Page 1 INTEGRATED SAFEGUARDS DATASHEET APPRAISAL STAGE I. Basic Information Date prepared/updated: 01/15/2010 Report No.: AC4710 1. Basic Project Data Country: Senegal Project ID: P109986 Project Name: Water and Sanitation Millennium Project Task Team Leader: Matar Fall Estimated Appraisal Date: October 26, 2009 Estimated Board Date: February 18, 2010 Managing Unit: AFTUW Lending Instrument: Specific Investment Loan Sector: Water supply (60%);Sanitation (40%) Theme: Rural services and infrastructure (50%);Access to urban services and housing (25%);Water resource management (25%) IBRD Amount (US$m.): 0.00 IDA Amount (US$m.): 55.00 GEF Amount (US$m.): 0.00 PCF Amount (US$m.): 0.00 Other financing amounts by source: BORROWER/RECIPIENT 0.00 Local Sources of Borrowing Country 1.56 1.56 Environmental Category: B - Partial Assessment Simplified Processing Simple [] Repeater [] Is this project processed under OP 8.50 (Emergency Recovery) or OP 8.00 (Rapid Response to Crises and Emergencies) Yes [ ] No [X] 2. Project Objectives The objective of the proposed project is to increase access to sustainable water and sanitation services in selected rural and urban areas. This would contribute to the achievement of the water and sanitation MDGs. The proposed project would achieve its objective by (i) facilitating access to services through programs for improving and extending water production and distribution systems and urban sanitation networks, constructing social water and sanitation household connections, public standpipes and on- site sanitation facilities, and (ii) consolidating the achievements of the urban water reform, supporting the rural water subsector reform and strengthening capacities to deliver and manage water and sanitation services. 3. Project Description The Project consists of five components: Component A: Rural water supply (estimated full cost: US$25.08 million). The main objective of this component would be to ensure and improve sustainable and satisfactory Page 2 access to drinking water of the population of the Senegal River Basin (Regions of Saint- Louis and Matam and the district of Bakel). Component B: Urban water supply (estimated full cost: US$6.65 million). The main objective of this component would be to increase the connection rate to water services in urban areas. Component C: Rural sanitation (estimated full cost: US$10.40 million). The main objective of the component would be to increase the access rate to adequate on-site sanitation of the rural populations in the Regions of Saint-Louis and Matam and the district of Bakel. Component D: Urban sanitation (estimated full cost: US$7.80 million). The main objective of the component is to increase access to sewerage and condominial networks in peri-urban areas of Dakar by completing works contemplated under the Long Term Water Sector Project. Component E: Institutional strengthening and capacity building (estimated full cost: US$6.63 million). The main objective of this component would be to consolidate the achievements and pursue actions already engaged within the framework of the sectoral reforms to improve performances and ensure the effectiveness and efficiency of investments. 4. Project Location and salient physical characteristics relevant to the safeguard analysis The focus of the project in rural water and sanitation will be in the regions of Matam, Tambacounda, Saint-Louis and Kaolack. For urban water, the project will focus on the peri-urban areas of urban cities and for sanitation on the commune of Joal in the region of Thies. 5. Environmental and Social Safeguards Specialists Mr Yves Andre Prevost (AFTEN) Mr Demba Balde (AFTCS) 6. Safeguard Policies Triggered Yes No Environmental Assessment (OP/BP 4.01) X Natural Habitats (OP/BP 4.04) X Forests (OP/BP 4.36) X Pest Management (OP 4.09) X Physical Cultural Resources (OP/BP 4.11) X Indigenous Peoples (OP/BP 4.10) X Involuntary Resettlement (OP/BP 4.12) X Safety of Dams (OP/BP 4.37) X Projects on International Waterways (OP/BP 7.50) X Projects in Disputed Areas (OP/BP 7.60) X Page 3 II. Key Safeguard Policy Issues and Their Management A. Summary of Key Safeguard Issues 1. Describe any safeguard issues and impacts associated with the proposed project. Identify and describe any potential large scale, significant and/or irreversible impacts: OP/BP 4.01 is triggered as the proposed project aims at establishing household connections to urban water and sanitation networks, rural water supply systems including pumping stations, elevated reservoirs, small water distribution networks, and a variety of small-scale sanitation systems for households and schools in the upper east regions along the Senegal River basin. This operation comes as a direct response to: (i) a longstanding potable water problem for the growing population in the project areas; and (ii) a set of environmental, social, and public health issues related to the lack of appropriate onsite sanitation. Despite the benefits