PROJECT INFORMATION DOCUMENT (PID)
APPRAISAL STAGE
Report No.: AB1219
Serbia Danube River Enterprise Pollution Reduction Project
Project Name
(under the BSDP)
Public Disclosure Authorized
Region
EUROPE AND CENTRAL ASIA
Sector
Central government administration (30%); Agro-industry (30%);
Gen. Agriculture (40%)
Project ID
P084604
GEF Focal Area

Borrower(s)
SERBIA AND MONTENEGRO,REPUBLIC OF SERBIA
Implementing Agency

Environment Category
[ ] A [X] B [ ] C [ ] FI [ ] TBD (to be determined)
Safeguard Classification
[ ] S1 [X] S2 [ ] S3 [ ] SF [ ] TBD (to be determined)
Date PID Prepared
November 15, 2004
Date of Appraisal
November 23, 2004
Authorization
Public Disclosure Authorized
Date of Board Approval
March 29, 2005
1. Country and Sector Background

The former Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (FRY) was once considered the most advanced
among the socialist bloc countries. Its economy underwent a significant decline in the 1990s as a
result of the structural problems of the socialist economic system combined with the break-up of
the federation, international isolation and ethnic conflicts. The same period also witnessed the
collapse of a considerable number of industrial enterprises as well as decline in infrastructure and
government enforcement capacity of regulations in a number of areas. Nevertheless, since 2000,
the Serbian economy has made significant strides towards stability and growth. The Serbian
Public Disclosure Authorized
government now is determined to tackle the challenge of employment generation and poverty
reduction, especially in rural areas, through appropriate structural and policy reforms and
increasing the international competitiveness of the economy as a whole.

Agriculture accounts for about 25 percent of Serbia's GDP and, as such, is the largest sector of
the economy. Furthermore, agricultural products make up about 26 percent of Serbia's exports.
Meat and milk production contributes about 34 percent of agricultural output. Herd numbers
also point to the significant role: In 2001, there were about 3.6 million pigs, 1.2 million cattle,
9.2 million poultry and 1.5 million sheep and goats in Serbia (incl. Kosovo). While Serbian
agriculture remained resilient and provided foodstuffs for the population during the difficult
years of the 1990s, it suffers from low crop productivity (cereal yields are a little more than half
of that of the main cereal growing areas in the EU which is significantly below its potential) and
loss of significant share of its export markets, including for livestock products. Increasing
Public Disclosure Authorized
international competitiveness in the agriculture sector is one of the pillars of the Government's
rural development policies.

The Serbian agriculture sector is characterized by a bi-polar farming structure: About 15 percent
of the total cultivate area or 0.8 million hectares is cultivated by large corporate farms,

---

comprising Agrokombinats (AKs) and Cooperative Farms. The rest of the total cultivated area is
farmed by small private farms which consist of two categories, "subsistence farms" and "private
commercial farms. Private subsistence farms number over a million and cultivate an average 3.6
hectares of land. Most farms produce for own household consumption only and are engaged in
non-farm activities for additional income. There is also an emerging group of dynamic,
commercial farms which produce primarily for the market. These farms cultivate on average 10
hectares amounting to a total of approximately 5 percent of the total arable land area. In 2000
there were 411 farming AKs, with an average size of 1,600 hectares and with a few having more
than 10,000 hectares. Both AKs and collective farms commonly also operate processing units. A
large number of AKs underwent a first phase of privatization in the late 1990s which in most
cases resulted in mixed employee and state ownership. During the past few years, some AKs
have been further restructured, have now private companies as shareholders and seek to
transform into majority private ownership. In some cases, the AKs are managed by professional
managers seeking to maximize profits.

There is also significant regional variation in production systems and products due to varying
geographical and climatic differences: Agriculture in the low-lying and fertile Vojvodina is
dominated by field and industrial crops, notably wheat, maize, sugar beet and sunflower.
Intensive production of pigs, cattle and poultry is characteristic of the region, in particular in
large AKs most of which have been partially privatized and / or employee owned. Producers in
this region are more strongly market-oriented than in the rest of the country. This contrasts with
Central Serbia where rural areas are characterized by hilly topography, small farms and diverse
farm production systems. Arable land is limited, but soil fertility and climatic condition are
favorable leading to fairly intensive production of high-value fruits, notably berries, and
vegetable crops. As in Vojvodina there is also a high concentration of livestock, however cattle
for milk production predominates. The majority of agricultural land is privately owned.
Southern Serbia, the poorest and least developed of the three regions, and characterized by
mountainous geography, is mostly dominated by ruminant production in extensive or semi-
intensive system.

