Strategic Moves - Regional Environmental Center for Central and ...

tion of a new Podgorica landfill and recycling centre have been completed and the
third phase (recycling centre) has secured significant financing from local and state
funds and from the Spanish Government. The remaining EUR 4.3 million are expected
to be financed from the state budget. For the project for the construction of
a hazardous waste landfill in Montenegro (EUR 9.17 million), an application for IPA
financing has been completed and submitted, thus it is highly likely to receive sufficient
financing. Many projects that are still on the list also recorded progress between
2007 and 2009. Four of these projects are from the waste sector and 10 from the
water sector. These projects have secured a total of EUR 64.55 million to date.
In Serbia, a total of EUR 22.7 million was secured for PEIP projects in the period
2007–2009. In total, four projects saw progress, two of which were removed
from the lists having successfully secured funding (EUR 20.6 million in total). The
project for equipment supply for the recultivation and preservation of the ash and slag
deposit at Kolubara (EUR 2 million from own funds) is a relatively small but environmentally
important waste project. The other project removed from the lists was
a major project in the water sector: the project for the upgrade and extension of the
wastewater treatment plant in Subotica. A total of EUR 17.7 million was secured
from EAR, the EBRD and municipal funds, and construction started in June 2009.
The remaining EUR 0.9 million will be secured through PUC tariff collection. The
project included the design of a new tariff system. The other two projects that saw improvements
but remained on the lists are both from the waste sector: a project for the
remediation of the Nis landfill, where additional funds were secured from the city
budget; and a relatively new project on the PEIP lists, for a hazardous waste management
facility (phase 1), for which EUR 3 million of the EUR 14 million required
in total have been secured through the IPA to prepare a feasibility study.
General observations
• Developing and updating the PEIP priority lists of projects has been a major
learning exercise for the SEE countries. However, for many of the projects it is
still difficult to obtain adequate data.
• Those projects that made more rapid progress had good-quality project documentation
from the outset, and PUC staff had actively participated in the
preparation of the documents.
• At national level, strong project preparation units are a driving force, as demonstrated
in Croatia, Montenegro and Serbia.
• The benchmarking and self-assessment of PUCs in order to improve their operational
efficiency has proved to have a beneficial effect on project preparation
and reform capacities.
• The IPA application process provided project preparation capacity building at
both local and national level. The proper inclusion of stakeholders from the
beginning of the process ensured that any potential problems in relation to location
or similar issues were resolved in time.
C H A P T E R 8
P R I O R I T I S AT I O N O F I N F R A S T R U C T U R E P R O J E C T S — T H E P E I P L I S T S
S T R AT E G I C M O V E S 201