PRIORITIZED ROAD INVESTMENT AND
MANAGEMENT ENHANCEMENTS (PRIME)PROJECT
Federated States of Micronesia

ENVIRONMENT AND SOCIAL MANAGEMENTFRAMEWORKFINAL

Prepared forWith Funding from

December 2020

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

CONTENTS
1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 1
1.1

Environmental and Social Assessment Overview ...................................................................... 1

1.2

Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) .................................................... 1

Project Background and Rationale .................................................................................. 3
2.1

Overview of the ‘PRIME’ Project ............................................................................................... 3

2.2

Climate Adaptation and Resilience Objectives .......................................................................... 3

2.3‘PRIME’ Investments and Activities ........................................................................................... 4

2.4

Project Location ........................................................................................................................ 7

Legislative & Regulatory Framework ............................................................................. 13
3.1

FSM National Government Legislation, Regulations and Policy Requirements ....................... 13

3.2

State Government Legislation, Regulation and Policy Requirements ...................................... 20

3.3International Standards and Guidelines .................................................................................. 27

3.4

Comparison of WB ESF and FSM Legislative Requirements .................................................. 33

Existing Environment ...................................................................................................... 39
4.1

Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 39

4.2

Project Area of Influence ......................................................................................................... 39

4.3

General Baseline Description .................................................................................................. 40

4.4

Indigeneity in FSM .................................................................................................................. 58

Anticipated Environmental & Social Impacts of Component 2 Physical Works ........ 60
5.1

Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 60

5.2

Potential Impacts of Components 1 and 3 ............................................................................... 60

5.3

Potential Feasibility, Design and Pre-Construction Impacts under Component 2 .................... 61

5.4

Potential Construction Impacts under Component 2 ............................................................... 62

5.5

Potential Operational Impacts under Component 2 ................................................................. 71

5.6

Cumulative Impacts................................................................................................................. 73

5.7

Risk Assessment & Impact Identification Methodology............................................................ 74

5.8

Residual “High Risk” Matters ................................................................................................... 97

5.9

Environmental and Social Sensitivities Maps .......................................................................... 97

Risk Management Procedures for Component 2 Works ............................................ 103
6.1

Environmental and Social Risk Screening ............................................................................. 103

6.2

Preparation of ESIA/ESMPs .................................................................................................. 104

December 2020

Final

ii

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

6.3

Civil Works Contractor Requirements ................................................................................... 106

6.4

Implementation of ESMP and CESMP .................................................................................. 107

6.5

Risk Management for Technical Advisory Activities .............................................................. 107

7.

Stakeholder Engagement, Consultation and Participation ........................................ 109

8.

Institutional Arrangements, Responsibilities and Implementation ........................... 111
8.1

Institutional Responsibilities and Structures .......................................................................... 111

8.2

Implementation Roles and Responsibilities ........................................................................... 113

8.3

Implementation Process ........................................................................................................ 117

9.

Budget and Financial Arrangements ........................................................................... 119

10.

Monitoring and Evaluation ............................................................................................ 121

11.

10.1

Internal Monitoring and Reporting ..................................................................................... 121

10.2

Submission and Distribution of Monitoring Reports ........................................................... 124

References ..................................................................................................................... 125

LIST OF TABLES
Table 3-1: WHO ambient air quality guidelines (WHO 2005) ......................................................................... 28
Table 3-2: WHO noise level guidelines (WHO 1999) ..................................................................................... 31
Table 3-3: Gaps between WB ESF and FSM legislative requirements, and gap filling measures................... 34
Table 4-1: Project Area of Influence (AOI) delineations and conditions......................................................... 40
Table 5-1: Qualitative risk analysis matrix ..................................................................................................... 74
Table 5-2: Qualitative measures of likelihood ............................................................................................... 75
Table 5-3: Qualitative measures of consequence ......................................................................................... 75
Table 5-4: Outcome of Assessment of Component 1 (Spatial and Sector Planning) and Component 3(Strengthening the Enabling Environment) Risks. .......................................................................................... 77
Table 5-5: Outcome of Assessment of Key Feasibility, Design and Pre-Construction Phase Environmental,
Social, Health and Safety Risks for Component 2 .......................................................................................... 79
Table 5-6: Outcome of Assessment of Key Construction Phase Environmental, Social, Health and Safety Risks
for Component 2 Physical Works ................................................................................................................... 85
Table 5-7: Outcome of Assessment of Key Operational Phase Risks Component 2 Physical Works ............ 95
Table 5-7: Key environmental and social attributes enabling assessment of level of sensitivity .................... 97
Table 5-8: ‘High’ sensitivity areas - Kosrae ................................................................................................... 98
Table 5-9: ‘High’ sensitivity areas - Pohnpei ................................................................................................. 98
Table 5-10: ‘High’ sensitivity areas - Chuuk .................................................................................................. 98

December 2020

Final

iii

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

Table 5-11: ‘High’ sensitivity areas - Yap ...................................................................................................... 98
Table 6-1: Examples of sub-plans to the Contractor Environmental and Social Management Plan .............. 107
Table 8-1: ESMF Implementation Responsibilities ....................................................................................... 118
Table 9-1: Indicative budget for implementing the ESMF ............................................................................. 119
Table 10-1: Schedule of construction reporting ............................................................................................ 123

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2-1: Location of FSM States: Kosrae, Pohnpei, Chuuk and Yap ........................................................... 8
Figure 2-2: Extent of PRIME Road on Kosrae. ................................................................................................. 9
Figure 2-3: Extent of PRIME Road on Pohnpei. ............................................................................................. 10
Figure 2-4: Extent of PRIME Road on Chuuk. ................................................................................................ 11
Figure 2-5: Extent of PRIME Road on Yap..................................................................................................... 12
Figure 4-1: Location of key terrestrial habitat classes in Kosrae (from Weeks 2019) .................................... 43
Figure 4-2: Location of key terrestrial habitat classes in Kosrae (from Weeks 2019) .................................... 44
Figure 4-3: Existing and proposed protected areas (from TNC 2019) ........................................................... 45
Figure 4-4: Areas of Biological Significance in Kosrae (from TNC 2019) ...................................................... 45
Figure 4-5: Key assets identified during the road corridor inspection – Kosrae ............................................. 47
Figure 4-6: Images showing key assets located in close proximity to the road on Kosrae including walls (topleft & right) private residences, garden and power poles (middle left & right), and one lane bridge on Lelu
causeway and coastal protection works (bottom left & right). ......................................................................... 48
Figure 4-7: Key assets identified during a road corridor inspection – Pohnpei .............................................. 51
Figure 4-8: Images showing examples of assets located in close proximity to the road on Pohnpei including
private residences and churches (top left & right), telecoms tower and water pipeline (bottom left & right). .. 52
Figure 4-9: Key assets identified during a road corridor inspection - Chuuk .................................................. 54
Figure 4-10: Images of Chuuk showing examples of assets identified during the road corridor on Chuukinspection including walls and private fences (top and middle left and right), pig pen (bottom left) and power
poles (bottom right). ....................................................................................................................................... 55
Figure 4-11: Key assets identified during a road corridor inspection - Yap ................................................... 57
Figure 4-12: Images showing examples of assets located in close proximity to the road on Yap including private
residences and commercial properties walls (top left & right) fences and walls (middle left & right, bottom left),and public utilities (bottom right) .................................................................................................................... 58
Figure 5-1: Key E&S sensitivities on Primary Road network – Kosrae (showing ‘high’ (red box) and ‘medium’(orange box) sensitivities) .............................................................................................................................. 99
Figure 5-2: Key E&S sensitivities on Primary Road network – Pohnpei (showing ‘high’ (red box) and ‘medium’(orange box) sensitivities). ........................................................................................................................... 100

December 2020

Final

iv

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

Figure 5-3: Key E&S sensitivities on Primary Road network – Chuuk (showing ‘high’ (red box) and ‘medium’(orange box) sensitivities). ........................................................................................................................... 101
Figure 5-4: Key E&S sensitivities on Primary Road network – Yap (showing ‘high’ (red box) and ‘medium’(orange box) sensitivities). ........................................................................................................................... 102
Figure 6-1: E&S screening process in relation to the ESMF......................................................................... 104
Figure 8-1: Implementation arrangements for the PRIME Project . .............................................................. 111

APPENDICES
Appendix A

Baseline Resource Report

Appendix B

Data used in E&S Sensitivities Maps

Appendix C

Environmental & Social Screening Forms

December 2020

Final

v

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

ABBREVIATIONSAOIArea of Interest

CBO

Community Based Organization

CIU

DoFA Central Implementation Unit

CRRSClimate Resilient Road Strategy

DoFA

Department of Finance and Administration

DoTC&I

Department of Transportation, Communications and Infrastructure

DRD

Department of Resources and Development

E&S

Environmental and Social

ESA

Environmental and Social Assessment

ESCP

Environmental and Social Commitment Plan

ESF

World Bank Environmental and Social Framework

ESMF

Environmental and Social Management Framework

ESMP

Environmental and Social Management Plan

ESSWorld Bank Environmental and Social Standards

FSM

Federated States of Micronesia

GIS

Geographic Information Systems

GoFSM

Government of FSM

GMGrievance Mechanism

IOL

Inventory of Loss

KIRMA

Kosrae Island Resource Management Authority

MOU

Memorandum of UnderstandingNGO

Non-Governmental Organization

OHS

Occupational Health and Safety

PAP

Project Affected Person

PIU

PRIME Project Implementation Unit

PMU

DoTC&I Project Management Unit

PRIME

Prioritized Road Investment and Management Enhancement Project

RF

Resettlement Framework

SEP

Stakeholder Engagement Plan

SOGI

Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity

SIDS

Small Island Developing States

TOR

Terms of Reference

VA

Vulnerability Assessment

December 2020

Final

vi

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

WWTP

Wastewater Treatment Plant

WB

World BankWHOWorld Health Organization

December 2020

Final

vii

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

GLOSSARY
Cut-off date

Disadvantaged
Vulnerable People

The eligibility cut-off date is the date of completion of the inventory ofloss (IOL) for Project works under Component 2. Assets located within
the Component 2 works footprint after this date will not be eligible for
entitlements or associated assistance.
/

Those who may be more likely to be adversely affected by the project
impacts and/or more limited than others in their ability to takeadvantage of a project’s benefits. Such an individual/group is also
more likely to be excluded from/unable to participate fully in themainstream consultation process and as such may require specificmeasures and/or assistance to do so. This will take into accountconsiderations relating to age, including the elderly and minors, andincluding circumstances where they may be separated from theirfamily, the community or other individuals on which they depend.
Specifically, vulnerable groups for PRIME, disadvantaged andvulnerable people consist of the following categories of persons: i)those without legal title to the land or other asset/s, ii) households
headed by females (where appropriate 1), iii) the elderly or disabled, iv)
vulnerable road users due to road construction (refer definition to
below), and v) other vulnerable groups, such as people living in
extreme poverty or hardship.

Gender Mainstreaming

The process of ensuring that gender concerns and women’s needs andperspectives are explicitly considered in projects and programs, andthat women participate in the decision-making processes associatedwith development-based activities.

Indigenous Persons

WB ESS7: Referring exclusively to a distinct, vulnerable, social andcultural group possessing the following characteristics in varying
degrees: (i) self- identification as members of a distinct indigenous
social and cultural group and recognition of this identity by other; and(ii) collective attachment to geographically distinct habitats, ancestral
territories or areas of seasonal use or occupation, as well as to thenatural resources in these areas; and (iii) customary cultural,
economic, social, or political institutions that are distinct or separate
from those of the mainstream society or culture; and (iv) a distinct
language or dialect, often different from the official language or
languages of the country or region in which they reside.

Meaningful
Consultation

WB ESF / ESS10: a two-way process that (a) begins early in the aproject planning process to gather initial views on the project proposal
an inform project design; (b) encourages stakeholder feedback,particularly as a way of informing project design and engagement by
stakeholders ion the identification and mitigation of environmental andsocial risks and impacts; (c) continues on an ongoing basis, as risks
and impacts arise; (d) is based on the prior disclosure anddissemination of relevant, transparent, objective, meaningful andeasily accessible information in a timeframe that enables meaningful

1 Note: On some islands in FSM all houses are headed by a female as they own the land.

head of the household would not be considered a vulnerable person.

December 2020

Final

In these cases, the femaleviiiFederated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

consultations with stakeholders, in a culturally appropriate format, in
relevant local language(s) and in understandable to stakeholders; €considers and responds to feedback; (f) supports active and inclusive
engagement with project-affected parties; (g) is free of externalmanipulation, interference, coercion, discrimination, and intimidation;and (h) is documented and disclosed by the Borrower.
PRIME Roads

Project
Persons

Roads that will be assessed as part of Technical Assistance (TA)
aspects of the PRIME Project, including the Vulnerability Assessment(VA), Climate Resilient Road Strategy (CRRS) and Environmental andSocial Assessment (ESA) studies, which include the majority of theexisting ‘primary roads’ on the main islands of each FSM State, andsome additional secondary roads that are considered to be of strategic
and/or economic importance by DoTC&I. Only the primary roads
identified will be funded under Component 2 of the PRIME Project.
Any recommended improvements identified by the VA/CRRS on thesecondary roads will not be considered for funding under Component
2 of PRIME, however they may form part of recommended future
investment needs for FSM’s road network.
Affected

Includes any person, households, entity, organizations, firms or private
institutions who, on account of changes that result from the Project will
have their (i) standard of living adversely affected, (ii) right, title, orinterest in any house, land (including residential, commercial,
agricultural, forest, plantations, grazing, and/organizing land), water
resources, communal fishing grounds, annual or perennial crops andtrees, or any other moveable or fixed assets acquired, possessed,
restricted, or otherwise adversely affected, in full or in part,
permanently or temporarily; and/or (iii) business, occupation, place ofwork or residence, or habitat adversely affected, permanently or
temporarily, with or without displacement.

Vulnerable Road Users

Road users who are more vulnerable to harm because they are not ina vehicle, including pedestrians, motorcyclists, cyclists, and those on
animals or animal drawn carts.

December 2020

Final

ix

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

1.

Introduction

1.1

Environmental and Social Assessment Overview
The Government of Federated States of Micronesia (GoFSM) has applied for financing
from the World Bank (WB) for the Prioritized Road Investment and Management
Enhancements (PRIME) Project to improve the climate resilience of FSM’s road network.
Part of the PRIME Project includes the assessment of environmental and social risks
including:(i)

Environmental and Social Assessment (ESA);(ii) Preparation of environmental and social instruments in accordance with the WB
ESF;(iii) Support stakeholder consultation activities; and(iv) Provision of technical environmental and social advice as required to theGovernment of FSM as part of project preparation.
The ESA Consultant has been engaged by the GoFSM through the Department ofTransportation, Communications and Infrastructure (DoTC&I) to undertake the ESA andpreparation of the instruments required for WB appraisal including development of an
Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) for the PRIME Project.

1.2

Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF)

1.2.1

Purpose and Scope of the ESMF
As outlined in the World Bank Environmental and Social Framework 2017 (ESF), thepurpose of the Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) is to examine
the risks and impacts of a project when the project consists of a program and/or series ofworks, and the risks cannot be determined until the program or works details have been
identified. This is the case for the PRIME Project as the specific works that will form theProject will only be determined after the completion of the Vulnerability Assessment (VA)
and Climate Resilient Road Strategy (CRRS) studies.
Once the works are defined for the PRIME Project and the necessary information becomes
available, the framework will be used to develop the projects specific Environmental andSocial Management Plans (ESMP) proportionate to potential risks and impacts for specificworks.
As set out in Environmental and Social Standard (EES) 1: Assessment and Managementof Environmental and Social Risks and Impacts (ESS 1) of the ESF, the ESMF is to set out
the principles, rules, guidelines and procedures to assess the environmental and social
risks and impacts, as well as measures and plans to reduce, mitigate and/or offset adverse
risks and impacts.

1.2.1.1

Covid-19 Pandemic
On March 11, 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared a global pandemic inresponse to the global spread of the severely infectious 2019 Novel Coronavirus (SARSCoV-2, or ‘Covid-19’).

December 2020

Final

1

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

FSM is particularly vulnerable to the risk of Covid-19 due to its economic reliance oninternational travel of residents, tourists, and trade. Although no cases have been reported
in the FSM to date (as at 1 December 2020), both international and domestic (i.e. interState) travel restrictions have been in place in FSM since March 2020, with strict
quarantine requirements for travelers.
As a result the core internationally-based ESA consultant team was not able to travel to
FSM as part of the preparation of PRIME Project ESA. Instead locally based subconsultants in each State were engaged to undertake baseline data collection, field survey
and stakeholder consultation activities under the direction of the internationally based
environmental and social experts.
In the absence of physically being present on-the-ground in FSM, the internationally-based
ESA consultant team implemented innovative solutions to baseline data collection
including the use of ESRI ArcGIS Collector, a device (e.g. smart phone) based application
which was used by the FSM-based team to capture data. The data was automaticallyuploaded to the consultants’ GIS database. This method of data collection ensured
consistent and comprehensive data and information collection and communication andallowed the GIS team to review in ‘real-time’ the data and ‘geo-tagged’ photographs
captured in the field.
Consultation meetings were facilitated by the State-based ESA consultant team members.
While initial efforts were made to allow relevant members of the international ESA
consultant team to call into larger meetings via online video conferencing, internet
connection was not reliable enough for this approach to be successful in most cases.
The FSM-based team was provided with training and consultation material (including
presentation, Project Summary, agenda, meeting minutes template and attendee lists) by
the international ESA consultant team members prior to consultation meetings. This wasundertaken to ensure consistency in the messages being communicated to stakeholders
across all four States, to ensure valuable feedback was provided and to manage
stakeholder expectations. An internal debrief meeting was then held after the meeting todiscuss any issues raised by the stakeholders and learnings from the process.

1.2.2

Links with Other Documents
This ESMF is just one of several reports and environmental and social (E&S) instruments
developed to support management of the E&S aspects of the PRIME Project. Other key
E&S documents prepared by the consultants for project appraisal include:•

Resettlement Framework (RF).

•

Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP).

•

Environmental and Social Commitment Plan (ESCP).

Documents to be prepared during project implementation, prior to preparation of theContractor Bid documents, include:•

Labor Management and Health & Safety Procedures (LMP).

•

Generic Environmental and Social Management Plan (ESMP).

December 2020

Final

2

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

2.

Project Background and Rationale

2.1

Overview of the ‘PRIME’ Project
The Prioritized Road Investment and Management Enhancements (PRIME) Project will
provide funds for technical assistance and institutional strengthening to improve themanagement of the road network in relation to potential climate change impacts for the
FSM. In addition, the Project will fund the feasibility, design and construction of physicalworks on priority road assets to improve resilience to climate-related hazards or events.
FSM faces significant challenges related to its small size, remoteness, geographicaldispersion, environmental fragility and sensitivity to external shocks. Climate projections
predict elevations in air temperature, frequency of days of extreme, increased rainfall andrising sea levels. Sea level rise combined with natural year-to-year changes will accentuate
the impact of storm surges and coastal flooding.
FSM’s transport network is of critical importance to the country’s economy and economic
development through supporting trade and promoting commercial activity by facilitating the
movement of goods and services, and providing safe and efficient access to social services
including schools and health facilities. Critical climate resilient road, bridge or drainage
improvement works to be implemented urgently to maintain a basic level of land transport
connectivity in each state will be identified as part of the PRIME Project. The extent ofthese works are described and shown in Section 2.4.
While some initial road works have been identified as requiring urgent works (refer
Component 2, Section 2.3.2), the design of the required works has not yet been undertaken
and the full extent of impacts are not yet known. The additional works that will form the
PRIME Project will be identified as part of the VA and CRRS studies. As part of thesestudies a multi-criteria assessment will be undertaken to prioritize the urgency of works
and works that will be funded by PRIME. Environmental and social risk screening will bepart of the multi-criteria analysis.

2.2

Climate Adaptation and Resilience Objectives
Frequent natural disasters and climate change impacts impose high costs and may eventhreaten the physical viability of some areas of the main islands of FSM and more remoteouter islands. Droughts, typhoons, storm waves, flooding and landslides all affect FSM.
FSM is particularly vulnerable to the impacts of climate change and is likely to suffer
serious adverse environmental, social and economic losses as a result of climate change
induced hazards. Many people live within the coastal zone and are therefore vulnerable
to climate related changes in precipitation, sea level, storms and coastal erosion.
The negative impacts of climate change are already evident in FSM, for instance, saltwater
intrusion from rising sea levels that damage crops and contaminate freshwater supplies
and increasing extreme weather events such as typhoons. In addition, as drought and sea
level rise are amplified by regional El Niño Southern Oscillation (ENSO) processes,
formerly sustainable atoll communities now rely on imported food and water during timesof stress. Exacerbated by sea level rise, extreme spring tides, known in FSM as ‘King
Tides’, are causing site-specific intense marine inundation that damages taro beds, soil,
agro-forestry resources, and critical infrastructure along the coast, especially on low atoll
islets.

December 2020

Final

3

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

Similar to other Small Island Developing States (SIDS), FSM is vitally dependent on accessto well-functioning and reliable transportation systems. FSM’s road network is of criticalimportance to the country’s economic development. It provides for the day-to-day wellbeing of its people by increasing their access to economic activities and social services. It
is estimated that around 75% of the population lives within 1 km of the coast, and criticalinfrastructure - such as hospitals, schools, government offices, places of employment,
tourist infrastructure, port facilities, airports, and roads–is located primarily in the coastal
zone. The country’s road network and users already suffer regular temporary – sometimes
only for hours, but occasionally longer - breaks of serviceability as vulnerable links or
locations can be frequently rendered impassable and journeys disrupted by flooding, debris
deposit, culvert, bridge and/or pavement damage.
Expected climate change effects - the combination of rising sea level and more intense
typhoons – will place these coastal assets and communities at a higher level of risk. The
FSM road network faces a range of vulnerability issues, in particular:(i) Coastal exposure to sea-level rise, storm surge, wave action during spring tides
and typhoons;(ii) Inland flooding and landslips during extreme rainfall events; and(iii) Accelerated pavement deterioration due to extreme weather and rising watertables in some locations.
The GoFSM plans to prepare a detailed assessment of vulnerabilities in road transport anddevelop a strategy for enhancing the climate resilience of the overall network for the sametime-frame, with WB’s assistance through the PRIME Project.
As outlined in Section 2.1, a key component of the PRIME Project is the preparation of theRoad Network VA and CRRS studies, the objective of which is to mainstream analysis ofsevere weather events and climate change into road network planning and will enable aprioritized list of proposed investments in the network.

2.3‘PRIME’ Investments and Activities
The PRIME Project will be included within the WB’s Pacific Climate Resilient Transport
Program (PCRTP) series of projects and will make significant investments in a range ofclimate resilient infrastructure.
Project activities will primarily take place within existing primary road corridors, orimmediately adjacent to the road to improve erosion protection, drainage or safety features.
Some additional secondary roads that are considered to be of strategic and/or economic
importance will also form part of the ‘PRIME Roads’ and be assessed under Component 1
below but recommended improvements on these secondary roads will not be considered
for funding under Component 2. The extent of these roads, including a definition of ‘PRIME
roads’ in each State, are presented in Section 2.4.
The three key components of the PRIME Project are outlined below.

2.3.1

PRIME Component 1: Spatial and Sector Planning Tools
This Component involves technical assistance (TA) that will improve the way that climatechange is addressed in FSM’s road sector to enable policymakers to make informed
decisions based on the most accurate and up-to-date information available. The following
activities are proposed under Component 1:

December 2020

Final

4

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Frameworka) Vulnerability Assessment (VA) and Climate Resilient Road Strategy (CRRS).
Preparation and implementation of a VA and CRRS to assess levels of vulnerability
to climate change and severe weather events (e.g. sea-level rise, extreme rainfall,landslide, storm surge, etc.) across FSM’s existing primary road corridors and
GoFSM-selected existing strategic secondary road corridors. The VA and CRRS
will also identify measures to enhance resilience and prioritize investments tobalance vulnerability reduction against cost implication. Training will be provided
to relevant national and state officials in the use of VA and CRRS tools.
b) Climate-informed road asset management systems. Provision of hardware,
software and ancillary tools to establish climate-informed road asset management
systems to be used by DoTC&I and State Road Authorities. Training will be
provided to relevant National and State officials in the use of these systems.

2.3.2

PRIME Component 2: Climate Resilient Infrastructure Solutions
This Component involves feasibility studies, design and construction of identified priority
road assets to improve their resilience to climate-related hazards. The integration ofclimate change considerations into infrastructure activities will help strengthen theresilience of assets and improve functionality of the road network. Component 2 is split
into two parts:a) Urgent Priority Works (including design and supervision). Critical climate resilientroad, bridge, causeway or drainage improvement works that should be
implemented urgently to maintain a basic level of road connectivity in each state.
Urgent works proposed for financing under the PRIME Project include:(i) Improving the narrow, low-level Lelu causeway in Kosrae;(ii) Replacing the 12 m Awak bridge in Pohnpei;(iii) Improving the 2.5 km airport to Pou Bay bridge road in Chuuk; and(iv) Replacing two short-span (6 m long) steel and concrete composite bridges
in Yap.
b) Works informed by the VA and CRRS (including design and supervision). In
addition to the urgent priorities under Sub-component 2a, a selection of near,medium and long-term road works would be financed to enhance the resilience ofthe network in each state to climate change impacts and natural hazards, inaccordance with the recommendations from the VA and CRRS undertaken as partof Component 1. Works will be restricted to road networks within the existing
primary road corridors. It is expected that physical works will not commence until
year 2 of the Project.
Interventions are expected to include measures to strengthen network resilience,
including but not necessarily limited to:(i)Pavement and surface strengthening – periodic maintenance, repairs,
rehabilitation or reconstruction of existing road pavement layers and/or
surfacing, including provision of sealed shoulders and raising road levels;(ii) Drainage improvements – provision, reinstatement and/or lining of
longitudinal drainage, replacement and/or increasing capacity of crossdrainage culverts, improving open or covered outfalls, provision of subsoil
drainage and cut-off drains;

December 2020

Final

5

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework(iii) Spot slope stabilization – widening and/or reducing slope of cuttings andfill embankments to reduce landslip risk, soil bioengineering andbiotechnical stabilization techniques, and anchoring of unstable rockslopes;(iv) Rock wall revetment strengthening – for protection of coastal roadsections;(v) Improvements to causeways and bridges – repairs or reconstruction ofexisting crossings and/or provision of new crossings to provide safe, allweather access for vehicles and pedestrians; and(vi) Road safety improvements – traffic calming measures, provision ofguardrails, line marking and minor realignments to improve sight distance.
Design of civil works will conform to international design codes of practice such as
Austroads 2 for road and bridge design. Specifications for all works and materials will also
be in accordance with international standards, making use of innovative materials andapproaches if they will enhance climate resilience.
Once the proposed Component 2 works have been identified as part of the VA/CRSS
prioritization process, early environmental and social risk screening will identify significant
impacts that require avoidance and mitigation and will contribute to project selection for
funding under the PRIME Project prior to commencement of preliminary design for theworks.
Further environmental and social risk screening will be undertaken once concept
preliminary designs have been developed to determine whether:(i) There are high risk (significant) environmental and/or social aspects of these works
that could prevent the works from being included under the PRIME Project;(ii) Works could be designed in a way to minimize environmental and social impacts;or(iii) Specific environmental assessments (such as ESIAs) and ESMPs, and Land
Access Reports/Plans are to be prepared. If works are subsequently redesigned,
further screening may be appropriate.

2.3.3

PRIME Component 3: Strengthening the Enabling Environment
This Component will provide funding to support institutional and regulatory reforms for road
sector asset management and maintenance, including measures to strengthen local
capacity and to increase the sustainability of climate resilient road sector investments. In
addition, this Component will help to strengthen coordination among relevant institutions,will look at ways in which road sector management can be improved, and will address any
emerging priority issues that can help support GoFSM in addressing climate change risks.
Proposed sub-components include:a) Institutional and Governance Review. A review of institutional arrangements,
key policies, regulations, legislation and roles and responsibilities of principle
stakeholders involved in the road sector with recommendations to strengthen sucharrangements.

2

https://austroads.com.au/

December 2020

Final

6

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Frameworkb) Project Management. Establishment and maintenance of a Project
Implementation Unit (PIU) to support the implementation of the PRIME Project. In
addition, this includes operating costs for PRIME-related travel andcommunications costs.
c) Road Safety Program. Provision of technical assistance activities to improve roadsafety.
d) Capacity Building Initiatives. Assess current preventive maintenance techniques
and industry capacity. Provide technical trainings to sector agencies and local
consultants and contractors to better operate and regulate a more climate resilient
road network.
e) Gender-informed Driver Licensing Pilot. A pilot program to study and implement
activities that address gaps in the possession of a driver’s license.
f)

Emerging Priority Issues. Providing technical assistance to strengthen the
Recipient’s capacity to address emerging priority issues that could have an impact
on the Recipient’s ability to manage a climate resilient road network.

Environmental and social instruments outlined in Section 1.2.3 (e.g. RF, ESMF, LMP, SEP
and ESCP), provide the methods to manage the environmental and social risks relating to
the technical advisory services that will be funded under this component. These
instruments are relevant for all activities under each Component. Environmental and social
instruments specifically relevant to Component 3 include the ESCP, SEP and LMP.

2.4

Project Location

2.4.1

National Context
FSM is located near the equator about 4,000 km southwest of the Hawaiian Islands in theWestern Pacific Ocean and within the Caroline Islands group. The largest nation in theMicronesian sub-region, FSM is made up of four semi-autonomous states (Kosrae,
Pohnpei, Chuuk and Yap) located between Marshall Islands to the east and Palau and thePhilippines to the west (refer Figure 2-1).
FSM is made up of 607 islands scattered over an area of about 2.6 million km 2, including
its Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), in the western Pacific Ocean. The total land area of
FSM is 704.6 km2, with 7,192 km2 of lagoon area. The islands vary from small islets, which
are inundated at high tide, to atolls and large volcanic islands with land area of more than
80 km2. Approximately 65 (approx. 10%) of the islands are inhabited.
In general, there is only one primary, circumferential route on each of the four main FSM
Island states. In addition, most of the population in FSM lives close to the coast, and criticalinfrastructure including roads, schools, places of employment, port facilities, tourist
facilities, power plants and airports, are located primarily in the coastal zone.

December 2020

Final

7

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

Figure 2-1: Location of FSM States: Kosrae, Pohnpei, Chuuk and Yap

2.4.2

Extent of ‘PRIME Roads’
For the purpose of the PRIME Project, the PRIME Roads have been defined as the roads
that will be assessed as part of Technical Assistance aspects of the PRIME Project,including the VA/CRRS and ESA studies, which include the majority of the existing ‘primaryroads’ on the main islands of each FSM State, and some additional secondary roads thatare considered to be of strategic and/or economic importance by DoTC&I. The extent of
the PRIME Roads in each State are shown in the sections below.
Only works that have been prioritized for primary roads will be eligible for funding underComponent 2 of the PRIME Project. Any recommended improvements identified by the
VA/CRRS on the secondary roads will not be considered for funding under Component 2of PRIME, however they may form part of recommended future investment needs for FSM’sroad network.
Component 2 works are only likely to include a small proportion (<10%) of the primaryroads within the PRIME Road network. The exact location of works, and the proportion of
the PRIME Road that will have climate resilient road works funded by PRIME will vary
between States depending on the nature of the works proposed.

December 2020

Final

8

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

2.4.2.1

Kosrae State
The primary road network in Kosrae consists of the coastal road which circles two-thirdsof the island, built largely on the coastal strand bordered by mangrove forest and coastal
shoreline, from Utwe in the south through to the Airport at Okat in the northwest.
The PRIME Road extent on Kosrae includes much of the primary road network, plus anadditional secondary road to the north east of the island (refer Figure 2-2) considered to
be of strategic and economic importance to Kosrae at last partly due to commercial activity
on that road (i.e. a water bottling plant).

Figure 2-2: Extent of PRIME Road on Kosrae.

December 2020

Final

9

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

2.4.2.2

Pohnpei StateThe Primary Road Network in Pohnpei consists of the 77 km coastal circumferential roadof which 54 km is paved and the remainder typically formed using a coral rock base course.
The PRIME Road extent on Pohnpei includes much of the primary road network plus
additional secondary roads considered to be of strategic an economic importance toPohnpei, including a road to Nan Madol (Figure 2-3), a significant archaeological site on
the eastern shore of Pohnpei that has been declared a United Nations Educational,
Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) World Heritage Site.

Nan Madol

Figure 2-3: Extent of PRIME Road on Pohnpei.

December 2020

Final

10

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

2.4.2.3

Chuuk StateThe Chuuk State capital is located on Weno Island has a circumferential road that is
approximately 18.5 km in length. The Weno primary road network is currently in poor
condition in places, and inadequate drainage leads to difficultly with ongoing maintenance.
The PRIME Road extent on Weno Island, includes much of the primary road network on
the island plus additional secondary roads (West Pou Road, and other linking roads)
considered to be of strategic an economic importance (refer Figure 2-4).

Figure 2-4: Extent of PRIME Road on Chuuk.

December 2020

Final

11

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

2.4.2.4

Yap State
The primary road network on Yap includes three primary roads: the main trunk road thatruns from the southern end of Yap Island in Magachil to the northern end of Maap Island;
the Yap Central Loop; and a road that branches off the main trunk road serving the districtsof Gagil.
The PRIME Road extent on Yap consists of the primary road network, plus additional
branches of the road to Ruu and Bugol as shown in refer Figure 2-5.

Figure 2-5: Extent of PRIME Road on Yap.

December 2020

Final

12

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

3.

Legislative & Regulatory Framework

3.1

FSM National Government Legislation, Regulations andPolicy Requirements

3.1.1

Overview
The GoFSM is modeled after the federal system similar to that of the United States with anational president and four state governors with respective legislatures and judiciaries. The
states of Pohnpei, Chuuk and Yap have four levels of governance – National, State,municipal, and traditional. Kosrae does not have the fourth level of government, as it nolonger has traditional leadership.
The four States of FSM (Kosrae, Pohnpei, Chuuk and Yap) have considerable degrees ofautonomy. Each State also has its own set of environmental and social laws andregulations geared to protect the States from a wide range of environmental impacts
including, the effects of climate change. Under the Compact II, Article VI and section 161
of Title II, FSM is committed to applying the National Environmental Policy Act 1969 (sincerepealed) and “to develop and implement standards and procedures to protect its
environment”.
The following articles of legislation are relevant to the PRIME Project.

3.1.2

FSM Constitution
The Constitution of the FSM (the ‘Constitution’) is the supreme law in FSM, and includes
a bill of rights (Art IV).
The Constitution acknowledges and protects the role and functions of traditional leaders
as recognized by custom and tradition, as well as the traditions of the Micronesian people(Art V).
The Constitution establishes National, State and Municipal levels governance (Art VII).
Each State is required to have its own democratic Constitution. The Constitution refers to
traditional practice and custom as a guiding influence in all aspects of decision-making in
FSM and seeks to preserve the role of tradition and custom in FSM life. To support this, aCouncil of Chiefs consisting of traditional leaders and elected representatives is provided
for in the Constitution.
Article IX of the Constitution establishes FSM’s legislature, which selects the President,
and with members elected for districts in each state according to population. Each State
elects their own legislature and governor. The National legislature has the power to makelegislation on a wide range of topics. For example, they may make laws “to regulate theownership, exploration, and exploitation of natural resources within the marine space of
the Federated States of Micronesia beyond 12 miles from island baselines” [Title 3].
Article X of the Constitution vests FSM’s executive power in an elected President as the
Head of State, who is elected by Congress for a four-year term and limited to no more than
two consecutive terms. The President appoints judges, ambassadors and principal officersof government departments in the National Government.
Article XI of the Constitution establishes the judiciary of FSM as comprised of the Supreme
Court, and subsidiary courts, established by statute. The Judiciary Act of 1979 provides

December 2020

Final

13

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Frameworkfurther guidance about the judiciary of FSM. Court decisions are constitutionally required
to be consistent with Micronesian customs and traditions.
The legislative power of the National Government is vested in Congress. The Congressincludes one member elected from each of the four States, an additional member electedfrom congressional districts in each State apportioned by population. Chuuk, Pohnpei andYap may decide that one of its seats be reserved for a traditional leader in place of one of
the elected representatives.
Regulation development, as prescribed under the FSM Administrative Procedures Act,requires the widespread publication and dissemination of proposed regulations before
adoption, including radio announcements in English and indigenous languages.
Opportunities for public comment and public hearings are incorporated in the Act.
In most instances, national legislation is supplemented, or even duplicated, by Statelegislation.
The Constitution contains several references to the environment, land use and customs,
including the following:

3.1.3

PreambleStates, in part, “[t]o make one nation of many islands, we respect the diversityof our cultures. Our differences enrich us. The seas bring us together, they
do not separate us. Our islands sustain us, our island nation enlarges us andmakes us stronger.”

Article XIII

Contains additional provisions, including some that relate to the environment.

Section 2

Provides that “radioactive, toxic chemical, or other harmful substances may
not be tested, stored, used, or disposed of within the jurisdiction of theFederated States of Micronesia without the express approval of the national
government of the Federated States of Micronesia.”

Section 4

In terms of land use, “[a] noncitizen, or a corporation not wholly owned bycitizens, may not acquire title to land or waters in Micronesia.”

Section 5

Prohibits a lease agreement for the use of land for an indefinite term by a
noncitizen, a corporation not wholly owned by citizens, or any government isprohibited.

Section 113 (General
Provisions)

Empowers the High Commissioner to restrict or forbid non-citizens fromacquiring interests in real property and in business enterprises.

Section 114 (General
Provisions)

Requires due recognition to be given to local customs in the system of law.

Section 202 (General
Provisions)

Provides that customs not in conflict with other laws in Micronesia arepreserved.

FSM Environment Protection Act (2014)
The Environment Protection Act (revised Code 2014) provides for the protection of theenvironment, culture, historic and natural aspects of Micronesian heritage.
The Act is a national government declaration of on-going commitment in cooperation with
State and municipal governments and other concerned public and private organizations.
The Act declares to use all practicable means and measures, including financial andtechnical assistance, in a manner calculated to foster and promote the general welfare tocreate and maintain conditions under which the people of FSM man and nature can exist
in productive harmony and fulfill the social, economic, and other requirements of present
and future generations of FSM.

December 2020

Final

14

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

The Act declares that it is the continuing responsibility of the FSM to use all practicablemeans, consistent with other essential considerations of national policy, to improve andcoordinate governmental plans, functions, programs, and resources to the end that the
inhabitants of the FSM may:a. Fulfill the responsibilities for each generation as trustee of the environment forsucceeding generations;b. Assure for all Micronesians safe, healthful, productive, and aesthetical and culturally
pleasing surroundings;c.

Attain the widest range of beneficial uses of the environment without degradation,risk to health or safety, or other undesirable or unintended consequences; andd. Preserve important historic, cultural, and natural aspects of our Micronesian
heritage, and maintain, wherever possible, an environment, which supports diversityand variety of individual choice.
The effort to protect and preserve the environment needs to be carried forward in close
cooperation with the States in the formulation of policy, enforcement, and other activities.
The FSM recognizes that each person has a responsibility to contribute to the preservationand enhancement of the environment. Section 302 of the Environmental Impact
Assessment Act states that - 1) any person, prior to taking any action that may significantly
affect the quality of the environment within the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) of the FSM,
or within the boundaries of the National Capital Complex at Palikir, must submit anenvironmental impact statement to the Director, in accordance with regulations establishedby the Director. (2) The environmental impact statements required by subsection (1) of thissection are public documents.
Building on the Trust Territory Environmental Quality Protection Act (Title 25 of the FSM
Constitution), the FSM Environmental Protection Act 1984 (FSM EPA), and its subordinate
instruments, seeks to provide the legislative basis for the protection of the environment,
including cultural, historic and natural aspects of Micronesian heritage, throughout FSM.
The Act acknowledges that close co-operation between the National and State
Governments is required to support this objective.
The 1969 Act established the Environmental Protection Board within the Office of the
President. The Board is composed of five members: “one member from each State andone member appointed by the President”. In 1987, an Act to Reorganize the Governmentof the FSM redefined the Board to mean the Secretary for Human Resources.
The Act requires the Secretary to enter into written cooperative arrangements with theStates or State agencies for the purposes of providing funds to the States, collecting dataon local needs and transferring authority to the States to act as agents of the National
Government in implementing environmental programs at the State level. Such delegationof functions may be withdrawn on written advice from the Secretary if the delegation resultsin termination of any financial grant.
The Secretary, as a result, has broad authority to protect health, welfare and safety and to
implement policy and strategies, through the promulgation of regulations, to remedy
pollution and contamination of air, land and water.

December 2020

Final

15

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

3.1.4

FSM EPA Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations (1989)
The purpose of the EIA Regulations is to implement Section 13 of the FSM Environmental
Protection Act by establishing standard procedures for preparation of an environmental
impact assessment statement prior to taking or funding any major action that may
significantly affect the quality of the human environment.
These Regulations require the National Government and its agencies to submit an
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to the Secretary of Human Resources prior to taking
any “major” 3 action significantly effecting the quality of the human environment. “Effect” isdefined to include indirect, direct and cumulative effects in areas such as land use,
population density, air, water and natural systems including ecosystems. “Effects” may beecological, aesthetic, cultural, historical, economic, social or health-related. “Significant
Impacts”, determined as a result of a preliminary assessment, require a Comprehensive
EIA. Draft EIA statements are to be made available for public comment and review,
including provision for a public hearing.
Part I (l) defines Project Proponents as the FSM National Government or its agencies or
the recipient of funding from the FSM National Government or its agencies, that propose
to undertake any major action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment.
Part III sets out the EIA process. Part IV elaborates on this process which is a two-step
assessment process with the first step being the submission of an Initial Assessment using
a checklist template. If following evaluation there are potentially severe environmental
impacts, then a Comprehensive EIA is required. The contents of the Comprehensive EIA
are set out in Part V.
The EIA process is intended to help the general public and government officials makedecisions with the understanding of the environmental consequences of their decisions,and take actions consistent with the goal of protecting, restoring, and enhancing theenvironment. These regulations provide the directions to achieve this purpose. In addition,these regulations are designed to:a. Integrate the EIA process into early planning of projects to ensure timely
consideration of environmental factors and to avoid delays; andb. Identify at an early stage the significant environmental issues requiring further
study thereby defining the scope of the EIA.
For the PRIME Project, DoTC&I in association with their state counterpart agencies (stateTransport Divisions/Departments) and the CIU Safeguards Team would identify the rangeof permits required, prepare the assessments and the permit applications. As much as
possible / relevant the assessments will be prepared for both the WB and FSM
requirements

3.1.5

Labor Law
FSM has national legislation that outlines worker’s rights. The Labor Code (Title 51)
outlines hiring of non-resident workers, labor development, and other requirements. The
Labor Code requires:

3 No definition is provided for a ‘Major’ action in the Regulations. For the purposes of this assessment it isassumed that the urgent works PRIME Project constitutes a ‘Major’ action given the potential nature and scaleof associated potential impacts.

December 2020

Final

16

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Frameworka.

Non-resident workers to obtain health certificates and have a minimum of two yearsof related work experience;b.

Any benefits provided to non-resident construction workers such as housing,transport, etc. will also be provided to any national contractor who is required toleave their principle place of residence for work;c.

Applications for foreign workers are needed, unless the foreign workers will be in the
country less than 90 days; andd.

Minimum employment conditions outlined in the Code apply to all foreign workers.

Legislation related to occupational health and safety is limited. The Public Employment
Code 2014 requires that workers exposed to hazardous working conditions are additionallycompensated.

3.1.6

Other Relevant Legislation
Current environmental regulations relevant to the PRIME Project which draw heavily on
legislation put in place during Trust Territory arrangements include those outlined below.
Legislation related to land tenure and land acquisition in FSM is outlined in the RF 4.
While there are laws regulating closed marine areas in FSM, there is no legislation
dedicated solely to protected areas in FSM.
FSM does not have any disaster risk management legislation; however a Nationwide
Climate Change Policy was created in 2009 (FSM, 2009). The focus of this Policy is to
mitigate climate chance especially at the international level and adaptation at the national,
state and community levels to reduce the FSMs vulnerability to climate change adverse
impacts.

3.1.6.1

Marine and Freshwater Quality Standards Regulations (1986)
The Marine and Freshwater Quality Standards Regulations (1986) identify the uses forwhich waters of FSM shall be maintained and protected in order to specify water quality
standards required to maintain the designated use and to prescribe requirements tomaintain specified water quality. Any entity responsible for a point source discharge thatthreatens a breach of these standards, unless it has received a discharge permit under the
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) from the USEPA, is in breachof these Regulations.
These Regulations provide the basis for the state water quality Regulations, with EPA /KIRMA managing these requirements at the state level. Most of their effort is allocated todrinking water quality rather than river or marine waters and, as a result, baseline data issparse. Rivers and streams and coastal areas potentially impacted by PRIME Project
activities will require baseline data collection and ongoing monitoring as detailed in the
ESMF.

3.1.6.2

Trust Territory Solid Waste Regulations (1979)
The Trust Territory Solid Waste Regulations (1979) establish minimum standards for thedesign, construction, installation, operation and maintenance of solid waste storage,
collection and disposal systems. “Solid Waste” is defined as “garbage, refuse, and other
4 DoTC&I, 2020, ‘Prioritized Road Investment and Management Enhancements (PRIME) Project, FSM: Resettlement

Framework’, Report prepared for Department of Transportation, Communication and Infrastructure.

December 2020

Final

17

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

discarded solid waste materials” not including substances in water sources, but including
liquid waste such as waste oil, pesticides, paints, solvents and hazardous waste. A“disposal system” includes the entire process of storage, collection, transportation,
processing and disposal of solid waste by any person or authority.
All waste generated as a result of the PRIME Project will be recycled where possible withresidual material being disposed of at a facility permitted by the state EPA/KIRMA.
Measures related to solid waste management, including minimization, recycling and reuseof material, will be developed in the Generic ESMP. A Waste Minimization andManagement Plan (WMMP) is also to be prepared by the Contractor which sets out
strategies and actions required to reduce potential health and environmental risks
associated with waste generation and disposal, as well as opportunities for constructionwaste reuse.
3.1.6.3

FSM EPA Earthmoving Regulations (1988)
These Regulations provide that “no person shall release funds, equipment or materials orbuilding permit to those engaged in earthmoving activities until a permit is issued by the
Secretary of Human resources”. Earthmoving is defined to include activities of a continuous
nature such as dredging or quarrying which disturb or alter the surface of the land, including
reefs and lagoons. Earthmoving also applies to the subdivision of land, and the moving,depositing or storing of soil, rock, coral or earth.
All aggregate material used for roading (and other works) construction activities will require
to be sourced from a quarry facility that has the appropriate permit. DoTC&I will need toestablish from State agencies whether a permit is required for the “depositing or storing ofsoil, rock, coral or earth” in relation to the PRIME Project. If aggregate material is imported
then State regulations will also need to be met.
Measures related to earthmoving, as well as use of aggregate material are outlined in the
Generic ESMP, including the prohibition of the use of coral reef/rock for project activities.
The disposal, and where appropriate reuse, of excavated material will be addressed in theContractor’s WMMP.

3.1.6.4

FSM Constitution, Title 26 Historical Sites, and Antiquities
The FSM Code Title 26 – Historical Sites and Antiquities states that it is FSM policy toprotect and preserve the diverse cultural heritage of the peoples of Micronesia and to
identify and maintain areas, sites and objects of historical significance. “Cultural attribute”
is defined as all aspects of local culture, tradition, arts, crafts, all social institutions, formsof expression and modes of social interaction. “Historical property” is defined as sites,
structures, building, objects, and areas of significance to local history, archaeology andculture. “Historical artefact” means an object 30 years or more in age.
Although the Act allows for the establishment of the Institute of Micronesian Culture andHistory, the Institute was never established and, in 1987, the relevant section of the Act
was repealed. The administrative body charged with the preservation of cultural heritageis the Office of Administration Services, which established the Division of HistoricPreservation in 1988. The Division is currently staffed by one Historic Preservation Officer.
To promote liaison with the States, local staff are employed to assist with the work of theDivision in the States.
The risk of PRIME Project impacting historical sites and antiquities is considered to be low
given the proximity of these identified features to the PRIME Project. If a historic site or

December 2020

Final

18

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

artefact is identified that could be potentially impacted as a result of PRIME Project
activities mitigation measures will be developed in the project-specific ESMP. A chancefind procedure will be developed in the Generic ESMP to address accidental discoveries.
3.1.6.5

Trust Territory Air Pollution Control Standards and Regulations (1980)
This Regulation sets air quality standards by preventing or controlling the emissions of air
contaminants at their source. The Regulations incorporates USEPA National Emission
Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants. If the PRIME Project requires the use of an
Asphalt plant consideration to the standards for this activity will be required 5.

3.1.6.6

Toilet Facilities and Sewerage Disposal Regulations (1977)
These Regulations establish minimum standards for toilet facilities and sewerage disposal
to reduce environmental pollution, health hazards, and public nuisance from such facilities.
Standards are established for i) flush toilets connected to a sewerage system available tothe public, ii) flush toilets connected to septic tanks and iii) a pit privy or outside banjo. All
public and private buildings require toilet disposal facilities approved by the Secretary of
Human Resources. The Regulations make it unlawful to dispose of treated or semi-treatedsewerage into any body of water in FSM, unless it can be clearly demonstrated that suchactivity is necessary for the economic and social benefit or research and that the activity
poses no public health hazard.
Any accommodation facilities and temporary toilet facilities provided as part of the PRIME
Project will need to be in compliance with these and/or State Regulations.

3.1.6.7

FSM Constitution Title 23 Resource Conservation
Marine species preservation is promoted under the FSMC Title 23 – Resource
Conservation, Chapter 1, Marine Species Preservation, which is based on Trust Territory
Code. Chapter 1 provides for the control of destructive fishing practices and prohibits theuse of explosives, poisons, chemicals or other substances which kills fish or marine life forcatching or killing fish unless authorized by a permit. The Chapter places limitations on
the harvesting of hawksbill turtles and sea turtles, cultivated sponges, black-lip mother-ofpearl oyster shell, trochus and marine mammals.
Title 23 – Resource Conservation (Chapter 2) of the Trust Territory Endangered Species
Act 1975 provides for the protection of endangered fish, shellfish and game. The Act
declares the indigenous plants and animals of the FSM to be of aesthetic, ecological,
historical, recreational, scientific and economic value. The Act further states that the policyof FSM is to foster the well-being of these plants and animals including the prevention of
the extinction of any species.
The Act is administered by the Director of the Department of Resources and Development(DRD) and provides the Director with the authority to set up conservation and research
programs aimed at conserving endangered and threatened species. It also provides
authority to acquire land or aquatic habitats for the conservation resident endangered or
threatened species. It is uncertain if any acquisitions or associated conservation programs
have been established by the Department.
Note that the National Government does not have jurisdiction inside the 12 nautical miles
limit which is the responsibility of the individual States (See Section 3.2 for further detail).
5 See https://www.epa.gov/stationary-sources-air-pollution/risk-and-technology-review-asphalt-processing-andasphalt-roofing-0

December 2020

Final

19

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

3.1.6.8

FSM Land Use Act
Section 205 of the General Provisions of the Land Use Act for FSM provides that “[t]he law
concerning ownership, use, inheritance, and transfer of land in effect in any part of theTrust Territory on December 1, 1941, shall remain in full force and effect to the extent thatit has been or may hereafter be changed by express written enactment made underauthority of the Trust Territory.”
The Government Property Acquisition [Title 56] deals with eminent domain (Chapter 1),
real property acquisition (Chapter 2), relocation assistance (Chapter 3) and alien property(Chapter 4).
This provisions of this Act are outlined in the RF.

3.2

State Government Legislation, Regulation and Policy
Requirements
The four States of FSM each have their respective state level regulations and legal
frameworks elaborating on the National Constitution and EIA Regulation and stipulating
their specific requirements. The state level EIA Regulations are briefly discussed below.
Note that it is the State regulations that are the most important for the PRIME Project, as
the works will be monitored at a State level.
State legislation related to land tenure and land acquisition is outlined in the RF.

3.2.1

Kosrae3.2.1.1

The Legal Framework
The following laws and policies that exist in Kosrae for managing and conserving theenvironment that may apply to the PRIME Project:

December 2020•

Constitution of the State of Kosrae 1984 (Primary rule of law in the State of
Kosrae).

•Kosrae State Code, Title 17, Chapter 4 (Establishes the Kosrae EPA).

•

Kosrae State Code Title 9 (Establishes the Kosrae Protected Areas System).

•

Kosrae Island Resource Management Act.

•

Kosrae State Development Regulation 2014.

•

Kosrae State Code, Section 11.103 (State Acquisition of Land).

•

Kosrae Code, Section 11.1401 and 11.1402 (Protection of antiquities andtraditional culture).

•

Kosrae Code, Section 11.1601 (Endangered species).

•

Kosrae Code Section 11.201 (Land use and subsidiary regulations).

•

Kosrae Code, Section 13.1201 (Toilets and the disposal of domestic (human)
waste).

•

Kosrae Code, Section 13.506 (Littering).

•

Kosrae Code, Section 13.514 (Water quality).

Final

20

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework•

Kosrae Code, Section 13.524 (Endangering a species).

The Development Review Commission (DRC) is a five-member body that reviews
development proposals and is mandated to “protect the environment … balancing
development with those of environmental quality … ensuring that economic and social
development is environmentally sustainable”. The DRC has the authority to enter, enforce,and issue injunctions, mandamus, or other remedies requiring compliance through the
Attorney General. Further, the DRC has the authority to protect the environment andantiquities.
The State can acquire an interest in private land for public purpose. The Constitution and
Article XI, Land and Environment, provide for fair compensation should there be a need forland acquisition for the purpose of resettlement. The process must be done in good faithwith reasonable effort to avoid substantial hardship to the interested parties.
3.2.1.2

Kosrae Constitution (1984)
Article XI of the Kosrae Constitution addresses land and environment matters. It grants
the people the right to “a healthful, clean and stable environment”. The State governmentis required to “by law protect the State’s environment, ecology, and natural resources from
impairment in the public interest.” The Constitution prohibits nuclear, chemical, gas or
biological weapons and hazardous radioactive material being in the State. The
Constitution provides “[t]he waters, land, and other natural resources within the marine
space of the State are public property, the use of which the State Government shallregulate by law in the public interest…” Rivers and streams may be designated by law as
public property for use in the public interest. The State Government may acquire land for
public purposes without the interested parties’ consent, subject to the payment of faircompensation and good faith attempt at negotiation. Title to State land may only be
acquired by Micronesian citizens who are Kosraean by descent.
Kosrae Article VIII of the Kosrae Constitution provides that the two levels of governmentfor Kosrae are State and municipal. Municipalities are granted powers and functions inrelation to local affairs, property and government so far as they are not limited by law. The
Kosrae Constitution requires the State Government to “protect the State’s traditions as
may be required by the public interest” (Art II).

3.2.1.3

Kosrae State Development Regulation 2014
The purpose of the Kosrae State Development Regulation 2014 is to implement Title 7,
Chapter 4 of the Kosrae Code by establishing the EIA process which is intended to help
the general public and government officials make decisions “with the understanding of theenvironmental consequences of their decisions, and take actions consistent with the goalof protecting, restoring, and enhancing the environment. In addition, the regulations areintended to:•Integrate the EIA process into the early planning of projects to insure timely
consideration of environmental factors in order to avoid delays; and•Identify at an early stage the significant environmental issues requiring further
study and de-emphasize insignificant issues, thereby defining the scope of theEnvironmental Impact Statement ("EIS").”The Regulation defines a "development project" to mean the construction, alteration,
movement, fill, removal, disposal or any other modification to the land or coastal areas. A
development project can include, but is not limited to the installation, placing, or building
December 2020

Final

21

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Frameworkof surface structures, land reclamation, navigation channels, harbors, utility lines, piers,
shopping centres, clearing land, causeways, golf courses, apartment complexes, hotels,
schools, roads, parking areas, or any other similar activity. It also defines "Earthmoving"
to mean any construction or other activity which disturbs or alters the surface of the land,a coral reef or bottom of a lagoon, including, but not limited to excavations, dredging,embankments, land reclamation in a lagoon, land development, subdivision development,
mineral extraction, ocean disposal, and the moving, depositing or storing of soil, rock, coralor earth.
Part III sets out the Development Review Permit process which among other things,
requires the developer to conduct initial consultation with the Kosrae Island Resource
Management Authority (KIRMA) to explain the planned development and to determine if a
Development Review Permit application is necessary. KIRMA operates as a semiautonomous agency within the Kosrae State Government and consists of five units(historic, marine, terrestrial, education, and permitting) which monitors, promulgates safety
and security, and informs policy in the protection of the island’s resources.
If necessary, the proponent then submits an application for a Development Review Permit
including an EIA Checklist. The review of the application will involve a determination if an
EIS is necessary, depending on the Technical Advisory Committee’s assessment of thenature and severity of the potential impacts. A Development Review Permit will be
reviewed and granted by KIRMA.
The DRC also determines if (under Section 3.7) the proposal requires a public information
meeting “whenever it is reasonably foreseeable that a project will result in a significant
impact to the environment, DRC will ensure that all affected persons will have theopportunity to provide input, written or oral, for the project.”
The Development Review Permit process will be required for physical works funded by the
PRIME Project with the decision being made on whether an EIA is required following areview by the Technical Advisory Committee.

3.2.2

Pohnpei

3.2.2.1

The Legal Framework
The following laws and policies that exist in Pohnpei for managing and conserving theenvironment that may apply to the PRIME Project:

December 2020•

Constitution of the State of Pohnpei 1984 (Primary rule of law in the State ofPohnpei).

•Public Trust Lands Distribution Act 1980.

•

Public Lands Act 1987.

•

Deed of Trust Act 1987.

•

Trust Territory Environmental Protection Act, preserved from the Trust Territory
environmental law (The Act and subordinate regulations relate to:o

Air pollution;oPesticides;oPublic water supply systems;

Final

22

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

3.2.2.2oMarine and freshwater quality;oSolid waste;oToilet facilities and sewerage disposal; andoEarthmoving.

•Transportation Zone Act 1987.

•

Conservation and Resource Enforcement Act 1982.

•

Forest Management Act 1979.

•

Pohnpei Watershed Forest Reserve and Mangrove Protection Act 1987.

•

Designation of State Bird Act.

•

Marine Resources Conservation Act 1981.

•

Pohnpei Environmental Protection Act 1992.

•

Pohnpei Cultural Preservation Act.

•

Trust Territory Environmental Quality Protection Act.

Pohnpei Constitution (1984)
Under the Pohnpei Constitution, the State Governor must establish and administer“comprehensive plans for the conservation of natural resources and the protection of theenvironment”. Article 12 states that only Ponapean citizens, who are also pwilidak ofPohnpei, may acquire a permanent interest in real property. The Constitution also prohibits
leases of more than 25 years and indefinite land-use agreements. The Government ofPohnpei may acquire land for public purposes following consultation with local government,
owners and an offer for payment of a purchase price or compensation. Article 13 of the
Pohnpei Constitution prohibits the introduction, storage, use, test and disposal of nuclear,chemical, gas and biological weapons, nuclear power plants and related waste materials
from Pohnpei.
Article 5 of the Pohnpei Constitution states “[t]his Constitution upholds, respects, andprotects the customs and traditions of the traditional kingdoms of Pohnpei” and that the
Pohnpei Government shall respect and protect customs and traditions.

3.2.2.3

Pohnpei Environmental Protection Act (1992)
Pohnpei’s Environmental Protection Act (1992) S.L. No. 3L-26-92 establishes a procedure
for preparation of an environmental assessment statement (EAS) prior to any action that
may significantly affect the quality of the human environment. The degree of environmental
assessment detail for a project depends upon the significance of its potential environmental
impacts.
Significance of the action is determined by the EPA on consideration of an Initial
Assessment (with a prescribed checklist) submitted by a proponent.
The EPA receives the environmental assessment document and reviews it for compliancewith the Act and the regulations in terms of format, adequacy of information and objectivity.
The EPA authorizes commencement of a project, through a permitting process, only if it
determines that the assessment is sufficient. Once the completed assessment is presented

December 2020

Final

23

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

to the EPA Board of Directors and upon the final deliberations of the EPA Board, a permit
will be given to the project proponent with conditions for compliance of the project
proponent as required by EPA regulations.
There is a range of potentially required permits and licenses for a major development in
Pohnpei. These comprise:a.

EPA Earthmoving Permit;b.

Land Ownership Documentation;c.

Forestry Clearance;d.

Marine Resources Assessment Report;e.

Municipal Government Clearance (planning approval);f.

Department of Lands Approval; andg.

Historic Preservation Clearance.

The Act requires the active assistance of all government authorities to achieve its goals.
The result, in practice, is that only the EPA Earthmoving Permit is required. This applies toprojects with significant amounts of earthworks. Its focus is the management of soil andwater conservation.
The Pohnpei EPA will require an initial assessment document which will determine whether
an EAS is required depending on the nature and scale of impacts. The EAS would be
reviewed by the EPA Board of Directors and a permit provided with conditions forcompliance with EPA regulations.

3.2.3

Chuuk

3.2.3.1

The Legal Framework
The following laws and policies that exist in Chuuk for managing and conserving theenvironment that may apply to the PRIME Project:

3.2.3.2•

Constitution of the State of Chuuk 1989 (Primary rule of law in the State of Chuuk.

•

Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) – Solid Waste Management (MoU between
the State and National Governments delegating State power to administer, at Statelevel, the Solid Waste Management Permit Program and the Solid Waste
Management Permit Variance Program).

•

MoU – Earthmoving (MoU between the State and National Governments
delegating State power to administer, at State level, the National Earthmoving
Regulations).

•

Chuuk State Historic Preservations Act 1991 (Relating to wrecks in Chuuk lagoon).

•

Chuuk State Environmental Protection Act 1994.

Chuuk Constitution (1989)
Article XI of the Chuuk Constitution requires the legislature to “provide by law for thedevelopment and enforcement of standards of environmental quality, and for theestablishment of an independent state agency vested with responsibility for environmental
matters.” Article XI of the Chuuk Constitution also gives the State Government the power

December 2020

Final

24

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

to take an interest in land for public interest purposes subject to negotiations and thepayment of compensation.
Article IV of the Chuuk Constitution recognizes and protects customary law and the role oftradition leaders in Chuuk.
3.2.3.3

Chuuk State Environmental Protection Act (1994)
The Chuuk State Environmental Protection Act (1994) creates and empowers the Chuuk
State EPA. Section 1005 defines the functions and powers of the Chuuk EPA, one of which(para f) is: “Establish and provide for the continuing administration of a permit system
whereby a permit shall be required before the discharge by any person of any pollutant in
the air, lands and water or for the conduct by any person of any activity, including but notlimited to, the operation, construction, expansion, alteration of any facilities.”
Section 1006 of the Act states that “A person shall submit an environmental impact
statement to the Agency, in accordance with regulations established by the Agency, prior
to taking any major action which may substantially affect the quality of the environment.”
In addition, further functions of the Chuuk EPA relevant to the PRIME Project include:•

Establishment of criteria for the classification of air, land and water; and•Collection of information, record keeping, monitoring, and reporting.

There are penalties for any persons who violate the Act or any permits or orders issued
under it. The Act is not clear regarding the process of applying for a permit, and theenvironmental assessment requirements to support such an application.
Notwithstanding this, given the nature and scale of the works proposed under the PRIME
Project it is likely that an EIS would be required.

3.2.4

Yap

3.2.4.1

The Legal Framework
The following laws and policies that exist in Chuuk for managing and conserving theenvironment that may apply to the PRIME Project:

December 2020•

Constitution of the State of Yap 1982 (Primary rule of law in the State of Yap).

•

Environmental Quality Protection Act 1987.

•

Draft Water Supply Systems Regulations (Based on the U.S. Trust Territory Public
Water Supply Systems Regulations).

•

Trust Territory Solid Waste Regulations 1979.

•

Draft Toilet Facilities and Sewerage Disposal Regulations.

•

Draft Earthmoving and Sedimentation Regulations.

•

Yap State Code, Chapter 10, Section 1008 (Wildlife conservation).

•

Yap State Code, Title 11, Section 805 (Oil spills).

•

Yap State Code, Title 11, Section 815 (Reef and environmental damage).

•

Yap State Code, Title 18, Chapter 4, Section 401 (Disposal of petroleum products).

Final

25

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

3.2.4.2•

Yap State Code, Title 18, Sections 404, 402 and 403 (Relating to oil spills).

•

Yap State Code, Title 18, Chapter 10, Section 1011 (Temporary protection ofmarine life).

•

Yap State Code, Title 20, Chapter 3 (Building permits).

Yap Constitution (1982)
The Yap Constitution states that the “state Government may provide for the protection,conservation and sustainable development of agricultural, marine, mineral, forest, water,
land and other natural resources.” It also prohibits testing, storing, using or disposing ofradioactive and nuclear substances within the State. Land ownership and uses are
restricted under the Yap Constitution. The State recognizes traditional rights andownership of natural resources and areas within the marine space of the State up to 12
miles from island baselines.
The Yap Constitution grants due recognition to the Dalip pi Nguchol and their traditionaland customary roles, and to traditions and customs in providing a system of law (Art III).
In Yap, Traditional leaders who serve in the Council of Pilung and the Council of Tamolcarry out traditional and customary functions. Land in Yap may only be acquired in amanner consistent with traditions and customs (Art XIII).

3.2.4.3

Yap – Regulations for Environmental Impact Assessment, Title II, Chapter I. (1995)
Administered by the Yap State Environmental Protection Agency (YSEPA), the Regulation
for Environmental Impact Assessment 1995 implements the Yap State Environmental
Quality Protection Act by establishing standard procedures for the preparation of an EIS tobe prepared prior to any action proposed to be undertaken that may significantly affect thequality of the human or natural environment.
In addition, these regulations are designed to:a. Integrate the EIA process into early planning of projects to ensure timely
consideration of environmental factors and to avoid delays; andb. Identify at an early stage the significant environmental issues that may require
further study thereby the, scope of the EIA.
The Regulation requires that all projects require a Preliminary Environmental Impact
Statement (PEIS) (Part II; 2.1, 2.2) prior to and preferably early in the planning stages ofthe development proposal.
There are exemptions from the preparation of a PEIS for activities that “will probably haveminimal or no significant effects on the environment.” Among those exempted activities are“(1) Operations, repairs, or maintenance of existing structures, facilities, equipment, or
topographical features, involving negligible or no expansion or change of use beyond that
previously existing; (2) Interior alterations involving things such as partitions, plumbing,and electrical conveyances.”
Where the environmental impacts in the PEIS is assessed by the EPA Board to be havesevere potential impacts, the proponent is required to prepare a more detailed
environmental assessment report (Draft EIS) which will be reviewed and commented onby the EPA Board and others including the public, and these comments are send to the
Proponent for review and incorporation into the Final EIS.

December 2020

Final

26

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

A process of public consultation and review of the Draft EIS is also provided in theRegulation (Section 3.4) with all written comments to be received by EPA after a specified
period. The EPA Board makes a determination whether or not to approve the proposal,
with or without conditions, or to decline, within 30 days of submission of the finalized EIS.
The Yap State EPA will require a PEIS which will determine whether an EAS is required
depending on the nature and scale of impacts. It is possible that the PRIME Project would
be exempt from the requirement to prepare a PEIS if it was determined that the proposed
activities consist of operations, repairs, or maintenance of existing structures, facilities,
equipment, or topographical features, involving negligible or no expansion or change ofuse beyond that previously existing. This would need to be discussed with the Yap State
EPA. A more detailed environmental assessment report would be required if it wasdetermined that the Project has severe potential impacts.

3.3

International Standards and Guidelines

3.3.1

International Environmental Agreements
FSM is a signatory to a number of international conventions and treaties. Those potentiallyrelevant to the Project are listed below:

3.3.2

•

International Plant Protection Convention 1951.

•

World Heritage Convention 1972.

•

United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea 1982.

•

Agreement relating to the Conduct of a Joint Program of Marine Geoscientific
Research and Mineral Resource Studies of the South Pacific Region, with
Annexes, 1982; with Related Agreement, 1984.

•

Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer 1985.

•

Convention for the Protection of the Natural Resources of the South Pacific Region
1986; and companion protocols 1986.

•

Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) 1993.

•

United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCC) Paris
Agreement 2016.

World Bank Environmental and Social Framework
As a condition of WB financing the PRIME Project, DoTC&I has committed to implementing
the Project in a manner consistent with the WB Environmental and Social Framework 2017
(ESF).
Matters to be addressed include environmental, health and safety, gender, labor, social,land and cultural heritage laws and policies as a minimum. The WB Environmental andSocial Standards (ESS), as set out in the ESF, are considered to relevant for the PRIME
Project requiring the GoFSM to prepare environmental and social risk management
instruments:

December 2020•

ESS1 – Assessment and Management of Environmental and Social Risks andImpacts.

•

ESS2 – Labor and Working Conditions.

Final

27

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework•

ESS3 – Resource Efficiency and Pollution Prevention and Management•

ESS4 – Community Health and Safety.

•

ESS5 – Land Acquisition, Restrictions on Land Use and Involuntary Resettlement•

ESS6 – Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Management of Living Natural
Resources.

•

ESS7 – Indigenous Peoples/Sub-Saharan African Historically Underserved
Traditional Local Communities.

•

ESS8 – Cultural Heritage.

•

ESS10 – Stakeholder Engagement.

Risk screening finds that potential impacts are less significant, site specific, mostly
reversible and that a range of potential measures for mitigation can be readily designed in
the majority of cases.

3.3.3

World Bank General Environmental, Health & Safety Guidelines
The World Bank Group’s General Environmental, Health, and Safety Guidelines 2007
(EHS Guidelines) represent good international practice for managing environmental
impacts and community and occupational health and safety (OHS) risks. The EHS
Guidelines contain the performance levels and measures that are generally considered tobe achievable in new facilities by existing technology at reasonable costs.

3.3.3.1

Environmental - Air Emissions and Ambient Air Quality
This guideline applies to projects that generate emissions to air and provides an approachto the management of significant sources of emissions including specific guidance forassessment and monitoring of impacts. The key potential source of air emissions
associated with the PRIME Project is in relation to potential cement or asphalt plant or dust
pollutants emissions generated from construction activities and/or machinery usage.
Projects with significant sources of air emissions and potential for significant impacts toambient air quality should prevent or minimize impacts by ensuring that:•

Emissions do not result in pollutant concentrations that exceed relevant ambientquality guidelines and standards by applying national legislated standards, or in
their absence, the current WHO Air Quality Guidelines (see Table 3-1); and•Emissions do not contribute a significant portion to the attainment of relevant
ambient air quality guidelines or standards. As a general rule, this Guideline
suggests 25 percent of the applicable air quality standards to allow additional,
future sustainable development in the same airshed.

Table 3-1: WHO ambient air quality guidelines (WHO 2005)

Parameter
Sulfur dioxide (SO2)

Averaging Period

Guideline Period in µg/m324-hour

10 minute

125 (Interim target-1)
50 (Interim target-2)
20 (guideline)
500 (guideline)

1-year40 (guideline)

Nitrogen dioxide (NO2)

December 2020

Final

28

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

Parameter

Averaging Period

Guideline Period in µg/m3

1 hour200 (guideline)

1-year70 (Interim target-1)
50 (Interim target-2)
30 (Interim target-3)
20 (guideline)

24-hour

150 (Interim target-1)
100 (Interim target-2)
75 (Interim target-3)
50 (guideline)

1-year35 (Interim target-1)
25 (Interim target-2)
15 (Interim target-3)
10 (guideline)

24-hour

75 (Interim target-1)
50 (Interim target-2)37.5 (Interim target-3)
25 (guideline)

8-hour daily maximum

160 (Interim target-1)
100 (guideline)

Particular Matter
PM10

Particular Matter
PM2.5

Ozone

Notes: PM 24-hour value is the 99th percentile. Interim targets are provided in recognition of the need for astaged approach to achieving the recommended guidelines.
Point sources are characterized by the release of air pollutants typically associated withthe combustion of fossil fuels such as nitrogen oxides (NO X), sulfur dioxide (SO2), carbon
monoxide (CO), and particulate matter (PM) as well as other air pollutants including certain
volatile organic compounds (VOCs). Emissions from point sources should be avoided andcontrolled according to good international industry practice (GIIP) through the combined
application of process modifications and emissions controls, such as regular engine
maintenance and repair, use of modern vehicle fleet with emissions control devices suchas catalytic converters and driver education programs.
Fugitive source air emissions refer to emissions that are distributed spatially over a wide
area and not confined to a specific discharge point. The most common pollutant involvedin fugitive emissions is dust or particulate matter (PM). This is released during certain
operations such as transport and open storage of solid materials and from exposed soil
surfaces including unpaved roads. Recommended prevention and control of theseemissions sources include:•

Use of dust control methods such as covers, water suppression, or increased
moisture content for open materials storage piles; and•Use of water suppression for control of loose materials on paved or unpaved roadsurfaces.

Consideration to both point source (from an asphalt or cement plants) and fugitive (e.g.
dust from stockpiles, exposed soils) will need to be given for the PRIME Project.

December 2020

Final

29

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

3.3.3.2

Environmental - Hazardous Materials Management
This guideline applies to projects that use, store, or handle any quantity of hazardous
materials defined as materials that represent a risk to human health, property or theenvironment due to their physical or chemical characteristics.
The guideline provides guidance in relation to both General Hazardous Materials
Management: (where hazardous materials are handled or stored) and Management ofMajor Hazards (storage or handling hazardous materials at, or above, threshold quantities
thus requiring special treatment to prevent accidents such as fire, explosions, leaks or
spills and to prepare and respond to emergencies).
The overall objective of hazardous materials management is to avoid or, when avoidanceis not feasible, minimize uncontrolled releases of hazardous materials or accidents during
handling, storage and use. This objective can be achieved by:•

Establishing hazardous materials management priorities based on hazard analysis
of risky operations identified through ESA;•

Where practicable, avoiding or minimizing the use of hazardous materials;•

Preventing uncontrolled releases of hazardous materials to the environment or
uncontrolled reactions that might result in fire or explosion; ·•Using engineering controls (containment, automatic alarms and shut-off systems)commensurate with the nature of hazard; and•Implementing management controls (procedures, inspections, communications,training, and drills) to address residual risks that have not been prevented orcontrolled through engineering measures.

A Waste Minimization and Management Plan (WMMP) and Spill Management Plan (SMP)
are to be prepared by the Contractor which sets out strategies and actions required toreduce potential health and environmental risks associated with waste generation anddisposal, including hazardous materials (discussed further in Section 6.2.3), management
to avoid spills and other environmental releases, and identify opportunities for constructionwaste reuse.
3.3.3.3

Environmental - Waste Management
These guidelines apply to projects that generate, store, or handle any quantity of waste.
Solid (non-hazardous) wastes generally include any garbage, refuse. Hazardous waste
shares the properties of a hazardous material (e.g. ignitability, corrosivity, reactivity, or
toxicity), or other physical, chemical, or biological characteristics that may pose a potential
risk to human health or the environment if improperly managed.
Waste management should be addressed through a Waste management system that
addresses issues linked to waste minimization, generation, transport, disposal, andmonitoring.
PRIME Project will generate a range of solid waste types including non-hazardous andpotentially hazardous wastes including waste material generated from removal of existingroad surfaces, bridges, causeways etc. Consideration to the management of hazardous
materials will be required for the PRIME Project.

December 2020

Final

30

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

A WMMP is to be prepared by the Contractor which sets out strategies and actions required
to reduce potential health and environmental risks associated with waste generation anddisposal, as well as identify opportunities for material recycling or reuse (discussed further
in Section 6.2.3).
3.3.3.4

Environmental - Noise
Noise prevention and mitigation measures should be applied where there is the potential
for noise levels to exceed applicable guidelines at sensitive receptors.
The preferred method for controlling noise from stationary sources is to implement noise
control measures at source. Methods for prevention and control of sources of noise
emissions depend on the source and proximity of receptors. Noise reduction options thatshould be considered include: Selecting equipment with lower sound power levels;
mandatory mufflers on engine exhausts and compressor components; limiting hours ofoperation for specific pieces of equipment or operations, especially mobile sources
operating through community areas; Re-locating noise sources to less sensitive areas totake advantage of distance and shielding; Taking advantage of the natural topography asa noise buffer during facility design; and developing a mechanism to record and respondto complaints through the Grievance Mechanism (GM) established for the PRIME Project(outlined in the RF and SEP).
Noise impacts should not exceed the levels presented in Table 3-2, or result in a maximum
increase in background levels of 3 dB at the nearest receptor location off-site.
Table 3-2: WHO noise level guidelines (WHO 1999)

Receptor

3.3.3.5

One Hour LAeq (dBA)
Daytime (07:00 – 22:00)

Daytime (22:00 – 07:00)

Residential; industrial; educational

55

45

Industrial; commercial

70

70Worker Health and Safety
The fundamental premise for OHS under the EHS Guidelines is that “Employers andsupervisors are obliged to implement all reasonable precautions to protect the health andsafety of workers” and that “Companies should hire contractors that have the technicalcapability to manage the occupational health and safety issues of their employees…”.
The OHS philosophy in the EHS Guidelines is that preventive and protective measures
should be introduced according to the following order of priority:
a. Eliminating the hazard by removing the activity from the work process.
b. Controlling the hazard at its source through use of engineering controls.
c.

Minimizing the hazard through design of safe work systems and administrative or
institutional control measures.

d. Providing appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) in conjunction withtraining, use, and maintenance of the PPE.
All workers engaged in the PRIME Project will need to be covered under the terms of the
EHS Guidelines. The Contractor will be required to provide a Worker H&S Plan that

December 2020

Final

31

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Frameworkaddresses key project requirements in relation to worker health and safety. All other
Project workers will work under the OHS controls to be prepared in the LMP.
3.3.3.6

Community Health and Safety
This guidance specifically addresses some aspects of project activities taking place outsideof the traditional project boundaries but nonetheless related to the project operations.
These issues may arise at any stage of a project life cycle and can have an impact beyond
the life of the project and includes issues such as:•

Water Quality - Groundwater and surface water represent essential sources ofdrinking water which may be impacted by project activities involving discharges.

•

Traffic Safety - Prevention and control of traffic related injuries and fatalities
should include the adoption of safety measures that protect project workers androad users. Road safety initiatives proportional to the scope and nature of project
activities should include measures such as:•oAdoption of best transport safety practices (e.g. emphasizing safety
aspects among drivers, improving driving skills);o

Use of speed control devices (governors) on trucks;oRegular maintenance of vehicles;o

Employing safe traffic control measures, including road signs and flag
persons to warn of dangerous conditions; andoPlanning and timing of road use for Project activities (such as delivery ofequipment or material).

Disease prevention - Health hazards typically include those relating to poor
sanitation and living conditions, sexual transmission and vector-borne infections
associated with imported labor. Communicable diseases of most concern aresexually-transmitted diseases (STDs) such as HIV/AIDS.
Recommended
interventions include: Providing surveillance and active screening and treatment ofworkers; Undertaking health awareness and education initiatives.

Consideration to community health and safety will be required for the PRIME Project inrelation to water quality, traffic safety, SEA/SH and disease prevention, will also be
required, particularly if imported labor is used. The Generic ESMP and works specific
ESMP will include controls to protect the community from road works incidents andnuisances, vehicle incidents and nuisances and harm from workers. A Community Healthand Safety Plan is to be prepared by the Contractor which sets out strategies and actions
required to prevent and/or minimize any negative health or safety impacts on thecommunity arising from the physical works (discussed further in Section 6.2.3).
3.3.3.7

Toll Roads
The guidance document for toll roads includes information relevant to construction,
operation and maintenance of large, sealed road projects including bridges andoverpasses. Elements of this guideline document also apply to smaller scale and / orunsealed road projects and have been described here for completeness.
Issues specific to construction and operation of roads, as set out in the Toll Roads guidance
document, include the following:

December 2020

Final

32

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

3.3.3.8•

Environmental issues – including habitat alteration and fragmentation,
stormwater, waste, noise, air emissions and wastewater.

•

Community Health and Safety issues - including pedestrian safety, traffic safety
and emergency preparedness.

Construction Materials Extraction
The construction materials extraction guidance document includes information relevant toconstruction materials extraction activities such as aggregates,
sand, gravel, etc. It
addresses stand-alone projects and extraction activities supporting construction, civil
works, and cement projects.
Potential issues during the operational, construction, and decommissioning phases of
construction materials extraction primarily include the following:

3.3.4

•

Environmental issues – including air emissions, noise and vibrations, water,
waste and land conversion.

•

Occupational health and safety hazards – including respiratory hazards, noiseand physical hazards•

Community health and safety issues – including land instability, water,
explosives safety and decommissioning.

World Bank Good Practice Notes
A number of World Bank Good Practice Notes which outline an Environmental and Social
Framework for Investment Project Financing (IPF) Operations are relevant for the PRIME
Project including:•

Addressing Sexual Exploitation and Abuse and Sexual Harassment (SEA/SH) in
Investment Project Financing involving Major Civil Works, February 2020.

•

Non-Discrimination and Disability, June 2018.

•

ESS6: Biodiversity and Sustainable Management of Living Natural Resources,
June 2018.

•

Gender, October 2019.

•

Road Safety, October 2019.

•

Non-Discrimination: Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity (SOGI), October 2019.

These Good Practice Notes have been considered in preparation of the PRIME
instruments and where appropriate incorporated into technical advisory, the developmentof relevant environmental and social assessments, Generic ESMP and any works specific
ESMPs for the PRIME Project.

3.4

Comparison of WB ESF and FSM Legislative Requirements
Table 3-3 provides an analysis of gaps between WB safeguard requirements as set out inthe ESMF and FSM Legislative requirements.

December 2020

Final

33

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

Table 3-3: Gaps between WB ESF and FSM legislative requirements, and gap filling measures

WB Environmental and Social Standards

FSM Legislative Requirements

Equivalence and Gap
Filling

The EIA Regulations at national and state levels require an
EIA to be prepared prior to taking any “major” action
significantly effecting the quality of the human environment.
The EIA process is intended to assist understanding ofenvironmental consequences and actions required toprotect, restore, and enhance the environment.
The regulations Identify at an early stage significant
environmental issues thereby defining EIA scope.

Partial equivalence.
ESS1 and FSM nationaland state requirements
would need to be followed
for ESA and preparation of
instruments.
Where
possible, instruments will
be prepared to satisfy both
WB
and
FSM
requirements. In someinstances,
separate
instruments
willbeprepared (for example
where the timing or scale oftheassessment
issignificantly different).

FSM national legislation outlines worker’s rights, and theLabor Code outlines the requirements regarding hiring of
non-resident workers, labor development and otherrequirements.

Partial equivalence.
ESS2 requirements will befollowed where there aregaps in local legislation,
including preparation of the
PRIME Project LMP.

ESS1 – Assessment and Management of Environmental and Social Risks and Impacts
To identify, evaluate and manage the environment and social risks and impacts of the project in a mannerconsistent with the ESSs.
To adopt a mitigation hierarchy approach to:(a) Anticipate and avoid risks and impacts;(b) Where avoidance is not possible, minimize or reduce risks and impacts to acceptable levels;(c) Once risks and impacts have been minimized or reduced, mitigate; and(d) Where significant residual impacts remain, compensate for or offset them, where technically andfinancially feasible.
To adopt differentiated measures so that adverse impacts do not fall disproportionately on the disadvantaged
or vulnerable, and they are not disadvantaged in sharing development benefits and opportunities resulting
from the project.
To utilize national environmental and social institutions, systems, laws, regulations and procedures in theassessment, development and implementation of projects, whenever appropriate.
To promote improved environmental and social performance, in ways which recognize and enhance Borrower
capacity.
ESS2 – Labor and Working Conditions
To promote safety and health at work.
To promote the fair treatment, non-discrimination and equal opportunity of project workers
To protect project workers, including vulnerable workers such as women, persons with disabilities, children(of working age, in accordance with this ESS) and migrant workers, contracted workers, community workers
and primary supply workers, as appropriate.
To prevent the use of all forms of forced labor and child labor
To support the principles of freedom of association and collective bargaining of project workers in a mannerconsistent with national law.
To provide project workers with accessible means to raise workplace concerns.

December 2020

Final

34

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

WB Environmental and Social Standards

FSM Legislative Requirements

Equivalence and Gap
Filling

The EIA Regulations at national and state levels require an
EIA and permitting process to assist with understanding ofenvironmental consequences and actions required toprotect, restore, and enhance the environment, as well assourcing raw aggregate material required, and disposal ofwaste.

Partial equivalence.
ESS3 requirements will befollowed where there aregaps in local legislation.

No specific health and safety regulations or policies relating
to community well-being.

ESS4 requirements will befollowed where there aregaps in local legislation.

FSM’s legislation:

Partial equivalence.
ESS5 requirements will befollowed where there aregaps in local legislation,
including preparation of the
PRIME Project RF.

ESS3 – Resource Efficiency and Pollution Prevention and Management
To promote the sustainable use of resources, including energy, water and raw materials.
To avoid or minimize adverse impacts on human health and the environment by avoiding or minimizing
pollution from project activities.
To avoid or minimize project-related emissions of short and long-lived climate pollutants.
To avoid or minimize generation of hazardous and non-hazardous waste.
To minimize and manage the risks and impacts associated with pesticide use.
ESS4 – Community Health and Safety
To anticipate and avoid adverse impacts on the health and safety of project-affected communities during the
project life cycle from both routine and nonroutine circumstances.
To promote quality and safety, and considerations relating to climate change, in the design and constructionof infrastructure, including dams.
To avoid or minimize community exposure to project-related traffic and road safety risks, dis-eases andhazardous materials.
To have in place effective measures to address emergency events.
To ensure that the safeguarding of personnel and property is carried out in a manner that avoids or minimizes
risks to the project-affected communities.
ESS5 – Land Acquisition, Restrictions on Land Use and Involuntary Resettlement
Involuntary resettlement should be avoided where feasible, or minimized, exploring all viable alternative
designs.
Where it is not feasible to avoid resettlement, resettlement activities should be conceived and executed assustainable development programs, providing sufficient investment resources to enable the persons
displaced by the end of the project to share in the project benefits.
Displaced persons should be meaningfully consulted and should have opportunities to participate in planningand implementing resettlement programs.

December 2020

Final

•

Encourages the avoidance of adverse
environmental and social impacts and their effective
mitigation where avoidance is not possible.

•

Requires negotiations with affected land owners, onvalues of land, and resettlement assistance.

35Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

WB Environmental and Social Standards

FSM Legislative Requirements

To address the impacts resulting from Bank-assisted investment projects, the borrower prepares a
resettlement plan or resettlement policy framework.
It is necessary to improve or at least restore livelihoods of Displaced Persons (DP) by a range of strategies
targeted at Affected People (AP). Nobody is to be made worse off as a result of the development project.
Requires that Displaced Persons are compensated for all losses, including non-land assets, at full
replacement cost.
Bank expects the borrower to take into account the views, roles, and rights of groups including NGOs andlocal communities affected by the Bank financed project in the planning, designing, implementing, monitoringand evaluating of such projects.
Bank requires that Displaced People (DP) should be meaningfully consulted and should have opportunities
to participate in planning and implementing resettlement programs. Bank also requires that displaced persons
should be assisted in their efforts to improve their livelihoods and standards of living or at least to restore
them, in real terms, to pre-displacement levels or to levels prevailing prior to the beginning of project
implementation, whichever is higher.

•

Avoiding hardship on displaced land owners is
explicitly provided for but more for legal landowners,
and legal occupiers, not for illegal occupiers andtheir assets / livelihoods•

Requires negotiations with affected land owners, onvalues of land, and resettlement assistance.

•

Limits compensation imposed on how muchcompensation is paid for lost income from businessor farm operation.

•

Provides for public consultation as part of theenvironmental assessment process and full
disclosure of EIA reports to the public.

•

is explicit on dealing with displaced people•

recognizes the heritage, traditional boundaries andcultural ties to the islands

Equivalence and Gap
Filling

Bank requires: i) Screening to identify whether Indigenous Peoples are present, ii) Social assessment toassess potential adverse impacts, iii) Consultation and participation, iv) preparation of an Indigenous Peoples
Plan (if required), and v) Public Disclosure.
ESS6 – Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Management of Living Natural Resources
To protect and conserve biodiversity and habitats.
To apply the mitigation hierarchy and the pre-cautionary approach in the design and implementation ofprojects that could have an impact on biodiversity.
To promote the sustainable management of living natural resources.

The Environment Protection Act provides for the protectionof the environment, culture, historic and natural aspects ofMicronesian heritage.
The EIA Regulations at national and state level requires
actions that protect, restore, and enhance the environment.

Partial equivalence.
ESS6 requirements will befollowed where there aregaps in local legislation.

The Environment Protection Act provides for the protectionof the environment, culture, historic and natural aspects ofMicronesian heritage.

Partial equivalence.

To support livelihoods of local communities including Indigenous Peoples, and inclusive economic
development, through the adoption of practices that integrate conservation needs and development priorities.
ESS7 – Indigenous Peoples
To ensure that the development process fosters full respect for the human rights, dignity, aspirations, identity,
culture, and natural resource-based livelihoods of Indigenous Peoples/Sub-Saharan African Historically
Underserved Traditional Local Communities.

December 2020

Final

36

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

WB Environmental and Social Standards

FSM Legislative Requirements

Equivalence and Gap
Filling

To avoid adverse impacts of projects on Indigenous Peoples/ Historically Underserved Traditional Local
Communities, or when avoidance is not possible, to minimize, mitigate and/or compensate for such impacts.

FSM law recognizes the heritage, traditional boundaries
and cultural ties to the islands.

ESS7 requirements will befollowed where there aregaps in local legislation.
Provisions have been
included in the PRIME
Project SEP to comply withESS7.

FSM National and State law including the Environment
Protection Act recognizes the heritage, traditionalboundaries and cultural ties to the islands

Partial equivalence.
ESS8 requirements will befollowed where there aregaps in local legislation.
Provisions have been
included in this ESMF toaddress potential risks andimpacts and comply withESS8.

The EIA Regulations at national and state level involves aprocess which is intended to help the general public andgovernment officials make decisions with thePartial equivalence.
ESS10 requirements will
be followed where there

To promote sustainable development benefits and opportunities for Indigenous Peoples/Historically
Underserved Traditional Local Communities in a manner that is accessible, culturally appropriate andinclusive.
To improve project design and promote local support by establishing and maintaining an ongoing relationshipbased on meaningful consultation with the Indigenous Peoples/ Historically Underserved Traditional Local
Communities affected by a project throughout the project’s life cycle.
To obtain the Free, Prior, and Informed Con-sent (FPIC)3 of affected Indigenous Peoples/ Historically
Underserved Traditional Local Communities in the three circumstances described in this ESS.
To recognize, respect and preserve the culture, knowledge, and practices of Indigenous Peoples/Historically
Under-served Traditional Local Communities, and to provide them with an opportunity to adapt to changing
conditions in a manner and in a time-frame acceptable to them.
ESS8 – Cultural Heritage
To protect cultural heritage from the adverse impacts of project activities and support its preservation.
To address cultural heritage as an integral aspect of sustainable development.
To promote meaningful consultation with stake-holders regarding cultural heritage.
To promote the equitable sharing of benefits from the use of cultural heritage.

ESS10 – Stakeholder Engagement and Information Disclosure.
To establish a systematic approach to stake-holder engagement that will help Borrowers identify stakeholders
and build and maintain a constructive relationship with them, in particular project-affected parties.
To assess the level of stakeholder interest and support for the project and to enable stake-holders’ views to
be taken into account in project design and environmental and social performance.

December 2020

Final

37

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

WB Environmental and Social Standards

FSM Legislative Requirements

Equivalence and Gap
Filling

To promote and provide means for effective and inclusive engagement with project-affected parties
throughout the project life cycle on issues that could potentially affect them.

understanding of the environmental consequences of
their decisions

are
gaps
in
local
legislation.
Provisions have been
included in the PRIME
Project SEP to comply with
ESS10, and national
legislationonpublicconsultation,
project
information disclosure andgrievance mechanisms.

To ensure that appropriate project information on environmental and social risks and impacts is disclosed to
stakeholders in a timely, understandable, accessible and appropriate manner and format.
To provide project-affected parties with accessible and inclusive means to raise issues and grievances, andallow Borrowers to respond to and manage such grievances.

December 2020

Final

38

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

4.

Existing Environment

4.1

Introduction
This section provides a summary of the information provided in the Baseline Resource
Report (Appendix A) on the physical, biological and socio-economic elements of theenvironment.

4.2

Project Area of Influence
The initial description of the Project’s Area of Influence (AOI) is based on the definition
provided in the Guidance Note to ESS1, to which the Project is to comply. Specifically, this
Guidance note states that:“….Where the project involves specifically identified physical elements, aspects, andfacilities that are likely to generate impacts, the collection and analysis of environmental
and social baseline information and data, at an appropriate level of detail for the project,
are essential to define the project’s area of influence and describe relevant physical,
biological, ecological, socioeconomic, health, and labor conditions, including any changes
anticipated to occur in the foreseeable future (including projected variability in climatic andenvironmental conditions due to potentially significant climate change or that would require
adaptation measures that could occur over the life of the project), along with current andproposed development activities within the general project area but not directly connectedto the project to be financed…..”
The area considered for assessment of baseline conditions (the Project “Area of Influence”
or “AOI”) consists of the:•Road corridor adjacent to the ‘PRIME Roads’ (and works where it is a bridge,
causeway, etc.) and immediate adjacent environment either side of the roadalignment (see Figure 2-2 to Figure 2-5);•

Road users and communities connected to and by the PRIME roads;•

Any temporary structures (such as bridges, causeway replacement structure, etc);•

Receiving environment downstream (and upstream when considering fish passage)
if the works are a bridge (or causeway) or works are related to drainage, culverts
etc.;

•

Contractors yards, lay down or stockpile areas and any other works related facilities;
and•Quarry locations and immediate surrounds.

Table 4-1 outlines the guidelines that have been followed to determine the AOI for the
PRIME Project which is based on a precautionary approach. All data was obtained bydesktop study and field survey conducted between July and October 2020.

December 2020

Final

39

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

Table 4-1: Project Area of Influence (AOI) delineations and conditions

Environment

Project AOILocal villages / communities
businesses

Adjacent to PRIME Road alignments and works locations.
Connected to and by the PRIME Road network.

Road users (motorists, cyclists,
pedestrians and other modes oftransport)

Users of the road that may have access or transportation restrictions fromthe works if they are not adequately managed.
Users that will benefit from improved infrastructure.

Important species habitat

Sensitive ecological areas in close proximity to the PRIME Roadalignments and works locations potentially receiving runoff during
construction / operation.

Streams & inshore(adjacent to coastline)

watersAssuming a precautionary approach, an area directly adjacent to the
PRIME Road alignments and works locations potentially receiving
stormwater runoff during construction / operation.

The AOI extent considered in the ESMF is broader than the area in which possible physicalworks/interventions will occur as Component 2 works will only be undertaken along small
discrete sections (<10%) of the ‘primary roads’ identified a part of the ‘PRIME Roads’.
However all road users that rely on the road networks for work, education, markets,
community and social connectivity will potentially be affected by, and benefit from theProject.
The broader AOI has been applied for the E&S baseline, impact and risk assessment for
the ESMF in order to ensure the process captures anticipated impacts.
Any site-specific environmental and social assessment to be prepared, if required, are todefine the AOI specifically for those works, based on the works footprint including all
ancillary components and potential impacts on environmental, economic and social
resources.

4.3

General Baseline Description
This Section of the report summaries the key physical, environmental, and socio-economic
resources present nationally and at a state level potentially within the AOI from primary(i.e., field assessment) and secondary (e.g., reference material, GIS data) sources. The
E&S Baseline Resources Report which provides more detailed on the secondary source
information is provided in Appendix A. This information has been used to screen theenvironmental and social risks associated with the PRIME Project (see Section 5.7).

4.3.1

National

4.3.1.1

Biological Resources
FSM consists of two ecoregions (Wortel et. al. 2003). The Yap tropical dry forest ecoregionis characterized by a monsoon-like climate with rainy seasons followed by periods ofdrought. The dominant vegetation types are mixed broadleaf forest, swamp, mangrove,savanna, and agroforests (Falanruw et. al 1987). The other States share the Carolines
tropical moist forest ecoregion characterized by heavy rainfall. Mixed broadleaf forests
comprise the dominant vegetation type on the high volcanic islands. FSM is characterized
by 12 terrestrial biomes and 6 marine biomes. Biodiversity is characterized by a high rateof endemism and large numbers of species.
FSM coastline is about 3,300 nautical miles with an estimated 14,517 km2 of reefs andwide range of different habitat types. Areas of mangrove and seagrass beds, consisting

December 2020

Final

40

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Frameworkof a number of species and considered important sensitive habitat, are found throughout
FSM.
The EEZ has resident and transient or migratory populations of cetaceans (whales anddolphins) with a total of nine species being observed. Of these species, blue whale isconsidered ‘Endangered’ and sperm whale is considered ‘Vulnerable’. The green turtle(‘Endangered’) and hawksbill turtle (‘Critically Endangered’) are the most commonly
observed (IUCN 2020).
In terms of Conservation areas, areas, 130 Areas of Biodiversity Significance (ABS) havebeen identified in FSM (TNC 2003). The combined sites encompass 291,753 ha or 19%of the FSM's entire terrestrial and inshore area (including reefs and lagoon areas). In
addition, each state has a number of protected managed areas.
4.3.1.2

Governance, Economy, Poverty and Gender
Most States have an effective traditional system of governance which complements thenewer systems of government supported by non-government agencies (Raynor & Kostka
2003). Customary marine tenure gives resource owners jurisdiction and responsibility formarine resource use. Management of land, waters and all natural resources is through thetraditional leadership system.
Ownership of land and aquatic areas varies between States. In Kosrae and Pohnpei, landis both privately and State owned, while aquatic areas are managed by the State as publictrusts. In Chuuk, most land and aquatic areas are privately owned and acquired throughinheritance, gift or, recently, by purchase. In Yap, almost all land and aquatic areas(shoreline to the outer reefs) are owned or managed by individual estates and usage issubject to traditional control (FSM 2010).
FSM cash economy primarily depends on the flow of funds from the United States ofAmerica (OEC 2017).
FSM receives Compact of Free Association funds andsupplementary grants from the United States which provides for US economic assistance,
defense of the FSM and other benefits in exchange for US defense and certain otheroperating rights in the FSM. Economic activities consist primarily of subsistence farming
and fishing. The economy has languished over the last decade and real GDP growth has
averaged -0.4% resulting in declining living standards and contributed to net outward
migration (FSM DoTC&I 2015). The economy is firmly tied to overseas aid which issignificant relative to domestic revenue at the State level and is dominated by funding fromthe Compact agreement.
FSM is at an early stage of the process of urbanization with about 22% of its population
living in the urban areas (2010 FSM Census). Agricultural and livestock raising activities
and fishing activities are almost universal among FSM households.
Heads of households are primarily male with 53% of heads aged 40 to 59 years old (FSM2014). The annual average income in FSM was estimated to be USD 16,950. However,
20% of the households earned less than US$ 2,600 and approximately 37% of household
heads earned less than USD 5,000 with the majority of household heads earning between
USD 5,000–29,000. The most common source of income for households is home
production (mainly agriculture items) with 76% of the households involved in some form ofsubsistence activity.
A labor force comprised of 37,919 people represents a national labor force participation
rate of 57.3% (2010 FSM census). Of this group, 31,789 people are employed while 6,130

December 2020

Final

41

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

are unemployed equating to an unemployment rate of 16.2%. For those that are employedover half are involved in education (24.6%), public administration and defense (18.6%),
wholesale/retail trade and motor vehicle repair (9.7%) and health and social work (9.1%).
Approximately 22.4% of households or 29.9% of the population (SPC 2005) are living
below the minimum cost of living or the Basic Needs Poverty Line (BNPL). Chuuk, Pohnpei
and Yap have experienced an increase in the poverty incidence while Kosrae had adecline. Poverty also has a gender bias; while female-headed households constituted 20%of the household population in FSM, they constituted 39% of the total number ofhouseholds in the lower three expenditure deciles (ADB 2004).

4.3.2

Kosrae4.3.2.1

Physical Environment
Kosrae has a total area of approximately 112 km2. The steep mountainous interior iscovered with tropical rainforest. Around much of the island there are continuous mangroveswamp forests and seaward coastal strands. The island is surrounded by a broad shallow
carbonate platform much of which is covered by freshwater swamps, mangrove forestsand low coral land and beach strand (US Army Engineers 1989). In the nearshore coastal
environment, seagrass beds sensitive to development are present in some locations andfurther offshore, coral reef habitat.
Soils are typically brownish red in color, mostly fine granular clay depending on the bedrockand can be deep in places (Takesy 2014). The most erodible soils are typically confinedto the interior where steeper slopes predominate. The island has several significant Rivers
and other smaller perennial and intermittent streams and springs. Groundwater is notconsidered to be an important water source.
A number of areas (including Lelu, Malem, Utwe and Tafunsak) have been identified where
coastal change-related impacts are likely to be most significant either due to ongoing
movement of the shoreline and/or the proximity of key infrastructure to the shoreline suchas roads (Ramsay & Douglas 2000).

4.3.2.2

Ecological Environment
Terrestrial Ecology
There are over 322 plant species in Kosrae of which 250 species are native, many of which
are endemic to one or more islands in the FSM (Falanruw 2002). Key vegetation types
are shown in Figure 4-1.

December 2020

Final

42

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

Figure 4-1: Location of key terrestrial habitat classes in Kosrae (from Weeks 2019)

Those located in close proximity to the coastal road include:•

Freshwater marsh and riverine systems with grasses, sedges and herbs growing instanding water most of the year and generally located in areas slightly above sea
level and are often just inland of mangroves.

•

Swamp forests occur where soils are inundated with fresh or slightly saline water.
They are most commonly found just inland of mangroves, above tidal influence but
lower in elevation than the surrounding terrain.

•

Mangrove forests.

•

Agroforest including palm trees, a component of forests, which occur in dense stands
especially in areas where the primary forest has been disturbed.

Three species are identified as IUCN listed threatened (one ‘Endangered’ and two‘Vulnerable’) and one ‘near threatened’ (NT) flora species. Kosrae has six endemic bird
species two of which are now extinct. Two restricted-range bird species including the‘Critically Endangered’ migratory species Beck's petrel Pseudobulweria becki and theMicronesian Imperial-pigeon Ducula oceanica, which is considered ‘Near Threatened’ arealso present. Other rare, regionally significant or protected fauna species include twoendemic species of bats, three threatened reptiles and two ‘Endangered’ freshwater fish
species.
Coastal Marine Ecology
Kosrae is surrounded by a broad shallow carbonate platform much of which is covered by
freshwater swamps, mangrove forest and low coral land and beach strand. The carbonate
platform is of recent reef origin and extends between 1 – 5 km out from the islands volcanic

December 2020

Final

43

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

shoreline boundary. Three lagoons or embayment’s bisect the reef platform, the largest ofwhich is Lelu Harbor off the east coast.
Coastal marine habitat sensitive to development activities is present around Kosrae.
Figure 4-2 presents a map showing the distribution of key coastal habitat classes in Kosrae(from Weeks 2019).
Mangrove and lowland swamp forest occupy relatively large areas between the basaltic
uplands and seaward beach strand areas - 1,562 ha of mangrove forest represents 14%of the total land area (Cole et al 1999). Mangrove forest is most extensive along the south
and north-west coasts (and in Tofol Harbor) while lowland swamp forest occurs in several
discrete locations.
Sea grass beds are present on fringing reef flats primarily along the north and west coasts
and consist primarily of four species (Cymodea rotundata, Enhalus acoroides, Thalassia
hamprichii and Holdule uninervis).
Outer reef slopes and terraces beyond the spur and groove formations are characterizedby coral reef habitat with high diversity and species abundance. Several species of giant
clam that once proliferated across these reefs are now under threat due to the high levelsof exploitation.
Kosrae has 8 Protected Managed Areas (PMA) and 12 Areas of Biological Significance(Figure 4-4) including two terrestrial, one marine, five coastal marine and two coastal
freshwater ecosystems totaling 8,261 ha.
The primary roads considered under the Project do not pass through any of the ‘existing’protected areas, although four ‘proposed’ protected areas do intersect these roads Figure
4-3).

Figure 4-2: Location of key terrestrial habitat classes in Kosrae (from Weeks 2019)

December 2020

Final

44

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

Figure 4-3: Existing and proposed protected areas (from TNC 2019)

Figure 4-4: Areas of Biological Significance in Kosrae (from TNC 2019)

4.3.2.3

Social-Economic Environment
Kosrae’s economy depends significantly on financial support from the United States,
provided by the Compact Agreement with FSM. Consequentially, public sector dominates
the economy; the primary employer is the State through its ten departments.
Kosrae’s GDP was estimated at USD$14.6m in 2015 (FSM DoTC&I 2015). Major
economic sectors in the State of Kosrae are marine resources, tourism, agriculture andsmall scale businesses. The private sector provides employment through retail outlets,
restaurants, resorts, farming and some service businesses. Employee earnings in 2015
was US$1.822m (private sector) and US$17.051m (State Government). The subsistence
economy is based on small-scale horticulture and fishing.

December 2020

Final

45

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

Kosrae has a total population of 6,616 (FSM 2010 census) with an average annual growthrate of -0.40%, the greatest rate of change of all FSM States, reflecting a declining
economy and an interstate (to Pohnpei) or international population movement.
In terms of public infrastructure, piped water systems from rivers for potable water serve 7
areas in Kosrae (SPREP 2019). The Lelu sewerage system provides small bore sewers
which receive effluent from household septic tanks. The Tofol sewerage system collects
sewage from Government buildings and provides oxidation ponds treatment.
The solid waste facilities in Kosrae consist of five dumpsites and an aluminum cancompaction and storage facility. Kosrae has 20 permitted privately-owned quarry sites.
Only the Quarry at Tenwak (locally-known as Puk Quarry) has a rock crushing machineand sorter. No data is available on the quality or quantity of material potentially available
for roading projects.
Figure 4-5 shows the location of key sensitive social receptors (such as key villages,
churches, schools, hospitals) along the PRIME Road extent on Kosrae, as well as assets
identified during a road corridor survey (including private dwellings, commercial buildings,
grave sites). Examples of these assets are shown in Figure 4-6.

December 2020

Final

46

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

Figure 4-5: Key assets identified during the road corridor inspection – Kosrae

December 2020

Final

47

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

Figure 4-6: Images showing key assets located in close proximity to the road on Kosrae including
walls (top left & right) private residences, garden and power poles (middle left & right), and one lanebridge on Lelu causeway and coastal protection works (bottom left & right).

December 2020

Final

48

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

4.3.3

Pohnpei

4.3.3.1

Physical Environment
Pohnpei is a high volcanic island with a mountainous interior, is about 21 km in diameterand 112 km in circumference. Including lagoon islands, the total land area of Pohnpei isapproximately 340 km2.
In terms of Flooding and Erosion hazard areas the majority of the low-lying coastal margin
is considered at risk of flooding and the majority of ‘very high’ to ‘high’ potential erosion
hazard areas are located in the stepper areas poorer quality soils of the interior occasional
extending towards the coastal margin.

4.3.3.2

Ecological Environment
Key terrestrial habitat sensitive to development disturbance as a proportion of total area
ranges includes Mangrove (15.6%), Swamp forest (0.6%), Upland forest (35.4%) andMarsh (0.4%). A total of 729 species plants have been described with approximately 438
species being native. A total of 291 introduced plant species are present. A range of
avian, mammalian, reptilian species are present including 73 bird species. A number ofmammals (including bats), reptiles (skinks, geckos, snakes), amphibians and freshwater
fish are also likely to be present.
The key reef type in close proximity to the coast is described as “reticulated fringing reef
defined as a network of linear or polygonal reef framework with intervening depressions”.
Approximately 4,403.6 ha of predominately intertidal and shallow (<3 m) subtidal seagrassmeadow are present the waters around Pohnpei Island (and Atoll) of varying levels ofcoverage (continuous, aggregated, and isolated).
A total of existing (12 areas) and proposed (12 areas) protected areas in Pohnpei and 35
Areas of Biodiversity Significance (ABS) have been identified for Pohnpei including
terrestrial (9), marine (5), coastal marine (18) and coastal freshwater sites (3).

4.3.3.3

Social-Economic Environment
Economic activity consists largely of subsistence farming and fishing and government
activity which employs two-thirds of the adult working population and receives fundinglargely - 58% in 2013 – from US Compact of Free Association assistance. Pohnpei had
been the fastest growing with GDP growth averaging 2% per annum in the FY1987-FY2003
period (FSM Strategic Development Plan 2003). In the early period FY1987-FY1995 of
the Compact, a strong rate of growth 5.4% was experienced. Private and public sector
expanded attaining 9.0% and 2.3% growth respectively.
The mainstay of the economy is subsistence farming and fishing. There is limited tourism
due to a lack of access and facilities although it has increased in recent years with small
hotels opening.
Land is both privately and State owned while aquatic areas are managed by the State as
public trusts. The Constitution requires the Government of Pohnpei to protect customs
and traditions and allows statutes to be enacted to uphold custom.
A total of 29 bridges and causeways have been identified around Pohnpei associated with
the Project main road network. Piped water systems from Nanpil River and wells serve a
total population of 2,500 in Kolonia and Palikir. The Kolonia Central Sewerage System,
which consists of about 12 miles of sewers has about 1,200 connections.

December 2020

Final

49

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

Pohnpei has 45 coral sand dredge sites (33 inactive and 12 active) and two rock quarries.
They all have permits from EPA and are mainly for road maintenance and construction.
One of the hard rock quarries is located at Ipwal Sokes and is owned and operated by acompany called APSCO.
Figure 4-7 shows the location of key sensitive social receptors (such as key villages,
churches, schools, hospitals) along the PRIME Road extent on Pohnpei, as well as assets
identified during a road corridor survey (including private dwellings, commercial buildings,
a seawall and a pipeline). Examples of these assets are shown in Figure 4-8.

December 2020

Final

50

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

Figure 4-7: Key assets identified during a road corridor inspection – Pohnpei

December 2020

Final

51

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

Figure 4-8: Images showing examples of assets located in close proximity to the road on Pohnpei
including private residences and churches (top left & right), telecoms tower and water pipeline (bottom
left & right).

December 2020

Final

52

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

4.3.4

Chuuk

4.3.4.1

Physical Environment
Weno Island is of volcanic origin consisting of olivine-basalt with minor andesite, with steep
rugged uplands surrounded by coastal lowlands. Weno is drained by a number of streams
most of them short with small catchment areas. The compacted volcanic material results
in a shallow (unconfined) groundwater lens. Key areas considered to be of high coastal
instability are primarily located along the northern (including Pou Bay) and south-eastern
coastlines.

4.3.4.2

Ecological Environment
Key terrestrial habitat sensitive to development disturbance as a proportion of total area
includes mangrove (7%), upland forest (16.2%) and marsh (5.6%). A total of 470 species
have been described of which approximately 298 species are native. A total of 172 speciesof plants have been introduced. A range of avian, mammalian, reptilian species arepresent including 73 species of bird and number of mammals (including bats), reptiles(skinks, geckos, snakes), amphibians and freshwater fish are likely present.
Weno Island has several designated protected / managed areas. In addition, 50 Areas of
Biodiversity Significance (ABS) have been identified including terrestrial (9), marine (10),coastal marine (20) and coastal freshwater sites (11) throughout Chuuk. The key ABS
sites on Weno in close proximity to the primary road network are Pou Bay and the North
Weno Marine ABS (refer E&S Baseline Resources Report, Appendix A).

4.3.4.3

Social-Economic Environment
In 2010, Chuuk experienced 3% GDP growth with an increase in spending from both public
and private sectors (Arnold 2016). Chuuk’s economy grew at 1% experiencing public sector
expansion of 4.4% and the numbers of hours worked by civil servants increased. In
subsequent years, Chuuk has experienced very little growth. Analysts have forecast thedecrease in compact funding ($1.7 million) will hinder government spending with little
private sector growth. In 2011, the unemployment rate in Chuuk was 28%
The Chuuk Public Utility Corporation operates the public water supply serving 378
residential customers (around 19% of total households) and 101 commercial andgovernment customers. The Weno sewerage network, the only centralized sewer system,
is located on the north and north-western side of Weno Island. The sewerage network has
384 residential households and 106 commercial and government customers. Sewage istreated at the Weno Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) which is located next to the
Weno airport.
Solid waste facilities on Weno consist of the Fanipat dumpsite and the Weno Recycling
Facility (Johnston 2011). There are three basalt quarries located on Weno two of whichhave not been in operation since the 1990s. One of the sites has equipment and is still in
operation but output is extremely limited (see Figure 4-9). There is also a basalt Quarry on
Tonoas Island in Chuuk Lagoon.
Figure 4-9 shows the location of key sensitive social receptors (such as key villages,
churches, schools, hospitals) along the PRIME Road extent on Chuuk, as well as assets
identified during a road corridor survey (including private dwellings, commercial buildings,
and fruit trees). Examples of these assets are shown in Figure 4-10.

December 2020

Final

53

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

Figure 4-9: Key assets identified during a road corridor inspection - Chuuk

December 2020

Final

54

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

Figure 4-10: Images of Chuuk showing examples of assets identified during the road corridor on
Chuuk inspection including walls and private fences (top and middle left and right), pig pen (bottom
left) and power poles (bottom right).

December 2020

Final

55

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

4.3.5

Yap

4.3.5.1

Physical Environment
Yap Islands comprise an island arc system composed of continental crust and consist of
two distinct sequences: ancient weathered volcanic rock and weathered metamorphic
schists, accompanied by coral sand and mangrove mud. The islands are surrounded by abroad fringing barrier reef and has a low undulating topography. There are four main soil
types on the Yap Islands have been derived from the basement rocks.
The primary freshwater source on Yap proper is surface water. There are no perennial
streams on Yap where most streams will be dry during part of the dry season. A proportionof the surface water percolates into the soils recharging groundwater, which eventuallyescapes as small springs or seeps directly into the ocean. However, given the bedrock on
Yap is metamorphic and volcanic, it yields little groundwater for use.

4.3.5.2

Ecological Environment
The major land class/habitat types are: non-forest (28%), agroforest (26%) and secondary
vegetation (6%). The vegetation of Yap has been greatly modified; other than mangroves,little native forest remains. There are four threated (one ‘Endangered’ and three‘Vulnerable’) and one “Near Threatened’ (NT) floral species in Yap. All of the threatened
species are trees. Yap contains four endemic bird species: the Yap cicadabird isconsidered to be ‘Endangered’ and the other three are ‘Near Threatened’.
There are 8 protected marine areas and currently no legally protected terrestrial areas. A
total of 32 Areas of Biodiversity Significance (ABS) are located in Yap State including fiveterrestrial, six marine and 21 coastal marine ecosystems, at least seven of which are inclose proximity to the primary road network (refer E&S Baseline Resources Report,
Appendix A).

4.3.5.3

Social-Economic Environment
The Yap State economy is firmly dependent on funding from the US which provides about
75% of revenue. The Yap state economy achieved the highest rate of economic growth of
the FSM states during the original Compact period. Growth of the private sector was themost impressive achieving an annual average of 5.8% across 17 years. Economic
performance during the last 4 years of the Compact were disappointing reflecting theinability of the private sector to sustain growth, prudential fiscal policies and poor resultsof the state owned commercial purse seine fishing company (FSM 2003).
Almost all land and aquatic areas are owned or managed by individual estates and usage
is subject to traditional control (FSM 2010). The distribution of Yap’s population varies
considerably between rural (10,537 people) and urban (840) areas, with the population in
Piped water systems from Gitam Reservoir and wells serve the population of 3,150 inColonia. The sewerage system has about 700 connections. A disused quarry site is
located on the northern side of the western end of the existing Airport runway in Kanif. The
only solid waste management facility is the Fitkabeetinaem landfill.
Figure 4-11 shows the location of key sensitive social receptors (such as key villages,
churches, schools, hospitals) along the PRIME Road extent on Chuuk, as well as assets
identified during a road corridor survey (including private dwellings, commercial buildings,
and fruit trees). Examples of these assets are shown in Figure 4-12).

December 2020

Final

56

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

Figure 4-11: Key assets identified during a road corridor inspection - Yap

December 2020

Final

57

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

Figure 4-12: Images showing examples of assets located in close proximity to the road on Yap
including private residences and commercial properties walls (top left & right) fences and walls(middle left & right, bottom left), and public utilities (bottom right)

4.4

Indigeneity in FSM
Micronesians represent the overwhelming majority in FSM, with recent estimates putting themat 91% of the population. With the vast geographical expanse of the country, there is huge
cultural and linguistic diversity amongst the islands comprising the four states. While English
is the official language of FSM, there are eight major indigenous languages of the MalayoPolynesian linguistic family spoken in the FSM: Yapese, Ulithian, Woleaians, Chuukese,
Pohnpeians, Kosraeans, Nukuoro, Kapingamarangi. Each State includes the indigenous
languages as official languages. English has become the common language of thegovernment, and for secondary and tertiary education. Outside of the main capital towns of
the four FSM states, the local languages are primarily spoken.

December 2020

Final

58

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

There are distinct cultural identities between the four states with unique culturalcharacteristics. However, cultural similarities are indicated by the importance of traditional
extended family and clan systems found on each island as well as a common national identity.
Traditional leadership continues to play an important role in Micronesian society on mostislands (with the exception of Kosrae). Over the recent two decades, Pohnpei has rapidly
developed as the most westernized state in the nation. This results in large part because thenational government is located here. Yap continues as the most traditional society in the FSM
with a strong caste system.
The individual States have separate and distinct land tenure arrangements, with some broadcommonalities that persist throughout State land tenure systems. The FSM Constitution
forbids land ownership to foreigners as well as to domestic corporations that have non-FSM
citizens among their shareholders. Group and communal ownership of land is prevalentthroughout the FSM. There are differences, however, concerning rights of land transfer within
the FSM. In Chuuk, Kosrae and Yap, land can be transferred by law to all FSM citizens. In
Pohnpei, however, it can only be transferred to persons from that island.
Traditional and cultural institutions have a strong presence in Micronesian life. The keystoneof Micronesian society is the extended family, which is collectively responsible for maintaining
the welfare of the family including in relation to customary family land.
The system of land tenure is a complex mix of the old and the new. Older customary land
tenure conditions are strong or weak depending on the people involved, the location andhistory of the land, the historical title and rank of the land, and the cash opportunity associatedwith ownership, lease or use rights. Traditionally, land ownership in FSM was limited toinheritance within a family or clan. As a result, many land parcels in FSM are subject to thecommunal use and alienation rights of extended families, clans and communities. Private
landholders influenced to varying degrees by customary land tenure systems neverthelessoccupy most lands.
Patterns of public and private ownership over land and aquatic areas vary among thestates. In Pohnpei and Kosrae, land is both privately and state owned, while aquatic areas
are managed by the state as public trusts. In Chuuk, most land and aquatic areas are privately
owned and acquired through inheritance, gift or by purchase. In Yap, almost all land andaquatic areas are owned or managed by individual estates and usage is subject to traditional
control.
Land tenure patterns generally involve communal ownership of a single plot, single ownershipof several and separate plots or usage right to land owned by traditional leaders. In the
traditional economy, land is not a commodity to be sold or traded. However, the attitude insome areas towards land is changing with sales and trades taking place as well as leases
especially near centers of development. Cadastral and registration programs have been
undertaken in each of the states with varying effects. In the main island of Yap, less than
10% of land has been registered and titled since a cadastral program commenced some 30
years ago. Chuuk and Kosrae have made more progress in the initial determination of landparcels although there is a substantial backlog in the land parcels to be surveyed and mappedand numerous outstanding disputes. Pohnpei appears to have made the greatest progress inthe cadastral survey of private lands.

December 2020

Final

59

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework5.

Anticipated Environmental & Social Impacts ofComponent 2 Physical Works

5.1

Introduction
The PRIME Project has the potential to create a range of impacts as a result of Project
feasibility, design and construction of physical works on priority road assets. The impactsof this Project on the physical, ecological and social environment have been assessedusing the methodology described below.
Specific environmental and social sensitivities identified through the impact and risk
assessment are outlined in Section 5.9.
Detailed assessment and measures to be adopted to mitigate any potential impacts will be
provided in the Generic ESMP or works specific ESIA/ESMP.

5.2

Potential Impacts of Components 1 and 3
While the majority of potential impacts are expected under Component 2 physical works,
a number of risks exist for Components 1 (Technical Assistance related to the VA/CRRS,
and road asset management systems), and Component 3 (institutional and regulatory
reforms and capacity buildings.
The risks to be considered under Components 1 and 3 include the following:

December 2020•

Lack of or insufficient stakeholder engagement – where key stakeholders andcommunity have not been meaningfully engaged during the Technical Assistancestage, impacting outcomes of VA / CRRS and resulting in distrust / discontent fromstakeholders.

•Poor quality environmental and social data – existing data and information
inadequate to inform the assessment, with high level of inaccuracy or gap filing
required, leading to either additional investigative studies required or inaccurate
conclusions/recommendations from the VA/CRRS.

•

Avoiding sensitive receptors (cultural heritage, natural or critical habitats) –sensitive receptors not being adequately screened during Component 1, leading tothese sensitivities not being fully understood or identified.

•

Inadequate training of national and state officials – training and capacity
building undertaken during Component 1 and 3 is not adequate to provide nationaland state officials to either support the Project, meaningful input the decisionmaking process, or carry the Project forward through operation, after the external
consultants are no longer involved.

•

Institutional and regulatory reforms not sufficient – inadequate strengtheningof institutional structures and regulation leading to lack of communication between
institutions and States and an inability to effectively regulate climate change risks
on the roading network.

Final

60

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

5.3

Potential Feasibility, Design and Pre-Construction Impacts
under Component 2
Without knowing the exact Component 2 physical works to be implemented under the
PRIME Project, the impact assessment process for this ESMF involved identification of the
Project’s ‘likely’ activities and potential environmental and social impacts resulting fromeach activity during Project phases. A works activity could include design/technicalassistance, site preparation, construction, reinstatement, operation and maintenance.
Potential impacts have been screened and evaluated as to whether they are adverse,
positive, or have a negligible or neutral impact. These issues are discussed in the following
sections in relation to the ‘likely’ Component 2 works activities under the PRIME Project.
The feasibility, prioritization, design and procurement of works can play a major role to
avoid or reduce significant impacts to people and the environment. Project design shouldreflect current international standards for design and construction of roads and bridges,
which may include site preparation, slope stability, drainage, access road geometry,pavement, bridges, causeway and other road infrastructure assets.
The following key impacts need consideration at the design / pre-construction / technicalassistance phases:•

Climate Change Impacts – roads and bridges typically have design lives of 20 to
40 year timeframes over which climate change could have direct and indirect
impacts. Direct impacts are due to effects of the environment namely increased
frequency and intensity of rainfall and sea level rise. The indirect impacts of climatechange on roads are due to the potential relocation of population and human activity
altering the demand for roads. An understanding of the likely impacts of futureclimate change by road planners, designers and asset managers can result in
considerable cost savings in the long term.

•

Easement Agreements – there may be issues defining or securing the roadeasement documents for some works areas. This could include:(i) Formal easement documents do not exist;(ii) Documents are believed to exist, but cannot be sourced/found;(iii) Easement documents exist and can be sourced but are not well defined (i.e.,either no map accompanying the easement agreement or the map is notdetailed enough to define the exact extent of the easement); or(iv) There are existing (i.e. historic) disputes over the area of land or easement.
Not having formal, well defined, easement agreements in place for a section ofroad to be upgraded as part of the PRIME Project could potentially lead to Projectrisks such as land owner disputes and grievances, which if unmitigated orunresolved could hinder the implementation of works under the PRIME projectprogram of works.

•

Asset Damage – through stormwater runoff eroding road or damaging adjacentassets through poorly designed and installed side-drains and culverts.

•

Direct Land and/or Asset Loss – as a result of the need to relocate structures
such as houses, commercial properties, etc. and the resultant impact on livelihoodsto accommodate the PRIME Project.

December 2020

Final

61

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

5.4•

Disruption to Access – such as during road works activities or the replacementof bridge or causeway which could pose significant inconvenience to road users.

•

Restricted Coastal Margin Access – where works restrict local communities
access to the coastal margin either temporarily or permanently.

•

Safety in Design / Road Safety Assessments – design not robust enough for
local conditions or not international best practice, does not take into account locallyavailable material, or not appropriate for local safety issues (i.e. types of pedestrianor vehicular road use).

•

Avoiding sensitive receptors (cultural heritage, natural or critical habitats) –sensitive receptors not being adequately screened, leading to these sensitivities
not been fully understood or identified during design phase, resulting ininappropriate design, or unnecessary impacts.

•

Identifying opportunities for environmental improvements – opportunities
exist for environmental and social environment through sound and thoughtful
design, particularly as part of the ‘participatory design approach’.

•

Lack or insufficient public consultation and project information disclosure –leading to community not aware of nature, scope, impacts or timing of works, andnot being able to adequately engage in the ‘participatory design approach’ process.

Potential Construction Impacts under Component 2
Potential impacts arising from road works activities will depend on a number of factors
including the existing site conditions, the location of nearby assets and sensitiveenvironmental and social receptors and the scale and nature of the works proposed. On
this basis potential impacts are summarized in Sections below. In many instances potential
impacts can be mitigated through the implementation of Good International Industry
Practice measures outlined in the generic ESMP or works specific ESIA/ESMP.

5.4.1

Physical and Ecological Environment

5.4.1.1

Water Quality and Sediment
There is potential for the discharge of sediment and contaminants as a result of Project
construction activities. An increase in suspended sediments in receiving water bodies(streams and coastal marine area) can be caused by earthworks and vegetation clearance
activities as well as uncontrolled discharges of fine material from exposed soil andstockpiles through stormwater runoff and overland flow. This can lead to changes in thewater quality of adjacent watercourses and coastal environments. There is also thepotential for hydrocarbons from machinery operations and refueling activities impacting
water quality.
In the case of the PRIME Project potential water quality impacts could arise due to thegeneration of fine material in stormwater runoff and the vicinity of ecologically sensitive
water bodies. Impacts are manageable through the use of practical standard roadenvironmental mitigation practices, such as stormwater control, stockpile management,
controlling hazardous substances suitable slope stabilization, minimizing instream works
etc.

December 2020

Final

62

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

5.4.1.2

Terrestrial Biodiversity and Habitat
The potential impacts of construction activity relate primarily to the direct loss of habitat inroad, bridge or causeway footprints (such as riparian margins) as a result of earthworks
associated with construction activity. Noise and vibration are likely to be the main impacts
on terrestrial faunal species (e.g. birds, lizards, bats, etc.) during construction (refer section
5.4.1.5).
The environmental screening process (refer Section 6) includes a biodiversity and natural
habitat screening and assessment process for works, and specific mitigation measures areto be developed in a site-specific ESMP if necessary.

5.4.1.3

Freshwater and Coastal Marine Biodiversity and Habitat
The potential impacts of construction activity relate primarily to:•

The direct loss of freshwater and coastal marine habitat in road / bridge / causeway
footprint;•

Water quality impacts associated with uncontrolled runoff of sediments from exposed
earth or stockpiles in stormwater from construction areas, or from spills or leaks fromhazardous substances; and•Impacts on freshwater and marine fauna and flora as a result of changes in water
quality.

The environmental screening process (refer Section 6) includes a biodiversity and natural
habitat screening and assessment process for works, and specific mitigation measures (inaddition to those related to water quality management) are to be developed in the Generic
ESMP, or site-specific ESMP if necessary, such as maintaining fish migration and suitablecrossing design.
5.4.1.4

Air Quality
Fugitive emissions of particulate material can occur from earthworks, concrete construction
activities and from disturbance of unsealed roads. Mobile source emissions occur frommachinery used for excavation, construction and transport operations.
Emissions during construction are likely to consist of the following:•

Exhaust emissions from machinery (e.g. excavators, trucks, etc) which will dependon age and condition of machinery;•

Dust associated with the earthworks, road use, material storage/ stockpile, concrete
batching or asphalt plant operation, quarrying or crushing materials; and•Emissions of smoke from bitumen production, etc.

Adverse effects of these emissions depend primarily upon the sensitivity of the local
environment and proximity to local populations. Those located closer to the construction
activities are most likely to be most affected whilst those located further away are likely beleast affected. These effects can be classified generally as nuisance effects as a result of
deposition of particulates onto places where people live or frequent, or onto crops.
Impacts of particulate matter depend on the size of the particles generated. Human healtheffects of airborne particulate matter are mainly associated with fine particles that are lessthan 10 microns in size (PM10) and which are small enough to enter the upper respiratory
December 2020

Final

63

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

tract. Coarser particulate matter, greater than about 10 to 20 microns, generally cause
nuisance effects due to soiling of surfaces, visibility or irritation to eyes and nose. The
large fraction (greater than 20 µm) is usually referred to as deposited particulate matter.
Proposed construction activities are expected to result in minor impacts relating to dust
generation from earthworks activities, formation of soil and gravel stockpiles and from the
movement of heavy construction vehicles. These impacts can be managed but can causea nuisance for neighboring property owners and can create a hazard to road users.
Monitoring and implementation of measures to manage dust generation (such as the useof dust carts, etc.) will be in the generic ESMP. All machinery and vehicles used in the
Project will be expected to meet State EPA emissions standards and EHS Guidelines.
5.4.1.5

Noise and Vibration
Construction activities can result in increases in ambient and peak noise levels. Increases
in noise associated with construction are typically short term and are not considered to besignificant given the adoption standard mitigation measures (i.e., mufflers on vehicles,etc.).
Intense vibration can damage buildings, retaining walls and other structures as well as
cause nuisance and potential health effects on people.
The main potential sources of noise and vibration for this Project are likely to be:•

Removal of any road surface / soil / overburden / vegetation by bulldozer;•

Delivery and placement of fill material in reclamation areas;•

Equipment and material deliveries to site by heavy vehicles;•

Aggregate crushing, concrete batching or asphalt plant operation;•

Removal of existing structures (such as bridges and causeways); and•Installation works for new bridges and causeways (e.g. pile driving).

Any residential dwellings or commercial buildings in close proximity to works will be
particularly sensitive to elevated noise and vibration.
Construction related traffic or activities could affect noise levels and potentially result innoise effects on nearby sensitive receptors such as local residents.
Managing the timing of works and site activities is the most appropriate management option
for all the noise-producing activities.
No blasting is expected to be required reducing the potential impacts from vibration.
However, drilling may be required for installation of new bridge piles which could have low
to moderate vibration effects. Monitoring and compliance with accepted EHS Guidelines
will be required.
Overall, given the short-term nature of construction activity and adherence to GoodInternational Industry Practice and EHS Guidelines, including monitoring, the potential
noise and vibration impacts during construction are not expected to be significant.

December 2020

Final

64

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

5.4.1.6

Hazardous Substances
The use and storage of hazardous substances (such as hydrocarbons, bitumen, cement,etc) can impact on soil and water resources if they accidentally spill or leak into theenvironment or if they are not properly disposed of, or in the event of a fire in the case of
flammable substances. Storage of hazardous substances will need to be managed (i.e.,
EHS Guidelines and adopted for fuel stored in bunded areas, refueling activities remotefrom watercourses on hard stand areas, fire-related precautions adopted, etc.).
With Good International Industry Practice mitigation measures in place, such as suitablestorage, inspection, handling and contingency practices, the risk of hazardous substances
being discharged to the environment is considered to be low.

5.4.1.7

Waste Management
Solid waste will be generated as a result of the construction process particularly as a resultof removing existing structures such as bridges and causeways or the existing roadsurface. While existing road material could be re-used on site some may require removal
and disposal.
Any solid waste generated will be managed according to the following hierarchy oftreatment:(i)

Recycled / reused where possible.

(ii)

Remaining waste taken off-site and disposed at a facility licenced by a State
EPA/KIRMA.

Any hazardous waste generated as a result of the PRIME Project will be managed basedon EHS Guidelines.
Construction workers will also require access to sanitation facilities. Liquid wastes will
require treatment to a standard that is consistent with treatment of similar waste withineach State.
The Contractor will be required to prepare a Waste Minimization and Management Plan
(WMMP) and Spill Management Plan (SMP) which sets out strategies and actions required
to reduce potential health and environmental risks associated with waste generation anddisposal, including hazardous materials, management to avoid spills and otherenvironmental releases, and identify opportunities for material recycling or reuse.
5.4.1.8

Invasive Pest Species
Roads and vehicles associated with construction activities can be vectors for weeds andanimal pests. There is the potential to introduce invasive species through vehicles andtransport of soil, aggregate and construction materials particularly if this material isimported from overseas or inter-State. Implementation of Good International Industry
Practice mitigation measures (vehicle washing, sourcing weed free aggregates, etc) will
minimize the risk of invasive pest introductions.

5.4.1.9

Aggregate and Asphalt Suppliers
Construction works will require aggregate to be used and a supply of asphalt or cement.
Asphalt and concrete batching plants have the potential to be a source of pollution to soils,
ground and surface waters.

December 2020

Final

65

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

Suppliers of road construction material for the Project will be required to hold a quarry
license from the EPA/KIRMA and meet ESS, as well as be in general accordance with EHS
Guidelines. No coastal or marine coral rock or sand will be permitted to be used on the
PRIME Project due to risks to climate resilience and ecological impacts.
Each of the States have existing and disused quarry sites which have been for roadmaintenance and construction activities in the past. These sites (described in the Baseline
Resource Assessment, Appendix A) will require further investigation to determine whether
they can supply suitable material (both quality and quantity) to meet the needs of Projectworks (once known).
If these quarry sites are not able to meet Project needs, aggregate material will need to besourced from offshore.
Aggregate material imported from offshore will need to meet any State and ESS
requirements, which includes impacts managed through the implementation of Codes ofPractice for quarry and dredging operations and ensuring materials such as aggregate andequipment meet strict biosecurity precautions and clearance for imported materials, as wellas adherence to the World Bank Group EHS Guidelines for construction material
extraction.
With Good International Industry Practice mitigation measures in place any potential
impacts of locally or international sourced material can be managed.
5.4.1.10 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Greenhouse gas emissions (GGE) during construction will be generated by construction
machinery. This impact will be temporary and is not expected to be a significant contributor
to overall emissions, so long as vehicles are adequately maintained. Vessels bringing
equipment and resources from overseas will generate emissions but are considered to beminor in terms of overall contribution to GGE.
Since any change or increase in greenhouse gas emissions are likely to be minimal, noassessment has been completed and no mitigation is proposed.

5.4.2

Social-Economic and Cultural

5.4.2.1

Resettlement, Land and Asset Loss
Direct temporary or permanent land and/or asset loss as a result of the need to relocate
structures (such as house fences, boundary walls, access driveways) and the resultant
impact on livelihoods could arise as a result of the PRIME Project. No physicaldisplacement of people is expected to occur. Measures outlined in the Resettlement
Framework (RF) will mitigate this potential impact.

5.4.2.2

Pedestrian and Vehicular Traffic
During construction it is likely that there will be an increase in the number of truck
movements to and from the work sites bringing in fill, construction material and earthworks
equipment. This increased traffic could result in increased traffic congestion and anincreased risk of traffic incidents and general road safety issues (such as road crossing bypedestrians).
However, it is considered that any increased construction traffic experienced will result in
only minor impact on road users and minor and short term increases in congestion, andDecember 2020

Final

66

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

noise and air quality effects on nearby sensitive receptors such as local resident’s following
implementation of Good International Industry Practice mitigation measures.
Traffic related impacts on air quality, noise and vibration are discussed in Section 5.4.1.4
and Section 5.4.1.5 above.
Disruption of a key transportation networks (i.e. replacement of bridge or causeway) could
pose significant delays in journey times and overall inconvenience to road users.
Alternative routes and/or temporary crossings (in the case of bridges works) are to beconsidered as part of the design, and a ‘participatory design approach’ will be used todetermine the best approach to maintaining access for all road users during construction
for applicable works. Mitigation must include measures such as signage and fencing,speed restrictions, etc.
In addition, roads will be required to remain passable during construction activities tominimize potential impacts on all road users including pedestrians and cyclists.
A Traffic and Road Safety Assessment (TRSA) will be undertaken under PRIME
Component 1 for identified roads and mitigation will be included in ESMPs. The Contractor
will also be required to prepare a Traffic Management Plan (TMP) for the works.
Overall, the impacts from increased construction traffic to and from works sites, andconstruction related traffic impacts are considered to be minor for most works due to thefinite duration of works with any impacts mitigated through implementation of GoodInternational Industry Practice mitigation measures.
In some instances however there is a risk of more substantial pedestrian and vehiculartraffic related impacts from proposed works (such as proposed improvements to causeway
and bridge replacements). However these potential impacts can be managed through theimplementation of effective mitigation measures (i.e. installation of temporary parallel
crossing structure).
Given the significant benefit that the community will gain from the works being completed
these impacts are considered minor provided mitigation measures outlined in the Generic
ESMP and/or work specific ESMP are implemented.
5.4.2.3

Disruption to Existing Essential Services
It is possible that disturbance or relocation of existing utility services (such as power, water,
telecommunications etc) may be required for some works as it is common for thisinfrastructure to be located within or adjacent to the road easement in all States.
Once the Component 2 works have been determined, utility infrastructure within the
proposed works footprint is to be surveyed as part of the Inventory of Loss (IOL).
Consultations with the relevant State owners of the utility infrastructure identified within thefootprint will be necessary to negotiate the most practical solution for avoidance orrelocation of that infrastructure to ensure that works construction activities do not impact
provision of this service to the community.

5.4.2.4

Construction Yard, Site Offices, Laydown Areas, Stockpiles etc.
Construction yards, laydown areas and associated works facilities can cause an adverse
impact through the increased disturbance, vegetation clearance, noise and waste
generated by yards and work sites especially if the sites are located close to houses andvillages. In addition, use of construction camps to accommodate imported workers can

December 2020

Final

67

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

create a range of issues such as: unsolicited interaction with local communities; drug /alcohol use; and increases in communicable diseases such are sexually-transmitted
diseases (STDs), HIV/AIDS. etc.
Given the works are likely to be in close proximity to towns, villages and communities andin many cases State capitals, it is anticipated that the Project will not require
accommodation camps. Workers would likely be housed in existing facilities such as guest
houses or rental properties. However, should construction camps be required the potential
impacts can be mitigated by Good International Industry Practice such as providing
suitable sanitation, water, catering, recreation and controlling worker behavior.
Imported labor may be required for the Project, if adequate resources and skills are not be
available locally. Importing labor can result in a range of impacts including on theenvironment (e.g. increased pressure on existing natural resources), local economy andlivelihoods (e.g. inflation pressures, exacerbate vulnerability of marginal groups),
increased pressure on local infrastructure and health services (e.g. potential increases inviolence, alcohol / drug consumption, diseases, etc), and social and community wellbeing.
Contractors shall also adhere to the Project Labor Management Plan (LMP) 6, as well as
prepared a Social Interaction Plan (SIP), as part of the CESMP, which is to include a codeof conduct for site workers induction, rules regarding alcohol use, interaction with the local
community, establish requirement for stakeholder committee/community liaison officer, etc
A construction yard, site office, laydown areas and or stockpile areas may be required
during construction depending on the location and scope of the works.
Should this infrastructure be required, this will be negotiated between the Contractor andlandowners (as outline in Section 5.4.2.1). Mitigation measures will be included in the
Generic ESMP and the works specific ESMP to ensure no residual impacts are anticipated
5.4.2.5

Archaeology and Cultural Heritage Resources
Ground disturbance activities such as those likely for bridge and road works are to beundertaken which can potentially damage cultural or historic sites, particularly where
earthworks are required.
However the likelihood of any physical cultural resources being present within works is
considered low given the works are predominantly located within the road easement andon existing road network with no new alignments proposed. The exception is graves, inclose proximity to PRIME Project works.
Sites of archaeological or cultural significance (such as grave sites) that may be adversely
affected in any way by the works will have been identified in the design phase as part ofthe environmental and social assessment or through the Inventory of Losses survey, andthrough consultation with the land owners and community (and any other relevant
stakeholders). Contractors will implement the agreed mitigation measures throughout theconstruction phase.
To avoid any potential impacts to unknown sites of archaeological or cultural significance,a chance find protocol will be provided in the ESMP which will identify actions to beundertaken in the event of uncovering cultural heritage during the construction phase.

6 To be completed prior to the engagement of project workers.

December 2020

Final

68

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

5.4.2.6

Worker Health and Safety
Bridge and road construction activities can present significant health and safety risks toworkers. These include potential risk to workers from vehicles (working on an active road
network), heavy machinery, working near water, exposure to heat/sun, trenching, unstableslopes, overhead hazards (such as cranes), etc.
To avoid these impacts Contractors will be required to work in accordance with relevant
the WBG EHS Guidelines and adhere to National and State Health and Safety legislation,and be addressed by way of a Project specific Occupational Health and Safety Plan(OHSP) to be prepared by the Contractor which outlines labor and working conditions.
Contractors shall also adhere to the Project Labor Management Plan (LMP) 7 and the
National/State Labor Laws to prevent the exploitation of workers. In addition to workplace
occupational safety regulations, this includes requirements to not use child labor; notdiscriminate workers in respect of gender, employment and occupation; to not use forcedlabor; and to allow freedom of association.
Unexploded Ordinance (UXO) are known to exist in FSM as a result of military actions
throughout the Pacific during World War II from 1942-1945. While many of the UXO’s havebeen cleared there is a chance some may still remained undiscovered.
Given the works to be implemented under the PRIME Project are largely within existingroad corridors that had been constructed and maintained since that time (typically 1970s
onwards), the chance of workers encountering UXO’s as part of this Project is low.
However, mechanisms for identifying and reporting UXO’s should be included as part of
the Contractors Health and Safety Plan and included in a screening and Chance Find
Procedure to be included in the Generic ESMP. In the event that a temporary road, bridgeor causeway alignment is required an assessment for UXO risk should be undertaken, anda UXO clearance team may be required.

5.4.2.7

Community Health and Safety
Community health and safety can be impacted directly and indirectly during works
construction activities through accidents, injury and spread of communicable disease.
Public access must be restricted from entry to the work sites to ensure their safety. Safe,
well sign-posted, alternative routes for pedestrians and vehicles must be provided at all
times. Conversely, the Contractor must not restrict the rights of local communities toaccess their properties. Restricting the movements to traffic and temporarily changing
road layouts can increase the potential for accidents.
Construction traffic will utilize existing roads as haulage routes. The increase in vehicle
movements has the potential to place people using the area at risk particularly children.
This risk can be minimized by restricting construction vehicle speeds and timing the works
to avoid the periods when pedestrians and vehicles people are most frequently using theroad. Other protective measures include signage and barriers, speed restrictions, etc.
There is also the risk of spread of communicable diseases from workers to the local
community particularly if workers are working or residing in an area for extended periods.
Any associated risks will be managed through the works specific ESMPs.

7 To be completed prior to the engagement of project workers.

December 2020

Final

69

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

Gender-based violence (GBV) rates are high in FSM and women are vulnerable totrafficking, illegal sex work, unwanted pregnancies, harassment and violence. Sexual
Exploitation and Abuse (SEA) and Sexual Harassment (SH) is prevalent withapproximately one in three women (32.8%) having experienced physical and/or sexual
violence by an intimate partner in their lifetime.
Imported and transient workforces such as those required for the construction industry are
known to contribute to these issues. For women in FSM there are multiple barriers tohaving equal opportunities as well as a life free from violence and coercion. Priority areasof the GoFSM national gender planning include addressing female unemployment and agender-stratified labor market, teenage pregnancy, violence against women and girls andlimited access to justice and protection for women.
The PRIME Project aims at achieve gender mainstreaming in its design, management andimplementation, to ensure barriers to participation of women are taken into account. The
Contractor shall also prepare a GBV Action Plan, a part of the CESMP, to address GBV
risk. Additionally, a specific SEA and SH Grievance Mechanism is currently being
developed by the DoFA Centralized Implementation Unit (CIU) which will be implemented
for the PRIME Project.
5.4.2.8

Vulnerable Groups
ESS1 also states that “special consideration should be given to stakeholders that may bedisadvantaged or vulnerable”.
While some vulnerable groups may live near or use sections of road that will be potentially
impacted by works construction activities, they are not specifically targeted or likely to be
impacted over and above other landowners or groups and will not be excluded from any
socio-economic benefit from the Project.
Particular attention will be paid to the needs of vulnerable Project Affected Person (PAPs)
including socially and economically vulnerable groups during any stakeholder consultation
activities and socio-economic surveys to be undertaken for works (if required). This may
include those without legal title to the land or other assets, households headed by females(where appropriate 8) the elderly or disabled and other vulnerable groups such as people
living in extreme poverty or hardship 9. The Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) provides
further detail on engagement with PAPs.
Pedestrians and cyclists are also considered to be vulnerable to road works. Relevant
aspects of the WBG EHS Guidelines and the WB Road Safety Guidance Note are to beadhered to in regard to traffic safety.

5.4.2.9

Visual Amenity
Key potential impacts on visual amenity from the works could include minor vegetation
clearance, increased heavy vehicle traffic, land disturbance, lighting, the presence of works
infrastructure and increase workers.
Visual impacts are most significant when they affect the view of sensitive receptors suchas residential areas, urban areas, major and secondary roads, recreational and tourist

8 Note: On some islands in FSM all houses are headed by a female as they own the land. In these cases the female
head of the household would not be considered a vulnerable group.
9 As determined and identified by the relevant community leader.

December 2020

Final

70

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Frameworkareas, heritage sites and other landmarks. The development of works could disrupt the
local landscape and scenic views through:•Clearing of existing vegetation;•

Stripping, excavation and earthworks on the site;•

Soil, waste and aggregate stockpiling; and•Transportation of equipment to and from the site.

If these activities are appropriately managed (through measures such as visual screening
from replanting vegetation), the visual amenity impacts of construction activities for theworks are expected to be minor, and mostly temporary.
5.4.2.10 Stakeholder Engagement and Consultation Risks
Lack of meaningful, or insufficient consultation and project information disclosure
consultation can result in distrust or discontent from Project stakeholders.
It is important for the stakeholder engagement process to be inclusive, participatory andtransparent to ensure multiple opportunities for learning about the Project for all affected
or interested stakeholder groups. Ensuring informed participation and consultations
creating an atmosphere for open dialogue, ensuring the vulnerable are empowered andfacilitated to participate and transparency are the principles in the approach to stakeholder
engagement.
Key stakeholder considerations, principles and engagement approaches for the Project are
outlined in the Project SEP.

5.5

Potential Operational Impacts under Component 2
The potential operational phase impacts, including both positive and negative, aresummarized below.

5.5.1

Potential Benefits
Once operational, roads, culverts and causeway upgraded or repaired under the PRIME
Project will likely result in the following benefits:•Road and assets that are more resilient to climatic events by providing a more robustroad surface, effective drainage, protection from coastal and river/streambank
erosion, realignment away from erosion risk areas, etc.

•

Environmental benefits resulting from improved water flow / aquatic habitat frombridge, culvert and causeway improvements.

•

Improved connectivity and more reliable access resulting in socio-economic
improvements through the ongoing transportation and movement of people andgoods.

•

Reduction in lost time due to road damage from inclement weather events that affectbridges and culverts through flooding or washout.

•Enhance the safety of road users including pedestrians and cyclists.

•

Improve the travel times and comfort of road users.

•

Reduced vehicle wear and tear requiring less frequent maintenance.

December 2020

Final

71

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

The Project will therefore benefit both communities and vulnerable groups by way ofproviding a safer environment for all road users and allow improved and safer access toemployment opportunities, markets, and social services. This includes men and women,
the young and the old, indigenous and non-indigenous persons within FSM.
Other potential positive impacts following completion of the Project could include improved
road side drainage system (e.g., channels and catch pits) conveying stormwater to theadjacent receiving environment and assist with more efficient capture of potential
contaminants (such as sediment, litter etc.).

5.5.2

Environmental Impacts
Potential environment impacts include:

5.5.3

•

Water Quality – There is the potential for the discharge of sediment andcontaminants (such as heavy metals, oils and hydrocarbon) from vehicle movementson the completed works infrastructure (e.g. road, bridge, causeway etc). These
uncontrolled discharges have the potential to enter surface water drainage channels
from runoff over newly created impervious surfaces and migrate towards theadjacent receiving environment. This potential impact can be mitigated in design
and is considered minor and to be similar to that which occurs currently.

•

Aquatic Biodiversity and Habitat – The potential impact of the PRIME Project onaquatic biodiversity once completed primarily include the discharge of contaminants
in stormwater runoff from the road surface. This potential impact can be mitigatedin design and is considered minor and to be similar to that which occurs currently.

•

Terrestrial Biodiversity and Habitat – Minor clearance of overhanging vegetation
may be required for maintenance purposes for some works and a possibility ofroadkill cannot be discounted. However impacts on the integrity of natural habitats
are considered very minor and consistent with the current way the existing road
network is maintained throughout FSM.

•

Air Quality – Air quality source emissions during operation will occur from vehicular
movements along the road network and are likely to consist of exhaust emissions
and dust associated with the road use, etc. The likelihood of nuisance effects are
no different to that which occur currently because the works are not anticipated toincrease the volume of traffic or the duration of journey time. Dust may be reduced
in areas where the road surface is improved.

•

Noise and Vibration – Vehicle movements across the operational bridges,
causeways and roads are likely to result in very little or no increase in noise andvibration from current conditions for adjacent residential properties as no increases
in traffic movements are anticipated.
Speeds may increase due to safer
infrastructure and heavier truck weights may be possible due to the upgradedinfrastructure resulting in an associated increase in engine noise. However, thesmoother running surface is likely to reduce tire noise. While FSM has no noise
standards, any change from current conditions is expected to be minor.

Social Impacts
Potential social impacts include:•

December 2020

Pedestrian and Vehicular Traffic – traffic flow and road safety is expected to be
improved during operation. It is expected that similar volumes of traffic will continue
Final

72

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

to use the road network (i.e. there is expected to be no appreciable change in traffic
volume).
•Community Health and Safety – Community safety can be impacted directly andindirectly once the works have been completed, through vehicular and pedestrian
accidents resulting in injury (which can be potentially serious).

The potential increase in speed and wider road has the potential to place people,
particularly children, using the area at risk. This risk can be minimized through the design
and implementation of traffic management systems (speed bumps, pedestrian crossings,
signage, central pedestrian islands, etc.) which will assist with restricting speeds restricting
vehicle speeds particularly near residential properties. As no increase in vehicle
movements are anticipated, the increased potential to place people using the area at risk
is no more than minor.

5.6

Cumulative Impacts
Neither construction nor operation of the works likely to be implemented under the PRIME
Project are considered to result in trans-boundary or global scale impacts. The works will
result in local impacts that will not directly impact other countries outside of the FSM.
Cumulative impacts from the Project will potentially be created by vegetation clearance,
contaminants discharges (such as sediment) and social impacts such as changes toambient air quality and the existing noise environment primarily throughout the construction
period.
The Project will not significantly change environmental conditions and result in an overall
positive social outcome for local communities provided Good International Industry
Practice mitigation measures are implemented.

December 2020

Final

73

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

5.7

Risk Assessment & Impact Identification Methodology
Risk Assessment is routinely undertaken as part of the ESMF process. In assessing a
project’s environmental risk, impacts are rated to determine the appropriate response or
management actions that should be implemented to minimize potential impacts. The risk
assessment methodology for the PRIME Project is described in this Section.
The commonly adopted Australasian Standard for Risk Management 10 has been used todetermine the level of risk posed by activities associated with the Project based on thelikelihood or probability of an event, and the consequences of the impacts of that event
occurring (see Table 5-1).
Table 5-1: Qualitative risk analysis matrix
Consequence
1

2

3

4

5

Risk Map Color CodeLikelihood

SevereMajor

Moderate

Minor

Negligible

E = Extreme

A - Almost
Certain

E

E

H

M

M

H = High

B – Likely

E

H

H

M

L

M = Moderate

C- Possible

H

H

M

M

L

L = Low

D – Unlikely

H

M

M

L

L

E - Rare

M

M

L

L

L

This conventional risk management framework is considered applicable in the context of
this assessment which has a focus on high level identification of biodiversity andecosystem services and socio-economic risks. The ESMF assessment of risk (asdescribed below) provides detail on these risk areas as appropriate.
Note: this ESMF risk assessment focuses on the specific works level impacts and suitable
mitigation measures to reduce these impacts. The WB risk rating process undertaken by
WB as part of high level E&S risk screening 11 classifies and screens the Project-level risks
in terms of activities to be funded by the PRIME Project.
There are four main levels of risk after combining the ‘likelihood’ and ‘consequences’factors (see Table 5-2 and Table 5-3). Each level has a response or management control
action.
The four ‘Risk Levels’ are:•

Extreme (E) Risk - those impacts that require immediate action at the highest levelof management.

•

High (H) Risk - those impacts requiring action at senior management level.

•

Moderate (M) Risk - those that require policies in place to address impacts andmonitoring programs.

10 AS/NZS ISO 31000:2009.

Risk Management – Principles and guidelines.

11 WB, 2020, ‘Federated States of Micronesia Prioritized Road Investment and Management Enhancements
Project: Appraisal Environmental and Social Review Summary (ESRS Appraisal Stage)’, December 2020.

December 2020

Final

74

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework•

Low (L) Risk - those impacts that do not require any specific management actions
but may be part of routine management and monitoring plans.

In cases of “E”, “H” and “M” Risks, mitigation measures are identified to reduce the levelof residual Project risk.
Table 5-2: Qualitative measures of likelihood

Level

Descriptor

ExampleFrequencyA

Almost certain

Is expected to occur in most circumstances> Once per year

B

LikelyWill probably occur in most circumstances

Once per year

C

Possible

Could occur

Once every 5 years

D

Unlikely

Could occur but not expected

May happen within
Project life

E

Rare

Occurs in only exceptional circumstances

Not likely to happen
within Project life

Source: Modified from Standards Australia/New Zealand 2006

Table 5-3: Qualitative measures of consequence

LevelDescriptor

Environmental / Social Impacts

Public/Media
Attention

Financial(USD)

1

Catastrophic

Significant extensive detrimental long term
impacts on the environment, community or
public health. Catastrophic and/or
extensive chronic discharge or persistenthazardous pollutant. Damage to an
extensive portion of aquatic ecosystem.
Long term impact on water resource

Probable public ormedia outcry withnational/international
coverage. Significant
green NGO
campaign>$700,000

2

Major

Off-sire release contained with outside
assistance. Short to medium term
detrimental environmental and social
impact off-site or long term environmental
damage on-site.

May attract attentionof local and state
media and local
community groups$350,000 –$700,000

3

Moderate

Onsite release contained with outside
assistance. Significant discharge ofpollutant possible source of community
annoyance. Non-persistent but possible
widespread damage to land. Damage thatcan be remediated without long term lossor very localized persistent damage.

May attract attentionof local media
heightened by local
community$35,000 –$350,000

4Minor

On site release immediately contained
without outside assistance. Ongoing or
repeat exceedances of odor, dust or
noise/vibration limits.

Local community
attention or repeatedcomplaints$3,500 –$35,000

5

Insignificant

Negligible environmental impact. Minortransient release of pollutant including
odor, dust and noise/vibration. Minorsocial impact.

Local landownerverbal discussion /complaint<$3,500

Notes: Financial consequence value converted from AUD to USD (1:1.4)

December 2020

Final

75

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

5.7.1

Outcome of Risk Assessment & Impact Identification
Table 5-4 to Table 5-7 present the results of the assessment of risks associated with theproposed PRIME Project. A summary of key measures to mitigate risk are identified. Key
points in relation to any residual ‘Extreme’ and ‘High’ Risk Project activities following
mitigation are addressed in Section 5.8.

December 2020

Final

76

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

Table 5-4: Outcome of Assessment of Component 1 (Spatial and Sector Planning) and Component 3 (Strengthening the Enabling Environment) Risks.

Activity
1.

Source of Risk

Description of Potential Impact

Assessment of
Risk
C

L

RatingMitigation Summary

PostMitigation
Residual
ImpactPreparation of VA / CRRS

Lack of or insufficient
stakeholder engagement

Local community.

Lack of or insufficient stakeholder engagement
where key stakeholders and community havenot been meaningfully engaged during theTechnical Assistance stage, impacting
outcomes of VA / CRRS and resulting in
distrust / discontent from stakeholders.

2

A

E

Ensure Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) is
implemented to ensure appropriate engagement and input
and buy-in from stakeholders.

M

Poor quality environmental
and social data

Local community /environment

Poor quality environmental and social data
inadequate to inform the assessment, with highlevel of inaccuracy or gap filling required,leading to either additional investigative studies
requiredorinaccurate
conclusions/recommendations
fromthe
VA/CRRS.

2

A

E

Environmental and social objectives to be included inTerms of References (ToRs).

M

Sensitive receptors (cultural heritage, natural or
critical habitats) not being adequately screened
during Component 1, leading to thesesensitivities not being fully understood or
identified.

2

A

E

Mitigation of potential impacts on sensitive receptors
through screening and design-related avoidance. E&S
screening will be undertaken for each works site, todetermine assessment pathway, and feed into multicriteria
assessment for works prioritization.

M

3

A

H

Training and capacity building objectives to be included inTerms of References (ToRs), including assessment of
current capacities, and upskilling and resourcing
requirements and monitoring.

L

Initial E&S Screening ofsensitive receptors

2.

Local community /environment

Design team to be mindful of data sources, limitations andassumptions, and ensure accuracy and adequacy of thedata collection process.

Institutional and regulatory strengthening and capacity building

Inadequate training of
national and state officials

December 2020

Institutional
structures

Training and capacity building undertaken
during Component 1 and 3 is not adequate toprovide national and state officials to either
support the Project, meaningful input thedecision-making process, or carry the Project
forward through operation, after the external
consultants are no longer involved.

Final

77

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

Activity
Institutional and regulatory
reforms not sufficient

December 2020

Source of Risk
Institutional
structures

Description of Potential Impact
Inadequate strengthening of institutional
structures and regulation leading to lack ofcommunication between institutions and States
and an inability to effectively regulate climatechange risks on the roading network.

Final

Assessment of
Risk
C

L

Rating

3

A

H

Mitigation Summary
Existing challenges and experiences to be communicatedwith consultant undertaking Institutional Governance
Review, objectives to be included in Terms of References(ToRs).

PostMitigation
Residual
ImpactL

Suitable and realistic timeframes to be incorporated toallow meaningful engagement with all key institutional
stakeholders, including workshops.

78

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

Table 5-5: Outcome of Assessment of Key Feasibility, Design and Pre-Construction Phase Environmental, Social, Health and Safety Risks for Component 2

Activity

Source of Risk

1. Easement agreement (s)Easementagreement Land owners anddocumentation for existing land
users
road
easements
not adjacent to works
available for entire sections areas.
of proposed works areas.

2. Ecological biodiversity/habitats
Road / Bridge / Causeway Stream
anddesigncoastalarea
biodiversity andhabitats

3. Cultural heritage
Road / Bridge / Causeway
designDecember 2020

Cultural heritage
featuresandartifacts

Description of Potential Impact

Assessment of
Risk

Mitigation Summary

PostMitigation
Residual
ImpactC

L

RatingRisk of land owner/user objection to proposed
works

4

B

H

Improvement works for existing roads will be designed
through participatory design approach. Affected landowners and community will be consulted from preliminary
design stage and provide agreement to works design.
Property losses adjacent to roads will be minimized andwhere unavoidable will be restored through mitigation
measures outlined in the Resettlement Framework (RF).

L

Loss or modification of stream and coastal area
biodiversity and habitats

3

A

H

Mitigation of potential impacts on ecological habitat as aresult of improvement works to existing roads andstructures through screening and design-related
avoidance. Biodiversity and natural ecological habitat
impacts will be screened and assessed for each works
site, if required, site-specific ESMP will be prepared toprovide the avoidance and mitigation measures.
Design team to have EHS clauses in bid documents andrequire Contractors Environmental and Social
Management Plan (CESMP).

L

Loss or modification of cultural heritage features
and artifacts, graves

3

A

H

Mitigation of potential impacts on cultural, archaeologicalor historically significant sites through screening anddesign-related avoidance. Cultural heritage andarchaeological impacts to be screened and assessed foreach works site, and if required a site-specific ESMP is tobe prepared to outline specific avoidance and mitigation
measures.
Design team to have EHS clauses in bid documents andrequire CESMP from Contractors.

L

Final

79

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

Activity

Source of Risk

Description of Potential Impact

4. Permanent or temporary asset loss (e.g., land, buildings, fences, crops, etc.)
Loss of land and non-land Asset owners.
Permanent loss of land or restricted land use
assetsdue to land access requirements for projectworks. (Impacts identified through works designand due diligence process in advance of works.)

Temporary use of land forlaydown area

Asset owners.

Temporary loss of land due to use of land forlaydown area.

5. Construction materials (e.g., aggregates) and waste materials generated
Use of aggregate materials Environmental
Use of material from non-sustainable sourcesrisk.
in construction activities.
(i.e., coastal sand and coral reef materials).

December 2020

Final

Assessment of
Risk

Mitigation Summary

PostMitigation
Residual
ImpactC

L

Rating3

A

H

Avoidance of severe impacts on livelihood or thoserequiring physical displacement through screening
process.
Due diligence to assess losses, consultation with affected
persons, preparation of resettlement instrument(resettlement plan or voluntary land donation plan).

L

3

A

H

Identification and use of Government land for laydown
areas/ land previously used for similar activities, etc.
If required voluntary land donation (VLD) process to be
initiated. If no VLD, then rental allowance to be provided.
At end of rental period land to be returned in original
condition.

M

1

B

E

Only material from licensed local or international landbased sources (i.e., quarries) to be used (i.e. no coastal
sand and coral reef / rock to be used).
Where licensed local quarry sites do not meet compliancerequirements, they should develop and implement site
specific ESMP in line with relevant WBG EHS guidelines
for construction material extraction.
Design team to have EHS clauses in bid documents andrequire CESMP from Contractors.

M

80

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

Activity
Waste materials generated
during road construction
activities.

Source of Risk

Description of Potential Impact

Assessment of
Risk
C

L

RatingMitigation Summary

PostMitigation
Residual
ImpactDisposal of wastematerials.

Pollution arising from disposal of wastematerials at unlicensed facilities.

2

A

E

Material reused in roading process where possible ordisposed of at permitted landfills.
Design team to include in bid documents:
a. Relevant EHS clauses related to disposal of wastematerial.
B. Requirement for Contractor to prepare CESMP, ‘Waste
Minimization and Management Plan (WMMP)’ and ‘Spill
Management Plan (SMP)’.

M

6. Coastal margin access
Loss of access to coastal Landowners,area.
wider community.

Permanent or temporary loss of access tocoastal margin due to adjacent works.

3

A

H

Design engineer to identify where coastal margin access
restrictions and issues may arise during preliminary
design.
Avoidance or minimization of access restrictions throughparticipatory design approach, to ensure coastal marginaccess is maintained during and following construction.
Access restriction impacts to be screened and assessed
for each works site, and if required a site-specific ESMP
is to be prepared to outline specific avoidance andmitigation measures, including consultation withlandowners, reinstatement of access etc.
Design team to have EHS clauses in bid documents toavoid unnecessary access restrictions or disturbance, andrequire Contractor to prepare CESMP.

L

December 2020

Final

81

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

Activity

Source of Risk

7. Disruption to usual access
Replacement of bridges / Asset users / local
community
causeways

Adjoining
owners

December 2020

land

Description of Potential Impact

Assessment of
Risk

Mitigation Summary

PostMitigation
Residual
ImpactC

L

Rating

Permanent or temporary loss of access forusers / local community

2

A

E

Design engineer to identify where issue will arise. Sitespecific ESMP to be prepared including consultation withlandowners, reinstatement of access, etc.
Design and construction team to ensure alternativeroute(s) / crossing (s) are available.
Where this is not possible then temporary crossing to beprovided.
Road access restrictions and disruptions to be screened
and assessed for each works site, and if required a sitespecific ESMP is to be prepared to outline specificavoidance and mitigation measures, including
consultation with landowners, reinstatement of access.
Design team to have EHS clauses in bid documents andrequire Traffic Management Plan (TMP) and CESMP fromContractors.

M

Temporary restriction on use of adjoining
privately owned land adjacent to bridge /causeway alignment

2

A

E

Design engineer to identify where issue will arise. Sitespecific ESMP to be prepared including consultation withlandowners, reinstatement of access, etc.
Use of private/customary land for temporary use to benegotiated between with land owners.
At end of rental period land to be returned in original
condition.
Access restrictions and disruptions to be screened andassessed for each works site, and if required a sitespecific ESMP is to be prepared to outline specificavoidance and mitigation measures, including
consultation with landowners, reinstatement of access etDesign team to have EHS clauses in bid documents andrequire TMP and CESMP from Contractors.

M

Final

82

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

Activity

Source of Risk

Description of Potential Impact

Assessment of
Risk

Mitigation Summary

PostMitigation
Residual
ImpactC

L

Rating8. Erosion potential of stormwater / diverted surface waters
Change in waterflow as a Watercourses and Changes in erosion potential as a result in
result of culvert / bridge coastal areas.
changes in water flow.
installation.

3

A

H

Design of structures to minimize erosion potential such asconcrete side drains / culverts, energy dissipation
structures installed.
Design team to have EHS clauses related to sediment anderosion procedures in bid documents and require Erosion
and Sediment Control Plan (ESCP) from Contractors.
Water flow / hydrology impacts to be screening screened
and assessed for each works site, and if required a sitespecific ESIA and ESMP is to be prepared to outline
specific avoidance and mitigation measures, including any
appropriate technical studies.

L

9. Surface water quality
Discharges from operationalsurfaces.

3

A

H

Design of features to minimize ingress of stormwatercontaminants (e.g., catchpits), and specifications forregular maintenance required.

L

Surface waters.

New pathways for contaminants, including
refuse (e.g. trash, plastic bottles/bags, etc) toenter waterbodies.

Design team to have EHS clauses related to stormwatercontaminants and discharges in bid documents andrequire ESCP, WMMP and SMP from Contractors.
10. Use and Accommodation of Imported Labor (if required)
Use and accommodation of Local community.
Environmental (increased pressure on existing
imported labor.
natural resources) economic and livelihoods(inflationarypressures,
exacerbate
vulnerability of marginal groups, etc),
infrastructure and services pressure, health(potential increases in violence, alcohol/drug
consumption, sexually transmitted diseases,etc), and social and community wellbeing.

December 2020

Final

3

A

H

Identify whether imported labor required.

M

If imported labor required then a Social Interaction Plan
(SIP) is to be prepared to include site workers induction,
rules regarding alcohol use, interaction with the local
community, establish requirement for stakeholder
committee/community liaison officer, etc

83

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

Activity

Source of Risk

Description of Potential Impact

Assessment of
Risk
C

L

RatingMitigation Summary

PostMitigation
Residual
Impact11. Design
Safety in Design / Road
Safety Assessments

Local community

Design not robust enough for local conditions
or not international best practice, and does nottake into account locally available material.

2

A

E

Design specifications included in design consultant ToRs
(stating that design must adhere to appropriate
international best practices guidelines for the works).
Type and quality of locally available material
communicated include in ToRs to inform sound design, or
requirement for sourcing suitable material from offshore.

M

Design suitable for climatechange adaptation andresilience objectives

Local Community /environment

Design based on inaccurate climate change
projects and assumptions, including sea levelrise, extreme weather frequency and severity
etc, leading to insufficient road drainage
resulting in flooding and inundation issues.

2

A

E

Design specifications and objectives included in design
consultant ToRs (stating that design must adhere toappropriate international best practices guidelines for theworks, and latest internationally accepted climate change
projections).

M

Avoiding sensitive receptors(cultural heritage, natural or
critical habitats) throughdesignLocal community /environment

Sensitive receptors not being adequately
screened, leading to these sensitivities notbeen fully understood or identified during
design phase, resulting in inappropriate
design, or unnecessary impacts.

2

A

E

M

Design for transport noise
during operation, including
integrationofsuitable
mitigation measures, if
needed.

Local community

Design does not adequately account fortransport noise impacts on sensitive receptors
during operation, such as noise fromincreased speeds.

3

A

H

Mitigation of potential impacts on sensitive receptors
through screening and design-related avoidance (e.g.
participatory design approach’).
Sensitive receptors will be screened and assessed foreach works site, if required, site-specific ESMP will be
prepared to provide the avoidance and mitigation
measures.
Design specifications to include traffic calming devices invillages and barriers on corners, speed signs etc,
particularly in the vicinity of sensitive receptors.

December 2020

Final

L

84

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

Table 5-6: Outcome of Assessment of Key Construction Phase Environmental, Social, Health and Safety Risks for Component 2 Physical Works

Activity

Source of Risk

Description of Potential Impact

1. Air Quality / Dust
Generation of dust as a result ofconstruction activities in PRIME
Project works locations including
laydown areas

Soil disturbance, roadsurfaceremoval,spillage from trucks
transporting material

Local community

2. Noise & vibration
Construction activity creating
noise and / or vibration
disturbance in PRIME Projectworks locations including laydown
areas

December 2020

Assessment of
Risk

Mitigation Summary

PostMitigation
Residual
ImpactC

L Rating

Dust creating nuisance (and potential
health issues) where road works occur inclose proximity to adjacent residential /commercial properties.

4

B

M

Construction vehicles shall be regularly serviced andmaintained to prevent the emission of visible particulates.
The number and size of stockpiles shall be minimized, andhave appropriate containment to prevent dust discharges.
Dust suppression (i.e. a water cart, or similar) shall be used
to dampen active work areas and stockpiles in dry
conditions.
Washing vehicle tyres and sweeping the road on a daily
basis to prevent the spread of soil and dust outside of theworks area.
Banning fires on site.

L

Noise and / or vibration disturbance toadjacent households where road works
occur in close proximity

3

A

H

The Contractor shall ensure noise attenuation is inaccordance with the WHO and WB EHS guidelines.
Consultation and engagement so people are fully informed
and can make alternative arrangements for work or
accommodation during works, in accordance with SEP.
Strict adherence to State working hour requirements.
Regularly maintenance of machinery, equipment andvehicles to ensure noise reduction e.g. mufflers, use of air
brakes, etc.
Reduced speed limits.
Monitor and investigate complaints through GM, andconsider noise barriers where appropriate.
Contractor to identify structures within zone of vibration
impact, and assess condition of structure.
Noise monitoring at site and sensitive receptors.

M

Final

85

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

Activity

3. Surface Water Quality
Construction activities in PRIME
Project works locations e.g., road/ culverts / bridges / causeways.

December 2020

Source of Risk

Description of Potential Impact

Assessment ofRisk
C

L Rating

Mitigation Summary

Contractors

Noise/ vibration impacts on health ofworkers

3

A

H

Contractor to ensure adherence to OHSP.
Workers provided with PPE including ear protection.
Regularly maintenance of machinery, equipment andvehicles.

Changes in water
quality in adjacentreceivingenvironment,
includingsurfacewater and groundwater aquifers.

Ground disturbance leading to runoff ofcontaminants(e.g.,
sediment,hydrocarbons, cement, etc) in stormwaterand changes in water quality of adjacentreceiving environment.

3

A

H

Ingress of contaminants (such ashydrocarbons) due to spillage in laydown
areas, refueling activities entering
groundwater.

3

A

H

Loss and/or discharge of hazardous
material into the aquatic and/or terrestrial
receiving environment, or groundwateraquifer.

3

A

H

Contractor to prepare and implement ESCP detailingprocedures to ensure ground disturbance in minimized,
and measures to control offsite movement of disturbed
sediments hazardous substance and other discharges,
effective stormwater control, slop excavation, in-stream
works and monitoring requirements.
Contractor to prepare and implement a SMP, detailingprocedures to minimize release of contaminants such asfuels stored in bunded areas, refueling activities on
hardstand areas etc.
Additional controls for hazardous substances including oils
and hydrocarbons are provided below.
Storage of all hazardous substances and chemicals(including fuel) and refueling is to occur at least 50 m awayfrom watercourses.
Conduct daily inspections of machinery with particularattention to repair of hydraulic and fuel systems to prevent
leakage.
Careful handling of unhydrated cement material and wet
cement and fuel to avoid spills.
The Contractor shall have spill kits available and staff be
trained in their use.
Immediate notification of PIU in case of any fuel or chemical
spill, to report the incident and should be reported to the
EPA/KIRMA within 24 hours.

Final

PostMitigation
Residual
Impact
L

L

L

L

86

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

Activity

Source of Risk

Description of Potential Impact

4. Aquatic Ecological Resources
Construction activities in PRIME Aquatic(i.e.,
Project works locations adjacent freshwater
fish,
habitat) & coastal
to culverts/bridges/causeway
marineresources(fish,
coral
reef
habitat,seagrass
beds, etc)

5. Terrestrial / Riparian Ecological Resources
Construction activities in PRIME Sensitive terrestrial
Project works locations including fauna/
fauna
particularlyinlaydown areas.
sensitive ecologicalareas.
Invasive species.

Terrestrial
fauna.

fauna

6. Waste Management and Construction Material
Disposal of solid or liquid waste.
Environment.

December 2020/

Assessment of
Risk

Mitigation Summary

PostMitigation
Residual
ImpactC

L Rating

Ground disturbance leading to runoff ofcontaminants (e.g., soils, hydrocarbons,
cement, etc) in stormwater and depositionon downstream sensitive ecologicalenvironment.
Direct loss of habitat and/or resources infootprint of bridges / causeway.
Loss of endemic and/or protected species.

3

A

H

In addition to the mitigation proposed for water quality,
mitigation measures are to include identifying andplugging all discharge points, ensure upstream and owns
fish migration is not impeded, and design crossings(including bridges, culverts and causeways) to avoid
disturbance of sensitive habitat (e.g. mangroves, sea
grass etc) where possible. Where it is not possible aplanting regime is to be implemented to restore the lost
habitat.

L

Direct loss of habitat in construction
footprint or disturbance of terrestrial faunaand fauna

3

A

H

Contractor to implement site-specific ESMP detailingprocedures to minimize footprint and disturbance ofterrestrial fauna and fauna particularly in sensitive
ecological areas.

L

Introduction of invasive aquatic and / orterrestrial pest / weed species as a resultof construction activities.

4

B

M

Imported aggregates to be sourced from weed freelocations.
Washing of vehicles
Exposed soil to be reseeded and revegetated.

L

Uncontrolled disposal of solid or liquid
waste material into the aquatic and / orterrestrial receiving environment.

3

A

H

The Contractor to prepare a Waste Minimization andManagement Plan (WMMP), to cover all aspects of generalwaste generation, storage, disposal and reuse.
Workers to have access to rubbish receptacles, whichallow for the collection and segregation of wastes.
Solid wastes to be collected and disposed of at an
appropriately licensed disposal facility. Paper, bottles andcans shall be transported to local recycling facilities, if
available.

L

Final

87

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

Activity

Source of Risk

Description of Potential Impact

Use of aggregate materials inconstruction activities.

Environmental risk

Waste materials generated
duringroad
construction
activities.

Disposal of wastematerials

7. Land and Access Restrictions
Permanent loss of land and non- Land and asset
land assets.
owners and users

December 2020

Assessment ofRisk
C

L Rating

Use of material from non-sustainablesources (i.e., coastal sand and coral reefmaterials).

1

B

E

Pollution arising from disposal of wastematerials at unlicensed facilities.

2

A

E

Permanent loss of land or assets, or
restricted land use due to land accessrequirements for project works.

3

A

H

Final

Mitigation Summary
Only material from licensed local or international landbased sources (i.e., quarries) to be used (i.e. no coastal
sand and coral reef / rock to be used).
Where licensed local quarry sites do not meet compliancerequirements, they should develop and implement site
specific ESMP in line with relevant WBG EHS guidelines
for construction material extraction.
The Contractor shall provide a record of the quarry license
approval from aggregate suppliers (i.e. issued by
EPA/KIRMA) prior to start of construction.
The Contractor shall prepare a WMMP, to cover all
aspects of construction waste generation, storage,
disposal and reuse.
Road material that cannot be reused shall be transported
and/or stockpiled off-site for use on unsealed roads, ordisposed of at an appropriately licensed disposal facility.
Implementation of any construction related measures set
out in the land access procedures (e.g. Land Access Due
Diligence report, Voluntary Land Donation report or
Resettlement Plan), including consultation requirements
set out in the RF and SEP.
Contractor is to consult with the owners of the assets that
require relocation in order to determine the mostappropriate re-siting the affected infrastructures, andundertake relocation where appropriate.
Should unexpected impacts occur to land or assets as aresult of construction activities, community grievances areto be addressed through the Grievance Mechanism.

PostMitigation
Residual
ImpactM

M

L

88

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

Activity

Source of Risk

Description of Potential Impact

Assessment ofRisk
C

L Rating

Mitigation Summary

Temporary loss of land and/or
permanent loss of non-landassets such as crops, fences,ornamental gardens, etc in roadalignment, laydown areas or
temporary diversion roads.

Asset owners

Impacts due to construction affecting
private property or restricting access.
(Impacts that fall under construction
method for which the contractor is
responsible for determining)

3

A

H

Land required for construction facilities is to be secured by
the Contractor as required, via VLD if suitable. If no VLD
then lease agreement is to be negotiated and agreed
between the civil works Contractor and the land ownerprior to mobilization, and rental allowance to be provided if
appropriate (in accordance with RF).
At end of rental period, any temporarily acquired land is tobe rehabilitated to a pre-works condition or in a condition
acceptable to the land owner.
Should unexpected impacts occur to land or assets as aresult of construction activities, community grievances areto be addressed through the GM.

Disruption of road access forusers due to crossing works (e.g.
replacement of bridges / culverts/ causeways.

Road users

Permanent or temporary loss or restrictionof access for road users / local community.

3

A

H

Contractor to maintain road access throughout
construction (i.e. alternative route(s) / crossing(s) aremade available).
The local community is to be informed of the upcoming
works (including maps, dates and times of operation)
through letter drops to all adjacent properties, and theinstallation of signage (as per SEP).
TMP to be implemented and adhered to throughout
construction.
Any road user complaints to be to be addressed throughthe GM and complaints register.

December 2020

Final

PostMitigation
Residual
ImpactL

L

89

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

Activity

Source of Risk

Description of Potential Impact

Disruption of access to adjoining
properties due to works.

Residential
andcommercial
properties, and otherland owners

Disruption to Existing Services

Utility Providers
local community

December 2020/

Assessment of
Risk

Mitigation SummaryC

L Rating

Temporary restriction on access to, or useof, adjoining privately owned land adjacent
to works.

3

A

H

Contractor to maintain access to adjoining properties
throughout construction.
Vehicular and pedestrian access to adjacent properties
and adjoining roads shall be maintained throughout
construction except for essential works where temporary
closure shall be minimized.
Any road closures are to be undertaken and managed inaccordance with the DoTC&I standard practices.
TMP to be implemented and complaints addressed
through the GM.

Disturbance of underground or overhead
utility infrastructure resulting in a disruptionof services.

3

A

H

Contractor to engage with service providers prior to works
commencing to confirm the likely presence and locationsof services and develop a plan for minimizing disruption of
any services.
The Contractor shall be liable for any services disrupted asa result of the construction works.

Final

PostMitigation
Residual
ImpactM

L

90

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

Activity
8. Traffic Safety
Movementof
construction
vehicles

Source of Risk

Description of Potential Impact

Local Community /Contractors/
Pedestrian&
Vehicular Traffic

Potential human hazards due tomovement of vehicles and machinery on
all roads and potential for increase
accident risk around work areas.
These risks could include increased
traffic congestion, risk of traffic incidents,
and general road safety issues (such as
road crossing by pedestrians),
Disruption of key transportation networks(i.e. replacement of bridge or causeway)
could pose significant delays in journey
times and overall inconvenience to road
users.

Assessment ofRisk
C

L Rating

1

B

E

Mitigation Summary

Contractor to implement TMP in consultation with DoTC&I
and State representative agencies, which will include as aminimum:•

Controlled crossing points for local community;•

Construction activities to be restricted to relevant
State working hour requirements;•

Regular consultation with roadside residents as per
the SEP;•

Implementation of strict speed limits in settlement
areas;•

Project vehicles to be equipped with warning lights toensure high visibility to other road users;•

Traffic control supervisor to be used;•

Alternative routes and/or temporary crossings to be
identified;•

Strong enforcement of Project regulations regarding
drug and alcohol use and levels of fatigue; andPostMitigation
Residual
ImpactM

Implementation of GM during the Project to ensurecommunity concerns or issues are addressed.
Contractor to communicate TMP to local community as
described in the Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) andworks specific ESMP’s.
•

December 2020

Final

91

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

Activity

Source of Risk

Description of Potential Impact

9. Use and Accommodation of Imported Labor (if required)
Use and accommodation of Local community
Environmental (increased pressure on
imported labor
existing natural resources) economic andlivelihoods (inflationary pressures,
exacerbate vulnerability of marginal
groups, etc.), infrastructure and services
pressure, health (potential increases inviolence, alcohol/drug consumption,
sexually transmitted diseases, etc.), andsocial and community wellbeing

Assessment ofRisk
C

L Rating

3

A

H

Mitigation Summary

Establish/form stakeholder committee(s), where future
work plans, site requirements, labor and material
requirements and problems are discussed, in order toprioritize employment of locals, where appropriate.

PostMitigation
Residual
ImpactM

Implement Social Interaction Plan (SIP), including
undertaking weekly toolbox meetings with all site workers
on culture, tradition, custom and expectations of local
communities.
Transparency and open communication with thecommunities on issues that affect them.
Any imported labor related issues to be addressed throughthe GM and complaints register.

10. Labor Management
Use of underage people

Contracted workers

Use of people under the age of 18 inhazardous Project activities.

3

A

H

Contractor agrees to contract provisions that require nopeople under the age of 18 are to be employed inhazardous activities.

L

Implementation of the Project Labor Management
Procedures (LMP).
Forced labor

Contracted workers

Use of forced labor on the Project.

3

A

H

Contractors confirm that they are not using forced labor.

L

Where employment occurs directly with Government,
employees are not considered forced by virtue of the fact
as they have signed a contract.
Implementation of the Project Labor Management
Procedures (LMP).

December 2020

Final

92

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

Activity

Source of Risk

11. Cultural Heritage / Archaeology
Sites, features or artifacts of Cultural heritage
cultural,archaeologicalor
historical significance.

Description of Potential Impact

Physical disturbance of cultural,archaeological or historically significant
sites (e.g. grave sites, historical artifactsetc) due to proposed construction
activities.

Assessment ofRisk
C

L Rating

3

A

H

Mitigation Summary

Sites in close proximity to the works are to be mapped andcommunicated to the Contractor workers to minimize risk of
disturbance.

PostMitigation
Residual
ImpactL

Should sites of cultural, archaeological or historicalsignificance be deemed at risk of indirect disturbance as aresult of Project activities, the CIU is to develop strategies
to protect these sites in consultation with the local
community and the relevant State Government department.
A chance find procedure is to be implemented should
physical cultural resources be uncovered during
construction.

12. Health and Safety
Worker Health & Safety

Construction
workforce

Potential injury to workers as a result ofconstruction activities.

3

A

H

Contractor to comply with the FSM Labor Code, an informall employees of their rights.

M

Contractor to prepare and implement an OHSP which is tobe approved in writing by the PIU prior to commencing
works, and train workers in its content.
Contractor to conduct training for all workers on the OHSP
and health and safety matters as required by goodengineering practice.
Workers to be provided with appropriate PPE suitable forcivil work such as safety boots, helmets, gloves, protective
clothes, goggles and ear muffs for protection (asappropriate) at no cost to the workers.
Contractor to provide potable water supplies, first aid
facilities, a toilet and hand washing facilities at works sites.
All workers required to sign a Code of Conduct (CoC)
which outlines acceptable behavior for the workers andtheir role, including reference to GBV, SEA/SH.

December 2020

Final

93

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

Activity
Community Health & Safety

Source of Risk

Description of Potential Impact

Local community

Potential issues arising to local
community as a result of construction
activities in the vicinity of the works sites,
including risks associated with imported
labor.

Assessment ofRisk
C

L Rating

3

A

H

Mitigation Summary
Contractor to consult with adjacent landowners prior tocommencement of work on site, as directed by the SEP.

PostMitigation
Residual
ImpactM

Temporary signage and boundary fences are to be used
to deter pedestrian access into construction areas, andinform the community of works activities, timing and the
GM process.
Contractor OHSP to include the requirement to educate allsite staff on the prevention and treatment ofcommunicable diseases including filariasis, dengue, zika,
hepatitis, HIV/AIDS and Covid-19.
The Contractor and all workers (including imported labor)
associated with the Project are to comply to FSM nationaland State Covid-19 health and safety management plans,
and international WHO standards, and include Covid-19
provision in the OHSP.
All contractor site staff required to sign a Code of Conduct(CoC), as well as prepare a GBV Action Plan which
outlines acceptable behavior for the workers and theirrole, including reference to GBV, SEA/SH.

December 2020

Final

94

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

Table 5-7: Outcome of Assessment of Key Operational Phase Risks Component 2 Physical Works

Activity

Source of Risk

1. Surface and Groundwater Quality
Discharges from operational Surface waters andsurfacesgroundwater aquifers

2. Flooding
Road flooding

3. Road Integrity
Road Integrity

4.

Description of Potential Impact

Assessment of Risk
C
L Rating

Mitigation

Post-Mitigation
Residual Impact

Introduction of road activity contaminantsfrom operational surfaces
New pathways for contaminants, including
refuse (e.g. trash, plastic bottles/bags, etc) toenter waterbodies.

3

A

H

Regularly maintain and clear drainage
channels, culverts and stormwater
control features installed as part ofconstruction phase (e.g. catchpits), to
prolong life of infrastructure.

L

Road users andproperty owners

Overflow of drainage systems due to poor
maintenance affecting road users andproperty owners.

3

A

H

Regularly maintain and clear drainage
channels, culverts and stormwater
control features installed as part ofconstruction phase (e.g. catchpits), to
reduce the potential for site inundation(i.e. flooding) during extreme weather
events, and prolong life of infrastructure.

L

ErosionCompromised road integrity due to water
movement creating erosion issues as a resultof upgrades / sealing of roads.

3

A

H

Regularly maintain and clear drainage
channels, culverts and stormwater
control features installed as part ofconstruction phase (e.g. catchpits), to
reduce the potential for site inundation(i.e. flooding) during extreme weather
events, and minimize erosion risk.

L

Road users and local
community

Increase in accidents relating to increased
speeds on roads.

3

A

H

Evaluate potential for installation of
traffic calming devices in villages andbarriers on corners, speed signs, etc

L

Health and Safety

Road Safety

Consult with Police to enforce speed
limits.

December 2020

Final

95

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

Activity

Source of Risk

Description of Potential Impact

Transport noise during operation.

Local community

Increase of traffic noise from increased
speeds on roads.

Assessment of Risk
MitigationC
L Rating
3
A
H
Evaluate potential for installation of
traffic calming devices in villages andbarriers on corners, speed signs, etc

Post-Mitigation
Residual Impact
L

Consult with Police to enforce speed
limits.

December 2020

Final

96

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

5.8

Residual “High Risk” Matters

5.8.1

Introduction
All of the “Extreme”, “High” and “Medium” Risk matters identified in Section 5.7 of thisESMF can be resolved to a “Low“ or “Medium” Risk category by application of GoodInternational Industry Practice mitigation measures.

5.9

Environmental and Social Sensitivities Maps
To assist with identifying potential areas where impacts on environmental and social values
may arise from the PRIME Project, data from primary (field investigations) and secondary
sources (primarily GIS data) for a range of parameters including hazards (erosion andflooding), sensitive receptors and identified road corridor assets (described in Section 4.3)
have been mapped (see Figure 5-1 to Figure 5-4). The information used in these maps isprovided in Appendix B.
Identifying areas of environmental and social risk assists with the early screening of areasof potential concern from an environmental and social perspective. Based on key attributes
outlined in Table 5-7, an assessment of level of sensitivity for each state has been
undertaken (Table 5-8 to Table 5-11).
Figure 5-1 to Figure 5-4 identify areas considered to be of ‘Medium’ or ‘High’ environmental
and social sensitivity depending on the nature of the works proposed. Note these locations
are considered indicative only and require further investigation.
Where areas are identified as ‘High’ sensitivity, engineering design may be required (whereappropriate) to avoid or minimize potential impacts. Potential impacts in relation to‘Medium’ sensitivity areas can be managed through implementation of mitigation
measures.
Table 5-8: Key environmental and social attributes enabling assessment of level of sensitivity

Sensitivities

High

Mediuma. Higher density of important assets (e.g.
residential houses, businesses, fences
walls, fruit trees, etc) located in roadeasement;b. Watercourse / culvert upstream of
biologically significant CMA area;c. Erosion / flood risk hazard zone;
d. Populated area

2 or 3 of the 4 attributes
required

1 of the 4 attributes
required

Further investigation required
to confirm potential impacts.
Risks to be aware of rather
than necessary limit works
from proceeding.

Impacts can be managed
throughsuitable
engineering design.

Notes:

December 2020

Final

97

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

Table 5-9: ‘High’ sensitivity areas - Kosrae

E&S Sensitivity

Box No.
1, 9, 102, 3
3
4
5, 6, 7, 8
11

Watercourse / culvert / bridge upstream or in biologically significant area; Erosion / floodrisk hazard zone; Important assets
Watercourse / culvert / bridge upstream or in biologically significant area; Important assets
Watercourse / culvert / bridge upstream or in biologically significant area; Erosion / floodrisk hazard zone;
Watercourse / culvert / bridge upstream or in biologically significant area; Erosion / floodrisk hazard zone; Populated area
Watercourse / culvert / bridge upstream or in biologically significant area; Erosion / floodrisk hazard zone; Important assets; Populated area
Erosion / flood risk hazard zone; Important assets; Populated area

Table 5-10: ‘High’ sensitivity areas - Pohnpei

E&S Sensitivity

Box No.
1, 11, 16
2, 3, 4, 5, 6,
7, 8, 9, 10,
12, 15, 18, 19
11,
13

Watercourse / culvert / bridge upstream or in biologically significant area; Erosion / floodrisk hazard zone; Important assets
Watercourse / culvert / bridge upstream or in biologically significant area; Erosion / floodrisk hazard zone
Watercourse / culvert / bridge upstream or in biologically significant area; Erosion / floodrisk hazard zone; Important assets
Erosion / flood risk hazard zone; Important assets
Watercourse / culvert / bridge upstream or in biologically significant area; Important assets

16

Table 5-11: ‘High’ sensitivity areas - Chuuk

E&S Sensitivity

Box No.
1, 2, 3, 4, 5
5, 6

Watercourse / culvert / bridge upstream or in biologically significant area; Erosion / floodrisk hazard zone; Important assets
Erosion / flood risk hazard zone; Important assets

Table 5-12: ‘High’ sensitivity areas - Yap

Box No.
1-8
9December 2020

E&S Sensitivity
Watercourse / culvert / bridge upstream or in biologically significant area; Erosion / floodrisk hazard zone
Watercourse / culvert / bridge upstream or in biologically significant area; Erosion / floodrisk hazard zone; Important assets

Final

98

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

2
1

4
3
5
6

7

8
9
11

10

Figure 5-1: Key E&S sensitivities on Primary Road network – Kosrae (showing ‘high’ (red box) and ‘medium’ (orange box) sensitivities)

December 2020

Final

99

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

18

1

19

2

17

16
15

3

4
5

14
13

12

11

6
10
9

8

7

Figure 5-2: Key E&S sensitivities on Primary Road network – Pohnpei (showing ‘high’ (red box) and ‘medium’ (orange box) sensitivities).

December 2020

Final

100

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

4

2

3

1

5

6

Figure 5-3: Key E&S sensitivities on Primary Road network – Chuuk (showing ‘high’ (red box) and ‘medium’ (orange box) sensitivities).

December 2020

Final

101

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

1

5
6

4

1

7

2
3

8

9

Figure 5-4: Key E&S sensitivities on Primary Road network – Yap (showing ‘high’ (red box) and ‘medium’ (orange box) sensitivities).

December 2020

Final

102

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

6.

Risk Management Procedures for Component 2
Works

6.1

Environmental and Social Risk Screening
Once the climate resilient road works have been identified and prioritized for FSM as partof the VA and CRRS studies, two rounds of environmental and social screening are to beundertaken by the CIU Safeguard Team (supported by environmental and social
consultants engaged by the PIU, as required) as part of the feasibility and design process
for Component 2 works. This screening process is to outlined below:
1) Initial E&S Risk Screening (activity selection / prioritization under PRIME) an ‘Initial E&S Screening Form’ (Appendix C, Form 1) is to be completed which
identifies potential high-level environmental and social risks and impacts of the
proposed works and any critical risks that could prevent the identified works frombeing implemented under the PRIME Project.
2) Detailed E&S Screening (during preliminary design) – preparation of an ‘E&S
Screening Report’ after the works are further defined as part of the preliminary
design process to feed into the design and impact mitigation process. This reportis to include:a. An outline of the Project environmental and social risk screening process;b. Completed ‘Environmental and Social Screening Forms’ (Appendix C,
Forms 2 to 4);c.

A summary of the works E&S Screening (as directed by the Appendix C,
Form 2);d. A summary of the findings of the screening process, (as directed by the
Appendix C, Form 3 – E&S Assessment and Management Plan
Requirements; and Form 4 – Agreed E&S Documents); ande. Recommendations for the environmental and social assessment andpreparation of environmental and social risk management instruments.
On the basis of the environmental and social screening, the Project will adopt one of thefollowing approaches:3) Further redesign of the works to avoid/minimize environmental and social
impacts including potential land and/or asset loss where practical (in which case
the E&S Screening Report will need to be prepared again, after completion of theredesign). The design team, PIU, environmental and social consultants and CIU
Safeguards Team are to work together to identify risks and mitigation measures indesign in compliance with the WB ESS, ESMF, EHS Guidelines and GoodInternational Industry Practice.
4) Implementation of the Generic Environmental and Social Management Plan
(Generic ESMP) in the event of low risk environmental and social impacts withworks largely contained within the existing road easement.
5) Preparation of a works specific Environmental and Social Impact
Assessment (ESIA) and Environmental and Social Management Plan (ESMP)

December 2020

Final

103

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

if moderate, high or extreme environmental and social impacts are expected from
Component 2 works including impacts that may extend a significantly beyond theroad easement and / or where works impacts are not suitably captured as part of
the Generic ESMP. This is to be undertaken in parallel with detailed design.
The E&S screening process in relation to the ESMF is illustrated in the flow chart in Figure6-1). The scope of these documents is outlined in Section 6.2 below.

Figure 6-1: E&S screening process in relation to the ESMF.

The PRIME Project will also emphasis a ‘participatory design approach’ whereby thedesign of road improvements will prioritize works within the corridors of existing primaryroads and minimize avoidable environmental and social impacts such as loss of private
property, where technically feasible. This approach will provide potentially affected
persons and communities and stakeholders an opportunity to participate in the decisions
related to the design of road improvements that affect them (discussed further in the RF).
The E&S Screening Report will be prepared by the CIU Safeguards Team (supported byenvironmental and social consultants engaged by the PIU, as required) and submitted
together with the feasibility study report to the WB for review and clearance.

6.2

Preparation of ESIA/ESMPs

6.2.1

Generic ESMPA Generic ESMP will be prepared in advance of the Component 1 Technical Assistance,
including VA/CRRS studies. Once the VA/CRRS studies have been completed and the
proposed works have been confirmed this Generic ESMP may require revision to ensure
any physical climate resilience road works not initially envisioned under Component 2 aretaken into account.

December 2020

Final

104

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

The Generic ESMP is to be used in the event of low risk environmental and social impacts
with works largely contained within the existing road easement (such as road resurfacing,drainage improvements, installation of culverts, slope protection etc), and in locations
without high E&S sensitivities identified in Section 5.9.
Given the majority of PRIME Component 2 works are expected to result in low risk andeasily managed environmental and social impacts and be within the existing roadeasement, the Generic ESMP is expected to be suitable for the many of Component 2
works.
If moderate, high or extreme potential impacts are identified during E&S screening then aworks specific ESIA/ESMP will be required. The triggers for requiring a works specific
ESIA/ESMP are set out in the Environmental and Social Screening Forms (provided inAppendix C).

6.2.2

Works Specific ESIA and ESMPIn the event that potential works impacts are extensive and/or extend beyond the roadeasement, and/or have longer lasting impacts if not adequately managed, a works specific
ESIA and ESMP is to be prepared. These are categorized as moderate, high or extreme
using the risk tables in Section 5.8.
Depending on the nature and scale of Component 2 works proposed, it may be necessary
for an ESIA to be prepared, to adequately develop appropriate mitigation measures for the
potential works impacts, including the potential preparation of additional technical studies
in order to inform the impact assessment. The exact scope of the ESIA will depend on thenature and extent of potential impacts.
An example of this could be improvements to Lelu Causeway in Kosrae which has been
identified as one of the ‘urgent works’ under Component 2a. Due to the causeway being
the only practical access to Lelu township and potential for more moderate impacts on the
coastal and marine environment if works are not undertaken in an appropriate manner,initial E&S screening indicates that these works are likely to require a specific ESIA and
ESMP in order to fully understand the baseline environment, potential risks and impacts,and mitigate these impacts (depending on the proposed nature of causeway improvement
works to be undertaken).
Should the E&S screening determine that an ESIA is required for the Component 2 works
then it should adhere to the indicative outline included in ESS1 – Annex 1.D as well as incompliance with FSM National and State Environmental Legislation and Regulations. As
a minimum the ESIA should include the following key elements:(i)

Executive Summary;(ii) Description of the road works;(iii) Baseline Data;(iv) Environmental and Social Risks and Impacts;(v) ESMP including Mitigation and Monitoring Measures; and(vi) Analysis of Alternatives.
Additionally, the works specific ESMP is to be broadly consistent with the structure of theGeneric ESMP, where relevant, and include as a minimum:

December 2020

Final

105

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework(i)

Mitigation Measures;(ii) Monitoring Requirements;(iii) Capacity Building and Training;(iv) Implementation Schedule and Cost Estimates; and(v) Integration of the ESMP with other Project documents and Plans
Should a works specific ESIA/ESMP be required, the PIU may need to engage an external
E&S consultant to prepare these documents on its behalf and overseen by the CIU
Safeguards Team.
The works specific ESIA/ESMP should also be prepared alongside, and integrated with,the design process, participatory design approaches, stakeholder engagement, and any
Land Access Procedures Plan/s required (such as the Land Access Due Diligence Report,
Voluntary Land Donation Report or Resettlement Plan), as set out in the RF, as required
on a works specific basis.
In order to achieve the best outcome, the ESMP will need to be prepared in an integrated
way with the design consultant and with land access agreements. This would need to be
an iterative process where the ESMP informs design occurring concurrently with the design
process.

6.3

Civil Works Contractor Requirements

6.3.1

Environmental,
Documentation

Social,Healthand

SafetyClausesin

Bid

Environmental and social, health and safety clauses are to be incorporated in DoTC&I bid
documents for contracted works. Works-specific mitigation to be inserted in the bid
documents will be outlined in the Generic ESMP.
The CIU Safeguards Team will be responsible for the oversight of the environmental,social, health and safety activities of the Contractor will review draft bid documents andwill conduct periodic on-site visits to monitor and supervise progress.

6.3.2

Contractor Environmental and Social Management Plans
In addition to the ESMPs (discussed in Section 6.2) the following management plans will
be required by the Contractor in a Contractor Environmental and Social Management Plan
(CESMP) prior to the commencement of construction. They should be prepared based on
the nature and scale of risks identified in the scope of works.
These plans are to be approved by the PIU and CIU, and appended to the Contractors
ESMP (CESMP). A recommended list of these management plans is provided in Table
6-1. Should a site specific ESMP be required for the works additional management plans
may be identified for the Contractor to prepare and implement.
An outline of these plans will be included in the Generic ESMP to guide the Contractor in
the development of these plans.

December 2020

Final

106

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

Table 6-1: Examples of sub-plans to the Contractor Environmental and Social Management Plan

Management Plan

Responsibility

Approving Organisation

Contractors ESMP (CESMP)

Contractor

PIU and CIU Safeguards Team

Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (ESCP)

Contractor

PIU & CIU Safeguards Team

Surface Water and Groundwater Management
Plan (SWGMP)

Contractor

PIU & CIU Safeguards Team

Pollution Prevention and Control Plan (PPCP)

Contractor

PIU & CIU Safeguards Team

Waste Minimization and Management Plan
(WMMP)

Contractor

PIU & CIU Safeguards Team

Spill Management Plan (SMP)

Contractor

PIU & CIU Safeguards Team

Traffic Management Plan (TMP)

Contractor

DoTC&I, PIU & CIU Safeguards TeamRoad Safety Management Plan (RSMP)

Contractor

DoTC&I, PIU & CIU Safeguards TeamSocial Interaction Plan (SIP)

Contractor

PIU & CIU Safeguards Team

Quarry EHS Management Plan #Contractor

PIU & CIU Safeguards Team

Community Health and Safety Plan (CHSP)

Contractor

PIU & CIU Safeguards Team

Occupational Health and Safety Plan (OHSP)

Contractor

PIU & CIU Safeguards Team

Gender Based Violence Action Plan (GBVAP)

Contractor

PIU & CIU Safeguards Team

Emergency Management and Response Plan
(EMRP)

Contractor

PIU & CIU Safeguards Team

Subcontractor Management Plan

Contractor

PIU & CIU Safeguards Team

Environmental Monitoring Plan

Contractor

PIU & CIU Safeguards Team# in the event that Contractor needs to develop a quarry due to local licensed quarry sites not meeting Project,

or local compliance requirements.

6.4

Implementation of ESMP and CESMP
The design engineers, DoTC&I and other implementing agencies are to implement therelevant sections of the ESMP during feasibility, design, project prioritization, land ownernegotiations and other activities. Supervision of the implementation of the ESMP and
CESMP by the Contractor will be carried out by the PIU with training, oversight and auditingby CIU Safeguards Team.

6.5

Risk Management for Technical Advisory Activities
The process for screening and assessing environmental and social risks is as follows:
1. CIU Safeguards Team reviews all TOR and provides the required clauses or scopeof work for the TA to comply with the WB ESS, the PRIME ESMF, RF, SEP, LMP
and all other instruments.

December 2020

Final

107

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

2. CIU Safeguards Team assists in the evaluation of consultants or contractors forTA that includes E&S risk assessment or mitigation, to ensure that theteam/individual has the correct skills and experience.
3. CIU Safeguards Team reviews draft and final technical outputs against the ESS,
the PRIME ESMF, RF, SEP, LMP and all other instruments and make any
recommendations to the PIU for improvements or changes.

December 2020

Final

108

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

7.

Stakeholder
Participation

Engagement,

Consultation

andStakeholder engagement will be undertaken throughout the PRIME Project including
planning and design, construction and post construction phases (i.e. operation) for all
specific Component 2 works to be implemented under the PRIME Project and for alltechnical advisory activities under Component’s 1 and 3 where relevant.
The stakeholder engagement process for the broader PRIME Project is described in detailin the SEP 12 including stakeholder engagement undertaken to date a part of Project
preparation and those required throughout the PRIME Project.
Set out below is a summary of key considerations regarding stakeholder engagement
relevant to the ESMF.
A wide range of stakeholders have been identified for consideration throughout the Project(outlined in the SEP).
Each Component 2 works will have a discrete list of stakeholders identified and engagedwith:•Land Owners and Occupiers – called Project Affects Persons (PAPs) under ESS5.

•

Local Communities (including nearby or indirectly affected villages, community
interest groups, road users etc).

•

Relevant Municipal and State Government departments and agencies.

•

Traditional / community leaders.

•

Others (including NGOs, CBOs, businesses, utility providers etc).

A variety of mechanisms will be utilized to consult with the identified stakeholders during
implementation of the ESMF including:(i)Village meetings involving women, men and youth from communities;(ii) Separate meetings with specific interest groups and their representatives as
required (including women, youth, senior, religious, vulnerable households,
conservation groups, NGO/CBOs);(iii) Key informant interviews with relevant government staff (e.g. EPA/KIRMA) andcommunity/traditional leaders;(iv) Environmental NGOs and community groups interested in environmental andmatters; and(v) Informal conversations with passers-by, transport users and other interested
parties near the works site.
To ensure broader participation consultations are to be undertaken at venues, times andin language that do not disadvantage any particular groups (e.g. women, or vulnerable
households).

12 DoTC&I, 2020, ‘Prioritized Road Investment and Management Enhancements (PRIME) Project, FSM: Stakeholder

Engagement Plan’, Report prepared for Department of Transportation, Communication and Infrastructure.

December 2020

Final

109

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

Vulnerable groups are to be targeted through representative organizations including
women, disability and youth associations. Remote communities which are often low
income will be included through their traditional (e.g. chiefs) and formal representatives(e.g. senators).
Other considerations to be taken into account through the stakeholder engagement
process for the Project are outlined in detail in the SEP.
Should grievances arise from technical advisory, design, institutional strengthening,
construction or operation impacts from activities associated with the PRIME Project, a
Grievance Mechanism (GM) has been developed through which affected parties canresolve such issues in an efficient, unbiased, transparent, confidential timely and costeffective manner. This GM is outlined in the PRIME Project RF and SEP.
Consultations with stakeholders were undertaken during the preparation of the Project andrelevant E&S instruments, including the ESMF. A total of 108 separate stakeholder groups
across the four States were engaged during Project preparation, including:•National – 4 Government;•

Kosrae – 17 Government; 15 Communities groups; 7 ‘Other’ stakeholders;•

Pohnpei – 10 Government; 2 Communities groups; 2 ‘Other’ stakeholders;•

Chuuk – 22 Government; 3 Communities groups; 6 ‘Other’ stakeholders; and•Yap – 4 Government; 12 Communities groups; 4 ‘Other’ stakeholders.

A total of 42 consultation meetings were conducted from 30-Jul-2020 to 12-Nov-2020
across all four States. Information presented, and feedback provided by the stakeholders
along with how the issues are addressed by the project are set out in the SEP. A summaryof stakeholder engagement activities undertaken in outlined in SEP Appendix C, while
consultation meeting minutes are provided in SEP Appendix D.
The final draft of the ESMF, along with the other E&S Instruments, was made available by
DoTC&I to key stakeholders in each State to review and provide comment prior to the
documents being finalized. The ‘final’ ESMF as well as respective ESIA and ESMPs will
be publicly disclosed on the WB website (www.worldbank.org) as well as relevant FSM
government websites (www.dofa.gov.fsm).
In addition, Stakeholders are to be regularly informed and updated on the PRIME Projectthroughout by way of consultation meetings and public notices (e.g. radio, newspaper etc,
as appropriate), and signs and/or notice boards are to also be erected at the works site.
Details of disclosure activities and requirements are set out in the SEP.

December 2020

Final

110

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

8.

Institutional Arrangements, Responsibilities and
Implementation

8.1

Institutional Responsibilities and Structures
The realization of a successful ESMF will require the full participation of Project relevant
implementing agencies in collaboration with National, State and Municipal Government
Officials. The responsibility to implement all commitments in the ESMF along with the
Generic ESMP or any works specific ESIAs/ESMPs prepared will be distributed between
these stakeholders.
The relevant institutional structures to be either utilized (for existing institutions) or
established for the PRIME Project including roles and responsibilities are shown in Figure
8-1 and described below.

Figure 8-1: Implementation arrangements for the PRIME Project .

8.1.1

Coordination among the National and State Governments andDepartments
The PRIME Project is designed to work with the National GoFSM and with each of the four
State Governments and will be implemented over a five-year period following project
effectiveness. DoFA will be the Executing Agency (EA) while National DoTC&I will be the
Implementing Agency (IA) working closely with each of the four States.
As the PRIME Roads fall under the jurisdiction of the relevant State Governments, Project
Implementation Agreements (PIAs) with each of the States will also be required to help
govern the PRIME activities in each State, with one PIA for each of the following groups:

December 2020

Final

111

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework(a) National DoTC&I, Kosrae State Government and Kosrae Department of Transportand Infrastructure;(b) National DoTC&I, Pohnpei State Government and Pohnpei State Office ofTransport and Infrastructure;(c) National DoTC&I, Chuuk State Government, and Chuuk State Department ofTransport and Public Works; and(d) National DoTC&I, Yap State Government, and Yap State Department of Public
Works and Transportation.
PIAs will be executed prior to the commencement of Project activities under Component 2
to ensure clarity and agreement between all relevant parties on implementation roles andresponsibilities.
As each road authority is under its respective State’s control and to ensure good technicalcoordination, focal points will be appointed in each State to work on and manage day-today PRIME activities associated with its land transport sector and to liaise with the National
DoTC&I.
Within the National GoFSM, DoTC&I has a project management unit (PMU) that has
responsibility for the delivery of Overseas Development Assistance funded infrastructure
projects (including the World Bank, Asian Development Bank, United States Federal
Aviation Administration, People’s Republic of China and the United Nations) with the
exception of energy (managed by the Department of Resources and Development) andtelecommunications (managed by the DoTC&I Communications Division). The primary
focus of the PMU is on program management with day-to-day project management tasksdeferred to project implementation units.
A PRIME PIU will be established within DoTC&I. All contracts with consultants, contractors
and suppliers will be signed by the DoTC&I Secretary with the administration and contract
management tasks of the contract being implemented by the PIU as their day to day
responsibility. The DoTC&I Secretary will sign off on all consultant and contractor invoices
and authorize CIU to make payments.
During project implementation, the DoFA Centralized Implementation Unit (CIU)
Safeguards Team will assist DoTC&I with the environmental and social aspects.
Both the CIU and DoTC&I are existing units, and are familiar with WB ESF and projectspecific environmental and social risk management instruments from their experienceswith other WB-funded projects.

8.1.2

PIU Implementation Support
The PIU will coordinate the implementation of the PRIME Project with DoTC&I
management, DoTC&I PMU, DoFA CIU, PIU State Focal Points, and the State transport
agencies in a manner that is to be set forth in the PIAs that outlines the roles of eachorganization. The PIU will also be responsible for preparing and implementing the Projectin accordance with annual work plans and budgets which will detail the Project’s activities
and eligible expenditures. The PIAs will clarify, among other things, the necessary stateand intra-government cooperation and support necessary for the Project.
The PIU will have overall supervision of ESMF implementation. Environmental and social
risk management will also be the responsibility of the PIU, supported by the CIU

December 2020

Final

112

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

Safeguards Team. The PIU will ensure the availability of an appropriate budget for ESMF
implementation.
Training and capacity building of the PIU will take place under PRIME Component 1 and3. Technical capacity building will be undertaken by the external consultants engaged toundertake the TA, while E&S related capacity building is to be undertaken by the CIU
Safeguards Team.

8.1.3

CIU Implementation Support
The already established CIU within the DoFA, the PRIME Project Executing Agency (EA),
is a functional unit that supports the implementation of the WB portfolio and includes anenvironmental and social Safeguards Team.
In order to provide strong and efficient support throughout FSM, the CIU provides support
to core implementation functions needed for all WB portfolio projects in FSM including, but
not limited to, procurement, financial management, social and environmental risk
management, monitoring and evaluation, as well as outreach and communications. The
CIU team members responsible for these functions report to the CIU Program Manager
and provide services and hands on support to the PRIME Project Implementing Agency(i.e., DoTC&I) for preparation, implementation and capacity building activities. The CIU
will be supported during project implementation by environmental and social consultantsfor due diligence, community engagement and instrument preparation as needed. Project
implementation responsibilities however remains with the IA (DoTC&I).

8.1.4

Role and Composition of the PSC
To ensure the four States are adequately represented in decision making process, a
Project Steering Committee (PSC) will be established and chaired by DoTC&I. Recent
experience from the existing FSM Maritime Investment Project (FSMIP) suggests that
ensuring the appropriate representation of all parties in the Project Steering Committee(PSC) will be critical for success. The FSMIP project PSC structure could be considered.
The Secretary of DoFA will be a member, along with a member appointed by the Governorof each of the four States. The PSC will provide general oversight and policy direction to
PRIME Project stakeholders during Project implementation, convene key stakeholders in
the event of disagreement and periodically review Project progress. The PSC will have arole in determining priorities for allocating Project funds after the completion of the VA andCRRS studies.

8.2

Implementation Roles and Responsibilities
The management, coordination and implementation of the ESMF and its integral tasks willbe the responsibility of the PRIME PIU with support from the CIU Safeguards Team.
It will be important for the PIU and other implementing agencies to ensure that theinstitutional capacity is in place before implementation of the ESMF commences. Some of
the main shortcomings of E&S frameworks include:(i) Lack of funds for planning, development and follow-up monitoring; and(ii) Lack of experience in framework implementation due to the absence of qualified
and experienced staff.
The proposed organizational structure and management functions for implementing the
ESMF is described below. While the DoTC&I and DoFA may decide to adapt this structure

December 2020

Final

113

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

according its needs and funding, it is emphasized that the various components listed anddescribed below should be represented in the organizational structure in order tosuccessfully implement the ESMF.

8.2.1

PIU Project Manager and Project Officer
The PIU will be initially staffed with a PIU Project Manager, and a Project Officer, based in
Pohnpei (National Government DoTC&I) with additional PIU support to be recruited (suchas State level or administrative support) as required.
The PIU Project Manager will be responsible for working collaboratively with all national
level stakeholders and overseeing all State level stakeholder consultation activities withsupport from PIU State Focal Points.
The PIU Project Manager will also be responsible for the following tasks in relation to
implementation of the RF with support from the CIU Safeguards Team as required:•

Approve the content of any future revisions to the ESMF, based on technical review
and recommendations by CIU Safeguards Team;•

Initiate the commencement of, and review the content of, the E&S screening forms
and report to be undertaken by the CIU Safeguards Team (or a E&S consultant);•

Approve content of any ESIA/ESMPs prepared for specific works or the Generic
ESMP;

•

Implement and monitor all stakeholder engagement strategies/plans for the Project;•

Coordinate, facilitate, and where appropriate participate, in face-to-face stakeholder
meetings with on-the-ground support from the PIU Focal Points, and CIU Safeguards
Team;

•

Oversee implementation of any recommended environmental and social mitigation
measures set out in the ESMPs for the specific works; and•Prepare monthly and quarterly monitoring reports.

In addition, the PIU Project Manager will be responsible for the tasks set out in the RF.
Efforts are to be made to keep stakeholders informed on Project progress including
establishing a direct line of communication between to the PIU Project Manager as the key
stakeholder contact points. The PIU Project Manager can then direct stakeholder contact
to any other appropriate Project implementation groups (e.g. PIU State Focal Points, CIU
Safeguards Team, design consultants, E&S consultant and contractor) as appropriate.
This direct line of contact to the PIU Project Manager will allow for on-going updates anddiscussions outside of formal consultation activities and allow for stakeholder concernsand suggestions to be taken into account as they arise.
The Project Officer is to provide assistance and support to the Project Manager on theabove.

8.2.2

PIU State Focal Points
A focal point in each State will be appointed by the PIU to work on and manage day-to-day
activities for the PRIME Project such as coordinating implementation of specificComponent 2 works. The PIU State Focal Point is likely to be appointed from within the

December 2020

Final

114

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

State Department of Transport and Infrastructure (or Department of Transport and Public
Works’ in Chuuk and Yap).
The PIU State Focal Point will report directly to the PIU Project Manager, and act as the
key contact person for stakeholder enquires in each State with oversight from the PIU
Project Manager and CIU Safeguards Team, as appropriate.
Any PIU State Focal Points appointed should be suitably qualified with goodcommunication skills to undertake a range of stakeholder engagement activities and be
appropriately trained in the needs of the Project.
The PIU State Focal Point will also be responsible for the following tasks:•

Oversee all State level stakeholder engagement related activities for the Project;•

Manage the grievance mechanism (outlined in the RF and SEP) at the State level,
including receiving, screening, resolving for forwarding grievances (e.g. to PIU
Project Manager, CIU Safeguards Team or others), as appropriate;•

Interact with related and complementary support activities that require ad hoc or
intensive stakeholder engagement;•

Act as mediator between the Contractor and stakeholders;•

Support CIU Safeguards Team (or E& S consultant/s) to undertake E&S screening
for Component 2 works; and•Proactively identify stakeholders, Project risks and opportunities (with support fromthe CIU Safeguards Team) and inform the PIU Project Manager to ensure that thenecessary planning can be done to either mitigate risk or exploit opportunities.

In addition, the PIU Project Manager and Project Officer will be responsible for the tasks
set out in the RF.

8.2.3

PIU Project Assistant
The PIU will require a Project Assistant to be recruited to provide support to the Project byensuring all administrative requirements are managed effectively. Main responsibilities are
to include:•

Document management, including capture and filing (physical and electronic) of
stakeholder and PAP documents and records.

•

Database management, including:oContinuously update stakeholder information (contact details, organizational
details, designation, engagement activities); andoContinuously update grievance information (grievance records, grievance
database, agreements, meeting registers).

•

Logistics management;•

Support with arranging accommodation and traveling where required; and•Assist with printing of materials to be used during stakeholder meetings (posters,
pamphlets, Project Summary Documents, letters, attendance registers, maps,
newsletters etc).

December 2020

Final

115

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

8.2.4

CIU Safeguards TeamThe existing DoFA Centralized Implementation Unit (CIU) provides support for all WB
portfolio projects in FSM including, but not limited to, procurement, financial management,
environmental and social risk management, monitoring and evaluation, as well as outreachand communications.
The CIU Safeguards Team currently undertakes a range of stakeholder engagement
activities as part of it’s portfolio of WB funded Projects and has existing relationships witha many of stakeholders in each State which will be important to utilize for the PRIME
Project. The CIU will be supported by environmental and social consultants throughout
project implementation as needed.
In relation to implementation of the RF, the PIU will require support from the CIU
Safeguards Team in particular for capacity building and E&S technical support throughout
the Project and to ensure the RF is implemented appropriately and is consistent with therequirements of ESS5.
In relation to implementation of the ESMF, the CIU Safeguards Team will be responsiblefor:•Ensuring the E&S risk screening is undertaken for each Component 2 works (withlocal support from PIU State Focal Points);•

Applying the ESMF and other instruments to all Components, including review ofTechnical Advisory TOR and draft and final outputs;•

Prepare, or oversee the preparation of, works specific ESIA/ESMPs for the works (ifrequired), for the works, including the preparation of TOR, selection of consultants,
and review of draft and final outputs;•

Support external consultants to prepare any works specific ESIA/ESMPs required,and review and provide recommendation to PIU Project Manager for approval prior
to the completion of detailed designs;•

Ensure environmental and social clauses and relevant E&S instruments are included
in Contractor bid document, including environmental and social protection andmitigation measures are included;•

Supervise physical works, carry out audits etc., to ensure environmental and social
protection and mitigation measures are implemented by Contractors;•

Oversee the implementation of specific mitigation measures outlined in the ESMPs
and CESMP;•Manage grievances and EHS incidents as required, providing technical support toresolving issues and incidents;•

Storing data (including grievance records), collating and interpreting stakeholder
feedback and providing details to the PIU, DoTC&I, design team and others asnecessary;•

Provide E&S reporting on a quarterly basis as part of WB reporting;•Assist to obtain all relevant permits from EPA, KIRMA and federal agencies; andDecember 2020

Final

116

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework•

Providing technical and capacity building support to the PIU and other project
implementing agencies on the implementation of instruments, as the PIU does notcontain E&S expertise.

The CIU Safeguards Team may need additional social and environmental risk
management support to implement the growing WB portfolio in FSM including the PRIME
Project. Specialist consultants may be required on an ad hoc basis by the CIU to prepare
environmental and social assessments, E&S instruments and/or to conduct specialist
supervision or monitoring services.

8.2.5

Civil Works Contractors
The Contractor engaged to undertake road works construction will be responsible forundertaking stakeholder engagement related to construction of the specific physical works,
as well as implementing any environmental and social protection and mitigation measures
as outlined in their Terms of Reference and accompanied instruments (e.g. CESMP).
Specifically the Contractor is required to:

8.3•

Support the PIU State Focal Points in engaging with stakeholders relating tocommunicating the scope and timing of works (either by attendance at meetings,
installation of notice boards, door knocks/letter drops, etc.);•

Negotiation with landowners/users in relation to temporary use of land required forconstruction relation activities (e.g. laydown and storage/stockpile areas, worker
camps, amenities, etc.) and assessment of temporarily used land after
reinstatement/restoration to a condition acceptable to the land owner;•

Negotiation with landowners regarding relating/reinstalling physical assets (such as
fences, walls etc) located directly within the Project footprint;•

Receiving complaints and grievances by stakeholders and forwarding to the PIU
State Focal Point during works construction, and resolution of grievances if they are
related to the Contractor (in coordination with the PIU);•

Implement specific mitigation measures outlined in the ESMP; and•Prepare and implement additional E&S management plans relevant for the scope of
the works under their CESMP (e.g. TMP, H&SP, SMP, WMMP, ESCP, SIP etc.).

Implementation Process
All activities for implementing the ESMF, including the Generic ESMP or any works specific
ESIA/ESMP required will be completed prior to the commencement of any construction
activities for the works. PIU will submit evidence of recommended environment and social
mitigation implemented in advance of works construction activities commencing, whereappropriate, in order to satisfy the WB that the that PIU has satisfactorily completed theimplementation of the ESMF, and issue its “No Objection” for the award of civil works
contract.

December 2020

Final

117

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

Table 8-1: ESMF Implementation Responsibilities

Activities

Agency Responsible

Disclosure and public consultation for PRIME Project preparation.

PIU, with support from CIU
Safeguards Team

Coordinate and/or undertake Stakeholder engagement andconsultation throughout PRIME Project.

PIU, with support from CIU
Safeguards Team

Implement and monitor all stakeholder engagement
strategies/plans and activities required for the Project.

PIU, with support from CIU
Safeguards TeamE&S risk screening for works, including initial screening after
VA/CRRS, and detailed screening during preliminary design.

CIU Safeguards Team (or E&S
consultant)

Technical advisory into design process based on E&S screening.

CIU Safeguards Team

Preparation of works specific ESIA/ESMP.

PIU (engagement of E&S
consultant with oversight from CIU
Safeguard Team)

Obtain all relevant permits from EPA, KIRMA and federal agencies.

PIU, with support from CIU
Safeguards TeamESMF monitoring and reporting including monthly and quarterly
reports, including internal audits.

PIU, with support from CIU
Safeguards Team

Preparation of tender bid documents and TORs, including
requirement for Contractor ESMP.

PIU, with support from CIU
Safeguards Team

Tendering and award of civil works.

PIU, with support from CIU
Safeguards Team

Confirm ‘No Objection’ for the award of civil works.

WB

Preparation of Contractor CESMP (including ESCP, WMMP, SMP,
TMP, SIP, CHSP, OHSP etc.) as required.

Contractor (to be reviewed andapproved by PIU and CIU
Safeguards Team)

Clearance of Contractor CESMP prior to works starting.

PIU, with support from CIU
Safeguards TeamSupervision, including monitoring / auditing of Contractors
implementation of the CESMP.

PIU, with support from CIU
Safeguards Team

Establishment of Project level grievance mechanism, including
receiving, screening, resolving and/or forwarding grievances, as
appropriate.

PIU, with support from CIU
Safeguards Team, Contractor,
Council of Chiefs

Technical advisory throughout Project, including ad hoc capacity
building of PIU, Contractor etc., as required.

CIU Safeguards Team

December 2020

Final

118

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

9.

Budget and Financial Arrangements
PIU and DoFA shall ensure that the total cost of ESMF implementation (including time
inputs, material and reimbursements) are budgeted for within the PRIME Project Budget,and shall cover the following:(i)Engagement of external E&S consultants to support the CIU with E&S Screening
and/or preparation of works specific ESIAs/ESMPs;(ii) Technical analysis or assessment required as part of works specific ESIA;(iii) Implementation of any environment or social mitigation measures recommended
in the ESMPs, including any environmental monitoring requirements;(iv) Supervising the Contractor’s CESMP implementation and follow up of incidents,
non-compliances and other matters;(v) Consultation and stakeholder engagement; and(vi) Internal monitoring and implementation of the ESMF and other instruments (ESCP,LMP etc.).
While the types of activities and investments to be carried out under the PRIME Project
are known (refer Section 2.3), the extent of the works that can be completed will dependon the results of the VA and CRRS to be carried out under Component 1.
Budget allocation for environmental and social risk management is to be assessed
separately for each works based on the scope of climate resilience road works underComponent 2, and refined in the works ESMP.
An indicative budget of US$395,000 has been estimated for the GoFSM to implement the
E&S risk management requirements of the ESMF over five years as outlined in Table 9-1.
Table 9-1: Indicative budget for implementing the ESMF

Item

Description

Preparation of ESIA and ESMPs

Preparation of works specific ESIA and ESMP
under Component 2.

Purchase of environmental monitoring
equipment

Assumed handheld water quality meters andnoise meters purchased for each of the four
Includes purchasing, annualStates.
servicing and calibration fluids for five years.

Monitoring of works activities

Includes works monitoring across all four
States throughout Project. Includes travel for
key PIU and CIU staff from Pohnpei to otherStates, and travel for the PIU Focal Point
within each State (including flights, car hire,
fuel etc.) 13

Obtaining permits from EPA/KIRMA
and other regulatory authorities

Includes EIA/KIRMA permit fees for works etc

Stakeholder
engagement,
implementationofresettlement
framework and implementation of GM

As per the RF

Amount (US$)$310,000$20,000$50,000$15,000
NA (outlinedin the RF)

PROVISIONAL SUM$395,000

13 Assumed travel for international CIU Safeguards Team member/s to be covered under DoFA CIU budget.

December 2020

Final

119

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

Budget for Project stakeholder engagement, resolution of grievances through the GM,
preparation of land access procedure plans and securing land for the works is outlined in
the RF, and has not been duplicated here.
Any environmental and social mitigation measures required for works construction (suchas sediment controls measures, replanting of riparian vegetation, costs for disposal ofwaste material) is to be included in the Contractors budget.

December 2020

Final

120

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

10. Monitoring and Evaluation
10.1

Internal Monitoring and Reporting
Monitoring and evaluation is essential to ensure successful implementation of the ESMF.
The PIU, with support from the CIU Safeguards Team, will be responsible for establishinga monitoring program that will monitor, measure and assess the implementation and overall
success of the ESMF and mitigation measures recommended as part of either the Generic
ESMP or works specific ESMP (if required), including identifying issues and facilitate timely
responses.
The PIU will be required to ensure the Contractor’s bid documents include:(i)

The works specific ESMP or Generic ESMP;(ii) Standard Environmental and Social Contract Clauses;(iii) Roles and responsibilities are clearly explained; and(iv) Suitable budgets are allocated.
Internal monitoring is to be reported quarterly by PIU (with support from CIU Safeguards
Team) for the overarching PRIME Project, and monthly for the separate Component 2
works.

10.1.1 Construction Monitoring and Reporting
10.1.1.1 Monthly Monitoring
During the site preparation and construction phases for works, the following key progress
indicators are to be measured internally by the PIU on a monthly basis:(i)

Compliance with ESMP and CESMPs (and other Contractor Plans required);(ii) The status of implementation of any recommended environmental and social
mitigation measures; and(iii) The findings of monitoring programs.
Monitoring of environmental effects will be undertaken daily by the Contractor during
construction, in accordance with an Environment Monitoring Plan to be prepared by theContractor and approved by the PIU and CIU Safeguards Team prior to commencementof construction works.
The PIU State Focal Point is to undertake weekly monitoring for the works site throughout
the construction period (or at an alternative frequency agreed to by the PIU and Contractor
if required depending upon the progress of works). Monitoring by the PIU will be basedon frequent visual observations of works construction activities, preparation of necessaryplans and reports, engagement and consultation with stakeholders (as directed by the
SEP), and reviewing and reporting on any Project-related complaints and/or grievances.
Visual monitoring of a works site for adherence to environmental controls should include:•

Correct storage of diesel and other potential contaminants;•

Site tidiness;•

Waste disposal; andDecember 2020

Final

121

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework•

The effectiveness of sediment controls (where appropriate).

A visual assessment of watercourses in the vicinity of the works is to be undertaken by theState Focal Point during the weekly monitoring visit, for any observable changes insuspended solids or oil/grease downstream of works. If changes are observed (i.e.
discoloration in water column) or works are being undertaken in the watercourse or stream
banks at the time, water quality monitoring is to be undertaken within watercourses usinga hand-held water quality meter. Details regarding this water quality monitoring are to befurther described in the Generic ESMP, including parameters to be measured.
Noise monitoring may be required as part of the weekly monitoring by the PIU State Focal
Point for works sites in close proximity to sensitive receptors. If excessive noise frommachinery is suspected by the State Focal Point, noise monitoring is to be undertakenusing a handheld noise meter at i) the works site, and ii) any sensitive receptors identified
in close proximity to the works site (such as residential houses, schools, businesses,
churches etc), during the operation of machinery and construction activities.
Prior to the commencement of works the PIU State Focal Point is to undertake baseline
monitoring of the works site for both water quality and noise monitoring is to be undertaken
as described above, with the results to be used as a baseline to which construction
monitoring is to be compared.
The CIU Safeguard Team, and EPA/KIRMA may also visit the site at any time to ensure
adherence to the ESMP.
Periodic post-construction monitoring will be carried out by DoTC&I during the Defects
Notification Period which extends for 365 days after the completion of construction.
A brief monthly internal monitoring report will be prepared by the PIU on this basis,including the results of any other environmental monitoring specified in the Generic ESMP,
works specific ESMPs and CESMP. The monitoring requirements set out in the RF should
also be detailed in this monitoring report.
The results and findings from the monthly reports should be consolidated and summarizedannually until Project construction works are complete.
10.1.1.2 Incident Reporting
Should an environmental incident, such as a spill of hazardous substances, occur during
the course of site works, the Contractor Site Manager is to immediately notify the PIU State
Focal Point, who is then to forward the incident to the PIU Project Manager, CIU and
EPA/KIRMA. The Site Manager is to take prompt and immediate action to minimize any
impact and where necessary, liaise with all relevant authorities. The Site Manager is to, in
liaison with the PIU and CIU, direct an appropriate course of action and shall record thedate, time and nature of the incident, full details of the causes and effects, further
investigations to be undertaken, person responsible for such investigations, outcomes of
the investigation, actions and resolution of the incident (including preventative measures
implemented to prevent recurrence). Preventative measures are to be subject tomonitoring and review. Incidents will be included in any audit reports during site works.
10.1.1.3 Works Completion Report
At the completion of works activities a completion audit is to be undertaken to establish
whether the commitments set out in the ESMP and CESMP have been fully complied withduring implementation. This report should detail any issues and resolution encountered
December 2020

Final

122

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Frameworkduring works implementation and any residual issues or management measures required.
The report should also include photographs of site reinstatement
The completion report will be carried out by the PIU, with support from the CIU Safeguards
Team, and summarize whether the objectives set out in the ESMP and CESMP have beenachieved. The monitoring requirements set out in the RF should also be detailed in thisworks completion report.
10.1.1.4 Schedule of Construction Reporting
Reporting requirements during works construction are outlined in Table 10-1 below.
Table 10-1: Schedule of construction reporting

Frequency ofSubmission

Responsibility

Prior to commencementof works

Contractor

PIU Project Manager and
CIU Safeguards TeamAs required

Contractor

PIU Project Manager and
CIU Safeguards Team

Other Contractor
Management Plans (refer
Section 6.3.2)

Prior to commencementof works

Contractor

PIU Project Manager and
CIU Safeguards Team

Updates to any
Contractor Management
Plans

As required

Contractor

PIU Project Manager and
CIU Safeguards Team

Monthly Construction
ReportFirst week of month (formonth prior)

PIU (State Focal
Point)PIU Project Manager and
CIU Safeguards Team

Incident reporting

Within 24 hrs of incident

Contractor (SiteManager)

PIU Project Manager and
CIU Safeguards Team, thento EPA/KIRMA

Complaints andGrievances Reporting

Within 24 hrs of grievanceContractor (SiteManager)

PIU Project Manager and
CIU Safeguards Team

Works Completion Report

After completion of works
and reinstatement of site

PIU (State Focal
Point)PIU Project Manager and
CIU Safeguards Team

Report TypeCESMP
CESMP updates

Submit to:

10.1.2 Quarterly PRIME Project Monitoring and Reporting
Quarterly monitoring reports are to be prepared for the PRIME Project by the PIU including
the following information:(i)

Status of each activity and the related environmental and social risks, including asummary of the findings from monthly reports on physical works;(ii) Achievement of targeted indicators, including objectives attained and not attained
during the period;(iii) Issues or problems encountered, complaints/grievances received and progresswith resolving the grievances;(iv) EHS incidents, and progress with resolution and close out;(v) Schedule for the next period.
December 2020

Final

123

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

10.2

Submission and Distribution of Monitoring Reports
The Quarterly Monitoring Reports and Works Completion Report are to be circulated to
Project Stakeholders including DoTC&I, DoFA etc, and the WB for review and feedback,so they are made aware of:(i)

The ESMF implementation progress; and(ii) Any issues that may arise so as to take timely and appropriate action.
WB will provide implementation support for the PRIME Project on an on-going basis andvisit FSM to monitor and evaluate progress. In country mission support or virtual support
will be provided every three to six months to be timed for after submission of a quarterly
monitoring report.
The PRIME Project will undergo a mid-term review by the WB no later than three years
after the effective date of the Finance Agreement.

December 2020

Final

124

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

11. References
ADB 2004. Priorities of the people. Hardship in the FSM. September 2004.
ADB 2015. Understanding Land Issues and Their Impact on Tourism Development: A Political
Economy Analysis of Pohnpei, Federated States of Micronesia.
Cole, T. G., Ewel, K. C., and Devoe, N. N. 1999. Structure of mangroves trees and forests ofMicronesia. Forest Ecology and Management 117: 95-109.
Division of Statistics, Office of SBOC 2010. Summary Analysis of Key Indicators from the FSM 2010
Census of Population and Housing.
Division of Statistics, Office of SBOC 2012. 2010 Census of Population and Housing National andState Basic Tables.
Falanruw, M., T. Cole, A. Ambacher, K. McDuffie & J. Maka 1987. Vegetation Survey of Moen,
Dublon, Fefen and Eten, State of Truk, Federated States of Micronesia, USDA Forest Service,
Resource Bull. PSW-20, 6pp+ 3 maps.
Falanruw, M.C., C.D. Whitesell, T.G. Cole, C.D. MacLean, A.H. Ambacher. 1987. Vegetation surveyof Yap, Federated States of Micronesia. USDA, Pacific Southwest Forest and Range
Experiment Station, Resource Bulletin PSW-21, Berkeley, CA.
FSM 2003. Strategic Development Plan 2003-2023, Government of FSM
FSM 2009. Nationwide climate change policy 2009,
FSM 2010. State-Wide Assessment and Resource Strategy 2010 – 2015 +Government of FSM.
FSM 2014. Household Income and Expenditure Survey 2013/14 Main Analysis Report.
FSM DoTC&I 2015. Federated States of Micronesia Infrastructure Development Plan FY2016FY2025
FSM Department of Health, Education and Social Affairs Division of Education 2015. EDUCATIONFOR ALL 2015 National Plan. Government of FSM
FSM 2015. Universal Periodic Review Report, FSM Government.
FSM 2017. Chuuk Joint State Action Plan for Disaster Risk Management and Climate Change,
Government of FSM.
FSM 2020. First Voluntary National Review on the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development June
2020, Government of FSM.
IUCN (2020) International Union for Conservation of Nature’s (IUCN) Red List of Threatened
Species.
OEC

2017.
“Micronesia”.
Observatoryof
EconomicComplexity.
http://atlas.media.mit.edu/en/profile/country/fsm/#Exports (accessed 24 May 2017.

Ramsay, Douglas. 2000. Kosrae Shoreline Management Project.
Raynor, B and Kostka, W 2003. Back to the Future: Using Traditional Knowledge to Strengthen
Biodiversity in Pohnpei, Federated States of Micronesia. Ethnobotany Research &Applications 1: 55-63.

December 2020

Final

125

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

SPC 2005. FSM Household Income and Expenditure Survey. FSM Division of Statistics - Office of
Statistics, Budget and Economic Management, Overseas Development Assistance andCompact Management.
SPREP 2019. Proceedings of the Pacific Regional Consultation on Water in Small Island Countries– Country Briefing Papers
Standards Australia / Standards New Zealand 2006: Environmental Risk Management – Principles
and Process. HB 203:2006.
Takesy, A. 2014. Action Plan for PoWPA and Target 11. FSM Department of Resources andDevelopment.
TNC 2019. A blueprint for conserving the biodiversity of the Federated States of Micronesia. The
Nature Conservancy.
US Army Engineers 1989. Kosrae Coastal Resource Inventory. Prepared by US Army Engineers,
Honolulu.
Weeks, R., 2019. Spatial analysis in support of development of the Kosrae protected area network.
Technical report prepared for The Nature Conservancy 2019.
Wortel et al. 2003. Federated States of Micronesia. Fourth National Report 2010. Implementationof Article 6 of the Convention on Biological Diversity.
WHO 1999. Guidelines values are for noise levels measured out of doors. Source: Guidelines forCommunity Noise, World Health Organization
WHO 2005. Air Quality Guidelines Global Update, 2005.
WHO 2018. Country Cooperation Strategy at a Glance – Micronesia (Federated States of).

December 2020

Final

126

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

Appendix A

December 2020

Baseline Resource Report

Final

PRIORITIZED ROAD INVESTMENT AND
MANAGEMENT ENHANCEMENTS (PRIME)PROJECT
Federated States of Micronesia
BASELINE RESOURCE REPORT

Prepared forWith Funding from

December 2020

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

CONTENTS
1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 1
1.1

ESA Overview ........................................................................................................................... 1

1.2

Project Background and Rationale ............................................................................................ 1

1.3

This Report ............................................................................................................................... 2

Federated States of Micronesia ........................................................................................ 5
2.1

Physical Environment ................................................................................................................ 5

2.2

Biological Resources............................................................................................................... 10

2.3

Socio-Economic Environment ................................................................................................. 15

Kosrae ............................................................................................................................... 35
3.1

Physical Environment .............................................................................................................. 35

3.2

Biological Environment ............................................................................................................ 38

3.3

Socio-Economic Environment ................................................................................................. 46

3.4

Primary Data Collection .......................................................................................................... 54

Pohnpei ............................................................................................................................. 56
4.1

Physical Environment .............................................................................................................. 56

4.2

Ecology ................................................................................................................................... 60

4.3

Socio-Economic Environment ................................................................................................. 66

4.4

Primary Data Collection .......................................................................................................... 72

Chuuk ................................................................................................................................ 75
5.1

Physical Environment .............................................................................................................. 75

5.2

Ecology ................................................................................................................................... 77

5.3

Socio-Economic Environment ................................................................................................. 78

5.4

Primary Data Collection .......................................................................................................... 83

Yap .................................................................................................................................... 86
6.1

Physical Environment .............................................................................................................. 86

6.2

Ecology ................................................................................................................................... 88

6.3

Socio-Economic Environment ................................................................................................. 96

6.4

Primary Data Collection .......................................................................................................... 99

References ..................................................................................................................... 102

December 2020

Final

ii

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1-1: Project Area of Influence (AOI) delineations and conditions........................................................... 3
Table 2-1: Projected changes in annual mean sea level rise for FSM (from ABM & CSIRO 2014) .................. 7
Table 2-2: General vegetation types of FSM high islands (in Ha) (from FSM 2001) ...................................... 11
Table 2-3: Approximate numbers of native and introduced species of plants in States of the FSM (from Fosberg
et al 1979, 1982, 1987). ................................................................................................................................. 11
Table 2-4: Top invasive weed species within the FSM .................................................................................. 12
Table 2-5: Categories of birds recorded from the four states of the FSM (after Engbring et al. 1990) ........... 13
Table 2-6: Cetacean Species likely passing through the FSM waters (from Miller 2009). ............................. 14
Table 2-7: Key mangrove species in FSM (from Stemmermann & Proby 1978). ........................................... 15
Table 2-8: Number and size of areas of biodiversity significance (ABS) by type and State (adapted from TNC
2019) ............................................................................................................................................................. 16
Table 2-9: FSM land ownership (Doran 2004) .............................................................................................. 20
Table 2-10: Distribution of households by household head characteristics (FSM 2014) ................................ 21
Table 2-11: Household income by state 2013/14 (FSM 2014)....................................................................... 21
Table 2-12: Household expenditure by State 2013/14 .................................................................................. 22
Table 2-13: Occupational status of households 2013/14 ............................................................................... 23
Table 2-14: Total wage and salary income by industry 2013/14 .................................................................... 24
Table 2-15: National Projected population based on 2010 Census and HIES survey (for 2010/2021) .......... 25
Table 2-16: Demographic information for FSM (source 2010 census)........................................................... 25
Table 2-17: Major water systems in FSM (from SPREP 2019). ..................................................................... 32
Table 2-18: Production Capability of Operational Wells. ............................................................................... 32
Table 2-19: Overview of waste management infrastructure in FSM .............................................................. 32
Table 2-20: Noise data for the Pohnpei Port Development Project (from ADB 2013) .................................... 33
Table 2-21: Human response guidelines for vibration effects (from British Standard BS 5228‐2:2009) .......... 34
Table 2-22: Relevant WHO air quality guideline concentrations for key parameters ..................................... 34
Table 3-1: Key climate statistics for Kosrae including temperature (°C) and rainfall (mm) ............................ 35
Table 3-2: Types of plant communities in Kosrae ......................................................................................... 38
Table 3-3: Threatened or near threated flora species of Kosrae (Falanruw 2002 & IUCN 2018) ................... 40
Table 3-4: Endemic plant species specific to Kosrae (Costion & Lorence 2012). .......................................... 40
Table 3-5: Restricted-range and threatened birds of Kosrae (Birdlife International 2018, IUCN 2018) .......... 41
Table 3-6: Threatened mammals of Kosrae (IUCN 2018) ............................................................................. 41

December 2020

Final

iii

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

Table 3-7: Restricted-range and threatened reptiles of Kosrae (IUCN 2018) ................................................ 41
Table 3-8: Threatened fishes of Kosrae (IUCN 2018) ................................................................................... 42
Table 3-9: Protected areas of Kosrae ........................................................................................................... 45
Table 3-10: Demographic information for FSM (source 2010 census)........................................................... 48
Table 3-11: Heritage sites listed on the US National Register of Historic Places .......................................... 51
Table 4-1: Key climate statistics for Pohnpei including temperature (°C) and rainfall (mm) .......................... 56
Table 5-1: Key climate statistics for Chuuk including temperature (°C) and rainfall (mm) ............................. 75
Table 6-1: Key climate statistics for Chuuk including temperature (°C) and rainfall (mm) ............................. 86
Table 6-2: General vegetation / habitat types on Yap ................................................................................... 88
Table 6-3: Approximate number (and % of total) of native and introduced flora species in Yap .................... 89
Table 6-4: Threatened or near threated flora species of Yap ........................................................................ 91
Table 6-5: Endemic plant species of Yap ...................................................................................................... 91
Table 6-6: Restricted-range and threatened birds of Yap (BirdLife International 2018, IUCN 2018) ............. 92
Table 6-7: Restricted-range and threatened birds of Yap (cont.).................................................................... 92
Table 6-8: Threatened mammals of Yap (IUCN 2018) ................................................................................... 94
Table 6-9: Restricted-range and threatened reptiles of Yap (IUCN 2018) ..................................................... 94
Table 6-10: Threatened fishes of Yap (Pippard 2012) ................................................................................... 94
Table 6-11: Heritage sites listed on the US National Register of Historic Places (USG 2018)....................... 98
Table A-1: Identification of information outlined in the Gap Analysis ........................................................... 109

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2-1: Location of FSM States: Kosrae, Pohnpei, Chuuk and Yap .......................................................... 5
Figure 2-2: Historical & simulated mean annual surface air temperature – FSM West (from ABM & CSIRO
2014) ............................................................................................................................................................... 7
Figure 2-3: Epicentres of earthquakes in the west Pacific Islands region (Rong et. al. 2012) ......................... 8
Figure 2-4: Peak horizontal ground acceleration calculated for FSM (Note: 1g is equal to the acceleration ofgravity) (Rong et. al. 2012). ............................................................................................................................. 9
Figure 2-5: Map of FSM Ecoregions (TNC 2003) .......................................................................................... 10
Figure 2-6: Household expenditure 2013/14 ................................................................................................. 22
Figure 2-7: Typical noise levels and sources (Source: http://800nonoise.com/tutorials/generator-set-noisesolutions/) ...................................................................................................................................................... 33
Figure 3-1: Distribution of highly erodible soils (from Takesy 2014) .............................................................. 36
Figure 3-2: Digital Elevation Model with Important Watersheds of Kosrae (from FSM 2010) ........................ 36

December 2020

Final

iv

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

Figure 3-3: Key locations and types of coastal change likely to be experienced (left) and where coastal
inundation issues are expected to increase (right) on Kosrae ........................................................................ 37
Figure 3-4: Location of key terrestrial habitat classes in Kosrae ................................................................... 39
Figure 3-5: Location of key terrestrial habitat classes in Kosrae (from Weeks 2019) .................................... 43
Figure 3-6: Existing and proposed protected areas (from TNC 2019) ........................................................... 45
Figure 3-7: Areas of Biological Significance in Kosrae (from TNC 2019) ...................................................... 45
Figure 3-8: Incidence of targeted invasive species in Kosrae (U.S. FS and the FSM (2010) ......................... 46
Figure 3-9: Urban areas in Kosrae ................................................................................................................ 49
Figure 3-10: Locations of moorings in Kosrae indicating key dive sites ........................................................ 50
Figure 3-11: Locations of historic sites in Kosrae .......................................................................................... 51
Figure 3-12: Quarry site locations in Kosrae ................................................................................................. 52
Figure 3-13: Images showing infrastructure at Puk quarry ............................................................................ 52
Figure 3-14: Location of existing seawalls in Kosrae .................................................................................... 53
Figure 3-15: Images showing key assets located in close proximity to the road on Kosrae including walls (topleft & right) private residences, garden and power poles (middle left & right), and one lane bridge on Lelu
causeway and coastal protection works (bottom left & right). ......................................................................... 54
Figure 3-16: Assets within road corridor and location of sensitive social receptors – Kosrae ........................ 55
Figure 4-1: The distribution of the key soil types in Pohnpei ......................................................................... 57
Figure 4-2: The distribution of the general water resources in Pohnpei ........................................................ 58
Figure 4-3: The distribution of water courses in Pohnpei .............................................................................. 58
Figure 4-4: Areas of flood risk in Pohnpei ..................................................................................................... 59
Figure 4-5: Erosion hazard areas in Pohnpei ................................................................................................ 60
Figure 4-6: Distribution of vegetation types in Pohnpei ................................................................................. 61
Figure 4-7: Key marine ecological features in Pohnpei ................................................................................. 62
Figure 4-8: Distribution of seagrass beds in Pohnpei .................................................................................... 63
Figure 4-9: Distribution of reef zones in Pohnpei .......................................................................................... 64
Figure 4-10: Pohnpei existing and proposed protected areas (from Weeks 2015) ........................................ 65
Figure 4-11: Pohnpei existing and proposed protected areas (from Weeks 2015) ........................................ 65
Figure 4-12: Areas of Biodiversity Significance in Pohnpei ........................................................................... 66
Figure 4-13: Location of bridges and causeways in Pohnpei ........................................................................ 69
Figure 4-14: Location of wastewater assets in Pohnpei ................................................................................ 70
Figure 4-15: Location of sewer lines in Pohnpei ........................................................................................... 70
Figure 4-16: Location of potable water lines in Pohnpei ................................................................................ 71

December 2020

Final

v

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

Figure 4-17: Map showing coastal coral ‘quarries’ ........................................................................................ 71
Figure 4-18: Images of quarry sites on Pohnpei............................................................................................ 72
Figure 4-19: Assets within road corridor and location of sensitive social receptors - Pohnpei ....................... 73
Figure 4-20: Images showing examples of assets located in close proximity to the road on Pohnpei including
private residences and churches (top left & right), telecoms tower and water pipeline (bottom left & right). .. 74
Figure 5-1: Coastal stability areas in Chuuk .................................................................................................. 76
Figure 5-2: Chuuk conservation areas (FSM 2010) ....................................................................................... 78
Figure 5-3: Extent of CPUC Water Supply Network (from IEE 2020) ............................................................ 81
Figure 5-4: Schematic Layout of Sewerage System (from IEE 2020) ............................................................ 82
Figure 5-5: Assets within road corridor and location of sensitive social receptors - Chuuk ........................... 84
Figure 5-6: Images of Chuuk showing examples of assets identified during the road corridor on Chuukinspection including walls and private fences (top and middle left and right), pig pen (bottom left) and power
poles (bottom right). ....................................................................................................................................... 85
Figure 6-1: Soil types (left) and watersheds & wetlands (right) of Yap (IEE 2019) ........................................ 87
Figure 6-2: Vegetation map of Yap Islands (FSM 2010) ............................................................................... 89
Figure 6-3: Areas of native forest including mangroves (in blue) and terrestrial forests including disturbed
forests (left) and areas of relatively intact native forest (right) (from FSM 2010). ........................................... 90
Figure 6-4: Protected areas in Yap Island (Weeks 2016) .............................................................................. 95
Figure 6-5: Areas of biodiversity significance in Yap (TNC 2002) ................................................................. 95
Figure 6-6: Disused quarry site in Yap .......................................................................................................... 99
Figure 6-7: Assets within road corridor and location of sensitive social receptors - Yap ............................. 100
Figure 6-8: Images showing examples of assets located in close proximity to the road on Yap including private
residences and commercial properties walls (top left & right) fences and walls (middle left & right, bottom left),and public utilities (bottom right) .................................................................................................................. 101

APPENDICES
Appendix A

Gap Analysis Table

Appendix B

Detailed Asset Maps

December 2020

Final

vi

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

ABBREVIATIONSDoTC&I

Department of Transportation, Communications and Infrastructure

E&S

Environmental and Social

ESA

Environmental and Social Assessment

ESF

World Bank Environmental and Social Framework

ESMF

Environmental and Social Management Framework

ESS

World Bank Environmental and Social Standards

FSM

Federated States of Micronesia

GIS

Geographic Information Systems

GoFSM

Government of FSM

PRIME

Prioritized Road Investment and Management Enhancement Project

SEA

Sexual Exploitation and AbuseSH

Sexual Harassment

WB

World Bank

December 2020

Final

vii

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

1.

Introduction

1.1

Environmental and Social Assessment Overview
The Government of Federated States of Micronesia (GoFSM) has applied for financing
from the World Bank (WB) for the Prioritised Road Investment and Management
Enhancement (PRIME) Project to improve the climate resilience of FSM’s road network.
Part of the PRIME Project includes the assessment of environmental and social risks
including:(i)

Environmental and Social Assessment (ESA);(ii) Preparation of environmental and social instruments in accordance with the WB
ESF;(iii) Support stakeholder consultation activities; and(iv) Provision of technical environmental and social advice as required to theGovernment of FSM as part of project preparation.
Argo Environmental Ltd (ARGO) has been engaged by the Department of Transportation,
Communications and Infrastructure (DoTC&I) for FSM to undertake the environmental andsocial assessment (ESA) and preparation of the instruments required for WB appraisal,
including development of an Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF),
for the PRIME Project.
The ESA Consultant was engaged by the GoFSM through the Department ofTransportation, Communications and Infrastructure (DoTC&I) to undertake theenvironmental and social assessment (ESA) and prepare instruments required for WB
appraisal including development of an Environmental and Social Management Framework(ESMF) for the PRIME Project. This Baseline Resource Report was prepared to informthe development of the ESMF.

1.2

Project Background and Rationale
The Prioritized Road Investment and Management Enhancements (PRIME) Project will
provide funds for technical assistance and institutional strengthening to improve themanagement of the road network in relation to potential climate change impacts for the
FSM. In addition, the Project will fund the feasibility, design and construction of physicalworks on priority road assets to improve resilience to climate-related hazards or events.
FSM faces significant challenges related to its small size, remoteness, geographicaldispersion, environmental fragility and sensitivity to external shocks. Climate projections
predict elevations in air temperature, frequency of days of extreme, increased rainfall andrising sea levels. Sea level rise combined with natural year-to-year changes will accentuate
the impact of storm surges and coastal flooding.
FSM’s transport network is of critical importance to the country’s economy and economic
development through supporting trade and promoting commercial activity by facilitating the
movement of goods and services, and providing safe and efficient access to social services
including schools and health facilities. Critical climate resilient road, bridge or drainage
improvement works to be implemented urgently to maintain a basic level of land transport

December 2020

Final

1

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Reportconnectivity in each state will be identified as part of the PRIME Project . The extent ofthese works are described and shown in thew ESMF 1.
The PRIME Project focuses on primary road networks, as well as other (e.g. secondary)roads identified as being of strategic and/or economic importance to FSM within theexisting legal road easements in each State (e.g. road improvements, overlay, drainage
improvements, spot slope stabilization, rock wall revetment strengthening, improvements
to causeways and bridges).
In general, there is only one primary, circumferential route on each of the four main FSM
Island states. In addition, most of the population in FSM lives close to the coast, and criticalinfrastructure including roads, schools, places of employment, port facilities, tourist
facilities, power plants and airports, are located primarily in the coastal zone.

1.3

This Report

1.3.1

Background
This Baseline Resource Report presents a compilation of the ecological resource(terrestrial, freshwater and marine habitat) and socio-economic information and data
available for the FSM States acquired from primary and secondary sources. Locally based
sub-consultants in each State have been used to collect primary source information though
field survey under the direction of the international environmental and social expert team.
Initially, an analysis of available information was undertaken 2 where gaps in information
were identified to focus the baseline data collection phase of the Project. Appendix A
identifies where gaps in this baseline data still remain.
This baseline resources information will be used to assist with screening proposed
activities to be funded under the PRIME Project in terms of Environmental and Social (E &S) risk. All maps and GIS data used to generate the maps contained in this Report will beshared separately in electronic format to be used in E & S risk management.

1.3.2

Project Area of Influence
The initial description of the Project’s Area of Influence (AOI) is based on the definition
provided in the Guidance Note to ESS1, to which the Project is to comply. Specifically, this
Guidance note states that:“….Where the project involves specifically identified physical elements, aspects, andfacilities that are likely to generate impacts, the collection and analysis of environmental
and social baseline information and data, at an appropriate level of detail for the project,
are essential to define the project’s area of influence and describe relevant physical,
biological, ecological, socioeconomic, health, and labor conditions, including any changes
anticipated to occur in the foreseeable future (including projected variability in climatic andenvironmental conditions due to potentially significant climate change or that would require
adaptation measures that could occur over the life of the project), along with current andproposed development activities within the general project area but not directly connectedto the project to be financed…..”
1 DoTC&I, 2020, ‘Prioritized Road Investment and Management Enhancements (PRIME) Project, FSM: Environmental

and Social Management Framework’, Report prepared for Department of Transportation, Communication andInfrastructure.

Gap Analysis Report. Prioritized Road Investment and Management Enhancements (PRIME) Project (P172225).
Federated States of Micronesia. August 2020.

2

December 2020

Final

2

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

The area considered for assessment of baseline conditions (the Project “Area of Influence”
or “AOI”) consists of the:•Road corridor adjacent to the ‘PRIME Roads’ 3 (and works where it is a bridge,
causeway, etc) and immediate adjacent environment either side of the roadalignment;•

Any temporary structures (such as bridges, causeway replacement structure, etc);•

Receiving environment downstream (and upstream when considering fish passage)
if the works are a bridge (or causeway) or works are related to drainage, culverts
etc;•

Contractors yards, lay down or stockpile areas and any other works related facilities;
and•Quarry locations and immediate surrounds.

Table 1-1 outlines the guidelines that have been followed to determine the AOI for the
PRIME Project which is based on a precautionary approach.
Table 1-1: Project Area of Influence (AOI) delineations and conditions

Environment

Project AOILocal villages / communities

Adjacent to PRIME Road alignments and works locations.

Road users

Users of the road that may have access or transportation restrictions fromthe works if they are not adequately managed.

Important species habitat

Sensitive ecological areas in close proximity to the PRIME Roadalignments and works locations potentially receiving runoff during
construction / operation.

Streams & inshore(adjacent to coastline)

watersAssuming a precautionary approach, an area directly adjacent to the
PRIME Road alignments and works locations potentially receiving
stormwater runoff during construction / operation.

The AOI extent considered is broader than the area in which possible physicalworks/interventions will occur as Component 2 works will only be undertaken along a small
section (<10%) of the ‘primary roads’ identified a part of the ‘PRIME Roads’.
The broader AOI has been applied for the E&S baseline, impact and risk assessment inorder to ensure the process captures anticipated impacts.
Any site-specific environmental and social assessment to be prepared, if required, are todefine the AOI specifically for those works, based on the works footprint including all
ancillary components and potential impacts on environmental, economic and social
resources.

1.3.3

Methodology & Limitations
The following methodology was adopted to compile of baseline information provided in thisReport:3 ‘PRIME Roads’ are defined as roads that will be assessed as part of Technical Assistance aspects (including
the VA/CRRS and ESA studies) of the PRIME Project which include the majority of the existing ‘primary roads’
and some additional secondary roads that are considered to be of strategic and/or economic importance by
DoTC&I. Only the primary roads identified will be funded under Component 2 of the PRIME Project.

December 2020

Final

3

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report••

Primary data collection including In country consultations with relevant
Government Departments / Agencies and NGOs
Secondary data collection including internet searches of information repositories
and data requisition form relevant Government Departments / Agencies

All data was obtained by desktop study and field survey conducted between July andOctober 2020. Every endeavour has been made to identify and refer to the most recent
data available. However, some of the data is old and may be out of date.

December 2020

Final

4

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report2.

Federated States of Micronesia

2.1

Physical Environment

2.1.1

Location & Geography
FSM is located near the equator about 4,000 km southwest of the Hawaiian Islands in theWestern Pacific Ocean and within the Caroline Islands group. The largest nation in theMicronesian sub-region, FSM is made up of four semi-autonomous states (Kosrae,
Pohnpei, Chuuk and Yap) (see Figure 2-1) located between Marshall Islands to the eastand Palau and the Philippines to the west.

Figure 2-1: Location of FSM States: Kosrae, Pohnpei, Chuuk and Yap
December 2020

Final

5

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

FSM is made up of 607 islands scattered over an area of about 2.6 million km 2, including
its Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), in the western Pacific Ocean. The total land area of
FSM is 704.6 km2, with 7,192 km2 of lagoon area. The islands vary from small islets, which
are inundated at high tide, to atolls and large volcanic islands with land area of more than
80 km2. Approximately 65 (approx. 10%) of the islands are inhabited.

2.1.2

ClimateGeneral
FSM has a tropical climate that varies with seasonality of rainfall influenced by the two
distinct ecoregions (see Section 2.2 for more detail). The climate is tropical marine withdaily temperatures ranging from about 24 to 29°C with little average variation throughout
the year (Wortel et al. 2003). Annual rainfall ranges from 304 cm for drier islands like Yap
to over 1,016 cm per year in the high mountains of Pohnpei and Kosrae. Humidity
averages over 80 per cent. Northeast trade winds prevail from about November to May
when conditions may be drier on western islands of the FSM.
The region is affected by storms and typhoons, which are generally more severe in thewestern islands and by periods of drought and excessive rainfall associated with the “ElNino” (ENSO) phenomena. In recent times, the droughts of 1982-1983 and 1997-1998
were especially severe.
The West Pacific Monsoon affects the western states of Chuuk and especially Yap morethan the eastern states of Pohnpei and Kosrae. It tends to be farther east during El Niño,
bringing higher rainfall, and in a more western position during La Niña, resulting in lessrainfall.
Climate Change
Long- term average rainfall in FSM is projected by almost all models to increase with agreater increase projected in May to October than in November to April rainfall (ABM &CSIRO 2013). However, annual variability is still the same or larger than the projectedchange even in the highest emission scenario in 2090. Between 1979 and 2006 mean
rainfall has increased in the western states of FSM but models do not project this willcontinue at this rate into the future. This indicates that the recent increase may be caused
partly by natural variability and not due to global warming.
Extreme temperatures for the western FSM states are projected to increase by 0.8˚C by2030 under the very high emissions scenario, and the frequency and intensity of extreme
rainfall events are projected to increase by about 14 mm by 2030 in the very high emissions
scenario (Figure 2-2) (ABM & CSIRO 2014).
Satellite data indicates that sea level has risen in FSM by over 10 mm annually since 1993,
which is above the global average of 2.8- 3.6 mm per year. This higher rate of sea level
rise may be related to natural fluctuations that take place on a yearly or decadal basis
caused by phenomena such as the El Niño –Southern Oscillation. By 2030, under a very
high carbon dioxide emissions scenario, this rise in sea level is projected to be in the rangeof 41 – 90 cm (Table 2-1). Values represent the 90% of the range of model results andare relative to the period 1986-2005. The sea level rise combined with natural yearlychanges will accentuate the impact of storm surges and coastal flooding.

December 2020

Final

6

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

Figure 2-2: Historical & simulated mean annual surface air temperature – FSM West (from ABM &CSIRO 2014)
Table 2-1: Projected changes in annual mean sea level rise for FSM (from ABM & CSIRO 2014)

2.1.3

Topography
The Islands of Kosrae, Yap, Chuuk and Pohnpei are known as ‘high’ islands, which are of
volcanic origin. Geologically, Kosrae in the east is the youngest island, and the islands
gradually become older as they move toward the western end of the Caroline island chain(USDA SCS 1982).
These islands range from islets barely above sea level – the majority of the islands - to thehigh islands – of which Pohnpei, which reaches 791 m above mean sea level (Nahnalaud),
and then Kosrae (Mt. Finkol at 635 m) and Chuuk (Mt. Uinipot on Tol Island at 443 m)
follow, in order (TNC 2002).
The unique forests of the high islands are known to protect watersheds and prevent
erosion.

2.1.4

Hydrogeology
Approximately 60% of water resources in FSM exist as surface water in the form of small,intermittent streams that drain catchment areas of limited aerial extent (Johnston 2011).

December 2020

Final

7

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

The remaining 40% exist as groundwater in small, dispersed zones of sedimentarydeposits, weathered volcanics and schists.
Kosrae and Pohnpei have perennial stream flow and serve as invaluable, nearly infinite
resource as most of the water that does not run-off is absorbed through the soils and rockand sits as underground fresh water lenses in basalt caves created by earlier lava flows
and geologic formations.

2.1.5

Seismology & Earthquakes
Most of the islands in FSM are situated in a relatively quiet seismic area (for example,
Pohnpei is located in a seismic Zone 1 as classified by the Trust Territories of the PacificIslands Design Criteria 1970). The exception is Yap, which is situated close to the Pacific“ring of fire” (Figure 2-3). These tectonic plate boundaries are extremely active seismic
zones capable of generating large earthquakes and, in some cases, major tsunamis that
can travel great distances.
While significantly damaging earthquakes have not been observed in recent times, FSM is
subject to large tsunamis, as evident by the large tsunami run-ups of 1837, 1849 and 1899,
which caused death and destruction in the Caroline Islands. Pohnpei island has not been
affected the serious damage by earthquake since 1971.

Figure 2-3: Epicentres of earthquakes in the west Pacific Islands region (Rong et. al. 2012)

Yap has a 40% chance in the next 50 years of experiencing, at least once, light to moderatelevels of ground movement (see Figure 2-4).
Moderate levels of ground movement are expected to cause minor damage to wellengineered buildings. Much lower levels of shaking are expected in the other main islandsof FSM. In terms of expected annual economic-social wealth (EWS) loss risk due toearthquakes, FSM sits in the second lowest zone.

2.1.6

Oceanographic characteristics
Tides are semi-diurnal (2 tides a day) with a strong diurnal inequality and a maximum tidal
variation of just over 1.5 m (meso-tidal) (Wolanski & Furukawa 2007). Small seasonal anddaily tidal fluctuations have been recorded related to sea conditions associated withprevailing weather patterns.

December 2020

Final

8

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

Storm systems impact tidal height and can cause increased coastal erosion whencoinciding with high water levels.

Figure 2-4:

Peak horizontal ground acceleration calculated for FSM (Note: 1g is equal to theacceleration of gravity) (Rong et. al. 2012).

2.1.7

Unexploded Ordinance
FSM has a significant World War II history. Although the risk is considered low, due
diligence and careful consideration will be needed during Project works to ensure that thepresence of unexploded WW II munitions that may be present in the Area of Interest (AOI)
if present is removed.

December 2020

Final

9

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

2.2

Biological Resources

2.2.1

Biodiversity
The FSM consists of two ecoregions (see Figure 2-5) (Wortel et. al. 2003). The Yaptropical dry forest ecoregion is characterized by a monsoon-like climate with rainy seasonsfollowed by periods of drought. The dominant vegetation types are mixed broadleaf forest,
swamp, mangrove, savanna, and agroforests. Vegetation maps from 1976 aerial photos
indicate that wild forests cover about 40% of the land area of Yap (including mixed
broadleaf forest, swamp, and mangrove) (Falanruw et. al 1987). Agroforests (treegardens) cover another 26% of the land area, and about 22% of the vegetation is savanna.

Figure 2-5: Map of FSM Ecoregions (TNC 2003)

The other three States share the Carolines tropical moist forest ecoregion characterized
by heavy rainfall. Mixed broadleaf forests comprise the dominant vegetation type on thehigh volcanic islands. Historically, broadleaf forests almost completely covered these highislands, but people have since cleared or disturbed much of the lowland vegetation.
The islands of FSM are characterised by 12 terrestrial biomes including: atoll forest, littoral
beach strand, mangrove forest, swamp forest, freshwater marsh, riparian forest, freshwater
rivers and streams, grassland, secondary (agro) forest, primary forest, rain forest, andcrest (dwarf or montane cloud) forest. The country’s marine biomes include: mangrove
forest, estuaries, sea grass beds, lagoons, coral reefs and open ocean.
The biodiversity contained within these biomes is characterized by a high rate of endemism
and large numbers of species.

2.2.2

Terrestrial Flora
Vegetation Types
Table 2-2 presents a summary of general vegetation types found across the high islandsof FSM. Habitat sensitive to development disturbance as a proportion of total area ranges
from:December 2020•

Mangrove - 7% (Chuuk) to 15.6% (Pohnpei)•

Swamp forest – 0% (Chuuk) to 0.8% (Kosrae)
Final

10

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report•

Upland forest – 16.2% (Chuuk) to 35.4% (Pohnpei)•

Marsh – 0% (Kosrae) to 5.6% (Chuuk)

Table 2-2: General vegetation types of FSM high islands (in Ha) (from FSM 2001)

Plant Species
Over 1,239 species of ferns and flowering plants have been described in the FSM.
Approximately 782 species are native, including about 145 species of ferns, 267 species
of monocots and 370 species of dicots (Falanruw 2002). Table 2-3 presents approximate
numbers of native and introduced plant species by State.
Table 2-3: Approximate numbers of native and introduced species of plants in States of the FSM(from Fosberg et al 1979, 1982, 1987).

Over 457 species of plants, including many food plants have been introduced to the FSM
with the percentage of introduced plants varying between states (Zirkus 2001). Some ofthese introduced species have become invasive pests that have spread out of control. The
spread of invasive species is a continual threat due to increased movement of people andmachinery between the islands. Table 2-4 presents a list of the key invasive weed species
in FSM (FSM 2002).
A total of 364 vascular plant species that are considered endemic to Micronesia; most ofthem are restricted to the Caroline Islands (FSM and Palau) (Costion & Lorence, 2012).

2.2.3

Terrestrial Fauna
FSM terrestrial ecosystems support unique avian, mammalian, reptilian and other species,
including:

December 2020

Final

11

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report•

119 species of birds (including 31 resident seabirds, 33 migratory shorebirds, 19
migratory land or wetland birds and five vagrant species). Several species oflizards have been introduced but thus far there has been no confirmed
introductions of the brown tree snake (Boiga irregularis) which has decimated bird
populations in Guam. Table 2-5 presents numbers of by category for each State(Engbring et al 1990).

•

25 mammals (including six endemic species or subspecies of bats);•

Over 27 species of reptiles (skinks, geckos, snakes) and amphibians (most of themnative with at least four endemic) (Falanruw 2002); and•40 species of freshwater fish have been recorded in FSM (Pippard H 2012).

Introduced mammals include three species of rats, a mouse, deer, pigs, dogs, cats, andfrom time to time goats, rabbits and cattle, all of which can have damaging impacts on
native biodiversity. There is one introduced amphibian cane toad Bufo marinus (FSM
2002).
Table 2-4: Top invasive weed species within the FSM

Common Name

Scientific Name

Pohnpei

Chuuk

KosraeYap

Coccina grandis

NWS

Siam weed

Chromolaena odorata

WS

WS

WS

WS

Pagoda flower

Clerodendrum paniculatum

WS

NWS

Clerodendrum quadriloculare

WS

WS

WS

WS

Honolulu rose

Clerodendrum chinense

NWS

NWS

Crepe ginger

Costus speciosus

WS

Merremia peltata

NWS

WS

WS

Giant Sensitive plant

Mimosa diplotricha

WS

False kava

Piper auritum

NWS

African tulip-tree

Spathodea campanulata

WS

NWS

?

NWS

Wedelia

Wedelia trilobata

WS

WS

WS

WS

WS

WS

Notes: WS – widespread, NWS – not widespread

Several species of lizards have been introduced but thus far, there have been no confirmed
introductions of the brown tree snake Boiga irregularis which has decimated bird and reptile
populations on nearby Guam.

December 2020

Final

12

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

2.2.4

Freshwater Flora & Fauna
There is a paucity of data available on the abundance and distribution of freshwater flora and faunain FSM.

The FSM ecoregion is noted for its four endemic gobies - Sicyopterus eudentatus,

Sicyopterus lividus, and Stiphodon caeruleus located on Pohnpei and Kosrae, and Sicyopus
nigriradiatusis only found on Pohnpei 4.

Of these, Stiphodon caeruleus is the most abundant.

Sicyopterus eudentatus is listed as ‘Endangered’ according the IUCN Red List (IUCN 2020).

endemism for freshwater fish is high but the number of species is generally low, especiallyabove the first major waterfall where most euryhaline species are unable to inhabit (Parenti& Maciolek, 1993). This is thought to be largely due to the limited food base consisting of
few algae and aquatic insect species hence the diversity of food types plays a significant
role in the construction of an aquatic community. In Pohnpei, Sicydiine gobies, freshwatereels, and shrimps are typically the dominant life forms above the first waterfall in stream
systems investigated 5. Anguillid eels, Gobiid fishes and shrimps are native to Kosrean
streams (unpublished interviews) but there are no published reports regarding the riverine
biota.
Table 2-5: Categories of birds recorded from the four states of the FSM (after Engbring et al. 1990)

2.2.5

Marine Flora & Fauna
FSM coastline is about 3,300 nautical miles (Nimea 2006). The reefs, estimated at 14,517
km2, are home to more than 1,000 species of fish, more than 350 species of hard coraland 1,200 species of mollusc (FSM 2002).
Cetaceans
The EEZ of FSM has resident and transient or migratory populations of cetaceans (whales
and dolphins). A total of 9 species have been observed in FSM (see Table 2-6) (Miller2009). Of these species, blue whale Balaenoptera musculus is considered ‘Endangered’(i.e., likely to become extinct) and sperm whale Physeter macrocephalus is considered‘Vulnerable’ (i.e., is likely to become endangered unless the circumstances threatening its
survival and reproduction improve) based on the IUCN Red List.
For the remaining cetaceans, they are either of ‘least concern’ or there is insufficient
information to make an assessment on status.

4 https://www.feow.org/ecoregions/details/829
5 http://www.comfsm.fm/~brianl/research.html

December 2020

Final

13

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

Table 2-6: Cetacean Species likely passing through the FSM waters (from Miller 2009).
SpeciesCommon Name

Category

IUCN Category

Physeter macrocephalus

Sperm whale

C2

Vu

Lagenodlphis hosei

Fraser’s dolphin

C1

Lc

Tursiops sp

Bottlenose dolphin

C2

Lc

Ziphius cavirostrisCuviers beaked whaleU

Lc

Stenella attenuate

Pantropical spotted dolphin

U

Lc

Peponcephala electra

Melon-headed whale

C1

Dd

Stenella coeruleoalba

Striped dolphin

C1

Dd

Stenella longirostris

Spinner dolphin

C1

Dd

Globicephala electra

Short-finned pilot whale

C1

Dd

Mesoplodon gingkodens

Gingko-toothed beaked whale

C1

Dd

Orcinus orca

Orca

U

Dd

Balaenoptera edeni

Bryde’s-like whale

C1

Dd

Notes: C = confirmed. U = Unconfirmed. 1 refers to a relatively recent field (or specimen record) confirmation of thegiven species within the EEZ of a nation. 2 refers to a potential Class 1 record that is either dated, or may be marginallyoutside of a given EEZ. En = Endangered. Vu = Vulnerable. Lc = of least concern. Dd = Data deficient.

Marine turtles
The green turtle Chelonia mydas and hawksbill turtle Eretmochelys imbricate are the mostcommonly observed in the wider FSM waters, with the olive ridley turtle Lepidochelys
olivacea and the leatherback turtle Dermochelys coriacea being less common (Edwards
2002).
An assessment of the conservation status of these species based on the IUCN Red List(version 3.1) indicates:•

Hawksbill turtle is ‘Critically Endangered’ (i.e., facing a very high risk of extinction).

•

Green turtle is considered ‘Endangered’; and,•

Olive ridley, leatherback and loggerhead turtles are considered ‘Vulnerable’.

Seagrass
Tsuda et al. (1977) reported seven sea grass species in Yap, later confirmed by Tsuda &Kamura (1990), including Cymodocea serrulata, C. rotundata, Enhalus acoroides,
Thallasia emprichii, Halophila minor, H. ovalis and Syringodium isoetifolium. In Pohnpei,
Tsuda et al. (1977) reported two species of seagrass and McDermid & Edward (1999)
reported a third species of sea grass Cymodosia rotundata at Nah Pali, Pohnpei. The
abundance and distribution of seagrass in Pohnpei was last updated in 2005
(www.seagrasswatch.org). In Kosrae and Chuuk a total of 3 and 4 species respectively
were identified in investigations undertaken in 2004 (www.seagrasswatch.org).
Mangroves
The three most common mangrove species Bruguiera gymnorrhiza, Sonneratia alba andRhizophora apiculata are present on Yap, Kosrae, Pohnpei (Allen et al 2001) and Chuuk
December 2020

Final

14

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report(Stemmermann & Proby 1978). A total of seven (Kosrae and Pohnpei) and eleven (Yap)other mangrove species are present but are generally much less common (Allen et al2001). Table 2-7 presents the distribution of the most common species by FSM State.
Table 2-7: Key mangrove species in FSM (from Stemmermann & Proby 1978).

Species

Pohnpei

KosraeYap

Chuuk

Bruguiera gymnorrhiza









Lumnitzera littorea









Sonneratia alba









Rhizophora mucronata









Rhizophora apiculata







Avicennia alba









Ceriops tagal

2.2.6



Conservation Areas
Each State has a network of currently and proposed terrestrial and marine protected areas.
In addition, 130 Areas of Biodiversity Significance (ABS) have also been identified in FSM(Table 2-8) (TNC 2019). The location of these areas in each State is described in detail in
the following sections.
In summary, the combined sites encompass 291,753 ha or 19% of the FSM's entire
terrestrial and inshore area (including reefs and lagoon areas). Because the land area of
FSM is very small, 50% of the ABS (64 sites) and a majority of the total area (61% or
178,191 Ha) are coastal marine sites connecting terrestrial and coastal targets.
Marine-only sites, largely lagoons and coral reefs, comprise the second largest area at
28% (82,620 Ha) of the total ABS area. Terrestrial sites, mainly upland native forests,
make up just 8% (22,636 Ha) of total ABS area but total 23 sites. This reflects the relatively
limited extent of natural terrestrial systems on small Pacific islands compared with themuch larger marine systems surrounding them. Coastal freshwater areas, primarily
coastal freshwater marshes, total just 3% (38,133 Ha) of the total ABS area.

2.3

Socio-Economic Environment

2.3.1

EconomyOverview FSM GDP
The National Government, for the fourth consecutive year, showed a significant fiscal
surplus of $35.8 million FSM’s gross domestic product (GDP) was US$1.13b, or US$3,500
per capita, in 2015. In that year there as a trade balance deficit of US$314 million, with
exports at US$20.6 million (-17.8% annualized) and imports at $162 million (+15.8% since2010) (OEC 2017). National government revenue was at its highest level ever at $166.1
million in FY2017 when both domestic revenue and external grants reached record levels.
Public Law 18-107 in FY2015 amended the tax collection allocation to the States from 50
percent to 70 percent of net taxes collected for import taxes, income tax, and gross revenue
tax.
The impact of this tax policy change sees a $4.8 million decline in tax revenue for the
National Government from FY2016 onwards. This revenue has not been passed directly

December 2020

Final

15

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Reportto the States but by law is invested in the FSM Trust Fund on their behalf. It is estimatedthat $40 million will be invested in the Trust Fund on behalf of the States by 2023.
Table 2-8: Number and size of areas of biodiversity significance (ABS) by type and State (adaptedfrom TNC 2019)

Species# of ABS sites

Area (Ha)

Yap

3

651.9

Chuuk

9

1,328.1

Pohnpei

912,833.3

Kosrae24,835.0

Total Terrestrial

23

22,648.3

Yap

649,471.1

Chuuk

10

20,683.3

Pohnpei

512,480.5

Kosrae1

54.5

Total Marine

22

82,689.4

Yap

21

24,007.4

Chuuk

20

77,089.9

Pohnpei

18

75,695.3

Kosrae5

1,466.1

Total Coastal Marine

64

17,8358

Yap

2

31.8

Chuuk

11

936.7

Pohnpei

35,283.1

Kosrae4

1,904.9

Total Coastal Freshwater20

8,156.4

OVERALL TOTAL

130

29,1752.8

TERRESTRIAL SITESMARINE ONLY SITES

COASTAL MARINE SITES

COASTAL FRESHWATER SITESFSM Strategic Development Plan- 2004-2023
The FSM’s Strategic Development Plan (SDP) 2004 – 2023 provide a road map for socialand economic development in FSM for the period 2004 – 2023. The SDP four main
objectives include maintaining economic assistance at levels that support macroeconomic
stability, improved enabling environment for economic growth - to be achieved through the
FSM commitment to economic reform and the provision of an enabling environment tosupport open, outward - oriented and private sector led development and the use of the
December 2020

Final

16

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Reportannual Compact grant to support the provision of basic services in education and health(FSM 2003).
Compact of Free Association and Challenges from 2023
In 1986 FSM entered into a Compact of Free Association (Compact) with the US, which
provides for US economic assistance (including eligibility for certain US federal programs)
and other benefits in exchange for US defense and certain other operating rights in the
FSM. The US and FSM negotiated a second (amended) Compact agreement in 2002–
2003 that runs for a 20-year period to 2023, during which the US is providing roughly $2.1
billion to FSM (FSM Statistics Div 2018). The amended Compact's financial terms wererenegotiated with the aim of encouraging sustainable development. Under this agreement theUnited States will provide almost $100 million in direct assistance every year until 2023, which
includes the systematic reallocation of a portion of the direct aid to a jointly managed TrustFund (GSO 2017). The Compact Trust Fund’s total net position value increased 21.0 percent
to $565.0 million in FY2017 from $466.9 million in FY2016. The increase was primarily due tointerest, dividend, and realized and unrealized gains from investment of $69.3 million (OEC2018) and contribution from the United States government of $29.5 million (FSM 2018).
About 60% of the Compact Funds supports the Government’s administrative costs with therest infrastructure projects and economic development. The public sector drives the cash
economy and supports the service oriented private sector. FSM’s gross domestic product(GDP) was US$1.13 billion, or US$3,500 per capita, in 2015 (OEC 2017). FSM faces arange of economic challenges as it approaches 2023, when financial assistance under theamended compact expires. The immediate challenge is to facilitate and sustain strong
private sector growth through the use of its own land and marine resources. It also needs
to create an enabling environment conducive to private sector development that cancomplement Compact Trust Fund resources and sustain FSM financially beyond 2023.
Earnings from Export
There has been increased revenue from exports with the last five reported years indicating
the exports of Micronesia have changed by $88m from $41m in 2013 to $129m in 2018. The
main exports of Micronesia are non-filleted frozen fish, fish fillets, aluminium plating andplating and the main destinations are Thailand, China, Japan, Philippines and Mexico. The
fishing industry is highly important with foreign commercial fishing fleets paying over
$16.985m annually for the right to operate in FSM territorial waters. These licensing fees
account for 28% of the national government revenue and in addition, export of marine
products, mainly to Japan, account for nearly 85% of export revenues.
Fishing license fees broke the $70 million level for the first time with a payment in the
September quarter of $7 million for outstanding fees for 2015 and 2016 (FSM 2018) andthe medium-term outlook for fishing fees is a steady $65 million per year (GSN 2018). The
services sector, also a main contributor to GDP, stood at 65%. Manufacturing, as a value
adding activity, was responsible for only 0.45% of the country’s economy (Global Edge 2017).
Yet, while the value of tuna harvested within the country's Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ)
every year is about US$200 million, the vast majority is fished by foreign vessels and the FSM
earns only US$20 million annually from the sale of licensing fees.
Tourism potential
The tourism industry is another area of potential for FSM, particularly scuba diving, surfing
and eco-tourism. Visitors numbered 24,125 in 2016, which represented a decrease of 20%
on the previous year (Knoema. 2015). Tourism development is, however, constrained by
December 2020

Final

17

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

limited airline links and a lack of infrastructure. Some pre-historical cultural attractions of
Nan Madol and Lelu ruins are special attractions for tourism in Pohnpei and Kosrae
respectively. There is a need to preserve these sites for income generation throughtourism (PITA 2019).
Tourism will not develop without the involvement of local villages and community members
who are the major landowners in the FSM The tourism industry is another area of potential
for FSM, particularly scuba diving, surfing and eco-tourism. Some 21,000 tourists visit theislands each year. Tourism development is, however, constrained by limited airline links
and a lack of infrastructure. Some pre-historical cultural attractions of Nan Madol and Lelu
ruins are special attractions for tourism in Pohnpei and Kosrae respectively. There is aneed to preserve these sites for income generation through tourism (PITA 2019). Thee
complex landownership system makes access to land difficult and risky. Both formal andinformal institutions fall short in coping with the modern land market. These compounding
issues have led to underutilized and unproductive lands, hampering the growth of the tourism
industry (ADB 2015).
On-going support to the States of FSM
The National Government, through Congress, continues to support the States throughrevenue sharing initiatives, increasing from $9.4m in FY2012 to $47.7m in FY2017.
FY2017 includes infrastructure allocations to the States of $15.4m and public projects of$11.0m which are a mix of infrastructure, economic and social projects (Ibid 2018).
Economic activity for the four states consists largely of subsistence farming and fishing,and government which employ two-thirds of the adult working. The potential for tourism islimited by isolation, lack of adequate facilities and limited internal air and watertransportation.
Governance Structure
The Pohnpei, Kosrae, Chuuk and Yap governments have exclusive power to deal withlands and leases and over the regulation of foreign investment, distribution of federal tax
revenue and access to the United States (US) Compact of Free Association (Compact)
grants. The FSM government is complex with three branches of government and fourconstitutional states with specific authority and differing legislations. The states havegreater autonomy in managing their political and economic affairs. Natural resources,
budgetary policies, and economic development are also managed by each state. However,national policies give recognition to individual states policies and priorities.
Each state government holds equal power in national affairs through electoral
representation in the FSM National Congress. Most national political power was delegated to
the four states by the FSM constitution including regulation of foreign investment andrestrictions on leases. This meant that investors had to navigate between five different setsof regulations and licenses. U.S. citizens were able to live and work in the FSM indefinitely
without visas under the Compact but cannot own property on most FSM State islands (Ibid,
2018).
Most States have an existing effective traditional system of governance which complements
the newer systems of government and are also supported by non-government agencies(Raynor and Kostika, 2003). In most FSM states, traditional management of land, waters andDecember 2020

Final

18

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

all natural resources, is through the traditional leadership system 6. Although patterns andrules of land ownership are changing within the FSM, complex traditional systems of land
tenure still predominate. For instance, in the state of Yap land ownership has traditionallyinvolved multiple rights of use and one piece of land might belong to one person but be subject
to the consent of another, be lived on by a third, and harvested by a fourth party. This complex
system of land control has resulted in considerable diversity in management while preventing
widespread changes to large pieces of land (Falanruw 1985).
Customary Law and Tradition
Customary law and tradition have a lot of influence on access to and use of land, as declaredin the FSM National Code, in matters where recognized customary law is deemed relevant by
the courts, the customary law “shall the full force and effect of law so far as [it does notconflict with the TT laws of the or the laws of the U.S. in effect in the Trust Territory].” Indeed,even where parties before a court have not asserted that any principle of custom or tradition
applies, courts have an affirmative obligation of their own to consider custom and tradition.
The Constitution of the FSM includes a “Judicial Guidance Clause,” requiring that decisionsof the Court be “consistent” with the customs and traditions of the indigenous people of the
FSM. FSM citizens treat land as their most significant asset. The government states that“leasing of private lands in particular can be time consuming, due to fractional ownership anduncertain boundaries and titles. Many parcels of land are held by families or clans that may
have different factions, all of whom assert interest in the land (ADB 2015).
Land Tenure Arrangements
Land is part of family trusts that pass down land use rights, surface and subsurface, fromgeneration to generation within the extended matrilineal family system. Clans hold many
parcels, leading to fractional ownership and uncertain boundaries and titles. By
Constitution, only citizens can own land. Domestic corporations that have non-citizen
shareholders may not own land (FSM 2015).
While individual states have separate and distinct land tenure arrangements, there are somebroad commonalities that persist throughout state land tenure systems. The FSM Constitution
forbids land ownership to foreigners, as well as to domestic corporations that have non-FSM
citizens among their shareholders (Edward 2002).
Group and communal ownership of land is prevalent throughout the FSM. There aredifferences, however, concerning rights of land transfer within the FSM. In Chuuk, Kosrae andYap, land can be transferred by law to all FSM citizens. In Pohnpei, however, it can only betransferred to persons from that island (Pohnpei State 1997). Traditional and cultural
institutions have a strong presence in Micronesian life. The keystone of Micronesian societyis the extended family, which is collectively responsible for maintaining the family welfare—particularly as it relates to customary family land. Traditionally, land ownership in the FSM
was limited to inheritance within a family or clan. As a result, many land parcels in the FSM
are subject to the communal use and alienation rights of extended families, clans andcommunities (EMAPT 1996). Private landholders—influenced to varying degrees bycustomary land tenure systems, occupy most lands. The government describes
landownership in the FSM as “one of smallholdings. Most property is held as family trusts,
and land use rights are passed down from generation to generation within the extended family

Traditional leadership and impact on land ownership at State level will be explained in detail underdiscussions on land under each state.

6

December 2020

Final

19

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Reportsystem. Subsurface property rights are synonymous with surface rights. There are no state
owned subsurface mineral or water rights in any of the states (ADB 2015). Landownership islimited by the Constitution to citizens.
The government describes landownership in the FSM as one of smallholdings (ADB 2015
& FSM DOTC&I 2015). Most property is held as family trusts and land use rights are passed
down from generation to generation within the extended family system. With the exceptionof Yap and a few atolls in Pohnpei state where patrilineal affiliations govern inheritance ofland rights, matri-lineages traditionally controlled estates in Micronesia (Ryan & Les 2018).
Clans tend to hold many parcels, leading to fractional ownership and uncertain boundaries
and titles. In FSM subsurface property rights are synonymous with surface rights such that
there are no state-owned subsurface mineral or water rights in any of the states. FSM
citizens treat land as their most significant asset and leasing of private lands can be timeconsuming due to fractional ownership and uncertain boundaries and titles.
Landownership is limited by the Constitution to citizens. Even domestic corporations thathave noncitizen shareholders may not own land. However, noncitizen individuals andcorporations may lease either public or private lands. Although it is illegal to sell lands in
Pohnpei there are many recorded cases of ‘gifts’ of land with widely known but unrecorded
concurrent payments.
In FSM the majority of land is privately owned (68%) with only 32% considered to be public
land (Table 2-9). The amount of public land varies considerably between states, with only
2% of Yap state public land and the rest privately owned.
Table 2-9: FSM land ownership (Doran 2004)

Livelihoods and income
The majority of the population live in the coastal areas of the high islands; the mountainousinterior is largely uninhabited; less than half of the population live in urban areas. Most
people live a rural lifestyle largely dependent on their gardens and fishing for daily foodrequirements, although imported food is an increasing part of the diet. People are attracted
to urban centers for incomes directly or indirectly derived from offshore transfers in theform of grants from the United States (US) and other donors.
FSM is at an early stage of the process of urbanization with about 22% of its population
living in the urban areas (urban areas include Colonia in Yap, Weno in Chuuk, Kolonia in
Pohnpei and Lelu in Kosrae), a slight increase from the level estimated in 2000 (FSM DOS
2010). According to the 2010 FSM Census, 22,924 out of the total population of 102,843
live in the various defined urban areas across the four states compared to 79,919 in rural
areas or 77% of the total population (Knoema. 2015). Visitors numbered 24,125 in 2016,
which represented a decrease of 20% on the previous year.
Like many households in the Pacific, agricultural and livestock raising activities are almost
universal among FSM households (95% and 82% respectively; 95% and 86% in Yap). In
addition, fishing activities accounted for 71% of all households (88% in Yap). These
activities were carried out for own household or family use and consumption purposes.
December 2020

Final

20

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

About 10 percent of households reported to be engaged in these activities for sale ormarketing for cash. These activities were common throughout all four states, particularly
the outer island households reported heavy involvement in these activities for family use
and consumption.
In FSM, according to a household income and expenditure surveys in 2013/14, heads ofhouseholds are primarily male (80%), with 53% of heads aged 40 – 59 years old (Table
2-10). The annual average income in FSM was estimated to be USD 16,950. However,
20% of the households earned less than US$ 2,600 and approximately 37% of household
heads earned less than USD 5,000; with the majority of household heads earning between
USD 5,000 –29,000. Households headed by males earn on average 9% more than female
headed households (total net income excluding imputed rents) and 11% more based on
cash income.
Table 2-10: Distribution of households by household head characteristics (FSM 2014)

Headed households who are involved in paid work earn on average 36% more than theretired and obviously much higher than the one who work for free (might be home
production for consumption or volunteers). Households in FSM are dependent on cash
income as over 63% of their total income is cash with additional income (or its equivalent)
gains from a range of other sources (i.e. home production, gifts, imputed rents and in-kind)(Table 2-11). The less cash dependent households are the one whose heads work for free(not for cash) as they are involved in subsistence activities for own consumption.
Table 2-11: Household income by state 2013/14 (FSM 2014)

Notes: Cash: wage and salary income, business income, and sales of home production (agriculture, handicraft,livestock and/or fisheries). Home production: value of home production that the household produces themselves
and then consumes. Gifts: all goods given receive are treated as income. Imputed rents: represent the valueof a house for owner if they were to receive rent. Income in-kind: any income received by the household which
was not in the form of cash

December 2020

Final

21

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

While approximate 55% of households report cash income from a current wage and salaryjob (55.5%) the most common source of income for households in FSM was the home
production (mainly agriculture items) with 76% of the households involved in some form ofsubsistence activity. A large proportion of households also receive remittances i.e. cashfrom outside of FSM (41.6%).
Most household expenditure/disbursements are associated with consumption expenditure(94.1%) which represents items that the household consume itself. This analysis includes
cash/in-kind purchases as well as home production consumed and gifts given away outside
the household. Non-consumption expenditure accounts for only 4.9%, followed by only asmall amount on investment/savings (1.0%).
The majority of consumption expenditure is associated with “housing” (37.3%) especially
imputed rents (Figure 2-6, Table 2-12). Food and non-alcoholic beverages is the next mostsignificant group (36.6%). Transport and Alcohol and tobacco (including sakau and betelnuts) account for 7.0% and 5.5% of the total household consumption expenditure
respectively, with eight other divisions registering contributions lower than 3%. Only asmall amount is spent on education and health due to government assistance in this area.
Figure 2-6: Household expenditure 2013/14

Notes: Cash purchases represent any purchases made by the household for goods or services for which apayment was made by the household. The payment can be made in the form of a cash payment or payment inkind. Home production: covers the value of items which were home produced by the household and thenconsumed by that household. Imputed rents: represent the value of the house for owner and people who live intheir main house for free (rent free)

Table 2-12: Household expenditure by State 2013/14

Employment
The working age population at the 2919 census, defined as people aged 15 years andolder, of 66,146 people represents an increase of 2,310 people (3.6%) since the 2000
census (FSM 2010 Census). The actual labor force comprised 37,919 people (22,076
males, 15,843 females) representing a national labor force participation rate of 57.3% (66%
December 2020

Final

22

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Reportfor males, 48% females). Of this group, 31,789 people consider themselves employed
while 6,130 are unemployed equating to an unemployment rate of 16.2% for FSM (15%males, 17% females).
Only 40% of households were employed in paid work, resulting in an average annual
income between USD 18 – 20,000. For household where the head had no paid work, wasretired, had home duties or other (60%) the average income was less than USD 13,624(Table 2-13).
Table 2-13: Occupational status of households 2013/14

For those that are employed and working for salaries and wages, over half are involved in
education (24.6%), public administration and defence (18.6%), wholesale/retail trade andmotor vehicle repair (9.7%) and health and social work (9.1%) (Table 2-14). Very few earna wage or salary in the fishing (1.8%) or agriculture (0.6%) sectors, as income from these
sectors is generated from subsistence activities.
Transport
Priority infrastructure development projects in the ten sectors at National and State levelplus project management costs, institutional projects and infrastructure maintenancerepresent a total investment of $1,082 million over the 10-year Plan period. For the firsttime a project specifically targeted at cross-sector climate change adaptation is included.
This project in Yap will be followed in the future by similar projects identified through the
Joint National/State Action Plan processes that are now coming on-line across the FSM(FSM 2018).
FSM has 388 km of roads, 184 km sealed and 204 km unsealed (FSM DOTC&I 2015).
The majority of these roads are on the four main state islands. Few of the outer islands
have any roads and islanders rely on small walking tracks to get between villages. Noneof the states have widely available public transportation options except for taxis, and aschool bus service between Yap’s capital of Colonia and smaller villages is the only
significant public bus network in FSM. Road and pedestrian facilities are largely the
responsibility of state departments for infrastructure/public works.
The islands of Yap, Pohnpei, and Chuuk all contain major international ports which
welcome cruise and trading ships from around the world. Port development andmanagement is the responsibility of independent authorities in Kosrae, Pohnpei and Yap
that retain revenue generated from operations and have responsibility for operating costs
and making investments. In Chuuk the port is the responsibility of the Department ofTransportation and Public Works.

December 2020

Final

23

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

Table 2-14: Total wage and salary income by industry 2013/14

There are five major airports in FSM, with an international airport located in each state. In
addition there are nine smaller airports located on outer islands, two in Yap state, three in
Chuuk state and four in Pohnpei state. Airport development and management is the
responsibility of independent authorities in Kosrae and Pohnpei that retain revenue
generated from operations and have responsibility for operating costs and making
investments. In Chuuk and Yap the airport is the responsibility of the Department ofTransportation and Public Works.
According to the 2010 census, approximately 44% of Yapese household have a car, 6% abus or truck and 2% a motorbike. In Yap, 13% of households own a boat with a motor,
while 16% have a canoe or boat without a motor. Very few households in the Outer Islands(5) own a car, reflecting the lack of roads on the islands, however, they own the majorityof canoes or boats without motors in Yap (76%).

2.3.2

Demographics
The last Census for FSM was in 2010 and is currently being undertaken this year, 2020.
FSM’s 2010 census record (DOS 2012) had a total population of 102,843 comprising
52,193 males and 50,650 females (Table 2-16). Current estimated population for FSM in2020 is 105,503. World Bank estimate for 2019 population was 104,936 (World Bank
2016). The National Projected population based on 2010 Census and HIES survey isprovided in Table 2-15.

December 2020

Final

24

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

Table 2-15: National Projected population based on 2010 Census and HIES survey (for 2010/2021)

2021 Year

2020 Year
National& States

Males

Females

Total

Males

Females

Total

National
FSM

53,11051,540104,650

53,20253630

104,832

Pohnpei

18164

18,13836,832

18726

18170

36896

Chuuk

25,271

24,23749,509

25315

24280

49,585

Kosrae

3411

3321

6732

3417

3327

6744

Yap

5734

5843

11577

5744

5853

11597

Long-range population projections suggest a continuation of little or no population growth
for the foreseeable future. Projections to 2030 suggest no population growth from 2010
and less than 10% total growth to 2050. The level of urbanization in FSM remains relatively
low at 22.9% of the total population (2020) (FSM 2018).
The average household size in FSM declined from 6.7 persons in 2000 to 6.1 persons in2010 (Table 2-16). Similarly, average family size declined from 7.0 in 2000 to 4.4 in 2010
indicating a preference for smaller families by couples. This also reflects the decline infertility as well, as young people delaying first marriage.
Table 2-16: Demographic information for FSM (source 2010 census).

December 2020

Final

25

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

2.3.3

Education
FSM runs an American style education system with free public education from age 6through age 15 or completion of the 8th grade. High School attendance is not assured. All
States administer high school entrance tests to 8th graders. Instruction is strictly a
responsibility of the States with the National Government providing support and assistance.
Funding for education is primarily provided through State Compact funds with some local
revenue. The FSM is eligible for selected US Federal Education Programs that contributea significant amount to the overall education budget. The FSM’s only Institute of Higher
Education (IHE) is the College of Micronesia-FSM (COM-FSM) located in Pohnpei (FSM2015).
The national education agency is the FSM Department of Education. Each state has its
own education agency operating public schools. The curriculum in this eight-year program
includes subjects such as science, mathematics, language arts, social studies and physicaleducation. Public elementary and secondary schools are free for all Micronesian students.
There are five secondary schools (one per island) as well as several private secondary
schools. In FSM, the College of Micronesia provides accredited post-secondary educationfrom six campuses spread across all States.
Vocational education and training (VET) schools offer pathways to provide for the qualified
workforce needed across all sectors of the FSM economy. Equal access to affordable, highquality VET schools is a target of FSM’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), with anemphasis on substantially increasing the number of youths and adults with the relevant
skills for employment, decent jobs and entrepreneurship by 2030 (FSM, 2020). FSM has
allocated $205.8M over a decade (2016-2025) toward the construction of new schools andschool facilities throughout the islands, the single largest investment in the nation behindroads and pedestrian facilities (FSM 2020). This will be a collaborative effort between therespective Departments of Public Works and the Departments of Education 7. In terms ofbilateral aid to FSM the education sector receives the most assistance, with more than 35%
of all Overseas Development Assistance (ODA) going to educational opportunities, activities
and infrastructure (FSM 2020).

2.3.4

Public health
Health is a key SDG priority for FSM, highlighted by the fact that this sector has one of thehighest government expenditures (21%) as a percentage of national GDP (FSM 2020). The
World Health Organization (WHO) working with partners supports the Government inpursuing its national strategic priorities which include universal health coverage
antimicrobial resistance by building resilient and sustainable health systems, build corecapacities for proactive preparedness in health emergencies and natural disasters and,build capacity for NCD prevention and control (WHO 2018).
The Department of Health Services in each state provides medical and public healthservices through a hospital, community health centers and dispensaries (WHO 2018).
Compared to other countries in the Western Pacific Region, the Federated States ofMicronesia has relatively high coverage of health essential services (WHO 2018). Eachstate system is autonomous. Health services are highly subsidized by the state
governments, except in private clinics.

7 There are Boards of Education in each State and the College of Micronesia (COM) has a Board to manage its

affairs. Sector coordination is undertaken through the FSM Association of Chief State School Officers comprisedof the Secretary of Education, State Directors of Education and the COM President.
December 2020

Final

26

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

The National Department of Health and Social Affairs oversees health programs, including
health planning, donor coordination, and technical and training assistance. It is also
responsible for public health programs funded by the United States Department of Healthand Human Services.
In total, there are six private health clinics in the country and one private hospital. Accessto hospital services remains an issue, particularly for outer-islands residents due totransportation difficulties between islands. Furthermore, non-communicable diseases(NCDs) such as diabetes, cardiovascular diseases and cancers are major health problems.
Non-Communicable Diseases (NCDs) remain a vast and pervasive issue for the FSM,
accounting for more than 70% of deaths (FSM 2020).
The overconsumption of imported packaged food, lack of physical activity and use of
tobacco products are contributing to the high prevalence of NCDs and obesity in the
country. Intentional (violence) injury and suicide are other issues, whose contributing
factors are likely to be the burden of cultural and economic dislocation, particularly among
young adult males. Alcohol use often leads to violent incidents. Tuberculosis (TB) also
has a high prevalence, as does leprosy, the latter being among the highest in the Pacific.
COVID 19 Response
The implications of COVID-19 will impact the 4 states many ways, particularly noting publichealth, education, violence against women and children, mental health, psychosocial
distress self-sufficiency and the economy. In FSM, response to the COVID-19 pandemic,
people’s safety and security was the priority. The President declared a public healthemergency and the government established a COVID-19 taskforce and a response
framework with a budget of $2.1M, and an economic stimulus package of approximately$15M to provide subsidies to businesses and to support workers in the tourism, retail andfisheries sectors. The health pandemic only added to the range of challenges faced by
FSM including climate change, social and economic inequalities.
The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the need to shore up social protection systems
and wider policies and initiatives to deliver public goods and services, particularly to thepoorest and most vulnerable in the Federation (FSM Government, 2020).

2.3.5

Gender & Poverty
Ensuring that women are part of decision making at all levels, and protecting young girls,
has been a sustained focus over the past decade in FSM. The development, endorsement
and implementation of the National Gender Policy in 2018 has led to significant progressin government and civil society to address family protection issues.
The FSM National Gender Policy (FSM 2017) aims to ensure that all women, men, girls
and boys in FSM states are respected and can reach their potential. The policy focuseson six goals: elimination of gender-based violence; better women’s representation indecision-making; improved education outcomes; addressing barriers faced by women in
the workforce; better healthcare and choices over fertility; and mainstreaming genderacross government targets lifting the status of women to enable them to equally participate
in the political, economic and social affairs of the country.
The National Gender Policy has five main goals and these include the better representationof women in decision making, elimination of violence against women, equitable education
outcomes, addressing barriers women face in the workforce and access to better healthcare. The FSM National Youth Policy (2017-2023) also addresses young people’s issues

December 2020

Final

27

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

and this also specifically includes young women. The Policy seeks to ensure opportunities
to all youth to be active, responsible and self-reliant members of the community throughthe development of their full potential.
Poverty
Poverty and hardship exist in FSM and low-income households mostly spend their resources
on food especially in Yap and Chuuk. As welfare levels rise, food share falls in all States.
With more than 90% of families having access to land for farming, combined with strong
cultural norms of sharing, hunger is rare in the nation. Malnutrition is likely the greater issue.
The last FSM national basic needs poverty assessment was based on the Household Income
and Expenditure Survey (HIES), the most recent of which was completed in 2013/14.
Although considerable progress has been made, the incidence of hardship in the FSM is stillhigh.
The 2013/14 HIES indicates 31.4 % of the FSM population live below the national basic
needs poverty line with a slight increase from 2005 to 2013 (UNICEF, 2017). Poverty levels
are not uniform in the states. Children are also more likely to be vulnerable to poverty: nine
per cent of children aged 0–14 years were living less than 10 per cent above the basic
needs poverty line compared with 4.8 per cent of the total population (Ibid 2017).
Poverty levels are not uniform in the states. The poverty incidence is higher or more severein Pohnpei and Chuuk than in Yap and Kosrae. This remains a challenge for FSM with aclear need to initiate projects and programs to both lift the capacity of government
agencies, civil society organizations and the business community to implement projects
successfully (FM 2020).
Data suggest that poverty particularly affects children and female-headed households andthat poverty rates are significantly lower in Yap than in the other three states (UNDP 2014).
While female-headed households constituted 20% of the household population in FSM,
they constituted 39% of the total number of households in the lower three expendituredeciles (ADB 2017).
Gender Considerations
Although there are no specific discriminatory provisions in FSM law, there is no proactive
approach ensuring that women are able to exercise their de facto legal rights. A
comprehensive review carried out shortly after FSM ratified CEDAW found that withrespect to 113 internationally recognized indicators of legal compliance, FSM was fullycompliant on 27% partially compliant on 16 % and out of compliance on 57% of these
indicators.
The concluding observation of the UN on the CEDAW discussions with FSM in 2017
identified many gaps in laws relating to gender based violence in all the 4 States (FSM
2017). In 2018, the FSM National Gender Policy had been endorsed and this will help
progress gender work both at the national and state levels. The Gender Policy builds on
the National Strategic Development Plan 2017-2023 which had identified the importanceof inclusion of women as partners in development in FSM.
Gender relations in FSM are shaped by cultural norms and practices that vary greatly
across the four states. Women rarely become traditional leaders and tend to defer to men
in community affairs. In 2017 there was only one woman each in the Pohnpei and Chuuklegislature and the FSM Congress has introduced a bill (CB 20-116) that would purportedly
guarantee representation of women in the FSM Congress.
December 2020

Final

28

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

Micronesian societies, with the exception of Yap and a few atolls in Pohnpei, emphasize
matrilineal descent where identities, titles, rights and acquisition to property are traced
through female hereditary lines. Women’s rights to land ownership and their access toresources have, however, changed under the various colonial authorities that havegoverned FSM, with most decision making related to land ownership and land use being
retained by male members of the family (SPC, 2012).
FSM has one of the highest rates of maternal mortality in the Pacific region, with all fourstates reporting high teenage pregnancy rates. In the FSM, maternal deaths are declining
but are widely under-reported, and skilled birth attendants are in short supply in both states.
Authorities recognize maternal mortality is still a problem in FSM (FSM 2017).
In the FSM gender parity in education this had been achieved at all levels, however, thereis the issue of low economic participation of women. Better access to education does nottranslated into increased participation by women in the formal sector. This is likely due todeeply entrenched beliefs in the traditional role of women, where their role is at home (Ibid2018).
In 2017 (Gender Policy baseline year), no women had been elected to the National
government and there were only two female senators - one each in Pohnpei and Chuuklegislatures. Presence of women in higher positions in management and government isalso rare. Gender norms that curtail women’s opportunities to speak out and participate indecision-making are still strong (WBG 2017).
Culture and Traditions
Culture and traditions are revered in FSM and are constitutionally protected in the nationaland state constitutions. Article V, Section 2 provides: the traditions of the people of theFederated States of Micronesia may be protected by statute. If challenged as violative of
Article IV, protection of Micronesian tradition shall be considered a compelling social
purpose warranting such governmental action. This provision is mirrored in Article II,
Section 2 of the Kosrae Constitution; Article V, Section 2 of the Pohnpei Constitution;
Article IV, Section 1 of the Chuuk Constitution, and Article III, Section 2 of the Yap
Constitution.
Each FSM state exhibits its own distinct culture and tradition, but there are also common
cultural and economic bonds that are centuries old. For example, cultural similarities areevidenced in the importance of the traditional extended family and clan systems found oneach island. Although united as a country, the people are actually a heterogeneous
mixture, with different customs and traditions bound together by recent history andcommon aspirations (SPREP 2018). Cultural diversity is typified by the existence of eight
major indigenous languages, and the people continue to maintain strong traditions, folklore
and legends (FSM 2019).
Traditional gender norms, the patriarchal society and marriage practices such as early andforced marriage perpetuate GBV.
Customary practices such as mediation andreconciliation disadvantage survivors of GBV prioritising community harmony over theharm caused to them and their needs and rights (FSM 2020).
Gender- Based Violence
The legal rights of women are protected under the FSM National Constitution and theconstitutions of the four states, all of which prohibit discrimination on the grounds of sex.
There is no national legislation criminalising sexual assault, however, each state has
December 2020

Final

29

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

identical legislation criminalising both sexual assault with penetration and sexualintercourse with girls under the age of 13.
State women’s councils have been active in a range of women’s rights areas including theelimination of violence against women and children. State women’s councils haverotationally hosted National Women’s Conferences, which result in an outcomes documentof resolutions to government on a range of actions to progress the situation for women.
Gender based violence is relatively low in FSM. In 2016 it was estimated that 33% of
women have experienced physical and/or sexual violence from their intimate partner (ADB
2016) and stakeholders reported that Domestic Violence Law of 2017 is not being
implemented. Victim protection facilities are non-existent (in some states there arereported designated safe houses however they are not equipped for habitation) andprotection processes are unclear. Also commonly reported during consultations was age
consent issues as age of consent regulations are not enforced. The consent age has been
recently lifted to 16; however, Human Trafficking law defines a child as any person below
the age of eighteen (ESIA 2019).
In many parts of FSM, GBV towards women is normalised and socially and culturally
accepted. While there is no data specific on Sexual Exploitation and Abuse (SEA) andworkplace Sexual Harassment (SH) 65.2% of women agreed with at least one
circumstance when a man has the right to leave his wife (FSM 2020).
As part of efforts to strengthen national prevalence data across the Pacific region, Family
Health and Safety Surveys have recently been conducted in most Pacific Island Countries
and Territories (PICTs) including FSM. These national surveys provide insight and confirm
the experience of women in FSM who have been working to address GBV, highlightingthat rates of intimate partner violence and non-intimate partner violence against womenare high. The national survey also confirms attitudes held by men and women that supportand excuse GBV towards women. There remains a gap in national prevalence data onother forms of GBV including workplace SH, SH towards women in public places, SEA,
forced prostitution and human trafficking for the purpose of SEA (FSM 2020).
Surveys indicate one in five women in Pohnpei and one in four women in Yap haveexperienced violence at the hands of a loved one and these are below the National
average. The prevalence rate of ‘ever partnered’ 8 women in Chuuk is above the national
average at one in two and in Kosrae is higher again at close to three women in five (FSM2018). The FSM government increased its capacity to generate sex-disaggregated data
and to use gender statistics to guide national policy and decision-making, evaluation andlearning and human rights reporting. This resulted from support from SPC’s Progressing
Gender Equality in the Pacific (PGEP) project (PWO 2020).
The FSM Maritime Project (ESIA 2019), consisting of maintenance and upgrades toexisting infrastructure at primary ports across the four States, concluded that it is unlikelythat there will be significant environmental and social impacts. However, influx of foreign
workforce during the implementation phase and the increase in visiting fishing fleets during
post-implementation, have a potential to cause harm or harassment to host communities
including incidents of human trafficking.
There has been very little data collected on the levels of violence against women across
FSM, since 2014 (UNFPA 2014) and increasing reports of domestic violence cases and8 Women who have ever been married, ever lived with a man or are currently with a regular male sexual partner.

December 2020

Final

30

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Reportgender-based violence is widely considered to be one of the primary human rights issues
facing the FSM. Incest and child abuse both exist in FSM but are believed to be underreported due to cultural sensitivities. The government has acknowledged the need forreliable data on the nature and incidence of domestic violence against women.
Human Trafficking
The FSM is a source country for women subjected to trafficking with women from FSM
trafficked to Guam and mainland USA.
FSM has a national policy on human trafficking supported by anti-trafficking legislation at
the national level and in all states. Two states have approved state-level action plans to
implement the FSM National Action Plan and the government created an anti-trafficking
coordinator position to oversee government anti-trafficking work (PWO 2020).
However, the FSM Government does not fully meet US Government minimum standards
for the elimination of trafficking but is making significant efforts to do so demonstrating
overall increasing efforts resulting in Tier 2 status (USSD 2029). As reported humantraffickers are known to exploit domestic and foreign victims in FSM and from FSM abroad.
Although the government established an anti-human trafficking division within the
Department of Justice minimum standards in several key areas have not been met suchas comprehensive standard operating procedures (SOPs) for proactive victim identification
and referral to protection services.
Women’s groups in all four states have lobbied extensively over the years for legislationthat protects women from domestic violence and marital rape. In their concluding
observations to the FSM government, the CEDAW Committee raised concerns about thediscriminatory provisions particularly in relation to sexual offenses against women in the
penal codes and conditions of employment in the labour laws in FSM.

2.3.6

Sites of Archaeological & Historical Value
A total of 26 of the buildings, sites, districts, and objects in FSM have been listed on the
US National Register of Historic Places.

2.3.7

Infrastructure
Potable water
Piped water systems in FSM consist of two basic types. Systems, which use streams
consist of a small intake across the stream, a raw water main to the treatment plant (forthose systems which incorporate treatment) and a transmission and distribution network(SPREP 2019). Water treatment is by rapid filtration followed by chlorination. Only 5
systems out of about 70 identified have treatment facilities, and most systems supply
untreated water. Table 2-17: Major water systems in FSM (from SPREP 2019). identifies key
water systems in FSM.
Groundwater systems usually consist of a production borehole fitted with a submersible
pump and a transmission and distribution network. A chlorine injection procedure issometime incorporated into the system at the wellhead. A total of about 90 boreholes arepresent in the main islands. Table 2-18 identifies the key wells and production capacities.
Underground formations are not conducive to the development of high yielding wells.
However, the hydrogeology is considered suitable for multiple, low to medium yielding
wells and the quality of ground water is mostly excellent.

December 2020

Final

31

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

Table 2-17: Major water systems in FSM (from SPREP 2019).

Table 2-18: Production Capability of Operational Wells.

Sewerage Systems
There are five sewerage systems in FSM, which serve Kolonia town in Pohnpei, Weno
Island in Chuuk, Colonia town in Yap, Lelu town in Kosrae and the Tofol administrative
area in Kosrae. Table 2-19 presents an overview of waste management infrastructure.
Table 2-19: Overview of waste management infrastructure in FSM

December 2020

Final

32

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

Solid Waste Management

There are limited solid waste collection facilities in each of the principal islands of eachstate and dumpsites are located in the main centres of Pohnpei, Yap and Chuuk and ineach municipality of Kosrae (Johnston 2011). According to Johnston (2011), none of thesefacilities approaches what could be considered an acceptable landfill. In each state thegovernment has plans to develop a new landfill site but has been constrained by landavailability and funding availability. The situation is most critical in Chuuk where the current
dumpsite is neither secure nor environmentally acceptable (DOTC&I, 2004).

2.3.8

Noise & Vibration
There is limited noise and vibration monitoring data available for the FSM states. Noise
data was collected for the Pohnpei Port Development Project and is outlined in Table 2-20:
Noise data for the Pohnpei Port Development Project (from ADB 2013).
Table 2-20: Noise data for the Pohnpei Port Development Project (from ADB 2013)

Noise Level (dBA)

Sampling Location

Day

Night

Kolonia Town area (urban)

48.2

34.7

Min. Temperature

54.7

45.8

Figure 2-7 presents typical noise levels and sources. Both locations are typical of ‘quiet’ to‘moderately loud’ noise environments.

Figure 2-7: Typical noise levels and sources (Source: http://800nonoise.com/tutorials/generator-setnoise-solutions/)

December 2020

Final

33

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

The British Standard BS 5228‐2:2009 outlines human response guidelines for vibration
effects (Table 2-21). Any vibration generated from Project activities would need to becompliant with these (or similar) guidelines.
Table 2-21: Human response guidelines for vibration effects (from British Standard BS 5228‐2:2009)

Vibration level (mm/s)

2.3.9

Effect0.14

Vibration might be just perceptible in the most sensitive situations formost vibration frequencies associated with construction. At lower
frequencies, people are less sensitive to vibration.

0.3

Vibration might be just perceptible in residential environments.

1.0

It is likely that vibration of this level in residential environments willcause complaint.

10

Vibration is likely to be intolerable for any more than a very brief
exposure to this level.

Air Quality
There is a paucity of air quality monitoring data for FSM states. Table 2-22 presents World
Health Organisation air quality guideline (WHO AQG) concentrations for a range of key
parameters which will be required to be met in relation to the current Project.
Table 2-22: Relevant WHO air quality guideline concentrations for key parameters

Parameter

Averaging period

Air quality criterion

24 hour

50 μg/m3

Annual20 μg/m3

24 hour

25 μg/m3

Annual

10 μg/m3

10 min500 μg/m3

24-hour

20 μg/m3

1-hour200 μg/m3

24-hour

400 μg/m3

Annual40 μg/m3

PM10
PM2.5
SO2
NO2

December 2020

Final

34

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

3.

Kosrae3.1

Physical Environment

3.1.1

ClimateTable 3-1 presents key climate data for Kosrae (from https://en.climate-data.org/). The
key point to note is the abundant rainfall Kosrae receives annually (542 cm).
Table 3-1: Key climate statistics for Kosrae including temperature (°C) and rainfall (mm)3.1.2

Parameter

Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May

Jun

Jul

Aug

Sept

Oct

Nov

Dec

Avg. Temperature

27.5

27.5

27.4

27.2

27.4

27.4

27.2

27.5

27.4

27.5

27.5

27.5

Min. Temperature

24.8

24.8

24.7

24.5

24.6

24.5

24.2

24.3

24.2

24.3

24.4

24.7

Max. Temperature

30.2

30.2

30.1

30

30.2

30.3

30.3

30.7

30.7

30.8

30.6

30.3

Rainfall (mm)

399

485

500

583

491

453

446

415

383

344

414

510

Topography, Geology, Soils & Hydrology
Kosrae has a total area of approximately 112 km2. The steep mountainous interior, which
has four peaks ranging in height from 465-620 m above MSL, is covered with lush tropicalrainforest. Around much of the island there are continuous mangrove swamp forests andseaward coastal strands. The island is surrounded by a broad shallow carbonate platformmuch of which is covered by freshwater swamps, mangrove forests and low coral land andbeach strand (US Army Engineers 1989).
Kosrae is a volcanic high island with relatively flat and narrow coastal plains extending
from the foothills to the shore. Soils are typically brownish red in color, mostly fine granularclay depending on the bedrock and can be deep in places. The parent rock is mostly
Olivine or Benhaline basalt, and in places is porous and slaggy. Carbonates compose themajority of reef environments which include fringing reefs, lagoon floor, barrier reef, anddeep passes. Figure 3-1 presents the distribution of highly erodible soils based on soil
type and slope. The yellow and olive brown areas are considered to be the most highly
erodible (Takesy 2014).
Figure 3-2 presents the location of key watersheds and rivers in Kosrae. The mostsignificant rivers on Kosrae are the Finkol, Innem, and Okat. A number of other smaller
perennial and intermittent streams and springs also occur around the base of the volcanic
part of the island.

3.1.3

Groundwater
Groundwater is currently not an important water source on Kosrae as relatively little water
seeps through the soil and into cracks and pores in the volcanic rocks . In some parts ofthe coastal fringe, wells tap a shallow layer or lens of freshwater underlain by saltwater.
However, these wells only rarely provide drinking water because their water quality is poor.
There are a number natural springs that are highly respected as sources of water of
excellent quality and has substantial groundwater resources (FSM/UN 1995, Jenson &Heitz 2004).

December 2020

Final

35

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

Figure 3-1: Distribution of highly erodible soils (from Takesy 2014)

Figure 3-2: Digital Elevation Model with Important Watersheds of Kosrae (from FSM 2010)

December 2020

Final

36

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

3.1.4

Coastal Hazards
An investigation of the impacts of coastal change and inundation in Kosrae has been
undertaken previously (Ramsay & Douglas 2000). A number of areas were identified
where coastal change-related impacts are likely to be most significant either due to ongoing
movement of the shoreline and/or the proximity of key infrastructure to the shoreline (seeFigure 3-3) including:•

Lelu - Large changes have occurred in the shoreline position at Finfokoa over thelast half century and continued changes in shoreline position are expected.
Continued retreat of the coastline along the central section at Pukushruk will likely
increase the exposure of the road to damage over time. Similarly the proximity of
the road to the shoreline at Putukte suggests it will be susceptible to damage during
periods of large waves and high tides.

•

Malem – The length of road exposed at Pal and Mosral will continue to increase(to the south) with damage from erosion and wave overwashing. At Mosral if theconcrete outlet continues to deteriorate reducing its effectiveness as a “groyne”
the coastline to the north of the Mosral River could retreat more rapidly. A patternof ongoing slow shoreline retreat is likely along much of the Malem coast
particularly at Yeseng, Kuplu and from Yewak to Tenwak. At Yewak/Pilyuul, where
the Pilyuul River would have originally discharged before being deflected north,
there is a risk that ongoing retreat will increasingly expose the road to damage.

•

Utwe - The Impuspusa coastline is relatively stable but experiences episodic storm
damage which, over time, may increase the potential for damage to the road where
it is located close to the shore.

•

Tafunsak – The position of the shoreline at Finfoko and Wiya is relatively stable
but the proximity of the road to the shore means it is susceptible to storm-related
damage. At the western end of the seawall at Tafunsak downdrift erosion isundermining the road.

Figure 3-3: Key locations and types of coastal change likely to be experienced (left) and where coastal
inundation issues are expected to increase (right) on Kosrae

December 2020

Final

37

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

3.2

Biological Environment

3.2.1

Terrestrial Ecology - Flora
The vegetation of Kosrae (Falanruw 2002) is dominated by the following (see Table 3-2:
Types of plant communities in Kosrae):•

Cloud forest, which is considered unique given the number of endemic species
present.

•

Native upland forest characterised by Campnosperma species.

•

Palm trees, a component of forests which occur in dense stands especially in areas
where the primary forest has been disturbed.

•

Freshwater marsh and riverine systems with grasses, sedges and herbs growing
in standing water most of the year and generally located in areas slightly above
sea level and are often just inland of mangroves.

•

Swamp forests occur where soils are inundated with fresh or slightly saline water.
They are most commonly found just inland of mangroves, above tidal influence but
lower in elevation than the surrounding terrain.

•

Mangrove forests.

There are over 322 plant species in Kosrae of which 250 species are native, many of which
are endemic to one or more islands in the FSM.
Table 3-2: Types of plant communities in Kosrae

Community Type
Mangrove Forest
Swamp Forest
Upland Forest
Agroforest *Secondary vegetation
Other non-forest
Total Area

Area (ha)
1,562
345
5,090
2,538
1,272
263
11,186

Notes: * includes coconut plantations.

Figure 3-4 presents a map showing the distribution of key terrestrial habitat classes (fromWeeks 2019).
Three IUCN listed threatened (one ‘Endangered’ and two ‘Vulnerable’) and one nearthreatened (NT) flora species are present in Kosrae (Table 3-3). Of these species, one
species (NT) is not endemic to Kosrae, but instead a cultivar from the islands of Pohnpei
and Chuuk (Ivory nut palm Metroxylon amicarum). Two of the threatened species arelowland forest tree species (thorrot Intsia bijuga and lach Pterocarpus indicus) with
Pericopsis mooniana from coastal forest and Cycas micronesica from closed forest. The
other threatened species is the hornwort Dendroceros japonicas. The endemic tree
species Terminalia carolinensis (ka), also found in Pohnpei, is protected in Kosrae.

December 2020

Final

38

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

Figure 3-4: Location of key terrestrial habitat classes in Kosrae

Rare, regionally significant or protected flora species
In addition to IUCN listed species, Kosrae supports 18 endemic plant species (Costion &Lorence 2012) (see Table 3-4) with a further 20 found only in the Eastern Carolines(Kosrae, Pohnpei and Chuuk) and one species only found in Kosrae, Pohnpei and Palau.
In addition, 19 endemic species are found across the Caroline Islands (FSM and Palau)
including Kosrae.

3.2.2

Terrestrial Ecology - Fauna
Rare, regionally significant or protected species
Kosrae has six endemic bird species (Table 3-5):•

Two species are now extinct as they were last recorded in the 1800s: Kosrae Starling
Aplonis corvine and Kosrae Crake, Zapornia monasa; and•The other four endemic species are considered to be relatively common in theirrestricted range and are considered of ‘Least Concern’: Caroline Reed-warbler
Acrocephalus syrinx, Caroline Swiftlet Aerodramus inquietus, Kosrae Fruit-dove
Ptilinopus hernsheimi and Kosrae White-eye Zosterops cinereus.

December 2020

Final

39

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

Table 3-3: Threatened or near threated flora species of Kosrae (Falanruw 2002 & IUCN 2018)

Table 3-4: Endemic plant species specific to Kosrae (Costion & Lorence 2012).

In addition, there are two additional restricted-range bird species including the ‘CriticallyEndangered’ migratory species Beck's petrel Pseudobulweria becki and the MicronesianImperial-pigeon Ducula oceanica which is considered ‘Near Threatened’. Kosrae may also
be visited by 19 IUCN listed migratory bird species including two species considered‘Endangered’, six ‘Vulnerable’ and 11 ‘Near Threatened’ species.
Other rare, regionally significant or protected fauna species include:•

Two endemic species of bats of the genus Pteropus occur in Kosrae state; theKosrae flying fox Pteropus ualanus – ‘Vulnerable’) and Kosrae fruit bat (Pteropus
mariannus ualans –‘Endangered’) both of which are endemic (Table 3-6).

•

Three threatened reptiles are known to occur in Kosrae: two migratory marine turtle
species that nest on beaches and the Micronesia saw tailed gecko (Perochirus

December 2020

Final

40

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Reportateles) which is endemic to the Marianas Islands and FSM and listed as ‘Vulnerable’(Table 3-7).
•

Two ‘Endangered’ freshwater fish species that may occur in Kosrae including theJapanese eel Anguilla japonica previously recorded as a vagrant in FSM andSicyopterus eudentatus a large, herbivorous riverine goby which is endemic to
Kosrae and Pohnpei (Table 3-8).

Table 3-5: Restricted-range and threatened birds of Kosrae (Birdlife International 2018, IUCN 2018)

Table 3-6: Threatened mammals of Kosrae (IUCN 2018)

Table 3-7: Restricted-range and threatened reptiles of Kosrae (IUCN 2018)

December 2020

Final

41

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

Table 3-8: Threatened fishes of Kosrae (IUCN 2018)

3.2.3

Coastal Marine Ecology
Kosrae is surrounded by a broad shallow carbonate platform much of which is covered by
freshwater swamps, mangrove forest and low coral land and beach strand. The carbonate
platform is of recent reef origin and extends between 1 – 5 km out from the islands volcanic
shoreline boundary. Three lagoons or embayments bisect the reef platform, the largest ofwhich is Lelu Harbor off the east coast. The floor of the harbour is deep, mostly in excess
of 20-30m and is blanketed by fine silts and muds. Figure 3-5 presents a map showing the
distribution of key marine habitat classes in Kosrae (from Weeks 2019).
Mangrove Forests
Mangroves are a significant coastal habitat and play an important role in coastal biologicaldiversity, erosion control and are a natural barrier of protection for the islands such as
Kosrae (Falanruw 2002). They also play an important role in trapping sediment moderating
the effects of excessive storm runoff on the surrounding reef system.
Mangrove and lowland swamp forest occupy relatively large areas between the basaltic
uplands and seaward beach strands. There is 1,562 ha of mangrove forest in Kosrae
which represents 14% of the total land area (Cole et al 1999). Eleven mangrove tree
species, including one hybrid, are present on the island of which Sonneratia alba,
Bruguiera gymnorrhiza and Rhizophora apiculata are the most common (Allen et al 2001.)

December 2020

Final

42

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

Figure 3-5: Location of key terrestrial habitat classes in Kosrae (from Weeks 2019)

Mangrove forest is most extensive along the south and north west coasts, and in Lelu
Harbour, while lowland swamp forest occurs mainly along the southeast coast. Much of
the forest occurs behind a protective coastal strand. The most widespread anthropogenic
disturbance is harvesting of trees for fuelwood and poles which is done selectively andgenerally creates small, dispersed gaps. Other forms of anthropogenic disturbance, suchas modifications of coastal landforms, alterations of freshwater inflows, road construction
and conversion to residential or agricultural uses are still relatively minor but have led tosome irreversible losses (Allen et al 2001).
The swamp forests have been modified in some areas over time by development foragroforestry, cutting of timber and clearance for house construction.
Seagrass
Sea grass beds are present on fringing reef flats primarily along the north and west coasts.
Like mangroves, seagrass acts as a trap for terrigenous sediments and provide important
habitat for a range of invertebrate and fish species. Four species have been identified;Cymodea rotundata, Enhalus acoroides, Thalassia hamprichii and Holdule uninervis (seewww.seagrasswatch.org).
In the late 1960’s and early 1970’s, causeway construction on the reef flat between Kosrae
and Lelu islands is considered to have adversely affected Lelu Harbour. The causeway
blocked water circulation and fish runs into inner Lelu Harbour leading to a decline inseagrass and fish catches. The environmental effects of construction activity are possibly
still impacting nearshore areas with shore erosion, reduced water flow and restoration still
occurring at Lelu Harbour.
Reef Systems
The inner reef systems which extend beyond the mangrove fringe and terrigenous
sediments are dominated by calcareous sand and rubble deposits which support seagrass
December 2020

Final

43

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Reportbeds (Edwards 2002). The middle to seaward portion is frequently covered by coral rubble,
shingle tracts etc. On windward reefs (north and east facing), the outer edge of the reef
platform is covered by a solid reef pavement grading to sloping spur-and-groove formationin the surf zone where robust corals and coralline algae are abundant. Steep reef slopes
and terraces with abundant coral growth and high diversity extend beyond the spur andgroove formation. On leeward facing reefs this formation is less developed or absent
altogether and a coral-rich reef slope descends abruptly beyond the outer edge of the reefflat.
Soft Bottom Benthic Communities
Rudimentary embayments bisect the reef platform at several places including Lelu Harbour
which measures 3km long by 2 km wide. The floor is in excess of 20-30m deep andcovered in fine muds and silts. These softer sediments are likely to be dominated by arange of infaunal and epifaunal invertebrates.
The deeper reef slopes of the Harbour are dominated by talus slopes of coral rubble withlive coral more conspicuous on the steep mid-level and upper portions of the walls.
Threatened & Protected Species
Several species of giant clam are under threat in FSM due to the high levels of exploitation.
One species, Tridacna gigas has been extirpated in FSM. Other species, such as
Hypoppus hypoppus are also being depleted and like the T. gigas, they are being cultured
for restocking of reef flats.
As described in Section 3.3, the green turtle Chelonia mydas and the hawksbill turtle
Eretmochelys imbricata, are ‘threatened’ and ‘critically endangered’ respectively.
However, these species are known to be harvested throughout FSM.

3.2.4

Conservation Areas
Kosrae has 8 Protected Managed Areas (PMA) and 12 Areas of Biological Significance(Figure 3-7) including two terrestrial, one marine, five coastal marine and two coastal
freshwater ecosystems, totalling 8,261 ha (Table 2-8). Three officially protected terrestrial
areas include:•

Yela Ka Forest is a conservation area of ka trees (Terminalia carolinensis) in the
Yela Valley. A conservation easement, the first achieved outside the Americas,
protects 78 acres of the 1,400 acre valley (Figure 13).

•Olum Watershed Protected Area is an ABS site (310.3 ha) with native upland forestthat includes cultural and historical sites. The area is managed by KIRMA in
partnership with landowners.

•

Mahkontowe Conservation Area was enacted into Kosrae State Law 11-156 on June
7, 2018. This area refers to a 15 km2 area which hosts a variety of significant cultural,archaeological, and natural aspects (Figure 11).

Table 3-9 identifies informally and formally protected areas.

December 2020

Final

44

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

Figure 3-6: Existing and proposed protected areas (from TNC 2019)

Figure 3-7: Areas of Biological Significance in Kosrae (from TNC 2019)
Table 3-9: Protected areas of Kosrae

December 2020

Final

45

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

3.2.5

Rivers & Watersheds
Figure 3-2 presents the distribution of key watersheds and rivers in Kosrae (FSM 2010).

3.2.6

Invasive Species
Figure 3-8 presents the known locations of Kosrae’s priority action invasive species which
include the starburst bush Clerodendrum quadriloculare, bitter vine Mikania micrantha andcastor bean plant (Tangan tangan) Ricinus communis (FSM 2010). Other, more dispersive
species have not been mapped.

Figure 3-8: Incidence of targeted invasive species in Kosrae (U.S. FS and the FSM (2010)

3.3

Socio-Economic Environment

3.3.1

EconomyThe major economic sectors of Kosrae are marine resources, tourism, and agriculture.
Subsistence farming and fishing remains very important to most families. The public sector
greatly depends upon the economic assistance of the United States through the Compact
of Free Association.
The public sector plays a central role in the economy, the national and state-levelgovernments employ over half of the country’s workers and government services andpublic enterprises account for 38% of GDP. In 2013 the Kosrae Strategic Development
Plan: 2014 – 2023 (KSDP) was finalized, recognizing the needs and aspirations of theKosrae community and stakeholders in Kosrae. The KSDP takes a 10 year view of Kosrae
and its place in Federated States of Micronesia. Kosrae’s GDP growth has declined by
0.7% per annum since the beginning of the Amended Compact. A major issue is the sizeof the public sector in the economy, accounting for 40 percent of GDP activity. These
factors suggest the Kosrae economy is in a highly volatile state as it approaches 2023 andhas no significant financial reserves to fall back on.

December 2020

Final

46

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

Kosrae’s GDP in 2015 was estimated at USD$14.6 million (or USD$1,963 per person).
Major economic sectors in the State of Kosrae are marine resources, tourism, agriculture
and small scale businesses. The combined output from these sectors contributed to an
estimated USD$1.6 million, or 10% of the state products. The State Government owns
and operates all infrastructure facilities, health facilities, and most education services,
small enterprises, and an extensive commercial activity in the fishery.
The subsistence economy is based on small-scale horticulture and fishing. These two
activities are not mutually exclusive as most farmers are also fishermen. Some havelivestock for food production. This traditional subsistence economy is still vital for the
Kosraean’s. Remittances from family overseas also supplement the household income
especially those with subsistence production and or no employment.

3.3.2

Land Tenure and Access
In Kosrae, land rights may be legally sold to FSM citizen. The FSM Constitution forbids
the ownership of land by foreigners but they are permitted to lease land. Multiple
ownership of land still exists throughout the FSM, requiring the consensus of families, clans
and traditional leaders for leases and development. This can present a constraint todevelopment depending on the ability to achieve consensus.
The Kosrae Constitution took effect on January 11, 1984. The Kosrae Constitution
contains a provision where stated rights may be superseded where “when a tradition
protected by statute provides the contrary.” The Constitution also stipulates that court
decisions “shall be consistent with this Constitution, State traditions and customs, and thesocial and geographical configuration of the State.” The emphasis on protection of naturalland resources is a unique feature of the Constitution. This emphasis has made it possible
for Kosrae to enact an island-wide land use program supported by law.
Article XI, § 5 deals with the issue of eminent domain and compensation for land
appropriated by the government and authorizes the State Government to “acquire interests
in private land for public purpose without the consent of the interested parties.” Such anacquisition may occur upon “upon payment of fair compensation and the State
Government’s showing that the land and the interest are highly suited to their intended
use, that it has made a good faith effort to gain the consent of the interested parties, andthat it has made every reasonable effort to avoid substantial hardship to the interested
parties in consideration of their personal circumstances .
Article XI, § 6 designates rivers and streams as public property, and authorizes the State
Government to regulate their use in the public interest.
Article XI, § 7 limits ownership of land to a specified class of individuals and states that
only a person who is a citizen of the Federated States of Micronesia and Kosraean bydescent including by adoption or a corporation which is wholly owned by such persons,
may acquire title to land in the State. Acquisition of title by persons whose status as
Kosraean by descent is based solely on adoption shall be within limits set by law.
Acquisition or utilization of interests in real property may be restricted or regulated by law.
Article XI, § 8 states that “[n]o certificate of title shall be issued to the State Government
for land consisting of the road and adjacent areas except where the State has actual title.”
A certificate of title previously issued to the State for such land is voidable upon applicationby the landowner holding title provided that any prior use agreement between the State
Government and the private landowner shall be reinstated according to its terms until
modified.”

December 2020

Final

47

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

3.3.3

Demographics
Kosrae has a total population of 6,616 consisting of 3,352 is males (50.6%) and 3,264(49.4%) female (FSM 2010 census) (Table 3-10). With an average annual growth rate of-0.40%, the greatest rate of change of all the FSM states, this is a reflection declining
economy resulting in population movement interstate (Pohnpei) or to other countries.
Table 3-10: Demographic information for FSM (source 2010 census)

In addition, a number of other key points regarding the demographics of Kosrae:•

With a population of 6,616, Kosrae is the smallest state by population in FSM andhas the lowest population density of all the FSM states (156 persons/sq mile).

•

The distribution of Kosrae’s population varies considerably between rural (4,456
people) and urban (2,160) areas with the population in both rural and urban areas
declining growing at an average annual rate of -1.34% and -1.82% respectively.

•

The greatest population in Kosrae is located in Lelu municipality (22.7%) followed
by Tafunsak (32.0%), Malem (20.4%) and Utwe (13.9%)52. Figure 3-9 shows thelocation of urban areas on Kosrae and municipal boundaries.

•

the average household size (5.7) is slightly smaller than the national average, as is
the average family size (4.2).

•

the official language is Kosraean with English used in government discourse with
90.1% of the population speaking English and 90.7% speaks Kosraean.

•

The median age in Kosrae was 21.5 years.

December 2020

Final

48

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report•

There are 1,143 households in Kosrae. Of these: 1,1079 households (94%) source
power from a public utility; 990 (87%) have access to drinking water via public orcommunity water supply or household tank; 1119 (98%) are connected to a sewer
or have a septic tank; 872 (76%) have access to a car, bus/truck or motorbike; 490(43%) have access to a mobile phone; and 246 (22%) have access to a computer,with 156 (14%) having access to the internet.

Figure 3-9: Urban areas in Kosrae

3.3.4

Education
Education in the FSM is compulsory for children aged 6 to 13 (elementary school). The
national education agency is the FSM Department of Education. Each state has its own
education agency operating public schools. The curriculum in this eight-year program
includes subjects such as science, mathematics, language arts, social studies and physicaleducation. Public elementary and secondary schools are free for all Micronesian students.
There are five secondary schools (one per island) as well as several private secondary
schools. In FSM, the College of Micronesia provides accredited post-secondary educationfrom six campuses spread across all States.
According to the 2010 census, in Kosrae, 101% of 6-13-year olds go to elementary school(indicating students repeating years), 93% of 14-17 year olds attended high school and
25% of 18-24 year olds attend college. The 2010 FSM census also showed that 85%
percent of Kosraean’s aged 25 years and over had completed elementary education; 55%
had completed high school, and 39% had attended college or other higher-level education
institute with approximately 16% graduating. A further 2% were recorded as never having
attended school.

December 2020

Final

49

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

3.3.5

Fisheries – Related Industries
Commercial & Artisanal Fisheries
There are no large-scale inshore commercial fishing operations in Kosrae. Small scalecommercial game fishing charters catering for tourists is allowed. Much of the local smallscale fishers capture fish principally for household consumption and secondarily as anadditional income stream.
Dive Industry
In 1997 a series of mooring buoys were installed around the Kosrae coast in anticipationof increased diving and fishing pressure on the surrounding reefs (see Figure 3-10). Thesesites are used by local dive operators as part of a small dive tourism industry, with a subset
used for regular monitoring of the health of coral reef by Kosrae Island Resource
Management Authority (KIRMA).

Figure 3-10: Locations of moorings in Kosrae indicating key dive sites

3.3.6

Sites of Archaeological & Historical Value
Figure 3-10 presents the locations of historical sites in Kosrae. Several heritage sites havebeen identified in Kosrae that are identified in the US National Register of Historic Places(Table 3-11).

December 2020

Final

50

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

Figure 3-11: Locations of historic sites in Kosrae
Table 3-11: Heritage sites listed on the US National Register of Historic Places

3.3.7

Infrastructure
Piped water systems from rivers serve 7 areas in Kosrae, a total population of 6,633 (seeTable 2-17). The Lelu sewerage system provides small bore sewers which receive effluent
from household septic tanks. Collected sewage is delivered to a pumping station. The Tofol
sewerage system collects sewage from Government buildings and provides oxidation
ponds treatment which has a capacity of 15,000 gallons a day
Quarries
Kosrae has 20 permitted privately-owned quarry sites (see Figure 3-12). Only Quarry #16
at Tenwak (locally-known as Puk Quarry) has a rock crushing machine and a sorter (seeFigure 3-13). The current quarry output is approximately 40m 3 / day with 80% being 1”
crushed gravel. DOTC&I have stated aggregates (for asphalt) used in past road paving

December 2020

Final

51

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Reportprojects in Kosrae have been imported but that the local quarries should be able to provide
quality fill materials as base course. This needs to be confirmed however.

Figure 3-12: Quarry site locations in Kosrae

Figure 3-13: Images showing infrastructure at Puk quarry

December 2020

Final

52

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

Solid Waste Management

The solid waste facilities in Kosrae consist of five dumpsites and an aluminium cancompaction and storage facility (FSM DOTC&I 2004). The dumpsites include:•

Lelu Municipality dumpsite which is the largest of the five and occupies a hillside
opposite the KUA power plant. . This is the only site to have a public collection
service. A dump truck is employed for roadside collection of trash along thecircumferential road, two times per week.

•

The Tafunsak Municipality dumpsite, a small area located east of the airport andcommercial port.

•

The Malem Municipality dumpsite, a small area located south of the Lelu causewayalong the circumferential road.

•

Very small dumpsites located at Utwe and Walung village.

In all cases the dumpsites are located near residential and/or administrative areas andnone are fenced or any evidence of an organised operation. No state government body is
specifically charged with responsibility for solid waste management, but this role is taken
on by default by the Department of Public Works.
Further investigation is required to determine whether the solid waste facility has the ability
to dispose of any waste roading material generated from the PRIME Project.
Seawalls

A number of seawalls have been created in response to ongoing coastal erosion issues.
The location of existing seawalls is shown in Figure 3-14.

Figure 3-14: Location of existing seawalls in Kosrae
December 2020

Final

53

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

3.4

Primary Data Collection
A range of assets located in the road corridor along the PRIME Road have been identified
based on fieldwork undertaken. A map showing the location of these assets (which
includes as private fences/walls and gardens, fruit trees, buildings, bridges/culverts, etc.)
and other key resources are provided in Figure 3-16. Appendix B presents further detailon this map. Figure 3-15 presents examples of these assets. This information has beenused to identify E&S sensitivities for the ESMF.

Figure 3-15: Images showing key assets located in close proximity to the road on Kosrae including
walls (top left & right) private residences, garden and power poles (middle left & right), and one lanebridge on Lelu causeway and coastal protection works (bottom left & right).

December 2020

Final

54

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

Figure 3-16: Assets within road corridor and location of sensitive social receptors – Kosrae

December 2020

Final

55

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

4.

Pohnpei

4.1

Physical Environment

4.1.1

ClimateTable 3-1 presents key climate data for Pohnpei (from https://en.climate-data.org/). The
key point to note is the abundant rainfall Pohnpei receives annually (480.7 cm).
Table 4-1: Key climate statistics for Pohnpei including temperature (°C) and rainfall (mm)Parameter

Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May

Jun

Jul

Aug

Sept

Oct

Nov

Dec

Avg. Temperature

27.2

27.3

27.3

27.3

27.4

27.3

27

27

27

27.1

27.2

27.3

Min. Temperature

24.2

24.3

24.3

24.1

24

23.7

23.1

22.9

22.9

23

23.3

24

Max. Temperature

30.2

30.3

30.4

30.6

30.8

30.9

31

31.2

31.2

31.2

31.1

30.6

Rainfall (mm)

329

262

341

443

478

427

453

442

413

426

403

390

4.1.2

Topography, Geology, & Soils Hydrology
Pohnpei consists of a main island surrounded by an inner coral reef, 23 small basaltic islets,
a number of inshore deposit islet, and an outer encircling barrier reef with about 15 low coral
islets. Pohnpei itself is a high volcanic island with a mountainous interior and peaks as highas 798 m above sea level, is about 21 km in diameter and 112 km in circumference.
Including lagoon islands, the total land area of Pohnpei is approximately 340km2.
The distribution of various soil types across Pohnpei has been described by U.S.
Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) in
1982. The five key soil types present are as follows:•

Nansepsep/Sonahnpll/lnkosr - Very deep, well drained to poorly drained, level togently sloping soils; on bottom lands and alluvial fans•

Nanlak - Very deep, poorly drained, level and nearly level soils; in coastal tidal
marshes•

Umpump/Rakled - Moderately deep and very deep, moderately well drained andsomewhat poorly drained, level to moderately steep soils; on old lava flows,
terraces, and benches•

Dolekel/Fomseng - Shallow and moderately deep, well drained, moderately steep
to extremely steep soils; on uplands•

Tolonler/Dolen - Very deep, well drained, strongly sloping to extremely steep soils;
on uplands

Figure 4-1 presents a map prepared by the Island Research and Education Initiative (iREi)
showing the distribution of the key soil types.

4.1.3

Hydrology
Groundwater
Groundwater development on Pohnpei has been limited mainly to areas in the northern partof the island in and around the town of Kolonia and Palikir (Spengler et al 1992). Wells in
the Kolonia area exploit local unconformities between flow units of the late-stage volcanics
and the unconformity between these volcanics and the underlying shield-building lavas.

December 2020

Final

56

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource ReportMore productive wells located in the Palikir area exploit relatively unweathered shieldbuilding lavas.

Figure 4-1: The distribution of the key soil types in Pohnpei

Groundwater development in the northern half of the island is hindered by low permeability
basement rock and lack of an extensive, low permeability capping layer to impede themovement of basal groundwater into the lagoon. More favorable conditions for thedevelopment of basal groundwater are thought to exist in the southern half of the island dueto the presence of relatively thick deposits of low-permeability ash near the coast, althoughgroundwater has not yet been developed in this location.
Figure 4-2 presents a map prepared by (iREi) showing distribution of general water
resources.
Surface Water
The general distribution of freshwater resources on Pohnpei is shown in Figure _ based ondata provided by the U.S. Geological Survey in 1944 (USGS 1944) and complied by iREi.
The key point to note is that the majority of the island, primarily in the interior, has numerous
streams and springs with a few locations where water is taken from shallow wells (orstreams) for consumption. The majority of water for consumption located primarily on the
coastal fringes is through collected rainfall. Figure 4-3 presents maps showing location of
surface watercourses based on the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) topographic maps
(2001) and reinterpreted by iREi.

December 2020

Final

57

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

Figure 4-2: The distribution of the general water resources in Pohnpei

Figure 4-3: The distribution of water courses in Pohnpei
December 2020

Final

58

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

4.1.4

Hazards
Flooding
Figure 4-4 presents a map showing various levels of flooding hazard for Pohnpei preparedby iREi and is based data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) - Natural
Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) for local soil type, drainage, and otherparameters. The key point to note is that the majority of the low-lying coastal margin isconsidered at risk of flooding.

Figure 4-4: Areas of flood risk in Pohnpei

ErosionFigure 4-5 presents a map showing various levels of erosion hazard for Pohnpei preparedby iREi and is based data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) - Natural
Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) for local soil type, slope and other parameters.
The key point to note is that the majority of ‘very high’ to ‘high’ potential erosion hazard
areas are located in the stepper areas poorer quality soils of the interior occasional
extending towards the coastal margin.

December 2020

Final

59

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

Figure 4-5: Erosion hazard areas in Pohnpei

4.2

Ecology

4.2.1

Terrestrial Ecology – Flora
Vegetation Types
Table 2-2 presents a summary of general vegetation types found in Pohnpei. Key habitat
sensitive to development disturbance as a proportion of total area ranges includes
mangrove (15.6%), swamp forest (0.6%), upland forest (35.4%) and marsh (0.4%) (fromFSM 2001).
Plant Species
A total of 729 species of ferns and flowering plants have been described in Pohnpei.
Approximately 438 species are native, including about 106 species of ferns, 138 monocot
species and 194 dicot species (Falanruw 2002) (Table 2-3).
A total of 291 species of plants have been introduced to Pohnpei (Zirkus 2001). Some ofthese introduced species have become invasive pests (Table 2-4) and, of the top 11
invasive weed species in FSM, all are present in Pohnpei including the widespread Giant

December 2020

Final

60

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

Sensitive plant Mimosa diplotricha, African tulip-tree Spathodea campanulata and Wedelia
trilobata (FSM 2002).
Figure 4-6 presents a map showing the distribution of various vegetation types acrossPohnpei. The data set was developed from 2005 QuickBird satellite imagery by Digital
Globe through land cover classification carried out by U.S. Forest Service (2007).

Figure 4-6: Distribution of vegetation types in Pohnpei

4.2.2

Terrestrial Ecology – Fauna
A range of avian, mammalian, reptilian species are present including 73 species of bird(including 20 native species, 19 resident and non-resident seabirds, 20 migratory
shorebirds, and 3 introduced bird species) (Table 2-5). A number of mammals (includingbats), reptiles (skinks, geckos, snakes), amphibians and freshwater fish are also likely tobe present.
The Pohnpei Island skink (Emoia ponapea) is the only reptile endemic to Pohnpei, and it
is widely distributed in low-land and upland forest (Buden 2000).

December 2020

Final

61

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

4.2.3

Coastal Marine Ecology
Coastal Habitat
A number of significant marine ecological features are located around Pohnpei (from Weeks
2015). Figure 4-7 identifies these key features.

Figure 4-7: Key marine ecological features in Pohnpei

Mangroves
The three most common mangrove species Bruguiera gymnorrhiza, Sonneratia alba andRhizophora apiculata are present on Pohnpei (Allen et al 2001). A total of sevenothermangrove species are present but are generally much less common. Table 2-7 presents

December 2020

Final

62

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

the distribution of the most common species by FSM State. Figure 4-7 presents a map
showing the distribution of mangroves around Pohnpei.
Seagrass
Approximately 4,403.6 ha of predominately intertidal and shallow (<3m) subtidal seagrassmeadows are present the waters around Pohnpei Island (and Atoll) consisting of three key
species (Cymodocea rotundata, Thalassia hemprichii, and Enhalus acaroides) of varying
levels of coverage (continuous, aggregated, and isolated) (McKenzie & Rasheed 2006).
Figure 4-8 presents a map showing the distribution of seagrass areas around Pohnpei.

Figure 4-8: Distribution of seagrass beds in Pohnpei

Reef Zonation
The distribution of various reef zones around Pohnpei has been mapped using datacollected by the Millennium Coral Reef Mapping Project (IMaRS-USF & IRD 2005). Reefzones describe the locations and ecological conditions of different parts of the reef withrespect to the reef system as a whole. The key reef type in close proximity to the coast is
described as “reticulated fringing reef defined as a network of linear or polygonal reef
December 2020

Final

63

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Reportframework with intervening depressions”. Figure 4-9 presents a map showing the various
reef zones.

Figure 4-9: Distribution of reef zones in Pohnpei

Fauna
Two species of sea turtles (Chelonia mydas and Eretmochelys imbricata) are known tooccur regularly in surrounding waters (Buden 2000)

4.2.4

Conservation Areas
Figure 4-10 presents a map showing existing designated (12 areas) and proposed (12areas) protected areas in Pohnpei.

December 2020

Final

64

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

Figure 4-10: Pohnpei existing and proposed protected areas (from Weeks 2015)

In addition, 35 Areas of Biodiversity Significance (ABS) have been identified for Pohnpei
including terrestrial (9), marine (5), coastal marine (18) and coastal freshwater sites (3)(Table 2-8). The location of Pohnpei ABSs are shown in Figure 4-11 and Figure 4-12.

Figure 4-11: Pohnpei existing and proposed protected areas (from Weeks 2015)

December 2020

Final

65

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

Figure 4-12: Areas of Biodiversity Significance in Pohnpei

4.3

Socio-Economic Environment

4.3.1

EconomyEconomic activity consists largely of subsistence farming and fishing and government,
which employs two-thirds of the adult working population and receives funding largely 58% in 2013 – from Compact of Free Association assistance provided by the US. The
potential for tourism is limited by isolation, lack of adequate facilities, and limited internal
air and water transportation. Pohnpei (and Yap) have been the fastest growing with GDP
growth averaging 2% per annum in the FY1987-FY2003 period (FSM Strategic
Development Plan 2003). In the early period FY1987-FY1995 of the Compact growth wasstrong in Pohnpei which experienced rates of growth of 5.4. The private sector expanded
vigorously in both states attaining nearly 9.0% and public sector activity in Pohnpei
expanded by 2.3%.

4.3.2

Land Tenure & Access
Ownership of land and aquatic areas varies between States. In Pohnpei, land is bothprivately and State owned, while aquatic areas are managed by the State as public trusts.
With the establishment of a system of chieftainship, all land in a given chiefdom
theoretically came under the jurisdiction of the paramount chief. Individuals occupied small
farmsteads as tenants. State's Legislature amended its laws in September 2018 primarily
due to land issues and traditional land owner disputes.

December 2020

Final

66

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

The Constitution requires the Government of Pohnpei to protect the customs and traditions ofPohnpei and allows statutes to be enacted to uphold custom. However, in the event that astatute is challenged as being in violation of other Constitutional rights “it shall be upheld upon
the Pohnpei Supreme Court’s determination that the statute has reasonably protected an
existing, regularly practiced custom or tradition.”
Article XII, § 1 states that “no lease of land, except from the Government or as provided in
Section 4 of this Article, may exceed twenty-five years.” The right for option to renew andother protections shall be provided by statute
Article XII, § 2. limits ownership of land to a specified class of individuals. The Section statesthat “the acquisition of permanent interest in real property shall be restricted to Ponapean
citizens”.
Article XII, § 3 prohibits any agreement that “grants the user of land the unilateral authority
to continue use for an indefinite term.”
Article XII, § 5 prohibits the sale of land “except as authorized by statue.

4.3.3

Demographics
Geographical isolation and poorly developed infrastructure are major impediments to
FSM’s long-term growth. Over the years, agriculture’s socio-cultural role as a safety net
for the disadvantaged has greatly diminished. Inequality of income and the incidence offamilies with incomes below the poverty line are among the highest in the Pacific region.
Poverty is a concern and FSM has, in general, made only limited progress towards
achieving the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) by 2015.

4.3.4

Gender, GBV and Human Trafficking
The Gender Development Office has progressed implementation of the Pohnpei Domestic
Issues Act 2017 and helped to establish the Pohnpei Domestic Violence Act Taskforce. In
2018, the Taskforce committed to implementing the protection order sections in the Act
with the Adviser supporting the Pohnpei State Women’s Interest Officer to submit arecommendation to the Governor – a significant step. The Pohnpei Police Domestic
Violence Unit was formed following training provided by the Department of Health andSocial Affairs Family Protection Adviser.
Each of Micronesia’s four states has its own laws criminalizing trafficking offenses
however, Pohnpei did not explicitly prohibit adult sex trafficking. Cases prosecuted at thestate level may be heard subsequently at the national level, under national anti-trafficking
law, depending on which court hears a case. In Pohnpei discourse on trafficking has
mainly related to the resident fishing fleet. Incidences of prostitution (employment in barsand ‘houses’) and sexual exploitation (of underage women/girls) have been recorded in
the past, however, there is a need to distinguish between the two. General opinion is thatthe sex-related activities are prevalent, however, this is something that is not reported andnot discussed (ESIA 2017).
Findings from the report assessing gaps in EVAW services (FSM 2018) are being used tobetter assist women and children to access services relating to domestic violence including
work progressing the reopening of the Pohnpei safe house.

4.3.5

Education
The FSM is eligible for selected US Federal Education Programs that contribute asignificant amount to the overall education budget. FSM’s only Institute of Higher

December 2020

Final

67

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

Education (IHE) is the College of Micronesia-FSM (COM-FSM) located in Pohnpei. The
FSM Education system is composed of the State and National education. The FSM
National education provides coordination for development of standards and assessment,
reports on the status of education, provides technical assistance, coordinates externalfunding aid for education, and is responsible to provide support for the post-secondary
development of the Nation. Instruction is the responsibility of the State Departments of
Education (FSM 2015).

4.3.6

Health
FSM health services are provided at the state level. Health services provide cost-free
primary care for pregnant women and infants including basic and routine high-risk
antenatal care, delivery, postnatal care, postpartum family planning counselling andcontraceptives; and preventive and primary care for children and children with special
needs.
The National Health Progress Report (2008–2011) covers annual monitoring of 14 national
health indicators on health status, availability of essential drugs, health care utilization,
quality assurance and functionality of biomedical equipment (UNICEF, 2013). Information
available suggest that FSM generally, and Pohnpei State individually, have made some
progress in addressing violence against women and children but generally lack quality
essential services to eliminate violence against women and girls. This is especially thecase for women and children with disabilities, those living in rural and remote areas andthose made vulnerable by other circumstances e.g., poverty. Pohnpei State now has a
Domestic Violence Act and an implementation plan is being drafted.

4.3.7

Fisheries and other industries
The mainstays of the FSM economy and in Pohnpei are subsistence farming and fishing.
There is limited tourism due to lack of access and facilities, although it has increased inrecent years with the opening of a number of small hotels. Geographic isolation and poorly
developed infrastructure are major impediments to FSM’s economic growth and poverty isamong the highest in the Pacific region. FSM has, in general, made only limited progress
towards achieving the Millennium Development Goals by 2015.

4.3.8

Cultural Values
The traditional culture of Pohnpei, which involves strong land and resource management
components, is very much alive today and is still in large a strong influence on Pohnpeians'
lifestyle. The traditional system still exists within activities observed throughout the year.
Despite Pohnpei being the melting pot of the FSM, where people of various races and fromislands throughout FSM reside, the Pohnpei culture is very much practiced and respectedby the island residents.

4.3.9

Infrastructure
A total of 29 bridges and causeways have been identified around Pohnpei. The locationof these key infrastructural assets is shown in Figure 4-13.

December 2020

Final

68

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

Figure 4-13: Location of bridges and causeways in Pohnpei

Piped water systems from Nanpil River and wells serve populations of 2,500 in Kolonia
and Palikir (see Table 2-16). The Kolonia Central Sewerage System, which consists ofabout 12 miles of sewers, a total of 7 lift stations and a package sewage treatment plantwith a capacity of about a 0.8 million gallons a day. The system has about 1,200
connections. Treated sewage is discharged into the Sokehs harbor through a 12-inch
diameter pipeline. The location of the key wastewater network assets are shown in Figure
4-14 and Figure 4-15 and the potable water network is shown in Figure 4-16.

December 2020

Final

69

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

Figure 4-14: Location of wastewater assets in Pohnpei

Figure 4-15: Location of sewer lines in Pohnpei
December 2020

Final

70

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

Figure 4-16: Location of potable water lines in Pohnpei

QuarryPohnpei has 45 coral sand dredge sites (33 inactive and 12 active) and two rock quarries(Figure 4-17). They all have permits from EPA and are mainly for road maintenance andconstruction. One of the hard rock quarries is located at Ipwal Sokes and is owned andoperated by a company called APSCO (SOPAC 2005) (Figure 4-18).

Figure 4-17: Map showing coastal coral ‘quarries’
December 2020

Final

71

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

Figure 4-18: Images of quarry sites on Pohnpei
Solid Waste Management

The only solid waste facility on Pohnpei is the dumpsite on Dekethik Island on the eastside of the causeway at its northern end (Johnston 2011). The facility has an operations
shed, a battery recovery shed, and separated areas for aluminium can compaction andstorage and fuel drum sludge product extraction and storage. The larger portion of the area
is used for trash intended for disposal, without recovery efforts. A private company,
Pohnpei Waste Management Services (PWMS) provides most trash collection services,
although the Kolonia Municipal Government provides collection services for about half theresidents and commercial establishments in the town. Further investigation is required todetermine whether the solid waste facility has the ability to dispose of any waste roadingmaterial generated from the PRIME Project.

4.4

Primary Data Collection
A range of assets located in the road corridor along the PRIME Road have been identified
based on fieldwork undertaken. A map showing the location of these assets (which
includes as private fences/walls and gardens, fruit trees, buildings, bridges/culverts, etc.)
and other key resources are provided in Figure 4-19. Appendix B presents further detailon this map. Figure 4-20 presents examples of these assets. This information has beenused to identify E&S sensitivities for the ESMF.

December 2020

Final

72

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

Figure 4-19: Assets within road corridor and location of sensitive social receptors - Pohnpei

December 2020

Final

73

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

Figure 4-20: Images showing examples of assets located in close proximity to the road on Pohnpei
including private residences and churches (top left & right), telecoms tower and water pipeline (bottom
left & right).

December 2020

Final

74

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

5.

Chuuk

5.1

Physical Environment

5.1.1

ClimateTable 5-1 presents key climate data for Chuuk (from https://en.climate-data.org/). The key
point to note is the abundant rainfall Chuuk receives annually (352.6 cm).
Table 5-1: Key climate statistics for Chuuk including temperature (°C) and rainfall (mm)Parameter

Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May

Jun

Jul

Aug

Sept

Oct

Nov

Dec

Avg. Temperature

27.4

27.3

27.4

27.6

27.6

27.6

27.4

27.2

27.4

27.4

27.5

27.6

Min. Temperature

24.9

24.8

24.8

24.9

24.7

24.6

24.2

24

24.1

24.2

24.5

24.9

Max. Temperature

29.9

29.9

30.1

30.4

30.6

30.6

30.6

30.5

30.7

30.7

30.6

30.3

Rainfall (mm)

228

163

229

295

353

302

361

349

310

355

284

297

5.1.2

Topography, Geology, Soils & Hydrology
Chuuk State comprises a main atoll at Chuuk Lagoon, plus four outer island atoll groups:
the Mortlocks (with 11 inhabited atolls or islets) and Oksorod (comprising three groups);
Pattiw (having 4 inhabited atolls/ islets); Namonuito (5 inhabited atolls/ islets); and the Halls(4 inhabited atolls/islets). Total land area for all of Chuuk State is 49 km2.
The islands of Chuuk Lagoon are surrounded by a roughly circular barrier reef about 64
km in diameter. There are 19 high volcanic islands within the lagoon, and numerous lowlying coral islets or motu along the barrier reef. Weno (also known as Moen), the mostpopulous of the islands, is the center of government and commerce.
Weno island is of volcanic origin consisting of olivine-basalt with minor andesite, with steep
rugged uplands surrounded by coastal lowlands. The highest point on Weno, Mt. Tonoken,
is a distinctive peak that rises some 369 m (about 1,000 feet) above sea level.
In terms of soil types, the five key map units can be grouped into two general landscapesfor broad interpretative purposes (Laird 1980).
1.

2.

December 2020

Coastal mangrove swamps. Located on coastal strands and bottom lands andcomprise 27% of this survey area and include:•

Chla Insak Variant. Shallow and very deep, very poorly drained, level andnearly level soils in coastal mangrove swamps along the shoreline of manyislands which are flooded daily with seawater at high tide. Slope is 0 to 2%.

•

Dublon-Typlc Troporthents (urban land). Very deep, somewhat poorly
drained, level and nearly level soils, and urban land on coastal strands along
the shoreline of many islands. Slope is 0 to 2%. Elevation is sea level to 2m.

•

Ngerungor. Very deep, very poorly drained, level and nearly level soils onbottom lands on the coastal plains of some islands making up about 6% of
the survey area. Slope is 0 to 1%.

Soils on uplands. The soils in this group are nearly level to extremely steep andcomprise about 73% of this survey area. Elevation is 6 to 300 meters. The soils inthis group are shallow, moderately deep, and very deep and are well drained. They
formed in residuum and colluvium derived dominantly from basic igneous rock andinclude:Final

75

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report•

Tolonler-Dolen. Very deep, well drained, sloping to extremely steep soils; onuplands. This map unit is in the interior of all islands in the survey area. Slopeis 6 to 75%. The vegetation on this unit is mainly mixed forest. Elevation is
6 to 300 meters. This unit makes up about 65% of the survey area. It is
about 60% Tolonier soils and 25% Dolen soils.

•

Rocke outcrop Wahrekdam (variant Wahrekdam). Rock outcrop, and shallow
and moderately deep, well drained, nearly level to moderately sloping soils;
on uplands. This map unit is in the interior of many islands in the survey
area. It is mainly on ridgetops. Slope is 2 to 8%. The vegetation on this unit
is mainly mixed forest. Elevation is 10 to 300 meters. This unit makes up
about 8% of the survey area.

Chuuk is drained by a number of streams most of them short with small drainage areas.
The compacted volcanic material results in a shallow (unconfined) ground water lens.
Household water use within Weno is derived from either captured rainwater (typicallythrough a roof-gutter system that feeds a large storage tank) or groundwater. Raincatchment water is preferred for most domestic purposes such as drinking and cooking,whereas groundwater, typically accessed through hand-dug wells lined with concrete orrocks, is used for bathing and washing clothes.

5.1.3

Coastal Erosion Hazards
Figure 5-1 presents an image showing areas of concern in relation to coastal stability in
Chuuk based on ArcGIS data provided by Chuuk EPA. Key areas considered to be of highcoastal instability are primarily located along the northern (including Pou Bay) and south –eastern coastlines.

Figure 5-1: Coastal stability areas in Chuuk
December 2020

Final

76

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

5.2

Ecology

5.2.1

Terrestrial Ecology - Flora
Vegetation Types
Table 2-2 presents a summary of general vegetation types found in Chuuk. Key habitat
sensitive to development disturbance as a proportion of total area ranges includes
mangrove (7%), upland forest (16.2%) and marsh (5.6%) (from FSM 2001).
Plant Species
A total of 470 species of ferns and flowering plants have been described in Chuuk.
Approximately 298 species are native including about 45 species of ferns, 95 monocot
species and 158 dicot species (Falanruw 2002) (Table 2-3).
A total of 172 species of plants have been introduced to Chuuk (Zirkus 2001). Some ofthese introduced species have become invasive pests (Table 2-4) and, of the key 11
invasive weed species in FSM, 8 are present in Chuuk including the widespread Siam weed
Chromolaena odorata, Merremia peltata and Wedelia trilobata (FSM 2002).

5.2.2

Terrestrial Ecology - Fauna
A range of avian, mammalian, reptilian species are present in Chuuk including 73 speciesof bird (including 17 native species, 21 resident and non-resident seabirds, 33 migratory
shorebirds, and 2 introduced bird species) (Table 2-5). A number of mammals (includingbats), reptiles (skinks, geckos, snakes), amphibians and freshwater fish are also likely to bepresent.

5.2.3

Coastal Marine Ecology
Recently collected data describing coastal marine habitats around Chuuk is currently being
processed by Chuuk EPA and wasn’t available at the time of wiring of this report. A review
of existing information indicates that a total of 4 species were identified in a 2004 survey(see www.seagrasswatch.org).

5.2.4

Conservation Areas
Figure 5-2 presents designated protected / managed areas in Chuuk.

December 2020

Final

77

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

Figure 5-2: Chuuk conservation areas (FSM 2010)

A total of 50 Areas of Biodiversity Significance (ABS) have been identified for Chuuk
including terrestrial (9), marine (10), coastal marine (20) and coastal freshwater sites (11)(Table 2-8). The key ABS sites on Weno are Pou Bay and the North Weno Marine ABS
as shown in Figure 5-2.

5.3

Socio-Economic Environment

5.3.1

EconomyIn 2003 Chuuk’s GDP was $83 million (Arnold 2016). Chuuk then experienced a recession
for the next 5 years following inception of COFA II. By 2008, Chuuk’s GDP was $67 million
the lowest since the 1980s due to a decline in public sector spending and private sector
activities. After 2008, Chuuk State saw a rise in GDP due to the improvement of the sectors
grants allocations. Chuuk State had adopted and implemented the Long Term Fiscal
Framework requirements which allowed full utilization of funding sources from Compact II.
By 2010, Chuuk had experienced 3% GDP growth and there was an increase in spending
from both public and private sectors. Chuuk’s economy grew at 1% and it experienced an
expansion in the public sector by 4.4% and numbers of hours worked by civil servants
increased.
In subsequent years Chuuk has experienced very little growth. Analysts have forecasted
the decrease in compact funding ($1.7 million) will hinder government spending with little
private sector growth.

5.3.2

Land Tenure & Access
In Chuuk, most land and aquatic areas are privately owned and acquired throughinheritance, gift or, recently, by purchase. In early times, land was controlled by matrilineal
descent groups or clans that resided in specific locales.
Chuuk State has taken action by passing leasehold mortgage law but has not yet
promulgated regulations to implement the law. The extent to which land can be leveraged
and mortgaged is important for increasing productive activity and incomes. Land assetsthat become locked outside the modern market economy cannot be leverage or redeployedfor production. The overall effect is that many landowners are asset rich and income poor.

December 2020

Final

78

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

Article IV, § 4 provides recognition for traditional rights over reefs, tidelands, and othersubmerged lands, including their water columns, and successors rights thereto. It also
authorizes the State legislature to regulate their “reasonable use.” This Section strengthens
customary land use practices in marine areas and is unusual in that it does not reference
dry land areas. Sections 1 and 2 of this Article give authority to Chuukese custom andtradition as well as to the traditional leadership.
There are a number of provisions of the Chuuk State Constitution that indirectly affect land
tenure. Most of these references bolster customary land tenure practices. In various ways,
these references also influence the land tenure on Chuuk by limiting land use activities
identified as environmentally harmful.
Article IV, §§ 1–2 strongly supports traditional and customary rights to the extent that eventhe bill of rights (Article III) may be compromised for the protection of Chuukese custom andtradition where a compelling social purpose is evidenced.
Article VII, § 14 supports the traditional culture of Chuuk requiring court decisions to beconsistent with the Constitution, local traditions and customs, and the social and geographicalconfiguration of the State.

5.3.3

Governance
Chuuk State is the only state in the FSM that has a bicameral legislature (House of Senate& Representative). There are 10 Senate members, two of whom represent a region - five
regions all together. The House of Representatives aka ‘House’ has 28 members. They areelected by their respective districts. There are 13 districts with number of representatives
depends on population size. All together there are 28 members.
Chuuk State has 40 municipalities with their own municipal government. Each municipality
has an elected mayor act as the executive side. Legislative side is with the municipal
council. Each habitable island in Chuuk has a Traditional Leader known as “Soupun andor Makal’ who comes from a clan that rules the island. These Soupun and or Makal areequivalent to Chief of an island. Chuuk State has a council of traditional leaders composedof 42 active members. This council is a strong hold of customs and traditions therefore are
the decision makers of such matters

5.3.4

Demographics
Chuuk State, population 53,106, also includes several additional sparsely populated outerisland groups, including the Mortlock Islands to the southeast, the Hall Islands (Pafeng) to
the north, Namonuito Atoll to the northwest, and the Pattiw Region to west The populationof Chuuk State is (approx. 47% of FSM’s total population. The main population centre of
Chuuk State is the Chuuk Lagoon which has a population of 36,158 and includes FSM’slargest city, Weno which has 12,000 people (2010 Census). Chuuk has a population
density of 993 per square mile (383 per square kilometre), which is the highest density
compared to other states. Chuuk also has a younger population on average than the other
FSM states.
The Pattiw Region is of particular interest in that it contains some of the most traditionalislands in the Pacific which are culturally related to the outer islands of Yap. Most of theroads and transportation systems are poor or in disrepair. Potholes in the coastal road of
the business district of Chuuk are often filled with either saltwater at high tide or runoff thatcannot drain due to the low elevation. Drinking water is un-potable (FSM 2017). A largepart of Chuuk State still rely heavily on subsistence base living. Food grown on land andDecember 2020

Final

79

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Reportin the ocean are still big part of their source of food. Kon, a pounded breadfruit able to beeaten for a week long is a popular source of starch for many Chuukese.

5.3.5

Gender, GBV and Trafficking
The Chuuk Women’s Council is the only non-government organisation in FSM providing
GBV counselling services. Findings from the report assessing gaps in EVAW services(FSM 2018) are being used to better assist women and children to access services relating
to domestic violence. This includes the launch of the Chuuk Women’s Council GBV
counselling service.
Each of Micronesia’s four states have its own laws that criminalize trafficking offenses
however Chuuk State did not explicitly prohibit adult sex trafficking. Cases prosecuted at
the state level may also be heard at the national level, under national anti-trafficking law,depending on which court hears a case. Each of the four states’ anti-trafficking task forces
are comprised of members of state and national law enforcement, the legal community,
medical and mental health professionals, immigration officials, and women’s
empowerment and faith-based groups; only Chuuk (and Pohnpei’s) task force were active
during the reporting period.

5.3.6

Education
State governments in FSM have responsibility for education, with the majority of funds
coming from Compact of Free Association sources. All children in FSM are required by law
to attend school through to eighth grade, and many continue to college after graduating highschool. As a result, FSM has a high literacy rate. All students learn English as it is theofficial language of FSM. The National Infrastructure Development Plan earmarked
USD$135.4 million for education infrastructure spending across the 20 years between 2004
and 2023.
The Plan describes issues relating to education infrastructure including poor maintenance(including failure of water and power supplies); a number of schools in a highly deteriorated
state; a shortage of supplies includes furniture, equipment, books and tools; a lack ofdiverse facilities (such as music rooms, auditoriums, vocational training facilities);
inadequately qualified teachers; inappropriate school curricula; and a lack of vocational
training. Grants and US education programs are used to support many FSM students toattend the College of Micronesia (COM), the University of Guam and US colleges.

5.3.7

HealthThe primary health challenges affecting FSM include obesity induced illness and increasing
substance abuse amongst youth. FSM has been declared as a Public Health Emergency
for Non-Communicable Diseases (70% of all deaths are due to NCDs). Most of the divisionsof the Chuuk Department of Health share some common challenges. The Chuuk State
Department of Health Services (CSDHS) 6 divisions: Hospital & Management, Nursing,
Dispensary, Public Health, Dentistry and Environmental Health and Sanitation (Chuuk
Strategic Development Plan.

5.3.8

Infrastructure
Water Supply
The Chuuk Public Utility Corporation (CPUC) operates the public water supply on Weno
Island, serving 378 residential customers (around 19% of total households) and 101

December 2020

Final

80

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Reportcommercial and government customers (IEE 2020). Figure 5-3 presents a map showing
the water supply network.
Sewerage Network
The Weno sewerage network, the only centralized sewer system in Chuuk is located on
the north and north-western side of Weno Island and was commissioned in 1973. Figure
5-4 presents a schematic of the sewerage network.

Figure 5-3: Extent of CPUC Water Supply Network (from IEE 2020)

December 2020

Final

81

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

Figure 5-4: Schematic Layout of Sewerage System (from IEE 2020)

The sewerage network is operated by CPUC with 384 residential households and 106
commercial and government customers. Sewage is treated at the Weno wastewater
treatment plant (WWTP) which is located next to the Weno airport.
Beyond the sewerage network service area, septic tanks and pit toilets are widely used,particularly among poor communities. Septic tank and pit toilets discharge sewage
randomly into shallow aquifers and contaminate Weno’s groundwater sources.
QuarryThere are three basalt quarries located on Weno, Chuuk, two of which have not been in
operation since the 90s. One of the sites has equipment and is still in operation but output
is extremely limited.
There is also a basalt Quarry on Tonoas, Chuuk. Equipment and site are ready but notyet operational. Output Capacity is still unknown.
There are also three coral sand quarries on Weno, Chuuk. All sites are operational but
capacity is limited. Equipment consists of excavators, loaders and dump trucks only.
It is considered that none of these sites could be considered to be used for any major
project unless the Contractor is able to take over operations.
Solid Waste Management
Solid waste facilities on Weno consist of the Fanipat dumpsite located on the southwest
coast (Johnston 2011). The Department of Public Works has the responsibility of solid
waste management. There are also several unofficial dumpsites along Weno roads. Trashcollection is scheduled three times a week, but is reportedly not reliably operated.

December 2020

Final

82

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

Further investigation is required to determine whether the solid waste facility has the ability
to dispose of any waste roading material generated from the PRIME Project.

5.4

Primary Data Collection
A range of assets located in the road corridor along the PRIME Road have been identified
based on fieldwork undertaken. A map showing the location of these assets (which
includes as private fences/walls and gardens, fruit trees, buildings, bridges/culverts, etc.)
and other key resources are provided in Figure 5-5. Appendix B presents further detail on
this map. Figure 5-6 presents examples of these assets. This information has been used
to identify E&S sensitivities for the ESMF.

December 2020

Final

83

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

Figure 5-5: Assets within road corridor and location of sensitive social receptors - Chuuk

December 2020

Final

84

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

Figure 5-6: Images of Chuuk showing examples of assets identified during the road corridor on Chuukinspection including walls and private fences (top and middle left and right), pig pen (bottom left) andpower poles (bottom right).

December 2020

Final

85

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

6.

Yap

6.1

Physical Environment

6.1.1

Climatepresents key climate data for Yap (from https://en.climate-data.org/). The key point to noteis the abundant rainfall Yap receives annually (282.9 cm).
Table 6-1: Key climate statistics for Chuuk including temperature (°C) and rainfall (mm)Parameter

Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May

Jun

Jul

Aug

Sept

Oct

Nov

Dec

Avg. Temperature

26.8

26.9

27.1

27.5

27.5

27.4

27

27.1

27.3

27.3

27.2

27

Min. Temperature

23.6

23.7

23.8

24.1

24.1

23.9

23.6

23.7

23.8

23.7

23.8

23.8

Max. Temperature

30

30.1

30.5

31

31

30.9

30.5

30.6

30.8

30.9

30.7

30.3

Rainfall (mm)

201

146

146

149

232

313

360

371

330

319

238

24

6.1.2

Geology, Topography, Soils & Hydrology
The Yap Islands comprise an island arc system on the eastern convergent margin ofPhilippine Plate. They are composed of continental crust and consist of two distinct
sequences: ancient weathered volcanic rock and weathered metamorphic schists,
accompanied by coral sand and mangrove mud. The islands are surrounded by a broad
fringing barrier reef. Yap itself has a low undulating topography with a maximum elevationof 178 m at Mount Taabiywol in Fanif municipality.
There are four main soil types on the Yap Islands (FSM 2010) that have been derived fromthe basement rocks (Figure 6-1) as follows:•

Yap – ‘Very deep, well drained, level to moderately steep soils; on dissected volcanic
plateaus’ This soil type is present throughout the islands of Yap and Gagil-Tamilwhere it has been derived from volcanic rock. The surface soils are loamy andsubsoils consist of clay.

•

Gagil - ‘Very deep, well drained, nearly level to steep soils; on hills and plateau’.
This soil type is restricted to the islands of Gagil-Tamil and Yap. On Gagil-Tamil it
is present throughout the island whereas it is confined to a small area on southern
Yap. Gagil soil occurs on rounded hills that are actively eroding in drainage lines onrounded hills and on plateau. Similar to Yap soils this soil type is derived fromvolcanic rock. The surface soils are loamy and subsoils are clay.

•

Rumung-Weloy – ‘Shallow and moderately deep, well drained, nearly level to very
steep soils; on hills and mountains’. This soil type occurs on the hills and mountainsof the islands of Yap and Rumung. These soils are shallow and well drained and areformed from the underlying schist. The surface is gravelly (from the presence of ironcoated schist gravel) and loamy and the subsoil is very gravelly and clayey. Weloy
soils also occur on hills and mountains and are similar to Rumung soils in that they
are derived from the underlying schist but differ in that they are deeper but are still
gravelly and loamy.

•

Gitam – ‘Moderately deep, somewhat poorly drained, level to strongly sloping soils;
on toe slopes and upland plains’. This soil type is present on the islands of Yap,
Maap, Gagil-Tamil and Rumung. These moderately deep soils have formed from theunderlying schist. The surface is covered with gravel. The surface layer is gravelly
and loamy over clayey subsoils.

December 2020

Final

86

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

Areas of depositional soils are also present including beach deposits fringing the islands
and alluvium, mangrove peats, freshwater swamp and marsh deposits. The sandy beachdeposits which occur adjacent to coastal beaches have formed from wind and water
deposited coral sand.
Alluvium derived soils occur in valley bottoms and floodplains and are comprised ofweathered and eroded material from volcanic rock and schist which has formed soils
ranging from loams with gravels to clays. Freshwater marshes and swamps have formedon low lying poorly drained areas of alluvium. Most agricultural activity is undertaken on
the alluvium soils in valley bottoms and floodplains.
Mangrove peats which have formed in the intertidal zone adjacent to the shoreline arepresent on Yap, Maap and Gagil-Tamil. The mangrove peats are saline, very deep andpoorly drained and are predominantly derived from mangrove roots and litter.

Figure 6-1: Soil types (left) and watersheds & wetlands (right) of Yap (IEE 2019)

6.1.3

Hydrology
Surface water
The primary freshwater source on Yap proper is surface water (Figure 6-1). There are no
perennial streams on Yap where most streams will be dry during part of the dry season,
ranging from a few days to several months. The streams go dry because they have small
drainage areas and the water retention of the soil and rock of their watershed is low.
Mukong Stream and Tomil-Gagil streams are a few of the streams that do not dry up during
periods of low rainfall. A large water reservoir on Yap proper was constructed to capture
surface water in the stream drainage to the ocean.
The geological formation of Gagil-Tamil allows greater percolation of water to groundwater,and subsequent release to streams during long periods of dry weather. In addition, thedrainage area of Mukong Stream is much larger than any stream on Yap proper.

December 2020

Final

87

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

Groundwater
A proportion of the surface water percolates into the soils recharging groundwater which
eventually escapes as small springs or seeps directly into the ocean. However, given the
bedrock on Yap is metamorphic and volcanic, it yields little groundwater for use.

6.2

Ecology

6.2.1

Terrestrial Flora
Vegetation / Habitat Types
Figure 6-2 presents a vegetation map for Yap and Table 6-2 estimated coverage of key
vegetation / habitat types. The major land class/habitat types are:•Non-forest (28%) including grasslands, marshes, savanna grasslands, cropland,degraded sites and areas developed for urban use.

•

Agroforest (26%) which includes areas under cultivation for food crops, fruit, wood,and other products. The dominant species on these managed lands include
coconut palm, breadfruit, betel nut, papaya, banana, cassava, two species of taro,
and a variety of medicinal and ornamental species (Mueller-Dombois & Fosberg
1998).

•

Secondary vegetation (6%) such as vines, shrubs, and small trees on recently
disturbed areas.

The vegetation of Yap has been greatly modified; other than mangroves, little native forest
remains (Figure 6-3). Several factors have contributed to disturbance to the native
vegetation including pressure on natural resources to produce food, Japanese agricultural
practices, droughts, and repeated burning. A combination of these factors are thought tohave contributed to the destruction of the native vegetation and the development or
expansion of savanna areas of degraded soils (Falanruw et al 1987).
Nothing is known of the original vegetation of the area and very little is known about thecharacter of the vegetation prior to European contact (Zirkus 2001). Yap is thought to havebeen mostly covered with broadleaf deciduous forests in the past.
Table 6-2: General vegetation / habitat types on Yap

December 2020

Final

88

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

Plant Species
Table 6-3 presents approximate numbers of native and introduced flora species in Yap. Of
the 1,239 species of ferns and flowering plants found in FSM, approximately 618 occur in
Yap including 376 native species (45 ferns, 144 monocots, and 187 dicots). Of the 457
species of plants introduced to FSM, a total of 242 species are found in Yap.

Figure 6-2: Vegetation map of Yap Islands (FSM 2010)
Table 6-3: Approximate number (and % of total) of native and introduced flora species in Yap

December 2020

Final

89

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

Figure 6-3: Areas of native forest including mangroves (in blue) and terrestrial forests including
disturbed forests (left) and areas of relatively intact native forest (right) (from FSM 2010).

Rare, regionally significant or protected flora species.
There are four threated (one ‘Endangered’ and three ‘Vulnerable’) and one “NearThreatened’ (NT) floral species in Yap (see Table 6-4) (IUCN 2018). Of these species,
one species (NT) is not endemic to Yap but instead a cultivar from the islands of Pohnpei
and Chuuk (the Ivory nut palm Metroxylon amicarum).
All of the threatened species are trees with two (thorrot Intsia bijuga and lach Pterocarpus
indicus) found in lowland forest, one (Pericopsis mooniana) from coastal forest and one(faltir Cycas micronesica) from closed forest.
Of the 364 vascular plant species considered endemic to Micronesia (Costion & Lorence2012). Yap has nine endemic plant species, another two also found in either Chuuk orPohnpei, with a further 16 endemic species found across the Western Carolines (Palau,
Yap) (see Table 6-5). In addition, 17 endemic species are found across the Carolines,
including Yap and there is a boxlike shrub, Myrtella bennigseniana, also endemic to thesavanna environments of Yap and Guam (Zirkus, S. 2001 & USFS 2010).

6.2.2

Terrestrial Fauna
Rare, regionally significant or protected fauna species
Yap contains four endemic bird species: the Yap cicadabird (Coracina tenuirostris nesiotis)
which may be elevated to a separate species and is considered to be ‘Endangered’, andthree ‘Near Threatened’ species, the Yap monarch (Monarcha godeffroyi) and two whiteeyes (Yap Olive White-eye Zosterops oleagineus) and Yap Plain White-eye Zosterops
hypolais) (Table 6-6) (IUCN 2018).

December 2020

Final

90

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

Table 6-4: Threatened or near threated flora species of Yap

Table 6-5: Endemic plant species of Yap

Other birds endemic to FSM are also present in Yap including the Caroline Reed-warbler,
Acrocephalus syrinx and the Caroline Swiftlet Aerodramus inquietus.

December 2020

Final

91

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

Table 6-6: Restricted-range and threatened birds of Yap (BirdLife International 2018, IUCN 2018)

Table 6-7: Restricted-range and threatened birds of Yap (cont.)

December 2020

Final

92

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

In addition, there are four additional, restricted-range bird species including the ‘CriticallyEndangered’ migratory species, Beck's petrel Pseudobulweria becki, White-throatedground-dove Alopecoenas xanthonurus (‘Near Threatened’), the Micronesian starling
Aplonis opaca and Micronesian myzomela rubratra, both of which are of ‘Least Concern’.
Yap may also be visited by 21 IUCN listed migratory bird species including one ‘CriticallyEndangered’ species, two ‘Endangered’, six ‘Vulnerable’ and 12 ‘Near Threatened’
species.
A major threat to native bird species is loss of habitat, due to human-set fires during thedry season. In addition all endemic and native bird species on the Yap Islands are at risk
from introduced predators, the most notorious being the brown tree snake Boiga irregularis,
which is responsible for many extinctions on Guam. At present the snake is not known in
Yap. The tree sparrow Passer montanus, which was introduced in late 1970s from Eurasia,
may also pose a threat as it is known to carry exotic diseases.
Two endemic species of flying foxes of the genus Pteropus occur in Yap state; the Yap
flying fox Pteropus pelewensis ssp. Yapensis (‘Vulnerable’) which is endemic to the four
adjacent small main islands of Yap, and Marianas flying fox Pteropus mariannus(‘Endangered’) which is endemic to the northern Mariana Islands, Guam and Ulithi. The
sub species, Ulithi fruit bat Pteropus mariannus ulthiensis is endemic to Ulithi Island (Table
6-8).
Three threatened reptiles are known to occur in Yap: two migratory marine turtle species
that nest on beaches and the Micronesia saw tailed gecko Perochirus ateles which isendemic to the Marianas Islands and FSM are ‘Vulnerable’ (Table 6-9). In addition, there
is one restricted range species thought to occur on Ulithi Atoll, in Yap State, the Giantmicronesian gecko Perochirus scutellatus.

December 2020

Final

93

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

Table 6-8: Threatened mammals of Yap (IUCN 2018)

Table 6-9: Restricted-range and threatened reptiles of Yap (IUCN 2018)

There is one threatened freshwater fish species that may occur in Yap, the Japanese eel(Anguilla japonica; ‘Endangered’) which has previously been recorded as a vagrant in FSM(Table 6-10). No threatened invertebrate species listed on the IUCN Red List are known
to occur in Yap.
Table 6-10: Threatened fishes of Yap (Pippard 2012)

6.2.3

Conservation Areas
There are 8 protected marine areas in Yap (Figure 6-4). There are currently no legally
protected terrestrial areas and all land is privately owned. The use of natural resources
has been regulated by customary management but, as populations grow, this is becoming
more problematic.
Of the 130 Areas of Biodiversity Significance (ABS) identified in FSM, a total of 32 arelocated in Yap State (YSESC 2018) including five terrestrial, six marine and 21 coastal
marine ecosystems. Figure 6-5 shows areas of biological significance in Yap (identified in2002) and known areas of importance i.e. dive, cultural heritage or fruit bat/flying fox sites.

December 2020

Final

94

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

Figure 6-4: Protected areas in Yap Island (Weeks 2016)

Figure 6-5: Areas of biodiversity significance in Yap (TNC 2002)
December 2020

Final

95

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

6.3

Socio-Economic Environment

6.3.1

EconomyThe FSM economy, and the Yap State economy, is firmly dependent on funding from the US,
which provides about 75% of revenue. With one of the most productive tuna fishing grounds
in the world, the ocean is clearly the FSM's most important natural resource.
On smaller islands and atolls, subsistence or artisanal fishing is often the principal livelihood.
But overharvesting, lack of regulation and poor environmental practices, are threatening
inshore and near-shore fishing resources.
The Yap state economy achieved the highest rate of economic growth of the FSM states
during the original Compact period. Growth of the private sector was the most impressive,
achieving an annual average of 5.8% during the 17 years. While the state underwent a
public sector contraction similar to the other states after the second step-down, the private
sector managed to remain buoyant and assisted the state in maintaining positive GDP
growth during the period.
The state achieved the best outcome in the PSRP reform program meeting its ERP targets
and achieving the cost-savings anticipated. These policies have been maintained throughthe end of the original Compact period, and the state has avoided the temptation to utilize
the bump-up funds to temporarily inflate public expenditures. The main weakness in thestate’s performance is a failure to transform investment in public enterprises, which havefailed to produce a profit in all but one fiscal period since commencement of operations in
the early 1990s.
Economic performance during the last 4 years of the Compact were disappointing reflecting
the inability of the private sector to sustain growth, prudential fiscal policies, and poor
results of the state owned purseining company (FSM 2003).

6.3.2

Land Tenure & Access
Almost all land and aquatic areas are owned or managed by individual estates and usage
is subject to traditional control (FSM 2010). With respect to land tenure, the Yap State
Constitution recognizes the authority of traditions and custom, establishment of the Councilsof Traditional Leaders,61 prohibits ownership of land by non-FSM citizens and provides forthe possibility of 50-year leases involving foreign interest if approved by the State Legislature.
Article II, § 11 deals with the issue of eminent domain and compensation for land appropriatedby the government. The Section authorizes the legislature to “provide by general law for thetaking of private property for a public purpose.” The Section requires that such a general law“provide for just compensation, good faith negotiations for lease or purchase and consultation
with appropriate local government prior to the taking, and the manner of taking.”
Article XIII, § 3. This Section requires the title to land to be “acquired only in a mannerconsistent with traditions and customs.”
Article XIII, § 5 provides recognition for “traditional rights and ownership of natural resources
and areas within the marine space of the State, within and beyond 12 miles from island
baselines.” The Section also states that “[n]o action maybe taken to impair these traditionalrights and ownership, except the State Government may provide for the conservation andprotection of natural resources within the marine space of the State within 12 miles from island
baselines.”

December 2020

Final

96

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

Article XIV, § 8 identifies a citizen of the FSM domiciled in Yap as a citizen of Yap State. This
provision also allows for land ownership in Yap by citizens of the FSM. Traditional leadershipis thus accorded a powerful means by which to influence governance in matters of custom.
Thus tradition and customs heavily still influence land access, ownership and use.

6.3.3

Demographics
In 2009 the population was 11,780. Yap is comprised of two regions: Yap Islands (or Yap
Proper) and the Outer Islands. On Yap Island, the population (7,731) is about twice that of
the outer islands (4,006), however the population density is greatest in the Outer Islands(572 people/sq mile) compared with Yap Islands (189). The distribution of Yap’s population
varies considerably between rural (10,537 people) and urban (840) areas, with the
population in rural growing at an average annual rate of 0.52% and declining in urban areas(-3.84%). The greatest population in Yap Islands is located in Rull municipality (2,100)
followed by Tomil (1,231) and Weloy (1,030). Tomil recorded the greatest average annual
growth rate since 2000 (1.85%), followed by Gagil (1.62%). By comparison, Rull only
recorded a 0.39% growth rate and Weloy -1.50%.
In Yap state the average household size (4.9) is smaller than the national average, as is
the average family size (3.7).
In 2010, the median age in FSM was 21.5 years, compared to 25 years in Yap State and26.4 in the Yap Islands. There are 2,311 households in Yap State with 1,680 households
in Yap Islands. Of the Yap Islands households:

6.3.4

(i)

1,330 households (79%) source power from a public utility(ii)

1533 (91%) have access to drinking water via public or community water supply orhousehold tank(iii)

862 (51%) are connected to a sewer or have a septic tank(iv)

1179 (70%) have access to a car, bus/truck or motorbike(v)

1290 (77%) have access to a mobile phone(vi)

301 (18%) have access to a computer, with 179 (11%) having access to the internet.

Gender, GBV and Human Trafficking
In a survey conducted in 2017 on gender and human trafficking, stakeholders in Yap weremainly concerned with the age consent issues and awareness of internet risks for young
people (for their own communities); and with migrant smuggling (of foreigners into Guam).
Communities on the outer islands observed suspect behaviour at land and sea but with nounderstanding of the potential significance of reporting such behavior or of the reporting
process. The episode of a migrant ship landing on Yap shores a few years ago pointed at
the lack of preparedness to deal with such incidents, both in terms of institutional(procedural) preparedness as well as general awareness and logistics (ESIA 2017).

6.3.5

Education
According to the 2010 census in Yap state 102% of 6-13 year olds go to elementary school(indicating students repeating years), 95% of 14- 17 year olds attend high school and 22%
of 18-24 year olds attend college. In addition, 79% of Yapese aged 25 years and over had
completed elementary education; 59% had completed high school level and 30% had

December 2020

Final

97

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Reportattended college or other higher level education institute with approximately 16%
graduating. A further 7% were recorded as never having attended school.

6.3.6

Physical & cultural resources
Yap is known as the most traditional island group in the FSM, maintaining many cultural
practices and heritage sites. There are three key types of traditional material culture andthe associated cultural practices associated with Yap including: Stone fish weirs (aech):Traditional canoes: and stone money. Other items of tangible cultural heritage include
traditional stone platforms or foundations, men’s and community meeting houses, stone
paths, traditional trails and historic sites, and WWII relics.
A number of the buildings, sites, districts, and objects in FSM have been listed on the US
National Register of Historic Places. There are currently 26 listed sites located FSM withfive listed in Yap (Table 6-11).

Table 6-11: Heritage sites listed on the US National Register of Historic Places (USG 2018)

World Heritage nomination
The Yapese Disk Money Regional Sites World Heritage nomination involves two countries,
Palau and FSM. The World Heritage nomination consists of two sites in Yap namely
Mangyol Stone Money Bank and O'Keefe Island. The Mangyol site (located in Makiy
village, Gagil municipality) has been selected as it represents the most traditional stonemoney bank and it is the only site in Yap that has intersecting pathways and dancing
grounds. In addition, two sites have also been included in Palau namely Uet el Daob ma
Uet el Beluu and Chelechol ra Orrak in a Rock Island in Airai State was where the oval /round disk money were quarried by the Yapese before they were transported back to Yap.

6.3.7

Infrastructure
Piped water systems from Gitam Reservoir and wells serve the population of 3,150 inColonia (see Table 2-16). The sewerage system in Colonia, with about 700 connections
provides primary treatment with a capacity of 1,290 m3 per day.
QuarryA disused quarry site (see Figure 6-6) is located on the northern side of the western endof the existing Airport runway in Kanif.

December 2020

Final

98

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

Figure 6-6: Disused quarry site in Yap

Solid Waste Management
The only solid waste management facility is the Fitkabeetinaem landfill located adjacent to
the YSPSC power plant west of Colonia (Johnston 2011). Waste is regularly collectedonce or twice a week from a wide area by Department of Public Works and Transportation
for delivery to the landfill for compaction. It is estimated that about 60% of the waste
generated in Yap is being collected.

6.4

Primary Data Collection
A range of assets located in the road corridor along the PRIME Road have been identified
based on fieldwork undertaken. A map showing the location of these assets (which
includes as private fences/walls and gardens, fruit trees, buildings, bridges/culverts, etc.)
and other key resources are provided in Figure 6-7. Appendix B presents further detail on
this map. Figure 6-8 presents examples of these assets. This information has been used
to identify E&S sensitivities for the ESMF.

December 2020

Final

99

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

Figure 6-7: Assets within road corridor and location of sensitive social receptors - Yap

December 2020

Final

100

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

Figure 6-8: Images showing examples of assets located in close proximity to the road on Yap
including private residences and commercial properties walls (top left & right) fences and walls(middle left & right, bottom left), and public utilities (bottom right)

December 2020

Final

101

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

7.

References
ADB 2004. Priorities of the people. Hardship in the FSM. September 2004.
ADB 2013. FSM Pohnpei Port Development Project, Initial Environmental Examination.
Project No. TA 8143-FSM
ADB 2015. Understanding Land Issues and their Impact on Tourism Development: A
Political Economy Analysis of Pohnpei, Federated States of Micronesia.
ADB 2016. Gender Statistics: The Pacific and Timor-Leste.
ADB 2017. Poverty profile of FSM based on the 2013-14 household and income
expenditure survey.
Allen J. A., Ewel, K. C., & Jack, J. 2001. Patterns of natural and anthropogenic disturbanceof the mangroves on the Pacific Island of Kosrae. Wetlands Ecology andManagement 9: 279–289.
Arnold 2016. Chuuk State Strategic Development Plan. Report prepared for Chuuk State
Economic Development Commission.
Australian Bureau of Meteorology & CSIRO 2014. Climate Variability, Extremes andChange in the Western Tropical Pacific: New Science and Updated Country Reports.
Pacific-Australia Climate Change Science and Adaptation Planning Program
Technical Report, Australian Bureau of Meteorology and Commonwealth Scientificand Industrial Research Organisation, Melbourne, Australia.
BirdLife International 2018. Federated States of Micronesia.
Buden D. W., 2000.
Micronesica 32.

The Reptiles of Pohnpei, Federated States of Micronesia.

Cole, T. G., Ewel, K. C., and Devoe, N. N. 1999. Structure of mangroves trees and forestsof Micronesia. Forest Ecology and Management 117: 95-109.
Costion, C. & Lorence, D. 2012. The Endemic Plants of Micronesia: A Geographical
Checklist and Commentary. Micronesica. 43. 51-100
Division of Statistics, Office of SBOC 2010. Summary Analysis of Key Indicators from the
FSM 2010 Census of Population and Housing.
Division of Statistics, Office of SBOC 2012. 2010 Census of Population and Housing
National and State Basic Tables.
Doran, K. 2004. Private Lands Conservation in the Federated States of Micronesia. A
Report by the Natural Resources Law Center University of Colorado School of Law
Engbring J., F.L. Ramsey & V.J. Wildman 1990. Micronesian forest bird surveys, thefederated states: Pohnpei, Kosrae, Chuuk and Yap. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Department of the Interior, Washington D.C.
Edwards, A. 2002. Marine Biodiversity of the Federated States of Micronesia. FSM
National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan Project.
Edward C.K., Custom and Constitutionalism in the Federated States of Micronesia, 3 AsianPacific Law & Policy J. 259 n. 33 (2002).

December 2020

Final

102

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

EMPAT 1996. Working Paper No. 6: Economic Use of Land in the FSM 2 Economic
Management Policy Advisory Team.
ESIA 2019. Maritime investment Project, Gender and Human Trafficking Report. Report
prepared by ESIA Consultants.
Falanruw, M.V.C. 1985. People pressure: Management of limited resources on Yap. In:
National Parks, Conservation and Development: The Role of Protected Areas in
Sustaining Society, edited by W. McNeely. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian
Institution Press.
Falanruw, M., T. Cole, A. Ambacher, K. McDuffie & J. Maka 1987. Vegetation Survey ofMoen, Dublon, Fefen and Eten, State of Truk, Federated States of Micronesia, USDA
Forest Service, Resource Bull. PSW-20, 6pp+ 3 maps.
Falanruw, M.C., C.D. Whitesell, T.G. Cole, C.D. MacLean, A.H. Ambacher. 1987.
Vegetation survey of Yap, Federated States of Micronesia. USDA, Pacific Southwest
Forest and Range Experiment Station, Resource Bulletin PSW-21, Berkeley, CA.
Fosberg, F.R., M-H. Sachet and R. Oliver 1979. Geographical checklist of the Micronesian
Dicotyledonae. Micronesica 18(1):23-82.
Fosberg, F.R., M-H. Sachet and R. Oliver 1982. Geographical checklist of the Micronesian
Pteridophyta and Gymnospermae. Micronesica 18(1):23-82.
Fosberg, F.R., M-H. Sachet and R. Oliver 1987. Geographical checklist Rong, Park,
Duggan, Hahdyiar and Bauzzurro (2012) Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Assessment
for Pacific Island Countries. 15 WCEE Lisboa 2012.Johnston, M. 2011. Federated
States of Micronesia IWRM Outlook Summary and NWTF Report.
FSM/UN 1995. Groundwater resources assessment and development recommendations
for Kosrae State, FSM. Report prepared under the FSM/UN water resources
assessment and development Project. September 1995.
FSM 2001. Preliminary Report to the Conference of the Parties of the Convention on
Biological Diversity. May 2001.
FSM 2002. The Federated States of Micronesia National Biodiversity Strategy and Action
Plan. 66 pp.
FSM 2003. Strategic Development Plan 2003-2023, Government of FSM
FSM 2010. State-Wide Assessment and Resource Strategy 2010 – 2015 +Government ofFSM.
FSM Department of Transportation, Communications & Infrastructure 2015. Federated
States of Micronesia Infrastructure Development Plan FY2016-FY2025
FSM Department of Health, Education and Social Affairs Division of Education 2015.
EDUCATION FOR ALL 2015 National Plan. Government of FSM
FSM Statistics Division, Department of Resource and Development, 2018. Integrated
Agriculture Census, Federated States of Micronesia.
FSM 2014. Household Income and Expenditure Survey 2013/14 Main Analysis Report.
FSM, 2015. Universal Periodic Review Report, FSM Government.

December 2020

Final

103

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

FSM, 2017. Chuuk Joint State Action Plan for Disaster Risk Management and Climate
Change, Government of FSM.
FSM, 2017. FSM National gender Policy, Gov of FSM.
FSM 2018. Economic and Fiscal Update for FSM. FSM Office of Budget & Economic
Management.
FSM 2018. Eliminating Violence Against Women (EVAW) in Pohnpei and Chuuk, FSM
Final Report. December 2017.
FSM 2018. Infrastructure Development Plan for FSM.2016-2025.
FSM, 2019. Scoping Study Report on the desirability, feasibility and options for theestablishment of a Paris Principles-compliant National Human Rights Institution. Gov
of FSM.
FSM 2010. State-wide assessment and resource strategy. 2010-2015+. Federated Statesof Micronesia.
FSM, 2020. First Voluntary National Review on the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable
Development June 2020, Government of FSM.
FSM Government, 2020. First Voluntary National Review on the 2030 Agenda for
Sustainable Development June 2020, FSM
FSM, 2020. First Voluntary National Review on the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable
Development June 2020, Government of FSM.
FSM 2020. FSMIP GBV Trafficking Needs Action Plan. Draft. August, 2020
GlobalEDGE 2017. Insights by Industry. Database. Lansing: International BusinessCentre, Michigan State University. https://globaledge.msu.edu.
Global Security Organisation 2017. Micronesian Economy. Global Security News letter.
https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/oceania/fsm-economy.htm Ibid, 2012.
Global Security Newsletter 2018. Micronesia [FSM] – Economy
Ibid, 2017.
Ibid, 2018
IEE 2020. Federated States of Micronesia: Chuuk Water Supply and Sanitation Project.
Project Number: 53284-002
IUCN (2020) International Union for Conservation of Nature’s (IUCN) Red List of
Threatened Species. Accessed October 2020.
IMaRS-USF & IRD 2005. Millennium Coral Reef Mapping Project. Undertaken by theInstitute for Marine Remote Sensing - University of South Florida (IMaRS-USF) andthe Institut de Recherche Pour le Développement (IRD).Nimea, F.S., 2006. National
Assessment Report on Sustainable Development Strategies in the FSM. Support to
the Formulation of National Sustainable Development Strategy in the Pacific Small
Island Developing States. Project INT/04/X70.
Division for Sustainable
Development. United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs.

December 2020

Final

104

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource ReportJenson, J., Heitz, L. P. E. 2004. Preliminary Report: Potential for spring water andgroundwater development at selected sites in the Pukusruk watershed, Kosrae
State, FSM. University of Guam. May 2004.
Johnston, M. 2011. Federated States of Micronesia IWRM Outlook Summary and NWTF
Report.
Knoema. 2015. World Development Indicators (WDI), September 2015. Database.
https://knoema.com/Laird, W. E., 1980. Soil Survey of Islands of Truk, Federated
States of Micronesia. US Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service.
MCT 2014. Fifth National Report to the Convention on Biological Diversity. The Federated
States of Micronesia 2014
McDermid, K. J. & A. Edward. 1999. Seagrass community composition and biomass at
Nahpali Island, Pohnpei. Micronesica 31:255-262.
McKenzie, L.J. and Rasheed, M.J. (2006), Seagrasses: Pohnpei Island and Atoll Marine
Assessment, Technical report of survey conducted 26 October – 3 November 2005,
Seagrass‐Watch HQ, DPI&F, Cairns, 60pp
Miller, C., 2009. Current State of knowledge of Cetacean Threat, Diversity and Habitats in
the Pacific Islands region, 2009 Revision. WDCS International. 77p
OEC

2017.
“Micronesia”.
Observatoryof
EconomicComplexity.
http://atlas.media.mit.edu/en/profile/country/fsm/#Exports (accessed 24 May 2017.

OEC 2018. Micronesia (FSM), Imports, Exports and trade Patterns.
profile.ocfsm

oec.world

Pacific Investment Trade Australia 2019. Country Profile - Federated States of Micronesia.
DFAT

Parenti, L. R.; Maciolek, J. A. 1993. New sicydiine gobies from Ponape and Palau,
Micronesia, with comments on systematics of the subfamily Sicydiinae(Teleostei: Gobiidae). Bull. Mar. Sci. 53(3): 945-972
Pohnpei State Const. art. XII, § 2; R. Crocombe, Draft Report—Improved Economic Use ofLand in the Federated States of Micronesia, Asian Development Bank (1997)
Pippard, H (2012). The current status and distribution of freshwater fishes, land snails andreptiles in the Pacific Islands of Oceania
PWO 2020. FSM Brief Snapshot of Highlights, 2020. Pacific Women Shaping Pacific
Development.
https://pacificwomen.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/FSMBrief_Snapshot-of-highlights_Aug-2020.pdf
Ramsay, Douglas. 2000. Kosrae Shoreline Management Project.
Raynor, B and Kostka, W 2003. Back to the Future: Using Traditional Knowledge toStrengthen Biodiversity in Pohnpei, Federated States of Micronesia. Ethnobotany
Research & Applications 1: 55-63.
Ryan, B & Les, P. 2018. Countries and Their Cultures: Culture of Federated States ofMicronesia Australian Bureau of Meteorology & CSIRO 2013. Current and futureclimate of the Federated States of Micronesia. Pacific-Australia Climate Change
Science and Adaptation Planning Program
December 2020

Final

105

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

Spengler, S. R. Peterson, F. L., Mink J. F. 1992. Geology and hydrogeology of the islandof Pohnpei, FSM. Technical Report No. 189. January 1992.
SOPAC 2005.
Identiﬁcation of onshore aggregate-quarry sites, prospects fordevelopment, Pohnpei Island, Federated States of Micronesia. SOPAC Technical
Report 382· January 2006.Spengler R. S., Peterson F. L., & Mink J. F. 1992.
Geology and Hydrogeology of the Island of Pohnpei, FSM. Technical Report No.
189. January 1992.
SPC 2005. FSM Household Income and Expenditure Survey. FSM Division of Statistics Office of Statistics, Budget and Economic Management, Overseas Development
Assistance and Compact Management.
SPC 2012. Gender Stocktake –Federated States of Micronesia, SPC, Noumea.
SPREP 2018. Federated States of Micronesia: Review of Environmental Legislation,
SPREP.
SPREP 2019. Proceedings of the Pacific Regional Consultation on Water in Small Island
Countries – Country Briefing Papers
Stemmermann, L., Proby, F., 1978. Inventory of Wetland Vegetation in the Caroline
Islands, Volume 1: Wetland Vegetation Types. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
Pacific Ocean Division. VTN Pacific, Honolulu, HI, p. 231
Takesy, A. 2014. Action Plan for PoWPA and Target 11. FSM Department of Resources
and Development.
The Yap State Environmental Stewardship Consortium 2004.
Strategy and Action Plan.

Yap State Biodiversity

TNC 2003. A Blueprint for Conserving the Biodiversity of the Federated States ofMicronesia. The Nature Conservancy.
TNC 2019. A blueprint for conserving the biodiversity of the Federated States ofMicronesia. The Nature Conservancy.
Tsuda, R. T., 1978. Marine Biological Survey of Yap Lagoon. University of Guam Marine
Laboratory, Technical Rept. No. 45.
Tsuda, R. T., Fosberg, R.T., and Sachet M.H. 1977. Distribution of Sea Grasses in
Micronesia. Micronesica: Vol 13: 191-198.
Tsuda, R. T., & Kamura, S. 1990. Comparative Review on the Floristics, Phytogeography,
Seasonal Aspects and Assemblages Patterns of the Seagrass Flora in Micronesia
and the Ryukyu Islands. Reprinted from Galaxea, Sesoko Marine Science Center.
USSD 2019. Latest Update-Trafficking on FSM.
UN 2013. Millennium Development Goals Report. TNC 2002. Pacific Island Countries
Operating Unit Pacific Action Plan FY 2003-2007. The Nature Conservancy.
Auckland, New Zealand. 27 pp.
UNDP, ‘State of Human Development in the Pacific: A Report on Vulnerability andExclusion at a Time of Rapid Change’, 2014.
UNFPA 2014. FSM Family Health and Safety Study. Report prepared for FSM Department
of Health and Social Affairs. October 2014.
December 2020

Final

106

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

UNICEF, 2013. Tracking Progress in Maternal and Child Survival, Case Study Report for
the Federated States of Micronesia, July 2013 ©The United Nations Children’s Fund
(UNICEF).
UNICEF 2017. Situation Analysis of Children in FSM, UNICEF.
USDA, 1982. Pacific Northwest Forestry Inventory and Analysis: Federated States ofMicronesia Publications.
US Army Engineers 1989. Kosrae Coastal Resource Inventory. Prepared by US ArmyEngineers, Honolulu.
U.S. Geological Survey Military Geology Branch. 1944. Ponape including Pakin and Ant
Islands (Carolines) Terrain Intelligence / prepared by Geological Survey, U.S.
Department of the Interior, under direction of Chief of Engineers, U.S. Army.
Strategic Engineering Study no. 109.
US Government 2018. National Register of Historic Places listings in the Federated Statesof Micronesia.
UNDP 2014. State of Human Development in the Pacific: A Report on Vulnerability andExclusion at a Time of Rapid Change.
Weeks, R., Terk, L. Gorong, B. Aulerio, M. Reyuw, B. 2016. SPATIAL ANALYSIS IN
SUPPORT OF DEVELOPMENT OF THE YAP PROTECTED AREA NETWORK.
Technical report prepared for The Nature Conservancy February 2016
Weeks, R., 2015. Pohnpei’s Protected Area Network: Gap Analysis & Spatial Prioritisation.
Technical report prepared for The Nature Conservancy 2015.
Weeks, R., 2019. Spatial analysis in support of development of the Kosrae protected area
network. Technical report prepared for The Nature Conservancy 2019.
Wolanski E, Furukawa K (2007) The oceanography of Palau. Pp. 59–72 in Kayanne H.,
Omori M., Fabricus K., Verheij E., Colin P., Golbuu Y., Yukihira H. (eds.), Coral
Reefs of Palau. Palau International Coral Reef Center, Palau, 238 pp.
Wortel et al. 2003. Federated States of Micronesia. Fourth National Report 2010.
Implementation of Article 6 of the Convention on Biological Diversity.
WHO 2017. Report of the global gender-based violence task force. July 2017.
WHO 2018. Country Cooperation Strategy at a Glance – Micronesia (FSM).
WHO 2018. UHC and SDG Country Profile 2018 Federated States of Micronesia.
Zirkus, S. 2001. Yap Islands State, Federated States of Micronesia WWF unreviewed
document

December 2020

Final

107

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

Appendix A Gap Analysis Table

December 2020

Final

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

Table A-1: Identification of information outlined in the Gap Analysis
Information Type

KosraePohnpei

Chuuk

Yap

Comment

Protected/Biological Significance areas









Sourced from secondary data / reports, EPA, KIRMA

Coastal erosion data / information









Sourced from secondary data / reports

Watercourses / Streams









Sourced from secondary data / reports

Watersheds / Catchments









Sourced from secondary data / reports

Sensitive ecological communities (adjacent to PRIME
roads or works)









Identify during field survey (where possible). Confirmed from secondary
data / reports

Riparian vegetation









Data unable to be source.

Freshwater ecology (flora & fauna)









Apart from some freshwater fish info for FSM, detailed data unable to besourcedLandfill location EPA permits (or other relevant licenses),construction details (lined), etc









Identified during field survey / consultation or sourced from secondary data /reports. EPA / KIRMA permits still to be provided

Aggregate sources – Quarry (incl. EPA permits or otherrelevant licenses)









Identified during field survey / consultation or sourced from secondary data /reports. EPA / KIRMA permits still to be provided

Aggregate sources – Dredging (incl. EPA permits or otherrelevant licenses)

-





-

Identified during field survey / consultation or sourced from secondary data /reports. EPA / KIRMA permits still to be provided

Sources of potential land contamination (e.g.
contaminated sites, storage of hazardous substances etc)

-

-

-

-

Data not available.

Groundwater resource info









Information sourced from secondary data / reports.

Air quality / Noise / Vibration Data

-

-

-

-

Data not identified/available. Field measurements to be taken prior toconstruction

Environmental

December 2020

Final

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

Information Type

KosraePohnpei

Chuuk

Yap

Comment

Contour Data (10 m resolution)









Sourced from secondary data / reports

Natural Hazard Data (e.g. flood prone / low lying areas,
landslides)









Sourced from secondary data / reports

Climate Change Projections









Information for FSM available but not individual States

Land Tenure / Ownership









Extent of road easement information is known in vicinity of urgent works.
These documents can be acquired once scope of works known.

Key Project Stakeholders









Identified during discussions with DoTC&I.

Land / assets encroaching on Road Reserve









A range of encroachments identified

Land Use









Sourced from secondary data / reports

Public utilities (e.g. power, telecom, water) near urgent
works









A range of utilities identified during field survey

Sensitive communities and receptors (e.g. schools, healthfacilities etc)









Sourced from secondary data

Traffic Data



-

-

-

Lelu causeway data only. Any additional traffic data to be sourced prior to
preparation of site-specific ESMP (if required)

Cultural heritage sites (e.g. cemeteries, graves sites)









Identified during field survey / consultation or sourced from secondary data /reports.

OHS (Local examples of OHS practice in project situation)









Not able to be obtained.

Labor grievance (Local examples of Labor Grievance
practice in project situation)









Not able to be obtained.

SocialDesign & Engineering

December 2020

Final

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

Information Type

KosraePohnpei

Chuuk

Yap

Comment

Primary Road Network









Extent determined through consultation with DoTC&I

Bridges / Causeways / Crossings









Identified during field survey. Sourced from secondary data / reports

Current Coastal Protection Areas









Identified during field survey. Source from secondary data / reports

Priority Project design









DoTC&I to provide once available

Construction material requirements









DoTC&I to provide once available

VA & CRRS Studies









DoTC&I to provide once available

Notes:  = Information / data identified / obtained.  = no information / data available. – No information / data obtained.

December 2020

Final

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

Appendix B Detailed Asset Maps

December 2020

Final

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

December 2020

Final

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

December 2020

Final

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

December 2020

Final

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

December 2020

Final

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

December 2020

Final

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

December 2020

Final

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

December 2020

Final

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

December 2020

Final

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

December 2020

Final

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

December 2020

Final

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

December 2020

Final

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

December 2020

Final

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

December 2020

Final

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Baseline Resource Report

December 2020

Final

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

Appendix B Data used in E&S Sensitivities Maps

December 2020

Final

Table 1: Types of sensitive resource s or hazards and their location - Kosrae

Attribute

Type

Locations

Coastal change & inundation- Finfokoa & Pukushruk (Lelu)- Pal and Mosral, Yeseng, Kuplu and from Yewak
to Tenwak (Malem)- Finfoko and Wiya (Tafunsak)

Flooding and erosion hazards

Numerous

Ecological

Areas of Biological Significance‘Areas of Biological Significance’:39-05: Yela-Okat Terminalia Mangrove ABS
39:12: Foko Finfoko Marine ABS
39-04: North East Kosrae Marine ABS
39-07: Tofol FW Marsh ABS
39-09: Lelu Marine ABS
39-08: Foko Puk Marine ABS
39-07: Malem Marsh ABS
39-11: Malem Utwe Mangrove ABS
Protected/Managed Areas:- Tafunsak- Awarne (includes Lelu Causeway)- Olum Watershed- MalemSocialAssets (such as trees, buildings, fences,
gardens, etc)

PhysicalNumerous

Table 2: Types of sensitive resources or hazards and their location - Pohnpei

Attribute

PhysicalType
Erosion – Prone land (based on soil type,slope angle, stability of soils, etc)

Numerous

Flood-Prone land (based on soil type,elevation, etc)

Numerous

Coastal erosion (areas
requiring stabilisation)

Ecological

Locationspotentially

Areas of Biological SignificanceKey locations:- Ipat & Dolleki (Net Municipality)- Nansalohhi to Maramasok (Uh Municipality)- Nanrohi to Nanwei (Kitti Municipality)‘Areas of Biological Significance’:36-01: Pohnpei Central Forest ABs
36-14: Dausokele Estuary ABS
36-19: Dien Mangrove ABS
36-07: Alokapw Marsh ABS
36-08: Nan Pailong ABS
36-0_: Dolopwail-Metipw Marine Reserve ABS
36-0_:Senpehn-Lehdau
MangroveABS(Sapwalap Mangroves ABS)
36-05: Tewmen Island ABS
36-02: South Pohnpei Marine ABS(including: Lapinsed ABS, Rohi to Mwudok MarineABS)Attribute

Type

Locations36-10: Southern Kitti Marine ABS
36-09: Nan Mand Forest ABS (Sapwatkai Forest
ABS)36-09: Palikir-Paies ABS
36-16: Dau Mwoakote Estuary ABS
Protected/Managed Areas:- Enipen Mangrove Reserve

Stream crossings
SocialNumerous

Assets (such as trees, buildings, fences,
gardens, etc)

Numerous

Table 3: Types of sensitive resources or hazards and their location - Chuuk

Attribute

Type

LocationsPhysicalCoastal stabilisation areas

Key locations with ‘High’ coastal stability issues:- Mechitiw to Pou Bay- Pou Bay
- Meseltruk- Fanachau to Nemwan- Mwan (bridges x2)

EcologicalConservation Areas‘Areas of Biological Significance’:24-19: Pou Bay ABs
24-34: North Weno Marine ABS

SocialAssets (such as trees, buildings, fences,
gardens, etc)

Numerous

Table 4: Types of sensitive resources or hazards and their location - Yap

Attribute

Type

Locations
Key locations with ‘High’ coastal stability issues:

PhysicalCoastal stabilisation areas

EcologicalConservation Areas

SocialAssets (such as trees,buildings, fences, gardens, etc)

‘Areas of Biological Significance’:
02:02: Marbaa Forest ABS
02:05: East Harbour Marine ABS
02:03 Northern Yap Channels ABS
02:20: Ngolog Bay ABS
Protected/Managed Areas:- Tamil traditional management zone (upper reaches)
NumerousFederated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Management Framework

Appendix C Environmental
Forms

December 2020

Final

&

SocialScreeningFederated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Screening

FORM 1 – Initial E&S Risk Screening(To be completed by CIU Safeguards Team, with on-ground support from PIU State Focal Point where appropriate)
Note: Refer ESMF Risk Assessment & Impact Identification table (Section 5.6.1) for overview of potential impacts, risks andmitigation summary.
Timing: To be completed after Component 1 Assessments (e.g. VA/CRRS), and prior to preliminary design
Purpose: 1) To identify high risk environmental and social aspects of the proposed works;
2) Inform confirmation of eligibility of works for funding
Name of Works:
Location of Works:
Description of Works:

Date of Form Completion:
Name of Person Completing
Form:
Date of Site Visit:
People consulted to date (toinform completion of form):
Attached concept
description (circle one)

Yes / No

1.0

Environmental

1.1

Any vegetation clearance (incl. riparianvegetation) or works within a stream
upstream of or within areas of biologicalsignificance).

1.2

Any disturbance of (either works locatedwithin, or potential impact upon) protected
coastal marine areas (CMAs).

Potentially High orExtreme Impact

Low or Moderate
Impact (can be
managed)Activity

NO Impact

Impact Screening(without mitigation) 1(Put only 1  in eachrow)

Justification(Nature,scale,
duration of
impacts or
sensitivityofreceptors)

Recommended
Action1 Use Risk Rating tables in ESMF to determine level of potential impact.

FORM 1 – Initial E&S Risk Screening

Page 1Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Screening

1.3

Is the site in an area identified as aprotected or conservation area.

1.4

Works within an identified hazard zone
(e.g. erosion, flooding, coastal
inundation).

2.0

Socio-cultural

2.1

Any likely physical displacement /relocation of people.

2.2

Any likely economic displacement (e.g.
temporary or permanent land acquisition,
disturbance of physical assets, crops/fruit
trees etc).

2.3

Any identified cultural sites (e.g. graves,historic buildings etc) directly adjacent toroad easement in vicinity of the works (i.e.
within 50m of site) or otherwise could be
affected by physical works.

2.4

Any potential access restriction tosensitive receptors / essential services(e.g. hospital, school, church etc).

2.5

Risk to community health & safety fromthe proposed works (i.e. communities inclose proximity to work site) or
construction workforce (e.g.
imported/migrant labour related risks)?

2.6

Is there a risk of UXOs being present in
the works footprint?

FORM 1 – Initial E&S Risk Screening

Potentially High orExtreme Impact

Low or Moderate
Impact (can be
managed)Activity

NO Impact

Impact Screening(without mitigation) 1(Put only 1  in eachrow)

Justification(Nature,scale,
duration of
impacts or
sensitivityofreceptors)

Recommended
ActionPage 2Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Screening

FORM 2 – Environmental and Social Screening(To be completed by CIU Safeguards Team, with on-ground support from PIU State Focal Point where appropriate)
Timing: To be completed after concept or preliminary design)
Purpose: 1) To scope potential environmental risks from proposed works that could be minimized through participatory design;
2) Inform E&S Assessment and Management Plan Requirements (Form 3);3) To inform scope of Terms of Reference for and E&S Consultants to be engaged.
Name of Works:
Location of Works:
Date of Form Completion:
Name of Person Completing
Form:
Date of Site Visit:
People consulted to date (toinform completion of form):
Attached concept
description (circle one)

Yes / No

Form 2a – Environmental Risk Screening

1.0

Physical

1.1

Dust / noise / vibration
impacts on sensitive
receptors (e.g. residential
communities, businesses,
essential services etc).

1.2

Generation and dischargeof solid and liquid waste(e.g. spoil, roading material,refuse, domestic waste/
wastewater, hazardous
substances etc).

Moderate to Extreme
ImpactLow Impact

Potential Impact

NO Impact

Potential Impact(without
mitigation) 2 ()Describe

2 Use Risk Rating tables in ESMF to determine level of potential impact.

FORM 2 – Environmental and Social Screening

Page 1Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Screening

1.3

Erosion and sedimentation
risk as a result of works(e.g. stream bank, slope,
coastal margin, channel
modification and hydrology
etc).

1.4

Works within an identified
hazard zone (e.g. erosion,flooding, coastal inundation
zones).

1.5

Is construction material
required for the design (e.g.
rock/ aggregate/ asphalt/
cement) able to be sourced
locally from a licensed
facility (e.g. quarry) 3.

1.6

Could an alternative design
be explored to decrease /avoid physicalenvironmental impacts3.

Moderate to Extreme
ImpactLow Impact

Potential Impact

NO Impact

Potential Impact(without
mitigation) 2 ()Describe

Yes
No
Describe:

Yes
No
Describe:

2.0

Ecological

2.1

Removal of terrestrial
vegetation and/or habitat(incl. riparian vegetation).
(a) Native / naturalvegetation.
(b) Invasive / exotic
vegetation (e.g.
weeds).
(c) Privately owned trees /crops / gardens (refer
Form 2b).

3 Discuss with design engineer, if required

FORM 2 – Environmental and Social Screening

Page 2Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Screening

2.2

Moderate to Extreme
ImpactLow Impact

Potential Impact

NO Impact

Potential Impact(without
mitigation) 2 ()Describe

Potential impacts on
freshwater ecosystem,
including:(a) Direct disturbance offreshwater habitat(e.g. works footprint
within watercourse).
(b) Indirect disturbance offreshwater habitat(e.g. fromsedimentation, water
quality pollution).
(c) Risk of barriers to fishpassage.

2.3

Works within or potential
disturbance of coastal
marine area (CMA)

2.4

Could an alternative design
be explored to decrease /avoid ecological impacts or
improve ecologicaloutcomes3.

FORM 2 – Environmental and Social Screening

Yes
No
Describe:

Page 3

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Screening

Form 2b – Social & Resettlement Risk Screening

1.0

Land

1.1

Impacts on land outside of
the road easement?

Moderate to Extreme
ImpactLow Impact

Potential Impact

NO Impact

Potential Impact(without mitigation) 4 ()DescribeNo
Yes (Temporary Use)
Yes (Permanent Loss)

1.2

Estimated extent of land
loss outside of roadeasement.

Estimated area:

1.3

Estimated number ofprivate landowners areaffected?

Estimated No. of landowners:

1.4

Is the ownership status
and current usage of land
to be acquired known?

Yes
No
Describe:

1.5

Easement paperwork
available and obtained?

Yes
Available, not yet obtained
No easement paperwork available
Not yet sure if easement paperwork
available (to be confirmed)

1.6

How is this land to beprovided:

Voluntary Land Donation (VLD)
Lease / Rental
Willing-seller-willing-buyer
Available Government land
Involuntary acquisition
To be confirmed
Describe:

4 Use Risk Rating tables in ESMF to determine level of potential impact.

FORM 2 – Environmental and Social Screening

Page 4Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Screening

1.7

Could an alternative design
be explored to decrease /avoid land loss 5?

Moderate to Extreme
ImpactLow Impact

Potential Impact

NO Impact

Potential Impact(without mitigation) 4 ()Describe

Yes
No
Describe:

2.0

Assets2.1

Are there likely to be lossof physical assets and/or
crops/productive trees due
to works footprint or
associated facilities?

2.2

Estimated number of asset
owners affected?

2.3

What type of assets areaffected:

Yes
No
Estimated No. of landowners:

Residential house
Business/commercial structure
Secondary structure (e.g. fence,
wall, driveway, pavement, shed orsimilar)Crops (including type)
Productive Trees
Perennial Trees
Cultural sites (e.g. grave sites,
historic buildings etc)
Describe:

2.4

Yes

5 Discuss with design engineer, if required

FORM 2 – Environmental and Social Screening

Page 5Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Screening

Could the assets berelocated or repaired?

Moderate to Extreme
ImpactLow Impact

Potential Impact

NO Impact

Potential Impact(without mitigation) 4 ()Describe

No
Describe:

2.5

Could an alternative design
be explored todecrease/avoid asset loss?

Yes
No
Describe:

3.0

Livelihoods

3.1

Will the works have any
impact on people’s
livelihood (e.g. economic
displacement)?

Yes
No
Describe:

3.2

Estimated number ofpeople/households withlivelihoods affected?

3.3

What kind of livelihoods
are likely to be impacted?

Estimated No. of people/households:

Business/commercial – Owner
Business/commercial – Employee
Agricultural / Farming
Fishing
Other:___________________________
Describe:

FORM 2 – Environmental and Social Screening

Page 6

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Screening

3.4

Could an alternative design
be explored todecrease/avoid livelihood
impacts?5Moderate to Extreme
ImpactLow Impact

Potential Impact

NO Impact

Potential Impact(without mitigation) 4 ()Describe

Yes
No
Describe:

4.0

Access Restrictions

4.1

Are there likely to beaccess restrictions?

Yes
No
Describe:

4.2

What kind of access
restriction are expected?

Pedestrians (including closure ofroad verges)
Driveways – Residential Agricultural/ Farming
Driveways – Business/commercial
Transport Network
Access to essential services
Coastal margin
Other (e.g. natural resources,
communal land/facilities, services
etc)

4.3

Is an alternative means ofaccess required (e.g.
temporary diversion orwater crossing etc)?

Yes
No
Describe:

4.4

Could an alternative design
be explored to

Yes
No

FORM 2 – Environmental and Social Screening

Page 7

Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Screening

decrease/avoid access
restriction impacts?

5.0

Other Social Impacts

5.1

Impacts on Sensitive
receptors in close proximity
to the works (e.g.
residential communities,businesses, essential
services etc).

5.2

Disproportionate Impacts
on vulnerable groups orroad users

5.3

Risk to community health &safety from the proposed
works (i.e. communities inclose proximity to worksite).

5.4

Risk posed to thecommunity from theconstruction workforce(e.g. imported/migrantlabour related risks).

5.5

Risk of UXOs in works
footprint, and resultant risk
to worker health andsafety.

FORM 2 – Environmental and Social Screening

Moderate to Extreme
ImpactLow Impact

Potential Impact

NO Impact

Potential Impact(without mitigation) 4 ()Describe

Describe:

Page 8Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Screening

FORM 3 – E&S Assessment and Management Plan Requirements(To be completed by CIU Safeguards Team, with on-ground support from PIU State Focal Point where appropriate)
Timing: To be completed after concept or preliminary design together with Form 2 and 4
Purpose: 1) To confirm which whether work specific ESIA/ESMPs are required;
2) To determine which Land Access Procedure Plans are required
Name of Works:
Location of Works:
Date of Form Completion:
Name of Person Completing
Form:

Potential Impact

Assessment
()
Yes

1.1

1.2

Does the Generic ESMP adequately address thepotential environmental and social risks identified inForm 1 and 2?

Documents RequiredNo(Note: If ‘No’, then works specific ESIA &ESMP required)Is the site in an area, or could potentially impact an
area, identified as a protected or conservation area.
(Note: If ‘Yes’, then works specific ESIA &ESMP required)

1.3

1.4

Do the works involve land loss outside of the roadeasement, asset loss, or loss of income sources or
impacts livelihoods?

(Note: If ‘No’, then Land Access Due
Diligence Report required).

Will the land and/or assets be acquired via
Voluntary Land Donation (VLD)?
(Note: If ‘Yes’, then Voluntary Land Donation
Report (VLDR) required)

1.5

Will the land and/or asset loss, or livelihood
impacts require financial compensation, as per
entitlement matrix in RF?

FORM 3 – E&S Assessment and Management Plan Requirements(Note: If ‘Yes’, then Resettlement Plan (RP)required)Page 1Federated States of Micronesia PRIME Project
Environmental and Social Screening

FORM 4 – Agreed Environmental and Social Documents Required(To be completed by CIU Safeguards Team, with the support of PIU State Focal Point where appropriate)
Timing: To be completed after concept or preliminary design together with Form 2 and 3
Purpose: 1) To confirm which ESMPs or land access plans are to be prepared and/or implemented for the works;
2) To confirm which additional management plans are to be prepared by the Contractor (as informed by the ESMF).
Name of Works:
Location of Works:
Date of Form Completion:
Name of Person Completing
Form:
Name of Person Approving:
As per the PRIME E&S Management Framework (ESMF) the following safeguard documents are to beprepared/implemented for the above works:
Generic ESMPWorks specific ESMPWorks specific ESIAAs per the PRIME Resettlement Framework (RF) the following safeguard documents will be prepared forthe above works:
Land Access Due Diligence Report
Voluntary Land Donation Report
Resettlement Plan

Signature:

Signature:

Signed by:(Completed Form)

Signed by:(Approver)

Date:

Date:

FORM 4 – Agreed E&S Documents Required

Page 1