89479 INTEGRATED SAFEGUARDS DATA SHEET APPRAISAL STAGE I. Basic Information Date prepared/updated: May 29, 2014 1. Basic Project Data Country: Pakistan Project ID: P150522 Additional Project ID (if any): P125414 Project Name: Additional Financing for FATA Urban Centers Project Appraisal Date: May 19, 2014 Expected Approval Date: June 30, 2014 Managing Unit: SASDU Lending Instrument: Multi Donor Trust Fund (MDTF) Sector: Sub-natl govt admin(30%); Urban Transport(30%); Solid waste mgmt(10%); Water supply(30%) Theme: Access to urban services and housing(60); Municipal governance and institution building(20); Other urban development(20) IBRD Amount (US$m.): 0.00 IDA Amount (US$m.): 0.00 GEF Amount (US$m.): 0.00 PCF Amount (US$m.): 0.00 Other financing amounts by source: Borrower 0.00 MDTF for Crisis Affected Areas of KP/FATA/Balochistan 1.00 Total 1.00 Environmental Category: B - Partial Assessment Simplified Processing Simple [ ] Repeater [ ] Is this project processed under OP 8.00 (Rapid Response to Crises Yes [x] No [] and Emergencies) 1 2. Project Objectives: The objective of the FATA Urban Centers Project (FUCP) is to improve urban services and management in Khar, Bajaur Agency, and develop a framework for urban management in FATA. The objectives of the Additional Financing will be the same as the original project. 3. Project Description: The project comprises two components: a) Priority Infrastructure Investments; and b) Technical Assistance and Implementation Support. The additional financing for the project will support both components of the ongoing project. The additional financing would specifically focus on scaling-up priority infrastructure investments in Khar, Bajaur Agency, and undertake a planning exercise to develop structure plans and identify priority investments for two additional urban centers in FATA. Component 1: Priority Infrastructure Investment Projects (US$ 0.4 Million): This component supports priority infrastructure investments in Khar town in Bajaur Agency. The universe of infrastructure sub-projects supported under this component includes rehabilitation, reconstruction, expansion, and upgradation of urban municipal infrastructure and services. The additional financing will support the implementation of additional infrastructure investments in Khar, including (i) primary collection of solid waste; (ii) provision of rescue and firefighting equipment; (iii) development of a family park; and (iv) construction of public toilets. Component 2: Technical Assistance and Implementation Support (US$ 0.6 Million): This component supports: (a) design and development of an overall urban management framework to be implemented under the TARUCCI program in all 14 towns in FATA; and (b) detail the implementation plan for the pilot center (Khar, Bajaur Agency) being supported under this project. The additional financing will assist in the undertaking a planning exercise, involving the development of structure plans and identification of priority investments in two more towns in FATA, besides Khar. 4. Project Location and salient physical characteristics relevant to the safeguard analysis: The Project will be implemented in the crisis-affected area of the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) in the northwest of Pakistan, lying between the provinces of Khyber Pakhtunkwa (KP), Baluchistan, and neighboring Afghanistan. The insurgency and counter insurgency actions 2 of 2009 led to a displacement of approximately 3 million people in FATA and the neighboring Khyber Phaktunkhwa (KP) regions. While by now most have returned to their homes, the events are likely to have long-term effects on their socio-economic growth, with high unemployment and large scale internal migration. FATA lags behind other provinces across a wide range of social and economic indicators, with the lag even more pronounced when viewed through a gender lens. Khar is the Agency headquarter for Bajaur, with an estimated population of 0.16 million. It has been adversely affected by violent militant activity in the recent past, before a successful military operation to restore peace. 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 rehabilitation/reconstruction, expansion, and/or upgradation of urban municipal infrastructure and services including primary collection of solid waste; development of a family park; and construction of public toilets under Component-1, may potentially cause negative environmental and/or social impacts such as contamination of soil and water, air quality deterioration, and safety hazards for workers and surrounding population. However, none of these impacts are likely to be irreversible, wide-spread, or unprecedented. Moreover, sub-projects are unlikely to cause large scale resettlement impacts as maximum efforts will be made to avoid land acquisition, displacement, and damages to private or public assets. Once the scope of each sub-project is defined and preliminary designs prepared, the Implementing Agency (IA) will conduct social screening of each sub-project to determine the scope of involuntary resettlement impacts. In case of small scale land acquisition and other resettlement impacts, the project will follow the principles laid down in the Environment