Consultant Report Nepal: Water Resources Project Preparatory Facility

Consultant Report

Project Number: 45206-001 September 2020

Nepal: Water Resources Project Preparatory Facility FINAL REPORT

This document is being disclosed to the public in accordance with ADB's Access to Information Policy.

GOVERNMENT OF NEPAL

Ministry of Energy, Water Resources and Irrigation

Department of Water Resources and Irrigation

WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal Final Report

21 January 2020

Mott MacDonald 22 Station Road Cambridge CB1 2JD United Kingdom

T +44 (0)1223 463500 F +44 (0)1223 461007 mottmac.com

WRPPF: Preparation of

1243 124 124 Priorityhttps://mottmac.sharepoint.com/teams/pj-b1549/Shared River Basins Documents/02-Reports/FinalFlood Report/Final Final Submission/210120 WRPPF_Final Report.docx Risk ManagementMott MacDonald Project, Nepal Final Report

21 January 2020

Mott MacDonald Limited. Registered in England and Wales no. 1243967. Registered office: Mott MacDonald House, 8-10 Sydenham Road, Croydon CR0 2EE, United Kingdom

Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal Final Report

Issue and Revision Record

Revision Date Originator Checker Approver Description 0 15/11/19 Consultants L. Akindiji C. Hetmank 1st submission (Draft Final) Team C. Hetmank E. Klaassen A. Choudhury 1 15/01/20 L Akindiji A C Hetmank 2nd submission (Final) C Eller Choudhury 2 21/01/20 L Akindiji A C Hetmank Revised to include updated Choudhury economics figures

Document reference: 383877 | REP | 0062

Information class: Standard

This document is issued for the party which commissioned it and for specific purposes connected with the above- captioned project only. It should not be relied upon by any other party or used for any other purpose.

We accept no responsibility for the consequences of this document being relied upon by any other party, or being used for any other purpose, or containing any error or omission which is due to an error or omission in data supplied to us by other parties.

This document contains confidential information and proprietary intellectual property. It should not be shown to other parties without consent from us and from the party which commissioned it.

This Re por t has be en p rep are d solely for use by t he p arty w hich c om mission ed it (the 'Client') i n co nnecti on wit h the cap tione d p roject . It s hould not be used for any oth er p urp ose. N o p erso n ot her tha n th e Client or any party who has expr essly a gre ed t er ms of relia nce wit h us (the 'Recipie nt(s )') m ay r ely on the cont ent, info rma tion or any view s exp ress ed in the R epo rt. This R epo rt is co nfide ntial and c ont ains p rop riet ary in tellect ual p rop erty and we ac cept no duty of ca re, resp onsibility or li ability t o any oth er recipi ent o f this R epo rt. N o re pre sent ation , wa rran ty o r un dert aking , exp ress or i mplie d, is made an d no res ponsi bility or liability is acce pted by us to any p arty oth er t han the Cli ent or a ny Reci pient (s), as t o the accu racy or c om plete ness of th e info rm ation cont aine d in t his Rep ort. Fo r t he av oida nce o f do ubt t his Re port do es no t in any way pu rpo rt to includ e a ny leg al, ins ura nce or fin ancial advic e or opini on.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal Final Report

Contents

Executive summary 3

1 Introduction 3 1.1 Rational 3 1.2 Impact and Outcome 5 1.3 Outputs 6 1.4 Purpose of this report 6

2 Methodology 7 2.1 Introduction 7 2.2 Innovative and nature-based solutions 7 2.3 Hydrological and hydrodynamic modelling 8 2.3.1 Hydrological modelling 8 2.3.2 Hydrodynamic modelling 10 2.3.3 Design strategy of hydraulic structures for flood mitigation 12 2.4 Flood Forecasting and Early Warning Systems (FFEWS) 15 2.4.1 Understanding FFEWS Needs and River Regime in Basins 15 2.4.2 Flood Forecasting Modelling Framework 15 2.4.3 Assessment of Hydro-Meteorological Data and Gauging Network 15 2.4.4 Flood Forecasting Model Development 16 2.5 Community Based Disaster Risk Management 16 2.5.1 CBDRM Components 17 2.5.2 Management and Implementation of CBDRM 17 2.6 Methodology for Financial and Economic Analysis 18

3 Summary of project results 19 3.1 Introduction 19 3.2 Mawa – Ratuwa Basin 20 3.2.1 Location 20 3.2.2 Civil works 21 3.2.3 FFEWS and CBDRM 24 3.2.4 Safeguards 32 3.3 Bakraha Basin 33 3.3.1 Location 33 3.3.2 Civil works 34 3.3.3 FFEWS and CBDRM 37 3.3.4 Safeguards 44 3.4 Lakhandei Basin 45 3.4.1 Location 45 3.4.2 Civil works 46

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal Final Report

3.4.3 FFEWS and CBDRM 50 3.4.4 Safeguards 57 3.5 East Rapti Basin 58 3.5.1 Location 58 3.5.2 FFEWS and CBDRM 59 3.5.3 Safeguards 64 3.6 West Rapti Basin 65 3.6.1 Location 65 3.6.2 Civil works 67 3.6.3 FFEWS and CBDRM 69 3.6.4 Safeguards 75 3.7 Mohana – Khutiya Basin 76 3.7.1 Location 76 3.7.2 Civil works 77 3.7.3 FFEWS and CBDRM 79 3.7.4 Safeguards 86

4 Cost Benefit Analysis 88 4.1 Introduction 88 4.1.1 Approach to Estimation of Sub Project Benefits 88 4.2 CBA Mawa – Ratuwa Basin 89 4.2.1 Subproject Interventions 89 4.2.2 Beneficiaries 91 4.2.3 Mawa Ratuwa Benefits 92 4.2.4 Mawa Ratuwa Project Costs 92 4.2.5 Results of Economic Analysis 93 4.3 CBA Bakraha Basin 94 4.3.1 Subproject Interventions 94 4.3.2 Beneficiaries 94 4.3.3 Benefits 95 4.3.4 Costs 96 4.3.5 Results of the Economic Analysis 96 4.4 CBA Lakhandei Basin 97 4.4.1 Subproject Interventions 97 4.4.2 Benefits 98 4.4.3 Benefits Not Quantified 98 4.4.4 Costs 98 4.5 CBA East Rapti Basin 99 4.5.1 Subproject Interventions 99 4.5.2 Beneficiaries 99 4.5.3 Benefits 99 4.5.4 Costs 100 4.6 CBA West Rapti Basin 101 4.6.1 Sub Project Interventions 101 4.6.2 Beneficiaries 102

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal Final Report

4.6.3 Benefits 102 4.6.4 Costs 103 4.6.5 Results of the Economic Analysis 103 4.7 CBA Mohana – Khutiya Basin 104 4.7.1 Sub Project Interventions 104 4.7.2 Beneficiaries 106 Source: Consultants’ flood modelling results 106 4.7.3 Benefits 106 4.7.4 Costs 107 4.7.5 Results of Economic Analysis 108 4.8 CBA whole project 109 4.8.1 Subproject Benefits 109 4.8.2 Project Costs 1 4.8.3 Results of Economic Analysis 1 4.8.4 Distribution Analysis and Poverty Assessment 2

5 Deliverables 2

6 Implementation arrangements 4 6.1 Implementation organisation 4 6.2 Responsibilities 5 6.3 Implementation plan 11

7 Design Monitoring Framework 1 Appendices 6

A. Location of Priority Structures 7 A.1 Mawa Ratuwa 7 A.2 Bakraha 18 A.3 Lakhandei 22 A.4 West Rapti 26 A.5 Mohana Khutiya 29

B. Cost Benefit Analysis Results 37 B.1 Mawa Ratuwa Cost Benefit Analysis Results 37 B.2 Bakraha Cost Benefit Analysis Results 38 B.3 West Rapti Cost Benefit Analysis Results 39 B.4 Mohana Khutiya Cost Benefit Analysis Results 40 B.5 Whole Project Cost Benefit Analysis Results 41

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 1 Final Report

List of abbreviations

ADB - Asian Development Bank ADCP - Acoustic Doppler Current Profiler BCR - Benefit Cost Ratio CBA - Cost Benefit Analysis CBDRM - Community Based Disaster Risk Management CBS - Central Bureau of Statistics CNP - Chitwan National Park DEM - Digital Elevation Model DGPS - Differential Global Positioning System DHM - Department of Hydrology and Meteorology DWRI - Department of Water Resources and Irrigation DP - Displaced People DPR - Detailed Project Report DWIDM - Department of Water Induced Disaster Management EARF - Environmental Assessment & Review Framework EIRR - Economic Internal Rate of Return EPR - Environmental Protection Rule FFEWS - Flood forecasting and early warning system FHRMP - Flood Hazard Mapping and Risk Management Project GESI - Gender Equality and Social Inclusion GIS - Geographic information system GoN - Government of Nepal GSM - Global System for Mobile communication HEC-HMS - Hydrologic Engineering Center - Hydrologic Modelling System HEC-RAS - Hydrologic Engineering Center - River Analysis System IEE - Initial Environmental Examination IP - Indigenous People LARIP - Land Acquisition, Resettlement and Indigenous People MEWRI - Ministry of Energy, Water Resources and Irrigation MoF - Ministry of Finance MoHA - Ministry of Home Affairs NPR - Nepalese Rupee NPV - Nett Present Value PAM - Project Administration Manual PEP - People Embankment Program PIU - Project Implementation Unit PMU - Project Management Unit PRTW - Proposed River Training Works Q - Discharge RCP - Representative Concentration Pathways RRP - Report and Recommendation of the President SCF - Standard conversion factor SERF - Shadow Exchange Rate Factor SWRF - Shadow Wage Rate Factor TA - Technical Assistance UK - United Kingdom USD - Unites States Dollar

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 2 Final Report

VAT - Value Added Tax WL - Water level WRPPF - Water Resources Project Preparatory Facility

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 3 Final Report

Executive summary

Introduction Nepal’s low level of development and complex topography renders the country highly vulnerable to climate change impacts and it is prone to natural hazards. During the monsoon season (June to September) Nepal receives 80% of the country’s annual rainfall resulting in widespread inundation in low lying areas. Flooding is reported to account for about 12% of total deaths and 63% of total families affected by all types of natural hazard-induced disasters in the country. Development activities and increasing population have caused further vulnerability and pressure on already scarce land resources. The increasingly frequent flood events threaten the country’s economic development and undermine the country’s progress toward poverty reduction.

The Terai Region of Nepal is particularly vulnerable to flood events. The region lies at the foothills of the Siwalik and Mahabharata mountains, which are highly degraded and have a high rate of deforestation. The mountains’ exposure to high-intensity precipitation extremes are projected to increase in frequency and intensity with climate change. A network of rivers originating from the mountains carry significant sediment loads leading to deposition in the riverbeds, reducing the channel capacity, inundating riverbanks causing recurrent and severe flooding of the adjacent floodplains. Flooding causes significant damage to infrastructure, crops and erodes agricultural land affecting the lives and livelihoods of the population living in the area. The region has only 17% of Nepal’s total land area but accounts for 51% of the 2.64 million hectares (ha) of cultivable land. During heavy monsoon rainfall in August 2017, the southern Terai plains were critically affected, with an estimated $340.3 million of damages to agriculture, irrigation and livestock. The total damage by the flooding was estimated at $584.7 million, almost 3% of Nepal’s gross domestic product.

The Government of Nepal (GoN) has requested the Asian Development Bank (ADB) to support the development of the Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project which focuses on seven priority river basins in the Terai Region: West Rapti, Mawa-Ratuwa, Lakhandei, Mohana, Khutiya, East Rapti, and Bakraha. The locations of the different basins, which have been grouped into six sub-projects, are shown in Figure X1.

Figure X1: Subproject Locations

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 4 Final Report

The project aims to reduce flood-related economic and social losses in the priority river basins by strengthening integrated disaster risk management approaches. The direct project beneficiaries include local communities within the project area, DWRI and the Department of Hydrology and Meteorology (DHM). Public sector support is justified as it is unlikely that the private sector would invest because of the mainly social project benefits.

The WRPPF Package 7 project has the following outputs:

· Output 1: Flood protection infrastructure improved. · Output 2: Flood response capacity enhanced. · Output 3: Flood prevention and preparedness capacity improved.

This document is the Final Report which describes the activities carried out under Package 7 of the WRPPF in support of the above output areas. These activities included the project preparatory work for the six sub-projects including:

· Feasibility design; · Detailed design; · Social and Environmental Safeguards; · Flood Early Warning System (FEWS) design; · CBDRM Approach; · Financial and economic analysis for each sub-project and the WRPPF project as a whole; and · Preparation of procurement documents including Project Administration Manual (PAM).

Output 1: Flood protection infrastructure improved For this project six feasibility studies, one for each of the sub-projects, as well as two detailed design studies for the Mohana – Khutiya and Mawa – Ratuwa sub-projects were prepared. The designs in each basin were guided by the principles of sustainability and adaptability as well as being environmentally friendly (bio-engineering) and low-cost solutions.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 5 Final Report

The design was informed by a range of primary and secondary data, site visits by the project team as well as a range of associated studies. These studies included:

· Morphology assessment; · Hydrological and hydraulic modelling; · Initial Environmental Examinations; · Social Safeguarding including Resettlement Planning; · Economic Assessments;

Achieving innovation Hydrological and hydrodynamic models were used in this project to obtain a better understanding of the present hydrological and hydraulic regimes in the priority river basins. Furthermore, modelling was carried out to assess the potential impacts of the proposed interventions under present day and future conditions taking climate change into account.

The use of hydrological and hydrodynamic models for river basin management is a comparatively new approach in Nepal. Traditionally, empirical formulae are used for the estimation of design flood flows.

Based on the modelling, flood maps for each river were produced which identify flood prone areas for a range of flooding probabilities. These maps will aid the Community Based Disaster Risk Management process as well as the land-use planning process of the government (‘Zoning’ as defined in the DWIDM Policy 2072). Zoning is a non-structural measure for flood management.

Natural-based solutions for Nepal Where viable, natural-based solutions where considered for the design. The choice of natural- based solution proposed depended on the characteristics of each site. This included the use of grasses for embankment protection; the integration of Vetiver grass into hard structures in rural landscapes; the use of bamboo porcupines for erosion protection and to support sedimentation; to induced meander cut-offs; and to intentionally allow erosion.

Mawa-Ratuwa Basin

Detailed designs have been prepared and are programmed for implementation under the scope of this project for 10,485m of embankments with revetments; 1,330m of additional revetments; 188 spurs and 19 outlet structures. The locations of the priority structures are shown in Section 3 Figure 11. The details of individual priority work structures are presented in Appendix A.

The subproject on Mawa - Ratuwa Basin, located in the Terai of Eastern Nepal, is categorized as an Environmental Category B and accordingly an Initial Environmental Examination (IEE) has been prepared as a stand-alone document.

Overall the project’s impact on indigenous people is expected to be minimal, with the main impact being loss of land / economic displacement. A land acquisition, resettlement and IP (LARIP) plan is prepared to mitigate these impacts.

For involuntary resettlement, the Mawa - Ratuwa Basin subproject is a Category C project for ADB, i.e. there are no involuntary resettlement impacts, and Category C / Low risk under the Nepalese Guideline. There is no need for further action.

Bakraha Basin

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 6 Final Report

For this basin preliminary designs of flood protection schemes defending life and property up to a 1 in 50 years return period including the impact of climate change have been prepared. In total, 17,355 m of embankments protected with revetments, 600 m of revetments only, and 114 spurs have been designed for costing. However, for economic viability only 4,365 m of embankment protected by revetments and 42 spurs are recommended for implementation. The locations are shown in Section 3 Figure 17.

The subproject in the Bakraha Basin, located in the Terai in the east of Nepal, is categorized as an Environmental Category B. Accordingly an IEE has been prepared as a stand-alone document.

The Indigenous People (IP) risk categorisation in line with ADB criteria and Ministry of Energy, Water Resources and Irrigation (MEWRI) sector guideline criteria, this subproject is Category B with limited impacts on IPs.

For involuntary resettlement, the river basin subproject is a Category C project for ADB i.e. there are no involuntary resettlement impacts and Category C/Low risk under the Nepalese Guideline. There is no need for further action.

Lakhandei Basin

For this basin preliminary designs of flood protection schemes defending life and property up to a 1 in 50 years return period including the impact of climate change have been prepared. In total 9,130 m of embankments with revetments, 6,055 m of revetments only and 148 spurs have been designed for costing. However, for economic viability only 1,600 m of embankment protected by revetment, 1,160 m of revetments only and 27 spurs are recommended for implementation. The locations are shown in Section 3 Figure 25.

The Lakhandei subproject has been categorized as an Environmental Category B. Accordingly an IEE has been prepared as a stand-alone document.

The IP risk categorisation, in line with ADB criteria and MEWRI sector guideline criteria, for this subproject is Category B with limited impacts on IPs.

East Rapti Basin

Only non-structural measures are being taken forward under the project. As a result, there are no negative social impacts associated. With regards to the non-structural measures, this project is classified as Environmental Category C and an environmental assessment is covered in the Environmental Assessment & Review Framework (EARF).

West Rapti Basin

For this basin preliminary designs of flood protection schemes defending life and property up to a 1 in 50 years return period including the impact of climate change have been prepared. In total, 18,840 m of embankments protected by revetments and 75 spurs have been designed for costing. However, for economic viability only 12,530 m of embankment protected by revetment and 36 spurs are recommended for implementation. The locations of the priority structures are shown in Section 3 Figure 35.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 7 Final Report

The West Rapti sub-project has been categorized as an Environmental Category B. IEE has been prepared as a stand-alone document.

The IP risk categorisation of this sub-project, in line with ADB criteria and MEWRI sector guideline criteria, is Category B with limited impacts on IPs.

Mohana-Khutiya

For this basin preliminary designs of flood protection schemes defending life and property up to a 1 in 50 years return period including the impact of climate change have been prepared. In total 7,250 m of embankment protected by revetment, 3,030 m of embankment only, 2,150 m of revetments only and 146 spurs will be implemented. The locations of the priority structures are shown in Section 3 Figure 40.

The Mohana-Khutiya sub-project has been categorized as an Environmental Category B. IEE has been prepared as a stand-alone document.

The IP risk categorisation of this sub-project, in line with ADB criteria and MEWRI sector guideline criteria, is Category B with limited impacts on IPs.

Output 2: Flood response capacity enhanced The selection of the most appropriate flood forecasting modelling tool(s) for each of the project basins was guided by the flowing criteria:

· Achievability and affordability · Data availability · Basin characteristics/complexity · Target accuracy and reliability · Target lead time · Needs of the flood risk communities · Ability of the operating organisation to routinely operate, maintain and update the models

Based on these criteria and based on a review of the existing FEWS in operation in Nepal the following forecasting tools have been proposed:

● Gauge-to-gauge correlation: the simplest and cheapest method, fast to develop, and thus could be operational within 7 to 8 months from the inception of the project. However, it has a very short lead time (2 to 5 hours) and is not appropriate in upper steep slope river reaches, as flood wave propagates fast in those reaches and correlation of two gauges is not strong due to presence of pools and riffles.

● Combined rainfall-runoff and gauge-to-gauge correlation: with the addition of a runoff model, the forecast lead time could be extended up to 72 hours. However, this requires a stage- discharge rating curve at each gauging station; such rating curve is difficult to develop for out- of-bank flow conditions without a hydraulic model; as soon the hydraulic model will be developed (within 9 to 10 month), such rating curve will be available from the model

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 8 Final Report

● 1-d model: this tool will be developed for the entire river system in the Terai and is appropriate for flood forecasting which is the same model type used in Bangladesh.

● 1-d/2-d linked model: this will be the final delivery around month 24. A pure 2-d model will be developed and transformed into a 1-d/2-d linked model with the linkage to the 1-d model.

Output 3: Flood prevention and preparedness capacity improved A Community Based Disaster Risk Management (CBDRM) approach was developed with a view to compliment the proposed structural components under Output 1. The CBDRM approach was designed to achieve the following project objectives:

i. Reduce the loss of life, household and community assets, property and livelihoods from flood-related and other disasters through development of Disaster Risk Management Plans (DRMP) for implementation in target communities, and

ii. Strengthen community resilience and a create safer environment for economic and social development, through building FFEWS awareness, adoption of mitigation strategies and provision of flood shelters.

The approach first defined the key principles that will guide the planning and implementation of CBDRM for the project. The most important of these are that it a) will be developed within the context of the legal and policy framework of the GoN and b) that planning, and decision making should facilitate ownership and both municipal and community levels.

Based on a number of selection criteria, target communities will be identified in each of the six priority basins for the implementation of the CBDRM. The process for identifying these target communities will be based on flood and hazard mapping, surveys and stakeholder consultations. Following the selection of target communities, community resilience surveys will be undertaken. The purpose of these surveys is to collect information on the knowledge, attitudes and practices of households in dealing with natural hazards.

Having set out the guiding principles and selecting target communities, the implementation of CBDRM will be through two components, which are:

1. Component 1: Institutional Disaster Risk Management (DRM) Capacity Building; This focuses on strengthening capacities of DRM at municipality level and will provide an important framework for supporting community-based DRM initiatives. It involves the establishment of institutional structures (Local Disaster Management Committees, LDMC) and plans (Local Disaster Risk Management Plans, LDRMP), as well as the establishment of early warning systems and structural and non- structural preparedness measures.

2. Component 2: Community-based DRM capacity building; This directly engages communities in understanding and managing the risks they face through enhancing community decision making and resource mobilisation. It will involve the following; · Establishment of Community Disaster Risk Management Committees (CDRMC); · Development of Community Disaster Risk Management Plans (CDRMPs); · Establishment of Community Disaster Response Teams (CDRT), and · Small mitigation measures and livelihood support. Table E1 below gives a summary of proposed interventions for each of the project outputs.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 1 Final Report

Table E1: Overview of Proposed Project Interventions Mohana Mawa Lakhandei Bakraha West Rapti East Rapti Khutiya Ratuwa Output 1: Flood protection infrastructure improved (Civil Works) Embankments protected with 7,250 10,485 1,600 4,365 12,530 - Revetment (m) Embankment only 3,030 - Additional 2,150 1,330 1,160 0 - - Revetments (m) Spurs (no) 146 188 27 42 36 - Outlet Structures 16 19 not designed yet - (no) Output 2: Flood Response Capacity Enhanced (FFEWS)

Rain gauge (no) 11 4 5 6 5 12 Hydrometric Gauge 9 4 4 5 8 6 Network (no) Output 3: Flood Preparedness Capacity Improved (CBDRM) CBDRM Implementation in 20 20 10 6 10 10 Communities (no) Construction of 13 11 6 3 10 5 Flood Shelters (no) Project Benefits Protected Land (1 in 435 808 356 710 - 50yr) ha People benefitting 3,647 2,869 1,680 5,910 - (no) Households 729 639 502 985 - Benefitting (no) Environmental, Indigenous People and Involuntary Resettlement Categorisation Environmental Category Category B Category B Category B Category B Category B Categorisation B (IEE) (IEE) (IEE) (IEE) (IEE) (EARF) Indigenous People B (Limited B (Limited B (Limited B (Limited B (Limited B (Limited Categorisation impacts) impacts) impacts) impacts) impacts) impacts) Involuntary ADB ADB ADB Category ADB Category ADB Category ADB Category Resettlement Category Category C C (No impact) C (No impact) C (No impact) C (No impact) Categorisation C (No (No impact) impact) Nepali Govt Nepali Govt Nepali Govt Nepali Govt Nepali Govt Category C Category C Category C Category C Nepali Category C (Low risk) (Low risk) (Low risk) (Low risk) Govt (Low risk) Category C (Low risk)

Project Costs

Total Project costs including contingencies for 6 subprojects amount to NPR 8,062 million (USD 61.58 million) including costs for any uncertainty related to land and the environmental management action plan, project implementation consultancy, infrastructure and the proposed FFEWS, but excluding interest during implementation estimated at USD1.42 million. In economic prices, the cost is NPR 7,238.8 million (US$ 55.26 million).

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 1 Final Report

Table E2: Project Cost including contingencies by Expenditure Category (NPR’000)

Investment Costs 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 Total Civil Works 207,280 703,640 1,042,216 1,468,105 1,262,625 680,558 23,545 5,387,969 Equipment 0 120,993 178,904 173,647 167,331 57,029 0 697,903 Supplies, Materials & 1,908 37,082 42,418 45,678 37,074 34,980 32,586 231,724 Operations Studies and Surveys 0 88,044 140,635 149,607 159,003 56,281 0 593,570 Training and 0 5,215 8,615 9,277 9,969 9,702 1,751 44,528 Workshops Consulting Services 4,188 67,219 76,292 83,043 86,364 88,161 4,593 409,861 Government Staff 4,766 38,077 79,514 85,625 92,009 94,811 64,721 459,524 Resettlement 178,006 13,336 14,396 15,502 16,658 0 0 237,898 Total 396,148 1,073,607 1,582,989 2,030,484 1,831,032 1,021,520 127,196 8,062,977

Project Financial and Economic Viability A Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) was carried out for each sub-project to assess each sub-project’s individual economic viability. Additionally, a CBA for carried out for the entire WRPPF Package 7 project.

Pre-feasibility studies for the priority river basins were carried out in 2015-16. The methodology used in the economic and financial analysis prepared for these studies was detailed and comprehensive, particularly regarding the factors contributing to project benefits.

For the present study the benefit estimation methodology and models prepared for the prefeasibility studies were adopted. This included the estimates of housing classes and the extent of damage to the buildings and infrastructure for each flood return period. Additionally, the present study generated new data for the flood vulnerable areas and for the infrastructure within each flood envelope. Prices for infrastructure, agriculture and livestock were also updated to 3rd quarter of 2018 prices for all sub-projects’ areas. Costs for the feasibility level designs have been updated in accordance with the current district unit costs for the sub-project districts.

Results of Economic Analysis

The prevention of flood related damage is the main source of benefits for the subprojects.

Risks to the subproject may occur in implementation if, for any reason, structures are not completed to the required standard. Another source of risk would be climate change engenders more and larger floods than have so far been predicted.

The results of the analysis are shown in the table. No cost benefit analyses were completed for East Rapti or for Lakhandei subprojects but both projects have extensive non-quantified benefits and the cost of implementing them are included in the estimate of the total project EIRR.

Table E3: Cost Benefit Analysis for all Sub Projects

Sub Project EIRR % NPV (NPR m) Mohana Kutiya 16.9 964.4 Mawa Ratuwa 9.2 20.2 West Rapti 16.5 362.9

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 2 Final Report

Lakhandei Not estimated - Bakaraha 15.0 211.5 East Rapti Not estimated -

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 3 Final Report

1 Introduction

1.1 Rational Nepal’s low level of development and complex topography renders the country highly vulnerable to climate change impacts and it is prone to natural hazards. During the monsoon season (June to September) Nepal receives 80% of the country’s annual rainfall resulting in widespread inundation in low lying areas. Flooding is reported to account for about 12% of total deaths and 63% of total families affected by all types of natural hazard-induced disasters in the country. Development activities and increasing population have caused further vulnerability and pressure on already scarce land resources. The increasingly frequent flood events threaten the country’s economic development and undermine the country’s progress toward poverty reduction.

The Terai region has a long history of floods affecting livelihoods and agriculture. Figure 1 shows the large number of districts that were affected by floods during the monsoon in August 2017.

Figure 1: Monsoon affected districts 11-13 August, 2017 (source: reliefweb.int)

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 4 Final Report

Vulnerable communities in the Terai are increasing due to the migration of people from the mountains and hills to flood prone areas in the Terai region in search of better livelihoods. The region’s climate-sensitive agriculture sector is dominated by small-scale farmers with the women contributing substantially in terms of farm labour and decision-making. Both farmers and communities are not fully prepared for flooding due to limited warnings of impending flood events. The region’s inadequate investment in disaster risk management including flood protection affects the poor and marginalized, who are occupying the most hazard-exposed areas.

Flooding in the Terai can have a significant impact on the country. The region has only 17% of Nepal’s total land area but accounts for 51% of the 2.64 million hectares (ha) of cultivable land. During heavy monsoon rainfall in August 2017, the southern Terai plains were critically affected, with an estimated $340.3 million of damages to agriculture, irrigation and livestock. The total damage by the flooding was estimated at $584.7 million, almost 3% of Nepal’s gross domestic product.

Several government agencies are actively involved in flood risk management, employing structural measures such as river protection works, and non-structural measures such as early warning systems, district and village disaster risk management plans. However, effective prioritization of disaster risk management at local level in the Terai Region remains challenging and consequently flood mitigation is less effective. This is primarily due to a lack of financial investment (both in construction and maintenance of assets), and limited technical capacity of the government agency with reactive interventions being a priority. The Department of Water Resources and Irrigation (DWRI) is responsible for all protection works for water induced disasters. There are, however, no guidelines for prioritizing works requested by communities. This results in non-optimal construction of embankment works without consideration of impacts to other areas. Furthermore, there is a lack of flood forecasting, gaps in Nepal’s hydro- meteorological stations and minimal communication strategies for effective early warning systems.

Collectively, 22,000 ha of the priority river basins and 95,000 people are exposed to a 1-in-50 year flood. In the project areas minimal reactive embankment interventions are implemented, which provide limited flood protection. Between 1991 and 2015 the priority river basins experienced 390 floods of which 35 floods caused economic damage of at least NPR1 million, 37 floods caused a total of 440 deaths, and 79 floods caused a total destruction of greater than 10 households. Flood risk is expected to increase as more people and assets locate into the vulnerable areas of the Terai Region. This risk will be further exacerbated by climate change. The project aims to reduce flood-related economic and social losses in the priority river basins by strengthening integrated disaster risk management approaches. The direct project beneficiaries include local communities within the project area, DWRI and the Department of Hydrology and Meteorology (DHM). Public sector support is justified as it is unlikely that the private sector would invest because of the mainly social project benefits.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 5 Final Report

Figure 2: Location of sub-projects The project aligns key government policy directives and goals such as the National Water Plan, 2002–2027 which promotes risk-reduction for severe flooding through improved infrastructure, functional water induced-disaster warning systems and integrated water resources management. The project also aligns with the National Strategy for Disaster Risk Management which also promotes the development of a well-functioning modern hydro-meteorological and early warning system aimed at enhancing government disaster risk management capacity. Combined, these policy directives and goals seek to reduce the vulnerability of communities by increasing their adaptive capacity to manage flood risks.

The project directly supports key ADB policy and operational plans. Project outputs contribute to ADB’s Water Operational Plan 2011–2020 which identifies flood and drought mitigation as an urgent challenge to be addressed in the integrated water resource management process. The project furthermore contributes to key objectives of the ADB’s Operational Plan on Integrated Disaster Risk Management 2014–2020. The project builds on the ADB’s Climate Investments Fund’s Pilot Program for Climate Resilience Technical Assistance (TA), which supports establishing early warning systems and mobilizing community participation in water-induced disaster management. The project is included in the country operations business plan, 2018– 2020 for Nepal as a 2020 standby project.

1.2 Impact and Outcome The project will provide long-term sustainable solutions for flood control infrastructure as well as Flood Forecasting and Early Warning System (FFEWS). Investments in infrastructure and early warning systems will be supplemented by Community Based Disaster Risk Management (CBDRM) interventions and targeted capacity development. The outcome of the project will be that ‘The resilience of communities to flood risks in selected river basins in the Terai Region is improved’1. The project will be aligned with the following impacts: (i) social and economic losses due to water-induced disasters are reduced; (ii) assessment, identification, monitoring and early warning system on potential disasters are strengthened.

1 Government of Nepal, MoHA. 2009. National Strategy for Disaster Risk Management (NSDRM). Kathmandu

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 6 Final Report

1.3 Outputs The project has the following outputs:

· Output 1: Flood protection infrastructure improved. Specifically, the project will reduce direct impacts from flooding through: (a) rehabilitation and construction of flood control infrastructure; (b) demonstration of nature-based solutions for better flood risk management such as bio-engineering river embankments with suitable flora/vegetation to prevent soil erosion, and (c) development of flood protection infrastructure maintenance manuals and monitoring systems.

· Output 2: Flood response capacity enhanced. This project will support government and communities in flood prone areas to improve early warnings systems through: (a) installation of hydro-meteorological stations and strengthening capacity for flood forecasting; (b) strengthening early warning communications system, possibly using sirens, mobile phone technology, to communicate advance flood warnings to local communities; and (c) flood forecasting and early warning system maintained.

· Output 3: Flood prevention and preparedness capacity improved. This will be delivered by (a) preparing and implementing a project stakeholder communication and outreach program; (b) undertaking organizational capacity-building program on flood risk management and infrastructure planning for DWRI; and (c) developing CBDRM plans in line with local development plans and budgets that integrate disaster risk information.

1.4 Purpose of this report This is the Final Report of the project “Preparation of Priority River Basin Flood Risk Management”, which covers 6 priority river basins in the Terai Region. The outline of the report is as follows:

Chapter 2 Describes some important aspects of the methodology Chapter 3 Provides a summary of the structural and non-structural measures defined for the 6 sub-projects Chapter 4 Provides an overview of the cost-benefit analysis of the 6 sub-projects and the project as a whole Chapter 5 Provides an overview of the submitted deliverables / documents Chapter 6 Describes the implementation arrangements Chapter 7 Describes the Design and Monitoring Framework

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 7 Final Report

2 Methodology

2.1 Introduction In this chapter the general methodology as applied for this project is described. For details, reference is made to individual technical reports (see Chapter 4). In this chapter the following main items of the methodology are described:

- Innovative and nature-based solutions; - Hydrological and hydrodynamic modelling; - Design strategy for hydraulic structures for flood mitigation. - Flood forecasting and early warning systems - Community based disaster risk management - Financial and economic analysis - Safeguards

2.2 Innovative and nature-based solutions Innovative solutions need to be explored as an option to further develop flood management capacities in Nepal. Innovative solutions can be found in the applied structures but also in the methodology.

Methodology, an innovative approach for Nepal Making use of hydrological and hydrodynamic models for river basin management is a new approach in Nepal. Traditionally, use is made of empirical formulae to calculate the required width of the river (e.g. Lacey parameter) and empirical formulae are used to estimate the design flood flow. Using hydrological and hydrodynamic models, a better understanding of the impact of climate change and proposed interventions can be obtained. The impact that proposed interventions may have on water-levels can be assessed and structures which restrict the river too much can be avoided or redesigned. Applying models for river basin management provides the opportunity of a better understanding of the river basin, the impact of climate change and the impact of proposed interventions.

The flood maps provide insight into the impact of floods. This insight can be used for different purposes such as the identification of flood prone areas, explanation to communities about the impact of floods (CBDRM) and land-use planning of the government. Zoning is a non-structural measure for flood management. Flood maps support the land-use zoning, as defined in the DWIDM Policy 2072.

Natural-based solutions for Nepal Where applicable, the Consultant considered the implementation of natural-based solutions at all locations. The choice of natural-based solution proposed depended on the characteristics of each site;

- Grasses are used to protect embankments; a) the outer (river-side) slope of the embankment above the design water level; b) the crest of the embankment; and c) the inner (land-side) slope. Further, as mentioned above certain grasses will also be incorporated into the revetment gabion baskets. Some embankments which are set back from the riverbank and are not exposed to high velocities or wave attack may not need gabion protection below the design water level and will be simply protected by grasses;

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 8 Final Report

- Integration of Vetiver grass into hard structures in a rural landscape has been proposed. Vetiver grass will be planted into the top rows of revetment gabions as a pilot project. The Vetiver grass can grow within the gabions making it a stronger structure and more environmentally friendly; - Bamboo porcupines have been considered on a case-by-case basis as a means of protecting river banks from erosion and encouraging sedimentation. It is emphasized that these types of structure do not have the same design life as hard structures and are mainly seen as emergency or temporary works; - Induced meander cut-offs have been considered on a case-by-case basis to straighten the river and avoid the continued river bank erosion which is part of the natural meander evolution process. Meander cut-offs connect the two closest parts of the meander to form a new channel. The steeper drop in gradient will cause the river flow gradually to abandon the old meander which will silt up with sediment from deposition. Cut-offs are a natural based solution since they are a natural part of the evolution of a meandering river, however they are not a permanent riverbank erosion protection solution and if implemented should be monitored after every flood season; - Allowing continued erosion and regular monitoring. In certain locations it may be advisable to allow continued erosion to occur, particularly if the adjacent erosion-risk land has low value or low productivity. Erosion is a natural process. In these cases the erosion situation will be monitored after every flood season.

2.3 Hydrological and hydrodynamic modelling Hydrological and hydrodynamic models were used during this project to obtain a better understanding of the impact of climate change and proposed interventions. For details, reference is made to the different River hydrology Assessment reports, which have been prepared for each of the six sub-projects.

2.3.1 Hydrological modelling HEC-HMS (Hydrologic Engineering Center - Hydrologic Modelling System) software was used for the preparation of the hydrological model.

Model and schematisation

The following sub-models were selected within HEC-HMS for computing flow:

· Initial and constant loss model: Interception and depression storage is considered as initial loss. After the initial loss is satisfied, the maximum potential loss of precipitation is constant throughout an event. The constant loss is considered to be the ultimate infiltration capacity of the soil. The model has two parameters: initial loss and constant loss rate; · Clark’ s runoff transform model: Clark’ s model derives a watershed Unit Hydrograph by explicitly representing two critical processes, translation and attenuation, in the transformation of excess precipitation to runoff. In this model, linear reservoirs represent the aggregated effect of storage. The time of travel is represented by a time area histogram. The model has two parameters: time of concentration and storage coefficient; · Recession base flow model: According to this model, the base flow decays exponentially from the starting flow. The parameter of this model is recession constant;

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 9 Final Report

· Lag routing model: According to this model, the outflow hydrograph is simply the inflow hydrograph, but with all ordinates translated (lagged in time) by a specified duration. Lag time is the parameter of this model.

The basins have been schematised into HEC-HMS using sub-basins, junctions, reaches and sinks. At each junction, the contribution of flow from each tributary is added. An example of a schematisation is shown in Figure 3.

Figure 3: Example of HEC-HMS Model Schematisation for Lakhandei Climate change

For a sustainable development it is crucial to include the impact of climate change. As described in the River Hydrology Assessment reports, the impact of climate change is integrated into the hydrological model by including the projected rainfall following the RCP4.5 climate change scenario. The climate change scenario of RCP4.5 was selected based on a detailed study during Package 3 and it was deemed suitable for use following our review.

Peak flow calculations

Based on the climate change scenario rainfall hyetographs were defined. As some of the basins were ungauged basins, it was not possible to define the model parameters (loss model parameter, Clark’s model parameters, recession base flow parameters and lag routing model parameter) based on observed data. For those basins, as an alternative, data from Babai River was used as a donor catchment. Babai Basin has similar characteristics to other rivers originating from the Siwalik range and has a gauging station at Chepang.

Based on the rainfall data and the defined parameters the peak flow with and without the impact of climate change for the different return periods were calculated. The return periods considered are: 2 years, 5 years, 10 years, 25 years, 50 years and 100 years.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 10 Final Report

2.3.2 Hydrodynamic modelling The hydrodynamic modelling was carried out by using the 1-dimensional HEC-RAS (Hydrologic Engineering Center - River Analysis System) software. The hydrodynamic model used for Package 3 could not be used and required redevelopment. This was because the Digital Elevation Model (DEM) used in Package 3 did not represent the actual situation. Key issues were;

(1) The use of the DEM to represent in-channel bed levels, which are not well picked up given the resolution of the DEM. (2) The absence of existing hydraulic structures. (3) Package 3 used a DEM from 2009.

Schematisation

1. River channel and floodplains: It was concluded that new hydrodynamic models had to be developed in order to have enough detail for the feasibility study. For this, existing data i.e. 2014 surveyed cross-sections from Package 3, together with new river cross- section surveys (surveyed in 2018) were incorporated in the new models to represent the river channels and floodplain areas. 2. Embankments: Embankments are modelled as lateral structures in HEC-RAS. Embankment crest levels have been picked up during the 2018 topographical surveys and used to define the lateral structures. In some of the 2014 surveyed cross-sections, the crest-level of the embankment was not included. The embankment levels for these sections have been inferred based on the 2018 topographic survey and the cross- sections modified accordingly. Levee markers are used in the HEC-RAS model when the embankments are overtopped, and flood passes to the flood plain.

3. Bridges: Bridges have been incorporated into the models using the bridge unit within HEC-RAS. Key data such as number of piers, span between the piers and level of the bridge were taken from the 2018 survey and included into the bridge editor.

4. Spurs and Porcupines: No topographical survey has been undertaken for spurs and porcupines, and these have not been considered in the HEC-RAS model. For spurs, the main purpose is to divert the main flow away from the embankments in order to decrease the velocity along the toe of the embankments / revetments to mitigate erosion. Spurs are relatively small structures that do not cause backwater. During flood conditions, the spurs are submerged and do not have a flood defence purpose. For that reason, the spurs have not been surveyed but only the locations have been identified. Porcupines do not constrict flow but rather stimulate sedimentation by reducing velocities. After a few years due to the accumulation of sedimentation the porcupines can be seen as a solid structure. They are not considered as a structure in the 1-d models, due to the uncertainty in the potential increase in sedimentation, and the possibility that the accumulated sediment could be washed out during an extreme flood event. Figure 4 shows and example of a schematisation based on the new topographic surveys.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 11 Final Report

Figure 4: Example of HEC-RAS schematisation of Lakhandei Basin Flow data

The HEC-HMS hydrological model calculates the discharges based on rainfall values with and without the impact of climate change. These discharges are inputs for the hydrodynamic model.

Model scenarios

For different return periods (1 in 2 years, 1 in 5 years, 1 in 10 years, 1 in 25 years, 1 in 50 years and 1 in 100 years) the following model runs were made:

· Reference Alternative (Run 1): This is the situation as per today including the existing structures;

· Future Alternative 1 (Run 2): This is the Reference Alternative (Run 1) including the impact of climate change;

· Future Alternative 2 (Run 3): This is the Future Alternative 1 (Run 2) including the proposed structures.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 12 Final Report

Based on the modelling results, flood maps for the different runs and return periods were prepared. An example is shown in Figure 5.

Figure 5: Example Flood Maps - Mawa-Ratuwa without (Run 1 – left) and with (Run 2 – right) the impact of climate change, 50 year return period

2.3.3 Design strategy of hydraulic structures for flood mitigation When preparing the preliminary designs, the following design aspects were considered:

- Sustainability; - Environmentally friendly (bio-engineering); - Adaptability; - Low cost solutions.

Sustainability

It is important that the proposed structures are sustainable and do not fail after one flood season. This requires that the implemented structures should be designed appropriately. Concerning embankments, possible overtopping or excessive rainfall can cause erosion / damage to the crest and / or inner slope of the embankment, which could result in failure of the embankment. To avoid this, besides protecting the outer slopes, also the crest and the inner slopes should be protected. Sufficient freeboard should be applied to compensate possible increasing bed levels due to aggradation and changes in climate change projections. It is also important, from a sustainability point of view, to make use of locally available materials, which also benefits the maintenance works.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 13 Final Report

Environmentally friendly (bio-engineering)

The structures must have sufficient resistance and height to mitigate the impact of floods. Nonetheless, they should also become an integrated part of the surrounding landscape. Large areas of the priority basins have a rural character. To integrate the structures into the landscape it is preferred to include environmentally friendly solutions (bio-engineering) into the designs. An environmentally friendly solution is to integrate e.g. Vetiver or other grasses into the structure design.

Grass such as Vetiver grass is implemented in different countries to protect the embankments (bank stabilisation) against floods and is also available in the Terai region. The root system of Vetiver grass is finely structured and very strong which stabilises the soil, making the embankments resistant against the flood waters.

Environmentally friendly solutions also have the advantage that they decrease the quantities of required construction materials, which results in lower construction costs.

Environmentally friendly solutions are already implemented in the Terai region, see Figure 6.

Figure 6: Example of environmentally friendly embankment (bio-engineering)

Adaptability

Due to the uncertainties in e.g. climate change, settlement and hydraulic boundary conditions it is important that the structures should be adaptable to future changes. When required, the crest level of the structure should be able to be increased to cope with future changes. For instance, adding another layer of e.g. gabions of soil on top of the existing structure.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 14 Final Report

Low-cost solutions

Budgets are limited while many areas in the basin require protection against erosion and / or flooding. To minimise the costs, it is important to make use of local available materials. Materials such as (reinforced) concrete are more expensive compared to locally available materials. This also benefits the maintenance works. Examples of low-cost solutions are shown in Figure 7.

Figure 7: Low-cost solutions bamboo porcupine (left) or nylon bags filled with sand to be used as spurs (right) Problem with these low-cost solutions is that the design life time is short to approximately 2-4 years.

Making use of local material also concerns the use of stones and boulders. For example, Khutiya Basin is the number one quarry in the far west of Nepal. Large quantities of materials (e.g. boulders) are excavated from the river bed and transported to different construction sites, see Figure 8.

Figure 8: Khutiya river bed used as quarry

Due to the local availability and lower costs compared to other construction materials, structures designed and constructed by the People’s Embankment Programme, PEP field office engineers mainly comprise gabions filled with suitable boulders and stones excavated from the river bed.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 15 Final Report

2.4 Flood Forecasting and Early Warning Systems (FFEWS) One of the key non-structural measures for reducing disaster risk is the provision of reliable and accurate flood forecasting systems that aid a better understanding of flood propagation in rivers and inundation of large floodplains. Implementation of FFEWS will reduce the impact of flooding, particularly the loss of life, as it would give people advance warning of impending floods and adequate time to evacuate flood prone areas.

In this study, the feasibility level design for a FFEWS has been prepared. The flood forecasting modelling tools which are proposed to be developed range from simple tools to more advanced hydraulic models in the five priority river basins. The FFEWS for West Rapti is not covered in this study because it is developed by the Department of Hydrology and Meteorology (DHM) under the World Bank funded project, “Building Resilience to Climate Related Hazards”.

This section gives an overview of FFEWS development in five priority basins.

2.4.1 Understanding FFEWS Needs and River Regime in Basins An effective flood forecasting and warning system has to be based on hydrological and hydrodynamic/hydraulic models to simulate rainfall-runoff from precipitation and to simulate propagation of floods along the tributaries, main streams and floodplains. Therefore, a proper understanding of the physical characteristics of a river system such as channel slope, river braiding, meandering and flood plain extent of river basins is key in the development of hydraulic models. In this study a detailed morphological assessment was undertaken, and a report produced. Recommendation were made for additional topographical surveys in river reaches.

2.4.2 Flood Forecasting Modelling Framework The prime objective of a FFEWS system is to acquire data in real time and disseminate alerts and warnings of rising water levels in river reaches. Flood forecasting models vary in complexity from simple gauge-to-gauge correlations to highly automated integrated catchment flood forecasting models. The degree of automation and sophistication should be considered based on the needs for a particular location and a particular community. While the type of forecast system will be typically based on existing hydrometric networks or the enhancement or development of new networks, the system will need to be achievable and affordable. The type of flood forecasting system will therefore depend on:

· Available data · Basin characteristics/complexity · Accuracy and reliability required · Lead time requirements · Needs of the flood risk communities · Ability of the operating organisation to routinely operate, maintain and update the models

2.4.3 Assessment of Hydro-Meteorological Data and Gauging Network Given that hydrological and hydrodynamic/hydraulic models form the building blocks of any FFEWS, an assessment hydro-meteorological data and hydrometric gauging network in the sub- basins was necessary. The objectives of the assessment were;

· Determination of data quality and availability from existing gauges. · Where data was of poor quality or incomplete, alternative data sources that could be used were explored e.g. satellite data.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 16 Final Report

· Ascertain if the density of meteorological gauging i.e. rainfall, evaporation and temperature was adequate for FFEWS development. This informed proposals for new meteorological stations where necessary. · Ascertain if there was a good coverage of discharge and water level stations at key/proposed forecast locations. New stations were proposed where gaps were identified.

2.4.4 Flood Forecasting Model Development For the selection of the most appropriate flood forecasting modelling tools to be adopted for the project, an assessment of existing DHM early warning systems was undertaken. This was necessary because the any proposed system needs to compliment and build on existing systems. There are several Flood Early Warning Systems (FEWS) on several major rivers around the country. These FEWS range from Probabilistic Flood Forecasting Models with lead times of 7-8 hours, to advanced hydrological and 1-d hydraulic forecast models that have lead times of up to 72 hours.

The full details of the flood forecasting modelling conceptualisation are presented in the FFEWS reports for the different sub-basins.

The following forecasting tools have been proposed:

● 1-d model: this tool will be developed for the entire river system in the Terai and is appropriate for flood forecasting which is the same model type used in Bangladesh.

● 1-d/2-d linked model: this will be the final delivery around month 24. A pure 2-d model will be developed and transformed into a 1-d/2-d linked model with the linkage to the 1-d model.

A summary of the FFEWS approach for each sub-basin is presented in Chapter 3.

2.5 Community Based Disaster Risk Management The Community Based Disaster Risk Management (CBDRM) for this project was developed with a view to compliment the proposed structural components. The adopted CBDRM methodology will through a participatory and community-based approach support the project objectives which are:

i. reduce the loss of life, household and community assets, property and livelihoods from flood-related and other disasters through development of Disaster Risk Management Plans (DRMP) for implementation in target communities, and ii. strengthen community resilience and a create safer environment for economic and social development, through building FFEWS awareness, adoption of mitigation strategies and provision of flood shelters.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 17 Final Report

The following gives an overview of the processes and activities proposed for the development of CBDRM for this project. Full details of the process are presented in a separate CBDRM Report submitted for this. The approach first defined the key principles that will guide the planning and implementation of CBDRM for the project. The most important of these are a) that it will be developed within the context of the legal and policy framework of the GoN and b) that planning, and decision making should facilitate ownership and both municipal and community levels.

Having set out the guiding principles and selecting target communities, the implementation of CBDRM will be through two components, which are:

1. Component 1: Institutional Disaster Risk Management (DRM) Capacity Building 2. Component 2: Community-based DRM capacity building.

These components are briefly discussed below, and details are presented in the main CBDRM report.

2.5.1 CBDRM Components

2.5.1.1 Component 1 Institutional DRM Capacity Building This focuses on strengthening capacities of DRM at municipality level and will provide an important framework for supporting community-based DRM initiatives. It involves the establishment of institutional structures (Local Disaster Management Committees, LDMC) and plans (Local Disaster Risk Management Plans, LDRMP), as well as the establishment of early warning systems and structural and non-structural preparedness measures.

2.5.1.2 Component 2 Community Based DRM Capacity Building This directly engages communities in understanding and managing the risks they face through enhancing community decision making and resource mobilisation. It will involve the following;

· Establishment of Community Disaster Risk Management Committees CDRMC, · Development of Community Disaster Risk Management Plans CDRMPs, · Establishment of Community Disaster Response Teams CDRT, and · Small mitigation measures and livelihood support.

2.5.2 Management and Implementation of CBDRM CBDRM will be created and implemented under this project in line with existing government framework. For the management of the CBDRM components the following structure is recommended;

· Steering Committee; The project will be guided by a Project Steering Committee comprising representatives from the Executing Agency (Ministry of Energy, Water Resource and Irrigation - MEWRI), the Implementing Agency (Department of Water Resource and Irrigation - DWRI), the Department of Hydrology and Meteorology (DHM), the Asian Development Bank and other relevant ministries and departments of the GoN.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 18 Final Report

· Basin Coordination Committees: For each basin comprising the municipal representatives of MEWRI, DWRI, DHM and other relevant ministries and departments. These committees provide guidance and policy support for this project and the relevant agencies have direct responsibilities for implementation of some aspects of this project.

· Project Management and Implementation Consultant Team (PMIC): The PMIC will provide overall management support and oversight of all the activities as well as technical support to relevant ministries/departments through FFEWS and preparedness infrastructure and CBDRM experts.

· Local non-governmental organisation (NGO), Community-Based Organisation (CBO): One or more local NGOs or CBOs (may differ between target locations) will provide management support and oversight of CDRMCs, undertake community mobilisation, resilience surveys, provide technical training and support for CDRTs and small scale mitigation and livelihood activities. The content of their TOR will be developed by the CBDRM Expert.

The estimated timeline for the implementation of CBDRM will be 5 years. The CBDRM implemented under the project will be handed over to respected municipalities after project completion.

2.6 Methodology for Financial and Economic Analysis The economic and financial analysis for the project has been carried out based on the requirements of the ADB’s Guidelines for the Economic Analysis of Projects (2017). The costs for the interventions proposed for each subproject have been estimated based on the designs prepared during the present feasibility studies.

Project benefits accrue from the damage and losses to infrastructure, buildings, agriculture, livestock and the affected population that are prevented through the implementation of the proposed flood mitigation works. These benefits were estimated in detail during the preceding prefeasibility studies and depend on the level (return period) of flooding mitigated, since larger floods will cause more damage and, with the project, generate larger benefits. For the present studies, the level of benefits has been updated based on the most recent available data on the infrastructure, buildings and population in the protected areas. The updated value of these benefits and the costs for the proposed project interventions are in third quarter 2019 prices.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 19 Final Report

3 Summary of project results

3.1 Introduction In this chapter the main results of the project are summarised. It includes a brief description of the basin, the structural and non-structural measures as included in the Cost Benefit Analysis (CBA), cost estimates and summary of the safeguards. For details, reference is made to the separate documents as enumerated in Chapter 5. General catchment characteristics of the 6 basins are summarised in Table 1.

Table 1: Subproject Basin Characteristics

Mawa Bakraha Lakhandei East Rapti West Rapti Mohana Ratuwa Khutiya

Catchment Area 413 km2 437 km2 425 km2 2,963 km2 6,370 km2 702 km2 (km2)

District/Province Morang and Ilam, Jhapa, Sarlahi Hetuada, Majorly in Kailali, Jhapa Morang Province 2 Chitwan Province 5 Kanchanpur Province 1 Province 1 Province 3 and small Province 7 parts in Province 6 & 4

No. of 366 357 264 1,564 4,264 359 Settlements

Population 165,260 165,435 260,988 610,000 949,100 190,063

Households 36,871 37,335 44,968 13,000 192,550 37,681

Major Towns Damak and Madhumalla, Lalbandi, Hetuada Kohalpur Dhangadi Urlabari Urlabari, Harwan, Municipality, (part of it) and Attrariya Pathari, Nawalpur, Bhandara, Gadawa, Hasandaha, Koudena, Bhimphedi, Lamhi, and Khutauna, Makwanpur Bhaluwang, Govindapur and Bhadsar Gadi, Bijuwar, Bhainse, Khalanga, Bharatpur Libang, and Metropolitan Khilji, City, Kohalpur Ratnanagar, (part of it) Ayodhapuri

Population Statistics CBS 2011

Due to limited budget availability for the project i.e. USD $65 million, proposed interventions had to be prioritised for the scheme to be economically viable. To achieve this the approach taken in prioritisation of potential locations for works involved close cooperation with the WRPPF and PEP field office to assess the on-ground situation in the different basins through site visits.

The main inputs to location prioritisation are (i) FHRMP Package 3 (pre-feasibility), (ii) the Detailed Project Report (DPR); (iii) site visits and (iv) discussions with knowledgeable Government staff.

An overview of proposed structural and non-structural interventions in each of the sub basins is described in the following sections.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 20 Final Report

3.2 Mawa – Ratuwa Basin

3.2.1 Location The Mawa – Ratuwa basin extends from the Chure Hills (Siwalik Hills, also known as sub- Himalayan hills, at low altitude) in the North to the Nepal - India border in the South, see Figure 9.

Figure 9: Mawa - Ratuwa Basin

Ratuwa River is the main water body, which is joined by the Mawa in the West, and Bidhawa and Chanju Khola in the East. The catchment covers an area of 413 km2 is located in the East of Nepal. The Mawa - Ratuwa Basin shares the districts of Morang and Jhapa, both in Province No. 1. The basin has 366 settlements distributed over rural and urban municipalities with a population of 165,260 and 36,871 households (CBS, 2011). Damak and Urlabari are the two major towns located in this catchment.

The Mawa and Ratuwa rivers are non-perennial and the flooding is characterized as being flashy in nature. There has been a history of 58 flood events between 1991 and 2015 of which a significant proportion have caused moderate damage and loss of life. It is emphasised that the

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 21 Final Report

section of Mawa river, north of the confluence with Ratuwa river was not included in Package 3. Table 2 provides an overview of the historic flood events in Mawa – Ratuwa Basin.

Table 2: High impact flood events (1991 – 2015) in Mawa – Ratuwa Basin 0 Description (threshold) Number of occasions [#] 1 Reported damage value (> NPR 1 million) 5 2 Reported dead (> 1) 1 3 Reported mission (> 2) 1 4 Reported injuries (> 2) 1 5 Reported affected people (> 500) 6 6 Reported affected households (> 10) 0 7 Reported evacuated households (> 15 people) 3 8 Reported relocated persons (> 50) 0 9 Reported housing destruction (> 10) 5 10 Reported damage housing (> 25) 2 11 Reported livestock loss (> 50) 0 12 Reported land affected (> 20 ha) 5 13 Reported other impacts (> 1) 0 Source: Package 3 Prefeasibility Reports Note: No detailed data per basin is available for the period after 2015

3.2.2 Civil works A comparison was made of structure locations from Package 3 and this Package 7 project for the Mawa – Ratuwa Basin to determine if they coincided. The Mawa section was not included in Package 3, meaning that no flood mitigation structures were proposed, or hazard maps were prepared for that section. Figure 10 shows the comparison for the 1 in 50 years return period between Package 3 and Package 7.

Figure 10: Comparison of proposed structures between Package 3 (left for structures and right for flood hazard) and Package 7 (centre) of Mawa – Ratuwa Basin Package 7 priority locations are consistent with the Package 3 locations of structures in the Mawa - Ratuwa basin.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 22 Final Report

The benefits of the project depend on the area that the proposed structures protect compared to the situation without the project, comparing Run 2 and Run 3. Table 3 provides an overview of the protected land.

Table 3: Affected and protected land for Mawa – Ratuwa Basin Return period Description 2 5 10 25 50 100 years years years years years years Run 1: Existing situation without the impact of climate change Affected area by flooding [ha] 1,483 1,952 2,397 3,169 3,945 4,462 Run 2: Run 1 including the impact of climate change Affected area by flooding [ha] 1,500 2,285 3,053 3,915 4,622 4,834 Run 3: Run 2 including the proposed structures Affected area by flooding [ha] 1,431 2,110 2,699 3,320 3,745 4,090 Protected land due to structures (difference of Run 2 and 3) Protected land [ha] 69 175 354 595 877 743 For the preliminary designs a return period of 1 in 50 years including the impact of climate change was used. For each of the priority works, preliminary designs have been developed.

In total the following structures are designed and implemented under the scope of this project: 10,485m of embankments with revetments; 1,330m of additional revetments; 188 spurs and 19 outlet structures . The locations of the priority structures are shown in Figure 11. The details of individual priority work structures are presented in Appendix A.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 23 Final Report

Figure 11: Location priority works Mawa – Ratuwa Basin

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 24 Final Report

Civil Works Costs Estimate The estimated capital costs for the hydraulic structures for Mawa – Ratuwa Basin are shown in Table 4 (1 USD = 115.08 NPR).

Table 4: Capital costs hydraulic structures Mawa – Ratuwa Basin No Description Amount (NPR) Amount (USD) Mawa A Civil works A1 Embankments/ revetments 201,461,753 1,750,624 A2 Spurs 173,907,743 1,511,190 A3 Outlet Structure 6,488,838 56,385 Ratuwa A4 Embankments/ revetments 336,523,196 2,924,254 A5 Spurs 222,701,187 1,935,186 A6 Outlet Structure 4,460,020 38,756 Sub-total A 945,542,737 8,216,395

B General Items B1 Mawa 1,718,362 14,932 B2 Ratuwa 2,536,580 22,042 Sub-total B 4,254,942 36,974

C Contingencies C1 Mawa 95,464,583 829,550 C2 Ratuwa 140,921,101 1,224,549 Sub-total C 236,385,684 2,054,099

D VAT D1 Mawa 49,641,583 431,366 D2 Ratuwa 73,278,972 636,765 Sub-total D 122,920,556 1,068,131

Grand Total 1,309,103,918 11,375,599

The maintenance costs are estimated as 3% of the economic prices of the civil works, which are NPR 39.3 million or USD 0.34 million. 3% is commonly used in Nepal to estimate the maintenance costs.

3.2.3 FFEWS and CBDRM

3.2.3.1 FFEWS It has been proposed to develop FFEWS for the Mawa - Ratuwa Basin. This includes a simple tool for use with the most advanced hydraulic models being employed in countries like Australia and UK. The simple tool could be operational within eight months, or as soon as some hydrometric data becomes available from the new proposed gauge network. Over a period of three years, advanced hydraulic models will be developed, calibrated, validated and will be made operational

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 25 Final Report

as more data becomes available from the new gauging network and new measurements. The following forecasting tools have been proposed:

· Gauge-to-gauge correlation: simplest and cheapest method, fast to develop, and thus could be operational soon. However, it has a very short lead time and is not appropriate in upper steep slope river reaches. There are also other limitations; · Combined rainfall-runoff and gauge-to-gauge correlation: due to the addition of a runoff model, the forecast lead time could be up to 72 hours. However, this requires a stage- discharge rating curve at each gauging station; such rating curve is difficult to develop for out-of-bank flow conditions without a hydraulic model; · 1-d model: this tool will be developed for the entire river system in the Terai and is appropriate for flood forecasting which is the same model type used in Bangladesh; · 1-d/2-d linked model: this will be the final delivery around month 24. The pure 2-d model and 1-d model will be transformed into a 1-d/2-d linked model; this is the advanced forecast model used in some areas of Australia, UK and Malaysia. Rain gauge network installation

Four new auto telemetry rain gauge stations have been proposed for installation. This will deliver one rain gauge in every 68km2 over the basin, similar to England (60km2) where rain gauge density is highest in Europe. The locations are shown in Figure 12.

Hydrometric gauge network installation

Four hydrometric stations have been proposed; one in Mawa and three in Ratuwa river. The locations have been chosen carefully to allow good calibration of run-off from hydrological model and river levels in the hydrodynamic model. At three stations, all in Ratuwa, both water level and discharge will be recorded, and at one station in Mawa, only water level will be recorded. One of the above discharge stations will be a cableway station. Proposed location will be finalised through discussions with DHM. The locations are shown in Figure 13.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 26 Final Report

Figure 12: Locations of existing and proposed equipment of rain gauges in Mawa – Ratuwa Basin

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 27 Final Report

Figure 13: Locations of existing and proposed equipment of water level and discharge equipment in Mawa – Ratuwa Basin Hydrometric equipment

ADCP, DGPS and echo sounder will be purchased for discharge measurement. This set of equipment will be used for discharge measurement for other basins, such as the Bakraha Basin, as well.

Topographic and asset survey

Topographical surveys have been conducted in 2018 within the project Package 7: WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project. Based on the surveys the hydrodynamic models and designs were prepared. The topographical surveys have been submitted to the WRPPF (January 2019). Reference is made to the final reports:

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 28 Final Report

- Deliverables – Final Social Survey Report for Detailed Design Project (July 2018); - Detailed Design Projects (Mawa – Ratuwa) Additional Survey (December 2018).

In summary, the topographical survey created cross-sections of the river and 100m of the banks at minimum 250m intervals down the river at the structure locations. Supplementary levels were taken to form the L-profile of the river banks. Standard static DGPS Survey method was adopted for the benchmarks, with total station used for the levels.

Budget for purchasing high resolution satellite imageries has been included for Mawa - Ratuwa basin for lower catchment only in Terai to provide DEM to model development and flood inundation map preparation.

3.2.3.2 CBDRM and flood shelters The CBDRM component will be developed as described in Chapter 2. Within the CBDRM component, at the community level, groups of people will be trained to guide the communities in the event of a flood warning and increase their resilience to respond. It is crucial that people know what to do and where to go in case of flood warnings.

CBDRM necessarily includes a participatory approach and a flood resilience capacity assessment with the local communities. An inventory of the different houses and buildings in each community should be made to identify the vulnerable and non-vulnerable places. Available schools or government buildings, which are most of the time higher and stronger structures compared to houses, can be used for temporarily shelter during flood events. In case of the absence of those kinds of buildings, flood shelters can be constructed. It is recognised that most communities do have some form of “safe house” (often a local school) identified, and the assessment process will need to review how appropriate the existing systems are.

In case flood shelters are required, it is important to discuss and decide together with the community where the flood shelter should be constructed. The location of the shelter will need to consider how safe it is (low/high ground), how far it is from those it is serving, and land ownership.

Flooding in the Mawa – Ratuwa Basin affects a large number of people. Table 5 provides an estimate of the flood affected people after construction of the structures as included within the scope of this project.

Table 5: Estimation of flood affected people in Mawa – Ratuwa Basin Return period Description 2 5 10 25 50 100 years years years years years years Run 1: Existing situation without the impact of climate change Flooded Area (ha) 1,483 1,952 2,397 3,169 3,945 4,462 Flood affected households (#) 345 497 635 965 1,456 1,865 Flood affected people (#) 1,554 2,235 2,858 4,342 6,554 8,393 Run 2: Run 1 including the impact of climate change Flooded Area (ha) 1,500 2,285 3,053 3,915 4,622 4,834 Flood affected households (#) 345 631 983 1,680 2,268 2,466 Flood affected people (#) 1,554 2,841 4,421 7,562 10,208 11,099

Run 3: Run 2 including the proposed structures

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 29 Final Report

Return period Description 2 5 10 25 50 100 years years years years years years Flooded Area (ha) 1,431 2,110 2,699 3,320 3,745 4,090 Flood affected households (#) 298 520 764 1,247 1,578 1,865 Flood affected people (#) 1,339 2,341 3,440 5,611 7,100 8,394 Considering that flood shelters are prepared for 150 – 200 people, a large number of flood shelters are required. However, existing schools, government buildings and those houses that are not vulnerable to flooding as well as a decrease the number of affected people due to future constructed flood mitigating works, less shelters will be required.

During the CBDRM phase, it is important that together with the national and local government, the most vulnerable areas are identified. For these areas a detailed survey needs to be conducted to identify which the vulnerable houses are and what houses / buildings / structures can be used for shelter. This project will not undertake a survey of the existing resources. As mentioned above, a local needs assessment is essentially a participatory process to create local ownership and resilience. At this stage, the project assumes that 20 communities require immediate support and of these communities, 9 have buildings such as schools that can be used as flood shelter and 11 new shelters will be needed. The indicative locations are shown in Figure 14.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 30 Final Report

Figure 14: Indicative locations of proposed flood shelters in Mawa – Ratuwa Basin

3.2.3.3 FFEWS and CBDRM Costs Estimates The capital costs and costs for operation and maintenance for Mawa – Ratuwa Basin are indicated in Table 6 and Table 7, respectively.

Table 6: Capital costs FFEWS and CBDRM in Mawa – Ratuwa Basin (1 USD = 115.08 NPR) Categories Unit Unit price Capital costs [#] [USD] [USD] [NPR] Development flood forecasting model Data: collection, processing, analysis 1 39,600 39,600 4,557,168 Hydrological modelling 1 96,500 96,500 11,105,220 Gauge to gauge correlation 1 52,000 52,000 5,984,160 Pure 2-d modelling 1 48,500 48,500 5,581,380 1-d modelling 1 84,000 84,000 9,666,720 1-d/2-d linked modelling 1 80,500 80,500 9,263,940

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 31 Final Report

Categories Unit Unit price Capital costs [#] [USD] [USD] [NPR] Modelling software with multi user network license*1 1 13,000 13,000 1,496,040 Topographic cross-section survey 1 47,789 47,789 5,499,558 Satellite imagery 1 14,050 14,050 2,767,674 Total 475,950 54,772,326 Hydro-meteorological data networking Rain gauge - Telemetry 4 5,000 20,000 2,301,600 Water level + discharge *3 90 *2 4,333 390,000 44,881,200 Water level 1 7,000 7,000 805,560 Total 417,000 47,988,360 Discharge measurement equipment / station installation DGPS 1 25,000 25,000 2,877,000 Echo-sounder 1 25,000 25,000 2,877,000 ADCP 1 35,000 35,000 4,027,800 Cable-way discharge station (building costs) 1 95,000 95,000 10,932,600 Total 180,000 20,714,400 CBDRM CBDRM (20 communities) 20 8,060 161,200 18,550,896 Flood Shelter 11 35,000 385,000 44,305,800 Total 546,200 62,856,696 *1: Modelling software license cost is distributed over five basins; the software will have multiple network license, and the cost shown here is per basin. West Rapti is exclude from the software cost *2: Discharge measurement to be carried out fortnightly from mid-May to mid-October; this will be 10 measurements per year, 30 in 3 years and total 90 measurements in 3 stations will be used in all basins in rotation; *3: Discharge measurement cost is a continuous expenditure, like model development cost (and should be considered similar to capital cost); it includes cost for all skilled human resources and the logistics required.

Table 7: Operation & maintenance costs FFEWS and CBDRM in Mawa – Ratuwa Basin (1 USD = 115.08 NPR) Categories Costs Costs Remarks [USD] [NPR] Development flood forecasting model Gauge to gauge correlation 49,850 5,736,738 Annual costs operation / dissemination Pure 2-d modelling 47,900 5,512,332 Annual costs operation / dissemination 1-d modelling 63,250 7,278,810 Annual costs operation / dissemination 1-d/2-d linked modelling 58,200 6,697,656 Annual costs operation / dissemination Hydro-meteorological data networking Rain gauge - Telemetry 6,000 690,480 For a period of 3 year Water level + discharge 6,000 690,480 For a period of 3 year Water level 6,000 690,480 - Discharge measurement equipment / station installation DGPS 1,250 143,850 - Echo-sounder 1,000 115,080 - ADCP 1,000 115,080 - CBDRM CBDRM (20 communities) 89,080 10,251,326 Operational costs for year 2 and 5 Notes: Maintenance cost of hydro-meteorological data networking is $2,000 per basin for all station per year; this involves routine site visits, repair and maintenance

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 32 Final Report

3.2.4 Safeguards

Social and environmental surveys have been conducted in the Mawa – Ratuwa Basin.

3.2.4.1 Environment safeguards

The baseline environmental conditions have been defined as well as the anticipated environmental impacts and mitigating measures. There will be a nominal additional cost for the implementation of above mentioned mitigation measures as majority of the mitigation measures are part of the Good Practices in the construction management as well as legally binding requirements that need to be complied with. Expected costs during implementation are 4,200,000 NPR or 36,496 USD (exchange rate: 1 USD = 115.08 NPR).

In addition to publishing the notice in a national newspaper informing communities about the project, a number of consultation meetings were organised covering the impacted local bodies to understand the public views about the project and obtain suggestions to minimise the adverse impacts. People expressed positive views towards the project and suggested that the river protection works should cover all along the river banks for long-term benefits.

3.2.4.2 Social safeguards - Indigenous people (IP) For this subproject, IP groups will not be differentially impacted than other community members. There are no direct negative impacts on IP groups. A small number of IP households who have their land plots at the river banks where the embankments will be constructed will impacted by loss of land / economic displacement. A land acquisition, resettlement and IP (LARIP) plan is prepared to mitigate these impacts.

IP groups will benefit from the project interventions for FFEWS and CBDRM, in a similar fashion to non-IP groups. The benefits will accrue to those living closer to the proposed structured locations, those who participate in flood risk management training, and those living within user distance of the flood shelters. The GESI Action Plan, in particular the social inclusion part, will address ways to ensure that IP and caste groups benefit in an equitable manner as non-IPs. For instance, by ensuring culturally appropriate communication campaigns and community development processes are undertaken.

Based on the above analysis, the IP risk categorisation in line with ADB criteria and MEWRI sector guideline criteria, this subproject is Category B with limited impacts on IPs.

3.2.4.3 Social safeguards - Involuntary resettlement Involuntary resettlement assessment undertaken during the Feasibility Study deemed that the Mawa - Ratuwa Basin subproject is a Category B project for ADB because it had involuntary resettlement impacts that are not deemed significant. Subsequently, the Involuntary Resettlement

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 33 Final Report

category was reclassified to C as during further detailed social due diligence activities, it was found that private landowners and non-title holders are both eligible and willing to contribute land for embankment construction on a voluntary basis. Voluntary land use donations will not severely affect the living standards of affected persons and the benefit of embankment construction will realistically offset the donation.

Involuntary resettlement is also a Category C / Low risk under the Nepalese Guideline.

The total costs for voluntary land donation and livelihood assistance are estimated to be NPR 65.7million equivalent to USD 0.57 million. For details, reference is made to the Social Due diligence Report Plan Mawa – Ratuwa Basin.

3.3 Bakraha Basin

3.3.1 Location The basin extends from Chure Hills (Siwalik Hills, also known as sub-Himalayan hills, at low altitude) in the north and in Terai (meaning low flat land) up to the Indo-Nepal border in the south, see Figure 15.

Figure 15: Bakraha Basin

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 34 Final Report

Bakraha is the main water course, which is joined by the key tributaries Soltikhola and Sunjhoda Khola. The catchment covers an area of 437 km2 in the east of Nepal Bakraha River System shares the district of Ilam and Jhapa in the East and Morang in the West, both in Province No. 1. The basin has 357 settlements distributed over rural and urban municipalities with a population about 165,435 and 37335 households (CBS, 2011). Madhumalla, Urlabari, Pathari, Hasandaha, and Govindapur are the major towns or village located in this basin.

Bakraha river is a non-perennial river and the flooding is characterized as being flashy in nature. There has been a history of 29 flood events between 1991 and 2015 of which a significant proportion have caused moderate damage and loss of life. In recent years, the river has experienced high sediment deposition often aggravated by landslides in the upper catchment. Table 8 provides an overview of the historic flood events in Bakraha Basin.

Table 8: High impact flood events (1991 – 2015) Bakraha Basin No Description (threshold) Bakraha 1 Reported damage value (> NPR 1 million) 5 2 Reported dead (> 1) 0 3 Reported mission (> 2) 0 4 Reported injuries (> 2) 0 5 Reported affected people (> 500) 3 6 Reported affected households (> 10) 0 7 Reported evacuated households (> 15 people) 0 8 Reported relocated persons (> 50) 3 9 Reported housing destruction (> 10) 2 10 Reported damage housing (> 25) 3 11 Reported livestock loss (> 50) 0 12 Reported land affected (> 20 ha) 5 13 Reported other impacts (> 1) 2 Source: Package 3 Prefeasibility Study Reports Note: No detailed information per basin is available for the period after 2015.

3.3.2 Civil works

Bakraha Basin was not included in the Package 3 pre-feasibility meaning that no flood mitigation structures were proposed and only flood hazard maps were prepared. To demonstrate consistency of Package 7 with Package 3 for Bakraha Basin, a comparison with the 1 in 50 years return period flood hazard map of Package 3 is made with the proposed structures of Package 7. The comparison is also shown in Figure 16.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 35 Final Report

Figure 16: Comparisons of flood hazard of Package 3 (left) and locations of proposed structures of Package 7 for Bakraha Basin Package 7 priority locations are consistent with the location of the extreme flood hazards as shown on the flood hazard map of Package 3.

The benefits of the project depend on the area that the proposed structures protect compared to the situation without the project, comparing Run 2 and Run 3. The table below provides an overview of the protected land.

