INTEGRATED SAFEGUARDS DATA SHEET
RESTRUCTURING STAGE
Note: This ISDS will be considered effective only upon approval of the project restructuring
Public Disclosure Copy
Report No.: ISDSR8964
Date ISDS Prepared/Updated: 26-Aug-2014
Date ISDS Approved/Disclosed: 11-Sep-2014
I. BASIC INFORMATION
1. Basic Project Data
Country: Africa Project ID: P079734
Project Name: East Africa Trade and Transport Facilitation Project (P079734)
Task Team Solomon Muhuthu Waithaka
Leader:
Estimated 20-Jun-2005 Estimated 24-Jan-2006
Appraisal Date: Board Date:
Managing Unit: GTIDR Lending Specific Investment Loan
Instrument:
Sector: General transportation sector (38%), Railways (37%), General public
administration sector (13%), Ports, waterways and shipping (12%)
Theme: Trade facilitation and market access (29%), Regional integration (29%),
Regulation and competition policy (14%), Improving labor mar kets (14%),
Social risk mitigation (14%)
Is this project processed under OP 8.50 (Emergency
Recovery) or OP 8.00 (Rapid Response to Crises and
Public Disclosure Copy
No
Emergencies)?
Financing (in USD Million)
Total Project Cost: 371.67 Total Bank Financing: 229.02
Financing Gap: 0.00
Financing Source Amount
BORROWER/RECIPIENT 62.85
International Development Association (IDA) 214.02
IDA Grant 15.00
IDA Guarantee 60.00
African Development Fund 15.80
UK British Department for International Development (DFID) 4.00
Total 371.67
Environmental A - Full Assessment
Category:
Page 1 of 7
Is this a No
Repeater
Public Disclosure Copy
project?
2. Current Project Development Objectives
The project's development objectives are to: (i) assist the EAC to implement its Customs Union
Protocol; (ii) enhance regional trade through increasing efficien cy in
cross-border operations; and (iii) facilitate and support the development
of an efficient regional railway system through its concession to the private se
ctor.
Proposed New PDO (from Restructuring Paper)
The project's development objectives are to: (i) assist the EAC to implement its Customs Union
Protocol; (ii) enhance regional trade through increasing efficien cy in
cross-border operations; and (iii) facilitate and support the development
of an efficient regional railway system through its concession to the private se
ctor.
3. Project Description
The proposed project is conceived as a multi-sector program to facilitate further trade integration in
the region by addressing institutional, legal, and infrastructure constraints. Specifically, it will
support EAC trade integration by (i) providing technical assistance and equipment to implement the
joint customs administration, (ii) providing technical assistance, financial support, and equipment to
improve efficiency at the main border posts, ports, and regional road and railway corridors, with a
specific focus on the integration of railways through support to the joint concession of the Kenya and
Uganda Railways and their interconnections with the Tanzanian railway network.
The project is expected to comprise the following components:
Public Disclosure Copy
(a) EAC Customs Union Implementation: Provide training, technical assistance and equipment to
implement a modem customs interconnection system and common data base linking the customs
departments in the member states to the EAC Customs directory in Arusha; (b) Institutional support
for transport facilitation: Strengthen the full name NCTTCA, and support to establish an appropriate
management mechanism for the Central Transport Corridor connecting Dar-es-salaam with the Great
Lakes countries; (c) Investment support for transport facilitation: Upgrade Corridor efficiency by (i)
financing a regional electronic cargo tracking system from the ports of Mombasa and Dar es Salaam
throughout the EAC, (ii) reviewing and updating the axle load control policy and (iii) improving Port
Security and Port Facilitation in Mombasa and Dar es Salaam; (iv) financing the establishment of
five joint border posts at main cross-border points within the region (Malaba, Busia, and three others
to be determined);(d) Support to railway concessioning: Facilitate the joint concession of the
Kenya and Uganda Railways, and improve its interface to the Tanzanian network, complementing
existing support to the process in Uganda. This would comprise, among others, financing of
severance packages and environmental and social mitigation plans in Kenya, , technical support to
the proposed Kenya railways Asset Authority, and possibly the provision of a Partial Risk Guarantee
(PRG) for both countries.
4. Project location and salient physical characteristics relevant to the safeguard
analysis (if known)
The project will finance activities at several different sites in Kenya, Uganda, Rwanda and Tanzania,
Page 2 of 7
including: (a) those parts of the existing railway lines in Uganda and Kenya which are to be
concessioned to a private consortium; (b) existing border posts between Kenya and Uganda, Uganda
and Rwanda, and Tanzania and Kenya, which are to be upgraded, and (c) a number of trade-related
Public Disclosure Copy
agencies in the four countries. Because the works to be carried out under (b) and (c) are of limited
scope at existing sites, they are not being treated as significant safeguard issues. Thus safeguards
treatment primarily concerns environmental conditions and social impact of actions to improve the
concessioned rail system in the yards and along the lines, knowing that the project itself does not
fund any infrastructure investment. At Gatuna/Katuna where a wetland strands the border, the
proposed infrastructure has been located away from it.
5. Environmental and Social Safeguards Specialists
Gibwa A. Kajubi (GURDR)
Jane A. N. Kibbassa (GENDR)
6. Safeguard Policies Triggered? Explanation (Optional)
Environmental Assessment OP/ Yes
BP 4.01
Natural Habitats OP/BP 4.04 No
Forests OP/BP 4.36 No
Pest Management OP 4.09 No
Physical Cultural Resources OP/ No
BP 4.11
Indigenous Peoples OP/BP 4.10 No
Public Disclosure Copy
Involuntary Resettlement OP/BP Yes
4.12
Safety of Dams OP/BP 4.37 No
Projects on International No
Waterways OP/BP 7.50
Projects in Disputed Areas OP/BP No
7.60
II. Key Safeguard Policy Issues and Their Management
A. Summary of Key Safeguard Issues
1. Describe any safeguard issues and impacts associated with the Restructured project.
Identify and describe any potential large scale, significant and/or irreversible impacts:
During the last restructuring in 2011 the issues arising were as presented below. These issues
have not changed and current restructuring aims to provide time to complete implementation of
agreed actions.
Environmental audits of the two national rail lines have documented oil spills, poor containment
and disposal of toxic and other wastes, damage to local water supplies, degraded or eroded slopes
Page 3 of 7
and other environmental hazards along various portions of the lines. Polluted sites are mainly
found around stations and works yards. While the total number of such sites is large, the damage
at each site is of limited significance and can be reversed with proper rehabilitation measures in all
Public Disclosure Copy
the important cases. There is asbestos pollution in Uganda as well as in Kenya. Occupational
Health and Safety also needs to be improved.
Social impact audits and resettlement reports have documented severe safety hazards at several
specific "hot spots" where encroachment along the tracks and use of the tracks for pedestrian
traffic and trading will pose dangers to the people involved as the railways begin to raise service
speeds and frequencies. Clearance of safety zones at these sites must be done to relieve these
threats. The most difficult of these sites is where the line runs through the large Kibera slum
community of Nairobi, and to a lesser extent in neighboring Mukuru. Sites in Uganda are much
smaller and less sensitive.
2. Describe any potential indirect and/or long term impacts due to anticipated future activities
in the project area:
Proper environmental management can both rehabilitate damaged sites and ensure that indirect or
long-term adverse impacts and further damage are either avoided or minimized. The inclusion of
Social, Health and Environment clauses in the concession arrangements to be signed between the
Concessionaire and the two Governments should guarantee the improvement of the situation
compared to the current patterns of the existing public railways. There is however still some
danger that cleared safety zones along the rail lines at "hot spots" will reoccur if measures
proposed in resettlement action plans are unsuccessful.
It is expected that all but two activities for the Kenya component will be substantially completed
before October 2014. These two remaining activities are the railway RAP in Kibera and Mukuru
and installation of weighbridges on the Northern Corridor (NC). Implementation of the five One
Stop Border Posts (OSBPs) is progressing satisfactorily while the rest of the railway activities and
the port and customs components have been completed.
Public Disclosure Copy
3. Describe any project alternatives (if relevant) considered to help avoid or minimize adverse
impacts.
The sites already exist. Different technologies exist for rehabilitation of various types of sites,
and different options are open for displacement and resettlement. Action planning is under way to
ensure that such alternatives are considered and that optimal solutions are found. The
Resettlement Action Plan (RAP) for Kenya has been received and disclosed. An abbreviated RAP
for Uganda has also been received and approved and will be directly implemented by the
Government.
4. Describe measures taken by the borrower to address safeguard policy issues. Provide an
assessment of borrower capacity to plan and implement the measures described.
The borrowers have undertaken extensive environmental and social audits of the rail lines, both
in Uganda and Kenya. The railroad corporations of each country have retained and managed high
level consultants to carry out this work, and to write the RAPs and EMPsto manage the reduction
of environmental and social risks. These safeguards documents have been completed, and enjoy
strong in-country ownership and interest on the part of the interdepartmental and interagency
teams overseeing the concessioning of the railways and the reorganization of the residual assets-
holding corporations in the two countries. Each of the plans calls for concessionaires to carry out
implementation consistently with Kenyan and Ugandan environmental legislation, World Bank
safeguard policies and Environmental, Health and Safety Guidelines.
Page 4 of 7
The concessionaire will prepare its own documentation in compliance with World Bank Safeguard
Policies and World Bank Group applicable Environmental, Health and Safety Guidelines (Rail
Transit System, Port and Harbor Facilities, Occupational Health and Safety, Hazardous Materials
Public Disclosure Copy
and Monitoring). Regarding Safety and occupational Health, the Concessionaire will, every five
(5) years, prepare two (2) Safety Management Plans, one for Kenya and the other for Uganda, the
first one to be submitted to the government 12 months from the concession commencement date.
Regarding environment, the concessionaire will prepare environment management plans in Kenya
and Uganda within six months from the commencement date. He will subsequently be submitted
to the annual audits of the two National Environmental Management Agencies.
A RAP was prepared for Kibera and Mukuru in 2006 to ensure a clear corridor for railway
operations and the safety of people living in close proximity to active railway lines for the
proposed relocation of 3,500 households within the Right of Way in Kibera and Mukura.
However, due to post election violence and conflict, particularly in Kibera, GOK was unable to
implement this RAP. Consequently, an updated RAP was prepared with a cut off date of
December 18, 2010 and was endorsed by the World Bank in 2011. At that time the total number of
project-affected households identified were 9,567. These were 6,952 in Kibera and 2,615 in
Mukuru.
The 2011 RAP was disclosed in Kenya and made available to local organizations and
administrators for consultation by affected and interested parties. The Kenyan and Ugandan EMPs
have also been disclosed.
In Kenya, the borrower intends to use part of the proceeds of the Credit for the implementation of
the RAP. The change will reflect higher counterpart funding by the Government of Kenya (GOK)
towards the implementation of the RAP and weighbridge works contracts. Higher bid prices for
RAP contracts and services for border posts have increased the overall cost and GOK is expected
to raise about US$38 million to close the financing gap. In their communication with the Bank
dated November 23, 2012, GOK committed to provide the balance. Therefore, it is proposed to
change the financing parameters for the implementation of the RAP and weighbridges works
Public Disclosure Copy
contracts to reflect a larger GoK counterpart contribution during the extended credit period.
5. Identify the key stakeholders and describe the mechanisms for consultation and disclosure
on safeguard policies, with an emphasis on potentially affected people.
On the social safeguard side: Affected people include especially those vendors and residents
occupying parts of the rights of way of the railways that need to be cleared to ensure that
minimum safety standards can be met. Their neighbors, local civil society leaders (in churches,
advocacy and service organizations), and administrative representatives are all stakeholders in the
process. At the national level, key decision makers are in the respective railroad corporations,
Ministries of Transport, Ministries of Finance (in both privatization units and as the counterparts
of the World Bank), Ministries of Housing and other agencies. For all the key stakeholders,
consultation has taken place in project presentation meetings, discussions of the issues involved,
and in the case of the Kenyan RAP, participation in the enumeration process for recording all
those affected. Also in Kenya, the NGO PAMOJA Trust has been a key partner with the
consultant in developing the ideas and data for the RAP, and other NGOs working on housing
issues have also been consulted. Finally, affected people have been consulted in neighborhood
meetings and individually as homes and businesses to be affected directly have been censused and
interviewed to build up the data needed for RAP planning purposes
A four tier grievance mechanism is in place comprising (a) segment level committees and (b) a
Page 5 of 7
multi-segment grievance committee and the Project Implementation Team Grievance Committee
comprising of PAP representatives and professionals. The final tier – a Grievance Appeals Panel
has also been established and ToRs have been prepared for its operation.
Public Disclosure Copy
B. Disclosure Requirements
Environmental Assessment/Audit/Management Plan/Other
Date of receipt by the Bank 26-May-2005
Date of submission to InfoShop 08-Jun-2005
For category A projects, date of distributing the Executive 30-Jun-2005
Summary of the EA to the Executive Directors
"In country" Disclosure
Comments:
Resettlement Action Plan/Framework/Policy Process
Date of receipt by the Bank 26-May-2005
Date of submission to InfoShop 30-Jun-2005
"In country" Disclosure
Comments:
If the project triggers the Pest Management and/or Physical Cultural Resources policies, the
respective issues are to be addressed and disclosed as part of the Environmental Assessment/
Audit/or EMP.
If in-country disclosure of any of the above documents is not expected, please explain why:
C. Compliance Monitoring Indicators at the Corporate Level
Public Disclosure Copy
OP/BP/GP 4.01 - Environment Assessment
Does the project require a stand-alone EA (including EMP) Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ]
report?
If yes, then did the Regional Environment Unit or Practice Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ]
Manager (PM) review and approve the EA report?
Are the cost and the accountabilities for the EMP incorporated Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ]
in the credit/loan?
OP/BP 4.12 - Involuntary Resettlement
Has a resettlement plan/abbreviated plan/policy framework/ Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ]
process framework (as appropriate) been prepared?
If yes, then did the Regional unit responsible for safeguards or Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ]
Practice Manager review the plan?
The World Bank Policy on Disclosure of Information
Have relevant safeguard policies documents been sent to the Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ]
World Bank's Infoshop?
Page 6 of 7
Have relevant documents been disclosed in-country in a public Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ]
place in a form and language that are understandable and
accessible to project-affected groups and local NGOs?
Public Disclosure Copy
All Safeguard Policies
Have satisfactory calendar, budget and clear institutional Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ]
responsibilities been prepared for the implementation of
measures related to safeguard policies?
Have costs related to safeguard policy measures been included Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ]
in the project cost?
Does the Monitoring and Evaluation system of the project Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ]
include the monitoring of safeguard impacts and measures
related to safeguard policies?
Have satisfactory implementation arrangements been agreed Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ]
with the borrower and the same been adequately reflected in
the project legal documents?
III. APPROVALS
Task Team Leader: Solomon Muhuthu Waithaka
Approved By
Regional Safeguards Name: Alexandra C. Bezeredi (RSA) Date: 11-Sep-2014
Coordinator:
Practice Manager/ Name: Date:
Manager:
Public Disclosure Copy
Page 7 of 7