Saint Lucia Water Supply Infrastructure Improvement Project€¦ · The urgent need to improve the...

Environmental Assessment (EA) Saint Lucia Water Supply Infrastructure

Improvement Project

]March 25, 2005

Prepared for the World Bank

E1134

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Page i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 2. INTRODUCTION 3 3. DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES 3

3.1. Alternative 1 – Improve Capacity of Existing System (Capacity Improvement) 4

3.2. Alternative 2 – Installation of a Mobile Desalination

Plant at Pigeon Point (Desal- Plant) 11 4. REGULATORY AND LEGAL FRAMEWORK 12

4.1. General Legislative Authorities 12

4.2. WASCO legislation 13

4.3. Public Health Legislation and Regulations 17

4.4. Employees (Occupational Health and Safety) Act No 10 of 1985 18

4.5. International Treaties 18

5. DESCRIPTION OF ENVIRONMENT 21

5.1. Physical 21

5.2. BIOLOGICAL 23

5.3. Socioeconomic 27 6. ANALYSIS OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION 36

6.1. Summary Overview 36

6.2. Alternative 1 – Improve Capacity of Existing System (Capacity Improvement) 37

6.3. Alternative 2 – Installation of a Mobile Desalination

Plant at Pigeon Point (Desal- Plant) 44

Page ii

7. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN 52

7.1. Contract development 52

7.2. Vigilance 53

7.3. Close out 53

7.4. WASCO Responsibilities 53 8. MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS 54 9. INSTITUTIONAL IMPLEMENTATION 54 10. CAPACITY BUILDING 54

APPENDICES - APPENDIX I, IUCN Criteria for Critically Endangered, Endangered and Vulnerable APPENDIX II, DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONTRACT CLAUSES

1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The urgent need to improve the availability of good quality drinking water in the northern section of St. Lucia is obvious. Current inadequacies of the distribution system coupled with the demands for growth in the region are placing increasing pressure on the distribution system. The ability to service all population segments is a priority with the greatest benefit going to low income families. At risk groups include children under 5 and the elderly. These groups will realize a greater proportional benefit from improved access to public water supplies. The impacts associated with both alternatives differ widely given the technologies involved and the users served by the two options. Both options will result in induced development in the extreme northern service area (Rodney Bay, Grose Islet) as pent-up development demand is currently frustrated due to lack of water. Numerous communities have been designed and laid-out with supporting infrastructure but are not developing due to poor land sales. There are also plans for the construction of no less than 4 new hotel complexes in the region.

Environmental Impacts Generally, impacts associated with the first alternative – Capacity improvement, are related to construction activities at the work site. Only those portions of the project involving the construction of new pipelines will affect the community at large as these works will require access to private lands. Those works to occur in public roadways present additional but manageable impacts. The greatest positive impact associated with this option is that it improves the ability to provide a reliable supply of potable water throughout the Theobolds WTP service area and reaches into low income communities where service is poor or non-existent. These are the groups least able to afford developing alternative sources to public water supply. While this option will result in the continued development of the extreme northern service area, the infrastructure and current supply are adequate to meet the current and anticipated future demand. The second option, the Desal-plant, provides water only to a specific section of the Theobolds WTP area. While it would relieve the system of short term demands emanating from that area, it would not permit the other improvements necessary to reliably supply water throughout the Theobolds WTP service area. Aside from the greatly increased costs of water production, the desal option contains a variety of other environmental consequences. These include for example, aesthetic issues, management of seawater intake and brine discharge, chemical pollutants, ecological and marine habitat concerns, issues associated with endangered species and increased energy demands. Furthermore, it is clear, given the pressure for growth in the

plants service region, that the demand on the system will quickly increase as new construction begins again in the belief that water is readily available. Finally, the service area for the desal plant represents one of the highest income areas of the island where the average household income is nearly double the national average. This indicates that the direct benefits of this option will not be distributed among the middle to lower income brackets more prevalent in the greater northern service area. The additional cost associated with the production of desalinated water would not be borne by the local service area but would necessarily be folded into the general cost of WASCO water production. Paying for this additional cost would have to be distributed across the entire population through the entire system. Absent a special use fee for the service area, the result is a form of water subsidy for the most affluent portion of the country.

Comparison of Alternatives Of the two options, option 1, Capacity upgrade, produces the greatest long-term benefit for the entire service area and addresses the total water demand over the next 10 – 15 years. The capacity upgrades clearly meet the long term growth requirements of the northern section with greater reliability, lower cost, and fewer significant direct environmental impacts than the desal option. Neither alternative has constructions planned in an area suspected of containing undiscovered artifacts or areas of cultural-historical significance.

2. INTRODUCTION A program of improvements to the St. Lucian public water system is contemplated to alleviate the shortages currently experienced in the northern portion of the distribution system. The two scenarios examined include:

• Improvements to increase the capacity of the current system

• Installation of a 20,000m3/day desalination plant Of the two options, the improvements to existing capacity has the greatest impact on the service region by making water available to a wider segment of the population. The Desalination plant is planned in a sub-region of the northern part of the island and while alleviating the short-term demand for water, services a limited population in an explosive growth area. In either case, development in the north is hampered by the lack of water. This report explores the environmental impacts associated with the two alternative projects.

3. DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES Two alternatives are under consideration for the improvement of potable water services under this project. The first involves the improvements to existing infrastructure and the amplification of the existing water treatment facility at Cicero. As the map indicates, figure 3.1, this system is connected to the John Compton reservoir the principal source of water to the north end of the island. The second alternative is the installation of a containerized desalination plant at the north end of the island. This plant would be built with a 20,000 m3/day production capacity. The objective of both alternatives is to improve water availability to the northern end of St. Lucia and areas in the vicinity of Castries which currently receives limited or intermittent service. This program is part of a comprehensive strategy to strengthen the water sector, which is essential to the economic development and growth of Saint Lucia. The sector has tremendous impacts on health, agriculture, tourism, industry and the quality of life. It is important to note that the benefits of the recommendations outlined can only be realized with the implementation of the capacity upgrades recommended for the entire Roseau System. Calculations illustrate that the 2003 demand exceeds the capacity of many of existing components in the Roseau System. As indicated Table 3.0 below summarizes the current and projected demands as well as the existing capacities of the infrastructural components required for production.

Table 3.0 Current & Projected Demands (Roseau System)

SYSTEM Existing Capacity (MGD)

Demand 2003* (MGD)

Demand 2010* (MGD)

Demand 2015* (MGD)

Demand 2020* (MGD)

Demand 2025* (MGD)

ROSEAU SYSTEM a) Pumps b) Pipeline c) Treatment Plant

6.20 (max) 6.00 (max) 6.20 (max) 6.20 (max)

7.19

8.66

9.92

11.41

13.16

Improvement to existing infrastructure comprises a 4 part program designed to improve treatment and distribution for the northern end of the Island. Project elements include:

• John Compton Dam Pumping Upgrade

• Removal of Vanard-Sarot Bottleneck

• Expansion of the Theobalds Water Treatment Plant (WTP)

• Upgrade of Morne-Bocage Distribution Line

3.1. Alternative 1 – Improve Capacity of Existing System (Capacity Improvement)

3.1.1. John Compton Dam Pumping Upgrade

The John Compton Dam pumping facility is the primary intake, transmission and distribution of raw water in St Lucia. The sequence of operations that form part of this facilty require extraction of water from a built-up dam using a parallel-pump configuration consisting of five (5) pumps, pumping in sequence to a collecting tank located at the Millet Ridge which flows by gravity to the Theobalds Water Treatment Plant at Ciceron in Castries. See Figure 3.1. Currently, the existing configuration cannot meet the forecasted demand for the year 2000 and beyond, to the year 2025. recommendations for an upgrade to the facility have been made. Some of the problems identified included Inadequate capacity to maintain current demand as well as the lack of back up capacity in the event of mechanical and or electrical failure.

With the John Compton Dam as the primary source of supply, recommendations are to increase the output of the current facility to match current and future demands. The proposed solutions to the above stated problems are as follows:

• Upgrade of pumping capacity to match future demand (i.e. to the year 2025).

• Upgrade of pipework and other civil works Replacement of the current standby generating set to accommodate for the increased power supply requirements of the larger pump-motor assemblies. The scope of work required includes the replacement of the the existing pump-motor assemblies, as shown in the photo presented in figure 3.2, No.4 & No.5 (rated at 150 Hp (horsepower) each), with larger capacity pump-motor assemblies (rated at 200 Hp each). The pump-motor assembly unit No.3 is also to be replaced by a 150 Hp unit. This upgrade will facilitate a pumping capacity of approximately 10 MGD as opposed to the existing 6 MGD capacity. The resulting increase in power supply requirements will require an increase in the standby generating capacity and slight changes to the electrical appurtenances inclusive of the Motor Control Center to accommodate the increased electrical demand required to sustain at least four pumps in the event of a power loss to the station. These works are planned as upgrades or replacements for existing infrastructure, and fall with the the existing operational design parameters of the system. This pipeline would be installed parallel to the existing 18” pipeline which would upgrade the raw water transmission pipeline capacity of up to 10 MGD from the Roseau dam and Millet intake. The joint restraints will be installed on pipe sections between Millet and Vanard stations at river crossings to improve the integrity and reduce the disaster vulnerability of the pipeline particularly when exposed to heavy river flows.

Figure 3.1

Project Area and Generalized Infrastructure

Figure 3.2 Pumps at the John Compton Dam

3.1.2. Expansion of the Theobalds Water Treatment Plant (WTP) The T.R.Theobalds Water Treatment Plant , or the Ciceron Water Treatment Plant as it was formerly known, was commissioned in March 1993 as part of the upgrade of the general water works that formed part of the Roseau Basin Water Development Project. The components completed under that project included the construction of a 750,000,000 gallon rock filled water dam complete with a pumping station, a new water intake and raw water transmission pipeline at Millet stream extraction station, construction of a 100,000 gallon header tank at Millet, a raw water transmission pipeline between Millet and Ciceron, construction of a modern water treatment plant at Ciceron (T.R.Theobalds ) and finally the first phase installation of a new treated water transmission main from T.R.Theobalds to Port Castries. The T.R.Theobalds Water Treatment Plant is designed to meet the needs of persons living the northern portions of the island. The areas serviced by this facility plant include all of Castries, the Roseau Basin, Babonneau and Gros Islet and associated rural areas. Demand calculations for the north of the island indicate a current domestic demand (2003) of 5.39 MGD. The demand from the commercial sector such as hotels, cruise

ships and other large consumers is an additional 2.5 MGD. This represents a total daily demand of 7.89 MGD. To date the plant is treating on average a total of 6 MGD. This increase in treatment capacity is in keeping with the maximum design capacity of the plant of 6.5 MGD. Minor modifications have already been made to the plant with respect to the filter media in two of the bays and the use of a coagulant aid – Polymer (PAX-18) for sediment flocculation to improve throughput in the existing facility. The original design of the system included the installation of a duplicate plant on space reserved at the same site in order to ultimately produce a maximum of 10.0 MGD. This was anticipated to meet the population demands beyond 2005. Limiting the productivity of the future system however, is the raw water transmission pipeline capacity. New larger pipe (24 inch) was connected to 18 inch lines during the initial project resulting in flow restrictions to the system. The intention was to address replacement of these older lines in the future program phase bringing transmission capacity up the original system design specifications. For the additional treatment capacity to have its desired effect, transmission line upgrades will be required as the available supply will be insufficient to realize the benefit of increased treatment capacity. Specifically, the expansion of the Theobalds Water Treatment Plant (WTP) will include the following elements:

• Expansion of the existing facility – This to meet the capacity of the raw water transmission system which is expected to be approximately 10 MGD.

• Modification of receiving chamber - to allow for the increase in flows.

• Introduction of plate or tube settlers – to improve the efficiency of the clarifiers by 40% to 50%. The settlers will increase the surface area in the clarifier, thereby reducing the settling time by more then 50%.

• Construction of settling tank or pond for the re-cycling of back wash water and

sludge collection - asettling tank or pond would be constructed for the treatment of back wash water which is normally discharged with the solids. At an operating volume 9.0 MGD, the total backwash water volume is about 400,000 gallons per back wash cycle. In order to reuse the backwash water it will be necessary to construct a pond to contain this water and to recycle it. With planned improvements to the system, the projected backwash interval when operation at 9.0 MGD is every 2 days.

• Trucking of Sludge – the installation of water recovery and sludge drying areas

will allow the removal of solids to the Beausejour Sewage Treatment Facility for further processing and drying. Sludges are currently discharged directly to a nearby surface stream.

3.1.3. Upgrade of Morne-Bocage Distribution Line This component focuses on the Morne, Bocage and Morne Du Don Water Distribution System. Demand calculations for the north of the island indicate a total daily demand of 7.89 MGD, not including the storage demand, can be expected. Combined supply figures for the Roseau and Hill 20 systems vary between 7.4 MGD and 6.5 MGD during the wet and dry seasons respectively. Domestic demand for the Babonneau region is estimated at 0.7 MGD. The high elevation areas in the Castries region, (such as Upper Morne Du Don, Bocage, Upper Entrepot and Carillie) are supplied by both the Theobalds and Hill 20 water treatment systems. Hill 20 derives its raw water from two stream extraction stations.. During the rainy season, excess water produced by the Hill 20 System is the primary source of potable water. During the dry season, however the stream flows are greatly reduced and raw water available to the Hill 20 plant is often not capable of supplying the Babonneau region. Under these conditions, water is diverted from the Roseau System to Hill 20. Water is pumped from the Theobalds WTP to Morne via an 8” PVC pipeline. This line flows by gravity to the Bocage reservoir tank through a badly corroded 6” cast iron pipeline. Current domestic demand (2003) requires a pumping capacity at Theobalds WTP of approximately 1.84 MGD and a gravity line with a capacity of 1.69 MGD. Current capacities for the pumping and gravity system are 0.9 MGD and 0.76 MGD respectively. Table 3.1 summarizes the existing system capacities and present and projected demands. During the dry season, poor infrastructure and the lack of raw water in the Hill 20 System, dictate that stringent rationing schedules be implemented. Most of the high elevation communities in the Castries and Babonneau areas which enjoy a daily supply during the rainy season, only receive water for a few hours once or twice weekly. This is a rural area and residents most effected include numerous low income families who are unable to purchase storage tanks to compensate for the interruptions in supply.

Table 3.1 Current & Projected Demands (Roseau System & Hill 20 System)

SYSTEM Existing Capacity (MGD)

Demand 2003* (MGD)

Demand 2010* (MGD)

Demand 2015* (MGD)

Demand 2020* (MGD)

Demand 2025* (MGD)

ROSEAU SYSTEM Ciceron P.S. Morne to Morne

Du Don Pipeline

6.20 (max) 0.90 (max) 0.76 (max)

7.19 1.84 1.69

8.66 2.10 1.93

9.92 2.31 2.13

11.41 2.53 2.34

13.16 2.78 2.57

HILL 20 SYSTEM Wet Season Dry Season

1.20 (max) 0.24 (min)

0.70

0.80

0.89

0.97

1.06

TOTAL Wet Season Dry Season

7.40 (max) 6.44 (min)

7.89

9.46

10.81

12.38

14.22

* Figures do not include demand generated by private storage tanks.

The specific system upgrades to be constructed include the following:

• New Ciceron Pump Station at Theobalds WTP - Installation of three duty pumps and one standby pump at Ciceron to meet the estimated water demand of 2.31 MGD by 2015.

• New dedicated 12” Pumping Main - Install a 1900m pipeline to improve supply

flows from Theobalds WTP to Morne Fortune. Pipeline upgrades are designed to meet water demands estimated at 2.53 MGD in 2020.

• New 200,000 Imperial Gallon (Igal) tank at Morne Fortune - Install a 200,000

Igal tank at Morne Fortune to provide additional storage for Flow stabilization during peak demand, Flow stabilization required for firefighting, and Emergency storage.

• New 12” gravity main, 4900m - Install a dedicated transmission pipeline directly

to existing storage tanks at the Morne and Morne Du Don. This special pipeline link and valve assembly will allow the Theobalds WTP to feed the Bocage Reservoir tank and the Hill 20 WTP.

• New 100,000 Imperial gallon (Igal) tank at Babonneau - This storage facility will

be required Install a 100,000 Igal tank at Babonneau, near the Hill 20 WTP to accept flows from the Morne. This is to provide additional storage for Flow

stabilization during peak demand and flow stabilization required for firefighting, and Emergency storage

3.2. Alternative 2 – Installation of a Mobile Desalination Plant at Pigeon Point (Desal- Plant)

The second alternative is the installation of a 20,000 M3 desalination plant along the east end of the Pigeon Point causeway. The proposed site is on the west coast of the island, north of Rodney Bay. This alternative involves the installation of a portable, containerized facility covering approximately 2,200 sq. ft. in the vicinity of the Rodney Bay public beach. The installation will include necessary upgrades to electrical supply and the installation of backup power systems. A transmission line of approximately 700 meters in length is to be constructed along the causeway to connect with WASCO transmission system. Water would then pass to the local pumping network to service the extreme northern portion of the island including Rodney Bay, Cap estates and surrounding areas. The proposed location is undeveloped and covered with vegetation typical of the region; acacia and other dry adapted flora adapted typical of the island’s dry coastal environs. The planned service area is the northern segment of the current WASCO distribution system and includes Gros Islet, Rodney Bay , Cap estates Casen Ba and surrounding areas. The service area is currently experiencing significant water shortages as the restrictions in the current WASCO transmission system permit pumping to the area 2 or 3 days per week. Additionally, current capacity limitations in the WASCO system do not permit the development of sufficient water pressures to reach houses constructed at higher elevations. The area is located behind a critical elevation in the WASCO system where water originating at the Theobalds WTP is pumped. After the topographic rise, the flow is by gravity to a series of local pumping stations used to maintain distribution pressures in this portion of the network. The result is that the water produced by the desalination plant will only service the local area as the WASCO system cannot distribute this water beyond the gravity fed portion of the line. This portion of the Island is an important tourism and commercial area which is under intense development pressure. Several hotels are in operation in the area and several more are planned for future construction. This is an affluent area filled with large homes and vacation residences. Additionally, the area supports a golf course and plans are for the development of several housing areas for residents and vacation homes. Also in this area is the Rodney Bay complex which supports the island’s largest recreational port. It is the “dry” end of the island and alternative water supplies, apart from rainwater storage, do not currently exist. One hotel, on the Pigeon Point causeway has installed a

desalination unit to augment the public water supply. Intakes and brine returns are located in the sea on the north side of the causeway. Residents and businesses in the area have constructed a large number of personal storage tanks to help alleviate the shortages due to the limited mainline supply. These tanks can reach as much as 10,000 Igal in capacity. As a result, when water is available, WASCO is constantly supplying future water demand, by filling tanks, rather than satisfying the much lower daily end-of-pipe demand. Tanks at lower elevations are filled first with those at higher elevations having access to water on a much shorter time schedule. This has created an artificial drought return period that only increases as residents continue to install large storage tanks. Specifically, this alternative involves:

• Construction of a mobile desalination plant at the pigeon point causeway

• Construction of appropriate office, laboratory spaces and sanitary services fro operating staff.

• Construction of a transmission line to link with the WASCO system

• Providing sufficient pumping capacity to move water to the local WASCO

pumping stations. Water would be drawn either from Rodney Bay or the sea along the northern side of the causeway via 12 inch buried pipeline. Brine discharges would be routed either to Rodney bay or the sea to the north as well.

4. REGULATORY AND LEGAL FRAMEWORK

4.1. General Legislative Authorities There are four main institutions with shared responsibility for the management of inland water resources and related environmental policy in St Lucia. These are:

• Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries

• Ministry of Physical Development, Housing & Infrastructure

• National Water & Sewerage Commission (NWSC)

• Ministry of Health The principal environmental regulatory instruments in St. Lucia are dispersed among the four principal government agencies as presented in table 4.1. While conservation law is

fairly strong, laws pertaining to the use of lands and management of their environmental impacts are relatively new and not well enforced. Additional supporting environmental management instruments are presented in table 4.2. As a resource manager, the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries has overall responsibility for the protection of both land and marine resources for conservation as well as managed exploitation. The Ministry of Planning is in the process of strengthening its capabilities in both land use planning and in the establishment of a new building code. In their enabling legislation, the Physical Planning & Development Act, 2001, the ministry is also responsible for the review of environmental impact statements, which are only required for major projects. A land rationalization and titling program is underway but a significant amount of land remains untitled. Finally, in theory, the Ministry of planning grants use and building permits for constructions. This process is co-managed by WASCO as the Ministry should not grant permits unless WASCO has approved the connection to the public water and sewage system. Inefficiencies and poor communication between WASCO and Ministry of Planning have limited the effectiveness of this process.

4.2. WASCO legislation The Water and Sewerage Act (No. 13 of 1999) repealed the Water and Sewerage Authority Act (No 18 of 1984) and provides for establishment of a National Water and Sewerage Commission to regulate the granting of licenses, the development and control of water supply and sewerage facilities and related matters. The Act requires that all existing gathering grounds be retained as forest reserve or protected forest in accordance with the Forest, Soil and Water Ordinance, or be declared controlled areas, in which no person or public authority can claim or obtain the right to abstract and use water or construct works except in accordance with the Act. The Act also provides for proclamation of additional gathering grounds, to forest reserve, protected forest, or controlled areas. The Act protects the storage capacity or sanitation of gathering grounds from deforestation and animals, via the Minister responsible under the Forest, Soil and Water Conservation Ordinance, the Ministry of Health under the Public Health Act of 1975, or directly (in the case of animals) should responsible agencies not take appropriate action. The National Water and Sewerage Commission, established under the Water and Sewerage Act of 1999 is also required to regulate the granting of licenses and development and control of water supply and sewerage facilities. The Commission must work with WASCO for the purpose of conserving, redistributing or otherwise augmenting water resources.

Table 4.1 Key Environmentally Related legislation

Agency Legislative Mandate

Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries

Department of Forestry Department of Agriculture Forest, Soil & Water Ordinance, 1946 Wildlife Protection Act, 1980 Water Resources Policy (Draft) Land Conservation & Improvement Act, 1992 Pesticides & Toxic Chemicals Act, 2001 Agricultural Small Tenancies Act, 1983

National Water & Sewerage Commission (NWSC)

Water & Sewerage Act, 1999

Ministry of Physical Development, Housing & Infrastructure

Physical Planning & Development Act, 2001

Ministry of Health

Environmental Heath Department Public Health Act, 1975 Public Health (Water Quality Control) Regulations, 1978 etc. ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT GOVERNMENT OF ST. LUCIA

Table 4.2 Government of St. lucia

Selected Water and Environmentally related Mandates

Agency Instrument Notes

Land Conversation and Improvement Act (1992)

Provision for improved land drainage conservation

Establishment of Pesticides Control Board Control of import, use, labeling and storage of pesticides

Pesticides & Toxic Chemicals Act (2001) Pesticides Control Regulations (1987)

Registration of and licenses for use and storage of pesticides

Agricultural Small Tenancies Act (1983)

Enforcement of regulations requiring sound soil and water conservation practices on small holdings Control of plant pests and diseases

Department of Agriculture, MAFF

Plant Protection Act (1988) Regulations SI (1995)

Prevent the introduction of exotic species

Management of forest resources

Establishment of forest reserve and protected forests

Protection of forest, soil, water and wildlife resources

Forest, Soil and Water Conservation Act (1946)

Management of water catchments

Department of Forestry, MAFF

Wildlife Protection Act (1980) • Conservation of wildlife

Designation of wildlife reserves

Water Resources Policy (draft)

Promotion of the integrated management of water resources

National Water & Sewerage Commission

Water & Sewerage Act (1999) • Management of water resources (ensure sustainability of water resources, promote public awareness and disseminate information about water resources management)

Regulatory oversight of water supply and sewerage services

Ministry of Physical Development, Environment and Housing

Physical Planning & Development Act (2001)

Land use planning, development control, formulation and implementation of housing policy, environmental management

Agency Instrument Notes

Environmental Health Department, Ministry of Health

Public Health Act (1975), Public Health Regulations (1978, 1980)

Regulatory oversight of water quality, domestic waste disposal, sanitary facilities, food safety and drainage

National Conservation Authority

National Conservation Authority Act (1999)

Establishment of an authority to manage public parks and beaches

Under the Water and Sewerage Act (No. 13 of 1999), WASCO is required to carry out Government policy in relation to water supply and sewerage, provide the public with a safe and reliable water supply, and provide dependable sewerage services. WASCO shall, as far as reasonably possible, provide the public with potable water for domestic purposes and satisfactory supplies for agricultural, industrial or commercial purposes. The Minister may make regulations for water conservation, prescribing water fittings to be used, forbidding the illegal reconnection or use of water fittings that are deemed unsuitable, prescribing the method of water storage on any premises, and the installation, operation and maintenance of a water supply system in a private development. WASCO is required to comply with directives, instructions, regulations and standards for water quality set by the Ministry responsible for public health. Persons authorized by WASCO may enter upon any land with such equipment as may be necessary, for the purposes of carrying out its functions, providing reasonable notice to the owner or occupier has been given. WASCO may enter any land and construct or operate (water or sewerage) works, providing reasonable notice to the owner or occupier has been given. A person whose property is affected has a right to compensation. The Act provides for the declaration of discharges or deposition of wastes onto land, sewer or drain, water or watercourse, and of wastes or classes of waste, as controlled water quality areas, or controlled wastes or classes of wastes respectively. This is to protect public health, established and intended uses of water resources, protection of flora and fauna, and scenic and environmental values. The Minister may take action to prevent polluting matter from entering water, or remove and dispose of polluting matter to remedy or mitigate any pollution. The legislation is currently being revised under the Water Sector Reform Project.

4.3. Public Health Legislation and Regulations The principal source of mandatory environmental standards for water and sewage works in St. Lucia is the Public Health Act (Act No.8 of 1975. Regulations made under this Act include Water Quality Control Regulations, Sewage and Disposal of Sewage etc (No. 24

of 1978), Disposal of Offensive Matter (1976) and the Public Health (Nuisance) Regulations (1978). Generally, these legal instruments impose absolute prohibitions or qualitative restraints on activities, including the disposal of sewage and industrial effluents, that are intended to protect water supplies from contamination at source. Some applicable standards are imposed by the Public Health (Sewage and Disposal of Sewage and Industrial Waste Works) Regulations 1978, which prohibit the unauthorized disposal of any sewer fluid or liquid industrial effluent into any watercourse. The Regulations provide that authorization may only be granted if the quality and rate of dilution of the effluent prevents the creation of a nuisance or the effluent is treated to the satisfaction of the Public Health Board. The Regulations contain detailed specifications for the construction of sewage treatment plants, including septic tanks, Imhoff tanks, settling tanks, biological filters, package sewage treatment plants, oxidation ditches and ponds, and intermittent sand filters. As regards the allowable standards of biological oxygen demand (BOD), suspended solids and other chemicals in any effluent to be released into the environment. The Public Health (Water Quality Control) Regulations also address issues like the construction of water supply systems, construction and location of wells and penalties for infringement. As regards the inspection, repair or renewal of water and sewerage mains, however, the only relevant provisions appear in the Public Health (Nuisance) Regulations 1978, under which the matters designated as nuisances include any water supply system that is not maintained in a sanitary manner and any sanitary convenience not constructed and maintained according to law. The MOH issues licenses to hotels for occupancy, food, swimming pool, but not for sewage plant operations.

4.4. Employees (Occupational Health and Safety) Act No 10 of 1985 The Employees (Occupational Health and Safety) Act No 10 of 1985 sets standards for occupational health and safety in places of employment, and requires employers to, as far as practicable, maintain work conditions that are safe and without risk of injury to health, provide safe means of access and egress, ensure risks of injury or accident do not arise from the handling, storage, transport, use or disposal of dangerous substances, provide information, training, supervision, protective clothing and first aid facilities to ensure employee protection. Employees are required to take reasonable care, cooperate with the employer in carrying out the provisions of the Act, not tamper with safety devices, ensure that risks do not arise in the handling, storage, transport, use or disposal of dangerous substances, properly use and care or protective clothing, report defects which may cause accident or injury, and report accidents or injuries to his immediate supervisor. The Act provides for disposal of wastes and effluents, ventilation, drinking water, latrines and urinals, first aid appliances, medical examination, notification of accidents and dangerous occurrence, guarding of machinery, training and supervision of operators, toxic substances, work in

confined spaces, personal protective equipment and protective tools, protection of eyes and precautions in case of fire.

4.5. International Treaties St. Lucia is party to fourteen environmentally relevant treaties or conventions. As presented in table 4.3, these deal variously with protection of resources, pollution management and abatement, endangered species protection, management of hazardous chemicals and protection of marine resources. Of particular interest are the treaties dealing with marine protection and management of natural resources. While the preferred alternative, strengthening the existing water infrastructure, is unaffected by these instruments, the proposal for the installation of a desalination plant will affect the coastal zone. Therefore, treaties relating to the protection of endangered species and protection of marine environments have particular relevance.

Table 4.3 International Environmental Treaties And Conventions

Ratified by St. Lucia

Subject Title Summary Information

Hazardous Wastes

Basel Convention on the Control of Trans-boundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal

Opened for signature - 22 March 1989 Entered into force - 5 May 1992

objective - to reduce trans-boundary movements of wastes subject to the Convention to a minimum consistent with the environmentally sound and efficient management of such wastes; to minimize the amount and toxicity of wastes generated and ensure their environmentally sound management as closely as possible to the source of generation; and to assist LDCs in environmentally sound management of the hazardous and other wastes they generate.

Biodiversity

Convention on Biological Diversity

Opened for signature - 5 June 1992 Entered into force - 29 December 1993

objective - to develop national strategies for the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity.

Marine Life Conservation

Convention on Fishing and Conservation of Living Resources of the High Seas

Opened for signature - 29 April 1958 Entered into force - 20 March 1966

objective - to solve through international cooperation the problems


involved in the conservation of living resources of the high seas, considering that because of the development of modern technology some of these resources are in danger of being overexploited.

Endangered Species

Convention on the International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Flora and Fauna (CITES)

Opened for signature - 3 March 1973 Entered into force - 1 July 1975 objective - to protect certain endangered species from overexploitation by means of a system of import/export permits.

Marine Dumping

Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping Wastes and Other Matter (London Convention)

Opened for signature - 29 December 1972 Entered into force - 30 August 1975 objective - to control pollution of the sea by dumping and to encourage regional agreements supplementary to the Convention.

Environmental Modification

Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques

Opened for signature - 10 December 1976 Entered into force - 5 October 1978 objective - to prohibit the military or other hostile use of environmental modification techniques in order to further world peace and trust among nations.

Whaling

International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling

Opened for signature - 2 December 1946 Entered into force - 10 November 1948 objective - to protect all species of whales from over-hunting; to establish a system of international regulation for the whale fisheries to ensure proper conservation and development of whale stocks; and to safeguard for future generations the great natural resources represented by whale stocks.

Climate Change-Kyoto Protocol

Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

Opened for signature - 16 March 1998, but not yet in force objective - to further reduce greenhouse gas emissions by enhancing the national programs of developed countries aimed at this goal and by establishing percentage reduction targets for the developed countries.

Ozone Layer Protection

Montreal Protocol on Substances That Deplete the Ozone Layer

Opened for signature - 16 September 1987 Entered into force - 1 January 1989 objective - to protect the ozone layer by controlling emissions of substances that deplete it.

Ship Pollution

Protocol of 1978 Relating to the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution From Ships, 1973 (MARPOL)

Opened for signature - 17 February 1978 Entered into force - 2 October 1983 objective - to preserve the marine environment through the complete elimination of pollution by oil and other harmful substances and the minimization of accidental discharge of such substances.


Law of the Sea

United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (LOS)

Opened for signature - 10 December 1982 Entered into force - 16 November 1994 objective - to set up a comprehensive new legal regime for the sea and oceans; to include rules concerning environmental standards as well as enforcement provisions dealing with pollution of the marine environment.

Desertification

United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification in Those Countries Experiencing Serious Drought and/or Desertification, Particularly in Africa

Opened for signature - 14 October 1994 Entered into force - 26 December 1996 objective - to combat desertification and mitigate the effects of drought through national action programs that incorporate long-term strategies supported by international cooperation and partnership arrangements.

Climate Change United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

Opened for signature - 9 May 1992 Entered into force - 21 March 1994 objective - to achieve stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a low enough level to prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system.

5. DESCRIPTION OF ENVIRONMENT

5.1. Physical

5.1.1. General St. Lucia has an area of approximately 616 square kilometers, making it one of the largest islands in the Organization of East Caribbean States (OEC’S). The island lies between latitude 130 43’N and 140 07’N and longitude 600 53’W to 610 05’W and is approximately 43 km long by 22 km wide. The Atlantic Ocean washes the windward or eastern coast and the Caribbean Sea, the leeward or western coast of the island. Therefore, many of the sheltered bays and bathing beaches lie on the western coast of the island. The northwestern coast of the island, has been developed for tourism, light industry and housing. The island’s principal recreational beaches and yacht harbor are located along Rodney bay.

5.1.2. Topography The topography of the island could be described as mountainous. It has a central mountain ridge, known as the Barre de L'lsle, running parallel to the West Coast rising to a maximum elevation of 950 m at Mt. Gimie. All of the other mountain ridges rise to elevations below 400m.

Many rivers and streams cut the mountain ridges forming steep sided gullies and narrow valleys. Over half the island has slopes greater than 200 and more than 70% of the island has slopes over 10°. The island could be divided into 37 main watersheds. One such watershed in the upper reaches of the Roseau valley has been dammed to form the John Compton Dam and impounding reservoir that feeds the Theobalds Water Treatment Plant. This forms the largest water supply system on the island. The slopes created by mountain rises are steep and cuts are often unstable. When exposed these slopes are susceptible to landslide. On the coast, the rivers flow into narrow alluvial flood plains often forming small alluvial deltas.

5.1.3. Climate St. Lucia enjoys a tropical climate with little annual or diurnal variation in temperature. Maximum daily temperatures ranges between 30 to 33 C with minimums ranging between 16 to 21 C. Rainfall distribution across the island varies considerably. The total annual rainfall is approximately 1,200 mm at the northern and southern ends of the island, the dry regions. Higher amounts are realized in the central mountains owing to orographic effect and reaches up to 3,500 mm near Mt. Gimie. Although the distribution of rainfall across the island is variable, the pattern of rainfall across the island is the same. There is a dry season that runs from January to June and a wet season from June to December. The island is vulnerable to hurricanes and the hurricane season runs from June to November.

5.1.4. Geology Almost all of St. Lucia is composed of volcanic rocks of Tertiary to Quaternary age. Radiocarbon dating gives the last volcanic eruptive phase at some 30,000 to 40,000 years ago although, at present, there are signs of volcanic activity at the sulphur springs at Soufriere on the West Coast. The oldest rocks are found mainly in the region north of an imaginary line joining the Cul de Sac Valley to Grand Anse Bay. A central series of younger rocks forms the main mountain mass with a third younger series in the south and southwest centered on 8 Soufriere. In the south, around Vieux Fort, the rocks are older, and comparable to the northern series. The rocks of the northern series, north of the Barre de L'isle systern, are mainly basaltic and comprise lava flows, agglomerates and mudflows. Andesites also occur in this area. Agglomerates formed by explosive eruption of volcanoes and consisting of a mixture of boulders, cobbles and ash are also found in the northern area. Where there are no gravelsized particles, the deposit is an ash. If the ash is consolidated, a luff is formed. Tuffs are not widespread in the northern part of the Island.

Mudflows are found resembling agglomerates, but consisting of boulders in a matrix. These boulders are sometimes large. The central area, corresponding to the Barre de L’lsle land system contains hard columnar andesites. Towards the East Coast, the rock consists mainly of andesitic agglomerates and ashes and are similar to those found in Anse La Raye on the West Coast. At the southern border of the central series, basaltic rocks occur in the Mt. Gimie and Piton St. Esprit systems. Andesitic agglomerates are also found north of Soufriere but, also occur further south. To the south and east of Soufriere the main deposit is a pumice flow, consisting of a loose light-colored porous sandy deposit. Regarding earthquakes, the island lies on the western margin of the Caribbean tectonic plate and is seismically active. Earthquakes occur with regularity but seldom reach magnitudes sufficient to produce damage.

5.2. BIOLOGICAL

5.2.1. Environmental Features Variations in altitude, rainfall and soil characteristics have contributed to the wide variety of vegetation cover of St. Lucia that ranges from tropical wet forest, tropical dry forest; tropical moist forest, sub-tropical moist forest to sub-tropical rain forest and wetlands. Approximately 43% of the island’s coverage falls under the category of tropical wet forest. It is estimated that the rate of deforestation is approximately 1.9% per annum. By 1988 St. Lucia had lost up to 40% of its wetlands through reclamation and other forms of physical land transformation.

5.2.2. Habitats The variation in vegetation cover is matched by great heterogeneity of habitats and ecosystems. In the coastal zone areas, the ecosystems comprise mangroves, sea grass beds, coral reefs and sandy beaches. According to Devaux, Rj., 3 in the terrestrial environment, the diversity continues with wetlands; varying vegetation zones; riverine ecosystems and ecosystems created by micro-climatic, edaphic and other factors in valleys, canyons and on mountains. The northern end of the island supports a dry forest ecology composed of acacia and related species. Of particular note is the plight of the endangered Jacquot (St. Lucia Parrot) which has its habitat in the mountainous tropical wet forest areas. The John Compton Dam was built within the natural habitat of Jacquot. As part of the environmental mitigation measures for that project, a plan was successfully put in place for the protection of this natural

treasure of St. Lucia. There is no evidence to suggest that the construction of the dam significantly affected the population of the bird.

5.2.3. Protected areas St. Lucia has designated a number of sites across the island as protected areas. These protected areas have been put under special management status to ensure that the resources they contain are maintained and made accessible for sustainable uses compatible with conservation requirements. The first protected area in St. Lucia dates back to 1916 when the Castries Waterworks Reserve was set up. This reserve now forms part of the St. Lucia Forest Reserve. Since that time, Other protected areas comprising archaeological and historic sites; and marine, nature and forest reserves have been established. A full listing together with annotated maps of St. Lucia", protected areas can be found in the publication ’A System of Protected Areas for St. Lucia’ put out by the SLNT in 1992. Pigeon Island, located on the western north coast is the site of a colonial fort and enjoys national park status as a cultural historic site.

5.2.4. Endangered Species Eight internationally recognized endangered species are noted for St. Lucia under the Convention for Trade in Endangered Species CITES. Aside from the St. Lucian parrot and the Peregrine Falcon, the remaining extant species, presented in table 5.0, are reptiles. Notably the majority are marine turtles with their attendant critical habitat requirements. These include feeding grounds, nesting beaches, and other requirements relating directly to marine water quality.

Note: 1. Annexes I, II and III list the species covered by the Convention and may be amended pursuant to Articles XV (Appendices I and II) and XVI (Appendix III). a). Appendix I includes all species threatened with extinction which are or may be affected by trade. Trade in specimens of these species must be subject to particularly strict regulation in order not to endanger further their survival and must only be authorized in exceptional circumstances.

Table 5.0 St. Lucia Appendix 1

CITES Endangered Species

Group Scientific Name Common Name Caretta caretta Loggerhead Turtle Chelonian mydas Green Turtle Eretmochelys imbricata Hawksbill Turtle Dermochelys coriacea Leatherback Turtle

Reptiles

Boa constrictor Boa Constrictor Mammals Megaptera novaeangliae Humpback Whale

Amazonia versicolor

St. Lucian Parrot Birds

Falco peregrinus Peregrine Falcon

5.2.5. IUCN Red List In addition to the species listed under CITES, the IUCN* (the World Conservation Union), maintains a separate list of species it deems endangered, threatened or of special concern. While the listing carries no regulatory or legal force it is the result of a rigorous application of scientific criteria and peer review and compliments the CITES listing by considering those species not necessarily threatened by trade or commerce. The criteria for listing are presented in appendix I. In St. Lucia and its adjacent marine environment, there are 27 species listed as vulnerable or endangered including birds, mammals, reptiles, fish and plants. Presented in table 5.1, the majority of the species are listed due to the general decline in populations as a result of habitat loss and changes in habitat quality. These are largely due to human interactions through development and economic pressures. Over half of those species listed are marine wildlife largely dependent on nearshore and reef environments. Of particular interest is the White-Breasted Thrasher, Ramphocinclus brachyurus. By IUCN criteria this species is considered endangered and depends on the dry forest habitats found on the island. The northern portion of St. Lucia supports this species however development is threatening this habitat. Presently, land planning efforts have done little to assist in managing the remaining habitats in this portion of the island *(Formerly International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN))

Table 5.1 St. Lucia IUCN Redlist of Species of Concern

Group Scientific Name Common Name(s) Red List Status

Amazona versicolor

SAINT LUCIA AMAZON (E) SAINT LUCIA PARROT (E) ST LUCIA AMAZON (E) ST LUCIA PARROT (E)

VULNERABLE

Cichlherminia lherminieri

FOREST THRUSH (E)

VULNERABLE

Leucopeza semperi

SEMPER’S WARBLER (E)

CRITICALLY ENDANGERED

Melanospiza richardsoni

ST LUCIA BLACK FINCH (E)

ENDANGERED

BIRDS

Ramphocinclus brachyurus

WHITE-BREASTED THRASHER (E)

ENDANGERED


Megalomys luciae

SANTA LUCIA GIANT RICE RAT (E)

EXTINCT

MAMMALS

Megalomys luciae

BUNCH (E) HUMP WHALE (E) HUMPBACK WHALE (E) HUNCHBACKED WHALE (E)

VULNERABLE

Scarus guacamaia

RAINBOW PARROTFISH (E)

ENDANGERED

Epinephelus striatus

NASSAU GROUPER (E) CHERNA CRIOLLA (S)

VULNERABLE

Balistes vetula

QUEEN TRIGGERFISH (E)

VULNERABLE

Carcharodon carcharias

GREAT WHITE SHARK (E)

VULNERABLE

Lachnolaimus maximus

HOGFISH (E)

VULNERABLE

Lutjanus analis

MUTTON SNAPPER (E)

VULNERABLE

Lutjanus cyanopterus

CUBERA SNAPPER (E)

VULNERABLE

Dermatolepis inermis

MARBLED GROUPER (E)


FISH

Epinephelus itajara

GOLIATH GROUPER (E) JEWFISH (E)


Dermochelys coriacea

LEATHERBACK (E) LEATHERY TURTLE (E) LUTH (E)

CRITICALLY

Eretmochelys imbricata

HAWKSBILL TURTLE (E)

ENDANGERED

Caretta caretta

LOGGERHEAD (E)

ENDANGERED

REPTILES Chelonia mydas

GREEN TURTLE (E)

ENDANGERED


Liophis ornatus

ST LUCIA RACER (E)

VULNERABLE

Cnemidophorus vanzoi ST LUCIA WHIPTAIL (E)

VULNERABLE

Juniperus barbadensis

No common name ENDANGERED

Pouteria pallida

No common name VULNERABLE

Pouteria semecarpifolia

No common name ENDANGERED

Swietenia mahagoni

AMERICAN MAHOGANY (E)CUBAN MAHOGANY (E) SMALL-LEAVED MAHOGANY (E) WEST INDIAN MAHOGANY (E)

VULNERABLE

PLANTS

Cedrela odorata

CIGAR-BOX WOOD (E) RED CEDAR (E) SPANISH CEDAR (E)

**EXTINCT (EX) - A taxon is Extinct when there is no reasonable doubt that the last individual has died. CRITICALLY ENDANGERED (CR) - A taxon is Critically Endangered when it is facing an extremely high risk of extinction in the wild in the immediate future, as defined by any of the criteria (A to E) as described Appendix I. ENDANGERED (EN) - A taxon is Endangered when it is not Critically Endangered but is facing a very high risk of extinction in the wild in the near future, as defined by any of the criteria (A to E) as described Appendix I. VULNERABLE (VU) - A taxon is Vulnerable when it is not Critically Endangered or Endangered but is facing a high risk of extinction in the wild in the medium-term future, as defined by any of the criteria (A to E) as described in Appendix I.

5.3. Socioeconomic The Government Statistics Department estimates the current population at 156,260 with a growth rate at 1.21% per annum. The capital city, Castries, with a population density of 710 persons per sq. km is the most densely populated area in St. Lucia. Other areas of high to moderately high population densities include Vieux Fort in the south of the island and Gros Islet to the northwest. The Gros Islet area the area of highest tourism infrastructure.

5.3.1. Economic Conditions Notwithstanding its small land area, exacerbated by its rugged terrain; its small population; and limited natural resource base; St. Lucia’s economy could be regarded as having performed well over the last two decades fueled by activity in the agricultural and tourism sectors.

The country’s fertile volcanic soils have provided the resource base for a vibrant agricultural sector. This sector, which is dominated by banana production, has, between 1995 to 1999, contributed an annual average of 8.5% of GDP. However a combination of:

• Recent changes in the European Union’s import preference regime and increased competition from Latin American bananas

• Unfavourable weather conditions

• Efforts by GOSL for crop diversification

have contributed to a steady decline in banana output and farmers leaving the industry. The island’s natural beauty and long expanses of white sandy beaches, has been exploited in support of tourism. The tourism sector (as measured by the hotel and restaurant sub-sector) has. between 1995 to 1999. contributed an average of 18.5% of GDP. Total visitor arrivals continue to grow at an average rate of 3.5% per annum. In 1999, St. Lucia recorded a modest rate of inflation of 3.5%, the highest for the period 1996 to 1999. In keeping with worldwide trends, the country could be expected to maintain low rates of inflation in the short to medium term. Its average exchange rate which is set by the Eastern Caribbean Central Bank and has been fixed since 1976, is pegged at EC$2.7 per US$. On the whole, economic growth in St Lucia has been relatively slow in the period since 1995 (see Figure 5.1 below). GDP has grown at approximately 2.5 per cent per annum in real terms, with the exception of the period 2000-01 where growth was zero or negative. This compares with the 1980s when GDP growth was much higher at around 7 per cent per annum.

Figure 5.1 Real GDP growth, St Lucia, 1993-2003

6

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

GD

Pg

row

th(p

erce

nt)

Source: IMF Statistics and World Bank, World Development Indicators

This level of economic growth has not been enough to significantly reduce unemployment, which has remained at around 15-20 per cent, while per capita income has grown by a total of approximately 11 per cent in total in real terms since 1995 (see Figure 5.2 below).

Figure 5.2 Per capita income and unemployment

St Lucia, 1993-2002

0

5

10

15

20

25

1993199419951996199719981999200020012002

Unem

ploy

men

trat

e(p

erce

nt)

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

GNI

perc

apita

(EC

dolla

rs)

Unemployment

GNP per capita

Source: St Lucia Statistics Department

5.3.2. Factors influencing income distribution Figure 5.3 shows the level of unemployment in St Lucia since 1996. Over this period unemployment has fluctuated roughly between 15-20 per cent. In 2001, the last year for which figures are available, unemployment was marginally greater than in 1995.

Income distribution may also be affected by the level of growth in individual industrial sectors that are important employers for low income households. Perhaps the most significant structural shift in the economy since 1996 has been the decline in banana production as favorable market access conditions for banana exports have been removed. The total number of banana farmers has declined from 13,000 at the time of the 1996 Poverty Assessment Report to less than 3,000 today. This change has been reflected in the declining contribution of agriculture to GDP, which was around 11 per cent in 1995 falling to around 6 per cent in 2002. The decline in banana production and the number of banana farmers might have been expected to contribute to an increase in poverty since 1996. However, this is not necessarily the case. First, there were a significant number of marginal banana producers already living in poverty prior to the structural adjustment that has been observed in the industry. Second, whether poverty has increased will depend on whether the former banana producers have been able to find employment elsewhere in the economy, or whether there has been sufficient growth in other economic sectors to offset the decline in banana farming. At a macro-level, the unemployment figures would seem to indicate that the decline in banana farming has not shown up as a long term increase in the unemployment rate. Labor force participation has also been constant at around 69 per cent over the period 1997-2000 (indicating that former banana farmers have not left the labor force to become unemployed). Also, the total level of employment over 1997-2000 increased from 56,000 persons to 64,000 persons in 2000. It seems likely that growth in tourism prior to 2000 largely offset the impact of the decline in banana farming and minimized any impact from this structural shift in the distribution of income in St Lucia. Since 2000, there has been a slow down in the tourist trade, particularly since the events of 2001. This may have had some impact on low income households to the extent that hotels and other tourism related employers have had to reduce staff numbers. No quantitative data is available at this stage to assess this impact.

5.3.3. Average income by district Much of the commercial and tourism development is focused in the north of the island and, as a result, the administrative districts located in the northern region of the island might be expected to have significantly higher levels of income. This is generally true, with average income in Gros Islet (EC$3,069 per month) and Castries Suburban (EC$2,559 per month) significantly above the national average of EC$1,695 per month. That said, average monthly incomes in the remaining two administrative districts in the northern region (Castries City and Castries Rural), while significantly above the national average, are broadly similar to those in Viuex Fort, in the south of the island.

Table 5.2 shows average monthly income in each of St Lucia’s administrative districts and incorporates a map showing the location of each of these administrative districts (as well as population distribution on the island).

5.3.4. Access to water supply services Based on 2001 census data, 86 per cent of households in St Lucia report that their primary source of water (table 5.3) is supplied by WASCO through either a house connection, yard tap or standpipe. This figure may be closer to 90 per cent when illegal connections are taken into account. This is a significant increase compared to 1991 when around 80 per cent of households (including an allowance for illegal connections) reported that their primary water supply was from WASCO. In terms of absolute numbers, the number of households where WASCO is the primary water supplier (according to census data and without any allowance for illegal connections) increased from approximately 25,000 in 1991 to around 36,000 in 2001, an increase of around 11,000 households. There has also been a significant increase in the number of households with house connections or yard taps and a corresponding decline in the number of households served by standpipes. Between 1991 and 2001, the number of in-house or yard tap connections increased by approximately 17,000, while the number of households served by standpipes declined from around 9,000 (28 per cent of all households) to around 3,500 (8.5 per cent of all households). Based on data from WASCO’s customer database, estimates are that by end-2003 this figure had dropped to 3,000 (about 6 per cent of all households).

Table 5.2

Average Monthly Household Income By District (East Caribbean dollars per month)

District Number of

householdsAverage income (EC$ per month)

Gros Islet 5,794 3,069 Castries Suburban

7,659 2,559

Castries City 3,009 2,116 Castries Rural 6,389 2,013 Vieux Fort 4,159 1,974 Soufriere 1,827 1,763 Micoud 4,461 1,716 Laborie 1,971 1,680 Anse La Raye 1,733 1,556 Canaries 537 1,553 Choiseul 1,674 1,510 Dennery 3,485 1,501 National average

1,695

Source: St Lucia Population and Housing Census, 2001; St Lucia map courtesy of St Lucia Statistics Department

A number of factors have contributed to the significant increase (between 1991 to 2001) in the number of households being served by WASCO, particularly through house connections or yard taps. One factor has been the decline in private water systems. Apparently a number of private water systems, perhaps related to the operation of various banana plantations, were transferred to WASCO management over this period. Other factors contributing to the increase in yard tap or house connections over this period include:

• Free connections policy instituted for a limited period following WASA’s conversion to WASCO in 1999

• Investments in network infrastructure initiated and partly financed by PRF and

BNTF over this period;

• Network investment initiated by WASCO on its own over this period; and government policy to eliminate standpipes.

Table 5.3

Sources of Water Supply, St Lucia

1991 2001 Number Proportion

(%) Number Proportion

(%) Private piped into dwelling

5351 16.2 1001 2.4

Private catchment not piped

697 2.1 491 1.2

Private catchment piped 245 0.6 Public piped into dwelling

10444 31.6 24221 58.4

Public piped into yard 4917 14.9 8070 19.5 Public standpipe 9361 28.3 3517 8.5 Public well or tank 226 0.7 138 0.3 Other 2083 6.3 2909 7.0 Not stated 889 2.1 Total 33079 100.0 41481 100.0 Source: Government of St Lucia, Ministry of Social Transformation, Culture and Local Government, Interim Poverty Reduction Strategy and Action Plan for St Lucia, 2003 drawing on Population and Housing Census, 1991 and Preliminary Population and Housing Census, 2001.

The ‘other’ category identified in table 5.3 is likely to include households that collect and store rainwater, self abstract from rivers, and may also include households obtaining water from relatives or neighbors with WASCO connections. WASCO considers that a large number of respondents in this category are also likely to have illegal connections. In the period since 2001, a review of WASCO customer records indicated that the trends have continued. In particular, the number of households depending on standpipes has declined from 3,500 in 2001 to an estimated 3,000 in 2003. The number of households directly connected to the WASCO network has also continued to increase. Table 5.4 provides details of settlements in St Lucia with more than 50 households reporting non-WASCO or ‘other’ water supply sources as their primary water supplier in the 2001 census. In 2001, 18 communities in St Lucia had more than 50 households that reported their primary source of water supply was either a private system, public tank or well, or ‘other’ water supply source. Half of the 18 communities are located in the Castries district. Six of the 18 communities (Ciceron, Morne Du Don, Victoria Street, Downing Street, Clark Street, Waterworks) are in predominantly urban areas. For these communities, the large number of ‘other’ water supplies may indicate a concentration of illegal connections

Table 5.4 Settlements in St Lucia with more than 50 households reporting non-WASCO or

‘other’ water supply sources

Settlement Households reporting non-WASCO water

supplies Total Private

supply, public tank, well

‘Other’ Number Proportion of

households

Castries - Bexon/Ravine Poisson

86 274 360 19%

Gros-Islet - Monchy/Vieux-Sucr 96 119 215 24% Castries – Babonneau/Fond Assau

76 123 199 15%

Castries - La Croix Maingot/Ba 70 42 112 28% Castries – Forestiere 41 61 102 57% Castries - Ciceron/Millenium 8 89 97 10% Castries - Morne Du Don 26 55 81 8% Vieux-Fort – Augier 27 49 76 12% Vieux-Fort – La Resource 7 67 74 17% Dennery - Village/Victoria Street

11 53 64 7%

Micoud - Village/Downing Street

8 55 63 9%

Castries - Cul De Sac/Ferrand 16 44 60 32% Anse-La-Raye – Jacmel 8 51 59 33% Micoud - Pierrot/Tet Morne 6 53 59 30% Castries – Marigot 33 23 56 31% Vieux-Fort - Town/Clark Street 8 48 56 8% Castries – Waterworks 54 1 55 41% Dennery - Au Leon 12 39 51 12% Source: Statistics Department, Population and Housing Census data, 2001

5.3.5. Water expenditure by low income households The amount that each household spends on water is determined by their volume of water consumption (if they are metered) or the number of household occupants (if they are un-metered). A lack of relevant survey data means that it is not possible to generalize as to whether low income households are metered or un-metered or, if metered, the volume of their consumption. As a result a number of different billing scenarios for low income households have been considered. The three billing scenarios examined, presented in table 5.5 are that: the household water bill paid by a low income household is at the average level for the district; the household water bill paid by a low income household is the minimum bill for a metered customer (i.e. EC$14.70 per month); and the household

water bill paid by a low income household is the minimum bill for an un-metered customer with five household occupants (i.e. EC$37.05 per month).

Table 5.5 Water expenditure as proportion of household

expenditure for low income households

District

Scenario 1 Average water

billa

(% of household income)

Scenario 2 Minimum water bill for a metered

household


Scenario 3 Water bill for 5

person, unmetered household


Anse La Raye

3.7-4.8% 1.6-2.1% 4.1-5.3%

Canaries 3.9-5.1% 2.0-2.6% 5.1-6.6% Castries 2.8-3.7% 1.3-1.7% 3.3-4.3% Choiseul 4.4-5.7% 2.5-3.2% 6.2-8.1% Dennery 3.0-3.9% 1.9-2.5% 4.8-6.3%

Gros Islet 3.8-5.0% 1.5-1.9% 3.7-4.8% Laborie 4.2-5.4% 2.1-2.7% 5.3-6.8% Micoud 3.4-4.4% 1.9-2.5% 4.8-6.3%

Soufriere 2.3-3.0% 1.3-1.7% 3.3-4.3% Vieux Fort 3.7-4.8% 1.6-2.1% 4.0-5.2% National Average

3.4-4.4% 1.6-2.1% 4.0-5.2%

a Average household water bill for each the administrative districts was calculated using WASCO’s billing records.

6. ANALYSIS OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION

6.1. Summary Overview The urgent need to improve the availability of good quality drinking water in the northern section of St. Lucia is obvious. Current inadequacies of the distribution system coupled with the demands for growth in the region are placing increasing pressure on the distribution system. The ability to service all population segments is a priority with the greatest benefit going to low income families. At risk groups include children under 5 and the elderly. These groups will realize a greater proportional benefit from improved access to public water supplies. The impacts associated with both alternatives differ

widely given the technologies involved and the users served by the two options. Both options will result in induced development in the extreme northern service area (Rodney Bay, Grose Islet) as pent-up development demand is currently frustrated due to lack of water. Numerous communities have been designed and laid-out with supporting infrastructure but are not developing due to poor land sales. There are also plans for the construction of no less than 4 new hotel complexes in the region. Generally, impacts associated with the first alternative – Capacity improvement, are related to construction activities at the work site. Only those portions of the project involving the construction of new pipelines will affect the community at large as these works will require access to private lands. Those works to occur in public roadways present additional but manageable impacts. The greatest positive impact associated with this option is that it improves the ability to provide a reliable supply of potable water throughout the Theobolds WTP service area and reaches into low income communities where service is poor or non-existent. These are the groups least able to afford developing alternative sources to public water supply. While this option will result in the continued development of the extreme northern service area, the infrastructure and current supply are adequate to meet the current and anticipated future demand. The second option, the Desal-plant, provides water only to a specific section of the Theobolds WTP area. While it would relieve the system of short term demands emanating from that area, it would not permit the other improvements necessary to reliably supply water throughout the Theobolds WTP service area. Aside from the greatly increased costs of water production, the desal option contains a variety of other environmental consequences. These include for example, aesthetic issues, management of seawater intake and brine discharge, chemical pollutants, ecological and marine habitat concerns, issues associated with endangered species and increased energy demands. Furthermore, it is clear, given the pressure for growth in the plants service region, that the demand on the system will quickly increase as new construction begins again in the belief that water is readily available. Finally, the service area for the desal plant represents one of the highest income areas of the island where the average household income is nearly double the national average. This indicates that the direct benefits of this option will not be distributed among the middle to lower income brackets more prevalent in the greater northern service area. The additional cost associated with the production of desalinated water would not be borne by the local service area but would necessarily be folded into the general cost of WASCO water production. Paying for this additional cost would have to be distributed across the entire population through the entire system. Absent a special use fee for the service area, the result is a form of water subsidy for the most affluent portion of the country. Of the two options, option 1, Capacity upgrade, produces the greatest long-term benefit for the entire service area and addresses the total water demand over the next 10 – 15 years. The capacity upgrades clearly meet the long term growth requirements of the

northern section with greater reliability, lower cost, and fewer significant direct environmental impacts than the desal option. Neither alternative has constructions planned in an area suspected of containing undiscovered artifacts or areas of cultural-historical significance.

6.2. Alternative 1 – Improve Capacity of Existing System (Capacity Improvement)

Under this alternative, impacts are considered for the following four capacity improvement program components:

• John Compton Dam Pumping Upgrade

• Removal of Vanard-Sarot Bottleneck

• Expansion of the Theobalds Water Treatment Plant (WTP)

• Upgrade of Morne-Bocage Distribution Line

Negative impacts are generally restricted directly to the construction sites and are limited to the construction phase of the program. At the John Compton dam, works involve the replacement of existing equipment and require no additional intervention in the area beyond the existing facility. These are basically maintenance upgrades and involve the removal and installation of pipes and machinery. While the entire program will result in the increase availability of raw water to the system, the upgrades are within the water sector development initiative plans and well within the planned parameters of the long term design capacity of the reservoir. For this reason, further environmental analysis of equipment upgrades is not necessary. The remaining three components are discussed in the following.

6.2.1. Removal of Vanard-Sarot Bottleneck This element involves two components. The installation of 1300 m of 24 inch pipe and the replacement of joint restraints on existing lines. The replacement of restraints is a maintenance function with no significant impacts associated with the process. The result is wholly beneficial to the system as it improves the survivability of pipe connections when exposed to flood or earthquake forces.

The installation of 1300 meters of 24 inch pipe does have significant negative environmental consequences associated with the works. These however are reversible and limited to the construction phase. Impacts expected from the pipe installation include:

• Temporary loss of crops and use of agricultural land at the construction site

• Potential for soil erosion

• Worker sanitation management

• Interdiction of public roadways

• Possible contamination of work sites with fuels and hazardous materials.

• Pollution from construction wastes

• Noise from construction activities

• Dust control issues

• Discovery of cultural-historical antiquities

• Standing water and disease vector production

As the works are planned, no permanent modification to the landscape is expected and no natural areas will be intervened during the project. Finally, the routing of the new pipeline was chosen so that no persons or structures will require relocation.

6.2.2. Expansion of the Theobalds Water Treatment Plant (WTP) The Theobalds WTP was originally designed to accommodate two treatment units and a sludge dewatering tank. During the first phase of construction, space was set aside for the location of the sister unit within the WTP property. Land has already been prepared for the construction. As the entire system was originally designed to achieve the treatment throughput the additional unit will provide, there is no additional design demand being placed on the raw water supply. With this addition, the system will be brought up to 100% operational performance in accordance with original designs. Environmental impacts are limited to those associated with construction and include:

• Worker sanitation

• Disposal of construction wastes

• Use and storage of fuels during construction

• Management of hazardous materials and hazardous wastes during construction

• Site management and erosion control.



The area is fenced and self contained. A positive direct impact of the project element is the elimination of the practice of discharging backwash water directly to a stream off property. With the additional facilities, provisions will be made for sludge drying and disposal will be managed using the local landfill. Of course, the major positive social benefit is the contribution of this element to the overall strategy for doubling the volume of available treatment capacity for improved service and distribution. As part of the long term strategy, this upgrade will meet the forecast demands into the year 2015.

6.2.3. Upgrade of Morne-Bocage Distribution Line This component will provide for the installation of :

• New Ciceron Pump Station at Theobalds WTP

• New dedicated 12” Pumping Main

• New 200,000 Imperial Gallon (Igal) tank at Morne Fortune

• New 12” gravity main, 4900m

• New 100,000 Imperial gallon (Igal) tank at Babonneau The Ciceron pump station is to be located in the same area as the existing pump station at the Theobalds WTP. It is essentially a rehabilitation fo the exsting facility. The remaining works will have the same basic impacts as envisioned for the installation of the Vanard – Sarot line. Negative impacts are generally limited to the construction phase and include:





• Pollution form construction wastes





Sites chosen for tank installation are already occupied by older, smaller tanks therefore no new land will be required for those constructions. Pipes, as with Vanard – Sarot will follow existing roadway alignments. The principal impact associated with this is the possible interdiction of access through the affected communities. This is particularly important as essential services could be disrupted.

6.2.4. Summary of Impacts Taken together, the suite of projects are socially important and beneficial. The improvements in distribution and treatment supply provide benefits across the social spectrum in the service area. These works will:

• Improve health and welfare for the service region through improved potable water supply

• Reduce the need for the purchase of expensive bottled water particularly

beneficial to lower income groups.

• Differentially benefit populations at risk from water borne disease such as the elderly and children under 5

• Assist with reducing the overall reliance private storage tanks (which are beyond

the economic reach of low income groups)

• Improve the quality of treated water through improved treatment capacity

• Add distribution capacity to those currently not on the public water system Negative impacts are largely related to the construction phase and include:





• Pollution form construction wastes





A lingering issue is the anticipated growth for the Grose Islet – Rodney Bay service area. There is no doubt that once water becomes reliably available that pent-up development demand will become unrestrained. While not an issue in terms of WASCO functions, this development will greatly alter the landscape impacting other public services and the remaining dry forest habitats of the area. This issue goes beyond the scope of WASCO’s programs and will require pro active involvement on the part of the Ministry of Planning to manage in a balanced manner.

6.2.5. Mitigation Measures The mitigation of direct impacts associated with the capacity expansion option are relatively simple and straightforward. The direct impacts are related to construction, compensation, and short-term impediments to transportation. These are managed by:

• Improved communication with the public

• Strong planning and coordination with emergency services and Ministry of Works

• Site management plans

• Enforcement and inspection through contract vehicles

Specific mitigations are outlined in table 6.0 and pertain to the construction phase of the works contemplated. To implement these requirements, a series of draft

contract clauses have been developed and are presented in Appendix II. The use of these clauses is presented in the following section, Environmental Management Plan.

Impact Mitigation

Potential for soil erosion

Stabilize banks of excavations, erect erosion control barriers where necessary, cover removed soil and re-vegetate excavations when work is complete

Worker sanitation management

Provide sanitary facilities at the construction site or make arrangements for the use of existing sanitary facilities

Interdiction of public roadways

Informed the public through press releases and community meetings of planned works, coordinate with emergency services to assure no loss in community coverage, Coordinate with Min. Works to re-surface roads in a timely fashion, Plan works in order to minimize blockages and to facilitate traffic flows in general and around local traffic patterns

Possible contamination of work sites with fuels and hazardous materials.

Control or limit the use of hazardous materials substituting materials with less hazardous products, Provide for the safe storage and use of hazardous materials through protected storage and worker training, Provide for the safe disposal of used hazardous materials in accordance with St. Lucian law. Use existing commercial fueling stations, Provide for the secure storage of fuel supplies in the field, locate fueling areas away from environmentally sensitive areas such

Saint Lucia Water Supply Infrastructure Improvement Project€¦ · The urgent need to improve the...

Documents

Transcript of Saint Lucia Water Supply Infrastructure Improvement Project€¦ · The urgent need to improve the...

Water Protection in Cooperation with Agriculture · this approach. This brochure hopes to encourage the more widespread use of water-friendly measures and highlight the fact that

Comparative Study for the Defluoridation of Water by ...

Lucia Molinu - hal.archives-ouvertes.fr

Book lucia iraci oqvs

APPLICATION OF GIS FOR THE DESIGN OF POTABLE WATER ... · distribution system of potable water using geospatial tools in near-real time scenario. The GIS framework for water distribution

Multiple subglacial water bodies below the South Pole of ...

APPENDICES - Springer › content › pdf › bbm:978-1-349-08670...the Queen Marguerite 16 Les Huguenots the Queen 20 Lucia di Lammermoor Lucia 27 Faust Marguerite 30 concert Gala.

Appeal from District Court, Water Division 1 · Appeal from District Court, Water Division 1 Honorable James F. Hartmann Case No. 03CW99 CONCERNING THE APPLICATION FOR WATER RIGHTS

Introduction to Clouds Introduction to Clouds · up into cold air! Introduction to Clouds Introduction to Clouds The Earth’s Water Cycle The water on Earth is always on the move,

Règlement – Saison · PDF fileBeat: 900 m right bank on both sides of the confluence with the Red Water 900 m left bank on both sides of the confluence with the Red Water. GPS :

WATER SOFTENER ADOUCISSEUR D’EAU · The water softener will not purify polluted water or make it safe to drink! • Installation of the water softener should only be undertaken

L'EAU EN FRANCE Water in france. LES CÔTES FRANÇAISES The french coasts.

Water Purification System - Aqualytic · 2015. 5. 13. · Inspire the next generation of water purification system Reliable work! Integrated feedwater check Good quality feedwater

EN Installation & Operating Instructions WATER SOFTENER FR ...€¦ · slight discoloration of the treated water might occur. This is totally harmless and will disappear rapidly!

The Step2 Company, LLC. Water Table Streetsboro, …...1 7794 Paw Patrol Water Table For assistance or replacement parts please contact : The Step2 Company, LLC. 10010 Aurora-Hudson

The Herschel-Heterodyne Instrument for the Far-Infrared ... · and Observations of red-shifted [CII]. 2.1 Observations of Water Water is a key ingredient in many environments, including

The Efficient Use of Water in Irrigation - World Bankdocuments.worldbank.org/curated/en/... · The Efficient Use of Water in Irrigation Principles and Practices for Improving Irrigation

Application of the metabolic scaling theory and water–energy ...sites.bu.edu/cliveg/files/2016/08/Choi-asrl-geb-2016.pdfApplication of the metabolic scaling theory and water–energy

Lucia de Anna

These de Lucia