BC Application Rev0 PDF

ANNEX XXI
MAJOR PROJECT
REQUEST FOR CONFIRMATION OF ASSISTANCE UNDER ARTICLES 39 TO 41
OF REGULATION (EC) NO 1083/2006
EUROPEAN REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT FUND /
COHESION FUND
INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT
Extension and Rehabilitation of Water and Wastewater Infrastructure in
Bacau County, ROMANIA
CCI No [2009 RO 161 PR 015]
Table of Contents
A.
ADDRESSES AND REFERENCES
B.
PROJECT DETAILS
C.
RESULTS OF FEASIBILITY STUDIES
38
D.
TIMETABLE
49
E.
COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS
53
F.
ANALYSIS OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
69
G.
JUSTIFICATION FOR THE PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION
82
H.
FINANCING PLAN
83
I.
COMPATIBILITY WITH COMMUNITY POLICIES AND LAW
86
J.
ENDORSEMENT OF COMPETENT NATIONAL AUTHORITY
89
ANNEX I DECLARATION BY AUTHORITY RESPONSIBLE FOR MONITORING

NATURA 2000 SITES
ANNEX II PROJECT DETAILS
ANNEX III PROCUREMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
ANNEX IV LIST OF PERFORMANCE INDICATORS
ANNEX V LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
ANNEX VI CORRECTION PROTOCOL
ANNEX VII APPROVALS
ANNEX VIII FINANCIAL PLAN
ANNEX IX TARIFF ACTION PLAN
EN
EN
A.
ADDRESSES AND REFERENCES
A.1.
Authority responsible for the application (i.e., managing authority or

intermediate body)
A.1.1.
Name:
Ministry of Environment and Forests
A.1.2.
Address:
59-61 Justitiei Street, Sector 4, Bucarest
A.1.3.
Contact:
Florian Burnar
A.1.4.
Telephone: +40-21-316.67.00
A.1.5.
Telex/Fax: +40-21-316.67.78
A.1.6.
E-mail:
A.2.
Organisation responsible for project implementation (beneficiary)
A.2.1.
Name:
Compania Regionala de Apa Bacau CRAB
A.2.2.
Address:
Strada Narciselor, numarul 14, cod postal 600310, BACAU-ROMANIA
A.2.3.
Contact:
Mr. Razvan-Grigore Gaina
A.2.4.
Telephone: 0334 401 811
A.2.5.
Telex/Fax: 0234 551175
A.2.6.
E-mail:
B.
PROJECT DETAILS
B.1.
Title of project / project phase:
florian.burnar@mmediu.ro
manager@apabacau.ro
Extension and Rehabilitation of Water and Wastewater Infrastructure in

Bacau County, ROMANIA
B.2.
Categorisation of project activity1

Code
Percentage [%]
45
46
94
B.2.2. Code for the form of finance dimension
01
100
B.2.3. Code for the territorial dimension
01
05
93
B.2.4. Code for the economic activity dimension2
09
21
94
B.2.4.1. NACE Code3
E36, E 37
B.2.5. Code for the location dimension (NUTS/LAU)4
RO211
B.2.1. Code for the priority theme dimension
1
2
3
EN
Annex II to Regulation (EC) No 1828/2006 unless otherwise specified.

Where a project involves more than one economic activity, multiple codes may be indicated. In that case the
percentage share for each code should be indicated with the total not exceeding 100%.
NACE-Rev.2, 4 digit code: Regulation (EC) No 1893/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council
(OJ L 393, 30.12.2006, p.1).
EN
B.3.
Compatibility and coherence with the Operational Programme
B.3.1.
Title of the related Operational Programme:

Sectoral Operational Program ENVIRONMENT 2007-2013 SOP-ENV
B.3.2.
Common Code for Identification (CCI) No of Operational Programme

2007 RO 161 PO 004
B.3.3.
Fund
ERD F
B.3.4.
Cohesion Fund
Title of the priority axis

Priority Axis 1 Extension and modernization of water and wastewater infrastructure
B.4.
Project description
B.4.1.
Project (or project phase) description:

(a)
Provide a description of the project (or project phase).
The present project represents the first step of the Masterplan for development of water
infrastructure in Bacau County. The sector addressed by the present project is
Environment Part Water Supply and Wastewater Disposal. Beneficiary County is
Bacau County which is situated in the North-Eastern part of Romania, in the Moldova
Region.
The following terms are defined as follows:
Locality - Settlement parts of communes, usually clearly separated
Water Supply Zone Part of a Water Supply Area that is supplied by the same reservoir
or group of reservoirs.
Water Supply Area Water Supply Areas are geographical areas of uniform
characteristics like supply from the same main system, the same topographical
characteristics and with a size of approx. 5% 15% of the county
Agglomeration Sufficiently concentrated area for urban wastewater to be collected and
conducted to an urban wastewater treatment plant WWTP
Cluster Group of agglomerations which shall be served by a specific WWTP
Main deficiencies in water supply are bad quality, old and worn-out facilities, high losses
and unsupplied areas, main deficiencies in WW are infiltrations in the sewerage network
and the poor condition of both civil structures and electro-mechanical equipment of
wastewater treatment plants.
EN
Regulation (EC) No 1059/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ L 154, 21.6.2003, p. 1). Use the
most detailed and relevant NUTS code. Where a project affect multiple individual NUTS/LAU 2 level areas,
consider encoding the NUTS/LAU1 or higher codes.
EN
The selection of the priority investments took into account the requirements and
deadlines imposed by the Accession Treaty and priority has been given to the need to
ensure compliance for the agglomerations exceeding 10,000 p.e. or having the status of
an urban area. According to the Priority Investment List of the Masterplan, 8 urban
agglomerations have most stringent requirements and 6 of them were selected for
investments from CF. Finally 5 of participate in the CF Funding program (Bacau,
Moinesti, Buhushi, Darmanesti and Targu Ocna).
Total population
2008
2014
2018
2039
Bacau
197,013
195,142
193,993
183,710
Moinesti
23,902
23,641
23,483
22,178
Buhushi
19,644
19,429
19,299
18,227
Darmanesti
11,508
11,382
11,306
10,678
Targu Ocna
12,118
11,985
11,905
11,244
Total
264,184
261,579
259,986
246,036
They represent 37 % of the total county population = 722,000. The locations are shown in
the following map:
Buhushi
Moinesti
Bacau
Darmanesti
Targu Ocna
Onesti
EN
EN
According to the Accession Treaty, Romania has been granted transition periods for
compliance with the acquis for urban wastewater collection, treatment and discharge by
2015 for a number of 263 agglomerations of more than 10,000 population equivalent
(p.e.) and by 2018 in 2,346 agglomerations of between 2,000 and 10,000 p.e. Transitions
periods are also agreed for compliance with the Directive No 98/83/EC on drinking water
quality by 2015. All priority agglomerations have more than 10,000 p.e., or have the
status of a city. The proposed investments are intended to improve the current situation of
the selected agglomerations, both in water and wastewater sectors in order to comply
with the environmental acquis. It follows the provisions of the SOP to reduce the
environmental infrastructure gap between Romania and the EU. The achievement of the
objectives for the water and wastewater sector is realized through a process of
regionalization, meaning the implementation of an institutional framework within the
Project area, suitable to combine the water supply and wastewater services related to the
development areas in that region, within a common operating process. The
regionalization is a key element in improving the quality and cost efficiency of local
water infrastructure and services in order to fulfil environmental targets, but also to
assure sustainability of investments, of operations, of a long term water sector
development strategy and of regional balanced growth.
The investments are focused on the following components:
Water Supply: rehabilitation of water treatment plants, extensions of water distribution
networks, including metering.
Wastewater: extension of sewage networks, pumping stations and main collectors,
rehabilitation and construction of wastewater treatment plants.
The following table shows an overview of the WS measures for each priority WSZ:
Priority WSZ
Bacau
Sources
Treatment
Main pipes
Pumping
Stations
Reservoirs
Networks
Moinesti
Buhushi
Darmanesti
No water supply measures for Cohesion Fund
Targu Ocna
No water supply measures for Cohesion Fund

EExtension, RRehabilitation
EN
EN
The following table shows an overview of the WW measures for each agglomeration:
Wastewater
agglomeration
Main Collectors
Pumping Stations
WWTP
Networks
Bacau
--
Moinesti
--
E, R
Buhushi
--
Darmanesti
--
Targu Ocna
--
EExtension, RRehabilitation
The following table shows number and percentage of population that will have access to
water services before/after the project:
EFFECT OF
ROC EFFORTS
EFFECT OF CF PROJECT
Agglomeration
Water supply services

(years 2008 / 2015)
Wastewater services
(years 2008 / 2015)
Water Services
Nr.
Nr.
% / Year
Bacau
177,311/175,377
90 / 90
143,132/175,377
73/90
97 / 2013
Moinesti
20,317/21,242
84 / 90
16,060/21,242
67/90
97 / 2013
Buhushi
16,697/17,457
85 / 90
10,700/17,457
54/90
97 / 2013
Darmanesti
10,357/10,227
90 / 90
0/10,227
0/90
97 / 2013
Targu Ocna
11,754/11,606
97 / 97
6,544/10,769
54/90
97 / 2013
Currently, in Bacau County the institutional set up is under implementation: the IDA
created is ADI Bacau, the operating ROC is Compania Regionala de Apa Bacau
CRAB and the delegation contract will be signed in the near future.
The current connection rate to water services in the project area is 89% for water supply
and 64% for wastewater and shall be increased close to 100% in water supply sector and
in wastewater sector (90 % with CF project and 100 % with additional ROC efforts). 5 of
6 WWTP need extension (partly new WWTPs at other locations) and rehabilitation, the
WWTP Moinesti South is completely new.
The Project shows satisfactory financial and economic indicators with benefits exceeding
costs and no serious risks for a successful implementation and operation.
EN
EN
(b)
Where the project is a phase of an overall project, provide a description of the

proposed stages of implementation (explaining whether they are technically
and financially independent).
N/A
(c)
What criteria have been used to determine the division of the project into
phases?
N/A
B.4.2.
Technical description of the investment in infrastructure

(a)
Describe the proposed infrastructure and the work for which assistance is being
proposed specifying its main characteristics and component elements.
General
The project comprises water supply and wastewater investments in the 3 agglomerations
Bacau, Moinesti and Buhushi and only wastewater investments in the 2 agglomerations
Darmanesti and Targu Ocna due to financial constraints. The following table shows the
current service levels of these agglomerations:
Agglomeration
Service Level WS
Service Level WW
Bacau
90%
73%
Moinesti
84%
67%
Buhushi
85%
54%
Darmanesti
90%
0%
Targu Ocna
97%
54%
Total
89%
64%
In order to achieve connection rates of at least 90% extensions of the infrastructure are
proposed. The condition of the existing infrastructure is partly poor with old and obsolete
parts. Within the present Cohesion Fund Application the following components are
included:
1. Extension and rehabilitation of water and wastewater infrastructure in the
agglomeration Bacau
2. Extension and rehabilitation water and wastewater infrastructure in the agglomeration
Moinesti
3. Extension of water and wastewater infrastructure in the agglomeration Buhusi
4. Extension of wastewater infrastructure in the agglomeration Darmanesti
5. Extension of wastewater infrastructure in the agglomeration Targu Ocna
6. Technical Assistance and Supervision of Works
An overview of the investment costs (net investment in thousand Euro, constant rates) is
given in the following table
EN
EN
Item
Total County
Bacau
Moinesti
Buhusi
648
997
648
13,095
0
228
Water Supply
1.1
Water Abstraction
1.2
Water Treatment Plant
1.3
Water Main
1.4
Pumping Station, Reservoirs
1.5
Distribution Network
1,644
SUM WS
5,236
3,591
37,494
0
1,720
Wastewater
2.1
WWTP
2.2
Main Collector
2.3
Pumping Stations
2.4
Darmanesti
Targ u Ocna
997
7,960
7,450
5,027
3,962
176
442
532
342
0
0
3,591
3,591
Wastewater Network (incl pressure lines)
40,168
9,839
5,309
5,260
13,073
6,687
SUM WW
79,382
23,162
13,445
13,152
18,632
10,991
Total
84,618
26,754
14,093
14,148
18,632
10,991
Component 1: Extension and Rehabilitation of Water and Wastewater

Infrastructure in the Agglomeration BACAU
The works of these components are located inside the agglomeration Bacau except the
WTP Caraboaia, which is located in Darmanesti. With its population of 197,013
inhabitants (year 2008), the agglomeration of Bacau is the largest agglomeration in Bacau
county and situated in the middle of Bacau county.
An overview is shown in the following figure, red lines correspond to the agglomeration
= WSZ Bacau.
EN
EN
Water Supply
The main water source in the county of Bacau is the artificial Poiana Uzului Lake located
in the Carpathian mountains which has a volume of 90 Millions m. The untreated water
flows after passing a hydropower plant to the Water Treatment Plant Caraboaia, located
on approx. 420 m.a.s.l. nearby Darmanesti. There a coagulation and flocculation,
sedimentation, filtration and chlorination process take place. The treated water is
conducted by three transmission mains to cities in Bacau county.
The southern branch is approx. 29 km long and supplies Onesti and Targu Ocna as well
as several localities in between. The water flows by gravity.
The northern branch supplies Darmanesti, Moinesti as well as several other localities.
The third branch the largest with approx. 65 km passes its highest point in Moinesti and
supplies WSZ Bacau. Furthermore Bacau City has also additional groundwater sources.
To supply localities by the northern branch and as well as Bacau City the water is
pumped from WTP Caraboaia.
On the way to Bacau there is one additional chlorination station in locality Stejaru,
commune of Scorteni, approx. 17 km located in the east of Bacau City..
The Bacau Water Supply Zone includes a main reservoir at Barati with a storage capacity
of 20,000 m.
The water quantity is sufficient for the system including all connected localities. Judging
from the few available data, the water quality is not sufficient.
Measures of an ongoing ISPA project (No 2002 RO 16 P PE 018) consist of investments
concerning water supply sector, transport and treatment. A new main pipe from Poiana
Uzului including intake at the barrage and pumping station is planned to be built.
Furthermore a micro-hydro-power plant at Stejaru is in construction ( capacity max. 800
l/s ) and as well a new Water treatment Plant at RSV Barati is also under construction. By
this measure the groundwater sources shall only be used for industry.
The main deficiencies of Water Supply Zone Bacau are the water quality from existing
WTP and wellfields, high losses in networks and partly old and worn-out equipment.
The Cohesion Fund measures focus on the rehabilitation of the WTP Caraboaia in order
to improve the quality of the produced water. It was commonly agreed to include this
investment at the agglomeration Bacau, although this WTP will supply the
agglomerations Moinesti, Darmanesti and Targu Ocna in future while Bacau will be
supplied by a new WTP Barati (ongoing ISPA project)
1. Rehabilitation of the WTP Caraboaia
Rehabilitation of WTP Caraboaia will improve the general situation of the plant. Most
important measures to be executed there are replacement of M&E equipment (for filter
backwashing process), a new inflow metering and regulation chamber as well as a new
rapid mixing, coagulation and flocculation chamber. Water losses will decrease by
implementing facilities for sludge dewatering and a new treatment technology. Additional
Sludge dewatering facilities will cause water losses of approx. 7.8 m/d respectively
approx. 2,847 m/year (max. daily sludge: 12 t, dry solid : 35%) This sums up to approx.
0,11 per mill of water losses ( produced water : 69,120 m/d). Comparing to the year
2008 this would mean a saving of more than 1.8 million m raw water.
The existing production capacity of 800 l/s shall remain unchanged.
EN
EN
Wastewater
1. Wastewater Collection System
The sewer network in Bacau is a combined wastewater collection system. The system
consists of 138 km of sewers. The overall connection rate in the service area is 73 %.
The wastewater collection system and treatment system is presently owned and operated
by C.A.B. (former name: R.A.G.C. Bacau). A regional operation company for the County
of Bacau (CRAB Comania Regionala De Apa Bacau) has already been formed but is
not operating yet.
The extension of the wastewater collection system has been established together with
C.A.B. The sewers were sized taking into account the existing population and the
population in the area which will be connected to this network in the future years.
To achieve a connection rate of at least 90 % within this project, 42.5 km of sewer
extensions and 6 pumping stations are to be added to the existing wastewater collection
system.
2. Wastewater Treatment Plant
The WWTP Bacau is located at the south-eastern side of the agglomeration Bacau. The
whole agglomeration is served by one central plant.
The waste water treatment plant is under refurbishment, ISPA Project Number ISPA
/2002 RO 16 P PE 018 and will be extended on the established site within the current site
boundaries. Additional land purchase is not necessary. The proposed treatment concept
employs existing structures and equipment to utmost extent.
The resulting design flow data are presented in the following table.
Design Flow Data
Daily Flow
Qday,DW
Q24,DW
73,965
3,082
m/d
m/h
Maxi mum Dry Weather Flow
Qmax,DW
3,720
1,033
m/h
l/s
Maxi mum Design Flow
Qmax,Storm
5,899
1,638
m/h
l/s
Including industrial pollution loads the final design pollution loads will be as follows.
Design Pollution Loads
BOD5
210
mg/l
15,879
COD
421
mg/l
31,759
kg/d
SS
245
mg/l
18,526
kg/d
mg/l
kg/d
organic N
kg/d
NH4-N
35
mg/l
2,646
kg/d
NO3-N
mg/l
265
kg/d
Total N
39
mg/l
2,911
kg/d
mg/l
529
kg/d
Based on a specific BOD5 of 60 g/p.e./day the plant has a size of 241,000 p.e.
Consequently the following discharge effluent parameters as set out in the Urban
EN
10
EN
Wastewater Treatment Directive 91/271/EEC which has been implemented in the

Romanian standard NTPA 001 011 apply for the WWTP Bacau.
Extension of the mechanical treatment (screening station, grit and grease trap, inlet
flow meter, inlet pumping station, primary sedimentation tanks). Rehabilitation
measures comprise civil structures and electromechanical equipment.
Extension of the biological treatment (activated sludge tanks, blowers, return sludge
pumping station, excess sludge pumping station).
Extension of sludge treatment (anaerobic digesters, gas holding tank, cogeneration
unit).
Extension of sludge dewatering and storage facilities
The following table summarizes the proposed investments for component 1:
Measure
Quantity
WATER SUPPLY
Rehabilitation WTP Caraboaia
Investment [Euro]
3,591,286
1 pc
WASTEWATER
3,591,286
23,162,220
Network extension
42.5 km
9,826,850
WW Pumping Stations
6 pcs
228,000
Pressure Lines
0.15 km
12,000
WWTP Bacau
1 pc
13,095,370
Component 2: Extension and Rehabilitation of Water and Wastewater

Infrastructure in the Agglomeration Moinesti
The works of these components are located inside the agglomeration Moinesti which
includes the administrative area of the city of Moinesti. The population is 23,902 (year
2008) inhabitants.
= WSZ Moinesti.
EN
11
EN
Water Supply
Water from WTP Caraboaia is pumped approx. 20 km by a steel pipe DN 800 which
changes into two pipes (1x DN 300, 1x DN 400). The water goes first into the reservoirs
of PS Vasiesti located in the south of Moinesti, situated at approx. 420 m.a.s.l. From there
the water is pumped by two pipes DN 300 and DN 400, both made up of steel, to several
reservoirs. The pumping station Vasiesti is in bad condition and will be abandoned, the
existing new PS Vermesti will provide future supply.
The main deficiencies of Water Supply Zone Moinesti are the water quality from existing
WTP, high losses in networks and partly old and worn-out equipment.
The WTP is included in component 1, Cohesion Fund measures focus on the extensions
of the network in order to achieve a connection rate of 90%.
1. Network extensions
In the WSZ some streets will be connected to the existing water supply system. The
connection rate will increase from 84% to 90%.
Wastewater
Monesti has a separate wastewater collection system which is basically confined to the
City of Moinesti and has presently around 67 % connection rate in this service area.
EN
12
EN
The stormwater drainage system was built in 1984 and has a total length of 2.2 km. The
total sewer network is 11.7 km long, of which 2.9 km are main collectors. The sewer
network is currently owned and operated by Apa Prim. A regional operation company for
the County of Bacau (CRAB Comania Regionala De Apa Bacau) has already been
formed but is not operating yet.
Apa Prim. The sewers were sized taking into account the existing population and the
To increase the connection rate from 67 % to at least 90 % within this project, 21.2 km of
sewer extensions and 4 pumping stations are to be added to the existing wastewater
collection system.
The WWTP Moinesti is located at the middle of the agglomeration Moinesti close to
Tazlaul Sarat River. The agglomeration is served by two plants, WWTP Moinesti North
(existing) and WWTP Moinesti South (not existing yet) which must be located at the
southern end of the agglomeration. The existing WWTP is extended at the existing site,
to utmost extent within the current site boundaries. The proposed treatment concept
employs existing structures to a smaller extent.
The WWTP Moinesti South is located at the southern side of the agglomeration Moinesti.
The basic design parameters concerning the calculation of flows and loads are presented
in Chapter 8.3 of this Feasibility Study.
The resulting design flow data for WWTP Moinesti North are presented in the following
table.
Design Flow Data
Daily Flow
Qday,DW
Q24,DW
6,174
257
m/d
m/h
Qmax,DW
388
108
m/h
l/s
Qmax,Storm
666
185
m/h
l/s
Parameter
BOD5
COD
SS
organic N
NH4 -N
NO3-N
Total N
P

Loads
kg/d
1,531
3,061
1,786
0
254
27
281
105
Concentration
mg/l
242
483
282
0
40
4
44
17
Based on a specific BOD5 of 60 g/p.e./day the plant has a size of 25,500 p.e..
EN
13
EN

Romanian standard NTPA 001 011 apply for the WWTP Moinesti North.
Parameter
Plant Size
Effluent
Concentration
Minimum percentage
of reduction
p.e.
mg/l
BOD5
--
25
COD
--
125
SS
> 10,000
35
90
> 100,000 or sensitive areas
80
Total N (1)
> 100,000 or sensitive areas
10
70 - 80
The resulting design flow data for the WWTP Moinesti South are presented in the
following table.
Design Flow Data
Daily Flow
Qday,DW
Q24,DW
1,296
54
m/d
m/h
Qmax,DW
86
24
m/h
l/s
Qmax,Storm
157
44
m/h
l/s
Parameter
BOD5
COD
SS
organic N
NH4-N
NO3-N
Total N
P

Loads
kg/d
373
745
435
0
62
6
68
27
Concentration
mg/l
279
558
325
0
46
5
51
20
The investments proposed in this project mainly include but are not limited to the
following.
Construction/Rehabilitation of the mechanical treatment (screening station, grit and

grease trap, inlet flow meter, inlet pumping station, primary sedimentation tanks).
Rehabilitation measures comprise civil structures and electromechanical equipment.
Construction/Rehabilitation of the biological treatment (activated sludge tanks,
blowers, return sludge pumping station, excess sludge pumping station).
Construction/Rehabilitation and extension of sludge treatment (anaerobic digesters,
gas holding tank, cogeneration unit).
Construction/Rehabilitation and extension of sludge dewatering and storage facilities.
EN
14
EN
Measure
Quantity
WATER SUPPLY
Investment [Euro]
647,752
Network Extension
3.529 km
458,752
House Connections
315
189,000
WASTEWATER
13,445,037
Network Extension
21.2 km
5,019,938
WW Pumping Stations
4 pcs
176,000
Pressure Lines
3.6 km
288,800
Wastewater Treatment Plant
2 pcs
7,960,299
Component 3: Extension of Water and Wastewater Infrastructure in

the Agglomeration Buhusi
The works of these component are located inside the agglomeration Buhusi which
includes the administrative area of the city of Buhusi. The population is 19,644 (year
2008) inhabitants.
= WSZ Buhusi.
EN
15
EN
Water Supply
The Buhusi Water Supply Zone is fed by ground water sources. There are three
groundwater sources whereas only source Poiana Morii is usually in operation. The
sources Coscau and Bistrita are used additional in peak days when the demand of water is
very high
There are two RSVs and the total storage capacity sums up to 2,500 m. The water
quantity is sufficient for the system and even leaves additional capacity for the supply of
more people. Judging from the few available data, the water quality is also sufficient, but
nitrate levels are relative high and close to limit.
The main deficiencies of Water Supply Zone Buhusi are the high nitrate levels, partly
poor and broken technical equipment as well as high losses.
The Cohesion Fund measures focus on increasing the connection rate.
1. Network extensions
In the city of Buhusi some streets will be connected to the existing water supply system.
The connection rate will increase from 85% to 90%.
Wastewater
The sewer network in Buhusi is a combined wastewater collection system. The system
consists of 24.6 km of of sewers, of which 6.7 km are main collectors. No information is
available on the number of overflow devices in the network. The overall connection rate
in the service area is 54 %.
EN
16
EN
The wastewater collection system and treatment system is presently owned and operated
by Directia de Gospodarire Comunala.
Apa Prim. The sewers were sized taking into account the existing population and the
collection system.
The WWTP Buhusi is located in the middle of the agglomeration Buhusi. The whole
agglomeration is served by one central plant. The existing WWTP will be abandoned. A
new plant will be built on public property located eastern to the existing Plant.
The design flow data are as follows:
Design Flow Data
Daily Flow
Qday,DW
Q24,DW
7,238
302
m/d
m/h
Qmax,DW
464
129
m/h
l/s
Qmax,Storm
828
230
m/h
l/s
Industrial discharges have been assessed in detail (see Chapter 6 of FS). Including
industrial pollution loads the final design loads are as follows:
Parameter
BOD5
COD
SS
organic N
NH4-N
NO3-N
Total N
P

Loads
Concentration
kg/d
mg/l
2,089
282
4,179
563
2,438
329
0
0
349
47
34
5
383
52
70
9
Based on a specific BOD5 of 60 g/p.e./day the plant has a size of 34,800 p.e..
Romanian standard NTPA 001 011 apply for the WWTP Buhusi.
Parameter
Effluent
Concentration
Minimum
percentage of
reduction
p.e.
mg/l
BOD5
--
25
COD
--
125
SS
EN
Plant Size
> 10,000
35
90
10,000 100,000
80
Total N (1)
10,000 100,000
15
70 - 80
17
EN
following.
Mechanical treatment (screening station, grit and grease trap, inlet flow meter, inlet
pumping station, primary sedimentation tanks
Biological treatment (activated sludge tanks, blowers, return sludge pumping station,
excess sludge pumping station).
Sludge treatment (anaerobic digesters, gas holding tank, cogeneration unit).
Sludge dewatering and storage facilities.
Measure
Quantity
WATER SUPPLY
Investment [Euro]
996,672
Network Extension
6.282 km
816,672
House Connections
300 pc
180,000
WASTEWATER
13,151,506
Network Extension
20.1 km
5,032,717
Wastewater PS
11 pcs
442,000
Pressure Lines
2.8 km
227,200
1 pc
7,449,590
Component 4: Extension of Wastewater Infrastructure in the

Agglomeration Darmanesti
The works of these components are located inside the agglomeration Darmanesti which
includes the localities Darmanesti, Darmaneasca and Lapos. The population is 11,508
(year 2008) inhabitants.
= WSZ Darmanesti.
EN
18
EN
Water Supply
The agglomeration is supplied by the WTP Caraboaia. The connection rate is already 90
%.
Due to budget limitation of the Cohesion Fund no water supply projects are scheduled for
implementation under the Cohesion Fund in the agglomeration Darmanesti.
Wastewater
The Agglomeration of Darmanesti does not have a functioning wastewater collection
system at present. There are currently only 0.5 km of sewers which are in a very poor
condition. The existing sewer system will not be used in the future, instead an entirely
new wastewater collection system will be built.
Apa Serv Bacau. The sewers were sized taking into account the existing population and
the population in the area which will be connected to this network in the future years.
To increase the connection rate to at least 90 % within this project, 50.4 km of sewer
extensions and 14 pumping stations are to be added to the existing wastewater collection
system.
2. Wastewater Treatment
The existing WWTP of Darmanesti is located in the middle of the town and serves a
block of flats with high population density. It has only mechanical treatment and is not
sufficient for the whole town. Because of the size and the location of the WWTP, it is
recommended to dismantle the old WWTP and build a new central WWTP in the south
eastern part of Darmanesti where a site in public ownership is available.
EN
19
EN
Design Flow Data

Daily Flow
Qday,DW
Q24,DW
4,410
184
m/d
m/h
Qmax,DW
266
74
m/h
l/s
Qmax,Storm
471
131
m/h
l/s
Parameter
BOD5
COD
SS
organic N
NH4-N
NO3-N
Total N
P

Loads
Concentration
kg/d
mg/l
1,292
286
2,584
572
1,507
333
0
0
220
49
17
4
237
52
43
10
Romanian standard NTPA 001 011 apply for the WWTP Darmanesti.
Parameter
BOD5
COD
Plant Size
Effluent
Concentration
Minimum
percentage of
reduction
p.e.
mg/l
--
25
--
125
> 10,000
35
90
10,000 100,000
80
Total N (1)
10,000 100,000
15
70 - 80
SS
following.
EN
20
EN
Measure
Quantity
Investment [Euro]
WASTEWATER
18,631,868
Network Extension
50.8 km
12,673,348
Wastewater PS
14 pcs
532,000
Pressure Lines
5 km
400,000
1 pc
5,026,520
Component 5: Extension Wastewater Infrastructure in the

Agglomeration Targu Ocna
The works of these components are located inside the agglomeration Targu Ocna which
includes the administrative area of the city Targu Ocna and connected locality Valcele.
The population is 12,118 (year 2008) inhabitants.
= WSZ Targu Ocna:
Water Supply
The agglomeration is supplied by the WTP Caraboaia via the southern branch, a main
pipe with gravity flow. The connection rate is already 97 %.
Due to budget limitation of the Cohesion Fund no water supply projects are scheduled for
implementation under the Cohesion Fund in the agglomeration Targu Ocna.
Wastewater
EN
21
EN
Targu Ocna has a separate wastewater collection system which is basically confined to
the City of Targu Ocna and has presently around a 54 % connection rate in this service
area.
The stormwater drainage system was built in 1984 and has a total length of 5.9 km. The
total sewer network is 15.5 km long, of which 2.1 km are main collectors. Although the
main area of the agglomeration is connected to the existing central Wastewater Treatment
Plant, parts of the network are covered by a small-sized Biological Wastewater Treatment
Plant (BWWTP). The sewer network is currently owned and operated by Consiliul Local
Targu Ocna. A regional operation company for the County of Bacau (CRAB Comania
Regionala De Apa Bacau) has already been formed but is not operating yet.
Consiliul Local Targu Ocna. The sewers were sized taking into account the existing
population and the population in the area which will be connected to this network in the
future years.
collection system.
2. Wastewater Treatment
The existing waste water treatment plant is located in the eastern part of Targu Ocna. The
capacity of the WWTP is insufficient and the site is endangered by flooding. So it is
recommended to dismantle the old WWTP and build a new central WWTP within an area
of higher flood protection. There is already a site available (ca. 1.2 ha) which is adjacent
to the existing plant but higher situated. The available site is in public ownership.
Design Flow Data
Daily Flow
Qday,DW
Q24,DW
3,304
138
m/d
m/h
Qmax,DW
220
61
m/h
l/s
Qmax,Storm
395
110
m/h
l/s
Parameter
BOD5
COD
SS
organic N
NH4-N
NO3-N
Total N
P
EN

Loads
Concentration
kg/d
mg/l
956
282
1,911
563
1,115
328
0
0
158
47
17
5
175
52
32
9
22
EN
Romanian standard NTPA 001 011 apply for the WWTP Targu Ocna.
Parameter
Plant Size
Effluent
Concentration
Minimum
percentage of
reduction
p.e.
mg/l
BOD5
--
25
COD
--
125
2,000 10,000
60
SS
70
10,000 100,000
80
Total N (1)
10,000 100,000
15
70 - 80
following.
Measure
Quantity
WASTEWATER
Investment [Euro]
10,991,280
Network Extension
24.1 km
6,351,150
Wastewater PS
9 pcs
342,000
Pressure Lines
4.2 km
336,000
1 pcs
3,962,130
Component 7: Technical Assistance

The new founded regional operating company CRAB must achieve experience in
implementing internationally funded projects (ISPA) from the included local operators
and must be able to face new challenges in future when extending its services in the
region. One of the two companies from the merger process, SC Compania Regionala Apa
Bacau SA, is implementing an ISPA Project.
EN
23
EN
The recommended Technical Assistance should help implementing the project in order to
ensure putting in place a reliable system and effectively improve the water service.
Technical Assistance has been recommended within the Investment Plan (Master Plan
Level). These accompanying measures are necessary for a smooth implementation of the
projects and will include the following:
TA for Preparation of Tender Documents for CF Priority II works
TA for Project Management and Project publicity;
TA for Supervision of implementation.
The Technical Assistance for Tender Preparation CF II should include the following:
Performing of designs based on FS results and at the level of conceptual or detailed
design depending on the type of contract defined in procurement plan (yellow book, red
book)
Preparation of Tender Documents and confidential cost estimates
Support during Tendering and Evaluation
Acting as designer in the Red FIDIC Contracts during the works contracts
implementation, according to the Law No. 10/1995 requirements
The Technical Assistance for Project Management should include the following:
Support the Beneficiary in Project Implementation and Project Publicity;
Support the Beneficiary in implementing an action plan for the protection of water
sources;
Support the Beneficiary in documenting the water supply networks and in developing
hydraulic network models and carrying out calibration measurements;
Support the Beneficiary in developing the sewer network documentation and hydraulic
modelling;
Support the Beneficiary in implementation of the Action Plan for Sludge Reuse;
Support the Beneficiary in the procurement of equipment;
Training in the field of new technologies, equipment and instruments
The Technical Assistance for Site Supervision should include the following:
Acting as Engineer on site, according to the Law 10/1995 requirements
Quality surveillance of the construction works and technologies
Inspection, control and coordination of the construction works and technologies
Design inspection and coordination with progress schedule
Inspection and coordination of the construction sequences with progress schedule
Stage payment monitoring, Cost control
Inspection completeness and quantity of the construction works
Quality control and abidance of required construction methods
Quality and quantity control of delivered materials on site
Inspection of the materials storage and movement on site
EN
24
EN
Inspection of process of required tests and measurements

Safety supervision on site
Environmental monitoring on site
(b)
In respect of the work involved, identify and quantify the key output indicators
and, where relevant, the core indicators to be used:
Performance indicators for drinking water a
Units
Performance
Existing
After
236
236
Connected Population
1,000 capita
Service coverage
% population
89
90
l/c,d
96
94
1,000 m3/d
76.5
59.5
Water treatment capacity
m /d
161,200
164,000
Minimum production capacity of wells, WTP
m3/d
84,800
83,800
Non revenue water
m /d
41,580
27,310
Non revenue water
% water into supply
54
46
Length of transmission mains
km
135
135
Length of distribution network
km
238.0
247.8
Percentage of distribution network rehabilitated-of total network
Specific domestic consumption

Average production
Population served per length of WS network and mains
Capita/km
633
Specific water loss rate
m/km pipe main/d
62
56
Compliance of delivered water with EU DWD
% water into supply
100
88
100
1,000 kWh/year
6,848
7,575
Metering Level
Average electricity consumption
Performance indicators for wastewater
Unit
616
Performance
Existing
After
% of total population
64
90
km
190
348
Average flow collected
1000 m3/d
66
68
Average flow treated (primary, secondary, tertiary)
1000 m3/d
66
68
Infiltration
1000 m3/d
35
35
% of treated effluent
meeting EU standards
100
Population connected to centralised collection network

Length of Wastewater network
Compliance with EU UWWTD standards
(c)
Main beneficiaries of the infrastructure (i.e. target population served,

quantified where possible):
Beneficiary Population:
Additional Connected:
WS approx. 1,660 (= 0.6 % of agglomerations or 0.2 % of county)
EN
25
EN
WW 58,636 (= 21% of agglomerations or 8 % of county)

Provided with sufficient wastewater treatment:
235,072 (= 90 % of agglomerations or 33 % of county)
Beneficiary administrative units:

Cities: Bacau, Moinesti, Buhushi, Darmanesti, Targu Ocna
Communes: Margineni, Hemeius, Letea Veche, Magura
(d)
Is the construction of the infrastructure to be delivered through a public-private

partnership (PPP)?
Y es
No
If yes, describe the form of the PPP (i.e., selection process for private partner,
structure of PPP, infrastructure ownership arrangements, risk allocation
arrangements, etc.):
N/A
Give details of how the infrastructure is to be managed after the project is completed
(i.e., public management, concession, other form of PPP).
The infrastructure resulted after the project will be managed by the Regional Operating
Company (ROC) CRAB.
In line with SOP provisions, the local municipalities in the project area created an
Intercommunity Development Association (IDA) to which they transfer, by a power of
attorney, the right to exercise in their name and on their behalf the competencies related
to the management of water and wastewater services. On this ground, IDA will conclude
a delegation contract with the ROC. Through this mechanism, IDA exercises the
contractual rights of the Contracting Authority, especially the monitoring of the contract
performance in the name and on behalf of its members (municipalities).
The Granting Authority has a general power of economical, financial and technical
control over the Operators activities and performance. The ROC has as shareholders
local authorities from the area of operation.
This institutional set-up is in line with the regional strategy of the Sectoral Operational
Programme for Environment and supported by Romanian legal provisions. The
regionalisation of water services, by creating regional operators, is considered a key
element in improving the quality and cost-efficiency of water infrastructure and services,
in order to fulfil environmental targets, but also to assure sustainability of investments of
operations, of a long term water sector development strategy and of regional balance
growth. For details please check the Institutional Analysis Report.
(e)
Does the project form part of a Trans-European Network agreed at Community

level?
Y es
No
TEXT BOX
EN
26
EN
B.5.
Project objectives
B.5.1.
Current infrastructure endowment and impact of the project

