USAID · Projects with significant environmental concerns include the Chad Cameroon Petroleum Pipeline ... -funded Southern Highway Project in Belize, Asian Development

..

LIST OF UPCOMING MULTILATERAL DEVELOPMENT BANK (MDB) PROJECTS WITH POSSIBLE ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS

June 1998

'

USAID

******* ~ •• , •• ,

,, OPPIC. or BNVIROIDID1T

BORBAU POR POLICY ARD PROGRAM COORI>INATIOR U.S. AGBlfC'! POR INTDD41'IODL DffBLOPIIBlff

WASHING'l'OR, D.C. 20523

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS USED

BANXS, ADB -AfDB -BIC -BITS -

LENDING INSTITtJTIONS AND NGO•• Asian Development Bank African Development Bank Bank Information Center

CIDA -DOE -EBRD -EDF -EEC -EU -EXIM -EXIMBANKGEF -GTZ -FAO -FINNIDA -IDB -IBRD -IDA -IFC -IFAD -IMF -IUCN -KfW -

MIGA -MDB -MRC -NGO -NRC -ODA -OECF -SIDA -USG -WB -WWF -

Swedish Agency for International Technical and Economic Cooperation Canandian International Development Agencvy Department of Energy (USG) European Bank for Reconstruction and Development Environmental Defense Fund European Economic Commission European Union Export Import Bank (USG) Export Import Bank (Japan) Global Environmental Facility German (bilateral) Technical Assistance Agency United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization Finnish International Development Agency Inter-American Development Bank International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (WB) International Development Association (WB) International Finance Corporation (WB) International Fund for Agricultural Development International Monetary Fund World Conservation Union . Kreditanstalt f'llr Wiederaufbau (German Bank for Reconstruction and Development) Multilateral Inveatment Guarantee Agency (WB) Multilateral Development Bank Multinationals Reaouce Center (NGO) Non-Governm~ntal Organisation Nuclear Regulatory COllllliaaion (USG) Overseas Development Agency (United Kingdom) overseas Economic Cooperation PUnd (Japan) Swedish International Development Agency United States Government World Bank Group (including IBRD, IDA, IFC, and MIGA) world Wildlife Fund

O'l'DR ABBRBVIATIOll81 EA -EIA -EDS -GIS -Gwh -ha -ICDP -IEE -km -kV -MOS -MW -N/A -PIO -USED -

Environmental Aaaesament Environmental Impact Assessment (used interchangeably with EA) Environmental Data Sheet (WB) Geographic Information System Gigawatt hour• hectare(a); 1 ha. 2.47 acres, 1,000 ha (10 lan 1 ) • 3.87 miles 1

Integrated conservation and development project Initial Bnvironmental Examination kilometer(a); 1 Jan• .62 mite• kilovolt• ' Monthly Operational Swmnary (World Bank) Megawatt• Not applicable Project Information Document (WB) u.s. Executive Director

. "

t

LIST OF UPCOMING MULTILATERAL DEVELOPMENT BANX (MDB) PROJECTS WITH POSSIBLE ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS USED .....

MDB PROJECTS FORMBRLY RBPORTBD OR FOLLOWED BY USAID THAT WERE APPROVBD, DROPPED, OR POT INTO RESERVB STATUS

2

SINCE THB APRIL 1997 RBPORT 6

EXECUTIVB SlJMMARY . 7

TRENDS AND ANALYSBS 8

Belize: Southern Highway Project and the Inter-american Development Bank . . . . . 10

The Philippines: Asian Development Bank and World Bank Projects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

Health Sector Projects and Environmental Impacts 13 Hidrovia, Paraguay-Paran! Waterway . . . . . . . 16 Hydro Project Trends in this Report . . . . . . . 19 TABLE: HYDRO PROJECTS REPORTED BY USAID'S "LIST OF UPCOMING

MDB PROJECTS WITH ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS" 1986-1998 20

RBVIBW OP BNVIRONMBNTAL ASSBSSMBN'l' CATBGORIBS AT MDBa

LIST OP tJPCONING MULTILATERAL DBVBLOPMJDft' BANK (MDB) PROJBC'l'S ·

HEALTH SBCTOR PROJBC'l'S

AFRICA REGION Health Sector.

1. n Ethiopia: IDA - Health Sector . . . . 2 • n Ghana: IDA - Health Sector Support 3 . n Kenya: AfDB - Rural Health Services

Project II . . . . . . . . . 4. n' Madagascar: IDA - Health II . . . . . . 5. n Mali: IDA - Health Sector Development

ASIA/NEAR BAST REGION Health Sect;,or . . . , . . . . ·. · , 6.n Sri Lanka: IFC - Lanka Hospital

Corporation/Apollo Lanka Hospital 7.n Vietnam: IFC - Namoi International Hospital

EUROPE AND THE NEW INDEPENDENT STATES REGION Health Sector 0.n Turkey: IFC - Bayindir Medical Centers

LATIN AMERICAN AND THB CARIBBEAN Health Sector .. · · 9,n Haiti: IDB - Organization and

Rationalization of the Health

21

24

24

24 24

26 26

28

28

28 29

30 30

31

June 1998: Page -4-

Sector . . . . . . . NORTH AFRICA AND THE MIDDLE EAST Health Sector

10." Algeria: IBRB - Algiers Urban Renewal

PROJECTS LOCATED IN AFRICA 11. Western Africa: IDA/AfDB - Regional

Hydropower Development (Mali, Mauritania, and Senegal) IDA/IFC - Petroleum Development and Pipeline

12.

13. 0

14.

15."

16. 1 7. n

18."

19. n

20. n

Chad-Cameroon:

Ghana: AfDB -Small Scale Rubber Plantations Development

Guinea-Bissau: AfDB - Etudes Routes Boke-

Lesotho:

Madagascar: Niger:

Niger:

Uganda: Zimbabwe:

Qubeo . . . . . . . . .. IBRD - Lesotho Highlands Water Project - Phase lB ...... . IDA - Transport Sector Project . AfDB - Kandaji Dam Construction study . . . . . . . . . AfDB ~ Natµral Resource Conservation Project ..... . IDA - First Roads Sector ..... . IDA - Local Government Development .

PROJECTS LOCATBD IN ASIA AND PACIPIC . . . . . . . . . . . 21. 22.

23. 24.

Cambodia: Indonesia:

Indonesia: Lao PDR:

IDA - Northeast Rural Development ADB - Metro Medan Urban Development ....... . IBRD - Simmering Flood Control . World Bank Group - Nam Theun II Hydropower. . . . . . . . ..

PROJBCTS LOCATBD IN BUROPB ARD CD'l'RAL ASIA . ....... . 2 5 . " Armenia: EBRD - Hrasdan Unit No 5

Privatisation ...... . 26." Azerbaijan, Georgia: IFC/EBRD -Early Oil

Development . . . 2 7 . n Georgia: EBRD - Enguri Hydro . . . . . .

PROJBCTS LOCATSD IR LATIN AMBRICA AND TD CARIBBDN . . 28. Bolivia: IDB - ~rt Corridors: Santa

29. 30.

31.

32.n 33. n

34. n

Cruz-Puerto Su4rez Highway .. Colombia: IDB - Regional Roads Program. Dominican Republic: IDB - Watershed

Dominican Republic: Management Program. IBRD/IDB - Power Market Development/ Power

Ecuador: Ecuador: Ecuador:

Sector Hybrid Program IDB - National Roads Program II IDB - Urban Development II .. IDB - Cuenca-Molleturo Road

31

31 31

33

33

38

41

42

43 44

46

47 48 49

51 51

53 54

55

58

58

59 61

62

62 65

66

68 71 72 73

June 1998: Page -5-

IDB - Water and Sewer Program 74 IDB - Critical Areas of

35. El Salvador: 36. El Salvador:

Decontamination . . . . . 76 IDB - Agricultural Sector 37. Haiti:

38. n Jamaica: Modernization . . . . . . 78 IBRD - Road Infrastructure

39. n Panama: Development (RIDE) . . . . . . . . 80 IBRD - Second Roads Rehabilitation (and IDB National Rural Roads Program II - PR0104) 81

40. n Panama: IDB - Electricity Expansion Program . . . . . . . . . 83

41. n Panama: IDB - Mining Sector Loan 84 42. n Panama: IDB - Social Emergency Fund II 85 43. n Panama: IDB - Tourism Support Program 86 44. Paraguay: IDB - Development of Asuncion Bay

Coastal Area . ... ·. . . . . . 88 45. n Paraguay: IDB - Cotton Sector Support

Program . . . . . . . . . . . . 89 46. n Paraguay: IDB - Support for International

Trade Negotiations. . . . . . . 90

PROJBCTS LOCATm> IN TD MIDDLB BAST AND NORTH Al'RICA 91 47.n Jordan: IBRD - Amman Water and Sanitation

Management. 91

RBPBRBHCBS 92

n = Newly listed project since the April 1997 report.

,,

MDB PROJECTS FORMBRLY REPORTED OR FOLLOWED BY USAID THAT WERE APPROVED, DROPPED, OR PUT INTO RESERVE STATUS SINCE THE APRIL 1997 REPORT

Country: MDB - Project Name

PROJBCTS LOCATBD IN Al'RICA 1. Kenya: IDA - Energy Sector Reform, $125 m 2. Eritrea: AfDB - Fisheries Infrastructure, $5 m

3 • Gambia: AfDB - Coastal Protection Study, UA 80 million

4. Guinea-a.: AfDB - Transportation Infrastructure Rehabilitation, $8.5 m

5. Guinea-a. : AfDB - Boke-Qubeo Road Study 6. Senegal: AfDB - Projet de Modernisation et

d'Intensification Agricole, UA 10 m

7. Sierra Leone: AfDB - Rhombe and Rolako Swamp Studies, $2.5 million

8. Uganda: IFC - Afritours & Travels/Sambiya River Lodge, $0.85 million

PROJBC'l'S LOCATm> IX ASIA Alm PAC:Inc 9. India: IBRD/IDA - Coal Sector Rehabilitation 10. Nepal: IDA - Agriculture Re•earch & Extension ll. Nepal: IDA - Irrigation Sector

Statua,Comment•

Approved 6/97 Approved 11/97, .EA conducted by FAQ, available 1/97 Approved 9/97, infrastructure study suggested Approved 3/97, .EA measures incorporated into design. Unknown Approved 5/97, significant environmental measures incorporated into project. Approved 5/97, expanded BA economic analysis, community participation requested. Approved.

Approved. Approved 8/97. Approved ll/97, technical assistance incorporated into project design.

·12. Philippines: IBRD - Community-baaed Resource

PROJBC'l'S LOCATm> Ill BUllOPB Alm CDftAL ASIA

Mgmt Approved 4/98.

13. Poland: IBRD - Krakow Water and Wa•tewater 14. Russia: IBRD - Krasnodar Power Generation

PROJBC'l'S LOCATm> Ill LATIB AIIIUCA Alm TD CUIUUB 15. Bolivia-

Brazil: IDB/IBRD - Natural Gas Export

16. Mexico: IDB - Food and Agricultural Sector 17. Mexico: IBRD - Aquaculture

18. Panama: IBJID - Social Inve•tment Fund

PROJBC'l'S LOC.&2'D DI TD KmnLS DST AllD1 IIORTB AnICA 19. Jordan: IBJU> - Disi Alllllan Conveyor Project 20. Jordan: IBRD - Second Tourism Development 21. Morocco: IBRD - Water Resource• Management 22. Morocco: IBRD - National Watershed Management

Dropped 1997. Dropped 1998.

Approved 12/97, consultation with indigenous peoples increased, proposed mitigation measures improved. Approved. Approved 6/97 scope of project reduced. Approved 8/98.

Dropped Approved 10/98 Approved 02/98 Dropped

For more information on the above projects contact the USAID Bureau for Policy and Program Coordination, Office of Environment, PPC/ENV.

N. newly listed since the April 1997 report.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

In accordance with section 537(h) of Public Law 100-202, this June 199~ repor~ lists proposed multilateral development bank (MDB) proJects likely to have adverse impacts on the environment, natural resources, public health or indigenous peoples. The report is a snapshot of proposed MDB projects that USAID is currently concerned about .. The last re~ort was issued in April 1997. This report does not ~reJudge th~ United States Government's position on the final versions of proJects when they are considered by the MDB executive boards. The report serves as a record of USAID environmental monitoring of MDB projects. It also indicates the level of progress made by the MDBs on environmental policies and procedures since 1986 when Congress first expressed concern over these issues.

This year's report highlights environmental concerns with 47 MDB projects, including 20 in Latin American the Caribbean, 15 in Africa 6 in Asia and the Pacific, 4 in Europe and Central Asia, and 2 in th~ Middle East and North Africa. There are 10 health sector projects highlighted in the report. Since environmental concerns with the health sector is a relatively new issue, these projects have been given a separate section (page 24) a~d further study in the Trends and Analyses section (page 13). All other projects are listed by region in the main body of the report (page 33). Total project numbers for sectors other than health include 10 public/urban infrastructure, 9 road, 9 power, 4 agriculture, 2 natural resources, and 1 mining sector· project.

Projects with significant environmental concerns include the ChadCameroon Petroleum Pipeline, Lesotho Highlands Water, Lao Nam Theun Hydro II, Azerbaijan-Georgia Early Oil, Bolivia Export Corridors (Santa Cruz-Puerto Su4rez Road), Ecuador Cuenca-Molleturo Road, and Panama Second Roads Rehabilitation Project. These projects will have significant environmental impacts.

The Trends and Analyses section of the report summarizes USAID's MDB monitoring and coordination activities for the 1997 calendar year and analyzes various issues. This includes a review of the Interamerican Development Bank (IDB)-funded Southern Highway Project in Belize, Asian Development Bank and World Bank Projects in the Philippines, Health Sector Projects and Environmental Impacts, and Hydro Project Trends. These sections explore some of the current environmental and social issues ,ith MOB lending. For example, the Belize Southern Highway underscores potential problems with transport sector projects in general. Issues include secondary social impacts on indigenous peoples, environmental impacts on primary forests and biodiversity, irregular environmental assessment procedures and funding of mitigation measures. In another example, environmental impacts from medical waste produced by health projects is examined. There is growing concern around the world with medical waste management and its environmental impact in developing countries. MDBs and other donor agencies should develop standards and approved practices for treatment of medical wastes in their projects.

TRENDS AND ANALYSES

Background

USAID began monitoring proposed MDB projects in 1983. Over the course of the next several years it increased its review of environmental aspects of loans, which were often the most problematic. Beginning in 1986 Congress supported and expanded USAID's efforts in these activities with appropriations legislation and amendments to the International Financial Institutions Act. USAID's Bureau for Policy and Program Coordination investigates and ~eports on environmental concerns identified by USAID missions and interested NGOs. As part of this activity, USAID co-chairs the "Tuesday Group," a monthly meeting of international NGOs and u.s. government agencies, to discuss environmental and social issues at the MDBs.

This report lists proposed Multilateral Development Bank (MDB) projects -- those that have not yet been approved by their respective Executive Boards. Projects are considered for inclusion in the report if a USAID Mission identifies environmental, natural resource, public health, or indigenous peoples concerns. Project entries in the report also incorporate comments from other USG agencies and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), mostly through the Tuesday Group meeting mentioned below. MDB staff have also been very helpful in providing additional information and addressing issu~s raised on projects. ·

The list concentrates on the major MDBs, including the World Bank, the Asian Development Bank (ADB), the African Development Bank (AfDB), the Inter-american Development Band (IDB), and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRO). This report does not usually include projects in countries where USAID does not have a program (such as China, Vietnam, etc.). Also, the list is more thorough with respect to projects from the World Bank and IDB, for which early information is readily accessible. It is much less complete for the AfDB, ADB, and EBRO. Early project information from these MD-Bs is usually inadequate for a preliminary environmental review.

The principal mechanism for compiling this report is USAID's Early Project Notification (EPN) Syste~. In this system, USAID's Bureau for Policy and Program Coordinat1on notifies USAID field offices, regional bureau desk officers, and selected embassies of upcoming projects as each MOB makes the information publicly available. USAID field missions respond if there i& reason to anticipate environmental and other concerns, and the EPN System compiles the information. Projects are then investigated further, and placed on the list based on available information and the judgment of the U.S. Government. This report specifically notes USAIO field staff comments by referring to them with USAID/count.ry name. Brackets follow the comments with the method of communication (cable number, fax, oremail) and date (for example, [e-mail: USAID/Kenya 12/4/96].

June 1998: Page -9-

I~clus~on on th~ list indi~ates that the project could have s1gnif1cant env1r~n~ental impacts. Proper project planning and design should anticipate these impacts. Environmental assessment of the project may lead to its redesign, selection of alternative measures, .or t~e.int~oductio~ of specific mitigation measures. Many con~erns identified in the list are being addressed through the environmental assessment and project design process, and are noted. This report and more recent editions of it are available on USAID's homepage on the Internet (http://www.info.usaid.gov/environment/pubsl. A list of MDB proj~cts formerly monitored by USAID that were approved, dropped, or put into reserve status since the April 1997 report, appears after the Table of Contents.

USAID works with the Departments of Treasury and State, the Environmental Protection Agency, and the U.S. Executive Directors' offices at the MDBs to help resolve or clarify environmental issues on selected projects. USAID also works with MDB staff and management while loans are in the design stage to resolve issues.

MDBs have made significant progress toward integrating environmental concerns into their loan criteria and sector policies in recent years. The World Bank, followed by.!DB and ADB, have been leaders in improving the MDB environmental policies. Strengthened staff capacity for most MDBs, MDB policies in forestry, and World Bank policies in energy and information access have been especially important changes ...

Beginning in 1989, the World Bank and regional MDBs have put in place internationally recognized standards for comprehensive environmental assessment procedures. The procedures help ensure that proposed projects are screened for possible environmental impacts, and that full environmental assessments (EAs) are conducted when impacts are likely to be significant. The EA classification systems differ by bank. A sununary of each classification system follows this Introduction. In addition, all the MDBs have adopted procedures by which non-confidential project-related information is available electronically and through headquarters' and field offices (however, this information is not always provided in a timely manner). The U.S. Government was the leading advocate for this move, as it improves the process of exchange, consultation, and project performance.

The current edition of this repol1t reflects the improvements at the MDBs. Although the number of projects with potential concerns on the list is roughly the same as in previous reports, the nature of the problems has shifted since the late 1980s. The rep~r~ no longer reveals a need for environmental procedures and policies, but serves as an indicator for how well these are being carried out. While the MDBs have been doing a much better job of exami~ing ~nd ~ddre~si~g environmental impacts of their projects, USAID is s~ill iden~ifying some significant issues which indicates that there is a continued need for USAID monitoring in this area.

June 1998: Page -10-

The.fol~owing sections review USAID's multilateral development bank monito~ing and co~rdination activities for the 1997 calendar year. The~e incl~de review of the IDB-funded Southern Highway Project in Beli 7e, .Asian Development Bank and World Bank Projects in the Philippines as well USAID coordination efforts with ADB Health ~ecto~ Projects and Environmental Impacts, and Hydro Pr;jects Trends in ~his Report. These sections explore some of the current envi~onmental and social issues with MOB project planning and lending.

Belize: Southern Highway Project and the Inter-american Development B•nk

U~AI~ conducted an affirmative.investigation (or fact finding mission) on the IDB-funded Belize Southern Highway Project, a $16 million loan for upgrading 64 km of the highway's northern section. The December 1997 investigation reviewed several environmental and social concerns regarding the project, which !DB's board approved in early January 1998. Major concerns surrounded the project's potential and serious impacts on the region's biodiversity, protected areas, coastal and marine ecosystems, and social impacts on the Maya indigenous peoples and other ethnic groups.

To mitigate indirect impacts of the Southern Highway Project, IDB approved a separate $2.6 million loan for the Environmental and Social Technical Assistance Project (ESTAP) in March 1997. ES'IAP is developing a regional plan which is supposed to address comprehensive development issues, including the road and mitigation of its indirect impacts. ESTAP appeared to be on its way to developing the plan, and had active participation of local groups and the government of Belize (GOB). However, ESTAP had not finalized the regional plan prior to board approval of the Southern Highway project. Also, no funding was available or committed to the implementation of the plan. An approved environmental and social mitigation plan -- and financial commitments to implement it -- are essential to have in place prior to board approval of any infrastructure project. Both the ESTAP and Southern Highway project continue to be controversial.

The following USAID recommendations were based on field observations and interviews with government officials, various representatives of Maya organizations, and local repfesentatives of environmental groups. USAID recommended the following for USG support of the southern Highway Project:

1. IDB should put in place adequate funding for Protected Area Conservation Trust (PACT), specifically for a protected area mitigation program in southern Belize, before board approval of the Southern Highway Project. This was also recommended.by the project's EIA, and ignored by IDB and ~B. The terr7stria; protected areas system in southerz:i Belize has ve'f;Y 17ttle in the way of infrastructure and trained staff, making it particularly vulnerable to outside pressures. Forest Reserves


are especially susceptible since they have logging leases in them, and, Colombia River excepted, do not have management plans or sufficient monitoring.

2. GOB compliance with final recommendations regarding land tenure of all ethnic groups (especially Mayans) of the Regional Development Plan resulting from the ESTAP process should be made a condition of the project prior to letting out bids for construction. The land tenure situation of ethnic groups in the region, especially the Maya, is extremely vulnerable. Though ESTAP is designed to address the situation, government support of a resolution appears to be mixed.

3. ESTAP needs to place more emphasis on addressing marine and coastal issues. A more thorough review of impacts on coastal and marine ecosystems and possible mitigation measures should be completed as a condition of the project prior to letting out bids for construction. Belize's globally important barrier reef and other coastal and marine ecosystems will be affected by the change in water quality due to road-induced land use changes.

4. A formal environmental and social analysis should be performed on a recently approved petroleum exploration lease in southern Belize. The analysis should comply with the rules and regulations of the existing Environmental Protection Act of Belize. This petroleum exploration lease in southern Belize has not been addressed by the project's EIA (the lessee plans to drill test wells in the area of Crique Sarco). This EA should be completed as a condition of the loan prior to letting bids out for construction.

s. It is also strongly suggested that private sector interests be actively brought into to the ESTAP process through the Project Steering Committee or other appropriate means. There has been little involvement to date, and the private sector will play an important role in the region's development.

·6. IDB should clearly document the various donor interests in the region in the project documents, and ESTAP should provide a strong mechanism for donor coordination in the southern region. For the Southern Highway P~ject to become-an impetus for sustainable development in the region, donor coordination in the Regional Development Plan will be essential.

7. The Southern Highway Project should be brought back to the board for re-approval before letting out any bids for . construction. A report on progress of these recommendations, especially 1 through 4, and that of ESTAP should be made available to the board and to the public 90 days in advance of this board vote.


USAID'.s (and U~G'.s) ~oncerns regarding this particular project (funding for mitigation programs, secure land tenure for indigenous ~eoples, adequate environmental/social analysis, and participation issues) are genera~ly applicable to other transport sector projects funded by M~Bs .. Nine other road pr~jects are listed in this report and are indicative of the weakness in addressing these issues. MDB supported transport sector projects continue to be a major source of ~nvironmental and social concerns. When properly planned and implemented, roads can be key to the sustainable development of a region. When poorly done, they are the cause of deforestation biodiversity loss, land speculation, and marginalization of ethnic peoples. Prior resolution of the above issues is essential to the success of a transportation project and avoidance of serious and long-term environmental and social impacts on a region and its development.

The Philippine•: Aaian Development B•nk and World B•nk Project•

USAID conducted an affirmative investigation of several projects in the Philippines and met with Asian Development Bank (ADB) staff and the US Executive Director's (USED's) _office in February 1997. USAID met with the USED's office and discussed its functions and how USAID can best interact with it. USAID can effectively influence and coordinate with ADB's program plans, which have a significant effect on sustainable development in the region, in several key ways. These are through review of the Country Operational Strategy Statement, the annual Country Program Notes document, and the (project) Report and Recommendation to the President documents. Certain windows of opportunity must be kept in mind, however, to be effective.

USAID reviewed environmental aspects of several ADB projects in the Philippines, including the Small Towns Water Supply Sector, the Bukidnon Integrated Area Development, the Grains Production Improvement, and the Sixth Road Improvement. For instance, one of the main environmental issues associated with water in the Philippines is the lack of integration between water supply and wastewater disposal (sewage). Increased water supply means increased sewage, which is usually ignored in project design or project implementation. As a result Metro Manila has only 8 percent of its area served by sewage connections, and the rest of the Philippines has nearly none. Raw sewage and accompanying industrial effluent go directly into storm sewers (if th$y exist), affecting estuaries and coastal waters. Sewage effluent has a major adverse environmental impact on public health, fisheries,- coral reefs and other coastal ecosystems. USAID supports a leading Coastal Resource Management program in the Philippines, so the issue is of particular concern. ADB continues to fund water supply projects, usually without addressing the policy and project design issues needed to integrate water supply and wastewater treatment. A partial exception is the privatization aspects o; the propose~ Metr? Manila.water Supp;y Improvement Project, which USAID reviewed in the field. ~Bis currently developing a water resources and management policy paper.


~his is ~n opportunity to strengthen ADB's internal policies on the integration of water and sanitation projects. The current draft of the policy mentions this as an issue.

USAID ~l~o reviewed one site of the World Bank-funded Agrarian Reform Co~mun~ties_Dev7lopment (AR~D) Project while in the Philippines, which is being implemented in a number of areas adjacent to USAIDfunded Community~bas7d F~restry Manag7ment programs. The WB project has a number of institutional and environmental concerns including local EIA review procedures and the environmental effect~ of rural infrastructure on upland and lowland areas.

The environmental impacts from the ARCD project appeared to be manageable as long as the agrarian reform communities involved are located on private, unforested lands. However, it is not clear that this will always be the case. The ambiguous definition of "forest" in the Philippines may allow for some deforestation through the project if care is not taken. Also, indigenous peoples claims in agrarian reform community areas should be settled before the project selects a particular municipality or area. In the site visited (Nabuntaran) the local Department of Agriculture {DAR) officials appeared to be sensitive to environmental issues. The process for review of EIAs for any new rural infrastructure development should be closely monitored by the Central Project Office in DAR, the Department of Natural Resources, and the World Bank. To its credit, the World Bank project document describes mitigation me.asures for increased use of.agricultural chemicals including integrated pest management, soil conservation, agro-forestry, and crop rotation. The project should promote an integrated approach between lowland water users and upland residents to ensure watershed protection. Indirect impacts from new roads, such as induced settlement, land speculation, and impacts on upland areas (such as deforestation and increase in erosion), should be carefully considered.

Health sector Project• and Bnvirompental J)ppact1 Health sector projects can have a significant environmental impact from medical waste disposal, yet many MOB projects that produce medical waste have little in the way of environmental review {see the projects 1 through 10, beginning on page 24). Action needs to be taken now to address serious policy and procedural issues in donor agencies regarding medical waste,management. Environmental, public health and safety issues need to be taken into account simultaneously to assure proper management.

Medical waste generated from health projects in developing countries is often burnt on site to eliminate problems with potentially infectious material. However, incinerated medical waste can cause significant negative environmental impacts, mainly from extremely toxic dioxins (and furans) produced during combustion of chlorinated plastics (e.g., polyvinyl chloride or PVC). Dioxins are fo':1Ild in the fly ash, bottom ash, and air emissions from the burnt plastics.


Studies of significantly exposed human populations show that dioxins produce developmental effects, chloracne, and an increase in all cancers (especially lung cancer and soft tissue sarcomas), and suggest that they may also alter immune and endocrine function. In contrast, the h7alth effects of low-level environmental exposure have ~ot been established (Env. Health Perspectives 1998). High interspecies variability in dioxin toxicity means that dioxins are ~ore toxic to many animals than to humans. Dioxins are carcinogenic 1n some animals in minuscule quantities -- parts per trillion a level significantly below those reported for other chemicals (IARC 1979) .

Other impacts from medical waste incineration come from acid gases (from chl~rina~ed plastics) and toxic metals -- especially mercury (from various items such as thermometers, dyes, batteries, etc.). One study showed that medical waste incinerators (MWis) can produce dioxins up to two orders of magnitude higher per volume than municipal incinerators. MWis have been identified as one of the major contributors to dioxin pollution in the US (EPA 1994). This is for several reasons: Medical waste .. has a high percentage of plastics compared to municipal wastes (301 vs. 71). Hospital or clinic incinerators are small and inefficient compared to their municipal counterparts. Onsite incinerators tend to burn waste in batches, which maximizes the start up and cool down period during which dioxin formation is greatest. They are also usually run by untrained personnel and are not equipped with expensive air pollution control devices.

Monitoring of medical waste incinerators is also not typically done, and is very expensive to do. Most developing countries do not have laboratories capable of testing for dioxins, and all waste from hospitals is usually incinerated en masse to ensure that no infectious waste is left and because of lack of information on the dangers of burning certain wastes. Inappropriate reuse of syringes and other equipment, typically disposed of in developed countries, is a problem in many developing countries. So, there may not be as much plastic waste generated. Where incinerators are not in use, medical waste is disposed of in municipal dumps or simply thrown out with other trash (almost literally out the back door). In all cases this poses a public health and environmental problem.

r,. • Model medical waste management programs in India and elsewhere have shown that segregation and reduction practices can minimize much of the waste that needs to be safely disposed by non traditional means. These programs were successful in reducing the amount o; potentially infectious waste, reducing other medical wastes, educating staff, and developing local policies to deal with these issu~s. S~veral.non burn technologies for the safe disposal of ~ote~tia;ly infecti?us waste are available to hospitals and other institutions producing medical waste. These include:

1. Steam sterilizations {autoclaving);


2. Shredding followed by chemical disinfection; and 3. Shredding followed by microwaving.

These technologies are not without their own, albeit lesser, disadvantages and environmental risks.

Many of the health programs supported by multilateral development banks and other donor organizations ignore the significant environmental and public health impacts of medical waste inc~nerators. Mo~t of these insti~utions have no policy in place for environmental review of health proJects that produce medical waste, consequently these may be categorically excluded from environmental assessment procedures. This is apparent from the list of health projects recently identified by USAID with potential environmental problems with medical waste disposal. The 10 health related projects in this report variously require no, some, or complete environmental assessments.

The Multinationals Resource Center, an international NGO, recently conducted a survey of 32 recently approved or proposed World Bank (IDA, IBRD, and IFC) health projects that include medical waste incinerators. Of these, 3 were classified as environmental assessment category "A," 18 as "B," and 8 as "C," and 3 undetermined. The variable classification demonstrates a major inconsistency in dealing with environmental assessment of medical waste. Onsite incineration was proposed in about half the projects as the only method for disposal of medical wastes, without discussion of the risks involved or availability of alternatives. In the materials reviewed, many projects were vague on how medical waste was to be managed. Only a few projects discussed segregation and disposal at an offsite regional or municipal incinerator, and only two discussed the use of autoclaves for sterilization of waste. Ignorance of the problem is typically the reason for this oversight in medical waste management. Most health officials {as was the case in India) will welcome the opportunity to avoid public health problems in their projects!

Environmental assessment of proposed health projects that produce medical waste is essential to establish a plan to ensure public health and environmental safety. The risk of infection (such as from hepatitis or AIDS) from medical waste is real, so alternatives for medical waata management should ~e studied closely: segregation and reduction of wastes is key to proper medical waste management. The potentially infectious part of the waste is much less than 10 percent (some estimates are 1 - 3 percent). So, if waste management programs are based on good segregation, they will greatly reduce the waste that needs to be sterilized through incineration or other methods. Incineration should NOT be proposed as a primary method for final disposal of all wastes.

Incineration is only an appropriate option for disposal of a very small part of the medical waste stream: including pathogenic wastes


(e.g., body parts), certain expired pharmaceuticals, and some special~y waste (~uch as ch~motherapy waste, not usually a problem in develo~ing countries). Mcd7ca~ waste that is not potentially infectious should never b~ incinerated, especially plastics and metals (mercury). Since the amount of waste which is suitable for incineration is so small, it usually does not makes sense to have an onsite incinerator as other waste will end up in it too. A municipal or other centralized, high-tech incinerator -- or even a crematorium -- is most appropriate for pathogenic waste. However, transport of medical waste to a regional facility incurs a series of other problems; such as difficulty and expense of travel, potential infection through accidents with needles, blades, etc.

In conclusion, donor agencies should insist on an environmental assessment of their proposed health projects that produce medical wastes. Multilateral development banks and other donor agencies (USAID included) should develop standards and approved practices for treatment of medical wastes in projects that they are funding. These projects should have a plan for safe disposal of medical waste -including rigorous programs for toxicity reduction and waste segregation -- and a budget to implement it. Project plans should be checked against the established standards. Finally, donor agencies should establish research programs to study alternative means of safe medical waste disposal, appropriate for developing countries, that do not contaminate the environment or effect public health.

·Hidrov!a, Paraquav-Paran& Wat,rway Summary: Past editions of this report have highlighted environmental and social concerns with this huge waterway project. Various experts reviewed the recently completed environmental studies and roundly rejected them as being incomplete and inadequate. IDB, the major funder of the studies, received the studies that were completed, and has come to the conclusion that "if any further request for project funding were made, the potential borrower should carry out additional EIA studies and comply fully with the Bank's environmental requirements and procedures." The government of Br~zil ~as.also repeatedly stated that it would not approve the proJect in its national territory.

The proposed Hidrov!a Waterway p~oject would develop a complex navigation system along the Paraguay and Paran4 River~ throug~ Bolivia, Brazil, Paraguay, Argentina, and Uruguay. Hidrov!a is seen by many to be the physical manifestation of the Mercosur free trade agreement. The project would facilitate year-round navigation in the Paraguay-Paran4 Riv~r system -- ~ waterway for transportation of goods and raw materials. Potential modifications of the Parani and Paraguay Rivers, including extensive engineering works, would make 3,400 kilom7ters #

navigable for 3-meter-draft vessels from the Atlantic to Caceres, Brazil.


In 1991, the Intergovernmental Committee on Hidrovia (CIH) received $8.5 million in grants from IDB and the United Nations Deve~o~m7nt Prog~am (UNDP) to ~onduct engineering and economic feasibility studies and an environmental impact assessment. The studies began in April 1995 and were completed in December 1996. Financial support from IDB and UNDP (and other multilateral donors) for the implementation of the project itself has not been requested, and there is no commitment by IDB to finance the project.

If Hidrovia were built, the direct and indirect environmental and social impacts would be significant and extensive. Direct impacts would include: alteration of the hydrological regime, increased water pollution, loss of wetlands, loss of the regulatory effect of the Pantanal wetlands with resulting increased flooding; loss of local, regional and global biodiversity, particularly fish diversity; decline in biological productivity, especially fisheries; and changes in food-chain patterns. The river will also lose landscape complexity.

Indirect impacts would include increased pressure on natural resources (including increased agridultural production, mining, deforestation and timber extraction), deterioration of local lifestyles, loss of recreation and tourism potential, expansion of vector borne diseases, and secondary impacts through induced development. Induced development impacts would be aggravated given the improbability that research, planning, and control · mechanisms would be sufficient to effectively guide sound development. Moreover, the possibility exists that once Hidrov!a becomes operational, the project will escalate and further the need for additional large-scale engineering. These proposals may include damming for flood control and to facilitate navigation. Overall, the Pantanal clearly represents the area of highest concern, given its hydrological complexity and its outstanding biological richness.

In summary, concerns include the adequacy or thoroughness of 1) public consultation (including indigenous peoples), 2) environmental impact studies,· 3) cost-benefit and hydrological analyses, and 4) the analysis of alternatives.

In an encouraging development, t~e Brazil delegation to CIH has repeatedly announced (since February 1996) that it would not support large-scale engineering works or dredging in the C!ceresCorumba section of the Paraguay River.

USAID conducted an affirmative investigation of Hidrov!a activities in August 1995, and participated in an informal forum on Hidrovia in Asunci6n, Paraguay, sponsored by Wetlands for the Americas and the World Wildlife Fund (WWF). USAID has also attended two initial formal public meetings on Hidrovia, which were not participatory in nature, and were marked by a lack of

•


availability of copies of the studies, inappropriate meeting format, and absence of representatives of large sectors of the public (including indigeno~s peoples). USAID was struck by the fact that the barge companies, thP. major commercial users of the waterway, had not been consulted during the studies.

A third official public meeting was held in November 1996 with not~b~e impr~veme~ts in public participation due in part ~o IDB's additional financial support for public participation. However, NGOs were understandably put off by CIH's announcement that copies of the 15 volumes of the completed studies were available in its Buenos Aires office for a cost of $1,200!

CIH convened a specialist review panel in November 1996 to review hydrological aspects of the studies. The panel concluded that "the evidence presented to it failed to demonstrate that the impacts of the Hidrovia project are minimal, as the consultants who carried out the studies assure." The panel believed "additional technical, environmental, and economic studies must be carried out if the intention is to carry out the project without ecosystem damage." The IDB and UNDP refused to review the findings of the official studies because of the additional costs.

In July, 1997, a _report by an expert panel of well-known scientists from North and South America, organized by the CEBRAC Foundation (Brasilia) and the Environmental Defense Fund (Washington), concluded that "the engineering and environmental feasibility studies as well ae the environmental impact evaluation are defective and inadequate. They did not take into account aspects such as the cumulative effects of developed induced by the infrastructure works such as massive migration, more intensive resource exploitation and contamination."

The Environmental Impact Study Commission of the Dutch Cooperation Ministry completed their evaluation of the official studies ·for Hidrov!a in December, 1997. Their report says that "the project is justified only through an economic perspective, primarily by transport of minerals and soy products, which is not convincing. The consultants did not take into account the environmental considerations of \hese activities themselves."

Prompted by USG concerns over the project, Undersecretary of State for Global Affairs, Timothy Wirth, invited the President of Paraguay, Juan Carlos Wasmosy, to visit the Everglades and Mississippi areas in the beginning of 1997. It was hoped that government of Paraguayan (GOP) would learn from the experience of these water management programs. Subsequently, the GOP solicited an independent review of the project by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The·Corps re~orted to GOP and CI~, an~ its ~omments included: "The elimination of rock outcroppings in various points is, not only a significant cost, but also represents the


major irreversible impact of the project. If these rock out~ropp~n~s c~ntrol the flow of the river system in any way, their el~mination could have consequences which go beyond the channel itself. The complete stability of the system could be compromised. "

Unless CIH or individual governments propose to finance Hidrovia (or parts thereof) through the MDBs, USAID will not continue to list the project in this report. However, USAID will continue to monitor Hidrovia issues as they could have a profound effect on sustainable development in Bolivia, Brazil, and Paraguay, where USAID has programs.

Hydro Project Trend• in this Report

This report has been an important vehicle for highlighting concerns about large hydro projects. Complex environmental, social and resettlement issues often make large dams highly controversial -- and costly in the long run. Over the past 12 years, USAID has reported to Congress on a total of 25 dam projects (see table below). Of the .25, 10 are in Africa, 8 in LAC, 6 in ANE and l in ENI. In reviewing their status, 9 were approved, 6 were dropped, 4 are still pending (and are included in this edition), and the remaining 5 are unknown. This report has listed at least 2 dam projects in each edition, and the level peaked with a total of 12 projects in the June 1989 report. The effect of USAID's·reporting, together with pressure from other USG agencies and NGOs, has resulted in the MDBs dropping many of the large hydro projects from their loan portfolios. It has also improved or increased environmental and social studies and components, and overall financing of fewer large hydro projects.

The recent formation of the "World Commission on Dams" to conduct a two-year study of the pros and cons of hydro development is evidence that hydro issues will continue to be debated for a long time. The number of large hydro projects reported with environmental concerns by USAID has gone down in recent years, which is in part indicative of the growing reluctance of MDBs to fund these. However, as only 15 percent of the potential hydro sites around the world have been tapped, and with growing concern over global climate change, the pressure to develop hydro resources will probably be renew,a. This report will continue to highlight issues regarding particular projects.


... ··············································································-··································

TABLE: HYDRO PROJECTS REPORTED BY USAID'S "LIST OF UPCOMING MOB PROJECTS WITH ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS" 1986-1998

__ co __ U.._N .... TR .... Y __ PROJECT NAME

Africa Western Africa

Benin/Togo Mozambique Lesotho Lesotho Somalia Uganda Gambia/Senegal Burkina Faso Nigw

China Pakistan

Manantali Regional Hydropowar Dav. (Senegal, Mali, Mauritania)

Adjaralla Hydroalactric Massingir Dam Rehabilitation Highlands Watar Construction IA Highlands Water · Ph111 18 Baardhart DamlRISlttllllllllt Poww Ill (Dwtn Falls) Rivw Basin Dtw. (Balingho, Kakrati) Bagra Dam Kandldji Dam

Thl'II Gorga Dam Kalabagtt Dam

E11t1r1 E1rop1 1111 till 11w 1•111•1t 111111 Georgia Engwi Hyn

lati1 A•rfcl 11~ till C1rMIIII

BAH USAID Repon Reference Year· Project Status•

IDA/Ama 98, 97 · Approved by WI, pending AfDB

AfDB 98, 95, 93 • Dropped AfD8 90, 11189, 6189 IDA 90, 11189, 6189, 11 /88 · Approved IBRD 98 · Pandint IDA 90, 11189, 6/89, 11 /88, 4188, 12/87 IOA 90 · ApprDVld AfOB 11 /89, 8/89, 11 /88, 4188 · Dropped AfOB 11 /88 · ApproVld AfD8 98 · Raconsidnd; 4188, 12/87, 8/87, 12/86 · Droppad

IOA 98, 97, 98 · Piffling IOA/AOB 95, 93, 90, 11 /89, 8189, 11 /88 , Dropped IOAnBRD 93 · Approwd IBROnDA 90, 11/89, 8/89, 11188, 4188, 12187, 6187, 12/88 ·

Apprffld, tt. lo• stopped attar two years. IBRD 11/89, 6/89, 11/88, 4188, 12187, 8187, 12/88 · Dropped IBRO 8189, 4188, 12/87, 8187 · Oroppad

EBRO 98 · Plndint

Argentina/Paraguay Yacyreta Hych IBRD,IDB 93 • Apprawd Brazil Sapia Hychpowlr (Pinna Stltll IDB 11 /89 · Approwd Ecuador EIIC Pwr 1""1111111 (D• Plripa Oanl IDB 11189, 8189, 11188, 4188, 12187, 6/87, 12/88 Mexico Hyn IJMlpiml (A-- Ximlpan) IBRO 6189, 11 /88 • AppraVld Brazil Pawar Sectlr I (Bllllinll6 atlllr daml) IBRD 6189, 11 /88 · AppraVld Costa Rica Ellctrtc Dl1IIDlll8l H (llriaul damlt 108 ', 8189 · Approwd Guyana T ......... Hyn 108 8/87, 12/88 Colombia URRA n On IBRDffDB 8187, 12188

• This report WU originally issued samilnllllly -··· 12/88. din •• a 199().1992 hiatus, it WU tt. issuad on 12/93, 3195, 3/98, 4197 and 6198


REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT CATEGORIES AT MDBa

In ~ecent years most of the multilateral development banks (MDBs) have come a long way toward integrating environmental concerns into their loan criteria and sector policies. Most have developed environmental assessment categories based on the nature, 1mportance and sensitivity of environmental issues. Sin~e 1990, several banks have newly developed or changed their environmental assessment procedures and classification systems. They are not all the same, so a summary of their classification systems follows.

World Bank {International Bank for Reconstruction and Development IBRD Int rnat'on D V ' ' I A

International Finance Corporation (IFC) : Category A: Environmental Assessment is normally required as

Category B:

Category C: Category U:

Category T: Category FI:

the project may have adverse and significant environmental impacts. More limited environmental analysis is appropriate, as the project may have specific environmental impacts. Environmental analysis is normally unnecessary. Unclassified is being introduced to indicate structural adjustment loans, which do not fall within one of the above three categories for purposes of the [operational] directive· governing environmental assessment. To be determined. IFC only -- relates to financial intermediaries whose subprojects may result in environmental impacts, thus requiring an environmental review by the intermediary, according to IFC procedures.

African Development Barus (AfDB) category I: Projects that may have significant environmental

impacts, requiring detailed field review and an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) study.

category II: Projects with limited environmental impacts that can be mitigated by applying specific measures in the project design.

category III: Projects not anb1cipated to result in adverse environmental impacts, for which environmental analysis is normally unnecessary.

Asian Development Bank (,ADB) . category A: An EIA is undertaken for those proJects ;or

which significant adverse environmental impacts have been forecast in the initial environmental examination (IEB).

category B: An IEE confirms that there are no significant adverse environmental impacts requiring a


Category C:

detailed EIA. The IEE represents the complete environmental assessment report. Projects in this category may have adverse environmental im~act that.a~e o~ a lesser degree than Category A impact; m1t1gat1on measures for these impacts are more easily prescribed. An e~vironmental assessment is normally not required for Category C because the project is unlikely to have adverse environmental impact.

Inter-American Development Bank (IDB} IDB revised its EA categorization procedures in March 1997. As of yet, there is no information available on the new procedures. The former procedures are described below: Category 4: Operations that may have significant negative

impacts on the environment and will require a detailed environmental assessment.

Category 3: Operations that may have a moderate impact on the environment but for which there are recognized and well-defined solutions.

Category 2: Operations that have no direct or indirect environmental impact.

Category 1: Operations designed specifically to improve environmental quality.

The Asian Development Bank gives illustrative examples of each ·environmental category of project. These are generally representative of all three basic categories used by the MDBs. They are:

Category A (World Bank A, AfDB I, and IDB 4): - Forest industries (large scale)

Category

Irrigation (large scale with new source development) River basin development Large scale power plants Large scale industries surface and underground mining Large water impoundments New railways/mass transit/roads (near or through senaitive areas) Porta and harbors ,. water supply (with impoundments and/or river intakes)

B (World Bank B, AfOB II, and IDB 3): Agro-industries (small scale or no wet processing) Renewable energy Aquaculture and mariculture . . Rehabilitation, maintenance and upgrading proJects (small-scale) Industries (small-scale and without toxic/harmful pollution discharges) water supply without impoundments or new river intakes


Category C (World Bank C, AfDB III, and IDB 1 & 2): Forestry research and extension Protected area establishment and management Marine sciences education Geological or mineral surveys Education Family planning Capital market development study Securities Ltd.

STAGE OP WORLD BANlt PROCBSSING FOR A TYPICAL PROJBCT: 1. Project identification 2. Project preparation 3. Preparation mission 4. Pre-appraisal mission s. Pre-appraisal 6. Appraisal mission 7. Appraisal report preparation 8. Negotiations 9. Board date and approval

LIST OP UPCOMING MULTILATERAL DEVELOPMENT BANX (MDB) PROJECTS

WITH POSSIBLB ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS

HEALTH SECTOR PROJECTS

AFRICA REGION Health Sector

1.a Ethiopia: IDA - Health Sector

Projected IDA Funding: Projected Total Cost: Projected WB Board Date: Stage: World Bank EA Category: Project first entered: Entry last updated:

$ 100 million Unknown To be determined preparation B April 1998 June 1998

Description: This project will provide support to the Health Sector Development Program (HSDP). Project components to be determined. Several technical studies have been financed through a PHRD grant to assist the preparation of this operation. A second PHRD grant has been obtained to finance additional studies. · ·

Issues: Possible concerns would be biohazardous waste disposal of health clinics that the program may build, rehabilitate or upgrade. [USAID/Ethiopia email 4/30/98)

Status: Comments conveyed to Bank Task Manager for the project, who responded that he is asking his medical equipment specialist and health facilities architect to look into the question of medical waste disposal again when we return to Ethiopia in the week of July 20. I trust we'll come up with agreements with Government which will take care of reasonable concerns about this subject. [World Bank email 7/2/1998)

2.a Ghanaa IJ:>A - Health Sectqr Support ., Projected IDA Funding: Projected Total Cost: Projected WB Board Date: Stage:

World Bank EA Category: Project ID: Project first entered: Entry last updated:

$ 35 million $650 million Approval Approved October 21, 1997, signed April 3, 1998 C Cr. 2994-GH April 1998 May 1998


Description: The credit will support the government's mediumterm strategic framework for health development. The strategy will aim to increase access to health services, improve quality of services, empower households and communities, forge linkages with development partners, and improve the financing of health services.

Issues: This program has been placed in Environmental Assessment Category "C" by the World Bank, which means that an environmental assess~ent w~ll not be necessary as the program may not have any s1gn~f1cant impact on the environment. Medical waste could pose a maJor health hazard to people and therefore appropriate actions must be undertaken to improve disposal. The capacity of waste management authorities is severely limited. An analysis of the problem may be necessary. [USAID/Ghana email 3/30/98]

Status: Bank staff replied that ... the Ghana program is not a typical health project. IDA, along with other donors of a consortium, are supporting and monitoring progress made across the entire health sector; we are not financing individual activities or components. We, along with some technical experts, had already discussed with the Ghana authorities about the need to address medical waste (as well as the over re-use of some supplies), and continue to raise it as one of the many issues that the Ghana authorities need to deal with over the coming years. In response, the Ministry of Health officials have shown interest, and informally place the issue somewhere in the middle of their list of priority areas for action. We expect that as the large hospitals are gaining autonomy, and as a hospital services policy is being developed, there will be more opportunity to deal with hospital managers on this issue.

On the technical side, I don't think anyone has disagreed with the general principles of waste segregation and appropriate disposal based on an assessment of risks, benefits, and costs, as described in the abstract you forwarded [see introduction]. It is important to note that the hospital waste profile, disposal practices, options for waste disposal, and financial resources are very different in Ghana (and much of West Africa~ from hospitals in the Americas and Europe, and even those of India. In particular, the amount of waste plastics and metals is much lower, there is much lower avail~ility of municipal waste disposal options, and few hospitals have incinerator~. In .. dealing with each country, we need to respond to their specific situation.

World Bank staff would also encourage USAID to keep the issue on the table and to follow up in Ghana. The Ghana USAID staff are well respected by both the Minis~ry of.Health ~d ~ther.donors, and are working hard to keep their assistance in line with t~e agreed sector Program of Work. USAID would have a more prominent role at the health policy discussions in Ghana, and therefore

June 1998: ?age -26-

~ble to speak mor~ ~irectly to the waste management issue, if ~hey were to participate more fully in the sector program. This would mean that USAID would start using the Ghana implementation systems that we, and other donors, are committing to. [WB email 6/25/98]

3 • 11 Kenya: AfDB - Rural Health Service• Project II

Projected AfDB Funding: Projected Total Cost:

$ 6.9 million Unknown

Projected Date to AfDB Board: June 1998 final Stage:

AfDB EA Category: Project first entered: Entry last updated:

II April 1998 May 1998

Description: Rural Health Services Project II. The project objective is to improve health status in selected districts through provision of primary health care possibilities and community participation. (Ministry of Health; Nairobi. )

Issues: The environmental impact on this activity will depend on the activities being carried out. An Initial Environmental Examination is needed to determine what activities will need to ._have mitigation measure• put in place and monitored. !USAID/Kenya email 4/1/98)

Status: The above comment• were forwarded to AfDB staff, which responded that the project comprises mainly rehabilitation of Health Centers and Community Based Health Care activities, and was reviewed and classified as Category II. These health centers are not expected to produce large quantities ot hazardous chemical wastes. However, adequate mitigative measures will be introduced in all cases through safe disposal procedures. [AfDB email 5/8/98)

4. 11 Madagaacar1 IDA - Health I%

Projected IDA Funding: Projected Total Coat: WB Board Date: Stage:

World Bank EA Category: Project IO: Project first entered: Entry last updated:

Description: The project will

,, $ 25 million $ 27 million 1999 Preappraisal mission is scheduled for January 1999 C MGPB51741 April 1998 May 1998


(a) support the process of decentralization of the health delivery system currently under way;

(b) reinforce the health care services at the district level; and

(c) strengthen public health programs and promote community-managed cost recovery.

Issues: This project is very important to the full achievement of USAID/Madagascar's Strategic Objective No. 2 "Smaller ~ealthier_Fam~lies" and USAID/Madagascar is sub~tantively' involved in discussions with the World Bank and other partners concerning the project's development. However, Mission recommends a Category B rating although the EA category for this project is yet to be determined.

Two issues should be included in the EA scope: (l) Provisions must be made for negative environmental impacts during rehabilitation or construction of health centers or hospitals and mitigation measures should be specified in the design to address potential construction impacts; (2) It is not clear from the Project Information Document (PIO) whether this project will supply hospital or clinic products which may result in biohazard wastes. If so, provisions must be made to address waste issues.

In the Environmental Aspects section of the PIO, the use of DDT is mentioned. "Spraying of DDT will not have a direct negative impact on the environment as it will be residual indoor spraying and limited to small geographical areas on the fringes of the highlands."

In an USAID 1995 Report on Pesticide Use and Pest Management in Madagascar, the use of DDT is noted. "Citizens on the high plateau are required to allow its application to the inside of their homes for malaria control every year. The chronic human health effects of this chemical can include liver damage, degeneration of the central n~rvous system, dermatitis, weakness and convulsions. Tremors are one of the most noticeable effects of long-term exposure to DDT, even at fairly low concentrations (Rengam and Snyder, 1991). In spite of these potential problems, no one haa monitored or kept sysqematic records of this or any other pest-management campaign, even for applicator positioning. Institutions that could contribute to a program do not coordinate their activities at present .... As a result, little information is available about pesticide impact on human health and the environment in Madagascar."

This project, if it proposes DDT use, should assure user safety, address storage and handling issues and most importantly - m~ke an effort at addressing the issue of long term use or eve~ single exposures through appropriate studies. Finally how localized

.


would DDT spraying be? It ~snot clear if the spraying is only an interior household campaign or if it implies the immediat surrounds as well. [USAID/Madagascar email: 4/07/98] e

Status: World ~ank ~taff.responded that the content of this forthcoming proJect 1s being reconsidered by the Ministry of Health. Provided that the new project includes health infrastructure works and indoor DDT spraying, we will carefully address the question of hospital waste and DDT chronic health effects, and, of course, the project's environmental category. [World Bank email: 5/08/98]

s.m Malis IDA - Health Sector Development

Projected IDA Funding: Projected Total Cost: WB Board Date: Stage:


$ SO million $ 120 million 1999 Appraisal mission is scheduled for late June 1998 C MLPA40652 April 1998 May 1998

Description: The project will assist the government in (a) accelerating fertility decline; (b) expanding access to basic health care; (c) improving the efficiency and effectiveness of the health care system; and (d) improving internal resource mobilization.

Issues: The Project Information Document states that "The handling and management of medical waste and hazardous materials would be assessed during project preparation, and specific recommendations for waste disposal will be drawn up for implementation. All project-financed construction would include drainage·~ solid waste dispoaal and sanitary facilities. World Bank staff stated: ~ ... at this juncture [6/18/98) in the process there is no specific proposals for handling medical waste and hazardoua materials. Rather, the Government and the donors will disc:uaa reconmendationa tha~ at some future point would be converted into specific proposals for handling such waste."

Status: The Multinationals Resource Center has identified this project as one with potential environmental problems with medical waste management.

ASIA/NBAR BAST RSQlOR Health Sector

s.• Sri Lanka, IWC - Lanka Boapital Corporation/Apollo Lanka Hoapital

Projected IFC Funding: Projected Total Cost: Tentative WB Board Date: Stage:


June 1998: Page -2 9-

$ 6 million $ 32 million March 1998 Appraisal mission 1s scheduled for January 1998 B 007374 June 1998 June 1998

Description: The project is to establish a 350-bed modern private hospital in Colombo, which will serve both as a general hospital as well as offering tertiary acute-care services in disciplines such as cardiology, cardiothoracic surgery, neurology and neurosurgery, renal care, nephrology and urology, obstetrics and gynecology, general and minimal invasive surgery and internal medicine. The project will address strong local demand for quality medical care in Colombo and will be a major referral center for the entire community. The project is among the first instances of private direct foreign investment in Sri Lanka's hospital sector.

Issues: "Pathogenic and infectious solid waste will be separately collected and disposed in an on-site, electricallyheated medical incinerator." The Multinationals Resource Center has identified this project as one with potential environmental regarding medical ·waste management and incineration.

Status: The Multinationals Resource Center is following up on this particular project.

7. 11 Vietnama Il'C - Namoi International Hospital

Projected IFC Funding: Projected Total Cost: Tentative WB Board Date: Stage: World Bank EA Category: Project ID: Project first entered: Entry last updated:

$ 6.2 million $ 20 million April 1998 Project summary in preparation B 008137 June 1998

,, June 1998

Description: The Project will ref~r~ish, upgrade, c~nst~ct, and operate an international standard Joint-venture ho~pital in . Hanoi for both local and foreign patients, to be implemented in two s~parate phases. The first phase will inv~lve a 50-~ed. hospital operation by refurbishing and upgrading the.existing building of Hoan Kiem Hospital. The ~econd phase w~ich may be implemented depending on certain conditions, would involve construction of a new building and an addition of 200 more beds along with an expanded scope of technology, equipment and general


hospital services.

Issues: "Solid wastes will be incinerated and be fi.illy treated on site before release. 11 The Resource Center has identified this project as environmental problems regarding medical waste local incineration.

liquid wastes will Multinationals one with potential management and


EUROPB AND THB NBW INDBPBNDJIH'l' STATBS RBGION Health Sector

8 • ll Turkey 1 IPC - Bayindir Medical Center•

Projected IFC Funding: Projected Total Cost: Tentative WB Board Date: Stage:


$ 36 million $ 63 million April 1998 Decision memorandum under consideration B 008491 June 1998 June 1998

Description: Bayek, the health care subsidiary of Bayindir Holdings AS, was established in 1987. The Company's Ankara hospital, which was opened in 1992, has grown to become a leading private hospital in Turkey. IFC will provide th~ project with long-term financing which is difficult to obtain in Turkey on reasonable terms. IFC will also introduce the Company to the international loan syndication market. The project will: a) bring high quality medical technology to raise the level of medical care in Turkey, b) create approximately 600 new jobs, c) provide training to bring the staff's skills to international standards, d) make available high quality health care to lower income groups via payments from the government social security system. ·

Issues: "Environmental, occupatiP.nal health and safety issues associated with this project include: water supply, sewage disposal, air emissions from boilers, incinerators ... " "An incinerator with a burning unit temperature of 800oC will be used for infectious waste." The Multinationals Resource Center has identified this project as one with potential environmental problems regarding medical waste management and local incineration.



LATIN AMERICAN AND THE CARIBBEAN Health Sector

9. a Hai ti: IDB - Organization and Rationalization of the Health Sector

Projected IDB Funding: Projected Total Cost: IDB Board Date: Stage: IDB EA Category:

Project ID: Project first entered: Entry last updated:

$ SO million pending definition. 1999 In analysis stage. An Environmental Impact A••••ament will not be required HA0045 April 1998 April 1998

Description: The program would encompass three main areas: {a) support for implementation of health policy, and financing and organization of health services, including diversifying and stabilizing sources of financing for the sector, improving the allocable efficiency of the public health budget, establishing a constructive regulatory environment, assisting with the development of aid coordination mechanisms, and supporting the creation and use of a health information system; {b) strengthening departmental and local health authorities, including strengthening or supporting the creation of health

. ·surveillance, coordination and supervision mechanisms at the departmental and lower levels, as well as referral systems within selected departments in both the public and private sectors; and (c) increasing access to quality health services, including implementing a strategy to extend coverage and facilitate access by low-income and vulnerable populations, supporting infrastructure improvements and other essential health sector inputs linked to enhancements in resource management, improvement of quality and expansion of coverage, and supporting the delivery of basic, cost-effective health services in the public and private sectors that address the problems with the most significant impact on the public's health.

Issues: The description of this Health project simply stated that no environmental assessment was needed. This project will likely generate medical waste (w~th potential public health and environmental impacts) because it appears direct service delivery occurs.

Status: These comments have been forwarded to IDB staff.

NORTH Al'RICA AN]) THB MIDDL• BAST Health Sector

10.m Algeria, IBRB - Algier• Orban Renewal


Projected IBRD Funding: Projected Total Cost: WB Board Date: Stage: World Bank EA Category: Project ID: Project first entered: Entry last updated:

$ 70 million $132 million July 1999 Project preparation underway A DZPE4957 June 1998 June 1998

Description: The program seeks to improve and expand public services such as urban water supply, sewerage and refuse collection and disposal, all in the city of Algiers. It includes the rehabilitation of urban development, sewerage facilities and an existing sanitary landfill. It also provides for the supply of trucks, hospital incinerators and trash containers.

Issues: Individual incinerators, which are notoriously inefficient (see Introduction), are being proposed to manage medical waste. The Multinationals Resource Center has identified this project as one with potential problems with the release of dioxins and furans and other emissions.

Status: MRC is following up on this project.


PROJECTS LOCATED IN AFRICA

11. Western Africa: IDA/AfDB - Regional Hydropower Development (Mali, Mauritania, and Senegal)

Projected AfDB: IDA Funding: Projected Total Cost: Tentative AfDB Board Date WB Board Date: Stage:

AfDB Environmental Category: World Bank EA Category: Project ID: Project first entered: Entry last updated:

$ 20 million $ 38 million $444 million Indefinite June 1997 ~fDB, negotiations completed in November 1997, but board consideration is pending a policy determination on multinational projects. World Bank approved its loan in June 1997. I A SNPA46648 March 1997 May 1998

Description: The ·main objectives of this proposed project are to: (a) install power generation capacity to generate economic and financial benefits from the Manantali dam which has already been built, and encourage cooperation and energy exchanges between the three member countries; (b) help minimize the long-term cost of electricity supply to the three countries; (c) provide hydropower to help meet increased demand for electricity and reduce fuel costs (in Dakar, Bamako, and Nouakchott); (d) strengthen the Organization of the Development of the Senegal River (OMVS) and the power sector entities in the three countries and establish an effective organization to manage and operate ~he Manantal·~ dam and project facilities with satisfactory procedures, in particular regarding safety, health and environment protection; and {e) contribute to develop traditional agriculture downstream through the rational management of the Manantali reservoir. ,, The proposed project would include the following components:

(a) construction of 200 MW hydroelectric plant (5 units of 40 MW each and civil works);

(b) construction of 225 'r:Y high voltage transmission lines to Bamako (306 km) and to Decker (821 kma) along the Senegal River, and a 132 'r:Y transmission line to Knocked (219 kms);

(c) construction of 11 substations and a dispatching center; (d) supervision of project construction; (e) technical assistance and training (support to OMVS and The

June 1998: ?age -34-

Society de Gestio de l'Energie de Manantali (SOGEM), including regulatory, reservoir management, health and environment aspects and for the recruitment of a private operator for the project).

Issues: The Bank has done a commendable job in recognizing d?wnstream a~d wa~er m~nagem7nt issues for the lower Senegal River 1n co~Jun~tion with this project. It has the potential to promote a w1n-w1n development program -- by achieving sound development goals with economic, environmental and social sustainability. However, it is not clear from the EA and other project documents that the project design takes full advantage of this opportunity.

Background: Since its completion in the late 1980's, the Manantali Dam on the Bafing River in Mali, which controls about 45% of the total Senegal River flow, has aggravated environmental and socioeconomic conditions downstream, adversely affecting the well-being of hundreds of thousands of riparian households. The pre-dam flood regime supported a dense human and livestock population in a low rainfall area.·. The flood made possible a sustainable seasonal succession of fishing, herding, floodrecession farming, reforestation, and aquifer recharge.

The cessation of the natural flood, and the inconsistent and flawed attempts to· provide simulated floods, have resulted in incidents of social conflict in the valley; herders and fishers· now must compete for land and water reaourcea they previously were able to use mutually. Poverty and out migration have increased, as productive yields have declined. Labor burdens for women, children and the elderly have increased without corresponding increases in income.

USAID realizes that this project is trying to rectify some of the downstream impacts that the dam haa had, while trying to realize its economic potential through hydropower development. However, the EA Surrunary (January 1997) does not analyze the downstream environmental and social impacts that the Manantali has had, or refer to a host of studies on the subject. Though the EA proposes a Water Management Optimization Program to address downstream- issues, it is vague op what OMVS will be held accountable to. USAID supported'the Institute for Development Anthropology's studies of resettlement upstream from the.dam and environmental and socioeconomic impacts of the changed river regime downstream. These studies conclude that a properly managed release of reservoir waters replicating.the natural.flood would substantially restore the pre-dam production system without adversely affecting hydropower potential.

The issue of dam management has been much debated and politicized. Based on the above researc~, the gove~ent of Senegal is willing to follow recommendations regarding a


controlled release program. Mali has been indifferent on the subject, as long as power is generated, since most of the floodplain is ~ownstream from the country. Mauritania is apparently resistant to the idea since it is seeking a shift from traditional production to large-scale irrigation.

OMV~, the three-~ountry river basin authority, has customarily resisted suggestions about ways for managing the river system other tha~ for power generation, navigation, and irrigation. However, in 1995, senior OMVS staff visited the Institute's headquarters in New York, indicating a receptivity to considering alternative management scenarios.

USAID understands that ORSTOM, a French agency, has been selected to carry out an optimization study. ORSTOM historically has shown little enthusiasm for maintaining the traditional production system, and its river-flow model (by Mr. Lamargat) for dam releases should be replaced by one based on rainfall and runoff data from the Fouta Djallon, where at least five collection stations are tied into the meteorological satellite network. The latter model would substantially enhance real time forecasting, and should be carefully considered. A comparative analysis of the two models would be in order. The World Bank reported that ORSTOM is using real time (tele-detection) modeling based on rainfall and run-off data upstream, and also on measured flows of downstream river tributaries (for better timing of th~ artificial flood).

Given the current situation, USAID suggests the following:

( 1)

( 2)

( 3)

( 4)

The Bank should try to leverage as much as possible a policy change at OMVS, to.include as one of its fundamental objectives the management of the Senegal River basin for recessional agriculture and other flood-based activities in an integrated way with electricity production.

Loan disbursements should be conditioned on the successful implementation of this integrated approach. Especially, the private operator of the project should have incentives and disincentives in its contract that would ensure an optimal artificial flood while producing a maximum of electricity. The operator should not rec~ve bonuses based on electricity production alone.

Downstream villages should be given representation on the board of OMVS, or in some other significant way have an ongoing voice in reservoir management.

The project's environmental assessment should be expanded to include (or refer to) an analysis of downstream environmental and social impacts.


Statu~: Th~ World Bank's financing of the project was approved and signed in_J~ne ~997. The African Development Bank's financing decision is pending passage of its policy on multinational projects.

USAID and Bank staff met regarding the above issues. Bank followed up with.the following comments: Although the EA summary of January 1997 is not clear enough on how the project would contribute to achieving the sound, use-balanced management of water resources from the Manantali reservoir, this issue is much bet~er ~ddressed in the En~ironment Impact Mitigation and ~onitoring Plan (PASIE) whi7h has just been finalized by OMVS and its consultant, as well as in the corresponding sections of the SAR on environment, social and health aspects, which should be sent to the Board during the first week of June 1997. These aspects will be discussed during credit negotiations; specifically, agreements must be reached on: (i} detailed actions and budget to carry out the environment impact mitigation and monitoring program (PASIE), in particular for involuntary resettlement and land acquisition; (ii) final terms of reference for preparing the Manantali reservoir management agreement.

On background, the three countries will, through OMVS, undertake an agreement (Charter) for the sound management of the Manantali reservoir. OMVS will be held accountable for monitoring the

_proper application of the agreement, while the private operator of the hydropower plant will be charged of the actual implementation of the reservoir management program. Adequate dispositions will be defined in detail during the studies financed by IDA, CIDA and France under the project. The study, contracted by the Bank to a hydrology specialist (Mr. Lamagat) during project preparation, confirms the results of detailed studies by Dr. Horowitz regarding the need/feasibility of maintaining artificial flooding without adversely affecting hydropower potential.

Also on background: after verification with Bank staff working in the agriculture sector in this country, Mauritania is not "resistant to the idea (of a controlled release program) since it is seeking a shift from. traditional production to large-scale irrigation•. Indeed, in its REPORT, Mauritania clearly defines the important role that artificiil flooding will continue to play in the valley, in complement to the irrigation program.

on USAID suggestions: what is suggested in this section is .. precisely what will be done through the project, OMVS subscribing to a Charter for sound management of the Manantali reservoir; dated covenant in Credit Agreements regarding this Charter; adequate incentives/disincentives in the contract.of t~e.private operator to ensure application of the Charter's d1spos1t1ons for artificial flooding. It is not planned, however, to expand the EA on downstream environmental and social impacts, because both


the EA and the PASIE refer to detailed studies carried out on these aspects and endorse in large part their conclusions.

USAID remains concerned about how sound management of the Manantali reservoir will be achieved as the operating principles or obJectives of the agreement (Charter) have yet to be defined. USAID review of the Lamagat study concluded that it indicates hydropower would compete with flooding. The EA does not refer to nor endorse numerous studies on downstream and public health impacts of the dam. USAID has recently (May 1998) begun work on disseminating information on the project to downstream water users and other stakeholders. USAID will continue to dialogue with the Bank on these issues.


12. Chad-Cameroon: IDA/IFC - Petroleum Development and Pipeline

Projected IDA Funding: Projected IFC Funding: Projected Total Cost: Private sector sponsors:

Tentative WB Board Date: Stage:

world Bank EA Category: IDA Project ID: IFC Project ID: Project first entered: Entry last updated:

$ 115 million $ 250 million $ 3.5 billion Exxon International, Royal Dutch Shell, and Elf Aquitaine. Exxon's local affiliate will be the operator of the project. October 1997 IDA: Project preparation underway. Draft EA is being reviewed by the borrowing governments. IFC: Appraisal underway; financing negotiations underway. A TDPE44305 4338 March 1997 May 1998

Description: The project involves the development of Chad's oil fields and the construction of a petroleum export pipeline from the south of Chad to the Atlantic coast of Cameroon and related marine installations. The objectives of the project are:

(a) to promote the economic growth of Chad and Cameroon through the private sector-led development of Chad's substantial petroleum reserves and their export through Cameroon; and

(b) to strengthen Chad's management of petroleum revenues through a technical assistance component.

The project would involve:

(a)

(b)

(c)

the development of Chad's Doba oil fields;

the construction of a JO-inch, 1,100-km buried from Chad's Doba fields to Cameroon's Atlantic related pumping stations, ancillary facilities infrastructure; and

~

pipeline coast, and and

the installation of marine export terminal facilities in Cameroon (a moored floating storage and offloading vessel), and associated marine pipelines and related facilities.

Issues: If approved, this would be one ?f the larges~ . construction projects in sub-Saharan Africa. The pro~ect is mentioned in the World Bank's country program strategies for Chad and Cameroon.

The African Forest Action Network (AFAN), representing some 70


A~rican NGOs engaged.in the.forest sector in anglophone and f.ancophone Africa, is a maJor USAID partner in Cameroon for carrying out the Central African Regional Program for the Environment (CARPE). USAID met with the Network to review its concerns regarding the project. AFAN was concerned with the three alternative pipeline routes and how they would affect sensitive ecosystems. AFAN was also concerned about public consultation in conjunction with the EIA; it sees public meetings as a useful forum for discussing the project.

The Cameroon Environment and Development NGO (CED) reported that the EA i~ n?t readily ~vaila~le within Cameroon, that it can only be read inside a certain office and photocopies are not able to be made, and (2) clearing for construction preparation has already begun in the area south of Kribi, and (3) the mitigation plan in Cameroon has not yet been made available for review.

CARPE is currently supporting the assessment of biodiversity priorities in Cameroon; additional studies are planned for the identification of priority areas for biodiversity conservation in the Congo Basin as a whole. Initia~ results indicate that forest-savannah ecotones (areas bridging forest and savannah ecosystems) are of particular interest because they contain a high degree of endemic species and important ongoing evolutionary processes. USAID suggests that these areas be taken into account during the EA process. . .

Status: World Bank staff gave a briefing to USG representatives (including USAID) on this project in April 1997. On consultation, Bank staff reported that nine NGOs (both international and local, though these did not include AFAN), 68 villages, local governments and several towns had been consulted regarding the pipeline project. The Bank has released the EA and mitigation plan for Chad, and the EA for Cameroon. However, the mitigation plan for Cameroon is still pending. The Bank expects that the EA will be made public in both English and French at least six months in advance of the board presentation. The EA is divided into two parts, the Chad EA on oil field and pipeline development, and the Cameroon EA on pipeline and export facilities (no refineries are associated with the project). With the Bank's encouragement, the governments have established expert panels to assist them in analyziqg the draft EA and to evaluate and comment on the mitigation plan.

The project sponsor plans to consult with AFAN as part of its . ongoing public consultation process. In particular, an exten~1ve in-country survey of the pipeline route will be conducted du~1ng the second half of 1997. This survey will include consultations with NGOs and villages along the route.

The sponsors have indicated that the Bank's participation is essential for the project to go forward. The sponsors and Bank


have taken a proactive approach on environmental and social aspects of the project. The governments and the Bank are discussing a transparent oil revenue budgeting mechanism in association with the project. Revenues would be channeled through the government of Cameroon or Chad's national budgets which would help ensure accountability.

13.u Ghana:


AfDB -Small Scale Rubber Plantations Development

Projected AfDB Funding: Projected Total Cost: Projected Date to AfDB Board: Stage: AfDB EA Category: Project first entered: Entry last updated:

$ 7.4 million Unknown 1998 Final none given April 1998 April 1998

Description: The main objective is to expand rubber production. This will be achieved through the supply of seedlings and inputs to small holder farmers.

Issues: USAID/Ghana reported that the project may have significant adverse environmental impacts such as soil degradation, deforestation, soil and water pollution from increased use of agrochemicals. A detailed review and an environmental impact assessment may be necessary.

USAID/Ghana reported the same issues with AfDB's Small-Scale Irrigation Development Project and the Food Crop Development Project, which were approved in December 1997. It is difficult to comment on these projects because of the lack of information available to the public and other donors. Project descriptions, other than what is found above, environmental reviews or

.:summaries, and other analyses typically made public by other multilateral development banks are not usually not made available by the African Development Bank.

Status: Comments were conveyed to AfDB staff through the USED's office.

,,


14. Guinea-Bissau: AfDB - Etudes Routes Boke-Qubeo

Projected AfDB Funding: Projected Total Cost: Projected Date to AfDB Board: Stage: AfDB EA Category: Project first entered: Entry last updated:

Unknown $ 40 million 1997 Unknown none given December 1996 February 1997

Description: The study involves the preparation of technical aspects of bidding and contract documents for the road.

Issues: USAID staff suggest that the planned study would be an Environmental Category III project, but that the construction of the proposed road (southern Guinea-Bissau to northwest GuineaConakry) would pose environmental risk. This new road may threaten nearby coastal forests and biodiversity, including habitats of the forest elephant, chimpanzees and numerous other important species. [e-mail: USAID/Bissau l6Dec96]

Status: According to the AfDB, the Islamic Development Bank prepared the feasibility study for this project. The Task manager agrees that the project should be a Category I project due to the coastal zone and biodiversity importance; a full Environmental Impact Assessment will be done. AFDP will· not fund this alone, and is seeking other financiers. [fax: AfDB/USED 07Feb97]


15.~ Lesotho•, IBRD L h - esot o Highlands Water Project - Phase lB

Projected IBRD Funding: ProJected Total Cost: Projected Date to WB Board: Stage: World Bank EA Category: Project ID: Project first entered: Entry last updated:

$ 45 million $ 1.132 billion Approval Approved June 4, 1998 B LSPE1409 (Ln. 4339-LSO) May 1998 June 1998

Description: This the second phase of a project to transfer water from Lesotho to the Guateng province of South Africa. This phase will add 12 m3/second under phase A. The project includes construction of a 150-meter-high dam, a 19-meter-high weir and two tunnels (one 31.5 km and one 6.4 km) and complementary environmental and social activities. Cofinancing, mainly export credits and commercial loans, is required. AfDB and European Investment Bank financing is also being discussed.

Issues: Although USAID's Regional Center for Southern Africa (based in Botswana) has not had not had the time to fully evaluate the Lesotho Highlands Water Project, a representative has visited the site, read through project materials, and has been following Phase lA from afar. USAID/RCSA has the _(ollowing concerns: · ·

l) Phase IA still has several unresolved social problems including its ability to restore affected people's income. Also, questions remain about how Highlands conununities will benefit from the Development Fund and about how effective the Fund will be in reducing poverty in Lesotho. These problem should be more fully resolved before the next phase proceeds.

2) Southern Africa is a largely an arid and semi-arid region. The SADC region is beginning to take steps toward acknowledgin~ this fact and living within their water means through increased attention to water conservation and demand management. Because Phase IB of the Lesotho Highlands Project is moving ahead without full knowledge of its implications and without full consideration for the most efficient use of these waters, it appears that this project could. set a precedent fol supply-side water reso~rce management in southern Africa. It is understood that this project is moving ahead at a premature rate. It seema reaso~able to delay this project at least until all issues and alternatives have been fully explored.

3) Lastly, the downstream environmental impacts on the Orange River have not been adequately addressed.

Status: These comments were conveyed to the U.S. Executive Directors Office.

June 1998: ?age -44-

16. Madagascar: IDA - Transport Sector Project

Projected IDA Funding: Projected Total Cost: Tentative WB Board Date: Stage: World Bank EA Category: Project ID: Project first entered: Entry last updated:

$ so.a million Unknown Late FY 99 Project preparation is underway B MGPA01534. January 1997 May 1997

Description: The project will:

(a) support the restructuring of public enterprises in charge of road and rail transport and coastal shipping;

(b) finance limited improvements to road and transport infrastructure; and

(c) support privatization of trans~ort activities.

Issues: Madagascar's new law for investment, MACAW, requires that 0.5 percent of the investment (be it private or public) will be set aside for environmental evaluation. This could be a good test case for Madagascar to try the effectiveness of the law and iocal ability to enforce it. [e-mail: USAID/Madagascar 18Dec96]

This would be excellent opportunity to test the capacity of Madagascar's environmental impact legislation, MECIB (Mise en compatibilite des Investisse.ments avec l'Environnement) Law No. 95-377. Though thresholds have not been clearly established, private and public investment in infrastructure is point 20 of Annex 1 of the law, which specifies the list of investments requiring environmental impact assessment in Madagascar.

In the project's Environmental Data Sheet, under the section on major environmental iseuea-, only two areas of concerns are identified. USAID/Madagaacar would also include (1) road site/railroad site impacts (such as worker camps, use of local natural resource material, etc) and possible mitigation measures; (2) track replacement and its en~~ronmental consequences; and (3) water-routing changes or impacts and presence. of wetlands in construction of selected waterways infrastructure. [USAID/Madagascar email, 4/07/98)

Status: World bank staff reported that the timing of the project's preparation currently calls for preappraisal in September/October 1998, appraisal in January 1999, negotiations in March, and board presentation during the fourth quarter of FY 1999. The World Bank will be conducting a mission in June/July 1998 when it will take up environmental issues.


Regarding railways, there have been many delays in the concession of the North TCE/MLA line, and inclusion of the railway component is tentative at this point. The Bank will follow up on the issues mentioned by USAID regarding road and railroad site impacts and track replacement consequences.

Regarding waterways, the studies are almost completed. The project should only include, on a pilot basis, small investments aimed at facilitating river navigation, i.e. loading docks. The Bank takes note of the issue raised with regard to water-routing changes or impacts and presence of wetlands. [WB email, 5/08/98]

' ,


1 7 • 11 Niger: AfDB - Kandaji Dam Construction study

Projected AfDF Funding: Projected Total Cost: Projected Date to AfDB Board: Stage: AfDB EA Category: Project first entered: Entry last updated:

$ 0.8 million Unknown 1998 final none given April 1998 April 1998

Description: The project's objective is the construction of a Dam with multiple goals.

Issues: USAID/Niger commented that this is the type of project for which complete set of environmental concerns studies should be conducted. This project was first identified in the 1970s and at this time the environment impact aspects were not clearly envisaged in Niger. No environment impact assessment was conducted. However, the project is being reviewed and the environment aspects are included in the new project paper and a sow is being developed to conduct the studies. It is anticipated that the studies will start by June, 1998. [USAID/Niger Email 3/30/98]

Status: These comments were forwarded to AfDB staff through the .. USED' s office.

, ,

18.Q Niger:


AfDB - Natural Resource Conservation Project

Projected AfDF Funding: Projected Total Cost:

· Projected Date to AfDB Board: Stage: AfDB EA Category: Project first entered: Entry last updated:

$ 5.2 million Unknown June 1998 final III April 1998 April 1998

Description: The project seeks the conversion/planning of forests with popular participation and the development of standard follow-up measures.

Issues: USAID/Niger commented that no environmental impact assessment study is anticipated. The GON technical staff believes that this project, identified to have positive impact to the environment, may fall into ADB category III as activities are not anticipated to result in adverse environment impacts. Environment analysis is normally unnecessary. However, USAID/Niger does not entirely agree on this assumption and believes that activities intended to create positive impacts on forests may result in adverse impacts on other ecosystem components, so there is a real need for an environmental impact assessment. [USAID/Niger Email 3/30/98]

Status: Comments were conveyed to AfDB staff through the USED's office.

,,


19 • 11 Uganda: IDA - Pirat Roada Sector

Projected IDA Funding: Projected Total Cost: Tentative Board Date: Stage:


S 270 million $ 750 million Unknown Preappraisal is scheduled for October 1998 B Unknown May 1998 May 1998

Description: The project will (a) support institutional strengthening and capacity building; (b) improve the classified road network through pavement strengthening; (c) rehabilitate the classified road network; (d) maintain of existing roads; (e) construct traffic terminals in Kampala; and (f) provide technical assistance. Parallel financing is expected from Germany and EU.

Issues: USAID/Uganda has general concerns regarding rehabilitation and maintenance of roads--beyond direct the environmental impacts. The Project Information Document and Environmental Data Sheets are not yet available for the First Roads Sector project, so it difficult to be specific in stating concerns. The potential for cumulative and indirect impacts. For example, the project could cause increased migration along rehabilitated roads, resulting in increased deforestation and · other environmental impacts that go along with increased human presence. The project should undergo an environmental review (and if necessary an EA) will be conducted prior to final design, so that actual alternatives can be analyzed before commitments to rehabilitate specific portions are made, and as long as that EA is shared with the public and donors (for such a large project that seems reasonable).

Status: Comments were forwarded to Bank staff and USAID/Uganda met with.them in country and reported that the project is in the process of doing the EAs. They have developed a list of possible road rehabilitation projects, none of which are final, and are waiting on other reports, including the EAs. So these are REAL alternatives. If the EA finds s~gnificant impacts, they will choose a different alternative. USAID/Uganda plans to meet with the environmental consultants when they come to Uganda and discuss road rehabilitation and EA content. USAID/Uganda is working with the team doing an evaluation on the Rural Feeder Roads project here. Lots of road rehabilitation is going on, and there are many environmental issues. A rehabilitated road adjacent to a protected forest reportedly has affected ill7gal timber cutting--there has been an increase. USAIO/Uganda is generally satisfied with progress on with enviroz:unental aspects of this project, and welcomes the chance to get involved, even peripherally. [USAIO/Uganda email 6/29/98)


20.Q Zimbabwe: IDA - Local Government Development

Projected IDA Funding: ProJected Total Cost: Tentative Board Date: Stage: World Bank EA Category: Project ID: Project first entered: Entry last updated:

$ 50 million $ million Unknown Project preparation is underway. B Unknown May 1998 May 1998

Description: The project will provide infrastructure financing and capacity building support for local governments, including rural and urban district councils. Environmental Assessment Category B.

Issues: USAID/Zimbabwe reported that, though there is not much information on which to comment, if the project is going to finance infrastructure, it will qualify as a Environmental Assessment Category A project, not Bas stated. [USAID/Zimbabwe Email 3/30/98)

USAID/Zimbabwe suggests that the project should include strengthening of environmental units of local governments. In Zimbabwe, at the moment, knowledge on environmental reviews is very limited and ~estricted to the Department of Natural Resources in the Ministry of Mines, Environment and Tourism. It is virtually absent within local authorities. USAID/Zimbabwe does not have any experiences with local governments requiring environmental reviews for any projects. Local governments don't have any mechanisms for screening projects for environmental reviews. The Zimbabwe EIA Policy placed this function within the Department of Natural Resources, who at the moment have severe capacity constraints. It might be necessary for the project to set up a mechanism for environmental reviews for its subprojects. [USAID/Zimbabwe Email 5/29/98).

Status: World Bank staff responded that USAID/Zimbabwe is quite correct that information is limited as we are at the initial stage of agreement with the Government on project design. However, we have agreed in principle that this would be a "programmatic• operation under w~ich infrastructure would be financed with proceeds of the IDA credit only if Local Authorities meet strict eligibility criteria.

Two types of Local Authorities (representing all local government in Zimbabwe) would be potentially eligible. First, Rural District Councils (RDCs) would be eligible for District Development Grants (DDGs) as continuation of the current Rural District Council Pilot Capital Development Project. DDGs are small, about US$l00,000 equivalent per RDC per year, and these . are approved against meeting all the criteria and procedures laid


out in the agreed Operational Manual. Infrastructure projects (e.g., boreholes, small bridges and the like) are approved as part of.the annual in~estment plan that is approved only if the evaluation presented 1n the Manual is satisfied. This evaluation includes environmental screening (EA Category B). The main objective of this project is RDC capacity building.

Second, any Local Authority (22 Urban Councils and 57 RDCs) potentially would be eligible to receive "matching" grants for financing of investments that are (a) creditworthy and attract financing from Zimbabwe's capital market and (b) meet all of the evaluation criteria to be determined in a "prospectus" provided to potential investors. These criteria will include screening of environment impact (again Category B). Exact investments will be demand driven by the Local Authorities and evaluated by the capital market. Some investments may be for "social" infrastructure such as school and health building rehabilitation or construction, for which a full EA may not be required. Other investments may be for "economic" infrastructure, such a water supply and sanitation or roads that, depending on their conditions may require a full EA (Category A). In the latter case, an EA would be done, summarized in the prospectus and placed in the public domain.

In summary, current dialogue with Government indicates that investments to be ·partially financed by IDA will be demand driven, subject to strict eligibility and evaluation criteria and very diverse, ranging from small rural projects, to social infrastructure, to large economic infrastructure projects, most or all of which should have a full EA. Thus, the proposed operation would be classified as Category Bas an overall. operation, but some major infrastructure projects to be financed would be classified as Category A.

The Task Manager for the project emphasized that h~ responded while on mission in Zimbabwe and without the benefit of consultation with his environmental specialist colleagues. Also, project design is a "work in progress", including the most appropriate methods for environmental assess~nt, and further consultationa-are required. [World Bank email 5/01/98}

,,

June 19 9 8 : Page - 51 -PROJECTS LOCATED IN ASIA AND PACIFIC

21. Cambodia: IDA - Northeast Rural Development (formerly Rural Development)

Projected IDA Funding: Projected Total Cost: Tentative Board Date: Stage:

World Bank EA Category: Project ID: Project first entered: Entry updated:

$ 4.5 million Unknown April 1998 Appraisal mission is scheduled for September 1998. B KHPE4562l January 1997 June 1998

D7scr~pti~n: Th7 project aims to improve rural livelihoods by pilot~ng innovativ7 approaches ~o the selection, financing and sustainable operation of rural investment subprojects in select poorer districts of northeast Cambodia.

Issues: This activity will be focused on the provinces of the Northeast which are very sparsely populated and have some of Cambodia's most pristine forests, including a large population of indigenous peoples. An environmental assessment category "C" seems to not fill this need for clearer understanding of potential impacts·of investments on the environment [The· project

· had been an EA category C]. For example will roads be a part of this infrastructure investment? If so, what will be the impact on illegal logging, forest degradation, etc. Also, production is listed as an input. There are plans for large-scale plantations of palm oil, rubber, etc., which potentially have major environmental impacts if implemented. [e-mail: USAID/Cambodia 25Nov96]

USAID/Cambodia would like to correct the statement in the Environmental Data Sheet for the World Bank "North East Rural Development" project that indicated that "this support has already led to adoption by the Government of significant short and long term policy changes for forestry, whose implementation is being monitored.~ Substantive policy recommendations in the forestry sector are only now being developed under the auspices of a World Bank Forestry Project~, This project is tasked with developing recommendations that will affect foreat policy, sustainable forest management, monitoring of illegal logging operations, and the legal environment conducive- to sustainable forest resource use in Cambodia. The technical assistance team responsible for the policy recommendations (ARD). is sc1:1e<;1uled to complete their assignment by the end of May 1998. Additionally, the statement that "it is expected that it will lead to the adoption by the Government of a National Environme~tal Action Plan in 1997" should also be amended. An executive summary of the final draft of the National Environmental Action Plan,


foc~sing on 1) forest policy, 2) fisheries and floodplain agri~ultu~e in the Tonle Sap region, 3) coastal fisheries, 4) b1od1vers1ty and protected areas, 5) energy and the environment, and_ 6) urban waste was only recently circulated. [USAID/Cambodia email: 4/03/98]

Status: The World Ban~ respo~ded.that, having initiated a major effort on forest/logging policy in Cambodia over the past year we are familiar with the value of and threats to the natural ' resources of the North East part of the country.

rn.f~ct, .the proposed NE Rural Development Project will focus on raising incomes of poor farming households mainly in the Mekong river valley, from Kompong Cham up to Stung Treng, rather than in the two very sparsely populated, highland provinces of the northeast (Ratanakiri, Mondulkiri) which USAID/Cambodia probably has in mind.

The project would not include any large-scale plantation development. It would finance subprojects for the improvement of small-scale crop farming and livestock raising and possibly some non-farm enterprise development.

The project would help repair some of the roads and other basic infrastructure in the area, which as you know has received virtually no public- investment or maintenance for nearly 30 years, but would not get into new road or highway construction.· Thus, it would not be opening up forest land for commercial logging, and would help discourage illegal tree felling by local residents by improving alternative income earning opportunities in agricultural and similar activities.

By helping to establish village-based organizations for community development and by strengthening local government capacities for basic land use planning, the project would help pave the way for a possible GEF-supported natural resource management/ biodiversity conservation project in the NB of Cambodia. This possible GEP project would include the watershed areaa of the three Mekong tributaries reportedly being considered for hydropower development by the MRC as well as critical riverine and wetland areaa in the Mekong yalley proposed as a RAMSAR site. , Thus, the proposed RDP does not raise any significant .. environmental issues but, rather, help• develop local capacities and willingness to prevent them. Its environmental category rating will be decided at the concept review stage (February 24). [E-mail: World Bank 18Feb97]

[The project is an EA category B instead of a C.]

22. Indonesia: June 1998: Page -53-

ADB - Metro Medan Urban Development

Projected ADB Funding: Projected Total Cost: Tentative Board Date: Stage: ADB EA Category: Project ID: Project first entered: Entry updated:

$116 million $198 million Unknown Appraisal B IN027358 January 1997 May 1998

Description: The project consists of two parts, Part A:

(a) water supply; (b) sewerage and sanitation; (c) flood control; (d) drainage; (e) urban roads; and (f) solid waste management.

Part B involves institutional capacity building, trai~ing and project implementation assistance. It is envisaged that the project will improve the living conditions by raising public health standards, increasing access to basic infrastructure and services, reducing potential disruption to social and e~onomic activities caused by flooding and traffic congestion, and improving urban environmental conditions.

Issues: The project's objectives are to improve the delivery, operations and maintenance of essential urban services through capacity building of respective agencies and rehabilitation and construction of new infrastructure. Some work components, particularly cleaning and repair of central sewerage, construction of new access roads, and improvement and expansion of disposal sites, should be carefully handled because these kind of activities may have a negative impact on the environment if, not done' carefully. An BIA and the environmental monitoring and management plan should be carried out before approving the project. [e-mail: USAID/Indoneaia 27Nov96}

Status: ADB staff reported that,the project is EA category "B," and an initial environmental exalination (IEE) was conducted. The Bank is reviewing the IEE to ensure compliance with ADB's Environmental Assessment Requirements and Environmental Review Procedures (March, 1993). At present, ADB has fielded a Project Consultation Mission for the purpose of redesigning the scope of the project and a follow up Fact Finding Mission is planned in February. Should there be a change in the scope of the project, the IEE will be updated correspondingly to ensure that environmental concerns are adequately addressed. [fax: ADB 31Jan97]


23. Indonesia: IBRD • Simmering Plood Control

ProJected IBRD Funding: Projected Total Cost: Tentative Board Date: Stage: World Bank EA Category: Project ID: Project first entered: Entry updated:

$ 75 million $120 million 1999 Project preparation is underway To be determined. IDPA42542 December 1996 June 1998

Description: The aim of this proposed project is to mitigate flood damages to areas located east and west of Simmering in Central Java. The project will finance flood protection works and related studies for possible future investments and introduce a cost recovery policy for such works. Significant unexpected land acquisition and resettlement costs may lead to project restructuring or dropping of the project.

Issues: The Simmering Flood Control Project needs to have an EIA [category "A"] since this project wi-ll involve resettlement of "squatters" living along the river banks. [The World Bank's Operational Directive on Involuntary Resettlement (4.30) states that "the screening process for EA normally classifies a project involving involuntary resettlement as an "A,n so that environmental impacts of resettlement can be adequately · . d "] assesse . . . .

Status: The Bank informed USAID that preparation of the project continues, and it is not expected to be completed until early 1998. Several design changes are necessary, partly triggered by the high cost for land acquisition and resettlement.

In response to USAID's query, the Bank wishes to inform USAID that the discussion continues in the Bank on whether the EA category for this project should be nA" or "B.n However, no firm decision.has been made so far. This issue will be addressed by the "core" task team, once the final land acquisition and resettlement requirements are known. This is not expected to be before the end of 1997. [WB fax: 23Jan97] The project's environmental assessment category~is still to be determined as if April 1998.

24.


Lao PDR: World Bank Group - Nam Theun II Hydropower

Projected World Bank Funding: Projected Total Cost: Tentative Board Date: Stage: World Bank EA Category: Project first entered: Project information updated:

undetermined 1.2 billion (approximately) undetermined under study unaaaigned February 1996 May 1998

Descripti9n:. The World.Bank Group does not currently include Nam Theun II in its portfolio of proposed projects, but has asked the government of Lao PDR to conduct several environmental, social and_rese~tlement studies befor~ consideration. The proposed proJect involves the construction of a 50-m-high dam, with a 690-MW power plant, on the Nam Theun tributary of the Mekong River. It would create a 450-km 2 reservoir (about one-fourth the size of Yacyreta's reservoir in Argentina and Paraguay, but both have about the same kilowatts per hectare of flooded area ratio). Nam Theun II is being developed by private developers -- a consortium of Australian, French, Italian and Thai companies. The bulk of the financing would come from the private sector, with the government of Lao PDR taking an equity stake of approximately 25%. Virtually all electricity output would be exported to Thailand under an existing memorandum of understanding (for purchase of 1,500 MW) between the two governments.

The project is expected to generate approximately $35 million per year in revenues to Lao PDR 5 years after completion, increasing to about $100 million per year in year 10, and leveling off at $100 million until year 25, when the loan will finally be paid off. It is expected to-generate about $4 billion in aggregate pay out.

Issues: Key issues relate to the loss of habitat of high conservation value, economic issues, the social impacts of resettling 950 families, and the hydrological and water quality impacts on two river syatema. IUCN recently identified the Nam Theun area aa a high priority for conservation. Also, the Global Environmental Facility (GEF) approved a $5 million Wildlife and Protected Ar••• conservation Project in February 1994, listing the Nakai/NaarTheun area as a priority for protection.

The GEF profile of the proposed protected area stated the [Nam Theun II] hydro project would be a major threat to the area's establishment. The proposed reservoir would flood about 80 km1

of pristine tropical forest and about 370 km1 of degraded forest due to shifting cultivation. The Nakai/Nam Theun component was recently dropped from the GEF project because of the major . infrastructure planned. According to the Bank, however, there is now a general agreement in principle among the pow~r developers that the project will provide funds for the establishment and


long-term.management of the.3,500-kmJ Nakai Biodiversity Cons~rvation Area ~NBCA) which includes approximately 1/3 of the Nakai Plateau. This would also include sustainable development programs for about 1000 families in the protected area.

Intern~tio~al NGOs (such as the International Rivers Network-IRN) have highlighted economic, resettlement, and biodiversity issues. The~e is ~lso concern about the cumulative effects of hydropower pr~Jects in the relatively undeveloped Mekong basin, which is being developed in the absence of a national energy sector strategy. An !RN-commissioned review of the hydrological data for Nam Theun II indicated that the available hydrological data "is not sufficient to fully assess the Nam Theun 2 Hydroelectric Project's viability." Apparently, much of the stream flow data are based on only a seven-year period of rainfall data. Without adequate knowledge of how much water will be available to turn the dam's turbines, investors in the project will expose themselves to a high risk of less than expected energy production. The potential environmental and social impacts will also be difficult to assess with limited hydrological data.

International NGOs are not in a position to represent locals -but Laotian NGOs are nearly non-existent. International NGOs would like the World Bank to organize local meetings and consultations including both government and citizen ·representatives (indeed, the World Bank has requested the Lao PDR government to hold such consultations). Regional criticism comes from Thai NGOs because all the power from the project will be sold to Thailand. UNDP haa offered to hold a forum on the project. The World Bank haa been asked to present information and coordinate with UNDP.

The project may also undermine an existing bank loan in Lao PDR, Forestry Management and Conservation Project (#Cr.2586.LA). It is also questionable that the bank is spending so much time and funds on preparatory studies for this project without officially listing i't in its portfolio of proposed projects. This undermines the Bank'• credibility regarding openness.

Status: According to the World Bank's draft Country Assistance Strategy for Lao PDR, the gove~nt of Lao PDR has asked the Bank Group to provide financial support for the project through the IFC, and partial risk guarantees from the MIGA. The Bank Group's position is that only on the basis of preparation to acceptable standards would the Bank group appraise ~he.project and subsequently decide whether it can participate 1n its financing. In particular, the project would have to comply with its policies concerning the environment, resettlement and indigenous peoples.

A preliminary EIA has been undertaken, but further work is required to address the ongoing degradation in the area, mitigate


adverse i~pacts from the project, and develop a longer range plan to maintain the ecology of the catchment area. Further work is currently ongoing in the area of aquatic biodiversity assessment, social impact assessment and indigenous people's issues, rn1t1gat1on of downstream water quality impacts, and management planning for the NBCA. The most recent EIA draft is dated December 1995. This was translated into Lao, but the government of Lao PDR has not agreed to release it. A further revision of the EIA draft is expected in May 1996.

Alternative power generation possibilities, including sites for hydropower development, need to be studied further in a manner acceptable to the Bank, so as to confirm the preliminary findings of the site's economic viability and to place the proposed project within a comprehensive power development strategy. A precondition for Bank consideration of this project is a public consultation plan, including an open, transparent, participatory process in conducting the studies to satisfy the above Bank concerns. According to the Bank, it has also asked the government to prepare a regional social action plan which would try to anticipate and shape economic and social development in the broader project impact area.

The private developers want Bank support, and have indicated that they would strive to meet the Bank's expectations. Bank staff considered the developer's support for environmental protectiop of the watershed as enlightened self interest, not altruism. The Bank regarded this as assurance that the developer would comply with such a condition when required by the Bank. However, to date the government of Lao PDR has not agreed to undertake these studies. If the government agrees, precondition studies will be conducted addressing three broad areas of concern: economic impact, analysis of alternatives, and environmental and social impact. The studies have a six-month time frame, but the . consultation process may take longer than that. When the studies are completed, the Bank Group will be in a position to appraise the project.

In addition, the Bank reported that it has had a very open dialogue with the NGO community so far. It has met and corresponded with the NGOs. The Bank has stated that its objective is to manage a transpa,ent process for arriving at its decision with regard to this project.


PROJECTS LOCATED IN EUROPE AND CENTRAL ASIA

25.u Armenia: EBRD - Hraadan Unit No 5 Privatisation

Projected EBRD Funding: Projected Total Cost: Tentative Board Date: Stage: EBRD EA Category: Project first entered: Project information updated:

$ 29.8 million $120.4 million undetermined final B/1 April 1998 May 1998

Description: The proposed loan to the Republic of Armenia will complete construction of a 300MW gas-fired power generating unit at the Hrasdan thermal power plant (Unit No. 5) and to privatize it upon completion.

The proposed project will significantly increase the efficiency of energy use in Armenia by providing the country with a new generating unit significantly more efficient than the existing ones. It will also facilitate early decommissioning of the Medzamor nuclear power station, and strongly support the Government's effort to restructure its energy sector along more commercial lines .by encouraging private investment in thermal generation. ·

Issues: In the case of the Hrazdan project, USAID/Armenia reviewed the summary environmental remarks, and would add the following considerations:

A recent environmental assessment of the energy sector that was carried out by one of USAID's contractors to support the $95 million World Bank Transmission and Distribution project in Armenia identified PCBa in the country's transformers. Mitigation measures have been recommended by the consultants. Since Unit 5 is partially constructed, checking for PCBs during completion of the project would be an appropriate mitigation measure.

- The assessment does not mentiqn consideration about earthquake hazard. The plant, aa is the rest of Armenia, is located in zone of relatively high seismicity. The infrastructure at the Hrazdan complex sustained considerable cracking from the 1988 earthquake, that had an epicenter 30 miles away. The question about such a design consideration should be raised, and not taken for granted. [USAID/Armenia Email 4/15/98)

Status: These comments have been forwarded to EBRO staff through the USED's office.

26.Q Azerbaijan, Georgia:

Projected IFC Funding: Projected EBRO Funding: Projected Total Cost: Tentative Board Dates: Stage: IFC Project ID: EBRD Project ID: EBRD EA Category: World Bank EA category Project first entered:


IFC/EBRD -Early Oil Development of part of the Chirag oil field located-offshore Azerbaijan and completion of export pipelines and facilities in Azerbaijan and Georgia

$ 200 million (up to) $ 200 million $1. 856 billion mid 1998 Final 7271 ZPOl/2431 A/1 A

Project information updated: May 1998 June 1998

Description: The Project is widely recognized as strategically important. Development of a financi.ng structure for the "early oil" phase of production in the Chirag oil field in Azerbaijan, which is being implemented by an international consortium (EBRD).

The companies seeking financing are affiliates of Amoco Corporation, Exxon- :corporation, Lukoil Joint Stock Company, Turkiye Petrolleri A.O. (Turkish Petroleum Company), and Unocal Corporation. The Early Oil Project involves the development of part of the Chirag field, and is the first step in the full development of the group of three fields known as Azeri, Chirag and deep-water Gunashli. Production from the Early Oil Project is expected to reach 105,000 barrels per day (bpd) by the year 2000. Azerbaijan will also receive significant quantities of associated natural gas from the Project, which will reduce the gas deficit in the country. The Project will have a positive impact on local industry and employment and will provide essential support for Azerbaijan's economic recovery program. Georgia will receive the benefits of substantial investment in export pipeline and terminal infrastructure, and will also obtain transit fee income from oil transported across its territory. Russia has signed a contract to export oil from Azerbaijan and will also receive tariff income !~om transport of oil from the Project. IFC's role in this Project is to: (i) provide long term financing, which is not currently available in Azerbaijan or Georgia, (ii) mobilize financing from international commercial banks, and (iii) mitigate cross-border and other perceived political risks.

Issues: Several environmental groups voiced their concerns over the proposed Azeri/Chirag Early Oil Project, citing the particular sensitivity of the Caspian Sea environment a~d inadequate mitigation measures [USAID/Caucasus agreed with the


issues raised, see email 6/20/98].

Status: The Treasury Department brought these issues, including transparency and reinjection of production water, to the attention of the lending institutions. Both IFC and EBRO indicated to Treasury that they will use their best efforts to ensure that these concerns are met over the life of the project. Treasury will be watching developments on this project very closely.

, ,

. I

27.Q Georgia: EBRD - Enguri Hydro

Projected EBRO Funding: Projected Total Cost: Tentative Board Date: Stage: EBRO EA Category: Project first entered: Project information updated:


$64.8 million (l ECU ~ l USO) Unknown undetermined final B/1 April 1998 May 1998

Description: Enguri is indeed a large dam, one of the largest, 1n the world, concrete arch, at the end of a cascade. This project will rehabilitate the parts of the existing dam 1nfrast~uctu~e: there are significant repairs contemplated in connection with the loan. USAID/Georgia believes these are for the large diameter tunnel (it is about 6 meters on a side) that carries water to the hydroelectric station in Abkhazia, some 15 kilometers away. All the power is generated there. Also, the project will repair the deterioration in a relief tunnel, and the gates at the toe of the dam. Georgia depends heavily on its hydroelectric capability, approximately half the country's power comes from this station. It is also a major flood control emplacement. The agricultural area below it, which is extensive, also is dependent upon the reservoir behind the dam and its regulation. Naturally, there is _also a drinking water consideration involved. [Little ·

· ·information is available on this project on EBRD' s website].

Issues: The entire watershed for this dam is under severe degradation. Silting of the reservoir is high, largely because of the primary forest long ago having been removed in the immediate watershed and continuing in the watershed with several sawmills that are up stream from the dam and are quite active, reaching further inland to bring down the larger trees that are out of sight from the roadway. USAID/Georgia would hope that EBRO not miss an opportunity to insist that the GOG better manage the dam watershed. The silting up of the reservoir has a significant impact on the useful life of the dam and the hydroelectric station. There have been several recent technical reports financed at UN expense assessing the condition of the dam and its appurtenances. USAID/Georgia would be skeptical of any report except by an international consultant. The high velocities in the tunnel are something to be wary of.

In sum, USAID/Georgia would say that the significance of the work is more than one might expect from just looking at the amount of money being invested. Environmental conditionality to better manage the watershed would be a good idea. [USAID/Georgia emails 4/15, 4/17/98] .•

Status: These comments have been forwarded to EBRD staff through the USED's office.


PROJECTS LOCATED IN LATIN AMERICA AND THB CARIBBEAN

28. Bolivia: IDB - Export Corridors: Santa Cruz-Puerto su,rez Highway

Projected IDB Funding: Projected Total Cost: Tentative IDB Board Date: Stage: IDB EA Category: Project ID: Project first entered: Entry updated:

$134 million $135 million Unknown Preparation stage 3 B0036 January 1997 June 1998

Description: The goal of this proposed project is to increase the competitiveness of Bolivian products in international markets by decreasing transportation costs in the country and assuring that the Santa Cruz - Puerto Su4rez Highway remains open and passable throughout the year. The program will include works, studies, and an environmental impact,mitigation component.

Issues: USAID/Bolivia understands that this project aims at improving an existing road, that it has major economic and development significance, and that it will have an environmental ~mpact mitigation component. It is not the direct impacts of the road itself that are of concern, but rather the indirect ones. · The project description itself alludes to those potential indirect impacts when it implies that this is a natural area for population expansion.

Specifically, USAID/Bolivia wants to make sure that the improved road will not accelerate haphazard colonization and deforestation, in particular into areas that are l) inappropriate for long-term agricultural production, or 2) of high biological value (e.g., the Tucavaca Valley; while much of this is already slated for "traditional" development, at least portions of this valley need to be protected -- see RAP Working Paper No. 4, "The Lowland Dry Foresta of Santa Cruz, Bolivia: A Global Conservation Priority,• July 1993. An improved road would almost certainly put thia area under inc~eased conversion pressure, and maybe that "protection• issue should be considered and resolved before the road work would begin).

There's also the issue of what impact the road would have on the Bolivian Pantanal. According to biologist Ted Parker, "Although worldwide attention has been focused on conservation efforts in Brazil, the Bolivian pantanal may be of even great~r biological importance due to the very extensive tracts of undisturbed dry forest and cerrado ... 11 (p. 52). He goes on to flag his fears of "an increasing emphasis on mining (e.g., Cerro Mutun), the export of natural gas, and harvest of timber in the dry forests to the


northwest" (p. 56) -- the kind of things this project will presumably encourage. Cerro Mutun is just to the south of Puerto Suarez.

USAID/Bolivia would like to see rigorous enforcement of authoritative land-use planning before the road improvements begin: The improved road would also potentially move more people relatively close to the Kaa Iya del Gran Chaco National Park (where USAID supports work with WCS and the Izoceno indigenous people). There should be some guarantees that it would not encourage encroachment into the park (in particular with cattle ranches, logging of quebracho, or irrigated agriculture). some increased protection for the northern border of the park linked to the road improvement might also make sense.

The road is a priority development project, and USAID is not suggesting that it should not go ahead. But it suggests it might be better classified as Category 4 -- "Operations that may have significant negative impacts of the environment and will require a detailed environmental assessment" .. . all the more so because this activity would also explore the feasibility of other transportation infrastructure improvements in this environmentally fragile area, and it might not be a bad idea to make sure everyone knows, up front, how important the question of environmental imp_act is when doing this kind of planning. It would also be nice· to do the EA to ensure some participation in this decision. As USAID understands Category 3, such participation need not take place. [These comments may not be totally relevant now, as IDB changed its EA classification system in March 1997]. [e-mail: USAID/Bolivia 12/05/96]

The local Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS) representative, STRONGLY endorsed USAID/Bolivia's recommendation -- that a full impact assessment should be required.

Not only are the areas flagged above of critical conservation importance, but there is also the Chiquitano dry tropical fore·st that goes from the north to the south of the proposed road. This is also "important and highly threatened habitat," according to the WCS. Many of these areas have already been flagged as being of critical conservation importance in the Santa Cruz land use plan (the PLUS, done with German'and World Bank funding). wcs echoed USAID concerns -- that these areas should have some concrete protection before the road improvement. In addition,. USAID/Bolivia strongly recommends that there be an anthropologist on the team, since this is likely to affect several important indigenous peoples groups, i.e., the Izocenos and Chiquitanos (USAID/Bolivia is working with both groups under its forestry and biodiversity conservation work), as well as the Ayoreos and perhaps others.

USAID/Bolivia recommends using the project as a vehicle to ensure


that these areas are protected,· i.e., build into the project, on the basis of the EA, resources to mitigate the indirect impacts of the road construction. [e-mail: USAID/Bolivia 12/12/96]

The project would also give a push for the Hidrovia Waterway the paved road would go right to its door, so to speak, and that would make agricultural production and logging that much more profitable, over a MUCH bigger area. The pressures from those sectors for the Hidrovia would therefore increase substantially; all the more reason why to do some serious thinking before the road gets improved.

Status: These comments have been conveyed to IDB staff, which responded that since April 1997, IDB has not used environmental classification for its projects. Particulary for this project, a full EIA was asked for independent of the category 3 classification. For the Santa Cruz - San Jose segment, a consulting firm is preparing the detailed engineering design and the detailed environmental assessment. For the San Jose - Puerto Suarez segment, this firm is preparing only the EIA. Although slowly, the studies are proceeding·1orward.

29. Colombia:


IDB - Regional Roads Program

Projected IDB Funding:

Projected Total Cost: Tentative IDB Board Date: Stage: IDB EA Category: Project ID: Project first entered: Entry updated:

$100 million (+ $1.5 million Project Preparation Facility C00176) '

$167 million Unknown In preparation stage 3 cooosa & coo116 January 1997 January 1998

Description: The program would include:

(a) institutional strengthening and modernization of regional road management;

(b) development and execution of regional pluriannual road maintenance and investment plans;

{c) promotion of private sector participation in all aspects of regional road maintenance; and

(d) assistance for the government in the road network transfer process, as well as with administrative and technical decentralization.

Issues: The summary seems to be very clear in the sense that this specific project calls for strengthening of local organizations responsible for the planning and management of roads. It has been classified as category 3 to which USAID/Colombia agrees. The problem will be in the future when those organizations will start building new roads and or fixing the existing ones. Then, specific projects might have signigicant environmental impacts and need very good Environmental Impact Assessments, so some of them will need a category 4-level BIA. Once the project is in a more advanced status a more detailed analysis should be done regarding the final category under it should fall. [e-mail: USAID/Colombia 12/12/96}

status: ,,

These comments have been conveyed to IDB staff.


30. Dominican Republic: IDB - Watershed Management Program (formerly Management of the Mao River Basin)

Projected IDB Funding: Projected Total Cost: Tentative Board Date: Stage: IDB EA Category: Project ID: Project first entered: Entry last updated:

$15 million $17 million Unknown Project under identification 3 DR0119 May 1993 January 1998

Description: The proposed project is designed to improve community life and the situation of renewable natural resources in the Mao River Basin area:

(a) management of the remaining natural forests and reforestation;

(b) recovery of eroded areas; and

(c) institutional strengthening through training, environmental education, and consulting.

-.Issues: USAID/Dominican Republic urges IDB to obtain substantial policy reform regarding sustainable use of forests. Given this concern, a complete EA should be conducted [#00043 03Jan92].

A full EA should be conducted prior to construction of rural roads.

Given the energy crisis in the DR and growing importance of hydroelectricity (currently accounts for about 351 of the electrical power generated), USAID suggests that these limited funds be used to replicate successful watershed management pilot activities in critical watersheds with potential to produce · hydroelectricity. There exists various successful management models implemented by NGOs with ampl& participation from rural hillside conaunitiea in design and decision-making during implementation. ,,

USAID strongly suggests that watershed management measures to be promoted in the project be based on an economic rationale to attract farmer participation and focus more on tree farming with fast growing species than on soil conservation works for use with short-cycle crop production. Measures should be easily assimilated by farmers and produce relatively quick and impressive results to stimulate replication by other farmers in the watershed.

The project should include a relatively strong marketing


component which includes securing of tree harvesting permits from the governmen~. Local NGOs have been quite successful 1n securing permits for participating farmers." [e-mail: USAID/Dominican Republic 12/05/96]

Status: Comments have been forwarded to IDB. IDB reported that an Env1ronmenta~ ~u~mary for this project was approved in August 1992. The feasibility study was prepared with the participation of three experts in environment and renewable natural resources management. It complemented studies commissioned by IDB that:

(a)

(b)

quantified environmental benefits and updated envir~nmental impact information in June 1992; took into account consultations with local populations regarding social and environmental impacts in an evaluation of forest management and agroforestry activities.

The summary also recommended special attention be given to:

(a) environmental viability of pilot forest industry components;

(b) soundness of the technical design of environmentally beneficial components; and

(c) financial and economic viability of sustainable forest management and conservation in the project area.

The technical team working on the project has carried out five missions to further develop this project from 1987 to 1992. As a result, larger investments are contemplated in the recovery of deforested areas, soil and water conservation, erosion control, and demonstration fish farming. A modest sawmill component was eliminated. Consultants have been hired to help the government of the Dominican Republic complete program design, and negotiations with Plan Sierra are ongoing regarding its participation in project execution. Specific financing is contemplated for studies to support areas of policy reform regarding sustainable use of .forests, which would be directly related to the implementation of this project. An updated Environmental Summary may be prepared if the project team, the Environmental Committee, and/or the Environmental Protection Di vision consider it advisable. ''

In conclusion, USAID urges IDB to deal with policy reform issues regarding sustainable use of forests in advance of lending. Studies to support areas of policy reform after the loan has been approved are likely to receive little attention.


31. Dominican Republic: IBRD/IDB - Power Market Development/ Power Sector Hybrid Program.

Projected IBRD Funding: Projected IDB Funding: Projected Private Funding: Projected Total Cost: Tentative WB Board Date: Stage:

World Bank EA Category: World Bank Project ID Number: IDB Project ID Number: Project first entered: Entry last updated:

$110 million unknown $155 million $375 - 400 million Unknown project preparation is underway. Japanese Grant Facility is funding project preparation studies. A D0-PA0-70ll/6DOMPA035 DR0133 (formerly DROOSO) July 1993 June 1998

Description: The proposed World Bank (formerly named Power Transmission or Power II) project includes:

The overall objective is to support power secor reform by esta~l~shing a compet~vtive bulk sup~ly market for electricity. Specifically, the proJect seeks to lift transmission constraints that hinder open access of publicly as well as privately owned power generators and to support

(a) installation of an Energy Control Center (ECC) and Financial Settlement Center;

(b) strengthening and expansion of the Interconnected Transmission System; and

(c) providing technical assistance.

The proposed IDB project, San Macoris Power Plant (DR0133), was· formerly ·called the Power Sector Hybrid Program (DR0080). The San Pedro de Macoria Power Plant will be a combined-cycle power plant, conaiating of three oil-fired units of 100 MW with total net generating capacity of 296 MW. The project is located at an undeveloped site on the west banlc$ of the Higuamo River approximately 8 km from the town of San Pedro de Macoris along the south-central coast of the Dominican Republic. Each low nitrogen oxide gas turbine will be coupled with a heat recovery steam generator and a steam turbine. Cooling towers will be used, with makeup water coming from onsite wells, offsite well·-:. and from the Higuamo River, which is located immediately east <~f the project site. Plant process water will be obtained from or..site groundwater wells. Cooling water and treated process waste water from the project will be discharged to the Higuamo River.

The project will include the construction of mooring and fuel


unloa~ing facilities near the mouth of the Higuamo River. A fuel pipeline will be constructed to connect the power plant and fuel unloading facility.

Issues: USAID/Dominican Republic recommended that the project have an adequate assessment of the potential for air emissions water and marine contamination, and landscape contamination. ' ~#05649 06Jul93]. This project should fit into a general integrated resource.planning s~rategy for the Dominican Republic. Serious adverse environmental impacts from the site location and possible resettlement include effects on sensitive marine and coastal ecosystems.

The government of the Dominican Republic had suggested the l) the Samana Bay, one of the largest winter breeding areas for humpback whales in the Caribbean; and 2) the Luper6n Bay, the last known breeding area for the West Indian manatee. These two sites have apparently been eliminated as alternatives.

Project-specific EAs should be conducted for power plant construction with careful consideration given to site location of new plants to avoid placement in environmentally sensitive areas such a Samana Bay and Luperon Bay. The energy law designed to establish the legal and regulatory framework for privatization of the electrical energy sector is still languishing in congress after three years.·· However, there are indications that the recently elected government will nlegally" proceed to privatize the CDE and establish the regulatory framework, without the energy law. The Mission still plans to help the government of the Dominican Republic establish internationally accepted environmental norms and standards for electric power generation and distribution under the USAID/DR Electrical Energy Restructuring Project. The project was recently redesigned to place more emphasis on commercially feasibly renewable energy options for rural electrification. The major environmental concerns on proposed conventional power projects are pollution (especially in environmentally sensitive areas), institutional weaknesses and ability to enforce new environmental regulations. USAID/DR suggests that prior to construction of new power plants, environmental regulations should be in place and a regulatory body established to implement and enforce the regulations. USAID/DR would also like for IDB''and IBRD to support the inclusion of environmentally sound renewable energy into a National Energy Plan." [e-mail: USAID/Dominican Republic 05Dec96]

status: IDB responded that:

1. The site: Luperon and Samana were discarded as possible sites in studies done in 1993 and 1994. The February 1994 study only recommended Azua, Bacahica and San.Pedro de Maco~is as sites. Afterward, the first two were discarded and since 1994,


we have only been discussing sites in the San Pedro de Macoris area.

2. Snvironmental Regulations: USAID has had the leadership in the area of environmental issues. Recently, USAID hired a consu~tan~y to do envir?nmental audits of the electricity d1s~r1but1on system, pr7or to privatization and preliminary audits on power generation. Also, to prepare an Environmental Management Plan and basic regulations, and to develop a plan to strengthen the regulatory capacity of the government. The regulation of the sector would be done through the Electricity Superintendency, an agency that is expected to be created via a decree, in case the Electricity Sector Law is not approved. The project's schedule is pending results of ongoing discussions with the government, which is currently undergoing a power restructuring. [e-mail: IDB, l2May97]

In February 1996, IDB responded that the project has been delayed, however, project-specific EIA's had been requested and are being performed. The sector analysis and some of the specific EIA [previously] prepared by Bechtel will have to be updated if the operation goes back on line. There may be some action on the project after the [local] elections in May.

For the March 1995 report, the World Bank stated that a detailed EA of the entire electric power sector has just recently been completed, and is being reviewed by the Bank. This study, which was financed by USAIO, also examined in detail the environmental implications of the two new thermal power plants which the Power II project would help finance. Moreover, the study recommended specific improvements in the environmental management of the power plants, including .. the transportation land storage of coal and the management of ash residues. The Bank reported that project-specific EAs will be carried out for the two sites mentioned above, before any construction activities start at those sites. The EA category waa changed from an B to an A since this report was last issued in December 1993.

In conclusion, USAID'a emphasizes the need for project-specific EAs conducted with careful consideration given to site location alternative•, local participation, marine resources and . contamination. The above sector~l EA, though very valuable, will not guarantee complete coverage of the proposed Power II project sites.

world Bank recently confirmed that a project-specific EA should be carried out by the company selected to develop the proposed 2SOMW power plant, before starting its construction. This condition has been included in the proposed Request for Proposal for the above power plant.

June 1998: !?age -71-

32.Q Ecuador: IDB - National Roads Program II


$ 80 million $100 million Unknown In identification. Not yet determined EC0132 April 1998 April 1998

Description: To continue the current pluriannual program to rehabilitate and maintain the national road system. Estimated total cost: $100 million.

Issues: This project is of major concern, because the Ministry of Public Works and the Provincial Councils do not always consider the environment when building infrastructure. Cases in point are the Borb6n-Mataje road and the Cuenca-Molleturo road. This project will need to establish an Environmental Assessment for each road to be rehabilitated or improved. [USAID/Ecuador Email 4/17/98).

Status: These comments have been conveyed to IDB staff.


33.u Ecuador: IDB - Urban Development II

ProJected IDB Funding: Projected Total Cost: Tentative IDB Board Date: Stage: IDB EA Category:

Project ID: Project first entered: Entry updated:

$100 million $300 million Unknown In preparation. An Environmental Impact Assessment would be required. EC0139 April 1998 April 1998

Description: This second phase would continue the current Municipal Development Program, which will be expanded to include decentralization of functions to provincial governments. It would consist of the following components: {a) a line of credit for investments; (b) technical assistance; and (c) institutional development for the sector. The first component would provide credit financing for local public sector infrastructure projects or packages of projects that make up a local investment program.

The technical assistance component would provide assistance in: (a) development of local autonomous service entities; (b) strategic planning; and (c) community participation in service management. The municipal training would be directed at sectional governments and local service agencies involved in managing services, finances, credit and the environment. The institutional development component would strengthen the agencies participating in this program, as well as support an institutional development component would strengthen the agencies participating in this program, as well as support an institutional plan to get cormnercial banks and capital markets involved in local financing. A financial information and tracing system for municipalities would be strengthened to continuously evaluate their capacity to service their debts and the coverage, organization, costs and quality of the services they provide.

Issues: USAID/Bcuador and USAID/Regional Urban Development Office are working with several small municipalities in Ecuador, mainly on solid waste management. Since this project includes a credit component for unidentified,. investments, I agree it will need more than an Environmental Assessment. It will be useful to know if it is a country-wide implementation project or if the municipalities to be served are already identified, to avoid duplication of efforts with our programs and due to the small funding we have. [USAID/Ecuador Email 4/17/98].

Status: These comments have been conveyed to IDB staff.


34.u Ecuador: IDB - Cuenca-Molleturo Road

ProJected IDB Funding: Projected Total Cost: Tentative IDB Board Date: Stage: IDB EA Category: Project ID: Project first entered: Entry updated:

$ 30 million Pending definition Unknown In early stages of definition Pending definition EC0181 April 1998 April 1998

Description: The components of the program have not yet been determined. Estimated total cost: pending definition.

Issues: USAID/Ecuador reported that this road is one of the worst environmental disasters in Ecuador. With the recent El Nino Phenomenon, severe flooding, land slides, and other problems have caused major damages to the road, to the point of cutting its use for some months. A new loan will need a very careful review of current and potential environmental problems.

The Cuenca-Molleturo road (originally financed by IDB in the late 1980s, and refinanced in the mid 1990s), has already caused eutrophication of numerous paramo lakes in Cajas National Recreation Area, destruction of large areas of montane ~ain forests with probable consequent loss of biological diversity, severe soil erosion, elimination of tourism businesses, flooding and permanent loss of prime coastal agricultural land, and sedimentation and loss of marine life in mangrove forests.

Any additional loans for this road should undoubtedly include severe requirements for environmental analysis to define necessary mitigation of environmental impacts that have already been caused as well as identification and mitigation of impacts from new proposed actions. [USAID Ecuador email, ll/1297, 4/17/98]

Status: These conments have been forwarded to IDB staff.


35. El Salvador: IDB· Water and Sewer Program


$ 43.7 million $ 57 million May 27, 1998 Final 3 ES0068 January 1997 June 1998

Description: The program would contribute to the reform of the water and sanitation sector and would assist in the consolidation of the ~ew institution~l infrastructure. As the first phase of re;orm.in the sector, it would seek to accomplish the following obJectives:

(a) strengthen the management capacity of the water authority (to be created by a new law); (b) consolidate the separation.of the regulatory and operation functions in the water and sanitation subsector, strengthening the regulatory capacity created for the subsector; and (c) support the efficiency of services at the independent water operator level. .

. .

The first component of the program would reform water resource management by strengthening the small, independent water resource authority to be newly created. This new authority would function temporarily to resolve conflicts in water resource distribution, until the water law is approved. Technical assistance would be provided to this authority to carry out basic studies on water balance, quality, efficient mechanisms and economic instruments to distribute water, economic value of water for different uses, and compatibility with the environmental law.

The second component would support the consolidation and institutional strengthening of the new regulatory agency for service provision in the water and sanitation sectors, providing basic toola for its effective functioning. Institutional strengthening and technical asai,tance activities would be provided in areas such as regulation, tariff policies and plans for private participation in the sector.

The third component would improve the provision of potable water and sanitation services by supporting the decentralization process in independent water entities. The activities necessary to support this process are: (a) strengthening of region~l operator entities, including their basic management capacity, and technical assistance in the areas of technical cadastre, macrometering, micrometering, system optimization, leak control, business and operating efficiencies, and protection of water


sources; and (b) support for decentralizing small municipal and rural system, i~cluding transfer of systems to local operators, a program of multiple works for rehabilitation and transfer works, and local institutional strengthening activities to help carry out the transfers.

The fourth component would carry out priority investments in water and sanitation, particularly emergency investments needed to avoid service interruptions in important population areas. Twelve emergency rehabilitation investments have been identified, to date.

Issues: This project could have a moderate to severe effect on the environment during construction, depending on where the systems are located. Normal IDB environmental review and mitigation procedures should be carefully monitored for this project. Actual implementation through local institutions should insure that these institutions have environmental monitoring units established in the entity AND that appropriate procedures for following mitigation are in place AND actually carried out. [e-mail: USAID/El Salvador l0Dec96]

Status: IDB staff replied that stringent environmental recommendations will be followed during the implementation of the project. The focus of the project is on institutional and policy reforms. Improvements will include rehabilitation of existing, systems; no new systems will be financed under the project. · Decentralization of the management of systems will be accompanied by technical assistance, and involve public consultations especially including women. Water management issues will be approached holistically. [e-mail: IDB 29Apr97]


36. El Salvador: IDB - Critical Areas of Decontamination


$ 45 million $ 55 million Unknown In analysis 3 ES0074 January 1997 June 1998

Description: The program would be at a national level with a concentration i~ the urba~ areas and would cover: protection of selected contaminated bodies of water; solid waste management in urban centers; monitoring of the main sources of atmospheric pollutants and institutional strengthening of the entities involved. The main focus of the program is on solid waste management in the eastern region.

Local viable solutions are sought. The idea is to strengthen municipal capacity to manage solid waste and get community and private sector involvement.

There is a small component to establish basic capacity in the country to monitor air quality, and to help on related policy and

·regulation issues.

Protection of specific sources of potable water (aquifers) include Opico Quezaltepeque and the Lago Ilopango watersheds. In the former, the idea is to find a solution to an illegal waste dump sitting on top of the main aquifer for San Salvador. In the latter, the objective is to protect the potable water plant on the Cuaya River, in the Lago Ilopango watershed. Protection measures may include some work with the local industries for pollution control, with the municipalities for solid waste and sanitation work. This may become a small-scale pilot project for integrated pollution control in a very specific area. The program will also include institutional support, capacity building, education and promotion. [e-mail: USAID/El Salvador l0Dec96J

Issues: The Critical Areas of Decontamination Project could have a moderate to severe effect on the environment during construction depending on where the systems are located. Normal IDB environmental review and mitigation procedures should be carefully monitored for this project. Actual implementation through local institutions should ensure that these institutions have environmental monitoring units established in the entity AND that appropriate procedures for following mitigation are in place AND actually carried out.

The USAID/El Salvador has maintained close liaison with the IDB


and the Secretariat of the Environment (SEMA) for the overall El Salvadoran Environmental Program (PAES) of which this project is a part. USAID/El Salvador's environmental program includes complementary actions to project 0074 which will require close coordination. This coordination should ensure that USAID will be aware of adverse impacts and can assist in drawing them to the attention of IDB if necessary. As mentioned in the project brief, the PAES is assisting SEMA in the strengthening of their Environmental Impact Assessment Division, and USAID/El Salvador has also worked with this group. USAID recommends that the IDB continue with its plans for an Environmental Review and that the mitigation suggested be carefully followed. [e-mail: USAID/El Salvador l0Dec96]

Status: In response to the above comments, IDB staff said that the project will focus on the capacity to do air quality monitoring, developing an institutional framework, and technical support implementing agencies. Solid waste management support will go to medium-sized municipalities to develop locally viable solutions. For industrial pollution, the project will focus on two key water sources, to protect key water sources. This will prevent problems with contamination of these aquifers. The project will help define a strategy for management of solid waste, with some financing available for improved management of existing systems. Mitigation measures for solid waste management will be decided upon in consultation with local cormnunities .. Appropriate procedures are in place for environmental mitigation measures and their implementation. IDB will closely monitor the implementation of this project. [e-mail: IDB 29Apr97]


37. Haiti: IDB - Agricultural Sector Modernization (Intensification of Agriculture)


$ 30 million $ 40 million August 1998 Final To be determined HAOOl6 January 1997 June 1998

Description: The objecti,·,= of the program is to enable farmers ~o inc~e~se ~heir incomes and total output through intensification of staple and export crop production in selected areas of Haiti with high sustainable potential. The program would finance institutional and physical infrastructure required to improve producer access to and utilization of water and land resources, as well as strengthen selected support services. It would include three components:

(a) A water resource management component to complete feasibility studies and implement selected irrigation schemes, including rehabilitation of existing infrastructure, construction of additional water· impoundment,· d.iversion and distribution facilities, and assistance in the establishment of a system of private water-user groups and upstream watershed management through institutional strengthening and institution-building ac:~vities at the local level;

(b) A :. a\nd tenure administration component to implement key elements of the investment program being developed the Institut de Reforme Agraire (INARA), including investments in equipment, systems installations, technical assistance and training for that agency; and

(c) An agricultural support services component to focus on reinforcing the regulatory and supervisory capacities of the executing agency to assure that selected support services be provided to producers int~ intensified production areas (although actual service delivery may be provided by private firma or NGOs), particularly in the areas of technology transfers, soil conservation measures, and animal and plant health protection.

Issues: one of the project component will be dealing with construction of water impoundments and diversion of water from streams. There is also a potential for population resettlem~nt; changes in the agricultural production systems. Use of chem1ca;s (fertilizers & pesticides), should also be carefully addressed in the environmental assessment process.


There is some overlap with USAID projects ASSET 2000 (not yet funded), Productive Land Use Systems, and Coffee Revitalization. (e-mail: USAID/Haiti, 12Dec96]



38.m J 9 -•ica•. IBRD R d If --- - oa n raatructure Development (RIDE)

Projected IBRD Funding: Projected Total Cost: Tentative World Bank Board Date: Stage:


$ 60 million $125 million After September 1998 Project preparation is awaiting conclusion of policy dialogue with the government. C JMPA7480 April 1998 April 1998

Description: causeway and Town and St. traffic flow

The project includes (a) upgrading of Kingston Port road; (b) upgrading of highway Al between Spanish Ann's Bay; and (c) a program to improve the urban by developing bus terminals in Kingston.

Issues: USAID/Jamaica identified this World Bank project as one that should be more carefully examined. According to World Bank documents, it includes the "upgrading of the highway Al between Spanish Town and St. Ann's Bay." The subject road goes through the Rio Cobre river basin. The road may also transect or come near National Forest Reserves which are located along the St. Catherine and St. Ann Parish boundaries).

According to the February, 1998 "Monthly World Bank Operational Summary of Proposed Projects" listing, the RIDE project was classified as an "Environmental Assessment C." (A category C indicates that an environmental analysis is normally unnecessary. The October 1996 Project Information Document indicates that the project is EA Category A). Based on our experience, we believe that the subject project should at least be classified as an Environmental Assessment B or A. Any road improvement activity has the potential to cause significant environmental impacts -particularly in watershed areas and forest reserves.

Status: These comments have been forwarded to World Bank staff.

,,

3 9 • 11 Panama : June 1998: Page -81-

IBRD - Second Roads Rehabilitation (and IDB National Rural Roads Program II - PR0104)

Projected IBRD Funding: Projected Total Cost: Tentative Board Date: Stage:


$ 85 million $124 million July 1998 Negotiations completed, Board presentation was scheduled for June 16, 1998 B R98-126 June 1998 June 1998

Description: The project will support

(a) rehabilitation of selected high-priority primary and secondary roads, urban roads and intersections;

(b) continued development of institutional capacity of the Ministry of Public Works; and

(c) urban traffic management, improving urban passenger transport, improving maintenance management and training staff.

··Issues: The Surmnary Project Analysis states that "The rehabilitation of the project roads and streets is not expected to cause any adverse environmental impacts since the works are generally on the existing road alignments." It concludes that there will be no negative impacts arising from the works. However, several segments in eastern Panama Province raise concerns about serious environmental and social impacts:

a. The above statement is simplistic; even rehabilitated roads will have some direct impacts (such as increased erosion dur_ing constructing) or indirect impacts (improved access can cause induced development). The fact that the road segment running from Margarita-San Jos6 (which comes within a few kilometer• of the sensitive Kuna Yala indigenous people• reserve, the Chargas National Park and the Panama canal watershed) was originally included in the project raises concerns about environmental and social considerations in project selection and analysis. USAID realizes that this segment is no longer included in the project. However, USAID is concerned about MOP's Environmental Unit and its ability to carry out environmental/social planning, analysis and monitoring. Will this Margarita-San Jose road be built anyway -- without proper analysis and mitigation, as World Bank and IDB money "frees up" other government funds for roads?


b. In the eastern part of the Panama Province three other segments also raise concerns (one near Loma de Naranjo, an0ther Jenene, and another near Canazas). These are lo~ated along the corridor of the proposed IDB-financed $80-rnillion National Rural Road• Program II (PR0104) to be completed in three segments, leading up to Yaviza in the Darien Province. Financing for the IDB project is still pendi~g.the.completion an environmental and social analysis and m1t1gat1on plan. Approval of the IDB Project is planned for the end of 1998. The road is controversial because of potential impacts on the region's biodiversity and indigenous peoples. Participation of indigenous peoples and other local groups in the road project and mitigation plans is also a concern. These three road segments should be considered in the context of the above environmental and social analysis and mitigation plan, rather than as separate segments.

2. Recommendations,

a. There should be clear benchmarks or accomplishments for institutional strengthening of MOP's environmental unit. These accomplishments should be a condition of the loan.

b. MOP should submit an annual project work plan for review and approval by bank staff as a condition of the loan. Approval of the annual project work plan should be based on the environmental and social analyses of proposed projects.

c. The three road segments (Loma de Naranjo, Jenen6, and Canazas) should be analyzed in the context of the IDB road project environmental and social assessment and mitigation plans.

Status: The project had been slated for a June 16, 1998 board meeting, under the •streamlined Procedure," whereby there is no board discuaaion before its approval. At the request of the U.S. Executive Director the project was removed from the Streamlined Procedure to allow for discussio~. World Bank staff is currently reviewing NGO and USAID concerns in the field; the board date has been postponed.

40.~ Panama:


IDB - Electricity Expansion Program

Projected IDB Funding: Projected Total Cost: Tentative Board Date: Stage: IDB EA Category: Project ID: Project first entered: Entry updated:

$ 70 million $100 million June 24, 1998 Appraisal 3 PN006l April 1998 June 1998

Description: Rehabilitation and expansion of energy production, transmission and distribution in order to satisfy future energy demand and improve the level of services provided by IRHE. The program would also include studies to analyze energy expansion alternatives for the country.

Issues: An EIA for this project was submitted and approved previously. At the moment,there are plans for the expansion of new lines of transmission and distribution to run through Chiriqui, Veraguas, Cocle, West Panama and metropolitan area of Panama City.

INRENARE (the National Institute for Renewable Natural Resources) intends to do a preliminary environmental evaluation for each area through which the line is passing, and anticipates··no major problems except in the Panama West area where the possibility exists of cutting a large quantity of trees. However, NGO experts point out that Cocle and the north part of Panama City might also be affected because IRHE will use the highest sites ('cordilleras') for installation of towers. The completed evaluation from INRENARE is expected a month from now. Depending on the quantity of hectares affected, INRENARE will recommend modifying the course of the programmed line. The INRENARE evaluation should be reviewed to make sure that impacts to the cordilleras are also taken into account.

Status:· These comments have been forwarded to IDB staff.

'


IDB - Mining Sector Loan


$ 15 million Pending definition Unknown In early stages of preparation. Pending definition PN0ll4 April 1998 April 1998

Description: determined.

The program's components have not yet been

Issues: The mining projects currently authorized are only for nonmetallic minerals. Since the last protests from indigenous groups affected by mining projects in the Chiriqui Province, the GOP assured the public that the Ministry of Commerce would submit an EIA prior to approval of any mining project. An unresolved problem still exists with an indigenous group in Chiriqui where a mining project·is in the process of being approved by the GOP. There is another mining project within the Chagres National Park in the Panama Canal watershed that has yet to be approved by INRENARB (the National Institute for Renewable Natural Resources) because of concerns about park degradation. INRENARE is considering requiring mitigation through the purchase of additional lands for the National Park.


, ,

42.~ Panama:


IDB - Social Emergency Fund II

Projected IDD Funding: Projected Total Cost: Tentative Board Date: Stage: IDB EA Category: Project ID: Project first entered: Entry updated:

$ 30 million Pending definition Unknown In early preparation Pending definition PNOlll April 1998 April 1998

Description: Definition of a strategy to extend the mandate of the Social Emergency Fund to include an increased emphasis on local development.

Issues: The change towards increased emphasis on local development has no salient environmental impacts. Regarding FES projects in general, INRENARE and the Social Emergency Fund (FES) are negotiating an agreement that would allow FES to use a computerized mechanism for environmental impact assessments of its projects (these EIAs will then be submitted to INRENARE for approval). FES has met w~th ANCON, an NGO, to learn about their computerized EIA program with the possibility of adopting the same methodology. When the system is up and running, it should be required that all proposed FES projects pass through the EIA process before approval.



43.a Panama: IDB - Tourism Support Program

Projected IDB Funding: Projected Total Cost: Tentative Board Cat~: Stage: IDB EA Category: Project ID: Project first entered: Entry updated:

$ 2.7 million $ 3.5 million July 15, 1998 Final Pending definition PN0120 April 1998 June 1998

Description: The proposed technical cooperation would assist the Government of Panama to develop an economically, environmentally and socially sustainable tourism industry to respond to market demand, foster private sector participation, and increase tourism revenue, employment and training opportunities for the labor force. In order to meet these objectives the program would include the creation of a strategic market plan, institutional reorganization, and environmental planning support for the sector, as a basis for investment or specific project activities based on the market analysis. The components that are projected are as follows: (a) tourism planning and institutional strengthening; (b) regulatory development, environmental planning and protection for the tourism sector; and (c) community and NGO involvement and linkages with the tourism sector. The first _component would include: (a) a rigorous market research·study to identify needs and expectations of international and local client demand, and thus lay the foundation for priority promotion, marketing and investment decisions; (b) institutional analysis and reorganization, including analysis of current institutional structure and bottlenecks, institutional reorganization of the Panamanian Institute for Tourism (IPAT) and other public agencies, as well as clear definitions for the role of the public and private sector, as well as responsibilities for marketing, promotion, tourism development review and approval, environmental protection, regulation and community relations; (c) socio-economic analysis of the tourism sector, including consolidation of baseline data on the sector's direct and indirect benefits to the national economy as well as sub-regional developmen~, implications of alternative development strategies, and development of improved guidelines for tourism project review and analyaisr and (d) analysis ol current information and technology support systems and recommendations for optimized management information systems, integrated internet and intranet capabilities, information and technology support systems and training. On the basis of established market demand and . institutional reorganization, the second component would provide for the proposal of a regulatory and environmental protection framework for the tourism sector to enable sustainable development. These activities can include: (a) elaboration of a regulatory plan, including for land use, and a c~astal manage~ent framework for sustainable development; (b) baseline and carrying


capacity studies; (c) development of industry standards, licensing rul~s.and supervision mechanisms for quality control of tourism facilities and services; (d) improved public/private sector linkages; (e) ide~t~f~cation of necessary infrastructure proJects; and (f) poss1b1l1t1es of privatization or concession of facilities currently owned and managed by IPAT. Environmental land-use and natural resource-use regulatory studies will be carried out for those tourism zones and projects that have the highest priority and market responsiveness, as identified in the market research. To ensure community participation and benefits, consultation with communities involved in projects identified will be undertaken in the third component. Consultation mechanisms will include: (a) surveys of existing tourist facilities, services, skills and interest offered by communities; (b) assessment of potential employment generation, and social and environmental impacts of tourism; (b) surveys of traditional resource use of potential tourism asses (i.e., fisheries, forested areas), including use by indigenous communities to ensure socially compatible recreational activities and avoid conflicts; (d) discussion of project proposals generated by strategic marketing plan to obtain community input, and identification of training and community development activities; and (e) identification of organizational response needed by IPAT to better coordinate community and NGO involvement activities. Amount of loan: $3.5 million

Issues: The Panamanian Institute for Tourism is working on the development of mechanisms for a sustainable tourism industry. NGOs cite the need for development of the tourism industry, but recommend that it be geared towards low volume/high profits to limit environmental degradation. Legislation to regulate tourism exists; namely, IPAT reviews all tourism projects within a period of 90 days and, if necessary, makes recommendations to I~ARE regarding revision of the environmental aspects of the proJects. However, threats to the natural environment remain because of poor enforcement. There is particular concern about projects in Bocas del Toro where hotel construction plans could affect coastal biodiversity. A well.-prepared study of land use and carrying capacity is necessary in order to minimize environmental damage from tourism projects.

status: These comments have bee,n forwarded to IDB staff.


44. Paraguay: IDB - Development of Asuncion Bay Coastal Area


$ ~o million $112 million To be determined In preparation. 3 PR0043 January 1997 June 1998

Description: An integrated program to protect Asunci6n from flooding by the Paraguay River. The program would include:

(a) construction of a protective road; (b) residential development; (c) relocation of inhabitants by the river; (d) housing consolidation; (e) protection of natural areas; (f) employment improvement; and (g) reconversion of building facilities (convention center,

tourism projects, and other facilities).

Issues: The design of this project incorporated enviro·nmental considerations from. the very beginning, however environmental . impact assessment should be done as required by Paraguayan law. Proposed dredging and filling activities should be designed so as to have minimal impact on wetland ecosystems along the Paraguay river bank. This project has also been framed by NGOs and Government within the context of the controversial Hidrovia project proposed for the Paraguay River. Therefore, it should be studied with care and integrated within the broader context of development for the region. Resettlement indicates that the project environmental assessment category should be a 4. [e-mail: USAID/Paraguay 03Dec96]

Status: Comments have been conveyed to the IDB staff, which reported that both projects [the Asunci6n Bay project and the National Environmental Program - PR017] contains specific components or activities for deve~oping and implementing sustainable natural resource policies, including the establishment of an independent environmental authority, strengthening the Environment and Forestry Directorates of the Subsecretary of Natural Resources, and a planning and policy group in the re-structured MAG. Finally, at the level of extension and education activities, the Terms of Reference include sustainable resource use, integrated pest management, etc. (E-mail: IDB 25Apr97]


..

45.~ Paraguay:


IDB - Cotton Sector Support Program


$ 25.65 million (phase 1) $ 47 million June 23 1998 Final, approval Required PR0082 April 1998 June 1998

~escription:. T~e program would help small cotton producers inc~ease their incomes by substantially improving productive and agricultural health technology and practices, as well as phytosanitary monitoring mechanisms in the country. The program would finance two components: (a) support for the Cotton Cultivation Reactivation Plan through a five-year integrated national campaign to control the weevil population; and (b) technical assistance for the private sector in the production of selected and treated cotton seeds. Estimated total cost: $25 million (phase 1).

Issues: USAID/Paraguay has general concerns about the environmental aspects of this project. As of April 1998, IDB had not released the EA report, and USAID/Paraguay has been unable to comment on it. The US Executive Director's office abstained on ·the project when it came to a vote in late June because the EIA had only been released 15 days before the board vote (the Pelosi amendment requires that the USG not vote in favor of any project whose EIA has not been released at least 120 days before the board vote). In view of the concerns highlighted below, it seems the project was prematurely approved by IDB.

USAID/Paraguay, once it was able to review the project document and Environmental Impact Assessment, had the following comments: ... there aren't significant concerns related to the environmental impact of the Project and the proposed mitigation measures.

However, in a broader analysis, we could discuss if it's reasonable to invest $50 million in a support program for the cotton sector, which is seen as a very limited strategy for Paraguay's economic growth. Thi~could be confronted with other development options such as the promotion of agricultural diversification, forestry, sustainable aero-industries, etc.

If the program is successful, it should improve the cotton production in Paraguay, in sever~l aspect~: improved seeds~ implementation of soil conservation techniques, crop rotation, integrated management of plagues, and controlled use of fertilizers and pesticides. The last point is the weakest and less covered in the project.


These.actions sho~ld minimize the expansion of the agricultural frontier, preventing the remaining forest of the Oriental Region from practically disappearing.

Going to the specifics, USAID/Paraguay believes that the expected results. of the compone1:1t ','communication campaign" might be too p~etentiou~ and very difficult to achieve. Broadcasting and disseminating messages ?n a particular subject, by itself, is not a guarantee that they will be attended by the public, understood and that consequently people will behave in the desired way. '

The1proposed mitigation measures are unclear in several points. I

don t know how the IDB reads, considers and eventually includes those measures into the program design.

Status: These comments have been conveyed to IDB staff through Treasury and the USED's office.

46. 11 Paraguaya IDB - Support for International Trade Negotiation• (Technical Cooperation)


$ 2.0 million $ 3.43 million March 1998 Final Not required TC9610503 April 1998 June 1998

Description: The program would support institutional strengthening activities aimed at helping the country conduct international trade negotiations.

Issues: This project focuses on the improvement of Paraguay's performance on the design and conduction of international trade negotiations. Its main objective is to strengthen the technical trade capacity of the nationa+ institutions responsible for the international trade policy. The Bank environmental review recommended to, include the topic of "trade and environment" in the training courses programmed if?- the different components of the program. However, in the project description this issue is mentioned without further explanationa on how the topic will be developed in the courses and how this relates to the whole project. Also, the measure of including environmental issues in training courses is not sufficient. The environmental concerns related to international trade, mainly in the regional case (Mercosur, etc), have to be considered in the action plans and policies that are going to be produced as a result of this project. Strengthening of regional regulation• for minimizing environmental impact of trade, is the meat important one. Status: These comments have been forwarded to IDB staff.

..

REFERENCES

In addition to USAID's Early Project Notification System, the following references were used in compiling project data and descriptions:

ADB Business Opportunities: Proposed Projects. Procurement Notices and Contract Awards. Asian Development Bank, Metro Manila, Philippines. December 1997.

Country Program Notes 1993-96. Asian Development Bank, Metro Manila, Philippines. March 1993, March 1993.

Monthly Operational Summary of Bank and IDA Proposed Projects (As of June 15. 1998}. World Bank. Washington, DC. July 9, 1998.

Monthly Operations Report, January 1998. International Finance Corporation, Washington, DC.

Monthly Report on status of Loan Applications and Technical cooperation and status of Procurement, February 1998. Inter-American Development Bank, Washington, DC. December 1995.

Project Information Documents World Bank, various dates. These reports, available at the Bank's Public Information Center, were used extensively in describing World Bank projects.

ouarterly operational summary (as of 31 January 1998>. African Development Bank, Central Projects Department, Abidjan, Cote D'Ivoire.

MEDICAL WASTB MANAOBMBHTa

Dioxins and Furans; Spidemiologic Assessment of cancer Risks and Other Human Health Effects. Environmental Health Perspectives, Volume 106, Supplement 2, April 1998

Toxic Profile for Chlorinated Dibenzo-p-dioxins, Agency for Toxic substances and Disease Registry. IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of the Carcinogenic Risk of Chemicals to Humans, International Agency for Re,-arch on Cancer, 1979.

Autoclaving versus Medical waste Incineration; A viable Policy Alternative Sut Not Without Risks. University of Massachusetts, Lowell, Work Environment Department, Work Environment Policy.

Implementing Hospital waste Management, a guide to health care facilities. Srishti, September 1997;