Table 9: Flood affected and protected areas in Bakraha Basin Return period Description 2 5 10 25 50 100 years years years years years years Run 1: Existing situation without the impact of climate change Affected area by flooding [ha] 1,378 1,534 1,610 1,711 1,808 1,980 Run 2: Run 1 including the impact of climate change Affected area by flooding [ha] 1,412 1,606 1,711 1,858 2,105 2,463 Run 3: Run 2 including the proposed structures Affected area by flooding [ha] 1,288 1,426 1,499 1,591 1,749 2,173 Protected land due to structures (difference of Run 2 and 3) Protected land [ha] 124 180 212 268 356 290 For the preliminary designs a return period of 1 in 50 years including the impact of climate change has been used. In total, the following structures are designed: 17,355 m of embankments protected with revetments, 600 m of revetments only, and 114 spurs. The locations are shown in Figure 17. For details per priority structure, reference is made to Appendix A.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 36 Final Report

Figure 17: Location priority structures Bakraha Basin

3.3.2.1 Costs Estimates of Civil Works for Bakraha Cost estimate covering all proposed structures is NPR 1,212.92 million. The initial CBA shows that the sub-project was not feasible. To make the project feasible, the estimated costs for each of proposed structures were reviewed. The structures with comparatively low flood benefits and

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 37 Final Report

high investment costs have been analysed. Costs have to be reduced to make the project feasible. For that reason, structures PRTW.01, PRTW.02 PRTW.03, PRTW.05 and PRTW.09 were removed from the project. They have low flood benefits compared to the high investment costs.

The cost estimates, excluding the structures PRTW.01, PRTW.02 PRTW.03, PRTW.05 and PRTW.09, is shown in Table 10 (1 USD = 115.08 NPR). Works to be implemented under the scope of this project are: embankments: 4,365 metres; revetments: 4,365 metres; and 42 spurs.

Table 10: Capital costs hydraulic structures in Bakraha Basin No Description Amount [USD] Amount [NPR] A Civil works A1 - Embankments / revetments 1,542,129 177,468,237 A2 - Spurs 1,060,593 122,053,009

Sub-total A 2,602,722 299,521,246 B General items General items 11,712 1,347,846

Sub-total B 11,712 1,347,846 C Contingencies Contingencies 650,680 74,880,312

Sub-total C 650,680 74,880,312 D VAT VAT (13%) 338,354 38,937,762

Sub-total D 338,354 38,937,762 Grand total (A+B+C+D) 3,603,469 414,687,165 The maintenance costs are estimated as 3% of the economic prices of the hydraulic structures, which are NPR 11.0 million or USD 0.10 million.

3.3.3 FFEWS and CBDRM

3.3.3.1 FFEWS It has been proposed to develop FFEWS for the Bakraha Basin. This includes a simple tool for use with the most advanced hydraulic models being employed in countries like Australia and UK. The simple tool could be operational within eight months, or as soon as some hydrometric data becomes available from the new proposed gauge network. Over a period of three years, advanced hydraulic models will be developed, calibrated, validated and will be made operational as more data becomes available from the new gauging network and new measurements. The following forecasting tools have been proposed:

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 38 Final Report

· 1-d model: this tool will be developed for the entire river system in the Terai. This is similar to model type currently being used in neighbouring Bangladesh; · 1-d/2-d linked model: this will be the final delivery around month 24. The pure 2-d model and 1-d model will be transformed into a 1-d/2-d linked model. This advanced forecast model is being used in some areas of Australia, UK and Malaysia.

Rain gauge network installation

The basin has no existing hydrometric stations. Two stations are located just outside the basin.

Six new auto telemetry rain gauge stations have been proposed for installation in the Bakraha Basin under this project. These stations will be tipping bucket auto telemetered using GSM. The Bakraha catchment area is 437 km2. This will deliver a rain gauge station density as one rain gauge per 73 km2. For locations reference is made to Figure 18.

Hydrometric gauge network installation

Five hydrometric gauging stations in Bakraha catchments have been proposed. All stations are easily accessible and are located in the neighbourhood of a settlement. All stations have access to GSM (DHM, 2018). For locations reference is made to Figure 19.

The locations have been chosen carefully and will allow for calibration of runoff from the hydrological model and calibration of river levels in the hydrodynamic model. There will be three (3) water level (WL) and discharge (Q) stations (both parameters at same station), and two (2) WL only (no Q) stations.

At all five hydrometric stations, bed material samples shall be collected. At the three discharge stations, suspended sediment samples shall be collected.

Hydrometric equipment

Only budget for cableway construction has been considered for this basin. No budget for ADCP, DGPS and echo-sounder have been considered for this basin. The equipment set proposed to be bought for Mawa-Ratuwa Basin, will be used for this basin as well. Both basins are located adjacent to one another.

Topographic and asset survey

Topographic survey will include river section, any existing structures and flood embankment profile. In 54 km, 142 cross-sections will have to be surveyed. For topographic survey, no survey equipment has been proposed for purchase; survey will be done through outsourcing.

Budget for purchasing high resolution satellite imageries has been included for only the lower catchment of the Bakraha basin in the Terai. This will provide DEM to model development and input for flood inundation map preparation.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 39 Final Report

Figure 18: Locations of existing and proposed equipment of rain gauges in Bakraha Basin

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 40 Final Report

Figure 19: Locations of existing and proposed equipment of water level and discharge equipment in Bakraha Basin

3.3.3.2 CBDRM and flood shelters Only implementing a FFEWS is insufficient to protect the people living and carrying out their livelihoods in the flood prone areas. It is important to train community members in how to respond when a warning is given. Within the CBDRM component and at the community level, groups of people will be trained to guide the communities in the event of a flood warning and increase their resilience to respond. It is crucial that people know what to do and where to go in the event of flood warnings.

CBDRM includes a participatory approach and a flood resilience capacity assessment with the local communities. An inventory of the different houses and buildings in each community should be made to identify the vulnerable and non-vulnerable places. Available schools or government buildings, which are most of the time higher and stronger structures in comparison to houses, can

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 41 Final Report

be used for temporarily shelter during flood events. In case of the absence of these types of buildings, flood shelters can be constructed. It is recognised that most communities do have some form of “safe house” (often a local school) identified, and the assessment process will need to review how appropriate existing systems are.

Where flood shelters are required, it is important to discuss and decide together with the community where the flood shelter should be constructed. The location of the shelter will need to consider how safe it is (low/high ground), how far it is from those it is serving, and land ownership.

Flooding in Bakraha Basin affects a large number of people. Table 11 provides an estimate of the flood affected people, after construction of the structures as included within the scope of this project.

Table 11: Estimation of flood affected people in Bakraha Basin Return period Description 2 5 10 25 50 100 years years years years years years Run 1: Existing situation without the impact of climate change Flooded Area [ha] 1,378 1,534 1,610 1,711 1,808 1,980 Flood affected households (#) 450 541 603 704 793 887 Flood affected people (#) 2,440 2,929 3,265 3,813 4,295 4,806 Run 2: Run 1 including the impact of climate change Flooded Area [ha] 1,412 1,606 1,711 1,858 2,105 2,463 Flood affected households (#) 576 719 844 998 1,141 1,470 Flood affected people (#) 2,622 3,272 3,842 4,543 5,193 6,691 Run 3: Run 2 including the proposed structures Flooded Area [ha] 1,288 1,426 1,499 1,591 1,749 2,173 Flood affected households (#) 328 394 470 560 639 987 Flood affected people (#) 1,804 2,169 2,586 3,082 3,513 5,427 Taking into account that flood shelters are prepared for 150 – 200 people, a large number of flood shelters would therefore be required. However, existing schools, government buildings and those houses that are not vulnerable to flooding as well as a decrease in the number of affected people due to future constructed flood mitigation works, mean that fewer shelters will be required.

During the CBDRM phase, it is important to collaborate with the national and local government in the identification of the most vulnerable areas. For these areas a detailed survey needs to be conducted to identify which are the vulnerable houses and what houses / buildings / structures can be used for shelter. This project will not undertake a survey of the existing resources. As mentioned above, a local needs assessment is essentially a participatory process to create local ownership and resilience. At this stage, the project assumes that 6 communities require immediate support and of these communities, 3 have buildings such as schools that can be used as flood shelter and 3 new shelters will be needed. Indicative locations are shown in Figure 20.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 42 Final Report

Figure 20: Indicative locations of flood shelters in Bakraha Basin

3.3.3.3 FFEWS and CBDRM Costs The capital costs and costs for operation and maintenance for FFEWS and CBDRM for Bakraha Basin are indicated in Table 12 and Table 13, respectively.

Table 12: Capital costs FFEWS and CBDRM in Bakraha Basin (1 USD = 115.08 NPR) Unit Unit Capital costs Categories price [#] [USD] [USD] [NPR] Development flood forecasting model Data: collection, processing, analysis 1 32,500 32,500 3,740,100

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 43 Final Report

Unit Unit Capital costs Categories price [#] [USD] [USD] [NPR] Hydrological modelling 1 93,300 93,300 10,736,964 Gauge to gauge correlation 1 52,000 52,000 5,984,160 1-d modelling 1 68,000 68,000 7,825,440 1-d/2-d linked modelling 1 80,500 80,500 9,263,940 Modelling software with multi user network license 1 13,000 13,000 1,496,040 (see note below) Topographic cross-section survey 1 28,400 28,400 3,268,272 Satellite imagery purchase 1 16,500 16,500 1,898,820 Total 384,200 44,213,736 Hydro meteorological data networking Rain gauge - Telemetry 6 5,000 30,000 3,452,400 Water level + discharge 90 4,333 390,000 44,881,200 Water level 2 7,000 14,000 1,611,120 Total 434,000 49,944,720 Discharge measurement equipment / station installation Cable-way discharge station (construction costs) 1 95,000 95,000 10,932,600 Total 95,000 10,932,600 CBDRM CBDRM 6 8,060 48,360 5,565,269 Flood Shelter 3 35,000 105,000 12,083,400 Total 153,360 17,648,669 Notes: - Modelling software license cost is distributed over five basins; the software will have multiple network license, and the cost shown here is per basin. West Rapti is excluded from the software cost; - Discharge measurement to be carried out fortnightly from mid-May to mid-October; this will be 10 measurements per year, 30 in 3 years and total 90 measurements in 3 stations; - Discharge measurement cost is a continuous expenditure, like model development cost (and should be considered similar to capital cost); it includes cost for all skilled human resources and the logistics required.

Table 13: Operation & maintenance costs in Bakraha Basin (1 USD = 115.08 NPR)

Costs Costs Categories Remarks [USD] [NPR] Development of flood forecasting model Gauge to gauge correlation 25,275 2,908,647 Annual costs operation / dissemination 1-d modelling 37,875 4,358,655 Annual costs operation / dissemination 1-d/2-d linked modelling 37,800 4,350,024 Annual costs operation / dissemination Hydro-meteorological data networking Rain gauge - Telemetry 6,000 690,480 For a period of 3 year Water level + discharge 6,000 690,480 For a period of 3 year Water level 6,000 690,480 For a period of 3 year CBDRM CBDRM (6 communities) 26,724 3,075,398 Operational costs for year 2 to year 5 Notes: Maintenance cost of hydro-meteorological data networking is $2,000 per basin for all station per year; this involves routine site visits, repair and maintenance

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 44 Final Report

3.3.4 Safeguards

Social and environmental surveys have been conducted in the Bakraha Basin.

3.3.4.1 Environmental safeguards

The subproject in the Bakraha Basin, located in the Terai in the east of Nepal, is categorized as an Environmental Category B. Accordingly an IEE has been prepared as a stand-alone document to accompany this feasibility study.

The baseline environmental conditions have been defined, as well as the anticipated environmental impacts and mitigating measures. There will be a nominal additional cost for the implementation of above mentioned mitigation measures as the majority of the mitigation measures are Good Practice in construction management as well as legally binding requirements that need to be complied with. Expected costs during implementation are 4,200,000 NPR or 36,496 USD (exchange rate: 1 USD = 115.08 NPR).

In addition to publishing the notice in a national newspaper and informing communities about the project, a number of consultation meetings were organised. These meetings engaged with the impacted local bodies and sought to understand the public views about the project. Suggestions on how to minimise the adverse impacts were also obtained at these meetings.

Overall, people expressed positive views towards the project and suggested that the river protection works should cover all along the river banks for long-term benefits.

3.3.4.2 Social safeguards – Indigenous People (IP) For this subproject, IP groups will not be differentially impacted when compared to other community members. There are no direct negative impacts on IP groups. There is potential for a small number of IP households who have their land plots at the river banks where the embankments will be constructed to be impacted by loss of land/economic displacement. A LARIP plan is proposed to mitigate these impacts.

IP groups will benefit from the project interventions for FFEWS and CBDRM, in a similar fashion to non-IP groups. The benefits will accrue to those living closer to the proposed structured locations, those who participate in flood risk management training, and those living within user distance of the flood shelters. The GESI action plan, in particular the social inclusion part, will address ways to ensure that IP and caste groups benefit in an equitable manner as non-IPs. For instance, by ensuring culturally appropriate communication campaigns and community development processes are undertaken.

Based on the above analysis, the IP risk categorisation in line with ADB criteria and MEWRI sector guideline criteria, this subproject is Category B with limited impacts on IPs.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 45 Final Report

3.3.4.3 Social safeguards – Involuntary resettlement Initial Involuntary resettlement assessment undertaken during the Feasibility Study deemed that the river basin subproject is a Category B project for ADB because it had involuntary resettlement impacts that are not deemed significant.

Subsequently, the Involuntary Resettlement category was reclassified to Category C as during further detailed social due diligence activities, it was found that private landowners and non-title holders are both eligible and willing to contribute land for embankment construction on a voluntary basis. Voluntary land use donations will not severely affect the living standards of affected persons and the benefit of embankment construction will realistically offset the donation.

Involuntary resettlement is also a Category C / Low risk under the Nepalese Guideline.

3.4 Lakhandei Basin

3.4.1 Location The basin extends from Chure Hills (Siwalik Hills, also known as sub-Himalayan hills, at low altitude) in the North and in Terai (meaning low flat land) in the south up to the Indo-Nepal border, see Figure 21.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 46 Final Report

Figure 21: Lakhandei Basin

Lakhandei is the main water body; the key tributary is Chapani Khola in the West. The catchment covers an area of 425 km2 in the east Nepal, Province No. 1. Lakhandei River System lies in the district of Sarlahi in Province No. 2. The basin has 264 settlements distributed over rural and urban municipalities with a population about 260,988 and 44,968 households (CBS, 2011). Lalbandi, Harwan, Nawalpur, Koudena, Khutauna, and Bhadsar are the two major towns or village located in this basin.

Lakhandei river is a non-perennial river and the flooding is characterized as being flashy in nature. There has been a history of 69 flood events between 1991 and 2015 of which a significant proportion have caused moderate damage and loss of life. Table 14 provides an overview of the historic flood events in Lakhandei Basin.

Table 14: High impact flood events (1991 – 2015) Lakhandei Basin No Description (threshold) Lakhandei 1 Reported damage value (> NPR 1 million) 12 2 Reported dead (> 1) 11 3 Reported mission (> 2) 0 4 Reported injuries (> 2) 0 5 Reported affected people (> 500) 25 6 Reported affected households (> 10) 0 7 Reported evacuated households (> 15 people) 0 8 Reported relocated persons (> 50) 0 9 Reported housing destruction (> 10) 26 10 Reported damage housing (> 25) 20 11 Reported livestock loss (> 50) 7 12 Reported land affected (> 20 ha) 28 13 Reported other impacts (> 1) 3 Source: Package 3 Prefeasibility Study Report Note: No detailed information per basin is available for the period after 2015.

3.4.2 Civil works Lakhandei river is a very dynamic river which is regularly changing its course due to the absence of protected embankments. This is one of the ongoing issues between Nepal and India. India prefers Lakhandei to follow its original course as it connects to the irrigation works in India while Nepal prefers to maintain the existing course because the area of the previous course has been further developed by settlements and agriculture.

The main issue is that parts of the river are not confined between protected embankments making it possible to change its course during every flood. Due to the high velocities upstream and not having any protected embankments, erosion continues in the upstream area. Although the discharge is limited and there is no flooding, the river is very wide due to uncontrolled erosion. This is seen upstream where in the recent years’ spurs were constructed to protect the banks, but the river eroded the banks and created another channel “behind” the spur, see Figure 22.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 47 Final Report

Figure 22: Uncontrolled river, erosion behind spur Due to the uncontrolled behaviour of the river, large areas of private land have been claimed by the river. By not controlling the river, more areas will erode in the future and in case the river changes its course again, the investments in flood mitigation works completed and ongoing in the downstream area of the basin would be wasted.

PEP field office experts indicated that the project should look at longer stretches of flood protection and not just patchwork interventions by adding small part of embankments / protection throughout the basin.

Therefore, the priority works selected in this project focus on the area upstream of the East – West Highway with the objective to:

- Control the river to avoid more erosion in the area (both banks) to impact settlements and agriculture and to mitigate flooding. Creating a safer environment would also stimulate investments in the area; - Controlling the river upstream would also support the development in the downstream area as the course, as it did in the past, will not change. By confining the upstream part of the river, preventing it to change its course, the already made investments in the downstream area will not be wasted; - Controlling the river in the upstream area, where the river is wide, will be the basis of proper river basin management and creates the opportunity for flood plain management and return some of the land to the private owners who have previously lost the land to the river. First step is to “control” the river by confining its outer boundary. For this project this will be achieved by providing flood embankments with a return period of 1 per 50 years. At those locations where the river is very wide, in the future, revetments can be constructed in the river bed for e.g. a return period 1 per 10 years. The area in between, the flood plain, will be flooded less and can be used by its original owners for e.g. agricultural purposes, which should fit the zoning as proposed in the DWIDM Policy 2072. The owners must be aware and accept that sometimes the flood plains will be flooded.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 48 Final Report

Figure 23: Flood plan management Based on the above-mentioned analysis and discussions with PEP field office, the locations of Package 7 structures differ from Package 3. However, taking into account the flood hazard map it can be seen that the structures of Package 7 are located in the area with extreme flood hazards, mainly due to the uncontrollable character of the river in combination with high velocities in the upstream area causing severe erosion and changing river courses.

A comparison is made with Package 3 related to the flood hazard maps and proposed measures. A comparison with the 1 in 50 years return period flood hazard map is also shown in Figure 24. The extreme hazard is due to the large flow velocities causing the erosion due to the absence of protected embankments.

Figure 24: Comparisons flood hazard map (left) and proposed structures (right) between Package 3 and Package 7 (centre) for Lakhandei Basin Based on the above-mentioned analysis and discussions with PEP field office, the locations of Package 7 structures differ from Package 3. However, taking into account the flood hazard map it can be seen that the structures of Package 7 are located in the area with extreme flood hazards,

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 49 Final Report

mainly due to the uncontrollable character of the river in combination with high velocities in the upstream area causing severe erosion and changing river courses.

The benefits of the project depend on the area that the proposed structures protect compared to the situation without the project, comparing Run 2 and Run 3. Table 15 provides an overview of the protected land.

Table 15: Flood affected and protected areas in Lakhandei Basin Return period Description 2 5 10 25 50 100 years years years years years years Run 1: Existing situation without the impact of climate change Affected area by flooding [ha] 657 1,090 1,323 1,556 1,678 1,883 Run 2: Run 1 including the impact of climate change Affected area by flooding [ha] 844 1,222 1,355 1,579 1,740 1,930 Run 3: Run 2 including the proposed structures Affected area by flooding [ha] 844 1,222 1,355 1,574 1,733 1,923 Protected land due to structures (difference of Run 2 and 3) Protected land [ha] 0 0 0 5 7 7 For the preliminary designs a return period of 1 in 50 years including the impact of climate change has been used. In total it concerns 9,130 m of embankments with revetments, 6,055 m of revetments only and 148 spurs. The locations are shown in Figure 25. For details per priority structure, reference is made to Appendix A.

Figure 25: Locations of priority structures in Lakhandei Basin

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 50 Final Report

Cost estimate covering all proposed structures is NPR 632.66 million. The initial CBA shows that the sub-project was not feasible. To make the project feasible, the estimated costs for each of proposed structures were reviewed. The structures with comparatively low flood benefits and high investment costs have been analysed. Costs have to be reduced to make the project feasible. For that reason, structures PRTW.02, PRTW.03, PRTW.04, PRTW.05, PRTW.06 and PRTW.07 were removed from the project. They have low flood benefits compared to the high investment costs.

The cost estimates of hydraulic structures, excluding the structures PRTW.02, PRTW.03, PRTW.04, PRTW.05, PRTW.06 and PRTW.07, is shown in Table 10. Works to be implemented under the scope of this project are: embankments: 1,600 metres; revetments: 2,760 metres; and 27 spurs.

Table 16: Capital costs hydraulic structures in Lakhandei Basin (1 USD = 115.08 NPR) No Description Amount [USD] Amount [NPR] A Civil works A1 - Embankments / revetments 600,261 69,078,091 A2 - Spurs 228,266 26,268,907

Sub-total A 828,528 95,346,999 B General items General items 3,728 429,061

Sub-total B 3,728 429,061 C Contingencies Contingencies 207,132 23,836,750

Sub-total C 207,132 23,836,750 D VAT VAT (13%) 107,709 12,395,110

Sub-total D 107,709 12,395,110 Grand total (A+B+C+D) 1,147,097 132,007,920 The maintenance costs are estimated as 3% of the economic prices of the civil works, which are NPR 3.50 million or USD 0.03 million.

3.4.3 FFEWS and CBDRM

3.4.3.1 FFEWS It has been proposed to develop FFEWS for the Lakhandei Basin. This includes a simple tool for use with the most advanced hydraulic models being employed in countries like Australia and UK. The simple tool could be operational within eight months, or as soon as some hydrometric data becomes available from the new proposed gauge network. Over a period of three years, advanced hydraulic models will be developed, calibrated, validated and will be made operational as more data becomes available from the new gauging network and new measurements. The following forecasting tools have been proposed:

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 51 Final Report

· Combined rainfall-runoff and gauge-to-gauge correlation: due to the addition of a runoff model, the forecast lead time could be up to 72 hours. However, this requires a stage- discharge rating curve at each gauging station; such rating curve is difficult to develop for out-of-bank flow conditions without a hydraulic model; · 1-d model: this tool will be developed for the entire river system in the Terai. This model is similar to what is being used in neighbouring Bangladesh; · 1-d/2-d linked model: this will be the final delivery around month 24. The pure 2-d model and 1-d model will be transformed into a 1-d/2-d linked model. This i advanced forecast model is similar to those used in some areas of Australia, UK and Malaysia. Rain gauge network installation

Five new auto telemetry rain gauge stations have been proposed for installation. This will deliver one rain gauge in every 85 km2 over the basin. The locations are shown in Figure 26.

Hydrometric gauge network installation

Four hydrometric stations have been proposed. The locations have been chosen carefully to allow good calibration of run-off from hydrological model and river levels in the hydrodynamic model. At three stations, both water level and discharge will be recorded. At one station, only water level will be recorded. The locations are shown in Figure 27.

Hydrometric equipment

ADCP, DGPS and echo-sounder will be purchased for discharge measurement. This set of equipment can be used for discharge measurement of other nearby located basins as well.

Topographic and asset survey

Topographic survey will include river section, any existing structures and flood embankment profile. In 61 km, 161 cross-sections will have to be surveyed. No survey equipment has been proposed for purchase; survey will be done through outsourcing.

Satellite imagery is purchased for the development of the FFEWS.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 52 Final Report

Figure 26: Locations of existing and proposed equipment of rain gauges in Lakhandei Basin

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 53 Final Report

Figure 27: Locations of existing and proposed equipment of water level and discharge equipment in Lakhandei Basin

3.4.3.2 CBDRM and flood shelters Only implementing a FFEWS is insufficient to protect the people living and carrying out their livelihoods in the flood prone areas. It is important to train community members on how to respond when a warning is given. Within the CBDRM component and at the community level, groups of people will be trained to guide the communities in the event of a flood warning and increase their resilience to respond. It is crucial that people know what to do and where to go in case of flood warnings.

CBDRM includes a participatory approach and a flood resilience capacity assessment with the local communities. An inventory of the different houses and buildings in each community should be made to identify the vulnerable and non-vulnerable places. It is proposed that available schools or government buildings can temporarily be used as flood shelters. This is because, most of the time there are higher and stronger structures in comparison to residential houses. In the absence

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 54 Final Report

of these type of buildings, flood shelters can be constructed. It is recognised that most communities do have some form of “safe house” (often a local school) identified, and the assessment process will need to review how appropriate the existing systems are.

Flooding in Lakhandei Basin affects a large number of people. Table 17 provides an estimate of the flood affected people, after construction of the structures as included within the scope of this project.

Table 17: Estimation of flood affected people in Lakhandei Basin Return period Description 2 5 10 25 50 100 years years years years years years Run 1: Existing situation without the impact of climate change Flooded Area [ha] 657 1,090 1,323 1,556 1,678 1,883 Flood affected households [#] 27 88 106 141 164 189 Flood affected people [#] 164 529 635 847 982 1,136 Run 2: Run 1 including the impact of climate change Flooded Area [ha] 844 1,222 1,355 1,579 1,740 1,930 Flood affected households [#] 66 99 107 143 176 194 Flood affected people [#] 395 597 645 857 1,059 1,165 Run 3: Run 2 including the proposed structures Flooded Area [ha] 844 1,222 1,355 1,574 1,733 1,923 Flood affected households [#] 66 99 107 143 176 194 Flood affected people [#] 395 597 645 857 1,059 1,165 Taking into account that flood shelters are prepared for 150 – 200 people, a large number of flood shelters would be required. However, existing schools, government buildings and those houses that are not vulnerable to flooding as well as a decrease the number of affected people due to future constructed flood mitigation works, mean that fewer shelters will be required.

During the CBDRM phase, it is important that together with the national and local government, the most vulnerable areas are identified. For these areas, a detailed survey needs to be conducted to identify which are the vulnerable houses and what houses / buildings / structures can be used for shelter. This project will not undertake a survey of the existing resources. As mentioned above, a local needs assessment is essentially a participatory process to create local ownership and resilience. At this stage, the project assumes that 10 communities require immediate support and of these communities, 4 have buildings such as schools that can be used as flood shelter and 6 new shelters will be needed. The indicative locations are shown in Figure 28.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 55 Final Report

Figure 28: Indicative locations of flood shelters in Lakhandei Basin

3.4.3.3 FFEWS and CDBRM Costs The capital costs and costs for operation & maintenance are indicated in Table 18 and Table 19, respectively.

Table 18: Capital costs FFEWS and CBDRM in Lakhandei Basin (1 USD = 115.08 NPR) Unit Unit Capital costs Categories price [#] [USD] [USD] [NPR] Development flood forecasting model Data: collection, processing, analysis 1 32,500 32,500 3,740,100 Hydrological modelling 1 80,500 80,500 9,263,940 Gauge to gauge correlation 1 52,000 52,000 5,984,160

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 56 Final Report

1-d modelling 1 68,000 68,000 7,825,440 1-d/2-d linked modelling 1 80,500 80,500 9,263,940 Modelling software with multi user network 1 13,000 13,000 1,496,040 license (see note below) Topographic cross-section survey 1 32,200 32,200 3,705,576 Satellite imagery purchase 1 15,800 15,800 1,818,264 Total 374,500 43,097,460 Hydro meteorological data networking Rain gauge - Telemetry 5 5,000 25,000 2,877,000 Water level + discharge 90 4,333 390,000 44,881,200 Water level 1 7,000 7,000 805,560 Total 422,000 48,563,760 Discharge measurement equipment / station installation DGPS 1 25,000 25,000 2,877,000 Echo-sounder 1 25,000 25,000 2,877,000 ADCP 1 35,000 35,000 4,027,800 Cable-way discharge station (construction 1 95,000 95,000 10,932,600 costs) Total 180,000 20,714,400 CBDRM CBDRM 10 8,060 80,600 9,275,448 Flood Shelter 6 35,000 210,000 24,166,800 Total 290,600 33,442,248 Notes: - Modelling software license cost is distributed over five basins; the software will have multiple network license, and the cost shown here is per basin. West Rapti is excluded from the software cost; - Discharge measurement to be carried out fortnightly from mid-May to mid-October; this will be 10 measurements per year, 30 in 3 years and total 90 measurements in 3 stations; - Discharge measurement cost is a continuous expenditure, like model development cost (and should be considered similar to capital cost); it includes cost for all skilled human resources and the logistics required.

Table 19: Operation & maintenance costs in Lakhandei Basin (1 USD = 115.08 NPR) Costs Costs Categories Remarks [USD] [NPR] Development of flood forecasting model Gauge to gauge correlation 25,275 2,908,647 Annual costs operation / dissemination 1-d modelling 37,875 4,358,655 Annual costs operation / dissemination 1-d/2-d linked modelling 35,175 4,047,939 Annual costs operation / dissemination Hydro-meteorological data networking Rain gauge - Telemetry 6,000 690,480 For a period of 3 year Water level + discharge 6,000 690,480 For a period of 3 year Water level 6,000 690,480 For a period of 3 year Discharge measurement equipment / station installation DGPS 1,250 143,850 - Echo-sounder 1,000 115,080 - ADCP 1,000 115,080 - CBDRM

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 57 Final Report

Costs Costs Categories Remarks [USD] [NPR] Development of flood forecasting model CBDRM (10 communities) 44,540 5,125,663 Operational costs for year 2 to year 5

Notes: - Operation and maintenance cost of hydro-meteorological data networking is $2,000 per basin for all station per year; this involves routine site visits, repair and maintenance.

3.4.4 Safeguards

Social and environmental surveys have been conducted in the Lakhandei Basin.

3.4.4.1 Environmental safeguards

The subproject in the Lakhandei Basin, located in the Terai in the far west of Nepal, is categorized as an Environmental Category B. Accordingly an IEE has been prepared as a stand-alone document.

The baseline environmental conditions have been defined as well as the anticipated environmental impacts and mitigating measures. There will be a nominal additional cost for the implementation of the above mentioned mitigation measures as the majority of the mitigation measures are Good Practice in construction management as well as legally binding requirements that need to be complied with. The expected costs during implementation are 4,200,000 NPR or 36,496 USD (exchange rate: 1 USD = 115.08 NPR).

In addition to publishing the notice in a national newspaper informing communities about the project, a number of consultation meetings were organised. These meetings engaged with the impacted local bodies and sought to understand the public views about the project. Suggestions on how to minimise the adverse impacts were also obtained at these consultation meetings.

Overall people expressed positive views towards the project and suggested that the river protection works should cover all along the river banks for longer-term benefits.

3.4.4.2 Social safeguards – Indigenous People (IP) For this subproject, IP groups will not be differentially impacted than other community members. There are no direct negative impacts on IP groups. There is potential for a small number of IP households who have their land plots at the river banks where the embankments will be constructed to be impacted by loss of land/economic displacement. A LARIP plan is proposed to mitigate these impacts.

IP groups will benefit from the project interventions for FFEWS and CBDRM, in a similar fashion to non-IP groups. The benefits will accrue to those living closer to the proposed structure locations, those who participate in flood risk management training, and those living within user distance of the flood shelters. The GESI Action Plan, in particular the social inclusion part, will address ways to ensure that IP and caste groups benefit in an equitable manner as non-IPs. For instance, by ensuring culturally appropriate communication campaigns and community development processes are undertaken.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 58 Final Report

Based on the above analysis, the IP risk categorisation, in line with ADB criteria and MEWRI sector guideline criteria, for this subproject is Category B with limited impacts on IPs.

3.4.4.3 Social safeguards – Involuntary resettlement For involuntary resettlement, the river basin subproject is a Category B project for ADB because it has involuntary resettlement impacts that are not deemed significant, and Category C/Low risk under the Nepalese Guideline. A LARIP plan is proposed to mitigate the impacts.

Subsequently the IR category was reclassified to Category C (ADB) as during social due diligence activities it was found that private landowners and non-title holders are both eligible and willing to contribute land for embankment construction on a voluntary basis. Voluntary land use donations will not severely affect the living standards of affected persons and the benefit of embankment construction will realistically offset the donation.

3.5 East Rapti Basin

3.5.1 Location The basin extends from the southern slopes of the Mahabharata Range in the north, Chure Hills (Siwalik Hills, also known as sub-Himalayan hills, at low altitude) in the Middle and in Terai (meaning low flat land) in the south up to the Indo-Nepal border, see Figure 29.

Figure 29: East Rapti Basin East Rapti is the main water body, which is joined by the Mahanahari, Lothar and Budhi Rapti in the west. In the east it is joined by the Karra Khola, and Khukreni Khola and in the Southwest by Riu Khola.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 59 Final Report

East Rapti River is a perennial river with a number of tributaries. The flooding characteristics are dependent on the location of the site and can range from being considered prone to flash flooding in the upper parts of the catchment to a more delayed but sustained flooding in the lower part of the catchment. There has been a history of 143 flood events between 1991 and 2015 of which a significant proportion have caused widespread damage and loss of life. Large parts of the basin are part of the Chitwan National Park.

In recent years, the river has experienced high sediment loads often aggravated by landslides in the upper catchment. Table 20 provides an overview of the historic flood events in East Rapti Basin.

Table 20: High impact flood events (1991 – 2015) East Rapti Basin No Description (threshold) East Rapti 1 Reported damage value (> NPR 1 million) 10 2 Reported dead (> 1) 22 3 Reported mission (> 2) 3 4 Reported injuries (> 2) 7 5 Reported affected people (> 500) 32 6 Reported affected households (> 10) 2 7 Reported evacuated households (> 15 people) 5 8 Reported relocated persons (> 50) 2 9 Reported housing destruction (> 10) 35 10 Reported damage housing (> 25) 7 11 Reported livestock loss (> 50) 19 12 Reported land affected (> 20 ha) 47 13 Report other impacts (> 1) 10 Source: Package 3 Prefeasibility Study Report Note: No detailed data for East Rapti Basin is available for the period after 2015.

3.5.2 FFEWS and CBDRM

3.5.2.1 FFEWS It has been proposed to develop FFEWS for the East Rapti Basin. This includes a simple tool for use with the most advanced hydraulic models being employed in countries like Australia and UK. The simple tool could be operational within eight months, or as soon as some hydrometric data becomes available from the new proposed gauge network. Over a period of three years, advanced hydraulic models will be developed, calibrated, validated and will be made operational as more data becomes available from the new gauging network and new measurements. The following forecasting tools have been proposed:

· Gauge-to-gauge correlation: simplest and cheapest method, fast to develop, and thus could be operational within a relatively short period. However, it has a very short lead time and is not appropriate in upper steep slope river reaches. There are also other limitations; · Combined rainfall-runoff and gauge-to-gauge correlation: due to the addition of a runoff model, the forecast lead time could be up to 72 hours. However, this requires a stage- discharge rating curve at each gauging station; such rating curve is difficult to develop for out-of-bank flow conditions without a hydraulic model; · 1-d model: this tool will be developed for the entire river system in the Terai and is appropriate for flood forecasting which is the same model type used in Bangladesh;

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 60 Final Report

· 1-d/2-d linked model: this will be the final delivery around month 24. The pure 2-d model and 1-d model will be transformed into a 1-d/2-d linked model; this is the advanced forecast model used in some areas of Australia, UK and Malaysia. Rain gauge network installation

Twelve new auto telemetry rain gauge stations have been proposed for installation. This will deliver one rain gauge in every 73 km2 over the basin, similar to England (60 km2) where rain gauge density is highest in Europe. For the locations, reference is made to Figure 30.

Figure 30: Locations of existing and proposed equipment of rain gauges in East Rapti Basin Hydrometric gauge network installation

Six hydrometric stations have been proposed. The locations have been chosen carefully to allow good calibration of run-off from hydrological model and river levels in the hydrodynamic model. At three stations, both water level and discharge will be recorded, and at the other three stations,

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 61 Final Report

only water level will be recorded. One of the above discharge stations will be a cableway station. Proposed location will be finalised through discussion with DHM. For the locations, reference is made to Figure 31.

Figure 31: Locations of existing and proposed equipment of water level and discharge equipment in East Rapti Basin Hydrometric equipment

The budget only for Cableway construction has been considered for this basin. No budget has been considered for ADCP, DGPS and echo-sounder for this basin. This equipment has already been purchased within the World Bank funded project.

Topographic and asset survey

Topographic survey will include river section, any existing structures and flood embankment profile. Survey will have to be done in East Rapti river and three tributaries. In 139 km, 364 cross- sections will have to be surveyed. For topographic survey, no survey equipment has been

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 62 Final Report

proposed for purchase. Survey will be done through outsourcing. Budget for the purchase of satellite imagery for the preparation of the FFEWS is included.

3.5.2.2 CBDRM and flood shelters Only implementing a FFEWS is insufficient to protect the people living and carrying out their livelihoods in the flood prone areas. It is important to train community members in how to respond when a warning is given. Within the CBDRM component, at the community level, groups of people will be trained to guide the communities in the event of a flood warning and increase their resilience to respond. It is crucial that people know what to do and where to go in case of flood warnings.

CBDRM necessarily includes a participatory approach and a flood resilience capacity assessment with the local communities. An inventory of the different houses and buildings in each community should be made to identify the vulnerable and non-vulnerable places. Available schools or government buildings, which are most of the time higher and stronger structures compared to houses, can be used for temporarily shelter during flood events. In case of the absence of these kinds of buildings, flood shelters can be constructed. It is recognised that most communities do have some form of “safe house” (often a local school) identified, and the assessment process will need to review how appropriate the existing systems are.

Flooding in East Rapti Basin affects a large number of people. Table 21 provides an estimate of the flood affected people, after construction of the structures as included within the scope of this project.

Table 21: Estimation of flood affected people in East Rapti Basin Return period Description 2 5 10 25 50 100 years years years years years years Run 1 - Existing situation without the impact of climate change Flooded Area [ha] 2,253 2,881 3,138 3,389 3,537 3,652 Flood affected households [#] 868 1,137 1,250 1,363 1,407 1,447 Flood affected people [#] 4,338 5,687 6,248 6,817 7,035 7,236 Run 2 - Existing situation with the impact of climate change Flooded Area [ha] 2,390 2,950 3,227 3,527 4,399 4,661 Flood affected households [#] 977 1,169 1,302 1,422 2,389 2,501 Flood affected people [#] 4,883 5,846 6,508 7,111 11,943 12,504 Taking into account that flood shelters are prepared for 150 – 200 people, a large number of flood shelters are required. However, existing schools, government buildings and those houses that are not vulnerable to flooding as well as a decrease the number of affected people due to future constructed flood mitigating works, less shelters will be required.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 63 Final Report

resilience. At this stage, the project assumes that 10 communities require immediate support and of these communities, 5 have buildings such as schools that can be used as flood shelter and 5 new shelters will be needed. Indicative locations are shown in Figure 32.

Figure 32: Indicative locations of flood shelters in East Rapti Basin

3.5.2.3 FFEWS and CBDRM Costs The estimated capital and operation and maintenance costs for FFEWS and CBDRM are indicated in Table 22 and Table 23 respectively (1 USD = 115.08 NPR).

Table 22: Capital costs FFEWs and CBDRM in East Rapti Basin Unit Unit price Capital costs Categories [#] [USD] [USD] [NPR] Development flood forecasting model

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 64 Final Report

Unit Unit price Capital costs Categories [#] [USD] [USD] [NPR] Data: collection, processing, analysis 1 39,250 39,250 4,516,890 Hydrological modelling 1 167,750 167,750 19,304,670 Gauge to gauge correlation 1 52,000 52,000 5,984,160 1-d modelling 1 71,500 71,500 8,228,220 1-d/2-d linked modelling 1 80,500 80,500 9,263,940 Modelling software with multi user network 1 13,000 13,000 1,496,040 license (see note below) Topographic cross-section survey 1 72,800 72,800 8,377,824 Satellite imagery 1 60,200 60,200 6,927,816 Total 557,000 64,099,560 Hydro meteorological data networking Rain gauge - Telemetry 12 5,000 60,000 6,904,800 Water level + discharge 90 4,333 390,000 44,881,200 Water level 3 7,000 21,000 2,416,680 Total 471,000 54,202,680 Discharge measurement equipment / station installation Cable-way discharge station (construction costs) 1 95,000 95,000 10,932,600 Total 95,000 10,932,600 CBDRM CBDRM 10 8,060 80,600 9,275,448 Flood Shelter 5 35,000 175,000 20,139,000 Total 255,600 29,414,448 Note: - Modelling software license cost is distributed over five basins; the software will have multiple network license, and the cost shown here is per basin. West Rapti is exclude from the software cost; - Discharge measurement to be carried out fortnightly from mid-May to mid-October; this will be 10 measurements per year, 30 in 3 years and total 90 measurements in 3 stations.

Table 23: Operation & maintenance costs FFEWS and CBDRM in East Rapti Basin Costs Costs Categories Remarks [USD] [NPR] Development of flood forecasting model Gauge to gauge correlation 25,275 2,908,647 Annual costs operation / dissemination 1-d modelling 37,875 4,358,655 Annual costs operation / dissemination 1-d/2-d linked modelling 39,375 4,531,275 Annual costs operation / dissemination Hydro-meteorological data networking Rain gauge - Telemetry 6,000 690,480 For a period of 3 year Water level + discharge 6,000 690,480 For a period of 3 year Water level 6,000 690,480 For a period of 3 year CBDRM CBDRM (10 communities) 44,540 5,125,663 Operational costs for year 2 to year 5 Notes: - Operation and maintenance cost of hydro-meteorological data networking is $2,000 per basin for all station per year; this involves routine site visits, repair and maintenance

3.5.3 Safeguards

Within this project only FFEWS and CBDRM, including flood shelters, will be implemented. For that reason, during Package 7, no environmental and social surveys have been conducted. Only Focus Group Discussions were held in East Rapti Basin.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 65 Final Report

3.5.3.1 Environmental safeguards

The sub-project on East Rapti Basin, located in the Terai, only has the components of FFEWS and CBDRM of “Preparation of Priority River Basin Flood Risk Management Project”. Although the river basin passes through the Chitwan National Park (CNP) but due to no structural works along the river banks and in forested area, this project is classified as Category C project and environmental assessment is covered in the Environmental Assessment & Review Framework (EARF). No environmental assessment is required as per the Environmental Protection Rule (EPR) of Nepal, however there is the need to seek permission from Ministry of Forest and Environment to install the meteorological stations and construction of few flood shelters within the buffer zone of CNP.

3.5.3.2 Social safeguards – Indigenous People (IP)

For this subproject, IP groups will not be differentially impacted than other community members. There are no direct negative impacts on IP groups. The benefits will accrue to those living within user distance of the flood shelters. The GESI action plan, in particular the social inclusion part, will address ways to ensure that IP and caste groups benefit in an equitable manner as non-IPs.

Based on the above analysis, the IP risk categorisation in line with ADB criteria and MEWRI sector guideline criteria, this subproject is Category B with limited impacts on IPs, which are only beneficial.

3.5.3.3 Social safeguards – Involuntary resettlement

There are no proposed structural works and there no involuntary resettlement impacts. The river basin subproject is a Category C project for ADB and Category C / Low risk under the Nepalese Guideline. No further action is required.

3.6 West Rapti Basin

3.6.1 Location The river originates from the middle mountains of Nepal at Chunwang, then enters the lowlands and finally drains to the Ghagra (Karnali) River, a tributary of the Ganges River. It has several tributaries. Major tributaries are Jhimruk River, Mari River, Arun River, Lungri River, Sit River, Dunduwa River, Sotiya and Gandheli rivulets. Downstream of the confluence of the Jhimruk and Mari Rivers, the river is named the West Rapti River. The source of runoff is due to the monsoon rainfall and groundwater. The basin catchment covers an area of 6,370 km2 in the central Nepal, Province No. 5 and a very small part Province 6 and 4.

West Rapti River system lies in the district of Pyuthan, Rolpa, Salyan, Rukum, Gulmi, Arghakhanchi, Kapilbastu, Dang and Banke. The basin has 4,264 settlements distributed over rural and urban municipalities with a population about 949,100 and 192,550 households (CBS, 2011) Kohalpur (part of it) Gadawa, Lamhi, Bhaluwang, Bijuwar, Khalanga, Libang, and Khilji, Kohalpur (part of it) are the major cities, towns and settlements. West Rapti River basin has two well developed valleys, i.e. Madi Valley aand Jhimrukvalley in the middle mountain catchment, and Deukhuri and lower Rapti Valley in the South bounded by the Siwalik Hills. It has a small part of Terai in the south west.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 66 Final Report

Figure 33: West Rapti Basin West Rapti River is a perennial river and flooding in this river is characterized as being flashy in the narrow valley and prolonged in the wider plain areas in the downstream reaches. There has been a history of over 60 flood events between 1991 and 2015 of which a significant proportion caused low to moderate damage.

In recent years, the river has experienced high sediment loads often aggravated by landslides in the upper catchment. Table 24 provides an overview of the historic flood events in West Rapti Basin.

Table 24: High impact flood events (1991 – 2015) West Rapti Basin No Description (threshold) West Rapti 1 Reported damage value (> NPR 1 million) 0 2 Reported dead (> 1) 1 3 Reported mission (> 2) 2 4 Reported injuries (> 2) 1 5 Reported affected people (> 500) 3 6 Reported affected households (> 10) 0 7 Reported evacuated households (> 15 people) 0 8 Reported relocated persons (> 50) 1 9 Reported housing destruction (> 10) 7 10 Reported damage housing (> 25) 0 11 Reported livestock loss (> 50) 0 12 Reported land affected (> 20 ha) 4 13 Report other impacts (> 1) 2 Source: Package 3 Prefeasibility Study Report Note: No detailed data per basin is available for the period after 2015.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 67 Final Report

3.6.2 Civil works A comparison of structure locations from Package 3 and this Package 7 project was undertaken. In the figure below the proposed locations of Package 7 are compared with the locations of the structures of Package 3.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 68 Final Report

Figure 34: Comparisons of proposed structures between Package 3 (top) and Package 7 for West Rapti Basin Package 7 priority locations are consistent with the Package 3 locations of structures.

The benefits of the project depend on the area that the proposed structures protect in comparison to the situation without the project i.e. comparing Run 2 and Run 3. Table 25 provides an overview of the protected land.

Table 25: Flood affected and protected areas in West Rapti Basin Return period Description 2 5 10 25 50 100 years years years years years years Run 1: Existing situation without the impact of climate change Affected area by flooding [ha] 7,838 9,866 11,247 12,927 14,092 15,319 Run 2: Run 1 including the impact of climate change Affected area by flooding [ha] 8,650 10,869 11,904 13,539 14,821 15,824 Run 3: Run 2 including the proposed structures Affected area by flooding [ha] 8,107 9,929 10,843 12,333 13,551 15,057 Protected land due to structures (difference of Run 2 and 3) Protected land [ha] 543 940 1,061 1,207 1,270 767 For the preliminary designs a return period of 1 in 50 years including the impact of climate change has been used. In total, the following structures are included in the designs: 18,840 m of embankments and 75 spurs. The locations of the priority structures are shown in Figure 35. For details, reference is made to Appendix A.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 69 Final Report

Figure 35: Locations of priority works in West Rapti Basin

Cost estimate covering all proposed structures is NPR 2,732 million. The initial CBA shows that the sub-project was not feasible. To make the project feasible, the estimated costs for each of proposed structures were reviewed. The structures with comparatively low flood benefits and high investment costs have been analysed. Costs have to be reduced to make the project feasible. For that reason, structures PRTW.01, PRTW.02 and PRTW.07 were removed from the project. They have low flood benefits compared to the high investment costs. It has been suggested that PRTW 09 also not included in the ADB project due to potential transboundary effects.

The cost estimates for hydraulic structures, excluding the structures PRTW.01, PRTW.02 and PRTW.07, is shown in Table 26 (1 USD = 115.08 NPR). Works to be constructed within the scope of this project are: embankments: 13,580 metres; revetments: 13,580 metres; and 44 spurs.

Table 26: Capital costs hydraulic structures in West Rapti Basin No Description Amount [USD] Amount [NPR] A Civil works A1 - Embankments / revetments 9,360,830 1,077,244,327 A2 - Spurs 1,866,768 214,827,621

Sub-total A 11,227,598 1,292,071,947 B General items General items 50,524 5,814,324

Sub-total B 50,524 5,814,324 C Contingencies Contingencies 2,806,899 323,017,987

Sub-total C 2,806,899 323,017,987 D VAT VAT (13%) 1,459,588 167,969,353

Sub-total D 1,459,588 167,969,353 Grand total (A+B+C+D) 15,544,609 1,788,873,611 The revised financial cost is NPR 1,788.87 million or USD 15.54 million The maintenance costs are estimated on 3% of the economic prices of the civil works, that is NPR 1,574.20 which works out NPR 47.2 million or USD 0.41 million.

3.6.3 FFEWS and CBDRM

3.6.3.1 FFEWS In this sub-basin, FFEWS and CBDRM form part of the scope of an ongoing World Bank funded project “Establishment of End-to-end Flood Early Warning System in Koshi And West Rapti River Basins to Support and Strengthen Disaster Risk Management”. Notwithstanding this, allowance for FFEWS and CBDRM has been included in the Package 7 project. This will increase the equipment and provide funding for CBDRM in areas not covered by the World Bank Project.

The FFEWS equipment and CBDRM which are proposed under the WRPPF Package 7 project are described below.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 70 Final Report

Rain gauge network installation

Five new auto telemetry rain gauge stations have been proposed for installation. West Rapti catchment area is 6,370 km2. There are 25 existing gauging stations by DHM within this basin. This will deliver a rain gauge station density as one rain gauge in every 212 km2. The locations are shown in Figure 36.

Hydrometric gauge network installation

Eight hydrometric gauging stations in the West Rapti catchments are proposed. All stations are easily accessible and are located in the neighbourhood of a settlement. Five stations will be used for both discharge and water level measurements. Three stations will only measure water levels. The locations are shown in Figure 37.

Hydrometric equipment

Only budget for cableway construction has been considered for this basin. No budget for ADCP, DGPS and echo-sounder has been considered for this basin.

Topographic and asset survey

Topographic survey will include river section, any existing structures and flood embankment profile. Survey will have to be carried out for a river length of 160 km. In total, 421 cross-sections will have to be surveyed. As the on-going FFEWS model development by DHM under World Bank funding is based on old topographical survey, so new survey is proposed for the topographic survey, no survey equipment has been proposed for purchase as the river survey will outsourced.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 71 Final Report

Figure 36: Locations of existing and proposed equipment of rain gauges in West Rapti Basin

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 72 Final Report

Figure 37: Locations of existing and proposed equipment of water level and discharge equipment in West Rapti Basin

3.6.3.2 CBDRM and flood shelters Only implementing a FFEWS is insufficient to protect the people living and carrying out their livelihoods in the flood prone areas. It is important to train community members in how to respond when a warning is given. Within the CBDRM component, at the community level, groups of people will be trained to guide the communities in the event of a flood warning and increase their resilience to respond. It is crucial that people know what to do and where to go in case of flood warnings.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 73 Final Report

CBDRM includes a participatory approach and a flood resilience capacity assessment of the local communities. An inventory of the different houses and buildings in each community should be made to identify the vulnerable and non-vulnerable places. Available schools or government buildings, which are most of the time higher and stronger structures in comparison to houses, can be used as temporary shelters during flood events. In case of the absence of these kinds of buildings, flood shelters can be constructed. It is recognised that most communities do have some form of “safe house” (often a local school) identified. The assessment process will need to review how appropriate the existing systems are.

Flooding in West Rapti Basin affects a large number of people. Table 27 provides an estimate of the flood affected people, after construction of the structures as included within the scope of this project.

Table 27: Estimation of flood affected people per return period in West Rapti Basin Return period Description 2 5 10 25 50 100 years years years years years years Run 1 - Existing situation without the impact of climate change Flooded Area [ha] 7,838 9,866 11,247 12,927 14,092 15,319 Flood affected households [#] 1,915 2,776 3,587 4,430 5,013 5,764 Flood affected people [#] 11,490 16,657 21,520 26,583 30,081 34,584 Run 2 - Existing situation with the impact of climate change Flooded Area [ha] 8,650 10,869 11,904 13,539 14,821 15,824 Flood affected households [#] 2,233 3,309 3,955 4,870 5,578 6,447 Flood affected people [#] 13,396 19,852 23,729 29,218 33,465 38,679 Run 3 - Run 2 including the proposed structures Flooded Area [ha] 8,107 9,929 10,843 12,333 13,551 15,057 Flood affected households [#] 1,705 2,602 3,076 3,857 4,532 5,502 Flood affected people [#] 10,229 15,614 18,458 23,141 27,189 33,010 Taking into account that flood shelters are prepared for 150 – 200 people, a large number of flood shelters would therefore be required. However, existing schools, government buildings and those houses that are not vulnerable to flooding as well as a decrease in the number of affected people as a result of future constructed flood mitigating works, less shelters may be required.

During the CBDRM phase, it is important that together with the national and local government, the most vulnerable areas are identified. For these areas a detailed survey needs to be conducted to identify which are the vulnerable houses and what houses / buildings / structures can be used for shelter. This project will not undertake a survey of the existing resources. As mentioned above, a local needs assessment is essentially a participatory process to create local ownership and resilience. At this stage, the project assumes that 10 communities require immediate support and of these communities, 10 new shelters will be needed.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 74 Final Report

3.6.3.3 FFEWS and CBDRM Cost Estimates The estimated capital and operation and maintenance costs for the proposed FFEWS equipment and CBDRM are indicated in Table 28 and Table 29, respectively.

Table 28: Capital costs FFEWS equipment and CBDRM in West Rapti Basin (1 USD = 115.08 NPR) Unit Unit price Capital costs Categories [#] [USD] [USD] [NPR] Development flood forecasting model Topographic cross-section survey 1 84,200 84,200 9,689,736 Total 84,200 9,689,736 Hydro meteorological data networking Rain gauge - Telemetry 5 5,000 25,000 2,877,000 Water level + discharge 150 4,333 650,000 74,802,000 Water level 3 7,000 21,000 2,416,680 Total 696,000 80,095,680 Discharge measurement equipment / station installation Cable-way discharge station (construction costs) 1 95,000 95,000 10,932,600 Total 95,000 10,932,600 CBDRM CBDRM 10 8,060 80,600 9,275,448 Flood Shelter 10 35,000 350,000 40,278,000 Total 430,600 49,553,448 Note: - Discharge measurement to be carried out fortnightly from mid-May to mid-October; this will be 10 measurements per year, 30 in 3 years and total 150 measurements in 5 stations.

Table 29: Operation & Maintenance costs FFEWS equipment and CBDRM in West Rapti Basin (1 USD = 115.08 NPR) Costs Costs Categories Remarks [USD] [NPR] Hydro-meteorological data networking Rain gauge - Telemetry 6,000 690,480 For a period of 3 year Water level + discharge 6,000 690,480 For a period of 3 year Water level 6,000 690,480 For a period of 3 year CBDRM CBDRM (10 communities) 44,540 5,125,663 Operational costs for year 2 to year 5 Notes: - Operation and maintenance cost of hydro-meteorological data networking is $2,000 per basin for all station per year; this involves routine site visits, repair and maintenance

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 75 Final Report

3.6.4 Safeguards

Social and environmental surveys have been conducted in the West Rapti Basin.

3.6.4.1 Environmental safeguards West Rapti Basin, located in the Terai of Western Nepal, is categorized as an Environmental Category B. Accordingly an IEE has been prepared as a stand-alone document. As per the Environmental Protection Regulation of Nepal, because it is proposed that the project will have more than 10 km of flood protection works in this river basin, it also requires IEE report to be prepared and approved by the MEWRI.

The baseline environmental conditions, the anticipated environmental impacts and mitigating measures have all been defined as part of the environmental assessment undertaken. There will be a nominal additional cost for the implementation of mitigation measures as majority of the mitigation measures are part of the Good Practices in the construction management as well as legally binding requirements that need to be complied with. Expected costs during implementation are 4,200,000 NPR or 36,496 USD (exchange rate: 1 USD = 115.08 NPR).

In addition to publishing the notice in a national newspaper informing communities about the project, a number of consultation meetings were also organised. Impacted local bodies were engaged at these meetings in order to understand the public views about the project, and to obtain suggestions on how to minimise the adverse impacts.

Overall people expressed positive views towards the project and suggested that the river protection works should cover all along the river banks for long-term benefits.

3.6.4.2 Social safeguards – Indigenous People (IP) For this subproject, there is potential for a small number of IP households owning land plots at the river banks (i.e. where the embankments will be constructed) to be impacted by loss of land/economic displacement. A LARIP plan is proposed to mitigate these impacts.

Based on the above analysis, the IP risk categorisation in line with ADB criteria and MEWRI sector guideline criteria, this subproject is Category B with limited impacts on IPs.

3.6.4.3 Social safeguards – Involuntary resettlement For involuntary resettlement, the river basin subproject is a Category B project for ADB because it has involuntary resettlement impacts that are not deemed significant, and Category C/Low risk under the Nepalese Guideline. A LARIP plan is proposed to mitigate the impacts.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 76 Final Report

3.7 Mohana – Khutiya Basin

3.7.1 Location The basin extends from Chure Hills (Siwalik Hills, also known as sub-Himalayan hills, at low altitude) in the north and in the Terai up to the Nepal - India border in the south. The catchment covers an area of 702.4 km2 and is located in the far west of Nepal (Figure 38). The Mohana - Khutiya Basin system lies in districts of Kailali and Kanchanpur in Province no 7. This river system has 359 settlements distributed over rural and urban municipalities with a population of 190,063 and 37,681 households (CBS, 2011). Dhangadi and Attrariya are the two major towns located in this catchment.

Figure 38: Mohana - Khutiya Basin Mohana and Khutiya rivers are non-perennial rivers and the flooding is characterized as being flashy in nature. There has been a history of 31 flood events (30 in Mohana and 1 in Khutiya) between 1991 and 2015 of which a significant proportion have caused moderate damage and loss of life. Table 30 provides an overview of the historic flood events in Mohana – Khutiya Basin.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 77 Final Report

Table 30: High impact flood events (1991 – 2015) Mohana – Khutiya Basin No Description (threshold) Mohana Khutiya 1 Reported damage value (> NPR 1 million) 3 0 2 Reported dead (> 1) 2 0 3 Reported mission (> 2) 0 0 4 Reported injuries (> 2) 0 0 5 Reported affected people (> 500) 3 0 6 Reported affected households (> 10) 0 0 7 Reported evacuated households (> 15 people) 0 0 8 Reported relocated persons (> 50) 0 0 9 Reported housing destruction (> 10) 4 0 10 Reported damage housing (> 25) 1 0 11 Reported livestock loss (> 50) 0 0 12 Reported land affected (> 20 ha) 0 0 13 Reported other impacts (> 1) 0 0 Source: Package 3 Prefeasibility Report Note: No detailed information per basin available to update the table for the period after 2015

3.7.2 Civil works A comparison is made with Package 3 flood hazard maps and proposed measures. A comparison with the 1 in 50 years return period flood hazard map is also shown below.

It is emphasized that in Package 3, Khutiya was not included in the pre-feasibility. A comparison is made between the proposed locations and the flood hazard map prepared by Package 3. Package 7 priority locations are consistent with the Package 3 locations of structures and the location of extreme hazards.

Figure 39: Comparisons of proposed structures between Package 3 (left for Mohana structures and right for Khutiya flood hazard) and Package 7 (centre) for Mohana – Khutiya Basin Package 7 priority locations are consistent with the Package 3 locations of structures (for Mohana) and with the Package 3 flood hazard map (for Khutiya).

The benefits of the project depend on the area that the proposed structures protect compared to the situation without the project, comparing Run 2 and Run 3. Table 31 provides an overview of the protected land.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 78 Final Report

Table 31: Affected and protected land in Mohana – Khutiya Basin Return period Description 2 5 10 25 50 100 years years years years years years Run 1: Existing situation without the impact of climate change Affected area by flooding [ha] 2,507 2,974 3,887 4,160 4,297 4,417 Run 2: Run 1 including the impact of climate change Affected area by flooding [ha] 2,587 3,197 4,115 4,346 4,523 4,640 Run 3: Run 2 including the proposed structures Affected area by flooding [ha] 2,271 2,741 3,308 3,526 3,695 3,877 Protected land due to structures (difference of Run 2 and 3) Protected land [ha] 316 456 808 820 828 763 For the preliminary designs a return period of 1 in 50 years including the impact of climate change have been used. For each of the priority works (see figure below), preliminary designs have been developed. In total, it concerns 7,250 m of embankments protected by revetments, 3,030 m of embankment only, 2,150 m of revetments, 177 spurs and 19 outlet structures. The locations of the priority structures are shown in Figure 40. For details reference is made to Appendix A.

Figure 40: Locations of priority structures in Mohana – Khutiya Basin

3.7.2.1 Civil Works Cost Estimates Table 32 provides a summary of the cost estimates of the hydraulic structures.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 79 Final Report

Table 32: Capital costs hydraulic structures Mohana – Khutiya Basin (1 USD = 115.08 NPR) No Description Amount [USD] Amount [NPR] A Civil works Mohana A1 - Embankments / revetments 2,773,859 319,215,706 A2 - Spurs 1,156,276 133,064,232 A3 - Outlet structure 48,858 5,622,615 Khutiya A4 - Embankments / revetments 1,998,628 230,002,112 A5 - Spurs 1,033,375 118,920,739 A3 - Outlet structure 36,679 4,221,003 Sub-total A 7,047,675 811,046,408

B General items B1 Mohana 17,905 2,060,561 B2 Khutiya 13,809 1,589,147 Sub-total B 31,715 3,649,709 C Contingencies

C1 Mohana 994,748 114,475,638 C2 Khutiya 767,170 88,285,964 Sub-total C 1,761,919 202,761,602

D VAT Mohana 517,269 59,527,332 Khutiya 398,929 45,908,701 Sub-total D 916,198 105,436,033

Grand total 9,757,506 1,122,893,752 The maintenance costs are estimated as 3% of the economic prices of the civil works, which are NPR 33.7 million or USD 0.29 million. 3% is commonly used in Nepal to estimate the maintenance costs.

3.7.3 FFEWS and CBDRM

3.7.3.1 FFEWS It has been proposed to develop FFEWS for the Mohana – Khutiya Basin. This includes a simple tool for use with the most advanced hydraulic models being employed in countries like Australia and UK. The simple tool could be operational within eight months, or as soon as some hydrometric data becomes available from the new proposed gauge network. Over a period of three years, advanced hydraulic models will be developed, calibrated, validated and will be made operational as more data becomes available from the new gauging network and new measurements. The following forecasting tools have been proposed:

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 80 Final Report

· 1-d model: this tool will be developed for the entire river system in the Terai and is appropriate for flood forecasting which is the same model type used in Bangladesh; · 1-d/2-d linked model: this will be the final delivery around month 24. The pure 2-d model and 1-d model will be transformed into a 1-d/2-d linked model; this is the advanced forecast model used in some areas of Australia, UK and Malaysia. Rain gauge network installation

Eleven new auto telemetry rain gauge stations have been proposed for installation. This will deliver one rain gauge in every 64 km2 over the basin, similar to England (60 km2) where rain gauge density is highest in Europe. For locations reference is made to Figure 41.

Figure 41: Locations of existing and proposed equipment of rain gauges in Mohana – Khutiya Basin

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 81 Final Report

Hydrometric gauge network installation

Nine hydrometric stations have been proposed, five in Mohana - Godawari and four in Khutiya - Shivaganaga rivers. The locations have been chosen carefully to allow good calibration of run-off from hydrological model and river levels in the hydrodynamic model. In the Mohana-Godawari catchment, there will be two water level (WL) and discharge (Q) stations (both parameters at the same station), as well as three WL only (no Q) stations. In the Khutiya-Shivaganga catchment, there will be two WL and Q stations and two WL only (no Q) stations. For locations reference is made to Figure 42.

Figure 42: Locations of existing and proposed equipment of water level and discharge equipment in Mohana – Khutiya Basin

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 82 Final Report

Hydrometric equipment

ADCP, DGPS and echo-sounder will be purchased for discharge measurement. This set of equipment can be used for discharge measurement for other basins as well.

Topographic and asset survey

Topographical surveys have been conducted in 2018 as part of this project.2 The hydrodynamic models and designs were prepared based on these surveys.

Budget for purchasing high resolution satellite imageries has been included for Mohana – Khutiya Basin for lower catchment only in Terai to provide DEM to model development and flood inundation map preparation.

3.7.3.2 CBDRM and flood shelters Only implementing a FFEWS is insufficient to protect the people living and carrying out their livelihoods in the flood prone areas. It is important to train community members in how to respond when a warning is given. Within the CBDRM component, at the community level, groups of people will be trained to guide the communities in the event of a flood warning and increase their resilience to respond. It is crucial that people know what to do and where to go in case of flood warnings.

CBDRM necessarily includes a participatory approach and a flood resilience capacity assessment with the local communities. An inventory of the different houses and buildings in each community should be made to identify the vulnerable and non-vulnerable places. Availability of schools or government buildings, which are most of the time higher and stronger structures compared to houses, can be used for temporarily shelter during flood events. In case of the absence of these kinds of buildings, flood shelters can be constructed. It is recognised that most communities do have some form of “safe house” (often a local school) identified, and the assessment process will need to review how appropriate the existing systems are.

Flooding in Mohana – Khutiya Basin affects a large number of people. Table 33 provides an estimate of the flood affected people, after construction of the structures as included within the scope of this project.

2 Detailed Design Projects (Mohana – Khutiya) Additional Survey (December 2018).

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 83 Final Report

Table 33: Estimation of flood affected people per return period Mohana – Khutiya Basin Return period Description 2 5 10 25 50 100 years years years years years years Run 1: Existing situation without the impact of climate change Flooded Area (ha) 2,507 2,974 3,887 4,160 4,297 4,417 Flood affected households (#) 735 1,005 1,873 2,180 2,346 2,446 Flood affected people (#) 3,677 5,025 9,367 10,901 11,732 12,231 Run 2: Run 1 including the impact of climate change Flooded Area (ha) 2,587 3,197 4,115 4,346 4,523 4,640 Flood affected households (#) 791 1,164 2,145 2,396 2,637 2,749 Flood affected people (#) 3,954 5,820 10,725 11,982 13,183 13,746 Run 3: Run 2 including the proposed structures Flooded Area (ha) 2,404 2,910 3,698 3,917 4,088 4,232 Flood affected households (#) 543 782 1,242 1,465 1,635 1,774 Flood affected people (#) 2,716 3,908 6,208 7,326 8,176 8,868 Taking into account that flood shelters are prepared for 150 – 200 people, a large number of flood shelters are required. However, existing schools, government buildings and those houses that are not vulnerable to flooding as well as a decrease the number of affected people due to future constructed flood mitigating works, less shelters will be required.

During the CBDRM phase, it is important that together with the national and local government, the most vulnerable areas are identified. For these areas a detailed survey needs to be conducted to identify which are the vulnerable houses and what houses / buildings / structures can be used for shelter. This project will not undertake a survey of the existing resources. As mentioned above, a local needs assessment is essentially a participatory process to create local ownership and resilience. At this stage, the project assumes that 6 communities require immediate support and of these communities, 3 have buildings such as schools that can be used as flood shelter and 6 new shelters will be needed. The indicative locations of the flood shelters are shown in Figure 43.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 84 Final Report

Figure 43: Indicative location of flood shelters Mohana – Khutiya Basin

3.7.3.3 FFEWS and CBDRM Costs The capital costs and costs for operation and maintenance are indicated in the Table 34 and Table 35, respectively.

Table 34: Capital costs FFEWS and CBDRM in Mohana – Khutiya Basin (1 USD = 115.08 NPR) Categories Unit Unit price Capital costs [#] [USD] [USD] [NPR] Development flood forecasting model Data: collection, processing, analysis 1 48,500 48,500 5,581,380 Hydrological modelling 1 137,500 137,500 15,823,500 Gauge to gauge correlation 1 80,500 80,500 9,263,940 Pure 2-d modelling 1 93,000 93,000 10,702,440

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 85 Final Report

Categories Unit Unit price Capital costs [#] [USD] [USD] [NPR] 1-d modelling 1 144,500 144,500 16,629,060 1-d/2-d linked modelling 1 169,500 169,500 19,506,060 Modelling software with multi user network 1 13,000 13,000 1,496,040 license*1 Topographic cross-section survey 1 73,400 73,400 8,446,872 Satellite imagery 1 22,300 22,300 2,566,284 Total 782,200 90,015,576 Hydro-meteorological data networking Rain gauge - Telemetry 11 5,000 55,000 6,329,400 Water level + discharge *3 120 *2 4,333 520,000 59,841,600 Water level 5 7,000 35,000 4,027,800 Total 610,000 70,198,800 Discharge measurement equipment / station installation DGPS 1 25,000 25,000 2,877,000 Echo-sounder 1 25,000 25,000 2,877,000 ADCP 1 35,000 35,000 4,027,800 Cable-way discharge station (construction costs) 1 95,000 95,000 10,932,600 Total 180,000 20,714,400 CBDRM CBDRM (20 communities) 20 8,060 161,200 18,550,896 Flood Shelter 13 35,000 455,000 52,361,400 Total 616,200 70,912,296 *1: Modelling software license cost is distributed over five basins; the software will have multiple network license, and the cost shown here is per basin. West Rapti is exclude from the software cost *2: Discharge measurement to be carried out fortnightly from mid-May to mid-October; this will be 10 measurements per year, 30 in 3 years and total 120 measurements in 4 stations; *3: Discharge measurement cost is a continuous expenditure, like model development cost (and should be considered similar to capital cost); it includes cost for all skilled human resources and the logistics required.

Table 35: Operation & maintenance costs FFEWS and CBDRM in Mohana – Khutiya Basin (1 USD = 115.08 NPR) Categories Costs Costs Remarks [USD] [NPR] Development flood forecasting model Gauge to gauge correlation 60,000 6,904,800 Annual costs operation / dissemination Pure 2-d modelling 65,000 7,480,200 Annual costs operation / dissemination 1-d modelling 108,500 12,486,180 Annual costs operation / dissemination 1-d/2-d linked modelling 90,750 10,443,510 Annual costs operation / dissemination Hydro-meteorological data networking Rain gauge - Telemetry 6,000 690,480 For a period of 3 year Water level + discharge 6,000 690,480 For a period of 3 year Water level 6,000 690,480 For a period of 3 year Discharge measurement equipment / station installation DGPS 1,250 143,850 - Echo-sounder 1,000 115,080 - ADCP 1,000 115,080 - CBDRM CBDRM (20 communities) 89,080 10,251,326 Operational costs for year 2 and 5 Notes: Maintenance cost of hydro-meteorological data networking is $2,000 per basin for all station per year; this involves routine site visits, repair and maintenance

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 86 Final Report

3.7.4 Safeguards

Social and environmental surveys have been conducted in the Mohana – Khutiya Basin.

3.7.4.1 Environmental safeguards

The subproject in the Mohana - Khutiya river basin, located in the Terai in the far west of Nepal, is categorized as an Environmental Category B and accordingly an IEE has been prepared as a stand-alone document to accompany this feasibility study.

3.7.4.2 Social safeguards – Indigenous People (IP) For this subproject, IP groups will not be differentially impacted than other community members. There are no direct negative impacts on IP groups. A small number of IP households who have their land plots at the river banks where the embankments will be constructed will impacted by loss of land/economic displacement. A LARIP plan is proposed to mitigate these impacts.

IP groups will benefit from the project interventions for FFEWS and CBDRM, in a similar fashion to non-IP groups. The benefits will accrue to those living closer to the proposed structured locations, those who participate in flood risk management training, and those living within user distance of the flood shelters. The GESI action plan, in particular the social inclusion part, will address ways to ensure that IP and caste groups benefit in an equitable manner as non-IPs. For instance, by ensuring culturally appropriate communication campaigns and community development processes are undertaken.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 87 Final Report

Based on the above analysis, the IP risk categorisation in line with ADB criteria and MEWRI sector guideline criteria, this subproject is Category B with limited impacts on IPs.

3.7.4.3 Social safeguards – Involuntary resettlement The social survey team identified that land is not being cultivated right up to the river bank and there is flood plain land. The flood plain land, where it is sandy or swampy with grasses and bushes and not so productive, can potentially be used for the embankment structures, such that crops are not impacted. The social survey found willingness among the Displaced People (DP) and community households interviewed to provide land voluntarily with no compensation. Their reasoning is that providing small portions of their total landholding with protect the rest of their plot for cultivation.

The total costs for any uncertainty related to land are estimated to be NPR128 million equivalent to USD 1.11 million. For details, reference is made to the LARIP Mohana – Khutiya Basin.

For involuntary resettlement, the Mohana - Khutiya river basin subproject is a Category B project for ADB because it has involuntary resettlement impacts that are not deemed significant, and Category C / Low risk under the Nepalese Guideline.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 88 Final Report

4 Cost Benefit Analysis

4.1 Introduction For each basin and the project as a whole, Cost Benefit Analyses (CBA) have been prepared. This chapter provides a summary of the results. For details reference is made to the report Financial and Economic Analysis, see Chapter 5.

In the CBA the following key assumptions were used:

· Numeraire and prices: The analysis uses the domestic price level numeraire, expressed in local currency. The financial prices used are those applying in the market as of the third quarter of 2019. To derive economic prices the foreign component of the price of traded goods is adjusted by the shadow exchange rate factor (SERF), scarce labour is adjusted by the shadow wage rate factor (SWRF) of 0.8, taxes (VAT of 13% and any import duties) are removed from prices and domestic resources are multiplied by a factor of 1 (i.e. the financial prices of domestic resources are equal to the economic prices).

· Conversion factors and exchange rate: The standard conversion factor (SCF) of 0.92 (SERF = 1.09) was estimated using import and export data for three years. The exchange rate used throughout the analysis is USD1 = NPR 114.9.

· Opportunity cost of capital: The opportunity cost of capital used for the analysis is 9%.

4.1.1 Approach to Estimation of Sub Project Benefits The approach to estimation of project benefits was similar for all sub projects with the exception of East Rapti sub project. The sub project benefits were derived from the two distinct interventions under each sub project.

Firstly, the structural measures will protect the specific area covered by the proposed structures of embankment / revetments, spurs and outlet structures. Secondly, the non-structural measures of FFEWS and CBDRM will be benefiting area and households within the modelled flood envelope area. Thus, protected area will have direct full benefits where as FFEWS benefits will be comparatively less in the outside protected area but inside the entire flood envelope area modelled under the during feasibility studies.

In East Rapti project benefits were only derived from non-structural measures. This is because there are no structural interventions being implemented in this basin as it is within a conservation area.

Benefits of the subproject depend on the flood affected and protected areas without and with project implementation. Benefits of the subproject come from the avoided losses accruing with implementation of the flood protection measures. Direct benefits quantified for the analysis are;

1. Avoided damage and destruction of buildings and public infrastructure, 2. Avoided damage to monsoon season crops, 3. Prevented human injury and mortality, 4. Avoided livestock deaths and 5. Avoided costs of repairing buildings, bunds and other field infrastructure and addressing the effects of sedimentation.

Indirect benefits include;

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 89 Final Report

1. the value of increases in private and public infrastructure and 2. increases in agricultural productivity and production inside the flood protected area that are induced by the increased security from flood damage.

The incremental benefits of the subprojects are the difference between avoided losses in the without and with project situations, plus indirect benefits obtained as a result of the proposed project. Avoided losses are weighted by the probability of their future occurrence and benefits independent of flood events are scheduled with reference to the project flood management time frame.

4.2 CBA Mawa – Ratuwa Basin

4.2.1 Subproject Interventions The following structures will be implemented and are included in the CBA:

· embankments protected by revetments totalling 10,485 metres; · revetments only totalling 1,330 metres; · a total of 188 spurs; · a total of 19 outlet structures. In addition the Flood Forecasting and Early Warning System (FFEWS) will be implemented in the basin and Community Based Disaster Risk Management (CBDRM) will be implemented within the area protected by the subproject interventions. 20 communities will be covered with CBDRM interventions. In addition, 11 flood shelters to provide safe locations for affected households during flood events will also be constructed.

Table 36: Location and Length of Priority Works Included Chainage *1 Length *2 Symbol Location / Purpose Upstream Downstream [m] [m] [m] PRTW.01 (a) Municipality: Gauradaha Na.Pa. 5 18,453.7 18,245.7 420 Tole / village: Chandu dovan District: Jhapa; River: Ratuwa Requirement: Left bank, protection PRTW.01 (b) Municipality: Gauradaha Na.Pa. 5 18,003.7 16,369.7 1,780 Tole / village: Chandu dovan District: Jhapa; River: Ratuwa Requirement: Left bank, protection PRTW.02 Municipality: RatuwaMai Na.Pa.10 19,387.7 18,629.7 825 Tole / village: Mangalbare District: Morang; River: Ratuwa Requirement: Right bank, protection PRTW.03 Municipality: Damak- 3 44,454.6 43,975.3 535 Tole / village: Dumse District: Jhapa; River: Mawa Requirement: Left bank, protection PRTW.04 Municipality: Urlabari- 7 33,305.6 32,559.4 785 Tole / village: Shanti tole District: Morang; River: Mawa Requirement: left bank protection

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 90 Final Report

Chainage *1 Length *2 Symbol Location / Purpose Upstream Downstream [m] [m] [m] PRTW.05 (a) Municipality: Urlabari- 1 37,452.6 37,001.7 470 Tole / village: Tappu District: Morang; River: Mawa Requirement: Right bank, protection PRTW.05 (b) Municipality: Urlabari- 1 37,878.1 37,614.6 250 Tole / village: Tappu District: Morang; River: Mawa Requirement: Right bank, protection PRTW.07 Municipality: Urlabari -9 25,130.8 24,248.2 930 Tole / village: Borderline District: Morang; River: Mawa Requirement: Right bank, protection PRTW.08 Municipality: Ratuwa Mai Na.Pa.3, 4 7,333.9 6,033.5 1,330 Tole / village: Chaukighat District: Morang; River: Ratuwa Requirement: Right bank, protection PRTW.09 (a) Municipality: Damak- 2 41,154.3 41,014.1 205 Tole / village: Nawa basti, Triveni tole District: Morang; River: Ratuwa Requirement: Right bank, protection PRTW.09 (b) Municipality: Damak- 2 42,044.4 41,249.1 820 Tole / village: Nawa basti, Triveni tole District: Morang; River: Ratuwa Requirement: Right bank, protection PRTW.09 (c) Municipality: Damak- 1 37,562.7 36,601.2 950 Tole / village: Himalaya tole District: Morang; River: Ratuwa Requirement: Right bank, protection PRTW.09 (d) Municipality: Damak- 7 35,878.2 35,845.8 55 Tole / village: Nawa sirjana tole District: Morang; River: Ratuwa Requirement: Right bank, protection PRTW.10 Municipality: Damak- 6 38,430 38,195.9 265 Tole / village: Rubber Plant area District: Jhapa; River: Mawa Requirement: Left bank, protection PRTW.11 Municipality: Urlabari- 17 39,852.6 39,206.3 650 Tole / village: Mahesh chok/ Abiral chok District: Morang; River: Mawa Requirement: Right bank, protection PRTW.12 Municipality: Kamal- 6 31,772.1 31,380 500 (L/B) Tole / village: Khayarbari District: Jhapa; River: Ratuwa Requirement: Left bank, protection

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 91 Final Report

Chainage *1 Length *2 Symbol Location / Purpose Upstream Downstream [m] [m] [m] PRTW.12 Municipality: Damak- 10 31,043.1 30,634.3 500 (R/B) Tole / village: Panchthare tole District: Morang; River: Ratuwa Requirement: Right bank, protection PRTW.13 Municipality: Damak- 4 32,442.4 32,342.3 175 (L/B) Tole / village: Udaytole District: Jhapa; River: Mawa Requirement: Left bank, protection PRTW.13 Municipality: Urlabari- 7 32,442.4 32,070 370 (R/B) Tole / village: Shanti tole District: Morang; River: Mawa Requirement: Right bank, protection

4.2.2 Beneficiaries The estimated population and number of houses in the area that will be protected by the project are shown in Table 37, based on the flood modelling results for the subproject. The population is derived from the 2011 census data for Jhapa and Morang districts adjusted by 1.6% per annum for the intervening period. This is a slightly lower growth than the rate of just over 1.66% observed between the 2001 and 2011 censuses. The total population of 10,208 in the protected area are the direct beneficiaries of the project.

Estimates for the population and houses (and other infrastructure) affected by flooding include 3 scenarios:

1) the present situation based on historical flood events – this is the base case; 2) the present situation taking into account the expected impact on flooded areas of climate change and the “affected area” and is the “without project” scenario; and 3) the future situation taking into account the expected impacts of climate change and the infrastructural interventions proposed for the subproject. This is the “with project” scenario.

Those in the affected area outside the protected area (i.e. those living in areas prone to flooding but outside the areas that will be protected by the civil works to be implemented by the project) will also benefit from the FFEWS and anticipated reductions in loss of life, injuries and loss of livestock.

Table 37: Flood Affected Population and Houses (2019 estimates) Return period 1:2 1:5 1:10 1:25 1:50 1:100 Base case Population 1,554 2,235 2,858 4,342 6,554 8,902 Houses 345 497 635 965 1,456 1,978 Affected Area: Population 1,554 2,841 4,421 7,562 10,208 11,099 Houses 345 631 983 1,680 2,268 2,466 Protected area: Population 12 294 770 1,748 2,869 2,543 Houses 3 65 171 388 639 565

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 92 Final Report

Source: Consultants’ flood modelling results

4.2.3 Mawa Ratuwa Benefits Benefits estimated for Mawa Ratuwa are summarised in Table 38

Table 38 Mawa Ratuwa Discounted Benefits (financial prices) NPV of Benefit Source of Incremental Benefits % Total Benefits Stream (NPR mln) Direct infrastructure avoided losses 1,141.9 53.0 Indirect infrastructure benefit 718.8 33.4 Direct agriculture avoided losses 47.2 2.2 Indirect agriculture benefit 0.31 0.01 Direct livestock avoided losses 1) 35.8 1.7 FFEWS direct livestock avoided loss 30.8 1.4 Direct funeral and injury expenses avoided 1) 0.27 0.01 FFEWS Direct funeral and medical avoided costs 0.32 0.01 Direct and indirect avoided prevention & coping costs 178.8 8.3 TOTAL BENEFITS 2,154.2 100

Note: 1) Include avoided losses in flood affected area (outside protected area) due to implementation of the flood forecasting and early warning system.

Figure 44: Estimation of Benefits Mawa Ratuwa

Direct and indirect avoided prevention & coping costs FFEWS Direct funeral and medical avoided costs Direct funeral and injury expenses avoided 1) FFEWS direct livestock avoided loss Direct livestock avoided losses 1) Indirect agriculture benefit

Direct agriculture avoided losses Benefit Type Benefit Indirect infrastructure benefit Direct infrastructure avoided losses

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 NPR (Million)

4.2.4 Mawa Ratuwa Project Costs Total subproject costs amount to NPR 2,208 million (USD 17.2 million), as shown in Table 39. In economic prices, the total cost is NPR 1,977 million (USD 15.4 million). The civil works cost includes cost for river training works (NPR 1,309 million) and FFEWS and CDBRM (NPR 332 million).

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 93 Final Report

Table 39: Mawa Ratuwa Costs by Expenditure Category (NPR ‘000)

Investment Costs 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 Total

Civil Works 111,665 367,728 409,044 438,512 313,479 803 0 1,641,230 Equipment 0 21,239 30,414 27,962 25,866 8,994 0 114,474 Supplies, Materials and 397 7,847 8,955 9,643 7,632 7,249 6,785 48,508 Operations Studies and Surveys 0 17,022 27,239 29,024 30,893 10,950 0 115,128 Training and Workshops 0 1,199 1,984 2,136 2,296 2,218 730 10,563 Consulting Services 1,173 17,282 19,193 20,736 21,727 21,835 1,358 103,301 Government Staff 966 7,697 15,991 17,220 18,503 18,957 12,952 92,285 Resettlement 60,688 4,752 5,130 5,524 5,936 0 0 82,029 Total Costs (financial) 174,888 444,766 517,949 550,756 426,331 71,005 21,824 2,207,520 Total Costs (economic) 161,690 395,409 461,341 490,519 380,847 66,062 20,858 1,976,726

4.2.5 Results of Economic Analysis The Mawa-Ratuwa subproject has an EIRR of 9.2%. Increases in costs and reductions in benefits in the sensitivity analysis generally reduce the EIRR below 9%, although in most cases the values are close to 9%.

Risks to the subproject may occur in implementation if, for any reason, structures are not completed to the required standard. Other sources of risk would include if climate change engenders more and larger floods than have so far been predicted.

Table 40: Results of the Economic Analysis (Mawa Ratuwa) % NPV EIRR Switching change (NPR mil.) Value Base case 9.2% 20.2 Investment costs +10% 8.1% -128.2 +1% +20% 7.1% -276.5 Benefits -10% 7.7% -161.1 -1% -20% 6.1% -342.5 Buildings affected in flood envelope +10% 10.5% 197.6 -1% -10% 7.7% -157.1 % buildings damaged/destroyed +10% 10.0% 130.9 -1% -10% 8.3% -90.4 Public infrastructure affected +10% 9.9% 111.8 -1% -10% 8.5% -66.1 Future growth in infrastructure +10% 9.6% 80.7 -3.4% -10% 8.7% -40.3 Agricultural area affected +10% 9.2% 25.2 -31% -10% 9.1% 15.4

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 94 Final Report

4.3 CBA Bakraha Basin

4.3.1 Subproject Interventions The subproject will implement the following structures:

· Embankments protected by revetments totalling 4,365 metres; · A total of 42 spurs.

The location and length of embankments included in the subproject are shown in the following table.

Table 41: Works included in the Subproject Chainage *1 Length Symbol Location / Purpose Upstream Downstream [m] [m] [m] PRTW.04 Municipality: Urlabari- 4 Tole / village: 36,115 35,838 200 Thapadagi River: Bakraha Requirement: Right bank, protection against erosion. PRTW.06 Municipality: Patahrishanischare- 3 29,621 28,304 1,300 Tole / village: Milandada River: Bakraha Requirement: Right bank, protection against erosion. PRTW.07 Municipality: Bakrahamai- 5 Tole / 17,600 15,283 2,365 village: Kaseni & Leti River: Bakraha Requirement: Left bank, protection against erosion and flooding. PRTW.08 Municipality: Sunwarshi- 6 Tole / village: 496 0 500 Bardanga, Chaukitole River: Bakraha Requirement: Right bank, protection against erosion and flooding. · *1: Based on the chainage (Station Number) in the modelling. Zero at the downstream part of the hydrodynamic model In addition FFEWS and CBDRM will be implemented. Flood shelters to provide safe locations for affected households during flood events will also be constructed.

4.3.2 Beneficiaries The estimated population and number of houses in the area that will be protected by the project are shown in Table 42. The population is derived from the 2011 census data for Morang district is adjusted by 1.35% per annum for the intervening period which was observed between the 2001 and 2011 censuses.

Estimates for the population and houses (and other infrastructure) affected by flooding include 3 scenarios:

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 95 Final Report

The without project population of 6691 in the protected area are the direct beneficiaries of the project. Those in the affected area outside the protected area will also benefit from the FFEWS and anticipated reductions in loss of life, injuries and loss of livestock.

Table 42: Flood Affected Population and Houses (2018 Estimates) Return period 1:2 1:5 1:10 1:25 1:50 Totals Base Case: Population 2,440 2,929 3,265 3,813 4,295 4,806 Houses 450 541 603 704 793 887 Affected Area: Population 2,622 3,272 3,842 4,543 5,193 6,691 Houses 576 719 844 998 1,141 1,470 Protected area: Population 818 1,103 1,256 1,461 1,680 1,264 Houses 248 324 374 438 502 483

4.3.3 Benefits Benefits estimated for Bakraha are summarised in Table 43.

Table 43: Discounted Benefits (financial prices) for Bakraha Basin NPV of Benefit Source of Incremental Benefits % Total Benefits Stream (NPR mln) Direct infrastructure avoided losses 612.7 64.0 Indirect infrastructure benefit 211.0 22.0 Direct agriculture avoided losses 31.6 3.3 Indirect agriculture benefit 0.97 0.1 Direct livestock avoided losses 9.5 1.0 FFEWS direct livestock avoided loss 10.7 1.1 Direct funeral and injury expenses avoided 0.26 0.03 FFEWS Direct funeral and medical avoided costs 0.29 0.03 Direct and indirect avoided prevention & coping costs 80.6 8.4 TOTAL BENEFITS 957.7 100

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 96 Final Report

Figure 45: Bakraha Estimated Benefits

Direct and indirect avoided prevention & coping… FFEWS Direct funeral and medical avoided costs

Direct funeral and injury expenses avoided FFEWS direct livestock avoided loss Direct livestock avoided losses Indirect agriculture benefit Direct agriculture avoided losses Benefit Type Benefit Indirect infrastructure benefit Direct infrastructure avoided losses

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 NPR (Million)

4.3.4 Costs Total subproject costs amount to NPR 841 million (USD 6.3 million), including an allowance for any uncertainty related to land and the environmental action plan. The civil works cost includes costs for river training works (NPR 414 million) and FFEWS and CDBRM (NPR 95 million). In economic prices, the costs is NPR 756 million (USD 5.7 million) see Table 44.

Table 44: Costs by Expenditure Category (NPR ‘000) for Bakraha Basin

Expenditure Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 Total Investment Costs Civil Works 0 2,560 97,048 123,332 129,892 133,187 23,545 509,564 Equipment 0 15,247 22,908 22,599 22,417 7,850 0 91,021 Supplies, Materials & 250 4,551 5,227 5,629 4,957 4,642 4,277 29,533 Operations Studies and Surveys 0 12,091 19,311 20,540 21,827 7,725 0 81,494 Training and Workshops 0 480 794 856 919 888 292 4,229 Consulting Services 419 7,628 8,905 9,785 10,081 10,493 1,358 48,667 Government Staff 575 5,157 13,249 14,267 15,330 16,003 12,322 76,902 Resettlement 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total (financial prices) 1,244 47,714 167,442 197,007 205,424 180,788 41,793 841,412 Total (economic prices) 1,184 43,409 150,307 176,566 184,132 162,140 38411.3 756,150

4.3.5 Results of the Economic Analysis The Bakraha subproject has an economic internal rate of return (EIRR) of 15.1%, above the discount rate of 9% that is the hurdle for confirming economic viability. As may be seen from Table 45 the EIRR remains safely above 9% for all the changes in key variables tested in the sensitivity analysis. Risks to the subproject may occur in implementation if, for any reason, structures are

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 97 Final Report

not completed to the required standard. Another source of risk would be climate change engenders more and larger floods than have so far been predicted .

Table 45: Result of the Economic Analysis for Bakraha Basin NPV Switching % change EIRR (NPR mil.) Value Base case 15.0% 217.1 Investment costs +10% 13.2% 167.6 +43.7% +20% 11.7% 118.2 Benefits -10% 12.8% 138.1 -27.6% -20% 10.7% 59.1 Buildings affected in flood envelope +10% 17.2% 294.4 -28.3% -10% 12.9% 139.1 % buildings damaged/destroyed +10% 16.7% 294.8 -37.5% -10% 13.4% 159.5 Public infrastructure affected +10% 16.1% 258.1 -67.7% -10% 14.0% 178.5 Future growth in infrastructure +10% 15.5% 234.9 - -10% 14.6% 199.4 Agricultural area affected +10% 15.1% 220.0 - -10% 14.9% 214.3

4.4 CBA Lakhandei Basin

4.4.1 Subproject Interventions The CBA includes the following structures:

· Embankments protected by revetments totalling 2,760 metres; · A total of 27 spurs. The location of these structures is shown in the table below In addition, the FFEWS and CBDRM will be implemented. Flood shelters to provide safe locations for affected households during flood events will also be constructed.

Table 46: Works included in Subproject Chainage *1 Length *2 Symbol Location / Purpose Upstream Downstream [m] [m] [m] PRTW.01 Municipality: Lalbandi 46,181 44,186 2340 Tole / village: Pattharkot, Jiyajor River: Lakhandei Requirement: Right bank, protection against erosion and flooding. PRTW.08 Municipality: Haripur 31,294 30,786 420 Tole / village: Kachariya Tole River: Lakhandei Requirement: Left bank, protection against erosion and flooding.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 98 Final Report

4.4.2 Benefits Benefits of the subproject depend on the flood affected and protected areas without and with project implementation and from benefits accruing from implementation of the FFEWS and CBDRM measures, including the construction of 6 shelters to provide safety for people in the affected area during flood events.

The major source of benefits for other subprojects is the avoidance of damage and losses during floods due to the implementation of the proposed structures. For Lakhandei, because of the location and purpose of the proposed interventions, the benefits accruing from this source are extremely small. For this reason no cost benefit analysis has been completed for this subproject.

4.4.3 Benefits Not Quantified A primary purpose of the proposed infrastructure interventions is to control flooding in the river by confining the river to a narrower flood plain and to reduce erosion. Non-quantified benefits of the project therefore include the reduction of erosion as well as other unspecified impacts on the environment.

Implementation of the subproject would also provide increased security to and benefits for the population living along the river, from the northern area of the basin down to the border with India. The Lakhandei river is located in Silahi district which is part of Province 2. This area has a significant Madhes population which in recent years has mounted a number of protests against the central authorities focussing on their exclusion from public life in Nepal. The most recent of these protests, the cause of which was dissatisfaction with key provisions in the draft constitution, was the blockade of the border with India from September 2015 to February 2016 which caused extensive disruption to the local and national economy.

Furthermore, poverty levels in Province 2 are high. The multidimensional poverty index for Province 2 is 0.217 – only for Province 6 is the index higher – compared with the national average of 0.127. The headcount value of multidimensional poor is 47.89%, and again only for Province 6 is it higher – the national average is 28.62%. Province 2 is home to about 35% of all poor Nepalis.

While the measures proposed for implementation on the Lakhandei river will not improve the lot of all the population in the province, by contributing to the control of floods in the river it will contribute to improving lives and livelihoods in the basin. Furthermore, such projects are likely to contribute to a sense of inclusion in the national life with the potential for reducing disruptive protests and would contribute to the harmonious development of the economy in the province.

4.4.4 Costs Total costs amount to NPR 518.0 million (USD 3.8 million). The civil works cost includes costs for river training works (NPR 132 million) and FFEWS and CDBRM (NPR 61 million). In economic prices, the cost is NPR 470 million (USD 3.5 million) see Table 47.

Table 47: Costs by Expenditure Category (NPR ‘000) for Lakhandei Basin

Expenditure Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 Total Investment Costs Civil Works 0 6,933 46,939 50,320 49,649 39,431 0 193,272

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 99 Final Report

Equipment 0 17,366 26,195 26,689 25,754 8,994 0 104,998 Supplies, Materials & 200 4,740 5,631 6,064 4,697 3,935 3,409 28,676 Operations Studies and Surveys 0 11,414 18,158 19,245 20,384 7,193 0 76,394 Training and Workshops 0 714 1,164 1,253 1,347 1,397 0 5,874 Consulting Services 251 5,482 6,619 7,351 7,493 7,972 173 35,342 Government Staff 480 4,540 12,583 13,551 14,561 15,334 12,423 73,472 Resettlement 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total (financial price) 931 51,190 117,290 124,473 123,884 84,256 16,005 518,029 Total (economic price) 889 46,361 105,917 112,418 112,002 76,741 15,600 469,927

4.5 CBA East Rapti Basin

4.5.1 Subproject Interventions Because including physical infrastructure would make the subproject environmental category A and because of the need to protect the natural environment in the national parks, there will be no physical interventions for this subproject. The subproject will only implement the FFEWS and CBDRM in the basin and as well as constructing 5 flood shelters to provide safe locations for affected households during flood events.

4.5.2 Beneficiaries The estimated population and number of houses in the area that will be protected by the project are shown in Table 48. The population is derived from the 2011 census data for Hetauda and Chitwan districts adjusted by 2% per annum for the intervening period. This is a slightly lower growth than the rate of just over 2.6% observed between the 2001 and 2011 censuses. The total population of 7513 in the protected area are the direct beneficiaries of the benefit from the FFEWS and anticipated reductions in loss of life, injuries and loss of livestock.

Table 48: Flood Affected Population and Houses

Return Period 1:2 1:5 1:10 1:25 1:50 1:100 Base case (historical floods) Population 4,883 5,846 6,508 7,111 11,943 12,504 Houses 977 1,169 1,302 1,422 2,389 2,501 Affected area Population 4883 5846 6508 7111 7320 7513 Houses 977 1,169 1,302 1,422 1,464 1,503

4.5.3 Benefits Benefits of the subproject depend on the flood affected and protected areas without and with project implementation. These are shown in Table 49. Areas are included for protection up to the 1:50 year flood level, in accordance with the design criteria. Under East Rapti sub project the entire flood envelope area will get benefit of FFEWS system. Therefore affected with climate change area will be the FFEWS benefit area.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 100 Final Report

Table 49: Flood Affected and Protected Areas (ha) Return periods 1:2 1:5 1:10 1:25 1:50 1:100 Affected area without 2,253 2,881 3,138 3,389 3,537 3,652 Climate Change Affected area with Climate 2,390 2,950 3,227 3,527 4,399 4,661 Change FFEWS Benefit area 2,390 2,950 3,227 3,527 4,399 4,661 The benefits accruing to other subprojects (Mohana Kutiya, Mawa Ratuwa, West Rapti and Bakaraha) are principally derived from the avoided losses that accrue as a result of the physical infrastructure. For East Rapti there will be no implementation of physical infrastructure and therefore no avoided losses. Benefits will only accrue from implementation of the FFEWS and CBDRM as they affect the population in the flood affected areas. The quantifiable benefits attributable to the FFEWS and CBDRM are relatively limited.

The reason given for not including physical interventions for East Rapti is that including them would have made this subproject environmental category A since the East Rapti basin includes both the Chitwan National Park and the Parsa National Park. In effect the preservation of the natural environment and its fauna and flora in these national parks is of paramount importance and structural interventions would place these risks. Preservation is also of high national importance for Nepal as, among other things, these areas make an important contribution to Nepal’s tourist industry.

Although the population in the upstream and downstream areas will not benefit from flood management structures in their area, they should not be excluded from what protection is possible given the above constraints. Penalising them for living where they do would, under the circumstances, be unjust.

Any quantification of these benefits of the East Rapti subproject, in terms of the protection of the population during flood events and the protection and preservation of the natural environment and wildlife in the national parks, would only be able to consider a small portion of the actual benefits and, in particular, would not provide sufficient weight to the long term benefits, Therefore, no cost benefit analysis is presented for this subproject, but the subproject costs are included in the overall project cost benefit analysis.

4.5.4 Costs Total subproject costs amount to NPR 321 million (USD 2.5 million). In economic prices, the cost is NPR 289 million (USD 2.2 million).

Table 50: Costs by Expenditure Category (NPR’000) Expenditure Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 Total Investment Costs Civil Works 0 2,844 9,165 9,825 7,010 0 0 28,845 Equipment 0 16,560 25,081 25,871 24,888 8,689 0 101,089 Supplies, Materials & 178 4,193 4,897 5,274 3,847 3,381 3,039 24,810 Operations Studies and Surveys 0 16,762 26,810 28,555 30,382 10,765 0 113,273 Training and Workshops 0 698 1,135 1,222 1,313 1,382 0 5,749 Consulting Services 168 4,410 5,476 6,134 6,199 6,712 173 29,272 Government Staff 0 3,161 3,412 3,674 3,948 4,018 0 18,212

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 101 Final Report

Resettlement 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total (financial prices) 345 48,627 75,976 80,555 77,588 34,947 3,213 321,251 Total (economic prices) 312 43,884 68,309 72,431 69,826 31,823 2850.3 289,436

4.6 CBA West Rapti Basin

4.6.1 Sub Project Interventions The CBA of the subproject includes the following structures:

· Embankments protected by revetments totalling 12,530 metres; · A total of 36 spurs. The locations and length of embankments included in the subproject are given in the table below.

Table 51: Location and Length of Works included in CBA Chainage *1 Length Symbol Location / Purpose Upstream Downstream [m] [m] [m] PRTW.03 Municipality: Gadhawa- 5 142,513 136,487 5,770 Tole / village: Takaipur District: Dang River: West Rapti Requirement: Left bank, protection against erosion and flooding. PRTW.04 Municipality: Lamahi- 4 136,936 136,487 500 Tole / village: Butkauwa District: Dang River: West Rapti Requirement: Right bank protection against erosion and flooding PRTW.05 Municipality: Lamahi- 6 132,874 132,403 500 Tole / village: D/S of Balrampur Package District: Dang River: West Rapti Requirement: Right bank, protection against erosion and flooding. PRTW.06 Municipality: Gadhawa -7 133,701 132,929 700 Tole / village: D/S of Kanchhigaon Package District: Dang River: West Rapti Requirement: Left bank, protection against erosion. PRTW.08 Municipality: Rapti Sonari -6 20,348 14,747 5,010 Tole / village: Kachnapur District: Banke River: West Rapti Requirement: Left bank, protection against erosion and flooding.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 102 Final Report

4.6.2 Beneficiaries The estimated population and number of houses in the area that will be protected by the project are shown in Table 52, based on the flood modelling results for the subproject. The population data is derived from the 2011 census data for Dang and Banke districts adjusted by 2% per annum for the intervening period. This is a slightly lower growth than the rate of just over 2.2% observed between the 2001 and 2011 censuses.

Estimates for the population and houses (and other infrastructure) affected by flooding include 3 scenarios:

4) the present situation based on historical flood events – this is the base case; 5) the present situation taking into account the expected impact on flooded areas of climate change and the “affected area” and is the “without project” scenario; and 6) the future situation taking into account the expected impacts of climate change and the infrastructural interventions proposed for the subproject. This is the “with project” scenario.

Those in the affected area outside the protected area will also benefit from the FFEWS and anticipated reductions in loss of life, injuries and loss of livestock.

Table 52: Population and Houses (2018 Estimates) Return period 1:2 1:5 1:10 1:25 1:50 1:100 Base case Population 11,490 16,657 21,520 26,583 30,081 34,584 Houses 1,915 2,776 3,587 4,430 5,013 5,764 Affected Area Population 13,396 19,852 23,729 29,218 33,465 38,679 Houses 2,233 3,309 3,955 4,870 5,578 6,447 Protected Area Population 2,956 4,028 5,001 5,711 5,910 5,075 Houses 493 671 834 952 985 846

4.6.3 Benefits Estimated benefits for the West Rapti subproject are summarised in Table 53.

Table 53: Discounted Benefits (financial prices) for West Rapti Basin NPV of Benefit Source of Incremental Benefits % Total Benefits Stream (NPR mln) Direct infrastructure avoided losses 2,450.4 85.6 Indirect infrastructure benefit 86.4 3.0 Direct agriculture avoided losses 30.45 1.06 Indirect agriculture benefit 9.55 0.33 Direct livestock avoided losses 1.76 0.06 FFEWS direct livestock avoided loss 87.78 3.06 Direct funeral and injury expenses avoided 0.06 0.00 FFEWS Direct funeral and medical avoided costs 3.14 0.11 Direct and indirect avoided prevention & coping costs 194.4 6.8 TOTAL BENEFITS 2,864.3 100

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 103 Final Report

Figure 46: West Rapti Benefit Estimation

Direct and indirect avoided prevention & coping… FFEWS Direct funeral and medical avoided costs

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 NPR (Million)

4.6.4 Costs Total subproject costs amount to NPR 2,005 million (USD 14.9 million). Table 54. For economic viability only PRTW 03, 04, 05, 06, and 08 are recommended for construction which leads to a total civil works costs of NPR 1,588 million.

Table 54: Costs by Expenditure Category (NPR ‘000) for West Rapti Basin

Expenditure Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 Total Civil Works 0 6,542 122,980 463,355 488,894 506,335 0 1,588,106 Equipment 0 24,673 36,479 34,725 34,250 11,988 0 142,114 Supplies, materials and 504 8,143 9,009 9,702 8,606 8,863 8,605 53,431 operations Studies and Surveys 0 3,966 6,422 6,915 7,431 2,656 0 27,390 Training and Workshops 0 938 1,579 1,700 1,827 1,611 0 7,656 Consulting Services 1,026 15,404 17,192 18,606 19,462 19,629 173 91,494 Government Staff 1,072 8,384 16,733 18,019 19,362 19,556 12,052 95,177 Total (Financial Prices) 2,602 68,051 210,394 553,021 579,832 570,638 20,830 2,005,368 Total (Economic Prices) 2,467 62,261 189,257 491,973 515,829 507,264 19,828 1,788,880

4.6.5 Results of the Economic Analysis The West Rapti subproject has an economic internal rate of return (EIRR) of 16.5%, which is above the discount rate of 9% that is the hurdle for confirming economic viability. As may be seen from Table 55 the EIRR is resilient to changes in the key variables in the sensitivity analysis. Only in the case of a 20% overall reduction in benefits does the EIRR fall slightly below 9%. Risks to the subproject may occur in implementation if, for any reason, structures are not completed to the required standard. Another source of risk would be climate change engenders more and larger floods than have so far been predicted.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 104 Final Report

Table 55: Result of the Economic Analysis for West Rapti Basin NPV Switching % change EIRR (NPR mil.) Value Base case 16.5% 362.9 Investment costs +10% 12.7% 214.4 +24.4% +20% 10.0% 65.9 Benefits -10% 12.6% 178.1 -19.6% -20% 8.9% -6.7 Buildings affected in flood envelope +10% 21.9% 548.8 -19.6% -10% 12.4% 177.8 % buildings damaged/destroyed +10% 21.4% 531.1 -21.7% -10% 12.7% 195.5 Public infrastructure affected +10% 17.5% 402.8 - -10% 15.8% 326.4 Future growth in infrastructure +10% 16.9% 369.8 - -10% 16.3% 355.9 Agricultural area affected +10% 16.5% 366.2 - -10% 16.4% 359.5

4.7 CBA Mohana – Khutiya Basin

4.7.1 Sub Project Interventions The CBA of the subproject includes the following interventions:

· Embankments protected by revetments totalling: 7,250 m; · Embankments 3,030 m · revetments 2,150 m · A total of 146 spurs. · Number of outlets: 16. The locations and lengths of the embankments included in the subproject are shown in the following table.

Table 56: Details of Locations and Lengths of Priority Works Chainage *1 Length *2 Symbol Location / Purpose Upstream Downstream [m] [m] [m] PRTW.01 Municipality: Krishnapur-07 40,554 39,611 700 Tole / village: Near Santipur District: Kanchanpur; River: Mohana Requirement: Right bank protection PRTW.02 Municipality: Krishnapur-08 37,484 36,765 800 Tole / village: Upstream of Majgaun bridge District: Kanchanpur; River: Mohana Requirement: Right bank protection

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 105 Final Report

Chainage *1 Length *2 Symbol Location / Purpose Upstream Downstream [m] [m] [m] PRTW.03 Municipality: Dhangadhi-13 36,442 36,109 330 Tole / village: Downstream of Majgaun bridge District: Kailali; River: Mohana Requirement: Left bank, protection PRTW.06 Municipality: Godhawari-9 19,860 18,183 1,630 Tole / village: Arjun Tole District: Kailali; River: Khutiya Requirement: Right bank protection PRTW.07 Municipality: Godhawari-9 18,183 17,707 715 Tole / village: Murkatti District: Kailali; River: Khutiya Requirement: Right bank protection PRTW.08 Municipality: Dhangadhi-17 18,768 17,550 1370 Tole / village: Uttar Khaireni, Sukumbasi District: Kailali; River: Khutiya Requirement: Left bank protection PRTW.09 Municipality: Dhangadhi-15 9,044 8,509 520 Tole / village: Tarbariya District: Kailali; River: Khutiya Requirement: Left bank protection PRTW.10 Municipality: Krishnapur-09 34,080 33,704 400 Tole / village: Rajghat District: Kanchanpur; River: Mohana Requirement: Right bank protection PRTW.11 (a) Municipality: Krishnapur-09 26,943 24,146 1,345 Tole / village: Sanagaun District: Kanchanpur; River: Mohana Requirement: Right bank protection PRTW.11 (b) Municipality: Krishnapur-09 24,933 24,465 510 Tole / village: Sanagaun District: Kanchanpur; River: Mohana Requirement: Right bank protection PRTW.12 Municipality: Dhangadhi-3 26,943 25,983 960 Tole / village: Chatakpur District: Kailali ; River: Mohana Requirement: Left bank protection PRTW.13 Municipality: Godhawari-9 16,587 15,551 1,000 Tole / village: Dhanchuari District: Kailali; River: Khutiya Requirement: Right bank protection *1: Based on the chainage (Station Number) in the modelling. Zero is just downstream the confluence of Mohana and Khutiya rivers; *2: these length are the first estimates. During the preliminary design, these length will be checked and updated when required Note: PRTW.04 and PRTW.05 have been removed from the subproject due to their proximity to the Indian border. In addition to the civil works, FFEWS and CBDRM will be implemented and 13 flood shelters to provide safe locations for affected households during flood events will also be constructed.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 106 Final Report

4.7.2 Beneficiaries The estimated population and number of houses in the area that will be protected by the project are shown in Table 57, based on the flood modelling results for the subproject. The population is derived from the 2011 census data for Kailali and Kanchanpur districts adjusted by 2% per annum for the intervening period. This is a slightly lower growth than the rate of just over 2.2% observed between the 2001 and 2011 censuses.

Estimates for the population and houses (and other infrastructure) affected by flooding include 3 scenarios:

7) the present situation based on historical flood events – this is the base case; 8) the present situation taking into account the expected impact on flooded areas of climate change and the “affected area” and is the “without project” scenario; and 9) the future situation taking into account the expected impacts of climate change and the infrastructural interventions proposed for the subproject. This is the “with project” scenario.

Those in the affected area outside the protected area (i.e. those living in areas prone to flooding but outside the areas that will be protected by the civil works to be implemented by the project) will benefit from the FFEWS and CBDRM with anticipated reductions in loss of life, injuries and loss of livestock.

Table 57: Population and Houses (2019 Estimates) Return period 1:2 1:5 1:10 1:25 1:50 1:100 Base Case:

Population 3,677 5,025 9,367 10,901 11,732 12,231 Houses 735 1,005 1,873 2,180 2,346 2,446 Affected Area: Population 3,954 5,820 10,725 11,982 13,183 13,746 Houses 791 1,164 2,145 2,396 2,637 2,749 Protected area: Population 1,098 1,622 3,047 3,201 3,647 3,568 Houses 220 324 609 640 729 714 Source: Consultants’ flood modelling results

4.7.3 Benefits Estimated benefits for the Mohana Khutiya Basin are summarised in Table 58

Table 58: Discounted Benefits (financial prices) NPV of Benefit Source of Incremental Benefits % Total Benefits Stream (NPR mln) Direct infrastructure avoided losses 1,271.9 49.4 Indirect infrastructure benefit 949.2 36.8 Direct agriculture avoided losses 47.8 1.9 Indirect agriculture benefit 9.1 0.4 Direct livestock avoided losses 1) 20.4 0.8 FFEWS direct livestock avoided loss 36.9 1.4 Direct funeral and injury expenses avoided 1) 0.27 0.01

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 107 Final Report

FFEWS Direct funeral and medical avoided costs 0.50 0.02 Direct and indirect avoided prevention & coping costs 240.9 9.3 TOTAL BENEFITS 2577.0 100

Note: 1) Include avoided losses in flood affected area (outside protected area) due to implementation of the flood forecasting and early warning system.

Figure 47: Mohana Khutiya Benefit Estimation

Direct and indirect avoided prevention & coping costs FFEWS Direct funeral and medical avoided costs Direct funeral and injury expenses avoided FFEWS direct livestock avoided loss

Direct livestock avoided losses Indirect agriculture benefit Direct agriculture avoided losses Benefit Type Benefit Indirect infrastructure benefit

Direct infrastructure avoided losses

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 NPR (Million)

4.7.4 Costs Total costs amount to NPR 2,168 million (USD 16.83 million) including an allowance for any uncertainty related to land and environment management action plan. The civil works cost includes costs for river training works (NPR1,122 million) and FFEWS and CDBRM (NPR 304 million). In economic prices, the cost is NPR 1,953 million, (US$ 15.0 million).

Table 59: Costs by Expenditure Category (NPR ‘000) A. Investment Costs 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 Total Civil Works 95,615 317,032 357,040 382,761 273,700 803 0 1,426,950 Equipment 0 25,909 37,827 35,802 34,156 10,513 0 144,206 Supplies, Materials and 379 7,608 8,697 9,366 7,335 6,910 6,472 46,766 Operations Studies and Surveys 0 26,788 42,696 45,328 48,086 16,992 0 179,890 Training and Workshops 0 1,186 1,959 2,110 2,267 2,206 730 10,457 Consulting Services 1,152 17,013 18,907 20,431 21,403 21,520 1,358 101,784 Government Staff 1,188 9,139 17,547 18,896 20,304 20,943 14,972 102,988 Resettlement 117,319 8,584 9,266 9,978 10,722 0 0 155,869 Total (financial) 215,652 413,259 493,938 524,671 417,973 79,886 23,531 2,168,911 Total (economic) 204,335 368,311 440,980 468,387 374,432 74,167 22,601 1,953,212

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 108 Final Report

4.7.5 Results of Economic Analysis The Mohana-Khutiya subproject has an economic internal rate of return (EIRR) of 16.9%, above the discount rate of 9% that is the hurdle for confirming economic viability. As may be seen from Table 60 the EIRR is resilient to changes in the levels of damage sustained by buildings and public infrastructure during flood events. The prevention of this damage is the main source of benefits for the subproject, and it may therefore be concluded that subproject is economically viable and changes in the key factors measured are unlikely to undermine this conclusion.

Table 60: Result of Economic Analysis

% NPV Switching change EIRR (NPR mil.) Value

Base case 16.9% 964.4

Investment costs +10% 15.1% 817.5 +65.5% +20% 13.6% 670.5

Benefits -10% 14.7% 694.8 -36.0% -20% 12.5% 425.1

Buildings affected in flood envelope +10% 19.1% 1226.8 -38.8% -10% 14.8% 701.6

% buildings damaged/destroyed +10% 18.4% 1118.1 -62.6% -10% 15.5% 810.4

Public infrastructure affected +10% 17.6% 1054.1 - -10% 16.3% 882.8

Future growth in infrastructure +10% 17.6% 1064.6 - -10% 16.3% 864.3

Agricultural area affected +10% 17.0% 972.0 - -10% 16.9% 956.7

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 109 Final Report

4.8 CBA whole project A Cost Benefit Analysis for the entire project i.e. subprojects was undertaken and an overview is presented in the sections below.

4.8.1 Subproject Benefits Benefits come from the avoided losses accruing with implementation of the flood protection measures. Direct benefits quantified for the analysis are avoided damage and destruction of buildings and public infrastructure, avoided damage to monsoon season crops, prevented human injury and mortality, avoided livestock deaths and the avoided costs of repairing buildings, bunds and other field infrastructure and addressing the effects of sedimentation. Indirect benefits include the value of increases in private and public infrastructure and increases in agricultural productivity and production inside the flood protected area that are induced by the increased security from flood damage. The quantified avoided losses are weighted by the probability of their future occurrence. Benefits independent of flood events are estimated with reference to the project flood management time frame. The discounted benefits, in economic prices, are shown in Table 61.

For the East Rapti subproject, because the basin includes two important national parks, no physical structures have been proposed for implementation but only FFEWS and CBDRM measures (see the section above on this subproject). Also for the Lakhandei subproject the measures proposed, because of their particular location will lead to very low levels of the avoided losses measured for the feasibility study. However, Lakhandei is located in one of the poorest areas of Nepal and the non-quantifiable benefits of implementation are likely to be significant.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 1 Final Report

Table 61: Estimated economic benefits (net present values) Mohana Khutiya Mawa Ratuwa West Rapti Bakraha Total Source of Incremental NPV of benefit NPV (NPR Benefits NPV (NPR m) % benefits NPV (NPR m) % Benefits NPV (NPR m) % Benefits % Benefits stream NPR % Benefits mln) Million Direct infrastructure 1,307.6 48.5 1,141.9 53.0 1644.6 81.7 612.7 64.0 4,681.2 59.8 avoided losses Indirect infrastructure 1,091.6 37.1 718.8 33.4 75.5 3.8 211.0 22.0 2,023.3 25.8 benefit Direct agriculture avoided 55.8 2.1 47.2 2.2 28.6 1.4 31.6 3.3 167.5 2.1 losses Indirect agriculture benefit 10.7 0.4 0.31 0.01 8.0 0.1 0.8 0.1 21.3 0.3 Direct and indirect livestock avoided losses 56.3 2.2 66.6 3.1 107.6 5.3 20.2 2.1 263.8 3.3 1) Direct funeral and injury 0.77 0.03 0.59 0.02 3.2 0.2 0.6 0.06 5.7 0.1 expenses avoided 1) Direct and indirect avoided prevention & 263.0 9.8 178.9 8.3 146.5 7.3 80.6 8.4 671.4 8.6 coping costs TOTAL BENEFITS 2,696.8 34.4 2,154.2 27.5 2,094.0 26.7 957.7 12.2 7,829.2 100.00

1) Include avoided losses in flood affected area (outside protected area) due to implementation of the flood forecasting and early warning system. 2) As noted in the subproject sections above: a) for Lakhandei subproject, the benefits accruing from the physical infrastructure are very small due to the characteristics of the proposed interventions, and b) for East Rapti there are no structural interventions because the river flows through two important national parks and benefits for the population only accrue from implementation of the FFEWS and CBDRM.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 1 Final Report

4.8.2 Project Costs Total Project costs including contingencies for 6 subprojects amount to NPR 8,062 million (USD 61.58 million) including an allowance for any uncertainty related to land and the environmental management action plan, project implementation consultancy, infrastructure and the proposed FFEWS, but excluding interest during implementation estimated at USD1.42 million. In economic prices, the cost is NPR 7,238.8 million (US$ 55.26 million).

Table 62: Project Cost including contingencies by Expenditure Category (NPR’000) Investment Costs 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 Total Civil Works 207,280 703,640 1,042,216 1,468,105 1,262,625 680,558 23,545 5,387,969 Equipment 0 120,993 178,904 173,647 167,331 57,029 0 697,903 Supplies, Materials & 1,908 37,082 42,418 45,678 37,074 34,980 32,586 231,724 Operations Studies and Surveys 0 88,044 140,635 149,607 159,003 56,281 0 593,570 Training and 0 5,215 8,615 9,277 9,969 9,702 1,751 44,528 Workshops Consulting Services 4,188 67,219 76,292 83,043 86,364 88,161 4,593 409,861 Government Staff 4,766 38,077 79,514 85,625 92,009 94,811 64,721 459,524 Resettlement 178,006 13,336 14,396 15,502 16,658 0 0 237,898 Total 396,148 1,073,607 1,582,989 2,030,484 1,831,032 1,021,520 127,196 8,062,977 Note: Costs including contingencies, but excluding financing costs.

4.8.3 Results of Economic Analysis The results of the economic analysis for each subproject are provided in the preceding sections of this report. For convenience the results are summarised in Table 63. For the detailed results for each subproject reference should be made to the respective sections above.

Table 63: Cost Benefit Summary for all Subprojects

Sub Project EIRR % NPV (NPR m) Mohana Kutiya 16.9 964.4 Mawa Ratuwa 9.2 20.2 West Rapti 16.5 362.9 Lakhandei Not estimated - Bakaraha 15.0 211.5 East Rapti Not estimated - Note: Cost benefits analyses for Lakhandei and East Rapti are not present. Refer to the relevant sections above for detailed presentation of these subprojects. The results of the analysis for the whole project are shown in Table 64. The EIRR for the whole project is 11.7% and the NPV NP1,000 million. These results include the costs but no quantified benefits for the East Rapti and Lakhandei subprojects.

Table 64: EIRR and Sensitivity Analysis for the Project NPV Switching % change EIRR (NPR mil.) Value Base case 11.7% 1000 Investment costs +10% 10.2% 480 +19%

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 2 Final Report

+20% 8.9% -40 Benefits -10% 9.8% 282 -13.9% -20% 7.8% -436 Buildings affected in flood envelope +10% 12.9% 1441 -22.6% -10% 10.5% 560 % buildings damaged/destroyed +10% 13.0% 1490 -20% -10% 10.4% 511 Public infrastructure affected +10% 13.1% 1534 -20.2% -10% 10.4% 503 Future growth in infrastructure +10% 12.1% 1186 -53.5% -10% 11.2% 815 Agricultural area affected +10% 11.7% 1019 - -10% 11.6% 982

The principal source of benefits for the project is the avoided losses of public and private infrastructure (buildings (including houses), roads, bridges and power lines) and the greatest impact of flooding is on this infrastructure. From the sensitivity analysis presented in Table 4 it can been seen that variations in the impact of floods on this infrastructure will not greatly affect the overall viability of the project, although it is noted that 20% in project costs or a 20% decrease in benefits throughout the life of the project would result in the EIRR falling slightly below 9%. Variation in the future growth in infrastructure, the estimate of which is based on population growth in the terai and the assumption that growth implies more buildings and roads within the flood envelopes, also has limited impact on the EIRR for the project. By contrast, the impact of agricultural losses is generally minor, since the level of damage depends on when in the cropping cycle floods occur.

In addition to these quantified benefits, it is also estimated that over the 25 year project life, based on historical flood data, that the project will save 221 lives, save 44 missing persons and prevent 102 flood related injuries.

As with the individual subprojects, risks to the subproject may occur during implementation if, for any reason, structures are not completed to the required standard. It will also be necessary for the infrastructure is maintained so that the protection of the population and land continues during the life of the project and beyond. Another source of risk would be climate change engenders more and larger floods than have so far been predicted.

4.8.4 Distribution Analysis and Poverty Assessment A distribution analysis has been undertaken for the whole project, but not for the individual subprojects. This is shown in the table below. A poverty impact ratio of 17.1% is estimated for the project.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 1 Final Report

Table 65: Distribution Analysis Allocation of Externalities Distribution Analysis Net Present Values (NPR '000) (NPR '000) GON / Farm Financial Economic Differences Economy Households households Labour Total Project Benefits Direct infrastructure avoided loss 6,593.0 4,681.2 -1,911.8 879.4 1,032.4 1,911.8 Infrastructure indirect benefit 2,362.0 2,023.3 -338.8 155.8 182.9 338.8 Direct & indirect agriculture avoided 160.11 183.82 23.7 - - 23.71 - 23.71 loss Direct & indirect livestock avoided 263.80 263.80 ------loss Direct & indirect funeral & medical 5.76 5.76 ------avoided loss Prevention and coping costs avoided 750.0 671.4 -78.6 - 39.3 - 39.3 78.6 loss Total Benefits 10,134.7 7,829.2 -2,305.5 1,035.2 1,254.6 23.7 39.3 2,352.9 Project Costs Investment Costs 5,075.5 5,202.5 -594 534 59 594 O&M Costs 857.8 979.9 -130 117 13 130 Total Costs 5,933.3 6,182.5 -723

Net benefits 2,276.3 1,646.8 -629.5 -54.0 740.3 23.7 -33.0 676.9 Proportion to the poor 21% 21% 21% 100% Benefits for the poor -11.3 155.5 5.0 -33.0 116.1 Poverty impact ratio 17.1%

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 1 Final Report

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 2 Final Report

5 Deliverables

The deliverables submitted within the scope of this project, in alphabetical order, are enumerated in Table 66.

Table 66: Deliverables No Title 1 Assessment institutional capacity and training needs 2 Assessment of climate change risks and project adaptation measures 3 Bidding documents: Mawa - Ratuwa Basin 4 Bidding documents: Mohana - Khutiya Basin 5 Community Based Disaster Risk Management 6 Detailed engineering design + report: Mawa - Ratuwa 7 Detailed engineering design + report: Mohana - Khutiya 8 Environment Assessment & Review Framework 9 Feasibility Report: Bakraha Basin 10 Feasibility Report: East Rapti Basin 11 Feasibility Report: Lakhandei Basin 12 Feasibility report: Mawa - Ratuwa basin 13 Feasibility report: Mohana - Khutiya basin 14 Feasibility Report: West Rapti Basin 15 Final Report 16 Financial and Economic Analysis 17 Financial management assessment 18 Flood Forecasting and Early Warning System: Bakraha Basin 19 Flood Forecasting and Early Warning System: East Rapti Basin 20 Flood Forecasting and Early Warning System: Lakhandei Basin 21 Flood Forecasting and Early Warning System: Mawa-Ratuwa Basin 22 Flood Forecasting and Early Warning System: Mohana-Khutiya Basin 23 GESI Action Plan 24 Hydraulic Structures Assessment: Bakraha basin 25 Hydraulic Structures Assessment: East Rapti basin 26 Hydraulic Structures Assessment: Lakhandei basin 27 Hydraulic Structures Assessment: Mawa - Ratuwa basin 28 Hydraulic Structures Assessment: Mohana - Khutiya basin 29 Hydraulic Structures Assessment: West Rapti Basin 30 IEE: Bakraha Basin (ADB format) 31 IEE: Bakraha Basin (DWRI format) 32 IEE: Lakhandei Basin (ADB format) 33 IEE: Lakhandei Basin (DWRI format) 34 IEE: West Rapti Basin (ADB format) 35 IEE: West Rapti Basin (DWRI format) 36 Inception report 37 Initial Environmental Examination: Mawa - Ratuwa (ADB) 38 Initial Environmental Examination: Mawa - Ratuwa (DWRI) 39 Initial Environmental Examination: Mohana - Khutiya (ADB) 40 Initial Environmental Examination: Mohana - Khutiya (DWRI)

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 3 Final Report

No Title 41 Land Acquisition, Resettlement and Indigenous People Plan Mawa – Ratuwa Basin 42 Land Acquisition, Resettlement and Indigenous People Plan Mohana - Khutiya Basin 43 Master Tender Documents - Civil Works 44 Morphology Assessment: Bakraha Basin 45 Morphology Assessment: East Rapti Basin 46 Morphology Assessment: Lakhandei Basin 47 Morphology Assessment: Mawa - Ratuwa basin 48 Morphology Assessment: Mohana - Khutiya basin 49 Morphology Assessment: West Rapti Basin 50 PAM 51 Poverty and Social Assessment 52 Procurement plan 53 Procurement Risk Assessment 54 Project costings and investment and financial plan 55 Resettlement Policy Framework 56 River Hydrology Assessment - Bakraha Basin 57 River Hydrology Assessment - East Rapti Basin 58 River Hydrology Assessment - Lakhandei Basin 59 River Hydrology Assessment: Mawa - Ratuwa basin 60 River Hydrology Assessment: Mohana - Khutiya basin 61 River Hydrology Assessment: West Rapti Basin 62 RRP 63 Sector analysis + summary 64 Social Safeguards Due Diligence Report: MK subproject 65 Social Safeguards Due Diligence Report: MK subproject 66 SPRSS 67 Terms of Reference - Project Management and Implementation Consultant 68 Terms of reference of Initial Environmental Examination (IEE) of Bakraha River Basin Flood Risk Management Sub-Project 69 Terms of reference of Initial Environmental Examination (IEE) of Lakhandei River Basin Flood Risk Management Sub-Project 70 Terms of reference of Initial Environmental Examination (IEE) of West Rapti River Basin Flood Risk Management Sub-Project 71 Terms of reference of Initial Environmental Examination (IEE) of Mohana – Khutiya River Basin Flood Risk Management Sub-Project 72 Terms of reference of Initial Environmental Examination (IEE) of Mawa - Ratuwa River Basin Flood Risk Management Sub-Project

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 4 Final Report

6 Implementation arrangements

6.1 Implementation organisation The executing agency of the project will be the MEWRI and the implementing agency will be the DWRI.

The implementation of the Project will be monitored by the Project Steering Committee at MEWRI. This shall be the apex body chaired by the Secretary, MEWRI. The other members of the Steering Committee shall be Joint Secretaries from MoF, DWRI, DHM, representatives from Ministry of Home Affairs.

DWRI will establish a Project Management Unit (PMU) at Jawalakhel, Lalitpur headed by Project Director from DWRI and Deputy Project Director from DHM with appropriate staff besides Engineer (Design), Engineer (Procurement), Engineer (Implementation and Execution), Sociologist Officer, Environmental Officer and staff for Administration and support. The activities related to FFEWS shall be monitored by Deputy Project Director of PMU. There will be Project Implementation Units (PIU) in six People Embankment Program field offices located in respective sub-project areas in the Districts Jhapa, Morang, Sarlahi, Makwanpur, Dang, Kailali for the sole purpose of implementing the Project. The PIU will be headed by a Project Manager and appropriately staffed.

The PMU shall have its advisory sections comprising: (i) a committee that will review designs and documents, and advise as necessary; (ii) an environment safeguards and Social Monitoring and Evaluation Section that will monitor, evaluate and report on required safeguard and social activities; (iii) an Accounts and Finance Section that will be responsible for effective accounts and financial management; (iv) a Communications Section who will lead communication activities; and (v) a Procurement Section that will be responsible for obtaining approvals and issuing bid documents, managing bidding processes and bid evaluation until package award, and contract management including review and approval of contract variations.

Local Bodies will interact at Field level with respective PIU only.

Figure 48 shows an overview of the implementation organisation.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 5 Final Report

Figure 48: Implementation organisation

6.2 Responsibilities The project implementation organizations including their roles and responsibilities are shown in the table below.

Table 67: Project implementation: roles and responsibilities

Project Implementation Management Roles and Responsibilities Organizations

Ministry of Finance (MOF) · Ensure timely signing of lending agreements · Manages the advance accounts each for the ADB loan and grant established in DWRI and DHM · Processes requests from DWRI and DHM for release of funds from the advance accounts to the project’s subaccounts (replenishment or reimbursement). · Through the DWRI and DHM obtains account statements of advance accounts, reconciles advance accounts with the project subaccounts, and submits withdrawal applications to the Asian Development Bank (ADB). · Ensure timely allocation and release of both project and counterpart funds

· Chaired by MEWRI and members are shown in Appendix C. It will Project Steering Committee meet at least biannually, or more regularly as required. · Provides policy guidance based on performance reviews of project · Ensures collaboration among central and district level agencies. · Monitors the progress and addresses relevant issues for smooth implementation of the project

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 6 Final Report

Executing agency: · Executes the project. Ministry of Energy, Water · Makes timely decisions on all matters relating to project Resources and Irrigation implementation. (MEWRI) · Takes full responsibility for operation and maintenance of project facilities. · Leads interagency coordination. · Ensures adequacy of overall project financing and secures annual budget allocations for implementation. · Overall responsibility for compliance with loan and grant covenants, environmental safeguards, and facilitates corrective actions as required. · Overall responsibility for ensuring the project is implemented Implementing agency: according to time, quality and budget. Department of Water · Ensures full staffing and timely mobilization of project Resources and Irrigation management unit and project implementation units. (DWRI). · Ensures minimum staff turnover of project management unit and project implementation unit. · Monitors compliance with loan and grant covenants, environmental safeguards, and facilitates corrective actions as required. · Opens and manages project subaccounts. · Reviewing the withdrawal applications, obtaining project account statements, and submitting them to MEWRI.

· Overall responsibility for ensuring that project output 2 on FFEWS Implementing agency: is implemented according to time, quality and budget. Department of Hydrology and · Ensures full staffing and timely mobilization of project Meteorology (DHM) management unit and project implementation unit. · Ensures minimum staff turnover of project management unit and project implementation unit. · Monitors compliance with loan and grant covenants, environmental safeguards, and facilitates corrective actions as required. · Opens and manages project subaccounts. · Reviewing the withdrawal applications, obtaining project account statements, and submitting them to MEWRI. · · The PMU will be established within the DWRI offices in Project Management Unit Jawalakhel. (PMU) · The PMU will be led by a project director who will be responsible for overall implementation management of the project. The project director will serve as the focal contact with ADB. · Prepares reports advising the PAC. · Maintains project documents and submits reports (quarterly progress reports and project completion report) in a timely manner. · Consolidates accounts and submits draft withdrawal applications to MEWRI. · Submits all audited project accounts and financial statements pertaining to the project within six months of the end of each fiscal year. · The PMU will be responsible for:

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 7 Final Report

o Preparing implementation plans, annual budgets, and disbursement projections. o Overseeing the overall implementation of the project o Liaising and corresponding with ADB on all issues relating to the project o Coordinating with government agencies to resolve any departmental issues o Approving all planning, design and contract documents associated with the project o Leading implementation of the project by (i) procuring and evaluating services, works and goods; (ii) obtaining all necessary government approvals and right-of-way clearances from state departments and private land owners o Overall management of the Project Implementation Consultant (PIC) o Recruiting and managing the (i) independent environmental monitoring expert; (ii) urban management advisor; (iii) investment promotion advisor; (iv) sustainable township management capacity development; and (v) investor promotion and transaction advisory services consultant services packages o Acting as the “Employer” for all civil works packages o Overseeing and managing the procurement of services, works and goods by the PIU o Monitoring the activities of the PIU and advising as necessary o Maintaining project accounts and comprehensive loan financial records, and submitting consolidated quarterly reports o Establishing and maintaining a project performance monitoring and evaluation system (PPMES) for each package, output and outcome levels o Monitoring physical and non-physical investment activities under the project; obtaining necessary data for establishing baselines, maintaining and updating the PPMES o Preparing (i) reports to the EA for consideration and approval; (ii) periodic progress reports on each investment activities; (iii) disbursement projections; (iv) requesting budgetary allocations for counterpart funds; (v) collecting supporting documents and preparing withdrawal applications; (vi) audit reports; and (vii) reports mandated under the loan, grant and project agreements o Monthly reconciliation of the project accounts and provision of supporting documents for withdrawal applications to ADB for liquidation or replenishment of each project account. o Reviewing, approving and transferring of PIU’s request for payments o Approving media information and the project’s communications plan prepared by PIU · Updating and monitoring of the satisfactory implementation of the environment management plans (EMPs), and any correction action plans for additional facilities such as access roads and camps, consistent with safeguards requirements and ADB’s Safeguards Policy Statement (2009), and submitting updated safeguards and monitoring reports for review and disclosure.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 8 Final Report

· The PIU will be established within the DHM offices in Babarmahal, DHM PIU Kathmandu · The PIU will be led by a project manager who will be responsible for overall implementation management of Output 2 FFEWS. The project manager will serve as the focal contact with ADB. · Prepares reports advising the PAC. · Maintains project documents and submits reports (quarterly progress reports and project completion report) in a timely manner. · Consolidates accounts and submits draft withdrawal applications to. · Submits all audited project accounts and financial statements pertaining to the project within six months of the end of each fiscal year. · The PMU will be responsible for: o Preparing implementation plans, annual budgets, and disbursement projections. o Overseeing the overall implementation of the project o Liaising and corresponding with ADB on all issues relating to the project o Coordinating with government agencies to resolve any departmental issues o Approving all planning, design and contract documents associated with the project o Leading implementation of the project by (i) procuring and evaluating services, works and goods; (ii) obtaining all necessary government approvals and right-of-way clearances from state departments and private land owners o Overall management of the Project Implementation Consultant (PIC) o Recruiting and managing the (i) independent environmental monitoring expert; (ii) urban management advisor; (iii) investment promotion advisor; (iv) sustainable township management capacity development; and (v) investor promotion and transaction advisory services consultant services packages o Acting as the “Employer” for all civil works packages o Overseeing and managing the procurement of services, works and goods by the PIU o Monitoring the activities of the PIU and advising as necessary o Maintaining project accounts and comprehensive loan financial records, and submitting consolidated quarterly reports o Establishing and maintaining a project performance monitoring and evaluation system (PPMES) for each package, output and outcome levels o Monitoring physical and non-physical investment activities under the project; obtaining necessary data for establishing baselines, maintaining and updating the PPMES o Preparing (i) reports to the EA for consideration and approval; (ii) periodic progress reports on each investment activities; (iii) disbursement projections; (iv) requesting budgetary allocations for counterpart funds; (v) collecting supporting documents and preparing withdrawal applications; (vi) audit reports; and (vii) reports mandated under the loan, grant and project agreements

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 9 Final Report

o Monthly reconciliation of the project accounts and provision of supporting documents for withdrawal applications to ADB for liquidation or replenishment of each project account. o Reviewing, approving and transferring of PIU’s request for payments o Approving media information and the project’s communications plan prepared by PIU · Updating and monitoring of the satisfactory implementation of the environment management plans (EMPs), and any correction action plans for additional facilities such as access roads and camps, consistent with safeguards requirements and ADB’s Safeguards Policy Statement (2009), and submitting updated safeguards and monitoring reports for review and disclosure.

Implementing agency: Six There are six PIUs (Jhapa, Morang, Sarlahi, Makwanpur, Dang and Project Implementation Units Kailali) established at field level and working under the PMU. Each (PIU) under the Project PIU will be headed by a Project Manager and will be responsible for Management Unit. day-to-day management of the civil works, FFEWS and CBDRM contracts in their respective areas. The main functions of the PIUs will include: · Close coordination with PMU on management of civil works contracts, timely disbursements, compliance with loan covenants and any project management issues; · Day-to-day inspection of civil works and quality assurance control; · Monitoring of environmental management plan implementation; · Addressing of project related grievances on gender and safeguards; · Preparation of progress reports for assigned contracts; · Verification and certification of contractors’ claims and submission of required documents for withdrawal applications; and · Maintenance of project financial and other records. Project Implementation · Review and confirm designs and finalize bid documents of Consultant (PIC) remaining civil works, goods and services contract packages to be awarded under Project 1; (CS-01) · Providing overall project management and administration support on reporting, financial management, and monitoring and evaluation · Supporting the PMU and PIUs with establishing and maintaining the PPMES · Procure, mobilize, manage and supervise all contracts and act as the “Engineer” for Phase 1 · Ensuring implementation of the project per the approved plans, designs and cost estimates · Undertaking any necessary additional surveys and investigations to support designs and implementation; · Prepare detailed terms of reference, and assist PIU to recruit, mobilize, and manage studies and surveys under provisional sum items; · Prepare ADB financing and other necessary documents for Project 2 investments;

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 10 Final Report

· Provide technical and management advice, as required; · Manage and administer the project financing; · Prepare routine reporting requirements of ADB; · Knowledge transfer to the PIU, township management, and Phuentsholing Thromde. · Assist PIU with preparations, logistics and reporting for missions fielded by ADB, as necessary. · Report directly to PIU for all matters related to implementation of the project · Support all necessary activities for finalizing activities for Project 2 during the contract period. · Preparing due diligence reports (technical, economic, financial, safeguards) and draft ADB board documents for possible financing of Project 2 · Supporting commissioning and operation of the investments, including preparing management, operation and maintenance manuals Flood Forecasting Early · Design and Development of appropriate 1-d and 2-d Warning System consultants inundation mapping tools and processing of results of flood (FFEWS) forecasting model in a GIS environment into maps of flood (CS-02) · Implementation of a standalone user-friendly Windows based application, integrating the flood forecasting model and knowledge base of topographic and thematic GIS data, with the capability of running the flood forecasting model automatically. · Development of a web-enabled Windows Application on server client architecture · Design of appropriate format, content and dissemination protocols (as in the current practice within DHM or an improvement to the DHM practice) for the Flood Alert to flood-affected residents, both designated and broad category to all mobiles in the likely-affected areas. · Post evaluation of performance of forecast each year during the project period. · Obtain feedback from stakeholders and incorporate suggestions on dissemination of forecasts and warning. · Integration of the knowledgebase from hydrological and hydrodynamic modelling and data analysis within DHM.

Community Based Disaster · Responsible for identification of the need for CBDRM Risk Management Consultant activities, stakeholder consultation, (CBDRM) (CS-03) · Preparation of detailed CBDRM implementation schedule, TOR, including training and small scale mitigation works and livelihood requirements. · Prepare the budget and RFP for the recruitment of one or more local NGOs/CBOs to implement CBDRM activities in accordance with the project proposal. · Assist the PMU in obtaining ADB’s approval in all recruitment activities in accordance with the agreed procurement plan, government regulations and ADB’s Community Participation and · Support the PMIC to design and conduct baseline, midline Awareness Building NGO and endline resilience surveys in identified target communities.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 11 Final Report

· Establish Community Disaster Risk Management Committees (CDRMC). · Support the CDRMCs to undertake a consultative process to develop Community Disaster Risk Management Plans (CDRMP), · Support the CDRMCs to establish Community Disaster Response Teams (CDRTs) · Support the CDRMCs to identify, design and implement small scale risk reduction measures

ADB The Asian Development Bank (ADB) will monitor and review overall implementation of the project including compliance with loan agreement, project agreement and ADB guidelines. ADB will: · Field bi-annual review missions, midterm review mission, and project completion review mission to assess project implementation progress and compliance with loan covenants; · Review PMU’s submissions for procurement of goods, civil works, and services; and · Ensure timely disbursement of funds subject to PMU’s submission of withdrawal applications.

6.3 Implementation plan The project is expected to be approved in June 2020. After loan effectiveness, anticipated in July 2018, the project implementation period is 7 years. The project is expected to be physically completed by June 2027. Monitoring of the project performance and outcome will be until June 2028, including preparation of the project completion report. The project implementation plan is shown below.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 1 Final Report

Figure 49: Project Implementation Plan 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 Indicative Activities (Mth/Qtr) (Mth/Qtr) (Mth/Qtr) (Mth/Qtr) (Mth/Qtr) (Mth/Qtr) (Mth/Qtr) (Mth/Qtr (Mth/Qtr) (Mth/Qtr) Output 1: Flood Protection Infrastructure Improved Activity 1.1: Advance Contracting - Procurement of Good, Works and Non- l l l l Consulting Services (CW-01: Mohana- Khutiya & CW-02: Mawa-Ratuwa) Activity 1.2: Procurement of Consulting Services (CS-01-Project Implementation l l l Consultants) Activity 1.3: Prepare detailed engineering designs and bid documents for CW-03, CW- 04, CW-05, CW-06, FF-01, EQ-01 and l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l surveys including construction supervision of all works packages Activity 1.4: Procurement of Good, Works and Non-Consulting Services (CW-03: West Rapti, CW-04: Lakhandehi & CW-05: l l l l Bakraha Activity 1.5 Construction of CW-01: Mohana- Khutiya & CW-02: Mawa-Ratuwa Packages l l l l l l l l l l l Activity 1.6: Construction of CW-03: West Rapti, CW-04: Lakhandehi & CW-05: l l l l l l l l l l l l Bakraha Activity 1.7: Prepare and disseminate O&M manuals for hydraulic structures. Monitor performance of nature- based infrastructure l l l l (CW-01 & CW-02 by Q2 2023; CW-03, CW- 04 and CW-05 by Q2 2025) Activity 1.8: Handover of sites to DWRI (CW- 01 & CW-02 by Q4 2023; CW-03, CW-04 & l l l l CW-05 by Q4 2025) Output 2: Flood response capacity enhanced

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 2 Final Report

2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 Indicative Activities (Mth/Qtr) (Mth/Qtr) (Mth/Qtr) (Mth/Qtr) (Mth/Qtr) (Mth/Qtr) (Mth/Qtr) (Mth/Qtr (Mth/Qtr) (Mth/Qtr) Activity 2.1: Procurement of flood forecasting and early warning system l l l l Activity 2.2: Design, supply and installation of Flood Forecasting and Early Warning l l l l l l l l l l l l equipment (FF-01) system Activity 2.3: Prepare and disseminate O&M manual for flood forecasting and early l l l l l l l l warning systems and trial

Activity 2.4: FFEWS training and handover l l l l Output 3: Flood prevention and preparedness capacity improved Activity 3.1: Procurement of NGO for implementation of CBDRM (CS-02- Community Based Disaster Risk l l l Management NGO) Activity 3.2: Procurement of CW-06: Flood Shelter Houses l l l l

Activity 3.3: Construction of flood shelters l l l l l l l l l l l l Activity 3.4: Inception phase (identification target communities, baseline resilience l l l l survey, detailed project plans) Activity 3.5: Establishment of Community DRM Committees l l

Activity 3.6: Establishment of Local DRM l l Committees Activity 3.7: Development of Local DRM Plans l l l l Activity 3.8: Development of Community DRM Plans l l l l Activity 3.9: Flood forecasting modelling, training and capacity building on early l l l l l l l l warning systems

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 3 Final Report

2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 Indicative Activities (Mth/Qtr) (Mth/Qtr) (Mth/Qtr) (Mth/Qtr) (Mth/Qtr) (Mth/Qtr) (Mth/Qtr) (Mth/Qtr (Mth/Qtr) (Mth/Qtr) Activity 3.10: Establishment of Disaster Response Teams and training l l l l Activity 3.11: Small scale mitigation measures and livelihoods l l l l l l l l l l Activity 3.12: Preparedness infrastructure and other measures l l l l l l l l l l Activity: 3.13: Mid-term review (mid-line resilience survey, project evaluation and l l monitoring)

Activity 3.14: Exit phase (end-line review, l l l l project evaluation) A. Management Activities Annual review l l l l l l l Midterm review l Physical Completion l Financial completion l Project completion report l l l l

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 1 Final Report

7 Design Monitoring Framework

The design and monitoring framework is shown in Table 68 below.

Table 68: Design and Monitoring Framework (TO BE UPDATED)

Impact the Project is aligned with Social and economic losses due to water-induced disasters reduced (Nepal National Water Plan 2002–2027)a Results Performance Indicators with Targets and Data Sources Risks Chain Baselines and Reporting

Outcome By 2027:

Resilience of a. 2,309 ha of combined agricultural an residential a–b. Project Future climate communities land with 2,855 households protected from 1-in-50 technical and change impact to flood risks year flood (2019 baseline: 0 ha agricultural lands, 0 progress reports exceeds of selected ha residential lands, 0 households) projections river basins in and negatively the Terai affects the region b. 36 advanced flood warnings issued at gauging project improved stations within 5 sub-basins and minimum 500m interval along the river length to affected communities (2019 baseline 0 flood warnings)

Outputs By 2026:

1. Flood 1a. 39,260 m of resilient flood embankments 1a–b. Project Ongoing protection constructed, 4,640m of additional revetment, 439 technical and federalization infrastructure spurs and 35 outlet structures constructed (2019 progress reports process in the improved baseline: 0 km of flood embankment constructed, 0 country delays spurs and) implementatio n and capacity development activities 1c. 6 flood protection maintenance manuals and asset database developed with budget allocated and endorsed by DWRI 1c. River basin planning documents, quarterly progress reports

2. Flood By 2026: response capacity 2a.43 meteorological and 36 hydrometric stations 2a–b. Project enhanced commissioned and operational (2019 baseline: 40 technical and meteorological and 16 hydrometric stations) progress reports

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 2 Final Report

Results Performance Indicators with Targets and Data Sources Risks Chain Baselines and Reporting

2b. 5 flood forecasting and gender-responsive early warning systems in priority river basins installed and made operational (2019 baseline: 0 FFEWS operational)

2c. 5 flood forecasting and early warning system maintenance O&M Pan and budget prepared and submitted to DHM for endorsement (2019 baseline: NA)

2c. Government budget

3a. Pre- and 3. Flood By 2026: post-training prevention evaluation. and 3a. preparedness At least 50% of trained DWRI staff (at least 50% capacity women) demonstrated skills in flood risk improved management.(2019 baseline: 0)

3b. 76 gender inclusive CBDRM plans implemented (with 50% of involved in plan implementation to be made up of women) (2019 baseline: 0) 3b. Approved CBDRM plan, 3c. 76 communities have been trained in CBDRM progress reports and 48 flood shelters constructed. (2019 baseline: 0)

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 3 Final Report

Results Performance Indicators with Targets and Data Sources Risks Chain Baselines and Reporting

Key Activities with Milestones 1. Flood protection infrastructure improved

1.1 Initiate construction and supervision of at least 30% of the total project cost (at least two subprojects; i.e. CW-01 and CW-02) using detailed engineering designs and construction contracts, prepared under the TA (Q3 2020)

1.2 Prepare detailed engineering designs and bid documents for the remaining hydraulic structures in the project (Q2 2021)

1.3 Call bidders and engage contractors for CW-03, CW-04 and CW-05 (Q2 2022)

1.4 Construct remaining hydraulic structures (Q3 2022 – Q2 2025)

1.5 Prepare and disseminate O&M manuals for hydraulic structures and monitor performance of nature- based infrastructure (CW-01 & CW-02 by Q2 2023; CW-03, CW-04 & CW=05 by Q2 2025).

2. Flood response capacity enhanced

2.1 Award of design, supply and installation contract for flood forecasting and early warning systems for selected basins (Q4 2021)

2.2 Select strategic locations and install hydrometeorological, flood forecasting and early warning systems (Q1 2022 – Q4 2024)

2.3 Prepare and disseminate O&M manual for flood forecasting and early warning systems including trial, testing and commissioning (Q1 2025 –Q4 2026)

2.4 Training and handover of flood forecasting and early warning flood systems (Q4 2025)

3. Flood prevention and preparedness capacity improved

3.1 Prepare and implement project stakeholder communication and outreach program (Q1 2024)

3.2 Prepare and implement capacity-building program in flood risk management for DWRI staff, stakeholders, and community members (Q1 2024 – Q4 2025)

3.3 Prepare and implement, in consultation with women, CBDRM plans for project communities and local government officials (Q1 2025)

3.4 Develop high-resolution hazard, exposure and vulnerability maps of communities at high risk (Q4 2025)

Project management activities · Establish steering committee and project implementation unit (Q1 2020) · Assign government and community counterparts (Q2 2020) · Prepare annual work plans and ensure 100% of milestones are met (Q4 2020–Q4 2026) · Implement and monitor project activities: including the design and monitoring framework; stakeholder communication and outreach program; plans for social development, gender and development, and indigenous people; resettlement plan; and environmental management plan (Q4 2020–Q4 2026). · Prepare semiannual progress reports, including inception, midterm, and final reports (Q3 2020–Q2 2027).

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 4 Final Report

Results Performance Indicators with Targets and Data Sources Risks Chain Baselines and Reporting

Inputs ADB: $40 million loan (concessional loan), $10 million ADF DRR Grant, , $500,000 TASF-grant basis Government: $15 million

ADB = Asian Development Bank, ADF = Asian Development Fund, CBDRM = community-based disaster risk management, DHM = Department of Hydrology and Meteorology, DRR = disaster risk reduction, DWRI = Department of Water Resources and Irrigation, FFEWS = flood forecasting and early warning system, MEWRI = Ministry of Water Resources, Energy and Irrigation, OCR = ordinary capital resources, O&M = operation and maintenance, TRTA = transaction technical assistance. a Government of Nepal, Water and Energy Commission Secretariat. 2002. Nepal National Water Plan 2002–2027. Kathmandu. b Government of Nepal, Ministry of Home Affairs 2009. National Strategy for Disaster Risk Management. Kathmandu. Source: Asian Development Bank.

Table 69: DMF Indicators Mohana Mawa Lakhandei Bakraha West Rapti East Rapti Khutiya Ratuwa Output 1: Flood protection infrastructure improved (Civil Works) Embankments protected with 7,250 10,485 1600 4,365 12,530 - Revetment (m) Embankment only 3,030 - Additional 2,150 1,330 1,160 0 - - Revetments (m) Spurs (no) 146 188 27 42 36 - Outlet Structures 16 19 not designed yet - (no) Output 2: Flood Response Capacity Enhanced (FFEWS)

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 5 Final Report

Environmental Category Category B Category B Category B Category B Category B Categorisation B (IEE) (IEE) (IEE) (IEE) (IEE) (EARF) Indigenous People B (Limited B (Limited B (Limited B (Limited B (Limited B (Limited Categorisation impacts) impacts) impacts) impacts) impacts) impacts) Involuntary ADB ADB ADB Category ADB Category ADB Category ADB Category Resettlement Category Category C C (No impact) C (No impact) C (No impact) C (No impact) Categorisation C (No (No impact) impact) Nepali Govt Nepali Govt Nepali Govt Nepali Govt Nepali Govt Category C Category C Category C Category C Nepali Category C (Low risk) (Low risk) (Low risk) (Low risk) Govt (Low risk) Category C (Low risk)

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 6 Final Report

Appendices

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 7 Final Report

A. Location of Priority Structures

A.1 Mawa Ratuwa

Symbol / overview (indicative) Details PRTW.01 (a) River: Ratuwa Start structure Latitude 26°33'1.75"N Longitude 87°38'50.01"E End structure Latitude 26°32'51.90"N Longitude 87°38'55.56"E Chainage *1 Upstream [m] 18,453.7 Downstream [m] 18,245.7

Description:

Located along the left bank providing protection against erosion and inundation. Structures: · Earthen embankment protected by a gabion revetment. The total length is 420 m; · The new embankment will tie with existing bridge at the upstream end and natural ground at the downstream end. · The countryside slope will be strengthened by rockfill, toe drain and grass plantation and seeding (bio-engineering / environmentally friendly). Also, the river side slope will be protected by grass planting and seeding above the design water level; · A toe drain is specified, discharging into tributary · An access road for inspection will be provided at the embankment crest; · 7 spurs; · Launching aprons to protect the toe of the revetment and spurs. PRTW.01 (b) River: Ratuwa Start structure Latitude 26°32'51.43"N Longitude 87°38'56.60"E End structure Latitude 26°31'54.90"N Longitude 87°39'5.70"E Chainage *1 Upstream [m] 18,003.7 Downstream [m] 16,369.7

Description:

Located along the left bank providing protection against inundation and erosion. Structures: · Earthen embankment protected by a gabion revetment. The total length is 1,780 m;

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 8 Final Report

Symbol / overview (indicative) Details · The new embankment will tie with natural ground at the upstream end and existing embankment at the downstream end. · The countryside slope will be strengthened by rockfill, toe drain and grass plantation and seeding (bio-engineering / environmentally friendly). Also, the river side slope will be protected by grass planting and seeding above the design water level; · The toe drain will include cross-drainage culverts under the earth embankment as indicated in drawings. The culvert will include a trash screen and a penstock at the country side and a flap gate at the riverside with associated gabion mattress for the river bed and bank erosion protection at drainage outlet locations; · An access road for inspection will be provided at the embankment crest; · 10 spurs; · Launching aprons to protect the toe of the revetment and spurs.

PRTW.02 River: Mohana Start structure Latitude 26°33'26.04"N Longitude 87°38'24.95"E End structure Latitude 26°33'2.32"N Longitude 87°38'37.92"E Chainage *1 Upstream [m] 19,387.7 Downstream [m] 18,629.7

Description:

Located along the right bank providing protection against inundation and erosion. Structures: · Earthen embankment protected by a gabion revetment. The total length is 825 m; · The new embankment will tie with natural ground at the upstream end and bridge foundation at the downstream end. · The countryside slope will be strengthened by rockfill, toe drain and grass plantation and seeding (bio-engineering / environmentally friendly). Also, the river side slope will be protected by grass planting and seeding above the design water level; · The toe drain will include cross-drainage culverts under the earth embankment as indicated in drawings. The culvert will include a trash screen and a penstock at the country side and a flap gate at the riverside with associated gabion mattress for the river bed and bank erosion protection at drainage outlet locations; · An access road for inspection will be provided at the embankment crest; · 14 spurs; · Launching aprons to protect the toe of the revetment.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 9 Final Report

Symbol / overview (indicative) Details PRTW.03 River: Mawa Start structure Latitude 26°44'28.89"N Longitude 87°40'59.31"E End structure Latitude 26°44'12.12"N Longitude 87°41'1.39"E Chainage *1 Upstream [m] 44,454.6 Downstream [m] 43,975.3

Description:

Located along the left bank providing protection against inundation and erosion. Structures: · Earthen embankment protected with a gabion revetment. The total length is 535 m; · The new embankment will tie with natural ground at the upstream end and existing embankment at the downstream end. · The countryside slope will be strengthened by rockfill, toe drain and grass plantation and seeding (bio-engineering / environmentally friendly). Also, the river side slope will be protected by grass planting and seeding above the design water level; · The toe drain will include cross-drainage culverts under the earth embankment as indicated in drawings. The culvert will include a trash screen and a penstock at the country side and a flap gate at the riverside with associated gabion mattress for the river bed and bank erosion protection at drainage outlet locations; · An access road for inspection will be provided at the embankment crest; · 9 spurs; · 1 outlet structure; · Launching aprons to protect the toe of the revetment.

PRTW.04 River: Mawa Start structure Latitude 26°39'17.81"N Longitude 87°38'24.72"E End structure Latitude 26°38'53.40"N Longitude 87°38'30.16"E Chainage *1 Upstream [m] 33,305.6 Downstream [m] 32,559.4

Description:

Located along the right bank providing protection against erosion and inundation. Structures: · Earthen embankment protected with a gabion revetment. The total length is 785 m; · The new embankment will tie with existing embankment at the upstream end and existing embankment at the downstream end.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 10 Final Report

Symbol / overview (indicative) Details · The countryside slope will be strengthened by rockfill, toe drain and grass plantation and seeding (bio-engineering / environmentally friendly). Also, the river side slope will be protected by grass planting and seeding above the design water level; · The toe drain will include cross-drainage culverts under the earth embankment as indicated in drawings. The culvert will include a trash screen and a penstock at the country side and a flap gate at the riverside with associated gabion mattress for the river bed and bank erosion protection at drainage outlet locations; · An access road for inspection will be provided at the embankment crest; · 15 spurs; · 1 outlet structure; · Launching aprons to protect the toe of the revetment and spurs.

PRTW.05 (a) River: Mawa Start structure Latitude 26°41'26.20"N Longitude 87°39'2.63"E End structure Latitude 26°41'11.10"N Longitude 87°39'1.54"E Chainage *1 Upstream [m] 37,452.6 Downstream [m] 37,001.7

Description:

Located along the right bank providing protection against erosion and inundation. Structures: · Gabion revetment only in the first 200 m followed by Earthen embankment protected with a gabion revetment in the next 270 m. The total length of the structure is 470m; · The new embankment will tie with natural ground at the upstream end and natural ground at the downstream end. · The countryside slope will be strengthened by rockfill, toe drain and grass plantation and seeding (bio-engineering / environmentally friendly). Also, the river side slope will be protected by grass planting and seeding above the design water level; · The toe drain will include cross-drainage culverts under the earth embankment as indicated in drawings. The culvert will include a trash screen and a penstock at the country side and a flap gate at the riverside with associated gabion mattress for the river bed and bank erosion protection at drainage outlet locations; · An access road for inspection will be provided at the embankment crest; · 9 spurs; · Launching aprons to protect the toe of the revetment and spurs.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 11 Final Report

Symbol / overview (indicative) Details PRTW.05 (b) River: Mawa Start structure Latitude 26°41'38.09"N Longitude 87°39'2.43"E End structure Latitude 26°41'29.92"N Longitude 87°39'3.10"E Chainage *1 Upstream [m] 37,878.1

Downstream [m] 37,614.6

Description:

Located along the right bank providing protection against inundation and erosion. Structures: · Earthen embankment protected with a gabion revetment. The total length is 250 m. · The new embankment will tie with natural ground at the upstream end and existing embankment at the downstream end. · The countryside slope will be strengthened by rockfill, toe drain and grass plantation and seeding (bio-engineering / environmentally friendly). Also, the river side slope will be protected by grass planting and seeding above the design water level; · The toe drain will include cross-drainage culverts under the earth embankment as indicated in drawings. The culvert will include a trash screen and a penstock at the country side and a flap gate at the riverside with associated gabion mattress for the river bed and bank erosion protection at drainage outlet locations; · An access road for inspection will be provided at the embankment crest; · 8 spurs; · Launching aprons to protect the toe of the revetment and spurs.

PRTW.07 River: Mawa Start structure Latitude 26°35'49.54"N Longitude 87°38'12.04"E End structure Latitude 26°35'23.91"N Longitude 87°38'19.91"E Chainage *1 Upstream [m] 25,130.8 Downstream [m] 24,248.2

Description:

Located along the right bank providing protection against inundation and erosion. Structures: · Earthen embankment protected by a gabion revetment. The total length is 930 m;

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 12 Final Report

Symbol / overview (indicative) Details · The new embankment will tie with natural ground at the upstream end and bridge at the downstream end. · The countryside slope will be strengthened by rockfill, toe drain and grass plantation and seeding (bio-engineering / environmentally friendly). Also, the river side slope will be protected by grass planting and seeding above the design water level; · The toe drain will include cross-drainage culverts under the earth embankment as indicated in drawings. The culvert will include a trash screen and a penstock at the country side and a flap gate at the riverside with associated gabion mattress for the river bed and bank erosion protection at drainage outlet locations; · An access road for inspection will be provided at the embankment crest; · 17 spurs; · Launching aprons to protect the toe of the revetment and spurs.

PRTW.08 River: Ratuwa Start structure Latitude 26°27'54.54"N Longitude 87°39'8.82"E End structure Latitude 26°27'24.78"N Longitude 87°39'43.59"E Chainage *1 Upstream [m] 7,333.9 Downstream [m] 6,033.5 Description:

Located along the right bank providing protection against inundation and erosion. Structures: · Earthen embankment protected by a gabion revetment. The total length is 1,330 m; · The new embankment will tie with planned embankment at the upstream end (under construction) and bridge foundation (under construction) at the downstream end. · The countryside slope will be strengthened by rockfill, toe drain and grass plantation and seeding (bio-engineering / environmentally friendly). Also, the river side slope will be protected by grass planting and seeding above the design water level; · The toe drain will include cross-drainage culverts under the earth embankment as indicated in drawings. The culvert will include a trash screen and a penstock at the country side and a flap gate at the riverside with associated gabion mattress for the river bed and bank erosion protection at drainage outlet locations; · An access road for inspection will be provided at the embankment crest; · 4 spurs; · Launching aprons to protect the toe of the revetment and spurs.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 13 Final Report

Symbol / overview (indicative) Details PRTW.09 (a) River: Ratuwa Start structure Latitude 26°42'32.64"N Longitude 87°42'16.43"E End structure Latitude 26°42'26.17"N Longitude 87°42'17.34"E Chainage *1 Upstream [m] 41,154.3 Downstream [m] 41,014.1

Description:

Located along the right bank providing protection against inundation and erosion. Structures: · Only gabion revetment protecting existing bank. The total length is 205 m; · 8 spurs; · Launching aprons to protect the toe of the revetment and spurs. PRTW.09 (b) River: Ratuwa Start structure Latitude 26°43'0.12"N Longitude 87°42'8.40"E End structure Latitude 26°42'34.92"N Longitude 87°42'16.69"E Chainage *1 Upstream [m] 42,044.4 Downstream [m] 41,249.1

Description:

Located along the right bank providing protection against inundation and erosion. Structures: · Only gabion revetment protecting existing bank. The total length is 820 m; · 13 spurs; · Launching aprons to protect the toe of the revetment and spurs.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 14 Final Report

Symbol / overview (indicative) Details PRTW.09 (c) River: Ratuwa Start structure Latitude 26°40'42.71"N Longitude 87°42'54.30"E End structure Latitude 26°40'13.82"N Longitude 87°42'53.66"E Chainage *1 Upstream [m] 37,562.7 Downstream [m] 36,601.2

Description:

Located along the right bank providing protection against inundation and erosion. Structures: · Earthen embankment protected by a gabion revetment. The total length is 950 m; · The new embankment will tie with existing embankment at the upstream end and existing embankment at the downstream end. · The countryside slope will be strengthened by rockfill, toe drain and grass plantation and seeding (bio-engineering / environmentally friendly). Also, the river side slope will be protected by grass planting and seeding above the design water level; · The toe drain will include cross-drainage culverts under the earth embankment as indicated in drawings. The culvert will include a trash screen and a penstock at the country side and a flap gate at the riverside with associated gabion mattress for the river bed and bank erosion protection at drainage outlet locations; · An access road for inspection will be provided at the embankment crest; · 25 spurs; · Launching aprons to protect the toe of the revetment and spurs.

PRTW.09 (d) River: Ratuwa Start structure Latitude 26°39'56.15"N Longitude 87°42'41.63"E End structure Latitude 26°39'54.70"N Longitude 87°42'40.56"E Chainage *1 Upstream [m] 35,878.2 Downstream [m] 35,845.8

Description:

Located along the right bank providing protection against inundation and erosion. Structures: · Earthen embankment protected by a gabion revetment. The total length is 55 m; · The new embankment will tie with existing embankment at the upstream end and existing embankment at the downstream end. · The countryside slope will be strengthened by rockfill, toe drain and grass plantation and seeding (bio-engineering / environmentally friendly). Also, the river side slope will be protected by grass planting and seeding above the design water level;

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 15 Final Report

Symbol / overview (indicative) Details · The toe drain will include cross-drainage culverts under the earth embankment as indicated in drawings. The culvert will include a trash screen and a penstock at the country side and a flap gate at the riverside with associated gabion mattress for the river bed and bank erosion protection at drainage outlet locations; · An access road for inspection will be provided at the embankment crest; · 2 spurs; · Launching aprons to protect the toe of the revetment and spurs.

PRTW.10 River: Mawa Start structure Latitude 26°41'56.37"N Longitude 87°39'14.37"E End structure Latitude 26°41'47.77"N Longitude 87°39'13.38"E Chainage *1 Upstream [m] 38,430

Downstream [m] 38,195.9

Description: Located along the left bank providing protection against inundation and erosion. Structures: · Earthen embankment protected by a gabion revetment. The total length is 265 m; · The new embankment will tie with existing embankment at the upstream end and natural ground at the downstream end. · The countryside slope will be strengthened by rockfill, toe drain and grass plantation and seeding (bio-engineering / environmentally friendly). Also, the river side slope will be protected by grass planting and seeding above the design water level; · The toe drain will include cross-drainage culverts under the earth embankment as indicated in drawings. The culvert will include a trash screen and a penstock at the country side and a flap gate at the riverside with associated gabion mattress for the river bed and bank erosion protection at drainage outlet locations; · An access road for inspection will be provided at the embankment crest; · 7 spurs; · Launching aprons to protect the toe of the revetment and spurs.

PRTW.11 River: Mawa Start structure Latitude 26°42'41.16"N Longitude 87°39'11.26"E End structure Latitude 26°42'20.44"N Longitude 87°39'7.47"E Chainage *1 Upstream [m] 39,852.6 Downstream [m] 39,206.3

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 16 Final Report

Symbol / overview (indicative) Details

Description:

Located along the right bank providing protection against inundation and erosion. Structure: · Gabion revetment only in the first 105 m followed by Earthen embankment protected with a gabion revetment in the next 545 m. The total length of the structure is 650 m; · The new embankment will tie with natural ground at the upstream end and existing embankment at the downstream end. · The countryside slope will be strengthened by rockfill, toe drain and grass plantation and seeding (bio-engineering / environmentally friendly). Also, the river side slope will be protected by grass planting and seeding above the design water level; · The toe drain will include cross-drainage culverts under the earth embankment as indicated in drawings. The culvert will include a trash screen and a penstock at the country side and a flap gate at the riverside with associated gabion mattress for the river bed and bank erosion protection at drainage outlet locations; · An access road for inspection will be provided at the embankment crest; · 10 spurs; · Launching aprons to protect the toe of the revetment and spurs.

PRTW.12 (L/B) River: Ratuwa Start structure Latitude 26°38'10.26"N Longitude 87°41'16.69"E End structure Latitude 26°37'56.60"N Longitude 87°41'6.94"E Chainage *1 Upstream [m] 31,772.1 Downstream [m] 31,380

Description:

Located along the left bank providing protection against inundation and erosion. Structure: · Earthen embankment protected by a gabion revetment. The total length is 500 m; · The new embankment will tie with existing embankment at the upstream end and natural ground at the downstream end. · The countryside slope will be strengthened by rockfill, toe drain and grass plantation and seeding (bio-engineering / environmentally friendly). Also, the river side slope will be protected by grass planting and seeding above the design water level; · The toe drain will include cross-drainage culverts under the earth embankment as indicated in drawings. The culvert will include a trash screen and a penstock at the country side and a flap gate at the riverside with associated gabion mattress for the river bed and bank erosion protection at drainage outlet locations; · An access road for inspection will be provided at the embankment crest; · 12 spurs; · Launching aprons to protect the toe of the revetment and spurs.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 17 Final Report

Symbol / overview (indicative) Details PRTW.12 (R/B) River: Ratuwa Start structure Latitude 26°37'58.17"N Longitude 87°40'53.33"E End structure Latitude 26°37'44.07"N Longitude 87°40'44.25"E Chainage *1 Upstream [m] 31,043.1 Downstream [m] 30,634.3

Description:

Located along the right bank providing protection against inundation and erosion. Structures: · Earthen embankment protected by a gabion revetment. The total length is 500 m; · Above the design water level, the outer slope will be protected by using grass (bio- engineering / environmentally friendly). Also the crest and inner slope will be protected by using grass; · 6 spurs; · Launching aprons to protect the toe of the revetment and spurs.

PRTW.13 (L/B) River: Mawa Start structure Latitude 26°38'53.37"N Longitude 87°38'37.99"E End structure Latitude 26°38'48.98"N Longitude 87°38'42.29"E Chainage *1 Upstream [m] 32,442.4 Downstream [m] 32,342.3

Description:

Located along the left bank providing protection against inundation and erosion. Structures: · Earthen embankment protected by a gabion revetment. The total length is 175 m; · The new embankment will tie with existing embankment at the upstream end and natural ground at the downstream end. · The countryside slope will be strengthened by rockfill, toe drain and grass plantation and seeding (bio-engineering / environmentally friendly). Also, the river side slope will be protected by grass planting and seeding above the design water level; · The toe drain will include cross-drainage culverts under the earth embankment as indicated in drawings. The culvert will include a trash screen and a penstock at the country side and a flap gate at the riverside with associated gabion mattress for the river bed and bank erosion protection at drainage outlet locations; · An access road for inspection will be provided at the embankment crest; · 5 spurs; · Launching aprons to protect the toe of the revetment and spurs.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 18 Final Report

Symbol / overview (indicative) Details PRTW.13 (R/B) River: Mawa Start structure Latitude 26°38'50.36"N Longitude 87°38'32.26"E End structure Latitude 26°38'39.48"N Longitude 87°38'37.56"E Chainage *1 Upstream [m] 32,442.4 Downstream [m] 32,070

Description:

Located along the left bank providing protection against inundation and erosion. Structures: · Earthen embankment protected by a gabion revetment. The total length is 370 m; · The new embankment will tie with existing embankment at the upstream end and existing embankment at the downstream end. · The countryside slope will be strengthened by rockfill, toe drain and grass plantation and seeding (bio-engineering / environmentally friendly). Also, the river side slope will be protected by grass planting and seeding above the design water level; · The toe drain will include cross-drainage culverts under the earth embankment as indicated in drawings. The culvert will include a trash screen and a penstock at the country side and a flap gate at the riverside with associated gabion mattress for the river bed and bank erosion protection at drainage outlet locations; · An access road for inspection will be provided at the embankment crest; · 7 spurs; · Launching aprons to protect the toe of the revetment and spurs.

A.2 Bakraha

Symbol / overview (indicative) Details PRTW.01 River: Bakraha Start structure Latitude 26°44'12.70"N Longitude 87°38'49.75"E End structure Latitude 26°43'59.52"N Longitude 87°38'36.26"E Chainage *1 Upstream [m] 44,939 Downstream [m] 44,325 Description: Located along the left bank providing protection against erosion. Structures: · Gabion revetment with a total length of 600 m; · 6 spurs; · Launching aprons to protect the toe of the revetment and spurs. PRTW.02 River: Bakraha

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 19 Final Report

Symbol / overview (indicative) Details Start structure Latitude 26°42'10.51"N Longitude 87°37'15.85"E End structure Latitude 26°42'2.75"N Longitude 87°37'13.20"E Chainage *1 Upstream [m] 40,208 Downstream [m] 39,854 Located along the right bank providing protection against inundation and erosion. Structures: · Earthen embankment with gabion revetment. The total length is 250 m; · Above the design water level, the outer slope will be protected by using grass (bio- engineering / environmental friendly). Also, the crest and inner slope will be protected by using grass. Freeboard is 1.0 m; · 7 spurs; · Launching aprons to protect the toe of the revetment and spurs. PRTW.03 River: Bakraha Start structure Latitude 26°40'28.35"N Longitude 87°37'21.16"E End structure Latitude 26°40'18.04"N Longitude 87°37'13.14"E Chainage *1 Upstream [m] 36,969 Downstream [m] 36,569 Located along the left bank providing protection against inundation and erosion. Structures: · Earthen embankment protected by a gabion revetment. The total length is 380 m; · Above the design water level, the outer slope will be protected by using grass (bio- engineering / environmentally friendly). Also, the crest and inner slope will be protected by using grass. Freeboard is 1.0 m; · 9 spurs; · Launching aprons to protect the toe of the revetment and spurs. PRTW.04 River: Bakraha Start structure Latitude 26°39'17.81"N Longitude 87°38'24.72"E End structure Latitude 26°38'53.40"N Longitude 87°38'30.16"E Chainage *1 Upstream [m] 36,115 Downstream [m] 35,838 Located along the right bank providing protection against inundation and erosion. Structures: · Earthen embankment protected with a gabion revetment. The total length is 200 m; · Above the design water level, the outer slope will be protected by using grass (bio- engineering / environmentally friendly). Also, the crest and inner slope will be protected by using grass. Freeboard is 1.5 m; · 6 spurs; · Launching aprons to protect the toe of the revetment and spurs.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 20 Final Report

Symbol / overview (indicative) Details PRTW.05 River: Bakraha Start structure Latitude 26°37'32.37"N Longitude 87°36'24.51"E End structure Latitude 26°34'22.84"N Longitude 87°36'3.10"E Chainage *1 Upstream [m] 30,448 Downstream [m] 24,642 Located along the right bank providing protection against erosion. Structures: · Earthen embankment protected with a gabion revetment on top of existing embankment. At some locations the existing embankment is high enough and only requires a revetment against erosion. The total lengths are 5,260 m and 6,100 m for respectively the embankment with revetment (A in the picture) and revetment (B in the picture); · Above the design water level, the outer slope will be protected by using grass (bio- engineering / environmentally friendly). Also, the crest and inner slope will be protected by using grass. Freeboard is 1.0 m; · 43 spurs; · Launching aprons to protect the toe of the revetment and spurs.

PRTW.06 River: Bakraha Start structure Latitude 26°24'55.71"N Longitude 87°39'50.27"E End structure Latitude 26°24'47.38"N Longitude 87°39'44.12"E Chainage *1 Upstream [m] 29,621 Downstream [m] 28,304 Located along the right bank providing protection against erosion and inundation. Structures: · Earthen embankment protected with a gabion revetment. The total length is 1,300 m; · Above the design water level, the outer slope will be protected by using grass (bio- engineering / environmentally friendly). Also, the crest and inner slope will be protected by using grass. Freeboard is 1.0 m; · 14 spurs; · Launching aprons to protect the toe of the revetment and spurs.

PRTW.07 River: Bakraha Start structure Latitude 26°31'0.49"N Longitude 87°35'29.50"E End structure

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 21 Final Report

Symbol / overview (indicative) Details Latitude 26°29'58.56"N Longitude 87°34'48.57"E Chainage *1 Upstream [m] 17,600

Downstream [m] 15,283

Located along the right bank providing protection against inundation and erosion. Structures: · Earthen embankment protected with gabion revetment on top of existing embankment. The total length is 2,365 m; · Above the design water level, the outer slope will be protected by using grass (bio- engineering / environmentally friendly). Also, the crest and inner slope will be protected by using grass. Freeboard is 1.0 m; · 13 spurs; · Launching aprons to protect the toe of the revetment and spurs.

PRTW.08 River: Bakraha Start structure Latitude 26°23'57.37"N Longitude 87°35'14.28"E End structure Latitude 26°23'42.16"N Longitude 87°35'15.53"E Chainage *1 Upstream [m] 496 Downstream [m] 0 Located along the right bank providing protection against inundation and erosion. Structures: · Earthen embankment protected with gabion revetment of 500 m; · Above the design water level, the outer slope will be protected by using grass (bio- engineering / environmentally friendly). Also, the crest and inner slope will be protected by using grass. Freeboard is 1.0 m; · 9 spurs; · Launching aprons to protect the toe of the revetment and spurs.

PRTW.09 River: Bakraha Start structure Latitude 26°43'33.84"N Longitude 87°37'48.17"E End structure Latitude 26°43'4.97"N Longitude 87°37'34.52"E Chainage *1 Upstream [m] 42,993 Downstream [m] 41,900 Located along the right bank providing protection against inundation and erosion. Structures: · Earthen embankment protected by a gabion revetment. The total length is 1,000 m; · Above the design water level, the outer slope will be protected by using grass (bio- engineering / environmentally friendly). Also, the crest and inner slope will be protected by using grass. Freeboard is 1.0 m;

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 22 Final Report

Symbol / overview (indicative) Details · 7 spurs; · Launching aprons to protect the toe of the revetment and spurs.

A.3 Lakhandei

Symbol / overview (indicative) Details PRTW.01 River: Lakhandei Start structure Latitude 27° 6'40.73"N Longitude 85°39'16.80"E End structure Latitude 27° 5'43.11"N Longitude 85°38'39.37"E Chainage *1 Upstream 46,181 Downstream 44,186

Description: Located along the right bank providing protection against inundation and erosion. Structures: · Three sections of earthen embankment with gabion revetment, which are A1 (300 m), A2 (500 m) and A3 (380 m). The total length is 1,180 m; · Two sections of gabion revetment, which are B1 (500 m) and B2 (660 m). The total length is 1,160 m; · Above the design water level, the outer slope of the embankments will be protected by using grass (bio-engineering / environmentally friendly). Also, the crest and inner slope will be protected by using grass. Freeboard is 1.0 m; · 22 spurs; · Launching aprons to protect the toe of the revetment and spurs.

PRTW.02 River: Lakhandei Start structure Latitude 27° 5'12.96"N Longitude 85°37'59.54"E End structure Latitude 27° 5'3.14"N Longitude 85°37'26.07"E Chainage *1 Upstream 42,590 Downstream 41,515 Located along the right bank providing protection against inundation and erosion. Structures: · Earthen embankment with gabion revetment. Total length is 990 m; · Above the design water level, the outer slope will be protected by using grass (bio- engineering / environmentally friendly). Also, the crest and inner slope will be protected by using grass. Freeboard is 1.0 m; · 7 spurs; · Launching aprons to protect the toe of the revetment and spurs.

PRTW.03 River: Lakhandei

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 23 Final Report

Symbol / overview (indicative) Details Start structure Latitude 27° 5'4.78"N Longitude 85°37'24.38"E End structure Latitude 27° 4'41.34"N Longitude 85°35'15.61"E Chainage *1 Upstream 41,171 Downstream 38,277 Located along the right bank providing protection against inundation and erosion. Structures: · Two sections of earthen embankment with gabion revetment, which are A1 (800 m) and A2 (810 m). The total length is 1,610 m; · Two sections of gabion revetment, which are B1 (1,900 m) and B2 (200 m). The total length is 2,100 m; · Above the design water level, the outer slope of the embankments will be protected by using grass (bio-engineering / environmentally friendly). Also, the crest and inner slope will be protected by using grass. Freeboard is 1.5 m; · 51 spurs; · Launching aprons to protect the toe of the revetment and spurs. PRTW.04 River: Lakhandei Start structure Latitude 27° 6'17.58"N Longitude 85°39'25.83"E End structure Latitude 27° 5'50.16"N Longitude 85°39'15.92" Chainage *1 Upstream 45,506 Downstream 44,930

Located along the left bank providing protection against inundation and erosion. Structures: · One section of an earthen embankment with gabion revetment (A1) with a total length of 400 m; · One section of a gabion revetment (B1) with a length of 620 m; · Above the design water level, the outer slope of the embankments will be protected by using grass (bio-engineering / environmentally friendly). Also, the crest and inner slope will be protected by using grass. Freeboard is 1.0 m; · Launching aprons to protect the toe of the revetment.

PRTW.05 River: Lakhandei Start structure Latitude 27° 5'43.95"N

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 24 Final Report

Symbol / overview (indicative) Details Longitude 85°39'15.70"E End structure Latitude 27° 4'48.42"N Longitude 85°37'26.00"E Chainage *1 Upstream 44,477 Downstream 41,171 Located along the left bank providing protection against erosion. Structures: · One section consists of earthen embankment with gabion revetment (A1) with a total length of 1,600 m; · Two sections of gabion revetment, which are B1 (500 m) and B2 (1,355 m). The total length is 1,955 m; · Above the design water level, the outer slope of the embankments will be protected by using grass (bio-engineering / environmentally friendly). Also, the crest and inner slope will be protected by using grass. Freeboard is 1.0 m; · 26 spurs; · Launching aprons to protect the toe of the revetment and spurs. PRTW.06 River: Lakhandei Start structure Latitude 27° 4'44.13"N Longitude 85°36'20.01"E End structure Latitude 27° 4'28.32"N Longitude 85°35'7.13"E Chainage *1 Upstream 39,836 Downstream 37,458 Located along the left bank providing protection against erosion and inundation. Structures: · Two sections consist of earthen embankment with gabion revetment, which are A1 (1,240 m) and A2 (600 m). The total length is 1,840 m; · One section of gabion revetment (B1) with a total length of 320 m; · Above the design water level, the outer slope of the embankments will be protected by using grass (bio-engineering / environmentally friendly). Also, the crest and inner slope will be protected by using grass. Freeboard is 1.0 m; · 14 spurs; · Launching aprons to protect the toe of the revetment and spurs.

PRTW.07 River: Lakhandei Start structure Latitude 27° 3'36.16"N

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 25 Final Report

Symbol / overview (indicative) Details Longitude 85°34'5.28"E End structure Latitude 27° 3'3.84"N Longitude 85°34'13.13"E Chainage *1 Upstream 35,331 Downstream 33,478

Located along the left bank providing protection against inundation and erosion. Structures: · Earthen embankment protected with gabion revetment on top of existing embankment. Total length is 1,090 m; · Above the design water level, the outer slope will be protected by using grass (bio- engineering / environmentally friendly). Also, the crest and inner slope will be protected by using grass. Freeboard is 1.0 m; · 23 spurs; · Launching aprons to protect the toe of the revetment and spurs. PRTW.08 River: Lakhandei Start structure Latitude 27° 2'7.22"N Longitude 85°34'34.54"E End structure Latitude 27° 1'53.62"N Longitude 85°34'32.53"E Chainage *1 Upstream 31,294

Downstream 30,786 Located along the left bank providing protection against inundation and erosion. Structure: · Earthen embankment protected with gabion revetment. Total length is 420 m; · Above the design water level, the outer slope will be protected by using grass (bio- engineering / environmentally friendly). Also, the crest and inner slope will be protected by using grass. Freeboard is 1.0 m; · 5 spurs; · Launching aprons to protect the toe of the revetment and spurs; · Note that the structure connects to an existing structure. The google earth image is old.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 26 Final Report

A.4 West Rapti

Symbol / overview (indicative) Details PRTW.01 River: West Rapti Start structure Latitude 27°49'3.96"N Longitude 82°39'41.21"E End structure Latitude 27°48'56.09"N Longitude 82°38'18.80"E Chainage *1 Upstream [m] 148,209 Downstream [m] 146,105 Description: Located along the left bank providing protection against erosion and inundation. Structures: · Earthen embankment with gabion revetment. The total length is 2,340 m; · Above the design water level, the outer slope will be protected by using grass (bio-engineering / environmentally friendly). Also, the crest and inner slope will be protected by using grass. Freeboard is 1.5 m; · 13 spurs; · Launching aprons to protect the toe of the revetment and spurs. PRTW.02 River: West Rapti Start structure Latitude 27°48'51.90"N Longitude 82°38'2.34"E End structure Latitude 27°49'9.36"N Longitude 82°36'49.62"E Chainage *1 Upstream [m] 145,481 Downstream [m] 143,617 Located along the left bank providing protection against inundation and erosion. Structures: · Earthen embankment with gabion revetment. The total length is 2,100 m out of which first 1,200 m is revetment (A in the picture) only and remaining 900 m (B in the picture) is embankment with gabion revetment; · Above the design water level, the outer slope will be protected by using grass (bio-engineering / environmentally friendly). Also, the crest and inner slope will be protected by using grass. Freeboard is 1.5 m; · 9 spurs; · Launching aprons to protect the toe of the revetment and spurs. PRTW.03 River: West Rapti Start structure Latitude 27°49'34.51"N Longitude 82°36'12.54"E End structure Latitude 27°49'45.73"N Longitude 82°32'46.46"E Chainage *1 Upstream [m] 142,513 Downstream [m] 136,487 Located along the left bank providing protection against inundation and erosion. Structures: · Earthen embankment protected by a gabion revetment. The total length is 5,770 m;

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 27 Final Report

Symbol / overview (indicative) Details · Above the design water level, the outer slope will be protected by using grass (bio-engineering / environmentally friendly). Also, the crest and inner slope will be protected by using grass. Freeboard is 1.5 m; · 10 spurs; · Launching aprons to protect the toe of the revetment and spurs. PRTW.04 River: West Rapti Start structure Latitude 27°50'22.05"N Longitude 82°32'55.13"E End structure Latitude 27°50'14.45"N Longitude 82°32'39.11"E Chainage *1 Upstream [m] 136,936 Downstream [m] 136,487 Located along the right bank providing protection against inundation and erosion. Structures: · Earthen embankment protected with a gabion revetment. The total length is 500 m; · Above the design water level, the outer slope will be protected by using grass (bio-engineering / environmentally friendly). Also, the crest and inner slope will be protected by using grass. Freeboard is 1.5 m; · Launching aprons to protect the toe of the revetment. PRTW.05 River: West Rapti Start structure Latitude 27°50'55.88"N Longitude 82°30'56.11"E End structure Latitude 27°50'51.38"N Longitude 82°30'38.47"E Chainage *1 Upstream [m] 132,874 Downstream [m] 132,403 Located along the right bank providing protection against erosion and inundation. Structures: · Earthen embankment protected with a gabion revetment. The total length is 500 m; · Above the design water level, the outer slope will be protected by using grass (bio-engineering / environmentally friendly). Also, the crest and inner slope will be protected by using grass. Freeboard is 1.5 m; · 4 spurs; · Launching aprons to protect the toe of the revetment and spurs. PRTW.06 River: West Rapti Start structure Latitude 27°49'54.38"N Longitude 82°31'12.46"E End structure Latitude 27°50'6.10"N Longitude 82°30'49.23"E Chainage *1 Upstream [m] 133,701 Downstream [m] 132,929

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 28 Final Report

Symbol / overview (indicative) Details Located along the left bank providing protection against erosion and inundation. Structures: · Earthen embankment protected with a gabion revetment. The total length is 750 m; · Above the design water level, the outer slope will be protected by using grass (bio-engineering / environmentally friendly). Also, the crest and inner slope will be protected by using grass. Freeboard is 1.5 m; · 4 spurs; · Launching aprons to protect the toe of the revetment and spurs.

PRTW.07 River: West Rapti Start structure Latitude 28° 4'37.65"N Longitude 81°49'20.66"E End structure Latitude 28° 4'58.48"N Longitude 81°49'9.61"E Chainage *1 Upstream [m] 34,889 Downstream [m] 34,097 Located along the right bank providing protection against inundation and erosion. Structures: · Earthen embankment protected with a gabion revetment on top of existing embankment. The total length is 820 m; · Above the design water level, the outer slope will be protected by using grass (bio-engineering / environmentally friendly). Also, the crest and inner slope will be protected by using grass. Freeboard is 1.5 m; · 9 spurs; · Launching aprons to protect the toe of the revetment and spurs.

PRTW.08 River: West Rapti Start structure Latitude 28° 3'52.69"N Longitude 81°43'35.35"E End structure Latitude 28° 1'36.53"N Longitude 81°45'8.91"E Chainage *1 Upstream [m] 20,348 Downstream [m] 14,747

Located along the left bank providing protection against inundation and erosion. Structures: · Earthen embankment protected with gabion revetment of 5,010 m; · Above the design water level, the outer slope will be protected by using grass (bio-engineering / environmentally friendly). Also, the crest and inner slope will be protected by using grass. Freeboard is 1.5 m; · 18 spurs; · Launching aprons to protect the toe of the revetment and spurs.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 29 Final Report

Symbol / overview (indicative) Details

PRTW.09 River: West Rapti Start structure Latitude 27°57'41.96"N Longitude 81°45'28.87"E End structure Latitude 27°57'9.16"N Longitude 81°45'37.40"E Chainage *1 Upstream [m] 7,233 Downstream [m] 6,324

Located along the left bank providing protection against inundation and erosion. Structures: · Earthen embankment protected by a gabion revetment. The total length is 1,050 m; · Above the design water level, the outer slope will be protected by using grass (bio-engineering / environmentally friendly). Also, the crest and inner slope will be protected by using grass. Freeboard is 1.5 m; · 8 spurs; · Launching aprons to protect the toe of the revetment and spurs.

A.5 Mohana Khutiya

Symbol / overview (indicative) Details PRTW.01 River: Mohana Start structure (Embankment) Latitude 28°46'58.13"N Longitude 80°32'42.51"E End structure (Embankment) Latitude 28°46'40.07"N Longitude 80°32'52.11"E Start structure (Revetment) Latitude 28°47'8.44"N Longitude 80°32'37.25"E End structure (Revetment) Latitude 28°46'53.01"N Longitude 80°32'50.43"E Chainage *1 Upstream [m] 40,554 Downstream [m] 39,611 Description: Located along the right bank providing protection against erosion and inundation. Structures: · Earthen embankment is provided on top of existing road (hence the alignment) and gabion revetment along the bank of the river. The total length of embankment is 700 m (B in figure) and revetment is 600 m (A in figure); · The new embankment will tie with natural ground/access track at the upstream end and bridge foundation at the downstream end.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 30 Final Report

Symbol / overview (indicative) Details · The countryside slope will be strengthened by rockfill, toe drain and grass plantation and seeding (bio-engineering / environmentally friendly). Also, the river side slope will be protected by grass planting and seeding above the design water level; · The toe drain will include cross-drainage culverts under the earth embankment as indicated in drawings. The culvert will include a trash screen and a penstock at the country side and a flap gate at the riverside with associated gabion mattress for the river bed and bank erosion protection at drainage outlet locations; · An access road for inspection will be provided at the embankment crest; · 9 spurs; · Launching aprons to protect the toe of the revetment and spurs.

PRTW.02 River: Mohana Start structure Latitude 28°46'16.60"N Longitude 80°32'6.87"E End structure Latitude 28°45'56.28"N Longitude 80°32'12.64"E Chainage *1 Upstream [m] 37,484 Downstream [m] 36,765

Description: Located along the right bank providing protection against inundation and erosion. Structures: · Earthen embankment protected by a gabion revetment. The total length is 800 m; · The new embankment will tie with an existing embankment at the upstream end and natural ground at the downstream end. · The countryside slope will be strengthened by rockfill, toe drain and grass plantation and seeding (bio-engineering / environmentally friendly). Also, the river side slope will be protected by grass planting and seeding above the design water level; · The toe drain will include cross-drainage culverts under the earth embankment as indicated in drawings. The culvert will include a trash screen and a penstock at the country side and a flap gate at the riverside with associated gabion mattress for the river bed and bank erosion protection at drainage outlet locations; · An access road for inspection will be provided at the embankment crest; · 22 spurs; · Launching aprons to protect the toe of the revetment and spurs.

PRTW.03 River: Mohana Start structure Latitude 28°45'52.83"N Longitude 80°32'23.36"E End structure Latitude 28°45'44.73"N Longitude 80°32'31.29"E Chainage *1 Upstream [m] 36,442 Downstream [m] 36,109 Description: Located along the left bank providing protection against inundation and erosion. Structures: · Earthen embankment protected by a gabion revetment. The total length is 330 m;

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 31 Final Report

Symbol / overview (indicative) Details · The new embankment will tie with existing bridge foundation at the upstream end and natural ground at the downstream end. · The countryside slope will be strengthened by rockfill, toe drain and grass plantation and seeding (bio-engineering / environmentally friendly). Also, the river side slope will be protected by grass planting and seeding above the design water level; · The toe drain will include cross-drainage culverts under the earth embankment as indicated in drawings. The culvert will include a trash screen and a penstock at the country side and a flap gate at the riverside with associated gabion mattress for the river bed and bank erosion protection at drainage outlet locations; · An access road for inspection will be provided at the embankment crest; · Launching aprons to protect the toe of the revetment.

PRTW.06 River: Khutiya Start structure Latitude 28°46'11.14"N Longitude 80°39'24.14"E End structure Latitude 28°46'11.14"N Longitude 0°39'19.33"E Chainage *1 Upstream [m] 19,860 Downstream [m] 18,183

Description: Located along the right bank providing protection against erosion and inundation. Structures: · Earthen embankment protected with a gabion revetment. The total length is 1,630 m; · The new embankment will tie with natural ground/access track at the upstream end and natural ground/access track at the downstream end. · The countryside slope will be strengthened by rockfill, toe drain and grass plantation and seeding (bio-engineering / environmentally friendly). Also, the river side slope will be protected by grass planting and seeding above the design water level; · The toe drain will include cross-drainage culverts under the earth embankment as indicated in drawings. The culvert will include a trash screen and a penstock at the country side and a flap gate at the riverside with associated gabion mattress for the river bed and bank erosion protection at drainage outlet locations; · An access road for inspection will be provided at the embankment crest; · 18 spurs; · Launching aprons to protect the toe of the revetment and spurs.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 32 Final Report

Symbol / overview (indicative) Details PRTW.07 River: Khutiya Start structure Latitude 28°45'27.42"N Longitude 80°39'16.96"E End structure Latitude 28°45'4.90"N Longitude 80°39'18.57"E Chainage *1 Upstream [m] 18,183

Downstream [m] 17,707

Description: Located along the right bank providing protection against inundation and erosion. Structures: · Earthen embankment protected with a gabion revetment. The total length is 715 m. · The new embankment will tie with natural ground/access track at the upstream end and natural ground/access track at the downstream end. · The countryside slope will be strengthened by rockfill, toe drain and grass plantation and /seeding (bio-engineering / environmentally friendly). Also, the river side slope will be protected by grass planting and seeding above the design water level; · The toe drain will include cross-drainage culverts under the earth embankment as indicated in drawings. The culvert will include a trash screen and a penstock at the country side and a flap gate at the riverside with associated gabion mattress for the river bed and bank erosion protection at drainage outlet locations; · An access road for inspection will be provided at the embankment crest; · 11 spurs; · Launching aprons to protect the toe of the revetment and spurs.

PRTW.08 River: Khutiya Start structure (Embankment) Latitude 28°45'40.93"N Longitude 80°39'39.31"E End structure (Embankment) Latitude 28°45'2.41"N Longitude 80°39'33.43"E Start structure (Revetment) Latitude 28°45'43.35"N Longitude 80°39'38.26"E End structure (Revetment) Latitude 28°45'20.71"N Longitude 80°39'25.60"E Chainage *1 Upstream [m] 18,768 Downstream [m] 17,550 Description: Located along the left bank providing protection against erosion and inundation. Structures: · Earthen embankment is provided on top of existing road and gabion revetment along the bank of the river. The total length of embankment is 1,370 m and revetment are 800 m; · The new embankment will tie with natural ground/access track at the upstream end and natural ground/access track at the downstream end.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 33 Final Report

Symbol / overview (indicative) Details · The countryside slope will be strengthened by rockfill, toe drain and grass plantation and seeding (bio-engineering / environmentally friendly). Also, the river side slope will be protected by grass planting and seeding above the design water level; · The toe drain will include cross-drainage culverts under the earth embankment as indicated in drawings. The culvert will include a trash screen and a penstock at the country side and a flap gate at the riverside with associated gabion mattress for the river bed and bank erosion protection at drainage outlet locations; · An access road for inspection will be provided at the embankment crest; · 16 spurs; · Launching aprons to protect the toe of the revetment and spurs.

PRTW.09 River: Khutiya Start structure Latitude 28°41'30.05"N Longitude 80°40'20.65"E End structure Latitude 28°41'18.62"N Longitude 80°40'6.73"E Chainage *1 Upstream [m] 9,044 Downstream [m] 8,509 Description: Located along the left bank providing protection against inundation and erosion. Structures: · Earthen embankment protected by a gabion revetment. The total length is 520 m; · The new embankment will tie with natural ground at the upstream end and natural ground at the downstream end. · The countryside slope will be strengthened by rockfill, toe drain and grass plantation and seeding (bio-engineering / environmentally friendly). Also, the river side slope will be protected by grass planting and seeding above the design water level; · The toe drain will include cross-drainage culverts under the earth embankment as indicated in drawings. The culvert will include a trash screen and a penstock at the country side and a flap gate at the riverside with associated gabion mattress for the river bed and bank erosion protection at drainage outlet locations; · An access road for inspection will be provided at the embankment crest; · 16 spurs; · Launching aprons to protect the toe of the revetment and spurs.

PRTW.10 River: Mohana Start structure Latitude 28°44'56.87"N Longitude 80°32'39.13"E End structure Latitude 28°44'48.47"N Longitude 80°32'50.17"E Chainage *1 Upstream [m] 34,080 Downstream [m] 33,704 Description: Located along the right bank providing protection against inundation and erosion. Structures: · Earthen embankment protected by a gabion revetment. The total length is 400 m; · The new embankment will tie with existing embankment at the upstream end and natural ground at the downstream end.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 34 Final Report

Symbol / overview (indicative) Details · The countryside slope will be strengthened by rockfill, toe drain and grass plantation and seeding (bio-engineering / environmentally friendly). Also, the river side slope will be protected by grass planting and seeding above the design water level; · The toe drain will include cross-drainage culverts under the earth embankment as indicated in drawings. The culvert will include a trash screen and a penstock at the country side and a flap gate at the riverside with associated gabion mattress for the river bed and bank erosion protection at drainage outlet locations; · An access road for inspection will be provided at the embankment crest; · 13 spurs; · Launching aprons to protect the toe of the revetment and spurs.

PRTW.11 (a) River: Mohana Start structure Latitude 28°43'14.71"N Longitude 80°33'18.39"E End structure Latitude 28°43'4.42"N Longitude 80°32'32.26"E Chainage *1 Upstream [m] 26,943 Downstream [m] 24,146 Description: Located along the right bank providing protection against inundation and erosion. Structures: · Earthen embankment protected by a gabion revetment. The total length is 1,345 m; · The new embankment will tie with existing bridge foundation at the upstream end and existing embankment at the downstream end. · The countryside slope will be strengthened by rockfill, toe drain and grass plantation and seeding (bio-engineering / environmentally friendly). Also, the river side slope will be protected by grass planting and seeding above the design water level; · The toe drain will include cross-drainage culverts under the earth embankment as indicated in drawings. The culvert will include a trash screen and a penstock at the country side and a flap gate at the riverside with associated gabion mattress for the river bed and bank erosion protection at drainage outlet locations; · An access road for inspection will be provided at the embankment crest; · 8 spurs; · Launching aprons to protect the toe of the revetment and spurs.

PRTW.11 (b) River: Mohana Start structure Latitude 28°43'7.37"N Longitude 80°32'22.76"E End structure Latitude 28°42'56.08"N Longitude 80°32'9.54"E Chainage *1 Upstream [m] 24,933 Downstream [m] 24,465 Description: Located along the right bank providing protection against inundation and erosion. Structures: · Earthen embankment protected by a gabion revetment. The total length is 510 m; · The new embankment will tie with existing embankment at the upstream end and natural ground at the downstream end.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 35 Final Report

Symbol / overview (indicative) Details · The countryside slope will be strengthened by rockfill, toe drain and grass plantation and seeding (bio-engineering / environmentally friendly). Also, the river side slope will be protected by grass planting and seeding above the design water level; · The toe drain will include cross-drainage culverts under the earth embankment as indicated in drawings. The culvert will include a trash screen and a penstock at the country side and a flap gate at the riverside with associated gabion mattress for the river bed and bank erosion protection at drainage outlet locations; · An access road for inspection will be provided at the embankment crest; · 8 spurs; · Launching aprons to protect the toe of the revetment and spurs.

PRTW.12 River: Mohana Start structure (Embankment) Latitude 28°43'11.71"N Longitude 80°33'23.15"E End structure (Embankment) Latitude 28°42'49.05"N Longitude 80°33'2.89"E Start structure (Revetment) Latitude 28°43'11.71"N Longitude 80°33'23.15"E End structure (Revetment) Latitude 28°43'3.43"N Longitude 80°33'0.30"E Chainage *1 Upstream [m] 26,943 Downstream [m] 25,983 Description: Located along the left bank providing protection against inundation and erosion. Structures: · Earthen embankment is provided on top of existing road and gabion revetment along the bank of the river. The total length of embankment is 960 m and revetment are 750 m; · The new embankment will tie in with the bridge at the upstream end and natural ground/access track at the downstream end. · The countryside slope will be strengthened by rockfill, toe drain and grass plantation and seeding (bio-engineering / environmentally friendly). Also, the river side slope will be protected by grass planting and seeding above the design water level; · The toe drain will include cross-drainage culverts under the earth embankment as indicated in drawings. The culvert will include a trash screen and a penstock at the country side and a flap gate at the riverside with associated gabion mattress for the river bed and bank erosion protection at drainage outlet locations; · An access road for inspection will be provided at the embankment crest; · 9 spurs; · Launching aprons to protect the toe of the revetment and spurs.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 36 Final Report

Symbol / overview (indicative) Details

PRTW.13 River: Khutiya Start structure Latitude 28°44'46.31"N Longitude 80°39'4.23"E End structure Latitude 28°44'22.54"N Longitude 80°39'22.85"E Chainage *1 Upstream [m] 16,587 Downstream [m] 15,551

Description: Located along the right bank providing protection against inundation and erosion. Structures: · Earthen embankment protected by a gabion revetment. The total length is 1000 m; · The new embankment will tie with natural ground/access track at the upstream end and natural ground at the downstream end. · The countryside slope will be strengthened by rockfill, toe drain and grass plantation and seeding (bio-engineering / environmentally friendly). Also, the river side slope will be protected by grass planting and seeding above the design water level; · The toe drain will include cross-drainage culverts under the earth embankment as indicated in drawings. The culvert will include a trash screen and a penstock at the country side and a flap gate at the riverside with associated gabion mattress for the river bed and bank erosion protection at drainage outlet locations; · An access road for inspection will be provided at the embankment crest; · 16 spurs; · Launching aprons to protect the toe of the revetment and spurs.

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 37 Final Report B. Cost Benefit Analysis Results

B.1 Mawa Ratuwa Cost Benefit Analysis Results

Mawa Ratuwa: ADJUSTED PROBABILITIES for FLOODS WITH CLIMATE CHANGE Project costs in Economic prices in NPR m Project benefits in Economic prices in NPR m Benefit stream Casualties Incremental Incremental FFEWS Incremental FFEWS Incremental direct Incremental direct Incremental direct agriculture Incremental Incremental direct funeral Incremental direct and indirect Annual Total dead, Total infrastructure infrastructure agriculture indirect direct livestock direct livestock and medical funeral and prevention and Total benefit missing and Investment Maintenance costs, NPR avoided loss, NPR indirect benefit, avoided loss, benefit, NPR avoided loss, avoided loss, avoided costs, medical avoided coping costs benefits, stream, NPR injured saved NPR m NPR m m m NPR m NPR m m NPR m NPR m NPR m costs, NPR m saved, NPR m NPR m m per annum Year 1 161.69 - 161.69 ------161.69 Year 2 395.41 2.96 398.37 ------398.37 Year 3 461.34 12.70 474.04 110.59 0 4.86 0 3.74 3.22 0.028 0.034 17.32 139.78- 334.26 2.72 Year 4 490.52 23.53 514.05 111.74 10.05 4.87 0.01 3.74 3.22 0.028 0.034 17.50 151.18- 362.87 2.72 Year 5 380.85 35.15 416.00 112.89 20.10 4.88 0.01 3.74 3.22 0.028 0.034 17.68 162.58- 253.42 2.72 Year 6 66.06 43.45 109.52 114.05 30.15 4.89 0.02 3.74 3.22 0.028 0.034 17.86 173.98 64.46 2.72 Year 7 20.86 43.48 64.33 115.20 40.20 4.90 0.02 3.74 3.22 0.028 0.034 18.04 185.38 121.04 2.72 Year 8 43.48 43.48 116.35 50.25 4.91 0.03 3.74 3.22 0.028 0.034 18.22 196.78 153.30 2.72 Year 9 43.48 43.48 117.50 60.31 4.92 0.04 3.74 3.22 0.028 0.034 18.40 208.17 164.70 2.72 Year 10 43.48 43.48 118.65 70.36 4.93 0.04 3.74 3.22 0.028 0.034 18.58 219.57 176.10 2.72 Year 11 43.48 43.48 119.81 80.41 4.94 0.05 3.74 3.22 0.028 0.034 18.76 230.97 187.50 2.72 Year 12 43.48 43.48 120.96 90.46 4.94 0.05 3.74 3.22 0.028 0.034 18.94 242.37 198.89 2.72 Year 13 43.48 43.48 122.11 100.51 4.95 0.05 3.74 3.22 0.028 0.034 19.12 253.76 210.29 2.72 Year 14 43.48 43.48 123.26 110.56 4.96 0.05 3.74 3.22 0.028 0.034 19.30 265.16 221.68 2.72 Year 15 43.48 43.48 124.41 120.61 4.97 0.05 3.74 3.22 0.028 0.034 19.48 276.55 233.07 2.72 Year 16 43.48 43.48 125.57 130.66 4.98 0.05 3.74 3.22 0.028 0.034 19.66 287.94 244.47 2.72 Year 17 43.48 43.48 126.72 140.71 4.99 0.05 3.74 3.22 0.028 0.034 19.84 299.33 255.86 2.72 Year 18 43.48 43.48 127.87 150.76 5.00 0.05 3.74 3.22 0.028 0.034 20.02 310.73 267.25 2.72 Year 19 43.48 43.48 129.02 160.82 5.01 0.05 3.74 3.22 0.028 0.034 20.20 322.12 278.64 2.72 Year 20 43.48 43.48 130.17 170.87 5.02 0.05 3.74 3.22 0.028 0.034 20.39 333.51 290.04 2.72 Year 21 43.48 43.48 131.33 180.92 5.03 0.05 3.74 3.22 0.028 0.034 20.57 344.91 301.43 2.72 Year 22 43.48 43.48 132.48 190.97 5.04 0.05 3.74 3.22 0.028 0.034 20.75 356.30 312.82 2.72 Year 23 43.48 43.48 133.63 201.02 5.05 0.05 3.74 3.22 0.028 0.034 20.93 367.69 324.21 2.72 Year 24 43.48 43.48 134.78 211.07 5.06 0.05 3.74 3.22 0.028 0.034 21.11 379.08 335.61 2.72 Year 25 43.48 43.48 138.24 241.22 5.09 0.05 3.74 3.22 0.028 0.034 21.65 413.26 369.79 2.72 1,976.726 1,483.21 309.74 1,792.95 1,141.86 718.76 47.23 0.31 35.79 30.81 0.27 0.32 178.82 2,154.17 20.18 62.57 Discount rate 9% NPV benefiit 53.0% 33.4% 2.2% 0.01% 1.7% 1.4% 0.01% 0.01% 8.3% 100% 3,200.54 over the life of NPV 20.18 NPR m % NPV benefit 1,860.62 47.54 66.60 the project IRR 9.2% 0.06189

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 38 Final Report

B.2 Bakraha Cost Benefit Analysis Results

Bakaraha: ADJUSTED PROBABILITIES for FLOODS WITH CLIMATE CHANGE Bakraha Project costs in Economic prices in NPR m Project benefits in Economic prices in NPR m Benefit stream Casualties Incremental Incremental FFEWS FFEWS Incremental direct Incremental direct Incremental direct agriculture Incremental Incremental Incremental direct Incremental direct and indirect Annual Total dead, infrastructure infrastructure agriculture indirect direct livestock direct livestock funeral and funeral and prevention and Total benefit missing and Investment Maintenance Total costs, avoided loss, NPR indirect benefit, avoided loss, benefit, NPR avoided loss, avoided loss, medical avoided medical avoided coping costs benefits, stream, NPR injured saved NPR m NPR m NPR m m NPR m NPR m m NPR m NPR m costs, NPR m costs, NPR m saved, NPR m NPR m m per annum Year 1 3.69 - 3.69 ------3.69 Year 2 68.23 - 68.23 ------68.23 Year 3 159.72 0.05 159.77 59.34 0 3.06 0 0.99 1.12 0.027 0.031 7.81 72.38- 87.39 2.64 Year 4 184.82 2.47 187.29 59.96 2.95 3.09 0.02 0.99 1.12 0.027 0.031 7.89 76.08- 111.21 2.64 Year 5 141.77 5.56 147.33 60.57 5.90 3.12 0.04 0.99 1.12 0.027 0.031 7.97 79.78- 67.55 2.64 Year 6 146.32 8.82 155.14 61.19 8.85 3.16 0.05 0.99 1.12 0.027 0.031 8.05 83.48- 71.66 2.64 Year 7 29.27 12.17 41.45 61.81 11.80 3.19 0.07 0.99 1.12 0.027 0.031 8.13 87.18 45.74 2.64 Year 8 12.77 12.77 62.43 14.76 3.22 0.09 0.99 1.12 0.027 0.031 8.22 90.88 78.11 2.64 Year 9 12.77 12.77 63.05 17.71 3.25 0.11 0.99 1.12 0.027 0.031 8.30 94.58 81.81 2.64 Year 10 12.77 12.77 63.67 20.66 3.28 0.13 0.99 1.12 0.027 0.031 8.38 98.28 85.51 2.64 Year 11 12.77 12.77 64.28 23.61 3.32 0.15 0.99 1.12 0.027 0.031 8.46 101.99 89.21 2.64 Year 12 12.77 12.77 64.90 26.56 3.35 0.16 0.99 1.12 0.027 0.031 8.54 105.69 92.91 2.64 Year 13 12.77 12.77 65.52 29.51 3.38 0.16 0.99 1.12 0.027 0.031 8.62 109.37 96.60 2.64 Year 14 12.77 12.77 66.14 32.46 3.41 0.16 0.99 1.12 0.027 0.031 8.70 113.05 100.28 2.64 Year 15 12.77 12.77 66.76 35.41 3.44 0.16 0.99 1.12 0.027 0.031 8.79 116.73 103.96 2.64 Year 16 12.77 12.77 67.37 38.37 3.47 0.16 0.99 1.12 0.027 0.031 8.87 120.42 107.64 2.64 Year 17 12.77 12.77 67.99 41.32 3.51 0.16 0.99 1.12 0.027 0.031 8.95 124.10 111.33 2.64 Year 18 12.77 12.77 68.61 44.27 3.54 0.16 0.99 1.12 0.027 0.031 9.03 127.78 115.01 2.64 Year 19 12.77 12.77 69.23 47.22 3.57 0.16 0.99 1.12 0.027 0.031 9.11 131.46 118.69 2.64 Year 20 12.77 12.77 69.85 50.17 3.60 0.16 0.99 1.12 0.027 0.031 9.19 135.15 122.37 2.64 Year 21 12.77 12.77 70.46 53.12 3.63 0.16 0.99 1.12 0.027 0.031 9.27 138.83 126.06 2.64 Year 22 12.77 12.77 71.08 56.07 3.67 0.16 0.99 1.12 0.027 0.031 9.35 142.51 129.74 2.64 Year 23 12.77 12.77 71.70 59.02 3.70 0.16 0.99 1.12 0.027 0.031 9.44 146.19 133.42 2.64 Year 24 12.77 12.77 72.32 61.97 3.73 0.16 0.99 1.12 0.027 0.031 9.52 149.88 137.10 2.64 Year 25 12.77 12.77 74.17 70.83 3.83 0.16 0.99 1.12 0.027 0.031 9.76 160.92 148.15 2.64 704.55 510.48 78.49 588.97 NPV benefii 612.68 211.04 31.60 0.97 9.49 10.75 0.26 0.29 80.63 957.72 60.68 Discount rate 9% % NPV ben 64.0% 22.0% 3.3% 0.10% 1.0% 1.1% 0.03% 0.03% 8.4% 100% over the life of NPV 217.12 NPR m 515.7 823.72 20.25 the project IRR 15.0%

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 39 Final Report

B.3 West Rapti Cost Benefit Analysis Results

West Rapti: ADJUSTED PROBABILITIES for FLOODS WITH CLIMATE CHANGE West Rapti CBA Project costs in Economic prices in NPR m Project benefits in Economic prices in NPR m Benefit stream Casualties Incremental Incremental Incremental FFEWS FFEWS Incremental direct direct Incremental direct agriculture Incremental Incremental Incremental direct Incremental direct and indirect Annual Total dead, Total infrastructure infrastructure agriculture indirect direct livestock direct livestock funeral and funeral and prevention and Total benefit missing and Investment NPR Maintenanc costs, NPR avoided loss, indirect benefit, avoided loss, benefit, NPR avoided loss, avoided loss, medical avoided medical avoided coping costs benefits, stream, NPR injured saved m e NPR m m NPR m NPR m NPR m m NPR m NPR m costs, NPR m costs, NPR m saved, NPR m NPR m m per annum Year 1 2.47 - 2.47 --2.47 Year 2 62.26 - 62.26 156.92 0 2.72 0 0.22 10.86 0.0065 0.323 13.98 185.03 122.77 - Year 3 189.26 0.92 190.18 158.56 1.02 2.75 0.14 0.22 10.86 0.0065 0.323 14.12 188.00- 2.17 0.30 Year 4 491.97 11.36 503.33 160.19 2.04 2.78 0.28 0.22 10.86 0.0065 0.323 14.27 190.97- 312.36 0.30 Year 5 515.83 22.54 538.37 161.83 3.06 2.81 0.42 0.22 10.86 0.0065 0.323 14.41 193.94- 344.43 0.30 Year 6 507.26 34.34 541.60 163.46 4.08 2.84 0.56 0.22 10.86 0.0065 0.323 14.56 196.91- 344.70 0.30 Year 7 19.83 45.55 65.37 165.10 5.09 2.87 0.70 0.22 10.86 0.0065 0.323 14.70 199.87 134.50 0.30 Year 8 45.55 45.55 166.73 6.11 2.90 0.84 0.22 10.86 0.0065 0.323 14.85 202.84 157.30 0.30 Year 9 45.55 45.55 168.37 7.13 2.93 0.98 0.22 10.86 0.0065 0.323 14.99 205.81 160.26 0.30 Year 10 45.55 45.55 170.00 8.15 2.96 1.12 0.22 10.86 0.0065 0.323 15.14 208.78 163.23 0.30 Year 11 45.55 45.55 171.64 9.17 2.99 1.26 0.22 10.86 0.0065 0.323 15.29 211.75 166.20 0.30 Year 12 45.55 45.55 173.27 10.19 3.02 1.40 0.22 10.86 0.0065 0.323 15.43 214.72 169.17 0.30 Year 13 45.55 45.55 174.90 11.21 3.05 1.40 0.22 10.86 0.0065 0.323 15.58 217.54 172.00 0.30 Year 14 45.55 45.55 176.54 12.23 3.08 1.40 0.22 10.86 0.0065 0.323 15.72 220.37 174.83 0.30 Year 15 45.55 45.55 178.17 13.24 3.11 1.40 0.22 10.86 0.0065 0.323 15.87 223.20 177.66 0.30 Year 16 45.55 45.55 179.81 14.26 3.14 1.40 0.22 10.86 0.0065 0.323 16.01 226.03 180.48 0.30 Year 17 45.55 45.55 181.44 15.28 3.17 1.40 0.22 10.86 0.0065 0.323 16.16 228.86 183.31 0.30 Year 18 45.55 45.55 183.08 16.30 3.20 1.40 0.22 10.86 0.0065 0.323 16.31 231.69 186.14 0.30 Year 19 45.55 45.55 184.71 17.32 3.23 1.40 0.22 10.86 0.0065 0.323 16.45 234.52 188.97 0.30 Year 20 45.55 45.55 186.35 18.34 3.26 1.40 0.22 10.86 0.0065 0.323 16.60 237.34 191.80 0.30 Year 21 45.55 45.55 187.98 19.36 3.29 1.40 0.22 10.86 0.0065 0.323 16.74 240.17 194.63 0.30 Year 22 45.55 45.55 189.62 20.38 3.31 1.40 0.22 10.86 0.0065 0.323 16.89 243.00 197.46 0.30 Year 23 45.55 45.55 191.25 21.39 3.34 1.40 0.22 10.86 0.0065 0.323 17.03 245.83 200.28 0.30 Year 24 45.55 45.55 192.89 22.41 3.37 1.40 0.22 10.86 0.0065 0.323 17.18 248.66 203.11 0.30 Year 25 45.55 45.55 196.15 23.43 3.40 1.40 0.22 10.86 0.0065 0.323 17.47 253.27 207.72 0.30 1,197.90 286.95 1,484.85 Discount rate 9% NPV benefiit 1,644.60 75.54 28.62 8.00 2.11 105.45 0.06 3.14 146.47 2,013.99 2,525.69 6.92 NPV 362.85 NPR m % NPV benefit 81.66% 3.75% 1.42% 0.40% 0.10% 5.24% 0.00% 0.16% 7.27% 100% over the life of IRR 16.45% 194.52 23.43 3.40 36.62 17.32 the project

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 40 Final Report

B.4 Mohana Khutiya Cost Benefit Analysis Results

Mohana: ADJUSTED PROBABILITIES for FLOODS WITH CLIMATE CHANGE Project costs in Economic prices in NPR m Project benefits in Economic prices in NPR m Benefit stream Casualties Incremental Incremental FFEWS FFEWS Incremental direct Incremental direct Incremental direct agriculture Incremental Incremental Incremental direct Incremental direct and indirect Annual Total dead, infrastructure infrastructure agriculture indirect direct livestock direct livestock funeral and funeral and prevention and Total benefit missing and Investment Maintenance Total costs, avoided loss, NPR indirect benefit, avoided loss, benefit, NPR avoided loss, avoided loss, medical avoided medical avoided coping costs benefits, stream, NPR injured saved NPR m NPR m NPR m m NPR m NPR m m NPR m NPR m costs, NPR m costs, NPR m saved, NPR m NPR m m per annum Year 1 204.33 - 204.33 ------204.33 Year 2 368.31 2.53 370.84 135.57 0 5.78 0 2.29 4.15 0.031 0.056 27.27 175.16- 195.69 6.89 Year 3 440.98 10.93 451.91 137.05 14.72 5.85 0.20 2.29 4.15 0.031 0.056 27.57 191.92- 251.59 6.89 Year 4 468.39 20.39 488.78 138.52 29.45 5.91 0.41 2.29 4.15 0.031 0.056 27.86 208.68- 280.10 6.89 Year 5 374.43 30.53 404.96 140.00 44.17 5.97 0.61 2.29 4.15 0.031 0.056 28.16 225.44- 179.52 6.89 Year 6 74.17 37.78 111.95 141.47 58.90 6.04 0.82 2.29 4.15 0.031 0.056 28.46 242.20 130.26 6.89 Year 7 22.60 37.80 60.40 142.94 73.62 6.10 1.02 2.29 4.15 0.031 0.056 28.75 258.97 198.56 6.89 Year 8 37.80 37.80 144.42 88.35 6.16 1.22 2.29 4.15 0.031 0.056 29.05 275.73 237.93 6.89 Year 9 37.80 37.80 145.89 103.07 6.22 1.43 2.29 4.15 0.031 0.056 29.35 292.49 254.69 6.89 Year 10 37.80 37.80 147.36 117.80 6.29 1.63 2.29 4.15 0.031 0.056 29.64 309.25 271.45 6.89 Year 11 37.80 37.80 148.84 132.52 6.35 1.84 2.29 4.15 0.031 0.056 29.94 326.01 288.21 6.89 Year 12 37.80 37.80 150.31 147.25 6.41 2.04 2.29 4.15 0.031 0.056 30.24 342.77 304.97 6.89 Year 13 37.80 37.80 151.78 161.97 6.48 2.04 2.29 4.15 0.031 0.056 30.53 359.33 321.53 6.89 Year 14 37.80 37.80 153.26 176.70 6.54 2.04 2.29 4.15 0.031 0.056 30.83 375.89 338.09 6.89 Year 15 37.80 37.80 154.73 191.42 6.60 2.04 2.29 4.15 0.031 0.056 31.13 392.45 354.65 6.89 Year 16 37.80 37.80 156.21 206.15 6.66 2.04 2.29 4.15 0.031 0.056 31.42 409.00 371.20 6.89 Year 17 37.80 37.80 157.68 220.87 6.73 2.04 2.29 4.15 0.031 0.056 31.72 425.56 387.76 6.89 Year 18 37.80 37.80 159.15 235.60 6.79 2.04 2.29 4.15 0.031 0.056 32.01 442.12 404.32 6.89 Year 19 37.80 37.80 160.63 250.32 6.85 2.04 2.29 4.15 0.031 0.056 32.31 458.68 420.88 6.89 Year 20 37.80 37.80 162.10 265.04 6.92 2.04 2.29 4.15 0.031 0.056 32.61 475.24 437.44 6.89 Year 21 37.80 37.80 163.57 279.77 6.98 2.04 2.29 4.15 0.031 0.056 32.90 491.79 453.99 6.89 Year 22 37.80 37.80 165.05 294.49 7.04 2.04 2.29 4.15 0.031 0.056 33.20 508.35 470.55 6.89 Year 23 37.80 37.80 166.52 309.22 7.10 2.04 2.29 4.15 0.031 0.056 33.50 524.91 487.11 6.89 Year 24 37.80 37.80 167.99 323.94 7.17 2.04 2.29 4.15 0.031 0.056 33.79 541.47 503.67 6.89 Year 25 37.80 37.80 169.47 338.67 7.23 2.04 2.29 4.15 0.031 0.056 34.09 558.02 520.22 6.89 1,953.212 1,469.74 269.11 1,738.85 NPV benefiit 1,307.55 1,001.59 55.79 10.72 20.40 36.95 0.27 0.50 263.02 2,696.79 165.47 Discount rate 9% % NPV bene 48.5% 37.1% 2.1% 0.4% 0.8% 1.4% 0.01% 0.02% 9.8% 100% over the life of NPV 964.43 NPR m 57.35 the project IRR 16.9%

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 41 Final Report

B.5 Whole Project Cost Benefit Analysis Results

Project: ADJUSTED PROBABILITIES for FLOODS WITH CLIMATE CHANGE Project costs in Economic prices in NPR m Project benefits in Economic prices in NPR m FFEWS Incremental FFEWS Incremental Incremental Incremental Incremental Incremental direct Incremental direct and direct Incremental Incremental agriculture direct direct funeral and direct indirect infrastructure infrastructure direct agriculture indirect livestock livestock medical funeral and prevention Investment Maintenance Total costs, avoided loss, indirect benefit, avoided loss, benefit, NPR avoided avoided avoided medical and coping NPR m NPR m NPR m NPR m NPR m NPR m m loss, NPR m loss, NPR m costs, NPR avoided costs saved, Year 1 370.88 - 370.88 ------Year 2 959.64 5.49 965.13 292.50 - 8.51 - 2.51 16.36 0.04 0.45 41.25 Year 3 1,416.11 24.83 1,440.94 465.71 15.74 16.61 0.34 7.23 20.81 0.09 0.51 66.84 Year 4 1,812.29 59.39 1,871.68 470.59 44.53 16.74 0.72 7.23 20.81 0.09 0.51 67.54 Year 5 1,637.07 96.93 1,734.00 475.47 73.33 16.87 1.10 7.23 20.81 0.09 0.51 68.25 Year 6 918.20 128.95 1,047.14 480.36 102.12 17.01 1.47 7.23 20.81 0.09 0.51 68.95 Year 7 120.15 144.53 264.68 485.24 130.91 17.14 1.85 7.23 20.81 0.09 0.51 69.65 Year 8 - 145.13 145.13 490.12 159.70 17.28 2.23 7.23 20.81 0.09 0.51 70.36 Year 9 - 145.13 145.13 495.00 188.49 17.41 2.61 7.23 20.81 0.09 0.51 71.06 Year 10 - 145.13 145.13 499.88 217.28 17.54 2.98 7.23 20.81 0.09 0.51 71.77 Year 11 - 145.13 145.13 504.76 246.07 17.68 3.36 7.23 20.81 0.09 0.51 72.47 Year 12 - 145.13 145.13 509.64 274.86 17.81 3.74 7.23 20.81 0.09 0.51 73.17 Year 13 - 145.13 145.13 514.52 303.65 17.94 3.74 7.23 20.81 0.09 0.51 73.88 Year 14 - 145.13 145.13 519.40 332.44 18.08 3.74 7.23 20.81 0.09 0.51 74.58 Year 15 - 145.13 145.13 524.28 361.23 18.21 3.74 7.23 20.81 0.09 0.51 75.29 Year 16 - 145.13 145.13 529.16 390.02 18.35 3.74 7.23 20.81 0.09 0.51 75.99 Year 17 - 145.13 145.13 534.04 418.82 18.48 3.74 7.23 20.81 0.09 0.51 76.69 Year 18 - 145.13 145.13 538.92 447.61 18.61 3.74 7.23 20.81 0.09 0.51 77.40 Year 19 - 145.13 145.13 543.80 476.40 18.75 3.74 7.23 20.81 0.09 0.51 78.10 Year 20 - 145.13 145.13 548.68 505.19 18.88 3.74 7.23 20.81 0.09 0.51 78.81 Year 21 - 145.13 145.13 553.56 533.98 19.02 3.74 7.23 20.81 0.09 0.51 79.51 Year 22 - 145.13 145.13 558.44 562.77 19.15 3.74 7.23 20.81 0.09 0.51 80.21 Year 23 - 145.13 145.13 563.32 591.56 19.28 3.74 7.23 20.81 0.09 0.51 80.92 Year 24 - 145.13 145.13 568.20 620.35 19.42 3.74 7.23 20.81 0.09 0.51 81.62 Year 25 - 145.13 145.13 578.26 675.24 19.63 3.74 7.23 20.81 0.09 0.51 82.99 7,234.330 5,202.53 979.93 6,182.46 NPV benefiit 4,681.19 2,023.27 162.52 21.30 65.89 197.91 0.85 4.92 671.38 Discount rate 9% % NPV bene 59.8% 25.8% 2.1% 0.3% 0.8% 2.5% 0.01% 0.06% 8.6% NPV 1,000.32 NPR m 263.80 IRR 11.68%

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report Mott MacDonald | WRPPF: Preparation of Priority River Basins Flood Risk Management Project, Nepal 42 Final Report

mottmac.com

383877 | REP | 0062 | 21 January 2020 Final Report