Acacia 75 WANGIRA BUSEKIRA Compound tree Reservoir 2 and Booster Station 76 LATE MUSUNGU BIRENGE DAHA 0.289 Transmission Main 2 77 BWIRE MICHAEL LWANGOSIA Mutumba 78 NERIMA CAROLINE LWANGOSIA Mutumba 79 EGESA ROBERT WANYAMA LWANGOSIA Mutumba 80 EGESA MUSAWO RICHARD LWANGOSIA Umbrella tree 81 ODUBAKA BWIRE LWANGOSIA Nsambya 82 BALUUTI SULAIMAN LWANGOSIA Nsambya 83 WANDERA KILEMBE LWANGOSIA Gum tree Lira tree; Eucalyptus tree; Gravelia; Mutumba; Banana 84 AUMA TEOPISTA BWIRE LWANGOSIA clumps; Mugavu 85 PIUS LWANGOSIA Banana clumps; Mutumba 86 BWIRE MUSA LWANGOSIA Umbrella tree 87 MUGENI SIMON KWOBA LWANGOSIA Mugavu; Acacia; Gum trees hedge 88 RICHARD OGUTI LWANGOSIA Lira trees; Teak trees Ministry of Water and Environment 182 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Land to be acquired S. No. Name of Claimant Village (Acres) Crops to be compensated 89 BWIRE STANSLOUS LWANGOSIA Gum trees 90 GEOFREY WANDERA LWANGOSIA Gum trees; Nongo; Mvule 91 LWANGOSIA Pine 92 OUMA SILVER OMONI LWANGOSIA Lira tree; Mvule; Mango 93 WERE FRANCIS (LATE) LWANGOSIA Mango 94 BWIRE MICHAEL (LATE) LWANGOSIA Gravelia; Lira tree 95 JESICA NABWIRE BWIRE LWANGOSIA Nsambya; Lira tree 96 MUSUNGU PAUL LWANGOSIA Mutumba 97 GIRABA GODFREY LWANGOSIA Mutumba 98 PIUS OSATO LWANGOSIA Pine trees 99 OUNDA JAMES BUWAMBO Mvule tree 100 TAMBITI FLORENCE BUWAMBO Eucalyptus 101 BETTY TAMBITI BUWAMBO Eucalyptus; Lira 102 OUMA LAUBEN NAMBOKWE SIKOBWE Eucalyptus; Mvule; Mutumba; Nsambya 103 MASAFU SUB COUNTY BUWANDA Musisi; Avocado; Mango 104 MASAFU PRI. SCHOOL BUWANDA Mvule; Tamarine; Gum tree; Mango; Acacia 105 MASAFU POLICE STATION BUWANDA Banana clumps 106 MASAFU HOSPITAL BUWANDA Nsambya; Jacaranda 107 MASAFU MASJID MIRRA Mango 108 ABUDALAH WAFULA MIRRA Banana clumps 109 TABBU PATRICK MIRRA Banana clumps 110 JOHN BARASA MIRRA Pines 111 ADAM MAYENDE MIRRA Nsambya 112 BWIRE CUMULA BUSABALE - S Jambula; Gravelia; Mango Ministry of Water and Environment 183 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Land to be acquired S. No. Name of Claimant Village (Acres) Crops to be compensated 113 BWIRE CUMULA BUSABALE - S Mutuba; Mango 114 WABWIRE FRANCIS BUSABALE - S Gravelia; Cypress; Acacia; Teak; Banana 115 MAGENI RONALD BUSABALE - S Banana clumps; Guava 116 GUSINO PETER BUSABALE - S Mango 117 WERE STEVEN BUSABALE - S Nsambya 118 BUSABALE GINNERY BUSABALE - S Chain link fence 119 WILLIAM OGUTU BUSABALE - N Mugavu; Umbrella tree; Mvule 120 OUMA RISMAS BUSABALE -N Mvule Lira trees; Jacaranda; Eucalyptus; Mugavu; 121 DABAN GIRLS SS BUSABALE -N Kabakanjagala 122 DABAN HOSPITAL BUSABALE -N Chain-link fence on metal posts; Gum trees 123 LATE POTELI WANDERA DABAN WEST Jackfruit; Acacia; Avocado; Mango 124 OPIO BLASIO DABAN WEST Gravelia; Umbrella tree; Kifabakazi; Banana 125 ODONGO KENETH DABAN WEST Jackfruit; Musizi 126 OJAMBO NORMAN DABAN WEST Eucalyptus; teak 127 NAMULUNDU WILBER DABAN WEST Mango 128 PASTOR ANDREW DABAN WEST Mango; Banana Stem 129 NAMUSYA DABAN WEST Mutumba 130 Mrs. BAKER WANDERA DABAN EAST Jackfruit; Mango; Musizi 131 NGOLOBI PAUL DABAN EAST Musisa; Umbrella; Compound tree 132 MALEKISUWA WABWIRE DABAN EAST Musisa; Cypress; Nsambya 133 EGESA DAVID DABAN EAST Mango; Gravelia 134 MAKULO SAMUEL DABAN EAST Gravelia; Umbrella Ministry of Water and Environment 184 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Land to be acquired S. No. Name of Claimant Village (Acres) Crops to be compensated 135 BUDECHO PRI. SCH DABAN EAST Pine; Acacia 136 OJAMBO SEDRACK DABAN EAST Umbrella trees; gravelia; Eucalyptus 137 WANYAMA NICHOLAS DABAN EAST Musizi 138 JUMA HAJUSU DABAN EAST Musizi 139 ALEKI JACOB DABAN EAST Mugavu; Banana 140 PAFURA PAUL DABAN EAST Banana clupms Reservoir 3 141 DABAN SUB COUNTY DABAN EAST 0.537 Gravelia 142 DABAN SUB COUNTY DABAN EAST 0.103 Transmission Main 4 143 ACHODE SAMUEL BUWUMA Pine trees; Cypress; Mvule 144 MUWANGUZI DAVID BUWUMA Banana clumps; Pine 145 CHRISTOPHER WERE (LATE) BUWUMA Lira 146 TOM OKUMU BUWUMA Mango Ministry of Water and Environment 185 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project 14.4 APPENDIX 4: MINUTES OF STAKEHOLDERS MEETINGS ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FOR BUSIA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT MINUTES OF MEETING HELD WITH THE LOCAL LEADERS/OPINION LEADERS OF MAJANJI SUB COUNTY TUESDAY 16TH JUNE 2015 2:45 PM AT MAJANJI COMMUNITY HALL. AGENDA: 1. Introduction 2. Presentation by the MWE representative 3. Presentation by the project Manager. 4. Reactions. 5. Closing remarks VENUE: Majanji Community Hall TIME: 2:45 PM. ATTENDEES: Attendance list attached Table 37: Minutes of the meeting held at Majanji, Busia District. Min. Item/ Description Action by Date No 1. The LCIII chairperson of Majanji Sub County introduced the team LCIII of Consultants to the local leaders. Chairperson 2. Presentation by the Environmentalist / MWE. Teddy In her presentation, the Ministry of Environment and Water Gwoyazika representative informed the leaders that the Ministry of Water and Environment had secured a loan from the World Bank to implement a water management and development project in eight towns in Uganda including Busia, Ngora-Kumi, Pallisa, Rukungiri, Katwe-Kabatoro, and Koboko Town council. She informed them that, the project shall benefit the small towns and that Majanji town is one of the towns to be will benefit from the project. She called for their cooperation in the implementation of the project. 3. Presentation by the Project Manager: Mr. Samuel Mr. Samuel Vivian Matagi informed the leaders that the Vivian Matagi Consultants are from Survesis and Savimaxx who were given a contract by the MWE to conduct an Environmental and Social Impact assessment of key activities and the Resettlement Action Plan for this Water Supply project. He informed them that the project targets Busia Municipality Council because the Ministry of Water and Environment 186 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Min. Item/ Description Action by Date No Municipality population has increased since 1995 when the water sources were constructed. He elaborated to them that there will be 4 reservoirs/tanks along this route i.e at Majanji, Butangasi, Dabani and at the Busia Municipal Council. All these reservoirs will feed the towns along the way from the Water Treatment to Busia Municipal Council. He further informed them that there is a team of the RAP specialist that will come later and will sensitize them on the compensation, survey and valuation issues that may affect the project. He called on the sociologist to talk to the leaders on the various issues that call for their input. 4 Question and Answer Session. Esther The Sociologists informed the local leaders that as they are the Nassonko leaders their views are very important for a successful Kavuma implementation of the project regarding the negative and positive effects of the project and how they can be dealt with. She requested him to provide all their opinions and concerns so that they can be integrated into the ESIA report. Qn. What is your opinion about the proposed project? Reverend: thank you for the work that is being done , thank you for revisiting the plan for Majanji to be provided with water Religious leader (Earlier on the towns along the route had not been given a provision to get water). We want employment opportunities for our people, so that they can easily support the project. The communities should be sensitized. LCIII Chairperson: For us as the sub county we need safe and Political Leader clean water. Currently all the water source that we have are salty. All the borehole that we have and all those that have been sunk are salty.it is very hard to use the lake water , it is too dirty and has a high prevalence of diseases like cholera, bilharzia etc. We in Majanji have the source of this water and therefore before it goes to Busia we need to have our share. And we are happy that we have been considered as beneficiaries. However we need to sensitize people about the sanitation and hygiene and also how to protect the environment like not to cultivate along the shores so that water remains clean. Elder Qn. Is there any negative impact that you envisage to arise from the project? Ministry of Water and Environment 187 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Min. Item/ Description Action by Date No Response: some people have gardens in this piece of land that is going to be development I request that their crops are compensated. The good thing however is that, people are very willing to surrender their land to project as long as they are compensated. Leader Qn. What do you propose as the appropriate mitigation measures for the identified negative impacts? Response: We have already started engaging the community members and we are continuing to sensitize them about the project. The project should also start engaging the people early enough together with the local government officials concerned so that, people get prepared to receive the project in their respective communities because in a way, this will help to reduce on the compensation. There is need to sensitize the community not to steal the construction materials. 5 In his closing remarks, the team leader thanked the chairman for Mr. Samuel his time and contributions he made which he said were very Vivian Matagi important in informing the development of the ESAI report. He encouraged them to continue sensitizing the communities about the project activities and that RAP team will give them more LCIII information about compensation. Chairperson Majanji Sub The chairman also thanked the team for coming and for their County efforts they have made to consult the people on issues regarding the project. Ministry of Water and Environment 188 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Ministry of Water and Environment 189 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FOR BUSIA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT MINUTES OF MEETING HELD WITH Mr. Wanyama LCIII Chairperson Buhehe Sub County on the 16th June 2015, BUSIA DISTRICT AGENDA 1. Self-introductions 2. Presentation by the project manager 3. Presentation from the sociologist 4. Reaction and Feedback from the Sub County Chief 5. Closing remarks VENUE: Buhehe Sub County headquarters. TIME: 5.00 PM ATTENDEES Find the attendance list attached Table 38: Minutes of meeting at Buhehe Sub County, Busia District. Min. Item/Description Action Date No 1. Introduction. All participants The consultancy Team introduced themselves to the chairman and he chairman did the same. 2. Presentation by the Project Manager. Team leader Mr. Matagi Samuel the Team leader of the Consultancy team gave the background of the project. He informed the LCIII chairperson that the Ministry of Water and Environment had secured a loan from the World Bank to implement a water management and development project in eight towns in Uganda including Busia, Kumi-Nyero- Ngora, Pallisa, Rukungiri, Katwe- Kabatoro and Koboko Town council. He informed him that, the project is being implemented in phases by different consultants. The first phase of the project was conducted by design engineers who developed the technical designs and the general lay out. Within this phase, the consultants identified the suitable locations for the intake, the treatment plant, the reservoir and the sewage plant and that, these designs were produced and also shared with the relevant town council and district authorities and in this case it had shared with Busia district and Busia municipality. He noted that, the second phase of project implementation entails conducting detailed Environment and Social Impact Assessment activities related to the project and developing a Resettlement Action Plan which Ministry of Water and Environment 190 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Min. Item/Description Action Date No had be given to Savimaxx and Survesis. He further informed him that right now they had come to handle a detailed Environment and Social Impact Assessment 3. Presentation by the Sociologist: The Sociologist summarized the project design which included the use of the road reserve for the pipelines and distribution water points within the rural growth centres of which Buhehe town is one of them. She requested that the Chairman give his opinion, fears and concerns about the project. 4. Opinion, issues and concerns: LCIII The chairman appreciated and welcomed the project because it Chairperson will help more people to have access to clean and safe water. The chairman guaranteed his support to the project. However his concerns were that;, 1. The community needs to be clear about the road reserve. This could be done through sensitization. He also recommended that both the leaders and the community need to be sensitized. 2. That will the people along the pipeline be able to benefit, in terms of access to clean and safe water 3. There is need to employ community members especially during the construction of the pipelines. 5. Closing Remarks Team Leader In his closing remarks, Mr Matagi thanked the LCIII chairperson, and the LCIII Buhehe sub County for his time and contributions he made chairperson. which he said were very important in informing the development of the ESAI report. He further advised the chairperson as a leader to do a lot of sensitization to the community about the project so that the project is not halted and to keep the conflicts minimal in case they arise. The chairman also thanked the team for coming and for the efforts made to consult the people on issues regarding the project. Ministry of Water and Environment 191 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Ministry of Water and Environment 192 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FOR BUSIA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT MINUTES OF MEETING HELD WITH THE NAMAWUMBI B VILLAGE/ COMMUNITY MEETING AT ELIM NAMAWUMBI PRIMARY SCHOOL ON THE 18TH JUNE 2015 AT 9.30 AM AGENDA: 1. Introduction of the Consultancy Team 2. Presentation by Environmentalist from the Ministry Of Water and Environment 3. Presentation by the Project Manager 4. Reactions 5. Answering The Question 6. Closing remarks VENUE: Elim Namawumbi Primary School TIME: 9:30 am ATTENDEES Attendance list attached Table 39: Minutes of the meeting held at Namawumbi Village, Busia District. No. Item/ Description Action Date 1 The Consultancy Team was introduced to the Community Chairman LC1 meeting. Namawumbi B 2. Presentation by the Environmentalist / MWE. MWE Official Ms Teddy Gwoyazika the Ministry of Water and Environment official introduced the consultants from Survesis and Savimaxx limited who had been contracted by the MWE to conduct the ESIA and RAP on the proposed water project. She mentioned that, the government of Uganda through the MWE had secured a loan to implement a water project which was going to supply water to Busia Municipal Council. She further informed the community that there are different components on the project which included Solid Waste Plant, Intake, Water Treatment Plant, Reservoirs and Faecal sludge which was proposed to be put in Namawumbi B. She further informed the community that the first phase of project implementation had been completed and also the technical designs had already been produced and shared with the Municipal Council and the district. At this point she requested the Team Leader/Project Manager for the ESIA team to talk to the community members. 3. Presentation by the Team Leader/ Project Manager. Mr. Samuel Mr. Matagi Samuel, the Team leader for the ESIA team AP first Matagi, The introduced himself and the sociologist as consultants from Team Leader Survesis and Savimaxx who were given a contract by the MWE to Ministry of Water and Environment 193 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project No. Item/ Description Action Date conduct an environmental and Social Impact assessment of key activities in the project and the Resettlement Action Plan (RAP).He went further to elaborate about the project and emphasized that the project has about four components, these include; water supply to Busia Municipal Council, Solid waste management, improving the drainage system and faecal sludge. He informed the community that the government realized that some towns have not been able to grow because they lack services like water, and that Busia is one of the towns under the project. Others towns included Rukungiri, Katwe-Kabatoro, Koboko, Kumi, Nyero – Ngora and Pallisa. The government has borrowed money to set up the water system in these towns. He mentioned that Busia mainly uses, boreholes, springs, shadouffs yet it has grown to the Municipality status yet this water is no longer safe because of the increased population which has tended to contaminate the water and diseases like cholera, bilharzia etc. are very common now. He further informed the community that water source was identified at Majanji at lake Victoria after a thorough check of all the water sources like River Malaba and the water was found not suitable. He clarified that although the government got money from the World bank but that money is usually for Consultation and construction but the money for compensation is from the central and local governments, and the land provided by the local government. The sites for the project were identified which included the intake and water Treatment plant, garbage collection centre, reservoirs and the faecal sludge sited in this area near the bridge on river Solo. Through his elaborate presentation, Samuel informed the community members that the Reserve tanks have been sighted in different area along the route from Majanji so that the towns along the route will access water from the project. As a result some Sub counties will provide land for the reserve tanks (that is for the public/ government land), and in case of private land being affected an agreement will be reached and the affected person will be compensated, a case in point is the reservoir at Butangasi. Mr. Matagi clarified that although the land for the faecal sludge has been sited/proposed but has not yet been acquired. 4. Reaction The presentation steered up so many question and below are the questions and comments from the community. Mangeni: 1. Why do you have to put a faecal sludge in our area yet, this is not Busia Municipality? Ministry of Water and Environment 194 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project No. Item/ Description Action Date 2. Busia is developing very fast, and the lagoon maybe transferred elsewhere won’t it be double work? Malaba Tyson: 1. Have they surveyed and confirmed that this is the place for the faecal sludge? 2. Are they going to pay for the area? 3. Sensitize the community about the effects of the activity like smell. Godfrey Birungi: Kampala has more cholera more than Busia, do you want us to get Cholera (because of the faecal sludge in the area). Rev Ben Kyangulo: Animals have died and our skin peels offs when we come in contact with this water from River Solo; and when it comes to 6 pm, you may fail to eat food because of the smell that comes from the Tannery. They brought the Tannery from Jinja. It has affected us so much. You cannot wash you bicycle in that river, it will rust immediately. You cannot plant crops along that river they will not grow. The population is high here, we were 300 households by then but now we are over 1000 households. My fear goes to the children. There is a lagoon in Kenya that has been a cause of many people, they have been drowning. Therefore, with that I appeal to you to take the faecal sludge/sewer system away from here. Head Teacher Elim Namawumbi Primary School; Have you come here to ask us whether we agree or not? What is the distance of the faecal sludge from the people? Robert Mubiisi: This is one of the most populated areas in Busia and there are other areas with less population and with more permanent streams that can be used for this purpose, why can’t you explore those other areas? How can you bring the sewer system near the school, it is very dangerous to the children. Children can drown in the lagoon as by their nature they are very inquisitive they can easily play near the lagoon and they drown who will be responsible for that. Rev Ben: The Alternative site is Syumutumba. The area is not populated and there is a stream that pours in river Solo. Mr. Idi Abubakar (LCIII Chairperson). 1. All this land around here (Referring to area around the faecal sludge area) is sliced into plots and they belong to people. This place is highly populated, so it would not be a good site for Ministry of Water and Environment 195 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project No. Item/ Description Action Date the faecal sludge. There are very small plots of land in that so called “large undeveloped piece of land” 2. The distance from town here is too short and that project will hinder development of the project. 3. The value of land will go down and the people will move away. 4. The government has a poor compensation policy, i.e. it pays little money or no compensation at all. The projects should always consult the different stakeholders. 6. . Closing Remarks The meeting ended unceremoniously as the community did not at all welcome the project in their area. The community members refused to sign the attendance form in fear that their signing on that attendance sheet may mean that they accepted the project in the area. It was agreed that the consultancy team pay a visit to the alternative site proposed by the community (the site was visited) ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FOR BUSIA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT MINUTES OF MEETING HELD WITH MEN OF OSIPIRI, TIIRI, OKAME AND OMANYE VILLAGES OBUYETI PARISH, BUTEBA SUB COUNTY, BUSIA DISTRICT AT THE SOLID WASTE SITE ON THE 17 TH JUNE 2015 AT 11.20 AM Agenda 1. Introduction 2. and Presentation from the Consultant 3. Opinions, Issues and concerns 4. Mitigation 5. Cooperate social responsibility 6. Closure VENUE: Proposed Site for Solid Waste. TIME: 11.20 AM ATTENDEES Find the attendance list attached Table 40: Minutes of the meeting held at Buteba Sub County, Busia District. Min Item/ Description Action by Date No. 1. Introductions. All All the participants and the consultancy team introduced participants themselves. Ministry of Water and Environment 196 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Min Item/ Description Action by Date No. 2. Presentation by the Sociologists. Esther The Sociologist welcomed the men participants for the meeting Kavuma and informed the residents that, there is an upcoming water supply project that is going to be implemented by the Ministry of water and environment with financials support from the World Bank. She further informed them that the first phase was conducted by the design engineers who identified suitable sites for the intake, the treatment plant and the water reservoir, the faecal site and solid waste management. In the second phase, two things are going to be done namely; developing the Resettlement Action Plan (RAP) and the Environmental and Social Impact Assessment Report (ESIA). She informed them that, as a sociologist, she is the one concerned with all the social issues related to the project She further informed them that, this water project as mentioned earlier has different aspects which include taking piped water to Busia Municipality from Majanji from Lake Victoria, have a faecal sludge, working on drainage of the municipality and solid waste. She told them that the Municipal Could had already secure the solid waste management site in their area (the community were aware of site).She further informed them that at this particular site the factory /structure is going to be constructed where garbage will be sorted and one of the things to be got from it will be manure and the Busia community will be able access it through buying it and being used to increase agricultural yields. The Sociologist further informed the participants that, the main aim for this meeting is to consult them about their perceived social and environmental issues, what they think can be done to mitigate those concerns and based on their opinions to develop the ESIA report for the project. Being the community at the solid waste site, she encouraged them give the information/issues that they had which they think should be integrated into the project implementation. 3. Opinions, Issues and Concerns. Through the meeting it was established that the community mainly engages in agriculture and grow crops like maize, cassava, ground nuts. The community were aware that the land belonged to the Municipality but were not happy about the place being a solid waste management site. Earlier the Council had dumped waste in that place and the experience was not good. There was uncontrollable smell and one time they buried someone in a shallow pit where even the legs were left out. Ministry of Water and Environment 197 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Min Item/ Description Action by Date No. Although the community were happy about the project concerning creating employment opportunities for the community especially for the women, the community had other issues which were presented in form of questions, and below are the questions: 1. Will the liquid discharge from solid waste be channelled into their homes and gardens or channelled in the designated area? 2. Won’t the garbage affect us especially the children? We may get cholera, malaria, how shall we be helped? 3. What shall we do, the smell shall be too much and will affect us and may not be even to eat our food? 4. We have a school just at the fence of this site (Nursery to Primary Five), our children will be affected. What are we going to do, shall we have to shift the school? 5. We have restaurants in this township, because of the smell from the solid waste we might lose our business. 6. Shall we be able to get water because we are also water stressed like in the Municipal Council? 7. When will the project start? If it takes a longer time to start, more people will settle around the site. The Municipality has to put its infrastructure like the solid waste site within its boundaries, so that they do not affect other areas especially projects that affect other areas negatively. 4. Mitigation: The community recommended that there is need to come up with a strategy to stop the smell. 5. Cooperate social responsibility: Through the discussion the participants requested that;  The community should be offered employment opportunities in the plant.  The project should open the road from should be Okame village to Buteba sub county headquarters.  The water should be extended to Buteba Sub County.  Extending electricity to this community.  Repairing of the borehole which is not currently functioning. 6. Closure. Consultancy The consultant thanked the participants who attended the Term Leader discussion and requested them to be positive towards the project. Ministry of Water and Environment 198 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Ministry of Water and Environment 199 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FOR BUSIA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT MINUTES OF MEETING HELD WITH MR. EBU MIKE COUNTY CHIEF LUMINO SUB COUNTY ON THE 16TH JUNE 2015 AGENDA 1. Presentation by the project manager 2. Presentation from the sociologist 3. Reaction and Feedback from the Sub County Chief 4. Closing remarks VENUE: Lumino Sub county Headquarters. TIME: 4.11 PM. ATTENDEES: Attendance list attached Table 41: Meeting with stakeholders in Lumino Sub County, Busia District. Min. Item / Description Action By Date No 1. Presentation by the Project Manager: Mr. Mr. Matagi Samuel introduced himself and team. He further gave the Samuel background of the project. He informed the sub county chief that , Vivian the Ministry of Water and Environment had secured a loan from the Matagi World Bank to implement a water management and development project in eight towns in Uganda including Busia, Ngora-Kumi, Pallisa, Rukungiri, Katwe- Kabatoro and Koboko Town council. He informed him that, the project shall be implemented in phases by different consultants. The first phase of the project was conducted by design Engineers who developed the technical designs and the general lay out. Within this phase, the consultants identified the suitable locations for the intake, the treatment plant, the reservoir, solid waste site and the faecal sludge plant and that, these designs were produced and also shared with the relevant town councils and district authorities and in this case it had been shared with Busia district and Busia Municipality Council. He noted that, the second phase of project implementation entails conducting detailed Environment and Social Impact Assessment activities related to the project and developing a Resettlement Action Plan which had be given to Savimaxx and Survesis .He further informed him that this particular team are handling the detailed Environment and Social Impact Assessment and in a few days the RAP team would be in the project area. Ministry of Water and Environment 200 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Min. Item / Description Action By Date No The Team leader called on the Sociologist to a have a discussion with the sub County chief. 2. Presentation by the Sociologist. Esther The Sociologist informed the sub County Chief that the pipeline will Kavuma mainly follow the road reserve and it is likely that not so many will be affected. She informed him that distribution water points will be put with in the rural growth centres. From that background She requested that sub county chief to give his opinion, fears and concerns about the project. 3. Reaction and Feedback from the Sub County Chief Sub County Opinion: Chief He appreciated and welcomed the project since it will help more people to have access to safe and clean water. The chief reported that they have a few boreholes which are not salty, and the demand for water is too high in the sub county. Out of the 37 villages in the sub county only 15 boreholes are functional and are being shared among all these villages. The water vendors’ literary take over the boreholes and it is hard for other users to access water from the boreholes especially in town. The chief informed the team that the council had passed a resolution to sink a borehole for every village but there is lack of funds to implement the resolution. Issues/ Concern 1. The chief informed the meeting that his main concern would have been compensation but since the road reserve was going to be used, the community has to be sensitized about that; what constitutes off a road reserve etc. 2. The chief also had issues on how affordable the water will be to the community. He requested that the water should be priced in relation what the communities can afford. 3. He further showed concern over the burst of the water pipes and the need to train local people to maintain them 4 Closing Remarks Mr. In his closing remarks, Mr. Matagi thanked the sub county chief for Samuel his time and contributions he made which he said were very Vivian important in informing the development of the ESIA report especially Matagi that there is limited likeness of having compensation issues since the road reserve will be used by the project. The chief also thanked the team for coming and for their efforts they have made to consult the people on issues regarding the project. Ministry of Water and Environment 201 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Ministry of Water and Environment 202 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FOR BUSIA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT MINUTES OF MEETING HELD WITH KAYIIRA MAHMOOD, SUB COUNTY CHIEF DABANI SUB COUNTY WEDNESDAY 17TH JUNE 2015 FOR A RESERVOIR AT DABANI SUB COUNTY HEADQUARTERS. AGENDA 1. Introduction 2. Presentation by the project Manager. 3. Reactions from the Sub county Chief. 4. Closing remarks VENUE: Dabani Sub County Headquarters TIME: 3.00 PM. ATTENDEES: Attendance list attached Table 42: Meeting with stakeholders in Dabani Sub County, Busia District. Min. Item/ Description Action by Date No 1. Presentation by the Project Manager: Mr. In his presentation, Mr. Samuel Matagi the Team leader for the Samuel Consultancy Team informed the Sub county Chief that, the Ministry of Vivian Water and Environment had secured a loan from the World Bank to Matagi implement a water management and development project in eight towns in Uganda including Busia, Ngora-Kumi, Pallisa, Rukungiri, Katwe- Kabatoro and Koboko Town council. He informed him that, the project shall be implemented in phases by different consultants. The first phase of the project was conducted by design Engineers who developed the technical designs and the general lay out of the project. Within this phase he elaborated that the consultant identified the suitable locations for the intake, the treatment plant, the reservoirs, solid waste management site and the faecal sludge site and that, these designs were produced and also shared with the relevant Town Councils and District authorities, of which Busia Municipal Council and District has been benefited and the information has been shared. He noted that, the second phase of project implementation entails conducting detailed Environment and Social Impact Assessment activities related to the project and developing a Resettlement Action Plan which were going to be carried out by consultants from Survessis Ministry of Water and Environment 203 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Min. Item/ Description Action by Date No and Savimaxx limited who were contracted by the MWE to undertake this assignment. He informed him that a site for a reservoir had been identified at the Dabani sub county headquarters and from the information from the District and Municipality an acre has to be offered for this government project. 2. Reaction from the Sub County Chief Sub The Chief appreciated the project as it would make more people County access clean and safe water. The Sub County chief informed the Chief Consultancy team that he had got some information from the Municipality about the land take for the reservoir but the request was made orally not formally. However before the oral request from Busia Municipality that same piece of land had been offered to Child fund by the sub county Council for the construction of the Resource centre. He further informed the team that he made an initiative to go to the Municipality Council to request them make a formal request for the land, but the Municipal Council wrote to the District requesting for the land and the District has never formally communicated to the Sub County. However to some of the Sub County staff, this was not taken well as it was perceived as the Municipal Council project as the municipality is the target beneficiary. Tub county officials feel left out as they were not consulted on sub County land take reserved for the reservoir and its eventual take by the project. He advised the team to talk to the LCIII chairperson and hear him out on the project. 3 In his closing remarks, the team leader thanked the sub county chief Mr. for his time and contributions he made which he said were very Samuel important in informing the development of the ESIA report especially Vivian regarding the existing communication gap between the local Matagi government levels. Ministry of Water and Environment 204 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Ministry of Water and Environment 205 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FOR BUSIA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT MINUTES OF MEETING HELD WITH THE Mr. BWIRE BENSON LCIII chairperson, Majanji Sub County TUESDAY 16th JUNE 2015 at 2 PM AGENDA: 1. Presentation by the MWE official 2. Presentation by the Consultant 3. Question and answer session 4. Closing remarks VENUE: Majanji Sub County Offices TIME: 4.00 PM. ATTENDEES: Attendance list attached Table 43: Minutes of meeting with stakeholders in Majanji Sub County. Min. Item/Description Action by Date No. 1 Presentation by the Environmentalist/MWE MWE 1. Introduction and Presentation by the Environmentalist / MWE. Official In her presentation, Teddy informed the LCIII Chairperson that, the Ministry of Water and Environment had secured a loan from the World Bank to implement a water management and development project in eight towns in Uganda including Busia, Ngora-Kumi, Pallisa, Rukungiri, Katwe- Kabatoro and Koboko Town council. She informed him that, the project shall be implemented in phases by different consultants. The first phase of the project was conducted by design engineers who developed the technical designs and the general lay out. Within this phase, the consultants identified the suitable locations for the intake, the treatment plant, the reservoir and the sewage plant and that, these designs were produced and also shared with the relevant town council and district authorities in that are concerned of which even Busia has been shared with this information. She noted that, the second phase of project implementation entails conducting detailed Environment and Social Impact Assessment activities related to the project and developing a Resettlement Action Plan. At this point, he introduced Mr. Matagi Samuel Vivian, the project manager and environmentalist and Esther Kavuma, the sociologist as consultants from Survessis and Savimaxx limited who were contracted by the MWE to undertake this assignment. 2 Presentation by the Project Manager. Samuel The ESIA and RAP Consultant Representative Mr. Samuel Vivian Vivian Matagi informed the chairman that consultants from Survesis and Matagi Ministry of Water and Environment 206 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Savimaxx were given a contract by the MWE to conduct an environmental and Social Impact assessment of key activities in the project. He explained that the earlier pre-feasibility and feasibility and detailed engineering plans had been done by Fichtner and M & E Associates. He further mentioned that there are eight towns in this assignment i.e. Busia, Nyero, Ngora, Kumi, Pallisa in the East; Rukungiri and Katwe -Kabatoro in the West and Koboko in West Nile. He further informed the chairman that, in addition to the environmentalist and the sociologist, there was another big team of ecologists including one for butterflies, mammals, plants and frogs he had travelled with to assess the impact of the project regarding those different ecological systems in the project area. At this point he called in the Sociologist to come and interview the LCIII Chairman. 3 Question and Answer Session/Discussion Esther The Sociologists informed the chairman that the sub county is very Nassonko key in the project and therefore his views are very important for a Kavuma successful implementation of the project. She requested him to provide all his opinions and concerns so that they can be integrated into the ESIA report. The interview went as follows; Qn. What is your opinion about the proposed project? Response: For us as the sub county we need safe and clean water. Currently all the water source that we have are salty. All the borehole that we have and all those that have been sunk are salty.it is very hard to use the lake water, it is too dirty and has a high prevalence of diseases like cholera, bilharzia etc. We in Majanji are the source of this water and therefore before it goes to Busia we need to have our share. This is the hunters share. Before this water goes to Busia we should get our share. However, we need to sensitize people about the sanitation and hygiene and also how to protect the environment like not to cultivate along the shores so that water remains clean. Qn. Is there any negative impact that you envisage to arise from the project? Response: some people have gardens in this piece of land that is going to be development I request that their crops are compensated. The good thing however is that, people are very willing to surrender their land to project as long as they are compensated. Qn. What do you propose as the appropriate mitigation measures for the identified negative impacts? Response: We have already started engaging the community members and we are continuing to sensitize them about the project. The project should also start engaging the people early enough Ministry of Water and Environment 207 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project together with the local government officials concerned so that, people get prepared to receive the project in their respective communities because in a way, this will help to reduce on the compensation. There is need to sensitize the community not to steal the construction materials. 4 Closing Remarks In his closing remarks, the team leader thanked the chairman for his time and contributions he made which he said were very important in informing the development of the ESIA report. The chairman also the team for coming and for their efforts they have made to consult the people on issues regarding the project. Ministry of Water and Environment 208 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FOR BUSIA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT MINUTES OF MEETING HELD WITH BUSIA DISTRICT OFFICIALS ON TUESDAY 16 TH JUNE 2015 AT 9.15 AM AGENDA 1. Opening prayer 2. Self-introduction 3. Presentation by Environmentalist from the Ministry of Water and Environment 4. Presentation by the Project Manager 5. Reactions 6. Discussion 7. Closing remarks VENUE: Busia District Headquarters. TIME: 9.15 am. ATTENDEES: Attendance list attached. Table 44: Minutes of meeting with stakeholders at Busia District Headquarters. Min. Item Description Action by Date No 1. Presentation by the Environmentalist / MWE. MWE The Ministry of Water and Environment Official Ms Teddy Harold Official introduced the team of consultants from Survesis and savimaxx limited who had been contracted by the MWE to conduct the ESIA on the proposed water project. She further informed the district officials that, the first phase of project implementation had been completed and that, the technical designs had already been produced and shared with both the Municipal council and the district. At this point she asked the lead EIA Consultant to make his presentation to the district staff. 2. Presentation by the Project Manager. Samuel Mr. Matagi Samuel the ESIA and RAP Consultant representative Vivian informed the District officials that the project is to expand the water Matagi distribution in the district. He further informed them that Survesis and Savimaxx were given a contract by the MWE to conduct an environmental and Social Impact assessment of key activities in the project and the RAP. He mentioned that, his team had conducted a reconnaissance in which they visited all the proposed sites for the project and that, this was now a follow up visit in which actual data Ministry of Water and Environment 209 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Min. Item Description Action by Date No collection is going to be conducted. Apart from consultations with different stake holders, a team of ecologists and a hydrologist were already on ground doing ecological surveys on plants, frogs, mammals, and butterflies and also doing water quality analysis. He informed them that, the ESIA is aimed at looking at the different impacts particularly those that are likely to arise from project activities and based on that, to design appropriate mitigation mechanisms. He further said that the government of Uganda had identified Lake Victoria as the source of safe water that can be used for the project. At this point, he called in the sociologist to have a discussion with the District Officials. 3. Reactions from the Deputy DCAO The Deputy Chief administrative officer thanked and welcomed the team for coming into the district and for their efforts to come and talk to the technical team of the district. He informed the team that this is not the first meeting a team on the project but has worked with other teams before. And as a result there are many issues that are attached to the project. 1. Apart from the urban areas that it is targeting, it also targets the rural areas, and there some aspects that people in the rural areas do not easily grasp like issues of compensation, and payment for the water services. 2. There was a leader in one of the sub counties who had resisted the giveaway of the sub county land to the project (Dabani Sub County). But we worked on this and he agreed because nobody can resist a government project like that. The cause of this was for the selfish reasons, earning from the project through the sale of the land to the municipality and also thought that the community / people thought that the project was entirely for the Municipality. 3. Other people do not know how they are going to benefit from the project. 4. Question and Answer Session. Esther Esther the Sociologist thanked the staff for attendance, their time Nassonko and their contribution to the project so far. She indicated that, Kavuma within the scope of the ESIA, they are going to widely consult all the different stake holders at all levels and that, the views of the district technical staff are quite critical given their level of understating of the issues related to the environment and the social aspects of people in the entire district. At this point, she asked the officials to give her a few minutes of their time to give their views and opinions Ministry of Water and Environment 210 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Min. Item Description Action by Date No on the key issues related to the project. The discussion went as follows; What are your opinions regarding the project? CDO: The communities are used to free water but with the project water is not going to be free. This process is going to be new to the CDO people, and their therefore changing their attitude might not be easy. For example when a bore is being sunk the community contribution was only 200,000/ out of the 15 million that cost a borehole for only the purpose of creating a sense of ownership and maintaining the facility. But here the project demands for water payment every month. This was anticipated to be very hard in the rural areas. This will call for a lot of sensitization regarding the road reserve, they have heard about it but do not understand what it is and its dimensions. Environmental Officer: The likely issues envisaged in the project are quite many and include effect of the system to the lake, land acquisition and others. Env. Officer Qn. Do you have any specific concerns / fears or issues that you think should be given ample considerations? CDO: There is need for people to know how much they will be getting or how the compensation process will be like how much the garden of cassava will cost and therefore the compensation values, CDO structures, and how a person who built in the reserve will be handled. How will the people benefit from the project especially those in the rural areas? Environmental Officer: the Intake may have issues with the navigation. This is because the project is long term. We may be concerned with the transportation and fishing which may affect the intake. Related to this the officer stressed the need to push the Env. Officer intake pipes further from the fishing village because it might be destroyed by the fisher men. It may also be difficult to acquire the 4 acres needed for the water treatment plant in Majanji because this is an urban area, it may be hard to get all these four acres all in one place. And four acres means cutting down trees and all the other organisms in this area therefore destroying the environment. Will the tanks be tanks be washed as a way of maintaining the tanks and preventing diseases to the consumers. How will the safety of the tanks be secured especially regarding poisoning the people who use the water. 5. Closing Remarks Samuel In his closing remarks, Mr. Samuel Vivian Matagi, the Consultant Vivian answered some of the questions that were paused towards him Matagi Ministry of Water and Environment 211 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Min. Item Description Action by Date No especially those regarding the compensation, road reserve, sensitization issues, issues of security to the treatment plant, protection of catchment area and the technology to be used on the project. On compensation, a RAP study was underway and it would come with most of the solutions of compensation, where a reserve road starts and ends and how far people should build from the road reserve. It was noted that land compensation rates will come from the districts rates. He further called on the officials to embrace and coordinate the project and offer all the necessary support to the project. The Deputy CAO was very grateful to the team and pledged all their support. Deputy CAO Ministry of Water and Environment 212 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FOR BUSIA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT MINUTES OF MEETING HELD WITH THE BUSIA MUNICIPAL COUNCIL OFFICIALS AT THE MUNICIPAL COUNCIL OFFICES ON MONDAY 15th JUNE 2015 AT 4.00 PM. AGENDA: 1. Opening the meeting by the Assistant Town Clerk 2. Self-Introduction 3. Project Background by MWE officer 4. Presentation by the Project Manager 5. Interview of Municipal Staff 6. Closing remarks VENUE: Busia Municipal Council Offices TIME: 4.00 PM. ATTENDEES: Attendance list attached Table 45: Minutes of stakeholder meeting with Municipal Council Officials. Min. Item/Description Action by Date No. 1 Presentation by the Environmentalist/MWE MWE In her presentation, the Ministry of Water and Environment official Official introduced the Consultant and gave a brief of what the Consultant was going to do. She informed the Municipal Staff that, the project shall be implemented in phases by different Consultants. Design Engineers who developed the technical designs conducted the first phase of the project and the general lay out. Within this phase, the Consultants identified the suitable locations for the intake, the treatment plant, the reservoir and the sewage plant and these designs were produced and also shared with the relevant town council and district authorities in the District. This she informed the staff that the second phase of project implementation entails conducting detailed Environment and Social Impact Assessment activities related to the project and developing a Resettlement Action Plan and she introduced the Consultant responsible for a detailed EIA and RAP. 2 Presentation by the Project Manager. Samuel Vivian Ministry of Water and Environment 213 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Min. Item/Description Action by Date No. The ESIA and RAP Consultant Representative Mr. Samuel Vivian Matagi Matagi informed the Municipal Staff that the project is to expand the water distribution in the municipality and the district. He explained that the earlier pre-feasibility and feasibility and detailed engineering plans had been done by Fichtner and M & E Associates. He further mentioned that there are eight towns in this assignment i.e. Busia, Nyero, Ngora, Kumi, Pallisa in the East; Rukungiri and Katwe -Kabatoro in the West and Koboko in West Nile. He further clarified that a detailed ESIA is going to be done regarding the environment and social issues on the intake, reservoir, water treatment plant, distribution networks, solid waste and faecal sludge treatment plant. On this component there are a number of specialist; ecologists of snakes, birds, butterfly, mammals etc. At this point he called in the Sociologist to come and interview the Assistant Town Clerk and Municipal Council Staff. 