Georgia Secondary and Local Roads
Framework Policy
For
Environmental Assessment and Protection
April 2004
Revised May 19, 2004 and
October 2008
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION
II. World Bank Safeguard Policies
III. SCREENING AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
IV. SUPPLEMENTAL COMMENTARY: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
V. IMPLEMENTATION
Attachment 1 Template for an Environmental Management Plan
Attachment 2 WB OP 4.01
Attachment 3 WB BP 4.01
Attachment 4 WB OP 4.12
Attachment 5 Public Consultation Minutes dated December 26, 2008
Georgia Secondary and Local Roads
Policy Framework for Environmental Assessment and Protection
I. Introduction
1.1 The following Policy framework for Environmental Assessment and Protection has been prepared in support of the Georgia Secondary and Local Roads (GSLR) Project being funded mainly by a credit from the International Development Association, hereafter referred to as the World Bank. The works designated for inclusion under this project focus on and are classified as rehabilitation of existing secondary and local roads. [1] According to this classification, the Ministry of Environment Protection and Natural Resources (MEPNR) does not require the carrying out of Environmental Assessment (EA) for these works.
1.2 The Safeguard policies of the World Bank, however, do require the conduct of EA, including the preparation of Environmental Management Plans (EMPs) with mitigation and monitoring plans (see OP/BP 4.01). For the works identified for the first year of the project these EAs/EMPs have been prepared by local consultants in advance of Appraisal. A similar process will be followed for works to be undertaken during the remainder of the project. This document (i) serves as a general guidance for the subsequent EAs/EMPs and (ii) provides a reference for handling chance finds during implementation . It builds upon a workshop held for the design consultants preparing the first sets of EAs/EMPs.
1.3 Governmental reorganization and restructuring had been underway during the preparation process for the GSLR Project. As a result the State Department of Roads (SDRG) was briefly referred to as the Georgia Road Administration (GERA). Later it became the Roads Department of the Ministry of Infrastructure and Development , and finally the Roads Department of the Ministry of Economic Development (RDMED) This later name has been used in this revised version of the Framework Policy for the GSLR Project.
II. World Bank Safeguard Policies
2.1 The World Bank's OP 4.01 Environmental Assessment is considered to be the umbrella policy for the Bank's environmental safeguard policies. These policies are critical to ensuring that potentially adverse environmental and social consequences are identified, minimized, and mitigated. These policies receive particular attention during the project preparation and approval process. The World Bank carries out screening of each proposed project to determine the appropriate extent and type of EA to be undertaken and whether or not the project may trigger other safeguard policies. The Borrower is responsible for any assessment required by the Safeguard Policies, with general advice provided by the World Bank staff.
2.2 The safeguard policies and triggers for each policy are provided in the following table.
Exhibit 1. Safeguard Policies and Triggers
Policy / TriggersEnvironmental Assessment (OP 4.01) / If a project is likely to have potential (adverse) environmental risks and impacts in its area of influence.
Forests
(OP 4.36) / Forest sector activities and other Bank sponsored interventions which have potential to impact significantly upon forested areas
Involuntary Resettlement (OP 4.12) / Physical relocation and land loss resulting in: (i) relocation or loss of shelter; (ii) loss of assets or access to assets; (iii) loss of income sources or means of livelihood, whether or not the affected people must move to another location.
Indigenous Peoples (OP 4.10) / If there are indigenous peoples in the project area, and potential adverse impacts on indigenous peoples are anticipated, and indigenous peoples are among the intended beneficiaries.
Safety of Dams (OP 4.37) / If a project involves construction of a large dam (15 m or higher) or a high hazard dam; If a project is dependent upon an existing dam, or dam under construction.
Pest Management (OP 4.09) / If procurement of pesticides is envisaged; If the project may affect pest management in the way that harm could be done, even though the project is not envisaged to procure pesticides. This includes projects that may (i) lead to substantially increased pesticide use and subsequent increase in health and environmental risk, (ii) maintain or expand present pest management practices that are unsustainable, not based on an IPM approach, and/or pose significant health or environmental risks.
Physical Cultural Resources (OP 4.11) / The policy is triggered by projects which, prima facie, entail the risk of damaging cultural property (e.g. any project that includes large scale excavations, movement of earth, surface environmental changes or demolition)
Natural Habitats (OP 4.04) / The policy is triggered by any project with the potential to cause significant conversion (loss) or degradation of natural habitats whether directly (through construction) or indirectly (through human activities induced by the project).
Projects in Disputed Areas (OP 7.60) / The policy is triggered if the proposed project will be in a “disputed area”.
Projects on International Waterways (OP 7.50) / If the project is on international waterway such as: any river, canal, lake, or similar body of water that forms a boundary between, or any river or body of surface water that flows through, two or more states ( or any tributary or other body of surface water that is a component of this waterway); any bay, gulf, strait, or channel bounded by two or more states or, if within one state, recognized as a necessary channel of communication between the open sea and other states-and any river flowing into such waters.
III. Screening and Environmental Assessment
3.1 The screening process for the GSLR Project is discussed in the Project Appraisal Document (PAD) and summarized in the EMP. It is the intention that the selection of the local roads to be matched with the rehabilitation of secondary roads in a Raion would be based on local consultation with users. Since the works involve rehabilitation, it has not been expected that there would be any significant environmental issues. Consultations during the screening process would provide an opportunity to identify any unforeseen issues and reduce the likelihood of chance finds.
3.2 All works that are selected for inclusion under the project would have their own respective EMP (referred to as segment EMPs), including mitigation and monitoring plans, prepared as part of the EA for each road segment. The EA/EMP would provide a back-up validation of the screening process. Mitigation efforts must be specifically addressed in each segment EMP. The EA/EMP for a single secondary road and its associated local roads may be combined in a single document.
3.3 Integral with the preparation of each EMPs is a public disclosure of the findings at the level where the work is to be performed, a central Raion location being acceptable. The minutes of the public meeting and attendance lists must be attached to the EMP and provided to the World Bank for retention by the INFO Shop.
3.4 The structure of an EA will follow a fairly standard format as indicated in the TOR to be provided by the Transport Reform and Rehabilitation Centre (TRRC) to firms contracted to provide this service. Some commentary follows, and additional information is available at the World Bank web-site, www.worldbank.org. A sample table of contents is provided in Exhibit 2.
Exhibit 2: Environmental Assessment, Sample Table of Contents
I.. IntroductionII. Baseline Situation
III. Proposed Investment
IV. Analysis of Potential Environmental Impact
V. Consideration of AlternativesVI. Environmental Management Plan
A. Institutional Issues
B. Mitigation Plan
C. Monitoring Plan
D. Public Consultations
Annexes: Includes minutes of public consultation
IV. Supplemental Commentary: Environmental Assessment
4.1 Introduction: The introduction to the EA should include but not be limited to:
-reference to the main project by name
-such basic contract information as the date of contract and the contract number if available
-reference to the fact that the EA is being prepared as part of the larger design effort of the contractor
-compliance with
-Georgian law and
-World Bank operational policy 4.01
-the time frame for the execution of the assessment
-the lead person responsible for the EA and contact information
4.2 Baseline Situation: Be as specific as you can in providing this information.
-provide a basic description of what is [suggest description by kms]
-road condition
-environmental concerns
-it is suggested that you include a map of the area
-collect from the local government social data on health and education for example, attendance/user figures, facilities in the area.
-indicate if environmental problems have been caused by the road
-information gathering may include consultations with local government or with residents
-depending on how long the segment is you may use an indicative sample
-what is likely to happen if the rehabilitation is not done,
impact on road
impact on the environment
-are there any social issues?
4.3 Proposed Investment: What actions are being proposed
-describe the rehabilitation process and what will be included
-provide indicative cost
4.4 Analysis of potential Environmental Impacts: How could the work have negative impact on the environment? Basically explain how this is to be covered. Included (i) Direct Impact, (ii) Indirect Impact, and (iii) Social Impact.
4.5 Consideration of Alternatives: this section is not that significant for this project since we expect to use ONLY the existing alignments and existing parameters. If there is an environmental problem that could be solved in a better or less expensive way, then discuss it here at least. In such a case the costs should be included. The total cost shown in the design would be using the existing alignment.
4.6 Environmental Management Plan: The EMP is a part of the EA. It includes both the mitigation plan and the monitoring plan. An abbreviated table has been used for the segment EMPs prepared for the first year. A more detailed, alternate format for this table is provided in Attachment 1 but is not required.
A. Mitigation Plan: the Mitigation plan identifies the mitigation measures that will be used to address specific issues. It also indicates who is the responsible agent
Exhibit 3: Sample Structure for Mitigation Plan
Issue
/Mitigation Measure/Control
/ Institution/Agent Responsible{see example provided in the Main EMP for the GSLR project)
B. Monitoring Plan: The monitoring plan shows how compliance is to be tracked during implementation, again addressing the report mechanisms, who is responsible and the timing.
Exhibit 4: Sample Structure for Monitoring Plan
Issue
/Monitoring Indicator
/ Frequency/Timing/ Institutional Responsibility
V. Implementation
5.1 In advance of initiating work the civil contractors must prepare a “passport” or profile for the work and obtain a permit according to Georgian procedures. All contractors will also be responsible for proper work execution at the work site. Specifics including normal good practice are indicated in the contract terms to be provided to each contractor. (see sample in main EMP for the GSLR Project). Contractors not in compliance with the terms so specified will be considered in violation of the contract terms.
5.2 The project manager will play a major role in monitoring. He will provide the TRCC a monthly report that indicates any variances from the EMP, any chance finds, and specific mitigation actions that have been taken or need to be taken. The monthly report would include a table as below in Exhibit 5.
Exhibit 5: Sample Table for Monthly Report
Road Segment/km / In Compliance[date] / Variations on EMP / Mitigation/additional actions required / Sign-off Date
Etc.
5.3 In the case of chance finds the contractor must immediately stop work and notify the project manager who would immediately notify the TRRC. The TRRC, in consultation with the RDMED environmental liaison officer, would notify the appropriate ministry, agency, or bureau within 24 hours. The appropriate government body notified would undertake necessary actions to record the findings and determine mitigation requirements within seven working days. Subsequent actions and settlement would follow Georgian law.
Exhibit: 6: Summary for Social Impact
Social Impact
The initial screening process and EA are expected to catch any social issues. If disputes arise in the process of implementation the contractor would attempt to resolve issues directly. If necessary any issues needing further attention would be referred to the Project Manager, who would then refer the matter to the appropriate local agencies. In such cases the proceeding would follow Georgian law and be documented. Essential aspects include: transparency, accountability, equity, certainty, timeliness, and right of redress or appeal.Notes
/ Responsible Parties/
Contract terms for construction contractors specify requirements. Included in designs. In case of disputes, contractors will refer to Project Manager.
/ TRRC, Project Manager, RRMC, ContractorsExhibit: 7: Summary for Physical Cultural Properties/Resources
Physical Cultural Properties/Resources
Works posing any threat for PCP/Rs would not be considered eligible for funding. Initial Screening would divert such proposals. In the course of rehabilitation, however, it is possible that there would be a chance find. Such cases shall be promptly communicated to the Ministry of Culture, Monument Protection and Sport (MCMPS) through the Center of Archaeology (CA) of the National Museum of Georgia under this Ministry.Discussing with the MCMPS indicated that there were adequate protections in place under Georgian law to support the policies of the WB. In such cases the proceeding would follow Georgian law and be documented. Essential aspects include: transparency, accountability, equity, certainty, timeliness, and right of redress or appeal.
/
Notes
/ Responsible Parties/
(i) Ecological Passport covers clearance from CA (ii) Policy Framework specifies actions to take in the case of chance finds
/ (i) CA, TRRC, Project Manager, Contractors (ii) CA, RDMED, TRRC, Project Manager, Contractors
Exhibit: 8: Summary for Involuntary Resettlement
Although neither resettlement nor land acquisition is expected under the project, there is the remote possibility that there could be illegal squatters or encroachment on the right of way that was not identified in either the screening or EA process. This most unlikely possibility would be handled as primarily a social issue keyed to loss of income or loss of access issues.
Discussion with the MEPNR and RDMED indicated that existing Georgian law covered these areas in ways compatible with WB policies. In such cases, therefore, the proceeding would follow Georgian law, similar to the guidelines express under social issues, and be documented. Essential aspects include: transparency, accountability, equity, certainty, timeliness, and right of redress or appeal
/
Notes
/ Responsible Parties/
Attachment 4 to this Policy Framework specifies actions to be taken for handling land use issues in the right of way
/ RDMED, TRRC, Project Manager, RRMC, ContractorsAttachment 1