Municipal Governance and Services Project...

Municipal Governance and Services Project (MGSP)

Environmental Assessment

Volume 1: Overall Environmental Assessment

Draft Final Report

September 2013

Local Government Engineering Department (LGED)

And

Bangladesh Municipal Development Fund (BMDF)

Ministry of Local Government, Rural Development and Cooperatives

Government of the People's Republic of Bangladesh

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

wb452162

Typewritten Text

E4300 v1

b

The Environmental Assessment report split in following two volumes.

Volume 1: Overall Environmental Assessment Volume 2: Environmental Management Framework (EMF)

Both volumes have been prepared by Bureau of Research, Testing and

Consultation (BRTC). Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology

(BUET), Dhaka

ABBREVIATIONS

BDT Bangladesh Taka BMD Bangladesh Meteorological Department BMDF Bangladesh Municipal Development Fund BNBC Bangladesh National Building Code BOD5 5-day Biochemical Oxygen Demand BRTC Bureau of Research Testing and Consultation BUET Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology CC City Corporation COD Chemical Oxygen Demand DG Director General DoE Department of Environment EA Environmental Assessment ECA Ecologically Critical Area ECoP Environmental Code of Practice ECR Environment Conservation Rules EIA Environmental Impact Assessment EMIS Environmental Management Information System EMF Environmental Management Framework EMP Environmental Management Plan FGD Focus Group Discussion GoB Government of Bangladesh GRC Grievance Redress Committee IDA International Development Association IEE Initial Environmental Examination IEF Important Environmental Features LGED Local Government Engineering Department MGSP Municipal Governance and Services Project MoEF Ministry of Environment and Forest NGO Non Government Organization OHS Occupational Health and Safety OP Operational Policy PAP Project Affected Person PCDP Public Consultation and Disclosure Plan PD Project Director PM Particulate Matter

PM2.5 Particulate Matter with aerodynamic diameter

PM10 Particulate Matter with aerodynamic diameter m PMO Project Management Office RCC Reinforced Cement Concrete SECs Special Environmental Clauses SIA Social Impact Assessment SMF Social Management Framework SMP Social Management Plan SPM Suspended Particulate Matter TDS Total Dissolved Solids ToR Terms of Reference ULB Urban Local Bodies WB World Bank

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.

1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................ 1

1.1 Background ................................................................................................................................ 1

2.0 POLICY LEGAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE FRAMEWORK ....................................................................... 5

2.1 National Environmental Laws and Regulations ......................................................................... 5

2.2 Institutional Arrangements at National and Sub-national Levels ............................................ 10

2.3 World Bank Safeguard policies ................................................................................................ 12

2.4 Implications of National Policies and Regulations on MGSP ................................................... 15

2.5 Implications of World Bank Safeguard Policies on MGSP ........................................................ 16

3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL PRACTICE AND CAPACITY ASSESSMENT ........................................................... 18

3.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 18

3.2 Environmental Practices .......................................................................................................... 18

3.3 Institutional and Staff Capacity ............................................................................................... 18

3.4 Training Requirements ............................................................................................................ 19

4.0 OVERALL PROJECT BASELINE .......................................................................................................... 21

4.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 21

4.2 Physical Environment .............................................................................................................. 21

4.2.1 Physical Infrastructure ................................................................................................... 21 4.2.2 Existing Condition of Potential Sub-project Sites .......................................................... 31 4.2.3 Climate ........................................................................................................................... 33 4.2.4 Geology, Soils and Seismity ........................................................................................... 38 4.2.5 Flood-prone Areas ......................................................................................................... 41 4.2.6 Water Supply, Drainage and Sanitation ........................................................................ 43 4.2.7 Solid Waste Management ............................................................................................. 50 4.2.8 Noise Level ..................................................................................................................... 51 4.2.9 Water Quality ................................................................................................................ 55

4.3 Ecological Environment ........................................................................................................... 60

4.3.1 Dhaka-Chittagong Corridor ............................................................................................ 60 4.3.2 Dhaka-Sylhet Corridor .................................................................................................... 68 4.3.3 Dhaka-Mymensing Corriodor ......................................................................................... 71 4.3.4 Dhaka-Bogra-Rangpur Corridor ...................................................................................... 74 4.3.5 Cluster ............................................................................................................................ 77

5.0 OVERALL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ............................................................................................ 81

5.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 81

5.2 Potential Significant Impacts during Construction Phase ........................................................ 81

5.3 Potential Significant Impacts during Operational Phase ......................................................... 86

v

6.0 STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS AND PUBLIC CONSULTATION ................................................................. 85

6.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 85

6.2 Stakeholder Analysis ................................................................................................................ 85

The objectives of Stakeholder Analysis (SA) for the sub-projects of proposed MGSP were: . 85

6.3 Findings from FGDs .................................................................................................................. 91

6.3.1 FGD-1: Elenga Pourashava ............................................................................................. 93 6.3.2 FGD-2: Tangail Pourashava ............................................................................................ 94 6.3.3 FGD-3: Comilla City Corporation ................................................................................... 96 6.3.4 FGD-4: Trishal Pourashava ............................................................................................. 96 6.3.5 FGD-5: Bhairab Pourashava ........................................................................................... 97 6.3.6 FGD-6: Gopalganj Pourashava ....................................................................................... 98

6.4 Disclosure ................................................................................................................................. 99

References .......................................................................................................................................... 100

Appendix A ......................................................................................................................................... 101

Terms of Reference (ToR) ............................................................................................................ 101

Appendix B.......................................................................................................................................... 114

List of Participants in thr FGDs ..................................................................................................... 114

vi

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

E1.0 Background The Government of Bangladesh (GoB) intends to enhance the capacity of urban local bodies (ULBs) in development and management of urban infrastructure, and improve municipal governance and services through undertaking the Municipal Governance and Services Project (MGSP) in selected Pourashavas and City Corporations. The Local Government Engineering Department (LGED) and the Bangladesh Municipal Development Fund (BMDF) will implement the project with participation of the selected ULBs. The project will be financed by IDA, with GoB contribution for land acquisition and management, and Municipalities equity for accessing BMDF competitive finance. Under the MGSP the LGED will implement about 20 types of sub-projects in 26 ULBs, which include 22 Pourashavas and 4 City Corporations; while the BMDF will implement about 13 types of sub-projects in 119 Pourashavas. Both the LGED and the BMDF intends to ensure that the proposed infrastructure takes into account the environmental concerns in accordance with the Environment Conservation Rules 1997, and the World Bank Safeguard Policies. Details of the sub-projects to be implemented under MGSP will be finalized during project implementation phase and therefore, the exact locations, size and extent of the sub-projects will remain unknown during carrying out of the environmental assessment. Therefore a framework approach has been adopted following an environmental assessment. The Environmental Management Framework (EMF) has been prepared by LGED and BMDF based on the: (i) assessment of the environmental practices of the recently completed MSP; (ii) evaluation of the potential overall environmental impacts of the proposed project activities; (iii) suggestions for subproject specific standard environmental mitigation and monitoring plan with unit costing; (iv) public consultations; (v) identification of the institutional barriers and capacity building needs for environmental management; and (vi) agreements necessary on the institutional arrangements for the environmental management. Therefore the assessment report has two major volumes: (1) Overall environmental assessment, and (2) Development of Environmental Management Framework (EMF). “Volume 1” of the Environmental Assessment report consists of the overall environmental assessment which involves: (a) Analysis of existing policy, legal and administrative framework and their implications

on the MGSP;

vii

(b) Assessment of existing environmental practices, including those of the recently

completed Municipal Services Project (MSP), and capacity of stakeholder

organizations (ULBs, LGED, BMDF) for environmental management;

(c) Establishment of overall project baseline, against which possible environmental

impacts of MGSP will be evaluated;

(d) Evaluation of potential environmental impacts of the sub-projects to be implemented

under MGSP in different ULBs, and identification of generic mitigation measures (for

negative impacts), enhancement measures (for positive impacts), and monitoring

plan;

(f) Carrying out stakeholder analysis and public consultations. For carrying out “overall environmental assessment” of the MGSP, field visits were made to 12 ULBs, which included two City Corporations and ten Pourashavas. Table E.1 shows the ULBs visited and the dates of the visits. During field visits, discussions were held with the Mayors of the UBLs on different issues; discussions were also held with engineers and other officials of the ULBs on recently completed/ ongoing projects; proposed sub-projects to be implemented under MGSP; and capacity and institutional arrangement for environmental management of the proposed sub-projects. At each of these ULBs, sites of recently completed/ ongoing projects, and potential sites for sub-projects under MGSP were visited. Besides, noise level measurements were carried out and samples were collected for water quality analysis. Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) were held at 6 ULBs during these field visits, which were participated by a wide range of stakeholders. In addition, public consultations (in the form of informal discussion) were also carried out at the ULBs. Discussions have been held with the LGED and BMDF officials on different aspects of project implementation and management, particularly focusing on existing capacity and institutional arrangement for environmental management of the proposed sub-projects.

Table E.1: ULBs visited and the dates of visits Corridor ULB Date Visited

Dhaka-Chittagong Corridor Comilla City Corporation, Chandina Pourashava,

04.06.2013

Patiya Pourashava, Chokoria Pourashava

02.07.2013

Dhaka-Sylhet Corridor Madhabdi Pourashava, Bhairab Pourashava

18.06.2013

Dhaka-Mymensing Corriodor Bhaluka Pourashava, Trishal Pourashava

12.06.2013

Dhaka-Bogra-Rangpur Corridor Tangail Pourashava, 25.05.2013

Elenga Pourashava 24.05.2013

Rangpur City Corporation 07.07.2013

Cluster Gopalganj Pourashava 20.06.2013

viii

Policy, Legal and Administrative Framework

Bangladesh has an environmental legal framework that is conducive to both environmental protection and natural resources conservation and applies to the proposed MGSP. The policies, laws and regulations (some of them cross sectoral and partially related to environmental issues) regulations that are relevant and may apply to activities supported by the MGSP have been reviewed along with the institutional arrangement and national and sub-national level to implement these laws into actions. In addition to that, the World Bank safeguard policies for environmental protection are reviewed and their applicability to the proposed MGSP is also discussed. According to Bangladesh rules and regulations, most of the sub-projects to be implemented under MGSP would fall either under Orange A or Orange B category; a few would fall under Green category, and none are likely to fall under Red category. According to the WB project classification (OP 4.01), MGSP in general could be classified as a “Category B” project while some of the individual sub-projects (e.g., street light, traffic control) may fall under “Category C”.

Environmental Practice and Capacity Assessment

As a part of the overall environmental assessment, discussions were held with the LGED and BMDF officials on different aspects of project implementation and management (including experience from recently completed Municipal Services Project, MSP). Based on discussions with the relevant stakeholders (LGED, BMDF, ULBs), it appears that there is significant scope for improvement in environmental assessment and management practices of projects/ sub-projects implemented by these organizations. The ULBs have very limited experience in environmental management practices and rarely consult the DoE regarding this. It appears that the ULBs have limited staff (engineers) and capacity for environmental management and monitoring of projects and there is limited scope for increasing the number of staff (engineer) at the moment. On the other hand, the BMDF is a relatively small organization and usually hires consultants to oversee implementation of the project. But since the responsibility of environmental management lies on BMDF, capacity building of existing BMDF staff is necessary to correctly oversee the job of the consultants. The LGED has experience in environmental management and monitoring. The Environment and Climate Change

Unit/ Committee will also be able to assist LGED in environmental management of projects. Table E.2 summarizes the training requirements of ULBs, BMDF and LGED.

Table E.2: Training requirements for successful environmental management of MGSP

Training Type/ Contents Participants Schedule

General environmental awareness, regulatory requirements, EMF frameworks for MGSP, environmental impacts and mitigation, analysis of alternatives, environmental management

Engineers of ULBs (at least one engineer from each ULB)

Prior to commencement of sub-project activities

Advanced training on environmental assessment, management (EMP, ECoP), monitoring, including details on EMF framework

Participants from: (a) Engineering Unit of BMDF, (b) PMO/ Environmental Unit of LGED

Immediately after project commencement

ix

Overall Project Baseline

An environmental baseline study was carried out in areas within and surrounding 12 selected ULBs (10 Pourashavas and 2 City Corporations, Table E.1). The specific objectives of the baseline study were to gather information on the existing physical and ecological environment of the areas within and around the project sites, and to assess peoples’ perception on different aspects of the proposed project. The ULBs were visited during May-July 2013. During field visits, discussions were held with the Mayors, engineers and other officials of the ULBs and sites of recently completed/ongoing projects were visited. It was found that many ULBs are preparing and short-listing sub-projects for possible implementation under MGSP. It was found that most of the ULBs are keen to implement road (construction/ improvement/ rehabilitation) sub-projects (both RCC and bituminous roads) and drain (both RCC and pipe drain) sub-projects under MGSP.

Physicochemical environment Relevant information on climate, geology and soils, water supply and sanitation, solid waste management, existing drainage conditions, noise level, and water quality (surface water and groundwater) were collected. Major physical infrastructures such as administrative, educational and religious institutions, communication facilities, public and private service sectors, health centres, archeological heritage spots, recreational facilities etc. were identified mostly from secondary information with some visual observation. Existing water supply, sanitation, solid waste management and drainage conditions were assessed from interaction with locals and through visual observation. The general observation was that all these areas are suffering from deterioration in varying levels of magnitude due to various reasons and required improvement.

Ecological environment A rapid ecological baseline study was carried out in 12 ULBs for the proposed MGSP. The macro level ecological study was conducted in daytime during May-July 2013 at 10 Pourashavas and 2 City Corporations where the MGSP will be implemented by the LGED. Ecological information was collected through field research, consultation with local people, and literature review. The specific objectives of the baseline study were to gather information on the existing biological environment of the areas in and around the proposed MGSP sub-project sites. The baseline ecological survey primarily focused on identifying floral and faunal diversity and their distribution and abundance as well as their biological status in Bangladesh (e.g. threatened flora and fauna). Protected areas, wildlife sanctuaries, game reserves and ecologically critical areas were also identified, if any.

Environmental Impacts during Construction Phase

Ecological impacts: Based on assessment the baseline environment at different sub-project locations (during field visits) and the nature and scale of the proposed sub-projects, it appears that ecological impacts are not likely to be significant for most of the proposed sub-projects under MGSP. However, for a few sub-projects the significance of ecological impacts needs to be assessed. These sub-projects include: (i) bridge, (ii) box culvert, and (iii) boat landing jetty.

x

Physicochemical impacts: Possible physico-chemical impacts from the sub-project activities to be carried out in different ULBs may include the following: (a) Drainage congestion, (b) Noise pollution, (c) Air pollution, (d) Surface water pollution, (e) Groundwater pollution, (f) Soil erosion/ contamination, and (g) Environmental pollution from solid/ construction waste.

Socio-economic impacts: Possible socio-economic impacts from the sub-project activities to be carried out in different ULBs may include the following: (a) loss of land, (b) loss of income and displacement, (c) traffic congestion, (d) impact on top soil, (e) health and safety, (f) employment and commercial activities, and (g) impact on archaeological and historical sites, and safeguarding physical cultural resources (PCR). Table E.3 shows a semi-quantitative impact assessment for activities associated with small scale civil engineering construction works.

Project Activities during Construction

phase

Physicochemical Impacts Socio–economic impacts

Dra

inag

e

con

gest

ion

No

ise

po

lluti

on

Air

po

lluti

on

Wat

er

qu

alit

y

Gro

un

dw

ater

p

ollu

tio

n

Soil

Ero

sio

n

Soil

Po

lluti

on

Loss

of

Lan

d

Loss

of

inco

me

an

d

dis

pla

cem

en

t

Traf

fic

Imp

act

on

to

pso

il

Pu

blic

He

alth

an

d s

afe

ty

Effe

ct o

n

Arc

he

olo

gica

l si

tes

Emp

loym

en

t an

d

com

mer

cial

ac

tivi

tie

s

Stockpiling of materials

-2S 0 -2S 0 0 0 0 0 -2S -2S 0 -1S/L 0 0

Mobilization of equipment

0 -2S -2S 0 0 0 0 0 -1S -2S 0 -1S/L 0 +1S

Site clearance 0 0 0 0 0 -2S 0 0 -1S 0 -2S 0 0 +1S

Labor camp establishment

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 +1S

Labor camp operation -1S 0 0 -2S 0 0 -2S 0 0 0 0 0 0 +1S

Piling work 0 -2S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -2S/L 0 +1S

Excavation work -1S -1S -2S -1S 0 -1S 0 0 -1S 0 -1S -1S/L 0 +1S

Drilling boreholes 0 -1S 0 0 -1L 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 +1S

Construction (concreting) work

0 -1S -1S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1S/L 0 +1S

Demolition work -1S -1S -2S 0 0 0 0 0 -1S 0 0 -1S/L 0 +1S

Work on water bodies (bridge, culvert, jetties)

0 -1S -1S -2S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1S/L 0 +1S

Asphalt work 0 -1S -2S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1S/L 0 +1S

Provision for safe water and sanitation facilities for workers

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 +2L 0 0

[+2 = High Positive Impact, +1 = Low Positive Impact, 0 = No impact, -1 = Low Negative Impact, -2 = High Negative Impact] [S = Short term impact, L = Long term impact]

xi

Potential Significant Impacts during Operational Phase

Ecological impacts: During operational phase, the possible impact of the sub-project activities on the biological environment would be insignificant, except for a couple of sub-projects. These include: (a) storm drain; and (b) boat landing jetty. Physico-chemical impacts: Depending on the type of sub-projects a number of physico-chemical parameters could experience both positive and negative impacts during operation phase of the sub-projects. Important issues and parameters include: (a) Drainage, (b) Water quality, (c) Air quality and noise level, and (d) Environmental pollution from solid waste. Socio-economic impacts: The MGS project is aimed at bringing about improvement in the socio-economic conditions of the ULBs through improvement of basic infrastructure. Thus, implementation of the proposed sub-projects is likely to bring about significant improvement in the overall environmental and socio-economic conditions at the ULBs. Important socio-economic parameters that are likely to experience beneficial impacts due to implementation of the sub-projects include: (a) traffic, (b) public health and safety, and (c) employment and commercial activities.

Table E.4 shows a semi-quantitative impact assessment for activities associated with small scale civil engineering projects during the operation phase.

Project Activities during Operation phase


Dra

inag

e

con

gest

ion

No

ise

po

lluti

on

Air

po

lluti

on

Surf

ace

Wat

er

po

lluti

on

Envi

ron

me

nta

l

po

lluti

on

du

e t

o

solid

was

te

Traf

fic

co

nge

stio

n

Pu

blic

He

alth

an

d

safe

ty

Emp

loym

en

t an

d

com

mer

cial

ac

tivi

tie

s Operation of establishments (kitchen market, cattle market, slaughter house)

0 -1L 0 0 -2L -1L 0 +2L

Operation of bridges, culverts 0 -1L -1L 0 0 -2L 0 +2L

Operation of jetties 0 0 0 -1L 0 0 0 +2L

Operation of street lights and traffic signals

0 0 0 0 0 +2L +2L 0

Increased movement of vehicles and people (improved local roads and pedestrian bridges)

0 -2L -2L 0 0 -2L 0 +2L

Use of public toilets 0 0 0 +2L 0 0 +2L 0

Increased access to safe water supply

0 0 0 0 0 0 +2L 0

Establishment of solid waste management facilities (bins, tractors, carts)

+2L 0 0 +1L +2L 0 +2L +1L

Operation of Bus and Truck terminals

0 -1L -1L 0 0 +2L 0 +2L

[+2 = High Positive Impact, +1 = Low Positive Impact, 0 = No impact, -1 = Low Negative Impact, -2 = High Negative Impact] [ S = Short term impact, L = Long term impact]

xii

Stakeholder Analysis and Public Consultation

As a part of overall environmental assessment, efforts were made to identify the key stakeholders of the proposed project and assess the power relationships as well as influence and interests of stakeholders involved in the development of the project. Key stakeholders for sub-projects under MGSP have been identified through brainstorming, use of local knowledge, consultation with LGED officials, City Corporation/Pourashava Mayors and officials, and local people at the ULBs visited. Table E.5 shows the list of identified key stakeholders (people/institutions/organizations) who could significantly influence the MGSP, and/or to whom the MGSP is of particularly important.

Table E.5: Key stakeholders for the sub projects of MGSP

Key Stakeholder Issues related to the sub projects of MGSP

Specific Relationship with MGSP Sub Projects

Government of Bangladesh (GoB)

Ministry of Finance (MoF) Financial approval and disbursement

All sub projects

Ministry of Environment and Forests: Department of Environment (DoE)

Regulatory – environment All/some sub projects

Ministry of Land (MoL): Directorate of Land Record and Survey

Regulatory – land Some sub projects

Bangladesh Inland Water Transport Authority / Corporation (BIWTA/BIWTC)

Regulatory – inland water transport

Boat Landing Jetty, Bridge

Bangladesh Water Development Board (BWDB)

Regulatory - river Bridge, Culvert

LGED, BMDF Project formulation, implementation, monitoring

All sub projects

Water and Sewerage Authorities (e.g., WASAs, DPHE, LGED)

Water supply, Drainage Drains, Water supply systems

Rural Electrification Board (REB) Electricity supply Street light

Police Department (PD) (local / divisional) Regulatory – traffic Traffic Control, Street light

Local People, Peoples’ Representatives

Members of Parliament (MPs) Local development Sub-projects area

Politicians – all political parties Local development Sub-projects at their City /Pourashava

Local elites (urban dwellers) Local development Sub-projects at their City /Pourashava

Mayors - City Corporation / Pourashava City/Pourashava development Sub-projects at their City /Pourashava

Councilors – City Corporations / Pourashavas Ward development Sub-projects at their Wards

Project Sponsor

Project Sponsor – IDA (e.g. WB) Financial, regulatory issues etc All sub-projects

xiii



Organizations

Various Organizations (e.g. truck/bus owners association, kitchen market owners society)

Site selection, construction, time schedule etc

Some sub-projects

Non Government Organization (NGO)/Community Based Organization (CBO)

NGOs, CBOs and other community structures General affairs of all / some sub-projects

All/some sub-projects related to them

Media (Electronic, Print etc)

Media timely completion of Project identification, implementation

All sub-projects

Six Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) were carried out at 6 ULBs during these field visits, in order to document and record opinions of a wide range of stakeholders on different aspects of the proposed project, total of 169 people were participated in the FGDs. A wide range of stakeholders (e.g. Mayors, Ward Councilors, urban people, businessman, land/house owner, farmer, teacher, student etc.) participated in the FGDs. In the FGDs, the participants expressed their opinions regarding different issues, including their knowledge about the sub-projects of MGSP, socio-economic condition of people in their localities, possible impact of the proposed sub-project activities on the local environment (physical, biological and social) and in their localities, and also provided suggestions of mitigation measures. Disclosure

Copies of the full report (in English) and the summary (in Bengali) will be sent to all the offices of the concerned Pourashavas and City Corporations and will be made available to the public and will also be uploaded in the website of ULBs/LGED/BMDF and in the Bank InfoShop. In addition a national workshop has been planned in October, 2013 to present the EMF and SMF to the key stakeholders including field level staff of the implementing agencies (LGED, BMDF), ULBs, community representatives, NGOs, civil society etc. The comments and the findings from the workshop and other public will be reviewed and incorporated in the final EA report.

1

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

1. The Government of Bangladesh (GoB) intends to enhance the capacity of urban local bodies (ULBs; i.e., municipalities and city corporations) in development and management of urban infrastructure, and improve municipal governance and services through undertaking the Municipal Governance and Services Project (MGSP) in selected Pourashavas and City Corporations. The project will provide performance-based infrastructure improvement block grants and pilot O&M grants to approximately 200 urban local bodies (ULBs), comprising Pourashavas and City Corporations, located along the growth corridors. The Local Government Engineering Department (LGED) and the Bangladesh Municipal Development Fund (BMDF) under the Ministry of Local Government, Rural Development and Cooperatives will implement the project with participation of the selected ULBs. The project will be financed by IDA, with GoB contribution for land acquisition and management, and Municipalities equity for accessing BMDF competitive finance.

2. Since the IDA and GoB are the financing sources of the project, the environmental assessment of the proposed project should comply with the policies and legislative requirement of the World Bank and the GoB. Thus, the proposed project requires carrying out an Environmental Assessment in accordance with the Environment Conservation Act 1995 (Amended in 2000, 2002 and 2010), the Environment Conservation Rules 1997, and the World Bank Safeguard Policies. In accordance to an agreement with the LGED, the Bureau of Research Testing and Consultation (BRTC) of Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology (BUET) has been hired as consultant to prepare the Environmental Assessment (EA) of the proposed project.

3. Under the MGSP Sub-component 1.1 of Component 1 (Municipal Governance and Basic Urban Services Improvement), the LGED will implement 20 types of sub-projects in 26 ULBs, which include 22 Pourashavas and 4 City Corporations. Under MGSP Sub-component 2.1 of Component 2 (BMDF Operation and Institutional Improvement), the BMDF will implement about 13 types of sub-projects in 119 Pourashavas; the number of ULBs may increase in the future. The sub-projects to be implemented in different ULBs under the MGSP are presented in Appendix A. Table 1.1 shows the sub-projects to be implemented under LGED and BMDF components of the MGSP. Additional types of sub-projects could be considered in the future.

4. The LGED and the BMDF intends to ensure that the proposed infrastructure takes environmental concerns into account. Details of the sub-projects to be implemented under MGSP will be finalized during project implementation phase and therefore, the exact locations, size and extent of the sub-projects will remain unknown during carrying out of the environmental assessment. Therefore, a framework approach has been adopted for EA of the proposed project; the EA has two major volumes: (a) Overall environmental assessment, and (b) Development of Environmental Management Framework (EMF).

2

Table 1.1: Types of sub-projects to be implemented under LGED and BMDF components of MGSP

Sub-projects LGED Component BMDF Component

Box-culvert, Bus Terminal, Community Centre, Drain, Kitchen/Municipal Market , Boat Landing Jetty, Public Toilet, Road, Slaughter House, Street Light, Truck Terminal, Water Supply System1, Cattle Market, Park, Pedestrian Bridge, Retaining Wall, Sweeper Colony, Solid Waste Management, Traffic Control

Bridge --

Office Building --

5. The “overall environmental assessment” including the “overall project baseline”, evaluation of potential significant impacts of different sub-projects, and assessment of environmental practices in different ongoing and completed projects form the basis of the EMF. In summary, the overall environmental assessment involves:

(a) Analysis of existing policy, legal and administrative framework and their implications

on the MGSP;

(b) Assessment of existing environmental practices, including those of the recently completed Municipal Services Project (MSP), and capacity of stakeholder organizations (ULBs, LGED, BMDF) for environmental management;

(c) Establishment of overall project baseline, against which possible environmental impacts of MGSP will be evaluated;

(d) Evaluation of potential environmental impacts of the sub-projects to be implemented under MGSP in different ULBs, and identification of generic mitigation measures (for negative impacts), enhancement measures (for positive impacts), and monitoring plan;

(f) Carrying out stakeholder analysis and public consultations. The EMF is intended to provide general policies, guidelines and procedures to be integrated into the design and implementation of all sub-projects under the proposed project; it will serve as a guide for preparation of the sub-project specific EAs when these will be identified.

1Deep tubewell. pump houses, pipe lines, water meter etc, excluding water treatment plant

3

1.2 Approach and Methodology

6. The “overall environmental assessment” forms the basis of the EMF. In accordance to the ToR for Environmental Assessment (Appendix A), for carrying out “overall environmental assessment” of the MGSP, field visits were made to 12 ULBs, which included two City Corporations and ten Pourashavas. Table 1.2 shows the ULBs visited and the dates of the visits.

Table 1.2: ULBs visited and the dates of visits

Corridor ULB Date Visited

Dhaka-Chittagong Corridor Comilla City Corporation, Chandina Pourashava,

04.06.2013

Patiya Pourashava, Chokoria Pourashava

02.07.2013

Dhaka-Sylhet Corridor Madhabdi Pourashava, Bhairab Pourashava

18.06.2013

Dhaka-Mymensing Corriodor Bhaluka Pourashava, Trishal Pourashava

12.06.2013

Dhaka-Bogra-Rangpur Corridor Tangail Pourashava, 25.05.2013

Elenga Pourashava 24.05.2013

Rangpur City Corporation 07.07.2013

Cluster Gopalganj Pourashava 20.06.2013

7. During field visits, discussions were held with the Mayors of the UBLs on different issues including major infrastructure related problems faced by the ULBs, difficulties in project formulation, implementation and management. Discussions were also held with engineers and other officials of the ULBs on recently completed/ ongoing projects; proposed sub-projects to be implemented under MGSP; and capacity and institutional arrangement for environmental management of the proposed sub-projects. At each of these ULBs, sites of recently completed/ ongoing projects were visited, and discussions were held with ULB officials about environmental management of these projects. In addition, the sites tentatively selected for implementation of different sub-projects under the MGSP were also visited, in order to obtain first hand information and insight on the sub-project baseline scenarios. Apart from reconnaissance survey of these sub-project sites, noise level measurements were carried out. A surface water sample (typically from the water body receiving drainage water), and a groundwater sample (typically from a randomly selected tubewell) were also collected for assessment of water quality. Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) were held at 6 ULBs during these field visits, which were participated by a wide range of stakeholders. The participants expressed their views on different aspects of the proposed sub-projects to be implemented in their ULBs, including possible environmental impacts of the sub-projects and possible mitigation/ abatement measures. In addition, public consultations (in the form of informal discussion) were also carried out at the ULBs.

4

8. As a part of the overall environmental assessment, discussions have been held with the LGED and BMDF officials on different aspects of project implementation and management (including experience from recently completed Municipal Services Project, MSP), particularly focusing on existing capacity and institutional arrangement for environmental management of the proposed sub-projects. “Volume 1” of the Environmental Assessment Report presents the “overall environmental assessment” of the MGSP, while “Volume 2” presents the environmental management framework (EMF).

1.3 Overall Structure of the Report

9. The overall environmental assessment (i.e., Section A of the report) has been presented in six chapters. Chapter 1 (Introduction) presents the background of the project and the approach and methodology followed for overall environmental assessment. Chapter 2 presents an overview of the relevant policy, legal and administrative framework covering national laws and WB operational policies. Chapter 3 presents an assessment of the existing environmental practices, and institutional set up and capacity of LGED and BMDF, focusing on environmental management of projects. Chapter 4 presents the overall baseline of the project areas, based on data and information collected from field visits to 12 ULBs as well as secondary sources. Chapter 5 presents an assessment of the overall environmental impacts of the proposed sub-projects to be implemented under MGSP at different ULBs, along with generic mitigations measures to reduce or eliminate adverse impacts. Finally, Chapter 6 presents an analysis of stakeholders and outcomes of public consultations carried out as a part of overall environmental assessment.

5

2.0 POLICY LEGAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE FRAMEWORK

10. The proposed Municipal Services and Governance Project (MGSP) will be implemented in compliance with applicable environmental laws and regulations. Bangladesh has an environmental legal framework that is conducive to both environmental protection and natural resources conservation. This environmental legal framework applies to the proposed MGSP. In addition, a wide range of laws and regulations related to environmental issues are in place in Bangladesh. Many of these are cross-sectoral and partially related to environmental issues. This Section presents an overview of the major national environmental laws and regulations that are relevant and may apply to activities supported by the MGSP, institutional arrangement and national and sub-national level, and World Bank safeguard policies.

2.1 National Environmental Laws and Regulations

National Environmental Policy 1992

11. The concept of environmental protection through national efforts was first recognized and declared in Bangladesh with the adoption of the Environment Policy, 1992 and the Environment Action Plan, 1992. The major objectives of Environmental policy are to i) maintain ecological balance and overall development through protection and improvement of the environment; ii) protect country against natural disaster; iii) identify and regulate activities, which pollute and degrade the environment; iv) ensure environmentally sound development in all sectors; v) ensure sustainable, long term and environmentally sound base of natural resources; and vi) actively remain associate with all international environmental initiatives to the maximum possible extent.

Bangladesh Environmental Conservation Act (ECA), 1995 amended 2002

12. This umbrella Act includes laws for conservation of the environment, improvement of environmental standards, and control and mitigation of environmental pollution. It is currently the main legislative framework document relating to environmental protection in Bangladesh, which repealed the earlier Environment Pollution Control ordinance of 1977.

The main provisions of the Act can be summarized as:

Declaration of ecologically critical areas, and restrictions on the operations and processes, which can be carried or cannot be initiated in the ecologically critical area;

Regulation in respect of vehicles emitting smoke harmful for the environment.

Environmental Clearance;

Regulation of industries and other development activities with regards to discharge permits;

Promulgation of standards for quality of air, water, noises and soils for different areas for different purposes;

Promulgation of standard limits for discharging and emitting waste; and

Formulation and declaration of environmental guidelines;

6

13. The first sets of rules to implement the provisions of the Act were promulgated in 1997 (see below: “Environmental Conservation Rules 1997”). The Department of Environment (DoE) implements the Act. DoE is headed by a Director General (DG). The DG has complete control over the DoE and the main power of DG, as given in the Act, may be outlined as follows:

Identification of different types and causes of environmental degradation and pollution;

Instigating investigation and research regarding environmental conservation, development and pollution.

Power to close down the activities considered harmful to human life or the environment.

Power to declare an area affected by pollution as an Ecologically Critical Area. Under the Act, operators of industries/projects must inform the Director General of any pollution incident. In the event of an accidental pollution, the Director General may take control of an operation and the respective operator is bound to help. The operator is responsible for the costs incurred and possible payments for compensation.

Environment Conservation Rules (ECR) 1997 amended 2003

14. These are the first set of rules, promulgated under the Environment Conservation Act 1995. Among other things, these rules set (i) the National Environmental Quality Standards for ambient air, various types of water, industrial effluent, emission, noise, vehicular exhaust etc., (ii) requirement for and procedures to obtain Environmental Clearance, and (iii) requirements for IEE/EIA according to categories of industrial and other development interventions.

15. However, the rules provide the Director General a discretionary authority to grant ‘Environmental Clearance' to an applicant, exempting the requirement of site/location clearance, provided the DG considers it to be appropriate.

16. Presently, "EIA Guidelines for Industries" published by the Department of Environment and the "Environment Conservation Rules 1997”are the formal documents providing guidance for conducting Environmental Assessment. Any proponent planning to set up or operate an industrial project is required to obtain an "Environmental Clearance Certificate" from the Department of Environment (DoE), under the Environment Conservation Act 1995 amended in 2002. 17. The first step of obtaining Environmental Clearance for the project the proponent is to apply for it in prescribed form, together with a covering letter, to the Director/Deputy Director of respective DoE divisional offices. The application should include a project feasibility study report, the EIA report, No Objection Certificate (NOC) of the local authority; Mitigation Plan for minimizing potential environmental impacts; and appropriate amount of fees in ‘treasury chalan’ (in the present case the amount is BDT 50,000). The DOE authority reserves the right to request additional information, supporting documents, or other additional materials for the proposed project. Under the conditions specified in the Environment Conservation Rules-1997, the DoE divisional authority must issue environmental site clearance certificates within 60

7

working days from the date of submitting the application, or the refusal letter with appropriate reasons for such refusal. The clearance issued remains valid for a one-year period and is required to be renewed 30 days prior to its expiry date. 18. Environment Conservation Rules-1997 ensures the right of any aggrieved party to appeal against the notice order or decision to the appellate authority. The appeal should be made to the appellate authority with clear justification and the attested copy of the specific notice, order, or decision of the respective DoE office against, which the appeal is to be made. Prescribed fee is to be paid through treasury Chalan of BDT 50,000 and the relevant papers for the appeal must be placed. 19. Rule 7 of Environment Conservation Rules (ECR) has classified the projects into following four categories based on their site conditions and the impacts on the environment; (a) Green, (b) Orange A, (c) Orange B and (d) Red. Various industries and projects falling under each category have been listed in schedule 1 of ECR 1997. According to the Rules, Environmental Clearance Certificate is issued to all existing and proposed industrial units and projects, falling in the Green Category without undergoing EIA. However, for category Orange A and B and for Red projects, require location clearance certificate and followed by issuing of Environmental Clearance upon the satisfactory submission of the required documents. Green listed industries are considered relatively pollution-free, and therefore do not require site clearance from the DoE. On the other hand, Red listed industries are those that can cause 'significant adverse' environmental impacts and are, therefore, required to submit an EIA report. These industrial projects may obtain an initial Site Clearance on the basis of an IEE based on the DoE’s prescribed format, and subsequently submit an EIA report for obtaining Environmental Clearance. Figure 1 shows the process of application leading to environmental clearance for all four categories of projects . National Land-use Policy, 2001 20. The Government of Bangladesh has adopted national Land use Policy, 2001. The salient features of the policy objectives relevant to the proposed are as follows:

To prevent the current tendency of gradual and consistent decrease of cultivable land for the production of food to meet the demand of expanding population;

To ensure that land use is in harmony with natural environment;

To use land resources in the best possible way and to play supplementary role in controlling the consistent increase in the number of land less people towards the elimination of poverty and the increase of employment;

To protect natural forest areas, prevent river erosion and destruction of hills;

To prevent land pollution; and

To ensure the minimal use of land for construction of both government and nongovernment buildings.

8

Environment Court Act, 2000 21. The aim and objective of the Act is to materialize the Environmental Conservation Act, 1995 through judicial activities. This Act established Environmental Courts (one or more in every division), set the jurisdiction of the courts, and outlined the procedure of activities and power of the courts, right of entry for judicial inspection and for appeal as well as the constitution of Appeal Court.

NOC = No Objection Certificate, usually obtained from local government.

Figure 1: Process of application for environmental clearance in Bangladesh (Source: The Environment Conservation Rules (ECR), 1997, Bangladesh)

9

Bangladesh Labor Act, 2006

22. This Act pertains to the occupational rights and safety of factory workers and the provision of a comfortable work environment and reasonable working conditions. In the chapter VI of this law safety precaution regarding explosive or inflammable dust/ gas, protection of eyes, protection against fire, works with cranes and other lifting machinery, lifting of excessive weights are described. And in the Chapter VIII provision safety measure like as appliances of first aid , maintenance of safety record book, rooms for children, housing facilities, medical care, group insurance etc. are illustrated. Public Procurement Rule (PPR), 2008 23. This is the public procurement rules of Bangladesh and this rule shall apply to the

Procurement of Goods, Works or Services by any government, semi-government or any

statutory body established under any law. The rule includes the adequate measure regarding

the “Safety, Security and Protection of the Environment’ in the construction works. This clause

includes mainly, the contractor shall take all reasonable steps to (i) safeguard the health and

safety of all workers working on the Site and other persons entitled to be on it, and to keep the

Site in an orderly state and (ii) protect the environment on and off the Site and to avoid damage

or nuisance to persons or to property of the public or others resulting from pollution, noise or

other causes arising as a consequence of the Contractors methods of operation.

Bangladesh National Building Code 24. The basic purpose of this code is to establish minimum standards for design, construction, quality of materials, use and occupancy, location and maintenance of all buildings within Bangladesh in order to safeguard, within achievable limits, life, limb, health, property and public welfare. The installation and use of certain equipment, services and appurtenances related, connected or attached to such buildings are also regulated herein to achieve the same purpose. 25. Part-7, Chapter-3 of the Code has clarified the issue of safety of workmen during construction and with relation to this, set out the details about the different safety tools of specified standard. In relation with the health hazards of the workers during construction, this chapter describes the nature of the different health hazards that normally occur in the site during construction and at the same time specifies the specific measures to be taken to prevent such health hazards. According to this chapter, exhaust ventilation, use of protective devices, medical checkups etc. are the measures to be taken by the particular employer to ensure a healthy workplace for the workers. 26. Section 1.4.1 of chapter-1, part-7 of the BNBC, states the general duties of the employer to the public as well as workers. According to this section, “All equipment and safeguards required for the construction work such as temporary stair, ladder, ramp, scaffold, hoist, run way, barricade, chute, lift etc. shall be substantially constructed and erected so as not to create

10

any unsafe situation for the workmen using them or the workmen and general public passing under, on or near them”. 27. Part-7, Chapter -1 of the Bangladesh National Building Code (BNBC) clearly sets out the constructional responsibilities according to which the relevant authority of a particular construction site shall adopt some precautionary measures to ensure the safety of the workmen. According to section 1.2.1 of chapter 1 of part 7, “in a construction or demolition work, the terms of contract between the owner and the contractor and between a consultant and the owner shall be clearly defined and put in writing. These however will not absolve the owner from any of his responsibilities under the various provisions of this Code and other applicable regulations and bye-laws. The terms of contract between the owner and the contractor will determine the responsibilities and liabilities of either party in the concerned matters, within the provisions of the relevant Acts and Codes (e.g.) the Employers' Liability Act, 1938, the Factories Act 1965, the Fatal Accident Act, 1955 and Workmen's Compensation Act 1923”. (After the introduction of the Bangladesh Labor Act, 2006, these Acts have been repealed). 28. To prevent workers falling from heights, the Code in section 3.7.1 to 3.7.6 of chapter 3 of part 7 sets out the detailed requirements on the formation and use of scaffolding. According to section 3.9.2 of the same chapter, “every temporary floor openings shall either have railing of at least 900 mm height or shall be constantly attended. Every floor hole shall be guarded by either a railing with toe board or a hinged cover. Alternatively, the hole may be constantly attended or protected by a removable railing. Every stairway floor opening shall be guarded by railing at least 900 mm high on the exposed sides except at entrance to stairway. Every ladder way floor opening or platform shall be guarded by a guard railing with toe board except at entrance to opening. Every open sided floor or platform 1.2 meters or more above adjacent ground level shall be guarded by a railing on all open sides except where there is entrance to ramp, stairway or fixed ladder. The precautions shall also be taken near the open edges of the floors and the roofs”.

2.2 Institutional Arrangements at National and Sub-national Levels

29. As outlined in the National Environment Policy (1992) and National Forest Policy (1994), the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) acts as the guide and custodian for the conservation and development of the environment and, in the pursuit of that goal, to ensure through appropriate laws and regulations that natural resources, including land, air, water and forests, are exploited and managed in an environmentally sustainable manner. The Department of Environment (DoE), formed in 1989 with a mandate for environmental management later formalized under the Environment Conservation Act, 1995 (ECA’95), acts as the technical arm of the Ministry and is responsible for environmental planning, management, monitoring and enforcement. The DoE is headed by a Director General, with Divisional offices in Dhaka, Chittagong, Bogra, Khulna, Barisal and Sylhet. The Environment Conservation Rules (1997) provide the Director General a discretionary authority to grant ‘Environmental Clearance' to an

11

applicant, exempting the requirement of site/location clearance, provided the DG considers it to be appropriate. 30. The mandate of the Department has expanded over time, evolving from an exclusive focus on pollution control to include natural resources and environmental management, now covering:

monitoring environmental quality;

promoting environmental awareness through public information programs;

controlling and monitoring industrial pollution;

reviewing environmental impact assessments and managing the environmental clearance process; and,

establishing regulations and guidelines for activities affecting the environment 31. Thus, the GoB has well-defined legal/regulatory systems for safeguarding environment issues through the Ministry of Environment and Forest in the policy level and the Department of Environment in the implementation level. Although the environmental legal framework is relatively modern and is in an advanced state in connection with the environmental assessment, the main limitations are in the capabilities of the regulatory agencies to enforce and promulgate these legal tools. The existing resources (manpower, technical tools etc.) of regulatory agencies are deemed largely inadequate to monitor compliance with existing rules. 32. The environmental management system in Bangladesh constitutes an extremely centralized and partially de-concentrated model of environmental management. At the divisional level, there is a Divisional Environmental Advisory Committee headed by the Divisional Commissioner with representation from various government agencies. The DoE does not have any representation below this level. An important gap in existing formal rules (the Constitution and other laws) is that the divisions, districts, upazilas, unions do not have a clearly defined role to play in environmental management. Lack of an appropriate mandate and institutional arrangements below the divisional level is a key factor contributing to difficulties in implementing environmental policies and regulations. 33. The ECA’95 and ECR ’97 make no provision for the environmental clearance function of the DoE to be devolved to the municipalities, upazila or union authorities, even for small scale, low impact investments falling under the Green Category. As per ECA ’95, the only potentially important environmental role given at this level is the issuance of the no objection certificate (NOC), which is a requirement while applying for environmental clearance from the DoE. In this case, the applicant is to obtain and submit a No Objection Certificate issued by the Municipal Chairman in Pourashavas, and the City Corporation Executive in metropolitan areas. With no systematic review or assessment process in place, however, these certificates are normally procured through private negotiation. Nevertheless, if greater public consultation could be introduced into this process, municipalities could perform a valuable role in environmental management, particularly considering their unique positions as locally-based elected representatives.

12

34. The LGED plays a pivotal role in rural infrastructure development. In order to be able to deliver sustainable projects, LGED has pursued a strategy of mainstreaming environmental concerns in project development and implementation, and has supported training in environmental management, both for its staff and other stakeholders, including contractors selected to execute works under LGED programs. 35. Environmental aspects have been considered in LGED projects since 1994, when the first edition of “Guidelines on Environmental Issues related to Physical Planning” was published. These guidelines have since been supplemented with more specific guidance, for example the “Environmental Codes of Practice” prepared for the Rural Transport Infrastructure Project supported by the World Bank. Under the same project, an Environmental Information Management System has also been piloted to ensure that top executives in the Department have access to environmental management information for all on-going projects. In 2008, LGED formulated the “Environmental Assessment Guidelines for LGED Projects” (LGED, 2008). The aim of the document is to provide the framework for EIA for different sector projects undertaken by LGED for planning, implementation and subsequent operation. The guidelines constitute simple procedures and formats to undertake IEE and EIA of proposed projects and subprojects to identify potential negative impacts and draw up an Environmental Management Plan (EMP) where necessary. The guidelines may also be used to conduct IEE and EIA of ongoing projects/subprojects to identify potential negative impacts and recommend environmental mitigation measures and monitoring programs.

2.3 World Bank Safeguard policies

36. The objective of these policies is to prevent and mitigate undue harm to people and their environment in the development process. Safeguard policies provide a platform for the participation of stakeholders in project design, and act as an important instrument for building ownership among local populations. The effectiveness and development impact of projects and programs supported by the Bank has substantially increased as a result of attention to these policies. The World Bank has ten environmental, social, and legal safeguard policies. The relevant policies for environmental safeguard are the following:

OP/BP 4.01 Environmental Assessment OP/BP 4.04 Natural Habitats OP/BP 4.09 Pest Management OP/BP 4.11 Physical Cultural Resources OP/BP 4.36 Forests OP/BP 4.37 Safety of Dams

37. Operational Policies (OP) are the statement of policy objectives and operational principles including the roles and obligations of the Borrower and the Bank, whereas Bank Procedures (BP) is the mandatory procedures to be followed by the Borrower and the Bank. Apart from these, the IFC guidelines for Environmental Health and safety have been adopted by

13

the World Bank Group which is also relevant for environmental protection and monitoring. In addition to that the disclosure policy of World Bank exists as BP 17.5 which also relates to environmental safeguard. The environmental safeguard and disclosure policies as well as the IFC guidelines are discussed below: OP/BP 4.01 Environmental Assessment 38. This policy is considered to be the umbrella safeguard policy to identify, avoid, and mitigate the potential negative environmental and social impacts associated with Bank lending operations. In World Bank operations, the purpose of Environmental Assessment is to improve decision making, to ensure that project options under consideration are sound and sustainable, and that potentially affected people have been properly consulted. The borrower is responsible for carrying out the EA and the Bank advises the borrower on the Bank’s EA requirements. The Bank classifies the proposed project into three major categories, depending on the type, location, sensitivity, and scale of the project and the nature and magnitude of its potential environmental impacts:

Category A: The proposed project is likely to have significant adverse environmental impacts that are sensitive, diverse, or unprecedented. These impacts may affect an area broader than the sites or facilities subject to physical works.

Category B: The proposed project’s potential adverse environmental impacts on human population or environmentally important areas-including wetlands, forests, grasslands, or other natural habitats- are less adverse than those of Category A projects. These impacts are site specific; few if any of them are irreversible; and in most cases mitigation measures can be designed more readily than Category A projects.

Category C: The proposed project is likely to have minimal or no adverse environmental impacts.

OP/BP 4.04 Natural Habitats 39. The conservation of natural habitats is essential for long-term sustainable development. The Bank therefore supports the protection, maintenance, and rehabilitation of natural habitats and their functions in its economic and sector work, project financing, and policy dialogue. The Bank supports, and expects borrowers to apply, a precautionary approach to natural resource management to ensure opportunities for environmentally sustainable development. The Bank does not support projects that involve the significant conversion or degradation of critical natural habitats. OP/BP 4.09 Pest Management 40. The aim of the pest management policy is to minimize and manage the environmental and health risks associated with pesticide use and promote and support safe, effective and environmentally sound pest management. The procurement of any pesticide in a Bank-financed project is contingent on an assessment of the nature and degree of associated risks, taking into account the proposed use and the intended user. To manage pests that affect either agriculture or public health, the Bank supports a strategy that promotes the use of biological or environmental control methods and reduces reliance on synthetic chemical pesticides. In Bank-

14

financed projects, the borrower addresses pest management issues in the context of the project's environmental assessment. In appraising a project that will involve pest management, the Bank assesses the capacity of the country's regulatory framework and institutions to promote and support safe, effective, and environmentally sound pest management. OP/BP 4.11 Physical Cultural Resources 41. Physical cultural resources are defined as movable or immovable objects, sites, structures, groups of structures, and natural features and landscapes that have archaeological, paleontological, historical, architectural, religious, aesthetic, or other cultural significance. Their cultural interest may be at the local, provincial or national level, or within the international community. Physical cultural resources are important as sources of valuable scientific and historical information, as assets for economic and social development, and as integral parts of a people's cultural identity and practices. The Bank assists countries to avoid or mitigate adverse impacts on physical cultural resources from development projects that it finances. The impacts on physical cultural resources resulting from project activities, including mitigating measures, may not contravene either the borrower's national legislation, or its obligations under relevant international environmental treaties and agreements. The borrower addresses impacts on physical cultural resources in projects proposed for Bank financing, as an integral part of the environmental assessment (EA) process. OP/BP 4.36 Forests 42. Forest is defined as an area of land of not less than 1.0 hectare with tree crown cover (or equivalent stocking level) of more than 10 percent that have trees with the potential to reach a minimum height of 2 meters at maturity in situ. A forest may consist of either closed forest formations, where trees of various stories and undergrowth cover a high proportion of the ground, or open forest. The definition includes forests dedicated to forest production, protection, multiple uses, or conservation, whether formally recognized or not. The definition excludes areas where other land uses not dependent on tree cover predominate, such as agriculture, grazing or settlements. In countries with low forest cover, the definition may be expanded to include areas covered by trees that fall below the 10 percent threshold for canopy density, but are considered forest under local conditions. The Bank's forests policy recognizes the importance of forests to reduce poverty in a sustainable manner integrates forests effectively in economic development, aims to reduce deforestation, promote afforestation and enhance the environmental contribution of forested areas. The Bank assists borrowers with the establishment and sustainable management of environmentally appropriate, socially beneficial, and economically viable forest plantations to help meet growing demands for forest goods and services. OP/BP 4.36 Safety of Dams 43. When the World Bank finances new dams, the Policy Safety on Dams requires that experienced and competent professionals design and supervise construction, and that the borrower adopts and implements dam safety measures through the project cycle. The policy also applies to existing dams where they influence the performance of a project. In this case, a

15

dam safety assessment should be carried out and necessary additional dam safety measures implemented. IFC Environmental, Health and Safety Guidelines 44. The Environmental, Health and Safety (EHS) Guidelines of the World Bank Group (WBG)/International Finance Corporation (IFC), 2008 is the safeguard guidelines for environment, health and safety for the development of the industrial and other projects. They contain performance levels and measures that are considered to be achievable in new facilities at reasonable costs using existing technologies. When host country regulations differ from the levels and measures presented in the EHS Guidelines, projects are expected to achieve whichever is more stringent. If less stringent levels or measures than those provided in these EHS Guidelines are appropriate, in view of specific project circumstances, a full and detailed justification for any proposed alternatives is needed as part of the site-specific environmental assessment. This justification should demonstrate that the choice for any alternate performance levels is protective of human health and the environment. 45. The section 4 of EHS Guidelines for “Construction and Decommissioning” provides additional, specific guidance on prevention and control of community health and safety impacts that may occur during new project development, at the end of the project life-cycle, or due to expansion or modification of existing project facilities. Disclosure policy 46. In addition to the safeguard policies, the Bank has Disclosure Policy, which also relates to safeguards. To promote transparency and facilitate accountability, Bank disclosure Policy supports decision making by the Borrower and Bank by allowing the public access to information on environmental and social aspects of projects in an accessible place and understandable form and language to key stakeholders. The Bank ensures that relevant project-related environmental and social safeguard documents, including the procedures prepared for projects involving subprojects, are disclosed in a timely manner before project appraisal formally begins. The policy requires disclosure in both English and Local language and must meet the World Bank standards.

2.4 Implications of National Policies and Regulations on MGSP

47. The Environmental Conservation Rules (ECR) 1997 (DoE, 1997) classifies projects into four categories according to potential environmental impacts: (1) Green; (2) Orange A; (3) Orange B; and (4) Red. Green category projects are those with mostly positive environmental impacts or negligible negative impacts; Orange A category projects are those with minor and mostly temporary environmental impacts for which there are standard mitigation measures; Orange B category project are those with moderately significant environmental impacts; while Red category projects are those with significant adverse environmental impacts. As discussed in Section 4.1, most of the sub-projects to be implemented under MGSP would fall either under Orange A or Orange B category; a few would fall under Green category, and none are likely to fall under Red category.

16

48. For projects categorized as Orange B, according to ECR ’97, a feasibility report and an IEE, an NOC from local authority would be required to obtain site clearance and environmental clearance certificate. For projects categorized as Orange A, the feasibility and IEE report will not be essential. 49. The BNBC, PPR 2008, Bangladesh Labor Act 2006 outlines guidelines for ensuring worker’s health and safety during construction works which would have direct implications in MGSP. It would be the responsibilities of the contractors (with supervision of ULBs) to make sure that these guidelines are followed in the workplace environment.

2.5 Implications of World Bank Safeguard Policies on MGSP

50. According to WB Operational Policy (OP 4.01), the nature of environmental assessment to be carried out for a particular sub-project would largely depend on the category of the sub-project. As mentioned earlier, The World Bank Operational Policy (OP) 4.01 classifies projects into three major categories (category A, B and C), depending on the type, location, sensitivity and scale of the project, and nature and magnitude of potential impacts. 51. The sub-projects to be implemented under the Municipal Governance and Services Project (MGSP) do not involve large-scale infrastructure development (e.g., construction of sanitary landfill, water or wastewater treatment plant, major highways). The sub-projects would involve either minimum or no involuntary land acquisition. Thus, the sub-projects to be carried out do not appear to pose risk of significant adverse environmental impacts. In view of subprojects nature, the overall project is classified as a Category ‘B’ and the safeguard policy OP/BP 4.01 has been triggered for the proposed operation. The policy has been triggered to ensure that the sub project design and implementation will be focused on reducing adverse impacts and enhancing positive impacts. However, some of the individual sub-projects (e.g., street light, traffic control) may fall under “Category C”. 52. It is highly unlikely that any natural habitant formed largely by native plant and animal species will be affected or modified by the subprojects activities to be implemented under MGSP because most of the infrastructure development works are small-scale and will take place in the built environments of municipalities adjacent to various other infrastructures. However, the EMF stipulated the code of practice on natural habitat as advance precautionary measures and Natural Habitats (OP/BP 4.04) has been triggered. 53. Also it is unlikely that any designated physical cultural resources will be affected by the subprojects. However, the impacts will be examined as part of the environmental screening/assessment of each sub-project. The EMF provided criteria for screening and assessment of physical cultural resources. In addition, ‘Chance find’ procedures conforming to local legislation on heritage would be evaluated that any physical or cultural resources will not be impacted. OP 4.11 (Physical Cultural Resources) has been triggered.

17

54. The activities of the project will not involve any pesticide application or are related to protection of dams. Hence OP 4.09 and OP 4.37 will not be relevant as well. 55. The IFC guidelines provides guidance on certain EHS issues which include standards for environmental parameters (ambient air quality, water and wastewater quality, noise level, waste management), hazard and accident prevention, occupational and community health and safety (during commissioning and decommissioning works) etc. These guidelines will be directly applicable to the MGSP project. As a general rule, the IFC guidelines should complement the existing Bangladesh guidelines or standards. In case the Bangladesh guidelines or standards differ from the IFC guidelines, project is expected to follow the more stringent ones. 56. The World Bank disclosure policy would be directly followed. The MGSP project will make the environmental assessment and EMF documents available to the public by publishing it in their websites. In addition, subproject specific screening/assessment report will periodically be posted in the LGED/BMDF website before the bidding process. Hard copies of these documents in English (including a summary in Bengali) will be made available in the offices of the respective Pourashavas and city corporations for the local stakeholders.

18

3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL PRACTICE AND CAPACITY ASSESSMENT

3.1 Introduction

57. As a part of the overall environmental assessment, discussions were held with the LGED and BMDF officials on different aspects of project implementation and management (including experience from recently completed Municipal Services Project, MSP), particularly focusing on existing environmental management practices. Based on these discussions and evaluation of available documents, institutional and staff capacity of LGED, BMDF and ULBs have been assessed with respect to proper environmental management of MGSP. Staff requirement and training needs have also been evaluated. This Chapter summarizes theses assessments and evaluations.

3.2 Environmental Practices

58. Based on discussions with the relevant stakeholders (LGED, BMDF, ULBs), it appears that there is significant scope for improvement in environmental assessment and management practices of projects/sub-projects implemented by these organizations. The ULBs have not been found to be particularly aware of the environmental regulations/requirements with regard to implementation of a project. The ULBs primarily carryout small-scale projects (e.g., local road, drain, culvert), and the requirements of environmental clearance (from the DoE), and environmental management/monitoring for such projects are not clear to them; the ULBs usually do not consult the DoE office during implementation of such projects. 59. The LGED has considerable experience in environmental management of a wide range of projects. The LGED has its own environmental assessment guidelines (LGED, 2008). The BMDF usually hires consultants for overseeing implementation of projects in the field. However, assessment of the recently completed projects, including the Municipal Services Project (MSP), suggests that environmental and safeguard compliances in these projects have not been monitored in a consistent manner. The environmental management framework (EMF) developed for the MSP project was also not followed consistently.

3.3 Institutional and Staff Capacity

60. Based on assessment of institutional and staff capacity, it appears that the ULBs have limited staff (engineers) and capacity for environmental management and monitoring of projects. The Engineering Department of a “Category A” ULB is led by an Executive Engineer, while that of “Category B or C” ULB is led by an Assistant Engineer. The Engineering Department of all ULBs has two sections – (a) water supply and waste management section, and (b) Civil, electrical and mechanical section. In all ULBs one Sub-assistant Engineer looks after the water supply and waste management section. For a “Category A” ULB, there are 5 posts for engineers in the “civil, electrical and mechanical section”, including one Assistant Engineer (civil), two Sub-assistant Engineers (civil), one Sub-assistant Engineer (electrical), and one Sub-assistant Engineer (mechanical). On the other hand, for a “Category B or C” ULB, there are only three

19

posts for engineers, which include two Sub-assistant Engineers (civil), and one Sub-assistant Engineer (electrical). 61. There is limited scope for increasing the number of staff (engineer) in the ULBs at the moment. Hence for ensuring proper environmental management of sub-projects under the MGSP, the focus should be on capacity building of ULB engineers. Currently, the ULB engineers have very little exposure to regulatory requirements, and environmental management and monitoring of projects. The senior engineer of an ULB (Executive Engineer for a “Category A” ULB, and Assistant Engineer for a “Category B or C” ULB) should take the responsibility of environmental management, and carry out responsibilities in accordance to the environmental management framework (EMF) developed for the MGSP. 62. The BMDF is a relatively small organization. Its Engineering Section, comprising of 7 members, has only two engineers and one urban development specialist (social safeguard specialist). Most of the works to be carried out by the BMDF under the MGSP will be supported by the hired M&S consultant. However, since the overall responsibility of environmental management lies with BMDF, the BMDF needs to ensure that its consultants are carrying out their responsibilities properly. Hence, here also the focus should be on capacity building. 63. As noted earlier, the LGED has experience in environmental management and monitoring. The Environment and Climate Change Unit/Committee will also be able to assist LGED in environmental management of projects. However, advanced training on environmental management and monitoring (same as that for BMDF engineers), particularly emphasizing on the modalities of the MGSP (i.e., framework approach) would be useful for engineers of PMO/ Environmental Unit of LGED in successfully implementing environmental management, following the EMF.

3.4 Training Requirements

64. As noted earlier, it appears that the engineers at the UBLs have limited or no exposure to environmental assessment and management. For the MGSP, at each ULB, the senior ULB engineer could act as the environmental and social focal point. Hence, basic training on regulatory requirements, environmental impacts, and environmental assessment and management would greatly improve the capability of the ULBs in carrying out their responsibilities under the MGSP. Training for the ULB engineers should be arranged in phases, e.g., ULBs where project activities would be initiated immediately could receive training first, and others could gradually receive training as project work progresses. From logistic point of view, the trainings may be organized on a regional basis. 65. As noted earlier, most of the works to be carried out by the BMDF under the MGSP will be supported by the hired M&S consultant. However, the overall responsibility of environmental management lies with BMDF. For this purpose, it is important that the BMDF engineers/urban planner receive advanced training on environmental management and monitoring in Bangladesh and overseas. Such training will assist them in properly overseeing

20

the activities of the consultant engaged in environmental management of the MGSP, following the EMF. 66. The LGED has considerable experience in environmental management of a wide range of projects. The LGED has its own environmental assessment guidelines (LGED, 2008). However, advanced training on environmental management and monitoring (same as that designed for BMDF engineers), particularly emphasizing on the modalities of the MGSP (i.e., framework approach) would be useful for engineers of PMO/Environmental Unit of LGED in successfully implementing environmental management, following the EMF. Table 3.1 summarizes the basic training requirements of ULBs, BMDF and LGED. Table 3.1: Basic training requirements for successful environmental management of MGSP

Training Type/ Contents Participants Schedule

General environmental awareness, regulatory requirements, EMF frameworks for MGSP, environmental impacts and mitigation, analysis of alternatives, environmental management

Engineers of ULBs (at least one engineer from each ULB)

Prior to commencement of sub-project activities

Advanced training on environmental assessment, management (EMP, ECoP), monitoring, including details on EMF framework

Participants from: (a) Engineering Unit of BMDF, (b) PMO/ Environmental Unit of LGED

Immediately after project commencement

21

4.0 OVERALL PROJECT BASELINE

4.1 Introduction

67. In order to develop a comprehensive Environmental Management Framework (EMF) for the MGSP, an environmental baseline study was carried out in areas within and surrounding 12 selected ULBs (10 Pourashavas and 2 City Corporations) out of the 26 ULBs (23 Pourashavas and 3 City Corporations) included under the LGED component. The specific objectives of the baseline study were to gather information on the existing physical environment of the areas within and around the project sites, and to assess peoples’ perception on different aspects of the proposed project. The data and information gathered during the baseline study provide a detailed description of the existing conditions of physical and biological environment in and around the project areas in the 12 selected ULBs. It should be noted that the baseline social environment has been assessed as a part of developing social management framework (SMF), which is presented in a separate report. 68. This Chapter describes the existing physical and biological environment of areas in and around the project sites in the 12 ULBs based on the baseline physical and ecological surveys and other studies (e.g., physical infrastructures, water supply and sanitation, solid waste management, water quality, and noise level measurements) carried out as a part of the present study. Relevant information on climate, geology and soils, water supply and sanitation, solid waste management, hydrology and water resources, noise level, and water quality has been described in this Chapter. The possible environmental impacts of the sub-projects under MGSP have been evaluated against these baseline environmental conditions.

4.2 Physical Environment

4.2.1 Physical Infrastructure

69. As discussed in Section 1.2, the 12 ULBs selected for the purpose of the baseline survey are: Tangail Pourashava, Elenga Pourashava, Bhaluka Pourashava, Trishal Pourashava, Chokoria Pourashava, Patia Pourashava, Bhairab Pourashava, Gopalganj Pourashava, Madhabdi Pourashava, Chandina Pourashava, Comilla City Corporation, and Rangpur City Corporation. The ULBs were visited during May-July 2013. Appendix B shows the maps of these ULBs as supplied by the ULB authorities. As noted earlier, during field visits, discussions were held with the Mayors, engineers and other officials of the UBLs, and sites of recently completed/ ongoing projects were visited (see Fig. 4.1) 70. The major physical infrastructure (e.g. school, college, industries) and land use patterns identified in the 12 ULBs through field survey are summarized in Table 4.1. Detailed physical infrastructure characteristics of the 12 ULBs are described in Table 4.2 and 4.3. It has been found that all the 12 ULBs have very good communication facilities with good connectivity through road networks. However, in many Pourashavas, the local roads have been found to be in poor condition (see Fig. 4.2); there are also needs for new roads especially surrounding local

22

markets at the ULBs. Most of the ULBs visited have already identified road sub-projects (including construction of new roads and rehabilitation of existing roads) for possible implementation under MGSP. ULBs like Tangail Pourashava, Patia Pourashava, Bhairab Pourashava, Comilla City Corporation, and Rangpur City Corporation also have good railway network for communication. Some ULBs like Bhaluka Pourashava, Chokoria Pourashava, Bhariab Pourashava, and Comilla City Corporation have waterway communication facilities as well. It has been observed that all the visited ULBs are connected to grid electricity. 71. Some of the ULBs have small to large numbers of industries. There is a number of private service sectors developed in each of the ULBs, which includes banks, hospitals/clinics, hotels, markets, newspaper, cinema hall, community center, auditorium, different archeological heritage spots. Large number of people works in these service sectors and in the industries, which constitute a major share of the overall economy of the ULBs. Business and agriculture are also observed as important occupations among the populations of these ULBs. Agricultural practices vary among ULBs, and include cultivation of vegetable, rice, seasonal fruits, etc. Some ULBs like Trishal Pourashava, Chokoria Pourashava have significant numbers of fish culture firms, which also form a major source of earning for the people of the ULBs.

23

Figure 4.1: Photographs of field visits. (a, b, c, d, e) in conversation with the Mayors of Trishal, Elenga, Patiya, Chandina Pourashavas and Comilla City Corporation respectively (f) visiting Tangail pourashava

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

(e) (f)

24

Figure 4.2: Snapshots of existing road conditions: (a) deteriorated roads causing travel hazards in waterlogged condition in Elenga pourashava (b) reinforcements are exposed in a rigid pavement in Valuka pourashava (c, d) poor condition of unpaved roads at Madhobdi and Tangail pourashavas respectively

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

25

Table 4.1: Summary of major physical infrastructures and land use characteristics of 12 ULBs visited

District Pourashava/City Corporation

Pourashava Class

Area Population Agriculture Education Transportation Electricity/ Power

Industry

Tangail Tangail Pourashava A 29.43 sq.km. Yes University, Medical College, College, School, Madrasha.

Roads, rail Yes Yes

Elenga Pourashava C 14.52 sq.km. Yes College, School Roads Yes Yes

Mymensingh Bhaluka Pourashava

A 10.68 sq.km. Colleges, School, Madrasha.

Roads, water Yes Yes

Trishal Pourashava A 15.49 sq.km. Yes University, College, School, Madrasha,

Roads Yes No

Cox’s Bazar Chokoria Pourashava

A 15.43 sq.km. Yes College, School, Madrasa, Hareji

Roads, water Yes No

Chittagong Patia Pourashava A 10.36 sq.km. Yes College, School, Madrasa

Roads, rail Yes Yes

Kishoreganj Bhairab Pourashava

A 13.07 sq.km. Yes College, School, Madrasa

Roads, rail, water Yes Yes

Gopalganj Gopalganj Pourashava

A 13.82 sq. km. Yes Medical College, College, School, Madrasha

Roads Yes No

Narshingdi Madhabdi Pourashava

A 5.09 sq.km. No College, School, Madrasa

Roads Yes Yes

Comilla Chandina Pourashava

B 14.02 sq.km. Yes College, School, Madrasa

Roads Yes Yes

Comilla City Corporation

N/A 53.04 sq.km. Yes University, College, School, Madrasha

Roads, rail, water Yes Yes

Rangpur Rangpur City Corporation

N/A 50.66 sq.km. Yes University, College, School

Roads, rail Yes Yes

Note: N/A = not applicable

26

Table 4.2: Some details of basic physical infrastructures and facilities of 12 ULBs visited

Pourashava/ City

Corporation

Administration Educational institutions

Religious institutions

Communication Orphanage, Fire Service Station,

Petrol Pump

Industies, Factories,

Mills, Godowns

Health Centres Police Station, Sub Registrar Office,

Land Office, Other Institutes

Tangail Pourashava

Consists of 9 wards, 63 mahallas.

University 1, medical college 1, college 11, high school 20, primary school 37, madrasha 53, others 3.

Mosque 670, temple 89.

Roads: pucca 40 km, semi pucca 2 km and mud road 264 km.

-- Industry 1. Hospital 5, clinic 26.

--

Elenga Pourashava

Consists of 27 Mouzas.

College 3, high school 5, primary school 15, Kindergarten 15.

-- Roads: pucca 12.5 km, semi pucca 0.5 km and mud road 67 km.

-- Industry: heavy 1, small

184.

Hospitals1, clinic 7.

--

Bhaluka Pourashava

Consists of 9 wards, 6 mouzas, 4907 holding numbers

College 3, agricultural college 1, high school 2, government primary school 4, private primary school 2, kinder garden school 30, madrasha 4.

Mosque 41, temple 4, church 1.

Roads: carpeting road 18.85 km, HBC road 15.00 km, brick soling road 10.00 km, cc/rcc road 5.00 km, mud road 72.00 km, bridge/culvert 20.00 meter, bus terminal 1, ghat 1,

-- Industrial factories 17.

Government hospital 3,

private hospital 6,

private clinic 9.

Clubs 21.

Trishal Pourashava

-- University 1, college 2, high school 5, primary school 7, madrasha 3.

Mosque 36, temple 6

-- -- -- Government hospital 1,

private clinics 5.

--

Chokoria Pourashava

Consists of 9 wards, 14 mouzas, 10,867 holding numbers

College 3, secondary school 6, government primary school 9, registered primary school 2, kinder garden school 2, ebtedayi madrasa 8, dakhil madrasa 6, hareji 1.

Mosque 80, temple 25, pagoda 2

Roads: pakka 82 km, mud road 30 km, bridge 2, culvert 30, truck terminal 1, bus terminal 1, post office 3, kheya ghat 3, bus station 6.

Orphanage 5, fire service

station 1, petrol pump 3

-- Government hospital 1,

private hospital 5.

--

Patiya Pourashava

Consists of 9 wards

College 2, secondary school 1, girls’ secondary school 2, boys’ secondary school 2, primary school 10,

Mosque 65, temple 15, pagoda 1, church 1.

Roads: pakka 20.38 km, semi-pakka 64.26 km, mud road 8.20 km, bridge/culvert 30, rail station 1, bus

Orphanage 10, fire service station 1

Salt Mill 41, Rice Mill 5,

Food Godown 1.


private hospital 3.

--

27

Pourashava/ City

Corporation




Petrol Pump


Mills, Godowns



aliya madrasa 2, dakhil madrasa 3, kinder garden school 14, madrasa 18.

stand 1,

Bhairab Pourashava

Consists of 9859 holding numbers.

College 1, women’s college 2, secondary school 7, primary school 19, madrasa 5

Mosque 78, temple 5, pagoda 2, eidgah 7

Roads: pakka 30.45 km, mud road 18 km, bridge 11, culvert 24, launch terminal 1, kheya ghat 4, bus terminal 1, bus stand 3, railway junction 1.

Orphanage 2, fire service station 2,

Industries 10. Hospitals 1, clinic 6, health

complex 1.

Police station 3, sub registrar office 1,

land office 1.

Gopalganj Pourashava

-- Medical college 1, college 4, high school 6, primary school 27, madrasha 6


Bus terminal 1, truck terminal 1.

Fire service station 1.

-- Government hospital 1,

Government treatment center 2, private

treatment center 3, diabetes

hospital 1, mother care

center 1, private clinic

12.

Police super station 1, passport office 1, veterinary clinic 1.

Madhabdi Pourashava

Consists of 9 wards.

College 5, high school 2, primary school 12, madrasa 9.


-- Orphanage 5, fire service station 1.

Small 240, medium 80,

large 80.

Hospital 1, private clinic 8,

health care center 1.

Police station 1

Chandina Pourashava

Consists of 7 mouzas, 12 villages, 9 wards, 8000 familys.

College 2, high school 3, girls’ high school 1, primary school 17, madrasa 25.

Mosque 23, temple 5.

Roads: pakka 21.50 km, semi pakka 8 km, mud road 80 km, bridge 12, culvert 30.

-- Food godowns 6.


private hospital 1,

clinic 2.

Jute research institute 1.


Consists of 27 wards, 33886 holding numbers.

Public university 1, private university 1, government college 4,

Mosque 120, eidgah 1, temple 7, church 2, buddhist temple

Road: bituminous 197 km, CC 60 km, RCC 16 km, brick flat soling 55

Orphanage 7 Industries 95. Hospital 2, clinic (TB) 1,

maternity clinic

Police station 2, police fari 4, judge

court 1, gymnasium

28

Pourashava/ City

Corporation




Petrol Pump


Mills, Godowns



private college 12, cadet college 1, public medical college 1, private medical college 2, art college 1, law college 2, homoeopathic medical college 1, public polytechnic institute 1, public engineering survey institute 1, private polytechnic institute 3, madrasha 37, teachers training college 2, government high school 3, private high school 20, government primary school 55.

1. km, mud road 154 km, bridge 2, culvert 279, footpath 20 km, railway station 1, bus station 6, ferry ghat 1, T & T office 1, GPO 1, post office 16

2, private clinic 59, diabetic hospital 1,

nagar matri sadan 1, nagar health center

6, satellite clinic 72

2, recreation club 2.

Rangpur City Corporation

Consists of 33 wards, 177603 holding numbers.

University 1, college 2, high school 4, primary school 8.

-- Roads: pakka 433.25 km, semi pakka 20 km, mud road 834 km, bridge 28, culvert 65, Dhaka coach stand 1, central bus stand 1, truck stand 1

-- -- City corporation hospital 1.

Museum 1, Begum Rokeya memorial

center 1.

Note: “--" = no data available.

29

Table 4.3: Some details of facilities and services of the seven Pourashavas and City Corporations under the MGSP

Pourashava/ City Corporation

Hotels, Dak Banglow, Cyclone Center.

Public Library, Playing Field, Park

Bank, Poura Market, Bazar, Slaughter House

Telephone Exchange, Press Club, Newspaper, Post office

Drainage, Dustbin, Garbage Truck, Public Toilet

Water Supply, Tube wells, Overhead Tank, Ponds

Community Center, Auditorium, Cinema Hall

Street Lights, Road Roller.

Archeological heritage

Tangail Pourashava

-- Public library 1, play ground 20, park 3.

-- Newspaper 13.

Khals 7. Hand tube wells 18,072, deep tube wells 8.

Cinema hall 6, theater stage 1.

-- Majar of Mawlana Bhashani, Jamidar Bari of Santos, House of PC Sarkar, Open Stage, Shamsul Hoque Gate.

Elenga Pourashava

-- -- -- -- Khal 1. -- -- -- --

Bhaluka Pourashava

-- Playing field 3 Bazar 1 -- Drainage: rcc drain 3.00 km, brick drain 2.00 km, pipe drain 0.50 km, kaccha drain 8.50 km, dustbin 270, garbage truck 1, riksha van 8, push cart 1, public toilet 2.

-- Cinema hall 2.

Road roller 1. --

Trishal Pourashava

-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Jatio Kobi Kazi Nazrul Islam Museum.

Chokoria Pourashava

Hotels 10, dak banglow 3, cyclone center 7.

Public library 1, playing field 2

Poura Market 2, bazar 5.

Telephone exchange 1, newspaper 3

Dustbin 20, garbage truck 1,

Tube wells 460, ponds 2

-- Street lights 10, road roller 2.

--

Patiya Pourashava

Dak banglow 1. Government library 2, private library 10.

Bank 15, bazar 5, slaughter house 1.

-- Drain 5.20 km, canal 4, dustbin 35, public toilet 2.

Tube wells 410. Community center 11, cinema hall 2.

Street lights 1390. --

Bhairab Pourashava

Dak banglow 3 Library 4, stadium 1.

Bank 15, poura market 1, kitchen market 5.

Press club 1, post office 3.

Public toilet 7. Overhead tank 1. Auditorium 2, cinema hall 2, upazilla complex 1

-- --


Circuit house 1, cyclone center 1.

Park 1, stadium 1. Bank para 1, bazar 1.

Press club 1, post office 1,

-- -- Auditorium 1. -- Court Mashjid, Kali Bari, A.G.

30

Pourashava/ City Corporation

Hotels, Dak Banglow, Cyclone Center.

Public Library, Playing Field, Park

Bank, Poura Market, Bazar, Slaughter House

Telephone Exchange, Press Club, Newspaper, Post office

Drainage, Dustbin, Garbage Truck, Public Toilet

Water Supply, Tube wells, Overhead Tank, Ponds

Community Center, Auditorium, Cinema Hall

Street Lights, Road Roller.

Archeological heritage

Church, Madhumati Lake.

Madhabdi Pourashava

-- -- Bank 34. -- Dustbin 4, garbage truck 2.

Ponds 13. -- Street lights 1200. Jamidar Babur Bari.

Chandina Pourashava

-- Park 1. Bank 4, bazar 1. Telephone exchange 1, post office 1.

-- Tubewells 800, (Irrigation system: Deep tube wells 4, shallow tube wells 40, hand tube wells 120)

Cinema hall 1.

-- --


-- Park 1, zoo 1, stadium 1.

Market 8, shopping complex 5, own shops 984.

-- Drain: pakka drain 65.50 km, earthen drain 105.46 km, canal 17.50 km, dustbin 155, garbage truck 15, public toilet 16, sanitary latrine 23802, sanitary land fill 1.

Overhead tank 6, deep tube wells 23, pipe line 146 km, house connection 5015, pump house 23, street hydrant 300.

Community center 1, Auditorium 1, Cinema Hall 4.

Street lighting: electricity line 132.35 km, light post 4661, tube light point 1060, energy savings light point 3601, meter/switch point 22, road roller (4-6 ton) 3, road roller (8-10 ton) 4, excavator (8cft) 1, bulldozer 1, hydraulic beam lifter 1. Trucktor 4.

Dharmashagor Dighi, Town Hall, Sachin Dev Barman House, Zoo, Botanical Garden, Ranir Kothir, Nuriahan Eco Park, Moinamoti Museum, Rupban Mora, Salbon Bihar.


Hotel 1, Parjatan Motel 1.

-- Bank 19, poura market 9, bazar 15, slaughter house 2.

Newspaper 14

Drain: pakka 60 km, mud drain 175 km, public toilet 5.

Total house connection 5500, pipe line 135 km, iron removal plant 2, deep tube wells 10, over head tank 5, city corp. owned ponds 2, lakes 3.

-- -- Tajhat Rajbari.

Note: “--" = no data available

31

4.2.2 Existing Condition of Potential Sub-project Sites

72. During field visits to 12 ULBs, it was found that many ULBs are in the process of identification of sub-projects for possible implementation under MGSP. These potential subprojects will be further reviewed and analyzed for preparing short-list of sub-projects on priority based for possible implementation under MGSP. It was found that most of the ULBs are keen to implement road (construction/improvement/rehabilitation) sub-projects (both RCC and bituminous roads) and drain (both RCC and pipe drain) sub-projects under MGSP. For example, Chokoria Pourashava has initially identified 5 sub-projects involving improvement and rehabilitation of roads (length varying from 0.5 km to 2.0 km); Comilla City Corporation has also primarily selected 5 road improvement sub-projects (length varying from 0.385 km to 2.1 km) for possible implementation under MGSP. Bhaluka Pourashava has initially listed 9 sub-projects involving construction and improvement of roads (length varying from 0.57 km to 2.2 km), and one sub-project involving construction of about 0.5 km embankment. Tangail Pourashava has also in process of identification of a number of road and drain sub-projects for possible implementation under MGSP. These include 4 sub-projects involving rehabilitation of road (length 0.28 km to 3.37 km), construction of RCC sewerage drain (0.7 km to 1.075 km), cleaning of drain (1.75 km), repair of drain (1.0 km), and re-excavation of a canal. The sub-projects short-listed by Trishal Pourashava for possible implementation under MGSP include 11 road (length 0.2 km to 3.05 km), 10 drain (length 0.2 km to 1.137 km), one foot bridge (10 m), one kitchen market (18 m by 6 m CI shed) and two public toilet sub-projects. Apart from 32 road (length 0.25 to 2.0 km) and 34 drain (length 0.3 km to 1.5 km) sub-projects, Madhabdi Pourashava has also primarily listed sub-projects involving construction of a park, a graveyard, an auditorium, a school and an Eidgha (Muslim pray ground) for possible implementation. Other ULBs visited were in the process short-listing sub-projects for possible implementation under MGSP.

Figure 4.3: Existing conditions of potential roads to be reconstructed under the MGSP: (a) a

road section near a market in Elenga; (b) an earthen road in Elenga

a b

32

Figure 4.3: Existing conditions of potential roads to be reconstructed under the MGSP: road section in Tangail; (d) proposed site for a new road at Madhabdi (e) a damaged road section at Bhaluka; (f) a damaged road in Bhaluka 73. As a part of the “overall environmental assessment”, the potential sites of some of the sub-projects to be implemented under MGSP were visited during field trips to the 12 ULBs. Figure 4.3(a)-(f) show some of the potential sites at these ULBs where road reconstruction/ rehabilitation could take place under the MGSP. The figures show relatively poor condition of the existing roads. Figure 4.4 shows potential site for a cattle market a Madhabdi pourashava and the potential site for a bride over Khiru river in Bhaluka pourashava. During field trips, sites of recently completed and ongoing projects were also visited, in order to assess environmental management practices and present condition of the projects. Figure 4.5 shows the site of an under-construction bridge, and a recently completed drain project in Tangail pourashava.

c d

e f

33

Figure 4.4: (a) Proposed site for a cattle market at Madhabdi; (b) Proposed Site for a bridge over Khiru River in Bhaluka

Figure 4.5: (a) A bridge under construction in Tangail Pourashava; (b) a recently constructed drain in Tangail Pourashava

4.2.3 Climate

74. Bangladesh is located at the central part within the Asiatic monsoon region where the climate is tropical. Relatively small size of the country and generally low-lying area cause moderate spatial variation of temperature, precipitation, relative humidity, wind speeds and other climatic variables. However, the climate of Bangladesh exhibits pronounced temporal variability. This is because of the moisture-laden monsoon winds flowing predominantly from the south-west during summer and the comparatively dry and colder north-western winds during winter. 75. Three seasons are generally recognized: a hot, muggy summer from March to June; a hot, humid and rainy monsoon season from June to November during which more than 85% of the total annual rainfall occurs; and a moderately cold, dry winter from December to February. The beginning of the rainy season vary from year to year; heavy rains may commence anywhere

a b

b a

34

between mid-April and early June and may end anywhere between the end of September and mid-November. Usually winter season is dry with occasional rains. The early summer season is considered from March-April. During summer the air becomes hot with very low humidity. Early summer is also dominated by Baishaki cyclone and rains. 76. The Bangladesh Meteorological Department monitors different climatic variables from 35 stations in Bangladesh. Among them 7 stations can represent the 12 municipalities visited as shown in Table 4.4. Different meteorological data like rainfall, temperature, relative humidity, evaporation, and solar radiation measured in these stations during the period 2001 – 2012 are summarized in Tables 4.5(a) – (f). Precipitation

77. The general pattern of precipitation (which consists entirely of rain) follows the monsoon pattern with the cooler, drier months of November to March, increasing rains in April and May and highest rainfall in the summer months of June to September when the prevailing wind direction from the southwest brings moisture-laden air from the Bay of Bengal. The winter period (November to February) is dry with very little rainfall. Even though the temporal pattern of rainfall is pretty much similar throughout the country, there is pronounced spatial variation. Among the places visited, Patiya and Chokoria pourashavas, which are represented by Chittagong and Cox’s bazar BMD stations, have been shown to experience significantly higher rainfall during monsoon compared to the rest of the places. Figure 4.6 shows the location of the pourashavas/city corporations on the rainfall map of Bangladesh.

Table 4.4: The meteorological stations representing the municipalities visited in this study

Pourashava /

City Corporation

District Upazila Nearest BMD

Weather Station

1. Tangail Tangail Tangail Tangail

2. Elenga Tangail Kalihati

3. Valuka Mymensingh Valuka

Mymensingh

4. Trishal Mymensingh Trishal

5. Bhairab Kishorganj Bhairab

6. Madhabdi Narshingdi Madhabdi

7. Patiya Chittagang Patiya Chittagang

8. Chakaria Cox’s Bazar Chakaria Cox’s Bazar

9. Gopalganj Gopalganj Gopalganj Sadar Madaripur

10. Rangpur City Corporation Rangpur Rangpur Sadar Rangpur

11. Comilla City Corporation Comilla Comilla Sadar Comilla

12. Chandina Comilla Chandina

35

Table 4.5(a): Monthly averages of climatic variables at the Mymensingh BMD station, 2001-2012

Month Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Rainfall (mm) 6 11 36 147 284 420 419 341 244 190 16 6

Mean Temp (°C) 17.2 20.9 24.5 26.8 27.8 28.3 28.6 28.9 28.5 26.8 22.9 18.9

Max Temp (°C) 22.2 25.2 28.6 30.7 31.8 31.7 31.6 31.9 31.5 30.6 27.0 23.1

Min Temp (°C) 8.2 11.0 14.6 19.0 20.2 22.3 24.4 24.3 23.9 19.5 13.8 9.8

Humidity (%) 82 75 75 80 81 86 87 86 86 85 83 83

Sunshine (Hours) 5.3 7.2 6.8 7.0 6.5 3.7 4.0 4.7 4.5 6.3 7.2 5.7 Solar Radiation (Cal/cm2/min) 120 152 178 193 188 140 155 162 157 150 146 132

Evaporation (mm/d) 1.9 2.8 3.9 4.6 4.5 3.8 3.7 3.9 3.7 3.3 2.7 2.0

Source: Bangladesh Meteorological Department

Table 4.5(b): Monthly averages of climatic variables at the Tangail BMD Station, 2001-2012


Rainfall (mm) 6 10 54 83 238 322 331 253 265 191 27 7

Mean Temp (°C) 16.5 20.5 25.0 27.9 28.4 28.7 28.8 28.9 28.5 26.8 22.7 18.4

Max Temp (°C) 27.8 32.0 36.2 37.2 37.3 36.6 35.2 35.4 35.7 35.0 32.2 29.0

Min Temp (°C) 7.7 10.0 13.7 19.0 20.4 22.6 24.2 24.3 24.0 19.7 13.8 9.6

Humidity (%) 81 73 69 74 78 83 85 84 85 83 80 82

Sunshine (Hours) 5.8 7.8 7.8 7.9 6.8 4.1 4.3 4.8 4.5 6.0 7.3 5.5

Source: Bangladesh Meteorological Department. Note: Solar radiation and Evaporation not measured in this station

Table 4.5(c): Monthly averages of climatic variables at the Comilla BMD Station, 2001-2012


Rainfall (mm) 7 10 49 107 284 434 370 292 271 179 29 6

Mean Temp (°C) 17.9 21.6 25.2 27.4 28.2 28.3 28.3 28.6 28.3 27.1 23.5 19.5

Max Temp (°C) 28.5 31.3 33.9 35.5 36.2 35.6 34.8 35.2 35.3 34.9 32.3 29.8

Min Temp (°C) 8.7 11.1 15.0 18.5 20.4 22.7 23.9 24.2 23.6 20.4 14.6 10.1

Humidity (%) 78 73 76 80 80 85 85 84 84 82 79 80

Sunshine (Hours) 6.3 7.9 7.8 8.0 7.1 4.8 5.0 5.7 5.5 6.8 7.6 6.6 Solar Radiation (Cal/cm2/min) 112 143.2 164.5 168.6 160.6 135.3 132.3 135.9 127.0 124.8 116.0 104.4

36


Evaporation (mm/d) 2.1 3.1 3.9 4.5 4.6 3.9 4.0 4.0 3.8 3.5 2.9 2.1

Source: Bangladesh Meteorological Department

Table 4.5(d): Monthly averages of climatic variables at the Chittagong BMD Station, 2001-2012


Rainfall (mm) 8 4 30 95 313 710 688 503 270 257 37 12

Mean Temp (°C) 20.1 22.7 26.3 28.2 28.6 28.3 27.9 28.1 28.3 27.9 25.2 21.4

Max Temp (°C) 29.4 32.3 35.1 34.9 35.3 33.9 33.4 33.7 34.1 34.3 32.8 30.0

Min Temp (°C) 11.5 12.8 17.3 20.2 21.3 23.1 23.8 24.0 23.6 21.3 16.8 12.6

Humidity (%) 71 67 72 76 78 83 85 84 83 80 75 74 Source: Bangladesh Meteorological Department. Note: Solar radiation, sunshine hours and Evaporation not measured in this

station

Table 4.5(e): Monthly averages of climatic variables at the Coxsbazar BMD Station, 2001-2012


Rainfall (mm) 5 12 23 88 400 894 935 711 423 257 50 9

Mean Temp (°C) 20.5 23.1 26.4 28.6 28.9 28.0 27.5 27.6 27.8 27.7 25.1 21.7

Max Temp (°C) 30.9 32.9 35.5 35.3 35.6 34.6 33.5 33.8 34.5 34.7 33.5 31.3

Min Temp (°C) 12.8 14.0 18.0 21.0 21.7 23.2 23.8 24.0 23.7 22.2 17.1 13.4

Humidity (%) 72 69 73 76 79 86 88 87 86 83 77 74

Sunshine (Hours) 8.3 9.3 8.6 9.0 7.3 4.3 3.7 4.7 5.8 7.3 8.1 8.0 Source: Bangladesh Meteorological Department. Note: Solar radiation and Evaporation not measured in this station

Table 4.5(f): Monthly averages of climatic variables at the Rangpur BMD Station, 2001-2012


Rainfall (mm) 7 9 30 133 263 491 452 316 332 235 3 5

Mean Temp (°C) 16.0 19.8 23.9 26.1 27.6 28.4 28.8 29.2 28.5 26.4 22.4 18.3

Max Temp (°C) 26.5 30.2 34.3 35.4 36.5 35.6 35.4 36.2 35.1 33.9 31.0 28.1

Min Temp (°C) 7.8 9.8 13.8 18.0 20.2 21.7 23.4 24.3 23.4 19.2 13.8 9.8

Humidity (%) 82 74 69 76 79 84 84 84 85 83 79 81

Solar Radiation (Cal/cm2/min) 125 174.5 199.0 200.8 192.7 159.4 156.4 166.2 163.1 159.7 149.9 133.4

Evaporation (mm/d) 2.0 3.0 4.2 4.8 4.8 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.2 3.6 3.2 2.3

Source: Bangladesh Meteorological Department. Note: Sunshine hours not measured in this station

37

Table 4.5(g): Monthly averages of climatic variables at the Madaripur BMD Station, 2001-2012


Rainfall (mm) 6 13 30 74 178 344 386 275 279 181 33 3

Mean Temp (°C) 17.6 21.5 25.9 28.4 29.0 28.8 28.7 28.9 28.6 27.3 23.5 19.2

Max Temp (°C) 28.6 32.7 35.8 36.6 36.9 36.4 34.8 35.0 35.1 34.9 32.5 29.5

Min Temp (°C) 9.3 11.2 15.0 19.7 21.0 23.3 24.6 25.0 24.4 20.7 15.1 10.4

Humidity (%) 80 74 72 77 80 85 87 85 86 84 81 82

Sunshine (Hours) 6.2 7.7 7.4 7.5 6.7 3.9 4.1 4.6 4.6 6.1 7.0 6.1

Source: Bangladesh Meteorological Department. Note: Solar radiation and Evaporation not measured in this station

Relative Humidity 78. The spatial and temporal variation of Relative Humidity throughout the year is very low in Bangladesh. The relative humidity varies from 69% to 88%.

Ambient Air Temperature 79. The temperature of the country is related to the period of rainfall. In general, cool seasons coincide with the period of lowest rainfall. Tables 4.5(a) – (g) shows the monthly average mean, maximum and minimum temperature of in the regions of the selected municipalities. Maximum average temperature over the year is usually observed in July - August and minimum average temperature in January.

Solar Radiation and Evaporation 80. The average incident solar radiation is comparatively higher during the period between February to May than the other months of the year. Consequently the amount of evaporation is also higher during that period.

38

Figure 4.6: The locations of 12 pourashavas and city corporations on the rainfall map of Bangladesh (map source: www.banglapedia.org)

4.2.4 Geology, Soils and Seismity

81. Geology of Bangladesh is generally dominated by poorly consolidated sediments deposit over the past 10,000 to 15,000 years (Holocene age). It is mostly characterised by the rapid subsidence and filling of a basin in which a huge thickness of deltaic sediments were deposited as a mega-delta outbuilt and progressed towards the south. The delta building is still continuing into the present Bay of Bengal and a broad fluvial front of the Ganges-Brahmaputra-Meghna river system gradually follows it from behind.

39

Soil Characteristics

82. The soil formation in Bangladesh is remarkably homogeneous in appearance, both vertically and laterally. It comprises layer of unconsolidated clay, about 10m thick near Dhaka, but apparently thinner to the east and possibly much thicker in the west of the Rajshahi district. The sand mineralogy in this area is broadly similar to that of the tertiary hill sediments. Mineral contents of the soil are high in quartz, relatively low in feldspar and mica, and with zircon, tourmaline, kyanite, staurolite, sillimanite, and epidote dominating the heavy mineral fractions. The content of easily weatherable minerals ranges from 4 to 9%. The soil of Bangladesh can broadly be classified into seven tracts: (1) Madhupur Tract or Red Soil Tract, (2) Barind Tract, (3) Tista Silt, (4) Brahmaputra Alluvium, (5) Gangetic Alluvium, (6) Coastal Saline Tract, and (7) Hill Tracts. Figure 4.7 shows the position of the 12 pourashavas and city corporations on the soil tract map of Bangladesh. 83. The soil formation of Trishal and Valuka Pourashava underlies Madhupur and Barind tracts. This tract represents the red lateritic soils of Madhupur area, a highland tract above flood level intersected by numerous large and small depressions, locally known as ‘BAID’. The soils of this tract have clayey texture and contain large quantity of iron and aluminium, which are highly aggregated. The pH value ranges from 5.5 to 6.0 in the topsoil. The cation exchange capacity is low and the soils have the high phosphate fixing capacity. The soils are deficient in organic matter, nitrogen, phosphate and lime. Tangail, Elenga, Bhairab, Madhabdi, Chandina Pourashavas and Comilla City Corporation falls under the Brahmaputra floodplain. The dominant soil texture is sandy loam. The soils are acidic in character and the pH ranges from 5.5 to 6.8. The soils are naturally fertile and are recharged every year by fresh deposition by the floodwaters. The riverine lands of Gangetic floodplain underly the Gopalganj municipality. Soil texture here varies from clay loam to sandy loam. The pH of the soils ranges from 7.0 to 8.5. The soils are moderately fertile and are characterised by calcium carbonate content and are well supplied with phosphate and potassium. The Rangpur City Corporation falls under the Tista silt soil tract. The predominant soil texture is sandy loam. The pH of the topsoils ranges from 5.5 to 6.5. The soils are in general fertile and are rich in potash and phosphates. Patiya and Chokoria pourashaves are in the flat low-lying areas along the coastal belt and the estuarine islands. The soils are saline and the pH values are neutral to slightly alkaline. The soils are well supplied with potash and phosphates.

40

Figure 4.7: Map showing the 12 pourashavas and city corporations on the seven soil tracts of Bangladesh (map source: www.banglapedia.org)

Seismicity

84. In the north and northeast of Bangladesh, there are areas of high seismic activity and some of the major earthquakes originating in these areas have affected the adjacent regions of the country. The whole of Bangladesh is divided into three seismic zones (Fig. 4.8). The northern part of the country that includes the greater districts of Rangpur, Mymensingh, and Sylhet are in the Zone-I where earthquake shock of maximum intensity of IX of the Modified Mercalli Scale is possible. The Zone-II includes the greater districts of Dinajpur, Bogra, Dhaka and Chittagong and the shocks of intensity of VIII are possible. The southern part of the country, the least active region, where the maximum intensity is not likely to exceed VII, is in the Zone-III. The experts suggest not constructing normal buildings with more than 60m height.

41

The Rangpur City Corporation, Trishal, Valuka, Bhairab and Madhabdi pourashavas are located near the interface between zone I and II; Tangail, Elenga and Chandina pourashavas and Comilla City Corporations fall in zone II while Gopalganj is in zone III. Figure shows the locations of these in the seismic map of Bangladesh.

4.2.5 Flood-prone Areas

85. Bangladesh is prone to flooding; the coastal flooding as well as the bursting of Bangladesh's river banks is common and severely affects the landscape of the country. 75% of Bangladesh is less than 10m above sea level and 80% is flood plain, therefore rendering Bangladesh a nation very much at risk of further widespread damage. Flooding normally occurs during the monsoon season from June to September during the monsoon. The convectional rainfall of the monsoon is added to by relief rainfall caused by the Himalayas. Melt-water from the Himalayas is also a significant input and flood every year. Figure 4.9 shows the positions of municipalities over the flood risk map of Bangladesh. It can be observed that Rangpur, Bhairab, Madhabdi, Trishal and Valuka are not located in the flood-prone areas. Tangail, Elenga, Gopalganj, Comilla and Chandina are in low to moderate level river flooding zone. Patiya has some risk associated with flash flooding which is pretty common in hilly areas. The Chokoria pourashava is in an area which may be affected by tidal surges.

42

Figure 4.8: Locations of the 12 pourashavas and city corporations on the seismic map of Bangladesh (map source: www.banglapedia.org)

43

Figure 4.9: Locations of the 12 pourashavas and city corporations on the flood risk map of Bangladesh (map source: BARC)

4.2.6 Water Supply, Drainage and Sanitation

Water Supply 86. Information on water supply and sanitation scenario in the 12 selected ULBs were gathered during the field visits. The water supply systems existing in different ULBs vary in terms of source of water supply, technology, and storage facility depending on the location of the ULBs. The salient features of the water supply systems of different ULBs are given in Table 4.6. During the field visits it has been observed that most of the ULBs rely on groundwater for the supply of drinking water. In case of using groundwater, issues like arsenic, iron, and manganese-contaminated groundwater are of major concern in some ULBs (e.g., iron contamination in the ground water of Rangpur City Corporation, Tangail Pourashava and

44

Chandina Pourashava). For this reason drinking water treatment plants have been installed in the Rangpur City Corporation, Chandina Pourashava and Tangail Pourashava mainly to treat iron from the groundwater. As a result of a drop in the water table, most of the ULBs with groundwater based water supply system have been facing a decrease in the yields of the tubewells in the recent years (e.g., Comilla City Corporation, Patia Pourashava). 87. In areas with severe arsenic and/or iron contamination in the groundwater use of surface water has been observed in some ULBs (e.g. Gopalganj Pourashava). Gopalganj Pourashava has a surface water based supply system, which includes a drinking water treatment plant for treating the surface water collected from Modhumati River. Salinity intrusion in the river water poses a big concern in the water supply system of Gopalganj Pourashava.

Figure 4.10: Water Treatment Plant at Gopalganj

For the supply of drinking water, piped water supply network has been observed in some ULBs (e.g. Comilla City Corporation, Rangpur City Corporation, Chandina Pourashava, Gopalganj Pourashava, Bhairab Pourashava, Tangail Pourashava, etc.). Chokoria Pourashava has already installed a water supply pipe network but did not connect to any water source yet. Some ULBs installed overhead water tanks for storage of drinking water. During the field visit ULBs with piped water supply networks have been found to face problems like inferior quality piping material, inadequate water pressure in the water supply lines for high rise buildings, and absence of underground water reservoir in old buildings. Drainage 88. The drainage situation of different ULBs was assessed during the field visits. Drainage system in most of the visited ULBs needs immediate improvement. In most of the ULBs, the storm water generated after a rainfall is conveyed through a network of pucca drains into various natural khal systems, which eventually drains into a major stream. It has been found that most of the ULBs suffer from inundation and water-logging problems even after light shower (Fig. 3.8). The salient features of the drainage system in different Pourashavas and City Corporations visited under the MGSP are given in Table 4.7.

45

Sanitation 89. Most of the ULBs visited have been observed to have a significant portion of populations using unhygienic latrines. The sanitation systems mostly existing in different ULBs are septic tank system, sanitary pour flush latrines and pit latrines with water seal. No wastewater treatment facility was found in any of the twelve visited ULBs. It has been found that wastewater mixes with storm water and discharges in water bodies, causing pollution of natural water bodies (Fig. 4.11). The salient features of the sanitation system in different Pourashavas and City Corporations visited under the MGSP are given in Table 3.7. Among the different ULBs visited, only Comilla City Corporation has been observed to have 100% sanitation coverage.

46

Figure 4.11: Water supply and sanitation systems in the ULBs (a) Water-logging due to lack of drainage systems in Elenga pourashava (b) Latrine just near the water body in Elenga Pourashava (c) Open drains conveying domestic sewage in Valuka (d) Broken drainage lines beside the main road in Tangail pourashava (e) Water-logging two days after rainfall in Bhairab pourashava (f) Natural drainage channels being obstructed due to disposal of solid wastes in Comilla City corporation.

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

(e) (f)

47

Table 4.6: Salient features of Water Supply Systems of the twelve visited ULBs (Pourashavas and City Corporations) under the MGSP

Pourashava/City Corporation

Salient features of the Water Supply Systems

Tangail Pourashava About 20% of the Pourashava area is covered by piped water supply; the water is supplied from three water treatment plants (two rapid sand filters, and one slow sand filters), which draws water from a total of 8 deep tubewells, and then pump the treated water to 3 overhead (OH) water tanks. The groundwater has very high concentrations of iron and manganese. The Pourashava is trying to construct an iron-manganese removal plant. The remaining 80% of the Pourashava area is served by hand tubewell.

Elenga Pourashava The entire Pourashava is served by hand tubewell. The Pourashava would like to construct overhead water storage tank and water supply line for piped water supply; but so far has not prepared any design or cost estimate for this purpose.

Bhaluka Pourashava Only source of water supply of Bhaluka municipality is hand tube wells (HTWs) and it covers 100% of its population. There is no evidence of Arsenic contamination in its HTWs.

Trishal Pourashava The Pourashava is mainly served by hand tubewells. Water supply line covers only a few areas. There are three deep tubewells within the pourashava boundry, two are in operation and the other is not functional yet.

Chokoria Pourashava

Chokoria has a water supply network already installed in the pourashava but not yet connected to any water source. The water source will presumably be a series of deep tubewells. The groundwater has been found to be safe from arsenic contamination and salinity.

Patia Pourashava Both shallow and deep tubewells are the main source of water supply but there is no centralized water supply system. There is no Arsenic or salinity problem in the groundwater. But the groundwater level is observed to be declining over the years, which might render the existing shallow tubewells out of operation. Water supply project is not proposed by the pourashava in the first phase mostly because the officials are unsure of which option to choose for a reliable drinking water supply. The officials suggested that they need consultation of experts to resolve this issue.

Bhairab Pourashava Main source of water supply of Bhairab municipality is Hand Tube Well (HTWs) and it covers about 68.96% of its total population. There are 950 HTWs without Arsenic pollution. Second main source of water supply is Deep Tube Well (DTW) based piped water supply and it covers about 20.69% of the total population. Remaining 10.35% people are dependent on pond/canal water for their daily necessity. This group of people is exposed to various water born diseases. There are 5 DTWs and 20 pond/canal in the Pourashava used for drinking water supply purpose.


A surface water based supply system exists which serves 68% of the population. It treats the water from the Modhumati river (treatment plant constructed in 2007) and serves the households via several water storage tanks. Groundwater is contaminated by Iron and Arsenic and people are aware of it. Therefore practically they do not use tubewell water for drinking purpose. One of the major problems that affect the water treatment plant is the occasional salinity in the Madhumati river. During the dry season or if the rainfall is less during May-June, there is salinity intrusion in Madhumati river and the water treatment plant does not have any provisions to treat saline water currently. The municipality wants another treatment plant to serve the remaining population and improvement of the existing water treatment plant (e.g. spare mechanical parts, pipeline extension, provisions to treat salinity). The plan to extend the municipality has been passed; in that case the current system will be inadequate to serve the future population. Considering the severity of iron and arsenic in groundwater in Gopalganj, the existing surface water system upgradation is a priority for safe drinking water supply.

Madhabdi Pourashava

Main and only source of water supplyof Madhabdi municipality is hand tube wells (HTWs). About 3,200 HTWs supplies water to the residents of the municipality. No information is available about the municipality’s water supply coverage. The municipality also has 13 ponds.

Chandina Pourashava

Chandina Pourashava has 3 production tubewells (one is not working currently), which eventually goes through a water treatment plant (to treat iron mainly). The production tubewells serve approximately 150 households. There has been problems reported in the water supply service lines (low pipe quality) and often inadequate pressure of water is observed at the user end. The old buildings usually do not have underground reservoirs to store supply water and the supply water usually does not have enough pressure to be lifted to multiple stories. Therefore these households do not favor the supply water and rather use their own shallow tubewells (with high iron content). Upgradation of the water supply system is therefore necessary.

48


Salient features of the Water Supply Systems


The City Corporation has 29 production tubewells which stores water in 6 overhead tanks. These tubewells cover 25% population of the city corporation. In recent times the yield of these tubewells have been found to decrease. The rest of the population is served b 50 deep tara pumps and 25 shallow tara pumps; the community performs the operation of maintenance. Nowadays, high-rise building owners are installing their own tubewells. Recently, a JICA survey is going on in Comilla City Corporation to determine the feasibility of treating surface water from existing ponds for drinking water supply.


The City Corporation has a groundwater-based pipeline connected drinking water supply system. There is a total of 5500 house connection with a pipeline network of 135 km in length. There are 10 production deep tubewells, which stores water in 4 overhead water tanks. There are 2 iron removal plants for treating the groundwater.

Table 4.7: Salient features of Drainage and Sanitation Systems of the twelve visited ULBs (Pourashavas and City Corporations) under the MGSP

Pourashava/City

Corporation Salient features of the Drainage Systems Salient features of the Sanitation Systems

Tangail Pourashava

In Tangail municipality, storm water discharges in rivers, khals and agricultural land through the natural drains/khals. Tangail municipality has seven khals and they are: (i) Central Khal, (ii) Biswas BetkaKhal, (iii) Dighulia Khal, (iv) Sakrail Khal, (v)Beradoma Khal, (vi) Dewla Khal, and (vii) Enayetpur Khal. Significant areas of the Pourashava (particularly one portion) suffer from inundation and water-logging during the entire wet season. Existing drainage lines (particularly the main drains, known as Central Khal) have been found virtually completely blocked by debris. The upstream end of Central Khal is made of RCC, while the downstream end is earthen. It appears that the downstream end of the drain is now at a higher elevation due to accumulation of solids, thus virtually preventing any flow through the Khal to the ultimate discharge point (Louhajang river).

about 55% people use hygienic latrines (includes Septic Tank System, Sanitary latrines-pour flush and Pit latrines with water seal). Overall sanitation condition is not satisfactory as about 45% people use non- hygienic latrines (includes Pit latrines without water seal, Hanging latrines and others). This lower sanitation coverage pollutes the environment and bears a potential risk of pathogenic diseases contagion. Storm drains running along roads appear to receive direct discharge of sewage by households/ commercial establishments, contributing to pollution.

Elenga Pourashava

In Elenga municipality, storm water discharges in Pathaikandi Khal and Louhajang River through the natural drains. Drainage problem appears to be the most significant problem of the Pourashava. Significant areas of the Pourashava suffer from inundation and water-logging even after light shower. Existing drainage lines have been blocked by unplanned development (shops, houses); blockage by solid waste (especially from kitchen markets) is also likely. Most of the drains have not been constructed up to the discharge location (river/ khal); thus they are unable to carry storm water out of the Pourashava.

Pit latrines and septic tank system are major sanitation systems in the Pourashava. In Elenga municipality, about 70% people use hygienic latrines (includes Septic Tank System, Sanitary latrines-pour flush and Pit latrines with water seal). But, Overall sanitation condition is not satisfactory as about 30% people use non- hygienic latrines (includes Pit latrines without water seal, Hanging latrines and others) still now. However, storm drains running along roads would be prone to direct discharge of sewage by households/ commercial establishments.

Bhaluka Pourashava

In Bhaluka municipality, storm water discharges in river (Khiru River), khals and agricultural land through the natural drains and box culverts. There are four Khals in this municipality and they are: Baksattra Khal, Beltiasangan Khal, Kalanga Khaland and GolashangunKhal. Bhaluka municipality faces water logging every year. Within the drainage /flood control structures, Bhaluka municipality has only sluice gate.

Sanitation coverage in Bhaluka municipality is not satisfactory as most of the people, about 65% people use non- hygienic latrines (includes Pit latrines without water seal, Hanging latrines and others). This lower sanitation coverage indicates potential risks on over all public health of the municipality i.e. break out of pathogenic diseases.

Trishal Drainage is one of the most significant problems in this Pit latrines and septic tank system are major

49

Pourashava/City


Pourashava pourashava. Water logging problems occurs every year. The main discharge location is the river named ‘Sutia’.

sanitation systems in the Pourashava.

Chokoria Pourashava

Three khaals namely Mog khaal, Batakhali khaal and Jaliapara khaal serve the main drainage function. These khaals are eventually connected to Matamuhuri river. Human activities have caused the khaals to be silted up. Small rainfall usually does not cause waterlogging in the pourashava.

Pit latrines and septic tank system are major sanitation systems in the Pourashava.

Patia Pourashava

The pourashava has a drainage system, some RCC drains are being constructed using climate change trust fund. Patia bakkhali khaal, which connects with the Karnaphuli river, serves as the principal natural drainage route.

Pit latrines and septic tank system are major sanitation systems in the Pourashava. Septic tanks are often connected to drainage lines. But due to tidal activities in the khaal, the pollution load is flushed away periodically and usually do not cause any environmental problems

Bhairab Pourashava

The rainwater in Bhairab Pourashava discharges in Meghna River through a network of natural low ditches, khals and low lands.Bhairab municipality faces water logging problem every year during the rainy season.

Overall sanitation condition of the Bhairab municipality is not satisfactory, as about 55% of its total population use non-hygienic latrines (such as Pit latrines without water seal, Hanging latrines and others). This lower sanitation coverage bears a great potential risk on over all public health of the municipality.


The old Modhumati river serves the main drainage function of Gopalganj. There are also several small khaals (Bairagi khaal, Pachuria khaal) which are also means of natural drainage. But since the domestic wastewater (overflow from septic tanks) is also connected to these khaals, the water quality gets deteriorated specially in the dry season. Some densely populated areas get waterlogged during rains. If drainage is improved, a large portion of the roads can be saved from deterioration.

Pit latrines and septic tank system are major sanitation systems in Gopalganj Pourashava. They envisage constructing a master drain parallel to the old Modhumati River, which will divert the domestic wastewater, treating it in a treatment plant and finally discharging it in the main Modhumati River.

Madhabdi Pourashava

In Madhabdi municipality, a storm water discharge in Old Brammaputra Nadh through the natural drains and constructed storm sewers. Madhabdi municipality faces water logging sometimes and municipality has polders as a drainage /flood control structures.

About 7.3% people of the municipality use hygienic latrines, 0.13% use non- hygienic latrines and majority of the population about 92.57% do not use any latrine. People of Madhabdi municipality are in a great health risk due to this lower sanitation coverage. There are 3000 nos. Septic tank systems and 5107 nos. Sanitary latrines in this Pourashava. The non-hygienic latrines include 104 nos. Pit latrines (without water seal) and 50 nos. hanging latrines.

Chandina Pourashava

Karzon khaal is the main drainage outlet, which is connected to Khiro River. Waterlogging is not common in the residential areas except in the kitchen bazaar. Due to the construction of the Dhaka-Chittagong 4-lane highway, some part of the existing drainage canals/lines haven been filled up which needs rehabilitation. Construction of box culvert in Karzon khaal has become necessary to maintain its drainage function.

Pit latrines and septic tank system are major sanitation systems in the Pourashava.


Storm water discharges in Khals and nearby agricultural land through the natural drains and box culverts. There are six khals in CCC and they are: (i) Gungiajuri Khal, (ii) Raice korce Khal, (iii) Unaishar Khal, (iv).Kata Khali Khal, (v) Kuchaitoli Khal, and (iv) Kamalapur Khal. There is no drainage /flood control structure. The stormwater

The sanitation coverage is 100%. Septic tanks are connected to existing khaals, which are also used to dispose domestic wastewater. The industrial wastewater from Comilla EPZ also drains through these khaals and eventually towards Dakatia river. Therefore, the khaals contain both

50

Pourashava/City


drainage and is through existing khals which eventually drains southwards to Dakatia River. Each year the khals are filled up by rubbish (due to indiscriminate solid waste disposal of the city’s inhabitants). Although through regular maintenance and rehabilitation, the stormwater drainage system has improved from the past, there is still 1 to 1.5 hours of waterlogging inside the city in the event of heavy rainfalls.

domestic and industrial wastewater. There are total 15 public toilets among which 5 are in good condition.


There is a network of drain in the City Corporation for storm water discharge. Total length of the drain is 235 km, which includes 60 km of pucca drain and 175 km of mud drain.

Pit latrines and septic tank system are major sanitation systems in the Pourashava. There are 5 public latrines in different bazars, bus terminals, coach stands, and mosques.

4.2.7 Solid Waste Management

90. The solid waste management system of different ULBs under MGSP has been observed during the field visit. Most of the visited Pourashavas and City Corporation usually have a centralized solid waste collection system using handcarts or vans into dustbins. The solid waste collected from the community is mostly used as landfills. However these landfills are not designed for the purpose and serves mostly as a solid waste dumping ground. In most ULBs it has been observed that the location of the solid waste landfill areas is not selected considering the impact on surrounding environment. Rather these solid waste dumping areas are selected considering available land area or upon request from the community (Fig. 4.12). No specific guidelines have been observed for the management of hospital wastes in any of the ULBs. The hospitals waste generated is incinerated or buried in some Pourashavas by the hospital authorities. The major physical infrastructures owned by different ULBs for solid waste management includes handcarts, vans, garbage trucks, dustbins. Table 4.8 describes the salient feature of solid waste management systems in the twelve visited ULBs.

Table 4.8: Salient features of Solid Waste Management Systems of the twelve visited ULBs (Pourashavas and City Corporations) under the MGSP


Salient features of the Solid Waste Management Systems

Tangail Pourashava Solid waste is collected by using public trash bins/dustbins and transported by using handcarts /rickshaw vans and trucks. There is no designated site for disposal of solid waste; these are disposed in low lands. Blockage of drains by solid waste is therefore a major concern.

Elenga Pourashava In Elenga municipality, each day one-ton solid waste generates in total. There is no solid waste collection tools/structures (Public trash bins/dustbins or Transfer Station) in the municipality. Elenga municipality has only one truck to transport solid waste. But no designated dumping zone in this municipality. The municipality dumps solid waste on roadside at Moshajan. Lack of public trash bins /dustbins and dumping zone makes the municipal’s solid waste management initiatives futile and pollutes the environment. There is no designated site for disposal of solid waste; these are disposed in low lands. Blockage of drains by solid waste is therefore a major concern.

Bhaluka Pourashava In Bhaluka municipality, total 6.627 ton solid waste generates in everyday with per capital generation 0.25 kg/day. Generally, people gather solid waste at the public trash bins/dustbins and municipal workers collect waste from there. There are nine hand carts

51


Salient features of the Solid Waste Management Systems

/rickshaw vans and one truck to transport the solid waste. Due to absence of a designated dumping zone, collected waste are dumped on the high way road side. Such unregulated dumping of waste pollutes the environment. Moreover, no special attention is given on management of clinical waste.

Trishal Pourashava There is no solid waste collection tools/structures (Public trash bins/dustbins or Transfer Station) in the municipality. Designated dumping zone is also absent there. For this reason, collected wastes are dumped into the low-lying areas and by the road side.

Chokoria Pourashava Solid waste is collected and dumped in low-lying areas near the hills, several kilometers away from the Pourashava boundary. These hilly areas have low inhabitant density, which is a reason for choosing as a dumping site. Seagulls and local fauna of the hilly areas mostly consume the organic solid wastes.

Patia Pourashava Solid waste is collected by the Pourashava and some NGOs by trolleys and is disposed in lowlands on sides of the railway track, which is owned by Bangladesh Railway. These lands are gradually being filled up. Hospital waste is also collected by the pourashava and they are usually incinerated.

Bhairab Pourashava The Pourashava has a community based door-to-door solid waste collection system by handcarts in one of the wards as a pilot project. There are insufficient public dustbins throughout the Pourashava. The solid wastes collected by the pourashava are used for landfill upon request from the community. Some part of the hospital wastes generated are buried by the hospital authority, while the remaining part is given to central collection system.

Gopalganj Pourashava The Pourashava has dedicated dumping center having a land area of 4-5 acres. This is not a regular/engineered landfill, rather a dedicated dumping ground. Solid waste is collected in vans to dustbins, from where the dumping tracks take it to the disposal site.

Madhabdi Pourashava In Madhabdi municipality, total 8-10 tons solid waste generates everyday with per capital generation 0.09 kg /day. Generally, people dispose solid waste at the public trash bins/dustbins and municipality workers collect waste from there. There are four public trash bins/ and 14 handcarts /rickshaw vans and two trucks are used to transport the solid waste. There is no designated site to dump the solid waste in Madhabdi municipality and now waste is dumping at old rail line side (Madangonj road).

Chandina Pourashava There is no dedicated/official dumping site and the Pourashava has no capacity to buy land for dumping sites at the moment. The waste collection is performed by vans and garbage trucks and dumped into nearby lowlands. An effective solid waste management strategy of this Pourashava needs to be developed.

Comilla City Corporation Jhankunipara (a 10 acre land) is the city’s solid waste disposal site (not a regular/engineered landfill, rather a dedicated dumping ground). 4-acre land of this dumping site is already consumed. The city has 7 solid waste transfer stations and 13 dump trucks.

Rangpur City Corporation The City Corporation has dedicated solid waste dumping location. This is not a regular/engineered landfill, rather a dedicated dumping ground. Solid waste is collected in vans to dustbins, from where the garbage trucks take it to the disposal site. The city has a total of 6 garbage trucks.

4.2.8 Noise Level

91. As a part of the baseline study, noise level measurements were made at different locations inside the municipalities (Fig. 4.13). Noise measurements were mostly made at the existing or proposed locations of the kitchen markets during daytime with a calibrated noise level meter (CEM-DT-8850). 5-minute continuous noise level measurements were carried out at the selected locations, and the equivalent noise levels (Leq) as well as the maximum noise levels (Lmax) were determined. Table 4.9 shows the summary of noise level measurements carried out in different municipalities. Table 4.10 shows the Bangladesh noise level standards during daytime and nighttime for various types of areas.

52

92. Table 4.9 shows that noise levels at certain locations are quite high during daytime (Kitchen markets in Madhabdi, Bhairab, Tangail, Elenga, Patia Pourashavas and Rangpur City corporation, bus stoppages of Elenga and Rangpur CC) often exceeding 70 dBA while the maximum noise level exceeding 90 dBA occasionally. This is due to noise associated with vehicular movement and dense gathering of people. Often the kitchen markets are placed along the main roads where a huge number of vehicles gather to take passengers and uncontrolled honking is quite common. On the other hand, in the absence of vehicular movement, noise levels within and surrounding the Kitchen Market areas are relatively low as can be seen in Trishal and Valuka pourashava market places.

53

Figure 4.12: Solid waste management scenario in the ULBs (a,b) Solid waste dumped in Madhabdi at lowlands and roadsides respectively (c) Jhakunipara, the official solid waste dumping ground at Comilla CC (d) Roadside dumping in Trishal pourashava (e) Roadside dumping in Bhairab pourashava (f) Solid waste dumping site at Gopalganj pourashava

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

(e) (f)

54

Table 4.9: Noise level measurements during daytime at selected locations in the pourashavas and city corporations

Pourashavas/City Corporations

Noise level measurement

locations Latitude Longitude

Equivalent Noise level

(dBA), Leq

Maximum Noise leve

(dBA), Lmax

Trishal pourashava

Kabi Nazrul University N 24° 34' 56.2" E 90° 22' 29.3" 69.14 75.5

Kitchen Market Place

N 24° 35' 1.4" E 90° 22' 29.9" 54.33 55.7

Valuka pourashava Kitchen Market

Place N 24° 24' 6.5" E 90° 23' 0.0" 59.82 62.7

Madhabdi pourashava Kitchen Market

Place (near Pourashava Office)

N 23° 51' 9.7" E 90° 40' 29.6" 80.25 86.3

Bhairab Pourashava Kitchen Market

Place (Bhairab Bazar) N 23° 48' 37.1" E 90° 25' 77.2" 78.64 86.5

Tangail Pourashava Pourashava Premises N 24°15'03.11" E 89°54'51.93" 66.72 73.0

Sontose bazar,Tangail N 24°14'01.37" E 89°53'25.43" 75.56 81.2

Elenga Pourashava

Bus Stopage N 23°44'42.90" E 90°23'42.20" 74.89 84.6

Kitchen Market Place

23°45'05.40"N 90°24'07.20"E 73.51 79.2

Patia Pourashava Kitchen Marketplace (Muncefbazar area)

N 22°17'55.20" E 91°58'20.03" 74.4 83.1


Bus Terminal N 25°44'37.15" E 89°13'56.54" 75.03 92.0

City Corporation Market

N 25°45'10.24" E 89°15'10.21" 73.96 82.7

[Note: The equivalent level is the level (Leq) of a hypothetical steady sound that would have the same energy (i.e., the same time-averaged mean square sound pressure) as the actual fluctuating sound observed. The equivalent level represents the time average of the fluctuating sound pressure and is close to the maximum level observed during the measurement period. For the fluctuating noise scenario the equivalent noise level (Leq) is generally used for more complete noise sample and is calculated as follows:

n

i

L

ieqiPL

1

10/

10 10log10

where Pi is the probability of the noise level lying in the i-th measurement interval and Li is the mid-point of that interval.]

Table 4.10: Bangladesh standards for sound level (GoB, 2006)

Locations Noise level (dBA) at day

Noise level (dBA) at night

Silent zone 50 40 Residential area

55 45

Mixed area

60 50 Commercial area

70 60

Industrial area

75 70

(Ref: Noise Pollution Control Rules, 2006)

55

Figure 4.13: Noise measurement at the kitchen market locations of Elenga pourashava (a) and

Patiya pourashava (b)

4.2.9 Water Quality

Drinking water quality 93. Drinking water samples were collected from different pourashavas and city corporations (the sample collection locations are shown in Table 4.11) and tested for selected water quality parameters. The drinking water supply is mainly groundwater based where the inhabitants collect the water from household shallow or deep tubewells. Some pourashavas (such as Tangail) supply drinking water collected by deep tubewells after treatment while some derive drinking water from surface water sources (Madhumati river in Gopalganj) and serve the inhabitants. Table 4.12 shows the characteristics of the drinking water sample in different pourashavas and city corporations. The analyses in Table 4.12 represent the samples collected from handpump tubewells, which basically shows the groundwater quality at these locations. 94. All the groundwater samples (except the one from Madhabdi) showed high color exceeding Bangladesh standards which is probably due to the high iron content in the samples. Specially the color of samples from Gopalganj and Bhairab have been found to be an order higher than the Bangladesh Standards. The iron content in these samples have also been found to be very high (6 mg/L in Gopalganj and 3 mg/L in Bhairab) also exceeding Bangladesh Standards. The turbidity of the samples have been found to be very high coincident with the high color; all the samples except the one from Patiya exceeded the drinking water quality standards. Manganese concentration in all the groundwater samples have been found to be generally very high with samples from Patiya, Elenga, Gopalganj, Trishal, Madhabdi and Chandina exceeding Bangladesh Standard of 0.1 mg/L. However, the Bangladesh standard for Manganese is very stringent and if we compare the analyses of the WHO guideline value of 0.4 mg/L, only samples from Madhabdi and Chandina exceed the limits. Regarding the concentration of Arsenic, only the sample from Madhabdi marginally exceeded the Bangladesh standard of 50 ppb. All other samples were within the limits of the national standard. The TDS concentrations of all samples have been found to be within allowable limits.

(a) (b)

56

Table 4.11: Locations of Drinking water samples collected from different pourashavas and city corporations

Pourashavas/City Corporations GW sampling Location Latitude Longitude

Comilla City Corporation Handpump tubewell of a

household 23°47’19.4” 90°23’9.4”

Chandina pourashava GW based water supply 23°28’46.9” 91°00’25.8”

Trishal pourashava Handpump tubewell at the

Pourasahva premises 23°29’39.1” 90°58’36.1”

Valuka pourashava Handpump tubewell at the


Madhabdi pourashava Handpump tubewell at the


Bhairab Pourashava Handpump tubewell at the

Pourasahva premises 24°02’41” 90°59’10.7”

Gopalganj Pourashava Handpump tubewell of a

household 23°00’24.1” 89°50’7.8”

Elenga Pourashava Handpump tubewell at the

Pourasahva premises 24°20'6.97" 89°55'7.79"

Chokoria Pourashava Handpump tubewell at the


Patia Pourashava Handpump tubewell at the


95. In order to assess the efficiency of existing treatment plants installed in different pourashavas, samples were collected from the treatment plant inlet and outlet. Among the twelve locations surveyed, two treatment plants were found serving water to the pourashavas, one in Tangail and the other one in Gopalganj; both of these treatment plants are operated and maintained by the pourashava authority. The treatment plant in Tangail treats the groundwater extracted from deep tubewells, while the one in Gopalganj treats the water from the Modhumati river. Table 4.13 and Table 4.14 summarize the water quality characteristics of the water in the treatment plants at Tangail and Gopalganj, respectively, before and after treatment. The treatment plant at Tangail has been found to be treating the excess Iron, Manganese and Arsenic present in groundwater to acceptable or near acceptable levels. The drinking water parameters in general have been found to be acceptable after treatment (though Iron concentration marginally exceed national standards). On the other hand, the treatment plant at Gopalganj has been found to be not working efficiently as large concentration of nitrate and ammonia still persists after treatment. Although some organic matter is removed after treatment, a significant amount still is present in the treated water as indicated by the high COD and BOD5 values. This indicates that this treatment plant requires additional measures to eliminate the BOD, COD and nitrogenous compounds and bring the water to acceptable levels.

57

Table 4.12: Analysis of drinking water samples collected at different pourashavas and city corporations


pH Color Turbidity Total

Hardness as CaCO3

Iron, Fe Manganese,

Mn Arsenic,

As Chloride,

Cl-

Total Dissolved

Solids, TDS

Electric Conductivity

Units Pt. Co Unit

NTU mg/L mg/L mg/L Ppb mg/L mg/L µS/cm


7.02 46 18.4 - - - - - 153 309

Chandina Pourashava

6.22 36 10.7 98 1 0.7 3.91 36 174 290

Trishal Pourashava

6.98 24 3.16 146 0.28 0.263 0.35 20 232 342

Valuka Pourashava

6.81 17 1.84 106 0.25 0.048 0.62 5 194 271

Madhabdi Pourashava

7.26 13 5.02 184 0.4 2.355 53.22 54 352 634

Bhairab Pourashava

6.5 127 28.7 82 3 0.011 3.71 41 188 305


7.04 113 92.9 386 6 0.285 22.75 20 1336 2360

Tangail Pourashava

- - - - - - - - - -

Elenga Pourashava

6.92 30 137 162 0.8 0.166 5.6 30 341 583

Chokoria Pourashava

6.72 24 9.55 76 0.95 0.138 0.8 8 169 244

Patia Pourashava 6.86 39 3.89 44 0.95 0.062 ND 8 111 124

WHO drinking water guidelines

6.5 – 8.5

15 5 500 0.3 0.4 10 250 1000 -

Bangladesh drinking water standards (ECR ’97)

6.5 – 8.5

15 10 200 - 500 0.3 – 1.0

0.1 50 150 - 600

1000 -

58

Table 4.13: Groundwater quality of raw and treated water at the Treatment Plant serving water to Tangail Pourashava

Surface Water Quality Parameters

Unit Concentration

Present

Before

treatment After

Treatment

pH -- 7.08 7.76

Electrical Conductivity µs/cm 630 641

Turbidity mg/L 73 1.24

Color Pt. CoUnit 93 16

Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) mg/L 373 351

Chloride mg/L 41 55

Hardness mg/L 160 172

Iron (Fe) mg/L 4.8 1.4

Manganese (Mn) mg/L 0.287 0.032

Arsenic ppb 27.92 7.84

Table 4.14: Groundwater Quality of raw and treated water at the Treatment Plant serving water to Gopalganj Pourashava

Surface Water Quality Parameters

Unit Concentration

Present

Before

treatment After

Treatment

pH -- 7.17 7.38

Electrical Conductivity µs/cm 286 273

Turbidity mg/L 2.73 2.63

Dissolved Oxygen (DO) mg/L 1.60 4.66

Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) mg/L 121 146

Total Suspended Solids (TSS) mg/L 22 11

COD (KMnO4 Demand) mg/L 24 15

BOD5 at 20ºC mg/L 8.8 4.8

Nitrate-Nitrogen, NO3-N mg/L 0.4 0.6

Ammonia (as NH3-N) mg/L 0.574 0.299

Phosphate, PO4 mg/L 0.131 0.143

Color Pt. Co Unit 37 37

Water quality in natural canals and rivers 96. Rivers and khals serve the natural drainage function of the pourashavas and city corporations. In addition to storm water drainage, it also serves as a conveyance for domestic wastewaters from households. This wastewater often consists of untreated sewage or connections from septic tanks. Therefore, there is significant risk of pollution of these khals and rivers which might affect the inhabitants directly or indirectly if they use the water of these natural canals for drinking or other purposes. In order to assess the water quality of these drainage canals and rivers, samples were collected (Fig. 4.14) and analyzed in the laboratory for

59

selected parameters. The sample collection locations are summarized in Table 4.15 and the results of the laboratory analysis are presented in Table 4.16.

Figure 4.14: Surface water sampling in progress in Gopalganj pourashava (a) and Chokoria

pourashava (b)

Table 4.15: Locations of surface water samples collected from different pourashavas and city corporations


SW sampling Location Latitude Longitude


Songraish Khal 23°27’55.1” 91°11’50.1”

Chandina pourashava (Sample-1)

Discharge Canal (Beside the Pourashava Office)

23°28’47.2” 91°00’26.2”

Chandina pourashava (Sample-2)

Khir River 23°29’12” 91°00’46”

Trishal pourashava Sutia River 24°34’51.5” 90°23’22.6”

Valuka pourashava Khiru River 24°24’6.5” 90°23’00”

Madhabdi pourashava No sample Collected

Bhairab Pourashava Brahmaputra River 24°02’33.8” 90°59’18.2”

Gopalganj Pourashava (Sample-1)

Old Madhumati River 23°00’23.0” 89°49’35.3”


Pachuria khal 22°59’56.9” 89°49’25.6”


Bairagi khal 23°00’23.3” 89°50’28.1”

Tangail Pourashava Discharge Canal from Louhojong river

24°15'6.13" 89°54'35.00"

Elenga Pourashava

Pungli River 24°18'55.47" 89°55'26.28"

Chokoria Pourashava Batakhali Khal 21°45’45.87” 92°04’21.78”

Patia Pourashava Indorpol Chankhali Khal 22°18’3.39” 91°57’52.62”

(a) (b)

60

97. Table 4.16 shows that the water quality characteristics are highly variable depending on the location. For example, dissolved oxygen has been found to be very low (less than 1 mg/L) in certain khals and rivers (in Comilla, Gopalganj, Elenga), which indicates that the pollution load in these rivers and canals are very high and it will be difficult for aquatic lives such as fish to survive in this environment. The COD and BOD in the Songraish khal in Comilla has been found to be very high (136 mg/L and 56 mg/L respectively), which can be accounted to the industrial wastewater it receives from the Comilla EPZ. The samples from Elenga, Valuka and Gopalganj showed some significant BOD levels probably owing to organic pollution. The COD levels in all samples were found to be several times higher than BOD which indicates that the waste stream may contain mixed wastes. High ammonia and phosphate concentrations have been found in Comilla, Gopalganj, Trishal and Elenga indicating that the natural canals rivers in these pourashavas/city corporations are the most polluted compared to others.

4.3 Ecological Environment

98. A rapid ecological baseline study was carried out in 12 ULBs for the proposed Municipal Governance and Services Project (MGSP). The macro level ecological study was conducted in daytime during May-July 2013 at 10 Pourashavas and 2 City Corporations where the MGSP will be implemented by the LGED. Ecological information have been colleted through field research, consultation with local people, and literature review. The specific objectives of the baseline study were to gather information on the existing biological environment of the areas in and around the proposed MGSP sub-project sites. The baseline ecological survey primarily focused on identifying floral and faunal diversity and their distribution and abundance as well as their biological status in Bangladesh. The possible impacts of the MGSP sub-project activities have been evaluated against the baseline conditions and mitigation measures have been identified for reducing/ eliminating adverse impacts. This Section describes the existing ecological environment of the ULBs based on the survey carried out in 12 ULBs.

4.3.1 Dhaka-Chittagong Corridor

Comilla City Corporation and Chindina Pourashava: 99. Bio-ecologically the Comilla City Corporation and the Chindina Pourashava (proposed MGSP sub-project sites) fall under the Meghna Floodplain (IUCN Bangladesh, 2002). On the other hand, agro-ecologically the areas fall under the Old Meghna Estuarine Floodplain (BARC/UNDP/FAO, 1995). The non-calcareous / calcareous dark gray / gray floodplain soil provide suitable environment for growing various types of floral species, and also provide supportive habitat for various types of fauna. General ecological features of the sub-project sites are given below:

61

Table 4.16: Analysis of surface water samples collected at different pourashavas and city corporations


pH Color Turbidity Dissolved Oxygen

Chemical Oxygen Demand

(COD)

Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD5)

Nitrate-Nitrogen (NO3-N)

Ammonia-Nitrogen (NH3-N)

Phosphate (PO4)

Total Dissolved

Solids, TDS

Total Suspended Solids, TSS

Electric Conductivity

Units Pt. Co

Unit NTU mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L µs/cm


6.89 155 43.6 0.41 136 56 0.3 27.5 10.85 380 61 825

Chandina (Sample-1)

7 80 30 3.57 30 7.2 1.2 1.545 5.9 147 43 288

Chandina (Sample-2)

6.68 103 32.5 2.25 16 3.2 1.7 0.3075 1.385 81 39 166

Trishal 7.04 391 16.01 1.01 18 3.2 1 3.2 2.708 385 82 226

Valuka 6.94 34 73.8 4.01 53 12.8 0.5 0.827 0.375 131 20 607

Madhabdi - - - - - - - - - - - -

Bhairab 6.75 49 11.2 4.38 8 0.75 0.3 0.413 1.477 64 21 81

Gopalganj (Sample-1)

7.26 40 5.12 3.13 16 5.6 0.4 0.509 0.401 138 13 284


7.51 39 8.84 2.3 26 6.4 0.9 0.374 0.634 266 12 526


7.45 91 23.9 0.91 62 14 8.7 10.32 5.252 311 64 695

Tangail 7.11 16 10.9 4.09 2 0 1 0.132 0.347 233 - 447

Elenga 6.9 146 27.7 0.2 66 16 0.4 8.2 5.98 228 - 538

Chokoria 6.76 38 18.1 1.68 21 5.5 1.2 0.765 0.654 106 20 249

Patia 6.67 42 29.4 1.51 21 2 0.3 0.62 0.3 209 27 420

62

100. Terrestrial Ecology: It includes various types of terrestrial flora (tree, herb and shrub) and fauna (mammal. bird, reptile and amphibia), most of which are distributed in and around the urban homesteads, fallow lands, along the road, market and building sites, in open areas, and besides water bodies (pond, canals, rivers). Common natural terrestrial vegetation grows naturally in plenty in the rainy season. Most of the flora, particularly the trees, are planted for economic purposes and are fairly common, and distributed in scattered way, and have similarity in comparison to other districts of Bangladesh. Some important plant species were observed in the surveyed areas like medicinal plant e.g. Chatim - Alstonia scholaris. The existing terrestrial floral diversity makes a complex ecosystem in which some wildlife has direct relationship through their ecological niche.

101. The common terrestrial floral species (tree, see Fig. 4.15) are: Mango - Mangifera indica, Coconut - Cocos nucifera, Eucalyptus - Eucalyptus citriodora, Boroi/Kul - Zizyphus mauritiana, Kadam - Anthocephalus chinensis, Mehagini - Swietenia mahagoni, Jackfruit - Artocarpus heterophylla, Rain tree/Rendi - Samanea saman, Krishnachura - Delomix regia, Banana - Musa sapientum, Kamranga - Averrhoa carambala, Tamarind - Tamarindus indica, Bamboo – Bambusa sp., Banyan tree - Ficus religiosa, Tal/Palm - Borassus fiabellifer, Date palm /Khejur - Phoenix sylvestris, Betel nut/Supari - Areca catechu, Teak/Segun - Tectona grandis, B. heart/Sharifa - Annona reticulate etc. Therefore, natural floral species (herb and shrub) primarily includes: Kantanotey - Amaranthus spinosus, Assamlata - Mikania cordata, Hatisur - Heliotropium indicum, Dholkalmi - Ipomoea fistulosa, Sheyalmutra - Blumea lacera, Telakucha - Coccinia indica, Reri/Venna - Ricinus communis, Durbaghas – Cynodon dactylon, Kash - Saccharum officinarum, Shongrass/Patila - Phragmites sp., Thankuni - Mimosa invisa, Lazzaboti - Mimosa pudica, Bishkatali - Polygonum hydropiper, Vat - Clerodendrum viscosum, Fern - Drynaria quercifolia etc.

Figure 4.15: Terrestrial flora observed: (a) besides a road in Comilla City Corporation; (b) at Chandina Pourashava

102. Most of the terrestrial faunal species found here are fairly common (see Fig. 4.16) in comparison to other districts of Bangladesh. Faunal species that are adapted in altered urban habitat are commonly seen in the study sites. The common terrestrial faunal species are: Flying Fox - Pteropus gigantius, Bandicoot Rat - Bandicota indica, Fulvous Fruit Bat - Rousettus leschenaultia, Small Indian Mongoose - H. auropunctatus, Jackal - Vulpes bengalensis, House Mouse - Mus musculus, Indian Pipistrelle - P. coromandra, Indian Field Mouse - Mus booduga,

63

Grey Musk Shrew - Suncus murinus, Indian mole Rat - B. bengalensis, Asian Palm Swift - Cypriirus parvus, Paddy field Pipit - Anthus rufulus, Indian Cuckoo - C. micropterus, Red-vented Bulbul - Pycnonotus cafer, Brahminy Kite - Haliastur Indus, Rock Pigeon - Columba livia, Common Myna – Acridotheres tristis, B. H. Shrike - Lanius schach, C. Tailorbird - O. sutorius, B-H Oriole - Oriolus xanthornus, Spotted Dove - S. chinensis, O. Magpie Robin - Copsychus saularis, Rufous Tree Pie - D. vagabunda, Black Drongo - D. macrocercus, Jungle Crow - C. macrorhynchus, House Crow- Corvus splendens, House Sparrow - Passer domisticus, A. Pied Starling - Sturnus contra, W. T. Kingfisher - Halcyon smyrnensis, W-throated Fantail - Rhipidura albicollis. C. Wolf Snake - Lycodon aulicus, C. Garden Lizard - Calotes versicolor, Rat Snake - Coluber mucosus, C. Vine Snake - Ahaetulla nasutus, C. House Lizard - Hemidactylus flaviviridis, C. House Lizard - Hemidactylus frenatus, G. Monitor Lizard - V. bengalensis, Bull Frog - H. tigerinus, Common Toad - Bufo melanostictus, Cricket Frog - L. limnocharis, M. Tree Frog - P. maculates.

Figure 4.16: Terrestrial fauna observed: (a) Jungle Crow and House Crow inside a waste dumping site in Comilla City Corporation; (b) Common Garden Lizard in a homestead vegetation at Chandina Pourashava

103. Aquatic Ecology: It includes various types of aquatic flora (tree, herb and shrub) and fauna (mammal. bird, reptile, amphibian and fish), most of which are distributed in and around the water bodies (pond, canal, river, ditch etc). Common natural aquatic vegetation grows in plenty in the rainy season. Aquatic flora plays an important role for biodiversity conservation. Aqautic flora grow in rivers, ponds, canals, ditches and low lying cultivated fields as submerge, free-floating and rooted floating states.

104. The common aquatic floral species (see Fig. 4.17) are: Kalmi - Ipomoea aquatica, Water Hyacinth/ Kachuripana - Eichhornia crassipes, Indurkanipana - Salvinia cuculata, Topa pana - Pistia strateotes, Khudipana - Lemna perpusilla, Jhanjhi - Ceratophyllum dumersum, Water Lily/Sada Shapla - Nymphaea nouchali, Barun/Banny - Crataeva nurvala, Phutki/Janglidhan - Hygroryza aristata, Patajhangi - Vallisneria spiralis, Jhangi - Utricularia aurea, Floating Grass – Echinoclo acolonum, Water Chestnut – Trapabi spinosa, Spiral Algae - Spirogyra sp., Ghenchu - Aponogeton natans, Janjhi/Kurcli - Hydrilla verticillata etc.

64

Figure 4.17: Aquatic flora observed at a low land under Comilla City Corporation

On the other hand, various assemblages of faunal communities exist here (see Fig. 4.18); many of them are adaptive to altered urban habitat. Some species use the proposed sub project sites as permanent habitats and others as temporary habitats. Reproduction, breeding and multiplication of aquatic fauna is finely tuned and adjusted with the rhythm and amplitude of monsoon flooding. The common aquatic faunal species including fishes are: (i) Aquatic fauna: Little Cormorant - Phalacrocorax niger, W-breasted Waterhen - Amaurornis phoenicurus, B. Winged Jacana - Metopidius indicus, Indian Pond heron - Ardeola grayii, Common Kingfisher - Alcado athis, Great Egret - Egretta alba, Small Egret – Egretta gazetta, Intermediate Egret – Egretta intermedia, Fish Eagle - Ichthyophagus ichthyaetus, Snipe - Gallinago henura, Olive Keelback - Atretium schistosum, Checkered Keelback - Xenochrophis piscator, C. S. Water Snake - Enhydris enhydris, Common Skink - Mabuya carinata, Indian Roofed Turtle - Kachuga tecta, Skipper frog - Euphlyctis cyanophlyctis, etc and (ii) Fish: Asiatic Snakehead - Channa orientalis, Spotted Snakehead - Channa punctatus, Striped Snakehead - Channa striatus, Giant Snakehead - Channa marulius, Tank Goby - Glossogobius giuris, Bumblebee Goby - Brachygobius nunas, Mottled Nandus - Nandus nandus, Gangetic Mudeel - Monopterus cuchia, Indian Threadfish - Polydactylus indicus, One-stripe Spinyeel - Macrognathus aculeatus, Swamp Barb - Puntius chola, Rosy Barb - Puntius conchonius, Indian Carplet - A. microlepis, Magur - Clarius batrachus, Stinging Catfish - Heteropneustes fossilis, Rohu - Labeo rohita, Catla - Catla catla, Mrigal - Cirrhinus mrigala, L-whiskered Catfish - Aorichthys aor, Freshwayer Shark - Wallago attu, Paddy Eel - Pisodonophis boro, Gery Fetherback - Notopterus notopterus, Humped Fetherback - Notopterus chitala, Climbing Perch - Anabas testudineus, Gangetic Mystus - Mystus cavasius, Tengra Mystus - Mystus tengara etc.

Figure 4.18: Aquatic fauna observed: (a) Skipper Frog in the periphery of a ditch in Comilla City Corporation; (b) Variety of fish species for sale at Chandina Pourashava

65

105. Threatened flora and fauna: No threatened flora and fauna identified from these MGSP sub project sites.

106. Protected areas, wildlife sanctuaries, game reserves and ecologically critical areas: Protected area (PA): Protect Area (PA) refers to an area of land and/or sea especially dedicated to the protection and maintenance of biological diversity, and of natural and associated cultural resources, and managed through legal or other effective means i.e. PA is predominantly a natural area established and managed in perpetuity, through legal or customary regimes, primarily to conserve their natural resources (IUCN, 1990). No PA exists at or near the proposed study areas. 107. National Park (NP): It is a reserved land, usually declared and owned by a national government, protected from most human development and pollution (IUCN, 1990). No NP exists at or near the proposed project sites. 108. Game reserve (GR): It is an area of land set aside for maintenance of wildlife for tourism or hunting purposes (IUCN, 1990). No GR exists at or near the study areas. 109. Wildlife Sanctuary (WS): It is an area that assures the natural conditions necessary to protect nationally significant species, groups of species, biotic communities, or physical features of the environment, where these require specific human manipulation for their perpetuation (IUCN, 1990). No WS exists at or near the study areas. 110. Ecologically Critical Area (ECA): It is an environmental protection zone, defined by the Government of Bangladesh under the Bangladesh Environment Conservation Act, 1995, where ecosystem is considered to be threatened to reach a critical state. No ECA exists at or near the study areas.

Patiya Pourashava and Chokoria Pourashava: 111. Bio-ecologically the Patiya and the Chokoria Pourashavas (proposed MGSP sub-project sites) fall under the Chittagong Hills and CHTs (IUCN Bangladesh, 2002). On the other hand, agro-ecologically the areas fall under the Northern and Eastern Hills (BARC/UNDP/FAO, 1995). The brown hill soil provides upland environment for growth of diverse types of floral species, and also provides habitat for diversified fauna. General ecological features of these sub-project sites are given below:

112. Terrestrial Ecology: It consists of various types of terrestrial flora (tree, herb and shrub) and fauna (mammal. bird, reptile and amphibia). A remarkable number of floral species are planted and are distributed in and around the unban homesteads, fallow lands, along the road, market and building sites, in open areas, besides water bodies (pond, canals, rivers) etc. Common natural terrestrial vegetation grows naturally in plenty in the rainy season. Most of the flora particularly the trees are planted for economic purposes and are fairly common, and distributed in scattered way.

66

113. The common terrestrial floral species (tree, see Fig. 4.19) are: Teak/Segun - Tectona grandis,, Rendi - Samanea saman, Mehagini - Swietenia mahagoni, Krishnachura - Delomix regia, Coconut - Cocos nucifera, Date palm /Khejur - Phoenix sylvestris, Kadam - Anthocephalus chinensis, Jackfruit - Artocarpus heterophylla, Banyan tree - Ficus religiosa, Betel nut/Supari - Areca catechu, Mango - Mangifera indica, Banana - Musa sapientum, Eucalyptus - Eucalyptus citriodora, Bamboo – Bambusa sp. etc. The common natural terrestrial floral species (herb and shrub) primarily includes: Assamlata - Mikania cordata, Shongrass/Patila - Phragmites sp., Lazzaboti - Mimosa pudica, Bishkatali - Polygonum hydropiper, Fern - Drynaria quercifolia, Hatisur - Heliotropium indicum, Dholkalmi - Ipomoea fistulosa, Sheyalmutra - Blumea lacera, Kash - Saccharum officinarum etc.

Figure 4.19: Terrestrial flora observed: (a) besides a road IN Patiya Pourashava; (b) besides a road under Chokoria Pourashava.

114. The common terrestrial faunal species (Fig. 4.20) are: House Mouse - Mus musculus, Indian Pipistrelle - P. coromandra, Flying Fox - Pteropus gigantius, Jackal - Vulpes bengalensis, Indian Field Mouse - Mus booduga, Grey Musk Shrew - Suncus murinus, Asian Palm Swift - Cypriirus parvus, Red-vented Bulbul - Pycnonotus cafer, Rock Pigeon - Columba livia, Spotted Dove - S. chinensis, Brahminy Kite - Haliastur Indus, Indian Cuckoo - C. micropterus, B. H. Shrike - Lanius schach, C. Tailorbird - O. sutorius, O. Magpie Robin - Copsychus saularis, Common Myna – Acridotheres tristis, Black Drongo - D. macrocercus, Jungle Crow - C. macrorhynchus, House Crow - Corvus splendens, House Sparrow - Passer domisticus, A. Pied Starling - Sturnus contra, C. Garden Lizard - Calotes versicolor, C. Vine Snake - Ahaetulla nasutus, C. House Lizard - Hemidactylus flaviviridis, G. Monitor Lizard - V. bengalensis, Common Toad - Bufo melanostictus, Cricket Frog - L. limnocharis, M. Tree Frog - P. maculates Bull Frog - H. tigerinus, etc.

67

Figure 4.20: Terrestrial fauna observed: (a) A Red-Vented Bulbul sitting on a tree branch in Patiya Pourashava; (b) A Spotted Dove sitting on a tree branch at Chokoria Pourashava

115. Aquatic Ecology: It consists of diversified aquatic flora (tree, herb and shrub) and fauna (mammal. bird, reptile, amphibian and fish). Most of these are distributed in and around the urban water bodies (pond, canal, river, ditch etc). Common natural aquatic vegetation grows naturally in plenty in the rainy season. Aquatic flora plays an important role for biodiversity conservation. Aqautic flora grows in river, pond, canal, ditche and low lying cultivated field as submerge, free-floating and rooted floating states. These aquatic floras also provide habitat for certain type of faunal species.

116. The common aquatic floral species (Fig. 4.21) are: Barun/Banny - Crataeva nurvala, Water Hyacinth / Kachuripana - Eichhornia crassipes, Khudipana - Lemna perpusilla, Topapana - Pistia strateotes, Ghenchu - Aponogeton natans, Janglidhan - Hygroryza aristata, Kalmi - Ipomoea aquatic, Water Lily/Sada Shapla - Nymphaea nouchali, Jhangi - Utricularia aurea.

Figure 4.21: Aquatic flora (various species) observed at Chokoria Pourashava.

117. The common aquatic faunal species (Fig. 4.22) including fishes are: (i) Aquatic fauna: Littlel Egret – Egretta gazetta, Common Kingfisher - Alcado athis, Indian Pond heron - Ardeola grayii, B. Winged Jacana - Metopidius indicus, Little Cormorant - Phalacrocorax niger, Checkered Keelback - Xenochrophis piscator, C. S. Water Snake - Enhydris enhydris, Common Skink - Mabuya carinata, Skipper frog - Euphlyctis cyanophlyctis, and (ii) Fish: Magur - Clarius batrachus, Stinging Catfish - Heteropneustes fossilis, Tank Goby - Glossogobius giuris, Spotted Snakehead - Channa punctatus, Asiatic Snakehead - Channa orientalis, Bumblebee Goby - Brachygobius nunas, Tengra Mystus - Mystus tengara, Indian Threadfish - Polydactylus indicus, One-stripe Spinyeel - Macrognathus aculeatus, Swamp Barb - Puntius chola, Rosy Barb - Puntius

68

conchonius, Indian Carplet - A. microlepis, Rice Eel - Pisodonophis boro, Climbing Perch - Anabas testudineus, Rohu - Labeo rohita, Catla - Catla catla, Mrigal - Cirrhinus mrigala etc.

Figure 4.22: (a) An Indian pond heron taking rest beside a waterbodies in Potiya Pourashava; (b) Urban pond as aquatic habitat for various fish species in Potiya Pourashava

118. Threatened flora and fauna: No threatened flora and fauna identified from these MGSP sub-project sites.

119. Protected areas, wildlife sanctuaries, game reserves and ecologically critical areas: No protected area, national park, game reserve or ecologically critical areas exists at or near the proposed project sites. The Chunati Wildlife Sanctuary exists several kilometers away from the Chokoria Pourashava.

4.3.2 Dhaka-Sylhet Corridor

Madhabdi Pourashava and Bhairab Pourashava: 120. Bio-ecologically the Madhabdi Pourashava and the Bhairab Pourashava (proposed MGSP sub-project sites) fall under under the Brahmaputra – Jamuna Floodplain (IUCN Bangladesh, 2002). On the other hand, agro-ecologically the areas fall under the Old Brahmaputra Floodplain (BARC/UNDP/FAO, 1995). The non-calcareous dark gray / gray floodplain soil provides dynamic environment for growing diverse types of floral species, and also provide supportive habitat for numerous types of fauna. General ecological features of these sub-project sites are given below:

Terrestrial Ecology: Various types of terrestrial flora (tree, herb and shrub) and fauna (mammal. bird, reptile and amphibia) are the main component of terrestrial environment. Most of the floral and faunal species are distributed in and around the unban homesteads, fallow lands, along the road, market and building sites, in open areas, besides water bodies (pond, canals, rivers) etc. Common natural terrestrial vegetation grows in plenty in the rainy season. Most of the flora particularly the trees are planted for economic purposes and are fairly common, and distributed in scattered way, and have similarity in comparison to other districts of Bangladesh.

121. The common terrestrial floral species (tree, Fig. 4.23) are: Banana - Musa sapientum, Boroi/Kul - Zizyphus mauritiana, Banyan tree - Ficus religiosa, Tal/Palm - Borassus fiabellifer,

69

Tamarind - Tamarindus indica, Date palm/Khejur - Phoenix sylvestris, Bamboo – Bambusa sp., Rendi - Samanea saman, Mango - Mangifera indica, Jackfruit - Artocarpus heterophylla, B. heart/Sharifa - Annona reticulate Coconut - Cocos nucifera, Eucalyptus - Eucalyptus citriodora, Kadam - Anthocephalus chinensis, Mehagini - Swietenia mahagoni, Krishnachura - Delomix regia, Kamranga - Averrhoa carambala, Betel nut/Supari - Areca catechu etc. Naturally grown floral species (herb and shrub) primarily includes: Dholkalmi - Ipomoea fistulosa, Kash - Saccharum officinarum, Lazzaboti - Mimosa pudica, Telakucha - Coccinia indica, Kantanotey - Amaranthus spinosus, Assamlata - Mikania cordata, Hatisur - Heliotropium indicum, Shongrass/Patila - Phragmites sp., Thankuni - Mimosa invisa, Bishkatali - Polygonum hydropiper, Vat - Clerodendrum viscosum, Fern - Drynaria quercifolia, Sheyalmutra - Blumea lacera, Reri/Venna - Ricinus communis etc.

Figure 4.23: Terrestrial flora observed: (a) in Madhabdi Pourashava; (b) besides a road under Bhairab Pourashava.

122. Here also most of the terrestrial faunal species (Fig. 4.24) are fairly common in comparison to other districts of Bangladesh. The common terrestrial faunal species are: C. House Lizard - Hemidactylus flaviviridis, C. House Lizard - Hemidactylus frenatus, G. Monitor Lizard - V. bengalensis, House Mouse - Mus musculus, Indian Field Mouse - Mus booduga, Grey Musk Shrew - Suncus murinus, Indian mole Rat - B. bengalensis, C. Wolf Snake - Lycodon aulicus, C. Garden Lizard - Calotes versicolor, Rat Snake - Coluber mucosus, C. Vine Snake - Ahaetulla nasutus, Bull Frog - H. tigerinus, Common Toad - Bufo melanostictus, Cricket Frog - L. limnocharis, M. Tree Frog - P. maculates. Indian Pipistrelle - P. coromandra,, Flying Fox - Pteropus gigantius, Bandicoot Rat - Bandicota indica, Jackal - Vulpes bengalensis, Small Indian Mongoose - H. auropunctatus, Red-vented Bulbul - Pycnonotus cafer, Spotted Dove - S. chinensis, House Sparrow - Passer domisticus, Indian Cuckoo - C. micropterus, Asian Palm Swift - Cypriirus parvus, Paddy field Pipit - Anthus rufulus, Brahminy Kite - Haliastur Indus, Rock Pigeon - Columba livia, Common Myna – Acridotheres tristis, C. Tailorbird - O. sutorius, B-H Oriole - Oriolus xanthornus, Rufous Tree Pie - D. vagabunda, Black Drongo - D. macrocercus, Jungle Crow - C. macrorhynchus, A. Pied Starling - Sturnus contra, W. T. Kingfisher - Halcyon smyrnensis, W-throated Fantail - Rhipidura albicollis. O. Magpie Robin - Copsychus saularis, B. H. Shrike - Lanius schach, House Crow- Corvus splendens.

70

Figure 4.24: Terrestrial fauna: (a) An O. Magpie Robin in Madhabdi Pourashava; (b) A Pied Starling searching food at Bhairab Pourashava

123. Aquatic Ecology: Various types of aquatic flora (tree, herb and shrub) and fauna (mammal. bird, reptile, amphibian and fish) are the main component of aquatic environment. Most of the aquatic floral and faunal species are distributed in and around the urban water bodies (pond, canal, river, ditch etc) and are common in comparison to other areas in Bangladesh.

124. The common aquatic floral species (Fig. 4.25) are: Water Hyacinth / Kachuripana - Eichhornia crassipes, Indurkanipana - Salvinia cuculata, Topapana - Pistia strateotes, Khudipana - Lemna perpusilla, Jhanjhi - Ceratophyllum dumersum, Water Lily/Sada Shapla - Nymphaea nouchali, Barun/Banny - Crataeva nurvala, Phutki/Janglidhan - Hygroryza aristata, Kalmi - Ipomoea aquatic, Patajhangi - Vallisneria spiralis, Jhangi - Utricularia aurea, Khudipana - Lemna perpusilla, Water Chestnut – Trapabi spinosa, Spiral Algae - Spirogyra sp., Ghenchu - Aponogeton natans, Janjhi/Kurcli - Hydrilla verticillata, etc. 125. The common aquatic faunal species (Fig. 4.26) including fishes are: (i) Aquatic fauna: Olive Keelback - Atretium schistosum, Checkered Keelback - Xenochrophis piscator, C. S. Water Snake - Enhydris enhydris, Common Skink - Mabuya carinata, Indian Roofed Turtle - Kachuga tecta, Skipper frog - Euphlyctis cyanophlyctis, B. Winged Jacana - Metopidius indicus, Little Cormorant - Phalacrocorax niger, W-breasted Waterhen - Amaurornis phoenicurus, Indian Pond heron - Ardeola grayii, Common Kingfisher - Alcado athis, Great Egret - Egretta alba, Small Egret – Egretta gazetta, Intermediate Egret – Egretta intermedia, Fish Eagle - Ichthyophagus ichthyaetus, Snipe Gallinago henura, and (ii) Fish: Swamp Barb - Puntius chola, Rosy Barb - Puntius conchonius, Gangetic Mystus - Mystus cavasius, Tengra Mystus - Mystus tengara, Stinging Catfish - Heteropneustes fossilis, Striped Snakehead - Channa striatus, Asiatic Snakehead - Channa orientalis, Spotted Snakehead - Channa punctatus, Giant Snakehead - Channa marulius , Tank Goby - Glossogobius giuris, Bumblebee Goby - Brachygobius nunas, Mottled Nandus - Nandus nandus, Gangetic Mudeel - Monopterus cuchia, One-stripe Spinyeel - Macrognathus aculeatus, Magur - Clarius batrachus, Rohu - Labeo rohita, Black Rohu - Labeo calbasu, Catla - Catla catla, Mrigal - Cirrhinus mrigala, L-whiskered Catfish - Aorichthys aor, Freshwayer Shark - Wallago attu, Rice/paddy Eel - Pisodonophis boro, Gery Fetherback - Notopterus notopterus, Humped Fetherback - Notopterus chitala, Climbing Perch - Anabas testudineus, Indian Carplet - A. microlepis, Indian Threadfish - Polydactylus indicus etc.

71

Figure 4.25: Aquatic flora observed: (a) in a low laying area at Madhabdi Pourashava; (b) beside a canal at Bhairab Pourashava.

Figure 4.26: Aquatic fauna: (a) A Snipe before flying in Bhairab Pourashava; (b) fish for sale at Madhabdi Pourashava


127. Protected areas, wildlife sanctuaries, game reserves and ecologically critical areas: No protected area, national park, game reserve, wildlife sancturary or ecologically critical areas exists at or near the proposed project sites.

4.3.3 Dhaka-Mymensing Corriodor

Bhaluka Pourashava and Trishal Pourashava: 128. Bio-ecologically the Bhaluka pourashava and the Trishal Pourashava (proposed MGSP sub-project sites) fall under the Brahmapura –Jamuna Floodplain (IUCN Bangladesh, 2002). On the other hand, agro-ecologically the areas fall under the Old Brahmaputra Floodplain (BARC/UNDP/FAO, 1995). The non-calcareous/ calcareous dark gray / gray floodplain soil provides vigorous environment for growing various types of floral species, and also provide supportive habitat for various types of fauna. General ecological features (related to sub project types) of these sub-project sites are given below:

129. Terrestrial Ecology: It also includes various types of terrestrial flora (tree, herb and shrub) and fauna (mammal. bird, reptile and amphibia), most of which are distributed in and

72

around the urban homesteads, fallow lands, along the road, market and building sites, in open areas, besides water bodies (pond, canals, rivers) etc. Most of the flora particularly the trees are planted for economic purposes and are fairly common, and distributed in scattered way, and have similarity in comparison to other districts of Bangladesh.

130. The common terrestrial floral species (tree, Fig. 4.27) are: Rendi - Samanea saman, Jackfruit - Artocarpus heterophylla, Mango - Mangifera indica, Coconut - Cocos nucifera, Eucalyptus - Eucalyptus citriodora, Boroi/Kul - Zizyphus mauritiana, Kadam - Anthocephalus chinensis, Mehagini - Swietenia mahagoni, Bamboo – Bambusa sp., Banyan tree - Ficus religiosa, Tal/Palm - Borassus fiabellifer, Date palm/Khejur - Phoenix sylvestris, Betel nut/Supari - Areca catechu, Krishnachura - Delomix regia, Banana - Musa sapientum, Kamranga - Averrhoa carambala, Tamarind - Tamarindus indica etc. Naturally grown floral species (herb and shrub) primarily includes: Danda kalash – Leucus aspera, Vat - Clerodendrum viscosum, Assamlata - Mikania cordata, Kantanotey - Amaranthus spinosus, Hatisur - Heliotropium indicum, Dholkalmi - Ipomoea fistulosa, Reri/Venna - Ricinus communis, Durbaghas – Cynodon dactylon, Kash - Saccharum officinarum, Shongrass/Patila - Phragmites sp., Thankuni - Mimosa invisa, Lazzaboti - Mimosa pudica, Bishkatali - Polygonum hydropiper, Fern - Drynaria quercifolia, Sheyalmutra - Blumea lacera, Telakucha - Coccinia indica,etc.

Figure 4.27: Terrestrial flora observed: (a) besides a road in Bhaluka pourashava; (b) besides Trishal Pourashava office 131. The common terrestrial faunal species (Fig. 4.28) are: House Mouse - Mus musculus, Indian Pipistrelle - P. coromandra, Indian Field Mouse - Mus booduga, Grey Musk Shrew - Suncus murinus, Indian mole Rat - B. bengalensis, Flying Fox - Pteropus gigantius, Bandicoot Rat - Bandicota indica, Fulvous Fruit Bat - Rousettus leschenaultia, Small Indian Mongoose - H. auropunctatus,Jackal - Vulpes bengalensis, Rufous Tree Pie - D. vagabunda, Black Drongo - D. macrocercus, Red-vented Bulbul - Pycnonotus cafer, Paddy field Pipit - Anthus rufulus, Indian Cuckoo - C. micropterus, Brahminy Kite - Haliastur Indus, Rock Pigeon - Columba livia, Common Myna – Acridotheres tristis, B. H. Shrike - Lanius schach, C. Tailorbird - O. sutorius, B-H Oriole - Oriolus xanthornus, Spotted Dove - S. chinensis, O. Magpie Robin - Copsychus saularis, Jungle Crow - C. macrorhynchus, W. T. Kingfisher - Halcyon smyrnensis, W-throated Fantail - Rhipidura albicollis. House Crow- Corvus splendens, House Sparrow - Passer domisticus, A. Pied Starling - Sturnus contra, C. Wolf Snake - Lycodon aulicus, C. Garden Lizard - Calotes versicolor, Rat Snake - Coluber mucosus, C. Vine Snake - Ahaetulla nasutus, C. House Lizard - Hemidactylus flaviviridis,

73

C. House Lizard - Hemidactylus frenatus, G. Monitor Lizard - V. bengalensis, Bull Frog - H. tigerinus, Cricket Frog - L. limnocharis, M. Tree Frog - P. maculates, Common Toad - Bufo melanostictus, etc.

Figure 4.28: Terrestrial fauna: (a) A Common Myna taking rest on a tree trunk in Bhaluka Pourashava; (b) A B. H. Shrike looking for food in Trishal Pourashava

132. Aquatic Ecology: It also includes various types of aquatic flora (tree, herb and shrub) and fauna (mammal. bird, reptile, amphibian and fish), most of which are distributed in and around the urban water bodies (pond, canal, river, ditch etc) and are common in comparison to other districts of Bangladesh.

133. The common aquatic floral species (Fig. 4.29) are: Pitali - Trewia nudiflora, Phutki/Janglidhan - Hygroryza aristata, Water Lily/Sada Shapla - Nymphaea nouchali, Barun/Banny - Crataeva nurvala, Kalmi - Ipomoea aquatic, Khudipana - Lemna perpusilla, Floating Grass – Echinoclo acolonum, Water Chestnut – Trapabi spinosa, Spiral Algae - Spirogyra sp., Water Hyacinth / Kachuripana - Eichhornia crassipes, Indurkanipana - Salvinia cuculata, Topapana - Pistia strateotes, Ghenchu - Aponogeton natans, Janjhi/Kurcli - Hydrilla verticillata, Patajhangi - Vallisneria spiralis, Jhangi - Utricularia aurea etc.

Figure 4.29: Aquatic flora observed: (a) at the periphery of Bhaluka pourashava; (b) besides a building at Trishal Pourashava.

134. The common aquatic faunal species (Fig. 4.30) including fishes are: (i) Aquatic fauna: B. Winged Jacana - Metopidius indicus, Indian Pond heron - Ardeola grayii, Common Kingfisher - Alcado athis, Small Egret – Egretta gazetta, Intermediate Egret – Egretta intermedia, Little Cormorant - Phalacrocorax niger, W-breasted Waterhen - Amaurornis phoenicurus, Great Egret

74

- Egretta alba, Fish Eagle - Ichthyophagus ichthyaetus, Snipe Gallinago henura, Olive Keelback - Atretium schistosum, Checkered Keelback - Xenochrophis piscator, C. S. Water Snake - Enhydris enhydris, Indian Roofed Turtle - Kachuga tecta, Common Skink - Mabuya carinata, Skipper frog - Euphlyctis cyanophlyctis and (ii) Fish: Rohu - Labeo rohita, Black Rohu - Labeo calbasu, Catla - Catla catla, Mrigal - Cirrhinus mrigala, Magur - Clarius batrachus,Asiatic Snakehead - Channa orientalis, Spotted Snakehead - Channa punctatus, Striped Snakehead - Channa striatus, Giant Snakehead - Channa marulius, Tank Goby - Glossogobius giuris, Bumblebee Goby - Brachygobius nunas, Mottled Nandus - Nandus nandus, Gangetic Mudeel - Monopterus cuchia, Indian Threadfish - Polydactylus indicus, One-stripe Spinyeel - Macrognathus aculeatus, Swamp Barb - Puntius chola, Rosy Barb - Puntius conchonius, Freshwayer Shark - Wallago attu, Rice/paddy Eel - Pisodonophis boro, Gery Fetherback - Notopterus notopterus, Humped Fetherback - Notopterus chitala, Climbing Perch - Anabas testudineus, Gangetic Mystus - Mystus cavasius, Tengra Mystus - Mystus tengara, Indian Carplet - A. microlepis, Stinging Catfish - Heteropneustes fossilis, L-whiskered Catfish - Aorichthys aor etc.

Figure 4.30: Aquatic fauna observed: (a) A I. Pond Heron beside a water biody in Bhaluka Pourashava; (b) A Paddy Eel in central fish market in Bhaluka Pourashava



4.3.4 Dhaka-Bogra-Rangpur Corridor

Tangail Pourashava and Elenga Pourashava: 137. Bio-ecologically the Tangail Pourashava and the Elenga Pourashava (proposed MGSP sub-project site) fall under the Brahmaputra - Jamuna Floodplain (IUCN Bangladesh, 2002). On the other hand, agro-ecologically Tangail Pourashava falls under the Old Brahmaputra Floodplain and Elenga Pourashava falls under the Young Brahmaputra and Jamuna Floodplain (BARC/UNDP/FAO, 1995). The non-calcareous / calcareous dark gray / gray floodplain soil provides suitable environment for growing nymerous types of floral species, and also provide

75

supportive habitat for various types of fauna. General ecological features (related to sub project types) of these sub-project sites are given below:

138. Terrestrial Ecology: It also includes various types of terrestrial flora (tree, herb and shrub) and fauna (mammal. bird, reptile and amphibia), most of these are distributed in and around the urban homesteads, fallow lands, along the road, market and building sites, in open areas, besides water bodies (pond, canal, river) etc. Most of the flora particularly the trees are planted for economic purposes and are fairly common, and distributed in scattered way, and have similarity in comparison to other districts of Bangladesh.

139. The common terrestrial floral species (tree, Fig. 4.31) are: Sal – Shorea robusta, Ban Chalta –Dillenia pentagyna, Jackfruit - Artocarpus heterophylla, Kadam - Anthocephalus chinensis, Tamarind - Tamarindus indica, Mango - Mangifera indica, Coconut - Cocos nucifera, Eucalyptus - Eucalyptus citriodora, Boroi/Kul - Zizyphus mauritiana, Mehagini - Swietenia mahagoni, Rendi - Samanea saman, Krishnachura - Delomix regia, Banana - Musa sapientum, Kamranga - Averrhoa carambala, Tal/Palm - Borassus fiabellifer, Date palm /Khejur - Phoenix sylvestris, Betel nut/Supari - Areca catechu, B. heart/Sharifa - Annona reticulate, Bamboo – Bambusa sp., Banyan tree - Ficus religiosa etc. Naturally grown floral species (herb and shrub) primarily includes: Kash - Saccharum officinarum,, Telakucha - Coccinia indica, Reri/Venna - Ricinus communis, Hatisur - Heliotropium indicum, Dholkalmi - Ipomoea fistulosa, Sheyalmutra - Blumea lacera, Shongrass/Patila - Phragmites sp., Thankuni - Mimosa invisa, Lazzaboti - Mimosa pudica, Bishkatali - Polygonum hydropiper, Vat - Clerodendrum viscosum, Fern - Drynaria quercifolia Kantanotey - Amaranthus spinosus, Assamlata - Mikania cordata etc.

Figure 4.31: Terrestrial flora observed: (a) besides a road in Tangail Pourashava; (b) besides a damage road under Elenga Pourashava

140. The common terrestrial faunal species (Fig. 4.32) are: House Mouse - Mus musculus, Indian Field Mouse - Mus booduga, Grey Musk Shrew - Suncus murinus, Bandicoot Rat - Bandicota indica, Flying Fox - Pteropus gigantius, Small Indian Mongoose - H. auropunctatus, Jackal - Vulpes bengalensis, Indian Pipistrelle - P. coromandra, Indian Cuckoo - C. micropterus, Red-vented Bulbul - Pycnonotus cafer, Brahminy Kite - Haliastur Indus, Rock Pigeon - Columba livia, Common Myna – Acridotheres tristis, B. H. Shrike - Lanius schach, C. Tailorbird - O. sutorius, B-H Oriole - Oriolus xanthornus, Spotted Dove - S. chinensis, O. Magpie Robin - Copsychus saularis, Rufous Tree Pie - D. vagabunda, Black Drongo - D. macrocercus, Jungle

76

Crow - C. macrorhynchus, House Crow- Corvus splendens, House Sparrow - Passer domisticus, A. Pied Starling - Sturnus contra, W. T. Kingfisher - Halcyon smyrnensis, W-throated Fantail - Rhipidura albicollis. C. Wolf Snake - Lycodon aulicus, C. Garden Lizard - Calotes versicolor, Rat Snake - Coluber mucosus, C. Vine Snake - Ahaetulla nasutus, C. House Lizard - Hemidactylus flaviviridis, C. House Lizard - Hemidactylus frenatus, G. Monitor Lizard - V. bengalensis, Common Toad - Bufo melanostictus, Cricket Frog - L. limnocharis, M. Tree Frog - P. maculates. Bull Frog - H. tigerinus.

Figure 4.32: Terrestrial fauna observed: (a) A Common Toad ready to catch insect at Tangail Pourashava; (b) A Black drongo in Elenga Pourashava

141. Aquatic Ecology: It also includes various types of aquatic flora (tree, herb and shrub) and fauna (mammal. bird, reptile, amphibian and fish), most of which are distributed in and around the urban water bodies (pond, canal, river, ditch etc).

142. The common aquatic floral species (Fig. 4.33) are: Kalmi - Ipomoea aquatica, Jhanjhi - Ceratophyllum dumersum, Water Lily/Sada Shapla - Nymphaea nouchali, Barun/Banny - Crataeva nurvala, Jhangi - Utricularia aurea, Khudipana - Lemna perpusilla, Floating Grass – Echinoclo acolonum, Water Chestnut – Trapabi spinosa, Spiral Algae - Spirogyra sp., Water Hyacinth / Kachuripana - Eichhornia crassipes, Indurkanipana - Salvinia cuculata, Topapana - Pistia strateotes, Ghenchu - Aponogeton natans, Janjhi/Kurcli - Hydrilla verticillata, Phutki/Janglidhan - Hygroryza aristata, Patajhangi - Vallisneria spiralis etc.

Figure 4.33: Aquatic flora observed: (a) beside a drain in Tangail Pourashava; (b) Water Hyacinth in a waterbody in Elenga Pourashava

77

143. The common aquatic faunal species (Fig. 4.34) including fishes are: (i) Aquatic fauna: Common Kingfisher - Alcado athis, Great Egret - Egretta alba, Small Egret – Egretta gazetta, Intermediate Egret – Egretta intermedia, W-breasted Waterhen - Amaurornis phoenicurus, B. Winged Jacana - Metopidius indicus, Indian Pond heron - Ardeola grayii, Snipe Gallinago henura, Olive Keelback - Atretium schistosum, Checkered Keelback - Xenochrophis piscator, C. S. Water Snake - Enhydris enhydris, Common Skink - Mabuya carinata, Skipper frog - Euphlyctis cyanophlyctis, and (ii) Fish: Mottled Nandus - Nandus nandus, Gangetic Mudeel - Monopterus cuchia, Indian Threadfish - Polydactylus indicus, One-stripe Spinyeel - Macrognathus aculeatus, Asiatic Snakehead - Channa orientalis, Spotted Snakehead - Channa punctatus, Striped Snakehead - Channa striatus, Giant Snakehead - Channa marulius, Tank Goby - Glossogobius giuris, Bumblebee Goby - Brachygobius nunas, Swamp Barb - Puntius chola, Rosy Barb - Puntius conchonius, Gery Fetherback - Notopterus notopterus, Humped Fetherback - Notopterus chitala, Climbing Perch - Anabas testudineus, Gangetic Mystus - Mystus cavasius, Tengra Mystus - Mystus tengara , Indian Carplet - A. microlepis, Magur - Clarius batrachus, Stinging Catfish - Heteropneustes fossilis, Rohu - Labeo rohita, Black Rohu - Labeo calbasu, Catla - Catla catla, Mrigal - Cirrhinus mrigala, L-whiskered Catfish - Aorichthys aor, Freshwayer Shark - Wallago attu, Rice/paddy Eel - Pisodonophis boro, etc.

Figure 4.34: (a) A pond (aquatic habitat for fish) observed in Tangail Pourashava; (b) A pond heron in a ditch in Elenga Pourashava



4.3.5 Cluster

Gopalganj Pourashava: 146. Bio-ecologically the Gopalganj Pourashava (proposed MGSP sub-project site) falls under the Gopalgang / Khulna Peat Lands (IUCN Bangladesh, 2002). On the other hand, agro-ecologically it falls under the Gopalganj-Khulna Beels (BARC/UNDP/FAO, 1995). The peat soils / non-calcareous dark gray floodplain soil provide suitable environment for growing various types

78

of floral species, and also provide supportive habitat for various types of fauna. General ecological features (related to sub project types) of these sub-project sites are given below:

147. Terrestrial Ecology: It includes diverse type of terrestrial flora (tree, herb and shrub) and fauna (mammal. bird, reptile and amphibia), most of which are distributed in and around the urban homesteads, fallow lands, along the road, market and building sites, in open areas, besides water bodies (pond, canals, rivers) etc.

148. The common terrestrial floral species (tree, Fig. 4.35) are: Rendi - Samanea saman, Mango - Mangifera indica, Coconut - Cocos nucifera, Eucalyptus - Eucalyptus citriodora, Boroi/Kul - Zizyphus mauritiana, Kadam - Anthocephalus chinensis, Mehagini - Swietenia mahagoni, Krishnachura - Delomix regia, Banana - Musa sapientum, Kamranga - Averrhoa carambala, Tamarind - Tamarindus indica, Bamboo – Bambusa sp., Banyan tree - Ficus religiosa, Tal/Palm - Borassus fiabellifer, Date palm /Khejur - Phoenix sylvestris, Betel nut/Supari - Areca catechu, B. heart/Sharifa - Annona reticulate etc. Naturally grown floral species (herb and shrub) primarily includes: Dholkalmi - Ipomoea fistulosa, Sheyalmutra - Blumea lacera, Telakucha - Coccinia indica, Kantanotey - Amaranthus spinosus, Assamlata - Mikania cordata, Hatisur - Heliotropium indicum, Reri/Venna - Ricinus communis, Durbaghas – Cynodon dactylon, Kash - Saccharum officinarum, Shongrass/Patila - Phragmites sp., Thankuni - Mimosa invisa, Vat - Clerodendrum viscosum, Fern - Drynaria quercifolia, Lazzaboti - Mimosa pudica, Bishkatali - Polygonum hydropiper etc.

Figure 4.35: Terrestrial flora observed besides a road in Gopalganj Pourashava

149. The common terrestrial faunal species (Fig. 4.36) are: Fulvous Fruit Bat - Rousettus leschenaultia, Small Indian Mongoose - H. auropunctatus, Jackal - Vulpes bengalensis, House Mouse - Mus musculus, Indian Pipistrelle - P. coromandra, Flying Fox - Pteropus gigantius, Indian Field Mouse - Mus booduga, Grey Musk Shrew - Suncus murinus, Asian Palm Swift - Cypriirus parvus, Indian Cuckoo - C. micropterus, Red-vented Bulbul - Pycnonotus cafer, Brahminy Kite - Haliastur Indus, Rock Pigeon - Columba livia, Common Myna – Acridotheres tristis, B. H. Shrike - Lanius schach, C. Tailorbird - O. sutorius, B-H Oriole - Oriolus xanthornus, Spotted Dove - S. chinensis, O. Magpie Robin - Copsychus saularis, Rufous Tree Pie - D. vagabunda, Black Drongo - D. macrocercus, Jungle Crow - C. macrorhynchus, House Crow- Corvus splendens, W. T. Kingfisher - Halcyon smyrnensis, W-throated Fantail - Rhipidura albicollis. House Sparrow - Passer domisticus, A. Pied Starling - Sturnus contra, C. Wolf Snake -

79

Lycodon aulicus, C. Garden Lizard - Calotes versicolor, Rat Snake - Coluber mucosus, C. Vine Snake - Ahaetulla nasutus, C. House Lizard - Hemidactylus flaviviridis,G. Monitor Lizard - V. bengalensis, Bull Frog - H. tigerinus, Cricket Frog - L. limnocharis, M. Tree Frog - P. maculates, Common Toad - Bufo melanostictus.

Figure 4.36: Terrestrial fauna (Rufous Tree Pie) observed in Gopalganj Pourashava

150. Aquatic Ecology: It also includes various types of aquatic flora (tree, herb and shrub) and fauna (mammal. bird, reptile, amphibian and fish), most of which are distributed in and around the urban water bodies (pond, canal, river, ditch etc).

151. The common aquatic floral species (Fig. 4.37) are: Hijal –Barringtonia acutangula, Barun/Banny - Crataeva nurvala, Water Lily/Sada Shapla - Nymphaea nouchali, Jhanjhi - Ceratophyllum dumersum, Phutki/Janglidhan - Hygroryza aristata, Kalmi - Ipomoea aquatic, Patajhangi - Vallisneria spiralis, Jhangi - Utricularia aurea, Janjhi/Kurcli - Hydrilla verticillata Khudipana - Lemna perpusilla, Floating Grass – Echinoclo acolonum, Water Chestnut – Trapabi spinosa, Spiral Algae - Spirogyra sp., Reeds/Sedges, Water Hyacinth / Kachuripana - Eichhornia crassipes, Indurkanipana - Salvinia cuculata, Topapana - Pistia strateotes, Ghenchu - Aponogeton natans etc.

Figure 4.37: Aquatic flora observed beside a pond in Gopalganj Pourashava

152. The common aquatic faunal species (Fig. 4.38) including fishes are: (i) Aquatic fauna: Indian Pond heron - Ardeola grayii, Little Egret – Egretta gazetta, Intermediate Egret – Egretta intermedia, Little Cormorant - Phalacrocorax niger, W-breasted Waterhen - Amaurornis phoenicurus, B. Winged Jacana - Metopidius indicus, Common Kingfisher - Alcado athis, Fish Eagle - Ichthyophagus ichthyaetus, Snipe Gallinago henura, Olive Keelback - Atretium

80

schistosum, Checkered Keelback - Xenochrophis piscator, C. S. Water Snake - Enhydris enhydris, Common Skink - Mabuya carinata, Indian Roofed Turtle - Kachuga tecta, Skipper frog - Euphlyctis cyanophlyctis, and (ii) Fish: Asiatic Snakehead - Channa orientalis, Spotted Snakehead - Channa punctatus, Striped Snakehead - Channa striatus, Giant Snakehead - Channa marulius , Tank Goby - Glossogobius giuris, Bumblebee Goby - Brachygobius nunas, Mottled Nandus - Nandus nandus, One-stripe Spinyeel - Macrognathus aculeatus, Swamp Barb - Puntius chola, Rosy Barb - Puntius conchonius, Indian Carplet - A. microlepis, Magur - Clarius batrachus, Stinging Catfish - Heteropneustes fossilis, Rohu - Labeo rohita, Black Rohu - Labeo calbasu, Catla - Catla catla, Mrigal - Cirrhinus mrigala, L-whiskered Catfish - Aorichthys aor, Freshwayer Shark - Wallago attu, Rice/paddy Eel - Pisodonophis boro, Gery Fetherback - Notopterus notopterus, Humped Fetherback - Notopterus chitala, Climbing Perch - Anabas testudineus, Gangetic Mystus - Mystus cavasius, Tengra Mystus - Mystus tengara, Gangetic Mudeel - Monopterus cuchia, Indian Threadfish - Polydactylus indicus etc. 153. Threatened flora and fauna: No threatened flora and fauna identified from this MGSP sub-project sites.

Figure 4.38: (a) Aquatic fauna (Little Cormorant) sitting on a bamboo stick in Gopalganj Pourashava; (b) Variety of fish species ready for sale in Gopalganj Pourashava.


81

5.0 OVERALL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

5.1 Introduction

155. After establishing the baseline environment and identification of the sub-project activities during construction phase, the next step in the IEE/ EIA involves assessment/ prediction of the impacts of these activities on the baseline environment. The potential environmental impacts during construction phase of sub-projects could be categorized into: (a) ecological impacts; (b) physic-chemical impacts; and (c) socio-economic impacts. This Chapter identifies and describes the generic potential significant environmental impacts during construction and operational phases of different sub-projects under MGSP. The impacts during construction and operational phases have been discussed separately.

5.2 Potential Significant Impacts during Construction Phase

Ecological impacts: 156. Based on assessment the baseline environment at different sub-project locations (during field visits) and the nature and scale of the proposed sub-projects, it appears that ecological impacts are not likely to be significant for most of the proposed sub-projects under MGSP. However, for a few sub-projects the significance of ecological impacts needs to be assessed. These sub-projects include: (i) bridge, (ii) box culvert, and (iii) boat landing jetty. In all these cases, the assessment should focus primarily on the water quality. For some sub-projects, such as construction of new road, felling of trees may be required; felling of significant number of trees, if required, would generate adverse ecological impacts. In general, the ecological impact should focus on:

(a) Impact on flora (aquatic and terrestrial); (b) Impact on fauna (aquatic and terrestrial) including fish;

157. Based on preliminary assessment, it appears that the ecological impacts resulting from the sub-project (listed above) activities would of relatively low. The environmental management framework (EMF) of the MGSP (Section B of the Report) presents a detail methodology for assessment of ecological impacts.

Physico-chemical impacts: 158. Possible physico-chemical impacts from the sub-project activities to be carried out in different ULBs may include the following:

Drainage congestion,

Noise pollution,

Air pollution,

Surface water pollution,

Groundwater pollution,

Soil erosion/ contamination, and

Environmental pollution from solid/ construction waste

82

Drainage congestion: 159. During execution of sub-projects, temporary drainage congestion often results from obstruction to natural flow of drainage water due to storage of materials, piled up excavated material/soil, and temporary embankments constructed to keep work area dry. Such drainage congestions could create significant discomfort to people living in sub-project areas. Noise pollution: 160. Noise pollution could results from a wide range of construction activities, including movement of vehicles (carrying equipment/ material to and from site), operation of construction equipment and generators. Significant noise is generated from operation of pile drivers, bulldozers, dump trucks, compactors, mixing machines, and generators, etc. Demolition activities, if required, also generate noise. Such noise may cause discomfort to the people living in the surrounding areas at close proximity of the sub-project site, especially if such activities are continued during the night. Noise pollution is particularly important for sensitive establishment e.g., hospitals, educational/religious institutions. The construction work will take place inside the pourashava boundary and likely to be in close proximity to the residential and highly populated areas. Therefore, a large number of people may be exposed to high levels of noise during construction. Air pollution: 161. During construction phase, air pollution may result from exhaust emissions (containing carbon monoxide (CO), sulfur dioxide (SO2), oxides of nitrogen (NOX), and particulate matter (PM)) from machines and equipment (e.g., drilling rig, mixing machines, generators, asphalt plants) used for different sub-project activities. Furthermore, construction activities such as excavation, leveling, filling and vehicular movement on unpaved tracks may also cause fugitive dust emissions. In most of the pourashavas, the conditions of the roads are not good, characterized by large potholes often exposing the base and subbase materials. Any heavy vehicle movement will further deteriorate these conditions causing increased re-suspension of dust particles. Sub-projects that could generate appreciable air pollution include road, drain, bridge, culvert, bus/ truck terminal, community center, and sweeper colony construction. For the sub-projects to be implemented under the MGSP, adverse impacts of air pollution are therefore not likely to be limited to the areas surrounding the sub-project sites, the vehicle movement through the deteriorated roads can create scattered sources of particulate matter pollution. Surface Water pollution: 162. Water pollution may result from discharge of wastewater (e.g., liquid waste from labor sheds), spills and leaks of oils/ chemical into nearby water bodies (e.g., drain, pond, khal, drain, river). None of the pourashavas and city corporations are equipped with a sewerage system or treatment plants. Although the sanitation coverage is high (due to septic tanks, improved latrines), there is no fecal sludge management and therefore the overflows from septic tanks or direct discharges of domestic sewage is flushed out by the khals and rivers. If adequate sanitation arrangement of the laborers is not made, it can create odor issue, public nuisance and water pollution problems.

83

163. For bridge, culvert and boat landing jetty sub-projects, construction activities would be carried out on water bodies; hence these sub-projects are more likely to generate water pollution due to re-suspension of river sediments and excavation. Re-suspension of sediments can temporarily create unsuitable conditions for fish breeding and disrupt the ecosystem by blocking the passage of sunlight through the water column leading to anoxic conditions. For other sub-projects, the presence and existing use of water bodies surrounding the sub-project site would determine the level of impact. For example, if a pond located close to a sub-project site is used for washing/ bathing or for fish culture, pollution of the pond from sub-project activities would generate significant adverse impacts. Groundwater pollution 164. Construction of public tubewells, if not proper precaution is taken during borehole drilling, can be prone to groundwater contamination. If there is Arsenic contamination in the upper aquifer and adequate precaution is not taken during deep drilling, there will be a possibility of short-circuiting between the deeper and shallow aquifers which will render the supply water to become arsenic contaminated. Soil Erosion: 165. Most of the sites are located in generally flat areas not prone to floods and consequent soil erosion. Some areas such as Patiya and Chokoria are susceptible to flash floods and some soil erosion may occur. Apart from that, certain construction activities can potentially erode soil at the proposed sites particularly during the rainy season. Soil erosion can affect the integrity of the existing and proposed buildings at the sites, can cause water ponding particularly during rainy season, and can also affect the trees and natural vegetation of the area. The construction activities which could potentially cause soil erosion include the following:

Construction camp establishment

Site clearance

Excavation

Obtaining material from borrow sites

Construction of foundations Environmental pollution from solid/ construction waste: 166. In many sub-projects, considerable construction debris (e.g., demolition of existing structures) is likely to be generated from different sub-project activities. Solid wastes will also be generated from labor sheds, particularly for labor-intensive sub-projects. The contractors’ workshops will generate oily water, waste oils, oily rags, and other similar wastes. The stores and warehouses will generate solid waste such as empty cement bags, cardboards, and wooden crates. Improper disposal of these waste streams can potentially contaminate the soils of the area. Soil contamination can potentially have negative impacts on the local community, natural vegetation, agriculture, and biological resources of the area including aquatic flora and fauna. Improper management of construction debris and solid waste could cause blockage of drainage line/ path and environmental pollution. Several pourashavas may struggle to deal with solid waste management issues in this regard. Some of the pourashavas surveyed such as Trishal,

84

Tangail, Elenga, Valuka and Chandina do not have any designated solid waste disposal site; rather the solid waste is dumped in nearby lowlands. Among them, Trishal pourashava do not have any formal solid waste collection and transportation system in place. It would be important to establish a formal solid waste management system in these places in order to properly handle the solid wastes generated. Socio-economic impacts:

167. The social assessment of the MGSP (carried out separately) presents detail discussions on socio-economic impacts. This Section provides an overview of the possible major socio-economic impacts of the MGSP during construction phase, and presents guidelines for identification and protection of physical cultural resources (PCR). Possible socio-economic impacts from the sub-project activities to be carried out in different ULBs may include the following:

loss of land,

loss of income and displacement,

traffic congestion,

impact on top soil,

health and safety,

employment and commercial activities,

impact on archaeological and historical sites, and safeguarding physical cultural resources (PCR), and

Loss of land: 168. Acquisition of private land is often necessary for implementation of projects, and loss of land is one of the most significant socio-economic impacts. However, based on feasibility study of MGSP and field visits carried out so far, it appears that significant land acquisition will not be required for any of the sub-projects to be implemented in different ULBs. Many of the sub-projects involve rehabilitation/ improvement/ expansion of existing infrastructure/ facilities, and sub-projects involving new construction would be carried out in government/ ULB owned land. Therefore loss of land is not likely to be an issue of concern for the proposed MGSP. However, if significant land acquisition becomes necessary for implementation of any sub-project, the issue should be addressed in light of the Government regulations and relevant WB operational guideline OP 4.12: Involuntary Resettlement (World Bank, 2001), following the framework currently being developed for social impact assessment (SIA) of MGSP. Loss of income and displacement: 169. Loss of income may result from inability to use a particular piece of land/ establishment (e.g., footpaths) during the construction phase for income generation activity. Some of the proposed sub-projects may cause temporary displacement of people. For example, during construction/ rehabilitation of a section of road or drain, road-side vendors or small temporary shops on footpaths may not be able to operate for a period of time. However, considering the extent and scale of the sub-projects, it appears that such impacts would not be significant; for example, in most cases, the affected road-side vendors or footpath shops would be able to

85

operate by just moving a short distance away from the sub-project site. Nonetheless, such impacts should be carefully assessed following the framework currently being developed for social impact assessment (SIA) of MGSP. Traffic congestion: 170. During construction phase of sub-projects, traffic congestion may result from stock piling of material by the sides of roads, increased movement of people and vehicles carrying material and equipment. Field visits carried out reveal that traffic congestion is a major problem in most ULBs. The situation is further aggravated by the poor condition of the roads. Some of the sub-projects, such as road and drain, may aggravate the existing traffic problem during construction phase. This should be addressed with proper traffic management, and avoiding stockpiling of materials in a way that could hamper traffic movement.

Impact on top soil: 171. For sub-projects involving significant excavation (e.g., new storm drain, installation of underground water supply pipeline), conservation of top soil is an important issue. Utmost care should be taken to protect the topsoil (and thus maintain soil fertility) during excavation and backfilling. First 12 to 18 inches of topsoil should be excavated and stored on one side and the rest of the excavated soil on the other side. During back filling of trench, the top soil should be placed on the top again.

Health and safety: 172. Safety is an important issue during construction phase. General construction activities pose safety risks, which should be addressed as part of occupational health and safety plan.

Construction activities often involve operation of heavy construction machinery, vehicular traffic, excavation, filling operations and demolition of structures. These activities may pose some safety hazards to the local population. Stockpiling of construction material and debris from the demolished structure may cause serious accident to the construction worker and people in the vicinity.

173. Slips and falls associated with poor housekeeping, such as excessive debris, fall of bolts during assembling of steel frames, loose construction materials, and uncontrolled use of electrical cords and ropes on the ground, are also among the most frequent causes of lost time due to accidents at construction sites. Vehicle traffic and use of lifting equipment in the movement of machinery and materials at a construction site may pose temporary hazards, such as physical contact, dust, emissions, and noise.

174. Inappropriate waste disposal at the camps and construction sites, and air quality deterioration caused by the project’s vehicular traffic and construction activities potentially pose health hazards for the construction staff and nearby population. Unhygienic condition and unavailability of safe drinking water for the construction staff will expose them to health risks. In addition, influx of construction staff can potentially expose the nearby population to communicable diseases.

86

Employment and Commercial Activities: 175. During construction phase, some beneficial impact at local level would come in the form of employment in sub-project related works, which would depend on the nature and extent of the sub-project. For example, labor-intensive sub-project works (e.g., manual excavation) could generate employment for considerable number semi-skilled workforce. This in turn would induce some positive impacts on some other parameters including commercial activities in the sub-project areas.

Impact on archeological and historical sites: 176. Archeological and historical sites are protected resources. Damage of such sites by digging, crushing by heavy equipment, uprooting trees, exposing sites to erosion, or by making the sites more accessible to vandals are of particular concern. While there are archaeological and historical sites at many of the 12 ULBs visited, none of these would be directly affected by the sub-project activities. A guideline for archaeological impact assessment is nevertheless needed.

Safeguarding physical cultural resources (PCR): 177. Since the exact locations of the sub-projects to be implemented under MGSP are not known at this moment, a guideline is needed for identification of physical cultural resources (PCR) and determination of the suitability of the sub-projects from the perspective of PCR. 178. Table 5.1 presents an example assessment of physico-chemical and socio-economic impacts from typical activities associated with a small- to medium-scale civil engineering project, similar to the sub-projects to be implemented under the MGSP. It should be noted however that such an exercise should be carried out specifically for each sub-project, as a part of IEE/ EIA (if needed), to be implemented under MGSP, considering the actual baseline situation and exact nature and scale of the sub-project activities.

5.3 Potential Significant Impacts during Operational Phase

Ecological impacts: 179. During operational phase, the possible impact of the sub-project activities on the biological environment would be insignificant, except for a couple of sub-projects. These include: (a) storm drain; and (b) boat landing jetty.

180. As explained earlier, poor quality of drainage water (e.g., due to direct discharge of toilet wastewater into storm drain) could cause pollution of the receiving water body (e.g., river, khal) and thus adversely affect aquatic flora, fauna and associated terrestrial fauna. Similarly, discharge of oil (from engine driven boats) and other wastes at the boat landing jetty could cause pollution of the river/ khal, thereby affecting the aquatic ecology. Monitoring of water quality (for river/ khal) is therefore necessary to detect possible adverse ecological impacts at an early stage.

87

Physico-chemical impacts:

181. Depending on the type of sub-projects a number of physico-chemical parameters could experience both positive and negative impacts during operation phase of the sub-projects. Important issues and parameters include:

Drainage,

Water quality,

Air quality and noise level, and

Environmental pollution from solid waste

88

Table 5.1: Physicochemical and socio-economic impacts from activities associated with typical small to medium-scale civil engineering projects

Project Activities during Construction phase


Dra

inag

e

con

gest

ion

No

ise

po

lluti

on

Air

po

lluti

on

Wat

er

qu

alit

y

Gro

un

dw

ater

po

lluti

on

Soil

Ero

sio

n

Soil

Po

lluti

on

Loss

of

Lan

d

Loss

o

f in

com

e

and

dis

pla

cem

en

t

Traf

fic

Imp

act

on

to

pso

il

Pu

blic

He

alt

h a

nd

safe

ty

Effe

ct

on

Arc

he

olo

gica

l sit

es

Emp

loym

en

t an

d

com

me

rcia

l

acti

viti

es

Stockpiling of materials -2S 0 -2S 0 0 0 0 0 -2S -2S 0 -1S/L 0 0

Mobilization of equipments

0 -2S -2S 0 0 0 0 0 -1S -2S 0 -1S/L 0 +1S

Site clearance 0 0 0 0 0 -2S 0 0 -1S 0 -2S 0 0 +1S

Labour camp establishment

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 +1S

Labour camp operation -1S 0 0 -2S 0 0 -2S 0 0 0 0 0 0 +1S

Piling work 0 -2S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -2S/L 0 +1S

Excavation work -1S -1S -2S -1S 0 -1S 0 0 -1S 0 -1S -1S/L 0 +1S

Drilling boreholes 0 -1S 0 0 -1L 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 +1S

Construction (concreting) work

0 -1S -1S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1S/L 0 +1S

Demolition work -1S -1S -2S 0 0 0 0 0 -1S 0 0 -1S/L 0 +1S

Work on water bodies (bridge, culvert, jetties)

0 -1S -1S -2S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1S/L 0 +1S

Asphalt work 0 -1S -2S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1S/L 0 +1S

Provision for safe water and sanitation facilities for workers

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 +2L 0 0

[+2 = High Positive Impact, +1 = Low Positive Impact, 0 = No impact, -1 = Low Negative Impact, -2 = High Negative Impact] [S = Short term impact, L = Long term impact]

89

Drainage: 182. The proposed sub-projects involving construction and rehabilitation of storm drains are

likely to bring about improvement in the drainage condition in the sub-project areas, which is a major problem in many ULBs. However, blockage of the drains (e.g., by solid wastes due to improper maintenance) could aggravate drainage problem. For example, in Comilla City Corporation, although the drains are deemed to be adequate to handle storm water, waterlogging persists only because the drains are usually blocked by unscrupulous dumping of solid wastes by the residents. Better management of solid waste could significantly facilitate the maintenance of storm drains in this case.

Water quality: 183. For particularly two sub-projects, possible pollution of water body (rivers/ khals) is an important issue during operational phase; these are storm drain and boat landing jetty. As discussed above, poor quality of drainage water (e.g., due to direct discharge of toilet wastewater into storm drain) could cause pollution of the final receiving water body; discharge of oil (from engine driven boats) and other wastes could cause pollution of the river/ khal.

184. A number of sub-projects are likely to contribute to the betterment of water quality (and environment in general) through proper management of wastewater. These include public toilet, slaughter house, and properly operated kitchen market and cattle market.

Air quality and noise level: 185. During operational phase, vehicular movement would be the principal sources of air pollutants and noise. However, majority of the proposed road sub-projects involve rehabilitation,

improvement and expansion of existing roads. Therefore in many cases, risk of air pollution (i.e., particulate pollution) would be reduced due to paving of the existing unpaved roads. However, increased movement of vehicles through roads, bridges, culverts to be constructed under the MGSP could generate higher air and noise pollution. Also, increased movement of people and vehicles surrounding public places like kitchen market, cattle market, and community center could generate higher noise and air pollution.

Environmental pollution from solid waste: 186. Implementation of the sub-project involving solid waste management (supply of bins, carts,

etc) would significantly improve overall environmental condition and reduce the risk of clogging of drains by solid waste. However, as mentioned before, lack of solid waste disposal facility at the ULBs is a concern.

Socio-economic impacts: 187. As noted earlier, the social assessment of the MGSP (carried out separately) presents detail discussions on socio-economic impacts. This Section provides an overview of the possible major socio-economic impacts of the MGSP during operational phase. The MGS project is aimed at bringing about improvement in the socio-economic conditions of the ULBs through improvement of basic infrastructure. Thus, implementation of the proposed sub-projects is likely to bring about significant improvement in the overall environmental and socio-economic conditions at the ULBs. Important socio-economic parameters that are likely to experience beneficial impacts due to implementation of the sub-projects include:

90

traffic,

public health and safety,

employment and commercial activities, Traffic: 188. Implementation of a number of sub-projects is likely to bring about significant improvement in the traffic situation at the ULBs. These include construction of roads, bridges, box culverts, pedestrian bridge, street light, traffic control measures, bus terminal and truck terminal, and boat landing jetty. However, efforts should be made to properly manage traffic surrounding kitchen market, cattle market, and community center, so that these places public congregation do not aggravate the traffic situation. Public health and safety: 189. The proposed sub-projects are also likely to bring about significant positive impact on the public health and safety through improvement of general environment and enhancement of public utility services. The important sub-projects in this regard are drain, kitchen market and cattle market, park, pedestrian bridge, public toilet, slaughter house, solid waste management and water supply system. Employment and commercial activities: 190. A number of basic infrastructure to be developed under the MGSP are likely to generate opportunity for employment and expansion of commercial activities. These include kitchen market, cattle market, bus and truck terminal, road, bridge and culvert. 191. Table 5.2 presents an example assessment of physico-chemical and socio-economic impacts from typical activities associated with some of the sub-projects to be implemented under the MGSP. It should be noted however that such an exercise should be carried out specifically for each sub-project, as a part of IEE/ EIA (if needed), to be implemented under MGSP, considering the actual baseline situation and exact nature and scale of the sub-project activities.

91

Table 5.2: Physicochemical and socio-economic impacts from typical activities associated with some of the sub-projects to be implemented under the MGSP

Project Activities during Operation phase


Dra

inag

e

con

gest

ion

No

ise

po

lluti

on

Air

po

lluti

on

Surf

ace

W

ate

r

po

lluti

on

Envi

ron

me

nta

l

po

lluti

on

d

ue

to

solid

was

te

Traf

fic

co

nge

stio

n

Pu

blic

He

alt

h a

nd

safe

ty

Emp

loym

en

t an

d

com

me

rcia

l

acti

viti

es

Operation of establishments (kitchen market, cattle market, slaughter house)

0 -1L 0 0 -2L -1L 0 +2L

Operation of bridges, culverts 0 -1L -1L 0 0 -2L 0 +2L

Operation of jetties 0 0 0 -1L 0 0 0 +2L

Operation of street lights and traffic signals

0 0 0 0 0 +2L +2L 0

Increased movement of vehicles and people (improved local roads and pedestrian bridges)

0 -2L -2L 0 0 -2L 0 +2L

Use of public toilets 0 0 0 +2L 0 0 +2L 0

Increased access to safe water supply

0 0 0 0 0 0 +2L 0

Establishment of solid waste management facilities (bins, tractors, carts)

+2L 0 0 +1L +2L 0 +2L +1L

Operation of Bus and Truck terminals

0 -1L -1L 0 0 +2L 0 +2L

[+2 = High Positive Impact, +1 = Low Positive Impact, 0 = No impact, -1 = Low Negative Impact, -2 = High Negative Impact] [ S = Short term impact, L = Long term impact]

85

6.0 STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS AND PUBLIC CONSULTATION

6.1 Introduction

192. As a part of overall environmental assessment, efforts were made to identify the key stakeholders of the proposed project and assess the power relationships as well as influence and interests of stakeholders involved in the development of the project. This Chapter presents an analysis (SA) of key stakeholders, including categorization of the most important stakeholders with respect to formulation, design, and implementation and monitoring of the project activities. As noted earlier, six Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) were carried out at 6 ULBs during these field visits, in order to document and record opinions of a wide range of stakeholders on different aspects of the proposed project. This Chapter also summarizes the major findings from the FGDs.

6.2 Stakeholder Analysis

193. Stakeholders could be defined as people, communities, groups or institutions, who/ which are likely to be affected (either negatively or positively) by the sub-projects of the proposed Municipal Governance and Services Project (MGSP), or those who/ which can potentially affect the outcome of the MGSP. Stakeholder Analysis (SA) is a tool that assists policy makers and managers to identify whose interests need to be taken into account when making decisions. Performing a stakeholder analysis during the planning stage can greatly assist in the development of an effective project strategy. 194. Generally, the stakeholders of a project are of three types viz. (a) Primary Stakeholders (directly affected, either positively or negatively) (b) Secondary Stakeholders (indirectly affected, either positively or negatively) and (c) Key Stakeholders (those who have significant positive or negative influence on the project). Usually, “primarily” and “secondary” stakeholders are those people who live/work within and close to the area of influence of the project/ sub-project under consideration. The opinions, concerns and suggestions of these stakeholders about different aspects of a project/ sub-project are typically gathered through public consultations and focus group discussions (FGDs, see Section 6.3). 195. Generally, “key stakeholders” are those who can significantly “influence” the project/ sub-project, or to whom the project/ sub-project is of significant “importance”. Influence refers to how powerful a stakeholder is in changing/ determining the course of a project/ sub-project; on the other hand, “importance” refers to what degree the project/ sub-project addresses the needs and interests of “key stakeholders”. The objectives of Stakeholder Analysis (SA) for the sub-projects of proposed MGSP were:

Identification of the key stakeholders;

Assessment of the power relationships, including influence of stakeholder on the projects/ sub-projects and importance of the projects/ sub-projects to the stakeholder, and

Analysis for categorization of the most important actors/ stakeholders in the

86

formulation, design, implementation and monitoring of projects/ sub-projects. 196. As noted earlier, the sub-projects of the MGSP have already been identified but the precise locations and details of these sub-projects have not yet been finalized. Hence, key stakeholders for sub-projects under MGSP have been identified through brainstorming, use of local knowledge, consultation with LGED officials, City Corporation / Pourashava Mayors and officials, and local people at the ULBs visited (see Figs. 6.1-6.5). Generally, stakeholder identification is a continuous process which allows inclusion of newly identified stakeholders. Table 6.1 shows the list of identified key stakeholders (people / institutions / organizations) who could significantly influence the MGSP, and/ or to whom the MGSP is of particularly important.

Figure 6.1: Consultation with Mayor and local people at: (a) Comilla City Corporation, and (b) Chandina Pourashava

Figure 6.2: Consultation with Mayor and local people at: (a) Potiya Pourashava, and (b) Chokoria Pourashava

a

a b

b

87

Figure 6.3: Consultation with Mayor and local people at: (a) Tangail Pourashava, and (b) Elenga Pourashava

Figure 6.4: Consultation with Mayor and local people at: (a) Trishal Pourashava, and (b) Bhaluka Pourashava

Figure 6.5: Consultation with Mayor and local people at: (a) Bhairab Pourashava, and (b) Madhobdi Pourashava

a

a

a

b

b

b

88

Table 6.1: Key stakeholders for the sub projects of MGSP



Government of Bangladesh (GoB)

Ministry of Finance (MoF) Financial approval and disbursement

All sub projects

Ministry of Environment and Forests: Department of Environment (DoE)

Regulatory – environment All / some sub projects

Ministry of Land (MoL): Directorate of Land Record and Survey

Regulatory – land Some sub projects

Bangladesh Inland Water Transport Authority / Corporation (BIWTA/BIWTC)

Regulatory – inland water transport

Boat Landing Jetty, Bridge

Bangladesh Water Development Board (BWDB)

Regulatory - river Bridge, Culvert

Local Government Engineering Department (LGED), Bangladesh Municipal Development Fund (BMDF)

Project formulation, implementation, monitoring etc

All sub projects

Water and Sewerage Authorities (e.g., WASAs, DPHE, LGED)

Water supply, Drainage Drains, Water supply systems

Rural Electrification Board (REB) Electricity supply Street light

Police Department (PD) (local / divisional) Regulatory – traffic Traffic Control, Street light

Local People, Peoples’ Representatives

Members of Parliament (MPs) Local development Sub-projects at their City /Pourashava

Politicians – all political parties Local development Sub-projects at their City /Pourashava

Local elites (urban dwellers) Local development Sub-projects at their City /Pourashava

Mayors - City Corporation / Pourashava City/Pourashava development

Sub-projects at their City /Pourashava

Councilors – City Corporations / Pourashavas

Ward development Sub-projects at their Wards

Project Sponsor

Project Sponsor – IDA (e.g. WB) Financial, internal regulatory issues etc

All sub-projects

Organizations

Various Organizations (e.g. truck/bus owners association, kitchen market owners society etc)

Site selection, construction, time schedule etc

Some sub-projects

Non Government Organization (NGO)/ Community Based Organization (CBO)

NGOs, CBOs and other community structures

General affairs of all / some sub-projects

All/some sub-projects related to them

Media (Electronic, Print etc)

Media Project description All sub-projects

89

197. Stakeholder Analysis (SA) could be carried out in several ways, and it differs from project to project. Here, the key stakeholder analysis has been carried out for all sub-projects of MGSP following the stakeholder importance/ influence matrix presented in Table 6.2. The assessment of key stakeholders is presented in Table 6.3.

Table 6.2: Stakeholder Importance/Influence Matrix

Stakeholder Category Importance Influence

A High High

B High Low

C Low High

D Low Low

A. Stakeholder has a high degree of influence on the project and the project is of high importance for the Stakeholder. This implies that the project managers will need to develop good working relationships with the stakeholder, to ensure smooth implementation of the project.

B. The project is of high importance to the Stakeholder, but the Stakeholder has a low influence on the project. This implies that they will require special initiatives if their interests are to be protected.

C. Stakeholder has high influence, who can therefore affect the project outcomes; but whose interests are not the target of the project. This implies that the Stakeholder needs to be carefully handled in order to get support for project implementation.

D. Stakeholder has low influence on the project and the project is not of significant interest to the Stakeholder.

198. Information gained from this analysis is intended to be used to facilitate planning, design, implementation and monitoring of sub-projects under MGSP, through identification of key stakeholders involved and their interests, roles and responsibilities at different stages of the sub-projects.

90

Table 6.3: Assessment of key stakeholder power relationships (influence and interest) for the sub-projects of MGSP

Key Stakeholder (Stakeholder

Category)

Key Interest Importance of Project

Influence on Project Participation

Ministry of Finance (A)

Collaboration on joint processes,

Public fund disbursement

Securing lender fund (negotiation, fund collection, etc) and disbursement

High: Will provide overall leadership and political support for fund disbursement from public sector and WB

High: Will have influence on all aspects of financial policies for fund collection and disbursement (public and WB)

Responsible for overall project fund disbursement

Department of Environment (DoE) (A)

Issuing Environmental Clearance Certificate (ECC)

Monitoring environmental aspects

High: Will provide ECC for relevant sub-projects of MGSP. Will monitor environmental compliance

High: Will have influence timely and successful initiation and progress of the project

Responsible for issuing ECC and monitoring environmental issues.

Ministry of Land (C)

Land acquisition, if any

Low: Will facilitate land acquisition (if needed)

High: Will have influence on land acquisition.

Responsible for land acquisition process.

BIWTA and BIWTC (C)

Site selection

Guideline / Technical support

Low: Will provide guideline /technical support for boat landing jetty, bridge

High: Will have influence sub-projects e.g., boat landing jetty, bridge

Will be involved in bridge site selection, commissioning of boat landing jetty

Bangladesh Water Development Board (BWDB) (D)


Low: Will provide guideline / technical support on water resources issues

Low: Will have influence on sub-projects, e.g., bridge, culvert

Will be involved in issues related to water resources (e.g., flow, bank protection)

LGED and BMDF (A)

Provide assistance in planning, design and implementation of all sub-project

High: Will provide overall leadership and support

High: Will have influence on all aspects of project planning and implementation

Responsible for overall project formulation and implementation

Water / Sewerage Authorities ( WASAs, DPHE, LGED) (A)

Coordination/ Technical support

High: Will provide technical support for water / drainage issues

High: Will have influence on water supply and drainage issues.

Will provide information and guidance on water supply / drainage issues

Rural Electrification Board (REB) (D)

Electricity supply

Low: Will provide technical support to street light sub-project

Low: Will have influence on electricity supply issues

Will have influence on electricity supply

Police Department (PD) (D)


Low: Will provide technical support on street light / traffic issues

Low: Will have influence on street light and traffic issues

Will be responsible for traffic control issues and law and order

Members of Local development High: Will only Low: Will provide Consulted where

91

Key Stakeholder (Stakeholder

Category)

Key Interest Importance of Project

Influence on Project Participation

Parliament (MPs) (B)

provide limited input into project

cooperation

necessary

Politicians – all political parties (B)

Local development High: Will provide support to project implementation where relevant

Low: Will provide cooperation

Consulted where necessary. Informed through regular updates

Local elites (urban dwellers) (B)

Local development High: Will provide support to project implementation where relevant



Mayors - City Corporation / Pourashavas (A)

Local development

Development through collaboration

High: Sub-project identification and implementation

High: Will play a key role in sub-project identification and implementation

Key role in sub-project identification and implementation

Councilors – City Corporations / Pourashavas (B)

Local development High: Sub-project identification



Project Sponsor – IDA (e.g. WB) (A)

Fund allocation

Internal regulatory issues

High: Will provide overall support for fund disbursement, compliance

High: Will have influence all aspects of project implementation and fund disbursement

Responsible for project fund disbursement

Various Organizations (e.g. truck/bus owners association) (D)

Local development Low: High participate in site selection of concerned sub-projects

Low: Will provide indirect support to the sub-projects

Will provide indirect support to the concerned sub-projects

NGOs, CBOs (B)

Collaboration in implementation processes

Provide services to local authorities

High: Will provide indirect support to the sub-projects

Low: Will provide indirect support to the sub-projects

Involvement during project identification, implementation

Media (D)

Collaborate in implementation processes through publishing news

Low: Will update people about the status of the sub-projects

Low: Will influence sub-project through publishing reports on project issues

Reporting on different aspects of the sub-projects

6.3 Findings from FGDs

199. As noted in Chapter 1, in addition to baseline survey, a total of six focus group discussions (FGDs) (Figure 6.6) have also been carried out for assessment of socio-economic impacts of the MGSP. This section presents the major findings from the FGDs.

92

Focus Group Discussion at Comilla Focus Group Discussion at Tangail Pourashava

Focus Group Discussion Elenga Pourashava Focus Group Discussion Trishal Pourashava

Focus Group Discussion Bhairab Pourashava Focus Group Discussion Gopalganj Pourashava

Figure 6.6: Focus Group Discussion at Different ULBs

93

200. As a part of the socio-economic study, 6 FGDs were conducted in during May – June 2013. Table 6.4 shows the details of the FGDs; a total of 169 people were participated in the FGDs. A wide range of stakeholders (e.g. Mayors, Ward Councilors, urban people, businessman, land / house owner, farmer, teacher, student) participated in the FGDs. Members of the EA team lead by a socio-economist, and representatives from local Municipality/ City Corporation officials participated in the FGDs. Appendix B shows the list of individuals who participated in the FGDs.

Table 6.4: Locations and other details of FGDs

Sl. No. Location Date No. of People Attended

FGD-1 Elenga Pourashava 24 – 05–2013 11.00 a.m. – 12.00 p.m.

29

FGD-2 Tangail Pourashava 25 – 05–2013 11.00 a.m. – 12.00 p.m.

35

FGD-3 Comilla City Corporation 04 – 06–2013 12.00 p.m. – 01.00 p.m.

32

FGD-4 Trishal Pourashava 13 – 06–2013 11.00 a.m. – 12.00 p.m.

19

FGD-5 Bhairab Pourashava 18 – 06–2013 11.00 a.m. – 12.00 p.m.

32

FGD-6 Gopalganj Pourashava 20 – 06–2013 03.00 p.m. – 04.00 p.m.

22

Total 169

201. In the FGDs, the participants expressed their opinions regarding different issues, including their knowledge about the sub-projects of MGSP, socio-economic condition of people in their localities, possible impact of the proposed sub-project activities on the local environment (physical, biological and social) and in their localities, and also provided suggestions of mitigation measures. The major findings of the FGDs are summarized below.

6.3.1 FGD-1: Elenga Pourashava

202. Sub-projects being considered: Road, Drain, Kitchen Market, Slaughtered House, Bus Terminal and Water Supply Systems.

Most participants (about 80%) are not aware about the current planning scheme of the sub-projects to be implemented in the Pourashava under of MGSP.

All participants support the sub-projects of MGSP at their locality. Reason for support are as follows: o Local economy as well as infrastructure will be developed/ improved through

implementation of the sub projects; o New jobs will be created; o Master plan for Elenga Pourashava has not yet been prepared; the MGSP provides

an opportunity to prepare a master plan for the Pourashava;

94

o Adjacent highway already congested; the sub-projects under MGSP may relive the situation to some extent.

Urban road network is weak; the Pourashava requires new roads with good drainage system for road longevity. Movement of heavily loaded trucks is damaging local roads.

All sub-drains should be included with the main drains.

Within Pourashava, road should be inter-connected.

Residential buildings / houses are being established randomly; Pourashava requires proper planning and new roads with drains connecting the new urban establishments.

Road-side plantation program should be included under the sub-projects of MGSP.

There is no modern bus terminal in the Pourashava; Government land is available where it could be established. It may work as a hub to support road transportation of 17-18 districts in the surrounding areas. Efforts should be made to construct a terminal/ station for three wheelers as well.

Inter-district movement time will be reduced, if a modern bus terminal is established in the Pourashava.

Road accident increased to some extent due to heavy movement of vehicles in the adjacent highway; therefore there is a need for flyover for inter-district vehicles using the highway.

The adjacent Louhajang river needs re-excavation/ dredging to improve navigability.

There is no public toilet; at least half dozen public toilets are required in the Pourashava.

A proper solid waste dumping/ disposal area is required for the Pourashava.

Mosquito problem has increased in the Pourashava; occurrence of diseases also appeared to have increased.

A permanent cattle market required (daily/weekly basis) at the Pourashava

There is no slaughter house in the Pourashava; at least three slaughter houses are required.

The kitchen markets are not in good condition. At least a couple of permanent kitchen markets are required.

Ground water has Arsenic (As) and Iron (Fe); pure drinking water supply is not adequate. Establishment of overhead tank may resolve the water supply problem.

Water logging is a major problem in the Pourashava; proper storm water drains needed which would discharge into the adjacent Louhajang River.

Most ditches are silted, and require excavation to improve the water logging problem; sluice gates are also required to reduce the water lodge problem.

Air pollution increased for industrial activities and increased vehicular movement.

Uninterruptible electric supply required for industrial activity.

Limited gas supply is available in the area.

6.3.2 FGD-2: Tangail Pourashava

203. Sub-projects being considered: Road, Drain, Kitchen Market, Slaughtered House and Water supply system

95

Most participants about (60%) are not aware about the current planning scheme of the sub-projects to be implemented in the Pourashava under of MGSP.

All participants are supportive of sub-projects of MGSP at their locality. Participants believed that local economy will be improved by implementing it.

Pourashava Master Plan is under preparation; require integration of sub-projects of MGSP with the draft Master Plan.

Road traffic has increased significantly in some parts of the Pourashava, partly due to running more vehicles without license. It should be control by allowing only licensed vehicle.

Sound pollution increased due to increased vehicular movement.

Internal roads of Pourashava are narrow; those should be widened.

New roads with drains are required along Louhajang River to prevent illegal encroachment.

At least a couple of bypass roads are required for Tangail Pourashava.

Three wheeler vehicles with two stroke engines run in the Pourashava (which were earlier banned in Dhaka City) causing air pollution, and creating health hazards.

Current drainage systems are not adequate, it should be widened. Modern sewerage line / system is required.

Drainage system should be included with all roads to prevent future water lodging and to improve road longevity; proper maintenance / cleaning of those drains are needed.

All drains inside the Pourashava are in open condition (without any cover). Covers are required to prevent accidents, spread of diseases, and prevent disposal of solid wastes into drains.

Drain water enter into the Louhajang River without treatment which accelerate the pollution.

Water logging is a major problem in some areas of the Pourashava.

Within Pourashava, ponds and lakes are being polluted by disposal of solid and liquid waste; proper waste management is needed prevent such pollution.

Modern solid waste dumping/ disposal station with waste segregation system is required.

Solid waste collection vehicles not enough in number; more waste collection vehicles are required.

Bad smell comes from the dustbins which promote unhygienic conditions and spread diseases.

Most houses dump their household wastes randomly; campaign is required for environmental awareness.

Modern slaughter houses not available, at least 4 to 5 slaughter houses are required.

For drinking water supply, more overhead tank are required.

There is scope for improving the open water fishing in the river; require road extension up to the river bank for easy transportation.

Participant suspect adverse impact of cellular / mobile tower on fruits (e.g. coconut); require proper investigation.

Wildlife in the Pourashava appears to be on the decline.

96

Inside Pourashava, illegal drug business has increased

Public awareness program on ‘environmental conservation’ by media, bill board should be increased.

Uninterruptible electricity supply is required for economic development.

Most electricity lines are in close of trees which should be in safe distance for safety.

6.3.3 FGD-3: Comilla City Corporation

204. Sub-projects being considered: Road, Drain, Slaughtered House, Solid Waste Management, Street Light, Traffic Control, Public Toilet and Park


All participants are supportive of the sub-projects of MGSP at their locality. Participants believed that local economy will be improved through its implementation.

City Corporation Master Plan is under preparation; require integration of sub-projects of MGSP with the draft Master Plan.

Most local roads are narrow; require widening of existing roads with road divider and footpath.

Road-side plantation is ongoing and sub-projects of MGSP should be integrated with the current programs.

Current drainage system is not adequate; RCC / covered drains are needed; people dump solid waste into open drains, causing drainage congesting and water logging.

City Ward No 1, 2 and 14 are situated in low-lying area; need to improve the roads (e.g., construction of elevated roads) to solve the water-logging problem.

Race Course canal already polluted; require cleaning to prevent health problems.

Street lights are inadequate, and suffer from lack of maintenance; more street lights should be installed for safe movement of people.

Proper solid waste disposal site is not available; waste disposal site is required.

More vehicles for carrying solid wastes are required.

Wastes are not regularly taken from the dustbins; quick removal of wastes from the dustbins is essential.

There are few mobile dustbins to carry solid wastes from houses; more mobile dustbins are required.

To manage solid wastes, a waste recycle plant could be included in the sub-projects of MGSP.

There should be campaign to change behavior of people who dump solid wastes into open drains, and canals.

There are a couple of slaughter houses, but these are not hygienic; 3 to 4 new and modern slaughter houses are required.

There is one small park in the Pourashava with limited facilities; a modern park is required with modern facilities for refreshment.

6.3.4 FGD-4: Trishal Pourashava

97

205. Sub-projects being considered: Road, Drain, Kitchen Market, Slaughtered House, Bus, Terminal, Solid Waste Management, Water Supply Systems


All participants are supportive of the sub-projects of MGSP at their locality. Participants believe that local economy will be benefited through implementation of MGSP.

Pourashava Master Plan is under preparation; require integration of sub-project of MGSP with the draft Master Plan.

Fund is a major constraint for improvement of infrastructure; MGSP could resolve the issue by providing funding to construct infrastructure.

Existing roads are inadequate; need widening of existing roads and construction of new roads.

More tree plantation is required if tree felling occurs for the MGSP; tree plantation should be considered under MGSP.

New bus terminal with modern facilities is needed.

Specific site for solid waste dumping/ disposal is not available; proper solid waste management system is required.

New drainage and sewerage system are required to address drainage (water logging) and pollution problems.

Rain water could be harvested for drinking / household purposes; large artificial pond could be created.

Modern kitchen market is required, which will improve the social environment.

People suggested to include the following in the MGSP: o a central modern graveyard. o a public park for entertainment o playing grounds, especially for children

6.3.5 FGD-5: Bhairab Pourashava

206. Sub-projects being considered: Road, Drain, Kitchen Market, Box Culverts Sweeper Colony, Solid Waste Management and Water Supply Systems


All participants support the sub-projects under MGSP at their locality. Participants believed that local economy will be benefited through implementation of MGSP.


More roads are required to come to the Bhairab bazaar; street lights and traffic signs/ markings are also required.

Road and drainage system should be widened in some Wards of the Pourashava.

Construction of embankment is required to avoid flooding, inundation and water

98

logging.

Construction / reconstruction of 150 years old Hindu Shashan road is required; about one lac people use the road to attend religious festival every year.

Tree plantation beside road should be included in the MGSP.

A central drainage system is required which will connect all other drainage lines.

Water logging is common at some places beside the kitchen market, which needs to be addressed;

Existing drainage system requires improvement.

Water supply is insufficient and often suffers from pollution; new water supply line is required; the area suffers from Arsenic (As) and Iron (Fe) problem. Meghna river water could be used as a drinking water source through installation of a surface water treatment plant.

Unplanned urbanization is taking place;

Solid waste management is poor.

Public toilets are needed.

More kitchen markets are required beside Bhairab bazaar.

Modern sweeper colony will improve the life style of its residents, which will ultimately improve the social environment of the Pourashava.

Some poultry firms in the area creating air pollution and creating health problems.

A central graveyard is required; improvement of existing graveyard is also needed.

6.3.6 FGD-6: Gopalganj Pourashava

207. Sub-projects being considered: Road, Drain, Slaughter House, Solid Waste Management, Community Center and Water Supply Systems

Most participants (90%) are not aware about the current planning scheme of the sub-projects to be implemented in the Pourashava under of MGSP.

All participants are supportive of the sub projects of MGSP at their locality. Participants believe that local economy will be improved through implementation of MGSP.


Most roads are narrow; road widening is required.

Insufficient road network on the eastern side of the Pourashava; road expansion is required.

Drain should be constructed before road construction.

Drain should be established beside Madhumati River

Excavation of Madhumati River and Bairagir Canal is required; waste dumping in these river/ canal should be stopped.

Solid waste management system not working well; modern solid waste management system required; there is no specific site for dumping of solid waste; a proper waste dumping site is required.

Waste water treatment is required before discharge into river.

Open drains emit bad smell and cause health hazards.

99

Severe drinking water problem; have a surface water treatment plant which is not enough to supply drinking water; new water treatment plant is required; more overhead water tanks are also required.

Water supply lines are old and run parallel to drains.

Water meter should be introduced to control water use.

Encroachment of canal is common; construction of embankment is needed to discourage encroachment.

Kitchen markets in some wards are in poor condition; renovation is required.

Modern community center is required (at least three); public halls could be renovated as community centers.

A park is requires for entertainment of children.

6.4 Disclosure

208. Copies of the full report (in English) and the summary (in Bengali) will be sent to all the offices of the concerned Pourashavas and City Corporations and will be made available to the public and will also be uploaded in the website of ULBs/ LGED/ BMDF and in the Bank InfoShop. 209. In addition a national workshop has been planned in October, 2013 to present the EMF and SMF to the key stakeholders including field level staff of the implementing agencies (LGED, BMDF), ULBs, community representatives, NGOs, civil society etc. The comments and the findings from the workshop and other public will be reviewed and incorporated in the final EA report.

