government of india ministry of development of north ... · 8 hume pipe culvert 1000 mm dia (29...

1

Government of India Ministry of Development of North Eastern Region

----------------- Minutes of the 52nd Meeting of the NLCPR Committee held at 11.00 AM on 24.10.2007 and 04.30 PM on 31.10.2007 under the Chairmanship of Secretary, M/o DoNER in Committee Room, Vigyan Bhavan Annexe.

1. Smt. Sushma Singh, Secretary, Ministry of Development of North Eastern

Region…..In Chair. 2. Dr. Hari Krishna, Joint Secretary, Ministry of Development of North Eastern Region. 3. Shri Naveen Verma, Joint Secretary (NE), Ministry of Home Affairs, North Block,

New Delhi. 4. Shri V.S. Senthil, Joint Secretary, Department of Expenditure, Ministry of Finance,

North Block, New Delhi 5. Shri R.K. Vats, Joint Secretary & FA, Ministry of DoNER and Ministry of Urban

Development, Nirman Bhawan, New Delhi 6. Shri S. N. Brohmo Choudhury, Director (SP-NE), Planning Commission 7. Shri K. Guite, Joint Director, IFD, Ministry of DoNER 8. Shri Sarvan Kumar, Director, Planning Commission 9. Shri R. R. Jha, Director(NE), Ministry of Home Affairs, New Delhi.

Ms. Jayati Chandra, Sr. Adviser (SP-NE), Planning Commission was granted leave

of absence. Shri Naveen Verma, Joint Secretary (NE), Ministry of Home Affairs granted leave of absence on 31.10.2007.

Following Officers were also present as special invitees: Shri Nikhil Pandey (Director), Shri P.R. Meshram (Director), Shri B.B. Samaddar,

Deputy Secretary, Shri D.P. Singh (Under Secretary) and Shri S.K. Saha (Section Officer), Ministry of DoNER.

The Committee met and deliberated on the Agenda items. Following observations

and recommendations were made: Item No.1: Confirmation of Minutes of 51st Meeting of the NLCPR Committee

held on 21.09.2007 Minutes of the 51st Meeting were confirmed.

* * * Item No.2: Action taken report of decisions / recommendations made by

NLCPR Committee in the 51st Meeting held on 21.09.2007 The Committee noted that the Minutes for 51st Meeting have been issued on 27.09.2007 and action has been initiated by the Ministry of DoNER on the decisions/ recommendations made by the NLCPR Committee in that meeting. It was decided that the action be taken and progress reported in the next meeting.

* * * *

2

Item No.3: Project “Construction of Road from Sille to Yagrung in East Siang District", Arunachal Pradesh for consideration of sanction

The Committee noted that the project was retained at an estimated cost of

Rs.4.50 crore in its 42nd meeting held on 16.06.2006. The DoRTH vetted the project at Rs.542.30 lac. The project is for construction of an entirely new 10 Km blacktop road on earthen embankment from Sille to Yagrung. The road will have 5.95 m formation width and 3.75m carriage way width. After deliberations, the Committee, excluding inadmissible items, recommended the project for sanction with the following components at an estimated cost of Rs.500.94 lac: S.No. Components of work Amount

(Rs. in lac) 1 Jungle Clearance 5.25 2 Earth Work in banking for road formation 155.78 3 Granular Sub base 68.70 4 Earthen Shoulder 8.54 5 WBM - II 31.55 6 WBM - III (Two layers) 82.44 7 P.M.C 58.32 8 Hume Pipe Culvert 1000 mm dia (29 Nos) 36.16 9 Slab Culvert- 1.00 m span (9 Nos) 17.10 10 Slab Culvert- 4.00 m span (2 Nos) 13.28 11 Slab Culvert- 6.00 m span (1 No) 13.19 12 Road Sign and Logo 0.81 Sub - Total 491.12 Add 2% Contingency 9.82 Total 500.94

The Committee observed that the sanction will be subject to the following conditions:

i. The PWD, Government of Arunachal Pradesh should follow all codal formalities while executing the project.

ii. Codal formalities should include tenders being called on competitive basis by giving wide publicity in print media like Newspapers & Trade Journals and the web based publicity.

iii. The construction agency will adhere to the time schedule given by them in the estimate for completion of the project.

iv. The 2% contingency charges amounting to Rs.9.82 lac may be reimbursed for actual contingent expenditure to the State Government on production of documentary evidence. However, they would not include any work charge, daily wages or any other establishment charges.

v. The State Government would immediately get the video-graphy done of the project site so as to highlight the existing condition with the details of those areas where specific works are to be done, including proposed site of new bridge, approaches, earth work, protection works, pavement works, etc.

* * *

Item No.4: Proposal for Improvement of Nagaon- Barapujia Road under Nagaon

District in Assam.

The project for Improvement of Nagaon- Barapujia Road under Nagaon District in Assam was retained by the NLCPR Committee in its 46th meeting held on 12.01.2007 for detailed examination at an estimated cost of Rs.298.00 Lac.

3

The proposal is for improvement of 20 Km existing road. The Committee noted that the Department of Road Transport & Highways have examined the DPR, who have found it to be in order and have stated that the estimated cost of the project is reported to be based on survey and investigation carried out by the State PWD and various items of works have been priced at current Schedule of Rates for the year 2006-07 prevailing in the area or as per analyzed rates and may be taken as firm and DPR may be considered for approval. Committee also noted that certificate, as desired by DoRT&H, from Government of Assam that this work is not funded against any other source/programme, is already available in the DPR. It was also observed that Department of Road Transport & Highways have found the DPR to be in order subject to the comments given in the Annexure-1.

The Committee, therefore, recommended sanction of this at the cost of Rs.298.00

lac including 1% Contingency Charges (i.e. Rs. 2.95 lac) as per details given below: - (Rs. in lac)

Sl. No.

Name of item Amount

1 Clearing grass and removal of rubbish 0.11 2 Dismentling of existing structure 0.12 3 Removal of Telephone/Electric Poles and Lines 0.08 4 Construction of Embankment with material obtained from Borrow pits 50.15 5 Excavation in cutting in soil by manual means with lead upto 50m 0.79 6 Scarifying Existing Bituminous road surface. 2.37 7 Granular Sub-base with well graded materials 21.47 8 Water Bound Macadam Sub base/base 123.04 9 Providing Prime Coat 5.77 10 Providing Tack Coat 1.63 11 Providing Open Graded premix Carpet 22.09 12 Providing Seal Coat 7.47 13 Construction of Culvert 16.00 14 Providing Road side Drain 43.96 15 Add 1% Contingency 2.95 Total 298.00

The project was recommended for sanction subject to the following conditions:

i. The observations of Department of Road Transport & Highways as given in Annexure-1 would be taken into consideration at the time of implementation.

ii. The State Government should follow all codal formalities while executing the project.

iii. Codal formalities should include tenders being called on competitive basis by giving wide publicity in print media like Newspapers & Trade Journals and the web based publicity.

iv. The construction agency will adhere to the time schedule given by them in the estimate for completion of the project.

v. The State Government would immediately get the video-graphy done of the project site so as to highlight the existing condition with the details of those areas where specific works are to be done, including proposed site of road, approaches, earth work, protection works, pavement works, etc.

vi. Contingency charges may be reimbursed to the State Government on production of documentary evidence of actual contingent expenditure. However, these charges would not include any work charged establishment, daily wage charges or any other staff charges.

* * *

4

Item No.5. Project for consideration under NLCPR – Improvement of Nagaon-Morikolong Nonoi Dakhinpat Road in Nagaon District in Assam

The project for Improvement of Nagaon-Morikolong Nonoi Dakhinpat Road in Nagaon District in Assam was retained by the NLCPR Committee in its 46th meeting held on 12.01.2007 for detailed examination at an estimated cost of Rs. 201.00 Lac.

The proposal is for improvement of 12 km road. The Committee noted the Department of Road Transport & Highways have examined the DPR who have found it to be in order and have stated that the estimated cost of the project is reported to be based on survey and investigations carried out by the State PWD and various items of works have been priced at current Schedule of Rates for the year 2006-07 prevailing in the area or as per analyzed rates and may be taken as firm and DPR may be considered for approval. Committee also noted that certificate, as desired by DoRT&H, from Government of Assam that this work is not funded against any other source/programme, is already available in the DPR. It was also observed that Department of Road Transport & Highways have found the DPR to be in order subject to the comments given in the Annexure-2.

The Committee, therefore, recommended sanction of this project at the cost of

Rs.199.03 lac, including 1% contingency (i.e. Rs.1.97 lac) and after deleting inadmissible expenditure on quality control, as per details given below: -

(Rs. in lac) Sl. No.

Name of item Amount

(A) Road Works 1 Earth work in subgrade 33.33 2 Scarifying 2.28 3 G. S. B. 22.01 4 Water Bound Macadam (WBM) Gr.II 16.86 5 Water Bound Macadam (WBM) Gr.III 41.96 6 Providing Prime Coat 3.70 7 Providing Tack Coat 3.12 8 Providing Open Graded premix Carpet 44.22 9 Providing Seal Coat 19.34 10 Miscellaneous 0.24 Total (A) 187.06 (B) Bridge Work 1 Bridge No.18/1 6.67 2 Bridge No.19/2 3.33 3 1% Contingency 1.97 Total (B) 11.97 Grand Total (A+B) 199.03

The project was recommended for sanction subject to the following conditions: i. The observations of Department of Road Transport & Highways as given in

Annexure - 2 would be taken into consideration at the time of implementation. ii. The State Government should follow all codal formalities while executing the

project. iii. Codal formalities should include tenders being called on competitive basis by

giving wide publicity in print media like Newspapers & Trade Journals and the web based publicity.

iv. The construction agency will adhere to the time schedule given by them in the

5

estimate for completion of the project. v. The State Government would immediately get the video-graphy done of the

project site so as to highlight the existing condition with the details of those areas where specific works are to be done, including proposed site of road, approaches, earth work, protection works, pavement works, etc.

vi. Contingency charges may be reimbursed to the State Government on production of documentary evidence of actual contingent expenditure. However, these charges would not include any work charged establishment, daily wage charges or any other staff charges.

* * *

Item No.6: Construction of Dibrugarh Sapekhati Road from km 12 to km 18

along with 2 RCC Bridges No. 18/1 and 19/1 with approaches (Bridge over River Buridihing at Saraighat

This project was retained by the NLCPR Committee, for techno-economic

examination, in their 29th Meeting held on 02.06.2004 at an estimated cost of Rs.1794.00 lac.

The Committee noted that DPR has been examined by the Department of Road

Transport & Highways, who have stated that the estimated cost of the project is reported to be based on survey and investigation carried out by the State PWD and various items of works have been priced at current Schedule of Rates for the year 2005-06 prevailing in the area or as per analyzed rates and may be taken as Firm and DPR may be considered for approval. It was also noted that DoRT&H have cleared the project subject to some observations, which are at Annexure-3. DoRT&H have also desired that necessary certificates from the Government of Assam should be obtained certifying that this work is not included in any other source/programme.

The Committee recommended sanction of this project at a cost of Rs.2116.45 lac (inclusive of contingency charges amounting to Rs.20.95 lac) after deducting the inadmissible item viz. cost of preparation of DPR. The project was recommended for sanction for the following items of works:

Sl. No.

Name of the item Approved cost (Rs. in lac)

A Road Works 1 Earth Work in Core 65.17 2 Earth Work in SUB GRADE 51.17 3 Turfing 1.38 4 GSB 77.54 5 WMM 156.90 6 Prime Coat 7.92 7 Tack Coat 3.01 8 OGPS 38.65 9 Seal Coat 16.49 10 Miscellaneous* 3.02 Sub-Total (A) 421.25 B CD Works 1 HP Culvert 9.39 2 Construction of RCC Bridge No. 18/1 1202.33 3 Construction of RCC Bridge No.19/1 317.01 Sub-Total (B) 1528.73 C Protection Work and Guide Bund 1 Guide Bund 141.73

6

Sl. No.

Name of the item Approved cost (Rs. in lac)

2 Protection Work 3.79 Sub-Total (C) 145.52 Total (A)+(B)+(C) 2095.50 Contingency @ 1% 20.95 Grand Total 2116.45

* The miscellaneous item mentioned in part A of the project includes providing and

erecting direction and place identification retro reflectride sign as per IRC Code, reinforced cement concrete and 15 grade km stone as per IRC Code, station marking of ROW pillars etc.

The NLCPR Committee recommended sanction of this project subject to the

following conditions:

i. Necessary certificate from the Government of Assam should be obtained certifying that this work is not included in any other source/ programme.

ii. The observations of Department of Road Transport & Highways as given in Annexure-3 would be taken into consideration at the time of implementation.

iii. The State Government should follow all codal formalities while executing the project.

iv. Codal formalities should include tenders being called on competitive basis by giving wide publicity in print media like Newspapers & Trade Journals and the web based publicity.

v. The construction agency will adhere to the time schedule given by them in the estimate for completion of the project.

vi. The State Government would immediately get the video-graphy done of the project site so as to highlight the existing condition with the details of those areas where specific works are to be done, including proposed site of road, earth work, protection works, pavement works, etc.

vii. Contingency charges may be reimbursed to the State Government on production of documentary evidence of actual contingent expenditure. However, these charges would not include any work charged establishment, daily wage charges or any other staff charges.

* * *

Item No.7: Revision in cost of the project “Construction of Joising Doloi

Auditorium complex at Diphu” in Karbi Anglong District of Assam. The project “Construction of Joising Doloi Auditorium complex at Diphu” in

Assam) was sanctioned at a cost of Rs. 354.11 Lac on the basis of recommendation made by the NLCPR Committee in the 46th meeting held on 12.01.2007.

The Committee noted the request of the State Government for reconsideration of the cost of the project on the basis of the APWD schedule of rates of Government of Assam and remote area charges @ 15%.

It was also observed that Ministry of Urban Development who had earlier vetted the cost of the project have re-examined the DPR and have remarked that “the estimate has now been revised with Cost Index 71.08% against taken earlier as 52.41% over DSR 2002. As regards adding 15% weightage for remote area, no percentage can be added over and above the cost index on DSR Rates”. The Committee noted that the Ministry of Urban Development have, therefore, recommended the project at a revised

7

total cost of Rs. 458.43 Lac, including 3% Contingency Charges, based on Cost Index 71.08% of DSR 2002.

In view of the above, the NLCPR Committee, after deleting the inadmissible items and restricting the contingency charges to 2% of the project cost, recommended revision of the approved cost for this project to Rs. 379.38 Lac for the following items of works:

(Rs.in lac)

Sl. No. Items of Work Amount 1. Main Auditorium hall (Civil Works) 193.15 2. Main Auditorium hall (Internal sanitary & water supply) 4.01 3. Main Auditorium hall ( Internal electrification) 24.65 4. Care Taker’s Quarter (Civil Works) 11.85 5. Care Taker’s Quarter (Internal sanitary & water supply) 0.87 6. Care Taker’s Quarter ( Internal electrification) 1.59 7. Ticket counter, Boundary wall with gate, cattle trap etc. 14.31 8. External Sewerage and water supply (Deep tube well and

filtration tank ) 3.92

9. Earth Filling in Site 10.69 10. Acoustic Treatment 26.00 11. Sitting arrangement (1100 + 100) Seats @ 1500 seat 18.00 12. Sound and Speaker system 25.00 13. Central A.C. in main hall and Conference Hall 31.54 14. External Water Supply (Deep tube well and filtration tank ) 8.00 15. Misc. Works & Contingency @ 2% of Building cost 5.80

Total 379.38 The cost revision was recommended subject to the following conditions:

i. The State Government should follow all codal formalities while executing the project.

ii. Codal formalities should include tenders being called on competitive basis by giving wide publicity in print media like Newspapers & Trade Journals and the web based publicity.

iii. Construction agency should adhere to the time schedule given in the estimate.

iv. The Contingency Charges may be reimbursed to the State Government for actual contingent expenditure on production of documentary evidence. However, the Contingency Charges would not include any work charged establishment, daily wage charges or any other staff charges.

* * * Item No.8: Proposal for “Cashew Processing Plant at Mankachar in Assam”

This NLCPR Committee, in the 40th Meeting held on 28.03.2006, had

recommended retention of this project for Techno-economic examination from the Priority List of 2005-06, at an estimated cost of Rs.206.00 Lac.

The NLCPR Committee noted that the Ministry of Food Processing Industry have conveyed their ‘No Objection’ stating that proposal appears to be in order from technical angle. It was seen that M/o FPI have further stated that for the purpose of considering the project proposals for financial assistance under its plan schemes, they rely on appraisal reports of the projects carried out by scheduled banks/financial

8

institutions inter-alia indicating details of project cost, means of finance, financial parameters viz. IRR, DER, DSCR, BEP etc. alongwith comments on technical and financial viability of the projects. M/o FPI had observed that no such appraisal report on the project had been furnished and accordingly, Ministry of Development of North Eastern Region was requested to examine the proposal further as per their guidelines.

The NLCPR Committee noted that in response to the remarks of M/o FPI, the North Eastern Development Finance Corporation Ltd. (NEDFi), which is a financial Institution under the M/o DoNER, have examined the DPR and have found that the proposed cashew processing plant of NERAMAC is technically feasible and economically viable. NEDFi have recommended sanction of this project subject to the normal terms and conditions as applicable to such assistance.

In addition, M/o UD have examined the DPR with respect to the estimates concerning the site development and building of structures and have cleared these portions of the DPR at a cost of Rs. 115.73 lac, subject to the following remarks: a. The estimate has been checked arithmetically with respect to measurement and

details supplied with the estimate b. This is further subject to feasibility of work at site, site conditions, technical

viability etc. which are to be checked at site by the competent authority before taking up the actual execution of work.

The NLCPR Committee observed that the cost of plant and machinery,

miscellaneous fixed assets, pre-operative expenses and contingency charges, as included in the DPR, which has been technically cleared by M/o FPI and NEDFi, comes to Rs. 96.00 lac. In response to the IFD’s comments, the Committee was of the view that Para 4.1(viii) of the “Guidelines for Administration of NLCPR” covers strategic intervention through Corporations / Organisations under the administrative control of the Ministry of DONER and, therefore, this project can be considered for approval.

The NLCPR Committee desired to know if this project had been approved by the Board of Directors of NERAMAC. It was informed to the Committee that the project had already been approved earlier by the Board of NERAMAC. The NLCPR Committee, therefore, recommended sanction of the project at a cost of Rs.210.85 Lac (including contingency @ 2% i.e Rs. 4.12 lacs) with 90% funding (as Grant) from the NLCPR and balance 10% loan component to be raised by the State Government / NERAMAC. The project was recommended for the following items of work:

(Rs. in lac)

Sl. No. Name of item Amount A Structure Compound wall 12.00

Office and Laboratory 8.33 Change Room for workers 2.23 Security and Time Office 1.11 Worker’s Dining Hall 2.23 Wash Room 1.11 Total A 27.01

B Factory Building Steam Cooking 2.21 Shelling Section 8.83 Borma and Humidifier 5.90 Peeling Section 13.28

9

Sl. No. Name of item Amount Grading 5.90 Inspection Packing and stacking 7.37 Total B 43.49

C Storage Raw Nut Storage Shed - I 13.21 Raw Nut Storage Shed – II 11.01 Raw Nut Storage Shed - III 9.91 Total C 34.13

D Site Development Excavation of Earth 6.40 Total D 6.40 E Miscellaneous Plinth Protection Drain 0.98 Drying Yard 3.12 Gate 0.30 Well 0.30 Total E 4.70 Grand Total A + B + C + D + E 115.73 F Plant and Machinery 69.00 G Miscellaneous Fixed Assets 19.00 H Pre – operative Expenses 3.00 I Contingencies @2% 4.12 Total F+G+H+I 95.12 Grand Total A + B + C + D + E+ F+G+H+I 210.85

The project was recommended for sanction subject to the following conditions:

i. The feasibility of work at site, site conditions, technical viability etc. should be checked at site by the competent authority before taking up the actual execution of work.

ii. The funds for this project would be released to the State Government who in turn would release the same to NERAMAC. The funds would be released in the form of 90% Grant and remaining 10% loan component would be raised by the State Government / NERAMAC.

iii. The implementation and execution of this project would be carried out by NERAMAC. The monitoring would be done by NERAMAC, the State Government and the Ministry of DoNER.

iv. Government of Assam and NERAMAC should follow all codal formalities in executing the project.

v. The implementing agency should adhere to the time schedule given in the estimate.

vi. The Contingency Charges may be reimbursed for actual contingent expenditure on production of documentary evidence. However, the Contingency Charges would not include any work charged establishment, daily wage charges or any other staff charges.

* * * Item No.9: Project for consideration under the Non-Lapsable Central Pool of

Resources - Construction of 18 PHSCs in Valley areas

The Committee noted that the project was retained at an estimated cost of Rs.332.13 lac in its 32nd meeting held on 28.02.2005. The State Government has certified that the project is not included for funding under National Rural Health Mission

10

(NRHM) taking into account that they had already been retained for funding from NLCPR. The Ministry of Urban Development vetted the civil part of the project at Rs.289.53 lac. The Ministry of Health & Family Welfare (MoH&FW) suggested that the proposal may be considered as per proposed framework of NRHM. The cost of equipments proposed at Rs. 7.79 lac is yet to be vetted by the MoH&FW.

The committee observed that the funding for such projects is also available under

NRHM. However, since the project was retained in February 2005, when the NRHM was not operational, the committee after deliberations, recommended the project for sanction of the civil part, of the following 18 PHSCs, excluding inadmissible items, at a cost of Rs.256.50 lac.

S. No Name of the Districts No. of PHSC

Approved Cost (Rs. in lac)

1. Imphal West District 7 97.80 2. Thoubal District 6 83.82 3. Bisnupur District 5 69.85 Sub Total 18 251.47 2% Contingency Charges 5.03 Total 18 256.50

PHSC wise break up of cost of Construction is as follows:

S. No. No. of Unit PHSC Approved Cost (Rs. in lac)

1 Imphal West District :

i. Kongthoujam ii. Nongchup Keithelmanbi iii. Irom Meijrao iv. Samusang v. Toubungkhok vi. Awang Jiri vii. Lilong Chajing

13.9713.9713.9713.9713.9713.9713.97

Sub - Total 97.802 Thoubal District

i. Haoreibi Turel Ahanbi ii. Wangkhem iii. Maibam Konjil iv. Khoirom Kekru v. Mayeng Lamjao vi. Pangaitabi

13.9713.9713.9713.9713.9713.97

Sub - Total 83.823 Bisnupur District

i. Toubal ii. Kabo Wakching iii. Pukhrambam iv. Phubala v. Keibul Lamjao

13.9713.9713.9713.9713.97

Sub - Total 69.85 Total 18 PHSCs 251.474 2% Contingencies 5.03 Total 256.50 Conditions: i. The MoH&FW may be requested for funding the equipments for these 18 PHSCs

under NRHM so that PHSCs can become functional. ii. The 2% Contingency charges amounting to Rs.5.03 lac may be reimbursed for

actual contingent expenditure to the State Government on production of

11

documentary evidence. However, they would not include any work charge, daily wages or any other establishment charges.

iii. The implementing agency should adhere to the time schedule given in the estimate.

iv. The Government of Manipur should follow all codal formalities while executing the

project. v. The codal formalities should include calling of tenders of competitive basis by

giving wide publicity in newspapers, trade journal etc. as well web based publicity.

* * *

Item No. 10: Project for consideration under the Non-Lapsable Central Pool of Resources- Construction of 32 PHSCs in Hills areas


Rs.648.91 lac in its 32nd meeting held on 28.02.2005. The Ministry of Urban Development vetted the civil part of the project at Rs.648.91 lac. The Ministry of Health & Family Welfare (MoH&FW) suggested that the proposal may be considered as per proposed framework of NRHM. The cost of equipments proposed at Rs.13.34 lac is yet to be vetted by the MoH&FW. Also the State Government has certified that the project is not included for funding under National Rural Health Mission (NRHM) taking into account that they had already been retained for funding under NLCPR.


NRHM. However, since the project was retained in February 2005, when the NRHM was not operational, the committee after deliberations, recommended the project for sanction of the civil part of the following 32 PHSCs, excluding inadmissible items, at a cost of Rs.545.39 lac.

S. No Name of the Districts No. of PHSC Approved Cost

( Rs in lac) 1. Churachandapur District 10 170.33 1. Uihrul District 8 131.45 2. Senapati District 7 112.33 3. Tamenglong District 3 51.03 5. Chandel District 4 69.56 Sub Total 32 534.70 2% Contingency Charges 10.69 Total 32 545.39

The PHSC wise approved cost of civil works is given as under:

S. No District PHSC Approved Cost

(Rs. in lac) 1 Churachandpur District

i. Ngariyan ii. Charoi Khullen iii. Kom Keirap iv. Saipum v. Kailang vi. Alusingtam vii. Suangdoh Chepu viii. Singpukawn

15.73 15.73 15.73 16.40 16.40 16.40 16.40 19.18

12

S. No District PHSC Approved Cost (Rs. in lac)

ix. Kangreng x. Ngampabung

19.18 19.18

Sub - Total 170.33 2 Ukhrul District

i. Sahamphung ii. Kharasom iii. Molvailep iv. Chongdan v. Leisen vi. Singkap vii. Lamlai Khumou viii. Tungou

17.25 17.25 17.25 15.94 15.94 15.94 15.94 15.94

Sub - Total 131.45 3 Senapati District

i. Vaisocha ii. Ngari Khullen iii. Rajamei iv. Yangkhulen v. Panikeshetri (Irang part I) vi. Koide vii. Sadim

16.24 16.24 16.24 16.24

15.79 15.79 15.79

Sub - Total 112.33 4 Tamenglong District

District

i. Abem ii. Longpi iii.Toubem

17.01 17.01 17.01

Sub - Total 51.03 5 Chandel District

i. Saibol Zoupi ii. Yangoulen iii. New Somtal iv. Sita

17.80 17.80 17.80 16.16

Sub - Total 69.56 Total 32 PHSCs 534.70 6 2 % Contingencies 10.69 Total 545.39

Conditions: i. The MoH&FW may be requested for funding the equipments for these 18 PHSCs

under NRHM so that PHSCs can become functional. ii. The 2% Contingency charges amounting to Rs.10.69 lac may be reimbursed

against actual contingent expenditure on production of documentary evidence but shall not include expenditure on Work Charged or any other Establishment.


iv. The Government of Manipur should follow all codal formalities while executing the project.

v. The codal formalities should include calling of tenders of competitive basis by giving wide publicity in newspapers, trade journal etc. as well web based publicity.

* * *

13

Item No.11: Project for consideration under the Non-Lapsable Central Pool of Resources- Construction of 10 PHCs in valleys (i) Primary Health Centre (ii) Barrack type Qtr.


Rs.934.85 lac in its 32nd meeting held on 28.02.2005. The Ministry of Urban Development vetted the civil part of the project at Rs.886.64 lac. The Ministry of Health & Family Welfare (MoH&FW) suggested that the proposal may be considered as per proposed framework of NRHM. Also the State Government has certified that the project is not included for funding under National Rural Health Mission (NRHM) taking into account that they had already been retained for funding under NLCPR.


NRHM. However, since the project was retained in February 2005, when the NRHM was not operational, the committee after deliberations, recommended the project for sanction of the following 10 PHCs, excluding inadmissible items, at a cost of Rs.785.68 lac.

S. No. Name of the Districts No. of PHCs Estimated Cost

(Rs. in lac) 1. Imphal East District:

PHC Barrack Type Qtr.

3 108.04 123.33

2. Imphal West District: PHC Barrack Type Qtr

3 108.04 123.33

3. Thoubal District: PHC Barrack Type Qtr

4 142.43 165.11

Total 10 770.28 2% Contingency charges 15.40 Total Cost 10 785.68

The PHC wise approved cost of civil works and Barrack Type Qtr. given as under:

Cost of construction of PHCs S.No. District PHCs Approved Cost (Rs.) 1 Imphal East District :

i. Akampat ii. Nongpok Keithelmanbi iii. Heingang

35.22 37.60 35.22

Sub - Total 108.04 2 Imphal West District

i. Kakwa ii. Mekola iii. Sekmaijin

35.22 35.22 37.60

Sub - Total 108.04 3 Thoubal District

i. Leisangthem ii. Serou iii. Khongjom iv. Wangjing Lamding

35.74 35.21 35.74 35.74

Sub - Total 142.43 Total 10 PHCs 358.51 4 2% Contingencies 7.17 Total 365.68

14

Cost of construction of Barrack type quarters S.No. District PHCs Approved Cost (Rs.) 1 Imphal East District :

i. Akampat ii. Nongpok Keithelmanbi iii. Heingang

40.78 41.77

40.78

Sub - Total 123.33 2 Imphal West District

i. Kakwa ii. Mekola iii. Sekmaijin

40.78 40.78 41.77

Sub - Total 123.33 3 Thoubal District

i. Leisangthem ii. Serou iii. Khongjom iv. Wangjing Lamding

41.18 41.57 41.18 41.18

Sub - Total 165.11 Total 10 PHCs 411.77 4 2% Contingencies 8.23 Total 420.00 Conditions:

i. The implementing agency should adhere to the time schedule given in the

estimate. ii. The State Government should get the architectural and structural drawing

approved by competent authorities. iii. All the walls of PHCs should be constructed of full brick width. iv. The Government of Manipur should follow all codal formalities while executing the

project. v. The codal formalities should include calling of tenders on competitive basis by

giving wide publicity in newspapers, trade journal etc. as well as web based publicity.

vi. The 2% Contingency charges amounting to Rs.15.40 lac may be reimbursed against actual contingent expenditure on production of documentary evidence but shall not include expenditure on Work Charged or any other Establishment.

* * * Item No.12: Proposal for "Construction of Tikrikilla College Complex at West

Garo Hills” in Meghalaya under Non Lapsable Central Pool of Resources (NLCPR).

The Committee noted that the project was considered by NLCPR Committee in its

45th meeting held on 24.11.2006 and recommended for approval at Rs.537.72 lac. However, in the minutes inadvertently the cost of items “Canteen” and “Site Development” was reflected as proposed in DPR instead of the cost vetted by MoUD. Also there is a totalling error in the final cost of the project recommended by the Committee. The Committee reconsidered the project proposal and after deliberations recommended the corrected cost of the project for sanction at Rs.542.83 lac excluding inadmissible items as under:

15

S. No.

Head of work Sub-Head of work Cost (Rs. in lac)

Ground floor-1985.30 sqm 178.68 First floor-994.00 sqm 71.57

Sub Total -I (A) 250.25 Water supply and sanitary installation @ 7.5% @ over A

18.77

Electrification @ 10% over A 25.02

1 Administrative- cum-college block including Auditorium

Total-II 43.79 Ground + 1st floor (each of 923.30 sqm) (B) 138.50 Water supply and sanitary installation @ 7.5% @ over B

10.39

Electrification @ 10% over B 13.85

2 Hostel blocks (2 nos.)

Total-III 162.74 3 Canteen 15.14 4 Site development including compound wall, retaining wall etc.

and security cabin of 36 sqm 60.27

Total 532.19 5 2% contingencies 10.64 Grand Total 542.83

Conditions:

a) The Government of Meghalaya should follow all codal formalities while executing the project.

b) Codal formalities should include tenders being called on competitive basis by giving wide publicity in print media like Newspapers & Trade Journals and web based publicity.

c) The construction agency will adhere to the time schedule given by them in the estimate for completion of the project.

d) The 2% contingency charges amounting to Rs.10.64 lac may be reimbursed against the actual contingent expenditure on production of documentary evidence, but no expenditure for work charged or other establishment should be incurred under it.

e) The Sanction is further subject to the following conditions. The funds may be released after receipt of the undertaking from concerned NGO/ Voluntary Organisations to abide by following conditions:

i) The assets created out of NLCPR funds will be owned by the State

Government and will be used by the institution/ organization for the sole purpose for which they have been sanctioned failing which they will be reverted back to the State Government.

ii) Like all other NLCPR funded projects in the State sector, the funds sanctioned for implementation of projects by these Organisations / Institutions will be released to the State Government.

iii) The State Government concerned, after sanction, will very closely monitor proper and timely implementation of the project.

iv) The State Government concerned will put the system in place for yearly inspection to ensure that the assets are being used only for the purpose for which they were created.

v) The maintenance of these assets will be the sole responsibility of the institution and they should clearly spell out how they are going to manage funds to run the institution.

16

vi) The institution will run for the welfare of the society and use these assets for the welfare of the society and not for commercial purposes.

vii) No fees will be realized on commercial basis from the users of the facility created. However, the institution may charge only a nominal fee for maintenance of the assets.

viii) Such assets should not be disposed of or encumbered or utilized for purposes other than for which the funds were given.

ix) If the institution ceases to exist at any time, such infrastructure shall be reverted back to the State Government.

x) In case of (permanent) closure of the activity for which funds/ project is sanctioned, the immovable assets created through assistance/ funds of NLCPR would be handed over to State Government.

xi) In order to safeguard the interests of public funds and the welfare of society the State Government has to sign an Agreement with the institution before release of funds.

* * * Item No.13: Proposal for “Construction of School Building, Mendipathar

Secondary School, East Garo Hills” in Meghalaya under Non-lapsable Central Pool of Resources (NLCPR)


Rs.2.43 crore in its 33rd meeting held on 10.05.2005. The Committee also noted that the project was techno-economically examined by Ministry of Human Resource Development (MHRD), Department of Secondary & Higher Education (D/o S&HE) and Ministry of Urban Development (MoUD). The D/o S&HE informed that they support such proposals to construction of additional schools in view of the need to make secondary education universal. The MoUD vetted the project at Rs.267.47 lac. After deliberations, the Committee, excluding inadmissible items, recommended the project for sanction with the following components and conditions at a cost of Rs.121.40 lac:

Sl. No.

Components of Work Amount (Rs. in lac)

a) Construction of School Building including Water Supply, Sanitary Installation and Electrification (GF – 1144 sqm only)

85.74

b) Construction of Security Cabin including Electrification 0.40 c) Construction of Stone Masonary Compound Wall and 2

Gates (415 Rm) 13.25

d) Construction including Metalling and Black topping of Approach Road (700 m)

19.63

Total 119.02 e) Add 2% Contingencies 2.38

Grand Total 121.40 Conditions: a) The 2% contingency charges amounting to Rs.2.38 lac may be reimbursed

against the actual contingent expenditure on production of documentary evidence, but no expenditure for work charged establishment should be incurred under it.

b) The State Government should follow all codal formalities while executing the project.

17

c) Codal formalities should include tenders being called on competitive basis by giving wide publicity in print media like Newspapers & Trade Journals and web based publicity.

d) The construction agency will adhere to the time schedule given by them in the estimate for completion of the project.

e) The Sanction is further subject to the following conditions and sanction order may be issued after receipt of the undertaking from concerned NGO/ Voluntary Organisations: i) The assets created out of NLCPR funds will be owned by the State












* * * Item No.14: Proposal for sanction of project “Construction of School Building,

Ri-Bhoi Presbyterian Higher Secondary School, Nongpoh, Ri-Bhoi District” in Meghalaya under NLCPR


Rs.4.96 crore in its 33rd meeting held on 10.05.2005. The Committee also noted that the project was techno-economically examined by Ministry of Human Resource Development (MHRD), Department of Secondary & Higher Education (D/o S&HE) and Ministry of Urban Development (MoUD). The D/o S&HE informed that they supported the proposal and the MoUD vetted the project at Rs.496.17 lac. After deliberations, the Committee, excluding inadmissible items, recommended the project for sanction with the following components and conditions at a cost of Rs.365.08 lac:

18

S.No. Components of work Amount

(Rs. in lac) 1. C/o double storied RCC School Building (GF=1365 sqm.,

FF=1086 sqm 204.56

2. C/o of two double storied RCC Hostel Buildings for Boys & Girls (plinth area: GF=382.44 sqm., FF=298.44 sqm. each.)

121.74

3. C/o Boundary Fencing (510.80 m.) 20.78 4. Provision of Approach Roads (248.00 m., width 4m.) L/S 10.00 5. External Electrification L/S 8.00 Total 365.08

Conditions:

a) The State Government should follow all codal formalities while executing the

project. b) Codal formalities should include tenders being called on competitive basis by

giving wide publicity in print media like Newspapers & Trade Journals and web based publicity.

c) The construction agency will adhere to the time schedule given by them in the estimate for completion of the project.

d) The Sanction is further subject to the following conditions and sanction order may be issued after receipt of the undertaking from concerned NGO/ Voluntary Organisations:

i) The assets created out of NLCPR funds will be owned by the State












* * *

19

Item No.15: Improvement including Metalling and Blacktopping of

Mukhaialong Lumshyurmit Road (0-19 Km) in Meghalaya under Non-Lapsable Central Pool of Resources (NLCPR).

The Committee noted that the project was retained at an estimated cost of Rs.9.50 crore in its 33rd meeting held on 10.05.2005. The project was considered by NLCPR Committee in its 47th Meeting held on 16.03.2007 wherein Committee observed that the requirement of 6.00 m to 7.5 m formation for a single lane road was at higher side, thus the project needs to be reframed as per IRC Guidelines. Accordingly, the State Government of Meghalaya was asked to reframe the proposal as per IRC guidelines. DoRTH vetted the DPR of the reframed proposal received from the State Government. After deliberations, the Committee, excluding inadmissible items, recommended the project for sanction with the following components and conditions at a cost of Rs.911.00 lac:

Sl. No.

Item of Work Amount (Rs. in lac)

1. Excavation in hilly area by mechanical means 52.35 2. Construction of embankment with materials deposited from

roadway 13.20

3. Protection Works (Retaining Walls) 265.88 4. Cross Drainage Works 182.62 5. Construction of Granular Sub Base 74.09 6. Construction of Unlined Surface Drain 21.22 7. Providing laying spreading and compacting stone aggregates 172.94 8. Blacktopping 90.44 9. Supplying of Sign Board 2.00 10. Escalation cost of Bitumen 18.40 Sub Total 893.14 12. Add 2% Contingency Charges over 17.86 Grand Total 911.00

Conditions:

i The Government of Meghalaya should follow all codal formalities while executing the project.

ii The codal formalities should include calling of tenders on competitive basis by giving wide publicity in newspapers, trade journal etc, as well as web-based publicity.

iii The implementing agency should adhere to the time schedule given in the estimate.

iv The 2% contingency charges amounting to Rs.17.86 lac may be reimbursed against the actual contingent expenditure on production of documentary evidence but shall not include Work Charged or any other Establishment expenditure.

v The State Government would immediately get the video-graphy done of the project site so as to highlight the existing condition with the details of those areas where specific works are to be done, including proposed site of earth work, protection works, pavement works, etc.

* * *

20

Item No.16: Proposal for sanction of revised estimates of the project “Construction of Government Medical College and Hospital” at Agartala in Tripura for funding under NLCPR

The Committee noted that the civil portion of the project was sanctioned for

Rs.77.03 crore in 34th NLCPR Committee meeting on 18.07.2005 and equipments & furniture (including books & journals) at Rs.464.19 lac in the 45th meeting of the NLCPR Committee held on 24.11.2006. The Committee also noted that the MoUD vetted the revised estimate of civil works of the project submitted by State Government at Rs.106.01 crore including contingencies (3% as per earlier decision) and provisions of Heating Ventilation and Air-Conditioning (HVAC). The Committee observed that the provision of “Modification of super speciality Block to college” of Rs.316.72 lac and “Re-modification of 1st year medical college building to teaching hospital” of Rs.297.80 lac being in-fructuous expenditure may not be sanctioned. After deliberation, the Committee recommended to sanction the revised estimate of the civil part of the project at Rs.9987.17 lac with following components and conditions:

Cost as

per DPAR 92

and DSR-02

Cost Index as on 6/05

Additional Cost for Richer

Specification which cost does

not covered DPAR-92

HVAC Cost

Total Cost

(include-ing 3%

contingencies)

S. No

Particulars of Activities

(Rs.in lac) 1. Medical College and Library

(G+4) 2616.42 140.44 133.63 2890.49

2. Hostel for Boys – 300 Nos. (G+6)

839.07 26.89 0 865.96

3. Boys Interns Hostel – 60 Nos. (G+3)

261.38 11.23 0 272.61

4. Hostel for girls – 200 nos. (G+6)

636.45 19.41 0 655.86

5. Girl interns hostel – 40 nos. (G+3)

175.79 7.02 0 182.81

6. Hostel for Nurses (G+6) 900.66 29.46 0 930.12 7. Dean Housing (1 unit) 27.92 1.22 0 29.14 8. HOD Housing – 8 units (G+7) 261.54 9.71 0 271.25 9. Professor Housing – 27 units

(G+6) 392.86 9.26 0 402.12

10. Teaching staff Housing – 22 units (G+5)

227.09 6.50 0 233.59

11. Non- Teaching staff Housing – 22 units (G+5)

200.49 5.42 0 205.91

12. Doctor’s Hostel (G+4) 434.98 30.82 0 465.80 13. Animal House & Central

workshop 56.59 3.59 1.93 62.11

14. Autopsy Block 138.51 3.20 4.23 145.94 15. Auditorium 357.62 24.93 131.93 514.48 16. Incinerator 22.65 20.00 0 42.65 17. Security Cabin 2.87 0 0 2.87 18. Sewerage Treatment Plant 81.48 60.00 0 141.48

21

Cost as per

DPAR 92 and

DSR-02 Cost

Index as on 6/05

Additional Cost for Richer

Specification which cost does

not covered DPAR-92

HVAC Cost

Total Cost

(include-ing 3%

contingencies)

S. No

Particulars of Activities

(Rs.in lac) 19. Service Building for Medical gas

manifold room, Electrical Panel and D.G. Set

62.12 459.94 0 522.06

20. Electricals (Air conditioning, lift, under-ground cables)

0 0 0 0

21. Gymnasium, Sports complex, Playground

38.65 1.04 0 39.69

22. Extra for Aluminium work (On Items 1-17 and 20)

0 0 0 0

23. Extra for Partition work (On Items 1-17 and 20)

0 0 0 0

24. False Ceiling (For Items 1-17 and 20)

0 0 0 0

25. Fire water pump room 18.07 0 0 18.07 26. Boundary wall 117.47 0 0 117.47 27. External water supply 92.93 0 0 92.93 28. External Sewerage System 54.62 0 0 54.62 29. Overhead tank 71.83 0 0 71.83 30. U.G. sump, pump room and

water treatment plant 108.56 0 21.75 130.31

31. Landscaping internal roads, street lighting and drainage

256.91 270.98 0 527.89

32. Retaining wall 97.11 0 0 97.11 Total 8552.64 1141.06 293.47 9987.17

Conditions:

i. The Government of Tripura should follow all codal formalities while executing the project.

ii. The codal formalities should include calling of tenders on competitive basis by giving wide publicity in newspapers, trade journal etc, as well web based publicity.


* * *

Item No.17: Projects identified by the Hon’ble MPs of NE Region in their

respective State Priority Lists of 2006-07. The NLCPR Committee noted that the project recommended by Shri Dwijendra

Nath Sharma, M.P. Rajya Sabha in the Priority List for 2006-07 namely “Construction of Guwahati Medical College Auditorium Hall Phase-I (Assam type portion only) had to be dropped from the list of retained projects. This project was dropped on the

22

recommendations of NLCPR Committee, made in the 51st meeting held on 21.09.2007, since it is being executed under the scheme of Ministry of Health & Family Welfare.

The Committee further noted that the Hon’ble Minister, DONER, while intimating

the dropping of the project to Shri Dwijendra Nath Sharma, had requested him to submit an alternative project in lieu of earlier one. He submitted the project “Metalling & Blacktopping of road from Dr. Fakaruddin Ali Ahmed Path to Dolgobindarpur via Nalbari Hindu Smashan Nalbari, along with Pucca Drain and RCC Slab Culverts” (estimated cost Rs. 251.00 Lac).

The NLCPR Committee recommended retention of this project as proposed by Shri

Dwijendra Nath Sharma, M.P. in lieu of the earlier proposal.

* * * Item No.18: Consideration of Priority List 2007- 08 of Arunachal Pradesh for

retention of projects for detailed examination The Committee discussed priority list 2007-08 and concept papers of projects listed therein in detail and also took into account the letters written by the State Government including those by Hon’ble Chief Minister, Arunachal Pradesh with regard to the priority list. After deliberation, the Committee recommended following 8 projects for retention:

S. No.

Project Name Retained Cost (Rs. in Crore)

1. Infrastructure Development of VKV, Koloriang ( Phase-II) 2.77 2. C/o Motorable Steel Arch Bridge over river Yamne at Reglat

under Mariyang Division. 5.35

3. C/o road from New Mohong to Mahadevpur Township via Nongkhon.

5.00

4. Improvement of road from Changlang to Khimyong in Changlang District (36.10 KM)

9.95

5. Road from Loffa to Pakoti village – 8 KM 7.00 6. C/o road from Hawai to MCL Bridge point (45.77 KM) 30.00 7. C/O. Dumporijo- Hali Road 35.72 8. Mukto Small Hydro Power Project (6 MW) – Phase-I (total

estimated cost Rs.40.90 crore) 20.00

Total 115.79 The retention of project at S.No.1 is subject to verification of the utilization of

funds released under NLCPR and BADP earlier for Phase-I of the School.

* * * Item No.19: Consideration of Priority List 2007- 08 of Meghalaya for retention

of projects for detailed examination The Committee discussed priority list 2007-08 and concept papers of projects listed therein in detail. After deliberation, the Committee recommended following 2 projects for retention:

23

S. No.

Project Name Retained Cost (Rs. in Crore)

1. Construction of 132 D/C line from Rongkhon to Ampati along with 2x20 MVA, 132/33 KV Sub-Station at Ampati

23.27

2. Construction of Ganol Hydro Electric Project (22.5 MW) at Tura, West Garo Hills. (Project cost Rs.177.53 crore)

53.30

Total 76.57

* * * Item No.20: Proposal for “Construction of Sanshnong Secondary School, at

Kynton, Umlyngka / Nongkesh Shillong" in Meghalaya under Non-lapsable Central Pool of Resources (NLCPR)

The Agenda Note was withdrawn for further examination.

* * *

Item No.21: Project in Tripura, for consideration of deletion from the list of

retained projects. The Committee noted that the project was retained for 'Widening &

Strengthening of Jolaibari - Kowaifung - Ailmara Road (22.00 km)' in the 32nd meeting of NLCPR Committee held on 28.02.2005 from the Priority List 2005-06 of Tripura at an estimated cost of Rs.10.70 Crore. The State Government submitted DPR for "Widening & Strengthening of Jolaibari-Kowaifung" (11.70 Km) section of the road at Rs.8.90 crore, as the balance “Kowaifung to Ailmara” (9.50 Km) section of road was sanctioned by the North Eastern Council (NEC) at Rs.313.75 lac only (Rs.33.03 lac/Km) in March 2005. The original and revised DPRs of Jolaibari-Kowaifung" (11.70 Km) section at Rs.8.90 crore and Rs.1111.63 lac, respectively, were examined in Department of Road Transport (DoRTH). The DoRTH observed that, the existing road is already having single lane carriageway and formation, its widening to 5.50 carriageway and 9.0 m formation as proposed, is not justified in view of the extremely low traffic volume. After deliberations, Committee recommended that the scope of works sanctioned by the NEC may be checked and the cost may be examined including the cost at which the project was sanctioned by NEC and proposal may again be submitted for consideration of the Committee.

* * *

Item No.22: Provision of medical facilities to 5 (five) Hospitals in Meghalaya

under Non-lapsable Central Pool of Resources (NLCPR) The Committee noted that the project “Provision of medical facilities to 5 (five) Hospitals in Meghalaya” was retained from Priority List 2006-07 in 42nd meeting of NLCPR Committee held on 16.06.2006 at Rs.7.37 crore. The project was dropped, on the request of the State Government, along with 9 other projects retained under NLCPR to retain the project proposal “New Umtru H.E. Project (2x20 MW) at Ri Bhoi District, Meghalaya” in the 48th meeting of NLCPR Committee held on 31.05.2007. The State Government of Meghalaya have now proposed re-retention of the project “Provision of medical facilities to 5 (five) Hospitals in Meghalaya” in lieu of the following two projects:

1. The project “Extension of the existing building of Jaintia Eastern College, Khliehriat” dropped in the 48th meeting of NLCPR Committee.

2. The project proposal, “Extension of State Museum at Shillong and Security Fencing around the Museum building i/c landscaping and metalling &

24

black-topping of an approach road” proposed for dropping by the State Government.

The Committee after detailed deliberation recommended dropping of the project proposal, “Extension of State Museum at Shillong and Security Fencing around the Museum building i/c landscaping and metalling & black-topping of an approach road” from the list of retained NLCPR projects and also recommended to re-retain the project “Provision of medical facilities to 5 (five) Hospitals in Meghalaya”, droped earlier, at Rs.7.37 crore in lieu of the two projects as mentioned above in serial no. 1 & 2.

* * * *

25

Annexure-1

Comments of Department of Road Transport & Highways (i) Proposal The proposal envisages upgradation/improvement of Nagaon- Barapujia road for a total length of 6.150 km which is reported as Sate Highways - 38. Widening of existing carriageway from 3.75 m to 7m from Ch. 0.00 to Ch. 2350.00 m having formation width of 12m (within Nagaon Municipal Area) and 5.5m carriageway from Ch. 7800m to Ch. 11250m with formation width of 9m. Construction of 5 single row HP culverts of 1000mm dia NP 3 pipe and a double row HP culvert of 1000mm dia NP - 3 pipe, Catch water brick drain on one side covering length of 1355mm etc. (ii) Alignments and Cross-sectional Element: The road is proposed to be improved on existing alignment. From the plan, L-section and cross-sections furnished with the proposal, it is observed that details of horizontal and vertical curves and the design speed etc have not been given so, no comments can be made on the horizontal and vertical alignments of the proposed road. State PWD may, however, be advised to improve the horizontal and vertical curves, wherever necessary, as per IRC:38-1988 and IRC:SP:23-1983. (iii) Pavement:

The details of existing crust have not been given. The crust thickness 300mm comprising 150mm GSB, 150mm WBM (75mm Gr.II & 75mm Gr.III) and 20mm PC & SC throughout the stretches as proposed may be agreed to. (iv) Cross-Drainage Works:

(a) State PWD have proposed 5 single row HP culverts of 1000mm dia NP-3 pipe and a double row HP culverts of 1000mm dia NP-3 pipe. The locations of these culverts have not been indicated. Hydraulic calculation justifying the proposal has also not been enclosed. No comments can be made on adequacy of waterway. However, State PWD may be advised to ensure the adequacy of waterway and number of culverts as per site condition. The width of culverts may be kept equal to the formation width.

(b) Construction of catch water brick drain on one side covering length of

1355m of size 90cm wide and 120 cm deep has been proposed. Since, proposed drain from Ch.0.00m to Ch.1375m fall within Nagaon Municipal area, the above provisions may be allowed.

(c) The estimate is stated to be based on SOR 2006-07 for the State of Assam.

* * *

26

Annexure-2

Comments of Department of Road Transport & Highways

1. Proposal:

The proposal envisages improvement of Nagaon-Morikalong Nonoi Dakhinpat Road for a total length of 12 km by providing 75mm WBM and PC & SC over existing carriageway of 3.75m from Ch.11000m to Ch.19000m and 150mm GSB, 150mm WBM (75mm Gr.II & 75mm Gr.III) and PC & SC over existing carriageway of 3.75m from Ch.19000m to Ch.23000m. Strengthening of SPT bridges No.18/1 & 19/1. 2. Alignments and Cross-sectional Element: The road is proposed to be improved on existing alignment. From the plan, L-section and cross-sections furnished with the proposal, it is observed that details of horizontal and vertical curves and the design speed etc have not been given so, no comments can be made on the horizontal and vertical alignments of the proposed road. State PWD may, however, be advised to improve the horizontal and vertical curves, wherever necessary, as per IRC:38-1988 and IRC:SP:23-1983.

3. Pavement:

The details of existing crust have not been given. The crust comprising 75mm WBM and PC & SC from Ch.11000m to Ch.19000m and 150mm GSB, 150mm WBM (75MM Gr.II & 75mm Gr.III) and PC & SC over existing carriageway of 3.75m from Ch.19000m to Ch.23000m as proposed may however be agreed to. State PWD may ensure the adequacy of the proposed pavement based on present based on present traffic intensity and CBR of the subgrade. 4. Maintenance of SPT Bridge:

Strengthening of existing 2 SPT bridges No.18/1 & 19/1 have been proposed with an estimated amount of Rs.10.01 lac. Nothing has been mentioned for replacement of these SPT bridges by permanent bridges in near future. The strengthening of SPT bridges as proposed may be agreed to.

* * *

27

Annexure-3

Comments of Department of Road Transport & Highways

A Proposal: Proposal envisages improvement/ widening of road from existing 5 to 6 m formation width to 9 m, construction of 5.5m carriageway with 150mm GSB, 225mm WBM and 20mm PC & SC from 12th km to 18th km of Dibrugarh Sapekhati road. Construction of 5 single row HP culvert with NP-3 pipe, 2 RCC bridges (Br.No.18/1 & 19/1) including approaches, guide bund, protection work, etc. on the same stretch of road. B Construction of road from km 12 to km 18: The State PWD has proposed 9m formation and 5.5m carriageway width as against 9m formation and 3.75m carriageway suggested vide para A.1 of Ministry’s letter of even number dated 27.12.2006. It has been stated that the traffic will increase many fold after completion of bridges as such 5.5m carriageway has been adopted. This may be agreed to. The crust composition with 150mm GSB, 225mm WBM and 20mm PC & SC as proposed may be agreed to. C Bridge No.18/1 & 19/1: C.1 As per site plan enclosed with the proposal, both bridges are on straight alignment and may be agreed to. C.2 The Bridge No.18/1 is a major bridge having 8 spans of 40m each and bridge no.19/1 is a single span of 40m. The overall width of 8.58m for both the bridges as adopted have been allowed. Bridge no.18/1 is proposed with well foundation of 8m external diameter and 5.6m internal diameter for abutment well and 7m external diameter and 4.8m internal diameter for pier well. In case of bridge no.19/1, the foundation is proposed with well having external and internal diameter 7m & 5m respectively. The proposal for both bridges are found to be generally in order. However, C.E., PWD may ensure the safety and stability of the bridges including well foundation. D Cross-drainage Works: Construction of 5 HP single row culverts of 1000mm dia NP-3 pipe have been proposed at various locations. This may be agreed to, however, State PWD should satisfy itself regarding the adequacy of waterway on the basis of hydraulic data, which is not furnished with the estimate, before execution. Further, bed slope inside pipe culverts may be provided at least 2% so as to avoid clogging caused from debris etc. E. Protection works: Guide bund for Bridge No.18/1 which was not considered in original proposal has now been proposed for length of 75m on Jakai side and 150m length on Bamunbari side. Protection work with builder pitching on side slope of approaches has also been proposed. This may be agreed to. However, State PWD may ensure that the protection work of bridge and approaches are done strictly as per IRC:89-1985.

* * *

government of india ministry of development of north ... · 8 hume pipe culvert 1000 mm dia (29...

Documents