SRI LANKA: DAM SAFETY AND WATER RESOURCES PLANNING PROJECT

INTEGRATED SAFEGUARDS DATASHEET APPRAISAL STAGE

I. BASIC INFORMATION Date prepared/updated: 04/03/2007 Report No.: 39360 1. Basic Project Data Country: Sri Lanka Project ID: P093132 Project Name: Dam Safety and Water Resources Planning Project (DSWRPP) Task Team Leader: Nihal Fernando Estimated Appraisal Date: April 20, 2007 Estimated Board Date:, July 12, 2007 Managing Unit: SASSD Lending Instrument: Specific Investment

Loan Sector: General water, sanitation and flood protection sector (70%); Irrigation and drainage (30%) Theme: Water resource management (P); Natural disaster management (P);Rural services and infrastructure (S) IBRD Amount (US$m.): 0.00 IDA Amount (US$m.): 60.90 GEF Amount (US$m.): 0.00 PCF Amount (US$m.): 0.00 Other financing amounts by source: BORROWER/RECIPIENT 11.00 Environmental Category: B –Partial Assessment Simplified Processing Simple [X] Repeater [] Is this project processed under OP 8.50 (Emergency Recovery) Yes [ ] No [ ]

2. Project Objectives The objectives of this project are (i) establishment of a long term sustainable system of dam operation and maintenance (O&M) and (ii) improved water resources planning. This would be achieved through three main project components: (i) improving dam safety and operational efficiency; (ii) upgrading and modernizing the existing hydro-meteorological information systems; and, (iii) providing technical assistance for developing integrated water resources plans for selected river basins. Each project component would include institutional development and capacity building for the implementing agencies (IAs). In addition to the above three components, the project would include a fourth component to support project management and monitoring. 3. Project Description (i) Component 1: Improving Dam Safety and Operational Efficiency: The expected outcome of this component would be enhanced public safety of selected high-risk dams, sustainable institutional arrangements for effective dam safety management

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

and efficient dam operation and maintenance (O&M). This would be achieved through: (a) Remediation works for 20 high-risk dams out of the 38 dams for which risk assessments have been conducted; (b) Provision of basic safety and operational facilities for the 80 dams classified as large dams according to the definition of International Committee of Large Dams - - the facilities include access roads, communications, monitoring instruments, rapid response facilities for emergency repairs, floodlights and equipment; (c) Collection of basic engineering and operational information essential for sustainable operation and management of the 80 large dams (d) Technical assistance for risk assessment on the remaining portfolio of 42 large dams, training in dam safety, development of O&M manuals, codes of practice and operating procedures, including the procurement and adoption of modern software for hydrological and structural analysis of dams; (d) Establishment of an inter-organizational arrangement for regular dam safety inspection, a sustainable need-based O&M funding mechanism and assistance for the establishment of dam safety regulation. This component would finance civil works, goods, consultancy services required for the stated purposes and bulk of the civil works fall within this component. (ii) Component 2: Hydro-Meteorological Information System (HMIS): The expected outcome of this component would be enhanced staff capacity and physical and analytical infrastructure for monitoring hydro-meteorological data, detecting and forecasting water hazards and assessing water resources for multi-sectoral planning, development and management. This component would comprise: (a) Establishment of 9 new and 41 upgraded hydrometric stations; (b) Modernizing 30 agro-meteorological stations; (c) Establishment of data banks at the Irrigation Department (ID) and the Department of Meteorology (DoM) and improving the analytical capability of staff.; (d) Establishing procedures and providing tools and training for real-time analysis of flood situations in the influent streams of some major reservoirs; and (e) Groundwater monitoring and assessment including support to upgrade the groundwater database. This component would finance goods, consultancy services and minor and limited civil works required for the stated purposes.. (iii) Component 3: Multi-sectoral Water Resources Planning: The expected outcome of this component would be water resource development master plans at national level and for two selected river basins leading to the completion of 2-3 specific detailed project feasibility studies in the two river basins ready for investment. This component would comprise: (a) The development of a national water-use master plan; (b) Optimization study on usage of available water resources in the Mahaweli and adjoining connected river basins leading to the preparation of a New Mahaweli Water Resources Development Plan. and several Feasibility reports for potential projects, (c) Preparation of a holistic water resources development plan and management proposals for the Mundeni Aru river basin (of the Eastern Province); (d) Establishment of institutional arrangements, processes/procedures, manuals, state-of-art techniques and modern analytical tools for multi-sectoral water resources planning and management. . This component would finance consultancy services required for the stated purpose.

