Page  1
Integrated Safeguards Data Sheet (ISDS) 
Section I 
–
Basic Information 
Date ISDS Prepared/Updated: September 15, 2004 
Report No.:AC809
A. Basic Project Data 
 
A.1. Project Statistics 
Country: China 
Project ID: P068752 
Project: Inner Mongolia Transport (and 
Trade Faci 
TTL: Supee Teravaninthorn 
Total project cost (by component): 
Appraisal Date: September 26, 2004 
Loan/Credit amount($m):  
IBRD: 100 
Board Date: December 16, 2004 
  
Other financing amounts by source: 
 
($m.) 
Managing Unit: EASTR 
Sector: Roads and highways (90%);Sub-
national government administration (10%) 
Lending Instruments: Specific Investment 
Loan 
 
Is this project processed under OP 8.50 (Emergency 
recovery? 
Yes?
[
]
No?
[X ] 
Environmental Category: A 
Safeguard Classification: S2 
A.2. Project Objectives 
The main objective of the project 
is to promote and sustain the development of China’s cross-border trade 
between China on one hand and Russia and Mongolia on the other by improving transport infrastructure 
and logistics. These improvements, in turn, will lower transport costs, increase income from external trade, 
and raise incomes in Inner Mongolia, the country’s third-largest province and one of the poorest provinces 
of the western region.  
A.3. Project Description 
The project includes the following components:  
·
Component 1
—Hailar–Manzhouli Highway. 
Expansion of highway capacity by 
upgrading or constructing about 177 km of HMH. The component is estimated to cost about 
US$172 million, of which US$70 million will be financed by the World Bank;  
·
Component 2—Border Roads for Trade.
 Upgrading and rehabilitation of about 413 km of 
the highway network, sections identified either as key links for international trade facilitation at 
smaller border crossings with Russia and Mongolia, or as critical missing links in the highway 
network. The component aims to improve transport access to four other seasonal land ports 
between China and Russia and China and Mongolia. The component is estimated to cost about 
US$51 million, of which US$18 million will be financed by the Bank. 
·
Component 3—Cargo transfer terminal and trade facilitation program.
 Development of 
facilities and trade regime designed mainly for China’s import and export trade with Russia and 
Mongolia, but also meeting the requirements of potential trade in transit shipped through Chinese 
seaports to other countries. The primary purpose of the CTT is to facilitate the consolidation, 
distribution, and trucking of cargo. The component is composed of:  (i) construction of a transfer 
station in Hailar housing facilities for transferring cargo between transportation modes (rail and 
road) and between Chinese and Russian trucks as well as for warehousing; and (ii) carrying out of 
a
diagnostic study on measures to promote cross
-
border trade bet
ween China and its land
-
locked 
Page  2
neighbors.  The study could later form a foundation to further improve a process for the quick and 
convenient inspection and clearance of cargo by customs and quarantine authorities; and to 
develop an internationally accepted trade documentation and practices for importers and exporters, 
transportation carriers, banks, and insurance companies.  The component is estimated to cost about 
US$26 million, and will be financed locally.  The component is estimated to cost about US$26 
million, and will be financed locally. 
·
Component 4
—Institutional strengthening and training.
 Various technical assistance and 
training aiming to improve the quality of development zone planning, trade promotion, and 
transportation efficiency, as well as project management, environmental monitoring, and 
supervision of highway construction. The component is estimated to cost about US$1.2 million 
and will be financed by the Bank. 
A.4. Project Location and salient physical characteristics relevant to the safeguard 
analysis: 
The project area lies mainly in grassland with herd activities and agricultural land except for Erka 
Wetland.  Erka Wetland is a natural habitat but not a protected area in any sense.
 
B. Check Environmental Category 
A
[
X
], B [ ], C [ ], FI [ ] 
 
Comments:  
C. Safeguard Policies Triggered 
 
Yes No 
 
Environmental Assessment
(
OP
/
BP
/
GP
4.01) [X] 
[ 
]  
Natural Habitats
(
OP
/
BP
4.04) [X] 
[ 
] 
 
Pest Management
(OP 4.09) 
[ ] 
[X] 
 
Cultural Property
(draft OP 4.11 - 
OPN 
11.03
-) 
[
]
[X]  
Involuntary Resettlement
(
OP
/
BP
4.12) [X] 
[ 
] 
 
Indigenous Peoples
(
OD 4.20
)
[X] [ 
] 
 
Forests
(
OP
/
BP
4.36) [ 
] 
[X] 
 
Safety of Dams
(
OP
/
BP
4.37) [ 
] 
[X] 
 
Projects in Disputed Areas
(
OP
/
BP
/
GP
7.60)
*
[
]
[X]  
Projects on International Waterways
(
OP
/
BP
/GP 7.50) 
[
]
[X]  
*
By supporting the proposed project, the Bank does not intend to prejudice the final determination of the parties' 
claims on the disputed areas
 
Page  3
Section II 
–
Key Safeguard Issues and Their Management  
D. Summary of Key Safeguard Issues
.
D.1. Describe any safeguard issues and impacts associated with the proposed project. 
Identify and describe any potential large scale, significant and/or irreversible impacts. 
Only the following Bank’s safeguard policies are triggered under this project: 
 
OP4.01 Environment Assessment 
This is a category A project under OP.4.01 Environment Assessment.  IMCD has 
prepared Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and Environmental Action Plan (EAP) 
through required two-step consultation.  Those documents were disclosed locally in July 
2004 and in Washington D.C. in July 2004. 
 
In order to minimize environmental impacts, intensive alternative analysis was conducted 
including non-project alternative.  Major considerations that have been included in the 
design are:  (1) to avoid a tourism area under planning; (2) to use the existing alignment 
as much as possible; (3) to avoid fragile ground in an old mining area; (4) to avoid going 
through Manzhouli City; and (5) minimize the length to cross a Wetland. 
 
At the public consultations, participants showed their concerns on (1) the free movement 
of their herds animals, (2) recovery of vegetation along the highway, and (3) damage to 
the scenery by borrow pits or dumping sites.  In order to respond  their concerns that (1) 
the number of culverts is increased as the results of the public consultation form 104 in 
original design to 110, and the pathways and passenger overpasses from 30 to 47; (2) 
budget for rehabilitation of vegetation is ensured; (3) a dumping site will be moved to 
behind a mountain so as not to damage the scenic view.  
 
The EIA has identified four environmentally sensitive spots: (1) four residential areas 
with 17 to 475 households, (2) one hospital with 260 beds, (3) three seasonal rivers, and 
(4) Erka wetland.  IMCD has experienced to deal with noise, dust, and water-pollution 
control from their past projects including two Bank’s projects.  The EIA and EAP 
addressed those issues with established mitigation measures and the impacts will be 
controlled within an acceptable level. 
OP4.04 Natural Habitat 
The project area lies mainly in grassland with herd activities and agricultural land.  There 
are no environmental protected areas within the impact zone of the project.  The proposed 
alignment goes over Erka Wetland by 13 km.  Erka Wetland is a natural habitat but not a 
protected one in any sense, while there are several protected wetlands in Inner Mongolia.  
However, the safeguard meeting convened Jan. 13, 2004 decided that a natural wetland 
near the protected wetland should also be regarded as critical habitat.  Accordingly, in 
order to evaluate the quality and importance of the Erka Wetland and to develop offset 
measures, an independent international ecological expert was invited and the expert took 
a
field survey and EIA review on May 17 to 20,2004.  
 
According to the international expert, (1) Erka Wetland has international importance in 
terms of migration of birds; (2) Major impacts 
by
the project will be caused during the 
Page  4
construction period, while the impacts during the operation stage will be minimal; (3) 
promotion of eco-tourism and protection of the wetland was recommended as offset 
measures.  IMCD and the Fulunbeier Government agreed to take necessary measures to 
realize his proposal in addition to ones in draft EAP. The major components are as 
follow: 
(1)  Design Phase 
z
The design of the highway made the wetland section as short as possible. 
z
To avoid any impacts to water flow, 1,640 m or 12.4% of the section will be 
bridge and in addition 10 culverts will be constructed.  
z
No dumping sites or construction camp will be set in the wetland.  
(2) Construction 
z
No wastes or wastewater will be allowed to dump into the wetland.   
z
Temporally land use will be minimized in the wetland area. 
z
Hunting animals will be strictly prohibited.  The local government will patrol the 
wetland 
z
Special monitoring on the ecological condition of Erka Wetland will be 
conducted by ecological experts during the construction period. 
(3) Operation Phase 
z
The speed limit will be reduced and no phone signs will be set.   
z
The local government will establish a wetland protection plan to control the land 
use around the wetland.   
z
Eco-tourism will be promoted with carefully designed facilities for observation to 
enhance public understanding of the importance of the wetland protection.   
z
Special monitoring on the ecological condition of Erka Wetland will be 
conducted for three years during the operation period. 
 
Conclusion: (1) Multiple mitigation measures in the EAP are regarded to control the 
impacts within an acceptable level.  The project will not cause significant level of change 
to the existing environment.  (2) In addition to mitigation measures, in order to provide 
total benefit to the ecological environment, the project will promote eco-tourism thought 
constructing a small facility composed of a small parking lot, wood path, and educational 
boards and the local government agreed to set up a wetland protection plan to control 
long term impacts by the operation of the highway. (3) This project is regarded as in 
compliance with OP.4.04. 
 
OP 4.12  Involuntary Resettlement 
The major social issues of the project relate to land acquisition and resettlement.  The 
project office has carried out census of the affected people, an inventory of affected 
assets, a socioeconomic survey and a social assessment within an extended corridor of 
about 10 kilometers along the proposed alignment to assess the general social economic 
impacts of the project.  Five resettlement action plans have been developed, detailing 
census, inventory, project resettlement policy, compensation rates and budget, 
compensation and rehabilitation programs, institutional and monitoring arrangements.  
The Bank has reviewed all resettlement action plans and found them in compliance with 
the Bank policy. 
 
A
due diligence review was conducted of the 30
-
km section of the highway between 
Page  5
Hailar and Manzhouli Port, which was completed under private sector investment over a 
year ago.  This review, which focused mostly on the resettlement practice and involved 
site visits and interview of the local people and government officials, concluded that:  (i) 
the resettlement for this road section followed the Chinese laws and regulations, (ii) 
compensation had been completed in 2002, and there were no outstanding issues. 
 
OD 4.20 Indigenous People
 
Hulunbairer Municipality is an ethnic minority area.  The social assessment and resettlement planning 
activities have concluded that the project would have an overall positive impact on the regional 
development benefiting many local ethnic minority population and the project adverse impacts of land 
acquisition is mainly upon Mongolian population. An Ethnic Minority Development Plan (EMDP) has 
been developed on the basis of an analysis of local policies on ethnic minorities, a desk analysis of 
historical, academic research and statistic data, a sample questionnaire survey, interviews of key informants 
and focus groups discussions among different ethnic minority groups.  The EMDP describes the identified 
ethnic minority groups, the legal framework regarding ethnic minority groups, social and economic life of 
the ethnic minority groups, project benefits as well adverse impacts on them, information dissemination 
and consultation efforts, proposed measures and implementation arrangements, including budget, 
institutions and monitoring arrangements. 
 
D.2 Describe any potential indirect and/or long term impacts due to anticipated future 
activities in the project area. 
 
Apart from above issue, there is none. 
 
D.3. Describe the treatment of alternatives (if relevant) 
 
In order to minimize environmental impacts, intensive alternative analysis was conducted 
including non-project alternative.  Major considerations that have been included in the 
design are:  (1) to avoid a planed tourism area; (2) to use the existing alignment as long as 
possible; (3) to avoid fragile ground in an old mining area; (4) to avoid going through 
Manzhouli City; and (5) minimize the length to cross a Wetland. 
 
D.4. Describe measures taken by the borrower to address safeguard issues. Provide an 
assessment of borrower capacity to plan and implement the measures described. 
 
The comprehensive mitigation measures are described in EAP, RAPs and EMDP.  The 
borrower has demonstr
ated its capacity through the previous Bank’s projects: Tri-
provincial Highway Project and Inner Mongolia Highway Project.  New implementation 
arrangements as well as institutions are proposed to be established including independent 
monitoring for RAP and EMDP implementation. 
 
D.5. Identify the key stakeholders and describe the mechanisms for consultation and 
disclosure on safeguard policies, with an emphasis on potentially affected people. 
 
The key stakeholders are people living along the highway.  There are three major 
residential areas, Hailar, Manzhouli, and West Wuzhuer.  Public consultations were 
conducted along the relevant safeguard policies. 
 
Page  6
Page  7
F. Disclosure Requirements                               Date
 
Environmental Assessment/Audit/Management Plan/Other:  
Date of receipt by the Bank 
Aug/03/04      
Date of “in-country” disclosure 
June/16/04     
Date of submission to InfoShop 
Aug/04/04     
For category A projects, date of distributing the Executive Summary of the EA to the 
Executive Directors 
Sept/17/04       
Resettlement Action Plan/Framework/Policy Process: 
Date of receipt by the Bank 
June/05/04    
Date of “in-country” disclosure 
June/16/04    
Date of submission to InfoShop 
Sept/14/04      
Indigenous Peoples Development Plan/Framework:  
Date of receipt by the Bank 
June/06/04       
Date of “in-country” disclosure 
June/06/04       
Date of submission to InfoShop 
Sept/13/04       
Pest Management Plan:  
 
Date of receipt by the Bank 
Not Applicable 
Date of “in-country” disclosure 
Not Applicable 
Date of submission to InfoShop 
Not Applicable 
Dam Safety Management Plan:  
  
Date of receipt by the Bank 
Not Applicable 
Date of “in-country” disclosure 
Not Applicable 
Date of submission to InfoShop 
Not Applicable 
If in-country disclosure of any of the above documents is not expected, please explain 
why. 
The disclosure of EIA for HMH is not completed due to the delay of approval by the 
State Environmental Protection Bureau. 
Section III 
–
Compliance Monitoring Indicators at the Corporate Level 
(To be filled in when the ISDS is finalized by the project decision meeting) 
OP/BP 4.01 - Environment Assessment:
 
Yes
No
Does the project require a stand-alone EA (including EMP) report? 
x 
 
If yes, then did the Regional Environment Unit review and approve 
the EA report? 
x
Are the cost and the accountabilities for the EMP incorporated in the 
credit/loan? 
x
OP/BP 4.04 - Natural Habitats: 
Yes
No
Would the project result in any significant conversion  or 
degradation of critical natural habitats? 
x
If the project would result in significant conversion or degradation of 
other (non-critical) natural habitats, does the project include 
mitigation measures acceptable to the Bank? 
x
OP 4.09 - Pest Management: 
N.A.
Does the EA adequately address the pest management issues? 
 
 
Is a separate PMP required? 
 
 
If yes,  are PMP requirements included in project design? 
 
 
Page  8
Draft OP 4.11 (OPN 11.03) - Cultural Property: 
N.A.
Does the EA include adequate measures? 
 
 
Does the credit/loan incorporate mechanisms to mitigate the 
potential adverse impacts on physical cultural resources? 
 
OD 4.20 - Indigenous Peoples: 
Yes
No
Has a separate indigenous people development plan been prepared in 
consultation with the Indigenous People? 
x
If yes, then did the Regional Social Development Unit review and 
approve the plan? 
x
If the whole project is designed to benefit IP, has the design been 
reviewed and approved by the Regional Social Development Unit? 
x
OP/BP 4.12 - Involuntary Resettlement: 
Yes
No
Has a resettlement action plan, policy framework or policy process 
been prepared? 
x
If yes, then did the Regional Social Development Unit review and 
approve the plan / policy framework / policy process? 
x
OP/BP 4.36 
–
Forests: 
N.A.
Has the sector-wide analysis of policy and institutional issues and 
constraints been carried out? 
 
Does the project design include satisfactory measures to overcome 
these constraints? 
 
Does the project finance commercial harvesting, and if so, does it 
include provisions for certification system? 
 
OP/BP 4.37 - Safety of Dams: 
N.A.
Have dam safety plans been prepared? 
 
 
Have the TORs as well as composition for the independent Panel of 
Experts (POE) been reviewed and approved by the Bank? 
 
Has an Emergency Preparedness Plan (EPP) been prepared and 
arrangements been made for public awareness and training? 
 
OP 7.50 - Projects on International Waterways: 
N.A.
Have the other riparians been notified of the project? 
 
 
If the project falls under one of the exceptions to the notification 
requirement, then has this been cleared with the Legal Department, 
and the memo to the RVP prepared and sent? 
 
What are the reasons for the exception? 
 
 
Please explain: 
 
 
Has the RVP approved such an exception? 
 
 
OP 7.60 - Projects in Disputed Areas
:
N.A.
Has the memo conveying all pertinent information on the 
international aspects of the project, including the procedures to be 
followed, and the recommendations for dealing with the issue, been 
prepared, cleared with the Legal Department and sent to the RVP? 
 
Does the PAD/MOP include the standard disclaimer referred to in 
the OP? 
 
BP 17.50 - Public Disclosure: 
Yes
No
Have relevant safeguard policies documents been sent to the World 
x 
 
Page  9
Bank's Infoshop? 
Have relevant documents been disclosed in-country in a public place 
in a form and language that are understandable and accessible to 
project-affected groups and local NGOs? 
x
All Safeguard Policies: 
Yes
No
Have satisfactory calendar, budget and clear institutional 
responsibilities been prepared for the implementation of the 
safeguard measures? 
x
Have safeguard measures costs been included in project cost? 
x 
 
Will the safeguard measures costs be funded as part of project 
implementation? 
x
Does the Monitoring and Evaluation system of the project include 
the monitoring of safeguard impacts and measures? 
x
Have satisfactory implementation arrangements been agreed with the 
borrower and the same been adequately reflected in the project legal 
documents? 
 
Signed and submitted by:
 Name
Date
Task Team Leader: 
Supee Teravaninthorn 
Sept. 22, 2004 
Project Safeguards 
Specialist 1: 
Chaohua Zhang 
 
Project Safeguards 
Specialist 2: 
Naoya Tsukamoto 
 
Project Safeguards 
Specialist 3: 
 
Approved by:
 Name
Date
Regional Safeguards 
Coordinator: 
Glenn Morgan 
 
Comments: 
Sector Manager: 
Jitendra Bajpai 
 
Comments: