Bi-annual Environmental Monitoring Report

Project Number: 49244-002 December 2019

ARM: Armenia–Georgia Border Regional Road (M6 Vanadzor–Bagratashen) Improvement Project

Prepared by the “Transport Project Implementation Organization” State Non-Commercial Organization of the Ministry of Territorial Administration and Infrastructure of the Republic of Armenia for the Asian Development Bank.

This environmental monitoring report is a document of the borrower. The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent those of ADB's Board of Directors, Management, or staff, and may be preliminary in nature. Your attention is directed to the “terms of use” section on ADB’s website.

In preparing any country program or strategy, financing any project, or by making any designation of or reference to a particular territory or geographic area in this document, the Asian Development Bank does not intend to make any judgments as to the legal or other status of any territory or area.

Semi-annual Environmental Monitoring Report

Project Number: 3449 - ARM Jan- June 2019

Armenia: M6 Vanadzor-Alaverdi-Georgian Border Interstate Road (Section Km 38+450 – Km 90+191) (Financed by the ADB)

Prepared by the “Transport Project Implementation Organization” SNCO based on the monthly Environmental Monitoring Reports of the Technical Supervision Consultant/Engineer

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION...... 4 2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND CURRENT ACTIVITIES ...... 5 3. ENVIRONMENTAL SAFEGUARD ACTIVITIES ...... 13 4. RESULTS OF ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING ...... 15 5. FUNCTIONS OF THE SEMP ...... 21 6. GOOD PRACTICE AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR IMPROVEMENT ...... 23 7. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 24

ANNEXES

ANNEX 1: THE STATUS OF LARP IMPLEMENTATION PHASES PER LOTS ANNEX 2: PHOTOS OF ACTIVITIES DURING THE REPORTING PERIOD APPENDIX 3: PROGRESS OF ISSUES IDENTIFIED DURING THE ADB&TPIO`S SITE VISIT HELD ON MARCH 7, 2019 ANNEX 3. STATUS OF MEASUREMENTS ON DUST, NOISE, WATER QUALITY AND VIBRATION IN THE REPORTING PERIOD ANNEX 5: PHOTOS OF INCIDENT IN LOT 2 APPENDIX 6: SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES ENCOUNTERED DURING THE REPORTING PERIOD

List of Abbreviations

ADB Asian Development Bank

CEMP Contractor’s Environmental Management Plan

CR Completion Report

DNVW Dust, Noise, Vibration and Water

EMP Environmental Management Plan

IEE Initial Environmental Examination

ES Environmental Specialist

LARP Land Acquisition and Resettlement Plan

LAR Land Acquisition and Resettlement

MNP Ministry of Nature Protection

MOTCIT Ministry of Transport, Communication and Information Technologies

MoC Ministry of Culture

NCN Non-Compliance Notice

SSEMP Site Specific Environmental Management Plan

TMP Traffic Management Plan

TPIO Transport Project Implementation Organization” SNCO

EMR Environmental Monitoring Report 1. INTRODUCTION

1.1. Preamble 1. This report represents the Semi-Annual Environmental Monitoring Review (SAEMR) for Rehabilitation and Improvement of the M6 Vanadzor-Alaverdi-Georgian Border Interstate Road (Section Km 38+450 – Km 90+191) (Loan No.: 3449-ARM). 2. As defined by LARP, the LARP implementation has to be implemented in “section by section” principle to simplify the implementation process in terms of deadlines to be met under the Law, as well as for the commencement of construction. The LARP implementation has been divided into 3 Phases, the division of LARP implementation Phases per Lots and status are presented in the Annex 1. The LARP implementation in all 3 Phases 1 has been completed and the respective CRs have been approved by ADB and consequently the LAR-completed sections have been handed over to the Contractors.

1.2. Headline information 3. Lot 1: As of June 30, 2019, the following road sections are handed over to the Contractor: km38+450-km47+030, km47+065-km47+540, km47+670-km47+780 and km47+900- km48+140. The completion rate in Lot 1 is 60.6%. 4. Lot 2: As of June 30, 2019 the following road sections are handed over to the Contractor: km48+140-km48+935, km49+060-km49+510, km49+540-km54+515, km54+540-km54+695, km54+825-km56+135, km56+280-km56+450, km56+475-km58+540, km58+780-km60+745 and km60+810-km62+300. The completion rate in Lot 2 is 10.7%. 5. Lot 3: As of June 30, 2019 the following road sections are handed over to the Contractor: km62+300-km64+895, km64+900-km67+850, km68+070-km71+670, km71+710-km72+450, km72+475-km72+575, km72+905-km75+520, km75+595-km75+860 and km76+251- km90+191. The completion rate in Lot 3 is 15.8%.

2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND CURRENT ACTIVITIES

2.1. Project Description 6. The Republic of Armenia (hereinafter called "Borrower") has received financing from the Asian Development Bank (ADB) in a form of loan towards the costs for the Armenia – Georgia Border Regional Road (M6 Vanadzor–Bagratashen) Improvement Project. Actually, ADB has approved a $50 million loan to improve the transport efficiency and safety of the M6 Highway from Vanadzor in Armenia to the border with Georgia at Bagratashen, one of the strategic roads for internal and external trade. The Government is now giving priority to the rehabilitation of transport infrastructure and the proposed project is meant to promote economic development and support transit traffic, having in mind that the ports on the Black Sea, accessed through Georgia, provide one of the major access routes for this traffic.

Map 2-1: M6 Vanadzor–Alaverdi–Georgian Border Interstate Road Rehabilitation and Improvement Project Area

2.2. Project Contracts, Contact Details and Management

7. The Employer/Client: “Transport Projects Implementation Organization” SNCO Address: 4 Tigran Mets ave, 0010 Yerevan, Armenia Email: [email protected] Tel: (+37412) 20-10-09, 20-10-10 Webpage: www.tpio.am

8. Contract and Sub-contract for Construction Works: The Contractor: Horizon-95 LLC &Oberosler Cav Pietros SRL Joint Venture Address: Amiryan 26, 0002 Yerevan, Armenia Email: [email protected] Tel: (+37410) 53-88-56, 53-88-52 Webpage: www.horizon.am The Sub-Contractor: Charagayt CJSC Address: 1st street of Haghtanak district. 46 building, 0081 Yerevan, Republic of Armenia Email: [email protected] Tel: +(374 60) 75 75 25 Webpage: www.charagayt.com Lot 1 Civil works for rehabilitation/reconstruction of the existing M6 -Vanadzor-Alaverdi -Georgian border interstate road (km 38 +450 -Km 48 +140) Date of Signature: 30 November 2017 Commencement Date: May 29, 2018 Time for Completion: 900 days Defects Notification Period: 365 days The Contractor: Joint Venture: " Black Sea Group & AAB Project " Address: 39/1a Arabkir str., 0037 Yerevan, Armenia Email: [email protected] Tel: (+37410) 25-92-59 Webpage: www.aabconstruction.am Lot 2 Civil works for rehabilitation/reconstruction of the existing M6 -Vanadzor-Alaverdi -Georgian border interstate road (km 48 +140 -Km -Km 62 +300) Date of Signature: 30 November 2017 Commencement Date: May 29, 2018 Time for Completion: 900 days Defects Notification Period: 365 days The Contractor: SUARDI JSC Armenian Branch Address: 2nd Inuastrial str., №24 Transport Enterprise, Abovyan, Armenia Email: [email protected] Tel: (+37499) 55-14-69 Webpage: www.suardispa.it The Sub-Contractor: KAPAVOR LLC Address: 47bld. Shirak street, 0085 Yerevan, Armenia Email: [email protected] Tel: (+37493) 80-00-15 Webpage: www.kapavor.am Lot 3 Civil works for rehabilitation/reconstruction of the existing M6 -Vanadzor-Alaverdi -Georgian border interstate road (km 62 + 300 -Km 90 +191) Date of Signature: 30 November 2017 Commencement Date: May 29, 2018 Time for Completion: 900 days Defects Notification Period: 365 days

9. Contract for Consultancy Services:

Engineer: Joint Venture Safege SAS and Hill International N.V. Address: 1704 Hakhpat Kisakayaran, Alaverdi, Armenia Email: [email protected] Tel: (+37455) 55 08 30 Contract Signed: April 03, 2018 Commencement April 03/May 03, 2018 Date/Effective Date: Duration of the Services: 30 months Defect Notification Period 12 months

2.2.1. Environmental Safeguards Staff of TPIO 10. The Project Environmental Impact Management activities are undertaken by Head of Environmental Impact Management Service and Environmental Specialist: 11. Mr. Gevorg Afyan - Head of Environmental Impact Management Service is responsible for Environmental management of the project and compliance with the national environmental legislation of the RA and safeguard policies of financing donors during the preparation and implementation of the Projects, including design, construction and supervision. 12. Mr. Mikael Tevosyan - Environmental and Archaeological Specialist is responsible for the compliance of the projects to safeguard policies of financing donors and RA legislation.

2.2.2. The Environmental Safeguards Staff of the Engineer 13. Presently the Environmental Safeguards Staff of the Supervision Consultant/Engineer consists of: 14. Mr. Arsen Hayriyan, the National Environment Specialist. He is responsible for (i) review all documents and reports regarding the integration of environmental including contractor’s environmental action plan, (ii) supervise the contractors' compliance to the site specific EMP, and (iii) prepare compliance reports for submission to the Client. He is a part-time employee and during the reporting period his input was respectively 9 and 12 days per month. 15. Mr. Armen Grigoryan, the National Social Safeguards (Resettlement) Specialist. He is responsible for provision all the professional and logistic support to the team leader. Conduct regular visits to project sites. Prepare Semi-annual internal Social Monitoring Report presents the observations, findings, issues, non-compliance, and any variance from the provisions of the LARP, recommended actions necessary to ensure compliance with the terms of the approved LARP and ADB’s Safeguard Policy Statement (2009). He is part-time employed consultant (involved from May 2019) and during the reporting period his input was respectively from 8 to 10 days per month (depending on the month).

2.2.3. The Contractor’s Environmental Unit 16. The Contractors` Environmental Units are staffed as follows: 17. Lot 1 Mr. Koryun Harutyunyan – Project Manager: is responsible for the overall project management including the environmental, social and health and safety issues; Mr. Pertsh Bojukyan - Environment and Social Safeguards Specialist: is responsible for the compliance of the Contractor’s activities to Environment and Social requirements of the ADB Safeguard Policy Statement and Armenian legislation; Mr. Sergey Adamyan - Health and Safety Specialist: is responsible for the compliance of the Contractor’s activities to Health and Safety requirements of the ADB Safeguard Policy Statement and Armenian legislation; 18. Lot 2 Mr. Hovhannes Abrahamyan – Project Manager: is responsible for the overall project management including the environmental, social and health and safety issues; Mrs. Nairi Zadikian – Environment, Health and Safety and Social Safeguards Specialist: is responsible for the compliance of the Contractor’s activities to Environment, Health and Safety and Social requirements of the ADB Safeguard Policy Statement and Armenian legislation; 19. Lot 3 Project Manager Mr. Mauro D’Orazio /[email protected] / and Quality, health & safety manager - Sif Ababsia according to the organizational structure of Project Team are responsible for securing of the works quality as well as environmental, occupational health and safety (OHS) and social issues. Mr. Artak Ter-Torosyan – Environmental and Social Safeguards Specialist: is responsible for the compliance of the Contractor’s activities to Environment and Social requirements of the ADB Safeguard Policy Statement and Armenian legislation.

2.3. Project Activities during current reporting period 20. The following activities were carried out during the current reporting periods (see photos in Annex 2): 21. Lot 1 On 29 May 2018 with the letter N 536 the Employer/Client informed that the road sections km38+450 - km39+600 and km39+751 - km42+100 of existing M6 Vanadzor-Alaverdi- Georgian Border Interstate Road km38+450 – km48+140 are free from 3rd party rights (alienated) and is a property of the Employer. Thus, in accordance with Clause 2.1 of the Contract No CW-ICB-M6 12016-2 for the Rehabilitation/reconstruction of the existing M6 Vanadzor-Alaverdi-Georgian Border Interstate Road (km38+450-km48+140), the Employer provided the Contractor with the right to access to the said areas in order to carry out civil works. Following the official notice from the Employer/Client, the Engineer with his letter dated 29 May 2018 ref 29/05/LOT1/01/MD/2018 issued Notice for the Commencement of Works based on FIDIC Clause 8.1. On 17 October 2018 with the letter N 1371 the Employer/Client informed that the monitoring completion report for the 2nd phase of LAR plan is approved by ADB and the following LAR- free sections of the M6 road are being handed over to the lot 1 Contractor for civil work implementation: km39+600 – km39+750 (150m); km42+100 – km43+800 (1700m); km43+850 – km46+000 (2150m); km47+900- km48+140 (240m). During the reporting period on 12 March 2019 with the letter N 234 the Employer/Client informed that the monitoring completion report for the 3rd phase of LAR plan is approved by ADB and the following LAR-free sections of the M6 road are being handed over to the lot 1 Contractor for civil work implementation: km43+800-km43+850 (50m), km46+000-km47+030 (1030m), km47+065-km47+540 (475m), km47+670-km47+780 (110m). As of June 30, 2019, the following road sections are handed over to the Contractor: km38+450- km47+030, km47+065-km47+540, km47+670-km47+780 and km47+900-km48+140. By the end of June 2019, the progress of civil works is roughly as below:

Figure 2-1: Physical progress of the civil works by June 30, 2019

Physical progress of the civil works by June 30, 2019

Total

Pipeline relocation

Rockfall protection

Structures

Drainage

Earth Works

- 400,000,000 800,000,000 1,200,000,000

Actual Scheduled

Table 2-1: Physical progress of the civil works by June 30, 2019 Completion Lot 1 Scheduled Actual rate % Earth Works 753 068 940 806 000 000 107,0 Drainage 55 047 636 2 464 000 4,5 Structures 480 000 000 0 0,0 Rock fall 43 226 000 0 0,0 protection Pipeline 2 610 000 0 0,0 relocation Total 1 333 952 576 808 464 000 60,6

22. Lot 2 On 29 May 2018 with the letter no 535 the Employer/Client informed that the road section km50+671-km53+250 of existing M6 Vanadzor-Alaverdi-Georgian Border Interstate Road (km48+140 km62+300) is free from 3th party rights (alienated) and is a property of the Employer. Thus, in accordance with Clause 2.1 of the Contract No CW-ICB-M6 12016-2 for the Rehabilitation/reconstruction of the existing M6 Vanadzor-Alaverdi-Georgian Border Interstate Road (km48+140-km62+300), the Employer provided the Contractor with the right to access to the said areas in order to carry out civil works. Following the official notice from the Employer/Client, the Engineer with his letter dated 29 May 2018 ref File:29/05/LOT- 2/01/MD/2018 issued Notice for the Commencement of Works based on FIDIC Clause 8.1. On 17 October 2018 with his letter no 1371 the Employer/Client informed that the monitoring completion report for the 2nd phase of LAR plan is approved by ADB and the following LAR- free sections of the M6 road are being handed over to the lot 2 Contractor for civil work implementation: km48+141 – km48+900 (759m); km49+705 – km50+671 (966m); km53+250 – km54+515 (1265m); km54+940- km56+050 (1110m); km57+350 – km58+540 (1190m); km60+910 – 62+300 (1390m). During the reporting period on 12 March 2019 with the letter N 234 the Employer/Client informed that the monitoring completion report for the 3rd phase of LAR plan is approved by ADB and the following LAR-free sections of the M6 road are being handed over to the lot 2 Contractor for civil work implementation: km49+060-km49+510 (450m); km49+540-km49+705 (165m); km54+540-km54+695 (155m); km56+050-km56+135 (85m); km56+280-km56+450 (170m); km56+475-km57+300 (825m); km58+780-km60+745 (1965m). As of June 30, 2019 the following road sections are handed over to the Contractor: km48+140- km48+935, km49+060-km49+510, km49+540-km54+515, km54+540-km54+695, km54+825- km56+135, km56+280-km56+450, km56+475-km58+540, km58+780-km60+745 and km60+810-km62+300. By the end of June 2019, the progress of civil works is roughly as below:

Figure 2-2: Physical progress of the civil works by June 30, 2019

Physical Progress of the civil works by June 30, 2019

Total Sidewalks Rockfall protection Structures Road furnishing Drainage Road pavement Earth works

- 300,000,000 600,000,000 900,000,000

Actual Scheduled

Table 2-2: Physical progress of the civil works by June 30, 2019 Completion Lot 2 Scheduled Actual rate % Earth Works 358 550 514 86 436 000 24,1 Road pavement 81 181 487 5 040 000 6,2 Drainage 110 946 576 1 274 300 1,1 Road furnishing 19 182 572 0 0,0 Structures 234 329 550 1 203 000 0,5 Rock fall 72 325 021 0 0,0 protection Sidewalk 56 782 399 6 365 000 11,2 Total 933 298 119 100 318 300 10,7

23. Lot 3 On 29 May 2018 with his letter no 537 the Employer/Client informed that the road section km76+251 - km90+191 of existing M6 Vanadzor-Alaverdi-Georgian Border Interstate Road (km62+300 km90+191) is free from 3th party rights (alienated) and is a property of the Employer. Thus, in accordance with Clause 2.1 of the Contract No CW-ICB-M6 12016-2 for the Rehabilitation/reconstruction of the existing M6 Vanadzor-Alaverdi-Georgian Border Interstate Road (km48+140-km62+300), the Employer provided the Contractor with the right to access to the said areas in order to carry out civil works. Following the official notice from the Employer/Client, the Engineer with his letter dated 29 May 2018 ref 29/05/LOT3/01/MD/2018 issued Notice for the Commencement of Works based on FIDIC Clause 8.1. On 19 October 2018 with his letter no 1390 the Employer/Client informed that the monitoring completion report for the 2nd phase of LAR plan is approved by ADB and the following LAR- free sections of the M6 road are being handed over to the Lot 3 Contractor for civil work implementation: km62+300 – km64+710 (2410m); km64+900 – km66+340 (1440m); km66+480 – km67+850 (1370m); km68+070- km71+340 (3270m). During the reporting period on 12 March 2019 with the letter N 234 the Employer/Client informed that the monitoring completion report for the 3rd phase of LAR plan is approved by ADB and the following LAR-free sections of the M6 road are being handed over to the lot 3 Contractor for civil work implementation: km64+710-km64+895 (185m); km66+340-km66+480 (140m); km71+340-km71+670 (330m); km71+710-km72+450 (740m); km72+475-km72+575 (100m); km72+905-km75+520 (2615m); km75+595-km75+860 (265m). As of June 30, 2019 the following road sections are handed over to the Contractor: km62+300- km64+895, km64+900-km67+850, km68+070-km71+670, km71+710-km72+450, km72+475- km72+575, km72+905-km75+520, km75+595-km75+860 and km76+251-km90+191.

Figure 2-3: Physical progress of the civil works by June 30, 2019 Physical Progress of the civil works by June 30, 2019

Total Utilities relocation Structures Road furnishing Drainage Road pavement Earth works Preparatory Works

0 500,000,000 1,000,000,000 1,500,000,000 2,000,000,000

Actual Scheduled

Table 2-3: Physical progress of the civil works by June 30, 2019 Completion Lot 3 Scheduled Actual rate % Preparatory 30 215 000 92 000 0,3 Works Earth works 375 010 756 140 160 578 37,4 Road pavement 889 782 931 42 653 338 4,8 Drainage 75 469 264 42 217 000 55,9 Road furnishing 57 685 932 0 0,0 Structures 401 281 885 83 343 800 20,8 Utilities relocation 117 603 405 0 0,0 Total 1 947 049 173,00 308 466 716,00 15,8

2.4. Description of Any Changes to Project Design

24. After additional site investigations, implemented during May 30 to June 20, 2019, all the parties, including the Engineer, Contractor of Lot 1 and the subcontractor for design changes Artsakhroad Institute concluded that the left sides of the following road sections need additional land expropriations: 44+385 to 44+404; 45+800 to 45+825; 46+375 to 46+625; 47+275 to 47+550; 48+070 to 48+100. The issue related to the difference between the ground surface in design and the actual situation, which did not match. The issue was submitted to the designer consultant Artsakhroad for design revision. It is expected that the LARP boundaries will be changed as result of the mentioned changes. 25. An issue related to water supply and sewage pipes in Lot 2 and Lot 3 was identified during the reporting period. The Employer has already tasked the design consultant Artsakhroad LLC to develop design solutions. 26. Another issue relates to optic cables in Lot 3. The Employer, the Engineer and the owners of optic cables (Beeline and Rostelecom) have come to common approach in solving design issues related to optic cables. Employer will task the design consultant to develop design solution for the optic cables soon.

2.5. Description of Any Changes to Agreed Construction methods

27. No changes. 3. ENVIRONMENTAL SAFEGUARD ACTIVITIES

3.1. General Description of Environmental Safeguards Activities 28. Transport Project Implementation Organization is implementing day-to-day management of project execution. The TPIO includes an Environmental Safeguards staff whose responsibilities include the management of all environmental aspects of the project. 29. The Engineer is providing Technical Assistance to the TPIO in the management and reporting of the project. Environmental Specialist of the Engineer is responsible for supervising the construction works in relation to environmental and archaeological impact and, in particular, for supervising and reporting on the Contractor’s performance in the implementation of the EMP. 30. Contractors are implementing construction works. Every contractor has Environmental specialist responsible for preparation and implementation CEMP and SEMPs, monitoring of the construction activities and reporting.

Monitoring Reporting

3.2. Site Audits 31. During the reporting period site audits were carried out according the Monitoring program developed based on the ADB Safeguards and EMP requirements. Unscheduled audit visits were carried out when needed. The following site audits were undertaken: - Regular audit site visits on weekly basis by contractors’ environmental specialists. The audits have been done according to the approved checklist template. - Regular audit site visits on monthly basis by engineer’s environmental specialist. The audits have been done according to the approved checklist template. - The TPIO environmental specialists participated in some of the audit site visits of the engineer’s environmental specialist, but not less than once in a quarter. 32. To check compliance of the Program activities to the ADB SPS (2009) requirements an ADB audit mission took place on March 7, 2019. Site visit was held to monitor on-going civil works in construction sites, Contractors` camp area, topsoil stockpiling sites and excavated material dumping sites. The environmental specialists of the TPIO, Engineer and Contractor with the National Environmental Consultant of ADB participated and discussed the possible environmental, Health and Safety Issues. On March 7, 2019 ADB submitted the list of shortcoming, the summary of shortcomings and the status of performed activities as of June 30, 2019 is given the Annex 3.

3.3. Issue Tracking (Based on Non-Conformance Notices) 33. During the reporting period totally 11 issues were tracked. 6 issues were closed and 5 are still open. 7 issues are environmental and only 4 relates to safety. 27% of the issues have high priority, 18% - low and 55% - medium. Summary of the issues is given in the tables below:

Table 3-1: Summary of Issues Tracking Activity for Current Period Summary Tables

Total Number of Issues for Project 11 Issues by Category Number of Open Issues 5 Environment 7 Issues by Lot 1-3 Number of Closed Issues 6 Social 0 Percentage Closed 55% Health 0 Lot 1 7 Issues Opened This Reporting 0 Safety 4 Lot 2 2 Period Issues Closed This Reporting 0 Other 0 Lot 3 2 Period

Figure 3-1: Summary of Issues by Priority and Non-conformance level

Issues by Priority Non-conformance Level

N/A; 0

2; 18% 3; 27% Minor; 4

6; 55% Major; 7

Low Medium High Major Minor N/A

3.4. Trends 34. Total number of issues for the 2nd period decreased from 16 to 11 issues which is 31%. The number of environmental issues decreased by 46% from 13 to 7 and safety issues increased by 1 (from 3 to 4).

Table 3-2: Comparison table of Issues of 1st and 2nd Period

st nd st nd 1 Period 2 Period 1 Period 2 Period Total Total Number of Issues for 16 27 Issues by Category Project Total Number of Open Issues 6 11 Environment 13 7 20

Total Number of Closed Issues 10 16 Social 0 0 0

Percentage Closed 63% 59% Health 0 0 0 Issues Opened This Reporting 16 11 Safety 3 4 7 Period Issues Closed This Reporting 10 6 Other 0 0 0 Period

3.5. Unanticipated Environmental Impacts or Risks 35. No unanticipated environmental impacts and risks were identified during the current period.

3.6. Vibration Monitoring 36. The Methodology for Pre-Construction inventory of buildings and vibration monitoring were developed by all three Contractors and approved by Engineer. Lot 1: On May 21, 2019 the Contractor submitted the Pre-construction Inventory of Buildings and Vibration Monitoring Report for Phase 1 and 2 sections. The Engineer provided comments on May 11, 2019. During the reporting period the revised Report was not submitted to Engineer. On June 25, 2019 the Contractor submitted the Vibration Management Plan which includes description and mitigation measures during construction works for 8 sensitive locations. The locations include the following: • The sensitive locations provided in the Vibration Study Report prepared by Egis; • Houses located close to the road; • Houses of people who are concerned about the impact of the works on their houses. The environmental Expert of Engineer has already provided his comments to the report. The Vibration Monitoring will be held by the Vibration Monitoring Consultant. Once the Contract with the Vibration Monitoring Consultant is signed by Engineer the report will be submitted to the Consultant for review and combined comments will be submitted to the Contractor. It is expected that the contract with the Vibration Monitoring Consultant (Georisk LLC) will be signed in July, 2019. 37. Lot 2: The Contractor submitted to Engineer the Pre-construction Inventory of Buildings and Vibration Monitoring Report to Engineer. The Engineer`s no objection was provided on January 5, 2019. 38. Lot 3: The Contractor finished the Pre-construction Inventory of Buildings and the respective report is being developed. It was expected that the report will be finalized and submitted for Engineer`s review by the end of June, 2019, but however the report was not submitted. The Engineer submitted reminder to the Contractor and requested to submit the report in July, 2019.

3.7. GRM Tracking 39. During the reporting period totally 14 grievances were tracked. 6 grievances were closed and 8 are still open. The significant part of the grievances relates to the damages2 out of LARP boundaries. 6 grievances were closed in non-satisfaction of APs, since the complaints related to the damage to trees or fence, but the examination showed that the damage was not done (in the case of fence), or AP did not provide documents confirming that he was caring (owner or user) the trees. Summary of the grievances by status and subject is given below;

1 The report was submitted in May, since no works were held near the sensitive buildings before that. 2 Damages to trees and fence Table 3-3: Summary of GRM Tracking for Past Periods

Summary Tables 1st Period 2nd Period Total 1. Total Number of Grievances 16 14 30 2. Number of Closed Grievances 12 6 18 2.1. In satisfaction of AP 10 0 10 2.2. In non-satisfaction of AP 2 6 8 3. Number of Open Grievances 4 8 12 4. Percentage Closed 75% 43% 60% 5. Grievances by Categories 5.1. New damage within LARP boundaries 4 2 6 5.2. Damage out of LARP boundaries 7 9 16 5.3. Design issues 1 2 3 5.4. Other issues 4 1 5

Figure 3-2: Summary of Grievances by Status and Subject

4. RESULTS OF ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING

4.1. Overview of monitoring conducted during the current period 40. During the reporting period instrumented measurements and monitoring of environmental parameters of air quality, noise and vibration, water quality were undertaken. 41. Contractor has completed the baseline data collection for dust, noise, water and vibration in 2018. 42. Instrumented measurements and monitoring of environmental parameters (dust, noise, water and vibration) during the reporting period has been implemented at the sensitive points by Lot 1 and Lot 3 Contractors which were identified and approved by the Engineer. 43. The Contractors hired qualified companies to hold DNVW measurements: Lot 1 – National Centre for Disease Control and Prevention SNCO for noise, water and vibration measurement and ATMS Solutions LLC for dust (PM2.5 and PM10) and Lot 2 and 3 – ATMS Solutions LLC. According to the monitoring reports noise and vibration actual levels at measurement point were within the Threshold Limit Values (TLV) set by Sanitary norms and WHO standards. The main noise and vibration sources at all noise measurement points are operation of construction equipment and movement of cars and vehicles along the M6 highway. The actual dust concentrations in all measurement points in different daytime periods don’t exceed the daily average and maximum permissible concentrations set by the RoA Government Decree No160- N “Norms of maximum permissible concentrations of atmospheric air pollutants in residential areas" and WHO Air Quality Guidelines - Global Update, 2005. At measurement points the actual levels of vibration were below the TLVs. The measurement of water was not conducted, since no works were held near the river (bridge and etc.). 44. Detailed information on the results of operational monitoring is presented in the Noise and Dust Assessment Reports available in Contractors` and Engineer`s offices (see extract from reports in Annex 4).

4.2. Trends 45. The number of problems in the 2nd reporting period significantly decreased. During the 1st reporting period, the main problem was the use of landfills without Engineer`s approval, which was almost completely resolved in the second period. 46. During the 1st period dust measurements were held in accordance with local standards and measurement parameter (dust) did not correspond to the measurement parameter in accordance with the WHO standards (PM2.5 and PM10). Taking into account the ADB`s comment on the 1st Semi-annual report the current measurements were held in accordance with the internationally acceptable parameters.

4.3. Summary of monitoring outcomes 47. The results of Lot 1 contractor for the 1st reporting period were unsatisfactory and 4 non- compliance notices were submitted by Engineer in the first two months of the reporting period. Since then, Lot 1 Contractor had rather improved the situation and no more major issues were observed during the following four months of the reporting period. 48. Lot 1 and 2: During the reporting period major issues were not observed in the sections, medium and low priority issues were observed and fixed in the operating mode.

4.4. Waste Management 49. Lot 1: All excavated materials are disposed at the dumping sites (DSs) in Odzun community. 5 DSs (Alaverdi 1-3 and Tumanyan 1,2) were not used during the reporting period. During the reporting period Engineer observed that the Contractor places the excavated materials in dumping site which was not approved by Engineer. The DS is located at KM44+000 – KM44+080 (Odzun 6). The SEMP for the DS was submitted to Engineer on June 29, 2019. The SEMP is under revision by Engineer. 50. Lot 2: All excavated unsuitable material is disposed in Alaverdi`s solid household waste landfill. Excavated rocky materials are disposed in Haghpat (DS near the camp), where the materials are crushed for further use in the road construction (sub base layer). No issue related to usage of non-approved dumping sites was observed during the reporting period. 51. Lot 3 The excavated materials were disposed in Ayrum dumping site as well as in sites Akhtala- 1 and Akhtala-2. No issue related to usage of non-approved dumping sites was observed during the reporting period.

4.4.1. Current period Table 4-1: Waste generated in the current period3

Lot 1 Lot 2 Lot 3

Type of Waste Excavated soil Excavated soil (non- Excavated soil (non-hazardous) (hazardous or (non-hazardous) hazardous) and stripped and stripped asphalt (hazardous non- asphalt (hazardous 4th 4th category) hazardous) category) Waste Source Excavation works in Excavation works Excavation works in the right of (what activity the right of way way and asphalt stripping works generated the waste and where) Quantity of Roadway Rocky Excavation - 12500 Roadway excavation (soil) - waste excavation (soil) - m3 16138m3 generated 76023 m3 Rocky Excavation - 5939 m3 Rocky Excavation - Stripped Asphalt – 395m3 30500 m3 Treatment/disp Excavated soil is Rocky materials are taken Excavated soil and rocky osal route reused for to Haghpat DS and crushed material has been used as (provide improving private for further use in the road backfill material in Ayrum information on and community construction (sub base dumpsite and land improvement quantity of lands. layer). works in Akhtala-1 and Akhtala- waste reused, Rocky materials are 2 sites. recycled and crushed for further sent to landfill use in the road Stripped asphalt will be reused or incineration) construction (sub as a road edge material base layer). Final Disposal Duping Sites: Madan DS, Haghpat DS Ayrum dumpsite, sites Akhtala-1 Site for waste Odzun 2,4,5 and 6 Stripped asphalt is stored in and Akhtala-2. the territory of Camp Stripped asphalt is stored at the storage site near the Camp.

3The status of approval of SSEMPs is given in the table 5.1 below.

4.4.2. Cumulative waste generation

Table 4-2: Waste generated in the 1st and 2nd periods

Lot 1 Lot 2 Lot 3

Type of Waste Excavated soil Excavated soil (non- Excavated soil (non-hazardous) (hazardous or (non-hazardous) hazardous) and stripped and stripped asphalt (hazardous non- asphalt (hazardous 4th 4th category) hazardous) category) Waste Source Excavation works in Excavation works Excavation works in the right of (what activity the right of way way and asphalt stripping works generated the waste and where) Quantity of Roadway Roadway excavation (soil+ Roadway excavation (soil) - waste excavation (soil) - stripped asphalt) - 5500m3 21138m3 generated 125677 m3 (4585 is soil +asphalt (20%) Rocky Excavation - 5939 m3 Rocky Excavation - and 915 only soil) Stripped Asphalt – 3509m3 30500 m3 Rocky Excavation - 18000 m3 Treatment/disp Excavated soil is Excavated soil is used for Excavated soil has been used osal route reused for cultivation of Alaverdi solid as backfill material in Ayrum (provide improving private household waste landfill dumpsite and land improvement information on and community (Madan DS). works in Akhtala-1 and Akhtala- quantity of lands. Rocky materials are 2 sites. waste reused, Rocky materials are crushed for further use in recycled and crushed for further the road construction (sub Stripped asphalt will be reused sent to landfill use in the road base layer). as a road edge material. or incineration) construction (sub base layer). Final Disposal Duping Sites: Madan DS, Ayrum dumpsite, sites Akhtala-1 Site for waste Tumanyan 1 and 2, Rocky materials are taken and Akhtala-2. Stripped asphalt Odzun 1- 6, to Haghpat DS is stored at the storage site near Alaverdi 1 and 2 Stripped asphalt is stored in the Camp. the territory of Camp

4.5. Health and Safety 4.5.1. Community Health and Safety 52. Lot 2: On May 4, 2019 while transporting new equipment through M6 an incident took place in Alaverdi City near the bridge which takes to «Sanahin» village (the photos are provided in Annex 5). Some cables were damaged, and the Contractor agreed with local authorities to repair the damage. The issue was fixed and damage was restored by the Contractor. 53. Despite of the above issue, no incidents or traffic accidents have occurred during the reporting period. 4.5.2. Workers Safety and Health 54. No accidents were recorded during the reporting period. 55. No safety campaigns were conducted during the reporting period.

4.6. Trainings 56. Lot 1-3: The Environmental and H&S Specialists of Contractor trained the personnel on site, on Work Site Safety and Environmental Policies and Procedures during the 1st period. New employees are trained as soon as they get involved with the project. 57. Lot 1: During the reporting period (January 2019) training on oil and lubricants management and traffic regulation at construction site was held. 58. Lot 2: A training with the following agenda was held on February 15, 2019: • Importance of EHS trainings • Accident international data • Rights and obligations of workers/company • Personal safety measures • Environmental measures • Emergency • Hot line • Health hazards and correspondent PPE • Alaverdi project`s specific risks and mitigation • EHS Quiz 59. Lot 3: The following social and OHS trainings were conducted during the reporting period (in May 2019): • Use of personal protective equipment and emergency procedure • Fire safety and fire extinguisher use • Basic aid and first aid during the works • Environmental protection practices during the works • HIV awareness • Training on venomous snakes, first aid for bitten person, how to avoid a snake bite • How to manage an area.

4.7. Archeological Issue 60. No archeological finds were found during the reporting period. 5. FUNCTIONS OF THE SEMP

5.1. SEMP review 61. Lot 1: On June 12, 2019 the Engineer provided No-objection to the SEMPs for Dumping Sites Alaverdi-1, Alaverdi-2, Odzun-2, Odzun-5 as well as additional comments for the SEMPs of Concrete Mixing Facility and Crusher Plant4. The revised SEMPs were resubmitted on June 26, 2019 and Engineer`s No-objection was provided on June 28, 2019. On June 29, 2019 the Contractor submitted SEMP for Odzun 6 DS which is currently under revision by Engineer. 62. Lot 2: During the reporting period SEMP for Haghpat (km 56+600) DS was submitted to Engineer and no-objection was provided as given in the below table. 63. Lot 3: During the reporting period SEMPs for Akhtala 1 (km 66+600) and 2 (/km 64+850) DSs were submitted to Engineer and no-objection was provided as given in the below table. 64. Currently, the following documents were submitted to the Engineer: Table 5-1: Current status if SSEMP approval SSEMPs Lot 1 Lot 2 Lot 3 Odzun 1 (no objection 31.01.2019) /km 43+300 – 43+700/ Odzun 2 /km 45+300- 45+700/ no objection 12.06.19 Odzun 3 /km 39+574 – 39+625/ no objection May 2019 Odzun 4 /km 40+225 40+300/ – Ayrum no objection May 2019 Madan /km 81+500/ Odzun 5 /km 40+900- 41+200/ no objection 12.06.19 Odzun 6 / km44+000 – SEMP for Dumping Site 44+080/ Alaverdi 1 /km 43+934/ no objection 12.06.19 Alaverdi 2 /km 48+200 – 43+400/ no objection 12.06.19 Alaverdi 3 (Private) /not DSs in the section used yet/ of Kapavor SC Tumanyan 1 (Akhtala 1) /km 37+500/ /km 66+600/ Haghpat (no objection DSs in the section 26.02.2019) of Kapavor SC Tumanyan 2 (Private, no /km 56+600/ (Akhtala 2) objection 24.12.2018) /km 64+850/ no /km 37+500/ objection May 30, 2019

4 The following shortcomings were identified by Engineer: 1) The section of received permission was missing in the SSEMPs, and 2) The land title was attached but agreement with the land owner was missing. The Contractor was asked to address the comments and resubmit the SSEMPs. Ayrum SEMP for Top-soil storage /km 81+500/ (no site objection 24.12.2018) SEMP for Stripped asphalt (no objection (no objection storage site; 14.02.2019) 24.12.2018) SEMP for sand-gravel (no objection aggregate quarry 24.12.2018) (no objection (no objection SEMP for Crusher plant 28.06.2019) 14.02.2019) SEMP for Concrete plant/ (no objection (no objection Concrete Mixing Facility 28.06.2019) 24.12.2018) (no objection SEMP for Asphalt plant 14.02.2019) SEMP for the CAMP PK 44+520 - PK 44+540 PK 53+700 – PK no objection 26.02.2019 53+800 SEMP for blasting works PK 46+000-PK46+150 PK 53+680 – PK /Engineer provided 53+725 no objection comments/ 14.02.2019

Engineer`s no objection was provided (conditional or final) Is under Engineer`s consideration or Engineer provided comments and is being revised by the Contractor Have not been submitted yet

6. GOOD PRACTICE AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR IMPROVEMENT

6.1. Good Practice 65. TPIO adopted a procedure concerning a dumping site selection and SEMP approval as follows: (i) Contractor selects the site for topsoil stockpiling or dumping of excavated material; (ii) Engineer’s ES visits the site and provide Contractor with site evaluation report with identified sensitive receptors and recommendations on the site use. Archaeological specialist is also involved to give their conclusion concerning any potential historical and cultural object (if any); (iii) Contractor secures the site and prepares SEMP based on the findings of evaluation report and submits for Engineer’s approval; (iv) The Engineer’s ES reviews the SEMP and issues an approval; (v) Then Contractor is permitted to start the site operation. 66. The procedure allows to assess the site and identify the sensitive receptors in early stage of the procedure and by this way accelerates the further works related to SEMP preparation and approval. Figure 6-1: Dumping Site Selection and SEMP Approval Procedure

Contractor Engineer Engineer

SEMP review Site Selection and approval Permission to start the site operation NES visits the SEMP site and preparation provide the Contractor Contractor with recommendati ons

Engineer

6.2. Opportunities for improvement 67. No opportunities outside the formal NCN process were identified during the reporting period. If any will be presented in the further reports.

7. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS

7.1. Summary 68. Contractor is guided by the IEE and CEMP for the Project as a part of the Bid and Contract documents, Site-specific Environmental Management plans, as well as by the Contractor’s Environmental Management Plan prepared by the Contractor that detail on site environmental management requirements implementation and management, particularly construction impacts mitigation, monitoring and reporting requirements in order to ensure the environmental performance. Compliance with EMP is being regularly monitored and reported. 69. In order to comply with national safeguard system and legislation, Contractor has obtained necessary permits and licenses for construction activities. During the reporting period it was observed that construction in general complies with all national pertinent environmental laws and regulations. In this regards some shortcomings were observed which are presented in details in the clause 3.3 of this report. The number of issues shows decreasing trend, which pleases and confirms the effectiveness of monitoring. 70. In order to ensure the environmental performance, it was supervised that the implementation of construction activities in general meets CEMP requirements which is prepared in accordance with IEE (July 2016), ADB Environmental Policy and RA legislation. 71. The thresholds for monitoring of environmental parameters of dust, water, noise and vibration are set in accordance with standards and norms set by Armenian legislation as well as by the guidance for ADB funded projects. 72. Contractors ensure all necessary communication with local self-governmental bodies (communities) and regional administrative authorities (marzes) to comply with Armenian legislation during construction and obtains permits and approvals for any use of territory and roads for transportation, waste dumping, and material borrowing. 73. No pre-construction public hearings were held during the reporting period. 74. Proper functioning of the grievance registration and redress mechanism in all communities is regularly checked by the Contractor and reported. In order to perform effective monitoring of the grievances raised during the construction period the Complaint Log Sheet and the Grievance Recording Form were placed on the Google Drive. During the reporting period, totally 14 grievances were received. Detailed information on the grievances is summarized in the clause 3.7 (GRM Tracking). 75. The SSEMPs for the dumping sites for three lots were developed and reviewed by the Engineer. The list of shortcoming related to the SSEMPs as well as the status of approval is provided in clause 5.1 of this report. 76. The Environmental and Social Specialists of Contractors have already trained the personnel on site, on Work Site Safety and Environmental/Social Policies and Procedures. New employees are trained as soon as they get involved with the project. 77. No historical finds were found during the reporting period. 78. Four NCNs were submitted by Engineer during the reporting period, one to Lot 3 contractor and three to Lot 1 Contractor.

7.2. Recommendations 79. The DNVW measurements shall be held in accordance with national and international standards. Particularly PM10 and PM2.5 parameters shall be measures and provided for Engineer`s review. 80. Traffic Management shall be improved, since the regulators/flagman are not always at their positions. 81. It is recommended to arrange a Public Consultation for the residents of the sensitive buildings located close to the road. Vibration Management Plan shall be prepared and presented to the residents during the Public Consultation.

Annex 1: The status of LARP implementation Phases per Lots

The status of LARP implementation Phases per Lots is presented below in tables 1, 2 and 3 (the percentages indicated in the tables show the portion of each phase in terms of LAR-completed road section in length (m)).

Table 1: Status of LARP Implementation Phases, Lot 1 Construction Length, LARP Implementation Involved Chainage, KM section, KM/m m Phase communities 38+450-39+600 1150 Phase 1 39+600-39+750 150 Phase 2 39+750-42+100 2350 Phase 1 42+100-43+800 1700 Phase 2 43+800-43+850 50 Phase 3 Tumanyan, Lot 1 43+850-46+000 2150 Phase 2 Aygehat, (km 38+450-km 46+000-47+030 1030 Phase 3 Odzun, 48+140), 9690m 47+030-47+065 35 Under expropriation Alaverdi 47+065-47+540 475 Phase 3 47+540-47+670 130 Under expropriation 47+670-47+780 110 Phase 3 47+780-47+900 120 Under expropriation 47+900-48+140 240 Phase 2 Construction started 3500 Phase 1 Construction started 4240 Phase 2 Construction started 1665 Phase 3 Under expropriation 285 Phase 3, Under expropriation (2.94%)

Table 2: Status of LARP Implementation Phases, Lot 2 Construction Length, LARP Implementation Involved Chainage, KM section, KM/m m Phase communities 48+140-48+935 795 Phase 2 48+935-49+060 125 Under expropriation 49+060-49+510 450 Phase 3 49+510-49+540 30 Under expropriation 49+540-49+705 165 Phase 3 49+705-50+670 965 Phase 2 Phase 1 (LAR-free 50+670-53+250 2580 section) 53+250-54+515 1265 Phase 2 54+515-54+540 25 Under expropriation Lot 2 Alaverdi, 54+540-54+695 155 Phase 3 (km 48+140-km Aqori, 54+695-54+825 130 Under expropriation 62+300), 14160m Haghpat 54+825-56+050 1225 Phase 2 56+050-56+135 85 Phase 3 56+135-56+280 145 Under expropriation 56+280-56+450 170 Phase 3 56+450-56+475 25 Under expropriation 56+475-57+300 825 Phase 3 57+300-58+540 1240 Phase 2 58+540-58+780 240 Under expropriation 58+780-60+745 1965 Phase 3 60+745-60+810 65 Under expropriation Construction Length, LARP Implementation Involved Chainage, KM section, KM/m m Phase communities 60+810-62+300 1490 Phase 2 Construction started 2580 Phase 1 Construction started 6980 Phase 2 Construction started 3815 Phase 3 Under expropriation 785 Phase 3, Under expropriation (5.54%)

Table 3: Status of LARP Implementation Phases, Lot 3 Construction Length, LARP Implementation Involved Chainage, KM section, KM/m m Phase communities 62+300-64+710 2410 Phase 2 64+710-64+895 185 Phase 3 64+895-64+900 5 Under expropriation 64+900-66+340 1440 Phase 2 66+340-66+480 140 Phase 3 66+480-67+850 1370 Phase 2 67+850-68+070 220 Under expropriation 68+070-71+340 3270 Phase 2 Haghpat, 71+340-71+670 330 Phase 3 Neghots, Akhtala, 71+670-71+710 40 Under expropriation Lot 3 Shnogh, (km 62+300-km 71+710-72+450 740 Phase 3 Artchis 90+191), 27891m 72+450-72+475 25 Under expropriation 72+475-72+575 100 Phase 3 72+575-72+905 330 Under expropriation 72+905-75+520 2615 Phase 3 75+520-75+595 75 Under expropriation 75+595-75+860 265 Phase 3 75+860-76+250 390 Under expropriation Ayrum, Phase 1 (LAR-free Haghtanak, 76+250-90+191 13941 section) Ptghavan and Bagratashen Construction started 13941 Phase 1 Construction started 8490 Phase 2 Construction started 4375 Phase 3 Under expropriation 1085 Phase 3, Under expropriation (3.89%)

Annex 2: Photos of activities during the reporting period

Lot 1: Rodway excavation at km47+325 Lot 1: Construction of R/c pipe at km43+608

Lot 2: Earth works for installation of metal casing Lot 2: Construction of new kerbstones at km 48+600 pipe at km 48+510 Lot 2: Roadway excavation (removal of existing Lot 2: Construction of Inlet head of drain pipe at pavement layres at km 48+890 – km 48+935 km 48+296

Lot 3: Roadway excavation (removal of existing Lot 3: Compaction of subgrade at km72+920 – pavement layers at km72+920-km73+100 km73+400

Lot 3: Construction of R/c pipe at km 73+349

Lot 3: Construction of retaining wall at km74+430 – Lot 3: Construction of flumes (34cm x 30cm) at km74+450 km73+814 –km73+924

Appendix 3: Progress of issues identified during the ADB&TPIO`s site visit held on March 7, 2019

Relevant to all Status and photos Engineer`s comments three lots

a The Supervision N/A The issue of usage of DS Engineer must give without Engineer`s its approval to the approval related to DSs Alaverdi 2 (km 48+200 – start of using any of 43+400), as well as Odzun spoil disposal sites. 2 (Km 45+300 –Km Approval of all 45+700) and 5 (Km 40+900 spoil disposal sites –Km 41+200). Agreements which are currently with land owners are being used and for attached to the SSEMP. any new sites must Engineer`s No-Objection was provided on June 6, be completed 2019. immediately

b To gain approval of the Supervisory Engineer, the Contractors must provide a detailed Site-Specific Environmental Plan (SSEMP) and all agreements with the land owners or community as part of the SSEMP

c The SSEMP shall Odzun 1 DS The revised SSEMPs were include measures received by the Engineer. for reinstatement of The measures were the site following included in the Mitigation spoil disposal to Measures as well as in the cover with topsoil section Site Closure and or to seed each site, Rehabilitation of the to avoid soil erosion SEMPs. and speed up re- vegetation d In locations where DS Alaverdi 2 (km 43+934) On April 4, 2019 a spoil disposal sites meeting was held with Lot have been located 1 Contractor and a close to river, bank protocol was signed conditions should between the Engineer and be restored to Contractor of Lot 1. In the natural conditions protocol Contractor with riparian tree confirmed that will ensure planting and rocks the requested measures. are provided to The SSEMP for the DS ensure erosion does was revised and the not occur at the measures were included in spoil site and rive is the mitigation measures as maintained DS Tumanyan 2 (km 37+500) well as in the section Site Closure and Rehabilitation of the SEMP.

The Contractor will restore the river shore to natural conditions with riparian tree planting during the site closure and rehabilitation works.

e The contractors are The Notification letter recommended to was prepared and signed ensure that by the land owner of following Tumanyan 2 DS (km reinstatement, 37+500) written acceptance of the site is collected in its final condition and that land owners are made aware that any subsequent building works conducted on the land will be at their

own risk; f Contractors and During the meeting held Supervision on April 4, 2019 the Engineer to Contractor of Lot 1 was confirm that for suggested particular community lands measures to prevent adjacent to rivers encroach of soil into the that spoil disposal river and a protocol was does not encroach signed. The onto river peak implementation of the season flow area measures is in the focus of the Engineer`s monitoring.

Contractor confirms that for community lands adjacent to rivers that spoil disposal does not encroach onto river peak season flow area

g Lot 1: Contractor Lot 1 Considering the Camp refueling rectangular-like shape of facility is located the Lot 1 camp and its directly adjacent to width (43m) any change river and with no of today`s position of the secondary fuel tank will still be less containment. than the required 50m. Contractor Therefore, it was agreed recommended to that the fuel tank shall be move refueling site inside an isolated concrete away from river container of volume to 1.1 according to the times the volume of the Project`s IEE/EMP fuel tank. and national legislation requirements and provide secondary containment h Contractors are N/A It was observed that the requested not to issue is fixed burn vegetation cut on-site and provide to local community.

i Contractors are Lot 2 Secondary containment requested to was provided but there is improve storage of a hole in the front of the hazardous oil, secondary containment bitumen, fuel with which makes the measure secondary useless. containment to The Contractor was avoid instructed to fix the issue contamination by the end of July 2019.

Lot 3 No Comments

j Occupation health N/A The instruction is and safety measures implemented and should be properly supervised by the H&S followed, especially Expert. staff working at The issue is in the focus of height for utilities Engineers supervision removal where requested to make safe. Annex 4: Status of Measurements on Dust, Noise, Water Quality and Vibration in the reporting period

1. The list of Identified Sensitive/Monitoring Points

Point Parameters Piquet (km) Coordinates Community Lot 1 Dust 41°4'53''N №1 479+50 Alaverdi Noise 44°37'2''E Dust 41°0'45''N №2 395+20 Alaverdi Noise 44°38'15''E 41°0'20.3''N №3 Noise 396+00 Tumanyan 44°38'10.5E 41°3'44''N Alaverdi, Sanahin №4 Noise 479+50 44°37'24''E Kayaran 41°5'3''N №5 Water 483+00 Alaverdi 44°37'9''E 41°0'15''N №6 Water 384+00 Tumanyan 44°38'24''E

Point Parametes Piquet (km) Coordinates Community Lot 2 Dust Noise №1 48+90 41°4'58.85"N Alaverdi Vibration 44°37'4.76"E Water Dust

Noise 49+302 41° 5'9.23"N Alaverdi №2 44°37'53.89"E Vibration Dust Noise №3 51+419 41° 5'26.97"N Alaverdi Vibration 44°38'40.22"E Water Dust 41°5'51.16"N №4 Noise 54+450 Alaverdi 44°39'54.17"E Vibration Dust 41°5'32.24"N №5 54+984 Alaverdi Noise 44°41'41.37"E Dust 41°5'49.57"N №6 Noise 57+276 Aqori 44°40'16.85"E Vibration Dust

№7 Noise 58+207 41°6'0.01"N Haghpat 44°41'47.46"E Vibration Dust №8 60+632 41°6'45.68"N Haghpat Noise 44°42'50.29"E Vibration Dust Noise №9 62+350 41°7'7.89"N Haghpat Vibration 44°45'6.05"E Water

Point Parametes Piquet (km) Coordinates Community Lot 3 Dust 41.139347N №1 Noise 65+700 Neghots 44.770454E Vibration Dust 41.148195N Noise 67+300 Akhtala №2 44.784881E Vibration Dust 41.148266N At the beginning of №3 Noise 67+800 44.790649E Akhtala community Vibration Dust Noise 41.150450N №4 71+900 Shnogh Vibration 44.831312E Water 41.167286N Between Karkop and №5 Water 74+125 44.844991E Shnogh communities Dust 41.181427N №6 Noise 76+800 Karkop settlement 44.865782E Vibration Dust 41.187484N №7 79+800 Ayrum Community Noise 44.892219E Dust 41.207352N №8 Noise 82+900 Haghtanak Community 44.906010E Vibration Dust 41.220810N Between Ptghavan and №9 Noise 87+400 44.866024E Haghtanak settlements Vibration

41.222682N At the beginning of №10 Water 87+600 44.864761E Ptghavan community Dust 41.228809N №11 Noise 88+800 Ptghavan community 44.854147E Vibration Dust 41.230416N №12 Noise 90+100 Bagratashen community 44.840008E Vibration Dust 41.197590N №13 Noise 81+500 Artsis community 44.903876E Vibration №14 Dust 64+000 Akhtala community Noise 41.122635N Vibration 44.753145E

2. The map of Identified Sensitive/Monitoring Points

Lot 1

Lot 2

Lot 3 3. Measurement Approach and Methodology

Dust Measurements

The measurements are conducted in accordance with the below mentioned national normative documents and international best practices:

• GOST 17.2.4.05-83. "Environmental protection. Atmosphere. Gravimetric method for determination of suspended dust particles", • Government Decree № 160-N. "Norms of maximum permissible concentrations (MPC) of atmospheric air pollutants in residential areas", • World Health Organization (WHO). Air Quality Guidelines Global Update, 2005. • Measurements of dust concentration (PM2.5 and PM10) are conducted during the daytime.

Measurements at every measuring point are taken 3 times during the day.

Daily average and maximum permissible concentrations (MPC) for PM2.5 and PM10

Maximum Permissible Concentration ( mg/m3) National National WHO5 № Name of substance Max Daily average 24 hour

1 PM2.5 0.16 0.035 0.025

2 PM10 0.3 0.06 0.05

Noise Measurements

Instrumental measurement, analysis and evaluation of results are carried out in accordance with the following regulations/standards:

• Sanitary Norms № 2-III-11.3 "Noise in the workplaces, in residential and public buildings and in residential construction areas" adopted by the order of RA Minister of Health №138 on 06.03.2002, • ISO 1996-1:2003 "Acoustics-description, measurement and assessment of environmental noise - Part 1: Basic quantities and assessment procedures", • ISO 1996-2:2007 "Acoustics-description, measurement and assessment of environmental noise - Part 2: Determination of environmental noise levels", • Guidelines for Community Noise, World Health Organization (WHO), 1999.

As criteria for determination of the conformity level of the actual noise in sensitive areas, the normative values of the equivalent (average) and maximum sound levels are used, according to the Sanitary Norms №2-III-11.3 "Noise in the workplaces, in residential and public buildings and houses in construction areas".

5 World Health Organization (WHO). Air Quality Guidelines Global Update, 2005

Measurements of noise levels are conducted during the daytime. Measurements at every measuring point are conducted 3 times with the duration of 10 minutes each one.

Threshold limit values for noise6

Threshold limit values (TLV), dBA National WHO № Premises and territories One hour Equivalent to Maximum equivalent to sound level sound level soud level 1 Workplace 80 85 Shops, trading halls, airport and railway stations 2 waiting rooms, drop-off points of public service 60 75 70 providers Territories adjacent to residential buildings, clinics, ambulatories, rest houses, care homes, 3 55 70 557 disabled persons homes, libraries, kinder gardens, schools and other educational facilities

Vibration Measurements

Instrumental measurement, analysis and evaluation of results are carried out in accordance with the following regulations/standards:

• Hygienic Norms №2-III-11.3 "Vibration in the workplaces, in residential and public buildings", • Directive 2002/44/EC on the minimum health and safety requirements regarding the exposure of workers to the risks arising from physical agents (vibration), • GOST 31319-2006 (EN 14253) "Mechanical vibration. Measurement and assessment of occupational exposure to whole-body vibration with reference to health. Requirements for measurement at the workplace", • GOST 31191.1-2004 (ISO 2631-1) "Mechanical vibration and shock - Evaluation of human exposure to whole-body vibration - Part 1: General requirements".

As criteria for determination of the conformity level of the actual vibration in sensitive areas, the normative values of vibration acceleration are used according to the Hygienic Norms №2.2.4-009-06 "Vibration in the workplaces, in residential and public buildings".

Measurements of vibration acceleration are conducted during the daytime. Measurements at every measuring point are conducted 3 times with the duration of at least 5 minutes each one.

6 Only noise TLVs for day-time are presented in Table 3

7 The daytime indicator is taken, since no works are conducted at night. Threshold limit values (TLV) for vibration acceleration

TLV for corrected and equivalent corrected values № Whole-body vibration m/sec2 dB 1 Transport-technological (2nd category) 0.28 109 2 Technological (3rd category a) 0.1 100 3 Technological (3rd category b) 0.04 92 4 Technological (3rd category g) 0.014 83 5 Residential buildings, clinics, rest houses 0.004 72

4. Measurement Results and Evaluation

Lot 1: Extract from the Noise, vibration and dust assessment report N3 (June 2019)

Table 5: Results of noise measurements conducted at points №1, №7 and №8 on 26.06.2019 compared with baseline noise measurements8.

Threshold Threshold Sound level (equivalent to limit value limit value Measurement No sound level), LAeq, dBA (equivalent (maximum to sound sound level), operational baseline level), dBA dBA No1 (commercial) 26.06.2019 28.06.2018 1st measurement 57 58 2nd measurement 58 56 70 3rd measurement 56 56 Average value 57 56.6 No7 (residential) 26.06.2019 1st measurement 53 2nd measurement 51 No baseline measurements 55 70 3rd measurement 53 for this point Average value 52.3 No8 (workplace) 26.06.2019 26.06.2019 1st measurement 77 66 2nd measurement 75 64 809 3rd measurement 75 60 Average value 75.6 63.3 *Measurements are done during the constructional works and results considered as operational.

8 Sensitive locations close to the construction site are selected for measurements

9 80 dBA is applied as TLV if the construction site is far from residential and commercial objects. Table 6. Results of dust PM2.5 and PM10 measurements conducted at points No7 and No9 on 27.06.2019 compared with MPC

Maximum permissible Dust actual concentration, concentration (MPC), mg/m3 Measurement No mg/m3 Daily Maximum operational baseline average value No7

26.06.2019 PM2.5 0.009 0.025 0.16 1st measurement PM10 0.018 0.05 0.3 *No baseline PM2.5 0.012 0.025 0.16 2nd measurement PM2.5 and PM10 0.033 PM10 0.05 0.3 PM2.5 0.01 measurements 0.025 0.16 3rd measurement for this point. PM10 0.023 0.05 0.3 PM2.5 0.01 0.025 0.16 Average value PM10 0.025 0.05 0.3 No1

26.06.2019 PM2.5 0.021 0.025 0.16 1st measurement PM10 0.046 0.05 0.3 *No baseline PM2.5 0.015 0.025 0.16 2nd measurement PM2.5 and PM10 0.036 PM10 0.05 0.3 PM2.5 0.03 measurements 0.025 0.16 3rd measurement for this point PM10 0.056 0.05 0.3 PM2.5 0.022 0.025 0.16 Average value PM10 0.046 0.05 0.3 * During the baseline survey measurements were held in accordance with local standard which defines permissible concentration for dust only. Thus, the baseline data is available in dust only and is not comparable with the operational measurement data. Taking into account the ADB`s comment on the 1st Semi-annual report the current measurements are held in accordance with the internationally acceptable parameters.

Table 7. Results of vibration level measurements conducted at points No7 on 26.06.2019 compared with TLV

Corrected and equivalent TLV for corrected corrected values, dB Measurement № Vibration category and equivalent operational baseline corrected values, dB

№7 26.06.19 1st measurement 28 Residential buildings, Baseline data 2nd measurement 26 72 clinics, rest houses is not available 3rd measurement 24 Average value 26

Conclusions

• At points №1 (Commercial), №7 (Residential) and №8 (Workplace) the equivalent noise averaged (average value of 3 measurements conducted at different daytimes during the day) values were 57 dBA, 52.3 dBA and 75.6 dBA accordingly were within the 70, 55 and 80 dBA TLV set by the Sanitary norms. • As a TLV for vibration (Residential buildings, clinics, rest houses vibration) at point 7 the 72 dB of corrected and equivalent corrected value is applied. • The main noise and vibration sources in measurement point’s №7 and №8 were operation of construction equipment as well as movement of cars and vehicles. • In point №1, the main noise and vibration source was movement of cars and vehicles along the road. • PM2.5 and PM10 (dust particles of 2.5um and 10um accordingly) concentrations at points №7 and №9 didn’t exceed the daily average (set by the WHO) and maximum permissible (national norm) concentrations for residential areas.

Lot 2: Extract from the Noise, vibration and dust assessment report N3 (June 2019)

Dust, noise and vibration instrumental measurement results for each sensitive point are summarized in Table 5 (for noise), Table 6 (for dust) and Table 7 (for vibration) accordingly.

Table 5: Results of noise measurements conducted at points №1 and №2 on 28.06.2019 compared with baseline noise measurements

Sound level Maximum sound Threshold limit Threshold limit (equivalent to sound level, LAmax, dBA value (equivalent value (maximum Measurement № level), LAeq, dBA to sound level), sound level), dBA dBA operational baseline operational baseline

№1 (workplace)

28.06.19 02.08.18 28.06.19 1st measurement 77.6 91.4 2nd measurement 71.1 84.4 No data 65 8010 3rd measurement 75.9 87.6 Average value 74.9 87.8 №2 (workplace)

28.06.19 10.08.18 28.06.19 1st measurement 66.7 84.2 2nd measurement 61.8 79.8 No data 55 80 3rd measurement 68.7 85.6 Average value 65.7 83.2

Table 6. Results of dust (PM2.5 and PM10) measurements conducted at points №1 and №2 on 28.06.2019 compared with MPC

Maximum permissible Dust actual concentration, concentration (MPC) for dust, Measurement time mg/m3 mg/m3 (from - till) operational baseline Daily average Maximum value

Dust 1 28.06.19 PM2.5 0.027 0.025 0.16 1st measurement *No baseline PM10 0.055 PM2.5 and 0.05 0.3 PM2.5 0.018 PM10 0.025 0.16 2nd measurement PM10 0.048 measurements 0.05 0.3 PM2.5 0.017 for this point. 0.025 0.16 3rd measurement PM10 0.038 0.05 0.3

10 80 dBA is applied as TLV if the construction site is far from residential and commercial objects Maximum permissible Dust actual concentration, concentration (MPC) for dust, Measurement time mg/m3 mg/m3 (from - till) operational baseline Daily average Maximum value

PM2.5 0.021 0.025 0.16 Average value PM10 0.047 0.05 0.3 Dust 2 28.06.19 PM2.5 0.008 0.025 0.16 1st measurement PM10 0.021 *No baseline 0.05 0.3 PM2.5 0.009 PM2.5 and 0.025 0.16 2nd measurement PM10 0.028 PM10 0.05 0.3 PM2.5 0.011 measurements 0.025 0.16 3rd measurement PM10 0.025 for this point. 0.05 0.3 PM2.5 0.01 0.025 0.16 Average value PM10 0.025 0.05 0.3 * During the baseline survey measurements were held in accordance with local standard which defines permissible concentration for dust only. Thus, the baseline data is available in dust only and is not comparable with the operational measurement data. Taking into account the ADB`s comment on the 1st Semi-annual report the current measurements are held in accordance with the internationally acceptable parameters.

Table 7. Results of vibration measurements conducted at points №1 and №2 on 28.06.2019 compared with TLV Corrected and equivalent TLV for corrected corrected values, dB Measurement № Vibration category and equivalent operational baseline corrected values, dB

№1 28.06.19 *Baseline 1st measurement 109.2 measurement transport-technological unit does not 2nd measurement 70.1 (2nd category) correspond to 109 3rd measurement 105.2 the current Average value 94.8 method №2 28.06.19 *Baseline 1st measurement 68.8 measurement transport-technological unit does not 2nd measurement 68.6 (2nd category) correspond to 109 3rd measurement 73.5 the current Average value 70.3 method *During the baseline survey measurements were held in accordance with local standards and measurement unit does not correspond to the current method.

Conclusions • Dust, Vibration and Noise operational measurements do not exceed the maximum averages accepted by the norms, taken as reference to this plan. • The baseline data cannot be properly compared to the current measured data, since the equipment is not the same and the method of measurement either.

Lot 3: Extract from the Noise, vibration and dust assessment report N4 (April 2019)

Dust, noise and vibration instrumental measurement results for each sensitive point are summarized in Table 5-6 (for noise), Table 7-8 (for dust) and Table 9-10 (for vibration) accordingly.

Table 5. Results of noise measurements conducted at points №5, №6 and №13 on 30.04.2019 compared with baseline noise measurements Sound level Maximum sound Threshold limit Threshold limit (equivalent to sound level, LAmax, dBA value (equivalent value (maximum Measurement № level), LAeq, dBA to sound level), sound level), dBA dBA operational baseline operational baseline

№5 (workplace)

30.04.19 02.08.18 30.04.19 02.08.18 1st measurement 69.3 70.6 88.6 92.3 2nd measurement 68.6 69.9 89.5 82.5 8011 3rd measurement 62.3 67.2 79.5 81.4 Average value 66.7 69.2 85.8 85.4 №6 (residential)

30.04.19 02.08.18 30.04.19 02.08.18 1st measurement 64.1 70.6 79.6 92.3 2nd measurement 68.3 69.9 87 82.5 55 70 3rd measurement 66.7 67.2 84.9 81.4 Average value 66.3 69.2 83.8 85.4 №13 (workplace) 30.04.19 10.10.18 30.04.19 10.10.18 1st measurement 47.8 54.4 63.1 71.3 2nd measurement 51.9 62.7 65.9 81.0 80 3rd measurement 50 58.6 63.4 79.9 Average value 49.9 59 64.1 77.4

Table 6. Results of noise measurements made at sensitive point №15 on 30.04.2019 (baseline noise measurements)

Sound level Maximum Threshold limit value Threshold limit Measurement (equivalent to sound level, (equivalent to sound value (maximum sound level), № LAmax, dBA level), dBA sound level), dBA LAeq, dBA №15 (workplace) 1st measurement 67.6 82.4 2nd measurement 65.5 79.9 80 3rd measurement 69.6 84.2 Average value 67.5 82.1

11 80 dBA is applied as TLV if the construction site is far from residential and commercial objects

Table 7. Results of dust (PM2.5 and PM10) measurements conducted at points №5, №6 and №13 on 30.04.2019 compared with dust baseline measurements

Maximum permissible concentration Dust actual (MPC) for dust, mg/m3 Measurement time concentration, mg/m3 (from - till) operational baseline Daily average Maximum value

Dust 5 30.04.19 02.08.18 PM2.5 0.008 0.024 0.025 0.16 1st measurement PM10 0.018 0.046 0.05 0.3 PM2.5 0.02 0.008 0.025 0.16 2nd measurement PM10 0.052 0.02 0.05 0.3 PM2.5 0.016 0.021 0.025 0.16 3rd measurement PM10 0.036 0.042 0.05 0.3 PM2.5 0.015 0.018 0.025 0.16 Average value PM10 0.035 0.036 0.05 0.3 Dust 6 30.04.19 02.08.18 PM2.5 0.009 0.024 0.025 0.16 1st measurement PM10 0.02 0.046 0.05 0.3 PM2.5 0.012 0.008 0.025 0.16 2nd measurement PM10 0.028 0.02 0.05 0.3 PM2.5 0.009 0.021 0.025 0.16 3rd measurement PM10 0.022 0.042 0.05 0.3 PM2.5 0.01 0.018 0.025 0.16 Average value PM10 0.023 0.036 0.05 0.3 Dust 13 30.04.19 10.10.18 PM2.5 0.008 0.023 0.025 0.16 1st measurement PM10 0.017 0.05 0.05 0.3 PM2.5 0.006 0.03 0.025 0.16 2nd measurement PM10 0.016 0.057 0.05 0.3 PM2.5 0.008 0.025 0.025 0.16 3rd measurement PM10 0.018 0.051 0.05 0.3 PM2.5 0.007 0.026 0.025 0.16 Average value PM10 0.017 0.053 0.05 0.3

Table 8. Results of dust (PM2.5 and PM10) measurements made at sensitive point №15 on 30.04.2019 (baseline dust measurements)

Maximum permissible Dust actual concentration (MPC) for dust, concentration, Measurement № mg/m3 mg/m3 Daily average Maximum value №15 (PM2.5) 1st measurement 0.008 2nd measurement 0.009 0.025 0.16 3rd measurement 0.008 Average value 0.008 №15 (PM10) 1st measurement 0.018 2nd measurement 0.018 0.05 0.3 3rd measurement 0.017 Average value 0.018

Table 9. Results of vibration measurements conducted at points №5, №6 and №13 on 30.04.2019 compared with baseline vibration measurements

Corrected and equivalent TLV for corrected corrected values, dB Measurement № Vibration category and equivalent operational baseline corrected values, dB

№5 30.04.19 02.08.18 1st measurement 105.6 98.5 transport-technological 2nd measurement 106.5 89.1 (2nd category) 109 3rd measurement 106.4 89.4 Average value 106.1 92.3 №6 30.04.19 02.08.18 1st measurement 107 98.5 transport-technological 2nd measurement 108.2 89.1 (2nd category) 109 3rd measurement 104.1 89.4 Average value 106.4 98.0 №13 30.04.19 10.10.18 1st measurement 105 91.5 transport-technological 2nd measurement 88.4 91.8 (2nd category) 109 3rd measurement 82.5 96.8 Average value 91.9 93.3

Table 10. Results of vibration measurements made at sensitive point №15 on 30.04.2019 (baseline vibration measurements)

Corrected and TLV for corrected and Measurement Vibration category equivalent corrected equivalent corrected № values, dB values, dB №15 1 106.2 transport-technological (2nd 2 103.7 category) 109 3 107.5 Average value 105.8

Conclusions

• As a TLV for evaluation of noise actual levels at measurement points №5, №13 and №15 80 dBA should be applied, as these points are considered as workplaces. 55 dBA as equivalent and 70 dBA as maximum noise levels (applied as TLVs for territories adjacent to residential buildings) are used for actual noise levels evaluation at point №6 (residential). • At points №5, №13 and №15 the equivalent noise averaged (average value of 3 measurements conducted at different daytimes during the day) values were 66.7 dBA, 49.9 dBA and 67.5 dBA accordingly were within the 80 dBA TLV set by the Sanitary norms for workplaces. • At point №6, the equivalent and maximum noise actual averaged values: 66.3 dBA and 83.8 dBA accordingly were above the TLVs (55 dBA and 70 dBA) set by the Sanitary norms for commercial areas on 11.3 dBA and 13.8 dBA. • As a TLV for vibration (transport-technological (2nd category) vibration) at points №5, №6, №13 and №15 the 109 dB of corrected and equivalent corrected value is applied. • At points №5, №6, №13 and №15 the actual levels of transport-technological (2nd category) vibration (106.1 dB, 106.4 dB, 91.9 and 105.8 dB accordingly) were below the 109 dB TLV. • The main noise and vibration sources in measurement points №5, №13 and №15 were operation of construction equipment as well as movement of cars and vehicles. • In point №6, the main noise and vibration source was movement of cars and vehicles along the M6 road. • PM2.5 and PM10 (dust particles of 2.5um and 10um accordingly) concentrations at points №5, №6, №13 and №15 don’t exceed the daily average (set by the WHO) and maximum permissible (national norm) concentrations for residential areas.

Lot 3: Extract from the Noise, vibration and dust assessment report N5 (May 2019)

Dust, noise and vibration instrumental measurement results for each sensitive point are summarized in Table 5-6 (for noise), Table 7-8 (for dust) and Table 9-10 (for vibration) accordingly.

Table 5. Results of noise measurements conducted at points №5 and №13 on 31.05.2019 compared with baseline noise measurements Sound level Maximum sound Threshold limit Threshold limit (equivalent to sound level, LAmax, dBA value (equivalent value (maximum Measurement № level), LAeq, dBA to sound level), sound level), dBA dBA operational baseline operational baseline

№5 (workplace)

31.05.19 02.08.18 31.05.19 02.08.18 1st measurement 54.5 70.6 68.6 92.3 2nd measurement 59 69.9 75.8 82.5 8012 3rd measurement 62.5 67.2 78.3 81.4 Average value 58.6 69.2 74.2 85.4 №13 (workplace) 31.05.19 10.10.18 31.05.19 10.10.18 1st measurement 50.7 54.4 69.9 71.3 2nd measurement 60.8 62.7 60.8 81.0 80 3rd measurement 48.6 58.6 60.4 79.9 Average value 53.3 59 63.7 77.4

Table 6. Results of noise measurements made at sensitive point №16 and №17 on 31.05.2019 (baseline noise measurements)

Sound level Maximum Threshold limit value Threshold limit Measurement (equivalent to sound level, (equivalent to sound value (maximum sound level), № LAmax, dBA level), dBA sound level), dBA LAeq, dBA №16 (workplace) 1st measurement 66.9 77.2 2nd measurement 65.8 74.1 80 3rd measurement 66.2 75.9 Average value 66.3 75.7 №17 (workplace) 1st measurement 69.1 88.2 2nd measurement 67 84.7 80 3rd measurement 62.7 71.6 Average value 66.2 81.5

12 80 dBA is applied as TLV if the construction site is far from residential and commercial objects

Table 7. Results of dust (PM2.5 and PM10) measurements conducted at points №5 and №13 on 31.05.2019 compared with dust baseline measurements

Maximum permissible concentration Dust actual (MPC) for dust, mg/m3 Measurement time concentration, mg/m3 (from - till) operational baseline Daily average Maximum value

Dust 5 31.05.19 02.08.18 PM2.5 0.004 0.024 0.025 0.16 1st measurement PM10 0.013 0.046 0.05 0.3 PM2.5 0.012 0.008 0.025 0.16 2nd measurement PM10 0.027 0.02 0.05 0.3 PM2.5 0.004 0.021 0.025 0.16 3rd measurement PM10 0.009 0.042 0.05 0.3 PM2.5 0.006 0.018 0.025 0.16 Average value PM10 0.016 0.036 0.05 0.3 Dust 13 31.05.19 10.10.18 PM2.5 0.017 0.023 0.025 0.16 1st measurement PM10 0.047 0.05 0.05 0.3 PM2.5 0.016 0.03 0.025 0.16 2nd measurement PM10 0.046 0.057 0.05 0.3 PM2.5 0.005 0.025 0.025 0.16 3rd measurement PM10 0.014 0.051 0.05 0.3 PM2.5 0.012 0.026 0.025 0.16 Average value PM10 0.035 0.053 0.05 0.3

Table 8. Results of dust (PM2.5 and PM10) measurements made at sensitive point №16 and №17 on 31.05.2019 (baseline dust measurements)

Maximum permissible concentration 3 Measurement № Dust actual concentration, mg/m3 (MPC) for dust, mg/m Daily average Maximum value Dust 16 PM2.5 0.01 0.025 0.16 1st measurement PM10 0.028 0.05 0.3 PM2.5 0.012 0.025 0.16 2nd measurement PM10 0.026 0.05 0.3 PM2.5 0.009 0.025 0.16 3rd measurement PM10 0.021 0.05 0.3 PM2.5 0.01 0.025 0.16 Average value PM10 0.025 0.05 0.3 Dust 17 PM2.5 0.004 0.025 0.16 1st measurement PM10 0.011 0.05 0.3 PM2.5 0.006 0.025 0.16 2nd measurement PM10 0.02 0.05 0.3 PM2.5 0.032 0.025 0.16 3rd measurement PM10 0.032 0.05 0.3 PM2.5 0.007 0.025 0.16 Average value PM10 0.021 0.05 0.3

Table 9. Results of vibration measurements conducted at points №5 and №13 on 31.05.2019 compared with baseline vibration measurements

Corrected and equivalent TLV for corrected corrected values, dB Measurement № Vibration category and equivalent operational baseline corrected values, dB

№5 31.05.19 02.08.18 1st measurement 83.3 98.5 transport-technological 2nd measurement 76.1 89.1 (2nd category) 109 3rd measurement 75.6 89.4 Average value 78.3 92.3 №13 31.05.19 10.10.18 1st measurement 79.7 91.5 transport-technological 2nd measurement 79.6 91.8 (2nd category) 109 3rd measurement 69.8 96.8 Average value 76.3 93.3

Table 10. Results of vibration measurements made at sensitive point №15 on 31.05.2019 (baseline vibration measurements)

Corrected and TLV for corrected and Measurement Vibration category equivalent corrected equivalent corrected № values, dB values, dB №16 1 74.6 transport-technological (2nd 2 68.2 category) 109 3 63.6 Average value 68.8 №17 1 86.5 transport-technological (2nd 2 85.2 category) 109 3 76.2 82.6

Conclusions • As a TLV for evaluation of noise actual levels at measurement points (workplace) №5, №13, №16 and №17 80 dBA should be applied, as these points are considered as workplaces. • At points №5, №13, №16 and №17 the equivalent noise averaged (average value of 3 measurements conducted at different daytimes during the day) values were 58.6 dBA, 53.3 dBA, 66.3 dBA and 66.2 dBA accordingly and were within the 80 dBA TLV set by the Sanitary norms for workplaces. • As a TLV for vibration (transport-technological (2nd category) vibration) at points №5, №13, №16 and №17 the 109 dB of corrected and equivalent corrected value is applied. • At points №5, №13, №16 and №17 the actual levels of transport-technological (2nd category) vibration (78.3 dB, 76.3 dB, 68.8 and 82.6 dB accordingly) were below the 109 dB TLV. • The main noise and vibration sources in measurement points №5, №13, №16 and №17 were operation of construction equipment as well as movement of cars and vehicles. • PM2.5 and PM10 (dust particles of 2.5um and 10um accordingly) concentrations at points №5, №3, №16 and №17 don’t exceed the daily average (set by the WHO) and maximum permissible (national norm) concentrations for residential areas.

Appendix 5: Photos of Incident in Lot 2

Appendix 6: Summary of Environmental Issues Encountered During the Reporting Period

Date No Site/Location Category Description of Issue Recorded The Contractor has not started the 1 Lot 1 04.02.2019 Safety vibration study yet

Lot 3 The Contractor uses 3 Dumping Sites 2 (Kapavor 19.01.2019 Environment (DS) which were not approved by the Section) Engineer. Akhtala 1 and Akhtala 2.

The Contractor hold blasting works in 3 Lot 1 12.02.2019 Safety the without method of statement and SSEMP for the works.

SEMP DS at PK 40+270 (Odzun community) was not prepared as well 4 Lot 1 21.02.2019 Environment as an issue with fuel tank was observed

The area near Alaverdi 1 DS was used 5 Lot 1 21.02.2019 Environment as dumping site without approval and soil is dumped in the river area.

The sewage from the camp goes 6 Lot 2 07.03.2019 Environment directly to the river

Secondary containment for fuel tank was provided but there is a hole in the 7 Lot 2 28.05.2019 Environment front of the secondary containment which makes the measure useless.

It was observed that old homemade 8 Lot 1 28.05.2019 Safety stove is used at the camp of Subcontractor Charagayt. It was observed that fire extinguisher is 9 Lot 1 28.05.2019 Safety missing at the camp of Subcontractor Charagayt.

SEMP for the Camp of Subcontractor 10 Lot 1 28.05.2019 Environment Charagayt is missing

It was observed that DS km 71+460 is 11 Lot 3 16.07.2019 Environment used without approved SEMP