(iv) Component 4: Project Management and Monitoring: This component would assist the PMU and project implementing agencies to execute, manage and monitor the project. The assistance would include the provision of consultants, vehicles, equipment and incremental staff and operating costs. 4. Project Location and salient physical characteristics relevant to the safeguard analysis The proposed project would cover the entire country. Since the project is associated with upgrading and rehabilitation of existing facilities there will be no major alterations in the existing land use patterns. The project will not fund any activity within natural habitats, declared forest and wildlife reserves and protected areas, therefore would not have any adverse impact on environmentally sensitive areas. 5. Environmental and Social Safeguards Specialists Sumith Pilapitiya (SASSD) Suryanarayan. Satish (SASSD) 6. Safeguard Policies Triggered Yes No Environmental Assessment (OP/BP 4.01) X Natural Habitats (OP/BP 4.04) X Forests (OP/BP 4.36) X Pest Management (OP 4.09) X Physical Cultural Resources (OP/BP 4.11) X Indigenous Peoples (OP/BP 4.10) X Involuntary Resettlement (OP/BP 4.12) Safety of Dams (OP/BP 4.37) X Projects on International Waterways (OP/BP 7.50) X Projects in Disputed Areas (OP/BP 7.60) X

II. KEY SAFEGUARD POLICY ISSUES AND THEIR MANAGAMENT A. Summary of Key Safeguard Issues 1. Describe any safeguard issues and impacts associated with the proposed project. Identify and describe any potential large scale, significant and/or irreversible impacts: 1.1 Environmental Safeguards.Since the DSWRPP is associated with upgrading and/or rehabilitation of existing dams under the Dam Safety component, many of the serious and irreversible environmental consequences as in the case of constructing of a new dam will not be encountered. However, the construction activities undertaken to rehabilitate/upgrade the dams will cause issues such as air and water pollution at the sites which would largely be of temporary and localized in nature provided that adequate precautions are taken to manage such issues. If dam rehabilitation work requires the emptying of a reservoir, there would be impacts on its aquatic life depending on the extent of drying up that will take place.

However, tanks/reservoirs in the country’s dry zone are subjected to seasonal fluctuations in the level of water, particularly the ones that receive water from its own catchment only, and the aquatic life in these water bodies are adapted to the seasonal changes that take place. In addition, the water levels within the reservoirs will never be below the dead storage levels, even during rehabilitation works. Hence, it is not felt that there will be irreversible changes to aquatic life. Solid waste/debris disposal will be another issue that will need to be addressed. The dam remediation works will result in removal of large quantities of top soil, rip rap etc and in the generation of concrete debris and other construction wastes. In addition, wastes will be generated from worker camps. The project should explore options for re-using material such as soil and for the careful disposal of other waste material. It is also mentioned that many of the tanks and reservoirs currently subjected to ad hoc and hap hazard disposal of garbage, construction debris and industrial/domestic wastewater. Such practices if allowed to continue will only undermine the expected benefits from a project of this nature. The main environmental impacts of the dam remediation works envisaged under this project would be off site where large quantities of resources such as sand/soil, rocks etc will be extracted for rehabilitation work. Resource extraction is a critical issue in Sri Lanka where unsustainable operations that have continued unabated for many years has destroyed natural environments beyond remediation. Therefore, selection of sites for resource extraction should be made on careful evaluation of resource availability within the sites and in conformity with the GOSL regulations for designation of such sites. Another important aspect that ought to be considered in conveyance of material to the site is the potential danger of the spread of invasive species. Sri Lanka has many examples of severe invasions of aquatic weeds in waterways as well as terrestrial species in dry coastal areas. The spread of invasive plants in already disturbed environments such as construction sites, is particularly high. This risk can be minimized by identifying potential burrow sites in nearby areas where the occurrence of invasive types are not observed. Therefore, the proper identification of suitable burrow sites will be a key consideration in managing the above-mentioned environmental impacts. During the construction phase, potential environmental issues could arise from constructing and operating worker camps. Siting of labour camps should be planned out carefully in order to ensure that impact on sensitive natural habitats such as waterways, wildlife, forest areas, wetlands etc as well as on man made environments such as residences, schools and religious sites are minimum. Similarly, vehicle/equipment servicing and maintenance yards as well as stocking areas should be selected carefully after giving due consideration to the potential environmental problems it can give rise to. Disposal of sewage and solid wastes from worker camps can add to the pollution load and hence need to be provided with appropriate facilities for safe disposal of such wastes. Conformity with Local Authority requirements for septic tanks for toilets is a requirement. Safe disposal of solid wastes should be undertaken in consultation with the Local Authority and the Central Environmental Authority. These worker camps can also be a source of potential public health problems and therefore need to be kept clean and

hygienic. Provision of proper sanitation is key to this, especially in the case of preventing the introduction and spread of water-bourne diseases. Also, the work force may require substantial quantities of firewood for cooking and hence increase the demand for it. This could have a threatening effect on the forest resources in the area. In order to eliminate this threat, the construction contract should require worker camps to be provided with Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) as cooking fuel. LPG canisters are freely available throughout the country so should not pose an undue burden on the contractor. In addition, run off from the vehicle yards containing fuel and lubricants and run off from material stock piles containing particulate matter can all lead to contamination of soil and water. Hence, proper waste management for all types of wastes generated on-site is of high importance. GOSL’s investment in upgrading and/or rehabilitating selected dams under the project will not yield the anticipated long term benefits unless there is proper management of the watersheds in the catchment areas. Major environmental factors affecting the functioning and the life span of the dam are those caused by land, water and other resource use in the catchment areas above the reservoir. Increased pressure on upland areas above the dam is a common phenomenon caused by the resettlement of people from the inundated areas and by uncontrolled influx of people to the watershed. On site environmental deterioration as well as a decrease in water quality and an increase in sedimentation rates in the reservoir result from clearing forest land for agriculture, grazing pressures, use of agricultural chemicals and illegal timber felling for commercial purposes. It would therefore be of utmost importance to identify such issues and arrest them with appropriate measures, in order to yield the maximum benefits of the proposed interventions. The construction of buildings under some of the other components of the project may trigger environmental impacts. These impacts, if any, are expected to be minimal. If the construction work is to be located on sites where the implementing agency has existing buildings, it is not anticipated that any real environmental concerns may arise. The main impacts of building construction for such sites will be off-site impacts due to resource extraction for construction. Hence, resources should be extracted from authorized locations and sources that are licensed by relevant GOSL authorities. 1.2 Social Safeguards Involuntary Resettlement (OP 4.12): The project remediation works under its key component, ‘dam safety’, would involve either one or all of the following interventions: (i) strengthening of the existing dams; (ii) repair/ replacement of sluices; and (iii) repair/ improvements to existing spillways. In addition, the project would finance the replacement of essential electro-mechanical equipment to improve operational efficiency of dams. None of these activities will require acquisition of any land. Hence, no land acquisition is envisaged, nor will there be any displacement of people. However, in a few cases, it is likely that water flows into the reservoir and consequently, irrigation flows might have to be stopped for prolonged periods to conduct detailed technical investigations and repair/ rehabilitation works. This could impact livelihoods of some downstream users adversely. Given this situation, a better appreciation of the need, or

otherwise, for triggering this policy demands an understanding of the selection processes and different types of dams being covered by the project. Selection of Dams: Sri Lanka has 350 major dams, of which 80 dams are categorized as “Large Dams” according to the classification of International Committee of Large Dams. The selection of dams for remedial works are based on a scientific risk assessment of the nature and extent of public safety. Given the paucity of resources, of these 80 dams, portfolio risk assessment (PRA) for 38 dams have been carried out to prioritize dams according to their hazard and risk levels. This risk analysis considered the number of population at risk in the event of dam failure as one of the risk profiling criterion. (details in PAD Annex 4 Component 1 project description). The risk profiles of the analyzed dams are ranked according to there safety deficiencies using the Risk Based Profile System (RBPS) developed by United States Bureau of Reclamation (USBR). This is an internationally and widely accepted risk ranking methodology. Subsequently, 20 dams that pose the highest threat to public safety have been listed for remedial measures under the component 1. These 20 could be classified into four broad categories depending on the nature and extent of social impacts point of view:

• Category I (2 dams)-- (example, Victoria) the interventions or the nature of remediation measures are such that it does not obstruct the water flows into the down stream uses. Remedies could either be undertaken without obstructing water flows or that alternatives could be worked out to ensure water flows.

• Category II (7 dams)-- there is direct agriculture under its command but the nature of remedial measures are such that it does not require suspension of water releases to its users for prolonged period (example, Inginimitiya Dam).

• Category III (9 dams) -- there is direct agriculture under its command and the nature of remedial measures do require suspension of water releases to its users for prolonged periods (example, Tabbowa and Ridiyagama dams).

• Category IV (2 dams)-- those which serve multiple commands and users and whose radius of influence extend beyond the immediate agriculture command area to a number of other distant hydraulically inter-connected agricultural command areas and villages/ towns (ex; Chandrikawewa dam).

Given this typology, Categories III and IV are significant from the perspective of

adverse social impacts. It is expected that out of the 20 dams likely to be included in the program, not more than 11 dams will be of category III and IV, and there may be as few as 2 dams in Category IV. As planned currently, project will not take up any Category IV dams. Thus, some 9 dams falling under Category III will be the focus of attention due to interruption of water flows. Interruption of water flows and impacts.The suspension of water could prevent farmers from growing paddy. Instead, they will have to resort to some other crops (relatively alien to them) or forego cultivation for one or two seasons. However, discussions with Agricultural Experts reveal that although the farmers would have to forego paddy cultivation, they can grow other field crops like maize, cowpea and green gram and ground nuts using residual moisture and limited

rainfall during the Yala season and under rain-fed condition in Maha (wet) season. However, rainfed farming of non-paddy crops would be an entirely a new practice to some farmers, because it requires different crop husbandry practices and probably higher wage labor inputs. Thus, despite this potential alternative cropping possibility, it is felt that that the livelihoods for the following users could be affected adversely: (i) farmers who draw water from the reservoir for cultivating paddy; (ii) landless laborers eking their wages from the agricultural operations in the command area; and (iii) fishers involved in catching fishes from the reservoir. In addition, in a few cases, water supplies for domestic purposes (drinking, bathing, washing, and cooking) could also be affected. Physical Cultural Resources (OP/BP 4.11): Apart from the chance finds, the project recognizes that, in the case of ancient dams, certain structures such as sluices could be of high archaeological significance. In case, they are replaced, the older ones need to be preserved as a ‘cultural property’. This in view, the policy is triggered. 2. Describe any potential indirect and/or long term impacts due to anticipated future activities in the project area:

The Dam Safety component of the project essentially aims at addressing the urgently needed remedial work to improve dam safety in some of the tanks/reservoirs considered to be of high risk. Apart from the urgent interventions identified by the various engineering surveys and funded by the project currently, it is possible that the GOSL could undertake other interventions in the future as part of a continuous effort to improve/maintain dam safety. However, since it is not possible to define what those activities would constitute of, if undertaken at some point in future, it is not possible to assess any resultant cumulative environmental impact. For large development programs EIAs/IEEs will be mandatory in accordance with the National Environmental Act and associated regulations, hence the impacts will be addressed through the EIA/IEE studies in the future. The EAs will take activities funded under this project into account, therefore, cumulative impacts, if any, will be addressed at that stage. 3. Describe any project alternatives (if relevant) considered to help avoid or minimize adverse impacts.

Environmental Impacts: The Dam Safety component of the project, which is triggering most of the environmental impacts, is primarily focused on reducing water induced hazards to the public by improving dam safety of some of the high risk tanks/reservoirs in the country. Therefore, the proposed interventions are essential and critical and hence alternative options do not apply because the dams are already constructed and the project is financing interventions for rehabilitation. Different alternatives for rehabilitation will be considered during the engineering design stage and the most sustainable option will be selected. Social Impacts: Technical alternatives will be explored to the fullest extent so as to avoid stoppage of water flows and the adverse impacts thereof. Water flow stoppage will be resorted to if and only if appropriate technical alternatives are not coming through.

4. Describe measures taken by the borrower to address safeguard policy issues. Provide an assessment of borrower capacity to plan and implement the measures described. Environmental Safeguards: The policy and regulatory framework in Sri Lanka provides an adequate basis for the mitigation of potential impacts mentioned above. The Government of Sri Lanka (GOSL) established the Central Environmental Authority (CEA) in 1982 as the environmental regulatory agency instituted under the National Environmental Act (NEA). Under the National Environmental Act (NEA), all development projects that fall into a prescribed category is required to go through a comprehensive environmental screening and planning process (EIA or IEE). CEA has demonstrated technical expertise and a good track record of evaluating environmental impact assessments. Since the proposed project is concerned with dam rehabilitation and limited civil works in other components, there will be no EIA/IEE requirement under the NEA. Nevertheless, it has been agreed with GOSL that all interventions that have the potential for adverse environmental impacts will be subject to an environmental assessment and any identified adverse environmental impacts will be mitigated according to a site specific Environmental Management Plan (EMP). As the specific interventions in the selected dams have not been identified as yet, specific environmental assessments and EMPs cannot be prepared at this stage. Therefore, an Environmental Assessment and Management Framework (EAMF) has been prepared that will serve as a template and guidance for preparation of specific EAs and EMPs. The EA/EMP for the interventions during the first year of the project will be prepared prior to negotiations of the project and will be a pre-requisite for negotiations. Although an adequate policy and regulatory framework exists in the country for natural resource management and conservation, enforcement of such policies and regulations has been weak. Monitoring of EIA approval conditions, especially, is a weak area and needs strengthening. Several programs funded by bi-lateral as well as multi-lateral donors aimed at providing technical and financial assistance to CEA and other institutions dealing with natural resource management to improve institutional capacity have been implemented in the past. Some of these efforts are on-going. Hence, it is anticipated that the capacity to enforce regulations will gradually improve in the future. In terms of the project, the Mahaweli Authority of Sri Lanka, which is one of the implementing agencies for the project and under which the PMU has been established, has ample experience of conducting environmental assessments for dam related work. Under the accelerated Mahaweli Development Program, extensive environmental assessments have been conducted and risk mitigation measures implemented and hence the availability of such expertise institutionally will be very useful. Compliance monitoring (with the specifications in the EMPs for dams that will be rehabilitated), will be mainly conducted by the environmental specialists in the PMU and in the consultants’ team providing supervision on implementation. They will report on the contractor’s performance in terms of implementing conditions give in the particular EMP and take appropriate action accordingly. The EMPs will be part of the “Conditions of Contract” of all civil works contracts financed under the project. In addition, it is proposed that

safeguards monitoring committees which will include key stakeholders such as members from the local community and local environmental officers will be established for compliance monitoring. Social Safeguards –Involuntary Resettlement (OP 4.12):Voluntary Participation: In respect of Category III dams, the project encounters a scenario characterized by a temporary partial economic displacement to some of the water users. However, OP 4.12, Involuntary Resettlement, is not triggered because the resettlement is not attributable to the eminent domain or other forms of land acquisition backed by powers of the state. The operative principles are Informed Consent and Power of Choice. In respect of the former, project has put in mechanisms to ensure that local affected communities are fully knowledgeable about the project and its implications and consequences and free agree to participate in the project. Power of choice rests with the people viz., they have the option to agree or disagree. Efforts will be made to build not only full awareness of the potential social and economic disruptions of the contemplated dam safety remedial measures but also reach consensus with the users on the implementation schedule and arrangements of the repair work. Local communities who are likely to be affected would be identified through a comprehensive baseline survey for each of such dams and informed decision making will be accomplished through intensive Information, Education and Consultation (IEC) campaign. However voluntary may be the decision making, the project has felt the need for providing financial help to affected people as coping assistance1. A process cycle/ map, depicting sequentially activities that will go into ensuring voluntariness and further measures along with the role and responsibilities of the different actors as well as the review/ approval mechanisms has been presented in the matrix (as an appendix). This has been developed by GOSL in consultation with relevant stakeholders including local communities. .Public Information, Education and Communication (IEC) Campaign. The project well recognizes that the stakeholders need to be prepared adequately and appropriately to enable an informed decision making. For this, the project would deploy Livelihood Support Facilitators (LSF) and launch an extensive IEC campaign mainly in respect of Category (iii) dams. This will comprise intensive consultations with Farmers Organizations, Women, Fishers, Laborers and other interest groups. These would include, in addition to livelihood impacts, discussions on dam safety designs, technical investigation and construction work schedules, quality control requirements, and arrangements for the monitoring of the construction program. A Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) will be signed by the project (represented by Resident Project Manager/ Project Manager) and the local communities (represented by Farmers

1 Another dimension-- Stakeholder discussions have distinctly revealed that local communities express willingness to participate only when they perceive (apart from the public safety) a commercial benefit. The project did encounter a couple of cases (Category IV) wherein the local communities have refused to participate in the project as they could not perceive a direct commercial benefit for them. And, such cases were dropped from the project’s purview though Risk Assessments do list them in the priority list. Further, project will not include such dams wherein it is not feasible to ascertain ’voluntariness’.

Organizations and Fisher Associations). Once a voluntary decision is made by the stakeholders to carry out the remedial works, a site level construction monitoring committee will be formed to ensure that the remedial measures are carried out in accordance with the agreed implementation plan and norms and the consequent livelihood disruption is minimal. This committee will be built on the existing farmer organization, federations and project management committees that exist for irrigation management of those dams. A typical committee will comprise of the selected representatives of the affected stakeholders, technical staff of the project implementation agency, such as staff of the Irrigation Engineer (IE) in-charge of the dam, Resident Project Manager/Project Manager (RPM/PM) in-charge of irrigation management functions and site representative of the civil works contractor. Livelihood Support Assistance: During the Social Assessment enquiry, extensive discussions were held with the elected representatives of farmers’ organizations and federations of selected critical dams to gauge their perceptions and reactions to potential public safety threat and dealing with the likely economic disruptions. In cases, where farmers perceived the dam safety threat, and feel that the project interventions are timely and essential, the implementation planning and execution would be easier. In such cases, farmers expressed that they would not mind foregoing one season of cultivation provided they are adequately consulted and informed of the nature of remedial works and the implementation schedule sufficiently in advance (at least 4- 6 months) of the commencement of the works to enable them to prepare themselves. The farmers expressed that as a coping mechanism, they would set apart 35 Bushels of Paddy (equivalent to Rs 10,000 or US$ 100) per household from their previous paddy harvest for the consumption during the forgone season. However, if it extends beyond one season, they will not be able to sustain livelihood on their own, and external assistance will be needed. This in background, and that repair/ rehabilitation could disrupt water flows for two seasons (at the maximum) viz., an year, a sum of Rs 20,000 (US$ 200) will be provided to a cultivator household as coping assistance from the project. In addition to an adequate budget provision to finance the assistances, institutional and implementation arrangements for administering the same have been worked out. In respect of landless laborers and fishers, the situation is little different from that of the farmers. First; unlike the farmers, they are totally un-organized and hence no information exists on them. Consequently, it is difficult to clearly identify the potentially affected such people. Second, households who do not own land and which earn their livelihood exclusively from daily wage labor in farms are not many. Third, wage laborers are not fully locally based instead they migrate from one place to the other, to towns in search of livelihoods. In all, mapping them is difficult. But, it is expected that on an average, 10- 15% of the farmers to be exclusively landless laborers in any given situation. As regards fishers, each reservoir could have some 50- 100 fishers depending exclusively on the reservoir for their livelihoods. Towards ensuring that their livelihoods are not adversely affected, project would place funds at the disposal of the RPM / PM who (with the Social Animators) will prepare a Wage Assistance action plan to use the same and deploy labor for some asset generation/ maintenance work. The identification of these

groups will be done through a baseline survey prior to the commencement of the repair activities. Domestic water supplies are not likely to be affected for two reasons. One, there are many open wells in any command areas. Two, no reservoir is expected to be emptied fully and even in the event of a natural disaster, some dead storage water would always be available. Still, if there is a necessity to ensure uninterrupted water supplies for drinking, the project will enlist the help of the local administration and make available water at certain key locations. Finances: Total funds required for the livelihood assistance is estimated at US$ 9 million. This is worked out on the assumption that each dam could affect some 3,000 cultivator households, and 1,000 fishers and/ or landless laborers. Uniform Assistance vs household wise compensation: . As an alternative to the uniform assistance, provision for household wise compensations was deliberated and found not feasible for the following reasons : Compensations implying ‘entitlements’ are characteristics of ‘involuntary resettlement’ and erodes the principles underpinning ‘voluntariness’. Dam repairs and rehabilitation resultant water flow disruptions are quite common throughout the world and no where compensations have been made. Rather they are underpinned by the following principles : (a) timely information dissemination so that farmers can make alternative arrangements and do not incur losses by investing in farm inputs; (b) counseling to farmers and fishing communities for alternatives; and (c) provision of some assistance – similar to calamity relief and/ or concessions. Estimating household wise impacts is extremely difficult – It would not only demand huge resources, both time and staff but also highly subjective and contestable. Cultural Property (OP 11.03): Project recognizes that, in the case of ancient dams, certain structures such as sluices could be of high archaeological significance. In case, they are replaced, the older ones need to be preserved as a ‘cultural property’. Towards this, the project would seek the technical assistance from the Department of Archaeology and undertake an Archeological Impact Assessment study in cases where this issue is deemed to be prevalent. Subsequently, the Department of Archaeology would draw an implementation action plan, as deemed appropriate. This apart, Chance Finds would also be subject to enquiry and technical assistance thereof from the Department of Archaeology. Details of the role and responsibilities of the project as well as the department will be as outlined in GOSL’s notification on ‘The Antiquities Ordinance’ and as per Projects Procedure Regulations No 01 of 2000. As per the recommendations of the department, procedures for dealing with the cultural property will be incorporated in the contract documents with a provision for an orientation program for the project authorities as well as contractors.

5. Identify the key stakeholders and describe the mechanisms for consultation and disclosure on safeguard policies, with an emphasis on potentially affected people. Environmental: The key stakeholders include (a) project affected people (b) local NGOs (c) administrators/regulators at the district/divisional level (d) project implementing agencies at the national level (Department of Irrigation, MASL and to limited extent, Ceylon Electricity Board) (e) Central Environmental Authority (f) any other national level agency under whose jurisdiction project activities may fall under (Ex: Department of Wildlife Conservation). Consultations have been carried out in the preparation of the EAMF while the document is currently opened for the public to review and comment. However, more extensive consultations with the key stakeholders, especially the potentially affected people, will be conducted when site specific EAs are undertaken. The EAMF has been made available in the Bank Infoshop while locally, it has been translated to Sinhala and Tamil and made available at public places. The project would continue with similar public disclosure arrangements for safeguard related documents in the future as well. Social Assessment: Social Assessment conducted during the project preparation has enabled identifying key stakeholders both from a geographical/ administrative – national, regional, district and village – as well as from functional perspectives. The latter comprised (i) Water users of reservoirs such as farmers and farmer organizations and federations, laborers earning wage from agricultural operations, fishers catching fishes in the reservoir, and households using water for domestic purposes; (ii) Water Managers or the Service Providers at the operational level – chiefly, officers of the Irrigation Department, Mahalweli Authority, Ceylon Electricity Board (CEB), National Water and Drainage Board, Agrarian Development Department; (iii) Administrators/ Regulators such as the offices of Divisional Secretary, Government Agents, at an Intermediary level; (iv) Water Resources Decision Makers, at the strategic level -- Ministries of Irrigation, MASL, Power, Finance, Disaster Management Center, Meteorology who formulate draft policies/ programs as well as resource allocations; and (v) Apex/policy level comprising administrators, policy makers, political functionaries, scientific and extension agencies who play a major role in promoting public safety and water resources development and planning. Systematic and extensive consultations with all the key stakeholders have been conducted as a part of the social assessments and a framework for continuing consultations during implementation has also been proposed in the project. Social Assessment enquiry provided : (i) an insight into the water resources management scenario in the country in the backdrop of socio-economic profile which enabled understanding appreciate ‘diversity’; (ii) stakeholder analysis – identifying key stakeholders and assessing their expectations from, as well as concerns, about the project; (iv) impact assessments – positive as well as negative impacts likely to occur as a result of the project interventions and the mitigatory measures thereof; (v) institutional analysis and the implications on implementation arrangements requirements thereof; and (vi) identifying key issues that merit attention in the context of project designing . Detailed report is available on request as well as on the project’s portal.

Monitoring and Evaluation: . A systematic program has been designed to monitor various environmental and social parameters including LSAs. The environmental and social issues will be monitored as a part of the overall sub-project progress monitoring. Indicators for the same have been developed. In addition, PCU will enlist the services of an external consulting agency to conduct an assessment thrice during the project implementation, at the end of 12th, 24th and 36th month. Results of the evaluation will be used for midcourse corrections (if need be). All sub-project proposals along with LSA Plans and EMPs will be shared with the Bank for comments before commencing construction (details, in Process Cycle). Public disclosure arrangements viz., making available information related to all the sub-project proposals, individually, as well as the project, as a whole, at different places, including locally at the reservoir level and at the national level have been made.

PROCESS MAP/ CYCLE Activity Responsibility Review/

Approval Primary Secondary Assoc.

Pre-Planning Phase 1 Preparation of Long List of Dams – based on Risk Assessment GOSL 2 Categorization of Dams – I , II, III and IV GOSL

Priority wise Category III Dams – Activity Initiation GOSL 3 Designing of Information,

Education and Consultation (IEC) Campaign – training of facilitators, production of training materials, workshops, advertisements etc.

CDS (PMU)

RPM/ PM LSFs PD (PMU)

4 IEC campaign – awareness creation among the potentially affected people

RPM/ PM

LSF FOs PD (PMU)

5 Public Consultations with farmers organizations (FOs), fishers and other community organizations.

LSF RPM/PM

-- CDS (PMU)

6 Preliminary Community Mapping – FOs / Fishers/ CBOs/ laborers/ Others

LSF RPM/PM

-- CDS (PMU)

7 Agree to Do Meeting – 1: Communities agree on Decision to repair the dam culminating in a Resolution

FOs/ Fishers/ CBOs

RPM/PM

LSF PD

8. Submission of the Activity Initiation Report (AIR) to World Bank covering steps 3-7 above

PMU RPM/PM World Bank

PMU will seek Comments from the Bank on the AIR Report DECISION to go ahead or not – PMU – Planning Phase Initiated

9 Detailed Village Resource/ Community Mapping -

LSF RPM/PM - CDS

10 Baseline Information Generation on the potentially affected people/households

LSF RPM/PM CDS PD

11 Consultations with the affected people on detailed Technical Proposals for dam repairs, construction mode and schedule. Feedback obtained on changes/ other requirements to minimize social/env. Impacts. Technical Plans Finalized.

RPM/ PM

SLF FO/ CBOs

CDS/ PD

12 Agree TO Do- 2 FOs/ RPM/ PM LSF PD

Communities Resolve to carry out remedial works (or not) as per the finalized Technical Plan

CBOs

11 Preparation of TOR for Environmental Assessments (EAs)

ES/ PMU

PD/PMU WB

12 Conduct EAs ES/ PMU

PD/PMU WB

13 Public Consultation on EA ES/ PMU

RPM/PM PD/PMU WB

14 EA Review and clearance WB 15 Preparation of Detailed Livelihood

Assistance Plans PMU RPM/ PM

LSF FO/ CBOs

16

-Cash Assistance Plan for affected cultivating households;

– Number of Households

--Total Cash Amount to be paid

-- Number of Installments (not less than 4 if it is for an year)

-- Opening of Joint Bank Accounts

-- Finalization of the list of Bank Account Numbers and the Bank details for each household (the mode of payment will be through cheques and paid into the Bank accounts)

17 - Alternative Cropping/Livelihood

Plans

-- Crops to be grown

-- Input requirements and arrangements (seed supply etc.)

-- Technical assistance (extension support etc.)

--any other information required by affected people

RPM/ PM

LSF FOs CBOs

PD

18

Final closure and endorsement of alternative crop plans

FO CBOs

LSF PMU

19 Wage Employment Plans for landless laborers, fishers and vulnerable groups

RPM/ PM

LSF Labors Fishrs

PMU

20 Consultation and closure on the provision of alternative drinking Water supply to affected people, if any.

21 Consolidation of all of the above plans into a single report including aggregate costs, supplementary assistance requirements, and M&E arrangements and. Public Disclosures done. Objections, if any, are addressed

RPM/ PM

SLF PMU

22 Establish, in consultation with affected communities, a mechanism for complaints/grievances redressal

PMU

PMU will share the Livelihood Assistance Plans together with dam-specific Environmental Assessment and Management Plan (EAMP) with the Bank task team and seek Bank’s no objection before the implementation begins. Implementation Phase

23 Construction Management Committee established - The committee is inclusive of the representatives of affected/beneficiary people

RPM/ PM

MASL/ID PMU

24 Cash Assistance Plan- Implemented

RPM/ PM

LSF FOs CBOs

PMU

25 Wage Assistance Plan- Implemented

RPM/ PM

LSF DS/ GA

PMU

26 Facilities Plan – Implemented RPM/ PM

LSF DS/ GA

PMU

27 EMP implemented EMC PMU/ WB

28 Day to Day oversight, Concurrent Monitoring, and ROGs

RPM/ PM

LSF CDS PMU

29 Monthly Meetings/ Reviews PMC/ PC

30 Quarterly Reviews PMC/ PC

PMU

31 Preparation of Implementation Completion Report

PMU Consultant Bank

GOSL : Government of Sri Lanka; PMU: Project Management Unit; PD: Project Director RPM: Resident Project Manager (Mahaweli Authority); PM: Project Manager (Irrigation Department); CDS: Community Development Specialist; FO: Farmers Organziation; CBOs: Community Based Organizations; DS: Divisional Secretariat; GA: Government Agent; Fishr: Fishers; Labors: Laborers; Assoc: Associated; AIR – Activity Initiation Report.; IEC –

Information, Education and Communication; FO – Farmers Organization; ID – Irrigation Department; MASL- Mahaweli Authority of Sri Lanka; LSF – Livelihood Support Facilitator; ES- Environmental Specialist; WB: World Bank; EMC – Environmental Monitoring Committee

B. Disclosure Requirements Date

Environmental Assessment/Audit/Management Plan/Other:

Date of receipt by the Bank February 2007

Date of "in-country" disclosure January 2007

Date of submission to InfoShop March 2007 For category A projects, date of distributing the Executive Summary of the EA to the Executive Directors

Resettlement Action Plan/Framework/Policy Process: Date of receipt by the Bank Date of "in-country" disclosure Date of submission to InfoShop

* If the project triggers the Pest Management and/or Physical Cultural Resources, the respective issues are to be addressed and disclosed as part of the Environmental Assessment/Audit/or EMP. If in-country disclosure of any of the above documents is not expected, please explain why:

C. Compliance Monitoring Indicators at the Corporate Level (to be filled in when the ISDS is finalized by the project decision meeting) OP/BP/GP 4.01 - Environment Assessment Does the project require a stand-alone EA (including EMP) report? Yes –

EAMF has been prepared

If yes, then did the Regional Environment Unit or Sector Manager (SM) review and approve the EA report?

Not yet

Are the cost and the accountabilities for the EMP incorporated in the credit/loan? Yes The World Bank Policy on Disclosure of Information Have relevant safeguard policies documents been sent to the World Bank's Infoshop?

Yes

Have relevant documents been disclosed in-country in a public place in a form and language that are understandable and accessible to project-affected groups and local NGOs?

Yes

All Safeguard Policies Have satisfactory calendar, budget and clear institutional responsibilities been prepared for the implementation of measures related to safeguard policies?

Yes

Have costs related to safeguard policy measures been included in the project cost? Yes Does the Monitoring and Evaluation system of the project include the monitoring of safeguard impacts and measures related to safeguard policies?

Yes

Have satisfactory implementation arrangements been agreed with the borrower and the same been adequately reflected in the project legal documents?

Yes

D. Approvals

Signed and submitted by: Name Date Task Team Leader: Nihal Fernando Environmental Specialist: Sumith Pilapitiya Social Development Specialist Suryanarayan Satish Additional Environmental and/or Social Development Specialist(s):

Approved by: Regional Safeguards Coordinator: Frederick Edmund Brusberg

Comments: Sector Manager: Gajanand Pathmanathan

Comments:

wb101076 C:\Documents and Settings\wb101076\My Documents\My Documents\NWAMI_SL\ISDS Appraisal Stge -April 1- 2007.doc 04/01/2007 9:58:00 AM