Correction Protocol for revised version of application and supporting documents for Rehabilitation and Modernization of Water and

Wastewater Systems in Mehedinti County Project: TA Number: Task: Consultant: Date: Rehabilitation and Mehedinti County
2004RO/16/P/PE/008-01

Modernization

of

Water

and

Wastewater

Systems

in

Revised version of application and supporting documents for Rehabilitation and Modernization of Water and Wastewater Systems in Mehedinti County Sogreah Consultants, France, ILF Consultants, Austria and Bostina Associates, Bucharest July 01, 2011

This Protocol for the revision of documentation represents revision requests and additions required by the Ministry of Environment and Forests in order to evaluate the documentation of the project Rehabilitation and Modernization of Water and Wastewater Systems in Mehedinti County. General comments The application and supporting documents has been improved compared to the previous version. Noted with thanks Next Steps A revised version of the documentation shall be developed taking into account the comments included in the Correction Protocol. This is in preparation and will be submitted as soon as all clarifications have been resolved with the Final Beneficiary because we are still receiving additional comments from them.

Volume/Document APPLICATION FORM Re qNr . 1 Chapter/ Annex/ Page General Addition/Correction Requested To be fill in by the Consultant Comments Chapter /Page (if case) The opinion of the Final Beneficiary is that agreements have been reached with Strehaia town (and other localities) to connect all properties to water supply and sewerage systems through the ROC and the IDA

APPLICATION FORM Please indicate that a new water supply network exists in Comanda It exists. Information is and provide information in this respect. provided In the FS you indicate that A total of 400 properties will be connected; in 2010 the number connections made has reached 150. There is a high demand for water, but the local government does not have sufficient funds to purchase water meters and make all the connections. (p148) while elsewhere you indicate that the new network was commissioned in the second half of 2009 (p107).

Volume/Document APPLICATION FORM Re qNr . Chapter/ Annex/ Page To be fill in by the Consultant Addition/Correction Requested Comments Chapter /Page (if case) Should we understand that nor the local government, nor the people can prefinance/finance and pay for the service provided? If people dont connect to the water network, what are the chances that the wastewater services provided under EU support will get paid and the service be sustainable? Please clarify. Inconsistency between Table B4-38 regarding investment Done components and some of the Physical Indicators for Stehaia and Baia de Arama (replacement and extension are reversed) / For DTS WWTP no information are given only a short sentence: A brief explanation is B4.2(a) Extension of WWTP. Please give more information related to what taken from Annex C-2. this extension means in terms of flow and loads and the final The NTPA 001 capacity in PE. Please mention in the same way as for the other standards are given. agglomerations the tables with the design parameters of the WWTP and the discharge requirements. Please note that the water permit for DTS shows effluent standards lower than the minimum requirements from UWWD and NTPA 001: there is no requirement for T-N and for T-P is 2mg/l which is over the maximum allowed for Table 4-43 This was discussed WWTDs>100,000PE of 1mg/l. For Strehaia WWTP the Water Permit doesnt require nutrient previously with MEF removal before connection of future localities which will increase the and AR, therefore no need to explain. The

2 3

p.32

B.4.2 p.21

(a)

Volume/Document APPLICATION FORM Re qNr . Chapter/ Annex/ Page To be fill in by the Consultant Addition/Correction Requested Comments Chapter /Page (if case) WWTP capacity over 10,000 PE. Please explain. Please correct the number separator is This is not number separator for the PE capacity of the WWTP in table B4-43 corrected. agreed. Please refer The Strehaia WWTP is to previous designed for almost decision 10,000 PE (less 150 PE), made and under such between circumstances nutrients MEF-AR removal should be confirmed by FB and considered. JASPERS. The Option Analysis section needs to be re-written in order to be in A summary of the line with the Feasibility Study (FS). Option Analyses in the Repitition is For both water supply and waste water services, this section should FS is included. deleted. indicate the approach, methodology used and present a summary of The first few A reflection the conclusions as presented in the FS. paragraphs of this of section section repeat twice. 8.5 is More important, this provided section does not reflect without the corresponding copy-paste. section in the FS which Please note is 8.5. SUMMARY OF that the FB OPTION ANALYSIS. does not There is no need to agree with provide details of the this MP options and copy comment. and paste of entire On this sections of the FS not basis, we relevant (e.g. CBA). have simply Please revise and use reviewed the Guidelines the text for attached. clarification

C.1.2 Options Considered

Volume/Document APPLICATION FORM Re qNr . 5 Chapter/ Annex/ Page F.7/page 110 Addition/Correction Requested To be fill in by the Consultant Comments Chapter /Page (if case) . Done. There are no WTPs with CF support Section H.1 is done. The CBA will be revised as necessary after all technical and other matters are approved and we have confirmed with the FB. Done

Please revise the included information regarding the discharge limits for DTS based on the new completed water approval. On the other hand it is necessary to clarify the contribution of the project related to the water treatment (100% with CF support).

H.1 & Please correlate the section H.1 with the DG constant prices. More Annexes 1-6 attention about the positions 3, 5, 7, 8, 11 from section H.1 and after Deviz Gen. that, correlate these values with the CBA model (Investment)

I.4

Appendix I Natura 2000 Declarations

Involvement of JASPERS in project preparation Please complete this section with the following tasks: - Review of all the documents regarding the project (AF, FS, CBA) - Review the Clarification Note made it by EC representative - Please attach accordingly the documents for Natura 2000: for each agglomeration a single PDF should be attached with the corresponding Declaration followed by the afferent map. - Pay attention related to the components mentioned in Natura 2000 Declarations/maps; for instance at Baia de Arama are mentioned 2 rehabilitated DWTPs and also 2 clorination plants; for Strehaia is mentioned the rehabilitation of DWTP!

Done

Volume/Document APPLICATION FORM Re qNr . 9 Chapter/ Annex/ Page Addition/Correction Requested To be fill in by the Consultant Comments Chapter /Page (if case) Already done We now have different (new) tariffs from the FB and we work to finish this together. Corrected

10

The map for Vanju Mare it is not visible. Annex II In this annex please attach: annexes 2 made by EPA (in a single PDF for each agglomeration) and the screening decision (in a single PDF EIA for each agglomeration). documents CFA E1. Please take into consideration that the tariffs at 01.01.2011 are the Financial one supplied in the file attached Water tariffs Mehedinti and the analysis ; CBA first unification will be achieved at 31.12.2011 with the followings tariffs 3,01 Ron /mc without VAT for water and 0,84 Ron/mc without VAT for wastewater.

11

ANEXA 1-CFA

Inconsistencies between various articles from annex 1 and the elements from the Financing Application ( see the attached file CFAAnnex1)

Volum/Document FEASIBILITY STUDY Req . Nr. 12 13 14 Chapter/ Annex/ Page Executive Summary 1.4.1.1 Page 29 1.7.1 Page 43 Addition/Correction Requested FEASIBILITY STUDY Please revise the summary of options analysis and the presented maps regarding the Simian agglomeration. Inconsistency regarding some reservoir storage facilities which will be provided
under the project with table B4-38 THE INVESTMENT PROPOSED FOR WATER AND WASTE WATER
INFRASTRUCTURE

To be fill in by the Consultant Comments Chapter /Page (if case) Done Done To be done after CBA is

Inconsistency between TABLE 1-7: PRELIMINARY ARRANGEMENT MILLION) and section D.2.3 of AF

OF

FINANCING SOURCES (

Volum/Document FEASIBILITY STUDY Req . Nr. Chapter/ Annex/ Page Addition/Correction Requested To be fill in by the Consultant Comments Chapter /Page (if case) finished based on the last information from the FB Done

15

16

4.2.11.8 and Please revise this subchapter in view of the new proposed solution. the followings The wastewater from Simian agglomeration will not be treated in DTS. Chapter 6 - Please revise the Sludge Strategy Chapter based on the quantity of all 6 WWTPs/1 WTP sludge from the project area (9 agglomerations and water supply areas). To demonstrate the efficiency of measures it is necessary to correlate the sludge production with the quantities disposed through the proposed alternatives, including for Baia de Arama, Vanju Mare WWTPs and also for DTS WTP. - Please consider that the costs related to the selected alternative of the strategy must be included in CBA. - In the sludge strategy should be included also information related to the management of residues from WWTP (sewage cleaning, grease, sand washing) quantifying the corresponding volumes and loads. - It is necessary to send to EC a clear decision related to sludge disposal. This Decision, based on the final Sludge Strategy, should be approved and signed by ROC and IDA. The information related to the implementation of the designed sludge strategy must be summarized in a specific Action Plan made by the Beneficiary (ROC and IDA), including the necessary activities for short, medium and long terms which will be accomplish by the Beneficiary.

The WTP of Drobeta does not recover any sludge, in accordance with the current ISPA measure and the Financing Memorandum. The WWTPs of Baia de Arama and Vanju Mare are included in the strategy. The costs for the sludge strategy are already included in the CBA. Estimates for other residues from the WWTPs and a strategy for their evacuation are included. The decision of ROC and IDA is

Volum/Document FEASIBILITY STUDY Req . Nr. Chapter/ Annex/ Page To be fill in by the Consultant Addition/Correction Requested Comments Chapter /Page (if case) appended in Annex I. The information included in tables 6.2-6.4 is not clear: 25% DS A detailed correspond with tonnes and 35% DS with m 3; any correlation between explanation of the the two percentages could not be made! calculations will be provided in Annex I. - Related to the PHARE WWTPs and DTS WTP, please present the Additional same information from the Chapter 6.3.1.2. information on the Baia de Arama and Vanju Mare WWTPs is provided. Table 6.5: It is not clear the significance of the new mentioned Orsova The sludge WWTP having in view that this is not part of the project area. On the quantities of Orsova other hand it is unknown the relevance of the year 2025 having in WWTP are added view the entire time horizon (the envisaged short, medium and long for info and terms); please clarify the importance for the strategy of the sludge completeness, since production from this year. In fact it is important that year with the this town is in the maximum sludge production; in this respect please present a specific Mehedinti County. annex with the envisaged production for the entire time horizon (until Orsova is not 2038). included in the project area and the strategy for its sludge disposal is not further developed here. Please revise this chapter for concrete information for the future The Consultant for capacities for landfilling; in this respect please contact the Consultant preparing the solid for the under preparing waste project (EPEM/ISPE). waste project has been contacted; there is no further information available.

17

18

Chapter 6.3.2.1, 6.3.2.1/page 173 Chapter 6.3.2.1/page 173

19

Chapter 6.3.2.3/page 174

20

Chapter 6.4.3.2/page 177

Volum/Document FEASIBILITY STUDY Req . Nr. 21 Chapter/ Annex/ Page Chapter 6.4.5.2/page 182 Addition/Correction Requested - Related to the information included in Table 6.13, the specifications regarding the existing Baia de Arama and Vanju Mare is missing; please clarify. - Please specify also about the principle agreements for the reuse of sludge in agriculture obtained until now. To be fill in by the Consultant Comments Chapter /Page (if case) Additional information on the Baia de Arama and Vanju Mare WWTPs is provided. Two principle agreements for sludge reuse have been signed. These are appended in Annex I. The principle agreement for reuse of sludge in forestation is appended in Annex I. The conclusions in the text are compliant with this agreement. A multi-criteria analysis of all available alternatives, taking into account all relevant criteria is included. Investment and operational costs are more clearly presented in the text, in addition to

22

Chapter 6.4.6/page 186

Related to the potential considered decision, please correlate the conclusion for the reuse of sludge in forestation based on the attached principle agreement from the territorial Forestry Directorate.

23

Chapter 6.5./page 184

- For relevant analyses of the affordable alternatives envisaged for the County, please present the relevant specific information for each criterion. The all available alternatives should be considered and selected according with the relevant comparison (for this purpose the included information is not convincing for the final disposal of the sludge). - Please consider that the assessment of the costs must be done based on the sound analyze in order to be proved the affordability of the sludge strategy. Please revise accordingly.

Volum/Document FEASIBILITY STUDY Req . Nr. Chapter/ Annex/ Page Addition/Correction Requested To be fill in by the Consultant Comments Chapter /Page (if case) the FNPV analysis that is already existing in Annex I. There are no alternatives in the sludge strategy, the alternatives have been compared in the previous chapter and a strategy has been developed. This strategy includes several different solutions that will be implemented in different ways at the time. The Beneficiary decision includes the correct 35% DS for sludge disposal. The estimations of the sludge quantities have changed since the decision has been taken, but the total quantity is now lower than in the decision, so the

24

Chapter 6.6/page 190

- Please revise this chapter for clear information regarding the alternatives envisaged for short, medium and long terms. It is necessary to mention the considered percentages from the total quantity of the sludge calculated for each period which can be used through the specific alternatives considering all 6 WWTPs and DTS WTP from the project area. - Having in view that this conclusive chapter is unclear presented for the sludge management of WWTPs/WTP, the Beneficiary Decision mentions also general information about the selected alternatives; for instance 30% DS and presented quantities of sludge are not correlated with the Strategy.

10

Volum/Document FEASIBILITY STUDY Req . Nr. Chapter/ Annex/ Page Addition/Correction Requested To be fill in by the Consultant Comments Chapter /Page (if case) implementation is still feasible. The corresponding time horizons are indicated in the text.

25

Chapter 6.9/page 189

Pay attention that the approved action plan will be considered that made by the Beneficiary based on the Sludge Strategy. Anyway, the Action Plan should take into account all necessary measures for an appropriate implementation of the sludge strategy distinct measures considering the selected alternatives for short, medium and long terms, mentioning the corresponding periods.

26

27

28

29

30

8.3. WATER This section is confusing because the terms agglomeration and SUPPLY cluster are used while those terms only refer to wastewater.. OPTIONS Please revise. 8.4.5.2 Please revise the option analysis in view of the new proposed Option solution. analysis Simian agg. Chap. 13 and Procurement plan AF B.4.2 Please add the Audit contract, the Publicity contract and the Supply contract regarding the functioning of the PIU and the afferent values. tab. 13-1 Please explain how there were calculated the values of the contracts page. 344 stipulated in table 13-1 (ex: the value mentioned for CW5-Baia de Arama in tab 13-1 is bigger than the value from constant estimate for Baia de Arama, please check all the contracts) 8.4.1.1/Page In order to accept that priority investment areas are not suited to I-228 disposal of wastewater to ground using septic tanks, please clarify the following:

Changed

Done

Done based on latest information from FB Changed

On-site sanitation Section cannot be controlled 8.4.1.1 and it is impossible to prevent discharges to Nature of soils: is it the case of soils with very low percolation neighboring properties of steep rates or no soil percolation such as clay soils, or on the because contrary, too-fast percolation rate, perhaps too sandy please ground slopes and

11

Volum/Document FEASIBILITY STUDY Req . Nr. Chapter/ Annex/ Page Addition/Correction Requested refer to the geotechnical surveys; Development density: please refer to the sufficiently concentrated area definition, as per the document Terms and definitions of the Urban Wastewater Treatment Directive (91/271/EEC). Our understanding is that the same level of environmental protection as a collecting system cannot be reached, but this needs to be substantiated. The risk of effluent draining into neighbouring properties: is it because solid organic materials are transmitted to the drainfield, and clog soil passages, or because soil absorption stops, and soil is flooded. This should be substantiated (if that is the case) by reference to the geotechnical surveys. To be fill in by the Consultant Comments Chapter /Page (if case) clay soils

31

11.5.6. PRESENT TARIFF LEVEL

Again, we insist in relating the substantiation to some hydro-geological data. In principle, a soil with low percolation implies a percolation time (T-time) greater than 50 min/cm or less than 1 min/cm. Please try and provide such information. The current tariffs in place as presented in the table p313 is unclear: There is no location in for instance, has wastewater tariff increased by 10% in 2009 and Mehedinti with the 2010 in Galati? name Galati and Also, the correlation with the CBA model is not evident: for instance there is reference in the wastewater tariff in Strehaia in 2010 is different in the model our document to this Please correlate and revise. city. The model uses the exact same tariffs in Lei and converts them correctly to Euro. No correlation / revision required.

In the available time frame this is not possible

No action required

The table provided by The comment, FB is referring to DTS (and changed not to Galati as initially mentioned by mistake), is maintained..

12

Volume/Document FS ANNEXES Req. Nr. Chapter/ Annex/ Page Annexes June Addition/Correction Requested To be fill in by the Consultant Comments Chapter /Page (if case) Kindly done by the FB

32

33

Annexes June

FS ANNEXES 1-6 Devizul General preturi constante si curente Pozitia 7.1 - achizitionarea de bunuri necesare functionarii Unitatii de Implementare a Proiectului, la nivel de Beneficiar, reprezentand suma echivalenta in RON a maximum 10.000 Euro trebuie trecuta la pozitia 4.5 Dotari 4.5.11 Dotari UIP. Eliminati TVA de la pozitia 7.1 Salarii UIP. Corelati valorile cu modelul CBA (investment). Adaugati devizul pe obiect aferent dotarilor UIP. 1-6 Annex 5 5.1 Please specify what represent this table and add the reference units. Annex 1 The annex regarding the performance indicators is incomplete. Please follow the attached model
Anexa - Perform ance indicators.xls

Kindly done by the FB

34

New Annex

Please provide the Clarification Note made it by Benoit Nadler (CE)

List of questions and com ents Mehedinti.doc m

35

with the final answers. ANNEX L-CFA- - Annex L, localty DTS, Table L-1 and CFA Table B 4-40 water Drawings network 50mm =4492m, on the maps (Cerneti) this pipe was replaced with 63 (in annex L this network its not included in the total column); water network 63 in annex L at the extensions column there are 12982 m , in the total column there are 19059 m, in CFA there are 12982 m in the estimate there are 14567m. - Annex L, Table L-2 Strehaia locality, transmission main 300 mm quantity of 372 m its being rehabilitated not extended.

It was done previously but inadevertently it was omitted from the DVD. Kindly done by the FB

13

Volume/Document FS ANNEXES Req. Nr. Chapter/ Annex/ Page Addition/Correction Requested To be fill in by the Consultant Comments Chapter /Page (if case)

36

37 38

- CFA, Table B 4-16 Baia de Arama, sewerage network extension there is 11.174 km compared to 10.578 km from Annex L and estimate. - CFA, Table B 4-27 Gura Vaii locality, rehabilitated water network there are 3805 m compared to 4105 m on the map and networks and 2254 m extension network compared to 1954 m. - CFA, Table B 4-44 Strehaia locality, the sewerage network of 350 mm is missing, which is formed of 220 m rehabilitation and 1408 m extension. - CFA , Table B 4-47 Vanju Mare locality, sewerage network extension 250 mm, there are 15489 m, compared to 15189 from annex 1 and networks. - CFA, Table B1-62 Gura Vaii locality, water network rehabilitation 110 there are 1145 m , same in annex L , compared to 1445 as it must be according to the estimate. - CFA, Table B1-62 Gura Vaii locality, under pressure sewerage network =300 mm there are 1729 m compared to 1245 m from annex L and estimate - Annex L Table L-9 Rogova locality transmission main, it must be written 160 mm compared to 150 mm, as it is in the table. - CFA, Table B4-56 Cujmir locality pumping main, it must be written 250 mm instead of 300 mm, as it is in the table. General Please perform the detailing of estimating the costs for the projects elements so that a detailed analysis can be done, as it was requested in the Guide for Elaboration of the Feasibility Study (how were calculated the unit prices from Annex E - Detailed Investment Cost Breakdown, based on what?) Deviz general For UATs Simian, Cujmir, Obirsia de Cimp, Rogova the percent in preturi 0,1% afferent to the Construction State Inspectorate tax, was not calculated. constante General General Estimate all UATs/ Value without VAT (RON)/Chaper 7.1 Estimate (in In the formula for the calculation of the value afferent to Costs constant for PIU salaries, old percentages are used, percentages which are

Agreed with FB that this is not required Done Done

14

Volume/Document FS ANNEXES Req. Nr. Chapter/ Annex/ Page prices) General Estimate constant prices) (in Addition/Correction Requested referring to the ratio of the Costs for main works (chap.4) afferent to each UAT. General Estimate / VAT (RON) VAT must be applied to the value equivalent in RON for 10.000 Euro, not to the value in Euro. ( the value written in the VAT column (RON) represents VAT- in euro ) DTS current prices / Value with VAT (Euro)/Chapter 7.1 Column Value including VAT, is different from value without VAT, but VAT is 0. Please add in the UATs the VAT afferent to the chapter 7.1. resulted from applying the VAT percent for the value of 10.000 euro. According to HG 28 at Feasibility Studys level it is necessary to provide the topographical studies which must comprise topographical plans with the location of the benchmarks, the list of the benchmarks from the national reference system. Please deliver also the situation plans afferent to Cujmir, Strehaia and Obirsia de Cimp localities (geotechnical studies.) To be fill in by the Consultant Comments Chapter /Page (if case)

39

Done

40

Deviz general in preturi curente si constante Annex SGeotechnical studies

Done

41

The person who holds the benchmarks is on holiday. This does not affect feasibility information will be provided as soon as possible

42

General

Volume/Document COST BENNEFIT ANALYSIS COST BENNEFIT ANALYSIS As far as Comanda water supply situation is concerned, the FS indicates that 35 A new water supply system is built; it was commissioned in 2nd half of 2009. (footnote p107). It is therefore not clear why the connection rate in the CBA is only 25% in 2010. Please explain and revise.

The whole CBA document is clarified and revised with JASPERS as explained at the 01.06.2011 meeting. Although the CBA has

CBA General The opinion of the Final Beneficiary is that

15

Volume/Document COST BENNEFIT ANALYSIS been modified and indicate an increasing connection rate, close to 100% by 2014, it remains unclear how this process will be financed, bearing in mind, in particular, your comment made elsewhere (see our comment and you quote in request number 1 in this CP ). Please clarify and explain. 43 4.3.2.1.6 Other operating costs P73 The answer to our previous comment, under request 163, remains unclear. If the concession fee includes ISPA loan, the sentence in the CBA volume should be revised. Also, it is unclear whether possible financial commitments from PHARE projects (e.g co-financing in Vanju Mare and Baia Arama) have been included or not. Please clarify. Clarified and revised The ISPA loan was included in OM costs as concession fee for DTS Agglomeration (please see OM Sheet, line 111). There are no other commitments of ROC from PHARE projects. Ok. Explained at 01.06.2011 meeting agreements have been reached with all localities to connect all properties to water supply and sewerage systems through the ROC and the IDA

Section 4.3.2.1.6 No action required see the letter ref. 5550/13.7.11 from FB

44

4.3.2.1.6 Other operating costs p.73

Following our comment in the previous CP under 164, it remains unclear why depreciation cost for the existing assets in Simian, Strehaia, Baia de Arama, Rogova, Vanju Mare have not been accounted for in the tables as well as in the model. Baia de Arama and The comment is Vanju Mare, for instance, have new wastewater treatment plants maintained (although (PHARE). the Consultant had characterised the Please explain. corresponding cost as marginal during the

No action required To be done after all technical aspects are concluded

16

Volume/Document COST BENNEFIT ANALYSIS meeting it was agreed that they will provide the information) 4.4.2.3 Tariff Please provide an additional table presenting the Tariffs in Euro and Done Section unification make sure to correlate the table with the one provided in the 4.4.2.3 strategy for Institutional Analysis (see comment after). OK. the With No action Project required Scenario Our previous comment under request 170 remains valid. Explained at No action 4.5.1.1 Please revise. 01.06.2011 meeting required General Consideratio Comment maintained. ns and (the level of account Explained at Assumptions receivable cannot 01.06.2011 p.95 increase every year, meeting representing almost there is half of the annual nothing turnover) more to add CBA Report / Table 3-2 Investment per cost component (page 40) CBA Report To be done The values from this table are not corresponding with Annex 1-3 after all Investment costs (CBA model MH- excel file) technical aspects are concluded CBA Model MH / Annex 1-3 Investment costs (excel file- Investment) CBA Model To be done In the tables Investment in constant prices, and current prices, the MH after all values for lines Buildings and construction, Plan and machinery, technical Contingenties and VAT and other taxes and fees are not aspects are corresponding with the values from Equivalent Diagram of position concluded from tables Investment cost and General Estimate in constant and current prices

45

46

47

48

17

Volume/Document DRAWINGS Req. Nr. Chapter/ Annex/ Page ---------------Volume/Document INSTITUTIONAL ANALYSIS Req. Nr. Chapter/ Annex/ Page General Addition/Correction Requested INSTITUTIONAL ANALYSIS 1. Statutul Asociaiei de Dezvoltare Intercomunitar (A.D.I.): - Din cadrul Actului aditional nr. 3 la Statutul Asociaiei pentru managementul serviciilor de ap i de canalizare Mehedini, trebuie eliminat de la art. 20 (alin.7), urmtoarea prevedere Pentru toate Hotrrile Adunrii Generale este necesar votul pozitiv al reprezentantului Consiliului Local al municipiului Drobeta Turnu - Severin care este acionar majoritar al operatorului, deoarece nu este conform cu H.G. nr. 855/2008. 2. Contractul de delegare al gestiunii serviciilor: Va rugam sa adaugati actul adiional la Contractul de Delegare al Gestiunii Serviciilor prin care sunt preluate cele 4 localitati - Branitea, Cujmir, Obria de Cmp, Breznia de Ocol
act_aditional CD.PDF

Addition/Correction Requested DRAWINGS

To be fill in by the Consultant Comments Chapter /Page (if case)

To be fill in by the Consultant Comments Chapter /Page (if case)

49

3. Studiul de fezabilitate: - emiterea de H.C.J./H.C.L.-uri privind aprobarea Studiului de fezabilitate i a indicatorilor tehnico-economici ai proiectului (ale U.A.T.-urilor care au prevzute investiii finantate prin POS Mediu); - emiterea avizului Adunrii Generale a Asociailor A.D.I. privind aprobarea i Studiului de fezabilitate i a indicatorilor tehnico-economici ai proiectului;

18

Volume/Document INSTITUTIONAL ANALYSIS Req. Nr. Chapter/ Annex/ Page Addition/Correction Requested To be fill in by the Consultant Comments Chapter /Page (if case)

50

51

- emiterea avizului C.T.E. al O.R. privind aprobarea Studiului de fezabilitate i indicatorii tehnico-economici ai proiectului; - aprobarea de ctre A.D.I. a planului anual de evoluie a tarifelor (conform rezultatelor Analizei Cost-Beneficiu). 4. Cofinanarea proiectului: - emiterea de H.C.J./H.C.L.-uri privind aprobarea cofinanrii proiectului (cheltuieli eligibile i neeligibile). 5. Alte documente de eligibilitate: - Declaraia de Angajament a Beneficiarului (aprobat i de A.D.I.); - Declaraia de Eligibilitate a Beneficiarului. Plan de The document refers to the take over of three localities Vanjulet, Hinova and Confirmed but Bala actiune Bala where no Cohesion Fund investments are planned. Please confirm. not finalized preluare OK actualizat 2011. Anexa 4 The document presents different tariffs in place in several localities of which See (italics) recalculata the above mentioned localities that are being taken over. It is therefore explanation below eng. assumed that these localities have functioning water supply networks as During the last well as a wastewater network for one (Bala). Despite this fact, it seems that meeting, it was these localities have not been included in the CBA model. Therefore it is agreed that another expected that the proposed tariff strategy for the ROC is ignoring the category Other corresponding cost and potential revenues attached to these localities. would be added to Consequently, the proposed tariff strategy may not properly insure the the CBA model. We sustainability of the investments. Please clarify and explain. take note of the explanation provided and the fact that no information has been provided concerning Bala and other localities

No action required

No action required

There is nothing more to add

19

Volume/Document INSTITUTIONAL ANALYSIS Req. Nr. To be fill in by the Consultant Chapter/ Addition/Correction Requested Comments Chapter Annex/ /Page (if case) Page part of the ROC area, or due to be part of the ROC responsibilities. Likewise, the level of O&M cost presented in the CBA is not fully reflected in the model. Anexa 4 Also, please note that the existing tariff presented in the document does not There is recalculata fully correlate with the existing tariff indicated in the CBA volume under nothing eng. 4.4.2.3 Tariff unification strategy for the With Project Scenario as well as more to the existing tariff presented in the model. add Please correlate. Volume/Document EIA Req. Nr. Chapter/ Annex/ Page Addition/Correction Requested EIA 53 General comments - Please attach the revised water approvals. Related to the water permits Kindly please be aware the project designer is ONUR but SOGREAH it is mentioned the FB only for DTS; please replace the approval for Gura Vaii with that revised for the water effluent! On the other hand for DTS the information for the extension of WWTP and the corresponding discharge limits are missing! The names of the agglomerations Branistea, Simian or Comanda are not mentioned in the titles of the corresponding water approvals. done by To be fill in by the Consultant Comments Chapter /Page (if case)

52

20

Volume/Document EIA Req. Nr. Chapter/ Annex/ Page Addition/Correction Requested - Please include in the EIA volume, for each agglomeration, all documents mentioned in the annex 2 issued by LEPA (in the same order from the annex 2), including all announcements and the copy from the new papers. - Be aware that as regards the screening decision for Gura Vaii, the project is not within 3 Natura 2000 sites (see the afferent Natura 2000 Declaration). To be fill in by the Consultant Comments Chapter /Page (if case)

Summary of existing problems:

Analiza Institutionala Evaluat Corectie / Conformar e

Document

Observatii

Statut/Act Constitutiv ADI

DA

Conform POS Conform POS Conform POS Conform POS Conform POS Conform POS Conform POS

Din Statutul ADI se va elimina alin 7 al art 20 pentru a fi conform in totalitate cu HG 855/2008

HCL/HCJ infiintare/modificare Statut/Act Constitutiv ADI Certificat inregistrare ADI Act Constitutiv Operator Regional (OR) HCL/HCJ infiintare/modificare Act Constitutiv OR Certificat inregistrare OR Contractul Unic de Delegare a Gestiunii Serviciilor (CDMS)

DA DA DA DA DA DA

Se va adauga si Actul Adtitional la CDMS 21

Document

Analiza Institutionala Evaluat Corectie / Conformar e

Observatii

HCL/HCJ aprobare CDMS HCJ privind aprobarea Master Planului i a listei de investiii HCJ privind aprobarea Studiului de fezabilitate i a indicatorilor tehnico-economici ai proiectului Avizul Adunrii Generale a Asociailor ADI privind aprobarea Studiului de fezabilitate i a indicatorilor tehnico-economici ai proiectului Avizul CTE al OR privind aprobarea Studiului de fezabilitate i a indicatorilor tehnico-economici ai proiectului HCJ/HCL-uri privind aprobarea cofinanrii proiectului (cheltuieli eligibile i neeligibile) Planul anual de evoluie a tarifelor (conform rezultatelor Analizei Cost-Beneficiu) aprobat de ADI Dovezi privind privind proprietatea/posesia autoritilor locale asupra terenurilor sau accesibilitatea acestora i privind punerea terenurilor la dispoziia proiectului - HCL Adeverin prin care se menioneaz faptul c nu au fost depuse cereri de retrocedare, n conformitate cu legislaia n vigoare i c nu exist litigii cu privire la stabilirea i delimitarea proprietii Declaraie de Angajament a Beneficiarului (aprobat i de ADI) Declaraie de Eligibilitate a Beneficiarului Scrisori de intenie de la bnci comerciale/de investiii privind interesul acestora de a cofinana proiectul, dac este cazul Plan preluare servicii

DA DA Lipsa Lipsa

Conform POS Conform POS

Lipsa Lipsa Lipsa DA Conforme

DA

Conforme

Lipsa Lipsa DA DA 22

Document

Analiza Institutionala Evaluat Corectie / Conformar e

Observatii

Constituire UIP

DA

Conform POS

23