COMBINED PROJECT INFORMATION DOCUMENTS / INTEGRATED SAFEGUARDS DATA SHEET (PID/ISDS)

Additional Financing.

Report No.: PIDISDSA18001

Date Prepared/Updated: 12-Jun-2017I. BASIC INFORMATION

A. Basic Project DataCountry: Rwanda Project ID: P158092

Parent Project ID (if any):

P126498

Project Name: Rwanda Feeder Roads Development Project - Additional Finance (P158092)

Parent Project Name: Rwanda Feeder Roads Development Project (P126498)

Region: AFRICA

Estimated Appraisal Date: 29-May-2017 Estimated Board Date: 20-Jul-2017

Practice Area (Lead): Transport & ICT Financing Instrument: Investment Project Financing

Borrower(s) Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning

Implementing Agency Ministry of Agriculture and Animal Resources

Financing (in USD Million)

Financing Source Amount

Borrower 16.00

Free-standing Single Purpose Trust Fund 68.00

Financing Gap 0.00

Total Project Cost 84.00

Environmental Category: A-Full Assessment

Appraisal Review Decision (from Decision Note):

The review did authorize the team to appraise and negotiate

Other Decision:

Is this a Repeater project? Yes.

.

B. Introduction and ContextCountry Context

Rwanda comprises four provinces and the City of Kigali, all divided into thirty districts. According to

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

provisional results from the fourth Population Census, 2012, the total population is 10.5 million, with a population density of 416 people per square kilometer, the highest in Africa. Rwanda has been experiencing impressive economic growth, with an average growth rate of 7.7 percent in the last decade, primarily driven by the service, agriculture and mining sectors. Despite this growth, Rwanda is rated among the poorest countries in the world. Rural areas are the poorest parts of the country, with 39 percent of the rural population living under the national poverty line. With the GDP per capita of US$697 (2015), the national poverty head count declined but was still high at 39.1 percent in 2013/14, compared to 44.9 percent in 2010/11. For rural areas, it was higher at 48.7 percent and lower in urban areas at 22.1 percent in 2010/11. With 72 percent of population residing in rural areas and relying on subsistence farming, agriculture is employing about three-quarters of the total employment and generating about 33 percent of GDP. Agriculture and food exports also amount to about US$290 million, contributing to about 40 percent of the total merchandise exports or 4 percent of GDP. On the other hand, Rwanda imports about US$480 million of food items every year, which account for about 7 percent of GDP. Better connectivity within the country would significantly contribute to the country’s development.

GoR has shown clear commitment to address development challenges with policies and strategies for economic and social transformation that would promote growth with shared prosperity. In particular, the GoR has assigned fundamental importance to the development of the economic infrastructure of the country, and in particular to road transportation. The Vision 2020 sets out the Government’s goal to promote Rwanda to middle income status. In order to achieve the long-term goals, the GoR has formulated a medium term strategy, EDPRS II, covering the period 2013 to 2018. EDPRS II has four strategic themes: (i) economic transformation; (ii) rural development; (iii) productivity and youth employment; and (iv) accountable governance. Development of the road infrastructure constitutes one of the economic development strategies for the reduction of poverty and for stimulating social-economic growth: facilitating access to domestic/international markets and ensuring favorable conditions for provision and distribution of imported products within the country, improved road infrastructure increases internal production and, in general, economic welfare.

In recent years, the GoR has implemented several ambitious programs (i.e. crop intensification program, one cow per poor family, accessing fertilizers, etc.) to increase productivity in the agriculture sector. But poor physical infrastructure – exacerbated by hilly/mountainous topography – remains a major constraint to increasing access, diversifying production, and enhancing competitiveness. As a result of isolation, insufficient all-season connectivity and high transport costs, farmers have difficulties sourcing and transporting key inputs (like seeds or fertilizers) and marketing their products. A significant part of perishable products is lost or damaged in transit. The lower farm gate prices of agricultural products perpetuate basic subsistence agriculture since poor farmers cannot save enough to modernize.

Sectoral and Institutional Context

At national level, Rwanda has a well-established road network comprising about 30,000 km of classified and unclassified roads. This translates into a relatively high classified road density of 27 km per 100 km2 (or 58.4 km per 100 square km including District Class 2 Roads), when compared with neighboring countries. Under the conventional 2 km threshold, it is estimated that the current road network may cover about 80.3 percent of the country’s total population, if all roads were rehabilitated and well maintained. Although the Government of Rwanda (GoR) has been investing important resources in road projects, the network is still unsatisfactory. The concern is not so much the density of the network than the quality of the roads. In 2015/16, it is estimated that about 64 percent of District Class 2 Roads are in poor condition.

The unclassified roads network, which is estimated at about 15,000 km, is also predominantly earth roads of low engineering standard; and more than 70 percent are in dismal state. Moreover, about 55 percent of District Road (Class 1) are considered to be in poor condition. The GoR has been investing significant resources in the road sector, however, many farmers are still not well connected to input or output markets. The poor condition of the non-primary road network is a major constraint to the mobility of the rural population. Based on a new method to measure rural access, it is estimated that about 3.9 million people are still unconnected in rural areas (the proportion of rural population who live within 2 km of an all-season road in good condition). The Rural Access Index (RAI) in 2016 is estimated at 55.3 percent—very close to the original estimate in 2006. The measured RAI by district varies significantly from 25.7 percent in Rutsiro to 79.2 percent in Nyarugenge; and it is generally high around the major cities, such as Kigali, Rubavu and Huye.

The GoR has expressed a strong desire to maximize connectivity in a greater area of agricultural production with higher standard feeder roads, but it has limited resources of its own. Furthermore, there is a significant challenge of constructing and maintaining roads in difficult terrain and geo-hazard conditions. The proposed Additional Finance will create expanded opportunities to implement a broader program with harmonized standards and wider institutional capacity development at national as well as district levels. The expanded program will therefore strengthen government vision and strategy under the EDPRS II directly supporting three out of four strategic themes; (a) economic transformation; (b) rural development; and (c) productivity and youth employment.

In realization of the above, a National Feeder Roads Policy and Strategy (NFRPS) was developed under the ongoing project in the context of Vision 2020 and EDPRS II which aim among others to promote Productive High Value and Market Oriented Agriculture (Pillar 5, vision 2020) and to reduce the agricultural population from 90% in 2000 to 50% in 2020 which requires the creation of 200,000 new off-farm jobs each year (Vision 2020 revised in 2012). The Mission of the NFRPS is to “Maximize the direct Feeder Road stimulus as incentives for farmers to change their behaviour and rapidly increase the Productivity of land, per farmer and per inputs; and thus raise the Quantity (Q) of marketed crops per Km of road”. The corresponding mid-term global objective of Feeder Roads Policy is: “To bring a motorable road to within 2 km of all farms in Rwanda by 2027.”

This NFRPS which was approved on April 5, 2017 provides the following policy key statement and actions for the implementation of the Feeder Roads program in the next 10 years:(a) The planned feeder roads network in the context of bringing a motorable road to within 2 km of farms in Rwanda requires a global road network of about 30,000 km;(b) All the improved roads must be maintained all the time before investing in any upgrading/rehabilitation and new constructions;(c) Allow investment in staged feeder roads development (width, grades, depth) in upgrading of Unclassified roads, to spread to more farmers the incentive of vehicle services in respect of the feeder roads standards and Road Act;(d) The local resources especially manpower must be used by promoting Labour Based Technology (HIMO), this requires the establishment of a specialized training framework;(e) The presence of many stakeholders in the sector requires a streamlining of the institutional organization as per the proposed Feeder Road Institutional set up;(f) The Road Maintenance Fund (RMF) mandate needs to be extended to give it financial ability to finance the maintenance of all roads.

The NFRPS also integrates the provisions of the “Green Growth and Climate Resilience, the National Strategy for Climate Change and Low Carbon Development” of October 2011 which requires the design of roads & bridges for the future weather.

.

C. Proposed Development Objective(s)

Original Project Development Objective(s) - ParentPHORGPDO

The objective of the project is to enhance all season road connectivity to agricultural market centers in selected Districts.

Proposed Project Development Objective(s) - Additional Financing

The objective of the project is to enhance all season road connectivity to agricultural market centers in selected Districts.

Key Results

The Results Framework (RF) has been revised as a result of increase in the number of districts. New indicators have been introduced under (a) gender, (b) climate change, (c) road safety, (d) citizen engagement, and ICT connectivity. The targets of the original indicators have also been revised.

.

D. Project Description

The project is highly relevant and directly linked to the Bank’s twin goals of reducing extreme poverty and enhancing shared prosperity. The activities proposed under the AF remain in line with the focus area of improving access and quality to infrastructure services of the Country Assistant Strategy (FY09-FY13). Besides, the AF remains aligned with objectives under the new Country Partnership Strategy (FY14–18) (Report No. 87025-RW) discussed by the Executive Directors on May 1, 2014.

The FRDP was approved on March 21, 2014 for an amount of US$45 million and became effective on June 19, 2014 with an original closing date of June 30, 2021. The project is being implemented over a period of 7 years, including nine months for preparatory activities, two years for the rehabilitation works, followed by three years for the multi-year maintenance, and the remaining period for defects liability period, for a contractor to remedy any defects as a result of poor workmanship during the maintenance period. 18 months will be added to the closing date of FRDP to cater for maintenance and unforeseen works such as landslide protection and project winding up activities, for the new participating districts, making the new closing date December 31, 2022.PHCOMP

Component Name:Component One: Rehabilitation, Upgrading and Maintenance of Indicative Feeder RoadsComments ( optional)

PHCOMP

Component Name:Component Two:Strategy Development for Rural Access and Transport Mobility ImprovementComments ( optional)

PHCOMP

Component Name:Component Three:Institutional Development and Project ManagementComments ( optional)

E. Project location and Salient physical characteristics relevant to the safeguard analysis (if known)The Additional Financing for the rehabilitation of feeder roads will be implemented in six districts: Gatsibo and Nyagatare in the Eastern province, Nyabihu and Rutsiro in the Western Province,

Nyaruguru in the Southern Province and Gakenke in Northern Province).The Western, Southern and the Northern Provinces have similar mountainous terrains while the Eastern Province is characterized by low lying flat areas. The Nyaruguru and Nyagatare Districts have identified their feeder roads to be financed by the AF prior to appraisal. Accordingly, specific instruments (ESIAs and RAPs) were prepared for these two district feeder road sub-projects.

Rwanda has a hilly and mountainous relief with an altitude ranging between 900 m and 4,507 m. The feeder roads are not located in areas with ethnic minorities, but some road sections though will pass through national parks, wetlands, rivers and physical cultural resources. Some of the existing sections of the Nyaruguru District feeder road are within a National Park and could also potentially affect the Nkanda Memorial Site and Kibeho Square, which is considered a holy site. The design of each subproject and the ESMP will take into account potential impacts on these valued ecosystem components such as natural habitats, PCR and communities.

.

F. Environmental and Social Safeguards SpecialistsEmmanuel Muligirwa( GEN01 )

George Bob Nkulanga( GFA07 )

Josefo Tuyor( OPSPF )

Lilian Wambui Kahindo( GSU07 )

II. IMPLEMENTATIONThe implementation of the proposed AF will follow the same approach as in the original project. The AF will be coordinated at the national level by the MINAGRI, which will be the focal institution for feeder road program coordination as it has the mandate to support the agriculture and animal resource development agenda in Rwanda. Implementation oversight and strategic guidance will be provided by the steering committee for feeder roads, consisting of MINAGRI (chair) and among others, Ministry of Infrastructure (MININFRA), Ministry of Local Government (MINALOC), Local Administrative Entities Development Agency (LODA) and Rwanda Transport Development Agency (RTDA). MININFRA is responsible for overall transport policy and strategic planning, the creation of a transport enabling environment, and setting of transport rules, regulations, standards and strategic planning. RTDA assists the Ministry with the management and administration of the transport sector, and delivery, management and maintenance of road infrastructure. The core task of feeder road rehabilitation, upgrading and spot improvement, as well as maintenance of district and feeder roads will be implemented by the six (6) participating districts through district project management teams (DPMTs). As in the original project, MINAGRI will as well sign implementation agreements with RTDA and the six (6) districts.

MINAGRI has the required capacity to coordinate and implement the environmental and social management plans and monitoring programs. At the central level, the SPIU has 5 full time staff working on environment and social safeguards while at the District level one full time staff is hired by the District to work on environment and social safeguards. The expanded scope of the Additional Financing and more district feeder roads located in mountainous terrains with challenging environmental and social issues, the project needs to beef up its safeguard staffing at the District level by having one full time Environment staff and one full time Social Development staff. The successful implementation, monitoring and reporting of the RAPs and

ESMPs will rely on the district level safeguard staff including the District Environmental, Social and the Land Officers who will have to work closely with the environmental and social safeguard officers hired by the Contractors and the supervision firms. The District Safeguard Officers are working under the guidance and supervision from the SPIU Safeguards Team. Contractors will be required to hire Environment and Social Safeguard staff to implement the ESMP. Supervision consultants will also be hired by the PIU to monitor the implementation of the ESMP by the contractors. Trainings will continue and even intensified under the Additional Financing..

III. SAFEGUARD POLICIES THAT MIGHT APPLYSafeguard Policies Triggered? Explanation (Optional)

Environmental Assessment OP/BP 4.01

Yes The project will mainly involve rehabilitation and upgrading of existing feeder roads in six districts within existing alignments. There will be no new construction.

Based on the ESIAs of the two new subprojects (Nyaruguru and Nyagatare District Feeder Roads) and the experience of the parent project, project impacts are expected to be both positive and negative. Positive impacts include increased employment during construction, increased accessibility and mobility and social interactions when these feeder roads are completed, increased rural incomes, reduction in travel time and travel costs. But because of the locations of some feeder roads along mountainous and hilly terrains, settlement areas, national parks and areas with known physical cultural resources, potential negative impacts, mostly construction-related, are also expected. These may include increase in soil erosion and risks of landslides especially in the Western, Southern and Northern provinces that are situated in mountainous terrains, loss of land due to rehabilitation works, increase in local floods, temporary noise and air pollution nuisance due to construction works, sediment-laden runoff from exposed areas mainly due to vegetation clearing during construction; increase in solid wastes, pollution from improper use and storage of waste oils from construction equipment, health and safety issues especially during construction. Impacts on physical cultural resources could also potentially take place during construction.

Furthermore, rehabilitation of roads will need more lands that are private or public land for which compensation may be required. Some trees, crops and other structures that are within road reserve to be rehabilitated are also likely to be affected and will need compensation.

To address predicted impacts, the ESMF for the parent project was updated and ESIAs for the two out of six new district feeder roads have been prepared, consulted upon and disclosed following the updated ESMF. The ESIAs for the remaining district feeder roads will be prepared during implementation following the updated ESMF.

Natural Habitats OP/BP 4.04 Yes Portions of some feeder roads pass through national parks (e.g., Nyaruguru feeder road), forests, wetlands and river systems for which some activities related to rehabilitation and upgrading of feeder roads may potentially affect these natural habitats. As works are mainly on existing road alignments, potential impacts are expected to be localized and manageable. Where portions of the feeder roads pass through national parks and PCRs (e.g., Nyaruguru District Feeder Road), works will be limited within the existing carriageway and no expansion will be carried out. These requirements will be considered in the design. Environmental and social measures to protect and conserve natural habitats will be included in the ESMP, bidding and contract documents.

Forests OP/BP 4.36 Yes The road rehabilitation will follow existing alignments with some widening. Since roads are mainly existing and works carried out will mainly be within existing carriageway, potential impacts on forests are expected to be manageable. Where widening could potentially affect forest areas, re-alignment will be done, where possible. Where portions of the feeder roads pass through forests, works will be limited within the existing carriageway. The ESIA-ESMP will also include re-vegetation measures using native trees to compensate for the tree losses during construction.

Pest Management OP 4.09 No The project will not involve any purchase of pesticides or pesticide equipment. Road

maintenance will mainly be carried out manually and will not involve the use of chemical pesticides.

Physical Cultural Resources OP/BP 4.11

Yes Impacts on physical cultural resources (PCRs) could potentially take place during civil works. The Nyaruguru Feeder road subproject, for example, could potentially affect the Nkanda Memorial Site and the Kibeho Square, which is considered a holy site. In order to avoid affecting PCRs, the road widening activity shall be limited within the existing carriageway. Where impacts cannot be avoided, a detailed PCR Management Plan shall be prepared by the contractor and approved by the SPIU and the Bank prior to the commencement of any civil works. All subproject ESMP(s) will include provisions for “Chance Finds”.

Indigenous Peoples OP/BP 4.10 No The project does not trigger this policy.

Involuntary Resettlement OP/BP 4.12 Yes Rehabilitation of feeder roads will need lands that are private or public land for which compensation will be required. Some trees, crops and other structures that are within road right of way to be rehabilitated are also likely to be affected and will need compensation.

The resettlement policy framework (RPF) was updated to include six additional new districts and to take into account the lessons learned and experiences from the original project. The RPF was cleared and disclosed on the WB infoshop on March 17th 2017.

For Nyaruguru feeder road subproject, land to be acquired is 25.45 hectares valued at 21,806,600 Rwanda francs included in the RAP budget.The total number of project-affected households is 855 HHs of which 84 HHs will be relocated while the remaining 771 HHs will be partially affected from land acquisition related to widening in some road sections.

For Nyagatare feeder road subproject land to be acquired is 36.03 hectares valued at 43,961,358 Rwanda Francs included in the RAP budget. The total number of project-affected households is 298 of which 71 HHs will be relocated while the remaining 227 HHs

will be partially affected from land acquisition. All of the PAPs are covered by their respective Resettlement Action Plans.

To accommodate the additional remaining four districts and compensation for loss of land, the RPF has been updated, cleared by the RSA.

Safety of Dams OP/BP 4.37 No The project will not finance construction or rehabilitation of any dams as defined under this policy.

Projects on International Waterways OP/BP 7.50

No Project does not affect any international waterways, thus the policy is not triggered.

Projects in Disputed Areas OP/BP 7.60

No The project does not operate in any disputed areas, therefore the policy is not triggered.

.

IV. Key Safeguard Policy Issues and Their ManagementA. Summary of Key Safeguard Issues

1. Describe any safeguard issues and impacts associated with the proposed project. Identify and describe any potential large scale, significant and/or irreversible impacts:

The improved feeder roads conditions during and after construction are expected to result to positive impacts such as increased employment and income during construction and increased accessibility and mobility of people and goods, reduced travel time and travel costs after the completion of these roads.

The project will mainly involve rehabilitation and upgrading of existing feeder roads in six districts. There will be no new construction and works will largely follow existing alignments. As part of the project design, road expansion will not be carried out in road portions traversing national parks and areas with known physical cultural resources. In these areas, works will be limited within the existing ROW/alignments and avoidance will be the main course of action.During construction there will be a number of land preparations, excavations, soil disturbance and increased traffic around the sites as a result of heavy trucks delivering various construction materials and machineries and equipment taking away the generated waste including construction debris.All these are likely to pollute and degrade the environment through mud slides, noise, dust, vibration and air pollution. Health and safety of workers and communities are also a concern. Labor influx is not an issue since local labor will be sourced.

There is a significant risk of landslides for subprojects in the Northern, Western and Southern province districts as these are located in mountainous areas. The subprojects will incorporate engineering and vegetative measures to minimise landslide risks.

Specific impacts are as follows:Nyagatare Feeder Road. Potential negative impacts include loss of 84.19 ha of land, 263 trees,

128 houses and other structures (like water points). The total number of project-affected households is 298 of which 71 HHs will be relocated while the remaining 227 HHs will be partially affected from land acquisition.Nyagururu Feeder Road. Potential negative impacts likely to occur include loss of 95.61 ha of land, 156 trees and 178 houses. The total number of project-affected households is 855 HHs of which 84 HHs will be relocated while the remaining 771 HHs will be partially affected from land acquisition related to widening in some road sections; increase in erosion rates along hillsides affected by cuts, encroachment of road segments 5 and 6 through the forest buffer zone of Nyungwe National Park and potential impact of road segment 2 at the site that hosted appearances of the Virgin Mary in 1980s and road segment 14 that passes close to the Nkanda memorial site.2. Describe any potential indirect and/or long term impacts due to anticipated future activities in the project area:

Long term impacts are largely positive such as reduction in travel time and costs, improved connectivity, accessibility and mobility among in the rural areas, improved movement of goods and trades and consequently improvement of local economy, increased in social and industrial activity, reduction in accidents, better drainage system, reduction in fuel consumption and greenhouse gases.3. Describe any project alternatives (if relevant) considered to help avoid or minimize adverse impacts.

Among the project alternatives considered in the feasibility and detailed design include the with and without the project scenarios, road expansion versus limiting works within the existing ROW and alignments to avoid or minimize impacts on natural habitats and PCRs, preference for hillside cuts over valley-side cuts because of technical constraints, sourcing of construction materials that would require less impacts and travel time and use of local labor over outside labor.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 client has updated the Project’s Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) and Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF) to include the six additional districts and to take into account the lessons learned and experiences from implementing the ESMF under the original project.

The updated ESMF for Feeder Roads Development Project provides a corporate environmental and social safeguard policy framework, strengthens the institutional arrangements and capacity program available to identify and mitigate potential safeguards issues and impacts of each sub-project (district). The ESMF also provides more site-specific measures for potential impacts on natural habitats, physical cultural resources and labor influx during construction even this is not a major issue in this project since local labor will be used.

In addition, the ESIAs and RAPs for two feeder roads subprojects identified at appraisal have been prepared, consulted and disclosed locally and in the Bank’s Infoshop following the updated ESMF and updated RPF, respectively. These are the ESIAs and RAPs for Nyaruguru and Nyagatare District Feeder Roads. The ESIAs and RAPs for the other 4 four district feeder

road subprojects (e.g., Gatsibo, Nyarihu, Rutsiro and Gakenke) will be prepared during implementation following the updated and disclosed ESMF and RPF.

The ESIA has put forward generic measures to address construction-related impacts such as noise, dust, water and air quality, increased traffic and health and social issues. The ESIA has also provided site-specific measures for project impacts on national parks, forests, physical cultural resources, landslides and erosions.

MINAGRI through the FRDP is the lead agency in the implementation of the ESMPs and RAPs and in building the capacity of other actors in environmental and social management. MINAGRI has the required capacity to coordinate and implement the environmental and social management plans and monitoring programs. At the central level, the SPIU has 5 full time staff working on environment and social safeguards while at the District level one full time staff is hired by the District to work on environment and social safeguards. The expanded scope of the Additional Financing and more district feeder roads located in mountainous terrains with challenging environmental and social issues, the project needs to beef up its safeguard staffing at the District level by having one full time Environment staff and one full time Social Development staff. The successful implementation, monitoring and reporting of the RAPs and ESMPs will rely on the district level safeguard staff including the District Environmental, Social and the Land Officers who will have to work closely with the environmental and social safeguard officers hired by the Contractors and the supervision firms. The District Safeguard Officers are working under the guidance and supervision from the SPIU Safeguards Team.

Safeguard staffing and training of the parent project are done and ongoing, but for the new districts safeguard staff and training will be done during AF implementation. The SPIU has planned training sessions, initially, for the environment and social development staff from the AF districts offices; which will be followed up by training that will include all safeguard specialists from the contractors and supervising consultants, once they get on board.

The contractor and supervising firm staff have attended the trainings on environmental and social safeguards compliance organized by the project in which 14 staff in Gisagara and 11 in Rwamagana attended the training. The Bank gave importance to the district and communities’ access to information, including to safeguards instruments and reports on the project. Summaries of these documents translated into local languages were placed in accessible areas such as libraries and district offices, but also on the websites of the project in MINAGRI and district offices. A practical training program for the SPIU, District Level Safeguard Staff, Supervision consultants and contractors will be developed for the Project, including the Additional Financing. This will include, among others, training on the environmental and social management of construction impacts, health and safety, influx of labor, resettlement, land acquisition and livelihood restoration, grievance redress mechanisms, safeguards monitoring and reporting.5. Identify the key stakeholders and describe the mechanisms for consultation and disclosure on safeguard policies, with an emphasis on potentially affected people.

The updated ESMF, the updated RPF, the two ESIAs and the two RAPs have been consulted

with various stakeholders including the project affected people and other relevant stakeholders at national level such as government institutions (RDB, REMA, MININFRA/RTDA, MINIRENA/RNRA, etc.) and at the local level. Consultations with farmers’ organizations, NGOs, Private sector, civil society, micro-finance institutions were also done. The Minutes of the meetings are annexed to the updated ESMF and ESIAs. The updated ESMF, RPF and the ESIAs and RAPs of the 2 new sub-projects under the AF have been submitted to and reviewed and cleared by the Bank and disclosed on the following dates:

Instrument Local Disclosure Date Bank Disclosure DateUpdated ESMF March 2, 2017 March 16, 2017Updated RPF March 2, 2017 March 13, 2017RAP for Nyaruguru March 30, 2017 April 3, 2017RAP for Nyagatare March 30, 2017 April 3, 2017ESIA for Nyaruguru March 10, 2017 March 13, 2017ESIA for Nyagatare March 10, 2017 March 13, 2017

.

B. Disclosure Requirements

Environmental Assessment/Audit/Management Plan/OtherPHEnvDelete

Date of receipt by the Bank 15-Feb-2017

Date of submission to InfoShop 13-Mar-2017

For category A projects, date of distributing the Executive Summary of the EA to the Executive Directors"In country" DisclosurePHEnvCtry

Rwanda 10-Mar-2017Comments:

Resettlement Action Plan/Framework/Policy ProcessPHResDelete

Date of receipt by the Bank 03-Mar-2017

Date of submission to InfoShop 03-Apr-2017

"In country" DisclosurePHResCtry

Rwanda 30-Mar-2017Comments:PHIndCtry

RwandaComments:PHPestCtry

RwandaComments:

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 LevelPHCompliance

OP/BP/GP 4.01 - Environment AssessmentDoes the project require a stand-alone EA (including EMP) report? Yes [X] No [] NA []

If yes, then did the Regional Environment Unit or Practice Manager (PM) review and approve the EA report?

Yes [X] No [] NA []

Are the cost and the accountabilities for the EMP incorporated in the credit/loan? Yes [X] No [] NA []

PHCompliance

OP/BP 4.04 - Natural HabitatsWould the project result in any significant conversion or degradation of critical natural habitats?

Yes [] No [X] NA []

If the project would result in significant conversion or degradation of other (non-critical) natural habitats, does the project include mitigation measures acceptable to the Bank?

Yes [X] No [] NA []

PHCompliance

OP/BP 4.11 - Physical Cultural ResourcesDoes the EA include adequate measures related to cultural property? Yes [X] No [] NA []

Does the credit/loan incorporate mechanisms to mitigate the potential adverse impacts on cultural property?

Yes [X] No [] NA []

PHCompliance

OP/BP 4.12 - Involuntary ResettlementHas a resettlement plan/abbreviated plan/policy framework/process framework (as appropriate) been prepared?

Yes [X] No [] NA []

If yes, then did the Regional unit responsible for safeguards or Practice Manager review the plan?

Yes [X] No [] NA []

Is physical displacement/relocation expected?

3,933 Provide estimated number of people to be affected

Yes [X] No [] TBD []

Is economic displacement expected? (loss of assets or access to assets that leads to loss of income sources or other means of livelihoods)

3,933 Provide estimated number of people to be

Yes [X] No [] TBD []

affected

PHCompliance

OP/BP 4.36 - ForestsHas the sector-wide analysis of policy and institutional issues and constraints been carried out?

Yes [] No [] NA [X]

Does the project design include satisfactory measures to overcome these constraints? Yes [] No [] NA [X]

Does the project finance commercial harvesting, and if so, does it include provisions for certification system?

Yes [] No [] NA [X]

PHCompliance

The World Bank Policy on Disclosure of InformationHave relevant safeguard policies documents been sent to the World Bank's Infoshop? Yes [X] No [] NA []

Have relevant documents been disclosed in-country in a public place in a form and language that are understandable and accessible to project-affected groups and local NGOs?

Yes [X] No [] NA []

PHCompliance

All Safeguard PoliciesHave satisfactory calendar, budget and clear institutional responsibilities been prepared for the implementation of measures related to safeguard policies?

Yes [X] No [] NA []

Have costs related to safeguard policy measures been included in the project cost? Yes [X] No [] NA []

Does the Monitoring and Evaluation system of the project include the monitoring of safeguard impacts and measures related to safeguard policies?

Yes [X] No [] NA []

Have satisfactory implementation arrangements been agreed with the borrower and the same been adequately reflected in the project legal documents?

Yes [X] No [] NA []

V. Contact pointWorld Bank

PHWBContact:Muhammad Zulfiqar AhmedTitle:Senior Transport Engineer

PHWBContact:Emmanuel TabanTitle:Highway Engineer

.

.

Borrower/Client/RecipientPHBorrName:Ministry of Finance and Economic PlanningContact:Jules Cesaire YAGANZATitle:Directeur du Departement Techniques Industrielles et ExploitEmail:legrand_cesar@yahoo.fr

.

.

.

Implementing AgenciesPHIMPName:Ministry of Agriculture and Animal ResourcesContact:Esdras ByiringiroTitle:Project CoordinatorEmail:esdras.byiringiro@gmail.com

.

.

.

VI. For more information contact:.

The World Bank1818 H Street, NWWashington, D.C. 20433Telephone: (202) 473-1000Web: http://www.worldbank.org/projects

VII. ApprovalTask Team Leader(s): Name:Muhammad Zulfiqar Ahmed,Emmanuel Taban

Approved By:PHNonTransf

Safeguards Advisor: Name: Nathalie S. Munzberg (SA) Date: 16-Jun-2017

Practice Manager/Manager: Name: Aurelio Menendez (PMGR) Date: 16-Jun-2017

Country Director: Name:Yasser Aabdel-Aleem Awny El-Gammal (CD)

Date:19-Jun-2017