FACE SHEET INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL EXAMINATION … · Agribusiness Initiative (aBi) Trust; $22 ......

FACE SHEET

INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL EXAMINATION

&

REQUEST FOR CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION

Program/Activity Number: 617, Development Objective One (DO1)

Functional Objective 4: Economic Growth

Program Name: Uganda Feed the Future

Program Area 4.5: Agriculture

Program Elements: 4.5 Agriculture and 4.8 Environment

4.5.1 Agriculture Enabling Environment,

4.5.2 Agriculture Sector Capacity.

4.8.2 Clean Productive Environment [FtF Climate Adaptation]

Country/Region: Uganda / East Africa

Sub-Activities / Amounts:

1. Agriculture Inputs Activity; $7.5 million

2. Commodity Production and Marketing; $22.9 million

3. Community Connector; $24.5 million

4. Biosafety Activity; $1.1 million

5. Banana Biotechnology Research Program in Uganda (ABSP II); $7.1 million

6. Cassava and Maize Research; $1.5million

7. Borlaug Higher Education Agricultural Research and Development (BHEARD); $ 1.5 million

8. Food Security Innovation Labs (Washington Funded /Based)

9. Production for Improved Nutrition (PIN); $ 22million

10. Developing and Delivering Bio fortified Crops/ Harvest Plus; $10 million

11. Nutrition and Collaborative Research and Support Program (NCRSP); $ 7 million;

12. Northern Uganda Health Integration to Enhance Services (NUHITES) / Nutrition Component; $ 4

million

13. Development Credit Authority (DCA) programs; $5 million

14. Agribusiness Initiative (aBi) Trust; $22.5 million

15. Public Private Alliances - Partnership Innovation Fund; $17.8 million

16. USAID/Uganda Agribusiness Development Facility; $ 1.5 million

17. Enabling Environment for Agriculture; $20.2 million

18. Enabling Environment for Agriculture/Climate Change Component; $ 3 million

19. Education and Research to Improve Climate Change Adaptation; $ 4 million

20. Enhancing Climate Resilience of Agricultural Livelihoods; $ 1 million

21. Purchase for Progress (P4P)/World Food Program; $5.5 million

22. Peace Corps Interagency Food Security Partnership; $1.25 million

23. The Learning Contract; $7.4 million

Funding Begin: FY 2014 End: FY2019 LOP Amount: $ ($270 Million)

2

IEE Prepared By: Jessica Okui, MEO, USAID/Uganda; and the Development Objective One (DO1)

Economic Growth Team and David Kinyua, Regional Environmental Advisor; USAID/East Africa

Current Date: January 2014.

IEE Expiration Date: 31 Dec. 2020 unless amended

IEE Amendment (Y/N): N If "yes", Filename & date of original IEE:

ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION (S) RECOMMENDED: (Place X where applicable)

Categorical Exclusion: X Negative Determination: __X

Positive Determination: X Deferral: ___ ___

ADDITIONAL ELEMENTS: (Place X where applicable)

CONDITIONS: X EMMP : __X__ ERF/ERR : __X__ WQAP : __X__ PVO/NGO: X

Pesticides (22 CFR 216.3 (b)(1)) applies): __X__

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS:

The purpose of this FY 2014 Initial Environmental Examination (IEE) is to provide threshold

determinations for the activities of USAID/Uganda’s Development Objective No. 1 (DO1): Economic

growth, Agriculture Sector. This IEE covers all the Feed the Future (FTF) activities implemented in the

USAID/Uganda Mission. Note: Two additional IEEs are intended to be developed to cover the

NRM/Biodiversity (FAF 4.8.1) and Infrastructure components of the Economic Growth portfolio.

USAID/Uganda's agriculture sector is diverse, focusing on: Agricultural inputs activities, agricultural

research, nutrition improvement, activities to improve the enabling environment for agriculture, climate

change and financial support to agricultural activities among others. Agricultural infrastructure

development will be covered in more detail in the planned infrastructure development IEE, which cross

cuts across all Development Objectives in the Mission.

This IEE consolidates the threshold determinations for all activities currently envisioned under Economic

Growth, Agricultural sector, to be implemented in the next five years, and it replaces the previous Blanket

IEE for DO1, completed in 2009. Section 1.3 gives a description of activities implemented in DO1,

Agriculture sector; Section 2 provides an overview of Uganda’s environment and agriculture sector;

Section 3 provides an evaluation of the potential environmental impacts of DO1, agriculture sector

activities, and provides the threshold environmental determination and mitigation actions, addresses

promotion of environmental management and capacity building. Other sections address environmental

responsibilities, operationalizing provision of IEE, and monitoring responsibilities. See Section 3.4 for

General Restrictions and Responsibilities, including Government to Government (G2G).

Environmental Determinations

This IEE has recommended the following environmental determinations:

3

1. A Categorical Exclusion from environmental examination is recommended for activities which do

not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the environment, pursuant to 22 CFR

216.2(c) (2),

(i) for activities involving education, training, technical assistance or training programs;

(ii), for activities involving controlled experimentation exclusively for the purpose of research and

field evaluation which are confined to small areas and carefully monitored;

(iii), for activities involving analyses, studies, academic or research workshops and meetings;

(v), for activities involving document and information transfers;

(viii), for programs involving nutrition, health care, or family planning services except to the extent

designed to include activities directly affecting the environment (such as construction of facilities, water

supply systems, waste water treatment, etc.), and

(x) Support for intermediate credit institutions when the objective is to assist in the capitalization of

the institution or part thereof and when such support does not involve reservation of the right to review

and approve individual loans made by the institution.

1. A Negative Determination with Conditions per 22 CFR 216.3 (a) (2) (iii) is recommended for

activities that will have no significant adverse environmental impacts with adequate mitigation and

monitoring, this include the following activities:

i. Increasing the availability of agricultural inputs to farmers;

ii. General dissemination of improved technology, supply of improved seeds and use of fertilizers

to enhance agricultural production;

iii. Control of field pests and diseases using pesticides;

iv. Control of produce pest infestation;

v. Construction and maintenance of post-harvest facilities;

vi. Provision financial support services;

vii. Promotion of appropriate technology to improve access to safe water and sanitation;

viii. Activities to support animal husbandry;

ix. Activities involving providing support to judicious use of modern agricultural biotechnology in

order to increase agricultural productivity.

x. Activities involving the production of therapeutic foods, supplementary foods, and bio fortified

foods.

Environment Monitoring and Mitigation Plan (EMMP) which identifies the IEE conditions and mitigation

measures for each award will be developed using the EMMP template attached on this IEE. The EMMP

will be part of the program work plan

2. A Positive Determination is recommended per 22 CFR 216.2 (d) (1) for activities involving

irrigation activities. Positive Determinations require preparation and approval by the BEO of an

Environmental Assessment in accordance with §216.6

3. Environmental Responsibilities:

As required by ADS 204.3.4, the DO1 Economic Growth Agriculture team (USAID /Uganda) and

activity implementing partners will actively monitor and evaluate whether the environmental features

designed for the activity resulting from the 22 CFR 216 process are being implemented effectively and

whether there are new or unforeseen consequences arising during implementation that were not identified

and reviewed in accordance with 22 CFR 216. If additional activities not described in this document are

added to this program, an amended environmental examination must be prepared and approved.

4

See Section 3.4 for General Restrictions and Responsibilities, including Government to Government

(G2G).

APPROVAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION RECOMMENDED

DO 1: Economic Growth: Agriculture: Feed the Future IEE

CLEARANCE:

Deputy Mission Director

USAID Uganda: ________________________ Date: ____________________

Mark Meassick

Mission Director

USAID Uganda: ________________________ Date: __________________

Leslie Reed

CONCURRENCE:

Bureau Environmental Officer, _____/WIK for/______________ Date: _8/13/2104___

AFR/SD: Brian Hirsch

File Name: Uganda_DO1_FtF_IEE_0813214

ADDITIONAL CLEARANCE:

Mission Environment Officer, _________________________ Date: __________________

USAID/Uganda: Jessica Okui

DO1 Team Leader, _________________________ Date: __________________

USAID/Uganda: Jo Allen Lesser - Oltheten

Regional Environment Officer, _________________________ Date: __________________

East Africa Region: David Kinyua

5

INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL EXAMINATION

&

REQUEST FOR CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION

Program/Activity Number: 617, Development Objective One (DO1)

Functional Objective 4: Economic Growth

Program Area 4.5: Agriculture

Program Element 4.5.2: Agriculture Sector Productivity Capacity

Program Activity: Feed the Future

Country/Region: Uganda / East Africa

1.0 SECTION 1: BACKGROUND AND SCOPE OF IEE :

1.1 Purpose and Scope of the IEE:

The purpose of this IEE is to provide threshold determinations for the existing and new Development

Assistance (DA) programming activities in DO1 Economic Growth, Agriculture Sector in accordance

with the requirements of Regulation 22 CFR 216 (Reg. 216), This document will assist in ensuring

environmental compliance, and will permit the implementation of the proposed DA funded program

activities in accordance with USAID Environmental Policy and Procedures (22 CFR Part 216).

This IEE provides the first review of the reasonably foreseeable effects on the environment of the

proposed development interventions and activities for the Agriculture Sector. Activities under the

Agriculture Sector involving infrastructure development will be detailed in the DO1, Economic Growth

Infrastructure IEE.

This IEE consolidates the threshold determinations for all activities currently envisioned under the DO1

Economic Growth Agriculture sector and replaces the DO1 blanket IEE developed in 2009. A Blanket

IEE was prepared in FY 2009 for DA programming activities in DO1 Economic Growth, for

Agriculture, Environment, Private Sector Competitiveness, Water and Sanitation sectors which expires in

FY 2014. This IEE replaces the expired IEE and covers activities in the thematic area of Agriculture. It

will cover the period FY 2014 to 2019.

In the event that any new proposed activity in the agriculture sector differs, substantially from the type or

nature of activities describes here or require different or additional mitigation measures beyond these

described, this IEE will be amended.

1.2 Background

Uganda had developed the National Development Plan 2010/2011 – 2014/2015 which lays out national

priorities and has prioritized agricultural development as top priority among the plans primary growth

sectors. The agricultural sector employs 73% of Uganda’s labor force.

Feed the Future (FTF) is a $3.5 billion U.S. government (USG) initiative to address the root causes of

hunger and poverty through country-led plans in twenty focus countries, including Uganda. FTF seeks to

accelerate inclusive agriculture sector growth through improved productivity, expanded markets and

trade, and increased economic resilience of rural communities. Led by the U.S. Agency for International

Development (USAID), FTF aims to coordinate USG investments and expertise, while leveraging the

strengths and resources of multilateral institutions, civil society, and the private sector.

6

However despite sustained economic and agriculture sector growth, Uganda still suffers from widespread

poverty, hunger, and malnutrition. By developing key agricultural commodities and increasing access to

diverse and nutritious foods, FTF aims to raise farmer incomes, to create jobs, and to improve the

nutritional and economic status of approximately 2.4 million Ugandans, in 38 focus districts over five

years.

Agricultural programming aligns directly with the goals of Uganda’s Development Strategy and

Investment Plan (DSIP), concentrating on the development of maize, bean, and coffee value chains.

Nutrition activities support the Ministry of Health’s Health Sector Strategic and Investment Plan, as well

as the development and implementation of the multilateral Uganda Nutrition Action Plan (UNAP).

USAID, in partnership with the Government of Uganda (GoU), private entities, and other donors, is

implementing the following activities:

1.3 DESCRIPTION OF ACTIVITIES AND AREAS AFFECTED

1.3.1 Agricultural Inputs Activity:

The program purpose is to increase the use of quality agricultural inputs in Uganda. Four intermediate

results (IRs) will contribute to this purpose:-

IR (1): Increase availability of inputs to farmers in FTF focus districts

IR ( 2): Decrease prevalence of counterfeit agricultural inputs

IR ( 3): Increased awareness of inputs, their benefits and proper usage

IR (4); improved domestic regulatory environment.

The program focuses on developing the private sector agricultural inputs markets in Uganda with the goal

of increasing the quality, availability and use of inputs. The program will work closely with major

stakeholders including the Uganda National Agricultural Inputs Dealers Association (UNADA) and the

private sector.

Coverage: Pilot districts; Bushenyi, Masaka, Mubende, Iganga, Gulu.

1.3.2 Commodity Production and Marketing:

The proposed commodity production and marketing activity will focus on sustainably increasing the

production and marketing of quality maize, beans, and coffee. This activity is part of USAID/Uganda’s

FTF value chain development project, which addresses the wide range of activities targeting various

actors (producers, traders, service providers, key policy makers, etc.) to promote an integrated value chain

system that enhances market value of products. The overall objective of the FTF commodity production

and marketing activity is to sustainably increase the production and marketing of high quality maize,

beans, and coffee in FTF focus districts. The activity objective will be achieved by: increasing crop

productivity (increase in yields, reduction of production costs, and reduction of post-harvest losses);

increasing availability and effectiveness of support services (financial, advisory, market information, and

other production and marketing services); strengthening inter-actor relationships for better movement of

products and information between buyers and sellers; and increasing access to competitive markets

(domestic, regional and international).

The Activity objective will be achieved through the following IR’s and sub IR’s:-

IR (1): Increase crop production

- Increased use of improved farm management practices.

- Increased use of high quality agricultural inputs.

- Increased access to production support services.

7

IR (2): Increase access to competitive markets (domestic. Regional and international).

- Improve market linkages

- Increase access to market support services

- Improve post-harvest handling.

Coverage: 34 FTF districts. Amuru, Gulu, Nwoya, Agago, Nebbi, Oyam, Kole, Lira, Dokolo ,Alebtong,

Kiryandongo, Masindi, Kamwenge,Kasese,Ibanda,Kanungu,Kisoro,Kabale,Isingiro,Kiruhura,Masaka,

Mubende,Kiboga,Luwero,Mukono,Jinja,Kamuli,Iganga,Bugiri,Tororo,Mbale,Sironko, Kapchorwa and

Rakai.

1.3.3 Community Connector:

The goal of the program is to reduce poverty by enabling vulnerable households in Uganda to achieve

sustainable food and livelihood security through community-level action. The program targets

communities with the highest level of malnutrition and poverty by increasing incomes, improving

nutrition and empowering women, children/youth through community based interventions.

This will be achieved through two intermediate results and sub IR’S..

IR (1): Improved nutritional status, especially of women and children

- Households adopt improved nutrition-related behaviors.

- Households adopt key hygiene actions.

- Households increase access to diverse and quality foods.

- Increased knowledge on healthy timing and spacing of pregnancies.

IR (2): Sustainable and equitable opportunities for improved livelihoods

- Livelihoods diversity is increased and/or protected.

- Equitable household management of resources improved.

- Households’ capacity to mitigate shocks improved.

Coverage: Pader, Agago, Nebbi, Dokolo, Kanungu, Oyam, Ibanda, Kabale, Kisoro, Kiryandongo,

Masindi, Kamwenge, Kasese, Lira, kole.

1.3.4 Biosafety Activity: The goal of the activity is to create an enabling environment for facilitating judicious use of modern

biotechnology to boost food security and incomes among Ugandan farmers. Activities will be conducted to

attain three intermediate results (IRs) that will contribute to attaining activity goals (see result Framework

below):-

IR (1): Framework for use of biotechnology product developed.

IR (2): Regulatory agencies and institutions capacity strengthened.

IR (3): Biosafety advocacy and outreach improved. The activity is to create an enabling environment for

facilitating judicious use of modern biotechnology to boost food security and incomes among Ugandan

farmers. The activities will be conducted to attain three intermediate results (IRs) that will contribute to

attaining activity goals (see result Framework below): -

IR(1) : Framework for utilization of biotechnology product developed.

IR(2) : Regulatory agencies and institutions capacity strengthened.

IR (3) : Biosafety advocacy and outreach improved.

Converge : National.

8

1.3.5 Banana Biotechnology Research Program in Uganda (ABSP II):

The USAID Mission in Uganda has been supporting biotechnology development since 2004 through the

Agricultural Biotechnology Support Project II (ABSPII). Its support has focused on the development of

disease resistant varieties of East African Highland (EAH) banana, combined with comprehensive

infrastructure and human capacity development in the areas of scientific research and biosafety

regulation. USAID/Uganda has been instrumental in strengthening molecular, transformation and tissue

culture laboratories at the Kawanda, Namulonge and Agricultural Biotechnology Center. With funding

from the Mission, Kawanda has built a Level II biosafety greenhouse, several screen houses and confined

field trial facilities.

The objective of this program is to promote the judicious use of modern agricultural biotechnology in

Uganda. ABSPII aims to increase agricultural productivity, nutritional security and ultimately, the

incomes of the rural poor. This program will also promote the protection of intellectual property rights

and biosafety policies necessary for the adoption of bioengineered crops.

ABSP II provides support in the following priority areas: 1) development of technology through

establishment of embryonic cell suspension cultures; 2) transgenic plant transformation; 3) confined field

testing for transgenic plant materials; 4) advancement of communication, outreach, and scientific capacity

building; and 5) development of intellectual property management and licensing. To further the primary

objectives, ABSP II constructed and continues to support the management of a modern greenhouse and

containment field trial facilities for research at various locations.

Coverage: Kampala (Kawanda)

1.3.6 Cassava and Maize Research:

To investigate, develop, promote and disseminate farmer and consumer acceptable cassava, maize and

beans varieties that are resistant and tolerant to a wide array of biotic and abiotic stresses and /or have

enhanced nutritional characteristics.

Coverage: Wakiso (Namulonge)

1.3.7 Borlaug Higher Education Agricultural Research and Development (BHEARD):

Aims at developing human resource skills in research, institutional capacity and focuses on educating the

next generation of researchers and policy analysts in the agricultural sector in Uganda. BHEARD is

primarily a long-term degree (MSc and PhD), agriculture and food security training program supporting

the goals of agriculture-led growth and poverty reduction.

The objectives of the program are to:

- Develop the scientific capacity (both human and institutional) of FTF countries based on

strategic analysis of institutional and national capability to address the FTF goals of

agriculture- led growth reduction of hunger.

- Create strong and supportive linkages between the scientific and higher education

communities across Africa an in US in order to achieve FTF goals

- Encourage and identify innovative and effective mechanisms for human and institutional

capacity development through focused monitoring evaluation and analysis.

9

- Create an efficient implementing entity through which USAID missions and bureaus can

easily conduct capacity building activities with low transaction costs.

Coverage: National.

1.3.8 Food Security Innovation Labs/Collaborative Research Support Programs (CRSP)

The CRSPs were put into place to exploit the capabilities of U.S. land-grant universities to accelerate

agricultural development in nations worldwide. The innovation Labs is partnerships between U.S.

Universities, developing countries institutions and USAID to address issues of hunger and poverty

through science and technology. They are working to build efficient and effective value chains across the

globe and three are currently active in Uganda: Horticulture, Integrated Pest Management, and

Sustainable Agriculture and Natural resource Management.

- Horticulture (HORT) CRSP: The University of California at Davis leads an international

effort to help developing countries out of poverty through improved marketing and

production of high-value horticultural crops.

- Integrated Pest Management (IPM) CRSP: Virginia Polytechnic Institute supports

regional research programs in Africa, Asia, Eastern Europe, and Latin America to

develop and promote the adoption of IPM approaches that raise food quality and quantity

and protect the environment.

- Sustainable Agriculture & Natural Resource Management (SANREM) CRSP at the

Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University promotes stakeholder empowerment

and improved livelihoods through the discovery, organization, and dissemination of

SANREM.

1.3.9 Production for Improved Nutrition (PIN):

The goal is to reduce the burden of under nutrition in focus areas and targeted groups and to facilitate

sustainable local production and distribution of nutritious and therapeutic foods, through the following

IR’s and sub IR’s:-

IR(1): Increase production of therapeutic and supplementary foods to children, pregnant women and

people living with HIV with moderate or severe acute malnutrition.

- Improvement in financial management systems; marketing, food production, quality control,

human resource management and supply chain management.

- Enhanced local production of age-appropriate nationally acceptable therapeutic and

supplementary foods to meet national needs.

- Strengthen quality control and quality improvement systems for food production.

IR(2): Establish an effective distribution system for therapeutic and supplementary foods within public

and private sectors in Uganda.

- Establish strong distribution system for the therapeutic and supplementary foods to USG

supported nutrition programs.

- Improve demand for therapeutic and supplementary food.

R(3): Livelihood strengthening; improve agricultural practices and increase market access of at least

80,000-150,000 local small scale farmers located in rural districts in Uganda.

- Improve agriculture production among small scale farmers in targeted districts for nutrient –

dense food crops and raw materials.

- Increase household incomes to local farmers in targeted districts

IR(4): Expand access to essential services for orphans and other vulnerable children, their

caregivers and households

10

- Promote increased agricultural production and livelihoods diversification to OVC households

to strengthen their food security.

- Promote increased access and retention of vulnerable children in schools to realize equal

education opportunities for all children.

- Enhance asset growth for OVC and their households through life skills training and support

for formation of saving schemes.

Coverage. National

1.3.10 Developing and Delivering Bio fortified Crops/ Harvest Plus:

To introduce and promote bio-fortified crops, such as pro-Vitamin A orange-flesh sweet potato and iron-

and zinc-rich beans, and to foster the adoption and consumption of nutrient dense crops. The objectives of

the program include: 1) Assess and develop existing seed systems for the target crops and enable them to

accelerate uptake of bio-fortified varieties; 2) Assess different methodologies for increasing farmer

productivity and production of bio-fortified crops in farming communities; 3) Assess the contribution of

nutrition awareness on consumption and adoption of bio-fortified crops with emphasis on vulnerable

groups; 4) Determine the most appropriate channels of creating awareness of new bio-fortified crops; and

5) Assess the effects of improved market linkages and business support services on consumption and

farmer incomes.

The Project Goal is to reduce micronutrients malnutrition and improve dietary intake of vitamin A and

iron in 13 selected districts. This is to be achieve through two IR,s and sub IR’s:

IR (1): Increase production of orange sweet potatoes and high iron beans.

- Appropriate bio fortified varieties of beans and sweet potatoes developed and tested.

- Enhanced production of high iron beans and orange sweet potatoes.

- Marker linkages and business support services supported.

IR (2): Increased consumption of orange sweet potatoes and high iron beans

- Recommend feeding practices for children under five and mothers.

- Crate awareness on the nutrition importance of high iron beans and orange sweet potatoes.

1.3.11 Nutrition and Collaborative Research and Support Program (NCRSP): To assess the effectiveness of integrated “packages” of agricultural, health and nutrition interventions and

to support the research and build the capacity of partner universities, governments, non-government

organizations and private enterprises.

Coverage: Agago, Kole, Lira, Dokolo, Kamwenge, Kisoro.

1.3.12 Northern Uganda Health Integration to Enhance Services (NUHITES)/Nutrition Component

To improve and sustain the health and nutritional status of the population of northern Uganda. Through

delivery of essential nutrition services at the facility and community level. This will be achieved in

partnership with district health teams and private sector partners by assessing under nutrition at the

community level, and improving facilities’ capacity to manager severe malnutrition through use of ready

to use therapeutic foods.

Coverage: Gulu, Amuru, Nwoya, Kitgum, Lamwo, Pader, Agago, Lira, Otuke, Oyam, Kole, Apac,

Dokolo, Amolatar, Alebtong.

1.3.13 Development Credit Authority (DCA) and Financial Inclusion Programs:

11

To stimulate competition among local commercial and microfinance banks to enter the agriculture finance

market and provide credit to micro, small and medium enterprises (MSMEs), producer organizations and

Savings and Credit Cooperatives (SACCOs) in the agriculture sector.

This will include financial intermediations, micro-credit, loans, micro-finance institutions (MFIs),

microfinance deposit-taking institutions (MDIs), and micro enterprises, loan guarantees, and Global

Development Alliances (GDA) and Development Credit Authority (DCA) commitments.

The Mission is negotiating a loan portfolio guarantee agreement with Opportunity Bank Uganda (“a

leading provider of financial services to low income people in rural and urban areas of Uganda,

promoting holistic transformation of lives whilst maintaining sustainability”

(http://opportunitybank.co.ug/ )). This guarantee will support loans for students to attend secondary

school in addition to providing access to finance for village health team workers. Borrowers under the

guarantee will be supported by USAID/Uganda programming, including the Orphaned and other

Vulnerable Children (OVC) initiative.

USAID/Uganda is also working to finalize a multi-lender loan portfolio guarantee with Finance Trust

Bank (FTB), a commercial bank in Uganda, licensed by the Bank of Uganda, the central bank and

national banking regulator, as well as UGAFODE Microfinance Limited (an MDI), supporting SMEs in

Uganda, and the Development Finance Company of Uganda Bank Limited (DFCU). This guarantee will

support lending to USAID/Uganda's priority Feed the Future value chains of coffee, maize, and beans, as

well as the agricultural sector in general. Technical assistance is currently being contemplated, which may

include support from the E3 Bureau via the Agriculture Lending Toolkit and/or from the Mission's

Commodities, Production and Marketing (CPM) program.

During the DCA risk assessment, we'll be verifying that the Financial Institutions have the procedures in

place to comply with Ugandan environmental laws (which they should have otherwise they wouldn't have

been licensed by the central bank).

For the case of DCA credit guarantees, note that the specific intent of such guarantees is to stimulate

lending (and thus the activities supported by that lending) that would not otherwise take place. Thus, even

in situations in which USAID will not exert direct control over the loan‐making process or over

Borrowers’ use of USAID‐backed financing (i.e., how guaranteed funds are put to use on the ground),

USAID bears partial responsibility for any unintended adverse impacts.

USAID thus has a dual responsibility: (1) to ensure that financial intermediaries receiving DCA credit

garuntees have functional environmental due diligence processes in place for their DCA-

supported loans that enforce requirements of the “standard language,” and beyond this, compliance

with host country requirements; and (2) to provide complementary TA to entities receiving DCA‐

backed loans to support compliance and good practice.

1.3.14 Agribusiness Initiative (aBi) Trust:

http://opportunitybank.co.ug/

12

To support the aBi Trust, a multi-stakeholder entity devoted to agribusiness development, to improve the

performance and competitiveness of key commodity value chains. Activities under this project will be

undertaken by aBi Trust to strengthen the productivity and competitiveness of the value-chains of three

crops, namely: maize, beans and coffee, and the players therein. The work will be based on a thorough

assessment of the principal characteristics and needs of each of the selected value-chains. It will address

the principal weaknesses along the chains to help make Ugandan agricultural produce more competitive

and better able to meet the standards of local, regional and international markets. Implementing

mechanisms will involve grants being made to experienced agricultural commodity value-chain support

agencies, NGOs, producer organizations, business development service providers and financial

institutions.

The Agricultural Business Initiative Trust (aBi Trust) is an institution founded by the Governments of

Uganda and Denmark as a vehicle for channeling financial and technical support to partners for

agribusiness development. The strategic objective is “to strengthen the competitiveness of Uganda’s

agricultural and agro-processing sectors through enterprise or firm-level interventions for agribusiness

development.” To achieve this objective the Trust operates through it sub components; Value Chain

Development and Financial Services Development.

Coverage: Agago, Alebtong, Amuru, Bugiri, Bushenyi, Dokolo, Iganga, Isingiro, Jinja, Kamuli,

Kapchorwa, Kasese, Kibale, Kiboga, Kiryadongo, Kole, Lira, Luwero, Masaka, Masindi, Mayuge, Mbale,

Mubende, Mukono, Nebbi, Nwoya, Oyam, Pader, Rakai, Sironko, Tororo.

1.3.15 Public Private Alliances - Partnership Innovation Fund:

To leverage private sector resources, technology, experience, and expertise through public-private

partnerships and by replicating sustainable and scalable business approaches. This activity Solicits Public

Private Alliances (PPA) with private sector companies in areas where a company's core business interests

intersects with USAID's development objectives.

USAID/Uganda seeks priority partnerships that include promising methods for substantially advancing

coffee, maize, beans, agriculture inputs, energy, nutritional food products, financial services, information

and communication technologies (ICT) solutions.

i. Coffee GDA: USAID support for (farmer trainings in agronomic practices, (2) establishment

of a traceability system, (3) access to finance for smallholders.

ii. Maize GDA: USAID support for (1) technical assistance, (2) trainings,

(3) Construction of maize “village aggregation centers” (storage facilities),

(4) Purchase of post-harvest handling equipment.

Coverage: Agago, Alebtong Amuru, Bugiri, Bushenyi, Dokolo, Gulu, Ibanda, Iganga, Isingiro, Jinja,

Kamuli, Kamwenge, Kapchorwa, Kasese, Kabale, Kiboga, Kiryandongo, Kole, Lira, Luwero, Masaka,

Masindi, Mayuge, Mbale, Mubende, Mukono, Nebbi, Nwoya, Oyam, Pader, Rakai, Sironko, and Tororo.

1.3.16 USAID/Uganda Agribusiness Development Facility:

Provides technical assistance and business development services to investee companies and deliver a

competitive financial return to investors in the Africa Agricultural Capital Fund (AACF).

13

Equity investments made in high quality businesses operating in the agriculture value chain in East Africa

will lead to growth of investee companies, enable delivery of improved products, services and markets to

smallholder households and increase by at least $80 per household, the income of 250,000 smallholder

farmers.

IR 1.1: Income Led by Strategic Value Chains in Selected Populations Increased

IR 1.1.1: Agricultural Productivity Improved

IR 1.1.2: Markets and Trade Expanded

IR 1.1.3: Investment in Agriculture and Nutrition-related Activities Increased

IR 1.1.1:1: Agriculture Policy Environment Improved.

1.3.17 Enabling Environment for Agriculture:

This activity is intended to improve the enabling environment for agriculture development, trade and

adaptation to climate change. This will be achieved through; reducing targeted policy and regulatory

constraints to agriculture production and trade, strengthening the capacity of Government of Uganda

institutions to facilitate agriculture development and trade, responding to the impacts of climate change

on agriculture and enhancing the capacity of the private sector and civil society organizations to

contribute to policy decisions.

The overall objective of the activity is to increase the value of agricultural production and trade. The

expected results are:

(1) Removal of policy and regulatory constraints to agricultural production, marketing, and

trade;

(2) Strengthened capacity of Government of Uganda institutions to facilitate agricultural

development and trade;

(3) Strengthened capacity of Government of Uganda institutions to respond to climate

change impacts on agriculture; and

(4) Enhanced capacity of Ugandan private sector and civil society institutions to contribute to

policy decisions related to agricultural development, agricultural trade, and climate

change adaptation.

Coverage: National

1.3.18 Enabling Environment for Agriculture/Climate Change Component:

The Enabling Environment for Agriculture activity partners with Ugandan private and public sector

institutions to improve the enabling environment for agricultural development, trade, and adaptation to

climate change. The activity is an integral element of the FTF and Global Climate Change initiatives in

Uganda and will contribute to a sustainable increase in agricultural sector incomes and exports.

The climate change adaptation component will focus on:

(1) Improving government capacity to execute the National Climate Change Policy and

Implementation Strategy.

(2) Improving district government capacity to integrate climate change into planning

processes.

(3) Providing technical support to civil society, private sector, local/national government,

and implementing partners to maximize adaptive capacity of existing agriculture projects.

1.3.19 Education & Research to Improve Climate Change Adaptation:

Education and Research to Improve Climate Change Adaptation will partner with Makerere University’s

Centre for Climate Change Research and Innovation, the National Agricultural Research Organization

(NARO), and the International Institute for Tropical Agriculture (IITA) to increase the level of education,

professional expertise, and research to help meet the challenge of adapting to climate variability and

change in the agricultural sector.

14

The Activity will:

(1) Provide short-term training for university staff, government, civil society, and private

sector professionals;

(2) Improve undergraduate, graduate, diploma, and post-graduate level education; and

(3) Develop and implement a research program at Makerere University linked to field

trials by NARO and dissemination by the National Agricultural Advisory Services

(NAADS).

1.3.20 Enhancing Climate Resilience of Agricultural Livelihoods:

The overall goal of the project is to generate and promote technological and institutional interventions

that contribute to building resilience of agricultural systems in minimum two and maximum four districts

for improved livelihoods of smallholder farmers.

Increased resilience of agricultural systems will be achieved through:

(1) Enhanced awareness, accuracy, and robustness of the anticipated impacts of climate

change and shocks,

(2) Improved efficiency and availability of adaptation technology packages,

(3) Informed-decision making at household and community level to reduce negative trade-

offs over time, over space, and between actors, and (iv) improved understanding of how

policies affect farmers vulnerability and adaptive capacity at the local level with the aim

to create awareness and action with local policy actors.

1.3.21 Purchase for Progress (P4P)/World Food Program:

To support the purchase for progress projects, a pilot initiative that provides tools, equipment and training

for farmers to enable them both to increase productivity and improve their post-harvest operations.

Coverage: Gulu, Amuru, Nwoya, Pader,Agago, Kitgum,Lamwo,Soroti, Serere, Kaberamaido, Amuria,

Iganga, Bugiri, Kamuli, Tororo,Kamwenge, Kasese, Kabarole, Kapchorwa, Kween.

1.3.22 Peace Corps Interagency Food Security Partnership:

To support the training of Peace Corps Volunteers and local counterparts in food security issues and their

placement in target districts.

Coverage: TBD

1.3.23 The Learning Contract:

To support monitoring and evaluation of Feed the Future activities in all focus countries.

Coverage: 38 districts.

SECTION 2.0: COUNTRY AND ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION (BASELINE

INFORMATION)

2.1 Locations Affected:

Uganda’s Environmental Threats and Opportunities Analysis (ETOA) completed in 2012 summarizes the

key environmental variables in Uganda. Uganda is a landlocked country on the equator, covering 241,038

sq. km. Over one-fifth of the total area of Uganda is open water and swamp. Four of east Africa's Great

Lakes –Lake Victoria, Lake Kyoga, Lake Albert, and Lake Edward – lie within Uganda or on its borders.

Uganda holds much biodiversity of regional and global importance within its borders, and has seven of

the 18 bio-geographic regions in Africa are found. The country ranks fourth on the continent in number of

bird species (over 1000) and third in number of mammal species. In the 1960s, Uganda held the largest

mammal biomass (elephants, buffaloes, hippos) globally, and with animal populations again steadily

building up in the PAs, Uganda still has the potential to do so. Inadequate management of these

15

[biodiverse] regions, combined with external pressures brought on by poverty and population growth,

place Uganda's unique biodiversity at immediate risk. Managed wisely, Uganda's ecosystems can

continue to serve as repositories for biological diversity while providing a foundation for sustainable

economic growth.‖ Since 2000, however, most of the threats to biodiversity have increased in magnitude

and a new threat has materialized – the discovery of oil in the Albertine Rift. Today, the threats to

biodiversity that typically result from agricultural production remain, while the threats from industrial and

commercial development and the transformation from rural to increasingly urban areas place greater

pressure on the natural environment than in 2000. Inadequate management of Uganda’s biodiversity, as

stated in the year 2000 COBS report remains a key conservation issue.

Uganda’s species biodiversity is extremely important globally because it is so diverse, it includes some

species that are endemic to Uganda and many that are endemic to the Albertine Rift Region, and species

that are considered globally threatened

Three regions of Uganda have particularly important biodiversity. Western Uganda forms part of the

Albertine Rift Region, which is one of Africa’s most important regions for biodiversity. About half of the

entire population of the mountain gorilla (Gorilla gorilla berengei) lives in the extreme southwestern part

of this region; Lakes George and Edward have 79 species of fish, a high number for these relatively small

lakes. Three of these species are endemic to Uganda (Varicorhinus ruwenzori, Microcteriopoma damasi

and Hypsopanchax modestus) (NEMA, 2009). An endemic species of papyrus (Chloropeta gracilirrostris) grows in the shallower parts of Lakes Edward, George, and Bunyonyi. In the Southern

Central Region, Lake Victoria, the lakes of the Kyoga basin, and Sango Bay originally had more than

600 endemic haplochromine cichlids; they also have important biodiversity that due to the island nature is

extremely fragile. This gives the southern portion of Central Uganda its particular importance for

biodiversity (NEMA, 2009). Northeastern Uganda is important for biodiversity because a number of

species occur only there and in nearby areas of Kenya and Southern Sudan. These species include 30

species of birds, among which are the Karamoja Apalis (Apalis karamojae), a threatened species, and

several species of butterflies, including Papilio nobilis and Charaxes smaragdilis elgonae, the cheetah

(Acinonyx jubatus), lesser kudu (Tragalaphus imberbis), greater kudu (Tragalaphus strapsiceros), roan

antelope (Hippotragus equines), Secretary bird (Sagittarius serppentaris) and ostrich (Struthio camelus).

(see Section 5 and Annex J for a detailed discussion of these and other threats) .

In 2005 the NFA measured Uganda’s total forest area as 3,570,643 ha – including tropical forest, swamp

forest, and savannah forest compared to 4,900,000 ha in 1990. The annual rate of forest loss between

1990 and 2005 had been 88,638 hectares per year with approximately 0.7% (7,000 ha/y) of the forest loss

occurring within the PAs and 2.27% outside of PAs.

The wide distribution of wetlands and the lack of protective mechanisms mean that a large proportion of

the population has access to wetlands; this results in extensive degradation

The Kafu Basin and Lake Victoria Shores and Islands (Sections 1.4.1 and 1.4.2) have suffered for a long

time from indiscriminate killing of wildlife mainly as a means of safeguarding crops and livestock, but

also for meat and other animal products.

As a result of Global Climate Change, it is commonly observed indications that Uganda is experiencing a

warming trend include rising temperatures, changing rainfall patterns, melting glaciers in the Rwenzori

mountains, increasing prevalence of agricultural pests and human diseases, and increasing intensity and

frequency of dry spells and floods

There are environmental problems associated with excessive fertilizer use and pesticide use in many

intensive production systems. Irrigation that often accompanies intensive farming can also threaten

biodiversity and result in environmental impacts. Dams used to control and store water can result in the

16

buildup of silt behind them, preventing nutrients from flowing downstream; and salinization of cropland

can occur, reducing soil fertility and can ultimately lead to the abandonment of agricultural land – and the

conversion of land to agricultural production. In addition, irrigation places demands on water resources

and competes with alternative uses – domestic, commercial, and ecosystem uses. If irrigation water is not

well managed, it can result in significant waste of water. With climate change and the changing rainfall

patterns, irrigation becomes more important for crop growing, yet water availability for ecosystem and

other purposes also becomes more tenuous. Commercialized agriculture can also result in expansion of

land under agriculture, as was recently illustrated in Uganda by the attempt to convert Mabira Forest into

sugar plantation, and as can be seen on Sesse Islands where commercial oil palm plantations resulted in

deforestation.

Activities in DO1 Economic Growth agriculture sector will be implemented among the 38 FTF districts; a

few of these activities will be implemented at the national level as indicated after each respective activity

description in section 1 above.

2.2 National [or applicable] Environmental Policies and Procedures [of host country both for

environmental assessment and pertaining to the sector]

The Uganda National Environment Action Plan (NEAP) presents strategies for the kind of development

Uganda needs to guide us on the path of improving the quality of human life and at the same time

conserving the environment. The National Environment Policy provides the framework to guide

development actions and is the cornerstone of the country’s commitment to social and economic

development that is environmentally sustainable and which will bring the benefits of a better life to all

Ugandans. The overall policy goal is sustainable social and economic development which maintains or

enhances environmental quality and resource productivity on a long term basis that meets the needs of the

present generation without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.

Agriculture is the backbone of Uganda’s economy and domestic food supply. However, the high

population growth, poor agricultural practices, and past economic and social instability have put severe

stress on this sector and consequently on the environment

The objective of the Agriculture sector in Uganda is to promote farming systems and land use practices

that t conserve and enhance land productivity in an environmentally sustainable way, through:-

Enhancing and strengthening the environmentally concerns in the agricultural extension system,

including research and training for extension workers, NGOs and land users;

Placing greater emphasis on environmentally friendly means of increasing agricultural

production;

Supporting research to develop farming systems that combine optimum production and land

resources conservation and which are compatible with the socio-economic conditions of the target

population.

Reviewing the existing agricultural legal framework among others.

Since the mid-1980s, Uganda’s development policy has increasingly recognized the critical importance of

natural resources to the country’s economic base. There is also an increasing realization of the link

between environmental degradation and poverty, population and inappropriate economic policy. This is

apparent in Uganda’s current political focus on poverty alleviation, as reflected in the Poverty Eradication

Action Plan (PEAP), and in its overall focus on broad social and economic development. A number of

policies contain references to the conservation of natural resources and biodiversity in Uganda. The more

relevant of these are described below.

17

The Poverty Eradication Action Plan (PEAP). The PEAP which is being revised as the National

Development Plan (NDP) currently guides GOU’s development strategy with the objective of effecting a

dramatic reduction in poverty. The GOU sees the wise use of natural resources as a means of eradicating

poverty, and government’s strategy hinges on conservation of soil, forests and biomass, water, wetlands

and wildlife.

The goal of the National Environment Management Policy (NEMP) is to enhance the quality of life for all

Ugandans. The NEMP is supposed to guide sustainable economic development through sound

environmental and natural resources management using a participatory approach. The NEMP promotes

environmentally responsible social and economic growth and recognizes biodiversity conservation as a form

of natural resources management that is critical to meeting the needs of Ugandans.

The National Environment Management Authority (NEMA) was created as a result of the National

Environment Environmental Action Plan (NEAP) process and the National Environmental Statute. NEMA

is the government body charged with ensuring that projects, programs and activities undertaken by the

public and private sectors do not have negative environmental impacts. NEMA is expected to encourage,

supervise, monitor and coordinate environmental actions among and between sectors, provide technical and

training input, and provides policy level assistance to other agencies.

Specifically regarding Environment Impact Assessment (EIA), NEMA has recruited competed EIA

specialists and registered private firms that have the skills in carrying out EIA’s. NEMA with the mandate

of government is engaging the private sector to include EIA in the planning phase of investment.

The Plan for Modernization of Agriculture (PMA) is a poverty–focused framework that firmly endorses

improved household food security and income generation through the market, and envisions an agricultural

sector that is competitive, productive, diversified, export-oriented, and private-sector driven. The PMA

gives a framework for increasing agricultural output through increased acreage, improved crop and animal

varieties, and management.

The Competitiveness and Investment Climate Strategy (CICS) for the private sector is firmly focused on

improving competitiveness of Ugandan business and promoting export development while

simultaneously implementing actions such as infrastructure development and trade policy reform to create

an environment conducive to investment and private sector led growth. Past achievements have been

fueled by agriculture and the future of broad-based economic growth in Uganda will continue to depend

on agriculture. However, the gains of the past were based upon expansion of the cultivated area, rather

than productivity. Since only 25 % of the land in Uganda is considered “highly productive,” continuing

expansion increasingly pushes farmers onto marginal land, producing low yields and damaging the

nation’s biodiversity. Fostering growth and increasing incomes will depend on increasing productivity in

the agricultural sector, primarily through the closer integration of agriculture programs with sustainable

natural resource management interventions in critical landscapes. At the same time, agriculture alone

cannot produce the growth that is needed to raise Uganda’s population above poverty. It is imperative to

find alternatives through economic diversification. This implies improving the capacity and sustainability

of enterprises of all sizes, and creating a policy and regulatory environment that is conducive to

efficiency, competitiveness, and sound environmental management.

18

The Government of Uganda has formulated a comprehensive development framework for Northern

Uganda the Peace, Recovery and Development Plan (PRDP),as a strategy to eradicate poverty and

improve the welfare of the population in Northern Uganda. Northern Uganda has consistently fallen

behind the rest of the country within the realm of human development e.g. access to basic services such as

water and sanitation, as well as health facilities is poor by national standards. PRDP is committed to

stabilize and recover the north over three years 2007 – 2010 through a set of coherent programs under one

organizing paradigm that all stakeholders will adopt when implementing their program in the region.

Strategic objective 3 is Revitalization of the Economy and the three results to be achieved are (i)

production and marketing enhancement (ii) infrastructure rehabilitation and urban improvement program

(iii) environment and natural resource management.

3.0 EVALUATION OF ACTIVITY/PROGRAM ISSUES WITH RESPECT TO

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT POTENTIAL

Many of the proposed activities do not have direct adverse environmental impacts, as they entail

information meetings, consultations, awareness creation, capacity building, education, communication,

training, research, community mobilization, planning, management, and outreach activities. However, in

the course of implementing these activities, partners should take advantage of opportunities to address

potential adverse environmental impacts.

Some of the proposed activities will certainly have potential impacts on the proposed project areas.

Promotion of the improved agricultural production and post harvest handling as proposed in many of the

above activities will require increased levels of inputs including new seed varieties, pesticides and

inorganic fertilizers. Some activities may well lead to intensification and extensification of agriculture.

Increased flow of chemical fertilizers and pesticides into water ways, and increased expansion of

agriculture to unsuitable areas are likely to lead to adverse environmental impacts. The potential impacts

on the environment by each activity are analyzed in the table below.

3.1 Threshold Determinations and Mitigation Measures:

Table 1: Recommended Threshold determinations and Conditions attached to each activity group.

Activities under DO1 in Uganda Impact Issues & conditions, mitigation or proactive interventions

Activities in Group 1

Supporting the implementation

of policy reforms in agriculture

sector, building the technical and

organizational capacity of

producer and marketing

associations, training,

consultations, meetings, etc and

activities not involving

biophysical interventions.

Will not have a direct effect on the environment.

No further environmental review required.

Categorical Exclusion, per 22 CFR 216.2 (c)(2)(i), education,

technical assistance or training; 216.2 (c)(2)(iii): analyses,

studies, academic or research workshops and meetings; 216.2

(c)(2)(v): document and information transfers; 216.2(c)(2)(viii):

programs involving nutrition, health care, or family planning

services except to the extent designed to include activities directly

affecting the environment (such as construction of facilities, water

supply systems, waste water treatment, etc).

19


A Positive Determination with Conditions recommended pursuant to 22 CFR 216.2(d)1 for the

following activities:

Large scale irrigation

activities e.g. under commodity

production and marketing

activities.

Irrigation or water management projects including dams and

impoundments requires the development of an Environmental

assessment in accordance with 22 CFR 216.6

A Negative Determination with Conditions recommended pursuant to 22 CFR 216.3(a)(2)(iii) for the

following activities:

Activities in Group 2:

Use of fertilizers in the

agricultural sector to improve

production.

If fertilizers are subject to approval by local regulatory authorities,

then only those fertilizer products that are approved by the

appropriate local authority may be used. (USEPA does not register

or otherwise approve fertilizers as it does pesticides.) Further,

because of the environmental risks inherent in improper handling,

storage, use and application, implementing partners must assure

that potential users are trained in proper handling, storage, use and

application techniques.

Activity Group 3:

Construction Activities:

Construction, rehabilitation and

renovation activities under any

part of the activities proposed in

this DO

Conditions:

While the rehabilitation of existing facilities and for construction of

facilities in which the total surface area disturbed is less than

10,000 square feet is not subject to conditions, construction or

rehabilitation of facilities or structures in which the surface area to

be disturbed exceeds 10,000 sq. ft (1000 sq meters) (E.g. small

warehouses, farm packing sheds, agricultural trading posts, produce

market centers, and community training centers.), these activities

shall be conducted following principles for environmentally sound

construction, as provided in the Small Scale Construction chapter

of the USAID Environmental Guidelines for Small-scale Activities

in Africa, which can be found at:

http://www.usaidgems.org/sectorGuidelines.htm

Activity Group 4: Pesticides

including Agricultural Inputs

Activities ; Commodity

Production and Marketing; Use of pesticides in the

agricultural sector. Most

activities involving in improved

agriculture will require the use

of pesticide in production phase

in crop protection and also in

post-harvest protection

Pesticides can be defined as any substance or mixture of substance

intended for preventing, destroying or mitigating any pest.

Conditions:

Use of pesticides can only be authorized after a Pesticide

Evaluation Report and Safe Use Action Plan (PERSUAP) is written

and approved by the Bureau Environmental Officer. An

agricultural sector PERSUAP is being prepared, in final draft as of

August 2014.


20


Activity Group 5:

Biotechnology and Genetically

Modified Organisms

e.g under Cassava and maize

research,

Improve agricultural production

potentially involving seed and

germplasm s transfer under the

FtF Initiative Use of

Biotechnology and Genetically

Modified Organisms

Conditions::

For activities involving the use, experimentation, promotion or

distribution of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and/or

biotechnology products as proposed under the FtF program for

activities involving making use of cutting-edge biotechnology

which may include GMOs and Life Modifying Organisms (LMOs:

A biosafety review MUST be conducted before the use of

genetically modified organisms in research, field trials, or

dissemination any Genetically Modified Organism may proceed.

This biosafety determination is separate from and must precede any

decision to proceed.

Activity Group 6:

e.g under Biosafety and banana

biotechnology research program

in Uganda (ABSAP II), Cassava

and maize research,

disseminating improved seed

varieties and seed multiplication

involving use of new planting

materials including seeds

Introduction of non-native seeds carries a potential risk of

introducing invasive species.

Conditions: Suppliers shall: 1) ensure appropriateness for the

agroclimatic zone to which they are being introduced; 2) avoid

introducing exotic invasive species; and 3) avoid providing or

promoting genetically modified organisms (GMOs). This requires

identifying and mitigating any potential direct adverse impacts on

the physical environment and human health and safety (such as due

to aflatoxin contamination) arising from distribution of free seeds.

Condition: non-native plants will not be introduced into protected

areas.

Activities in Group 7.

Land and Water management

improvement, watershed

management, soil erosion

control, etc.

Conditions:

A Negative Determination with Conditions is recommended for

reforestation activities to ensure that optimal practices are followed,

such as reflected in Chapter 1 of the USAID Environmental

Guidelines for Small Scale Activities in Africa (EGSSA) on

Agriculture: Soil and Water Resources, including Irrigation. This

document is available at - USAID Africa Bureau's Environmental

Guidelines for Small-Scale Activities in Africa:

Activity Group 8:

Water and Sanitation related

Activities (under the community

connector and others)

Conditions:

Mitigation measures focus on (1) minimizing potential

environmental impacts during construction; and (2) minimizing

potential health impacts due to provision of drinking water of

inadequate quality. The environmental issue of greatest concern is

maintaining acceptable water quality that the implementing partner

bears responsibility for ensuring delivery of clean water to the

recipient communities.

The Mission shall ensure that the Implementing partner shall

develop and implement a Water Quality Assurance Plan that

addresses how the implementing partner intends to ensure the

provision of safe drinking water to communities served under this

program. Section 4.2 includes specific points that shall be included

http://www.encapafrica.org/SmallScaleGuidelines.htm


21


in the Plan as well as recommendations for meeting appropriate

water quality standards.

Activity Group 9:

Micro credit, loans, MFIs and

micro enterprises: loan

guarantees, DCAs.

Conditions:

The Mission shall ensure that the Guaranteed Party or Parties have

environmental screening system sufficient to demonstrate

compliance with local environmental laws. USAID shall assess the

proposed policies and procedures prior to irrevocable commitment

of funds to the guaranteed party to assure that the projects financed

are environmentally sound and comply with applicable laws and

procedures.

Approval of DCA guarantees will be contingent upon the

submission by the Guaranteed Party of evidence sufficient to

demonstrate compliance with Uganda environmental regulations

and procedures and to enable USAID to make an assessment of the

environmental impact of such activities. This includes the

guaranteed party submitting to USAID its proposed policies and

procedures to ensure that projects financed are environmentally

sound and comply with applicable laws and procedures.

Activity Group 9, cont’d.:

DCA Loan Portfolio

Agreement: Opportunity Bank

Uganda will support loans for

students to attend secondary

school in addition to providing

access to finance for village

health team workers. Borrowers

under the guarantee will be

supported by USAID/Uganda

programming, including

the Orphaned and other

Vulnerable Children (OVC)

initiative.

Categorical Exclusion

22 CFR 216.2(c) (2) (x) Support for intermediate credit institutions

when the objective is to assist in the capitalization of the institution

or part thereof and when such support does not involve reservation of

the right to review and approve individual loans made by the

institution.

Activity Group 9, cont’d.:

DCA Loan Portfolio

Agreement

USAID/Uganda is working to

finalize a multi-lender loan

portfolio guarantee with Finance

Trust Bank (FTB), a commercial

bank in Uganda, licensed by the

Bank of Uganda, the central

bank and national banking

regulator, as well as UGAFODE

Microfinance Limited (MDI),

supporting SMEs in Uganda, and

Negative Determination is recommended pursuant to 22 CFR

216.3(a)(2)(iii) for this DCA loan guarantee intended to strengthen the

Guaranteed Party’s ability to finance loans to increase access to finance

in the agribusiness value chains subject to the conditions that:

a) The Guaranteed Party shall seek prior USAID approval and submit

evidence of environmental compliance before placing certain types of

loans under Guarantee coverage as specified in Section 2.02(b) of the

Uganda Guarantee Agreements with Financial Institutions.

b) The USAID/Uganda Economic Growth Team will periodically

review the Guaranteed Party’s implementation of this requirement,

including during and project monitoring visits.

22


the Development Finance

Company of Uganda Bank

Limited (DFCU). This

guarantee will support lending to

USAID/Uganda's priority Feed

the Future value chains.

Technical assistance is currently

being contemplated, which may

include support from the E3

Bureau via

the Agriculture Lending Toolkit

and/or from the Mission's

Commodities, Production and

Marketing (CPM) program.

Other DCAs in the future may

be negotiated for the FtF

portfolio in order to achieve

the Mission’s FtF objectives

c) Small and Medium Size Enterprises in the agribusiness value chains

and the lending institution (i.e. the Guaranteed Party) will likely receive

training and technical assistance, and in the event that they do, the use of

environment guidelines will be included. The guidelines shall illustrate

how environmentally sound practices can be used to improve the

effectiveness and efficiency of enterprise. Training of the lending

institution will include the concept of environmental due diligence,

awareness of the environmental hazards presented by typical types of

enterprises, and basic environmental management appropriate to typical

Small and Medium Size Enterprise activities. Where technical assistance

to the lending institution includes loan-making procedures, basic

environmental review will be built into loan-making processes. This

training and technical assistance will support compliance with Ugandan

law and implementation of good practice as set out in this IEE.

Activities in Group 10: Activity Group: Sub-grants.

Conditions: All sub-grant programs will include use of the USAID/ Africa

Bureau Environmental Review Form in their sub-grant procedures.

- USAID Africa Bureau's Environmental Guidelines for Small-

Scale Activities in Africa:

3.2 Mitigating Measures

i) Use of fertilizers to promote increase agricultural production:

A Negative Determination with Conditions is recommended pursuant to 22 CFR 216.3(a) (2) (iii) for

activities involving the use of fertilizers in agricultural production.

If fertilizers are subject to approval by local regulatory authorities, then only those fertilizer products that

are approved by the appropriate local authority may be used. (USEPA does not register or otherwise

approve fertilizers as it does pesticides.) Further, because of the environmental risks inherent in improper

handling, storage, use and application, implementing partners must assure that potential users are trained

in proper handling, storage, use and application techniques

ii) Small Scale Construction


activities involving construction, rehabilitation and maintenance of facilities under this program.

Construction activities in general, share a set of common features and potential adverse environmental

impacts, including ; damage to ecosystems, sedimentation of streams and surface water, contamination

of water supplies, social impacts , spread of diseases, creation of stagnant (standing) water, damage to

aesthetics of area (see EGSSAA Chapter 3: Small-Scale Construction for details).

The conditions attached to the above activities shall include the following:



http://www.encapafrica.org/EGSSAA/Construction.pdf

23

All construction activities shall be conducted following principles for environmentally sound

construction, as provided in Chapter 3: Small Scale Construction of the USAID Environmental

Guidelines for Small-scale Activities in Africa, which can be found at

http://www.usaidgems.org/sectorGuidelines.htm.

For the rehabilitation of existing facilities, and for construction of facilities in which the total surface

area disturbed is less than 10,000 square feet, the condition is that these activities shall be conducted

following principles for environmentally sound construction, as provided in the Small Scale

Construction chapter of the USAID Environmental Guidelines for Small-scale Activities in Africa

(see above),

iii) Pesticides A Negative Determination with Conditions, pursuant to 22 CFR 216.3(a)(2)(iii), is recommended for

activities involving any use of pesticides under this program:

Use of pesticides in the agricultural sector for crop protection, post-harvest product storage and animal

husbandry under this program is widely anticipated. Most activities involving in improved agriculture

will require the use of pesticide in production phase in crop protection and also in post-harvest

protection.

Conditions:

Use of pesticides can only be authorized after a Pesticide Evaluation Report and Safe Use Action Plan

(PERSUAP) is written and approved by the Bureau Environmental Officer.

iv) Seed and germplasm s transfer under the FtF Initiative and Genetically Modified

Organisms and use of Genetically Modified Organisms A Negative Determination with Conditions, pursuant to 22 CFR 216.3(a)(2)(iii), is recommended for

activities involving the use, experimentation, promotion or distribution of genetically modified organisms

(GMOs) and/or biotechnology products as proposed under:

Conditions:

1) A biosafety review MUST be conducted before the use of genetically modified organisms in

research, field trials, or dissemination any Genetically Modified Organism may proceed. This

biosafety determination is separate from and must precede any decision to proceed.

2) Before transferring bioengineered organisms to a developing country for confined field testing

or release, the grantee/contractor must submit a proposal for approval by USAID. The

information required in this proposal is detailed in USAID Biosafety Proposal and Reporting

Requirements

3) For activities in physically contained facilities such as laboratories, greenhouses, or animal

barns, grantees/contractors must follow the National Institute of Health Guidelines on

Research Involving Recombinant DNA Molecules. Grantees/contractors are prohibited from

testing or releasing bioengineered organisms outside of contained facilities prior to obtaining

host country approval followed by written approval from USAID. Except in extraordinary

circumstances, USAID will not approve the field testing or open release of bioengineered

organisms into the environment in countries that lack biosafety regulations or laws

4) The grantee/contractor must submit to the USAID Activity Manager, CTO or Technical Team

documentation from the relevant authority in the host country approving any confined field trial

or release of the bioengineered organism, including any specific conditions imposed by the host

country. USAID will not grant biosafety approval in the absence of this documentation of host

country approval.

http://www.encapafrica.org/EGSSAA/Construction.pdf


http://www.usaid.gov/our_work/environment/compliance/documents/biosafety_proposal_reporting_requirements.pdf

http://www.usaid.gov/our_work/environment/compliance/documents/biosafety_proposal_reporting_requirements.pdf

http://www4.od.nih.gov/oba/rac/guidelines/guidelines.html

http://www4.od.nih.gov/oba/rac/guidelines/guidelines.html

24

5) An amendment to this IEE will be required, based on the results of the biosafety review before

any Genetically Modified Organisms may be subjected to confined field trial or dissemination.

Additional conditions will be imposed, based on the results of the biosafety review and any

conditions imposed by the host country.

In addition to these USAID procedures, grantee/contractors must obey applicable host government laws

(e.g., biosafety, shipping/packaging, sanitary, or phytosanitary standards).

v) Disseminating improved seed varieties and seed multiplication involving use of new planting

materials including seeds

A Negative Determination with Conditions, pursuant to 22 CFR 216.3(a)(2)(iii), is recommended for

activities involving dissemination of improved seed varieties and seed multiplication and use of new

planting materials

Conditions: Suppliers shall: 1) ensure appropriateness for the agroclimatic zone to which they are being

introduced; 2) avoid introducing exotic invasive species; and 3) avoid providing or promoting genetically

modified organisms (GMOs). This requires identifying and mitigating any potential direct adverse

impacts on the physical environment and human health and safety (such as due to aflatoxin

contamination) arising from distribution of free seeds. Non-native plants will not be introduced into

protected areas.

vi) Water and Sanitation and solid waste disposal A Negative Determination with Conditions is recommended pursuant to 22 CFR 216.3(a) (2) (iii) for

activities provision of clean water and sanitation under this program.

The human health benefits of water and sanitation activities are enormous, and generally far outweigh any

potential negative impacts of such activities. Still, the potential for adverse environmental impacts from

water and sanitation activities exists, and it is the responsibility of program designers and implementers to

avoid such impacts to the extent possible. Potential adverse impacts from water and sanitation activities can

be summarized as follows:

Potential adverse impacts from water supply activities include:

1. Depletion of fresh water resources (surface and groundwater)

2. Chemical degradation of the quality of potable water sources (surface and groundwater)

3. Creation of stagnant (standing) water

4. Degradation of terrestrial, aquatic, and coastal habitats

5. Increased human health risks (e.g. from arsenic content in groundwater)

Potential adverse impacts from sanitation activities:

1. Increased human health risks from contamination of surface water, groundwater, soil, and food

by excreta, chemicals and pathogens

2. Ecological harm from degradation of stream, lake, estuarine and marine water quality and

degradation of land habitats

See EGSSAA Chapter 16: Water Supply and Sanitation

Conditions:

To mitigate potential effects of inadequate drinking water quality, the Implementing partners shall:

a) Prepare a Water Quality Assurance Plan that describes monitoring criteria, monitoring frequency,

and measures for ensuring the safe provision of water to recipients.

http://www.encapafrica.org/EGSSAAsectionsJan04/Env%20Guidelines%20Chapter%2016%20Water_Feb25.pdf

25

The Water Quality Assurance Plan shall describe how the partner intends to ensure safe drinking water in

the. The Water Quality Assurance Plan shall include:

A) Water Quality Assurance Plan

(1) Water quality standards and criteria that partner intends to meet (this should include WHO and host

country water quality standards and monitoring requirements; this section can be updated for each country

when the partner begins operations in a country. For information on WHO standards, see

http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/dwq/gdwq0506.pdf for guidance on meeting WHO

recommendations.);

(2) Measures to ensure partners continue to meet the above water quality standards and criteria;

(3) Frequency of testing and monitoring, by contaminant;

(4) Responsible parties for testing and monitoring;

(5) Location of laboratory to be used;

(6) Measures for host-country and USAID reporting;

(7) Measures to correct any water quality issue that is found out of compliance; and

(8) Notification measures (to USAID, host-country, and school/community) that will be taken if the water

quality at a borehole is found to be out of compliance.

B) Equipment Inspection and Maintenance Plan

(1) Equipment maintenance requirements and schedule

(2) Responsible parties for maintenance

(3) Maintenance reporting requirements

While the Partner may propose alternative means of ensuring that water quality does not present a risk to

human health, the analyses and standards that the Partner proposes should be based on sound risk

assessment and should be science-based.

The table below provides a summary of standard recommendations that should be followed to minimize

potential impacts of inadequate water quality.

Design Use a “sanitary seal” on top of the well casing to prevent any

contaminants from going directly down the borehole through the

casing. The area around the borehole should be sloped away from

the casing to prevent contamination from surface run-off.

Locate the fill line into the storage tank above the overflow with an

air gap of at least 2 pipe diameters or 6 inches (152.4 mm).

Vent the storage tank with a u-shaped, down-facing opening that is

screened to keep air-borne contaminants, bugs and birds out of the

tank.

Direct overflow away from the borehole. Also, ensure an air gap

above the overflow outlet.

Protect the communal tap from back-siphoning with a check valve or

another anti-siphon device.

Disinfection Use an erosion chlorinator to treat the water automatically as it enters

the tank. This is proposed as the most effective and cost-effective

approach to water quality assurance.

Maintenance Inspect tanks daily to ensure that the hatch is closed, the vent and

screens are intact, etc.

Clean tank at least annually and more frequently if there is noticeable

sediment in the tank. If the system is not chlorinated, we

recommend monthly cleanings.

http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/dwq/gdwq0506.pdf

26

Water Quality

Assurance Select a good quality groundwater source.

Install the system correctly, clean and disinfect system, and test

water quality again after installation is complete.

USAID requires that ground water must be tested for Arsenic

Install disinfection equipment.

Maintain system properly.

Monitor for a disinfection residual.

Public notification Advise the public, in a thoughtful and careful manner, about the

possible risks associated with long-term consumption.

Monitoring and Reporting

The partner shall submit an Environmental Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (EMMP) which shall discuss

how the partner intends to comply with the above mitigation, and which provides information on who is

responsible for implementing mitigation, implementation milestones, and reporting on status of

implementation of mitigation measures.

vii) Improvement of land and Water management improvement, watershed management, soil

erosion control, etc.

Conditions:

Improvement of land and water management techniques need to be reviewed to ensure that they don’t

cause destruction or degradation of natural habitat, including deforestation, desertification and drainage of

wetlands; lead to loss of biodiversity; does not lead to the introduction of exotic and non-native animals

and plants; or lead to further erosion and loss of soil fertility, siltation of water bodies and or reduction in

water quality. Chapter 1 of the USAID Environmental Guidelines for Small Scale Activities in Africa

(EGSSA) on Agriculture: Soil and Water Resources, including Irrigation describes optimal and best

practices that can be adopted to mitigate potential adverse impacts.

viii) Development Credit Authority (DCAs)

A Negative Determination with Conditions recommended pursuant to 22 CFR 216.3(a)(2)(iii) for activities involving facilitating financing options and other agriculture-linked enterprises via USAID-

supported DC .

Condition:

The Mission shall ensure that the Guaranteed Party or Parties have environmental screening system

sufficient to demonstrate compliance with local environmental laws and to enable USAID to make an

assessment of the environmental impact of such activities and shall submit to USAID their proposed

policies and procedures to assure that the projects financed are environmentally sound and comply with

applicable laws and procedures.

ix) All subgrants and sub awards


activities likely to involve Sub-grant activities:

Conditions:

1. Any grants or other monetary transfers of USAID funds (e.g., sub-grants) to support this program’s

activities must incorporate provisions that the activities to be undertaken will comply with the

environmental determinations and recommendations of this IEE. This includes assurance that the

activities conducted with USAID funds fit within those described in the approved IEE or IEE

amendment and that any mitigating measures required for those activities be followed. This applies

27

also to business association, civil society and private sector partners, involving support for activities

with the potential for impact on the environment, i.e. those that would not qualify for Categorical

Exclusion. The REGI Team, together with the REA, is responsible for determining whether the

activities intended for support warrant an environmental screening process.

2. Implementing partners will screen proposed activities according to the Africa Bureau Environmental

Report Form Review Process, Africa Bureau Environmental Review Form (DEC 2010). When ERRs

are necessary, implementing partners will observe recommendations in the Africa Bureau- EGSSAA

for relevant sectors when developing mitigation actions and monitoring plans. Once the ERRs are

approved, project implementers should ensure mitigation measures and monitoring procedures

described therein are in place as they will be considered requirements.

3.3 Monitoring and Compliance Assurance:

Implementing partners' annual reports and, as appropriate, progress reports shall contain a brief

update on mitigation and monitoring measures being implemented, results of environmental

monitoring, and any other major modifications/revisions in the development activities, and

mitigation and monitoring procedures.

The DO team Activity Managers and A/CORs will report to the MEO on an annual basis on the

status of the implementation of mitigation and monitoring requirements. This report should draw

upon implementing partners' progress and annual reports, as well as on periodic site visits by the

A/CORs and the activity managers

The DO team is responsible for monitoring and evaluation of activities after implementation with

respect to environmental effects. A process will be integrated into the DO's pertinent

Performance Monitoring and Evaluation Plan which will involve periodic field visits.

The Activity Managers and the respective A/CORs are responsible for assuring that implementing

partners have the human capacity necessary to incorporate environmental considerations into

program planning and implementation and to take on their role in the Environmental Screening

Process. Implementing partners should seek training as needed, such as through participation in

the Africa Bureau’s Global Environmental Management Support (GEMS II) offered training

courses.

As required by ADS 204.3.4, the DO team shall actively monitor ongoing activities for compliance with

approved IEE recommendations, and modify or end activities that are not in compliance. If additional

activities are added to this program that is not described in this document, an amended environmental

examination must be prepared.

3.4 General project implementation and monitoring requirements

In addition to the specific conditions enumerated above, the negative determinations recommended in this

IEE are contingent on full implementation of the following general monitoring and implementation

requirements:

1. IP Briefings on Environmental Compliance Responsibilities. The EG office shall provide each

Implementing Partner (hereinafter IP), with a copy of this IEE; each IP shall be briefed on their

environmental compliance responsibilities by their cognizant C/AOR. During this briefing, the

IEE conditions applicable to the IP’s activities will be identified.

http://www.encapafrica.org/documents/AFR-EnvReviewForm-20Dec2010.doc

28

2. Development of EMMP. Each IP whose activities are subject to one or more conditions set out

in section 3 of this IEE shall develop and provide for C/AOR review and approval an

Environmental Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (EMMP) documenting how their project will

implement and verify all IEE conditions that apply to their activities.

These EMMPs shall identify how the IP shall assure that IEE conditions that apply to activities supported

under subcontracts and sub grants are implemented. (In the case of large sub grants or subcontracts, the IP

may elect to require the sub grantee/subcontractor to develop their own EMMP.)

(Note: The AFR EMMP Factsheet provides EMMP guidance and sample EMMP formats:

http://www.usaidgems.org/Documents/lopDocs/ENCAP_EMMP_Factsheet_22Jul2011.pdf )

3. Integration and implementation of EMMP. Each IP shall integrate their EMMP into their

project work plan and budgets, implement the EMMP, and report on its implementation as an

element of regular project performance reporting.

IPs shall assure that sub-contractors and sub-grantees integrate implementation of IEE conditions, where

applicable, into their own project work plans and budgets and report on their implementation as an

element of sub-contract or grant performance reporting.

4. Integration of compliance responsibilities in prime and sub-contracts and grant agreements.

a. The EG office shall assure that any future contracts or agreements for implementation of

FTF portfolio activities, and/or significant modification to current contracts/agreements

shall reference and require compliance with the conditions set out in this IEE, as required

by ADS 204.3.4.a.6 and ADS 303.3.6.3.e.

b. IPs shall assure that future sub-contracts and sub-grant agreements, and/or significant

modifications to existing agreements, reference and require compliance with relevant

elements of these conditions.

5. Assurance of sub-grantee and sub-contractor capacity and compliance. IPs shall assure that

sub-grantees and subcontractors have the capability to implement the relevant requirements of this

IEE. The IP shall, as and if appropriate, provide training to sub grantees and subcontractors in their

environmental compliance responsibilities and in environmentally sound design and management

(ESDM) of their activities.

6. DO1/EG/FTF team monitoring responsibility. As required by ADS 204.5.4, the EG team will

actively monitor and evaluate whether the conditions of this IEE are being implemented effectively

and whether there are new or unforeseen consequences arising during implementation that were not

identified and reviewed in this IEE. If new or unforeseen consequences arise during

implementation, the team will suspend the activity and initiate appropriate, further review in

accordance with 22 CFR 216. USAID Monitoring shall include regular site visits.

7. New or modified activities. As part of its Work Plan, and all Annual Work Plans thereafter, IPs, in

collaboration with their C/AOR, shall review all on-going and planned activities to determine if

they are within the scope of this IEE. If any activity makes substantial modifications outside the

http://www.usaidgems.org/Documents/lopDocs/ENCAP_EMMP_Factsheet_22Jul2011.pdf

29

scope of what is covered by this IEE, an amendment to this IEE shall be undertaken prior to formal

approval of the proposed modification. Any amendment to the PAD to include a new activity

outside those listed under this IEE will require an amendment of this IEE before approval of the

PAD amendment

If activities outside the scope of this IEE are planned, the EG team shall assure that an amendment to this

IEE addressing these activities is prepared and approved prior to implementation of any such activities.

Any ongoing activities found to be outside the scope of the approved Regulation 216 environmental

documentation shall be modified to comply or halted until an amendment to the documentation is

submitted approved.

8. Compliance with Host Country Requirements. Nothing in this IEE substitutes for or supersedes

IP, sub grantee and subcontractor responsibility for compliance with all applicable host country

laws and regulations. The IP, sub grantees and subcontractor must comply with host country

environmental regulations unless otherwise directed in writing by USAID. However, in case of

conflict between host country and USAID regulations, the latter shall govern.

9. Government-to-government (G2G) assistance. In keeping with USAID Forward, investment in

government-to-government assistance is an important development objective. In order to pursue

such opportunities USAID/Uganda will need to obtain Authorization for Use of Partner Country

Systems (AUPCS)—a new requirement for G2G assistance specified in ADS 220 - Use of Reliable

Partner Country Systems for Direct Management and Implementation of Assistance. This will

include certification of the effectiveness of the GoU’s environmental assessment procedures,

policies, and legal/regulatory framework as well as their actual implementation. This certification

likely will require that a capacity assessment be implemented to assure that host government

systems are capable of ensuring sound environmental compliance and where gaps are identified

appropriate capacity building measures will be recommended as conditionalities to the final

approval of an AUPCS. This also should be harmonized with the expectations of other sector

donors (World Bank, EU, etc.), in line with the Paris Declaration of Aid Effectiveness.

30

APPENDIX

USAID/Uganda, DO1 Program

Environmental Mitigation and Monitoring Plans (EMMP) Part 1 of 3: Environmental Verification

Form

USAID/Uganda, DO1 Program, Award

Name _______________________________

Name of Prime Implementing

Organization:__________________________

Name of Sub-awardee Organization (if this EMP is

for a sub): _____________________________

Geographic location of USAID-funded activities

(Province, District):_________________________

Date of Screening:_____________________

Funding Period for this award: FY____

Current FY Resource Levels: FY________

This report prepared by:

Name:______________ Date: ____________

Date of Previous EMP for this organization:

____________(if any)

Indicate which activities your organization is implementing under this funding.

Key Elements of Program/Activities Implemented Yes No

1 education, technical assistance or training programs

analyses, studies, academic or research workshops and meetings;

document and information transfers;

Nutrition care, or family planning services except to the extent designed

to include activities directly affecting the environment (such as

construction of facilities, water supply systems, and waste water

treatment).

2 Use of fertilizers

3 Construction, rehabilitation and or maintenance of facilities

4 Use of Pesticides

5 Agricultural research likely to involve GMOs and biotechnology products

6 Improved agricultural production involving dissemination of new seed

varieties

31

7 Land and Water management improvement, watershed management, soil


8 Water and Sanitation related Activities

9 Development Credit Authority (DCA)

10 Sub grant activities or sub awards or including microfinance or Small and

Medium Enterprises (SMEs) or Business Development Services (BDS)

32


EMP Part 2 of 3: Mitigation Plan

Category of Activity

from Section 4 of

IEE

Describe specific

environmental threats

of your organization’s

activities (based on

analysis in Section 3 of

the IEE)

Description of Mitigation

Measures for these activities

as required in Section 5 of IEE

Who is

responsible

for monitoring

Monitoring

Indicator

Monitoring

Method

Frequency

of

Monitoring

1. Education,

technical assistance,

training, etc.

No environmental

impacts anticipated as a

result of these activities.

Education, technical assistance

and training about activities

that inherently affect the

environment include

discussion of prevention and

mitigation of potential

negative environmental

effects.

COTR/AOTR

continually

monitors to

ensure that

categorical

exclusion

applies

throughout life

of grant

Discussion of

environmental

impact

included in

education,

technical

assistance,

training and

other materials

Review of

materials

Annual

2.Use of fertilizers Annual

3.Construction,

rehabilitation and or

maintenance of

facilities

4.Use of Pesticides

5.Agricultural

research likely to

involve GMOs and

biotechnology

products

33

Category of Activity

from Section 4 of

IEE

Describe specific

environmental threats

of your organization’s

activities (based on

analysis in Section 3 of

the IEE)

Description of Mitigation

Measures for these activities

as required in Section 5 of IEE

Who is

responsible

for monitoring

Monitoring

Indicator

Monitoring

Method

Frequency

of

Monitoring

6.Improved

agricultural

production involving

dissemination of new

seed varieties

7.Land and Water

management

improvement,

watershed

management, soil


8.Water and

Sanitation activities

9.Development

Credit Authority

(DCA)

10.Sub grant

activities or sub

awards

Must use the Environmental

Review Form (ERF) first

34


EMP part 3 of 3: Reporting form

List each Mitigation Measure from

column 3 in the EMP Mitigation Plan

(EMP Part 2 of 3)

Status of Mitigating Measures

List any outstanding issues relating to

required conditions

Remarks

35


Certification

I certify the completeness and the accuracy of the mitigation and monitoring plan described above

for which I am responsible and its compliance with the IEE:

Signature Date

Print Name

__________________________

Organization

BELOW THIS LINE FOR USAID USE ONLY

USAID/Uganda, DO1 Program, Clearance of EMMP:

Contracting/Agreement Officer Technical Representative:_______________ Date: __________

Mission Environmental Officer: ______________________ Date: ____________

As appropriate: REA, BEO [depending on nature of activity, which potentially may require an EA]

Note: if clearance is denied, comments must be provided to applicant

FACE SHEET INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL EXAMINATION … · Agribusiness Initiative (aBi) Trust; $22 ......

Documents

Transcript of FACE SHEET INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL EXAMINATION … · Agribusiness Initiative (aBi) Trust; $22 ......