integrated safeguards datasheet - Documents & Reports



Date prepared/updated: 03/18/2014

1. Basic Project Data

Original Project ID: P094007 Country: Morocco Project ID: P148003 Report No.: AC7055 Original Project Name: MA-Rural Roads II Project Name: Morocco Second Rural Roads Project - AF2 Task Team Leader: Vincent Vesin Estimated Appraisal Date: March 18, 2014 Estimated Board Date: April 29, 2014 Managing Unit: MNSTI Lending Instrument: Investment Project Financing Sector: Rural and Inter-Urban Roads and Highways (100%) Theme: Rural services and infrastructure (100%) IBRD Amount (US$m.): 95 IDA Amount (US$m.): GEF Amount (US$m.): 0 0 PCF Amount (US$m.): 0 Other financing amounts by source: Borrower Environmental Category: B - Partial Assessment Simplified Processing Simple [] Is this project processed under OP 8.50 (Emergency Recovery) or OP 8.00 (Rapid Response to Crises and Emergencies) 36.00 36.00 Repeater [] Yes [ ] No [X]

2. Project Objectives

Current Project Development Objective – Parent Project The parent project's development objective is to increase rural population's access to all weather roads in support of the Government's Second National Rural Roads Program (NRRP2). The main goal of the NRRP2 is to improve the National Rural Road Accessibility Index from 54% in 2005 to 80% at the end of the program in 2015. Proposed Project Development Objective - Additional Financing The project development objective remains unchanged under the proposed additional financing, which is processed to cover a financing gap in the overall NRRP2.

3. Project Description

The Project supports the NRRP2, which has two components, according to the source of financing:

Component A (financed by the Caisse pour le Financement Routier (CFR)): the rehabilitation or the upgrade of 12,560 km of rural roads (including small, complementary road-related infrastructure), for an estimated cost of MAD 12,003 million (equivalent to US$1,450 million). The CFR falls under the Ministry of Equipment and Transport and was established in 2004 as a public entity with administrative and financial autonomy (law 57-03) to mobilize financial resources for investments in the road sector. Under the NRRP2 the CFR manages both loans and grants from several international donors (including the Bank) and contributions from local authorities (regions, provinces, and communes). Component B (financed by the General Budget and the Road Fund): the rehabilitation or the upgrade of 3,000 km of rural roads (including small, complementary road-related infrastructure), for an estimated cost of MAD 3,520 million (equivalent to US$425 million). The Borrower for the proposed additional financing is the CFR. Such proposed additional financing of US$95 million equivalent is needed to cover a financing gap in the overall NRRP2. It, alongside the US$36 million contribution of the Borrower (obtained from local authorities), will finance around 1,300 km of rehabilitation or upgrade of rural roads (including small, complementary road-related infrastructure), which were already selected in 2005 as part of the NRRP2, whose detailed design is ready, but for which no other financier could be identified. These 1,300 km are part of 2,000 km still to be financed under component A of NPRR2. The Borrower is still waiting for the contribution from the local authorities to fund the remaining 700 km under component A. The proposed additional financing is expected to close on November 30, 2016

4. Project Location and salient physical characteristics relevant to the safeguard analysis

The project will cover the regions of Tanger-Tetouan, Taza-Al-Hoceima-Taounate, Fès Boulmane, Meknès-Tafilalet, Tadla-Azilal, Doukkala-Abda, Rabat-Sale-Zemmour-Zaer, Casablanca, Oriental, Marrakech-Tensift-El Haouz, Chaouia-Ourdigha, Gharb-Chrarda Beni Hsen, Souss-Massa-Drâa as well as the province of Guelmin.

5. Environmental and Social Safeguards Specialists

Ms Fatou Fall (MNSSU) Mr Taoufiq Bennouna (MNSEE)

6. Safeguard Policies Triggered Natural Habitats (OP/BP 4.04) Forests (OP/BP 4.36) Pest Management (OP 4.09) Safety of Dams (OP/BP 4.37) Environmental Assessment (OP/BP 4.01) Physical Cultural Resources (OP/BP 4.11) Indigenous Peoples (OP/BP 4.10) Involuntary Resettlement (OP/BP 4.12) Projects on International Waterways (OP/BP 7.50) Projects in Disputed Areas (OP/BP 7.60) II. Key Safeguard Policy Issues and Their Management Yes




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: The additional financing for this project covers a financing gap only. There are no changes to project scope, activity or design from the parent project, thus no new/different environment and social safeguards related risks are anticipated under the additional financing. Rural roads to be upgraded or rehabilitated under the Second National Rural Roads Program (NRRP2) have a wide range of positive impacts. Positive impacts stemming from the project are numerous. The rehabilitation or the upgrade of all-weather rural roads will give isolated populations year-round access to basic social and economic services (health, education and markets). These roads will have a significant impact more specifically in the agricultural sector, by facilitating the distribution and marketing of agricultural products, thereby increasing the sector's productivity. The rehabilitation or the upgrade of rural roads should also lead to significant improvement in both transport services' quality and competitiveness, and to a large drop in transport cost. Finally, the use of labor-intensive techniques, which will be encouraged under the project, will provide local population with opportunities for temporary work. There are some potential adverse environmental and social impacts however. Roads located in the escarpments are characterized by hairpin bends, whereas in flat areas they follow straight alignments. These geometric features affect the volumes of earthworks to be carried out and consequent impacts on the environment. Disruption of drainage is a major consideration in road design as it may hamper free drainage, it may cause stagnant pools of water and may lead to increased sediments into ponds, streams and rivers due to erosion from road tops and sides, as well as increased run-off and flooding. In the case of mountain roads, borrow excavation into the mountainside to achieve the planned design width of the roadbed may lead to the erosion of exposed slope surfaces and possibly to slides of slopes onto the road. Slope stabilization is therefore a key design issue in mountainous areas. Loss of natural vegetation may also occur during construction, especially when widening is planned. In that case, revegetation and replanting will be

envisioned to protect susceptible soil surfaces. Loss of access is possible in case roadbeds are raised or villages bisected by road widening. During construction, inadequate disposal of oil and bitumen, as well as the introduction of work camp or hazardous wastes, may lead to soil and groundwater contamination. Environmental impacts resulting from road works are expected to be localized and it is therefore reasonable to assume a negligible risk of cumulative negative impacts. On the environmental side, the project activities entail potential impacts on the natural and human environment of the areas on and through which the road infrastructures will be established. Considering the fact that the exact project locations were not known at the time of project preparation, an Environmental Management Plan (EMP) was commissioned by the Government in 2006. The EMP report remains valid for the proposed additional financing, it includes precise recommendations for limiting the impacts during execution of the works. It also includes specific environmental management plans and monitoring plans indicating the mitigation and monitoring measures, responsible parties and timing. For social safeguards, the Bank's policy on involuntary resettlement (OP 4.12) is triggered as was the case for the parent project and for which a Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF) was prepared. The experience for social safeguards related issues and risks have been modest in scope. Almost all of the road works (rehabilitation or upgrading) has been along existing alignments and within the right-of-way. Modest amounts of lands, when required, have been obtained through amicable agreements, land donations, or limited acquisition using eminent domain principle. The Borrower's approach is to try to avoid expropriation whenever possible. 2. Describe any potential indirect and/or long term impacts due to anticipated future activities in the project area: Indirect impacts include induced commercial and business developments along the rehabilitated or upgraded rural roads. An increased risk of road accidents due to higher speeds could also occur. Such risk is however limited, considering that most of these roads handle a very low volume of traffic (less than 30-50 vehicles per day). 3. Describe any project alternatives (if relevant) considered to help avoid or minimize adverse impacts. Analysis of alternatives for each rural road project will be carried out during project preparation, in case adverse impacts are identified. Alternatives considered will include design (especially earth works and drainage structures), technology, construction techniques and phasing, as well as operation and maintenance procedures. 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. An Environmental Management Plan (EMP) and a Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF) were developed under the first Rural Roads Project (adopted in June 2004) and were subsequently modified for the parent project in 2006 with a view to limiting the

negative impacts of road projects on the environment, and to evaluate and address the socioeconomic impacts of projects on the population. The main mitigation measures that will be implemented under the EMP and RPF include, among others: • Improved and environmentally-sound road standards, especially: (i) use of surface drainage controls on vulnerable surfaces and slopes; (ii) size and location of roadside drainage and culverts to handle maximum anticipated flows; (iii) line receiving surfaces with stones or concrete; and (iv) location and design of borrow/quarry sites for erosion control during road construction and future maintenance operations. • Adequate measures during construction, such as: (i) collecting and recycling used lubricants; (ii) minimizing wastes generated during construction and reusing construction wastes where practicable; (iii) managing construction period worker health and safety; (iv) using archeological chance find procedures and coordination with appropriate government agencies; and (v) ensuring adequate maintenance of culverts, roadside slopes, drainage control measures, road surface and vegetation. • Systematic public consultations with project stakeholders including people adversely affected by the NRRP2. Although the CFR is the project's implementing agency, it has delegated the implementation of the road projects it finances to the Directorate of Roads (DR) of the Ministry of Equipment and Transport. In that context, the DR has appointed an environmental specialist and a social specialist to ensure that all roads improved under the NRRP2 comply with the standards set for social and environmental safeguards. At the local level, the Regional Offices (DREs) and Provincial Offices (DPEs) of the Ministry of Equipment and Transport, which will carry out the rural road projects and assume responsibility for their operation and maintenance, are currently designating one of their existent staff to take on responsibilities in terms of monitoring and reporting on environmental and social safeguards in order to ensure that safeguards procedures are thoroughly applied throughout the NRRP2 and report to the DR on progress achieved. The DR, DREs and DPEs should therefore be adequately capacitated to implement the EMP, the RPF and relevant procedures in the Project Implementation Plan. During project implementation, training activities will be regularly carried out to build capacity and further strengthen those institutions. In terms of land acquisition on classified roads, the DR has a department (Service du Domaine Public) staffed by competent personnel with in-depth knowledge of Moroccan legislation as well as on Bank safeguards on expropriation. Lessons learned during the implementation of the parent project have been shared with the Borrower on a regular basis, especially those relating to the provisions of the Bank's policy on OP 4.12. Recognizing some systematic bottlenecks in payment of compensation, the Borrower has sought to augment its capacity to manage safeguards and to address social issues as they arise. Social safeguards trainings for the Borrower have been carried out and a social consultant hired to carry out extensive due diligence on

social safeguards. Under the proposed Additional Financing, the Borrower will follow defined procedures in their revised Project Implementation Plan which has been strengthened to ensure that the project captures clearly necessary information related to: (i) eligibility criteria of affected people as defined by OP 4.12, including those who have no recognizable legal right or claim to the land they are occupying, (ii) the grievance redress mechanisms in place, and (iii) clear identified procedures for compensation of affected people prior to affecting their assets/livelihoods, including any land take. In addition, the Borrower will continue to ensure that appropriately qualified staff at central and local levels are available to monitor and report on social safeguards through appropriate training. 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 include: all rural population living along or nearby the rehabilitated or upgraded roads, who will significantly benefit from all-weather roads; local authorities (collectivités locales); the Caisse pour le Financement Routier (CFR); and the Directorate of Roads (DR) within the Ministry of Equipment and Transport. During the preparation of the NRRP2, all provinces in Morocco, as well as elected officials and representatives of local authorities, were consulted by the DR (through its DPEs) on those roads to be included in the program. In a number of provinces, provincial councils organized pre-consultation meetings on their own, at the commune level, in order to present projects in greater detail and gather comments prior to the consultations organized by the DPEs. The consultations led to approval of the majority of roads selected by the DR (and therefore of the selection methods applied), as well as a few changes aimed at meeting specific local demands. The objective of consultations was also to strengthen the impact of road projects for the populations concerned, by enabling local authorities to match, as much as possible, their own investment programs with the NRRP2. The public will be consulted during subproject level preparation of environmental and social instruments. The consultation mechanisms will ensure effective outreach to the stakeholder population using methods that are appropriate/responsive to the local context. In addition, it should be noted that Moroccan expropriation procedures require the public announcement of intent to expropriate at least twice in a national newspaper and in the Bulletin official. The expropriation proposals and plans are also posted in the offices of the relevant communes. Locally elected representatives will play an active role in informing their constituents of the expropriation plans.

B. Disclosure Requirements Date

Environmental Assessment/Audit/Management Plan/Other:

Was the document disclosed

prior to appraisal?

Date of receipt by the Bank Date of "in-country" disclosure Yes 02/13/2006 02/13/2006

Date of submission to InfoShop 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?

Date of receipt by the Bank Date of "in-country" disclosure Date of submission to InfoShop

Indigenous Peoples Plan/Planning Framework:

Was the document disclosed

prior to appraisal?

Date of receipt by the Bank Date of "in-country" disclosure Date of submission to InfoShop

Pest Management Plan:

Was the document disclosed Date of receipt by the Bank

prior to appraisal?

Date of "in-country" disclosure Date of submission to InfoShop 02/13/2006 Yes 02/13/2006 02/13/2006 02/27/2006

* 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? If yes, then did the Regional Environment Unit or Sector Manager (SM) review and approve the EA report? Are the cost and the accountabilities for the EMP incorporated in the credit/loan? Yes Yes Yes

OP/BP 4.12 - Involuntary Resettlement

Has a resettlement plan/abbreviated plan/policy framework/process framework (as appropriate) been prepared? If yes, then did the Regional unit responsible for safeguards or Sector Manager review the plan? Yes Yes

The World Bank Policy on Disclosure of Information

Have relevant safeguard policies documents been sent to the World 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? Yes Yes

All Safeguard Policies

Have satisfactory calendar, budget and clear institutional responsibilities been prepared for the implementation of measures related to safeguard policies? Have costs related to safeguard policy measures been included in the project cost? Does the Monitoring and Evaluation system of the project include the monitoring of safeguard impacts and measures related to safeguard policies? Have satisfactory implementation arrangements been agreed with the borrower and the same been adequately reflected in the project legal documents?

D. Approvals Signed and submitted by:

Task Team Leader: Environmental Specialist: Social Development Specialist Additional Environmental and/or Social Development Specialist(s):

Approved by:

Sector Manager: Comments:


Mr Vincent Vesin Mr Taoufiq Bennouna Ms Fatou Fall Ms Patricia Veevers-Carter Yes Yes Yes Yes


03/17/2014 03/17/2014 03/17/2014 03/17/2014