Indicate the extent to which the region(s) is/are at present endowed with the type of
infrastructure covered by this application; compare it with the level of infrastructure
endowment aimed for by target year 20.(i.e., according to the relevant strategy
or national/regional plans, where applicable). Indicate the foreseeable contribution of
the project to the strategy/plan objectives. Specify potential bottlenecks or other
problems to be resolved.
The overall objective of the project is to improve the infrastructure in the water and
wastewater sectors of Bacau County, not only for the benefit of inhabitants and a better
environment but also to meet the obligations regarding the environmental aquis within
the transition periods agreed between Romania and EU.
The specific objectives of the project are:
improvement of drinking water quality in order to meet EU standards (98/83/EC);
increasing the accessibility to and the quality of water and sewerage services;
increasing the connection rate to wastewater treatment plants in order to meet the
Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive;
The new investments will have an essential contribution in the pursuit of the following
objectives of Article 174 of EC Treaty
preserving, protecting and improving the quality of the environment;
protecting human health;
prudent and rational utilization of natural resources;
promoting measures at international level to deal with regional or worldwide
environment
improvement of water quality in watercourses
The detailed objectives and impacts of each measure are included at the description of
each component in chapter B.4.2.
The following tables show an overview about the impacts of the main investments,
details can be found in annex II
MAIN WS INVESTMENT
EN
WSZ
Investment
Quantity []
Result
Impact
Bacau
Rehabilitation WTP
Caraboaia
3,591,286
Rehabilitation of the
mixing, filtration and
sludge treatment
facilities
Compliance with
regulation 98/83 EC
Moinesti
Extension of WS Network
647,752
Additional 3,529 m WS
network
Increase CR to 90 %
Buhushi
Extension of WS Network
996,672
Additional 6,282 m WS
network
Increase CR to 90 %
27
EN
Main WW Investments
Cluster
Agglomeration
p.e. in 2037
p.e. in 2008
Investment
Description
Bacau
314,862
Bacau
237,013
Total for
agglomeration:
Extension of
WWTP Bacau
Extension of the
wastewater
network
Construction of
wastewater
pumping
stations and
pressure lines
Moinesti
31,719
34,823
Impact
23,162,220
Extension and
rehabilitation of
civil works and
Compliance with UWWTD
13,095,370 electromechanical
91/271/EEC
equipment for a
design load of
241,000 p.e..
Extension of 42.5
9,826,850 km sewer
network
Increase of connection rate
6 PS, Connection
of catchment
areas that can not
240,000
discharge by
gravity to the
WWTP
Total for
agglomeration:
27,727
Extension of
WWTP
Moinesti North,
Construction of
WWTP
Moinesti South
Extension and
rehabilitation of
civil works and
electromechanical
equipment for a
design load of
7,960,299 31,700 p.e..
91/271/EEC
Extension of the
wastewater
network
Extension of 21.2
km sewer
5,019,938 network
4 PS, Connection
of catchment
areas that can not
discharge by
gravity to the
464,800 WWTP
Buhusi
25,937
Total for
agglomeration:
Construction of
WWTP Buhusi
Extension of the
wastewater
network
Construction of
wastewater
pumping
stations and
pressure lines
EN
Result
Moinesti
Construction of
wastewater
pumping
stations and
pressure lines
Buhusi
Quantity []
13,445,037
13,151,506
Civil works and
electromechanical
equipment for a
design load of
7,449,590 34,800 p.e..
91/271/EEC
Extension of 20.1
km sewer
5,032,717 network
11 PS,
Connection of
catchment areas
that can not
discharge by
gravity to the
669,200 WWTP
28
EN
Main WW Investments
Cluster
Agglomeration
p.e. in 2037
p.e. in 2008
Investment
Description
Darmanesti
21,530
Darmanesti
Total for
agglomeration:
Construction of
WWTP
18,668 Darmanesti
Extension of the
wastewater
network
Targu Ocna
15,926
Targu Ocna
Quantity []
Result
18,631,868
Construction of a
WWTP (Civil
works and
electromechanical
equipment) for a
design load of
5,026,520 21,500 p.e..
91/271/EEC
Construction of
wastewater
pumping
stations and
pressure lines
Extension of 50.8
km sewer
12,673,348 network
14 PS,
Connection of
catchment areas
that cannot
discharge by
gravity to the
932,000 WWTP
Total for
agglomeration:
10,991,280
Construction of
WWTP Targu
13,756 Ocna
Extension of the
wastewater
network
Impact
Construction of a
WWTP (civil
works and
electromechanical
equipment) for a
design load of
91/271/EEC
6,351,150 16,000 p.e..
Extension of 24.1
km sewer
6,351,150 network
9 PS, Connection
of catchment
areas that cannot
discharge by
gravity to the
678,000 WWTP
Construction of
wastewater
pumping
stations and
pressure lines
Summary of Physical Indicators
EN
Physical indicators Water Supply

Rehabilitation Water Treatment Plant
Network extension
New house connections
Unit
pc
m
m
2010 - 2014
1
9,811
615
Physical indicators Wastewater

Network extension
Network rehabilitation
New main collector
Main collector rehabilitation
New River Undercrossings / Canal Undercrossings
New WW Pumping Stations
New WWTP
Unit
m
m
m
m
pcs
pcs
pcs
p.e.
2010 - 2014
158,000
0
0
0
0
44
4
266,500
29
EN
WWTP extension
pcs
p.e.
2
78,500
Details on Sludge Disposal

Detailed information on the sludge disposal strategy is provided in the FS Chapter 7,
Sludge Disposal Strategy. The following table summarizes the current sludge disposal
practice.
WWTP
Current Sludge Treatment
Final Disposal
Current Production
(t DS/a)
anaerobic digestion
Bacu City
sludge lagoon
15,858
drying beds
390
drying beds
507
drying beds
105
mech. Dewatering
Imhoff tanks
Buhui
drying beds
Imhoff tanks
Moineti
drying beds
aerobic stabilization
Comneti
drying beds
Drmneti
unknown
unknown
unknown
Slanic Maldova
drying beds
drying beds
non-compliant landfill
Imhoff tanks
Trgu Ocna
drying beds
Oneti
Imhoff tanks
sludge lagoon
692
Ciui
not functioning
none
none
Faraoani
drying beds
unknown
<< 1
Rcciuni
unknown
non-compliant landfill
0.05
Podu Turcului
not functioning
none
none
A detailed list of WTP sludge production for each treatment plant is presented the
following table.
Water Treatment Plant
Unit
2010
2013
2015
2018
2021
2024
2030
2037
t DS/a
1,895
818
928
1,055
1,143
1,206
1,236
1,254
t DS/a
1,141
1,100
1,133
1,166
1,197
1,231
1,259
Caraboaia
Sludge Production
Barai
Sludge Production
Based on the WWTP design and corresponding sludge treatment, the following values for
specific sludge production are applied:
EN
WWTP without primary settling tanks and simultaneous aerobic stabilization

(WWTP 50,000 p.e.): 70 g DS/p.e./d
30
EN
WWTP with primary settling tanks and anaerobic sludge digestion (WWTP >
50,000 p.e.): 49 g DS/p.e./d
Above mentioned treatment processes include tertiary treatment. According to the

Accession Treaty of Romania to the European Union all the agglomerations with more
than 10,000 p.e., should get equipped with such a tertiary treatment phase when they
discharge into sensitive areas. Thus all treatment plants that are exceeding 10,000 p.e.
need to be equipped with a tertiary treatment.
The basis for the sludge prediction is the forecast for the connected population
equivalents. The following table shows the forecast for the annual sludge amount.
Parameter
Population
WWTPs
connected
to
the
P.E. connected to the WWTPs

Total P.E.
WWTPs
connected
to
the
Total urban sludge production

Total urban sludge volume (20 %
DS)
Unit
2010
2013
2015
2018
2021
2024
2030
2037
capita
176,607
220,689
235,071
233,988
232,642
230,951
226,904
221,433
p.e.
51,746
58,906
58,906
58,906
58,906
58,906
58,906
58,906
p.e.
228,353
279,595
293,977
292,894
291,548
289,857
285,810
280,339
t DS/a
4,431
5,553
5,860
5,839
5,812
5,778
5,697
5,589
m/a
12,659
15,866
16,744
16,682
29,059
28,890
28,487
27,944
t/a
13,925
17,453
18,418
18,350
31,964
31,779
31,336
30,738
Total urban sludge weight

(wet sludge 1.1 t/m)
Different sludge disposal alternative have been analyzed for Bacau County. The
following is the result of the cost assessment.
Sludge Disposal Costs Bacau WWTP:
Disposal Route
/t
Transport /t
DS
Laboratory
Analyses /t
DS
Entrance Fee
/t DS
Application
Costs
/t
DS
Total Costs
/t DS
Agriculture
75
40
124
Reforestation
11
60
40
111
Land Reclamation
11
60
40
111
290
295
37
41
Co-Incineration
Land Filling
EN
Drying
DS
31
EN
Sludge Disposal Costs Moinesti WWTP:

Disposal Route
Drying
DS
/t
Transport /t
DS
Laboratory
Analyses /t
DS
Entrance Fee
/t DS
Application
Costs
/t
DS
Total Costs
/t DS
Agriculture
21
75
40
136
Reforestation
60
40
109
Land Reclamation
60
40
109
290
297
11
37
48
Transport /t
DS
Laboratory
Analyses /t
DS
Entrance Fee
/t DS
Application
Costs
/t
DS
Total Costs
/t DS
Co-Incineration
Land Filling
Sludge Disposal Costs Buhusi WWTP:

Disposal Route
Drying
DS
/t
Agriculture
75
40
124
Reforestation
11
60
40
111
Land Reclamation
11
60
40
111
290
294
37
45
Co-Incineration
Land Filling
Sludge Disposal Costs Darmanesti WWTP:

Drying
/t DS
Transport /t
DS
Laboratory
Analyses /t
DS
Entrance Fee
/t DS
Application
Costs
/t
DS
Total Costs
/t DS
Agriculture
24
75
40
139
Reforestation
60
40
109
Land Reclamation
60
40
109
290
298
13
37
50
Disposal Route
Co-Incineration
Land Filling
EN
32
EN
Sludge Disposal Costs Targu Ocna WWTP:

Disposal Route
Drying
DS
/t
Transport /t
DS
Laboratory
Analyses /t
DS
Entrance Fee
/t DS
Application
Costs
/t
DS
Total Costs
/t
DS
Agriculture
24
75
40
139
Reforestation
60
40
109
Land Reclamation
60
40
109
290
299
12
37
50
Co-Incineration
Land Filling
Specially, the short-term sludge disposal will be:

Bacu WWTP:
- The sludge will go to the central county Chimiei Street landfill.
Buhui WWTP:
Moineti WWTP:
Drmneti WWTP:
Trgu Ocna WWTP:
The water treatment plant sludge will go to the Chimiei Street landfill over the whole
planning period. This sludge cannot be utilized in any other way; it is mainly mineral
with significant heavy metal concentrations.
At this point in time, however, it is not at all possible to state which of the disposal paths
in the long-term best meets the objectives set down by the County, the Romanian
Ministry of Environment and Forests and the EU. This will only be possible after several
years of operation of the CF facilities to be built, the implementation of the recommended
harmonization of the legal and administrative regulations dealing with wastewater and
sludge management in Romania (given below), and further intensive investigations and
negotiations.
Strategy Implementation Steps:
I. First Step Activities completed by 2012

A.
Industrial Dischargers 5
Regional Operator responsible for execution of activities
EN
See Chapter 6.9 Action Plan to Manage Industrial Dischargers
33
EN
1.
Setup Inventory
complete in detail and with ongoing updating
2.
Modify Contracts
implement a unified contract for all the agglomerations making adjustments

after changes in NTPA-002, MO 344/2004, etc
3.
Setup Discharge Data Base
==> must have dedicated staff !!

4.
Monitor Industrial Discharges

ongoing expanded program for agricultural sludge management
B.
Sludge 11

1.
Setup Data Base
==> must have dedicated staff !!

2.
Monitor Sludge
establish unified sampling procedures
carry out parallel laboratory analyses of samples to establish the

uncertainty limits of the laboratory results
carry out an ongoing program according to MO 344/2004 to establish
quality standards needed for agricultural, land reclamation and forestry use of sludge
II. Second Step Activities completed by 2018
Regional Operator responsible for execution of most activities

A.
Co-Incineration
Negotiate possible contract(s)
-
Lafarge Ciment factories

-
B.
Carpatcement cement factory in Bicaz
General Energetic biomass-power plant in Pngrai
Bio-Gas Production
Negotiate possible contract
- Scandinavian Biogas
C.
Agriculture
1.
Determination of Usable Areas
according to MO 344/2004, an ICPA and OSPA activity

2.
Agricultural Use Field Trials

3.
EN
Negotiate Possible Contracts with Agricultural Operators
34
EN
D.
Forestry
1.
Determination of Reforestation Areas
a National Forest Authority, Bacu Forest Directorate (Regia Naional a PdurilorRomsilva, Direcia Silvic Bacu) activity in cooperation with local councils
2.
Reforestation Field Trails
according to MO 344/2004, an ICPA activity

3.
Negotiate Funding
with the Ministry of Environment and Forests and the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural
Development to have funds provided from the State budget according to the Forestry
Code, Law 46/2008
E.
Land Reclamation
1.
Determination of Reclamation Sites/Areas
an ICPA, OSPA and APM activity

2.
Reclamation Field Trials

3.
Negotiate Funding
with the Ministry of Environment and Forests and the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural
Development to have funds provided from the State budget according to Article 41 of the
Land Reclamation Law, Law 138/2004
III.
Third Step Activities completed by 2020

A.
CO2 and Energy Balance Study
B.
Select Disposal Scheme
using multi-objective decision making procedure which includes monetary and nonmonetary criteria to select a scheme which can include simultaneously several disposal
paths, considering the goals of
-
disposal security
environmental security
affordability
C.
Implement Selected Disposal Scheme
D.
Post-Implementation Monitoring continuing
E.
environment
economics
Plan Modification continuing
The middle and long-term urban-sludge disposal alternatives must be coordinated with
the solid-waste disposal from large scale, intensive animal production units in the
County.
EN
35
EN
B.5.2.
Socio-economic objectives
Indicate the projects socio-economic objectives and targets.
The Project will lead to the achievement of the following objectives:
- Creation of new jobs during the construction and operation phase;
- Economic growth by the improvement of infrastructure in the project area. Reliable
and compliant DW and WW services will lead to increase the number of investors in
the project region.
- Improvement of the hygienic and the health conditions in the project area: safe
drinking water will contribute to reduce health risks for the population. Wastewater
disposal and treatment will contribute to improve the hygienic conditions.
- Improvement of the quality of life of the population living in the service area by
ensuring the access to drinking water and waste water services both in quantity and
quality:
- 90 % of the population will have access to compliant drinking water supply after
project implementation, compared with approx. 89% before (in the project area).
- 90% of the population instead of about 64 % will be connected to the sewerage
system (in the project area).
- Resource cost savings for the future customers by avoiding cost for well pumping
and septic tank cleaning.
- Increased attractiveness of the region by reduction of visual disseminates, odors and
direct health risks
B.5.3.
Contribution to the achievement of the Operational Programme

Describe how the project contributes to the achievement of the priorities of the
Operational Programme (provided quantified indicators where possible).
Indicator
Unit
Baseline (2008)
Target (2015)
Output
Localities provided with
Number of
communes
45
49
Number
Population connected to basic water services

in a regional system
40
53
Wastewater treated (of the total wastewater

volume)
67
89
Number of Regional Water Companies

created
Number
new/rehabilitated water facilities in a regional

management system
New/ rehabilitated wastewater treatment
plants
Result
The specific objectives as set-out in SOP ENV are

1. Improvement of quality and access to water and wastewater infrastructure.
2. Development of sustainable waste management system.
EN
36
EN
3. Reduction of negative environmental impact and mitigation of climate change

caused by heating plants.
4. Protection and improvement of biodiversity and natural heritage.
5. Reduction of the incidence of natural disasters affecting the population.
The project is a major step in providing water supply and wastewater services in line
with EU practices and policies, in urban areas by 2015 and by setting efficient
regionalised water and wastewater management structures. All urban areas of the
county are involved; the project comprises the countys urban population which is a
major contribution to objective No. 1.
By reducing the discharge of untreated sewage into receiving water bodies and
improving the WWTPs efficiency to tertiary treatment, the project contributes to
objective No. 3, protection and improvement of biodiversity and natural heritage.
The Priority Axis 1 objectives stipulated in SOP-ENV are:
Provision of adequate water and sewerage services, at accessible tariffs;

provision of adequate drinking water quality in all urban agglomerations;
improvement of the purity of water courses;
improvement of the WWTP sludge management;
introduction of innovative and efficient water management structures.
The above-mentioned objectives are directly and substantially supported through the
projects technical water supply and wastewater measures.
In addition Chapter 7, Sludge Disposal Strategy, provides the basic documentation
for the ROCs for improved WWTP sludge management.
EN
37
EN
C.
RESULTS OF FEASIBILITY STUDIES
C.1.
Provide a summary of the main conclusions of the feasibility studies conducted
Item
Key dimension
of the Feasibility
Study
Description
Technical aspects
The project comprises water supply measures in the water supply

zones Bacau (rehabilitation WTP Carboaia), Moinesti (extension
of network) and Buhushi (extension of network). Main objectives
are achieving sufficient water quality and connection rates above
90%, modernised systems and reduction of water losses.
Reference
FS Report
In the wastewater field the agglomerations Bacau (Extension of

the WWTP, WW network extension, construction of pumping
stations), Moinesti (Construction/extension of 2 WWTPs, WW
network extension, construction of pumping stations), Buhusi
(Construction of the WWTP, WW network extension,
construction of pumping stations), Darmanesti (Construction of
the WWTP, WW network extension, construction of pumping
stations), Targu Ocna (Construction of the WWTP, WW network
extension, construction of pumping stations)
Main objectives are achieving connection rates above 90%,
modernised systems, reduction of infiltration and improved
wastewater treatment.
2
Institutional
aspects
The beneficiary of the project is Compania Regionala de Apa

Bacau SA which is the Regional Operating Company (ROC)
from Bacau County.
Institutional
Analysis
Report
The key institutional elements according to the strategy from the

