Road Network Development Program, Project 3 (Masalli to ......Project 3 (Masalli to Astara Motorway...

Bi-Annual Environmental Monitoring Report

# 5 Bi-Annual Report (July–December 2013) January 2014

AZE: Road Network Development Program,

Project 3 (Masalli to Astara Motorway – Covering Sections B

and C)

Prepared by Azer Road Service OJC, Ministry of Transport for the Asian Development Bank.

Bi-annual Environmental Monitoring Report

Project Number: 39176

January 2014

Republic of Azerbaijan: Road Network Development Program: Project I Masalli to Astara Motorway

(Financed by the Asian Development Bank)

Report 5: 1st July 2013 to 31st December 2013

Part II - Loan 2831 AZE, Covering Sections B & C

Prepared by Azer Road Service OJC (Ministry of Transport) for the Asian Development Bank (ADB).

The bi-annual environmental monitoring report is a document of the borrower. The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent those of ADB’s Board of Directors, Management, or staff, and may be preliminary in nature.

Fifth Bi-annual environmental monitoring report for the Masalli to Astara Motorway (Part II) ii

CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS (As of 1 December 2013)

Currency Unit – Azerbaijan New Manat (AZN)

AZN 1.00 = USD 1.27 USD 1.00 = AZN 0.79

ABBREVIATIONS

ADB – Asian Development Bank ARS – Azerbaijan Road Service EIA – Environmental Impact Assessment EMP – Environmental Management Plan EPM – Environmental Protection Manager EPP – Environmental Protection Plan GRM – Grievance Redress Mechanism MENR – Ministry of Ecology and Natural Resources PIU – Project Implementation Unit PPE – Personal Protective Equipment SSEMP – Site-Specific Environmental Management Plan

WEIGHTS AND MEASURES m – Metre km – Kilometre

Fifth Bi-annual environmental monitoring report for the Masalli to Astara Motorway (Part II) iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................... 5

A. Construction Activities and Project Progress during previous six months ....... 5

B. Project organization and environmental management team ........................... 7

C. Relationships with Contractors, owner, lender, etc. ........................................ 7

II. ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING ........................................................................... 8

A. Status ........................................................................................................... 8

B. Results ........................................................................................................... 8

C. Action ........................................................................................................... 9

III. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT........................................................................10

A. Status ......................................................................................................... 10

B. Documents ................................................................................................... 13

C. Inspections and Audits ................................................................................. 13

D. Non-Compliance and Corrective Actions ...................................................... 14

E. Consultations and Complaints ...................................................................... 15

F. Emerging Issues .......................................................................................... 17

G. Conclusions ................................................................................................. 17

IV. APPENDICES .........................................................................................................18

Appendix 1: Photographs ..................................................................................... 18

Appendix 2: Environmental Monitoring Results ..................................................... 20

Appendix 3: Example Site Audit Checklist ............................................................ 38

Fifth Bi-annual environmental monitoring report for the Masalli to Astara Motorway (Part II) iv

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE 1: ORGANISATION CHART FOR ÖZGÜN LLC ...................................................... 7

FIGURE 1: LACK OF ACCEPTABLE HAZARDOUS MATERIAL STORAGE AND DRAINAGE FACILITIES AT THE SECTION B CONTRACTOR’S CAMP ..........18

FIGURE 2: THE CLEAN AND WELL-EQUIPPED SECTION B WORKSHOPS ....................18

FIGURE 3: THE MODERN CONCRETE PLANT (STILL UNDER CONSTRUCTION) (L) AND CLINIC AT THE SECTION B SECTION B CONTRACTOR’S CAMP (R) ...........18

FIGURE 4: ADDRESSING ISSUES HIGHLIGHTED ON SECTION B LATE IN 2013: TOP LEFT: CONSTRUCTION OF SEDIMENT POND AT CONCRETE PLANT. TOP RIGHT: CONSTRUCTION OF WHEEL WASHER. MIDDLE LEFT: IMPROVEMENT OF CAMP DRAINAGE. MIDDLE RIGHT: NEW BUND INSIDE WORKSHOP. BOTTOM LEFT: NEW OIL STORAGE AREA. BOTTOM RIGHT: NEW EXTRACTOR FAN IN KITCHEN. .............................................................19

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE 1: INSTRUCTIONS TO SECTION B CONTRACTOR DURING THE LAST SIX MONTHS ................................................................................................................................14

TABLE 2: GRIEVANCE REGISTER – SECTION B ...................................................................16

Fifth Bi-annual environmental monitoring report for the Masalli to Astara Motorway (Part II) 5

I. INTRODUCTION

A. Construction Activities and Project Progress during previous six months

1. The Masalli to Astara Motorway is a new 62 km motorway section of the M-3 highway corridor that links the capital city, Baku, to the south of the country and the town of Astara, which straddles the Azeri/Iranian border. The project is split into three sections; A (0 - 22.15 km), B (22.15 - 45.00 km), and C (45.00 – 62.14 km).

2. The Executing Agency for the project is the Azeri Road Service (ARS) Open Joint Stock Company.1

3. Following screening,2 an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) was carried out for the project in 2007. The EIA report was approved by ARS and ADB, and has served as a basis for the development of the specification and contract documents, and for the preparation and pricing of the Contractor Environmental Management Plan (EMP).

4. The Engineer appointed by ARS is Nippon Koei UK Ltd. The construction contract for Section B was awarded to Özgün Construction Industry and Trading Co. Inc. Section C was awarded to Polat LLC in November 2013.

5. The first bi-annual environmental monitoring report covered the period 1st March to 31st August 2011. The second bi-annual environmental monitoring report covered the period 1st September 2011 to 31st May 20123. The third report covered the period 1st June 2011 to 31st December 2012. The fourth report covered the period 1st January 2013 to 30th June 2013. The present report covers the period 1st July to 31st December 2013, and has been split according to loan source into two reports; Part I, covering Section A and Lenkaran Bridge (Loan 2354 AZE), and Part II, covering Sections B & C (Loan 2831 AZE).

6. Key milestones relating to mobilisation are summarised below:

• Overall Contract agreement: 15th Dec 2010.

• The Engineer mobilised on 21st February 2011.

• Section B Contract Agreement: 29th March 2013.

• Notice to Commence for Section B was issued on 18th June 2013.

• Earthworks began on Section B in August 2013.

• Section C Contract Agreement: 4th November 2013.

• Notice to Commence for Section C has not yet been issued.

7. As the notice to commence for Section C has yet to be issued, the Contractor is unable to begin any preparatory work on environmental protection, and that contract will therefore not be discussed further in the present report. It is expected that mobilisation will commence during the next monitoring period.

1 Formerly called “The Road Transport Service Department” (The change of name took effect on 22nd February 2007). 2 Screening was carried out according to ADB’s Environment Policy and Operations Manual (OM) 20. The project was classified as Category

A, principally due to the anticipated resettlement issues triggering the ADB Policy on Involuntary Resettlement (1995). 3 Due to the extended period of inactivity during the winter season, and so that the present report includes the results of the ADB mid-term

review.


8. Key milestones and construction activities relating to the past six months’ work are summarised below:

Section B

• During the present reporting period the Contractor completed construction of his main camp and equipment facilities.

• Aside from camp establishment, the Contractor has concentrated his efforts on the following Work items: clearing/grubbing, topsoil removal/stockpiling, removal/ replacement of unsuitable materials, Utility relocation and installation of pipe culverts.

• One box culvert was also completed during the reporting period. No bridge works have been started to date.

• Interim Payment Certificates (IPC) 2 and 3 have been submitted by the Contractor in the reporting period for Works executed each month up to the 31 December 2013. Interim Payment Certificate 2 has been paid. Interim Payment Certificate 3 is under processing for payment.

• The Contractor has submitted a draft of Variation Order No 1 (VO1) for the Engineer’s review and comment.


B. Project organization and environmental management team

9. The Section B contractor’s EPM is Reshad Kerimov, the previous Section A EPM. The overall organisation of the Özgün team is provided in Figure 1 below.

10. The PIU’s Safeguards Specialist, Ms. Ilaha Ilyasova, is no longer responsible for the project. She has not yet been replaced, but the PIU is currently searching for a candidate.

11. There have been no changes to the existing environmental management team within the Engineer, other than the recruitment of a Biodiversity Expert, Dr. Julian Caldecott, who is responsible for oversight of ecological issues associated with the construction activities in the vicinity of Moscow Forest (km 39+500).

Figure 1: Organisation Chart for Özgün LLC

C. Relationships with Contractors, Owner, Lender, etc.

12. The relationships between contractors, Engineer, Owner, and Lender are considered normal working relationships.

13. At the working level, communication with regards to environmental issues remains good; the specialists mentioned in Section B above are in frequent communication and consultation.


II. ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING

A. Status

Section B

14. Pre-construction monitoring took place on the 26th July 2013, followed by regular monthly monitoring in accordance with the SSEMP.

B. Results

Section B

15. Monthly environmental monitoring has been carried out at Section B work sites, and seven sets of results are therefore available for the present reporting period. The monitoring results are presented in Appendix 2.

16. All water quality monitoring results for all determinands and all monitoring stations were below Azeri national standards during the present reporting period. Some further observations on the results are provided below:

• Water temperature decreased at all stations from July to October, as expected considering seasonal patterns.

• Turbidity and BOD vary very little between upstream and downstream monitoring stations. At many locations, levels of determinands actually decrease as they move downstream.

• There is practically no variance in pH levels throughout the reporting period at each station.

• Heavy metal levels are all well below the national standards, and show very little variance between the pre-construction monitoring and the end of the present reporting period.

• Nitrates / Nitrites and other major ions are well below the standards at all locations and show very little variance with the pre-construction monitoring.

17. All air quality monitoring results for all determinands and all monitoring stations were below or at Azeri national standards during the present reporting period. Some further observations on the results are provided below:

• NO2 and CO readings gradually reduced throughout the monitoring period. This is not expected to be attributable to the works, or any improvement in practices; it is more likely a result of increased rainfall due to seasonal change.

• Particulate levels were at the national limits at both operational borrow pits during the August, September and October 2013 monitoring. Despite this, average particulate results were lower during the present reporting period in comparison to the previous reporting period.

18. Noise and vibration monitoring results showed little variance across the reporting period, and all results were well below the permitted limits.


C. Action

19. No action is required on Section B in response to the monitoring results from the present reporting period.


III. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT

A. Status

Section B

20. Since the previous reporting period the Section B contractor has recruited an EPM, who is the previous Section A EPM. This is advantageous due to the EPM having relevant experience, but disadvantageous due to the abandonment of the more problematic Section A (See Report 5 Part I for further details).

21. As a result of the recruitment of the EPM, good progress has been made on environmental and social issues since the previous Biannual Report:

• All required licences, permits, and subcontracts have been successfully organised;

• The contractor’s camp has been installed with relatively high standards of environmental consideration (see Figures 2 & 3 of Appendix 1);

o The stores and workshop areas are well built and maintained, and are equipped with effective waste oil storage facilities;

o Worker accommodation is acceptable, and equipped with functioning heating and air conditioning. Bathrooms are communal, but were very clean during site inspections;

o There are ample first aid and fire-fighting posts dotted around the camp, as well as an abundance of signs reminding staff of health and safety matters;

o All plant and vehicles appear to be new and / or well maintained. The backup generator was new and therefore had efficient sound insulation;

• Health and Safety are being taken seriously; a visit was made to the clinic, which was impressive, and all staff were observed to be wearing the correct PPE;

• Pre-construction monitoring, and regular monthly monitoring has been taking place in accordance with the SSEMP;

• Site inspections and reporting have been carried out and submitted on time.

22. The major environmental management activity during the present reporting period has been a biodiversity investigation into the “Moscow Forest” – an isolate of the Hirkan National Park that the road will pass at km 39+500. A biodiversity specialist was hired by the Engineer to carry out the investigation, which took place during November 2013. Full details of this investigation are provided in a separate report4, but a summary of the purpose, activities, findings, and recommendations are provided below.

23. Purpose & activities: The objectives of the investigation were as follows:

• To determine whether the road alignment encroached on the forest area, by cross-checking the design drawings, satellite imagery, GPS coordinates, and on-site pegging out;

• To determine the feasibility of shifting the road alignment, should encroachment of the forest be likely;

4 See Draft Biodiversity Impacts Management Plan for the ‘Moscow Forest’


• To confirm the boundaries of the Hirkan National Park and other relevant cadastral issues;

• To survey the Moscow Forest to determine its ecological importance, understand its character, and observe the extent of current anthropological impacts;

• Using the results of the above survey in conjunction with information provided in meetings with relevant stakeholders, to develop suitable mitigation measures and offsets, which will be included in a Biodiversity Impacts Management Plan and in the contractor’s additional SSEMP for the Moscow Forest Area5.

24. Findings: The key results of the investigation were as follows:

• It was confirmed that construction of the road would result in the loss of approximately 1 ha of the Moscow Forest, however the forest area to be lost is on municipal land and is not part of the Hirkan National Park;

• Shifting the road alignment to avoid the forest would result in the resettlement of approximately 12 houses;

• The forest is presently used by local residents for grazing cattle and some wood-cutting. A stream along the eastern edge of the forest is used as a dumping site for municipal waste. These activities are causing negative environmental impacts on the forest.

• It was concluded that keeping the planned alignment but employing mitigation measures and offsets would be more beneficial to the forest than shifting the alignment.

25. Recommendations: A number of mitigation measures and offsets were proposed, as follows:

• Design changes proposed include:

o Diversion of the stream into an unlined earthen channel rather than the proposed concrete channel;

o Providing a road-runoff collection channel upstream of the diverted stream;

o Moving the underpass at km 39+650 to a new location between km 38+000 and 39+000, and to provide an additional underpass somewhere beyond km 40+000;

o Installation of rigid “New Jersey” crash barriers alongside the road, and enforcing an 80 km/hr speed limit;

• Additional construction mitigation measures proposed include:

o Installation of temporary fencing and noise barriers during construction;

o Presence of representative of Hirkan National Park during certain activities (for example, forest clearance);

o Installation of silt fences;

o Limiting access to the site to be only from the RoW and not from the adjacent village;

o Ensuring that cut trees fall away from the forest;

o Noise, vibration and air quality monitoring in the adjacent village;

• Offset measures proposed are as follows:

5 An SSEMP is already in place covering all other works on Section B, other than the 1 km section at Moscow Forest.


o A biodiversity inventory of the area that is to be cleared, and of the wider Moscow Forest;

o Fencing of the entire forest to prevent grazing and tree cutting;

o De-isolation of the forest via a program to maintain/regenerate a corridor of natural habitat between the main area of the National Park and the Moscow Forest;

o Encouragement of organic farming around the Moscow Forest.

26. In meetings held at the end of November 2013 between ARS, ADB and the Engineer it was decided that the SSEMP could not be finalised until the biodiversity survey was carried out. Considering the scheduled start of construction work in the area of June 2014, it was decided that the biodiversity survey would take place in or around April 2014. It was also decided that the implementation of mitigation and offset measures would be carried out in three phases, as follows:

• Phase 1: (a) draft BIMP and SSEMP; (b) develop terms of reference for Ecological and Biodiversity Inventory; (c) identify, recruit and mobilise scientists for inventory.

• Phase 2: (a) implement Ecological and Biodiversity Inventory; (b) finalise BIMP and SSEMP. (c) mitigated construction of motorway; (d) fencing of HNP.

• Phase 3: a) implementation of other off-setting investments.


B. Documents

27. The draft SSEMP has been prepared by the Section B contractor to an acceptable standard. As described above, the SSEMP will be revised following completion of the Ecological and Biodiversity Inventory.

28. Site checklists are being regularly completed by the Section B EPM; an example checklist is provided in Appendix 3.

C. Inspections and Audits

29. No major audits by ADB took place during the reporting period, although the ADB’s project team have visited the site.

30. A team working on a regional safeguards assessment (“Improving of Environmental Safeguards in Central and West Asia”) visited the Section B site on the 8th, 9th, and 10th of October. The team conducted a site visit in the company of the EPM, and inspected the relevant documentation. Although no official communication has been received, it is understood that the team viewed the safeguards compliance favourably.

31. The Section B contractor’s EPM conducts ad hoc site visits on a daily basis, with a full audit of all sites once a week.

32. The Engineer’s Environmental Specialist has made visits to all construction sites during the reporting period.

33. The Executing Agency has made a number of ad hoc visits to site as required.


D. Non-Compliance and Corrective Actions

Section B

34. During a November 2013 site visit by the Engineer’s Environmental Specialist, a number of non-compliances were noted on Section B, as follows:

• Wheel washing facilities have not been installed at the entrance of the Contractor’s camp.

• Noise barriers have only been installed along part of the western perimeter of the Contractor’s camp, and not along the entire western boundary, as specified in the SSEMP.

• Vehicle washing was observed to be taking place outside the camp entrance.

• Site drainage arrangements require improvement; standing water was evident in areas.

• The kitchen is not equipped with an extractor fan system.

• The area of the workshop building that is being used for the storage of oil drums is not bunded.

• Similarly, drums of oil are stored without a suitable bund in the storage building adjacent to the workshop.

• The gasket on the fuel station bund requires attention to ensure that, in the event of failure of the tank, fuel would not be able to leak out of the bund;

• Two barrels of trichloroethylene were stored outside the laboratory in an unsecure, unbunded area. Trichloroethylene is harmful to human health and pollutes both water and atmosphere.

35. The above issues were discussed on site with the EPM, followed up by a letter formalising the need to take action.

36. By January 2014, photographic evidence was submitted to the Engineer that showed almost all of the above issues were either resolved or were in the process of being addressed. Figure 9 reproduces some of the photographs mentioned above.

Table 1: Instructions to Section B Contractor During the last Six Months

No Date Description of Instruction

1 04/09/2013 Letter No 029

Requirement for additional underpasses and service roads

2 04/11/2013 Letter No 065

Setting out of alignment for Moscow forest

3 06/12/2013 Letter No 099

Notice of non-compliance for numerous environmental issues


E. Consultations and Complaints

Section B

37. Public consultations were carried out in Haftoni settlement, with the participation of Haftoni, Laj and Kargalan villages, on 27th June 2013. The consultation consisted of a presentation by the EPM, which focussed on three main subjects:

• The construction process and schedule;

• HIV awareness; and

• The Grievance Redress Mechanism.

38. Following the presentation, attendees were able to ask questions. Questions received related to the provision of employment by the contractor, and to the planned underpass locations. Public information leaflets were also distributed at the meeting.

39. A further public consultation meeting was held on the 6th January 2014 at the Contractor’s camp. Attendees to the meeting were residents and authorities from Luveser and Mamusta villages. The format of the meeting was very similar to the June 2013 meeting, and the questions posed by attendees were also very similar.

40. One grievance and one request were lodged with the Section B Contractor during the present reporting period. A summary of the grievances to date and how they were resolved is provided in Table 2 overleaf.


Table 2: Grievance Register – Section B

No Tranche Location Date

Received

How grievance

was received Plaintiff

Description of the

issues/complaints

Contact

details Notes, undertaken actions Status

1 Section B Haftoni

settlement 15.08.2013 From local

Municipality Rovshen Zeynalov

During the delivery of

materials construction

vehicles caused dust on local

roads

050-546-86-20

Contractor appointed the

water truck on that roads and

the local roads had been

watered by sprinkler truck on

July, August and during dry

weather periods every hour

Solved

2 Section B Haftoni

settlement 26.08.2013 From local

Municipality Rovshen Zeynalov

Contractor had been

requested for recruited

workers from close

communities

050-546-86-20

Request was accepted and a

15 workers recruited from

close communities

Solved


F. Emerging Issues

41. No emerging issues are reported.

G. Conclusions

42. Environmental management on Section B is proceeding well. Although a number of minor issues at the Contractor’s camp were in need of attention towards the end of 2013, the Contractor has swiftly acted on the advice of the Engineer, and works are ongoing to address the issues. It remains to be seen if the good practices and attitude found on camp are extended to the road works, but initial indications are promising.

43. The additional biodiversity work at Moscow Forest has been successful to date. The findings are provided in the draft BIMP report. Once the BIMP has been approved, work will begin on organising the ecological and biodiversity inventory, which is due to take place sometime in April-May 2014.


IV. APPENDICES

Appendix 1: Photographs

Figure 1: Lack of acceptable hazardous material storage and drainage facilities at the Section B Contractor’s camp

Figure 2: The clean and well-equipped Section B Workshops

Figure 3: The modern concrete plant (still under construction) (L) and clinic at the Section B Section B Contractor’s camp (R)


Figure 4: Addressing issues highlighted on Section B late in 2013: Top left: construction of sediment pond at concrete plant. Top right: construction of wheel washer. Middle left:

improvement of camp drainage. Middle right: new bund inside workshop. Bottom left: New oil storage area. Bottom right: new extractor fan in kitchen.


Appendix 2: Environmental Monitoring Results

Section B

Water Quality

1) Pre-Construction Monitoring

Determinand Unit Lakar 1 River Lakar 2 River Ogru River Gamishli River

Limit Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

pH 7.7 7.7 7.6 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.6 7.7 6.0-9.0

Electrical conductivity X103

cm/cm 0.204 0.205 0.203 0.204 0.204 0.204 0.206 0.207 -

Limpidity cm 24.0 25.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 25.0 25.0 25.4 <30

Turbidity mg/l 26.3 26.4 26.7 25.5 25.5 25.7 24.9 24.9 <30

Dissolved O2 mg/l 4.2 4.2 4.4 4.6 4.9 4.7 4.5 4.7 4.6-6.0

BOD mg/l 1,6 1,6 1,9 1,9 2,8 2,7 2,7 2,9 3

Total roughness mqekv/l 4.13 4.15 4.18 4.22 4.56 4.59 4.60 5.15 7.0

Calcium ion Ca2+

mg/l 114.0 115.0 128.0 128.0 108.0 109.0 106.0 105.9 180.0

Magnesium ion Mg2+

mg/l 10.2 10.3 11.9 11.9 9.9 9.9 9.9 9.9 200.0

Chloride ion Cl- mg/l 145.2 146.1 148.7 148.8 138.5 139.3 137.8 138.2 350.0

Sulphate SO42-

mg/l 266.3 261.6 269.9 269.9 178.4 178.5 177.9 177.9 500.0

Bicarbonate ion, HCO3-

mg/l 229.4 229.7 231.9 231.9 182.6 183.4 182.5 182.8 -

Na++K

+ ions mg/l 157.9 158.6 159.7 159.8 144.9 144.9 144.7 144.9 -

Sum of ions,∑ 1 mg/l 932.7 933.4 934.3 935.5 743.4 743.2 745.3 745.8 1000.0

Ammonium ion, NH4+ mg/l 0.336 0.337 0.337 0.338 0.231 0.231 0.240 0.242 0.39

Nitrite ion, NO2- mg/l 0.007 0.008 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.008 0.005 0.006 0.02

Nitrate ion, NO3- mg/l 3.22 3.24 3.20 3.23 2.52 2.53 2.34 2.40 9.0

Oil & grease mg/l 0.002 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.002 0.002 0.001 0.002 0.05

Faecal coliform per 100

ml <2.0x10

5 <2.0x10

5 <2.0x10

5 <2.0x10

5 <2.0x10

5 <2.0x10

5 <2.0x10

5 <2.0x10

5 <2.0

TSS mg/l 0.226 0.226 0.228 0.229 0.110 0.113 0.114 0.117

SSAM mg/l 0.028 0.029 0.033 0.033 0.020 0.025 0.025 0.026 0.1

Phenol mg/l 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.0002 0.0003 0.0004 0.001


2) August 2013



pH 7.7 7.7 7.4 7.5 7.6 7.5 7.6 7.6 6.0-9.0


cm/cm 0.207 0.208 0.206 0.206 0.208 0.206 0.206 0.206 -

Limpidity cm 25.0 25.0 25.0 24.0 22.0 21.0 26.0 25.3 <30

Turbidity mg/l 26.4 26.7 25.1 25.9 23.3 23.1 23.2 24.9 <30

Dissolved O2 mg/l 4.1 4.2 4.1 4.4 4.1 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.6-6.0

BOD mg/l 1,6 1,6 1,9 1,9 2,5 2,5 2,7 2,8 3


Calcium ion Ca2+

mg/l 116.0 116.0 129.0 128.0 108.0 107.0 106.0 105.8 180.0

Magnesium ion Mg2+

mg/l 10.1 10.3 11.8 11.8 9.4 9.7 9.7 9.8 200.0


Sulphate SO42-

mg/l 266.8 261.8 270.1 269.9 179.0 178.7 177.9 177.9 500.0


mg/l 229.9 229.9 232.9 231.9 182.8 183.1 182.8 182.5 -

Na++K

+ ions mg/l 158.1 158.5 159.9 159.8 145.0 144.9 145.2 144.8 -

Sum of ions,∑ 1 mg/l 933.2 933.6 935.2 935.9 743.7 743.1 745.4 745.6 1000.0




Phosphate

Oil & grease mg/l 0.003 0.003 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.004 0.004 0.05


ml <2.0x10

5 <2.0x10

5 <2.0x10

5 <2.0x10

5 <2.0x10

5 <2.0x10

5 <2.0x10

5 <2.0x10

5 <2.0

TSS mg/l 0.226 0.226 0.229 0.228 0.111 0.110 0.120 0.119

SSAM mg/l 0.029 0.029 0.033 0.032 0.020 0.024 0.023 0.023 0.1

Phenol mg/l 0.0002 0.0002 0.001 0.001 0.0003 0.0003 0.0002 0.0002 0.001


3) September 2013



pH 7.6 7.7 7.5 7.5 7.4 7.5 7.7 7.6 6.0-9.0


cm/cm 0.208 0.208 0.207 0.208 0.209 0.208 0.207 0.208 -

Limpidity cm 25.0 25.0 25.0 24.0 22.0 21.0 27.0 27.6 <30

Turbidity mg/l 26.6 26.6 25.3 25.6 23.7 23.5 23.3 24.9 <30

Dissolved O2 mg/l 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.2 4.3 4.6 4.7 4.6-6.0

BOD mg/l 1,6 1,7 1,9 1,9 2,8 2,7 2,8 2,9 3


Calcium ion Ca2+

mg/l 118.0 117.0 128.0 128.0 109.0 109.0 107.0 107.1 180.0

Magnesium ion Mg2+

mg/l 10.3 10.4 11.9 11.8 9.6 9.7 9.8 9.9 200.0


Sulphate SO42-

mg/l 267.1 267.9 270.5 269.9 180.0 180.7 177.4 177.7 500.0


mg/l 229.7 229.8 233.1 233.9 182.9 183.9 182.9 182.9 -

Na++K

+ ions mg/l 158.3 158.5 159.6 159.9 145.3 144.7 145.6 144.9 -

Sum of ions,∑ 1 mg/l 933.7 933.9 935.1 935.7 743.8 743.5 745.5 745.8 1000.0




Phosphate

Oil & grease mg/l 0.002 0.003 0.003 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.004 0.004 0.05


ml <2.0x10

5 <2.0x10

5 <2.0x10

5 <2.0x10

5 <2.0x10

5 <2.0x10

5 <2.0x10

5 <2.0x10

5 <2.0

TSS mg/l 0.228 0.228 0.230 0.231 0.114 0.115 0.124 0.119

SSAM mg/l 0.030 0.029 0.034 0.034 0.023 0.024 0.024 0.023 0.1

Phenol mg/l 0.0001 0.0001 0.001 0.001 0.0002 0.0003 0.0002 0.0003 0.001


4) October 2013



pH 7.8 7.7 7.2 7.2 7.5 7.4 7.3 7.3 6.0-9.0


cm/cm 0.200 0.201 0.217 0.217 0.220 0.221 0.210 0.208 -

Limpidity cm 26.0 25.0 25.0 25.6 23.0 23.0 22.0 23.6 <30

Turbidity mg/l 27.6 27.9 24.6 24.3 25.3 25.5 22.4 22.9 <30

Dissolved O2 mg/l 4.8 4.8 5.9 5.7 4.7 4.8 5.4 5.7 4.6-6.0

BOD mg/l 2,2 1,9 2 1,9 2,1 2,3 2,2 2,4 3


Calcium ion Ca2+

mg/l 123.0 123.3 103.0 103.2 106.0 106.7 96.0 99.1 180.0

Magnesium ion Mg2+

mg/l 11.2 11.7 7.8 7.8 9.2 9.5 8.8 9.3 200.0


Sulphate SO42-

mg/l 263.7 267.0 173.5 178.9 196.3 197.0 186.8 187.2 500.0


mg/l 229.5 229.4 182.2 183.6 213.3 213.9 193.5 193.7 -

Na++K

+ ions mg/l 168.2 168.1 142.3 142.7 152.5 150.8 139.4 140.2 -

Sum of ions,∑ 1 mg/l 932.3 932.9 743.5 743.4 816.4 818.1 749.6 749.9 1000.0




Phosphate

Oil & grease mg/l 0.002 0.002 0.003 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.003 0.004 0.05


ml <2.0x10

5 <2.0x10

5 <2.0x10

5 <2.0x10

5 <2.0x10

5 <2.0x10

5 <2.0x10

5 <2.0x10

5 <2.0

TSS mg/l 0.229 0.229 0.230 0.230 0.116 0.115 0.123 0.122

SSAM mg/l 0.028 0.028 0.035 0.034 0.023 0.023 0.025 0.024 0.1

Phenol mg/l 0.0001 0.0001 0.001 0.001 0.0001 0.0002 0.0002 0.0003 0.001


5) November 2013



pH 7.5 7.5 7.2 7.1 7.6 7.6 7.4 7.5 6.0-9.0


cm/cm 0.198 0.200 0.219 0.220 0.224 0.223 0.212 0.203 -

Limpidity cm 27.0 27.4 25.0 25.8 23.0 23.0 22.2 23.8 <30

Turbidity mg/l 28.3 28.7 25.1 25.7 25.3 25.3 22.7 23.1 <30

Dissolved O2 mg/l 4.9 4.8 5.4 5.6 4.7 4.9 5.6 5.8 4.6-6.0

BOD mg/l 2,4 2,1 2,0 2,0 2,4 2,1 2,2 2,4 3


Calcium ion Ca2+

mg/l 123.5 123.8 103.6 103.3 106.2 106.2 96.4 99.6 180.0

Magnesium ion Mg2+

mg/l 11.8 11.9 7.9 7.9 9.4 9.6 8.9 9.0 200.0


Sulphate SO42-

mg/l 263.8 267.6 173.7 178.8 196.4 197.1 187.0 187.2 500.0


mg/l 229.7 229.6 182.1 183.5 213.7 213.8 194.3 194.7 -

Na++K

+ ions mg/l 168.2 168.1 146.3 146.7 152.6 150.7 139.6 140.0 -

Sum of ions,∑ 1 mg/l 932.4 932.8 743.8 743.9 816.6 818.6 749.0 749.5 1000.0




Phosphate

Oil & grease mg/l 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.003 0.004 0.05


ml <2.0x105 <2.0x105 <2.0x105 <2.0x105 <2.0x105 <2.0x105 <2.0x105 <2.0x105 <2.0

TSS mg/l 0.222 0.224 0.233 0.232 0.120 0.121 0.125 0.126

SSAM mg/l 0.024 0.026 0.037 0.039 0.025 0.025 0.024 0.023 0.1

Phenol mg/l 0.0001 0.0001 0.001 0.001 0.0002 0.0001 0.0002 0.0002 0.001


6) December 2013



pH 7.6 7.5 7.3 7.3 7.5 7.6 7.6 7.5 6.0-9.0


cm/cm 0.195 0.198 0.222 0.221 0.225 0.230 0.217 0.209 -

Limpidity cm 27.3 28.1 25.3 25.5 23.5 23.7 22.7 23.5 <30

Turbidity mg/l 28.7 28.9 25.6 25.9 26.2 27.3 22.7 23.8 <30

Dissolved O2 mg/l 4.3 4.5 5.6 5.7 4.8 4.9 5.7 5.9 4.6-6.0

BOD mg/l 2,7 2,6 2,0 2,0 2,4 2,7 2,7 2,5 3


Calcium ion Ca2+

mg/l 123.2 123.5 103.7 103.8 106.6 106.7 96.0 99.1 180.0

Magnesium ion Mg2+

mg/l 11.9 11.9 7.5 7.8 9.7 9.6 9.0 9.0 200.0


Sulphate SO42-

mg/l 263.9 266.3 173.8 174.9 196.6 197.0 187.7 187.1 500.0


mg/l 229.9 229.6 182.3 183.7 213.9 214.4 194.6 194.9 -

Na++K

+ ions mg/l 168.5 168.8 146.7 146.8 152.7 151.3 139.6 138.1 -

Sum of ions,∑ 1 mg/l 933.1 933.6 743.9 743.9 817.7 818.9 749.4 749.6 1000.0




Phosphate

Oil & grease mg/l 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.003 0.002 0.003 0.004 0.05


ml <2.0x105 <2.0x105 <2.0x105 <2.0x105 <2.0x105 <2.0x105 <2.0x105 <2.0x105 <2.0

TSS mg/l 0.226 0.225 0.233 0.234 0.124 0.127 0.121 0.125

SSAM mg/l 0.026 0.026 0.038 0.040 0.028 0.028 0.022 0.023 0.1

Phenol mg/l 0.0001 0.0001 0.001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0002 0.0002 0.0001 0.001


Air Quality


Monitoring locations Determinand Concentration Allowed concentration

Contractor Camp Dust 0.3 0.5

NO2 0.063 0.085

Carbon monoxide 3 5

Sensitive Receptor 1 Dust 0.3 0.5

NO2 0.060 0.085

Carbon monoxide 3 5


NO2 0.062 0.085

Carbon monoxide 3 5


NO2 0.063 0.085

Carbon monoxide 3 5


NO2 0.055 0.085

Carbon monoxide 3 5

Sapnakaran village Dust 0.3 0.5

NO2 0.063 0.085

Carbon monoxide 4 5

Yuxari Nuvadi village Dust 0.3 0.5

NO2 0.062 0.085

Carbon monoxide 4 5

Mamusta village Dust 0.3 0.5

NO2 0.060 0.085

Carbon monoxide 4 5

Lenkaran Borrow Pit Dust 0.4 0.5

NO2 0.073 0.085

Carbon monoxide 4 5

Sovu Borrow Pit Dust 0.4 0.5

NO2 0.075 0.085

Carbon monoxide 4 5


2) August 2013



NO2 0.060 0.085

Carbon monoxide 3 5


NO2 0.060 0.085

Carbon monoxide 3 5


NO2 0.061 0.085

Carbon monoxide 3 5


NO2 0.060 0.085

Carbon monoxide 3 5


NO2 0.055 0.085

Carbon monoxide 3 5


NO2 0.064 0.085

Carbon monoxide 4 5


NO2 0.067 0.085

Carbon monoxide 4 5


NO2 0.056 0.085

Carbon monoxide 3 5


NO2 0.074 0.085

Carbon monoxide 4 5


NO2 0.078 0.085

Carbon monoxide 4 5


3) September 2013



NO2 0.059 0.085

Carbon monoxide 3 5


NO2 0.060 0.085

Carbon monoxide 3 5


NO2 0.060 0.085

Carbon monoxide 3 5


NO2 0.062 0.085

Carbon monoxide 3 5


NO2 0.053 0.085

Carbon monoxide 3 5


NO2 0.063 0.085

Carbon monoxide 3 5


NO2 0.065 0.085

Carbon monoxide 4 5


NO2 0.051 0.085

Carbon monoxide 3 5


NO2 0.074 0.085

Carbon monoxide 4 5


NO2 0.073 0.085

Carbon monoxide 4 5


4) October 2013



NO2 0.050 0.085

Carbon monoxide 3 5


NO2 0.052 0.085

Carbon monoxide 3 5


NO2 0.054 0.085

Carbon monoxide 3 5


NO2 0.050 0.085

Carbon monoxide 3 5


NO2 0.048 0.085

Carbon monoxide 3 5


NO2 0.058 0.085

Carbon monoxide 3 5


NO2 0.061 0.085

Carbon monoxide 3 5


NO2 0.045 0.085

Carbon monoxide 3 5


NO2 0.069 0.085

Carbon monoxide 4 5


NO2 0.065 0.085

Carbon monoxide 3 5


5) November 2013



NO2 0.048 0.085

Carbon monoxide 2 5


NO2 0.047 0.085

Carbon monoxide 2 5


NO2 0.047 0.085

Carbon monoxide 2 5


NO2 0.045 0.085

Carbon monoxide 2 5


NO2 0.049 0.085

Carbon monoxide 3 5


NO2 0.050 0.085

Carbon monoxide 3 5


NO2 0.052 0.085

Carbon monoxide 3 5


NO2 0.040 0.085

Carbon monoxide 2 5


NO2 0.052 0.085

Carbon monoxide 3 5


NO2 0.050 0.085

Carbon monoxide 2 5


6) December 2013



NO2 0.045 0.085

Carbon monoxide 1 5


NO2 0.043 0.085

Carbon monoxide 1 5


NO2 0.040 0.085

Carbon monoxide 2 5


NO2 0.040 0.085

Carbon monoxide 2 5


NO2 0.039 0.085

Carbon monoxide 2 5


NO2 0.045 0.085

Carbon monoxide 2 5


NO2 0.043 0.085

Carbon monoxide 2 5


NO2 0.035 0.085

Carbon monoxide 1 5


NO2 0.046 0.085

Carbon monoxide 2 5


NO2 0.041 0.085

Carbon monoxide 1 5


Noise & Vibration


Noise level (dB)

Monitoring locations Results Allowed

Haftoni Settlement 33 50

Sensitive Receptor 1 32 50




Luveser village 40 50

Sovu village 44 50

Sapnakaran village 40 50

Yuxari Nuvadi village 41 50

Mamusta village 27 50

Vibration level (dB)

Monitoring locations Results Allowed







Sovu village 70 77





2) August 2013

Noise level (dB)

Monitoring locations Measuring results Allowed







Sovu village 44 50












Sovu village 69 77





3) September 2013

Noise level (dB)








Sovu village 42 50












Sovu village 70 77





4) October 2013

Noise level (dB)








Sovu village 34 50












Sovu village 63 77





5) November 2013

Noise level (dB)








Sovu village 32 50












Sovu village 57 77





6) December 2013

Noise level (dB)








Sovu village 29 50












Sovu village 47 77





Appendix 3: Example Site Audit Checklist

Below is a sample site audit checklist prepared by the Section B Contractor’s EPM during the reporting period.

Road Network Development Program, Project 3 (Masalli to ......Project 3 (Masalli to Astara Motorway...

Documents

Transcript of Road Network Development Program, Project 3 (Masalli to ......Project 3 (Masalli to Astara Motorway...