GEF-6 REQUEST FOR PROJECT ENDORSEMENT/APPROVAL PROJECT TYPE: Full-sized Project TYPE OF TRUST FUND:GEF Trust Fund For more information about GEF, visit TheGEF.org PART I: PROJECT INFORMATION Project Title: Promotion of Waste-to-Energy (WTE) options for sustainable urban management in the Democratic Republic of the Congo Country(ies): Democratic Republic of the Congo GEF Project ID:1 9683 GEF Agency(ies): UNIDO GEF Agency Project ID: 150127 Other Executing Partner(s): 1. Ministry of Industry Submission Date: 2. Industrial Promotion Fund 3. Ministry of Energy and Water Resources 4. Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development 5. Provincial Government of Kinshasa GEF Focal Area (s): Climate Change Project Duration (Months) 48 Integrated Approach Pilot IAP-Cities IAP-Commodities IAP-Food Security Corporate Program: SGP Name of Parent Program [if applicable] Agency Fee ($) 376,161 A. FOCAL AREA STRATEGY FRAMEWORK AND OTHER PROGRAM STRATEGIES2 (in $) Focal Area Trust Focal Area Outcomes GEF Project Co-financing Objectives/Programs Fund Financing CCM-1 Program 1 Promote Innovation, Technology Transfer and GEFTF 3,959,589 20,174,000 Supportive Policies and Strategies Total project costs 3,959,589 20,174,000 B. PROJECT DESCRIPTION SUMMARY Project Objective: To promote waste to energy technologies for sustainable waste management in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (in $) Project Finan GEF Confirmed Component Trust -cing Project Outcomes Project Outputs Project Co-financing s/ Fund Type3 Financin Programs g 1. Policy and TA 1.1 Strengthened policy and 1.1.1 Municipal solid waste GEFTF 125,000 45,000 regulation regulatory environment (MSW) assessment report development 1.1.2 Policies to enhance MSW and energy utilization drafted for the consideration and approval of the Government of DRC 2. TA 2.1 Development of an 2.1.1 Market review updated GEFTF 152,500 16,208,800 Establishment efficient waste collection and roadmap developed of a infrastructure and building 2.1.2 Improved design for a sustainable a supply chain for sorted waste collection and sorting waste wastes to become useful infrastructure deployed in collection and resources for energy Kinshasa sorting system production 2.1.4 Local businesses in Kinshasa capacitated in establishing collection and sorting 1 Project ID number remains the same as the assigned PIF number. 2 When completing Table A, refer to the excerpts on Error! Main Document Only.. 3 Financing type can be either investment or technical assistance. GEF6 CEO Endorsement /Approval Template – August 29, 2018 1 Project Objective: To promote waste to energy technologies for sustainable waste management in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (in $) Project Finan GEF Confirmed Component Trust -cing Project Outcomes Project Outputs Project Co-financing s/ Fund Type3 Financin Programs g infrastructure as a paid service Inv 2.1.3 Pilot material recovery GEFTF 837,500 950,000 facility (MRF) processing 250,000 t of wastes - investment initiated at selected waste transfer stations for waste collection and waste sorting 3. TA 3.1 Pilot Waste-to-energy 3.1.1 Feasibilities and business GEFTF 162,870 29,700 Demonstration (WTE) technologies in models developed for local of municipal industries implemented industries to utilize municipal waste to waste and waste from energy industries as energy sources technologies 3.1.2 Pilot investment 1: 1.35 MWel biomethanisation WTE plant co-fermenting municipal and industrial wastes in Inv GEFTF 1,352,500 1,100,000 industry 3.1.3 Pilot investment 2: utilization of 40,000 t of refuse derived fuels (RDF) processed at industrial facilities 3.1.4 Pilot investment 3: utilization 2,300 t of market wastes for production of bio- briquettes 4. TA 4.1 Potential for replication 4.1.1 Waste collection/sorting, GEFTF 75,800 115,000 Replication assessed WTE potential and business and scale up opportunities for replication projects assessed Inv GEFTF 710,000 1,385,000 4.1.2 Financing mechanism for scale-up of waste collection/sorting and WTE applications established TA 4.2 Capacity of key players 4.2.1 Training and capacity GEFTF 274,868 76,500 in municipal programs on waste collection, administration, target sorting and utilization of businesses/industries residues organized enhanced 4.2.2 Sharing of the best practices from other countries on MSW management, energy recovery and recycling 5. TA 5.1 Continuous monitoring 5.1.1 Terminal evaluation GEFTF 80,000 98,000 Monitoring and evaluation (M&E) of conducted & the implementation of the Evaluation GEF/UNIDO Project 5.2.1 Project's progress conducted in accordance monitored, documented and with established GEF and recommended actions formulated GEF6 CEO Endorsement /Approval Template – August 29, 2018 2 Project Objective: To promote waste to energy technologies for sustainable waste management in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (in $) Project Finan GEF Confirmed Component Trust -cing Project Outcomes Project Outputs Project Co-financing s/ Fund Type3 Financin Programs g UNIDO procedures and guidelines Subtotal 3,771,038 20,008,0000 Project Management Cost (PMC)4 GEFTF 188,551 166,000 Total project costs 3,959,589 20,174,000 C. CONFIRMED SOURCES OF CO-FINANCING FOR THE PROJECT BY NAME AND BY TYPE Please include evidence for co-financing for the project with this form. Sources of Co-financing Name of Co-financier Type of Cofinancing Amount ($) Private Sector Eagle Waste Solutions SARL In-kind 20,000,000 GEF Agency UNIDO Grants 84,000 GEF Agency UNIDO In-kind 90,000 Total Co-financing 20,174,000 D. TRUST FUND RESOURCES REQUESTED BY AGENCY(IES), COUNTRY(IES) AND THE PROGRAMMING OF FUNDS (in $) GEF Trust Country Programming of GEF Focal Area Agency Fund Name/Global Funds Project Agency Fee Total Financing a) (b)2 (c)=a+b (a) UNIDO GEF TF Democratic Climate Change (select as applicable) 3,959,589 376,161 4,335,750 Republic of Congo Total Grant Resources 3,959,589 376,161 4,335,750 a ) Refer to the Fee Policy for GEF Partner Agencies 4 For GEF Project Financing up to $2 million, PMC could be up to10% of the subtotal; above $2 million, PMC could be up to 5% of the subtotal. PMC should be charged proportionately to focal areas based on focal area project financing amount in Table D below. GEF6 CEO Endorsement /Approval Template – August 29, 2018 3 E. PROJECT’S TARGET CONTRIBUTIONS TO GEF 6 CORE INDICATORS Update the relevant sub-indicator values for this project using the methodologies indicated in the Core Indicator Worksheet (as used in GEF 7 Endorsement template – Annex E) and aggregating them in the table below. Progress in programming against these targets is updated at mid-term evaluation and at terminal evaluation. Achieved targets will be aggregated and reported any time during the replenishment period. There is no need to complete this table for climate adaptation projects financed solely through LDCF and SCCCF. Project Core Indicators Expected at CEO Endorsement 1 Terrestrial protected areas created or under improved management for conservation and sustainable use (Hectares) 2 Marine protected areas created or under improved management for conservation and sustainable use (Hectares) 3 Area of land restored (Hectares) 4 Area of landscapes under improved practices (excluding protected areas) (Hectares) 5 Area of marine habitat under improved practices (excluding protected areas) (Hectares) Total area under improved management (Hectares) 6 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Mitigated (metric tons of CO2e) 1,495,924 t CO2eq direct emission reductions achieved by EOP and indirect 1,340,139 t CO2eq after 20 years Total 2,893,572 t CO2eq 7 Number of shared water ecosystems (fresh or marine) under new or improved cooperative management 8 Globally over-exploited marine fisheries moved to more sustainable levels (metric tons) 9 Reduction, disposal/destruction, phase out, elimination and avoidance of chemicals of global concern and their waste in the environment and in processes, materials and products (metric tons of toxic chemicals reduced) 10 Reduction, avoidance of emissions of POPs to air from point and non-point sources (grams of toxic equivalent gTEQ) 11 Number of direct beneficiaries disaggregated by gender as co-benefit of GEF approximately 900,000 investment inhabitants, thereof 50% women Provide additional explanation on targets, other methodologies used, and other focal area specifics (i.e., Aichi targets in BD) including justification where core indicator targets are not provided. F. PROJECT TAXONOMY Please update the table below for the taxonomic information provided at PIF stage. Use the GEF Taxonomy Worksheet provided in Annex F to find the most relevant keywords/topics/themes that best describe the project. The taxonomic information required for this project is provided in Annex F. Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Influencing Models (multiple selection) (multiple selection) (multiple selection) Stakeholders (multiple selection) (multiple selection) (multiple selection) Capacity, Knowledge and Research (multiple selection) (multiple selection) (multiple selection) Gender Equality (multiple selection) (multiple selection) (multiple selection) Focal Area/Theme (multiple selection) (multiple selection) (multiple selection) Rio Markers (multiple selection) GEF6 CEO Endorsement /Approval Template – August 29, 2018 4 PART II: PROJECT JUSTIFICATION A. DESCRIBE ANY CHANGES IN ALIGNMENT WITH THE PROJECT DESIGN WITH THE ORIGINAL PIF5 This section provides additional information and details on the project design, complementing the PIF. The two main changes lie in a) the presidential elections and the subsequent still on-going government-level restructuring. As result, the discussions with the interim government during the PPG phase could be done on technical level only. While the subsequent orientation of the project has been discussed and endorsed during the various meetings and the validation workshop, the request for co-financing letters from the national and provincial government level are still pending, with the valid argument that the final binding commitments have to be executed once the final government will be inaugurated and the high-level government positions are nominated.