Integrated Safeguards Data Sheet (Initial) Report No: AC131 Section I - Basic Information Date ISDS Prepared/Updated: 06/24/2003 A. Basic Project Data (from PDS) Public Disclosure Authorized I.A.1. Project Statistics Country: INDIA Project ID: P077856 Project: Lucknow-Muzaffarpur National Highway Task Team Leader: Zhi Liu Project Authorized to Appraise Date : April 15, 2004 IBRD Amount ($m): 525.00 Bank Approval: September 30, 2004 IDA Amount ($m): Managing Unit: SASEI Sector: Roads and highways (100%) Lending Instrument: Specific Investment Loan (SIL) Theme: Infrastructure services for private sector Status: Lending development (P); Public expenditure, financial management and procurement (S)

I.A.2. Project Objectives (From PDS):

Public Disclosure Authorized The Lucknow-Muzaffarpur National Highway Project (LMNHP) aims to (i) reduce transport constraints on national economic activity, and (ii) improve institutional capabilities to manage road programs, assets, and services on a more commercial basis.

The project will be the fourth Bank loan to support the Government of India's (GOI) National Highway Development Program (NHDP), which funds the upgrading of 13,000 km core national highway network, including the Golden Quadrilateral (linking Delhi, Kolkata, Chennai and Mumbai) and the East-West and North-South Corridors. With a programmatic approach, the Bank has been financing the NHDP through a series of loans. The first two, the Third National Highway Project (TNHP) and Grand Trunk Road Improvement Project (GTRIP), were approved by the Board in June 2000 and June 2001, respectively. The third, Allahabad Bypass Project (ABP), has recently been appraised. LMNHP will finance the upgrading of a 513 km national Public Disclosure Authorized highway stretch between Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh and Muzaffarpur, Bihar on the East-West Corridor, and support institutional strengthening actions under an institutional development framework agreed with the client. Its development objectives are consistent with the other three projects.

I.A.3. Project Description (From PDS): Components Public Disclosure Authorized 2 ISDS

Highway upgrading : The national highway sections proposed for upgrading to 4-lane divided carriageway under the project are all located along a 513 km continuous stretch between Lucknow and Muzzafarpur along the East-West Corridor in the states of Uttar Pradesh and Bihar. The entire stretch is divided into five engineering design contract packages: (i) Lucknow-Ayodhya (126 km); (ii) Ayodhya-Gorakhpur (117 km); (iii) Gorakhpur-Gopalganj (106 km); (iv) Gopalganj-Muzzaffarpur (134 km), and (v) Gorakhpur Bypass (40 km). The civil works for the first four sections (total 483 km) are proposed by NHAI for Bank financing, and the Gorakhpur Bypass for NHAI’s own financing. The feasibility study and detailed engineering design including EA and RAP are being carried out by design consultants funded by NHAI’s own funds, under the Terms of Reference (TOR) agreed with the Bank. As the Gorakhpur Bypass is an integral part of the stretch between Lucknow and Muzaffarpur, its EA and RAP will follow Bank safeguard requirements.

Corridor management : The component will fund the contracts to private operators for the O&M of national highway stretches under 5 Corridor Management Units (CMU, approximately 600 km each), and the procurement of relevant equipment such as automatic traffic management and toll collection systems. The concept, policy, and operational procedures of CMUs were studied through a TA component under the TNHP. A few CMUs have been established by NHAI to manage the stretches of the Golden Quadrilateral. TNHP, GTRIP, and ABP all have made provision to fund the O&M contracts and equipment. The similar component under the LMNHP will fund the future needs arising from the growing number of CMUs on the NHDP network.

Institutional strengthening : The component will fund institutional strengthening actions identified under the institutional development framework agreed by NHAI, MORTH, the Bank, and ADB. The framework itself is developed but continues to evolve to meet the emerging needs for institutional capacity and arrangement. An institutional strengthening study funded as a technical assistance (TA) component under the TNHP is underway, and specific actions to be supported under the LMNHP will be defined based on the specific recommendations of the study. It was agreed with NHAI in principle that the following actions may be supported by the project: (i) a TA to examine the long-term relationship of NHAI with MORTH and capacity building actions to better position NHAI to complete the NHDP and take up new responsibilities; (ii) a TA on the O&M management strategy, policy, and procedures; (iii) capacity building for addressing legal and contracting issues that often arise from land acquisition and law and order on highways; (iv) performance monitoring and benchmarking for India's road sector and road agencies; and (v) future project preparation and relevant sector studies.

I.A.4. Project Location: (Geographic location, information about the key environmental and social characteristics of the area and population likely to be affected, and proximity to any protected areas, or sites or critical natural habitats, or any other culturally or socially sensitive areas.) The project is located on the National East-West Highway corridor between Lucknow and Muzaffarpur. It traverses 8 districts of Uttar Pradesh (Lucknow, Bababanki, Gonda, Basti, Faizabad, Sant Kabir Nagar, Gorakhpur and Deoria) and 3 districts of Bihar (Gopalganj, East Champaran and Muzaffarpur). The population density in these two states (and all the 11 districts 3 ISDS traversed) is high, the economy primarily agricultural and the overall socioeconomic development indicators low. The highway passes through rural landscape and most of the cities/towns on this route has bypasses already. More bypasses would be built at other towns, such as Ayodhya, Gorakhpur, and Muzaffarpur. The area traversed by the highway situated below the lower periphery of the Terai (“lowlands”, foothill valleys of Eastern Himalayas), but no stretch of the highway is within 50 km of the Terai Arc, which is one of the Global 200 eco-regions. The highway does not pass through any national park or wildlife sanctuary. The protected areas close to the highway include Bakhira Wildlife Sanctuary (18 km from the highway) Udaipur Bird Sanctuary (25 km), Valmiki National Park (40 km). The highway side is devoid of any forest, although a number of protected plantation stretches are there. The Bihar section of the highway is overtopped frequently by flash floods, and is located in the flood plains of several small rivers. The highway passes very close to the World Heritage site of Kushinagar. The 2500 year old Buddhist excavations at Kushinagar are about 400 m away from the highway. The highway bypasses Ayodhya-Faizabad, which are historical settlements and major pilgrimage centers. Devasharif Dargah (25 km from the highway) and Gorakhnath Math (10 km) are also important religious places. Whenever the Gorakhpur Bypass (which is not currently included under the Bank supported program) is built, it will be implemented following all Bank safeguard policies.

B. Check Environmental Classification: A (Full Assessment) Comments: The project has been categorized as ‘A’ considering the presence of the environmentally sensitive areas and important heritage sites and cultural properties along the highway. Most of the environmental impacts are local and reversible, and could be mitigated and managed through good environmental management practices. The cultural properties, however, need to be identified clearly and need to be conserved and enhanced, if possible.

C. Safeguard Policies Triggered (from PDS) (click on for a detailed desciption or click on the policy number for a brief description) Policy Triggered Environmental Assessment (OP 4.01, BP 4.01, GP 4.01) Yes No TBD Natural Habitats (OP 4.04, BP 4.04, GP 4.04) Yes No TBD Forestry (OP 4.36, GP 4.36) Yes No TBD Pest Management (OP 4.09) Yes No TBD Cultural Property (OPN 11.03) Yes No TBD Indigenous Peoples (OD 4.20) Yes No TBD Involuntary Resettlement (OP/BP 4.12) Yes No TBD Safety of Dams (OP 4.37, BP 4.37) Yes No TBD Projects in International Waters (OP 7.50, BP 7.50, GP 7.50) Yes No TBD Projects in Disputed Areas (OP 7.60, BP 7.60, GP 7.60) * Yes No TBD 4 ISDS

Section II - Key Safeguard Issues and Their Management D. Summary of Key Safeguard Issues . Please fill in all relevant questions. If information is not available, describe steps to be taken to obtain necessary data.

II.D.1a. Describe any safeguard issues and impacts associated with the proposed project. Identify and describe any potential large scale, significant and/or irreversible impacts. Environment Assessment (OP 4.01) : The main environmental issues in the project are: (i) unavoidable felling of a large number of roadside trees, (ii) impairment to or worsening of the local and regional drainage and flood situations, if the road works are not properly designed based on adequate hydrological investigations, (iii) unavoidable conversion of some fertile agricultural to RoW, (iv) potential poorly planned or managed development induced by the presence of a high quality transport facility, (v) possible impacts on aquatic flora and fauna in the rivers and rivulets the project highway passes over, and (vi) construction related temporary impacts such as dust from the haul roads, pollution from the plants and machinery required for construction. These potential impacts will be avoided, minimized and/or mitigated through sound management practices, to be detailed in the EMPs. Some of the community resources, either shifted or re-built, will be enhanced on a case-to-case basis with commitment from local communities for their upkeep. On the positive side, a large section of the highway will use a very significant quantity of fly ash from nearby thermal power plants in embankment construction; and a number of roadside community assets and environmental resources will be enhanced by the project. There would be no large scale, significant and irreversible impact in the project. Cultural Property (OPN 11.03) : The project traverses an area of rich history, and potentially involves impacts on archaeological chance finds, particularly near the heritage sites of Ayodhya-Faizabad, Gorakhpur and Kushinagar. The World Heritage site of Kushinagar itself is adjacent to the highway, and will require careful planning and execution of works to avoid adverse impacts.

II.D.1b. Describe any potential cumulative impacts due to application of more than one safeguard policy or due to multiple project component. There is no significant cumulative impact arising from the identified safeguard policies and project components. All the environmental and social impacts identified are relatively independent and will be mitigated through EMPs or RAP. The only probable cumulative impact relate to the combination of safeguard policies (on involuntary resettlement and environment assessment) triggered if formal resettlement sites are proposed. The plans for the resettlement sites, if required, will include an EMP with appropriate environment management measures both for siting and development.

II.D.1c Describe any potential long term impacts due to anticipated future activities in the project area. No adverse long-term environmental impact is anticipated due to future activities on the highway. Due to road improvements, it is anticipated that some of the local drainage problems will be resolved, and road safety would be improved. However, substantial land and property development would accompany this improvement of transport facility. Poor management of this 5 ISDS development may create negative impacts in the medium term, by way of additional stress on natural resources or by encouraging ribbon development.

II.D.2. In light of 1, describe the proposed treatment of alternatives (if required) During the detailed feasibility studies and the EA and SIA, several alignments, structural and geometric design alternatives are being considered. The following factors are being minimized/optimized in the design of the project: resettlement, tree cutting, loss of arable land vis-à-vis the traffic-carrying performance of the highway, and impacts on cultural properties. This project will upgrade the current highway, and therefore no route alternatives are being investigated, except that in a few small stretches where several realignment options are being examined.

II.D.3. Describe arrangement for the borrower to address safeguard issues

Environmental Assessment OP/BP/GP 4.01 : To comply with these, a detailed EA will be carried out, and EMPs prepared for each contract package. The EMPs will include mitigation and enhancement measures for all identified impacts, and will be made part of the construction contract documents.

Cultural Property OPN 11.03 : Although no protected monuments will be impacted, the R&R plans will be prepared to safeguard the affected temples and other common property resources that would be identified to have a cultural significance. These plans will be part of the EMPs.

Involuntary Resettlement OP 4.12 : A detailed social impact assessment will be carried out for which social survey tools are proposed to be used and 100% census for inventory of assets including land (public and private), persons, livelihood, etc will be undertaken to establish the adverse impacts. The assessment process will further identify vulnerable people and their socioeconomic characteristics. Based on the assessment and lessons learnt from the ongoing Bank supported national highway projects, the existing R&R entitlement framework will be reviewed and if necessary, modified to ensure that it covers all R&R issues that emerge from the project. The framework may include specific principles and provisions; entitlements for various types of impacts; and broad institutional arrangements to address the adverse impacts. The detailed mechanism to implement the principles and provisions will be the basis to prepare the RAP. This will be prepared for each contract and a consolidated RAP will also be prepared. The scope will include recording of types of impacts, mitigation and enhancement measures for all identified impacts, process of public consultation with outputs and arrangements required for continuos consultation during implementation, land acquisition plan, income restoration plan to improve the livelihood of the people, institutional arrangement for implementation, budget for compensation and resettlement and rehabilitation and monitoring and evaluation program. Furthermore, the RAP will provide appropriate preventive plan for building awareness on sexually transmitted diseases and outcomes from consultation process on safety issues, provision of service lanes, under and over passes to address accessibility will be documented. 6 ISDS

II.D.4. Identify the key stakeholders and describe the mechanisms for consultation and disclosure on safeguard policies, with an emphasis on potentially affected people.

There are various stakeholders such as project affected people, nongovernment organizations, district administration, officials from line departments, local political representatives and others in the project area. The project proposes to carry out consultations with all stakeholders at different stages of project preparation and implementation.

Methodology: The different means of consultation will include door-to-door personal interviews, village meetings, focus group discussions, and consultation with experts and NGOs working in the area. At the village level, group discussions with different social communities and especially women and other vulnerable groups will be focused upon.

Preparation : During social screening, consultations were carried out at about 51 locations with directly affected people to familiarize them about the proposed project and to identify social issues. In addition, consultations with other key stakeholders were also conducted with government departments to seek their support in the preparation of the project. To further strengthen the participation of the people, it is proposed to carry out additional focus group discussions at local level to finalize alignments for by-passes, widening along existing alignment, location of underpasses / overpasses, median openings, requirement of service lanes. The additional consultations will facilitate in minimization of the magnitude of impacts by devising minimum impact alignment. Consultations will be undertaken with other line departments such as Revenue and Public Works Department to seeks support through available documents to establish legal right of way and preparing land acquisition plans. Furthermore, consultation will be conducted during detailed preparation to develop mitigative action plan which includes entitlements for resettlement and rehabilitation appropriate for the affected and the displaced people. In specific, consultations will be carried out at village, block, district and state level to ensure participation of the affected people and other stakeholders. The consultations will also facilitate in devising income generation activities suitable to their skills and market opportunities. The Executive Summary (translated in the local language) will be made available in the project affected districts in places accessible to the public such as village panchayats, municipalities, district libraries, project offices, and other places.

Implementation : During operationalisation of the mitigative action plan, NHAI will conduct workshops to build further consensus on disbursement mechanisms of assistance, relocation of displaced, common property resources, restoration of livelihood and on other issues. The mechanisms to carry out these consultations will be detailed in the action plan.

E. Safeguards Classification (select in SAP). Category is determined by the highest impact in any policy. Or on basis of cumulative impacts from multiple safeguards. Whenever an individual safeguard policy is triggered the provisions of that policy apply.

[X] S1. – Significant, cumulative and/or irreversible impacts; or significant technical and institutional risks in management of one or more safeguard areas [ ] S2. – One or more safeguard policies are triggered, but effects are limited in their impact and are 7 ISDS

technically and institutionally manageable [ ] S3. – No safeguard issues [ ] SF. – Financial intermediary projects, social development funds, community driven development or similar projects which require a safeguard framework or programmatic approach to address safeguard issues.

F. Disclosure Requirements Environmental Assessment/Analysis/Management Plan: Expected Actual Date of receipt by the Bank 4/1/2004 Date of “in-country” disclosure 4/28/2004 Date of submission to InfoShop 4/28/2004 Date of distributing the Exec. Summary of the EA to the Executive 4/28/2004 Directors (For category A projects) Resettlement Action Plan/Framework: Expected Actual Date of receipt by the Bank 4/1/2004 Date of “in-country” disclosure 4/28/2004 Date of submission to InfoShop 4/28/2004 Indigenous Peoples Development Plan/Framework: Expected Actual Date of receipt by the Bank Date of “in-country” disclosure Date of submission to InfoShop Pest Management Plan: Expected Actual Date of receipt by the Bank Date of “in-country” disclosure Date of submission to InfoShop Dam Safety Management Plan: Expected Actual Date of receipt by the Bank Date of “in-country” disclosure Date of submission to InfoShop If in-country disclosure of any of the above documents is not expected, please explain why.

Signed and submitted by Name Date Task Team Leader: Zhi Liu June 24, 2003 Project Safeguards Specialists 1: Project Safeguards Specialists 2: Project Safeguards Specialists 3:

Approved by: Name Date Regional Safeguards Coordinator: L. Panneer Selvam June 24, 2003 Sector Manager/Director Guang Zhe Chen June 23, 2003