46495-002: Building Resilience to Climate Change …...PAPUA NEW GUINEA: Building Resilience to...

Safeguards Monitoring Report No. 02, January 2020 1

Environmental and Social Monitoring Report

Semi-annual Report

January 2020

PNG: Building Resilience to Climate Change in Papua New Guinea

Prepared by Climate Change and Development Authority for the Asian Development Bank. This Environmental and Social Monitoring Report is a document of the Borrower. The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent those of ADB’s Board of Directors, Management, or staff, and may be preliminary in nature. In preparing any country program or strategy, financing any project, or by making any designation of or reference to a particular territory or geographic area in this document, the Asian Development Bank does not intend to make any judgements as to the legal or other status of any territory or area.


Safeguards Monitoring Report # 02

Semi-annual Report: July to December 2019

PAPUA NEW GUINEA: Building Resilience to

Climate Change (BRCC) in Papua New Guinea Grant No: 0447-PNG, 0598-PNG, and 0600-PNG

Prepared by the Project Management Unit for the Climate Change and Development

Authority (CCDA) for Government of Papua New Guinea and the Asian Development Bank.

Submission Date: 31 January 2020


Contents Pg.

List of Acronyms and Abbreviations ...................................................................................... 4

1. Introduction .................................................................................................................... 5

2. Project Overview, General Safeguards Matters ............................................................. 5

3. Safeguards Monitoring Plan ........................................................................................... 8

3.1. Environmental Safeguards ...................................................................................... 8

3.2. IR Safeguards ......................................................................................................... 8

4. Monitoring Results and Actions Required....................................................................... 8

4.1. Institutional Coordination and Capacity Building ..................................................... 8

4.2. Project Activities for the Reporting Period ............................................................. 10

4.3. Public Consultation and Information Disclosure .................................................... 13

4.4. Grievance Redress Mechanism ............................................................................ 14

4.5. Planned Action for the Next Six Months ................................................................ 15

5. Compliance with Safeguard Related Project Covenants .............................................. 15

6. Conclusion ................................................................................................................... 15

Annex A. Consolidated Comments on draft Updated IEE for Alotau Wharf ................... 16

Annex B. BRCC Training Activities ............................................................................... 30

Annex C. GRM Focal Persons ....................................................................................... 36

Annex D. Compliance with Safeguard Related Project Covenants ................................ 40


List of Acronyms and Abbreviations

Acronym Meaning

ADB Asian Development Bank

AF Additional Financing

AROB Autonomous Region of Bougainville

BRCC Building Resilience to Climate Change

CCDA Climate Change and Development Authority

CCVAP Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment and Adaptation Plans

DOH Department of Health

EARF Environmental Assessment and Review Framework

EMP Environmental Management Plan

ENBP East New Britain Province

EWC Early Warning Communications

GFP Grievance Focal Point

NARI National Agricultural Research Institute

NDC National Disaster Centre

NGO Non-Government Organization

NMSA National Maritime Safety Authority

PAM Project Administration Manual

PCR Program for Climate Resilience

PDO Provincial Disaster Office

PEFC PNGPLC Enabling Framework Consultants

PISC Project Implementation Support Consultants

PNG Papua New Guinea

PNGPCL PNG Ports Corporation Limited

PMU Project Management Unit

PPCR Pilot Program for Climate Resilience

PPMS Project Performance Monitoring System

SCF Strategic Climate Fund

SEMP Site-specific Environmental Management Plan

SGF Small Grant Facility

SPCR Strategic Program for Climate Resilience

WASH Water Sanitation and Hygiene


1. Introduction 1. This report covers activities undertaken by the Building Resilience to Climate Change in Papua New Guinea (BRCC) project under ADB Grant No: 0447, 0598- PNG and 0600-PNG from July to December 2019. This is the second semi-annual safeguard report for this project. 2. This Report starts with a Progress Overview describing the project objectives, scope and components and this is then followed with a Project Progress as per Safeguard Category. Discussions also include Safeguard Plans, Implementation Arrangements and finally, Environmental Performance Monitoring. Discussions also include i) Status of EMP implementation, ii) Health and Safety and iii) Environmental Effect Monitoring. Other section are Involuntary Resettlement, Public Consultation, Information Disclosure, Capacity Building, Grievance Redress Mechanism and Compliance with Safeguard-Related Project Covenants.

2. Project Overview, General Safeguards Matters 3. BRCC will implement Papua New Guinea’s (PNG) Strategic Program for Climate Resilience (SPCR)1 aimed at achieving transformational change in addressing the current and future threats from climate change and related hazards. The Asian Development Bank (ADB) approved the grant for $24.25 million on 21 October 2015. The grant was provided by the Strategic Climate Fund–Pilot Program for Climate Resilience (SCF–PPCR) administered by ADB. In 28 September 2017, the SCF–PPCR Sub-Committee approved the allocation of an additional $5 million in PPCR grant resources as additional financing (AF) to original project for the climate proofing of the wharf in Alotau. On 9 February 2018, the co-financing agreement between the Government of Australia and ADB with respect to the additional financing to original project for the climate proofing of the wharf in Alotau, for an amount of A$4 million was signed. Table 1: Project Summary

Project title Building Resilience to Climate Change in Papua New Guinea

Grant number 0447-PNG; 0598-PNG; 0600-PNG (Additional Financing)

Recipient Government of Papua New Guinea

Executing agency Climate Change Development Authority (CCDA)

Project cost

Grant 0447-PNG (SCF)

$24.25 million

Grant 0598 (DFAT) $ 2.98 million

Grant 0600-PNG (SCF)

$ 5.00 million

Government of PNG $ 2.68 million

Beneficiaries $ 1.00 million

Total $35.91 million

Key dates Grant 0447-PNG

(SCF) Grant 0598-PNG

(DFAT) Grant 0600-PNG

(SCF)

Date of approval 21 October 2015 3 September 2018 3 September 2018

Date of signing 15 January 2016 19 September 2018 19 September 2018

Date of effectiveness 1 March 2016 19 December 2018 19 December 2018

Closing date (original)

30 April 2022 30 April 2022 30 April 2022


4. The project impact is increased resilience to the impacts of climate change and climate variability. The outcome is “improved capacities of communities (in vulnerable atolls and islands), government agencies, and civil society to plan and respond to the impacts of climate change.” 5. This will be achieved by mainstreaming climate resilience into development planning and addressing country priorities that focus on vulnerable communities in the Autonomous Region of Bougainville and provinces of East New Britain, Manus, Milne Bay and Morobe comprising 21 priority vulnerable islands/atolls identified through a participatory process using SPCR identified risk factors across four sectors including (i) infrastructure, (ii) natural resources, (iii) health, and (iv) agriculture against potential impacts from climate change and variability. 6. The project has three outputs: (i) climate change and vulnerability assessments carried out and adaptation plans developed for target communities, (ii) sustainable fishery eco-systems and food security investments piloted in nine vulnerable island and atoll communities, and (iii) enabling framework for climate resilient infrastructure established and communications network extended. 7. On the other hand, the AF expanded the scope of and will increase project benefits. The existing design-life expired wharf will be rebuilt with innovative climate adaptation features. Climate resilient building codes and design standards will be developed based on the pilot climate proofing of the wharf in Alotau. The AF also contributes to sustained access of outer island communities to basic needs post-disaster and extreme climate events. During normal operations, the wharf contributes to increased economic activities to support the livelihood and social needs of the communities, particularly women and children. The climate proofing of the wharf in Alotau will deliver additional and immediately tangible benefits to Milne Bay Province. 2.1 General Safeguards Requirements 8. Under this project, the overview for Safeguard Policy Statements (SPS) categorization are contained in Table 1. Table 2: Project Overview, Snapshot of Project Progress

Project Number and Title:

Building Resilience to Climate Change in Papua New Guinea Grant No: 0447-PNG, 0598-PNG, and 0600-PNG

Safeguards Category

Environment B

Indigenous Peoples C

Involuntary Resettlement

C

Reporting period: July 2019 to December 2019

Last report date: None

Key sub-project activities since last report:

Contract awarded – At this stage, contracts awarded have mostly been related to project implementation. For this reporting period, the only contract signed is for the engagement of the National Financial Management Specialist. No contracts involving project site activities have been awarded as yet. Note that it is projected that the activities that will trigger


safeguards issues are those related to the Alotau Wharf component. All other activities in this project involve no significant impact on the environment. A summary of key activities undertaken during this reporting period include;

• Progress of Work: Elapsed time as of end of December 2019 is 66.7%. Project implementation progress is estimated at 14.7%;

• Field activities during the reporting period includes:

a. Field surveys for the expanded Early Warning Communication (EWC),

b. Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH) survey, and

c. Supplemental data collection for batch 0 island-communities (for the preparation of proto-type CCVAP reports),

• Schedules of field activities for EWC/WASH/Batch 0 are as follows:

a. 03 – 23 July 2019 for AROB

b. 05 – 15 September 2019 for Manus

c. 05 – 28 September 2019 for Morobe

d. 11 – 30 November 2019 for Milne Bay

• Training undertaken during the period includes:

a. Training on Climate Change, Disaster Risks, Vulnerability Assessment and Safeguards (national) on 30 July to 02 August 2019

b. Provincial Training on Climate Change, Disaster Risks, Vulnerability Assessment and Safeguards: 03 – 04 October 2019, Milne Bay; 07 – 08 October 2019, Manus; 10 – 11 October 2019, Morobe; 14 – 15 October 2019, East New Britain; and 17 – 18 October 2019, ARoB

• Under the Additional Financing (AF), the remaining survey (geotechnical survey) was finally completed. The surveys were undertaken to support detailed design work.

Status of Safeguard Approvals / Permits / Consents

• The IEE for Alotau Wharf had been updated; the draft was reviewed by PMU (with assistance from PISC) and endorsed to ADB for clearance/approval. Awaiting ADB’s decision of the IEE. Other environmental permits are being processed.

• As of December 2019, other project activities undertaken did not require actions in terms of safeguards approvals/permits/consents.


3. Safeguards Monitoring Plan 3.1. Environmental Safeguards 9. For this reporting period, the review and updating of the EARF has been completed. The updated EARF had been submitted to and cleared by ADB on 15 November 2019. As agreed with ADB, the disclosure is deferred until final refinements had been completed (inasmuch as the text on institutional arrangements may need revisions/updating when negotiations with UNDP are concluded). 10. However, final refinement will have to await the preparation of the CCVAP and SGF process manuals to ensure consistency. 11. The detailed design for the Alotau wharf is at the design finalization stage. Awaiting results of laboratory tests on soil samples. Social inclusion is incorporated in the design. Detailed design submitted by Milne Bay Provincial Administration to PNG-PCL for final review and approval, particularly on the technical drawings and bill of quantities.

12. In conjunction with the design finalization, the IEE for the Alotau Wharf underwent several rounds of internal review led by the PISC Environmental Specialist/s. Comments and recommendations were forwarded to the PEFC Team. While there were outstanding issues in the last review, PMU and PISC agreed that the IEE be submitted to ADB for final review and clearance/approval. Annex A contains the last consolidated comments from PISC Environmental Specialist/s. 3.2. IR Safeguards 13. With regards to the Resettlement Framework, there is no need to revise the framework at this point.

4. Monitoring Results and Actions Required

4.1. Institutional Coordination and Capacity Building

14. As part of preparation for project implementation, focal persons in both PMU and CCDA has been identified. Table 3: PMU and CCDA Focal Persons

Activities/Concerns CCDA PMU

Safeguards (env)

Luanne Losi-Yawingu Peter Iki

Joy Samo Safeguards (IR/IP)

Social To be identified (Silina Tagagau Seri resigned

November 2019) Gender

15. To strengthen institutional capacity, training and workshop had been undertaken. Project overview as well as briefing on the ADB SPS were part of the program. BRCC-funded training activities are shown in Table 4.


Table 4: BRCC-funded training activities completed (July – December 2019)

Title of Training Training Date and Location

Training Objective Number of Participants

Total Male Female

1. Training on Climate Change, Disaster Risks, Vulnerability Assessment and Safeguards

30 July – 2 August 2019

(a) To Increase knowledge on basic concepts of disaster risks and climate change as well as vulnerability assessment and adaptation strategies; and (b) to provide participants with sufficient skillsets to comply with ADB’s operational and safeguards requirements.

36 20 16

2. Framework for Stakeholder Mapping and Engagement (PEFC)

22 Aug 2019 and 29 Aug

2019

54 39 15

3. Vulnerability Assessment and Adaptation Options Methodology for Port Infrastructure (Session 1) (PEFC)

10 Sep 2019 To discuss the adaptation planning process and agree on next steps in the vulnerability assessment

14 10 4

4. Vulnerability Assessment and Adaptation Options Methodology for Port Infrastructure (Session 2) (PEFC)

17 Sep 2019 To discuss baseline assessment and maps, to define preliminary adaptation options and to kick start the implementation of vulnerability assessment

12 10 2

5. Provincial Training on Climate Change, Disaster Risks, Vulnerability Assessment and Safeguards

03-04 Oct 2019

Milne Bay

07-08 Oct 2019

Manus

10-11 Oct 2019

Morobe

14-15 Oct 2019

(a) To Increase knowledge on basic concepts of disaster risks and climate change as well as vulnerability assessment and adaptation strategies; and (b) to provide participants with sufficient skillsets to comply with ADB’s operational and

89 67 22


Title of Training Training Date and Location

Training Objective Number of Participants

Total Male Female

East New Britain

17-18 Oct

2019 ARoB

safeguards requirements.

16. On the request of CCDA, a follow up training on climate change and disaster risks was conducted on 9 August 2019 at the CCDA Conference Room mainly for CCDA staff. This follow up training was funded by CCDA. 17. Details (e.g., photos, list of participants) for the various training activities are included in Annex B. 4.2. Project Activities for the Reporting Period 18. Key activities undertaken during this reporting period include: 19. Field surveys for the expanded Early Warning Communication (EWC) 20. During this reporting period: the second round of field work was undertaken to ascertain the exact location where communication facilities will be installed in the respective island-communities. The fieldwork was done concurrently with the WASH/CCVAP trips (see related discussions below) in order to save on expenses. The first leg of field work has been completed for ENB on 04 – 14 June 2019. The field work in this reporting period are as follows:

a. 03 – 23 July 2019 for AROB b. 05 – 15 September 2019 for Manus c. 05 – 28 September 2019 for Morobe d. 11 – 30 November 2019 for Milne Bay

21. Similar to WASH, it was agreed that procurement will be done in batches. With the assistance of the ADB procurement specialist, the procurement for the 1st package (Manus) is ongoing. With the RFQ already advertised, offers are being evaluated. It is projected that delivery and installation will commence 1st half of 2020. 22. The experiences in this procurement will guide the packaging of the succeeding packages. 23. Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH) survey 24. As reported previously, the WASH survey consists of three components: Individual Questionnaire, Focus Group Discussion and an Observation Group. 25. With the field assessment/survey completed, the focus is now on the preparation of procurement packages. It was agreed that procurement will be done in batches. The three (3) batches will cover the WASH requirements of the following provinces/region: (1) ENB/AROB; (2) Manus; and (3) Morobe/MBP. Each batch will consist of two (2) packages: one package for new facilities and another package for the rehabilitation.


26. Procurement documents for the first package (ENB/AROB; new facility) is being prepared. Finalization of the procurement forms is ongoing and expected to be completed for ADB’s NOL in January or February 2020

27. Supplemental data collection for batch 0 island-communities (for the preparation of proto-type CCVAP reports) 28. The Batch 0 island-communities include Kerawara (ENB), Carteret (AROB) and Kwaraiwa (MB). Batch 0 island-communities is intended as test-run for the preparation of CCVAP reports and subproject proposals that will be replicated in the other island-communities. The Batch 0 were selected due to availability of data and/or information from similar activities completed. Supplemental data collection was needed to either update or supplement currently available data.

29. With field work for Batch 0 completed, work had now shifted to finishing the CCVAP reports. PISC is supporting PMU in the finalization of the CCVAP reports by focal persons.

ARoB Field Work

ARoB Field Work

ENB Field Work

ENB Field Work

Manus Field Work

Manus Field Work


Milne Bay Field Work



30. Activities under Additional Financing (AF) 31. Under the Additional Financing (AF), all the required surveys to support design finalization had been completed (topographic survey; flora and fauna survey; bathymetric survey; water quality survey; and geotechnical survey).

32. Detailed design at the finalization stage awaiting results of laboratory tests on soil samples. Social inclusion is incorporated in the design. Detailed design submitted by Milne Bay Provincial Administration to PNG-PCL for final review and approval, particularly on the technical drawings and bill of quantities. 33. The surveys undertaken also provide inputs for the updating of the IEE. In conjunction with the design finalization, the IEE for the Alotau Wharf underwent three (3) rounds of internal review led by the PISC Environmental Specialist/s (based on the October, November and December versions). Comments and recommendations were forwarded to the PEFC Team after each review. While there were outstanding issues in the December version, PMU and PISC agreed that the IEE be submitted to ADB for final review and clearance/approval. Annex A contains the consolidated comments from PISC Environmental Specialist/s 34. Summary of Issues 35. As of December 2019, project activities undertaken except for the Alotau Wharf did not require specific safeguards actions in terms of screening nor assessment. It should be noted that only the wharf rehabilitation among the project activities can be considered as “Category B” for environment.

36. Likewise, no regulatory requirement/s (under PNG laws) have been triggered (e.g., permits/consents) except for Alotau Wharf. Application for environmental permit is being discussed with CEPA. 4.3. Public Consultation and Information Disclosure 37. This project was launched in 2018 and a number of Memorandum of Agreements (MoA) were signed between the Climate Change and Development Authority (CCDA) and the provinces and this event resulted in the project officially launched in East New Britain, Milne Bay, Autonomous Region of Bougainville, Morobe and Manus provinces. 38. Likewise, information dissemination and awareness are imbedded in various field activities (e.g., field testing of survey materials, provincial survey on EWC). A project overview is presented at the start of activities, especially in assemblies or dialogues with island-communities.

39. The IEE/EMP for Alotau Wharf Climate proof and connectivity improvement project has been cleared by safeguards specialist and disclosed on ADB website for public consumption.


ARoB Field Work

ARoB Field Work

ENB Field Work

ENB Field Work



4.4. Grievance Redress Mechanism 40. The project has not encountered any grievance yet, in the provinces and therefore there is none to report in this period. The project was designed to avoid grievances. There is a GRM in place for this project and GRC established for each of the five provinces. 41. It is possible that other nearby islands not involved in the project could be aggrieved however this project scope cannot cover all the 600 islands in this county.

42. In anticipation of more field activities, GRM focal persons at the provincial and community level have been identified. A list of these focal persons can be found in Annex C.


4.5. Planned Action for the Next Six Months 43. In anticipation of full project implementation, the following actions and activities are planned for the next six (6) months:

a. Operationalization of GRM (continuing) – the project will continue to operationalize (and strengthen) the GRM as described in the EARF. The provincial focal points and provincial project assistants will be oriented on their tasks as Grievance Focal Points (GFPs) at the provincial level. Orientation of GFPs at the lower level (e.g., village) will also be conducted.

b. Pending finalization of discussions with the community facilitator, a briefing of the staff and personnel (for the community facilitator) will also be conducted to cover topics on safeguards and GRM among others. This is projected during the mobilization stage of the community facilitator.

c. Disclosure of the EARF – Upon engagement of the community facilitator, the EARF

will be refined in terms of institutional arrangements (if necessary). This is projected during the mobilization stage of the community facilitator.

5. Compliance with Safeguard Related Project Covenants 44. Grant covenants related to safeguards are being complied with. Summary is attached as Annex D.

6. Conclusion 45. At this stage, there are no significant safeguards issues reported or requiring actions.

46. The GRM is functioning rather there is no issues raised during this reporting period.

47. Consultation, awareness and stakeholder engagements are ongoing, with support

from respective provincial governments.


Annex A. Consolidated Comments on draft Updated IEE for Alotau Wharf

IEE Sections and Review Comments:

General Comments:

The report has been re-formatted and useful for the bank to review. There are still several acronyms not included (it is suggested that the table of abbreviations be reformatted on single spacing). Overall this draft is well developed – however, there is a need to ensure that the style is consistent with ADB’s writing style manual. (In discussions with ADB PNG-RM Safeguard Officer during latest ADB Review Mission of 18 – 27 November 2019, the options for the IEE to be forwarded to ADB for formal review was discussed. Jack Stanley wants the review by PMU/PISC to be completed before ADB start its own review). (new issues based on discussions during the latest ADB Review Mission of 18 – 27 November 2019).

• On the provisions of temporary wharf facility while the construction/upgrading is underway. This was discussed in the latest mission. i. There is no mention of the removal and/or development of the old wharf (that is intended to be used as temporary wharf). Rather

the IEE refers to the existing smaller wharf that will be used – please verify if this is the temporary wharf mentioned by the MBPG ii. In the discussions, it was also mentioned that this temporary wharf will be constructed on top of an existing old wharf. It was also

mentioned that the old wharf has some historical association/value. Please validate and ensure that this is adequately covered in the IEE (especially in the context of historical/cultural heritage/resources).

iii. Please include an explicit statement that this is not considered as an “associated facility” based on ADB SPS – provide the rationale or justification for the exclusion. If necessary, suggest the necessary mitigating or preventive measures needed to be undertaken by MBPG during construction and operation of the temporary wharf.

• The MBPG also reported that the Geotech survey did not hit the bedrock at the depth of 30.0 meters (which was specified in their TOR). There were discussions during the latest mission that this may lead to some modification in the design.

i. Please verify if the final design as described or discussed in the IEE already incorporates any last-minute changes based on this finding (or, if there was no need for design modification).

ii. Ensure that any such design changes are covered by the assessment and the recommended mitigating/management measures.

• During the mission, the removal of the sunken boat was also discussed. Note that it was mentioned that the owner had authorized the MBPG/transport authority to remove the wreck.

i. Please validate/assess if the removal of the sunken boat needs to be included in this IEE.


ii. If yes, please ensure that the entire process is fully documented (including liability and/or responsibility for the removal of the wreck especially in terms of potential pollutants/fuels/petrochemicals). Please include the necessary mitigating or preventive measures needed.

iii. If no, please ensure that the entire process is fully documented is another report/document. Include discussions on liability and/or responsibility for the removal of the wreck especially in terms of potential pollutants/fuels/petrochemicals.

iv. Note that the primary concern of ADB is to ensure that no future claims for damages/liability will be made against the project.

• On the fuel storage and distribution system. It was clarified during the mission that the fuel storage will be rehabilitated by the owner of the facility. However, distribution system (fuel pipe and dispenser) will be located (or will traverse) the project site.

i. Please include an explicit statement that the fuel storage is not considered as an “associated facility” based on ADB SPS – provide the rationale or justification for the exclusion. If necessary, suggest the necessary mitigating or preventive measures (especially related to safety) needed to be undertaken by private owner during construction and operation of the fuel facilities.

ii. For the fuel line and dispenser – please include recommendations on safety and emergency (e.g., spill containment).

Executive Summary:

Overall much better and provides a good summary of the project. Discussions may be reviewed and tighten to be more concise and precise. Other comments include. Para 1 – no need to repeat Government as it is already known that the agreement is between the Government of PNG and ADB. Para 2 – repetition in the last two sentences and these can be synthesized better. Para 3 – The second and third sentences can be synthesized better. The project has only 3 outputs. Strictly speaking, the climate proofing of the wharf is under output 3 but financed under AF (or additional financing). Para 4. - CCDA need to be corrected as stated in the abbreviation. Again, the sentences in this paragraph need clear articulation. Para 5 – No need to mention safeguard document i.e. IEE again in sentence. Also sentence stating IEE was conducted can be improved. i.e. no need for stating conducted as it is a process here. Para 6. Should it say that the wharf is located on the waterfront in the bay which is easily accessible by the general public? Para 7 – The first and third sentences have repetition, and this must be synthesized better. Para 8 - Project description should start in para 7 and continue to para 11. Para 9 states final options whilst par 10 states preferred option –need consistency in wording. Para 10 – three ladders will be provided at 60 m intervals – the wharf is only 40 m – so how are these arranged? Some on the wharf others on the shoreline?


Para 16 – it is a little confusing the way it is written. Please note that CEMP is the contractor EMP, this will be prepared by bidders and included in their submission. The CEMP should be based on the EMP of the IEE (which will be included, upon ADB’s approval in the procurement tender). Para 17 – So do we take it that there has not been any additional discussion pertaining to the environment and social aspects of the project since 2017? See paragraph 35 below. Sure, these two time periods were specifically allocated – which is great, but I am sure there must have been considerable ‘ad hoc” discussions since then from different partners? Was there not discussion undertaken during the marine assessment – when the environmental consultant reviewed the IEE in Alotau – I guess this may need to be reworded t indicate (if it is correct) discussion have been undertaken throughout the life of the project to date? As it is it reads that nothing has been done since 2017 which I am sure is not correct? Para 21 – WSU – needs to be spelled out – also not in the acronyms? NB: Para 11 - no mention of the wharf to be constructed by the MBPTA to allow vessel docking whilst the wharf is replaced – this wharf is to be up graded – WWII landing site and includes removal of a vessel.

Introduction:

Para 1 Similar comment as in exec summary – remove government Para 4 Same comment as a fourth output. Is this in order??? Para 5 Correct CCDA as in abbreviation. Text and wording could be improved to be articulate Para 7 Synthesis sentence to link the purpose of IEE rather than “conduct” Para 9 See earlier comment in Exec Summary on wording for the location of the wharf Para 10 Similar comments as in Exec Summary. Sentence 1 and 3 to be improved to avoid repetition Para 12 Level 1 activity is not passed onto provincial or local level government and this should be stated clearly Para 13 The EPAR paragraph can be improved for clear articulation rather than stating the categories but only focus on the ones applicable to this project Para 15 Table 2.2 could be better in the Appendix and referenced in the text here. Para 18 – 19 Information on CEPA could again be clearly articulated and no need to describe CEPA activities in detail. Para 20 – 23 Likewise, ADB SPS could be synthesis better in two paragraphs with the similar comment as above. Para 24 – 27 EARF discussions can be shorten – need only to discuss that IEE was prepared in accordance with the EARF.

Description of the Project:

Para 28 – 33 Description of the project suffers from similar comments as above. Text here could be reduced to only 3 or 4 paragraphs. Para 34 – 35 Discussions need to be refined/clarified. In ADB parlance, “due diligence” would culminate in a preparation of a due diligence report (and the corresponding corrective action plan). Does the “due diligence” here refers to environmental assessment activities? Para 35 Minor spelling issues manager’s needs to be manager/s. Para 43 – ladder distances as mention in Ex Sum.


Para 44 – is correct however as I understand the design which is funded by ADB will provide suitable infrastructure for fuel distribution and associated bunkering – safety requirements – this should be mentioned? Para 49 & 50 – justify text of para needed.

Description of the Environment:

Para 51 Figure 4 (b) can be flipped to indicate the way the shoreline of the Alotau wharf Para 55 – 56 Geology can be synthesized to only that within Alotau i.e. Eastern Fold belt and only discuss that aspect here. Para 57 – 59 Landform discussion here is poor and can be reduced to be articulated and concise. A lot of this is repetitive or overlapping Para 60 Landform information useful but must link with the text as in the preceding paragraphs Para 61 – 62 Incorrect spelling of Kulawin, it should be Kaluwin et al and must have a year for this 2011 Para 72 Table 4.6 could be in the Appendix and only referred to in the text here. Para 75 -76 Figures 4.13 and 4.14 repetition of numbers and not all are required here. Figure 4.14 a can cover for a number of these disasters and the others can be omitted. Para 78 – indent issue in format. Includes statements indicating the assessment showed very poor biodiversity etc but at the same time “luxuriant coral growth”? This is a little confusing – and as such may require to be rewritten – i.e. is the luxuriant coral growth at the wharf site and will this be impacted or are these sites outside of the direct and indirect areas of influence. Para 79 demonstrates that the marine assessment showed “surprising large sections of hard corals” so is these shallow areas a high biodiversity? and will these corals be impacted by the scope of works and if so, what is the impact. Possibly the summary needs to be enlarged to indicate what are the marine conditions within the direct area of influence – i.e. what will be impacted and what are outside the direct impact area and will they be impacted and if so how to manage? It is a little confusing – this confusion is also in the marine assessment. An endemic fish was recorded – what impact if any will the scope of work have on this species? This should be included. Para 80 – double full stop – needs to be fixed. Para 82 – should the date of the marine assessment also be included as conformation of these biological attributes? Para 90 – so n corals will be removed – they will only be affected by sediment? In the marine assessment report it states that coral attached to the wharfs piles etc. and in the near facility would be removed due to the scope of work – maybe this section needs to be rewritten to reflect this – however the general outcome is impacts to the benthic invertebrate community is very low and these species are found in neighboring areas hence no significant impact on the species populations. Para 91 indent issue Para 91 -111 Figure 4.19 to be corrected and image sharpened The annexes referred to in this section have been reviewed and provide the background information suitable to the IEE.

Anticipated environmental impacts and mitigation measures.

Para 120 This needs to be written better such as stating what the CCP will do so that it is clear.


Para 126 Could be written better

Design and Pre-Construction Phase

Suitably addressed – agree with the UXO issue at the existing wharf.

Construction Phase Annex F reviewed – suitable information for IEE. Suitably addressed.

Operational Phase Suitably addressed.

Indirect, Induced Cumulative Impacts

Suitably addressed.

Information Disclosure

Suitable – possible provide reference to the formal workshops and meetings undertaken.

EMP

Para 167 Last sentence in this paragraph is confusing and not essential Para 176 – 187 (GRM) Please note that the GRM section/text in the EARF was provided to allow for the preparation of GRM specific to the Alotau Wharf Project. Note for example in para 180: “a separate detailed GRM specifically for component 3.0 activities (climate resilient infrastructure – Alotau Wharf) is set out in detail in the component’s IEE”. This is now a confusing statement. Para 188 – 189 These two paragraphs could be worded better i.e. articulated.

The EMP tables seem all OK – please check. Minor format issues

Conclusions

October 2019: Review of the update Alotau Wharf IEE.

IEE Sections and Review Comments:

General Comments:

Minor Format issues throughout the document that need to be rectified. US word spelling is required – please run a spell check. Review acronyms and update as required.

Executive Summary:

The Executive Summary needs to be reviewed and updated to reflect the up to date work. Examples;


• Paragraph 16 – SEMP – states that a marine assessment will be undertaken? A marine assessment has been undertaken and as such this section is out of date (i.e. is a duplicate of the October 2018 IEE), this also includes the footnote.

• Similarly, Paragraph 17 infers that there has been no consultation on the project since 2017?? Furthermore, there is no information (summary) on the marine assessment - however conclusions have been drawn as to no impacts on the marine environment nor resources associated with the project – this needs to be included. No information on the proposed “dumping” of waste material in Sanderson’s bay and several other key potential environmental safeguard issues – these need to be articulated in the Executive summary. The above was identified during the review on October 2018 – see below.

Introduction:

First paragraph there is a format issue – includes the word INTRODUCTION in the text - needs to be fixed. Line 3 it is now 24 islands and atolls not 9 please replace. Para 5 – format issue – please fix. Para 6 – No reference to the marine assessment? Para 14 – what is CCS – not spelled out please fix and add to acronyms. Para 14 – Need additional information on the TOR and specifically what will be tested – add summary in the text plus annex the TOR. Para 30 – No mention of the marine assessment – any terrestrial assessment?

Description of the Project:

Paragraph 44 and 45 – duplications – rectify Figures are referred but not in report provided. Paragraph 47 – the petrochemical bunkering on the wharf is a design change and as such needs to be articulated in the report – this has the potential for significant environmental impacts and as such needs to be described. Paragraph 51 - minor spelling issues – change Table 3.1 Physical Environment. Corrective Actions - Number 3 – a marine assessment has been done – so why are we suggesting another? Biological Environment – Vague Corrective action – this needs to be redeveloped and provide clear detail actions. Paragraph 90 – An extra paragraph describing the 9% of the benthic biota should be included. Was this hard coral, seaweed? Sessile, sedentary and what affect will the project have on these animal/plants if any. Were there any sea grass communities located within the area of influence, adjacent areas? In addition, more information pertaining to non-biological attributes of the area of influence would be useful to describe the shallow water marine environment at the site. Paragraph 91 – some additional information on species of plants/tress located within the area of influence and a clear statement that there are or are not mangrove located within the area of influence and they are or are not and that non will be impacted.


Paragraph 98 – tree species?

Anticipated environmental impacts and mitigation measures.

Design and Pre-Construction Phase

Paragraph 115 – needs to have the section Project compliance with country systems requirements moved to a separate paragraph. Paragraph 119 – unsure if this is needed, possible moved to the background section and expanded with data and references. There is no reference to UXO – should there be a survey undertaken before construction – pile driving hitting a UXO will cause significant issues?

Construction Phase Paragraph 120 – there are potential impacts for construction material movement outside the wharf – and specifically impacts with the removal and disposal of waste material? The issue of where to put the old concrete from the wharf needs to be highlighted and discussed? This needs its own section with details. In addition, this issue needs to be discussed directly with the ADB – additional marine surveys may be required to ensure the location of the proposed marine dump site does not cause environmental issue during the dumping and longer term. Petrochemical spills although through careful management should be avoided are a potential impact and as such should be further described including mitigation measures and management – coordination requirements. Format issues with Table 5.2 Paragraph 128 – it states vibration and noise will be disturbing to marine life? What marine life!!! Were there any cetaceans located during the survey or reported to frequent this part of the bay? This statement needs to be justified – if there are potential issues –impacts then these need to be highlighted – discussed and suggested mitigation activities provided. This is also mentioned in paragraph 135. Paragraph 130 – Why has it been suggested that marine monitoring is required during construction when the benthic resource assessment clearly indicated that there is a paucity of marine benthic flora and fauna within and adjacent to the area of influence? If monitoring what are you monitoring? I would suggest the marine monitoring program be reconsidered – this effort and funds should be reallocated to oil spill management and or a physical cleanup of the site. Paragraph 30. Information pertaining to the communities whom reside next to the road where increase traffic will take place transporting material etc. should be included. This is also relevant for dust and so on.

Operational Phase Long term management of petrochemical spillage – will emergency kits and training be provided during the project?


It is mentioned in the early sections and in the designs that petrochemical – fuel – will be located on the wharf which presumably includes a pipeline – source? and termination point – this needs to be clearly described and full mitigation activities mentioned? This could be a significant point of an environment impacts. This section needs to be rewritten to reflect the above. Table 5.4 format issues. Paragraph between table 5.4 and 5.5 (needs to be renumbered) contradicts the above and suggest there are a number of operational environmental impacts? This confusion needs to be rectified. Table 5.5 is this for the wharfs long term operation once the project is complete? OR is this information design to be implemented during construction phase?

Information Disclosure

As highlighted above – this needs to be updated to include ALL stakeholder activities up to the submission of this report? Note table 7.1 reflects new information from the original IEE draft – where this information has been derived needs to be detailed. Table 7.2 – anticipated impacts last bullet point spelling - form to from.

Environmental Management Plan


October 2018 Alotau IEE comments General Comments on the IEE Draft – Climate Proofing and Connectivity Improvement of Alotau Provincial Wharf – Project No: 46495-003. April 2018. BRCC Environmental Specialist.

IEE Section Suggested Updates - Comments

General Comments

1. IEE confirms low environmental footprint – this is correct for terrestrial flora and fauna – however for the marine benthic environment (flora and fauna) they are assumptions from literature – hence urgency for a marine assessment to provide direct data on the ecological importance of this marine area. Until this is provided the IEE cannot be completed. Marine assessment findings need to be included in EMP.

2. Confirm throughout the document and updated as required; ➢ Roles and responsibilities of agencies. ➢ Scope of Work – associated diagrams and descriptions – reflect in EMP is required. ➢ SEMP to be changed to CEMP (Contractor Environmental Management Plan) as ADB SPS requirements.

Executive Summary

1. Executive Summary to be updated for all amendments made in the main report –Executive Summary needs to be consistent with main report.

2. Areas that may need to be updated include; ➢ Roles and responsibilities of agencies involved in the project. ➢ Include more information on Operational Impacts associated with the project (see comments below). ➢ Replace SEMP with CEMP (see above). ➢ EMP summary updated if changed. ➢ GRM updated if changed – Building Resilience to Climate Change (BRCC) project currently reviewing the project’s Environmental

Assessment and Review Framework (EARF) – amended document will be provided (little change is envisaged). ➢ Include summary findings of the marine assessment (urgency – final IEE can’t be completed till this is completed). Amend EMP and

IEE to reflect marine assessment findings. ➢ Include summary information on environmental impacts on scope of works for port road access and sanitation facilities (if included in

scope of works).

I. Introduction

➢ Paragraph 2 – Change the project financing form 5 million to 8.64 million US$ (new figures as of September 2018). ➢ Paragraph 4 – Institutional - confirm all arrangement are correct – amend if required. ➢ Paragraph 6 – Environmental section – needs to include the marine ecological assessment and marine water quality assessment.


II. Legal, Policy & Administrative Framework

➢ Further elaborate on seawater quality regulations – possible include a table of parameters – this needs to link to the projects water quality monitoring program (before and during construction and during operational phases).

➢ Paragraph 17 – review and update international and regional conventions - agreements etc. These should be comprehensive and relevant to the project.

III. Description of the Project

➢ Paragraph 44 – Confirm option 4a has been accepted as the projects design for the scope of works. If changed – amended, then this needs to be included in IEE including engineers drawing (latest versions need to be included).

➢ Paragraph 45 – Main Wharf – last bullet point – If the project is involved in repairing the access road and sanitation building then these NEED to be included in the relevant sections of the IEE.

➢ Paragraph 48 and 49. Confusion - is fuel bunkering to continue and transport of petrochemical between land and boats through wharf? Conformation of activities to be undertaken, detailed and amendments made to this section – and amendments to IEE where required.

➢ Review all sections and confirm if information is still correct – amend where required, including engineering designs.

IV. Description of the Environment

Physical ➢ Confirm all descriptions and diagrams are correct – amend as required. ➢ Paragraph 65 – Climate Change – Data used for Port Moresby should be replaced with data on Milne bay – preferably

Alotau – Milne bay climate change issues and climate very different to Port Moresby – this section needs to change. ➢ Paragraph 66 – Rainfall – use Alotau – Milne bay information not Port Moresby – this section needs to change. ➢ Paragraph 70 – refer to figure 4.9 in text. ➢ Paragraph 71 – Water Quality - Additional information on the process to be undertaken on the marine water quality

baseline (data needs to be collected during design phase, during construction and operational phases). Define parameters that need to be tested.

➢ Paragraph 72 – Review if air quality baselines are needed. Air quality will decrease during construction – however most likely minor, short lived and due to weather patterns dispersed quickly – low or very low impact to surrounding area.

➢ Add a paragraph on location of material to be used for the project - Is their quarry material? Where will be sourced from – needs to be a permitted location – a description – transport routes etc. etc.

➢ Add a section on waste disposal for all material from the project – as above. Question: The IEE refers to two navigational buoys in Sanderson bay – is there any work activities undertaken on these items? If so, these needs to be included in the IEE. If changes to the benthic environment – marine assessment should undertake a baseline data.

Biological ➢ Paragraph 76 – 78 - Section developed not based on a project specific marine assessment – hence this section needs to be reviewed and amended to reflect the findings of the marine assessment to be undertaken. It is to include the key


findings and description of the area surveyed as detailed in the marine assessment, the full marine assessment report is to be attached as an annex to the IEE.

➢ Urgency to undertake the marine assessment of the project benthic flora and fauna – findings critical to the IEE findings. ➢ Paragraph 80 – This section to be expanded to provide detailed description of vegetation located within and surrounding

the area of influence. If any vegetation to be removed this needs to be documented (names, photos, endemic, introduced, size and GPS location etc.). Including the areas directly impacted and surrounding the ports access road and abolition block.

➢ Paragraph 84 Figure 4.12 – figure poor quality needs to be replaced. ➢ Need to add a paragraph – section on plants and animals that are endemic, protected to Milne bay including general

summary information on biodiversity, CITES, etc. ➢ Add a description of surrounding environment include streams (permanent, intermittent), flooding events etc. that

discharge into the ports bay and effects on water contaminations – sources of pollutants etc.

Socio –economic

➢ Paragraph 88 Noise location sites. Need to include site specific GPS coordinates (table 4.6) for each data recording sites – to ensure monitoring program will collect data at the same location. Duplication of data sets to be undertaken during design, construction and operational phases. A general monitoring plan needs to be included. 24-hour data collection should be considered to ensure peak noise periods.

➢ Paragraph 96 – Roads – include additional information on the ports access road – description, photo, current flooding etc. ➢ Paragraph 97 – Water Supply – Additional information on supply to the port – vessels etc. and information on water

management to the sanitation facilities to be built by the project. ➢ Paragraph 98 – assuming the project is developing the new toilet sanitation block – this should be described in this section

including waste management etc. - this facility needs to be fully described in the IEE scope of works (including general design of the building and water management – septic systems etc.) and mitigation methods included in the EMP.

➢ Paragraph 101 Sold water management – further developed to include what will be undertaken at the port during construction and operational phases including collection, storage and disposal (waste recycling, separation should be considered).

➢ Paragraph 102 Power – further develop to include specific activates with the port during construction and operation. Is there any consideration for alternative power? Solar?

➢ Additional section on general economic activities associated in and around the port – fishing etc.

V. Anticipated Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures

Design Phase

➢ Consider dividing the design phase impacts into physical, biological and social issues – consistent with construction and operational phases described in this section and aligned with the EMP.


➢ Paragraph 107 – needs to be amended to reflect if the baseline data assessments during the design phase are not undertaken it will cause potential delay to the project – especially relevant to the marine assessment.

➢ Paragraph 109 – Include possible issues due to the potential delay in obtaining Environmental Clearances for the project from the relevant government agencies.

➢ Paragraph 111 (throughout the document) – change SEMP to CEMP and confirm if monthly reporting requirements remain suitable for contractor (appear to be suitable) – amend if changed.

➢ Paragraph 112 – Community Preparation for Construction – Add section on Social disruption (access, road usage etc.) and include spread of communicable diseases, STI’s and HIV AIDs (these need to be included in the EMP with mitigation actions).

➢ Add a section each on i) Climate Change Adaptation; ii) Impacts due to Establishment of Construction Camps and Worksites, iii) Accidental Discovery of archeological assets, artifacts, sites or resources.

➢ Is there the need to include Unexploded Ordnances (UXO)?

Construction Phase

Physical ➢ Paragraph 114 – Last paragraph – further consideration if seedbed sediment monitoring as suggested is required? Further justification is required and if it is required outline how this will be undertaken, who will do the work, how will it be incorporated into the project, data analyses etc.

➢ Paragraph 116 – Reduced Air Quality – Revision to reflect impacts associated with the dust issues with quarry sites, transportation to site, issues at the site, waste material management on site and transportation – referenced table 5.1.

➢ Paragraph 119 – Last sentence – Water quality monitoring – this needs to be further expanded to include what will be undertaken, parameters tested, when, where etc. (a map identifying sites would be helpful) and how the data collected will be managed, stored and analyzed?

Biological ➢ Paragraph 120 – needs to be updated to reflect information and findings from the marine assessment once information is available.

➢ Additional information (maps etc.) on marine protected areas, LMMA etc. in the area and more information on protected species that may utilize the waters associated with the project (e.g. possible turtles, dolphins etc.).

➢ Paragraph 122 – last sentence – “repairs should be don off- site”. Further information required ensuring environmental impacts are managed to suitable standards (e.g. at approved and licensed premises).

➢ Paragraph 123 – further consideration for the suggestion that additional marine benthic assessments are required during construction and operational phase of the project. Decision should be determined based on the marine assessment report findings.

➢ Need to add a section on Impacts to the terrestrial habitats and flora and fauna associated with the project. Although minor this needs to be discussed and mitigation actions included (e.g. only trees identified to be removed etc.).

Social – Economic

➢ Paragraph 127 – Review the need for weekly vibration monitoring – if required provide description of parameters measures, sites, data analysis etc.


Operational Phase

➢ Consider dividing the design phase impacts into physical, biological and social issues – consistent with construction and operational phases described in this section and aligned with the EMP.

➢ Reconsider paragraphs statements – there are a number of operational environmental impacts associated with the operations of the port and associated services – these if managed well should be minor – however need to be identified, as such consideration for inclusion of; 1. Marine – Terrestrial Pollution - contamination of environment, waste accumulation within the port and adjacent areas, water pollutants

entering (discharge) into the water. 2. Petrochemical Management – spillage and emergency contingency plans, capacity training of staff, equipment etc. 3. Disposal of Solid Wastes – Collection, separation, disposal systems – no disposal into sea and/or land. 4. Management systems for port operational Noise, Vibration, Dust 5. OH&S systems, PPE etc. for staff. 6. Loss of biodiversity due to port – marine terrestrial – any need for rehabilitation – green zones etc.

F. Indirect, Induced and Cumulative Impacts due to Construction

➢ Paragraph 138 – Update this section to reflect up to date status of the projects – e.g. has the JICA market project competed. ➢ Review of this section to update – consistent with IEE review.

VI Analysis of Alternatives

➢ Review and update as required. ➢ Paragraph 154 table 7.1 update to reflect additional activities undertaken since the draft IEE developed.

VII Environmental Management Plan

➢ Change SEMP to CEMP. ➢ Part A – Institutional Arrangements and Past B – Mitigation and Management – review to ensure correct – if changed – changes need to

be reflected in other sections of the report. ➢ Part C – GRM – Review to ensure process is correct - if changed – changes need to be reflected in other sections of the report. Possibly

redraw the GRM flow chart to represent the process for the Alotau wharf project. ➢ Note: BRCC EARF is being reviewed – updated document will be circulated when completed – (October 2018). ➢ Pact D – Monitoring and Reporting - Reword – the ADB does not directly monitor – rather the contractors and projects staff do and ADB

review monitoring reports and processes.

Table 8.2 EMP Table

➢ Undertake a complete review to ensure all amendments have been included. ➢ Maintain consistence with each section – Design, Construction and Operation with Physical, Biological and Social impact

sections. Includes the additional suggestions in sections above.

IX. Conclusion and Recommendations

➢ Update as required – including any relevant findings from the marine assessment.

References ➢ Review and update to reflect amended information.


Annexes ➢ Review and update to reflect amended information. ➢ Include the marine assessment report. ➢ Annex D – update to reflect additional stakeholders consulted during the IEE review – including marine assessment

activities.


Annex B. BRCC Training Activities

List of participants: Training on Climate Change, Disaster Risks, Vulnerability Assessment and Safeguards (POM)

30 July – 2 August 2019

Name Gender Designation Organization Contact

Davis Alele M Focal Person Autonomous Bougainville Government

[email protected]

Maria Vanua F Provincial Project Assistant

BRCC Project [email protected]

Jane Larme F Focal person ENB Provincial Administration

[email protected]

Henry Mane M Provincial Project Assistant


Luke N’Drasal M Focal Person Manus Provincial Administration

[email protected]

Latin N’Drihin M Provincial Project Assistant


Lulu Osembo F Focal Person Milne Bay Provincial Administration

[email protected]

Chris So’onwai M Provincial Project Assistant


Robin Kiki M Focal Person Morobe Provincial Administration

[email protected]

Arthur Forepe M Provincial Project Assistant


Jacob Ekinye M Project Director CCDA [email protected]

Luanne Losi F Adaptation Manager

CCDA [email protected]

Ayesha Boeha F Projects Officer CCDA [email protected]

Benedict Goiye M Adaptation Officer CCDA [email protected]

Albert Milala M Projects Officer CCDA [email protected]

Manau Renagi F Senior Adaptation Officer


Iki Peter M Senior Projects Officer


Joseph Kunda M Project Coordinator BRCC PMU [email protected]

Silina Tagagau F Social and Gender Officer

BRCC PMU [email protected]

Joy Samo F Projects Officer CCDA [email protected]

Gau Gau M NDOH [email protected]

Ray Kangu M NDOH [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]











































Name Gender Designation Organization Contact

Josing Salimbi M NDOH [email protected]

Paul Ginis M NMSA [email protected]

Jude Dumeng M NMSA [email protected]

Dr. Akinapally Ramakrishna

M NARI 72521852

Peter Gendua M NARI [email protected]

Jackson Smith M Intern [email protected]

Madonna Popen F Intern [email protected]

Rachel Rabi F NFA [email protected]

Rendi Kandi F Intern [email protected]

Anna Herry F M&E Officer BRCC PMU [email protected]

Scholly Masueng F PNG Ports [email protected]

Rose Godana F GIS Officer CCDA [email protected]

Theresa Paru F Project Assistant GIZ [email protected]

Ordy Wefin M Projects Officer CCDA [email protected]

List of participants: Provincial Training – Autonomous Region of Bougainville 17-18 October 2019

Name Gender Designation Organisation Contact

Davis Alele M Focal Person Autonomous Bougainville Government

Maria Vanua F Provincial Project Assistant


Ursula Rakova F Tulele Peisa [email protected]

Peter Salei M Tulele Peisa [email protected]

Galdy Kumis M Teop Island

Sammy M Teop Island

Moses Tekuau M Department of Community Government

[email protected]

Thomas Matasi M Atolls District [email protected]

Lesley Gagesin F ABG [email protected]

Chris Binabat M DPI-fisheries [email protected]

Jonathan Sapaka M IOM [email protected]











































Claudia Dalet F Environment Health Officer

Health Department [email protected]

Freddy Taravaru M First Secretary-Office of the Vice President

ABG [email protected]

David Marena M Consultant M Ticca Inc. [email protected]

Joseph Jeraha M Disaster and Climate Change Officer


Jeffrey Magum M Managing Director Destiny Guest House

73459128 [email protected]

Sione Nash M Director Dept. of Community Development

[email protected]

Sam Mark M Disaster Emergency Climate Change Officer


Stella Waineth F NGO Promotion Inc.

[email protected]

Samany Moore M Community Government Teop Island

71243594

Galdy Kumis M Youth President Teop Constituency 71915162

Rooney Solly M Dept. of Lands [email protected]

Moses Koliwan M Self employed 71580576

List of participants: Provincial Training – East New Britain Province 14-15 October 2019


Jane Larme F Focal Person ENB Provincial Administration

[email protected]

Henry Mane M Provincial Project Assistant


Rebecca Ilam F marketing DAL [email protected]

Ofara Petilani M Special Officer NARI [email protected]

Josie Pidi F Accounts Officer Kokopo Village Resort

[email protected]

Chris Laup M Officer DPI [email protected]

Peter Tutuai M Program Manager Community Development

[email protected]

Gladys Piniau F DAL [email protected]

Nason Pukai M PNG Ports [email protected]

Joseph Kabiu M Officer in charge NMSA [email protected]

Simon Passingan M NGO [email protected]











































Levi Mano M Deputy PA ENB Provincial Administration

[email protected]

Paschalis Kinakava M Program Manager Public Health [email protected]

Chris Apisai M DAL-NGI [email protected]

Darius Joshua M NFA-NGI [email protected]

Sharon Nerius F IOM [email protected]

Enoch Pabon M Advisor Fisheries [email protected]

Donald Tokunai M Coordinator Disaster 7112777

List of participants: Provincial Training – Manus Province 7-8 October 2019


Luke N’Drasal M Focal Person Manus Provincial Administration

[email protected]

Latin N’Drihin M Provincial Project Assistant


Janet Konabe F Disaster Coordinator

Manus Provincial Administration

[email protected]

Francis N’Drewei M A/Coordinator Community Dev.


72124882

Selarn Kaluwin M Councillor Pobuma LLG

[email protected]

John Nuhwou M Trainee Community Dev. Officer


74275753

Augustine Sipai M Villager

Paul Ollou M LLG Census Coordinator

73046892

Charles Sileh M Manus Provincial Health Authority

[email protected]

Kanamon Daniel M Department of Works

[email protected]

Selarn Manuai M Human Resource Officer

Manus Prov. Administration

9709425

Mildred Kelly F CBO 79923768
























Provincial training (Milne Bay)

Provincial training (ARoB)

POM Training

POM Training

List of participants: Provincial Training – Milne Bay Province 3-4 October 2019


Lulu Osembo F Focal Person Milne Bay Provincial Authority

[email protected]

Chris So’Onwai M Provincial Project Assistant

BRCC Project 72914996

Led Liboma M Division of Fisheries 70415899

Noel Wangunu M Marine Biologist Eco Custodian Advocates

[email protected]

Sam Lemeri M Procurement Officer

Work Supervision Unit

6411368/71220243

Jack Purai M UCPNG WASH [email protected] 71776772

Steve Tobessa M Coordinator Provincial Disaster [email protected] 71162447

Dailo Elliot F Project Accountant WSU [email protected]

Nelson Tauyuwada M Area Manager KROG 70268221

Misa Lionel M PA Planning 70358562

John Demerua M Food Security DAL-MBA 73752055











Gansen Kadi M PA 71760041

Judith E Gambud F MBP Health Authority 70246352

Josuha Jerome M 72301216

Simon Dibele M A/Coordinator Sea Transport

MBPTA 71852428/6411424

Lassam Philip M 71002289

C.Solonwai PPA-BRCC

Gracia Moliola F Project Assistant IOM 73229485/[email protected]

List of participants: Provincial Training – Morobe Province 10-11 October 2019


Robin Kiki M Focal Person Morobe Provincial Administration

[email protected]

Arthur Forepe M Provincial Project Assistant


Edmond Nagombi M PNG University of Technology

[email protected]

Yanam Tamu M ELCPNG 79292571

Siuze gatus M 74711456

Warime Guti M ELCPNG [email protected]

Asenath Tubian F ELCPNG [email protected]

John Ben M NGO-ARMF [email protected]

Chris Tumi M Morobe Fisheries [email protected]

Jeffrey Waki M Scientist- crop Imprint

NARI-Bubia [email protected]

Maria Linibi F Observer PNG Women in Agriculture

[email protected]

Janet Pandi F Researcher-Livestock

NARI [email protected]

Siove Done F Community Learning Coordinator

[email protected]

Timothy Jiram M Research Officer Morobe Provincial Administration

[email protected]

Margaret Pais F ADRA PNG [email protected]

Bonnie Keoica M Lutheran Development Service

72472380


























Annex C. GRM Focal Persons

Provincial/Regional Grievance Focal Persons

Name Gender Phone Email Contact

Autonomous Region of Bougainville

Davis Alele M (675) 70836008 [email protected]

East New Britain

Jane Larme F (675) 70665164 [email protected]

Manus

Luke N’Drasal M (675) 73635617 [email protected]

Milne Bay

Lulu Osembo F (675) 71031514/6411132 [email protected] or

[email protected]

Morobe

Robin Kiki M (675) 76772467 [email protected]



Island-communities Grievance Focal Persons

Island Name Designation Gender Phone Email Contact

Autonomous Region of Bougainville

Carterets (5 islands)

Bernard Tunium Ward Chairman Male Only accessible by

radio n/a

Mortlock Poppy Posai Ward Chairman Male As above n/a

Tasman Simon Teperu Ward Chairman Male As above n/a

Fead (3 villages) Jethro Benda Ward Chairman Male As above n/a

Tinputs Receiving Sites

Ursula Rakova T. P Co-ordinate Female 73994806 [email protected]

East New Britain

Mualim Joe Paibi Ward Member M 7480 6810 [email protected]

Mioko (2 villages) William Bekeman Ward Member M 7016 1441 [email protected]

Utuan Sailas Wokwok Ward Recorder M 7921 2727 [email protected]

Karawara Hosea Morongo Chairman LLC M 7021 9140 [email protected]

Manus

Ahus Michael Kiromat Ward Development Officer (WDO)

M 71134615 n/a

Andra Hon:Hubert Molean Ward Member & President P’nka LLG

M 72947937 n/a

Bipi (4 villages) Joe Magun Ward Development Officer (WDO)

M 70634029 n/a

Ponam Hon: Hubert Molean Ward member & President

M 72947937 n/a

Milne Bay



Kwaraiwa Edward Digwaleu Ward Councillor M

No digicel and telikom network coverage Communicate via Focal Point or PPA, MBP


Ware Elizah Moses Ward Councillor M



Budibudi Essie Awauwa Ward Councillor M

No digicel and telikom network coverage Communicate via Focal Point or PPA, MBP (HF Radio)


Wiakau (2 villages)

Jonathan Boitau Ward Councillor M



Kitava Ronny Pabby Ward Councillor (Lalela Ward)

M

No digicel and telikom network coverage Communicate via Focal Point or PPA, MBP (HF Radio or Area Manager)


Simsimla (2 islands)

David Duduwa Ward Councillor M



Kaileuna (5 villages)

Augustine Isaiah Mwakania

Ward Councillor M 72601177/ 73140843 n/a

Note: The Area Managers for the 3 respective LLGs (Bwanabwana LLG - Kwaraiwa & Ware); (Kiriwina LLG - Kitava, Simsimla & Kaileuna); Murua LLG (Budibudi & Wiakau) can also step in to assist these Ward Councillors when needed to. Reliable means of communication is through HF Radio; sending



messages verbally through trusted relatives/ friends/ other Milne Bay Administration staff travelling to these target islands to relay to the above-mentioned names or physically travelling to these target islands to disseminate/ gather information.

Morobe

Malai Isaac Malai Ben Ward Councillor M 74537672 n/a

Aromot Martin Lekong Ward Councillor M 70440776 n/a

Mandok Katong Silas Ward Councillor M 70372509 n/a

Tami (2 villages) Augustine Aigilo Ward Councillor M 72816726 n/a


Annex D. Compliance with Safeguard Related Project Covenants

No. Covenant Reference Due Date Compliance Status as

of 30 June 2019.

10 Environment 3. The Recipient shall ensure or cause CCDA to ensure that the preparation, design, construction, implementation, operation and decommissioning of the Project, each Subproject and all Project facilities comply with (a) all applicable laws and regulations of the Recipient relating to environment, health, and safety; (b) the Environmental Safeguards; (c) the EARF and (d) all measures and requirements set forth in the respective IEE and EMP, and any corrective or preventive actions set forth in a Safeguards Monitoring Report.

Schedule 4 During implementation

Being complied with

11 Land Acquisition and Resettlement 4. The Recipient shall ensure or cause CCDA to ensure that the Project does not have any involuntary resettlement impacts within the meaning of the Safeguard Policy Statement. If due to unforeseen circumstances, the Project has involuntary resettlement impacts, the Recipient shall take all steps required to ensure that the Project complies with the applicable laws and regulations of the Recipient and with the Safeguard Policy Statement.


Being complied with

12 Land Acquisition and Resettlement 5. The Recipient shall or cause CCDA to ensure that any voluntary land acquisition and resettlement under the Project and each Subproject tis carried out in accordance with Voluntary Land Use/Negotiated Settlement Framework and that no physical or economic displacement takes place in connection with the Project or any Subprojects until compensation and other entitlements, if any, have been provided to affected people in accordance with Voluntary Land Use/Negotiated Settlement Framework.


Being complied with

13 Indigenous Peoples 6. The Recipient shall ensure or


Being complied with



of 30 June 2019.

cause CCDA to ensure that the Project does not impact indigenous peoples within the meaning of the Safeguard Policy Statement. If due to unforeseen circumstances, the Project impacts indigenous peoples, the Recipient shall take all steps necessary or desirable to ensure that the Project complies with all applicable laws and regulations of the Recipient and with the Safeguard Policy Statement.

14 Labor Standards, Health and Safety 7. The Recipient shall ensure or cause CCDA to ensure that the core labor standards and the Recipient’s applicable laws and regulations are complied with during Project implementation. The Recipient shall include specific provisions in the bidding documents and contracts financed by ADB under the Project requiring that the contractors, among other things (a) comply with the Recipient’s applicable labor law and regulations and incorporate applicable workplace occupational safety norms; (b) do not use child labor; (c) do not discriminate workers in respect of employment and occupation; (d) do not use forced labor; (e) allow freedom of association and effectively recognize the right to collective bargaining; and (f) disseminate or engage appropriate service providers to disseminate, information on the risks of sexually transmitted diseases, including HIV/AIDS, to the employees of contractors engaged under the Project and to members of the local communities surrounding the Project are, particularly women.


Being complied with

15 Labor Standards, Health and Safety 8. The Recipient shall strictly monitor compliance with the requirements set forth in paragraph 8 above and provide ADB with regular reports.


Being complied with

17 Safeguards - Related Provisions in Bidding Documents and Works Contracts 10. The Recipient shall ensure or cause CCDA to ensure that all bidding documents and contracts for Works contain provisions that require


Being complied with



of 30 June 2019.

contractors to: (a) comply with the measures and requirements relevant to the contractor set forth in the IEE and the EMP (to the extent they concern impacts on affected people during construction), and any corrective or preventative actions set out in a Safeguards Monitoring Report. (b) make available a budget for all such environmental and social measures; and (c) provide the Recipient with a written notice of any unanticipated environmental, resettlement or indigenous peoples risks or impacts that arise during construction, implementation or operation of the Project that were not considered in the IEE.

18 Safeguards Monitoring and Reporting 11. The Recipient shall do the following or shall cause CCDA to do the following: (a) submit semi-annual Safeguards Monitoring Reports to ADB and disclose relevant information from such reports to affected persons promptly upon submission; (b) if any unanticipated environmental and/or social risks and impacts arise during construction, implementation or operation of the Project that were not considered in the IEE or the EMP, promptly inform ADB of the occurrence of such risks or impacts, with detailed description of the event and proposed corrective action plan; and (c) report any actual or potential breach of compliance with the measures and requirements set forth in the EMP promptly after becoming aware of the breach.


Being complied with

46495-002: Building Resilience to Climate Change …...PAPUA NEW GUINEA: Building Resilience to...

Documents

Transcript of 46495-002: Building Resilience to Climate Change …...PAPUA NEW GUINEA: Building Resilience to...