DINTERNATIONALBANKFORRECONSTRUCTIONAND DEVELOPMENT 43350
INTERNATIONALDEVELOPMENTASSOCIATION
THE INSPECTIONPANEL 1818 HStreet,N.W. Telephone: (202) 458-5200
Washington, D.C.20433 FLU (202) 522-0916
Email:ipanel@worldbank.org

Werner Kiene
Chairperson

IPNREQUESTRQ07/08

April 18,2008

MEMORANDUMTO THE EXECUTIVEDIRECTORSAND ALTERNATES
OF THE INTERNATIONAL BANKFORRECONSTRUCTIONAND
DEVELOPMENT

Requestfor Inspection
Argentina: SantaFe RoadInfrastructureProject(LoanNo. 7429-AR)
Reportand Recommendation

Please find attached a copy of the Inspection Panel's Eligibility Report entitled
"Requestfor Inspection: ARGENTINA: Santa Fe RoadInfiastructure Project (Loan No. 7429-
AR)" datedApril 18, 2008.

This Report follows on a memorandum from the Chairperson of the Inspection Panel
entitled "Requestfor Inspection- ARGENTINA: Santa Fe Road Infiastructure Project (Loan
No. 7429-AR) Extension of Report Submission Date" submitted to the Board of Executive
Directors on a non-objection basis on December 21, 2007. The report contains the Panel's
final recommendation on whether the issues raised in the Request for Inspection warrant an
investigation. 74-
WernerChairperson
iene

Report No. 43350-AR

The InspectionPanel @

Report andRecommendation

Argentina: Santa Fe Road
InfrastructureProject
(Loan No. 7429-AR)

April 18,2008

The InspectionPanel

Reportand Recommendation
on
Request for Inspection

Re: Request for Inspection
Argentina: Santa FeRoadInfrastructureProject
(Loan No. 7429-AR)

On September 13, 2007, the Inspection Panel (the "Panel") received a Request
for Inspection, dated September 7, 2007, related to the Argentina: Santa Fe
Road Infrastructure Project (the "Project"). The Request was signed and
submitted by Mr. Hector E. Jullier and Ms. Ana Rosa Tizianel, residents of
Franck, Province o f Santa Fe (PSF), Argentina, on behalf o f themselves and ten
other residents o f the Project-affected area who had also signed the Request (the
"Requesters"). On September 26, 2007, the Requesters sent the Panel certain
clarifications to the terms o f the Request for Inspection. They also asked the
Panel to treat a letter addressed to the Panel, dated August 31, 2007, and
attached documents, as part o f the Request for Inspection. The September 7
Request, the September 26 clarifications and the August 31 letter constitute the
Request for Inspection(the "Request").

2. The Requesters claim that they, and other area residents, are and will be directly
affected by the design and implementation o f the Project. Attached to the
Request are a number o f documents providing background and technical
information related to the concerns o f the Requesters regarding compensation,
highway design and alleged adverse environmental and economic impacts o f
the Project, together with copies o f letters to and from Provincial and Federal
authorities and World Bank' staff.

3. The Request for Inspection i s the third Request the Panel has received
concerning this Project. It raises issues very similar to those presented in the
two previous requests.* On August 28, 2006, the Panel received a Request for

'"Worldo Bank," "Bank" or "IBRD" mean the International Bank for Reconstructionand Development.
Four f the current Requesters were also among the persons that signed the earlier Requeststhat the Panel
received inrelation to the Project.

Inspection (the "First Request"), dated August 20, 2006. The Request was
submitted by Mr. Hugo Mario Arriola-Klein and Dr. Nancy Beatriz Jullier,
residents o f Chateaux Blanc, district o f San Agustin, PSF, Argentina. They
represented residents who live and work in the location known as Chateaux
Blanc. On September 21, 2006, the Panel received a second Request for
Inspection (the "Second Request"), dated September 21, 2006. This Request
was submitted by Mr.Victor Hugo Imhoff and Ms. Maria Alejandra Azzaroni,
on their own behalf and on behalf o f people living in San Jerdnimo del Sauce,
inthe Department ofLas Colonias, PSF, Argentina.

4. The Panel registered the First and Second Requests and decided to process
them jointly for reasons o f economy and efficiency since they referred to the
same Project and issues. The Panel assessed whether these two Requests were
eligible and whether they warranted an investigation. It concluded that, while
the Requesters were otherwise eligible to submit a Request for Inspection, the
procedural criterion requiring that the Requesters have brought the "subject
matter (.,.) to Management's attention and that, in the requesterjs view,
management has failed to respond adequately demonstrating that it has
followed or is taking steps tofollow the Bank's policies and procedures" was
not fully met. The Panel therefore determined that it could not make a
recommendation on whether to investigate the subject matter o f the Requests
for Inspection at that time.3

5. The Panel registered the third and current Request for Inspection on the
Inspection Panel Register and notified the Board o f Executive Directors and
Bank Management on October 19, 2007 of the registration. Management
submitted its Response to the Request for Inspectionon November 20,2007.

6. On December 21, 2007, the Panel requested the Board o f Executive Directors
to extend the deadline for submitting the Report and Recommendation,
originally due on that same day. Inits Memorandum to the Executive Directors,
the Panel noted that the processing o f the Request coincided with recent
changes in the PSF Government, thereby leading to the appointment o f new
officials andpossible staff changes inthe Project Implementation Unit (PIU). In
light o f this, "and after discussing the matter with the Requesters and the
Executive Director representing Argentina" the Inspection Panel took the view
that "the interests of all parties concerned with the Request would be better
served if the Panel delays the issuance of its report on the eligibility of the
Request and its recommendation .., "for "about 90 days."4 The Board approved
the Panel's recommendationon a non-objection basis on January 9,2008.

Inspection Panel Report and Recommendation, Request for Inspection, Argentina Santa Fe Road
Infrastructure Project (Proposed), November 16,2006,764.
Memorandum to the Executive Directors and Alternates ofthe International Bank for Reconstruction and
Development, Argentina: SantaFe RoadInfrastructure Project (Loan No. 7429-AR), Extension of Report
SubmissionDate, INSPR2007-0007, December27, 2007.

7. The purpose of this Report is to determine whether the Request satisfies the
eligibility criteria for an Inspection, as set forth in the 1993 Resolution'
establishing the Panel and the 1999 ClarificationsY6and whether to recommend
an investigation of the matters alleged inthe Request for Inspection.

A. The Project

8. The Project aims at improving transport conditions, including road safety, of a
segment of National Route 197betweenthe PSF and the Province of Cordoba,
along a strategic road corridor linking the PSF with regional and international
markets. Project objectives also include identifying transport infrastructure and
trade facilitation constraints, fostering territorial planning, assessing and
managing environmental and social impacts resulting from the execution of
large civil works, and monitoring and evaluating the execution of infrastructure
investments.' These objectives are to be achieved through two components:
civil works (Part 1) and institutional strengthening (Part 2). The Request for
Inspection raises issues about Part 1 of the Project, which provides for
upgrading Route 19 betweenthe town of Santo Tom6 inthe PSF and the border
of the Province of Cordoba, including widening this segment of the road to
convert it into a dual carriageway. This Project component provides also for the
alignment of three sharp curves, and for constructing four lane by-passes in San
Jeronimo del Sauce and San Pereyra, ground-level interchanges at the
intersections with rural and urban roads, and turn lanes and returns at intervals
of 6km each.g

9. According to Management Response, the Project is part of a broader
infrastructure strategy aimed at, inter alia, making Santa Fe the most
competitive province in Argentina." As a national road, the improvement of
Route 19 would fall under the jurisdiction of the national Government.
However, limited fiscal resources have led the national Government to accept
PSF's offer to provide financing for the Project. l1

10. Management states that the upgrading of Route 19 i s the first phase of a two-
phase project. The first phase, financed by the World Bank, provides for
improving a total of 136 km of Route 19 betweenthe cities of Santo Tom6 in
the PSF and the province of Cordoba, and constructing a dual carriageway to
convert Route 19 into a four lane highway (highway; in Spanish, Autovia).
Under the second phase, Route 19 would eventually be transformed into a

Resolution No. IBRD 93-10 o f September 22, 1993, hereinafter "the Resolution".
6 The 1999 Clarifications to the Resolution (hereinafter "the 1999 Clarifications") are contained in the
"Conclusions o fthe Board's Second Review o f the Inspection Panel" dated April 20, 1999.
'*NationalRoute 19 is hereinafter referred to as "Route 19."
Loan Agreement, Schedule 1 (Project Description).
9Loan Agreement, Schedule 1.
10Management Response to the Request for Inspection, November 20, 2007,T[lO. Attached as Annex I1to
this Report.
Management Response, 10.

freeway, with dual carriageways and limited access at toll booth points
(freeway; in Spanish, Autopista).12 The Bank finances upgrading of 130km of
Route 19, while works inthe remaining 6km inthe province of C6rdoba will be
fundedbythe NationalRoadDirectorate (DNV).The PSF is to expropriate land
north of the existing road alignment to reach a right of way (ROW) of 120m.13
Under the Project design, the dual carriageway will runalong the northern part
ofthe 120mROW.14

11. Part 2 of the Project aims at providing institutional support to the PSF and is
composed of five subcomponents, related to road safety, measurement of
logistic costs in the PSF, strengthening of the strategic planning capacity,
strengthening of the capacity of the Provincial Road Directorate (DPV) to
enhance environmental and social management, and a design capacity building
program to incorporate monitoring and evaluation analysis in infrastructure
projects.

12. According to Management's Response, as of November 2007, no
disbursements had been made under the loan, and road upgrading works had
not commenced. The PSF concluded the bidding process for upgrading Route
19 and was ex ected to complete the evaluation process by the end of
November 2007. Managementnotes that the works will commence only when
E
the Resettlement Action Plan (RAP) is carried out inamanneracceptableto the
Bank.l6

B. Financing

13. The total cost of the Project is about US$173.1 million. The IBRD loan to the
PSF i s US$126.7 million, while the PSF provides US$46.4 million. The loan is
guaranteedby the Argentine Republic. The IBRD Board of Executive Directors
approved the loanon February 13,2007. The Loan Agreement is dated June 12,
2007, and became effective on August 17, 2007. The Closing Date of the loan
i s June 30,2012.

C.The Request

14. The Requesters believe that they "will suffer damages as a consequence of
failures or omissions by the World Bank" in the design and supervision of the

l2 See Management Response, 719. During its visit to Santa Fe on March 10 -17, 2007, the Panel was
informed that the second phase of the Project referredto inthe ManagementResponse is still ina planning
stage.
13During the 1970sthe national Governmentexpropriatedland along 54km ofthe northside ofthe Route.
14 The Panel was informed that the future fieeway would require construction of an additional dual
carriagewaythat would occupy the central ROW area, south ofthe carriageway to be built under the Bank-
financedProject.The original Route 19would thenbecome a service road.
l5ManagementResponse, 717.
l6ManagementResponse, 717.

Project." More specifically, they list several instances o f non-compliance with
Bank operational policies and procedures, and related harm and losses-for
which they state they have evidence-including: "discriminationy' and
"intimidating notices," "inequity of the values," "risk of flooding," "lack of
of areas," and the `bossibility of future pollution and

15. The Requesters claim that, as a result o f the Project the area will suffer an
"devolution of economic and social development with respect to the rural
activities in the zone of influence of Nut. Route 19," andno economic support to
undertake new activities or help the existing ones i s provided. Intheir view, by
causing "the loss of the practical use of apaved road (unique) in a wide area,
and the use restriction that will be created by the motorway..."`g the Project
will worsen the already declining economic conditions o fthe area, where dairy
farms as family business are disappearing and farming is done by tenants or
contractors.

16. The Requesters also state that the Project is incompatible with the area's
hydrological situation. They believe that the "loss of agronomic balance in the
soil produces insuflcient absorption and retention of rainwater..." and claim
that this will be aggravated by the spillways in the Route for the passage o f
water, which are inadequate. They add that the proposed "new elevated
carriageway will act as a contention and the culvert (north side) will operate as
a collector of the ever increasingflows, which will causeproblems offlooding
in the neighboring fields and affect the population settlements... .y'20 In this
context, the Requesters refer to the situation created by the "jlood disasters" in
December 2006 and March 2007 as well the "increasing risk offlooding in the
city of Santo Tomb."21 In addition, according to the Requesters, ``juture
possibility of pollution and contamination" will result from the Project. They
argue that the quarries that will be used for the soil needed to elevate the new
carriageway to 0.80m, may become "a potential space for waste dumps or
undue usefor human emergency settlements, or animals."

17. The Requesters further allege that the expropriations carried out under the
current Project took place on the basis o f cadastral information for a 1970s
project to build a highway adjacent to Route 19. They believe that the use o f
those measurements leads to a situation in which most o f the affected owners
will be expropriated of an amount o f land larger than what is needed for the
Project, in some cases up to 15 or 20 percent. According to the Requesters,
"[tlhere is also inequity in the appraisal of thefields to be expropriated, since
there are differences of up to 70 % in the valuesproposed for adjacent fields

l7Request p. 1.
18Request p. 1and Clarifications to the terms o f the Requestfor Inspection.
19Clarifications to the terms o fthe Requestfor Inspection.
2oClarifications to the terms o fthe Request for Inspection.
Clarifications to the terms o fthe Requestfor Inspection.

and with the same production potential."22 They also claim that the
compensation under the Project is "not consistent withpoint 36 of the previous
inspection report.,,23

18. They also state that they have presented their complaints in person and by
sending letters on several occasions including, inter alia, letters sent on April 3,
2007, July 19, 2007 and August 27, 2007 to the World Bank and by sending
additional letters to Undersecretary of Investment Projects and External
Financing. They consider the answers that they received inadequate and state
that they were not offered any solutions to the problems raised by them. The
Requesters also state that, as of the date of the Request, they had not received
an answer to their letter sent on August 27,2007.

19. On August 31, 2007, the Requesters submitted a letter to the Panel expressing
again their concerns about the Project and asked that the letter be considered as
an integral part of the Request. Inthis letter the Requesters refer to their 2006
Requests for Inspection and claim that not only has the situation not improved
but also new facts have developed that support their previous concerns. They
request a limitation of the expropriations to 30m up to the 18thkilometer on the
National Route 19, and the elimination of the projected elevation of the layout
to "level +0.80." Moreover, they request that the Project must include adequate
spaces for drainage, the establishment of a parallel program that supports the
absorption of left-over waters from the entire area, and the replacement of
artificial drainages with natural drainages. The Requesters also ask for the
application of an equitable systemof compensationfor all the plots acquired for
the construction ofthe highway.

20. The Requesters ask the Panel to recommend to the Board of Executive
Directors of the World Bank that an investigation be conducted on the alleged
matters.

21. The above claims may constitute non-compliance by the Bank with various
provisions ofthe following Operational Policies and Procedures, inter alia:

OP 1.00 Poverty Reduction
OMS 2.20 Project Appraisal
OP/BP 4.01 Environmental Assessment
OP/BP 4.12 Involuntary Resettlement
OP/BP 10.00 Investment Lending: Identificationto Board
Presentation

22Clarifications to the terms o f the Request for Inspection.
23Requestp. 1. On November 16, 2006, the Panel issuedits Report and Recommendationto determine the
eligibility o f the above-mentioned 2006 Requests for Inspection. Paragraph 36 o f the Report summarizes
Management Response to the Requests, with respect to the compensation issue, as follows: "According to
Management, expropriated land will be compensated in cash, with the amount corresponding to
replacementcost at marketprice. Compensationwill beprovided before land acquisition is undertaken."

OP/BP 13.05 Project Supervision
World Bank Policy on Disclosure of Information

D.ManagementResponse

22. On November 20, 2007, the Panel received Management's Response to the
Request for Inspection. The main body o f the Response addresses so-called
Special Issues raised in the Request, and Annex Iresponds in detail to the
Requesters' claims. Management states that the major concerns o f the Requesters,
which are analyzed in the Management Response, were also highlighted in a
meeting with the Requesters on October 31,2007, inFranck, Argentina.

23 The Management Responsefirst addresses the issue of flooding that, according to
the Requesters, may result from the proposed elevation (0.80m) of the new
carriageway to be constructed under the Project. Management states that the
Requesters offer no engineering or other evidence in support of their allegation,
while from a safety and engineering point of view the proposed elevation is
necessary to avoid that, during intense rain, water crosses the new improved
Route 19, as it has happenedthus far withthe present Route. Management refers
to the "professional rigor of the engineering designs" prepared by "well-known
Argentine engineering Jirms," and the "stringent quality control process" for
these designs. This brought about the adoption of the "basic principle of road
design standards"24 reviewed and approved by both the Bank and the DPV.
Because of this, the concerns of the Requesters, in Management's view, are not
"wellfounded."

24, According to the Response, the Bank complied consistently with the policy on
Environmental Assessment (OP/BP 4.01): all the studies and simulations
conducted in Project preparation comply with sound standards. Therefore, it is
Management's position that the Project will not worsen the hydrological situation
of the area, but, to the contrary, it will reduce the risk of flooding comparedto the
without-project conditions. The engineering designs were also re-examined with
respect to the risk of flooding, after severe rain and flooding of Route 19occurred
inMarch2007. A Bank missiontraveled to the area to check the Project designs,
while the national authorities withheld the approval of these designs untilthe PSF
again analyzed and re-examined them to ensure "their Both the
Bank's and the PSF's review confirmed the soundness of the designs and
concluded that the Project will not increase the risk of flooding of the areas
surrounding Route 19. Management further claims that the PSF has discussed the
issue of flooding and drainage with the Requesters and in general with Project
affected people in various public hearings. According to Management, in one of
these meetings, one of the current Requesters even acknowledged that the area's

''ManagementResponse,
24ManagementResponse,720.
723,

hydrological issues pre-dated the Project and the flooding was not an issue that
the Project hadto solve.

25. Inresponse to the Requesters' claim that the Project design provides for excessive
land expropriation and their request to limit the expropriations to 30m up to the
18th kilometer, rather than taking land for a 120m ROW, Management states that
the issue o f the amount o f landto expropriate was carefully reviewed and that the
PSF was asked to study alternatives to reduce landtaking. The PSF decided that it
will expropriate landsto reachthe planned 120mROW, andjustified this decision
on three grounds. The first relates to construction costs and potential negative
environmental externalities. According to the Response, with a reduced ROW, the
soil for the construction o f the embankments would have to be partially extracted
ina location far from the Route site, where land would have to be purchased and
soil transported to the construction site, thus doubling the costs o f construction o f
the embankments. In addition, the extraction o f soil from locations outside the
ROW could create negative environmental liabilities. The second reason for
maintaining the 120m ROW is that it will allow constructing frequent returns to
minimize restrictions in accessing roadside properties, as requested by affected
communities. The third reason for confirming the project design i s that the DPV
standards require 120m o f ROW for eventual construction o f a limited-access
highspeed freeway, as plannedunder phase two o fthe program.

26. The Response also states that the Requesters' proposal to limit expropriations to
30m would not be safe and cost effective, and does not seem to be based on any
technical justification. It would create a 60m ROW, which would not allow
enough space for a dual carriageway highway, and would be even below the
lOOm standards for a single-lane carriageway. Management also states that the
additional proposal o f expropriating the land incrementally, to reach the 120m o f
ROW when the decision to construct the freeway i s made, i s not possible for the
three reasons explained above.

27. Management further states that inan area where the average size o f the properties
is 100 hectares, "in fifi percent of the properties less than 4 hectares will be
acquired to expand the ROW"26under the Project. About 50 percent o f the land
required to upgrade Route 19 was acquired by the National Government in 1970;
the remaining hectares that will be expropriated are located in 236 properties
along the Route. Inaddition, 27 buildings will be displaced, 20 houses, 6 business
and one school. The Response states that a RAP was prepared inaccordance with
OPBP 4.12 on Involuntary Resettlement and it will be implemented before
commencing the physical works. Management adds that the RAP includes an
information and communication program. For landowners and households and
businesses to be displaced, "additional programs are included."27 For those
physically displaced, the program provides support for families and businesses "to

26ManagementResponse,728.
2'ManagementResponse, 729.

restore their socioeconomic conditions to the level that existed prior to
displacement."28

28. Management argues that under the Project lands are acquired in accordance with
the laws o f the PSF.29 It adds that the Province "agreed with the Bank tofollow
Bank compensation policies for land acqui~ition."~~ Management's Response
describes the valuation methodology followed by the DPV in order to establish
the amount o f compensation to be paid. This amount has to be equal to the
objective value o f the land ("valor objetivo") plus direcuindirect damage caused
by the expropriation o f the land. Various elements are taken into account to
evaluate rural land, such as quality and productivity o f the land, soil
configuration, and real or presumed renuincome from the land. Other
characteristics, including the location o f the land and the expropriated surface o f
affected land, also contribute to determining the final price offered to the
landowner. According to Management, evidence shows that the PSF has been
conducting this process in an equitable way, taking also into account that "rural
land valuation under the best circumstances inevitably involves a degree of
subjectivity ... [because] [n]o twoplots of lands are ever identical so comparisons
with neighboringplots as a valuation basis can never beperfect."31

29. Management states that it has closely supervised the land acquisition process. It
adds that to date "Management has not seen any evidence of intimidatory
communication or dis~rimination"~~ towards the land owners as alleged by the
Requesters. When asked by the Project team, project affected people did not
report any lack o f respect behavior by members o f the PIU and, Management
notes, even the Requesters, in their August 24, 2007 letter, thank the PIU for
responding to their questions and concerns and offering explanations.

30. With respect to the consultation process, Management states that project affected
people have had numerous opportunities to express their concerns, including in
public meetings and through an electronic mailbox and physical mailboxes in 15
communities. Management notes that the Project design underwent a number o f
changes thanks to the consultations with affected peoples, whose concerns were
key in the decision making process regarding for example road alignments o f
bypasses, the location o f road crossings and the types o f restoration programs for
urban areas. Management also states that the Requesters "have participated
actively in the consultation process and their concerns about access toproductive
land have been accommodated in the Project."33Management further states that
the Project team participated actively inthe consultations as well, participating in
meetings, talking to landowners and communicating their concerns to the PIU.

28ManagementResponse,Box atp. 11.
29See ManagementResponse, 73 1 for a briefdescription o f the landacquisitionprocess.
30ManagementResponse,732.
31ManagementResponse,atnote30.
32ManagementResponse,735.
33ManagementResponse,738.

31. Management's Response also includes a section specifically addressing the
Bank's compliance with the policies andproceduresthat, inthe Requesters' view,
the Bank has violated.

32. OPBP 4.01 Environmental Assessment: Management states that the "EA was an
integral part of Project design." The Project was classified as Category B because
the new road will run along the existing road alignment, landacquisition is only
requiredto expandthe ROW and few cases ofdisplacementsare taking place. The
EA determined that "no signifzcant adverse sensitive, diverse or unprecedented
environmental impacts are expectedto occur."34Inaddition, the PSF has prepared
the Environmental and Social Management Plan (ESMP), which identifies
potential environmental impacts3' and social issues along with appropriate
mitigation measures, and reflects concerns of the project affected people and the
local governments.

33. OPBP 13.05 Project Supervision: The Project team has carried out various
supervision missions and a number of smaller site visits to supervise the
implementation of the RAP and the land acquisition and to take care of urgent
issues such as the flooding following the intense rains inMarch 2007.

34. World Bank Policy on Disclosure of Information: The Project Information
Document (PID), the Integrated Safeguard Data Sheet (ISDS), the ESMP, the
RAP are available in the Infoshop in Washington DC and in the Public
Information Center (PIC) in Buenos Aires, Argentina. Local municipal offices
may provide a summary of the ESMP, which together with the RAP i s also
available in Spanish. "The PIU made available to the 2007 Requesters-after
receiving a requestfrom them-a copy of the ESMP and RAP."36

35. Management concludes by stating that the "Bank has made every effort to apply
its policies and procedures and to pursue concretely its mission statement in the
context of the Santa Fe Road Influstructure Pr~ject."~'As a result, Management
believes that the rights and interests of the Requesters have not been, nor are
likely to be, harmed by a failure of the Bank to implement its policies and
procedures.

36. On November 30, 2007, the Panel received a letter from the management of the
PIU providing comments and additional information on the various issues raised
inthe Request for Inspection. ThePanelacknowledged this letter andreiteratedto
the management of the PIU that the mandate of the Inspection Panel is to review

34ManagementResponse, 742.
"In2007thePSFpreparedanewAnnexoftheESMPregarding"Restorationof EnvironmentalLiabilities
along the RN19 Corridor," which concludes that "there are no illegal waste dumps along the ROW of
National Road 19." The Requesters allege that the quarries that will be used for the soil needed to elevate
the new carriageway to 0.80m, may become a potential space for waste dumps.
36ManagementResponse, 146.
37ManagementResponse, 747.

the Bank's compliance with its own policy and procedures in the preparation,
appraisal and implementation of a Bank-financed project, upon receiving a
Request for Inspection from Project affected people. While the Panel appreciates
information related to the Project, the Panel wishes to reiterate that it does not
review the performance ofthe Borrower or the implementing agency.

E.Eligibility

37. The Panel must determine whether the Requests satisfy the eligibility criteria
for an Inspection, as set forth inthe 1993 Resolution establishing the Panel and
the 1999 Clarifications, and whether to recommend an investigation of the
matters alleged inthe Request for Inspection.

38. The Panel Chairperson, Werner Kiene, together with Operations Officer
Tatiana Tassoni and expert consultant Eduardo Abbott visited Argentina from
March 10-17, 2008. During their visit, the Panel met with signatories of the
Request and with other affected people in the area near Santa Fe. The Panel
also met with national Government officials, and with the Governor of the
Province of Santa Fe and other provincial authorities, with officials of the
Provincial Ministries and the PIU in Santa Feyand with Bank staff in Buenos
Aires.

39. The Panelwishes to express its deep appreciation to the Requestersfor showing
Project areas of concern and to other affected people who met with the Panel.
The Panel also wishes to thank the Governor of the Province and other PSF
authorities for meeting with the Panel and sharing their insights about the
Project. The Panel's deep appreciation also goes to management and staff of the
PIUfor their fine assistance and for providing documents and discussing points
of concerns with the Panel team visiting the Project area. The Panel also wishes
to thank the National Director of Projects with International Financial
Institutions for meeting with the Panel team in Buenos Aires and providing
valuable comments about the Project; and Bank staff in Buenos Aires for
providing relevant information, engaging in valuable and rich discussions with
the Panelteam and assistingwith logistical arrangements.

40. This was the secondPanelvisit to the SantaFe Road Infrastructure Project area.
The Panel visited Santa Fe in November 2006 in the context of the first two
Requests for Inspection the Panel received in August and September 2006 in
relation to the then proposed Project. On that occasion, the Panel met with the
signatories of bothRequests and with the managementand staff of the PIU on a
number of occasionsto discuss indepthpoints ofconcernraised inthe Request.
PIU staff also traveled with the Panel team on the segment of Route 19 to be
upgraded under the Project to explain thoroughly the Project design and how
the widening ofRoute 19 is to affect the area.

41. To determine the eligibility o f the Request and whether an investigation of the
Requesters' concerns is warranted, the Panel has reviewed the Request for
Inspection and other letters and communications received from the Requesters
expressingtheir continuing concerns about the Project; Management Response,
and other relevant documents provided by Bank staff and the PIU. During its
field visit, the Panel has thoroughly discussed the issues o f concerns with the
Requesters, with other residents and landowners impacted by the proposed
road, with national andprovincial authorities and with Bank staff.

42. Duringthe visit, the Panelconfirmed that the Requesters are legitimate parties
under the Resolution to submit a Request for Inspectionto the InspectionPanel.
The Requesters live inthe Project area andhave common interests andconcerns
as required in Paragraph 9(a) o f the 1999 Clarifications ("The affected party
consists of any two or more persons with common interests or concerns and
who are in the borrower's territory").

43. The Panel notes that the Request "assert[s] in substance that aserious violation
by the Bank of its operational policies and procedures has or is likely to have
material adverse effect upon the requesters." (Paragraph 9(b)).

44. The Requesters express concerns that, based on the current Route design and
expropriationplans, the Project could cause them harmas a result of the Bank's
possible non compliance with its policies and procedures, in particular OPBP
4.01 on Environmental Assessment and OPBP 4.12 on Involuntary
Resettlement. The Requesters believe that new facts have occurred to increase
their worries since some Project affected people expressed their concerns to the
Panel inthe 2006 Requests.

45. Because o f the high risk o f flooding to which the area around Route 19 is
exposed during periods o f intense rains-as the "jZooddisaster of March 27/28,
2007" and the flooding o f December 2006 have shown-the Requesters argue
that the current Route design was not properly assessed in accordance with
OPBP 4.01 on Environmental Assessment. They believe that, because o f
inadequate drainage design, the proposed elevation o f the new carriageway to
be built will increase the risk o f flooding o f lands surrounding the road, rather
than address the existing flooding problem. The Requesters, who are mostly
farmers owning parcels o f land along Route 19, claim that the current Route
allows excess water to go over it, thus dissipating the flood rather quickly. The
new carriageway, instead, designed to be roughly a meter higher than the
current road, would not allow this "equalization" because the water passages
(culverts and bridges) plannedunder the Project are not sufficient and this will
cause or worsen the inundation o fthe surrounding fields.

46. Management responds that from a safety and engineering point o f view the
proposed elevation is necessary to avoid that, during intense rain, water crosses
the new upgraded Route 19, as it has happened thus far with the present road. It

claims that while the drainage i s currently insufficient, the Project was designed
to improve this situation and avoid the harm feared by the Requesters. Inthis
light, the engineering designs were also re-examined after the intense rain and
flooding occurred in March 2007, as referred to by the Requesters, and their
soundness was confirmed.

47. The Requesters also express concerns about the Project compensation and
rehabilitation program. They claim that no socio-economic baseline survey was
conducted to assess their economic situation after their land is expropriated,
even if only partially. They state that the Project will exacerbate a downturn in
the economic development o f the area, but no economic support is provided to
initiate new activities or help the existing ones. This they believe i s inviolation
o f Bank policy requirements that impoverishment risks deriving from
involuntary resettlement are mitigated and people are assisted inrestoring their
livelihoods and standards o f living. In addition, the Requesters claim that the
process by which the compensation has been paid i s in violation o f Bank
policies, because o f the inadequate amounts o f compensation and because
people have been subjected to alleged "arm-twisting" to convince them to
accept the proposedamounts.

48. The Requesters reiterate that consultation and disclosure o f information about
the Project are not adequate. They complain that communication about the
Project in general and about each landowner specific situation was inadequate.
Though the majority o f landowners have signed agreements for the payment o f
compensation, they feel that they were not provided sufficient information to
make an informed and satisfactory choice.

49. Management claims that evidence shows that the PSF has been conducting this
process in an equitable way, and that to date "Management has not seen any
evidence of intimidatory communication or dis~rimination~'~~ towards the land
owners as alleged by the Requesters.

50. The Requesters are also concerned about the amount o f landto be expropriated
under the Project, in violation o f OP/BP 4.12's requirement that involuntary
resettlement, including lost o f assets or access to assets, should be avoided or
minimized. They believe that the planned expropriations are excessive,
especially considering that the land acquisitions are not based on the Bank-
financed Project but rather on a future project yet to be properly evaluated from
an environmental, social and economic point o fview.

51. The Panel notes that the subject matter o f the Request is not related to
procurement, as required by paragraph 9(d).

38ManagementResponse, 735.

52. The Request satisfies the requirement inparagraph 9(e) that the related loan has
not been closed or substantially disbursed.39

53. Furthermore, the Panel has not previously made a recommendation on the
subject matter o f the Request. Therefore, the Request satisfies Paragraph 9(f).

54. The 1999 Clarifications further provide that the Panel shall satisfy itselfthat the
Request "does assert that the subject matter has been brought to Management's
attention and that, in the Requesters' view, Management hasfailed to respond
adequately demonstrating that it has followed or is taking steps to follow the
Bank's policies and procedures" as set forth in Paragraph 9(c). In its Report
and Recommendation concerning the Requests for Inspection received in 2006
the Panel stated that the procedural criterion provided inParagraph 9(c) was not
fully met because the first Requesters had approached the Bank shortly before
filing their Request with the Panel, while the second Requesters approached the
Bankandthe Panel at the sametime inSeptember 2006.

55. Since the submission o f the 2006 Requests, Project area affected people,
including the current Requesters, have had the opportunity to express their
points o f concerns to Bank staff in several occasions-even through the
Inspection Panel, which conveyed affected people's letters to the Project team
ina couple of occasions.40Bank Management also indicates inits Response to
the present Requestthat the Project team and the PIU "have interacted with the
2007 Requesters in many more instances than thosepointed out by them in their
The Requesters, however, feel that the Bank has not satisfactorily
addressed their concerns. The Panel therefore confirms that the Requesters
satisfy the requirement set forth inParagraph 9(c).

56. As noted before, during its visit to the Project area, the Panel has had the
opportunity to discuss thoroughly the issues with all stakeholders involved. In
meetings with the Panel, Bank staff inBuenos Aires have repeatedly expressed
to the Panel their willingness to address the issues raised by the Requesters. The
Panel notes that Bank Management has made a number o f efforts to meet with
the Requesters and other affected people to understand and try to solve their
grievances. Inthis sense, Management states that actions have been taken, such
as changes to the Project design to build access roads to the new Route 19 for
landowners, even to some landowners who do not currently have access to the
existing road, and to include more frequent returns (every 4km, rather than
every 6km, according to Panel's discussions with engineers o f the PIU) to
facilitate connections with nearby cities.

39According to the Resolution, "this will be deemedto be the case when at least ninety-five percent of the
loanproceeds have been disbursed." Footnoteto Paragraph 14(c).
40Letter sent to the Panel on August 6, 2007 and forwarded to Management on August 7, 2007 and fax
receivedby the Paneland submittedto Managementon August 10,2007.
41ManagementResponse, Annex 1, p. 32.

57. Notwithstanding these efforts claimed by Management, the Panel notes that the
Requesters' complaints and the nature of their conflict with Bank staff have
been mainly viewed by the latter as essentially focusing on the amount o f
compensation for their land. To the contrary, the Panel's discussions with the
affected populations have showed that, though the amount of land
compensation remains a concern, particularly at a time when per hectare yields
for soybean have driven up the value o f land, the people's fear o f recurrent
inundation o f their fields for inadequate drainage o f the upgraded Route as
designed is an equal or even higher concern to most farmers.

58. The Panel acknowledges that after unexpected heavy rains occurred in
December 2006 and March 2007, Bank staff have promptly responded to the
new circumstances and requested a review o f the Route design to ensure the
soundness o f Project design andthat flooding o f that magnitude be prevented in
the future. The Panel also recently received a note from Management outlining
certain actions that Management intendsto carry out to improve transparency o f
land-related information (soil maps and cadastre data), provide capacity
building on resettlement and consultations, monitor compensation payments
and ensure continuedreview o fProject design4*

59. The Panel notes however that recent meetings between the Requesters and the
PIUtechnical officials have not yielded satisfactory results. The Panel observes
that the Requesters continue to be concerned about the issues raised in the
Request for Inspection, and inparticular about the hydrological situation inthe
Project area, should the design o f the road, especially provisions for water
drainage, remain unchanged.

60. The Panel also observes that while it believes that during its visit to Santa Fe the
Panel team was provided with adequate information about other issues o f
concern to the Requesters, such as the methodology used to assess the value of
the land, it also noted that affected people were, instead, unaware o f important
details related to this aspect of the Project and o f the specifics of the changes in
the Project design referred to by Management. Inaddition, other parties (a local
telephone cooperative and a dairy cooperative) expressed concerns that they had
not beenproperly consulted andthat they may be affected by the Project.

F. Conclusions

61. The Panel finds that the Request and the Requesters satisfy the eligibility
criteria for an Inspection, as set forth inthe 1993 Resolution43establishing the
Panel andthe 1999 Clarifications.

62. The Panel notes that the Request and Management Response and additional
communications o f both parties with the Panel contain conflicting assertions

42Communication dated April 9,2008 to Inspection Panel Chairperson.
43ResolutionNo. IBRD 93-10 of September 22, 1993, hereinafter "the Resolution."

and interpretations about the issues, the facts, compliance with Bank policies
andprocedures, andharm,that could be addressed only with an investigation.

63. Inview ofthe foregoing, the Panelrecommends an investigationofthe matters
raised in the Request for Inspection. The Panel notes that the investigation
would take into account progress in the implementation o f the actions noted in
the Management Response and other actions being carried out to address the
concerns o f the Requesters. The investigation, therefore, will focus on issues
raised in the Request that still remain pending, particularly issues related to
route design and flood risks, as well as disclosure o f information and
consultation with project affected people on resettlement and environmental
aspects.

DE : MQROON NO.DE FQX : 0342 4930772 28 SEP. 2007 19:42 P1

FRANCK,26 de Septiembrede 2007

SR. PETER LALLAS
SECRETARIO EJECUTIVO PANEL DE INSPECCldN
-
1818 H Street NW
WASHINGTON DC 20433 EE.UU
FAX 001*2025220916

De mi coneideraci6n:

Ref.:V/ fax del 19/09/2007
As: R.Nac419/Autovla-Aclaraci6n
Atento a v/ pedido de aclaraci6n del asunto de referencia, adjunto
envio el desarrollo de los temas, que individualito con la numeracidn de mi pedido de
investigacibn del 07/09/2007. En cada tema menciono 10s documentales enviados por
correo postal el 18/09/2007 y mis trabajos envlados con anterioridad, donde se puede
obtener mayor informacidnsobre cada tema tratado.
lnformacion: en tres fojas.
A

Rte: HECTOR E.JULLIER
Belgrano2187 I

3009 FRANCK(Sta, Fe)-Argentina
-
Te. 0342 4930154
FAX: 0342 4930772
--

DE : MRROON NO.DE FRX : 0342 4930772 28 SEP. 2007 19:42 P2

INFORMACIdNAMPLIATORIAA MI PEDIDO DE INVESTIGACI6N DEL07-09-2007
PUNTO 5 lnvoluci6ndel desarrollo econdmicoy social.
-
Referido a las adividades ruralesde la zona de influenciade la R. Nac.lQ/Autovla.

La desaparicion de 10s tambos como actividad de la familia rural en lo$ Oltimos
aflos,produjo la extincibnde actividadesdinhmicasy la despoblacibn en esa zona.
La subdivisibn de parcelas (minifundido), 10s ' condominios y la titularidad de
terrenos en personas de edad avantada, impulsa el desarrollo de la agricultura,
mediante contratistaso arrendamientos.
Ello hace imposible la reivindicacibnde actividadesdiniimicas, y emprender nuevas
actividades (Granjas, huertos, quintas, etc.) requiere de apuntalamientos
econ6micos que no existen.
Con la obra proyectada, se pierdeel us0 prdctico de una ruta pavirnentada(UniCa)
en una amplia zona, y la restriccion de us0 que determinarala autovia, contribuira
a mantener actividades pasivas, con proceso praductivo estacionario o de
involuci6n.

DOCUMENTALENVIADO:Folio N9-OrdenanzaChateau Blanc.
OBSERVACIONESY COMENTARIOSSOBRE ESTUDIO ECON6MICOAMBIENTAL DE
LA RN 19Fecha 24/08/2007.
PROPUESTAS DE BASE PARA UN POLO DE DESARROLLO DE LA REGldN DE
FECHA28/02/2007.

PUNTO6 Posibilidadfutura de poluciony contaminaci6n.
Existeindefinici6ny faltas de ordenarnientopara lugaressuburbanos y rurales, &reaspara
manufacturas y de restricciones para us0 de productos quimicbs y de aplicaciones
contaminantes.

+ La creacibn de espacios baldio (GOMts) o su utilizaci6n como cantera de la tierm
necesaria para la elevaci6n de la nueva calzada (+0.80), representa un espacio
potencial para basurales o utilizacion indebida para asentamientos de ernergencia
humana, o animal, corn0 10s existentes en la periferia de las cludadesde Santa Fe
y SantoTorn&

DOCUMENTALREMITIDO Folio 10

DE : MAROON NO.DE FFiX : 0342 4930772 28 SEP. 2007 19:43 P3

PUNTO 7 lncompatibilidaddel proyecto hidricocon el Vial.

0 La perdida de equilibrio agron6mico del suelo, produce insuficiente absorcidn y
retenci6n de aguas pluviales, con excedentes extraordinarios y aumento
progresivo.
El programa hidrico desde hace aRos, se basa en la construccion de canales que
aceleran el escurrimiento hacia depresiones que no son cuencas naturales de
evacuaci6n.
Estos caudales llegan descontrolados desde una amplia zona nor-oeste y toman
contact0 en varios puntoscrlticosson la R Nac.lS/Autovia.

6 Los vertederos para el paso del agua en la obra vial no son adecuados, la nueva
calzada elevada aduar4 como contencidn y la cuneta (lado norte) oficiara como
colectora de caudales cada vez mayores, que provocaran problemas anegando
campos vecinos y afectando a pobladosde la zona, como lo oclrrrido en diciembre
de 2006, y el desastre hidricodel 27/28 de marzode 2007, e incrementar6el riesgo
de anegarnientosde la Ciudadde Santo Tome.

MAYOR INFORMAC16N: "LA TIERRA SE MUERE" del 03/03/2007 y SUS ANEXOS
CAPITULOS 2 y 3, y "PROGRAMA DE RECOMPOSICIdN DE LA CONFORMACIoN
AGRON6MICA DEL SUELO ZONA CENTRO DEL DEPARTAMENTOLAS COLONIAS.

PUNTO8 Exproplaciones por catastrosde otra obra.
Enla dbcada de 1970se proyecto la construcci6nde una AUTOPISTA lindantecon la RN
19. Las expropiaciones para esa obra estaban previstas y 10s planos catastrales
confeccionados. Para la determinaci6n de la superficie a utilizar para la Autovla, se tom6
esta informacidn.

Utilizando esa medici6n en la mayoria de 10s frentistas afectados aportarhn una
superficie superior desde algunas dkimas, hasta un 15 o 20% a lo informado por
las notas 192,193,197 y 198de la U.G.

0 En la valuaci6n de 10s campos a expropiar, se actda con inequidad, ya que para
campos lindantes y de igual potencial productivo se observan diferencias de hasta
un 70% en 10s valores propuestos.

DE : MQROON NO.DE FQX : 0342 4930772 28 SEP. 2807 19:43 P4

No se respetan 10s importes, los plazas y forma de pago segirn 10s criterios de la
Gerencia del Banco expresados en el punto 36 del informe del panel de inspewion
recibido.

DOCUMENTALPROBATORIOREMITIDO.
Folio 1,3,4, 5, 6, 7, 8 y 12.

26 de Septiembrede 2007 n

HECTOR E. JULLIER
Belgrano2187
3009 FRANCK (Sta. Fe) Argentina .
- -
Tea0342 4930154
FAX:0342 4930772
--

" DE: MCX3N ND.DE FAX : 0342 4930772 18 SEP. 2007 19:42 P2

FRANCK,September 26,2007

MR. PETER LALLAS
EXECUTIVE SECRETARY -INSPECTION PANEL
1818 H Street NW
WASHINGTON DC 20433
USA FAX 001 2025220916

Dear Sir:

Ref: Your fax dated 09/19/2007
Subj: National Road191Motorway (Autovia)-Clarification
In answer to your request for clarification of the subject of reference, I
am attaching the development of the points, which I have identified with the numbering
used in my request for an investigation of 09/07/2007. In each point I mention the
documents that were sent by post on 09/18/2007 and my works sent previously, where
more information may be found on each of the subjects discussed.
Information:in three pages.
h

Sender: HECTOR E. JULLIER
Belgrano2187
3009 - FRANCK (Sta. Fe) -Argentina
Te. 54-342 -4930164
FAX: 54-342- 4930772

' DE:MAROON ND.DE FAX : 0342 4930772 28 SEP. 2007 19:42 P2

INFORMATIONCLARIFYING MYREQUESTFORAN INVESTIGATIONOF09/07/2007
POINT 5 - Involution of economic and social development.
With referenceto the ruralactivities in the zone of influence of Nat. Road 19/Autovia,

The disappearance of the dairy farms as an activity of rural families in the last few
years has caused the extinction of dynamic activities and the exodus of the
population from that zone.
The subdivision of plots (minifunds), the joint ownership (condominium) and the
advanced age of the owners of the land, all promote the development of
agriculture through contractors or sharecroppers.

This makesit impossibletovindicatedynamicactivitiesandundertakenewactivities(farms,
vegetablegardens, fruit orchards,etc.) requiringnonexistenteconomicsupport.
The plannedwork causesthe loss of the practical use of a paved road (unique) in a
wide area, and the use restrictionthat will be created by the motorwaywill contribute
to maintaining activities passive,with a productiveprocess that will remain stationary
or will involve.

DOCUMENTSENT: PageN9-ChateauBlancResolution.
OBSERVATIONS AND COMMENTS ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMIC STUDY OF
NATIONAL ROAD 19 Date 08/24/2007.
BASIC PROPOSALS FOR A REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT POLE DATED 02/28/2007.

POINT 6 Future Possibility o f Pollution and Contamination,

There is lack of definitionand planning failures for suburban and nrral sites, areas for manufacturingand
restrictionstotheuseofchemicalproductsandpollutingapplications.

The creation of empty spaces (6OMts) or their use as a quarry for the soil needed to
elevate the new carriageway (+0.80), represents a potential space for waste
dumps or undue use for human emergency settlements, or animals, as those
existing in the periphery of the cities of Santa Fe and Santo Tome.

DOCUMENTSENT: Page 10

'DE:MAROON ND,DEFAX:03424930772 38 SEP. 2007 19:42 P2

POINT7 Incompatibilitybetweenthewater andthe roadproject.

0 The loss of agronomic balance in the soil produces insufficient absorption and
retention of rainwater, with extraordinary surpluses and progressive increases.
For years, the water program has been based on building canals that accelerate the
runoff towards depressions which are not natural drainage basins.

These flows arrive uncontrolled from a wide north-west zone and at several critical
points come into contact with NR 19/Autovia.

0 The spillways in the road for the passage of water are not adequate, the new
elevated carriageway will act as a contention and the culvert (north side) will operate
as a collector of the ever increasing flows, which will cause problems of flooding in
the neighboring fields and affect the population settlements in the zone, as was the
case in December 2006,andintheflooddisasterof March2728,2007, aswellasincreasing
theriskofflooding inthecity of Santo Tome.

MORE INFORMATION: "LA TIERRA SE MUERE" ("The land is dying") of 03/03/2007 and ITS
ANNEXES CHAPTERS 2 and 3, and PROGRAM FOR THE RECOMPOSITION OF THE
AGRONOMICAL MAKE-UP OF THE SOIL, CENTER ZONE OF THE DEPARTMENT LAS
COLONIAS.

POINT8 Expropriationspursuanttothe cadastreofanotherwork.
Inthe 1970sthere was a projectto builda HIGHWAYadjacentto NR 19.The expropriations for that work
hadbeen plannedandthe cadastredrawingswere made.That informationwas usedto determinethe area
to beusedforthis Motorway.

Using those measurements, most of the affected owners will contribute with an
area that is larger, by some tenths of one meter in some cases and up to 15 or
20% more in others, than informed in notes 192, 193, 197 and 198 of the
Management Unit (U.G.)
There is inequity in the appraisal of the fields to be expropriated, since there are
differences of up to 70% in the values proposed for adjacent fields and with the
same production potential.

' DE:MPSU30N ND.DEFAX : 0342 4930772 48 SEP. 2007 19:42 P2

The amounts, payment terms and timeframes according to the criteria of the Bank's
Management expressed in point 36 of the report received from the Inspection Panel
are not respected.

EVIDENCEDOCUMENTSSENT.
Pages 1, 3,4,5, 6, 7, 8 and 12

September26, 2007

HECTOR E. JULLIER
Belgrano2187
3009 - FRANCK(Sta. Fe)-
Argentina
Tel. 54-342-4930154
FAX: 54-342-4930772

SUN,'JQN-01-00 4 :14AM MUTUOL CFlF 03424930441 P. 01

FRANCK,Septiembre07de2007-09-07

AI SECRETARIO EJECUTIVO -PANEL DEINSPECCI~N~3 ?-- 7 c1 --.- 40
1818HStreetNW.WASHINGTONDC. 20433EE.UU.
- 1 I
., ' - 1
_-
?*' .'4:. -
I . .,,> - . q *
*<

FAXNo001-202-52200916
0446

condomicilio encalle Belgrano2187de FRANCKpia. de SantaFe RephblicaArgentina, por
1) Nosotros, HECTORE.JULLIER LE,6.235.289 y ANA ROSAT J Z W L LC. 6.486.425,
-
propiadecisi6ny encoincidencia conotra actores involucradosmanifestamosque:

2) SufiiremosW o s como consecuenciasde deficienciasuomisionesdelBancoMundialenel
proyectode infiaestructuraVial de SantaFe (Argentina) R.Nac. 19/ Autovia.

3) Dafiosy Perjuicios C/documentales
-
1- Discriminaci6ne Intimaci6n
2- Inequidadesen 10s valores
3- Riesgode inundacion
4- Faltadeplanificacibny delimitacibndeiireas
5- Involucionde desarrolloecon6mico y social
6- Posibilidadfuturade poluciony contaminaci6n
7- Incompatibilidaddeproyectohidricoconel vial
8- Expropiacibnpor mtastrcisde om'ohm

4) Descripoi6nampliatoria
1 Comunicacionesinthidatorias
-
2- hkdeih&&imw,
3- Elevationdel tmzo proyectadoa nivel+ 0,80
uocoimidtlltes collelpunto36delhtbrnit'de inspcccibnanterior

4- No sc delimitanhas, ah-urbanitsI)rural, ni determinacihnde lugare9paraclamde
mprendirnientos
. 5 Rootriooihppm lcw aatividtlduoaotuuluu, y obutciouloo pura nuem emprenciimilantoo
6- Indcfinicionsabredicaciones contaminantesy creaoihn&espacins inbtilespclivesa
poluciony contaminwion
7- Divorciosentreel programahidricoy el proyectovial

5- Hemosmanifestadonuestrasquejaspornotay personalmente:el03/04/07a1BM;el
10/07/07 a la SPIFE; el 19/07/07 21 BM; el 08/08/07 la SPIFE; el 27/08/07 a1BMy a la SPIFE.
B
Canrespiiestasy explicacionesque 110conternplansolucionesa 10s problemaqplanteadoa,ya que
nomoditicanlopropuestoorignrilmentc.Lrtsremitidas el 27/0#!07 a la SYlF't;,y a1 HM,nnfiieron
respondidas.

6- Por t& lo exprosado pdimob alpaaddc itlspccci6nquc rccomicndc al Dircctorio
EjecutivodelBMparaque lleve a cab0 unainvestigacibnsobre estas cutstiones.

. I

LE.6435.289

"E:03424930154 FAX:0342-4930015

Los Actoresinvolucradosdirectosa1proyectodetransfomi6n de laFtN 19enAutovia, nos
sentimosperjudicadosy coincidimosconlapresentaciondeld a07/09/07paralograruna
investigacidn&unproyecto queconsideramosdiscrirninatorio.

Nombre Apellido .
lq.~p!3,*,~?i/!.!?to ......................................
'&U/"m
&,@..!r ..............................................8=2
....M.?!? r -
f / Z ~ ~ V

/do .......................................................................................
k6.N /%/F///y -hz.4?*8'8v
....................................
4-lu7-0nrr"4LOQMZQ * ......................................................
U 6.ZW3f `...`.U(.l..l.l...l

..h&?=!,i2................H2
MA....A e??.. t?! . IN?!:, ...%2:J!?3:4%:........
.:...I..

.......................................................................
hJCECG./rh ldU6VtT

*~,~.~.~.,~~~~...............................
!...

..............................................................................................................
CdnioS Z M h o F F

....... .............

...
........Px..*,.:.%$4$,

................................................... ....................... ..................................... .....................................

............................................................................................................... .....................................

SUFI, JAN-01-00 6:52AM MUTUAL CRF 03424930441 . -y,v see
P. 01

9 - , 6 C J U t F w T k 8 7

. . . . . .

P. 01

CONVENJODE'TRANSFERENCIA

Entre Los seiiores MAR10 PEDRO SCHMIDT, argentino, nacido el 22 de diciembre de 19.3I,
jubilado, casado en primeras nupcias con Beatriz Ethel Jullier; de apellido niatcrno PERETTI. 1, E.
No6.211390, CLJJT/CLXLNo20-6 211.390-2,domiciliado en calle EstanislaoLopez No2025 de la
localidad de Franck, provincia de Santa Fe y BEATRlZ ETHEL JULLIER, argentina, nacida el
26 de enero de 1936 jubilada; casada en primeras r1upcia.s con Mario Pedro Schmidt; de apellido
materno Amerdt, L.C. No 2 970.296, CUlT/CUlL No 27-2.970.296-4, domiciliada en calle
Estanislao Lopez No2025 de la localidad de Franck, provincia de Santa Fc. en el caracter de
propietarios del irunuehle ubicado en el Distrito Sail Agistin del Departamento Las Colonins,
empadionado a 10s fities del Iinpuesto lnmobiliario bajo la partida 09-29-00-09I629/0004(Mayor
Area) y cuyo dominio consta inscripto al Tonio 176 Imp, Folio 1225. Numero 26445, Aiio 1973,
Totno 240 Imp. Folio 1266, Numero 43707. Aiio 1986 v Torno 290 Par, Folio 1360, Numero
71118, Aiio 1996, por una parte y el M M 0 JUAN PABLO GARZON en representacion de la
Direccion Provincial de Vialidad de Santa Fe, se conviene ad-referendumdel Seiior Adrninistrador
General de esta ultima lo siyuiente

lo) Los propietarios transfieren por avenimiento expropiatorio a la Direccion Provincial de
Vialidad de Santa Fe el terreno necesario para la construccibn de la m:RUTANACIONAL No
19. TRAM0 I:RUTA NACIONAL NoI1 - RUTA PROVINCIAL No6, declarndo de Utilidad
Publica e Interds General niediante Resolucion NoNo2398 de fecha 26 de Octubre tic 2006, de
acuerdo a la descripcionde la fraccionafectada que se detallaen el Art. 11O del presente.-

2") Los propietarios se obligan a entregar n la Direccion Provincial de Vialidad de Santa Fe la
superficie afectada descripta en el Art. 1lo, de ocupantes y mioras, a1 momento de redizarse
libre
el pago establecido en la clausula 9O, el que solo se hara efectivo una vez que la Reparticion tome
posesion de la fraccion de terreno objeto dcl presente -

3") Los propietarios declaraii set' personas inayores de ednd, hibiles. no estar inhibidos, y que
sobre el bien objeto de este conveniono pesanjnhibiciones ni embargos -

4") Si durante la tramitacion del presente convenio y antes de su inscripcion, 10s propietarios
transtieren parcial o totalnicnte el ininueble, deberiin haccrlo con deducdon de la superficie
descripta en et Art. 1 Io,previo aviso a la Direccibn Provincial de Vialidad, haciendo constar eii el
.
bolero o escritura respectiva la existencia de esta transferencia.-

So) L a Direccibn Provincial de'Vialidad inscribira la presente transferen-ia en el Registro de la
Propiedadde conformidad con lo dispiiesto por el Art. 67 bis de la Ley Provincial no7534; para tal
tin 10s propietarios se obligan a entregarle toda la docurnentacionnecesaria dentro del termino de
10 (diez) dias a contar de la fecha del presente convenio, la que constara'de: fotocopia certiticada
del Titulo de propiedad, Certificado de Libre Deuda del lmpuesto Inmobiliario incluyendo todo el
presentc aiio y comprobantede pago'por contribucioude mejoras si correspondiere-

\ DIKECCI6N PRCjVINClAL DE VIALLUAD
SANTA FE

CONVENiO DETWNSPERENCLA

Entre. Los seiiores MARIO PEDRO SCHMIDT, argentino, iiacido el 22 de diciembre de 1931;
jubilado; casado en primeras nupcias con Beatriz Ethel Jullier, de apellido materna PERETTI, L.E.
No6.211 390, CUIT/CUlL No20-6.211.390-2;domiciliado en calle EstanislaoLopez No2025 de la
localidad de Franck, provincia de Santa Fe y BEATRII, ETHEL JULIJER, argentina, nacida el
26 de eiiero de 1936 jubilada; casada en primeras nupcias con Mario Pedro Schmidt; de apellido
niaternu Amerdt, L.C. No 2.970.296, CUlTXUlL No 27-2.970.296-4; domiciliada en cdle
Estanislao Lopez No2025 de la localidad de Franck, provincia de Santa Fe; en el caricter de
propietarios del inmueble ubicado en el Distrito San Agustin del Departaniento Las Colonins,
empadronado a 10s tines del Impuesto Inmobiliario bajo la partida 09-29-00-09 1629/0004(Mnyor
Area) y cuyo doininio consta inscripto al T o m 176 Imp., Folio 1225, Numero 26445, Aiio 1973;
Tomo 240 Imp., Folio 1266. Nuinero 43707. Aiio 1986 y Totno 290 Par, Folio 1369, Numero
71118, k7o 1996; por una parte y el M M.O.JUAN PABLO GARZON en representacion de la
Direccion Provincial de Vialidad de Santa Fe, se coiiviene ad-referendum del Seiior Administrador
General de esta ultima lo siguiente.

1") Los propietarios transtieren por aveniniiento expropiatorio a la Direccion Provincial de
' Vialidad de Santa Fe el terreno necesjtrio para la construccicinde la m:RUTA NACIONAL No
19, TRAM0 1: RUTA NACIONAL No11 - RUTA PROWNCIAL No6, declarado de Utilidad
Piiblica e Interis General mediante Resolucion NoNo2398 de fecha 26 de Octubre de 2006, de
acuerdo ic la descripcion de la fraccih afectada que se detallaen el Art. 11" del presente.-

2') Los propietarios se obligan a entresar a ia Direccion Provincial de 'Vialidad de Santa Fe la
superficie afectada descripta en el Art. 1Io,libre de ocupantes y mejoras, iil momento de realizarse
el pago establecido en la clausula 9'. el que solo se harii efectivo una vez que la Reparticion tome
posesih de la fraccion de terreno objeto del presentc -

3") Los propietarios declaran ser personas inayores de edad, habiles, no estar inhibidos. y que
sobre el bien objeto de este convenio no pesaninhibicionesni embargos.-

4") Si durante la tramitacion del presente convenio y antes de su inscripcion, 10s propietarios
traiisfieren parcial o totalniente el in'niueble, deberan hacerlo con deduccion de la superficie
descripta en el Art. 11'. previo aviso a la Direccibn Proviiicial de Vialidad, haciendo constat en el
boleto b cscritura respectiva ia existenciade &a transferencia.-

I
5") L.a Direccion Provincial de Vialidad inscribira la presente transferencia en el Registro de la
Propiedad de cont'onnidad con lo dispuesto pot el Art 67 bis de )a Ley Proviticialno7534; para tal
fin 10s yropietarios se obligan a entreyarle toda la docurnentacion necesaria dentro del ttirmino de 1I
10 (diet) dias a contar de la fecha del prescnte convenio, la que constara de: fotocopia cenificada
del Titulo de propiedad, Cenificado de Libre Deuda del Impuesto Tnmobiliario incluyendo todo el II
presenre afio y comprobantede pago por contribucicjnde mejoras si correspondiere - I
I

FRANCK, September 7,2007

To the EXECUTIVE SECRETARY -THE INSPECTIONPANEL
1818HStreet NW, WASHINGTON DC. 20433, U.S.A.

FAXNO.001-202-522-00916
[Handwritten:`c0916yy]

1) We, HECTOR E. JULLIER, (Argentine) IdentityDocument 6.235.289 and
ANA ROSA TIZIANEL, (Argentine) IdentityDocument 6.486.425, address
2187Belgrano Street, Franck, Province of Santa FeyRepublic o f Argentina,
by our owndecision and inagreementwith other parties involved, state that:

2) We will suffer damages as a consequenceof failures or omissions by the
World Bank inthe SantaFe (Argentina) Road Infrastructure Project, National
Road 19/ "Autovia" (Motorway).

3) Damages and losses-w/documentary evidence

1. Discriminationandnotices
2. Inequityof the values
3. Risk of flooding
4. Lack ofplanning and delimitation of areas
5. Involutionof economic and social development
6. Possibility of future pollutionand contamination
7. Incompatibility of the water project withthe road project
8. Expropriation as per cadastre for another work

4) Explanatory Description
1. Intimidatorycommunications
2. Compensationsnot consistent with point 36 o fthe previous inspection
report
3. Elevationof the projected layout to level +0.80
4. Lack of delimitation of areas, suburbanor rural, or determination of sites
for classes o f developments
5. Restrictions for current activities, and obstacles to new developments
6. Lack of definition on polluting settlements and creation o fuseless spaces
prone to pollution and contamination
7. Divorce betweenthe water program andthe road project

5) We havepresentedour complaints by letter andpersonally: on 04/03/07 to the
WB: on 07/10/07 to the SPIFE; on07/19/07 to the WB; on 08/08/07 to the
SPIFE; on 08/27/07 to the WB and the SPIFE. With answers and explanations
which do not contemplate solutions to the issues that were raised, since they

do notmodifywhat was initially proposed.Those sent on 08/27/07to the
SPIFEandthe WB hadno answer.

6) Becauseofthe abovewe requestthat the inspectionpanelrecommendto the
ExecutiveBoardofthe WorldBankcarryingout aninvestigationonthese
matters.

(Signed) HECTORE.JULLIER, IdentityDocument6.235.289
ANA ROSATIZIANEL, IdentityDocument 6.486.425

Tel. (54) 342-4930154; Fax: (54) 342-4930075

We stakeholdersdirectlyaffectedbythe project oftransformationofNational Road 19
into a Highway (autovia), feel damagedandagree with the presentationmadeon
09/07/07 to achievean investigationof aprojectthat we consider to be discriminatory.

Name Surname Argentine IdentityDocument Signature

HECTOREDUARDOJULLIER 6235289 Landownerkm 14
ANA ROSA TIZIANEL 6486425
ALDO JOSEM.HOFFMAN 17848448 Landownerkm4 /illegible/
ANTONIO LORENZOKRUGER 6208138 Landownerkm/Illegible/
SILVINA A. HOFFMAN 22144425 Landownerkm43
ANGELITA ANA KRUGER 6118072 Landowner km 18
LORENZOMEYNET 6242155 Landowner km29
CARLOSIMHOFF 6308892 km29
GUSTAVOJAVIER REY 18106943 km30
JORGEALBERT0 CASSINI 7891030 km 16-17
GABRIELA FABIANA GILLI 20856256 km24
LILIANA BEATRIZGILLI 22677311 km24

DOCUMENT 8

There is adrawing withthe following markings:

Calle pfiblica: Public thoroughfare
RutaNac. 19 (Prov.): National Road 19 (Prov.)
Croquis dtitulo: UntitledSketch
Datos curva: Data onthe Curve
CuerdaAB: ChordAB
Arc0 AB: Arch AB

Croquis de Ubiaccibn: LocationSketch
Mensura: Survey
Pueblo de San Agustin: Village of San Agustin

DrawingNo. 75693
P.LL No. 9162572
Assessed Value o f land $26,026
Assesed Value of improvements $3,560
Year 1973

Province of Santa Fe
Department:Las Colonias
District: San Agustin
Place: /illegible/ San Agustin
Purpose: Survey - S.E.O.A. -NationalRoads Directorate -National Road 19-
Connection with Santa Fe-Rosario Highway- Sa Pereira- Section /illegible/, Progr.
0.00 -29.000,OO
PROPERTY OWNED BY:
NILDA, SOSA MICHLIGDE /Illegible/

Ruralproperty located inthe colony of San Agustin, Department Las Colonias, Dominion
/illegible/

BALANCE OF AREAS:
/Illegible/

Jose H.Matem, Jorge E.Ledesma, Jose E. Toscanelli
/Illegible/

Updated 1975

Santa FeyFebruary 1973

Observations:

Measures inmeters
Corners markedwith hardwoodstakes
Amends /illegible/ 18.542

Cadastredesignation: 75693

Provincial RoadDirectorate
Santa Fe

ASSIGNMENT AGREEMENT

BetweenMessrs. MARIO PEDRO SCHMIDT, Argentine, bornDecember 22, 1931,
pensioner, marriedinhisfirst marriage to Beatriz EthelJullier, mother's surname
PERETTI, identitydocument 6.211.390, Tax registration number 20-6.211.390-2;
address 2025 Estanislao L6pez Street ofthe town of Franck, province of Santa Fe and
BEATRIZETHELJULLIER, Argentine, bornJanuary 26,1936, pensioner, marriedin
herfirst marriage to Mario Pedro Schmidt, mother's surname Amerdt, Identitydocument
2.970.296, address 2025 Estanislao L6pez Street of the town of Franck, province of
SantaFeyintheir capacity as owners of the property located inthe District o f SanAgustin
of the Department Las Colonias, registered for the purposeof the property tax under
number 09-29-091629/0004(Greater Area) andthe ownership of which is registered in
Volume 176odd, Page 1225, Number 26445, Year 1973; Volume 240 odd, Page 1266,
Number43707, Year 1986andVolume 290 even, page 1369,Number 71118, Year 1996;
for the first party and for the other, Certified Construction Technician (MM.0.)JUAN
PABLO GARZON, on behalf of the Provincial Road Directorate of Santa Feysubject to
the approval ofthe GeneralAdministrator ofthe same, the following is agreed:

1) As a result of an expropriation agreement, the owners assignto the Provincial
RoadDirectorate of SantaFe the landnecessary for the construction of the Work:
NATIONAL ROADNO.19; SECTION 1:NATIONAL ROAD NO.11-
PROVINCIAL ROAD No. 6, declaredof Public Usefulness and General Interest
by ResolutionNo. No. [sic] 2398 dated October 26,2006, inaccordance with the
description of the affected fraction that i s detailed inArticle 11herein.

2) The owners undertake to deliver to the Provincial Road Directorate o f SantaFe
the affected area describedinArt. 11free from occupantsandimprovements, at
the time whenthe payment indicated inclause9this made, whichwill only be
made effective once the Agency takes possessionofthe fraction of landthat is the
subject of this agreement.

3) The owners declare they are of age, sane, not subject to restrictions, and that the
property that is the subject-matter ofthis agreementi s not encumberedor
attached.

4) Ifduring the processing of this agreement andbefore its registration, the owners
should transfer the property inwhole or inpart, they shall do it with the deduction
of the area describedinarticle 11herein,withprior notice to the Provincial Road
Directorate, indicating the existenceof this assignment inthe respective deed or
sale document.

5) The Provincial Road Directorate shall file for the registration of this assignment in
the Property Registry inaccordancewithArticle 67 bis of ProvincialLawNo.

7534; to that end, the owners undertake to provide all the necessary
documentation within a period o f 10 (ten) days as from the date o f execution o f
this agreement, consistingin:certifiedphotocopy ofthe deed. Certificate of
payment o f the Property Tax including all ofthe current year and certificate of
payment o f the fee for improvements, as may be the case.

ANNEX I1

BANKMANAGEMENT RESPONSETO
REQUESTFORINSPECTIONPANEL REVIEW OF THE
ARGENTINA: SANTE FEROADINFRASTRUCTUREPROJECT
(Loan No. 7429-AR)

Management has reviewed the Request for Inspection of the Argentina: Santa Fe Road
Infrastructure Project (Loan No. 7429-AR), received by the Inspection Panel on Septem-
ber 13,2007 (with clarifications dated September26,2007) andregistered on October 19,
2007 (RQ07/08). Managementhas preparedthe following response.

CONTENTS
Abbreviations and Acronyms ............................................................................................ .iv
I. Introduction................................................................................................................ 1
11. The Request............................................................................................................... .2
111. Project Background ................................................................................................... -3
IV. SpecialIssues.......................................................................... :.................................. .6
V. Management's Response .......................................................................................... 18

Map
Map 1. IBRDNo. 34981

Annex

Annex 1. Claims and Responses
Annex 2 Justifications of the Right of Way adoptedfor the Upgrading ofNational Road
19
Annex 3 List of Bank Missions
Annex 4 Communications betweenRequesters, PIUand the World Bank
Annex 5 Sample of Modificationsto the RoadDesign for the UpgradingofNational
Road 19 as Follow up to the Concernsof Affected Landowners
Annex 6 Simulations of Drainage Capabilities at the "Los Cuatro Sauces" Site (Km
22+850m onNationalRoad 19)

iii

ABBREVIATIONS ANDACRONYMS

AADT Annual Average Daily Traffic
BP BankProcedure
DNV NationalRoad Directorate
DPV Provincial RoadDirectorate
EA Environmental Assessment
ESMP Environmental and Social ManagementPlan
IBRD International Bank for ReconstructionandDevelopment
IDA International Development Association
IIRSA Initiative for the Integration of Regional Infrastructure in
SouthAmerica
INTA NationalInstitute of Agricultural Technology
IPN Inspection Panel
ISDS Integrated Safeguards Data Sheet
MRM ModifiedRational Method
Mercosur SouthernCommon Market
NPV Net PresentValue
OP Operational Policy
OPRC OperationsProcurement Review Committee
PAD Project Appraisal Document
PAP Project Affected People
PID Project InformationDocument
PIU Project ImplementationUnit
PSF Province of SantaFe
RAP Resettlement Action Plan
ROW Right of Way

Currency Unit
(Exchange RateEffective (November 14,2007)
Currency Unit = AR Peso
AR$1.00 = US$0.32

I. INTRODUCTION

1. On October 19, 2007, the Inspection Panel registered a Request for Inspection,
IPNRequest RQ06/05 (hereafter referred to as "the Request"), concerning the Argentina:
Santa Fe Road Infrastructure Project (Loan No. 7429-AR) financed by the International
Bankfor Reconstruction andDevelopment (the Bank).

2. This Request follows two earlier Requests that were submitted to the Inspection
Panel in 2006. The First Request was submitted on September 11, 2006, (IPN Request
RQ06/05) and concerned the Argentina: Provincial Road Infrastructure Project which is
being financed by the Bank through Loan No. 7301-ARYand the Argentina: Santa Fe
Road Infrastructure Project, which was under preparation at the time. The Second Re-
quest (IPN RQ06/05-2) also concerned the same two Projects and was registered on Sep-
tember 27,2006. For reasonsof economy and efficiency, the SecondRequest for Inspec-
tion was addedto the First Request andthe ManagementResponseaccordingly addressed
issues raised in both Requests (the "2006 Requesters"). Management clarified that the
Provincial Road Infrastructure Project (Loan 7301-AR) did not finance any activity re-
lated to the Requesters' claims; therefore, the Management Responsedid not refer to the
ProvincialRoad Infrastructure Project.

3. Management submitted its Response on October 18, 2006. Inaddition to respond-
ing to specific claims by the Requesters, Management asked that the Panel consider the
Requests ineligible for investigation because Management did not have adequate time to
address the concerns raised by the Requesters before the Requests were filed. According
to the Notice of Registration, on August 28, 2006, the Panel had received a Request for
Inspection dated August 20,2006. This was only five days after the August 15, 2006 let-
ter by which Management was made aware of the Requesters' concerns. For the Second
Request, Management received the letter on September 21, 2006, the same date it was
sent to the Inspection Panel. The Project team had engaged with the Requesters and the
Province of Santa Fe (PSF) on the issues raised inthe letter, although none of these inter-
actions were recorded inthe Request for Inspection.

4. On November 16, 2006, the Panel issued its Report and Recommendation, with
the following conclusions:

"The Requests and Management Responses contain conflicting assertions and in-
terpretations about the issues, the facts, compliance with Bank policies and proce-
dures, andharm.The Panelcan only address these issues during aninvestigation.

While the Requesters are otherwise eligible to submit a Request for Inspection,
the procedural criterion of paragraph 9(c) requiring that the Requesters have
brought the "subject matter (...) to Management's attention and that, in the re-
quester's view, management has failed to respond adequately demonstrating that
it has followed or is taking steps to follow the Bank's policies and procedures"

Argentina

has not been fully met. Therefore the Panel cannot make a recommendation on
whether to investigate the subject matter of the Requestsfor Inspection."'

5. Structure of the Text. The document contains the following sections: Section I1
presents the Request. Section I11provides background informationon the Project. Section
IV discusses specialissues and SectionV containsManagement's response. Annex 1pre-
sents the Requesters' claims, together with Management's detailed responses, in table
format. Several other annexes of supporting information are attached, along with a map
ofthe Project area.

11. THE REQUEST

6. The Request was signed by Mr. Hector E. Jullier and Ms. Ana Rosa Tizianel,
residents o f Franck, PSF, Argentina, who submittedthe Requeston behalfof themselves
and on behalf of 10 other area residents who are landowners and who have also signed
the Request (all of them collectively referred to as the "2007 Requesters").

7. Attached to the Request are a number of documents providing background and
technical informationrelated to the concerns of the Requesters regarding compensation,
highway design and alleged adverse environmental and economic impacts of the Project,
together with copies of letters to and fiom Provincial and Federal authorities and World
Bank staff. Inaddition, the 2007 Requesters askedthe Panel to treat a letter addressedto
the Panel on August 31,2007, and its attached documents, as part of the Requestfor In-
spection. No further materials were received by Management insupport of the Request.

8. The Requestcontains claims that the Panelhas indicated may constitute violations
by the Bank of various provisions of its policies andprocedures, including the following:

OP/BP 4.01,Environmental Assessment, January 1999, revisedAugust 2004

OP/BP 4.12, InvoluntaryResettlement, December2001

OP 1.OO, Poverty Reduction, July 2004

OP/BP 13.05, Project Supervision, July 2001, revisedinAugust 2004, September
2006, andApril 2007, respectively; and

World Bank Policy on Disclosure of Information, September2002.

See InspectionPanel's Report and Recommendationdated November 16,2006, paragraphs 63 and 64.

SantaFe RoadInfrastructure

111. PROJECTBACKGROUND

PROJECTDESCRIPTION

9. The Santa Fe Road Infrastructure Project is a USD 173.1 million Project to
upgrade road infrastructure and provide institutional supportfor a strategic corridor
linking the PSF to regional and international transportation and trade hubs. The Pro-
ject has triggered the following Bank operational policies: Environmental Assessment
(OP 4.01); Involuntary Resettlement (OP 4.12); Project Supervision (OP/BP 13.05) and
The World Bank Policy on Disclosure of Information (September 2002). The Environ-
mental and Social Management Plan (ESMP), which includes the Land Acquisition and
Resettlement Action Plan (RAP) prepared by the PSF, has been available to the public
through its website since August 31,2006. The Project Appraisal Document (PAD) deci-
sion meeting was held on September 7, 20062, the Project was approved by the Board of
Directors of the World Bank on February 13, 2007 and the Loan Agreement became ef-
fective on August 17,2007.

10. Improving National Road 19 is a cornerstoneof the development of a transport
corridor in the PSF, which is afundamental step infostering regional integration in
the Center R e g i ~ nThe investment in National Road 19 i s a priority component of an
. ~
infrastructure strategy being developed by the PSF, aimed at sustaining recent high rates
of economic growth and positioning Santa Fe to be the most competitive province inAr-
gentina. The infrastructure strategy includes projects under national jurisdiction, for ex-
ample, the dredging of the ParanaRiver, and other projects under provincialjurisdiction,
such as the relocation of the Santa Fe city port. While financing for the improvement of
NationalRoad 19 would normally beprovided by the national government, due to limited
fiscal resources and significant infrastructure backlogs, the national government accepted
an offer by the PSF to finance this project. The national government is working with the
PSF inthis Project through the NationalRoadDirectorate (DNV).

11. The improvement of National Road 19 is a two-phase project. The first phase (to
be financed by Loan 7429-AR) involves the construction of a two lane carriageway to
convert National Road 19 into an A u t ~ v i awhile the second phase plans to transform
, ~
National Road 19 into an Autopista' with total control access6The acquisition of the
right of way (ROW) by the PSF for the construction and safe operation of the Autovia
will allow future construction of anAutopista without any additional landrequirements.

* SeeAnnex 6 for project milestonesand a list ofpreparationand other project-relatedmissions.
The Center Region was officially created in2004 and comprisesthe provinces of Cbrdoba, Santa Fe and
EntreRios.
4A divided highway with a two lane carriageway in each direction. This highway is without full control of
access, Le., it has toll booths at certain points. Any driver entering and exiting the highway between these
points does not pay atoll.
A divided highway with at least a two lane carriageway in each direction and which can only be entered
or exited at toll boothpoints (Le., a limited control of access fieeway).
For more detailed pioject background information see the Project Appraisal Document (Report 38464-
AR).

Argentina

12. There is a broad consensus on the need to develop this transport corridor. The
two main chambers of commerce in PSF' produced a joint report' contributing to the
formulation of a strategic plan for the Center Region. Inthe report, the upgrading o f Na-
tional Road 19 between San Francisco and Santa Fe was recognized as a necessary infra-
structure intervention to facilitate the flow of goods in the Center Region. Within a
broader integration perspective, the Initiative for the Integration of Regional Infrastruc-
ture in South America (IIRSA) highlighted the upgrading of NationalRoad 19 as an inte-
gral part of the bi-oceanic corridor that constitutes the Mercosur-Chile transportation cor-
r i d ~ r . ~

13. The improvementof National Road 19 has become all the more urgent because
of the significant growth in traffic levels. Betweenthe last study conducted by DNV in
2003 and one carried out for project preparation in March 2006, Annual Average Daily
Traffic (AADT) grew approximately 40 percent. Traffic composition changed, increasing
the relative importance of trucks, which in some segments of the road account for more
than 45 percent of total traffic, supporting its regional relevance. The economic evalua-
tion of this project produces a Net Present Value (NPV) of USD 63 million. The eco-
nomic benefits of the project increasedsignificantly since the NPV of the project was es-
timated in2006. The provincial Gross Domestic Product grew 9.3 percent in2006 and is
expected to grow 8.5 percent in 2007. These rates of economic growth generated higher
than anticipated growth intraffic inthe PSF road network. Traffic growth coupled with
the very high incidence of fatal road accidents along National Road 19 has increasedthe
economic and socialjustification for upgrading NationalRoad 19.

PROJECTOBJECTIVES

14. The overallpurpose of the Project is to improve transport conditions along a
strategic road corridor that links the PSF with regional and international markets.
Adding capacity to NationalRoad 19 will reduce logistics costs, facilitate access to major
regional consumption and export markets and foster the effective economic integration of
the Center Region provinces. The Project also aims to provide institutional support to the
PSF to achieve the following specific objectives: (i) improve road safety by implement-
ing pilot interventions capable of providing valuable qualitative and quantitative informa-

'Bolsa de Comercio de Santa Fe y Bolsa de Comercio de Rosario.
Aportes para la Formulacidn del Plan Estratbgico de la Regidn Centro de la Repliblica Argentina. Infor-
me Tbcnico N2: Relevamiento de Acciones Gubernamentalesy Obras de Infiaestructura de Transporte y
Logistica a Evaluar con el Gobierno de la Provincia de SantaFe. Bolsa de Comercio de Santa Fey Bolsa
de Comercio de Rosario, November 2004.
Mercosur is the Southern Common Market, a customs union between Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay, Para-
guay and Venezuela, founded in 1991by the Treaty of Asuncibn, which was later amended and updated by
the 1994 Treaty of Our0 Preto. Its purpose is to promote free trade andthe fluidmovement of goods, peo-
ples, and currency. The organization has a South and Central America integration vocation. The Mercosur-
Chile transportation corridor is the main industrial area in South America, with high value added industries
(automotive, construction materials, petrochemical, agroindustrial) and some o f the most productive agri-
culture lands in the world. Further increases inthe commercial flows, which are essential to the formation
o f more efficient supply value chains in both ends o f the axis, are threatened by the poor conditions and
capacity o f infrastructure. To this end, IIRSA prioritizedthe upgrading ofNational Road 19.

SantaFe RoadInpastructure

tion to the comprehensive road safety action plan elaborated by the PSF in 2005; (ii)
identifytransport infrastructure andtrade facilitation constraintsby setting up a systemto
measure logistics costs in the PSF; (iii) reinforce the PSF's planning capacity to foster
economic growth; (iv) strengthen provincial capacity to assess and manage environ-
mental and social impacts of large civil works; and (v) createprovincial capacity to moni-
tor and evaluate large infrastructure projects.

PROJECT FINANCING

15. Total Project cost is USD 173.1 million, of which USD 126.7 million is being
provided by the Bank loan and the remaining USD46.4 million by the PSF." The Bank
loanis guaranteedby the Argentine Republic.

PROJECTCOMPONENTS

16. The Project has two key components, which are explained inthe PAD.

Component 1 - Upgrading National Road 19 (estimated cost, including con-
tingencies, USD 167.4 million of which USD 123.9 million will be financed
bythe Bank Loan). This component will transform 130kilometers ofNational
Road 19 inthe PSF into a four lane highway (Autovia) with separate two lane
carriageways in each traffic direction to expand the capacity and road safety
of this heavily traveled corridor. This is the first stage in upgrading the corri-
dor, whichDNV plans to transform into a limitedaccess freeway inthe future.
The component entails building: (i) two lane carriageway within the ROW
a
that will serve East-West traffic, which in the future will become one of the
main carriageways of the freeway; (ii) four-lane bypasses o f the towns
three
of San Jerbnimo del Sauce, Sa Pereyra and Frontera (and its twin city San
Francisco) within the PSF; (iii)alignment improvements for three sharp
curves on the existing two lane highway; (iv) grade separationinterchanges at
high trafficked intersections - National Roads 34 and Rosario Santa Fe Free-
way - and overpasses for railroad crossings; (v) ground-level interchanges at
intersections with provincial and rural roads; and (vi) turn lanes and returns at
intervals of about 6 kilometers to facilitate safe access to properties along the
corridor.

The national government, through DNV, will also finance the upgrading of 6
kilometers of National Road 19 in the Province of C6rdoba (from the border
with PSF to National Road 158), using the same design standards applied to
the upgrading of this road in the PSF. DNV design standards for National
Roads that will be converted into freeways require 120 meter ROW. In the
1970s, DNV acquired the landnorth of the existing alignment neededto meet
the 120 meter ROW requirement for about 54 kilometers (approximately 40

loSee Annex 5 o f the PAD, page 57.

Argentina

percent of the Project length). The PSF has been acquiring the land for the
remaining section of the Project.

Component 2 - Institutional Strengthening (estimated cost USD2.8 million,
all Bank-financed). This componentwill consist of four subcomponents:

o Sub Component 2.1 -Road Safety;
o Sub Component 2.2 -Measurementof logistics costs inthe PSF;
o Sub Component 2.3 - Strengtheningthe strategic planning capacity ofthe
PSF;
o Sub Component 2.4 - Strengtheningthe capacity ofthe ProvincialRoad
Directorate (DPV) to enhance environmental and social management; and
o Sub Component 2.5 -Design of a capacity buildingprogram to incorpo-
rate monitoringand evaluation analysis ininfrastructure projects.

PROJECT UPDATE

17. As ofNovember 2007, the loan still has hadno disbursements.However, progress
has been made in the two components. The PSF concluded the bidding process for the
upgrading of National Road 19. This process requiredthe clearance o f the Bank Opera-
tional Procurement Review Committee (OPRC) twice, for the bidding documents and for
the evaluation of the prequalification process. Construction of the new carriageways was
dividedinto five contracts and46 bidswere submittedintotal. Itis expectedthat the PSF
will conclude the evaluation process by the end of November 2007. It should be noted
that the Project works will not commence until the pertinent provisions of the Resettle-
ment Action Plan (RAP) have beencarried out inaccordancewith the terms of the RAP,
and ina manner acceptableto the Bank.l1

18. Biddingdocuments for hardand soft road safety interventions on Provincial Road
21 will soon be ready as the PSF i s making the changes requestedby the Bank during the
supervision mission of September 2007. Progresshas also beenmade inthe implementa-
tion of the institutional components. The Terms of Reference for the measurement of lo-
gistics costs, the design and implementation of a base line to measure Project indicators
and the agenda for the first workshop to conduct a strategic environmental assessment
have all been sent to the Bank for no objection.

IV. SPECIAL ISSUES

19. The Project team hadthe opportunity to meet with the 2007 Requesters inFranck,
PSF, on October 31, 2007. The meeting deepened the understanding of the 2007 Re-
questers' major concerns, which can be summarized as: increased risk o f flooding as a

"SeeSectionI.A.5oftheLoanAgreemententeredintobetweentheBankandthePSF,datedJune 12,
2007 for LoanNo. 7429-AR.

Santa Fe Road Infiastructure

result of the upgrading of NationalRoad 19; excessive landexpropriation (2007 Request-
ers ask to limit expropriations to 30 meters up to km 18); inadequatemonetary compensa-
tion and delays incompensationpayment for landexpropriation; and lack of adequacy of
the consultation process12. These issues are addressed below. The 2007 Requesters'
claims, accompaniedby Management's detailed responses, are provided inAnnex 1.

FLOODING RISKS RESULTINGFROMTHE UPGRADINGOF NATIONAL ROAD19

20. The 2007Requesters state that the upgrading of National Road 19 asproposed
will constitute an unnecessarily high embankment that will causeflooding in the sur-
rounding area. However, they include no engineering or other evidence to support
their assertion.The 2007 Requesters do not accept the proposed elevation (an average of
80cm) of the new carriageway. However, from a safety and engineering perspective, the
elevation of the new carriageway i s necessary. If the carriageway is not elevated, water
could cross over the upgradedNational Road 19 as has occurred inthe present road dur-
ing the last decade after two episodes of intense rain.13The Project approach has beento
elevate the new carriageway, adopting basic principles of road design standards and in-
cluding drainage canals and bridges, longitudinal canals, culverts and passage pipes of
sufficient size to avoid any blocking effect from an elevatedroad.

21. Theprofessional rigor of the engineering designsfor upgradingNational Road
19, and the stringent quality controlprocess to which they were subject,provide assur-
ance that concernsabout thepossibilityfor upgradingof National Road 19 toproduce
a `dam effect' are not wellfounded. The engineering designs, prepared by well-known
Argentine engineering firms, paid particular attention to the hydrological conditions of
the area. As part of the quality control process, the engineering designs were reviewedby
the Bank and formally approved by the DPV, the Provincial Ministry of Hydrological
Affairs and DNV.

22. Management considers that OPBP 4.01, Environmental Assessment, has been
consistentlyfollowed in this Project and that the studies and simulations conducted
during project preparation and the re-examination made after theflooding of March
2007 are sound and lead to the conclusion that the upgrading of NationalRoad 19 will

l2 November20,2007 Managementreceivedafaxfiomthe2007Requesterssuggestinganamendment
On
to the minutes o fthe meeting heldon October 31,2007 between the Bank andthe 2007 Requesters. The
amendment acknowledges that the PSF didnot interact with them with a lack o f respect. However the 2007
Requesters suggest inthe amendment that there were many instances where the DPV called landowners to
urgethemto signthe voluntary agreements (Convenios de Advenimiento). The Requesters suggest that
elderly (80 years old or more) people perceive this as psychologicalpressure. Management's recall o fthe
meetings referred to inthe minutes does not coincide with the Requesters on this point. However, Man-
agement takes very seriously any allegations o f discrimination and intimidation, and therefore Management
will follow up closely on this issue to c o n f m that no such incidents have taken place and to ensure that all
communications are proper (see also para. 34 o f this response).
l3 The existingcarriageway gets flooded (water passing over the road). That is one o fthe mainreasons why
it will not be part ofthe future fkeeway, remaining as a service roadonce theAutovia is upgradedto a mo-
tonvay (Autopista).

Argentina

not worsen the hydrological situation of the area surrounding it.14On the contrary, all
the engineering evidence suggests that the risk o f flooding inthe surrounding area will be
reducedcomparedto the without-project situation. The ESMP, preparedby the PSF with
the assistance of an independent consulting firm, details the possible impacts for a wide
range of hydrological aspects o f the upgrading of National Road 19. The ESMP lists all
recommendations that were carefully taken into account in the engineering designs, in-
cluding an assessment of the site "Los Cuatro Sauces" (km 22+850m) cited by the 2007
Requestersas a critical spot (see Annex 6).

23. During Project preparation, the Project team took an active role to guarantee
that the engineering designs comply with sound standards that satisfactorily address
the risks offlooding. Inlight of potential new informationabout hydrologicalimpacts in
the area after the unusual magnitude of the March 27-28, 2007 floods, a Bank mission
travelled to Santa Fe immediately afterwards to re-check the engineering designs. While
the evaluation of the engineering designs was taking place, the national authorities with-
held the approval process of the engineering designs and the PSF requested its Ministry
of Water Affairs to carry out a new analysis and a re-examination of the designs in order
to double check their robustness. The re-evaluations carried out independentlyby the PSF
andthe Bankvalidated the proposedengineering designs and concluded that such designs
do not increasethe risks of flooding faced by residents along National RoadNo. 19.

24. ThePSF has met regularly with the 2007 Requestersand otherproject-affected
people (PAPS)during Projectpreparation and implementation to discussflooding and
drainage issues. The most recent community meetings were held in July 2007, when
specifics of the engineering designs were discussed inpublic hearings inall communities
located near the ROW. Flooding and drainage issues were discussed extensively during
those meetings and representativesfrom the engineering firms and the provincial Minis-
try of Water Affairs made presentations and answered questions about these issues. It is
important to note that during a meeting held on the premises of the Project Implementa-
tion Unit(PIU) onNovember 29,2006 inthe context of the Project pre-appraisal mission,
one of the people who acknowledged that the hydrological problems pre-date the Santa
Fe Road Infrastructure Project was a Requester for the most recent Inspection Panel Re-
quest. H e also acknowledged that resolving the issue of flooding inthe PSF falls outside
the scope ofthe upgrading ofNationalRoad 19.l 5

LAND EXPROPRIATON LIMITEDTO30METERSTO KM18 UP

25. Thorough attention was devotedfrom the early stages of Project preparation to
the amount of land required to upgrade National Road 19. Inthe first preparation mis-
sion the Project team requested the PSF to study alternative schemes to reduce land ex-
propriation. The PSF and the DNV indicated that they decided to adopt a 120 meter
ROW following the prevailing standardfor Autopistas inArgentina. The Project team, as
part of its due diligence during Project preparation, asked the PSF to present a written

l4Evidenceprovidedby engineeringstudies, availableinProjectfiles.
15This is inthe Aide-memoire ofNovember2006 whichis inthe Projectfiles.

SantaFe Road Inpastructure

justification for the need to adopt the 120meter ROW for the upgrading of NationalRoad
19.16

26. I n a July 27,2006 report, the PSF reaffirmed the 120 meter width standard and
planned location of ROW. Itjustified its decision on the following basis:

0 Additional construction costs and potential negative environmental external-
ities. A reduced ROW would not allow sufficient lateral extraction of soil for
the construction of embankments, and the additional soil would needto be ex-
tracted from landto be purchasedelsewhere, and thentransported to construc-
tion sites. Consultants estimatedthat additional soil transportation costs would
double the embankmentconstruction costs. ''In addition, extracting soil from
sites located outside the ROW could create negative environmental liabilities.
Land extraction sites, without proper and continuous control, could become
informalsolid waste dumps.

0 Construction offiequent returns in response to the request of affected com-
munities to minimize restrictions on access to properties. Incorporating re-
turns at about 6 kilometer intervals inline with the outcome of consultations
with affected communities requires a wide separation between the existing
carriageway and the one to be financed under the Project, in order to provide
enough space for acceleration lanes and returns compatible with the project
design speed, without compromising road safety and the quality of the road
alignment.

Standards applied by DNV in similar projects. Insimilar projects under prepa-
ration or execution, DNV is mandating a 120 meter ROW for improvement
works aimed at the eventual construction of a limited access freeway. Exam-
ples of this practice are the two roads that are currently being upgraded - Na-
tional Roads 9 and 5.

27. I t should be noted that the specificproposals of the 2007 Requestersregarding
land acquisition (30 meters up to Km 18) would not be compatible with a design that is
safe and cost effective. The proposal to expropriate 30 meters of land would result in a
60 meter wide ROW-not enough space to build a two-carriageway Autovia with
ground-level returns and even below the 100 meter national standard stipulated for one-
lane carriageway roads. The proposal o f an incremental expropriation, in which the ac-
quisition of the 120 meter ROW is deferred until the decision to build the freeway with
full access control is made, was consideredby the PSF but rejected for the reasons ex-
plained inthe previous paragraph. The 2007 Requesters do not explain why landacquisi-
tion should be reducedto 30 m only up to Km 18 andthere does not seem to be any tech-

16Argentina. Proyecto Infraestructura Vial en Santa Fe. Ayuda Memoria. Misi6n de Preparaci6n. Junio
2006. This Aide Memoire is inthe Project files.
l7Annex 2 presents an estimation of cost savings comparing alternative ROWS.

Argentina

nical merit for this request since from Km 8.1 onwards the land is used for agricultural
purposes.

COMPENSATION FORLAND EXPROPRIATION

28. Theroad infrastructure will be located alongside the existing alignment, requir-
ing only acquisition of landfor the expansion of the ROW. National Road 19 is located
in an area characterized by low density population and intensive agricultural and live-
stock production. The average size of the affected properties is 100 hectares and in fifty
percent of the properties less than 4 hectares will be acquired to expand the ROW. The
expansion o fthe ROW affects 1,3 13 hectares. O f these 1,3 13 hectares, 662 (50.4 percent)
were acquired bythe national government (DNV) inthe 1970s.The remaininghectaresto
be acquired (633) are located in 236 properties along the road in the PSF. A total of 27
buildings will be displaced: 20 houses (6 with businesses), 6 businesses and one school.

29. Consistent with Bank policy, the PSF prepared a RAP that meets the require-
ments of OP 4.12. A census was undertakento identify PAPS.The RAP covers not only
the portionof the project inthe PSF, but an additional 6 kilometers of road that traverses
the neighboring Province of C6rdoba". The RAP will be fully implementedprior to any
physical workslg. The RAP includes an information and communication program, and
administrative proceduresto be followed to make available previously expropriated land
(land acquired by DNV inthe 1970s). For owners of landto be acquired and for house-
holds and businesses to be displaced, additional programs are included. A summary of
the RAP is includedinBox 1.

30. Its implementation is being carried out by the PSF in a manner consideredsat-
isfactory by the Bank. The Project team is closely supervising the implementation of the
Land Acquisition and RAP through frequent missions to Santa Fe 9 (see Annex 3). The
PSF produces a monthly report with the state of implementation of each program. The
aide memoire produced after each mission lists the Project team's observations and
agreements with the Project authorities on areas for follow-up and strengthening of im-
plementation.

'*Seeparagraph 4 of OP 4.12.
l9See footnote 11 above.

SantaFe RoadInfastructure

Box 1: LandAcquisition and Resettlement Plan
lnfomation and Communication: Stakeholderswill be informed through mass media and a newsletter
which will be distributed monthly. The Project has also created an electronic address where stake-
holders can send their questions and comments and get answers. Additionally, several "Community
Points"will be established along the road to maintain a direct dialogue with affected communities.Two
social specialistswill be assigned by the PSF and monitored by the PIU to manage these Community
Points.
Land Acquisition and Compensation:Through this programthe land required by the Project will be ac-
quired and compensated.
lrnplementation of Former Expropriations: This program aims at determining if the properties expropri-
ated by the national government more than 30 years ago are ready to be used for construction of the
new carriageways of National Road 19.The program includes informationand communicationactivities,
and administrative proceduresto be followed to make availablethe previouslyexpropriated land.
Assistance for Socioeconomic Restoration: This program will provide support for the families and busi-
nesses that will be physically displaced to restore their socioeconomic conditions to the level that ex-
isted priorto displacement.
Assistance for Parfially Affected Properfies: This program is designed to assist owners of partially af-
fected properties, whose houses will be close to the road, to mitigate any problems related to safety,
noise or privacy.
Relocation of the General San Martin rural school: A specific program was design to relocate this
school.This programwill be implementedwith the Ministry of Culture and Educationof the PSF.
Grievance Mechanism:A grievance mechanismwas designed to receive and respond to any grievance
that could emergeduring the implementationof the Plan.

31. The land acquisition process is governed by specific laws in the PSF. The Pro-
vincial laws provide that the expropriating entity is authorized to reach voluntary agree-
ments (Convenios de Avenimiento) with affected landowners in connection with the ex-
propriation of their land.20In case an agreement cannot be reached, the expropriating
entity initiates the judicial proceedings in the PSF courts to resolve the dispute over the
amount of compensationto be paid. It should be noted that ifthe expropriation case goes
to court, the expropriating entity shall, at the time of filing the complaint, deposit in"es-
crow" (consignacion `udicial) with the court the amount of compensation offered to the
affected landowner?JThe affected owners also have the possibility of addressing their
claims to the provincial ombudsman office ("Defensoria del Pueblo de la Provincia de
Santa Fe"), which i s an independentbody that reports to the Provincial legislature. 22 The

2o See articles 28-30 ofProvincialLaw No. 4908 (as amended andrestated), andarticles 24,25 and28-34
of Provincial Law No. 7334-Expropriation law (as amended).
21 See articles 28 and 29 ofProvincialLaw No. 4908 (as amendedandrestated), and articles 35-50 of Pro-
vincial Law No. 7534, as amended). With respect to paymentof interest, it shouldbe noted that the Su-
preme Court of SantaFe has ruledthat the expropriated landowneris entitledto the payment of interests
with respect to any amount of compensationnot acknowledgedby the expropriating entity at the time of
displacement(see Domingo, OsvaldoJ. v. Provincia de Santa Fe, Suprema Corte de Justicia de SantaFe,
March3, 1999 LexisNo70007854). The Supreme Court of Santa Ferulingcitedherein is inline with
-
the FederalSupreme Court precedents, andProvincial Law No. 7534 (as amended) is also consistentwith
the federal legislationon expropriation (see also article 31ofProvincial Law No. 7534 (as amended) and
Marienhoff, Miguel S., Tratado de Derecho Administrativo (Lexis No2206/001716), Section 1371on the
rightto claim interest over expropriation amounts).
The mainmandate ofthe Ombudsmanoffice is to protect the rightshterests of its citizens andthe com-
munity against actions/omissionscarried out by the public administration (including its agencies) which
imply, inter alia, abusive, arbitrary, illegitimate, discriminatory andnegligentpracticesinconnection with

Argentina

PSF has a proven track record of reaching voluntary agreements for the acquisition of
land. Statistical informationabout the outcome of previous processes of land acquisition
was obtained during project preparation. This information shows that for works initiated
between2004 and 2006, there were challenges with regard to only four out of 455 plots
of land (0.9% of total plots) with respect to the amount o f compensation offered by the
PSF inthe provincial courts.23

32. The PSF agreed with the Bank tofollow Bank compensation policies for land
acquisition. The valuation methodology of affected land followed by the DPV is the fol-
lowing:

e According to article 17 of Provincial Law No. 753424the amount of compen-
sation ("indemnizacidn") to be paid shall be equal to the objective value
("valor objetivo ") of the land plus any direct and immediate damage caused
by the expropriation of the affected land.

e Pursuant to the Provincial LawY2'the DPV is the entity in charge of carrying
out the valuation of land affected to road projects. In order to carry out said
mandate, the DPV may seek informatiodassistance from the Provincial Ca-
dastre,26which it does underthe present case.

e Pursuant to article 25 of Provincial Law No. 2996 - "Valuation and Cadastre
of Real Estate" (as amended), the valuation of real estate shall be basedon ob-
jective background information ("antecedentes objetivos ") which shall not
take into account personal nor incidental factors. Moreover, article 25 of the
same Law provides inpart that the amount of compensation ("`ustiprecio") to
bepaidmust be adjustedto the time inwhichpayment is made47 .

the performance of its functions, or which mightbeperceived as a deviation of its power (see articles 1and
22 o fProvincial Law No. 10396).
23 Please note that Court precedents indicate that the Argentine Supreme Court has historically rejected
valuations o fthe objective value ("valor objetivo") which are not consistent with "market value" (see
Marienhoff, Miguel S., Tratado de Derecho Administrativo, Tom0 IV). According to Marienhoff, (op. cit.
Section 1359) "the expropriation should reflect a replacement invalue: the valuation o f the expropriated
asset is replaced by its equivalent monetary value. The legal principle that the compensation mustbe `fair'
(justa) means that there should be a rigorous equivalence invalue betweenthe expropriated asset andthe
amount o f compensation. Without such equivalence, the compensation is not `fair'."
24 As amended.
"See thirdparagraph o farticle 25 ofProvincial Law No. 7534 (as amended), and article 3 o fProvincial
Law No. 12653.
26 See article 2 (a) (6) o f Provincial Law 10921.
27 See also Provincia de Santa Fe v. Jannarelli, Luis, et al, Suprema Corte de Justicia de Santa Fe, Novem-
ber 11, 1981 - LexisNo70026277 inwhichthe court applied adjustments to the value ofcompensation to
be paidto the expropriated landowner to compensatefor the depreciationo fthe localcurrency due to infla-
tion. According to the court ruling, the adjustment to the amount o f compensation for local currency depre-
ciation shall be paid by the Province fiom the date o f displacement to the date inwhich full compensation
i s paid to the expropriated landowner. The Court also ruledthat the expropriated landowner was entitled to
interest payments during saidtimefiame.

Santa Fe Road Infrastructure

The following are the elements that the valuation of rural land shall take into
account:

(a) the soil configuration, the quality of the land and the underground water,
the productivity of the land (including its subdivision, the intensity of its
economic production compared with the predominant land production in
the area, the real redincome ("renta real") set in (private) contracts or
public deeds or the presumed income ("renta presunta") that takes into
account statistical informationon estimatedproduction and the production
averageprices for a rangeperiodof not less than 5 years; and

(b) as supplemental background information, the owner's tax return, the cur-
rent fiscal valuation, the average sales prices (since the last valuation) of
similar land within the area, court rulings on expropriation cases, the
valuations carried out by official mortgage financial institutions, the in-
formation that may be provided by the provincialtax authority, and the in-
formation reflected inthe real estate registry, municipal cadastre registries
(for urbanand semi-urban land) andthe ProvincialDirectorate of Cadastre
and Mapping("Direccibn Provincial de Catastroy CartograJia "),

Once the DPV obtains the price information mentioned above, and inorder to
determine the objective value ("valor objetivo "), the DPV also seeks informa-
tion from: (a) banks, real estate agencies, cooperatives ("Cooperativas ") and
the municipality ("Comuna ") with respect to the prevailing price per hectare;
and (b) (i) estate publications, and local and national newspaperswith re-
real
spect to physical improvements/fixtures; and (ii) alia, the Instituto Na-
inter
cional de Tecnologica Agropecuaria (INTA) with respect to the value of the
crops.28

Thereafter, and before the DPV makes a final compensation offer ("valor ob-
jetivo '' plus any direct and immediate damage caused by the expropriation of
the affected land) to the affected landowner, the DPV also takes into account a
series of characteristics related to the affected land which increase the final
price to bepaidto the landowner by an amount which shall not exceed 30 per-
cent of the amount of the land valuation issued by the Provincial Cada~tre.~'
The characteristics that the DPV takes into account include, inter alia, the lo-
cation of the land (for example, the proximity of the landto trade centers is an
important factor) andthe expropriated surface (such as ifthe landhas been af-
fected inwhole or inpart).

28See RAP, pages 55-56.
29See article 25 o f ProvincialLaw No. 2996 and article 29 of Provincial Law 4908, as amended andre-
stated.

Argentina

Finally, the DPV notifies the affected owner o f the expropriation and at the
same time offers the owner the final compensation, as described above.30

33. Evidence collected in meetings held with landowners who signed a voluntary
agreement indicates the PSF i s carrying out the land acquisition process in an equitable
way. To further study the application o f the agreed valuation o f land, Bank Management
will review in detail a sample o f 20 cases in which voluntary agreements have been
signed, as part o f its next supervision mission.

34. Management considers that the PSF is applying adequately the provisions of
the RAP and the Provincial law that regulates expropriations.The supervision carried
out by the Project team has reviewed a sample o f the administrative files that include the
valuation o f lands and structures and all administrative documents that are used to elabo-
rate a monetary offer. The Project team has found no inconsistencies inthe principles fol-
lowed by the DPV3'to value the affected land and structures. The 2007 Requesters have
acknowledged that there i s no doubt that the PSF i s acting according to the law in their
letter o f August 27,2007 (section: Objeciones a1procedimiento de notificacibn de adven-
imientos por expropiaciones a frentistas), which i s included inthe IPN Request RQ07/08.

35. Management takes very seriously any allegations of discrimination and intimi-
dation. To date, Management has not seen any evidence of intimidatory communica-
tion or discrimination by the PIU or any other provincial agency towards the land
owners. The Bankhas been working with the 2007 Requesters and other PAPs to address
issues that have arisen during Project implementation and relations have been cordial and
constructive. On different occasions members o f the Project team asked affected land-
owners (including the 2006 and 2007 Requesters) to provide details o f the interaction
with the DPV unit in charge o f conducting the expropriation process. When asked spe-
cifically about "lack o f respect" from the DPV unit, the PAPs indicated they had not ex-
perienced this problem. The Project team has worked closely with the PIU since the start
o f Project preparationto make sure all concerns raisedby potentially affected populations
are addressed promptly and effectively by the PSF through the PIU. The 2007 Requesters
clearly acknowledge, in a letter sent to the PIU and dated August 24, 2007, which i s in-
cluded in the Request (Ref V/Nota 352 del 24/07/07 RN19/Autovia) the comprehensive

30 It should be noted that rural landvaluation under the best o f circumstances inevitably involves a degree
o f subjectivity. Land is not a fungible commodity equivalent to exactly replicable goods. No two plots o f
landare ever identical, so comparisons with neighboring plots as a valuation basis can never be perfect and
affected landowners will understandably see their particular land as perhaps more valuable than would oth-
ers. The situation i s exacerbated inthe case o f a tight land market with relatively few recent transactions, as
appears to be the case inthe vicinity o fthe intersectiono fNational Road 19 and Provincial Road 6, the
location (or area) most cited by the 2006 and 2007 Requesters Insuch circumstances, the emphasis should
be on affirming the validity (consistent with Bankpolicy) of the valuation principles to be applied under
local law, with an understanding that the exact value resultthey may yield is not predictable with scientific
precision. The Requestersinthis case, were they to dispute the resulting valuation, have access to the vari-
ous formal dispute resolution mechanisms (including courts) at their disposal inSanta Fe with a proven
track record for dealing equitably with such cases.
31DPV has the legal mandate to carry out the expropriations for this Project.

SantaFe RoadInfrastructure

verbal and written communication between the 2007 Requesters and the PIU and they
thank the PIUfor providing explanationsto their concernsanddemands.

LACK ADEQUACY OFTHECONSULTATIONPROCESS
OF

36. The consultation process has given numerous opportunities to all interested
parties to express their concerns. The communication channels include: meetings open
to the public at large inthe communities where the 2007 Requesters live or own proper-
ties, an electronic mailbox (inforutal90,santafe. POV.~~),mailboxes placed in 15 localities
along the road corridor, and direct telephone communication with the PIU.

37. The consultationshave been critical in the decision making process,prompting
several changes to the design of National Road 19, including road alignments of by-
passes, location of road crossings and returns, the need for special safety measures
such as bus stops, and the definition of the types of restorationprograms to be carried
out in urban areas. The case of Estacion Josefina and the location of the bypass of
Frontera is an example of how the engineering design was changed to accommodate a
community's concerns. Estaci6n Josefina, according to the first design, was supposedto
be outside the bypass but after a series of consultations, it was decided to change the by-
pass location, leaving Estacion Josefina inside the bypass to maintain its connectivity
with the city of Frontera. By accepting this change, the cost of the project increasedas a
result of the increased size of the bypass. Several other changes to the road design were
made at the request o f landowners, includingthe cases of Degano (km 23.3), Imhoff (km
3 9 , andMaurino (Km37), among many others.32

38. The 2007 Requesters have participated actively in the consultationprocess and
their concerns about access toproductive land have been accommodatedin the Project.
Some of the 2007 Requesters, like many other landowners along National Road 19 and
along most of National Roads in Argentina, have built informal access roads to their
properties. Building this type of access is extremely dangerous for road safety. The up-
grading ofNational Road 19 will end this unsafepractice by providing adequate and reli-
able access to the Autovia.

39. The Project team has actively participated in the consultation process, being
present in several community meetings, visiting affected businesses and houses along
National Road 19, exchanging emails and phone calls with landowners and meeting
some of them, including the 2007 Requesters, during Bank missions.33The ultimate
objective of Bank participation inthe consultation process is to ensure that the PSF i s in
full compliance with the ESMP and RAP. All concerns have been communicated to the
PIU for action and significant supervision effort is concentratedinmaking sure appropri-
ate answers are providedto the concerns ofthe affected population.

32Annex 5 provides a sample o fthe changes made following concerns communicated through alternative
channels by the affected landowners. This sample was extracted fiom the Aide Memoire o fthe preparation
mission o f November 2006.
33Aide Memoires ofpreparation and supervisionmissions and Back to Office Reports present details o f
Bankparticipation inthe consultationprocess.

Argentina

APPLICATIONOFBANKOPERATIONALPOLICIES

40. TheNotice of Registration indicates that the 2007 Requesters' claims may con-
stitute non compliance with thefollowing Operational Policies and Procedures: Envi-
ronmental Assessment (OPBP 4.01); Involuntary Resettlement (OPBP 4.12); Project
Supervision (OPBP 13.05); and The World Bank Policy on Disclosure of Information,
September 2002. The project design incorporates appropriate mitigation measures for
each triggered policy. Previous sections focused on the measuresadopted to comply with
OPBP 4.12. This section provides more information regarding compliance with OPBP
4.01, OPBP 13.05 andthe Disclosure Policy.

OPBP 4.01 EnvironmentalAssessment (EA)

41. Bank staff advised the PSF in thepreparation of the EA. The EA was an inte-
gral part of Project design, with continuous interaction between the EA team and de-
sign engineers. The Project team undertook an initial screening of safeguards policies
and reviewedwith the PSF which policies would be triggered by the Project and the re-
sulting requirements for the PSF. The Bank reviewedthe EA and recommended several
rounds of consultations with communities located near the ROW.

42. Based on the safeguards screening, theproposed Project was classified as Cate-
gory "B". The new road infrastructure will be located alongside the existing alignment.
Land acquisition will be requiredto expand the ROW. There will be few cases of physi-
cal displacement. Most of the impacts identified will be managed through sound engi-
neering design and construction practices according to the latest version of construction
procedures approved by DNV.34The Project area i s already heavily developed with ex-
tensive and intensive cattle ranching and high-value crops, such as soy and corn. The EA
concluded that no significant adverse sensitive, diverse or unprecedented environmental
impacts are expectedto occur.

43. ThePSF hasprepared a comprehensive and detailed ESMP in accordance with
Bank policy. The ESMP evaluates the existing conditions, identifies the potential envi-
ronmental and social issues of concern and proposes adequate mitigation measures for
eachnegative impact identifiedas well as measuresfor enhancing each identifiedpositive
impact. The views and concerns of the PAPSand local governments have beenreflected
inthe ESMP, including a road safety program, landscaping, placement of bus stops, res-
toration of certain road segments in the urban areas of communities that the improved
road will bypass, construction management, and restoration of certain rural roads. The
ESMP includes a summary chart where all the problems encountered and proposed miti-
gation and enhancement measures are mentioned, and their location is provided inalign-
mentmaps for the entire road corridor. Monitoringandsupervisionarrangements, as well
as an institutional strengthening program for the environmental unit of DPV are also in-
cluded in the ESMP. Additionally, the institutional strengthening program for the envi-
ronmental unit i s being financed by Component 2 of the Project. A summary of the

34MEGA: Manualde Evaluaci6ny Gesti6nAmbiental de Obras Viales. Revisedin2005.

SantaFe RoadInpastructure

ESMP is presented inBox 2. All programs of the ESMPinclude numerous details on de-
sign specifications, associated costs, responsibilities and schedule. Project bidding docu-
ments include all specifications regarding these programs as well as a mandate to con-
struction companies to hire an environmental and social expert. The nature of the
programs included in the ESMP indicates that an assessment of its implementation will
need to wait until construction starts. The only exception is the communication program,
which has been adequately implemented by the PSF (see section on adequacy of consul-
tation process). A new Annex of the ESMP, "Restoration of Environmental Liabilities
along the RN19 Corridor," was prepared in 2007. The assessment concluded that there
are no illegal waste dumps along the R O W of National Road 19. The report also identi-
fies all the measures that will be implementedwhen the relocation of the gasoline station
on Km 32 takes place, especially the handling and closure of potentially polluting under-
ground gasoline deposits. This Annex has been added to the ESMP report and disclosed
on the PSF website.

Box 2: Environmental and Social Management Plan
Landscaping and Re-vegetation Program: This major environmental enhancement program includes
reforestation and re-vegetationof the ROW (including separators) with native species; restoration and
augmentation of existing native forest patches; and construction of rest and recreation areas along the
ROW.
Community Road Safety: Complementingthe engineering road safety design (bus stops, special cross-
ings), this programwill implementroad safety education in communitiesalong the ROW.
Restoration of Rural Road Network: This includes the construction of special crossings and returns to
allow connectivityof the existing rural road network.
lmprovement in Urban Segment of Santo Tome: Potentially perhaps the most challenging segment of
the Project,this heavily urbanized segmentwill be subject to a special urban restorationprogram includ-
ing specific designs for boulevards,bicycle paths, parkingspaces and traffic management measures.
Urban Restoration in Bypassed Towns: Road segments that will be abandoned because of the con-
struction of bypasses will be reconstructedas urban boulevards,with special archways at the entrance
points, reforestation,illumination,and special signs that will direct traffic to use businessesand facilities
in those towns.
EnvironmentalManagementof Construction:In order to adequatelycontrol impacts during construction,
a rigorous set of good environmental practices will be applied in the Project. These specifications are
based on the existing EnvironmentalSpecificationsfor Road Construction designed by the DNV under
road programs financed by the Bank. In addition to these specifications,site specific guidelines and re-
strictions have also been incorporatedsuch as prohibitionson constructioncamp and asphalt location in
or near sensitive watercourses, demarcation of trees and patches of vegetation that need to be pro-
tected during construction, special traffic restrictions during harvest time, etc. Chance find procedures
for archaeological and paleontologicalartifacts are part of these specifications.All critical points along
the ROW (either environmentally or socially) have been identifiedand applicable preventiveand correc-
tive actions developed. Compliance with environmental specificationsduring constructionwill be part of
the engineeringsupervisionand will be monitored by the environmentalunit of the DPV.
The above programswill be complementedby:
- lnstitufional Strengthening in DPV: The environmental management capacity of the existing environ-
- mental unit of the DPVwill be improvedin order to facilitate monitoring and supervisionof the Project.
Social Communication Program: A social communication and public participation program has been
designed and implemented for Project preparation and construction to inform communities along the
road about the progress of the Project and establish a mechanism to respond to any question or con-
cern.

Argentina

OPBP 13.05 -- ProjectSupervision
44. Inaccordance with OP/BP 13.05, the Project has conducted several full supervi-
sion missions as well as smaller site visits to follow up on the implementation of landac-
quisition and the RAP as well as to address urgent matters, such as the site visit carried
out in May 2007 to review drainage modeling under the engineering designs in light of
the flooding of March 2007. Several Bank missions conducted over the past 18 months
have included representativesof Bank Management (sector leaders and sector manager),
including four missions betweenthe date the Project was approved by the Board of Di-
rectors and the day it became effective. A complete list of Bank missions during prepara-
tion and supervision is provided inAnnex 3. The supervision budget for FY08 i s consid-
ered adequate (USD 110,000) as it complies with Bank norms.

World BankPolicyon Disclosure

45. The World Bank Policy on the Disclosure of Information, 2002 requires that cer-
tain documents be publicly disclosed while the project i s under preparation. These are the
Project Information Document (PID), the Integrated Safeguards Data Sheets (ISDS), the
EAandthe resettlement instruments.

46. The PID was disclosed on December 15,2006. The final version ofthe EA report
(including the ESMP) and RAP were disclosed on December 18,2006, and the ISDS was
disclosed on December 18, 2006. Copies of the documents were made available in the
InfoShop and the Public Information Center in Buenos Aires, Argentina. The Executive
Summary of the ESMP has been available inthe municipal offices o f the local communi-
ties along National Road 19. The ESMP and RAP are in the local language (Spanish).
The ESMP and RAP have been sharedand discussedwith members of the affected com-
munities.The PIUmade available to the 2007 Requesters-after receiving a requestfrom
them-acopy ofthe ESMP andRAP.

V. MANAGEMENT'S RESPONSE

47. Management believes that the Bank has made every effort to apply its policies
andprocedures and to pursue concretely its mission statement inthe context of the Santa
Fe Road Infrastructure Project. InManagement's view, the Bank has followed the guide-
lines, policies andprocedures applicable to the matters raised by the Request. As a result,
Managementbelieves that the 2007 Requesters' rights or interests have not been, nor will
they be, directly and adversely affected by a failure of the Bank to implement its policies
andprocedures.

48. The risks offlooding will not increase as a result of the upgrading of National
Road 19. The engineering designs comply with solid and robust international standards
for the construction of highways and fully address the risks of flooding. Management
considers that the studies and simulations conducted during Project preparation and the
robustness check made after the extraordinary flooding of March 2007 lead to the conclu-
sion that the upgrading o fNational Road 19 will not worsen the hydrological situation of

SantaFe RoadInfrastructure

the area surrounding it. On the contrary, it i s expected that the risk o f flooding inthe sur-
rounding area will be reduced compared to the without-project situation. Neither the Re-
quest nor the clarification submitted to the Inspection Panel present any quantitative evi-
dence or additional analysis that challenge the engineering designs approvedby the PSF.

49. The PSF is applying a well established legal process to determine the value of
land to be acquired. Thisprocess has been assessed by the Bank, whichfound it satis-
factory, and the PSF is applying it consistently. Every land acquisition process creates
disagreements regarding the value o f land. Precisely because this i s a normal occurrence,
Management notes that PAPS in the PSF have the right to complain to the Provincial
Ombudsman and to challenge incourt the value offered by the PSF. To date, no PAP has
done so. It is important to note that the recent evidence indicates the PSF has a very low
incidence (less than 1percent) o f landacquisition cases challenged incourt, an indication
that people in the PSF believe there is adequate compensation in land acquisition proc-
esses.

50. There has beenfrequent communication between the 2007 Requesters, the PSF
and the Bank to address the concernspresented in the 2007 Request, which were al-
ready raised in the 2006 Requests. The PSF has provided detailed explanations to the
2007 Requesters, arranged meetings with several provincial authorities and made avail-
able all Project-related documentation upon request. The 2007 Requesters acknowledged
inthe information submittedto the InspectionPanelthe willingness o fthe PSFto provide
explanations to their concerns and recognizedthat the PSF acts according to the law.

51. The fact that inmany instances the engineering designs were not altered does not
meanthat the PSF and the Bank did not consider carefully the concerns raised. As noted
above, in many instances the Project was altered in response to issues raised by stake-
holders. However, sometimes this was not possible for various reasons, sometimes tech-
nical, sometimes to balance the interests across all stakeholders o f the PSF, or to comply
withprovincial laws.

52. The 2007 Requesters' claims, accompanied by Management's detailed responses,
are provided inAnnex 1.

Santa Fe RoadInfastructure

ANNEX1

The 2007 Requestersassert that con- The PSF suffered significantfloods in 2003 that affected ap-
structionof the proposed road at a proximately200,000 hectares and the majority of the city of Santa
higher elevation (+0.80m)will increase Fe. The PSF has since then adopted measuresto minimizethe
the risk of flooding of their properties. risks of flooding on this scale occurring again. The PSF did experi-
ence similar rainfall in 2007 that unfortunately affected farmland;
however, it had a much smaller impact on the city of Santa Fe
largely becauseof the measures adopted after the events of 2003.
Given the ever present risks of flooding, the ESMPdetails the
possible impactsof the improvementof National Road 19 in terms
of a wide range of hydrologicalaspects. A matrix included in the
ESMP (Chapter3, page 12) links a list of hydrologicalaspectswith
measures being taken under the Project and the legislation or pro-
cedures applicableto each aspect. A detailed description of the
hydrologicaland hydraulic aspects of the Project, included in An-
nex 4 to the ESMP, lists all recommendationsthat were carefully
considered in the engineering designs.
The constructionof a road always affects the natural drainage
flows in the surrounding area, consequently introducing risks of
flooding.Well aware of the risks and trade offs, the Projectteam
reviewedthe engineering designs of the upgrading of National
Road 19.The conclusion of the Project team's assessment is that
the engineeringdesigns comply with well-established design stan-
dards that satisfactorilyaddress the risks of flooding.
To measure rainfall drainage in the design of the new lanes at a
level +0.80, calculationsof the discharge capacity of stormwater
managementfacilities (bridges, culverts and drain pipes) under the
embankmentof the new roadway have been carried out using the
Modified RationalMethod (MRM), in line with international best
practice in highway design. This method uses the critical storm
duration to calculate the maximum volume to be discharged by a
facility under a road. The critical storm duration generates the
greatest volume of runoff. The MRM assumes that the rainfall av-
erage intensity period is equal to the actual storm duration. As a
basisfor the calculationsfor this project, the statistical data con-
cerning rainfall have been provided by INTA, the national regula-
tory authority, and design storm return frequencies of 50 years for
bridgesand 25 years for culverts and drain pipes have been
adopted.
Watershed areas have been determined using topographic
maps on a scale of 1:50,000. Using both the data and MRM, the
design inflowfor all watersheds in the area of the highway has
been obtainedand the corresponding embankment crossing facili-
ties have been designed to accommodate the flows. Many of the
existing drainagefacilities under the present roadway do not have
enough capacity for the resulting runoffs. Therefore, these facilities

Argentina

have been enlarged to give them the same capacity of discharge
as the drainage channels that will be built for the new carriageway.
In addition, new drain pipes crossing the highway embankment
have been designed at low pointswhere there were none previ-
ously, to improvethe existing drainage conditions in those points.
With all these improvements,the resulting capacity of discharge
flow of the Autovia will be much higher than the current capacity.
The quality control process of the engineering designs for up-
grading National Road 19 providesassurance that the concerns
raised regardingthe possibilitythat the upgradingwill produce a
'dam effect' are not well founded. In the quality control process,
the engineering designs were reviewed by the Bank and formally
approved by the DPV, the provincial Ministry of Water Affairs and
the DNV.

Lack of planningand marking of The PSF is responsiblefor establishingzoning districts and de-
boundaries -No delimitation of subur- limitationof areas (urban and rural), as established by Provincial
ban or rural areas, nor determination of Law 2996, article 17.
commercialsites. National Road 19 passes through three areas, or sections:
In the letter, dated August 31, 2007,
that the 2007 Requesterssubmitted to (a) urban area: 1.4 km in the city of Santo Tome;
the Panel and that the 2007 Requesters (b) suburbanarea: 8.1 km in a semi-urban area with significant
asked to be treated as a part of the Re- presenceof economic activity (industries);and
quest [...]They request a limitation of
expropriationsto 30 meters, up to kilo- (c) rural area: the remaining 126 km (from km 9.5 to the city of
meter 18 on the National Road 19. Fronterain the PSF).
In sections (a) and (b) the upgrade of National Road 19 has
been designed as a typical urban road, with 4 lanes separated by
only 2 meters,which includessidewalks and bicycle paths. There
will be no expropriations in section (a).
The 2007 Requesters do not explain why land acquisition should
be reducedto 30 meters only up to Km 18.This request does not
seemjustified as, from Km 8.1 onwards, the land is used for agri-
cultural purposes. In addition, changing the zoning from rural to
urbanwould go against the purposeof a road corridor and would
foster urban sprawl that could gradually encroach on the road.
The demand for a 30 meter ROW is also present in the 2006
Requests.Thorough attentionwas devoted from the early stages
of Project preparationto the amount of land required to upgrade
National Road 19. In the first preparation mission the Project team
requestedthe PSF to study alternative schemes to reduce land
expropriation.The PSF and the DNV indicatedthat they decided to
adopt a 120 meter ROW following the prevailingstandard for
Autopistas in Argentina. The Projectteam, as part of its due dili-
gence during Project preparation,asked the PSF to present a writ-
ten justification for the need to adopt the 120 meter ROW for the
upgradingof National Road 19. In addition, to assess the impact of
the Projecton land use, the Projectteam requestedthe PSF to
considerthe alternative of constructingthe central carriageway in
the Project instead of the northerncarriageway, minimizing expro-

SantaFe RoadInfiastructure

priations.
In a July 27, 2006 report, the PSF reaffirmed the 120 meter
width and planned location of ROW. Itjustified its decision on the
following basis:
Additional construction costs and potential negative environ-
mental externalities. A reduced ROW would not allow sufficient
lateral extraction of soil for the construction of embankments,
and the additional soil would need to be extracted from land
which would need to be purchased, and then transported to
construction sites. Consultants have estimated that additional
soil transportation costs would double the embankment con-
struction costs. Extracting soil from sites located outside the
ROW could create negative environmental liabilities. Land ex-
traction sites, without proper and continuous control, could be-
come informal solid waste dumps.
Construction of frequent returns in response to the request of
affected communities to minimize restrictions on access to
properties. Incorporatingreturns at intervals of approximately 6
kilometers in line with the outcome of consultations with af-
fected communities requires a wide separation between the
existing carriageway and the one to be financed under the
Project, in order to provide enough space for acceleration
lanes and returns compatible with the Project design speed,
without compromising road safety and the quality of the road
alignment.
Standards applied by DNV in similar projects. In similar pro-
jects under planning or execution, DNV is mandating a 120
meter ROW for improvement works aimed at the eventual
construction of a limited access freeway. Examples of this
practice are the two most recent roads being improved, Na-
tional Roads 9 and 5.
A cost comparison of different ROWSis presented in Annex 2

Possiblefuture pollutionand contamina- According to OP/BP 4.01, during Project preparation the PSF,
tion. with Bank supervision,conducted an assessment (included in the
There is a failure to demarcateand ESMP) of induced impacts derived from a better quality road. The
structure suburban and rural areas, ar- likelihood of having new productionfacilities that either used inten-
eas for manufacturing,and restrictions sively chemical productsand/or were polluting industries was con-
on the use of chemical productsand sidered very low.
contaminants. The ESMP pays special attentionto possible negative environ-
mental effects from constructionworks. These will be addressed
by adopting the provisionsof the "Handbook for Environmental
Assessment and Managementfor road works" (MEGA). The
ESMP identifiedthe following environmental impacts from con-
struction: nuisancesto population(such as re-routing traffic),
noise, construction camps and asphalt plants. Construction firms
will be responsiblefor following the EnvironmentalTechnical
Specifications included in the constructioncontracts.

23 *

Argentina

The creation of dead space (60 meters) Managementwishes to clarify the following issues raised by the
or its use to excavatethe soil needed to 2007 Requesters:
raisethe new roadway (0.8 meter) is a
potential place for trash dumps or im- Extraction of soil within ROWjustified on economic and envi-
proper use for precarioushuman or ronmental grounds. As explained in Item 2 above, a reduced
animal settlementssuch as those found ROW, as the 2007 Requesters propose, would not allow suffi-
on the outskirts of the cities of Santa Fe cient lateral extraction of soil for the construction of embank-
and Santo Tome. ments, and the remainingsoil would need to be extracted from
land to be purchased,and then transported to construction
sites. This would double the cost of embankment construc-
tion.' Extractingsoil from sites located outside the ROWcould
also create negativeenvironmental impacts that would be
much more difficult for the PSFto monitor. Land extraction
sites, without properand continuous control, could become in-
formal solid waste dumps; and
Risk of informal waste dumps and emergency settlements
minimized by the institutional set up. National Road 19 is un-
der a concessioncontract. The concession contract mandates
the concessionaireto maintain the road and do additional
works (for instancecleaning, brush removal) within the ROW.
Thus, the possibilityof having informal waste dumps and/or
emergency settlements is minimal as the ROWwill be under
daily supervision. Moreover,the evidence in Argentina clearly
supportsthe fact that this risk is very low. There are no waste
dumps and emergency settlements in the ROW of the Buenos
Aires-Rosario and Rosario-Santa Fe highway, both of which
have the same size ROW as the one of the future Autovla of
National Road 19.

Incompatibilityof the hydrologicalpro- Managementunderstandsthat by "hydrological program" the
gram and the highway project: 2007 Requestersrefer to the policiesthat the provincialgovern-
ments have designed and implementedto plan and regulate the
0 The loss of agricultural balance in
the soil causes insufficientabsorp- use of water and address problems related to flooding and water
tion and retentionof rainwater,with management.
heavy and steadily increasing run- Managementshares the 2007 Requesters' concerns about the
offs. problemsfaced by productive lands related to the agronomic bal-
ance in the soil, the lack of absorption and retention of waterways
0 For years, the hydrological program
has been based on construction of and agrees with the 2007 Requestersthat the problem of informal
canals that hasten drainage toward canals being built by landownersis generating negativeexternal-
depressionsthat are not natural ities which have a potentialto damage the productive lands of the
evacuation basins. Province.
Managementconsidersthat the studies and simulations con-
0 These flows arrive uncheckedfrom
a wide area in the northwest and ducted by well-known Argentine engineering firms under the su-
touch various critical points of the pervisionof the PSF during Project preparation and the reviews
National Road IS/Four-lane high- made after the flooding of March2007 are robust and lead to the
way. conclusion that the upgradingof National Road 19 will not worsen
the hydrologicalsituation of the area surrounding National Road

'Net savings are estimatedat USD3 million.

Santa Fe Road Inffastructure

0 Culvertsfor passageof water in the 19. On the contrary, all of the studies indicatethat the risk of flood-
highway projectare inadequate. ing in the surrounding area will be reduced compared to the case
The new raised elevation of the without the project.
roadwaywill act as a dam and the
drainage ditch on the north side will The 2007 Requestersacknowledge that the hydrologicalprob-
serve as a collector of ever greater lems that create recurrentflooding in the PSF pre-date the Santa
flows that will cause problems for Fe Road InfrastructureProject. The PSF has met regularly with the
neighboringfields and hurt resi- 2007 Requestersand other PAPSduring Project preparationand
dents of the area, as happened in implementationto discuss flooding and drainage issues.The most
December 2006, and the flooding recentcommunity meetingswere held in July 2007, where specif-
disaster of March 27-28, 2007 and it ics of the engineering designs were discussed in public hearings in
will increasethe risk of flooding in all communities located near the ROW. Floodingand drainage
the city of Santo Tome. issueswere discussed extensively during those meetingsand rep-
resentativesfrom the engineering firms and the provincial Ministry
MORE INFORMATION:"LaTierra se of Water Affairs made presentations and answered questions
muere"("The Land is Dying")of03/03/2007 about these issues. It is important to note that during a meeting
and ItsAnnexes, Chapters2 and 3, and held on the premisesof the PIU on November29,2006 in the con-
Programfor the Restorationof the Agricul- text of the Project pre-appraisal mission, one of the peoplewho
tural Potentialof the Soil inthecentral acknowledgedthat the hydrological problems pre-datethe Santa
Zone of the LasColonias Department. Fe Road InfrastructureProject was one of the 2007 Requesters.
He also acknowledgedthat resolvingthe issue of flooding in the
PSF falls outside the scope of the upgradingof NationalRoad 19
(a copy of the Minutesof the meetingwith the Requestersis in-
cluded in the Aide Memoire of the November2006 Project prepa-
ration mission,available in Project files).

Managementwould like to emphasize the commitment of the
Projectteam and the PSF to seriously address the issueof flood-
ing risks in the Project.After the flooding of March 27-28, 2007,
the Senior Engineerof the Project team (Mr. Jose Maria Alonso
Biarge) travelled to Santa Fe to re-evaluatethe engineering de-
signs (Mr. Alonso Biarge'sconclusions can be found in the Aide
Memoiredated May 2007 and available in Project files). At the
same time, the PSF stopped the national authorities' approval
processof the engineering designs and requestedthe provincial
Ministryof Water Affairs to prepare a new analysis and a re-
examinationof the designs. To double check the soundness of the
plans,the Bank and the Provincial Government independently
came to the conclusion that the engineering designs will not cause
the problems mentioned by the 2007 Requesters. In addition, it is
importantto note that the DNV needs to give its approval to all en-
gineeringdesigns produced by the PSF. The PSF shared with the
Projectteam the observations made by DNV during the prepara-
tion of the engineeringdesigns. Thus, DNV has functioned as an
additional level of quality control, reducing even further the possi-
bilitiesof mistakes in the design of drainage measures included to
address risks of flooding.

In the letter, dated August 31, 2007, A detailedtechnical analysis was made regardingthe elevation
that the 2007 Requesterssubmitted to of the road and its potentialconsequences on drainage and flood-
the Paneland that the 2007 Requesters ing. The technical standards of the design were found satisfactory

Argentina

asked to be treated as a part of the Re- by the Bank, the PSF, and the DNV (as National Road 19will re-
quest [... They request] the elimination main underthe jurisdiction of the FederalGovernment,the DNV
of the projected elevation of the layout has the mandate to approve the final design of the road).
to "level +0.80". The elevation of the layout to "level +0.80" respondsto basic
principlesof road design standards,which are specified and
adopted by DNV. In addition, the elevation of this road will improve
the transit conditions of National Road 19, a heavily used trade
corridor, and a key arterial road for local producers. Historically,
there have been instanceswhere water crossed over National
Road 19, making its use impossible. By elevating the road and
improvingdrainage conditions, the Projectwill bring a more reli-
able mode of communication/transportto the adjacent communi-
ties, including improved access by emergency vehicles in crisis
situations. Moreover, by elevating the road, the humidity conditions
of the soil will allow a reduction of maintenancecosts, improving
the sustainability of the investment.See Item 1for more details.
The 2007 Requestersallege that the design of the road, and, in
particular, its elevation by an additional 80 cm, will worsen the ef-
fects of flooding on adjacent fields, includingtheir own. Beyond a
general statement to this effect, only one reference is made to a
specific location (km 22+850m)where the proposeddrainage
pipes are deemed inadequate.A one-page calculation is attached
in the 2007 Requestto substantiatethis claim. The precipitation
and run-off in this section was modeled by the provincial Ministry
of Water Affairs in 2004 and also evaluated in detail by an inde-
pendentengineering consulting firm (Ing. Corner0 Consultora
S.A.) during the preparationof engineeringdesigns in 2006 and
again after the severe flooding that affected the area in March,
2007. The results (see Annex 6) demonstratethat the proposed
drainage pipes are sufficiently large to handle a 50-year flood
event.

[In the same letter, ...I, they request Managementconsiders that OP/BP 4.01 has been consistently
that the project must include proper followed in this Project. Drainagecapabilities of the upgraded Na-
preparationof the drainage areas, and tional Road 19will be better than the existing drainage conditions.
launchingof a parallel program to en-
courage water absorption in the soil of The establishment of a program that supports the absorption of
the whole zone, eliminating artificial di- residualwaters from the "entire area" should be pursued by the
version of water to placeswithout natu- PSF but it is an activity that clearly goes beyond the scope of the
ral watersheds. Project.
The issue of drainage canals in the entire area of central Santa
Fe was discussed in different meetings held with PAPS,in particu-
lar agricultural producers.The PSF developed a public private
partnership("Cornit& de Cuenca")with local governments and
producersto elaborate possiblesolutions to improve drainage in
the area and reduce the destructive practice carried out by some
producerswho build informaldrainage canals. Part of this discus-
sion was summarized by the PIU in notes taken during the July
2007 meetings organized with the communities along National
Road 19.

SantaFe RoadInfrastructure

Discriminationand harassment- Intimi- Managementtakes very seriously any allegations of discrimina-
dating communications tion and intimidation.To date, Management has not seen any evi-
dence of intimidatingcommunicationor discrimination by the PIU
or PSF towards the landowners. The Bank has been working with
the 2007 Requestersand other PAPs to address issues that have
arisen during project implementationand relations have beencor-
dial and constructive. On different occasions members of the Pro-
ject team asked affected landowners (including the 2006 and 2007
Requesters)to provide details of the interactionwith the DPV unit
in charge of conductingthe expropriation process.When asked
specifically about "lack of respect"from the DPV unit, the PAPs
indicatedthey had not experiencedthis problem.
Itshould be notedthat affected land owners may express their
concerns to the PIU but also to other provincial actors that are in-
dependent of the executive branch of government. Examplesof
these actors are: local governments ("presidentes comunales")
and the ProvincialOmbufsman ("Defensor del Pueblo de la
Provinciade Santa Fe"). The RAP explains all the mechanisms
available to project-affectedlandowners (see section on Compen-
sation for expropriationsthat starts on RAP page 48).
The Projectteam has found no evidence of discrimination as all
potential PAPs have been invited to Project information meetings.
There is no limitationto the participationof PAPs and the PIU has
respondedto all communicationssent through the available chan-
nels (mailboxes, e-mail, letters and phone calls). Annex D of the
RAP summarizesthe communicationactivities carried out until
December2006. Updatedinformationon the communication ac-
tivities is available upon requestfrom the PIU. The PIU registers
all communicationswith PAPs and produced minutes of all com-
munity meetings.
The Projectteam has worked closely with the PIU since the start
of Project preparationto make sure all concerns raised by poten-
tially affected people receivea fast and clear answer from the PIU.
The 2007 Requestersclearly acknowledge, in a letter dated Au-
gust 24, 2007, which is included in the Request (Ref V/Nota 352
del 24/07/07 RNlS/Autovia) the comprehensive verbal and written
communication betweenthe 2007 Requesters and the PIU and
they thank the PIU for providingexplanations to their concerns and
demands.

The main mandate of the Ombudsman office is to protectthe rightslinterestsof its citizens and the com-
munity against actionslomissionscarried out by the publicadministration(including its agencies)which im-
ply, inter alia, abusive,arbitrary,illegitimate,discriminatoryand negligent practicesin connection with the
performanceof its functions, or which might be perceivedas a deviationof its power (see articles 1 and 22
of ProvincialLaw No. 10396).

Argentina

In the 1970sthere were plans for con- The Governmentof Argentina plannedthe upgrading of National
struction of a four-lane highway border- Road 19 in the early 70s. For that purpose, it preparedthe corre-
ing National Road 19. Expropriationsfor sponding cadastre measurementand acquired 660 hectares in the
that project were planned and surveys PSF. To carry out the works to be financed under this Project,the
done. This data was used to calculate PSF needs to buy approximately650 additional hectares.The
the area neededfor the new four-lane Province hired three engineeringfirms to update the cadastre in-
highway. formation of the affected properties.The cadastre information is
Using these figures for the majority reviewedand approved by the Direccidn de Cafastroy Carto-
of the frontage propertiesaffected grafla. Whenever inconsistenciesare found, the cadastre meas-
would result in an area up to 15 or urements are rejectedand corrections are made. Official offers for
20% larger than that reported in land acquisition are only made after the approval of the cadastre
notes 192, 193, 197, and 198 of the by the Direccidn de Catasfro.
Project ImplementationTeam. The DPV, which is in charge of land acquisition in the PSF, has
There was inequity in the appraisal been signing voluntary agreements (Conveniosde Avenirniento,
of the propertiesto be expropriated, see below) for the purchaseof land using cadastre informationthat
because for adjacent properties corresponds to the final road design. It should be noted that in the
with the same productive potential event affected landownersidentify problems in the cadastre infor-
there were differences of up to 70% mation they can contact the PIU to request the revision of the ca-
in the settlements proposed. dastre. This indeed is what happenedwith one of the 2007 Re-
questers, and his concerns were addressed and solved through
They did not respectthe amounts, the mechanisms in place and the prompt responsefrom the PIU.
terms, and form of paymentspeci-
fied in the Bank management`scri- The land acquisition process is governed by specific laws in the
teria, as set forth in point 36 of the PSF.3The Provinciallaws providethat the expropriating entity is
Inspection Panel'sreport that was authorized to reach Conveniosde Avenirnienfo with affected land-

received. owners in connectionwith the expropriation of their land. In case
an agreement cannot be reached,the expropriating entity initiates
judicial proceedings in the PSF courts to resolvethe dispute over
the amount of compensationto be paid. It should be noted that if
the expropriation case goes to court, the expropriating entity shall,
at the time of filing the complaint, deposit in "escrow" (con-
signacidnjudicial) with the court the amount of compensation of-
fered to the affected landowner.The affected owners also have
the possibilityof addressingtheir claims to the Provincial Om-
budsman.The PSF has a proven track record of reaching volun-
tary agreements for the acquisition of land. Statistical information
about the outcome of previous processesof land acquisition was
obtained during project Preparation. It shows that for works initi-
ated between 2004 and 2006, there was a challenge regarding
only four out of 455 plots of land (0.9 percent of total plots) with
respect to the amount of compensationoffered by the PSF in the
provinciaI courts.
The PSF agreed with the Bank to follow Bank compensation
policies for land acquisition. The supervision carried out by the
Projectteam has revieweda sample of the administrative files that
include the valuation of lands and structures and all administrative
documents that are used to elaborate a monetary offer. The Pro-
ject team has found no inconsistenciesin the principles followed

See paragraphs 31-34, and footnotes 18-28, inthe Narrative section o fthe Management Response.

SantaFe RoadInfiastructure

by DPV to value the affected land and structures.
The procedureof land acquisition is explained in detail in the
RAP (see pages48-61), a final version of which was made public
in December,2006 and is available to all interested parties.A
summary of the valuation methodologyof affected land followed by
the DPV is the following:
According to article 17 of Provincial Law No. 7534 the amount
of compensation("indernnizaci6n'?to be paid shall be equal to
the objective value ("valor0bjetivo"j of the land plus any direct
and immediatedamage caused by the expropriationof the af-
fected land.
Pursuantto the Provincial Law, DPV is the entity in charge of
carryingout the valuation of land affected to road projects. In
order to carry out said mandate,the DPV may seek informa-
tion from the ProvincialCadastre, which it does under the pre-
sent case.
Pursuantto article 25 of Provincial Law No. 2996 -"Valuation
and Cadastre of Real Estate" (as amended), the valuation of
realestate shall be based on objective background information
("antecedentesobjetivos")which shall not take into account
personal nor incidentalfactors. Moreover, article 25 of the
same Law provides in part that the amount of compensation
("justiprecio")to be paid must be adjusted to the time in which
payment is made.
The following are the elements that the valuation of rural land
shall take into account:
(a) the soil configuration,the quality of the land and the un-
dergroundwater, the productivity of the land (including its
subdivision,the intensity of its economic productioncom-
paredwith the predominant land production in said area,
the real renvincome ("rentareal'? set in (private) contracts
or public deeds or the presumed income ("rentapresunta'?
that takes into account statistical information on estimated
productionand the production average prices for a range
periodof not less than 5 years; and
(b) as supplementalbackground information,the owner's tax
return,the current fiscal valuation, the average sales prices
(since the last valuation) of similar land within the area,
court rulingson expropriation cases, the valuations carried
out by official mortgagefinancial institutions, the informa-
tion that may be provided by the provincial tax authority,
and the informationreflected in the real estate registry,
municipalcadastre registries (for urban and semi-urban
land) and the Provincial Directorate of Cadastre and Map-
ping ("Direcci6nProvincial de Catastro y Catfografla").
Once the DPV obtains the price valuation mentioned above,
and in order to determine the objective value the DPV also

Argentina

seeks informationfrom: (a) banks, real estate agencies, coop-
eratives ("Cooperativas'?and the municipaIity ("Comuna") with
respectto the price per hectare;and (b) (i) real estate publica-
tions, and local and national newspapersin respectof physical
improvements/fixtures;and (ii) inter alia, the INTA in respectof
the value of the crops.
Thereafter,and before the DPV makes a final compensation
offer ("valorobjefivo" plus any direct and immediatedamage
caused by the expropriation of the affected land) to the af-
fected landowner,the DPV also takes into account a series of
characteristicsrelated to the affected land so as to increase
the final price to be paid to the landowner,which increase shall
not exceed 30 percent of the amount of the land valuation is-
sued by the ProvincialCadastre.The characteristicsthat the
DPVtakes into account include, inter alia, the location of the
land (for example, the proximity of the land to trade centers is
an importantfactor) and the expropriated surface (such as if
the land has been affected in whole or in part).
Finally,the DPV notifies the affected owner of the expropria-
tion and at the same time offers the owner the final compensa-
tion, as described above.
Managementhas made all possibleefforts to assess the validity
of the allegations of inequity in the appraisal of properties. Specifi-
cally the Projectteam asked the PSF to take the two examples
provided by the 2007 Requesters and explain the justification for
the differences in the appraisal. The PSF sent a letter on October
8, 2007 (available in Projectfiles) where it says that the plot cited
by the 2007 Requesters in Example 1 (Plano 69157/1973) will not
be subject to any expropriation.The letter indicates that the differ-
ence in example two is explained by the very different quality of
soil.

Unfair appraisals. The amounts, payment Evidencecollected in meetings heldwith landownerswho signed a
terms and timeframes accordingto the voluntary agreement indicates the PSF is carrying out the land
criteriaof the Banks Managementex- acquisition process in an equitable way. To further study the appli-
pressed in point36 of the report received cation of the agreed valuation of land, Bank Managementwill re-
from the InspectionPanelare notre- view in detail a sample of 20 cases in which voluntary agreements
spected. have been signed, as part of its next supervision mission.
In the letter, dated August 31, 2007, the
2007 Requestersask for the application
of a fair system for compensation for
the lands to be used for construction of
the four-lane highway.

11. Restrictionof economic and social de-
velopment-Concerning rural activities The trends cited by the 2007 Requesters (disappearance of
dairy farms, the gradual replacement of cattle farming by soy) are
in the zone of influenceof National a realitv in the PSF and the whole PamDa Reaion in Araentina. but

Santa Fe Road Infastructure

Road IS/Four-lane highway they clearly pre-datethe Santa Fe Road Infrastructure Project.
The disappearanceof dairying as a While the Project cannot by itself reversethese trends, the upgrad-
rural family activity in recentyears ing of National Road 19 is expected to be beneficialto economic
has led to the end of thriving eco- development.When a road is upgradedand access to it main-
nomic activity and depopulationof tained or even improved,as is the case of National Road 19,the
the zone. value of nearby land increases,as transportationcosts to demand
centers decrease.A more reliable National Road 19 might influ-
Subdivision of the land (minifundo), ence firms' locationdecisions,which could translate intojob crea-
condominiums, and landownership tion activitiesfor the communitiesalong the road. It is worth noting
by elderly persons has encouraged that if the zoning district is changed to increasethe urban area, as
farming by contractorsor tenants. the 2007 Requesterssay they would prefer, the trends described

This makes it impossibleto carry on above would be aggravated.

dynamic activities, and initiationof At the request of affected communities,ground-level inter-
new activities (farms, orchards, changes with speed reducers are includedevery 6 kilometers or
ranches,etc.) would demand non- less. Moreover,the future freeway will include a collector road to
existent economic resources. maintainaccess to the road and, as part of the Bankfinanced pro-
ject, intersectionswith unpaved rural roadswill be upgraded. This
will have a positive effect on rural connectivity and will reduce the
cost of doing business for new developments (farms, vegetable
gardens and other productiveactivities mentioned by the 2007
Requesters).

The proposed projectwill mean effec- The upgrading of National Road 19 will foster productivity and
tive loss of use of the single paved road competitivenessthrough cost reductions in transport and logistics.
in a large area, and the restrictedac- It is expected that an improved National Road 19will open devel-
cess implied by the four-lane highway opment opportunities for the local communities, as agricultural
will perpetuate passiveeconomic activ- productionand agribusinesses located in the area will benefit from
ity, with stagnation or recession. reduction in logistics costs. The economic evaluation conducted
during Project preparationestimated the NPV of the proposed Pro-
ject at USD 63 million.
The upgrading of National Road 19 includesthe construction of
improvedaccess to productivefacilities. Currently, most of these
access roads are informaland dangerous.The new Autovia will,
by no means, create any restrictionof use or access. On the con-
trary, having an improved road, with many roundaboutsto facilitate
interconnectionof productivefacilities in the hinterland of National
Road 19, will provide more dynamism and economic opportunities
to the PSF.
Traffic levels along National Road 19 in the territory of the PSF
have been growing significantly. Betweenthe last study conducted
by the DNV in 2003 and the one carried out for Project preparation
in March2006, AADT grew approximately40 percent. Traffic com-
positionchanged, increasingthe relative importanceof trucks,
which in some segments of the road account for more than 45
percentof total traffic. According to the latest traffic study, it is ex-
pected that the averageAADT will exceed 7,500 by 2015 along all
segments of the road in the PSF, and 10,000 along the segments
close to urban areas. Observedtraffic levels havejustified the up-
grading of National Road 19.

Argentina

In the letter, dated August 31, 2007, When the 2006 Requestsfor Inspection(RQ06/05 and
that the 2007 Requesterssubmitted to RQ06/05-2)were registered,the Projectwas in a pre-appraisal
the Panel and that the 2007 Requesters stage. The Project is currently under supervision and progress is
asked to be treated as a part of the Re- being made on all components.The Project team has conducteda
quest, the 2007 Requesters referto detailed Projectsupervision (for a list of missions see Annex 3),
their previous Requestsand state that with special emphasis on the implementationof the RAP. Two 10-
the situation of the project has not im- cal consultants have been hired to follow up on implementationof
provedand now facts have developed the ESMAPand RAP. They travel to Santa Fe every two months.
that support their previousconcerns,
especiallythe progressiveflooding in The preparationprocessfollowed by the PSF and Bank team-
the area of National Road 19. from project identificationup to the current stage of supervision-
has incorporateda review of the specific concerns raised by the
2007 Requestersregardingthe upgrading of National Road 19.
The consultationprocesscontinues; for example, consultation
meetingshave been organized in several communities along Na-
tional Road 19.The 2007 Requesters have participated in these
meetings.
Managementwould like to emphasize that the consultation
process has addressedconcerns raised by the affected popula-
tion. The Aide Memoireof the November2006 mission (available
in Project files) provides many examples of changes in the design
of the road to respondto specific needs and concerns of landown-
ers. Annex 5 presentsa report that summarizes some changes to
the design adopted following requests made by affected landown-
ers (the report is extracted from the Aide Memoire of the Novem-
ber 2006 preparation Mission).
An example of the successful implementation of the RAP is the
programto relocatethe rural General San Martin school. A meet-
ing was organized in June 2007 with representatives of the provin-
cial Ministryof Education, parents,teachers, the police and repre-
sentativeof the communal government. This is the first
consultationof this type in the PSF; previously there has never
been a processof consultation undertakenwhen a school needed
to be relocated as a consequenceof an infrastructure project.

We have made our complaints in writing The Projectteam and the PIU have interacted with the 2007 Re-
and personallyon the following occa- questers in many more instancesthan those pointed out by them
sions: 4/3/07 to the World Bank; 7/10/07 in the Request (seeAnnex 4).
to the SPIFE [Undersecretariatfor In-
vestment Projectsand External Financ- Managementand the PIU have carefully responded to concerns
ing]; 7/19/07to the Bank; 8/8/07 to the raised by the 2007 Requesters in their letters. The 2007 Request-
SPIFE; and 8/27/07 to the Bank and the ers clearly acknowledge, in a letter dated August 24, 2007, which
SPIFE. The repliesand explanations is included in the Request(Ref V/Nota 352 del 24/07/07
did not offer solutions to the problems RN19/Autovia)the intenseverbal and written communication be-
posed, becausethey did not alter the tween the 2007 Requestersand the PIU and they thank the PIU
original proposal.The letters sent on for providingexplanationsto their concerns and demands.
8/27/07to the SPIFE and the Bank With respect to the letter sent on 08/27/07 it should be noted
were not answered. that the Task Team Leader asked the 2007 Requesters to send a

SantaFe Road Infrastructure

letter to the PIU, asa follow up to a telephoneconversation held
on August 20, 2007 (Phone records are availablefrom GSD).
Given that the Projectteam had suggested this letter be sent to
the PIU, it understoodthat the Bankwas copied for information
only. Moreover,duringthe telephone conversationof August 20,
2007, the Task Team Leader informedthe 2007 Requestersthat a
Bank supervision missionwould travel to Santa Fe the week of
September 10, 2007. The missionsubsequently took place and
there were further consultationswith the 2007 Requestersand
other PAPS.
Managementreaffirms its commitmentto the ongoing consulta-
tion processthat has generated meaningfuland broad participa-
tion and open dialogue which has allowed all interested parties not
only to express their views about the project, but to help design,
improve, and implementtheir input.

Argentina

ANNEX2
JUSTIFICATIONSTHE RIGHTOFWAY ADOPTEDFORTHE
OF
UPGRADING OF NATIONAL ROAD19

DNV, the entity incharge ofthe federal network, to which NationalRoad 19belongs, has
defined a ROW 120 meters wide for existing and future freeways, in Argentina consid-
ered to be Category I(standard set by DNV). National Road 19, being part of a bi-
oceanic corridor, i s consideredCategory I.

The PSF reaffirmed the 120meter widthand plannedlocation ofthe ROW. Itjustified its
decision on the following basis.

0 Additional construction costs and potential negative environmental externalities.
A reduced ROW would not allow sufficient lateral extraction of soil for the con-
struction of embankments, and the remaining soil would need to be extracted
fiom land to be purchased, and then transported to construction sites. Consultants
estimated that additional soil transportation costs would double the cost of em-
bankmentconstruction (see below for a cost comparison with alternative ROWs).
Extracting soil from sites located outside the ROW could create negative envi-
ronmental liabilities. Landextraction sites, without proper and continuous control,
could become informal solid waste dumps.

0 Construction offiequent returns in response to the request of affected communi-
ties to minimize restrictions on access toproperties. Incorporatingreturns at about
6 kilometer intervals in line with the outcome of consultations with affected
communities requires a wide separationbetween the existing carriageway and the
one to be financed under the Project, in order to provide enough space for accel-
eration lanes and returns compatible with the Project design speed, without com-
promising road safety andthe quality ofthe road alignment.

The ROW establishedby the DNV will allow the lateral extraction of two million
cubic meters of soil for the construction of the embankments for the new roadway and
designed improvements inthe existing one, apossibilitythat is critical, given the very flat
area of the works. This ROW thus amounts to a savings of USD 3.5 million (see Table
A2-1 below). Ifthe ROW were to be reducedto minimize the expropriation area - to 90
meters, for instance - the two million cubic meters of soil for the embankments would
have to be excavated from borrow pits more than 200 meters away from the ROW. This
would require a lot o f additional acquisition of land by the contractor, according to the
bidding documents, and impose additional costs for transportation to the work site.

The following table and graphics show the differences for ROWs of 90 and 100 meters,
compared withthe 120meters adoptedfor the Project:

SantaFe RoadInfastructure

Table A2-1

Right Expro- UnitPrice Total Volume of Additional Additional Additional Difference in Difference
ofWay priation ofLand Exp. Lateral volume out unitprice for cost of soil Expro- Total
(m) Area(ha) Cost Extraction of ROW (**) soil transport transport priationCost cost
(AG$) (MM$) (*) (m3) (m3) (AG$/m3) (AGS$) (***I
_-
(AG$) CAW)
90 624.3 20,000 12.5 0 1,903,488 7.92 15,075,625 4,162,000 10,913,625
100 693.7 20,000 13.9 634,496 1,268,992 7.92 10,050,417 2,774,000 7,276,427
120 832.4 20,000 16.7 1,903,488 0 7.92

2 000 000, 160
14 0
0VoS4meof laleral soli 120 transpollation

;11000000-
200 000 extractcon f 100
,E additional land
8 0 acquisition (referred to
800 000-. Adomional mi.me of SOI -$ 6 0 120rn)
600 000 10 be lransponed 0DifferenceinTotal Cost
400 000 ~-(refenealo-120mj
----- 4 0

200 000 2 0
I
0----- 0 0
90 100 120 90 100
Right-of-way (m) Right-of-way (m)

Furthermore, the 120 meter ROW established by the DNV allows space for two
collector roads and their ditches inthe last phase as a freeway, inaddition to the two main
roadways. It also increases road safety for the road users, given the existence o f many
direct accessesto the properties along the existing road.

The following three cases of established ROWSare interesting comparative ex-
amples: (i) the DPV of Buenos Aires Province has established a ROW o f 100 meters for
two-lane roads; (ii) the highway Santa Fe-Rosario the ROW i s 150 meters but, inaddi-
in
tion, there are two collector roads 20 meters wide each, resulting in a total of 190 meters;
and (iii) the highway under construction between Rosario and C6rdoba has a ROW o f
120 meter because it is a Category Iroad, like the one financed by the project.

Argentina

ANNEX3
LISTOF BANKMISSIONS

2005

17- April 2006
l8 I
2006

22- 1
23 May 2006

Tomas Serebrisky,Jose Ma-
ria Alonso, Juan Manuel Financial Management
2006 Preparation Campana, Lucia Spinelli, Fer- Specialist (Alejandro
nando Brunstein,Juan San- Solanot) traveled June
5-8 June guinetti 12-,6
Tornas Serebrisky,Juan Da-
12- II
14 July 2006 Preparation vid Quinteros, Elena Correa,
Fernando Brunstein
Social and En-
30- vironmental Juan David Quinteros,
31 August 2006 Pre-Appraisal Fernando Brunstein
I Informal mission to ana-
7- August 2006 Technical Is- Juan Manuel Campam Luck lyze technical informa-
l8 I mission
Preparation -
sues Spinelli tion with DPV
'2"; 1 Pre-Appraisal
September 2006 Of Technical Jose Maria Alonso, Juan Ma-
1 Issues nuel Campana, Lucia Spinelti
Tomas Serebrisky, Lucia Spi-
nelli, Jose Luis Irigoyen,Al-
2006 berto Ninio, Alexandra Beze- Meetings with 2006
redi, Juan David Quintero, Requesters
Elena Correa, Reynaldo Pas-
tor
2006 Tomas Serebrisky, Lucia Spi- InWorld Bank's Buenos
Appraisal nelli, Solanot, Mac Gaul. Aires Office
Tomes Serebrisky, Elena Co-
VC for Social rrea, Fernando Brunstein, vc inWorld Bank Bue-
14 March 2007 and Environ- Lilian Pedersen, Lucia Spinelli nos Aires offices to dis-
mental Issues (WB) Corzo and Vazquez cuss and envi-
lPll I\
,, ,-, ronmental issues

2007 1st Followup Fernando Brunsteinand Lilian Implementationof
ESMAP visit Pedersen ESMP and PER
21- Technical Mission to assess tech-
25 I May 2007 Issues Jose Maria Alonso nical design after flood-
ing of March 2007
2007 2"aFollow up Lilian Pedersen and Lucia Implementationof
ESMAPVisit Spinelli ESMP and PER
June 2007 3'aFollow up Fernando Brunsteinand Lilian Implementationof
ESMAPVisit Pedersen ESMP and PER
Participate in Workshops in Frontera,
2007 Project Dis- Fernando Brunsteinand Lucia San Jer6nim0, Sa Per-
semination Spinelli eyra, San Agustin and
Workshops Santo Tome

SantaFe RoadInfastructure

(community
meetings)
Tom& Serebrisky,Juan Ma-
nuel Carnpana,Lucia Spinelli,
September 2007 S ~ Fernando Brunstein, Lilian
~ ~ ~ ~ n
Pedersen,Alonso Zalzar,
Alejandro Solanot
Tomls Serebrisky, Elena Co-
October- 2o07 Supervision rrea, Reidar Kvarn, Reynaldo Meetingwith 2007 Re-
November Mission Pastor, Franz Drees-Gross, questers
Albert0 Ninio
Note:

Argentina

ANNEX4
COMMUNICATIONS BETWEEN 2007 REQUESTERS, PIuAND THEWORLD BANK
Form of
Date Cornmunica- Name Issue Date
tion Reply

Aide Memoire of meeting be-
29-NOV-06 Meeting Jullier,
Hector tween World Bank (WB) staff
and Mr. Jullier.

PIU requested on behalf of Mr
Jullier meetingswith: the Min-
4-Dec-06 Note Jullier,
Hector istry of Water Affairs, the Mu-
nicipalityof Santo Tome, and
the CoordinationMinistry

5-Dec-06 Fax Jullier,
Hector Fax sent by Mr. Jullier received

Email sent to Mr. Jullier and
6-Dec-06 E-mail Jullier, Arriola copyingthe note sent
Hector by PIU to the ministriesmen-
tioned before.

Report of meetingheld on the
28-Feb-07 Meeting Jullier, 26th of Feb 2007, between Mr.
Hector Jullier and officialsfrom the
Ministry of Water Affairs

Notefrom Mr. Jullier to Mr.
Felipe Saez (WB) attaching
28-Feb-07 Note Jullier, copies of the notessent to
Hector Ministry of Water Affairs and to
the Planning and Control Sub-
Secretariat

Note sent by WB to Mr. Jullier,
5-Mar-07 Note Jullier,
Hector informingthat his concernes
had been redirectedto PIU
Notefrom Mr. Jullier to Mr.
Axel Van Trotsenburg(WB)
9-Apr-07 Note Jullier, reportingthey have not had
Hector any news about resettlements
and leaving much uncertainty
(fax)
Note from Mr. Jullier to Mr. WB replyto Mr Jullier that his
9-Apr-07 Fax Jullier, Saez (We)requestingto open 18Apr-
Hector a gap on ruta 19 Km 21 to 07 communicationwas sent to Mr.
clear water from flood Francisco Sobrero

24-Jul- PIU release of Note352 00301 -
07 0056987-5with copies of file to
the MAH and DPV

10-JuI-07 Note Jullier,
Hector Various Fax form WB to Mr. Jullier Com-
31-Jul- municatingthat throughthe Let-
07 ter sent by the ManagementUnit
on July 24th, answers to his
inquires had been provided

Requestsinformationabout
8Aug-07 Interview Hector
Jullier' socio-economicstudies, water
issues and access to his land

SantaFe Road Infiastructure

Note 387 sent to Ministryof Pro-
NoteOf Mr'Jullier to 'Iu "g- duction, Ing. Ceretto. File 00301
27-Aug-07 Note Jullier~ gesting to revise certain as- 27-Aug- - 0056987 - 5. Documents pro-
Hector peck of proposedworks 07 vided by Mr. Jullier relatedto soil
problems and productiveareas
are sent.

This matrixdoes not detail the dates of telephone conversationsheld between the PSF and Mr. Jullier and the
Projectteam and Mr. Jullier (the Team leader called Mr Jullier on July 20, 2007 and August 20, 2007).

Argentina

ANNEX5
SAMPLE OF MODIFICATIONS
TO THE ROADDESIGN
FOR THE UPGRADING OF
NATIONAL ROAD19AS FOLLOW TO AFFECTEDLANDOWNERS'
UP CONCERNS

GOVERNMENTOF SANTA FE-MINISTRY OFWORKS, PUBLICSERVICES,AND HOUSING
-PROVINCIAL HIGHWAY DIRECTORATE-DEPUTY SECRETARIATFOR INVESTMENT
PROJECTSAND EXTERNALFINANCING
Public Bid 73/05
"Social and Environmental Study, National Road 19, section: National Roads 11to 158

CLAIMS OF AFFECTED PARTIES REQUESTING ROUTE CHANGES

Degano Case
Km 23.3
Property record: 092900-091606/0000
Owners: Degano, Sergio Gabriel.
Total area: 31.23 hectares

Mr. Deganoparticipatedin the August 7 informationmeeting held in San Agustin, at
which time he left his e-mail address, to which we sent him three e-mails with links to the
ESMP, preliminary project planimetric maps, and the Planfor Expropriationsand Reset-
tlement.

On September 3, at the offices of the Project ImplementationUnitfor the National Road
19 upgrading project,there was a meeting requested by Sergio Degano and Willian Gilli,
in which Hector Corzo, DanielTuma, and FranciscoSobrerotook part. Mr. Degano re-
quested more information on the areas of his propertyto be expropriated. He was told
about the characteristicsof the project, and that it was planned to preserve land on his
property as a rest area. About 36 percent of his lot would be affected, as shown by the
blue or cyan line in the following figure:

GOVERNMENTOF SANTA FE MINISTRY OF WORKS, PUBLICSERVICES,AND HOUSING
-
-PROVINCIAL HIGHWAY DIRECTORATE -DEPUTY SECRETARIAT FORINVESTMENT
PROJECTSAND EXTERNALFINANCING
Public Bid73/05
"Social and Environmental Study, NationalRoad 19, section: NationalRoads 11to 158

Mr. Degano requestedthat area not be taken, because his property has 31 economically
productivehectaresthat support two families. His request was noted and he was told
that it would be transmitted to the highway designersfor consideration.

Finally,in a meeting held on November27, DPV told the environmental consultant
that after evaluationwith the engineeringconsultant itwas decided not to locatea
rest area on this property.There would only be a turnaround, so the affected area
would be reducedas the owner requested. As shown in the graph, this will involve
the removal of the trees in the northernsector of said area.

~ S e l T l 2 U&l asociados s.a
Consultori

GOVERNMENT OF SANTA FE MINISTRY OFWORKS, PUBLICSERVICES, AND HOUSING
-
-PROVINCIAL HIGHWAY DIRECTORATE-DEPUTY SECRETARIATFOR INVESTMENT
PROJECTSAND EXTERNAL FINANCING
Public Bid73/05
"Social and Environmental Study, National Road 19, section: National Roads 11to 158

Don Case
Km 14.95
Property record: 092900-091629001
Owner: Don, Maria
Total area: 32.68 hectares

The parcel in questionis used for fruit farming, specifically raspberries.According to the
preliminary proposal,three barns and a housewould be affected.
Since this could adversely affect the owner's livelihood,she requested a change in the
route. In a meeting with Mr. Garzon (DPV Lands Division),an agronomist was assigned
to analyze the case.
The case continues under study.

GOVERNMENT OF SANTA FE MINISTRY OF WORKS, PUBLICSERVICES, AND HOUSING
-
-PROVINCIAL HIGHWAY DIRECTORATE -DEPUTY SECRETARIAT FORINVESTMENT
PROJECTSAND EXTERNAL FINANCING
Public Bid73/05
"Social and Environmental Study, NationalRoad 19, section: NationalRoads 11to 158

Imhoff Case
Km 35
Property record: 0931000926650000
Total area: 52.138 hectares
Owner: Imhoff,Victor
Mr. Imhoff's parcel is in San Jeronimo del Sauce, a communitythat the road will bypass.
He is engaged in dairy farming on the property.

Means SUBJECT
DATE
Sa Pereira June 29 Notifiedthat he was surveyed, has no opposition to the project, and offers
mailbox to sell the complete property ([handwritten]note attached)
San Jer6nimo Aug. 10 Attended the information meeting on the preliminary project proposal and
\sawthe available information
E-mail I Aua. 11 IReauestedmore informationon the Droiect and maDs of the route

I Sept. 28 ]Reportfrom the IBRD country director on a complaint lodgedwith the In-
lset up a meeting with engineeringcoordinator Ing. G6mez

a Serman& asociados s.a
Consulton

GOVERNMENT OF �ANTA FE-MINISTRY OFWORKS, PUBLIC SERVICES,AND
-PROVINCIAL HIG IRECTORATE -DEPUTY SECRETARIATFOR ~NVESTMENT
~ R O ~ C AND EXTERNALFINANCING
T S
Public Bid73/05
"Social and Environmental Study, NationalRoad 19,section: National Roads 11to 158

lvisit I Oct. 26 IMeetingwith Mr. Juan Pablo Garz6n (DPV Lands Division)
Visit Oct. 27 Visit to his property by Messrs. Sobrero and Vissio
E-mail Oct. 30 Accepts the memorandumwith a commitment to come and sign it

We studied two variations of the route as shown on the attached planimetric map,Varia-
tion 1 in green and Variation 2 in blue. The green VI is very close to the original route
studied years ago by the National Highway Directorate (1974). The blue V2 retainsthe
first curve in the same position and connectswith the original of the preliminary project
before the intersectionof the SJ del Sauce exit.
The green is the one that leaves a smaller remnant on the south end of Mr. Imhoff's
field, but it is worse for the neighboring propertiesof Carlos Muller and Albertina Muller.
On the other hand,the blue is less harmfulto them and leaves a somewhat larger rem-
nant on the south of the lmhoff property. It seems to bethe fairest option.

Areas

The following table shows how each of the variants would affect or not affect given par-
cels, and how they would change the areas to be expropriated:

Parcel Affected North rem- South rem- % of area
area TOM area nant nant affected
Original Solution in Prelim. Project

Parcel 7: CignettiJose Maria (fraction) 16.160 71.741 55.581 22.5%
Parcel9: Theiler Yolanda Maria et al 6.080 47.098 41.018 12.9%

GOVERNMENT OF SANTA FE-MINISTRY OF WORKS, PUBLIC SERVICES,AND HOUSING
-PROVINCIAL HIGHWAY DIRECTORATE-DEPUTY SECRETARIAT FOR INVESTMENT
PROJECTSAND EXTERNAL FINANCING
Public Bid73/05
"Social and Environmental Study, NationalRoad 19, section: National Roads 11 to 158

IIParcel IO: CastelliAmelia et al 1
Parcel 11: PeriottiAbel Bernardo 1 - - - - 11 - - 11 - - 1 I
Parcel 12: Muller Carlos Alberto + one 0.150 16.868 0.9%
I
I1 17.018
ParcelA: Bieler. Ariel Abel + one 1.440 7.546 6.106 19.1%
I Parcel B: Bieler.Ariel Abel + one III 1.360 I 7.023 III 5.663 III - III 19.4% I

I Parcel 14: Muller Faustino I
Parcel D:LacteosSan Jeronimo 1.230 7.590 5.364 0.996 16.2%
Parcel 15: MullerAlbertina 5.110 35.340 1.470 28.760 14.5%
I 1 1 1 I
42.390

Variant 1 (Similar to the route estab- Affected Total area North rem- South rem- % of area
lished by DNV in the 1970s) (green) I area nant nant affected
I Parcel7: CignettiJose Maria (fraction) I 16.153 I 71.741 I 55.588 I - I 22.5% 1
Parcel9: Theiler Yolanda Maria et al I 3.231 I 47.098 I 43.867 I 6.9%

I Parcel 11: PeriottiAbel Bernardo I 2.826 I 57.230 I - I 54.404 I 4.9% I

ParcelA:Bieler. Ariel Abel + one I 7.546 I
I Parcel B: Bieler.Ariel Abel + one I - I 7.023 I - I - I I

I Parcel 14: Muller Faustino I 1.707 I 40.005 I - I 38.298 I 4.3% I
Parcel D:LacteosSan Jeronimo 0.001 7.590 7.589 0.01%
Parcel 15: MullerAlbertina 7.549 35.340 6.767 21.024 21.4%
43.386
Variant 2 (blue) Adopted Affected North rem- South rem- % of area
area area nant nant affected
Parcel7: Cignetti Jose Maria (fraction) 15.315 71.741 56.426 21.3%

Parcel9: Theiler Yolanda Maria et al 3.510 47.098 43.588 7.5%

Parcel IO: CastelliAmelia et al 0.441 35.895 35.454 1.2%

Parcel 11: PeriottiAbel Bernardo 2.409 57.230 54.821 4.2%

Parcel 12: Muller Carlos Alberto + one 4.216 17.018 2.678 10.124 24.8%
ParcelA:Bieler. Ariel Abel + one - 7.546
Parcel B: Bieler,Ariel Abel + one - I 7.023 I
Parcel C: Suace RemateS. A. - I 40.030 I

Parcel 14: Muller Faustino 0.179 40.005 39.826 0.4%

Parcel D:LacteosSan Jeronirno n967 7.590 6.623 12.74%

USerltIlin& asociados s.a
Cenrultora

GOVERNMENTOF SANTA FE-MINISTRY OF WORKS, PUBLICSERVICES,AND HOUSING
-PROVINCIAL HIGHWAY DIRECTORATE-DEPUTY SECRETARIAT FORINVESTMENT
PROJECTSAND EXTERNALFINANCING
Public Bid 73/05
"Social and Environmental Study, National Road 19, section: National Roads 11to 158

Parcel 15:MullerAlbertina 6.636 35.340 2.090 26.614 18.8%
41.933

BUDGETS

According to the consultant'sstudies,the budgetsfor the three alternatives, excluding
expropriation costs, are as follows:

Original solution in the preliminary project: $8,144,017.15
Variant 1 (green) $9,860,445.49 ++ 21 %
.I%
Variant 2 (blue) $9,771,521.26 20.0

V I costs $1,716,428.34more than the original.
V2 costs $1,627,504.11 more than the original.

We also evaluatedthe possibilityof putting a connectingculvert underthe four lanes of
the highway to link both sectors (north and south) so that cattle could circulate between
them. This solution could be applicableto any of the three alternatives. Its cost would be
$880,721.OO.

Resolution
Change of route: Variant 2 (blue).
- Note deposited by Mr. Victor lmhoff in the mailbox for consultations and suggestions
in Sa Pereira.

mset`man& asociados s.a
Gansulton

GOVERNMENT OFSANTA FE-MINISTRY OFWORKS, PUBLIC SERVICES,AND HOUSING
-PROVINCIAL HIGHWAY DIRECTORATE-DEPUTY SECRETARIAT FORINVESTMENT
PROJECTSAND EXTERNALFINANCING
Public Bid 73/05
"Social and Environmental Study, National Road 19, section: National Roads 11to 158

GOVERNMENT OF SANTA FE MINISTRY OF WORKS, PUBLIC SERVICES, AND HOUSING
-
-PROVINCIAL HIGHWAY DIRECTORATE -DEPUTY SECRETARIATFORINVESTMENT
PROJECTSAND EXTERNALFINANCING
Public Bid73/05
"Social and Environmental Study, National Road 19, section: National Roads 11to 158

I
Y

GOVERNMENTOF SANTA FE MINISTRY OFWORKS, PUBLICSERVICES,AND HOUSING
-
-PROVINCIAL HIGHWAY DIRECTORATE-DEPUTY SECRETARIAT FOR INVESTMENT
PROJECTS AND EXTERNALFINANCING
Public Bid73105
"Social and Environmental Study, NationalRoad 19, section: National Roads 11to 158

MaurinoCase

Km 37
Property record: 092657/0000
Owner: Maurino, FernandoMateo

The parcel is situatedwhere there will be a bypass around San Jeronimo del Sauce.
In a meetingwith DPV the owner requesteda route change,which was granted.
Variant 1 Orange: original design

Chronoloclvof Contacts
Means Date Subject
E-mail July 6 Asked about the boundary markersfor the detour around the urban
area of San Jeronimo del Sauce
Meeting No date Visit to the ProvincialHighway Division, makingobservationson the

E-mail Sept. 4 Told that his request is being evaluated by the engineering consultant
E-mail Sept. 15 Told that the ESMP is availableon the provincialwebsite
E-mail Sept. 20 I Told that a copy of the planimetric map of the preliminary project is
available in the Commune
Telephone Sept. 22
I IHe raises questions regarding the maps in the Commune, poses no
call objection to modifiedroute
E-mail Sept. 29 Told that the Plan for Expropriations and Resettlementis posted on
the Drovincialwebsite

GOVERNMENTOFSANTA FE-MINISTRY OF WORKS, PUBLIC SERVICES,AND HOUSING
-PROVINCIAL HIGHWAY DIRECTORATE-DEPUTY SECRETARIAT FORINVESTMENT
PROJECTS AND EXTERNAL FINANCING
Public Bid73/05
"Social and Environmental Study, National Road 19, section: National Roads 11to 158

Pairetti Case
Km 120
Property record: 0286-568786/0000
Owner: Pairetti, Marcela F
Total area: 66.12 hectares

In July Mr. Jorge Pairetti sent two e-mails expressing his concern over the possible ex-
propriationof one of hisfields at km 120;one e-mail attacheda map showing the field's
location(which corresponds to the one owned by Marcela F. Pairetti according to the
recordedplat). Initiallyit was thought that the Frontera-San Franciscobypass would go
through this property, as shown in the following figure.

On October 6 Jorge Pairetti and Rairl Pairettimet with HectorCorzo of the Project Im-
plementationUnit of the projectfor upgrading National Road 19to a four-lane highway.

They askedfor more precise details about the areas to be expropriated,the date of ex-
propriation,and how the values would be calculated.

They were told about the criteria usedfor valuation, and that the amount and timing of
payment could be determinedafter the final Executive Projectwas ready (in about two
months) and that the general criteria for compensationtakes into account each prop-
erty's specific situation, based on existing provincial regulationsand the guidelines
agreed uponwith the financing organization.

They askedfor informationabout how much of their parcelswould be expropriated, and
more details about the timeframe in which the fencing would be up. They were informed
of the dimensions and that constructionwas expected to start in April 2007.

Inthe end the route was changed, considerably reducingthe part of the parcel affected,
a
which will be 2.41 percent of its total area.

Serman& asociados s.a
bnsultora

GOVERNMENTOF SANTA FE MINISTRY OF WORKS, PUBLIC SERVICES,AND HOUSING
-
-PROVINCIAL HIGHWAY DIRECTORATE-DEPUTY SECRETARIATFORINVESTMENT
PROJECTS AND EXTERNAL FINANCING
Public Bid73/05
"Social and Environmental Study, NationalRoad 19, section: National Roads 11to 158

a SWlllaIl & asociados s.a
bnrultora

GOVERNMENT OF SANTA FE-MINISTRY OF WORKS, PUBLICSERVICES,AND HOUSING
-PROVINCIAL HIGHWAY DIRECTORATE-DEPUTY SECRETARIAT FORINVESTMENT
PROJECTSAND EXTERNALFINANCING
Public Bid 73/05
"Social and Environmental Study, National Road 19, section:National Roads 11to 158

ChiavassaCase
Progressive: 123+500
Property record: 055 568808/0000-4
Owner: Chiavassa,Juan Carlos
Total area: 49.18 hectares
Affected area: 10.79 hectares
Percentageof area affected: 22%
North remnant:21.90 hectares
South remnant: 16.43 hectares

On June 20 the owner deposited a letter in the mailbox in Frontera, in which he re-
quested a route change because breaking up his parcelwould affect ranching on it and
its value. (A copy of the letter is attached, in which the owner notes that he has two bor-
dering parcels. According to the informationprovided by engineering, ParcelA, to which
the note refers, is owned by Juan Carlos Chiavassa and has a total area of 49.18 hec-
tares, while Parcel B belongsto CarassioVairolatti and has a total area of 37.19 hec-
tares.)

The owner was interviewed in the social survey conducted in July and said that he had
requested a route change for the abovementionedreasons. (Interview attached.)

Finally he attended the information meeting in Fronteraon August 22, without recording
any comment on the case.

The measurewas evaluated but it was decided that it is not possibleto change the
route.

GOVERNMENTOF SANTA FE-MINISTRY OF WORKS, PUBLIC SERVICES,AND HOUSING
-PROVINCIAL HIGHWAY DIRECTORATE-DEPUTY SECRETARIAT FORINVESTMENT
PROJECTSAND EXTERNAL FINANCING
Public Bid73/05
"Social and Environmental Study, National Road 19, section: National Roads 11to 158

- Letter deposited by Messrs. Juan Carlos and Lorenzo Chiavassa in the mailbox for
consultationsand suggestions in Frontera:

San Francisco,June 20,2006

To INCOCIVConsultora
and ITYAC
Santa Fe

Dear Sirs:

Juan Carlos and Lorenzo Chiavassa, domiciled at Geronimo del Barco No. 2617 in this
city, owners of two rural lots (designatedas A and B on the attached map), with the fol-
lowing identificationnumbers and areas:

Lot A
Parcel 09-41-00-568808/0000-4Area 441,027 m2
Parcel 08-41-01-569015/0000-4 Area 60,000 m2

Lot B
Parcel 08-41-00-568809/0000-4Area 360,333 m2

which are used for farming, are writing to your consulting firm regardingthe preliminary
projectfor construction of a four-lane highway on National Road 19 on the section from
Santa Fe to San Francisco, and wish to state that said preliminary project will seriously
harm us because of the magnitude of the area to be expropriated,and the fact that the
impaired remaining portionwill have limited use and economicvalue.

We therefore request a change in the tentative routeto avoid and/or mitigate the serious
damages indicated,so that requirementsfor public order may be compatible with private
property,which is in this case in full productiveoperation.

Yours truly,

(two signatures)

mSelXtlan & asociados s.a
bwultora

GOVERNMENTOF SANTA FE-MINISTRY OFWORKS, PUBLIC SERVICES,AND HOUSING
-PROVINCIAL HIGHWAY DIRECTORATE-DEPUTY SECRETARIATFORINVESTMENT
PROJECTSAND EXTERNAL FINANCING
Public Bid73/05
"Social and Environmental Study, NationalRoad 19, section: National Roads 11to 158

GOVERNMENTOFSANTA FE MINISTRY OFWORKS, PUBLICSERVICES, AND HOUSING
-
-PROVINCIAL HIGHWAY DIRECTORATE-DEPUTYSECRETARIATFORINVESTMENT
PROJECTSAND EXTERNALFINANCING
Public Bid73/05
"Social and Environmental Study, National Road 19, section: National Roads 11to 158

Interview conducted by the environmental consultant's socialteam

FORMC. ECONOMICACTIVITY (PRODUCTlON/COMMERCE/PRIVATE SERVICES)

I 1. legal descriptionof the property:

a. Correlative number, identification numberof the parcel

Character of the housing:occupied/unoccupied

Identification of photographic register and GPS: 21-22-23 SOUTH, 24 NORTH- GPS
352 (NOT ON NATiONALROAD 19, BYPASS FRONTERA- SAN FRANCISCO)

I 2.Identificationdata of the occupants

Identification of the owner of the lot // of the house:JUAN CARLOS LORENZO CHiAVASSA
.. Name of party responsiblefor productive/commerciaI/servicesunit:CHlAVASSA

Identitydocument: 3,303,246

Legaldomicile: COLON 1553 SAN FRANCISCO (TEL 03564-426450/ CELL
15661281)

I 3. Type of tenancy, uses and activitiesof the property
... Owned/ leased/possessed/ occupied: OWNED

Uses of the property (Housing/commerce / industrial/ services):RANCH

Activities on the property (vegetables/ poultry / pigs / horses/ cattle/ fruit trees /
forest species / dairying / others):CATTLE

Area devoted to each use:

I 4. Constructive characteristicsof the buildina(s1:
. I
Occupancy (occupied/vacant):OCCUPIED

AREAS:TOTAL, CUBIC:-

. Number of rooms:-

Primary constructionmaterials:-

SWmfill& asociados s.a
bntultora

GOVERNMENTOF SANTA FE-MINISTRY OFWORKS, PUBLICSERVICES, AND HOUSING
-PROVINCIAL HIGHWAY DIRECTORATE -DEPUTYSECRETARIATFORINVESTMENT
PROJECTSAND EXTERNALFINANCING
Public Bid73/05
"Social and Environmental Study, National Road 19, section: National Roads 11to 158

. Age: 45 YEARS

Condition (qualitativerating):-

I5. Connectionsto services and/or alternatives
....... I

Electricity:YES

Water:YES

Sewers

Gas

Collectionand/or treatment and/or disposalof solidwaste

Telecommunications:

Public transportation

I 6. Description of the economic use of the unit
. Economic use and activities carried out (closedcategories)

o Productionof

o Manufacture of

o Sales of CATTLE
. Capital assets

o Machinery : HARVESTERS,PLANTERS USED FOR ANOTHER FIELD.

o spaces and equipment for conservation,refrigeration,storage

o spaces and equipment for processingof products

o spaces and equipment for serving clients

I 7. Setting
. Locationof most of the establishment'sclients

GOVERNMENTOFSANTAFE MINISTRY OF WORKS, PUBLICSERVICES, AND HOUSING
-
-PROVINCIAL HIGHWAY DIRECTORATE-DEPUTYSECRETARIATFORINVESTMENT
PROJECTSAND EXTERNALFINANCING
Public Bid73/05
"Social and Environmental Study, National Road 19, section: National Roads 11to 158

SAN FRANCISCO
Locationof most of the establishment'ssuppliers
SAN FRANCISCO

I 8. Institutionalorganization
. Officialregistration (Activity/ Commerce, etc.)
REGISTEREDAGENT
Membershipin local and/or regional Chamber or Association (specify)
I 9. Observations

The intervieweesaid he had put a letterinthe mailboxin Fronterarequestinga change in
the routebecause of problemsthat fragmentationof the propertywould posefor carry-
ingon his activity.

a Serman & asociados s.a
Consulton

GOVERNMENTOF SANTA FE-MINISTRY OFWORKS, PUBLIC SERVICES,AND HOUSING
-PROVINCIAL HIGHWAY DIRECTORATE-DEPUTYSECRETARIAT FORINVESTMENT
PROJECTSAND EXTERNALFINANCING
Public Bid73/05
"Social andEnvironmental Study, National Road 19, section: National Roads 11to 158

Aimar Case
Parcel 0970 - Reaistrv352724
Owner: Aimar, D&ielNatalio and another

Mr.Aimar's property is located in the community of San Francisco,Cordoba province, on
NationalRoad 158,at the far western side of the project. Initiallythe expropriationwas to
affect the property'simprovements:two houses (160m2and 50m2),two barns (60m2and
90x15m) and a swimming pool.
In order to have the least possible impact on the improvements,the route was altered;
according to the preliminary project presented,about 30 percent of the parcel will be af-
fected, but not the improvements.

Argentina

ANNEX6
SIMULATION OF DRAINAGE
CAPABILITIES IN THE SITE
"LosCUATRO SAUCES"(KM 22+850~)NATIONAL ROAD19

Santa Fe Road Infastructure

G ING. CORNER0 CONSULTORA S.A. PROVINCIALHIGHWAYDIRECTORATE
NATIONALROAD I 9 Sect: NationalRd. 1I-Provincial Rd. 6
PROVINCE OF SANTA FE
ENGlNEERlNG REPORT CHAPTER 5. BASE WORKS

SUPPLEMENTARY HYDROLOGICAND HYDRAULICSTUDY

OF NATIONALROAD 19
SECTION: National Road 11 Provincial Road 6
-
This study respondsto the request from the Ministry of Water Affairs of Santa
Fe Provinceto verify the design of the structures done for the subject project in light
of the extraordinaryrainfall that occurred at the end of March 2007.

This verification will consist of the following steps:

1. Descriptionof the extraordinaryevent
2. Available precipitation data
3. Determinationof the recurrence
4. Determinationof the hourly precipitationfor verification
5. Determinationof the runoffflows
6. Verification of the hydraulic sections of the structures already de-
signed.

1. Descriptionof the extraordinary event

This extraordinary event that occurred in March 2007 had the following character-
istics (accordingto the Agricultural Weather Station of the Rafaela ExperimentalAgricultural
Station):
- From midnight on March 23 to 3 p.m. on March 30 (7 % days) rainfall
was 363.3 mm.
- Total for the month of March 2007: 539.8 mm, a record for the month
of March during the period for which there are records, 1930-2006.

section studied by this consulting firm (Santo Tome - Access to San Carlos) had water
According to data collected during this meteorological event, the sectors of the

levels higher than the elevation of the existing pavement,as described below:

Argentina
ING. CORNER0 CONSULTORA S.A. PROVINCIALHIGHWAYDIRECTORATE
NATIONALROAD 19 Sect: National Rd. 11 -Provincial Rd. 6
PROVINCE OF SANTA FE
ENGlNEERlNG REPORT CHAPTER 5 BASIC WORKS

Pr. 9+900, San Jose ravine, where the water level was about 0.60 m higher than
the pavement. These photos show the condition of the road in that sector after that
event of great magnitude.

SantaFe RoadInpastructure
ING. CORNER0 CONSULTORA S.A. PROVINCIALHIGHWAYDIRECTORATE
NATIONALROAD 19 Sect: NationalRd. 11-Provincial Rd. 6
PROVINCEOF SANTA FE
ENGINEERING REPORT CHAPTER 5. BASIC WORKS
e Pr. 22+900, the water level is more than 0.60 m above the pavement. The following photos
show howthe event inundatedthis sector.

As can be seen in these photos, the slight grades were insufficient to drain the wa-
ter, thus increasing the flooded area of the basin, both headwater and tailwater.

ING. CORNER0 CONSULTORA S.A. PROVINCIALHIGHWAY DIRECTORATE
NATIONALROAD 19 Sect: NationalRd. 11-Provincial Rd. 6
PROVINCEOF SANTA FE
ENGINEERINGREPORT CHAPTER5. BASIC WORKS

2. Available precipitationdata

March is the year's rainiest month,with an average inthe historical series 1930-2006
of 149.7 mm (Rafaela ExperimentalStation).

The following figure shows the distribution of average monthly precipitation in the city
of Parana for the years 1961-1990, accordingto the NationalWeather Service. Note that the
highest precipitation occurred in the monthof March:

Source: National Weather Service

Data on highest monthly precipitation registered during the period 1930-2007
(above 400 mm for the month) are:
1. 1943, March 410.0 mm

2. 1947, March 419.7 mm

3. 1973,February 469.0 mm

4. 1977,March 402.4 mm

5. 2007, March 539.8 mm

Datafrom the RafaelaStation pluviometerfor March27-31, 2007 are as follows:

DATE PRECIPlTATlON
rmml
27 9.5
28 48.1
II 29 210.0
30 II 56.6 II
I 31 13.1 I
Measurementsfrom 9 a.m. to 9 a.m.

G SantaFeRoadInfrastructure
ING. CORNER0 CONSULTORA S.A. PROVINCIALHiGHWAY DIRECTORATE
NATIONALROAD 19 Sect: National Rd. 11-Provincial Rd. 6
PROVINCE OF SANTA FE
ENGINEERING REPORT CHAPTER 5. BASIC WORKS

3. Determinationof the recurrence

Recurrence indicates a given average period of time during which it may be ex-
pectedthat a magnitude will be equaled or exceeded at least once at some point dur-
ing that period. It is the average period of time during which it is considered that a
chance event can happen or be exceeded.
The formula usually used to calculate the time of recurrenceWeibull's:

Tr = n+l
m

where:
Tr time of recurrence, in years
n period of recorded data, in years
m number of times that the event occurs during the record-
keeping time period. It is also called the progression of the event or
the order of magnitude of the event.

Recurrence was calculated from the data for maximum monthly precipitation
recorded at the Rafaela ExperimentalStation. This is a partial series becausewe selected all
events equal to or greater than a given magnitude (400 mm) that had occurred during the
record-keeping period.

With a progression of the event m=5, it is possible to derive statistics to indicatethe
time of recurrencefor actual precipitation conditions in the Rafaela area during the 77 years
when data were recorded.
Applying the Weibull formula to calculatethe time of recurrencewe get:

77 + 1
Tr = 5 E 16years

So far we have calculated recurrence for monthly precipitation of 400 mm.

To determine recurrence for the 539.8 mm of the month of March 2007 we used
the formula of the United States Weather Bureau, which gives times of recurrence as an
average value of the various formulas shown in the following graph:

ING. CORNER0 CONSULTORA S.A. PROVINCIALHIGHWAYDIRECTORATE
NATIONALROAD 19 Sect: National Rd. 11-ProvincialRd. 6
PROVINCE OF SANTA FE
ENGlNEERlNG REPORT CHAPTER 5. BASlC WORKS

I CONVERSION FACTORASA NwnwOFRECURRENCE

1.7

1.6

1.5
1.4
8
I;:::
1.3

1.0

0 0.9
$8 0.8
0.7

0.6

0.5
0.4

0.3
0 10 16 20 30 40 50 60 T o 0 8 0 90 100

TIME OF RECURRENCE(YEARS)

From this graph we derive the following figures for this case:

539.8 mm = 1.35
400 mm

R= 16 years (400 mm) Factor = 0.90

Factor=O.gOx 1.35 = 1.22, for an R = 70 years

From the values derived, we conclude that the total precipitation in the month
of March 2007 has a recurrence of 70 years for the area surrounding the highway.

It should be noted that the recurrence calculated is for the total monthly rainfall in
March 2007. In the final 7.5 days there was 363.3 mm of rain. This situation, of "raining on the
already soaked"will be taken into account in the basin's background conditions, in view
of the rainfall calculation of 70-year recurrence.

4. Determinationof the hourly precipitationfor verification

The two methodologies used (the DNV isoyetes map and the I-D-R curves of
Rosario) yield very similar values, and the value adopted for Rt design hourly precipitation
for a 25-year recurrence is R25=70mmlh.

We should recall here that the structures were designed for a recurrence of 50
years, with an RS0=80.5mm/h.

The precipitation for verification should be for a recurrence of 70 years, for
which we used the formula of the United States Weather Bureau in the preceding graph, for
a factor (for 25 to 70 years) of 1.22.
For 70 years R70= 70 mm/h x 1,22 = 85.4 mm/h

SantaFe RoadInfrastructure
ING. CORNER0 CONSULTORA S.A. PROVINCIAL HIGHWAYDIRECTORATE
NATIONAL ROAD 19 Sect: Natlonal Rd. 11-Provincial Rd. 6
PROVINCEOF SANTA FE
ENGINEERING REPORT CHAPTER 5. BASIC WORKS

5. Determinationof the runoffflows

The determinationof these flows was done in a way similar to that used for the origi-
nal design of the runoff sections, with the Generalized Rational Method of Ing. Ruhle, publi-
cation of the National Highway Directorate "Determination of the maximum surface runoff
from rainy basins`: checkingit with the Burkli-Zieglermethod.

Addressing the problem of the occurrence of two consecutive events within a period
too short to allow complete runoff of the rainfall in the first one, we considered that the sec-
ond rainfall occurred while parts of the total area of the basin (surrounding the current road)
were still inundated.

The following figure shows the occurrence of consecutive events of magnitude in
the final week of March 2007:

I Accumulated Precipitation March 2007- Santa Fe
600

500

400

300

200

100 v. Monthly precip. (1901-2005) 141.4 mm
I

0 I I I I I I
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Time (days)

To calculate the runoff coefficient for this situation, we adopted the following
criteria:
The basinwas dividedinto three categories accordingto conditions before the rainfall for
verification:
- High:normal (40% of the basin) c= 0.60
- Medium: saturated
- (40% of the basin) c= 0.70
Low: inundated (20%, percentage of the basin obtained from
the topographic map based on flooding area at the pro-
jected grading elevation) c= 1.OO

Weighing of these three values gives a runoff coefficient of c= 0.72.

Argentina
G ING. CORNER0 CONSULTORA S.A. PROVINCIALHIGHWAYDIRECTORATE
NATIONALROAD 19 Sect: National Rd. II-Provincial Rd. 6
PROVINCEOF SANTA FE
ENGlNEERlNG REPORT CHAPTER5. BASK WORKS

Giventhese conditions and hourly precipitationof 85.4 mm/h (Tr = 70 years) we
have the following

6. Verification of the hydraulic sections of the structures already designed
,.-.I 1 1
The following table shows the hydraulic sections designedfc .Tr = 50 years, and
th verificationdone for Tr = 70 years:
1 I I I
SINGLE
FLOW DNV TYPE

0.41 m'/s/m :.A1 0-4;;; 1-1

0.80 m'/s/m 0.65 0-41211-1
4.00 m'/s H-I0235

4.00 m'/s 1.30 H-I0235

I.35m'/s/m

1.30m'/s/m

3.00 m'lslm

3.83 m'/s/m

9 West R 22+830 46.8 2 x 5.00 4.00 (1) 5.00 m'/s/m
9 West L 22+830 46.8 (4) 2 x 5.00 3-00 (I) 4.47 m'/s/m 2-2916-1
(1) Height of portico, from foundation elevation o grading evel. Culvert with
pit.
(2) Existing culvert.
(3) The hydraulic height of the culvert is 0.85 m (per type plan). The back-
water level will not reach the base of the embankment because the slab is
0.25 m thick.

G SantaFe RoadInfiastructure
ING. CORNER0 CONSULTORA S.A. PROWNCIALHIGHWAY DIRECTORATE
NATIONALROAD 19 Sect: National Rd. I1-Provincial Rd. 6
PROVINCE OF SANTA FE
ENGlNEERlNG REPORT CHAPTER5. BASK WORKS

Conclusions:

The hydraulic sections of the structures projected for a recurrence of 50 years,
confirm the flows obtained for a recurrence of 70 years and the abovementioned back-
ground conditions.

We might note that a culvert working with backwater level equal to its own height will
have within it a flow drop of about one third its height, which makes it possible to work with
a backwater level greater than H before working with pressure, as shown in the following
figure:

ING. CORNER0 CONSULTORA S A . PROVINCIALHIGHWAYDIRECTORATE
NATIONALROAD 19 Sect: NationalRd. 11-Provincial Rd. 6
PROVINCE OF SANTA FE
ENGlNEERlNG REPORT CHAPTER 5. BASlC WORKS

OTHER OBSERVATIONS BY THE MAH [MINISTRY OF WATER AFFAIRS]

7. Maximum level of the wafer surface and velocity for the design recurrence adopted for
each case, for both headwater and tailwater.

The following table shows for each work the maximum headwater level (Hr) and the
tailwater velocity, for a design recurrenceof Tr = 50 years:

(*) Free height:for the projected porticosthe height betweenthe base of the slab and the
elevation ofthe oufflow.

Velocity at the entrance to the culverts is relatively low, and since field data are not
availableon the periods of flooding, it is very hardto derive accuratevalues to calculate
it. It was not taken into account in this analysis becausethere is already a safety factor
for passageof heavierflows.

However, we calculatedthe equivalent in maximumwater level, considering the veloci-
ties at the entrance of the structures at an average value of 0.5 m/s and a maximum
value of 1.O m/s.The values derivedfrom these velocitieswere h = 0.012 m for v = 0.5
m/s, and h = 0.05 m for v = 1.O m/s.

2. Maximum level of the wafer surface and velocity for the verification recurrence
adopted for each case, for both headwater and tailwater.

Culverts for paved roads are usually designed for a recurrence of 25 years. This
project used a recurrence of 50 years, so it was initially not verifiedfor a different recur-
rence.

In this annex we did verification for a 70-year recurrence.

G SantaFe RoadInfiastructure
ING. CORNER0 CONSULTORA S.A. PROVINCIALHIGHWAYDIRECTORATE
NATIONALROAD 19 Sect: National Rd. 11-Provincial Rd. 6
PROVINCE OF SANTA FE
ENGlNEERlNG REPORT CHAPTER 5. BASIC WORKS

3. Maximum water level and velocity for the meteorological event that occurred from March
28 to 30, 2007. If the hydraulic design of the structure is exceeded, clear/y indicate the
magnitude of disruption of the road and duration of the effect, and propose hydraulic-
structural corrective measures to resolve the problem.

The following table shows the maximumwater level (Hr) upstreamandthe flow velocity
downstreamfor the verificationrecurrenceof Tr = 70 years:

I DIMENSIONS Hr Veloc.
PROG. head- tail-
Q70
HEIGHT (" water water
[rn'/s] [ml [m/sI

0.82 2.00 1.50 0.41 1.6
3 1+506 1.2 1.50 1.oo 0.65 2.0
4 2+800 7.5 2 x 1.80 F=l.37 1.30 2.9

5 3+024 4.7 1.80 F=l.37 1.30 2.9

6 4+727 2.7 2.00 0.75 0.90 2.3
7 8+535 2.6 2.00 0.75 0.87 2.3
8 9+885 33.1 II 4x3.00 II 3.00 1.60 3.0
9 East Right 22+800 1.85 3.3

9 East Left 22+800 1.85 3.3

9West Right 22+830 2 x 5.00 3.00 2.20 3.6

9 West Left. 22+830 42.0 2 x 5.00 2.00 2.10 3.4

The existing hydraulic structural model consists of the natural system for surface runoff,
the canal network,andthe existingroute'sculverts.

The hydraulicstructures exceeded by the subject floodingwere the existingworks of
the current route.

This consulting firm did its hydrologic and hydraulic studies based on precipitation
statistics for the area and a given recurrence, using the appropriate methodology for
these purposes.

4. Dimensioning of the hydraulics sections of the culverts was done in accordance
with the methodology in the book "Proyecto, Construccion, y Conservacionde
Alcantarillas", Volume11, UNRpublisher, based on the abacus of figure 7, for rectan-
gular concrete culvert sections.

This methodology is based on the manual Hydraulic Design of Highway Cul-
verts, 2007 of the Federal HighwayAdministration.

The calculationprocedure is as follows:

ING. CORNER0 CONSULTORA S.A. PROVINCIALHIGHWAY DIRECTORATE
NATIONALROAD 19 Sect: National Rd. I1-Provincial Rd. 6
PROVINCE OF SANTA FE
ENGlNEERlNG REPORT CHAPTER 5. BASE WORKS

1) Take the maximum possible backwater height Hr [m] based on headwater soil
use.
2) For that condition,get the Q/L ratio in m3/s/m.
3) With the Q/L ratio, select the span of the culvert based on the type plan used.
4) Verify the backwater elevation, using the inverse procedure.

Figure 7. Graphfor hydraulic calculation of concrete box culvert sections

Verification of the tapered inlet sections was done in the same way, using the graph to
plot the hydraulic dimensions of the spiral rib metal pipe tapered culvert. Figure 2.

Figure 2. Graph for hydraulic calculation of spiral rib metal pipe tapered culvert
with inlet control

SantaFe RoadInfrastructure
ING. CORNER0 CONSULTORA S.A. PROVINCIALHIGHWAYDIRECTORATE
NATIONALROAD 19 Sect: NationalRd. 11-Provincial Rd. 6
PROVINCE OF SANTA FE
ENGlNEERlNG REPORT CHAPTER 5 BASIC WORKS

DATA FROM THE RAFAELA PLUVIOGRAPH

Argentina
G ING. CORNERO CONSULTORA S.A. PROVINCIALHIGHWAYDIRECTORATE
NATIONALROAD 19 Sect: NationalRd. 11-Provincial Rd. 6
PROVINCEOF SANTA FE
HYDROLOGICAND HYDRAULIC CALCULATIONS
ALC. PR. 22+850

Concerning the hydrologic-hydraulic study of the Los Troncos Highway basin
(Cuatro Sauces area) that this consulting firm did to calculate the hydraulic dimensions of
the culverts crossing National Road 19 in Project 22+850, it should be noted that it built
on a study done by the Ministry of Water Affairs (MAH) of Santa Fe Province.

That agency did its study in 2004 in order to upgrade existing structures in the pro-
ject for rehabilitationof the basin.

The MAH obtained the following flows for the Los Troncos basin:

Flow (R=25years): 45 m3/s
Flow (R=50 years): 45 m3/sx 1.15= 51.8 m3/s
Feeder area: 133.75 km2

The existing works are insufficientto accommodate the calculated flows, so the
runoff section must be expanded.

The note transmitting the abovementionedreport is attached.

Values of the flows obtained by ING. CORNEROCONSULTORA S.A. consulting
firm for the Los Troncos basin (No. 9) are as follows:

Flow (R=50 aiios): 13m3/s(East drainage)+ 37 m3/s(West drainage)
Flow (R=50 aiios): 50 m3/s
Feeder area: 196.98 km2

A map of the basin is attached.

Total flows for the basin are similar to those calculated by the MAH.

Tr (50 years) Feeder area Design flow
(mm/hectare) (hectares) (mYsec)
Ministryof Water Affairs of
Santa Fe 13,375 51.8
50.0 =
13 m3/s
Ing. Corner0Consultora S.A. 80 19,698 (east drainage) +
37 m3/s
(west drainage)

SantaFe Road In3astructure

G ING. CORNER0 CONSULTORA S.A. PROVINCIALHIGHWAYDIRECTORATE
NATIONAL ROAD 19 Sect: NationalRd. I 1-Provincial Rd. 6
PROVINCE OF SANTA FE

Types and sections of existing and projected culverts
I PROJECTED
EXlSTll I CUL'
WORK PROG. IHEIGHTI G CULVERTS I
TYPE I SPAN I IDIAMETER I CONDITION I TYPE

9 East [
Sheet metal
pipe I 2 x 1.20 For destruction

9 East 22+800 Rectangular
masonry sec- I
0.75 I lFor destruction 2-2916-1
tion 4
H pipe 1.OO For destruction
9
West D 22+830

Rectanaular I
H pipe

masonisec- 1.00 0.75 I IlFor
For destruction 2-29., 6-1
tion II I I 1.OO lFor destruction

2 x5.00 3.00
22+830
9 West Sheet metal II
DiDe 2 x 1.oo For destruction
II
H pipe I
I I 2 x 1.00 I I
H pipe I II I 2 x 1 . 0 0 I I

Attached is a Supplementary Report with verification based on the extraor-
dinary rainfall of March 2007.

Argentina
G ING. CORNER0 CONSULTORA S.A. PROWNCIAL HIGHWAYDIRECTORATE
NATIONALROAD 19 Sect: NationalRd. 11-Provincial Rd. 6
PROVINCEOF SANTA FE

Santa Fe Road Infrastructure
ING. CORNER0 CONSULTORA S.A. PROVINCIALHIGHWAYDIRECTORATE
NATIONALROAD 19 Sect: National Rd. I 1 -Provlnclal Rd. 6
PROVINCEOF SANTA FE

e9bl&dw&flA&
MinisteriodeAsuntoskldricos
HYDRAULIC REPORT
Subj:Expansionof culverts onNationalRoad 19
on the Los Troncos basin (Cuatro Sauces area)-
Prog. MAHkm.28.1128, Las Colonias Department
The project for Rehabilitation of Los Troncos basin is under way, making it neces-
sary to updatethe structures inthe area.
The situation of the existing culverts on National Road 19 inthe Los Troncos basin
section canbe summarized as follows:
Inthe Eastern drainage ofthe communeroad, the following culverts are inplace:
Two corrugated metal tubes of 1.4 m. diameter, pavement elevation = 34.76 m.,
depthelevation= 32.33 m.
0 One masonry culvert 1m. long, 1 m. high, pavement elevation = 34.76 m., depthele-
vation= 33.40 m.
One Ho. Ao tube 1 m. diameter, pavement elevation = 34.76 m., depth elevation=
32.87 m.

Inthe Western drainage ofthe communeroad, the following culverts are inplace:
Two corrugated metal tubes of 1.4 m. diameter, pavement elevation = 34.76 m.,
depthelevation = 32.26 m.
0 One masonry culvert 1m. long, 1m. high, pavement elevation = 34.76 m., depthele-
vation = 33.29 m.
0 One Ho. Ao tube 1 m. diameter, pavement elevation = 34.76 m., depth elevation =
32.80 m.
They are installed at km.28.118 where the grading was done bythe Ministry of Water
Affairs.
The hydrologic-hydraulic study was done considering the feeder basin ofthe replace-
ment section for the culverts usingthe mathematical model HYMO 16as modifiedby
theProvincialHydraulic Works Department for changes inrainfall-flow. Itconsidereda
storm occurring once in25 years and checkedagainst the 50-year record, calculated on
thebasisofthe I-D-Rcurves ofthe city ofRosario.
Fromthe model, it was determinedthat:
Flow (R=25 yrs): 45.00 m3/sec Flow (R=50 yrs): 56.00m3/sec
Feeder area: 133.75 km2
CN adopted: 60
Average velocity of the Average velocity ofthe
section: 0.33 dsec section: 0.34 dsec L,&&?L-

SantaFe Road Infrastructure

ING. CORNER0 CONSULTORA S.A.

PROVINCEOF SANTA FE

L3Sadw&AU&
MinisteriodeAsuntos'Hldrlcos

The existing project does not accommodatethe calculated flows, so the runoffsection
mustbeexpanded. Itis therefore recommendedto replacethe masonry culverts (1 m.
long and 1m.high) andthe Ho. Ao. Tube (1 m. diameter) installed inthe west drain-
age of the commune road, with a spanculvert =two sections of 3 m. and free height =
2.2 m., elevation ofpavement = 34.76 m. and elevation of project = 32.20 m. The sec-
tion will be left with one span=2 sections of 3 m. and two corrugated metal tubes of
1.4 meter diameter.

The specific objective of the project is to expandthe culvert crossing sectionto

carry the flow from the headwater canals being restored, inorder to reduce urbanandru-

ral flooding inthe area.

Departmentof Studies andProjects, SantaFeyApril 12,2004

Ing: MARIA a8 105 MILAGROS viomi J-, ,
Osprtamento de studios y Pmyector
COORDINACI~NAREA INQENIERIA .
OlRECClONPROVlRClALb OSAns HIORAUUCAS
M. 0 8, P. V Y