INTEGRATED SAFEGUARDS DATA SHEET APPRAISAL STAGE Report No.: PIDISDSA14255 Public Disclosure Copy Date ISDS Prepared/Updated: 06-Oct-2015 I. BASIC INFORMATION 1. Basic Project Data Country: Indonesia Project ID: P154978 Project Name: REPLICATION AND MAINSTREAMING OF REKOMPAK (COMMUNITY- BASED SETTLEMENT REHABILITATION AND RECONSTRUCTION) (P154978) Task Team George Soraya Leader(s): Estimated Estimated 02-Nov-2015 Appraisal Date: Board Date: Managing Unit: GSU08 Lending Investment Project Financing Instrument: Sector(s): Other social services (20%), Sanitation (20%), Solid waste management (20%), Water supply (20%), Housing construction (20%) Theme(s): Other social development (25%), Urban services and housing for the poor (25%), Other urban development (25%), Urban planning and hou sing policy (25%) Is this project processed under OP 8.50 (Emergency Recovery) or OP No Public Disclosure Copy 8.00 (Rapid Response to Crises and Emergencies)? Financing (In USD Million) Total Project Cost: 1.62 Total Bank Financing: 0.00 Financing Gap: 0.00 Financing Source Amount Borrower 0.00 Indonesia Disaster Management Fund (DMF) 1.62 Total 1.62 Environmental B - Partial Assessment Category: 2. Project Development Objective(s) The Development Objective of this proposed project is to support the GoI in meeting the needs for disaster-resilient settlement for disaster-affected communities and to mainstream community-based processes into a national framework for disaster relief and mitigation. 3. Project Description The Project will be designed as a grant with an amount of US$ 1.62 million, to be executed by the Page 1 of 13 Ministry of Public Works and Housing, in collaboration with BNPB. This is a new project that will replicate and mainstream the ongoing successful REKOMPAK Yogyakarta/Merapi project (Community-based Settlement Rehabilitation and Reconstruction Project) and REKOMPAK Aceh in Public Disclosure Copy Karo District and in Manado City. The project will assist the eruption disaster affected community in Karo District and the flood-disaster affected community in Manado City. The proposed activities are grouped into the following components: Component A: Community Neighborhood Reconstruction Support Sub-Grants (US$ 449,000). While BNPB should provide the housing grants, this component is still necessary to support design, prototypes or start up of construction (for temporary shelter, housing, etc.) and to act as a placeholder to receive allocations in the case of funding shortfalls. Beneficiaries of this component will be assisted by community development facilitators who are financed through Component C. These DMF funds will contribute an estimated 12% of the total costs for rehabilitation of small-scale tertiary village infrastructure, facilities required for DRR at the community level and other priority investments for recovery (the rest will be covered by BNPB). The selection of infrastructure projects eligible for sub-grants will be based on Community Settlement Plans (CSPs) and detailed plans for housing clusters relocating from some high-risk areas. Component B: Community Education and Quality Assurance (US$ 695,000). Housing task force teams will be recruited to oversee project implementation; verify compliance with construction standards; provide capacity building for project management at the community level; and educate communities in emergency preparedness and mitigation of future disasters. Facilitation will consist of organizing training and providing assistance to communities in doing self-surveys and detailed mapping, analysis and planning, screening of potential environmental and social impacts; making commitments on plans and programs including environmental and social management and mitigation measures; assuring the quality of construction and utilities; managing procurement; ensuring that user contributions are sufficient to cover operations and maintenance, and facilitating interaction between communities and government agencies as well as other parties. Public Disclosure Copy Component C: Project Implementation Support (US$ 475,000). This component will be used to support National Management Consultant and District Management Consultant Teams to carry out the following activities: (a) Manage field activities; recruit and train facilitators; collaborate with local agencies and other stakeholders; support capacity building of stakeholders; ensure increased local agency participation in assistance and approval of CSPs; organize disaster risk reduction activities; and transfer knowledge gained through the activities under the project. (b) Carry out monitoring and evaluation. (c) Assist with the preparation of studies, information packages, technical guideline packages and proposals for application of the community-based approach by relevant agencies at local as well as national level, using knowledge and practices developed in Aceh as well as through presently ongoing activities in Yogyakarta and Central Java, international experience, as well as direct experience from the assistance underway, particularly in North Sumatra and North Sulawesi. This will include village planning for disaster-resilience, building regulation and land-use control, retrofitting, and management information systems (MISs). (d) Facilitate collaboration among agencies and stakeholders involved with disaster relief and mitigation to settle on arrangements mentioned above and implement joint programs, and to develop a Disaster Recovery Framework, which lays out an organizing structure supported by official agreements and regulation for disaster recovery, action planning, guidance for funding and portfolio Page 2 of 13 management, monitoring and impact evaluations, and creates a multi-stakeholder platform. 4. Project location and salient physical characteristics relevant to the safeguard analysis (if known) Public Disclosure Copy The Project plans to provide sub-grants for community/tertiary infrastructure and prototypes of shelter or housing that would complement the larger priority investment in infrastructure and housing funded by BNPB. Project locations will be in the villages for the disaster-affected communities in the Karo District (North Sumatera) and in the City of Manado (North Sulawesi) and in the relocation sites, as identified during Project implementation. Selection of target villages that will be supported by the Project will be decided in agreement with the respective Local Governments and decision on the relocation sites will be determined based on the agreement among the respective Local Governments, the affected community groups, BNPB and the Project. If relocation is needed, it will be located in suitable areas closest to where affected communities used to live and to livelihood activities in the same district of Karo and in the City of Manado. No relocation will take place outside District of Karo and City of Manado. Initial screening based on the World Bank Study (2010) and a teleconference held by the Task Team with a local government official who was also affected by the eruption and a member of the Karo community, suggested that there are no IPs communities in the Karo District and Manado City including in the disaster-affected areas and in the potential relocation sites as per OP 4.10 definition which also generally applies to “Masyarakat Adat” beyond the definition of vulnerable, isolated groups. See Section 6 on Safeguards Policies. Both in District Karo and City of Manado, the relocation sites will be located in the same District and City, respectively. Although the Karo communities still follow traditional value and custom practices, they display homogeneous cultural characteristics in the Karo District and its surroundings. No community group identified themselves as having distinct cultural values and traditional customs from the general Karo people living in the area. The Karo communities with a population of 300,000 are spread over the Karo District covering an area of 5,000 km2. These communities have long Public Disclosure Copy history of migration to other districts in the North Sumatera province and to the other parts of the country rendering the Karo people having no communal and cultural attachment to the land they live on. In the Karo District, land is individually owned or claimed and cultivated. The Karo people rely on the agricultural sector as the main source of livelihoods with rice, coffee, vegetables and fruits being grown on their land. If there is relocation, the community will maintain its cultural values and traditional customs in the relocation sites. The potential relocation sites in this Project would be on productive forest, but no natural forest will be affected. At present, the productive forest comprised of pine plantation, and is managed by a State-owned company, who has a well-established forestry management system in place. Access road to the potential relocation sites will also use the productive forest. 5. Environmental and Social Safeguards Specialists Indira Dharmapatni (GSURR) Kian Siong (GENDR) Krisnan Pitradjaja Isomartana (GENDR) 6. Safeguard Policies Triggered? Explanation (Optional) Environmental Yes This project is funded by the grant that will involve Page 3 of 13 Assessment OP/BP 4.01 community education and the facilitation of the community based settlement rehabilitation and reconstruction in disaster affected areas at Sinabung in Public Disclosure Copy Karo District and Manado City. It is a replication of REKOMPAK model at Yogyakarta/Merapi and Aceh. This education and facilitation activities cover 78.4% of the grant or around USD 1.17 million. The main housing and infrastructure grants will be provided by BNPB and not by this project. Ministry of Public Work and Housing will be responsible for housing construction. This project will finance sub-grants for the reconstruction and rehabilitation of small scale tertiary village infrastructure (18.9% of the grant or around USD 0.28 million) such as roads, sanitation, schools, small bridges as well as housing models. etc. Based on the experience from previous REKOMPAK projects, the expected environmental impacts of activities funded by the Project are mostly related to construction activities which are not significant, not large in scale, non- irreversible, site-specific, and localized and consist mainly of debris and dust during the clean-up and during construction, and temporary deterioration of water quality, sanitation and drainage facilities due to eruption materials. Public Disclosure Copy The construction activities financed by the project will be relatively small in volume, uses community-based approaches and is highly participatory. Likely environmental impacts are therefore considered manageable. Although the existing REKOMPAK Environmental Guidelines, ESSF and SOP are considered sufficient, they will have to be slightly revised to reflect the intention that they will be used for the project in Karo District and Manado City. This project is thus a Category B as per the WB safeguards policy. The DG Human Settlements and Urban and Rural Development have SOP guidelines for some types of projects (including measures to control dust, noise and traffic at construction sites; specifications for backfilling and re-vegetating disturbed areas to prevent erosion; and procedures to control negative impacts at solid waste transfer stations; Page 4 of 13 etc.). And they have also issued the “SOP for Relocation Site Arrangement” (SOP Tata Cara Penataan Kawasan Relokasi) dated July 2011 including environmental and Public Disclosure Copy social aspects and impact. This SOP is developed based on the “Environmental Guidelines” of the ESSF. The thematic safeguards review process for Indonesia portfolio in February to March 2015 also visited Rekompak site in Merapi on 28 February 2015 and the team was impressed with the waste management handling and drainage management of the project. The ESSF that have been adopted and updated since 2005 also cover the screening process for potential environmental and social impacts for the construction activities at the relocation site that will be done during the CSP (Community Settlement Plan) preparation. The appropriate mitigation measures and instruments for managing impacts shall also be defined during the CSP preparation. The REKOMPAK site in Yogyakarta has implemented the safeguard guidelines with satisfactory result (drainage management, waste management (bio gas) etc.). The CSP is a key effective instrument to implement the ESSF in REKOMPAK Yogyakarta/ Merapi. If it is necessary to prepare specific Safeguards instruments such as an UKL/UPL or SOP/ Public Disclosure Copy SPPL, or a Resettlement Plan, they will be part of the CSP. At appraisal, the ESSF and the SOP have been assessed and they are still applicable to this project. The ESSF has been revised to reflect the intention that it will be used for REKOMPAK Karo District and Manado City, adopt the most current regulatory system and to reflect lesson learnt from previous projects. The continuous improvement of the SOP will be conducted during implementation as part of Component C along with other necessary revisions. The Draft Grant Agreement of this project has also s tipulated the requirement for contractors to refer to UKL/ UPL or SOP during contract preparation and construction phase. Natural Habitats OP/BP No The project will not involve or cause significant 4.04 conversion or degradation of natural habitats nor in Page 5 of 13 established or proposed critical natural habitat. The small scale tertiary village infrastructure financed Public Disclosure Copy under the project will be located in the urban and peri- urban area (especially for Manado city) or at the already disturbed area around the relocation site. For Sinabung, the relocation site is located in the production/plantation forest area and the Ministry of Environment and Forestry has given the permit to use the area for relocation site. PP 24/2010(Government Regulation 24/2010 is the basis for this permit). The relocation site and its ancillary facilities such as access road is not located at protection forest or at conservation and sensitive area (data from Statistic PHKA). The screening process of the “Environmental Guidelines” will be used by the facilitators and the community during the CSP preparation in determining the location of the proposed tertiary village infrastructure needed. And the SOP of Relocation Site Arrangement has also defined that any construction activities has to consider the buffer zone of the surrounding river or lake if applicable. The potential encroachment of resettlement area to surrounding area have been addressed in the current ESSF and Environmental Guidelines by the provision of negative list/prohibited activities of logging and the Public Disclosure Copy purchase of logging equipment and the development on protected areas (page 10 of ESSF). Forests OP/BP 4.36 No The Project will not finance activities that involve significant conversion or degradation of critical forest areas or natural forest as defined under the policy. The project is not intended for commercial plantation and there is no project component to improve the forest function. For Sinabung, the relocation site is at the productive forest land, but no natural forestry is directly affected by the project. The productive forest is managed by PT Inhutani IV, a state owned forestry company under the Ministry of State Own Enterprise and the Ministry of Forestry. As part of the permitting process mentioned before, MPW and BNPB, as the project owner, shall follow the permit requirements and relevant regulation such as PP 24/2010 about the use of forest area. Inhutani, established in 1973, has well established forestry Page 6 of 13 management system in place and has developed forestry management plan for the forestry in the project areas. Pest Management OP 4.09 No The Project does not involve any activities that use Public Disclosure Copy pesticide or activities that may result in potential increase of increased pesticide use due to the crop production. This project will involve community education and the facilitation of the community based settlement rehabilitation and reconstruction in disaster affected areas. Physical Cultural Yes Confirmation on the potential impacts on PCR will be Resources OP/BP 4.11 done during the screening of environmental and social impacts in the CSP preparation as guided in the ESSF. The highly participatory nature of the project will ensure that communities would be able to identify if any proposed sub-project will have an impact on cultural property and to ensure that these activities do not adversely affect cultural property. Sub-project proposals will require the identification of any such activities and require the group proposing the sub-project to specify adequate mitigation measures. Chance find procedure is included in the ESSF and contract document with contractor. Indigenous Peoples OP/ No Initial screening based on the World Bank Study (2010) BP 4.10 and a teleconference held by the Task Team with a local government official who was also affected by the eruption and a member of the Karo community, suggested that there are no IPs communities in the Karo District and Public Disclosure Copy Manado City including in the disaster-affected areas and in the potential relocation sites as per OP 4.10 definition which also generally applies to “Masyarakat Adat” beyond the definition of vulnerable, isolated groups. “Masyarakat Adat”, a term commonly used in the government regulations, are present in an area if the following criteria are met: • membership to a group with traditional rights based on collective genealogical and/or territorial relationships; • possession and attachment to natural wealth and territory that have been passed down from generation to generation; and • presence of social and cultural life that is governed by customary law and customary institutions along with their traditional leadership that have continuously sustained them as a community. Both in District Karo and City of Manado, the relocation Page 7 of 13 sites will be located in the same District and City, respectively. Although the Karo communities still follow traditional value and custom practices, they display Public Disclosure Copy homogenous cultural characteristics in the Karo District and its surroundings. No community group identified themselves as having distinct cultural values and traditional customs from the general Karo people living in the area. The Karo communities with a population of 300,000 are spread over the Karo District covering an area of 5,000 km2. These communities have long history of migration to other districts in the North Sumatera province and to the other parts of the country rendering the Karo people having no communal and cultural attachment to the land they live on. In the Karo District, land is individually owned or claimed and cultivated. The Karo people rely on the agricultural sector as the main source of livelihoods with rice, coffee, vegetables and fruits being grown on their land. Land for potential relocation sites in Karo District is owned by PT Inhutani IV, a state-owned company. The nature of the Project is a highly participatory and transparent process during the planning stage (self- mapping, preparation of the Community Settlement Plan- Public Disclosure Copy CSP-) and implementation stage as well. Since it is a highly participatory and transparent process, the decision making process will take into account the cultural values and traditional customs of Karo people who are the Project beneficiaries. Involuntary Resettlement Yes In the case that relocation is needed, the Project will only OP/BP 4.12 support voluntary relocation. The decisions to relocate will be made on an informed, participatory and voluntary consent basis. A protocol of voluntary relocation has been developed since 2011 (and updated since then) and adopted for the REKOMPAK Yogyakarta/Merapi, i.e. Standard Operating Procedures for Arrangements of Relocation Area. The SOP includes, among others: basic principles and procedures for voluntary relocation and preparation of the relocation sites. Relevant protocols for voluntary relocation are also included in various REKOMPAK guidelines and manuals including community self-surveys, village planning, land acquisition, neighborhood and detail design, Page 8 of 13 implementation/construction, relocation and environmental management. At appraisal, there is no plan of Local Governments of Public Disclosure Copy Manado to acquire land for the relocation sites for the flood-affected families. Plan to relocate the flood affected families very much depending on the facilitation process during project implementation. Whereas the Karo District is planning to use the production forest as potential relocation sites, including access roads. In the case that during project implementation there is a need for the local government of Karo District and/or Manado City to acquire land for relocation sites using eminent domain as per requirement of OP 4.12, they have to prepare a RAP approved by the Bank prior to relocation. The RAP will have to be prepared along with the Community Settlement Plan (CSP) preparation. The RAP will be prepared in reference to the Land Acquisition and Resettlement Policy Framework that is adopted from the LARPF of REKOMPAK. The project will adopt the Land Acquisition and Resettlement Policy Framework in the ESSF and various guidelines and manuals relevant for voluntary relocation of the REKOMPAK Yogyakarta/ Merapi, which have been updated to reflect the intention that it will be used for the project in Karo District and Manado. Safety of Dams OP/BP No The Project will not finance construction or rehabilitation 4.37 of dam. Projects on International No The Project sites will not be located in the watersheds of Public Disclosure Copy Waterways OP/BP 7.50 any international waterways. Projects in Disputed No The Project is not located in any known disputed areas as Areas OP/BP 7.60 defined under the policy. 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: As was the case with the REKOMPAK projects in Aceh, Yogyakarta/Merapi, the expected environmental impacts of activities funded by this project are not large in scale, not significant or irreversible, it is site-specific and localized, consist mainly of debris and dust during the clean-up and during construction, and temporary deterioration of water quality, sanitation and drainage facilities due to eruption materials. The project is small in scale, uses community-based approaches and is highly participatory. These impacts can be locally managed or mitigated through the community-based self-help clean up and continuous environmental awareness training with the assistance of local governments, as necessary. Disposal sites for putting the construction debris and clean-up materials will be defined Page 9 of 13 by community groups at the location where the environmental condition is not vulnerable. It has been long known that eruption material from a volcano such as Sinabung and Mount Merapi is suitable for construction. Public Disclosure Copy Based on the experience from previous REKOMPAK project, construction activities financed by the project will be relatively small in volume. The number of core-housing units to be rebuilt with the project’s support during the coming phase will be relatively small (less than 100 units), resulting in a need for less than 100m3 of timber and less than 800m3 of sand, gravel and split stone. Whenever possible, alternative material to timber for housing, such as metal truss for roof, will be considered. The construction will reuse as much as possible usable debris and volcanic eruption materials. Likely environmental impacts are therefore considered manageable and the existing REKOMPAK Environmental Guidelines considered broadly adequate. The thematic safeguards review process for Indonesia portfolio in February to March 2015 also visited REKOMPAK site in Yogyakarta/Merapi on 28 February 2015 and the team was impressed with the waste management handling and drainage management of the project. In addition, a well- structured relocation sites and participatory and transparent process of voluntary relocation and housing development were acknowledged as successful. The project may involve voluntary relocation to large-scale relocation areas. At this point, number of affected families who would be willing to relocate voluntarily cannot be identified, and therefore number and size of each relocation site cannot be defined. In Karo District, as relocation sites would be located in the production forests, relocation will lead to land use conversion into settlement. As was the case of relocation sites in REKOMPAK Aceh and Yogyakarta/Merapi, no significant and/or irreversible impacts took place. 2. Describe any potential indirect and/or long term impacts due to anticipated future activities in the project area: At appraisal, it was found that there is no potential indirect and/or long term impacts identified due to anticipated future activities in the project area. The demand for construction materials (wood, Public Disclosure Copy sand, gravel) is still manageable and will be relatively small in volume, based on the experience from Yogyakarta. The potential encroachment of resettlement area to surrounding area have been addressed in the current ESSF and Environmental Guidelines by the provision of negative list/ prohibited activities of logging and the purchase of logging equipment and the development on protected areas (page 10 of ESSF). During community participatory forum this aspect shall also become one of the screening process discussion. 3. Describe any project alternatives (if relevant) considered to help avoid or minimize adverse impacts. The relocation sites, including access roads, will be selected among others based on the suitability of the site for a safe-settlement, from the perspective of land use suitability, topographical, water availability, accessibility, etc. Site that are prone to erosion, flood, etc. will be avoided. The site will be chosen based on agreement among the local government, the relocated community, and the project. CSP will be used to select alternatives of relocation site. 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. The project will adopt the Environmental and Social Safeguards Framework (ESSF) and Guidelines of the REKOMPAK Yogyakarta/Merapi that have been updated from time to time since 2005, as the project nature and potential environmental and social impacts for this project in Karo District and Manado city would be similar with those of in Yogyakarta/Merapi. The ESSF Page 10 of 13 has been recently updated to reflect the intention that they will be used for the project in Karo District and Manado City, adopt the most current regulatory system and to reflect the lesson learnt from previous projects. As was the case with the ongoing REKOMPAK Yogyakarta/Merapi, all Public Disclosure Copy project components to be planned and implemented under this project, regardless of financing sources (including larger infrastructure and houses financed by the Government) will adopt the updated ESSF and Guidelines and SOP. Training for consultants and facilitators, particularly for safeguards, will be carried out as part of the training for CSPs. In addition, communities will be given hands-on assistance during the preparation of CSPs (including safeguards issues and during construction. In addition, consultants and facilitators will monitor and supervise the implementation of safeguards measures during construction. The Ministry of Public Works and Housing as the Executing Agency of this project has gained significant experience with community-based disaster reconstruction approach since the Aceh post-tsunami reconstruction in 2005. It has managed large-scale voluntary relocation, supporting the community self-surveys, finding suitable land for relocation sites, and rebuilding new settlements or housing clusters including earthquake-resistance houses in Yogyakarta Province (Bantul District in 2008-2009; Sleman in 2011-present) and in Central Java Province (Magelang in 2011-present) working with BNPB, the National Agency for Disaster Mitigation (2011-present). Experiences in the REKOMPAK Yogyakarta/Merapi implementation showed that ESSF and safeguards guidelines along with other guidelines (e.g. CSP Guidelines, Technical Guidelines, etc.) have been satisfactorily implemented. For instance, the fully informed, participatory and transparent voluntary relocation is well documented. The team of the thematic safeguards review process for Indonesia portfolio in who visited REKOMPAK site in Yogyakarta/ Merapi in February 2015, also confirmed that the projects have satisfactorily implemented safeguards requirements. Safeguards ratings in ISRs were also satisfactory. As was the case with the REKOMPAK practices in Aceh and Yogyakarta/Merapi, the National and Regional Management Consultants (including facilitators) in charge of Sinabung in Karo District and Manado City will be trained and together with the communities will be tasked to Public Disclosure Copy identify environmental and social safeguard issues and mitigation measures during the preparation of the Community Settlement Plans (CSPs) guided by ESSF. At the village level, community organizations (including the BKMs and TPKs) that have received assistance and capacity building through WB-supported PNPM (Urban and Rural), will be assisted by facilitators to deal with safeguards issues. Similar to REKOMPAK Aceh and Yogyakarta/Merapi, these community organizations will ensure that decision to relocate will be made on an informed, participatory and voluntary basis. 5. Identify the key stakeholders and describe the mechanisms for consultation and disclosure on safeguard policies, with an emphasis on potentially affected people. Stakeholders involved in this project are the Ministry of Public Works and Housing (MPWH) as the Executing Agency, BNPB, provincial and District/City BPBD, Local Governments of Karo District and Manado City, disaster-affected families, and project management consultants including facilitators. As a community-based project, consultations will be done at the community level along the reconstruction process, from planning, implementation/construction in the project cycle, from self-mapping/survey, preparation of the CSP, construction and operation and maintenance of the infrastructure. Project manuals and guidelines incorporating environmental and social safeguards, as was the case in the REKOMPAK Yogyakarta/Merapi, will be distributed to the consultants, facilitators and community groups. The REKOMPAK Yogyakarta/Merapi ESSF was uploaded in the Infoshop on March 3, 2011; and manuals (e.g. general guidelines, technical Page 11 of 13 guidelines, SOP of CSP formulation, SOP of community-based environmental assessment, ESSF in English and Bahasa Indonesia version, SOP of relocation site development) are available in the www.rekompakjrf.org. The updated ESSF, approved by the Bank, will be uploaded in the Public Disclosure Copy InfoShop and Project’s website. In the case that if in the future a RAP is prepared, it will be prepared in consultations with the affected people during the CSP preparation and the draft will be disclosed locally in the affected villages and in the project’s website as well as in the Infoshop. B. Disclosure Requirements Environmental Assessment/Audit/Management Plan/Other Date of receipt by the Bank 16-Sep-2015 Date of submission to InfoShop 28-Sep-2015 For category A projects, date of distributing the Executive 00000000 Summary of the EA to the Executive Directors "In country" Disclosure Indonesia 30-Sep-2015 Comments: Resettlement Action Plan/Framework/Policy Process Date of receipt by the Bank 16-Sep-2015 Date of submission to InfoShop 28-Sep-2015 "In country" Disclosure Indonesia 30-Sep-2015 Comments: If the project triggers the Pest Management and/or Physical Cultural Resources policies, the respective issues are to be addressed and disclosed as part of the Environmental Assessment/ Audit/or EMP. Public Disclosure Copy If in-country disclosure of any of the above documents is not expected, please explain why: C. Compliance Monitoring Indicators at the Corporate Level OP/BP/GP 4.01 - Environment Assessment Does the project require a stand-alone EA (including EMP) Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] report? If yes, then did the Regional Environment Unit or Practice Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] Manager (PM) review and approve the EA report? Are the cost and the accountabilities for the EMP incorporated Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] in the credit/loan? OP/BP 4.11 - Physical Cultural Resources Does the EA include adequate measures related to cultural Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] property? Does the credit/loan incorporate mechanisms to mitigate the Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] potential adverse impacts on cultural property? OP/BP 4.12 - Involuntary Resettlement Has a resettlement plan/abbreviated plan/policy framework/ Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] process framework (as appropriate) been prepared? Page 12 of 13 If yes, then did the Regional unit responsible for safeguards or Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] Practice Manager review the plan? Public Disclosure Copy Is physical displacement/relocation expected? Yes [ ] No [ ] TBD [ ] Provided estimated number of people to be affected Is economic displacement expected? (loss of assets or access to Yes [ ] No [ ] TBD [ ] assets that leads to loss of income sources or other means of livelihoods) Provided estimated number of people to be affected The World Bank Policy on Disclosure of Information Have relevant safeguard policies documents been sent to the Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] World Bank's Infoshop? Have relevant documents been disclosed in-country in a public Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] place in a 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 Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] responsibilities been prepared for the implementation of measures related to safeguard policies? Have costs related to safeguard policy measures been included Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] in the project cost? Does the Monitoring and Evaluation system of the project Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] include the monitoring of safeguard impacts and measures related to safeguard policies? Public Disclosure Copy Have satisfactory implementation arrangements been agreed Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] with the borrower and the same been adequately reflected in the project legal documents? III. APPROVALS Task Team Leader(s): Name: George Soraya Approved By Safeguards Advisor: Name: Date: Practice Manager/ Name: Jolanta Kryspin-Watson (PMGR) Date: 10-Nov-2015 Manager: Page 13 of 13 The original had problem with text extraction. pdftotext Unable to extract text.