FEASIBILITY STUDY Addressing Climate Vulnerability in The Water Sector (ACWA)

I
Annex II – Feasibility Study

GREEN CLIMATE FUND FUNDING PROPOSAL
FEASIBILITY STUDY
Addressing Climate Vulnerability
In the
Water Sector (ACWA)
United Nations Development Programme

UNDP
On behalf of Government of the

Republic of the Marshall Islands
RMI
March 2018
For Submission to the Green Climate Fund

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Republic of the Marshall Islands (RMI) is a small island developing states (SIDS) consisting of 29 coral
atolls and 5 single islands. The nation is a large-ocean state, with approximately 1,225 islands and islets with
a total land area of only 182 km2, spread across over 2 million km2 of vast ocean space. Most of the 24
inhabited local government jurisdictions (atolls and islands) are remote and lie merely 2 meters above sea
level on average, posing various challenges and risks to sustainable development in face of climate change.
RMI’s population in 2017 is estimated as 55,5621, most of which is concentrated in urban atolls of Majuro
and Kwajalein (Ebeye)2.
Context
Climate Change: It is predicted, that RMI will face increasing sea level rise, increasing rainfall variability with
potential for extended drought periods and increasing storm surges with climate change3, further aggravating
RMI’s vulnerability and more specifically sustainable water supply. These climate change impacts are likely
to exacerbate the risks of water shortages in RMI, by further challenging the ability of the Marshallese people
to have access to safe freshwater resources year-round. Droughts and storm waves are some of the key
climate based events that impact RMI. Climate projections show that in the next twenty-five years, rainfall
and drought scenarios in RMI will continue and may increase in the short term4. Combined with changing
weather patterns, extreme events, and sea level rise5 due to climate change, the finite and fragile water
resources in RMI are likely to be even more constrained in the future.
Water: Communities and the households in RMI primarily rely on an inadequate water resource and supply
system, which makes them vulnerable to risks of water shortages and drought. In urban communities of
Majuro and Kwajalein (Ebeye), there are public water reticulated systems which will be improved through
existing Master Plans that address their water needs for the future. For rural communities6, families rely on
household or community rainwater harvesting (RWH) systems to supply their freshwater for drinking, cooking,
and basic hygiene and RMI has not addressed their current adaptive needs in the face of climate change
and are consequently the most vulnerable. Many of the rural communities in RMI also have access to
groundwater wells however increased salinity of groundwater is experienced during drought conditions with
the reduction of the freshwater lens due to increased reliance as an alternative water source. The potential
of groundwater as an alternate water source is further compromised by pressure from sea level rise and also
seawater inundation due to high tides which contaminating the freshwater which will be further exacerbated
by climate change.
The rural communities have the least adaptive capacity due to their social and economic conditions versus
the urban communities and face the following challenges
 The dependence on rainwater harvesting for freshwater, without adequate safe water options,
make Marshallese people extremely vulnerable to water shortages due to varied rainfall
patterns, especially in face of climate change. People in RMI are often faced with severe water
shortages, where they cannot access sufficient water required for basic drinking, cooking, and
hygiene (minimum of 20 liter per capita day (Lpcd) annually – WHO/Sustainable Development Goal
Standard7) under drought conditions. During the dry season between December to April8, people
across RMI are often faced with very low quantities and quality of water, especially during ENSO
years.
1
2016 population estimates were calculated based on 2011 RMI Census of Population and Housing and 2016 SPC Pacific Island Populations. Estimates and
projections of demographic indicators for selected years. (PRISM) . Details are included in FS Annex 2.
2 urban population is approximately 74%. Government of the Republic of the Marshall Islands. 2011. Census.
3
Historic data shows a decreasing trend of rainfall quantities, with drought risk respectively increasing. Historic observation data indicate that the sea level has
risen near Majuro by about 7mm (0.3 inches) per year since 1993. This is larger than the global average of 2.8–3.6 mm (0.11– 0.14 inches) per year. In the
future, sea level is projected to continue to rise.
4
RMI Climate Projection Report – FS Annex 21
5
In terms of sea level, measurements at the Majuro project site indicate a sea-level rise of 4.0 mm/year since 1993 (SPSLCMP, 2010). This is an insufficient
temporal sampling for some purposes but the data are consistent with regional rates of sea level rise (Figure 15, right) and reconstructed global data extending
back to 1900, which indicate a sea-level rise of about 1.7 ± 0.2 mm/year (Figure 15, left). Satellite-based observations since 1993 closely mirror this upward trend
(Church and White, 2011) . Source: SPREP, et. al. 2014. PACC Technical Report 5. Vulnerability and adaptation (V&A) assessment for the water sector in
Majuro, Republic of the Marshall Islands.
6
Communities in Majuro, Kwajalein and other outer atolls and islands without access to public reticulated water will be termed rural communities throughout the
FS
7
WHO and SDG minimum standard to provide water for drinking, cooking and basic hygiene
8
Dry season extends to May or June during El Niño–Southern Oscillation (ENSO)
Page | 2 | FEASIBILITY STUDY | ACWA

 Protection of Groundwater . Protection of groundwater wells from inundation of seawater, which is
under threat from sea level rise and increasing level of high tides and development of the
understanding of its optimal to reduce dependency on RWH.
 Tackling issues of water security and resilience in face of climate change is a critical national
priority for RMI, formalized by various national policies and institutional frameworks. RMI’s
Strategic Development Plan “Vision 2018” sets out 15-year (2003 – 2018) long-term goals, objectives,
and strategies, where climate change resilience and water sector improvements are part of 3 of its 10
goals.
The following institutional and financial barriers hinder RMI from advancing efforts in tackling integrated water
resilience in both their urban and rural communities.
Barriers
Institutional Barriers: The National Water and Sanitation Policy as well as the recently amended National
Environmental Protection Act formalize the political accountability mechanisms for water governance. This
can be utilized as the overarching framework to advance comprehensive and integrated implementation at
all levels of governance in RMI.
However, significant gaps remain in implementing national policies related to water security, in terms of
effectiveness of stakeholders and institutions from environmental, social, political and economic levels.
These include:
 Limited coordination, reporting and accountability mechanisms related to water at all levels
 Limited institutions and stakeholders with formalized roles and responsibilities at the subnational and
community levels
 Limited information generated and shared for all types of water resources at all levels, limiting
transparency and evidence-based participatory decision-making at all levels
 Limited accountability frameworks and public participation at all levels of governance
 Limited effectiveness of water governance especially in terms of functioning institutions at the
subnational level and coordination mechanisms with other sectors.
As a result, current water governance from economic, social, environmental and political dimensions is
challenged in RMI.
Financial barriers: The best practice in achieving financial sustainability for investments towards climate
change adaptation in the water sector is to recover the full investment cost from rational tariff based revenue
collected from the project beneficiaries. However, especially in the rural communities of RMI , this is difficult
given their low income levels. The median income of rural household in RMI in 2011 was estimated at USD
1,936 per annum, with a number of residents in the outer atolls (rural communities) earning $1 to $2/day. The
predominant economic activity in most of the rural communities includes copra production, fishing, and
subsistence agriculture/ animal husbandry.
Therefore, rural communities in RMI cannot afford to finance capital investments, nor support the annual
O&M costs through their own resources (i..e water tariff). As a result, alternate sources of funding has to be
identified and arranged by the national government in order to provide water security.
Theory of Change
Problem - Water Insecurity: People of the rural communities of RMI still do not have year-round access to
safe freshwater supply for drinking and cooking despite many past initiatives. The Government of RMI has
announced a State of Emergency due to the severe droughts most recently in 2017, 2015/2016 and
2013/2014, and has invested significant financial resources to deploy drought response efforts in urban and
rural RMI with support from external parties. There is little confidence at the national, subnational and
community levels that there is sufficient water infrastructure, human capacities, financial resources, and
institutional capacity mechanisms in place to avoid and mitigate future water shortages in RMI, especially
with the projected impacts of climate change.
Root Causes: Strategically placing investments to avoid or mitigate droughts and/or to holistically strengthen
and improve the freshwater resource system in which communities rely on during drought and non-drought

times have not been done. Given this context, previous water interventions focused more on one-off
infrastructure investments, with limited time and resources allocated for an integrated and participatory
planning water security supported by sustainable operations and maintenance practices. This has been
further exacerbated by the fact that national and subnational institutions and governance framework for water
is yet to be set up in RMI. There is a lack of coordinated and officially endorsed water security targets, good
practices, institutional set up, roles and responsibilities for the various actors, and implementation plans
backed up by historical data and evidence. The resultant reactive approach risks the inclusion of vulnerable
groups, such as women, children, and people with disabilities to actively participate in the design, decision,
and implementation of water security efforts.
Remaining gaps: Many of the current initiatives are focused on water resource management and drought
risk management, while institutional capacity initiatives are still very limited. Efforts are already underway to
define goals and detail the process of enhancing the piped water systems through the Master Plan
development processes for MWSC and KAJUR. In rural RMI, water security solutions depend on improving,
protecting and scaling existing systems as well as better protecting and utilizing available resources.
Lessons learned and good practices: Recommendations for addressing identified gaps and barriers, which
are presented in this Feasibility Study (FS), were designed through an extensive assessment of past
experiences and consultations with stakeholders, including an assessment of ongoing related projects and
efforts. It was found that community participation is required in all key activities, including the design of
community based and supported infrastructure. This study recommends building on best practices, such as
community participation in all steps in upgrading water systems. The report recommends establishing
community water level committees for water management, which ensures these committees have roles to
play in the monitoring drinking water supply as well as the monitoring of operations and maintenance in
supporting community specific water safety planning.
Proposed Adaptation Solution
The proposed, Addressing Climate Vulnerability in the Water Sector (ACUWA) project aims to realize RMI’s
transition into a more water resilient future by providing year-round access to safe and more diversified
freshwater resources to the 55,226 people9 of RMI (2017) in face of climate change risks managed through
national and subnational water governance systems.
This will be achieved by delivering the following results:

 Improving water security through providing access to safe freshwater resources year-round for at
least 15,572 people (28% of 2017 estimated population), including 7,369 (49%) women;
 Improving groundwater protection and awareness training of use to reduce demand on rainwater
harvested water;
 Capacity building of both national and subnational institutions and stakeholders to manage water
security and disaster preparedness efforts to be coordinated, effective, participatory, equitable, and
sustainable
Water Security, improving access to safe water year round, requires a multi-step approach to ensure that
people in RMI have at least 20 Lpcd accesses to safe freshwater resources year-round. The water security
investments focus on infrastructure improvements that include scale-up of cost effective measures from
proven projects for both Urban and Rural population:
a. Rural -The project analysis indicates that 77 rural communities10 across 24 atolls and islands require
additional safe freshwater supply to meet the minimum water security standard of 20Lpcd year-round.
This will be achieved through implementation of:
 Household Rainwater Harvesting System improvements
 Community Rainwater Harvesting System improvements and new community storage tanks
 New community roof with rainwater harvesting system and storage tanks
 Protect Groundwater from inundation from seawater due to higher tides and storms
exacerbated by sea level rise.
Table 1: Summary of Water Security Investments
9
100% of 2016 estimated population. Government of RMI. 2011. Census. SPC. 2016 Population Projection.
10
Communities that were found water secure with existing and/or planned water resources were: Kili Community in Kili Island Enejelar Community in Ailuk Atoll.

Investments Number and Locations
Type Local Gov’t Communities
Jurisdictions
Water Household Rainwater Improvement 2,529 households 24 77
Security Harvesting Systems
Community Improvement and 158 community 18 60
Rainwater Harvesting additional storage buildings
Systems tanks
Construction of new 121 new 18 35
community roofs community RWH
with RWH systems systems
and tanks
Rehabilitation Up to 2,586 wells 24 77
Institutional Capacity Building - Empowering national and subnational institutions & stakeholders to
champion water governance for efforts to be coordinated, effective, participatory, equitable, and sustainable
a. National Level: Supporting and strengthening the implementation of existing policies
 Support EPA to implement monitoring, reporting, accountability, and sustainability of National
Water and Sanitation Policy.
 Strengthen OCS/NDMO’s coordination capacity to manage water related disaster risks
 Develop comprehensive National Water Safety Plans in line with the Community Water Safety
Plans and National WASH Policy, National Environmental Protection Act, JNAP, and other
relevant policies
b. Community Level – support establishment of Community Based Water Committees
(CWC’s)
 Developing and fostering ownership and buy-in for a (financially and technically) sustainable
operation and maintenance practices for new infrastructure and supporting resilience
programs will require behavioral changes through awareness and understanding of value of
effort.
 Developing and utilizing best practice SOP’s for RWH (community and household) solutions,
and consistently monitoring and managing groundwater source will ensure sustainable
services.
The proposed interventions will benefit water security for the Rural inhabitants of RMI for up to 28% of the
population. By definition established within this project Water security is defined as people’s ability to access
safe freshwater resources year-round through RWH and groundwater. Improvement, upgrading and
restoration of the rainwater harvesting systems and community water supply schemes, including protection
of groundwater resources will support water security efforts for the entire communities.
The key paradigm shift of these recommendations derives from building on lessons learned from previous
projects and utilizing best practices, by strengthening both the institutional and community levels to actively
manage water resources management through local community level accountability and monitoring.
Key Design Parameters and Approaches Determined through the Feasibility Study
The technical evaluation process informed the following key design parameters and approaches of the
ACUWA project’s water investments. These include:
Water security target – The proposed intervention aims to achieve water security in RMI by providing at
least 20 Lpcd safe water supply year round, which is in line with the WHO standard for drinking, cooking, and
basic hygiene. Various stakeholder discussions took place that led to the selection of this water security
target during the project design period, and the target was endorsed at the national stakeholder consultation
meeting in August 2016.
Strategies for rural water security – The technical evaluation reviewed existing water baselines in RMI
where existing water resources, root causes of water shortages, past, current and future investments, and
climate change trends were reviewed and analysed. The baseline analysis indicated that water security
solutions for rural communities in RMI require different strategies given their diverse contexts. In rural
communities, defined as areas in Majuro and Kwajalein that are not serviced by public water utility companies,
and the Outer atolls and islands, different water security solutions are needed that are suitable for their unique,

small and remote socio-economic and climatic contexts. Most importantly, water interventions in rural
communities need to be community-led to ensure the ease of construction, operation, maintenance, and
financial sustainability.
Water security, groundwater protection and institutional capacity interventions

Climate resilient water interventions for the rural communities were selected based on resilient design
principles that were established through the technical evaluation process in line with the GCF investment
criteria. Based on these principles, water investment options that were brought to the attention of the project
design team during the stakeholder consultation process were first sorted based on their relevance and
appropriateness as water security and/or resilience interventions in rural Marshallese communities. Second,
the investment options were ranked based on their cost effectiveness of their lifecycle costs. The technical
evaluation process found that based on lifecycle cost of water investments trialled in RMI and in the Pacific
(or similar) region, effective water interventions in rural communities in RMI are (in order of effectiveness): 1)
household rainwater harvesting (RWH) system improvements; 2) community RWH system improvements
(including improvement of existing system and addition of new roofs and RWH systems); and 3) desalination
technologies. Third, the gap between existing (and planned) water resources against the water security target
at the community level were calculated using available information gathered during the project design. Based
on this gap analysis, the technical evaluation process found that water security for all target rural communities
could be met through the top 2 effective water security solutions11.
Groundwater interventions were designed to foster resilience against future climate change impacts and to
provide additional water volume and use (such as for sanitation and food security) that are significantly
affected during drought times leading to health, gender and equity concerns. Groundwater and smart water
usage awareness were selected as strategic interventions based on review of national policies and plans,
past and ongoing initiatives, and community survey results.
Furthermore, a robust institutional framework was designed based on literature review, stakeholder
consultation, and community surveys. Information was analysed through a Rapid Water Governance
Assessment to ensure that this framework is in line with, and informed by, current national climate change,
water, and disaster policies, and coordinates and drives integrated water resource management and disaster
risk reduction efforts that are resilient to climate change. Furthermore, various community level governance
mechanisms related to water, such as disaster committees, Reimaanlok natural resource management
committees, etc were also identified as mechanism for communities to build on and integrate with. Training,
awareness raising, and knowledge management mechanisms were also reviewed, and existing efforts as
well as good practices were integrated into the design of the water governance system.
Conclusions and Next Steps
This Feasibility Study presents a comprehensive analysis of the existing context of climate change in RMI
and how that is influences water security in rural communities; examines the mandates and capacities of
stakeholders and institutions related to water governance; reviews ongoing and planned initiatives related to
water resilience and identifies remaining gaps; studies the root causes and theory of change of transforming
the water sector in RMI to a more sustainable system; reviews the various technologies options and proposes
a good practice design of the proposed integrated water security, resilience and governance interventions;
through cost effective and equity analysis recommends the implementation strategies; and highlights
definitions, limitations, and assumptions relevant to the FS process.
11
These are: 1) household rainwater harvesting (RWH) system improvements; 2) community RWH system improvements (including improvement of existing
system and addition of new roofs and RWH systems)

TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..............................................................................................................................2

Context .....................................................................................................................................................2
Barriers .....................................................................................................................................................3
Theory of Change .....................................................................................................................................3
Proposed Adaptation Solution...................................................................................................................4
Key Design Parameters and Approaches Determined through the Feasibility Study.................................5
Conclusions and Next Steps .....................................................................................................................6
List of Figures...............................................................................................................................................9
List of Tables ..............................................................................................................................................10
Abbreviations and Glossary of Key Terms..................................................................................................12
Preface.......................................................................................................................................................14
1. Climate Change in the Republic of the Marshall Islands .........................................................................17
1.1. Country Context and Background ....................................................................................................17
1.1.1 Geographical context and Vulnerabilities ....................................................................................17
1.1.2 Socio-Economic Context and Vulnerabilities...............................................................................17
1.2 Climate Change: Observed and Projected Climate Variability and Change ...................................21
1.2.1 Precipitation Patterns..................................................................................................................21
1.2.2 Sea Level Rise, High (King) Tides, Cyclones and Storms........................................................... 25
1.2.2.1 Sea Level and Tides (King) – Modelled Future Changes .........................................................25
1.2.2.2 Cyclones and Storms...............................................................................................................26
1.2.3 Temperature ............................................................................................................................... 27
1.2.4 Aridity and Evaporation – Current and Projections......................................................................29
1.3 Key Climate Change Risks: Droughts ............................................................................................... 29
1.3.1 Droughts – Historical Impact.......................................................................................................30
1.3.2 Impacts – Focus on Drought 2015/16 .........................................................................................34
1.4 Targeting – Prioritizing the Geographic Regions to Address Climate Change Induced Drought
Impacts ...................................................................................................................................................41
2. Climate Change Policies and Strategies .................................................................................................42
2.1 National Policies, Plans and Climate Change....................................................................................42
Principles:............................................................................................................................................43
2.2 Institutional Arrangements.................................................................................................................43
2.2.1 Stakeholders and Institutions – National Level............................................................................43
2.2.2 Effectiveness .............................................................................................................................. 45
2.2.3 Jurisdictional and Local Level .....................................................................................................46
2.3 National Drought monitoring, early warning, and communication.....................................................................46
2.3.1 Planning for Response ...............................................................................................................49
2.3.2 Drought Risk Management .........................................................................................................49
2.3.3 Key Findings and Barriers – Drought Response .........................................................................51
3. Current Status of Water Infrastructure in RMI .........................................................................................54
3.1 Overview...........................................................................................................................................54
3.2 Available Data – Collected or Compiled through Site Visits............................................................... 54

3.3 Freshwater Resources ......................................................................................................................55
3.3.1 Overview of Water Resources in RMI .........................................................................................55
3.3.2 Water Resources in the Rural communities ................................................................................56
3.3.3 Key Barriers – Rural Communities.............................................................................................. 67
4. Ongoing and Planned Efforts to Address Water Security.......................................................................68
4.1 Water Resource Management...........................................................................................................68
4.2 Institutional Capacity Building ...........................................................................................................72
4.3 Drought Risk Management................................................................................................................73
4.4 Key Findings .....................................................................................................................................74
4.5 Remaining Gaps ............................................................................................................................... 75
4.5.1 Water Resource Management ....................................................................................................75
4.5.2 Institutional Capacity..................................................................................................................77
4.5.3 Drought Risk Management .........................................................................................................78
4.5.4 Key Findings............................................................................................................................... 78
5. Challenges to Support Water Security and Adaptation Practices............................................................ 78
5.1 Problems and Root Causes ..............................................................................................................78
5.2 Adaptation Solutions – Paradigm Shift .............................................................................................. 79
5.3 Theory of Change ............................................................................................................................. 80
5.4 Institutional and Financial Barriers ...................................................................................................81
5.4.1 Institutional Barriers ....................................................................................................................81
5.4.2 Financial Barriers........................................................................................................................82
5.4.3 Key Findings ..................................................................................................................................83
6. Intervention Development – Design Process ..........................................................................................83
6.1 Design Process.................................................................................................................................83
6.2 Water Security Definitions .................................................................................................................84
6.3 Design Principles .............................................................................................................................. 86
6.4 Key Findings .....................................................................................................................................87
7. Options Review ......................................................................................................................................87
7.1 Introduction to the Options Review....................................................................................................87
7.2 Multi-Criteria Assessment of Options ................................................................................................ 88
7.2.1 Developing the Long List of Options ........................................................................................... 88
7.2.2 Developing the Short List of Options........................................................................................... 90
7.3 Operations and Maintenance Costs for the Shortlisted Water Security Options ................................ 91
7.3.1 Rainwater Harvesting – Household............................................................................................. 91
7.3.2 Community Rainwater Harvesting............................................................................................... 91
7.3.3 Desalination – Stationary Reverse Osmosis Systems.................................................................92
7.4 Good Practices .................................................................................................................................92
7.4.1 Rainwater Harvesting Systems (Household and Community) .....................................................92
7.4.2 Groundwater............................................................................................................................... 95
7.4.3 Asset Management of Existing Large Concrete Tanks................................................................ 97
7.5 Key Findings .....................................................................................................................................99
8. Selection for Water Security Investments ............................................................................................... 99
8.1 Introduction to Rural Water Security ........................................................................................... 100

8.1.1 Target Communities .................................................................................................................100
8.1.2 Water Resources...................................................................................................................... 100
8.1.3 Design Target ........................................................................................................................... 101
8.2 Design Methodology for the Rural Water Security Investments ....................................................... 102
8.2.1 Rural Water Security Technical Design..................................................................................... 102
8.2.2 Rainwater Harvesting Modeling Methodology ...........................................................................103
8.2.3 Rainwater Harvesting Model Inputs and Assumptions .............................................................. 104
8.2.4 Status Quo Rural Water Security under Baseline Drought ........................................................ 108
8.3 Rural Water Security Investment Design......................................................................................... 110
8.3.1 New Community Storage Tank Design................................................................................114
8.4 Cost Effectiveness Assessment for Rural Water Security Technical Design Options..................116
8.4.1 Introduction to Cost Effectiveness............................................................................................. 116
8.4.2 Marginal Abatement Cost Curve (MACC) methodology ............................................................ 117
8.4.3 Assessment of interventions .....................................................................................................119
8.4.4 Assessment of costs for targeted interventions.........................................................................121
8.4.5 Cost curves for targeted islands/ atolls of RMI ..........................................................................121
8.5 Final Water Security Intervention Mix .............................................................................................. 122
8.6 Operations and Maintenance (RWH and Storage) ..........................................................................127
8.5.1 Maintenance Task for Rainwater Harvesting System................................................................ 127
9 Technical Design for Water Resilience (Rural Communities) .................................................................128
9.1 Groundwater ...................................................................................................................................128
9.2 Proposed Water Resilience Interventions - Rural ............................................................................130
10. Implementation Strategy..................................................................................................................... 131
10.1 Partners – Scaling and Stakeholders ............................................................................................ 131
10.1.1 Household RWH improvements in the rural communities –IOM and MIRCS WASH ...............131
10.1.2 Community RWH improvements and new construction........................................................... 131
10.1.3 Institutional Capacity Building .................................................................................................132
10.1.4 Training for Building Capacity in Key Stakeholders.................................................................132
10.2 Logistics for Implementation..........................................................................................................133
10.3 Key Findings .................................................................................................................................133
11 Definitions, Limitations and Assumptions............................................................................................. 134
11.1 Definition of High Level Impacts ....................................................................................................134
11.2 Water Security Definitions .............................................................................................................134
11.3 Demand Response and Preparedness Definitions ........................................................................135
11.4 Capacity Development Definitions.................................................................................................135
11.5 Limitations and Assumptions.........................................................................................................136
11.5.1 Limitations for Rural Communities Water Security Intervention Design - Technical.................136
11.5.2 Limitations and Assumptions for Rural Water Resiliency Intervention Design – Technical ......140
12 Exit Strategy.....................................................................................................................................140
List of Figures
Figure 1: a) Location of RMI and b) Extent RMI Exclusive Economic Zone.................................................17
Figure 2: Percent of contribution to the GDP by sector in the RMI .............................................................. 18

Figure 3: Household income level in different island – atoll groups............................................................. 19
Figure 4: Poverty incidence across urban and rural communities, based on BNIL ......................................20
Figure 5: Average annual rainfall versus latitude for the RMI weather stations ...........................................22
Figure 6: Majuro Annual Rainfall and Temperature.....................................................................................23
Figure 7: Kwajalein Annual Rainfall ............................................................................................................23
Figure 8: Annual Average temperatures for Majuro ....................................................................................27
Figure 9: Annual Average temperatures for Kwajalein ................................................................................28
Figure 10: Typical Temporary Water Collection Point .................................................................................35
Figure 11: Institutional Effectiveness (Based on Institutional Capacity Scorecard)......................................46
Figure 12:Disaster Communication System in RMI ....................................................................................48
Figure 13: Water Resources in the Rural Communities ..............................................................................56
Figure 14: Assessment of Roof Conditions of Household Rainwater Harvesting Systems ..........................57
Figure 15: Volume of Household Rainwater Harvesting Tanks based on Community Surveys ...................58
Figure 16: Summary of household rainwater harvesting tank sizes ............................................................ 58
Figure 17: Example of Upgraded Public Schools with Rainwater Harvesting Systems (Wotho Atoll) ..........60
Figure 18: Concrete rainwater storage tank in Jabwor, Jaluit Atoll.............................................................. 61
Figure 19: Emergency RO desalination unit with a capacity of 1360 litres/day............................................67
Figure 20: Theory of Change......................................................................................................................80
Figure 21: Macro-fiscal position of RMI since the amended Compact.........................................................82
Figure 22: Design Process .........................................................................................................................84
Figure 23: Current and Potential Water Security Score for the Long List of Water Resource Options.........90
Figure 24: Dry rainwater harvesting system components in a best practice design.....................................94
Figure 25: Wet rainwater harvesting system components in a best practice design (SPREP, 2015)...........94
Figure 26 MACC Cost Curve Example .....................................................................................................117
Figure 27 Overview of water availability and drought water requirements by 2045 across 24 target islands/
atolls......................................................................................................................................................... 118
List of Tables
Table 1: Summary of Water Security Investments ........................................................................................4

Table 2: Site locations of the seven existing weather stations.....................................................................24
Table 3: Comparison of Expected Changes in rainfall (percentage) for Years 2035 and 2045....................24
Table 4: Sea Level rise projections for the Marshall Islands for three emission scenarios. .........................25
Table 5: Historical Disasters in RMI (1987 – 2016) .....................................................................................26
Table 6: Annual and Seasonal trends in max, min and mean air temperatures (1950 to 2009)...................28
Table 7: Projected Annual average air temperature changes for the Marshall Islands three emission
scenarios....................................................................................................................................................29
Table 8: Projected changes (by percent) in aridity ......................................................................................29
Table 9: History of Droughts experienced by RMI.......................................................................................30
Table 10: Summary of Rainfall for 2015 - 2016 Drought .............................................................................31
Table 11: Projected changes Percentages in drought frequency ................................................................ 32
Table 12: Projected changes (days) in drought duration .............................................................................33
Table 13: Summary of Baseline and Projected Drought Periods reflecting Max Anthropogenic Change by
Station ........................................................................................................................................................33
Table 14: MWSC Drought Rules.................................................................................................................34
Table 15: Key Water Institutional Stakeholders in RMI ...............................................................................43
Table 16: Key Policies & Strategies Related to Water Sector .....................................................................44
Table 17: Drought Risk Management and Institutional Efforts.....................................................................49
Table 18: Disaster Coordination Mechanisms in RMI .................................................................................51
Table 19: Overview of Freshwater Resources in RMI .................................................................................55
Table 20: Household Rainwater Harvesting Systems in Rural Communities in RMI (Typical) .....................59
Table 21: Community Rainwater Harvesting Systems in Rural Communities in RMI (Typical) ....................60
Table 22: Survey data for existing large concrete tanks..............................................................................62
Table 23: Comparison of Global and RMI Daily Water per Capita Figures..................................................84
Table 24: Expanded Water Technology Options to Improve Water Security in RMI....................................89
Table 25: Groundwater Wells in Rural Communities in RMI .......................................................................96
Table 26: Volume of concrete tanks (m³) in each condition rating............................................................... 97
Table 27: Concrete tank rehabilitation options based on the tank condition ................................................98
Table 28: Concrete Tanks in Rural Communities in RMI.............................................................................99
Table 29: Water Resource Applicability for Rural Water Security.............................................................. 100

Table 30: Stationary RO systems and water provided per person ............................................................ 101
Table 31: Baseline Drought Length and Climate Change Additionality to 2045.........................................102
Table 32: Atoll and Most Representative Weather Stations ......................................................................102
Table 33: Relationship between RWH system condition and catchment efficiency ...................................104
Table 34: RWH Modelling Approach to Estimate Percent Full for Household Tanks on 1st Day of Drought
.................................................................................................................................................................105
Table 35: RWH Modelling Approach to Estimate Percent Full for Household Tanks when the Drought
Warning is Issued .....................................................................................................................................106
Table 36: RMI wide baseline assumptions (used for the infrastructure data gaps)....................................107
Table 37: Summary of the Status Quo RWH Systems and the Baseline Drought RWH results at the
atoll/island level ........................................................................................................................................109
Table 38: Household Rainwater Harvesting Systems in Rural Communities in RMI (Typical) ...................110
Table 39: Community Rainwater Harvesting Systems in Rural Communities in RMI (Typical) ..................110
Table 40: Water Security options..............................................................................................................112
Table 41: Summary of the 2045 rainwater harvesting modelling results at the atoll/island level (with climate
change additionality).................................................................................................................................113
Table 42: Tank material option assessment result .................................................................................... 114
Table 43: Tank material option assessment detail for life expectancy....................................................... 115
Table 44: Water Security Options – RWH Systems ..................................................................................116
Table 45 Interventions included in cost curve analysis across all target islands/ atolls ............................. 119
Table 46 Overview of weighted average unit costs of interventions across 24 target islands/ atolls..........121
Table 47 Comparison of Selected Project Interventions and total possible interventions .......................... 122
Table 48 Overview of final interventions to meet the water security target (differentiated by baseline and
climate induced drought) .......................................................................................................................... 122
Table 49 Comparison of selected project interventions and total possible interventions ........................... 123
Table 50: Summary of Cost Effective Water Security Investment Results by Atoll/Island.......................... 124
Table 51: Community Level Water Supply Gap Results and Distributed Cost Effective Water Security
Investments ..............................................................................................................................................125
Table 52: Planned Maintenance Tasks for RWH Systems and Recommended Frequency ...................... 128
Table 53: Groundwater Wells Investment Options .................................................................................... 129
Table 54: Description of proposed water resilience interventions.............................................................. 130
Table 55: Proposed Training for and with Community Stakeholders ......................................................... 132
Table 56: Limitations of Water Security Design and Maintenance ............................................................ 136
Table 57: Model assumptions for the volumetric benefit calculations........................................................ 139
Table 58: Limitations or Assumptions of Ground Water and Concrete Tank Design .................................140

Abbreviations and Glossary of Key Terms
ADB Asian Development Bank

ARFF Airport Rescue and Fire Facility
AusAID Australia's aid program
CERF Central Emergency Response Fund
CIP Capital Improvement Program
CSIRO Australian Bureau of Meteorology and Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research
Organization
Compact Compact of Free Association with the United States
DHS Department of Homeland Security (USA)
D.U.D. Delap-Uliga-Djarrit (area on Majuro Atoll)
DRM Disaster risk management
ENSO El Niño-Southern Oscillation
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
EPPSO Economic Policy, Planning and Statistics Office, RMI
EU European Union
FAOLEX Food and Agriculture Organization of the United States
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency, U.S.A.
GCF Green Climate Fund
GDP Gross Domestic Product
GFDRR Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery
GRMI Government of the Republic of the Marshall Islands
GNI Gross National Income
HH Household
IOM International Organization for Migration
ITCZ Inter Tropical Convergence Zone
KAJUR Kwajalein Atoll Joint Utilities Resources
MACC Marginal Abatement Cost Curves
MIMRA Marshall Islands Marine Resource Authority
MIRCS Marshall Islands Red Cross Society
MJO Madden-Julian Oscillation
MOE Ministry of Education, RMI
MOM Management Operation Maintenance
MWSC Majuro Water and Sewer Company
NDC National Disaster Committee
NEMCO National Emergency and Coordination Office
NEOC National Emergency Operation Centers
NGO Non Governmental Organization
NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
NOAA-NWS National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration - National Weather Service

NOC National Emergency Operation Centers
NWSO National Weather Service Office
O&M Operation and Maintenance
OCHA Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs
ODM Office of Disaster Management
OEPPC Office of Environmental Policy and Planning Coordination
PACC Pacific Adaptation to Climate Change
PCCSP Pacific Climate Change Science Program
PCRAFI Pacific Catastrophic Risk Assessment and Finance Initiative
PEC Pacific Environment Community
Reimaanlok Marshall Islands Conservation Plan
RMI Republic of the Marshall Islands
RO Reverse Osmosis
RWH Rainwater Harvesting – guttering and downpipes systems (including first flush systems)
SITREP Situation Report
SOPAC South - Pacific Islands Applied Geoscience Commission
SPC Secretariat of the Pacific Community
SPREP Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Program
SPSLCMP South Pacific Sea Level and Climate Monitoring Project
STI Sexually transmitted infections
SWOT Strength, Weaknesses, and Opportunities, Threats analysis
TDS Total Dissolved Solids
WS Water Security – defined as people’s ability to access safe freshwater resources year-round
US United States
UNDP United Nations Development Program
UNEP United Nations Environmental Program
UNICEF United Nations International Children's Emergency Fund
USACE United States Army Corps of Engineers
USAID United States Agency for International Development
USD United States Dollar
WASH Water, Sanitation and Hygiene
WHO World Health Organization

Preface
Government of the Republic of the Marshall Islands (RMI), supported by UNDP as the accredited entity to
the Green Climate Fund (GCF), has been leading the development of a proposal to the GCF that aims to
strengthen RMI’s water sector resilience to climate change impacts, which is an urgent and critical
sustainable development priority for RMI. Despite the recognition of the importance of water security in RMI,
due to various institutional and financial barriers, the Government of RMI faces constraints in addressing
water challenges without assistance, especially when these issues need to be tackled immediately given the
imminent risks of climate change impacts faced by Small Island Developing States such as RMI. In light of
this context, in June 2015, RMI Government, together with UNDP has embarked on a process to develop a
GCF proposal for water security. This Feasibly Study (FS) for the Addressing Climate Vulnerability in the
Water Sector (ACWA) is a product of an 24 month project development process and the projects already
completed or ongoing by RMI and donor agencies.
Objective
The FS aims to:
 Evaluate the socio-economic and technical effectiveness of existing water security measures – by
describing what infrastructure is in place and evaluating the effectiveness of its operation and
maintenance.
 Derive lessons learned and good practices – by reviewing past and planned initiatives and identifying
gaps in both the hard (technical and infrastructure investment) and soft measures (institutional,
political, capacities, knowledge, skills, and systems) to strengthen climate change adaptation in the
water sector in RMI.
 Propose an effective and efficient solution – by identifying sustainable cost effective interventions by
types, technology options, quantities and locations of interventions, including provision of technical
specifications, costing and sustainability strategies (for financial and operation and maintenance).
By achieving the above objectives, this FS provides the baseline analysis for the Project Design Team,
stakeholders, and beneficiaries to make an informed decision and build consensus around how best to
achieve water security in RMI based on the investment criteria of GCF. The information, analysis, and
recommendations detailed in the FS are incorporated into the design of the proposed water investments
under the ACWA funding proposal to be submitted to the GCF.
Process
The project design and preparation process was initiated upon the receipt of an official request letter from
RMI’s National Designated Authority (NDA) to the GCF to UNDP in May 2015. Shortly after receiving this
letter, which indicated RMI government and stakeholder’s desire for a project on water security and resilience,
UNDP together with stakeholders in RMI initiated a Pre-Feasibility Study. The Pre-Feasibility Study was
based on a desktop analysis and extensive literature review, which took place in 2015-2016. Based on the
key findings of the Pre-FS on the challenges and potential solutions, as well as remaining information gaps,
a full FS process was launched in 2016. This FS Report is a product of this process.
The FS was informed by the following inputs gathered from 2015 - 2017:
1) Literature review – of statistics (census, etc.), government, project, donor, agency, academic papers
and reports, past assessments and surveys, etc. Key documents gathered and reviewed are
highlighted in Annex 7 of the Feasibility Study (FS).
2) National stakeholder consultation workshops - From May 2015 – December 2017, the
Government of RMI in partnership with UNDP held national stakeholder consultation meetings. These
workshops were used to gather information on baseline, good practices, and lessons learned, as well
as discuss and / confirm / endorse key methodologies and findings emerging from the FS and
proposal design process.
3) Mayor’s survey –implemented in conjunction with the annual Mayor’s meeting in August 2015.
General information on existing water resources and challenges in the outer island context was
gathered through this survey. This informed the process of narrowing / focusing the scope of the
proposal, as well as the overall Theory of Change for water security and resilience.
4) Bilateral meetings and discussions – took place in Majuro and in rural communities as well as
through emails and phone calls. Bilateral meetings allowed the design team to gather documents,
information, data and feedback on baselines, good practices, and lessons learned, implementation
strategies, logistical and operational contexts, budgets, etc. Six technical assessment missions took

place as part of the design process, where many bilateral meetings and discussion took place – along
with stakeholder workshops and community consultations and surveys.
5) Community consultation and surveys - 33 community visits, where men and women’s group
consultations were held along with site surveys, were conducted to assess the structural condition of
the existing water infrastructure. These community consultations and assessments were
implemented in partnership with Women’s United Together Marshall Islands (WUTMI) and Marshall
Islands Organic Farmers Association (MIOFA). Some of the community consultations were
conducted together with GIZ and SPC, who are designing and implementing water initiatives in rural
communities of RMI. Government leaders (senators and ministers), Mayors and traditional leaders,
government department staff (OCS, OEPPC, Ministry of Public Works, EPA, etc.) also joined the
community consultation missions. Detailed methodology and findings from the community
consultation and survey are included in FS Annex 21.
Organization of the FS:
1) Section 1 provides the climate change context, including RMI’s ability to cope with it, especially in
relation to drought. This section identifies the target communities for the project.
2) Section 2 provides background relating to strategic policies, plans and programs that are incorporated
within both the national and sub-national level addressing water security planning, institutional
capacity assessment, drought response planning and preparedness.
3) Sections 3 and 4 provide background information discovered through literature review and local
consultations relating on-going and past initiatives to ensure water security and disaster preparedness.
4) Section 5 identifies the gaps and barriers through a development of the theory of change that RMI
faces in addressing its water security needs and disaster preparedness planning.
5) Section 6 provides background of the principles and general design process utilized in addressing the
technical gaps faced in addressing the water security needs.
6) Section 7 provides a review of technical options to address water security gaps, their technical
prioritization and review of best practices for operations and maintenance.
7) Section 8 focuses on the appropriate technical options for water security suitable for the needs of
each community and details the engineering design required.
8) Section 9 provides the background in the technical requirements to assure groundwater protection
and quality/quantity assessments.
9) Sections 10 and 11 reviews the implementation strategy to be used by the project and also describes
the assumptions and limitations in the design process.
Key Stakeholders
This FS has been conducted through the engagement of and in partnership with various national, regional,
community and international stakeholders.
The proposal development and FS process was led by the RMI’s NDA to GCF: the Office of Environmental
Planning and Policy Coordination (OEPPC), who coordinated the project design, assessment and
consultation activities together with UNDP to ensure that various stakeholders were engaged and consulted
throughout RMI in the development of the proposal. Given that 2015 – 2016 was a very strong El Niño year,
and one of the most severe droughts experienced in many communities in RMI, the FS was also informed by
and contributed to the drought response coordination mechanism led by the RMI Government, regional
agencies and international and bilateral agencies.
National thematic experts on water served as the key technical working group informing the design, analysis
and decision-making related to the proposal development and FS process. These agencies included: Office
of the Chief Secretary (OCS), Environmental Protection Authority (EPA), National Disaster Management
Office (NDMO), Majuro Water and Sewer Company (MWSC), Weather Service Office (WSO), Ministry of
Finance (MOF), Ministry of Public Works (MPW), National Training Council (NTC), and Ministry of Internal
Affairs (MOIA).
Political leaders, including the President, Ministers, Cabinet members and Senators were also informed and
engaged throughout the process to provide strategic guidance and endorsement. Government leaders
(senators and ministers), Mayors and traditional leaders, government department staff (OCS, OEPPC,
Ministry of Public Works, EPA, etc.) also joined the community consultation missions.

Non-government actors also played critical roles in the project design and FS process – by not only
contributing information and experiences, but also as key implementers of the surveys and community
consultations (i.e. WUTMI and MOIFA). Regional, bilateral, and international partners also supported the FS
and project design, both financially and technically. Some of the community consultations were conducted
together with GIZ and SPC, who are designing and implementing water initiatives in rural communities of
RMI. This ensured close coordination, synergies, and collaboration in the design and implementation of the
proposed project.
Technical assessments and missions were conducted by a team of UNDP experts with financial resources
made available by UNDP, as well as through generous support from Korea Environmental Industry &
Technology Institute (KEITI), the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (MFAT) New Zealand, USAID Adapt
Asia Program, who enabled Government of RMI and UNDP to engage thematic experts in the areas of gender,
financial sustainability, and water engineering.
Key stakeholders consulted and contributed to the FS included:

 RMI Ministries – Chief Secretary’s Office, Ministry of Health, Ministry of Public Works, Ministry of
Education, Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Environmental Planning and Policy
Coordination (OEPPC), Weather Service Office (WSO), Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Ministry of Internal
Affairs, Ministry of Finance, National Training Council, Municipal Governments – Council of Mayors.
 Traditional leaders, Mayors and Community Leaders – Mayors and community leaders of each atoll
visited, Church groups, Landowners and Community Groups.
 Multi-lateral and Bi-lateral Donors – World Bank, Asian Development Bank, UNDP, International
Federation of Red Cross/RMI National Volunteer Group (IFRC/MIRCS), GIZ, Japan Embassy and
Japan International Cooperation Agency, International Organization for Migration (IOM), Die
Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ), Germany, Republic of China
(Taiwan), Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade - Australia, Ministry of Foreign Affairs – New
Zealand, Secretariat of Pacific (SPC/SOPAC), Secretariat of Pacific Region Environmental
Programme (SPREP)
 Representatives of civil society - Women United Together Marshall Islands (WUTMI), Local Churches,
Hospitals and Schools, Marshall Islands Organic Farmers Association (MIOFA)
 Representatives of private sector and State Owned Enterprises – Majuro Water and Sewer Company
(MWSC), Kwajalein Atoll Joint Utilities Resources (KAJUR), Marshalls Islands Shipping Corporation
(and other shipping companies), Air Marshall Islands, Moana Marine (Reverse Osmosis Supplier),
Marshall Islands Marine Resources Authority (MIMRA)

1. Climate Change in the Republic of the Marshall Islands
1.1. Country Context and Background
1.1.1 Geographical context and Vulnerabilities
The Republic of the Marshall Islands (RMI), one of the small island developing states (SIDS) in the sub-
region of Micronesia in the Pacific Ocean, consists of 29 coral atolls and 5 single islands. The atolls form 2
groups, the Ratak (sunrise) and the Ralik (sunset) chains, that run parallel to each other, spanning from the
northwest to the southeast. The nation is therefore a large-ocean state, with 1225 islands and islets. RMI’s
population in 2017 was 55, 562 people (RMI ESSPO)12. Population has been growing, and is expected to
continue to grow, despite strong trends of outward migration. Average annual population growth rate was
reported as 0.4% in 2011, and estimated as 0.5% in 201613.
RMI embodies many of the SIDS challenges with respect to the various issues and risks in the face of climate
change. RMI’s land area is extremely limited – approximately 182 km2 of land remains visible above water
level during high tide; most of the 24 inhabited local government jurisdictions on average lie merely 2 meters
above sea level; and the islands are generally small - the largest island, Kwajelein, is approximately 16 km2.
This puts physical limits on growth and infrastructure, which can create serious pressures on natural
resources and the environment, influencing water and food insecurity. Furthermore, isolation from other
countries globally, as well as other communities within the country makes access to markets and achieving
economies of scale difficult.
Figure 1: a) Location of RMI and b) Extent RMI Exclusive Economic Zone14

The hydro-geophysical features of the country significantly contribute to its high vulnerabilities to natural
disasters and climate change. The geographic location is such that it is heavily influenced by storms,
cyclones, king tides, sea level rise, El Nino, reduced annual rainfall and temperature rise contributing to
reduction of water security for the residents of RMI.
1.1.2 Socio-Economic Context and Vulnerabilities

The unique socio-economic context of RMI makes climate change adaptation extremely challenging without
external support. Since its independence in 1990, when the United Nations formally dissolved US
trusteeship15, RMI’s revenues have depended on resources provided by the United States under the Compact
of Free Association (Compact), which initially provided USD 1 billion during 1986-2001, and was renegotiated
to provide USD1.5 billion in direct US assistance from 2003-2024. Through the amended Compact
agreement, the US Government is also funding, jointly with the Marshall Islands Government, a Trust Fund
12
Refer to FS Annex for population data projections provided by RMI EPPSO.
13
2016 SPC Pacific Island Populations. Estimates and projections of demographic indicators for selected years. (PRISM)
14
Source: Chapman, L. 2004. Information Paper 8. Near shore domestic fisheries development in Pacific island countries and territories.
4th SPC Heads of Fisheries Meeting.
15
RMI entered into a Compact of Free Association (Compact) with the United States in 1986. Further information on independence is provided in FS 1.1.2 History

that will provide an income stream for RMI after 2024, which is when the amended Compact agreement with
the United States is scheduled to expire16.
Impacts of climate change and expiration of the US Compact of Free Association in FY2023 are major
medium-term fiscal challenges17.The annual grant assistance under the Compact has been diminishing since
2003 (ADB, 2014). Compact annual grants have reduced from $35.2 million to current annual distribution of
$32.1 million (as of 2016) and will end with the distribution of $27.7 million in the year 2023. After the Compact
grant period expires in 2023, RMI is expected to complement domestic revenues with returns from currently
accumulated Compact Trust Fund, which receives annual savings from fiscal surpluses, and contributions
from development partners. Building the trust fund is a major challenge, especially under prevailing global
economic uncertainty. The US Department of Interior Audit of RMI Trust Fund indicated as of 2015 that the
trust fund was valued at $247.1 million USD18, which is short of maintaining the necessary real value needed
in 2024. By 2024, a balance of $550M within the Compact Trust Fund is likely needed to generate investment
earnings to replace the existing grant. However, the real value of the Compact Trust Fund will not be
maintainable due to the possible volatility of investment returns without further assistance (IMF, 2016). The
Republic of Taiwan has assisted by contributing funds to the trust and additional donors will be required to
meet the long-term fiscal goal. The US Ronald Reagan Missile Test Site at Kwajalein Atoll also provides key
income to the RMI economy and delivers an estimated one-third of economic activity19.
In search of employment opportunities, people have been steadily migrating from the rural and islands to the
two urban centres of Majuro and Ebeye. Migration is also suspected to be accelerating from Marshall Islands
to the United States given terms under the Compact that Marshallese citizens may work and study in the
United States without a visa. These forces of migration contribute to further decline of the outer island
economy, therefore increasing the income gap between the urban and rural and island population20.
Given its small and sparsely distributed land and population size, RMI’s economy is small and fragile. RMI
is heavily dependent on external aid. RMI has limited private sector growth due to challenges of accessing
domestic and international markets due to its remoteness and is additionally challenged with dispersed
communities over a vast ocean area with a weak regulatory framework. Estimated GDP in 2016 was
US$ 186,716,626 (in current US$) and US$ 3,816 (PPP). The public sector is the largest employer and
contributor to RMI’s GDP.
40
1997-1999
Sector Contribution (%)
35
30 2010-2012
25
20
15
10
5
0
Private Public Finance Government NGOs Households Indirect
Enterprise Enterprise (Banks) Sectors
Figure 2: Percent of contribution to the GDP by sector in the RMI21

The largest sources of domestic revenue are taxes on trade and consumption, a small percentage of income,
closely followed by revenue from taxes on income and profits, which respectively generated US$17.3 million
and US$11.3 million in fiscal year 2012/13 (PCRAFI , 2015). Remittances make up 14.3 percent of GDP
16
The RMI will continue to receive annually declining grants averaging US$45 million (26 precent of GDP as of FY2012) until FY2023. 1 A Compact Trust Fund (CTF) is being built up
to provide funding from FY2024 onwards. The fiscal year runs from October to September. Source: IMF 2014. IMF Country Report No. 14/26. RMI. Staff Report for the 2013 Article IV
Consultation.
17
IMF. 2016. 2016 Article IV Consultation – Press Release ; Staff Report; and Statement By the Executive Director for Republic of the Marshall Islands.
18
US Department of Interior – Trust Fund for the People of the Republic of Marshall Islands Financial Statements Sept 2015.
19
Government of the Republic of the Marshall Islands. 2008. Republic of the Marshall Islands National Action Plan for Disaster Risk Management 2008 – 2018.
20
It is reported that 2/3 of outer islanders live on less than $1 day. In the urban areas, there is a concentration of highly paid public servants on the urban islands of Majuro and Ebeye.
US Compact and federal funding that largely benefit urban areas, and nuclear compensation and lease payments that benefit communities on certain islands. There is a continuing
decline in the price of copra (the economic mainstay of the outer islands and a lack of low-skilled jobs in both urban and rural areas. ADB. 2003. Priorities of the People, Hardship in the
Marshall Islands.
21
RMI FY 2012 Economic Review, Mark Sturton et.al available on www.pitiviti.org

according to estimates provided by World Bank 22 and grants from the Compact and from development
partners amounted to $59.2 million. This means that contributions from donors account for approximately 60
percent of the annual budget. The country’s limited budget flexibility and access to cash make it difficult to
fund disaster response domestically (ADB, 2014). This provides context for the challenges the government
will face in co-financing activities for future climate response infrastructure enhancements and disaster
response activities after 2023.
Income inequality within atolls and islands: The income inequality within an island or atoll is also
important when determining ability to pay for water services. Given that RMI is 74% urbanized, close to 50%
of the poor households (below BNIL) live in the urban atolls of Majuro and Ebeye. The income inequality is
also very high in urban atolls where the average income of poor households is only 15% of the islands
average income. In rural communities, the income inequality is comparatively lower and average income of
poor households is about a third of the island’s average income. Any effort to cross subsidize water charges
using volumetric fixed rates will be more effective in urban atolls than in rural communities.
The trends in household income can help understand a household’s ability to pay for improved water facilities
and services. The three sources of household income are: wages, agricultural income and remittances. The
primary revenue for the residents of the rural communities is copra production and handi-crafts.Of these,
wages contribute 92% of the income. Wages are significantly higher in the government sector, public
enterprises, financial sector, and at Kwajalein air base. These sectors employ close to 50% of the work force.
There is wage disparity even within the government sector. The central government employees in Majuro
earn twice as much as those employed by the local governments. The private sector, which employs 38% of
the workforce, pays the lowest salaries (2.6 times lower than central government wages). The higher paying
government positions are concentrated within the urban atolls.
The average household income in Marshall Islands in 2011 was USD 13,362. There is a huge disparity
between rural and urban regions in household income level as shown below:
Annual Household income and population of atolls and islands

30000 Urban
27,797
Near Serviced atolls Typical and isolated outer atolls
urban
25000
20000 17829
16549
15000
10751 Median
6767 income
10000 8061 5210
5558 6909 6873
4725 5443 4294 5026
4267 4031 2817 3812 3738
5000 2636 2824 2964
2393 2246
Figure 3: Household income level in different island – atoll groups23
The following are key observations with regards to household income at different atolls. Income disparity
between rural and urban centers - the average household income in urban atolls is three times the median
household income of USD 4,725 per year. The chart above shows that average household income is higher
in urban and serviced atolls. Serviced atolls have higher household income as they receive additional income
from special trust funds. It is to be noted that the proximity to urban atolls has not improved the household
income levels in near islands.
Incomes are significantly higher in communities (such as Enewetak, Rongelap, Utrik and Kili/ Bikini) affected
by nuclear testing and receiving compensation for loss of land use based on $/acre affected than those in
22
World Bank Group April 2017 - Migration and Development Brief 27
23
Source: RMI Government. 2011. Census.

other islands (CRS, 2005). In the remaining atolls, communities’ lack of income-earning opportunities has
led to concerns over rising unemployment, financial hardship (including declining real incomes and higher
levels of consumer debt), and hunger. These factors provide powerful incentives for migration from rural
communities to the two major urban centers, as well as externally to the United States.24
Poverty statistics: While the incidence of absolute poverty is low, data indicates high levels of inequality,
evidence of malnutrition in urban areas, and limited access to cash incomes in rural areas (GFDRR 2011).
The Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery (GFDRR, 2011) reported that 20% of the population
in RMI lived on less than US$1 a day. Consultations with RMI Economic Policy, Planning and Statistics Office
(EPPSO) in November 2017 confirmed this as consistent with their findings.
Based on the 2011 Census using a single Basic Needs Income Line (BNIL) approach to define poverty level,
it is estimated that 40% of households in Marshall Islands fall below the poverty line. Assuming that an income
level above twice that of BNIL is considered ‘not vulnerable’, an additional 21% of the households are
vulnerable to poverty. The poverty incidence across different atoll and island groups is given below :
Poverty trend in RMI
% national level 38.4 20.9 40.7
% outer islands 59.1 20.3 20.6
% urban 29.7 21.2 49.1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Below Basic Needs Income Level Vulnerable to poverty Not Vulnerable
Figure 4: Poverty incidence across urban and rural communities, based on BNIL25
With more than 80% of households vulnerable and below the poverty line, the rural communities ability to
pay for water charges is low. However, the ability to pay should be seen in the context of the costs to attain
water currently incurred by the households.
Unfortunately, the poverty rate in the Marshall Islands has been increasing in recent years. According to the
country’s 2011 census, one-third of the population fell below the basic-needs income level. A “basic-needs
income line” or BNIL for RMI was estimated at $15.46 per person per week for the urban centres, and $13.60
per person a week for the rural islands.26
Education and Employment Vulnerability
Based on the 2011 Census for urban residents greater than 25 years old, 28 percent completed high school
and 20 percent completed some level of college. The related figures for the ruralcommunities is 16 percent
and 11 percent. The census reported that in the urban areas 24 percent of males and 17 percent of females
had some college education or higher; in the rural communities this differential was more stark, 14.4% for
males but only 7.4% for females. Taken together these figures suggest that those in the rural communities
areas are disadvantaged in relation to education and that, in particular, females are especially disadvantaged
at the post-high school level.
Connected to education vulnerability, the lack of employment or under-employment is a consequence of
many other factors including gender, education, health and disability as well as location, and the impact of
broader economic policies on the general economic environment.
24. World Bank

http://www.wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2013/02/27/000356161_20130227121655/Rendered/PDF/695100CAS0P1310
Official0Use0Only090.pdf
25
Derived from RMI Government. 2011. Census.
26
Derived from RMI Government. 2011. Census.