Sectoral Operational Programme (SOP) (the Intercommunity
Development Association (IDA), the Regional Operating
Company (ROC)) are implemented at the level of Bacau County
and the Delegation Contract is going to be signed in the near
future.
3
Environmental
aspects
Analysing the adverse and beneficial environmental impacts and

the necessary mitigation measures determined to comply with the
admissible environmental standards that are provided by
extensive Technical Memoirs for each agglomeration, the LEPA
Bacau will take the screening decision in the Technical Review
Committee that will be held soon.
Chap. 13,
EIA
summary
report
(EIA Vol.
V)
O&M
The particular O&M cost categories are estimated as a composite

of: (i) the cost which is related to the proposed Project measures
(With Project Scenario), and (ii) the O&M cost which is related
to the existing system assets, assumed to be used further on
(Without Project Scenario).
Financial
and
Economic
Analysis,
Chapter 4.3
Projection
of Operating
Costs
In the With Project Case the O&M cost for water activity are
anticipated to decrease from EUR 8.3 million in 2009 to a level
of EUR 7.8 million in 2018 and then increase to a level of EUR
14.9 million by the year 2039.
In the With Project Case the O&M cost for wastewater activity
are anticipated to increase from EUR 2.6 million in 2009 to a
level of EUR 5.4 million in 2018 and to a level of EUR 10.4
million by the year 2039.
In the Without Project Case the O&M cost for water activity
EN
38
EN
Item
Key dimension
of the Feasibility
Study
Description
Reference
are anticipated to decrease from EUR 8.4 million in 2009 to a

level of EUR 7.6 million in 2018 and then to increase to a level of
EUR 14.5 million by the year 2039.
In the Without Project Case the O&M cost for wastewater
activity are anticipated to decrease from EUR 2.6 million in 2009
to a level of EUR 3.7 million in 2018 and to a level of EUR 8.2
million by the year 2039.
5
Financial
Indicators
The financial analysis uses the incremental method: that means,

the project is evaluated on the basis of the differences between
the scenario with the project and an alternative scenario
without the project.
Based on a detailed analysis and assessment the Consultants
propose the following financing scheme for the project (as
percentage of total eligible costs):
- EU Grant: 76.98%;
Financial
and
Economic
Analysis,
Chapter 4.7
Projection
of
EU
Intervention
Level
- State Budget contribution: 11.77%;

- Local Budgets contribution: 1.81%;
- Loan contracted by the ROC: 9.44%.
The balance of the cash flow statement for the ROC shows
positive ending balances in all years of the analysis; highlighting
the sustainability of the operation of the ROC after project
implementation.
6
Tariff and
affordability
The Consultant has elaborated a relatively detailed tariff study,

performed to identify the most suitable tariff strategy for the
particular regional operator.
The affordability policy for the water and wastewater sector is the
following:
- The affordability limit for the poorest 10% of households is set
at 4%, based on a per capita consumption of 75 litres per day.
Financial
and
Economic
Analysis,
Chapter 4.6
Affordability
Analysis
- This corresponds to approximately 2% - 2.5% of the net income

of an average income household.
The maximum affordability ratio for average income households,
reached in 2013 is between 0.9% and 2.2%. These levels are
relatively low and with good measures from the ROC they will
assure a high collection ratio.
7
Economic
analysis
In order to prove that the project is advantageous to the society of

the country the Consultant has performed a detailed economic
analysis.
The results of the economic analysis are as follows:
- The Benefit/Cost ratio is about 2.67;
- The EIRR is 19.0 %;
Financial
and
Economic
Analysis,
Chapter 5
Economic
Analysis
- The NPV calculated at a discount rate of 5.5% is about EURO

201.6 million.
The project shows very satisfactory economic indicators with
economic benefits significantly exceeding economic cost.
EN
39
EN
Item
Key dimension
of the Feasibility
Study
Sensitivity
analysis
Description
Reference
In order to validate the assumptions used and to identify the most

sensitive variables, a detailed sensitivity and risk analysis is
performed in three parts.
Financial
and
Economic
Analysis,
Chapter 6
Sensitivity
and
Risk
Analysis
The sensitivity analysis indicates that the results of the financial

and economic analysis are rather robust.
Regarding the financial and economical analysis there are no
critical parameters for which a variation of 1% would lead to a
change of the financial NPV by more than 5%.
9
Risk analysis
A detailed risk analysis is conducted for the sensitive variables; it

is conducted at 2 levels:
- for the financial analysis parameters;
- for the economic analysis parameters.
The risk analysis indicates that there is no serious risk for a
successful implementation and operation of the Project Measure.
Financial
and
Economic
Analysis,
Chapter 6
Sensitivity
and
Risk
Analysis
Give precise references if ERDF, Cohesion Fund, ISPA or other Community

assistance is/was involved in the financing of the feasibility studies.
FS is part of the ISPA Project 2005 RO 16 P PA 001-002
C.1.1.
Demand analysis
Provide a summary of the demand analysis, including the predicted utilisation rate on
completion and the demand growth rate.
The demand forecast for the project agglomerations was prepared considering the
following assumptions:
The population forecast was build based on previous figures from the past census and the
estimated future growth of the population realised by the National Statistics Institute
(Projection of the population of Romania on averages until year 2025 - Proiectarea
populatiei Romaniei pe medii pana in anul 2025). The summary of the total population
evolution is presented in the following table:
Total population
EN
2008
2014
Bacau
197,013
195,142
193,993
183,710
Moinesti
23,902
23,641
23,483
22,178
Buhushi
19,644
19,429
19,299
18,227
Darmanesti
11,508
11,382
11,306
10,678
Targu Ocna
12,118
11,985
11,905
11,244
Total
264,184
261,579
259,986
246,036
40
2018
2039
EN
The evolution of connection rates is correlated with the implementation of investments

and considers the impact of the proposed investments costs and additional ROC efforts.
The evolution of connection rates is presented in the following 2 tables:
Connection level water
services
2008
2014
2018
2018 (finally as
(reached by
application)
effect of ROC
effort*)
2039
Bacau
90%
90%
90%
100%
100%
Moinesti
84%
90%
90%
100%
100%
Buhushi
85%
90%
90%
100%
100%
Darmanesti
90%
90%
90%
100%
100%
Targu Ocna
97%
97%
97%
100%
100%
Total
89%
90%
90%
100%
100%
Connection level
services
Bacau
Moinesti
Buhusi
Darmanesti
Targu Ocna
Total
wastewater
2008
2014
2018
2018 (finally as
(reached by
application)
effect of ROC
effort*)
2039
73%
90%
90%
100%
100%
67%
90%
90%
100%
100%
54%
90%
90%
100%
100%
0%
90%
90%
100%
100%
54%
90%
90%
100%
100%
64%
90%
90%
100%
100%
*The ROC is aware of spending additional investments from other funds to reach 100% Connection Rate
In designing the individual demand forecast the following 2 elements were considered:
a) The elasticity of quantity determined by the tariffs (the significant increases of tariff
on medium term will lead to a decrease of domestic water consumption);
b) The elasticity of quantity determined by the individual wealth (the increases of
household revenues on long term will lead to increase in quantity);
The trend of the average individual consumption is presented in the following chart:
EN
41
EN
Average individual consumption evolution

130
120
Liters / capita /day
110
100
90
80
20
08
20
09
20
10
20
11
20
12
20
13
20
14
20
15
20
16
20
17
20
18
20
19
20
20
20
21
20
22
20
23
20
24
20
25
20
26
20
27
20
28
20
29
20
30
20
31
20
32
20
33
20
34
20
35
20
36
20
37
20
38
70
The individual demand forecast was prepared considering the specific situation of each
agglomeration and based on discussions with the ROC. Considering the significant
differences between the current individual consumptions, the usage of unique parameters
for price elasticity was not possible. The elasticity factors used for calculating the
individual water consumptions are the following:
Price elasticity on medium term:

o We have used a similar approach for all the agglomerations. We started from the
actual individual consumption data in 2009 provided by the operator. An average
elasticity factor of -0.18 was considered for the period 2011-2014.
o For Buhusi, Targu Ocna and Darmanesti agglomerations, which have a low actual
consumption, we have used an increasing trend of consumption determined by the
increase of connection to sewerage services (the households which are also connected
to sewerage have the tendency to consume more water). We have considered that due
to the low actual consumption the individual consumption will be very inelastic to
price adjustments. This effect will be counterbalanced by the increase in household
wealth: due to the fact that the need for water and wastewater services is basic it will
be amongst the first to be satisfied when an increase in wealth is recorded.
The evolution of the individual consumption is not linked only to the evolution of price
but should be also linked to the level of primary and secondary metering. The historical
evolution recorded in the Romanian Water Sector proves that the impact of increase of
metering on the evolution of individual consumption has a significant impact regardless
the evolution of the tariff.
Individual wealth elasticity: for the long term individual consumption we have used an
average elasticity factor of 0.24.
EN
42
EN
On medium term, it was considered that the average water consumption of water will
equal the average wastewater generation considering the fact that the connection rates to
the both services will become equal (or very close). In the case of Bacau County, after the
finalization of investments (starting with 2014), in all except one of the agglomerations
the connection level to wastewater services will be almost equal to the connection level to
water services.
The evolution of individual consumptions is presented in the following table:
Individual water consumption
(lcd)
Bacau
Moinesti
Buhusi
Darmanesti
TarguOcna
Other
Average
2009
2014
2018
2039
104
87
45
59
76
72
94
96
83
82
83
84
66
91
100
87
86
87
88
69
96
123
107
106
108
109
86
118
Non-domestic water consumption (invoiced water sales) is assumed to remain

approximately constant on medium term (2009-2014) as result of the present international
crisis and due to the price elasticity (increase of tariffs will lead to decrease of
consumption) and will have an increasing trend starting with 2014 as result of the
economic growth.
The evolution of the total water and wastewater consumption for each agglomeration is
presented synthetically in the following tables:
Domestic water quantity (m3/year)
Bacau
Moinesti
Buhusi
Darmanesti
TarguOcna
Other
Total
Non-domestic
water
quantity
(m3/year)
Bacau
Moinesti
Buhusi
Darmanesti
TarguOcna
Other
Total
2009
6,720,325
639,103
276,088
222,387
325,400
209,463
8,392,765
2009
2014
6,126,572
642,501
523,366
310,336
356,417
190,956
8,150,146
2014
2018
6,398,745
670,507
546,181
323,859
371,960
199,439
8,510,693
2018
2039
7,352,194
776,305
632,336
374,921
430,628
231,577
9,797,961
2039
3,355,270
272,246
89,010
46,805
273,546
145,000
4,181,877
3,019,743
245,021
80,458
47,275
276,292
113,682
3,782,472
3,142,357
249,959
83,725
47,654
278,509
118,298
3,920,502
3,872,615
277,559
103,182
49,696
290,444
145,789
4,739,285
The development of the wastewater generation was estimated starting from the actual
consumptions, considering the level of water consumption for each category of
consumers and the impact of the investment project. The evolution of the wastewater
generation for each agglomeration is presented in the following table:
EN
43
EN
Total
wastewater
(m3/year)
Bacau
Moinesti
Buhusi
Darmanesti
Targu Ocna
Total
invoiced
2008
2014
2018
2038
10,175,056
748,586
525,307
2,562
429,759
9,448,289
863,020
837,978
352,883
579,373
9,855,338
895,470
873,568
366,748
595,790
11,598,076
1,027,910
1,034,301
421,051
662,030
11,881,270
12,081,543
12,586,914
14,743,368
The detailed assumptions used for the demand forecast for each agglomeration are
presented in the Technical Feasibility Study and in the Financial and Economic
Analysis (Chapter 1.4).
C.1.2.
Options considered
Outline the alternative options considered in the feasibility studies.
A. Selection of the Strategic Options Performed in Masterplan

Option analyses have been made for water supply and wastewater. The results of these
option analyses tip the scale for the implementation of centralized or de-centralized water
supply and wastewater systems.
The strategy towards determining the most appropriate solution for the wastewater
sector has been developed in a case-by-case analysis taking different sound technical
solutions into consideration.
The decision about a common or a separate system has been based on an economic
analysis through calculation of the net present values for all possible solutions. In the end,
the most cost efficient solution has been selected.
The option analysis gives a detailed overview of the approach, and the assumptions and
details of the refined calculations. The economic analysis includes investment costs as
well as operation and maintenance costs for all relevant elements. The basis for the
selection of the most preferable solution for a clustered agglomeration is the Net Present
Value.
As an economic result of the option analysis the solution with one central WWTP for
several agglomerations turned out to be most cost efficient solution for all investigated
agglomerations. Also the more efficient maintenance and operation costs of a central
treatment facility are reasons for centralized wastewater systems. Agglomerations below
2,000 P.E. were connected to a wastewater system in case a main collecting sewer of a
bigger agglomeration runs through the agglomerations or if the WWTP is located in the
smaller agglomerations.
Depending on the different compliance dates and the geographic locations of the
settlements, the Consultant proposes a phasing of investments in the clustered
agglomerations.
Results for project area are shown in chapter B below.
EN
44
EN
The option analysis for the water supply sector has been performed based on the
existing conditions. As different regional solutions have been planed for the County of
Bacau and as local sources are partly contaminated and/or inadequate for human
consumptions, option analyses have been carried out within the five of the 19 supply
areas W10 Damienesti - Plopana, W13 Horgesti - Ungureni, W14 Pancesti Dealu
Morii, W15 Filipeni - Rachitoasa and W16 Podu Turcului - Motoseni. In the supply areas
W01 Bacau city and surroundings, W02 Moinesti till Onesti and W04 Slanic Moldova
centralized solutions represent the only conceivable solution. In all other 10 supply areas
de-centralized solutions represent the only conceivable ones.
In the areas W10 Damienesti - Plopana Region that lies in the north-eastern corner of the
county the centralised option including a transport system from Bacau city is 34 % more
expensive than the de-centralised one. In the neighbouring areas W13 Horgesti
Ungureni and W15 Filipeni - Rachitoasa that lies in the east of the county the centralised
option including a transport system from Bacau city is 18 % more expensive than the decentralised one. In the neighbouring areas W14 Pancesti Dealu Morii and W16 Podu
Turcului - Motoseni that lie in the south-east corner of the county the centralised option
including a transport system from Siret valley is 55 % more expensive than the decentralised one. For all 5 areas the de-centralised option is significantly cheaper and was
selected.
B) SELECTION OF THE TECHNICAL SOLUTIONS

1 Agglomeration Bacau
Water Supply
There are no supply options inside Water Supply Zone Bacau
Wastewater
The agglomeration Bacau contains the capital Bacau City as well as the settlements
Crihan, Padureni, Trebes, Valea Budului, Margineni, Barati, Letea Veche, Dealu Mare,
Magura, Hemeius and Lilieci. Furthermore, the settlement Saucesti will join the cluster of
Bacau in phase 2 (compliance date 2018) and the settlements Fantanele, Sohodol and
Bogdan Voda in phase 3.
In the master plan study, the goal of the option analysis has been to find the most
economical solution, comparing the following 2 options:
Option 1: 1 WWTP 1 in Bacau for Bacau Agglomeration, 1 WWTP 2 at Saucesti and 1
WWTP 3 at Hemeius
Option 2: 1 central WWTP in Bacau for the whole cluster
The following table summarizes the screening of options.
Existing assets
WWTP Bacau
Existing sewer network in
Bacau
Description of key
deficiencies
- Effluent quality
does not meet
requirements of
UWWTD because no
efficient Nitrogen
and Phosphorous
removal is existing
Identification of
options
First screening
Justifications for selection

Advantages:
1) 1 WWTP in
Bacau, 1 decentral
WWTP in Saucesti, 1
decentral WWTP in
Hemeius
- Only 2 pumping stations and

pressure lines necessary
rejected
Disadvantages:
- Poor condition of
- Higher NPV than option 2

because of higher investment
EN
45
EN
Existing assets
Description of key
deficiencies
Identification of
options
First screening
electro-mechanical
equipment and of
civil structures
and operational costs

- 3 WWTPs to operate
Advantages:
- Only 1 WWTP to operate
- Lowest NPV due to lowest
investment and operational costs
2) 1 central WWTP
in Bacau
retained
Disadvantages:
- 3 pumping stations and
pressure lines necessary
Justification for selection:
Lowest NPV
The financial evaluation (NPV assessment) is compiled in the following table.

Option 2/ Final cost
P.E.
Investment Sum
specific costs Investment Sum
Operation cost
Discounted Present Value

spec. NPV Euro/p.e.
Option 1
314,862
314,862
45,787,616
52.926.853
145
168
100.0%
115.6%
2,952,416
3,026,789
100.0%
102.5%
94,112,507
102,710,793
299
326
100.0%
109.1%
Due to economic reasons Option 2 was selected as preferred solution.
2 Agglomeration Moinesti
Water Supply
There are no supply options inside Water Supply Zone Moinesti.
Wastewater
The agglomeration of Moinesti comprises the town Moinesti and the locality Gazarie.
The settlement Zemes will join the clustered agglomeration in phase 3.
For Moinesti cluster the following 2 options have been analysed:
Option 1: 1 central WWTP in Moinesti North with 3 PS
Option 2: 1 WWTP in Moinesti North and 1 WWTP in Moinesti South
EN
46
EN
Existing assets
Description of key
deficiencies
Identification of
options
First screening

Advantages:
- Lower NPV compared to
option 2 due to lower operation
costs
WWTP Moinesti North

Existing sewer network
Moinesti North
- Effluent quality
does not meet
requirements of
UWWTD because no
efficient Nitrogen
and Phosphorous
removal is existing
1) 1 central WWTP
in Moinesti North
with 3 PS
retained
Disadvantages:
- 3 pumping stations in Moinesti
South and one in Gazarie
necessary
Lowest NPV
- Poor condition of
electro-mechanical
equipment and of
civil structures
Advantages:
- Only 1 pumping station in
Gazarie necessary
2) 1 WWTP in
Moinesti North and 1
WWTP in Moinesti
South
Disadvantages:
rejected
- Higher NPV compared to
option 1 due to higher operation
costs

Option 1/ Final cost
P.E.
Investment Sum
Operation cost

spec. NPV Euro/p.e.
Option 2
31,719
31,719
17,814,902
17,491,511
562
551
100.0%
98.2%
486,833
504,638
100.0%
103,7%
26,646,531
26,667,953
840
841
100.0%
100.1%
Due to economic reasons Option 2 was selected as preferred solution.
3 Agglomeration Buhushi
Water Supply
There are no supply options inside Water Supply Zone Buhusi
Wastewater
EN
47
EN
The agglomeration of Buhusi comprises only the town Buhusi itself. The settlements
Blagesti, Buda, Valea Lui Ion, Tardenii Mari and Racova will join the cluster in phase 2
(compliance date 2018).
For Buhusi Cluster the following 2 options have been analysed:
Option 1: 1 WWTP 1 in Buhusi, 1 WWTP 2 in Blagesti, 1 WWTP 3 in Racova and 1
WWTP 4 in Valea Lui Ion
Option 2: 1 central WWTP in Buhusi
Existing assets
Description of key
deficiencies
Identification of
options
First screening

