flood damage emergency reconstruction project –...

Ministry of Water Resourcesand Meteorology (MOWRAM)

Asian Development Bank Cambodia

Flood Damage Emergency Reconstruction Project– Output 3: Irrigation and Flood ControlADB Loan Number : 2852-CAM(SF)

AusAID Grant Number: 0285-CAM(EF)

SUB-PROJECT PROFILE

BOEUNG KVEK

Version 1

DECEMBER 2012

6 December 2012

In association with

KEY CONSULTANTS (CAMBODIA)

Egis Eau Document quality information

Flood Damage Emergency Reconstruction Project – Output 3: Irrigation and Flood ControlVersion 1

Document quality information

General information

Author(s) FDERP-MOWRAM TA; EGIS EAU / KCC

Project name Flood Damage Emergency Reconstruction Project – Output 3: Irrigationand Flood Control

Document name BOEUNG KVEK sub-project profile

Date 6 December 2012

Reference FDERP-SPP-07-1112

Addressee(s)

Sent to:

Name Organisation Sent on (date):

H.E. Ponh Sachak PIU 6/12/12

Copy to:

Name Organisation Sent on (date):

PCMU

ADB

History of modifications

Version Date Written by Approved & signed by:

Egis Eau Contents


Contents

Chapter 1 - INTRODUCTION........................................................................ 9

1. Background .......................................................................................... 92. Flood Damage....................................................................................... 9

Chapter 2 - SUB-PROJECT DESCRIPTION .............................................. 10

1. Location ...............................................................................................102. Existing Situation ................................................................................10

2.1. Description of facilities ................................................................................. 10

2.2. State of Repair ............................................................................................. 10

2.3. Socio-economic and Agriculture .................................................................. 142.3.1. Area............................................................................................................... 14

2.3.2. Population and Beneficiaries ......................................................................... 14

2.3.3. Agricultural practices ..................................................................................... 14

2.3.4. Cropping Patterns ......................................................................................... 15

2.4. FWUC/FWUG .............................................................................................. 15

2.5. O&M ............................................................................................................. 16

2.6. Hydrology ..................................................................................................... 16

Chapter 3 - SCOPE OF WORKS................................................................ 17

1. Proposed Interventions ......................................................................172. Cost estimate.......................................................................................173. Photos..................................................................................................17

Chapter 4 - SUB-PROJECT SCREENING ................................................. 19

1. Resettlement........................................................................................191.1. Resettlement Impact Categorization Check-list........................................... 19

2. Environment ........................................................................................192.1. Environmental Assessment Check-list......................................................... 20

Chapter 5 - CONCLUSIONS....................................................................... 21

1. Screening.............................................................................................212. Proposed interventions ......................................................................21

Egis Eau List of tables


List of tables

Table 1 Population and beneficiary data and rice areas ................................................14

Egis Eau List of figures

Flood Damage Emergency Reconstruction Project – Output 3: Irrigation and FloodControl Version 1

List of figures

Figure 1 Location Map for Boeung Kvek ..........................................................................11

Figure 2 Aerial Photo showing Boeung Kvek dike ...........................................................12

Figure 3 Layout of gross area...........................................................................................13

Figure 4 Cropping Pattern _ Boeung Kvek.......................................................................15

Egis Eau List of appendices


List of appendices

Appendix 1 Involuntary Resettlement Impact Check-list .......................................................22

Appendix 2 Screening for environmental impacts – BOEUNG KVEK...................................23

Appendix 3 Sketches of emergency repairs ..........................................................................27

Appendix 4 Environmental Management Plan (EMP)...........................................................28

Appendix 5 Hydrology ...........................................................................................................33

Egis Eau Acronyms and Abbreviations


Acronyms and Abbreviations

ADB Asian Development Bank

AusAID Australian Agency for International Development

CARM Cambodian Resident Mission (of ADB)

EA Executing Agency

FDERP Flood Damage Emergency Reconstruction Project

FWUC Farmer Water User Community

IA Implementing Agency

IEE Initial Environmental Examination

MEF Ministry of Economy and Finance

MOU Memorandum of Understanding

MOWRAM Ministry of Water Resources and Meteorology

O&M Operation and Maintenance

PAM Project Administration Manual

PCMU Project Coordination and Monitoring Unit (MEF)

PDWRAM Provincial Department of Water Resources and Meteorology

PIU Project Implementation Unit

PP Procurement Plan

RGC Royal Government of Cambodia

ROW Right-of-way

RRP Report and Recommendation of the President (to the board of directors)

SAH Severely Affected Households

SPS Safeguard Policy Statement

TA Technical Assistance

TOR Terms of Reference

Egis Eau Sub-project Profile-BEOUNG KVEK


Chapter 1 - INTRODUCTION

1. Background

Following the 2011 floods in Cambodia that caused widespread damage to infrastructure, the

Government of Australia and ADB has approved funding under the Flood Damage Emergency

Reconstruction Project (FDERP) to assist the Royal Government of Cambodia (RGC) with

implementation of repairs. The Project includes restoration irrigation scheme facilities to be

implemented by the Ministry of Water Resources and Meteorology (MOWRAM).

During the ADB fact finding mission in January and February 2012, interventions were identified

within a framework for structuring project activities and divided into 3 Stages.

Stage 3 interventions were to follow the Stage 2 fast-track repairs necessary to repair damaged

facilities within the following two dry seasons.

The project documents identify Stage 3 sub-projects/contract packages in the Procurement Plan

(PP). However the PP was a hastily prepared list of sub-projects requiring interventions with

guess estimates of cost (with total cost well above actual funding availability)1. Thus, a project

requirement is for the Stage 3 sub-projects to be confirmed prior to commencing detailed

design.

This-report concerns the Stage 3 intervention for Boeung Kvek located in Kampong Thom

province, which is limited to reconstruction of the dyke embankment of Boeung Kvek sub-

project and some appurtenant structures.

The emergency reconstruction work for Boeung Kvek sub-project is included in the PP as

Contract No. MOWRAM-CW13 for an estimated final contract value of US$ 0.32 million, which

included costs for reconstruction of facilities at O Ansar, O Thnot, and Prek Touch and Prek

Thom sub-projects.

2. Flood Damage

The dike embankment was breached by the extreme flood events of recent years and is not

passable in vehicle.

The regulator is still in good condition but needs repair especially the stem at the left exterior

gate. There is evidence that the top slab of the regulator has been reached by the waters and

during last year flood the water level reached 50 cm above the top slab.

1The PP was recently revised and included in the Inception Mission MOU of 16-31 July 2012



Chapter 2 - SUB-PROJECTDESCRIPTION

1. Location

The sub-project area is located right side facing north adjacent to the Steung Sen River in

Chheul Teal commune, Sandan district Kampong Thom province. It is about 60 km north east

from Stung Sen City passing through national road No. 6-2. From the junction of the national

road to the right, the project area can be reached through an earth road of about 55 km or 2

hours travel by car from Steung Sen City. Then a boat ride to other side of river takes about 15

minutes. Another option of reaching the project area through Prasat Sambo road going to

Sandan district. (see Location Map _Figure 1 and Aerial photo _Figure 2).

2. Existing Situation

2.1. Description of facilities

The sub-project is a flood spreading scheme based on recession rice cultivation with some

temporary storage, which consists of a dike about 450m long, which permits some storage of

flood season water for diversion or recession rice growing. The ‘reservoir’ is comprised of

oxbow lakes, remnants of ancient river alignments shown clearly in Figure 3. The sources of

water for the reservoir come from the immediate catchment area and from an offshoot

distributary stream from Steung Sen River. The inflow and outflow from the ‘reservoir’ is

controlled by a regulator with three steel gates. Inflow also occurs at the northern end of the

scheme through double pipe culvert under the village access road. Water retained in the

reservoir may be released depending on conditions through the gates with return to the Stung

Sen River under a bridge on the village road to the south. At flood stage levels the whole area is

inundated as it is basically a flood plain. The existing infrastructure was built in 2005 by the

Eastern Rural irrigation Development Project (ERIDP). The dike was damaged by flood and is

not passable. During field inspection in September 2012 at height of flood season the crest of

the dike was submerged by about 50 cm. tributary

2.2. State of Repair

The dike has been overtopped and breached in several locations (refer to photos further below).

The emergency repaired sections at breach locations will need to be rebuilt.

The regulator structure is still in good condition but needs repair especially the stem at the left

gate and there is no provision of a ladder to reach the hoist gates platform

The crest elevation of the existing dike is evidently too low and is easily submerged by low flow

floods. With this situation the regulator is being isolated and the control of flood water is

effectively not attained.



Figure 1 Location Map for Boeung Kvek

Egis Eau


Figure 2 Aerial Photo showing Boeung Kvek dike

Egis Eau


Figure 3 Plan of gross area

Egis Eau Sub-project Profile- BOEUNG KVEK


2.3. Socio-economic and Agriculture

2.3.1. Area

The command area of the scheme is reckoned by the farmers to be about 260 ha, which

corresponds with the community data (see below). The scheme area is delineated by a

community access road to the east and the river and adjacent village access road to the west.

2.3.2. Population and Beneficiaries

The beneficiaries from Boeung Kvek are composed of people from 7 villages and number 300

households. Four villages are located in Ngon commune and three villages in Chhoeu Teal

commune. The Boeung Kvek scheme benefits directly 300 families mostly from Chhoeu Teal

Commune. There are some farmers from the Ngon commune (Sam Phi, Treub, Veal Pring Loeu

and Srar Lao villages) who benefit also from the infrastructures.

Beneficiary information is provided in the Table 1

Table 1 Population and beneficiary data and rice areas

Command AreaPopulation

Wet season Dry SeasonCommune Village NameNumber of

households

Total Female

Beneficiary

Area Yield Area Yield

hh No No hh ha t/ha ha t/ha

Veal Pring Krom 188 952 487 130 125.5 1.5

Sam Rith 254 1266 570 61 61

Boeung Pra 157 676 345 47 13.26

ChhoeuTeal

Subtotal 599 2894 1402 238 199.76

Sam Phi 107 672 344 12 15

Treub 87 409 227 6 7

Veal Pring Loeu 76 337 183 20 20

Ngon

Sras Lao 422 24 14

Subtotal 273 1840 754 62 56

TOTAL 872 4734 2156 300 255.7

2.3.3. Agricultural practices

At the present, the rice crop planted within the Boeung Kvek is composed of two principal types;

short duration, medium duration/upland rice, late duration and dry season rice.

The short duration rice is grown from the early of May including IR66, Sen Pidao and local seed

varieties and harvested in August with yields of about 1.5t/ha.



The medium duration and upland rice is grown from June, typically Phka Romduol, Lak Leuk,

Neang Keut and other local seed varieties, and harvested in late November with yields of about

1.5 tons/ha.

The late duration rice is grown from late April including Rang Chey and local seed varieties and

harvested in late December with the yields of about 1.5 tons/ha

The dry season rice is grown from the middle of October including IR504, IR66 and IR42

varieties and harvested in late January with the yields of about 2 tons/ha

Generally, as subsidiary crop the farmers grow some dry foot crops on the high ground along

the Stoeung Sen river such as peanut, green bean, sesame, corn and other crops.

2.3.4. Cropping Patterns

Figure 4 Cropping Pattern _ Boeung Kvek

Late rice varieties inside Reservoir

WS

Medium rice varieties, inside Reservoir

WS

Upland rice, inside reservoir

WS

Early rice varieties Recessoning period

WS Inside Reservoir

Month Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar

2.4. FWUC/FWUG

The Farmer Water User Group of Beoung Kvek subproject was developed and established in

2005 and denominated that “Ou Kvek Dike FWUG”. The FWUG is comprised of beneficiaries

from 2 communes including Ngon and Chheou Teal communes in Sandan district, Kampong

Thom province. After the FWUG Committee was elected, the FWUG was initially supported by

Kampong Thom PDWRAM that had recognized the Ou Kvek Dike FWUG committee that

consisted of 4 persons including: a FWUG Chief, First vice chief, Second vice chief and

Treasure. Ou Kvek Dike FWUG is comprised of 7 sub water user groups (WUGs) comprising 17

families/subgroups.



The internal rules and FWUG statute of Ou Kvek Dike FWUG were developed, registered

through assistance by Kampong Thom PDOWRAM. The Irrigation Service Fee (ISF) was

determined at 5,000 riels/ha but has never been collected and the FWUG has in effect been

dormant.

Through the site visits by project staff interest in the FWUG has been rekindled and the CSC

has been activated and the beneficiaries have shown interest in the reconstruction works.

Willingness to contribute to operation and maintenance needs to be confirmed as for all

irrigation projects.

2.5. O&M

The water source for Boeung Kvek sub-project is from rainfall in the catchment area and a

offshoot stream from the Stung Sen river as well as back-up from a drain that discharges to the

river. In wet season the gates of the control structure on the dyke are closed about May so as to

store water to support the short, medium and upland rice that is planted only in reservoir formed

in the depressed area within the scheme. The system operation or rice planting is highly

dependant on the actual hydrologic conditions.

In the case of extreme flood due to torrential rain, all gates of structure are opened to drain

water from reservoir into Stoeung Sen River in order to avoid the overflow on the embankment

and rice damage. However at flood stage there is no such possibility as the land is a flood plain.

In dry season the water in reservoir is released for harvesting the medium rice. The Boeung

Kvek reservoir does not completely empty in dry season; the average water depth of the

reservoir in dry season approximated 0.2 m.

So far, neither structure nor dike embankment of Boeung Kvek reservoir has been maintained

since construction in 2006 as the FWUG Committee not yet collected the ISF from the farmers

and does not have the budget for maintenance. The ISF was originally defined at an amount of

5,000 riels/ha when the FWUG was established in year 2006. However, the beneficiaries

together with MOWRAM have taken part in some repairs.

The gate structure is missing a ladder to reach the gate mechanisms platform and one of the

gate stems is buckled and needs repair. As the gate leaves of the regulator gate have not been

painted, these are rusty and the screw stem movement is tight due to use black oil instead of

grease for lubrication.

2.6. Hydrology

The hydrology of the Boeung Kvek area is covered by the brief report attached here as

Appendix 5. Of particular interest for the FDERP sub-project Boeung Kvek is the stage

hydrograph which shows the high water level stages. The main problem for the designers is to

correlate the hydrological stage datum level with that used for the topographical surveys.

Experience has shown that in Cambodia the local people have very good reference marks for

flood levels experienced during extreme flood events as in this case where overtopping of the

regulator structure is well marked.



Chapter 3 - SCOPE OF WORKS

1. Proposed Interventions

The proposed scope of basic work for the emergency reconstruction of Boeung Kvek includes

the following works:

Raising the crest elevation of the dike for its length of 450 m to 50 cm above theelevation of the top slab of the regulator.

Bush and shrub clearance along dike Provision of laterite surfacing for improved access on dike crest Grass sodding on both side slopes of the dike or as required Install a steel ladder at the regulator to have easy access to the hoist platform Repair of steel gates including realignment of stem including painting, lubrication, oiling,

etc. Concreting works for additional headwall, parapet and railings Riprap protection at the top of wingwalls and end section of the dike to protect from

scouring during flood flow. Rehabilitation or replacement of two culverts across village access road with gated or

stop logged culverts to permit management of water inflow to system

The beneficiaries have expressed their desire to extend the rehabilitation of the dike to a higher

ground following the route of the foot path until the national road, the eastern boundary to the

project area. The main reason for this request is that their present village homes are always

flooded in wet season and they would move their homes to the proposed dyke. However the

dike embankment would need to be maintained as an access road so this would be impractical.

Thus, the option was considered to extend the dike to the national road by following the natural

contour of high ground and along the existing access road from the road bridge to the national

road (refer to Figure 3). Total length would be about 3 km. In conjunction with the village and

national road embankments this would effectively create a polder with a gross area of about 660

ha, of which about 150 ha comprises reservoirs; the net protected area would then be about

twice the actual Boueng Kvek beneficiary rice growing area. Further investigation including

topographic surveys, resettlement and environmental screening would be required to confirm

this option. Cost estimate is much higher and the option has been rejected.

2. Cost estimate

The basic cost of repairing the existing system (dyke reconstruction and regulator repairs)

amounts to about $100,000 without contingencies, which is considerably more than the initial

rough estimate in the PP of $6,278.

(The approximate cost for the proposed polder option would amount to some $334,000)

3. Photos

The following photos show the existing conditions of the Boeung Kvek dyke and structures.



Existing regulator with minor repair of stem and providenew ladder

Dyke section needs rehabilitation

Dyke section needs rehabilitation Dyke section needs rehabilitation

View of regulator from reservoir side Top slab of regulator already reached by normal flood flow



Chapter 4 - SUB-PROJECT SCREENING

1. Resettlement

The Boeung Kvek sub-project works selected for emergency reconstruction comprise

emergency reconstruction of the dyke/road embankment and ancillary structures. There is no

land encroachment, affected structure or household as well as small business to be found in the

Right of Way (ROW) of Boeung Kvek sub-project area. No land acquisition is required for this

sub-project intervention. In short, there is no involuntary resettlement impact found at this pre-

detailed design stage from the proposed repairs to the Boeung Kvek scheme.

1.1. Resettlement Impact Categorization Check-list

The resettlement impact check-list is included in Appendix 1 and confirms that there are no

involuntary resettlement impacts and that the project interventions are within the Category C for

resettlement as per the SPS.

The Screening for Resettlement Categorization was conducted on the 28th

of August 2012 by

the national Resettlement Specialist accompanied by other team members including design

engineers.

Review of the resettlement check-list confirms that the sub-project Boeung Kvek may be placed

in Category C for resettlement, and therefore, no Resettlement Plan (RP) is needed for Boeung

Kvek sub-project since the infrastructural improvements will not cause any resettlement or land

acquisition impact.

2. Environment

The Boeung Kvek subproject of the CW13 proposed procurement package (PP) was subjected

to environmental screening process using ADB’s Classification System. Based on SPS 2009, a

project category is evaluated by the category of its most environmentally sensitive component,

including direct, indirect, cumulative, and induced impacts in the project’s area of influence. The

subprojects are classified according to the following Categories:

1 Category A. A proposed subproject is classified as category A if it is likely to have significant

adverse environmental impacts that are irreversible, diverse, or unprecedented. These

impacts may affect an area larger than the sites or facilities subject to physical works.

2 Category B. A proposed subproject is classified as category B if its potential adverse

environmental impacts are less adverse than those of category A projects. These impacts

are site-specific, few if any of them are irreversible, and in most cases mitigation measures

can be designed more readily than for category A projects.

3 Category C. A proposed subproject is classified as category C if it is likely to have minimal or

no adverse environmental impacts.



2.1. Environmental Assessment Check-list

During project preparation, the overall project was classified by ADB as Category B with impacts

that are expected to be site-specific (see appendix 7 of PAM).

Based on the rapid environmental assessment conducted, sensitive areas such as cultural

heritage site, protected area, wetland, mangrove, estuarine and buffer zone of protected area

are not adjacent or within the project area. During construction, impacts on surface water

quality, occupational health and safety, noise and vibration, hazardous driving conditions, poor

sanitation and solid waste disposal are expected, however, these are minimal and short term in

which mitigation measures can be readily formulated and be implemented (see appendix 2).

Hence, Boeung Kvek subproject is classified as Category B as per the SPS. The requisite

Environmental Management Plan (EMP) has been prepared and is attached here as Appendix

4.

The general Environmental Management Plan (EMP) is included as part of the Special

Provisions of the Specification and Performance Requirement (Section V) in the NCB

documents for the FDEP-MOWRAM procurement contracts for civil works. The Contractor will

incorporate the EMP in his planning and will be required to prepare an EMP and report

periodically.



Chapter 5 - CONCLUSIONS

1. Screening

The selected Boeung Kvek sub-project emergency reconstruction work is not new infrastructure

and will improve flood control management; it will not change pre flood hydrology and conforms

to the FDERP criteria for selection as provided in the ADB project documents2, principally it is

an irrigation (flood spreading) facility that has been damaged by the consecutive floods of

recent years and the scheme is managed by an existing FWUG.

A sub-project review has confirmed that there are no involuntary resettlement impacts and

confirm that the project interventions are within the Category C for resettlement.

The Boeung Kvek sub-project is not situated in a protected area and there will be no change in

downstream impacts. Proposed interventions will have minimal or no adverse environmental

impacts. Short term environmental impacts may occur during the construction phase. Pre-flood

O&M measures will be maintained by the already established FWUG that will require

reactivation and strengthening.

Average repair costs will amount to less than $1,000 per ha of gross area (agricultural lands)

protected after repairs and following project criteria3

may proceed without having to verify the

economic viability.

2. Proposed interventions

The proposed basic interventions described above will be defined in detailed design and based

on the topographic survey already carried out.

Typical cross-sections for the embankment works are included here in Appendix 3.

2PAM Annex 1; ‘Selection Criteria for Sub-projects’, March 2012

3Threshold for average repair costs of US$1,000 per ha; PAM Annex 1 Selection Criteria for

sub-projects.

Egis Eau Sub-project Profile-BOEUNG KVEK


Appendix 1 Involuntary Resettlement Impact Check-list

Boeung Kvek Sub-project

Involuntary Resettlement EffectsYes No Not

known

Remarks

Information on Project areas and Involuntary Acquisition of Land

1. Will there be land acquisition?

2. Is the site for land acquisition known? NA4

3. Is the ownership status and current usage of the landto be acquired known?

NA

4. Will easement be utilized within an existing Right ofWay (ROW)?

5. Will there be loss of shelter and residential land due toland acquisition? NA

6. Will there be loss of agricultural and other productiveassets due to land acquisition? NA

7. Will there be loss of crops, trees, and fixed assets dueto land acquisition? NA

8. Will there be loss of businesses or enterprises due toland acquisition? NA

9. Will there be loss of income sources and means oflivelihoods due to land acquisition NA

The dike embankment

lies within the existing

ROW of the dike which

is the property of RGC.

Involuntary restriction on land use or on access to legally designated parks and protected areas

10. Will people loss access to natural resources,communal facilities and services?

11. If land use is changed, will it have an adverse impacton social and economic activities?

12. Will access to land and resources owned communallyor by the state be restricted?

Information on Displaced Persons:

Any estimate of the likely number of persons that will be displaced by theproject?If YES, approximately how many?

[NA] No Yes

Are any of them poor, Female-headed of household, or vulnerable to povertyrisks?

[NA] No Yes

Are there any displaced persons from endogenous or ethnic minority groups? [NA] No Yes

4NA: Not applicable



Appendix 2 Screening for environmental impacts – BOEUNG KVEK

Screening Questions Yes No Remarks

A. PROJECT SITING

IS THE PROJECT AREA ADJACENT TO ORWITHIN ANY OF THE FOLLOWING

ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREAS?

PROTECTED AREAX No cultural heritage sites are

adjacent to or within the subprojects

area

WETLANDX

MANGROVE X

ESTUARINE X

BUFFER ZONE OF PROTECTED AREA X

SPECIAL AREA FOR PROTECTINGBIODIVERSITY X

There are no environmentally

sensitive areas within the subproject

area.

B. POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

WILL THE PROJECT CAUSE…

loss of precious ecological values (e.g. result ofencroachment into forests/swamplands orhistorical/cultural buildings/areas, disruption ofhydrology of natural waterways, regional flooding,and drainage hazards)?

X No loss in ecological values as the

subproject is to repair the existing

dykes and canal to the pre-flood

conditions within existing and long

established flood spreading irrigation

scheme

conflicts in water supply rights and related socialconflicts? X Water User Group (WUG) has been

already established and confirmed to

be working effectively to operate and

maintain the scheme. (project

selection criteria requirement).

Conflict resolution is included in the

FWUC strengthening.

impediments to movements of people andanimals? X No impediment expected for dyke

rehabilitation. If necessary temporary

bypass will be provided to local

people and animal passage during

construction and as specified in

contract documents

potential ecological problems due to increased soilerosion and siltation, leading to decreased streamcapacity?

X Scheme facilities do not impact any

streams. Repairs to embankment

include grass sodding bank

protection to reduce erosion risk.

Good construction practices to

mitigate soil erosion and silt runoff

are included in specification.

Insufficient drainage leading to salinity intrusion?X No salinity issues are expected at

any sites




over pumping of groundwater, leading tosalinization and ground subsidence? X Not expected as ground water will not

be used.

impairment of downstream water quality andtherefore, impairment of downstream beneficialuses of water?

X Scheme facilities do not impact any

streams_ no change to system

dislocation or involuntary resettlement of people?X No IR impacts envisioned. The works

will be carried out only within the

existing embankments. Fill materials

will be taken from existing reservation

area or existing designated borrow

pits/quarries.

disproportionate impacts on the poor, women andchildren, Indigenous Peoples or other vulnerablegroups?

X The subproject will not affect

indigenous people or other

vulnerable groups.

potential social conflicts arising from land tenureand land use issues? X The reconstruction works are to

restore the existing dykes to the pre-

flood conditions. Thus, there will be

no conflict on land use.

soil erosion before compaction and lining ofcanals? X Not applicable. Note that good

construction practices to mitigate soil

erosion before compaction of dike

embankment are specified. Work is

planned for dry season.

noise from construction equipment?X

dust during construction?X

Some dust and noise is expected

during construction but impacts will

be temporary and short in duration. In

addition, construction activities are

far from residential area. Good

construction practices to mitigate

noise and dust are included in

specifications.

waterlogging and soil salinization due toinadequate drainage and farm management? X The scheme is a lowland flood

spreading irrigation for paddy rice.

leaching of soil nutrients and changes in soilcharacteristics due to excessive application ofirrigation water?

X The reconstruction works are to

restore the existing embankment

dyke and appurtenant structures to

the pre-flood conditions. Soils

characteristics will not be changed

compared to pre-flood irrigation

practice conditions which consists of

paddy rice cultivation, mostly in wet

season

reduction of downstream water supply during peakseasons? X There is no water flow in dry season,

scheme is based on flood spreading

and use of retained water for dry

season.




soil pollution, polluted farm runoff andgroundwater, and public health risks due toexcessive application of fertilizers and pesticides?

X No change compared to pre-flood

conditions.

soil erosion (furrow, surface)?X No change from pre-flood conditions.

Bunded rice paddy irrigation will be

practiced on land without slope.

scouring of canals?X No canals

clogging of canals by sediments?X No canals.

clogging of canals by weeds?X No clogging of channels is expected

as the repair works will not affect the

existing pre-flood conditions.

seawater intrusion into downstream freshwatersystems? X Not applicable.

introduction of increase in incidence of waterborneor water related diseases? X The reconstruction works are to

restore the existing embankment to

the pre-flood conditions.

dangers to a safe and healthy workingenvironment due to physical, chemical andbiological hazards during project construction andoperation?

X Contractor is obliged to conform to

safety standards for protection of

public and workers through a Health

Safety Plan. No chemical, biological

and radiological hazards are

expected during construction and

operation. Only natural materials

such as soils or laterites will be used.

No chemicals will be used.

large population influx during project constructionand operation that causes increased burden onsocial infrastructure and services (such as watersupply and sanitation systems)?

X The number of non-local workers will

be small in number. If necessary,

construction contractors will be

required to provide a worker’s camp

with independent basic facilities.

social conflicts if workers from other regions orcountries are hired? X Priority in labor employment will be

given to local residents and non-local

workers will be small in number

risks to community health and safety due to thetransport, storage, and use and/or disposal ofmaterials such as explosives, fuel and otherchemicals during construction and operation?

X No explosives and chemicals will be

used for the subprojects.

community safety risks due to both accidental andnatural hazards, especially where the structuralelements or components of the project (e.g.,irrigation dams) are accessible to members of theaffected community or where their failure couldresult in injury to the community throughout projectconstruction, operation and decommissioning?

X Construction area will be clearly

demarcated and access controlled.

Only workers and project staff will be

allowed to enter the operational sites.

The emergency reconstruction works

are of small scale




Climate Change and Disaster Risk Questions

The following questions are not for environmental

categorization. They are included in this checklist to

help identify potential climate and disaster risks.

Yes No Remarks

Is the Project area subject to hazards such asearthquakes, floods, landslides, tropical cyclonewinds, storm surges, tsunami or volcanic eruptionsand climate changes?

X Not Applicable

Could changes in temperature, precipitation, orextreme events patterns over the Project lifespanaffect technical or financial sustainability (e.g.,increased glacial melt affect delivery volumes ofirrigated water; sea level rise increases salinitygradient such that source water cannot be usedfor some or all of the year)?

X Not Applicable

Are there any demographic or socio-economicaspects of the Project area that are alreadyvulnerable (e.g., high incidence of marginalizedpopulations, rural-urban migrants, illegalsettlements, ethnic minorities, women orchildren)?

X Not Applicable

Could the Project potentially increase the climateor disaster vulnerability of the surrounding area(e.g., by diverting water in rivers that furtherincreases salinity upstream, or encouragingsettlement in earthquake zones)?

X Not Applicable



Appendix 3 Sketches of emergency repairs



Appendix 4 Environmental Management Plan (EMP)

Institutional ResponsibilitiesProject Phase Project Activity

Potential Environmental

ImpactsProposed Mitigation Measures

Implement Monitor

1) Loss of trees (during site

clearing and quarrying of

construction materials)

On the design stage, ensure that there areacceptable alternative borrow pit areas thatwould have an overall beneficial advantage interms of improved livelihood and reducedenvironmental impact.

TA Consultant, IA/EA TA Consultant, IA/EA,

CSC (FWUC)

1.Pre-Construction Detailed Engineering Design

2) Damage to existing structures The design should maximize benefits or avoidimpacts on assets. Resettlement framework forthe Project and Cambodian laws, policies, andregulations should be complied with.


CSC (FWUC)

3) Risk of land mine or UXO Consultative meetings with local communitiesare necessary to know clearly where there arerisks of mines or UXO. Unsafe areas should becleared before project implementation.


CSC (FWUC)

2. Construction Earthworks, site clearing,

hauling of construction

materials, piling works,

Operation of construction/

workers’ camps, borrow

operation, hauling of

construction wastes to spoil

sites

4) Dust generation The Contractor will be required to formulate andimplement a Dust Abatement Program thatincludes spraying of water on embankment/dykeused as roads and work areas within villagesclose to the road.

Vehicles transporting materials should becovered with tarpaulin or similar material

Contractor TA Consultant, IA/EA,

CSC (FWUC)

5) Noise and vibration The Contractor should ensure that constructionactivities within 100m of a village or town shouldbe limited between 12 PM to 2 PM and at night


CSC (FWUC)






Implement Monitor

time.

Provide enclosures/barriers on major worksbeing undertaken on sensitive areas.

6) Water contamination Waste/used oil should be collected, properlystored and disposed to an approved site(according to national standard). Storage shouldbe in drums raised off the ground and properlycovered to keep rain water out. Lining or panshould be provided to contain any spills andsimplify clean up.

The Contractor shall prepare a SpillManagement Plan (including measures to betaken and equipment to be used) to ensureadequate cleanup of any spills.


CSC (FWUC)

7) Water-borne disease Fill-up depressed areas to prevent water pondingwhich may be used as breeding ground fordisease- carrying organisms mosquitoes

Borrow pits may be utilized for aquaculture or bedeveloped as water reservoir for community use.


CSC (FWUC)

8) Loss of agricultural land for

borrow pits

The contractor will use only licensed borrowoperators. There will be no side borrowpermitted, unless agreed to withembankment/dyke side residents.

The contractor will be responsible forrehabilitating any borrow sites opened and


CSC (FWUC)






Implement Monitor

operated by them.

9) Loss of trees Tree clearing should be avoided as much aspossible;

The borrow pits will need to be re-vegetatedbefore being handed back to the owner, or couldbe used for aquaculture.

Tree planting should be carried out in theappropriate location of the embankment/dyke.Coordinate with MoE regarding the species oftrees to be used.


CSC (FWUC)

10) Soil erosion The contractor will be required to implement soilerosion control to minimize soil erosion andsedimentation of waterways. The alternativeapproaches should be: (1) provide adequatecross drainage to avoid over flow or flooding and(2) re-vegetation of erosion-prone areas.


CSC (FWUC)

11) Generation of domestic wastes Sufficient garbage containers should be providedin construction camps and work sites

Employ regular disposal of waste in an approvedlandfill or site

Maintain cleanliness/orderliness at camps andwork sites

Contractor TA Consultant, IA/EA






Implement Monitor

12) Safety and Health

The Contractor should formulate and implementa Health and Safety Plan to protect both thepublic and the workers. A trained first aidpersonnel and health facility should be providedon site.

Provide potable water and sanitary facilities toworkers

Install warning signs like “safety first” at theconstruction area including fences or enclosures

Provide Protective Personal Equipment (PPE) toworkers e.g. safety shoes, hardhats, earplugs,etc.

The Contractor should implement a Health andSafety Plan to protect both the public and theworkers during cutting branch of big trees.


12) Traffic congestion Contractor should perform the following: i) orienttheir drivers or equipment operators to complywith the required speed limit. (ii) drive at lowspeeds, especially in market, school, hospital,urban areas. (iii) keep the roadway or bypassaccessible to commuters to avoid traffic jams.(iv) park at designated area.

Provide appropriate storage area for theconstruction materials.

Detour road should be provided and accessibleto commuters

Contractor/in

coordination with the sub-

district officials

TA Consultant, IA/EA






Implement Monitor

Temporary access of equipment and trucks mustbe established and approved by the sub-districtofficials

13) Transmission of sexuallytransmitted disease (HIV)

Prepare and implement a Health and Safety Planincluding education of workers on sexuallytransmitted disease.


14) Generation of employment The contractor should comply with the Labor and

Gender Action Plan; employed people fromvillages including women and unskilled workers.

Contractor IA/EA , local authorities

3.Operation Phase Use of hydraulic facilities,15) Accident, social conflicts

Provide warning signs on accident-prone pointssuch as spillways, especially near schools,hospitals and market areas.

Provide signs on the specialty structures to avoidparking. Prohibit setting up of food stalls etc.

Contractor, PDWRAM /

FWUC

MOWTRAM/PDWRAM,

local authorities, FWUC

16) Social conflicts, facility andwater use conflict

Prepare the FWUG and FWUC TA Consultant, IA/EA ,

FWUC, PDWRAM, Local

authority

MOWTRAM/PDWRAM,

local authorities, FWUC



Appendix 5 Hydrology

A – Hydrological and flood hazard in sub-area

3. Hydrological and flood hazard in Boeung Kvek

3.1. Catchment Characteristics

Boeung Kvek area sees Figure 3.1, located in Kampong Thom province, along

adjacent floodplain of Stung Sen River. There are more than 1074 ha with Boeung Kvek

catchment area in which 510 ha are irrigation area for both dry and early wet season rice

inside the irrigation scheme (commanded area).

Figure 3.1 Boeung Kvek Layout Catchment Area.

This area was flood plain dyke with 500 m long and a three vertical gate at downstream of

catchment and this facility structure was built in year 2005 by the ERIDP Project. It function

is to store water during the flood season to irrigate dry rice and early wet season rice for

inside the ring dyke.

There’s 90% of Boeung Kvek catchment area is low land with elevation mostly between 20

and 50 meters masl [mean absolute sea level]. The area is characterized by plate and large

floodplain including several ponds connecting each other within the catchment area and

gentle slopes along Stung Sen River.

Rainfall

The rainy season started in Cambodia in mid-May and lasts until end of October. The mean annual

rainfall varies from 1100 mm to more than 4000 mm.

In the northern region, the mean annual rainfall varies from 1100 mm to 2400 mm.

In the northeastern region: 1000 mm to 2000 mm

At Bokor near Kampot: 4650 mm

Figure 3.2 Annual Rainfalls at Kampong Thom.

Temperature

The variation of the mean annual temperature over Cambodia is very small.

The mean maximal temperature in April 35°C

The mean minimal temperature in December 20°C

Humidity

The mean annual humidity over Cambodia varies in a narrow range among 75% at Phnom

Penh, to about 80% at Sihanouk Ville.

The mean seasonal variation of humidity at Phnom Penh is from 66% to 85%.

Evaporation

The observations on evaporation in Cambodia are mostly made with the Pich evaporimeter

and to a limited extend with the evaporation pan. The annual observation made by Pich

evaporimeter varies from 1020 mm to 1470 mm. At Phnom Penh mean annual evaporation

is 1348 mm.

Water resources

Cambodia has a unique hydrological system. The Mekong River and Tonle Sap Lake are

connected by Tonle Sap River which twice a year reverse its stream direction. From July to

October, when the Mekong level is higher, water is pushed up in the Tonle Sap Lake (great

Lake), thereby increasing the size of the Lake.

Boeung Kvek catchment is part of the floodplain along Stung Sen River flow forwards to

Great Lake; most of flow within this area is created by rainfall run-off and over bank flow

from Stung Sen River. Upper Boeung Kvek catchment flow forward to lower part especially

in beginning wet season most of those flow volume are directly going into lower part and

temporary store within the ponds such as Boeung Pra, Boeung Vealpring and other smaller

than these two big. They connected to each other by natural canal of shallow depth water

before reaching vertical gate at Boeung Kvek as the old track of Stung Sen River itself in the

pass cause of evolution morphological river change. There’s enough volume of flow going to

Boeung Kvek gate via several irrigation facilities like pipe culvert or box culvert from upper

catchment whereas the linkage to Stung Sen River is included so there’re two sources of

water going into Boeung Kvek project study rainfall run-off and Stung Sen River flow.

Therein linkage between this catchment and Stung Sen River flow interaction can happen in

normal case because the river bank top is not higher than flow level of this river that why

Vealpring Krom Village get flood even normal flow condition in the river not include heavy

rain occurred in upper part of Stung Sen River by storm rainfall or typhoon hits like year

2009 called Kesana. Most of flow in the catchment is from rainfall run-off inside catchment

itself (Fig.3.3 Flood Image in year 2000) and flow from Stung Sen River; the over bank is

directly going into catchment this may cause by recent infrastructure within the catchment

as well as Vealpring Krom Village; flood picture year 2012 is below:

The entrance to vertical gate is flooded. The dyke and vertical gate is under water.

Figure 3.3. Satellite Flood Image year 2000.

(Further Analysis will be made in final report after receiving data)

flood damage emergency reconstruction project –...

Documents