According to the 2011 Census, there are a total of 12,647 people in the labour force, with 51 percent of all
men of working age engaged in either paid or unpaid work, compared to 28 percent of women of working
age. Based on the 2011 Census, 40% of the RMI population were considered economically active, with 65
percent males and 35 percent females. Females generally have a lower employment rate and in government
there is a better balance, for the private sector males accounted for two thirds of the workforce with the
remaining one third balance for females. The vast majority of women in the rural communities rely on food
production and processing and handicraft production for family subsistence.27
The other side of a low level of formal employment is often a high reliance on agriculture for both subsistence
and cash income. As the 2015/16 drought demonstrated, a reliance on agriculture can lead to a serious
increase in hardship as income from cash crops and food from subsistence farming declines putting a major
squeeze on household incomes and food security; this is very relevant for the rural communities which rely
on subsistence farming and copra production.
Note on Private sector development:

The private sector in RMI has been growing at an annual average rate of 3.3% over the past 6 years,
reflecting strong growth in fisheries. With the set-up of a tuna loining factory in 2010, the commercial
fisheries sector has seen significant growth. Copra production and processing is an export oriented
manufacturing activity supported by Tobolar, a state owned enterprise. There are small entrepreneurs in
sectors such as fisheries, retailing, construction, and hospitality. There are also some small farms that
produce exports such as coconuts and breadfruit, but the atolls have few natural resources and the entire
Republic relies on imports.
In addition to foreign aid, the primary economic driver is the sale of fishing rights, which represents twelve
percent of the RMI economy, but is primarily managed through Majuro. The RMI benefits from its participation
in the Parties to the Nauru Agreement (PNA), which has doubled tuna revenue over the past two years.
Development of sustainable coastal fisheries is underway using ecosystem-based management guidelines
established under the Reimaanlok mechanism to assist local governments in formulating fishery
management plans and fishery management ordinances, and to harmonize efforts in facilitating the
implementation of community fishery management programs28.
1.2 Climate Change: Observed and Projected Climate Variability and Change
1.2.1 Precipitation Patterns 29
The current climate of RMI is tropical with two seasons: a wet season from May to November; and a dry
season from December to April. Air temperatures show very little variation, with mean maximum
temperatures in the warmest months less than 1°C (2°F) warmer than those in the coldest months. Rainfall
however varies greatly from atolls and islands in the north to those in the south. The atolls and islands
located 10°N and further north receive less than 1,250 mm (50 inches) of rain annually and are very dry in
the dry season. The atolls and islands located further south of 7°N receive more than 2,500 mm (100 inches)
of rain annually. Given the variation of precipitation patterns, the 24 local government jurisdictions (or atolls
and islands) of RMI are often categorized into 3 zones:
 Zone 1 with atolls/islands located above 8’ N latitude
 Zone 2 with islands between 6’ and 8’ N latitude
 Zone 3 with atolls/islands below 6’ N latitude.
During the dry season, atolls and islands in the northern Zones 1 and 2 often experience prolonged days
without rain, and therefore are more vulnerable to drought events. This rainfall pattern relating latitude and
amount of rainfall is reflected in Figure 5, which has been generated through analysis of annual average
rainfall data (provided by RMI NWS) and relating it to the atoll latitude; the further north the atoll, the lower
average rainfall experienced. The dotted line on the graph is the polynomial trend of the data points.
In addition, the Inter Tropical Convergence Zone (ITCZ) brings rainfall to RMI throughout the year. It is
strongest and closest to RMI during the wet season, and weakest and farthest away during the dry season.
27
RMI, Ministry of Internal Affairs. 2015. National Gender Mainstreaming Policy of the Republic of the Marshall Islands.
28
Republic of the Marshall Islands: National Report, May 2013. Produced by the RMI Ministry of Foreign Affairs in preparation for the Third International
Conference on Small Islands States in Apia, Samoa 2014
29
Australian Bureau of Meteorology (BoM) and Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO). 2014. Report: Climate Variability,
Extremes and Change in the Western Tropical Pacific 2014. Chapter 7. Marshall Islands.

Figure 5: Average annual rainfall versus latitude for the RMI weather stations
The main influence of the year-to-year natural climate variability in RMI is the El Niño-Southern Oscillation
(ENSO) where rainfall can be suppressed by as much as 80%. In a normal year, dry season lasts for 2 to 4
months with an average of 10 consecutive days without rain. In a dry year (i.e. 2015/2016, which was one
of the driest years in history for many atolls and islands), days without rain range from 10 to 30 days, for up
to 5 months (Dec 2015 to May 2016). Refer to Annex 4 for information on weather stations and Annex 5 for
detailed charts of the daily rainfall from December 2015 to end May 2016 for each of the seven weather
stations. A typical El Nino event is followed by a prolonged dry season of up to 6 months and a drop in 80%
rainfall. King tides, typically occur in January to March and have been growing in intensity due to higher sea
levels resulting in greater inundation of the atolls.
The West Pacific Monsoon (WPM) also affects RMI in some years, Madden Julian-Oscillation; the tropical
upper tropospheric troughs and the North Pacific sub-tropical high can also influence rainfall in a given year.
Historical data (details provided in FS Annex 4, 5, 6) shows a decreasing trend of rainfall quantities, with
drought risk respectively increasing. Droughts and storm waves are the main extreme weather events that
impact RMI. Droughts generally occur in the first 4 to 6 months of the year following an El Niño. During
severe El Niño events, rainfall can be suppressed by as much as 80% and the dry season begins earlier and
ends much later than normal.
To measure the climate information (recording rainfall and temperature on a 6 hour basis) for RMI the
Weather Office operates 9 stations (3 on Majuro). Majuro (main weather office) and Kwajalein locations are
consider first order stations and have been in operation for the last 50 years. The second order stations
located at Ailinglaplap, Jaliut, Mili, Utrik and Wotje have been in operation for the last 20 years. Using this
available data UNDP has determined the observed baseline drought periods as shown in Table 13 of this FS.
Figure 6 and 7 shows the historical drop in rainfall and rise of temperature (red line series on the graphs) for
the Majuro and Kwajalein atolls with the light blue, dark blue and grey bars denoting El Nino, La Nina and

neutral years respectively. Analysis of rainfall during the 2015 – 2016 drought year is included in FS Annex
5.
Figure 6: Majuro Annual Rainfall and Temperature30
Figure 7: Kwajalein Annual Rainfall31
30
Extremes and Change in the Western Tropical Pacific 2014. Chapter 7. Marshall Islands
31
Extremes and Change in the Western Tropical Pacific 2014. Chapter 7. Marshall Islands

1.2.1.1 Precipitation – Modelled Future Change
The climate projections 32 based on Coupled Model Intercomparison Project version 3 (CMIP3) of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC A4) show that in the future, rainfall and drought scenarios
in RMI through to 2030 will continue with little or no change. After 2030 with “moderate confidence” rainfall
during the dry-season will increase and consequently the frequency of drought events will decline. However,
climate models also predict an increase in extreme event intensity, which may influence the frequency and/or
magnitude of droughts in RMI.
UNDP commissioned a review of the available information and to apply CMIP5 GCM models that are
associated with the IPCC 5th assessment report to better understand the specific climate projections for RMI.
The future emissions projection scenario used for analysis was the Representative Concentration Pathway
8.5 (RCP8.5), which is consistent with 8.5 W/m2 of anthropogenic radiative forcing by 2100; this is widely
considered the “business-as-usual’ scenario and represents the trajectory that anthropogenic carbon
emissions are presently tracking (Le Quéré et al., 2016). Refer to Feasibility Annex 22 for final Report on
Climate Projections for RMI developed on behalf of RMI and UNDP by Dr. Kristopher Karnauskas. Within the
report (see FS Annex 22), climate change projections are focused on time horizons 2035 (representing
climatology spanning 2030 to 2039) and 2045 (2040 to 2049) in relation to the baseline decade of 2006 to
2015.
Projections within the models were attenuated to provide annual, wet and dry season rainfall totals for the
time horizons of 2035 and 2045 based on the location of the existing RMI weather stations (Table 2):
Site Weather Station Lon./Lat. Relative geographic Category

# description
1 Utrik 167°E 11°N South of Rongelap Atoll Northern
2 Wotje 171°E 10°N Northeast of Wotje Atoll Northern
3 Kwajalein 168°E 9°N East of Kwajalein Atoll Northern
4 Ailinglaplap 169°E 7°N Southeast of Ailinglaplap Atoll Southern
5 Majuro 172°E 7°N East of Majuro Southern
6 Mili 172°E 6°N South of Mili Atoll Southern
7 Jaluit 169°E 6°N West of Jaluit Atoll Southern
Table 2: Site locations of the seven existing weather stations
Baseline Rainfall (mm) 2035 2045

Weather (Climate Model) (Percentage Change) (Percentage Change)
Site #
27Station
Annual Wet Dry Annual Wet Dry Annual Wet Dry
1 Utrik 2397 1031 196 -10.6 -13.7 -23.4 -3.2 -10.3 -30.0
2 Wotje 2741 1088 269 -12.6 -15.6 -22.0 -5.5 -9.7 -41.0
3 Kwajalein 3062 1084 423 -9.5 13.0 -24.4 -7.3 -11.9 -31.8
4 Ailinglaplap 3577 1029 734 -7.9 -11.9 -17.5 -17.0 -14.8 -29.6
5 Majuro 3574 1030 714 -8.5 -20.2 -18.6 -15.3 -13.4 -25.0
6 Mili 3492 911 811 -11.7 -22.1 -14.0 -18.3 -16.7 -25.0
7 Jaluit 3527 922 838 -12.8 -15.0 -12.7 -19.4 -17.8 -27.6
T RMI (Ave) 3196 1014 569 -10.5 -15.8 -17.3 -13.1 -13.4 -28.4
Table 3: Comparison of Expected Changes in rainfall (percentage) for Years 2035 and 2045
Baseline rainfall totals (mm) and projected changes (%) in annual, wet season and dry season rainfall for
each RMI site and the average across all RMI sites are shown in Table 3. Baseline totals were computed
from the period 2006-2015 (first 10 years of simulation), averaged across all 20 GCMs. Projection figures
32
Source: Marshall Islands National Weather Service Office, Australian Bureau of Meteorology, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization
(CSIRO) (2013) Current and future climate of the Marshall Islands. http://www.pacificclimatechangescience.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/8_PACCSAP-
Marshall-Islands-11pp_WEB.pdf

given are the greatest reduction in rainfall within 95% confidence limits. Negative numbers indicate rainfall
reductions.
The projections show that the greatest possible reduction in rainfall within 95% confidence limits corresponds
to a significant drop in rainfall for both wet and dry periods for the 2035 and 2045 modelled scenarios as
shown in Table 3. This will exacerbate the need for assuring water storage capacities and rainwater
harvesting efficiencies to be maintained at a high level to capture maximum amount of available water. Based
on the historical trend of reduction in rainfall over the last forty years, the modelled projection is consistent
with the experiences of RMI.33
1.2.2 Sea Level Rise, High (King) Tides, Cyclones and Storms
Historic observation data indicate that the sea level near Majuro has risen by about 7mm (0.3 inches) per
year since 1993. This is larger than the global average of 2.8–3.6 mm (0.11– 0.14 inches) per year. To
measure local wave and sea levels, a Datawell Directional Waverider buoy was deployed in July 2014 in
partnership with University of Hawaii’s Pacific Islands Ocean Observing System (PacIOOS). The buoy is
deployed about one and half kilometres off of the eastern shore of Majuro and measures wave height, wave
direction, wave period and sea surface temperature every 30 minutes34, which is then reported to the Weather
Office. This information is used by regional studies.
The Pacific Climate Change Science Program report35 indicates that there are a number of historical sea-
level records available for RMI: Enewetak (1951 – 1971); Kwajalein (1946 – present); Majuro‐B (1968–2001);
and Majuro‐C (1993–2009). The report also mentions that long‐term locally‐monitored sea‐surface
temperature data, however, are unavailable for RMI.
High tides and specifically king tides are a common phenomenon in RMI. The consistent inundation from
tides and flooding compromises the ground water use as a potential drinking and a cooking water source
(RMI NDMO, pers comm). RMI NDMO indicated that the overwash height at the airport reservoir reached
75mm during the King Tide event experienced in March 2014.
1.2.2.1 Sea Level and Tides (King) – Modelled Future Changes

Sea level is projected to continue to rise in RMI, refer to Table 4 for expected sea level rise based on three
emission scenarios. Saltwater intrusion and flooding of the airport catchment and freshwater storage
reservoirs, as well as damage to their saltwater pump stations and treatment plant of the Majuro Water and
Sewer Company (MWSC) has historically impacted water supply to residents of Majuro. These risks due to
inundation to critical infrastructure, especially in the urban centres, may increase associated with extreme
sea levels and high tide events. Saltwater intrusion may also further stress the limited groundwater
availability and quantity, which will affect the Laura Community in Majuro and in the rural communities that
have limited, but vital, access to groundwater resources. For Majuro and the Laura community addressing
this risk is part of the overall Master Plan for MWSC. The islands not serviced by MWSC and KAJUR have
not yet addressed possible comprehensive alternatives for drinking water sources.
Table 4: Sea Level rise projections for the Marshall Islands for three emission scenarios.
Y2030 Y2055 Y2090

(cm) (cm) (cm)
Low Emissions Scenario 4 to 15 10 to 27 18 to 47
Medium Emissions
Scenario 4 to 15 11 to 32 21 to 60
33
Additional information reviewed for climate change analysis relevant to RMI includes:
Karnauskas, K, J. Donnelly, and K. J. Anchukaitis. 2016. Future freshwater stress for island populations. Nature Climate Change. 2987.
Antonietta Capotondi et. al, American Meteorological Society, June 2015, Understanding ENSO Diversity
S. Chand et al, Nature Climate Change (letters), Dec 2016, Projected Increase in El Nino driven tropical cyclone frequency in the Pacific
34
University of Hawaii. 2014. http://www.hawaii.edu/news/2014/07/10/wave-buoy-in-majuro-helps-keep-islanders-safe/
Near real-time data can be viewed from; http://www.pacioos.hawaii.edu/waves/buoy-majuro/
35

High Emissions Scenario 3 to 16 11 to 30 22 to 62
The seal level rise values in Table 4 represent 90% of the range of models and changes are relative to the
average of the time period 1980-1999.18
A review of the Kiribati report (PACCSAP, 2014) where mean sea levels are also projected to increase by
7-17 cm by 2030 irrespective of the climate change scenario and by 2050 this range in sea-level rise is 21-
33 cm and by 2090, 23-87 cm. Increases in mean-sea level will raise tide levels which may result in King
Tides (which currently make up approximately 3 to 4% of High Tides). By 2090 potentially over 90% of all
high tides could exceed what is presently considered a King Tide. It is expected that RMI will also face this
same phenomena.
1.2.2.2 Cyclones and Storms
Records of historical disaster events, including climate-induced disasters such as cyclone, floods and
droughts, are limited in RMI. Current evidence shows that the RMI is not located within the core cyclone belt.
However, historically, RMI has experienced impacts of and losses from tropical cyclones, which caused
significant damages to buildings, infrastructure, and livelihoods. In 1997, Typhoon Paka36 caused US$80
million of damage to crops and affected 70 percent of houses on Ailinglaplap Atoll37. During a 20-year period,
it is estimated that cyclones in RMI caused on average US$63 million per cyclone; Typhoons Zelda, Axel,
and Gay caused significant damage and loss within the span of one year (1991–1992). However storms
and cyclones
Below Table 5 summarizes information regarding historical disasters (non-droughts) declarations by the RMI
Government and often supported by a State of Emergency Declaration by the US President to release US
funding and resource support to RMI.
Table 5: Historical Disasters in RMI (1987 – 2016)
Year Disaster Type Affected Population & Location Economic Source*

Cost / Value
March 2014 King Tides Majuro: 70 homes damaged, 940 Unknown 1
evacuees
Arno, Mili, Maloelap, Kili and Wotje also
affected38
June 1994 High Surf, Wave Majuro Unknown 2, 3
Action
Dec 1992 Typhoon Gay 5,000 people in Mejit, Ailuk, Maloelap, Aur, Unknown 2, 4
Ujae, and Majuro
Feb 1992 Tropical Storm Unknown Unknown 2
Axel
Dec 1991 Typhoon Zelda 6,000 people in Ebeye (Kwajalein) Unknown 2, 5
Jan 1988 Tropical Storm 1 person killed. 3,500 affected in Majuro US$ 5 million 2, 6
Roy and Ebeye (Kwajalein)
*Source numbers correspond to those listed above.

Data sources available for historical records in RMI in regard to type of disaster, affected population,
location, and/ or economic cost are:
Sources:
1 – Relief Web. http://reliefweb.int/disaster/ss-2014-000032-mhl
2 – FEMA. Disaster Declarations for Republic of the Marshall Islands. https://www.fema.gov/disasters/grid/state-tribal-government/83
3 – RMI. 1997. Hazard Mitigation Plan.
http://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/www.pacificdisaster.net_pdnadmin_data_original_DM0008.pdf
4 – Joint Typhoon Warning Center, Guam, Marshall Islands. 1992. Annual Cyclone Report. http://www.usno.navy.mil/NOOC/nmfc-
ph/RSS/jtwc/atcr/1992atcr.pdf
5 – UNDRO. 1991. Marshall Islands - Typhoon Zelda Dec 1991 UNDRO Situation Reports 1-3
36
Paka is not included in the summary table of disaster as there is no record of state of emergency declaration in RMI (record available by FEMA for declaration
in Guam).
37
World Bank. Pacific Catastrophe Risk Assessment and Financing Initiative (PCRAFI). (2015). Country Note. Marshall Islands.
38
In Arno, Tinak Health Centre was completely destroyed, and Malel and Kilange Health Centers were low on medical supplies. Most breadfruit, pandanus and
banana trees destroyed, and shops lost all food stock. Many household water catchments were damaged and community tanks contaminated. Around 80
percent of sanitation facilities were affected, with sewage reported in some locations.

http://reliefweb.int/report/marshall-islands/marshall-islands-typhoon-zelda-dec-1991-undro-situation-reports-1-3
6 – Joint Typhoon Warning Center. Guam, Marshall Islands. 1988. Annual Tropical Cyclone Report. http://www.usno.navy.mil/NOOC/nmfc-
ph/RSS/jtwc/atcr/1988atcr.pdf
1.2.2.3 Cyclones and Storms – Modelled Future Change
From the RMI Climate Report in FS Annex the projected changes in tropical storm climate presented here
are statistically limited of their frequency over the last ten years (2005 to 2015) except perhaps for the
northernmost sites in the RMI. The climate baseline of number of storms per decade (2005 to 2015) in the
RMI region is approximately 30; the Global Climate Model (GCM) multi-model mean projection for RMI is to
experience an additional 2 tropical storms per decade by 2035 and an additional 3 tropical storms per decade
by 204539. The intensity of the storms is also projected to increase by 9% and 14% by 2035 and 2045,
respectively.
Based on long-term projections (past 2045), the frequency of cyclones and storms is expected to decrease
with moderate confidence (CSIRO, 2011). Fortunately the cyclone point of origin lies south and west of RMI
and typical travel west. However, the vulnerability to cyclones may increase due to a combination of factors
including sea level rise in the densely populated urban centres and associated increased risk for primary and
secondary impacts through increased destruction and interruption of critical infrastructure as a result of
cyclone events. Extreme weather events such as cyclones and storm surge flooding can cause saline
intrusion and overflow of septic tanks into freshwater lenses making them unsuitable for use.
1.2.3 Temperature
Air temperatures in RMI are constant year-round at approximately 27°C with average historical normal
temperature depicted for Majuro showing an increasing trend (Figure 8). The consistently increasing
temperature may result in deeper heat waves if continued that may affect consumption and usage levels.
Figure 8: Annual Average temperatures for Majuro
Light Blue Bars indicate El Nino years, dark blue indicate La Nina yeas and the grey bars indicate neutral
years 40.
Similarity similar historical temperature trends are shown by Figure 9 for Kwajalein Atoll.
39
Refer to RMI Climate Projections Report V4 in the FS Annex. Projected changes in number of tropical storms (storms per decade) and power dissipation
index (PDI) (% change) for the RMI region by the methodology of Zhang et al. (2017).
40

Figure 9: Annual Average temperatures for Kwajalein
Light Blue Bars indicate El Nino years, dark blue indicate La Nina yeas and the grey bars indicate neutral
years 41.
The temperature graphs (Figure 8 and Figure 9) are typical of RMI where the historical mean temperatures
have risen by 1 degree Celsius over the last 60 years.42
The main influence of temperature variability year to year is the El Nino Southern Oscillation (ENSO), with
wet season temperatures increasing slightly during the event. The seasonal temperatures vary very slightly
and the long term historical trends show increasing temperature values as per Table 6.
Majuro Tmax Majuro Tmin Majuro Kwaj. Tmax Kwaj. Tmin

(Deg. C per (Deg. C per Tmean (Deg. (Deg. C per (Deg. C per Kwaj. Tmean
10Y) 10Y) C per 10Y) 10Y) 10Y) (Deg. C per 10Y)
Annual +0.12 +0.17 +0.15 +0.16 +0.14 +0.15
Wet season +0.11 +0.20 +0.16 +0.18 +0.14 +0.16
Dry Season +0.13 +0.15 +0.14 +0.13 +0.14 +0.14
Table 6: Annual and Seasonal trends in max, min and mean air temperatures (1950 to 2009)
1.2.3.1 Temperature - Modelled Future Changes
The increase in temperature trend is expected to continue for all emission scenarios for both average air and
sea surface temperatures increasing as shown in Table 7. The temperature values represent 90 percentile
of the range of the climate models and described changes are baseline to the average of the time period
1980-1999.44
Projections indicate higher average temperatures resulting in the rise of number of hot days and a decline in
cooler weather. This is expected to exacerbate the existing demand for water supply and also accelerate the
evaporation potential of open air stored water reservoirs.
Y2030 Y2055 Y2090

(deg. C) (deg. C) (deg. C)
41
42

Northern
Medium Emissions Scenario 4 to 15 11 to 32 21 to 60
Atolls
Southern
Medium Emissions Scenario 4 to 15 11 to 32 21 to 60
Atolls
Table 7: Projected Annual average air temperature changes for the Marshall Islands three emission scenarios
1.2.4 Aridity and Evaporation – Current and Projections

Projected changes in aridity were also calculated for each RMI site (Table 8). This is based on a mid-
century time horizon due to availability of required model outputs (many variables are required for this
complex calculation).43 The aridity change is expressed as percent change from the year of 2016/17. An
increase in aridity can be affected by either decreased rainfall and/or increased evaporation—whichever is
the larger change in terms of the surface water balance will determine the sign of the change within 95%
confidence limits. The maximum increases in aridity for sites across the RMI are in the realm of 8-20%,
refer to the RMI Climate Project report in FS Annex 22 for breakdown by weather station region.
Site Weather station Projected

Percentage of
Change in Aridity
1 Utirik 8.1
2 Wotje 12.0
3 Kwajalein 18.4
4 Ailinglaplap 22.1
5 Majuro 23.6
6 Mili 15.3
7 Jaluit 17.0
Total 15.3
Table 8: Projected changes (by percent) in aridity
Fortunately for RMI, the majority of storage tanks at the household and community level are covered and
have limited exposure to the effects of evaporation. The Majuro catchment system is an open storage
reservoir and is exposed to the environment so subject to evaporation. Based on an estimate provide by
Allen Gale (pers comm) the existing airport system is losing approximately 41.6 million litres yearly due to
evaporation. This will only be exacerbated with higher temperatures and resulting higher aridity values. The
MWSC Master plan has hi-lighted this risk and is proposing to scale the completed UNDP PACC (2014)
project that covered two of the reservoirs with floating membranes and also re-sealed the floor of each
reservoir.
1.3 Key Climate Change Risks: Droughts
Climate change impacts faced in RMI can be characterized by both slow onset changes in the average
weather condition across several years as well as changes in the frequency and/or intensity of extreme
weather events. Slow onset changes are often interlinked with current and future extreme weather events.
Slow-onset changes that RMI is already observing include sea-level rise (SLR) and changes in precipitation
and temperatures patterns. Extreme weather events that are observed in RMI include droughts, tropical
storms and related storm surges, and high tides including king tides. The focus of this project is to address
drought, which has affected RMI repeatedly. Drought intensity has been has been shown to be exacerbated
with climate change.
Droughts are commonly categorized by the GRMI into 4 types:
43
All methods are documented fully in Karnauskas et al. (2016) and Karnauskas et al. (2017)

 A meteorological drought often refers to a period of lower-than-normal precipitation duration and/or
intensity. The commonly used definition of meteorological drought is an interval of time, in terms of
weeks, months or years, during which the actual moisture supply at a given place is consistently below
the climatically appropriate moisture supply.
 An agricultural drought occurs when there is inadequate soil moisture to meet the needs of a particular
crop at any given time. Agricultural drought usually occurs after or during a meteorological drought
but before hydrological drought and may affect livestock and other dry-land agricultural operations.
 A hydrological drought refers to deficiencies in the availability of surface and groundwater supplies.
There usually occurs a delay between lack of rain or snow and the occurrence of less-measurable
water availability in streams, lakes and reservoirs. Therefore, drought hydrological measurements
would tend to lag other drought indicators.
 A socio-economic drought may occur when physical water shortages start to affect the health, well-
being, and quality of life of the people, or when the drought starts to affect the supply and demand of
the production of goods and services in a given country or sub-national divisions.
According to the Glossary of Terms in IPCC, droughts by definition are:
A period of abnormally dry weather long enough to cause a serious hydrological imbalance. Drought is a
relative term, therefore any discussion in terms of precipitation deficit must refer to the particular precipitation-
related activity that is under discussion. For example, shortage of precipitation during the growing season
impinges on crop production or ecosystem function in general (due to soil moisture Glossary of Terms Annex
II 559 drought, also termed agricultural drought), and during the runoff and percolation season primarily
affects water supplies (hydrological drought). Storage changes in soil moisture and groundwater are also
affected by increases in actual evapotranspiration in addition to reductions in precipitation.
1.3.1 Droughts – Historical Impact

The combination of all the general climatic factors has resulted in a series of localized and nation-wide droughts
that have become more frequent over the last few decades. A review by Polhemus (2017) determined that droughts
like the 1986 drought which at the time was declared as a 1:125 year drought (Van der Brug 1986), can now be
expected to occur 1 in 10 years based on the last three decades of observed data. That is, the frequency of severe
droughts has increased. As further evidence of this, data for Majuro atoll (Presley 2005) indicate that the
meteorological drought events of 1992 and 1995 were equally severe as the 1986 event studied by Van der Burg.
In addition, during 2015-2016, total rainfall at Majuro from October 2015 to July 2016 was the driest 10-month
period in the 62-year historical record (PEAC 2016c). The recurrence interval of severe meteorological
drought at Majuro seems to be closer to 10-15 years, in close track with ENSO cycles as postulated by the
Polhemus report. Table 9 lists the reported number of droughts experience by RMI.
Table 9: History of Droughts experienced by RMI

Year Disaster El Nino Affected Population & Location Economic Source
Type Event Cost / Value
2017 Drought N Northern Atolls $350,000 5
2015 / Drought Y 21,000 people across all inhabited atolls US$ 8 million 1, 4
2016 and islands
2012 / Drought N 6,384 people living in 13 drought affected US$ 4.7 2, 4
2013 northern atolls and islands44 million
2007 Drought N Drought affected northern atolls and Unknown 3, 4
islands
2001 Drought N Drought affected northern atolls and Unknown 3, 4
islands
1997/ 1998 Drought Y 27,034 people of Majuro only have 4 gpd. Unknown 4
Ebeye only have 1 gpd. 20,806 in the rural
communities and island
1995 Drought N Unknown Unknown 4
1991-92 Drought Y Unknown Unknown 4
44
Enewetak, Wotho, Ujae, Lae, Lib, Namu, Likiep, Utrik, Ailuk, Wotje, Mejit, Maloelap, Aur

Year Disaster El Nino Affected Population & Location Economic Source
Type Event Cost / Value
1982-83 Drought Y Ebeye water supply was supported by the Unknown 4
US military base but on the other more
remote atolls beyond Majuro and
Kwajalein, which rely on small catchments
and shallow wells, the water supply
situation became acute, with daily rations
reduced to one gallon per day per person
(van der Brug 1986). Water limited from
MWSC to 4 hours per day.
1969/1970 Drought Y Unknown Unknown 4
1965/1966 Drought Y Unknown Unknown 4
Source:
1 – RMI. 2016. Post Disaster Needs Assessment and Emergency Response Plan
2 – OCHA. 2013. Pacific; RMI Drought. Situation Report No. 3.
http://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/RMI_Drought_OCHA_SitRep03_21%20May%202013_FINAL.pdf
3 – Pacific Disaster Net. http://www.pacificdisaster.net/pdnadmin/data/original/ENSO_1997_pacific.pdf
4 – Polhemus – 2017 Pacific Islands Climate Science Center/USAPI Drought in the US – Affiliated Pacific Islands (A Multi-level Assessment)
5. NDMO Consultations with UNDP on September 2017 Mission
For the drought of 2015-2016, each atoll exhibited slightly different rainfall patterns based on their location
(Table 10). However throughout RMI, both the household and community rainwater systems were depleted
on multiple occasions during this period. The poor condition of household RWH systems prevented the little
rainfall that was available from being captured and stored efficiently. Together with the rainfall data from the
weather stations, various impacts of drought have been documented via community surveys during Project
design period. Table 10 provides a summary of the 2015 – 2016 drought conditions.
Table 10: Summary of Rainfall for 2015 - 2016 Drought
Site Weather Rainfall Drought Drought Rainfall Length of each Days of Largest
station depth 1 start date end date depth drought periods drought community
Dec 2015 (HH tanks (tanks not during (days)1
based on droughts >
to 31 empty empty after these
May under this date drought 15 days (drought
2016 Baseline) under dates continues as long as
(mm) Baseline) (mm) daily rainfall < 5mm)2
1 Utirik 292 8-Feb-16 29-Jun-16 152 4 drought periods – 52, 142 Utirik
18, 25, 38 days
2 Wotje 295 18-Dec-15 18-May-16 53 1 drought period – 143 152 Wotje
days
3 Kwajalein 314 4-Jan-16 31-May-16 151 3 drought periods – 47, 148 Santo
23, 30 days
4 Ailinglaplap 530 14-Jan-16 10-May-16 128 5 drought periods – 20, 117 Woja
22, 34, 32 and 20 days
5 Majuro 650 16-Dec-15 4-May-16 228 4 drought periods – 37, 140 Arno
24, 18 and 25 days
6 Mili 637 28-Dec-15 13-May-16 358 3 drought periods – 41, 137 Mili
25, and 27
7 Jaluit 759 9-Jan-16 26-Apr-16 198 2 drought periods – 17 108 Jabwor
and 22 days
Notes:
1. Within Section 3 more details are provided relating to the effects of limited rainfall and the state of infrastructure that
resulted in days without water experienced by the residents.
2. Values are compiled by UNDP Project Design Team based on interviews and data collected with Majuro National Weather
Office. 2016

1.3.1.1 Droughts – Modelled Future
Drought Frequency
Projected changes in drought frequency are not uniform across the RMI and depend on duration of drought
being considered. Changes in drought were analysed in terms of drought of typical but impactful (e.g.,
“once in five years”) droughts, as well as aridity (which accounts for the increasing evaporative demand of
the atmosphere in a warming climate). Based on the analysis performed with the GCM in the RMI Climate
Report in the FS Annex 22 a minimum no-rain threshold of 30 days is a more appropriate representation of
the “once in 5 year’s drought” for southern atolls of RMI, while 60 days is a more appropriate representation
of the “once in 5 year’s drought” for the northern atolls and are representative of typical baseline droughts.
As summarized in previous sections, historically severe droughts in the RMI are driven by basin-scale inter-
annual climate fluctuations due to the quasi-periodic El Nino-Southern Oscillation (ENSO) cycle.
The projection analysis provided in Annex 22 FS, using the latest GCM 8.5, reports changes in drought
characteristics (be they frequency or duration) based entirely on anthropogenic climate change is shown in
Table 11. For some sites/durations/time horizons, the consensus projection may even be a reduction in
drought frequency (e.g., 10% decrease in 30-day drought frequency at site 7). However, increases in
drought frequency (of either duration, at either time horizon) cannot be ruled out at the 95% confidence
level at almost all sites. For example, Site 6 in Table 11 is the only site at which there is a very high
confidence that drought events of 30 days in duration will not increase (at either 2035 or 2045).
Table 11: Projected changes Percentages in drought frequency
2035 (30 days) 2035 (60 days) 2035 (30 days) 2035 (60 days)
Weather Percent Percent Percent Percent
Site #
Station
Mean Up To Mean Up To Mean Up To Mean Up To
1 Utrik 7 20 56 102 20 36 24 48
2 Wotje 12 39 -12 30 14 40 -23 7
3 Kwajalein 21 97 -3 34 7 43 -10 27
4 Ailinglaplap 7 54 -43 -9 32 84 5 54
5 Majuro -22 9 -10 39 -13 10 17 38
6 Mili -44 -12 60 223 -37 -6 -25 25
7 Jaluit -10 45 40 214 17 106 -30 10
T RMI (Ave) -4 36 11 90 6 45 -6 30
For 30- and 60-day droughts (with a minimum non-zero daily rainfall threshold of 3 mm) at time horizons of
2035 and 2045 for each RMI weather station site listed and the average percentage across all RMI sites. The
multi-model mean as well as the greatest increase in drought frequency within 95 percent confidence limits
are provided. Positive numbers indicate increases in drought frequency.
Drought Duration (Intensity)

Projected changes in drought duration are provided in Table 12. The multi-model mean projections are
relatively modest (on the order of a few days), but the spread is sufficiently large that increases in drought
durations by several weeks and even months cannot be ruled out at the 95% confidence level. For example,
the multi-model mean projection for changes in droughts at Site 2 for the time horizon of 2035 is 3 days, but
a change of 30 days is not outside of the 95% confidence limits. In this case, for example, a typical severe
drought of 55 days in duration today would occur at the same frequency in the future but last 58 days (multi-
model mean projected change in duration) or up to 85 days (the maximum change in duration within 95%
confidence limits). The duration of a “typical” drought (i.e., a roughly once in five years drought) as indicated
in Table 12 corresponds to such typical droughts in the GCMs and therefore may differ slightly from the
experience in the real world; such modified values are necessary to convey because GCMs attempt to
simulate the real world, time-varying climate system including extremes, but all GCMs have persistent biases
that do not necessary preclude the usefulness of their projections of changes in mean climate and extremes.

Table 12: Projected changes (days) in drought duration
2035 2045
Site # Weather Station Mean Up To Mean Up To
(Days) (Days) (Days) (Days)
1 Utrik +1 +20 -1 +14
2 Wotje +3 +30 +1 +16
3 Kwajalein +3 +30 +1 +13
4 Ailinglaplap +6 +58 -1 +9
5 Majuro +2 +17 +1 +11
6 Mili +2 +17 +3 +27
7 Jaluit 0 +15 +1 +19
T RMI (Ave) +2 +27 +1 +16
The model results shown in Table 12 are the projected number of additional days of drought due to
anthropogenic climate change.45 The multi-model mean as well as the greatest increase in drought duration
within 95% confidence limits are provided. Positive numbers indicate increases in average drought
duration.
Drought Summary
There is a combination of factors presented that postulate climate change projections for RMI will realize a
higher frequency of droughts that will be more intense (increase in consecutive drought days) putting greater
strain on residents. The project design will need to address a combination of climate factors:
1. Less potential rainfall

2. Longer drought periods (days without significant rain)
3. More frequent droughts
4. Higher aridity
5. More intense storms
Based on the above, the project design will need to resolve the storage gap and need for improved rainwater
capture efficiency to achieve a sustained supply of safe water for the duration of baseline and climate change
drought periods for RMI (summarised in Table 13). The table superimposes climate change induced
increases in drought days with current baseline drought days to suggest longest droughts within 95%
confidence limits. This is further corroborated by observed drought durations based on existing data.
Table 13: Summary of Baseline and Projected Drought Periods reflecting Max Anthropogenic Change by Station
Projected
Additional days of Projected Observed
Baseline Drought Baseline Drought (2025 - Drought Length of
Climate Length Days Drought Length 2035 or 2035 – Length 2015/16
Region (Climate Model) Observed** 45_***) Up to Y2045 Drought
Utrik 60 90 20 110 134
Wotje 60 90 30 120 143
Kwajalein 60 70 30 100 100
Ailinglaplap 60 60 58 118 128
Majuro 30 40 17 57 120
Mili 30 40 27 67 93
Jaluit 30 40 19 59 91
* Analysis based on Climate Model data for years 2005 to 2015.

** Analysis of rainfall data completed by UNDP based on information provided by RMI Weather Office over the last 50Y for Majuro and
Kwajalein and more than 20Y for the remaining weather stations .
*** the higher of the projected values either in 2025 to 2035 or 2035 to 2045 periods are chosen.
45
The results are indicative for any drought lasting longer than 15 days and with a daily rainfall threshold of <5 mm (discounted to mean that no rain day), for
time horizons of 2035 and 2045 for each RMI site listed in Table 12.

1.3.2 Impacts – Focus on Drought 2015/16
RMI has two major urban areas at Majuro (Capital City) on Majuro Atoll and Ebeye on Kwajalein Atoll. Both
of these communities have water utilities that operate and manage the water and sanitation facilities for the
community members in their service area. The two water utilities are MWSC and KAJUR respectively. The
remaining communities in the rural communities not connected to the MWSC or KAJUR service area
(commonly collectively referred to as rural communities for this Feasibility Study) do not have the benefit of
a managed system of collection and distribution water and sanitations services. The impact to each type of
location is described below. Note that both the MWSC and KAJUR utilities have developed utility level Master
Plans to cover the impacts from drought and future developments to properly service their communities.
1.3.2.1 Drought (2015 – 2016) Impact – Majuro Response
Within Majuro, approximately 98% of its residents are living within the possible service area of MWSC.
Majuro Water and Sewer Company (MWSC) has responsibility for urban water and sanitation services for
Majuro, with a community base of 28,000 people. MWSC has operated at a loss for the whole of its 26 years
life and the level of service is very low, with extremely limited supply of water that cannot be guaranteed as
potable.
However, some communities living in the other islets of Majuro Atoll are not within the service area of MWSC.
In these communities, most of their safe freshwater resources are supplied through HH RWH systems and
their water system context is similar to that of an outer atoll and island community of RMI.
Droughts relevant to Majuro are mainly meteorological, hydrological, and socio-economic droughts given
that: Majuro’s freshwater resources for drinking and cooking depends heavily on rain; the Laura lens provides
significant water resources to the Laura community and MWSC’s public reticulated system and serves as a
particularly important source of water during dry season and low rainfall years; and agricultural production is
limited to kitchen gardens.
When a meteorological drought is expected, MWSC coordinates their operations and response by following
their Drought Management Plan developed in 2015. During a drought, when total storage falls below 50%
and the weather forecast is for no rain, water distribution to customers will be reduced to 4 hours per day one
day per week. This is achieved by operation of the valves within the distribution system to supply the areas
of Long Island/Rairok on Monday, Delap on Wednesday and Rita on Fridays. Private tanker deliveries are
managed by MWSC to ensure equitable supply.
When total reservoir storage falls below 20%, supply to customers will be restricted to basic needs only, with
treated water only being delivered to storages located at: Rita – Marshall Islands School, Courthouse,
Hospital, and Rairok Elementary School. MWSC’s operating procedures under drought are described in
Table 14.
Table 14: MWSC Drought Rules46
Declining Storage (no rain predicted) Increasing Storage (rain predicted)

30,000,000 Initiate Laura transfers 30% total storage Restore distribution supply for one day per
gallons week
50% total storage Distribution supply 40% total storage Restore distribution supply for three days per
reduced to one day per week
week only
40% total storage Notify Chief Secretary 50% total storage Cease Laura transfers
regarding emergency
20% total storage Basic supply only – no

distribution
For the majority of the households in Majuro that are not connected to MWSC’s reticulated water system,
46
MWSC. 2015. Drought Master Plan.

when their household rainwater tanks are empty in times of drought, their options to source freshwater
include:
 Get water from family and/or neighbours’ whose tanks are not empty
 Purchase water from shops (bottled or fill containers)
 Purchase and transport water from MWSC to fill household tanks
 Get water (free of cost to residents) from water points set up by RMI Government (Figure 10) – subject
to long line ups and open for limited hours.
Source: RMI. 2016. Post Disaster Needs Assessment. Photo courtesy Marshall Islands Journal
Figure 10: Typical Temporary Water Collection Point
During the 2016 drought in Majuro, 21 temporary water collection points were installed at various locations
around Majuro. Water was supplied from a 20,000 gpd RO unit at the College of the Marshall Islands and
delivered by trucks operated by the MWSC and Majuro Atoll Local Government daily. The Post Disaster
Needs Assessment (PDNA)47 reports that long lines, inconvenient schedules, and strict limits led to increased
tensions and fighting. Estimate for water collection time in urban and rural areas increased significantly.
Estimates for loss in productive labor due to increased water collection are in the order of USD 500,000 and
USD 400,000 total for urban and rural households respectively for the duration of the drought period.
Given the large population and economic activity, drought-induced losses in Majuro are high. The PDNA
estimated that Majuro had the highest drought-induced financial losses totalling to US$ 2.5 million out of the
total US$ 4.9 million, although rural communities particularly those located in the drier northern areas had a
much higher per capita loss compared to Majuro (US$ 84 dollars per capita loss).
The impacts of climate change on water supply for Majuro are many, including:
• Increased demands for potable due to the residents experiencing higher temperatures.
• Insufficient water resource from the airport catchment for the extended dry periods
• Short-term salinization of the airport catchment due to high seas overtopping seawall protecting
the airport catchment. This has been very infrequent in the past but is expected to increase with
climate change. At present there is no means of managing seawater inundation other than the
current practice of monitoring the conductivity and diverting runoff to the lagoon if the salt levels
are beyond a safe limit. Increased frequency of inundation due to climate change could present a
major risk to this vital water source and management options need to be explored to prevent
long-term salinization.
• Expected increased evaporation losses from the airport catchment storage open air reservoir due
to higher aridity values.
• Short-term salinization of the Laura groundwater lens due to potential for higher sea level rise
exacerbating king tide impacts. Inundation of the Laura lens in the past has resulted in a short-
term, but not significant, increase in salinity of the freshwater lens but the lens recovered quite
47
RMI. 2016. Post Disaster Needs Assessment.

quickly. There currently are no means of managing seawater inundation. Increased frequency of
inundation due to climate change could present a major risk to this vital water source and
management options need to be explored to prevent long-term salinization..
• Over-extraction of water from the Laura groundwater lens due to increased demand from higher
temperatures.
• Long-term salinization of the Delap groundwater lens by over-extraction, resulting in loss of this
resource.
• Insufficient capacity in individual property rainwater harvesting systems, which is their primary
water source, to cope with the extended dry periods.
Majuro Master Plan which has been developed for the MWSC service area of Majuro Atoll will address the
gaps and impacts identified here, therefore will not be included as part of scope development as part of this
project.
1.3.2.2 Drought (2015 – 2016) Impact – Kwajalein Response
There was limited impact to Kwajalein due to their dependency on the operation of the Sea Water Reverse
Osmosis (SWRO) system to provide year-round water. Only 17% of households were reported to be relying
on household and/or community rainwater harvesting systems as their primary source of drinking water,
although 37% of households had household rainwater harvesting systems with similar storage capacities to
the systems in Majuro.
Currently, approximately 84% to 91% of households in Kwajalein Atoll are within the service area of Kwajalein
Atoll Joint Utilities Resources Inc. (KAJUR). Connection rate to the public water system supplied (KAJUR)
is high. The KAJUR water supply system is based solely on desalination through Sea Water Reverse
Osmosis (SWRO) and therefore less vulnerable to climate and rainfall variability compared to the freshwater
supply system in Majuro. This SWRO unit is serving 857 water connections, with water distributed for a few
hours per day to select areas, on one day each week48. Therefore, normally drinking water is collected from
the plant directly in 3-5 gallon containers with piped water filling household rainwater tanks and used for
cooking and cleaning.
Groundwater in Ebeye is known to be brackish and contaminated and is not relied upon.
Bottled water is available for purchase in stores and is either imported or desalinated in Kwajalein or Majuro.
This is only available in urban Kwajalein, or Ebeye. During the 2015/16 drought water was available for free
at Kwajalein U.S. military base. In Ebeye, some residents, especially during water shortage times, travel to
the Kwajalein U.S. military base, 4 miles (6 kms) south of Ebeye, to fill their containers free of charge and
carry them back home on ferries
For communities on islets and islands not connected to the KAJUR service area, the condition of RWH
systems, household and community infrastructure is similar to the rural communities. They had to travel to
the military base to collect water or were dependent on the mobile Reverse Osmosis systems distributed and
installed by MWSC or KAJUR technicians based on need.
The KAJUR Master Plan, currently under implementation by ADB, has been developed for the KAJUR service
area (Ebeye) of the Kwajalein Atoll and will address the gaps and impacts identified here, therefore will not
be included as part of scope development as part of this project.
1.3.2.3 Drought (2015 – 2016) Impact – Rural Communities
In the rural communities of RMI, where approximately 28% (2017) of RMI’s population lives, dependence on
rainwater as the primary source for drinking water is even higher than in urban areas; estimated at 98% in
2011 based on RMI Census results.
While the number of consecutive days without rain and drought days can vary greatly depending on the
location/latitude of the outer atolls and islands and between seasons and years, under existing conditions,
many people and communities in RMI are frequently faced with significant difficulty in securing year-round
48
PDNA report (2016) mentions “service is irregular and limited to a maximum of 45 minutes only a couple of days per week.”

access to safe freshwater resources, with very limited options for drinking, cooking, basic hygiene and
livelihoods once their household rainwater harvesting systems are empty.
Based on historical daily rainfall data from 7 weather stations in RMI (with varying years of data available)
the national maximum and median number of days with little or no rain are 132 days (in Wotje during 1989 /
1990 drought) and 11 days, respectively. Furthermore, during a very dry year, such as the 2015 / 2016 dry
season that had some of the lowest historical rainfall during the dry season for many communities in RMI due
to the strong El Niño, estimated days where communities experience water shortage (drought days) under
baseline (existing and planned49) water infrastructure conditions ranged from zero (0) days in Kili to 175 days
in Ujae. More than 52 rural communities across 13 local government jurisdictions were estimated to have
experienced more than 100 days of drought during this period. Harvested rainwater ran out less than 30
days of the start of the 2015-16 drought in most rural communities.
Groundwater
Groundwater is an important source of water on most islands, however most usage is often restricted to
bathing, cleaning and washing. According to 2011 Census, 33% and 27% of the population use well water
for watering livestock and crops, respectively, while only 2% of the population of RMI reported wells as their
primary source of drinking water; most of these (85%) were on Ujae atoll during normal rainfall periods.
However during drought periods, when the community and household water tanks are empty, groundwater
is the primary source for all water. The normal practice is to not boil their water prior to consumption,
aggravating the incidences of contaminated water borne ailments. PDNA (2016) report results indicate a rise
in skin disease and diarrhoea as a result of consumption of groundwater (due to depleted stores of rainwater)
in a number of atolls. This is indicative of polluted groundwater consumed by residents in utilising any
available water supply during the drought. The 2016 UNDP survey completed by the residents indicated that
they experienced consistent incidents of diarrhoea and stomach ailment, however did not generally seek
medical treatment because they are “getting used to this and don’t go for medical treatment.”
Community consultations highlighted that sanitation is a key concern for water security in the rural
communities, both in terms of securing safe freshwater resources, but also resolving critical public health and
gender concerns, especially during times of water shortage. While lack of sanitation facilities, including toilets
and hand-wash facilities, is a major concern from public health and gender perspectives, given that there are
no capacity or infrastructure for collecting and disposing of sewage from septic tanks (such as pump trucks
and well-functioning sewer outfalls), installation of flush toilet systems in the rural communities pose risks to
further contaminating the groundwater resources. In rural communities that have flush toilets, such as Wotje
and Jaluit, it was found that septic tanks that collect the sewage are often abandoned in place and found to
be leaking and overflowing, therefore polluting the groundwater.
The College of Marshall Islands completed a water quality survey on multiple atolls after the 2016 drought,
of groundwater wells and catchments of both community buildings and households (Annex 21). The results
indicate approximately 50 percent of the water sources tested are contaminated. By interviewing the residents
of the atolls, UNDP survey results indicated consistent evidence of diarrhea, stomach ailments and
dehydration. Impacts to residents were due to a number of factors, including:
 Limited information on water quality testing of groundwater and rainwater storages to help residents
avoid contaminated water and limit medical incidences.
 Limited understanding of groundwater lens thickness and monitoring – leading to poor understanding
of capacity of available groundwater resources.
 Limited information on number of groundwater wells and current condition – no programmatic
approach for capturing required information.
 Poor understanding of conservation measures communicated to the community.
Sanitation Facilities
For the Urban atolls of Kwajalein (KAJUR Service Area – Ebeye) and Majuro (MWSC service area) the
49
Planned interventions reviewed and incorporated into the calculation of number of days where community RWH systems are empty (or drought days) include:
community rainwater harvesting improvements and installations planned by Ministry of Public Works, GIZ and Government of Japan / JICA.

sanitation system utilizes a saltwater pumping and collection systems for their sanitation needs and the
households and communities are connected to this. These systems are managed by the respective public
utilities.
In the rural communities sanitation facilities use harvested rainwater to flush their toilets, therefore straining
freshwater supply particularly in drought times. There are limited numbers of toilet facilities installed for all
of the RMI, but especially on the Outer atolls, particularly evident at schools and churches. The few toilets
installed at these locations were restricted for students/school staff and for the pastors/congregation
respectively but often not suitable for the number of users. Most of these facilities are dependent on rainwater
for flushing, hygiene and hands washing. In addition, some households do not have toilet facilities and people
will then resort to open defecation using the lagoon, oceans and bushes. During times of drought most
household could not utilize their toilets due to lack of water.
Issues associated with sanitation:
 Poor consideration of privacy for women and limited accessibility for the physically disabled.
 Limited number of public toilets for community
 Schools often do not have toilets or have insuffient toilets or toilets that are non-operational due to
poor flushing systems (seawater or well water) or rainwater flushing has been depleted due to drought
conditions.
 Inappropriate technology (flushing toilets and septic tanks) often installed without considering
operational issues.
Consultation and Survey Results – Impact of Drought
Surveys across the following rural atolls and islands were conducted during 2016: Utrik, Ujae, Namu, Mejit
Island, Mejatto, Likiep, Lib, Lae, Ebadon, Ailuk, Jabot, Aur and Maloelap. Key findings include:
 Water Source:
− People felt water collected from rainwater harvesting systems, when available, was safe to drink.
However, it was also reported that people do get sick from drinking harvested water evidenced by
reports of stomach aches and diarrhea.
− Groundwater wells are at lower levels with incidences of higher salinity based on taste. Poor
understanding of contamination levels and available information on capacity and quality of ground
water.
− Water shortages and equitable sharing of available safe water resulted in increased community
stress and tensions, especially affecting minors and women.
− Women and children, who have primary responsibility for collection of water during shortages,
experience long lines and delays, which takes them away from other productive activities like
home gardening, handicrafts and school activities.
 Water Management:
− Radio communication was reported as an effective means of being informed of the onset of
drought. The Weather Office, through the NDMO, communicates with the local town council and
mayors office which disseminates forecasts and weather information to the community.
− NDMO communicates with local focal points to identify volume levels in tanks and support
validation efforts from the community to the National government.
− When water levels are low, a restriction on the use of water is put in place – however definitions
are not clear or consistent between atolls. SOPS have not been developed or communicated to
inform the residents of necessary actions.
− Water Safety Plans relating to consistent monitoring of water sources specific to each community
have not been developed to help inform the residents on possible alternate sources of water (ie.
regular testing of groundwater).
− SOPS that define the use of groundwater and seawater for washing and cleaning have not been
developed or communicated.
− Enforcement and understanding of limitations of water taking/sharing is limited, except where
community tanks at schools and churches are managed by staff. The available quantities of water
and distribution based on needs is not properly monitored or managed.
 Community Services:

− There are major impacts to school when water supply is low. Schools have been closed due to lack
of water sources for both drinking and hygiene.
− Toilet facilities provided for students are not always functioning and rainwater flush based systems
are not operational.
− Other services like coconut collecting, fishing and gathering food are impacted, and other important
events and activities are impacted because of limited food and water for the event/activity.
 Water Sanitation and Infrastructure:
− Some households do not have toilet facilities and people will then resort to using the lagoon, oceans
and bushes.
− Rainwater fed flushing toilets at community buildings and households are not functioning.
 Communication of drought information:
− Many residents of the rural communities reported that they had received information regarding the
drought through radio from NDMO and prepared for drought, but the scale of this drought
extended beyond their means.
Further results of the Community Surveys that examines the impact of drought from a gender, equity and
social inclusion (GESI) perspectives are included in FS Annex 21 and Proposal Annex XIIIc.
Key impacts of drought to RMI from a Gender Equality and Social Inclusion (GESI) perspective, documented
from community consultations, are summarized below:
 Women are primary caretakers and caregivers of the home and family. They are responsible for
upkeep of the house including cleaning of RWH guttering systems. Limited training and availability
of proper tools for proper operations and maintenance practices has not been provided
 The drought conditions and scarcity of fresh water for maintaining home gardens has negatively
affected food insecurity, caused by decreased yields of good quality subsistence crops and increased
diseases, loss of livestock and depleted fisheries stocks; This situation has created additional work
for women in gathering and preparing family meals and has resulted in malnutrition which has a
significant impact on children;
 Health problems, leading to increased prevalence of conjunctivitis (pink eye), diarrhea, dehydration;
scabies, influenza-like illness, communicable diseases that are made worse by unhealthy diets during
droughts.
 Poor hygiene and sanitation conditions is having a significant health impacts due to the lack of water
for bathing and cleaning, non-functioning toilets leading to increased open defecation and reduction
in critical public services – primarily schools. Issues related to menstruation hygiene management
were also raised by women during community consultation;
 Exclusion of women and other vulnerable groups from planning and decision-making processes at
community, island and national level.
1.4 Project rationale: Drought impacts due to climate change and focus on adaptive solutions
Observed and projected climate change trends, coupled with RMI’s geographic, political, environmental,
economic, and social contexts make the small island, large-ocean nation one of the world’s most vulnerable
countries to the impacts of climate change. Although RMI’s contribution to global greenhouse gas emissions
is minute, their estimated cost for adaptation is one of the highest in the world in terms of percent of GNP at
7.24% (ranked 8th in the world)50.
According to climate change projections discussed above:

 The rate of sea level rise observed in Majuro is about 7 mm (0.3 inches) per year, which is at least
twice as fast as the global average of 0.125±0.015 inches (3.2±0.4 mm) per year. This fast rate of
sea level rise is expected to continue to accelerate, with a rise between 20 to 60 cm (8 to 24 inches)
by 2090, relative to the sea level in 2000. This is likely to lead to increased inundation due to king
tides and storm surge.
50 Source; Nurse, L.A., R.F. McLean, J. Agard, L.P. Briguglio, V. Duvat-Magnan, N. Pelesikoti, E. Tompkins, and A. Webb, 2014: Small islands. In: Climate
Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Part B: Regional Aspects. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fifth Assessment Report of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, pp. 1613-1654. / Tsyban, A.,
J. T. Everett, J. G. Titus, and others. World Oceans and Coastal Zones. Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra, Australia, 1990.
http://risingsea.net/papers/federal_reports/IPCC-far_wg_II_chapter_6.pdf.

 RMI will continue to experience drought periods, but there is likely to be a decrease of drought
occurrence in RMI over the course of the 21st century, although there is only moderate confidence in
this prediction. However, climate models also predict an increase of extreme event intensity, which
may exacerbate the frequency and/or magnitude of droughts in RMI.
These climate change impacts are likely to exacerbate the frequent water insecurity RMI faces by further
challenging the ability of the Marshallese people to have access to safe freshwater resources year-round.
Currently, people in RMI utilize rainwater as their main, and often only, freshwater resource for drinking,
cooking and basic hygiene. Groundwater is used mainly for hygiene and sanitation, but also for drinking and
cooking in times of water shortage. Only in very limited communities is desalination water regularly
accessible. Further description of RMI’s water baseline is provided in Section 2. With current infrastructure
and considering climate change induced effects, such as sea level rise and a change in rainfall patterns,
water security will be further threatened.
In the medium term (upto 2045), greater rainfall variability with reduced rainfall and longer periods of no
rainfall, will make capturing sufficient rainfall before drought events ever more challenging with existing
infrastructure.
Summary of Impact from Climate Change

Given the significant impact of climate change on the Marshallese people’s ability to have adquate safe
freshwater resources year-round will require strengthening the water security of RMI through enhancing the
infrastructure and supporting institutional capacity development related to crucial climate change adaptation
investment for the people of RMI. However, RMI’s financial conditions described above makes national
investments towards water resilience extremely difficult. In light of this situation, RMI seeks financial
resources from the Green Climate Fund (GCF) to support the strengthening and scaling of integrated water
resilience interventions together with the institutional mechanisms and human capacities to sustain these
efforts.
It is clear from the evidence presented above that climatic changes have been and will continue to affect RMI.
These climatic changes affect the environment throughout the country (often through reduction of stored
rainwater and decreasing groundwater potential) and can be summarised as:
 Changes in rainfall are more uncertain. The historical record suggests that annual rainfall has
decreased hence reduction in RWH potential and acceleration of drought intensity. Future scenarios
also suggest potential for increase in number of droughts and also intensity of droughts (within 95%
confidence interval) within the 2045 time scenarios.
 Changes in rainfall will affect groundwater captured, with less rainfall resulting in higher groundwater
salinity. This is exacerbated by the increased pressure on the maintained freshwater lens due to
sea level rise.
 Both historical observations and projected changes in storms, cyclones, and king tides demonstrate
that frequency will increase and potentially be more intense. Associated with these intense cyclones
are greater storm surge, inundation levels and intrusion of saline water into groundwater, leading to
the availability of less potable water;
 Temperatures have been rising and are predicted to continue to rise. One important consequence
of this is the increase in evaporative demand from surface water reservoirs, especially during the
dry season when temperatures are greater;
Changes in the climate system pose direct and indirect impacts on the availability of freshwater resources
and impact the livelihoods which depend on these resources. The lack of freshwater additionally impacts
human health. Climate change impacts on clean freshwater resources and safe water supply systems are
exacerbated by non-climatic factors.
Groundwater quality and quantity may be influenced by both sea level rise and droughts. With sea level rise,
groundwater may become more saline due to intrusion of saltwater into the water lens. Droughts can also
cause groundwater overuse due to lack of rainwater by community members, the result may be the further
loss of water lens capacity which may also cause salt-water intrusion. The effects of drought of the 1998 on
Majuro’s major groundwater lens (Laura) are included in FS Annex 6. Unfortunately understanding of the
groundwater quality and quantity for usage by the residents is limited, especially within the rural communities
of the Outer Atolls. Consistent inundation of seawater onto the atolls due to SLR resulting in higher tides and

seasonal King tides will more frequently contaminate the groundwater lenses This will affect the usability of
the groundwater.
A recent study by Barkey and Bailey published in the Water magazine51 reported the results of an atoll
island algebraic model used to estimate the thickness of the freshwater lens for 680 inhabited and
uninhabited islands of the RMI, with a focus on the severe 1998 drought. Model results were tested for
islands that have fresh groundwater data. The results highlight the fragility of groundwater resources for
RMI. The study found that the average lens thickness in RMI during typical seasonal rainfall is
approximately 4 m, with only 30 percent of the islands maintaining a lens thicker than 4.5m and 55 percent
of the islands with a lens less than 2.5 m thick. Groundwater on small islands (<300 m in width) is typically
completely depleted during drought. Based on this report over half (54 percent) of the islands are classified
as highly vulnerable to drought if dependent on this resource.
The challenge is to ensure that groundwater lenses are protected from inundation from seawater and also
developing better awareness of groundwater usage through demand conservation. By understanding of
alternate uses of groundwater, for instance washing water for homes or watering gardens will help limit the
reliance of higher quality harvested rainwater for similar demands.
Gender inequality arises from various societal and cultural norms that impact women’s day to day activities
as well as their capacity to adapt to climate change. Women have less decision-making power within the
household and are the primary managers of the household and care for the family. This includes ensuring
safe drinking water for their families, which can often mean having to endure long lines to access a relatively
clean water source. The responsibility for finding drinking water leaves less time to engage in income
generation (handicrafts), and agricultural income generation becomes more difficult due to the lack of
freshwater for either home gardens or other labour-related activities. Women are therefore disadvantaged
by climate change on multiple levels.
The population consumes water quantities below WHO water thresholds during drought period and coupled
with compromised sanitation facilities due to the lack of flushing water leads to unsanitary conditions and
potential health risks. Unless additional freshwater solutions are provided e.g. reverse osmosis, upscaling
rainwater harvesting, maximizing groundwater potential or alternative technologies, the residents of RMI will
face increased stress from droughts and or compromises of freshwater resources.
1.4 Targeting – Prioritizing the Geographic Regions to Address Climate Change Induced Drought Impacts
Drought affects all of RMI, however some regions have greater capacity to respond and adapt based on
financial capacity and access to resources. In addition to the increases in temperature and reduction in
rainfall which will be experienced over the whole country, climate based impacts for all RMI include sea level
rise (SLR) and increased storm surges from cyclones and tropical storms. All of these impacts work to
increase the risk to reduction of rainwater harvesting, reduction of groundwater sources through the increased
risk of inundation of sea water contaminating available freshwater lenses and higher evaporation rates of
open reservoirs (Majuro).
The Majuro and Kwajalein (Kwajalein Atoll Joint Utility Resources) atolls are the two main populations centers
of RMI and have public utilities (MWSC and KAJUR, respectively) managing their reticulated systems. These
public utilities have both completed Master Plans, with KAJUR securing ADB funding to complete their
implementation plan, and MWSC in the process of securing funding. Both of these Master Plans, once fully
implemented, will provide water security for the serviced communities of Ebeye and Majuro.
Based on geographical and climate factors, the residents in the rural communities, having a higher
percentage of poor people than the urban atoll of Majuro and Kwajalein (Ebeye), are also likely to suffer more
deeply the intensification of impacts from climate change. They have a high dependency on rainwater
harvesting hence are very exposed to fluctuations in both rainfall patterns and seasonal, long-term variations.
In addition, this places further stress on rural communities populations who rely on both surface and
groundwater for drinking and agricultural/farming activities, causing people (particularly women) to have to
travel further to source safe and potable drinking water. The rural communities do not have publically piped
water or ready access to more comprehensive government services.
51
Estimating the Impact of Drought on Groundwater Resources of the Marshall Islands. Bandon Barky and Ryan Bailey, Colorado State University, 2017

As identified by the RMI, the focus of this GCF project should be to address the needs of the Outer Atolls
and the islands/islets not serviced by the public utilities or not having access to other options due to their low
income and high unemployment and poverty rates and exposure to climate events. As a result, these
populations experience greater water insecurity. This inability to adapt is exacerbated by a greater
percentage of poverty and unemployment evident in the Outer Atolls from the lack of income opportunities.
The potential income from copra farming and handcrafts, which are some of their main income streams, are
directly affected by the possibility of drought or inundation from king tides and and consequent impact on
groundwater resources. Gender inequality also arises from various societal and cultural norms that impact
women’s day to day activities as well as their capacity to adapt to climate change. Women have less decision-
making power within the household and at the workplace and are expected to manage the household and
care for the family. This includes ensuring safe drinking water for their families, which can often mean having
to travel long distances to access a relatively clean water source. The women working in income generating
activities, have poultry and pig rearing and homestead gardening as main livelihood activities. Women are
therefore disadvantaged by climate change on multiple levels; the responsibility for finding drinking water
leaves less time to engage in income generating activities, while water scarcity affects their ability to engage
in agricultural activities for either subsistence or income generating farming.
2. Climate Change Policies and Strategies
2.1 National Policies, Plans and Climate Change

Climate change resilience and water security are key priorities for RMI, and critical to achieving various
government policies and strategies for sustainable and equitable development. RMI’s Strategic
Development Plan “Vision 2018” sets out 15-year (2003 – 2018) long-term goals, objectives, and strategies,
where climate change resilience and water sector improvements are part of three of its 10 goals. RMI’s most
recent medium-term development plan, the National Strategic Plan (NSP) (2015 – 2017) is the roadmap for
development progress in anticipation of the scheduled completion of the U.S. Compact Agreement in 2023.
Climate change and water resilience are highlighted as critical priorities in the NSP, particularly in achieving
environment and climate change resiliency and infrastructure development.
National Climate Change Policy Framework (NCCPF) established in 2011 with a vision of “Building the
Resilience of the People of the Marshall Islands to Climate Change” guides RMI’s efforts to climate change,
for both adaptation and mitigation. Goal 2 of the policy focuses on Adaptation and Reducing Risks for a
Climate Resilient Future, whereby food and water security is highlighted as one of the key priority sector
requiring development of effective adaptation and risk reduction responses and capacity (Objective 2.1). The
Joint National Action Plan (JNAP) for Climate Change Adaptation and Disaster Risk Management
further mainstreams the NCCPF with the Disaster Risk Management National Action Plan by providing a
detailed strategy for holistically and co-operatively addressing climate and disaster risks in RMI. Enhancing
water resource sustainability and improving risk management for water related disasters are key priorities
indicated under JNAP goals 2 “Public education and awareness of effective DRM/CCA responses from local
to national level” and 5 “Enhanced local livelihoods and community resilience”.
The RMI Water and Sanitation Policy and Proposed Action Plan approved in 2014, which was formalized
as a legal instrument through the National Environmental Protection (Amendment) Act in 2016, serves
as the foundational framework for climate-resilient water sector development at the national and subnational
levels, outlining strategic steps for “enabling all citizens to access clean and adequate water supplies” and
providing a “level of hygiene and sanitation comparable to world standards.” With the legal mandate given
to the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) in consultation with the Office of Chief Secretary to assume
the role of the national authority for integrated water resource management, RMI is now ready to define and
implement their national institutional framework to strengthen their resilient and integrated water resource
management.
RMI has established a National Gender Mainstreaming Policy with a Policy Strategic Plan of Action for
2015 – 2019, which aims to “progress gender equality and the empowerment of women in the RMI with
meaningful involvement and contributions in all development sectors and civil society, and women and men
from all spheres, and at all levels of development and decision-making, from the Council of Iroij, the Nitijela,
and in local governments in the outer islands.” Engagement and empowerment of women, youth, children,

the elderly, people with disabilities, and other vulnerable groups through the proposed water resilience
initiatives are fully in line with and will further strengthen the realization of RMI’s policy objectives on gender.
Principles:
Governance principles examine, transparency, accountability and participation (TAP) in order to analyze
institutional performance as well as how stakeholders behave and relate to each other.
In RMI, strengths include:

 With the national policy framework in place for Water Governance, RMI is well placed to now define and
establish governance principles
 Community-based natural resource management approaches, especially the Reimaanlok, can be used
as a mechanism to also engage communities in water resource management, planning and decision-
making.
However, overall, transparency, accountability, and participation in relation to water governance are very
limited in RMI. Information regarding the water sector is limited at all levels as data are not consistently
gathered, monitored and analyzed. Therefore, both water governance officials and water users are not well
informed to make decisions related to their water investments. Furthermore, accountability mechanisms are
yet to be defined and operationalized at all levels. Participation for water governance is also limited at all
levels as mechanisms are yet to be defined and formalized.
2.2 Institutional Arrangements
2.2.1 Stakeholders and Institutions – National Level
Water governance refers to the political, social, economic and administrative systems in place that influence
water's use and management52. A Rapid Water Governance Assessment for RMI is included in FS Annex
11. Summary of key findings is indicated below.
Water resilience is a key priority for various stakeholders and institutions in RMI (Table 15), and is
mainstreamed within various mandates, policy and strategies. An overarching national institution for water
governance was recently formalized through the Water and Sanitation Policy and National Environmental
Protection Act amendment, which now officially designates EPA as the national authority to coordinate and
oversee RMI’s water governance under the purview of the Chief Secretary’s Office. Furthermore, the various
types and levels of institutions and stakeholders involved in water management and security provide a good
enabling environment to better monitor and manage water resources in terms of its quality and quantity. This
oversight and reporting mechanisms are to be further defined and implemented under the National Water
and Sanitation Policy.
However, significant challenge and gaps still remain. For example, clear mechanisms for coordination,
reporting and accountability are limited, which is critical given the breadth of stakeholders and institutions
involved. Formal stakeholders and institutions related to water governance at the sub-national level is less
established, in terms of its number of personnel available and clear understanding of coordinated
responsibilities. As a result, there tends to be a disconnect between community-based water governance
and national-level water governance mechanisms. As the majority of people in RMI rely on freshwater
harvested through their household RWH systems as their primary source of water for drinking and cooking,
formalization and/or enhancing the understanding of the subnational water governance mechanisms is
important for strengthening water resilience. Furthermore, stakeholders and institutions working on political
(i.e. participatory decision-making process related to water resources and distribution), social (i.e. equitable
access and distribution, including women, children and vulnerable groups) and economic (i.e. application of
cost effective and efficient solutions) dimensions of water are still limited at all levels. The key institutions
responsible for Water Security are listed in Table 15 based on sectors.
Table 15: Key Water Institutional Stakeholders in RMI
Public Sector Private Sector Civil Society External

Direct Stakeholders Direct Stakeholders College of Marshall Government of Australia
Islands EU
52
UNDP. Water Governance Facility. 2013. User’s Guide on Assessing Water Governance.

Public Sector Private Sector Civil Society External
Majuro Water and Sewer Churches German Government
Office of the Chief Secretary Company (MWSC) Schools US Government
(OCS) Kwajalein Atoll Joint Utilities Hospitals Government of Japan
Environmental Protection Resources (KAJUR) Community groups Government of Taiwan
Authority (EPA) Traditional leaders and
Other Relevant landowners SPREP
Other Relevant Stakeholders Stakeholders SPC
Marshalls Islands Shipping Non-government
Office of Environmental Corporation (and other Organizations (NGOs) IOM
Planning and Policy shipping companies) – i.e. Women United UNFPA
Coordination (OEPPC) Air Marshall Islands Together Marshall UNDP
Water vendors Islands (WUTMI) FAO
Weather Service Office
Coastal Management WHO
(WSO) Majuro
Advisory Council ADB
Economic Policy, Planning (CMAC) World Bank, etc.
and Statistics Office Marshall Island Red
(EPPSO) Cross / International
Federation of Red
National Disaster Cross
Management Office (NDMO)
Ministry of Health
Ministry of Public Works
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Ministry of Internal Affairs
Ministry of Finance
Marshall Islands Marine

Resources Authority
(MIMRA)
Local Governments
A detailed description of the institutions with their roles and responsibilities, including an assessment of their
capacities, is provided of each institution within FS Annex Water Governance Baseline Table 11.
WASH Cluster
The WASH Cluster, headed by the Office of the Chief Secretary (OCS) is a rapid response governmental
driven project team organized to deal with acute crises and consequential water shortages. In remote areas,
where drought affects are particularly intense due to distance from the major atolls, including Majuro and
Kwajalein, the WASH cluster (includes EPA, MWSC, KAJUR, NDMO, and other stakeholder agencies)
consists of institutions that are responsible to provide immediate relief and stabilization to the water system.
This gap cannot be covered by the ongoing program interventions because existing systems do not produce
enough water to meet local demand in the acute stages of droughts. Also, actors managing the systems are
often negatively affected by the crisis.
Key Water Policies and Strategies
A list of key policies and strategies at the National and Subnational levels have been compiled in Table 16.
A more detailed description of their relationship to water security is provided in the FS Annex Table 12.
RMI has focused time and effort in developing these strategies and plans, the key next steps of
implementation to the ground level, communication etc. are needed to ensure effectiveness.
Table 16: Key Policies & Strategies Related to Water Sector

National
Overarching National Policies and Strategies Other Relevant Policies
National Strategic Plan 2015 - 2017 EPA Public Water Supply Regulations, 1994
Vision 2018 (2001) EPA Marine Water Quality Regulations
National Climate Change Policy Framework (2011) Standard Hazard Mitigation Plan, 1994/2005
RMI Climate Change Roadmap (2010) Disaster Risk Management National Action Plan
2008 – 2018
Joint National Action Plan for Climate Change Adaptation and
Disaster Risk Management (JNAP) RMI National Emergency
Response Plan (2010)

Water Sector Policies and Law
RMI Ports Authority: Airport Emergency Plan (2012)
National Water and Sanitation Policy
National Environmental Protection Act 1984 RMI Drought Contingency Plan (2010)
(2016 amendment)
EPA: Strategic Plan (2012–14)
R&D Strategy and Action Plan (2005–10)
R&D Performance Report (2013)
MOIA Strategic Plan (2010–12)
Reimaanlok Looking to the Future: National

Conservation Area Plan for the Marshall Islands
2007-2021 (2008)
Reimaanlok Field Guide (2012)
RMI Protected Areas Management (PAM)
RMI Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (2000)
Public Health and Sanitation Act, 1996
Coastal Conservation Act, 1988
Draft National Solid Waste Management Strategy

(20120
National Gender Mainstreaming Policy
Subnational Local Government Ordinances

Public Utility Master Plans (Urban Atolls)
Public Utility Disaster Management Plans (Urban
Atolls)
2.2.2 Effectiveness
Effectiveness of institutions was assessed using an institutional Scorecard (Figure 11). Given that the
efforts have just commenced in RMI through establishment of formal institutional frameworks, much work
remains to be done to enhance effectiveness of institutional in RMI. The analysis shows that legislation for
both water allocation and water quality have been developed, but the next stages of implementation are
limited and require further support.
Indicators of Water Governance Effectiveness
0 1 2 3 4 5
trument framework
propriat Appropriat
gulatory legislative
cluding: including:
1. Legislation for water allocation

2. Legislation for water quality
s,
e
3. Existence of conflict-resolution mechanisms

4. Groundwater regulation
5. Land-use planning control
s,
e
Figure 11: Institutional Effectiveness (Based on Institutional Capacity Scorecard)
2.2.3 Jurisdictional and Local Level
Subnational:
Institutional effectiveness at the subnational level (i.e. municipal government, and traditional island /
community system) is still very limited. Regulatory bodies and enforcement agencies do not exist and are
yet to be defined at the subnational level. The National Water and Sanitation Policy indicates plans to
establish Water Committees, both at the national and community levels.
Through the Reimaanlok process, there are 3 to 5 communities with community resource management
groups established. Through the Ridge to Reef Project53, five more community-based resource management
committees are to be established. Some efforts are also underway through NDMO to establish disaster focal
points and committees. As drought disasters are key events for communities of RMI, the disaster committees
will also likely to be key agents for community resource management, especially for water.
Awareness campaigns are implemented at various scales and locations by various stakeholders, often as
part of projects and initiatives financed by external partners.
2.3 National Drought monitoring, early warning, and communication
Drought monitoring, warning and communication are significant elements of drought risk management in RMI.
The Weather Service Office (WSO) of RMI plays a critical role in monitoring, warning and communicating
drought risks before and during potential water shortage events.
Drought information monitored and communicated varies, but is mainly comprised of:
 Seasonal Forecasts – provides bulletins to scientists but also “translates” forecast for normal residents
to understand which is then sent to the OCS. OCS consolidates information and provides to the radio
station to publically broadcast. A government radio base station is used to primarily to disseminate
forecast info but are not always functional or may be turned off during nights by the outer islands since
VHF radios use a lot of power. Climate phenomena like the onset of El Niño/La Niña can be identified
early and communication is provided, the challenge is to ensure the residents respond using
conservation methods and maximizing potential of water sources through proper maintenance and
repair.
 Rainfall outlooks – Weather office, through the use of Chatty Beetles54 and radios provide weather
alerts and notifications (by text) to remote locations where communication options are limited. WSO
send an alarm signal for a disaster warning over the Chatty Beetle. The Chatty Beetle alarm keeps
Ridge to Reef - Testing the Integration of Water, Land, Forest & Coastal Management to Preserve Ecosystem Services, Store Carbon, Improve Climate
53
Resilience and Sustain Livelihoods in Pacific Island Countries (Regional R2R Project)” (2016 - 2021. GEF Trust Fund. US$ USD 10 million)
54
Chatty beetle is a portable satellite terminal that utilizes text-based alerts and messaging in remote locations, where communication options are
limited. This is used to send messages from the WSO and NDMO relating to potential of adverse weather or oncoming events.

going until someone manually acknowledges receipt at the other end. RANET (Radio and Internet for
the communication of hydro-meteorological and climate related information) developed the Chatty
Beetle as a text based alert and messaging device for remote application. The system is reliable and
robust to use where other communications do not exist and where simple notification is needed.
 Predicted atolls and islands with high drought risks – Both long and short-term rainfall outlooks and
predictions were also provided by the NOAA’s Pacific ENSO Applications Climate Centre and Guam
Forecast Office and were of help during the identification of Atolls forecasted to be hardest hit.
 Drought monitoring information – feedback about impacts of drought are passed through radio
communication to council members and OCS to organize response.
WSO shares this information with the Chief Secretary’s Office (NDMO), who then relays this information to
relevant national and subnational stakeholders through appropriate forums and channels. Furthermore, the
drought monitoring information provided by WSO is the main weather information used to prepare and plan
for drought management and response; together with situation updates received from communities regarding
water shortages observed, it serves as a key consideration for national declarations of State of Emergencies.
The RMI Weather Office currently use the NOAA weekly drought monitor for RMI to provide drought
statement and alerts. There are not yet any standard procedures or thresholds in RMI for triggering State of
Emergency declarations of drought.
Monitoring & Early Warning

WSO operations include undertaking a full cycle of manual synoptic and upper-air observations transmitted
to GTS/WIS, and communicating warning developed by US National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA) NWS to RMI authorities and communities. Locations of the current weather stations
are included in FS Annex 5.
In 2016, the detection of the El-Niño and early warnings were well received and disseminated to the RMI
authorities and communities by the WSO well ahead of time. Through its established support from the NOAA
NWS, WSO received forecasts, rainfall outlooks and drought monitoring information well in advance. Both
long and short-term rainfall outlooks and predictions were also provided by the NOAA’s Pacific ENSO
Applications Climate Centre and Guam Forecast Office and were of help during the identification of atolls
forecasted to be hardest hit. However, according to the PDNA report, the forecast and actual impacts were
very different. This highlights that the need for RMI authorities to improve capacities to analyze real-time
actual rainfall and temperature data to better target the response, whilst recognizing the lack of analyzing
capacity in country. In addition, spatial distribution of automated weather stations is to be improved.
Based on discussions with WSO following challenges were identified in terms of existing monitoring and early
warning capacities:
 Forecasting: Where there is a shortage of data, such as on atolls without a weather station, the
weather office extrapolates from existing weather stations based on zone plus for short-term forecasts,
WSO also calls atoll locals to ask what they see to strengthen the accuracy of the forecast (“informal
weather stations”).
 Often there is only one person on each island who is a NOAA certified weather observer, the Weather
office offers training for these personnel to maintain their certification. The observers provide real
time feedback on current weather situations to support the weather forecast models.
Communications
Communication required for effective drought risk management is diverse – in terms of its content, channels,
timing, and stakeholders. Currently in RMI, drought risk information before and during water shortage events
are communicated through hand-held radios located in centralized community buildings or local council office
and Chatty Beetles located in weather stations. Forecasts of possible lower rainfall are communicated from
Majuro to communities before drought through these channels, as well as communities communicate through
these channels to report on water shortage situations and request for supplies and equipment.
Based on UNDP Survey results, the majority of residents were informed of drought through the radio systems
and local council. General radio broadcast and bulletins from the Weather Office prior to onset of drought
was also provided through council of Mayors.

Standard operating procedures and guidelines for how, what and when to communicate are not fully
developed. NDMO together with various stakeholders are in the process of developing these guidelines as
well as designating and training disaster focal points in communities to execute these reporting and
communication protocols. As part of this effort, NDMO together with IOM are disseminating radios and
training communities in disaster communication as part of the community-driven preparedness plans through
the PREPARE program.
Active discussions are ongoing in RMI in regard to how best disaster communication can be enhanced.
Figure 12 describes existing and envisioned disaster communication system for RMI developed by national
stakeholders.
Figure 12:Disaster Communication System in RMI55

DISASTER COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM
-Empowered to issue
National Weather warnings if limited time
Service Office (need more MOUs)
-Work directly with and
Possible activities between these Possible activities between these
two groups: part of NDC/NDMO
two groups:
-Need improved
1. Confirm receipt of information
1. Early Warning Information (rapid informaiton gathering
2. Follow up with Outer Island Forcal
and slow on set) (rain gages)
Point on assessment reports (using
2. Request information on post event Office of the Chief standard templates that exist)
situation Secretary 3. Work with NDMO to prepare for
3. Information about upcoming
assessments/surveys. Text Message
(National Disaster Public School
assessment teams and relief items
4. Keep NDMO informed on
4. Assessment/survey results shared (needs to Management Office) System communities well being
5. Announcements about disaster be activated) 5. Beneficiary follow up on relief
relief distributions (who? what? chatty bettle items - ensure distribution has been
where? when? why?) conducted as indicated at community
V7AB Local Government level.
Mayor or Acting NTA 6.5
chatty bettle Representative on
DAMA sites
Possible activities between these NTA 6.5 Majuro or Ebeye (if
Possible activities between these
two groups: DAMA sites neither available bipass two groups:
Forecast this stage) Rain gages 1. Confirm receipt of information
1. Early Warning Information (rapid (need more) 2. Conduct atoll/island wide
and slow on set) assessments (standardized
2. Request information on post event Outer island Outer island forms)and relay information to Mayor
situation Despensary System Despensary System or NTA 6.5 operator
3. Information about upcoming 3. Prepare for assessment teams and
assessments/surveys. Outer Island Focal Point relief items - support team
4. Assessment/survey results shared 4. Keep Majuro/Ebeye informed on
5. Announcements about disaster Public School System communities well being
relief distributions (who? what? 4.Assist with relief distribution and
where? when? why?) monitoring
5. Beneficiary follow up on relief
items
Volunerable Community
populations groups
Community Disaser
(disabled, (Church,
members Committes
elderly, sick, Women,
etc) Youth)
Community groups work together as agents of change,

prepare for disasters, act as first responders and recovery/
restore their communities to pre disaster levels.
Based on discussions with WSO following challenges were identified in terms of existing communication
capacities:
 Currently WSO is developing new communication strategy working with the NDMO office. Chatty
Beetles provide weather alerts and notifications (by text) to remote locations where communication
options are limited. The NDMO sends an alarm signal for a disaster warning over the Chatty Beetle.
The Chatty Beetle alarm keeps going until someone manually acknowledges receipt at the other end.
RANET (Radio and Internet for the communication of hydro-meteorological and climate related
information) developed the Chatty Beetle as a text based alert and messaging device for remote
application. The system is reliable and robust to use where other communications do not exist and
where simple notification is needed.
 The level of island or atoll specific rainfall and temperature information that is available is limited (to
7 for all 24 local government jurisdiction) based on the number of installed weather stations. Nearby
55
RMI Disaster Stakeholders Consultation output. Shared by IOM in 2016.

weather information from atolls with weather stations was captured and then extrapolated to cover all
atolls in the area.
2.3.1 Planning for Response

Negative impacts of droughts can be avoided or reduced significantly with effective response. Therefore,
planning for drought response is a critical element of drought risk management. Measures to strengthen
drought responses at national and community levels include:
 National level:
o Conduct Risk Analysis with specific demographics, urban growth etc.56
o Establish coordination mechanisms for greater coherence and improved effectiveness of
combined hazard. Planning for preparedness and risk avoidance is captured and reviewed.
o Strengthen regional, sub-regional, national and international approaches
o Promote know-how transfer through partnerships
o Develop and apply standardized forms for statistical recording of risk factors,
o Establish risk monitoring capabilities and early warning systems as part of integrated process.
o Pre-positioning of emergency relief supplies
o Maintenance of mobile desalination units
o Training of technicians for operation and maintenance of mobile RO units
o Water resource monitoring and mapping of both stored water and ground water – in terms of
quality and quantity is noted by EPA but lack of formalized GPS based system.
o Organizing private sector engagement – including shipping agencies, local RO water bottling
providers.
 Community level:
o Establishment of disaster focal points and committees
o Development of contingency plans, with gender-differentiated impacts of drought taken into
consideration
o Clarification of standard operating procedures (SOPs) and awareness raising on the SOPs
o Employing water conservation measures and reviewing water use efficiencies.
o Resource monitoring – reporting back in timely manner.
o Drills and simulation exercises to build capacities to implement SOPs
o Capacity building, training, and awareness for community-driven preparedness plans
o Training for emergency medical responders
o Training for situation reporting
o Training for water resource maintenance, efficiency and operations (i.e. RWH, groundwater
monitoring, desalination, sanitation, etc.)
RMI’s drought response capacities have improved significantly over the past couple of droughts. 2013 was
the first drought in which RMI Government, together with external partners took initiative of drought response
efforts, due to the transition of U.S. involvement in emergency under the Compact agreement with the U.S.
that was amended. With lessons learned from 2013 drought, preparedness and response for 2016 improved
significantly, with the Disaster Response Plan developed and released and utilized starting February 2016.
However, the need for an updated National Water and Sanitation policy is urgently required to align the efforts
of the National Weather Office, NDMO, national, local governments and communities in avoiding replication,
inefficiencies and even conflicting efforts. There is an urgent need to promote dialogue and cooperation
among government departments and agencies, including budget sharing and decision making, to create
value added interventions that address multiple needs and interests. This will result in a more holistic and
efficient approach to developing resilience.
2.3.2 Drought Risk Management
With drought risk management and institutional efforts, drought can be mitigated or avoided at various levels.
Table 17 provides examples of possible drought risk management efforts.
Table 17: Drought Risk Management and Institutional Efforts
56
International Strategy for Risk Reduction https://www.unisdr.org/who-we-are/international-strategy-for-disaster-reduction

Drought Risk Management Institutional Efforts
Meteorological Improve the quality and quantity of meteorological information, Improve and enhance existing water systems
drought communication and dissemination to wide stakeholders so that safe freshwater is available during
lower-than-normal precipitation dry seasons
Agricultural Disseminate early warning / seasonal forecasts / outlooks Enhance cross-sectoral coordination
drought relevant to the agriculture sector. Key parameters (i.e. soil including stakeholders of the agriculture
moisture) are monitored. Farmers know how to change farming sector.
practices if needed in response to information provided.
Hydrological Community members are aware of available water resources Enhance knowledge of existing freshwater
drought (i.e. groundwater, community RWH systems, etc.) and know resources throughout the country through
how to utilize them effectively (i.e. water quality check, improved monitoring and data management.
treatment, and making good decisions on differentiated use of Various water resources are managed in an
water resources based on their quality and quantity, etc.) integrated way and well maintained.
Socio-economic Situation of water shortage and impacts are monitored and N/A. Aims to reduce and avoid incidences of
drought reported effectively within communities and between the socio-economic drought
community and national authorities. Response strategies are
planned based on evidence and data. Efforts are coordinated
at national, subnational and community levels following
standard operating procedures. Everyone in the community
knows their roles and responsibilities. Relevant members of the
community know how to operate, fix, and manage equipment
(i.e. desal units, community RWH systems, etc.) Women,
children and vulnerable groups in the community can access
water resources safely and equitably.
Institutional capacity building aims to reduce and mitigate the negative impacts of socio-economic drought.
However, even with the best coordination in place, risks of drought will always remain, especially given the
dependency on rainwater for their primary source of fresh water supply, especially in rural57 communities of
RMI. With projected climate change impacts, the drought risks are expected to continue to increase in RMI,
thus making drought risk management critical to RMI’s water resilience strategy.
2.3.2.1 Stakeholders and Institutions

Stakeholders and institutions relevant to drought risk management are similar to key actors of water
management in RMI. However, one of the unique characteristics of the stakeholders and institutions of
drought risk management are: 1) the role of the United States under the Compact, and 2) the coordination
mechanisms that are set up specific to prepare for and respond to drought disasters.
When a Disaster declaration is issued by the President of United States for RMI FEMA acts as the lead
agency to provide money through USAID and its implementation partners, such as IOM, to implement
disaster response (food, WASH supplies and water distribution). Since FY 2010, USAID/OFDA has
supported IOM to pre-position emergency relief supplies in three strategic locations throughout RMI. They
also develop standby agreements with island-based organizations (such as WUTMI and MIRSC
representatives on islands and/or local farmers associations (linked with MIOFA)) for logistical support during
an emergency response, including the provisioning of Reverse Osmosis Units to alleviate immediate and
medium-term effects of droughts.58
The Office of the Chief Secretary, who chairs the Emergency Operations Centre (EOC), lead the disaster
response with the clusters (Water and Sanitation (WASH), Health, Logistics and Food Security and
Agriculture and the Infrastructure and Shelter Cluster) to identify and meet immediate needs emerging from
disasters including droughts.
In 2016 drought, RMI Government coordinated a Joint Preliminary Damage Assessments (PDA) with the
support of the USA Team (US FEMA, WASH, Agriculture, Health, Logistics, and USAID). Based on findings
of the PDA, RMI Government released a Drought Response Plan seeking for specific areas of support from
57
Outer atolls and islands as well as communities that are not connected to MWSC and KAJUR supplied water in Majuro and Kwajalein.
58
USAID/OFDA Program Summary FSM, RMI and Palau Retrieved from:
https://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/documents/1866/palau_program_summary_01302014.pdf

international partners. External support included financial, human resource, materials and technical
assistance. Among others, the UN system coordinated and provided support for emergency needs
assessment as well as non-food commodities. For swift response RMI has setup a Disaster Assistance
Account (DAA) and a Contingency Fund. Both RMI and the US government with USD100,000 each resource
annually through the Contingencies Fund once both governments agree that a disaster warrants a certain
drawdown.
Disaster preparation, warnings and planning related to drought is under the purview of the Office of Chief’s
Secretary in coordination with departments and organizations, including but not limited to: MWSC, KAJUR,
EPA, Ministry of Internal Affairs and the Weather Office and civil society organizations that are all part of the
WASH cluster.
The mechanisms followed by these institutions in organizing and responding to disasters are described in
Table 18.
Table 18: Disaster Coordination Mechanisms in RMI

Mechanisms Descriptions
Emergency Operation Center The National Emergency Operations Centre (EOC), under the direction of the Chief
Secretary, activates upon the Declaration of a State of Emergency and coordinates
activated Clusters. Currently Terms of Reference for the Clusters, and Emergency
Operation Centre or other DRM structures do not exist. Under the leadership of the NDMO,
rapid needs assessments and deployment of necessary supplies to meet immediate
lifesaving needs were coordinated. The NDMO utilizes the EOC and its clusters to provide
recommendations to the National Disaster Committee for decision-making and further
recommendations to the Cabinet. In addition, the NDMO has begun to establish Outer
Island Disaster Committees (DisCom) and Disaster Focal Points with the assistance from
the International Organization for Migration (IOM). This focal points and DisComs would be
responsible for relaying early warnings, assisting the community to prepare for disasters
and reporting through standardized reporting forms. There are still many communities that
need to establish DisComs and strengthen focal points.
Cluster System During the 2013 Drought Response in the Northern Islands of the RMI the National Cluster
system was introduced to the RMI. Since 2013 the National Cluster System has been tested
during multiple medium and small size events – such as the 2014 inundations and Typhoon
Nangka that initiated the creation of the Infrastructure and Shelter Cluster. The National
Cluster System has been institutionalized into the RMI DRM operations structure. Different
clusters have different levels of operational capacity depending on how often they have
been activated and their composition. The WASH cluster was the most active cluster during
the 2016 El Nino Drought response, and also has the largest membership bringing together
government agencies, NGOs and Civil Society.
WASH Cluster Members of this cluster include EPA, OEPPC, Weather Service, MWSC, KAJUR, EPPSO,
ODM, MOH, MPW, MFA, MoF, MIA, College of Marshall Islands, MIMRA, Local
Governments, NGO’s (WUTMI, Youth to Youth), Donors and development partners,
traditional leaders and landowners. - During disaster situations a multi-sector Water Task
Force is constituted to plan, mitigate and respond to drought disasters organized by the
OCS
Post Disaster Needs Assessments During the 2015 / 2016 drought, RMI government conducted their first Post Disaster Needs
(PDNA) Assessment, which provided an evaluation of infrastructure and assets, described effects
on production/delivery of goods and access to services and the effects of the disaster on
government functions and systems. The assessment included estimating the value of
effects and impact of disaster for each sector and develop and recovery and reconstruction
strategy.
2.3.3 Key Findings and Barriers – Drought Response
community levels

 Strengthening of community preparedness and response to drought using applicable public
awareness and education materials and the development of a national training framework in
conjunction with community specific response plans.
 There is a need for upgraded information and communications platform to better facilitate information
flows prior to, during and after events. This will help to expedite damage reporting particularly from
the rural communities and formally incorporate the use of social media as an additional tool to
enhance the understanding or disaster impacts. Using basic Internet over HF radio may be looked at
for outer Islands.
 With regard to disaster information management system, there is a need for a government –based
centralized data system with content monitored, properly protected by the intellectual property
legislation, and properly followed protocol while promoting awareness, maintenance and regional data
sharing and public access.
 Topographic data and GIS layers relevant to disaster risk management are unavailable for response
purposes, or consolidated from old maps and new data from fieldwork to support effective response.
 Since the 2013 drought response, the introduction of Clusters and designation of government
agencies’ leads has improved the partnership across the different government agencies and non-
government sectors. One of the key challenges to the coordination is the lack of ability of partners to
sustain their engagement through dedicated and knowledgeable staff from the beginning to the end
of the disaster risk management processes. The high level of participation in Cluster meetings in the
initial days of emergency usually fizzles as the responders have their own ‘regular jobs’.
 Other areas where risk management could be strengthened include the need to further develop the
procedures for disaster warning and monitoring system. Validation and promotion of indigenous
knowledge to enhance good governance through increased participation of community decision
making, engagement of women as well as other marginalized groups such as youth, elderly and
disabled in community DRM decision making processes is an important necessary enhancement.
 Cross government data collection, compilation and analysis systems to provide timely and reliable
sex disaggregated statistics. Capacity strengthening related to knowledge sharing is then required so
that the data is then analyzed, interpreted and disseminated in a timely and appropriate manner to
the affected groups. Response plans and support can become more effective with the right data
availability.
 NDMO and EOC needs a better understanding on roles and responsibilities of all stakeholder groups
(including supporting NGOs and private partners) having the power and capacity to make decisions
rather than relying so heavily on centralized decision making.
 Meteorological and field data was inconsistent and sometimes conflicting. Data gathering was
inconsistent due to the lack of standardized forms and understanding of use to relay effective
actionable data. The level of granularity needs to improve for the provided data – leading to the need
for more equipment distributed onto atolls that provide overall coverage.
 Lack of staff or systems to perform real time tracking of activities and feedback mechanisms. Poor
understanding by support agencies to report back consistently on findings and progress so that next
steps can for response is clearly understood.
 Terms of Reference, for all parties involved within response, are not documented to describe
ownership of activities and to provide an understanding or coordination between organizations,
mayors and community representatives in the outer islands.
In light of urban and rural communities contexts described above, people in RMI currently face significant
challenges of accessing safe freshwater year-round. Freshwater access is particularly constrained during
extreme weather events with many consecutive days with little or no rain. During these events, people have
to sustain their lives and livelihoods without water for several days and months, resulting in agricultural
drought, hydrological drought, and socio-economic drought59. Just within the past two decades, RMI
experienced four major droughts - in 1998, 2007, 2013, and 2016, all negatively impacting water, sanitation
59
An agricultural drought occurs when there is inadequate soil moisture to meet the needs of a particular crop at any given time. Agricultural drought usually
occurs after or during a meteorological drought but before hydrological drought and may affect livestock and other dry-land agricultural operations. A hydrological
drought refers to deficiencies in the availability of surface and groundwater supplies. There usually occurs a delay between lack of rain or snow and the occurrence
of less-measurable water availability in streams, lakes and reservoirs. Therefore, drought hydrological measurements would tend to lag other drought indicators.
A socio-economic drought may occur when physical water shortages start to affect the health, well-being, and quality of life of the people, or when the drought
starts to affect the supply and demand of the production of goods and services in a given country or sub-national divisions. The most recent 2015/16 drought
covered all of the 3 definitions of drought.

and hygiene (WASH), food security and economic activities in varying severities and locations60. These
drought years coincided with El Niño events (1997/98, 2007/08, 2015/16. Other key natural hazards faced
by the urban and rural communities of RMI include: tropical storms and typhoons, sea swells coinciding
with king tides and tsunamis. These hazards, together with drought, all influence the quantity and quality of
the limited safe, freshwater resources accessible by the Marshallese people.
60
1998 - Severe Drought, All of RMI; 2007 - Severe Drought, Majuro, Utrik, Wotho, Lae, Namu, Ailuk; 2013 - Drought, 15 atolls/islands north of Majuro (above
8°N latitude); 2016 - Severe drought, All of RMI. Source: Government of RMI. 2014. Republic of the Marshall Islands Joint National Action Plan for Climate
Change Adaptation & Disaster Risk Management 2014 – 2018.

3. Current Status of Water Infrastructure in RMI
3.1 Overview
Given its unique geography and climate, freshwater resources are extremely limited in RMI, thus making
access to safe water and sanitation extremely challenging. In urban (Majuro and Kwajalein) and rural
communities of RMI, “improved water supply” coverage is high at 93% and 98% respectively61. However,
the majority of the improved water supply is reliant on rainwater harvesting systems alone, as groundwater
lenses can be accessed only in limited locations for drinking or cooking given their quality and quantity issues,
although data on the locations and quality of groundwater resources are limited. Furthermore, very few
surface water resources such as lakes and ponds exist throughout the country. Therefore, communities in
RMI currently do not have viable alternative safe water options, but are completely dependent on a single
source for freshwater resource. This lack of integrated water resource management system makes
Marshallese people extremely vulnerable to water shortages.
During the dry season between December to April (or until May during El Niño years), people across RMI
frequently face very low quantities of water with sufficient water quality, making year-round access to water
challenging. In 2010, 59% of households in Majuro reported that they did not have year-round access to
their primary drinking water source, indicating the high frequency of their household rainwater harvesting
systems being empty62. Conditions in the drier northern atolls and islands are more severe especially during
the dry seasons of El Niño years. Therefore, water insecurity is a major concern for the Marshallese people
today and in the future, based on climate change projections it is expected to be further exacerbated in the
future.
The focus of this section will be related to describing the conditions within the rural communities not
connected to MWSC and KAJUR public reticulation systems on Majuro and Kwajalein (Ebeye) respectively
since their needs for water security is covered through their individual master plans.
3.2 Available Data – Collected or Compiled through Site Visits
Available data and assessments on water resources in RMI vary by location, year, and the types of water
resources. The key data and assessments gathered and analyzed during the project design period are
included in FS Annex 7. In addition UNDP performed site visits to the largest communities of on 19 out of
the 24 populated atolls. The visits comprised of the infrastructure and completing consultations with local
communities to compile a better understanding of the technical state of the in
Detailed and consistent data and analysis on water resources in terms of its quality and quantity are lacking
in RMI, especially for the rural communities. Existing comprehensive nation-wide information related to water
and sanitation in RMI is limited to those collected through the 1999 and 2011 Household and Population
Census.
Surveys results from different agencies provided condition and community assessment data for review:
Including local community visits. Through these surveys UNDP was able to compile information on the site
and community conditions from 19 out of the 23 atolls.
1. IOM 2013 WASH surveys (households and community buildings) of Ailuk, Aur, Enewetak, Ebadon
and Mejatto (both Kwajalein), Lae, Lib, Maloelap, Ujae, Utirik, Wotho and Wotje.
2. International Red Cross 2013 WASH surveys (households and community buildings) of Likiep, Mejit
and Namu,
3. UNDP GCF Preparation Team April 2016 mission visit to Utrik (households and community buildings)
4. UNDP GCF Preparation Team August 2016 mission visit to Wotje, Jaluit and Majuro Atolls (Rongrong
Island) (households and community buildings)
5. UNDP GCF Preparation Team September 2016 visits to Ebon and Namdrik
6. UNDP GCF Preparation Team 1 (Technical Team) October 2016 visits to Kwajalein (Santo Island),
Ailinglaplap and Wotho
61
Source: WHO / UNICEF. 2014. Joint Monitoring Programme for Water and Sanitation.
62
Source. Government of RMI. 2014. National Water and Sanitation Policy.

7. UNDP GCF Preparation Team 2 (Gender Consultation Team) October to November 2016 – WUTMI
and MIOFA team visited Majuro atoll (RongRong community), Aur (Aur, Tobal), Maloelap (Airok,
Tarawa, Wollot, Jeng, Kaven), Mejit (Mejit), Utrik (Utrik), Ailuk (Ailuk), Likiep (Likiep), Ujae (Ujea),
Lae (Lae), Kwajalein (Ebadon, Mejatto), Lib (Lib), Namu (Majkin), Jabot (Jabot)
8. PDNA site visit to Arno
9. UNDP Water Proposal_2016 Provided by College of Marshall Islands
Additional information available is linked with technical assessments and studies conducted in relation to
water and infrastructure projects (during development and implementation), drought responses (situation
reports, rapid assessment surveys, etc.) and limited number of academic research.
With an acute recognition of the importance of water baseline information, there are significant interests and
intentions to develop monitoring mechanisms and databases for water and disasters within National Disaster
Management Organization (NDMO) and Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) under the purview of the
Chief Secretary’s Office. Some efforts have initiated where the newly recruited Water Security Officer within
EPA, supported by SPC with financial support from the New Zealand Government, is embarking on gathering
information on past and ongoing water-related initiatives in RMI.
3.3 Freshwater Resources
3.3.1 Overview of Water Resources in RMI

As described above, households in RMI primarily rely on a single water resource and supply system – their
private household rainwater harvesting system – that is highly vulnerable to low precipitation and climate
change. This is true across both urban and rural communities, with some site-specific variations in contexts.
Besides household rainwater harvesting (HH RWH) systems, limited options for alternative safe freshwater
supply currently exist in the rural communities of RMI. While limited in number and quality, these options
include: rainwater harvesting systems in community buildings (public, commercial, or churches), household
or shared community groundwater wells, and desalination systems that are available in some schools and
health centers or owned and operated by the municipal government. Below Table 19 summarizes the
different types of freshwater resources available in RMI.
Table 19: Overview of Freshwater Resources in RMI
Resources Supply Capture Storage Owners / Users Locations

Systems Managers
Rain Rainwater Household 4.5 / 5.7 / 6.1 HHs HHs Throughout RMI
harvesting (HH) roofs m3 tanks63 in
systems HHs
Community Majority of Schools, Students, patients, Throughout RMI
building tanks same hospitals, community groups,
roofs size as HH community HHs,
but new tanks groups, etc.
Up to 189 m3
tanks
HH and Concrete HHs, HHs, community Throughout RMI
Community tanks (i.e. community groups, etc.
Roofs WWII, often groups, etc.
underground)
Airport Storage Majuro water MWSC customers Majuro
reservoirs and sewer (commercial,
company government and HHs)
Groundwater N/A Wells HHs, HHs, community Throughout RMI
community groups, etc.
groups,
MWSC, etc.
Sea Water Stationary Solar or 4.5 / 5.7 / 6.1 Local HHs, patients, Kili, Utrik, Rongelap,
reverse diesel m3 tanks65 government, students, customers, Enewetak, Mejit, Ailuk,
osmosis KAJUR, etc. Likiep, Wotje, Maloelap,
63
1,200 / 1,500 / 1,800 gallon tanks
65
1,200 / 1,500 / 1,800 gallon tanks

Resources Supply Capture Storage Owners / Users Locations
Systems Managers
(RO) units operated Majuro Aur Mejatto, Wotho, Ujae,
with 200 – pumps hospitals, Lae, Lib, Namu, Kwajalein,
13,200 gallons schools, Majuro
per day stores, etc.
(gpd)64
capacity
Mobile RO Solar or Jerry cans, WASH Cluster HHs N/A – deployed based on
units with 360 diesel etc. (NDMO, need during drought
gpd66 capacity operated MWSC, IOM),
pumps local
government
Solar water Solar 4.5 / 5.7 / 6.1 Health centers Patients, HHs, etc. Mejit, Ailuk (Ailuk and
purifiers with operated m3 tanks67 Enejelar), Likiep (Likiep
4 L per day pumps and Jebal), Wotje (Wotje
capacity and Wodmej)
Imported N/A N/A Water bottles Shops Urban HHs Majuro and Kwajalein, etc.
Water
3.3.2 Water Resources in the Rural communities Water

The types of freshwater resources available in the rural Resources
communities of RMI are: Rainwater
 Household Rainwater Systems – HH residents Harvesting
directly use rainwater captured by the household System
rainwater harvesting systems Other
 Community rainwater harvesting systems, often 98%
supplying water to commercial and public buildings
 Groundwater resources are available in many of the
rural communities, although information regarding their
specific locations, available volume, and quality are 11% HH RWH
limited. Based on survey results, groundwater is Ownership
normally used for washing, cleaning, and / or for
sanitation, while in times are drought also used for Yes
drinking and cooking.
 Alternative and experimental systems are available
89% No
at ad-hoc bases in limited atolls (solar panels, hoop
systems etc.)
Rainwater Harvesting Systems

Households Figure 13: Water Resources in the Rural Communities
In the rural communities of RMI, where
approximately 28% of RMI’s population lives, dependence on rainwater as the primary source for drinking
water is even higher than in urban areas; it was estimated at 98% in 2011. A water survey conducted in 2013
in 11 atolls and islands68 reported that 89% of households in these atolls and islands had rainwater-harvesting
systems with 4,542 L (1,200 gallon) and/or 5,678 L (1,500 gallon) tanks. For a household of average 6
members69, at a water consumption level of 20 L (5.3 gallons) per person per day70, the household rainwater
tanks can supply water for one household for 37 to 47 days under conditions of little or no rain, if water tanks
are well maintained and kept full at the beginning of the dry spell.
Based on the completed atoll surveys for households in 2013 and the GCF preparation team in 2016, as
listed in Section 2.2. the rainwater harvesting systems typically have:
a. Corrugated steel or Aluminum/Tin sheet roof – typically in good condition.
64
0.8 – 50 m3
66
1.4 m3
67
1,200 / 1,500 / 1,800 gallon tanks
68
Ailuk, Aur, Ebadon, Lae, Lib, Maloelap, Mejatto, Ujae, Utrik, Wotho, and Wotje. Source. 2013 Wash Survey.
69
Average household size in outer islands and atolls calculated from 2011 Census was 6 for the outer islands and atolls, 7 for urban atolls, and 7 for the national
average.
70
WHO and SDG minimum standard to provide for drinking, cooking and basic hygiene

b. 75mm (3”) to 100mm (4”) guttering system is installed which provides less than 50% coverage or less
and was found to be poorly installed and in poor condition. (Need to consider larger guttering systems
(150mm) to limit overflow and spillage during heavy rainfall.)
c. No first flush mechanism or mosquito guard systems in place or provided as part of the original
installation. General practice on first seasonal rainfall was to divert the feed away from the storage
system to overflow onto the ground. This provides some level of first flushing of dirt and
d. Storage tanks are plastic PVC – usually one to two per households each sized (with (1000G), 4,542
L (1,200 G) and/or 5,678 L (1,500 G) tanks). Some households have not been provided a storage
tank.
e. Water quality during periods of rain within the storage tanks is adequate to be used for drinking,
cooking, showering and general cleaning of the house. During drought periods the water is restricted
for drinking and cooking only.
f. Maintenance of the rooves and the guttering system, based on observations documented within the
surveys, indicate minimal maintenance is performed. The guttering system in most households is
found to be in poor condition and not connected properly to the storage tanks – during periods of rain
a number of leaks resulted, demonstrating poor efficiency in capture and storage of water.
g. Each household was responsible for maintaining their own RWH system and clear identification of
existing costs to maintain system was difficult to qualify. Surveys indicate that residents spent minimal
money on maintenance of their RWH systems.
The infrastructure survey results (IFRC (2013), IOM (2013) and UNDP (2016)) have been graphed by atoll.
Figure 14 shows the household rainwater harvesting system condition assessment ratings (five point
condition rating from Excellent to Very Poor). Figure 14 shows the volume of household rainwater
harvesting tanks.
120
Number of Surveyed households
100
80
60
40
20
0
Ailuk Aur Jaluit Kwajalein Lae Lib Maloelap Ujae Utirik Wotho Wotje
Very Poor Poor Fair Good Excellent
Figure 14: Assessment of Roof Conditions of Household Rainwater Harvesting Systems
(Source: 2011 Census, IOM and IFRC (WASH Survey 2013) and UNDP (GCF Design Surveys, 2016)

Figure 15: Volume of Household Rainwater Harvesting Tanks based on Community Surveys
(Source: 2011 Census, IOM and IFRC (WASH Survey 2013) and Government of RMI / UNDP Surveys during Project Development, 2016))
The household rainwater harvesting systems in the three atolls surveyed by IFRC in 2013 (Likiep, Mejit and
Namu) were typically in worse condition and with smaller tanks than the atolls surveyed by IOM in 2013. A
rainwater harvesting improvement program was implemented in 2014 that targeted those three atolls (for
more details see Section 3). Rainwater harvesting storage tanks were distributed widely in Likiep, Mejit and
Namu which should improve the baseline household rainwater harvesting significantly in those atolls.
Figure 16 shows a distribution of different rainwater harvest tank sizes (and those without tanks) of
households in rural communities (the graph excludes Likiep, Mejit and Namu).
Figure 16: Summary of household rainwater harvesting tank sizes

The household roof materials were recorded during the IFRC and IOM 2013 surveys (total of 1,106
households in 14 atolls). A total of 95 households (8% of the surveyed households) were recorded as having
thatched roofs rather than tin or concrete, 74 of these households were in Namu. The IFRC 2013 survey also
recorded whether a house was occupied or not in those three atolls and 24 households were recorded as
being unoccupied (or 6% of the 411 households).
Table 20: Household Rainwater Harvesting Systems in Rural Communities in RMI (Typical)
Baseline HH RWH Systems in RMI

Roof  Surface area is normally around 54 m².
 Roof materials are corrugated steel or Aluminum/Tin sheet roof – typically in good
condition.
Connection In most HHs, only about 50% of the roof area is connected with guttering leading to loss of
of roof area rainwater from roof to tank.
to RWH
Gutters 75mm (3”) to 100mm (4”) guttering system is installed which typically provides 50% coverage
or less and was found to be poorly installed and in poor condition.
Downpipes 100mm diameter
Tanks
Most households have at least one 4,542 liter (1,200 gallon) to 5,678 liter (1,500 gallon)
storage tanks. Tanks are normally plastic PVC materials.
Most tanks in HHs do not have first flush diverters or mosquito guard systems. General
practice on first seasonal rainfall was to divert the feed away from the storage system to
overflow onto the ground. Therefore, significant rainwater stored in tanks is often lost for
cleaning.
Efficiency Typical 20%
Given above conditions, it is estimated that there is significant loss of rainwater in typical HH
RWH systems. 516mm of rain required to fill typical household tank under baseline RWH
system conditions
Community RWH Systems

Besides household rainwater harvesting systems, community RWH systems are available and utilized in the
rural communities in public, commercial, or community buildings. While approximately 79%71 of community
buildings in the rural communities have community rainwater harvesting systems, especially in upgraded
public schools (Figure 17), health centers, police centers, churches, and recreation or community centers,
many systems are in poor condition, with installation, maintenance and efficiency challenges, similar to
household systems. In particular for community rainwater harvesting, most of these systems are not fully
utilizing their catchment potential; although many public buildings have large roof areas to capture rainfall,
most structures only have 5,800 L tanks connected to them, and therefore are unable to store a lot of water
that is captured. Furthermore, public, commercial, and community structures in the rural communities with
sanitation facilities use harvested rainwater to flush their toilets, therefore straining freshwater supply
particularly in drought times.
Results of these surveys identified in section 3.2 provided:

 Newly Constructed Public Schools (Primary Schools and High Schools) – good condition for both
roofs and updated guttering systems, first flush mechanisms were installed.
 There are number of schools have not been upgraded and continue to be in use, their roof condition
are generally in good condition and guttering systems are in poor condition for these older facilities.
 Health Centers – good condition for both roofs and updated guttering systems – first flush mechanism
were not installed.
 Police Centers - good condition for both roofs and updated guttering systems – first flush mechanism
were not installed.
 Churches - good condition for roofs but limited guttering systems (often poorly constructed) and – first
flush mechanism were not installed
 Recreation / Community Centers - - good condition for roofs but limited guttering systems (often poorly
constructed) and – first flush mechanism were not installed
71
2011 RMI Census

Figure 17: Example of Upgraded Public Schools with Rainwater Harvesting Systems (Wotho Atoll)
Based on the surveys of community buildings the condition of the roofs was taken into account as well as the
guttering systems for 209 surveyed community buildings. A total of 44 community buildings did not have
guttering systems and only 8% of the community buildings with RWH systems had first flush components.
The roof condition of each community building was considered to be in good shape with the results described
in Table 21.
Table 21: Community Rainwater Harvesting Systems in Rural Communities in RMI (Typical)
Element Baseline Community RWH Systems in RMI
Roof area  Surface area of suitable community building is at least 100 m2. Large roof areas can
be over 400 m².
 Roof materials are corrugated steel or Aluminum/Tin sheet roof – typically in good
condition.
Connection In most suitable community buildings, only about 50% of the roof area is connected with
of roof area guttering leading to loss of rainwater from roof to tank.
to RWH
Gutters 75mm (3”) to 150mm (6”) guttering system which typically provides 50% coverage or
less and was found to be in good condition.
Downpipes 100mm diameter
Tanks  Most suitable community buildings have at least one 4,542 liter (1,200 gallon) to
5,678 liter (1,500 gallon) storage tanks.
 Given small tank size compared to large roof area, significant water is lost from tank
overflow.
 Most tanks in community buildings do not have first flush diverters or mosquito guard
systems. General practice on first seasonal rainfall was to divert the feed away from
the storage system to overflow onto the ground. Therefore, significant rainwater
stored in tanks is often lost for cleaning.
Efficiency Typical 35%
Given above conditions, it is estimated that there is significant loss of rainwater in typical
HH RWH systems. 81mm of rain required to fill typical community tank under baseline
RWH system conditions
Users 20 to 150 people per community building
The maintenance operations of the rainwater harvesting systems for cleaning tanks and upkeep of the
guttering systems are to be performed by the staff of the community building or ministry of education (for
schools) and ministry of public works for health care centers and police buildings. Based on the condition of
the guttering systems it is evident that limited maintenance was being performed. Water quality testing of
the catchments was not completed on a regular basis by EPA or properly trained staff and limited records
are available. The newly installed systems were still in good condition but need clean-out and minor repair.

The College of Marshall Islands completed a water quality survey on multiple atolls (Annex 21) after the 2016
drought, of groundwater wells and catchments of both community buildings and households. The results
indicates approximately 50 percent of the water quality sources tested are contaminated. By interviewing the
residents of the atolls UNDP survey results indicated consistent evidence of diarrhea, stomach ailments and
dehydration.
Summary of Condition of RWH Systems for Rural Communities
The frequent water shortages in the rural communities based on household rainwater harvesting systems
are caused by a combination of:
1. low efficiency of rainwater harvesting systems – poor sizing gutters, downspouts, brackets and fittings,
which are poorly installed for the maximum rainfall, capture.
2. lack of sufficient storage of rainwater harvesting systems – tank sizes for households and community
buildings are insufficient and are prone to overflows during normal rainfalls.
3. poor quality of water – due to improper operation and maintenance clean practices of guttering and
tanks the water capture is often contaminated leading to ailments within the community. Many
rainwater harvesting systems do not have mosquito covers or first flush systems72 that allow cleaning
of the tanks without losing all of the water stored in the tanks.
4. lack of water conservation practices – there is limited written guidance available and the community
has not identified lead personnel to establish community specific water conservation measures
including supporting encouragement of proper operations and maintenance practice.
5. extended period of very little or no rain - There is a significant difference between precipitation levels
and patterns of northern and southern atolls and islands. As such, atolls and islands of RMI are often
categorized into 3 zones 73 in recognition that different rainfall pattern requires different water
resilience strategies. However, studies have also shown74 that in most atolls and islands in RMI
including all zones, there is adequate rainfall during rainy season to supply for drinking, cooking and
basic hygiene; however, it is not effectively stored for utilization during the dry periods, where
households particularly in the northern Zones 1 and 2 have to manage with little or no rainfall for
extended periods of days.
Concrete Tanks (WWII)
In RMI, many atolls and islands have underground or partially underground concrete structures to store water.
Most of these concrete tanks were constructed by Japanese troops during their occupation in World War II
and are ageing. There are a number of these concrete tanks (the older tanks being called “WWII
catchments”) still in use today connected to the rainwater harvesting systems of households and community
buildings like schools and churches. During the infrastructure surveys in 2013 and 2016, 23 large concrete
tanks were recorded across 12 atolls and islands ranging in volume from 11m³ to 453m³. The concrete tank
volumes are included in the baseline storage in the relevant communities with a total recorded volume from
the infrastructure survey data of 1,254m³. An example concrete tank is shown in Figure 18.
Figure 18: Concrete rainwater storage tank in Jabwor, Jaluit Atoll
72
Based on IOM, Red Cross and UNDP 2016 Survey results gathered during proposal development process, out of 209 community buildings surveyed, only 17
buildings had first flush systems (8%). For households, only 43 (6%) out of 711 households surveyed had a first flush system.
73
Zone 1: atolls and islands located above 8’ N latitude, Zone 2: atolls and islands between 6’ and 8’ N latitude, Zone 3: atolls and islands located below 6’ N
latitude.
74
Wallis. 2011.

Survey data for the large concrete tanks connected to suitable community buildings (see Section 8.2.3 for
the description of suitable community buildings) are summarized in the table below75. There may be other
concrete tanks in use in communities that have not been surveyed.
Tanks smaller than 10m³ have not been included in Table 22. The tanks in Table 22 are included in the status
quo existing community storage volumes for the technical design. The qualitative condition ratings from the
infrastructure surveys are also shown in the table below. The condition rating is a five point rating from Very
Poor to Excellent.
Table 22: Survey data for existing large concrete tanks
Atoll Community Location of tank Survey Volume of Condition of tanks

date concrete tanks
(m³)
Ailinglaplap Jeh School Oct-16 15 Very Poor
Ailuk Ailuk Religious Center IOM 2013 38 Good
Ailuk Enejelar Religious Center IOM 2013 38 Good
Ebon Ebon School Sep-16 24 Very Poor

Ebon Ebon Government building Sep-16 14 Good
Jaluit Jabwor Community building Aug-16 141 Poor
Jaluit Jabwor Community hall Aug-16 17 Poor
Kwajalein Santo Church Oct-16 453 Good
Kwajalein Santo Church Oct-16 22 Very Poor
Majuro Rongrong School-Dormitory Girls Aug-16 54 Poor
Namdrik Namdrik School Sep-16 12 Very Poor
Namu Namu Church (protestant) IFRC 2013 11 Very good
Namu Majkin School IFRC 2013 72 Very good
Ujae Ujae Public School IOM 2013 37 Very poor
Utrik Utirik Health Center IOM 2013 38 Excellent
Utrik Utirik Religious Center IOM 2013 44 Good
Wotho Wotho School Oct-16 38 Excellent
Wotje Wotje Public school Aug-16 42 Good
Wotje Wotje Community Centre Aug-16 26 Good
Wotje Wormej Primary school Aug-16 41 Poor
Wotje Wormej Primary school Aug-16 41 Poor
Total 1255
The condition ratings in the table show that more than half (52%) of the tanks are rated to be in poor to very
poor condition. The remaining tanks (42%) are rated to be in good to excellent condition. Concrete tank
condition and asset management are discussed further in Section 7.4.3.
Some of the connected concrete tanks currently in use have slight cracks in the side walls or foundations,
resulting in small leaks. The water quality was generally good (as long as proper cover for hatch opening
was maintained) and the guttering system was cleaned out on a regular basis. Maintenance of these
catchments and guttering systems is completed by the community-building operator (e.g. schools or
churches).
The table excludes the concrete tanks that are either connected to a community building with a small roof
area (roof catchment area <100m²) and the tanks that are abandoned or located a considerable distance
from the existing community. Abandoned concrete tanks are often filled with debris or have groundwater
inundation due to cracks in the foundation and sidewalls, resulting in poor water quality condition. These were
not included in the status quo assessment due to their condition and/or location.
Groundwater
75
It is unknown if there are other large concrete tanks that are relied on for rainwater storage in the communities without infrastructure survey data.

Fresh groundwater in the rural communities exists in the form of a freshwater lens that floats (due to lower
density) atop the deeper, salty groundwater. The availability of fresh groundwater depends on island size
and rainfall, and diminishes during droughts. People tend to use groundwater for showering, washing
laundry, and watering animals and garden crops, as well as a backup source for drinking and other needs
during droughts.
Besides being moderate to extremely saline (depending on the season, tide, location and depth of the well),
basically wells are often found unprotected (i.e. uncovered and/or with a hand pump installed), with
artisanal lining and without a sanitary seal. And although there is little known about human excreta disposal
(e.g. availability and location of latrines with distance to well), the mere fact that the wells are unprotected
and with chickens, dogs and pigs roaming around makes bacteriological testing redundant; it is close to
certain that all wells are bacteriologically contaminated and thus unsafe to drink (without treatment).
Based on consultations the groundwater is still not used for drinking and often not used for cooking as well
for either dry or wet season.
Ground water wells lack proper covering or are not raised from ground level to protect from pollutants and
possible inundation from high tides. Further pollution or increase of salinity of the ground water will not only
affect possible availability of drinking water but will also affect ability to maintain vegetation (eg. coconut
trees) and island ecological functions. (Ryan T Bailey, 2016)
The number, locations, and conditions of groundwater wells in RMI, owned by households or shared among
communities are unknown76. Testing of the quality and quantity of the groundwater is part of the Reimaanlok77
process’ household surveys (Reimaanlok steps 3-4). However, most of the testing for groundwater quality
and quantity (through modeling) has focused on the major lenses in Majuro (Laura lens) and in Kwajalein
Atoll. As a result, currently, there are no a standard operating procedure for the frequency and parameters
for water quality and quantity testing or modeling for the rural communities.
Groundwater is collected through wells owned by households or communities. Some wells are protected,
while others are open (unprotected). Wells are typically concrete lined and have a concrete access cover
with a plastic hinged cover for the opening. Over the course of time these wells have been neglected and
minimum maintenance and repair has been performed. Some have collapsed, some are contaminated from
accumulated debris or fallen animals, and some are simply missing their plastic hatch opening potentially
exposing them to inundation from King tides and large storms.
An unknown percentage of wells are unprotected (i.e. uncovered and/or with a hand pump installed), with
artisanal lining and without a sanitary seal. Although water quality data is unavailable, it is likely that these
wells are susceptible to contamination from bacteria (from human and livestock activities).
Although limited information exist regarding groundwater quality in the rural communities, the location, the
use, and conditions of the wells (as described above) affect water lens quality significantly. Within a
community, proximity to sea as well as toilets and their septic tanks affect water quality significantly in terms
of salinity and bacteria such as fecal coliform. Wells that lack proper covering or are not raised from ground
level are susceptible to pollutants and inundation from high tides and storm surge (particularly due to climate
change induced sea level rise).
Furthermore, given its history of U.S. nuclear testing, the 4 northern atolls closest to the testing sites also
have concerns for nuclear radiation levels in water. During community consultations, residents of Utrik Atoll,
particularly women, expressed that they were concerned of using groundwater for drinking or bathing,
especially for babies and children and that they would save rainwater even during times of drought so that
the most vulnerable in the communities did not have to use groundwater.
The volumes of use and how / where the water is used also influence groundwater quality. Excessive use
and extraction of groundwater, which occur during the dry season and drought times, can cause saltwater
intrusion and increase the salinity of groundwater resources. Also, discharging used water above and/or
near wells and water lenses can also contaminate groundwater resources, especially when they are not
covered and protected.
76
Cross-reference FS section 7.3.3 on Groundwater.
77
Reimaanlok process on natural resource management is a community-driven, participatory approach that strengthens local capacities for effective and
financially sustainable ecosystem management

Based on testing performed by EPA at a few of the atolls (Ebon, Jaluit and Namdrik) during the 2016
disaster response more than 50% of the wells tested did not meet the required drinking water standard
(EPA set TDS > 500 mg/L).
RMI EPA Rating System:

For Wells the TDS Levels for Groundwater can be classified as
 Class 1 -0-250mg/L (Good Source)
 Class II -250-500mg/L –(Alternative Source)
 Class III > 500 mg/L – Not recommended for drinking
It is useful to compare the EPA rating system against the WHO Guidelines for Drinking Water Quality 2006.
WHO have not established health-based guideline values for TDS and other naturally occurring chemicals
such as chlorine and sodium. The reason given is because they occur in drinking water at concentrations
well below those at which toxic effects may occur. WHO agree that TDS may affect acceptability of drinking
water and state that the palatability of water with a TDS level of less than 600 mg/litre is generally
considered to be good; drinking-water becomes significantly and increasingly unpalatable at TDS levels
greater than about 1000 mg/litre. The WHO unpalatable TDS level is twice the EPA rating level shown
above.
During consultations residents confirmed at the majority of atolls that they limit the usage of ground water –
especially for drinking water due to perceived quality and known high salinity issues in times of drought.
The recent study on groundwater availability during drought by Barkey and Bailey published in the Water
magazine78 identified that groundwater on small islands (<300 m in width) is typically completely depleted
during drought. Based on the modelling, it was estimated that over half (54 percent) of the islands are
classified as highly vulnerable to drought if dependent on this resource. Thicker lenses typically occur for
larger islands, islands located on the leeward side of an atoll due to lower hydraulic conductivity, and
islands located in the southern region of the RMI due to higher rainfall rates.
During drought the community coordinates their activities to ensure that they clean out the known
contamination from ground water sources and also share wells that are checked or qualitatively
considered to still have good water for consumption and cooking. The community understands the
shared responsibility of all and will coordinate through the community chief and Mayor to support
each other. The residents will share ground water well access during times of water stress.
King tides and inundation of seawater of the atolls are projected to become more frequent due to SLR and
higher resultant storm surges and tides
Desalination Systems (Stationary)

In recent years, as a measure to manage the frequent water shortages during dry season, desalination
systems with varying technologies have been deployed in selected rural communities. These have had
different degrees of success in terms of installation, operation, maintenance, effectiveness (i.e. actual water
production volume) and sustainability.
Currently within the rural communities there are three types of fixed desalination units deployed.
 Solar powered Reverse Osmosis from Toray Industries (Supplied by JICA through the Pacific
Environment Community Fund) – Rated for 1130 Liters/day were installed at 15 public schools. These
units were designed to only be used during dry season or when there is an emergency water shortage.
In addition, 7 solar distillation systems, or solar water purifiers, are installed in 4 atolls and islands79
with capacity of 4 liters (1 gallon) per day using FCubed technology. Capital cost for the solar
distillation systems were financed through the GEF Special Climate Change Fund, and in partnership
with SPREP & UNDP Pacific Adaptation to Climate Change (PACC) Programme. Unfortunately,
many of the desalination units installed through the PEC and PACC programs are not generating the
freshwater at average volumes they are designed for or have broken down due to poor maintenance
and weather damage. As a result most of these systems were unable to provide emergency water
supply to the schools and health clinics and communities in which they were placed during the 2016
drought.
78
Estimating the Impact of Drought on Groundwater Resources of the Marshall Islands. Bandon Barky and Ryan Bailey, Colorado State University, 2017
79
Health Centers of Mejit, Ailuk (Ailuk and Enejelar), Likiep (Likiep and Jebal), Wotje (Wotje and Wodmej),

 Reverse Osmosis Units – Utrik, Rongelap and Enewetak (Northern Atolls) and Kili (Southern Atoll)
currently have RO units, which are supported through local supplier Mauna Marine or locally trained
staff (Rongelap and Enewetak). For Utrik and Kili the systems were designed to produce 15 liters per
person per day and then the equipment sizes were determined based on population served.
Maintenance contracts are provisioned through grant programs to support proper operation and
maintenance.
o Utrik - The RO system (installed in 2010) is the Spectra LB-1800 water treatment plant, which
includes two LB-1800, water making units (each rated for 6800 Liters/day), two XL4 solar and
wind power packs, a prefabricated building, and three 6600 liter catchment tanks. A well was
constructed to provide brackish feed water for the system. Only one LB-1800 unit is run each
day. (The capital cost for this system was approximately $270,000 plus transportation costs
allowing for local labor use). Utrik uses a small piped distribution system to provide water to
the residents from the RO system..
o Rongelap – This diesel driven RO Systems (installed in 2009) is rated for 22, 700 Liters (6000
G) per day and was installed in 2009, purchased by the US Department of the Interior. Local
residents operate and maintain the system costing in the order of $10, 000 yearly. This cost
does not include diesel.
o Kili – The RO system (installed in 2015) is the Spectra LB-2800 water treatment plant which
includes two LB-2800 water making units (each rated for 10600 liters), two XL 6 wind and
solar power packs, a prefabricated building, four 6600 liter catchment tanks, well construction,
installation, technician training, filters and chemicals for one year. Does not include shipping.
(The capital cost for this system was approximately $290,000 plus transportation costs
allowing for local labor use). A small piped distribution system is used to provide water to the
residents from the RO system.
o Enewetak - The RO system is the Spectra LB-2800 water treatment plant which includes two
LB-2800 water making units (each rated for 10600 liters), two XL 6 wind and solar power
packs, a prefabricated building, four 6600 liter catchment tanks, well construction, installation,
technician training, filters and chemicals for one year. Does not include shipping. (The capital
cost for this system was approximately $350,000 plus transportation costs allowing for local
labor use). Will be installed in 2017. A water distribution truck was purchased through
donations from JICA to help distribute the water to the residents.
Costs to maintain and operate the systems are covered by local government and external
grants, however the financial commitment is not sustainable without external grants as
indicated by the Mayors of Utrik, Rongelap and Kili.
 Solar distillation units are installed as part of a pilot program on Mejit Island, Ailuk, (Ailuk), Enejelar
(Ailuk), Jebal (Likiep), Likiep (Likiep), Wotje (Wotje), and Wodmej (Wotje). They are primarily installed
at health centers and operated and maintained by the Ministry of Health. They currently are not
producing water and are abandoned due to pump system failures that provide seawater to the solar
systems. Each unit produces 4 liters per day and can be installed into a bank of units to produce water.
Alternative and experimental systems

Hoop Solar Distillation System – is a pilot program that produces 1 liter per day per unit by, condensing
humidity from the air. The units have been installed and are managed/maintained at the health centers staff.
The units are primarily used for awareness training and for the community and are not considered as part of
a sustainable water security solution.
Solar Distillation Units – Solar distillation units are installed as part of a pilot program from PACC/SPC and
UNDP on Mejit Island, Ailuk, (Ailuk), Enejelar (Ailuk), Jebal (Likiep), Likiep (Likiep), Wotje (Wotje), and
Wodmej (Wotje). They are primarily installed at health centers and operated and maintained by the Ministry
of Health. Currently they are non-operational and are not producing water. They are abandoned due to
pump system failures that provide sea water to the solar systems. Each unit, if operational, produces 4 liters
per day and can be installed as a bank of units to produce larger amount of water potentially. The units are
capable of:
 Providing drinking water of reliable quality that meets EPA standards.
 Collecting rainwater when racked together.
 Produces marketable salt as a byproduct rather than a concentrated brine.

Due to the limited capacity to produce water in addition to the lack of acceptance, as evidenced by its
abandoned state, this solution is not included in the proposed water security interventions.
Summary of Desalination Installations:

Based on the several trials and errors experienced over the past few years of operating desalination in the
rural communities, following key success factors critical to the sustainable implementation of permanent
desalination units in the rural communities of RMI have been identified. These include:
1. installation and training conducted on site by manufacturer, supplier, or technical staff sufficiently
trained by manufacturer or supplier;
2. standard operating procedures for operation, maintenance and monitoring clearly defined and
understood by all stakeholders involved on site and in Majuro;
3. roles and responsibilities for operation, maintenance and monitoring designated officially;
4. adequate financing mechanism identified or established to perform operation, maintenance, and
monitoring for the typical 15 to 20 year lifecycle of the system.
Drought Response – Rural Communities
In RMI, the National Disaster Management Office coordinates with the Weather Service Office to determine
and validate if the residents within Atoll or community will experience a drought within the next 30 days using
the following procedure:
1. RMI Weather Service Office – communicates with the National Disaster Management office the
projected weather patterns and the possibility of drought conditions. The metrics used are:
a. For Northern Atolls (Utrik and Wotje) weather stations – if the forecast rainfall will be less than
150mm (6 inches) over the next 30 days then NDMO shall be informed.
b. For the Central Atolls (Majuro, Kwajalein and Ailinglaplap) weather stations - if the forecast
rainfall will be less than 200mm (8 inches) over the next 30 days then NDMO shall be informed.
c. For the Southern Atolls (Mili and Jaliut) weather stations - if the forecast rainfall will be less
than 250mm (10 inches) over the next 30 days then NDMO shall be informed.
2. NDMO – starts to communicate with the Atoll jurisdictional rural communities focal points and also the
local community leaders to identity the level of water available in their storage tanks. If the level is
less than 50 percent in more than 550 households in the affected area then NDMO takes the next
step in response.
3. Validation teams are organized and sent with response equipment to the affected communicate to
confirm the experience conditions and report back to the NDMO office which communicates to the
Office of Chief Secretary and the National Disaster Committee to advise the need for declaration of
state of emergency.
4. Validation teams consist of personnel from RMI Environmental Protection Agency who test both
stored water and ground water for quality. They communicate to the residents their findings and
support development of solutions relating to demand response. In addition, MWSC mobile reverse
osmosis technicians set up their stations in the event of need. Note it may take a week or more for
the validation team to organize and arrive on site to perform their tasks.
5. If there is an emergency declaration required the NDMO develops a response plan which is tailored
to the findings of the validation team including estimation of budget and resources for the necessary
response.
6. Identify contaminated wells with the community or household and organize cleaning to ensure that
this water source can be used for the upcoming drought. (The wells whether they were community
or HH owned were shared as necessary during times of water stress).
In response to potential drought conditions the validation team MWSC RO technicians with mobile
desalination units are deployed. MWSC currently has 54 RO desalination units (Figure 19) each with a
capacity of 1360 litres per day. The mobile RO units provide sufficient water for about 140 people assuming
a water need of 10 Lpcd to cover drinking, cooking and basic WASH needs or for 600 people assuming a
water need of 2.3 Lpcd covering only drinking/cooking needs.80
The units come complete with solar panels and batteries allowing them to run on a 24-hour basis. Deployment
is normally by a team of technicians, utilising a charter flight, who set up the unit in situ and handover the unit
80
This volume of water meets the requirements for short duration (<2 weeks) water availability based on WHO Guideline and Sphere Standard

to locally trained residents with oversight by council. After the drought emergency has passed, the
desalination unit is picked up and brought back to Majuro for maintenance and storage, so that it is ready for
service when needed next.
Figure 19: Emergency RO desalination unit with a capacity of 1360 litres/day
Due to experience from the 2013 and 2015/16 and the development of this procedure the coordination and
speed of setup and installation was improved, however problems due to limited maintenance and lack of
centralized storage space hamper effective timely deployment. In the 2016 drought response, deployment
was financed by USAID and RMI with assistance from JICA, Government of Australia. The cost included
provision of chartered boats and planes to deploy bottled water, WASH kits, food distribution, jerry cans,
hygiene soap mobile RO deployment and retrieval. For rural communities RO maintenance, currently 2 staff
from KAJUR and 3 staff from MWSC are required to provide support to the rural communities RO
maintenance – these technicians are required to travel to the 19 atolls once a month. This takes them away
from their work at the water utilities and limits their ability to respond to failures of the units in a timely manner
due to the long distances and the transportation capabilities between the islands and atolls.
When they are not deployed for drought response, the mobile RO units are stored and maintained by IOM
and MWSC. MWSC lacks of centralized warehouse for storage of these units, spare parts inventory and
proper testing centre for performing performance and preventative maintenance. This hampers their ability
to deploy the units in an efficient manner as well as ensure that the units are in good condition in
preparation of projected drought events.
3.3.3 Key Barriers – Rural Communities

Based consultations with community members during the project design phase and survey results from
previous studies the following are key barriers to water security to rural communities:
 Long distances between atolls require local self-supported solutions coupled with limited means for
transportation.
 Programmatic sustainable funding to support operations and maintenance of household and
community rainwater harvesting has not been developed.

 Programmatic sustainable funding to support operations and maintenance of desalination systems
has not been developed.
 Water Safety plans and asset management plans have not been developed in support of long-term
sustainability.
 Water Safety committees which are empowered to support proper practices and monitor condition of
water infrastructure have not been mandated, funded or developed for the community.
 Comprehensive standard operating practices for water resilience has not been provided to the
communities.
 Poorly functioning guttering systems for households with very limited first flush systems installed
which impacts water quality, poor material used for RWH systems and limited practices for
installations reducing the efficiency of capture of rainwater.
 Community buildings rainwater catchment systems are under utilized due to undersized connected
tanks and or no guttering system employed.
 Limited information on water quality testing of groundwater and rainwater harvested storage tanks to
help residents avoid contaminated water and limit medical incidences.
 Limited understanding of water lens thickness and monitoring – leading to poor understanding of
capacity of available groundwater resources.
 Limited information on number of groundwater wells and current condition – no programmatic
approach for capturing required information.
 Limited knowledge and capacity to support extensive maintenance and operations of infrastructure.
Mechanisms to support monitoring and enforcement of proper maintenance practices are not
accepted.
 Poor understanding of conservation measures communicated to the community.
 Weather information may not be specific enough for appropriate response measures (i.e. drought
forecasting, weather alerts and warnings). The need for more atoll specific information is necessary
to support specific response solutions and future planning.
 Communication of atoll or community specific information needs to be strengthened.
 Hygiene and WASH requirements are a challenge due to limited infrastructure (no toilets or wash
basins) and hampered by no budget available to maintain existing infrastructure.
 Limited capacity to store and maintain stock of mobile RO units in central warehouse. Deployment is
hindered due to minimum staff trained to install and maintain.
 There has been some evidence of safety issues during water collection by minors or women. Need
better mechanisms and understanding to provide safe points of access.
 Stationary desalination systems require financial support by external providers (not sustainable) due
to high operations and maintenance costs. Higher level of training required to maintain the systems.
4. Ongoing and Planned Efforts to Address Water Security

Various projects and initiatives to enhance water resilience in RMI are being implemented, ongoing, or
planned. Many of these initiatives are focused on water resource management and drought risk management,
while institutional capacity building initiatives are still very limited.
4.1 Water Resource Management
Public Water System Planning and Improvements – have been implemented and are ongoing in both
urban centers of Majuro and Kwajalein (Ebeye).
Recent and ongoing interventions include the following:

 In Majuro, efforts to climate-proof urban water supply system was supported by the Pacific Adaptation to
Climate Change (PACC) project (2009 – 2013, US$ 1.25 million financed by the Special Climate Change
Fund (SCCF) managed by the Global Environment Fund (GEF) and Government of Australia (formally
AusAID) implemented by SPREP in partnership with UNDP). The PACC project, based on a cost-benefit
analysis of different options, invested in relining (3 out of 6) and covering (1 out of 6) airport rainwater
reservoirs managed by MWSC at Majuro Airport, which increased rainwater storage capacity by 15%.
 In Ebeye, Master Plan for 2013 to 2025 was developed by the Asian Development Bank through a Project
Preparation Technical Assistance (PPTA) Project from 2013 – 2015 (US$ 1.37 financed by Multi-Donor
Trust Fund under the Water Financing Partnership Facility and Government of Australia). 5 major

components encompass the plan: Water Supply Master Plan for 2025 population projections; Wastewater
Master Plan; Electrical Master Plan; Hygiene Awareness and Education programs; and Project
Implementation assistance, Institutional Strengthening and Capacity Building.
 Implementation of the Master Plan is ongoing under the Ebeye Water Supply and Sanitation Project (2015
– 2017; US$ 19 million grant financing through ADB grant, Government of Australia Grant, and Grant
from Compact of Free Association Agreement)
 Currently, Majuro has developed a 20-year Master Plan through the Capital Improvement Program
financed by US Government managed by the Department of Interior, RMI Government and US
Department of Agriculture (2015 – 2016, US$ 1.96). The Master Plan focuses on institutional
strengthening, financial management and tariff reform. No financing has been confirmed for
implementation, though preliminary discussions are underway with various bilateral partners with the
finalization of the Plan completed in July 2017.
Furthermore, below initiatives are planned:

 Building on the Master Plan for urban Majuro that is underway through the Capital Improvement Program
currently under implementation, MWSC plans to implement the Majuro Water and Sanitation Master Plan
after the completion of all the technical feasibility studies, stakeholder consultations and engineering
designs in 2017. The estimated total budget for the Master Plan implementation is estimated at US$ 42
million for both water supply and sanitation improvements and expansions. No financing has been
identified to date; however, potential donors may include ADB, JICA and other bilateral partners.
Rainwater harvesting system installation and improvements – have been supported through national
and international financing.
Recent and ongoing interventions include the following:

 During the 2013 drought response in the RMI, the Marshall Islands Red Cross Society (MIRCS) and the
International Federation of Red Cross (IFRC) (IFRC post drought appeal, US$861,00081) implemented a
rainwater harvesting improvement program that targeted the following 3 atolls; Likiep Atoll, Mejit Island,
and Namu Atoll. The MIRCS/IFRC program built community catchments (for those areas with only thatch
roof), improved existing rainwater harvesting systems and promoted hygiene and education in schools
and communities. The WASH cluster considers this a very effective approach and during recent
assessments to these locations, the improvements made during 2013 remain and those homes with
proper guttering installed were capturing more water.
 At the household level, Government of RMI with support from international donors have an active
rainwater tank program serving remote island communities, where households now have a water tank of
over 3,785 liter (1,000 gallon) capacity. Government of Japan has also supported construction of water
reservoirs through Grassroots Grant funds made available at the Embassy of Japan in RMI. In November
2015, 2 water reservoirs, 75,708 liters (20,000 gallons) each were constructed for the local government
of Ailinglaplap Atoll (US$, 100,132. Japan Grass-Roots Grant). In June 2015, a 189,270 liters (50,000
gallons) water reservoir was constructed for the local government of Mejit Islands (Japan Grass-roots
Grant. US$ 100,000).
Rainwater harvesting system installation and improvements are completed at household and community
levels, in response to financial support made available after the 2015 / 2016 drought. These include:
 The Chief Secretary’s Office in partnership with Ministry of Public Works is upgrading rainwater harvesting
infrastructure at community buildings in the rural communities. (construction for Zone 1 and 2 catchments
2016 – 2017), US Department of Interior, US$ 1.9 million out of US$ 5 million secured). Zone 3
Construction dependent on securing further funding from Compact. Refer to FS Annex 12 for description
of size of catchments and community/atoll location, information provided by staff at Ministry of Public
Works (MPW). Under this Outer Island Water Catchment Project, a total of 30 new rainwater storage
tanks were installed during 2017 in 27 communities in 17 atolls (in priority Zones 1 and 2) with a total
installed capacity of 2,744 m³ (the tank sizes range from 47 to 189 m³). The RWH system gutters and
downpipes were also upgraded at the community buildings during construction of the new rainwater
storage tanks.
 Based on technical design and consultations conducted in 2016, GIZ through their Coping with Climate
Change in the Pacific Island Region (CCPR) Program had constructed additional RWH systems at the
81
IFRC. 2014. Emergency appeal final report Republic of the Marshall Islands: Drought. USAID. RMI Drought. Fact Sheet #4. September 2013.
https://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/documents/1866/09.30.13%20-%20USAID-
DCHA%20Republic%20of%20the%20Marshall%20Islands%20Drought%20Fact%20Sheet%20%234%20-%20FY%202013.pdf

three boarding high schools located in Jaluit, Wotje and Kwajalein (Gugeegue). Construction is planned
to commence in 2017, with an estimated budget of US$ 800,000.
 Rainwater Harvesting Improvement Program (2016, IOM, Ministry of Public WorksMIRCS, US$ 75K
financing from New Zealand Embassy) During the 2016 El Nino induced drought response, the WASH
Cluster developed a program to improve rainwater harvesting systems in the outer islands of RMI. IOM
received funding from the New Zealand Embassy to “pilot” or “test” the Program in three of RMI’s outer
islands. Funding was sufficient to cover fifty percent (50%) of households in Wotho, Ujae and Lae. Three
teams were created for implementation of the program using personnel from IOM, MIRCS and MPW.
IOM personnel acted as the “Team Leaders” and were responsible for overall implementation. The Public
Works personnel acted as the “Foremen” who had primary responsibility for the improvements /
construction. Finally, the MIRCS personnel were charged with “Community Liaison” responsibilities,
including the selection of beneficiary households and outreach to community members during
implementation. On average, each team had four (4) members: (1) Team Leader / IOM; (1) Foreman /
Public Works; and (2) MIRCS Community Liaison Volunteers. A total of 68 households were targeted for
improvement by the pilot project. During the implementation of the project in October and November
2016, a total of 64 households were direct beneficiaries. The project was concluded to be a success and
the approach was recommended for expansion to other atolls. The project report included a list of key
recommendations and considerations for future efforts and these are discussed further in Sections 7.3.2
and 10.1.2 (a key recommendation was to expand the approach to include community RWH
improvements).
Integrated Water Resource Management (IWRM) and Groundwater – is a priority issue for RMI, but most
efforts to date have been limited to the urban areas where significant improvements will be made through the
implementation of the Master Plans for MWSC and KAJUR. Apart from the public utility interventions, past
and ongoing IWRM and groundwater efforts include:
 The “Ridge to Reef - Testing the Integration of Water, Land, Forest & Coastal Management to Preserve
Ecosystem Services, Store Carbon, Improve Climate Resilience and Sustain Livelihoods in Pacific Island
Countries (Regional R2R Project)” (2016 - 2021. GEF Trust Fund. US$ USD 10 million) aims to further
scale this initiative in the Laura Community by scaling-up community adoption of appropriate on-site
waste management systems to improve environmental and public health at Laura Village; strengthening
the knowledge base for evidence-based integrated coastal management (ICM) planning for integrated
land, water, and lagoon resource/fisheries management at Laura; and integrated Coastal Management
planning, including the application of Marine Spatial Planning principles, for the promotion of sustainable
livelihoods in the Laura area.
 In Majuro, through the “Integrated Water and Land Management for the Sustainable use of the Laura
Water Lens, Majuro Atoll” project (2009 – 2015, GEF Trust Fund US$9 million, EU Pacific IWRM Planning
Programme funds US$2.8 million for 14 pacific countries) trialed integrated water resource management
in the Laura community and resulted in successful demonstration of 3 compost toilets, including one at
the Laura Lens Learning Centre. A 30% reduction in household water use is expected based on the
typical volume of a toilet flush and its contribution to total household daily use volume. Additional project
achievements include: 21 dry litter waterless piggery demonstration sites across Laura farms with
evidence of reduced small and nitrogen leaching from piggery farms utilizing dry litter pig pens;
Negotiation with the RMI Bank to provide micro loans for establishing dry litter piggeries (with one uptake
to date); 40 percent of all overloaded septic systems in Laura have been remediated; establishment of
the National IWRM Task Force; Establishment of the Laura Lens Community Advisory Committee to
oversee local implementation of IWRM activities; Establishment of the Laura Lens Learning Centre (see
photo above); Draft Water and Sanitation Bill well progressed towards Cabinet approval (some
amendments still required at the time of the TE assessment).
Planned efforts for IWRM including groundwater management include:

 The Reimaanlok – Looking to the Future: Strengthening natural resource management in atoll
communities in the Republic of Marshall Islands employing integrated approaches (RMI R2R) (OEPPC /
UNDP, GEF-5 Trust Fund, US$ 3.9 million, 2017 – 2022) aims to support operationalizing the Reimaanlok
– the National Conservation Area Plan, adopted in 2008 to effectively conserve at least 30% of the near-
shore marine resources and 20% of the terrestrial resources across Micronesia by 2020. By doing so,
the project objective is to sustain atoll biodiversity and livelihoods by building community and ecosystem
resilience to threats and degrading influences through integrated management of terrestrial and coastal
resources. The principles and processes outlined in Reimaanlok will be implemented in 5 islands/atolls
(Aur, Ebon, Likiep, Mejit, Wotho). Integrated water resource management will serve as an integral part

of the Reimaanlok process implemented in the target sites, with implementation of groundwater
monitoring and modeling planned for identified critical resources.
 The UNDP led “Managing Coastal Aquifers in Southern Pacific SIDS” project objective aims to improve
the understanding, use, management and protection of coastal aquifers in Tuvalu and RMI towards
enhance water security with the context of changing climate. (GEF Funded project $US 5.24M),
implementation expected to start in Feb 2018. The Outputs include:
o Enhanced understanding of locations of coastal aquifers and threats to the use of these aquifers
for domestic use.
o Develop improved management and protections mechanisms for the aquifers including better
governance at the national and community level.
 The proposed GEF-funded regional project “Managing Coastal Aquifers in Selected Pacific SIDS” covering RMI,
Palau and Tuvalu, which will improve the understanding, use, management and protection of coastal aquifers
towards enhanced water security within the context of a changing climate. This project with potential funding of
$5.24 million, will directly complement this proposed GCF project.
Additional UN Agency led programmes within the region include:
 The Pacific Adaptation to Climate Change Programme (and PACC+). USD 20 million over 5 years to support
policy development, governance and implementation capacity for 13 countries to pilot food security, water security
and coastal management resilience projects
 The Pacific Island Greenhouse Gas Abatement through Renewable Energy Project (PIGGAREP). USD 8.2 million
over 6.5 years to support an enabling environment for Renewable Energy (RE) investments and delivery of
practical RE solutions.
 GEF project on Implementing Sustainable Integrated Water Resource and Wastewater Management in the Pacific
Island Countries - under the GEF Pacific Alliance for Sustainability. USD 9.03 million, 14 Pacific SIDs,
 GEF Project on Testing the Integration of Water, Land, Forest & Coastal Management to Preserve Ecosystem
Services, Store Carbon, Improve Climate Resilience and Sustain Livelihoods in Pacific Island Countries. USD
9.83 million in 14 Pacific SIDs
 Project on Enhancing Capacity to Develop Global and Regional Environmental Projects in the Pacific. USD 1
million in 14 Pacific SIDs.
 Pacific Risk Resilience Program (PRRP). Funded by the Australian Government, USD 16.1 million, Fiji, Solomon
Islands, Tonga, and Vanuatu. Direct Implementation by UNDP.
 GEF project on Pacific Islands Oceanic Fisheries Management (PIOFMP 1). USD 11 million in 14 Pacific SIDs.
 GEF project on Implementation of Global and Regional Oceanic Fisheries Conventions and Related Instruments
in the Pacific Small Island Developing States (PIOFMP 2). USD 10 million in 14 Pacific SIDs.
Desalination – Significant international donor financing has been provided to stationary and mobile
desalination equipment with various size, location and technologies.
Existing and planned desalination systems are detailed in FS Annex 9. A summary is provided below:
Stationary Desalination Systems
 A grant from Japanese Pacific Environment Community Fund (PEC) (2011-2016, $4 million). The PEC
Fund Project purchased (15) 1,135 liters (300 gallons) per day RO systems to be distributed to the 15
Atolls in 2013. The majority of these units are not currently operational due to poor operations and
maintenance training and lack funding for purchase of spare parts.
 The Government of Japan has also financed 3 RO units (approx. 50,000 liters (132,000 gallons) per day
per unit) which will be installed in the hospital in Majuro and managed by MWSC along with water quality
testing equipment (2016. Government of Japan. Grant. US$ 569,000).
 IOM, through financing from Government of Australia has also provided 3 diesel powered desalination
units that were deployed in 2016 as part of the drought response efforts. These units were deployed in
the high schools of Jaluit, Wotje and Kwajalein (Gugeegue). Each RO provides 3028 liters per day (FCI
Water Makers 800 gpd) (2016, part of US$ 3.3 million financed by US Foreign Disaster Assistance
(OFDA), Government of Australia).
 Solar Water Purifiers that produce 4 lpd utilizing F-Cubed technology was deployed in health centers of
Mejit, Ailuk (Ailuk and Enejelar), Likiep (Likiep and Jebal), Wotje (Wotje and Wodmej) in 2014 / 2015 also
through the Pacific Adaptation to Climate Change (PACC) project (2009 – 2013, US$ 1.25 million financed
by the Special Climate Change Fund (SCCF) managed by the Global Environment Fund (GEF) and
Government of Australia (formally AusAID) implemented by SPREP in partnership with UNDP). However,
during the 2015 / 2016 drought preparation, very few of these units were found to be operating. Lessons
learned are analyzed in the technical evaluation chapter of the Feasibility Study.

Mobile Desalination Systems
 During the Northern Island Drought in 2013, FEMA provisioned mobile Reverse Osmosis (RO) units to
alleviate immediate and medium-term effects of the drought. ADB drew from its Asia Pacific Disaster
Response Fund in response to fund life-preserving services, including water assistance. (2013, Grant
financing from US FEMA/USAID - 2013-2014, US $5 million; ADB - 2013, US $300K).
 During the 2015 / 2016 drought, an additional 23 units with a capacity of 1,360 liters per day (360 gpd)
were purchased through by US Foreign Disaster Assistance (OFDA), USAID) funds as part of US$2.3
package. As a result, as of December 2018, there are 54 mobile desalination units managed between
NDMO / MWSC and IOM.
There are no planned additional stationary or mobile RO units apart from those indicated above (including
the SWRO unit to be upgraded through the Ebeye Water and Sanitation Project) in RMI as of December
2016.
4.2 Institutional Capacity Building

Initiatives working towards strengthening institutions are still very limited in RMI. However, now that the
national institutional framework is formalized under the amended National Environmental Protection Act and
National Water and Sanitation Policy, there is a significant opportunity and need to set up and initiate work
towards establishing and implementing capacity building at all levels in RMI.
Institutional strengthening and planning –envisioned to build on various existing and planned natural
resource management committees and disaster committees set up at the community levels.
 In the to present (ongoing to July 2018 under current funding), under the CADRE+ program (2015 –
2016. USAID/OFDA, US$ 1 million for RMI and FSM), IOM in partnership with NDMO has been targeting
at least 500 school-aged children and 5,000 community members across the 2 countries to build the
resilience of vulnerable communities to climate change and climate-induced hazards. Program activities
include establishing community disaster preparedness and response committees. As droughts are one
of the major disasters in many communities, significant linkages and collaboration and coordination with
water resource management committees and planning frameworks.
 Going forward, through the scaling of the Reimaanlok process, the RMI R2R project (OEPPC / UNDP,
GEF-5 Trust Fund, US$ 3.9 million, 2017 – 2022) aims to establish community level groups that analyze,
plans and make decision on natural resources on land and sea through a participatory bottom-up
approach. Freshwater resources are envisioned to be part of the natural resources planning of the
Reimaanlok process.
Water quality and quantity data gathering, monitoring and management – have been implemented for
groundwater and rainwater harvesting systems through various initiatives.
Past efforts include:
 Groundwater monitoring has been focused mainly in the two urban centers of Majuro and Kwajalein. In
Majuro, from 2011 – 2015, Japan International Research Center for Agricultural Sciences (JIRCAS)
assessed the sustainable daily pump discharge for Laura Lens based on numerical simulation was
performed using the SEAWAT model. Based on results found, JIRCAS developed a Laura Lens
Conservation and Management Manual.
 The Government of Japan in 2016 also provided grant financing to support EPA purchase 9 water quality
testing equipment to be used in Ebeye and Majuro.
 Water education and awareness raising efforts have been implemented by Pacific Resources for
Education Learning (PREL) in Hawaii in partnership with Ministry of Education through the Water for Life
(WfL) project. WfL project (US$2,842,492 financing from US National Science Foundation for RMI,
Chuuk, Yap and Palau. 2012 – 2017 (estimate)82) is a full scale development youth and community based
program centered on freshwater literacy, water conservation and rainwater harvesting. The goals of the
project are to: (a) promote an understanding of water conservation and stewardship in areas lacking
adequate quality water supplies and (b) build local capacity among rural communities to develop and
employ site specific freshwater harvesting strategies proven to improve water quality. In RMI, the project
is working with the Ministry of Education to upgrade existing catchment systems at all 12 public schools
around Majuro. Gutters have been replaced/repaired, screens and/or first-flush diverters installed, leaks
fixed, covers replaced, tanks cleaned/repainted, runoff/drainage improved, etc. Thousands of students,
as well as teachers, other school staff, and surrounding communities, now enjoy more ready access to
82
Source: National Science Foundation. https://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=1224185&HistoricalAwards=false

cleaner water. School-based Water Quality Management Teams (WQMTs) are now in place at all the 12
public schools in Majuro. These teams of students, teachers, and parents have taken three days of
training from RMI EPA staff and now maintain and monitor the schools’ water resources. WQMTs keep
roofs and gutters clean, empty first-flush diverters, and assess water quality in school dispensers,
reporting their data to RMI EPA monthly83. There is strong interest to scale these efforts at the national
level. Some efforts have already started in Ebeye. Through the Land to other outer island schools.
Planned and ongoing efforts include:
 The Strengthening Water Security of Vulnerable Island States (2016 - 2021, US$ 5 million across 5
countries financed by New Zealand Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (NZ DFAT) and
implemented by SPC) in the Marshall Islands a Water Security Officer has been appointed who will
support EPA and various stakeholders in RMI implement and enhance water monitoring, reporting, and
assessments, community awareness raising and training, community-level drinking water safety plans
and drought management plan development and piloting innovative technologies. The proposed ACWA
project will collaborate and partner very closely with the Water Security Officer throughout the project
implementation.
4.3 Drought Risk Management
Disaster risk reduction, management, and disaster and climate change awareness – have been
advanced through response initiatives after major drought events.
Past and ongoing efforts include:
 During the 2015/16, approximately US$ 2.5 million was provided from USAID’s Office of U.S. Foreign
Disaster Assistance (USAID/OFDA) to fund IOM for the procurement and distribution of supplemental
food assistance and WASH supplies to drought-affected communities. IOM is continuing to implement
the Climate Adaption, Disaster Risk Reduction, and Education (CADRE+) program in FSM and RMI.
Under the CADRE+ program (2015 – 2016. USAID/OFDA, US$ 1 million for RMI and FSM). IOM is
targeting at least 500 school-aged children and 5,000 community members across the 2 countries to build
the resilience of vulnerable communities to climate change and climate-induced hazards. Program
activities include establishing community disaster preparedness and response committees, developing
school emergency management plans and training teachers in climate change and evacuation center
management.
 Since 2010, IOM with financing from USAID/OFDA has worked on pre-position emergency relief supplies
in 3 strategic locations throughout FSM and RMI and develop standby agreements with island-based
organizations for logistical support during emergency response, if necessary (2016, USAID/OFDA,
US$ 46,000). In coordination with the pre-position supplies IOM manages the USAID funded five-year
(2013-2018) Disaster Preparedness for Effective Response (PREPARE) program with the goal of
increasing the resilience of FSM and RMI in mitigating the effects of natural disasters by enhancing
national and local capacities for disaster preparedness, response and recovery (July 2013-2018
approximately US$ 1,000,000 both countries).
 Government of Japan has also provided drought response in 2016, by supporting the Government of RMI
purchase 9,605 barrel of diesel to meet disaster response energy and logistics needs (Feb 2016.
Government of Japan Grant. approximately, US$ 720,000), providing 20 water filter pumps and 510
polyester water containers to be used in the drought-affected atolls and islands (March 2016. Government
of Japan Grant. approximately, US$ 44,000), and handing over 4 safety loader trucks to the Ministry of
Public Works to be used to deliver large amount of water to various communities’ water distribution points
/ stations (June 2016. Government of japan Grant. approximately, US$ 817,000).
 The Micronesia Red Cross Society (MRCS), the Pacific Red Cross Society (PRCS), and RMI National
Volunteer Group supported by the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
partnered with local government agencies, businesses, and communities to build awareness of disaster
response activities and cultivate a knowledgeable volunteer base for emergency responses. (2013 -
ongoing, Grant financing from USAID/OFDA - $260k).
 European Union – North Pacific Readiness for El Nino (RENI) Project – supporting communities to secure
food and water resources ahead of drought. By understanding individual and community key behaviors
and implementing measures through informed training for institutional and technical planning with focus
on Water Security in FSM and Palau and food security in RMI. (2017 – Grant Financing European Union
US$ 5.3M)
83
Source: Water for Life. http://w4l.prel.org/?page_id=44

Climate information and early warning – in RMI has evolved through the development of the establishment
and development of the Weather Service Office (WSO) in Majuro, which is the responsible agency in RMI for
providing weather services and related early warning programs.
 They are supported by United States Department of Commerce’s National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration National Weather Service (U.S NOAA NWS) in accordance with Article VII (Weather
Services and Related Programs) of the Compact Agreement (approximately US$ 500,000 annually84).
According to Sections 5 to 13 of Article VII of the Compact Agreement, U.S NOAA NWS provides weather
services through a WSO in Majuro. Furthermore, the National Weather Service Pacific Region
Headquarters (NWSPRH) that based in Honolulu, Hawaii Islands via a contract between U.S NOAA NWS
and the Government of the Republic of Marshall Islands provides administration, financial, operational,
management and oversight assistance to WSO Majuro. Weather Forecast Offices (WFOs) Guam and
Honolulu prepare and provide weather forecasts, watches, warnings and advisories for Micronesia
(Federated States of Micronesia, Republic of Palau, Republic of Marshall Islands and Northern Marinas)
through their respective WSOs.85
 Marshall Island is also part of the Finnish-Pacific project (FINPAC) project, which is a four-year, 3.7
million Euro, regional project funded by the Government of Finland and coordinated through the
Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme (SPREP) with a range of partners.
FINPAC aims to improve livelihoods of Pacific island communities by delivering effective weather, climate
and early warning services. The project commenced in 2013. In RMI, the FINPAC project is supporting
community-based climate early warning assessment and implementation in the Jenrok community of
Majuro with partnership with the IFRC and MIRC.
Furthermore, planned efforts for Disaster risk reduction, management, and disaster and climate change
awareness and Climate information and early warning in RMI include:
 World Bank supported RMI Pacific Resilience Project (PREP) Phase II (US$ 36.2 million. Financing to
be sourced from International Development Association (IDA) and GCF) focuses on: institutional
Strengthening early warning and preparedness; strengthening coastline resilience in Ebeye, and
Contingency Emergency Response. Under the first component, human resources, technical, and hard
investments are planned to:
a) Support the government to integrate climate change adaptation with disaster risk management
as foreseen in the JNAP and to help fully operationalize the central and local government
levels;
b) Promote multi-hazard early warning systems (e.g. data management) - prepare a clear system
and technology roadmap for outer island communications, establish communications systems
(e.g. radio system, Chatty beetle or others) in remote locations and train people to use them;
and
c) Prepare a detailed roadmap for NDMO modernization, including accommodation and fit-out;
develop and implement priority activities of the roadmap subject to available funding.
 Disaster Resilience for Pacific Small Island Developing States (SIDS) (RESPAC) (Implemented by UNDP
with financial support from the Russian Federation. US$ 7.5 million across selected 14 Pacific Island
Countries. 2016 – 2018) aims to improve Pacific SIDS’ resilience to climate-related hazards by: 1)
Strengthened early warning and climate monitoring capacity in selected PICs, 2) enhancing preparedness
and planning mechanisms and tools to manage disaster recovery processes at regional, national and
local level; and 3) Increased use of financial instruments to manage and share disaster related risk and
fund post disaster recovery efforts. In RMI, RESPAC is planning to support WSO to improve their weather
and climate information monitoring, forecasting and warning capacities.
4.4 Key Findings
There are a number of past and existing initiatives underway within RMI to address water security and
resilience. Key topics included:
Water Resource Management:
 Public Reticulation System improvements are ongoing and currently under development in Majuro
(MWSC) service area and Kwajalein (KAJUR -Ebeye) service areas.
84
Operating budget provided by NOAA is approximately US$ 500,000 annually (Source: Interview with WSO, April 2016)
85
Taiki, Henri. (2014). Final Report on Republic of Marshall Islands Regional Basic Synoptic Network (RBSN) Stations(31 October 2014) Prepared by Mr Henry
Taiki (WMO Office in Apia)

• Master plan for KAJUR (2013 to 2025) is funded and implementation is underway. Further
funding under this project is not required for the KAJUR service area but islands not
connected with the KAJUR system (part of Kwajalein atoll) are to be considered as part of
rural communities requirements and considerations.
• 20Y Master planning is underway with MWSC however funding has not been secured for
implementation. Technical feasibility study to be completed by mid-2017 is underway,
initial estimates indicate $42M improvements required for water and sanitation
infrastructure.
• Successful completion of the PACC project which piloted relining and covering airport
catchment system for three out of six reservoirs and covering of one.
 Rainwater Harvesting Improvements – there have been a number of initiatives for improving RWH
systems and capacity building within the rural communities, often connected to disaster response.
The IOM Rainwater Harvesting Improvement pilot project implemented in 2016 in Wotho, Ujae and
Lae atolls was a success. The project concluded that the household RWH improvement approach
should be scaled to other atolls after incorporation of the project recommendations (a key
recommendation was to expand the approach to include community RWH improvements).
 WASH and IWRM Initiatives – similar to the RWH improvements sectoral improvements (example
schools have been improved) or specific regions (Laura Wells – Majuro) have been completed. The
lessons learned from them have not been fully up-scaled to other regions that also have similar needs.
The Ridge to Reef (2016 to 2021) and Reimaanlok projects (2017 to 2022) will address lessons
learned for integrated coastal management and terrestrial resources.
 Desalination Systems (Stationary and Mobile) – installation of stationary systems through grant
programs in response to DRM specifically for provision of safe water during times of drought have
focused on schools (JICA and EU – GIZ) and the Majuro Hospital have been underway for many
years in RMI. Mobile systems have been procured through disaster response grants primarily and
RMI has a total of 54 units that can be deployed to communities in need to producing 1360 liters per
day. Stationary desalination systems have high operational costs which cannot be borne by the rural
communities which depend on grant funding to support operations and maintenance of the existing
units. In addition limited staff and training to maintain the proper operations of the equipment is noted
as part of existing conditions and capacity of the community.
Institutional Capacity
• Institutional -Very limited funded initiatives are underway.
• The CADRE+ program which is facilitated by IOM on behalf of NDMO and are developing
disaster preparedness and response committees in select communities.
• Planning within the Reimaanlok and RMI R2R projects will build capacity of community
groups to establish help decide best use of natural resources (land and sea including
freshwater resources).
 Water Quality – Information is limited to scope of smaller projects, EPA does not regularly test for
water quality in catchments/tanks or groundwater for rural communities.
Drought Risk Management

 Multiple efforts underway preparing for future drought with expansion of awareness and training
programs, pre-positioning of equipment, small equipment purchases etc.
 Enhancement and support of weather information through partnerships with NOAA NWS in
coordination with weather stations in Guam and Hawaii.
 Planned projects include World Bank PREP Phase II institutional strengthening of early warning
systems and preparedness and RESPAC – did not address secondary weather station improvements.
Key gaps in water resources, institutional capacity building and drought risk management remain that will
need to be identified in the next section as part of the continued baseline assessment.
4.5 Remaining Gaps

4.5.1 Water Resource Management
Currently, inadequate rainwater harvesting infrastructure and a lack of groundwater well protection in
combination with high rainfall variability results in water shortages during drought periods. In many
communities in both urban and rural communities of RMI, households rely primarily, and often solely, on their
household RWH systems.

Efforts have been implemented and are underway in RMI to reduce this vulnerability to drought through
expanding the water supply infrastructure. The availability of options and strategies for freshwater access
vary from urban and rural Marshallese populations. Urban areas of RMI include areas in Majuro and
Kwajalein atolls that are within the service area of the public water utility companies – MWSC and KAJUR.
Rural areas in RMI include all the remaining local government jurisdictions in the rural communities as well
as communities in Majuro and Kwajalein that are not within the service areas of the public utility companies.
In urban RMI, increasing access, reliability and service levels of the piped water systems can provide
significant water security improvements to residents living in their service areas by serving as a primary or
secondary water resource. Efforts are already underway to define goals and detail the process of enhancing
the piped water systems through the Master Plan development processes for MWSC and KAJUR. While the
piped water system upgrade is already in implementation in KAJUR, MWSC is still in the planning phase.
For MWSC, gaps remain in identifying financial resources to implement the Master Plan, which was finalized
in July 2017.
In rural RMI, water security solutions depend on improving existing systems as well as better utilizing
available resources through a more participatory and holistic, water resource management approach.
Based on evaluation of past successful trialed projects the water security options include: 1) improving
existing systems, including household RWH systems, community RWH systems, and stationary desalination
units (in selected communities); 2) expanding rainwater capture and storage capacities; 3) exploring non-
rainwater dependent freshwater resources (i.e. stationary desalination systems; 4) improving the
understanding of the quality and quantity of groundwater resources; and 5) improving conservation and
efficient use practices
Although various initiatives have been implemented in the rural communities of RMI to improve water security
options, remaining gaps exist as described below:
1) Improving existing systems, including household RWH systems, community RWH systems, and review of
stationary desalination units (in selected communities):
 Poor operation and maintenance capacities of water investments are a key barrier to increasing the
quantity (through efficiency improvements) and quality of freshwater resources in rural RMI. Some
successful initiatives to train communities in operations and maintenance of RWH systems have been
trialed in selected atolls and islands, but there is a significant gap in scaling this to other local
government jurisdictions and communities.
 The efficiency and effectiveness of the various stationary desalination units to provide reliable
freshwater resources depends on the type of technology and the available support provided for
operation and maintenance and training. While systems owned and operated by municipal
governments have trained technicians in Majuro and the rural communities responsible for operation
and maintenance, other systems lack people trained and responsible for operation and maintenance.
Grants are required by external providers to support the operations and maintenance costs for fuel or
spare parts. Therefore, this is not financially sustainable in the long-term.
 Further details of gaps and options are provided in FS Section 7: Options Review.
2) Expanding rainwater capture and storage capacities;

 Various projects have undertaken placements and/or construction of new household RWH tanks in
rural RMI and most households surveyed during past assessments and the project design process
were found to have at least 1 if not 2 tanks86 . The exact gaps for the number and conditions of the
household RWH tanks, need to be assessed per community as this information is not available and
has been extrapolated based on available information during the project validation phase.
 At the community level, although several initiatives are ongoing to improve and expand community
RWH storage, gaps remain to further expand storage capacities through improving unutilized
community storages (i.e. leakage reduction – by sealing or relining used WW2 concrete tanks) and
adding additional storage tanks to fully utilize the roof catchments.
 In some communities, there is a possible gap and opportunity to construct roofing for RW capture,
along with additional tanks for storage.
 Further details of gaps and options are provided in FS Section 7: Options Review.
86
Normally sized at 4.5 / 5.7 / 6.1 m3

3) Exploring non-rainwater dependent freshwater resources (i.e. stationary desalination systems)
 Based on stakeholder consultations conducted during the project design, no gaps were identified for
additional stationary desalination systems to be placed in rural RMI apart from those already planned
for installation by other initiatives (i.e. Australia, Japan, etc.)
 During the project design consultations strong interests were shown to explore alternative and
experimental technologies. For example, technologies such as the HOOP Solar Distillation System,
which is a University of South Pacific led pilot program that utilizes local materials to construct a
system that can produce 1 liter per day per unit, were found important, not only as a potential
freshwater resource, but also for communities to explore low-cost, low-technology and self-sufficient
alternative options for freshwater resources.
4) Improving the understanding of the quality and quantity of groundwater resources; Groundwater resources
can potentially serve as critical alternative freshwater resources especially in times of low precipitation.
However, Some initiatives have been implemented where groundwater quality have been tested. Good
quality information is available especially for the Laura Lens in Majuro only.
 For the rural communities of RMI, groundwater data available is inconsistent in terms of defining
location, water quality and water lens quantity parameters.
 Under the National Water and Sanitation Policy, the importance of developing a comprehensive
strategy and methodology for groundwater monitoring is elaborated; however, gaps remain in terms
of identifying the financial and technical resources for implementation.
 The “Managing Coastal Aquifers in Southern Pacific SIDS” project will build on better understanding
of the existing aquifer systems but does not include components to build protection of well systems
from contamination.
5) Conservation and Water Smart Use Practices

 Understanding the triggers and atoll specific practices for employing conservation measures based
on each type of drought forecasted.
 Educating and awareness communication materials develop and distributed to all of the communities
to manage non-essential water use and encourage review their rainwater harvesting systems and
storage tanks to ensure they are properly functioning and clean with updated O/M practices.
4.5.2 Institutional Capacity

RMI is just embarking on strengthening their institution systems, with a strong recognition and awareness of
the critical role it plays in strengthening water resilience at the national, subnational, and community levels.
As described in above sections, at the national level, the National Water and Sanitation Policy as well as the
recently amended National Environmental Protection Act formalize the political accountability mechanisms.
Building on this national framework, RMI aims to further advance comprehensive and integrated
implementation at all levels in RMI.
Based on the rapid water governance assessment, gaps to be tackled include:

 Limited coordination, reporting and accountability mechanisms related to water security and resilience at
all levels.
community levels.
transparency and evidence-based participatory decision-making at all levels.
 Limited accountability frameworks and participation at all levels.
 Limited effectiveness, especially in terms of functioning institutions at the subnational level and
coordination mechanisms with other sectors.
 Limited information, capacity, authority and funding available to support local community level in outer
atolls.
As a result, current capacity building from economic, social, environmental and political dimensions are
challenges in RMI.

4.5.3 Drought Risk Management
Drought risk management efforts have improved substantially since 2013 while RMI have been transitioning
from a U.S. government supported drought response approach to a more nationally-led drought risk
management approach. However, remaining gaps have emerged, and have been confirmed especially
through the most recent drought experience in 2015 / 2016.
Recognizing lessons learned and gaps, initiatives are ongoing and underway to strengthen institutional
capacities of NDMO at the national level. At the subnational and community levels, efforts to establish
disaster focal points and committees are advancing, but need further financial resources and technical
support to scale to cover all of the vulnerable communities, especially in rural RMI. The Weather Services
Office is able to provide 30 days warning to communities on the potential for upcoming droughts. The key
issues are the response from the residents to change their practices for demand conservation,
4.5.4 Key Findings

Water Security
 RWH Systems for both household and community building are poorly designed to maximize capacity
or in poor condition or both that reduces effective capture of rainwater. Poor operations and
maintenance practices utilized by the residents exacerbate these limitations.
 Stationary desalination systems are not supported effectively due to lack of trained personnel to
support operations and maintenance. Key issue is reliance on external funding providers through
grants to maintain operations costs.
 Despite multiple efforts to add capture or capacity of RWH or storage tanks within a community –
limited results due to non-holistic approach.
 There is a need to better understand the availability and quality of groundwater sources to serve as
an alternate source of fresh water. Lack the resources or funding to support comprehensive program
that reaches the outer atolls.
 Safe and sustainable sanitation options need to be developed because existing infrastructure often
depends on rainwater to support WASH. Limited programs have been developed to deal with
successful sanitation and hygiene implementation.
Capacity Building
community levels
 Limited accountability frameworks and participation at all levels.
 Limited effectiveness of functioning institutions at the subnational level and coordination mechanisms
with other sectors.
Drought Risk Management
 The weather service lacks equipment and trained personnel on strategic atolls to better collect and
subsequently analyze, with proper granularity, data to inform seasonal and immediate weather
patterns.
 Disaster response, using mobile RO units and MWSC personnel, is hampered by limited storage
space for centralized testing and maintenance location of equipment and personnel. Additional
factors includes limited number of trained personnel to support operation and maintenance of both
stationary and mobile systems.
 Sea level and tidal changes from the northern atolls cannot be measured due to lack of equipment
and they are subsequently more exposed without sufficient warning on possible events.
5. Challenges to Support Water Security and Adaptation Practices

5.1 Problems and Root Causes
Problem: Water Insecurity

 Despite diverse and numerous water related investments made in urban and rural communities the
people of RMI still do not have year-round access to safe freshwater supply for drinking and cooking.

 The RMI Government has announced a State of Emergency due to severe drought most recently in 2017
for Northern Atolls, and for all atolls in 2015/2016 and 2013/2014, they have expended significant financial
resources to deploy drought response efforts in urban and rural RMI with support from external parties.
 There is little confidence at the national, subnational and community levels that there is sufficient water
infrastructure, human capacities, financial resources, and institutional mechanisms in place to avoid and
mitigate water shortages in RMI, especially with the projected impacts of climate change.
 In addition to concerns of climate change, the high cost and frequency of drought response is a significant
concern to RMI government, given that the Compact agreement with the United States, which currently
provides substantial financial support to RMI Government including assistance for drought response
through USAID, is expected to end in 2023.
 If water insecurity continues or exacerbates, RMI’s socio-economic development is at threat. Migration
is already increasing, from rural to urban areas, as well as from RMI to abroad. Young people migrate
often in search of better living conditions and economic opportunities , which are further jeopardized in
RMI with increasing water insecurity.
Root Causes:
Many of the past water security interventions have been one-off efforts financed through time-bound projects,
often initiated through drought response efforts. In other words, water investments in RMI to date have been
allocated reactively after a drought event, rather than strategically placing investments to avoid or mitigate
droughts and/or to holistically strengthen and improve the freshwater resource system in which communities
rely on during drought and non-drought times. Given this context, these previous water interventions focused
more on one-off infrastructure investment, with limited time and resources allocated for integrated and
participatory planning, operations and management. They were also often time-bound and geared towards
quick-fix solutions, with very little time and resources spent to identify where, how and why these investments
are placed and how the communities themselves may be able operate and maintain them.
This has been exacerbated by the fact that national and subnational institutions and institutional framework
for water is yet to be fully set up in RMI. There is a lack of coordinated and officially endorsed water security
targets, good practices, institutional set up, roles and responsibilities the various actors, and implementation
plans backed up by historical data and evidence. This makes it difficult for stakeholders, including decision-
makers, beneficiaries, and financiers, to effectively and strategically identify and place water resilience
interventions when resources become available (often with a limited funding window). The reactive approach
has also risks the participation of vulnerable groups, such as women, children, and people with disabilities
actively participate in the design, decision, and implementation of water resilience efforts.
5.2 Adaptation Solutions – Paradigm Shift

Strengthening water security to ensure that people in RMI have year-round access to safe freshwater
resources is a paramount climate change adaptation concern and priority for RMI. This transformation will be
catalyzed, coordinated, and sustained through the implementation of the sustainable infrastructure with
SOP’s that inform and align with the National Environmental Protection Act and the National Water and
Sanitation Policy. Furthermore, existing water resources will be assessed, monitored and recorded across
resource types, locations, and timescales to inform effective management and use. Based on the specific
community context, examined alongside good practices and lessons learned, appropriated demand
management measures will be discussed, determined, designed, implemented, operated, monitored, and
maintained through a participatory process.
The paradigm shift potential of this project from a preventive risk management approach to a holistic and
integrated approach. Combined with proposed community managed and monitored water supply solutions
for year-round access of safe water as well as local and national institutional capacity building for climate
demand management and improved drought preparedness planning . Another key feature of the holistic
approach is the integration of actions in various levels, from community to local, regional and national
institutional levels.
All of these efforts are bolstered and sustained through improved operation, maintenance and management
capacities and coordination instilled among households, community groups, municipal governments,
technical officers, and national government staff, civil society organizations, private sector, academic
institutions, and regional and international agencies. Targeted training and capacity building opportunities

will be designed and delivered in partnership with existing national and regional training institutions and
mechanisms
Significant awareness raising and communication efforts will allow for a social-movement, culture, and
ecosystem of water resilience to develop and evolve at all levels. Through simple, accessible, integrated,
and intuitive tools, platforms, channels, and mediums, using both modern and traditional technologies, a hub
of information, knowledge, communication, and data for water will be activated.
The transformed, adaptive and resilient water resource management efforts in RMI will closely coordinate,
collaborate, and contribute to advancing disaster risk management in RMI including risk management for
drought. Furthermore, it will also coordinate closely with other key sectors such as agriculture, infrastructure,
education, health, rural development, and environmental protection and as a result play a critical role in
advancing RMI’s Sustainable Development Goals.
In light of above context of RMI, a climate-resilient adaptation solution is to develop an water management
system at national and atoll/island levels comprised of multiple water resource options (rainwater, and
groundwater). This system will be managed through a robust institutional framework with strong collaboration
both laterally and vertically coordinated under a national authority for water – the Water Office newly
established under the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA). Standard operational procedures (SOPs)
for monitoring and data management will be developed and implemented for effective planning and adaptive
management. The implemented water security systems will be cost-effective and financially sustainable,
which is able to maintain service levels in the context of climate change, particularly under greater rainfall
variability and extended periods without rain. Improved communication of weather and climate information
would be needed for evidence-based planning and preparation for extreme weather events. Capacity
development of national, subnational (municipal and traditional), and community stakeholders involved in
installation, management, monitoring, and operation of the system is critical to provide the appropriate
knowledge, skills, leadership and decision-making capacities required to ensure sustainable production,
monitoring and distribution of safe freshwater resources throughout the country. In order to achieve the above
solution, there are a number of barriers that need to be addressed.
5.3 Theory of Change

Figure 20: Theory of Change
As presented in the theory of change (Figure 20) main problems include several aspects related to the lack
of safe water sources; better understanding of use of alternate (non-potable) water sources and optimizing

disaster risk response from national to community level to limit impact of unsustainable practices and lack
of planning on the water resources for the Outer Atolls.
Barriers to address existing problems are associated with limited capacities including financial, technical
and knowledge of local communities and governments to respond to the climate change risks and manage
water resources; addressing best practices to operate and maintain infrastructure; limited understanding of
groundwater capacity and quality and alternate use; limited institutional capacities for coordinating
resources of local, government and community based organizations related to drought preparation and
response.
GCF funding and RMI co-financing will support the implementation of upgrades of RWH at household and
community building level to meet the climate induced longer drought periods and to cover the baseline
drought periods and resultant water gaps. In addition, new storage at existing community buildings and
new rainwater catchment systems complete with additional storage will be implemented depending on the
community assesses water gaps using a cost effective mix of interventions.. (Output 1).
Protecting groundwater from increased frequency of inundation to ensure that the common water lens does
not increase in salinity due to increase frequency of inundation of seawater from increase intensity of over-
wash water due to increased intensity storms and more frequent higher tides (including King Tides) . In
addition identifying options in the different uses of ground water (eg. home gardening, washing clothes and
households) coupled with awareness and adaptation training leading towards demand reduction of higher
quality harvested rainwater (demand management would contribute to improved water resources
management by vulnerable households and communities (Output 2).
GCF funding could support national government and local government barriers related to drought
preparedness/response and contingency planning . Further developing or memorializing the procedures
and practices relating from nation to community coordination based on types of information provided and
implementation communication practices on the relevant issues. This includes development of national
and community level coordinated water management and climate change adaptation within a
community/atoll approach through Water Safety plan development. In addition development of best
practice SOPs in owning, operating and maintaining will be developed and communicated to support
affected local households and community building owners/manager to ensure RWH and storage systems
are installed, operated and maintained properly. Training shall be provided to women and children (who
often have are tasked to support or perform this activity. Specific SOP’s will be developed to identify best
practices in operations and maintenance identifying proper methods, tools needed and frequency to
perform required tasks. These activities will contribute to strengthen understanding and systemizing
operational understanding of the infrastructure and the importance of maintaining them to support water
quality and quantity (captured and stored) to ensure long term health of the residents especially in times of
drought. (related to sustainably supporting Output 1).These activities will contribute to strengthen
understanding and systemizing knowledge of the impacts of climate change on water management (Output
3).
5.4 Institutional and Financial Barriers

5.4.1 Institutional Barriers
The Rapid Water Governance assessment found that there is an acute awareness and political will to
enhance water resilience through strengthening water governance mechanisms in RMI. Furthermore,
various stakeholders are already engaged with integrated water resource management mainstreamed into
their policy and strategies, thus providing an opportunity for multi-stakeholder water governance. At the
national level, the National Water and Sanitation Policy as well as the recently amended National
Environmental Protection Act formalize the political accountability mechanisms for water governance. This
can be utilized as the overarching framework to advance comprehensive and integrated water governance
implementation at all levels of governance in RMI.
In implementing this national priority for water, significant gaps remain in terms of stakeholders and
institutions, governance principles and effectiveness from environmental, social, political and economic levels.
These include:

community levels
 There tends to be a disconnect between community-based and national level water coordinating
mechanisms.
 Limited institutional capacity at sub national and community level on good practices in water management,
water quality management, and drought preparedness.
 Limited accountability frameworks and participation at all levels of governance
 Limited effectiveness of water governance especially in terms of functioning institutions at the subnational
level and coordination mechanisms with other sectors.
 Stakeholders and institutions working on political (i.e. participatory decision-making process related to
water resources and distribution), social (i.e. equitable access and distribution, including women, children
and vulnerable groups) and economic (i.e. application of cost effective and efficient solutions) dimensions
of water are still limited at all levels.
As a result, current water governance from economic, social, environmental and political dimensions can
be improved to ensure sustainable access to safe drinking water.
5.4.2 Financial Barriers
Financial barriers at country level

The national level fiscal situation of the RMI is presented with key observations as follows:
Overall GDP generally fluctuates between -1.6 to 3.5% (except for the year FY2005 when it plunged to -
22.3%) which relates to limited capacity for government to affect fiscal balance. The fiscal position of the
government appears unrelated to the economic cycle. For example, the government ran surpluses
during the financial crisis of FY2008-FY2009 period (when real GDP growth was negative), but ran deficits
in FY2012 and FY2013 when conditions had improved.
250 10
8
200 6.4 In percentage
6
3.5 3.7 3.2
In US $ mn
150 3.6 2.8

2.9 2.1 4
1.5 1.5 2.3
100 3.4 2
(0.08) (0.7)
0.3 1.7 -
50 (1.6) 0.2 (0.2) 0.6
(2)
(0.9)
(1.6) (1.7)
0 (4)
FY2004 FY2005 FY2006 FY2007 FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 FY2014 FY2015
Estd.
GDP at current prices Annual growth in real GDP (%) Fiscal balance (% of GDP)
Source: Statistical Appendices, Economic Review for FY 2015 of GRMI; the annual growth in real GDP of (-) 22.3% in FY2005 was
an outlier and hence not shown in the above exhibit
Figure 21: Macro-fiscal position of RMI since the amended Compact
Key observations emerging from analysis of varied revenues sources of government of RMI are as follows:
 Non-buoyant tax revenue base: The major source of tax revenue is income tax, accounting for
US$11.8 million, or 39% of a total tax yield of US$30.9 million in FY2015. This income tax, with customs
and other import duties constitute second most significant category in terms of yield have not risen
significantly with rise of revenues for the government of RMI.
 Undiversified base of non-tax revenues: The collection from non-tax revenue sources of the RMI is
around $ 17.8 million in FY2015, of which more than 88% is provided through fishing fees (i.e.
royalties). Limited diversity in attaining revenue due to lack of diversity of private sector.

 Diminishing but substantial dependence on grants: Though steadily declining especially since
FY2010, dependency of the government on grants is still significant which account for over 50% of its
expected revenues in FY2015. With regard to the grants from US (the single largest source), annual
assistance to the RMI under the amended Compact has been diminishing since 2003. After the
Compact grant period expires in 2024, the RMI is expected to complement domestic revenues with
returns from the Compact Trust Fund, which receives annual savings from fiscal surpluses and
contributions from development partners.
 Limited capacity to support technical solutions that require high operating and maintenance
funding: The earning potential of residents within the Outer Atoll residents will limit their capacity to
bear the costs of more expensive operating and maintenance solutions. As explained in Section 1 they
have limited income resulting in high poverty rates due to limited employment or agricultural/farming
income.
Further details related to RMI revenue profile (taxes, fees etc.), expenditure profile (government payments
for salaries spending of goods/services) and public debt profile are provided in Proposal Annex III Financial
Assessment.
5.4.3 Key Findings
Problems and Root Causes
 Despite many water related investments, which were often short duration and responding to current
needs only, within RMI the people still do not have year-round supply of safe water supply. This is
due to limited infrastructure, human and financial resources supported by effective institutional
mechanisms.
 This reactive approach is often uncoordinated with limited opportunity for participatory approaches
which in turn erodes the effectiveness of the initiatives.
Adaptation Solution
Coordinated evidence based solutions need to be developed and implemented with complementary capacity
building to support effective sustainable water security and demand management measures. Participation
by the knowledgeable community, which has the capacity and has been trained to takes ownership of
monitoring, maintaining and operating both water security and resilience measures is crucial. Key barriers
to address are institutional and financial considerations in delivering a cost effective and financially
sustainable solution.
 Institutional Barriers – limitations in terms of institutional capacity at both national institution to carry
out their mandate and community levels to provide on the ground support. This is further hampered
by lack of adequate information to develop evidence based solutions.
 Financial Barriers – household incomes and overall revenue generation within the Outer atolls is very
low and therefore the end users will not be able to make significant financial contribution to both
capital expenditure and annual O&M costs. Therefore external grant finance is required for this project
to complement co-financing by Government of RMI.
6. Intervention Development – Design Process

6.1 Design Process
The previous sections of the Feasibility Study provided RMI’s water context, baselines, and remaining gaps
towards achieving water resilience. The next sections of the Feasibility Study examines the various options
available to fill remaining gaps, and puts forward the technical design that is best suited for the context of
RMI in achieving improved water security and water resilience in the face of climate change.
The design process is outlined in Figure 22.

1. Defining project 4. Implementation
2. Options review 3. Technical Design
target & principles Strategy
• Setting the water • Review of various • Detailing technical • Partners

security target and approaches (technology design in terms of: • Logistics
design criteria / equipment & program) •Where • Financial sustainability
• Defining design that can potentially • What • M&E
principles achieve the target
• How many
• Assess approaches
• Why
against design
principles
Figure 22: Design Process
6.2 Water Security Definitions
Water security is defined as people’s ability to access safe freshwater resources year-round. To ensure
water security under the context of climate change adaptation coupled with an informed understanding of
demand for water resources it is important to compensate for the projected changes in precipitation and sea
level rise.
Both quantitative and qualitative indicators are used to define and monitor water security levels. One
indicator is the amount of fresh water supplied per capita per day. There are a number of national and
international guidelines for the quantity of water required per capita per day to ensure access to sufficient
water needed to maintain health and well-being. The guidelines listed in Table 23 vary significantly based
on the end use of water and the duration of use.
Table 23: Comparison of Global and RMI Daily Water per Capita Figures

L / capita / day Description of the standard Source
(Lpcd)
2.5 – 3 Lpcd87 Minimum daily water intake needed for drinking and food for survival WHO. 2011. Sphere Standard.88
needs. Intended for very short duration.
15 Lpcd Minimum water intake needed for drinking and cooking. Standard WHO & IOM 201189
intended to guide water levels that need to be supplied through
emergency provisions (i.e. water bottles or desalination devices that
produce potable water). Intended for short duration of one to two
weeks.
20 Lpcd Sufficient daily water to support drinking, cooking and personal WHO and SDG90
hygiene. Suitable for duration of 3 months or more.
38 Lpcd91. Average Daily Fresh Water Use per person with saltwater at non- RMI National Water and
residential building (in Majuro) Sanitation Policy
38.6 Lpcd92 Majuro’s daily water consumption level planned for in the Majuro within RMI Government 2015
Drought Management Plan
56.8 Lpcd Basic water needed daily for drinking, cooking, hygiene and washing Gleick, 199693
100 Lpcd Basic water needed daily for drinking, cooking, hygiene and washing Gleick, 199694
plus crop irrigation
170 Lpcd95 Average Daily Fresh Water Use per person with saltwater available at RMI National Water and
residence (in Majuro) (2014) Sanitation Policy
Water security can be significantly enhanced throughout RMI if people can have access to adequate amount
of safe freshwater resources during this time, and emergency drought response can be mitigated or avoided.
Given this context water insecurity in RMI, the most suitable water security target for RMI adopted for the
ACWA project is:
People in RMI to have access to at least 20Lpcd of safe, freshwater resources year-round
This figure has been discussed and agreed by relevant stakeholders in RMI during the National Stakeholder
Consultation Workshop that was held in Majuro in August 2016. During this meeting the range of national
and international guidelines were presented. The National Stakeholder Consultation Workshop Report is
presented in Annex 2096.
The relevant duration for the water provision is linked to the length of time that fresh water is scarce. Since
fresh water is typically provided by rainwater harvesting in RMI, the water scarce time period is determined
by the rainfall patterns. Rainfall levels and length of dry season and extreme dry season vary greatly between
atolls and islands of RMI. Water insecurity is most felt during the dry season, especially during the low
precipitation years.
87
Conversion of Gallons to liters: 2.5 to 3 liters = 0.66 to 0.79 Gal, 15 liters = 4 Gal, 20 liters = 5.3 Gal, 38.6 liter = 10.2 Gal, 56.8 Liters = 15 Gal, 100 liters =
26.4 Gal.
88
http://www.spherehandbook.org/en/water-supply-standard-1-access-and-water-quantity/
89
WHO.2011. Technical Notes on Drinking Water, Sanitation and Hygiene in Emergencies
90
WHO Technical Note No. 9, WHO/SEARO Technical Notes: Minimum Water Quantity needed for domestic uses
91
38 liters (10 gallons per person per day). These figures are average and not minimum. Furthermore, water usage in urban atolls (which these numbers are
based on) may be significantly higher than average usage in the rural communities.
92
3800 liters per household for two weeks
93
Basic Water Requirements for Humans Activities: Meeting Basic Needs
94
Basic Water Requirements for Humans Activities: Meeting Basic Needs
95
45 gallons per person per day. These figures are average and not minimum. Furthermore, water usage in urban atolls (which these numbers are based on)
may be significantly higher than average usage in the rural communities.
96
2.5 – 3 Lpcd and 15 Lpcd targets were found unsuitable as they are targets for drought response efforts. The objective of investments under ACWA aims to
reduce and/or avoid drought disasters from occurring. Figures from the RMI National Water and Sanitation Policy (38 and 170 Lpcd) were found unsuitable, as
they are average consumption figures in Majuro. It is expected that water consumption in Majuro is generally higher than that of the rural outer atolls and
islands, especially without flush toilets. Furthermore, average consumption level is likely to be much higher than the minimum level of water-required daily per
capita for health and well-being. In other words, people can be water secure even though level of water accessible is lower than what they normally use every
day. Gleik and other standards specifying higher quantities were not used since washing can be completed using saltwater or brackish groundwater (when
available)

In a normal year, dry season lasts for 2 to 4 months with an average of 10 consecutive days without rain. In
a dry year (i.e. 2015 / 2016 which was one of the driest years in history for many atolls and islands), days
without rain range from 10 to 30 days, for up to 5 months (Dec 2015 to May 2016). 97
6.3 Design Principles
In order to ensure that activities and interventions proposed within the ACWA project lead to water security,
climate change adaptation and ultimately water resilience, in addition to the quantitative water security target,
the following resilient design principles are used to review and design the overall project activities,
interventions, and implementation approaches.
The seven design principles (multi-criteria) are:

 Ownership
 Redundancy
 Effectiveness
 Efficiency
 Sustainability
 Equity, and
 Coordination
These principles also align with the Green Climate Fund’s investment framework which includes criteria for
impact potential, paradigm shift potential, sustainable development potential, needs of recipient, country
ownership, efficiency and effectiveness.98
Ownership
Ownership is defined as the acceptance of an individual and/or community through participation in developing
the design and installation of a solution/system to fully support its proper functioning with funding and
resources. Strong ownership at various levels is critical to establish a resilient water system or any public
sector initiatives and investments. Ownership can be characterized in various ways – including
institutionalization of the mandate / an effort in policies, plans, laws, and legislations, allocation of public
and/or community financing and/or human resources to co-financing and/or sustain investments.
 Atolls and islands level ownership can be defined through various parameters including, but not limited
to:
o Priority and need for the water investments indicated within municipal and/or community
policies, plans, and budgets
o Willingness to support implementation, operation, and maintenance though cash and/or in
kind investments
o Existence of ongoing, self-financed efforts / investments for water resilience
In assessing ownership, it is also necessary to assess capacities of atoll / island stakeholders including
municipal government, community groups, and households as this may highlight the barrier faced between
aspirations for ownership and their existing capacities.
Redundancy
One of the key principles of climate change and disaster resilient design is to account for both expected and
unexpected risks. In designing water systems, redundancy is a way in which risks such as system failure,
unexpected weather conditions can be mitigated. Redundancy can be achieved through various methods
and scales, but in the case of atoll / island level water resilience, this principle will be achieved through the
promotion of an integrated system - whereby, atolls / islands do not rely on single water resource and/ or
supply system, but have alternative, back up options.
97
Refer to Annex 5 for detailed charts of the daily rainfall from December 2015 to end May 2016 for each of the seven weather stations.
98
Green Climate Fund GCF/B.09/23 Annex III: Initial investment framework: activity-specific sub-criteria and indicative assessment factors

Effectiveness
The effectiveness of technology was assessed by reviewing challenges and successes of previous
investments. Water investments that have been installed, operated, and maintained successfully will be
included as options. On the contrary, investments that have broken down and/or underperforming will not be
recommended unless measures to resolve issues have been clearly identified through evaluation of lessons
learned.
Efficiency
The technical efficiency of operations was assessed, for example how efficiently does the option capture
and/or supply the available water.
Sustainability
Environmental, social, technical, and financial sustainability considerations were examined to determine the
final appropriate water investment options. The environmental and social sustainability process reviewed
immediate and long-term impacts of the proposed water resilient measures. If any potential risks investments
were identified they will be either removed from the options of investments to be supported, or risk mitigation
measures will be incorporated into the design and implementation of the investments.
Financial sustainability is assessed by examining the availability of funds and income streams for operations
and maintenance of water security investments.
Equity
Equity was assessed by examining the distribution of benefits among the various social groups. In the case
of water resilience investments, burden and benefits associated with water access and use will be examined
between men, women, boys, girls, elderly and people with disabilities.
In assessing equity, one key factor is access to the source of safe water. There a few factors that influence
this:
 Distance and time it takes to retrieve water from the safe water source.
 Location of water source on community land accessible by all.
 Gender equity sensitivity to ensure that the technology used addresses all capabilities and norms of the
society.
Refer to Annex 17 for more detailed description of equity.
6.4 Key Findings

Two major points driven by this section are:
 The design process defined will support water security measures to achieve 20Lpcd year round.
 Key design principles of ownership, redundancy, effectiveness, efficiency, sustainability, equity and
coordination will be used to assess the long list of water resource options.
7. Options Review
7.1 Introduction to the Options Review
There are various ways to achieve water security in RMI, defined as no water shortage days experienced in
the target communities based on a minimum of 20 Lpcd demand under project climate induced exacerbated
droughts. Although how water security is enhanced in each households, communities, and local government
jurisdiction may differ, given its diverse geographical, social, economic, and water baseline contexts, all
resilient solutions will entail both hard infrastructure investments, such as technology, equipment and/or
infrastructural investments (such as RWH tanks and roofing), coupled with soft investments (interventions),
such as community members efforts to install, operate, maintain, and monitor the water infrastructure as well
as enhancing integrated water resource planning and management as well as drought response capacities.
The final mix of interventions is determined by a cost curve analysis which identifies the most cost-effective
interventions per island/ atoll. More details are available in section 8.2.5.

7.2 Multi-Criteria Assessment of Options
7.2.1 Developing the Long List of Options
As defined in Section 6.2, water security requires access to safe water supply to meet the 20 liter (5.3
gallons) per capita day (Lpcd) minimum standard (for water used for drinking, cooking, and personal
hygiene99) year-round for a 25-year design period to 2045100.
To identify the most adequate intervention mix per community, a broad range of interventions (previously
trialed) were considered:
 Improvement of community rainwater harvesting system and increase in storage capacity
 Improvement of household rainwater harvesting system
 Protection of groundwater wells
 Stationary desalination (RO)
 Stationary desalination (Solar Distillation)
 Mobile RO desalination
 Hoop solar distillation
This list of water technology options is based on the existing primary sources of freshwater in the rural
communities, along with experimental systems that have been trialed in a limited number of communities.
The long list includes options raised by stakeholders in RMI during the consultations. The availability of
surface water sources is very limited in the rural communities. There are no rivers in RMI and small lakes
and ponds are typically not used for drinking due to poor water quality (e.g. there is a small lake on Mejit
Island but it is far from the inhabited areas).
Demand management options were considered including the use of composting toilets instead of flush toilets
(from rainwater storage tanks). It was concluded that the 20 Lpcd water supply target for drinking water,
cooking and personal hygiene allows no scope for any further demand reduction. In addition, the rural
community residents are already well practiced in conserving water during the dry season. Local consultation
also concluded that rainwater flush toilets were very scarce in the households of rural communities and the
residents typically flushed these with groundwater or saltwater during times of low rainfall.
The long list of water resource options has been expanded in Table 24 24 to include past and present
installation sites of relevant technologies along with lessons learnt.
99
WHO and Sustainable Development Goal standards. WHO 2011.
100
25 years is the minimum lifetime Ministry of Public Works designs their public infrastructure.

Table 24: Expanded Water Technology Options to Improve Water Security in RMI
Technology Water resources Past and Past initiatives Lessons Learned
Option present supporting the
installation technology
sites in RMI
Household Rainwater All inhabited USAID / IOM; Utilization of 150mm diameter gutter pipes
rainwater (Water Security) atolls and Government of Taiwan for the RWH systems ensures improved
harvesting system islands performance. Training and awareness of
proper operations and maintenance
practice
Community Rainwater All inhabited USAID / IOM; RMI Provision on larger catchments connected
rainwater (Water Security) atolls and government to community buildings – Improved150mm
harvesting system islands – in (President’s office, piping for the gutters of the RWH systems.
schools, Department of Public Greater understanding of capacity
hospitals, Works) requirements for community.
churches,
community
centers, etc.
Public rainwater Rainwater Majuro MWSC / ADB; PACC Improved efficiency of rainwater
catchment and (Water Security) catchment retention – relining and covers
reticulation improve capacity.
system
Groundwater Groundwater Majuro (Laura Protection from contamination, improved
infiltration (Potential Water lens) performance and understanding of water
galleries Resource) lens thickness and capacity.
Groundwater Groundwater All inhabited MWSC, PACC/ SPC & Water quality testing improvements,
wells (Potential Water atolls and UNDP, JIRCAS capacity of water lens, alternate source of
Resource) islands water for washing, cleaning and for
agriculture. Needs protection from
contamination and inundations, requires
consistent maintenance. Consider raising
the height of opening to be similar to
KiriWatsan developed standard.
Groundwater Groundwater All inhabited USAID / IOM; RMI Good efficient use of groundwater
wells with pumps (Potential Water atolls and government resource. More efficient than using
(hand pumps, Resource) islands (President’s office, bucket and rope – ensures protection from
solar pumps, Department of Public contamination.
Hydraulic Ram Works)
Pumps)
Desalination: Desalinated sea water Mejit, Ailuk PACC / SPC & UNDP System not installed optimally and has to
Solar distillation or brackish (Ailuk and establish clear lines of ownership for
(solar water groundwater Enejelar), maintenance and supportive funding. All
purifiers) (Water Security) Likiep (Likiep units are not working and not supported –
and Jebal), clearly currently not an effective solution.
Wotje (Wotje Large farms of solar panels will be
and Wodmej), required to support 20Lpcd for the
etc. community – not feasible for total solution.
Desalination: Desalinated sea water Mobile units USAID / IOM Ideal for disaster response and not
Reverse Osmosis or brackish deployed for suitable to meet long term water security
units – mobile groundwater disaster needs – requires common warehouse to
(Potential Water response to optimally store and maintain the units.
Resource) all affected Requires consistent training and upkeep.
atolls and
islands
Desalination: Desalinated sea water Refer to list of US Government, Good source of quality water. Costly to
Reverse Osmosis or brackish RO’s in Taiwan Government, maintain and operate, requiring
units – stationary groundwater Annex 9 Government of Japan considerable technical skills to support for
(Water Security) Kwajalein, (Pacific Environment optimal operation. Community requires
Utrik, Community Fund) external support to provide funding –
Enewetak, perhaps not a sustainable solution.
Kili
300 gpd (PEC

/ Japan)
public schools
in: Ailuk, Aur,
Mejatto, Lae,
Lib, Likiep,
Maloelap,
Mejit, Namu,

Technology Water resources Past and Past initiatives Lessons Learned
Option present supporting the
installation technology
sites in RMI
Ujae, Wotho,
Wotje, Jaluit,
Santo, Majuro
Hoop system Air moisture – Majuro, Ailuk University of South Limited capacity to provide water source.
(hybrid mini poly condensation units Pacific (USP) Can be used for awareness training –
tunnel) (Potential Water education.
Resource)
7.2.2 Developing the Short List of Options

The long list of technology options were assessed against the seven design principles outlined in Section 6.
This multi-criteria assessment was used to screen the options and determine whether each option would
contribute more to water security enhancement in RMI. The multi-criteria assessment and overall water
security scores for each option are described in detail in Annex 16. The overall water security scores are
presented as current (based on the existing situation of installed infrastructure) and potential (based on the
potential for infrastructure installations to be successful through supportive technical capacity building etc.).
The overall water security scores are shown in Figure 23.
Figure 23: Current and Potential Water Security Score for the Long List of Water Resource Options
The highest ranking options based on the current water security scores are household RWH followed by
community RWH and stationary desalination using RO units. The highest ranking options based on the
potential water security scores are community RWH and household RWH, followed by stationary desalination
using RO units. The next highest ranking option is groundwater.

Groundwater cannot be considered as a reliable source of drinking water to improve water security over the
long term (due to a lack of information on the capacity and quality of freshwater lenses in the rural
communities) but provides an important source of non-potable water. The groundwater resources are
recommended to be secured from inundation of seawater to improve resilience and provide additional non-
potable water during severe droughts. Sharing of groundwater wells (either household or community wells)
that are still producing good quality water during times of drought is evidenced throughout RMI in times of
need.
The water technology options were also assessed using a strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats
(SWOT) analysis in Annex 18. The SWOT analysis confirmed the results of the multi-criteria assessment and
the shortlist of preferred water resource options for meeting the 20 Lpcd minimum target for water security
enhancement in the rural communities is as follows:
1. Household Rainwater Harvesting
2. Community Rainwater Harvesting
3. Desalination – Stationary RO Systems
7.3 Operations and Maintenance Costs for the Shortlisted Water Security Options
As concluded in 7.2.2, the shortlisted water resource options for water security enhancement in the rural
communities are as follows:

The annual operations and maintenance requirements and approximate costs of these three technology
options are reviewed below.
7.3.1 Rainwater Harvesting – Household

Household rainwater harvesting system operations and maintenance requirements are quarterly cleaning of
guttering systems as well as an annual cleanout of rainwater storage tanks. The labor is to be performed by
the homeowner a simple tools are used to support the work. There may be some minor repair of guttering
needed due to damage from storms or other reasons. The annual cost for supply of maintenance materials
(tools and materials including bleach) is estimated be $50/year/household.
The typical household occupancy in the rural communities is 6.1 people per household. The operations and
maintenance cost per person is estimated to be $8.20 ($50 per household divided by 6.1 people per
household).
The minimum annual volume provided per person is 7,300 liters (20 liters per day for 365 days). This
translates to < $0.01 per liter for maintenance costs for household RWH systems.
7.3.2 Community Rainwater Harvesting

Similar to household RWH systems, community RWH systems will require quarterly cleaning of gutters with
an annual cleanout of rainwater storage tanks. This may be performed by community members on a
voluntary basis or part of paid program for Water Security managed by the Council. The annual cost for
supply of maintenance materials (tools and materials including bleach) is estimated be $50/year/community
building.
The typical community rainwater system will support 67 people as their secondary supply (refer to section
8.3.2 for further details). The operations and maintenance cost per person is estimated to be $0.75 yearly
($50 per community building divided by 67 people estimated accessing a single community tank).
A community tank is the secondary source of water after the primary household rainwater harvesting tanks
are depleted. The minimum annual volume provided per person is 7,300 liters (20 liters per day for 365 days).
The value per maintenance costs is also <$0.01 per liter of water for community RWH systems.

7.3.3 Desalination – Stationary Reverse Osmosis Systems
Permanently installed RO desalination units have significant operational and maintenance requirements to
ensure continuous operation over long periods of time. The cost effectiveness analysis will help determine
the support necessary by the project for either replacement or supporting the operations and maintenance
costs going forward for the duration of the life cycle of the project.
While the example on Utrik has shown that RO desalination units can work successfully, they need significant
ongoing financial and technical investments in their operation and maintenance for which funds have to be
made available from external sources for the entire operational lifetime of the system. For Utrik, the
operational and maintenance costs are covered by external grant funding, which expire in 2020, and the
community has limited means to support the operating costs and eventual replacement. The other rural
communities will also experience this fiscal constraint for similar reasons.. Further, there needs to be in-
country capacity to supply technical expertise and spare parts for the selected RO system in order to ensure
timely coverage of any technical intervention needs.
Annex 9 provides a list of stationary RO’s along with their capital and operating costs (information provided
by the Office of Chief Secretary).
Considering the financial barriers identified within Section 5.3.2 and discussions within RMI community
consultations, no new stationary desalination RO systems will be built under the proposed interventions due
to the high operations and maintenance costs and the supply chain challenges and lack of local technical
capacity in remote rural communities. Existing stationary RO desalination units that have an expected life
covering the project horizon of 25 years have been included in the baseline water supply calculations (this
only applies to one location, Enewetak Atoll).
Section 8.2.5 Cost Effectiveness within this FS provides the details on the process utilize to determine the
final mix of interventions at a community level by using the unit prices defined within this section and further
expanded on within the FS Annex 19 for operations and maintenance and capital cost of the defined
infrastructure construction.
7.4 Good Practices101
7.4.1 Rainwater Harvesting Systems (Household and Community)

Rainwater harvesting systems are widely used throughout RMI and pacific islands as the primary source of
drinking water. Rainwater harvesting systems can serve households or community facilities. Household
systems generally catch rain from the rooftops of homes and store it in at least one tank adjacent to the
homes. Water is typically drawn from a household tank by means of a tap at the base of the tank. In some
cases rainwater may be reticulated within a house using a pump/pressure system. Alternatively the tank may
be partly buried and a hand pump used to withdraw water. The roofs of large community buildings, such as
churches and schools, are often used as catchment surfaces and the water is stored in large tanks adjacent
to these buildings. Alternatively, if no suitable catchment surface is available, a separate catchment surface
is built adjacent to, or directly over, the water storage tank. Residents of the community walk to these tanks,
draw water from a tap at the base of the tank, and transport it back to their homes for drinking or cooking.
Recent development of modernized forms of rainwater harvesting systems utilizing tin roofs, gutters and
plastic storage tanks has improved efficiency for capturing rainwater. These RWH systems are able to
produce sufficient quantities of water in good quality if set up correctly. Past failures reported by Wallis (2014)
identify the main issues as:
1) improper placement under the roof eaves resulting in poor capture efficiency;
2) improper connections between gutter lengths and between gutter and downspout resulting in
leakage;
3) improper slope on gutter; and
4) gutters too small in width resulting in poor capture and retention of rainwater.
101
Best practice for reverse osmosis equipment is not described since they are not a recommended intervention.

These observations show that materials need to be well selected and the communities well trained to set up
functioning household rainwater harvesting systems. Wallis recommended a transition of guttering from four
inch to six inch guttering to improve capture efficiency of gutters during periodic heavy rainfalls..
A simple rainwater harvesting system consists of a rainwater catchment surface (roof), conveyance system
(gutters and downpipes), and water storage tank(s). There are two principal types of rainwater harvesting
system:
1. The dry system
2. The wet system
A dry system involves the downpipes from the roof gutters feeding directly into the tank. This is called a dry
system as the feed pipes run dry after the rain has stopped. The pipes in a wet system typically run
underground from the building to the tank and the pipes hold water after the rain stops.
Figure 24 shows a diagram of the household rainwater harvesting system components included in a best
practice design for a dry system. The primary purpose of the best practice design components is to improve
the water quality of the water stored in the tank.
The rainwater harvesting system components in Figure 24, in addition to the roof and the storage tank, are
as follows:
1. Guttering, ideally 150mm diameter circular guttering rather than the typical 100mm square profile102
2. Leaf diverter103 (coarse screen) to prevent leaves and other debris from entering the downpipe.
3. Downpipes, ideally 150mm diameter
4. First flush diverter to reduce pollution of tank water by diverting the first flush of contaminated water
away from the tank (available in several sizes).
5. Calmed inlet (optional) allows water to enter the system from the bottom without disturbing the
sediment in the bottom of the tank.
6. Floating out-take kit (optional) allows withdrawal of water from the top of tank, where the water is the
cleanest.
7. Outlet fitted with a tap to obtain water for household use. A valve can also be included where the
house is connected to a piped distribution system, e.g. in Majuro. The valve would allow closing of
the system to prevent rainwater from the tank entering the public water system.
8. Overflow outlet to spill water from the bottom of the tank (where the water is of lesser quality) when
the tank is full. Best practice design is to have the overflow outlet drain to a well for groundwater
recharge wherever practical.
9. Vent with a grid to prevent pollutants entering the tank (the overflow pipe will act as a vent where the
overflow outlet pipe is from the top of the tank rather than the bottom).
10. Level gauge (optional extra that would be useful for large community storage tanks).
102
Existing rainwater harvesting systems in RMI typically have 100mm guttering and downpipes. The ideal pipe sizing is 150mm for RMI and other high rainfall
areas of the Pacific.
103
Design would be ensured to be suitable for SIDS / RMI context – including moderate and high intensity rainfalls

Figure 24: Dry rainwater harvesting system components in a best practice design
(adapted from Marley New Zealand’s Rainwater Harvesting Guide)
A community rainwater harvesting system will likely have a larger building and storage tank than a household
system and is therefore more likely to be designed as a wet system. The standard RMI Public Works
Department design for rainwater harvesting systems in schools is a wet system.
The typical components for a wet rainwater harvesting system are shown in Figure 25 (component numbering
as per the dry system components in Figure 24). With a wet system, the pipes must be fitted with screens at
each end to ensure that insects cannot enter and breed in the system. The First Flush diverter for a wet
system needs to have a capacity equal to that of the pipes plus whatever amount is to be diverted from the
roof. The overflow pipe should be connected to a nearby adjacent ground water well to recharge ground
water system.
Figure 25: Wet rainwater harvesting system components in a best practice design (SPREP, 2015)

Materials commonly used in the construction of the roofs are corrugated aluminum and galvanized iron. Roofs
are generally sloped to avoid ponding and roof coatings are required to be non- toxic. The conveyance
systems need to be constructed from an inert material (e.g. PVC) for improved water quality. The effective
roof area and the material used in constructing the roof influence the collection efficiency and water quality.
The rainwater is stored in a storage tank, which also needs to be constructed of an inert material for improved
water quality. Reinforced concrete, and plastic are the most common storage tank materials in RMI. The
tanks should be raised on a concrete platform to enable easy access to the outlet tap.
During the Rainwater Harvesting Improvement Project in Wotho, Ujae and Lae Atolls to repair the household
rainwater harvesting systems a number of lessons learned relating to best materials and community
engagement for successful rainwater harvesting implementation were determined. Further details of this
project is provided in Section 10.1.2 and utilized as part of the design and implementation approaches.
Best Practice for Operation and Maintenance: Rainwater Harvesting Systems

Based on tables sourced from Harvesting the Heavens (SOPAC, 2004) guidelines have been developed for
employing best practices in operations and maintenance of household and community building rainwater
harvesting systems. These systems if they are well constructed, operated and maintained will provide good
quality water without need for water treatment.
In addition to the above recommended maintenance practices annual cleaning of tanks is necessary including
using bleach to disinfect the tank after brushing down the sides of the tank and flushing a few times. Periodic
water quality testing is also recommended to ensure safety and also trigger the need to clean and disinfect
the tanks.
For RWH Systems consisting of the guttering, connectors, downspout and first flush the frequency of simple
maintenance requires:
a. Quarterly cleaning, for example removal of collected debris from roof (including cutting down
overhanging branches), and debris accumulated in guttering downspout.
b. Cleaning of first flush mechanisms on an as needed basis – consistent inspection for
accumulated debris to clean out.
c. Annual clean-out of tanks (catchments) using proper cleaning solutions (e.g. chlorox bleach).
7.4.2 Groundwater
There is currently very limited information on the quality and availability of groundwater resources in the rural
communities. The freshwater lenses on Majuro Atoll and Kwajalein Atoll have been extensively studied as
they supported significant populations. The RMI Environmental Protection Authority has limited resources to
carry out monitoring activities on a regular basis given high transportation costs to rural communities, limited
number of staff, and lack of formal water quality and quantity testing protocols and standard operating
procedures available. As a result, although groundwater resources may have a high potential of serving as a
viable options for alternative to rainwater resources especially in times of limited rainfall, it is difficult to
quantify its potential in the rural communities.
There was a proposed groundwater investigation project (concept note prepared by OEPPC in 2015 to GIZ
ACSE fund) to research groundwater lenses in specific outer atolls (Wotho, Mejit, Ujae, Lae and Jaluit or
Wotje). This proposal included research using recent scientific methods, display of the results for public
outreach, and development of wells at the identified best locations for potable freshwater supply. This
proposal was not progressed.
Therefore potential interventions include implementing nation-wide groundwater monitoring protocols and
methodologies, coupled with the implementation of quick fixes for groundwater protection. This will be in line
with the National Water and Sanitation Policy, Policy Statement 2 on groundwater resource sustainability and
Policy Statement 5 on climate variability and change, the Project will establish and implement groundwater
quality and quantity monitoring protocols and methodologies, where the data will be monitored, reported, and
used for evidence-based planning and response integrated water resource management. The Project will
focus on protection of the wells from contamination due to inundation:
 raise or ensure that the concrete apron surrounding the well is of the proper height and the cover
seals the opening to stop inundation from seawater arising from increased frequency of over-wash
events.

 Identify and document location, final finished height of apron and depth of groundwater well to enable
ongoing monitoring of groundwater quality for identified critical groundwater resources.
The critical groundwater resources will be identified by the Community-based Water Committees (CWCs)
and are expected to include at least priority and high use community groundwater wells.
In addition to the water quality monitoring and research above, the Project will support good practices for
groundwater protection as shown in the table 25 below. The table compares the status quo situation with the
proposed improvements.
Table 25: Groundwater Wells in Rural Communities in RMI
Status Quo (Typical) Groundwater Proposed (Protected) Groundwater Wells in

Wells in RMI RMI
Protection Some wells are protected, while others are Protection from surface pollution by lining the well for the
open (unprotected). Wells are typically full depth and to at least 0.6 m above the ground to form
concrete lined and have a concrete access a head wall around the outer rim of the well.
cover with a plastic hinged cover for the
opening. Construction of concrete apron on the ground surface,
extending for 2 m around the well. The concrete slab also
seals any fissures between the well lining and the walls
of the excavated hole, preventing polluted surface water
from seeping into the well along the outer casing of the
well.
Covering top of the well with Tin or Plastic Cover, and

installation of hand pumps that are fitted, to further
prevent contaminants from entering the well
Maintenance Some wells are neglected and minimum Wells are maintained and cleaned regularly.
maintenance and repair has been Implementing periodic inspection to check that there is no
performed. As a result, some wells are no debris – every day for open wells, and periodically for
longer accessible for clean water. closed wells. Keeping areas surrounding the top of the
well clean to protect against contaminants polluting the
well
Ensuring periodic inspection and repair of the pumps,

including replacement of gaskets and moving parts.
Hand pumps are generally preferred from a water
conservation point of view as they cut down on over
pumping and minimize the risk of saltwater intrusion. The
pump selected should be easily operated and maintained
by women and children, who, traditionally, are the most
frequent users. Spare parts must be readily available and
maintenance training provided immediately following
installation of the pump.
For community wells, ensuring that there is a

representative water committee to monitor and report the
well surroundings are kept clean and where there is a
pump is properly maintained.
Quality Some wells are contaminated from Good water quality (and appropriate for planned use) with
accumulated debris or fallen animals, and effective protection and maintenance.
some are simply missing their plastic hatch
opening potentially exposing them to Ensuring buffer between wells and septic tanks (i.e. a
inundation from King tides and large minimum of 30m from a groundwater extraction point )
storms.
Some wells are located close to sea as well

as toilets and their septic tanks and
therefore their water quality is affected
significantly in terms of salinity and bacteria
such as fecal coliform.

Status Quo (Typical) Groundwater Proposed (Protected) Groundwater Wells in
Wells in RMI RMI
Quantity Information of water quantity of Information of water quantity and sustainable extraction
groundwater use is limited and rate of rate is determined for priority and high use community
extraction for sustainable use is unknown. groundwater wells identified by the Community-based
Water Committees (CWCs)
SPC and UNICEF have completed a best practice KiriWATSAN project in Kiribati - Groundwater and
Rainwater Monitoring Guidelines for the Outer Islands of Kiribati, which includes applying best practices for
groundwater protection and provided detail design drawings. This document shall be the basis for this
investment. Further details on the SWOT analysis of water intervention technology options to determine
best practices for groundwater wells are included in FS Annex 18.
7.4.3 Asset Management of Existing Large Concrete Tanks
Section 3.3.2 presented an overview of existing large concrete tanks used for rainwater storage in the rural
communities. The reviewed infrastructure survey information from 2013 and 2016 identified 23 community
buildings (with suitable roof area sized greater than 100m²) connected to large concrete tanks (>10m³) that
are in use by the community. The volume of these large concrete tanks has been included in the status
quo for existing community storage volume (which assumes the tanks can retain 100% of the water
captured by the RWH systems). Concrete tanks are known to be prone to leaks therefore good practice
requires proper asset management of the tanks including condition assessment, leakage assessment and
repairs/replacement as appropriate.
The condition of the status quo concrete tanks was assessed at a high level during the 2013 and 2016
infrastructure surveys. A qualitative five point condition rating (very poor to very good condition) was
assigned by the surveyors. The assessed concrete tank condition rating ranged from very poor to very
good depending on the presence of leaks/cracks. During 2016 the US Navy Seabees (with KalGov and
KADA) undertook a detailed condition assessment of large concrete tanks at two communities in the
Kwajalein Atoll (Bikeej and Enebuj). Their assessment concluded that the old tanks from the Japanese
period of WW II were in very poor condition in these communities and should not be repaired due to
expected high cost.
The concrete tank condition information shown in Table 22 in Section 3.3.2 is presented in Table 26 showing
the volume of tanks under each condition rating by atoll/island.
Table 26: Volume of concrete tanks (m³) in each condition rating
Atoll 1 2 3 4 5
Excellent Very Good Poor Very Poor
Good
Ailinglaplap 15
Ailuk 76
Ebon 14 24
Jaluit 158
Kwajalein 453 22
Majuro 91
Namdrik 12
Namu 83
Ujae 37
Utrik 38 44
Wotho 38
Wotje 67 83
TOTALS 76 83 654 332 110
% of total 6% 7% 52% 26% 9%
volume
Table 26 shows that 65% of the concrete tank storage volume is rated to be in good to excellent condition.
The remaining 35% of the concrete tank volume is rated to be in poor to very poor condition.

One of the tanks assessed in Enebuj (Carlos) Island was a larger, newer catchment built 3 to 5 years ago.
The Seabees found that this tank has never been operational due to some leaks on the south end of the
structure. The Seabees assessment concluded that concrete designs have a high failure rate, and are
highly susceptible to leaks and contamination.
The concern is the level of repair necessary to ensure the integrity of each tank and to ensure that their
capacity is not compromised especially during times of drought. The project should include an asset
management program for the large concrete tanks including detailed condition assessment, prioritization of
repairs/relining, followed by regular monitoring. This program should be designed to ensure that the capacity
of these concrete tanks to store rainwater without leakage over the design period of 25 years (similar to the
other infrastructure). In the worst scenario, assuming that there are many leaks but the foundation and side
walls are structurally sound a water bladder could be employed to retain the captured water.
The tanks included in Table 26 have been included in the status quo for existing community storage volume.
Four options were considered for concrete tank rehabilitation as shown in Table 27. The qualitative condition
ratings from the infrastructure survey data in Table 26 were used to select the indicative improvement option
for each concrete tank from the table below and assess an indicative capital cost for the cost effectiveness
analysis. The aggregated average unit cost of the concrete tank rehabilitation options was $80/m³ with an
expected life of 15 years. In practice, the appropriate option would be determined for each tank through
carrying out a detailed onsite condition assessment.
Table 27: Concrete tank rehabilitation options based on the tank condition
# Status quo tank condition as Proposed concrete tank Indicative initial capital cost
assessed during the validation improvement estimate including installation
phase
1 Tank in good to excellent condition with Do nothing, monitor condition on an $0
no visible leaks. annual basis
2 Tank in fair to poor condition with visible Reline the tanks using a potable water $38/m² of tank surface area (inside)
leaks and no structural failure. The liner made of reinforced PVC or
surface of the inside of the tank is polypropylene (including a geotextile Average cost for proposed tank
smooth and the tank can be lined without membrane to provide cushioning from locations
risk of puncturing. the concrete surface). Example supplier: $56 per m³
Fabric Solutions reinforced PVC liner
from Australia.
Expected life of at least 10 years

(material warranty is for 10 years).
3 Tank in fair to poor condition with visible Waterproof the tank with a painted $43/m² of tank surface area (inside)
leaks and no structural failure (i.e. the coating that goes over the concrete
roof, walls and floor are not at risk of interior (e.g. 98olyuria and polyurethane Average cost for proposed tank
collapse). The surface of the inside of elastomer). Example supplier: CIM locations
the tank is broken (e.g. reinforcing steel polyurethane elastomer from US $70 per m³
is protruding) and the tank cannot be
lined without risk of puncturing. Expected life of at least 5 years (material
warranty is for 5 years).
4 Tank in poor condition with visible leaks Replace the concrete tank with new $371/m³
and structural failure above ground tank from flat pack
modular construction
Expected life of 25 years.
Further details on the rehabilitation options is provided in Annex 19.
The status quo volume also includes the new concrete tanks installed by Japan in 2015 in Ailinglaplap Atoll
and Mejit Island, as well as the concrete tanks installed by MPW in 2017. These new concrete tanks installed
in 2015 and 2016 are expected to have a life greater than the 25 year design period and have not been
included in the tables above as they do not currently need any rehabilitation.
There may be older concrete tanks in use in communities that have not been surveyed. This would be verified
during the validation phase of the project.

Therefore, the Project could consider the rehabilitation of suitable concrete tanks, based on cost
effectiveness, in vulnerable rural communities of RMI. Based on information gathered during the Project
Design, it is estimated that there are approximately 23 concrete tanks with storage volumes of
approximately 1,254 m3, across 14 local government jurisdictions are suitable for rehabilitation. Concrete
tanks that are connected to community buildings with small roof areas (under 100m2) will not be targeted by
the project for rehabilitation. Furthermore, concrete tanks that are abandoned and filled with debris or have
groundwater inundation due to cracks in the foundation and sidewalls, resulting in poor water quality
condition were also excluded as target intervention sites. This is because the reason these tanks were
abandoned was primarily due to their remote location, situated far from the water users / community.
Table 28: Concrete Tanks in Rural Communities in RMI
Baseline (Typical) Concrete Tanks in RMI Proposed (Rehabilitated) Concrete Tanks in RMI
Tank The typical condition of connected tanks that are currently Existing concrete tanks are repaired and/or lined as
condition in use indicate slight cracks noted in the sidewall or necessary to ensure minimal leakage through cracks.
foundations resulting in small leaks. (Refer to the options outlined in Table 27)
Most tanks require repair to fix the cracks or install a new
liner to stop leaks.
Water quality The water quality is found to be generally good (as long Good water quality (and appropriate for planned use)
as proper cover for hatch opening was maintained) and with effective protection (cover, etc.) and
the guttering system was cleaned out on a regular basis. maintenance.
Maintenance Maintenance of these concrete tanks is completed by the Concrete tanks are maintained and cleaned regularly
community-building operator on an ad hoc basis (e.g. by building owner. Tanks are also routinely inspected
schools or churches). for leaks and repaired as necessary.
7.5 Key Findings
The multi-criteria assessment of the options in Section 7.2 and the information described in the SWOT
analysis in Annex 18, identified the following shortlist of preferred water resource options for meeting the 20
Lpcd minimum target for water security enhancement in the rural communities:
The analysis of good practices provides the following recommendations for improvements:
 Household RWH systems should be improved by upgrading to good quality 150mm diameter
ownspouts and guttering capturing the maximum roof area, along with installation of first flush
mechanisms and mosquito guards to support water quality.
 Community RWH systems should be improved by upgrading to good quality 150mm diameter
downspouts and guttering capturing the maximum roof area, along with installation of first flush
mechanisms and mosquito guards to support water quality.
 Existing RO desalination units should be maintained but new installations are not proposed in this
project due to their high operations and maintenance costs (based on assessment of financial barriers
in Section 5.3.2), difficulties with the spare parts supply chain and technical capacity in remote rural
communities.
To support water resilience – an updated design for well head elevation has been determined and best
practices for sustainable operations and maintenance of ground water wells are part of the key interventions
suggested by the ACWA project:
 Raising the concrete apron and the well head to limit future inundation from SLR and increasing storm
waves.
 Training in the proper operation and maintenance of ground water wells.
8. Selection for Water Security Investments

8.1 Introduction to Rural Water Security
8.1.1 Target Communities

All rural104 communities across the 24 inhabited local government jurisdictions with 5 or more households
(approximately 30 people or more people) were considered as target communities for the proposed
interventions. For the two urban local government jurisdictions of Majuro and Kwajalein, communities living
outside of the public water utility company service areas are also included as target sites given that their
water resource conditions and constraints are similar to those of the rural communities in the rural
communities. Total target population and communities included in the rural water security design analysis is
15,572 people and 2,574 households (2017 estimate), across 77 communities.
8.1.2 Water Resources

Within the water resource options of rainwater harvesting at the household level and at the community level,
there are improvements required to the existing rainwater harvesting systems as described in Section 7.5
along with additional storage needed to ensure water security during droughts, particularly under climate
change.
The rainwater harvesting improvement options for meeting the 20 Lpcd minimum target for water security
enhancement in the rural communities carried forward to the technical design and lifecycle cost evaluation
are:
1. Improvement of rainwater harvesting systems at existing community buildings along with new storage
tanks
2. Improvement of rainwater harvesting systems at households
3. New community roofs with storage tanks (for communities with insufficient existing buildings)
As concluded in Section 7.2.1, there will be no new stationary RO systems built under the proposed
interventions due to the high capital costs, operations and maintenance costs and the supply chain
challenges in remote rural communities. New storage at the household level was also ruled out as an option
due to economies of scale (it is more cost effective to install new storage at the community level) and due to
the majority of houses already having at least one storage tank connected to the RWH system.
Table 29 below shows the suitability and contribution of each of these water resources towards the water
security target.
Table 29: Water Resource Applicability for Rural Water Security
Water Suitability Explanation Contribution of the Water Resource Towards the Water
Resource for Rural Security Target
Option Water
Security
Rainwater Suitable Currently the primary source of Primary source of drinking water for the water security target in
harvesting drinking water in rural all rural communities (minor source of water for the rural
communities communities that have existing functioning stationary RO
systems).
Improvements to existing rainwater harvesting systems and new
storage will be required to meet the water security target.
Groundwater Not Groundwater is not suitable for From a long-term perspective of transforming rural communities
wells suitable drinking water in the rural water security conditions in RMI to enhance water security,
communities in the rural especially in light of climate change, better protection,
communities during drought monitoring, management, and utilization (for purposes
periods due to microbiological appropriate for its quantity and quality) is critical. Therefore,
pollution and increasing salinity groundwater modeling, monitoring, protection, and management
during drought, particularly are included as key elements of integrated water resource
under future climate change. management and resilience interventions at the community level
Information on the quality and in the rural communities. The proposed groundwater
quantity of groundwater is improvement interventions will likely add availability of safe
limited due to inconsistent and water resources in selected rural communities. However, this is
unformulated monitoring and counted outside of, and in addition to, the 20-Lpcd minimum
analysis available, especially in water security targets.
104
Rural communities include: Communities of Majuro Atoll that are located outside the service area of MWSC; communities of Kwajalein Atoll that are located
outside the service area of KAJUR; and communities located in the local government jurisdictions of the other 22 outer atolls.

Water Suitability Explanation Contribution of the Water Resource Towards the Water
Resource for Rural Security Target
Option Water
Security
the rural communities. (FS
Annex 8)
Desalination Suitable Functioning stationary RO Existing functioning stationary RO systems in Enewetak will be
systems exist in Enewetak, Kili, the primary source of water for the water security target for those
Rongelap and Utrik communities (rainwater harvesting will be a minor source of
water for those communities). The units at Kili, Rongelap and
Utrik life cycle will end before the 25Y asset lifecycle of the
project and thus are not included as part of base supply.
There are existing functioning stationary RO systems in Enewetak, Kili, Rongelap and Utrik that are
supplemented by rainwater harvesting. However only the Enewetak stationary RO desalination units that
has an expected life covering the project horizon of 25 years and is included in the status quo water supply
calculations producing 11 Lpcd. The approach for the other communities with existing stationary RO units
(Kili, Rongelap and Utrik) is to design assuming 100% reliance on rainwater harvesting in the future
(assuming that these assets will eventually fail and not be replaced).
Small stationary RO units with a design capacity of 3,028 L/day (800 Gallon/day) will be installed in 2018 at
boarding High Schools at Jaluit, Wotje and Gugeegu (Ebeye) to support emergency drinking water supply.
These units are expected to have 25 year life cycle. The capacity of these units is expected to supply the
boarding school students only and it is expected that the community will continue to rely on rainwater
harvesting.
The estimated current daily outputs from the applicable stationary RO system (with 25 year design life) are
shown in the table 30 below. This 11 Lpcd from the RO unit was subtracted from the 20 Lpcd target in the
rainwater harvesting calculations (i.e. the demand was reduced to 9 Lpcd for the rainwater harvesting
systems in Enewetak).
Table 30: Stationary RO systems and water provided per person
Location Estimated stationary RO daily Current population Estimated RO supply volume for
output (m³ per day) estimate (people) current population (Liters per
person per day)
Enewetak 7.57 687 11.0
8.1.3 Design Target
As defined in previous sections, the project aims to provide people of RMI with access to at least 20 liters
(5.3 gallons) per person per day of freshwater supply year-round. The water security target applies for all
communities, during wet and dry seasons, as well as normal and low rainfall years.
The proposed design criteria (target level of service) for the project is defined as:
A minimum of 20 liters per capita per day (Lpcd) of water will be supplied to the population in the
target communities under the predicted drought length including climate change additionality.
The drought lengths have been predicted for each local weather station area using the analysis of baseline
drought length plus the climate change additionality predictions (incorporating anthropogenic impacts of
climate change) from the modelling discussed in Section 1. The baseline drought length has been
estimated from an analysis of historical information and is the 1 in 5 to 1 in 10 year drought, i.e. shorter
than the more severe droughts such as 2015/16 and 1998. The 5 weather stations in the outer atolls have
over 18 years of weather data but the record is not continuous (there are typically no data points from July
2003 to December 2013 due to a breakdown in data transfer). The Majuro and Kwajalein weather stations
have more than 50 years of continuous weather records available.

Table 31 summarises the baseline drought lengths and the climate change additionality to 2035 and 2045
for each weather station area (as discussed in detail in Section 1.3.1). The maximum total drought length
with climate change additionality was selected for the infrastructure design.
Table 31: Baseline Drought Length and Climate Change Additionality to 2045
Weather Weather Baseline Climate Change Climate Change Total Projected

station station name drought length Additionality to Additionality to 2045 Drought Length
area # (days) 2035 (days) (days) 2035 - 45 (including
climate change
additionality (days))
1 Utirik 90 +20 +14 110
2 Wotje 90 +30 +16 120
3 Kwajalein 70 +30 +13 100
4 Ailinglaplap 60 +58 +9 118
5 Majuro 40 +17 +11 57
6 Mili 40 +17 +27 67
7 Jaluit 40 +15 +19 59
The most representative weather station for each of the 24 inhabited atolls was identified by the RMI Weather
Service Office and the results are shown in Table 32 (the weather stations are in geographical order from
north to south). The three zones for rainfall patterns (described in Section 1.3.1), are also shown in the table.
Zones 1 and 2 are the driest zones and were given highest priority for the 2017 installation of new storage
tanks by the Ministry of Public Works (see Annex 15 to this FS).
Table 32: Atoll and Most Representative Weather Stations105
Atoll Zone Appropriate Weather Station

Ailuk 1 Utrik
Enewetak 1 Utrik
Rongelap 1 Utrik
Utrik 1 Utrik
Wotho 1 Utrik
Ailinglaplap 2 Ailinglaplap
Jabat 2 Ailinglaplap
Maloelap 2 Kwajalein
Namu 2 Kwajalein
Kwajalein 2 Kwajalein
Lib 2 Kwajalein
Lae 2 Kwajalein
Ujae 2 Kwajalein
Aur 2 Kwajalein
Arno 2 Majuro
Majuro 2 Majuro
Mili 2 Mili
Wotje 2 Wotje
Likiep 1 Wotje
Mejit 1 Wotje
Ebon 3 Jaluit
Jaluit 3 Jaluit
Kili 3 Jaluit
Namdrik 3 Jaluit
8.2 Design Methodology for the Rural Water Security Investments
8.2.1 Rural Water Security Technical Design
As concluded in Section 7.5, improvements are required to the existing rainwater harvesting systems as the
primary water resource in the rural communities. Additional rainwater storage volumes may also be required
in the target rural communities if the existing storage is less than required to meet the water security target.
105
RMI – Information provided by RMI Weather Station Office

The contribution of each rainwater harvesting improvement to water security is estimated through rainwater
harvesting modeling as described in the following sub-sections.
The data requirements for assessing the need for water security investments in each of the target rural
communities are listed below.
1. Baseline rainfall patterns for each weather station area (described in Section 1.2 of this FS)
2. Extent and magnitude of the drought risk for each weather station area under baseline and climate
change additionality conditions (described in Section 1.3 of this FS)
3. Target water supply requirements (described in Section 8.1.3 of this FS)
4. Current available rainwater harvesting storage volume for households and communities (overview
provided in Section 3.3, community level data provided in the results tables)
5. Existing output from the RO desalination units (described in 8.1.2).
6. Condition and efficiency of existing household and community rainwater harvesting systems
(overview provided in Section 3.3)
7. Early identification and warning of droughts (introduced in Section 2.3)
These data were used in rainwater harvesting modelling to assess the water supply gap under baseline and
climate change rainfall conditions. Rainwater harvesting modelling was used to quantify the volumetric benefit
from each water security investment.
8.2.2 Rainwater Harvesting Modeling Methodology
Three rainwater tank volume modeling approaches were considered for assessing the performance of
existing (status quo) systems and the future improved systems under both the status quo and climate change
rainfall conditions. The three modelling approaches are described below.
Dry period method. This method provides a very rough estimate of the required tank size. The tank is
designed to accommodate the necessary water demand throughout the longest dry period. For example, if
the daily water demand is 100 liters and the dry season lasts for 120 days, a tank with a capacity of at least
12,000 liters would be required. The longest dry period needs to be defined.
Singular Tabular Method. This method uses monthly data over a one year rainfall period (e.g. the worst
recorded year). A table is created to tabulate the monthly supply versus demand. For each month the excess
water (not used by demand) from the previous month is factored into the existing tank volume (no allowance
is made for overflow from the tanks during high daily rainfall events). Over the year the cumulative volume
captured minus the cumulative demand over the year will determine the necessary tank size. The volume
captured in a month is calculated by multiplying the available roof area equipped with gutters (A, m²) by an
appropriate runoff coefﬁcient based on the type of roof surface (Cr) and the monthly rainfall (R, mm).
Daily mass balance model. This is the most sophisticated of the three methods considered. The daily mass
balance model is based on treating the RWH system as a closed system with a single input (rainfall depth),
a single output (demand), storage (with overflow when the tank is full), and losses (inefficiencies in the gutter-
downspout system and the percentage of the roof area with guttering attached). The daily mass balance
model calculates the volume of water stored in the tank at the end of each day and establishes a more
realistic estimate of the portion of rainwater volume delivered from the roof to the storage tank. This method
provides the most accurate assessment of the required tank size out of the three methods considered but
requires daily rainfall data therefore is only useful for modelling historical events not future events.
Monthly rainfall predictions have been prepared for 2045 under baseline and climate change scenarios. The
monthly analysis in the singular tabular method was used to estimate the performance of existing (baseline)
systems and future improved systems. The rainwater tank balance formula used in the design was the “Yield-
After-Spillage” (YAS) formula (Wallace, 2015). The YAS formula is the most widely used rainwater tank
volume formula for the water balance approach and the equation is as follows:
The volume stored in the tank at the end of each time period is calculated by this equation.