Advantages:
WWTP Buhusi
Existing sewer network
Buhusi
- Effluent quality
does not meet
requirements of
UWWTD because no
efficient Nitrogen
and Phosphorous
removal is existing
- Poor condition of
electro-mechanical
equipment and of
civil structures
1) 1 WWTP 1 in
Buhusi, 1 WWTP 2
in Blagesti, 1 WWTP
3 in Racova and 1
WWTP 4 in Valea
Lui Ion
- No pumping station and

pressure line necessary
rejected
Disadvantages:
- Higher NPV compared to
option 2 because of higher
investment and operational costs
Advantages:
- Lower NPV compared to
option 1 due to lower investment
and operational costs
2) 1 central WWTP
in Buhusi
retained
Disadvantages:
- Pumping station in Buda and
pressure line necessary
Lowest NPV
EN
48
EN
Option 2 / Final
P.E.
Investment Sum
Operation cost

spec. NPV Euro/p.e.
Option 1
34,823
34,823
22,620,442
23,681,501
650
680
100.0%
104.7%
497,317
602,879
100.0%
121.2%
31,623,653
34,616,059
908
994
100.0%
109.5%
Option 2 was selected as preferred solution due to economic reasons.
4 Agglomeration Darmanesti
Water Supply
There are no water supply measures inside Darmanesti WSZ.
Wastewater
The agglomeration Darmanesti includes the settlements Darmanesti, Darmaneasca and
Lapos. The cluster will be joined in phase 3 by the settlements Salatruc, Pagubeni and
Plopu. Due to the position of Darmanesti Agglomeration with no proximity to other
relevant settlements and no possibility to connect it to other agglomerations by gravity,
no option analysis was carried out.
5. Agglomeration Targu Ocna

Water Supply
There are no water supply measures inside Targu Ocna WSZ.
Wastewater
The agglomeration Targu Ocna includes the town Targu Ocna and Valcele. The cluster
will be joined in phase 3 by the settlements Poieni and Bogata. Due to the position of
Targu Ocna Agglomeration with no proximity to other relevant settlements and no
possibility to connect it to other agglomerations by gravity, no option analysis was
carried out.
D.
TIMETABLE
D.1.
Project timetable
Give below the timetable for the development of the overall project.
Where the application concerns a project stage, clearly indicate in the table the
elements of the overall project for which assistance is being sought by this
application:
EN
49
EN
Start date
(A)
Completion date
(B)
1. Feasibility studies:
01/06/2008
31/08/2010
2. Cost-benefit analysis (including financial)
15/03/2009
23/08/2010
3. Environmental impact assessment:
16/12/2009
ongoing
4. Design studies:
01/12/2009
31/12/2010**
30/03/2010
31/01/2011**
15/10/2010
15/02/2011**
n/a
n/a
8. Construction phase / contract:
01/12/2010
31/12/2013
9. Operational phase:
01/01/2014
01/01/2054
5. Preparation of Tender documentation:

6. Expected launch of tender procedure(s)
7. Land acquisition:
**Latest Contracts
An overview about the planned procurement is shown in the following table, details can be
found in annex III:
Title
Sum incl.
Conting.
WWTP Bacau
WW-Network Buhusi and Moinesti
WS-Networks Buhusi and Moinesti
WW-Network Bacau
Rehabilitation WTP Caraboaia
WWTPs Moinesti and Buhusi
WW-Networks Darmanesti and Targu Ocna
New WWTP Darmanesti and Rehabilitation WWTP Targu Ocna
14,064,427
12,014,467
1,766,111
10,811,797
3,857,041
16,550,220
22,161,451
9,653,810
Dec-2010
Jan-2011
Jan-2011
Jan-2011
Feb-2011
Feb-2011
Mar-2011
Mar-2011
Dec-2012
Dec-2013
Dec-2012
Dec-2013
Dec-2012
Dec-2013
Dec-2013
Dec-2013
7,580,989
Dec-2010
Dec-2013
Contract Nr.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9 Service Contracts Bacau

*
Start works End Works
Specify for each tender
Please attach a summary schedule of the main categories of works (i.e., a Gantt chart,
where available).
D.2.
Project maturity
Describe the project timetable (D.1) in terms of the technical and financial progress
and current maturity of the project under the following headings:
D.2.1.
Technical (feasibility studies, etc.):
Masterplan: Approved by MEF on 04/02/2009

Feasibility Study: Draft version delivered on 31/08/2010
Service and Work contracts: planned during years 2010/2011
D.2.2.
Administrative (authorisations, EIA, land purchase, invitations to tender, etc.):
Authorisations and permits:

The following authorisations and permits have been already issued:
- Urbanism Certificates for each agglomeration ongoing
- Water Management permits from the responsible National Administration Apele
Romane ongoing;
EN
50
EN
- Environmental Impact Assessment Permits ongoing

- Natura 2000 Declaration (See Annex I)ongoing;
- Special permits like Building permits have to be obtained by the Work Contractors
after the signatures of the Work Contracts.
Land purchase:
Declarations regarding the availability of the land for the location of the future work:
There is no land acquisition required. Lands required for the proposed investments are
owned by the local authorities and are available for the project objectives.
D.2.3.
Financial (commitment decisions in respect of national public expenditure, loans

requested or granted, etc. - give references):
Considering (i) the level of the financing gap calculated, (ii) the provisions regarding the
financing of the financing gap according to the Sectoral Operational Programme (SOP
Environment), and (iii) the decisions of the local stakeholders, the financing scheme
proposed to cover the project investment cost which are considered after approval by the
EC as eligible cost, has the following structure (% in total eligible investment costs):
EU Grant: 76.98%;
State Budget contribution: 11.77%;
Local Budgets contribution: 1.81%;
Loan contracted by the ROC: 9.44%
All costs related to the project are expected to be eligible. Considering this, the financial
plan for the total investments is identical with the financing plan for the eligible costs.
The financing plan for the eligible cost is presented in the following table in EUR
(current prices):
Financing plan
(Euro)
Eligible cost
EU Grant
State Budget
Local Budget
ROC Loan
Total
(117,301,887)
90,297,149
13,810,152
2,124,639
11,069,948
2009
-
2010
(1,112,581)
856,447
130,986
20,152
104,996
2011
2012
2013
(44,779,166)
34,470,298
5,271,928
811,066
4,225,874
(47,213,316)
36,344,068
5,558,505
855,155
4,455,588
(24,196,824)
18,626,335
2,848,734
438,267
2,283,489
The local authorities decided that their co-financing contribution to be financed by each
local authority part of the project.
The operator is still in process of analyzing the options for the co-financing loan (IFI vs.
commercial banks). This process will be finalized in the following months.
The loan will be repaid by the ROC from the revenues generated by the water and
wastewater activities.
The contribution from the central authorities is in line with the provisions of the Sectoral
Operational Programme (SOP Environment).
The financing plan in the structured required by the Managing Authority is presented in
the following table in EUR (current prices):
EN
51
EN
D.2.4.
If the project has already started, indicate the current state of works:
The project has not started
EN
52
EN
E.
COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS
This section should be based on the Guidelines on the methodology for carrying out the cost-benefit-analysis of
major projects. In addition to the summary elements to be provided, the full cost-benefit analysis document shall
be provided in support of this application as Annex II.
E.1.
Financial analysis
The key elements from the financial analysis of the CBA should be summarised below.
E.1.1.
Short description of methodology and specific assumptions made

Methodology
The cost benefit analysis was carried out in accordance with the rules set put in the
Council Regulation 1083/2006 for the 2007 2013 programming period of the
Cohesion Fund and follows the principles presented in the EU Working Document
no.4: Guidance on the Methodology for carrying out Cost Benefit Analysis
(version August 2006) and in the Guidelines for the Cost Benefit Analysis of Water
and Wastewater Projects to be supported by the Cohesion Fund and the European
Regional Development Fund in 2007 2013 (version December 2008 and updated
in April 2009).
The financial analysis of the project is carried out at incremental level on a 30 year
period (2010 2039) based on the two scenarios envisaged:
-
With Project: one ROC covering the entire project area, implementing the
current project and operating the existing infrastructure and the one to be built
following the implementation of the project,
Without Project: business as usual, based on the existing infrastructure,
General approach
In general terms the financial analysis takes into account all relevant data and
information made available from the various sources and especially the reports,
financial statements and production / service data provided by the former water
utilities for the years 2007 and 2008. It takes further into account the socio-economic
data and background information presented in the Master Plan Report and the
technical concepts, demand projections and cost estimates, as detailed in the
respective chapters of the Feasibility Study.
According to EU standard the CBA, and thus also the financial analysis has to use
the incremental method: that means, the project is evaluated on the basis of the
differences between the scenario with project and the scenario without project.
For the with project scenario costs and revenues considered must be those of a
scenario of efficient operation. For the without project scenario costs and revenues
considered are those of a business as usual, without any major new investments or
rehabilitations.
Institutional issues
The financial forecast considers the impact of the regionalization process on the
financial performances of the Regional Operating Company (ROC). The
implemented institutional set-up is in line with the provisions of the Sectoral
Operational Programme (SOP Environment).
EN
53
EN
Projection of water and wastewater sales

The projection of water and wastewater sales is carried out in line with the
assumptions and projections outlined in Section C1.
Affordability analysis approach

The affordability policy for the water and wastewater sector as applied for the project
is in line with the provisions of the SOP and with the policy of the Ministry of
Environment; the key issues are:
-
The affordability limit for the poorest decile (10%) of households is set at 4%,
calculated on an assumed per capita consumption of 75 litres per day;
This corresponds to approximately 2.0% - 2.5% of the net income of an average

income household.
Considering this policy, the affordability analysis is performed at 2 levels:

-
Affordability analysis for low income households;
Affordability analysis for average income households.
Projection of operating cost

The projection of operating costs is based on the actual O&M cost as provided by the
particular water utilities for the years 2007 and 2008 (in RON) and then projected on
an annual basis in line with the implementation schedule elaborated within the
Feasibility Study for the period 2010 to 2039; in EUR (constant prices).
The operating costs are calculated with specific assumptions separately for the with
project and the without project scenario.
Projection of revenues
The revenues are calculated with specific assumptions separately for the with
project and the without project scenario.
The projection of the revenues for the with project case is based on the
development of tariff levels as defined in a detailed Tariff Strategy Study and the
demand projections as outlined above. It is assumed that from 2013 onwards there
will be a unified tariff for the whole service area of the ROC with in principle equal
tariffs for domestic and non-domestic customers.
The revenues for the without project case are defined as required for cost recovery
in the without case (that means to cover in each year O&M cost, depreciation and a
profit charge. The revenues are calculated and stated on an annual basis in EUR
(constant prices).
Calculation of financing gap

The financing gap is calculated based on the methodology as provided by the
Guidelines for Cost Benefit Analysis of Water and Wastewater projects to be
supported by the Cohesion Fund and the European Regional Development Fund in
2007-2013 prepared by the Ministry of Environment and JASPERS for the
Romanian Water Sector Projects.
EN
54
EN
Financing the gap

According to the Sectoral Operational Programme, the financing mix considered for
financing the financing gap has the following structure:
-
EU Grant for the priority axis: 85%;
State Budget Contribution: 10% - 13%;
Local Budget Contribution: 2% - 5%.
A detailed analysis was conducted in order to define and set appropriate percentage
portions for the local and state budget contributions.
Projection of financial statements for the ROC

In order to assess the sustainability of the Regional Operator with the Project
Measure the Consultant has elaborated the following financial statements (in
constant EUR):
-
Balance sheet;
Income statement;
Cash flow statement.
Economic analysis
In order to prove that the project is advantageous to the society of the country the
Consultant has performed a detailed economic analysis. The economic analysis is
based on the methodology provided by the Guidelines for Cost Benefit Analysis of
Water and Wastewater projects to be supported by the Cohesion Fund and the
European Regional Development Fund in 2007-2013 prepared by the Ministry of
Environment and JASPERS for the Romanian Water Sector Projects.
Sensitivity analysis
In order to validate the assumptions used and to identify the most sensitive variables,
a detailed sensitivity and risk analysis is performed in three parts:
Analysis (1) shows the effects of variation in key parameters on the financing mix;
Analysis (2) shows the effects of variation in key parameters on the financial
results (FNPV and FRR);
Analysis (3) shows the effects of variation in key parameters on the economic
results (B/C ratio, ENPV, ERR).
Risk analysis
A detailed risk analysis is conducted for the sensitive variables at 2 levels:
-
For the financial analysis parameters;
For the economic analysis parameters.
The risk analysis regarding the financial parameters considers the following
variables:
EN
Investment costs;
Operating and maintenance costs;
Revenues.
55
EN
The risk analysis regarding the economic parameters considers the following
variables:
-
Investment costs;
Environmental benefits.
Both risk analyses are carried out for a number of scenarios and anticipated
probability distributions for each scenario. The variables tested are:
E.1.2.
FNPV/C and FNPV/K for the financial analysis;
ENPV and ERR for the economic analysis.
Main elements and parameters used in the CBA for financial analysis
Main elements and parameters
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
10
11
7
8
EN
Reference period (years)
Value
Not discounted
Value
Discounted (Net
Present Value)
30
Financial discount rate

5.0%
(%)6
Total investment cost excluding
contingencies (in euro, not
discounted)7
Total investment cost (in euro,
discounted)
Residual value (in euro, not
discounted)
Residual value (in euro, discounted)
Revenues (in euro, discounted)
Operating costs (in euro, discounted)
Funding gap calculation8
Net revenue = revenues operating
costs + residual value (in euro,
discounted) = (7) (8) + (6)
Investment cost net revenue (in
euro, discounted) = (4) (9)
(Article 55 (2))
Funding gap rate (%) =
(10) / (4)
97,732,908
89,621,847
21,126,216
5,132,536
42,580,091
39,254,885
8,457,742
81,164,104
90.5629%
Specify if the rate is real or nominal. If the financial analysis is conducted in constant prices, a financial discount
rate expressed in real terms shall be used. If the analysis is conducted in current prices, a discount rate in nominal
terms shall be used.
Investment cost should here exclude contingencies in accordance with working document number 4.
This does not apply: 1) for projects subject to the rules on State aids in the meaning of Article 87 of the EC Treaty
(see point G.1), pursuant to Article 55(6) of Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 and 2) if operating costs are higher
than revenues the project is not considered as revenue generating in the sense of Article 55 of Regulation (EC)
No 1083/2006, in which case, ignore items 9 and 10 and set funding gap to 100%.
56
EN
Where VAT is recoverable, the costs and revenues should be based on figures
excluding VAT.
The analysis is conducted in real terms and 5% real discount rate was used.
E.1.3.
Main results of the financial analysis

Without Community assistance With Community assistance
(FRR/C)
(FRR/K)
B9
A
1. Financial rate of return
2. Net present value
E.1.4.
(%)
(euro)
-5.09%
-87,558,333
FRR/C
FNPV/C
-0.28%
-11,300,021
FRR/K
FNPV/K
Revenues generated over its lifetime

If the project is expected to generate revenues through tariffs or charges borne by
users, please give details of charges (types and level of charges, principle or
Community legislation on the basis of which the charges have been established).
(a)
Do the charges cover the operational costs and depreciation of the project?
The water and wastewater tariffs are set in order to assure full cost recovery and a
sustainable development of the Regional Operator. The designed tariff strategy also
considers affordability constrains for domestic customers according to the policy
principles as presented in Section E.1.1- paragraph 4.
In order to achieve both objectives, the following annual increase of tariffs (in real
terms) is to be implemented by the ROC in ordered to assure tariff unification by the
year 2014x and a sustainable development:
Tariff unification strategy
Actual
Tariffs
Bacau
Water
Wastewater
Moinesti
Water
Wastewater
Buhusi
Water
Wastewater
Darmanesti
Water
Wastewater
Targu Ocna
Water
Wastewater
2011
2012
2013
2014
2.62
1.00
0.0%
30.0%
0.0%
0.0%
5.0%
20.0%
0.0%
25.0%
2.57
0.77
0.0%
24.0%
0.0%
0.0%
7.0%
40.0%
0.0%
45.9%
2.62
0.75
0.0%
24.0%
0.0%
0.0%
5.0%
35.0%
0.0%
55.3%
1.06
0.43
49.0%
67.0%
0.0%
0.0%
33.0%
65.0%
31.0%
64.6%
2.05
0.87
9.3%
16.0%
0.0%
0.0%
10.0%
30.0%
11.7%
48.6%
Traian
EN
For the calculation of the project profitability without ("/C") and with ("/K") Community assistance, refer to the
guidance provided by the Commission in line with Article 40 of Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006.
57
EN
Actual
Tariffs
2011
2012
2013
2014
Water
Wastewater
1.66
-
19.3%
-
0.0%
0.0%
18.6%
0.0%
16.9%
0.0%
Filipesti
Water
Wastewater
1.66
-
19.3%
-
0.0%
0.0%
18.6%
0.0%
16.9%
0.0%
Magiresti
Water
Wastewater
1.66
-
19.3%
-
0.0%
0.0%
18.6%
0.0%
16.9%
0.0%
Ardeoani
Water
Wastewater
1.80
-
15.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
15.5%
0.0%
15.0%
0.0%
Poduri
Water
Wastewater
1.61
-
20.5%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
19.5%
0.0%
18.5%
0.0%
Tatarasti
Water
Wastewater
1.71
-
17.5%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
17.0%
0.0%
16.8%
0.0%
Prajesti
Water
Wastewater
1.61
-
20.5%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
19.5%
0.0%
18.5%
0.0%
Tg Trotus
Water
Wastewater
1.67
-
18.6%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
18.0%
0.0%
17.5%
0.0%
Faraoani
Water
Wastewater
1.62
0.65
20.4%
34.0%
0.0%
0.0%
19.0%
45.0%
18.5%
54.4%
Buciumi
Water
Wastewater
1.59
-
21.4%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
19.6%
0.0%
19.0%
0.0%
Casin
Water
Wastewater
1.94
-
11.3%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
13.0%
0.0%
12.5%
0.0%
Racaciuni
Water
Wastewater
2.52
1.35
1.2%
1.0%
0.0%
0.0%
3.5%
15.0%
4.2%
24.5%
Ungureni
Water
Wastewater
3.00
-
-4%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
-4.4%
0.0%
-0.1%
0.0%
Dealu Morii
Water
Wastewater
3.00
-
-4%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
-4.4%
0.0%
-0.1%
0.0%
Gaiceana (populatie)
Water
Wastewater
1.01
0.5
52.5%
54.0%
0.0%
0.0%
35.0%
55.0%
32.5%
63.5%
Gaiceana (ag economici)
EN
58
EN
EN
Actual
Tariffs
2011
2012
2013
2014
Water
Wastewater
1.35
0.5
31.1%
54.0%
0.0%
0.0%
25.0%
55.0%
24.5%
63.5%
Nicolae Balcescu
Water
Wastewater
1.80
-
15.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
15.0%
0.0%
15.6%
0.0%
Hemeiusi
Water
Wastewater
4.07
-
-13.4%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
-11.9%
0.0%
-11.5%
0.0%
Sarata
Water
Wastewater
1.68
-
18.5%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
18.0%
0.0%
17.0%
0.0%
Izvorul Berheciului
Water
Wastewater
2.00
-
10.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
11.0%
0.0%
12.5%
0.0%
Margineni
Water
Wastewater
3.42
-
-8.2%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
-7.3%
0.0%
-5.5%
0.0%
Parincea
Water
Wastewater
3.50
0.50
-9.0%
54.0%
0.0%
0.0%
-7.5%
55.0%
-6.5%
63.0%
Parincea
Water
Wastewater
1.70
0.50
17.7%
54.0%
0.0%
0.0%
17.4%
55.0%
17.0%
63.0%
Pargaresti
Water
Wastewater
1.39
-
29.5%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
25.0%
0.0%
22.0%
0.0%
Sat Parau Boghii

Water
Wastewater
0.71
-
88.7%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
45.0%
0.0%
41.5%
0.0%
Colonesti
Water
Wastewater
1.14
-
43.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
30.0%
0.0%
30.0%
0.0%
Palanca
Water
Wastewater
1.00
-
54.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
35.0%
0.0%
32.5%
0.0%
Rachitoasa
Water
Wastewater
1.20
-
39.2%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
30.0%
0.0%
26.5%
0.0%
Stefan cel Mare

Water
Wastewater
1.53
-
23.5%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
21.0%
0.0%
20.3%
0.0%
59
EN
The local authorities (the entities responsible for approval of tariff adjustments) are
aware of the need of these tariff increases and will include them in the delegation
contract.
The ROC is preparing and updating the corporate business plan on an annual basis.
As part of the business plan process the ROC is performing the following activities
related to tariff strategy:
-
Prepare a medium term financial forecast in order to assure the sustainable

development of the Operator;
Identify the impact of any new elements on the activity of the Operator and
adjust the tariff strategy based on these impacts and considering the affordability
constrains;
Perform an affordability study and identify the categories of population that are
not able to pay the water and wastewater bill and assess the impact on the
collection ratio. Together with IDA and the local authorities find solutions, on a
year to year basis, for these categories of inhabitants.
(b)
Do the charges differ between the various users of the infrastructure?
Currently there are equal tariffs for domestic and non-domestic customers, both for
water and wastewater services (except for Gaiceana and Parincea agglomerations).
The tariff levels are also unified between the different sub-areas within the overall
service area of the ROC.
With the implementation of the Project Measure it is assumed that from now
onwards there will be one unified water tariff for the whole service area of the ROC,
with equal tariff rates for domestic and non-domestic customers.
There will also be one unified wastewater tariff with equal tariff rates for domestic
and non-domestic customers.
The increase of tariff rates in real terms in order to assure a sustainable development
is presented in the table in Section E.1.4.a).
(c)
Are the charges proportional

i)
To the use of the project/real consumption?
It is assumed that after completion of the Project Measure 100% of the connected
customers are metered, with functioning water meters.
As there is no fixed charge (standing charge) the charges for all categories of
customers are proportional to the actually metered volumes of water consumption.
As wastewater tariffs are applied on the quantities of metered water sales, also
wastewater charges are proportional to the volumes of metered water consumption.
ii)
To the pollution generated by users?
Regarding water consumption there is no indication for different levels / quantities of

pollution generated by domestic and non-domestic customers. Thus the equal water
tariffs applied are considered proportional to pollution generation.
Regarding wastewater discharge, domestic and non-domestic customers have to pay
in principle equal wastewater tariffs; non-domestic customers have, however, to pay
in addition a pollution charge in case that they exceed the agreed levels for the
EN
60
EN
quality of the discharged wastewater. The ROC is constantly monitoring the

industrial companies and this extra pollution charge is applied only for exceeding
the contractual requirements (according to the legal provisions).
If no tariffs or charges are proposed, how will operating and maintenance costs
be covered?
For this project a full cost covering tariff system is applied.
E.2.
Socio-economic analysis
E.2.1.
Provide a short description of methodology (key assumptions made in valuing costs

and benefits) and the main findings of the socio-economic analysis:
In order to prove that the project is advantageous to the society of the country the
Consultant has performed a detailed economic analysis. It is based on the following
assumptions:
-
The period of evaluation is 2010 to 2039:
The base year for evaluation is 2010, the first year of project implementation;
All cost and benefit figures are stated in constant economic prices;
Social discount rate used for calculation of NPV is 5.5%.
The cost components considered are:

-
Project investment cost;
Replacement cost;
Project OM&A cost.
CO2 emissions;
For the negative externalities (CO2 emissions) the following assumptions were used:
Negative Externalities
Type
Base for calculation
Monetary value
Increase in CO2 emission

sludge digestion
CO2 emission
tonnes)
(in
From 25 Euro/tonne in 2010 to

45 Euro/tonne in 2030
Increase in CO2 emission

sludge transportation
CO2 emission
tonnes)
(in
From 25 Euro/tonne in 2010 to

45 Euro/tonne in 2030
Comments
For the economic analysis the financial cost have to be transferred into economic
cost by applying appropriate conversion factors.
Within the framework of the economic analysis for Bacau County there is only one
conversion factor applied. It is a conversion factor for labour cost, used to exclude
the transfer payments included in labour cost (like taxes and social security
payments) and to establish a shadow price for labour considering unemployment.
EN
61
EN
The determination of the economic benefit is based on a comparison of the situation

with project and without project. The comparison of without project and with
project scenarios differs from the comparison of the situations before and after
the project, as the latter does not describe the situation which would prevail if the
project was not undertaken.
The estimation of the project economic benefits involves the identification of the
project benefits, which can be classified into the following three main categories:
a). Benefits from improved access to drinking water, which translates into more
water of adequate quality sold to the customers, either through increase of the
coverage of the water supply service or to the increase in individual consumption due
to the improvement of the quality of the service (i.e.: increase of pressure and
decrease of service interruptions).
b). Benefits from improved quality of bathing and other surface waters, which
translates into an improvement in the overall conditions of water bodies in the project
area as a result of pollution prevention.
c). Resource cost savings:
- for the customers, which takes place (i) when the customer does no longer need to
rely on private wells, private pumps, septic tanks, and does no longer have to buy
bottled water
- for the operator, through the optimization of the system which allows for a reduced
resource depletion through water abstraction as well as a reduction in emissions
related to energy savings.
The summarizations of the individual benefits are presented in the following table
(according to the JASPERS CBA Guide for Romania).
Project Benefits
Type
Access to drinking water
EN
Base for calculation

Nr. Of households in
project service area
Monetary value
148 Euro/household/year
(2008 value)
Improvement of water
bodies (use value)
Nr. Of people living

in the project service
area
20.4 Euro/person/year
(2008 value)
Improvement of water
bodies (non use value)
Nr. Of households in
project service area
Cost savings to customers

private well
Cost savings to customers
sewage disposal
Cost savings to operator
water abstraction
Cost savings to operator
energy consumption
Nr. Of households
newly connected
Nr. Of households
newly connected
Incremental water
savings (in m3)
CO2 emission savings
(in tonnes)
0.004 0.011
Euro/household/year/KM
river
Comments
Values for following
years of projection to be
increased by real GDP
growth
Values for following
years of projection to be
increased by real GDP
growth
Water abstraction fee
(Apele Romane)
From 25 Euro/tonne in
2010 to 45 Euro/tonne in
2030
62
EN
E.2.2.
Give details of main economic costs and benefits identified in the analysis together
with values assigned to them:
Un it v al ue ( whe r e
a ppli c abl e)
Acc e s s t o
dr i n ki n g wa ter
1 4 8 E u r o/ h ou se h ol d / ye a r
147,114,850
45.68%
I mpr o ve me n t of
wat e r b od i e s ( u se
va l ue )
2 0. 4 E ur o / p er son / ye a r
105,369,237
32.71%
I mpr o ve me n t of
wa t er b od i e s ( n on
u se va l u e)
0. 0 0 4 0. 0 1 1
E ur o / h ou se h ol d / ye a r / K M r i ve r
313,761
0.10%
C os t sa vi n g t o
cu st o mer s pr i vat e w el l
804,097
0.25%
cu st o mer s se wa ge d i sp os al
67,378,039
20.92%
op e r a t or wa te r
ab s tr ac ti on
0 . 0 1 2 E ur o/ m 3
0.00%
op er at or - e ner g y
c on s u mp t i on
Fr om 2 5 E ur o/ t on n e C O2 i n
2 0 1 0 t o 4 5 E ur o/ t on n e C O2 i n
2030
1,102,629
0.34%
C ost
Un it v al ue ( whe r e
a ppli c abl e)
Re s u lti n g o ve ra ll
e c on om i c ca p it al
c ost s
N/a
91,078,195
75.62%
I nc r e me n ta l
ec on omi c
o p er at i on c ost f or
wat e r
& wa st ewa te r
N/a
28,934,796
24.02%
CO 2 e m is si on s
Fr om 2 5 E ur o / t on n e i n 2 0 1 0 t o
4 5 E u r o/ t on n e i n 2 0 3 0
433,791
0.36%
E.2.3.
% of t ot a l
be nef it s
T ot a l v al ue
( in e ur o,
di sc o u nt e d)
% of t ot a l c o st s
Main indicators of the economic analysis

Main parameters and indicators
Values
1. Social discount rate (%)
5,5%
2. Economic rate of return (%)
19.0%
3. Economic net present value (in euro)
201,635,832
4. Benefit-cost ratio
EN
T ot a l v al ue
( in e ur o,
di sc o u nt e d)
Be nef it
2.67
63
EN
E.2.4.
Employment effects of project

Provide an indication of the number of jobs to be created (expressed in terms of fulltime equivalents (FTE)).
Number of jobs directly created:
No (FTE)
(A)
Average duration of these jobs

(months)10
(B)
1. During implementation phase
200
36
2. During operational phase
10
permanent
[NB: indirect jobs created or lost are not sought for public infrastructure
investments.]
E.2.5.
Identify the main non-quantifiable / non valuable benefits and costs:

The main non-quantifiable / non valuable benefits and costs identified for the project
are the following:
(1)
Development effects:
One of the most important general effects not considered within the quantitative
economic assessment is the anticipated impact of the improved public water and
wastewater infrastructure on the regional economic development of Bacau County.
The improvement of the water quality and rehabilitation of the sewerage and water
network will be an incentive for the commercial companies, real estate investors and
residential house developers to invest in Bacau County.
(2)
Health effects:
There will be a significant impact on the immediate communities from the reduced
level of pollutants in water and wastewater. This will also in the long term improve
the ground water aquifer leading to a further reduction in pollutants in potential
drinking water resources. The availability of safe drinking water for an increased
number of inhabitants will considerably reduce the risk of water born diseases, the
extent of drug consumptions and the number of sickness days of employees. The
estimate of the health effects considered in the quantitative economic analysis covers
just a part of these effects.
(3)
Water quality:
There will be a significant improvement of the water quality of the rivers and their
surrounding environment and of the groundwater quality in the project area.
Stopping the infiltrations of untreated wastewater into the underground layer will
lead to considerable reduction of organic and nutrient pollution load discharged
directly into receiving water body.
(4)
Environmental effects:
(i) Considerable reduction of organic and nutrient pollution load discharged directly
into the receiving water body;
(ii) Elimination of groundwater and subsoil contamination through rehabilitation of
wastewater collectors and elimination of leakages;
10
EN
In case of permanent jobs, instead of duration in months, type "permanent".
64
EN
(iii) Reduction of health risks for the population by eliminating discharge of

untreated or insufficiently treated wastewater;
(iv) Generation of energy by gas generation in sewage sludge digesters; the energy is
used for heating and saves energy, which usually is generated from non-renewable
energy sources.
(5) Employment effect

The project will generate additional employment in the area during the 4 years of
implementation period; with a considerable portion of manual labour, with benefits
for all social groups in the area.
(6)
Impact from construction works:
There will be limited impact on population and neighbouring land ownership, the
main works will be extension and rehabilitation works.
The main hindrance will be the impact on local traffic flows caused by truck and
staff transport during the 4 years of construction period. In general there will be a
certain hindrance but it will have just limited impact on the inhabitants or economic
and recreational activities in the local area; the impact will be mitigated by
appropriate traffic management at key junction points.
(7)
Impact on real estate:
The impact on real estate prices in Bacau County is expected to have more positive
than negative effects; on the one side there will be some noise and nuisance from the
works during the period of construction, on the other side there will be an increase of
the attractiveness of the real estate connected to functioning water supply and
wastewater collection and treatment systems.
E.3.
Risk and sensitivity analysis
E.3.1.
Short description of methodology and summary results

Sensitivity Analysis
In order to validate the assumptions used and to identify the most sensitive variables,
a detailed sensitivity and risk analysis has been performed, showing (i) the effects of
variation in key parameters on the financial results, and (ii) the effects of variation
in key parameters on the economic results.
(i)
Sensitivity Analysis regarding the Financial Analysis:
This Sensitivity Analysis shows the effects of reasonable variations in investment

cost, operation cost and revenues on:
-
NPV/C and FIRR/C;
NPV/K and FIRR/K;
both before community assistance and after community assistance.
(ii)
Sensitivity Analysis regarding the Economic Analysis:
This Sensitivity Analysis shows the effects of key parameters on the economic
results (NPV, EIRR and B/C).
EN
65
EN
The analysis is carried out for variations of +/- 1%; +/-5%; and +/-10% for the
following parameters:
-
Investment cost;
CO2 emissions;
Access to drinking water benefit;
Improvement of water bodies (use value);
Improvement of water bodies (non-use value);
Cost saving to customers - private well
Cost saving to customers - sewage disposal;
Cost saving to operator water abstraction;
Cost saving to operator - energy consumption;
Operating costs.
Risk Analysis
A detailed risk analysis is conducted for the most sensitive variables at 2 levels:
-
For the financial analysis parameters;
For the economic analysis parameters.
The risk analysis regarding the financial parameters considers the following sensitive
variables:
-
Investment costs;
Revenues.
The risk analysis regarding the economic parameters considers the following
variables:
-
Investment costs;
Environmental benefits cumulating the sensitive environmental variables;
Both risk analyses are carried out for a number of scenarios and anticipated
probability distributions for each scenario. The variables tested are:
-
FNPV/C and FNPV/K for the financial analysis;
ENPV and ERR for the economic analysis.
The results of the Sensitivity and Risk Analysis are stated in the following sections.
E.3.2.
Sensitivity analysis
State the percentage change applied to the variables tested: 1
Present the estimated effect on results of financial and economic performance
indexes.
EN
66
EN
Variable tested
Project investment cost (increase

of 1%)
Project investment cost (decrease
of 1%)
O&M costs (increase of 1%)
O&M costs (decrease of 1%)
Revenues development (increase
of 1%)
Revenues development (decrease
of 1%)
Variation in investment costs
(increase of 1%)
Variation in investment costs
(decrease of 1%)
Variation in CO2 emissions
(increase of 1%)
Variation in CO2 emissions
(decrease of 1%)
Variation of access to drinking
water benefit (increase of 1%)
Variation of access to drinking
water benefit (decrease of 1%)
Variation of improvement of
water bodies (use value)
(increase of 1%)
Variation of improvement of
water bodies (use value)
(decrease of 1%)
Variation in improvement of
water bodies (non use value)
(increase of 1%)
Variation in improvement of
water bodies (non use value)
(decrease of 1%)
Variation in cost saving to
customers - private well
(increase of 1%)
customers - private well
(decrease of 1%)
customers - sewage disposal
(increase of 1%)
customers - sewage disposal
(decrease of 1%)
operator water abstraction
(increase of 1%)
operator water abstraction
(decrease of 1%)
operator - energy consumption
(increase of 1%)
EN
Financial Rate of
Return (FRR/C)
variation
Financial Net
Present Value
(FNPV/C)
variation
-0.50%
-1.14%
0.50%
1.14%
-8.10%
7.84%
-2.83%
2.83%
8.38%
2.91%
-8.69%
-2.91%
67
Economic Rate
of Return
(ERR) variation
Economic Net
Present Value
(ENPV) variation
-1.55%
-0.91%
1.59%
0.90%
-0.002%
-0.002%
0.002%
0.002%
0.40%
0.73%
-0.40%
-0.73%
0.24%
0.52%
-0.24%
-0.52%
0.001%
0.002%
-0.001%
-0.002%
0.003%
0.00%
-0.003%
0.00%
0.23%
0.33%
-0.23%
-0.33%
0.000%
0.000%
0.000%
0.000%
0.00%
0.01%
0.00%
-0.01%
EN
Variable tested
Financial Rate of
Return (FRR/C)
variation
Financial Net
Present Value
(FNPV/C)
variation
Economic Rate
of Return
(ERR) variation
Economic Net
Present Value
(ENPV) variation
-0.76%
-0.91%
0.77%
0.91%
operator - energy consumption

(decrease of 1%)
Variation in operating costs
(increase of 1%)
Variation in operating costs
(decrease of 1%)
Which variables were identified as critical variables? State which criterion is applied.
From the Sensitivity Analysis it turns out that regarding the financial analysis none
of the variables tested is critical, when the criterion is, that a variation of a variable
by 1% will lead to a change of the FNPV/C or the FRR/C by more than 5%.
Therefore the Consultant has selected as critical variable the variables for which a
variation of 1% leads to a change in the FNPV or FIRR of approximately 1% (the
variables with the higher impact). Thus the risk analysis considers the following
variables:
-
Revenues;
Investment costs.
The Consultant has selected as critical variable the variables for which a variation
of 1% leads to a change in the ENPV or EIRR of approximately 0.3% (the variables
with the higher impact).Therefore the Consultant has selected the following variables
for the risk analysis:
-
Investment costs.
Which are the switching values of the critical variables?

The switching value of a particular variable is defined as the percentage value at
which the NPV/C, NPV/K and ENPV equals 0 (%). The switching values for key
variables are presented in the following table:
EN
68
EN
Critical value
Project investment cost
Revenue scenario
Revenue scenario
O&M costs
O&M costs
O&M costs
Access to drinking water benefit
Improvement of water bodies (use value)
E.3.3.
Switching value
Maximum decrease before NPV/C equals 0 (%)
Maximum decrease before NPV/K equals 0 (%)
Maximum increase before ENPV equals 0 (%)
Maximum increase before NPV/C equals 0 (%)
Maximum increase before NPV/K equals 0 (%)
Maximum decrease before NPV/C equals 0 (%)
Maximum decrease before NPV/K equals 0 (%)
Maximum increase before ENPV equals 0 (%)
Maximum decrease before ENPV equals 0 (%)
Maximum decrease before ENPV equals 0 (%)
88.0%
48.5%
221.4%
34.4%
4.4%
35.3%
4.6%
109.7%
137.1%
191.4%
Risk analysis
Describe the probability distribution estimate of the projects financial and economic
performance indexes. Provide relevant statistical information (expected values,
standard deviation).
The risk analysis regarding the financial performance parameters considers the
following sensitive variables:
-
Investment costs;
Revenues.
Regarding the two cost variables it has to be noted that reliable estimates have been
established based on a profound analysis of current market prices, their historic
trends and their most probable development in the future, thus reducing the risk of
unexpected variations. In the case of revenues, two issues have been considered:
-
Regarding the specific water demand, the Consultant has taken into account the
general trends observed in Romania as well as the experience from other projects
under similar conditions;
Regarding the tariff development the Consultant has seriously considered the
affordability constrains.
The following three tables show the assumptions for and results of the risk analysis
regarding the financial performance parameters in the following sequence:
-
scenarios studied;
probabilities assigned to the particular scenarios;
statistical parameters for the financial performance parameters.
The detailed risk analysis as presented in the Financial and Economic Analysis,
Chapter 6.2, indicates that there is no serious risk for a successful implementation
and operation of the Project Measure.
EN
69
EN
Scenarios
Variation in Key Variables

Investment Cost (I)
O&M Cost (O)
-10.0%
-10.0%
-5.0%
-5.0%
0.0%
0.0%
5.0%
5.0%
10.0%
10.0%
Scenario O2
Scenario O1
Base Case
Scenario P1
Scenario P2
Revenues (R )
10.0%
5.0%
0.0%
-5.0%
-10.0%
Probabilities for Key Variables / Scenarios

Investment Cost (I)
O&M Cost (O)
Revenues (R )
1
2
3
4
5
6
Optimistic Scenario 2 (O2)

Optimistic Scenario 1 (O1)
Base Case (BC)
Pessimistic Scenario (P1)
Pessimistic Scenario (P2)
Total
1.0%
3.0%
70.0%
19.0%
7.0%
3.0%
5.0%
70.0%
15.0%
7.0%
2.0%
4.0%
85.0%
6.0%
3.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
The probability of the FNPV/C falling below the base case scenario values is around
41%. On the other hand, the probability that the FNPV/C becomes larger than 0 (i.e.
FRR/C > 5%) is 0%. The following table provides an overview of the distribution of
probabilities for the FNPV/C.
FNP/C< Base Case
Base Case<FNPV/C<0
FNP/C>0 (=FRR/C>5%)
P (in %)
43.4%
56.6%
0.0%
The probability of the FNPV/K falling below the base case scenario values is around
41%. On the other hand, the probability that the FNPV/K becomes larger than 0 (i.e.
FRR/K > 5%) is 0%. The following table provides an overview of the distribution of
probabilities for the FNPV/K.
P (in %)
FNP/K< Base Case
Base Case<FNPV/K<0
FNP/K>0 (=FRR/K>5%)
43.9%
56.1%
0.0%
The following table shows the standard deviation, the mean and the corresponding
normal cumulative distribution for the FNPV/K based on the probability distribution
shown above.
FNPV/C
(87,558,333)
(91,692,238)
26,195,602
0.563
0.713
Base case
Mean
Standard deviation
Norm. cum. distribution
Std. norm. cum. distribution
EN
70
FNPV/K
(11,300,021)
(14,018,032)
11,971,564
0.590
0.722
EN
The risk analysis regarding the economic performance parameters considers the
following sensitive variables:
-
Investment costs.
The detailed risk analysis as presented in the Financial and Economic Analysis,
Chapter 6.2, indicates that there is no serious risk for a successful implementation
and operation of the Project Measure.
Scenarios
Optimistic (O)
Base Case
Pessimistic (P)
Optimistic Scenario (O)

Base Case (BC)
Pessimistic Scenario (P)
Total
Variation in Key Variables

OM Cost (OM)
Sewerage (SW)
-5.0%
5.0%
0.0%
0.0%
5.0%
-5.0%
Water (W)
5.0%
0.0%
-5.0%
Probabilities for Key Variables /Scenarios

OM Cost (OM)
Sewerage (SW)
Water (W)
11.0%
3.0%
3.0%
70.0%
90.0%
90.0%
19.0%
7.0%
7.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
There is a probability of 57% that the values of the selected variables will actually
achieve the base case value.
The probability that the ERR becomes lower than 5.5% (i.e. ENPV=0) is 0%. The
following table provides an overview of the distribution of probabilities for the ERR.
P (in %)
5.5%>ERR
5.5%<ERR<=Base Case
Base Case<ERR
0.0%
85.0%
15.0%
The following table shows the standard deviation, the mean and the corresponding
normal cumulative distribution for the ERR and ENPV based on the probability
distribution shown above.
ERR
Base case
Mean
Standard deviation
Norm. cum. distribution
Std. norm. cum. distribution
EN
19.0%
18.9%
0.81%
0.544
0.707
71
ENPV
201,635,832
200,261,082
13,290,321
0.541
0.706
EN
F.
ANALYSIS OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
F.1.
How does the project:

(a)
contribute to the objective of environmental sustainability (European climate

change policy, halting loss of biodiversity, other );
(b)
respect the principles of preventive action and that environmental damage

should as a priority be rectified at source;
(c)
respect the "polluter pays" principle.
a)
The project contributes to the protection of the receiver water bodies by

implementing the EU Directive for Urban Waste Water Treatment (Directive
91/271/EC amended by Directive 98/15/EC), together with an improved sludge
management and disposal and by ensuring an efficient and sustainable use of
water resources thanks to a reduction of technical water losses. After the
implementation of the project the connection rate of the population to the
sewerage system will increase from 64% to 100% (90 % with CF project and
100 % with additional ROC efforts).. Insofar the project respects the targets
given by the Water Framework Directive (WFD 2000/60/EC amended by
Directive 2008/32/EC), contributing to the public health. The project will
contribute to the improvement of the quality of life of the population by rising
the connexion rate to the drinking water system from 89% to aprox. 100% (90
% with CF project and 100 % with additional ROC efforts). After
implementation of the project Implementation of the extension/rehabilitation of
the WWTPs will directly contribute to the protection and improvement of
biodiversity and natural heritage trough the better quality of the discharged
water into the body receptors.
b)
The project respects the principles of preventive action: as a major focus is on

an integrated water/wastewater management policy, meaning the extension of
the sewage networks in correlation with the existing water supply networks or
extending both networks in the same project.
Positive impacts on environmental components are expected after the
implementation of the project.
Furthermore, the project will contribute to:
- Improve the environmental situation in Bacau County - and reduce the health
risk for the population living in the area due to the extension of sewer networks
and the extension of the existing new wastewater treatment plant together with
implementation of the tertiary treatment for reducing the concentration of N
and P,
- Improve the water quality in the receptors rivers. After project
implementation, only advanced treated wastewater will be discharged into the
receiving water course, reducing considerably the pollution loads discharged,
especially for N and P.
- Reduce the pollution of soil & subsoil and groundwater. The measures in
sewer network extension for those areas that were connected only to the
distribution water system will cut of the uncontrolled discharge of wastewater
on soil or into the ground.
EN
72
EN
- Implement an effective and environmentally sound sludge disposal

management.
c) The project respects the polluter pays principle. Quality parameters for industrial
wastewater discharged to sewers are set out in the Romanian legislation and are
applied nationally (NTPA 002/2002). In order to meet these standards, it is
necessary for most industries to provide pre-treatment prior to discharge to the
municipal sewerage system. The ROC will most likely establish service contracts,
which transpose the fining, and penalty system, applies by Apele Romane, on all
non-domestic and industrial customers. One of the future contract provisions could
be additional payment when established limit values for certain pollutants, both
concentrations and loads, are exceeded, according to the polluter pays principle.
The tariffing and fining tools have to encourage industrial customers to pre-treat
their wastewater according to established standards. The project developer (ROC)
will have the responsibility to not exceed the maximum limits of the quality
indicators for the discharged treated waste water according with the Technical
Norms NTPA 001/2005 approved by GD no. 188/2002 completed and modified
with the GD no. 352/2005. Elaboration of a Strategy and an Action Plan for
Monitoring the Wastewater quality received in the sewage network and WWTPs
from the potential polluter companies is a task imposed by the Water Management
Directorate. The Action Plan will contain also specific measures to be taken in
order to prevent the accidental pollution.
F.2.
Consultation of environmental authorities

Have the environmental authorities likely to be concerned by the project been
consulted by reason of their specific responsibilities?
Y es
No
If yes, please give name(s) and address(es) and explain that authority's responsibility:
Prior to obtain the development consent (building permit), the project for each
agglomeration have to enter in the EIA procedure.
According to the national legislation, the authorities likely to be concerned by the
project by reason of their specific environmental responsibilities are consulted in the
all stages of the EIA procedure, (respectively screening, scooping and reviewing)
during the Technical Review Committee (TRC) meetings. For this project, the TRC
for the screening stage will be held soon; the representatives of the statutory
consultees will make the proposal for the component of each agglomeration included
into the FS for Bacau County according with the national EIA legislation.
In case of this project, the environment competent authority, including also the
Natura 2000 procedure is the Local Environmental Authority, which is developing
the EIA procedure:
Agentia de Protectia Mediului Bacau

(Environmental Protection Agency Bacau)
Address: Str. Oituz, nr. 23, 600266, Bacau, County Bacau, Romania, Tel: 00400234-524691, Fax: 0040- 0234-517547, mail: office1@apmbc.ro
Other statutory consultees with responsibilities in environmental sector having
representatives into the Technical Review Committee were:
EN
73
EN
Water Authority in charge of issuing the Water Management Permit:

Administratia Nationala ÀPELE ROMANE`- Directia Apelor Siret (National
Administration ÀPELE ROMANE` - Water Management Directorate Siret)
Directia Judeteana de Sanatate Publica (Directorate for Public Health of Bacau
County) is in charge with the drinking water quality monitoring.
Inspectoratul pentru Situatii de Urgenta al Judetului Bacau (Inspectorate of
Emergency Situation Bacau County) is in charge with fire fighting and assurance of
fire fight water reserves.
- Garda Nationla de Mediu Comisariatul Judetului Bacau (National
Environmental Guard Bacau County Commissariat) is in charge with monitoring of
the Environmental legal requirements and applying penalties in case of noncompliance.
Water Authority in charge of issuing the Water Management Permit:
Administratia Nationala ÀPELE ROMANE`- Directia Apelor Siret (National
Administration ÀPELE ROMANE` - Water Management Directorate Siret)
Directia Judeteana de Sanatate Publica (Directorate for Public Health of Bacau
County) is in charge with the drinking water quality monitoring.
Inspectoratul pentru Situatii de Urgenta al Judetului Bacau (Inspectorate of
Emergency Situation Bacau County) is in charge with fire fighting and assurance of
fire fight water reserves.
- Garda Nationla de Mediu Comisariatul Judetului Bacau (National
Environmental Guard Bacau County Commissariat) is in charge with monitoring of
the Environmental legal requirements and applying penalties in case of noncompliance.
If no, please give reasons:
N/A
F.3.
Environmental Impact Assessment
F.3.1.
DEVELOPMENT CONSENT11
F.3.1.1. Has development consent already been given to this project?

Y es
No
F.3.1.2. If yes, on which date

N/A
F.3.1.3. If no, when was the formal request for the development consent introduced:
Semester II 2010
11
EN
The decision of the competent (national) authority or authorities which entitles the developer to proceed
with the project. In cases where the project submitted is part of a wider operation, the development
consent should refer only to the project submitted to the Commission. In cases where more than one
development consent decisions are required, please repeat the information as many times as necessary.
74
EN
The `Building permits` have to be obtained by the Work Contractors after the
signatures of the Work Contracts, according with Romanian current legislation.
According with the Implementation Plan the following dates can be estimated for
introducing the formal requests for the development consent for each agglomeration
and investment component:
EN
75
EN
Nr.crt.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Agglomeration
Investment
component
Bacau
Rehabilitation
Caraboaia
Moinesti
Buhusi
Darmanesti
Targu Ocna
WTP
Date
December 2010
Upgrading WWTP
October 2010
Waste Water
network
November 2010
WW Pumping
Stations
November 2010
New WWTP South
December 2010
Rehabilitation WWTP
North
December 2010
Water Supply
network
November 2010
Waste Water
network
November 2010
WW Pumping
Stations
November 2010
Rehabilitation WWTP
December 2010
Water
network
November 2010
Supply
Waste Water
network
November 2010
WW Pumping
Stations
November 2010
New WWTP
January 2011
Waste Water
network
January 2011
WW Pumping
Stations
January 2011
Rehabilitation
January 2011
WWTP
Waste Water
network
January 2011
WW Pumping
Stations
January 2011
F.3.1.4 By which date is the final decision expected?

One month later, as following:
Nr.crt.
1.
EN
Agglomeration
Investment
component
Bacau
Rehabilitation
Caraboaia
76
WTP
Date
January 2011
Upgrading WWTP
November 2010
Waste Water
network
December 2010
EN
2.
3.
4.
5.
Moinesti
Buhusi
Darmanesti
Targu Ocna
WW Pumping
Stations
December 2010
New WWTP South
January 2011
Rehabilitation WWTP
North
January 2011
Water Supply
network
December 2010
Waste Water
network
December 2010
WW Pumping
Stations
December 2010
Rehabilitation WWTP
January 2011
Water
network
December 2010
Supply
Waste Water
network
December 2010
WW Pumping
Stations
December 2010
New WWTP
February 2011
Waste Water
network
February 2011
WW Pumping
Stations
February 2011
Rehabilitation
February 2011
WWTP
Waste Water
network
February 2011
WW Pumping
Stations
February 2011
F.3.1.5. Specify the competent authority or authorities, which has given or will give the
development consent.
Bacau agglomeration - The Local Council of Bacau
Buhusi agglomeration - The Local Council of Buhusi
Moinesti agglomeration The Local Council of Moinesti
Darmanesti agglomeration The Local Council of Darmanesti
Targu Ocna agglomeration - The Local Council of Targu Ocna
F.3.2.
APPLICATION OF COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 85/337/EEC ON ENVIRONMENTAL

IMPACT ASSESSMENT (EIA)12
F.3.2.1. Is the project a class of development covered by:
12
EN
Annex I to that Directive (go to question F3.2.2)
OJ L 175, 5.7.1985, p. 40.
77
EN
Annex II to that Directive (go to question F.3.2.3)
Neither of the two annexes (go to question F.3.3)
Not decided yet The Technical Review Meeting for screening stage will be held
soon.
F.3.2.2.
When covered by Annex I to that Directive, include the following
documents:
(a)
the information referred to in Article 9(1) of that Directive;
(b)
the non-technical summary13 of the Environmental Impact Study carried out for
the project;
(c)
information on consultations with environmental authorities, the public

concerned and, if applicable, with other Member States.
F.3.2.3. When covered by Annex II to that Directive, has an Environmental Impact

Assessment been carried out for this project?
Y es
in which case, include the necessary documents listed under point F3.2.2
No
in which case, explain the reasons and give the thresholds, criteria or case by case
examination carried out to reach the conclusion that the project has no significant
environmental effects:
The Technical Review Committee will be held soon. After the Decision the EIA part
of the Application will be revised and completed.
The public was informed about the submission of the Requests of S.C. APA SERV
S.A for releasing the Environmental Agreement for all six agglomerations.
F.3.3.
APPLICATION OF THE STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

DIRECTIVE 2001/42/EC OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE
COUNCIL14 (SEA-Directive)
F.3.3.1. Does the project result from a plan or programme falling within the scope of the SEA
Directive?
No
in which case please provide a short explanation:

N/A
Y es
13
14
EN
Prepared under Article 5(3) of Directive 85/337/EEC.

OJ L 197, 21.7.2001, p. 30.
78
EN
in which case, in order to appreciate if wider potential cumulative effects of the

project have been addressed, please provide either an internet link to or an electronic
copy of the non-technical summary15 of the Environmental Report carried out for the
plan or programme.
The present project is part of the Sectoral Operational Programme Environment that falls
under SEA procedure and the procedure was undertaken accordingly. SEA procedure for
SOP ENV started on 23rd January 2006. A SEA Working Group was established in
February 2006, comprising representatives of relevant ministries Ministry of Health
Institute of public health, Ministry of Economy and Trade, Ministry of Administration
and Interior, Ministry of Agriculture, Forests and Rural Development, technical
departments of the Ministry of Environment, Ministry of Public Finance, and external
consultants. The external consultants elaborated the Environmental Report in November
2006. A public hearing was organized on 17th January 2007 with the aim to discuss both
the draft SOP and the Environmental Report. The comments made by the public and
relevant stakeholders during consultation process were taken into account in the final
SOP ENV.
The SEA procedure was finalized on 31st January 2007.
The internet link where can be found Non-Technical Summary of the Environmental
Report is: htpp://www.mediu.ro/proiecteeuropene/alte documente.htm
F.4. Assessment of effects on NATURA 2000 Sites
F.4.1.
Is the project likely to have significant negative effects on sites included or intended
to be included in the NATURA 2000 network?
Y es
in which case
(1)
Please provide a summary of the conclusions of the appropriate assessment

carried out according to Article 6(3) of Council Directive 92/43/EEC16.
N/A
(2)
In case, compensation measures were deemed necessary according to Article

6 (4), please provide a copy of the form Information on projects likely to
have significant negative effect on NATURA 2000 sites, as notified to the
Commission (DG Environment) under Directive 92/43/EEC17.
No
in which case attach a completed Appendix I declaration filled in by the relevant

authority.
The procedure is still ongoing
15
16
17
EN
Prepared under Annex I (j) to Directive 2001/42/EC.

OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7.
Document 99/7 rev. 2 adopted by the Habitats Committee (established under Directive 92/43/EEC) at
its meeting on 4 October 1999.
79
EN
F.5.
Additional environmental integration measures

Does the project envisage, apart from Environmental Impact Assessment, any
additional environmental integration measures (e.g. environmental audit,
environmental management, specific environmental monitoring)?
Y es
No
If yes, specify
After finalizing the EIA procedure this part of the Application will be completed.
F.6.
Cost of measures taken for correcting negative environmental impacts

If included in total cost, estimate proportion of cost of measures taken to reduce
and/or to compensate for negative environmental impacts
%
0.25
Explain briefly:
The environmental impact is reduced.
Therefore, a certain measures taken for rehabilitation of the existing components of
the project will save energy consumption, or will save the chemical demand for
treatment by the technologies proposed.
The above estimated percentage from the total cost, meaning cost of measures for
correcting the negative impacts on environmental components consists in the cost
under the budgetary line called Ènvironmental protection arrangements` (chap. 1, p.
1.3 from the General Cost Breakdown annex 6-3 of FS). Apart from this, other costs
that are included into the costs for main works and daily operating costs will
contribute to the correction of the potential negative impact on environment during the
construction and operating stages.
The cost of measures to be taken for correcting the potential negative environmental
impacts was included in the costs for the main works. The measures consist in:
- Monitoring of the impacts during the construction period Control under construction
contract according to the Law 10/1995, on the Quality in construction work, and
FIDIC conditions, human health and safety (clause 6.7) as well as the protection of the
environment by construction activities (clause 4.18);
- Strict control under construction Contract has to be determined to comply with
standards and regulations;
- In-house structures for sludge dewatering in order to protect the equipments and
reduce odour impact;
- Provision of noise protection measures for blower station;
- Planting of trees surrounding the WWTPs, near the fence;
- Soil, subsoil and water protection by assuring of the hygienic conditions during the
construction period.
EN
80
EN
The auto-monitoring of the treated waste water and sludge quality during the O&M
period enters under the daily operating costs. The auto-monitoring is one of the most
important measures for environmental protection.
F.7.
In case of projects in the areas of water, waste water and solid waste:
Explain whether the project is consistent with a sectoral/integrated plan and
programme associated with the implementation of Community policy or legislation18
in those areas:
The proposed project contributes to the fulfilment of the commitments of Romania as
per the Accession Treaty and is in line with the Sectoral Operational Programme for
Environment (SOP ENV). The overall objective of SOP ENV is to protect and
improve the environment and living standards in Romania, focusing in particular on
meeting the Environmental Acquis.
The SOP ENV is closely linked to the national objectives of the strategy laid down in
the National Development Plan 2007-2013 (NDP) and National Strategic Reference
Framework (NSRF), which takes into consideration the European Unions supporting
objectives, principles and practices.
The project took into account the SOPs key strategic considerations - relevant
contribution to the achievement of the environmental acquis aimed at improving the
environmental quality and living standards for the population in the project region,
setting efficient management of environmental services, regional convergence, speed
up implementation of national programmes, avoidance/ reduction of further economic
and environmental losses (associated with lack of sustainable actions in short term)
as well as specific objective constraints during the implementation period.
Following the negotiations on Chapter 22 Environment, Romania has certain
commitments that imply substantial investments in the water and wastewater sector
within relatively short transition periods. According to the Accession Treaty, Romania
has been granted transition periods for compliance with the acquis for urban
wastewater collection, respectively treatment and discharge.
Moreover, as a result of the negotiations for accession, the whole territory of Romania
is declared as sensitive area, thus all agglomerations of more than 10,000 p.e. should
be endowed with wastewater treatment plants providing advanced treatment level. In
this context, additional costs for compliance are needed. Romania has prepared
implementation plans for the fulfilment of the requirements set by the Directive No
98/83/EC on drinking water quality and Directive 91/271/EEC concerning urban
wastewater treatment as amended by Directive 98/15/EC.
The implementation of the proposed investments for water supply and wastewater for
all agglomerations of Bacau County included in this project is expected to be
implemented until 2013, in line with the transitions periods agreed for compliance
with the Directive No 98/83/EC on drinking water quality by 2015 and the transitions
periods agreed for compliance with the Directive 91/271/EC on urban wastewater by
2013 (collection) and 2015 (treatment) for agglomerations above 10,000 p.e..The
18
EN
In particular, Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (Water Framework
Directive) (OJ L 327, 22.12.2000, p. 1) Council Directive 1991/271/EC (Urban Waste Water Treatment
Directive) (OJ L 135, 30.5.1991, p. 40), Article 7 of Directive 2006/12/EC of the European Parliament
and of the Council (Waste Framework Directive) (OJ L 114, 27.4.2006, p. 9), Council
Directive 1999/31/EC (Landfill of Waste Directive) (OJ L 182, 16.7.1999, p. 1).
81
EN
proposed investments will grant compliance with the above mentioned targets and
requirements for each agglomeration until 2013, for the Directive 91/271/EEC
concerning urban wastewater treatment as amended by Directive 98/15/EC, too.
The project has been checked against the River Basin Management Plan, the
modelling of the combined sewage overflow discharges show no significant increase
of the overflow return frequencies due to the extensions, the WWTPs will be a major
step in improvement of river water qualities.
G.
JUSTIFICATION FOR THE PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION
G.1.
Competition
Does this project involve State Aids?
Y es
No
If yes, please give in the table below the amount of aid, and, for approved aid the
state aid number and the reference of the approval letter, for block-exempted aid the
respective registry number, and for pending notified aid the state aid number19.
Sources of aid (local, regional,
national and Community):
Amount
of aid
euro
State Aid number/

registry number for
block-exempted aid
Reference of
approval letter
Approved aid schemes, approved

ad hoc aid, or aid falling under a
block exemption regulation:
..
..
Aid foreseen under pending
notifications (ad hoc aid or
schemes) :
..
..
Aid for which a notification is
outstanding (ad hoc aid or
schemes)
..
..
Total aid granted:
Total cost of the investment
project
G.2.
Impact of Community assistance on project implementation

For each affirmative answer, give details:
19
EN
This application does not replace notification to the Commission under Article 88(3) of the EC Treaty.
A positive decision by the Commission on the major project under Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 does
not constitute state aid approval.
82
EN
Will Community assistance:

a)
accelerate implementation of the project?

Y es
b)
No
be essential to implementation of the project?

Y es
No
(a) The Community assistance will significantly accelerate the implementation of

the project by providing the largest share of the funds required (76.98%) in due time.
In the absence of the Community assistance, the local stakeholders and the central
authorities had to find the respective financial resources from other donors (in form
of grant money as proven by the financing gap analysis), which would be difficult
and certainly delay the project implementation. The amount is significant and finding
another funding source, even if possible, would be in any case be time consuming.
(b) The Community assistance is essential for the implementation of the Project
Measure; as it is providing the largest share of the funds required (76.98%). In the
absence of the Community assistance, the local stakeholders and the central
authorities will need to find respective financial resources from other donors in form
of grant money. Currently, grant money for infrastructure investment projects can be
obtained from 3 main sources: EU cohesion funds, state budget and local budget.
The local budgets are obviously limited and would not be able to provide a
significant portion of the funds required.
Also the state budget has limited resources compared with the nationwide needs in
water sector infrastructure.
In this context, the Community assistance is absolute essential for the
implementation of the project in due time.
H.
FINANCING PLAN
The decision amount and other financial information in this section must be coherent
with the basis (total or public cost) for the co-financing rate of the priority axis.
Where private expenditure is not eligible for financing under the priority axis it shall
be excluded from the eligible costs; where private expenditure is eligible it may be
included.
H.1.
Cost breakdown
A breakdown of the Project investment cost by cost categories is given in the
following table.
EN
83
EN
Euro
TOTAL PROJECT
COSTS
(A)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Planning/design fees
Land purchase
Building and construction
Plant and machinery
Contingencies(2)
Price adjustment (if
applicable)(3)
Technical assistance
Publicity
Supervision during
construction
implementation
Sub-TOTAL
(VAT(4) and other taxes
and fees)*
TOTAL
INELIGIBLE
COSTS
ELIGIBLE
COSTS
(1)
(B)
(C)=(A)-(B)
2,199,243
64,545,600
22,744,600
6,972,926
2,199,243
64,545,600
22,744,600
6,972,926
12,596,053
2,207,397
316,059
12,596,053
2,207,397
316,059
3,621,508
115,203,387
3,621,508
115,203,387
30,137,196
145,340,584
28,038,696
28,038,696
2,098,500
117,301,887
* As eligible expenditures are recorded taxes and fees related to the investments. As ineligible cost is recorded the VAT related
to the total value of investment without Salaries of the PIU.
A detailed description of the approach for the calculation of investment costs in

current prices is presented in the Financial and Economic Analysis, Chapter 3.3.4. Project Investment in Current Prices.
______________________________________________
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
H.2.
Ineligible costs comprise (i) expenditure outside the eligibility period, (ii) expenditure
ineligible under national rules (Article 56(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006), (iii) other
expenditure not presented for co-financing. NB: The starting date for eligibility of
expenditure is the date of receipt of the draft operational programme by the Commission or
1 January 2007, whichever is the earlier.
Contingencies should not exceed 10% of total investment cost net of contingencies. These
contingencies may be included in the total eligible costs used to calculate the planned
contribution of the funds Section H2.
A price adjustment may be included, where relevant, to cover expected inflation where the
eligible cost values are in constant prices.
Where VAT is considered as eligible, give reasons.
Total cost must include all costs incurred for the project, from planning to supervision and
must include VAT even if VAT is considered non eligible.
Total planned resources and planned contribution from the Funds

The funding gap rate was already presented under Section E.1.2. This should be
applied to the eligible cost to calculate the amount to which the co-financing rate for
the priority axis applies (Article 41(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006).
This is then multiplied by the co-financing rate of the priority axis to determine the
Community contribution.
EN
84
EN
H.2.1.
Community contribution calculation

Value
1.
Eligible cost (in euro, not discounted)

(Section H.1.12(C))
2.
Funding gap rate (%), if applicable = (E.1.2.11)
3.
Decision amount, i.e. the amount to which the co-financing

rate for the priority axis applies (Article 41(2)) = (1)*(2).
If H.2.1.2 not applicable, the decision amount must respect
the maximum public contribution according to state aid rules
4.
Co-financing rate of the priority axis (%)
5.
Community contribution (in euro) = (3)*(4)
H.2.2.
117,301,887
90.56%
106,231,940
85.0%
90,297,149
Sources of co-financing
In the light of the results of the financing gap calculation (where relevant) the total
investment costs of the project shall be met from the following sources (in Euro,
current prices):
Of which
(for
Information)
Source of total investment costs ()

Total investment
cost
Community
assistance
[H.1.12.(A)]
(a)=
(b)+(c)+(d)+(e)
145,340,584
H.2.3.
National
private
Other sources
(specify)
EIB/EIF
loans:
[H.2.1.5]
National
public (or
equivalent)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
90,297,149
55,043,435
Expenditure already certified

Have expenditure for this major project been already certified?
Y es
No
If yes, state the amount: . EUR.
H.3.
Annual financing plan of Community contribution

The Community contribution (H.2.1.5) shall be presented below in terms of the share
of annual programme commitment.
The following table shows the anticipated annual disbursements of the required
community contribution according to the implementation scheme of the project. The
annual disbursement figures will be correlated by the Ministry of Environment with
the programming scheme for Sectoral Operational Programme (SOP)
(in Euro)
CF
EN
2007
2008
-
2009
-
2010
-
856,447
85
2011
2012
2013
34,470,298
36,344,068
18,626,336
EN
I.
COMPATIBILITY WITH COMMUNITY POLICIES AND LAW
With regard to Article 9 (5) of Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 provide the following information:
I.1.
Other Community financing sources
I.1.1.
Has an application been made for assistance from any other Community source
(TEN-T Budget, LIFE+, R&D Framework Programme, other source of Community
finance) for this project?
Y es
No
If yes, please give details (financial instrument concerned, reference Nos, dates,
amounts requested, amounts granted, etc.):
TEXT BOX
I.1.2.
Is this project complementary to any project already financed or to be financed by

the ERDF, ESF, Cohesion Fund, TEN-T Budget, other source of Community
finance?
Y es
No
If yes, give details (provide precise details, reference Nos, dates, amounts requested,
amounts granted, etc.):
TEXT BOX
I.1.3.
Has an application been made for loan or equity support from EIB / EIF for this
project?
Y es
No
TEXT BOX
I.1.4.
Has an application been made for assistance from any other Community source
(including ERDF, ESF, Cohesion Fund, EIB, EIF, other sources of Community
finance) for an earlier phase of this project (including feasibility and preparatory
phases)?
Y es
No
An application for ISPA/PHARE assistance has been made for the preparation of this
CF/ERDF application and supporting documents (feasibility studies, environmental
studies, tender documents, etc.). This is part of the TA (ref. no
2005/RO/16/P/PA/001-2).
EN
86
EN
I.2.
Is the project subject to a legal procedure for non-compliance with Community

legislation?
Y es
No
If yes, please give details:

TEXT BOX
I.3.
Publicity measures
Give details of the proposed measures to publicise Community assistance (for
example, type of measure, brief description, estimated costs, duration, etc.):
All publicity activities within the Project will be implemented in compliance with the
provisions of EU Regulation No. 1159/2000. The measures will include:
- Erection of billboards according to established standard (under 6.1 of the above
mentioned Regulation). Billboards will be placed on all project sites;
- After finalization of works, the billboards will be removed not later than six months
after completion of the work and replaced by permanent commemorative plaques for
infrastructures accessible to the general public;
- Posters will be displayed on the premises of bodies implementing or benefiting from the
Project (County councils, local councils, regional and local environmental agencies,
employment agencies, vocational training centres, chambers of commerce and industry,
development agencies, etc.;
- All notifications of aid to beneficiaries sent by the competent authorities shall mention
the fact of part-financing by the European Union and may state the amount or percentage
of the assistance funded by the Community instrument concerned;
- All publications (such as booklets, leaflets and newsletters) concerning the Project will
contain a clear indication on the title page of the European Union's participation and,
where appropriate, that of the Fund concerned as well as the Community emblem if the
national or regional emblem is also used;
- Information will be also available by electronic means (e.g. websites) and by audiovisual material (presentations, CD-ROMs, etc.) with due regard to new technologies
which permit the rapid and efficient distribution of information and facilitate a dialogue
with the general public;
- In all events such as conferences, seminars, fairs and exhibitions in connection with the
Project Implementation it will be clearly stated that make the Community contribution to
these assistance packages explicit by displaying the European flag in meeting rooms and
using the Community emblem on documents.
The details of the campaigns have still to be designed. The measures directed to the
general public will include, but not be limited to campaigns in print, radio and TV media.
During the project implementation, the progress reports of the project will include copies
of the communication material produced and evidence of the information events carried
out in the period of time reported.
Publicity measures will be implemented in order to raise public awareness and
acceptance among the population. The measures aim at:
EN
87
EN
- Increasing the beneficiaries awareness of the Community assistance

- Increasing the beneficiaries awareness of the value of the improved water supply and/
wastewater services
- Increasing the beneficiaries willingness to pay adequate fees for the improved services
- Inform the public about the project measures, cost and benefits in order to ensure
project acceptance through transparency.
The total budget estimated for the implementation of publicity measures is 354,081 Euro
(in current prices).
I.4.
Involvement of JASPERS in project preparation
I.4.1.
Has JASPERS technical assistance contributed to any part of the preparation of this
project?
Y es
I.4.2.
No
Describe the elements of the project where JASPERS had an input (e.g.
environmental compliance, procurement, review of technical description).
JASPERS followed up the preparation of the documentation required (Feasibility
Study, Economic and Financial Analysis, Institutional Analysis and Application
Form). JASPERS was involved in the process of preparation of the financial model
for the financial and economic analysis. JASPERS prepared general guidance for the
financial and economic analysis which was considered by the Consultant in
preparing the financial and economic analysis. JASPERS also provided guidance for
filling in the Application Form and specific recommendation during the finalisation
process of the Application.
I.4.3.
EN
What were the principal conclusions and recommendations of the JASPERS

contribution and were these taken into account in the finalisation of the project?
The proposed project is coherent with the EU policies for environment and
with the Convergence objective; the project brings an important contribution
to the Accession Treaty obligations of Romania in the field of environment;
The proposed project is compliant with the SOP Environment document;
Social, institutional and economic contexts are well described, project

objectives are defined; relevant options assessed;
The Managing Authority should ensure that the co-financing funds are
available in due time in order to avoid project bottlenecks during
implementation;
The IDA shall support the ROC in the implementation of the action plan for
connections of new customers, as detailed in the annexes of this application
form;
The ROC shall monitor closely the implementation of ongoing investment

projects, so as to ensure that they are fully integrated and consistent with the
projects proposed for CF financing;
The ROC shall monitor closely the implementation of the sludge strategy
presented in the documentation.
88
EN
I.5.
Public procurement
In cases where contracts have been advertised in the Official Journal of the European
Union, give reference.
J.
Contract
Date
Reference
ENDORSEMENT OF COMPETENT NATIONAL AUTHORITY
I confirm that the information presented in this form is accurate and correct.
NAME:
Doina Frant
SIGNATURE:
ORGANISATION:
Ministry of Environment and Forests
(MANAGING AUTHORITY)
DATE:
EN
89
EN

BC Application Rev0 PDF

Încărcat de

Informații document

Descriere originală:

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

BC Application Rev0 PDF

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

ANNEX XXI

ADDRESSES AND REFERENCES

RESULTS OF FEASIBILITY STUDIES

ANALYSIS OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT

JUSTIFICATION FOR THE PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

COMPATIBILITY WITH COMMUNITY POLICIES AND LAW

ENDORSEMENT OF COMPETENT NATIONAL AUTHORITY

ANNEX I DECLARATION BY AUTHORITY RESPONSIBLE FOR MONITORING

ADDRESSES AND REFERENCES

Authority responsible for the application (i.e., managing authority or

Ministry of Environment and Forests

59-61 Justitiei Street, Sector 4, Bucarest

Organisation responsible for project implementation (beneficiary)

Compania Regionala de Apa Bacau CRAB

Strada Narciselor, numarul 14, cod postal 600310, BACAU-ROMANIA

Mr. Razvan-Grigore Gaina

Telephone: 0334 401 811

Telex/Fax: 0234 551175

Title of project / project phase:

Extension and Rehabilitation of Water and Wastewater Infrastructure in

Categorisation of project activity1

B.2.2. Code for the form of finance dimension

B.2.3. Code for the territorial dimension

B.2.4. Code for the economic activity dimension2

B.2.4.1. NACE Code3

B.2.5. Code for the location dimension (NUTS/LAU)4

B.2.1. Code for the priority theme dimension

Annex II to Regulation (EC) No 1828/2006 unless otherwise specified.

Compatibility and coherence with the Operational Programme

Title of the related Operational Programme:

Common Code for Identification (CCI) No of Operational Programme

Title of the priority axis

Project (or project phase) description:

Provide a description of the project (or project phase).

No water supply measures for Cohesion Fund

No water supply measures for Cohesion Fund

Water supply services

Where the project is a phase of an overall project, provide a description of the

Technical description of the investment in infrastructure

Water Treatment Plant

Pumping Station, Reservoirs

Wastewater Network (incl pressure lines)

Component 1: Extension and Rehabilitation of Water and Wastewater

Maxi mum Dry Weather Flow

Maxi mum Design Flow

Wastewater Treatment Directive 91/271/EEC which has been implemented in the

Component 2: Extension and Rehabilitation of Water and Wastewater

Maxi mum Dry Weather Flow

Maxi mum Design Flow

Design Pollution Loads

Wastewater Treatment Directive 91/271/EEC which has been implemented in the

> 100,000 or sensitive areas

> 100,000 or sensitive areas

Maxi mum Dry Weather Flow

Maxi mum Design Flow

Design Pollution Loads

Construction/Rehabilitation of the mechanical treatment (screening station, grit and

The following table summarizes the proposed investments for component 2:

Wastewater Treatment Plant

Component 3: Extension of Water and Wastewater Infrastructure in

Maxi mum Dry Weather Flow

Maxi mum Design Flow