Proposed ESSA Actions for Inclusion in the Program Action Plan S.L Risk Action Responsibility Timeframe Indicator 1 Adverse environment and social impacts resulting from poor planning during construction at city This may result from failure to adequately identify and mitigate adverse environmental impacts of the works leading to environmental damage, including loss of natural habitats and known or unknown physical cultural resources. Risk of increased environmental pollution and occupational health impacts. Screening for Environment and Social Risks of all proposed investments at city level: Incorporate environmental impact and risk criteria in the site selection screening forms for all city level investment in physical works through the ULGDP II window. Ensure that the screening is explicit in addressing natural habitats and physical cultural resources considerations in order to avoid sitting of infrastructures in areas that would cause significant adverse impacts. Appropriate mitigation measures to address induced impacts should also be identified during the site screening process for all new construction activities proposed through the II. MUDHCO, Regions and ULGs tasked with carrying out the site screening exercise for site selection of all construction activities at city Prior to final selection of a site for construction. Early site screening forms reflect good practice in, avoiding adverse impacts on natural habitats and physical cultural resources.
ULGs have selected areas that are far away from the city or habitation but would need to discuss operational aspects with potentially affected communities Disruption or destruction of sites of cultural, religious or historical importance ULGs have generally been able to any sites of cultural, religious or historical importance near waste management sites, using informal consultation with communities Moderately satisfactory Moderate Human settlements and land uses near landfill and composting sites ULGs have been generally careful in selecting sites that are located away from human settlement. However, consultation with community will be required before finalizing route to transport solid waste. Moderately satisfactory Moderate Windblown garbage, dust, odor and The practice to spread and compact incoming refuse, and cover with soil, daily has been weak in most cases. Moderately satisfactory Moderate government Creation of stagnant water sources causing risks of disease Proper designs for drainage have avoided any water stagnation or vector borne disease near the landfill sites Moderate to highly satisfactory Low Contamination of surface and groundwater with landfill runoff and leachate The water resources have been protected by locating landfills in area that are relatively impermeable, and have a high capability for containing chemical contaminants (e.g. clays). Also the bottom of the landfill is above the water table and away and down gradient from surface waters, and groundwater recharge areas sources. All new landfills use a landfill liner (e.g. clay, synthetic) and have a collection system for surface runoff and have installed test wells at landfill perimeter to monitor water quality during operations for early identification and mitigation of emerging adverse effects Moderate to highly satisfactory Low