The terms in the YAS formula are defined below. Dimension L represents a length unit (e.g. meter) and
dimension T represents a time unit (i.e. month for the singular tabular method).
Vt : volume of stored rainwater at the end of the month [L³]
Vt-1: volume of stored rainwater at the end of the previous month [L³]
Ai: effective rooftop catchment area (area projected from bird’s eye view and enclosed by gutters) [L²]
Pt: depth of rainfall per time step [L/T]
ε: catchment efficiency of the gutter-downspout system [no dimensions]
S: storage tank size [L³]
Ot: water demand per time step [L³/T]
Rainfall depth (Pt) is the sole input of water, and this is taken from the representative weather station area
for that community. The water demand (Ot) depends on the number of users (typical household or people
per community building) and the per capita demand (20 Lpcd) of the users. Design constants included in the
model are specific to the RWH system and include effective roof catchment area (Ai), storage tank size (S)
and losses. Losses from the gutter-downspout system are allowed for through a catchment efficiency factor
(ε) based on the condition of the RWH system (gutters and downspouts to connect from the roof catchment
area to the tank). The condition rating of the RWH system is based on the condition and diameter of the
gutter and downspout pipes (for example pipe age, presence of cracks, undersized and/or square pipes less
than 150mm diameter, incomplete connections between the gutters and downspouts and storage tanks). The
adopted time step was one month.
The assumed relationship between the RWH system condition and the catchment efficiency for both
household and community RWH systems is shown in the table below. This relationship assumes an
impermeable roof material such as corrugated iron sheets. Thatched rooves are only prevalent in a limited
number of atolls and are discussed further in the limitations table in Section 11.
Table 33: Relationship between RWH system condition and catchment efficiency106
RWH system condition (gutter-downspout) Catchment efficiency (ε)

Very good 80%
Good or average 70%
Fair 55%
Poor 40%
Very poor 20%
Table 29 shows that a gutter-downspout system in poor condition is expected to only capture 40% of the
rainfall that falls on the connected roof area of the building. The catchment efficiency (ε) is combined with the
percentage of roof area connected to the RWH system and storage tank to derive the overall RWH system
efficiency, for example if 100% of the roof area is connected to the storage tanks through a RWH system in
good condition, the overall RWH system efficiency is 70%. The maximum catchment efficiency of 80% (very
good RWH system condition) allows for losses from first flush devices, gutter overflow etc. that will still occur
from RWH systems in very good condition. This is a conservative assumption.
8.2.3 Rainwater Harvesting Model Inputs and Assumptions
The rainwater harvesting model calculations were completed for each community using the available
infrastructure survey data and assumptions for data gaps. The water supply demand balance assessment
was completed at the community rather than at the atoll/island level to reflect the reality of the geographic
location of the existing communities where the smaller communities are often very remote from the largest
communities (e.g. they could be at least an hour’s boat ride away therefore cannot share water during a
drought). Also, some very large tanks were installed by MPW during 2017 and atoll level calculations would
average these large storage volumes over all communities. Calculating the water supply demand balance at
a community level also takes into account the variation in population densities in different communities.
106
From Master of Science thesis on “Water Resources on Outer-Lying Islands in Micronesia”, by Alise Marie Beikmann, 2016

The calculations were run for a community using a representative or typical household and the typical values
for the suitable community buildings (i.e. individual models were not created for each community building).
The “suitable” community buildings are defined below.
Inputs and assumptions

 The water demand (Ot) depends on the number of users (typical household or people per community
building) and the per capita demand (20 L/person/day during drought).
 The population and households per community was based on the community level population
projection figures for 2017 and 2045 as generated by UNDP based on the RMI 2011 Population
Census and South Pacific Community (SPC) PRISM figures (with exceptions made for the two
communities with boarding high schools as discussed under Exceptions below) and endorsed by RMI
Economic Policy, Planning and Statistics Office (EPPSO)107. Where current population = 2017
estimate and future population = 2045 estimate. Community-level population estimates are included
in FS Annex 2.
 Pt: depth of rainfall per month was based on data for the appropriate weather station for each atoll.
Rainfall and Drought Timing

The existing status quo infrastructure condition (poor condition of gutters and downpipes, small diameter
pipes and connections to less than 100% of the roof area) leads to lower volumes of rainwater captured prior
to the start of the drought when compared to improved conditions. This was taken into account by using the
existing infrastructure condition data and estimating the percentage full that the existing storage tanks will be
at the start of a drought using the monthly rainfall singular tabular method.
In RMI, the dry season usually runs from December to April inclusive but is longer post El Niño years. As
described in Section 2.3, WSO typically provide 30 days warning of a potential drought based on the
predictions for rainfall in the next 30 days as follows (these are referred to as the drought rainfall thresholds):
 North < 152mm (6”) threshold in one month (Wotje and Utrik)
 Middle <203mm (8”) threshold in one month (Majuro, Ailinglaplap and Kwaj)
 South <254mm (10”) threshold in one month (Mili and Jaliut)
The RWH modelling approach used to estimate the percentage that the typical household tank is full on the
first day of the drought is shown in Table 34 below (based on the assumption that most droughts will start in
early January, i.e. a drought warning would be issued in early December). The percentage that the typical
household tank is full at the end of the previous month (November) also needs to be taken into account and
the modelling approach for this is shown in Table 35. A similar approach was taken for the community tanks
using the community wide population, average community storage per building and typical community roof
area. The community tanks were only considered to have demands in the 30 days prior to a drought if the
typical household tanks in that community were empty at the beginning of that time period.
Table 34: RWH Modelling Approach to Estimate Percent Full for Household Tanks on 1st Day of Drought
Baseline Future Climate Change Scenario with

Improved Conditions
RWH Based on recent Household RWH systems with maximum 70%
Infrastructure infrastructure survey data capture efficiency
Condition or RMI median values in Community RWH systems with maximum 70%
communities with no capture efficiency
survey data.
Gross volume of YAS formula using YAS formula using worse case of either drought
water captured in minimum of either the rainfall threshold or the 2045 predictions for CC
each existing HH drought rainfall threshold impacted December rainfall
tank under or baseline December (AF)
baseline rainfall
conditions in the (A)
30 days prior to a
drought (m³
supplied)

Demand on the 2017 population estimate 2045 population estimate X 20 LPCD
HH tank in the 30 X 20 LPCD (9 LPCD for Enewetak due to permanent RO)
days prior to (9 LPCD for Enewetak (BF)
drought (m³ due to permanent RO)
demand) (B)
Volume of water m³ supplied in 30 days m³ supplied in 30 days prior to drought minus
available in each prior to drought minus m³ m³ demand for the 30 days
existing HH tank demand in November (CF = AF – BF)
on the first day of from above
drought (m³ (C = A – B)
Supplied minus
Demand)
% full for each HH C divided by volume of CF divided by volume of typical HH tank
tank on the first typical HH tank
day of drought
Table 35: RWH Modelling Approach to Estimate Percent Full for Household Tanks when the Drought Warning
is Issued
Baseline Future Climate Change Scenario with

Improved Conditions
RWH Based on recent Household RWH systems with maximum 70%
Infrastructure infrastructure survey data capture efficiency
Condition or RMI median values in Community RWH systems with maximum 80%
communities with no capture efficiency
survey data.
Volume of water YAS formula using YAS formula using the 2045 predictions for CC
captured in tank in baseline November impacted November rainfall
November (m³ rainfall (A) (AF)
supplied)
Demand from 2017 population estimate 2045 population estimate X 30 LPCD
RWH for X 30 LPCD (19 LPCD for Enewetak due to permanent RO)
November (m³ (19 LPCD for Enewetak (BF)
demand) (higher due to permanent RO)
demand per (B)
person assumed
pre drought)
Volume of water m³ supplied in November m³ supplied in November minus m³ demand in
available in each minus m³ demand in November from above
existing HH tank November from above (CF = AF – BF)
when drought (C = A – B)
warning is issued
at end of
November (m³
Supplied minus
Demand)
% full for each HH C divided by volume of CF divided by volume of typical HH tank
tank at the end of typical HH tank
November (day
drought warning
is issued)
The community specific inputs for the rainwater harvesting models were based on the household and
community infrastructure survey data available from previous initiatives, as listed in the baseline survey data
in Section 3 (infrastructure data gaps are discussed below).
The infrastructure survey data from the community-level data sources were used to determine the baseline
assumptions for the following model inputs for each community (households and community buildings):

Ai: effective rooftop catchment area in m². For the current status quo, this was based on the utilized
roof area (available roof area X percentage of roof area connected to rainwater harvesting system).
Ε: catchment efficiency of the gutter-downspout system
S: storage tank size.
The infrastructure survey data for the existing community building sizes were reviewed to determine a
“suitable” roof area size that would capture enough water to store in the proposed large community storage
tanks. The threshold for a suitable community building was defined as a roof area greater than 100 m², which
is equivalent to twice the area of a small house. Typically the health centers were found to have greater
storage than most other community buildings but have roof areas smaller than 100 m² so were excluded from
the suitable community buildings (this provides additional contingency storage for the community). The
existing community storage tank volume was averaged over the community population (i.e. assuming that
the distribution of the community water demand would be proportional to the tank size).
Exceptions
An exception to the RMI common inputs for population is the two communities in the outer atolls that have
high schools with boarding students (Wotje in the Wotje Atoll and Jabwor in the Jaluit Atoll).
The high school boarding population was included in the 2011 Census population for the community where
the school is located (Jabwor and Wotje), even if the students live with their families in other communities or
atolls in the school holidays. The high schools are being supplied with additional rainwater storage through
the GIZ ACSE fund plus new RO units by IOM and concrete tank (Jaluit HS) from grassroots grant of Japan.
For this reason, the boarding student population was excluded from the community population for the
community rainwater harvesting design for the proposed investments. The estimated 2017 boarding student
population was:
 150 students in the Northern Island High School in Wotje, Wotje Atoll
 217 students in the Jaluit Area High School in Jabwor, Jaluit Atoll
Data gaps
For the communities without infrastructure survey data, the model inputs were based on RMI wide median
values from all of the infrastructure surveys (from the community-level data sources listed above) for
households and for suitable community buildings. These RMI wide assumptions for all data gaps are shown
in Table 36.
Table 36: RMI wide baseline assumptions (used for the infrastructure data gaps)
Parameter Households Suitable community
buildings
Available roof area (m²) 54 m² 200 m²
% of roof area connected 50% 50%
RWH condition Poor Good
RWH efficiency 20% 35%
Tank volume (m³) 5.68 m³ (1,500G) 5.68 m³ (1,500G)
People supplied with water per community N/A Average of 67 people per
building community building
Status Quo rainfall requirement to fill typical tanks

Under the status quo situation for RWH system condition and efficiency, the typical household storage tank
of 5.68 m³ tank requires 516 mm of rainfall to fill. Under the improved household RWH system conditions
(overall capture efficiency of 70%), the typical household storage tank requires 149 mm of rainfall
(approximately 30% of the original rainfall) to fill a 5.68 m³ tank.
Under the status quo situation for RWH system condition and efficiency, the typical community building
storage tank of 5.68 m³ tank requires 81 mm of rainfall to fill. Under the improved community building RWH
system conditions (overall capture efficiency of 80%), the typical community building storage tank requires
36 mm of rainfall (approximately 40% of the original rainfall) to fill.
The rainwater harvesting model outputs are discussed in the sections below.

8.2.4 Status Quo Rural Water Security under Baseline Drought
The status quo situation for the rural communities under the baseline drought is tabulated below at an
atoll/island level, including the estimates for the 2017 population and households and the estimated total
household and community storage volumes (the figures are rounded in the table). The community storage
volume only includes tanks attached to suitable buildings (with a roof area greater than 100 m²). The storage
located at additional smaller community buildings (e.g. health centres) provides a storage buffer.
The new large storage tanks built by MPW in 2017 are included in the table and in the total built storage. For
Kwajalein, the status quo storage volume also includes a 30m³ tank planned to be built by Seabees in 2018.
The baseline drought storage requirement is shown at the atoll/island level, i.e. is the sum of the individual
communities in atolls/islands that have multiple communities (due to different population densities and
community storage tanks). There are six atolls/islands (Aur, Ebon, Enewetak, Jabat, Jaluit and Kili) that have
a status quo built storage volume that is greater than the requirement for the baseline drought. These should
be checked during implementation as the community storage volume for some of the communities in these
atolls/islands are based on RMI wide assumptions due to a lack of infrastructure survey data.
Table 37 also shows the total aggregated volume of water stored on first day of drought under status quo
RWH system conditions and the baseline drought (as estimated from the rainwater harvesting calculations
for the status quo system condition and efficiency). The volume of water available on first day of drought is
less than the physical built storage in all atolls/islands under the status quo situation. This reflects the reality
of water lost from the RWH systems due to inefficient roof capture and leaking gutters and downpipes. After
accounting for this water loss through the RWH modelling, there are only two atolls/islands (Enewetak and
Jabat) that have more water stored on first day of the baseline drought under status quo conditions than the
baseline drought water requirement (i.e. the status quo provides sufficient water for the baseline drought for
Enewetak and Jabat only). The modelled number of days of drought that water can be supplied at 20 litres
per capita per day under the status quo RWH system conditions can only be shown at the community level,
see Table 51 for the community level results.

Table 37: Summary of the Status Quo RWH Systems and the Baseline Drought RWH results at the atoll/island level
Total Existing Existing Total Built

Current 2017 Household New Modelled volume
Number of Community Storage Baseline
Largest target Storage Community of water stored
target Storage Volume at under the Baseline storage
Atoll/Island rural population Volume Storage on first day of
communities Suitable Status drought volume
community (communities Built in baseline drought
(>= 5 HH ) (all Community Quo (HH requirement
>= 5 HH) 2017 under status quo
households) Buildings and CB)
UNITS communities people m³ m³ m³ m³ days m³ m³
Ailinglaplap Woja 10 1,788 1,687 327 189 2,209 60 2,395 875
Ailuk Ailuk 2 352 364 104 189 657 90 706 493
Arno Arno 12 1,772 970 117 189 1,277 40 1,583 167
Aur Aur 2 519 557 49 189 801 70 811 607
Ebon Toka 6 724 772 140 0 919 40 648 507
Enewetak Enewetak 1 690 833 57 189 1,079 90 625 781
Jabat Jabat 1 87 114 11 95 220 60 118 185
Jaluit Jabwor 6 1,533 1,363 176 0 1,545 40 1,391 377
Kili Kili 0 569 523 57 0 579 40 509 156
Kwajalein Santo 6 1,606 1,301 606 125 2,079 70 2,513 683
Lae Lae 2 344 273 17 95 384 70 538 316
Lib Lib 1 161 108 0 95 203 70 252 164
Likiep Likiep 3 417 572 35 189 796 90 839 576
Majuro Aenkan 1 180 233 104 0 343 40 161 273
Maloelap Tarawa 5 709 586 86 189 861 70 1,109 861
Mejit Mejit 1 362 335 195 0 530 90 727 381
Mili Mili 6 694 1,083 62 189 996 40 620 616
Namdrik Namdrik 1 528 568 65 0 639 40 472 348
Namu Majkin 4 786 761 102 189 1,058 70 1,229 825
Rongelap Rongelap 1 82 68 11 0 80 90 166 0
Ujae Ujae 1 378 307 42 189 538 70 592 336
Utrik Utrik 1 452 403 93 95 597 90 909 115
Wotho Wotho 1 101 87 72 95 254 90 203 206
Wotje Wotje 3 738 772 228 284 1,284 90 1,517 87
RMI Totals 77 15,572 14,639 2756 2774 19,926 20,633 9935

8.3 Rural Water Security Investment Design
As stated above, the rural community water security investments adopted in the design are:
1. Household RWH improvements: replacing existing gutters and downpipes with new 150mm diameter
pipes plus first flush.
2. Community building RWH improvements and storage:
a. Replacing existing gutters and downpipes with new 150mm diameter pipes plus first flush
b. Construction of new storage tanks
c. Construction of additional roof catchments (where there are insufficient community buildings)
The expected efficiency improvements are outlined in Table 38 and Table 39, which compare the status quo
situation to the improved situation for typical households and typical community buildings.
Table 38: Household Rainwater Harvesting Systems in Rural Communities in RMI (Typical)
Status Quo HH RWH Systems in RMI Improved HH RWH Systems

Roof Typical surface area is 54 m². No change to baseline for household roof area
(note limitation on thatched roofs discussed further in
Roof materials are corrugated steel or Section 11.5.1).
Aluminum/Tin sheet roof – typically in good
condition.
Connection of In most HHs, only about 50% of the roof area is Under improved design,100% of the available roof
roof area to connected with guttering leading to loss of area is connected with guttering leading with minimal
RWH rainwater from roof to tank. loss of rainwater from roof to tank.
Overflow pipe connected to nearby groundwater well

(if possible) to recharge the ground water table.
Gutters 75mm (3”) to 100mm (4”) guttering system is 150mm diameter
installed which typically provides 50% coverage
or less and was found to be poorly installed and
in poor condition.
Downpipes 100mm diameter 150mm diameter
Tanks Most household[1] have at least one 4,542 liter No change to baseline for household tanks
(1,200 gallon) to 5,678 liter (1,500 gallon)
storage tanks. Tanks are normally plastic PVC First flush diverter is in place to reduce pollution of
materials. tank water by diverting the first flush of contaminated
water away from the tank (available in several sizes).
Most tanks in HHs do not have first flush
diverters or mosquito guard systems. General Insect screens installed
practice on first seasonal rainfall was to divert
the feed away from the storage system to
overflow onto the ground. Therefore, significant
rainwater stored in tanks is often lost for
cleaning.
RWH system Typical 20% 70% after improvements to connection, gutters and
efficiency Given above conditions, it is estimated that there downspout outlined above
is significant loss of rainwater in typical HH RWH
systems.
516mm of rain required to fill typical household 149mm of rain required to fill typical household tank
tank under baseline RWH system conditions under improved RWH system conditions
Table 39: Community Rainwater Harvesting Systems in Rural Communities in RMI (Typical)
Status Quo Community RWH Systems in RMI Improved Community RWH Systems
Roof area Surface area of suitable community building is at No change to baseline for existing community
least 100 m2. Large roof areas can be over 400 building roof area
m².
For new community roofs, proposed surface area is
Roof materials are corrugated steel or 200 m² of galvanized corrugated panels.

Status Quo Community RWH Systems in RMI Improved Community RWH Systems
Aluminum/Tin sheet roof – typically in good
condition.
Connection of In most suitable community buildings, only about Under improved design, 100% of the available roof
roof area to 50% of the roof area is connected with guttering area is connected with guttering leading with minimal
RWH tank leading to loss of rainwater from roof to tank. loss of rainwater from roof to tank.
Overflow pipe connected to nearby groundwater well

(if possible) to recharge the ground water table.
Gutters 75mm (3”) to 150mm (6”) guttering system 150mm diameter
which typically provides 50% coverage or less
and was found to be in good condition.
Downpipes 100mm diameter 150mm diameter
Tanks Most suitable community buildings have at least All suitable community buildings have additional
one 4,542 liter (1,200 gallon) to 5,678 liter (1,500 storage tanks up to 50m3 in size. The proposed flat
gallon) storage tanks. pack materials are structural panels and base (made
of either galvanized steel or High Density
Given small tank size compared to large roof Polyethylene (HDPE) with marinized aluminum
area, significant water is lost from tank overflow. structural components) plus a food grade
polypropylene liner.
Most tanks in community buildings do not have
first flush diverters or mosquito guard Tanks are made of materials that are easy to ship and
systems. General practice on first seasonal construct (i.e. flat pack design[2])
rainfall was to divert the feed away from the
storage system to overflow onto the In order to avoid land issues and altering function of
ground. Therefore, significant rainwater stored the community building, maximum tank size per
in tanks is often lost for cleaning. suitable building is proposed at 50m3
First flush diverter is in place to reduce pollution of

tank water by diverting the first flush of contaminated
water away from the tank (available in several sizes).
Insect screens installed

RWH system Typical 35% 80% after improvements to connection, gutters and
efficiency Given above conditions, it is estimated that there downspout outlined above
is significant loss of rainwater in typical
community RWH systems.
81mm of rain required to fill typical community 36mm of rain required to fill typical community tank
tank under baseline RWH system conditions under improved RWH system conditions
Users From 20 to 150 people per community building From 18 to 77 people per community building
The volumetric benefit of the RWH system improvements was modelled using the improved RWH system
efficiencies in Table 38 and Table 39 along with the monthly rainfall data and assuming drought timing etc.
as described in Section 8.2.3.
Uncertainties are inherent in all models. Rainwater harvesting modeling has uncertainties associated with
both the supply (capacity of the rainwater harvesting system to capture and store water) and the demand
(which is influenced by water use behavior, household occupancy etc.). The aim is to minimize
uncertainties where possible and adopt a conservative approach. The key uncertainties and the potential
limitations are discussed in later sections (Section 11.5.2).
Table 40 shows the water security options and upper limit for target locations for each option.

Table 40: Water Security options
Description Inputs – structural / equipment Target locations

Household Improving existing Installing new/replacement 150mm Up to 2,524 households
RWH System household RWH from a gutters to capture 100% of the across 77 target communities
Improvements typical baseline efficiency available household roof area in 24 local island jurisdictions
of 20% to 70%108
Replacing existing 100mm
downspouts with 150mm downspouts
All households in
selected communities Installing first flush systems for
households with no first flush system
Community Improving existing Installing new/replacement gutters Up to 237 existing community

RWH System Community building RWH with 150mm gutters to capture 100% RWH systems available to be
Improvements from a typical baseline of the available roof area for suitable improved at 237 suitable
efficiency of 35% to community buildings community buildings (defined
80%109 as those with roof areas
Replacing existing 100mm greater than 100m²). This
All suitable community downspouts with 150mm downspouts excludes the community
buildings that were not on suitable community buildings buildings that received
upgraded in 2017 improvements and new large
Installing first flush systems for storage tanks in 2017.
community RWH with no first flush
system
Community Adding additional Installing new flat pack community Up to 237 existing community
RWH new community storage to storage tanks up to 50m³ in size for buildings suitable for new
storage suitable community communities with insufficient storage storage tanks across the 77
buildings to meet the target . target communities
The proposed flat pack materials are
All suitable community structural panels and base (made of
buildings that were not either galvanized steel or High Density
upgraded in 2017 Polyethylene (HDPE)110 with
marinized aluminum structural
components) plus a food grade
polypropylene liner.
Additional Construction of new Installing new 200 m² Roof Structures No limit on the number of
Community community roofs with made of galvanized roof panels with new community roof
Roofs new RWH systems to pressure treated timber supports structures across the 77
connect to new storage including new RWH system of 150mm target communities.
tanks. gutters and downspouts with first flush
systems connected to the new tanks. Target communities have an
insufficient number of existing
community buildings to install
new storage at (based on the
threshold of maximum of one
tank per building of 50m³).
Table 41 shows a summary of the 2045 rainwater harvesting modelling results at the atoll/island level
including the additional drought days and storage volume required due to climate change (these are
additional to the baseline drought days and volume requirement under the status quo condition in Table 37).
The table also shows the aggregated volumetric benefit for improved household (HH) and community building
(CB) RWH systems as estimated from the rainwater harvesting calculations. The volumetric benefit is the
additional water stored on the first day of the climate change drought in 2045 under improved RWH conditions
(RWH capture efficiency increased to 70% for HH and 80% for CB).
108
The maximum efficiency will always be less than 100% due to losses in the RWH system from overflows, first flush volumes etc. The maximum improved
efficiency has been set at 70% for household RWH to reflect the likely lower maintenance than community buildings.
109
The maximum improved efficiency has been set at 80% for community building RWH
110
Timber system may also be a viable alternative that can be further explored during project implementation

Table 41: Summary of the 2045 rainwater harvesting modelling results at the atoll/island level (with climate change additionality)
Atoll Number of Projected Climate change Storage volume required for Estimated volumetric benefit Estimated volumetric
target 2045 target additional days climate change additional to from HH RWH improvements benefit from CB RWH
communities population of drought baseline drought (rounded at based on 1st day of drought improvements based on
(>= 5 HH ) (communities community level to nearest 50 in 2045 (with climate change 1st day of drought in 2045
>= 5 HH) m³) impacts) (with climate change
impacts)
communities people days m³ m³ m³
Ailinglaplap 10 1,996 58 2,550 1,317 17
Ailuk 2 392 20 250 91 0
Arno 12 1,979 17 1,250 952 16
Aur 2 579 30 350 193 0
Ebon 6 810 19 150 412 36
Enewetak 1 771 20 0 275 0
Jabat 1 98 58 0 34 0
Jaluit 6 1,739 19 600 1,150 18
Kili 0 636 19 150 423 0
Kwajalein 6 1,795 30 1,600 1,213 43
Lae 2 384 30 400 64 0
Lib 1 180 30 150 14 0
Likiep 3 466 30 350 195 21
Majuro 1 201 17 0 70 0
Maloelap 5 792 30 750 0 0
Mejit 1 404 30 450 113 0
Mili 6 775 27 150 380 0
Namdrik 1 590 19 0 290 12
Namu 4 878 30 700 233 0
Rongelap 1 92 20 150 35 0
Ujae 1 423 30 300 194 9
Utrik 1 505 20 500 245 0
Wotho 1 113 20 0 36 0
Wotje 3 843 30 650 108 0
77 17,441 11,450 8,037 172

8.3.1 New Community Storage Tank Design
During the August 2016 mission to RMI, the project preparation team compared a number of material
options for the new community storage tanks including obtaining pricing from suppliers. The evaluated tank
material options were as follows:
 Molded plastic tanks
 Concrete tanks
 Concrete Block Tanks
 Modular steel tanks with liner
 Modular HDPE or timber tanks with liner
The tank material options were assessed based on the following seven criteria:
1. Life expectancy
2. Cost
3. Potable water quality
4. Risk of leaks
5. Environmental sustainability
6. Ease of construction
7. Transportability
The tank material option assessments are shown in Table 42 and 43.
Table 42: Tank material option assessment result

Comparison Molded Concrete Concrete Modular Modular Explanation
of tank plastic tanks Block steel HDPE or
material tanks Tanks tanks with timber
options liner tanks with
liner
Life 3.0 10.0 9.0 8.0 6.8 Life expectancy as per Table
expectancy 38
Cost 5 9 10 6 7 Relative cost. Molded plastic
tanks would require more land
area (based on multiple tanks
of 5.68 m³ each tank) so have
reduced score
Potable water 6 5 5 10 10 Quality of water provided
quality (much higher for the modular
tanks with liners)
Risk of leaks 5 4 4 8 8 Risk of cracks and leaks over
time
Environmental 7 5 6 8 8 Is the product made of
sustainability environmentally friendly
materials? It is made from raw
or recycled materials?
Ease of 9 4 5 8 8 Includes time to install, level of
construction technical difficulty of
installation, is skilled labor
required
Transportability 3 3 3 8 8 Transport from Majuro to the
outer atolls. Modular tanks
have higher scores as can be
flat packed with lighter weight
than concrete, so transport
‘footprint’ smaller plus can be
relocated easily if necessary
Total 38.0 40.0 42.0 56.0 55.8

Table 43: Tank material option assessment detail for life expectancy
Comparison of tank material Molded Concrete Concrete Modular steel Modular HDPE
options plastic tanks Block Tanks tanks with liner tanks with liner
tanks
Life expectancy (years) 10 50 40 30 25
Score for life expectancy 3.0 10.0 9.0 8.0 6.8
The flat pack modular tank material options (steel, HDPE or timber) received the highest assessment scores.
Flat pack modular tanks carry significant advantages over the locally built concrete tanks and are
recommended despite the need to import the tanks. These advantages include:
 Modular delivery - everything you need can be supplied as a kit
 Lightweight ease of transport into remote areas (can be flat-packed on to a pallet)
 Lighter weight than concrete, so transport 'footprint' smaller
 Ease of construction (local labor can be used following training by technician)
 Readily relocated (to other communities or atolls) if need be
 Can get a range of sizes without having to design specifically
 Concrete and block tanks both prone to cracking, prefab tanks are not
 The tank, if site is well prepared, will only take a few days to install
 The lighter weight tank material option (HDPE) does not require a concrete foundation
 No heavy machinery hoists/cranes required for the HDPE tank option, simple hand tools e.g. battery
drills and ladders only required.
 Inert materials will not rust nor leach out contaminants
 Materials used can potentially be recycled e.g. marinized aluminum components, HDPE, timber or
steel wall panels, bases and polypropylene liners, steel panels.
 Flexible polypropylene potable water grade liner providing superior water quality
Concrete tanks would need to be made from either concrete derived from local sources or imported concrete
blocks. Concrete derived from local sources originates from coral dredging and therefore are unacceptable
from an environmental impact perspective. Imported concrete blocks would incur equivalent material costs
but have much larger transport and installation costs. In addition, concrete tanks are more prone to leaks
and cracks.
The technical design has been based on the flat pack modular tanks due to the advantages outlined above.
Each flat pack modular tank material has different advantages and disadvantages, for example steel has the
longest life but requires a concrete foundation, HDPE does not require a concrete foundation but has a lower
asset life than steel, timber may be susceptible to termites. There are a number of suppliers of flat pack
modular tanks and the selection of a supplier would follow the standard commercial procurement process
(e.g. open tender process). Quotes were obtained from suppliers of each of the flat pack modular tank options
and the budget was based on the higher pricing from the range.
Based on discussion within RMI the tank capacity has been limited to 50m3. This moderate size should
eliminate the need for concrete foundations and should ensure that the tanks can be located next to buildings
even in more populated communities.
The technical design details are included in Annex 19. A wet RWH system is proposed for the community
storage tanks.

8.4 Cost Effectiveness Assessment for Rural Water Security Technical Design Options
Chapter 7 and earlier sections of Chapter 8 have assessed the current status of the existing water supply
infrastructure in target areas of this project. Further, it has assessed the potential and adequacy of a range
of different technical options to contribute to ensuring water security in RMI. The maximum water supply
augmentation potential and related costs for each technical option (intervention) has been assessed.
This analysis has illustrated that RMI has different options for ensuring water security across the project
period.
Considering RMI’s financial constraints, the interventions are prioritised based on their cost-effectiveness
(USD/m3). More details are provided below.
8.4.1 Introduction to Cost Effectiveness
As stated above, the three rural water security technical design options considered to enable the target
communities to meet the water resilience target are:
1. Household RWH improvements: replacing existing gutters and downpipes with new 150mm diameter
pipes plus first flush.
2. Community building RWH improvements and new storage tanks:
a. replacing existing gutters and downpipes with new 150mm diameter pipes plus first flush
b. construction of new community RWH storage tanks (flat pack tanks)
3. Construction of new roof catchments with new community storage tanks.
4. Existing Concrete tank rehabilitation (23)
During the feasibility design, a maximum tank size threshold was set to ensure that the proposed tanks are
suitable for construction in a village situation (based on one tank per community building). The proposed
maximum tank size threshold was set at 50m³ (Design details are included in FS Annex 19111).
The rural water security options were assessed and ranked based on their cost effectiveness index, in order
to determine the priority order for implementation of investments per target community.
The infrastructure included within the capital construction cost as well as the estimated number of installations
during the 25 year planning horizon for each option are summarized below:
Table 44: Water Security Options – RWH Systems
Rural Water Security Options Types of capital considered

Household RWH improvements New gutters
New downpipes
First flush
Community building RWH improvements and new storage New gutters
New downpipes
First flush
New flat pack community RWH storage tanks for
each suitable community building
New roof catchments
Types of infrastructure considered Expected useful life and number of installations for each
intervention during the 25 year planning horizon
RWH system improvements New gutters 10 year expected life and 3 installations (1 initial and 2 renewals)
in households and New downpipes
community buildings First flush
111
The maximum size of the community tanks suitable for each community will be discussed and agreed at the community consultation at the start of the project
implementation.

New Community RWH Storage Tanks 25 year expected life and 1 installation (1 initial and 0 renewals)
Additional roof catchments 25 year expected life and 1 installation (1 initial and 0 renewals)
New Household RWH Storage Tanks 10 year expected life and 3 installations (1 initial and 2 renewals)
8.4.2 Marginal Abatement Cost Curve (MACC) methodology
Chapter 7 and earlier sections of Chapter 8 have assessed the current status of the existing water supply
infrastructure in target areas of this project. Further, it has assessed the potential and adequacy of a range
of different technical options to contribute to ensuring water security in RMI. The maximum water supply
augmentation potential and related costs for each technical option (intervention) has been assessed.
This analysis has illustrated that RMI has different options for ensuring water security across the project
period. Considering RMI’s financial constraints, the interventions are prioritised based on their cost-
effectiveness (USD/m3). More details are provided below. The Marginal Abatement Cost Curve (MACC)
methodology was used to assess the most cost-effective sequence of water supply interventions to ensure
water security by year 2045 for targeted islands/atolls. By jointly assessing the highest potential to augment
water supplies or reduce water demand of each intervention and its related cost, a prioritization of
interventions can be made based on their cost-effectiveness and their potential to close the water supply-
demand gap.
An example of a MACC cost curve can be seen in Figure 26 below. The cost curve’s horizontal axis measures
the amount of water made available by each measure, i.e. either by augmenting water supplies or by reducing
water demand. The vertical axis of the cost curve measures the annual cost per unit of water required by
each intervention type. This annual cost is measured as Equivalent Annual Cost (EAC), which includes the
annual capital, operation and maintenance cost over the asset’s lifetime, as compared to the baseline.
Figure 26 MACC Cost Curve Example
Cost curves were determined for each target island/ atoll, considering their specific situation. However,
transportation costs are not considered to differ across interventions and are thus not considered in the unit
costs, but in the overall budget.
Water Security Target
The overall water security target is to ensure 20lpd for the target islands/ atolls during drought events. The

water security target has to be achieved for:
 Baseline droughts: Drought periods, which are unrelated to climate change

 Climate change induced drought periods: Drought periods beyond the baseline drought, which
have been prolonged by climate change.
Figure 27 below provides an overview on available water resources at the onset of a drought, as well as the
water requirements for the baseline and climate change induced drought. Further, it also shows the water
supply-demand gap to meet the defined water security target of 20Lpcd for each of these drought events.
To ensure water security in a baseline drought, an additional 11,302 m³ are required. To ensure water
security in a climate change induced drought, an additional 9,161 m³ of water are required. Some
communities within the atolls have excess water supplies, even after taking the baseline and climate
change drought water requirements into consideration. As this water – totalling 118 m³ - cannot be used by
other communities on the island/ atoll, this water has to be made available by additional interventions, thus
increasing the water availability gap by 118 m3 112. Likewise, as the underlying assessment for the water
availability gap for the baseline and climate-change induced drought are made at community level, the
RMI-wide totals of existing water availability and water requirements, as shown in Figure 27 below, do not
provide the details required to understand the true water availability gaps. Under the status quo
infrastructure conditions, most communities require additional water to meet the baseline drought
requirements. A few communities have sufficient water to meet the baseline and climate change induced
water requirements under the status quo infrastructure conditions. As such, the climate change induced
water availability gap is overall smaller than the climate change induced water requirement. This is due to
the fact that some communities have water supplies which can meet the baseline and the climate change
induced water requirements, thus reducing the total value. Likewise, the baseline water availability gap is
larger than one would expect when just subtracting the existing water availability from the baseline water
requirement – as some of the existing water is used by communities with excess water supplies to meet the
climate change induced drought. This demonstrates the importance of a community-based assessment of
the water availability gap.
Figure 27 Overview of water availability and drought water requirements by 2045 across 24 target
islands/ atolls
112
When not considering this community specific situation of existing water supplies and water requirements, the total water gap would be 20,345 ( total water
requirement for baseline and climate-induced drought minus existing water availability). This, however, would mask the true water requirements at a community
level.

The MACC analysis was conducted at an atoll/island level using the community specific water supply gap
calculations as described earlier in Section 8.2.
The achievement of the water security target for the baseline drought is considered a development objective,
and thus has to be ensured by the Government of RMI. The associated costs will be borne by the Government
of RMI as partial Co-financing to this project. The additional requirements to achieve water security for a
climate change induced drought are intended to be assured with GCF financing.
In practice – it is not possible to distinguish between water made available for the baseline or climate change
induced drought. Water security for climate change induced drought periods cannot be achieved without
having first achieved water security for baseline droughts. Thus, this project proposal targets the
achievement of both water security targets.
To ensure transparency, the analysis distinguishes between water required, water supply-demand gap,
required interventions and related costs for a baseline drought and for a climate change induced drought.
8.4.3 Assessment of interventions

Through this process the number of interventions – on community level at each island/ atoll - as feasible to
close the water supply-demand gap and to thus ensure the water security target.
These include:
1. Improvement of household rainwater harvesting structures

2. Improvement of community centre rainwater harvesting structures and increase in storage tanks
3. Construction of new community-based roof structures in combination with a storage tank
4. Rehabilitation of existing concrete storage tanks
In addition to stationary RO units, RMI has 54 mobile RO units, which are stored in Majuro and deployed to
islands in need as emergency measure response measure during droughts. The centralized storage
facilitates the O&M of these RO units, as compared to the stationary ones. To consider existing assets and
to provide a holistic analysis of measures, mobile RO units are included in the cost curves analysis.
Table 45 provides an overview of interventions included in the cost curve analysis for all islands/ atolls. The
cost curve analysis includes the maximum possible number of beneficiaries and volumetric benefit for each
intervention.113 The analysis of the possible interventions has been conducted for each island/ atoll
separately.
Table 45 Interventions included in cost curve analysis across all target islands/ atolls
Intervention Definition Total # of possible Total potential water
interventions increase (m3)
Improvement of household Total number of 2,529 households114 8,036 m3

rainwater harvesting households requiring
structures (HH RWH) RWH improvements.
Based on current state
of RWH schemes, the
volumetric benefit of
this intervention was
estimated.
Improvement of community Total number of 237 existing CB RWH Improvement:

building rainwater harvesting community buildings community buildings
structures and increase in requiring RWH for RWH improvement 172 m3
improvements and/or
113
For example, the final intervention mix may only include 100 interventions related to HH RWH. However, 2,524 HH could potentially benefit from this type of
intervention. Thus, to allow for a holistic analysis of all possible intervention mixes, the total possible number of all interventions are used as input variables to the
analysis.
114
Excludes the households improved by IOM in 2016 in Ujae, Wotho and Lae Atolls/Islands

Intervention Definition Total # of possible Total potential water
interventions increase (m3)
storage tanks (CB RWH) additional storage. A 158 additional tanks Additional tanks:
maximum of one for community
storage tank (50m3) buildings 7,900 m3
per community building
was assumed. Based Total:
on current state of
RWH systems and 8,072 m3
existing tanks, the
volumetric benefit of
this intervention was
estimated.
Construction of new Total number of new 445 new community 22,250 m3

community-based roof roof/ tanks structures roofs and storage
structures in combination with required to close the tanks (50m3)115
a storage tank (new CB RWH total water supply-
roofs and tanks) demand gap. As these
are new, free-standing
structures, their
number is not limited
to existing buildings
etc. The volumetric
benefit is estimated
based on the tank
volume (50m3) per
roof structure.
Rehabilitation of existing Total number of 23 concrete tanks 1,113 m3

concrete storage tanks existing storage tanks
(concrete tank rehab) requiring rehabilitation.
Based on their current
state the volumetric
benefit (less leakage)
was estimated for this
intervention.
Mobile reverse osmosis units Total number of 54 mobile RO units 104,248 m3

(mobile ROs) existing mobile RO
units. Volumetric
benefit is estimated
based on total days
with a projected water
gap and actual daily
production (as
opposed to design
capacity) to reflect
local realities.
Further, the feasibility study has identified the importance of rehabilitating and protecting groundwater
wells. The importance of groundwater as complementary water source for non-potable water uses was
115
While an unlimited number of community roofs and storage tanks could be installed, the number of total possible interventions is based on the total number
of roofs and storage tanks, which would be required to close the water supply demand gap on their own, i.e. without any other intervention.

demonstrated during previous drought events and is highly relevant for building additional resilience.
However, uncertainty around groundwater quality does not allow for its consideration as additional, reliable
drinking water source. Its importance lies in meeting non-potable water demand and thus reducing the
pressure on drinking water supplies – thus building further resilience. For these reasons, this intervention is
not included in the cost curves, which seek to identify cost-effective interventions to ensure the water
security target for essential uses (20 Lpcd).
While the cost curves are based on the type of interventions assessed in the feasibility study – with the
exception of existing mobile RO units - detailed on-site assessments will be required before implementation
to assess the exact scope and costs. 116
8.4.4 Assessment of costs for targeted interventions

Three categories of costs are considered for the project period of 26 years, starting with the implementation
phase:
 Capital expenditure
 Sustenance expenditure
 Operation and maintenance expenditure
The costs are discounted at 10% to derive the net present value. The unit costs for each intervention are
based on the annual volumetric benefit from each intervention and the equivalent annual cost (EAC) of
each intervention. Transportation costs are not included, as these would be similar per intervention. 117
The weighted average unit costs of each intervention type across all target islands/ atolls can be seen in
Table 46 below.
Table 46 Overview of weighted average unit costs of interventions across 24 target islands/ atolls
Intervention Unit cost (USD/m3)

HH RWH Improvement 49.37
CB RWH Improvement & Storage 56.95
CB new RWH roofs and tanks 78.56
Concrete tank rehab 96.97
Mobile RO 141.27
Note that the existing status quo infrastructure status of the rainwater harvesting structure of households
and community centres has an impact on the total volumetric benefit of each intervention. Thus, the unit
costs across islands/ atolls for these interventions can differ. Likewise, the volumetric benefit from
rehabilitating concrete tanks is tank specific and thus, unit costs differ per tank. For an island/ atoll specific
overview, please refer to the attached Excel File, sheet ‘Water savings and costs’. 118
8.4.5 Cost curves for targeted islands/ atolls of RMI

Following the cost curve analysis, it becomes apparent that only interventions from three out of the five
analysed intervention categories are required to meet the water security target. Concrete tank rehab, as
well as mobile RO are not among the most cost-effective interventions to close the water gap. More
detailed information on the Cost Curve Analysis is provided in FS Annex 24.
The differences in unit costs for HH RWH improvement and CB RWH improvement and storage across
islands/ atolls have resulted in islands/ atolls specific prioritisation of interventions based on cost-
116
For more details, please consult the Feasibility Study.
117
As per expert opinion.
118
File Name: Final_RMI MACC_Final Interventions_19122017

effectiveness. Thus, in some islands/ atolls, HH RWH improvement may be more cost-effective – and thus
prioritised – than CB RWH improvement and storage. In other islands/ atolls the opposite may be the case.
A comparison of the maximum number of interventions within each category with the most cost-effective
ones can be seen in 94% of all CC RWG improvement and storage interventions, as well as 64% of all HH
RWH improvement interventions were among the most cost-effective solutions and are thus prioritised.
Further, 29% of the total potential CC RWH roofs are found to be cost effective solutions across the target
area. The remaining interventions – while feasible – were not found to be cost-effective to meet the water
security target.
Table 47 Comparison of Selected Project Interventions and total possible interventions

Max # # Cost- %
interventions effective included
interventions
CB RWH Improvement & Storage 155 147 95%
CB RWH roofs with storage 445 140 31%
Concrete Tanks Rehab 23 - 0%
HH RWH Improvement 2,524 1,635 65%
Mobile RO 54 - 0%
The cost effective analysis is solely based on the technical feasibility of the interventions and their cost-
effectiveness (USD/m3). It does not consider criteria related to social or equity concerns, nor does consider
factors related to implementation. Thus, the results of this analysis can be used as guidance for the final
determination of the intervention mix.
8.5 Final Water Security Intervention Mix
The intervention mix based on the criteria of cost-effectiveness needs to be reviewed considering the basic
design principles described in Section 6.3, ownership, redundancy, effectiveness, sustainability, equity and
coordination.
Based on these criteria, it was decided to provide upgraded household Rainwater Harvesting
Improvements to all target households with rainwater harvesting systems. The principles of ownership,
equity and sustainability apply. The government of RMI needs to ensure equitable benefit to all the
residents equally in beneficiary communities. HH which receive repair in one community and not in another
will not be perceived as an equitable solution for all the residents despite the theoretical costs calculations
not supporting their complete intervention. RMI previous projects have not holistically supported every
resident equally and this project cannot be afford to follow this without the potential perception of
favouritism, It is not appropriate to build additional water security interventions in one community benefitting
at the HH level while leaving others without. By providing HH RWH improvements at each home (additional
152 above the cost effective determination) then the number of CB requiring improvements with storage
and new CB roofs with storage are affected and the final interventions are summarised in Table 48.
Table 48 Overview of final interventions to meet the water security target (differentiated by baseline and
climate induced drought)
Total M3 Interventions #
# CB # new roofs # tanks
Baseline Drought buildings and tanks rehab # HH
CB RWH Improvement &
Storage 3,204.89 69
CB RWH roofs with
storage 1,364.36 29
Concrete Tanks Rehab - -
HH RWH Improvement 6,733.05 1,937.00

Sub-total 11,302.30
Climate Change
Additionality Drought
Storage 4,170.69 89
CB RWH roofs with
storage 4,032.00 92
HH RWH Improvement 957.93 311.00
Sub-total 9,160.62
Total Baseline and
Climate Change
Additionality
Storage 7,375.59 158
CB RWH roofs with
storage 5,396.37 121
HH RWH Improvement 7,690.97 2,248.00
Total 20,462.93 158 121 - 2,248.00
Additional HH RWH for
social equity 550.82 281**
Additional CB with
Storage* (included in
numbers above) 3*
Grand Total (incl. 100%
HH RWH) 21,359.21 158 121 - 2,529.00
* 3 tanks and CB improvements are due to the calculation rounding up of tanks where communities require
a partial tank to complete the storage gap then this was rounded to a whole number. For example if a
community required 65m3 to cover their storage gap then 2 standard 50m3 tanks were allocated to the
community.
** number of interventions was increased from 2,248 to 2,524 for social equity reasons.
Table 49 below provides an updated overview of the final selected interventions and the maximum possible
interventions, when considering social equity concerns.
Table 49 Comparison of selected project interventions and total possible interventions

Max # # Selected %
interventions interventions included
CB RWH Improvement & Storage 237 158 67%
CB RWH roofs with storage 445 121 27%
Concrete Tanks Rehab 23 - 0%
HH RWH Improvement 2,524 2,524 95%
Mobile RO 54 - 0%

Table 50 shows the cost effectiveness results for rainwater harvesting at an atoll/island level. As described earlier, the cost curves results concluded that the concrete tank rehabilitation was not a cost effective option for water
security investment. Rehabilitation of the existing concrete tanks is not shown in the results tables but is recommended as a good asset management practice as it will ensure the baseline water storage is available in times of
drought. The results for the atoll/islands that have multiple communities have been distributed amongst the communities using the community level water supply demand balance calculations. The community level proposed cost
effective technical investments to ensure the goal of water security are shown in Table 51. A map of each atoll showing approximate locations for the target communities is provided in the atoll profiles in Proposal Annex IX. Scale-
up of current successfully cost-effective existing measures will provide assurance of sustainable interventions.
Table 50: Summary of Cost Effective Water Security Investment Results by Atoll/Island
Atoll/ 2017 HH Baseline Baseline Baseline Baseline Climate Climate Climate Climate Total # of Total # of Total # of Total new
Island Drought # of Drought # of Drought # of Drought # of Change Change Change Change new new households storage
new existing new households Additionality Additionality Additionality Additionality Community community for RWH volume
Community Community community for RWH Drought # of Drought # of Drought # of Drought # of tanks at roofs (1 tank Improvement
tanks at buildings roofs (1 tank Improvement new existing new households existing per roof)
existing requiring per roof) Community Community community for RWH buildings
buildings improvement tanks at buildings roofs (1 tank Improvement
existing requiring per roof)
buildings improvement
households tanks buildings tanks households tanks buildings tanks households tanks tanks households m³
Ailinglaplap 298 5 5 0 298 26 26 22 0 31 22 298 2650
Ailuk 64 2 2 2 64 0 0 3 0 2 5 64 350
Arno 256 10 10 0 256 14 14 0 0 24 0 256 1200
Aur 99 1 1 0 99 4 4 4 0 5 4 99 450
Ebon 137 0 0 0 63 1 1 0 75 1 0 138 50
Enewetak 110 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 110 0
Jabat 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 20 0 1 20 50
Jaluit 241 0 0 0 213 11 11 0 29 11 0 242 550
Kili 92 0 0 0 77 3 3 1 16 3 1 93 200
Kwajalein 232 12 12 0 232 10 10 13 0 22 13 232 1750
Lae 48 4 4 0 24 1 1 4 0 5 4 24 450
Lib 19 1 1 1 19 0 0 3 0 1 4 19 250
Likiep 76 2 2 0 76 6 6 0 0 8 0 76 400
Majuro 42 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 42 0
Maloelap 129 6 6 0 0 5 5 5 0 11 5 129 800
Mejit 59 5 5 0 59 1 1 5 0 6 5 59 550
Mili 131 0 0 0 32 0 0 1 100 0 1 132 50
Namdrik 101 0 0 0 43 0 0 2 59 0 2 102 100
Namu 135 4 4 0 135 6 6 5 0 10 5 135 750
Rongelap 12 2 2 1 12 0 0 1 0 2 2 12 200
Ujae 54 2 2 0 27 1 1 5 0 3 5 27 400
Utrik 72 2 2 9 72 0 0 5 0 2 14 72 800
Wotho 23 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 12 0 1 12 50
Wotje 136 11 11 16 136 0 0 11 0 11 27 136 1900
TOTALS 69 69 29 1937 89 89 92 311 158 121 2529 13950

Table 51: Community Level Water Supply Gap Results and Distributed Cost Effective Water Security Investments
Local Community Current 2017 Number of days that Gap in water Climate change # of new # of new Total new # of households Additional
governmen households in water can be supply for additional days of Community tanks community storage volume for RWH Households to
t community supplied on first day baseline drought tanks at existing roofs (1 tank Improvement receive RWH
jurisdiction of baseline drought drought under Community per roof) improvements for
under status quo status quo buildings (also equity
conditions conditions RWH
improvement)
households days days days tanks tanks m³ households households
Ailinglaplap Jah 19 26 34 58 2 1 150 19 0