Serbia has made the strategic choice to join the European Union (EU) and harmonize its policies
and legislation with those of the EU. Environmental sustainability of all economic production
activities are one of the most prominent areas that require adjustment. The Government's
commitment to achieve this objective is reflected in the existing or evolving sector strategies for
rural development, water management and environment, the 2003 Poverty Reduction Strategy
Paper (PRSP) and international agreements on the Protection of the Danube and Sava Rivers.

Key Issues, Root Causes, and Threats

In the late 1990s, basin-wide water quality models placed FRY in 3rd place with respect to
Nitrogen pollution and in 2nd place with respect to Phosphorus pollution among the 16 Danube
riparian countries. Serbia's livestock sector is among the largest sources of water pollution in
Serbia's part of the Danube/Black Sea Basin. Livestock farms, and in particular very large pig
farms that fatten more than 10,000 pigs per year, are significant polluters of nutrients due to their
inadequate storage practice of manure and limited and improper recycling of manure as
fertilizers. Highly concentrated liquid waste is disposed in lagoons, from where it penetrates the

---

groundwater, especially in the low lying Vojvodina where the groundwater table is high. Most
commonly, the liquid part of manure from the lagoons is directed into drainage canals which
channel it to the Danube or its tributaries without treatment.

Slaughterhouse waste also constitutes a significant source of nutrient pollution, especially in
Vojvodina where there are 240 slaughterhouses. Slaughterhouses typically collect animal waste
to storage tanks from where it is taken away by tankers for disposal into the municipal waste
water system or municipal landfill lagoons. This waste includes blood, the gut content, solids
including hoof and bristle, ears, and red water (the water that results from the washing and
cleaning of carcasses). In recent years, the waste to be disposed of has increased because the use
of bone meal as livestock feed has been discontinued in accordance with EU practice on animal
health. Given the current poor level of wastewater treatment and lack of sanitary landfills, this
practice likely results in high level discharge into the watercourses and leakage into the ground
water.

Local health effects of pollution from improperly disposed manure and slaughterhouse waste are
not measured, though the content of the waste suggests that the effects could be significant.
Slaughterhouse waste is high organic material and nitrogen content, and may contain pathogens,
including salmonella and shigella bacteria, parasite eggs, and amoebic eggs. This waste is
believed to pose a public health threat, especially to those communities that live near dumpsites
and scavenge on them. In addition, elevated concentrations of nitrates in groundwater, which is
the main drinking water source in rural areas, can lead to fatalities among infants (the "blue baby
syndrome").

Regulatory Framework. There has been little incentive in the past for livestock farms and agro-
processors to address these issues. Manure management in livestock farms is not regulated and
nutrient run-off from farms is not monitored. There is a need for a policy and for regulations on
how manure is to be stored properly and recycled as fertilizer in the context of a nutrient
management plan.

Regulations concerning slaughterhouse animal waste do not reflect the issue of the increased
quantities of waste and resulting pollution, following the discontinuation of recycling of animal
by-products into bone meal in response to heightened animal health concerns in Europe. There
is a need or guidelines / regulations on alternative ways of recycling, including necessary pre-
treatment, that are in line with the EU Animal By-products Directive.

Farmers' Knowledge on Nutrient Management. Nutrient management was not practiced in
large agrokombinats during the socialist period. Mineral fertilizers were made available at low
cost or for free. On the other hand, small, private farmers have always recycled manure on their
land, as they did not have access to the same type of service. Agricultural advisory services do
not provide advice on nutrient management or proper manure handling. Although there are
theoretical courses at the Agricultural Faculty on plant nutrient needs, agricultural advisors lack
practical experience in this field.

Water Quality Monitoring. At present, surface and groundwater monitoring are addressed by the
Law on Waters, "Regulations on Hazardous Substances in Waters", the Official Bulletin of SRS

---

(No. 31/82), "Regulations on Methods and Sampling for the Assessment of Wastewater
Quality", and the Official Bulletin of SRS (No. 47/83) governing surface and groundwater
quality monitoring. Water quality monitoring is conducted by Serbia's Hydrometeorological
Institute, which is responsible for measuring and recording quantities of wastewater discharged,
and submitting the data to the relevant public agency. Monitoring also includes tracking the
performance of wastewater treatment facilities. The results of all testing are published annually.
However, the implementation and enforcement of the Law on Waters has been hampered by a
number of factors, including overlapping mandates among various government institutions and
lack of enforcement capacity. Lack of personnel at the local level to monitor water quality on a
regular basis and inadequate fines for non-compliance have been other factors hampering
enforcement.

Government of Serbia's Response to the Key Issues

Legal and Regulatory Framework.
The Government of Serbia recognizes that the current
regulatory framework needs to be reformed and enforcement improved in order to provide the
right incentives for enterprises to comply with environmental standards. With the support of the
Government of Finland, it has drafted a number of new laws which are currently undergoing
public consultation. The include a new law on Environmental Protection, and new laws on
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), Strategic Environmental Impact Assessment (SEIA)
and Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC). An Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) has been established, although it is still in embryonic state. The Government has also
drafted a new Water Code in an attempt to transpose the EU Water Framework Directive. It
intends to harmonize its entire legal framework in the field of agriculture and environment with
the EU acquis.
Enforcement Capacity. The Government is cooperating with the EU / EAR to strengthen the
institutional capacity of the Ministry of Science and Environmental Protection's Department of
Environmental Protection (MSEP/DEP), EPA and local environmental inspectorates.

Government Grant Support to Environmentally-Friendly Agriculture.
In 2004, a rural
development grant fund was established with the objectives of helping to enhance the
sustainability of primary agricultural production; and to develop the rural economy and improve
the livelihoods of rural households through diversification of income sources. The fund provides
partial grants (20 ­ 50% of the value of investments) for farm improvements, notably for fruit,
vegetable, mushroom, flower and livestock production; the promotion of organic production;
marketing improvements; and village community development through non-agricultural
economic activities, such as agro-tourism.

Reform of Agricultural Advisory Services. Government plans to reform the agricultural
advisory service to be more responsive to farmers' needs in a competitive and EU environment.
It has asked World Bank assistance for this as part of a Rural Development Project. It intends to
mainstream environmental concerns into advice provided to farmers and agro-processors.

2. Objectives

---

The development objective of the project is to increase prevalence of environmentally friendly
practices among eligible enterprises and thereby reduce nutrient pollution of the Danube River.
The global environment objective is to demonstrate measures for reducing reduce nutrient
pollution of the Danube River and the Black Sea.

Progress towards achieving these principal project outcomes will be measured in terms of
percentage of selected farms and slaughterhouses implementing nutrient and manure
management plans properly two years after joining the project.

The Country Assistance Strategy (CAS) which will be submitted to the World Bank Board of
Directors in mid-December emphasizes environmental sustainability as an important component
of economic growth. It states that "[A]chieving Goal 2: Creating a larger, more dynamic private
sector will require progress in a number of difficult areas.... Fourth, further progress on cleaning
up and protecting the environment is necessary to ensure quality economic growth over the
medium term."

The project will also fulfill the goals of the relevant GEF Operational Program, OP. 8
Waterbody-based Operational Program under the GEF International Focal Area: The project
will be implemented under the GEF Strategic Partnership on the Danube and Black Sea Basin
which was established to support the ICPDR and the Black Sea Commission in their quest to
reducing nutrient pollution in the Danube River and Black Sea. The project will help Serbia
reduce its nutrient discharges into the Danube from agricultural sources in the long run as they
specified in FRY/SAM's Five Year Nutrient Reduction Plan submitted to the ICPDR. As such,
the project will serve the program's long-term objective to undertake a series of projects that
involve helping groups of countries to work collaboratively with the support of implementing
agencies in achieving changes in sectoral policies and activities so that transboundary
environmental concerns degrading specific water bodies can be resolved.

3. Rationale for Bank Involvement

The rationale for Bank involvement is two fold: First, the project complements and builds on
other development partners and the Government's efforts to strengthen the environmental
management framework and restructuring the agriculture sector to be more responsive to EU
requirements for enhanced exports. However, the majority of the international assistance is
focused on technical assistance and institutional and technical capacity building; and there are no
investment funds for mitigating agricultural and agro-industrial pollution at the current time.

WB has comparative advantage in carrying out agricultural and agro-industrial pollution control:
The Bank is the main implementing agency for the Investment Fund for Nutrient Reduction in
the Danube and Black Sea Basin and currently has a portfolio of 12 projects at various stages of
implementation and preparation in the basin, all aiming nutrient pollution reduction. So, the
Bank has gained significant experience in cost ­ effective methods to reduce nutrient run-off to
the watercourses, in building capacity on the part of implementing government agencies,
monitoring project success in reducing nutrient run-off, revision of regulatory framework. The
World Bank also has substantial experience in industrial pollution control in region, involving

---

both mitigation and remediation investments and legal framework reform, including in
neighboring Bulgaria. Most projects in the region involve harmonization with the EU
environment related acquis.
4. Description

Component 1: Support to Policy and Regulatory Reform (Total cost: US$ 0.22, of which GEF
funded: US$ 0.21 million):

The objective of this component is to strengthen the policy and regulatory framework that
regulates nutrient run-off and discharge from livestock farms and slaughterhouses, in line with
the European Union Nitrate Directive. In particular, the project will support (i) the development
of a Code of Good Agricultural Practices; (ii) a study to identify nitrate vulnerable areas in
Serbia, (iii) the development of an implementation plan for the Nitrate Directive; and (iv) the
drafting of a law on fertilizers and fertilization.

Component 2: Investment in Nutrient Reduction (Total cost: US$ 17.90 million, of which
GEF funded: US$ 7.09 million)

The objective of this component is to demonstrate cost-effective methods by livestock farms and
slaughterhouses to reduce nutrient run-off and discharge into the Danube River and its
tributaries; and to improve agricultural advisory service capacity to extend knowledge on these
technologies. The project will support a) investments in manure management in livestock farms;
b) investments in slaughterhouse animal waste management; c) the establishment of a Training
and Information Center (TIC) on proper nutrient, manure and slaughterhouse waste management;
and d) local advisory units to raise awareness among farmers and slaughterhouses on proper
nutrient / manure and animal waste management and assist enterprises participating in the
project.

Investments in nutrient management in livestock farms will be supported through partial grants
to farms that meet pre-established eligibility and selection criteria. The investments will mainly
consist of the establishment of a farm nutrient management plan (NMP), construction of proper
manure storage facilities and the purchase of manure spreading equipment. Geographical focus
will be on four municipalities, Novi Sad, Vrbas, Sabac and Po arevac where livestock density
and pollution levels are high. During the first year of project implementation, 8 pig and cattle
farms of differing sizes will be selected for support as demonstration farms. These will be used
to refine practices that are most suitable to local conditions, to demonstrate them to other
interested farmers, and to monitor water and soil quality improvements as a result of the project
interventions. A "grant scheme" will be implemented during project years 2-4 whereby a grant
of up to 60% of the total investment cost or US$100,000 will be provided to cover part of the
cost of investments in approximately 150 livestock farms. The total investment cost per farm
may range from US$ 36,000 in small cattle farms to US$ 440,000 in very large pig farms.

Grant support of up to 30% will be offered to approximately 8 large or very large
slaughterhouses to acquire animal waste separation, treatment and land application facilities and
equipment. Only those enterprises that are capable of meeting meat hygiene requirements for

---

export to the EU and those that manage risky animal waste1, as certified by veterinary
authorities, will be eligible to grant financing. There will be no geographical limitation to
eligibility other than being in the Danube River Basin. The total cost of investment at each site
will range from US$ 350,000 ­ US$ 450,000 depending on the size of the enterprise. Some
enterprises may already have some of the equipment or facilities in which case the total
investment cost will be lower. A manure management and nutrient management operational
manual (OM) has been developed providing detailed guidelines for the component.