expected to accrue to local communities with respect to improved access to potable water, adequate sanitation facilities and overall quality of life improvements, investments in water supply and sanitation may sometimes have adverse impacts on the biophysical and socioeconomic environment if proper mitigation measures are not in place. However, the environmental impacts of the proposed project are expected to be minimal, site-specific and manageable on at an acceptable level. OP/BP 4.12 is triggered as a consequence of potential resettlement implications involving compensation of lost assets or loss of livelihoods due to the construction of water production and distribution systems. OP/BP 7.50 is triggered since some sub-projects may involve water pumping systems from the Senegal River, an international waterway, hence the coordination with OMVS to take into account all precautionary measures. In a letter dated October 9, 2009, OMVS, on behalf of the riparian states, has given its no-objection to the project. 2. Describe any potential indirect and/or long term impacts due to anticipated future activities in the project area: None. 3. Describe any project alternatives (if relevant) considered to help avoid or minimize adverse impacts. The inclusion of a school sanitation program in the project decided at pre-appraisal stage as an alternative to the construction of public latrines in marketplaces initially envisaged, would have more impact on hygiene promotion and behavior changes in project intervention area. 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. Since the specific intervention sites cannot be confirmed prior to appraisal, the Borrower has prepared and submitted to the Bank an Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF for OP/BP4.01) and a Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF for OP/BP 4.12). Both frameworks identify procedures to be followed during the planning, design and construction phase of project activities, together with measures to mitigate and monitor such impacts, including a screening process for sub-projects setting criteria Page 4 for triggering specific ESIAs (Environment and Social Impact Assessments), ESMPs (Environmental and Social Management Plans) and RAPs (Resettlement Action Plans). The ESMF: (i) identifies potential adverse environmental and social impacts that may result from selected activities; and (ii) provides environmental guidelines and a screening mechanism to ensure that construction and subsequent operation and maintenance of the water supply and sanitation infrastructure works are carried out in an environmentally and socially sustainable manner. The RPF: (i) identifies potential adverse environmental and social impacts that may result from selected activities; and (ii) outlines the principles and procedures to be followed in the event of land acquisition, impact on assets, and/or loss of livelihoods. The Recipient would ensure that implementing agencies take appropriate actions to prepare, disclose, and implement specific ESIAs, ESMPs and RAPs as required by the screening process. The Framework reports were approved by the Bank and the Government and disclosed in Senegal on June 15, 2009 and made available to the public at the World Bank Info Shop on July 2, 2009. The costs associated with implementation of the mitigating measures of the ESMF and the RPF are integrated in the costs of the specific sub-projects or will be borne by the project Component E. Component E also includes resources required for the preparation of ESIAs, ESMPs and RAPs and for the monitoring, coordination, and supervision of the ESMF and the RPF. Capacity building, communication and remedial measures required for the ESMF and the RPF would be supported by the IDA financing in the proposed project. Capacity building and communication activities include information and sensitization campaigns and training sessions on good environmental management and social practices, losses of access to goods and resources, hygiene and security measures. The targeted groups are beneficiary populations, ASUFORs, local authorities and notables. Within the framework of community participation in the implementation of the program, special attention should be paid to the most vulnerable social groups, women and young people. The Directorate of Environment (Direction de l'Environnement et des Etablissements Classés - DEEC) in the Ministry of Environment has assigned staff to hold primary responsibility for implementing and monitoring the execution of both frameworks, in coordination with the PCU. DEEC helped implement the Long Term Water Project's Environmental Management Plan (Category A project) and delivered a satisfactory performance which would likely be duplicated under this less challenging project. 