100

REFERENCES GoB (1997), Environmental Conservation Rules 1997, Department of Environment, Ministry of Environment and Forest, Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh, June 1997. LGED (2008), Environmental Assessment Guideline for LGED Projects, Local Government Engineering Department, GoB, October 2008. Mumtaz, S. (2002) Environmental impact assessment in Bangladesh: a critical review. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev., 22: 163-179 World Bank (2006) Operational Policies, OP- 4.11: Physical Cultural Resources, The World Bank, Washington, D.C., USA, July 2006. World Bank (2004), Good Practice Note: Using Poverty and Social Impact Analysis to Support Development Policy Operations, Washington, D.C., USA. World Bank (2004a), Involuntary Resettlement Sourcebook, Planning and Implementation of Development Projects, Washington, D.C., USA. World Bank (2003), A User’s Guide to Poverty and Social Impact Analysis, Washington, D.C., USA World Bank (2001) Operational Policies, OP- 4.12: Involuntary Resettlement, The World Bank, Washington, D.C., USA, December 2001. World Bank (1999a) Operational Policies, OP- 4.01: Environmental Assessment, The World Bank, Washington, D.C., USA, January 1999. World Bank (1999b) Pollution Prevention and Abatement Handbook 1998: Toward Cleaner Production, Washington, D.C., USA.

101

APPENDIX A Municipal Governance and Services Project (MGSP)

Terms of Reference (ToR)

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

INTRODUCTION

1. The Government of Bangladesh (GoB) intends to enhance the capacity of urban local bodies (municipalities and city corporations) in development and management of urban infrastructure and improve municipal governance and services through undertaking the Municipal Governance and Services Project (MGSP) in selected municipalities and city corporations (urban local bodies). The project will provide performance-based infrastructure improvement block grants and pilot O&M grants to 26 municipalities, comprising four city corporations and 22 municipal governments located along the growth corridors. The Local Government Engineering Department (LGED) under the Ministry of Local Government, Rural Development and Cooperatives will implement the project with participation of the Bangladesh Municipal Development Fund (BMDF)2 and the selected (approximately 200 municipalities) urban local bodies (ULBs). The sub-projects will be implemented by ULBs with the technical and financial support from the LGED and BMDF. The section 2.3 describes the detailed institutional roles and responsibilities. 2. LGED in collaboration with BMDF intends to hire a consulting firm (the Consultant) to carry out an Environmental Assessment (EA) of the proposed MGSP at the preparation stage to ensure that the proposed infrastructure takes environmental concerns into account. The objective of the environmental management of the proposed project is to ensure that neither the municipal development nor the environment is compromised through the project activities.

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

2.1 Project Objective

3. The objectives of the proposed project are to improve municipal governance, basic urban infrastructure services and reduce urban poverty in selected city corporations and municipalities. The objectives will be achieved through an integrated approach including integrated municipal planning, social inclusiveness, and financial accountability and sustainability. The project has been organized in three major technical components, described in detail below, and provisions for project management and emergency response.

2.2 Project Description

Component 1: Municipal Governance Improvement (Total Cost: US $18 million) 4. Component 1.1: Capacity Building for ULBs. The objective of this sub-component will be to

2Established in 2004, BMDF performed well, disbursing a total of US$103 million on a 15:85 loan-grant ratio, with 80% loan recovery rate. Both

the Ministry of Finance (MoF) and the Local Government Division (LGD) support the development of BMDF as a sustainable non-banking financial institution to provide financing to ULBs. Other than the annual block grants from the central Government, BMDF is the only source for

ULBs to borrow for infrastructure development and services provision. The proposed project will make provision for BMDF capacity building, in

Component 4, for the following areas: develop a road map to develop as a sustainable financial intermediary; improve appraisal procedures, and performance assessment.

102

support governance improvement and urban management capacity in all ULBs in Bangladesh. The key activities to be supported are municipal revenue enhancement, improved planning and budgeting, enhanced service delivery and improved accountability.

(a) Improved governance and accountability. This sub-activity will support bottom up and top-down

accountability mechanisms to enhance voice, transparency, and accountability. It will support social accountability mechanisms (e.g. citizen score cards, citizen charters, social audits, and grievance redressal mechanisms), financial management (training, accounting, audits, and reporting), procurement, and monitoring and evaluation.

(b) Improved planning and budgeting. This sub-activity will support integrated urban planning and budgeting to enable ULBs to better prepare, use, update and implement participatory development plans. It will support enhancement of community participation to supervise and monitor municipal sub-projects.

(c) Enhanced service delivery. This sub-activity will support sector-specific training (e.g. solid waste management, urban transport, water supply and sewerage, markets, environment and social safeguards, bus/truck terminal management) and investment planning, management and public-private partnerships.

(d) Municipal revenue enhancement. This sub-activity will aim to improve municipal revenues through improvement of holding taxes and user charges collection and introduction of e-payments systems for various bills (e.g. trade licenses).

5. Component 1.2 Technical Assistance. Technical Assistance (TA) will be provided at a higher level (e.g. LGED) in the form of studies, training, and investments to support improvement of municipal management in Bangladesh. The technical assistance will include: a) Financing ULBs. TA on intergovernmental finances, revenue options, borrowing, and PPP

arrangements. b) Urban Planning. TA will be provided on effective short- and medium-term capital investment

planning and long-term urban planning, zoning laws and guidelines, and GIS. c) Study tours. Establishment and implementation of training programs for municipal elected

officials, concerned LGED and BMDF officials, and urban professionals. d) City corporation governance and service delivery. TA on developing and improving models of

governance and service delivery for city corporations. e) Bangladesh Municipal Development Fund. TA to support BMDF to appraise sub-projects, supervise

local planning and implementation of small- and medium-scale urban investments. Component 2: Basic Urban Services Investment and Maintenance Program (Total Cost: US $182

million)

6. Component 2.1: Basic Urban Services Investment Funding to 26 Urban Local Bodies (ULBs), comprising 4 city corporations and 22 municipalities located along major growth corridors radiating out from Dhaka. It is to complement and support major investments by GoB in national economic infrastructure identified in various studies including the World Bank Growth Study. The mission discussed and agreed with LGED that support to the following basic urban services will be eligible for inclusion in the component: road rehabilitation; new roads/footpaths (only arterial and main connector roads will be included); storm water drainage; bridges and culverts; rehabilitation of water supply systems; public toilets; solid waste collection and disposal (trash bins, carts, tractor/trailers); car parks; street lights; traffic management; and pedestrian underpass or overpasses; wholesale/kitchen markets;

103

bus/truck terminals; and basic urban services in slums/poor settlements. All 26 ULBs will be required to include basic urban services improvements in slums/poor settlements. 7. Following an appraisal, selected ULBs will be informed of their basic annual and total tentative investment support allocation over the project period in advance, providing they meet the eligibility and performance requirements, and stay in compliance annually. Funding will be augmented or decreased based on the results of an annual municipal performance assessment. This enables them to prepare five-year capital investment plans. The allocations are based on the available credit funding, and LGED needs to refine these arrangements from time to time. 8. Component 2.2: Pilot O&M Allocations on a Declining Basis. The preferred option is to provide O&M funding on a declining basis with corresponding increase of own O&M allocations during project period. Tentative plans are to provide: (i) a basic allocation to all 26 ULBs, while they prepare the O&M plans, establish O&M budgets and resources; and (ii) O&M support to participating ULBs for three years on a declining basis. Participating ULBs will have to comply with performance requirements, which will be verified during annual Performance Assessments that will be conducted by LGED using a consultant. LGED may develop other methods to implement the O&M enhancement plan, and discuss during forthcoming missions.

9. Annual performance assessments will be carried out in the 26 ULBs to assess compliance with performance requirements, and determine whether allocations will be reduced or augmented. LGED will undertake the annual performance assessment through a consultant engaged for that purpose. LGED will make recommendations to the LGD and the Bank for any adjustments to the O&M grant fund allocations, based on the report and recommendations of the consultant. The proposed eligibility criteria and performance requirements are detailed in Annex 2.

Component 3: BMDF Operations Support & Institutional Improvement (Total Cost: US $108 million, including 10% contribution from ULBs) 10. Other than the annual block grants from the central Government, BMDF is the only source for ULBs to borrow for basic urban services provision. Registered in 2002 and starting operations in 2004, BMDF performed well, disbursing a total of US$103 million on a 15:85 loan-grant ratio, with an 80% loan recovery rate. Both the Ministry of Finance (MoF) and the Local Government Division (LGD) support the development of BMDF as a sustainable non-banking financial institution to provide financing to ULBs.

11. Source of BMDF Funding. BMDF remits loan repayments to the MoF along with 1% interest, and retains 4% interest. However, without certainty of capital injections, the future of BMDF as a sustainable lending agency is not assured. BMDF informed the mission that MOF has agreed in principle to provide the amount of Bangladeshi Taka 600 million (about US$7.5 million) as endowment funding which will be used by BMDF as seed money for it loan operations. During the discussion with the Secretary of Bank and Financial Institutions Division, MoF, the Secretary indicated that MOF has the intention to provide one-third of International Development Association (IDA) funding as GoB counterpart funds, to be used for loan-grant financing along with Bank funding. The proposed project plans to provide US$90million to support lending operations on a loan-grant mix, as was done under the MSP.

12. Long-term Road Map for BMDF. BMDF needs to develop a road map to set out the vision for its future as a true lending agency that provides financing to ULBs. This would be in the form of a business plan with details of its evolution by 2015, 2020, 2025, 2030, and the future. The business plan should include: future growth scenario, options for capitalization, progressive lending terms, project selection, appraisal and operating procedures, criteria to assess loan financing, allowance for default, conditions

104

applicable to borrowing ULBs, and loan recovery projections including improved O&M of assets created.

Component 4: Project Management and Implementation Support (Total Cost: US$5 million) 13. Consultant services for implementation of Component 2: (i) consultant services for design, supervision, monitoring, reporting, and project management for Component 2 (includes quarterly progress reporting to World Bank); (ii) consultant services for ULBs to prepare and implement subprojects; (iii) incremental staff costs of LGED for providing technical support services to ULBs; (iv) incremental staff costs and consultant services to the Urban Management Support Unit, for capacity building for municipal officials and staff; (v) specialist consultant services for O&M planning and support; (iv) preparation of a national ULB monitoring and evaluation system; and (v) development of a GIS-based land management system to provide the basis for improving property tax revenue of municipalities.

14. Consultant services for implementation of Component 3: (i) consultant services for design, supervision, monitoring, reporting, and project management for Component 3 (includes quarterly progress reporting to World Bank); (ii) consultant services for ULBs to prepare and implement subprojects; (iii) incremental staff costs of BMDF for providing technical support services to ULBs; (iv) incremental staff costs and consultant services to BMDF, for capacity building of municipal officials and staff; (v) specialist consultant services for O&M planning and support; (vi) improving BMDF appraisal procedures; (vii) developing a business plan (road map) for evolution of BMDF as a sustainable lending agency for ULBs; and (viii) special training for engineers of borrowing ULBs.

Component 5: Emergency Response Provision (Total Cost: Zero) 15. The component is included to provide for any potential response necessary for a natural disaster event. In the event that it becomes necessary, funds will be appropriated from the project through reallocation or through providing additional financing.

2.3 Project Implementation and Institutional Arrangements

16. ULBs. Responsibilities of ULBs include: (i) preparation of O&M plan, O&M unit, logistics, and estimating funds and spares/ goods/equipment; (ii) preparation of detailed designs, and bid documents; (iii) supervise construction, carry out measurement of work and certify payments; (iv) use and manage imprest account; (vii) arrange for statutory and private audits.

17. The LGED. The following four roles are envisaged for LGED:

(i) Technical Services Support to (i) provide technical support to ULBs for all subproject preparation (including ULBs receiving funds from BMDF), for project preparation and implementation, using own staff and consultants); and (ii) improve its products and processes through a review and update of: project preparation, appraisals, technical specifications, cost estimating and standard designs. The LGED will also be responsible to develop the national monitoring and evaluation system covering all 316 ULBs, on behalf of the Local Government Division. (ii) Performance Assessments. LGED will engage specialist consultant to verify compliance with annual performance requirements for: (i) performance-based infrastructure; and (ii) O&M grant funding.

105

(iii) Urban Municipal Support Unit (UMSU).The UMSU will: (i) provide capacity building for all 316 ULBs; (ii) expand the scope of services to more practical handholding activities at the level of the ULBs. (iv) MGSP Project Management Office. LGED will set up a Project Management Office (PMO) for project coordination, management, monitoring, evaluation, and reporting (using own staff and consultants). The LGED PMO will be the main contact point for the Bank.

18. BMDF. Responsibilities include: (i) select, appraise and finance basic infrastructure subprojects; (ii) ensure borrowing ULBs comply with eligibility and performance requirements; (iii) prepare road map for a sustainable infrastructure financing agency; (iv) review loan: grant ratio with a view to increase loan portion to by end of the project; (v) provide greater emphasis to financing revenue earning subprojects, particularly using loan only financing; (vi) make efforts to maintain a satisfactory loan recovery performance. 19. Local Government Division of LGD. The LGD will oversee the basic urban services and maintenance program, including the pilot O&M grants. It will provide overall coordination and guidance to the project implementation, through a project steering committee headed by Secretary, Local Government Division. The LGD and other development partners will also use the national ULB monitoring and evaluation system developed under the project for various decision-making processes.

2.4 Project Duration

20. The proposed project will be implemented over a period of six years – zero year plus five years. The zero year will be used to complete project preparation for the entire project including advance procurement of consultants, and detailed preparation of the first year investments. The zero year of the project will be used for detailed project preparation, and eligibility requirements including formulating five year investment plans and O&M organizations and plans, and implementing action to meet the eligibility requirements to participate in the project. Development plans of participating municipalities will be appraised, and the total allocation for each municipality will be fixed, so that municipalities may start planning their investments.

EA REQUIREMENTS

21. The proposed project will be financed by IDA with GoB contribution for land acquisition & management and Municipalities equity for accessing BMDF competitive finance. Since the IDA, GoB and Municipalities are the financing sources of the project, the EAs that will be prepared to comply with the policies and legislative requirement of the World Bank and the GoB.

22. The Government’s Environment Conservation Act (amended 2010) is currently the main legislation relating to environment protection in Bangladesh. This Act is promulgated for environment conservation, environmental standards development and environment pollution control and abatement. Environment Conservation Rules (ECR), 1997 and Amendments provide categorization of industries and projects and identify types of environmental assessment required against respective categories of industries or projects. In addition, the government has several other legislative instruments for urban area development. The Consultant will also need to identify any other laws, regulations and guidelines both at national and regional levels related to environmental assessment.

106

23. In addition, the Bank will require environmental assessment (EA) of projects selected for Bank financing to ensure that they are environmentally sound and sustainable, and thus decision making. EA will take into account the natural environment (air, water, and land), human health and safety, social aspects (involuntary resettlement, indigenous people, and physical cultural resources), trans-boundary and global environmental aspects. The borrower is responsible for carrying out the EA. 24. The exact locations, size and extent and the degree of impact of the subprojects to be funded under the projects will be unknown during appraisal. The project has been classified as Category ‘A’ project since some of the subprojects(construction of new road, pedestrian underpass, bus/track terminal etc.) to be funded under the project may have significant and irreversible environmental impacts due to land development, construction related activities if design and implementation are planned and managed properly. Typical subprojects that may be funded under Component 2 (Basic Infrastructure) and Component 3 (BMDF) includes: new roads, pedestrian underpasses, bus/truck terminals, produce markets, parking lots, etc. Therefore, an Environmental Management Framework (EMF) will be prepared under this assignment to guide preparation of the sub-project specific EAs when identified. Two Bank policies related to environment will be triggered: (a) OP/BP 4.01 Environmental Assessment; and (b) OP/BP 4.11 Physical Cultural Resources to ensure that the project design and implementation are focused on reducing adverse impacts and enhancing positive impacts.

OBJECTIVES

25. The main objective is the assignment is to prepare an Environmental Management Framework of the project, which will provide general policies, guidelines, and procedures to be integrated into the design and implementation of all sub-projects under the proposed project. In order to achieve the main objective, the specific objectives of the assignment are to (i) assess the environmental practices of the recently completed project ‘Municipal Services Project (MSP)’; (ii) evaluate the potential overall environmental impacts of the proposed project activities; (iii) suggest subproject specific standard environmental mitigation and monitoring plan with unit costing; (iv) identify the institutional barriers and capacity building needs for environmental management; and (v)agree on the institutional arrangement for the environmental management. The ultimate objective is the assignment is to prepare an Environmental Management Framework of the project, which will provide general policies, guidelines, and procedures to be integrated into the design and implementation of all sub-projects under the proposed project.

SCOPES

26. The Consultant shall use the inception report preparation period (two week) to familiarize with the project details. The Consultant shall interact with other preparation consultants to determine how the preparation of the EMF fits into overall project preparation/project cycle; how overlapping areas are to be jointly addressed; and to appropriately plan the timing of the deliverables of the EA process. This section describes the key scope of the works and the annex provides a suggested structure of the report. The scope of works includes the translation of the report including the framework in Bangla. The scopes of consultant services include the following, but not necessarily be limited to:

Section A: Overall Environmental Assessment

Approach and Methodology

107

i) Develop methodological framework for this study which include an assessment on the expected positive and negative impacts of the overall environmental management in the urban sector;

ii) The report will also identify Public consultation frequency location and discussion issues etc. and those issues that would be raised in the public consultation during EMF preparation stage;

iii) Develop study design (methodology and work program) following this TOR and the given timeframe to capture information, analyze data and prepare reports. The consultant will demonstrate the detailed methodology, sampling design, interview schedules, sources of information and reporting schedule in an inception report upon mobilization;

iv) Prepare the inception report, present the approach and methodology to LGED, BMDF and the World Bank; and

v) Revise the approach and methodology based on the recommendations of the LGED, BMDF and the World Bank.

Review of Relevant Policies and Legislation

i) Review current relevant policies, legislations and EIA procedures/practices of the Government of Bangladesh (GoB) related to the sustainable urban sector development and explain its implication to the proposed project;

ii) Review the World Bank safeguard policies and explain its implication to the proposed project; iii) Explain what is meant by physical cultural resources as per World Bank OP/BP 4.11, and the

requirements to protect cultural resources and procedures to follow to address cultural finds;

iv) Review the national laws, regulations, and requirements related to the physical cultural

resources; and

v) Provide a Table with list of all necessary clearances, permissions and disclosure requirements of the World Bank and GoB.

Assessment of Existing Environmental Practices and Capacity Assessment

i) Assess the environmental management and practices in recently completed Municipal Service Project and its additional financing by (a) reviewing the environmental management framework; (b) scrutinizing documentations (environmental screening/assessment reports, monitoring reports etc.) for different at LGED, BMDF and ULBs; (c) visiting at least 5 different types infrastructure in 10 different locations (i.e., same types of infrastructure in 2 different locations); and (d) consulting with officials and communities;

ii) Evaluate the institutional and staff capacity of LGED and BMDF and carryout training needs assessment for environmental management; and

iii) Identify required staffing and consultant needs in LGED and BMDF for appropriate environmental management in the proposed project, prepare Terms of References (ToR) and estimate budget to be included in the project document;

iv) Assess the capacity needs of ULBs to effectively implement the subproject considering due diligence on environmental management;

v) Review the environmental issues incorporated in the LGED’s Environmental Guidelines. vi) Provide guidelines for required staffing, resources and training for ULB environmental staff

Overall Project Baseline and Environmental Impacts

108

i) Divide the total proposed project area into 5 zones/regions based on environmental criteria and collect information on the existing environment scenario of the each zone/region separately from secondary sources and identify gaps to be filled;

ii) Update the baseline information of the selected zones on physical, biological and socio-cultural environmental through primary surveys at representative and sensitive locations, and identification of all macro-level environmental issues;

iii) Describe the water supply, sanitation, wastewater and solid waste management systems in ULBs;

iv) Assess overall environment impacts of the project – level of significance, extent, irreversible vs. reversible etc.;

v) Assess whether the project will create additional liability i.e., the current environmental condition will be improved or worsened as a result of the proposed investments; and

vi) Assess whether existing associated facilities capable to support the improved system for example as a result of improved collection of solid waste, will the project be adding to or create more adverse impacts in a dumpsite that is not well operated or designed to receive more wastes;

vii) Assess the efficacy of earlier waste management systems and recommend best practices based on the analysis of the alternatives.

Stakeholder Analysis, Consultation and Participation

i) Identify key stakeholders of the proposed project and assess the power relationships as well as influence and interests of stakeholders involved in development of the project;

ii) Carryout a stakeholder analysis to categorize the most important actors for preparation, design, implementation and monitoring of the proposed project;

iii) Inform, consult, and be engaged in dialogue with stakeholders regarding proposed project design, likely impacts of the interventions (both positive and negative), environmental enhancement measures, possible measures for environmental mitigation/compensation, implementation and monitoring of mitigation/compensation measures, and specific recommendations regarding vulnerable groups, including significant common property that may require adjustments in project design3;

iv) Examine opportunities and conditions for the participation of the stakeholders including vulnerable groups in the project cycle; and

v) Document the consultation process (photographs, signature of participants) and record the discussions including options and suggestions provided by the participants for consideration in the project design, implementation and monitoring.

Section – B: Environmental Management Framework 27. Through background studies and sample sub-project/case studies a number of most relevant environmental issues associated with the different types of sub projects will come out which would be the basis of the formulation of the EMF.

Sub-Project Description i) Describe the key information required to describe the subproject for environmental assessment;

and ii) Describe how to present physical lay-out and other important information like construction

3consultation must be carried out at least 3 different ULBs.

109

duration/schedule and operating plans.

Sub-project Influence Area and Environmental Baseline

i) Describe the steps to define the project influence area for different category subprojects; ii) Describe how to define and identify the Important Environmental Features (IEFs) within the

project influence area; and iii) Prepare the guidelines on how to identify, collect and present subproject specific environmental

baseline and map in a way that information could be used for the purpose of environmental assessment and monitoring.

Alternative Analysis

i) Describe clearly the steps to be followed in subproject specific alternative analysis i.e., (a) identify and define alternatives; (b) development and refinement of alternatives and technical methodologies; (c) analysis and evaluation from environmental and economic perspective; and (d) selection of the locally preferred alternative;

ii) Describe the key elements in presenting findings and explanations of the alternative analysis; and

iii) Define the project approach to adopt the environmental sound alternative option.

Environmental Screening, Assessment and Management Plan

i) Develop environmental screening and assessment methodology for the subprojects, which will be applied to the component 1 and 2 of the proposed project;

ii) Describe in detail the process to determine the potential impacts at the subproject level due to the project interventions through identification, analysis and evaluation on sensitive areas (natural habitats; sites of historic, cultural and conservation importance), settlements and villages/agricultural areas or Important Environmental Features (IEFs);

iii) Describe how to distinguish between significant positive and negative impacts, direct and indirect impacts, immediate and long-term impacts, and unavoidable or irreversible impacts;

iv) Describe how to assess the environmental impact of the proposed investments on overall municipalities environmental conditions;

v) Describe the process to identify feasible and cost effective mitigation/compensation measures for each impact predicted as above to reduce potentially significant adverse environmental impacts to acceptable levels;

vi) Provide guidance on how to prepare the environmental screening and assessment report fulfilling the requirement of GoB and the World Bank;

vii) Identify the possible environmental impacts of the different kinds of proposed infrastructure under the project;

viii) Recommend standard feasible and cost-effective measures to prevent or reduce significant negative impacts to acceptable levels relevant to the project;

ix) Prepare Environmental Code of Practice (ECoP) for different types of infrastructure suitable at various stage of project implementation;

110

x) Describe in details the process for preparing site specific environmental management plan

(EMP)4 along with standard template for environmental mitigation/compensation and monitoring;

xi) Describe how to estimate the costing of EMP and ECoP5;

xii) Prepare occupational health and safety guidelines relevant to the proposed project; xiii) Prepare guidelines how to (a) carryout investigation and inventory of physical cultural resources

likely to be affected by project; (b) prepare documentation of significance of such resources; (c) assess the nature and extent of potential impacts on the resources; and (d) prepare and implement mitigation plan.

xiv) Provide a guideline for recommending some environmental enhance program as appropriate as subproject specific.

xv) Describe the set of special environmental clauses (SECs)6 to be included in the Technical Specification of the bidding documents.

Institutional responsibility

i) Define the roles and responsibilities of officials, staff, consultants and contractors of LGED, BMDF and ULBs on environmental management;

ii) Describe in details who will (a) collect the baseline information; (b) carryout the alternative analysis; (c) conduct environmental screening and assessment; (d)carry out the consultation; (e) prepare EMP and budget;(f) review and verify the environmental screening/assessment report; (g) take environmental clearance; (h) implement the environmental mitigation activities (i) carrying out environmental monitoring; (j) supervise environmental mitigation and monitoring; (k) design, implement and apply the environmental management information system (EMIS); and (l) prepare quarterly progress report on environmental management;

iii) Describe the steps to be followed to ensure environmental considerations are properly addressed in final civil engineering design and estimation;

iv) Prepare the ToR of Third Party Monitoring Firm for independently monitor the overall performance of environmental management; and

v) Provide necessary input in updating the EMIS which will be reviewed by the LGED Environment & Climate Change Unit; Prepare the ToR for establishing the EMIS.

Consultation, public awareness, disclosure and grievance redress

i) Develop the guidelines for carrying out consultation and public awareness for subproject at different stage of project cycle;

ii) Describe the procedure to answer subproject-related queries and address complaints, disputes, and grievances about any aspect of the subproject, including disagreements regarding the assessment and

mitigation of environmental impacts7;

iii) List which documents need to be translated in Bangla; and iv) Describe the disclosure requirement of environmental documents at different stage of project and

4 The EMP will have 2 separate plans: environmental mitigation/compensation plan and environmental monitoring plan. Both plans should be for

pre-construction, construction and operation phase. 5 The cost of environmental mitigation/compensation for pre-construction and construction phase must be included in the bidding document as fixed budget. 6 This also includes the provision of penalty in case contractor failed to comply party or fully to the environmental requirements.

7A mechanism for forming Grievance Redress Committee (GRC) will be described in each ULB to ensure proper presentation of complaints and

grievances, as well as impartial hearings and transparent decisions. The GR system should consistent between environmental and social issues.

111

subprojects so that the stakeholder consultation, full information on the designs and environmental mitigation measures will be disclosed and made accessible to common people.

STRUCTURE OF REPORTS

28. The Consultant is required to prepare the reports that are concise and limited to significant policy, institutional and environmental issues. The main text should focus on findings, conclusions and recommended actions, supported by summaries of the data collected and citations for any references used in interpreting those data. Detailed or uninterrupted data are not appropriate in the main text and should be presented in appendices or a separate volume. Unpublished documents used in the assessment may not be readily available and should also be assembled in an appendix. 29. Organize the report according to the outline below. This is a very generic template and the Consultant will propose the report structure in the inception report.

Executive Summary

Section – A: Overall Environmental Assessment Introduction

Approach and Methodology

Policy, Legal and Administrative Framework ((a)description of available policies, legislation and practice; (b) assessment in the context of sustainable urban development; (c) policies related to physical cultural resources; and (d) list of the required clearance, permission and disclosure requirements)

Assessment of environmental management in MSP ((a) the earlier EMF; (b) quality of environmental screening/assessment; (c) quality of implementation of mitigation activities; (d) quality of environmental monitoring; (e) available budget for environmental management; (f) supervision; and (g) institutional structure

Assessment of staffing and capacity building needs ((a) available staff with academic and professional experience on environmental management; (b) additional staff and consultant requirement for the project; (c) capacity building needs and plan; and (d) budget for capacity building

Overall project baseline focusing on (a) Physical Resources (Topography, climate, soils, geology, land use etc.); (b) Ecological Resources (Natural ecosystem, flora and fauna, wildlife and wetland); (c) Environmental Quality (Air quality, Noise level, Groundwater, Surface Water Quality; (d) Cultural Resources sites (historical, religious, or architectural); and (e) Environmentally sensitive areas.

Overall environmental impact of the project

Stakeholder analysis, consultation and participation during environment assessment and EMF preparation stage

Section – B: Environmental Management Framework Objectives and General Principles of the EMF

Sub-project Description (key elements and steps to be followed to present subproject description)

Sub-Project Area, Influence Area and Environmental Baseline (steps for defining project area, influence area and collecting and presenting environmental baseline for subprojects)

Alternative Analysis (Describe how to carryout subproject alternative analysis; selection of locally preferred option; presenting findings and explanations of alternative analysis; project approach for

112

environmentally sound alternative option)

Environmental Screening, Assessment and Management Plan (Environmental screening and assessment methodology; process to determine subproject impacts, feasible and cost-effective mitigation measures; standard ECoP, environmental screening and assessment reporting; elements and steps for site specific EMP preparation; possible potential impacts of different kind of subprojects to be financed under proposed project; standard mitigation and monitoring measures; EMP and ECoP costing; occupational health and safety etc.)

Institutional Arrangement (responsibility of different stakeholders at different stage of project cycle)

Environmental Management Information System (systematic computer based monitoring system)

Grievance Redress Mechanism (Steps to followed to record and manage complains)

Consultation, Public Awareness and Disclosure (steps to be followed for consultation, public awareness and disclosure; related budget requirements);

Environmental budget & training requirements.

List of References

Annexes: Data and Unpublished Reference Documents Terms of Reference of staff and consultants Records of Consultations (minutes and photographs) Template for Environmnetal Screening Environmental Code of Practice (EoCP) Template for Site Specific Environmental Mitigation Plan Template for Environmental Monitoring Plan Organogram of the Project showing the details of environmental management Terms of Reference for EMIS Firm Terms of Reference for Third Party Monitoring Firm Occupational Health and Safety Guidelines

DURATION OF ASSIGNMENT

30. Time is an important essence for the assignment, which will be closely coordinated with the preparation of the project. The assignment shall be of 3 (three) months from the date of contract signing. However, the Consultant is required to submit an acceptable draft report for disclosure within 2 (two) months of the contract signing.

CONSULTANT INPUT

31. The firm shall have past experiences to prepare IEE and EIA in urban sector for foreign aided projects. The consulting firm/institution/association should have at least 10 years of in-depth working experience. The assignment requires interdisciplinary analysis and the team must include professional with EIA specialist, environmental management specialist, institutional specialist, urban planner, ecologist, occupational health and safety specialist, archaeologist, communication specialist, field investigators. Following is an indicative allocation of manpower for the study. The Consultant is free to employ resources i.e. support staff as they see fit to carry out the assignment within stipulated time and meet the requirement of this service.

Position Indicative Person-month

Team Leader, Environment Impact Assessment Specialist: Masters degree in 03

113

Position Indicative Person-month

relevant field with at least 15 years of relevant experience with 5 years of experience as Team Leader

Environmental Management Specialist: Masters degree in relevant field with at least 10 years of relevant experience in consultancy

03

Institutional Specialist: Masters degree with at least 7 years of relevant experience in consultancy

02

Urban Planner: Bachelor degree in urban planning with at least 7 years of relevant experience in consultancy

02

Ecologist: At least 7 years of relevant experience in consultancy 01

Occupational Health & Safety Specialist At least 7 years of relevant experience in consultancy

1.0

Archaeologist: At least 7 years of relevant experience in consultancy 0.5

Communication Specialist: At least 5 years of relevant experience in consultancy 1.5

Field Investigators-02: At least 3 years of relevant experience 02 (for each investigator)

32. The consultants shall provide for all tools, models, software, hardware and supplies, as required to complete the assignment satisfactorily. These should be widely recognised or accepted. All supporting information gathered by the consultant in undertaking these terms of reference would be made available to the client.

REPORT SUBMISSION

33. The consultant is expected to provide the following reports, as per the schedule given. The Consultants are expected to allocate resources, such as for surveys, keeping this output schedule in mind.

Item Due date

(1) Inception Report 2 weeks after contract signing

(2) Presentation to Client on proposed methodology and approach 2 weeks after contract signing

(3) Draft Environmental Report 6 weeks after contract signing

(5) 2nd

Draft Report after incorporating comments from clients and Bank with Bangla version (This version should be in such standard that it can be disclosed in both government and Bank websites)

8 weeks after contract signing

(6) Conduct National Consultation Workshop 9 weeks after contract signing

(7) Final Report 11 weeks after contract signing

(8) Final Report translation in Bangla 12 weeks after contract signing

INPUTS TO BE PROVIDED BY LGED AND BMDF

34. The LGED and BMDF will make experienced officials available during first 2 months (full-time) and rest 1 month (part-time) term of the assignment. The LGED and BMDF will ensure that the Consultant has access to all information required and documentation especially related to the Municipal Service Project. 35. The LGED and BMDF will provide liaison and communication with other Government Authorities if and when required and facilitate different meetings, focus group discussion and workshops based on initial planning. 36. The LGED and BMDF will provide logistic support for the filed visits.

114

APPENDIX B

Municipal Governance and Services Project (MGSP)

List of Participants in thr FGDs

Municipal Governance and Services Project...

Documents

Transcript of Municipal Governance and Services Project...