INTEGRATED SAFEGUARDS DATASHEET APPRAISAL STAGE

I. Basic Information Date prepared/updated: 09/11/2012 Report No.: AC6721

Public Disclosure Authorized 1. Basic Project Data Original Project ID: P125032 Original Project Name: Leste Road Climate Resilience Project Country: Timor-Leste Project ID: P130975 Project Name: Timor Leste Road Climate Resilience Project - Additional Financing Task Team Leader: Mitsuyoshi Asada Estimated Appraisal Date: April 30, 2012 Estimated Board Date: March 21, 2013 Managing Unit: EASNS Lending Instrument: Specific Investment Loan Sector: Rural and Inter-Urban Roads and Highways (85%);Public administration- Transportation (15%) Theme: Climate change (60%);Rural services and infrastructure (20%);Regional Public Disclosure Authorized integration (20%) IBRD Amount (US$m.): 30 IDA Amount (US$m.): 10 GEF Amount (US$m.): 0 PCF Amount (US$m.): 0 Other financing amounts by source: Borrower 52.00 52.00 Environmental Category: B - Partial Assessment Simplified Processing Simple [] Repeater [] Is this project processed under OP 8.50 (Emergency Recovery)

Public Disclosure Authorized Yes [ ] No [X] or OP 8.00 (Rapid Response to Crises and Emergencies)

2. Project Objectives The project will deliver sustainable climate resilient road infrastructure on the - corridor.

3. Project Description The project would provide additional financing for the ongoing Timor Leste Road Climate resilience Project (TLRCRP). The proposed Additional Financing will finance the following revised components under RCRP:

Component A: Climate Resilient Road Infrastructure This component will invest in key road infrastructure to improve its climate resilience.

Public Disclosure Authorized The objective is to reduce the impact of the increasing traffic volume and intensity of rainfall on the road corridor from Dili to Ainaro. The physical works will include: (i) construction or reinforcement of slope stabilization structures; (ii ) improvement of drainage structures to meet forecasted rainfall volumes and intensities; and, (iii) pavement rehabilitation/improvements of all the road sections (112 km). This component includes design and supervision by international consultants supported by local staff including environmental and social safeguard specialists to monitor the safeguard compliance of the civil works.

Component B: Climate Responsive Maintenance and Emergency Planning and Response Systems Since the entire Dili-Ainaro road will now be improved, most of these components will be cancelled and an alternative maintenance approach will be adopted. The three-year routine and emergency maintenance contracts will be awarded to the works contractors, which would take effect at the conclusion of the two-year defects liability period. This would ensure that the rehabilitated road would be maintained for a minimum of 5 years in the project period.

Component C: Project Support and Training This component will not change, and include: (i) support to the Project Management Unit (PMU) established for the ADB RNDP in order to enable it to meet the additional World Bank project requirements; (ii) a training program for MOI and other government staff, as well as contractors, aimed at bridging the capacity gap on maintaining mountainous roads and emergency responses 8; and, (iii) independent safeguards monitoring.

Component D: Feasibility Study of the proposed road segments This new component will consist of feasibility studies of the proposed road segments linked to Dili-Ainaro road; Maubisse-Ermera-, -Same, and Ainaro-Cassa.

4. Project Location and salient physical characteristics relevant to the safeguard analysis The project will be located at key north-south links. The road from Dili to Ainaro was selected by government for TLRCRP because, as part of the 1,000 km Strategic Road Network, it is an important north-south artery providing access to residents along the road and to through traffic from Dili to the southern coast. The corridor is increasing in importance, because of the potential development of the Southern Corridor, related to the gas development. The Government has also expressed interest in including two further segments in the project depending on the availability of finance: (a) Maubessi-Same, which runs south towards Betano through areas of agricultural potential; and (b) a link to Ermera, which serves an important coffee growing area with tourism potential.

5. Environmental and Social Safeguards Specialists Ms Francisca Melia Setiawati (EASIS) Mr Virza S. Sasmitawidjaja (EASIS)

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: Identify and describe any potential large scale, significant and/or irreversible impacts: The project triggers the Environmental Assessment policy (OP 4.01) and is rated as a Category B project. The project is not expected to have long-term direct, induced or cumulative impacts on the environment including on natural or critical natural habitats.

The Additional Finance project proposes three additional links – Aitutu village to Same (26 km), Ainaro to Cassa (21 km) and junction south of Maubisse to Ermera (57 km) for potential inclusion. Of the three links, only the Aitutu village to Same link (26 km) passes near the proposed Mount Cablaque and Lake Welenas Protected Area (PA) near Same. No boundaries or ground survey by the Department of Protected Area have been fixed for the proposed PA but near the road corridor the boundaries are expected to be about 10 km (plus or minus) away from the road. The field visit concluded that none of the three links will be impact the natural habitat or any of the designated or proposed PAs and the construction of the proposed Aitutu village to Same link and the other two links are unlikely to result in any direct or indirect adverse environmental impacts on the natural habitat in the area.. In fact, if properly implemented, the project could improve the existing environmental conditions such would significantly reduce slope failures, reduce erosion and channel and redirect road side drainage. The proposed project is therefore designated as a environmental safeguard Category B project.

The adverse environmental impacts associated with the construction the three links are expected to be mostly limited to construction related impacts. These impacts are expected to be short lived, occurring mostly along the alignment of the three road links and are expected to be confined limited to the right of way. Some impacts are expected to occur at offsite locations such as river bed gravel extraction sites, quarry, crusher, and asphalt mixing plant sites and spoil or excess material disposal sites. These impacts can be avoided or minimized through careful design and good construction practices, or otherwise effectively mitigated during construction by use of appropriate mitigation measures and effective environmental supervision. The main potential impacts identified include: (i) disturbance from noise, vibration and dust arising from loading, unloading, and transportation of construction materials (aggregates and bitumen) by trucks; (ii) noise and dust arising during construction of slope protection and retaining structures, construction of the new road base and construction of the new surface in selected road segments; (iii) erosion and sedimentation from exposed surfaces that may affect the nearby farms and water bodies during the construction phase; (iv) risks from the use and improper disposal of hazardous materials such as used fuel and lubricants; and, (v) potential increase in accidents during construction and operation from increased vehicle movements, confined space, narrow right of way, and inadequate road safety signage .

Subject to confirmation of the links during negotiations, MOI will prepare an Environmental Management Plan (EMP) as per the Environmental Assessment and Review Framework (EARF) and as part of the road investigation and detailed engineering design. The EMP (which will use elements of the already approved EMP for TLRCRP) will be disclosed to the public for comments and feedbacks. The EMP will summarize the anticipated environmental impacts and the associated mitigation measures during design, construction and operational phases of the project. It will make reference to the relevant laws of TL and contract documents, approximate location, timeframe, mitigation measures and costs, and the responsibility for its implementation and supervision. A field monitoring checklist will be prepared based on the EMP and monitoring plan. The field monitoring checklist will be used by the contractors supervising engineers. The signed checklists will be provided to the PMU/MOI who will be responsible for the appropriate follow-up and compliance reporting.

The project is triggering the Bank's Indigenous Peoples Policy (OP 4.10). The Timorese population is indigenous because it has: (i) collective attachment to geographically distinct territories; and (ii) descent from groups present in specific areas prior to the establishment of modern states and relative borders, due largely in respect of Timor Leste being established as a sovereign nation in 2000. Ethnicity in Timor is bound by language. Seventeen languages, derived from one of two broad language groups - Austronesian (Malayo-Polynesian) and Papuan (Melanesian) - are spoken across the country. While the social assessments undertaken by the ADB road project indicate that no significant differences of cultural and social identity exist among the people who speak different languages, except for a small number of Muslims in an overwhelmingly Roman Catholic society, Timorese people are considered indigenous due to the two points raised above.

Since essentially everyone in Timor Leste is considered indigenous, an Indigenous People's Plan (IPP) is not required but elements of the plan have been integrated into the existing project PAD. Those elements will be applied under the proposed Additional Financing. Consistent with the requirements of OP 4.10 (Annex B), during project preparation for the original TLRCRP free, prior, and informed consultation with the affected communities along the Dili-Ainaro road corridor were carried out in three major sites. These consultations confirmed broad community support for the project. Free, prior and informed consultations will also be conducted with the communities along the proposed road links to ensure a broad community support to the project. The PAD and the project's Operational Manual will put in place a Consultations Framework for the implementation of the project. Given the existing, thorough and informative Social Assessment carried out for the ADB road project, this project will draw from it rather than prepare new ones for the proposed three links which may be financed under the project. The updated Social Assessment will be disclosed before the appraisal of the Additional Financing Project.

The Bank's Involuntary Resettlement policy (OP 4.12) is triggered. The civil works under the project will be conducted within the existing road alignments; therefore, the works for all the above roads will not involve any land acquisition. The number of households that may experience incidental impact from civil works will be small, and the magnitude of the impacts is expected to be small. Steps will be taken during implementation to mitigate these impacts. The Government, with support from the World Bank, ADB and JICA, has also recently prepared an updated Resettlement Framework (RF), which would be applied to the Additional Financing Projects. The Framework will be disclosed prior to appraisal of the Additional Financing Project. Any impacts that are experienced will be covered by Resettlement Plans developed under the auspices of this Framework. This will be disclosed and applied to all three link roads.

2. Describe any potential indirect and/or long term impacts due to anticipated future activities in the project area: It is anticipated that the design and construction of the proposed links will make the roads more climate resilient and will reduce long term impact from rain and the resulting flood damage to the roads. This will be achieved through good drainage control and bio- engineering methods; which should have a positive overall impact on water management and runoff in the areas around the road. As in the construction of the Dili to Ainaro road, bio-engineering methods will be applied in consultations with landowners and as they could involve restrictions on land use in steep slopes areas. If there are impacts to people's assets and livelihood, the RF will apply.

The Dili-Ainaro road does not pass through any protected areas, but the Aitutu village to Same link passes by the proposed Mount Cablaque and Lake Welenas Protected Area, located several kilometers away from the road. The area around Same and Maubisse has the potential for high Biological Value. However, the areas around the road links are highly impacted with slash and burn cultivations, coffee and banana plantations, firewood gathering, general deforestation and small village settlements. As in the Dili – Ainaro Project, the project will supplement the reforestation effort being implemented by the National Directorate of Forestry under the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, by making provision for planting trees, shrubs and re-vegetating the surrounding areas along the road links.

3. Describe any project alternatives (if relevant) considered to help avoid or minimize adverse impacts. No road alternatives were considered as the project is aimed at improving the climate resilience of the existing roads and is specifically designed to minimize the adverse impacts of rainfall and runoff on the roads. Given the hilly/mountainous terrain, realignment of the links or new alignments will prima facie result in potentially bigger environmental impacts. The design will incorporate specific solutions based on the site specific needs. Alternative design solutions will be considered before selecting the final design.

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 National Directorate of Environmental Services has the capacity to review and clear the EMP. This will be done before bidding documents for civil works are issued. Currently, the environmental management capacity of the Ministry of Infrastructure is being strengthened through on-the-job training during the EMP implementation and compliance monitoring on the existing World Bank and ADB financed road projects. Should these skills prove not be sufficient for the World Bank additional financing project, then additional training will be provided. The government has limited experience in dealing with World Bank social safeguards. However this experience is being enhanced by works in the current World Bank and ADB road projects. Responsibility for day-to-day monitoring of the implementation of the EMP and RPF will fall upon the international design and supervision consultant who will have strict reporting and monitoring requirements. The Project Management Unit established under the ADB project is being expanded to handle the World Bank activities. They will be responsible for monitoring the compliance of the EMP and RPF.

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 the residents along the road links to be improved. For the original TLRCRP public consultations were conducted during preparation of the project at three locations along the first year work program along the Dili-Ainaro corridor. These consultations disclosed the EMP and RPF, assessed the overall community support for the project in accordance with OP 4.10, and noted community comments and concerns. Similar consultations and documents disclosures will be carried out at the representative locations along the road links for the proposed three roads to ensure that the designs meet the needs and expectations of the communities. For the affected people, appropriate compensation arrangements will follow the RPF.

B. Disclosure Requirements Date Environmental Assessment/Audit/Management Plan/Other: Was the document disclosed prior to appraisal? Yes Date of receipt by the Bank 04/16/2012 Date of "in-country" disclosure 04/30/2012 Date of submission to InfoShop 04/24/2012 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 04/16/2012 Date of "in-country" disclosure 04/30/2012 Date of submission to InfoShop 04/24/2012 Indigenous Peoples Plan/Planning Framework: Was the document disclosed prior to appraisal? Yes Date of receipt by the Bank 04/16/2012 Date of "in-country" disclosure 04/30/2012 Date of submission to InfoShop 04/24/2012 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 No appropriate) been prepared in consultation with affected Indigenous Peoples? If yes, then did the Regional unit responsible for safeguards or Sector N/A 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: Mr Mitsuyoshi Asada 05/30/2012 Environmental Specialist: Mr Virza S. Sasmitawidjaja 05/30/2012 Social Development Specialist Ms Francisca Melia Setiawati 05/30/2012 Additional Environmental and/or Social Development Specialist(s):

Approved by: Regional Safeguards Coordinator: Ms Vilija Kostelnickiene 08/29/2012 Comments: Acting Regional Safeguards Advisor Sector Manager: Mr Charles M. Feinstein 08/28/2012 Comments: