E2254 Public Disclosure Authorized...

Department of Environment and Natural Resources ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT BUREAU

Integrated Persistent Organic Pollutants Management Project (IPOPs Project)

World Bank-Global Environment Facility (GEF)

GEF Grant No. P106885

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK (ESAF)

Executive Summary

2 January 2010

E2254V2

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

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

i

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1

2.0 SECTOR BACKGROUND 1

3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 4

4.0 APPROACH TO ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT 5

5.0 PROJECT COMPONENT ACTIVITIES UNDER THE FRAMEWORK 5

6.0 PROJECT-RELATED ENVIRONMENTAL/SOCIAL IMPACTS AND RISKS

8

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

IMPLEMENTATION15

11.0 COSTS FOR ESAF IMPLEMENTATION 16


1

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The Environmental and Social Assessment Framework for the Integrated Persistent Organic Pollutants Management Project (IPOPs Project) provides guidance to ensure that each site-specific activity under each project component will be implemented in an environmentally and socially sound manner. The World Bank Operational Policy (OP) 4.01 is the umbrella policy for this framework and under this umbrella it also covers other World Bank policies applicable to the project activities, including OP 4.12 on Involuntary Resettlement and OP 4.10 on Indigenous Peoples. This framework provides a sector background for Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs); describes the project and activities; identifies the impacts of activities; describes strategies for mitigating impacts; provides environmental and safeguards frameworks and instruments, with guidance documents; sets the roles and responsibilities of key stakeholders; guides the key stakeholders in preparing and reviewing safeguards instruments; provides guidance for monitoring and supervising the implementation of the environmental management plan; presents the particulars of the public disclosure and presentation conducted; and states the requirements and costs for capacity building and training.

2.0 SECTOR BACKGROUND

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

needed; • Monitoring and surveillance of health status relevant to potential impacts of POPs is

necessary; • The country's capacity to monitor dioxin and furan releases is limited; • Enforcement of existing laws relative to dioxin and furan emissions is weak; • Management and disposal of POPs-contaminated equipment (PCBs) must be

enhanced; and • Identification and management of POPs-contaminated sites should be expanded. 2.1 POPs Production, Emissions, Stockpiles, and Contamination 2.1.1 POPs Sources in the Philippines The Stockholm Convention on POPs identified twelve initial POPs in three categories: pesticides POPs, industrial POPs, and unintentionally produced POPs (UPOPs). A survey revealed the following sources of POPs in the Philippines: (1) POPs pesticide reformulations; (2) POPs pesticide use and dioxin and furan releases from open burning on agricultural farms; (3) dioxin and furan emissions from pulp and paper mills, fuel-burning and waste-processing facilities, and the


2

iron and steel and cement manufacturing industries; (4) Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) from transformer servicing facilities; and (5) PCBs, dioxins, and furans from electric utilities and hospitals. The Philippine NIP also reports the occurrence and distribution of POPs in the Philippines through economic profiles of these sources.

2.1.2 Estimates of POPs Stockpiles in the Philippines An inventory of POPs conducted as part of the Philippine Enabling Activity Project of the DENR-EMB, revealed the following: POPs Pesticides. Due to various regulations, use of POPs pesticides in the Philippines dropped significantly, leaving dioxins, furans, and PCBs as the country’s primary POPs concern. Dioxins and Furans. Using internationally-derived emissions factors, dioxin and furan emissions from all sources considered were estimated at 534 grams toxic equivalent per year (g TEQ/a). Uncontrolled combustion processes released the highest level of dioxins and furans, with 187 g TEQ/a, or 35 percent of total annual releases, emitting 135 g TEQ/a into the air. This is followed by power generation and cooking, with estimated releases of 157 g TEQ/a. The highest level of release to the air was 328 g TEQ/a, with 35 percent attributed to uncontrolled combustion of agricultural residues, 30 percent to firewood cooking, and 18 percent to subcategories of biomass-fired boilers. By 2004, the Philippine Second National Inventory of dioxin and furan emissions showed a lower total emission of 458 g TEQ/a. The Philippines intends to conduct a third inventory to include locally developed emission factors. PCBs. In 2004, the Philippines undertook a PCB inventory of 8,027 pieces of equipment. Only 143, or 1.8 percent, were confirmed as containing PCB oil; 98.2 percent were assumed to contain PCB oil and to require further validation and sampling. Of the equipment surveyed, 7,854 were transformers. Around 84 percent of these were located in electric utilities. A total of 6,658 of these units (85 percent) were reported to be online; 1,017 units (13 percent) were at servicing facilities for retrofilling. The collective weight of PCB oil was estimated at 2,401 MT; dry PCB equipment was estimated at 4,479 MT. About 64 percent was located at electric utilities and cooperatives.

2.1.3 Contaminated Sites in the Philippines The production, use, and disposal of POPs in the Philippines resulted in the contamination of land resources. Some sites are heavily contaminated with PCB wastes and obsolete POP pesticides, and among the various issues that have surfaced concerning their management are the country’s limited experience with identification, characterization, and remediation and its lack of adequate financial resources to undertake these actions. Sites potentially contaminated with PCBs include electrical utilities, old industrial plants, and transformer servicing facilities. The top three PCB hotspots are the National Capital Region, which contains the highest quantity of confirmed PCBs; Region 4, ranking second, with the greatest number of electric cooperative respondents; and Region 3, where Subic Bay and Clark Freeport Zones are located. Site assessments have been conducted at Clark and Subic. Other sites with PCB and PCB-contaminated materials include old urban and industrial areas of Cebu and Davao City and the Meralco warehouse at Barangay San Joaquin, Pasig


3

City, where PCB-contaminated equipment and materials excavated from the decommissioned Rockwell Power Plant in Makati City were encapsulated.

2.1.4 POPs Monitoring Capacity in the Philippines With its limited technical infrastructure for POPs monitoring, the Philippines conducts POPs monitoring and related activities on a limited basis. Monitoring of POPs generation and releases to the environment is a primary function of the DENR-EMB; it is also a concern of the Fertilizer and Pesticide Authority (FPA). Both agencies employ trained technical personnel to conduct environmental monitoring, but they lack the technical infrastructure for performing actual POPs measurements and analysis. Monitoring POPs impacts on human health is a function of the Department of Health. Other national government agencies and Philippine universities address similar issues, relying on existing foreign-funded monitoring activities to perform POPs research and monitoring. 2.2 POPs Management Practices 2.2.1 Control of Dioxin and Furan Releases Uncontrolled burning, a source of dioxins and furans, includes natural and deliberate burning at dump sites, biomass burning, waste incineration, accidental fires, and unregulated backyard burning in rural areas. Despite laws and regulations, solid waste disposal operations lag in controlling and preventing waste burning; local governments, in general, lack the financial and technical capability and available space to comply fully with requirements or to employ basic mitigation techniques, such as regular waste compaction and soil covering and gas management. At the upstream side of solid waste management, the low rate of household waste collection in all regions (except the National Capital Region), indicate that, where cost, convenience, or local custom and social acceptance make that option attractive, waste is being burned in the open. 2.2.2 PCB Management Surveys show that electrical and industrial companies contract out to servicing facilities the repair, maintenance, and retrofilling of transformers and other equipment containing PCBs. As disclosed, machines used to filter PCB oil were also used to filter mineral oil, thus resulting in the spread of PCB contamination. Nonusable oils are discarded either on the ground or into drains and canals. Such practices indicate the following: (1) a low level of knowledge and awareness about PCBs and their threat to the environment and the public; and (2) lack of technical infrastructure for conducting regular monitoring, resulting in improper PCB waste management by industries. The Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Environmental Management Bureau (DENR-EMB) has established a PCB inventory database with support from the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) Trust Fund. It has not yet been completed because not all PCBs have been identified. As of June 2009, about 657 PCB owners had been identified and registered, but only 69 PCB inventory reports and PCB management plans had been submitted. Final treatment and disposal when undertaken by PCB owners has been accomplished by sending it to countries that have facilities that can handle this task in an environmentally sound manner. This option will be supplemented by


4

a GEF-financed Philippine based non-combustion treatment facility which is scheduled to begin operation in 2010. 2.3 Analysis of Regulatory Framework for Philippine POPs Management

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


5

implementation of the CCO for PCBs, the World Bank, as the trustee of the CIDA Trust Fund, helped the DENR-EMB to develop a Guidance Document on PCB Management for Electric Cooperatives.

3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

Given the above sector background and other considerations, a total of five components were identified for the project. Component1: Strengthening the Regulatory Framework and Capacity Building for POPs

Monitoring Component 2: Reduction of Releases of Unintentional Persistent Organic Pollutants

(UPOPs) Component 3: Environmentally Sound Management of Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) Component 4: Identification, Prioritization, and Demonstration of Management of POPs

Contaminated Sites Component 5: Project Management These components address, in whole or in part and in various combinations, the following themes:

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

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

remediation of POPs occurrences. • Training for capacity building in managing and monitoring POPs and enforcing

POPs regulations. • Informing, educating and communicating about POPs with concerned government

departments and communities. Component 1 aims to strengthen the regulatory and monitoring capacity for phasing out POPs use and for reducing POPs exposure and releases. While the Philippines has established much of the legislative framework necessary for chemicals management generally and for other activities related to POPs management in particular, significant gaps remain, and in many cases existing legal mechanisms are not fully consistent with or do not specifically support implementation of the Stockholm Convention. In addition, the country has not yet established a system for monitoring these pollutants’ health effects.

Component 2 is designed to improve understanding of UPOPS — products of industrial processes or incomplete burning, largely from open burning in agriculture and municipal solid wastes — and to demonstrate how such releases can be reduced. Emphasis will be on improving the understanding of emissions, both from targeted sources and nationally; demonstrating implementation of BAT and BEP for reducing emissions from the solid waste management sector; and establishing BAT/BEP for other sources. This component will be implemented by the Department of Science and Technology (DOST), the National


6

Solid Waste Management Commission (NSWMC), and EMB through guideline development, pilot demonstrations, training, and dissemination. Component 3 will assist in minimizing the risk of PCBs exposure to humans and the environment by strengthening DENR oversight and improving the on-site management practices of PCB owners. PCBs were never produced in the Philippines, but they are used or stored in electrical equipment in the electric utility and manufacturing sectors, in old commercial buildings, and in transformer servicing facilities. A partial PCB inventory has been completed and standards for PCB management have been established; however, only a small percentage of operators has developed or implemented a PCB management plan or undertaken safe on site management practices. This component will support the DENR through the completion of the national PCB inventory, offer technical assistance and training for PCB owners and DENR inspectors, and facilitate demonstration of good on-site PCB management through implementation of PCB management plans. Component 4 aims to strengthen the country’s enabling capacity to reduce the risks posed by environmental POPs contamination by identifying contaminated sites; establishing a strategic framework, technical guidelines, and professional capacity to help address them; and building public knowledge and awareness. Some sites within the Philippines have been confirmed as being contaminated with POPs, including areas that once housed electrical transformers, old dump sites, former production facilities, and pesticide storage sites. Other sites are suspected of being contaminated, and many others have not yet been identified. The cleanup of these sites is not mandatory or otherwise regulated under Philippine law. Activities for this component include the development of a national inventory of sites and a national remediation strategy, including legislative and regulatory strengthening; establishment of site cleanup standards; national training and information dissemination; demonstration of site control methods for reducing exposure; and demonstration of contaminated site cleanup. Component 5 will support DENR in the management of the project. A Project Management Office (PMO) will be set-up at DENR-EMB to handle the day-to-day project management activities, including project management and coordination; information, education, and communication; monitoring and evaluation; and financial management and procurement.

4.0 APPROACH TO ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT

The environmental and social assessment adopted for this project follows the requirements of World Bank OP 4.01, the umbrella policy for environmental and social assessment. Under this umbrella, the framework covered other applicable Bank policies as identified through the World Bank review process, in particular OP 4.12 on Involuntary Resettlement and OP 4.10 on Indigenous Peoples. The project has multiple components, and the framework identified the activities under each component in which potential environmental and social safeguards issues may arise (see Section 5). After these activities were identified, their likely field operations were determined to isolate their potential social and environmental impacts (see Section 6) and from this research applicable mitigation strategies and measures were developed (see Section 7) with reference to the environmental and social policies of World Bank and GOP and local and international good practices. The roles and responsibilities for the Environmental and Social Assessment Framework were also defined covering screening subactivities for safeguards issues and requirements;


7

undertaking the required assessments; reviewing and approval of the activities for compliance; and ensuring implementation of mitigation measures and monitoring (see Section 8). Environmental guidelines and social assessment frameworks were developed for use in the preparation of the appropriate subactivity safeguards plans (see Section 9). Monitoring and supervision procedures were provided for the implementation phase of the project (see Section 10). Public disclosure and consultations on the framework were described. The procedures for consultation in the preparation of the various safeguards plans as per World Bank policy were also outlined as requirements under the framework (see Section 11). Lastly, requirements and costs of capacity building and training were outlined for different stakeholders (see Sections 12 and 13) to help ensure the effective implementation of the ESA process and safeguards. The assessment was conducted using data gathered from the literature, project design technical reports, and field surveys, with guidance from the World Bank project preparation team.

5.0 PROJECT COMPONENT ACTIVITIES UNDER THE ESA FRAMEWORK

5.1 Activities Covered under Environmental and Social Assessment The project involves investment cofinancing, technical assistance, and training. The environmental and social assessment for the IPOPs Project focused on those activities requiring physical works at a site. These physical activities involve the application of technologies that may directly alter the site, cause pollution, and risk affecting the local community and/or may require action under the World Bank safeguards policies. These activities and the estimated number of sites are as follows:

Component Activity/Subactivity Estimated Number of Sites

Component 2

Investments in BAT/BEP demonstration for the solid waste sector:

6*

• Works to stop dump site burning • Dump site closures • Improvements in landfill operations Component 3

Implementation of PCB Management 800

Component 4

Demonstration of site remediation and site control:

• Site remediation demonstration 2 • Site control measures for potentially highly

contaminated sites 1 to 3

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

Waste Sector This component includes demonstration of BAT/BEP to stop dump site burning, close dump sites, and improve landfill operation. Investments will include fire suppression (fire fighting exercises using soil, fire suppression foams and equipment) and preventing future disposal site burning as


8

part of landfill operation and dumpsite closure (application of soil cover, compaction, proper grading, improved administration, security, safety and waste inspection). From 33 prospective local government units (LGUs), 6 will be considered for assistance. Two solid waste disposal sites have been targeted to begin with. At these sites, the identification and development of interventions will be undertaken in the first year. These sites are located in General Santos City and in Iloilo City. The other specific sites as well as the project activities per site will be identified during implementation. 5.3 Component 3: Implementation of Environmentally Sound PCB

Management The activity will involve the implementation of sound on-site PCB management practices by about 800 PCB owners including equipment identification, testing, labeling, inventory, and safe storage. The activity will be supported by technical assistance that would develop and improve PCB management plans, provide training for their implementation and enhance regulatory oversight. The first year will be focused on inventorying the PCB owners nationally, while developing the PCB management plans and providing training and implementation of the plans will begin by the second year of the project. Treatment and disposal of PCBs are not included in the project scope and will be the responsibility of the PCB owners. Several environmentally sound options are available to the PCB owners including sending it to accredited facilities abroad and using the GEF financed non combustion facility. 5.4 Component 4: Site Remediation and Site Control Demonstration of site remediation is proposed at two sites: (i) a former PCB transformer site in the Clark Freeport Zone, under the administration of the Clark Development Corporation (CDC); and (ii) the fire-fighting training area in Subic Bay Freeport Zone, under the administration of the Subic Bay Management Authority (SBMA). As demonstrations, the entire process of identification of the technology and types of interventions along with the assessment of environmental and social risks and safeguards elements will be undertaken and carefully documented as part of the project to allow for its use in training and standards adoption. The activity will have the following major phases: (1) site assessment, environmental and social assessment and technology choice; (2) remedial design; (3) remedial action; and (4) operation and maintenance (including site closeout). Site characterization, activities, remedial design and cleanup approach, and environmental and social assessment will be undertaken during the first year of the project. The actual site remediation activities to be undertaken in year 2 will depend upon the choice of the technology which will be decided based on the effectiveness in reducing risk. The technologies employed may include, in situ or ex situ treatment processes and could involve offsite treatment or disposal. The site control subactivity will fund the development and implementation of demonstration site control measures in one to three sites, including institutional and physical measures to limit access and exposure to contaminated sites. The demonstration site will be selected in year 3 of the project based on the inventory of contaminated sites to be prepared in the course of the project. Site owners will receive site control training to reduce public exposure to the health risks of contaminated sites. The choice of such measures will depend upon the effectiveness in reducing risk and may take the form of physical containment, through fencing, capping, engineered bottom barriers, immobilization processes, and vertical barriers, or of institutional controls, such as restrictions on well use, title or deed restrictions.


9

6.0 PROJECT-RELATED ENVIRONMENTAL/SOCIAL IMPACTS AND RISKS

This section outlines the potential environmental and social impacts and risks considered in developing the overall environmental and social safeguards framework including the guidelines for development of subactivity impact mitigation measures and safeguards plans. 6.1 Component 2: Investments in BAT/BEP Demonstration for the Solid

Waste Sector This component will cover demonstrations of BAT/BEP for fire suppression to stop dump site burning and measures to prevent burning as part of dumpsite closure and landfill operations. An assessment to identify potential environmental and social impacts was undertaken in an example three (3) out of the 33 sites identified as potential candidates for inclusion in the project. The assessment sought to understand the environmental impacts of the technologies and practices that will be used to achieve the objectives of this component and evaluated the effects of project activities on the structures, livelihoods, and other assets of waste pickers and the presence of or collective attachment of indigenous peoples. Environmental Impacts:The following environmental issues were identified:

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

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

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

receive garbage. Social Impacts: Measures to stop dump site burning, outside of the health and safety issues covered under the EMP, are not anticipated to have social impacts as the waste picking typically does not occur in areas where there is active burning and land acquisition is not necessary for the activity. Similarly, landfill operations are not anticipated to have social impacts outside of those to be considered in the landfill operational plan. However, social impacts will arise from activities to close dump sites. The social impacts include the following:

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

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

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

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

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


10

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

The anticipated magnitude and nature of the impacts on wastepickers are as follows: Number of people affected: The number of waste pickers range from 100 to 600 per dumpsite. Waste pickers include children, juveniles, adult males, and adult females. At none of the sites did the social assessment find communities of indigenous peoples living and working as waste pickers. For the six project sites to be pursued, the estimated number of affected waste pickers is therefore anticipated to be between 600 and 3,600. Impacts on Livelihoods: The extent of loss of livelihoods of waste picking due to dumpsite closure activities under the project could be total or partial. Waste pickers normally earn between US$3 to US$4 per day from waste picking. Work schedules follow the collection and dumping schedule of garbage trucks. Their opportunities outside of waste picking can be limited as waste pickers are generally migrants from the rural areas and some do not have regular access to paid labor. Many have obtained only an elementary education; rarely does one find a high school graduate engaged in waste picking. They are also stigmatized as the activity is considered the lowest kind of work, and waste pickers are lumped with common criminals making them vulnerable to harassment and exploitation. It can also affect entire families as waste picking is generally a family activity, involving both parents and children. Women and children tend to work in dumpsites more than the men who generally engage in street picking or as itinerant waste buyers. Impacts on Structures: The structures used by the waste pickers are mostly temporary, made of discarded carton and plastic propped up by wooden or plastic poles. These are generally used for resting and storage areas for collected recyclables. A few residential structures made of semi-permanent materials like wooden boards with galvanized iron roofing can be found on dumpsites. 6.2 Component 3: Implementation of PCB Management

The PCB Management Plan to be implemented by the PCB owners includes environmentally sound practices for onsite PCB management including identification, testing, labeling and inventory procedures; decommissioning; and safe storage procedures. Residual environmental management issues considered as part of implementation of these procedures include safety and health risks to workers; pollution prevention; prevention and cleanup of spills of PCBs and PCB oils. Outside of the safety and health issues, there are no social issues for this component. 6.3 Component 4: Demonstration of Site Remediation and Site Control The site cleanup and site control activities will be designed to have minimal environmental and social impact with the overall impact not exceeding the environmental and social risks of leaving a contaminated site untouched. The process of technology choice and remediation design and implementation will include, as a central element, the reduction of environmental and human risk both during the implementation of the activity and in the long term. Similarly, site control which reduces public exposure from a contaminated site through both physical (fences, soil caps, groundwater barriers and immobilization) and institutional controls (e.g, well restrictions and title restriction) will be designed to reduce environmental and human risk. The potential impacts of undertaking such activities are listed below. Potential environmental impacts:


11

• Construction-related impacts (erosion, surface runoff and soiling of pathways, dust, noise, land disfiguration, temporary increase in waste generation, removal of vegetation, chance finds for cultural property);

• Cross contamination of neighboring soil; • Cross contamination of groundwater due to leaching of contaminants and chemicals

used for treatment; • Temporary elevated levels of odorous gases released from excavation or released from

using chemical for on-site treatment; • Temporary increase in the ambient noise level due to equipment operation like heavy

equipment and motors used in the on-site treatment of soil; • Pollution related to offsite treatment/disposal, transport accidents and emergency

spills; • Short-term exposure of workers to physical, chemical or biological hazards; • Risks to public and visitor safety and health; Potential social impacts:• Removal of useful structures as relevant cultural heritage structures; • Structural impacts due to vibration, dewatering and groundwater pumping • Temporary or long term (for site controls) restriction of access to the current site use

leading to loss of livelihood and economic loss and relocation of activities to another site

• Presence of or dependence of indigenous peoples on the natural resources of the land identified for remediation and control.

• General apprehension of the activity due to lack of local courtesies, timely information dissemination, and timely updates to local key stakeholders

One of the identified sites for Component 4, the Subic Freeport Zone, is covered by an ancestral domain claim of the Aetas. The land is currently used as a fire station and fire safety training ground. No Aetas live on site, nor are they dependent on the site’s natural resources for their livelihoods.

7.0 PROJECT- RELATED MITIGATION STRATEGY

7.1 Overall Approach In response to the impacts and risks identified in the previous section, corresponding options for mitigation measures were identified. In developing these options, reference was made to World Bank safeguards policies OP 4.01 on environmental assessment, OP 4.10 on Indigenous Peoples, and OP 4.12 on involuntary resettlement. World Bank policies were supported by the Philippine Environmental Impact Statement System (PD 1586) and by other Philippine environment and social laws, such as the Ecological Solid Waste Management Act of 2000 (RA 9003), the Toxic Substances and Hazardous and Nuclear Wastes Control Act of 1990 (RA 6969), the Clean Air Act of 1999 (RA 8749), the Clean Water Act of 2004 (RA 9275), and The Indigenous Peoples’ Rights Act of 1997 (RA 8371). Other local and international policies and good practices were considered in developing the mitigation strategy. 7.2 Component 2: Investments in BAT/BEP Demonstration for the Solid

Waste Sector


12

The three identified subactivities (stopping burning, closing open dump sites, and improving landfill operations to prevent burning) entail issues concerning the safety and health of operators, hazards from unstable slopes, impacts from removing or using soil cover, security, impacts on waste pickers and indigenous peoples, resettlement, and potential land acquisition. Environmental Issues:

Investment Criteria: As a strategy, investment criteria were established to ensure that the project constitutes an effective demonstration and that disposal issues are managed properly. To become part of the program, local governments must commit to closing dump sites and making alternative arrangements for disposing of or for reducing, reusing, and recycling (3Rs) garbage per RA 9003. To initiate an activity, the following must be confirmed: (i) the draft dump site closure plan must be updated to meet the requirements of the framework; (ii) financing for closure must be in place; and (iii) other arrangements and financing must have been established for managing disposal and the 3Rs. Fire suppression: For these subactivities, proponents must submit an EMP including issues of safety and health issues, management of collapse prone areas, source and transport of soil cover, and dust. Prevention of Burning as part of Dumpsite Closure: Closure plans will be updated by respective local governments using a revised outline that meets the World Bank OP 4.01 requirements. Plan development will also refer to the Guidebook for the Safe Closure of Disposal Sites (NSWMC and JICA). In addition to the basic elements of the closure operation including measures to prevent burning, it addresses residual environmental impacts including exposure of workers to smoke and gas; slope stability; sourcing and transport of soil cover; security and construction related impacts. Prevention of Burning as part of Landfill Operation: Operational plans will be updated by respective local governments using a revised outline that meets the World Bank OP 4.01 requirements and includes an assessment of residual environmental impacts of operation and associated mitigation measures. Plan development will also refer to the Technical Guide on Solid Waste Disposal Design and Operation (NSWMC). Social Issues:

Livelihood Impacts on Waste Pickers: As dumpsite closure will result in at least partial loss of livelihoods of the waste pickers that depend on the site, a Social Development Framework for Waste pickers is included in the ESAF for use by the local government in assessing the situation of the waste pickers, evaluating the severity of the project’s impact on them and preparing mitigation measures. The framework is based on the principles of: (i) improving the standard of living of waste pickers; (ii) avoiding prolongation of child labor by taking children out of waste picking and returning them to school; (iii) gender responsiveness through differentiation of the needs of women and men in the measures pursued; and, (iv) disclosure and participation. It outlines a process for social assessment, impact assessment and stakeholder analysis that will lead to the development of a site specific Social Development Plan for waste pickers that would mitigate these impacts by providing livelihood alternatives and other opportunities. Consultation with the wastepickers including separately among men, women, young adults or juveniles, and young children is an integral part of this process. In addition to clearly defining the affected population and the mitigation measures the Social Development Plan outlines implementation arrangements, budget, sustainability measures


13

and monitoring and evaluation. The framework also includes procedures for raising and redressing grievances. The exact mitigating measures to be pursued will be developed through a bottom up process through consultation with the waste pickers on a site specific basis; however, the measures are anticipated to take advantage of local government experiences with implementing measures for these groups by building upon the approaches taken in the past while meeting the requirements of the framework. Some examples that have been pursued by local governments are housing programs, non-formal education, feeding programs for children, sewing and bag making for women and elderly, job placement for adult males in construction work and conditional cash transfers. Lessons based on these previous activities, including approaches to ensure their effectiveness and sustainability will be considered for each locality and also more broadly as part of ongoing initiatives nationally on waste pickers with the assistance of JSDF seed grant to be implemented in the first year of the project. For fire suppression activities, impacts on waste pickers are not anticipated and therefore simple measures to ensure the activities do not interfere with waste picking activities or increase health and safety risks to waste pickers are incorporated as part of the EMP. Land Acquisition and Dismantling of Structures: The dump closure activities may involve dismantling of temporary, semi-permanent or permanent structures used by the waste pickers including resting places, food stalls and in some cases residences. These impacts on structures and any temporary land use/acquisition for use for the project activities are managed through a Land Acquisition and Resettlement Policy Framework included as part of the ESAF. The framework requires that for temporary structures, they are disassembled by and the materials obtained by their user with transport assistance provided by the local government. For semi permanent or permanent structures the user is compensated for the full replacement value of the structure. Arrangements for compensation of impacts and restoration of land use in cases of temporary land use/acquisition are also provided under this framework. For each project, specific plans will be developed to address these issues as appropriate. The framework also includes procedures for raising and redressing grievances. Indigenous Peoples: The indigenous peoples’ (IP) policy frameworks contain a process for screening for the presence of or the collective attachment of indigenous peoples to the area affect by the project. Where a collective attachment is found or when the field-based investigation determines that the project area is within an ancestral domain or claim, the project proponent will undertake information disclosure on the project and consultation with the indigenous cultural community leading to consent from the community in the form of a Memoranda of Agreement. This will be done in a manner consistent with the Free and Prior Informed Consent Guidelines of 2006 under RA 8371, as applied by NCIP. The framework also requires that assessment of the presence of a distinct and separate community of indigenous peoples (not just individuals) dependent on the project area (for example through waste picking at the dumpsite) for the practice of their customary cultural, economic, social, religious, or political institutions, separate from those of the dominant society and culture. If such a community is present, the project proponent, with the guidance of World Bank safeguards staff, will assess the IP community's situation (assessing its vulnerabilities, especially cultural identity and poverty), how the proposed project activities might adversely or positively affect that situation, and the community's coping mechanisms. The project proponent will also conduct consultations, obtain the broad support of the affected IP community, and develop an Indigenous


14

Peoples’ Development Plan (IPDP) to address potential impacts and to improve the lives of the IP community. 7.3 Component 3: Implementation of PCB Management The mitigation strategy outlined for addressing the risks of on site management of PCBs is incorporated as part of upgrading and updating PCB management plans, using guidelines, and following an outline that is consistent with World Bank OP 4.01 requirements. Plans will use as their primary reference the upcoming Revised Technical Guidelines for PCB Management. In addition to the basic operational plan for safe on site PCB management, the PCB Management Plan includes environmental plans and procedures related to spill prevention; emergency and cleanup; pollution prevention; and occupational safety and health.

7.4 Component 4: Demonstration of Site Remediation and Site Control Environmental Issues:

A Category “A” Environmental Assessment (EA) Report will be prepared to address both site control and site remediation. The EA content and approach were adapted from the Philippine EIS system, World Bank OP 4.01 and Canadian and USEPA guidelines for such activities. During preparation of these reports, in the absence of local guidelines or good practices, these international guidelines will be used. A key element of the approach is an analysis of alternatives that includes a risk based criteria for evaluating environmental and social impacts for identifying the remediation activities. In addition, a detailed environmental management plan will be prepared for the proposed technology including all activities from entry protocols, staging, cleanup, treatment and as appropriate disposal technologies. Environmental measures to be covered in the EA Report including the entire cleanup process and include soil management, surface water protection, groundwater protection, environmental protocols for transport and disposal as appropriate and control of odor, gaseous substances, volatile chemical substances, dust, and noise. Specifics of personnel safety and health measures and emergency response will also be provided. Social Issues:

Land Acquisition and Resettlement: For the site control and site remediation activities under the project, landowner consent will be a prerequisite for inclusion and participation. Landowners will sign a waiver for monetary compensation for any loss of structures or improvements resulting from remediation and site control activities. Mitigation of any temporary disruptions in the use of the site will be the responsibility of private or government landowners as their counterpart to the project. Due diligence will be conducted on sensitive or general use demonstration sites (such as those that affect water, electricity or other utilities and schools, health care centers and other institutions). The project will provide assistance in transporting equipment and other moveable items to a new site. In addition, compensation for relocation of any informal resettlers on site are also included. In cases where the land used for the demonstrations is used by residential or business renters, the framework requires arrangements for alternative sites to be pursued and if not found compensation for the disturbance is provided. The framework also includes procedures for raising and redressing grievances.


15

Indigenous Peoples: IP issues will be addressed through the same framework used for component 2 for IPs as part of the ESAF which contains a process for screening for the presence of or the collective attachment of indigenous peoples to the area affect by the project and development of an associated Memoranda of Agreement (in case of collective attachment) or IPDP (in case of presence) following Philippine Law and World Bank guidelines. An area in one of the candidate remediation sites, Fire Station 6 of the Subic Bay Freeport Zone, is located within an ancestral domain (now covered by a Certificate of Ancestral Domain Title [CADT R03 HER 0703 0008 A]). Consistent with the Indigenous Peoples Rights Act and its Free, Prior and Informed Consent guidelines, after the activities have been identified and before pursuing them, the SBMA will secure consent and forge a Memorandum of Agreement on the participation of the local Indigenous People. 8.0 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

The roles and responsibilities of concerned parties were identified during the preparation and review of the EA and SA instruments, in the environmental safeguards performance monitoring mechanisms instituted during project implementation, and during the funding of the safeguards. The key players in implementing the proposed activities are the DENR-EMB, partner agencies, activity proponents (site owners and operators), affected persons or communities, and, to an extent, the proponents’ service providers. These players will use various instruments to ensure that the IPOPs project implementation is in accordance with World Bank safeguards policies and GOP environmental and social laws and regulations. The proponent, EMB, and other entities will have the following roles and responsibilities in the different EA and SA activities:

EA and SA Activity

Proponent EMB Other Entities

EA and SA documents preparation

Prepares safeguards plans as required under the ESAF. Conducts consultation with persons or communities affected by the project as per policy requirements.

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

Safeguard plans review and approval

Submits the prepared safeguards plans to EMB. Provides EMB with additional information as needed.

Reviews and endorses safeguards plans to World Bank.

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

Safeguards plan implementation

Notifies EMB and stakeholders of the start date of activity implementation Submits the required self-monitoring reports to EMB

Monitors implementation of environmental and social safeguards

EMB Regional Office will assist EMB CO in the on-field verification of the environmental and social safeguards implementation NCIP will participate in the monitoring of MOA implementation. Part of


16

EA and SA Activity

Proponent EMB Other Entities

Finances implementation of the safeguards plans.

the MOA is a grievance redress mechanism that NCIP will supervise.

In general, the project budget includes the costs to prepare and implement the safeguards documents. Training and development and implementation of the communications plan will also be funded under the different components. The costs for safeguards screening, review, and implementation monitoring will be part of the project management budget. The proponent will bear the cost of EMP implementation. 9.0 PUBLIC DISCLOSURE AND CONSULTATION

Consultation on ESAF: The ESAF was strengthened through consultations. Consultations were undertaken at the project’s scoping stage and at the time the draft ESAF underwent review. In addition, small group consultations and interviews took place at various times with concerned implementing parties; oversight agencies, such as the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP); and affected populations, such as dump site waste pickers.

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


17

(i) The Social Development Plan (SDP) to be designed and implemented should include sustainability as a design criteria. In many cases, livelihood programs for waste pickers collapse because of changes in political leadership or depletion of funding from external sources.

(ii) The LGUs should be clear about who can participate in the livelihood restoration measures in the SDP, and they should clearly communicate their programs to the waste pickers and others affected so the plans are fully understood. Disparities in the registry of waste pickers could present problems. The LGU should establish and articulate the criteria for determining who can file for membership and what benefits and responsibilities they have.

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

among men, women, possibly young adults or juveniles, and young children) during the development of the Social Development Plan for each site. These consultations will also provide a basis for developing the livelihood restoration plan and will be required as part of the safeguards documentation.

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

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

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

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

Coordination with the NCIP commissioners and at Region 3 revealed that the selected remediation site at Subic Bay Freeport Zone falls within Certificate of Ancestral Domain title. Hence, the Indigenous Peoples Rights Act (IPRA) and the FPIC guidelines apply there. There is an existing Memorandum of Agreement between the Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority and the IPs, so the once the project activities are identified, subsequent Memorandum of Agreement likely to be generated may, at the discretion of the IP leaders, be simplified, as compared to a full-blown Free, Prior and Informed Consent process. It is to be expected that the IPs will ask for some social development program in the form of labor-based contracting for activities such as putting up the fences and signs, providing guides to detours, guarding the restricted site, and support for the formulation of their Ancestral Domain Sustainable Development and Protection Plan (ADSDPP). Consultation and Communications During Project Implementation: Preparation of each of the safeguards plans for each activity will require consultation as per World Bank policy. For the EMPs and dump closure plans, at least one consultation will be undertaken, while for the EAs under component 4, two consultations will be undertaken. The IP instruments and Social Development Plans for wastepickers and resettlement issues, consultation will be undertaken as part of the process as per the respective policies and as described in the individual frameworks. In addition, communications and outreach on the subproject activities both during their preparation and implementation, will be undertaken targeting relevant solid waste managers; land owners, local, regional and national government entities; regulated entities; and project affected groups and


18

entities to increase awareness of POPs issues, the iPOPs project, and the relevant subproject activity including safeguards issues. Disclosure: The ESAF was made available to the public at DENR, the Knowledge for Development Centers at the World Bank office in Manila and in the offices in the regions of the country and online in the World Bank Infoshop. 10.0 CAPACITY BUILDING AND TRAINING FOR ESAF IMPLEMENTATION

EA/SA implementation requires screening proposed physical activities for the required safeguards documents or EA/SA instruments; preparing, reviewing, and obtaining approval of these documents; and monitoring and supervising EMP implementation. Capacity building and training concerning EA/SA will be included in their respective components and associated technical, social and communication aspects. The success of EA/SA implementation depends on the capacity and interplay of project management (DENR and other partner government agencies) and activity proponents (LGUs and industries). Training will focus on the technical aspects of the activities and on methods of project management, particularly the preparation and review of EA/SA instruments and monitoring EMP implementation.

11.0 COSTS FOR ESAF IMPLEMENTATION

The costs for ESAF implementation are shown below. The GEF, with support and funding from proponents, will cover the costs for the consultants required to prepare the safeguards documents. The cost for EMB tasks (safeguards preparation guidance, screening, reviews, and monitoring) will form part of the project management budget. The cost of implementing environmental and social safeguards will be the responsibility of the proponents. The cost of training, capacity building, and developing and implementing communications plans will be covered using funds from the safeguards preparation and project component budget for training and dissemination.

ESAF Task Component 2 Component 3 Component 4 Safeguards document preparation

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

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

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

Safeguards screening, review, and clearance

Costs covered by EMB counterpart and GEF project management budget



Communications plan

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

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

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

Safeguards implementation

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

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

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


19

ESAF Task Component 2 Component 3 Component 4 Monitoring EMB monitoring covered

by project management budget

EMB monitoring covered by project management budget

EMB monitoring covered by project management budget Sources of funds for monitoring agreements with the indigenous people will be specified in the MOA.

Training and capacity building

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

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

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


20

Date post:	04-Jun-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	ngonhu
View:	212 times
Download:	0 times

E2254 Public Disclosure Authorized...

Documents