Bi-annual Environmental Monitoring Report

Loan Nos. 2561 and 2729-ARM July–December 2013

ARM: North–South Road Corridor Investment Program, Tranches 1 and 2

Prepared by the “Organization for Implementation of North–South Road Corridor Investment Program” State Non-Commercial Organization (PMU) based on the Bi-annual Environmental Monitoring Report of the Project Management Consultant (PMC)

This bi-annual 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.

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.

Table of Contents Part I Introduction ...... 6 1. Construction activities and Project progress during reporting period ...... 7 1.1 Section 1 Ashtarak-Talin M1 road from Km29+600 to Km 71+500: ...... 7 1.2 Section 2 Yerevan-Ararat M2 Road from Km9+312 to Km47+400: ...... 7 1.3 Section 3 Yerevan-Ashtarak M1 Road from Km18+370 to Km29+773: ...... 8 2. Environmental Safeguards Staffing...... 8 2 . 1 PMU Social and Environmental Safeguards Unit ...... 9 2.2 The PMC Environmental Safeguards Unit ...... 9 2.3 The Contractor’s Environmental Unit ...... 9 Part II Environmental Management ...... 11 3. Environmental Safeguards Program ...... 11 3.1 Compliance with National Safeguards ...... 11 3.2 Compliance with ADB Safeguards ...... 11 3.3 Contractor’s Compliance with the EMP ...... 12 3.4 Evaluation and Approvals of the Sites for Quarries, Borrow Pits, Excavated Material Dumping, Topsoil Stockpiling and Concrete Batching Plants ...... 12 3.5 Presentation of Environmental Safeguards ...... 13 3.6 Archaeological Works Program ...... 14 3.7 Grievance redress mechanism and Consultations ...... 16 3.8 ADB Mission ...... 17 3.9 Communication ...... 18 Part III Environmental Monitoring ...... 20 4. Monitoring ...... 20 4.1 Monitoring of the compliance with EMPs in road Section 1, Section 2 and Section 3...... 20 4.2 Environmental monitoring of noise and vibration, water quality, air quality...... 21 4.3 PPMS indicators ...... 22 4.4 Non-compliance notices ...... 22 5. Conclusions and recommendations ...... Error! Bookmark not defined. 6. Action plan for the upcoming reporting period: ...... Error! Bookmark not defined.

A N N E X E S

ANNEX A. Ashtarak Dumping Site Inspection Report No15

ANNEX B. Reminder on request confirmation on Jrahovit pit operation

ANNEX C. Topsoil stockpiling sites in Katnaghbyur 1 (PK 64+000-PK64+080), Katnaghbyur 2 (PK 65+700-PK65+800), Yeghnik (63+650km- 64+00km) and Talin (PK km 67+580-PK 68+750)

ANNEX D. Proposed topsoil stockpiling and excavated material dumping sites in Kaqavadzor (section 1 and section 2)

ANNEX E. Topsoil stockpiling site in Nerkin Bazmaberd 1, Nerkin Bazmaberd 2 and Nerkin Bazmaberd 3

ANNEX F Excavated material dump sites in Davtashen 1 and Davtashen 2

ANNEX G. Non-compliance notices no 0109 to CEMP in Section 3

ANNEX H. Non- compliance repeated notice to Contractor

ANNEX I Implementation report on the environmental impact assessment (EIA) mitigation requirements

ANNEX J Extracts from Noise and Dust Baseline Assessment N1, N2, N3 Reports

List of Abbreviations

ADB Asian Development Bank

CEMP Contractor’s Environmental Management Plan

EMP Environmental Management Plan

EIA Environmental Impact Assessment

IEE Initial Environmental Examination

IES International Environmental Specialist

NES National Environmental Specialist

PMC Project Management Consultant organization

PMU Project Management Unit

MNP Ministry of Nature Protection

MoTC Ministry of Transport and Communications

MoC Ministry of Culture

SMP Site Management Plan

TMP Traffic Management Plan

EMR Environmental Monitoring Report Part I Introduction

The present Bi-annual Environmental Monitoring Report covers the time period between July and December of 2013.

The Report was prepared with close cooperation with PMC1.

1. The RA has selected the Bavra-Yerevan-Agarak route as the north-south road corridor to be rehabilitated, reconstructed and expanded and has appointed the “North-South road Corridor Investment Program PMU” SNCO (“NSRP” PMU SNCO) of the Ministry of Transport and Communications (MOTC) to co-ordinate the work. The Program is funded by the Asian Development Bank (ADB) under a multi-tranche funding facility (MFF).

2. The MFF is designed to rehabilitate and upgrade national north-south roads to form a new, upgraded and expanded North-South highway. The main objective is to widen the existing 2-lane roads (often in poor condition) to become 4-lane divided roads along existing alignments wherever possible or to construct new alternate 2-lane roads where a single 4-lane road would not be feasible.

3. Tranche 1 Project is to improve two road sections of the North-South Corridor, namely, the M-1 section of road north from Yerevan to Ashtarak from km 18+370 to km 29+773 (Section 3 in the contract with Contractor) and the M-2 section of road south from Yerevan to Ararat from km 9+312 to km 47+400 (Section 2 in the contract with Contractor).

4. The Tranche 2 Project starts at km 29+600 in Ashtarak and end at km 71+500 close to Talin (Section 1 in the contract with Contractor). Two bypasses will be constructed in Agarak starting at km 29+934 to km 32+600, and in Ujan from km 36+600 to km 40+300. The Project will also have a new road alignment (8.95 kilometres) at Katnagbyur starting from km 59+950 to km 68+900 that will be located on the left side of the existing highway to join the existing alignment in Talin.

1 Project Management and Supervision Consultant for T1 and T2 is the joint venture of French “Safege” and Spanish “Eptisa” companies.

Figure 1. Tranche1 and Tranche2 of North-South Road Corridor

1. Construction activities and Project progress during reporting period

During the reporting period the following construction activities were implemented:

1.1 Section 1 Ashtarak-Talin M1 road from Km29+600 to Km 71+500:

 Top soil removing and stockpiling

 Excavation and excavated material dumping works.

1.2 Section 2 Yerevan-Ararat M2 Road from Km9+312 to Km47+400:

 Earth works and demolition of structures: removal of existing pavement and curbstones, common excavation, cleaning and grubbing;

 Subgrade (capping layer h=27cm), sub base (18cm) and aggregate base course C6 preparation;

 Removal of existing traffic signs;

 Removal of existing guardrail and delivery to store;

 Reinforcement of r/c culverts;  Repair to existing bridge in Km 180+41;

 Embankment;

 Concrete pavement.

1.3 Section 3 Yerevan-Ashtarak M1 Road from Km18+370 to Km29+773:

 Earth works and demolition of structures: common excavation, rock excavation, clearing and grubbing;

 Removal of existing pavement and curbstones,

 Demolition of existing drainage structures;

 Dismantling and storage of the existing guardrails,

 Dismantling of the billboards,

 Subgrade (capping layer h=27cm), sub base (18cm) and aggregate base course C6 preparation;

 Reinforcement or installation of r/c culverts,

 Embankment;

 Concrete pavement, Also the following works were implemented: road maintenance works, flattening works at the territories of the concrete plants; transporting curbstones; installation and relocation of the safety concrete blocks; road markings for temporary traffic regulation; compacting works;

2. Environmental Safeguards Staffing

The Project Management Unit is implementing day-to-day management of project execution. The PMU includes a Social and Environmental Unit whose responsibilities include the management of all environmental aspects of the project.

The Project Management Consultant is providing Technical Assistance to the PMU in the management and reporting of the project. Environmental Safeguards Unit of the PMC 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.

Contractor is implementing construction works. Contractor’s Environmental Unit is responsible for implementation of the EMP, monitoring of the construction activities and reporting.

Monitoring Reporting

2 . 1 PMU Social and Environmental Safeguards Unit

During the reporting period the PMU Social and Environmental Safeguards Unit consist of: Social Safeguards and Environmental Officer; Social Safeguards Specialist and Environmental Specialist:

Ms. Armine Yedigaryan- Social Safeguards and Environmental Officer, is responsible for Environmental, Resettlement and social management of the project.

Mss. Sona Poghosyan- Social Safeguards Specialist is responsible for the compliance of the project to ADB’s Safeguard Policy and RA Legislation.

Mr. Gevorg Afyan – Environmental Specialist is responsible for the compliance of the project to ADB’s Environmental Policy and RA Legislation.

2.2 The PMC Environmental Safeguards Unit Presently the PMC Environmental Safeguard Unit consists of:

Ms. Edita Vardgesyan, the National Environmental Specialist (NES), manages the unit after the departure of the International Environmental Specialist. Allocation of the NES came to an end and was renewed in October.

Mr. Boris Gasparyan, the National Archaeological Specialist, is responsible for the consultancy on archaeological issues in Tranche 2, compliance of the construction activities to the Armenian archaeological related legislation and inspection visits to the borrow pit, dumping and concrete plant sites with archaeological evaluation purposes.

Mr. Charles Adamson the International Environmental Specialist leaved the project on 6 June 2013 and now the environmental section is being managed by Ms. Edita Vardgesyan, the National Environmental Specialist (NES).

2.3 The Contractor’s Environmental Unit

The Contractor’s Environmental Unit is staffed by four people:

The Quality and Environmental Manager - Mr. Vicente Jorda Garcia resigned from the position on November 30, 2013, and instead of him Angel Ramon Rubio Lopez was charged as Acting Quality and Environmental Manager.

Mr. Viktor Bakhtamyan, the Environmental Specialist, is responsible for the assistance to the Quality and Environmental Manager as a local counterpart;

Mr. Sos Amirkhanyan, the Social Relation Specialist, is responsible for the compliance of the Contractor’s activities to social part of the ADB Safeguard Policy Statement;

Mrs. Ana Maria del Hoyo Figaredo, Health and Safety Manager, is responsible for the compliance of the Contractor’s activities to health and safety part of the ADB Safeguard Policy Statement;

Part II Environmental Management

3. Environmental Safeguards Program

3.1 Compliance with National Safeguards 3.1.1 In the reporting period it was managed that construction complies with all national pertinent environmental laws and regulations. 3.1.2 Topsoil stockpiling operations in Ashtarak- Talin M1 Road Section 1 were implemented in accordance with applicable Armenian legislation and regulations, particularly RA Land Code (2001), RA Government Decision No 1396-N and RA Government Decision No 1026-N.

3.1.3 Contractor has been registered in MNP as an environmentally active economic agent and regularly provides the quarterly environmental reports in accordance with Armenian legislation. Two reports for 3rd and 4th quarters were submitted by Contractor to MNP during the reporting period.

3.1.4 Contractor applied to the MNP for nature protection expertise of the design for installation of the Masis concrete plant. On 24 August 2013 the positive conclusion was granted by RA MNP for installation and operation of the plant.

3.1.5 Contractor applied to the RA Ministry of Emergency Situations for the technological safety expertise for the operation of Masis concrete plant. The positive conclusion was granted by RA MES on 6 September 2013.

3.1.6 Contractor applied to MNP and received Atmospheric Air Pollution permits for operation of Parpi and Masis concrete plants in August and September 2014 respectively in accordance with Armenian legislative requirements. The relevant permits for Parpi and for Masis concrete plants operation were granted to Contractor on 6 September and 7 November 2013 respectively.

3.2 Compliance with ADB Safeguards 3.2.1 In order to ensure the environmental performance, it was supervised that construction activity implementation meets EMP requirements which prepared in accordance with ADB Environmental Policy.

3.2.2 Prior operating any site for dumping of construction wastes, borrowing construction material and installation of concrete plant in Road Sections 2 & 3 Contractor prepares and submits for PMC approval the Site Management Plant in fulfillment of CEMPs for Sections 2 & 3. The outline of the SMP is provided in the CEMPs and PMC approves the site operation only the provided SMP is being prepared strictly in accordance with the outline.

3.2.3 Prior to signing off on any section of work that is dependent on payment to the Contractor the PMC NES needs to be advised that the section is being finally inspected and that the PMC NES should also sign off on it as well. This is to avoid failure by the Contractor to rehabilitate areas and properly close sites. A request has been `sent to the RE asking him to make sure that the PMC NES signs off together with the engineering staff on completed work.

3.2.4 Prior operating any site for topsoil stockpiling and excavated material disposal in Ashtarak- Talin M1 Road Section 1 the Site Management Plan containing the identification of site-specific environmental imapcts, risk assessment and mitigation measures is being prepared by Contractor guided with the Environmental Safeguards Information kit prepared by ADB Central & West Asia Department Safeguards Unit. 3.2.5 A series of public hearings were implemented in communities impacted by the Project in Ashtarak- Talin M1 Road Section 1 to meet the ADB SPS (2009) requirements on information disclosure and public participation. The details were presented below in 3.7 Consultations and Grievance redress mechanism.

3.3 Contractor’s Compliance with the EMP 3.3.1 In order to ensure the environmental performance, Contractor is guided by the IEE and EMP for Tranche 1 and EIA and EMP for Tranche 2 as a part of the Bid and Contract documents as well as by the three Contractor’s Environmental Management Plans for three road sections prepared by the contractor that detail on site environmental management requirements implementation and management, particularly construction impacts mitigation, monitoring and reporting requirements.

3.4 Evaluation and Approvals of the Sites for Quarries, Borrow Pits, Excavated Material Dumping, Topsoil Stockpiling and Concrete Batching Plants 3.4.1 The areas designated by the Ashtarak municipality for disposal of the excavated material generated on the Road Section 3 were evaluated from environmental and archaeological point of view on 8 and 9 July, 2013. It was stated that no significant environmental and archaeological issues should hinder the site use for the aforementioned purposes. (ANNEX A). The SMP was submitted and approved.

3.4.2 On 24 July 2013 an evaluation visit was done to Jrahovit borrow pit to check the compliance of site operation to the SMP requirements, as well as to check improved situation for identified defects that were subject to non-compliance notice issued 20 May 2013. (ANNEX B). Currently the operation of the site is temporarily stopped but the site will be kept according to the contract signed with the head of Jrahovit community till the end of construction activities. By the end of the operation the site shall be closed and rehabilitated in accordance with SMP for Jrahovit borrow pit site.

3.4.3 SMP for Parpi concrete plant prepared by Contractor were approved in fulfillments of the CEMP requirements.

3.4.4 An inspection visit was done to Ashtarak dump site on 23 August 2013 on response to the Contractor’s notification on the completion of the site operation.

It was stated that the site closure works were completed and the surface was smoothed evenly. The site was cleared from any machinery and any waste or garbage. The access roads were in satisfactory condition. No traces of spillages or other damages were noticed. According to the SMP there were no further obligations of Contractor.

3.4.5 The approval of SMP for Masis concrete plant was issued on 30 August 2013.. Visit on 30 September 2013 showed no significant environmental issues.

3.4.6 On 6 November 2013, 2 sites in Katnaghbyur community, 2 sites in Yeghnik community and 1 site in Talin proposed by the Contractor for topsoil stockpiling and for excavated material dumping were visited. The visit showed no significant problems in topsoil stockpiling and the Contractor was allowed to pile the topsoil conditioned that the topsoil SMP will be finalized and re-submitted according to PMC comments (ANNEX C). The site management plan for topsoil stockpiling was revised to meet requirements of ADB set for SMPs in the “Environmental Safeguards information kit” prepared by Safeguards Unit in Central and West Asia Department, ADB.

3.4.7 On 12 November 2013, 2 sites in Kaqavadzor community proposed by the Contractor for topsoil stockpiling (Kaqavadzor 1) and for excavated material dumping (Kaqavadzor 2) were visited. The visit showed that the sites were sensitive from environmental and archaeological points of view and the operation was undesirable. The findings of the visit: site descriptions, sensitive receptors and recommendations were presented in the inspection report N23 (ANNEX D)

3.4.8 On 19 November 2013 field visit 3 sites in Nerkin Bazmaberd for topsoil stockpiling (Nerkin Bazmaberd 1) and for excavated material dumping (Nerkin Bazmaberd 2, Nerkin Bazmaberd 3) were introduced. The visit showed no significant problems in topsoil stockpiling and the Contractor was recommended to proceed with necessary procedures to secure the site and to prepare the SMPs. The findings of the visits: site descriptions, sensitive receptors and recommendations for SMP development are presented in the Inspection reports N24, 25, 26 (ANNEX E). Draft versions of SMPs for dumping of excavated material in Nerkin Bazmaberd and Katnaghbyur community are currently in the process of review.

3.4.9 On 26 November 2013, 2 sites in Davtashen community proposed by the Contractor were visited: one for excavated material dumping (Davtashen 1) and second for topsoil stockpiling (Davtashen 2). The visit showed no significant problems in topsoil stockpiling and the Contractor was recommended to proceed with necessary procedures to secure the site and to prepare the SMPs. The findings of the visits: site descriptions, sensitive receptors and recommendations for SMP development were presented in the Inspection reports N27, 28 (ANNEX F)

3.5 Presentation of Environmental Safeguards 3.5.1 On 19 July 2013 awareness raising orientation on environmental safeguards was held in Yerevan office by the PMC NES. The PMC newly recruited staff members were present. The PMC NES presented the ADB Safeguards Policy, some relevant provisions of Armenian legislation, as well as EIA and EMP key requirements. She explained to new site supervisors their daily monitoring responsibilities and appealed to be cooperative.

3.5.2 On 16 and 17 September 2013, environmental teams of the PMU, PMC and Contractor participated in the training on environmental safeguards organized and provided by ADB. The new requirements on preparation of site-specific management plans and the risk assessment of impacts for mitigation measures, as well as other requirements on monitoring and participation of an environmental specialist in the tender evaluation process were introduced.

3.5.3 On 23 September 2013 the PMU and PMC environmental teams participated in the training on FIDIC organized and provided by Safege-Eptisa.

3.6 Archaeological Works Program During the reporting period the following activities were implemented:

3.6.1 All the permits from the Ministry of Culture for the excavations along Tranche 2 based on the Report and Archaeological works Guidance for Tranche 2 were obtained by the end of July 2013.

3.6.2 Series of field visits together with the officials from the MOC, Contractor and the excavation entities have been implemented with the purpose for further division of work areas between the excavating entities (Institute of Archaeology and Ethnography of the NAS of Armenia and Historical and Cultural Heritage Research Center), to draft contracts for excavation works at Talin, Katnaghbyur, Davtashen, Verin Sasnashen and Nerkin Sasnashen archaeological sites based on the Archaeological Works Plan.

3.6.3 Finalization of the Archaeological Works Plan for km 40.600 to km. 58.600, including Kosh, Shamiram, Aruch, Agarak (Talin), Kakavadzor and Nerkin Bazmaberd and submission to PMC and PMU, as well as to the Contractor and to the excavating entity (the Historical and Cultural Heritage Research Center).

3.6.4 Assistance in excavation started in Talin, Katnaghbyur, Agarak, Verin Sasnashen and Nerkin Sasnashen and Davtashen particularly the outline of the RoW and introduction of the main excavation units according to the Archaeological Works Plan have been provided to excavating entities.

3.6.5 Series of monitoring visits were done to monitor the progress in archeological excavation works in Talin, Katnaghbyur, Davtashen, Verin Sasnashen, Nerkin Sasnashen Nerkin Bazmaberd, Kaqavadzor and Agarak communities, the compliance of implemented works with contracts signed between Contractors and excavating entities, with Archaeological Works Plan (AWP) and time schedule to avoid any delays.

3.6.6 The contracts for excavations in Nerkin Bazmaberd and Kaqavadzor communities were signed between excavation entity and Contractor.

3.6.7 Excavation works were finished at the following archaeological sites during the reporting period: Katnaghbyur, Davtashen, Verin Sasnashen, Nerkin Bazmaberd and Kaqavadzor and were stopped in Agarak historical-cultural preserve due to the end date of the contract and cold weather conditions. Proposal from the Institute of Archaeology and Ethnography to continue the excavations of the Agarak historical cultural preserve during spring-summer 2014 have been reviewed in order to bring into correspondence with Archaeological Works Plan (AWP) and with the contract with excavating entity and submitted to the Contractor to initiate the discussion of the proposal.

3.6.8 The excavation implementation in accordance with AWP in Nerkin Sasnashen was finished, but a new archaeological site was discovered during the digging works, which was missing in the AWP. The newly discovered site was assessed by PMC Archaeology Specialist as a site with archaeological and scientific significance. The excavating unit was continuing the works in spite of the instructions of Contractor as a Client to stop the further excavations in the area which was out of the RoW and AWP. Mr. Hakob Simonyan, the head of the excavating entity was proposed to write a report on the historical and archaeological significance of the newly discovered site and to provide a justification on the excavations out of the scopes of AWP. Should the PMU approve the additional excavations, they could be started in 2014. Currently the excavations were stopped and the report is still awaited.

3.6.9 The Archaeological Works Plan (Armenian version) for the Parpi, Voskevaz, Agarak, Aghtsk and Ujan communities (Km 29.600 – Km 40.600) was prepared and submitted to PMC, PMU, Contractor and excavating entities. Also the Summary of the AWP containing detailed description of the methodology and principles of calculations of the excavated portions of the archaeological sites within the RoW, as well as safeguard mitigation measures was also provided.

3.6.10 Proposal on re-design of the Agarak-Aruch and Kosh interchanges with the purpose to escape significant excavation costs and delays of commencement of construction works is officially submitted to PMU on 2 December 2013. In the respond letter the PMC was charged with the task to provide the detailed calculation of possible excavation costs and estimated time delays, as well as present the LARP issues that may arise in the result of re-design of the interchanges.

3.6.11 A summary report on current status of contracts with excavating units and status of excavations implemented by the end of reporting period is presented in the Table below.

Summary Table on Status of Excavations as of 31 December 2013

Community Name of site Exacavating Contract Status of entity signed works

1 Parpi Nerkin Naver CHPC at MOC No not started

2 Agarak Agarak Historical- IAE of NAS Yes on-going Cultural Preserve

3 Aghtsk Aghtsk-1 tomb field CHPC at MOC No not started

4 Aruch Aruch archaeological CHPC at MOC No not started complex

5 Agarak (Talin) Hellenistic city CHPC at MOC No not started remains

6 Kaqavadzor Kakavadzor tomb field CHPC at MOC Yes finished

7 Nerkin Bazmaberd N. Bazmaberd tomb CHPC at MOC Yes finished field

8 Verin&Nerkin Sasnashen CHPC at MOC Yes Verin Sasnashen archaeological Sasnashen complex finished, Nerkin Sasnashen on-going

9 Davtashen Davtashen IAE of NAS Yes finished archaeological complex

10 Katnaghbyur Katnaghbyur IAE of NAS Yes finished archaeological complex

11 Talin Talin tomb field IAE of NAS Yes finished

3.7 Grievance redress mechanism and Consultations 3.7.1 Grievance redress mechanism to address the complaints/suggestions of communities on excessive dust, noise, improper waste dumping and on other environmental issues i s established which is described in Tranche 2 Environmental Impact Assessment. The grievance redress mechanism is additional to the existing channels of petitions in the form of letters and personal pleas established by local governments.

The Grievance Procedure and Redress Mechanism steps are shown graphically in figure 2.

Figure 2. Grievance Procedure and Redress Mechanism

Contractor provided the Complaints Register book to every impacted community which is kept at the office of head of the community and is open accessed to community members. Also the posters posted in every community containing the contact information where to apply should any disturbances occur. Mr. Sos Amirkhanyan, the Contractor’s Social Relation Specialist, is responsible for collecting concerns about project activity. His telephone number, email address, and name is posted on the posters. No complains and/or suggestions on environmental issues are registered as of today.

3.7.2 On August 15 the public consultation was held in Masis community administrative center as a consistent part of the EIA and environmental expertise procedure according to the Armenian legislation. The public consultation was organized by the “Environmental Expertise” SNCO, MNP and the Contractor as an initiator of the project.

The purpose of the consultation was to inform the affected community on possible environmental impacts during the installation and operation of the concrete plant. The possible environmental impacts of the project were presented by Contractor’s environmental specialist. It was emphasized that impact shall be temporary and all emissions shall be in the limits of the permitted standards.

The public consultation resulted in the decision to approve the project design.

3.7.3 On 3 September the public hearings were held in Nerkin Sasnashen and Verin Sasnashen, on 4 September in Katnaghbyur and Davitashen communities’ administrative centers, on 19 September in Yeghnik village, on 2 October in Talin and on 12 November in Nerkin Bazmaberd and Kaqavadzor communities in the scope of public participation and information disclosure program for Section 1.

The purpose of the hearings was to inform the affected communities on possible environmental impacts during the construction works. The possible environmental impacts and planned mitigation measures of the project were presented by Contractor’s environmental specialist. It was emphasized that impact shall be temporary and all emissions shall be in the limits of the permitted standards. Also the grievance redress mechanism was presented. The complaints register-book was handed to responsible person selected by community and the special posters with contact information posted.

No environmentally related concerns were raised by the public hearings’ present participants.

3.8 ADB Mission 3.8.1 ADB mission took place from 21 October to 29 October 2013. ADB mission visited the former dumpsite in Ayntap, the concrete plant in Masis, borrow pit sites in Dashtakert and Jrahovit in road Section 2 and the former dumpsite in Ashtarak, and Parpi concrete batching plant of road Section 3 as well as archaeological excavated sites of road Section 1.

3.8.2 Discussed issues are

- Workers PPE a work safety issues: particularly a worker didn’t wear dust mask in Masis concrete batching plant. The issue was resolved and next day during our visit to Parpi concrete batching plant it was noticed that workers wore dust masks. - Formal post-closure handover of borrow pits and dumping sites: Contractor usually signs delivery and acceptance act with head of communities on monthly bases for borrowed or dumped material respectively, based on contracts with head of communities. - Site specific EMPs for the wetland area: The mission visited the site described in Tranche 2 EIA as a wetland in the floodplain of Shahverd River that is neither a Ramsar site nor a protected area. It is a small marsh close to existing highway bridge and approximately 77 m away from under construction highway (see scheme of Road section close to Shaverd wetland on page 87). It is agreed as this area is not close to the Construction site, there is no need for the Site specific EMPs. However, necessary mitigation measures will be implemented to minimize possible adverse impact on this area. - The 13th century Aruch medieval Caravanserai: necessity of Site specific EMP for Aruch historic site was discussed to protect it from the negative impact in process of construction particularly from vibration. - Proposed realignment for Kosh, Agarak - Aruch and archeological sites: Engineers archeological specialist proposed realignment for cloverleaves which will give an opportunity not to enter of these archeological areas and to avoid additional archeological excavation works. PMU is waiting for proposed design and costs, after which final decision will be made. - FAM updating – By the consultancy of ADB mission, some required updates has been done in FAM by PMU and ADB’s Project Implementation Consultant and submitted to the ADB approval

3.9 Communication During the reporting period regular meetings and discussions to communicate the project related issues took place with ADB mission, PMC management and environmental team, official authorities and Contractor’s management and environmental team, particularly the issues on contracts with archaeological excavating companies; issues on topsoil and excavated material disposal, necessity to revise the monitoring checklist template were discussed.

3.9.1 Communication with Contractor’s environmental team took place via official letters, emails, phone calls and personal contacts. Regular weekly meetings took place between specialists of the PMC Environmental Safeguards Unit and the Contractor’s Environmental Unit, on which specialists of the PMU Environmental and Social Unit were also participated. Various issues were discussed. Particularly the following issues were touched during the reporting period:

- Trees in Section 3 median,

- The non-compliances issued in July, particularly the dust control issue and follow up measures,

- Update on baseline data collection and reporting,

- Opening of new dumping sites in Section 3 due to the fact the previousely operated site has been closed,

- Archaeological progress and contracts with excavating entities,

- Outline of SMPs for topsoil, excavated soil and other construction material dumping and stockpiling,

- Waste removal from construction sites as a repeated non- conformance,

- Unpermitted dumping on-site in Section 2 near the Artashat Bridge: Contractor reported that the situation was improved and provided proof pictures,

- Work safety were touched like uniform absence, unsafe practices detected on-site,

- Situation in concrete plants: wastewater, mud, - Regular Monitoring findings,

- Other routine issues

Part III Environmental Monitoring

4. Monitoring

Monitoring activities were carried out during the reporting period according to the Monitoring program developed based on the ADB safeguards and EMP requirements. The PMC Monitoring program includes:

(1) The monitoring of the compliance of construction activities in the road Sections 2 and 3 to the EMP requirements, as well as monitoring of topsoil stockpiling and excavated material disposal in road Section 1;

(2) Environmental monitoring of noise and vibration, water quality, air quality, and flora and fauna monitoring in road Section 1,

(3) Collection of monitoring data and providing to the PPMS.

4.1 Monitoring of the compliance with EMPs in road Section 1, Section 2 and Section 3. 4.1.1 Monitoring program for road Sections 1, 2 and 3 includes:

(1) Monitoring site visits on monthly basis with the monitoring sheet filled in by the PMC environmental staff;

(2) Completion of the monitoring checklist and summary of compliances and non-compliances;

(3) Unscheduled monitoring visits when needed;

(3) Issue the non-compliance notices to the Contractor;

(4) Review of the Contractor’s weekly monitoring reports.

4.1.2 Regular monitoring carried out by the PMC environmental team during the reporting period showed that the most frequent non- conformances were:  Dust control measures were ineffective;

 Removal of construction waste and garbage from site was implemented not properly. Some amount of the waste is just left on-site and on roadsides and is not removed to the approved dump sites;

 Waste collection containers have been provided in insufficient amount;

 All the types of wastes were mixed and not sorted;

 Some cases of dumping of construction waste on unapproved improper sites are detected;

 Some issues on the Masis and Parpi concrete plant areas were present, particularly effluent waste water appeared on-site. The mud is appeared as a result of non-effective runoff which could be spread out with vehicles tires;  Contractor’s representative either was not on-site or was in ignorance that he is responsible and in charge to ensure the environmental compliance.

 Fire extinguisher and the first aid kit are not available at construction camp or are locked and thus not accessible to workers;

 Not all workers are wearing the uniform on-site. Some of them, especially drivers, were not provided with the uniform;

 Some workers were not trained in environmental and safety safeguards, especially the newly recruited ones.

In some cases the mitigation is evaluated as partly effective.

The Contractor is always being informed on the detected non- conformances and is demanded to improve within the deadlines set and report on improvement. Contractor reported on the situation via emails, on the weekly meetings and in the monthly report. Improvement has been checked during the next monitoring visit. The unimproved non-conformances were qualified as non-compliances and notices issued (see 4.4. Non-compliance notices).

4.1.3 Monitoring of the topsoil stockpiling and dumping of the excavated material in Section 1 has been implemented once during the reporting period on 30 November.

The most significant detected non-conformances were:

 Site management plans for the site operation were in the process of preparation and the sites were being operated without approved SMPs;

 Not all newly recruited workers were trained on environmental and safety issues.

4.2 Environmental monitoring of noise and vibration, water quality, air quality. This part is relevant for Ashtarak- Talin road Section 1.

4.2.1 During the reporting period Contractor started the process of negotiations with ATMS Solutions LTD for baseline data collection and further monitoring of dust, noise and vibration. On 31 July 2013 the final approval of the Water, Noise, Vibration and Dust Instrumented Monitoring Plan submitted by Contractor was issued.

4.2.2 According to Water, Noise, Vibration and Dust instrumented Monitoring Plan for Section 1 Ashtarak to Talin (km 29+600 to km 71+500) instrumented monitoring was implemented in points Vibration 1 (PK 50+700), Dust 9 (PK 50+800), Noise 8 (PK 50+900) as a baseline monitoring and Dust 1, Noise 1 (Parpi Concrete plant), Dust 10 (PK 63+200), Dust 11 (PK 69+000) as an operational monitoring (Baseline monitoring for Dust 1, Noise 1, Dust 10, Dust 11 was done on 25.07.2013 and 26.07.2013). The measurement points are selected based on on-going construction works criteria. Measured values in all points are in the limits of RA norms and standards; and do not exceed the baseline data. Detailed information on the results of regular monitoring is presented in the Noise and Dust Assessment Reports (see extracts from three reports ANNEX K).

4.2.3 Due to seasonally stopped civil works the instrumented monitoring data collection in Section 1 is also suspended and will be re-started as soon as the civil works are re-commenced. The baseline data collection will be implemented in accordance with Water, Noise, Vibration and Dust instrumented Monitoring Plan for Section 1 in January 2014.

4.3 PPMS indicators 4.3.1 The following environmental performance indicators for the reporting period are reported to be included into PPMS:

4.3.2 Quarterly number of environmental non-compliance notices from PMC to Contractor based on standards for storm water, noise, dust and vibration, and on any breaches of the EIA and EMP regularly measured by PMC or by Contractor under PMC’s control: 1 non-compliance and 1 non-compliance repeated notices. No unsolved notices are registered by the end of reporting period.

4.3.3 Quarterly numbers of environmental complaints from communities along the Ashtarak-Talin road section, from 2013 to 2016 based on Contractor’s records of complaints verified by PMC: 0- no environmentally related complains are received and registered during reporting period.

4.4 Non-compliance notices The Contractor was always informed on the detected non-compliances and was demanded to improve within the deadlines set and report on improvement. Some of them were improved immediately, others were improved progressively and the rest were in the process of improvement.

4.4.1 Non-compliance notices issued to the Contractor. During the reporting period 1 “non- compliance” notice and 1 “non-compliance repeated” notice are issued to the Contractor (ANNEX H).

4.4.2 Follow up of non-compliances.

In the reply letter to the non-compliance dated 8 July 2013 Ref N CC/130708/484 the Contractor assured that the sub-contractor responsible for the detected non-conformances was notified accordingly and measures would be taken to improve the non-compliances.

4.4.2.1 The follow up inspections showed that

(i) Dust control although better managed still could not be considered as effective.

(ii) Trucks were operating using covers.

(iii) The amount of safety barriers was increased but still not sufficient

4.4.2.2 Following the non-compliance notice issued 2 July 2013, the dust control issue was repeatedly raised by PMC site- inspectors in Section 3 who found that the measures undertaken by Contractor were insufficient. Nevertheless the Contractor’s measures turned to be temporal and not sustainable.

4.4.2.3 A non-compliance repeated notice was issued to Contractor on 29 July 2013 based on the results of the PMC NES monitoring visit to road Section 3 carried out on 26 July 2013. Contractor was requested to ensure more effective and permanent solution of the problem

The respond actions were undertaken in August. Contractor increased the quantity of water machinery operating both in Section 2 and Section 3. The machinery was mostly equipped with water- sprinkling devices. Contractor held training on dust control for foremen and workers. During the monitoring visits it was stated that the dust control in Section 2 was implemented satisfactory and in Section 3 was much improved. (ANNEX I)

5. Conclusions and recommendations

5.1 During the reporting period it was managed to ensure the compliance of Project activities to the national legislation such as Contractor’s quarterly environmental reports regularly submitted to RA MoNP, application and obtaining of the positive conclusion of nature protection expertise and conclusion of technological expertise of RA MoES for Masis concrete plant, atmospheric air pollution permits for operation of Parpi and Masis concrete plants (3.1.1- 3.1.6).

5.2 Also the compliance to ADB environmental safeguards was ensured such as Contractor’s environmental management plans, approval of Site-specific Environmental Management Plans containing the identification of site-specific environmental impacts, risk assessment and mitigation measures, as well as series of public hearings implemented in communities impacted by the Project in pursuance of ADB SPS (2009) requirements on information disclosure and public participation (for the details see 3.2.1-3.2.5)

5.3 The dumping, borrow pit, concrete plant installation and topsoil stockpiling sites have been approved by PMC prior to the start of site operation and upon the closure via the series of site visits. Totally 1 dump site in Ashtarak was closed and 1 another Ashtarak dump site is approved during the reporting period, 1 site in Jrahovit borrow pit is temporarily stopped, the SMP for Masis concrete plant has been approved, as well as a series of inspection visits to Yeghnik, Katnaghbyur, Nerkin Bazmaberd and Talin communities has been carried out and permission to go on with SEMP preparation was given to Contractor (3.4.1- 3.4.9).

5.4 An awareness raising program went on during the reporting period. An awareness raising orientation on environmental safeguards was held for PMC staff and regular trainings for Contractor’s newly recruited workers and staff members. On the other hand the environmental teams of PMU, PMC and Contractor attended the trainings on environmental safeguards organized and provided by ADB (3.5.1- 3.5.3).

5.5 Archaeological works program included the excavation works in Agarak, Kaqavadzor, Nerkin Bazmaberd, Verin & Nerkin Sasnashen, Davtashen and Katnaghbyur and the monitoring of the works. In some of them the excavations are completed in others the works are temporarily stopped and will be re- started as soon as weather conditions are favorable (see the Summary Table) . Archaeological Works Plan for km 40.600 to km. 58.600, including Kosh, Shamiram, Aruch, Agarak (Talin), Kaqavadzor and Nerkin Bazmaberd, as well as for the Parpi, Voskevaz, Agarak, Aghtsak and Ujan communities (Km 29.600 – Km 40.600) have been prepared and submitted to PMU, Contractor and excavating entities (3.6.1-3.6.11).

5.6 Regular communication with impacted communities took place and the grievance redress mechanism has been established in all communities. No complains and/or suggestions on environmental related issues such as excessive dust, noise, improper waste dumping, etc. are registered by the end of reporting period (3.7.1-3.7.3).

5.7 Regular meetings to communicate the project related issues took place with ADB mission, PMU management and environmental team, and Contractor’s management and environmental team. (3.8.1- 3.9.1). 5.8 During the reporting period the monitoring activities were carried out which included baseline data collection, monitoring of noise and vibration, water and air quality in Section 1, monitoring to check compliance of civil works to the Contractor’s EMPs in Sections 2&3. The environmental monitoring showed that the dust, noise and vibration measurements don’t exceed the Armenian standards and Baseline data. The non-conformances detected during the monitoring visits were reflected in the monitoring checklists and the majority of them were improved immediately or during the time period set for improvement. Only the non-conformances which were not improved during the time set resulted in non-compliance notices issued to the Contractor. Number of environmental non-compliance notices from PMC to Contractor was 1 non-compliance notice and 1 non-compliance repeated notices on the ineffective dust control measures implemented by Contractor. Non-compliance was progressively resolved and no unsolved notices are registered by the end of reporting period (4.1-4.4).

6. Action plan for the reporting period from January to June 2014:

N Action Time frame Responsible Continuity in next reporting period (Jul- Dec 2014) 1 Consultancy provided to Apr- May 2014 PMC No input is Contractor’s environmental planned team on ADB Safeguard Policy Statement 2 Consultancy provided to Every month PMC To be continued Contractor’s environmental during Jan- June team on the Armenian 2014 Environmental legislation requirements 3 Evaluation site visits and Upon PMU/PMC To be continued assistance to the Contractor in Contractor’s the development of Site- request specific Environmental Management Plans for topsoil stockpiling and excavated material dump sites in Section 1 and other routine working documents. 4 Update the CEMP Apr- May 2014 PMU/PMC No input is (Contractor’s Environmental planned Management Plan) for Section 1 to meet ADB requirements which were presented at a training session for national consultants held in October 2013. 5 Review the outputs of the Every month PMC To be continued construction monitoring during Jan- July program with regard to 2014 measurement of dust, noise, water quality and vibration. 6 Formalize the integration of Apr- May 2014 PMC No input is environmental compliance planned requirements within the civil works supervision program. 7 Monitor the Contractor’s By the end of PMU/PMC To be continued construction works to ensure every month the compliance with EMP requirements in Sections 1, 2 and 3; 8 Review training requirements May 2014 PMC No input is for PMU, PMC management planned staff, Contractor and Sub- contractors. Prepare materials and undertake training as required. 9 Regular awareness orientation Upon the need PMC To be continued sessions for newly recruited PMC staff 10 Review the environmental April 2014 PMU/PMC No input is monitoring checklist with planned regard to current requirements and update as required. 11 Collect and provide the End of March PMU/PMC To be continued relevant information on 2014 environmental indicators to End of June PPMS 2014 12 Assistance and monitoring of Every month PMC To be continued the archaeological excavations during the in accordance with excavations archaeological Works Plan for Tranche 2 13 Review and addressing the End of every PMU/PMC To be continued GRM month 14 Other routine issues like Upon the need PMU/PMC To be continued unscheduled site visits, follow up of the detected defects, environmental assessment of re-designs, management of tree cutting, review and approval of Contractor’s documents, etc. 15 Reporting on environmental Monthly PMU/PMC To be continued safeguards Bi-annual

ANNEX A. Ashtarak Dumping Site Inspection Report No15

1. Introduction

On 9 July 2013 Mrs. Edita Vardgesyan, the SAFEGE- Eptisa NES, along with Mr. Viktor Bakhtamyan, the Contractor’s ES, and Mr. Sos Amirkhanyan, Contractor’s SS, visited two sites where the excavated material from the Section 3 is supposed to be disposed on behalf of Ashtarak municipality for community needs near Ashtarak town. An additional visit was done by Mr. Boris Gasparyan the day before on 8 July 2013.

The sites are being recommended by Ashtarak Municipality and are being selected by the Contractor.

The purpose of the visits was to evaluate the site from environmental and archaeological points of view to issue further approval to use.

2. Site description, plot N1: a. Location: The inspected site is located near the Ashtarak town, Aragatsotn marz, Armenia about 200m from the Ashtarak-Agarak crossroads towards Ashtarak town. b. Site characteristics: The site is about 1.6 ha and 3-4 m deep uneven pit (the death of the pits varies) situated in arid environment which roughly estimated may contain about - excavated material, rocky, upper surface is plain landscape, no soil layer which could be disturbed, no vegetation. c. Drainage and water supply system. No drainage and/or water pipelines are observed which could be affected. d. Distance from highway and condition of road access: the site is adjacent to the highway which is in average asphalt paved condition. e. Presence of any infrastructure and utilities: The nearest building with garden is private property in close vicinity on a distance about 10 m on left side, privately owned land plots on the front side on distance about 25m which could be affected if operation of the site is improperly managed. f. Status of the land: selected site is Ashtarak cimmunity’s property municipal category (sub-category “other type of land”), currently not used but there is some amount of garbage dumped into the pit.

4. Findings: a. No environmental and no archaeological issues have been identified with the site

5. Recommendations and findings: a) The findings show that there are no major concerns with the site; therefore the Contractor may proceed with securing the use of the site pre- conditioned that the existing pit will be used for disposal and no additional land from surface will be involved for permanent use. Special protective measures will be taken not to damage the garden and not to disturbed the house. b) The Contractor will need to prepare a SMP according to CEMP requirements with particular reference to

i. Dust ii. Noise iii. Site safety iv. Site rehabilitation v. A traffic management plan. To be prepared according to CEMP requirements with particular attention to households in close vicinity; vi. A community advise program will need to be arranged for the surrounding communities as follows: (i) Before and (ii) during operation.

On completion of the SMP the SMP is to be submitted to the RE for approval together with supporting documents which include:

a. Copy of the agreement with the head of Ashtarak community to use the site for disposal of the excavated material for community purposes.

2. Site description , plot N2: a. Location: The inspected site is located near the Ashtarak town, Aragatsotn marz, Armenia on the Ashtarak-Agarak crossroads. b. Site characteristics: The site is about 4000 m2 surface and 3-5 m deep uneven pit (the death of the pits varies) situated in arid environment which roughly estimated may contain about - excavated material, rocky, upper surface is plain landscape, no soil layer which could be disturbed, no vegetation. c. Drainage and water supply system. There is a storm water pipe under the existing roadbed which could be affected if the site operation is improperly managed. d. Distance from highway and condition of road access: the site is adjacent to the highway which is in good asphalt paved condition. e. Presence of any infrastructure and utilities: There is no buildings or other infrastructures in close vicinity which could be affected if operation of the site is improperly managed. f. Status of the land: selected site is Ashtarak cimmunity’s property municipal category (sub-category “other type of land”), currently not used.

4. Findings: a. No significant environmental and no archaeological issues have been identified with the site.

5. Recommendations and findings: a) The findings show that there are no major concerns with the site; therefore the Contractor may proceed with securing the use of the site pre- conditioned that the existing pit will be used for disposal and no additional land from surface will be involved for permanent use, as well as special protective measures shall be envisaged for storm water pipes. b) The Contractor will need to prepare a SMP according to CEMP requirements with particular reference to

vii. Dust viii. Noise ix. Site safety x. Site rehabilitation xi. A traffic management plan. To be prepared according to CEMP requirements with particular attention to households in close vicinity; xii. A community advise program will need to be arranged for the surrounding communities as follows: (ii) Before and (ii) during operation.

On completion of the SMP the SMP is to be submitted to the RE for approval together with supporting documents which include:

b. Copy of the agreement with the head of Ashtarak community to use the site for disposal of the excavated material for community purposes.

Mrs Edita Vardgesyan,

SAFEGE-Eptisa NES

Mr. Boris Gasparyan

SAFEGE-Eptisa Archaeological Expert

ANNEX B. Reminder on request confirmation on Jrahovit pit operation.

ANNEX C. Topsoil stockpiling sites in Katnaghbyur 1 (PK 64+000-PK64+080), Katnaghbyur 2 (PK 65+700-PK65+800), Yeghnik (63+650km- 64+00km) and Talin (PK km 67+580-PK 68+750)

(SITE INSPECTION REPORTS from N19 to N22)

Introduction

Inspection visit was carried out on 6 November 2013 by Mrs Edita Vardgesyan, PMC NES, Mr. Boris Gasparyan, PMC National Archaeologist, Mr. Viktor Bakhtamyan, Contractor’s environmental specialist, Mr. Sos Amirkhanyan Contractor’s social specialist and Mr. Gevorg Afyan, PMU Social and Environmental Safeguards Unit, environmental specialist.

Purpose of visit: to evaluate the sites and the started operations on stockpiling of the topsoil.

1. Topsoil stockpiling sites in Katnaghbyur 1 (PK 64+000-PK64+080) a. Location – Katnaghbyur community b. Site characteristics: The proposed site is situated in an arid undisturbed environment, rocky slightly inclined terrain; typical steppe not significant vegetation. There is a seasonally dry not deep gorge on the foothill of considered site.

c. Drainage system: Site is situated favorable not to interfere with natural drainage of the ecosystem (natural drainage is taking place presumably through the gorge). No manmade drainage lines are present. d. Distance from highway: Site is located in some 275 m from the existing highway and in some 10m almost adjacent to the N-S highway under construction. There is a field earth road in average condition which will be used as an access road to the site of stockpiling by workers and light traffic. No heavy machinery and trucks will use this access road. They will approach the stockpiling site using the RoW of the road under construction.

Existing highway

Access road from the highway to the site N-S Highway under construction e. Distance from settlements, residential and other buildings: the nearest village- Davtashen-is about 595 m far away; Katnaghbyur village is on some 1590 m distance; arable land on left side of the access road is private property. f. Presence of any infrastructure and utilities: The only infrastructure is drinking water pipeline in some 30 m near the site which may be impacted. g. Status of the land – community agriculture land of pasture category. h. Area of land to be occupied: 14433.8 m2 i. Amount to be removed: Total in Katnaghbyur community 28 000 m3. j. Findings

- The operations on the stockpiling of the topsoil were already started and were in progress. The topsoil is being dumped in the above mentioned sites and levelled. Light smoothing with small tractor is being implemented to prevent the scattering and spillage of the topsoil material.

- Special protective measures are needed for protection of

(i) drinking water pipeline;

(ii) adjacent pastures and field roads;

- No further environmental and archaeological issues were observed by PMC NES and NA. k. Sensitive receptors:

Adjacent pastures and field roads

L. Recommendations

-May proceed with the site will need to prepare a SMP according to the ADB requirements.

-Submit SMP for PMC approval with the Head of Community approvals.

- Protective fencing is not sufficient to prevent the scattering of the valuable material so the reinforcement of the fencing is needed.

- Escape the further dumping of topsoil close to the edges of proposed site.

- Improve the condition of access road before closing the site and hand out to communities.

2. Topsoil stockpiling site in Katnaghbyur 2 (PK 65+700-PK65+800) a. Location – Katnaghbyur community b. Site characteristics: The proposed site is situated in an arid environment, rocky slightly inclined terrain; typical steppe not significant vegetation. The site was previously disturbed supposedly for mining purposes. There is a source of water and moisture of unknown origin in the land plot just adjacent to the proposed site.

Proposed site

Adjacent area c. Drainage system and other natural water bodies: Site is adjacent to natural drainage of the ecosystem. No manmade drainage lines are present. The manmade watering place for cattle is nearby.

Watering place for cattle d. Distance from highway: Site is located in some 1260 m from the existing highway and in some 10m almost adjacent to the N-S highway under construction. There is a field earth road in average condition which will be used as an access road to the site of stockpiling.

Access road from the highway to the site N-S Highway under construction e. Distance from settlements, residential and other buildings: the nearest village- Katnaghbyur village is on some 1390 m distance; arable land on left side of the access road is private property. f. Presence of any infrastructure and utilities: On the observed area there are no public and private buildings and other structures, infrastructure like, telephone or internet cables, electric lines gas engines pipelines, drinking water pipelines, etc. g. Status of the land – community agriculture land of pasture category. h. Area of land to be occupied: 6732.4 m2 i. Amount to be removed: Total in Katnaghbyur community 28 000 m3. j. Findings

- The operations on the stockpiling of the topsoil were already started and were in progress. The topsoil is being dumped in the above mentioned sites and levelled. Light smoothing with small tractor is being implemented to prevent the scattering and spillage of the topsoil material. Unknown water source is present just adjacent to the proposed site. The proposed site is located in some 30-40 m distance and about 4-5 m higher from the water sources. The water source separated by some 3m height rocky wall which serve as a protection and prevents the impact.

- Special protective measures are needed for protection of

(i) natural drainage system which serve as a watering place for cattle is located in some 80-100m distance from the proposed site;

(ii) adjacent pastures;

- No further environmental and archaeological issues were observed by PMC NES and NA.

Sensitive receptors:

Adjacent pastures k. Recommendations

- May proceed with the site will need to prepare a SEMP according to the ADB requirements.

- Submit SEMP for RE approval with the Head of Community approvals.

- Protective measure is needed to prevent the scattering of the valuable material outside the site footprint.

3. Topsoil stockpiling site in Yeghnik (63+650km- 64+00km) a. Location – Yeghnik community b. Site characteristics: The proposed site consists of two parts (right side part from the gorge is being currently used and the left-side part is not operated yet) which are on about 50 m distance from each other and are separated by the seasonally dry 4m deep gorge on the foothills of considered sites. The site is situated in an arid undisturbed environment, rocky slightly inclined terrain; typical steppe vegetation.

Right side part from the gorge is being currently used and the left-side part is not operated yet c. Drainage system: Site is situated favorable not to interfere with natural drainage of the ecosystem (natural drainage is taking place presumably through the gorge). No manmade drainage lines are present. d. Distance from highway: Site is located in some 800 km from the existing highway and in some 400 m from the N-S highway. There is a field earth road in average condition which will be used as an access road to the site of stockpiling. e. Distance from settlements, residential and other buildings: the nearest village is about 2 km far away; arable land on left side of the access road is private property. f. Presence of any infrastructure and utilities: No infrastructure and utilities are present in close vicinity that may be impacted. g. Status of the land – community agriculture land of pasture category. h. Area of land to be occupied and amount to be removed: 4599.14 m2 + 2585.65 m2 = 7185 m2

I. Findings

The operations on the stockpiling of the topsoil were already started and were in progress. The topsoil is being dumped in the above mentioned sites and levelled. Some compaction is being implemented to prevent the scattering and spillage of the topsoil material. Also a protective fencing from the heaped rocks is being constructed to prevent the scattering of the topsoil into the gorge and buffer zone about left.

- There is some amount of heaped rocks on the aside the access road generated by community before starting of site operation.

- Special protective measures are needed for protection of

(i) natural gorge;

(ii) adjacent pastures and arable private land;

- No further environmental and archaeological issues were observed by PMC NES and AS.

Sensitive receptors:

Natural gorge adjacent pastures and fields

j. Recommendations

- May proceed with the site will need to prepare a SEMP according to the ADB requirements.

- Submit SEMP for RE approval with the Head of Community approvals.

- Protective fencing is not sufficient to prevent the scattering of the valuable material so the reinforcement of the fencing is needed.

- Escape the further dumping of topsoil close to the edges of proposed site.

- Improve the condition of access road before closing the site and hand out to communities.

4. Topsoil stockpiling site in Talin (PK km 67+580-PK 68+750) a. Location – Talin community b. Site characteristics: The proposed site is situated in an arid undisturbed environment, almost plain terrain; typical steppe not significant vegetation.

Proposed site

Adjacent area c. Drainage system and other natural water bodies: No manmade drainage lines are present.

Watering place for cattle d. Distance from highway: Site is located in some 70 m from the existing highway and in some 10m almost adjacent to the N-S highway under construction. There is earth road in average condition which will be used as an access road to the site of stockpiling.

Existing highway e. Distance from settlements, residential and other buildings: the nearest settlement is Talin city in some 1000 m distance. There are houses in some 200m from the site. f. Presence of any infrastructure and utilities: On the observed area there are no public and private buildings and other structures, infrastructure like, telephone or internet cables, gas engines pipelines, drinking water pipelines, etc. The electric lines in some 2-3 m distance from the proposed site are the only infrastructure that could be impacted. g. Status of the land – land plot acquired from private owner in the scope of LARP of the Project. The small plot of land between the proposed site and existing highway is community agricultural land. h. Area of land to be occupied: 5 660 m2 i. Amount to be removed: total in Talin 32 000 m3

j. Findings

- The operations on the stockpiling of the topsoil were already started and were in progress. The topsoil is being dumped in the above mentioned site and levelled. Light smoothing with small tractor is being implemented to prevent the scattering and spillage of the topsoil material.

- Some amount of heaped stones and rocks is available on the land plot between the site and existing highway. Contractor is not responsible for their origin.

- Special protection is needed for:

(i) electric lines

(ii) nearby houses

(iii) Being stockpiled on the open plain terrain not protected with hills or other rocky walls the site is exposed to wind blows and special protective measures are needed for protection of stockpiled topsoil from erosion.

- No further environmental and archaeological issues were observed by PMC NES and NA.

Sensitive receptors:

Existing highway, houses and electric lines

k. Recommendations

- May proceed with the site will need to prepare a SEMP according to the ADB requirements.

- Submit SEMP for RE approval.

- Protective measure is needed to prevent the scattering of the valuable material outside the site footprint as a result of wind erosion.

- Remove the heaped stones and rocks available on the land plot between the site and existing highway for site rehabilitation purposes.

ANNEX D. Proposed topsoil stockpiling and excavated material dumping sites in Kaqavadzor (section 1 and section 2)

SITE INSPECTION REPORT N 23

1. Introduction

Inspection visit was carried out on 12 November 2013 by Mrs Edita Vardgesyan, PMC NES, Mr. Boris Gasparyan, PMC AS, Mr.Viktor Bakhtamyan, Contractor’s environmental specialist, Mr. Sos Amirkhanyan Contractor’s social specialist, Mr. Muradyan, Head of Kaqavadzor community.

Purpose of visit: to evaluate the site for the topsoil stockpiling and dumping of excavated material.

The section adjacent to existing highway shall be used for excavated material dumping and the section adjacent to Kaqavadzor road shall be used for topsoil stockpiling.

2. Site Description a. Location – Kaqavadzor community b. Site characteristics: The proposed site is situated in undisturbed arid environment, site is located in seasonally dry gorge with about 4 m lengths between rocky hills; typical steppe vegetation.

Proposed site for topsoil stockpiling Proposed site for excavated material dumping

c. Drainage system: The gorge could serve as natural drainage. No manmade drainage lines are present. d. Distance from highway: Distance from the existing highway is about 600m for topsoil site and is adjacent to highway for excavated material.

e. Distance from settlements, residential and other buildings: the nearest Kaqavadzor village is about 800 m far away; the adjacent land is private property; there is an auto service station in some 300 m distance.

f. Presence of any infrastructure and utilities: no manmade infrastructure and/or utilities are present on the site. f. Status of the land – community agriculture land of pasture category. g. Area of land to be occupied and amount to be removed: TBD by Contractor

3. Findings a. Special protective measures are needed for protection of

(i) passage way;

(ii) gorge may serve as drainage for storm water

(iii) the site is located in Kaqavadzor tumb field monument area and chance for archaeological values could not be excluded;

(iv) adjacent land is private property

(v) transmission line tower on the top of the hill;

(vi) auto service station some 300 m away.

Sensitive receptors:

Passage way Gorge could serve as natural drainage

Presence of archaeological values is not excluded

4. Recommendations a. Due to the above mentioned findings PMC considers operation of the site unreasonable and undesirable. b. Should Contractor insist on the operation of selected site the second investigation site visit should be initiated.

ANNEX E. Topsoil stockpiling site in Nerkin Bazmaberd 1, Nerkin Bazmaberd 2 and Nerkin Bazmaberd 3

SITE INSPECTION REPORT N24

Introduction

Inspection visit was carried out on 19 November 2013 by Mrs Edita Vardgesyan, PMC NES, Mr. Boris Gasparyan, PMC Archaeology Specialist, Mr. Viktor Bakhtamyan, Contractor’s environmental Specialist, Mr. Sos Amirkhanyan Contractor’s Social Specialist, Mr. Gevorg Afyan, PMU Social and Environmental Safeguards Unit, environmental specialist and Mr. Noreyan, Head of Nerkin Bazmaberd community.

Purpose of visit: to evaluate the site for the topsoil stockpiling.

1. Topsoil stockpiling site in Nerkin Bazmaberd 1 a. Location – Nerkin Bazmaberd community b. Site characteristics: The proposed site is situated in arid undisturbed environment, rocky slightly inclined terrain; typical steppe vegetation. The right-side boundary of the proposed side is neighboring the natural dry gorge (not deep).

c. Drainage system: Site is situated favorable not to interfere with natural drainage of the ecosystem. No manmade drainage lines are present. d. Distance from highway: Site is adjacent to the existing highway. The access road is not available; Contractor shall put earth roads in order to operate the site. e. Distance from settlements, residential and other buildings: the nearest village is about 4 km far away; the adjacent arable land is private property.

f. Presence of any infrastructure and utilities: Irrigation water pipeline and flushing valve on the left- side boundary of the proposed site. g. Status of the land – community agriculture land of pasture category. h. Area of land to be occupied and amount to be removed: TBD by Contractor

i. Findings

-. Special protective measures are needed for protection of

(i) irrigation water pipeline;

(ii) natural gorge;

(iii) adjacent arable land;

(iv) road utilities;

(v) availability of rock material which may be mixed with topsoil and cause the damage;

-. No further environmental of archaeological issues were observed by PMC NES and AS. j. Recommendations

-. May proceed with the site will need to prepare a SEMP according to the ADB requirements.

-. Submit SEMP for RE approval with the Head of Community approvals.

-. Implement clearing of the surface from the rocks before stockpiling to prevent the mixing and damage of the topsoil;

Sensitive receptors:

Irrigation water pipeline Road utilities

Natural gorge

Recommendation:

Remove the rocks before stockpiling

2. Topsoil stockpiling site in Nerkin Bazmaberd 2 a. Location – Nerkin Bazmaberd community b. Site characteristics: The proposed site is situated in arid environment, rocky slightly inclined terrain; typical steppe vegetation. The initial natural landscape is heavily disturbed (presumably by mining activities) and the manmade pits are present. The pits are about 2 m deep in the ground level and 5-6m deep inside the hills.

c. Drainage system: Site is situated favorable not to interfere with natural drainage of the ecosystem. No manmade drainage lines are present. d. Distance from highway: Site is adjacent to the existing highway. The access road is not available; Contractor shall put earth roads in order to operate the site. e. Distance from settlements, residential and other buildings: the nearest village is about 800 m far away; the adjacent land is private property.

f. Presence of any infrastructure and utilities: Irrigation water pipeline and flushing valve on the left- side boundary of the proposed site. g. Status of the land – community agriculture land of pasture category. h. Area of land to be occupied and amount to be removed: TBD by Contractor i. Findings

- Special protective measures are needed for protection of (i) irrigation water pipeline and flushing valve;

(ii) adjacent land is private property

(iii) availability of rock material which may be mixed with topsoil and cause the damage;

-. No further environmental of archaeological issues were observed by PMC NES and AS. j. Recommendations

- May proceed with the site will need to prepare a SEMP according to the ADB requirements. - Submit SEMP for RE approval with the Head of Community approvals. - Include also the area adjacent to left- side from the proposed site to meet community request and provide Armenian version to Head of Community for familiarization. - Stockpile the topsoil in the way to fill the existing manmade pits and to restore the initial natural landscape. - Remove rock material to prevent mixing with topsoil and damage; Sensitive receptor:

Irrigation water pipeline and flushing valve

Recommendations:

Fill the pits Include also the left- side area to meet community needs

Remove the rocks

3. Excavated material dump site in Nerkin Bazmaberd 3 a. Location – Nerkin Bazmaberd community b. Site characteristics: The proposed site is located within and adjacent to the existing crossroad; site is situated in arid environment, rocky slightly inclined terrain in the foothill of the embankment of existing roads, typical steppe vegetation. c. Drainage system: Site is situated favorable not to interfere with natural drainage of the ecosystem. No manmade drainage lines are present. d. Distance from highway: Site is situated in some 150 m from the existing highway. The access road is asphalt paved section of the existing crossroad in average condition.

e. Distance from settlements, residential and other buildings: the nearest village is about 800 m far away; the adjacent arable land is private property. f. Presence of any infrastructure and utilities: Highway utilities are present within area proposed for dumping. g. Status of the land – community agriculture land of pasture category. h. Area of land to be occupied and amount to be removed: TBD by Contractor i. Findings - Special protective measures are needed for protection of

(i) existing asphalt paved road as a section of the crossroad;

(ii) road utilities;

(iii) rarely encountered vegetation;

(iv) irrigation water pipeline on the left- hand side.

- No further environmental of archaeological issues were observed by PMC NES and AS. j. Recommendations

- May proceed with the site will need to prepare a SEMP according to the ADB requirements.

- Submit SEMP for RE approval with the Head of Community approvals.

- Include also the area adjacent to left- side from the proposed site to meet community request and provide Armenian version to Head of Community for familiarization.

- Dump the excavating material in the manner to create a naturally looking flat terrain which could be later covered with vegetation. Escape creation of dump material heaps.

Sensitive receptor:

existing asphalt paved road road utilities

Protect rarely encountered vegetation ANNEX F Excavated material dump sites in Davtashen 1 and Davtashen 2

SITE INSPECTION REPORTS N27 and N28

Introduction

Inspection visit was carried out on 26 November 2013 by Mrs Edita Vardgesyan, PMC NES, Mr. Boris Gasparyan, PMC Archaeology Expert, Mr.Viktor Bakhtamyan, Contractor’s environmental specialist, Mr. Sos Amirkhanyan Contractor’s social specialist, Mr. Gevorg Afyan, PMU Social and Environmental Safeguards Unit, environmental specialist and Mr. Grigor Vardanyan, Head of Davtashen community.

Purpose of visit: to evaluate the sites for the excavated material (soil, soil mixed with stones and rocks) dumping.

1. Excavated material dump sites in Davtashen 1 a. Location – Davtashen community b. Site characteristics: The proposed site is situated in arid undisturbed environment, rocky inclined terrain in the foothill of the hills, typical steppe vegetation.

c. Drainage system: Site is situated favorable not to interfere with natural drainage of the ecosystem. No manmade drainage lines are present. d. Distance from highway: Site The proposed site is located adjacent to the existing highway. The site will be accessed via RoW of the N-S road under construction. There is also a filed earthy road approaching the site from the existing highway which may be used by workers and light traffic. No heavy machinery is intending to use the field road.

Existing highway N-S road under construction

Field earth road e. Distance from settlements, residential and other buildings: the nearest village Davtashen is about 100 m away; the adjacent arable land is private property. f. Presence of any infrastructure and utilities: Highway utilities are present within area proposed for dumping. g. Status of the land – community agriculture land of pasture category. h. Area of land to be occupied and amount to be removed: TBD by Contractor i. Findings

- Special protective measures are needed for protection of

(i) Adjacent pastures and private arable lands

(ii) Field earth roads

(iii) Some valuable bushes.

Sensitive receptors:

Field earth roads Adjacent pastures and private arable lands

Valuable bushes

j. Recommendations

- May proceed with the site will need to prepare a SEMP according to the ADB requirements.

- Submit SEMP for RE approval with the Head of Community approvals.

- Dump the excavating material in the manner to create a naturally looking flat terrain which could be later covered with vegetation. Escape creation of dump material heaps

- No further environmental of archaeological issues were observed by PMC NES and AS.

2. Topsoil stockpiling site in Davtashen 2 a. Location – Davtashen community b. Site characteristics: The proposed site is situated in arid undisturbed environment, almost plain terrain with not significant steppe vegetation typical for the region. The site is covered with stones and rocks.

c. Drainage system: Site is situated favorable not to interfere with natural drainage of the ecosystem. No manmade drainage lines are present. d. Distance from highway: Site The proposed site is located adjacent to and will be accessed through the N-S road under construction. The site is on about 600m distance from the existing highway. There is also a filed earthy road approaching the site from the existing highway which may be used by workers and light traffic. No heavy machinery is intending to use the field road.

N-S road under construction Field earth road e. Distance from settlements, residential and other buildings: the nearest village Davtashen is about 1000 m away; the adjacent arable land is private property. f. Presence of any infrastructure and utilities: irrigation water earth canal is present on the proposed site and the tertiary canal is about 200m away. Also road utilities are on-site.

Irrigation water earth canal

Road utilities g. Status of the land – community agriculture arable land plot acquired from private owner in the scope of LARP of the Project. h. Area of land to be occupied and amount to be removed: TBD by Contractor i. Findings

- Special protective measures are needed for protection of

(i) Adjacent private arable lands

(ii) Field earth roads

Sensitive receptors:

Tertiary irrigation water canal Water earth canal

Adjacent private arable lands

Field earth roads j. Recommendations

- May proceed with the site will need to prepare a SEMP according to the ADB requirements.

- Submit SEMP for RE approval with the Head of Community approvals.

- The proposed area is covered with stones and rocks. Clear the proposed area from stones and rocks prior to stockpiling in order to prevent the mixing of valuable topsoil with rocks.

- No further environmental of archaeological issues were observed by PMC NES and AS.

ANNEX G. Non-compliance notices no 0109 to CEMP in Section 3

ANNEX H. Non- compliance repeated notice to Contractor.

Annex I Implementation report on the environmental impact assessment (EIA) mitigation requirements

Follow-up/corrective Reference Mitigation Measure Find outs Fulfilled Activities actions Non-compliances issued to Contractor 1. Non-compliance Dust Control 1. Dust control is not Improved partly: 1. Dust control N0109 to CEMP - Provisions to use managed properly dust control measures according in Section 3 and using water 2. Trucks are measures are not to CEMP; Check issued 2 july 2013 spray of road provided with but are sufficient sustainability of surfaces to control not using covers measures; dust. while moving to the 2. Regularly check the -Trucks carrying earth, dump sites and availability and use of sand or stone shall be asphalt plant. covers; covered with tarps 3. The quantity 3. Increase the to avoid spilling of exclusion safety amount of safety barriers on the road barriers on the road. Traffic and Access is extremely insufficient. The Plan issue is many times -Traffic diversions on raised by PMC site public roads inspector. including direction signs, markings, traffic signals, lighting, clearly visible solid barriers to channel traffic, flagmen employed as needed, and maintenance of diversion 2. Non-compliance Dust Control 1. Dust control is not Improved 1.Ensure and repeated in - Provisions to use managed properly 1.Sufficient quantity regularly check the Section 3 dust and using water 2.Trucks are of water machinery sustainability of control ineffective spray of road provided with but are is being operated measures surfaces to control not using covers 2. water machines 2.The works should dust. while moving to the are equiped with be stopped during the -Trucks carrying earth, dump sites and effective water- re-filling of water sand or stone shall be asphalt plant. spreading devices machines. covered with tarps 3.Foremen and to avoid spilling workers received additional training on the dust control issue Other non-conformances detected 3 Site management Prepare and submit SMPs for some sites Improved partly Finalize and approve plans for the site the SMPs for all are not prepared SMPs for some sites all the SMPs operation were in topsoil stockpiling and are prepared, others the process of dumping sites are in the process of preparation and preparation the sites were being operated without approved SMPs; 4 First aid kit Provide to each First aid kit is not Improved Constantly check the availability on-site construction site with available on-site and all the sites provide availability and appropriate First Aid is not accessible to with first aid kit accessibility of the first Kits and firefighting all workers aid kit equipment

5 environmental Environmental and Some workers were Improved Constantly check the and safety safety safeguards not trained in Regularly organized minutes of trainings safeguards trainings before environmental and environmental and trainings starting work - site, safety safeguards safety trainings and especially the newly before starting work ensured the recruited ones. - site, especially the participation of newly recruited newly recruited staff ones. 6 Personal Workers usage of Not all workers are Improved partly Constantly check that protective safety equipment wearing the uniform workers were workers are wearing equipment (uniforms, helmets, on-site. Some of provide with uniform the uniform eye-glasses, ear- them, especially plugs - as required) drivers, were not Provide workers with provided with the uniform including for uniform winter season and charge foremen with responsibility to check compliance 7 Fire extinguishers Provide to each Fire extinguishers Improved Constantly check the availability on-site construction site with are not available all sites were availability and appropriate First Aid provided with fire accessibility of the fire Kits and firefighting extinguishers. extinguishers. equipment

8 Contractor’s Contractor’s Sub-contractor’s Not improved Contractor should be Environmental Environmental environmental more demanding from representative representative representative is not the sub-contractors on availability responsible and in on-site or is in the presence of charge to ensure the ignorance that he is environmentally environmental responsible and in trained representative compliance should be charge to ensure the on-site always on-site environmental compliance Sub-contractor’s representative charged with environmental responsibilities should be always on-site 9 Waste sorting sorting of the waste All the types of Improved Ensure sustainability wastes were mixed the sorting of the of measures and not sorted waste was implemented according to CEMP 10 Construction Waste, garbage and Removal of Improved Check that the waste waste disposal construction debris construction waste is dumped properly disposal and garbage from the waste was site was removed to the implemented not designated sites properly. Some approved by local amount of the waste authorities is just left on-site and on roadsides and is not removed to the approved dump sites; 11 Garbage Waste, garbage and Garbage collection Improved partly garbage collection collection construction debris containers were not some garbage should be organized containers disposal available on- site collection containers properly and availability were provided construction site kept clean 12 Construction dumping of Some cases of Improved Exclude the repetition waste dumping construction waste dumping of of unpermitted on unapproved should be on construction waste waste from dumping sites approved sites on unapproved unapproved sites improper sites were was removed into detected the sites approved by local authorities 13 Trucks were not Trucks carrying earth, trucks did not have Improved Contractor should be using covers sand or stone shall be covers trucks were provided more demanding from covered with tarps with covers the sub-contractors on to avoid spilling using of truck covers

14 The mud Waste washes down Masis concrete plant Not improved Concrete plant appearance as a requirements for the area was not operation is result of non- concrete plant and organized properly; Concrete plant temporarily stopped effective runoff in particularly effluent operation is and Contractor vehicles. How this Masis concrete waste water temporarily stopped assured that the plant area. waste water will be appeared on-site. measures will be treated and disposed The mud is applied as the re-start of. appeared as a result of plant. of non-effective runoff which could be spread out with vehicles tires 15 Warning signs Traffic diversions on Warning signs and improved Civil works were and exclusion public roads exclusion barriers temporarily stopped barriers were not including direction were not present Necessary amount after which Contractor of warning signs and present around signs, markings, around work site applied necessary traffic exclusion barriers work site areas in areas in Section 1 Installed measures. Section 1 signals, lighting, clearly visible solid barriers to channel traffic.

ANNEX J Extracts from Noise and Dust Baseline Assessment N1, N2, N3 Reports

Extracts from Noise and dust baseline assessment report №01

1. Introduction

"Corsan Corviam Construction", SA Armenian Branch (hereafter the Client), has assigned "ATMS Solutions" LLC (hereafter the Contractor) to conduct noise, vibration and dust measurements, to make assessment of obtained data and to report study results to the Client. The above mentioned study is being conducted for Section 1 (M1 Ashtarak to Talin road from km 29+600 to km 71+500), Section 2 (M2 Yerevan to Ararat road from km 9+312 to km 47+400) and Section 3 (M1 Yerevan to Ashtarak road from km 18+370 to km 29+773) of North-South Road Corridor Project financed by the Asian Development Bank and implemented by the Client on behalf of the Ministry of Transport and Communication of the Republic of Armenia. The Contractor has subcontracted an accredited testing laboratory "Shincertificate" LLC (accreditation N AST-001.Q-0008-2012 issued on 30.01.2012) to undertake measurements and to provide the relevant testing protocols. Assessment of noise, vibration and dust parameters are to be conducted in two phases:

First phase: Noise, vibration and dust baseline assessment (to be done before the road construction operations) Second phase: Assessment of noise, vibration and dust characteristics during the road construction operations to identify their potential environmental impact.

The given report (Baseline report 1) represents the results of measurements and evaluation of noise and dust baseline, conducted on 25.07.2013 and 26.07.2013. Location of baseline measurements points has been determined by the Client and agreed with the Contractor.

This report provides an overview of the measurement process, a description of the measurement points, a quantitative analysis and evaluation of the noise and dust measurement results.

2. Measurement approach, methodology and equipment

2.1 Measuring Equipment and Software

2.1.1 Dust measurement

Dust concentration is measured by using of mass concentration method (simple filtering). The dust is accumulated on the filter and then the filter is weighted. The weight of sampled dust is divided by mass flow volume to calculate the concentration of suspending dust. The duration of measurement is 30 minutes (it is anticipated that 30 minutes are enough to determine dust concentration). The obtained data is analyzed and compared with corresponding threshold limit value.

The air needed for dust sampling is delivered (pumped) through the АПВ-4-12В/220В-40 type four channel automatic aspirator with suction pump (factory № 97). Technical parameters of the device are listed below:

Air consumption during the sampling: 0.2-40 l/min,

2 rotameters with 0.2-1 l/min and 2 rotameters with 1-20 l/min.

Data on the state verification, as well as technical characteristics of the Aspirator are given in dust measurement protocols (Annex 2).

Figure 1. АПВ-4-12В/220В-40 type four channel automatic aspirator

The measurements are conducted in accordance with the following normative documentation acting in Armenia:

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".

The verification date of the aspirator is 18/01/2013. It is valid until 18/01/2014.

4/37 Measurements of dust concentration are conducted in the daytime. Measurements at every measuring point are taken three times with the duration of 30 minutes.

Table 1. Maximum permissible concentration (MPC) for dust

MPC ( mg/m3) № Name of substance Max Daily average

1 Suspended particle (Dust) 0.5 0.15

2.1.2 Noise measurement

Instrumental measurements of noise levels are performed using a sound level meter (SLM) "SL-834" (factory № T228758). The SLM consists of a microphone, electronic circuits and a readout display. The microphone detects the small air pressure variations associated with sound and transforms them into electrical signals. Afterwards, these signals are processed by the electronic circuitry of the instrument. The readout displays the sound level in decibels.

The SLM has SLOW and FAST response options. The response rate is the time period over which the instrument averages the sound level before displaying it on the readout. Usually measurements of background noise are taken in the SLOW response mode.

The SLM has the following technical characteristics:

Measurement range: 30÷130 dB (sub-ranges: 30÷80, 40÷90, 50÷100, 60÷110, 70÷120, 80÷130, 30÷130), Frequency Range: 31.5÷8500 Hz, Accuracy: ±1.5 dB.

The verification date of SLM №012558 is 03/05/2013, valid until 03/05/2014.

In order to ensure continuous measurements over a certain period of time and further analysis of the results, the SLM SL-834 is connected to a laptop. The special software installed in the laptop allows to record noise levels with one second frequency and provides complete information on the noise level (both in digital imaging and as a graph), including the minimum, maximum and average values of the sound level.

Figure 2. SL-834 type sound level meter

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

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", Sanitary Norm № 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, Methodical Guideline N4.3-001-07 "Guidelines for the instrumental measurements of noise in the workplaces, in residential and public buildings and in housing construction areas" adopted by the order of RA Minister of Health №1510-Ն dated by 05.10.2007.

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

Measurements of noise levels are conducted in the daytime. Measurements at every measuring point are taken three times with the duration of 20 minutes.

Table 2. Threshold limit values (TLV) for noise

TLV (equivalent to TLV (maximum Premises and territories № sound level), dBA sound level), dBA

1 Workplace 80 Residential rooms in apartments, residential premises of holiday houses, guest houses, residential houses for the 2 40 55 elderly and disabled people, sleeping premises in kindergartens and boarding schools

TLV (equivalent to TLV (maximum Premises and territories № sound level), dBA sound level), dBA

Shops trading halls, airport and railway stations waiting 3 60 75 rooms, drop-off points of public service providers

2.2 Description of measurement points

Current report presents results of noise and dust baseline measurements for the following measurement points defined by the Client. The given report presents assessment of measurements taken in 18 dust and 9 noise measurement points. Measurements for points Noise 1, 2 and Dust 1, 2, 3 were taken on 25-th of July, while measurements for points Dust 10, 11, 12 and Noise 9 were conducted on 26-th of July.

Points "Dust 1" and "Noise 1" are located within the boundary of concrete plant which is constructed to supply ready mix concrete for the Project needs.

Figure 3. Points "Dust 1" and "Noise 1"

Points "Dust 2" and "Noise 2" are located on M1 Yerevan-Gyumri highway near Agarak community (piquet 32+500). In the close vicinity of the measuring point charging station and number of shops are located.

Figure 4. Points "Dust 2" and "Noise 2"

Points "Dust 3" is located on M1 Yerevan-Gyumri highway 0.99 km to the west of Agarak community (piquet 33+700).There is number of industrial facilities in the vicinity of the measurement point.

Points "Dust 10" is located on M1 Yerevan-Gyumri highway, in the south-west of Davtashen community (piquet 63+200). The nearest residential house is 0.33 km to west (Davtashen community).

Figure 5. Point "Dust 10"

Point "Dust 11" is located on M1 Yerevan-Gyumri highway, in the east of Talin community (piquet 69+000), on the crossroad of M1 highway and the road to Talin community. There is abandoned car service center.

Figure 6. Point "Dust 11"

The nearest residential building is 0.45 km away from the measurement point (Talin community).

Points are located on M1 Yerevan-Gyumri highway, in the north-east of Talin community, app. 0.93 km to the north to the point "Dust 11". Near the point restaurant "Mush", a charging station and few other buildings are located.

Figure 7. Points "Dust 12" and "Noise 9"

Measurement points’ locations are shown in Annex 1.

3. Measurement results and evaluation

Measuring results for each measurement point are presented in testing protocols (Annex 2) and summarized in Table 3 (for noise) and Table 4 (for dust) accordingly. Diagrams, demonstrating noise levels fluctuations over the measured time, are shown in Figures 8-10, while dust concentration values in comparison with MPC (both average daily and maximum) are given in Figures 11.

Table 3

Measurement time Sound level Maximum Threshold limit value Threshold limit (equivalent to sound sound level, (equivalent to sound value (maximum (from - till) level), LAeq, dBA LAmax, dBA level), dBA sound level), dBA

Noise 1 10:00-10:20 58.8 63.8 12:45-13:05 59.6 64.4 80 14:40-15:00 58.9 69.7 Noise 2 11:00-11:20 60.1 75.0 13:20-13:40 60.7 71.4 60 75 15:15-15:35 59.5 71.6 Noise 9 10:30-10:50 58.6 65.6 12:30-12:50 59.2 67.3 60 75 14:25-14:45 59.1 69.0

Table 4

Dust actual Maximum permissible concentration Measurement time 3 concentration, (MPC) for dust, mg/m (from - till) 3 mg/m Daily average Maximum value

Dust 1 9:55-10:25 0.05 12:40-13:10 0.06 0.15 0.5 14:35-15:05 0.06 Average value 0.057 Dust 2 10:55-11:25 0.03 13:15-13:45 0.03 0.15 0.5 15:10-15:40 0.03 Average value 0.03 Dust 3 11:45-12:15 0.03 14:05-14:35 0.025 0.15 0.5 16:00-16:30 0.03 Average value 0.028

Dust actual Maximum permissible concentration Measurement time 3 concentration, (MPC) for dust, mg/m (from - till) 3 mg/m Daily average Maximum value

Dust 10 11:40-12:10 0.02 13:40-14:10 0.02 0.15 0.5 15:35-16:05 0.015 Average value 0.018 Dust 11 11:05-11:35 0.02 13:05-13:35 0.02 0.15 0.5 15:00-15:30 0.02 Average value 0.02 Dust 12 10:25-10:55 0.025 12:25-12:55 0.025 0.15 0.5 14:20-14:50 0,02 Average value 0.023

4. Conclusions

1) Evaluation of the results of measurements, conducted in measurement point “Noise 1” (the territory of concrete plant) during the different times within the day, demonstrates that equivalent as well as maximum noise levels are within the corresponding TLV of 80 dBA (TLV for workplace has been applied as apart from the employees group there are no any other noise impact receptors in the vicinity of the measurement point).

2) Both equivalent and maximum noise levels in measurement point “Noise 9” don’t exceed the TLVs of 60 dBA and 75 dBA accordingly. These TLVs are applied based on the Table 3 of Sanitary Norm № 2-III-11.3 "Noise in the workplaces, in residential and public buildings and in residential construction areas" (since no residential areas are located in the close vicinity of the measuring point the TLV for shops etc has been applied).

3) The maximum noise level in measurement point “Noise 2” are within the TLV of 75 dBA, while averaged equivalent noise level in the same point is above the 60 dBA TLV (for the TLV definition see the above conclusion).

4) Main noise source in all 3 measurement points is traffic. The peaks/maximums on the noise fluctuation diagrams (Figures 8-10) are conditioned by vehicles passing through the M1 highway during the measurement.

5) The intensity of peaks/maximums of noise fluctuation diagrams also indicates some changes in the traffic density depending on different periods of day and sectors of highway.

6) Dust concentrations in all measurement points exceed neither daily average nor maximum values of MPC for residential areas set by the RoA Government Decree №160-N "Norms of maximum permissible concentrations (MPC) of atmospheric air pollutants in residential areas".

Extracts from Noise and dust assessment report №02 The given report (Report 02) represents the results of measurements and evaluation of noise level and dust concentration in points “Dust 1” and “Noise 1” (Section of Parpi, Voskevaz and Agarak communities: Concrete plant) as well as point “Dust 11” (Section of Yeghnik and Talin communities), conducted on 22.10.2013. Location of measurements points has been determined by the Client and agreed with the Contractor.

3. Conclusions

1) Evaluation of the results of measurements, conducted in measurement point “Noise 1” (the territory of concrete plant) during the different times within the day, demonstrates that equivalent as well as maximum noise levels are within the corresponding TLV of 80 dBA (TLV for workplace has been applied as apart from the employees group there are no any other noise impact receptors in the vicinity of the measurement point).

2) Main noise source in measurement point “Noise 1” is Concrete plant. Background noise also influences on noise level. The peaks/maximums on the noise fluctuation diagram (Figure 5) are conditioned by operation of Concrete Plant equipment during the measurement, while the minimums are actual level of background noise.

3) Dust concentrations in all measurement points (“Dust 1” and “Dust 11”) exceed neither daily average nor maximum values of MPC for residential areas set by the RoA Government Decree №160-N "Norms of maximum permissible concentrations (MPC) of atmospheric air pollutants in residential areas".

Extracts from Noise, vibration and dust assessment report №03

The given report (Report 03) is developed based on Client’s e-mail request dated 11.11.2013 and represents the results of measurements and evaluation of dust concentration as well as noise and vibration levels in the following points and sections:

Date of Point1 Picket Section Status measurement

Concrete plant Dust 1 15.11.2013 Operational Parpi, Voskevas and Agarak communities

Concrete plant Noise 1 15.11.2013 Operational Parpi, Voskevas and Agarak communities

Vibration 1 50+700 Aruch Kakavadzor communities 02.11.2013 Baseline Dust 9 50+800 Aruch Kakavadzor communities 02.11.2013 Baseline Noise 8 50+900 Aruch Kakavadzor communities 02.11.2013 Baseline Dust 10 63+200 Davtashen and Katnaghbyur communities 15.11.2013 Operational Dust 11 69+000 Yeghnik and Talin communities 15.11.2013 Operational

2.1.3 Vibration measurement

Instrumental measurements of vibration are performed using a vibration meter “AR63A” (factory № 00723661). Operation of this vibration meter is based on the action of the piezoelectric effect in artificially polarized ceramics. The device is perfect for all types of vibration control of mechanical equipment, especially for the measurement of vibration of rotating machinery and mechanisms performing reciprocating movement. This device may measure the acceleration, the speed and displacement of the machinery.

Vibration meter has the following technical characteristics:

Measurement range of vibration acceleration: 0.1-199.9 m/s2, Measurement range of vibration velocity: 0.1- 199.9 mm/s, Accuracy: ±5 %.

Figure 3. AR63A type vibration meter

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

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 31191.1-2004 (ISO 2631-1) "Mechanical vibration and shock - Evaluation of human exposure to whole-body vibration - Part 1: General requirements", GOST 31192.1-2004 (ISO 5349-1) "Mechanical vibration - Measurement and evaluation of human exposure to hand-transmitted vibration - Part 1: General requirements", 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 31192.2-2005 (ISO 5349-2) "Mechanical vibration - Measurement and evaluation of human exposure to hand-transmitted vibration - Part 2: Requirements for measurement at the workplace".

Daily exposure action value (EAV) and daily exposure limit value (ELV) set by the Directive 2002/44/EC on the minimum health and safety requirements regarding the exposure of workers to the risks arising from physical agents (vibration) are used for the evaluation of actual vibration level as national Hygienic Norms №2-III-11.3 “Vibration in the workplaces, in residential and public buildings” are not relevant to this evaluation.

Table 3. Vibration exposure limit values and action values

Whole-body vibration EAV, m/s2 ELV, m/s2

Daily value A(8) 0.5 1.15

Points “Vibration 1”, “Noise 8” and “Dust 9” are located on M1 Yerevan-Gyumri highway. The distance between the measurement points and the nearest community (Aruch village) is about app. 1.5 km to the south. Point “Vibration 1” is situated in front of Qaravansaray monument, while points “Noise 8” and “Dust 9” are located near the Narek restaurant.

Figure 5. Point “Vibration 1”

Figure 6. Points “Noise 8” and “Dust 9”

Point “Dust 10” is located on M1 Yerevan-Gyumri highway, in the south-west of Davtashen community (piquet 63+200). The nearest residential house is 0.33 km to west (Davtashen community).

2.3 Measurement results and evaluation

Measuring results for each measurement point are presented in testing protocols (Annex 2) and summarized in Table 4 (for noise), Table 5 (for dust), Table 6 (for vibration) accordingly. Diagrams, demonstrating noise levels fluctuations over the measured time, are shown in Figures 9 and 10, while dust concentration values in comparison with MPC (both average daily and maximum) are given in Figure 11.

Table 4

Measurement time Sound level Maximum Threshold limit value Threshold limit (equivalent to sound sound level, (equivalent to sound value (maximum (from - till) level), LAeq, dBA LAmax, dBA level), dBA sound level), dBA

Noise 1 9:35-9:55 68.1 74.8

12:30-12:50 60.0 66.0 80 16:20-16:40 59.5 63.8 Noise 8 10:30-10:50 60.0 71.6

13:30-13:50 59.7 71.5 60 75 17:10-17:30 59.4 71.6

Table 5

Dust actual Maximum permissible concentration Measurement time 3 concentration, (MPC) for dust, mg/m (from - till) 3 mg/m Daily average Maximum value

Dust 1 9:35-9:55 0.034

12:30-12:50 0.035 0.15 0.5 16:20-16:40 0.036 Average value 0.035 Dust 9 10:30-10:50 0.018

13:30-13:50 0.017 0.15 0.5 17:10-17:30 0.02 Average value 0.018 Dust 10 11:00-11:20 0.017

14:00-14:20 0.02 0.15 0.5 17:40-18:00 0.02 Average value 0.019 Dust 11

11:30-11:50 0.018

14:30-14:50 0.02 0.15 0.5 18:10-18:30 0.02 Average value 0.019

Table 6

Vibration actual Vibration exposure Vibration exposure Measurement time exposure value, action value (EAV), limit value (ELV), (from - till) m/s2 m/s2 m/s2

Vibration 1 10:30-10:45 0

12:10-12:25 0 0.5 1.15 15:05-15:20 0 Average value 0

3. Conclusions

1) Evaluation of the results of noise measurements, conducted in measurement point “Noise 1” (the territory of concrete plant) during the different times within the day, demonstrates that equivalent as well as maximum noise levels are within the corresponding TLV of 80 dBA (TLV for workplace has been applied as apart from the employees group there are no any other noise impact receptors in the vicinity of the measurement point).

2) Main noise source in measurement point “Noise 1” is Concrete plant. Background noise also influences on noise level. The peaks/maximums on the noise fluctuation diagram (Figure 9) are conditioned by operation of Concrete Plant equipment during the measurement, while the minimums are actual level of background noise.

3) Both equivalent and maximum noise baseline levels in measurement point “Noise 8” don’t exceed the TLVs of 60 dBA and 75 dBA accordingly. These TLVs are applied based on the Table 3 of Sanitary Norm № 2-III-11.3 "Noise in the workplaces, in residential and public buildings and in residential construction areas" (since no residential areas are located in the close vicinity of the measuring point the TLV for shops, trading halls, etc. has been applied).

4) Dust concentrations in measurement points (“Dust 1”, Dust 10 and “Dust 11”) exceed neither daily average nor maximum values of MPC for residential areas set by the RoA Government Decree №160-N "Norms of maximum permissible concentrations (MPC) of atmospheric air pollutants in residential areas".

5) Dust baseline concentration in measurement point “Dust 9” also doesn’t exceed daily average and maximum values of MPC for residential areas.

6) According to the results of vibration baseline measurements, there is no vibration exposure near the measurement point “Vibration 1” (near Qaravansaray monument).

Road section close to Shaverd wetland

Section of Parpi, Voskevas and Agarak communities

Section of Aruch Kakavadzor communities

Section of Davtashen and Katnaghbyur communities

Section of Yeghnik and Talin communities