5. Identify the key stakeholders and describe the mechanisms for consultation and disclosure on safeguard policies, with an emphasis on potentially affected people. The Directorate of Rural Water (DHR) would implement the activities that are related to the expansion of access to water in rural areas whereas the Directorate of Operations and Maintenance (DEM) would implement activities related to rehabilitation and transfer of maintenance of the rural water facilities to private operators; SONES would implement Component B (Urban Water); the Department of Sanitation (DAS) would implement Component C (Rural Sanitation) with the assistance of a firm specialized in delegated project management; ONAS would implement Component D (Urban Sanitation); the Page 5 PCU of PEPAM would implement Component E (Institutional Strengthening and Capacity Building). All these agencies have extensive experience and competent technicians to handle various issues. Appropriate consultation has taken place for the development of the ESMF and the RPF as per the guidelines, and the level of consultation is commensurate with the two instruments. Concerned populations and local Governments were informed of the objectives, the scope, and potential impacts of the proposed project and their views have been fully reflected in the ESMF and the RPF. Public consultations were carried out between June 20 and June 25, 2009 in the regions of Matam, Tambacounda and Saint Louis and the participants were informed of the positive and negative environmental and social impacts that could arise during implementation of works, as well as the measures that will be put in place to address these issues. B. Disclosure Requirements Date Environmental Assessment/Audit/Management Plan/Other: Was the document disclosed prior to appraisal? Yes Date of receipt by the Bank 06/04/2009 Date of "in-country" disclosure 06/15/2009 Date of submission to InfoShop 07/02/2009 For category A projects, date of distributing the Executive Summary of the EA to the Executive Directors Resettlement Action Plan/Framework/Policy Process: Was the document disclosed prior to appraisal? Yes Date of receipt by the Bank 06/04/2009 Date of "in-country" disclosure 06/15/2009 Date of submission to InfoShop 07/02/2009 Indigenous Peoples Plan/Planning Framework: Was the document disclosed prior to appraisal? Date of receipt by the Bank Date of "in-country" disclosure Date of submission to InfoShop Pest Management Plan: Was the document disclosed prior to appraisal? Date of receipt by the Bank Date of "in-country" disclosure Date of submission to InfoShop * If the project triggers the Pest Management and/or Physical Cultural Resources, the respective issues are to be addressed and disclosed as part of the Environmental Assessment/Audit/or EMP. Page 6 If in-country disclosure of any of the above documents is not expected, please explain why: C. Compliance Monitoring Indicators at the Corporate Level (to be filled in when the ISDS is finalized by the project decision meeting) OP/BP/GP 4.01 - Environment Assessment Does the project require a stand-alone EA (including EMP) report? Yes If yes, then did the Regional Environment Unit or Sector Manager (SM) review and approve the EA report? Yes Are the cost and the accountabilities for the EMP incorporated in the credit/loan? Yes OP/BP 4.12 - Involuntary Resettlement Has a resettlement plan/abbreviated plan/policy framework/process framework (as appropriate) been prepared? Yes If yes, then did the Regional unit responsible for safeguards or Sector Manager review the plan? Yes OP 7.50 - Projects on International Waterways Have the other riparians been notified of the project? Yes If the project falls under one of the exceptions to the notification requirement, has this been cleared with the Legal Department, and the memo to the RVP prepared and sent? N/A Has the RVP approved such an exception? N/A The World Bank Policy on Disclosure of Information Have relevant safeguard policies documents been sent to the World Bank's Infoshop? Yes Have relevant documents been disclosed in-country in a public place in a form and language that are understandable and accessible to project-affected groups and local NGOs? Yes All Safeguard Policies Have satisfactory calendar, budget and clear institutional responsibilities been prepared for the implementation of measures related to safeguard policies? Yes Have costs related to safeguard policy measures been included in the project cost? Yes Does the Monitoring and Evaluation system of the project include the monitoring of safeguard impacts and measures related to safeguard policies? Yes Have satisfactory implementation arrangements been agreed with the borrower and the same been adequately reflected in the project legal documents? Yes Page 7 D. Approvals Signed and submitted by: Name Date Task Team Leader: Mr Matar Fall 01/15/2010 Environmental Specialist: Mr Yves Andre Prevost 01/15/2010 Social Development Specialist Mr Demba Balde 10/08/2009 Additional Environmental and/or Social Development Specialist(s): Approved by: Sector Manager: Mr Franck Bousquet 01/15/2010 Comments: