INTEGRATED SAFEGUARDS DATASHEET APPRAISAL STAGE I. Basic Information Date prepared/updated: 09/30/2011 Report No.: AC5819 1. Basic Project Data Original Project ID: P075407 Original Project Name: Third Rural Transport Project Country: Vietnam Project ID: P113498 Project Name: VN- Third Rural Transport-Additional Financing Task Team Leader: Phuong Thi Minh Tran Estimated Appraisal Date: October 1, 2011 Estimated Board Date: December 15, 2011 Managing Unit: EASVS Lending Instrument: Specific Investment Loan Sector: Rural and Inter-Urban Roads and Highways (100%) Theme: Rural services and infrastructure (100%) IBRD Amount (US$m.): 0.00 IDA Amount (US$m.): 97.00 GEF Amount (US$m.): 0.00 PCF Amount (US$m.): 0.00 Other financing amounts by source: BORROWER/RECIPIENT 10.00 10.00 Environmental Category: B - Partial Assessment Repeater [] Is this project processed under OP 8.50 (Emergency Recovery) Yes [ ] No [X] or OP 8.00 (Rapid Response to Crises and Emergencies) 2. Project Objectives The proposed development objective of the parent project (which does not change with the additional financing) is to improve rural access for communities to markets, off-farm economic opportunities, and social services, by: (i) Increasing the number of communities connected to new and improved all weather roads access; (ii) Improving the management and maintenance of the network to ensure sustainable improvements in access; and (iii) Increasing the capacity within government and the private sector to plan, implement and maintain improvements in the rural transport network. 3. Project Description The parent project consists of three components. Component A: Rehabilitation of the core rural roads network. This component is to finance the rehabilitation and improvement of the core rural roads network (district, commune and village roads) in 33 provinces (now 32 provinces as two provinces were integrated in 2008). In line with the GoV strategy the focus is to connect communes which lack all weather motorized vehicle access and to support improvements of the network including upgrading economically justified roads to a paved standards plus the provision of bridges. The focus is on developing cost effective, coherent networks with maximum connectivity. Component B: Maintenance of the district roads network. This component is to provide finance to augment provincial and district budgets for the maintenance of district roads and small bridges. Support will be provided for maintenance of District roads based on approved annual maintenance plans and will be subject to the implementation of simple systems for the collection of road condition data so that changes in network condition can be monitored over time. Component C: Institutional and capacity building program. This component provides technical assistance, implementation support and capacity building to strengthen the coordinating and advisory role of the Ministry of Transport and the implementation capacity of local transport departments. The aim is to provide greater clarity over the role of central government while at the same time providing the guidance, tools and training for local transport departments to implement in a decentralized environment. The proposed additional financing is to cover (i) Component A: the cost over-run of the rehabilitation activities under the Third Annual Work Program (AWP3) in 32 provinces, which will result in completion of the original rehabilitation target of 3,150 km; (ii) Component B: the increase in the total number of road kilometers being maintained in five pilot provinces from 12,000 km to 13,470 under the parent RTP3 and to 13,970 km under the AF including appropriate responses in road design specifications to climate change issues; and (iii) Component C: increased sustainability of the road network through improvement of the institutional arrangement and capacity building. 4. Project Location and salient physical characteristics relevant to the safeguard analysis As Ha Tay province was integrated into Hanoi in 2008, the 33 provinces covered under the original project are now 32 and will be benefitted by the proposed additional financing. The project provinces are located in the northern mountainous, northern highland, red river delta and central coast of Vietnam. The names of the provinces are as follows: * Northern Mountain area: (12 provinces): Bac Giang, Bac Kan, Cao Bang, Dien Bien, Ha Giang, Lai Chau, Lang Son, Lao Cai, Son La, Thai Nguyen, Tuyen Quang, Yen Bai. * Red River Delta area: (7 provinces): Bac Ninh, Ha Nam, Hai Duong, Hung Yen, Nam Dinh, Ninh Binh, Thai Binh. * Middle Lands area: (3 provinces): Hoa Binh, Phu Tho, Vinh Phuc. * North Central area: (3 provinces): Ha Tinh, Nghe An, Thanh Hoa. * South Central area: (7 provinces): Binh Dinh, Quang Binh, Quang Nam, Quang Ngai, Quang Tri, Thua Thien Hue, Phu Yen. Roads to be rehabilitated are located in well-defined rural settings in which the main activities are agricultural, small household businesses or plantations. Most of the alignments following existing degraded paved or unpaved roads. 5. Environmental and Social Safeguards Specialists Ms Ly Thi Dieu Vu (EASVS) Mr Nghi Quy Nguyen (EASVS) 6. Safeguard Policies Triggered Yes No Environmental Assessment (OP/BP 4.01) X Natural Habitats (OP/BP 4.04) X Forests (OP/BP 4.36) X Pest Management (OP 4.09) X Physical Cultural Resources (OP/BP 4.11) X Indigenous Peoples (OP/BP 4.10) X Involuntary Resettlement (OP/BP 4.12) X Safety of Dams (OP/BP 4.37) X Projects on International Waterways (OP/BP 7.50) X Projects in Disputed Areas (OP/BP 7.60) X II. Key Safeguard Policy Issues and Their Management A. Summary of Key Safeguard Issues 1. Describe any safeguard issues and impacts associated with the proposed project. Identify and describe any potential large scale, significant and/or irreversible impacts: OP 4.01, Environmental Assessment. Overall, the project will have positive environmental and social impacts by improving mobility and basic connection of rural road networks, reducing erosion and dust by the provision of sealed surfaces overlaying earthen or degraded surfaces and the provision of improved drainage. The key potential negative impacts/risks of the proposed road construction are: (i), clearance of vegetation along the right of way (ROW) at borrow pits and quarries, (ii) increased dust, noise, and vibration levels in localized areas along the road; (iii) disturbance to traffic and daily activities of local residents along road alignments; access roads and temporary materials storage areas;; (iv) increased turbidity in irrigation canals and water bodies adjacent to roads due to soil spillage;(v) damage to road-side crop lands due to construction work; and (vi) traffic safety. These potential impacts and risks are temporary, site-specific, at low levels and immitigable through the Environmental Management Framework (EMF), therefore the AF Project is proposed unchanged at Environmental Category B. OP 4.04, Natural Habitats. The proposed rural road rehabilitation is being implemented in well-defined rural settings while the alignment is generally not changed nor newly opened, so it is not expected to involve any impact on natural habitats nor environmentally sensitive areas. Further, environmental screening procedures have been developed that will, inter alia, ensure that natural habitats are not impacted. Therefore this policy is not triggered. OP 4.12, Involuntary Resettlement. The AF project will improve mobility and connectivity to road networks and other public services. Negative impacts are expected to be minor and mainly related to land acquisition due to road widening. Lessons learned in the parent project show that voluntary land donation by affected people needs to be carefully reviewed and verified in order to ensure that informed consent and the power of choice has taken place and is fully documented. In general, donations are acceptable if the impact is minor (less than 10%) of any holding per person and requires no physical relocation, except in the case of vulnerable households and individuals. Consultation with affected people and relevant stakeholders (local authority agencies) should be conducted before land donation procedures are adopted. Grievance mechanisms will be established and information on the process involved for submitting claims will be provided to affected people. OP 4.10, Indigenous Peoples. As the AF and its parent project cover areas where ethnic minorities are settled, thus OP 4.10 is triggered. During the implementation of the parent project, requirements for preparing Ethnic Minority Development Plans (EMDPs) differed among provinces. In the preparation of this AF project, the EMPF of the parent project has been updated to clarify and ensure that the instrument is in line with regulations and the World Bank#s policies. The procedure and requirements to develop EMDPs have been updated and reflected in the policy framework. Public Disclosure. All English versions of the final drafts of the updated EMF, RPF, EMDF etc. were sent to Infoshop in Washington DC on 15 August 2011 for disclosure. The Vietnamese versions of these documents have been disclosed at provincial level from 15 August 2011. The Vietnamese safeguard documents (EMP, RAP, EMDP) of pilot sub-projects have been disclosed in project communes from 15 August 2011. 2. Describe any potential indirect and/or long term impacts due to anticipated future activities in the project area: None are expected. 3. Describe any project alternatives (if relevant) considered to help avoid or minimize adverse impacts. As the project is dealing with rehabilitation of existing rural roads in often steep, rocky terrain, alternatives are limited. During implementation to date, localized alternatives have been considered for individual road links such as, one-sided road widening as a mitigation measure to reduce loss of land and property. 4. Describe measures taken by the borrower to address safeguard policy issues. Provide an assessment of borrower capacity to plan and implement the measures described. Environment. MOT has adopted the updated Environmental Management Framework by a decision dated 12 August 2011. EMP for AF#s pilot sub-projects (Trung Mon-Chan Son, Duc Ninh-Hung Duc, and Thai Hoa-Hong Thai in Tuyen Quang province, and Dong Thanh road in Hung Yen) were prepared in accordance with the updated EMF and take into account the Bank#s comments given on draft documents. Social. During the project preparation, an international consultant team with social development expertise was hired to assist PMU6 and PPMUs to develop or/ and update the following: i) a Resettlement Policy Framework; ii) an Ethnic Minority Development Policy Framework; iii) Abbreviated Resettlement Plans for roads in Dong Thanh commune, Hung Yen province; and iv) an Ethnic Minority Development Plan for Trung Mon # Chan Son road link, Yen Son district, Tuyen Quang province. The recommendations and lesson learned have been reflected in the design of the proposed AF project. Implementation arrangements. Under the parent project, an environmental and social unit within PMU6 was established to manage and supervise safeguard implementation; Each participating PPMU has appointed staff in charge of environmental and social safeguard implementation. An Independent Monitoring Consultant (IMC) has been hired to monitor compliance throughout project implementation. This institutional arrangement will be maintained during the implementation of the AF project. Capacity. The Borrower possesses adequate capacity for assessing the project#s environmental and social impacts, and proposing mitigation measures for these. This has been determined through the supervision missions of the World Bank and through the reports of the independent monitoring consultants. 5. Identify the key stakeholders and describe the mechanisms for consultation and disclosure on safeguard policies, with an emphasis on potentially affected people. The Project#s key stake-holders are MOT, PMU6 and their TA consultants, PPMUs, the People#s Committees at provincial, district and commune levels, design engineers, supervision consultants, contractors and local communities living in the project areas. Consultations with relevant stake holders during the preparation/updates of AF safeguard instruments and Sub-project EMP, RP, EMDP were conducted to comply with the Bank#s policy requirements. Further details on disclosure of safeguard documents are described below. B. Disclosure Requirements Date Environmental Assessment/Audit/Management Plan/Other: Was the document disclosed prior to appraisal? Yes Date of receipt by the Bank 08/15/2011 Date of "in-country" disclosure 08/15/2011 Date of submission to InfoShop 08/17/2011 For category A projects, date of distributing the Executive Summary of the EA to the Executive Directors Resettlement Action Plan/Framework/Policy Process: Was the document disclosed prior to appraisal? Yes Date of receipt by the Bank 08/15/2011 Date of "in-country" disclosure 08/15/2011 Date of submission to InfoShop 08/17/2011 Indigenous Peoples Plan/Planning Framework: Was the document disclosed prior to appraisal? Yes Date of receipt by the Bank 08/15/2011 Date of "in-country" disclosure 08/15/2011 Date of submission to InfoShop 08/17/2011 Pest Management Plan: Was the document disclosed prior to appraisal? Date of receipt by the Bank Date of "in-country" disclosure Date of submission to InfoShop * If the project triggers the Pest Management and/or Physical Cultural Resources, the respective issues are to be addressed and disclosed as part of the Environmental Assessment/Audit/or EMP. If in-country disclosure of any of the above documents is not expected, please explain why: C. Compliance Monitoring Indicators at the Corporate Level (to be filled in when the ISDS is finalized by the project decision meeting) OP/BP/GP 4.01 - Environment Assessment Does the project require a stand-alone EA (including EMP) report? Yes If yes, then did the Regional Environment Unit or Sector Manager (SM) Yes review and approve the EA report? Are the cost and the accountabilities for the EMP incorporated in the Yes credit/loan? OP/BP 4.10 - Indigenous Peoples Has a separate Indigenous Peoples Plan/Planning Framework (as Yes appropriate) been prepared in consultation with affected Indigenous Peoples? If yes, then did the Regional unit responsible for safeguards or Sector Yes Manager review the plan? If the whole project is designed to benefit IP, has the design been reviewed N/A and approved by the Regional Social Development Unit or Sector Manager? OP/BP 4.12 - Involuntary Resettlement Has a resettlement plan/abbreviated plan/policy framework/process Yes framework (as appropriate) been prepared? If yes, then did the Regional unit responsible for safeguards or Sector Yes Manager review the plan? The World Bank Policy on Disclosure of Information Have relevant safeguard policies documents been sent to the World Bank's Yes Infoshop? Have relevant documents been disclosed in-country in a public place in a Yes form and language that are understandable and accessible to project-affected groups and local NGOs? All Safeguard Policies Have satisfactory calendar, budget and clear institutional responsibilities Yes been prepared for the implementation of measures related to safeguard policies? Have costs related to safeguard policy measures been included in the project Yes cost? Does the Monitoring and Evaluation system of the project include the Yes monitoring of safeguard impacts and measures related to safeguard policies? Have satisfactory implementation arrangements been agreed with the Yes borrower and the same been adequately reflected in the project legal documents? D. Approvals Signed and submitted by: Name Date Task Team Leader: Ms Phuong Thi Minh Tran 09/01/2011 Environmental Specialist: Ms Ly Thi Dieu Vu 09/02/2011 Social Development Specialist Mr Nghi Quy Nguyen 09/02/2011 Additional Environmental and/or Mr Douglas J. Graham 09/05/2011 Social Development Specialist(s): Approved by: Sector Manager: Mr Dean A. Cira 09/06/2011 Comments: