INTEGRATED SAFEGUARDS DATA SHEET APPRAISAL STAGE Report No.: ISDSA2395 Public Disclosure Copy Date ISDS Prepared/Updated: 01-Apr-2013 Date ISDS Approved/Disclosed: 01-Apr-2013 I. BASIC INFORMATION 1. Basic Project Data Country: Armenia Project ID: P127759 Project Name: IRRIGATION SYSTEM ENHANCEMENT PROJECT (P127759) Task Team Giuseppe Fantozzi Leader: Estimated 02-Apr-2013 Estimated 21-May-2013 Appraisal Date: Board Date: Managing Unit: ECSAR Lending Specific Investment Loan Instrument: Sector: Irrigation and drainage (90%), General energy sector (10%) Theme: Water resource management (70%), Rural policies and institutions (20%), Rural services and infrastructure (10%) Financing (In USD Million) Total Project Cost: 37.50 Total Bank Financing: 30.00 Total Cofinancing: Financing Gap: 0.00 Public Disclosure Copy Financing Source Amount Borrower 7.50 International Bank for Reconstruction and Development 30.00 Total 37.50 Environmental B - Partial Assessment Category: Is this a No Repeater project? 2. Project Objectives The PDO is (i) to reduce the amount of energy used and to improve the irrigation conveyance efficiency in targeted irrigation schemes; and (ii) to improve the availability and reliability of important sector data and information for decision makers and other stakeholders. 3. Project Description Project Components Component 1. Irrigation System Enhancement (US$33.1 million). This component aims at lowering Page 1 of 10 the O&M needs of the conveyance section in selected irrigation schemes. It would finance the following two subcomponents: (a) Subcomponent 1.1: Conversion of pump-based irrigation to gravity (US$ 24.7 million): The Public Disclosure Copy rationale for this subcomponent is to lower the operating cost of water by converting pump-based irrigation to gravity irrigation. The project would provide for the construction of four gravity systems (in Meghri, Gegardalich, Baghramyan-Norakert and Kaghtsrashen); and (b) Subcomponent 1.2: Upgrading of outlet and other canals conveying pumped water (US$ 8.4 million). In this subcomponent, about 52 km of outlet canals in 13 selected pumping schemes would be rehabilitated to minimize losses of high-cost pumped water. Component 2. Management Information (US$1.7 million). This component has two subcomponents: 2.1 technical investigations; and 2.2 supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) system installation. Subcomponent 2.1: Technical investigations (US$0.9 million). This subcomponent has two activities: (1) analyses of O&M and EM needs (US$0.6 million); and (2) technical audit of irrigation institutions (US$0.3 million). Subcomponent 2.2: Supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) system installation (US$0.8 million). Component 3. Project Management and WUAs’ Support Group and Institutional Activities (US$2.7 million). This component will finance two subcomponents: (i) project management; and (ii) WUAs’ Support Group (SG). 4. Project location and salient physical characteristics relevant to the safeguard analysis (if known) Bulk of the individual investments under the Irrigation System Enhancement Project (ISEP) will be concentrated in Ararat, Armavir, and Aragatzon provinces (marzes) of Armenia. Two schemes targeted for conversion from pumping to gravity system are located in Syunik marz (Meghri), and Kotayk marz (Geghardalich). Public Disclosure Copy 5. Environmental and Social Safeguards Specialists Darejan Kapanadze (ECSEN) Kosuke Anan (ECSSO) 6. Safeguard Policies Triggered? Explanation (Optional) Environmental Assessment OP/ Yes The project will help to improve irrigation BP 4.01 efficiency and to lower costs by converting three existing deteriorated pump irrigation schemes to gravity fed schemes. This would imply moving some water intakes from their current locations to new ones, construction of new sections of irrigation pipelines, and heightening of a dam of an existing water reservoir. No new irrigation schemes will be constructed and new agricultural areas will be covered with irrigation services. Conversion to gravity feeding will improve service provision to the areas currently covered and could allow service delivery to over 1,300 ha Page 2 of 10 of areas previously served by the three schemes, but later having been cut-off due to deterioration of the infrastructure. The project will also finance Public Disclosure Copy rehabilitation of some outlet canals of the existing pumping stations of several irrigation schemes across the country. Activities proposed for the Project support trigger OP/BP 4.01 Environmental Assessment. Based on the nature and scope of the planned physical works, the project is classified through environmental screening as Category B. Its expected environmental impacts are low to medium. The project does not carry risks of destroying natural habitats, damaging forest stands, significantly altering hydrology of the natural waterways, or affecting other ecosystems in any tangible and/or irreversible ways. An Environmental Management Framework (EMF) is developed to cover all other investments under the project, because detailed designs and site-specific documents for them will be developed or finalized in the course of the project implementation. EMF provides sufficient information on the expected impacts and needed mitigation measures of all proposed investments, because all of them are identified, preliminary designs are redeveloped, and baseline Public Disclosure Copy environmental studies are available for them. A site-specific EIA report, including an Environmental Management Plan (EMPs) is available for Meghri scheme, as the design work is most advanced for it. Similar documents will be produced for Gegardalich and Bagramyan- Norakert schemes later, while preparation of simple EMPs using Environmental Management Checklist for Small Construction and Rehabilitation Activities is likely to be sufficient for the works planned on the outlet canals. Natural Habitats OP/BP 4.04 No Forests OP/BP 4.36 No Pest Management OP 4.09 Yes The project aims at improving water availability for the serviced areas and, possibly, restoration of over 1,300 ha agricultural areas back to irrigation. It is anticipated that because of improved Page 3 of 10 irrigation services agriculture will intensify in the coverage areas and higher value crops may be cultivated, which could entail more intensive Public Disclosure Copy usage of pesticides. Hence, OP 4.09 Pest Management is triggered. While there is no need of developing a Pest Management Plan, promotion of good pest and pesticide management practices is included into the project design. A library of brochures, fliers, and posters on the sound and safe handling of pesticides, including information on the Integrated Pest Management, has accumulated as a depository of outputs from a number of rural development projects implemented in Armenia with support of the Bank and other international/bilateral financiers. This material is readily available for reproduction for the needs of ISEP. Water User Associations will play pivotal role in promotion of good agricultural practice to farmers. Physical Cultural Resources OP/ No There are no known historical/cultural sites BP 4.11 located along the irrigation schemes selected for conversion and rehabilitation under the project. Therefore, OP/BP 4.11 Physical Cultural Resources is not triggered. Further site-specific environmental work to be undertaken in preparation for works on Gegardalich and Bagramyan-Norakert schemes, as well as for the repair of outlet canals of the other selected Public Disclosure Copy schemes will verify currently available information. As the Project implementation implies conduct of earth excavation works, occurrence of chance finds cannot be completely excluded. EMF carries provisions for the course of action in such cases, which call for immediate suspension of activity by works contractor and notification of the State Agency for Protection of Historical and Cultural Monuments by the PIU. Further action will follow the national legislation and the main principles of OP/BP 4.11. Indigenous Peoples OP/BP 4.10 No Involuntary Resettlement OP/BP Yes OP/BP 4.12 Involuntary Resettlement is 4.12 triggered, because construction of new irrigation pipelines, as well as rehabilitation of the existing ones - to lesser extent - may cause a need for land take or temporary restriction of land use. No physical relocation or large scale land acquisition Page 4 of 10 is likely, though, because rehabilitation of the existing schemes usually does not cause such impacts, and construction of the new sections of Public Disclosure Copy pipelines is planned along the right-of-way of the existing communications. Safety of Dams OP/BP 4.37 Yes OP/BP 4.37 Safety of Dams is triggered, because conversion of Gegardalich pumping scheme to gravity implies switching of water abstraction from Azat reservoir to the Gegardalich reservoir and expansion of the latter to be achieved by increasing the height of the existing dam from 13.9 m to 15.5 m. A Dam Safety Plan was prepared for the existing Gegardalich dam with the Bank support under the Dam Safety Project and accepted by Vorogum (the former irrigation agency, predecessor of the Water Supply Agencies) on February 12, 2003. As the detailed design works for the dam heightening will evolve, the Dam Safety Plan, including emergency preparedness plan, will be updated as required. The design, selection of works provider, construction quality supervision, and operation and maintenance arrangements will be subject to the review and oversight by the panel of experts to be established by the Borrower prior to recruiting of a design consultant. Projects on International Yes Meghri scheme abstracts water from the Meghri Public Disclosure Copy Waterways OP/BP 7.50 and Araks rivers, the former being tributary of the latter. River Araks is an international waterway shared by Armenia, Turkey, Iran, and Azerbaijan. An agreement on Araks water use was made in 1972, as amended in 1985 (between the Union of Soviet Socialistic Republics (USSR) and Turkey). An agreement also exists between Armenia (USSR) and Iran on the joint utilization of the border areas of the river Araks for irrigation, power generation and household use. The project will support conversion of the existing Meghri scheme from pumping to gravity flow focusing on the decrease in power consumption and increase in efficiency of the scheme operation. Based on the design documents and data on the actual water intake by Meghri scheme over the years of operation, the designed water intake capacity of the scheme after conversion will be less than of the original designed capacity of the Page 5 of 10 pumping scheme, while actual water abstraction after the project implementation will remain the same as it had been before the project launch. Public Disclosure Copy Therefore, while OP/BP 7.50 Projects on International Waterways is triggered, communication between the riparian states on the project interventions is deemed unnecessary. A memorandum granting a waiver on notification had been submitted the project team and was endorsed by ECAVP. Projects in Disputed Areas OP/BP No 7.60 II. Key Safeguard Policy Issues and Their Management A. Summary of Key Safeguard Issues 1. Describe any safeguard issues and impacts associated with the Restructured project. Identify and describe any potential large scale, significant and/or irreversible impacts: The project does not carry a risk of large scale and/or irreversible impact on the human health and the natural environment The proposed construction activities will cause temporary and localized impacts at the construction stage. Most damage to the environment may occur in the course of works in the waterways and while laying new sections of pipes. Arrangement of the new hydraulic structures for water intake and construction of one section of the Meghri pipeline will have temporary impacts on the water flow in river beds and will require strict adherence to the prescribed mitigation measures to avoid lasting damage to the aquatic life. Construction of new pipelines over the terrestrial areas will require clearing of vegetation and earth excavation, associated with threats of soil erosion and damage to the aesthetic appearance of the sites. Works near the settlements may cause nuisance to local residents through traffic congestion, blocked Public Disclosure Copy access, noise, dust and vibration. Deployment of construction machinery will carry common risks of operational spillage of fuel and lubricants, and will generate some noise, dust, and vibration. Transportation of construction materials and removal of waste with heavy vehicles may cause inconvenience for local dwellers, through most part of the construction sites are not within densely populated areas and the potential impact of moving and operating machinery can be easily mitigated through adherence to the good construction standards. Location of work sites in proximity to rivers carries temptation of on-site excavation of sand and gravel by construction workers. Unauthorized borrowing will be banned and excluded by close supervision of contractors’ performance. Purchase of aggregate material from registered suppliers is highly recommended, but in case contractor insists on mining for sand and stone – that would be allowed exclusively upon obtaining of a resource use license. Possible negative impacts of operation phase may come from poor maintenance of the provided infrastructure leading to congestion of schemes, flooding and waterlogging. The risk of pollution of agricultural fields from the contaminated irrigation water is marginal, as no large industrial facilities are located upstream of the water intake points. 2. Describe any potential indirect and/or long term impacts due to anticipated future activities in the project area: Page 6 of 10 Conversion of the selected pumping irrigation schemes into gravity fed schemes will improve water availability for the currently serviced areas and will also provide opportunity to bring over 1,300 ha of formerly irrigated agricultural fields back to irrigation. It is anticipated that because of Public Disclosure Copy improved services agriculture will intensify in the service areas and higher value crops may be cultivated, which could entail more intensive usage of pesticides. Risks associated with this possible indirect impact of the project will be mitigated through a public awareness campaign for the safe and optimal use of pesticides to be delivered with active participation of the Water User Associations (WUAs). Along with basic rules and recommendations, the disseminated material will carry information on the Integrated Pest Management. 3. Describe any project alternatives (if relevant) considered to help avoid or minimize adverse impacts. Environmental and social aspects were built into the process of selecting schemes proposed for reconstruction and rehabilitation in addition to the economic and engineering criteria. No works implying evident significant impact on the environment or requiring considerable take of private lands have been included into the project design. 4. Describe measures taken by the borrower to address safeguard policy issues. Provide an assessment of borrower capacity to plan and implement the measures described. Conversion of Meghri, Gegardalich, and Bagramyan-Norakert pumping schemes into gravity fed schemes was initially planned under the MCC financed program. The Borrower prepared an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) of the Meghri scheme and did baseline environmental studies for the other two. The Meghri EIA report was then re-worked to reflect recent changes in the design and in the source of funding. An Environmental Management Framework (EMF) was prepared to cover all other investments under the project, because detailed designs and site- specific documents for them will be developed or finalized in the course of the Project implementation. EMF provides sufficient information on the expected impacts and needed mitigation measures of all proposed investments, because all of them are identified, preliminary designs are redeveloped, and baseline environmental studies are available for them. Investment- Public Disclosure Copy specific EIA reports, including Environmental management Plans (EMPs) will be developed for Gegardalich and Bagramyan-Norakert schemes later, according to the EMF, while preparation of simple EMPs using Environmental Management Checklist for Small Construction and Rehabilitation Activities is likely to be sufficient for the works planned on the outlet canals. The project will be managed by the Water Sector Development and Institutional Improvements PIU, established under the State Committee for Water Management, which has extensive experience in implementing water projects mainly financed by the Bank. Safeguards compliance under the previously implemented projects had been generally satisfactory. To keep good environmental performance under the new Project and to ensure due sensitivity to the social and gender implications of its implementation, the PIU shall maintain a safeguards specialist responsible for coordination, quality control, and reality check of the work delivered by monitoring and supervision consultants. Safeguards Specialist of the PIU will also organize keeping of monitoring records and reporting on the safeguards work delivered by PIU through its staff