1

BRIDGES IMPROVEMENT AND MAINTENANCE PROGRAM (BIMP)

(IDA Credit 5138-NEP)

Mid-term Review

June 16 – 30, 2015

AIDE MEMOIRE

I INTRODUCTION AND ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

1. A World Bank team1 (see Annex A for a list of team members) carried out a mid-term review and

support mission for the Bridges Improvement and Maintenance Program between June 16-30, 20152. The

objectives of this review were to: (i) review the current implementation status of the Program, including

progress in achieving Disbursement-linked Indicators (DLIs), Program Action Plan activities and remedial

actions suggested in the last review to improve Program’s performance; (ii) conduct in-depth analysis of

issues that are critical in order to achieve Program objectives and to identify course of actions to address

them; and (iii) identify any restructuring requirements, which will be in line with Program’s objectives, in

order to enhance Program’s effectiveness, to expedite its progress and also to respond to the reconstruction

needs of the recent earthquake.

2. The Team would like to thank the Government of Nepal (GON) for the hospitality extended to it,

especially by counterpart agencies and officials (see Annex B for a list of persons met). This Aide-Memoire

summarizes assessments, agreements, and follow-up actions based on review findings. It also reflects

discussions at the wrap-up meeting of July 7, 2015 chaired by Mr. Tulasi Prasad Sitaula, Secretary, the

Ministry of Physical Infrastructure and Transport (MoPIT). As agreed during the meeting and according to

the World Bank’s Access to Information Policy, International Development Association (IDA) will

publically disclose this document.

Table 1 Summary of Project Status

Program Data Program Performance Ratings

Board Approval: 28-Jun-2012 Summary Ratings Last Now Trend

Effectiveness Date: 20-Dec-2012 Achievement of PDO MS MS ▲

Original Closing Date: 15-Jul-2017 Implementation Progress MS MS ▲

Original Cr. Amount: SDR3 38.7m

(US$ 60m) Action Plan MU MS ▲

Amount Disbursed: SDR 20.14m

(US$ 29.31m4)

Disbursement Linked Indicators MU MS ▲

Technical MS S ▲

Fiduciary MU MU ▼

Social and Environmental MS MS ▲

Counterpart Funding MS MS ◄►

Overall Program Rating MS MS ▲

Notes: S- satisfactory; MS – moderately satisfactory; MU - moderately unsatisfactory; U – unsatisfactory;

▲ improving trends; ▼ deteriorating trends; ◄► static.

II STATUS OF DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES

3. The Program’s Development Objective is “to provide safe, reliable and cost effective bridges on

Nepal’s Strategic Roads Network.” The Program is on course to achieve its objective and is showing a

positive trend overall. The Team is particularly pleased to see considerable progress in the preparation and

implementation of major maintenance works. Recent emergency major maintenance on the Ratu Bridge

along the East West Highway is an especially noteworthy accomplishment which has demonstrated a step-

1 Hereinafter referred as “the Team” 2 The review was originally scheduled in end-April, 2015, which was subsequently postponed due to the devastating

earthquake of April 25, 2015 3 Special Drawing Rights 4 Approximately 52% of the total credit amount in SDR as of end-June, 2015

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

2

change in Department of Roads (DOR’s) capacity for bridge maintenance. DOR and Bridge Branch in

particular have successfully turned the Program around from its unsatisfactory period. This represents a

major accomplishment. Annex D provides a summary assessment of individual Program areas.

4. The Program has also demonstrated good progress in achieving DLIs throughout the Fiscal Year

(FY) 2014/15 (see Annex H). Over the same time period there have been marked improvements in

coordination between Bridge Branch and DOR’s Geo-Environmental and Social Unit (GESU) which

oversees implementation of the Program’s Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF).

The Team is pleased to note that Bridge Branch’s management has made a conscious effort to improve

relations with GESU.

5. However, there are noteworthy areas where implementation can improve further, including:

(i) Improving the bridge quality management aspect as many bridges show considerable deviations

from specifications;

(ii) Demonstrating more systematic application of fiduciary and environmental frameworks in contract

preparation and management;

(iii) Increasing Bridge Branch’s effectiveness in overseeing and managing bridge works undertaken by

other DOR entities (especially Divisional Offices and regional Bridge Projects); and

(iv) Continuing budgeting and spending sufficient amounts on design, feasibility study, and quality

control functions.

6. The recent earthquakes in Nepal have impacted many aspects of the economy and highlighted the

critical importance of road connectivity to support recovery efforts. The Program’s objective is therefore

more relevant than ever. MoPIT and DOR’s attention to continue the Program’s positive trend will be

critical to ensuring that Nepal’s bridge network remains up to the task of supporting vital connectivity

during these difficult times.

III CURRENT IMPLEMENTATION STATUS (INCLUDING ACTION PLAN AND DLIS)

Technical

7. Bridge Branch has responded quickly to assess the impact of recent earthquakes on vulnerable

bridge infrastructure. Bridge Branch, with support from IDA, has mobilized eight trained bridge inspection

engineers to assess potential impacts on the bridges in quake affected divisions. Approximately 400 bridges

have undergone detailed condition inspection since May 2015 using a new and improved methodology for

diagnosing bridge conditions. Furthermore Bridge Branch is planning condition inspection of an additional

roughly 200 bridges within 2015. The Team is very pleased to note that DOR took this action prior to the

monsoon season when rains may render compromised bridges particularly vulnerable. Bridge Branch will

use these assessment results to design emergency maintenance packages where necessary to prevent

unintended bridge failures. The Team also wishes to note that the Program may request disbursement

against DLI-5 (Improved Bridge Asset Management) once NPC is able to verify that the Bridge

management System (BMS) contains updated condition data from these assessments.

8. Bridge branch is planning to procure an additional 2,000 meters of baily bridges to address

potential emergency maintenance needs on vulnerable bridges. These additional baily bridges are

required to mitigate risks linked to unexpected bridge failures on the Strategic Road Network (SRN). The

Team notes that these meters of baily bridge will qualify for disbursement against DLI-1 (major

maintenance) once verification has confirmed that they have been delivered and staged appropriate

locations in the field.

9. The Mugling Bridge is in critical condition and the contract for its replacement may require re-

tendering. The contractor who won the tender for replacing this bridge reportedly bid significantly lower

amount than the estimated cost for a bridge of this complexity. Progress on site has been very slow,

construction techniques used by the contractor has been poor and the contractor is failing to implement load

3

control on the existing Mugling Bridge as required under the contract’s scope of work. The team has urged

Bridge Branch to monitor the situation closely given the critical condition of the Mugling Bridge and its

strategic importance. If need be, Bridge Branch should exercise contractual remedies (including

termination) to ensure that connectivity remains uninterrupted along the Prithvi Highway. IDA would

welcome any request for additional technical assistance to support Bridge Branch in this regard.

10. The Program has achieved a major accomplishment by successfully implementing urgent major

maintenance on the Ratu Bridge. The Team is particularly pleased to note the successful urgent major

maintenance works on the 300 meter Ratu Bridge that failed in 2014 when heavy rains compromised one

of its piers. The bridge is particularly critical given its role in providing for all weather connectivity along

the East West Highway. With help from DOR’s international bridge expert Bridge Branch developed a

remedy to safely reestablish the bridge’s functionality. This work used technologies that are relatively new

in Nepal including pressure grouting to reinforce the compromised pier’s foundation, concrete jacketing of

the pier column, and carbon fiber reinforcement of girders above the compromised pier. Repairs on the

bridge completed in June 2015 (just-in-time) as heavy rains render the temporary dry riverbed detour

impassable for vehicles. The Team wishes to congratulate Bridge Branch on using this maintenance

intervention to defer the need for much costlier investment in new bridge construction and for

demonstrating the use of new bridge maintenance technologies in Nepal.

11. During FY 2014/15 the Program made good progress at implementing major bridge

maintenance. As of June 2015 the Program had successfully verified 1,444 meters of completed major

maintenance against a target of 17,215 meters. The Bridge Branch is in the process of submission of another

2,562m of bridges to the National Planning Commission (NPC) for verification shortly. Procurement of

over 1,500m of bridges will start soon. Also design of another 4,800m bridges is ongoing. The Team is

pleased to note that the Program’s FY 2013/14 maintenance spending recovered and increased by

approximately 103% from FY 2012/13 when it had fallen by 34% from the year before. Improvements in

the delivery of major maintenance works is a very positive accomplishment for the Program. The Team is

grateful for the remedial actions that GON took to achieve this noteworthy turnaround.

12. Divisions are performing some minor maintenance but the Program is failing to claim

disbursement for results achieved. The Team observed several bridges that had undergone minor

maintenance during field visits. An estimate suggests that the minor maintenance works of approximately

3,300m (the Program target is 3,500) of bridges are now complete and dossiers can be submitted for

disbursement. Bridge Branch has noted that poor coordination with DOR divisional offices has hampered

efforts to prepare dossiers required for NPC’s verification activities. DOR’s management needs to consider

means of making divisions more accountable for reporting on their bridge-related works so as to facilitate

DLI verification.

13. There is a need to reconsider the institutional relationships between Bridge Branch, Divisions,

and Regional Bridge Projects. MoPIT/DOR’s decision to create a Bridge Branch in 2014 has improved

the institutional approach to bridge maintenance and new construction. However, there is a need to ensure

that Bridge Branch can be fully effective alongside other DOR branches. Divisions (which fall under

Maintenance Branch) and regional Bridge Projects (which fall under the Director General through the

regional directors) remain only semi-accountable to Bridge Branch for expenditures under the Program as

well as the quality of completed bridge works. MoPIT and DOR may wish to consider adopting a set of

agreed Bridge Operating Procedures (BOP) that explicitly mandate where and how Bridge Branch will

interact with other DOR entities. For example, the BOP could specify the specific approvals Bridge Branch

would give at the, new bridge selection, design, budgeting, or expenditure stage. Similarly, BOPs may also

include agreed practices for signing off on the quality of completed works. At present Bridge Branch has

relatively little control over divisional offices and regional Bridge Projects once budget has been allocated

to a specific bridge. The Team recommends the development and adoption of BOP quickly to make the

Bridge Branch’s operation more effective. One of the options DOR could pursue is bringing the Bridge

Projects under Bridge Branch’s administrative and operational control.

4

14. The Program is delivering mixed results with respect to quality. The Team has observed wide

disparity in quality across bridge works in different locations. For example, the recently completed Trishuli

Bridge (bridge number: 36-F196-001) shows a very high level of design and construction quality. In

contrast, the Tadi bridge in Nuwakot District (bridge number: 25-F082-005) districts shows an opposite

result on both accounts. High quality bridges evidence that DOR and Bridge Branch have robust technical

capacity whilst lower quality bridges evidence that the systems for applying that capacity remain

inconsistent. The Team’s anecdotal experience is that bridge works involving closer oversight from Bridge

Branch itself tend to achieve higher levels of quality. MoPIT and DOR may wish to consider means of

establishing Bridge Branch more formally in a department-wide bridge quality assurance role. There is also

a need to reconsider the role of Construction Supervision and Support Engineers (CSSE). There is little

evidence to suggest that CSSEs are proving effective at improving quality. There are also reports that

CSSEs could do far better in discharging their duties. Bridge Branch is in the process of developing a tablet-

based system for CSSEs to provide more timely reports to back to Kathmandu. This system will also help

Bridge Branch to keep better control of CSSE activities. The Team welcomes this initiative and requests

DOR and MoPIT to support Bridge Branch in getting more from the Program’s CSSEs.

Fiduciary (Financial Management and Procurement)

15. The Program’s expenditure framework has become less transparent and there is a need for better

trimester reporting to compensate. During FY 2014/15, MOF discontinued the use of heading 337158 that

was previously supporting SRN bridge maintenance. In addition, budget heading 337159 that supported

design and feasibility study has become co-mingled between SNR bridges, Local Road Network (LRN)

bridges, and road related works that are outside the Program’s scope. The budget for feasibility studies and

design of SRN bridges within the Program currently falls under an economic sub-heading for “capital

research and consultancy” below heading 337320. Heading 337320 is now the only heading that is linked

to BIMP, for civil works and consultancy. The elimination of heading 337158 is not particularly

problematic for Program monitoring as maintenance expenditures are visible from the current format for

trimester reports which includes an estimate of spending for specific DLIs. In contrast, DOR is not currently

reporting the expenditure incurred on feasibility studies, designs, and quality control under the Program

separately. Trimester reports state expenditures under heading 337320 and 337159 in aggregate and

segregated by DLIs. As there is no DLI relating to designs and feasibility studies, trimester reports do not

include a breakdown of spending in this area. The Team therefore requests that DOR revise the current

trimester report to break out all economic sub-headings under 337320 and 337159 so that expenditures on

designs and feasibility study are readily apparent. The third trimester report for FY 2014/15 should include

this change for all prior trimesters in the FY 2014/15.

16. The Program’s actual budget for feasibility study, design, and quality control is above the level

committed in the financing agreement with IDA. As noted above, both heading 337320 and 337159 now

contain the Program’s budget for design, feasibility study, and quality control. During FY 2014/15 the

budget for expenditure under the economic sub-heading that corresponds to designs and feasibility studies

was approximately NPR 171million which was roughly 5.4% of the civil works portion of this heading.

This is in agreement with a requirement of the Program Action Plan, which is a legal covenant with IDA.

The Team request Ministry of Finance’s (MoF’s) immediate attention to budget an amount not less than

5% of the Program’s civil works budget to support design, feasibility, and quality control functions during

FY 2015/16.

17. The magnitude and nature of audit objections from FY 2012/13 indicate the need for an inquiry

and potential departmental action. One particular audit objection relates to approximately US$ 1.2 million

paid for price escalation against several lump-sum contracts. The Public Procurement Act (2007) and

related regulations do not allow price escalation payments for lump-sum contracts. However, it is

understood that all of them are design-build contract. One of the issues that the enquiry needs resolving is

whether a design-build contact is a lump-sum contract or not. Opinion is divided on this. The Team

recommends that MoPIT and DOR initiate an internal inquiry of this and other audit objections from FY

5

2012/13 followed by departmental actions as appropriate to ensure accountability for any confirmed

irregularities. The Team request DOR to share the inquiry report with the Bank. Also the Bank team stands

ready to help with the inquiry, if approached.

18. Contract variations remain an issue despite progress on delivering contracts within time. Verification activities have completed for 46 contract packages under the Program. Contract data form

verification results indicates that seven contracts (15%) have completed on time, five contracts (11%) have

completed early, and 34 contracts (74%) have required time extensions beyond the original completion

date. The average delay in implementing new construction works is 343 days and the average delay for

major maintenance works is 161 days. It is important to note that these figures represent a considerable

improvement over Program’s initial baseline where only about 10% of contracts completed on time or early.

Subject to confirmation form NPC, these improvements permit disbursement against DLI-4 as estimated in

Annex J. However, the current rate of time extension on contracts still leaves considerable room for

improvement. DOR has developed an improved procedure for estimating the contract duration for bridges

and roads. The spreadsheet-based procedure uses a formula that is developed using empirical evidence and

was tested. Bridge Branch now needs to use this procedure for the estimation of bridge contract durations

at the planning stage. The Team welcomes this initiative and stands ready to support Bridge Branch with

the tool’s development.

19. The list of procurement unit chiefs needs updating: In the past, Planning Branch has maintained a

register of procurement unit chiefs as required by the Program Action Plan. The current list is out of date

and DOR’s efforts to update it will be appreciated.

20. DOR’s Grievance Redressal Mechanism (GRM) is functioning but needs improvement: The GRM

has captured approximately 70 complaints thus far. However, these complaints are currently only coming

through the central web-based collection portal. There is a need to expand public awareness about the ability

to access the GRM via DOR divisional offices. In addition to increased public outreach, the Team also

advises that DOR revise the web portal for submitting complaints. The current web-portal is only available

in English and users would need to know to click on the link labeled “Grievance Redressal Mechanism” in

order access the system. This may not be intuitive enough. The Team requests that DOR revise this system

to include both Nepali and English language options with an intuitive hyperlink heading such as “click here

to complain!”

Social & Environmental

21. BIMP Environmental and social management through DOR system has largely produced

acceptable results and a system for environmental clearance, reviews, monitoring and verification of

Program bridges is in place. Annex J details safeguard implementation status. At the initial stage of

Program implementation DOR focused on improving the system. Accomplishments include: (i) the

issuance of ESMF addendum (April, 2013) that incorporates bridge social and environmental aspects; (ii)

the issuance of an official order that assigned GESU to lead the social and environmental

processes/activities in DOR; (iii) the approval of the GESU Business Plan and the allocation of operational

resources to GESU as per the plan (FY 2014/15 budget of is NPR 10 million compared with NPR 560,000

(US$ 5,800) during FY 2013/14; (iv) contracting out social and environmental activities to consultants; and

(v) the completion of activities to improve the operational performance including the field orientation of

the amended ESMF, the development, testing and mainstreaming of different checklists, screening tools.

Now GESU provides overall safeguard due diligence, oversight and monitoring including internal

compliance checks in BIMP. Rapid post-reviews of the social and environmental status of back-log bridges

(under-construction at the time of Program effectiveness) indicated that Program activities largely entailed

low-to-moderate safeguard risks (out of the 205 bridges screened until May 2015, 13 number of bridges

required limited EA or IEE).

22. More effort is needed to capture full provisions to mitigate social and environmental impacts

including bridges that use design-build approaches. GESU and Bridge Branch are working more closely

6

together than ever before and have made considerable improvements in applying DOR’s ESMF. However,

the Team has observed that there is still an issue with the timing of social and environmental assessments

during the preparation stage of civil works undertakings. On a number of occasions the design of social and

environmental mitigations occurred after contracts had been awarded. There is a need for Bridge Branch

and GESU to agree a procedure for assuring that social and environmental provisions are part of works

packages prior to tendering.

23. GESU is fully staffed and resourced but will require additional vehicle support to cover Program

works effectively: GESU’s staff currently includes one environmental specialist and one social specialist in

Kathmandu in addition to six field-based social mobilizers. As mentioned before GESU now has an

approved business plan and is receiving budgetary resources according to that plan. There is a need for this

team to spend greater time on site and with communities. DOR’s efforts to enable this by providing

additional vehicle access for GESU will help to ensure the EMSF’s implementation.

Restructuring requirements

24. Some adjustments to the DLIs are required in order to make it more effective and to align it with

new available evidence. The current DLI-1 (major maintenance) target is 17,125m and it is reported that

the Program has successfully completed the major maintenance just over 4,000m of bridges or

approximately 23% of the target (of them already claimed and disbursed: 1,444m and claims are being

processed: 2,562m). New evidence suggests that a further stock of approximately 12,000m of bridges are

available for major maintenance. This means that there is not enough supply of bridges to achieve DLI-1

target. However, the Program has already completed the minor maintenance of approximately 3,300m of

bridges, which is roughly 76% of the target (3,500m), although they are yet to be verified. More bridges

had undergone minor maintenance in FY 2014/15. The total length of these bridges could be as high as

9,500m. Therefore, there is a scope of enhancing DLI-2 target. It is reported earlier that the current

achievement of DLI-4 (delivery of works contracts within time) is 26% (against an end-project target of

50%). Also DOR has developed an objective system of estimation of the contract duration (currently in

majority cases they are estimated arbitrarily). This confirms that DOR intends to shift gears with regard to

contract management. The Program may help DOR in the adoption of the objective system in the estimation

of bridge contract duration. This could best be done by reformulating DLI-4. The reformulated DLI-4 may

contain a combination of the use of the newly developed method and completion of works contracts within

time.

General items

25. Baseline data collection for the Program’s impact evaluation is complete and the relevant report

is being finalized: A Bank executed trust fund has been supporting baseline date collection activities. The

consultants have submitted the data and reports, which are now being checked. It is expected that the

process will be completed by end-July, 2015.

26. There are large unmet needs for training on bridge and contract management subjects: To date,

the Program’s training plan has failed to gain traction. This is forgoing a key opportunity to develop DOR’s

capabilities. The international bridge expert has conducted several ad-hoc training sessions. However, there

is a need to implement a more systematic approach to training and development. The Team notes that the

recent extension of the Road Sector Development Project (RSDP) can provide additional IDA support for

training, if required. The Team also stands ready to assist the Program with gaining access to additional

international expertise as needed.

27. The next Program review will take place in approximately 4 months: The Team would like to

propose end October, 2015 as a potential time for this review.

Annex P-1

ANNEX A: IMPLEMENTATION REVIEW TEAM

# Name Position

1 Annu Rajbhandari Environment Consultant

2 Bhagawan Shrestha Consultant (Quality Assurance)

3 Bibash Shrestha Team Assistant

4 Dominic Pasquale Patella Transport Specialist

5 Drona Ghimire Environmental Specialist

6 Farhad Ahmed Sr. Transport Specialist and Task Team Leader

7 Jun Zeng Sr. Social Development Specialist

8 Pradeep Kumar Shrestha Consultant (Financial Management)

9 Ramesh Raj Bista Procurement Specialist

10 Sachin Upadhyaya Consultant (Social Development)

11 Shambhu Uprety Sr. Procurement Specialist

12 Shubu Thapa Professional Associate

13 Vishnu Shrestha Consultant (BIMP)

14 Yogesh Bom Malla Financial Management Specialist

Annex P-2

ANNEX B: LIST OF PERSONS MET

S. No. Name Position

Ministry of Physical Infrastructure and Transport (MoPIT)

1. Mr. Tulasi Prasad Sitaula Secretary

2. Mr. Bishnu Om Bade Joint Secretary

Department of Roads (DOR)

1. Mr. Madhab Kumar Karki Director General

2. Mr. Sanjaya Kumar Shrestha Deputy Director General, Foreign Cooperation Branch

3. Mr. Saroj Pradhan Deputy Director General, Bridge Branch

4. Mr. Naresh Man Shakya Senior Divisional Engineer, Bridge Branch

5. Mr. Krishna Raj Adhikari Senior Divisional Engineer, Bridge Branch

6. Mr. Vijay Kumar Mahto Unit Chief, GESU

7. Mr. Shiva Prasad Nepal Project Manager, Mugling-Narayanghat Project, DOR

8. Mr. Arjun Aryal SDE, Bridge Project, Eastern Region, DoR

9. Mr. Ganesh Kumar Gautam SDE, Bridge Project, Western Regions, DOR

10. Mr. Bhanu Joshi Division Chief, DRO Surkhet, DOR

11. Mr. Dhruba Kumar Jha Engineer, DRO Surkhet, DOR

12. Mr. Ramesh Singh Engineer, Bridge Project, Eastern Region, DoR

13. Mr. Ram Hari Pokharel SDE, Eastern Regional Office, DoR, Damak

14. Mr. Shambhu Acharya Engineer, Eastern Regional Office, DoR, Damak

15. Mr. Rajan Shrestha Environmental Expert, DOR/GESU (Consultant/BIMP)

16. Mr. Prabhakar Pandit Social Expert, DOR/GESU (Consultant/BIMP)

17. Mr. Udaya Nepal Financial Expert (Consultant/BIMP)

18. Mr. Bashant Lal Shrestha Materials Engineer (Consultant / RSDP)

National Planning Commission (NPC)

1. Mr. Gopi Nath Mainali Joint Secretary

National Vigilance Center (NVC)

1. Mr. Ramesh Kumar Sharma Secretary

2. Mr. Deepak Shrestha Joint Secretary

3. Mrs. Pramila Bajracharya Joint Secretary

Annex P-3

ANNEX C: SUMMARY ASSESSMENT OF INDIVIDUAL PROGRAM AREAS

Item Rating Key Points

Program

Development

Objective

MS Program is showing a positive trend overall and progress has accelerated

towards achieving objectives

The Program has demonstrated good progress in achieving DLIs throughout the

FY 2014/15

Considerable progress in the preparation and implementation of major

maintenance works

o Appropriate quality management remains a major issue as many bridges show

considerable deviations from specifications

Action Plan

(Overall)

MS Bridge Management System (BMS) priorities followed for 100% of Program

work plan

Grievance Redressal Mechanism (GRM) functioning; however, needs further

support to make it more effective

Fiduciary, environmental, and social related actions now acceptable

o Technical actions relating to quality management remain one of the main

concerns

o Project management team formulation not yet fully complete

o Training plan is yet to be developed

Disbursement

Linked Indicators

MS DLI-1: verification complete: 1,444m. Verification awaiting: 2,562m; Under

construction: 203m; design completed: 1,526m; Design on-going: 4,787m

DLI-2: 3rd disbursement is expected to submit a claim of approximately

3,275m (Program target: 3,500m). Further information collection is on-going

DLI-3: 3,257 meters verification complete and disbursed. 3rd disbursement

plans to claim another US$ 7-10 m. New construction works exactly following

BMS priorities

DLI-4: Initial analysis suggest that good progress made: 26% achieved against

a target of 50%. Yet to be verified.

DLI-5: BMS fully operational in all 25 divisions and 5 regions. Data collection

completed for 400 bridges.

DLI-6: GRM functioning. However, further actions are needed to make it more

effective.

Technical S Bridge Branch has responded quickly to assess the impact of recent

earthquakes on vulnerable bridge infrastructure (assessment of 400 bridges

completed)

BMS in use as the basis for planning and prioritizing the Program

Major achievements in the repair of strategically important bridges

103% increase in maintenance spending relative to prior FY

During FY 2014/15 the Program made good progress at implementing major

bridge maintenance

o Construction site supervision engineers are not playing effective roles

o The Program is delivering mixed results with respect to quality

o Progress slow on project management teams and other quality related actions

o No progress on developing and implementing training plans

Fiduciary MU o The Program’s expenditure framework becomes less transparent

o The nature of audit objections is serious and the magnitude is substantial

($12m)

o The list of procurement unit chiefs needs updating

The Program’s actual budget for feasibility study, design, and quality control

above the level committed in the financing agreement (5.4% against an agreed

amount of minimum 5%

Annex P-4

The GRM is mostly working but needs further improvement

Progress made in clearing backlog audit objections

No overdue Trimester and audit reports

Separate budgets maintained for construction on LRN and SRN

Social and

Environmental

MS BIMP Environmental and social management through DOR system has

largely produced acceptable results and a system for environmental clearance,

reviews, monitoring and verification of Program bridges is in place

GESU has been receiving adequate budget to support the Program

The Bridge Branch (BB) has been making efforts to engage GESU in all

aspects of Program implementation

o Timing of social and environmental assessments during the preparation stage

of civil works undertakings is an issue

o Further effort is required to mitigate social and environmental impacts in the

case of design and build bridges

Overall

Program rating

MS DOR, Bridge Branch in particular, have successfully turned the Program

around from its unsatisfactory period

o Need for improvement on: (i) quality management; (ii) application of

fiduciary and environmental frameworks in contract preparation and

management; (iii) improve Bridge Branch’s effectiveness in supervising

bridge works undertaken by divisions and bridge projects; (iv) allocation of

sufficient budget for design, feasibility study, and quality control functions

Notes: S - Satisfactory; MS - Moderately Satisfactory; MU - Moderately Unsatisfactory; U – Unsatisfactory; -

Accomplishments; - Concerns

Annex P-5

ANNEX D: UPDATE ON PROGRAM MONITORING FRAMEWORK

Indicators Baseline

Value

Date Progress To Date Date (of

the data

collection)

End-

of-

Project

Target

Value

Date

PDO: to provide safe, reliable and cost effective bridges on Nepal’s Strategic Roads Networks

A. PDO level results indicators

PDO

Indicator 1:

Improved

condition of

bridges on

SRN

(The

percentage

of bridges on

SRN rated as

being in

good or fair

condition)

53 Oct. 2012 Achievement: 56.1% As of end-

June, 2015 total number of

bridges in good or fair

condition: 959 (out of total

existing bridges: 1,709).

June 30,

2015

75

PDO

Indicator 2:

Reduced

number of

structurally

unsafe

bridges

(The

percentage

of bridges on

SRN rated as

structurally

unsafe)

6 Oct. 2012 Achievement: 3.74%. As of

end-June, 2015 total number of

bridges in unsafe condition: 64

(out of total existing bridges:

1,709).

June 30,

2015

1

PDO

Indicator 3:

Strengthened

performance

management

in bridge

sector

(Percentage

of bridge

works

completed

on planned

schedule)

Negligible Oct. 2012 An estimate suggests that the

achievement is 26%.

June 30,

2015

50

B. Intermediate result indicators

Annex P-6

Indicators Baseline

Value

Date Progress To Date Date (of

the data

collection)

End-

of-

Project

Target

Value

Date

Intermediate

Results

Indicator 1:

Completion

of major

maintenance

of bridges on

SRN

(Cumulative

metres)

0 4,006m of construction

completed

1,444m verified and disbursed

Remaining 2,562m is in the

process of submission for

verification

June 30,

2015

17,125

Intermediate

Results

Indicator 2:

Completion

of minor

repairs of

bridges on

SRN

(Cumulative

metres)

0 It is reported that repair of

3,275m completed and in the

process of submission for

verification

June 30,

2015

3,500

Intermediate

Results

Indicator 3:

New bridges

built or

improved on

SRN

(Cumulative

metres)

0 3,825m completed

3,257m (35 bridges) verified

and disbursed (1st and 2nd

tranches)

568m (8 bridges) completed

and awaiting verification

4763m (52 bridges) under

construction NPC

June 30,

2015

6,000

Intermediate

Results

Indicator 4:

Improved

Bridge Asset

Management

(Number of

actions

completed)

0 BMS fully operational in 25

divisions.

DOR has officially endorsed

BMS for SRN bridge

planning and prioritization via

letter from Director General

on Oct. 10, 2012.

BB has employed a full time

BMS operator.

Public version of BMS is

available on DOR website:

http://www.dor.gov.np

DOR has made BMS

compatible with Annual Road

Maintenance Plan (ARMP)

for divisional planning and

budgeting purpose

DOR plans to update existing

BMS in order to make it more

robust by Dec. 2015.

A portion of the allocation

against this DLI already

disbursed under 2nd tranche

June 30,

2015

Annex P-7

Indicators Baseline

Value

Date Progress To Date Date (of

the data

collection)

End-

of-

Project

Target

Value

Date

Intermediate

Results

Indicator 5:

Increased

effectiveness

of the

institutions

responsible

for bridge

sector

management

(Number of

actions

completed)

0 GRM policy developed and

approved by MoPIT

DOR formally launched GRM

system on Apr. 16, 2014.

A Help/Call Center has been

set-up in DOR to provide

system assistance to all DOR

cost centers.

Work in progress to

mainstream GRM system in

DOR as per an agreed Action

Plan

GRM Procedural Manual has

been finalized

A portion of the allocation

against this DLI already

disbursed under 2nd tranche

June 30,

2015

Annex P-8

ANNEX E: NOTES OF BRAINSTORMING SESSION (23RD JUNE, 2015)

S.N. Topic Issues and Discussions Conclusions / Recommendations

1 DLIs DLIs

There are six Disbursement Linked Indicators (DLI) in the BIMP. Are they still relevant to the

Program context?

Yes, all six DLIs are still

relevant.

DLI-1

Target is 17,125m, achievement by 2nd tranche of disbursement was 1,444.m and expected another

2,562m to be disbursed by 3rd tranche, totaling approximately 4,000m

Major maintenance works undertaken are not sufficient to meet the target

Local consultants have been facing problems in the design of bridge major maintenance given the

lack of experience

BB is publishing EOI very soon for additional 125 bridges which will cover around 3500 to 4000m

Remedial works of post-earthquake 400 bridges will cover another around 8,000m

Procurement of an additional 2,000m of bailey bridges is proposed to prepare for future

emergencies.

DLI 1 target could be met

Target (17,125m) is achievable.

However, would require further

assessment.

Suggested that the Program

procures another 2,000m of

bailey bridges.

DLI-2

Target is 3,500m, no disbursement has been made till date, a survey shows that 140 bridges are

currently under DLI-2 contracts so there is hope to meet target during 3rd tranche of disbursement.

Existing procurement rules and specification are found not favorable to carry out minor

maintenance by DOR divisions therefore they are least attracted to carry out of DLI-2 works.

Review is required in procurement rules that allows divisions to introduce force account system for

few approved activities under DLI-2 contracts. Or divisions will have to explore other contract

options to complete DLI-2 contracts.

For time being keep original

target of 3500m, however there

is an opportunity of enhancing

the target

DOR to review existing

procurement options applicable

to minor maintenance works

DLI-3

Target is 6,000m, achievement by 2nd tranche of disbursement was 3,257m and expected another

823m to be disbursed by 3rd tranche, totaling 4080m

DOR will meet original target of 6,000m in Program period

Keep 6,000m, i.e. no change is

required in original target.

Annex P-9

S.N. Topic Issues and Discussions Conclusions / Recommendations

DLI-4

No disbursement has been made against this DLI till date.

Difficult to meet the target, however all agreed, the DLI-4 is relevant to DOR to improve existing

contract management practices

Recent data provided by BB on contract completion period of each disbursed contracts under 1st

and 2nd tranches of disbursements indicates nearly 35% of contracts have been completed in

original contract completion period (however data needs a further investigation and improve in data

quality)

Possible options for this DLI, could be inclusion of objective method of determining Contract

Completion period, which DOR has recently developed officially circulated instruction for its

application in all the DOR roads and bridge contracts.

Keep DLI-4 either in reduced

form or exploring other options

as discussed

DLI-5

Targets of period-1 and 2 have been met and already disbursed.

Conducting a re-orientation on BMS operation might be required because there are additional nine

divisions and three bridge projects. Best possible period could be in the new FY. It is justified in

context of changes made in BMS condition rating using Dr. Raina’s suggestion.

No change required in DLI-5

Agreed to conduct re-

orientation on BMS

DLI-6

Targets of period -1 and 2 have been met and already disbursed.

GRM portal in DOR webpage is poorly presented and it is in English. The best would be to present

in Nepali also with clear text to public lodgers

Hosting of GRM system should be through DOR server, not by server of software consultants

Extending public awareness program including outreach strategy in DOR regions and divisions is

necessary

No change required in DLI-6

other than improving its

presentation on portal with

default in Nepali also

Extending public awareness

program such as outreach

strategy in regions and

divisions

2 Action Plan Technical Actions

BMS

Update of BMS and conduct re-orientation to divisions and regions

Currently new bridge condition assessment system has been introduced with Dr. Riana’s support

for condition assessment of nearly 400 post earthquake bridges with the support of RSDP, which

could be possible option for DOR to up-grade its current system of Bridge Management.

No change required except it is

to be hosted in a DOR server

BB is to publish EOI for

procurement of consulting

services for update of BMS.

Annex P-10

S.N. Topic Issues and Discussions Conclusions / Recommendations

Quality Assurance Plan (QAP)

BB has circulated template of QAP to all divisions and projects as suggested QAP template

The Contractors are responsible for QAP

Dr. Raina clarified that: QAP has two separate sections. One is QA (quality assurance), which is

responsibility of the Contractors under verification of Employer and next one is QC (quality

control) i.e. controlled is maintained by the Contractors still through Employer’s verification.

Therefore in both cases Employer is responsible for verification and quality is maintained by the

Contractors

Agreed to conduct

brainstorming session on

quality

Issue to be raised in mid-term

review

Project Management Team (PMT)

Not achieved formation of PMT at divisions and projects

Needs to increase threshold of formation of Project Management Team from NRs 10million to NRs

25million

Proposed to increase contract

value over NRs.25million for

formation of PMT

Issue to be suggested in mid-

term review

5% of total civil works

Initial data provided to the Bank derived from budget head 320 (SRN) +159 (LRN+SRN) that was

mistake, in actual, the SRN Program at the BB is underfunded to use 5% of civil works

BB had difficulty to use 5% from budget allocated to Bridge Projects

To be discussed with FM team

Issue to be raised in mid-term

review

Annual Training Plan

Not prepared till date, BB tried to procure consulting services of Nepal Administrative Collage,

however due to procurement problem it could not be procured.

Dr. Raina is suggested to provide some form of training plans

Annual training plans are

required to be prepared.

Alternate funding source to be

explored (e.g. RSDP)

Fiduciary Actions

Creation of separate budget head for SRN by MoF

Separation was clear in FY 2013/14 whereas it failed do that in FY 2014/15

MoF allocated budget for SRN new construction and maintenance in a single budget head 337320,

similarly, it allocated budget for design and feasibility study of roads and bridges of LRN and SRN

in a single budget head 337159.

Financial reporting has been difficult for BB due to combined budget for new construction and

maintenance of SRN from budget head 337320 and similarly reporting of budget head 337159 is

also difficult due to LRN and SRN in single budget head

Issue to be raised in mid –term

review

Annex P-11

S.N. Topic Issues and Discussions Conclusions / Recommendations

Divisions and projects are also confused to have budget allocation for maintenance and new

construction from the same budget head 320, giving temptation to expend more in new construction

than in maintenance works.

Annual Investment Plan

Prepared annual investment plan based on BMS and disclosed in DOR webpage.

Continue

Procurement Unit Chief

Appointment of procurement unit chief is achieved in each of the procuring entities but status

record is not maintained

Maintain status record

Audit Committee

Achieved as per requirements

Maintain audit observations record on yearly basis to track settlement on each year

Continue

Continue

Environmental and Social

Revised ESMF

Revision of ESMF achieved and disseminated via hard copy and DOR web page

No further action required

DOR provides power and adequate resources to GESU

DG has given adequate power to implement revised ESMF to GESU and resources including

dedicated budget from BB

GESU is still struggling to implement ESMF effectively. Practice of prior review of condition of

contract including BOQ before tendering by GESU has to be formalized by establishing an official

system of forwarding condition of contract and BOQ to GESU

Application of ESMF provisions in Design and Build contracts is still to be worked out

Suggested to conduct a brainstorming session to resolve all these issue by GESU

Agreed to conduct a

brainstorming session in DOR

by GESU next month

GESU’s Business Plan

GESU has approved Business plan

Dedicated budget being provided by BB as per plan

Individual consultants for social and environmental have been hired for GESU

There is an issue of transportation facility to the individual Consultants including for 6 social

mobilize Consultants at field to be resolved

Give continuity

Transport facility to be

explored under RSDP by FCB

Cross-cutting Actions

GRM

Discussed in DLI-6

Continue

Bridge operational toolkits: Give continuity

Annex P-12

S.N. Topic Issues and Discussions Conclusions / Recommendations

Bridge operational toolkits have been prepared and soft copy is made available in DVD and

presented in DOR webpage. Toolkit should also include administrative procedures and internal

control guidelines.

Update is required to incorporate recent changes in Public Procurement Acts

3 Budget

Allocation Much of this has been discussed in Action Plan Fiduciary item (i) Issue needs to be raised in the

mid-term review

4 Quality Revisit recently approved DOR Quality Management Policy and carry out a review of its degree of

applicability for major and minor maintenance.

For small works under maintenance, it would be applicable to follow quality control as specified in

specification

However DOR needs to conduct wider discussion similar to this brainstorming session for policy

revisit and develop strategy for its application on new construction and maintenance

Explore role of NVC for improvement in quality of works

Agreed to conduct

brainstorming session on

quality in July/August, 2015

5 BMS BMS has been discussed in DLI-5

6 GRM GRM has been discussed in DLI-6

7 Institutional

Framework and

Outsourcing

Currently there are 6 Construction Supervision Support Engineers in regions similarly there are 6

Social Mobilizer Consultants (SMCs) in regions. They are monitored by regional directors. An

effective monitoring and support system yet to be developed and implemented for enhancing the

SMC’s performance on implementing and monitoring the safeguards activities.

GESU have to involve the central based safeguards experts or externally hired senior safeguard

consultants for field verification of the bridges whose dossiers have been prepared by field based

SMC and submitted for reimbursement

Social mobilize Consultants are doing well. Their control and command need to be under GESU

Performance of some of the CSSEs and Structure Engineer is not satisfactory.

Issue needs to be resolved by

BB

Annex P-13

ANNEX F: ACTION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION STATUS

Action description Deadline Responsible party Completion

Measurement

Achieved?

(Y/N)

Updated Status Issues require to be

addressed during the

Mid-term Review

i. BMS, the basis for

planning, prioritization

and M&E, to be

continuously maintained

and used for prioritization

of the program.

On-going Bridge

Project/Regional

Directorate/Divisional

Office

Personnel

trained in use

of BMS,

conditions

surveys

updated and

annual

prioritized

programs

available. Y

Development of

interface software to link

BMS with ARMP is in

progress with nearly

80% complete

Advance methods of

BMS data storing and

condition rating have

been developed and it is

in trial-run to store

bridge condition data of

nearly 400 post

earthquake bridges, of

which, data collection of

330 bridges is now

complete.

Currently data

processing is also in

progress

Updating of BMS

Updating of BMS-

based 5-year bridge

to bridge investment

plan

Re-orientation on

BMS

Installation of in-

house server for

BMS hosting

Strengthening BMS

operation unit with

training and

resources

ii. DOR implements a

Quality Assurance Plan.

All materials testing to be

undertaken according to

specifications as

described in the Quality

Assurance Plan and in

the contract between

DOR and the contractor.

On-going Bridge Project/DOR Continued

compliance

will be

monitored by

technical audit

consultants.

Y Recently BB has

circulated QAP template

to all divisions/ projects

suggesting its use by the

contractors

According to the third-

partly verification team

and CSSEs, application

of QAP is found to be

improving in the

divisions/projects

Application of QAP and

materials testing as per

specification described

in QAP is yet to be fully

addressed

Training on

preparation of QAP

and how to address

specification

Strengthening

divisions/ project

materials laboratory

in terms of (a)

equipment

availability, (b)

technical staff, (c)

documentation

templates and

standards

DOR Quality

Management Policy

not yet implemented,

although approved.

Annex P-14

Action description Deadline Responsible party Completion

Measurement

Achieved?

(Y/N)

Updated Status Issues require to be

addressed during the

Mid-term Review

No departmental

action to to panelize

low quality works

No departmental

mechanism to ensure

that officials are

made accountable

with regard to

quality

Regional laboratories

are yet to be

established as

suggested in DOR

Quality Management

Policy-2012/13

DOR lacks adequate

supervision capacity

Monitoring and

Reporting

mechanism is

inadeqate

iii. DOR will assign project

management team for

each contract that has

value over US$125,000

equivalent (roughly

NPR10 million). The

project management team

will comprise technical,

social and environmental

personnel. A team can

manage multiple

contracts depending on

operational requirements.

October 31,

2012 and

ongoing

DOR Continued

compliance

will be

monitored by

technical audit

consultants.

N Formation of PMT has

not yet been

materialized in divisions

and projects

Project Support

Consultants (particularly

CSSEs and SMCs) are

not functioning as

expected

Formation of PMT

urgently required;

It may be necessary

to increase the

threshold: may be

double the

mentioned amount

iv. through MOF, during the

implementation of the

Program, allocate at least

five percent (5%) of its

total civil works budget

under the Program in

each said Fiscal Year, for

October 31,

2012 and

July 31 in

subsequent

years

MoPPWTM/MoF Increased

budgetary

allocation

Y In FY 2014/15 an

mount over 5% (5.4%)

of the capital budget has

been allocated.

Continuation of a

minimum allocation

of 5% is required for

the Program to

achieve its

objectives.

Annex P-15

Action description Deadline Responsible party Completion

Measurement

Achieved?

(Y/N)

Updated Status Issues require to be

addressed during the

Mid-term Review

feasibility studies,

design, supervision,

quality control,

management of

environmental and social

impacts, and other

required inputs for the

maintenance and

construction of bridges

under the Program.

v. DOR prepares annual

training plans for all SRN

bridge related functions

and implements these

plans throughout the

Program implementation

period.

October 31,

2012 and

annually

thereafter

DOR/Bridge Project Training Plan

prepared and

training

implemented.

Activities

supported by

capacity

building

consultants

N No tangible activity

noticed in developing

annual training plans for

all SRN bridges to

conduct training

throughout the Program

implementation period

DOR needs to

develop and

implement a training

plan as required by

the Action Plan.

i. Creation of separate

budget heads for SRN

bridges which will

provide the budget

allocation for

expenditures under the

SRN Bridge Program.

Effectiveness

condition

MoF Separate

budget lines for

SRN and LRN

bridges appear

in annual

budget issued

by MoF.

Y In current FY 2015/14

MoF allocated budget

for SRN separately;

however it combined

new construction and

maintenance in one

budget head 337320

28. But on the case of

budget head 337159 for

feasibility study and

design, MoF provide in

single budget head for SRN

and LRN

Field level

expenditure data

keeping and

reporting on budget

head 337320 is

major issue currently

in BB due to mix-up

of new construction

and maintenance in

one budget head,

because of that :-

It is noticed that some

divisions sometimes

carry out expenditure

of new construction

from budget

allocated to

maintenance such as

paying construction

of culvert from

budget allocated for

minor maintenance.

Annex P-16

Action description Deadline Responsible party Completion

Measurement

Achieved?

(Y/N)

Updated Status Issues require to be

addressed during the

Mid-term Review

Budget head 337159

is for LRN and SRN

feasibility study and

design. There is also

difficulty in keeping

expenditure data

separately for LRN

and SRN.

ii. Annual preparation and

public disclosure of

prioritized investment

and maintenance plans

based on BMS and

limited by identified

budget envelop.

October 31,

2012 and

annually

Bridge Project Annual

investment

plan prepared

and disclosed

in DOR

website

Y 3 year bridge to bridge

investment plan is

published on DOR

website;

BMS is available or

DOR website

BB has strictly followed

the priority in selection

of bridges for FY

2014/15

Revised bridge to

bridge investment

plan needs to be

developed and

disclosed after a

BMS update.

iii. Appoint and maintain a

procurement unit chief in

each of the procuring

entities with clear job

descriptions and provide

them with at least one-

week training on

procurement (if they are

not already trained).

October 31,

2012 and

revise the list

as

appropriate

DOR A memo from

DOR with the

list of

procurement

unit chiefs and

a confirmation

from DOR that

training has

been provided

Y All divisions, projects,

and BB have appointed

procurement unit chief

(PUC)

DOR conducts training

on procurement

periodically in each year

Maintaining record is

not in practice, however

DDG Planning and

Design has circulated

instructions to all

concerned for

maintaining record of

such appointment of

PUC

Record of such

appointment of PUC

needs to be

maintained including

training activities

conducted

iv. through DOR, (i)

establish an audit

committee meeting the

requirements of the

Recipient’s Office of the

Auditor General, to

October 31,

2012

DOR The committee

will have met

following

receipt of the

preliminary

report and

DOR has an audit

committee to address

outstanding audit

observation

Nearly all offices submit

their preliminary

DOR needs to

continue addressing

audit observations as

per this requirement

Annex P-17

Action description Deadline Responsible party Completion

Measurement

Achieved?

(Y/N)

Updated Status Issues require to be

addressed during the

Mid-term Review

address outstanding audit

observations from Fiscal

Year 2009/2010 and

those in subsequent

years, if any, resulting

from DOR’s own

operations; and (ii)

ensure that all said

outstanding audit

observations from Fiscal

Year 2009/2010 are

addressed according to a

time-bound action plan

acceptable to the

Association and

Recipient’s Office of the

Auditor General.

responded

within 35 days.

response on outstanding

audit observation within

35 days

The Program Action

Plan requires DoR to

address audit

observations from FY

09/10 and all subsequent

years. DOR has formed

an audit committee to

settle audit observations

with OAG. The audit

observations are

maintained on

cumulative basis since

FY 2002/03. The

cumulative audit

observations till FY

2012/13 are NPR 9.05

billion. The amount of

audit observations

settled till April 13,

2015 is about NPR 2.21

billion (24.50% of the

total cumulative up to

FY 2012/13).

i. through DOR, review

and revise DOR’s current

environmental and social

management rules and

procedures to incorporate

bridge specific

environmental and social

impact mitigation

measures, in form and

substance satisfactory to

the Association, and

immediately thereafter

implement said revised

rules and procedures in a

manner satisfactory to

October 31,

2012

DOR/GESU Revised ESMF

disseminated

via web and

hardcopy

Y DoR ESMF was

amended incorporating

roads and bridges on

(March 18, 2013).

DG, DOR has made

circulation of a notice

stating that EMSF is to

be implemented in all

DOR divisions and

project in (Oct 10, 2012)

ESMF was circulated in

DOR and published in

DOR webpage in June

2013. Hard copy was

Hard copy needs to

be published

incorporating all

amendments in a

single booklet rather

than separate

amendment books

Annex P-18

Action description Deadline Responsible party Completion

Measurement

Achieved?

(Y/N)

Updated Status Issues require to be

addressed during the

Mid-term Review

the Association

throughout the Program

implementation.

also made available in

GESU

Orientations on

amended ESMF were

conducted in BIMP

orientations and ARMP

workshop by GESU

Chief

ii. through DOR, provide

the Geo-Environmental

and Social Unit within

DOR with power and

adequate resources,

acceptable to the

Association, to enable it

to carry out the social

and environmental

management measures in

accordance with the

revised rules and

procedures referred to in

action (i) above

October 31,

2012

DOR Memo from

DOR to

formally assign

GESU to SRN

Bridge

Program

Y DOR DG has delegated

authority/power to

GESU to implement

ESMF in DOR in

Oct.2013

6-Social Mobilizer

Consultants (SMC) were

engaged in field from

February 2013 in

regions to support BIMP

safeguard

implementation.

Similarly one

Environmental Expert

and one Social

Safeguard Expert were

engaged from

September 17, 2014 to

support safeguard

implementation

activities both at central

and regional levels

stationed at GESU.

GESU was provided

with dedicated budget

from BB based on

approved Business Plan

for FY 2014/15

Continue providing

adequate resources to

GESU

iii. Preparation of a plan, and

subsequent

implementation of that

October 31,

2012 and on-

going

DOR GESU is

strengthened as

per agreed plan

Y GESU prepared a three-

year business plan

(Nepali FY 2069-72)

Continuity of budget

allocation from BB

as per Business Plan

Annex P-19

Action description Deadline Responsible party Completion

Measurement

Achieved?

(Y/N)

Updated Status Issues require to be

addressed during the

Mid-term Review

plan, to strengthen GESU

both in terms of

manpower and financial

resources

which is being

implemented.

Cross-cutting Actions

i. Grievance Redressal

Mechanism (GRM)

developed, made

operational, and

implemented in DOR for

managing all type of

complaints including

technical, fiduciary and

social/environmental

issues

September,

30, 2013 and

on-going

DOR GRM

developed and

made

operational

Y DOR has developed and

implemented DOR

GRM system

Nationwide since April

16, 2014

Policy document was

approved by GON on

Oct.7, 2012 and made

available in DOR

webpage

System Operational

Manual, GRM

Procedural Manual were

published.

Orientations were

carried out to all

concerned including

representatives of NVC

and CIAA

No of grievances

lodged has been low.

Public awareness

program needs to be

carried out.

DOR webpage needs

to be more user-

friendly and

interactive with

regard to lodging of

grievances.

ii. Preparation of a Bridge

Operations Toolkit (with

support from the

Association) that will

summarize various

bridge planning,

construction,

maintenance and

management procedures.

The toolkit will be

developed based on the

existing procedures that

exists in different DOR

manuals, guidelines etc.

December

31, 2012

Bridge Project Toolkit

developed and

published

Y Bridge Operational

Toolkit has been

developed and approved

by BB and made

available in DOR

webpage for application

Orientation on Bridge

Toolkit is being carried

out in DOR during

ARMP workshop.

DVD copy made

available to BB for

wider application at

divisions and projects

Update of Bridge

Toolkit is required to

incorporate recent

changes in PPA -

2014/15

Annex P-20

ANNEX G: STATUS OF AGREED ACTIONS FROM LAST REVIEW [NOVEMBER, 2014]

Next Step Responsibility Deadline Status

Project Development Indicator

Complete the baseline studies WB End-Mar., 2015 Baseline data collection, analysis and

reporting completed. Final verification

on-going

Action Plan implementation

Under technical action (i)

BB updates BMS and procures medium-term contract for

BMS software maintenance

BB By Sept. 30, 2015 Linked to DLI-5;

Condition of nearly 25% of existing

bridges (400 bridges) in BMS data-base

has been updated. In addition there is a

plan to update another 200 bridges

(12%) by Dec. 2015;

BMS software has been updated with

improved version of condition

assessment templates using tablet based

data entry;

BMS has been linked with ARMP and

practiced in recent ARMP workshops;

and

A BMS unit has been created within BB

with two supporting staff including one

IT personnel for minor software

maintenance.

BB prepares annual training plans for SRN bridge related

functions incorporating basic trainings in BMS, CMS,

GRM, Mobile Monitoring, Outreach Strategy, QAP/quality

control, new bridge technology in designs and construction

etc.

BB/Bridge Technical

Expert

By May 31, 2015 Linked to DLI-5; and

Not achieved, BB could not prepare

Annual Training Plans.

Under technical action (ii)

Annex P-21

Next Step Responsibility Deadline Status

Quality Assurance Plan implemented by DOR DOR/BB Confirmed

application of QAP in

divisions and projects

by the end of each

month through CSSE

Implementation of QAP is getting some

traction, BB has developed QAP

template and circulated to all divisions

and projects for its application through

the contracts;

CSSEs are reporting status of application

of QAP in their monthly report; and

BB also reports information on quality

assurance in its Quarterly Progress

Reports.

Under fiduciary action (i)

Public disclosure of 3year bridge-by bridge investment

plans based on BMS including approved annual program

Planning Branch/BB By January 31, 2015

Thereafter to be

presented on DOR

website as and when

updated

Achieved , DOR has published 3 year

bridge to bridge investment plan based

on BMS including approved annual

program

Under fiduciary action (ii)

DOR planning branch to maintain register of procurement

unit chiefs and to include this within trimester reports

Planning and Design

Branch

By Dec. 31 2014

Thereafter to be

updated as and when

required

Partially achieved, procurement chiefs

areappointed but updated register is not

maintained and status is not reported in

the Quarterly Progress Reports

Under fiduciary action (iii)

All outstanding audit observations from 2009/10 to be

addressed

DOR Audit Committee > 50% by end of FY

2014/15

The cumulative audit observations of FY

2002/03 to FY2012/13 are NPR 9.05

billion. The amount of audit observations

settled till April 13, 2015 is about NPR

2.21 billion (24.50% of the total

cumulative up to FY 2012/13)

Under social and environmental action (i)

Completed safeguard screening of 56 urgent major

maintenance (UMM) bridges and review Condition of

Contract documents

BB/GESU By Apr. 30, 2015 Safeguard screening of 28UMM bridges

completed ;

Remaining 28 UMM bridges will be

screened by August 2015; and

Condition of contracted reviewed to

ensure safeguard provisions through

provisional sum.

Annex P-22

Next Step Responsibility Deadline Status

Inclusion of safeguard measures in non-urgent major

maintenance of 60 bridges whose EOI has been recently

published

By May 31, 2015 Safeguard screening of 45 non-urgent

major maintenance of bridges completed

Carry out IEE or screening of all new crossings from FY

2012/13/14/15 and review Condition of Contracts

On-going till Jun. 30,

2015

Safeguard screening of 34 new crossings

completed out of total 72 bridges (of

which 13 bridges require IEE. Out of

which 5 bridges are design and built

contract option);

EOI for 8 bridges requiring IEE has

been processed by GESU on May 12,

2015; and

Terms of Reference (ToR) for 3 design

and build bridges has been approved and

remaining ToRs for 2 design and build

bridges are under preparation process.

GESU to endorse the Social and Environment section of

dossiers before submission to the NPC

On-going GESU has endorsed social and

environmental section of 47 dossiers

before submission to NPC

Developed site visit plan for GESU’s team in each contract

particularly at the time of (a) start of project (b) before

issuing Certificate of Substantial Completion, (c) before

issuing Defect Liability Certificate including final payment.

Implemented above plan and report included in (1)

Quarterly Progress Report and (2) issues arise during visits

to be well discussed in Coordination meeting

BB/GESU Develop GESU’s Site

Visit Plan by Dec.

31, 2014

Continue thereafter

BIMP Social / Environmental experts

developed site visit plan however could

not be implemented in absence of

transport facility

BB conducts formal meeting at least once in a month with

GESU for better coordination

BB/GESU BB and GESU meets

every month and the

decisions are minuted

Since November 2014 a total of 10

formal coordination meetings and

several informal discussions have been

held between BB and GESU

Carry out test run of templates developed for safeguard

screening for those bridges not requiring IEE

GESU/BB By Dec. 31, 2014

Achieved, test runs were carried out and

screening templates being further

improved

Annex P-23

Next Step Responsibility Deadline Status

Prepare Environmental and Social Screening Report;

Environmental and Social Assessment, Environmental

Management Plan, Social Action Plan for each sub-project

GESU/BB/Consultants Process to be

commenced and

continued

Screening and rapid assessment of 208

bridges (major maintenance, new

crossing and back log) have been carried

out and their reports prepared

Review of design and contract/bidding documents from

social and environmental perspectives

GESU/BB Process to be

commenced and

continued

Contract documents (those which have

been given to GESU only) have been

reviewed and suggested to ensure

safeguard concerns in the contact

documents including in BoQ however,

formal practice is still to be achieved

Provide concurrence to the documents prior to tendering to

ensure that social and environmental issues are addressed

GESU/BB Process to be

commenced and

continued

Process has not yet been practiced or

formalized in DOR

Conduct monitoring, implementation of mitigation

measures and reporting social and environmental status in

each trimester report

GESU/BB Process to be

commenced and

continued

Social mobilizers are monitoring to

possible extent at the field depending

upon interest of divisions and projects to

involve them in absence for formal

Project Management Team; and

Findings of such monitoring are

presented monthly by SMs from the

regions and included in Quarterly

Progress Report by the experts at GESU.

Provide no objection while issuing defect liability

certificate to confirm that no remaining issues linked to

social and environment

GESU/BB Process to be

commenced and

continued

Process has not yet been practiced or

formalized in DOR

Under social and environmental action (ii)

Cross cutting action (i)

Respond to complaints received and reports actions taken

in Quarterly Progress Report

DOR/ Divisions On-going

Linked to DLI-6; and

Achieved, such reports are included in

Quarterly Progress Report

Cross cutting action (ii)

DOR Bridge Operation Toolkit made available on DOR

website

BB By Dec. 31, 2014 Linked to DLI-4;

DOR Bridge Operation Toolkit has

been developed and made available in

DOR webpage; and

DVD copies are made available.

Annex P-24

Next Step Responsibility Deadline Status

BB uses an objective method in deriving total project

completion time in the case of all up-coming contracts,

including maintenance and new construction

BB As and when

required

Linked to DLI-4;

DOR has developed method of the

estimation of project duration for roads

and bridges. DG has circulated

departmental directives for its

implementation; and

BB is yet to introduce the method in the

estimation of contract duration

Disbursement Linked Indicators

Finalize the design of 56 UMM bridges BB By May 31, 2015 Linked to DLI-2;

Partially achieved; and

22 UMM bridge designs are still to be

finalized. This is delayed due to

resolving of the procurement process.

Finalize the procurement of consultants for designs

services of 60 major maintenance bridges

BB By FY 2014/15 end Partially achieved;

Designs of 44 bridges (out of 60 ) have

been submitted in draft by the

consultants; and

Review of designs is in process to

finalize designs before end of FY.

Submit dossiers of the already completed minor

maintenance bridges to NPC

DROs, BB Dossier submission

to NPC by Jun. 30,

2015

Not achieved;

Linked to DLI-2;

Around 142 bridges are currently

recorded under DLI-2 maintenance; and

Expected to be submitted in the next

tranche of disbursement.

Complete agreements of 34 new crossings (FY 2014/15)

with contractors including bridges selected under the

design/built contract option

BB By Jun. 30, 2015 Linked to DLI-3; and

Achieved ( which 5 bridges are under

D&B contract options, whereas

remaining are under DBB contract

options)

Note: next steps for DLIs 4, 5, and 6 included within action plan items

Others

Annex P-25

Next Step Responsibility Deadline Status

Engage a Procurement and Contract Management Expert

and a Geotechnical Engineer

BB By Jan 31, 2015 Achieved; and

DOR has engaged one Procurement and

Contract Expert.DOR has decided not to

engage Geo-technical Engineer for time

being.

Submit dossiers for DLI verification to NPC for tranche 2 BB By Jan 15, 2015 Achieved. Second tranche submitted and

disbursed;

Annex P-26

ANNEX H: UPDATE ON PROGRAM DLIS

DLI Period 3 targets Status Comments

DLIs related to the achievement of PDO Indicator 1&2

DLI-1: Completion of

major maintenance of

bridges on SRN

(cumulative metres)

6,225 Envisaged accomplishments

1,444m of bridges verified and

disbursed (under 1st and 2nd

tranches)

2,562m bridges completed and

awaiting verification

203m under repair

1,526m design completed

Consultancy services for design

of 5,847m need to be procured

the stock is not

enough to achieve a

target of 17,125m;

and

Target reduction is

needed.

DLI-2: Completion of

minor maintenance of

bridges on SRN

(cumulative metres)

1,400 Envisaged accomplishments

3,275m bridges completed and

awaiting verification

More target could be achieved

Completed DLI-2

works need to be

verified and

confirmed;

DLI-2 target will be

easily achievable;

and

Target may be

enhanced.

DLI-3: New bridges built

or improved on SRN

(cumulative metres)

3,800 Envisaged accomplishments

3,257m (35 bridges) verified and

disbursed (1st and 2nd tranches)

568m (8 bridges) completed and

awaiting verification

4763m (52 bridges) under

construction

DLI-3 target will be

easily achieved

DLIs related to PDO Indicator 3

DLI-4: Strengthened

performance management

in bridge sector (percent

works complete on

schedule)

20 It appears that 26% achieved Noticeable

progress;

Standard

Procedures for

estimating project

completion period

developed; and

This DLI may need

some re-

adjustments

DLI-5: Improved Bridge

Asset Management

BMS fully operational

in 30 divisional/

regional offices

See action plan update BMS installed in 25

divisions;

Orientation on

BIMP completed in

all 5 regions;

DOR has created 9

new divisions

totaling 34

divisions; and

Orientation on

BIMP is planned to

be conducted again

after end of this FY.

Annex P-27

DLI Period 3 targets Status Comments

DLI-6: Increased

effectiveness of the

institutions responsible

for bridge sector

management

GRM implemented in

DOR and report

disclosed detailing

status of complaints and

actions on fraud and

corruption and those

related to social and

environmental issues

See action plan update GRM is well in

operation in the

Central level at

Kathmandu, current

effort being made

for spreading the

system at the field

level

Annex P-28

ANNEX I: AGREED NEXT STEPS

Next Step Responsibility Deadline Comments

Project Development Indicator

Complete the baseline studies WB End-July, 2015 Baseline

data

collection,

analysis and

reporting

completed

Action Plan implementation

Under technical action (i)

BB updates BMS and host the BMS in an

in-house server

BB By July 31, 2015 Linked to

DLI-5

BB prepares annual training plans for SRN

bridge related functions incorporating basic

trainings in BMS, CMS, FMS, GRM,

Mobile Monitoring, Outreach Strategy,

QAP/quality control, new bridge technology

in designs and construction etc.

BB/Bridge Technical

Expert/RSDP support

By Dec. 31, 2015 Linked to

DLI-5

Under technical action (ii)

Quality Assurance Plan implemented by

DOR. BB develops simplified templates for

maintaining Quality Assurance by the

Contractor (under verification of the

Client’s representatives). Similarly BB

develops templates for Quality Control to be

maintained by the Contractor as per

Specification Standard (under verification

of the Client representative). BB

coordinates with Central Materials

Laboratory and maintain essence of DOR

Quality Management Policy while

preparation of such templates

DOR/BB Application of

QAP monitored

by the regional

directors and

status maintained

by respective

CSSE.

BB reports status

of each region in

Quarterly

Progress Report

Under fiduciary action (i)

Public disclosure of (1)updated BMS dat

base including (2) new bridges taken in

approved Annual Program since FY

2012/13 to FY 2014/15 and proposed new

bridges for FY 2015/16 in DOR webpage

BB 1st by March

2016

2nd by Sept. 15,

2015

Under fiduciary action (ii)

DOR planning branch to maintain register

of procurement unit chiefs and to include

this within trimester reports

Planning and Design

Branch

By Dec. 31 2015

Thereafter to be

updated as and

when required

Under fiduciary action (iii)

All outstanding audit observations from

2009/10 to be addressed

DOR Audit Committee By end of each

FY, and

maintained

monthly status

Under social and environmental action (i)

Annex P-29

Next Step Responsibility Deadline Comments

Complete safeguard screening of 28

remaining urgent major maintenance

(UMM) bridges with screening report and

review Condition of Contract documents

BB/GESU By Aug. 31,

2015

Screening of design undergoing remaining

15urgent maintenance bridge (out of total

60 bridges) and prepare screening report

By Aug 31,

2015

Inclusion of safeguard measures in non-

urgent major maintenance of

remaining 15 bridges (out of total 60

bridges) for which design is undergoing

By August end

for 6 under

construction

bridge

Carry out screening of all remaining (6

under construction and 34 EOI called) new

crossings from FY 2013/14, 14/15 and

review Condition of Contracts.

By Aug.

31,2015

Rapid assessment of remaining 13 backlog

bridges

BB/GESU By Aug. 31,

2015

Identification of safeguard requirement to

be considered in all screening completed

bridges

BB/GESU By Sept. 30,

2015

BB to involved GESU for screening work

of 120 major maintenance bridge for which

shortly DOR is going to publish EOI

GESU/BB By Dec. 31, 2015

Contract awarded for carrying out IEE of 8

new crossings for which EOI has already

been published on 12, May 2015

GESU/BB/Consultants By Aug. 31,

2015

BB/GESU to ensure transportation services

to central based safeguard expert and field

based SMC for monitoring and verification

activities

GESU/BB At earliest of the

first quarter of

New Fiscal Year

Annex P-30

Next Step Responsibility Deadline Comments

DOR/BB to establish an official system of

forwarding design documents and BOQ

and other relevant documents to GESU as a

practice to institutionalize the coordination

and cooperation between these two units as

well as to formalize and sustain the systems

of :

(a) Regular official meeting between and

GESU and BB,

(b) Review of design and

contract/bidding documents from social

and environmental perspectives,

(c) Ensuring GESU’s involvement during

construction,

(d) Ascertain GESU endorsement in the

Social and Environment section of

dossiers before submission to the NPC,

(e) Field verification of submitted

dossiers.

GESU/BB By Sept. 30,

2015

Develop option of specific BOQ and

contract document for Design and Built

Bridges

GESU/BB By Sept. 30,

2015

BB/GESU to plan (i) capacity building

trainings at regional / divisional level, and

(ii)Mobilize central based safeguard experts

on imparting ESMF training at

regional/divisional offices as needed also to

institutionalize SMC’s role at

regional/divisional offices

GESU/BB By Sept. 30,

2015

Under social and environmental action (ii)

Cross cutting action (i)

Respond to complaints received through

GRM and reports actions taken in Quarterly

Progress Report

DOR/ Divisions On-going

Linked to

DLI-6

Cross cutting action (ii)

Updated DOR Bridge Operation Toolkit

made available on DOR website

BB By Dec. 31,

2015

Linked to

DLI-4

BB/Divisions/Bridge Projects uses an

objective method in calculating project

duration in the case of all up-coming

contracts, including maintenance and new

construction

BB As and when

required from

FY 2015/16

Linked to

DLI-4

Disbursement Linked Indicators

Annex P-31

Next Step Responsibility Deadline Comments

Finalize draft designs submitted by the

Consultants under EOI called for 60 bridges

in Nov. 2014

BB By Aug. 31,

2015

Procure contracts for civil works of bridge

major maintenance of at least 60 bridges

whose designs have been approved

BB By Sept. 30,

2015

Publish EOI for another major maintenance

works of 120 bridges

BB By July 31, 2015

Conduct field survey of maintenance works

completed under DLI-2 in each division

and bridge project which have received

share of NRs. 380mil budget in FY 2014/15

BB/CSSE By Aug. 31,

2015

Note: next steps for DLIs 4, 5, and 6 included within action plan items

Others

Assess current performance of CSSEs and

SMCs and establish Project Management

Team for bridge value more than above

NRs. 25mil in divisions and bridge project

BB/DOR/RD/MB By Dec. 31, 2015

Submit dossiers for DLI verification to

NPC for 3rd tranche

BB By Aug. 31,

2015

Annex P-32

ANNEX J: ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL SAFEGUARD IMPLEMENTATION STATUS

The Team assessed5, against the requirements of OP/BP 9.00 (Program-for-Results Financing), the degree

to which the Government of Nepal’s Department of Roads’ environmental and social management system,

as applicable to the program, manage and mitigate the environmental and social impacts of the overall

BIMP. The ESSA concluded that the overall environmental and social system of the DOR are considered

acceptable for use in BIMP under the PforR operation, given the low-to-moderate levels of environmental

and social risks associated with the SRN Bridges eligible for funding under the Program. Activities that

pose a risk of potentially significant and irreversible adverse impacts on the environment and/or affected

people (activities classified as Category A under IL) have been excluded from Program-for-Results

operations. The ESSA proposed exclusion of the bridges from the PforR supported BIMP in the following

conditions: (i) Bridges that require significantly altering or impacting the hydrology or hydro-geological

impacts in the river; (ii) New bridges that will require new road alignment or long approach road for

connectivity; (iii) Any new bridge construction that may cause potentially significant and adverse

environment or social impacts; and (iv) Any new bridge construction inside protected areas or reserved

forests.

The ESSA makes a number of important recommendations for addressing institutional capacity constraints

and gaps across a range of environmental and social management system constraints. These

recommendations include: (i) Updating the DOR ESMF to include DOR Bridge Program; (ii) Strengthening

environment and social impact management within DOR, and (iii) Strengthening GESU. Following

paragraphs summarizes the progress made until the MTR with respect to the recommendations and action

plan as well as experiences of environmental and social management in the BIMP so far.

Updating the DOR ESMF to include DOR Bridge Program

Recommended/agreed improvements6 Progress so far and current status

DOR ESMF be updated and strengthened in line with

OP 9.00 and be expanded to include bridge-specific

risks.

The updating of the ESMF will include a technical

review, revision, and formal endorsement within

Department of Roads. The revised/ updated ESMF will

be issued for DOR operations with a decision circular.

DoR formally amended ESMF on 2069/12/5 (March 18,

2013), to incorporate and implement safeguard activities

in bridge projects. And then circulated the amended

version of ESMF through official letter to all DoR offices

at different level (branch, division, section, units and

project office etc.) on June 13, 2013 and also uploaded on

DoR website.

Strengthen the Geo-Environmental and Social Unit

Recommended/agreed improvements Progress so far and current status

GESU will be strengthened in terms of staffing, financial

resources, its internal operating arrangements and

coordination with other technical units and ministries

(an operational plan to strengthen GESU will be

developed). This plan will include: (i) Staffing

arrangements, including outsourcing, and a schedule of

their recruitments; (ii) Annual financial allocation

forecast and allocation for the next three years; (iii) Geo-

Environmental and Social Unit operation plan for the

SRN Bridge Program describing its responsibilities,

staffing (number, specialization and qualification), staff

assignment, operating methodologies, procedures, tools,

Staffing: The DoR/BB hired 6 Social Mobilizer

Consultants (SMC) from February 2013 in six BIMP

regions and 2 central level Safeguard Experts (one

environmental and one social) from September 17, 2014.

Budgeting: DoR/BB has been allocating budget for GESU

to implement safeguard activities. For the current Fiscal

Year (FY) DoR, Bridge Branch (BB) has allocated about

NPR Ten Millions to implement safeguard activities.

5Nepal Bridge Development Program: Environment and Social System Assessment (ESSA), May 2012

6 ESSA (page 39 -41) and Project Appraisal Document (page 63-64)

Annex P-33

monitoring modalities and coordination arrangements

with other units and divisions.

Coordination: The DoR/ GESU in collaboration with

Bridge Branch (BB) also planning to prepare annual

program and budget for the next fiscal year 2072/73

(2015/16). Coordination Bridge Branch and GESU being

improved through regular meeting and several unofficial

consultations between these two units and branch of DoR

since November 2014. With a view to sustaining and

further strengthening mutual coordination BB and GESU

also working to develop and establish a system of

forwarding BOQ and contract documents from BB to

GESU (see agreed next step d).

GESU also started to gain achievements with regard to

safeguard implementation in terms of: (i) screening of

bridges, (ii) determining IEE requiring bridges, (iii)

receiving monthly monitoring and implementation report

from the field, (iv) monthly meeting and coordination with

BB etc.

However, application of ESMF by Divisions and Projects

is still a challenge. Social Mobilizer Consultants (SMC)

in the region yet to be institutionalized by Divisional /

Regional Offices and they are yet to be involved in

safeguard activities (e.g. assessing safeguard scope in the

bridges to proposed by the Regional/Divisional offices,

complying and ensuring safeguard in the ongoing bridge

projects etc).

To address this issue, BB/GESU in the coming FY

program plans to include; (i) capacity building trainings at

regional/divisional level, and (ii) Mobilizing central based

safeguard experts on imparting ESMF training at

regional/divisional offices.

Despite allocation of dedicated budget, GESU still has

difficulty in providing transportation facilities for the

centrally based Safeguard Expert and regionally based

SMC even for conducting agreed field works. As a result

the BIMP safeguard team could not complete the screening

works of bridges on Western and Mid-Western region. BB

and GESU working together for permanent resolution of

this problem.

Bridge Category under BIMP

The following categories of bridges are included in the BIMP:

Minor Maintenance: “Damages detected are very minor and do not require any design input to carry out

the treatment or rectify the defects” are the minor maintenance bridges. DoR/Division Offices are

responsible for minor maintenance of such bridges and safeguard clearance not require for them.

Annex P-34

Major Maintenance: Major maintenance bridge have, “Numerous defects of structural and hydraulic

significance which may soon prevent the bridge in its proper functioning and detailed investigation may be

required to design the maintenance work (e.g. non-destructive testing).”

New Bridges: The bridges constructions of which started after the effectiveness of BIMP are new bridges.

The new bridges are of two sub categories: (i) Design and Built (The bridge to be design as well as

constructed by the contractor is design and built) and (ii) Design, Bid and Build (DoR/BB designs the

bridge and construction work executed by the contractor through bidding process).

Backlog Bridges: The bridges constructions of which started prior to the effectiveness of BIMP are

backlog. The backlog bridges are also of two sub categories; (i) Design and Built, and (ii) Design, Bid and

Build.

Table 1 below summarize the types of bridges/activities included in BIMP: 149 major maintenance works,

40 new bridges and 73 backlog bridges have been included in the BIMP as of May 2015. DoR/BB is

considering design of additional 34 new bridges in FY 2014/15.

Screening/Rapid Assessments Status of Bridges

DoR/GESU completed the screening of 208 bridges which include, 114 major maintenance 34 new and 60

backlog bridges. The detail is given in Table 1.

Table 1 Bridge Type Number of bridges

included in BIMP

as of May 31st 2015

Screening

Completed

Remaining

Major Maintenance Bridges

Bridge of which major maintenance work is

ongoing

61 48 13

Bridges of which design for major

maintenance has been completed

28 21 7

Bridge of which design for major maintenance

is ongoing

60 45 15

Total of Major Maintenance Bridges 149 114 35

New Bridges*

Design and Built 10 9 2

Design, bid and build 30 25 4

Total of New Bridges 40 34 6

Backlog Bridges

Design and Built 8 6 2

Design, bid and build 65 54 11

Total of Backlog Bridges 73 60 13

All Total 262 208 54

* DoR/BB has been designing another 34 new bridges taken for the FY 2014/15. Screening of these 34

under designing bridges will be carried out immediately after design completion.

Findings of Screening/Rapid Assessment

Major Maintenance

Safeguard screening of 114 major maintenance bridges have been completed from 149 bridges. Screening

of the 35 remaining bridges will be completed by end of August 2015. Following are the general findings

of the screening of the major maintenance works of the bridges:

Annex P-35

Water supply pipe and telephone line passes alongside the bridges. Although there is no adverse

impact at the time of screening, it has been recommended that care should be applied during

operation and maintenance. This needs to be coordinated with respective water and telephone

authority/ entity.

Stockpiling of construction material has been poor in some bridges, e.g. in Shivaganga bridge of

Kailali. Recommendations has been made for improved management of the stockpiling of the

construction material.

There has been inadequate warning signboard, and safety gears in most of the bridges.

Temporary land acquisition has been done for the diversion in some bridges, (e.g. Halhale bridge

Dolkha). No adverse impact or issue has been reported.

There is need for clearing the river waterway (e.g. Shivaganga river bridge, Ratu river bridge etc)

In some bridges, there is need for cleaning up and restoring the site after construction including

removal of construction materials, litters from camp site & camp facilities, diversion debris etc,

The safeguard team made recommendations for improving and mitigating the above mentioned weakness.

New Bridges

Screening have been completed for 34 of the 40 new bridges, and screening of remaining 6 bridges will be

completed by end of August 2015. Out of total 34 new bridges that were screened, 9 are Design and Built,

and 25 are Design, Bid and Built categories. In addition, DoR/BB has also been designing additional 34

new bridges that are being considered for the FY 2014/15. Screening of these 34 under designing bridges

will be carried out immediately after design completion.

Out of the 34 new bridges of which screening was completed until May 2015, 13 number of new bridges

require IEE, among them 5 are Design and Built and 8 are Design, Bid and Build bridges (Table 2).

Table 2: List of IEE requiring bridge and progress

SN Bridge ID Bridge Name Road Name Bridge Type

District Length Span Progress on IEE study

Central Region (Hetauda)

1 14-F052-xxx

Chhagariya Mirchaya –Katari Design & Built

Siraha 54 2 ToR under preparation

2 14-F052-006

Belsot Mirchaya –Katari Design & Built

Udayapur 94 3 ToR under preparation

3 F113 DawarKhola Bridge

Dharan-Chatara-Gaighat-Katari-Sindhuli-Hetaunda

Design & Built

Udayapur 150 3 ToR approved

4 F057 JhajaNadi Bridge

Gaur-Pipara-Santapur

Design, bid and build

Rautahat 72 3 EOI call for IEE study

5 F206 Lal Bakaiya Bridge

Parsa-Bara-Rautahat-Gandaknahar Road

Design & Built

Rautahat 546.9 4 ToR approved

6 20-H006-xxx

RatoNadi Bridge

Janakpur-Ramgopalpur-Samshee Road

Design, bid and build

Mahottari 209 4 EOI call for IEE study

7 Dori Bridge Gaur-Pipara-Samanpur-Santpur-Noonthar

Design, bid and build

Rautahat 32.9 1 EOI call for IEE study

Annex P-36

SN Bridge ID Bridge Name Road Name Bridge Type

District Length Span Progress on IEE study

8 Bharauli Khola Bridge

Dharan-Chatara-Gaighat-Katari-Sindhuli-Hetaunda

Design, bid and build

Udayapur 50.6 2 EOI call for IEE study

9 14-F057-009

Triyuga Bridge

Dharan-Chatara-Gaighat-Katari-Sindhuli-Hetaunda

Design, bid and build

Udayapur 76.2 EOI call for IEE study

10 25-F021-002

TadiKhola Bridge

Gangate-Tadi- Labdu- Samundratar-Golfutar

Design, bid and build

Nuwakot

50.7 5 EOI call for IEE study

11 F194 Dhungri Khola Bridge

Tamghas-Sandhikharka-Pyuthan

Design, bid and build

Arghakhnchi

35 1 EOI call for IEE study

12 62-F047-019

Burunge Khola Bridge

Chhinchu-Jajarkot-Dunai

Design, bid and build

Jajarkot/Dolpa

85 3 EOI call for IEE study

13 62-F047-024

Bheri Bridge-Rimna

Chhinchu - Jajarkot – Dunai

Design & Built

Jajarkot 130 ToR approved

Source: Mid Term Review Report on Environmental and Social Safeguard, DoR, GESU, June 2015

General findings from screening of the new bridges are:

Among IEE requiring bridges (5 Design and Built, and 8 Design, Bid and Build bridges) are

under construction stage but construction activities yet to be started in Dori and Jalanadi Bridges.

Personal occupational health and safety measures are found inadequate in most of the under

construction bridges

No warning sign to traffic/pedestrian around the construction sites in most of the bridges

Road diversion material needs to be removed after completion of work (e.g. Geuriya Khola

Jhapa)

Construction materials not properly stored (e.g. Khare khola bridge of Ramechhap)

Delay on acquiring permission for tree cutting

Reinstatement of quarry, borrow pit not done properly

River regime clarence

Land acquisition and reinstatement of community/private structure

Backlog Bridge

Safeguard status of the backlog bridges were assessed through rapid assessment. Among 98 total backlog

bridges; 35 have already disbursed. Thus, the number of backlog bridges to go through rapid assessment is

73 bridges of which rapid assessment have been completed for 60 bridges (of this 60 backlog bridges, 15

bridges are Design & Built, and 45 are Design, Bid and Built Bridges. Rapid assessment of remaining 13

bridges will be completed by end of August 2015. Following are the findings from the rapid assessment of

the backlog bridges:

Personal occupational health and safety measures are found inadequate in most of the bridges

No warning sign to traffic/pedestrian around the construction sites found in most of the bridges

Road diversion material needs to be removed after completion of work (e.g. Geuriya Khola

bridge, Sunsari)

Construction materials not properly stored in most of the bridges

Delay on acquiring permission for tree cutting (e.g. Kamala River bridge, Sindhuli)

Reinstatement of quarry, borrow pit not done properly

Annex P-37

River regime clearance (e.g. Kamala Khola bridge, Sindhuli, Farsait Bagaha Khola bridge,

Udayapur, Baruwa Khola bridge, Udayapur, Thado Khola Bridge etc)

Land acquisition and reinstatement of community/private structure (e.g. Ratu khola bridge, Lal

Bakaiya Khola bridge)

Relocation of temple (e.g.Jhanj Khola bridge, Rautahat)

Implementation of Environmental and Social Mitigations Measures

Major Maintenance

For major maintenance bridge DoR/BB has not made separate safeguard provision on contract document

however, safeguard provision for such bridges has been ensured by allocating budget under provisional

sum.

New Bridge

A. Design Bid and Build Bridge: In the past, contract document of such bridge did not have resource/

budget allocation for social and environmental /safeguard mitigations measures. Any safeguard mitigations,

if required, used to be implemented using the fund allocated under provisional sum. GESU has already

processed IEE of eight Design, Bid and Build Bridge. DoR / BB assured that the mitigations identified by

the IEEs will be implemented either through existing contract provisions or through variation of contract,

if necessary. The BB has incorporated the safeguard cluases and item of works in BoQ for new tendering

bridges.

B. Design and Built Bridge. There are five such bridges of which IEE are in process. The DoR/ BB

assured that safeguard mitigations identified by the IEE will be implemented through contract variations,

if necessary. DoR/BB is further clarifying the approach and requirements in upcoming ‘design and built’

bridges; developing contract options of specific BOQ and contract document for such bridge by end of

September 2015. GESU is planning to organize workshop/discussion on “how to apply environmental and

social safeguard measures in design and built bridges”.

Backlog Bridge

For ensuring safeguard measures in backlog bridges, MoPIT/DoR, in April 2014, provisioned 2% of

contract amount or 2.5 million rupees whichever is less in safeguard related activities both for Design, Bid

and Build Bridge and Design and Built Bridge. This provision has been found effective on settling social

and environmental issues like:

Reinstate of irrigation canal in Leguwa and Kawa Bridge, Dhankuta

Approval proceeded for tree cutting in Kamala Bridge from concern authority, Sindhuli

Compensation for affected land in Ratuwa Bridge, Jhapa

Constructed the NAGA temple in Benighat Trishuli River Bridge

Safeguard Verification of Bridge Dossiers

DoR/BB/GESU, internally verifying the safeguard status of completed bridges through SM in their

respective region before making dossiers. Till the date DoR has prepared and submitted 52 numbers of

dossiers to submit to National Planning Commission (NPC). Out of them DoR has received disbursement

for 507 bridges.

7 The total submitted dossier in year O and 1 was 52 . Among them the dossier of Budikhola in Bardiya was rejected during

external verification as the bridge was in LRN and dossier of Riyukhola bridge was not submitted to NPC as the bridge location

is in the buffer zone of Chitwan National Park.

Annex P-38

Table 3: Status of Dossier Submission and Disbursement Status by Region

Year Prepared

Dossiers

Submitted

Dossiers

Major

Maintenance

Backlog/New Total Numbers

0 29 29 8 21 29

1 21 21 7 14 21

Total 50 50 15 35 50

Emerging Lessons

Following are emerging lessons from implementing BIMP under P4R operation:

An established system and practice of interaction and coordination among safeguard team (GESU)

and engineering team (BB) is necessary for timely completion of screening, EMP, IEE etc. and

ensuring value-addition to the design of the bridges.

Capacity strengthening is a continuous process. GESU’s capacity needs be strengthened gradually

for managing variety of environmental and social issues related to bridges and roads, and for

various functions including assessments, monitoring, consultations and grievance handling.

Ensuring reliable resource to GESU is important for delivering environmental and social functions

as envisaged under ESMF.

Integration and mainstreaming of social and environmental aspects into bridge should be done from

early stage of bridge planning to make best use of the environmental and social inputs/ suggestions

in the plan, design and construction.

A clearly defined roles and responsibilities of various actors(such as GESU, BB, DRO, Contractor) as

well as system, process and procedure; and its awareness and practice is necessary for effective

application of the ESMF in bridge planning.

Going forward: Enhancing performance

Experiences until MTR indicate that following improvements are needed for improving social and

environmental management as implementation proceeds.

Social Mobilizer Consultants (SMC) are to be considered by DRO as team members and ensure

contractor understand the SMC‘s role and responsibility and cooperate with them.

DRO Offices and contractors needs to be made aware of social and environmental requirements/

ESMF in bridge planning and construction.

There should be compulsory requirement (officially instructed) of forwarding plan, design, contract

document, specification and BOQ to GESU for review and concurrence. All the safeguard measures

identified through screening and other preparatory documents (e.g. IEE) should be incorporated in

contract document.

DOR/BB inventory of the bridges need to include information of environmental and social safeguard

status (e.g. EIA/IEE/EMAP, effect on private land/assets etc).

Annex P-39

DoR/BB needs to ensure that GESU reviews and field verify the safeguard compliance of the

completed bridges, whose dossiers have been ready for submitting to NPC for external verification.

There should be provision for GESU verification and certification on safeguard compliance before

final payment of completed bridge.

GESU needs to have reliable and adequate provision for transport for enhancing site monitoring by

centre and region based staff.

Budget allocation to GESU, that started recently, needs to be retained and improved, as per need, for

improving social and environmental management and performance. This need to continue even

during post BIMP period as well.

Annex P-40

ANNEX K: ANALYSIS OF DLI-4 (% of contracts delivered on time or early)

Classification # of

contracts % by # of classification Amount (NPR)

Cont. amount (USD

equ.)

Major maintenance works

on-time 1 8% 9,893,385 97,290

early 2 17% 19,654,319 193,277

late 9 75% 158,274,881 1,556,444

subtotal 12 187,822,585 1,847,011

New construction works

on-time 6 18% 183,463,234 1,804,142

early 3 9% 1,200,454,715 11,805,038

late 25 74% 1,023,783,291 10,067,686

subtotal 34 2,407,701,240 23,676,866

Combined (major maint. + new const.)

on-time 7 15% 193,356,619 1,901,431

early 5 11% 1,220,109,034 11,998,315

late 34 74% 1,182,058,171 11,624,130

subtotal 46 2,595,523,824 25,523,876

% of on time or early contracts 26%

Baseline 10%

Disbursement rate 75,000 USD per 1% over baseline

Disbursement amount 1,206,522 USD

Annex P-41

ANNEX L: PROGRAM EXPENDITURE TRENDS

Figure 1 Maintenance budget and expenditure trends FY 08/09 through FY 13/14

Figure 2 New construction budget and expenditure trends

Figure 3 Shifting focus back to SRN bridges

-

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

500,000

600,000

700,000

200

8/0

9

actu

al

200

9/1

0

actu

al

201

0/1

1

actu

al

201

1/1

2

actu

al

201

2/1

3

actu

al

201

3/1

4

revis

ed

NP

R '

00

0

SRN maintenance budgets

SRN maintenance expenditures

103% increase from FY 12/13 in

LRN new

construciton

exp.

2,431,985

58%

SRN new

constuction

exp.

1,474,616

35%

SRN

maintenance

expenditures

204,601

5%

SRN br.

feasibility

study & QM

expenditures

102,604

2%

DOR's FY 12/13 Expenditures in the

Bridge SectorLRN new

construciton

exp.

1,943,315

50%

SRN new

constuction

exp.

1,400,000

36%

SRN

maintenance

expenditures

415,865

11%

SRN br.

feasibility

study & QM

expenditures

95,000

3%

DOR's FY 13/14 Expenditures in the

Bridge Sector

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

2012/13 actual 2013/14 revised

NP

R '

000

SRN new constuction budget

SRN new constuction exp.

Annex P-42

ANNEX M: FIELD VISIT NOTES

The Team also conducted field visits splitting in two groups on June 18 to 19, 2014. One group visited to

Karnali (Geruwa) bridge at Kothiaghat and Kohalpur-Surket road in Mid-Western Region and another

group visited to Ratu bridge, Pathlaiya- Dhalkebar road and Mugling – Narayanghat road in Central Region.

Both of the teams were represented by DoR officials. List of participating officials is annexed. The bridge

details and the field visit observations are provided below:

Group-1

Field Visit Site-1: Bardiya District

Bridge No. 66-H017-186 Road Link/

Name

Guleria-Kothiyaghat-

Rajapur Road

River Name Karnali (Geruwa) District Bardiya

BIMP Status

Bridge was built under Design & Build contract option. DLI

verification has been completed during 2nd tranche of

disbursement under DLI-3 in BIMP. It was contracted on June16,

2010 and the original schedule completion date was July 16,

2015. The actual completion date was Sept. 24, 2014; 292 days

prior to schedule completion date.

Bridge Type PSC Box Girder Bridge Span (m) 18x55m+

1x25m,RCC =1015m

Designed and Supervised by

Designed by

Consultants and

Supervised by Bridge

Project, Western

Region, Nepalganj

Final

Payment

Amount

(NPR)

1,181,309,862.00

Notes: First longest bridge built with prestressed concrete box-girder in Nepal by local Contractors under

supervision of DOR.

Work Quality: As per information supplied by the Bridge Project Mid-Western Region, the Contractor

has maintained all requirements under Quality Assurance and Quality Control to acceptable standard.

Workmanship has been found good as a whole during the site visit.

Safety: Safety measures including separate provision for pedestrian footpath, erection of delineator posts

along both sides of bridge approaches, painting on bridge railings, and erection bridge sign boards have

been found satisfactory.

Field Visit Site-2: Surkhet District

Kohalpur-Surkhat Road Road Link/ Name H12: Ratna Rajmarg , 90km

Bridges: Most of the bridges found in fair condition except bridge railings. In many bridges, railings are

found damaged except in few bridges where painting works have found satisfactory

Visit to Division Road Office, Surkhet:

Notes: Key regions, why Division hesitates to carry out minor maintenance works despite having

adequate budget available, are described below,

DOR existing norms and procurement provisions are not favorable to minor repair works;

Contractors are least attracted to minor repair works; and

It requires close supervisions, on other hand most of the Divisions are under staffed

Suggested Conclusions:

Norms should be revised and should be flexible and site specific;

Annex P-43

Relaxation in procurement rules: Divisions should be allowed to carry out minor repair works under

force account for few items of works; and

Adequate supervision staff should be made available to Divisions mainly sub-engineer level.

Group-2

Bridge No. 20-H001-150 Road Link/ Name East West Highway

River Name Ratu Khola District Dhanusa

BIMP Status Major maintenance works were successfully carried by the local

Contractors under close supervision of BB Engineer and International

Bridge Expert. Major maintenance works carried out were underpinning

displaced foundation footing, jacketing damaged pair, and jacking

conversed deck slabs to road level. The bridge was open to traffic on

18th June, 2015.

Bridge Type RCC Bridge T

Beam

Length (m)

Span (No)

204 meter

12

Maintenance Works

Designed and Supervised

by

International

Bridge Expert and

BB Engineers

Final Payment

Amount (NPR)

Technical Notes: Workmanship was found excellent. According to BB, quality was never

compromised till end of work.

A. Environmental Safeguard

Soil Erosion Land Slides

Remarks:

Drainage Erosion by Drainage Flow

No

Remarks:

Waste Disposal

Remarks:

Traffic Control Material/Transport

Remarks: The maintenance work of the settled bridge support was almost completed, however,

mobility for four wheeler vehicles was still restricted from the bridge and sidetracked to diversion

road maintained within ROW and along Ratu river

Public/ Workers Safety

Remarks: As maintenance worker was almost completed information about workers safety (e.g.

provision of helmet, boot, globe etc for workers) could not be observed/collected

Workers Insurance

Remarks:

Minor Training Works

Remarks:

Protection of Forest

Annex P-44

Remarks: No effect on nearby forest due to maintenance activities

Protection of Wildlife

No

Remarks: Generally, wildlife does not come in the construction side due to vehicular movement

Protection of Aquatic Life

No

Remarks: Seasonal river

Slope Protection on High Embankment Area

Remarks: Embankment protection was observed in both side of the bridge along the river ensured by

gabion works and construction of spours

Proper Signboard in Proper Location

Remarks: A small signboard informing about the ongoing maintenance work was positioned on

eastern part of the bridge

Management of Borrow Pit/Quarries

Not Applicable

Remarks: Maintenance work ongoing

Landscape

Remarks: There seem risks of collapsing old protection wall existing in the left embankment of Ratu

river.

Dust/Air Pollution

Remarks: As the maintenance work was ongoing.

Noise/ Vibration

Remarks:

Impact on Adjunct Area

No

Remarks: As the bridge is a bit far away from the major settlement it the maintenance works not likely

to have affected to the people on adjunct area.

Disruption to Public Utilities

Remarks:

Public Awareness

Remarks:

B. Social Issues

Land Acquisition:

Not applicable.

Annex P-45

SITE PHOTOS

Photo 1: The under maintenance Ratu Bridge

Figure 1

Photo 2: Mud barrier in the bridge approach to

restrict vehicular movement

Photo 3: Iron plate stratus given for

maintenance activities

Photo 4: Existing Riverbank protection work at Ratu

River