Integrated Persistent Organic Pollutants Management ... · Integrated Persistent Organic Pollutants Management Project ... Executive Summary ... (RA 8749); the Ecological

Department of Environment and Natural Resources ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT BUREAU

Integrated Persistent Organic Pollutants Management Project (IPOPs Project)

World Bank-Global Environment Facility (GEF)

GEF Grant No. P106885

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK (ESAF)

Executive Summary

28 December 2009

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

wb350881

Typewritten Text

52441

Integrated POPs Management (IPOPs) Project Environmental and Social Assessment Framework

i

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 2.0 SECTOR BACKGROUND 1 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 5 4.0 APPROACH TO ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT 6 5.0 PROJECT COMPONENT ACTIVITIES UNDER THE FRAMEWORK 6 6.0 PROJECT-RELATED ENVIRONMENTAL/SOCIAL IMPACTS AND

RISKS 8

7.0 PROJECT-RELATED MITIGATION STRATEGY 10 8.0 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES 13 9.0 PUBLIC DISCLOSURE AND CONSULTATION 14 10.0 CAPACITY BUILDING AND TRAINING FOR ESAF

IMPLEMENTATION 15

11.0 COSTS FOR ESAF IMPLEMENTATION 16


1.0 INTRODUCTION

The Environmental and Social Assessment Framework for the Integrated Persistent Organic Pollutants Management Project (IPOPs Project) provides guidance to ensure that each site-specific activity defined or firmed up and proposed under each project component will be implemented in an environmentally and socially sound manner. The framework provides for screening of project impacts and implications with regard to environmental and social management in accordance with relevant World Bank and Government of the Philippines (GOP) environmental and social policies and local and international good practices. The World Bank Operational Policy (OP) 4.01 is the umbrella policy for environmental and social assessment, but this framework also covers other relevant policies, including OP 4.12 on involuntary resettlement and OP 4.10 on indigenous peoples. Based on the relevant requirements of the World Bank Operational Policy (OP) 4.01, this framework provides a Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) sector background; describes the project and activities; identifies the impacts of activities; sets out strategies for mitigating impacts; provides environmental and safeguards frameworks and instruments, with guidance documents; sets the roles and responsibilities of key stakeholders; guides the key stakeholders in preparing and reviewing safeguards instruments; provides guidance for monitoring and supervising the implementation of the environmental management plan; presents the particulars of the public disclosure and presentation conducted; and states the requirements and costs for capacity building and training.

2.0 SECTOR BACKGROUND The GOP ratified the Stockholm Convention on POPs in February 2004, thus, committing itself to reducing and eliminating POPs in the country. Thereafter, in June 2006, the GOP submitted the Philippine National Implementation Plan (NIP) containing an assessment of the POPs issues in the country; the institutional, policy, and regulatory frameworks; and strategy and action plan elements. The more important POPs issues for the Philippines as identified in the NIP are the following: • The POPS inventory, including stockpiles and wastes, is incomplete; • Understanding of and knowledge about POPs is limited; • Screening, enforcement, and monitoring of present and potential POPs chemicals is needed; • Monitoring and surveillance of health status relevant to potential impacts of POPs is

necessary; • The country's capacity to monitor dioxin and furan releases is limited; • Enforcement of existing laws relative to dioxin and furan emissions is weak; • Management and disposal of POPs-contaminated equipment (PCBs) must be enhanced; and • Identification and management of POPs-contaminated sites should be expanded. 2.1 POPs Production, Emissions, Stockpiles, and Contamination 2.1.1 POPs Sources in the Philippines The Stockholm Convention on POPs identified twelve initial POPs in three categories: pesticides POPs, industrial POPs, and unintentionally produced POPs (UPOPs). A survey revealed the following sources of POPs in the Philippines: (1) POPs pesticide reformulations; (2) POPs pesticide use and dioxin and furan releases from open burning on agricultural farms; (3) dioxin and furan emissions from pulp and paper mills, fuel-burning and waste-processing facilities, and the iron and steel and cement manufacturing industries; (4) Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) from transformer servicing facilities; and (5) PCBs, dioxins, and furans from electric utilities and


hospitals. The Philippine NIP also reports the occurrence and distribution of POPs in the Philippines through economic profiles of these sources. 2.1.2 Estimates of POPs Stockpiles in the Philippines An inventory of POPs conducted as part of the Philippine Enabling Activity Project of the DENR-EMB, revealed the following: POPs Pesticides. Due to various regulations, use of POPs pesticides in the Philippines dropped significantly, leaving dioxins, furans, and PCBs as the country's primary POPs concern. Dioxins and Furans. Using internationally-derived emissions factors, dioxin and furan emissions from all sources considered were estimated at 534 grams toxic equivalent per year (g TEQ/a). Uncontrolled combustion processes released the highest level of dioxins and furans, with 187 g TEQ/a, or 35 percent of total annual releases, emitting 135 g TEQ/a into the air. This is followed by power generation and cooking, with estimated releases of 157 g TEQ/a. The highest level of release to the air was 328 g TEQ/a, with 35 percent attributed to uncontrolled combustion of agricultural residues, 30 percent to firewood cooking, and 18 percent to subcategories of biomass-fired boilers. By 2004, the Philippine Second National Inventory of dioxin and furan emissions showed a lower total emission of 458 g TEQ/a. The Philippines intends to conduct a third inventory to include locally developed emission factors. PCBs. In 2004, the Philippines undertook a PCB inventory of 8,027 pieces of equipment. Only 143, or 1.8 percent, were confirmed as containing PCB oil; 98.2 percent was assumed to contain PCB oil and to require further validation and sampling. Of the equipment surveyed, 7,854 were transformers. Around 84 percent of these were located in electric utilities. A total of 6,658 of these units (85 percent) were reported to be online; 1,017 units (13 percent) were at servicing facilities for retrofilling. The collective weight of PCB oil was estimated at 2,401 MT; dry PCB equipment was estimated at 4,479 MT. About 64 percent was located at electric utilities and cooperatives. The Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Environmental Management Bureau (DENR-EMB) has established a PCB inventory database with support from the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) Trust Fund. It has not yet been completed because not all PCBs have been identified. As of June 2009, about 657 PCB owners had been identified and registered, but only 69 PCB inventory reports and PCB management plans had been submitted. DENR-EMB plans to complete the inventory through the IPOPs Project. 2.1.3 Contaminated Sites in the Philippines The production, use, and disposal of POPs in the Philippines resulted in the contamination of land resources. Some sites are heavily contaminated with PCB wastes and obsolete POP pesticides, and among the various issues that have surfaced concerning their management are the country's very limited experience with identification, characterization, and remediation and its lack of adequate financial resources to undertake these actions. Sites potentially contaminated with PCBs include electrical utilities, old industrial plants, and transformer servicing facilities. The top three PCB hotspots are the National Capital Region, which contains the highest quantity of confirmed PCBs; Region 4, ranking second, with the greatest number of electric cooperative respondents; and Region 3, where Subic Bay and Clark Freeport Zones are located. Site assessments have been conducted at Clark and Subic. Other sites with PCB and PCB-contaminated materials include old urban and industrial areas of Cebu and Davao City and the Meralco warehouse at Barangay San Joaquin, Pasig City, where


PCB-contaminated equipment and materials excavated from the decommissioned Rockwell Power Plant in Makati City were encapsulated. 2.1.4 POPs Monitoring Capacity in the Philippines With its limited technical infrastructure for POPs monitoring, the Philippines conducts POPs monitoring and related activities on a limited basis. Monitoring of POPs generation and releases to the environment is a primary function of the DENR-EMB; it is also a concern of the Fertilizer and Pesticide Authority (FPA). Both agencies employ trained technical personnel to conduct environmental monitoring, but they lack the technical infrastructure for performing actual POPs measurements and analysis. Monitoring POPs impacts on human health is a function of the Department of Health. Other national government agencies and Philippine universities address similar issues, relying on existing foreign-funded monitoring activities to perform POPs research and monitoring. 2.2 POPs Management Practices 2.2.1 Control of Dioxin and Furan Releases Uncontrolled burning, a source of dioxins and furans, includes natural and deliberate burning at dump sites, biomass burning, waste incineration, accidental fires, and unregulated backyard burning in rural areas. Despite laws and regulations, solid waste landfill operations lag in controlling and preventing waste burning; local governments, in general, lack the financial and technical capability and available space to comply fully with requirements or to employ basic mitigation techniques, such as regular waste compaction and soil covering and gas management. At the upstream side of solid waste management, the low rate of household waste collection in all regions (except the National Capital Region), indicate that, where cost, convenience, or local custom and social acceptance make that option attractive, waste is being burned in the open. 2.2.2 PCB Management Surveys show that electrical and industrial companies contract out to servicing facilities the repair, maintenance, and retrofilling of transformers and other equipment containing PCBs. As disclosed, machines used to filter PCB oil were also used to filter mineral oil, thus resulting in the spread of PCB contamination. Nonusable oils are discarded either on the ground or into drains and canals. Such practices indicate the following: (1) a low level of knowledge and awareness about PCBs and their threat to the environment and the public; and (2) lack of technical infrastructure for conducting regular monitoring, resulting in improper PCB waste management by industries. Currently, PCBs are either stored on the premises of PCB owners or exported for destruction abroad. It is hoped that an effort under a United National Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO) implemented Global Environment Facility (GEF) project, will stimulate PCB elimination through a sodium-based chemical destruction process for PCB oil and equipment. To be established in Bataan and operated by the Philippine National Oil Company, the facility will remove PCB-contaminated insulating oil from electrical equipment, destroy the PCBs, and refill the equipment with clean oil. The PCB Destruction Facility capacity will be 1,000 tons per year. The facilities will destroy 1,500 metric tons of PCB oil and equipment during a two-year demonstration period, expected to begin in December 2009 and extend to December 2011.


2.3 Analysis of Regulatory Framework for Philippine POPs Management and Monitoring

POPs exists in different media and their control can largely be addressed through various Philippine pollution control laws (developed according to environmental media), such as the Philippine Clean Air Act of 1999 (RA 8749); the Ecological Solid Waste Management Act of 2000 (RA 9003); and the Toxic Substances and Hazardous and Nuclear Wastes Control Act of 1990 (RA 6969) and the Clean Water Act of 2004 (RA 9275). The implementing rules and regulations, and enforcement of these laws with respect to POPs are however underdeveloped. Dioxins and Furans. Laws govern releases of dioxins and furans due to combustion processes in dump sites, agricultural areas, backyards, and biomass power plants. RA 8749 prescribe an emission standard ceiling of 0.1 nanogram/m3 for all average values of dioxins and furans measured over a sample period lasting a minimum of six hours and a maximum of eight hours. The act requires an inventory, development of short-term and long-term national government programs for the reduction and elimination of POPs, prohibition of incineration, and promotion of a comprehensive ecological waste management plan, among other provisions. Regulations on backyard burning has provided conflicting rules and the lack of enforcement of rules on both burning or waste collection has provided municipalities and households the practical option of ignoring or interpreting the laws as is most convenient. With regard to solid waste disposal site management, regulations have been put in place that indirectly prevent fires at dump sites. These regulations require the closure of open dump sites, and controlled dump sites are given a set of technical standards to promote sanitary landfills and improve solid waste management using the principle of reduce, reuse, and recycle. These regulations further support the main law and regulations on solid waste management, RA 9003 and DAO 2001-34 (IRR of RA 9003). Currently, the regulatory oversight does not sufficiently detail nor emphasize measures that prevent burning during disposal site operation or closure and these fires are considered a normal occurrence with no associated regulatory fines. Mechanisms are also lacking to enforce the provisions of RA 8749 and RA 9003 addressing control of unintentional POPs releases agricultural areas, backyards, and biomass power plants. PCBs. DENR issued a Chemical Control Order (CCO) for PCBs (DAO 2004-01) on February 19, 2004 (effective March 19, 2004), pursuant to the provisions of its implementing rules and regulations under RA 6969 (DAO 29 Series of 1992) and other applicable laws, rules, and regulations. The CCO applies to the importation, manufacture, sale, transfer, distribution, and use of PCBs, PCB equipment, PCB-contaminated equipment, non-PCB equipment, PCB articles, and PCB packaging in commercial buildings and industrial facilities, including PCB use and possession by electric utilities and suppliers. The CCO also provides specific requirements for annual PCB reporting, inventory, phase-out, storage, treatment, and disposal. To institute these requirements, PCB owners or holders are required to submit a PCB management plan. The CCO also prohibits, by March 19, 2014, or ten years after the order's effective date, use or storage for reuse of any PCBs, PCB equipment, PCB-contaminated equipment, or PCB article, including those in totally enclosed applications. Likewise, on the same date, the storage of PCB packaging and PCB wastes will no longer be allowed. During the first year of implementation of the CCO for PCBs, the World Bank, as the trustee of the CIDA Trust Fund, helped the DENR-EMB to develop a Guidance Document on PCB Management for Electric Cooperatives.


3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Given the above sector background and other considerations, a total of five components were identified for the project. Component1: Strengthening the regulatory framework and capacity building for POPs

management and monitoring. Component 2: Reduction of releases of unintentional persistent organic pollutants. Component 3: Environmentally sound management of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). Component 4: Identification, prioritization, and demonstration of management of POPs

contaminated sites. Component 5: Project management. These components address, in whole or in part and in various combinations the following themes:

Improving the POPs management regulatory framework. Improving knowledge regarding POPs through inventory and monitoring. Introducing or adopting the best available technologies (BAT) or best environmental

practices (BEP) for field activities, piloting, or demonstration. Performing field activities, such as monitoring, mitigation, prevention, and remediation of

POPs occurrences. Training for capacity building in managing POPs and enforcing POPs regulations. Informing, educating and communicating about POPs with concerned government

departments and citizens. Component 1 aims to strengthen the regulatory and monitoring capacity for phasing out POPSs use and for reducing POPs exposure and releases. While the Philippines has established much of the legislative framework necessary for chemicals management generally and for other activities related to POPs management in particular, significant gaps remain, and in many cases existing legal mechanisms are not fully consistent with or do not specifically support implementation of the Stockholm Convention. In addition, the country has not yet established a system for monitoring these pollutants’ health effects. Component 2 is designed to improve understanding of UPOPS — products of industrial processes or incomplete burning, largely from agriculture and municipal solid wastes — and to demonstrate how such releases can be reduced. Emphasis will be on improving the understanding of emissions, both from targeted sources and nationally; demonstrating implementation of best available technologies (BAT) and best environmental practices (BEP) for reducing emissions from the municipal waste management sector; and establishing BAT/BEP for other sources. This component will be implemented by the Department of Science and Technology and supported by the DENR National Solid Waste Management Commission (NSWMC) through guideline development, training, and dissemination. Component 3 will assist in phasing out PCB use and minimizing the risk to humans and the environment of PCB exposure by strengthening DENR oversight and improving the on-site management practices of PCB owners. PCBs were never produced in the Philippines, but they are used or stored in electrical equipment in the electric utility and manufacturing sectors, in old commercial buildings, and in transformer servicing facilities. DENR is implementing a policy requiring complete phase out, by 2014, of the use or storage of PCBs. A partial PCB inventory has been completed and standards for PCB management have been established; however, only a small percentage of operators has developed or implemented a PCB management plan. This component will support the DENR through the completion of the national PCB inventory, offer technical assistance and training for PCB owners and DENR inspectors, and facilitate demonstration of good on-site PCB management through implementation of PCB management plans.


Component 4 aims to strengthen the country's enabling capacity to reduce the risks posed by environmental POPs contamination by identifying contaminated sites; establishing a strategic framework, technical guidelines, and professional capacity to help address them; and building public knowledge and awareness. Some sites within the Philippines have been confirmed as being contaminated with POPs, including areas that once housed electrical transformers, old dump sites, former production facilities, and pesticide storage sites. Other sites are suspected of being contaminated, and many others have not yet been identified. The cleanup of these sites is not mandatory or otherwise regulated under Philippine law. Activities for this component include the development of a national inventory of sites and a national remediation strategy, including legislative and regulatory strengthening; establishment of site cleanup standards; national training and information dissemination; demonstration of site control methods for reducing exposure; and demonstration of contaminated site cleanup. Component 5 will support DENR in the management of the project. A Project Management Office (PMO) will be set-up at DENR-EMB to handle the day-to-day project management activities, including project management and coordination; information, education, and communication; monitoring and evaluation; and financial management and procurement.

4.0 APPROACH TO ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT The environmental and social assessment adopted for this project basically followed the requirements of World Bank OP 4.01, the umbrella policy for environmental and social assessment. The framework also covered other policies, such as OP 4.12 and 4.10. The project has multiple components, and the framework covers activities in which potential environmental and social impacts may arise (see Section 5). After these sites were identified, their likely field operations were determined to isolate their potential social and environmental impacts (see Section 6); from this research applicable mitigation strategies and measures were developed (see Section 7) with reference to the environmental and social policies of World Bank and GOP and local and international good practices. The roles and responsibilities of the stakeholders were laid down both for the implementation of component measures and for the environmental and social assessment of each component activity (see Section 8). Environmental guidelines and social assessment frameworks were developed, including environmental and social assessment instruments containing the environmental management plans to be prepared by the proponent for review and approval by EMB (see Section 9). Monitoring and supervision statements were provided for the implementation phase of the project (see Section 10). Consultations were also done with members of the public and of other entities during the scoping phase and while drafting the ESAF, including with those at the dump sites and with the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP) (see Section 11). Lastly, requirements and costs of capacity building and training were outlined for different stakeholders (see Sections 12 and 13) to help ensure the effective implementation of the EA process and safeguards. The assessment was conducted using data gathered from the literature, project design technical reports, and field surveys, with guidance from the World Bank project preparation team. 5.0 PROJECT COMPONENT ACTIVITIES UNDER THE FRAMEWORK 5.1 Activities Covered under Environmental and Social Assessment The project involves investment cofinancing, technical assistance, and training. The environmental and social assessment for the IPOPs Project focused on those activities requiring physical works at a site. These physical activities involve the application of technologies that may directly alter the site, cause pollution, and risk affecting the local community. The activities and estimated number of sites are as follows:


Component Activity/Subactivity Estimated

Number of Sites Component 2 Investments in BAT/BEP demonstration for the solid

waste sector: 6

Works to stop dump site burning Dump site closures Improvements in landfill operations Component 3 Implementation of PCB Management 800 Component 4 Demonstration of site remediation and site control: Site remediation demonstration 2 Site control measures for potentially highly

contaminated sites 1 to 3

* From 33 prospective sites. 5.2 Component 2: Investments in BAT/BEP Demonstration for the Solid Waste

Sector This component will cover demonstration of BAT/BEP to stop dump site burning, close dump sites, and improve landfill operation. Investments under the GEF will ensure the incorporation of practices to prevent burning (soil cover, proper sloping and security, signage, and so on). From 33 prospective local government units (LGUs), 6 will be considered for assistance. Two solid waste disposal sites have been identified for identification, development and implementation of interventions. These are located in General Santos City and in Iloilo City. The other specific sites as well as the project activities per site will be identified during implementation. 5.3 Component 3: Implementation Environmentally Sound PCB Management The activity will involve implementation of sound on-site PCB management practices by about 800 PCB owners. The government has set the goal of phasing out PCBs by 2014. PCB management under the project covers improved equipment identification, testing, labeling, inventory, and safe storage. 5.4 Component 4: Site Remediation and Site Control Site remediation will occur at two sites: (i) a former PCB transformer site in the Clark Freeport Zone , under the administration of the Clark Development Corporation (CDC); and (ii) the fire-fighting training area in Subic Bay Freeport Zone, under the administration of the Subic Bay Management Authority (SBMA). Remediation activities will be funded by the GOP or by project partners. The demonstrations will have the following major phases: (1) site characterization; (2) remedial design, including feasibility study, environmental and social assessments, and remediation technology selection; and (3) implementation of remedial action. Site assessment and training will be done during the activity as part of GEF grant financing. Site characterization, activities, design and cleanup approach, and environmental assessment will be undertaken during the first year of the project. Site remediation, which may employ physical, chemical, or biological methods, will entail cleaning contaminated soil to a provisional standard developed in the course of the project. The site control subactivity will fund the development and implementation of demonstration site control measures in one to three sites, including institutional and physical measures to limit access and exposure to contaminated sites. The demonstration site will be selected from the inventory of contaminated sites to be prepared in the course of the project. Site owners will receive site control training to reduce public exposure to the high health risks of contaminated sites. Such measures may take the form of physical containment, through fencing, capping, engineered bottom barriers,


immobilization processes, and vertical barriers, or of institutional controls, such as restrictions on well use, title or deed restrictions, and/or land-use planning measures. 6.0 PROJECT-RELATED ENVIRONMENTAL/SOCIAL IMPACTS AND RISKS This section outlines the potential environmental and social impacts and risks considered in developing the overall environmental and social safeguards framework and formulating impact mitigation measures. This information will be used to develop site-specific environmental and social assessments and activity Environmental Assessment (EA)/Social Assessment (SA) safeguards instruments. In general, determinations regarding the significant impacts and risks posed by an activity are made at the neighborhood level, taking into account the nature and scale of potential operations. 6.1 Component 2: Investments in BAT/BEP Demonstration for the Solid Waste

Sector This component will cover demonstrations of BAT/BEP for stopping dump site burning, closing open dump sites, and improving landfill operations to prevent burning. Issues affecting these subactivities relate to (i) environmental concerns; (ii) waste pickers' social development; (iii) provision for resettlement of structures or houses; and, (iv) the rights of indigenous peoples (who may be waste pickers) and respect for ancestral domains. An assessment to identify potential environmental and social impacts has been undertaken in an example three (3) out of the 33 sites identified as potential candidates for inclusion in the project. The environmental assessment sought to understand the impacts of the technologies and approaches that will used to achieve the objectives of this component. The social assessment evaluated the effects of project activities on the structures, livelihoods, and other assets of waste pickers and screened for the presence of or collective attachment of indigenous peoples in the three sites. The following environmental issues were identified:

Workers' exposure to fumes and natural explosions due to gas build up. Risk to nearby settlers from slope collapse during major waste movement activity. Land disfiguration, soil erosion, water ponding, and safety risks due to soil excavation for

dump site cover. Increased airborne dust from soil excavation and on-site transfers, especially during

summer. Accumulation of mud along transport routes when moving wet soil off-site. Possible increases in uncollected waste in the absence of alternative facilities to receive

garbage. Measures to stop dump site burning will have no social impacts, but social impacts will arise from activities to close dump sites. The social impacts include the following:

Temporary land acquisition for workers and equipment during dump site closure operations.

Loss of structures (temporary or permanent) owned by waste pickers and used for residential and economic purposes.

Loss of livelihoods dependent on continued dump site operations. Location of dump sites in areas declared to be ancestral domains or with pending ancestral

domain claims. Loss of structures (temporary or permanent) owned by communities of indigenous peoples

working as waste pickers at dump sites to be closed under the project.


Loss of livelihood affecting communities of indigenous peoples working as waste pickers at dump sites to be closed under the project.

The project collected available information on wastepickers in the Philippines and undertook studies of three dumpsites chosen as samples from the potential candidate sites (one for each of the Philippines' three major island groups) to understand the nature of wastepickers and how the project might affect these groups. The following summarizes what was learned concerning the nature of the impacts: Number of people affected: These three sites (Cabanatuan, Iloilo, and Cagayan de Oro) had a total of 1,100 waste pickers. Waste pickers include children, juveniles, adult males, and adult females. At none of the sites were communities of indigenous peoples working as waste pickers. The number of waste pickers range from 100 to 600 per dumpsite. Project wide it is therefore anticipated for the six project sites to be pursued, the estimated number of affected people is between 1,500 and 3,000. Impacts on Livelihoods: The extent of loss of livelihoods of wastepicking due to dumpsite closure activities under the project could be total or partial. Waste pickers normally earn between US$3 to US$4 per day from waste picking. Work schedules follow the collection and dumping schedule of garbage trucks. Their opportunities outside of waste picking can be limited as waste pickers are generally migrants from the rural areas and some do not have regular access to paid labor. Many have obtained only an elementary education; rarely does one find a high school graduate engaged in waste picking. They are also stigmatized as the activity is considered the lowest kind of work, and wastepickers are lumped with common criminals making them vulnerable to harassment and exploitation. It can also affect entire families as waste picking is generally a family activity, involving both parents and children. Women and children tend to work in dumpsites more than the men who generally engage in street picking or as itinerant waste buyers. Impacts on Structures: The structures used by the wastepickers are mostly temporary, made of discarded carton and plastic propped up by wooden or plastic poles. These are generally used for resting and storage areas for collected recyclables. A few residential structures made of semi-permanent materials like wooden boards with galvanized iron roofing can be found on dumpsites. 6.2 Component 3: Implementation of PCB Management Key issues for PCB management leading up to the planned 2014 PCB phase out include safety and health risks to workers; risks of water pollution due to suspected lack of best practices in preventing spillage; and safely manage contaminated articles, tools, equipment, and washings. There are no social issues for this component. 6.3 Component 4: Demonstration of Site Remediation and Site Control Site remediation will involve cleanup, rehabilitation works, and post-cleanup institutional control. Site control separates the public from the contaminated site through both physical and institutional controls. The potential impacts have an area of influence largely confined within the demonstration site and the immediate area include both environmental and social factors. The environmental impacts include:

removal of vegetation and structures; water and air pollution; and safety and health risks to site personnel and the public.


The social impacts include:

Temporary or permanent cessation of residence, economic, and social activities in sites identified for remediation and control; Location of remediation and control sites in ancestral domains or areas with existing ancestral domain claims; Possible chance finds of cultural properties; and Presence of or dependence of indigenous peoples on the natural resources of the land identified for remediation and control.

One of the identified sites for Component 4, the Subic Freeport Zone, is covered by an ancestral domain claim of the Aetas. The land is currently used as a fire station and fire safety training ground. No Aetas live on site, nor are they dependent on the site's natural resources for their livelihoods. 7.0 PROJECT- RELATED MITIGATION STRATEGY 7.1 Overall Approach In response to the impacts and risks identified in the previous section, corresponding options for mitigation measures were identified. In developing these options, reference was made to World Bank safeguards policies OP 4.01 on environmental assessment, OP 4.10 on Indigenous Peoples, and OP 4.12 on involuntary resettlement. World Bank policies were supported by the Philippine Environmental Impact Statement System (PD 1586) and by other Philippine environment and social laws, such as the Ecological Solid Waste Management Act of 2000 (RA 9003), the Toxic Substances and Hazardous and Nuclear Wastes Control Act of 1990 (RA 6969), the Clean Air Act of 1999 (RA 8749), the Clean Water Act of 2004 (RA 9275), and The Indigenous Peoples’ Rights Act of 1997 (RA 8371). Other local and international policies and good practices were considered in developing the mitigation strategy. These safeguards were used to develop the project's environmental and social assessment frameworks or guidelines to be prepared by proponents for site-specific activities, including EAs, Environmental Management Plans (EMPs), social development plans (SDPs) for waste pickers, resettlement action plans, and indigenous peoples’ development plans (IPDP), as required. Key measures address issues of avoidance, prevention, preservation, minimization, rehabilitation, restoration, and compensation. To expand support for the project, a communications strategy will be implemented through the main project funding, and component communications plans will be designed to achieve effective information exchange among policy and decision makers, industrial and professional users, and the general public. 7.2 Component 2: Investments in BAT/BEP Demonstration for the Solid Waste

Sector The three identified subactivities (stopping burning, closing open dump sites, and improving landfill operations to prevent burning) each entail issues concerning the safety and health of operators, hazards from unstable slopes, impacts from removing or using soil cover, security, impacts on waste pickers and indigenous peoples, resettlement, and potential land acquisition. As a strategy, some investment criteria were established to ensure that the project constitutes an effective demonstration and that disposal issues are managed properly. To become part of the program, LGUs must commit to closing dump sites and making alternative arrangements for disposing of or for reducing, reusing, and recycling (3Rs) garbage per RA 9003. To initiate an activity, the following must be confirmed: (i) the draft dump site closure plan must be updated to


meet the requirements of the framework; (ii) financing for closure must be in place; and (iii) other arrangements and financing must have been established for managing disposal and the 3Rs. Closure plans will be updated by respective LGUs using a revised outline that meets the World Bank EA requirement. Plan development will also refer to the Guidebook for the Safe Closure of Disposal Sites, final edition (NSWMC and JICA 2006). For the stop burning subactivity, proponents must submit an EMP, while for the improved landfill operation subactivity an Operational Plan will be required. Additional plans for waste pickers, land acquisition, resettlement, and indigenous peoples will be required where applicable. For dump site closure activities, social impacts will be addressed by the proponent’s adherence to a social development framework for waste pickers; an indigenous peoples’ framework; and a resettlement policy framework covering temporary land acquisition, movement of structures, transfer of people, loss of immovable or permanent structures, and losses and disturbances resulting from cessation of residential, economic, and social uses of the land. The social development frameworks will provide a process for assessing involuntary resettlement impacts on waste pickers, a process for participation and consultation, and a process for mitigating these impacts by providing livelihood alternatives, contained in the social development plan. The menu alternatives will be identified and implemented over time as sub-projects are developed. Local governments commonly have programs that they implement for these groups that can be enhanced or form a basis from which to work. Some examples of these social and livelihood measures are housing programs, non-formal education, feeding programs for children, sewing and bag making for women and the elderly, job placement for adult males in construction work, and mini-conditional cash transfers. Many local government units are implementing one or several of these alternatives and the project will build on these initiatives. The indigenous peoples’ (IP) policy frameworks will contain a process for screening for the presence of or the collective attachment of indigenous peoples to the area affect by the project. Where an overlap is found to exist or when the field-based investigation determines that the project area is within an ancestral domain or claim, the project proponent will abide by the Free and Prior Informed Consent Guidelines of 2006 under RA 8371, as applied by NCIP. Project proponents will enter into Memorandums of Agreement with the claimants. A distinct and separate community of indigenous peoples (not just individuals) may be dependent on the project area for the practice of their customary cultural, economic, social, religious, or political institutions, separate from those of the dominant society and culture. As such, the project proponent, with the guidance of World Bank safeguards staff, will assess the IP community's situation (assessing its vulnerabilities, especially cultural identity and poverty), how the proposed project activities might adversely or positively affect that situation, and the community's coping mechanisms. The project proponent will also conduct consultations, obtain the broad support of the affected IP community, and develop an Indigenous Peoples’ Development Plan (IPDP) to address potential impacts and to improve the lives of the IP community. The implementation of environmental and social safeguards contained in the EMP and any social development plan for waste pickers, resettlement action plan, or indigenous peoples’ development plan will be included in the budget of the sub-projects. 7.3 Component 3: Implementation of PCB Management The mitigation strategy outlined for addressing the risks of managing PCBs at an activity site requires upgrading and updating PCB management plans, using current guidelines, to address gaps in existing outlines with reference to the World Bank EA requirements. Plans will use as their primary reference the upcoming Revised Technical Guidelines for PCB Management.


7.4 Component 4: Demonstration of Site Remediation and Site Control Site remediation and site control raise various environmental and social issues. Environmental issues relate to land disturbance, water and air pollution, and worker and resident health and safety. Social issues include removal of structures, land acquisition (leading to restricted access and loss of livelihood), and effects on indigenous peoples. A Category “A” Environmental Assessment (EA) Report will be prepared to address these issues and will include an environmental assessment of alternative plans. An EA outline has been prepared to serve as a model. In the absence of local guidelines or good practices, international guidelines will be used for all aspects of the component. Additional plans for land acquisition, resettlement, and addressing IP issues will be required, where applicable. Two local consultations will be undertaken, one at the scoping stage and another when finalizing the draft EA. The cleanup technologies used should have minimal environmental and social impact as their impact should not be greater than the environmental and social impact of leaving a contaminated site untouched. This principle is operationalized through a risk-based technology selection process that takes into account the derived cleanup standards and environmental and social considerations. Environmental measures in the EA Report will fall under the topics of soil management, surface water protection, groundwater protection, and control of odor, gaseous substances, volatile chemical substances, dust, and noise. Specifics of personnel safety and health measures will also be provided. To ensure public safety, a communications plan will be instituted for consulting lot owners and neighbors and for keeping them regularly informed about the progress of work. Notices indicating goals, procedures, and policies will be placed at the demonstration sites, and procedures for handling cultural property chance finds will be included in contracts with site remediation service providers. Land acquisition issues will be addressed through a framework. For the demonstration project, landowner consent will be a prerequisite for inclusion and participation. Without this consent, the project will not undertake site remediation. Landowners will sign a waiver for monetary compensation for any loss of structures or improvements resulting from remediation activities. Mitigation of any temporary disruptions in the use of the site will be the responsibility of private or government landowners as their counterpart to the project. Due diligence will be conducted on sensitive or general use demonstration sites (such as utilities and institutions). The project will provide assistance in transporting equipment and other moveable items to a new site. IP issues will be addressed through a framework. When an overlap is found to exist or when the field-based investigation determines that the project area is within an ancestral domain or claim, the project proponent will abide by the Free and Prior Informed Consent Guidelines of 2006, under RA 8371, as applied by NCIP. Given the intention of the IPOPS project to enhance environmental quality and improve health, efforts will be made when project proponents, with the cooperation of the NCIP, address indigenous peoples' concerns: first, their voluntarily participation will be solicited at the initiation of the subproject; and second, the subproject will be included in an Ancestral Domain Sustainable Development and Protection Plan (ADSDPP). Community-initiated activities are allowed under the Free and Prior Informed Consent Guidelines of 2006. An area in one of the two candidate remediation sites, Fire Station 6 of the Subic Bay Freeport Zone, is located within an ancestral domain (now covered by a Certificate of Ancestral Domain Title [CADT R03 HER 0703 0008 A]). Under the Indigenous Peoples Rights Act and its Free, Prior and Informed Consent guidelines, the SBMA will secure a local Free, Prior and Informed Consent and forge a Memorandum of Agreement on the participation of the local Indigenous People.


In some cases a site may not be located in an ancestral title or claim area but may nonetheless host a distinct and separate IP community (not just individuals) who depend on the project area or use it for their customary cultural, economic, social, religious, or political practices (separate from those of the dominant society and culture). As such, the project proponent, with the guidance of World Bank safeguards staff, will undertake a social assessment of the situation of the community (including its vulnerabilities, particularly in terms of cultural identity and poverty), how the proposed project activities might adversely or positively affect that situation, and its situation (especially its vulnerabilities, cultural identity, and poverty), and the community's coping mechanisms. The project proponent will conduct consultations to obtain the broad support of the IP community and will prepare an indigenous peoples’ development plan to mitigate project impacts and improve the lives of the indigenous peoples living in the activity area. While the project will fund all activities, implementation of the environmental and social safeguards contained in the EMP, resettlement action plan, or indigenous peoples' development plan will be the responsibility of the proponent. Specific interventions will be identified during project implementation. 8.0 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES The roles and responsibilities of concerned parties were identified during the preparation and review of the EA and SA instruments, in the environmental safeguards performance monitoring mechanisms instituted during project implementation, and during the funding of the safeguards. The key players in implementing the proposed activities are the DENR-EMB, partner agencies, activity proponents (site owners and operators), affected persons or communities, and, to an extent, the proponents' service providers. These players will use various instruments to ensure that the IPOPs project implementation is in accordance with World Bank safeguards policies and GOP environmental and social laws and regulations. The proponent, EMB, and other entities will have the following roles and responsibilities in the different EA and SA activities:

EA and SA Activity

Proponent EMB Other Entities

EA and SA documents preparation

Prepares documents for the EA and for any social development plans, resettlement action plans, or indigenous peoples’ development plans Conducts consultation with persons or communities affected by the project

Identifies environmental and social safeguards documents and provides proponents with guidance in preparing these documents Identifies and alerts other relevant partner agencies regarding the proposed activity

EA and SA documents review approval

Submits the prepared EA and SA documents to EMB Provides EMB with additional information

Reviews and endorses EA, RAP, IPDP, MOA and SDP documents to World Bank

EMB Regional Office will assist EMB CO in the review of the documents. NCIP will review the MOA between the project proponent and the indigenous peoples’ community.

EMP, SDP, MOA and RAP

Notifies EMB and stakeholders of the start

Monitors implementation of environmental and

EMB Regional Office will assist EMB CO in the on-


EA and SA Activity

Proponent EMB Other Entities

implementation date of activity implementation Submits the required self-monitoring reports to EMB Finances implementation of the EMP, SDP, RAP, and IPDPs

social safeguards field verification of the environmental and social safeguards implementation NCIP will participate in the monitoring of MOA implementation

In general, the project will assist in paying the costs of consultants to prepare the safeguards documents. The proponent will provide support and in-kind funding. Training and development and implementation of the communications plan will also be funded under the different components. The costs for safeguards screening, review, and implementation monitoring will be part of the project management budget. The proponent will bear the cost of EMP implementation. 9.0 PUBLIC DISCLOSURE AND CONSULTATION The ESAF was strengthened through consultations. The public consultations dealt environmental and social issues together following O.P.4.01. Consultations were undertaken at the project's scoping stage and when the draft ESAF underwent review. In addition, small group consultations and interviews took place at various times with concerned implementing parties; oversight agencies, such as the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP); and affected populations, such as dump site waste pickers.

A major scoping consultation was held on May 29, 2009, attended by 47 representatives from government agencies and nongovernment organizations. The issues raised included the status of preparation activities, coverage of dioxin and furan mapping, dioxin and furan sources, criteria for site assessment, compensation packages for involuntary resettlement, and the need for an IP framework. All items raised within the scope of EA and SA activities were addressed. Consultation on the draft ESAF was conducted on September 4, 2009, attended by 42 participants from different government agencies, including the Occupational Health and Safety Center, the Department of Science and Technology, and representatives from the League of Cities of the Philippines (LCP), and from nongovernment organizations, such as members of the EcoWaste Coalition. The comments raised issues regarding enforcement of the Sections 1-30 of RA 9003 to avoid landfills, participation of LGUs under the framework, expansion of the IPOPs project to more than ten LGUs, the project’s complementarity with the UNIDO implement GEF PCB destruction facility project in Bataan, selection of remediation technologies, the necessity for an IP framework in CDC and SBMA, lack of site remediation regulations, monitoring the health and safety of workers, and provision for post-cleanup activities. Consultations with field visits also took place at three sample dump sites (Cabanatuan City, Iloilo City, and Cagayan de Oro City) of the 33 candidate sites under the project, where stakeholders were identified in partnership with local governments. Consultants held a series of consultation activities, interviews, and direct observations with the LGU, administrative and operating units, waste pickers, buyers, and women, youth, and other stakeholders around the dump site. These activities addressed both environmental and social issues related to the proposed solid waste management interventions. A number of key implications can be gleaned from these visits and consultations.


On social issues, the consultations resulted in the following goals: (i) The social development plan (SDP) to be designed and implemented should include

sustainability as a design criteria. In many cases, livelihood programs for waste pickers collapse because of changes in political leadership or depletion of funding from external sources.

(ii) The LGUs should be clear about who can participate in the livelihood restoration measures in the SDP, and they should clearly communicate their programs to the waste pickers and others affected so the plans are fully understood. Disparities in the registry of waste pickers could present problems. In the case of waste pickers in Iloilo, for example, some 300 are undocumented. When designing appropriate plans these types of workers and their status would need to be verified. The LGU should establish and articulate the criteria for determining who can file for membership and what benefits and responsibilities they have.

(iii) In terms of process, separate consultations are needed with waste pickers (separately among

men, women, possibly young adults or juveniles, and young children) during the development of the social development plan for each site. Understanding of the value chain should be deepened as part of these consultations and should include the role of waste aggregators. These consultations will also provide a basis for developing the livelihood restoration plan and will be required as part of the safeguards documentation.

(iv) In choosing programs to address social issues, effectiveness must be carefully addressed. Past

programs have failed to improve standards of living for waste pickers; for example, efforts to provide housing were later abandoned as the proposed housing is a significant distance from the dumpsite. Scoping studies of good practices around the Philippines and worldwide are needed to improve conditions for waste pickers.

(v) Efforts to stop open burning to control POPs must be coordinated with government programs

that promote burning to achieve other goals. The Department of Health, for example, encourages the burning of organic wastes to kill dengue-carrying mosquitoes.

Coordination with the NCIP commissioners and at Region 3 revealed that the selected remediation site at Subic Bay Freeport Zone falls within Certificate of Ancestral Domain title. Hence, the Indigenous Peoples Rights Act (IPRA) and the FPIC guidelines apply there. There is an existing Memorandum of Agreement between the Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority and the IPs, so the subsequent Memorandum of Agreement likely to be generated may, at the discretion of the IP leaders, be simplified, as compared to a full-blown Free, Prior and Informed Consent process. It is to be expected that the IPs will ask for some social development program in the form of labor-based contracting for activities such as putting up the fences and signs, providing guides to detours, and guarding the restricted site. Consultations will continue during project implementation, as sites are firmed up and project activities are finalized. The project has prepared a communication plan which targets the implementers and influential entities and project affected persons and groups. The objectives of the consultation will be to increase awareness the environmental and health risks of POPs, develop policy options, identify problems in addressing the problem of POPs produced by dumpsite and backyard burning. 10.0 CAPACITY BUILDING AND TRAINING FOR ESAF IMPLEMENTATION EA/SA implementation requires screening proposed physical activities for the required safeguards documents or EA/SA instruments; preparing, reviewing, and obtaining approval of these documents; and monitoring and supervising EMP implementation. Capacity building and training


concerning EA/SA will be included in their respective components and associated technical aspects. The success of EA/SA implementation depends on the capacity and interplay of project management (DENR and other partner government agencies) and activity proponents (LGUs and industries). Training will focus on the technical aspects of the activities and on methods of project management, particularly the preparation and review of EA/SA instruments and monitoring EMP implementation. 11.0 COSTS FOR ESAF IMPLEMENTATION The costs for ESAF implementation are shown below. The GEF, with support and funding from proponents, will cover the costs for the consultants required to prepare the safeguards documents. The cost for EMB tasks (safeguards preparation guidance, screening, reviews, and monitoring) will form part of the project management budget. The cost of implementing environmental and social safeguards will be the responsibility of the proponents. The cost of training, capacity building, and developing and implementing communications plans will be covered using funds from the safeguards preparation and project component budget for training and dissemination.

ESAF Task Component 2 Component 3 Component 4 Safeguards document preparation

Costs of consultants covered by GEF Management and data collection inputs part of local government counterpart

Consultants covered by project GEF money with support and in-kind funding from PCB owners

Costs of consultants to prepare documents covered by GEF with support from in-kind funding from CDC, SBMA, and other landowners

Safeguards screening, review, and clearance

Costs covered by EMB counterpart and GEF project management budget



Communications plan

Included in safeguards preparation and project component budgets for training and dissemination

Included in the safeguards preparation budget and in the project component budgets for training and dissemination

Included in the safeguards preparation budget and in the project component budgets for training and dissemination

Safeguards implementation

Costs for EMP implementation, resettlement, waste picker SDP, and IPDP responsibility of the local government covered under the overall subproject budgeting

Costs for PCB management plan implementation as part of the responsibility of PCB owners

Costs for safeguards implementation (EMP, RAP, or IP instruments) responsibility of the land owner and, as appropriate, included in contracts for remediation and site control and as part of project budget

Monitoring EMB monitoring covered by project management budget

EMB monitoring covered by project management budget

EMB monitoring covered by project management budget

Training and capacity building

Safeguards training included as part of the preparation of the documents and supervision budget; also included in training and dissemination for the component

Training funded under the component for preparing and implementing the safeguards document (PCB Management Plan)

Training under component for specific sites and nationally includes the safeguards aspects

Documents

Integrated Persistent Organic Pollutants Management ... · Integrated Persistent Organic Pollutants Management Project ... Executive Summary ... (RA 8749); the Ecological