Draft Initial Environmental Examination November 2011 IND: Infrastructure Development Investment Program for Tourism — Project 2: Uttarakhand Prepared by the Government of Uttarakhand for the Asian Development Bank. CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS (as of 15 September 2011) Currency unit – Rupee (INR) INR1.00 = $0.02098 $1.00 = INR 47.65 ABBREVIATIONS ADB - Asian Development Bank ASI - Archaeological Survey of India CPCB - Central Pollution Control Board CRZ - Coastal Regulation Zone DoT - Department of Tourism DSC - Design and Supervision Consultants EIA - Environmental Impact Assessment EMP - Environmental Management Plan GMVN - Garhwal Mandal Vikas Nagam IEE - Initial Environmental Examination KMVN - Kumaon Mandal Vikas Nagam NGO - Non-government Organization PIU - Project Implementation Unit PMU - Project Management Unit RCC - Reinforced cement concrete ROW - Right-of-way SPS - Safeguard Policy Statement TA - Technical Assistance TRH - Tourist Rest House UEPPB - Uttarakhand Environment Protection and Pollution Board UTDB - Uttarakhand Tourism Development Board WEIGHTS AND MEASURES ha – Hectare km – kilometer m – Meter NOTES (i) In this report, "$" refers to US dollars. (ii) ―INR‖ and ―Rs‖ refer to Indian rupees This initial environmental examination is a document of the borrower. The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent those of ADB's Board of Directors, Management, or staff, and may be preliminary in nature. In preparing any country program or strategy, financing any project, or by making any designation of or reference to a particular territory or geographic area in this document, the Asian Development Bank does not intend to make any judgments as to the legal or other status of any territory or area. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page EXECUTIVE SUMMARY I. INTRODUCTION 1 A. Background 1 B. Purpose of the IEE 1 C. Environmental Regulatory Compliance 2 D. Report Structure 5 II. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT COMPONENTS 5 A. Components of the Subproject 5 B. Implementation Schedule 10 III. DESCRIPTION OF THE EXISTING ENVIRONMENT 10 A. Environmental Profile – Uttarakhand 10 B. Ecological Resources and Biodiversity – Uttarakhand 13 C. Economic Resources 15 D. Social and Cultural Resources 16 E. Environmental Profile – Component Specific 18 IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES 23 A. Land Acquisition and Resettlement 23 B. Environmental Impacts 23 V. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN 39 A. Institutional Arrangements 39 B. Environmental Monitoring Plan 42 C. Capacity Building 43 D. Environmental Budget 45 E. Environmental Monitoring and Reporting 45 VI. PUBLIC CONSULTATION AND INFORMATION DISCLOSURE 46 A. Process for Consultation followed 46 B. Plan for Continued Public Participation 47 C. Grievance Redress Mechanism 48 VII. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 49 VIII. CONCLUSIONS 49 1 APPENDIXES 1. Contract Clauses to be Integrated into Bid Documents 51 2. Rapid Environmental Assessment (REA) Checklist 55 3. Environmental Management Plan Template 58 4. Environmental Monitoring Format 75 5. Sample Grievance Registration Form 76 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1. The India Infrastructure Development Investment Program for Tourism (the Investment Program) envisages environmentally and culturally sustainable and socially inclusive tourism development in the project states of Himachal Pradesh, Punjab, Tamil Nadu and Uttarakhand, delivered through a multi-tranche financing facility (MFF) modality. Project 2 includes the states of Uttarakhand and Tamil Nadu. 2. This Initial Environmental Examination (IEE) assesses Project 2 subprojects for the state of Uttarakhand. The IEE was based on a careful review of subproject site plans and reports; approved management plans for protected areas; field visits, and secondary data to characterize the environment and identify potential impacts; and interviews and discussions with stakeholders. An environmental management plan (EMP) outlining the specific environmental measures to be adhered to during implementation of the subproject has been prepared. Subprojects will provide needed environmental and tourist infrastructure to improve the environmental management and quality of the sites towards preserving their ecological and cultural integrity. The subproject will conform to all Government regulations, policies, and standards, as well as Asian Development Bank‘s Safeguard Policy Statement (2009). 3. The selection of components are consistent with the subproject selection criteria outlined in the Environmental Assessment and Review Framework (EARF) aimed at enhancing protection of these sites and enhancing their environmental quality. Subprojects in Protected areas in Asan Barrage are consistent with defined management plans designed to protect environmentally sensitive and cultural locations. Management Plan for Asan Conservation Reserve (2009-10 to 2013-14) guided subproject design and location. All proposed facilities are located outside sensitive areas and sited in designated tourist development zones and located away from the interference-free sub-zone of 206 hectares defined in the management plan.. 4. The project design incorporates the views of primary and secondary stakeholders including local communities and local officials who were all meaningfully consulted during IEE and project preparation. 5. The Project 2 includes additional environmental awareness-building to raise conservation values consistent with management plans and Uttarakhand‘s environmental and tourism policies (which emphasize adventure and ecotourism) amongst local communities and local governments in order to ensure future sustainable development in and around these locations. 6. The environmental impacts of the project are therefore not significant and at Category B level, as per ADB's Safeguards Policy Statement. The specific measures stated in the EMP will address all adverse environmental impacts due to the subproject. Impacts are readily mitigated through careful siting, specific selection criteria for procuring contractors with demonstrated experience; execution of proven mitigation measures during the design; and adoption of good engineering practices during construction and implementation. A detailed monitoring plan prepared as part of this IEE will further mitigate negative environmental impacts during implementation. 7. Potential induced impacts are addressed through the following: (i) awareness-building of local management plans at proposed sites specifically addressing the need to regulate tourism related development and planning in the area through coordination with related government departments and local land use committees; and (ii) project-supported environmental ii awareness campaigns in surrounding communities to encourage participatory sustainable development consistent with eco-tourism principles and in compliance with the state's tourism policy ecotourism aspects. 8. The Project 2 includes upfront and ongoing supervision and training assistance for environmental monitoring reporting in project management structures. The effective implementation of the measures proposed will be ensured through the building up of capacity towards environmental management within the project management unit (PMU) supplemented with the technical expertise of a Safeguards Specialist as part of the Design Supervision Consultants (DSC) and Project Management Consultants (PMC). Further, the environmental monitoring plans provide adequate opportunities towards course correction to address any residual impacts during construction or operation stages. 9. Category B is proposed for this subproject for the following reasons: (i) No significant impacts are expected as subprojects are characterized by small- scale improvements (e.g., picnic areas, toilet facilities, rehabilitation of tourist welcome/info centers, etc.) which will improve environmental management and quality of infrastructure at tourist destinations. (ii) No natural or critical habitats or sensitive ecological areas will be impacted. Although one subproject is located in a legally protected area (Asan Barrage Community Reserve), subprojects are located outside ecologically sensitive areas and are consistent with defined protected area management plans that prescribe conservation zones where no activity is allowed. Therefore, the subprojects are consistent with ADB SPS for conserving biodiversity by (i) avoiding natural and critical habitats; (ii) ensuring consistency with defined protected area management plans; and (iii) implementing additional capacity building, awareness raising, and training programs for livelihood development and protected area conservation for the sustainable management of these areas. (iii) Subprojects do not endanger heritage or archaeological resources, and further precautions taken under the Project include: (i) Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) to review/clear all designs and supervise all works for the two ASI heritage sites; (ii) heritage and conservation specialists of the consultant teams to do the same; (iv) ASI- certified contractors with proven track record for working in heritage sites to be selected; (v) archaeological impact assessment required prior to works; and (vi) chance find procedures incorporated into the EMP further ensure that impacts are avoided. (iv) All subprojects were prepared in consultation with primary and secondary stakeholders where no objections were raised and inputs were incorporated into project designs. (v) The Project makes special provisions for environmental training and education to promote biodiversity conservation