Ailinglaplap Mejil 18 28 32 58 2 1 150 18 0
Ailinglaplap Jeh 47 24 36 58 2 7 450 47 0
Ailinglaplap Kattiej 16 58 2 58 2 0 100 16 0
Ailinglaplap Woja 78 16 44 58 10 6 800 78 0
Ailinglaplap Enewe/Bikajl 10 1 59 58 2 1 150 10 0
a
Ailinglaplap Bouj 41 39 21 58 4 1 250 41 0
Ailinglaplap Jebwan 18 13 47 58 2 2 200 18 0
Ailinglaplap Airok 45 30 30 58 4 3 350 45 0
Ailinglaplap Olar 6 28 32 58 1 0 50 6 0
Ailuk Enejelar 6 177 0 20 0 0 0 6 0
Ailuk Ailuk 58 55 35 20 2 5 350 58 0
Arno Ine 22 0 40 17 3 0 150 22 0
Arno Japo 19 0 40 17 2 0 100 19 0
Arno Likwoj 24 27 13 17 1 0 50 24 0
(Lukoj)
Arno Arno 47 0 40 17 4 0 200 47 0
Arno Ulien 32 12 28 17 2 0 100 32 0
Arno Bekarej 24 13 27 17 2 0 100 24 0
Arno Todo (Tutu) 6 0 40 17 1 0 50 6 0
Arno Langor 19 0 40 17 2 0 100 19 0
Arno Tinak 21 0 40 17 2 0 100 21 0
Arno Kilange 10 0 40 17 1 0 50 10 0
Arno Malel 10 0 40 17 2 0 100 10 0
Arno Matolen 22 2 38 17 2 0 100 22 0
Aur Tabal 43 57 13 30 2 1 150 43 0
Aur Aur 56 60 10 30 3 3 300 56 0
Ebon Jittaken 35 30 10 19 0 0 0 35 0
Ebon Jittoen 22 17 23 19 1 0 50 22 0
Ebon Rerok 12 10 30 19 0 0 0 12 0
Ebon Enilok 7 84 0 19 0 0 0 7 0
Ebon Toka 44 49 0 19 0 0 0 44 0
Ebon Enekoton 17 50 0 19 0 0 0 17 0
Enewetak Enewetak 110 126 0 20 0 0 0 0 110
Jabat Jabat 20 106 0 58 0 1 50 20 0
Jaluit Imiej 17 13 27 19 1 0 50 17 0
Jaluit Imroj 28 25 15 19 1 0 50 28 0
Jaluit Jabnoren 8 5 35 19 1 0 50 8 0
Jaluit Jabwor 108 6 34 19 5 0 250 108 0
Jaluit Jaluit 47 15 25 19 1 0 50 47 0
Jaluit Mejrirok 15 22 18 19 1 0 50 15 0
Jaluit Narmej 18 27 13 19 1 0 50 18 0
Kili Kili 92 14 26 19 3 1 200 93 0
Kwajalein Santo 100 32 38 30 6 4 500 100 0
(Enubirr)
Kwajalein Ebadon 11 0 70 30 2 3 250 11 0
Kwajalein Mejatto 52 13 57 30 6 3 450 52 0

Local Community Current 2017 Number of days that Gap in water Climate change # of new # of new Total new # of households Additional
governmen households in water can be supply for additional days of Community tanks community storage volume for RWH Households to
t community supplied on first day baseline drought tanks at existing roofs (1 tank Improvement receive RWH
jurisdiction of baseline drought drought under Community per roof) improvements for
under status quo status quo buildings (also equity
conditions conditions RWH
improvement)
households days days days tanks tanks m³ households households
Kwajalein Gugeegue 44 19 51 30 5 1 300 44 0

Kwajalein Enubuj 11 28 42 30 1 1 100 11 0
(Carlson)
Kwajalein Carlos 14 4 66 30 2 1 150 14 0
Lae Lae 48 46 24 30 5 4 450 24 0
Lib Lib 19 51 19 30 1 4 250 19 0
Likiep Melang 8 32 58 30 2 0 100 8 0
Likiep Jebal 10 82 8 30 1 0 50 10 0
Likiep Likiep 58 73 17 30 5 0 250 58 0
Majuro Aenkan 42 76 0 17 0 0 0 0 42
Maloelap Kaben 30 49 21 30 3 1 200 0 30
Maloelap Jang 20 63 7 30 2 0 100 0 20
Maloelap Wolot 20 100 0 30 1 0 50 0 20
Maloelap Tarawa 24 42 28 30 4 2 300 0 24
Maloelap Airok 30 68 2 30 1 2 150 0 30
Mejit Mejit 59 53 37 30 6 5 550 59 0
Mili Lukonwod 8 4 36 27 0 1 50 8 0
Mili Enejet 33 39 1 27 0 0 0 33 0
Mili Arbar 6 72 0 27 0 0 0 6 0
Mili Mili 49 58 0 27 0 0 0 49 0
Mili Nallu 28 47 0 27 0 0 0 28 0
Mili Tokewa 7 18 22 27 0 0 0 7 0
Namdrik Namdrik 101 33 7 19 0 2 100 102 0
Namu Namu 29 40 30 30 2 2 200 29 0
Namu Majkin 68 82 0 30 4 0 200 68 0
Namu Mae 19 29 41 30 2 1 150 19 0
Namu Loen 19 25 45 30 2 2 200 19 0
Rongelap Rongelap 12 0 90 20 2 2 200 12 0
Ujae Ujae 54 44 26 30 3 5 400 27 0
Utrik Utrik 72 13 77 20 2 14 800 72 0
Wotho Wotho 23 102 0 20 0 1 50 12 0
Wotje Wormej 22 32 58 30 1 0 50 22 0
Wotje Wotje 114 0 90 30 10 27 1850 114 0
TOTALS 2581 158 121 13950 2245 276

8.6 Operations and Maintenance (RWH and Storage)
The project will support capacity building for all the stakeholders in participatory, community-based water
access, distribution, and delivery planning and implementation to ensure gender-targeted, inclusive, and
equitable access to safe, year-round drinking water. In support of operations and maintenance of the installed
infrastructure the beneficiaries should be responsible for the operations and maintenance of livelihood assets
and technologies promoted. It is recommended that GCF finance is used to develop O&M plans and related
SOPs during the project implementation.
The Feasibility Study has documented acceptance of an operations and maintenance (O&M) system (based
on community consultations as well as discussions Mayors and OCS).
Tier 1: Beneficiary households and Community Building Owners/Management
Tier 2: Community Water Committees (CWC) or equivalent representative
Tier 3: Mayors and Community Leaders (Chiefs) – Mayor Council
Tier 4: OCS and NDMO/ National Government
The regular planned O&M will be led by the household or community building owner (Tier 1 ). Each will be
responsible to properly clean and maintain their systems with the frequency detailed in FS Annex 19. The
project will initiate and facilitate, through capacity building and peer-to-peer learning activities (like basic
carpentry) and continued monitoring of the availability and quality of water using simple O&M needs.
The CWC representative (Tier 2), who has been trained in proper operations and maintenance best practices,
is mandated by the Community leaders and Mayors to monitor and report the state of the infrastructure
including frequency of cleaning back to the Mayor or Community Leader. The Mayor or Community leader
will be responsible to encourage and support proper maintenance if an individual household or community
building is lagging. The CWC also has a number of other duties and will be the focal point for coordination
to complete:
 Support and coordinate with EPA for water quality testing and measurement of stored water (both
HH and groundwater review) in a programmatic method following SOPs that relate to the
Community level Water Safety Plans.
 Focal point for coordination with NDMO for supporting disaster preparedness and response for
water security.
 Become the expert in O/M of basic and minor repair of RWH systems and perform awareness
training for the community.
 Coordinate with municipal officials to support major and sustenance repairs when needed.
 Generate annual condition reports of water infrastructure and water resources to be provided to
Tier 3 and 4 stakeholders for each atoll.
Tiers 3 and 4 will support, mandate and hold accountable the CWC representative in performing the duties
and ensure coordination with National level stakeholders to monitor and report the asset condition of the
water infrastructure.
8.5.1 Maintenance Task for Rainwater Harvesting System
The success of the RWH systems to provide safe drinking water will be dependent on how well the system
is maintained. The RWH collection system and tank should be designed to make maintenance as easy as
possible to increase the likelihood that those responsible for the systems will follow proper maintenance
protocols. Downspout filters should be installed at a location easily seen and accessed by system users to
facilitate frequent inspection and cleaning. The treatment filters should be easily accessed and cleaned.
Storage tanks should have access ways and drawdown valves should be installed to make tank cleaning and
sediment removal easier.
Tasks that should be performed regularly include cleaning the catchment surface, gutters, and storage tanks;
Cleaning filters, first-flush diverters, and debris screens; and inspecting the system for possible points of entry
for mosquitoes and vermin. These tasks are described further in Table 41. The importance of maintenance

to the overall success of the rainwater harvesting system should be conveyed to the households (for
household-level RWH), and caretakers. Establishing a maintenance contract can reinforce the necessity of
timely and through maintenance practices and protect the designer from system problems that arise due to
lack of maintenance. Additionally, an owner’s manual or SOP should accompany every rainwater collection
system and should include detailed troubleshooting guidance, maintenance tasks and frequency, and
replacement part component details. Water safety plans will be developed for effective risk management.
The Table 52 outlines the required regular planned maintenance tasks for RWH systems and the
recommended frequency. The beneficiary households will be responsible for carrying out the regular planned
maintenance tasks for the household. Repairs (both minor and major) are unplanned maintenance tasks and
will be additional to the regular maintenance tasks. Repairs will be carried out on an as needed basis and will
be monitored and reported by the CWC.
Table 52: Planned Maintenance Tasks for RWH Systems and Recommended Frequency
Task Description/Details Frequency
Clean roof surface and Manually clean rooftops, gutters and downspouts by A minimum of once per
gutters hand, with hand tools, brooms and rakes. If using water month. For sites with
to flush rooftops, gutters, or downspouts, be sure to over hanging
divert this debris-laden water so that it does not flow into vegetation, after each
downspouts, filters or the tank. Inspect gutters for leaks significant rainfall
and holes; Repair as needed. This is especially event.
important after leaf fall.
Inspect and clean Disassemble, clean and replace screens on all inlet After each significant
debris filter(s) and first- filters as needed. Disassemble and clean as needed. rainfall event
flush diverter(s) Inspect all downspouts, clean any obstructions, inspect
all inlets and overflow pipe assemblies to ensure they
are unobstructed and working properly. Check screens
for holes/tears and repair as needed. Disassemble and
clean as needed. Disassemble and clean the first-flush
diverter; Ensure the weep hole is open and unclogged.
Record operations and It is good practice to keep an operational log-sheet to Daily
maintenance tasks record drinking water production ﬂow rates and when
cleaning procedures were undertaken.
Check all piping and Check all piping and valve for cracks, holes or leaks. Annually
valves for leaks; Repair as needed. Inspect all openings in the storage
Inspect all openings in tanks for leaks and gaps
storage tank
Remove tank Remove sediments that have accumulated in the bottom Annually or as needed
sediments of the tank. Be sure that all safety regulations are
followed with respect to confined space entry. Dispose
of sediment in the manner deemed appropriate by the
local regulating authority.
For more detailed O/M methodology refer to the FS Annex 19.
9 Technical Design for Water Resilience (Rural Communities)
9.1 Groundwater
The importance of rehabilitating and protecting groundwater wells, as a complementary water source has
been demonstrated during previous drought events. While the direct impact on augmented water supplies
from these measures is difficult to quantify due to lack of data on groundwater quality and quantity across
islands/ atolls, recognizing the importance of groundwater in supplementing minimum drinking water quality
requirements for washing, watering of household gardens, during drought events, and the measures and
steps to improve knowledge on groundwater have been incorporated in project interventions. The project
will install covers and raise sidewalls to protect 2586 groundwater wells identified within the 77
target communities.

A list of groundwater wells is provided in FS Annex 8. There is insufficient data available to properly evaluate
the physical number of wells, or their condition based on the cumulative review of the UNDP, IFRC and IOM
surveys of the residents within the atolls. In addition there are an insufficient number of water quality tests
performed at various times of the year (drought and non-drought periods) to confirm that this water source is
safe from contamination or high noted in the baseline Section 3, contaminated or highly saline water (approx.
50%) is prevalent in the catchments and wells. The residents consistently experienced stomach aches and
diarrhea, which is reflected in the UNDP survey results. Groundwater cannot be considered a water security
option to attain the 20 Lcpd of safe water value. If this source is better protected, including the implementation
of comprehensive long-term water quality testing, then groundwater may eventually become a more reliable
source for consumption or other possible uses.
Considering the limited information, it has been extrapolated that the number of households is equal to the
number of groundwater wells (both community and HH wells) for the rural communities therefore the project
will rehabilitate up to a maximum of 2,564 priority household and/or community groundwater wells identified
within the 78 target rural communities. The FS Annex 8 provides a general understanding of the number of
community wells versus household wells where some of the surveys differentiated them. There is
approximately 33 percent community wells compared to 67 percent household wells. During the drought the
consultations captured that the community shared the wells as common source for drinking water where it
was found to provide good quality of water. The community would organize and clean our any contaminated
wells as part of their preparation activities for drought. Considering this coordinated effort and willingness to
de-contaminate wells and from common ground water sources during times of stress from either HH and
community wells they may be considered as a shared resource.
Currently, many of the groundwater wells in the RMI rural communities have concrete rings as support walls,
placed up to about 100 mm above ground level and also a concrete apron. A concrete apron cast impedes
seepage of mud, debris, and other contaminants into the water that often surrounds the wells. A concrete
cover is placed over the well, with an opening for drawing water out with a bucket. However, some wells are
unprotected and require rehabilitation. The KiriWATSAN design, for the Republic of Kiribati, created by SPC
and UNICEF provides updated guidelines into the design of groundwater wells (Refer to Annex 19 for design
details). Note that the KiriWATSAN design requires that the well hole is raised to an elevation of 600mm
above the concrete apron. Table 53 provides a list of potential investment options to be considered.
Table 53: Groundwater Wells Investment Options
Current Groundwater Proposed intervention Suitable types of wells and use Possible
well condition Costs
Cover and Apron are in Requires periodic Household and communities wells for $0
good condition monitoring cooking and washing
Cover is Compromised, Provide Plastic / Tin Cover Household wells used for washing $240
concrete apron required and raise concrete opening
minor repairs to 0.6m.
Cover and concrete apron Provide Plastic / Tin Cover, Readily used community and/or critical $480
require rehabilitation raise concrete opening to household wells used for cooking and/or
0.6m.plus rehabilitation of washing
and concrete apron
Cover and concrete apron Hand Pump, Concrete Important and readily used community wells > $600
require rehabilitation plus Apron, 0.6m for concrete for drinking, cooking and/or washing and
install additional hand opening serves an important water resilience
pump function in the community
Cover and concrete apron Solar Pump and Concrete Very large and critical community wells > $1000
require rehabilitation plus Apron, 0.6m for concrete used for drinking, cooking and/or washing
install additional solar opening. and serves a very important water resilience
pump function in the community
The key concern is to ensure protection from inundation. The proposed intervention baseline should include
provision of plastic or tin cover and concrete apron assuming the condition of the existing groundwater wells
and casings are in good condition. For RMI during the design phase the Community Water Committees

(CWC) and engineering teams will determine if the groundwater source warrants the investment for a
rehabilitation or construction of the concrete apron, and tin cover (based on KiriWATSAN design). Finally
the concrete apron will prevent surface water and contamination to flow into the borehole directly. The apron
also provides a solid and clean base for the groundwater well opening or hand pump for the collection of
water. The apron is usually 2-3 meter in diameter with a (small) wall around the outside. The general
maintenance practice is to ensure that the apron is free of debris and the surface is exposed to sunlight to
provide some level of disinfection.
National standards (if available) will influence concrete apron design and the choice may depend on factors
such as: type of pump to be installed, price and need for protection against floods (in some areas), etc. A
protective fence is also recommended to keep animals away.
For best practice designs UNICEF/SPC have created guidelines suitable for groundwater infrastructure
relating to groundwater protection and diagrams are provided in Annex 19.
9.2 Proposed Water Resilience Interventions - Rural
Table 54 describes the proposed water resilience interventions. The locations for the proposed water resilience
interventions is shown in the table in Section 9.5.1.
Table 54: Description of proposed water resilience interventions
Water Description Inputs – Target locations

resilience structural /
intervention equipment
Groundwater Number and quality of groundwater Concrete Total number of wells estimated
well resources, especially in the rural apron and Up to 1 well per HH in all 77
rehabilitation communities are unknown. However, for plastic/tin target rural communities will be
water resilience, better understanding and access cover rehabilitated. (specific wells
utilization, wherever possible of groundwater repair or (including HH and community
resources is essential for water resilience replacement. wells) to be rehabilitated will be
(IWRM, DRM and CCA). identified and agreed upon
through the community integrated
Community groundwater well mapping & water resource planning process)
quality testing (as part of community
integrated water resource mapping and
planning)
For key groundwater resources (identified

through the water resource planning
process) implement groundwater quantity
modeling (building on R2R and Reimaanlok
process)

10. Implementation Strategy
10.1 Partners – Scaling and Stakeholders
This Project extracts and scales good practices and lessons learned from the various water security and resilience
initiatives implemented in RMI and in similar small island developing states in the Pacific Region. It is important to
identify and partner with successful implementers in up scaling existing initiatives.
10.1.1 Household RWH improvements in the rural communities –IOM and MIRCS WASH
HH RWH systems refer to rainwater harvesting (roof, gutter, and downpipes) and storage systems (plastic or concrete
tanks, first flush systems, etc.) that are installed, used, and owned by households. Although most households in RMI,
in both urban and rural communities, rely almost solely on household rainwater harvesting system as their primary
source of freshwater throughout the year, past studies, surveys119 and assessments conducted in selected atolls and
islands during the project design process reported significant challenges of household rainwater harvesting systems in
terms of their poor quality and quantity of water produced. Typical reasons of failures include: 1) improper placement
of tanks (often placed under the roof eaves resulting in poor capture efficiency); 2) improper connections between gutter
lengths and between gutter and downspout resulting in leakage; 3) improper slope on gutter; and 4) gutters too small in
width resulting in poor capture and retention of rainwater. Furthermore, fostering ownership for proper installation and
maintenance for household rainwater harvesting system that have been provided free of charge to residents through
grant financing have also been identified as key behavioral and economic challenges.
Understanding these challenges IOM and MIRCS together with the WASH Cluster recent completed a Rainwater
Harvesting Improvement Project in Wotho, Ujae and Lae Atolls to repair the household rainwater harvesting systems
through provision of dedicated paid carpentry teams to complete the upgrade of the guttering systems and also re-train
the residents targeting 50% of the population. These initiatives were coupled with community involvement activities and
training as well as an individualized or packaged approach for identifying catchment area and storage sa based on roof
area and household size. A number of lessons were learned and are applied to the design of this project including:
a. sensitizing each household of the importance of regular repairs and maintenance of their catchment system,
including cleaning the gutter and catchment tank.
b. Construction team members were locally sourced and part of the community.
c. The team composition worked well and included Team Leader / Foreman / Community Liaison.
d. Prior to construction activity reinforcement of expected outcomes were explained in town hall format to local
council and other community representatives.
e. Upgrading to 150mm diameter guttering and downspouts improved rainwater capture and prevented over
spilling during downpours. Ensure sufficient quantities are ordered – validation phase.
f. Ensure that all construction materials for staging work is brought to the construction team (ladders, generators,
catchment repair kits, power tools etc.)
g. Higher quantities of ancillary equipment like adaptors, gutter clips silicone, Clorox cleaning solution etc. should
be ordered as part of original supply. This will be supported by the validation phase.
Up scaling and building on this initiative by understanding and working with the staff at IOM or MIRCS would be
advantageous due to the field experience already learned and the good will earned through their community driven
approach. The Project will upscale the Rainwater Harvesting Improvement Project for improvement of household
and community rainwater harvesting systems.
10.1.2 Community RWH improvements and new construction
Community RWH systems will be improved and/or increased in 77 rural communities across the 23 local
government jurisdictions. Similar to HH RWH systems, community RWH systems refer to rainwater harvesting (roof,
gutter, and downpipes) and storage systems (plastic or concrete tanks, first flush systems, etc.) that are installed in
community buildings. Community buildings in RMI, outside of the urban centers normally include schools (primary and
high schools), health centers, churches, staff quarters in churches and schools, community halls, police stations, youth
centers, airport terminal buildings, copra houses, Marshall Islands Marine Resource Authority (MIMRA) buildings, etc.
Suitable community buildings considered for improvement and / or additional storage capacities (i.e. installation of
additional tanks) for this project are community buildings that have more than 100 m2 of roof area, which will normally
include all community buildings described above except for health centers and staff quarters, which tend to have smaller
roof areas. The majority of community buildings other than churches are under the care and responsibility of the Ministry
119
RMI Government. 2004. RMI Statistical Yearbook; WASH Survey. Wallis 2014. RMI Government. 2010. Republic of the Marshall Islands Majuro and
Kwajalein Atoll Household Water Survey Report; Wallis. 2014. Republic of the Marshall Islands Drinking Water Disaster Risk Reduction Guidance

of Public Works. MPW are responsible for the RWH system upkeep in coordination with Ministry of Public Schools,
Ministry of Health and also the Police facilities. MPW will support the lead proposed partners IOM/IFRC as part of up
scaling the Marshall Island Rainwater Harvesting Program to construct large scale community RWH systems for
community buildings on a number of atolls. Up scaling and building on this initiative by understanding and working with
MPW staff will be valuable in supporting and partnering with the GCF project.
10.1.3 Institutional Capacity Building

The water investments will be strengthened by the implementation and advancement of RMI’s institutional framework
at both national and subnational (local government and community) levels. Key components of this support include:
Enhance institutions at national level:

 Strengthen EPA’s capacity for coordination, monitoring, reporting, accountability and sustainability of the
National Water and Sanitation Policy.
 Strengthen OCS/NDMO’s coordination capacity to manage water related disaster risks
 Develop comprehensive National Water Safety Plans in line with the Community Water Safety Plans
 Develop a comprehensive National water database that builds on existing information as well as streamline
gathering of future information on water
 Develop a comprehensive knowledge management and communication strategy
 Convene National Water Forums and trainings
 Support outstanding national water stakeholders and leaders, both male and female, to participate in effective,
strategic, and meaningful workshops, conferences, and training opportunities that will enable RMI to establish
critical political and technical networks and acquire information and skills to advance climate-resilient integrated
water resources management in RMI.
 Nurture next generation of water leaders and experts by supporting the College of Marshall Islands develop and
establish a Certificate Course for Water, so that advanced technical training can be accessed in RMI to nurture
next generation of water leaders and experts that would lead, sustain, and advance RMI’s climate-resilient water
sector development.
Enhance institutions at local government and community levels:

 Building on ongoing community-based natural resource planning initiatives, strengthen (and establish only if
needed) 77 Community-based Water Committees (CWCs) and enhance their capacities to develop,
implement, operate, monitor, and maintain their Community Water Safety Plans, which will be the governing
framework for the water investments, in line with the National Water and Sanitation Policy. In line with the
National Water and Sanitation Policy, the CWCs will be represented by the area population, landowners, water
users, traditional leaders, local government, and national authorities.
 Develop and implement various training and awareness raising initiatives for all members of the target rural
communities. Topics covered will range from climate change, to disaster risk management, integrated water
and natural resource management.
 In addition to trainings and awareness raising initiatives designed for the entire members of the target
communities, develop and offer a number of targeted technical training programs for leaders and experts within
the community. Technical training programs for the community leaders and selected experts will focus on areas
of carpentry, water engineering, groundwater monitoring / testing, installation and construction (rainwater
harvesting systems, desalination systems), operation, maintenance, financial management and planning, etc.
10.1.4 Training for Building Capacity in Key Stakeholders
To support the sustainability of the proposed interventions at all levels of RMI from National, sub-national
government stakeholders to CSO’s, schools etc. Table 55 provides a list of training to infuse capacity within
organizations and residents of RMI.
Table 55: Proposed Training for and with Community Stakeholders
Thematic Training activities Stakeholders Frequency Trainers /

Area Coordinators
Integrated Water Safety Plan development, progress Water Committees; Part of monthly EPA, MOH,
Water monitoring, and awareness raising coordinated Women’s group; Water Committee CMI Land
Resource between EPA and MOH. (Aspects include Churches; Youth meetings Grant
Management analysis of water quantity and quality linkages groups; Farmer’s Program,
to health) association; NGOs; NTC
MOH, EPA, etc.

Thematic Training activities Stakeholders Frequency Trainers /
Area Coordinators
Integrated Support and coordinate with initiatives Youth and primary Once a year Ridge to Reef
Natural implemented under RMI’s Ridge to Reef schools, College of Project
Resource Program (Output 2.3 and 3.3 Support for Marshall Islands, Course-work
Management expansion / continuation of education and Ministry of Education,
awareness programs at the local and national Marshall Island
levels, e.g., RARE Pride campaign for local Conservation Society.
leaders, ‘Just Act Natural’ initiative;
complementary awareness programs
implemented using various forms of media to
mobilize support for conservation and
livelihoods; and Output 2.2 Capacity building
on integrated approaches for conservation
and livelihoods benefitting key national
government agencies, community leaders and
residents in all 22 outer islands in the entire
country )
Disaster Risk Disaster SOP development, progress Water Committees; Part of monthly OSC/NDMO,
Reduction monitoring, and awareness raising – including Women’s group; Water Committee Red Cross,
drought warning preparedness, water Churches; Youth meetings IOM,
conservation awareness and monitoring, etc. groups; Farmer’s Salvation
association; NGOs; Army, SPC,
etc. SPREP,
World Bank
Rainwater Skills building for installation, operation, Water Committees and Part of monthly NTC, Ministry
Harvesting maintenance, monitoring, and reporting in designated RWH Water Committee of Public
System partnership with information that is released manager per meetings Works, IOM,
and communicated from the Weather Service community RWH Red Cross,
Office (WSO). system Year-round CMI Land
Grant, EPA,
Awareness raising, training and social Water Committees MOE
mobilization, social marketing campaigns, CWC’s); Women’s
fund raising for financing for operation and group; Churches;
maintenance Youth groups;
Teachers; Nurses and
Health professionals
Groundwater Awareness raising and skills building for Water Committees and Part of monthly NTC, EPA,
groundwater protection, testing, condition designated Water Committee CMI Land
assessment, maintenance, monitoring, and groundwater manger meetings Grant,
reporting per wells; schools Academic /
Year-round Research
Institution,
MOE
Gender Awareness raising and community-based Women’s group, youth Year-round Ministry of
participatory research on gender- group, Women United Internal
differentiated impact of climate change and Together Marshall Affairs,
disaster impacts and water insecurity Islands, Marshall WUTMI, EPA,
challenges, such as Water and Sanitation, Islands Women’s Cookhouse
Menstrual Hygiene Management Research Initiative, Confidential
IOM, etc.
10.2 Logistics for Implementation
In defining the rollout of the physical infrastructure improvements there a series of strategic steps necessary
to ensure coordinated implementation, with each step building and learning as the project progresses. An
detailed Transport & Logistics Strategy and Community Outreach Plan is included in Proposal Annex XIIIc,
10.3 Key Findings
Key Partners for Implementation of Water Security measures.

 Household and Community RWH Improvements – The proposed RWH improvements will upscale
the 2016 Rainwater Harvesting Improvement Project that was implemented by IOM and MIRCS in

three atolls as a pilot. The lessons learned by the pilot 2016 project have been incorporated into the
technical design.
 Training partners as identified in Table 48.
Logistics of Implementation – description of implementation project rollout.
 Validation phase will need to determine detailed design parameters to support procurement and final
interventions tailored for each community due to limitations and assumptions made during feasibility
study phase.
 Due to complexity of rollout and distances project shall ensure high quality materials are specified
limiting future repairs.
 Grouping of Atolls by proximity and number of communities have been determined.
Financial Sustainability
 Due to the low median household income and the project capital cost residents cannot afford to
support or partially finance the investment, therefore this project will need to be grant funded.
 Ensure that continuing operating and maintenance costs for supporting the is less than 2.5% of
household income or it may not be sustainable for the community.
11 Definitions, Limitations and Assumptions

The Project will promote climate and disaster resilient integrated water resource management systems to be
implemented, monitored and sustained at the national and subnational (local government jurisdictions and
community) levels. Monitoring the efficacy of the infrastructure investments and plans to sustain the existing
and improved capacity of safe water resources to meet the desired goal of 20Lpcd during climate induced
droughts (based on 2016 conditions) will require definition of specific indicators of implemented water security
and resilience measures.
11.1 Definition of High Level Impacts
From a holistic viewpoint the general objective of increased resilience of health and well-being, and food and
water security through year round access to reliable quantity of safe water upon completion of the project
can be measured through performing general household surveys or community focus group discussions.
The target is realized by all the population (50% Male and Females) having access to 20 liter per person per
day. This can be coordinated through the general census surveys or supported by aggregated reporting by
community based water committees (CWC’s) as part of an annual report and then compared to historical and
current climatic data.
In addition another objective is to strengthen community and residents adaptive capacity by a reduction of
their exposure to climate risks. The end results will meet the 20Lpcd and ensure access to good water quality
data from both catchments and groundwater. This will help the residents decide on subsequent usage or
water employ conservation measures. Surveys or focused group discussions can capture the improvements
in addition to review of water quality testing reports that will be compiled in community water profiles. This
effort can be supported by the creation of a comprehensive water database consolidating the available
information that provides automated reporting to be reviewing at a community and national level.
11.2 Water Security Definitions
Objective – Improving water security through providing access to safe freshwater resources year-round for
at least 28% of the 2017 estimated population
For Rural communities annual or more frequent reports for water quality testing and monitoring,
improvements reflected in community profiles and the development of a comprehensive water database will
provide feedback on performance of investments in water security for the rural communities. In addition the
reduction of empty number of household and community tanks during the dry periods should be captured
and incorporated into the community profile. Surveys and observations by the CWC within each community
can track the residents’ knowledge and activities demonstrated in applying good installation, operating,
maintenance and repair practices for their RWH systems for both community building and households.

11.3 Demand Response and Preparedness Definitions
Objective - Expanding demand response/preparedness programs and disaster risk management (DRM) for
water security in face of climate change
To ensure water resilience a number of activities need to accomplish through the project and subsequently
maintained. The activities include:
a. Community water resources are surveyed, mapped, monitored and updates completed yearly. Each
resource is tested for water quality and information is shared on a regular basis with community
members. CWC’s and support EPA to support next steps actions produce water quality reports for
review by community leaders.
b. Asset management condition assessment is performed yearly for water security infrastructure, which
is captured for analysis within a database, of all water resources rehabilitated or newly created. This
includes capturing of operations and maintenance costs in relation to life cycle of the asset. The
measures reported include number of rehabilitated water resources and percentage improved for
water source quantity and/or quality.
c. Community members are engaged in water resilience practices (SOP’s training) and awareness
training program of best practice for water and sanitation.
d. In the event of disaster risk management is needed in preparation for a drought / low precipitation
year, the weather information systems have provide detailed information that has been analyzed to
formulate appropriate response plan to apply water conservation methods or provide emergency
water supply at least 3 days ahead of need. Production of accurate situation reports from the WASH
cluster.
e. The engagement of CWC’s that are reporting on status of infrastructure, providing analysis on needs
and long term trends within the community, reviewing weather forecasts both daily and seasonal to
implement timely community tailored water safety plans. Annual report CWC report reflecting update
community or atoll profile.
11.4 Capacity Development Definitions
In support of the water security and resilience improvements the institutional capacity building will ensure
sustainable support for the improvements made within infrastructure (security) and resiliency programs
recommended by this Feasibility Study. These initiatives need to inclusive to ensure participation by women
(49%) and youth groups to be informed and become equal partners in water security and resilience programs.
Key Components of Improvements within capacity building include establishment of:
a. Creation of Community based Water Committees – empowered and trained to provide guidance to
the community to support water condition infrastructure assessments, water quality data gathering
and management, utilize the water safety plans120 for executing water conservation practices and
disaster response preparations. In addition to support understanding of weather forecasts and ensure
that the community is preparing and informed on next steps to support water security and resilience.
Inclusion of women to participate equally (at least make-up 49% of CWC organizations) to ensure
equity in representation for decision making.
b. Creation of community and National Water Safety plans have been formalized, communicated and
awareness training provided on regular basis to the community. This will ensure coordinated
approach for funding and resources in support if disaster preparation and response.
c. Creation of Data Management System that incorporates asset conditions and inventory of water
resources within RMI. Training and support will be necessary to create, operate and maintain the
system at the National, institutional and community levels.
d. Financing mechanisms that have community acceptance in support of the increased operation,
maintenance and monitoring costs in ensuring the improved water security and resilience is
sustainable.
120
This approach can be expanded to a Drinking Water Saefty and Security Planning (DWSSP) approach upon discussion with stakeholders during project
implementation.

11.5 Limitations and Assumptions
For the GCF Feasibility study general limitations and assumptions made within this process include:
1. Planned community and household RWH interventions by other partners (Ministry of Public Works,
WASH Cluster / OCS, NDMO, MWSC, IOM, and Red Cross, GIZ, Government of Japan / JICA, etc.)
will be implemented as planned preceding and/or in parallel to the proposed GCF financed
interventions. The planned works have been factored into the design calculations for investment and
determination of gaps for intervention.
2. Dry season rainfall values will be equal to or more than that of modelled information provided in Annex
RMI Climate Projections Report.
3. Rainfall values available in the nearest functioning stations (7) are relevant to surrounding
communities without functioning weather stations with rainfall records.
4. Rate of population change will be consistent across local government jurisdictions with the national
rate projected in 2016 by SPREP.
5. Through effective planning, partnership, and cooperation with air and sea transport companies,
access to target sites will be made possible with minimal delays and change of schedule due to
adverse weathers and other emergencies beyond the control of the project stakeholders.
6. Majuro’s MWSC Master Plan will be completed, financed and implemented.
7. Other planned initiatives for IWRM, such as the Ridge to Reef Project (GEF-5) are implemented as
planned.
8. Levels of migration from rural communities to urban communities, as well as from RMI to abroad is
not extreme to the level that institutional stakeholders, policies and plans may become ineffective
after few years.
9. Political context of RMI is stable without any drastic changes that will completely overturn national
priorities.
10. Disputes over Community and land ownership related to placement of new infrastructure is properly
vetted.
11. Empowerment of CWC within the community is accepted to support the monitoring, evaluation and
enforce needed operations and maintenance activities to ensure water security and demand response
practices defined in the SOP’s are carried out.
12. Changes and introduction of enhanced institutional frameworks are supported both Nationally and
sub-nationally and specifically by the affected communities.
This will need to be tracked and reported to the government of RMI and Project Board to ensure that any
changes will be addressed during the project implementation phase with limited impact.
During the Implementation phase and initial roll out the project will need to gather more detailed information
to address the limitation and assumptions listed in the following subsections to ensure they mitigate the
impact during later stages of the project related to procurement and implementation.
11.5.1 Limitations for Rural Communities Water Security Intervention Design - Technical
As stated earlier, uncertainties are inherent in all models and rainwater harvesting modeling has uncertainties
associated with both the supply (capacity of the rainwater harvesting system to capture and store water) and
the demand (which is influenced by water use behavior, household occupancy etc.). The aim is to minimize
uncertainties where possible and adopt a conservative approach. The key uncertainties and the potential
limitations of the water security intervention design are shown in Table 56, along with the proposed action to
reduce the impact of the limitation.
Table 56: Limitations of Water Security Design and Maintenance

Limitation Description of impact of limitation Proposed action to reduce impact
Household rainwater There will be variation in rainwater capture No action required. The adopted
harvesting and demands on tank at a household level. In design approach is conservative and
performance is based reality, not all household tanks will empty at the actual volume of water in the
on typical household the same time, which would result in lower community storage tanks would be
RWH systems demands than modeled from the community expected to be higher than modeled (if
tank. the roof area and rainwater harvesting
system efficiency was at least as high
as assumed).
Some households The water supply gap has been estimated Confirm the existing available
may have no RWH assuming that 100% of the estimated 2017 household rainwater tanks (including
storage tank households have the median sized tank. This those not attached to buildings) during
is conservative as growth between 2011 and the validation phase of implementation.
2017 may have been less than forecast plus The water resource committees will
the household count may include unoccupied allocate budgets to priority
houses (which would not require RWH improvement areas in the target
improvements if the houses have been communities.
abandoned).
Where there are households without tanks (or
with smaller than median sized tanks), the
design effectively assumes that these
households share water with neighbors with
larger tanks than the median. The adopted
design approach is reasonable as some
households have larger storage volumes than
the median value. In addition there are other
programs that install household tanks in rural
communities, for example the IFRC tank
installations in Namu, Likiep and Mejit after
the 2013 drought.
If a household does not have a rainwater tank
there would be no benefit improving the RWH
system (guttering and downpipes). The
number of household RWH improvements
used in the cost curve analysis was based on
assuming that 100% of household RWH
systems are connected to rainwater storage
tanks and would be improved in the target
communities.
Some households The count of households for rainwater Confirm the status quo for suitable
have thatched rooves harvesting improvements is based on the total household rooves during the validation
that are unsuitable for estimated 2017 households in each phase of implementation. The water
rainwater harvesting community, regardless of roof type. This is resource committees will allocate
conservative as growth between 2011 and budgets to priority improvement areas,
2017 may have been less than forecast plus for example some households may
the household count may include unoccupied require a metal roof area for rainwater
houses (which would not require RWH harvesting.
improvements if the houses have been
abandoned).
Design of the Design of the required community storage is Survey the condition and sizing of all
required community based on community aggregated data rather existing community building RWH
storage is based on than individual community buildings (which systems and tanks during the validation
community may vary significantly in roof area, RWH phase of implementation (including
aggregated data efficiency and existing tank volume, leading to confirmation of the number of suitable
variation in RWH performance). community buildings in each
community. Run a rainwater-harvesting
model for the updated infrastructure
data for each community building.

The planned water The RMI wide assumptions at a household Confirm the existing conditions for
security level may be different from the actual existing household rainwater harvesting
improvements for status quo conditions. improvements based on site surveys
communities with no The RMI wide assumptions at a community during the validation phase of
infrastructure survey building level (for example number of suitable implementation.
data are based on a community buildings available, roof area etc.) Survey the condition and sizing of all
RWH model using may be different from the actual existing existing community building RWH
RMI wide conditions. systems and tanks during the validation
assumptions phase of implementation (including
confirmation of the number of suitable
community buildings in each
community).
Run a rainwater-harvesting model for
the updated infrastructure data for each
community building to confirm the
performance of the new storage tanks.
Current (status quo) Most of the infrastructure survey data is from Confirm the current condition for
condition may have surveys undertaken during the 2013 drought, household rainwater harvesting
changed from the with the remaining data from 2016. improvements based on site surveys
condition recorded The survey data at a household level may be during the validation phase of
during the different from the current conditions (for implementation.
infrastructure example due to rainwater harvesting Survey the condition and sizing of all
surveys improvement program by other organizations existing community building RWH
since the infrastructure survey). systems and tanks during the validation
The survey data at a community building level phase of implementation (including
may be different from the current conditions confirmation of the number of suitable
(for example, improvement or deterioration in community buildings in each
the RWH system condition since the community).
infrastructure survey). Run a rainwater harvesting model for
There could also be errors in the survey data. the updated infrastructure data for each
community building to confirm the
performance of the new storage tanks.
Larger community The current design shows the total proposed The required storage volumes for each
buildings may require new community storage volume based on 50 community building will need to be
larger tanks m³ per existing building or new roof. Very confirmed during the validation phase
large buildings may be able to have more than of implementation based on a building
one tank installed if there is sufficient space specific design that takes into account
(and to effectively utilize the available roof current and planned storage by others
area). and the available roof area.
No allowance for The constant demand assumption of 20 Lpcd No action required, this allows for a
rationing of demand does not take into account likely behavioral more conservative design.
adaptations, such as rationing, which may
improve the performance of the rainwater
harvesting systems.
Estimation of the The number of suitable community buildings in As above, survey the condition and
number of communities without infrastructure survey data sizing of all existing community building
Community buildings was estimated based on the RMI wide RWH and tanks during the validation
in communities assumptions. If there are less suitable existing phase of implementation. The
without infrastructure buildings than estimated, additional roof estimated additional roof catchments
survey data catchments may be required to be are essentially a contingency amount
constructed. that should be sufficient over the atolls.
Community buildings that have a
smaller roof area than the suitable
threshold may still have functioning
RWH systems with storage (e.g. health
centers are below the suitable
threshold but typically have significant
storage).

Operations and The community accepts and utilized the SOPs SOPS for operation and maintenance
Maintenance developed to ensure water quality . Cleaning developed with community member
and maintenance of guttering (quarterly) and participation. CWC is empowered to
tanks (annually) will be performed. motivate the community to monitor and
ensure necessary actions defined in
the SOP are taken.
Existing fleet of stationary and mobile RO IOM to coordinate with College of

units maintain their firm capacity to deliver Marshall Islands to develop sustainable
water. program for RO Operations and
Maintenance
The table below shows the model assumptions for the volumetric benefit calculations are shown in the
“improved (after intervention)” column in the table 57. The table also shows the status quo model assumptions
for comparison.
Table 57: Model assumptions for the volumetric benefit calculations
Rural water Status quo Improved (after intervention)

security options assumptions
Household RWH The status quo household RWH system Household RWH system catchment
improvements catchment efficiency was based on available efficiency is improved to 70% based on:
infrastructure data or the RMI wide • Replacing existing gutters and
assumption. downpipes with new 150mm diameter
The RMI wide assumption for the household pipes to ensure that 100% of the
RWH system catchment efficiency was 20% household roof area is connected to the
based on typical (median) values: RWH system
• 50% of the household roof area connected to Installation of first flush to improve water
the RWH system quality
• RWH system (household guttering and
downspouts) in poor condition
Household RWH improvements have recently
been installed in 50% of households in Wotho,
Ujae and Lae (pilot project)121
Community The status quo community building RWH Community RWH system catchment
building RWH system catchment efficiency was based on efficiency is improved to 80% based on:
improvements and available infrastructure data or the RMI wide • Replacing existing gutters and
tanks assumption. downpipes with new 150mm diameter
The RMI wide assumption for the community pipes to ensure that 100% of the
RWH system catchment efficiency was 35% community building roof area is connected
based on typical (median) values: to the RWH system
• 50% of the community building roof area Installation of first flush to improve water
connected to the RWH system quality
• RWH system (community building guttering New community storage tanks to increase
and downspouts) in good condition community storage volume to meet the
rural water security target under climate
change additionality
Installation of new 200m² roof catchments
with tanks as required where there are
insufficient existing community buildings
of a suitable size.
121
This assumption is made with information from the WASH Cluster / IOM in 2016 on household RWH improvement initiatives as implemented through the
Rainwater Harvesting Improvement Program.

The maximum household RWH catchment efficiency was set at 70%, lower than the maximum community
RWH catchment efficiency of 80%, based on the likelihood of less preventative maintenance quality expected
at the household level.
11.5.2 Limitations and Assumptions for Rural Water Resiliency Intervention Design –
Technical
Table 58 provides a list of limitations and assumptions that added to the uncertainty of design related to the
ground water interventions. The table also includes proposed actions to reduce the impact of the limitation
or assumption.
Table 58: Limitations or Assumptions of Ground Water and Concrete Tank Design
Asset Limitation/ Description of impact of limitation Proposed action to reduce

Assumption impact
Groundwater Determination of Due to the limited survey data from As part of the validation phase
Wells number of previous information provided by RMI, an complete inventory of
groundwater wells IOM, IFRC and developed by UNDP groundwater wells will be taken.
on the number of groundwater wells it
could not be definitely determined.
Estimates needed to be made to
equate the number of groundwater
wells to number of households.
Determination of Data for the physical condition As part of the validation phase
condition of assessment of each well was an complete inventory of
groundwater wells unavailable in addition to the above. groundwater wells condition and
Intervention will need to be assessed proposed intervention will be
based on condition of groundwater well taken.
– to identify what intervention is
needed to limit potential contamination.
Water Quantity Limited understanding of the As part of groundwater testing
groundwater lens is available for the program water lens shall be
rural communities. Unsure the measured and information will
capacity of volume available for use of be assist in developing long
how quickly it replenishes based on term models.
rainfall.
Water Quality Limited understanding of the Expand the capacity of CWC or
groundwater quality due to possible designate to programmatically
contamination or increase in salinity is test water quality and ensure
available for the rural communities. information is tracked on regular
Unsure the quality of water available basis.
for use of how quickly it replenishes
based on rainfall. Limits understanding
of water conservation methods and
DRM approach. Currently regular
water testing is completed in Majuro
and Kwajalein atolls.
12 Exit Strategy
Strengthening integrated water resilience is an urgent climate change adaptation priority for the Republic of
the Marshall Islands. Building on lessons learned and good practices from the past, as well as aligning with
ongoing and planned initiatives, a transformational change in the water sector in RMI would require a three-
pronged approach of:
• Improving water security through providing access to safe freshwater resources year-round for at
least 15,562 people (28% of 2017 estimated population), including 7,730 (49%) women;

• Protecting ground water resource from possible inundation and supported smart water demand
response to reduce reliance on RWH supplied water during periods of water stress.
• Empowering national and subnational institutions & stakeholders to champion capacity building for
efforts to be coordinated, effective, participatory, equitable, and sustainable
The project will provide financial support to bolster climate adaptation, in the form of additional equipment for
climate-resilient livelihoods and drinking water supply, as well as training and capacity building for targeted
beneficiaries and organisations. Providing skills development of vulnerable women and youth, in areas highly
vulnerable to future increases in drought, enables them to take climate smart decisions and, in the course of
their lifetimes, pass on climate smart practices to their children and grandchildren. Utilising locally-based
NGOs further provides opportunities for sustained follow-up of livelihood support.
The work to promote climate-resilient freshwater solutions has been designed in consultation with local
communities, NGOs/CBOs, traders’ associations and government agencies.. This will promote the integration
of climate-adaptive practices into water-based traditional and non-traditional livelihoods, facilitating adoption
of such practices in the long-term. Targeted capacity-building and training will inform planning, design, and
implementation of adaptation measures based on the local socio-economic and environmental contexts.
Development of community water committees . To ensure continuation beyond the project lifetime, the project
will ensure a management structure enabling them to provide sustainable O&M of all technologies and
equipment. Establishing links between the beneficiaries, committees, local and national governments to
ensure continued technical back-up and support.
Introduction of new technologies. The project will need to introduce new technologies like the household
based RWH option should be implemented in collaboration with the CWC through the implementation design
phase. The institution-based RWH should be implemented in collaboration with the communities, with direct
involvement of institution based management committees. After successful implementation of the water
provision infrastructure, the implementing agency will hand over the installed facilities to the the respective
committees and the households selected, and will withdraw from the intervention process. However, before
withdrawing it will be necessary to implement O&M guidelines, including WSP for the households, water user
groups, water management committees and third-party service providers and provide necessary training and
orientation, water management committee members, and caretakers.
Contingency planning community water committees. Support will be needed in the case of loss and damage,
due to either excessive droughts or a damaging cyclone. Technical and financial support will need to be
provided to the groups for developing/revising contingency plans, as well as developing recovery plans which
enable livelihoods to recover with minimal disruption and cost.

FEASIBILITY STUDY Addressing Climate Vulnerability in The Water Sector (ACWA)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

FEASIBILITY STUDY Addressing Climate Vulnerability in The Water Sector (ACWA)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

I

Annex II – Feasibility Study

United Nations Development Programme

On behalf of Government of the

For Submission to the Green Climate Fund

Page | 2 | FEASIBILITY STUDY | ACWA

Page | 3 | FEASIBILITY STUDY | ACWA

Proposed Adaptation Solution

This will be achieved by delivering the following results:

Table 1: Summary of Water Security Investments

Page | 4 | FEASIBILITY STUDY | ACWA

Page | 5 | FEASIBILITY STUDY | ACWA

Water security, groundwater protection and institutional capacity interventions

Conclusions and Next Steps

Page | 6 | FEASIBILITY STUDY | ACWA

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..............................................................................................................................2

Page | 7 | FEASIBILITY STUDY | ACWA

Page | 8 | FEASIBILITY STUDY | ACWA

Page | 9 | FEASIBILITY STUDY | ACWA

Table 1: Summary of Water Security Investments ........................................................................................4

Page | 10 | FEASIBILITY STUDY | ACWA

Page | 11 | FEASIBILITY STUDY | ACWA

ADB Asian Development Bank

Page | 12 | FEASIBILITY STUDY | ACWA

Page | 13 | FEASIBILITY STUDY | ACWA

Page | 14 | FEASIBILITY STUDY | ACWA

Organization of the FS:

Page | 15 | FEASIBILITY STUDY | ACWA

Key stakeholders consulted and contributed to the FS included:

Page | 16 | FEASIBILITY STUDY | ACWA

Figure 1: a) Location of RMI and b) Extent RMI Exclusive Economic Zone14

1.1.2 Socio-Economic Context and Vulnerabilities

Page | 17 | FEASIBILITY STUDY | ACWA

Figure 2: Percent of contribution to the GDP by sector in the RMI21

Page | 18 | FEASIBILITY STUDY | ACWA

Annual Household income and population of atolls and islands

Figure 3: Household income level in different island – atoll groups23

Page | 19 | FEASIBILITY STUDY | ACWA

Poverty trend in RMI

% national level 38.4 20.9 40.7

% outer islands 59.1 20.3 20.6

% urban 29.7 21.2 49.1

Education and Employment Vulnerability

24. World Bank

Page | 20 | FEASIBILITY STUDY | ACWA

Note on Private sector development:

Page | 21 | FEASIBILITY STUDY | ACWA

Page | 22 | FEASIBILITY STUDY | ACWA

Figure 6: Majuro Annual Rainfall and Temperature30

Figure 7: Kwajalein Annual Rainfall31

Page | 23 | FEASIBILITY STUDY | ACWA

Site Weather Station Lon./Lat. Relative geographic Category

Baseline Rainfall (mm) 2035 2045

Page | 24 | FEASIBILITY STUDY | ACWA

1.2.2.1 Sea Level and Tides (King) – Modelled Future Changes

Y2030 Y2055 Y2090

Page | 25 | FEASIBILITY STUDY | ACWA

1.2.2.2 Cyclones and Storms

Table 5: Historical Disasters in RMI (1987 – 2016)

Year Disaster Type Affected Population & Location Economic Source*

*Source numbers correspond to those listed above.

Page | 26 | FEASIBILITY STUDY | ACWA