The project will also fund the establishment of a Training and Information Center (TIC) in the
Institute for Animal Husbandry (IAH) which will offer training to agricultural advisors, farmers,
regulators and environmental inspectors on proper manure and slaughterhouse animal waste
management, to conduct applied research and be a national repository of knowledge on evolving
EU regulations in this field. The IAH's own manure and slaughterhouse animal waste
management facilities will be upgrade so that they can be used for demonstration purposes. An
OM detailing investments in activities by the TIC has been prepared.

Farmers and slaughterhouses will be offered advice on proper nutrient, manure and
slaughterhouse waste management through three Local Advisory Units in the project region.
These units will also evaluate eligibility of interested farms and assist those that are eligible in
preparing investment plans and grant applications. Furthermore, LAUs will ensure and verify
that project investments in selected farms and slaughterhouses are properly implemented. LAUs
will be provided guidance in their activities through a detailed OM.

Component 3: Water and Soil Quality Monitoring, Public Awareness Raising and
Replication Strategy (Total cost: US$ 1.21 million, of which GEF funded: US$ 0.63 million)

The objective of this component is threefold: To assess the impact of the project interventions on
water and soil quality in the Serbian Danube Basin; to increase local communities', enterprises'
and policy makers' awareness on water pollution from livestock farms and slaughterhouses and
of improvements made through the project; to devise a strategy to replicate the projects
interventions in other parts of the Danube River Basin in Serbia and beyond. This will be
achieved through four sub-components: a) Capacity Building and Support for Water and Soil
Quality Monitoring; b) Public Information Campaign (PIC); and c) Replication Strategy
Development. An OM for soil and water quality monitoring will be used in the implementation
of this component.

Component 4: Project Management and Project Impact Monitoring (Total cost: US$ 0.60
million, of which GEF funded: US$ 0.54 million)

This component will support project management, including project co-ordination and
administration, procurement, financial management and all reporting. All project outcome and
results monitoring will be carried out under this component as well.

A Project Implementation Unit (PIU) will be established to implement the project and to carry
out day-to-day activities of the project under the overall supervision of the MAFWM. The PIU,
1 Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy (TSE)

---

on behalf of the responsible ministries, will provide for project co-ordination and administration
of staff, procurement, financial management reporting and overall project monitoring and
evaluation activities for all components.

A Project Steering Committee will be established to provide overall guidance, advice and
approval for project activities, while execution will be responsibility of the PIU.
An OM has been prepared detailing the roles and responsibilities of individual government
agencies, institutions, PSC and the PIU.

5. Financing
Source: ($m.)
BORROWER/RECIPIENT 0.37
GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT FACILITY
8.98
BENECIFIARIES / LOCAL
8.64
COMMUNITIES
SIDA 3.63
INTERNATIONAL NGOs
0.38
Total: 22.00

6. Implementation

The Ministry of Agriculture Forestry and Water Management (MAFWP) will be the line
Ministry responsible for implementing the project. For this it will establish a Project
Implementation Unit (PIU) that will have overall management responsibility for the project. The
PIU will contract technical specialists who will monitor and facilitate implementation by
different agencies/departments of the Ministries, institutions and contracted enterprises. The PIU
will comprise a Project Director, an agricultural engineer, an agriculturalist a financial officer, a
procurement specialist, an administrative assistant/translator, and an office assistant. MAFWP
will provide the office space for the PIU while the project will provide for its rehabilitation as
well as office equipment, supplies, travel, communications, together with salaries and operating
costs for four years.

The PIU will provide for project co-ordination and administration of staff, procurement, financial
management reporting and overall project monitoring and evaluation activities for all
components. The Project Director will report to the Deputy Minister of MAFWM. The PIU will
inter alia (i) act as the overall project coordinating body on behalf of the MAFWM; (ii)
facilitate inter-ministerial coordination; (iii) contract different institutions e.g. Institute for
Animal Husbandry, Local Advisory Units for implementing project activities; (iv) operate the
investments grant programs; and (v) report to concerned authorities and the Bank.

A Project Steering Committee (PSC) will be established and comprise representatives from
MAFWM, MSEP, Ministry of Finance, livestock producers and farmers associations, NGOs, and
local authorities from project implementation areas. The PIU Director will act as executive
secretary and be an ex-officio member of the PSC. The Assistant Ministry of Agriculture will
chair the PSC. The PSC will be responsible for providing overall guidelines, advice and

---

approval for project activities, while execution will be responsibility of the PIU. PIU will be
allowed to make detailed implementation decisions within the approved framework for ensuring
proper project implementation.

Given insufficient personnel capacity of MAFWM, the PIU will initially be composed of
consultants. However, project activities will be mainstreamed into the regular activities of the
relevant government agencies through the continuous involvement of a technical staff member of
each of the agencies involved. The fact that MAFWM rather than another agency holds overall
project responsibility, the housing of the PIU in the MAFWM premises, capacity building of
EPA to hold overall responsibility for the project water quality monitoring, capacity building
among agricultural advisors in environmentally friendly agricultural practices will all contribute
to mainstreaming.

Water quality monitoring it will be undertaken by the Hydro meteorological Institute. The
Institute for Animal Husbandry will be responsible for training activities, MSEP/DEP will be
responsible for public awareness activities and EPA will be responsible for storing, utilization
and reporting of all water quality analysis data generated by the project. The Directorate for
Water Management will use this data for enforcing the laws for nutrient discharge generated by
agro-industry.

7. Sustainability

The project design includes elements that will contribute to the sustainability of project
interventions. These include:

(i)
Increasing awareness on the part of the general public on the negative
environmental and public health impacts of pollution from livestock farms and
slaughterhouses. By making information on improvements in water quality
and compliance by enterprises with the public , the project will seek to
mobilize public pressure on enterprises to improve their practices.
(ii)
Increasing awareness on the part of farmers on the financial benefits of better
nutrient management; notably, properly substituting manure for mineral
fertilizers.
(iii)
Only financially viable enterprises will be awarded grant support. This will
be one of the sub-project selection criteria.
(iv)
Agricultural advisory services will be strengthened so that advice on proper
manure/nutrient and animal waste management will be available to farmers on
a regular basis. Furthermore, farmers themselves will be trained in the
improved practices so that lack of knowledge will not hamper continued
implementation of project investments beyond the project period.
(v)
On the "stick" side, the project will support the development of regulations on
proper manure and slaughterhouse animal waste management. The project
will also enhance the enforcement capacity of environmental inspectors
through training on environmentally friendly agriculture. Environmental
monitoring capacity will also be enhanced through the purchase of equipment

---

to upgrade laboratories, training of staff and introduction of proper quality
controls.

8. Lessons Learned from Past Operations in the Country/Sector

The recently completed WB GEF Poland Rural Environmental Protection Project, as well as
ongoing agricultural pollution control projects in Romania and the Baltic Sea Region
implemented by the World Bank, have provided a number of critical lessons that have been
incorporated in the project design:

· An effective public information campaign (PIC) aiming at increasing farmer awareness
of the financial benefits of recycling manure as fertilizer is crucial for attracting farmers
to participate in the project by contributing their own funds and labor to the investments.
It was found that this task should be given to a full-time PIC specialist who will be
housed in the PIU who will be in constant contact with the project LAUs and
implementing agency staff and can fine-tune the campaign according to developing
needs, rather than to a public relations company that may not be so dynamic and flexible.

· To ensure the mainstreaming of environmentally friendly practices into agricultural
production, project components dealing with agriculture should be implemented by the
agency in charge of agriculture. This will ensure that environmental concerns are
mainstreamed in agricultural policies. On the other hand, water quality and other
environmental impact monitoring should be the responsibility of the agency in charge of
environmental protection.

· Investments have to make financial sense to farmers for them to not only contribute their
own funds but also to maintain the investments. O&M costs, financial as well as time,
of the practices have to be factored into the financial benefit cost analyses.

· Capacity building among a large group of agricultural advisors on nutrient management
is a precondition for the replicability of nutrient reduction methods introduced by the
project.

9. Safeguard Policies (including public consultation)

In regard to the social safeguards, all investments envisaged under the project (Component 2)
will be made on private land by the respective owners. Documentation of clear land ownership
rights will be a selection criterion. The investments will not involve any land acquisition,
eviction of tenants or restrictions of access. Hence, the Involuntary Resettlement safeguard
policy is not triggered. The likelihood of the project supporting investments that could affect
objects of cultural value in SAM has been assessed and is considered highly unlikely.

Project activities will not take place in any sensitive natural habitats hence the Natural Habitats
safeguard policy is not triggered. It has also been determined that the Projects on International
Waterways safeguard policy is not triggered since the project involves neither the use nor
potential pollution of the international waterways.

---

Safeguard Policies Triggered by the Project
Yes No
Environmental Assessment (OP/BP/GP 4.01) [X]
[
]
Natural Habitats (OP/BP 4.04) [
]
[X]
Pest Management (OP 4.09)
[ ]
[X]
Cultural Property (OPN 11.03, being revised as OP 4.11)
[ ]
[X]
Involuntary Resettlement (OP/BP 4.12) [
]
[X]
Indigenous Peoples (OD 4.20, being revised as OP 4.10)
[ ]
[X]
Forests (OP/BP 4.36) [
]
[X]
Safety of Dams (OP/BP 4.37) [
]
[X]
Projects in Disputed Areas (OP/BP/GP 7.60)*
[ ]
[X]
Projects on International Waterways (OP/BP/GP 7.50) [
] [X]
The following public consultation and disclosure process has been carried out:

· The EMP and the Operational Manual Environmental Chapter were disclosed to the public
on Tuesday November 16, 2004 through i) an announcement in the nationally circulated
newspaper Politika, including an invitation to a public consultation meeting on November 22,
2004; ii) posting on the official website of the Directorate for Environmental Protection; iii)
mailing to the municipal administrations of the four project areas with a request for posting
on bulleting boards.
· A public meeting was organized in the premises of the Institute for Protection of Nature of
Serbia on November 22, 2004.

10. List of Technical Documents

1. "Serbia Danube River Enterprise Reduction Pollution Reduction Project: Review of
Options for Improved Manure Management and Nutrient Discharge Reduction from Meat
Processing Industry and Slaughterhouses," by J.P. Metcalfe (Consultant), 16 August
2004.

2. "Serbia Danube River Enterprise Pollution Reduction Scheme: Report I. Financial
Analysis of Measures for On-Farm Nutrient Management and Nutrient Discharge
Reduction in Livestock Farms," by Dan Vadnjal, Nenad Brkich (Consultants) and
Svetlana Turudic (PPU Financial Specialist), 30 July 2004.

3. "Serbia Danube River Enterprise Pollution Reduction Scheme: Report II. Financial
Analysis of Measures for On-Farm Nutrient Management and Nutrient Discharge
Reduction in Slaughterhouse and Meat Processing Facilities," by Dan Vadnjal, Nenad
Brkich (Consultants) and Svetlana Turudic (PPU Financial Specialist), 30 July 2004.

* By supporting the proposed project, the Bank does not intend to prejudice the final determination of the parties' claims on the
disputed areas

---

4. "Serbia and Montenegro, Serbia Danube River Enterprise Pollution Reduction Project,
FAO Consultant Report," Pierre Gerber and Krzysztof Skapski (Consultants), 08 January
2004

5. Water Quality Monitoring report , Ramesh Kanwar and Mica Stojanovic (Consultants),
date

6. Soil Quality Monitoring report , Ramesh Kanwar and Mirjana Zdravkovi (Consultants),
date

7. "Report on the Assessment of Implementing Agency Capacity to Conduct Procurement
under the Serbia Danube River Enterprise Pollution Reduction Project", October 2004

11. Contact point
Contact: Tijen Arin
Title: Environmental Econ.
Tel: (202) 473-5535
Fax:
Email: tarin@worldbank.org

12. For more information contact:
The InfoShop
The World Bank
1818 H Street, NW
Washington, D.C. 20433
Telephone: (202) 458-5454
Fax: (202) 522-1500
Web: http://www.worldbank.org/infoshop

---