and 3 Social Screening and Assessment Framework (ESSAF) developed by the Bank for all projects under MDTF, consistent with the World Bank policy BP/OP 4.12 on Involuntary Resettlement. Since this project is financed by the MDTF, the ESSAF will apply on it. 2. Describe any potential indirect and/or long term impacts due to anticipated future activities in the project area No indirect or long term environmental negative impacts associated with the proposed interventions are expected, other than those related to the usage/operation and maintenance of the municipal services/infrastructure. No large scale social/involuntary resettlement impacts will occur due to this project. In case of small scale land acquisition and minor resettlement impacts, the extent of such impacts will be limited due to the nature of the sub-projects. 3. Describe any project alternatives (if relevant) considered to help avoid or minimize adverse impacts The only other alternative is the ‘no-project’ option, which could have detrimental effects by denying essential municipal services to the local population. Moreover, restoration of such services is linked with enhancing confidence of the local population in the State and will contribute towards peace building efforts. The ‘no-project’ alternative would avoid the negative environmental impacts associated with the rehabilitation, reconstruction, expansion and/or up- gradation of the municipal infrastructure and services. However, it would also result in continued environmental degradation and health hazards for the population associated with non- or poorly-functioning municipal services. At the conceptual stage, different technical design options for every sub-project will be considered to avoid or minimize adverse social impacts. Where these impacts cannot be avoided, the project will follow ESSAF/ESMP guidelines and principles to systematically assess, mitigate, and/or compensate them. 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 Bank has prepared an Environmental and Social Screening and Assessment Framework (ESSAF), in accordance with the OP 8.0 for emergency operations applicable to all interventions under the KP/FATA/Balochistan MDTF. It specifies the environmental and social assessment requirements that the implementing agency will need to fulfill before any Project component under the MDTF can be implemented. The Framework also describes the generic environmental/social monitoring and reporting requirements to be fulfilled during Project implementation, in addition to defining the broad institutional arrangements required for 4 environmental and social safeguard aspects associated with the individual projects under the MDTF. The ESSAF has been shared with the FATA Secretariat and TARUCCI Project Management Unit (TPMU). It has been disclosed locally by the FATA Secretariat on its website since 15 December 2010. In accordance with ESSAF requirements, the FATA Secretariat/TPMU has prepared a project- specific Environmental and Social Management Plan (ESMP) for the original project. This ESMP has been cleared by the Bank. The same ESMP will be applicable for the AF as well. Once preliminary engineering design of each sub-project under AF is available, the IA will screen it for any negative impacts on the local population, and to confirm that it will not cause any involuntary resettlement. In case negative impacts are identified, the IA will conduct sub- project specific Social Impact Assessment (SIA), and prepare a sub-project specific Resettlement Action Plan (RAP). Their clearance by the Bank will be a condition for disbursement of funds against that sub-project. Project funds will not be used for land acquisition. TPMU has appointed Environment and Social Safeguards Specialists, to ensure effective implementation of ESSAF and ESMP during implementation of the original project and to coordinate with the Bank and other stakeholders such as EPAs, on matters relevant to environmental and social management of the Project. These specialists will ensure ESMP implementation for the sub-projects under the AF as well. Moreover, capacity building of these Specialists and other related officials of Directorate of Local Government and Rural Development (DLG&RD) and Khar Municipal Committee, as well as awareness raising of the remaining Project staff, will continue to be undertaken for effective implementation of ESSAF and ESMP. ESMP Implementation of the Original Project: ESMP implementation had initially been somewhat weak, primarily because of inadequate Environment-related capacity of the IA. TPMU has recently taken steps to address this issue and has engaged a short term environmental consultant to strengthen its safeguard team. TPMU has been conducting safeguards trainings of the supervision consultants and contractors. With the help of these actions, the safeguard compliance has now improved. Experience of Implementing Safeguards in Parent Project: The ESMP has been applied on all sub-projects funded under FUCP to date, without encountering any major issues. TPMU is regularly sharing the Quarterly Progress Reports (QPRs). A Third Party Monitoring Agent hired by the MDTF Secretariat, has undertaken bi-annual reviews including of FUCP, and not raised any safeguard-related issues. 5 5. Identify the key stakeholders and describe the mechanisms for consultation and disclosure on safeguard policies, with an emphasis on potentially affected people Stakeholders of the AF are the same as those for the original project and include FATA Secretariat, line directorates, the Khar municipal committee, Khar political administration, project affected persons (PAPs), and the beneficiary population of Khar town. Much like the original project, the Project Director of TPMU will ensure that all relevant agencies involved in the implementation of ESSAF, ESMP, and RAPs (if required), are fully informed of the World Bank Policy requirements. Consultations will be mainstreamed in the preparation of new sub- projects under the AF. Before the preliminary technical design of each sub-project under the AF is undertaken, the IA and line agencies will consult the potentially affected groups on the project environmental and social issues, and will take their views into account. The IA will initiate these consultations soon after identification of each sub-project. For the initial consultation, the IAs will provide a summary of the proposed subproject's objectives, description, and potential impacts. For the sub-projects which cause involuntary resettlement impacts, a systematic Social Impact Assessment (SIA) will be conducted with active participation of affected persons and other stakeholders with the objective of eliciting their views on sub-project impacts, available design options to avoid or minimize resettlement impacts and ways to compensate them, and to reflect their concerns and recommendations in the construction activities. The ESSAF has been shared with the FATA Secretariat and TPMU. It has been disclosed locally by the FATA Secretariat on December 15, 2010 on its website, and disclosed at the InfoShop. The project-specific ESMP has also been disclosed on the FATA Secretariat website and locally. Despite the fact that the project is a low-risk category B project, the client has been conducting public consultations to assess the perceived environmental and social risks associated with the project, and has established a grievance redressal mechanism. The GRM will be further strengthened and made fully operational. Draft RAPs (where required) will also be disclosed to the PAPs and other stakeholders in a form and language(s) that are understandable and accessible to take their views on the resettlement planning and implementation before finalization of detailed design. RAPs (where required) will be finalized in light of comments made by the PAPs and other stakeholders. In addition to this, the Environment and Social Safeguard Specialists and Focal Persons of the DLG&RD and municipal committee, Khar have been conducting consultations for the original project and will continue to do so with the beneficiaries, PAPs, and other stakeholders of the sub-projects under the AF. B. Disclosure Requirements Dates Environmental Assessment/Audit/Management Plan/Other: Was the document disclosed prior to appraisal? N/A Date of receipt by the Bank 01/03/2013 6 Date of "in-country" disclosure 01/11/2013 Date of submission to InfoShop 07/09/2014 For category A projects, date of distributing the Executive N/A Summary of the EA to the Executive Directors N/A Resettlement Action Plan/Framework/Policy Process: Was the document disclosed prior to appraisal? N/A Date of receipt by the Bank N/A Date of "in-country" disclosure N/A Date of submission to InfoShop N/A Indigenous Peoples Plan/Planning Framework: Was the document disclosed prior to appraisal? N/A Date of receipt by the Bank N/A Date of "in-country" disclosure N/A Date of submission to InfoShop N/A Pest Management Plan: Was the document disclosed prior to appraisal? N/A Date of receipt by the Bank N/A Date of "in-country" disclosure N/A Date of submission to InfoShop N/A * 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. If in-country disclosure of any of the above documents is not expected, please explain why: N/A 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) yes review and approve the EA report? Are the cost and the accountabilities for the EMP incorporated in the Yes credit/loan? The World Bank Policy on Disclosure of Information Have relevant safeguard policies documents been sent to the World Bank's Yes Infoshop? Have relevant documents been disclosed in-country in a public place in a Yes form and language that are understandable and accessible to project-affected 7 groups and local NGOs? All Safeguard Policies Have satisfactory calendar, budget and clear institutional responsibilities Yes been prepared for the implementation of measures related to safeguard policies? Have costs related to safeguard policy measures been included in the project No cost? Does the Monitoring and Evaluation system of the project include the Yes monitoring of safeguard impacts and measures related to safeguard policies? Have satisfactory implementation arrangements been agreed with the Yes borrower and the same been adequately reflected in the project legal documents? C. Compliance Monitoring Indicators at the Corporate Level (to be filled in when the ISDS is finalized by the project decision meeting) 8