Nepal - Road Maintenance and Development Project - environmental assessment (Vol. 4 of 6)

HIS MAJESTY'S GOVERNMENT OF NEPAL MINISTRY OF WORKS AND TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT OF ROADS ROAD MAINTENANCE AND DEVELOPMENT PROJECT NEW ROAD DEVELOPMENT AND UPGRADING COMPONENT FINAL REPORT E-257 VOL. 4 INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL EXAMINATION For Road Upgrading SMEC International Pty. Ltd., 'A Cooma, NSW, Australia SMEC in association uwth/ CEMAT Consultants (Pvt.) Ltd., Nepal June 1999  TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS FOREWORD PROJECT PROPONENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY j I INTRODUCTION .................................. I 1.1 BACKGROUND .1 1.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION .2 1.3 AIMS OF INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL EXAMINATION . 3 1.4 PROPOSED UPGRADING WORKS .3 1.5 EXISTING AND PROJECTED ROAD TRAFFiC .5 2 LEGISLATION, POLICIES AND STANDARDS. . 7 2.1 HMGN LEGISLATION .7 2.2 WORLD BANK REQUIREMENTS .7 il 2.3 DEPARTMENT OF ROADS STANDARDS .8 2.4 NATIONAL POLICIES. 8 3 METHODOLOGY. 9 3.1 IEE SCOPING .9 3.2 ALIGNMENT INSPECTION AND INFORMATION COLLECTION .10 3.3 DESIGN OF UPGRADING WORKS .10 3.4 SOCIAL ASSESSMENT . .11 3.4.1 Sample Socio-Economic Survey .11 3.4.2 Census and Asset Verification .12 3.4.3 Interviews with Other Stakeholders .13 3.4.4 Limitations .13 4 BIO-PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT ...14 4.1 PHYSIOGRAPHIC REGIONS .14 4.2 TOPOGRAPHY .14 4.3 CLIMATE AND HYDROLOGY .15 4.4 GEOLOGY .16 4.5 LAND STABILTY .17 4.6 NATURAL HAZARDS .18 4.7 LAND USE .18 4.8 FOREST COVER .19 4.9 WATER QUALITY. ............................................................................ 21 4.10 AIR AND NOISE POLLUTION .21  5 SOCIO-ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT ................ ............. 22 5.1 REGIONAL AND DISTRICT CONTEXT ..................................,.,.22 5.2 DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILES AND SETTLEMENT PATTERNS ........ 23 5.3 ECONOMIC ACTIVITIES AND SUBSISTENCE ................................ 26 5.3.1 Occupational Status ............................................... 26 5.3.2 Agriculture and Land Tenure ............................................... 28 5.3.3 Income and Expenditure ............................................... 30 5.4 KEY SOCIAL SERVICES AND FACILITIES . ......................... 32 5.5 HEALTH ................................ 33 6 IDENTIFICATION OF POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS35 6.1 IMPACTS ................................. 35 6.2 POTENTIAL BIO-PHYSICAL IMPACTS . ......................................,.,,,, 35 6.3 POTENTIAL SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPACTS . .. 37 6.3.1 Social Development Potential .38 6.3.2 Loss of Assets and Resources .,, 43 7 KALIKOT ROAD .44 7.1 EXISTING ROAD CONDITION .44 7.2 PROPOSED MAJOR WORKS .45 7.2.1 Proposed Extraction Sites .46 7.2.2 Workforce Camp Sites .46 7.3 POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS . .......................... 47 7.3.1 Land Use Change .47 7.3.2 Landform Stability .47 7.3.3 Ecological Degradation .47 7.3.4 Other Significant Features .48 7.3.5 Noise .48 7.3.6 Vibration .49 7.3.7 Air Quality .49 7.3.8 Drinking Water Catchments.. 50 7.4 POTENTIAL SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPACTS . .51 7.4.1 Loss of Buildings and Other Structures .51 7.4.2 Loss of Land and Other Natural Resources .52 7.4.3 Population Displacement ............................. 54 8 CHHEDEGAD ROAD .. . 56 8.1 EXISTING ROAD CONDITION .56 8.2 PROPOSED MAJOR WORKS ........................ 57 8.2.1 Proposed Extraction Sites .58 8.2.2 Workforce Camp Sites .................................,,,.,.,.58 8.3 POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS . . 58 8.3.1 Land Use Change .58 8.3.2 Landforrn Stability. 59 8.3.3 Ecological Degradation . 5 8.3.4 Other Significant Features .60  8.3.5 Noise ..................................... 60 8.3.6 Vibration ..................................... 60 8.3.7 Air Quality ..................................... 61 8.3.8 Drinking Water Catchments .62 8.4 POTENTIAL SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPACTS ..62 8.4.1 Loss of Buildings and Other Structures .62 8.4.2 Loss of Land and Other Natural Resources .64 8.4.3 Population Displacement .65 9 SANDHIKHARKA ROAD .66 9.1 EXISTING ROAD CONDITION .................................,,.-66 9.2 PROPOSED MAJOR WORKS . .67 9.2.1 Proposed Extraction Sites .68 9.2.2 Workforce Camp Sites .68 9.3 POTENTIAL BIO-PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ... 68 9.3.1 Land Use Change ............................................. 68 9.3.2 Landform Stability ............................................. 69 9.3.3 Ecological Degradation ............................................. 69 9.3.4 Significant Features ............................................. 70 9.3.5 Noise ............................................. 70 9.3.6 Vibration ............................................. 71 9-3.7 Air Quality ............................................. 71 9.3.8 Drinking Water Catchments ............................................. 72 9.4 POTENTIAL SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPACTS . ................................... 73 a 9. 4.1 Loss 9.4.1 Loss of Buildings and Other Structures .................................. 73 9.4.2 Loss of Land and Other Natural Resources ........................... 74 9.4.3 Population Displacement ............................................. 76 10 IMPACT MITIGATION ..................................... 78 10.1 MITIGATION OF BIO-PHYSICAL IMPACTS . .78 10.1.1 Vegetation Clearance .78 10.1.2 Fill Disposal .78 10.1.3 Quarries and Borrow Pits .79 10.1.4 Workforce Camps .79 10.1.5 Revegetation . 80 10.1.6 Material Crushing and Storage .............................,,.,.,.80 10.2 MiTIGATION OF DIRECT SOCIO-ECONOMIC iMPACTS .. 81 10.2.1 Objectives .....................................,.. 81 X 10.2.2 Entitlement Framework ., , 82 10.2.3 Entitlements for Land Losses .83 10.2.4 Entitlements for Building Losses ................................ 83 3 10.2.5 Crops and Other Natural Resources .83 10.2.6 Community Assets and Resources . 84 10.2.7 Rehabilitation Measures ................................ 84 10.2.8 Land Acquisition .85 11 PROJECT BENEFITS AND COSTS .86 11.1 PROJECT BENEFITS .86 11.2 PROJECT COSTS ................... 86  12 PUBLIC CONSULTATION ........................ 88 12.1 IEE SCOPING ............................ 89 12.2 DATA COLLECTION ............................ 89 12.3 FORMULATION OF MITIGATION AND IMPROVEMENT MEASURES90 13 CONCLUSIONS ........................ 91 13.1 BIO-PHYSICAL IMPACTS ............................ 91 13.2 SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPACTS ............................ 92 14 REFERENCES ........................ 94 APPENDIX Appendix 1: Design Standards for Road Upgrading Appendix 2: Scoping Workshop Participants Appendix 3: IEE Scoping Issues Appendix 4: lEE Log Sheet Appendix 5: List of Potentially Affected Owners Appendix 6: List of Persons Interviewed Appendix 7: Slope Failure Risk Classification Appendix 8: River Bank Erosion and Flood Risk Classification Appendix 9: Detailed Entitlement Matrx TABLE Table 1.1: Roads Proposed for Upgrading ................................................................. 2 Table 1.2: Current Daily Traffic ............................................................5 Table 1.3: Projected 'Normal' Vehicular Traffic Composition, Volume and Loads ...................5 Table 3.1: Survey Sample .......................................................... 12 Table 4.1: Physiographic Regions of Nepal .......................................................... 14 Table 4.2: Physiographic Regions of the Upgrading Roads ...................................................... 14 Table 4.3: Topographic Features Along the Roads ........................................................... 15 Table 4.4: Climatic Zones .......................................................... 15 Table 4.5: Slope Failure Risk ........................................................... 17 Table 4.6: Riverbank Erosion and Flood Risk .......................................................... 18 Table 4.7: Land Use Alongside the Right-of-Way ............................................................ 18 | Table 4.8: District Forest Cover Type by Physiographic Region ............................................. 20 Table 4.9: District Per Capita Fuelwood Consumption by Enduse ............................................ 20 Table 5.1: Road Districts and Potentially Influenced Districts ................................................. 22 I Table 5.2: VDCs Crossed by the RMD Project Roads ........................................................... 22 Table 5.3: Road Districts by Key Development Indicators ....................................................... 23 Table 5.4: District Population Figures ............................................................ 24 Table 5.5: Households and Population in the Affected VDCs, 1991 and 1998 ..... 24 Table 5.6: Major Ethnic/Caste Groups of the Road Districts Population (1991) ...................... 24 Table 5.7: Demographic Features of the Household Population ............................................... 25  Table 5.8: Out-Migrants in the Mid-Western and Western Census Regions (1981-1991) ....... 26 Table 5.9: Residential Status of the Household Population (n = 1,231 persons) ...................... 26 Table 5.10: Occupational Status of Economically Active Population by Road District ........... 27 Table 5.11: Occupational Status of the Household Population ................................................. 27 Table 5.12: Landholdings by Road District ............................................................... 28 Table 5.13: Reported Household Landholding Size ............................................................... 29 I Tabl e 5.14: L ive stock Ownership ..................................................................................... 0 Table 5.15: Nominal Household and Per Capita Income by Development Region ...................30 Table 5.16: Income by Source and Development Region ........................31 Table 5.17: Reported Sources of Income During the Previous Year ....................... 32 Table 5.18: Expenditure by Type ....................... 32 Table 5.19: Schools and Students in the Road Districts* ....................... 3 Table 5.20: Health Facilities in the Road Districts (1996/97) ....................... 34 Table 6.1: Anticipated Losses Associated with the RMD Project ....................... 37 Table 6.2: Improved Access Associated With Road Upgrading (n = 213) ....................... 39 Table 6.3: Perceived Economic Effects Associated With Road Upgrading (n = 213) ............. 41 Table 7.1: Summary of Proposed Upgrading Works ....................... 45 >1 - ,Table 7.2: Proposed Borrow Pits and Maximum Available Extraction Volumes ..................... 46 Table 7.3: Approximate Annual Exhaust Emissions From Additional Traffic (kg/year) ......... 50 Table 7.4: Affected Buildings by VDC: Kalikot ....................... 51 Table 7.5: Affected Buildings by Type and Use: Kalikot ....................... 52 ii - -Table 7.6: Land Requirement for Kalikot Road Upgrading ....................... 52 Table 7.7: Owners/Users of Affected Land: Kalikot ....................... 53 Table 7.8: Landholding Size and Loss: Kalikot ........................53 Table 7.9: Affected Owners by Category of Loss: Kalikot ........................ ..................... 54 Table 7.10: Population Displacement: Kalikot ....................... 54 j Table 8.1: Summary of Proposed Upgrading Works ....................... 57 Table 8.2: Proposed Borrow Pits and Maximum Available Extraction Volumes ..................... 58 Table 8.3: Approximate Annual Exhaust Emissions From Additional Traffic (kg/year). 61 Table 8.4: Estimate of Affected Buildings by VDC: Chhedegad .63 Table 8.5: Estimate of Affected Buildings by Type and Use: Chhedegad (15 m ROW) .63 Table 8.6: Esimate of Buildings Required for Road Upgrading: Chhedegad .64 Table 8.7: Estimated Land Take for a 15 m COI: Chhedegad .64 Table 8.8: Estimated Land Take for Road Upgrading: Chhedegad .65 Table 8.9: Estimate of Population Displacement: Chhedegad .65 Table 9.1: Summary of Proposed Upgrading Works .67 Table 9.2: Proposed Borrow Pits and Maximum Available Extraction Volumes .68 Table 9.3: Approximate Annual Exhaust Emissions from Additional Traffic (kg/year) .......... 72 U Table 9.4: Affected Buildings by VDC: Sandhikharka ............................................................. 73 Table 9.5: Affected Buildings by Type and Use: Sandhikharka ............................................... 74 Table 9.6: Land Requirement for Upgrading: Sandhikharka .................................................... 74 ffi Table 9.7: Owners/Users of Affected Land: Sandhikharka .75 Table 9.8: Landholding Size and Loss: Sandhikharka* .75 Table 9.9: Affected Owners by Category of Loss: Sandhikharka .76 j Table 9.10: Population Displacement: Sandhikharka .76 Table 11.1: Internal Rate of Return of Roads .86 Table 11.2: Road Upgrading Cost Estimates .86 Table 11.3: Cost Estimates of Bio-engineering Measures .86 Table 11.4: Bio-engineering Cost Rates ..................................................................... 87  . Table 12.1: Summary of Public Consultation ........................88 Table 13.1: Summary of Affected Households by Impact Comrdor ........................93 Table 13.2: Summary of Affected Households by Road .9...................... 3 - I ,.1 .1  LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AADT Annual Average Daily Traffic. CBS Central Bureau of Statistics, His Majesty's Government of Nepal. a CDC Compensation Determination Committee. CITES The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora. dBA Unit of noise measured in decibels, weighted for human hearing. DDC District Development Committee. DFO District Forest Office. DMG Department of Mines and Geology, Ministry of Industry, His Majesty's Government of Nepal. DNPWC Departrnent of National Parks and Wildlife Conservation, Ministry of Forest and Soil Conservation, His Majesty's Government of Nepal. DOA Department of Archeology, Ministry of Sports and Culture, His Majesty's Government of Nepal. DOF Department of Forests, Ministry of Forests and Soil Conservation, His Majesty's Government of Nepal. DOR Department of Roads, Ministry of Works and Transport, His Majesty's Government of Nepal. DOSC Department of Soil Conservation, His Majesty's Government of Nepal. EA Environmnental Assessment. EIA Environmental Impact Assessment. EMAP Environmental Management (or Monitoring) Plan. EP Entitled Person. FRY Major Feeder Road. The Major Feeder Roads are the roads linking the National Highways to the District Headquarters and Zonal Headquarters as well as to the j major places of industry, tourism, public utilities and power stations. FWDR Far-Western Development Region. FY Fiscal Year (in Nepal, this is from mid-July to mid-July). GDP Gross Domestic Product. GEU Geo-Environmental Unit, Department of Roads, His Majesty's Government of * Nepal. GNP Gross National Product. j IEE Initial Environmental Examination. Preliminarily analysis undertaken to ascertain whether there are likely significant adverse impacts to warrant a 'full' EIA. IUCN The World Conservation Union (formerly International Union for Conservation of Nature). LRMEP Land Resource Mapping Project (HMG-Canada). Aerial photo survey of land use j in Nepal in 1978/79, published from 1982-86.  MCT Main Central Thrust. MOALR Ministry of Agriculture and Land Reform, His Majesty's Government of Nepal. MOFSC Ministry of Forests and Soil Conservation, His Majesty's Govermnent of Nepal. MOLD Ministry of Local Development, His Majesty's Government of Nepal. MOPE Ministry of Population and Environment, His Majesty's Government of Nepal. MOWT Ministry of Works and Transport, His Majesty's Government of Nepal. MWDR Mid-Western Development Region. NBAPP National Bio-diversity Action Plan Project. NBCP National Bio-diversity Conservation Project. NGO Non Governmental Organisation. NH National Highway. National Highways are the main arterial routes passing through the length and breadth of the country as a whole. The roads connecting the National Highways to Regional Headquarters are also classified as National Highways. These highways directly serve the greater portion of the long distance travel, provide consistently a higher level of service and serve the inter-community transport needs of regional interest. PAP Project Affected Person. P-IP Priority Investment Plan. RAP Resettlement Action Plan. -RMD Project Road Maintenance and Development Project. ROI Region of Influence. The area over which long-term, indirect environmental impacts are likely to occur. In this report the area is defined as 5 km linear either side of the road alignment, roughly equivalent to half a day's walk. ROW Right of Way. The legally reserved corridor of land within which the road is constructed. This land is legally acquired and owned by HMGN. A minimum ROW width of 15 m is proposed for all RMD Project roads, with the width increasing where necessary to accommodate the road forrnation (carriageway, road shoulder, side drains and cut and fill embankments). Rs. Rupees. Nepalese rupees at the conversion rate of Rs. 68 to US$ 1 as of 1/11 1/98. SCF Seasonal correction factor. SMEC Snowy Mountains Engineering Corporation International Pty. Ltd. SRN Strategic Road Network. The National Highways and Feeder Roads constitute the Strategic Road Network and command top priority in the allocation of the government resources. TOR Terms of Reference. VDC Village Development Committee. WB World Bank. WECS Water and Energy Commission Secretariat. WDR Western Development Region. .  FOREWORD The level of field data gathering during the preparation of this Initial Enviromnental Examination (EE) was restricted by unrest in some of the areas crossed by the subject roads in the Mid-Western Development Region. The initial environmental and engineering fieldwork was undertaken along the full length of the three roads, but detailed social and engineering design fieldwork was only undertaken for the Sandhikharka road (59.2 km) and the initial part of the Kalikot road (87 km). This EE has been completed based on the above levels of data. Given that all initial fieldwork inspections were completed, it is anticipated that the uncompleted fieldwork will not change the type of, or significantly change the extent of, environmental impacts. This level of assessment has been discussed with and approved by the Department of Roads (DOR) and the World Bank. J The discussion of the potential environmental impacts of the proposed upgrading works has been structured into a separate section for each road, at the request of DOR. -J :1  PROJECT PROPONENT The proponent of the Road Maintenance and Development Project (RMD Project) is His Majesty's Government of Nepal, Ministry of Works and Transport, Department of Roads. The Ministry of Works and Transport, Department of Roads, is proposing the RMD Project as part of its responsibilities to develop and maintain National Highways and Feeder Roads throughout Nepal. The RMD Project will upgrade three existing roads: from Surkhet to Kalikot, from Dharapani to Chhedegad, and from Gorusinge to Sandhikharka. i .= .I .I .1  EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Road Maintenance and Development Project (RMD Project) involves the construction of 196 km of new road and 253 km of road upgrading. This Initial Environmental Examination involves the assessment of the potential environmental impacts of the proposed road upgrading works Three existing earth roads will be upgraded in the Western and Mid-Westem Development Regions of Nepal, as detailed in Table 1. Table 1: Roads Proposed for Upgrading Road | Length DOR Road | Road Districts Crossed - (km) Classification* Number Surkhet - Kalikot 132.0 National Highway H13 Surkhet, Dailekh, Kalikot Dharapani - Chhedegad 61.5 Major Feeder Road F47 Surkhet, Salyan, i_______ _________________ Jajarkot Gorusinge - Sandhikharka 59.2 Major Feeder Road F11 Kapilbastu, I Total 252.7 FeederoRoad2Fl7Arghakhachi S source: Classification and Design Standards, DOR, 1994. Road upgrading is designed to bring the roads up to Fair Weather Gravel Track Standard (DOR, 1997). This will involve the standard works of reforming the road surface and gravelling to a depth of 150-250 mm, as well as side drain repair and construction. Major site-specific works will include road widening, retaining wall construction, drain repair and -, construction, and bio-engineering. Bio-physical and socio-economic impacts will result from the upgrading of the roads, but these impacts will generally be minor in extent and significance. Many of the effects of the J proposed upgrading works will be beneficial, particularly relating to road stabilisation and associated issues. Limited additional land is required to install the proposed works. POSITIVE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS j The primary benefits of road upgrading will be improved access and resulting economic development. Following the upgrading of the three roads, traffic is projected to increase by 5.05-5.32% annually. Social development benefits will result from improved access, including economic stimulation and road construction employment. Roadside communities currently experience access problems, particularly during the monsoon, due to current road conditions. Improved  access, to markets and health facilities specifically, will therefore be a significant benefit of road upgrading. Since the roads cross some of the most underdeveloped districts of the country, their upgrading may also contribute to (a) improvements in food supply and a reduction in the cost of consumer items; (b) improved access to health facilities and counseling, leading to possible improvements in the overall health status of people; and (c) possible improvements in the position of vulnerable social categories and groups, through the creation and stimulation of income-generating opportunities and a reduction in social and economic disparities. Another benefit that will be derived from road upgrading will be the stabilisation of many unstable batters along each road. Environrnental damnage is currently resulting from unstable cut and fill banks. Many existing road banks, primarily cut batters, are highly unstable and prone to slides and erosion, particularly during the monsoon. The installation of a large number of retaining walls and drains, and 22.26 ha bio-engineering measures, will stabilise most road batters, and thereby significantly reduce downslope sedimentation and damage to features. ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Adverse environmental impacts are likely to result from the proposed upgrading works, but these will generally be minor in extent and significance. Adverse impacts will include land loss, ecological degradation and population displacement. The total land use change that will occur as a result of road widening will be 18.49 ha over the combined road length of 253 km. This land use change includes 6.91 ha of cultivation. This net impact is classed as minor, equating to an average 0.73 m wide strip of land along the full length of the roads. Ecological degradation that may occur during road upgrading, or be induced by the resulting additional traffic, is anticipated to be minor. Only minor forest and shrubland clearance, estimated to total 5.75 ha, will occur at upgrading work sites. This loss of vegetation will be directly offset by bio-engineering vegetation establishment on 22.26 ha of bare or semi-bare land. Work contracts will be limited to 2-3 years duration, and the workforce will not be at any site for an extended period, therefore illegal forest harvesting should be minor. In addition, the annual increase in traffic (around 5%) is relatively small, therefore any additional long-term, road-induced ecological degradation is likely to be limited. No protected areas or identified sites of ecological significance occur within the vicinity of the roads. The disposal of 142,300 m3 of excess fill can potentially create a significant environmental impact unless it is correctly managed. Excess fill must be transported to suitable fill disposal locations to ensure that private and public land and vegetation are not damaged by uncontrolled tipping. This can be economically achieved using trucks or tractors. .,  Maximum fill disposal should occur in floodplain borrow pit voids created during the winning of road upgrading material. si Very minor adverse noise, vibration and air quality impacts will occur, either during upgrading or from the additional traffic resulting from road upgrading. Asset acquisition and population displacement will be relatively minor given the total length 3 of the roads. Only approximately 6.91 ha of private land will be acquired, as well as an estimated 112 residential and business structures. The total number of households affected by upgrading works is estimated at 569 (4,030 persons). The estimated number of households facing displacement is 51 (less than 9% of total households), consisting of some 385 persons. The additional 518 households (3,645 persons) will be affected through the acquisition of land, commercial establishments and other buildings. Table 2: Summary of Affected Households by Road Households Requiring Other Total Road Resettlement Affected Households Affected Households No. Population No. Population No. Population Kalikot 14 154 177 1,422 191 1,576 Chedegd 23 140 163 1,141 186 1,281 SanThkbara 14 91 178 1,082 192 1,173 Total 51 385 518 3,645 569 4,030 SMEC-CEMAT Field Surveys, 1998/99. . j In the context of road development, the number of affected households is relatively small, particularly since the Chhedegad road figure is expected to be reduced following additional engineering and census surveys. The estimated number of displaced households is also low, amounting to just under 9% of the affected households. Nevertheless, involuntary resettlement is often traumatic, and for those individuals and households being displaced, i the disturbances could be highly significant. J W I '' 9:  4* SMEC - t 1 INTRODUCTION I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 1.1 BACKGROUND Government policy, as detailed in the Eighth Plan (National Planning Cornmission, 1992), includes the construction of motorable roads to all non-road connected District Headquarters. The Priority Investment Plan (PIP) Project completed the Master Plan for Strategic Road Network and Rural Transport in 1997. This Plan identified 10 potential new roads that would provide connections to 12 districts in the Eastern, Mid-Westem and Far-Westem Development Regions of Nepal. The PIP Project screened and prioritised these 10 potential new roads, most of which were under construction as earth roads. From these 10 roads, five were selected as candidate roads for consideration in the Road Maintenance and Development (RMD) Project, with a firther three non-PIP roads to District Headquarters added for consideration. These eight roads were composed of a total of 12 separate candidate road sections for consideration for either construction or upgrading. _Co Considerable lengths of some of the candidate construction roads had already been constructed or were well into construction at the commencement of the RMD Project. Accordingly, the lengths of roads being screened were revised to their current status. All road sections under construction that were well advanced and scheduled for completion during or by the end of the 1998/99 fiscal year, when the RMD Project will be finalised, were included in the "candidate upgrading roads" group. In the initial RMD Project report, the Inception Report (SMEC, 1998), seven candidate roads were considered for construction (356 km) and five candidate roads were considered for upgrading (281 kin) in the Western, Mid-Westem and Far-Westem Development Regions. The aim of this study was to screen the roads down to approximately 500 km for detailed design. The candidate roads were screened based on economic, environmental and social factors. The * Inception Report recommended five roads totaling 204 km for detailed construction design to fair weather earth standard, whilst four roads totaling 265 km were recommended for U upgrading design to fair weather gravel standard. These recommended roads were subsequently approved by the Department of Roads (DOR) and the World Bank. Road Maintenance and Development Project 1 Initial Environmental Examination of Upgrading Roads May 1999  "SMEC U 1.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The RMD Project has the primary objective of advancing "the planning and preparation of selected components from among the recommendations of the PIP Master Plan to form the basis of a further Road Project" for World Bank funding (DOR, 1998). This work involves the I preparation of road designs, economic assessments, environmental assessments and resettlement and compensation planning for the construction and/or upgrading of sections of the strategic road network. This Initial Environmental Examination (IEE) assesses the potential impacts that are likely to result from the upgrading activities proposed for the three selected upgrading roads (see Table 1.1 and Figure 1). The environmental assessment for the five selected construction roads has been undertaken separately in the form of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and is not included in this IEE. Table 1.1: Roads Proposed for Upgrading Road Length DOR Road Read Districts Crossed (km) Classification* Number Surkhet - Kalikot 132.0 National Highway H13 Surkhet, Dailekh, __________ _________K alikot Dharapani - Chhedegad 61.5 Major Feeder Road F47 Surkhet, Salyan, Jajarkot Gorusinge- Sandhikharka 59.2 Major Feeder Road Fl1 Kapilbastu, Arghakhachi Total 252.7 Source: Classification and Design Standards, DOR, 1994. Throughout this IEE, each of the above roads will be referred to by its destination town only (e.g. "Kalikot" instead of "Surkhet-Kalikot"). The length of the road sections proposed for upgrading was determined by the status of road construction in November 1998. Since the PIP Project was completed, an additional 16 km of the Chhedegad road had been constructed therefore this was included in the length of road proposed for upgrading. The three roads are proposed for upgrading to Design Standards for Feeder Roads (DOR, 1997) "Construction Development Stage III (FWGT) - Fair Weather Gravel Track" standards for hilly terrain (see Appendix 1). This road standard represents a "construction stage to improve the road to dry season access of gravel standard", effectively upgrading it from fair weather earth track (FWET) standard. 2 Road Maintenance and Development PrDject Initial Environmental Examination of Upgrading Roads I May 1999  | , '> aiuu -,# < \ LJU ,Aa \ N ,~~~~~~~~ h . FdcnR E rac | .4C H H A. ac - cs k _ I fI r~ . ,s -K A - I K O T / 1 * Smh.4auaL7 - / t~~~~~( ' '.\( - "/-, . .t I & i l * Ba' s a \ SatwI" ~~ K .a~.g~~iaq,r KuMondre ' X * u> I \ L 1 E iC: HLa 2 t .\M * - wu/ -i W4. - - / / - \ $\ \ - v U - - 1:SRKE - KALIKO Sh>ECTIOr sN MA // \-/ ' |~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~.O4 T1 Lt ____/ - outu 0 iarctbunay Diutrict capital B&ag~~~~~~~~~~~~~nima1B& LeIend aXa VDnag Main traictlbound - I * \ Oy. X . Stream/inuer-  __. L_ __ ___ __J= \ , . \x3-. '<\" D 9 L E A 2 4 AAJ . I < / * i,, ; ;; ,; ~~~-L-,,42< ,, ;, _b ,,l, S .:J:E1 S~im '"' / t\ 1' ' / i ' ' \ i S f __ r 4 jl /~~~~~~~~ R K + I \ h . @-- ;As- " i(,~~~~~~~~~~ DHIAt 1!8^Eulh _a; :- ) + U ' '1 S '; SQL~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Kokin ;~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~a r *Il - Blrewlediuqnr \ ' .