and consultants. The national legislation of Armenia requires that technical supervision of works is performed by a licensed entity. PIU will ensure that TOR for a works supervision company(ies) include explicit provisions for monitoring implementation of EMPs, reporting on any environmental damage incurred in the course of works as a result of accidents or bad construction practice, and recommending to the client corrective actions in case of such occurrences. Page 7 of 10 5. Identify the key stakeholders and describe the mechanisms for consultation and disclosure on safeguard policies, with an emphasis on potentially affected people. The key beneficiaries of the project are the regional water supply agencies, WUAs receiving Public Disclosure Copy irrigation water from the schemes selected for the project intervention, and rural communities cultivating land within the areas irrigated from these schemes. The State Committee for Water Management (SCWM), as well as ministries of Regional, Agriculture, and Nature Protection are also the project stakeholders. The EMF and RPF prepared by PIU for the purposes of the ISEP implementation were disclosed in-country through the web page of the SCWM and a public consultation meeting on these documents was held in Yerevan on February 25, 2013. A report on the EIA carried out for works envisaged on the Meghri scheme was also disclosed on March 28, 2013 and will be discussed with local stakeholders in a meeting to be held in the Meghri area on April 5, 2013. Representatives of the central and local governmental agencies, academic circles, NGOs, and WUAs were given opportunity to place questions/comments pertaining environmental and social implications of the Project as described in the EMF and received explanation on the issues of their interest. The same procedures of disclosure and consultation will be applied to the site-specific environmental documents to be produced later for individual schemes covered by the Project. B. Disclosure Requirements Environmental Assessment/Audit/Management Plan/Other Date of receipt by the Bank 26-Feb-2013 Date of submission to InfoShop 26-Mar-2013 For category A projects, date of distributing the Executive Summary of the EA to the Executive Directors "In country" Disclosure Armenia 26-Mar-2013 Public Disclosure Copy Comments: Draft final EMF was disclosed on February 19, 2013, and the final EMF was disclosed on March 26, 2013. Resettlement Action Plan/Framework/Policy Process Date of receipt by the Bank 27-Mar-2013 Date of submission to InfoShop 28-Mar-2013 "In country" Disclosure Armenia 26-Mar-2013 Comments: Draft version was disclosed in country in January and through Infoshop (January 30, 2102), on which public consultation was held in February. The current version reflects the consultation and design updates. Pest Management Plan Was the document disclosed prior to appraisal? NA Date of receipt by the Bank NA Date of submission to InfoShop NA "In country" Disclosure Comments: Page 8 of 10 If the project triggers the Pest Management and/or Physical Cultural Resources policies, the respective issues are to be addressed and disclosed as part of the Environmental Assessment/ Audit/or EMP. Public Disclosure Copy If in-country disclosure of any of the above documents is not expected, please explain why: C. Compliance Monitoring Indicators at the Corporate Level OP/BP/GP 4.01 - Environment Assessment Are the cost and the accountabilities for the EMP incorporated Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] in the credit/loan? OP 4.09 - Pest Management If yes, has the PMP been reviewed and approved by a Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] safeguards specialist or SM? Are PMP requirements included in project design?If yes, does the project team include a Pest Management Specialist? OP/BP 4.12 - Involuntary Resettlement If yes, then did the Regional unit responsible for safeguards or Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] Sector Manager review the plan? OP/BP 4.37 - Safety of Dams Has an Emergency Preparedness Plan (EPP) been prepared and Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] arrangements been made for public awareness and training? OP 7.50 - Projects on International Waterways Has the RVP approved such an exception? Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] The World Bank Policy on Disclosure of Information Have relevant safeguard policies documents been sent to the Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] World Bank's Infoshop? Public Disclosure Copy Have relevant documents been disclosed in-country in a public Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] place in a form and language that are understandable and accessible to project-affected groups and local NGOs? All Safeguard Policies Have satisfactory calendar, budget and clear institutional Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] responsibilities been prepared for the implementation of measures related to safeguard policies? Have costs related to safeguard policy measures been included Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] in the project cost? Does the Monitoring and Evaluation system of the project Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] include the monitoring of safeguard impacts and measures related to safeguard policies? Have satisfactory implementation arrangements been agreed Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] with the borrower and the same been adequately reflected in the project legal documents? III. APPROVALS Task Team Leader: Giuseppe Fantozzi Page 9 of 10 Approved By Regional Safeguards Name: Agnes I. Kiss (RSA) Date: 01-Apr-2013 Public Disclosure Copy Coordinator: Sector Manager: Name: Dina Umali-Deininger (SM) Date: 01-Apr-2013 Public Disclosure Copy Page 10 of 10