3 Question and Answer Session/Discussion Esther Esther Nassonko Kavuma the Sociologist thanked the Municipal Nassonko Staff for their attendance and informed them that, in conducting an Kavuma environmental and social impact assessment, wide consultations must be undertaken with all the key stakeholders in the project and that their views are very important in the successful implementation of the project. She therefore asked them to provide all they opinion and concerns so that, they can be integrated into the ESIA report. The interview went as follows: - Qn. What is your opinion about the proposed project? WO Water Officer: It is a good project. CDO Community Development Officer (CDO): It is good project because currently there are boreholes, which are few and bring little water and a number of them have broken down. the project will benefit more people and will run throughout the year. It seems the cost of water will gradually reduce in terms of cost per 20 litre jerry can. ATC Assistant Town Clerk: Currently only 30% of the municipal population access water and the project will increase it to 70%. EO Environmental Officer: Communities currently draw water from unsafe sources like shadouffs, wells, boreholes, (Boreholes and shadouffs have become unsafe because of the increased population they are near pit latrines that contaminate the underground water) Ministry of Water and Environment 214 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Min. Item/Description Action by Date No. but the project will reduce the water related diseases. It will also serve a number of institutions like hospitals, schools and households. It will offer employment especially the casual work to the locals and most likely technical/skilled work is for some other people or the Contractor comes with them. the project will offer business opportunities like food vending to the local community members. I have fears especially about compensation issues. The people have been told that the pipes where the pipes will be sunk will be paid. But you are saying the pipes will be sunk in the in the road reserve which will call for no compensation. The people need to be sensitized and made aware of the road reserve and their dimensions so that the project is not resisted. The project may increase the HIV prevalence rate. This is because there may be influx of people and engage in unprotected sex. Therefore this will call for the sensitization of communities about HIV/AIDS. It is also going to bring about the sewage system which has not been in town. This will call for sensitization about these services. Private Water Busia Municipality Private Water Operator: There is need to protect Operator the water sources so that they are not damaged or the source polluted. Pipes should go further into the water so that they can be protected. There is need to sensitize communities where the pipe network will pass through. The sub counties include Masafu, Lumino, Buhehe, Majanji, Dabani etc. so that the pipes are protected and are safe in EO these communities. Environmental Officer: Sometimes the lake water reduces/ goes down some 5 metres (like recently it went down 5 metre), which may affect the water intake of the project, this therefore calls for protection of the water catchment area. I envisage a threat of water contamination from cutting the pipes. Also there is need to demarcate the road reserve from the source ATC up to the Municipality. Assistant Town Clerk: How will the new system be used with the old system? How are they going to co-exist, or the old one will be done away with? Water Officer: How will the catchment area be contained and WO maintained since the catchment are goes up to Kenya where we do not have control. Ministry of Water and Environment 215 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Min. Item/Description Action by Date No. The reservoir would go on the Sub county land, which will not be compensated. .I understand the road from Majanji to Busia is going to be worked on, I request that there is coordination with the road ATC Contractors so that the pipes for the project are not cut. Busia Municipal Assistant Town Clerk: The government did not take on the local Staff authorities. Like the Dabani the LIII Chairperson wrote a letter refusing the project to take the land that had been offered to the project to put up a reservoir. This therefore calls for the project to involve the local leaders right from the start. There is need for coordination of all projects that is the water, roads, electricity, optical fibre etc. The issue of two water systems i.e. the old and new system. Will the old one run concurrently with the new one? Who will continue to pay for the borehole and old system especially regarding the maintenance of these water sources? This will be made worse because the private operator contract is expiring in February 2017 when the National Water and Sewerage Corporation will take over. Shall we continue with the boreholes and shadouffs? Qn. Other concerns? What are we going to do to stop water stress in the future because even after establishing this new system we will only have 70% of the municipality covered? 4 Closing Remarks In his closing remarks, Mr. Samuel Vivian Matagi, the Consultant answered some of the questions that were paused towards him especially those regarding the compensation, road reserve, protection of catchment area. On compensation, a RAP study was underway and it would come with most of the solutions of compensation, where a reserve road starts and ends and how far people should build from the road reserve. It was noted that land compensation rates will come from the districts rates. However, it was noted these are low because when people under declare land valves in order to payless taxes. It is these low amounts found at the district that the Chief Government Valuer uses. He then thanked the Municipal staff for attending this meeting at such a short notice and their opinions and mitigation measures will be used to improve the water system in this area and project as a whole. Ministry of Water and Environment 216 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FOR BUSIA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT MINUTES FOR THE FGD WITH WOMEN OF OSIPIRI, TIIRI, OKAME AND OMANYE VILLAGES OBUYETI PARISH, BUTEBA SUB COUNTY, BUSIA DISTRICT AT THE SOLID WASTE SITE ON THE 17 TH JUNE 2015 AGENDA: 1. Introduction 2. Presentation from the Consultant 3. Question and Response from the Community 4. Closure LOCATION: Proposed SITE for solid waste ATTENDANCE: Find attached list attached Table 46: Minutes of stakeholder’s meeting at Buteba Sub County. Min. Item / Description Action by No. Date 1. Introductions. All participants Ministry of Water and Environment 217 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Min. Item / Description Action by No. Date All the participants and the consultancy team introduced themselves. 2. Presentations: The Sociologist welcomed the men participants for the meeting and informed the residents that, there is an upcoming water supply project that is going to be implemented by the Ministry of water and environment with financials support from the World Bank. She further informed them that the first phase was conducted by the design engineers who identified suitable sites for the intake, the treatment plant and the water reservoir, the faecal site and solid waste management. In the second phase, two things are going to be done namely; developing the Resettlement Action Plan (RAP) and the Environmental and Social Impact Assessment Report (ESIA). She informed them that, as a sociologist, she is the one concerned with all the social issues related to the project She further informed them that, this water project as mentioned earlier has different aspects which include taking piped water to Busia Municipality from Majanji from Lake Victoria, have a faecal sludge, working on drainage of the municipality and solid waste. She told them that the Municipal Could had already secure the solid waste management site in their area (the community were aware of site).She further informed them that at this particular site the factory /structure is going to be constructed where garbage will be sorted and one of the things to be got from it will be manure and the Busia community will be able access it through buying it and being used to increase agricultural yields. The Sociologist further informed the participants that, the main aim for this meeting is to consult them about their perceived social and environmental issues, what they think can be done to mitigate those concerns and based on their opinions to develop the ESIA report for the project. Being the community at the solid waste site, she encouraged them give the information/issues that they had which they think should be integrated into the project implementation. 3. Issues and concerns: All participants Through the meeting it was established that the community engages mainly engages in agriculture and grow crops like maize, cassava, ground nuts. The community were aware that the land belonged to the Municipality but were not happy about the place being a solid waste management site. Earlier the Ministry of Water and Environment 218 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Min. Item / Description Action by No. Date Council had dumped waste in that place and the experience was not good. There was uncontrollable smell and one time they buried someone in a shallow pit where even the legs were left out. Although the community were happy about the project concerning creating employment opportunities for the community especially for the women, the community had other issues which were presented in form of questions, and below are the questions: 1. Won’t the garbage affect us especially the children? We may get cholera, malaria, how shall we be helped? 2. What shall we do, the smell shall be too much and will affect us and may not be even to eat our food? 3. We have a school just at the fence of this site (Nursery to Primary Five), our children will be affected. What are we going to do, shall we have to shift the school? 4. We have restaurants in this township, because of the smell from the solid waste we might lose our business. 5. Shall we be able to get water because we are also water stressed like in the Municipal Council? 4. Mitigation: Need to get a strategy to stop the smell. 5. Cooperate Social Responsibility: All participants Through the discussion the participants requested that;  The community should be offered employment opportunities in the plant and during construction phases.  The project should open the road from Okamye village to Buteba sub county headquarters.  The water should be extended to Buteba Sub County for the community to benefit. 5. Closure: Team Leader The consultant thanked the participants who attended the for the discussion and requested them to be positive towards the Consultancy. project. Ministry of Water and Environment 219 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Ministry of Water and Environment 220 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project MINUTES FOR INTRODUCTORY MEETING FOR ESIA/RAP AT BUSIA MUNICIPAL OFFICE DURING RECONNAISSANCE VISIT TO BUSIA Held on 4th March 2015 AGENDA 1. Opening Prayer 2. Introductions 3. Remarks from the Mayor 4. Remarks from MWE/Consultant 5. Discussions 6. Closing remarks 7. Field Visit Minutes of the Meeting Agenda Submissions Action By Min. No 1 The meeting was chaired by the town clerk and started Opening Prayer with an opening prayer. Min. No 2 All members present introduced themselves and their All members Introductions respective designations and role in the project present Min. No 3 He once again thanked the MWE for the project given the Mugeni Remarks from the many water problems that the district is facing and Micheal Mayor officially welcomed us to the municipality. He informed us that he was aware of the project and as a municipality; they have already started sensitizing the people about the project. He also informed us that the district has already started in engaging with the different land owners to acquire land for the project facilities. Min. No 5 Thanked the officials present for welcoming us to the Trinah Remarks from the district. Kyomugisha consultant/MWE She brief informed the member present about the project and Informed the officials that the MWE was there to introduce the RAP/ESIA consultants. The reason for the ESIA was to determine the impact of the project on the environment and the community. She informed the meeting that issues of compensation in the project area will be addressed by the RAP. The findings of the ESIA and RAP team will be fed into the design phase of the project. She requested the town council to offer support in any way to the consultant in the execution of the project activities. She urged them to be patient as they will keep on receiving more consultants with regards to the project. Ministry of Water and Environment 221 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Agenda Submissions Action By Min. No 6 The officials at the Dabani Sub County informed us that the Discussion Discussions sub county had not received formal communication about by all the project so intense consultations at all these levels are very necessary. Therefore, there is need for harmony between the sub counties, the district and the municipal council before other project activities commence. Closing remarks The Mayor thanked all for coming for the meeting and he Mugeni said they look forward to working with the consultants so Micheal as to ensure that a sufficient RAP and ESIA are carried out. Field Visit The Officials from MWE, the Mayor, a representative from JOWA ESL and the consultants then proceeded for a field visit to some of the proposed project facilities. Ministry of Water and Environment 222 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Ministry of Water and Environment 223 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project 14.5 APPENDIX 5: WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT PLAN 1.0 INTRODUCTION The Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project particularly the Raw Water Intake and Water Treatment Plant lie within the shores of Lake Victoria. The aquatic and papyrus wetland ecosystem is an ecologically sensitive area that host hippopotamus. The intake and treatment plant are 10km away from River Sio on the Uganda – Kenya border the grazing range of the hippopotamus. The local inhabitants complained of Hippos invading the project area particularly at night looking for food. Therefore, the construction and operation of the intake and the plant is likely to interfere with the feeding range of the hippos, which is classified as endangered by the IUCN Red List. 1.1 Purpose of the WMP The purpose for this Wildlife Management Plan is to ensure appropriate implementation of mitigation measures proposed in the ESIA for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project are adhered to. Anthropogenic activities involved in construction and operation of water treatment works are likely to have the following key impacts on wildlife in the unprotected wildlife area: - i. noise pollution causing animals to: -  Avoid areas where construction is occurring,  Change behavior as noise interferes with vocalization as well as hearing (including for mating and alarm responses) ii. light pollution from construction sites  interfere with visual stimuli and orientation leading to confusion  increase likelihood of mortality for some species which may be attracted to the lights on site, iii. Increased traffic on roads may lead to road kills. 1.2 This WMP provides: - a. Responsibilities for implementation of the procedure; b. Impact management measures to be implemented; c. Verification and d. Records and reporting requirements. 1.3 The Objective of WMP Through its Contractor/Operator, MWE as the Developer seeks to ensure that impacts on wildlife in unprotected areas are minimized as far as possible. Thus, the overall objective of this WMP is to describe an approach and procedures to be undertaken by the Contractor/Operator with regard to management of problem wildlife animals in encountered during project implementation. 1.4 Scope of WMP Ministry of Water and Environment 224 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project This WMP sets out requirements for management of wildlife during project implementation. The focus of the procedure is primarily mitigation during construction and operation phases of the project. 1.4 Relationship to Other Project Documents This WMP should be implemented in conjunction with: - a. Contractor’s environment & social impact assessment; b. Project overall environment & social impact plan (ESMP) that specified project wide requirements for environmental and social management; c. The ESIA report for this project and d. Resettlement Action Plan (RAP) that covers the framework and procedures to be followed during land acquisition for construction of the project. 1.5 The Uganda Wildlife Act, 1996 This WMP is to be executed in compliance with The Uganda Wildlife Act, 1996. In the Act the Hippopotamus is described as vermin, problem animal, dangerous animal and as well a protected animal. Part IX, Management of Problem Animals of the Act gives the right to: - a. declare an animal as vermin in section 57; b. the authority to hunt vermin section 58; c. killing a protected animal in self-defence section 59; d. ownership of a carcass section 60; e. reports of damage by protected animals section 61; f. accidental killing of a protected animal section 62; g. wounded protected animal section 63 and h. wounded dangerous animal section 63. i. 2.0 WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT PLAN 2.1 Formation of Local Government Wildlife Committee The intake and water treatment plant in Manjaji Sub county lie outside a wildlife protected zone i.e. National Park, Game Reserve or Community Wildlife Protected Area. Section 12 of the Act calls for the setup of Local Government Wildlife Committees in order to manage wildlife issues like problem animals. The committee shall be formed with the approval of the District Council. Most of the committee members should come from Manjaji Sub county which is on the shores of Lake Victoria which as has a lot of hippos. 2.2 Local Government Wildlife Committee Responsibility a. A local government council may, on such terms and conditions as it considers necessary, appoint a committee to advise the Uganda Wildlife Authority on the management and utilisation of wildlife within the local jurisdiction; b. A committee appointed by a district council under subsection (i) shall submit an annual report to the Uganda Wildlife Authority (UWA) board on its activities and other matters relating to wildlife management in its area; Ministry of Water and Environment 225 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project c. The committee should report to UWA of any problem animal for management; d. The committee should co-ordinate the WMP in conjunction with the with the Contractor/Operator on side and the UWA on the other side. 2.3 The responsibility of the Contractor i. The Contractor should appoint an Environmentalist/Biodiversity Specialist (E/BS) on the site during project construction. The Contractor’s E/BS will closely work with the Developer’s Environmental staff/Supervising Engineer to ensure compliance with national and financier’s requirements as well as implementation of this WMP. ii. During construction, the Developer will facilitate an officer from the UWA to be on site and ensure that any problem animals encountered are managed according to requirements of the Uganda Wildlife Act, 1996. iii. All construction staff should be on the outlook for problem animals on site. Specific roles of persons to be involved in implementation of this procedure are outlined below. 2.4 Role of the Contractor’s Environmentalist/Biodiversity Specialist (E/BS) The E/BS is required to: - a.Communicate contents and requirements of this plan to Contractor/Staff; b. Sensitise workers to ensure that all are aware of their responsibilities in regard to problem animals; c.Inform UWA and the Local Government Wildlife Committee of problem animals encountered on site; d. Coordinate inspection and monitoring problem animals with UWA. The E/BS should keep in close contact with UWA; e.Implement measures recommended by UWA for management of “problem animals” encountered; f. Maintain records (monthly logs) related to problem animals during construction. 2.5 Role of Uganda Wildlife Authority i) Uganda Wildlife Authority should appoint a focal Officer who will co-ordinate with the Developer MWE/Contractor/Operator/Local Wildlife Committee on problem animals; ii) Uganda Wildlife Authority will provide the Officer with financial, transport logistics, communication equipment, trapping equipment, tranquilisers, fire arms and any protective gear needed to manage problem animals. iii) Uganda Wildlife Authority will provide the Officer with adequate trained personal to assist the Officer in the management of problem animals. 2.6 The Role of a Wildlife Officer from UWA A Wildlife Officer seconded to the project by UWA will have the following roles: - i) Visit the project site before the commencement of the project and get acquitted with the area, landscape, vegetation and terrain; Ministry of Water and Environment 226 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project ii) Interact and interview the local residents and members of the Local Wildlife Committee to get the extent of problem animals in the project area; iii) Design a rapid response plan to manage problem animals; iv) Manage problem animals once s/he is called; vii) Maintain monitoring records of made to the project site; ix) Write a report for the Developer/Contractor/Operator upon each visit made to the project site. 3.0 WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT PROCEDURE In the event that genuine problem animals are encountered, the procedures to be adopted are described in the sections below. 3.1 Identification/Detection of a wildlife problem animal A problem animal is one which is likely to cause damage to property, attack, injure or kill persons and domestic animals. A wildlife animal that attacks or charges a person/domestic animal is problem animal. Therefore, it is the duty of everybody (staff, local residents, E/BS, Wildlife Committee) in the project area to report the problem animal, before it does damage or causes fatality. 3.2 General rule when a problem animal is encountered Upon identification of suspected problem animal, the affected person, either Staff and/or local resident must stand still. In case a problem animal charges the person must run for safety. In case of an attack the affected person must defend oneself with any possible means at their disposal. An alarm should be made when it is necessary. 3.3 Reporting a problem animal Anybody who encounters a problem animal should report it to the Contractor Environmentalist/Biodiversity Specialist, the Local Government Wildlife Committee and UWA. The hot telephones of the above persons should be available to all local residents and staff. Immediate contact should be made once a problem animal is encountered. 3.4 Managing a problem animal by a UWA Officer or an authorized hunter. Once a telephone call is made that a problem animal has been encountered, the focal person i.e. a UWA Officer or an authorized hunter should rapidly mobilise and rush to the project scene were the problem has been encountered. The Officer/Hunter should make a rapid assessment if the problem animal should be either captured and relocated or it should be shoot on site. 4.0 TRAINING General awareness training will be provided by A UWA Official to all construction crews, local residents and the Operator’s Staff. The training will incorporate information on problem animal behavior, ecology and biology. Ministry of Water and Environment 227 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project This awareness will be maintained through tool-box talks that should be regularly conducted with all stakeholders. 5.0 MONITORING Monitoring will be done by the Contractor’s E/BS, Wildlife Local Government Committee with the principal objective being to provide assurance that: -  Project construction is compliant with this procedure and  Evidence is collected to demonstrate that commitments related to problem animal are being effectively met. 5.1 Action Tracking All non-compliance with this procedure shall be followed up and corrective action taken. The Contractor’s E/BS is expected to maintain actions tracking system as part of problem animal monitoring. Problem animal management action tracking including close out of actions (solutions and preventive actions taken) will be reported quarterly by the Contractor to the Project Developer. 6.0 REPORTING AND RECORD KEEPING Records in sections below will be kept by indicated personnel. 6.1 Contractor’s Environmentalist/Biodiversity Specialist The Contractor’s E/BS will report the following to Contractor Manager and UWA.  Awareness records on problem animals among workers on a monthly basis;  Quarterly report summarizing problem animal management activities and  Action tracking system on a quarterly basis. 6.2 UWA Official The UWA Wildlife Official will report the following to UWA, the Contractor/Operator and Local Government Wildlife Committee: -  Reconnaissance survey report at the commencement of the project;  Periodic results of any inspection made to the project area;  A detailed report of field activities undertaken once called upon to manage problem animals. 6.3 Local Government Wildlife Committee According to The Uganda Wildlife Act, 1996, The Local Government Committee is supposed to submit an annual report to the Uganda Wildlife Authority (UWA) board on its activities and other matters relating to wildlife management in its area of jurisdiction. Ministry of Water and Environment 228 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project 14.6 APPENDIX 6: MAXIMUM PERMISSIBLE LIMITS FOR EFFLUENT DISCHARGE Maximum permissible limits for effluent discharge (Source: National Environment Regulations for Discharge of Effluents into Water or Land (Uganda Parliament, 1999) and (World Bank Group, 2007). The most stringent of the two standards are recommended for this project N Parameter Unit Uganda National World Bank o Environment Regulations Indicative values for for Discharge of Effluents treated sanitary into Water or Land, 1999 waste water value 1 1,1,1, trichloroethane mg/l 3 2 1,1,2. dichloroethyelene mg/l 0.2 3 1,1,2 Trichloroethne 1.06 4 1,2-Dichloroethane mg/l 0.04 5 1,3-Dicloropropene mg/l 0.2 6 Aluminum mg/l 0.5 7 Ammonia Nitrogen mg/l 10 8 Arsenic mg/l 0.2 9 Barium mg/l 10 10 Benzene mg/l 0.2 11 BOD5 mg/l 50 30 12 Boron mg/l 5 13 Cadmium mg/l 0.1 14 Calcium mg/l 100 15 Chloride mg/l 500 16 Chlorine mg/l 1 17 Chromium (total) mg/l 1 18 Chromium (VI) mg/l 0.05 19 Cirrus-1,2 dichloroethylene mg/l 20 Cobalt mg/l 21 COD 100 125 22 Clifform Organisms 10000 counts / 100ml 400 23 Color TCU 300 24 Copper mg/l 1 25 Cyanide mg/l 0.1 26 Detergents mg/l 10 27 Dichloromethane mg/l 0.2 28 Iron mg/l 10 29 Lead mg/l 0.1 30 Magnesium mg/l 100 31 Manganese mg/l 1 32 Mercury mg/l 0.01 33 Nickel mg/l 1 34 Nitrite - N mg/l 20 35 Nitrogen total mg/l 10 10 Ministry of Water and Environment 229 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project 36 Oil and grease mg/l 10 10 37 pH 6.0-8.0 6-9 38 Phenols mg/l 0.2 39 Phosphate (total) mg/l 10 2 40 Phosphate (soluble) mg/l 5 41 Selenium mg/l 1 42 Silver mg/l 0.5 43 Sulfate mg/l 500 44 Sulfide mg/l 1 45 TDS mg/l 1200 50 46 Temperature °C 20-35 47 Tetra Cholera ethylene mg/l 0.1 48 Tetrachloromethananc mg/l 0.02 49 Tin mg/l 5 50 Total Suspended solids mg/l 100 51 Tricholoroethylene mg/l 0.3 52 Turbidity NTU 300 53 Zinc mg/l 5 Ministry of Water and Environment 230 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project 14.7 APPENDIX 6: IFC WASTEWATER AND AMBIENT WATER QUALITY GUIDELINES Table 1.3.1 Indicative Values for Treated Sanitary Sewage Discharges a Pollutants Units Guideline Value pH pH 6–9 BOD mg/l 30 COD mg/l 125 Total nitrogen mg/l 10 Total phosphorus mg/l 2 Oil and grease mg/l 10 Total suspended solids mg/l 50 Total coliform bacteria MPNb / 100 ml 400a Notes: a Not applicable to centralized, municipal, wastewater treatment systems which are included in EHS Guidelines for Water and Sanitation. b MPN = Most Probable Number Ministry of Water and Environment 231 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project 14.8 APPENDIX 8: WATER QUALITY TEST RESULTS AT THE PROPOSED FSTP SITE, ON OKAME STREAM Ministry of Water and Environment 232 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Ministry of Water and Environment 233 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for Busia Water Supply and Sanitation Project Ministry of Water and Environment 234 Survesis in joint venture with Savimaxx Limited