INTEGRATED SAFEGUARDS DATASHEET APPRAISAL STAGE Report No.: Date prepared/updated: February 19, 2013 75708 I. Basic Information 1. Basic Project Data Country: Armenia Project ID: P133831 Additional Project ID (if any): Project Name: Preparation of SREP Investment Plan Task Team Leader: Artur Kochnakyan Estimated Appraisal Date: March 11, 2013 Estimated Board Date: N/A Managing Unit: ECSEG Lending Instrument: TA Sector: ECSSD Theme: Renewable Energy (100%) IBRD Amount (US$m.): IDA Amount (US$m.): GEF Amount (US$m.): PCF Amount (US$m.): Other financing amounts by source: Scaling Up of Renewable Energy Program Grant of US$300,000 Environmental Category: B Is this a transferred project Yes [ ] No [X ] Simplified Processing Simple [X ] Repeater [ ] Is this project processed under OP 8.00 (Rapid Response to Crises Yes [ ] No [X ] and Emergencies) 2. Project Objectives: The objective is to support the Armenian government to prepare an investment plan for developing renewable energy in the country and securing funding from the Scaling Up Renewable Energy Program (SREP) fund. The plan should be comprehensive, clear and effective in demonstrating how SREP resources and other donor and private sector financing would be used in Armenia to overcome current obstacles to the wider penetration of renewable and low carbon energy. 3. Project Description: The project will have the following components: A. Preparation of SREP Investment Plan: This will include technical assistance for preparation of SREP investment plan, including review of the framework for renewable energy in Armenia; comprehensive assessment of renewable energy technologies applicable in Armenia; stakeholder consultations to agree on prioritization of renewable energy projects; environmental and social screening to identify and flag key positive or negative impacts of individual renewable energy technologies when pursuing development of renewable energy in the specific country context; and preparation of the Investment Plan in the template recommended by SREP. B. Project implementation: This will include financing of incremental operating costs of the implementing entity. 4. Project Location and salient physical characteristics relevant to the safeguard analysis: The project will finance only technical assistance aimed at the development of a renewable energy investment plan for consideration by the SREP for funding. No physical works will be supported. 5. Environmental and Social Safeguards Specialists on the Team: Darejan Kapanadze (Sr. Environmental Specialist) and Sarah G. Michael (Sr. Social Development Specialist) 6. Safeguard Policies Triggered (please explain why) Yes No Environmental Assessment (OP/BP 4.01) X Natural Habitats (OP/BP 4.04) X Forests (OP/BP 4.36) X Pest Management (OP 4.09) X Physical Cultural Resources (OP/BP 4.11) X Indigenous Peoples (OP/BP 4.10) X Involuntary Resettlement (OP/BP 4.12) X Safety of Dams (OP/BP 4.37) X Projects on International Waterways (OP/BP 7.50) X Projects in Disputed Areas (OP/BP 7.60) X II. Key Safeguard Policy Issues and Their Management A. Summary of Key Safeguard Issues 1. Describe any safeguard issues and impacts associated with the proposed project. Identify and describe any potential large scale, significant and/or irreversible impacts: The grant will finance exclusively technical assistance activities aimed at assisting Armenia in scaling up its use and scope of renewable energy sources. The key output of the project will be an investment plan intended for consideration by the SREP for funding, which will be based on the general analysis of potential for developing various renewable energy technologies for power generation and heat supply in Armenia. The analysis will be carried out based on the desk-top study of available country information and the literature covering prospects of reviewable energy use in Armenia. The technologies may include geothermal energy, wind, solar/ PV, biomass, solar heaters, heat pumps and any other technology deemed to be worth assessing. The project activities will not have any direct environmental impact, but their results will influence the future investment decisions and play an important role in determining the directions of developing renewable energy technologies. Therefore the development of the investment plan will include identification of the environmental and social risks and benefits of the technologies proposed for adoption and/or further development in Armenia, environmental assessment of the available pre-feasibility and feasibility studies, and planning of site-specific environmental assessment work for individual projects found in an advanced stage of preparation. 2. Describe any potential indirect and/or long term impacts due to anticipated future activities in the project area: The main long term impacts of implementing the investment plan to be produced under the project are expected to be positive due to reduction of the proportion of carbon- and emission intense fossil fuels used in Armenia. 3. Describe any project alternatives (if relevant) considered to help avoid or minimize adverse impacts: None. The TA itself will identify and analyze various alternative scenarios of scaling up the use of renewable energy. 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: The Renewable Resources and Energy Efficiency Fund (R2E2 Fund), acting as the project implementing entity, prepared the TOR for developing an investment plan for the SREP funding, which includes: (i) identifying environmental and social risks and benefits of various types of reviewable energy technologies considered as potentially suitable for Armenia; (ii) pointing out gaps in the coverage of environmental and social aspects of the reviewable energy generation by already produced sectoral studies and reviews; (iii) carrying out environmental/social assessment of the available pre-feasibility and feasibility studies and revising their findings and recommendations as required; and (iv) developing TORs for specific environmental/social studies for already identified individual projects being in an advanced stage of preparation for funding from SREP. 5. Identify the key stakeholders and describe the mechanisms for consultation and disclosure on safeguard policies, with an emphasis on potentially affected people: The key stakeholders are the Government of Armenia, national and international Civil society organizations/Non-government organizations, and the private sector. The draft TOR for the development of the investment plan was disclosed in-country and through the InfoShop, and the stakeholder feedback was sought. The priority list of renewable energy investment projects to be included in the investment plan will be determined in consultation with the key stakeholders through round-table discussions and the draft investment plan will also be disclosed to seek broader public feedback. B. Disclosure Requirements Date Environmental Assessment/Audit/Management Plan/Other: Was the document disclosed prior to appraisal? Yes Date of receipt by the Bank February 8, 2013 Date of "in-country" disclosure February 8, 2013 Date of submission to InfoShop February 14, 2013 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? Date of receipt by the Bank Date of "in-country" disclosure Date of submission to InfoShop 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 policies, the respective issues are to be addressed and disclosed as part of the Environmental Assessment/Audit/or EMP. If in-country disclosure of any of the above documents is not expected, please explain why: C. Compliance Monitoring Indicators at the Corporate Level (to be filled in when the ISDS is finalized by the project decision meeting) OP/BP 4.01 - Environment Assessment Does the project require a stand-alone EA (including Yes [X] No [] N/A [ ] EMP) report? If yes, then did the Regional Environment Unit or Sector Yes Manager (SM) review and approve the EA report? Are the cost and the accountabilities for the EMP Yes incorporated in the credit/loan? OP/BP 4.04 - Natural Habitats Would the project result in any significant conversion or Yes [ ] No [ X ] N/A [ ] degradation of critical natural habitats? If the project would result in significant conversion or degradation of other (non-critical) natural habitats, does the project include mitigation measures acceptable to the Bank? OP 4.09 - Pest Management Does the EA adequately address the pest management Yes [ ] No [ ] N/A [ X ] issues? Is a separate PMP required? Yes [ ] No [ ] N/A [ X ] If yes, has the PMP been reviewed and approved by a safeguards specialist or Sector Manager? Are PMP requirements included in project design? If yes, does the project team include a Pest Management Specialist? OP/BP 4.11 – Physical Cultural Resources Does the EA include adequate measures related to Yes [ ] No [ ] N/A [ X ] cultural property? Does the credit/loan incorporate mechanisms to mitigate the potential adverse impacts on physical cultural resources? OP/BP 4.10 - Indigenous Peoples Has a separate Indigenous Peoples Plan/Planning Yes [ ] No [ ] N/A [ X ] Framework (as appropriate) been prepared in consultation with affected Indigenous Peoples? If yes, then did the Regional unit responsible for safeguards or Sector Manager review the plan? If the whole project is designed to benefit IP, has the design been reviewed and approved by the Regional Social Development Unit? OP/BP 4.12 - Involuntary Resettlement Has a resettlement plan/abbreviated plan/policy Yes [ ] No [ ] N/A [ X ] framework/process framework (as appropriate) been prepared? If yes, then did the Regional unit responsible for safeguards or Sector Manager review and approve the plan/policy framework/process framework? OP/BP 4.36 – Forests Has the sector-wide analysis of policy and institutional Yes [ ] No [ ] N/A [X] issues and constraints been carried out? Does the project design include satisfactory measures to overcome these constraints? Does the project finance commercial harvesting, and if so, does it include provisions for certification system? OP/BP 4.37 - Safety of Dams Have dam safety plans been prepared? Yes [ ] No [ ] N/A [ X ] Have the TORs as well as composition for the independent Panel of Experts (POE) been reviewed and approved by the Bank? Has an Emergency Preparedness Plan (EPP) been prepared and arrangements been made for public awareness and training? OP/BP 7.50 - Projects on International Waterways Have the other riparians been notified of the project? Yes [ ] No [ ] N/A [ X ] 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? What are the reasons for the exception? Please explain: Has the RVP approved such an exception? OP/BP 7.60 - Projects in Disputed Areas Has the memo conveying all pertinent information on the Yes [ ] No [ ] N/A [ X ] international aspects of the project, including the procedures to be followed, and the recommendations for dealing with the issue, been prepared Does the PAD/MOP include the standard disclaimer referred to in the OP? The World Bank Policy on Disclosure of Information Have relevant safeguard policies documents been sent to Yes [X ] No [ ] N/A [X] the World Bank's Infoshop? 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? All Safeguard Policies Have satisfactory calendar, budget and clear institutional Yes [ X ] No [ ] N/A [ ] responsibilities been prepared for the implementation of measures related to safeguard policies? Have costs related to safeguard policy measures been N/A included in the project cost? Does the Monitoring and Evaluation system of the N/A project include the monitoring of safeguard impacts and measures related to safeguard policies? Have satisfactory implementation arrangements been N/A agreed with the borrower and the same been adequately reflected in the project legal documents? D. Approvals Signed and submitted by: Name Date Task Team Leader: Artur Kochnakyan February 19, 2013 Environmental Specialist: Darejan Kapanadze February 19, 2013 Social Development Specialist Sarah G. Michael January 23, 2013 Additional Environmental and/or Social Development Specialist(s): Approved by: Regional Safeguards Coordinator: Agi Kiss February 21, 2013 Comments: Sector Manager: Ranjit Lamech February 22, 2013 Comments: