environmental impact assessment report impact assessment report ... the environmental impact...

Environmental Impact Assessment Report

The views expressed herein are those of the consultant and do not necessarily represent those of ADB’s members, Board of Directors, Management, or staff, and may be preliminary in nature.

Environmental Impact Assessment (Chenchuri Beel and Narail Subproject) Project Number: 34418 June 2005

BAN: Southwest Area Integrated Water Resources

Planning and Management Project

Prepared by Halcrow Group Ltd., UK for the Asian Development Bank (ADB).

The environmental impact assessment 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.

SOUTHWEST AREA INTEGRATED WATER RESOURCES PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT PROJECT Bangladesh Water Development Board Water Resources Planning Organisation

Ministry of Water Resources Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh

June 2005

Halcrow Group Ltd, UK in association with DHI Water & Environment, Denmark Engineering & Planning Consultants Ltd, Bangladesh Kranti Associates Ltd, Bangladesh Halcrow Bangladesh Ltd, Bangladesh

ADB TA No. 4079 - BAN

Environmental Impact Assessment (Chenchuri Beel and Narail Subproject)

Southwest Area Integrated Water Resource Planning and Management Project TA 4079-BAN

Environmental Impact Assessment i

Table of Contents Acronyms and Abbreviations vi 1 Introduction..............................................................................................................1

1.1 Background ......................................................................................................1 1.1.1 Chenchuri Beel.........................................................................................1 1.1.2 Narail........................................................................................................2

1.2 Methodology and Approach of EIA ................................................................3 1.3 EIA Activities and Undertaking.......................................................................3

2 Description of the Project ........................................................................................5 2.1 Project Rationale..............................................................................................5 2.2 Objectives and Scope.......................................................................................6 2.3 Chenchuri Beel Subproject ..............................................................................8

2.3.1 Existing Infrastructure .............................................................................9 2.3.2 Proposed Measures Chenchuri Beel Subproject ....................................10

2.4 Narail FCD/I Subproject ................................................................................11 2.4.1 Existing Infrastructure ...........................................................................12 2.4.2 Proposed Measures in Narail Subproject...............................................13

2.5 Rural Arsenic Mitigation and Sanitation Program for Chenchuri Beel and Narail Subproject Areas.............................................................................................13

3 Description of the Environment.............................................................................15 3.1 Physical Environment ....................................................................................15

3.1.1 Atmosphere/ Climate .............................................................................15 3.1.2 Topography ............................................................................................16 3.1.3 Geology and Soils ..................................................................................16 3.1.4 Surface water / Hydrology / Morphology..............................................17 3.1.5 Groundwater and Arsenic Contamination .............................................18

3.2 Biological Environment .................................................................................19 3.2.1 Ecology ..................................................................................................19 3.2.2 Aquatic Biology/ Wetlands....................................................................20 3.2.3 Aquatic Flora .........................................................................................20 3.2.4 Aquatic Fauna ........................................................................................20 3.2.5 Terrestrial Flora .....................................................................................21 3.2.6 Terrestrial Fauna ....................................................................................21 3.2.7 Forests ....................................................................................................21 3.2.8 Rare and Endangered Species................................................................21 3.2.9 Protected Areas ......................................................................................21

3.3 Human and Economic Development .............................................................22 3.3.1 Infrastructure Facilities ..........................................................................22 3.3.2 Water Supply and Sanitation .................................................................22 3.3.3 Transportation ........................................................................................22 3.3.4 Land Use ................................................................................................23 3.3.5 Industries................................................................................................23 3.3.6 Power Sources and Transmission ..........................................................24 3.3.7 Fisheries .................................................................................................24 3.3.8 Agricultural Productivity .......................................................................25 3.3.9 Water Management................................................................................27 3.3.10 Livestock................................................................................................28


Environmental Impact Assessment ii

3.4 Social and Cultural Resources .......................................................................28 3.4.1 Population and Communities.................................................................28 3.4.2 Health.....................................................................................................30 3.4.3 Education ...............................................................................................30 3.4.4 Physical or Cultural Heritage.................................................................30 3.4.5 Current Use of Lands and Resources of Traditional Purposes by Indigenous People..................................................................................................30 3.4.6 Structures or Sites of Historical, Archaeological, Paleontological or Architectural Significance .....................................................................................30

4 Alternatives ............................................................................................................31 5 Anticipated Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures .............................34

5.1 Key Considerations........................................................................................34 5.1.1 Scoping ..................................................................................................34 5.1.2 Bounding................................................................................................35 5.1.3 Project Components Used for Impact Assessment ................................36 5.1.4 Impact Identification and Assessment Matrix .......................................37 5.1.5 Air ..........................................................................................................39 5.1.6 Soils........................................................................................................39 5.1.7 Physiography..........................................................................................39 5.1.8 Hydrology and Hydraulics.....................................................................39 5.1.9 Drainage and Irrigation ..........................................................................40 5.1.10 Erosion and Siltation..............................................................................42 5.1.11 Open Water Areas and Wetlands...........................................................42 5.1.12 Groundwater Recharge ..........................................................................43 5.1.13 Water Pollution ......................................................................................43

5.2 Impact on the Biological/Ecological Environment........................................43 5.2.1 Aquatic Ecosystem.................................................................................43 5.2.2 Terrestrial Ecosystem.............................................................................44 5.2.3 Endangered Species ...............................................................................44

5.3 Impact on Human and Economic Development ............................................44 5.3.1 Industries................................................................................................44 5.3.2 Infrastructure Facilities ..........................................................................44 5.3.3 Navigation and Road Transport .............................................................45 5.3.4 Land Use and Resettlement ...................................................................45 5.3.5 Power Sources and Transmission ..........................................................46 5.3.6 Agricultural land ....................................................................................46 5.3.7 Agricultural Productivity .......................................................................46 5.3.8 Fisheries .................................................................................................47 5.3.9 Water Management and Irrigation Practices..........................................48 5.3.10 Water Supply .........................................................................................48 5.3.11 Way of Life and Equity..........................................................................49 5.3.12 Income and Poverty ...............................................................................50 5.3.13 Education and Health.............................................................................51 5.3.14 Migration................................................................................................51 5.3.15 Status of Women....................................................................................51

5.4 Mitigation Measures ......................................................................................51 5.4.1 Potential Downstream Impacts on Salinity............................................52 5.4.2 Potential Conflicts of Interests among Stakeholders on Facility Management...........................................................................................................52 5.4.3 Loss of Natural Fish Habitats and Capture Fisheries Resources ...........52


Environmental Impact Assessment iii

5.4.4 Displacement of People .........................................................................53 5.4.5 Obstruction of Navigation by Regulators and Water Retention Structures ...............................................................................................................53 5.4.6 Earth Works, Embankment Works and Borrow Pit Excavation............53 5.4.7 Transport of Material and Disposal of Spoils ........................................53 5.4.8 Problems Associated with Poor Construction Quality...........................54 5.4.9 Water Quality Deterioration due to Increased Use of Pesticides...........54 5.4.10 Soil and Water Quality Degradation due to Increase Fertilizer Use......54 5.4.11 Lowered Water Levels in Shallow Aquifers..........................................54 5.4.12 Other Impacts.........................................................................................54 5.4.13 Aesthetics...............................................................................................55

6 Economic Assessment ...........................................................................................56 7 Institutional Requirements, Environmental Monitoring and Management Plan ...58

7.1 Overall Institutional Framework....................................................................58 7.2 Project Level Institutional Framework ..........................................................58 7.3 Capacity Strengthening..................................................................................59 7.4 Environmental Management Plan..................................................................60

7.4.1 General Environmental Guidelines during Pre-construction Stage .......64 7.4.2 General Environmental Guidelines during Construction.......................66 7.4.3 General Environmental Guidelines during Follow-on Development Support ................................................................................................................67 7.4.4 General Environmental Guidelines during O&M..................................68

7.5 Environmental Monitoring and Auditing Arrangements...............................68 7.5.1 Monitoring Considerations ....................................................................70

7.6 Complaints and Grievances ...........................................................................71 7.7 Reporting........................................................................................................71

8 Public Consultation and Disclosure .......................................................................73 8.1 Consultation Process......................................................................................73 8.2 Environmental Consultation ..........................................................................74 8.3 Major Findings of the Consultation Process..................................................75 8.4 Workshops .....................................................................................................76

9 Conclusion .............................................................................................................78 10 Bibliography ..........................................................................................................80

List of Tables

Table 2-1: Particulars of Regulators .................................................................................9 Table 2-2: Length and Location of Brick-lined Canal need Re-habilitation ..................10 Table 2-3: Sub-Project Component of Works ................................................................10 Table 2-4: Particulars of Regulators in the Singia-Nebugati Scheme ............................12 Table 2-5: Particulars of Regulators in the Mulia-Patharghata Scheme.........................13 Table 2-6: Sub-Project Component of Works ................................................................13 Table 3-1: Climatic Data of the Subproject Area ...........................................................15 Table 3-2: Mean Monthly Maximum salinity (ppt)........................................................18 Table 3-3: Arsenic Contamination of Tube-wells in Upazilas in the Project Area ........19 Table 3-4: Present Land Use in Chenchuri Beel Subproject ..........................................23 Table 3-5: Present Land Use Narail Subproject .............................................................23 Table 3-6: Fisheries Resources and Production in Chenchuri Beel (2002/03)...............24


Environmental Impact Assessment iv

Table 3-7: Fisheries Resources and Production Narail Sub-project (2001/02) ..............25 Table 3-8: Food Production and Demand Situation in the Narail District .....................26 Table 3-9: Present Land Type Distribution in Relation to Flood Depths in the Chenchuri Beel area........................................................................................................27 Table 3-10: Present Land Type Distribution in Relation to Flood Depths in Narail Subproject Area ..............................................................................................................27 Table 3-11: Occupational Pattern (%) of Household by Major Sectors .........................29 Table 3-12: Percentage Distribution of Household Heads According to Social Composition/ Land Category..........................................................................................29 Table 4-1: Analysis of Without and With Project ..........................................................33 Table 5-1: With and Without Project conditions for Chenchuri Beel and Narail...........36 Table 5-2: Impact Identification and Assessment Matrix...............................................38 Table 5-3: With and Without Project conditions for Chenchuri Beel and Narail...........40 Table 5-4: Dry Season Irrigated Areas ...........................................................................41 Table 5-5: Availability of Water for Irrigation and Other Uses (mill m3/yr) .................41 Table 5-6: Project Impacts and Displacement ................................................................45 Table 5-7: Estimated Fisheries Benefit and Disbenefits in the Chenchuri Beel Sub-project .............................................................................................................................47 Table 5-8: Estimated Fisheries Benefit and Disbenefits in the Narail Sub-project ........47 Table 5-9: Percent Increase in Income by Landholding Category .................................50 Table 5-10: On-Farm Employment (Figures: '000 man-days/year)................................50 Table 6-1: Project Investment in Environmental and Social Measures (2004 Prices) ...57 Table 7-1: Responsibilities of Different Organizations in Environment Management ..61 Table 7-2: Summary of Mitigation and Enhancement Measures ...................................62 Table 7-3: Summary of Environmental Monitoring Requirements................................69 Table 8-1: People’s Consultation Activities ...................................................................73 Table 8-2: Water Related Problems with Priority and Proposed Solutions....................75

List of Maps and Figures

Location Map of the Subprojects Map 1: Project Map of Chenchuri Beel Subproject Map 2: Project Map of Narail Subproject Figure 2-1: Typical Bank Protection Works Figure 2-2: Pateswari Navigation Lock Gate Figure 2-3: Noagram Regulator Figure 2-4: Typical 6 Vents Check-cum-Boatpass Figure 2-5: Pile Inlet Figure 2-6: Typical Water Retention Structure Figure 2-7: Long and Cross-Section of Embankment and Flood Wall Figure 2-8: Typical X-Section for Re-Sectioning of Embankment Figure 5-1: Dry Season Peak Salinity (No Gorai Flow) Figure 5-2: Dry Season Peak Salinity (with 1999 Gorai Flow) Figure 7-1: Organisation Chart of Project Figure 7-2: Outline of EMP Implementation during Construction


Environmental Impact Assessment v

Appendices

Appendix 1: List of Common Plants, Wildlife and Fish Species Appendix 2: Summary of Resettlement Framework and Resettlement Plan Appendix 3: Financial Analysis Appendix 4: Initial Social Assessment Summary Appendix 5: Draft Environmental Management Plan Appendix 6: Questionnaires for FGD on Environmental & Social Issues Appendix 7: List of Invitees and Participants in Different Workshops Appendix 8: Checklist of Environmental Parameters for Conducting IEE


Environmental Impact Assessment vi

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ADB Asian Development Bank BWDB Bangladesh Water Development Board DAE Department of Agricultural Extension DFR Draft Final Report DOE Department of Environment DOF Department of Fisheries DPHE Department of Health Engineering DTW Deep Tube Well EAP Environmental Action Plan ECR Environmental Conservation Rules EIA Environmental Impact Assessment EIRR Economic Internal Rate of Return EMP Environmental Management Plan EMU Environmental Management Unit ERP Environmental Responsible Procurement FAP Flood Action Plan FAO UN Food and Agricultural organisation FCD/I Flood Control, Drainage and Irrigation FD Forestry Department FGD Focused Group Discussion FPCO Flood Planning Coordination Organisation GOB Government of Bangladesh GPP Guidelines for People's Participation GPWM Guidelines for Participatory Water Management GWT Ganges Water Treaty IEC Important Environmental Components IEE Initial Environmental Examination IPM Integrated Pest Management ISPAN Irrigation Support project for Asia and Near East IWM Institute of Water Modelling IWRM Integrated Water Resources Management IWRMP Integrated Water Resources Management Plan JMC Joint Management Committee KJDRP Khulna Jessore Drainage Rehabilitation Project LLP Low Lift Pump LGI Local Government Institution MED Monitoring and Evaluation Division MOA Ministry of Agriculture MOEF Ministry of Environment and Forest


Environmental Impact Assessment vii

MOWR Ministry of Water Resources Mt Metric Ton NEDECO Netherlands Engineering Consultants NGO Non-Governmental Organisation NWMP National Water Management Plan NWPo National Water Policy O&M Operation and Maintenance PAP Project Affected Person PCU Project Coordination Unit PIU Project Implementation Unit PRRA Participatory Rapid Rural Appraisal PPTA Project Preparation Technical Assistance PSC Project Steering Committee RSDP Resettlement and Social Development Plan SEIA Summary Environmental Impact Assessment SIEE Summary Initial Environmental Examination SMO Subproject Management Office SSWRDSP Small Scale Water Resources Development Sector Project. STW Shallow Tube Well SWAIWRMP South West Area Integrated Water Resources Management Project SWMC Surface Water Modelling Center UNDP United Nations Development Program WARPO Water Resources Planning Organisation WHO World Health Organization WMO Water Management Organization WSSL Water Sealed Sanitary Latrine


Environmental Impact Assessment 1

1 Introduction

1. The Bangladesh Water Development Board (BWDB) engaged consultants to undertake an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) of the proposed Southwest Area Integrated Water Resources Management Project (the Project). The Project aims to enhance and sustain the livelihoods of rural people within the existing flood embankment systems suffering from low performance, through (i) preparing integrated water management plans (IWMPs) for the selected systems; (ii) delivering improved water management infrastructure and support services for agriculture and fishery development and pilot arsenic mitigation following IWMPs; and (iii) strengthening institutions to operate these functions while delivering intended benefits with self-sustaining operation and maintenance (O&M) mechanisms.

2. The Project will take a process type approach of implementation with a total envisaged coverage of 100,000 ha by selecting rehabilitation schemes that do not have significant adverse environmental impacts. To support the process, two sample subprojects were prepared (with a total area of 55,000 ha), representing the range of development work in the proposed Project. This report presents the results of the EIA of the two sample subprojects studied as a part of the Project’s feasibility study. The EIA also demonstrates the way environmental issues will be managed for all subprojects. This report was prepared under the Asian Development Bank (ADB) Technical Assistance (TA) number 4079-BAN titled "Southwest Area Integrated Water Resources Management Project" (SWAIWRMP).

1.1 Background

3. The project preparatory TA stages a two-phased approach with Phase I being essentially the strategy formulation and planning phase, including the preparation of Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) strategy for the northern sub-region of the Southwest areas of Bangladesh, including Faridpur, Narail, Magura, Rajbari, and Jessore districts. On the basis of the sub-regional strategy, the Phase II of the TA undertook preparation of the preparation of the detailed IWMP and feasibility studies for the two selected Flood Control and Drainage/Irrigation (FCD/I) schemes, following the national workshop held on 10 October, 2003 that presented the Phase I findings. These two FCD/I schemes are:

a) Rehabilitation of Chenchuri Beel FCD/I Scheme

b) Rehabilitation of Narail FCD/I Scheme

4. In preparing IWMPs and investment feasibility studies for these schemes, it was also decided to include a pilot arsenic mitigation and sanitation program in these two FCD/I areas, given the high priority accorded to address this issue by stakeholders.

1.1.1 Chenchuri Beel

5. Chenchuri Beel is situated in the South West Region of Bangladesh in the Narail District. It has a gross area of 25,560 ha. The area is completely surrounded by the rivers Chitra and Nabaganga, see Map 1.

6. The Chenchuri Beel Subproject was implemented in 1985-86 under the DFC-I project of the World Bank following a feasibility study prepared by NEDECO and the special project preparation cell of BWDB in 1977 as the: "Chenchuri Beel Flood Control and Drainage (FCD/I) Project". The aim was to provide security against large scale



inundation to the area with the overall objective to increase agricultural production by increasing the cropping intensity from 135% to 152%. Embankments and regulators were finalized in 1987. This had an adverse effect on fisheries. In 1989 a field assessment and project review, carried out by a joint FAO/World Bank team, indicated that the original project objectives had not been met. It further concluded that additional improvements in the drainage system were required, together with a substantial increase in irrigated agriculture and the introduction of appropriate O&M methods.

7. Later under a pre-feasibility study of UNDP/ADB 1993 (Halcrow, FAP 4) the Chenchuri Beel Rehabilitation FCD/I Project was considered for introducing an integrated development by enhancing water utilization for agriculture, fisheries (in beels) etc. and allowing the beneficiaries to have controlled flooding/drainage in the wet season and a formal irrigation that would promote extensive rabi/boro (dry season) cultivation.

8. The FAP-4 (Halcrow 1993) initially identified 30 FCD/I Subprojects and prioritized them in terms of need, implementation period, rate of return and social and environmental impacts. As a result of that analysis the seven subprojects (Chenchuri Beel, Narail, Padma-Kumar, Arial Khan-Bisharkandi, Swarupkhati, Bishkhai and Barisal) scattered over the south-western region were recommended for further study at feasibility level and for detailed design. In the selection of schemes the Chenchuri Beel Subproject ranked top. Under the South West Area Water Resources Development Project (SWAWRDP) (DHV, 1998), (ADB loan No. 1291 BAN (SF), TA No. 2021 BAN) between ADB and BWDB, a feasibility study of the seven subprojects was conducted and concluded in February 1998. The Chenchuri Beel Subproject was developed mainly as a flood control and drainage (FCD/I) scheme that would provide security against large scale flooding to a gross area of about 25,260 ha (net cultivable area of about 17,900 ha), with the original objective of increasing agricultural production through an increase of the cropping intensity.

9. Today the FCD/I scheme for Chenchuri Beel is in a progressed state of disrepair urgently needing rehabilitation. Frequent breach of embankment due to river erosion in the Nabaganga River is also causing crop damages, affecting farmer confidence in the FCD/I system. The objectives of the present Chenchuri Beel Subproject is to increase income and employment opportunities for landless, marginal and small farm households in the project area through enhanced agricultural and fisheries production,. with drainage improvement, controlled flooding, riverbank protection, year round water management and adoption of better agricultural and fisheries practices will achieve this.

1.1.2 Narail

10. The Narail FCD/I scheme subproject is located in the Southwest Region of Bangladesh within the districts of Narail (9 unions of Narail Upazila, 1 Union of Kalia Upazila) and Jessore (4 Unions of Abhoynagar Upazila).

11. The Narail FCD/I scheme consists of (i) Mulia-Patharghata Beel Drainage scheme, in the north covering about 7,510 ha and extending up to Gobra khal at the south, was completed by BWDB in 1981; (ii) Singa-Nebugati Beel Drainage scheme, in the south-west covering about 16,986 ha and extending up to a metalloid road through the boundary of the Narail and Abhayanagar Upazilla, was completed by BWDB in 1984; and (iii) the remaining 7,104 ha is the subsequent development by BWDB extending up to the Bhairab river and the Afra khal.

12. Previous studies from SWAWRMP (DHV, 1993). SWARDP (DHV, 1998) and SWAWRMP Phase I (2004) shows that the infrastructure constructed in 1981 and 1984



are not functioning well. Social surveys, PPRA and Stakeholders consultation results also show that people are very unhappy at the present situations and wants solution to their problems by rehabilitation schemes implementation.

13. The Narail Subproject will consist of re-sectioning of existing embankments, construction of some 15km new linking embankments (on the existing dikes), together with both rehabilitation and construction of gates and regulators. In order to enhance the realization of the economic goals of the project, there will be associated agricultural and fisheries support components desired to address specific issues where the present situation is a constraint to development.

1.2 Methodology and Approach of EIA

14. The present EIA has been prepared following the “Environmental Assessment Guidelines of the Asian Development Bank” (ADB, 2003) and ADB’s Guidelines for Selected Agricultural and Natural Resources Development Projects. It also took into consideration also the guidelines prepared by the Government of Bangladesh: "Guidelines for Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)", prepared by FPCO (1992), the accompanied "Manual for Environmental Impact Assessment" (ISPAN 1995), and the “Guidelines for Environmental Assessment of Flood Control, Drainage and Irrigation Projects” (WARPO, 2001). Being a large-scale flood control, drainage (FCD/I) scheme, the two schemes under the Project are classified as "Category Red" following the aforementioned GOB EIA guidelines.

15. Through the screening process during the Initial Environmental Examination (IEE) the expected impacts of the Project on all relevant environmental components were identified. The IEE identified some adverse environmental impacts. While these were not deemed significant given the project scope of rehabilitating the existing infrastructure, the Project was classified as “Category A” by ADB to undertake full EIA while meeting the GOB guidelines. In order to focus the EIA the impacts were evaluated and ranked in accordance to their expected importance and spatial boundary, the magnitude of the impact, permanence, reversibility and possible cumulative impact. The ranking was used in the EIA to identify the most Important Environmental Components (IECs). For each IEC the EIA has been carried out assessing a "With Project" and "Without Project" situation and compared likewise. The comparison determines the negative and positive impacts of rehabilitating and upgrading the FCD/I facilities in the Chenchuri Beel and Narail Subproject areas along with the supply of safe (arsenic free) drinking water.

1.3 EIA Activities and Undertaking

16. The EIA activities have been carried out jointly by a multidisciplinary team of consultants during the preparatory technical assistance from May to September 2004 using a variety of available data (Reports of Halcrow, 1993; DHV, 1998; Halcrow 2002, 2004) as well as data collected during various field surveys under the present study. The main responsibility for co-ordination of the activities and the overall assessment has been with the Environmentalists (International and Local). Socio-economic issues have relied on the work with the Sociologists and Economists while the Resettlement Specialists have covered resettlement issues.

17. A total of 1 man-month of the International and 3 man-months of the Local Environmentalist have been available for the IEE and EIA activities. To this would be added the time devoted to socio-economic and resettlement assessments by other team members.



18. The time and resources have not allowed for any extensive collection of data in the field. However, during field trips the staff involved in the EIA activities have familiarized themselves with the project area having various consultations with local stakeholders on environmental issues. In addition the socio-economic team have conducted filed surveys covering their specific issues as well as environmental issues in their consultations and assessments.

19. The overall contents of the EIA Report follows the List of Contents prescribed by the "Environmental Assessment Guidelines" (ADB 2003). The detailed contents of each chapter has been adapted to cover all relevant issues as prescribed by the "Guidelines for Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)", prepared by FPCO (1992), the accompanied manual for "Environmental Impact Assessment" (ISPAN, 1995), and the Guidelines for Environmental Assessment of Flood Control, Drainage and Irrigation Projects (WARPO, 2001).

20. The following Chapter 2 provides a description of the Project reflecting the outcome of the Feasibility Study as such. The environmental setting is described in Chapter 3 covering the physical, biological and socio-economic environments. The project alternatives identified during the previous Feasibility Study: "South West Area Water Resources Development Project" (DHV 1998) on which the present Project is based, are described in Chapter 4. In Chapter 5 the anticipated environmental impacts and mitigation measures in the "With Project" situation are presented, followed by an economic assessment in Chapter 6. The Institutional requirements, the environmental monitoring program and the Environmental Management Plan are found in Chapter 7, while an overview of the involvement of the public in the assessment is covered in Chapter 8, followed by the Conclusion in Chapter 9 and Bibliography in Chapter 10.

21. The Environmental Team would like to express their gratitude to the other Team members and the BWDB staff working on the Project. In addition, we thank the representatives from the various GOB organizations, other BWDB staff, NGOs, representatives from the Project Area and other institutions working in the environmental sector and those during the workshops who have provided valuable input and comments to support the EIA process. Acknowledgement is also given to the people in the Project Area for the invaluable provision of information during consultations, interviews and discussions in the field. Finally, our thanks go to the involved ADB staff for their support.



2 Description of the Project

2.1 Project Rationale

22. Between 1991/92 and 2000, the national poverty incidence fell from 59% to 50%, one of the fastest rates of decline recorded worldwide. Despite considerable progress, poverty is far more extensive in rural than in urban areas. However, real agricultural wages, which are a good proxy for living standards, increased from Tk24 per day in 1991 to Tk27 per day in 2000, and further to Tk29 per day in 2002. In 2003, for the first time, the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) put Bangladesh in the medium human development league, along with its neighbours - Bhutan, India, and Sri Lanka.1 Most of the extremely poor live in rural areas and incidence of extreme poverty remains higher in these areas (37%). Furthermore, the rural sector accounts for 79% of the total population and it is evident that the vast majority of the poor (85%) live in rural areas.

23. The SW area is still heavily dependent on the agricultural sector as the main source of income and livelihood. It is therefore axiomatic that the performance of the agricultural sector plays a pivotal role in the incidence of poverty in the region. A thriving and profitable agricultural sector will contribute to more stable prices, protecting the poor from sudden price “shocks” and will provide enhanced employment opportunities, both on-farm and off-farm.

24. Since the early ‘60s, the Government of Bangladesh has invested heavily in encouraging the growth of the agricultural sector in the region, not least in its development of infrastructure to protect land from flooding, poor drainage and, to a lesser extent, provide public irrigation facilities. History has shown, however, that despite this huge investment, less than optimal success has been achieved in many cases2.

25. FCD/I scheme infrastructure provides a common good. Benefits are felt by both rich and poor, but in pure economic terms, it is the rich with larger landholdings that have tended to accrue the most benefit. The landless poor continue to be marginalized from livelihood enhancing opportunities and have remained unable to escape from the poverty spiral. There is a pressing need for the application of new paradigms of water management which facilitate not only the recognition of these marginalized groups, but also present mechanisms whereby they are empowered within the community to improve their livelihood opportunities.

26. Past experience with FCD/I planning and implementation has revealed weaknesses in their ability to address both the specific needs of the poor and in the sustainability of the projects. Insufficient recognition of the specific needs of the potential beneficiaries through a “top-down” approach has resulted in little sense of ownership or responsibility on the part of the beneficiaries and this has contributed to the paucity of O&M carried out on the schemes.

27. Integrated Water Resources Management is founded on a participatory basis, whereby all stakeholders should have a voice in each element of the project cycle, from planning to operation and maintenance. Thus the application of IWRM explicitly calls

1 ADB Country Strategy and Program Update 2005-2006 2 Reference to Chapter 2 of this Volume will provide a more detailed review of past experience and lessons learned,

particularly with respect to flood control and drainage (FCD) schemes



for a “demand-driven” approach to all aspects of water management and its sub-sectors. It also implicitly provides the opportunity for maximizing the benefits of water management since the participatory approach will inevitably identify and prioritizeprioritize a wide range of water and non-water related issues in the planning stage3.

28. IWRM is concerned with water management and, in the context of FCD/I, the provision of a securer and sustainable environment, sufficiently flood-free and adequately drained, for stakeholders to exercise their livelihoods in a beneficial manner. However, past interventions have tended to focus on the establishment of the macro-environment, relegating internal works to be of secondary importance and thus losing the opportunity to target all potential beneficiaries in an optimal way. Here, the relative success of the ADB funded Small-scale Water Resources Sector Project is a pointer to a better way forward.

29. This project is designed in recognition of past deficiencies and to incorporate the lessons learned into the new paradigms of water management, taking advantage of the complementarities among IWRM, agricultural and fisheries support and other appropriate rural infrastructure and building on the opportunities created. All elements of the project are demand driven, thus respecting one of the central themes of IWRM.

30. The Guidelines for Participatory Water Management call for the setting up a hierarchy of beneficiary organizations from Water Management Groups at grass roots level to the project council at the apex level. This has met with some success in LGED’s SSWRDSP and also to an extent in BWDB’s Khulna Jessore Drainage Rehabilitation Project (KJDRP). This success should be built on.

31. Thus there is a rationale for rehabilitation works on existing FCD/I infrastructure provided that it is planned, designed and operated on a fully participatory basis. Incorporating smaller-scale works to enhance localized water management, also on a participatory basis presents the opportunity to target smaller groups. Combining the water management infrastructure with appropriate targeted support from agriculture extension together with equally pro-poor targeted fisheries support will maximize the benefits of IWRM within the projects.

32. Poverty is manifested not just in income poverty, but in human terms. The rounds of participatory consultation revealed a pressing need for safe water supplies within the project area. Again, taking advantage of the securer environment provided through FCD/I rehabilitation, the project component of arsenic mitigation piloting will contribute to overall beneficiary confidence in the participatory approach.

33. The National Water Policy (NWPo) recognizes the need for fundamental reforms in the water sector institutions to carry out the policy objectives. One of the principal elements of these is the need for increased decentralization of decision-making (the IWRM principal of management at the lowest appropriate level). The project will strengthen the move towards this end by building capacity for IWRM planning at regional level, which also includes support to participatory management groups as well as line agencies.

2.2 Objectives and Scope

34. The implementation of Integrated Water Resources Management and maximizing its impact through complementary, participatory-driven activities will

3 Intensive stakeholder consultations in Phase 1 of the PPTA are documented in NGO reports for the 5 Districts and

summarised in the Framework IWRM District Plans.



enhance the livelihoods of project beneficiaries, especially the poor. Thus the immediate objectives of the project are:

(i) Establish improved water management in selected hydrologic areas through a demand-driven participatory approach;

(ii) Contribute to poverty alleviation by ensuring that improved economic benefits of FCD/I schemes are achieved in the medium and long term;

(iii) To provide employment opportunities for landless, poor and vulnerable people, both women and men during construction;

(iv) To provide a limited number of beneficiaries with safe water supplies in the most heavily arsenic contaminated areas of the project;

(v) To create an environment relatively secure from flooding and poor drainage that will encourage agricultural and fisheries development on a sustainable basis;

(vi) To build institutional capacity within BWDB for decentralized planning and give support to participatory water management at the local level.

35. The wider goals of the project are:

(i) To promote GoB’s sector reform process through the establishment of institutional arrangements for participatory operation and maintenance of FCD/I schemes;

(ii) To assist the Government to implement the National Water Policy and the National Water Management Plan (NWMP, 2000);

(iii) To contribute to poverty alleviation by securing an environment conducive to improved health and wellbeing within the selected project areas.

36. The project will be implemented over a period of 7 years and will comprise the following components and sub-components:

(i) Institutional support for operation and service delivery, which will primarily consist of capacity building measures to address an agreed institutional agenda for implementation of decentralized participatory water management;

(ii) IWRM plan preparation and feasibility studies in other selected hydrological areas of the 5 districts in the project area;

(iii) Capacity building for groundwater monitoring and modelling;

(iv) Participatory improvement of Chenchuri Beel and Narail FCD/I projects with further similar works in other areas that will emerge from those to be studied to feasibility level under the project;

(v) Agricultural, fisheries and other miscellaneous livelihood support (such as social forestry) based on a demand-driven approach within all subproject areas;



(vi) A pilot arsenic mitigation project within Lohagara Upazila which will provide alternative safe water supplies to up to 126,000 persons and sanitation facilities for up to 80% of the population of Lohagara and Kalia Upazila.

2.3 Chenchuri Beel Subproject

37. The Chenchuri Beel is surrounded by the rivers Chitra and Nabaganga (See Map 1). The south-eastern part is under attack of erosion, driving people away from their homes on the river banks. The erosion-induced embankment breach has caused frequent damages in the monsoon crops in the recent years, undermining the farmer confidence of existing FCD/I system in promoting intensified agriculture. Interventions have been proposed to reduce erosion by the positioning of low-cost materials such as sand-filled geo-textile bags, embankment retirement, and strengthening of the existing compartment boundaries. The rivers in the southern part of the area are subjected to salinity intrusion.4

38. The Chenchuri Beel Subproject has a gross area of 25,560 ha. The net cultivable area is 17,900 ha out of which 4300 ha are under FCD/I and 13,600 ha under FCD/II. The Chenchuri Beel Subproject is essentially addressing the need to rehabilitate and improve the old, completed project to fully realize the original project objectives. The farmers have for long complained about overdrainage in higher lands (causing localized drought in the monsoon season) and water logging and drainage congestion in the low-lying areas (preventing timely cropping of dry-season crops making them vulnerable to early monsoon floods). Shortage of irrigation water in the dry season is exacerbated by leakage through structures. Furthermore, inadequate drainage causes water logging from irrigation during the dry season as well.

39. The need for the Chenchuri Beel Subproject was clearly demonstrated under the FAP 4 project where the Subproject was given the highest priority out of the 30 subprojects identified. The high-priority need for the Subproject was verified during the SWAWRDP (DHV, 1998) Feasibility Study. Accordingly the Chenchuri Beel Subproject constitutes an essential potential program components and was selected for preparation under the present Project in consultations between the GoB and ADB.

40. The Project will increase income and employment opportunities for landless, marginal and small farm households in the Subproject areas through enhanced agricultural and fisheries production. This will be achieved by (i) improved FCD/I infrastructure including river bank protection and strengthened flood embankments (to gain farmer confidence against flooding), re-excavation of drainage canals for drainage improvement, establishment/improvement of water retention structures and regulators for controlled flooding and year round improved water management; (ii) support services such as agriculture and fishery extension targeted to the poor and the disadvantaged (including those who are negatively affected)for the adoption of better agricultural and fisheries practices; and (iii) establishment and strengthening of local water management organizations and scheme-level joint management committee to ensure coordinated and participatory water management within the schemes. More detailed description is given below.

4 This was experienced in particular in early 1990s when the inflow from the Gorai river, a Ganges tributary was

seriously reduced in association with the expiration of the Ganges Water Treaty (GWT) between India and Bangladesh. The data in the recent years indicate more favorable condition.



2.3.1 Existing Infrastructure

41. The subproject area is protected from annual flooding by embankments around most of its periphery. A total of 86km of flood embankment has been built. In addition 10km of paved road-embankment at the north-east boundary of the subproject also provide flood protection. Along the 12 km north-east boundary of the subproject the ground levels are generally higher, in this reach dwarf embankments at isolated low lying sections exist. Due to active bank erosion in a short reach along the lower Nabaganga river that frequently breaches the flood embankments in the recent years, reliability of the flood protection system is low. No designed protection work has been provided. The embankments are mostly in reasonable condition, but need re-sectioning, retiring with new construction at many places. In some locations, embankments have cut across local drainage channels without any drainage structures, causing local drainage problems.

42. A total of 193 km of drainage channels and khals of various parameters are identified mainly in the central and southern area, but many of these khals are silited up, causing drainage congestion in large areas and constraining storage capacities for dry season irrigation. These need re-excavation. On the other hand, in relatively high lands, over-drainage from these channels is a problem causing water shortage even during the monsoon season. These channels drain in Chitra or lower Nabaganga rivers through outfall Regulators. The Regulators are located on the peripheral embankments along Chitra and Nabaganga rivers. In total there are eight regulators, six of them are used for duel function of flushing and drainage and two of the regulators are used for flushing only. Particulars of the regulators are as given in Table 2-1.

Table 2-1: Particulars of Regulators

Name of regulator Type No of Vents Size (mm) Invert level (m PWD) Takimara Flushing and Drainage 2 1520 x 1830 -0.61 Pateswari Flushing and Drainage 10 1520 x 1830 -0.61 Jadabpur Flushing 1 1520 x 1830 -0.61 Bagdanga-1 Flushing and Drainage 2 1520 x 1830 +0.31 Bagdanga-2 Flushing and Drainage 4 1520 x 1830 -0.61 Nowagram Flushing 1 1520 x 1830 -0.31 Madinar khal Flushing and Drainage 1 1520 x 1830 -0.61 Bagbaria Flushing and Drainage 1 1520 x 1830 -0.61

Source: BWDB and Consultants’ Survey

43. However, the Novagram regulator is presently under severe erosion and needs reconstruction at a new location. In addition, performance of five additional regulators (including the largest Pateswari and Bagdanga regulators) is low due to leakage, calling for rehabilitation of gates.

44. In the north-west corner of the subproject, a pumped irrigation scheme covering about 1,100 ha has been implemented by the BWDB. The scheme has two inclined irrigation pumps at Kamalapur and at Gandarbakhali each with a capacity of 0.60 cum/s. There are 16.43 km of brick-lined canals and 122 structures. The pumps are designed to draw water from Chitra river.

45. The existing bricklined canals at following locations are reported to be not functioning as designed and need rehabilitation. Length, location and ID No of the lined canal need rehabilitation are described in Table 2-2.



Table 2-2: Length and Location of Brick-lined Canal need Re-habilitation

Pump No Location Canal ID No. Length (km)

PS 1 Kamalapur P1(1) P1(3)

3.48 1.86

PS 2 Gandarbakhali

P2(1) P2(3)

P2(3A) P2(3B)

2.92 1.03 0.36 0.42

Source: BWDB

2.3.2 Proposed Measures Chenchuri Beel Subproject

Structural Measures:

46. The Chenchuri Beel Subproject structural works (see Map 1) will include re-sectioning and repair of 25km of embankment, construction of 6 km new internal dwarf embankments, retirement of 3.5 km of embankment and 2.8 km river erosion protection at two points of Nabaganga River, re-excavation of 193 km of drainage khals, 5 km excavation of new khals, rehabilitation of 10 km of brick lined irrigation canals, reconstruction of Noagram regulator, rehabilitation of gates for 5 regulators, construction of 6 drainage-cum-flushing structures, 7 water retention structures and 12 water inlet/outlet structures, besides construction of a navigation lock. Component of works under the subproject are summarized in Table 2-3. Overall, the Chenchuri Beel area will be separated into 8 compartments for optimal water management. (Its southernmost compartment is divided into three sub-compartments by dwarf dikes to control flooding of low-lying areas during dry season caused by water stored in irrigation/drainage khal.) The compartmentalization will be based on the existing road networks with installment of necessary check structures in the existing water channels crossing the compartment boundaries.

Table 2-3: Sub-Project Component of Works

Sl. No. Item of Works Quantity

1. Embankment: a) Re-sectioning 25km

b) Retire 3.5km

c) New construction 6km

2. Khal

a) Re-excavation of existing khal 193km

b) Excavation of new khal 5km

3. Rehabilitation of Regulators 5 Nos.

4. Proposed Structures a) Regulator 7 Nos.

b) Check Structure 9 Nos.

c) Water Retention Structure (WRS) 7 Nos.

d) Navigation Lock 1 No.

e) Inlet/Outlet Structure 12 Nos.

5. River Training works 2800m



Non-Structural Measures:

Agricultural Support

Extension and training to improve farm management practices (including water management and IPM) and to encourage crop diversification.

Facilitation of credit support for landless, marginal and small farmers to facilitate adoption of improved agricultural practices.

Facilitation of credit support to micro and small rural enterprises to encourage development of non-farm rural sector.

Tree and Grass Plantation in embankments and other public lands

Fisheries Development

Rehabilitation of small derelict fish ponds.

Open water fisheries stocking program

Technical training and extension to improve production techniques including fish/rice integrated farming.

Institutional Strengthening

47. The Project will also support the establishment and strengthening of local water management institutions, including (i) water management organizations (WMOs) following the national Guidelines for Participatory Water Management (GPWM), with the participation of the concerned stakeholders associated with the various water management infrastructures; and (ii) scheme-level joint management committee (JMC), with the participation of the representatives of the line departments, local governments, and WMOs. The JMC will jointly decide on the service delivery and O&M for the large water management facilities at the scheme level (having a command area of over 5,000 ha in principle), whereas WMOs are entrusted to manage smaller individual infrastructure. Furthermore, the Project will support the improved monitoring and information sharing of hydrological data in river water levels and flows, tidal ranges, and salinity to facilitate better water management in the Project area and its vicinities.

2.4 Narail FCD/I Subproject

48. The Narail FCD/I Scheme Subproject is surrounded by the Chitra and Afra rivers in the east and the west, respectively, see Map 2, having a gross area of about 31,600 ha (23,440 ha net). The subproject area is adjacent to Chenchuri Beel Subproject to the east. The area is largely divided into three sub-basins, viz., Mulia-Pathargata-Siapagla system in the north (compartments 1 to 3, 7,510 ha), Sheikhati system in the mid-west draining to the Afra river to the north (compartment 4, 4,288 ha), and Singa-Nebugati system draining to the Afra and Chitra rivers to the south (compartments 5 and 6, 19,802 ha).

49. The Narail Subproject area is generally a backward area with respect to development, mainly due to water management problems arising from the lack of security against floods and poor drainage over much of the area. Some infrastructure was built by BWDB in 1981 and 1984 (Mulia-Patharghata Beel Drainage Scheme and Singa-Nebugati Drainage Scheme, respectively). The total area covered by these projects is about 13,100 ha. However, the performance of existing facilities is low, causing similar



problems to Chenchuri Beel subproject, such as poorly maintained flood embankments; overdrainage in the higher lands; water logging and drainage congestion in the low-lying areas; and shortage of irrigation water in the dry season (due to leakage through structures). Mainly due to relatively high elevation, little water management infrastructure exists in the northern two subsystems (except for dwarf embankments along the Afra river in the midwestern subsystem). This causes frequent flood damages through open and unregulated khals in large areas, constraining the productivity of monsoon crops on the one hand, and causing lack of irrigation water in the dry season (due to overdrainage). Salinity problem is also experienced, in particular the early 1990s prior to the signing of the Ganges Water Treaty.

50. The objective of the Narail Subproject is to increase income and employment opportunities for landless, marginal and small farm households in the project area through enhanced agricultural and fisheries production. This will be achieved by (i) improved FCD/I infrastructure including strengthened flood embankments, re-excavation of drainage canals, establishing/improving check structures and regulators for controlled flooding, water retention, and drainage; (ii) support services such as agriculture and fishery extension targeted to the poor and disadvantaged (including those who are negatively affected) for the adoption of better agricultural/fisheries practices; and (iii) establishment and strengthening of local water management organizations and scheme level joint management framework. The details are shown below.

2.4.1 Existing Infrastructure

51. The existing infrastructure in the Sun-Project area has been provided under three previous schemes, namely, the Mulia-Patharghata Beel Drainage Scheme (4,600 ha), the Singia-Nebugati Beel Drainage Scheme (8,500 ha) and small LGED schemes (700 ha). There is 33.36km of flood embankment along the right bank of the Chitra River in the south-eastern part of the SP out of which about 10km needs re-section works. Total length of the drainage channels and khals in the SP area that need re-excavation is about 227km.

52. There are ten sluices/regulators, seven of these were provided under the Singia-Nebugati scheme, two under Mulia-Patharghata scheme and three were built by LGED. Most of the sluices except for LGED facilities are not working properly and needs modification. The particulars of the existing regulators of the Singia-Nebugati scheme and Mulia-Patharghata scheme are shown in Table 2-4 and Table 2-5.

Table 2-4: Particulars of Regulators in the Singia-Nebugati Scheme

Name of regulator Type No of vents Size (m) Invert level (m PWD)

Singia Flushing cum Drainage 2 1.52 x 1.83 -0.61 Khororia Flushing 1 0.91 x 1.22 -0.61 Jamruldanga Flushing cum Drainage 2 1.52 x 1.83 -0.30 Peruli Flushing cum Drainage 3 1.52 x 1.83 -0.61 Ramnagar Flushing cum Drainage 3 1.52 x 1.83 -0.61 Shidhir Pasha Flushing cum Drainage 2 1.52 x 1.83 -0.61 Ranagati Flushing cum Drainage 10 1.52 x 1.83 -0.61 Source: BWDB and Consultants’ Survey



Table 2-5: Particulars of Regulators in the Mulia-Patharghata Scheme

Name of regulator Type No of vents Size (m) Invert level (m PWD)

Mulia Drainage 3 1.52 x 1.83 0.00 Baredua Drainage 1 0.91 x 1.22 0.00

Source: BWDB and Consultants’ Survey

2.4.2 Proposed Measures in Narail Subproject

Structural Measures:

53. The structural works (see Map 2) under the Narail Subproject include 16.59 km of new linking, flood control embankment, re-sectioning of 10 km embankment, re-excavation of 227 km khals, excavation of 0.5 km new khal, construction of 14 drainage cum flushing regulators, construction of 4 check structures, 16 water retention structures and 4 inlet/outlet structures. Rehabilitation of all 9 existing regulators. Component of works under the subproject are summarized in Table 2-6. Compartmentalization based on existing road networks to generate 6 compartments will be implemented.

Table 2-6: Sub-Project Component of Works

Sl. No. Item of Works Quantity 1. Embankment: a) Re-sectioning 10km b) New construction 16.59km

2. Khal a) Re-excavation of existing khal 227km b) Excavation of new khal 0.5km

3. Rehabilitation of Regulators 9 Nos. 4. Proposed Structures a) Regulator 14 Nos. b) Check Structure 4 Nos. c) Water Retention Structure (WRS) 16 Nos. d) Inlet/Outlet Structure 4 Nos.

54. Key design figures for the water management structures of the subprojects are presented in Figure 2-1 to Figure 2-8.

Non-Structural Measures and Institutional Strengthening:

Same as for the Chenchuri Beel Subproject

2.5 Rural Arsenic Mitigation and Sanitation Program for Chenchuri Beel and Narail Subproject Areas

55. The problem of arsenic contamination in Bangladesh is well documented (but the knowledge base for its hydrogeological mechanisms, cost-effective and socially feasible coping measures is not yet fully established). The GoB recently finalized the National Policy for Arsenic Mitigation and its Implementation Plan, which provides a short- to medium-term strategy and actions to address arsenic problems, following the directives of the National Policy for Safe Drinking Water Supply and Sanitation. In the rural context, this strategy directs the initial thrust towards the provision of safe water from alternative sources, such as, pond sand filters, rainwater harvesting, and deep tubewells. At the same time this initiative presents opportunities for addressing the sustainability of future rural water supply and sanitation schemes, via the institutional imperative.



56. The Program will provide poverty reduction through the provision of potable water and sanitary facilities thereby significantly improving the welfare of poor communities living in arsenic contaminated areas. It will assess the technical, financial/economic and social viability of arsenic mitigation measures. In addition it will raise public awareness about mitigation measures and will primarily target women who are the main domestic water managers.



3 Description of the Environment

3.1 Physical Environment

3.1.1 Atmosphere/ Climate

57. The Project area experiences the sub-tropical monsoon climate typical of Bangladesh. The dominant seasons are the monsoon or wet season (from mid June to mid October, when temperature ranges from 29 to 320C); the winter or cold season (from October to the end of February, when temperature ranges from 10 to 250C); and the summer or hot season (from March to the end of May, when temperature can go up to 400C. The southwest monsoon lasts approximately from June to September, and producing the main rainy season. More than 90% of the annual rainfall (average 1,700 mm/yr in the Project Area) occurs during this period. There is no climatic station within the Project area. The station closest to the Project area is situated in Jessore. Table 3-1 shows the monthly and annual figures of the climatic data from this station (E-17).

Table 3-1: Climatic Data of the Subproject Area Parameter Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Ann Maximum Temp (0C) 25.8 28.9 33.3 35.8 35.1 32.9 31.9 31.9 32.3 31.9 29.7 26.4 31.3 Mean Temp (0C) 18.9 21.6 26.4 29.8 30.1 29.4 28.9 28.9 29.0 27.7 23.9 19.5 26.2 Minimum Temp (0C) 11.6 14.2 19.5 23.7 25.0 25.8 25.9 25.9 25.6 23.3 18.0 12.4 20.9 Relative Humidity (%) 71.0 65.0 70.0 68.0 75 85.0 88.0 87.0 86.0 81.0 75.0 73 77.0 Wind speed (knots) 5.0 5.0 6.0 9.0 8 7.0 7.0 7.0 6.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.3 Sunshine (hrs/d) 7.8 8.1 8.0 8.1 7.7 5.2 4.0 4.8 5.0 7.1 7.8 7.7 6.8 ETo (mm/d) 2.9 3.9 5.41 7.12 6.97 4.65 4.49 4.42 4.09 4.07 3.33 2.73 1649 Mean Rainfall (mm) 7.7 20.3 43.4 82.4 180.9 308.1 339.3 336.8 241.6 130.2 27.6 9.1 1727 Median Rainfall (mm) 0 13.7 30.5 73.2 164 274.3 335.9 330.6 200.4 111.6 2.5 0 1537 80% Dependable Rainfall (mm) 0 0 0 17.8 82.5 183.6 204.3 147.5 121 33.3 0 0 790.2

Source: BMD and WARPO

58. The mean monthly maximum temperature varies from a minimum in January of 25.80C to a peak of 35.80C in April. There is a significant diurnal fluctuation with mean monthly minimum temperatures varying from about 120C to 26.30C. Between April and October the mean monthly temperature remains fairly constant with changes of only about 20C.

59. The relative humidity is high throughout the year with a monthly average varying from 65% to 88%. Humidity is highest in the monsoon period of June to October. The average wind speed varies from 5 to 9 knots with highest speeds occurring between April and August. The potential evaporation rates reaches its highest values of more than 7 mm/day during the pre-monsoon in April with the lowest rates of about 3 mm/day occurring in January. In an average year the potential evapotranspiration exceeds rainfall between the months of October and April. The mean annual rainfall over the subproject area is 1727 mm, the median annual rainfall is 1537 mm and the 80% dependable annual rainfall is 790 mm. The rainfall exhibits a seasonal pattern with a single flattened peak occurring in July and August and about 71% of the total rainfall occurring in the monsoon months of June to September. The period form November to March is dry with only 6.3% of the annual total. Basically there is a need for irrigation between the months of November to April, even during years with average rainfall conditions.



60. The min source of air pollution is from the numerous brickfields being operated in the Project area.

3.1.2 Topography

61. The Chenchuri Beel subproject area is saucer shaped, having high ridges along the banks of the peripheral rivers, the Chitra and Nabaganga, with a gradual slope towards the middle forming depressions. The area lies within the south-eastern plain of the Ganges floodplain. The overall topographic feature is complicated due to the presence of a number of beels (Chenchuri, Pateswari, Nala, Mauli etc). Most of these dry up during the dry season but remain under water in the monsoon. A network of natural watercourses and drainage channels interconnects them. The general topography of the Chenchuri Beel area, however, slopes from north to south from 5.0m to 1.0m (PWD).

62. The general topography of the Narail Subproject slopes from north to south with elevation ranged from 4.5m PWD to 1.5m PWD. The overall topography is complicated by the presence of a number of low-lying areas (beels) which are inter connected by drainage channels and water courses. The principal beels are Singa, Nebugati, Mulia and Patharghata. Most of the beels dry up during the dry season but are deeply flooded during the monsoon season. All the surrounding rivers are tidal and a large volume of water enters and leaves the subproject area twice a day in the unprotected parts. Narrow levees of higher relief are present along the banks of the surrounding rivers and, to a lesser extent, along the tidal creeks within the subproject.

3.1.3 Geology and Soils

63. The Project Area is located in the south-west part of the Bengal Basin, a long established area of subsidence and deposition containing an almost complete sequence from the Cretaceous to Recent alluvium. The Bengal Basin is essentially a flat (1 in 15,000) deposition center, formed by the deltas of the Ganges, Brahmaputra and Meghna rivers, and covers an area of some 60,000 km2. The surface topography of the Quaternary deposits is very gentle. The whole of the south-west area is below elevation 17 m, and 75% is below 5 m. The surface geology consists mainly of Quaternary sediments, although there are some tertiary deposits in the eastern flood belt. Clay soils are prevalent in the low laying areas, and medium textured soils at the higher grounds.

64. The Chenchuri Beel and Narail subprojects are sited within the Low Ganges River Flood Plain and Gopalgonj Khulna Beels so-called agri-ecological zones. The Low Ganges River Flood Plain area has a typical meander landscape of broad ridges and basins. Difference in elevation between ridge tops and basin centers are generally in the range of 3-5 meters. The soils of the region are silt loams and silty clay loams to heavy clays on lower soils. Soils are calcareous in nature having neutral to slightly alkaline reaction. General fertility level is medium.

65. The Gopalganj Khulna Beels occupy extensive low lying areas between the Ganges River Flood Plain and the Ganges Tidal Flood Plain. Low lying basin covers most of the zones, with low ridges along rivers and creeks. Soil of this area are grey and dark grey, acidic heavy clays which are clay peat at 25-100 cm. Soft peat occupy perennially wet basin center. General soil types include peat and non-calcareous dark grey flood plain soils. Organic matter content is medium to high. The soils have low bearing capacity when wet, are potentially strongly acid and low in P status. Fertility level is medium.

66. Degradation of soil quality in flood plain is mainly attributed to improper use of fertilizers and pesticides to boost up agricultural production. Three types of fertilizer



such as Urea, T.S.P. and M.P. are used. A serious environmental problems related to agriculture is depletion of nutrients in the soil.

3.1.4 Surface water / Hydrology / Morphology

67. The hydrological regime in the Chenchuri Beel area is governed by the rivers Chitra on the west side and Nabaganga to the north, east and south and the khals flowing through the beel. The khals also serve as drainage canals. The tidal range in the Chitra and Nabaganga is from 0.5m to 1.0m during the dry season and 1m to 1.5 during the wet season. The water levels in the rivers are above the water levels normally experienced inside the Chenchuri Beel embankments leading to drainage congestion. The main khal traversing the beel is Pateswari khal arising from Chitra river on the south-west and going up to Nala beel almost near the northern border. The other major khals are Biliarchar khal, Bagdanga khal on the west falling in Chitra river, Modinar khal-Naturia khal on the south falling in Nabaganga river and Baghbaria khal on the south-east falling in Nabaganga river. Regulators on the embankments control the connections of these khals with the concerned rivers. Prior to empoldering, capture fishery operations was a major activity in the beels but empolderment turned the perennial beels into seasonal beels, drying up after December and used for rice cultivation.

68. The Chitra and Bhairab Rivers dominate the Narail Subproject area hydrological regime. The Bhairab river originates from the Ganges from the Indian territory and meets with the Kobadak river at Jikargacga under Jessore district. The upper Bhairab has been declining for last two centuries, where as the lower Bhairab below Jessore becomes increasingly active as the river becomes more tidal. The Chitra flows from northwest of the Narail Subproject and divides at the northern extremity of the subproject area into the Chitra and Afra Khal. The Chitra flows along the northeast boundary until it joins a branch of the Nabaganga near Narail. In the southeast corner the Nabaganga rejoins the Chitra and it bifurcates into the Majudkhali and the Atai rivers. The main channel at this point is the Atai. On the western side of the subproject the Afra Khal joins the Bhairab river near Shaikhati. Downstream of the junction, the Bhairab is up to 100 m wide and joins the Majudkhali at the southern extremely of the subproject. The tidal variation is from 0.5m to 1.0m during the dry season and 1m to 1.5 during the wet season.

69. The Project area is morphologically an active area formed as a part of the Ganges delta, which has a mosaic of numerous channels that are interdependent and in a constant state of change. For Chenchuri Beel subproject, important channels are Chitra and Navaganga rivers, whereas Narail subproject area is surrounded by Chitra and Afra Rivers. The Chitra and Afra rivers have a tidal meeting point and therefore it is in the process of mild siltation. On the other hand, progressive erosion is observed in the Navaganga river in two concave sections along the southern border of the Chenchuri Beel subproject, causing frequent breaches in embankments and flood damages. No significant river erosion problem is observed in other part of Chenchuri Beel and Narail subproject areas.

70. There are several seasonal beels in the Project area. They are important locations of seasonal fishing activities. In the dry season farmers plant rabi crops around the center of the beels as the water level drops. Beels expand in monsoon covering almost the entire compartments and gradually shrink in dry season.

71. The Nabaganga river splits into two channels at Kalachanpur, with the dominant channel carrying the major flows called the Chitra river and the minor channel being called the Nabaganga river. The Nabaganga river receives water from the Gorai-Madhumati river, a Ganges tributary, through the Halifax cut which reduces its flow during the dry season. During dry season, very lean flow is observed through the Gorai



river. Minimum dry season flow in recent years in the Gorai river varies from 10 m3/s to 11 m3/s during the month of March. The Chitra river receives flows from the irrigation waste flows from the Ganges-Kobadak surface irrigation system through a number of tributaries. Due to the reduced flow of these rivers during the dry season, salinity intrudes into the river systems, although its levels are generally within the acceptable limits for paddy cultivation, in particular after the ratification of the Ganges Water Treaty in late 1996. A thirty-year water treaty (The Ganges Treaty) was signed between Governments of Bangladesh and India on December 12, 1996 for sharing the dry season flow of the Ganges at Farakka. The dry season sharing is based on 10 day periods from the 1st January to the 31st May every year on the basis of 40 year (1948-1988) 10 day period average availability of water at Farakka. The sharing schedule as per the agreement is presented in the following table:

The 1996 Water Sharing Schedule of the Treaty with India

Share of Water (cumec) Water availability at Farakka

(cumec) Bangladesh India

≤1,980 50% 50%

1,980 to 2,120 990 cumec Balance of flow

≥2,120 Balance of flow 1130 cumec

Source: Treaty between GoB and India, 1996

The Treaty guarantees that India and Bangladesh receive 990 cumecs of water in alternate three 10 day periods during the period 1st March to 10th May. But even after this treaty, Bangladesh could not get its agreed share on occasion and the Ganges recorded its ever lowest flow of about 190 cumec only at the Hardinge Bridge in the dry season of 1997.

72. Mean monthly maximum salinity data after the ratification of the latest Ganges water Treaty from salinity monitoring stations at Gazirhat and Bardia of Nabaganga river and Gobraghat of Chitra river are shown in Table 3-2:

Table 3-2: Mean Monthly Maximum salinity (ppt)

River Name Station Name Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Nabaganga Gazirhat 0.20 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.27 0.54 0.49 0.23 Nabaganga Bardia 0.29 0.22 0.19 0.20 0.22 0.24 0.26 0.19 Chitra Gobraghat 0.18 0.20 0.27 0.26 0.22 0.24 0.37 0.17

Source: BWDB field data between 1988 and 2004

3.1.5 Groundwater and Arsenic Contamination

73. The groundwater resources in the project area are found in three separate aquifers: An Upper Aquifer: a surface layer, consisting mainly of clay and silt, characterized by high porosity but low permeability. A Composite Aquifer: an intermediate layer of mainly fine sands and clay, characterized by high porosity and moderate permeability (possibility of providing water with hand pumps). A Main Aquifer: a deeper layer, containing mainly fine to coarse sands. It is characterized by high porosity and moderate to high permeability and is separated from the composite aquifer by a clay layer. Where the aquifer is accessible, it becomes an important source that provides large quantities of water to deep tubewells.

74. The fresh groundwater is relatively carbonate rich with low Total Dissolved Solid contents less than 500 mg/l. However, in the southern portions of the project area, wells show evidence of salinity with high NaCl values. Controlling groundwater



abstraction rates to avoid saline intrusion, contamination caused by over-use of fertilizers and pesticides needs general consideration and should be monitored.

75. Arsenic was first detected in water from tube wells in Bangladesh in the early 1990s. Since then an extensive screening program has been undertaken and all wells in 268 Upazilas have been tested. Approximately 30% of these wells have been found to be contaminated with levels of arsenic in excess of the Bangladesh Drinking Water Standard of 0.05 mg/L. Ninety seven percent of the population of Bangladesh relies on groundwater for drinking purposes.

76. The arsenic contamination of groundwater is thought to be a geologic process and not a result of any human activities. There is no known control of the process at source. The mechanics of arsenic transport within and between aquifers, however, as related to groundwater abstraction, is not fully understood. Groundwater is also extensively used for irrigation in Bangladesh. Studies are currently being carried out in an effort to further understand the effects that arsenic in groundwater irrigation water has on agriculture and the food chain.

77. To date there had not been any discernible pattern observed in the arsenic contamination of aquifers. Large variations have been observed over relatively short distances, both horizontally and vertically. A similar high variation is seen in the Project area.

78. Table 3-3 shows the number of shallow tubewells in the 4 upazilas within the Project area and the number of wells contaminated at a level exceeding the Bangladesh Drinking Water Standard of 0.05 mg/L.

Table 3-3: Arsenic Contamination of Tube-wells in Upazilas in the Project Area

Upazila No. of Unions No. of Villages

Total No. Tube-wells Arsenic Contamination

No. % Kalia 15 127 11,116 8,131 73.15% Lohagora 12 149 18,307 8,417 45.98% Narail Sadar 13 190 15,039 3,134 20.84% Abhoynagar 9 127 18,356 2,856 15.56%

Source: DPHE, Chenchuri Beel Subproject covers Kalia, Lohagora upazila and a part of Narail upazila, whereas Narail Subproject covers Narail and a part of Kalia and Lohagra upazila.

3.2 Biological Environment

3.2.1 Ecology

79. The Project Area has a freshwater dominated environment inhabited by freshwater plants and animals. Agricultural activities, water resources development and capture fisheries have already altered the biological environment and the entire ecosystem to a state totally dominated by human interventions. There are no important ecologically sensitive sites in the Project area. The area with the highest biodiversity is homesteads and beels with their vegetation and aquatic biota.

80. The main rivers (Chitra, Nabaganga and Bhairab) and the spill channels carry large seasonal water flows and sediment loads, which induce a rapidly changing pattern of habitats due to continual erosion and deposition. This environment favors species with physiological and behavioral mechanisms which can cope with the resultant stress and which exploit the powerful dynamic systems transporting and delivering massive



quantities of all kinds of materials, nutrients and energy. Thus, the flood plain and the deltaic eco-systems of the subproject area are characterized by organisms adjusted to the temporal and spatial boundaries encompassing the full span of annual and seasonal changes. The evolutionary process is quite different from that in other types of environments, where the range of seasonal variations is less.

3.2.2 Aquatic Biology/ Wetlands

81. Although affected by human interventions such as flood embankments and regulators, wetlands play a crucial role in maintaining the ecological balance of ecosystems together with performing a wide variety of functions such as flood control, water purification, protection from natural disasters, source of livelihood, and providing habitat for wildlife and fish.

82. The major wetlands and aquatic habitats of the Project area are - (i) the open water bodies like the baor, beels, floodplains, rivers and khals comprising in total about 30,127 ha (13,715 ha in Chenchuri Beel and 16,412 ha in Narail subproject) whereas (ii) the closed water bodies are the different types of ponds, baors and ditches with a total of 2,615 ha (1,128 ha in Chenchuri Beel and 1,487 ha in Narail subproject) (see Table 3-6 and Table 3-7). During monsoon vast area inundates and the wetland expands. This abundance of wetlands supports a wide variety of wildlife. The rivers and beels support a diversity of fish fauna, including many commercially important species.

83. The seasonal beels are important locations of seasonal fishing activities. In the dry season farmers plant rabi crops around the centre of the beels as the water level drops. There are two Baors in the Narail Sub-project area in Abaynagar. During the rainy season these wetlands are flooded to form a shallow lakes but in the dry season, the water level falls approximately two meters and only the central portion remains flooded; this water is used for irrigation of rabi crops. Similarly beels also expand in the monsoon, covering almost the entire compartments and gradually shrink in dry season.

3.2.3 Aquatic Flora

84. While most of the aquatic plant species of the subproject areas are subject to seasonal water level fluctuations, the abundance of wetlands supports a wide variety of aquatic biota. The common aquatic plants are Helencha (Enhydro fluctuans) Kalmi (Ipomoea aquatica), Dhol Kalmi (Ipomaoa fistulosa), Cheicha (Scirpus articulatus), Kochuripana (Eichorina crassipes), Shapla (Nymphaea nouchali), Ducbweed (Spiredella sp.), Khudi pana (Lemna minor), Topapana (Pistia stratiotes), and Hogla (Typha angustata) in the saline area. The list of common flora and fauna is given in Appendix 1.

3.2.4 Aquatic Fauna

85. Fish is the most important aquatic fauna of the subproject areas, along with other groups. The aquatic fauna includes Prawns (Macrobrachium spp.) crabs, snails (Pila, Vivipara, Lymna etc.), freshalater mussels (Lamellidens sp.) etc. invertebrates and about 100 species of fish. Kolabang (Rana tigrina), Kochchop (Kachuga tecta), Gharial (Gavialis gangeticus); Guishap (Varanus bengalensis) and Matia sap (Enhydris enhydris) are common. The aquatic birds are – Pancowri (Phalacrocorax carto), Kanibok (Ardeola grayii), Sadabok (Egretta garzetta), Borobok (Egretta alba), Machranga (Halcyon pileata), Dahuk (Gallicrex cinerea), Kadakhosa (Gallinagro stenura) and winter migratory birds – Balihash (Dendrocygna javanica) and Chakha (Tadorna ferruginea). Only aquatic mammal Otter (Lutra lutra) is very rarely found. This is an endangered species. Dolphin (Plantanista gangetica) is sometimes found in the river in monsoon.



3.2.5 Terrestrial Flora

86. More than 90 species of flora are present in the Project area of which majority are planted plants. In addition to the aquatic macrophysics mentioned earlier, there are few natural vegetation viz. Dubba gash (Cynodon dactylon), Hargoza (Acanthus illicifolius), Telakachu (Coccinea cordifolia), Bet (Calamus sp.), Akanda (Calotropis procera), Nishinda (Vitex negundo), Tulshi (Ocimum canum) Venna (Ricinus communes), Babla (Acacia nilotica) Dumur (Ficus sp.), Gab (Diospyros peregrina) are the wild plants.

3.2.6 Terrestrial Fauna

87. Wild mammals are relatively scarce in the subproject areas; all larger wild mammals have disappeared. There are around 56 species of wild animals of which 2 species are amphibians, 11 reptiles, 33 birds (of which 9 are aquatic) and 10 mammals. The amphibians are the toad (Bufo melanostictus) and bull frog (Rang tigrina); the common reptiles are Wall lizard (Hemidactylus flaviviridis) Monitor lizard (Varanus bengalensis) Roofed turtle (Kachuga tecta), Spotted tortoise (Lissemys punctata), Gharial (Gavialis gangeticus), Water snake (Enhydris enhydris), Dora sap (Xenochrophis piscator) and Darajgap (Ptyas mucosus). In addition to 9 species of aquatic birds the common arboreal/ terrestrial birds are Back kite (Milvus migrants), Black Wing kite (Elanus cacruleus), Kestrel (Falco tinnunculus), Ring dove (Streptoplia decaocto), Magpie robin (Copsychus saularies), Red-vented bulbul (Pycnonotus jacosus), House crew (Corvus splendens), Common myna (Acridodheres tristis), Pied myna (Sturnus contra), House sparrow (Passer domestica) and Black drongo (Dicrurus macrocercus). The common mammals are – Flying fox (Pteropus giganteus) Vampire bat (Magaderma lyra), Mongoose (Herpestes edwardsi), Squirrel (Calloxiurus pygeregtharus), Fox (Vulpes bengalensis,), Jackal (Canis aurcus indicus), House rat (Rattus rattuis), Bandicota rat (Bandicota bengalensis) and Sherew (Suncus murinus).

3.2.7 Forests

88. Only homestead forests and social forest by plantation on embankment and roadsides are visible in the project area. Akashmoni (Acacia moniliformis) Mahogony (Suritenia mahogany), Shishu (Dalbergia shishu), Babla (Acacia nilotica) White koroi (Albizia procera), Betel nut (Areca catechu), Nim (Azadirachta indica) and Tal palm (Borassus flabellifo) are found on roadsides.

3.2.8 Rare and Endangered Species

89. There are no rare and endangered species of local biota in the Project area in real terms, except the migratory Ghorial and Otter, which are in the national list of endangered species. However, due to the habitat change caused by the construction of embankments and regulators, the perennial water bodies have been changed into seasonal beels. As a consequence these endangered species are unfortunately already very rare and close to extinction.

3.2.9 Protected Areas

90. There are no protected areas or sanctuary in and around the Project area.



3.3 Human and Economic Development

3.3.1 Infrastructure Facilities

91. The Chenchuri Subproject is protected from flooding by 86 km flood control embankment. About 193 km of drainage channels and khals are located mainly in the central and southern areas. Eight regulators (having one to 10 vents each 1.52m x 1.83m size) are located along the Chitra and Nabaganga rivers. There are 14.51 km of national highways, 8.7 km regional highways, 21.18 km Upazila metalled road, 47.45 km of Union metalled road, 90.6 km of Union eastern road and 1 river port/ launch ghat in the subproject area.

92. The water resources related infrastructure in the Narail Subproject encompasses approximately 33.36 km of embankment along the right bank of the lower Chitra river in the south-eastern part of the subproject: In addition there are about 227 km of drainage channels and khals and 10 sluices/regulators (having one to 10 vents). There are 7.05 km of national highways, 17.44 km regional highways 58.61 km Upazila metalled road, 43.67 km Upazila earthen road, 43.5 km Union metalled road and 83.2 km Union earthen road.

3.3.2 Water Supply and Sanitation

93. Tubewells are the major source of drinking water supply in the Project area. More than 98% of the population is dependent on groundwater for their water supply. The main problem is the presence of arsenic in a large number of the existing tubewells, see Table 3-3. However, the lowering of the groundwater table during the dry season beyond the withdrawal dept of shallow tubewells is also considered a problem.

94. The household survey showed that sources of drinking water is the tubewell for 100 percent of sample households. It has been observed that 42% of the households have their own tubewells, 13% of the households use pucca toilets and 26% semi-pucca, but more than 54% use Katcha toilets, 6% of the households still use open field.

3.3.3 Transportation

95. The Chenchuri Beel Subproject is completely surrounded by the rivers Chitra and Nabaganga and the only access to the area is by boat or ferry. There are two ferries in service on the Chitra River at Narail and at the Nabaganga River at Lohagara. River transport forms an important link to the peripheral parts of the subproject and the surrounding areas. Small country boats are used for communication on internal khals. Road access to the subproject is principally through the Jessore-Narail metalled road, which is in reasonable condition. There are two more motorable roads running north-south, one from Narail to Noagram and one from Lohagara to Mahajan from where a new road will soon be completed giving connection with the road to Dhaka. Narail is a one-hour’s drive from the airport of Jessore, served twice a day by Biman. A number of earthen roads, which are mostly seasonal, run through the area. Travelling on these roads is in general by rickshaw, rickshaw van or foot.

96. There is good road access to the Narail Subproject area with the Jessore-Narail road running through the northern part of the area with bridges across the Afra Khal and Chitra. The Jessore-Khulna road and railway run along the western boundary. Within the subproject there is a good network of metalled and unsurfaced roads. Travel within the subproject away from these roads is generally by rickshaw, rickshaw van or on foot. River transport forms an important link to the peripheral parts of the subproject and the surrounding areas using large and small country boats. Small country boats are



also used for communication on the internal khals, particularly in the beel areas and during the monsoon season.

3.3.4 Land Use

97. The Chenchuri Beel subproject has a gross area of 25,560 ha and net cropped area of 17,900 ha. About 70% of the land are used for cultivation and the rest are used for homestead and infrastructure (Table 3-4). Net cropped area is about 70% of gross land area with a relatively low cropping intensity of 190% which indicates that earlier interventions in 1981 and 1984 have not achieved the agricultural target due to the problems mentioned earlier. Double cropping is the main practice covering about 60% of the net cultivated land followed by single (25%) and triple (15%).

Table 3-4: Present Land Use in Chenchuri Beel Subproject

Present land use Area (ha) % Gross area 25,560 100 a. Cultivated area/ net cropped area 17,900 70 Single cropped area 4,428 25 Double cropped area 10,721 60 Triple cropped area 2,751 15 Total cropped area 34,113 100 Cropping intensity 190% b. Uncultivated area (Homestead, garden, graveyard, school, market, road, forest, pond & other water bodies, embankment, etc.)

7,660 30

Sources: DAE and Consultants Survey and Estimation.

98. The Narail subproject has a gross area of 31,600 ha out of which net cultivated area is 23,440 ha (74%). The remaining area is used for homestead and infrastructure (Table 3-5). Double cropping is the main practice covering about 71% of the net cultivated land followed by single (19%) and with little (10%) triple cropping.

Table 3-5: Present Land Use Narail Subproject

Present land use Area (ha) % Gross area 31,600 100 Cultivated Area 23,440 74 Single cropped area 4,545 19 Double cropped area 16,610 71 Triple cropped area 2,285 10 Total cropped area 44,479 100.00 Cropping intensity 190% Uncultivated Area (Homestead, kitchen garden, graveyard, school, market, road, forest, pond, khal, river, water bodies, embankment, etc)

8,160 26

Sources: DAE and Consultants Survey and Estimation.

3.3.5 Industries

99. The industry in Narail district contributes 12% (Tk.1,496 million) to the GDP. It grew at the rate of 5.2% per annum between 1995/96 and 1999/2000 (Source: Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics’ BBS 2003). The industries comprise small and medium enterprises. Agro-industrial enterprises are common and there are numerous rice mills and tobacco factories.



3.3.6 Power Sources and Transmission

100. Despite the expansion of rural electrification only about 33% of the households in the rural areas of Narail district benefit from electricity facilities compared to 43% of the population in urban areas.

3.3.7 Fisheries

101. Fisheries are an important sub-sector contributing to the socio-economic activities of the Chenchuri Beel Subproject area. With the introduction of FCD/I activities in 1981 the capture fisheries production reduced substantially from 1,069 MT in 1983/84 to 434 MT in 1996/97. The causal effects of the empolderment are change of perennial beels into seasonal water bodies, loss of natural recruitment due to prevention of fish migration. Other reasons are increased use of agrochemicals and pesticides leading to outbreak of diseases like epizootic ulcerative syndrome. However, with the initiation of open water stocking the production has increased to about 922 MT (2001/02) see Table 3-6. During the same period culture fisheries have also developed, and is now surpassing the capture fishery production, and increased from 286 to 1,270 MT (344%). Overall, (culture and capture) production between 1983/84 and 2001/02 increased from 1355 MT to 2,192 MT (increased by 62%) in the Chenchuri Beel. Fresh water pond fish farming yielded nearly 1,017 MT of fish during 2001/02 and has made steady progress during recent years in the sub-project area. The area of ponds in this Subproject is estimated at 565 ha of which 492 ha, or 87% are being cultured and the rest 13% cultivable and derelict. If all the ponds are brought under improved carp polyculture, production may increase to 1,693 MT. The value of incremental production of 662 MT would be 26.48 million taka (@ Tk.40/kg).

Table 3-6: Fisheries Resources and Production in Chenchuri Beel (2002/03)

Resources Area (ha)

Production (MT)

Remarks

A. Capture Fisheries

Between 1983/84 and 2001/02 production reduced/increased

1. Canals/ khals 57 6 Reduced by 76% 2. Beels 853 379 Reduced by 1% 3. Flood Lands 12,805 537 Reduced by 19% Capture Total: 13,715 922 Reduced by 14% B. Culture Fisheries 1. Pond/ Ditches 565 1,017 Increased by 270% 2. Shrimp Ponds/ Ghers 565 253 Increased by 314%

Both area and production increasing Culture Total: 1,128 1,270 Increased by 344% Overall Total (Capture + Culture) 14,843 2,192 Increased by 62%

Source: Consultant’s estimate

102. The present fisheries in the Narail Subproject area comprise (i) open water capture fisheries and (ii) closed water culture fisheries resources. The open water capture fisheries include rivers, beels and floodplains (total area of 16,412 ha) and the culture fisheries in freshwater ponds/ditches, baors and other closed water bodies (1,487 ha). Fresh water pond fish farming yielded 1,256 MT of fish during 2001/02 and has made steady progress during recent years. The area of ponds in the Sub-project is 698 ha, of which 87% are being cultured, 10% cultivable and 3% derelict in 2001/02. The area of ponds was 344 ha in 1983/84, of which only 36% were being cultured, 41% cultivable and 33% derelict and the annual yield was 346 MT. Total area of rivers (Chitra, Bhairab and Afra) having a water area of 309 ha produced 138 MT in 1983/84 (yield per ha 446



kg) but this catch was reduced to 33 MT in 2001/02 (Yield per ha 107 kg) subsequent to the FCD/I interventions in mid-eighties. Open water capture fisheries production between 1983/84 and 2001/02 reduced by 6.6 % and culture fishes production increased by 271%. Overall production increased by 72% (Table 3-7). There are 93 ha of baors, yielding 17 Mt of fish in 1983/84, (179 kg/ha) and in 2001/02 this increased to 70 Mt (748 kg/ha). Productivity of baors has gradually been increasing due to demonstration of fish stock enhancement using culture based technology and effective fishery management. It is considered that baors should be treated in the same way as khas beels, so far as any future FCD/I projects are concerned, i.e. that where baors occur within a project area, provision should be included for improving the fishery, by defining boundaries, restocking, and assigning the fishing rights to bonafide groups of fishermen., along with the provision of culture fishery opportunities.

103. In the two subproject areas, there are two government hatcheries, one for production of fish seeds and another for production of freshwater prawn (Golda) post-larvae in Narail district. Twenty three private nurseries produce 239.60 MT of fingerlings. Fish polyculture and freshwater prawn farmers have to bring required quantity of fish fry and prawn post-larvae for stocking their fish ponds and prawn ghers from Jessore and Khulna. In rapidly expanding situation of fish polyculture and freshwater prawn farming, required fish seed and prawn post-larvae should be made available by establishing both fish and prawn hatcheries at each Upazila of the district in public and private sectors. However, there are 109 private nursery in Narail Sadar Upazila, which produce 239.6 MT of fry/fingerlings annually.

Table 3-7: Fisheries Resources and Production Narail Sub-project (2001/02) Resources Area

(ha) Production

(MT) Remarks

A. Capture Fisheries

Between 1983/84 and 2001/02 production reduced/increased

1. Rivers 309 33 Reduced by 76% 2. Beels 277 123 Reduced by 1.6% 3. Flood Lands 15,826 724 Increased by 6.6% Capture Total: 16,412 880 Reduced by 6.6% B. Culture Fisheries 1. Pond/ Ditches 698 1,256 Increased by 268% 2. Baors 93 70 Increased by 312% 3. Shrimp Ponds/ Ghers 696 312 Increased by 350%

Both area and production increasing Culture Total: 1,487 1,638 Increased by 272% Overall Total (Capture + Culture) 17,899 2,580 Increased by 72%

Source: Consultant’s estimate

104. The common cultured fisheries in the Project area are – native species Katla Catla catla), Rui (Labeo rohita), Mrigal (Cirrhinus mrigala) and exotic species are silvercarp (Hypophthlmicthys molitrix), Grass carp (Ctenophyrngodon idella), Common carp (Cyprinus carpio v. commonis) Mirror carp (Cyprinus cariop v specularis) Thi Sarputi (Barbodes gonionotus) catfish (Pangasius suchi) and Tilapia (Orechromis niloticus). The culture system is mostly poly culture. But in the gher mixed culture of Golda and carps are.

3.3.8 Agricultural Productivity

105. Agriculture is the prime economic activity in Project area. But the main constraint in agriculture development here is water logging by drainage congestion, flood and saline water intrusion in the south, irrigation shortage and faulty water management. However, the agricultural production has increased considerably over the last 10 years (Table 3-8). The cropping patterns are depended on factors like land types, soil characteristics, rainfall pattern, and seasonal fluctuations of temperature, photoperiod,



growers need and preferences. In the Project area rice is the most important food crop. B. Aus are usually grown in most F0 and F1 land under Kharif I season, while B. Aman in F2 and F3 is planted in Kharif I season and continues to grow in Kharif II season. HYV Boro is grown on F1, F2 and F3 areas in irrigated condition, and wheat is grown in comparatively high alluvial areas under both irrigated and rainfed conditions. Sugarcane, vegetables, spices, potatoes and some minor crops grow on highlands, while jute, pulses and oil seeds on comparatively a bit lower lands. In the Kharif I season (March-June) local B.Aus and B.Aman and jute are the dominating crops with minor crops being oilseeds and fruits. In Kharif II (July-October) B.Aman continues in to grow in low lands (F1 and F3). In most areas LT Aman and HYV T.Aman are grown mostly relatively in high lands. In the Rabi season (November-February) wheat, lentil, mustard, mashkalai, gram, chilly, brinjal, bean, borboti, sesame, onion, garlic, sugarcane etc are planted in addition to boro. Fruits like banana, papaya and guava are grown round the year. Minor crops include vegetables, cotton, tobacco, maize, cheena and kaon.

Table 3-8: Food Production and Demand Situation in the Narail District

Food situation during last 10 years 1990-91 1995-96 2000-2001

Food demand ( tons) 107811 120203 134020 Food production (tons) 106760 139507 194167 Surplus/Deficit - 1051 19304 60147 Source: DHV, 1998

106. Agriculture contributes about 43% to GDP and provides over 70% employment opportunities in the Narail district covering both the Chenchuri Beel and Narail subproject areas. About 59% farmers belong to small farm categories (landless, marginal and small farmers) while 9% are large and 32% are medium farmers. It was observed that the smaller farmers have considerable potential to increase agricultural production and can contribute towards economic growth, if they are supported through intensification and diversification of cropping, use of HYV seed, balanced fertilization, irrigation and water management and seed production and preservation.

107. The Chenchuri Beel Subproject has a gross area of 25,560 ha and net cropped area of 17,900 ha. Table 3-9 provides an overview of the present land use. The cropping intensity is 190%. This relatively low figure indicates that the earlier interventions in 1981 and 1984 have not achieved the agricultural target. Double cropping is the main practice covering about 60% of the net cultivated land followed by single (25%) and triple (15%) cropping. The land classification (Table 3-9) shows that major parts of the Subproject area are low and medium lowlands which are consequently affected by flood and water logging due to the present poor functioning of the existing FCD/I schemes. These vast lowland areas have a potential for further agricultural development. Key physical constraints include (i) high risk of flooding (due to river erosion and poorly maintained embankments) in low and medium land (affecting farmer confidence for intensive agriculture during the monsoon); (ii) drainage congestion (affecting the timely cultivation of Rabi crops; (iii) lack of storage in low-lying areas (due to canal siltation and leakage from gates); and (iv) overdrainage in medium to high land (causing occasional droughts in the monsoon as well as dry season).



Table 3-9: Present Land Type Distribution in Relation to Flood Depths in the Chenchuri Beel area

Gross Area Net Cultivated Area Land classification Flood depth (m) Ha % Ha %

Highland FO 0.00 – 0.30 4,915 19.23 3,910 21.85 Medium highland F1 0.03 – 0.90 7,940 31.06 4,345 24.27 Medium lowland F2 0.09 – 1.80 7,901 30.91 6,610 36.92 Lowland F3 >1.80 4,904 18.80 3,035 16.96 Total 25,560 100 17,900 100

Source: Feasibility Study of the Subproject by DHV, 1998

108. The Narail Subproject has a gross area of 31,600 ha out of which net cultivated area is 23,440 ha (74%). The land categories by flood phase obtained from Thana Agriculture Offices presented in Table 3-10 show that the area is medium high and lowland with small areas of high land and low lands. About 74 % of the land are used for cultivation of which double cropping is dominant (71%). The cropping intensity is about 190%. Similar physical constraints persist as in Chenchuri Beel subproject due to lack of water management infrastructure and of their effective maintenance.

Table 3-10: Present Land Type Distribution in Relation to Flood Depths in Narail Subproject Area

Cross Area Net Cultivated Area Land categories Flood depth (m) ha % Ha %

Highland FO 0.00 – 0.30 5,805 18.37 5,665 24.16 Medium highland F1 0.03 – 0.90 9,969 31.55 7,695 32.83 Medium lowland F2 0.09 – 1.80 9,878 31.26 7,430 31.70 Lowland F3 >1.80 5,948 18.82 2,650 11.31 Total 31,600 100 23,440 100

Source: DAE, Agricultural Offices on Upazila Level/Consultants field survey and estimates

3.3.9 Water Management

Irrigation

109. Both surface water from rivers, canals, beels and ponds and underground water are used for irrigation purposes in the Project area. The rivers are the major sources of Low Lift Pumps (LLPs) and ground water is used by installing Shallow Tube Wells (STW). It is estimated that 34% (6,132 ha) of the Net Cultivated Ara (NCA) in the Chenchuri Beel Subproject is under irrigation while an estimated 39% (9,160 ha) is under irrigation in the Narail Subproject (DAE & Consultant's estimate). In addition to expanding cropped area, the increased availability of irrigation water has also facilitated the wider adoption of modern rice varieties, particularly during Rabi season. There are different types of equipment used for irrigation purposes. In Chenchuri Beel Subproject there are 1,981 STW, 88 LLP and 113 other irrigation equipments In the Narail Subproject there are an estimated 3,597 STW, 288 LLP and 294 other irrigation equipments (DAE, 2001-2002). There is still potential to expand the irrigated area and this will have notable impact on crop production and farm income. These irrigation facilities are owned and managed privately by individual farmers.5

5 One exception is a 1,100 ha pump irrigation system within the Chenchuri Beel subproject mentioned in para 41-42,

which is owned and managed by BWDB.



Flood Control and Drainage

110. There are a large number infrastructures that provide flood protection and drainage improvement functions to the two subproject areas, as elaborated in sections 2.3.1 and 2.4.1. These facilities have been mostly owned and managed by BWDB as a common good (except for a few small-scale water management structures constructed by LGED). However, as indicated above, the performance of these infrastructures has largely revealed the weaknesses in their ability to achieve and sustain intended benefits while addressing the diverse needs and interests of different stakeholders. In particular, insufficient recognition of the specific needs of the diverse beneficiaries through a top down planning, design, implementation and management has resulted in little ownership and responsibility on the part of the beneficiaries whom the investments were to serve. As a result, facility operation has tended to be often inappropriate reflecting the needs of a few and/or causing local conflicts without mediating efforts. Moreover, the maintenance has been under-resourced, and hence the investment purpose largely unrealized.

111. In recent years, the Government has initiated policy and institutional reforms for the water resources sector to address the past weaknesses. A comprehensive national water policy was approved that adopted the principles of integrated water resources management, stakeholder participation, sound social and environmental management, sustainable service delivery with management transfer to WMOs. Reforms of sector institutions such as BWDB to address the policy requirements are also initiated. Within this improved environment, the Government intends to enhance the performance of the water management infrastructure through integrated and participatory planning and implementation; establishment of local WMOs that can sustain the optimal benefits with integrated and coordinated O&M either on their own (for small structures) or jointly with BWDB (for large structures); and establishing effective public support systems. The Project aims to promote the process to these ends.

3.3.10 Livestock

112. Cattle and buffalo are the most important livestock providing meat, milk and hides and dung for manure and fuel, as well as required draft power for ploughing, transport and threshing. Other livestock include goat, sheep and poultry providing meat and eggs. Most livestock are kept for domestic purposes and local opportunity but, in recent years, the rural landless have take n up livestock production by the support of NGOs. The sources of feed of livestock are crop by-products like rice straw, rice bran, wheat bran, oil cakes, and pulse husks.

3.4 Social and Cultural Resources

3.4.1 Population and Communities

113. The 25,560 ha gross area of the Chenchuri Beel Subproject is located within 3 Upazilas: Narail (11,873 ha), Kalia (7,843 ha) and Lohagara (5,844 ha) and 144 Mouzas (Narail – 69 Mouzas in 4 Unions; Kalia – 43 Mouzas in 4 Unions and Lohagara 39 Mouzas in 1 Union) with a total population of 243,347 of which 122,773 are males and 120,574 are females. The sex ratio of the area are 102 males per 100 females. The decadal growth rate is 10.0% and annual compound growth rate is 0.95%. The population density is 9.5 per ha which is higher than the national average of 8.3 per ha. The average household size in the subproject area is 5.0 lower than the national average.

114. The Narail subproject gross area of 31,600 ha lies within Narail (18,002 ha), Kalia (2,077 ha) and Abhoynagar (11,521 ha) Upazilas. The area covers different proportionate parts of 9 unions of Narail, with 1,77,818 people, one union in Kalia with



19,059 people and 4 unions of Abhoynagar with 92,341 persons. The total population of the area has been calculated to a total of 289,218 with a sex rate of 105 males per 100 females. The population density is 9 per ha or 915 per sq.km which is higher than national average (835 per sq.km). The average household size in the subproject area is 5.6 which is slightly above the national average of 5.5.

115. In both subproject areas, agriculture is the dominant occupation of the beneficiary population. Secondary and tertiary occupation includes wage labor, fishing and formal employment/services. About 62.2% of the households were found to be functionally landless in Chenchuri, while the same in the Narail sub-project is 56.4%. In Chenchuri, percentage of households suffer from crop damages are 18.8% from inadequate irrigation facilities, 22.5% from draught, etc. The same for Narail is 22.8% for inadequate irrigation facilities and 13.2% for draught, etc. Percentage of households suffer from food shortages in Chenchuri are 28.5% for the limited job opportunity, 37.3% for the less production due to water logging, etc. The same for Narail is 18.3% for limited job opportunity and 28.1% for the less production due to water logging, etc. Based on the stated income, about 48% of the households are “poor” and 40.6% of the households are “hard-core’ poor in Chenchuri according to land category, where as for Narail, the figure is about 44.4% for “poor” and 36.3% for “hard-core’ poor.

116. Based on sample household survey (275 respondent in each subproject) results of the Socio-economic Survey the occupational pattern and social composition of beneficiaries in the project areas are present in the following Table 3-11 and Table 3-12.

Table 3-11: Occupational Pattern (%) of Household by Major Sectors

Primary Occupation Chenchuri Beel Subproject (%)

Narail Subproject (%)

Agriculture 51.3 63.2 House work 11.3 9.1 Business 12.7 7.3 Transport, Rik 4.7 5.5 Service 11.3 5.5 Non agri labor 1.14 4.0 Artisans 5.8 3.7 Fishermen/ boat 0.7 1.8 Others 1.1 0

Table 3-12: Percentage Distribution of Household Heads According to Social Composition/

Land Category Subprojects Household Category No. of Household % Chenchuri Large 6 2.2 Beel Medium 28 10.2 Small 35 12.7 Marginal 35 12.7 Landless 171 62.2 Total 275 100 Narail Large 8 2.9 Medium 30 10.9 Small 48 17.5 Marginal 34 12.4 Landless 155 56.3 Total 275 100



3.4.2 Health

117. The health situation of the Project area is far from satisfactory and water related diseases (diarrhea, dysentery, influenza, cough/cold, typhoid) and common fever, pneumonia, pox, gastric, measles, jaundice skin diseases etc. are still common here. Modern medical facilities are not available to larger percentage of the population. They depend mainly on traditional practitioners. Only between two and ten percent of all households can avail the facilities available at district headquarter. Common diseases in the families are dysentery (93%), diarrhea (94%), influenza (38%), cough and cold (83%) as expressed by the responded households. About 82% of the landless, 86% marginal, 69% medium and 63% large farm households contact Quack doctors for their treatment. Only 10% of the households availed themselves of the opportunity to use hospital facility. In the project area family planning is higher among landless (76%) and marginal farm (64%) families than in large farm families (13%).

3.4.3 Education

118. The available 1991 census data shows only the literacy rates of male 41.2%, female 28.0%, and total 34.6%. It appears that the modal value of literate population lies at primary level education (33%), secondary level education is 24% whereas higher secondary education comes down to 5% only. The survey carried out shows that 61.8% of the male, 53.5 of the female population are literate of which 29% has primary school level.

3.4.4 Physical or Cultural Heritage

119. No historical or important cultural sites are present in the area, which might be affected by the works proposed for the subproject. No nature reserves or protected sensitive ecological area exist in or near the subproject area.

3.4.5 Current Use of Lands and Resources of Traditional Purposes by Indigenous People

120. There are no indigenous peoples habitat in the Project area.

3.4.6 Structures or Sites of Historical, Archaeological, Paleontological or Architectural Significance

121. Only a few mosque and temples are of historical interest exist in the Project area. However, none of these will be affected by the Project.



4 Alternatives

122. The available alternatives were considered, both from the conceptual level, with direct reference to recommendations of the National Water Management Plan (NWMP)6 and from the “engineering” level, with more emphasis on the practical aspects of the alternatives considered. The NWMP identifies 3 main conceptual approaches to FCD/I schemes. However, for practical purposes, these can be reduced to 2 main options:

i) Rehabilitation/remodeling of existing schemes;

ii) Pro-active disengagement from “sick” schemes.

It was clear from local-level discussions and surveys in the two scheme areas that the point where little or no benefit could be derived from further specifically-targeted investment had not been reached yet. The option of abandoning schemes was therefore discarded. Three practical alternatives of undertaking rehabilitation/remodeling were considered based on multi-criteria analysis taking economic, social, and environmental consequences into account. Without Project/ Demolition of Existing Infrastructure,

(i) Rehabilitation of Existing FCD/I System as Single Compartment/Unit, and

(ii) Rehabilitation of Existing FCD/I System as Multiple Compartments/Units

123. Without Project/ Degradation of Existing Facilities. The earlier executed FCD/I project has contributed to economic growth in the sub-project areas. Existing embankments still provide some flood protection benefits, although the reliability is low due to frequent breaches caused by river erosion, particularly in the Chenchuri Beel subproject. The existing regulators still function for drainage and irrigation purposes, albeit partly and efficient operation is restricted due to the poor condition of lifting gear etc. However, the entire FCD/I infrastructure has degraded to a state where cost-effective maintenance and repair is not feasible. Besides, the present organizational and management infrastructure is inadequate. In a Without Project situation, facilities would degrade further.

124. Positive trends and developments achieved, such as the increase in food production, will be jeopardized and the general situation will deteriorate in both subproject areas. Investments made will be lost through lack of maintenance. Flood control will no longer be provided and agricultural production will decline. Road communication, commerce, livestock breeding and general social conditions such as water supply, sanitation and health will also deteriorate. A few positive impacts may be seen. Navigation will become possible in some channels which are now closed off, and capture fisheries may gradually increase in flood plains and beels. However, the loss in culture fisheries (associated with loss of reliable flood protection) will be considerable. Consequently, the option of doing nothing or demolishing the facilities was rejected by stakeholders during the consultative process.

125. Rehabilitation of Existing FCD/I System as Single Compartment/Unit. A conventional approach for FCD/I interventions place water control structures (embankments and regulators) along the boundaries of the hydrological unit taking the entire area as a single compartment or unit. This option has lower intervention costs for the subprojects, and will still provide flood protection, drainage, and irrigation. This will increase agriculture and culture fish productivity, and improve associated quality of life values, although there would be small negative impacts on the terrestrial and aquatic habitat.

6 National Water Management Plan, Volume 2, Main Report, Part A in “Strategy for the Water Sector”, Approved

2004



126. However, this option would not address the localized diverse internal local water management problems in the two subproject areas. The option would not address over-drainage of highland and water logging of low-lying areas, since no internal control of water movement is undertaken. Moreover, the main infrastructures tend to be managed for the benefits of influential and powerful stakeholders living adjacent to the facilities, with little recognition for the concerns and interests of those who live in internal areas. As a result, the overall stakeholder interests and support in this option is weaker and it will not address fully the water management issues.

127. Rehabilitation of Existing FCD/I System as Multiple Compartments/Units. The concept of dividing FCD/I systems into multiple smaller compartments enabling internal water management activities was developed during a previous study undertaken by BWDB with the assistance of ADB.7 Each main compartment can be further divided addressing more localized water problems within sub-units. This option requires more resources, but these are mostly small-scale in nature, and cost-effective, and will provide significant positive impacts on agriculture and culture fishery productivity, and associated quality of life values. However slightly more, albeit small, negative impacts on the terrestrial and aquatic habitat are expected (in association with the installation of additional small-scale structures).

128. The multiple compartment option was identified as the optimal solution and supported by the largest number of stakeholders. It will generate the highest income in a cost-effective manner. Strong ownership was shown by the concerned local stakeholders in terms of their willingness to participate in planning, implementation, and O&M of those local infrastructures using own resources, as demonstrated already elsewhere.8 The overall stakeholder interests in and support for the entire water management infrastructure is also expected to be the strongest for this options.

129. Other alternatives are somewhat limited in scope and are, in effect, slight mutations of the two basic themes of do nothing or rehabilitate the system with compartments. For example, one additional radical alternative could be the option of doing nothing with the infrastructure, but forming water management associations in each sub-system as proposed in the project. This however, must be rejected outright as there would be no incentive for WMOs to function, as the basic infrastructure would continue to degrade and the level of resource mobilization available to WMOs would be insufficient to address the repairs necessary.

130. The alternatives for without project, single/minimal compartment and with project scenarios or optimal compartment have been evaluated and compared to the Proposed Project using an analysis that summarized economic, social, and environmental consequences, see the summary of alternative analysis in Table 4-1.

7 Loan No. 1289-BAN: Southwest Area Water Resources Development Project, approved in November 1996. 8 Loan No. 1831-BAN: Second Small-scale Water Resources Development Sector Project, approved in July 2001.



Table 4-1: Analysis of Without and With Project PROJECT COMPONENTS and ALTERNATIVES

Chenchuri Beel Narail Arsenic Mitigation

Without Project

Single Compartment

Multiple Compartment

Without Project

Single Compartment

Multiple Compartment

River Hydraulics N I I N I N N N Flooding III BB BB III BB BB N N Drainage III BB BBB III BB BBB N N Irrigation III BB BBB III BB B N N Erosion & Siltation II B B II B I N N Wetlands BB I I BB I N N N Groundwater N N N N N N N N

Physical Environment

Water Pollution I N N I N I N N Terrestrial Habitat I I I I I I N N Aquatic Habitat B I I B I BB N N Culture Fisheries III BB BB III BB N N N

Biological Environment

Capture Fisheries BB I I BB I N N Land use and settlement/ resettlement

I II II I II II N N

Agricultural Land II i I II i I N N Agricultural productivity II BB BBB II BB BBB N N Safe Water Supply I B B I B B III BBB Navigation N I I N I I N N

Human and Economic Development

Road Transport I B BB I B BB N N Education & Health II B B II B B III BBB Employment and Economic Activities

II BB BB II BB BB N B

Poverty II BB BB II BB BB II B Migration II BB BBB II BB BBB I B Status of Women N B B N B B N B

Quality of Life Values

Equity N B B N B B II BB N= not significant B= small benefit I= small negative impact BB= moderate benefit II= medium negative impact BBB large benefit III= large negative impact



5 Anticipated Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures

5.1 Key Considerations

5.1.1 Scoping

131. During the project preparatory TA, the potential scope of the Project and its likely social and environmental implications were discussed at the mid-term regional workshop (in Jessore) and national workshop held on 12 May and 15 May 2004, respectively. Subsequently, the scoping was prepared following the ADB Environmental Assessment Guidelines (2003) and “Guidelines for Environmental Assessment of Flood Control, Drainage and Irrigation Projects” (WARPO, 2001). It was accomplished following the rapid impact assessment checklists separating the separating the elements in four basic group of effects on biological/ecological matters, effects on the socio-cultural environment, and effects on economic and operational elements. Major sources of information in the scoping process included:

• existing reports and documents dealing with environmental issues and problems of project area, including reports of Halcrow, 1993; DHV, 1998; Halcrow 2002 and 2004.

• environmental data collected by the socio-economic survey and the survey addressing resettlement;

• information collected through interview of local community and their representatives during environment field inspections;

• information collected from government officials through interview and formal and informal discussion during environmental field inspections;

• information on faunal and floral assemblages collected from reports prepared by IUCN (2001), Bangladesh Centre for Advance Studies (BCAS) Flood Action Plan (FAP) and through different project activities, as well as by field visit and field survey;

• field work was carried out in the project area to determine the present environmental conditions and to collect data from the area; and

• experience of environmental impact of drainage improvement projects in other parts of Bangladesh.

Important Environmental Components

132. Sustainable management of natural resources and preservation of natural fauna and flora are important issues in Bangladesh in promoting poverty alleviation and economic development. It is also important that human habitat is protected from water-related problems such as flooding, drainage congestion, river erosion, and shortages and contamination of surface and groundwater resources and that they have sufficient



employment opportunities to undertake livelihood activities while not excessively affecting the natural environment. Loss of the aforementioned water security are likely to lead to further pressure to the natural environment, leading to displacement to marginal land, overexploitation of fishery and forestry resources, unsustainable use of land and water resources, and indiscriminative disposal of wastes. This may also contribute to rapid depletion of biodiversity of the country. One best way to save the natural habitat and protect fauna and floral species of an area will be to stabilize human population in their existing environment/habitat and create more employment and income generating opportunities in those areas, so that they do not heavily exploit wildlife and forestry resources of the area. Thus, ensuring the proper and enhanced performance of the existing water management infrastructures is critical to achieve that objective.

133. The project area has been heavily impacted by human intervention. Flood protection structures have changed the natural fauna and flora of the area. Human introduced plant and animal species now dominate the area. Once the project area was important for natural fish and migratory bird species. Now, because of agricultural activities and high population density, the area is not of major importance. However, to a rather limited extent some of the project area still temporarily used by migratory birds. Parts of the project area remain as breeding and feeding ground for some species of fish. Consideration needs to be given on the preservation of such remaining natural environment.

134. The following Important Environmental Components (IECs) for the project area have been identified through the scoping process. In order to avoid repetition, some of the environmental components have been grouped together based on their similarity and or if they are likely to be modified in the similar way by the project.

(i) Physical environment: air, soils, physiography, river hydraulics, flooding, drainage, irrigation, erosion and siltation, open water areas wetlands, groundwater, and water pollution

(ii) Biological environment: aquatic ecosystem, terrestrial ecosystem, endangered species

(iii) Human and economic development: industry, infrastructure facilities, navigation and road transport, land use, power, agriculture land, agriculture productivity, culture fisheries, capture fisheries, water management, water supply/sanitation

(iv) Quality of life values: equity, migration, status of women, employment and economic activities, poverty, health, education

5.1.2 Bounding

135. In general, most of the potential environmental impacts are confined within the two subproject areas, except for a few parameters such as river hydraulics and salinity. The potentially impacted area identified during the scoping process is presented in the table below.



Table 5-1: With and Without Project conditions for Chenchuri Beel and Narail

Area description Possible Impacts Area Definition The Chenchuri Beel and Narail subproject areas and immediate adjacent areas affected during lifetime of the project options.

See IECs above Chenchuri Beel: Area bound by the existing flood embankments and the Chitra and Nabaganga rivers in the western and eastern boundary. Narail: Area bound by the existing flood embankments and the Chitra, Afra, and Bhairab rivers in the eastern, northwestern, and southwestern boundary.

Construction sites and adjacent areas impacted

See IECs above Sites for flood embankments, khal re-excavation, regulators, water retention structures, inlet-outlet structures, riverbank protection works

Areas further away on from the two subprojects potentially impacted during lifetime of project operation

Downstream impacts on river hydrology in terms of river flow and salinity

Existing polder systems in the immediate downstream operating dry season irrigation using surface water

5.1.3 Project Components Used for Impact Assessment

136. In order to simplify the impact assessment process, the main project components have been grouped together and their impact on the environment assessed. The components grouped together are either similar or related to each other or they are likely to impact the environment in a similar way. Only the activities likely to interfere with the environment are considered.

137. The components are separated for the three project phases, (i) participatory design; (ii) construction/implementation and (iii) O&M. The participatory design phase includes two components, whereas construction phase basically includes 3 components and the O&M phase consists of 3 long-term components. The following specific activities are identified that have environmental implications.

Participatory Design Phase

• Implementation plan preparation and detailed design. This will support the preparation of implementation plans for the individual structures and Project activities within the subunits associated with the structures, in consultation with the representatives of the local stakeholders.

• Water Management Organization (WMO) formation and strengthening. This will support the establishment and strengthening of the WMOs associated with the concerned subunits, encompassing all groups of stakeholders to support coordinated water management and sustainable maintenance of the concerned local structures.

Construction/ Implementation Phase

• Civil works for rehabilitating/improving water management structures. The activities, mostly through minor civil works undertaken by local contractors or labour contracting societies, will cover (i) flood embankments (transferring earth from adjacent borrow-pits); (ii) protection of river bank (using geo-textile bags filled with sand mined from the adjacent riverbed



with temporary work facilities); (iii) re-excavation of canals (with spreading of dredge spoil to nearby agriculture land owned by willing beneficiaries); (iv) minor structure works such as instalment or regulators and water retention structures (involving sub-structure and structure works with excavation of soils with temporal work camps); and (v) rehabilitation of limited section of lined irrigation canals.

• Support services for agriculture and fishery development, and livelihood enhancement. Specific activities include (i) agriculture extension including soil nutrient management, improved cropping practices for agriculture intensification/ diversification, seed multiplication, and integrated pest management; (ii) fishery development including promotion of fish culture in public and private water bodies, rice-cum-fish culture, and open water stocking; and (iii) livelihood enhancement support such as tree plantation and nursery development on public lands and livestock breeding.

• Pilot arsenic mitigation. Focusing on areas with little access to arsenic free drinking water, activities will include pilot provision of available alternative water supply options, and promotion of sanitation among the beneficiaries.

O&M Phase

• O&M of major water management facilities. The Project will establish permanent institutions and their operational framework to operate and maintain the improved water management infrastructure. The major facilities are envisaged to be managed by BWDB following the decisions of the Joint Management Committee (JMC) established with the representatives of the line departments, local governments, and WMOs. Transfer of management to local WMOs would also be considered in the medium to long term.

• O&M of local water management facilities. The local water management facilities to address local water management problems through small-scale structures (e.g., water retention structures, inlet/outlet, regulators, re-excavated khals) will be managed by the local WMOs with the participation of stakeholder groups within the command area of the facilities.

• Enhancement of economic activities by the beneficiaries. It is expected that the Project beneficiaries will enhance their agriculture, fishery, and other livelihood activities using the improved water management infrastructure and techniques provided under the Project.

5.1.4 Impact Identification and Assessment Matrix

138. The important Environmental Components (IECs) and their potential interaction with the major project activities are presented. GOB guidelines (FPCO 1992 and 1995) require presenting project impact in one table for easy comparison and interpretation. Benefits or positive impacts are here graded from +1 to +10, 0 for no impact and negative impacts scored from -1 to -10. Impacts are assessed quantitatively wherever possible. e.g. if a project will have a positive impact on agricultural productivity



and the production will be increased by 50%, then an scoring of +5 is applied to agricultural productivity.

139. Where it is not possible to directly quantify the impact in terms of increase or decrease in production, or deterioration of water quality or degradation of environment, the impact has to be estimated. For the purpose of estimation, positive and negative impacts were grouped in to three different groups, as Low, Medium and High. A low numerical value ranges from 1 to 3, Medium from 4 to 6 and High with a numerical value ranging from 6 to 9. Number 10 being reserved for extremely high positive or negative impacts. Each of these factors are again divided in to three categories for an example, low low impact=1, medium low impact=2, high low impact=3. In a similar way medium and high impacts were also rated. The following table presents the assessments.

Table 5-2: Impact Identification and Assessment Matrix

PROJECT PHASE DESIGN IMPLEMENTATION O&M

Chenchuri Beel

Narail Chenchuri Beel


Narail

Air 0 0 -1 -1 0 0 Soils 0 0 -1 -1 0 0 Physiography 0 0 0 0 0 0 River Hydraulics 0 0 -3 -2 0 0 Flooding 0 0 0 0 +6 +6 Drainage 0 0 0 0 +8 +8 Irrigation 0 0 -2 -1 +8 +8 Erosion and Siltation 0 0 -1 -1 +2 +2 Open water areas wetlands 0 0 -1 -1 -1 -1 Groundwater 0 0 0 0 0 0


Water pollution 0 0 -2 2 0 0 Aquatic Ecosystem 0 0 -1 -1 0 0 Terrestrial Ecosystem -1 -1 -1 -1 0 0


Endangered Species 0 0 -1 -1 0 0 Industry 0 0 -1 -1 +4 +4 Infrastructure facilities 0 0 -1 -1 +5 +5 Navigation 0 0 -2 -2 0 0 Road Transport 0 0 -1 -1 +5 +5 Land Use -2 -2 -2 -2 -2 -2 Power 0 0 0 0 0 0 Agricultural Land -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 Agricultural productivity -1 -1 -1 -1 +7 +7 Culture Fisheries 0 0 0 0 +4 +4 Capture Fisheries 0 0 -1 -1 -3 -3 Water Management 0 0 -1 -1 +7 +8


Water Supply/Sanitation 0 0 0 0 +7 +7 Equity 0 0 +1 +1 +2 +2 Migration 0 0 +3 +3 +7 +7 Status of Women 0 0 +1 +1 +2 +2 Employment and Economic Activities 0 0 +5 +5 +6 +6 Poverty 0 0 +1 +1 +3 +3 Health 0 0 0 0 +7 +7


Education 0 0 0 0 +2 +2 Note: The impact has been scored on a 1 to 10 scale: No impact is "0", negative impacts from -1 to -10

and positive impacts from +1 to +10



Impact on the Physical Environment

5.1.5 Air

140. During construction the handling and transport of construction material, earth movement and excavation may cause dust, noise and air pollution. Impacts during the transportation and storage of construction material will be minimized by covering the material or by keeping the surface wet. Work will be restricted to the daytime reducing nuisance from noise. Vehicles will be maintained to minimize exhaust.

5.1.6 Soils

141. Establishment of working areas, earthwork and storage of construction materials at the project site may cause damage to local vegetation and degrade the topsoil. As a mitigation measure, removing the topsoil from the storage sites and storing it in a secure place for later use would mitigate these impacts. After the completion of the construction, the topsoil would be placed to its original place. In areas of no topsoil construction material can be stored directly on top it. However, after the construction, the area would be turfed and trees planted.

142. During O&M phase, degradation of soil quality is mainly attributed to improper use of fertilizers and pesticides to boost up agricultural production. Another potential problem is depletion of the natural level of organic material and the nutrient content in the soil.

5.1.7 Physiography

143. The general physiography of the Subproject areas will not be altered by the project, and in general the existing situation will be maintained. Works are mainly confined to rehabilitation of existing water resources facilities. The implementation of new embankments and structures and the excavation of new khals will be carried out in limited areas.

5.1.8 Hydrology and Hydraulics

144. Inside Subprojects. The implementation of compartments and rehabilitation of the flood control infrastructure will result in a change in flood depths. In the Chenchuri Beel the flood depths of low lying land (F3: 1.8-3.0m according to the FPCO Guidelines) will be reduced by 13% and in the Narail Subproject by 13% as well. In terms of total area the reduction in areas with deep flooding is not substantial. However, the compartmentalization will result in a re-distribution of the flooded areas with the main objective to distribute water over the entire Subproject areas within each compartment, providing water for surface water irrigation. Further, the compartment water regulation structures will be operated to control the duration of flooding for optimizing agricultural production and avoid waterlogging. This will provide a better physical environment for socio-economic related activities and improve the living conditions for presently flood and water logging affected people. The positive impact is considered to be major.

145. When the Project is implemented the flood levels inside the FCD/I schemes will change. The change in flood depths according to the FPCO Guidelines for the With and Without Project conditions for Chenchuri Beel and Narail are presented in the following Table 5-3.



Table 5-3: With and Without Project conditions for Chenchuri Beel and Narail

Without Project With Project Subproject Land type Gross NCA Gross NCA

F0 < 0.3m 4,915 3,910 4,909 3,010

F1 0.3-0.9m 7,940 4,345 8,058 5,550

F2 0.9-1.8m 7,901 6,610 8,315 6,480

F3 1.8-3.0m 4,904 3,035 4,278 2,860

Chenchuri Beel

Total 25,560 17,900 25,560 17,900

F0 <0.3m 5,805 5,665 5,762 5,250

F1 0.3-0.9m 9,969 7,695 10,318 8,010

F2 0.9-1.8m 9,878 7,430 10,362 7,730

F3 1.8-3.0m 5,948 2,650 5,168 2,450

Narail

Total 31,600 23,440 31,600 23,440 Source: i. District Agricultural Office

ii. Consultant's Survey and Estimate

iii. Feasibility Study by DHV, 1998

146. The areas with high inundation (F3) will be reduced in both Subprojects providing a better physical environment for socio-economic related activities and improved living conditions for presently flood and water logging affected people. The positive impact is considered to be major.

147. The reduction in dry land (F0) affects primarily the net cultivable area, causing a relatively small reduction in the potential agricultural production. This reduction is brought about by the redistribution of accumulated floodwater (originating mainly from direct rainfall, over which the project has no control) among the compartments. Reducing the flooding and waterlogging in the lower compartments is offset by a small increase in food volumes retained (temporarily) in the upper compartments. Thus a small amount of land that was previously F0 will now convert to F1.

148. Outside Subprojects. The hydrological and morphological changes outside the Subproject areas are considered to be of little significance, given the relatively minor change in the land classification (Table 5-3). Areas outside of the subprojects are also covered by the present FCD/I schemes to a large extent.

149. Construction Phase. During the rehabilitation and upgrading of the water resources infrastructure the connectivity between various river segments and other water bodies would be temporarily affected/closed. However, the impact on the hydrology is considered to be limited.

5.1.9 Drainage and Irrigation

150. Inside Subprojects. The proposed rehabilitation works and extension of FCD/I facilities in the Project area will improve the drainage conditions especially during the pre-monsoon and post-monsoon seasons. Irrigation development is anticipated mainly through improved availability of surface water to ensure year round water supply. Surface water is carried from the peripheral channels through the re-excavated drainage channels into the Subproject areas in particular at the time of high tide. Water will be lifted from these channels to the fields by Low-Lift Pumps (LLP). Shallow Tube Wells (STW) and Deep Tube Wells (DTW) will lift groundwater. Groundwater irrigation is already practiced to a large extent in the Chenchuri Beel and Narail and is still expected to increase. Table 5-4 shows the irrigated area under the Without and With Project



conditions. In total, the estimated long term benefit of the Project is considered as major with respect to improvement of the drainage and irrigation.

Table 5-4: Dry Season Irrigated Areas

Subproject Present (ha) Without Project (ha) Future With Project (ha)

Chenchuri Beel 6,132 (34%)

7,712 (43%) 10,229 (57%)

Narail 9,160 (39%)

10,575 (45%) 12,703 (54%)

Source: DAE and Consultants Survey and Estimate

151. Outside Subprojects. External impacts may occur due to the surface water abstraction in the Chenchuri Beel and the Narail. Especially during the dry season, where the salinity level may increase at certain locations downstream of the project areas. However, as shown in Figure 5-1 and Figure 5-2, actual salinity levels in rivers near the project area are quite low and largely within the limits acceptable for irrigated agriculture (1-2 ppt). The isohalines shown in Figure 5-1 were measured with no flow in the Gorai river (a worst-case scenario). It can be seen that, after the effectuation of the Ganges Water Treaty in 1996 and restoration works, the level of salinity intrusion in the Southwest Area appears much reduced.

152. Nevertheless, the project anticipates increased surface water abstraction for irrigation using Low-lift pumps and further expansion of groundwater tubewells. This may cause negative impacts on the downstream irrigation users by causing reduced water availability and increased salinity. However, the impacts on water availability is deemed insignificant, as surface water withdrawal is generally done during the high tide, of which level is not affected by the Project-induced increased withdrawal. Regarding the possibility of increased salinity due to increased withdrawal in the Project area, impacts are also deemed slight and mitigated with the Project interventions that enables more efficient use of water for irrigation, and enhanced salinity monitoring and networking.

153. Specifically, the surface water irrigation will be done from internal re-excavated khals which will be filled from the surrounding rivers via regulators in the embankment during the late monsoon, for carry-over into the dry season. Farmers also abstract water from the rivers at times of high tide and low salinity during the dry season. After the Project, the larger amount of water will be stored in the re-excavated canals more effectively with improved regulators. Water use is also efficient in this area, as the seepage from irrigated fields drains out into the canal and recycled. When the risk of salinity is high, local farmers have also adopted the practice of not withdrawing water from river and switching to the use of groundwater. These measures, along with the more intensive salinity monitoring and information networking (to the local farmers, local government and line department representatives) suggested under the Project are expected to make the downstream impacts on river flow and salinity insignificant.

Table 5-5: Availability of Water for Irrigation and Other Uses (mill m3/yr)

Groundwater Surface water

Total (GW+SW)

Present withdrawal

Withdrawal FWO

Withdrawal FW

Percentage of available water

Chenchuri Beel

65 142 207 59 73 91 44%

Narail 104 142 246 83 98 109 44% Source: DHV 1998 and Consultant’s estimates

154. The Project is expected to utilize 44% of the available water resources both in the Chenchuri Beel and Narail Subproject areas, see Table 5-5. The utilization rate is



relatively high. Therefore it should be considered to include extension services in water saving methodologies as part of the agricultural development activities. Overall, the O&M phase of the Project is expected to provide a major improvement in the drainage and irrigation of the Project Area. Implementation Phase. During construction temporary impediments to existing drainage and irrigation may occur. However, the works should be planned carried out during dry seasons when the drainage facilities are normally not in use, with provision of temporary irrigation facilities and canals as possible to avoid any negative impacts. Overall the impact is expected to be only slightly negative.

5.1.10 Erosion and Siltation

155. Inside Subprojects. Riverbank protection works in Chenchuri Beel subproject will have significant local positive impacts by protecting the water resources infrastructure and productive agricultural and homestead land from progressive river erosion. Little morphological impacts are anticipated in the areas adjacent to the protection works, as they are largely localized works to stabilize the existing bank lines along the naturally developed river course. Canal re-excavation will also provide significant positive impacts within the subproject areas, removing the chronic drainage congestion problems. However, siltation may occur again in the excavated channels, and especially around existing and proposed structures. Siltation may hamper the functioning of structures, or non-functioning, especially if the canal entrances to inlet structures silt up entirely. As the potential impact is severe, adequate O&M is essential to prevent the occurrence of the problem.

156. Outside Subprojects. No major impacts on the river morphology is expected along the rivers outside of the Chenchuri Beel and Narail subproject areas, given the fairly local nature of the riverbank protection works. Stabilization of the river course would also benefit outside areas by reducing the negative impacts associated with dynamic movement of river courses. However, local induced erosion may occur at locally at the rivers. Erosion is already taking place at various positions along the Nabaganga river, where the present embankments are endangered, and where riverbank protection is planned as part of the Project. Erosion attacks may occur in other positions in future. These attacks are phenomena, that are difficult to predict whether generated by the river bank protection works under the Project, or by other factors. Most likely, the erosion attacks will be of equal size both in the With and Without Project. However, the impact of these activities will be local and limited in size. On the other hand, no impacts are anticipated in terms of siltation outside of the Subproject areas.

157. Implementation Phase. Erosion from the work sites and siltation from run-offs may occur during the construction phase. To mitigate this proper drainage facilities and protection of erosion prone works areas and materials should be provided. If necessary, spill flows with high sediment content should be contained for sediment removal.

5.1.11 Open Water Areas and Wetlands

158. The principal wetlands in the subproject areas are rivers and streams, flood plains and marshes (baors and beels), water storage ponds, fish ponds and, seasonally flooded cultivated plains. Local changes of these wetlands are likely to occur. The inundation depth in seasonal wetlands will decrease due to improved overall drainage (with a minor level of significance as indicated in Table 5-3). On the other hand, the excavation of channels and canals will enlarge and preserve other water bodies, along with the installment of water retention structures within the subproject areas. Overall, the expected loss of wetland areas is expected to be limited, with no or small negative impact.



5.1.12 Groundwater Recharge

159. Groundwater irrigation is rapidly expanding in both subproject areas in the recent years. This trend is expected to continue with or without the Project, with enhanced expansion under with Project scenario, as farmers are expected to respond to improved drainage conditions and expand dry season cultivation. The aquifer conditions in the Project area have been studied under the NWP Phase I and II, and the FAP 4 projects. These studies conclude that in general the aquifer conditions in the Project area is not very favorable for groundwater development. The available recharge, present use and development potential by modes for the Chenchuri Beel and Narail are given in Table 5-5 (DHV, 1998). Although year-to-year recharge capacity is more than sufficient, localized groundwater drawdown is observed in some areas during the dry season, increasing the cost of irrigation in such areas. With a groundwater based irrigation development anticipated to occur more in areas where the groundwater resources have not been exploited the impact of the Project is therefore expected to be slightly negative and seasonal.

160. As per British Geological Survey on ground water behavior there is a possibility of lateral/horizontal movement of arsenic but very slow. The possibility of vertical movement is more because of faulty construction of wells. But because of several clay layers of 10 to 20 meters within the Lohagara project area, there is only a minimal risk of contamination of arsenic in deep tube wells.

5.1.13 Water Pollution

161. The Project will provide irrigation and the drainage facilities that will assist to flush out polluted or stagnant water from the project area. This in turn will reduce local water pollution problems. The overall impact of the project on water pollution is expected to be positive.

162. Implementation Phase. During the implementation phase there may be some water pollution from the construction site etc. To mitigate this, the following measures will be taken:

(i) Maintain all construction sites in a clean and safe condition and provide and maintain appropriate facilities for temporary storage of all wastes before transportation and disposal.

(ii) Organize disposal of all wastes generated during construction in an environmentally acceptable manner. This shall include consideration of the nature and location of disposal sites, so as to cause least environmental impact.

(iii) Take all precautionary measures when handling and storing fuels and lubricants, to avoid causing environmental pollution. This is to include establishment of contingency plans for clean up in the event of spillage.

5.2 Impact on the Biological/Ecological Environment

5.2.1 Aquatic Ecosystem

163. The Project is likely to create minor to medium disturbance to the aquatic environment. The increased capacity for drainage will reduce flood water levels, and prolonged periods for drying out of certain water bodies may occur. However, the project will excavate khals, thereby creating enlarged aquatic habitats. The khals will act as dry seasons refuge areas where a mix of diverse species in reasonable quantities can



survive and attain maturity. Water retention structures will also expand water body areas and crate enlarged habitats, although they tend to impede the movement of fish species across their gates. A free movement of fish between rivers and floodplains for breeding, feeding and growth is essential for a sustainable productivity and maintenance of the floodplain biodiversity. The implementation of FCD/I schemes is known to block the free movement, having a detrimental effect on capture fisheries. However, the Project will implement measures to mitigate the blocking effect with the implementation of fish friendly operation of structures and regulators during peak fish migration. Despite the mitigation efforts it is anticipated that the project will have a moderate, overall negative impact on fish habitats and fish migration.

164. During implementation some construction works may cause erosion thereby increasing the turbidity in adjacent waters. However, fish species are generally adapted to such conditions. Further, disturbance from construction may cause fish to migrate away form the sites. However, these disturbances are temporary and reversible, and the negative impact assessed to be only minor.

5.2.2 Terrestrial Ecosystem

165. No natural forests remain in the Project area that the Project may encroach upon, thereby reducing the natural habitat for terrestrial wildlife and flora. The terrestrial flora present in the project area is mainly composed of human introduced species grown around homesteads and along roadsides. There are only a few wild animals present in the Project area. During the implementation phase disturbances and noise from construction may have a slight negative impact on the remaining, sparse fauna. During the O&M phase trees planted for protection of embankments will improve the terrestrial habitat of the area from a slight to medium degree.

5.2.3 Endangered Species

166. Disturbances during construction may have a temporary effect on the few, remaining endangered species. However, no permanent negative impact is foreseen.

5.3 Impact on Human and Economic Development

5.3.1 Industries

167. The small to medium scale industries present in the Project area will benefit from the provision of flood protection. In addition, the increased agricultural production and economic development as a result of the provision of improved drainage and irrigation facilities is expected to provide a basis for expansion in agricultural related industries. However, a few enterprises will have to be relocated to make land available for new embankments and khals.

168. Only a few industries are expected to be impacted temporarily during construction.

5.3.2 Infrastructure Facilities

169. The Project will rehabilitate and improve the FCD/I facilities in the Chenchuri Beel and Narail Subproject areas. Besides, roads will be rehabilitated/implemented on the embankments improving the road networks. In addition, safe water supply will be provided to arsenic affected areas on a pilot basis. The overall positive impact will be substantial. During construction existing infrastructure is not considered to be negatively impacted to any larger degree.



5.3.3 Navigation and Road Transport

170. The key factor influencing the navigation is the year round hydraulic conditions prevailing in the Project area. Installment of regulators and water retention structures in the open khals will obstruct boat transportation, although re-excavated khals would provide better environment for their operation. Overall impacts are deemed negative, although most of the facilities are installed in minor channels with little boat transportation. The Project will also install a navigation lock adjacent to the existing 10-vent regulator at Pateswari regulator in Chenchuri Beel subproject thereby redressing the major negative impacts of the previous intervention. A boat pass is also installed in the check structure across the Linar khal, a key boat route within the Chenchuri Beel subproject. For the other water control structures having smaller negative impacts, the Project will pursue gate operation to allow passage of boats during important seasons such as paddy harvests (when irrigation water is not required). On the other hand, road transport will improve considerable as the project will improve the road network and safeguard this against floods.

171. During construction some construction works may temporarily impede road transport and navigation at some sites. The impact is considered to be slightly negative.

5.3.4 Land Use and Resettlement

172. The proposed new interventions for rehabilitation of the subprojects will cause adverse social impacts and in some instances would require land acquisition and resettlement of affected households and businesses. According to the census/resettlement surveys9 conducted during the project preparatory work, the two subprojects together will involve acquisition of 56.4 ha of land (Chenchuri – 13.4 and Narail – 43.0 ha) for construction of project infrastructures. Table 5-6 presents a summary of impacts of the two subprojects.

Table 5-6: Project Impacts and Displacement

Subproject LA requirements

Households Requiring Relocation

Household affected but

need no relocation

Households losing agricultural land

only & TCF

Total Households

Total APs

Chenchuri10 13.376 ha 49 20 77 146 886

Narail 42.95 ha 100 134 166 400 2,495

Total 56.326 ha 149 154 243 546 3,381 Source: Socioeconomic Survey, August-September 2004

173. The two subprojects will affect 546 households out of which 149 would require relocation due to acquisition of their homesteads – the rest will lose fish farms, shops and agricultural land. Around 43 households in Chenchuri Beel and 12 households in Narail Subprojects are informal settlers on government or private land. In all, 132 residential/commercial structures will be affected. House structures are predominantly kuccha (89%) – made of wood, bamboo and straw with corrugated tin roof. About 8% are semi-pucca and the rest (3%) are pucca structures. In general, the type of losses include (i) loss of homestead land/trees; (ii) residential/commercial/ community structures, and (iii) loss of income/work days due to dislocation and relocation; (iv) loss of agricultural land (including bank lines and eroded land), and (v) loss of ponds

9 The surveys were conducted in August 2004 by Polli Unnayan Andolon (RDM), an experienced NGO in the

resettlement field. 10 Includes estimated figure of 43 households, and 27 shops on embankment slopes to be displaced.



(cultivated) and shrimp ghers (firms).To mitigate the adverse impacts, separate Resettlement Plans (RP) have been prepared for the two subprojects. The RP is presented in Appendix 2. The RP is based GOB laws and ADB policy11 and guidelines.12 The RP has devised appropriate mitigation measures to compensate for all identified losses and to assist in the resettlement of the affected population.13

174. During the construction phase some disturbances on homesteads adjacent to structure works may be unavoidable. However, with proper precautions taken as part of the Environmental Management Plan these are considered to be very localized and reversible. The negative impact therefore being only minor.

5.3.5 Power Sources and Transmission

175. No impacts on Power Sources and Transmission are envisaged.

5.3.6 Agricultural land

176. The Project will improve areas used for agriculture providing improved drainage and irrigation, and protect against floods. The riverbank protection works included in Chenchuri Beel subproject will also prevent the loss of land due to river erosion. However, during the implementation phase, small parts of agricultural land may be needed for storage of construction material, earth works, other working space etc. These activities will have an only short term and small negative impact. According to the census/resettlement surveys conducted during the project preparatory work, the construction of new embankments will require that agricultural land have to be acquired. An estimated total of 13.4 ha and 43.0 ha are needed for the construction of embankments and structures in the Chenchuri Beel and Narail Subproject areas, respectively. In Narail subproject, substantial proportion of the land is already used as dwarf flood embankments constructed under food-for-work programs with donation of the land from the landowners, which will be formally acquired under the Project. Overall, the negative impact on agricultural land is deemed very insignificant.

5.3.7 Agricultural Productivity

177. The negative impact of the loss of agricultural productivity for land used for embankment construction will be counterweighted by the major improvement in the productivity of the remaining agricultural land in the Project area. A principal direct impact is e.g. the change in land flood classes, see Table 5-3 and increase in irrigated areas, see Table 5-4. As land changes flood class, or as possibilities for irrigation increase, the crops grown and cropping intensities and yields achieved will change to those typical for a more productive agricultural land type. The project will have a very positive impact on agricultural productivity with a cropping intensity increase to 220%. The agricultural benefits constitute the largest part of the total project benefits. Improvements in flood control, drainage, irrigation and the Agricultural enhancement activities will result in changes in crops grown, cropping patterns, cropping intensities, yields and outputs.

178. It is estimated that the total cereal production will increase from a present 45,876 tons to 62,838 tons in the O&M phase for the Chenchuri Beel, and from 60,202

11 Involuntary Resettlement (1995), Asian Development Bank, Manila. 12 Handbook on Resettlement: A Guide to Good Practice (1998), ADB, Manila 13 In relation to the housing dislocation in Narail subproject, local stakeholders requested to construct the

embankments on the riverside of the ridge areas along the bank line that is heavily populated, as opposed to the inland side of the ridge where much less displacement impacts occur. This is to enhance the security of the homestead areas against flood risks.



tons to 79,356 in Narail (Consultant's Estimate). For a more detailed analysis of the positive impacts on agricultural productivity, refer to Appendix 3.

179. The agricultural productivity may be slightly reduced during implementation due to construction works. These impacts are considered to be temporary and small.

5.3.8 Fisheries

180. It is assessed that the proposed Culture Fisheries Development activities under the Project will increase the culture fish production from the present 1,270 Mt to 2,673 Mt (2001/2002 latest estimate, Table 5-7) in the Chenchuri Beel, and from 1,638 Mt to 3,170 Mt in Narail (2001/2002 latest estimate, Table 5-8). The overall positive impact on cultured fisheries is therefore considered to be major.

Table 5-7: Estimated Fisheries Benefit and Disbenefits in the Chenchuri Beel Sub-project

Without Project With Project Present Fisheries Production Area

(ha) Present production

(Mt) Area (ha)

Estimated future production

Capture Fisheries 1. Rivers Khals 2. Beels 3 Flood lands

57

853 12,805

6

379 537

57

853 12,593

9

245 480

Capture Total 13,715 922 13,503 734 Culture Fisheries Ponds/Ditches Boars Pen culture Paddy-cum-Fish culture Shrimp (Golda) culture in ponds

565

563

1017

253

660 50

200 400 563

1,850

300 150 120 253

Culture total 1,128 1,270 1,873 2,673 Overall Total (Capture+Culture) 14,843 2,192 15,376 3,407

Source: Consultant's Estimate based on expected Floodland (F2+F3) Changes Yield estimates

Table 5-8: Estimated Fisheries Benefit and Disbenefits in the Narail Sub-project

Without Project With Project Present Fisheries Production Area

(ha) Present production

(Mt) Area (ha)

Estimated future production

Capture Fisheries 1. Rivers Khals 2. Beels 3 Flood lands

309 277

15,826

33

123 724

309 277

15,530

40 93

575 Capture Total 16,412 880 16,116 708 Culture Fisheries Ponds/Ditches Boars Pen culture Paddy-cum-Fish culture Shrimp (Golda) culture in ponds

698 93

696

1,256

70 - -

312

815 93

100 600 696

2,238

140 300 180 312

Culture total 1,487 1,638 2,304 3,170 Overall Total (Capture+Culture) 17,899 2,580 18,420 4,004

Source: Consultant's Estimate based on expected Floodland (F2+F3) Changes Yield estimates

181. It is estimated that the present capture fisheries areas will be decreased by some 2% in the Chenchuri Beel and by the same amount in the Narail Subproject in the O&M phase. The estimated capture fisheries will be reduced from the present 922 MT to 734



MT in the Chenchuri Beel and decreased from 880 Mt to 708 Mt in Narail, provided the community based fisheries development program is implemented as part of the Project. The fish-friendly gate operation of regulators during the peak migration season is also expected to enhance the reduced stock thereby mitigating the negative impacts. Overall, however, the reduction in capture fisheries is considered to have a medium negative impact in both the Chenchuri Beel Subproject and the Narail Subproject, when fisheries improvement measures are implemented. Professional fisherfolk communities affected by the reduction in the capture fisheries would be provided culture fishery opportunities as compensation on a priority basis.

182. During the implementation phase, no negative impacts on culture fisheries are anticipated. Proper planning will ensure that no repairs and upgrading of structures etc. will take place during periods, when these structures are needed for protecting cultured fisheries and/or are necessary for their management, including the provision of water to the fish ponds etc.

183. Some minor negative impacts on capture fisheries are anticipated during the Construction Phase caused by disturbance and local erosion and increased turbidity from excavations etc. However, these effects are localized and reversible.

5.3.9 Water Management and Irrigation Practices

184. The provision of FCD/I facilities will provide the basis and substantially facilitate the potential for improved Water Management and Irrigation practices in the Chenchuri Beel and Narail Subprojects. Specific positive impacts would include (i) increased security against flood within the command area of the embankments, (ii) improved drainage in areas currently suffering drainage congestion; (iii) increased storage capacities of existing canals for irrigation during dry season as well as monsoon season (in particular in high land areas for the latter season). The size of irrigated areas is expected to increase from 6,132 ha to 10,229 ha in Chenchuri Beel and from 9,160 ha to 12,703 in Narail Subproject14.

185. Nevertheless, stakeholder interests in terms of the management of surface water are generally diverse and complex, and are different among farmers in different elevations, fishermen, boat operators, industrialists, and ordinary households. Therefore, during the participatory design stage and beneficiary mobilization stage, careful assessment is needed in terms of the designing structures and defining and agreeing on operational practices that can generate optimal benefits to the stakeholders. Effective monitoring and regulation is also needed for the due enforcement of the agreed operational practices.

186. During the implementation phase, some water management activities will be disrupted due to the construction works of embankments, canals, and structures. Primarily, river or channel sections would be blocked. However, careful planning, design and implementation will secure blockages are only temporarily. The overall impact is considered as minor.

5.3.10 Water Supply

187. The Lohagara Upazila, (being the worst affected Upazila where no arsenic mitigation measures are taking place) has been selected for provision of safe and arsenic free water supply to affected communities under the Project. Given the small pilot nature of the interventions, no significant environmental impacts are envisaged.

14 Source: DAE and Consultants Survey and Estimate



However, care must be taken to ensure that mitigation measures do not worsen or exacerbate the situation. Potential environmental risks associated with arsenic mitigation measures include the following:

• Cross-aquifer contamination by poor construction of deep tube wells.

• Leaching of arsenic sludge/ arsenic from spent media etc. from landfill sites.

• Contamination through flooding.

188. At present there is still no full understanding of the reasons for the arsenic contamination of the shallow aquifers in Bangladesh, although it is deemed to have naturally occurring geological origin. Consequently, it is not possible to assess in an assertive manner the environmental and health risks associated with a range of the potential mitigation measures. However, many organizations and parties are involved in research, surveys and monitoring of the functioning of arsenic mitigation measures in many of the worst affected districts in Bangladesh. It is imperative that the present Project becomes part of the network of projects and takes advantage of exchange of information in order to enhance the understanding those risks, and reduce these by:

• Proper technology selection for arsenic mitigation, on a case by case basis (there is no one solution).

• Proper site selection.

• Ensuring community awareness of the risks involved.

• Inclusion of a specific environmental management plan, which shall include monitoring routines, control measures and response procedures.

189. The implementation of arsenic mitigation will create only minor disturbances during construction on the urban and rural environment that will be only temporary.


5.3.11 Way of Life and Equity

190. All strata of the population will benefit from the Project protecting agricultural land, homesteads, markets, hospitals, schools, roads, irrigation systems, etc. Increased agricultural production and the construction works of the project will generate more employment opportunities for the poor and landless, including destitute women. In order to maximize these benefits, contractors will be required to recruit laborlaborers among the poor and landless with a preference for destitute women.

191. However, there is a risk that the opportunities for improved water management is captured by a small number of interested groups and operating facilities for the sake of their own benefits alone, affecting the livelihoods of the excluded stakeholders. For example, water retention structures may be operated to draw and store excessive amount of water causing drainage problems in low-lying areas. On the other hand, the water level may be kept low, without providing intended benefits to the high land area. Private fish culture interests might oppose the appropriate flushing of the drain water causing drainage congestion in the adjacent areas. Appropriate mitigation measures have to be operated at stages of site selection, design, and WMO formation, implementation, and O&M stages to mitigate such risk.



5.3.12 Income and Poverty

192. The project will help in alleviating poverty by increasing the agricultural production, employment and income generation possibilities. The Poverty Impact Analysis15 indicates that the main beneficiaries of the subproject interventions will be farmers (i.e. over 85% of financial benefits in both Chenchuri and Narail). Culture fish producers will also obtain significant financial benefits. The poverty impact ratio (i.e. ratio of the net benefits accruing to the poor to the net benefits of the subproject, expressed as a percentage) for Chenchuri Beel and Narail are estimated at 58% and 52% respectively. This implies that the poor will gain more than half of the project benefits. The project will therefore make an important contribution to poverty reduction in the subproject areas. However, the estimated increase in income by landholding categories in Table 5-9 show that all strata will benefit from the project.

Table 5-9: Percent Increase in Income by Landholding Category

Landholding Category

Narail Chenchuri beel

Large 10.7 13.5 Medium 11.0 13.3 Small 9.9 11.7 Marginal 8.4 9.7 Landless 10.4 10.4

Source: Calculated from Crop Budget and Baseline Survey 2004.

193. Increased income generation and employment in the agricultural sector will generate further economic activities and employment in other sectors such as transportation, provision of agricultural production materials such as fertilizers, and within trading of agricultural products. The estimated increase in On-Farm employment alone is shown in Table 5-10. There will be some reduction in capture fisheries and a decrease in the income of families depending on fishing activities. However, capture fisheries is no longer the occupation of full time fishermen. They have reduced substantially in numbers over the years, following the general decline in capture fisheries seen not only in the Project area, but also in general over entire Bangladesh. Therefore, capture fisheries are mainly carried out on a subsistence basis of families having other incomes as well. Aquaculture fisheries will increase, and generate income opportunities, that are likely to surpass the lost income generation from capture fisheries. The project will overall provide a major positive impact on income generation and economic activities in the Project area.

Table 5-10: On-Farm Employment (Figures: '000 man-days/year)

Total Employment Increase in Employment Without Project With Project Hired Family Total

Chenchuri Beel 5,258 5,901 219 424 643 Narail 7,067 7,841 275 499 774

Source: Consultant’s estimates

194. During construction the Project will generate considerable opportunities for income generation for local workers. The type of works foreseen and their size would not require the import of workers from outside the Project area. Merely, the workforce required should be recruited locally; thereby creating income generation especially for people that may temporarily be affected by disturbance form the same works. The

15 A summary is included as Appendix 4.



employment during construction is estimated to be in the order of 950,000 working days for Chenchuri Beel and 960,000 working days for Narail.

5.3.13 Education and Health

195. The project will provide sustained protection against floods and improved conditions for agricultural and aquaculture production. This will result in an overall increase in household income. With an improved financial situation, the people in the Project area will be encouraged to send their children to school on a more regular and prolonged basis, having a substantial positive impact on education. The Project will provide sustained protection of schools and colleges against floods in the area, reducing disruption of teaching and academic activities. The improved protection and enhancement of road infrastructure will provide easier access and increase attendance in schools and colleges. As the project will create increased income opportunities and protect against floods, the living conditions will improve, especially with respect to health and nutritional status of people. It is likely that the per capita expenditure on food, sanitation and health care will increase having a positive impact on health and education. Increased income will allow for a higher expenditure on food for the poor. The overall long-term impact of the Project on education and health will be very positive.

196. The work force will be hired locally. Any impacts on health of workers employed on the Project will be mitigated from provision of adequate water supply and sanitation facilities, proper waste collection and disposal systems, health clinics etc. at both sites.

197. There is a general risk of accidental injury of workers. Implementation of adequate safety procedures and provision of first aid facilities will mitigate this to the extent possible. Following appropriate construction techniques and safety procedures will mitigate or reduce these negative impacts on workers.

198. During the implementation phase schools in the vicinity may experience temporary noise and dust disturbances. Timing and placing of construction activities should seek to avoid any unnecessary disturbances during school hours.

5.3.14 Migration

199. With the increase in job opportunity in agriculture, fisheries and in construction phase there will be some day seasonal labour immigration from outside.

5.3.15 Status of Women

200. Women work in shrimp ghers, betel leaf boroj and work as domestic worker during harvesting periods. They enjoy only informal jobs with a very poor income. With new job opportunity in agriculture and fisheries training and credit support will help increase income and attending self sufficiency.

5.4 Mitigation Measures

201. The Project activities and effects that may impact the environment and socio-economic conditions in the Projects area have been identified. Each of these activities have been grouped and the mitigation measures necessary are discussed and presented below:



5.4.1 Potential Downstream Impacts on Salinity

202. The Project is expected to enhance irrigated area through improvement in water intake facilities such as regulators and inlet sluice, enhanced storage capacity through canal re-excavation and instalment of water retention capacities, along with the expansion of private groundwater irrigation. While these measures will substantially enhance water use efficiency in irrigation, increased river water withdrawal is also anticipated under the Project, albeit small compared with the total available water, which may induce increased salinity intrusion in the downstream areas.

203. This potential risk/impact is mitigated by (i) improving the salinity monitoring system within the areas potentially affected by salinity in the Southwest region; (ii) establishing information and warning system to alarm the concerned local governments and WMOs when the salinity level is rising or anticipated to rise; (iii) promoting efficient on-farm water management as a part of the agriculture extension program in the surface water irrigated areas; and (iv) institutionalizing appropriate O&M of water management infrastructure to support efficient irrigation water use.

5.4.2 Potential Conflicts of Interests among Stakeholders on Facility Management

204. The installed water management structures may cause conflicts of interests among different stakeholders within the subproject area as to the ways the facilities are operated, e.g., farmers in different land elevation (regarding the appropriate controlled water level in canals), fishermen (regarding the amount of water kept in the controlled canals and water bodies), local small boat operators (regarding the possibility of passing under the gate for boat transportation of goods and people), and industrial water use (regarding the amount of water kept in the controlled canal). Optimal management practices need to be identified and practiced to benefit the largest proportion of the stakeholders. This may require complex operation of structures such as regulators and water retention structures.

205. To mitigate the risk of suboptimal facility management that would cause avoidable negative impacts on specific stakeholders, the Project will (i) promote appropriate site selection of structures so for minimal stakeholder conflicts by technical review and intensive stakeholder consultation at the design stage; (ii) ensuring due representation of all stakeholder groups in the WMOs and agreeing on principle operational practices at the WMO formation stage (prior to construction); (iii) imparting due O&M training to implement the agreed optimal operational practices during construction and post-construction stage; and (iv) providing regular monitoring and support including social audit covering the appropriate facility management by the WMOs during the O&M stage.

5.4.3 Loss of Natural Fish Habitats and Capture Fisheries Resources

206. Because of the embankment re-sectioning and the construction of regulators in the open khals, along with the construction of water retention structures inside the subproject areas, the influx of floodwaters and capture fish will be reduced. To mitigate this adverse effect, the Project will (i) introduce fish-friendly operation in the regulators to allow fish migration into the FCD/I schemes at the onset of the monsoon; (ii) enhance and provide culture fishery opportunities in public water bodies and private ponds and paddy fields (for rice-cum-fish culture) with due extension services; (iii) support stocking of natural water bodies in support of the ongoing projects and programs undertaken by the Department of Fisheries. Professional fisher folks will be provided with priority opportunities to undertake culture fish activities in the public water bodies that can be controlled by the water management facilities.



5.4.4 Displacement of People

207. As described in section 5.3.1, the Project will require some land for retirement of some stretches of existing embankments, and establishment of new embankments as well. This will necessitate the dislocation households (49 and 100 households in Chenchuri Bell and Narail subprojects), acquisition of homestead and other non-agriculture properties (20 and 134 households in Chenchuri Beel and Narail subprojects), and strip acquisition of agriculture lands (77 and 166 household in Chenchuri Beel and Narail subprojects). These impacts will be properly addressed through the implementation of the Resettlement Plan. People affected by the embankment and other structure works will be rehabilitated following the ADB Guidelines as well as GOB policy, laws and regulations.

5.4.5 Obstruction of Navigation by Regulators and Water Retention Structures

208. Installment of regulators in the open khals will obstruct navigation, although they are constructed only in small khals under the Project. Construction of internal water retention structures will also obstruct internal boat transportation. To mitigate the impacts, the Project will (i) install navigation lock adjacent to the existing 10-vent regulator at Pateswari regulator in Chenchuri Beel subproject, thereby redressing the major negative impacts of the previous intervention; (ii) install a boat pass in the check structure across the Linar khal, a key boat route within the Chenchuri Beel subproject; and (iii) pursue gate operation to allow passage of boats during important seasons (such as rice harvests at the end of the monsoon) for the other water control structures having smaller negative impacts. Professional boat operators around the concerned gated structures will also be given priority opportunities for Project-supported livelihood enhancement activities such as fish culture and skills training.

5.4.6 Earth Works, Embankment Works and Borrow Pit Excavation

209. The earth works for re-sectioning or constructing embankments are not considered to have any significant negative impacts on the environment. When embankments are repaired, replanting of vegetation and trees will be carried out, both to protect the embankments and to enhance the local environment. The borrow pits to be used for excavation of material for embankment works will be beneficially used for culture fisheries under the fisheries development subcomponent of the Project, as a public water body to be provided to poor beneficiary stakeholders.

5.4.7 Transport of Material and Disposal of Spoils

210. Construction of structures and riverbank protection works would involve transportation and storage of construction materials, which may cause dust and noise pollution, in particular in case of riverbank protection works that require transportation of a large amount of sand and geo-textile bags. Dust blowing from various materials should be prevented by coverage or by keeping the surface wet during transport and storage. Any transport should take place during the daytime to minimize nuisance and disturbance. Proper planning for managing potential environmental and social impacts should be undertaken and reflected into the contract documents with the contractors.

211. These construction works will generate certain amount of spoils albeit not so significant. These spoils will be properly managed to avoid any negative impacts on the agriculture and other lands. There will also be a large amount of spoil dredged from the re-excavated canal beds. When these dredge spoils are placed adjacent to the re-excavated canals, these tend to be transferred back to the canal bed in the subsequent flood seasons due to soil erosion and inundation. Generally rich in organic materials,



these dredge spoils will be spread evenly in the nearby agriculture land to improve the organic soil content.

5.4.8 Problems Associated with Poor Construction Quality

212. In relation to the construction works, there is a risk that the constructed structures may not function properly due to poor quality of construction, in particular substructure works and underwater works, causing negative environmental and social impacts. To mitigate the risks, the Project will operate stringent and participatory construction supervision, including (i) training and engagement of stakeholder representatives in construction monitoring; (ii) strengthening construction recording and reporting through photograph-based quantity and quality confirmation in each construction work cycle; and (iii) strengthening internal technical auditing in construction management.

5.4.9 Water Quality Deterioration due to Increased Use of Pesticides

213. The potential impact of increased use of pesticides associated with the increased cropping induced by the Project will be mitigated by the adoption of recently introduced Integrated Pest Management (IPM). Department of Agricultural Extension (DAE) will provide training and assistance to introduce the system. Regularly water quality monitoring (of groundwater and surface water) is also undertaken to detect increased pesticide levels, with remedial action taken when required.

5.4.10 Soil and Water Quality Degradation due to Increase Fertilizer Use

214. Due to the increase in cropping intensity and the absence of natural sedimentation during floods, the soil fertility may decrease under the Project. An increased use of organic manure and mulches and judicious application of inorganic fertilizers would mitigate this. Controlled flooding promoted under the Project is a feasible mitigation measure during the monsoon. Training is also provided to the farmers through WMOs to be able to correctly apply the right quantities of fertilizers. The use of agrochemicals should be promoted thereby reducing the leaking of fertilizers into surface and groundwater.

5.4.11 Lowered Water Levels in Shallow Aquifers

215. Increased use of groundwater for irrigation would lower the water table during the dry season creating a problem for the use of shallow tubewells for domestic water supply in areas where irrigation and drinking water wells are located nearby. The Project will support, through provision of training and occasional guidance, the WMOs to monitor the use of groundwater within their command area, and promote appropriate site selection of new irrigation water wells to avoid significant negative impacts on household water use. Guidance is also provided when WMOs prepare and update agriculture development plans for their command area with the support of the Project. The Water Supply component of the Project would to some extent, albeit minor, to mitigate such problems in the arsenic affected areas supplying alternative water supply to the present arsenic affected shallow tube wells.

5.4.12 Other Impacts

216. Splitting up of Land. Splitting up of agricultural land, as a result of construction of new khals may occur, although in a very minor scale, which can be mitigated by the construction of simple bridges, for the farmers to reach their land without difficulty.



5.4.13 Aesthetics

217. Aesthetics. A slight modification of landscape, or impairment of aesthetics, will be a residual impact on the physical/biological environment. This impact cannot be entirely mitigated as such. Partly, the planting of trees on embankments and social forestry plantation will mitigate the impact of the construction works. However, in comparison with the changes that have occurred as the area has been brought under cultivation, the impact of the Project will be insignificant.



6 Economic Assessment

218. The projected capital investment required for the full project is estimated at US$35.60 M (in constant 2004 prices) for the seven-year project period. The foreign exchange component is calculated at US$6.52 M (18% of base cost) and the local component amounts to US$29.09 M (82% of base cost). Taxes and duties accounted for US$1.78 M of the local component.

219. If physical and price contingencies are included, the project cost increases to US$45.06 M. Physical contingencies are estimated at 10% of the base cost for all project components. Price contingencies are calculated on the basis of an expected foreign inflation rate of 0% per annum, and a local inflation rate of 4.5% per annum. After adding interest (at 1% per annum) on the ADB loan during project implementation, the total project cost rise by US$0.65 M to US$45.71 M. Project costs have been estimated in constant terms on the basis of prices prevailing in Bangladesh in 2004. When converting to US$, an exchange rate of Tk 60 to US$1 was used.

220. The economic assessment of the Project shows an economic internal rate of return (EIRR) of 18.0% and 24.1% for the Chenchuri Beel and Narail Subprojects, respectively.

221. For Chenchuri Beel, the results of the sensitivity analysis of the economic viability show that the economic viability of the subproject is not sensitive to changes in O&M costs, but fairly sensitive to adverse changes in capital costs. Nevertheless, the subproject still remains viable with increases in capital costs of up to 46%. The subproject is more sensitive to changes in incremental benefits and becomes uneconomic if incremental benefits are reduced by 27%. The analysis clearly shows the importance of implementing an agricultural support program focused on rice intensification and crop diversification. The analysis also considered the possibility of (i) not achieving the expected reduction in crop losses, and (ii) not including a fisheries component. The EIRRs and NPVs all declined under these three scenarios, but the subproject still maintained economic viability.

222. For Narail, the sensitivity analysis show that the economic viability of the subproject is not very sensitive to adverse changes either capital and O&M costs and still remains viable with increases in capital and O&M costs of up to 118%. The subproject is slightly more sensitive to changes in benefits and still remains economically viable if incremental benefits are reduced by 51%. The analysis also considered the possibility of: (i) not achieving the expected reduction in crop loss, (ii) not including a fisheries component. The EIRRs and NPVs all declined under these scenarios, but the subproject still maintained viability. A summary Financial and Economic Analysis is included as Appendix 3.

223. The costs associated with the Environmental Mitigation measures identified relate to the resettlement, mitigation components, environmental assessments of groundwater, monitoring of the KJDRP, environmental and benefit monitoring and institutional strengthening and training. The total costs are outlined in Table 6-1 and amount to US$ 8.1 million. Resettlement amounts to US$ 2.2 million.



Table 6-1: Project Investment in Environmental and Social Measures (2004 Prices)

Total Cost (US$’000) Basis of Derivation Quantifiable Items Chenchuri Beel

Subproject Narail Sub-

Project

Social Mobilization of Water Management Organizations

Social mobilization 384 491 Resettlement and Social Development

Resettlement and compensation during construction 494 1,678 Includes Land acquisition, Resettlement,

Rehabilitation & Training Environmental Mitigation Components

Environmental Costs - Civil Works Contract 344 286 Assumed at 5% of capital works costs

Construction of Boat Passes 276 - Full costs assumed as mitigation measure Arsenic Mitigation 1,000 - Fisheries Development 319 319 Estimated costs per subproject Agricultural Support incl. Integrated Pest Control and Optimal Fertilizer Use

340 340 Estimated costs p er subproject

Livelihood enhancement 274 274 Estimated costs per subproject Project Management + Monitoring & Evaluation Unit, Environmental Monitoring 146 188 Consultancy, local staff and 20% of total Project

Management operating costs Benefit Monitoring 43 56 Consultancy, Local Staff and 20% of Project

Management operating costs Institutional Strengthening and Training 382 490

Assumed that 30% of Institutional Strengthening costs will directly or indirectly contribute to environmental and social improvement, equally among all subproject areas

SUB-TOTAL 4,002 4,122 Contingencies Physical Contingencies (10%) 400 412 TOTAL 4,402 4,534 GRAND TOTAL 8,936 Source: Consultant's Estimate



7 Institutional Requirements, Environmental Monitoring and Management Plan

7.1 Overall Institutional Framework

224. The Environmental Management of the Project will involve a number of national level agencies. These main agencies will include:

• The BWDB, under the control of the Ministry of Water Resources (MOWR) and guidance and supervision of the Governing Council (GC) of the Board, would be the lead agency of the project

• Ministry of Environment and Forestry, Department of the Environment (DOE) responsible for enforcement of the national environmental legislation

• A Project Steering Committee (PSC) headed by Secretary, MOWR and participated by representatives of the DOE and other relevant ministries and agencies to be formed for the coordination of project implementation and relevant environmental issues at the central level

• A Joint Management Committee (JMC) participated by representatives of BWDB and relevant line departments, local governments, and WMOs to jointly decide on Project activities and post-Project O&M activities including mitigation measures that will be undertaken by responsible line departments (including Department of Public Health Engineering [DPHE] responsible for supporting pilot arsenic mitigation), private providers, NGOs, and WMOs

225. The overall Project Management framework is present in Figure 7-1.

7.2 Project Level Institutional Framework

226. The BWDB will be the executing agencies for the Project under the overall management and coordination of the Project Implementation Unit (PIU) to be set up at the BWDB Southwest Zonal Office at Faridpur, and headed by the Project Director at the level of Chief Engineer or Additional Chief Engineer. The overall responsibility for the environmental management and monitoring for the Project including liaison with DOE Khulna divisional office will be with the Monitoring and Evaluation Division (MED) in PIU headed by an executive engineer having environmental management experience and assisted by the consultants. MED will monitor, support, and guide the operation of the Environmental Management Plan (EMP, see section 7.4) implemented through the designated organizations and contracted agents. An environmental management monitor will also be included in the consultants’ team to monitor and advise on its operation on a part time bases throughout the Project implementation period, along with an environmental specialist who will provide capacity development support.

227. At the central level, BWDB will establish a Project Coordination Unit (PCU). A Project Coordinator will be appointed who will be the Director Planning II BWDB. PCU will provide technical backstopping and coordination, including the liaison with DOE headquarters on environmental management issues, which is coordinated by a



designated executive engineer within PCU. A Project Steering Committee (PSC) will be established for project coordination and monitoring and attending to implementation bottlenecks. The PSC will be headed by the Secretary, MOWR and would include representatives of the concerned ministries and agencies as members.

228. At the subproject level, subproject management office (SMO) will be established within the subproject area (by converting the existing O&M divisional and subdivisional offices of BWDB) to execute day-to-day subproject implementation activities, following the annual and periodic activity plans prepared with and endorsed by the subproject JMC. An experienced senior executive engineer will be assigned as full-time subproject manager in each SMO, who will be closely supervised and guided by Superintending Engineer in Jessore Circle, BWDB, who serves as subproject advisor. To effectively manage environmental issues, MED environmental staff and consultants will participate in JMC and ensure that EMP has been duly incorporated in the subproject periodic activity plans. An environmental officer will be placed in SMO to monitor and support the concerned mitigation activities and relevant indicators, with the assistance of the environmental monitor in the consultant’s team and staff in MED.

229. Under the Project, localized water management infrastructures (water retention structures, inlet/outlet, small regulators, irrigation and drainage canals) with a command area of less than 5,000ha in principle are expected to be managed by WMOs after these facilities are constructed and on-the-job O&M training is provided. EMP activities associated with these infrastructure will be undertaken by the concerned WMOs during the O&M phase, with the monitoring and support by the SMO and MED, which is expected to be set up as a permanent establishment in the BWDB zonal office.

7.3 Capacity Strengthening

230. In order to manage environmental issues, appropriate institutional arrangements and capacities need to be in place, with clear definition of a range of required activities, powers and responsibilities of the concerned organizations including the WMOs. The assessment of environmental impacts and mitigation measures have identified the need for effective operation of environmental management activities within the pre-construction, implementation, and O&M activities, to ensure optimal management of water resources, and due local resource mobilization for sustainable O&M while minimizing the negative environmental impacts. These have to be operated with necessary hardware and software to establish and monitor appropriate indicators.

231. The key to effective environmental management would be well-trained and motivated human resources within BWDB in particular, and collaborating agencies and WMOs as well. As to BWDB, sensitivity to non-engineering issues, ability to work with beneficiary population and affected people, skills to coordinate conflicts need to be developed on top of engineering skills already in place. To meet the requirements, BWDB has made some progress in diversifying the skill mix to establish positions for social, environmental, and other subject matter specialists. However, these need to be further expanded with establishment of skills development and career progression path. BWDB, with the support of the GC, is in the process of improving the service rules for recruitment, promotion, and job rotation, which is expected to further the progress made.

232. Within this context, competence levels of BWDB staff to adapt to the demand of the Project as well as other water sector interventions need to be enhanced. BWDB is also in the process of developing appropriate human resources development policy and plan, with the support of the GC. In coordination with the ongoing programs for capacity strengthening assisted by external funding agencies including ADB, the proposed Project also intends to identify capacity gaps in terms of effectively



implementing EMP and provide training to BWDB and other concerned organizations including WMOs through the consultants. In the absence of sufficient environment subject matter specialists, capacity strengthening of the existing engineers to address environmental issues would also be provided.

233. In the context of the EMP implementation in the two subproject areas, the Project through consulting services would also provide necessary hardware (such as monitoring equipment and computer facilities) and software, with a focus on establishing effective environmental and other monitoring indicators, and its effective recording, reporting, and auditing mechanisms.

7.4 Environmental Management Plan

234. The Environmental Management Plan (EMP) outlines the environmental management system that will be implemented during the detailed design and construction works of the project to manage minimization of deleterious effects and implementation of enhancement measures. The EMP also embraces environmental management issues following the implementation of the Project works to maximize the beneficial effects of the project, and detect and ameliorate adverse long-term effects.

235. The EMP is based on the anticipated environmental impacts and mitigation measures identified and described in chapter 4, but it would be developed and updated regularly as the progress of the Project implementation

236. The objective of the EMP is to provide a framework for the monitoring and management of environmental issues in a comprehensive manner. The EMP outlines the environmental management system that will be implemented during the participatory detailed design, WMO formation, rehabilitation and other works of the project, and sustainable post-completion O&M activities to minimize deleterious effects and implementation of enhancement measures. The EMP also defines environmental management issues maximize the beneficial effects of the project, and detect and ameliorate adverse long-term effects.

237. Specifically, the EMP monitors and manages environmental aspects and issues of the Project during its expected lifetime of 30 years by::

• Identifying potential environmental impacts;

• Recommending mitigation measures for the negative impacts;

• Identifying opportunities for enhancement measures;

• Providing an organisational framework for operating IWRM and other functions of the Project by assigning roles and responsibilities for environmental monitoring and management;

• Formulating an Environmental Action Plans (EAPs) that detail the specific mitigation, enhancement, and monitoring activities and indicators, to be prepared and attached to (i) annual and periodic activity plans for subproject implementation, and (ii) contract documents for subproject implementation.

238. The responsibilities for undertaking specific required activities at design, construction and operation stages are listed in Table 7-1.



Table 7-1: Responsibilities of Different Organizations in Environment Management

Project Stage Responsible Organisation Responsibilities DOE/ DOE Khulna Division Review Project EIA and provide Environmental Clearance for the

Project; Review environmental monitoring report; Monitor and supervise compliance with legal requirements during program implementation and O&M stages

BWDB Planning and O&M Departments (coordinated by PCU)

Guidance for environmental planning (Planning Dept), mitigation, and monitoring and management of monitoring and evaluation data (O&M Dept)

Project consultants Support development of the capacity for environmental management in BWDB, line departments, and WMOs Monitor, guide, and auditing environmental management activities by SMOs (including on-the-job training for MED)

Overall

PIU (in particular MED) Overall review, monitoring, and reporting to PCU including quarterly reports Monitoring, guidance, and auditing of environmental management activities arranged or implemented by SMOs

PIUSMO -- Consultants Minimize non-avoidable losses in consultation with diverse stakeholders, and prepare EAP by specifying mitigation and enhancement measures for engineering design, bid and contract documents, non-structure program plans, and periodic implementation plans

PIU -- Consultants Review and approve environmental mitigation measures reflected as EAP and attached to documents mentioned above

SMO – Consultants/NGOs Strengthen WMOs and JMCs including capacities for monitoring (undertaken during program implementation stage as well); ensure coordination/resolution of conflicting interests

Participatory design

SMO/NGOs -- Consultants Preparation and implementation of resettlement plans Contractors (structure works) LCS/NGO (earth works)

Implement required environmental measures as reflected in EAP and attached to the contract documents

Providers of agriculture and fishery extension, livelihood enhancement, and pilot arsenic mitigation works

Implement required environmental measures as reflected in EAP and attached to the program documents

SMO/MED -- Consultants Supervise contractors’ and service providers’ implementation of EAP, and enforce contractual and program requirements Monitor and report environmental indicators

Program implementation

MED/Consultants Audit EAP activities Submit quarterly/annual reports BWDB Provide budget to undertake environmental monitoring SMO/JMC – MED Carry out environmental monitoring and reporting WMOs – SMO/MED Carry out environmental monitoring of designated water

management infrastructure

Operation

PIU (in coordination with relevant BWDB field offices)

Strengthen hydrological monitoring system and operate networking of salinity data to local government and WMO representatives in salinity prone zones

239. The primary responsibility for environmental management lies with the PIU in BWDB Southwest Zonal Office at Faridpur. However, all responsible parties involved have their important role for the effective implementation of the EMP in order to minimize any environmental impact and maximize enhancements. The specific environmental impacts and mitigation measures at pre-construction, implementation, and O&M phases are summarized in Table 7-2. A draft Environmental Management Plan is included as Appendix 5.



Table 7-2: Summary of Mitigation and Enhancement Measures Possible Impact Mitigation during

Planning and Design Mitigation during

Construction Mitigation during

Follow-on Development Support

Mitigation during Operation and Maintenance

Mitigation Cost

(US$ ‘000) a. Air pollution - Incorporate

people’s suggestions

- Spray water on dry surfaces creating dust problems

- Regulate vehicle emission

- Awareness creation against air pollution like brickfield and pesticides spray

- Monitor vehicle, ship and brickfield emission

630

b. Soil quality degradation

- Consider strategies to avoid soil quality degradation

- Removing top soil for construction, turfing and plantation after civil works

- Training on soil and fertilizer management

- Use organic manures

- Occasional flushing through regulators

- Monitoring of soil quality - Continuation of soil and

fertilizer management training by DEA

Included in a.

c. Drainage and irrigation

- Establishing salinity monitoring and information sharing system in the region

- Implementation of civil works during dry season with temporary irrigation water provision

- Farmer training on efficient water management

- Training of effective water abstraction with salinity monitoring

- Operation of salinity monitoring and information networking system

334

d. River erosion and siltation

- Careful alignment of river bank protection works

- Limit excavation and fill

- Monitoring of civil works for riverbank protection

- Worksite soil erosion management

- Training of bank protection and vegetation growing

- Monitoring of morphological changes

- Provision of effective O&M for erosion/ siltation like clearing and excavated of canals side and bed slope

Included in c.

e. Degradation of open water areas and wetlands due to construction

- Survey and design for construction works

- Effective disposal of construction materials and waste management and maintenance of open water bodies

- Training on excavation and maintenance of khals and beels

- Monitoring of changes in wetland and open water areas

Included in a.

f. Groundwater depletion and quality degradation

- Inventorying of groundwater use and depletion status

- Careful quality control in installing deep tubewells as arsenic mitigation measures

- Training on local coordination on groundwater exploitation

- Groundwater quantity and quality monitoring

- Groundwater monitoring - Local coordination on new

groundwater exploitation

Included in c.

g. Water Pollution due to construction

- Avoid impediments to natural drainage and soil erosion.

- Same as above - Maintenance of

construction sites in a clean condition

- Training on water pollution control

- Monitoring of water quality Included in a.

h. Water pollution due to increased use of agrochemicals

- Suggest optimal application rate and IPM practice

- Practice IPM (integrated pest management) to reduce pesticides use

- Training on judicious use of agrochemicals and implementation of IPM

- Monitoring of fertilizer and pesticides use

680

i. Aquatic Ecosystem (Restricted access or blockade of fish migration)

- Careful site selection of control structures

- Design of fish-friendly structures

- Stakeholder consultation and agreement

- Maintenance of water courses at the construction site

- Proper maintenance of fish passes and regulators

- Training on gate operational practices, CBF management

- Training on coordinated WMO management

- Provision of culture fishery opportunities to fisher folks

- Stocking of natural water bodies

- Monitoring/auditing of effective WMO management including coordinated gate operation, fisheries management, habitat protection etc.

638

j. Terrestrial ecosystem (disruption to flora and fauna)

- Careful alignment of roads and embankments

- Careful site selection avoiding unnecessary disruption of existing vegetation

- Fencing of work sites

- Training on conservation of biodiversity, protection of wildlife and habitat restoration

- Tree plantation after completion of construction works

- Conserve local biota

Included in a.



Possible Impact Mitigation during Planning and Design

Mitigation during Construction

Mitigation during Follow-on Development

Support


Mitigation Cost

(US$ ‘000) to protect flora/fauna outside

k. Land acquisition and resettlement

- Minimize need for land acquisition

- Identification of at-risk group and incorporation of their interests and protection

- Preparation and implementation of compensation package

- Ensuring all compensation is provided prior to contract signing as per BWDB’s

- Provision of specific support services to ensure equal or higher level of income for APs

- Relocation of displaced household to new sites

- Periodical monitoring and necessary support services

2,172

l. Disruption of Road Traffic

- Minimise need for affecting existing roads

- Provide alternative access roads

- Practice caution in use of vehicles

- Motivational approach to people

- Monitoring road trafficking situation

Included in a.

m. Boat transport (blockade of boat passage)

- Stakeholder consultation and agreement on site selection and gate operation

- Design of navigation lock and boat pass

- Provision of temporary boat pass

- Training on gate operational practices

- Training on coordinated facility management

- Provision of livelihood enhancement support for boat operators

- Monitoring/auditing of effective coordinated gate operation

276

n. Disturbance to water supply

- Minimize impediments to water supply

- Establish adequate alternative water supply

- Training in maintenance of water treatment and supply facilities

- Monitoring of groundwater quantity and quality

- Maintenance

Included in a.

o. Disruption of agricultural activities

- Minimize need for use of agricultural land during construction

- Minimize need to disrupt irrigation

- Reinstate land after construction

- Provide adequate land rent and compensation

- Restore irrigation facilities

- Provide compensation

- Provision of agriculture development support services

- Provide agricultural extension training

- Monitoring of agricultural production

- Enhancement/ remediation if required

Included in a.

p. Disputes on water management practices

- Appropriate site selection with minimal conflicts

- WMO institutional development with stakeholder representation

- Agreeing on operational practices of facilities

- Avoid disruption of irrigation channels and other water management facilities


- Sufficient O&M training to implement agreed operational practices

- Monitoring/auditing of effective coordinated facility operation

- Monitoring irrigation efficiency

- Maintenance/ Remediation

875

q. Transmission of diseases among workers

- Providing health inspection and vaccination

- Organizing proper collection of wastes

- Providing adequate sanitary facilities to personnel and workers

Included in a.

r. Safety of workers - Adopt appropriate safety measures

- Provide first aid services

- Make workers aware of risks and how to avoid these

Included in a.



7.4.1 General Environmental Guidelines during Pre-construction Stage

240. Referencing to the potential negative impacts of the project as described in chapter 4, the identified compensation, mitigation and enhancement measures during design are explained in the following:

Compensation a) Acquisition of land

241. Some agricultural land will be required for the re-sectioning of existing and construction of new embankments and other works. The executing agency for the project will determine the registered land ownership and value of the land to be affected as part of the pre-construction phase. Values will be based on land capability for agriculture, location, recent land transactions and other parameters normally used for calculating land values. This component has been covered and detailed out under the resettlement program.

b) Crop loss

242. Crops may be damaged or people prevented in growing crops in smaller areas in the vicinity of the project works. There will be compensation for such damages and loss to be covered in the resettlement plan.

c) Homestead loss

243. Homestead loss will include loss of trees (including fruit trees), latrines and ponds, etc., in the area of the construction. These losses will be compensated and conditions will be returned to the fullest extent possible to those existing prior to construction. These activities and costs would be included in the contract work and the resettlement plan where relevant.

d) Income loss

244. During the implementation phase some people may be hindered in obtaining their regular income. This could be fishermen not being able to use their normal fishing ground at or in the vicinity of construction works. Further, agricultural workers may be devoid of their job opportunity in areas acquired for construction. These people will be compensated for their loss of income.

Mitigation a) Resettlement

245. People that unavoidably have to be resettled for the construction of the proposed works should be compensated adequately and assisted in their resettlement to achieve at least the same standard of living as before. These resettlement activities and costs involved has been included in the resettlement plan.

b) Local Employment

246. The contractor shall, to the maximum possible extent, employ local labor for the works;

247. Local female labor should comprise at least 25% of the workforce for earthwork



248. No children under the age of 14 should be employed for heavy earthwork, in compliance with the labor code of Bangladesh; and

249. During the O&M phase of the project, local labor should be provided with direct contracting opportunities through their own landless groups.

250. These conditions should be incorporated in the project Design as part of the tendering procedure.

c) Navigation Locks and Boat Passes

251. Where required, navigation locks or boat passes should be included in the planning and design to mitigate any adverse effects the Project may have on navigation.

d) Fish Friendly Structure Operation

252. Where required, structures should be designed and operated in a fish friendly manner, allowing the natural migration of fish, fry and fingerlings between the rivers and the flood plains inside the Subproject areas.

e) Road Shifting

253. In some places the road communication system could be disrupted due to project activities. These roads are critical, particularly in the dry season. In addition, some village roads may require re-routing. If and when required road shifting should be included in the Project Design.

f) Arsenic Mitigation

254. The arsenic mitigation component will provide safe water supply to the worst affected Upazila in the Project area where mitigation measures are not already taking place.

Enhancement a) Plantation of Trees and Grass

255. The objective of this enhancement component plan is to achieve long-term sustainability and to reduce the O&M cost of embankments and bank protection structures through non-structural measures designed to protect against erosion. The non-structural measures will include:

• Plantation of trees, shrubs and grasses;

• Protection and care of trees;

256. The planted saplings need to be protected for the first 2-3 years until they are established. These trees will be protected with bamboo baskets. Management of the planted saplings in respect of transplantation, watering, etc. shall have to be carried out according to the instructions of the Forest Department. Plantation of trees will be incorporated into the Project design.

b) Resettlement

257. The Project includes a resettlement component for the people that have to be resettled, as land is required for the construction of new embankments and structures. In total around 255 households and other physical units would be affected and have to be



covered by the resettlement plan. The activities and costs would be included in the Resettlement Plan separate from the EMP. A summary Resettlement Framework and Resettlement Plan for both subprojects is included as Appendix 2.

7.4.2 General Environmental Guidelines during Construction

258. Based on the findings of the EIA and consideration of the necessity to limit environmental impact during construction, the following general guidance would be devised and incorporated into the Tender Documents. The PIU under the guidance of the Consultants will be responsible to incorporate these engineering designs and specifications. Figure 7-2 outlines the implementation of the EMP during construction ensuring compliance with environmental rules, regulations and standards.

Contractor’s Responsibilities with Respect to the Environment

259. The contractor’s environmental responsibilities would be prescribed in the Tender Documents and later on award in the Contract and they would include the need to adhere to environmental clauses in the Contract and the guidelines provided. In the detailed design the contractor shall take due considerations to the following:

a) General

260. The Contractor shall take all reasonable steps to protect the environment and to prevent environmental damage and public nuisance resulting from construction activities.

261. Contractor shall comply with all statutory requirements, environmental regulations and environmental quality standards, as stated in the Environmental Conservation Rules (ECR), 1997 of DOE; and Bangladesh environmental guidelines relevant to the project.

262. Contractor shall bear all costs associated with environmental pollution avoidance and environmental mitigation, including any clean-up operations if necessary.

b) Pollution from Wastes

263. Maintain all construction sites in a clean and safe condition and provide and maintain appropriate facilities for temporary storage of all wastes before transportation and disposal.

264. Organize disposal of all wastes generated during construction in an environmentally acceptable manner. This shall include consideration of the nature and location of disposal sites, so as to cause least environmental impact.

265. Take all precautionary measures when handling and storing fuels and lubricants, to avoid causing environmental pollution. This is to include establishment of contingency plans for clean up in the event of spillage.

c) Protection of Human Health

266. Provision of adequate sanitation facilities on all construction sites, contractor's office(s) etc., if and when established.

267. Disposal from all sanitary systems should be undertaken to avoid causing environmental pollution. Wastewater should be routed through suitable designed septic tanks and soak well, without contaminating either ground or surface water or causing a health risk.



268. Provision of an adequate supply of water for drinking and washing purposes for all site personnel, including all workers, as appropriate. Drinking water quality should comply with GoB, DoE Environmental Quality Standards (ECR, DOE, 1997) and WHO guideline values.

d) Noise

269. Avoid any unnecessary noise for disturbance during construction.

270. Maintenance of all vehicles and mechanics to a high standard, in accordance with manufacturers maintenance procedures.

271. Careful sitting of noise generating activities to avoid unnecessary noise disturbance to local residents, in accordance with ECR guidelines.

e) Air Quality and Dust

272. Minimization of dust nuisance by regular watering of material stockpiles, access roads, bare soil, sand and other areas, as appropriate and as determined by weather conditions.

f) Disruption to Road Transport and Navigation

273. Minimization of disruption to road and river traffic, in consultation with local authorities and representatives.

274. A summary of the specific mitigation and enhancement measures during the design and construction phase related to the construction phase and the responsibility of the Contractor is presented in Figure 7-2.

7.4.3 General Environmental Guidelines during Follow-on Development Support

275. The Follow-on Development Support to the rehabilitation and upgrading of the FCD/I schemes includes non-structural measures such as support services to agricultural and fishery extension targeted to the poor and disadvantaged for the adoption of better agricultural/fishery practices. Further, support will be provided to establish arsenic safe water supply. Table 7.2 outlines the environmental mitigation and safeguarding measures to be taken as part of the Follow-on Development Support.

Agricultural Extension Environmental Mitigation Measures

276. As part of the Agricultural Extension support activities farmers will be trained in soil and fertilizer management. The training will aim at introducing environment friendly, whole farm approach providing a basis for efficient and profitable production that is economically viable and environmentally responsible. Relevant elements in the approach would be combinations of crop rotation, use of organic residues, fertilisers and crop protection chemicals, integration of livestock, cultivation choice, variety selection, practice of integrated pest management and improved energy efficiency.

277. The training in soil and fertilizer management will be combined with the introduction of efficient use of water for irrigation in combination with alternating cropping. Efficient methods for water abstraction will be promoted.

Fisheries Development Environmental Mitigation Measures

278. The Fisheries Development support activities will include a range of environmental mitigation measures directed towards minimizing the effects of the



Project on capture fisheries. The mitigation measures towards environment and fish friendly water management will identify optimal gate operation strategies allowing the seasonal and natural migration of fish from the rivers to the flood plains and visa versa to the largest extent possible. Building awareness of the importance of environment, community based fishery management and fish friendly water management and gate operation will be a central element, along with specific training of water managers, WMOs and gate operators.

279. Realizing there will be unavoidable negative impacts of the project on capture fisheries, the environment and fish friendly water management and gate operation will be supplemented by fish stocking of natural water bodies. This would be further complemented by the provision of culture fishery opportunities to the fisher folks negatively affected by a reduction in capture fisheries.

Arsenic Mitigation Measures

280. The provision of arsenic safe water supply will in itself have a highly positive impact on improving the health conditions for affected people. Where safe water is provided from deep tubewells, it is necessary to take precautions against contamination from vertical intrusion of water. Therefore, the annular space of bore holes of the deep tubewells are required to be sealed at the level of impermeable strata to avoid percolation of arsenic contaminated water. The drilling design shall include this measure and strict quality control to ensure the design is followed, is necessary during implementation. To sustain the positive impact the arsenic mitigation efforts will be supplemented by training in maintenance of safe water treatment and supply installations. Further, a monitoring system for groundwater and water supply will be implemented.

7.4.4 General Environmental Guidelines during O&M

281. During the O&M phase a range of monitoring and mitigation measures will be undertaken to safeguard the environment and secure no unanticipated negative impacts would occur. Should negative impacts be identified, relevant mitigation measures have to implemented accordingly. The monitoring activities are described in detail in the following Section7.5. In addition to the monitoring activities specific mitigation measures are identified for the O&M phase

282. The Agricultural Extension services including the soil and fertilizer management issues will be continued as part of the regular services provided by Department of Agricultural Extension.

283. Provision of effective O&M for safeguarding against negative impacts of erosion and siltation would be continued as part of the maintenance of the rehabilitated and upgraded FCD/I schemes under the responsibility of the PMO/SMOs in close cooperation with WMOs.

284. Planning for and coordination and management of groundwater exploitation would be an ongoing activity during the O&M phase under the responsibility of the PMO/SMOs in close cooperation with the WMOs.

7.5 Environmental Monitoring and Auditing Arrangements

285. This section of the EMP describes the environmental monitoring and auditing procedures to be implemented during the pre-construction, implementation and post construction phases of the Project. In principle, environmental monitoring will be operated under the overall responsibility of the PIU, through its MED, with the



technical backstopping of central BWDB, in coordination with and under guidance of DOE. MED’s key responsibilities for this purpose include:

• Updating EMP based on final design and planning of work, and of the EIA as necessary

• Designing and operating monitoring arrangements for deleterious environmental effects, mitigation measures, and enhancement measures with defined set of indicators

• Monitoring and supporting the performance of SMOs in terms of implementing their EMP responsibilities including (a) data collection, recording, and reporting on impact, mitigation, and enhancement indicators; and (b) managing the relevant subproject activities

• Compiling the environmental monitoring reports with the assistance of the consultants and forwarding the reports to PCU for reporting and coordination to the concerned BWDB sections and DOE

286. A summary of the environmental monitoring requirements is shown in Table 7-3.

Table 7-3: Summary of Environmental Monitoring Requirements Mitigation Measure

(Responsibility) Parameters to be monitored

Location Measurements Frequency Monitoring Responsibility

All measures Individual indicators as set out in the rows below and specified in EAPs

All subprojects Environmental monitoring reports

Quarterly PIU/ consultants

Monitoring and warning river salinity information (BWDB field office)

River salinity data Stakeholder satisfaction Communication records

Hydrological stations in the salinity prone area

Salinity level record communicated to PIU

Weekly from Feb – May; daily when exceeding warning level

PIU/ consultants

Overall

Groundwater monitoring and advising on well site selection (WMO)

Groundwater levels in potential conflict areas with irrigation expansion

Subprojects Water levels in households potable water tubewells and irrigation tubewells

Monthly, weekly during dry season

SMO/consultants

Careful planning and design for embankment alignments, structure sites, etc. (SMO)

Technical standards Agreements by all stakeholders

Subprojects - Implementation plan and design documents - Stakeholder consultation minutes including agreed operational plan

At times of endorsing implementation plans and designs

PIU (MED)/ Consultant

Inclusive WMO development (SMO/ consultants)

Potential Conflicts Stakeholders view

Subprojects Membership among stakeholder groups Executive and other committee composition Consultations

Quarterly PIU (MED)/ Consultants

Pre-construction Phase

Resettlement (SMO/NGOs)

People's satisfaction Financial progress against set targets

Subprojects - Consultations and surveys - NGO progress reports

- Ongoing during implementation - Quarterly

PIU (MED)/ RAC

Construction-related EAP measures such as Compensation for temporary loss (SMO/ contractors)

Parameters specified in EAP People's satisfaction

Construction sites and immediate surroundings

Water quality testing etc. Audits, Consultations and surveys

Once per month each construction site. Ongoing during construction

MED/ consultants MED/ consultants PIU

Implementation Phase

Facility O&M training for WMOs (SMO/ consultants)

Successful operation by WMOs Stakeholder satisfaction with no disputes

Facility sites Stakeholder disputes At times of O&M training

MED/ consultants



Mitigation Measure (Responsibility)

Parameters to be monitored

Location Measurements Frequency Monitoring Responsibility

Training for integrated pest control and soil management (provider/ consultants)

Pesticide and fertilizer concentrations

Selected water bodies

Water quality sampling & testing

Seasonal SMO-MED/ Consultant

Training for community based fisheries development (provider/ consultants)

Capture fish production Fish biodiversity Culture fish production

Subprojects (near new structure sites)

Fish landings Fish species catch

Seasonal SMO-MED/ DOF-consultants

Afforestation and plantation (provider/ consultants)

Forestry and plant cover

Subproject embankments

Forest and plant density & coverage

Yearly SMO-MED/ FD

Operation and Maintenance

Regular monitoring and support for optimal facility operation (SMO/ DOC)

Stakeholder satisfaction No visible conflicts

Gated facilities Stakeholder disputes Social audits

Quarterly MED/ consultants

7.5.1 Monitoring Considerations

287. The PIU/MED will need to regularly improve and strengthen monitoring techniques, including frequency, sampling methodologies and cost effectiveness. Monitoring would be conducted during the pre-construction, construction, and the post construction stages:

288. Environmental monitoring for the Project is best achieved through the use of indicators that can be conveniently measured and evaluated periodically to establish trends of impacts. The following is a brief of monitoring parameters for reference:

• Water: Monitor groundwater levels and quality at selected sites, to establish an updated baseline sufficient to assess potential for ground water pollution due to construction activities and design of pollution avoidance procedures. Sampling regime to be determined, analysing for the at least the following determinants: pH, As, Fe, Mn, SO4, N03, Fl, Mg, Cd, Al, salinity in addition to water level in the selected tubewells.

• Control of drainage from construction sites to avoid environmental deterioration.

• Agriculture: Agricultural land and crops: observations of damage to property and loss of agricultural land and crops due to project associated activities

• Soil quality: identification of areas where top soil should be removed, stored and reinstated after construction works;

• Air quality: ambient air quality with respect to black smoke from vehicles and construction equipment;

• Dust loads in the air and on vegetation: observations with respect to dust generation and consideration of dust control measures including grass-turfing and regular watering;



• Noise pollution; checking of the timing of noisy operations, such as plying vehicles, especially if at night;

• Waste (solid & liquid) disposal systems; inspection of waste collection methods, location of waste dumps and associated risk with respect to spread of disease and surface and groundwater contamination;

• Health and safety: periodic check of health and safety measures for the workers and other project personnel and provision of a first aid medical service;

• Fisheries: monitoring of impact on catches from construction sites compared to similar, non-disturbed areas.

• Wildlife: monitoring potential adverse effects on wildlife.

• Institutional: Regular inspection to certify staff positions are filled in PIU/MED. Review of CVs of staff to ensure staff having adequate qualifications. Appraise the functioning of the PIU/MED through review of reporting and consultations with stakeholders.

289. The PIU/MED will conduct regular monitoring of the site and environs during the construction period. This will include both pre-arranged and unscheduled audits and spot checks. PIU/MED staff will also conduct post-construction evaluations, as necessary, to assess the effectiveness of mitigation measures and the overall effect of the project on the environment.

290. At the same time, BWDB, through the consultants will also undertake auditing by engaging external monitoring firms/institutes to assess the performance of the Project with respect to expected and actual environmental impacts, effectiveness of monitoring, mitigation, and enhancement measures, and the degree that PIU/SMOs satisfies the environmental requirements. The assessment will also identify specific operational and capacity constraints, and advise on specific recommended actions to improve the performance, along with any unforeseen effects and mitigation measures.

7.6 Complaints and Grievances

291. Complaints and grievances from the public will be directed to the parties responsible for the environmental management through the WMOs and stakeholders organisations to the SMO. All complaints shall be properly recorded and reported to the PIU/MED for immediate consideration. In case of complaints on minor issues that needs immediate attention these will be handled by the SMO. For complaints on major issues these would be reported further to the PIU/MED for their immediate consideration and direction for resolving the problem. All complaints shall be reported in the quarterly and annual audit reports forwarded to the PIU.

7.7 Reporting

292. Under the Project, the organizations responsible to undertake mitigation activities is entrusted to collect data on the impact, mitigation, and enhancement indicators and report them to the MED (through SMO as appropriate). For example, the Contractor’s responsibility under the EAP to be specified and attached to the contract document includes reporting of the designated environmental indicators and



relevant environmental management activities on a monthly basis. On the basis of the submitted reports, MED will be responsible to collate and store the data while preparing a periodic Project-wide monitoring reports. The PIU will also submit regular (quarterly and annual) reports to the JMC, BWDB, and DOE. Finally, PCU/BWDB will also prepare environmental audit report on an annual basis and submit it to MOWR and DOE.



8 Public Consultation and Disclosure

8.1 Consultation Process

293. Consultation of stakeholders has been extensive during the Planning Phase I and the detailed feasibility study of the Subprojects during Phase II. Table 8-1 provides an overview of the People's Consultation activities. See Appendix 6 of this report for substantive issues.

Table 8-1: People’s Consultation Activities

Dates Consultation Process Consulting Groups No. of Participants Phase I 23 December2003 to 2January 2004

PRRA/FGD Farmers, Fishers, Landless, Destitute Women

15 from each stakeholder group in each Subproject

1 to 4 January 2004 25 January 2004

Stakeholders consultation meetings Upazila level District level

128 stakeholders 33 stakeholders

Phase II 22 June2004 PRRA/FGD Farmers, fishers, landless, destitute

etc. at union level. 15 from each stakeholder group in each Subproject

8 June to 7 July 2004 Stakeholders follow-up consultation With all groups including LGI and civil society representatives

40 group representatives from 8 compartments

21 June to 5 July 2004

Socio-economic baseline surveys Consulted people particularly in affected areas

275 households in each Subproject

18-21 July 2004 and 7-24 August 2004

Resettlement surveys (i) Initial social impact assessment (ii) Detail survey

50 + 50 242 + 267

294. The phase I consultation process included: (i) PRRA/FGDs in selected unions of each upazila supplemented by (ii) consultation meeting with all stakeholders at upazila level and (iii) district level consultation meeting, involving government agencies, NGOs, newsmen, and LGI representatives, consolidated the problems and suggested solutions for water resources management. All the findings and recommendations are consolidated in a comprehensive report by the NGO employed for the Public Participatory Survey.

295. Phase II included a follow up consultation process for validating the phase I recommendations and updating them with any new proposals from the stakeholders. A PRRA/FGD investigation approach was further designed for selected subprojects disaggregated on proposed compartments in each subproject. RDM a national NGO was engaged to undertake the PRRA including FGDs and further consultations at various levels in the subprojects.

296. The overall objectives of the consultations were to obtain the local people’s views and ideas regarding the current poverty and development status and constraints, their relations to the water management issues, and possible opportunities to resolve those constraints through integrated water management and related interventions (flood management, irrigation, drainage improvement, rural infrastructure, marketing facilities, etc.) and to duly reflect those in the sub regional integrated water management plans to be prepared under the PPTA. The intention of the consultation process was to synthesize the bottlenecks of the subprojects and to take initiatives accordingly in order to derive a maximum output from these subprojects through which the livelihood of these groups at grassroots level could be improved.



297. In addition to the PRRA, FGD and consultation meetings, socio-economic baseline surveys were also conducted to collect data on variables indicative of social, economic, cultural and natural context, in order to identify the local problems, constraints, conflicts and needs and rights, with the aim to identify appropriate interventions and articulating strategies that is applicable to the target populations.

298. Resettlement surveys were conducted initially during 18-21 July, 2004 for initial social impact assessment and detail surveys during 7-24 August 2004 to understand the extent of impact on settlements might be affected by the two proposed subprojects. The surveys included census of households and other physical structures, sampled agricultural plots etc. to be affected; socio-economic surveys on sampled households; business units and agricultural plots; video filming of affected physical units, land market survey and public consultation including FGDs and PRRAs.

8.2 Environmental Consultation

299. Questionnaire surveys on environmental issues were conducted (Appendix 6) by PRRA, FGD and Consultation meetings. The consultation process involved people from grassroot levels including the farmers, fishermen, boatmen, landless and destitute women, to UP members and chairmen, teachers, social workers, government and NGO representatives.

300. The consultation process adopted a bottom-up approach starting with FGD with diverse stakeholders separately in different components of the subprojects. The team members visited the concern areas, met people and identified potential persons to be included in the FGD and PRRA consultations. After conducting FGDs for all potential groups within the compartment, PRRA session was conducted involving all groups. Conflicts of interest over different issues were specially discussed. A subproject level consultation meeting was organized upon completion of FGDs and PRRA at compartment level involving larger participants.

301. As a part of the public involvement process a Consultative Meeting was held on the 21st September 2004 to present and discuss the results of the EIA inviting 14 leading NGOs and Government institutions and institutions active in the environmental sector, as well as BWDB. The questions and comments to the findings presented were responded to, and recorded. The participants were generally in line with the assessment of the environmental impacts and the mitigation measures identified. However, a number of suggestions were given for the optimizing the effects of the mitigation measures and for the finalization of the EIA reporting. The suggestion included (i) for the greater interest of the country this type of study should be extended to other districts; (ii) active participation of the beneficiaries people in managing the environment; (iii) increase in the use of LLP and avoid using STW and (iv) emphasis on technology transfer, arsenic eradication and erosion prevention issues.

302. It was noted that the project would improve the potential for irrigation by LLP thereby reducing the demand for irrigation by STW. With respect to fisheries improvement the meeting strongly recommended this to be implemented under the Community Based Fisheries Management framework. Rainwater harvesting was pointed at as a feasible solution to provide alternative drinking water resources in arsenic affected areas. The meeting stated that arsenic mitigation should be given a priority. Another important element pointed at was to arrest river erosion.

303. Finally the representatives from the two Subproject areas expressed their strong desire to immediately accept the project and suggested that for the interest of the people of the Project area the Project should be implemented immediately. The participants observed that the environmental concerns have been well addressed and mitigation



measures and environmental management plans proposed by the EIA should be sufficient to address the negative impacts of the project.

8.3 Major Findings of the Consultation Process

304. The people of the area specially the farmers and fishermen are facing water related problems including flooding, salinity intrusion, drainage congestion, irrigation insufficiency, arsenic contamination and communication. While many facilities are being managed without major conflicts of interests reported by stakeholders (many of whom do not seem to be familiar with operational practices) some facilities have reported otherwise. Specifically, there are reported cases for the conflicts between farmers and vested corners exploiting water control structures in their own interest. But only in some locations. This conflict relates to water control for checking flood or drainage and fish cultivation. The fishermen are restricted to some extent for fishing in the open water and the interest groups are exploiting these groups. The general people are in favour of fish sanctuaries, but the fishers/leaseholders of water bodies are sometimes skeptical in allowing these. However, where facilities have been constructed with active stakeholder consultation and formation of WMOs to manage those facilities,16 they tend to be managed with better performance in terms of successfully coordinating diverse stakeholder interests, although regular monitoring with social audits is also felt essential to sustain the optimal and agreed operational practices.

Table 8-2: Water Related Problems with Priority and Proposed Solutions

Problems with Priority Proposed Solutions 1. Water logging and drainage congestion Re-excavation of khals will provide water for irrigation, fish cultivation and

boat operation and remove drainage congestion. 2. Arsenic contamination in tube-well water Ensure safe arsenic free drinking water by installing free deep tube-well

and supply through piped water. 3. Flood incidences in the crop fields Repairing of existing embankments and sluices and construction of new

regulators 4. Scarcity of irrigation water and irrigation

infrastructure Install deep tube-wells, pump house and pucca drain.

5. Salinity in tidal flow Repairing of embankment and regulators and construct new embankment at the southern part.

6. Navigation problem Dredging of the river and other rivers and khals; removal of water hyacinth; construction of navigation lock and boat pass.

B. Other General Problems and Proposed Solutions 1. Agriculture related problems Better water management facilities, available quality seeds, fertilizer,

pesticides and other inputs. 2. Fisheries problems Dredge rivers and khals, extend beel fish culture, establish fry hatchery

and provide credit facilities 3. Sanitation problems Distribute sealed latrine to the poor 4. Communication and transport problem Katcha road to be made pucca and embankment to be carpeted. 5. Lack of electricity Rural electrification for irrigation, industry and domestic use. 6. Shortage of capital Interest free credit to poor for agriculture, fish culture and livestock rearing 7. Lack of adequate health services Presence of MBBS doctor in community hospital 8. Residence for the poor and erosion affected people Rehabilitation of landless and riverbank erosion affected people. 9. Unemployment Low interest credit to encourage income generating activities like goat

rearing and small business 10. Marketing and storage problems Create market facilities and cold storage in the area. 11. Lack of adequate education facilities Establish high school, primary school and Madrasa in the subproject area.

16 Within the subproject area, there are several small-scale structures constructed by Local Government Engineering

Department with WMO formation, with the ADB-assisted Loan No.1381-BAN: Small-scale Water Resources Development Sector Project.



8.4 Workshops

305. A Project Inception Workshop was held on the 24th October 2003 with 86 attendants from GOB, development partners, NGOs, institutions in the water and environment sectors, national and international experts in river engineering, environment and social development etc. (Appendix 7, Tables 1-1 and 1-2). The workshop focused on the need for improved water management in the South West Region of Bangladesh, and on the project objectives, institutional issues and capacity strengthening on regional and local level. Secretary of MWOR asserted the critical importance of effective water management in reducing rural poverty, and highlighted the most recent progress such as the near-future approval of the draft NWMP and the Government’s decision to resume the preparation of the Gorai River restoration project, which has a positive implication to the Project through increased water availability in the Southwest. Useful suggestions were also provided from the experts, including the need for (i) carefully defining the scope covered under regional integrated water resources management plans; (ii) identifying specific measures for poverty reduction for equal sharing of benefits; (iii) installing built-in self-correction mechanisms through effective monitoring and evaluation; (iv) due coordination with various donor-assisted sector interventions for consistent approach in pursuing the required institutional reforms; (v) bottom-up approach to be adopted in all respect of the planning activities; (vi) the resettlement plan being produced under ADB assistance for the RHD projects will require consultation for the resettlement issues under IWRM project; and (vii) not to be strict upon the existing guidelines and to develop ideas which are consistent over the present situation of the sub-project areas.

306. A Regional Level Workshop was held at the Deputy Commissioner Conference in Jessore on the 12th of May 2004 to present the findings of Phase I based on the Interim Reporting. The main objective of the workshop was to present the findings of Phase 1 and share opinion with the local level officials of different line agencies. 77 participants represented the GOB, donors, NGOs and local stakeholders of five districts under SWAIWRMP (Appendix 7, Tables 2-1 and 2-2). Useful feedback was received on the project components, implementation, people's participation and the formation of WMA. Besides important environmental problems such as arsenic contamination were raised.

307. The Regional Level Workshop was followed by a National Level Meeting held on 15 May 2004 at BRAC Center Inn, Mohakhali, Dhaka to finalize the Phase 1 (Interim) Report with the participation of 27 participants (Appendix 7, Tables 3-1 & 3-2). Consultants Team Leader presented the Phase I Interim Report and discussed the main aspects of the report. The Key points discussed were (i) refinement of the regional strategy in the context of the national water management policy and institutional implications of these strategies, (ii) nine major issues at the south-west region, (iii) multi-criteria analysis of the strategies, (iv) pints to address in detailing the strategies, in particular, poverty alleviation, livelihood, income generation, etc. (v) 5 districts water management plan based on hydrological units, (vi) list of possible interventions according to the strategies, (vii) primary and secondary screening approach to select the sub-projects focusing poverty alleviation and social impact, etc. Major points raised by some of the participants were (i) WARPO to take lead in local and regional planning exercise and would be involved in macro level planning, where as, BWDB would be involved in the micro level planning. Moreover, the two separate organizations would maintain co-ordination with each other, (ii) Role of LGED in the regional planning, (iii) participation of representatives from other agencies in the workshop, (iv) the project to use lessons from the previous studies, (v) the arsenic mitigation measures needs to be focused and implementation be expedited, (vi) augmentation of the surface water flows in the region, (vii) sustainable operation and maintenance, (viii) public funding mechanism should be rationalized, (ix) discouraging flood proofing outside the



embankment and be dropped from the options, etc. After a long discussion the proposed Flood Proofing for Vulnerable Communities in High Risk Areas subproject was dropped and other 3 subprojects were approved for the study.

308. Finally, a National Workshop was held on the 5th December 2004 at Spectra Catering Ltd, Gulshan 1, Dhaka to discuss the draft PPTA final report. 194 participants (Appendix 7, Table 4-1) were invited of which 111 participants (Appendix 7, Table 4-2) attended the workshop. Opening Session of the workshop was chaired by the Director General BWDB. Among others Secretary, Ministry of Water Resources, Division Chief (Agriculture) Planning Commission, Chief Engineer, LGED and ADB representatives were present in the opening session. The Technical Session of the workshop was chaired by the Director General, WARPO. Consultants Team Leader presented the Draft Final Report. The Key points discussed were (i) project components, overall objectives and immediate objectives (ii) decentralization of water management administrative (iii) institutional arrangement for subproject implementation (iv) environmental impacts and mitigation measures (v) agricultural extension through the adaptation of crop demonstration plots (vi) improvement of domestic water supply and sanitation facilities (vii) poverty reduction and gender issue (viii) arsenic contamination and pilot mitigation measures (ix) training needs and arrangements for different line agencies (x) participatory involvement in O & M (xi) financing arrangements (v) sustainable water management through IWRM. The points raised by some of the participants were (i) approach to be administered that the participatory monitoring can be monitored by WARPO (ii) the project has emphasized the siltation and congestion problem within the sub-project areas, the regional rivers are silting day by day and the project should make some recommendation to deal with these problems and more over these recommendations could be further studied by other agencies involved in the future (iii) method to ascertain the beneficiary participation during the implementation and the monitoring stages (iv) the financing arrangement from the beneficiaries, etc.



9 Conclusion

309. The objective of the Project is to increase income from agriculture and fisheries thereby providing employment opportunities that will contribute to the socio-economic development of the Project Area covering the Chenchuri Beel and Narail. The Project will also establish participatory institutions to operate and maintain the water management structures in a manner so that the diverse interests of the stakeholders can be optimized and sustained with beneficiary participation in O&M as well. In addition, the project will pilot test available options to mitigate the impacts of groundwater arsenic mitigation. With the socio-economic development and the provision of safe water supply, the overall standard of licking will increase. Poverty will be reduced due to the job opportunities created, especially for the landless and the destitute women. The agricultural production will increase due to the implementation of water resources infrastructure, improved drainage and on-farm development. Incomes from agriculture will rise, having a spin-off on other sectors. The rehabilitation of ponds and the promotion of paddy-cum-fish culture will stimulate fish production.

310. The project will not only benefit agriculture and culture fisheries. The flood free embankments will serve as roads and thus help to open up the areas, now inaccessible at places. Avoiding regular floods, the overall sectors within the economy will be allowed to develop without the regular setbacks the floods cause. Again, this will add to the socio-economic development and increase the standard of living. Further, the Project will alleviate the negative impacts of the existing and inadequate infrastructure, such as water logging, water shortage, interruption of fish movement and navigation, and water pollution.

311. The positive effects of the Project will substantially surpass the negative ones, such as the impacts on re-settlement, capture fisheries and navigation. The negative impact from the re-settlement of people would be fully mitigated by the implementation of the Re-settlement Plan and the people affected be adequately compensated and provided a sustained livelihood. Measures to mitigate gher unavoidable damage to capture fisheries and to navigation have been identified and pursued, by careful water management and gate operation to allow maximum passage of fish species and local boats, an adequate location and design of embankments and structures, and providing boat passes at critical locations. Professional fisher folks and boat operators will be provided with priority opportunity to project-supported income enhancement activities such as fish culture in public water bodies created behind the structures. Likewise, the risk of potential local conflicts associated with water management will be mitigated by careful site selection, stakeholder participation and agreement in design and operational practices, O&M training and post-completion monitoring and social audits. The risk of salinity intrusion inside and outside of the subproject areas is also mitigated by strengthening salinity monitoring and introducing warning systems. Overall, the final impact of the Project on all environmental aspects will be limited due to the mitigation measures.

312. Nevertheless, implementing identified environmental management activities including monitoring of environmental impact, mitigation, and enhancement indicators is critical to minimize negative environmental impacts and maximize positive impacts. The identified EMP should be integrated with the Project-specific information management systems such that all project-related activities are effectively managed through appropriately identified process and outputs indicators encompassing institutional, social, financial, and economic aspects. This also calls for effective operation of basic mechanisms for recording, reporting, monitoring and auditing



systems among SMO, JMC, PIU, and PCU, which should be embedded within BWDB’s field office structures. EMP will be operated within this context, with appropriate capacity strengthening support including training and recommendations on institutional reforms provided through the consultants.

313. People’s consultations carried out demonstrated that rehabilitating the existing FCD/I structures while addressing internal local water management problems, applying the concept of coordinated management of local water infrastructures through a participatory approach, is the best alternative that can generate maximum positive impacts. While local stakeholders have diverse interests in terms of the structure operation, these can be effectively coordinated to bring about optimal benefits with participatory water management and its supporting systems.

314. In conclusion, the Project will have overall positive benefits by preserving the existing flood protection, drainage control, and irrigation benefits provided by the existing facilities, and enhancing their positive impacts through rehabilitation of existing structures, and installment of additional small structures to address internal water management problems that have not been addressed. Its successful implementation will also serve as a model to demonstrate the process of achieving substantial under-achieved development potentials of existing FCD/I systems while sustaining their benefits through effective stakeholder participation.



10 Bibliography

ADB, 2003: “Environmental Assessment Guidelines of the Asian Development Bank”. Environmental Division of the ADB, revised edition.

DHV 1998: "Southwest Area Water Resources Development Project". Feasibility Study, Final Reports (Vol. 2 & 3) to Bangladesh Water Development Board, Government of Bangladesh.

DOE, 1997. "Environmental Conservation Rules". Department of Environment, Ministry of Environment and Forestry, Government of Bangladesh.

FPCO, 1992: "Guidelines for Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)", Flood Plan Coordination Organisation, Ministry of Irrigation, Water Development and Flood Control, The People's Republic of Bangladesh

Halcrow, 1993: FAP-4, Southwest Area Water Resources Management Project, Final Report: UNDP/ADB.

Halcrow, 2002: Jamuna-Meghna River Erosion Mitigation Project (Phase II), Feasibility Study, Final Report, Vol. 1, Main Report. TA No. 3659-BAN. BWDB/ADB.

Halcrow, 2004: Southwest Area Integrated Water Resources Management Project, Phase-I (Interim) Report, Vol 2: District Level Integrated Water Resources Management Plans (Annex D) - Narail District.

ISPAN, 1995: “Manual for Environmental Impact Assessment”, FAP-16, FPCO, MoWR, GoB.

NWMP, Halcrow and Mott MacDonald, 2000: "National Water Management Plan Project, Draft Development Strategy", Water Resources Planning Organisation, Ministry of Water Resources, Government of Bangladesh.

WARPO, 2001: “Guidelines for Environmental Assessment of Flood Control, Drainage and Irrigation Projects” WARPO, MoWR, GoB.


Environmental Impact Assessment

Maps and Figures



Location Map of Subprojects



Chenchuri Beel Subproject



Narail Subproject



Dry season Peak Salinity No Flow at Gorai

Figure 5.1: Dry Season Peak Salinity (No Gorai Flow)

. Nabaganga R.

Gopalganj

Khulna

Bagerhat

Pirojpur

Mongla

Satkhira

4.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

1.00



Dry Season Peak Salinity Gorai Flow as recorded in 1999 (with Dredging)

Figure 5.2: Dry Season Peak Salinity (with 1999 Gorai Flow)

Nabaganga R. Gopalganj

Khulna

Bagerhat

Pirojpur

Satkhira

Mongla

4.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

1.00



Figure 7-2: Outline of EMP Implementation during Construction

NO

NO

EMP EMP Procedures

Contractor EAP Procedures

Contractor/M&E Designing Sampling & Monitoring Procedures

Consultant (Environmentalist)

Inspections, Auditing and Reporting

Agreed Standards Exceeded?

Sampling: Compliant

with Contractor

Remedial Actions & Enhancement

Contractor/M&E Sample Collection &

Analysis

DoE Review & Inspection

PIU Inspection & Auditing

Inspection: M&E enforce

sampling

Southwest Area Integrated Water Resource Planning and Management Project TA 4079-BAN Environmental Impact Assessment

Appendix 1

Appendix 1

List of Common Plants, Wildlife and Fish Species


Appendix 1 1

Appendix 1: List of Common Plants, Wildlife and Fish Species

Table 1: Aquatic Macrophytes of the Project Area

Local Name Scientific Name Hogla Typha angustata Halencha Enhydro fluctuans Kalmi Ipomoea aquatica Dhol kalmi Ipomoea fistulosa Ghechu Aponageton sp. Kochuripana Eichornia crassipes Topa pana Pistia stratiotes Khudi pana Lemna minor Duck weed Spirodella sp. Duck weed Wolffia arrhiza Shapla Nymphaea nouchali Cheicha Scripus articulatus

Table 2: Flora Species in the Project Area

Local Name Scientific Name Dheras Abelmoschus esculentus Babla Acacia auriculiformis Akashmoni Acacia moniliformis Babla Acacia nilolica Hargozakata Acanthus illicifolius Bel Aegle marmelos Koroi Albizia procera Sirish Albizia lebbek Mankachu Alocasia indica Kantanotey, kantadenga, Katamiris Amaranthus spinosus Supari Areca catechu Kanthal Artocarpus heterophyllus Barta, Bankatal Artocarpus lacucha Nim Azadirachta indica Jowa bans Bambusa tulda Puishak Basella alba Chalkumra Benincasa hispida Shimul Bombax ceiba Tal Borassus flabellifer Bet Calamus viminalis Ponyal Callophyllum inophyllum Akanda Calotropis gigantia Swet akand Calotropis procera Kachamarich Capsicum annum Pepe Carica papaya Bandarlathi, Sonali Cassia fistula Kalkasunde Cassia sophera Chandanbeto Chenopodium ambrosioides Chorekanta Chrysopogon aciculatus Premkata Chrysopogon aciculatus Patipata Clynogyne dichotoma Narikel, Dab Cocos nucifera Patabahar Codiacum variegatum Kachu Colocasia esculenta Kumra Cucurbita maxima Durba, Durbaghas Cynodon dactylon Sishookat Dalbergia sisoo Krishnachura Delonix regia Karanja Derris indica Gab Diospyros peregrina Mandar Rrythrina variegata Ghaspata Euphorbia hirta


Appendix 1 2

Local Name Scientific Name Swet kerui Euphorbia thymifolia Batta, Batul, Harua Excoccaria indica Bot Ficus sltissima Kakdumur Ficus hispida Bot Ficus religiosa Bhola Hibiscus tiliaceus Ulukhor Imperata cylindrica Misti alu Ipomoea batata Sim Lablab purpureus Lau Lagenaria siceraria Bhadi Lannea grandis Telikadam Leucaena leucocephala Jhinga Luffa aculangala Am Mangifera indica Karulla Momordica charantea Sajna Moringa oleifera Aittakola Musa sapientm Dhanshi Myriostachya wightiana Dhan Oryza sativa Kewakata Pandanus foetidus Khajur Phoenix sylvestris Debdaru, Saralgoch Polyalthia longifolia Karanja, Karamcha Pongamia pinnata Peyara Pridium guajava Veranda Ricinus communis Nalkhagra Saccaharum spontaneum Raintree Samanea saman Saila/Shyola Sonneratia caseolaris Mehogini Swietenia mahagoni Jam Syjygium grandis Tetul Tamarindus indicus Arjun Terminalia arjuna Hoglapata Typha elephantina Barbati Vigna chinensis Nishinda Vitex negundo Ghagrasak Xanthium indicum Mainakata Xeromphis spinosa Baroi Zizyphus jujuba Lichu Lichi chinensis Sobeda Achras sapota Kamranga Averrhoea carmobola Amrah Spondias pinnate Ata Anona squamosa Bel Aegle marmelos Kodbel Feroria elephantum Jambura Citrus grandis Shal Tectona grandis Kadam Anthocephalus chinesis Shishu Dalbergia sisso Tulshi Ocimumsanctum Akarda Calotropis gigantea Chalta Dillenia indica Telakochu Coccinea cordifolia Kul Zizyphus mauritiana


Appendix 1 3

Table 3: Fauna in Project Area

Bangla Name English Name Scientific Name Status FISHES Kuchia Mud eel Monopterus cuchia UC Potka Puffe fish Tetradon cutcutia F Kakila Freshwater gars Xenentodon cancila C Shol Snakehead Channa striatus F Taki Snakeheads Channa punctatus C Gazar Mural snakehead Channa marulius R Darkina Esomus Esomus danricus C Chela Onygaster phulo C Mola Amlypharyngodom mola C Rui Major carp Labeo rohita C Kalibous Major carp Labeo calbasu C Catla Major carp Catla catla C Mrigal Major carp Cirrhinus mrigala F Tatkini Minor carp Cirrhinus reba F Silver carp Silver carp Hypophthalmichthes molitrix C Grass carp Grass carp Ctenopharyngodon idellus F Carpio Common carp Cyprinus carpio F Tit punti Barb Puntis ticto C Punti Barb Puntiu stigma C Shar punti Silver barb Puntius sarana R Thaipunti Thaibarb Puntius gonionotus F Gutum Lepidocephalus guntea C Shingi Stinging catfish Heteropneustes fossilis C Magur Catfish Clarias batrachus F Boal Giant catfish Wallago attu R Kani pabda Butter catfish Ompok bimaculatus R Pangas River catfish Pangasius pangasius R Rita River catfish Rita rita - Ayre Catfish Mistus aor F Nona-tengra Catfish Mystu gulio C Guni/Ghuitta tengra Catfish Mystus tengra F Chitol Feather backs Natopterus chitola R Foli Feather backs Natopterus notopterus R Chapila Herrings Gudusia chapra - Kachki Corica soborna F Baim Spiny eel Mastacembelus armatus F Gochi baim Spiny eel Mastacembelus pancalus C Tara baim Spiny eel Macrognathus aculeatus C Khalisha Goramy Colisa fasiatus C Chata/Boicha Goramy Colisa lalius C Koi Climbing perch Anabas testudineus C Meni Mud perch Nandus nandus F Telapia Tilapia Oreochromis niloticus F Chiring Pseudapocryptes lanceolatus C Baila Goby Glossogobiu giuris UC Sada chewa Trypauchen vagina UC Lal chewa Odontamblyopus rubicundus UC Poa Jew fish Pama pama C Koral Giant perch Lates calcarifer R Bara/Nama chanda Glass perch Chanda nama C Choto chanda Glass perch Chanda ranga C


Appendix 1 4

Bangla Name English Name Scientific Name Status Faisha Anchony Thryssa mystex C Elisha Hilsashad Tenualosa ilisha UC Vacha Eutropiichthys vacha C Loita Bombyduck Harpodon nehereus C Bashpata Sole Cynoglossys lingula UC Gotun Loach Lepidocephalus guntea C Bata Mullet Rhinomugil corsula R AMPHIBIANS Sonagang Bullfrog Rana tigrina UC Kuno bang Toad Bufo melanostictus C REPTILES Kochchop Tortoise Kachuga tecta C Tiktikee Wall lizard Hemidactylus C Tokkhok Gecko Gecko gecko UC Ghorial Ghorial Gavialis gangeticus UC Kalo gui Monitor lizard Varanus bengalensis T Atail Kacho Blind snake Typlina porrectus C Daraj sap Rat snake Ptyas mucosus C Gokhra sap Cobra Naja naja UC Kasim Flap – shell turtle Lissemys punctata C Dora sap C.K. Watersnake Xenochrophis piscator C Matia sap C. Watersnake Enhydris enhydris C BIRDS Bhuban cheel Black kite Milvus migrans C Sada cheel Black – wing kite Elanus cacruleus C Baz Kestrel Falco tinnunculus C Mala gugu Ring dove Streptopila decaocto C Teya Perakeet Psittacula krameri C Kokil Koel Eudynamys scolopacca C Suichora Common bee eater Merops leschenaulti C Ababil Common swallow Hirundo rustica C Bulbul Red-vented bulbul Pycnonotus jacosus C Doyal Magpic robin Copsychus saularis C Tuntune Tailor bird Orthotomus sutorius C Finga Black drongo Dicrurus macrocercus C Patikak House crow Corvus splendens C Darkak Jungle crow Corvus macrorynchos C Bhatsalik Common myna Acridotheres tristis C Go Salik Pied myna Sturnus contra C Jhuti salik Jungle myna Acridotheres fuscus C Chorui House sparrow Passer domesticus C Pancowri Little cormorant Phalacrocorax carto UC Boro bok Great egret Bubulcus ibis C Sada bik Little egret Egretta garzetta C Kali bok Black bittern Ixobrychus flavicollis C Lal bok Cinnamon bittern Ixobrychus cinnanmeocus C Kani bok Pond heron Ardeola grayii C Nishi bok Night heron Nyucticorax nycticorax UC Nol bok Grey heron Ardea cinerea C Chonkho cheel Brahminy kite Haliaster indus C Bali hans Lesser whistling teal Dendrocygna javanica UC Chakha Ruddy Shelduck Tadorna ferruginea UC Dahuk Water hen Gallicrex cinerea C Kali pipi Coot Fulica atra C


Appendix 1 5

Bangla Name English Name Scientific Name Status Hot titi Red-wattled lapwing Vanellus indicus C Pecha Spotte owlet Athena brama UC Kadtheibra Wood pecker Dinopium javanese C Lokki Pecha Bran owl Tyto alba C Tuntuni Tailor bird Orthotomus sutorius C Machranga White-throated kingfisher Halcyon pileata C MAMMALS Badur Flying fox Pteropus giganteus C Bege Mongoose Herpestes edwardsi C Bagdasha Large civet Viverra zibela R Indur L. bandicoot rat Bandicota bengalensis C Chika I. shrew Suncus murinus C Khaksial Fox Vulpes bengalensis UC Katbirali Squirrel Callosciuruspygeugthrus C Sehsu Gangetic dolphin Platanista gangetica C(SW) Shial jackal Canis aurcus indicus UC Udd Otter Lutra lutra UC

Note: C = Common, UC = Uncommon, R = Rare, T = Threatened


Appendix 2

Appendix 2

Summary of Resettlement Framework and Resettlement Plan


Appendix 2 1

Appendix 2: Summary of Resettlement Framework and Resettlement Plan

Resettlement Plan

1 The proposed new interventions for rehabilitation of the sub-projects will cause adverse social impacts and in some instances would require land acquisition and resettlement of affected households and businesses. According to the census/resettlement surveys1 conducted during the project preparatory work, the two subprojects together will involve acquisition of 56.4 ha of land (Chenchuri – 13.4 ha and Narail – 43.0 ha) for construction of project infrastructures. Table 1 presents a summary of impacts of the two subprojects.

Table 1: Project Impacts and Displacement

Subproject LA requirements

Households Requiring Relocation

Household affected but need

no relocation

Households losing agricultural land only & TCF

Total Households

Total APs

Chenchuri2 13.376 ha 49 20 77 146 886

Narail 42.95 ha 100 134 166 400 2,495

Total 56.326 ha 149 154 243 546 3,381 Source: Socioeconomic Survey, August-September 2004

2 The two subprojects will affect 546 households out of which 149 would require relocation due to acquisition of their homesteads – the rest will lose fish farms, shops and agricultural land. Around 43 households in Chenchuri Beel and 12 households in Narail Sub-Projects are informal settlers on government or private land. In all, 132 residential/commercial structures will be affected. House structures are predominantly kuccha (89%) – made of wood, bamboo and straw with corrugated tin roof. About 8% are semi-pucca and the rest (3%) are pucca structures. In general, the type of losses include (i) loss of homestead land/trees; (ii) residential/commercial/community structures, and (iii) loss of income/work days due to dislocation and relocation; (iv) loss of agricultural land (including bank lines and eroded land), and (v) loss of ponds (cultivated) and shrimp ghers (firms).

3 Agriculture is the dominant occupation of the affected populations in the subproject areas. Secondary and/or tertiary occupations include wage labor, fishing and formal employment/service. Working population constitutes close to 58% of the total population. The incidence of gainful employment by women is limited (under 6%) in the project area. Based on stated income, nearly 50% of the affected households have income below the poverty line.3 Among those, about 29 percent are “hard-core” poor, who live on a dollar-a-day basis. Women in poor households and households with no adult male members are in vulnerable situation due to lack of security in their economic and social position. The landless or small farmers lease in land and cultivate on their own. According to the sampled survey, about 11 ha of land are leased out and/or sharecropped. Households losing more than 10% of their agricultural income constitute about 35 percent of the total affected households.

4 To mitigate the adverse impacts, separate Resettlement Plans (RS) have been prepared for the two subprojects. The RPs are based GOB laws and ADB policy4 and guidelines. 5The RPs have devised appropriate mitigation measures to compensate for all identified losses and to

1 The surveys were conducted in August 2004 by Polli Unnayan Andolon (RDM), an experienced NGO in the resettlement field. 2 Includes estimated figure of 43 households, and 27 shops on embankment slopes to be displaced. 3 Official poverty line is calculated for 2122 KCal intake per person per day which is ensured by a per capita income of Taka 720/monthly 4 Involuntary Resettlement (1995), Asian Development Bank, Manila. 5 Handbook on Resettlement: A Guide to Good Practice (1998), ADB, Manila


Appendix 2 2

assist in the resettlement of the affected population. Table 2 contains a summary of the types of losses and compensation/entitlement packages.

Table 2: Compensation and Entitlement Packages

Type of Loss Entitlement package 1. Loss of land (agricultural,

commercial, homestead, pond, ghers, baroj)

1. Cash compensation under law (CCL) determined by DC in respective districts. 2. Positive differential in respect of replacement market price to be determined by PVAT. 3. Refund of registration cost incurred for replacement land purchase at the replacement value.

2. Loss of underwater land (basically eroded land and bank slopes)

1. In case of khas land, cash compensation under law (CCL) to DC in respective districts without 50% premium.

2. Replacement value of land assessed by PVAT, to the previous owner(s) whose land was eroded.

3. Refund of registration cost incurred for replacement land purchase at the replacement value. 3. Loss of residential

/commercial structure 1. Cash compensation under law (CCL) to be determined by DC based on joint verification to

legal owners. 2. Positive differential in respect of replacement market price to be determined by PVAT to titled

and non-titled owners. 3. Transfer grant equivalent to 12.5% of the value of non-concrete structure assessed by PVAT

to titled and non-titled owners. 4. Transfer grant equivalent to 5% of the value of concrete structure (pucca/semi-pucca)

assessed by PVAT to titled and non-titled owners. 5. Reconstruction grant equivalent to 12.5% of the value of non-concrete structure assessed by

PVAT for titled owners. 6. Homestead development and reconstruction grant of Tk. 15,000 to non-titled owners

(squatters, occupiers/encroachers, sheltered, etc.) 7. Salvaged materials free of cost.

4. Loss of non-structure assets (betel leaf baroj, shrimp gher and ponds.)

1. Cash grant equivalent to one year's net income from the structure to be determined by PVAT to the cultivator(s).

2. Cash grant equivalent to one year's rental income to the owners of associated land assessed by PVAT.

5. Loss of trees, crops, perennials

1. Compensation at the rate estimated by the Department of Forest (DOF) for trees and the Department of Agriculture Extension (DAE) for crops fixed by DCs.

2. Salvaged materials free of cost. 6. Loss of access to

agricultural, commercial and homestead land

1. Crop compensation to titled sharecroppers or leasees by DC. 2. Cash grant of Tk. 300/- per decimal of land sharecropped by non-titled sharecroppers. 3. Cash grant for alternative housing to renters of residential and commercial land at the rate of

Tk. 6000/- per household. 4. Cash grant of Tk. 500/- per decimal to renters of land for pond/gher/baroj.

7. Loss of income and work days due to dislocation

1. Cash grant of Tk. 5000 per household as subsistence for lost income/workdays. 2. Cash grant of Tk. 6000 for loss of business income by affected traders/shops. 3. Cash grant equivalent to Tk. 3000/- to owners of rented land/premises. 4. Cash grant of Tk. 3000 to the affected employees equivalent to 2 months' wages.

8. Affected vulnerable households

1. Additional cash grant of Tk. 5000 to head of affected households. 2. Training and credit facilities under income generation program (IGP). 3. Employment in the project construction work, if available.

9. Displacement of community structure

1. Cash compensation under law (CCL) to be determined by DC based on joint verification. 2. Positive differential in respect of replacement market price to be determined by PVAT. 3. Transfer grant equivalent to 5% of the assessed value of structure by PVAT. 4. Dismantling and reconstruction cash assistance including land as assessed by PVAT

considering the CCL for concerned land and structure. 10. Access to community/ civic

facilities at relocated sites 1. Community infrastructure facilities, access roads, plantation, tube-wells, sanitary latrines and

drainage. 11. Project induced erosion of

accreted land 1. Market value of concerned land assessed by PVAT to the owner-occupied land by 100 per

cent or share it 50-50 among owners and occupiers for non-owner occupied land.


Appendix 2 3

5 The RP concept and land acquisition requirements as per alternative options and technical designs for water management interventions were discussed with the primary stakeholders. The women and other vulnerable groups were also consulted on site concerning the project impacts and their livelihood aspects. The inputs from the stakeholders meetings have duly been used to develop mitigation measures listed under Table 2. The draft RPs as well as the RF were discussed in the field during project preparation.

6 APs will receive their compensation and additional assistance prior to relocation. The project will encourage “self-relocation” by affected households within the vicinity of their present residences. The objective is to minimize social disruption in the resettlement process and allow people to remain together within kin groups for mutual support. The RP implementing NGOs will be responsible for designing and implementation of income and livelihood programs. The Mitigation of losses and livelihood restoration are the main focus of the resettlement plans. The vulnerable and informal settlers will be allowed to resettle on the edge of the embankment through reconstruction of their houses assisted by the project. The implementing NGO will assist the APs in the process of relocation and resettlement. A time-bound implementation schedule for the RP will be prepared in accordance with the project construction schedule. Implementation of the subproject RPs will costs an estimated amount of Taka 111 million. The entire budget for land acquisition and resettlement will be provided from GOB fund.

7 The Ministry of Water Resources (MOWR) through the BWDB will be responsible for implementation of the RPs. The Project Director will monitor the RP implementation through the Chief Resettlement Officer at appointed at the PIU. The Executive Engineer, Narail O&M Division, BWDB, Narail will act as the Resettlement Coordinator (RC) at the field level. The RP implementing NGOs will open field offices to implement the RPs and will involve stakeholders in the implementation process. Various RP implementation committees including JVT, the Ministry of Water Resources (MOWR) will form PVAT and GRC through gazette notification. In addition, the implementing agency/NGO will form resettlement advisory committee (RAC) to involve the local communities and APs in the implementation process. Implementation of the RPs will be supervised and monitored by the PD in co-ordination with the CRO, BWDB field staff, SC and the resettlement-implementing NGO. The RP implementation monitoring will be done both internally and externally to provide feedback to BWDB and to assess the effectiveness. The PD will submit quarterly reports of progress to ADB indicting progress in RP implementation and actions taken on inadequacies, if any, in the implementation process.


Appendix 3

Appendix 3

Financial Analysis


Appendix 3 1

Appendix 3: Financial Analysis

SOUTH WEST AREA INTEGRATED WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT

Financial Analysis

1.1 Introduction

To demonstrate the likely impact of the proposed project interventions, a financial and economic analyses were undertaken for the two sample sub-projects, namely Chenchuri Beel and Narail. A financial analysis was undertaken to determine the likely implications of the proposed rehabilitation of civil infrastructure on farm production and income. The increases in net farm returns generated by the sub-projects then provided a clear indication of the farmers’ capacity to meet future operation and maintenance (O&M) costs and the extent to which the financial benefits are sufficiently attractively attractive to encourage the full participation of farmers in the rehabilitation works and subsequent O&M. Furthermore, enterprise budgets for both capture and culture fisheries production were prepared to estimate the net financial returns to fish production as a consequence of the fisheries support programme.

In the economic analysis, the costs and benefits of the proposed improvements in civil infrastructure and supporting services were determined. The capital investment and O&M costs required for the two sample sub-project areas were compiled from the estimates made by the water resource engineers and other study specialists. The capital investment costs were then distributed over a six year period in accordance with the proposed phasing of the project. Sub-project benefits were primarily determined by assessing the impact on changes in the cropping patterns and crop yields as a result of the improved flood control and drainage systems as well as an expansion of the irrigated area. In addition, the benefits of improved capture and culture fisheries production were also evaluated. Other economic benefits taken into account in the analysis included: (i) reduction in crop losses through mitigating flooding and saline intrusion, (ii) reduction in livestock losses and damage to houses/infrastructure, and (iii) reduction in transport costs through the upgrading of rural roads.

2.2 Financial Analysis

2.2.1 Crop Budgets

Information on present crop yields in the sub-project areas was gathered from the agricultural extension staff in Narail District. While data on crop management practices, levels of input use (i.e. seeds, fertilisers and pesticides) and labour requirements were collected during discussions with farmers and local agricultural extension officers in Chenchuri Beel and Narail sub-projects.

The crop yields used in the analysis for the present and future ‘without project’ situations, together with the crop input and labour requirements are detailed in Annex G of the final report of the TA. It can be seen from Table G1 that modest yield improvements are anticipated for the HYV paddy crops, i.e. T.Aus, HYV T.Aman and HYV Boro. These higher yields reflect better farming practices and the adoption of improved varieties. For all other crops, yields are expected to remain unchanged. Furthermore, no increase in crop yield is expected in the future ‘without project’ situation.


Appendix 3 2

Farm gate and market prices of all the major crops current prevailing in Narail District were collected from the Department of Agricultural Marketing. Agricultural wage rates and hire charges for draft power were collected directly from farmers during the field visits. Seed, fertiliser and pesticide prices were gathered from local private suppliers and farmers. The crop yields, input usage, labour and draft power requirements were then valued in 2004 farm gate prices in order to derive financial net returns for each of the main crops grown within the sub-project areas. To highlight any significant differences between the various farm sizes, net crop returns were derived for four farm categories, i.e. landless/marginal, small, medium and large.

The financial crop budgets for the present, future ‘with project’ and future ‘without project’ situations are detailed in Annex G. It is evident from the analysis that, at the present levels of productivity in the sub-projects, all the crops are profitable with respect net returns per hectare. The net returns from spices, vegetables, potatoes and orchard crops are substantially higher than the returns from paddy and other staple crops (such as wheat, pulses and oilseeds), but these attractive returns from these horticultural crops are moderated by the risks associated with large seasonal price fluctuations. Of the paddy crops, HYV Boro, HYV Aman and T.Aus achieved the highest net returns. This is due to the significantly higher yield levels which were more than sufficient to offset the additional production costs. With a more favourable water management environment in the ‘future with project’ situation, it is envisaged that that farmers in the sub-project areas will be able to exploit these differences in crop profitability through the adoption of more intensive cropping patterns, greater crop diversification, and improved management practices.

It should also be noted that the productivity of the horticultural crops, and consequently their net returns per hectare, were assumed to remain unchanged in both the ‘future with’ and ‘future without project’ situations. This avoided overestimating the potential benefits from an increase in the production of these high value crops, which would have a significant influence on both the financial and economic viability of the sub-projects.

Differences in net crop returns between the various farm size categories generally reflected the level of hired labour costs which increases in relation to farm size, e.g. large farmers employ hired labourers to cover about 66% of their crop labour requirements in contrast to landless/marginal farmers who only use family labour. With regard to crop yields and management practices, no significant differences were identified between the various types of farmer.

2.3 Farm Budgets

The present crop patterns were derived from information provided by local agricultural extension officers who compiled data on flood depths, cropped areas and irrigated areas for the various unions within Chenchuri and Narail sub-project areas. For each sub-project area, cropping patterns and crop areas were prepared for the different flood depths, i.e. highland (F0), medium highland (F1), medium lowland (F2) and lowland (F3). The detailed cropping patterns used in the analysis for the present, ‘future without project’ and ‘future with project’ are presented in Annex E – Agriculture, and summarised in Table 6-1 below.


Appendix 3 3

Table 1-1: Cropping Patterns in Chenchuri and Narail Sub-projects

Percentage of Net Cultivated Area Chenchuri Beel Narail Season/Crop Present FWO FW Present FWO FW Kharif I B.Aus 23.6 24.4 24.2 25.1 25.1 25.0 T.Aus 1.8 1.8 4.5 3.0 3.0 4.3 B.Aman 32.2 31.2 31.2 28.1 28.1 26.8 Jute 8.2 8.2 5.3 10.7 10.7 10.0 Sugarcane 2.2 2.2 2.0 2.9 2.9 2.5 Summer Vegetables 5.1 5.1 5.3 3.5 3.8 4.5 Oilseeds 6.0 6.4 12.9 3.9 6.7 8.8 Spices 3.6 5.2 7.0 1.7 3.6 3.8 Orchard Crops 2.2 2.2 2.3 2.6 2.6 2.7 Kharif II Local T.Aman 7.9 7.6 9.0 10.0 10.0 10.4 HYV T.Aman 23.2 27.9 30.6 18.6 25.0 28.7 Rabi Local Boro 2.3 2.3 2.1 1.8 1.8 1.8 HYV Boro 27.9 34.9 43.6 31.6 36.9 39.0 Wheat 3.3 3.3 4.4 5.0 5.0 6.9 Potatoes 0.4 0.4 0.6 0.3 0.3 0.4 Pulses 24.9 20.7 18.8 19.0 15.7 15.8 Oilseeds 10.3 12.5 7.2 12.1 12.1 12.5 Spices 3.2 4.3 4.4 5.5 5.5 7.2 Winter Vegetables 2.2 4.3 4.9 5.0 6.3 8.6 Cropping Intensity 190.6 204.9 220.0 190.4 205.0 219.6

Source: District Agricultural Office, Narail; Consultants’ estimate

In the ‘future with project’ situation, the estimates of crop areas were primarily based on changes in the flood depths and an expansion of the irrigated area. The improved water management infrastructure is expected to lead to modest changes in flood depths with increases in the areas of F1 and F2 land and a reduction in the area of F3 land (see Table 6-2). This improvement in the flooding regime will help to encourage the expansion of both T.Aman (both local and HYV) in the kharif II season.

Table 6-2: Flood Depths in Chenchuri and Narail Sub-projects

Net Cultivated Area by Flood Phase (hectares) F0 F1 F2 F3 Sub-project Area % Area % Area % Area %

Total Area

Chenchuri Beel Present and FWO 3,910 (21.9) 4,345 (24.3) 6,610 (36.9) 3,035 (17.0) 17,900 Future With Project 3,010 (16.8) 5,550 (31.0) 6,480 (36.2) 2,860 (16.0) 17,900 Narail Present and FWO 5,665 (24.2) 7,695 (32.8) 7,430 (31.7) 2,650 (11.3) 23,440 Future With Project 5,250 (22.4) 8,010 (34.2) 7,730 (33.0) 2,450 (10.5) 23,440

Source: District Agricultural Office, Narail; Consultants’ estimate N.B. Flood Phases: F0 (0.00 – 0.30 m); F1 (0.30 – 0.90 m); F2 (0.90 – 1.80 m); F3 (1.80 – 3.00 m)

More significant benefits will result from the anticipated expansion in the irrigated area and this will have an impact on cropping patterns in both the kharif I and rabi seasons. In Chenchuri Beel, the irrigated area is expected to substantially expand from 34% of the cultivated in the present situation to 57% in the ‘future with’ project situation. While, in Narail, the irrigated area is anticipated to increase from 39% to 54%. With an increase in


Appendix 3 4

the availability of water in the khals (as a consequence of khal re-excavation and installation of water retaining structures), there will be considerable scope for the uptake of low lift pumps (LLPs) which will lead to a substantial increase in the irrigated area. In addition, the expansion of the irrigated area will also result from the further adoption of shallow tubewells (STWs).

In the kharif I season, the availability of irrigation water will lead to the increase in the area of T.Aus. and, consequently, the area of the low yielding B.Aman will fall. Furthermore, through the promotion of crop diversification (one of the main aims of the agricultural extension programme), an increase in the areas of summer vegetables, oilseeds and spices is also expected in the kharif I season, while the areas of sugarcane and jute would marginally fall. In the rabi season, the improved irrigation facilities (coupled with crop diversification) are expected to result in an increase in the areas of HYV boro, wheat, potatoes and winter vegetables. Overall, the cropping intensity in expected to increase from 190% to 220% in both sub-project areas.

In the ‘future without’ project situation, less significant changes in cropping pattern are likely, but it is still anticipated that the ‘future without’ project cropping pattern would include substantial areas of boro rice and other rabi crops. The irrigated area is expected to increase from 34% of the cultivated area to 47% in Chenchuri Beel and from 39% to 45% in Narail over the next 7 to 8 years. The expansion of the irrigated area, due to the further adoption of STWs over this period, would therefore lead to an increase in the areas of HYV Boro and winter vegetables. Overall, cropping intensity in expected to rise from 190% to 205% in both sub-project areas. The ‘future without’ cropping patterns for Chenchuri and Narail are consultants’ estimates derived from information provided by DAE staff and farmers. The estimates of incremental irrigated area in the ‘future without project’ were based on recent trends in the expansion of LLPs in Narail District.

Farm budgets were prepared for landless/marginal (0.3 hectares), small (0.8 hectares), medium (1.5 hectares) and large (3.5 hectare) farms. Crop areas for each farm model were calculated and then applied to the respective financial crop gross margin in order to derive the likely net returns to farm households from crop production in the present, ‘future without’ and ‘future with’ project situations. Following deduction of fixed costs (e.g. sharecrop ‘rental’ value and tools/equipment), net farm returns were then obtained. The farm budgets are presented in Annex G and a summary of the net farm returns in the present and future situations are given in Table 6 -3

Table 6-3: Net Farm Returns in Chenchuri and Narail Sub-projects (2004 financial prices)

Net Farm Returns (Tk per farm) Chenchuri Beel Narail Farm Type Present FWO FW Present FWO FW Landless/Marginal 9,322 10,974 12,573 9,770 11,139 12,919 Small 27,277 31,841 36,398 28,420 32,264 37,145 Medium 51,807 60,281 68,826 53,770 60,974 69,933 Large 102,237 119,193 135,558 105,674 120,052 137,361 Weighted Average 1/ 27,417 31,991 36,540 28,511 32,374 37,219

Source: Appendix G3 - Farm Budgets 1/ Weighted by % farmers in each farm size category.

It is evident from Table 6-3 that there are likely to be significant increases in net farm returns. Comparing the present and ‘future with’ project situations, average net returns are expected to increase by 33% in Chenchuri Beel and 31% in Narail. With these improvements in net returns, the project interventions will enhance the income and welfare of farm households in the sub-project areas. The increases in household income


Appendix 3 5

should also help to ensure the full and active participation of farmers in the maintenance of sub-project infrastructure. However, a comparison between the ‘future without’ and ‘future with’ project situations suggests that incremental net returns will not be as large, with average net returns rising by 17% in Chenchuri Beel and 14% in Narail.

2.4 O&M Cost Recovery

On the basis of the farm budget analysis, an assessment of the farmers’ capacity to pay the water management charges, which would be sufficient to meet a proportion of the water management O&M costs (primarily khal re-excavation), was also undertaken. In the ‘future with’ project situation, the annual costs required to operated and maintain the water management infrastructure were estimated at Tk.1,576 per ha in Chenchuri Beel and Tk.765 per ha in Narail. On the assumption that farmers will be required to meet 50% of the O&M costs, Tk.788 per ha and Tk.383 per ha were deducted from the net farm returns in Chenchuri Beel and Narail respectively. With regard to the farmers’ capacity to meet these future O&M costs, the additional water management (WM) charges were then expressed as a percentage of the incremental net farm returns (before WM charges) for each type of farm. In the present situation, no WM fees are being charged and it has been assumed that this will continue in the ‘future without project’ situation. The results of this analysis are summarised in Table 6-4.

As a ‘rule of thumb’, additional WM charges as a percentage of incremental net farm returns should not exceed 35%. This guideline permits sufficient incremental net returns (after WM charges) to be generated by the project in order to encourage the full participation of farmers in O&M activities, as well as providing an adequate allowance for the substantial risks and uncertainties associated with crop production. It is evident from the Table G6 that, for all farm categories, the 35% ceiling is never exceeded. This suggests that farmers should have an adequate incentive to meet 50% of the O&M costs.

Table 6-4: Water Management Charges as % of Incremental Net Farm Returns

WM Charges as % of Incremental Net Farm Returns Farm Type Chenchuri Beel Narail Landless/Marginal 19.3% 10.2% Small 18.0% 9.9% Medium 18.0% 10.1% Large 22.0% 12.2% Weighted Average 18.8% 10.2%

Source: Appendix G3 - Farm Budgets 1/ Weighted by % farmers in each farm size category.

2.5 Fisheries Budgets

Financial budgets were prepared for the four types of culture fisheries system being promoted under the project, i.e. (i) pond culture, (ii) pen culture, (iii) paddy-cum-fish culture, and (iv) culture in beels/hoars, for both Chenchuri Beel and Narail sub-projects. For each system, fish yields, material inputs and labour requirements were valued in 2004 prices in order to derive their financial net returns. The financial budgets for the present, ‘future with’, and ‘future without’ project situations are detailed in Annex G. This analysis indicated that all culture fisheries systems are profitable, and that there is a significant improvement in the returns per hectare from pond culture when comparing the present and ‘future with’ project situations. This difference is primarily due to the substantially higher yield levels (3.5 t/ha in FW compared to 1.8 t/ha in the present situation).

With respect to capture fisheries, the net returns per hectare were estimated for three types of capture fishing, i.e. (i) canals and khals, (ii) beels, and (iv) floodplain. By applying


Appendix 3 6

the 2004 fish price and agricultural wage rate to the current yield levels and labour requirements, the net returns from each type of fishing were estimated. The differences in the net returns between the various capture fisheries systems, and between the present, ‘future with’, and ‘future without’ project situations, merely reflect the current and anticipated changes in fish yields (see Annex D – Fisheries).

3 Economic Analysis

3.1 Economic prices

Economic prices of the local goods and services required for the project were obtained by making adjustments to their monetary values. These adjustments included the removal of import duties/sales taxes and the use of economic conversion factors for different project costs. In the economic analysis of the proposed project, economic conversion factors were therefore applied to the costs of all local goods and services, while foreign costs remained unchanged. The standard conversion factor currently used in Bangladesh is 0.9, and the shadow wage rate factor is 0.85 for agricultural labour and 0.84 for construction labour.

For internationally traded goods, economic prices were derived from the World Bank commodity price projections. These world prices were then used to estimate economic farmgate prices by taking into account various intermediate costs (e.g. sea freight, port charges, transport/handling and processing). The economic prices of rice, wheat, sugarcane and fertilisers were all estimated on an import parity basis, while jute and urea were estimated on an export parity basis. The derivation of economic farm gate values for traded commodities is presented in Annex G.

In Bangladesh, the economic pricing of internationally traded commodities, e.g. rice, wheat and jute, has also been regularly undertaken in order derive a standard set of economic conversion factors for use by government officers and consultants in the preparation of feasibility studies and other economic planning work. These conversion factors were recently updated during the preparation of the National Water Management Plan Project (2001). A review of these conversion factors indicated that the economic pricing used in the present study is entirely consistent with other project analyses being undertaken in Bangladesh. An extract of the relevant chapters describing the methodology and derivation of economic prices used in the NWMP analysis is provided in Appendix G5.

In the analysis, the domestic price numeraire was used, and all values are expressed in constant 2004 prices. The Bangladesh Taka (Tk) is the unit of account and an exchange rate of Tk.60 per US$ was applied.

3.2 Economic Benefits

3.2.1 Increased Agricultural Production

The rehabilitation of the FCD infrastructure, coupled with improved water management and better cropping systems (as a consequence of the agricultural extension programme), is expected to lead to an expansion of the cropped area and improved crop yields. The expected changes in cropping patterns in Chenchuri and Narail sub-projects, as well as increases in crop yields, are presented in Annex E (Agriculture). These improvements have already been discussed in Section 6.2.

In the estimation of the agricultural benefits of the sub-projects, economic net returns per hectare were calculated by valuing the physical input and output quantities in terms of their respective economic prices These economic net benefits per hectare were then


Appendix 3 7

multiplied by the crop areas to determine the agricultural net benefit streams in the present, ‘future with’ and ‘future without’ project situations (see Annex G). The differences between the net benefits in these various situations were then calculated in order to determine the economic impact of the changes in cropping patterns and crop yields. It is envisaged that the crop production benefits will be fully achieved 3 years after completion of the rehabilitation works. From year 8 onwards, it was assumed that net agricultural benefits would increase by 1.5% per year due to the further adoption of improved varieties and better cropping practices. In the ‘future without’ project situation, a similar rate of productivity growth is also envisaged.

In Chenchuri Beel, the changes in the cropping patterns and crop yields, as a result of improved water management and agricultural extension programme, are expected to increase annual paddy production by 26,541 tonnes (from 69,263 tonnes to 95,804 tonnes). Notable increases in wheat, potato and vegetable production are also anticipated. As a result of these production increases, net agricultural benefits are therefore estimated to rise by Tk.160 M per annum (from Tk.464 M to Tk.624 M). For each crop, the estimates of the net agricultural benefits in the present, ‘future with’ and ‘future without’ project situations are detailed in Appendix G4.In Narail, a similar impact is anticipated with annual paddy production increasing by 24,086 tonnes (from 93,169 tonnes to 117,255 tonnes) and wheat, potato and vegetable production also rising. Overall, net agricultural benefits are estimated to rise by Tk.193 M per annum (from Tk.632 M to Tk. 825 M).

In addition, significant increases in marketable surpluses are also anticipated. In Chenchuri Beel, the marketable surplus is estimated to rise by 28,534 tonnes per annum (from 68,237 tonnes to 96,771 tonnes) while, in Narail, the marketable surplus is estimated to grow by 30,806 tonnes per annum (from 105,199 tonnes to 136,055 tonnes). In general, the crops that are widely sold in the sub-project areas include jute, sugarcane, vegetables, oilseeds, potatoes and spices. With regard to foodgrains (paddy and wheat), it is estimated that the marketable surpluses in Chenchuri Beel could rise from 25% of total foodgrain production in the present situation to 57% in the ‘future with’ project situation. In Narail, a similar increase is expected, i.e. from 26% to 47% of total foodgrain production.

3.2.2 Reduction in Crop Losses from Flooding

Flooding regularly causes crop damage in the sub-project areas and is most likely to occur during the kharif II season. The main crops affected are the Aus and Aman paddy crops as well as jute and sugarcane. The extent of the crop losses due to flooding depends on the depth and duration of flooding and stage of crop development. To estimate the value of the crop losses, data on the average crop damage over a 20 year period were used. For each type of crop, these data provided the average percentage of the area damaged by flood relevant to the Chenchuri Beel and Narail sub-project areas and so it was possible to estimate the average area of crop damaged each year. For this damaged area, it was estimated that about 50% of the crop would be lost. By applying the gross values of production for the various affected crops, and allowing for a reduction in labour costs, the overall value of net annual crop losses were determined. On the basis of this analysis, the average net value of production lost in Chenchuri Beel was therefore estimated at Tk.6.6 M per annum, while in Narail an economic loss of Tk.8.5 M per annum is being incurred. The detailed calculations are given in Annex G.

In the ‘future with’ project situation, it is anticipated that the improved infrastructure will protect crops from damage and so, in the analysis, it has been assumed that the economic losses currently being sustain will be eliminated. In the ‘future with’ project situation, these crop losses will continue to be incurred and, if there is no improvement in maintenance, the water management infrastructure will could deteriorate further


Appendix 3 8

which will lead to even greater crop losses being experienced. However, the level and extent of these potential crop losses are difficult to predict.

3.2.3 Reduction in Crop Losses from Saline Intrusion

In both Chenchuri Beel and Narail, the rehabilitation of the infrastructure will provide protection from saline intrusion in the southern parts of the sub-project areas. Salinity limits the use of groundwater for irrigation purposes, so the main crops affected are Boro and Aus. The average gross areas experiencing crop losses due to salinity are estimated at 2,000 ha (1,400 ha of cultivated area) in Chenchuri Beel and 4,000 ha (2,970 ha of cultivated area) in Narail. Based on data from BARC, the crop losses resulting from the current levels of salinity in the sub-project areas are estimated at about 20% of total production for the affected crops.

The annual crop losses were then valued by multiplying the affected crop areas by 20% of the gross values of production per hectare for the boro and aus paddy crops. On the basis of this analysis, the average net value of production lost in Chenchuri Beel was therefore estimated at Tk.5.2 M per annum, while in Narail an economic loss of Tk.10.2 M per annum is being incurred. The detailed calculations are given in Annex G. In the ‘future with’ project situation, it is anticipated that crops will be fully protected from saline intrusion and so the current economic losses will not be incurred. However, in the ‘future with’ project situation, it has been assumed that these crop losses will continue to be experienced and may even become more severe.

3.2.4 Reduction in Damage to Houses and Infrastructure

In addition to crop losses, flooding also results in damage to houses, shop and rural infrastructure. Severe floods can cause extensive damage, as well as causing temporary dislocation of economic activity but, in most years, the effects of flooding on property and infrastructure are usually small. No specific data were available on these types of economic losses within the sub-project areas, so the valuation of these losses was based on an average of 25% of annual crop losses. This broadly corresponds with the estimates used in the Flood Action Plan (FAP) studies. In an average flood year, the damage to houses and infrastructure were therefore estimated at Tk.1.7 M per annum in Chenchuri Beel and Tk.2.1 M per annum in Narail.

3.2.5 Increased Culture and Capture Fisheries Production

The impact of the project interventions on fish production in the sub-project areas is described in Annex D – Fisheries. With respect to culture fisheries, the ‘future with’ and ‘future without’ project scenarios show that the areas of pond culture in both Chenchuri Beel and Narail will increase. However, as a consequence of the project’s fisheries support component, 200 hectares of ponds will benefit from improved management and productivity (i.e. fish yields are estimated to increase from 1.8 tonnes per ha to 3.5 tonnes per ha). In addition, it is anticipated that alternative culture fisheries systems, i.e. paddy-cum-fish culture and culture fisheries in beels, will also be taken up by farmers in the sub-project areas, and the fisheries support component will help to accelerate the rate of adoption of these improved fisheries systems. Furthermore, fish pen culture will also be introduced. In the ‘future with’ project situation, culture fisheries production is expected to more than double in both sub-project areas, i.e. to 2,400 tonnes in Chenchuri Beel and to 2,857 tonnes in Narail (Table G10).

With regard to capture fisheries, the future project scenarios shows that the area and production of floodplain fisheries in both Chenchuri Beel and Narail sub-projects will continue to decrease in the floodplain as a consequence of the declining fish stocks. In addition, although the areas of capture fisheries in canals, khals and beels are expected to


Appendix 3 9

remain unchanged, fish productivity is also expected to fall. In the ‘future with’ project situation, the floodplain stocking programme is expected to partially mitigate this decline by maintaining fish productivity but, in the ‘future without’ project scenario, fish yields will continue to fall. Contrasting the ‘future with’ and ‘future without’ project scenarios, it is envisaged that capture fisheries production will be marginally greater as a result of the fisheries support programme. In the estimation of the fisheries benefits, economic net returns per hectare were calculated by valuing the physical input and output quantities in terms of their respective economic prices. The derivation of these net benefits with respect to fish yields, material inputs and labour requirements, as well as input and output prices, are presented in detail in Annex G.

In Chenchuri Beel, the improvements in culture fisheries production, as a result of better water management and the fisheries support programme, are expected to increase the overall net fisheries benefits by Tk.26.3M per annum (from Tk.20.8M to Tk.47.1M). In Narail, a similar impact is anticipated with net fisheries benefits rising by Tk.29.5M per annum (from Tk.25.6M to Tk.55.2M).

With regard to capture fisheries, the annual economic value of fish production in Chenchuri Beel and Narail will decrease by Tk.13.5M and Tk.11.3M respectively. However, the floodplain stocking programme will help to lower the losses expected in the ‘future without’ project situation by approximately Tk.3.07M in Chenchuri Beel and Tk. 4.1M in Narail. For each type of fisheries system, estimates of the net economic benefits in the present, ‘future with’ and ‘future without’ project situations are detailed in Annex G.

3.2.6 Water Supply for Arsenic Mitigation

An economic assessment of a rural water supply project is normally undertaken on the basis of cost effectiveness, either in terms of costs per cubic meter of water supplied or per person/household supplied, as it is assumed that household water demands will have to be met. The provision of clean and potable water to rural households is an important component of the poverty reduction strategy as it is vital to meeting basic human needs. The social and economic benefits of providing universal coverage are substantial, and one of the millennium development goals is to ensure that all households in Bangladesh have access to a potable water supply by 2010. In arsenic affected areas, the provision of universal coverage is therefore urgent.

On the basis of the information provided on capital and recurrent costs of alternative systems of water supply, as well as the number of beneficiaries (see Annex C – Water Supply for Arsenic Mitigation), economic present values of the cost streams for the various systems were determined over a 20 year period and then expressed in Tk per household. The results of this analysis are detailed in Annex G and the findings indicate that the shallow shrouded tubewell (with a hand pump) is the most cost effective water supply system. If this system is not technically or socially appropriate, the next best alternatives (from an economic perspective) include pond sand filter systems, piped water supply (Type B), and improved dugwell (with hand pump).

3.2.8 Livestock

With regard to the impact on livestock development within Chenchuri Beel and Narail sub-project areas, it is believed that increase in crop production in the ‘future with’ project situation will not have a significant impact on livestock production or returns. Although the availability of crop by-products (primarily rice straw) will increase following a change in the cropping pattern and increase in cropping intensity, this will be offset by a decrease in dry season grazing due to the expansion of rabi cropping. However, increasing livestock production for poor, landless households is an important


Appendix 3 10

activity of the project’s livelihoods support component. Under this component, the focus will on the poultry rearing, but the training courses will also include improved management practices for cattle, sheep and goat enterprises. Although the economic benefits of this livestock training programme are relatively small, a number of poor households could significantly improve their incomes through the adoption of improved livestock systems.

3.4 Project Economic Costs

The civil infrastructure, as well as other project components, requires the use of materials, machinery/equipment, skilled and unskilled labour. As the financial values of these costs may not reflect their economic values, it was necessary to separate the cost estimates into these different categories to allow the application of economic conversion factors to all local costs. In the derivation of economic prices, import duties, sales taxes and other levies were first omitted from the financial costs, as these are transfer payments within the economy and so are not real resource costs. The standard conversion factor of 0.9 was then applied to the financial costs of local materials, machinery/equipment and skilled labour. The cost of construction labour was also reduced by applying a shadow wage rate factor of 0.84. The financial costs of foreign goods and services remained the same.

These economic conversion factors were then applied to the financial costs of Chenchuri Beel and Narail in order to determine the economic costs of the sub-projects. The costs of the following project components: (i) IWRM planning and management, (ii) groundwater modeling, and (iii) feasibility studies/IWRM plan preparation, were exclude from the economic analysis as these studies are external to the specific interventions required for the sub-project areas. For Chenchuri Beel, the economic capital costs (including 10% physical contingencies) are estimated at Tk.647.4M. For Narail, the economic capital costs totalled Tk.473.5M.

The annual operation and maintenance (O&M) costs of the water management infrastructure were also included in the economic analysis as these costs will have to be incurred if the present and future benefits of the investment in rehabilitation and upgrading are to be sustained. An adequate budget is therefore required for khal re-excavation, embankment maintenance, and the operation and repair/maintenance of the water management structures. Provision was also made for the maintenance of rural roads upgraded by the project. In total, economic O&M costs were estimated at Tk.25.0M per annum for Chenchuri Beel and Tk.16.4M per annum for Narail. However, in the analysis, these project costs were offset by the annual O&M costs likely to be incurred in the ‘future without’ project scenario costs, which were estimated at Tk.8.4M and Tk.5.5M in Chenchuri Beel and Narail respectively. These costs will be saved if the project is implemented and so were deducted from the cost stream.

In addition, it is anticipated the about 25% of the BWDB staff seconded to the project will be required after project completion in order to continue with operation and maintenance as well as the identification of future works in Chenchuri Beel and Narail. Furthermore, it was assumed that about 50% of the agricultural and fisheries staff will also be required to provide extension services on a regular basis. This will ensure that agricultural and fisheries production continues to grow at about 1.5% per annum in the medium to long term future. In economic terms, annual recurrent costs after project completion amounted to Tk.21.6M for Chenchuri Beel and Tk.16.5M for Narail (including 10% for physical contingencies).


Appendix 3 11

3.5 Economic Viability and Sensitivity Analysis

The results of the economic analysis undertaken for the sub-projects are summarised in Table 6-5, and it can be seen that Chenchuri Beel and Narail are expected to generate EIRRs of 17.0% and 24.1% respectively. The detailed economic costs and benefits over a 30 year period for both sub-projects are shown in Annex G. These results clearly indicate that, on the basis of an opportunity cost of capital of 12%, the proposed works at both Chenchuri Beel and Narail are economically viable. The sub-projects are therefore justified on economic grounds.

Table 6-5: Economic Viability and Sensitivity Analysis

i) Chenchuri Beel

EIRR (%) NPV (Tk. M)

Switching Value (%)

Sensitivity Indicator

Base case 17.0% 140.2 Capital costs increase by 20% 14.4% 78.3 46% 2.21 O&M costs increase by 20% 16.5% 124.7 180% 0.55 Capital and O&M costs by increase 20% 14.0% 63.5 37% 2.74 Project life reduced to 15 years 16.1% 104.3 NPV declines by 25% Incremental benefits reduced by 20% 13.3% 35.5 27% 3.73 Rice price reduced by 20% 12.5% 12.6 23% 4.55 Cropping intensity in FW reduced to 210% 12.7% 20.5 NPV declines by 85% No increase in HYV rice yields in FW 14.4% 67.8 NPV declines by 51% Non-rice crop area – no difference FW v FWO 12.9% 26.4 NPV declines by 81% Delay in Incremental Benefits by 2 years 12.8% 29.5 NPV declines by 79% Reduction in Crop Losses not achieved 15.8% 105.7 NPV declines by 24% Fisheries component not included 14.9% 81.9 NPV declines by 41%

ii) Narail

EIRR (%) NPV Tk. M

Switching Value (%)

Sensitivity Indicator

Base case 24.1% 336.0 Capital costs increase by 20% 20.6% 279.4 118% 0.84 O&M costs increase by 20% 23.8% 324.2 570% 0.18 Capital and O&M costs increase by 20% 20.3% 267.6 98% 1.02 Project life reduced to 15 years 23.7% 301.5 NPV declines by 10% Incremental benefits reduced by 20% 19.5% 200.4 50% 2.02 Rice price reduced by 20% 21.1% 245.1 58% 1.35 Cropping intensity in FW reduced to 210% 18.7% 177.7 NPV declines by 47% No increase in HYV rice yields in FW 20.3% 223.6 NPV declines by 33% Non-rice crop area – no difference FW v FWO 18.0% 156.5 NPV declines by 53% Delay in Incremental Benefits by 2 years 17.6% 190.0 NPV declines by 43% Reduction in Crop Losses not achieved 22.6% 290.2 NPV declines by 14% Fisheries component not included 21.0% 246.8 NPV declines by 27%

Sensitivity analysis was also undertaken for both Chenchuri Beel and Narail to test the economic viability of the proposed project investments to various changes in the cost and benefit streams.

For Chenchuri Beel, the results of this sensitivity analysis show that the economic viability of the sub-project is not sensitive to changes in O&M costs, but fairly sensitive to adverse changes in capital costs. Nevertheless, the sub-project still remains viable with increases in capital costs of up to 46%. The sub-project is more sensitive to changes in incremental benefits and becomes uneconomic if incremental benefits are reduced by


Appendix 3 12

27%. It is also important to note that the project will become marginally economic if: (i) rice price falls by 20%, (ii) cropping intensity in future ‘with project’ is reduced to 210% (iii) there are no differences in the non-rice crop areas between FW and FWO situations, (iv) incremental benefits are delayed by 2 years. Given that an agricultural support programme is included in the project, the probability of not achieving the expected cropping intensity, or not having any impact on the non-rice crop area in comparison with the FWO situation, is therefore very low. There is, however, a chance that incremental benefits are delayed by 2 years, but this is small. Nevertheless, this analysis clearly shows the importance of implementing an agricultural support programme focused on rice intensification and crop diversification.

The analysis also considered the possibility of (i) not achieving the expected reduction in crop losses, and (ii) not including a fisheries component. The EIRRs and NPVs all declined under these three scenarios, but the sub-project still maintained economic viability.

For Narail, the results of this sensitivity analysis show that the economic viability of the sub-project is not very sensitive to adverse changes either capital and O&M costs and still remains viable with increases in capital costs of up to 118%. The sub-project is slightly more sensitive to changes in benefits, but still remains economically viable if incremental benefits are reduced by 51%. It is also interesting to note that the project maintains viability even if: (i) HYV rice yields remained unchanged in FW situation, (ii) rice price falls by 20%, (iii) there are no differences in the non-rice crop areas between FW and FWO situations, (iv) incremental benefits are delayed by 2 years. The analysis also considered the possibility of: (i) not achieving the expected reduction in crop loss, (ii) not including a fisheries component, and (iii) excluding the roads component. The EIRRs and NPVs all declined under these scenarios, but the sub-project still maintained viability.

4.0 Distribution Analysis and Poverty Impact Ratio

A distribution analysis of the sub-project costs and benefits was undertaken for both Chenchuri Beel and Narail in order to determine the poverty impact ratio. The financial gains and losses expected to be generated by the sub-project benefits and costs were distributed between the four main categories of stakeholders, namely farmers, fishers, hired labour and the government. In addition, the differences between the economic and financial present values (PVs) for the various benefits and costs were also distributed between these stakeholders to reflect the effects of the shadow pricing. The detailed analysis is given in Annex G.

With respect to the financial benefits, the analysis indicated that the main beneficiaries of the sub-project interventions will be farmers (i.e. over 85% of financial benefits in both Chenchuri and Narail). Culture fish producers will also obtain significant financial benefits. The capital investment and about 60% of recurrent costs will be incurred by the government. The distribution of the difference between the economic and financial PVs shows that farmers, fishers and, particularly hired labour, will also obtain net benefits from the shadow pricing effect.

The net benefits of the sub-projects being gained by poor households were then estimated by applying the percentage of poor living below the poverty line to the overall net benefits within the different stakeholder categories. The poverty impact ratio (i.e. ratio of the net benefits accruing to the poor to the net benefits of the sub-project, expressed as a percentage) was then calculated. The poverty impact ratios for Chenchuri Beel and Narail were estimated at 58% and 52% respectively, which showed that more than half of the project benefits will be gained by the poor. The project will therefore make an important contribution to poverty reduction in the sub-project areas.


Appendix 4

Appendix 4

Initial Social Assessment Summary


Appendix 4 1

Appendix 4: Initial Social Assessment Summary

POVERTY ANALYSIS

Dimensions of Poverty

Poverty focuses on a number of critical aspects of deprivation, both income and non-income. The present status of people in both Chenchuri and Narail sub-projects with respect to their income and non-income aspects are described in sections 2.5 and 2.6 in Annex H to this Report. Demographic profiles reflect that at least 1 member in each household earn an income for the family, ranging from Tk 28,000 to Tk 145,000, varying according to the land holding categories (large, medium, small, marginal), including even the landless households. Besides this literacy, housing conditions, asset-owning status, expenditure by land holding categories, present vulnerabilities to floods, water-logging, cyclones, storms, drought, erosion of river bank, salinity, diseases etc. reflect a deficient status. Coping capacity of the people is also low. It is all about known vicious circle: low income, low savings, low investment, low growth etc. It is about the quality of growth and being left out of growth. Given these multiple dimensions of poverty, it is rational to look into as many dimensions as possible on the basis of available data from generic sources and from sub-project socio-economic survey.

Pro-poor economic growth, human development, social safety and good and participatory governance practice constitute the total regime of human welfare and growth. Therefore, poverty as analytical construct, should not, in principle, be reduced to quantitative aspects of measurement only. But it has to be mentioned that this project’s nature of provision for FCD benefits will only impact a few poverty variables which have been analysed in this chapter.

Poverty Estimation for Narail District

Estimation of poverty situation of overall Narail district has been attempted at several layers.

As both the sub-projects are located in the same district, it is worth looking at the district poverty situation at the outset. This exercise has been performed on the basis of a few reliable sources as described below.

Poverty Monitoring Survey (Jan 2002)

The latest national Report of the poverty monitoring survey of May 1999 (BBS: Jan 2002) uses statistical region (i.e. almost similar to greater districts) in identifying the poverty from a national perspective. Within the report, the poverty status and relevant figures of income and expenditure (figures for greater district Jessore are indicative of Narail district) are shown in table below.

Table 1: Poverty Status - Greater Jessore

Area Poverty Status (% of poor HHs)

Monthly Avg. Household Income (in Taka)

Monthly Avg. Household Expenditure (in Taka)

Rural 39.78 3906 3788 Urban 35.71 5104 4782

Source: BBS: Jan 2002.


Appendix 4 2

Bangladesh Human Development Report 2000 (Jan 2001)

The Human Development Report for Bangladesh 2000 prepared by BIDS took a different approach in identifying poverty status of each of the districts in Bangladesh. The report considered both the income poverty and human poverty which are shown equal to each other. The headcount index of Narail district falls under the range of 35.1 – 40, which is of the third lowest class among the six classes identified by the report.

Table 2: Poverty Indicators - Narail District

Income Poverty Indicator (IPI) Value Human Poverty Indicator HPI) Value Narail 35.1 – 40 35.1 – 40

Source: Bangladesh Human Development Report 2000 (Jan 2001)

Analysis of Basic Needs Dimensions of Poverty (BBS: Aug 1998)

Poverty has been analysed for headcount, poverty gap and squared poverty gap measures for Narail district. The headcount is given by the percentage of the population living in households with a consumption per capita that is less than the poverty line. Poverty gap, on the other hand, is the mean distance below the poverty line as a proportion of that line. Squared poverty gap index is the mean of the squared proportionate poverty gaps. The first one is easy to interpret in terms of percentage of population under a defined poverty line. The second one measures the poverty depth while the third reflects severity of poverty.

Values of the three measures for Narail district are given below.

Table 3: Poverty Indices - Narail District

Head Count Index Poverty Gap Index Squared Poverty Gap Narail 38.66 0.13 0.06

Source BBS: Aug 1998.

IES (2000) estimation of average household income and expenditure

Household Income and Expenditure Survey (HIES) of BBS in 2003 gives annual income and expenditure for 4 different standard landholding categories (used also for the sub-projects’ survey) and for the landless households. These indicate levels of poverty when income of the absolute poor is Tk 45,000.000 and that of the extreme poor is Tk 38,000 per annum per household of 6 persons. Here, marginal farmers fall below the upper poverty line and landless households fall marginally above the lower poverty line.

Table 4: Income and Expenditure by Landholding Category

Landholding category

Average annual household income (in Taka)

Average annual household expenditure (in Taka)

Large 218796 156000 Medium 125000 91632 Small 67000 63600 Marginal 42000 42000 Landless 39000 34644 Source: Calculated from BBS HIES 2000 (BBS: March 2003).


Appendix 4 3

Present and Future Growth Scenario

It is important to see the present status of growth in relevant sectors of local economy at Narail district as a whole. It will pave the way for looking at the impact of value added by the two projects on growth in general and on various target variables for reducing poverty in particular. Following analysis is presented on the basis of regional data available from BBS sources for Narail. As both the subprojects are located in Narail district, the analysis will help understand the conditions of both the project areas under study.

Figure 1: Comparison of Sectoral Growth - Narail District

Comparison of sectoral GDP of Narail district(1995-96 to 1999-2k are actual and onward are projected upto 2015-16)

-5,000

10,00015,00020,00025,00030,00035,00040,00045,00050,000

1995

-96

1996

-97

1997

-98

1998

-99

1999

-2K

2K-2

001

2001

-02

2002

-03

2003

-04

2004

-05

2005

-06

2006

-07

2007

-08

2008

-09

2009

-10

2010

-11

2011

-12

2012

-13

2013

-14

2014

-15

2015

-16

Year

Ann

ual G

DP

at c

urre

nt p

rices

(in

Mill

ion

Taka

) OverallAgricultureIndustryServices

Source: Calculation based on Provisional Estimates of Gross Regional Products 1995-96 to 1999-2000 (BBS: May 2002).

The GDP figures for first 5 years for Narail district have been obtained from BBS sources and those for the subsequent years have been projected using the trend. It is observed that agriculture and services sector will follow a similar growth path and the rate of growth is modest. It indicates that present interventions in FCD for increasing agricultural production are imperative for maintaining the growth rate. Industry sector has a very low potential for future growth in the district.

Comparison of Sector Growth

Growth has been estimated from survey data sets for Narail and Chenchuri sub-projects with respect to agriculture, fisheries and labour sectors which are supposed to be directly impacted by the project interventions. The percentage increase of benefits in the three sectors are presented in the following bars. Culture fisheries represent the highest percentage of increase (above 24%), agriculture and labour show moderate increase (12% to 15%).


Appendix 4 4

Figure 2: Comparison of Sectoral Growth Increase

% of increase by sub-project

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Net AgriculturalBenefits

Net benefits fromculture fisheries

Total Labourrequirements

Sectors

Perc

ent o

f inc

reas

e

Chenchuri BeelNarail


Poverty Analysis

In the present poverty analysis, income dimension is measured by headcount index.

This is given by the percentage of the population living in households with a per capita consumption that is less than the poverty line. This is a measure of incidence of poverty. In Bangladesh, the present lower poverty line is defined around Tk 38,000 and upper poverty line around Tk 45,000 per annum per household1

Both the Narail and Chenchuri sub-projects show almost similar picture for income and expenditure of households across the compartments and localities (see socio-economic Annex H). Both the average income and expenditure figures in subprojects fall below those estimated in HIES for national average rural households. Following tables show the inferior status of income and expenditure of the project households compared to national averages by type of landholding.

Sub-project Status - Narail

Table 5: Average Annual Household Income

Landholding category Present

condition Future without Project

condition Future with project

condition Large 160128 176898 195749 Medium 96108 105604 117258 Small 46470 50446 55465 Marginal 29061 31108 33736 Landless 21297 24023 26515


1 Estimated on the basis of data given in HIES, BBS, 2000, table-A-1, page-122.


Appendix 4 5

Sub-project Status - Chenchuri beel

Table 6: Average Annual Household Income

Landholding category Present condition

Future without Project condition

Future with project condition

Large 141304 157020 178249 Medium 86340 95482 108186 Small 42506 46368 51784 Marginal 27060 29059 31879 Landless 26170 29519 32581


Compared to the national average annual income and expenditure by owned landholding categories as above for the rural household, the figures stand to be Tk 218796 and Tk 156972 respectively for the large holder. This is 27% and 10% higher than the sub-project level income and expenditure for the large land holding households. Similarly, medium, small and marginal holders’ national average income and expenditure fall below their sub-project counterpart levels.

Change in Income Status

Project interventions will certainly improve the income status of all the categories in both Narail and Chenchuri sub-projects. Survey results have been used and difference between income with project and income without project has been calculated to obtain net % increase.

Table 7: Percent increase in income by landholding category

Landholding Category

Narail Chenchuri beel

Large 10.7 13.5 Medium 11.0 13.3 Small 9.9 11.7 Marginal 8.4 9.7 Landless 10.4 10.4 Source: Calculated from Crop Budget and Baseline Survey 2004.

Chenchuri beel sub-project stands to be relatively better than Narail sub-project in pushing income of the people across the landholding categories with project. This increase in income will improve the human poverty aspects in terms of providing the poor with better access to food, health and education. In fact all households will experience increased income in a range of 8.4% and 13.5%.

This situation has been presented in the following Figure 3.


Appendix 4 6

Figure 3: Comparison of Average Increase in Income

Comprison of average increase in income

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

Large Medium Small Marginal Landless

Landholding catergory

Perc

enta

ge o

f cha

nge

in in

com

e

NarailChenchuri beel


Analysis of Poverty Line

HIES 2000 followed the three steps to obtain Cost of Basic Needs (CBN) to define poverty lines:

(1) Costs of fixed food bundle of 11 items (rice, wheat, pulse, meat, oil, milk, fresh water fish, potato, other vegetables, sugar and fruits) have been estimated

(2) Costs on two non-food items have been estimated

(3) Costs for two poverty lines have been estimated, one for 2112 Kcal and the other for 1805 Kcal

The lines have been derived for 14 geographic areas to represent regional differences. Accordingly, upper and lower poverty lines have been taken up for rural Khulna-Jessore-Kushtia area to be used for analyzing poverty line for Narail and Chenchuri sub-projects.

The CBN upper poverty line of the project area is defined to be Tk 624.00 per person per month and the lower line to be Tk 527.00. So annual value per household of 6 members comes to be Tk 45,000.00 for upper line and Tk 38,000.00 for lower line. These values lines have been fitted against the average annual income bars for present, without project and with project situations for both Narail and Chenchuri subprojects. The situations can be observed as follows.


Appendix 4 7

Figure 4: Poverty Line under Various Conditions - Narail Sub-Project

Narail

020000

400006000080000

100000

120000140000160000

180000200000



Avg

. Ann

ual H

H In

com

e (T

aka)

Present

FWOP

FWP

Low er poverty line(Tk. 38,000/ annum)

Upper poverty line(Tk. 45,000/ annum)

Source: Calculated from Crop Budget and Baseline Survey 2004. Poverty lines are estimated from HIES 2000.

Figure 5: Poverty Line under Various Conditions – Chenchuri Sub-Project

Chenchuri beel

0

20000

40000

60000

80000

100000120000

140000

160000

180000

200000



Avg

. Ann

ual H

H in

com

e (in

Tak

a)

Present

FWOP

FWP

Low er poverty line(Tk. 38,000/ annum)

Upper poverty line(Tk. 45,000/ annum)

Source: Calculated from Crop Budget and Baseline Survey 2004. Poverty lines are estimated from HIES 2000.

Above analyses show that large and medium farmers are invariably above poverty lines irrespective of whether project interventions are made or not. But their income status will decline at a regular rate across the categories if interventions are not made. But status of the small farmers will rise well above upper poverty line in both the sub-projects. But marginal landowners and the landless households will, however, remain under the lower poverty line, but will move up closer to lower line in both the sub-projects.

Here is an implication strongly for supporting the two categories with safety nets and other facilities and mainstreaming them in national development programs.


Appendix 5

Appendix 5

Draft Environmental Management Plan


Appendix 5 i

Table of Contents

Acronyms and Abbreviations 1 Summary of Impacts .................................................................................................... 1 2 Description of Proposed Mitigation Measures .............................................................. 2

2.1 General Environmental Guidelines during Pre-construction Stage ................... 2 Compensation.............................................................................................................. 2 Mitigation .................................................................................................................... 2 Enhancement ............................................................................................................... 3

2.2 General Environmental Guidelines during Construction................................... 3 2.3 General Environmental Guidelines during Follow-on Development Support .. 7 2.4 General Environmental Guidelines during O&M.............................................. 7

3 Description of Monitoring Programmes and Measures................................................. 9 4 Public Consultation Process ....................................................................................... 11 5 Responsible Authorities for Implementation of Mitigation Measures ......................... 15 6 Responsibilities for Reporting and Review.................................................................. 16

6.1 Approvals......................................................................................................... 16 6.2 Audits............................................................................................................... 16 6.3 Reporting.......................................................................................................... 16

7 Work Plan .................................................................................................................. 17 8 Environmental Responsible Procurement Plan........................................................... 18 9 Detailed Cost Estimate ............................................................................................... 19 10 Mechanisms for Feedback and Adjustment ................................................................ 20

10.1 Design .............................................................................................................. 20 10.2 Construction..................................................................................................... 20 10.3 Operation & Maintenance................................................................................ 20

List of Tables Table 1: Project Impacts on Important Environmental Components (IECS) ...................... 1 Table 2: Summary of Mitigation and Enhancement Measures ............................................. 5 Table 3: Summary of Environmental Monitoring Requirements........................................ 10 Table 4: Responsibilities of Different Organisations in Environment Management........... 15 Table 5: Project Investment in Environmental and Social Measures (2004 prices) ............. 19

List of Figures

Figure 1: EMP Procedures during Construction ................................................................ 20


Appendix 5 ii

Acronyms and Abbreviations BWDB Bangladesh Water Development Board DAE Department of Agricultural Extension DOE Department of Environment DOF Department of Fisheries DPHE Department of Health Engineering DTW Deep Tube Well EIA Environmental Impact Assessment EMP Environmental Management Plan EMU Environmental Management Unit ERP Environmental Responsible Procurement FCD/I Flood Control, Drainage and Irrigation FD Forestry Department FGD Focused Group Discussion GOB Government of Bangladesh GPP Guidelines for People's Participation IEC Important Environmental Components IPM Integrated Pest Management IWRM Integrated Water Resources Management JMC Joint Management Committee LLP Low Lift Pump LGI Local Government Institution MOA Ministry of Agriculture MOEF Ministry of Environment and Forest MOWR Ministry of Water Resources NGO Non-Governmental Organisation O&M Operation and Maintenance PAP Project Affected Person PIU Project Implementation Unit PRRA Participatory Rapid Rural Appraisal PSC Project Steering Committee RSDP Resettlement and Social Development Plan SEIA Summary Environmental Impact Assessment STW Shallow Tube Well


Appendix 5 1

1 Summary of Impacts The major adverse environmental and social impacts to be mitigated are resettlement due to land requirements for constructing new embankments and excavation of new khals, and the expected decline in capture fisheries. Besides these major adverse impacts a range of adverse impacts during construction has to be avoided and mitigated. Table 1 provides an overview of the adverse impacts identified.

Table 1: Project Impacts on Important Environmental Components (IECS)

PROJECT PHASE Design Implementation O&M

Important Environmental Components

Chenchuri Beel



Narail

Air 0 0 -1 -1 0 0 Soils 0 0 -1 -1 0 0 Physiography 0 0 0 0 0 0 River hydraulics 0 0 -2 -2 0 0 Flooding 0 0 0 0 +6 +6 Drainage 0 0 0 0 +8 +8 Irrigation 0 0 -2 -1 +8 +8 Erosion & Siltation 0 0 -1 -1 +2 +2 Open water areas wetlands 0 0 -1 -1 -1 -1 Groundwater 0 0 0 0 0 0


Water Pollution 0 0 -2 -2 0 0 Aquatic Ecosystem 0 0 -1 -1 0 0 Terrestrial Ecosystem -1 -1 -1 -1 0 0


Endangered Species 0 0 -1 1 0 0 Industry 0 0 -1 -1 +4 +4 Infrastructure Facilities 0 0 -1 -1 +5 +5 Navigation 0 0 -2 -2 0 0 Road transport 0 0 -1 -1 +5 +5 Land use -2 -2 -2 -2 -2 -2 Power 0 0 0 0 0 0 Agricultural land -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 Agricultural Productivity -1 -1 -1 -1 +7 +7 Culture Fisheries 0 0 0 0 +4 +4 Capture fisheries 0 0 -1 -1 -3 -3 Water Management 0 0 -1 -1 +7 +8


Water Supply/Sanitation 0 0 0 0 +7 +7 Equity 0 0 +1 +1 +2 +2 Migration 0 0 +3 +3 +7 +7 Status of Women 0 0 +1 +1 +2 +2 Employment and Economic Activities

0 0 +5 +5 +6 +6

Poverty 0 0 +1 +1 +3 +3 Health 0 0 0 0 +7 +7


Education 0 0 0 0 +2 +2 Note: The Impact has been scored on a 1 to 10 scale. No impact is “0”, negative impacts from –1 to –10 and positive impacts from +1 to +10


Appendix 5 2

2 Description of Proposed Mitigation Measures

2.1 General Environmental Guidelines during Pre-construction Stage

Compensation

a) Acquisition of land

Some agricultural land will be required for the re-sectioning of existing and construction of new embankments and other works. The executing agency for the project will determine the registered land ownership and value of the land to be affected as part of the pre-construction phase. Values will be based on land capability for agriculture, location, recent land transactions and other parameters normally used for calculating land values. This component has been covered and detailed out under the resettlement program.

b) Crop loss

Crops may be damaged or people prevented in growing crops in smaller areas in the vicinity of the project works. There will be compensation for such damages and loss to be covered in the resettlement plan.

c) Homestead loss

Homestead loss will include loss of trees (including fruit trees), latrines and ponds, etc., in the area of the construction. These losses will be compensated and conditions will be returned to the fullest extent possible to those existing prior to construction. These activities and costs would be included in the contract work and the resettlement plan where relevant.

d) Income loss

During the implementation phase some people may be hindered in obtaining their regular income. This could be fishermen not being able to use their normal fishing ground at or in the vicinity of construction works. Further, agricultural workers may be devoid of their job opportunity in areas acquired for construction. These people will be compensated for their loss of income.

Mitigation

a) Resettlement

People that unavoidably have to be resettled for the construction of the proposed works should be compensated adequately and assisted in their resettlement to achieve at least the same standard of living as before. These resettlement activities and costs involved have been included in the resettlement plan.

b) Local Employment

The contractor shall, to the maximum possible extent, employ local labor for the works;

Local female labor should comprise at least 25% of the workforce for earthwork

No children under the age of 14 should be employed for heavy earthwork, in compliance with the labor code of Bangladesh; and

During the O&M phase of the project, local labor should be provided with direct contracting opportunities through their own landless groups.

These conditions should be incorporated in the project Design as part of the tendering procedure.


Appendix 5 3

c) Navigation Locks and Boat Passes

Where required, navigation locks or boat passes should be included in the planning and design to mitigate any adverse effects the Project may have on navigation.

d) Fish Friendly Structure Operation

Where required, structures should be designed and operated in a fish friendly manner, allowing the natural migration of fish, fry and fingerlings between the rivers and the flood plains inside the Subproject areas.

e) Road Shifting

In some places the road communication system could be disrupted due to project activities. These roads are critical, particularly in the dry season. In addition, some village roads may require re-routing. If and when required road shifting should be included in the Project Design.

f) Arsenic Mitigation

The arsenic mitigation component will provide safe water supply to the worst affected Upazila in the Project area where mitigation measures are not already taking place.

Enhancement

a) Plantation of Trees and Grass

The objective of this enhancement component plan is to achieve long-term sustainability and to reduce the O&M cost of embankments and bank protection structures through non-structural measures designed to protect against erosion. The non-structural measures will include:

• Plantation of trees, shrubs and grasses;

• Protection and care of trees;

The planted saplings need to be protected for the first 2-3 years until they are established. These trees will be protected with bamboo baskets. Management of the planted saplings in respect of transplantation, watering, etc. shall have to be carried out according to the instructions of the Forest Department. Plantation of trees will be incorporated into the Project design.

b) Resettlement

The Project includes a resettlement component for the people that have to be resettled, as land is required for the construction of new embankments and structures. In total around 255 households and other physical units would be affected and have to be covered by the resettlement plan. The activities and costs would be included in the Resettlement Plan separate from the EMP. A summary Resettlement Framework and Resettlement Plan for both subprojects is included as Appendix 2.

2.2 General Environmental Guidelines during Construction

Contractor’s Responsibilities with Respect to the Environment

The contractor’s environmental responsibilities would be prescribed in the Tender Documents and later on award in the Contract and they would include the need to adhere to environmental clauses in the Contract and the guidelines provided. In the detailed design the contractor shall take due considerations to the following:

a) General


Appendix 5 4

The Contractor shall take all reasonable steps to protect the environment and to prevent environmental damage and public nuisance resulting from construction activities.

Contractor shall comply with all statutory requirements, environmental regulations and environmental quality standards, as stated in the Environmental Conservation Rules (ECR), 1997 of DOE; and Bangladesh environmental guidelines relevant to the project.

Contractor shall bear all costs associated with environmental pollution avoidance and environmental mitigation, including any clean-up operations if necessary.

b) Pollution from Wastes

Maintain all construction sites in a clean and safe condition and provide and maintain appropriate facilities for temporary storage of all wastes before transportation and disposal.

Organize disposal of all wastes generated during construction in an environmentally acceptable manner. This shall include consideration of the nature and location of disposal sites, so as to cause least environmental impact.

Take all precautionary measures when handling and storing fuels and lubricants, to avoid causing environmental pollution. This is to include establishment of contingency plans for clean up in the event of spillage.

c) Protection of Human Health

Provision of adequate sanitation facilities on all construction sites, contractor's office(s) etc., if and when established.

Disposal from all sanitary systems should be undertaken to avoid causing environmental pollution. Wastewater should be routed through suitable designed septic tanks and soak well, without contaminating either ground or surface water or causing a health risk.

Provision of an adequate supply of water for drinking and washing purposes for all site personnel, including all workers, as appropriate. Drinking water quality should comply with GoB, DoE Environmental Quality Standards (ECR, DOE, 1997) and WHO guideline values.

d) Noise

Avoid any unnecessary noise for disturbance during construction.

Maintenance of all vehicles and mechanics to a high standard, in accordance with manufacturer’s maintenance procedures.

Careful sitting of noise generating activities to avoid unnecessary noise disturbance to local residents, in accordance with ECR guidelines.

e) Air Quality and Dust

Minimization of dust nuisance by regular watering of material stockpiles, access roads, bare soil, sand and other areas, as appropriate and as determined by weather conditions.

f) Disruption to Road Transport and Navigation

Minimization of disruption to road and river traffic, in consultation with local authorities and representatives.

A summary of the specific mitigation and enhancement measures during the design and construction phase related to the construction phase and the responsibility of the Contractor is presented in Table 2.


Appendix 5 5

Table 2: Summary of Mitigation and Enhancement Measures




Support


Air pollution - Incorporate people’s suggestions

- Spray water on dry surfaces creating dust problems

- Regulate vehicle emission

- Awareness creation against air pollution like brickfield and pesticides spray

- Monitor vehicle, ship and brickfield emission

Soil quality degradation - Consider strategies to avoid soil quality degradation

- Removing top soil for construction, turfing and plantation after civil works

- Training on soil and fertilizer management

- Use organic manures - Occasional flushing

through regulators

- Monitoring of soil quality

- Continuation of soil and fertilizer management training by DEA

Drainage and irrigation

- Establishing salinity monitoring and information sharing system in the region

- Implementation of civil works during dry season with temporary irrigation water provision

- Farmer training on efficient water management

- Training of effective water abstraction with salinity monitoring

- Operation of salinity monitoring and information networking system

River erosion and siltation

- Careful alignment of river bank protection works

- Limit excavation and fill

- Monitoring of civil works for riverbank protection

- Worksite soil erosion management

- Training of bank protection and vegetation growing

- Monitoring of morphological changes

- Provision of effective O&M for erosion/ siltation like clearing and excavated of canals side and bed slope

Degradation of open water areas and wetlands due to construction

- Survey and design for construction works

- Effective disposal of construction materials and waste management and maintenance of open water bodies

- Training on excavation and maintenance of khals and beels

- Monitoring of changes in wetland and open water areas

Groundwater depletion and quality degradation

- Inventorying of groundwater use and depletion status

- Careful quality control in installing deep tubewells as arsenic mitigation measures

- Training on local coordination on groundwater exploitation

- Groundwater quantity and quality monitoring

- Groundwater monitoring

- Local coordination on new groundwater exploitation

Water Pollution due to construction

- Avoid impediments to natural drainage and soil erosion.

- Same as above - Maintenance of

construction sites in a clean condition

- Training on water pollution control

- Monitoring of water quality

Water pollution due to increased use of agrochemicals

- Suggest optimal application rate and IPM practice

- Practice IPM (integrated pest management) to reduce pesticides use

- Training on judicious use of agrochemicals and implementation of IPM

- Monitoring of fertilizer and pesticides use

Aquatic Ecosystem (Restricted access or blockade of fish migration)

- Careful site selection of control structures

- Design of fish-friendly structures

- Stakeholder consultation and agreement

- Maintenance of water courses at the construction site

- Proper maintenance of fish passes and regulators

- Training on gate operational practices, CBF management

- Training on coordinated WMO management

- Provision of culture fishery opportunities to fisher folks

- Stocking of natural water bodies

- Monitoring/auditing of effective WMO management including coordinated gate operation, fisheries management, habitat protection etc.

Terrestrial ecosystem (disruption to flora and fauna)

- Careful alignment of roads and embankments

- Careful site selection avoiding unnecessary disruption of existing vegetation

- Fencing of work sites to protect

- Training on conservation of biodiversity, protection of wildlife and habitat restoration

- Tree plantation after completion of construction works

- Conserve local biota


Appendix 5 6




Support


flora/fauna outside Land acquisition and resettlement

- Minimize need for land acquisition

- Identification of at-risk group and incorporation of their interests and protection

- Preparation and implementation of compensation package

- Ensuring all compensation is provided prior to contract signing as per BWDB’s

- Provision of specific support services to ensure equal or higher level of income for APs

- Relocation of displaced household to new sites

- Periodical monitoring and necessary support services

Disruption of Road Traffic - Minimise need for affecting existing roads

- Provide alternative access roads

- Practice caution in use of vehicles

- Motivational approach to people

- Monitoring road trafficking situation

Boat transport (blockade of boat passage)

- Stakeholder consultation and agreement on site selection and gate operation

- Design of navigation lock and boat pass

- Provision of temporary boat pass

- Training on gate operational practices

- Training on coordinated facility management

- Provision of livelihood enhancement support for boat operators

- Monitoring/auditing of effective coordinated gate operation

Disturbance to water supply - Minimize impediments to water supply

- Establish adequate alternative water supply

- Training in maintenance of water treatment and supply facilities

- Monitoring of groundwater quantity and quality

- Maintenance Disruption of agricultural activities

- Minimize need for use of agricultural land during construction

- Minimize need to disrupt irrigation

- Reinstate land after construction

- Provide adequate land rent and compensation

- Restore irrigation facilities


- Provision of agriculture development support services

- Provide agricultural extension training

- Monitoring of agricultural production

- Enhancement/ remediation if required

Disputes on water management practices

- Appropriate site selection with minimal conflicts

- WMO institutional development with stakeholder representation

- Agreeing on operational practices of facilities

- Avoid disruption of irrigation channels and other water management facilities


- Sufficient O&M training to implement agreed operational practices

- Monitoring/auditing of effective coordinated facility operation

- Monitoring irrigation efficiency

- Maintenance/ Remediation

Transmission of diseases among workers

- Providing health inspection and vaccination

- Organizing proper collection of wastes

- Providing adequate sanitary facilities to personnel and workers

Safety of workers - Adopt appropriate safety measures

- Provide first aid services

- Make workers aware of risks and how to avoid these


Appendix 5 7

2.3 General Environmental Guidelines during Follow-on Development Support

Agricultural Extension Environmental Mitigation Measures

As part of the Agricultural Extension support activities farmers will be trained in soil and fertilizer management. The training will aim at introducing environment friendly, whole farm approach providing a basis for efficient and profitable production that is economically viable and environmentally responsible. Relevant elements in the approach would be combinations of crop rotation, use of organic residues, fertilizers and crop protection chemicals, integration of livestock, cultivation choice, variety selection, practice of integrated pest management and improved energy efficiency.

The training in soil and fertilizer management will be combined with the introduction of efficient use of water for irrigation in combination with alternating cropping. Efficient methods for water abstraction will be promoted.

Fisheries Development Environmental Mitigation Measures

The Fisheries Development support activities will include a range of environmental mitigation measures directed towards minimizing the effects of the Project on capture fisheries. The mitigation measures towards environment and fish friendly water management will identify optimal gate operation strategies allowing the seasonal and natural migration of fish from the rivers to the flood plains and visa versa to the largest extent possible. Building awareness of the importance of environment, community based fishery management and fish friendly water management and gate operation will be a central element, along with specific training of water managers, WMOs and gate operators.

Realizing there will be unavoidable negative impacts of the project on capture fisheries, the environment and fish friendly water management and gate operation will be supplemented by fish stocking of natural water bodies. This would be further complemented by the provision of culture fishery opportunities to the fisher folks negatively affected by a reduction in capture fisheries.

Arsenic Mitigation Measures

The provision of arsenic safe water supply will in itself have a highly positive impact on improving the health conditions for affected people. Where safe water is provided from deep tubewells, it is necessary to take precautions against contamination from vertical intrusion of water. Therefore, the annular space of bore holes of the deep tubewells are required to be sealed at the level of impermeable strata to avoid percolation of arsenic contaminated water. The drilling design shall include this measure and strict quality control to ensure the design is followed, is necessary during implementation. To sustain the positive impact the arsenic mitigation efforts will be supplemented by training in maintenance of safe water treatment and supply installations. Further, a monitoring system for groundwater and water supply will be implemented.

2.4 General Environmental Guidelines during O&M

During the O&M phase a range of monitoring and mitigation measures will be undertaken to safeguard the environment and secure no unanticipated negative impacts would occur. Should negative impacts be identified, relevant mitigation measures have to be implemented accordingly. The monitoring activities are described in detail in the following Section 3. In addition to the monitoring activities specific mitigation measures are identified for the O&M phase


Appendix 5 8

The Agricultural Extension services including the soil and fertilizer management issues will be continued as part of the regular services provided by Department of Agricultural Extension.

Provision of effective O&M for safeguarding against negative impacts of erosion and siltation would be continued as part of the maintenance of the rehabilitated and upgraded FCD/I schemes under the responsibility of the PMO/SMOs in close cooperation with WMOs.

Planning for and coordination and management of groundwater exploitation would be an ongoing activity during the O&M phase under the responsibility of the PMO/SMOs in close cooperation with the WMOs.


Appendix 5 9

3 Description of Monitoring Programmes and Measures

The Bangladesh Water development Board will build on their existing staff when establishing the Project Management Office (PMO). The positions of Environmentalist, Water Supply Specialist and Socio-Economist in the Monitoring & Evaluation Division (MED) will be filled hiring new staff with the necessary qualifications. The environmentalists will be responsible for implementing the monitoring of the environmental aspects of the Project and the subsequent reporting and will be assisted by the PMO during construction.

The PMO/MED will conduct regular monitoring of the site and environs during the construction period. This will include both pre-arranged and unscheduled audits and spot checks. PMO/MED staff will also conduct post-construction evaluations, as necessary, to assess the effectiveness of mitigation measures and the overall effect of the project on the environment.

Water: Monitor groundwater levels and quality at selected sites, to establish an updated baseline sufficient to assess potential for ground water pollution due to construction activities and design of pollution avoidance procedures. Sampling regime to be determined, analysing for the at least the following determinants: pH, As, Fe, Mn, SO4, N03, Fl, Mg, Cd, Al, salinity in addition to water level in the selected tubewells.

Control of drainage from construction sites to avoid environmental deterioration.

Agriculture: Agricultural land and crops: observations of damage to property and loss of agricultural land and crops due to project associated activities

Soil quality: identification of areas where top soil should be removed, stored and reinstated after construction works.

Air quality: ambient air quality with respect to black smoke from vehicles and construction equipment;

Dust loads in the air and on vegetation: observations with respect to dust generation and consideration of dust control measures including grass-turfing and regular watering;

Noise pollution; checking of the timing of noisy operations, such as plying vehicles, especially if at night;

Waste (solid & liquid) disposal systems; inspection of waste collection methods, location of waste dumps and associated risk with respect to spread of disease and surface and groundwater contamination;

Health and safety: periodic check of health and safety measures for the workers and other project personnel and provision of a first aid medical service;

Fisheries: monitoring of impact on catches from construction sites compared to similar, non-disturbed areas.

Wildlife: monitoring potential adverse effects on wildlife.

Detailing of the monitoring programme with respect to monitoring sites and positions, frequencies, parameters etc. will be prepared during the project design period, as this detailing will depend on the final design of each intervention. Table 3 provides an overview of the monitoring requirements.


Appendix 5 10

Table 3: Summary of Environmental Monitoring Requirements

Mitigation Measure

Parameters to be monitored

Location Measurements Frequency Responsibility

Careful planning and design

Embankment alignments, fish friendly structures etc.

Sub-projects Audits of plans and designs

Monthly during planning and design

PIU/Consultant

Resettlement People's satisfaction Sub-projects Consultations and surveys

Ongoing during implementation

PIU/RAC

Pre-construction Phase

Water Resources Assessment

Groundwater Quality/quantity

Project Area Drilling/sampling/survey/testing

As per detailed assessment plan

PIU/Consultant

Construction Phase

EAP/ Compensation

Parameters in compliance with EAP. People's satisfaction

Construction sites and immediate surroundings

Water quality testing etc. Consultations and surveys

Once per month each construction site. Ongoing during construction

E&M unit/ Consultant PIU/WMA

Community based fisheries development

Capture fish production. Fish biodiversity

Sub-projects Fish landings Fish species catch

Seasonal E&M Unit/DOF

Afforestation and plantation

Forestry and plant cover

Sub-project embankment

Forest and plant density & coverage

Yearly E&M unit/FD

Integrated pest control and optimal use of fertilisers

Pesticide and fertiliser concentrations

Selected water bodies

Water quality sampling & testing

Seasonal E&M unit/ Consultant

Operation and Maintenance

Groundwater monitoring

Ground water level and quality

Sub-project Water quality sampling & testing (As etc)

Seasonal E&M Unit/ Consultant


Appendix 5 11

4 Public Consultation Process

It is envisaged that much of the area within the confines of each major FCD system infrastructure will be developed as individual component schemes, wholly managed by beneficiaries through Water Management Groups formed as per the Guidelines for Participatory Water Management. In the case of Narail and Chenchuri systems, these component schemes have already been defined, based on their internal hydrologic and hydraulic independence from the main works and/or each other. Internal works have been identified in outline, based on the PRRAs carried out during project preparation. Likewise the need for agricultural, fisheries and livelihood support has also been identified.

Based on the feasibility level plans prepared under the PPTA, the WMGs will collaborate in the preparation of the Final EMP and provide feedback of the functioning of the mitigation, compensation and enhancement measures. They will also work with the agricultural extension and fisheries services to define the extent, location and scope of any of these interventions within their area. An implementation plan for each of these interventions will be prepared by the appropriate agency in close cooperation with the WMA in order to ensure a transparent and results-oriented implementation of these schemes.

A nine stage generic implementation procedure involving local stakeholders at each stage is described below1, which for the EMP for the schemes in Narail and Chenchuri would begin at the prioritization stage, since the schemes have already been identified during project preparation.

Stage 1 Scheme Identification:

Based on the FCD/I scheme inventory, candidate schemes will be identified with initial PRRAs within the FCD/I scheme area, together with local line agency supplementary information, an outline inventory of needed works will be prepared incorporating stakeholder interests. The physical extent of each scheme will be defined in order to assess the extent of the beneficiaries within the scheme. The physical extent will form the boundaries for the implementation of the EMP. For inclusion as candidate schemes, the net benefit area would not exceed 14,000 ha. Main works required should comprise rehabilitation and improvement, with no major new works. The scheme would not require technically complex analysis such as drainage improvement of outer river channels and erosion control of dynamic rivers.

Stage 2 Scheme Assessment

The assessment of each scheme will provide confirmation, or otherwise, of its suitability for inclusion and will provide necessary information to enable a subsequent prioritization of the included schemes. This will require additional, more targeted PRRAs, socio-economic surveys and environmental examinations. Of particular importance will be the willingness and ability of the stakeholders to form WMOs and make commitments with respect participation in scheme implementation, operation and maintenance. Other criteria includes (i) infrastructure cost should not exceed $400/ha with pre-feasibility economic internal rate of return (EIRR) of more than 12%; (ii) poverty headcount ratio in the scheme area is above the national average; (iii) no major social or environmental impacts; and (iv) no major social and land related issues. A finalized shortlist of schemes with identified local environmental issues will result from this activity.

1 Based on the PSM for the WMIP Project Preparation Study Volume 2, Annex 1


Appendix 5 12

Stage 3 Prioritization and IWMP Preparation

Using the results of the surveys and investigations carried out under stage 2 above, schemes will be prioritized for feasibility assessment and IWMP preparation. The criteria to be used for prioritization will be kept simple and be based on the following:

• Beneficiaries of the proposed scheme show willingness and basic ability to form water management groups according to the needs;

• Beneficiaries will undertake to contribute to the cost of the capital works according to an agreed percentage (presently, LGED-executed works under the Small-scale Water Resources Development Sector Project require the beneficiaries to deposit funds equivalent to 3% of the cost of the earthworks and 1.5% of the cost of the structures);

• Priority will be given to those schemes that can be implemented relatively quickly with limited physical infrastructure requirements;

• Priority will be given to those areas where significant levels of poverty are evident and where opportunities exist for targeted pro-poor interventions under the project;

• Priority will be given to those schemes having a high potential for implementation of pro-poor fisheries support initiatives, subject to stakeholder willingness to comply with appropriate cost-sharing and/or operation and maintenance commitments;

• Sufficient evidence is available that the scheme will be economically viable and produce a higher economic rate of return.

On the basis of the ranking and in consideration of the manageability of the number of schemes in each SMO, feasibility studies and IWMP preparation will be undertaken by PMO and the consultants in collaboration with SMO, following the PPTA. An ad-hoc JMC will also be formed with participation of SMO, line agencies and union representatives to overview the process. The specific activities will include (i) data collection on physical, socio-economic, and institutional setting; (b) problem analysis on agriculture, fisheries, infrastructure, and water; (c) inventory of existing and planned programs; (d) participatory rural appraisal; (e) identification of priority investment requirements; and (f) preparation of IWMP for the concerned scheme. At the same time, feasibility study of the identified scheme will be undertaken, along with the associated assessment of safeguards issues including IEE/EIA, resettlement plan, and social development plan. The IWMP and feasibility study report including safeguards assessment should be endorsed by ad-hoc JMC, technical evaluation sub-committee of the central steering committee, and then by ADB. These activities are undertaken in one batch, covering all identified schemes at one time during the first two years of the project implementation period.

As to environmental assessment, a set of IEEs will be prepared for the selected schemes by the PMO/MED with the assistance of the consultants and in close consultation with MoE following GoB and ADB Guidelines. Based on the IEEs it will be decided if the individual scheme implementation will be subject to a full EIA, following GoB and ADB Guidelines. Full EIAs for the concerned schemes will be prepared by the PMO/MED with the assistance of consultants for subsequent approval by MoE and ADB.

Stage 4 Social Mobilisation

The aim of the social mobilization (or rural facilitation) is to establish appropriate WMOs within the scheme area. These groups will be formed from local beneficiaries with a wide but representative range of social and economic classes. Special


Appendix 5 13

encouragement will be given to women to participate directly in these groups and it will be a prerequisite that one-third of the membership shall be female.

Strengthening the WMOs to enable them to carry out water management functions in an environmentally sustainable way shall be the responsibility of BWDB community organisers and/or MED staff, staff of other departments or local level NGOs if suitable and capable organisations can be found and trained where necessary.

Stage 5 Planning & Design

In parallel to stage 4 activities, preparation of SIPs for the concerned subunits will take place by SMO (or LGED in case of independent subunits less than 1,000ha) with the WMOs and the TA Consultants and will closely involve DAE and DoF in the definition of supplementary service delivery of these functions. The SIP will define the extent of the physical works to be executed and will include the scope, nature, targets and expected outputs of the agriculture, fisheries and livelihood support components linked to the physical works. The service delivery implementation plan will be used by the WMG to monitor the progress of the non-structural components of the plan during project implementation.

On approval of the plan by the WMO, detailed design will be undertaken by the TA consultants and will be subject to technical approval by the Design Office of BWDB (or LGED, as appropriate). Based on the detailed design the EIA and EMP (for the concerned subunits) will be updated and finalised.

Stage 6 Implementation

The infrastructure components of the schemes will be constructed after a suitable tender process and SMO (or LGED for independent subunits less than 1,000ha) will be responsible for supervision and quality control of the works. The TA consultants will support PMO to undertake monitoring and auditing, whereas general supervision will be done by SMO. The WMOs will have the role of observing the construction works and will report shortcomings to BWDB/MED on environmental issues for action to be taken. The WMOs will work closely with DAE and DoF in following the prepared SIP for these support components.

Stage 7 Management Plan

For infrastructures of which command area is less than 2,500ha (most will be below 1000 ha.) a management plan will be drawn up between the WMOs and BWDB (or LGED, as appropriate) which will set out the modalities for operation of the infrastructure and the delivery of agricultural, fisheries and livelihood support components. The EMP will form part of the overall management plan. The same will apply to infrastructure of which command area is greater than 2,500ha, but for these the responsibility will lay with the Joint Management Committee. The management plans will be based on the original plan drawn up under stage 5 above. Clearly defined rules and responsibilities will be established with transparent environmental indicators. Future environmental monitoring will be included in the plan with responsibilities of the various stakeholders clearly set out.

Stage 8 Operation & Maintenance

The scheme will be operated as per the management plan including the EMP devised under stage 7 on an annual basis. To whatever extent is meaningful, such plans will reflect the longer requirements that infrastructure covering less than 2,500ha will eventually be operated and maintained by LGIs and/or community groups while larger infrastructure will be the responsibility of Joint Management Committee. An annual inventory of necessary maintenance and support service delivery will be made.


Appendix 5 14

Stage 9 Ex-post Monitoring

Scheme impacts in terms of the sustainability of the infrastructure, the socio-economy of the users and any active or passive environmental impacts will be monitored over the long term and the resulting data fed into national monitoring services. Responsibility for monitoring will rest with the concerned SMO, Department of Cooperatives, and the members of the Water Management Organisations. In this regard, it is interesting to note that legal frameworks for farmer managed irrigation in the Indian states of Andra Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh, require each water user organisation to undertake an annual socio-economic audit of their activities. This approach is worth considering piloting here, extending the audit to also include the environment.


Appendix 5 15

5 Responsible Authorities for Implementation of Mitigation Measures

The responsibilities for undertaking specific required activities at design, construction and operation stages are listed in the following Table 4.

Table 4: Responsibilities of Different Organisations in Environment Management

Project Stage Responsible Organization Responsibilities Overall DOE/ DOE Khulna Division Review subproject EIA and provide environmental clearance for the

subproject; Review environmental monitoring report; Monitor and supervise compliance with legal requirements during subproject implementation and O&M stages

BWDB Planning and O&M Departments (coordinated by PCO)

Guidance for environmental planning (Planning Dept), mitigation, and monitoring and management of monitoring and evaluation data (O&M Dept.)

Project consultants Support development of the capacity for environmental management in BWDB, line departments, and WMOs; Monitor, guide, and auditing environmental management activities by SMOs (including on-the-job training for MED)

PMO (in particular MED) Overall review, monitoring, and reporting to PCU including quarterly reports; Monitoring, guidance, and auditing of environmental management activities arranged or implemented by SMOs

Participatory design

PMO/SMO - Consultants Minimize non-avoidable losses in consultation with diverse stakeholders, and prepare environmental action plan (EAP) by specifying mitigation and enhancement measures for engineering design, bid and contract documents, non-structure program plans, and periodic implementation plans

PMO – Consultants Review and approve environmental mitigation measures reflected as EAP and attached to documents mentioned above

SMO – Consultants/NGOs Strengthen WMOs and JMCs including capacities for monitoring (undertaken during program implementation stage as well); ensure coordination/resolution of conflicting interests

SMO/NGOs – Consultants Preparation and implementation of resettlement plans Program implementation

Contractors (structure works) LCS/NGO (earth works)

Implement required environmental measures as reflected in EAP and attached to the contract documents

Providers of agriculture and fishery extension, livelihood enhancement, and pilot arsenic mitigation works

Implement required environmental measures as reflected in EAP and attached to the program documents

SMO/MED – Consultants Supervise contractors’ and service providers’ implementation of EAP, and enforce contractual and program requirements Monitor and report environmental indicators

MED/Consultants Audit EAP activities; Submit quarterly/annual reports Operation BWDB Provide budget to undertake environmental monitoring SMO/JMC – MED Carry out environmental monitoring and reporting WMOs – SMO/MED Carry out environmental monitoring of designated water management

infrastructure PMO (in coordination with relevant

BWDB field offices) Strengthen hydrological monitoring system and operate networking of salinity data to local government and WMO representatives in salinity prone zones

The primary responsibility for environmental management lies with the PIU in BWDB. However, all responsible parties involved have their important role for the effective implementation of the EMP in order to minimise any environmental impact and maximise enhancements.


Appendix 5 16

6 Responsibilities for Reporting and Review

6.1 Approvals

The PMO forwards the revised EIA and the detailing of the EMP based on the detailed Project Design to DoE for approval.

6.2 Audits

The PMO/MED will conduct regular monitoring of the site and environs during the construction period. This will include both pre-arranged and unscheduled audits and spot checks.

PMO/MED staff will also conduct post-construction evaluations, as necessary, to assess the effectiveness of mitigation measures and the overall effect of the project on the environment.

PMO/MED staff will conduct monitoring of the functioning of the Project and the effect of mitigation and enhancement activities throughout the Project period. This would include inspections and audits of repair and maintenance work.

6.3 Reporting

The Contractor’s responsibility under the EMP includes reporting of the environment monitoring and management on a monthly basis, through submission of results that form Annexes to the EMP.

The PMO will also submit regular (quarterly and annual) reports to the Joint Management Committee, BWDB and DoE that will review and assess the results of the environmental monitoring and mitigation and enhancement measures.

With respect to the Resettlement, the PMO will submit quarterly reports of progress to ADB indicting progress in RP implementation and actions taken on inadequacies, if any, in the implementation process.


Appendix 5 17

7 Work Plan


Appendix 5 18

8 Environmental Responsible Procurement Plan

The procurement and associated costs of equipment required to implement the mitigation and monitoring programmes are included in the overall costing of environmental and social measures, see Table 6 in Chapter 9.

During detailed design the specific items and equipment needed for mitigation and monitoring will be specified in detail. This would include purchase of means for transport (cars, motorbikes, boats), sampling equipment, sample handling and storage equipment, photo and video recording equipment, in-situ measurement equipment (noise, dust, water quality etc.), computers, office facilities etc. No ineligible items are foreseen procured.

Included in the environment review of design should be a review of the goods and services envisaged in the design, an assessment of their potential damage to the environment, and recommendations for substitution of goods and services where less damaging alternatives are identified (ERP).


Appendix 5 19

9 Detailed Cost Estimate

The investment costs for the implementation of environmental and social measures are estimated as shown in Table 6. Costs related to include environmental considerations into design and constructions have been estimated to 10% of the entire construction costs.

Table 5: Project Investment in Environmental and Social Measures (2004 prices)

Quantifiable Items Total Cost (US$)

Social Mobilization of Water Management Organization

Social Mobilization 875,000

Resettlement and Social Development

Resettlement and compensation during construction 2,172,000

Environmental Mitigation Components

Environmental Costs - Civil Works Contract 630,000

Construction of Boat Passes 276,000

Arsenic Mitigation 1,000,000

Fisheries Development 638,000

Agricultural Support incl. Integrated Pest Control and Optimal Fertiliser Use 680,000

Livelihood enhancement 548,000

Project Management

Monitoring & Evaluation Unit, Environmental Monitoring 334,000

Benefit Monitoring 99,000

Institutional Strengthening and Training 872,000

SUB-TOTAL 8,124,000 Contingencies

Physical Contingencies (10%) 812,400

TOTAL 8,936,400


Appendix 5 20

10 Mechanisms for Feedback and Adjustment

10.1 Design

During the design phase the M&E Unit should work in close co-operation with the design team and review all plans and designs with respect to their potential environmental impacts, and the possibility for avoiding and/or mitigation such impacts through re-design. An ERP plan should be elaborated.

10.2 Construction

Figure 1 outlines the Feedback and Adjustment procedures during construction. The mechanisms for feedback and adjustment are included here. For a detailed description of adjustment procedures built into the mitigation measures, see section 2.4.1.

Figure 1: EMP Procedures during Construction

10.3 Operation & Maintenance

The Generic Implementation Procedure with its nine stage described under the Public Consultation Process in Chapter 6 contains in itself the recurrent monitoring and assessment of the functioning of the project and assessment of the environmental and socio-economic impacts that would lead to modifications of the Operation and Maintenance of the Project. During this stage the WMAs together with the BWDB will decide on all adjustments. The MED Unit will conduct its regular monitoring and report to the PSC and to the WMAs for them to take such decisions.

NO

NO

EMP EMP Procedures

Contractor EAP Procedures

Contractor/MED Designing Sampling & Monitoring Procedures

Consultant (Environmentalist)

Inspections, Auditing and Reporting

Agreed Standards Exceeded?

Sampling: Compliant

with Contractor

Remedial Actions & Enhancement

Contractor/MED Sample Collection &

Analysis

DoE Review & Inspection

PMO Inspection & Auditing

Inspection: MED enforce

sampling


Appendix 6

Appendix 6

Questionnaires for FGD on Environmental & Social Issues


Appendix 6 1

Appendix 6: Questionnaires for FGD on Environmental & Social Issues

Table 1: Questionnaire Survey on Environmental Issues: Socio-Economic

Section 1

Questions Answers

1 What kinds of diseases are common in the area? Diarrhoea, Dysentery, Cold and Fever, Cough, Pox, Pneumonia, Blood pressure, Allergy, Typhoid, Skin disease, Appendicitis, Gastric, Missels and Jaundice.

2 What kinds of food are normally eaten by the people of the area? (How many days in a week eat meat and fish?)

Rice and vegetables/ pulse and fish. Fish twice/ thrice a week. Meat once in every one/ two months.

3 What kinds of fish are available in the rivers or beels? Where do people fish?

Shol, Boal, Puti, Taki, Tengra, Chingri, Baim, Koi, Shingh, Magur, Chanda, Pabda, Gazar, Khalsia and carps. Chitra and Nobaganga rivers, beels, khals and ponds.

4 What kinds of migratory birds are available? During winter ducks (bela hash) are some time, found. Sarail, Hargila, Manikjor and Pankuri are also seen.

5 What kinds of wild animals are available? Mongoose, Wildcat, Fox, Guishap, Jatshop, Shajaru, Bagdasha, Khatas, Katbirali, Ghorial, Alligator (?), Hare, Badur etc.

6 What kinds of Culture fish are available? Locally produced or imported from outside?

Rui, Katla, Mrigal, Grass carp, Silver carp, Mirror carp, Telapia, Pangas, Thai, Sarputi, African Magur and Prawn. Locally cultured and some particularly hatchery fry are imported from outside.

7 What kinds of trees are found in the area? (Fruits, wood, medicinal)

Mango, Jackfruit, Coconut, Betelnut, Plam, Date palm, Guava, Lichi, Jamrul, Mahagoni, Shishu, Horitoki, Amra, Neem, Epilipil, Tulsi etc.

8 What kinds of vegetables are cultivated? Lalshak, Puishak, Data shatk, Lauchak, Palonshak, Basil, Patshak, Kalmishak, Kachushak, Mula, Begun, Patal, Mistikumra, Lau, Koralla, Ol, Kachu, Lady’s finger, bottle gourd etc. vegetables common in Bangladesh.

9 What fuel do you use? Fire wood, crop residue, dried cow dung, twigs, foliage and leaves of tree including bamboo leaves.

Table 2: Questionnaire Survey on Environmental Issues: Socio-Economic

Section 2

Questions Answers

1 What are the common diseases? Is dirrhoea common? Malaria? Is an adequate treatment facility available?

Dirrhoea common in October-November, Dysentry, Typhoid, Blood pressure and gastric. Malaria is not found in the area. Medical facilities are not adequate.

2 Is there any conflict between farmers and fishermen? Are there more or less fishermen now than before? Is a fishery declining?

There is no conflict between the farmers and the fishermen. The traditional fisherman is decreasing. Fishery resource is declining very much.

3 Are people happy with embankment? What will happen if there is no embankment? What are the common problems related to farming and water?

Yes, embankment is useful but fishermen are not getting any benefit. However, others are happy. Flood will come. Water logging, quality water and scarcity of irrigation water.

4 Is there any water logging within embankment protected area? Yes, little water-logging.

5 Is there any evidence that large farmers are purchasing more and more land? How can the water problems be solved?

People working abroad and service holders are purchasing lands. By installing Deep tubewells, and re-excavating rivers and canals.

6 What the fishermen are doing if they are not finding any fish?

Selling labour, pulling rickshaw van, working in agriculture and fish trading.

7 Has there been any cut of the embankment by local people?

No, except the Nowagram embankment which was cut once in 1988 and again in 1998.

Southwest Area Integrated Water Resources Planning and Management Project TA 4079-BAN Environmental Impact Assessment

Appendix 7

Appendix 7

List of Invitees and Participants in Different Workshops


Appendix 7 1

Appendix 7: List of Invitees and Participants in Different Workshops

Table 1-1: List of Invites for Project Inception Workshop

Date: 24 October, 2003 Venue: BRAC Center Inn, 75, Mohakhali, Dhaka Ministry of Water Resources: 1. Mr. Md. Sayef Uddin, Secretary, Ministry of Water Resources. 2. Mr. Ehsan Shamim, ndc, Additional Secretary, Ministry of Water Resources. 3. Mr. Md. Habib Ullah Majumder, Joint Secretary, Ministry of Water Resources. 4. Mr. Abdur Razzak, Joint Chief, Ministry of Water Resources. 5. Mr. A.B.M. Golam Moula Bhuiyan, Deputy Secretary (Admin.), Ministry of Water

Resources. 6. Ms. Nasima Begum, Senior Assistant Secretary, Ministry of Water Resources. 7. Mr. Jane Alam, Senior Assistant Chief, Ministry of Water Resources. 8. Mr. Md. Tajul Islam Miah, P.S. to Secretary, Ministry of Water Resources. Planning Commission: 9. Mr. KMSA Kaiser, Division Chief, Planning Commission. 10. Mr. Md. Hamidur Rahman, Joint Chief, Irrigation Wing, Planning Commission. 11. Mrs. Rokeya Begum, Deputy Chief, Irrigation Wing, Planning Commission. 12. Mr. Rezaul Karim, Senior Assistant Chief, Irrigation Wing, Planning Commission. IMED: 13. Mr. Kamal Uddin, Director General, IMED. 14. Mr. Zahid Hossain, Director (Water Resources), IMED. ERD: 15. Mr. Mohammad Shahidullah, Deputy Chief (ADB-I), ERD. 16. Mr. Jasim Uddin, Senior Assistant Secretary (ADB Desk), ERD. 17. Mr. Monjurul Islam, Senior Assistant Secretary (ADB Desk), ERD. Bangladesh Water Development Board: 18. Mr. Mukhlesuzzaman, Director General, BWDB, Dhaka. 19. Mrs. Khaleda S. Kabir, Additional Director General (O&M-I), BWDB, Dhaka. 20. Mr. Md. Moinul Hossain, Additional Director General (Planning), BWDB, Dhaka. 21. Mr. Quazi Sulaiman Ahmad, Additional Director General (O&M-2), BWDB, Dhaka. 22. Mr. Khandoker Abu Md. Abdullah, Additional Director General (Finance), BWDB,

Dhaka. 23. Mr. Jasim Uddin, Controller (Finance & Accounts), BWDB, Dhaka. 24. Mr. Quazi Golam Mostafa, Chief Engineer, Central Zone, BWDB, Dhaka. 25. Mr. Md. Monjurul Karim, Chief Monitoring, BWDB, Dhaka. 26. Mr. Md. Anwar Hossain Bhuiyan, Chief Planning, BWDB, Dhaka. 27. Mr. A.N.H. Akhter Hossain, Chief Training & Staff Development, BWDB, Dhaka. 28. Mr. Noorul Amin Talukdar, Chief Engineer, FFW, BWDB, Dhaka. 29. Mr. Aminul Islam, Chief Engineer, Design, BWDB, Dhaka. 30. Mr. Md. Saeedur Rahman, Chief Engineer, CERP, BWDB, Dhaka. 31. Mr. Giasuddin Ahmed Chowdhury, Chief Engineer O&M, BWDB, Dhaka. 32. Mr. Sharif Rafiqul Islam, Additional Chief Engineer/ Project Director, PMU-CAD,

BWDB, Dhaka. 33. Mr. Md. Aminul Hoque, Chief Engineer, Hydrology, BWDB, Dhaka. 34. Mr. Md. Obaidul Hoque Sarker, Chief Water Management, BWDB, Dhaka. 35. Mr. Nityananda Chakravorty, Joint Chief, Planning, BWDB, Dhaka. 36. Mr. G.A. Jafor, Secretary, BWDB, Dhaka.


Appendix 7 2

37. Mr. Md. Liaquat-Al-Faruque, Director, Planning-I, BWDB, Dhaka. 38. Mr. Md. Mosharaf Hossain, Director, Planning-III, BWDB, Dhaka. 39. Mr. A.F.M. Mahbubul Alam, Director, Programme, BWDB, Dhaka. 40. Mr. A.N.M. Wasim Chowdhury, Director, Staff Development, BWDB, Dhaka. 41. Mr. Md. Masudur Rahman, Director, Public Relation, BWDB, Dhaka. 42. Mr. M.A. Salek, Director, Land & Revenue, BWDB, Dhaka. 43. Mr. Anwar Hossain, Superintending Engineer, Processing & Flood Forecasting Circle,

BWDB, Dhaka. 44. Mr. Md. Aminul Haque, Director, Planning-II, BWDB, Dhaka. 45. Mr. Abdul Haque Sarker, Superintending Engineer, Design Circle-V, BWDB, Dhaka. 46. Mr. G.M. Shamsur Rahman, CSO to Director General, BWDB, Dhaka. 47. Mr. Morshed Ahmed, Director, Project Evaluation Directorate, BWDB, Dhaka. 48. Mr. Sahabuddin, Executive Engineer, Planning-II, BWDB, Dhaka. 49. Mr. Amal Krishna Sarkar, Executive Engineer, Planning-II, BWDB, Dhaka. 50. Mr. Mosadeque Hossain, Executive Engineer, Planning-II, BWDB, Dhaka. 51. Mr. Habibur Rahman, Executive Engineer, Planning-II, BWDB, Dhaka. 52. Mr. A.K.M. Shamsul Karim, Executive Engineer, Planning-II, BWDB, Dhaka. 53. Mr. Abdul Jalil, Executive Engineer, Staff Development Directorate, BWDB, Dhaka. 54. Mrs. Anwara Begum, Deputy Chief Fisheries, Planning-II, BWDB, Dhaka. 55. Mr. Nirmal Kumar Ganguli, Deputy Chief Agronomist, Planning-II, BWDB, Dhaka. 56. Mr. Rafiqul Islam, Deputy Chief Agronomist, Planning-II, BWDB, Dhaka. 57. Mrs. Feroza Khatun, Assistant Chief Economist, Planning-II, BWDB, Dhaka. 58. Mr. Saiful Alam Bhuiya, Sub-Divisional Engineer, Planning-II, BWDB, Dhaka. 59. Mr. Sree Charan Bhowmik, Sub-Divisional Engineer, Planning-II, BWDB, Dhaka. 60. Mr. Md. Abdul Halim Patwary, Sub-Divisional Engineer, Planning-II, BWDB, Dhaka. 61. Mr. A.N.M. Abdul Hafiz, ADG (Admin), BWDB, Dhaka. 62. Md Anwarul Kamal, PS to DG, BWDB, Dhaka. Field Office: 63. Mr. Md. Panna Sheikh, Chief Engineer, South-Western Zone, BWDB, Faridpur. 64. Mr. Md. Sharif-Al-Kamal, Superintending Engineer, Jessore O&M Circle, BWDB,

Faridpur. 65. Mr. Nur Nabi Chowdhury, Superintending Engineer, Kushtia O&M Circle, BWDB,

Kushtia. 66. Mr. Sk. Abdul Momin, Executive Engineer, Faridpur O&M Circle, BWDB, Faridpur. 67. Md. Aminul Islam, Executive Engineer, Jessore O&M Division, BWDB, Jessore 68. Sk. Nurul Ala, Executive Engineer, Narail O&M Division, BWDB, Narail. 69. Mr. Safiqul Alam Sarkar, Executive Engineer, Rajbari O&M Division, BWDB, Rajbari. 70. Deputy Commissioner, Faridpur District, Faridpur. 71. Deputy Commissioner, Rajbari District, Rajbari. 72. Deputy Commissioner, Jessore District, Jessore. 73. Deputy Commissioner, Magura District, Magura. 74. Deputy Commissioner, Narail District, Narail. WARPO: 75. Mr. H.S. Mozaddad Faruque, Director General, WARPO, Dhaka. 76. Mr. Md. Shahjahan, Secretary, WARPO, Dhaka. 77. Mr. Md. Arzel Hossain Khan, PSO, WARPO, Dhaka. 78. Dr. Nilufa Islam, PSO, WARPO, Dhaka. 79. Mr. Md. Shahjahan, PSO, WAPRO, Dhaka. 80. Mr. Abdul Halim Miah, PSO, WARPO, Dhaka. 81. Mr. Dhali Abdul Qaium, PSO, WARPO, Dhaka. 82. Mr. Md. Abdul Baten, PSO, WARPO, Dhaka. 83. Mr. S.M. Shahabuddin Mahmood, Deputy Secretary, WARPO, Dhaka. 84. Mr. Saiful Alam, SSO, WARPO, Dhaka. 85. Mr. Md. Ekram Ullah, SSO, WAPRO, Dhaka.


Appendix 7 3

86. Mr. Md. Jakir Hossain, SSO, WARPO, Dhaka. 87. Mr. Nur Mohammad Khan, SSO, WAPRO, Dhaka. 88. Mr. Md. Siddiqur Rahman, SSO, WAPRO, Dhaka. 89. Mr. Md. Rezaul Karim, SSO, WAPRO, Dhaka. 90. Mr. Rafiqul Islam, SSO, WAPRO, Dhaka. 91. Mr. A.B.M. Golam Faruque, SO, WAPRO, Dhaka. 92. Mrs. Nazmun Nahar Chowdhury, Library & Publication Officer, WARPO, Dhaka. 93. Mr. Mojibur Rahman, Accounts Officer, WARPO, Dhaka. 94. Mrs. Fahmida Akter, Scientific Officer, WARPO, Dhaka. 95. Mr. G.J.N. Murshed, Senior Scientific Officer, WARPO, Dhaka. Other Departments: 96. Mr. Md. Azizul Haque, Director, Joint Rivers Commission, Govt. of Bangladesh, Dhaka. 97. Mr. Emdadul Hoque, Director General, DAE, Dhaka. 98. Mr. A.B.M. Nasiruddin, Director General, Department of Fisheries, Dhaka. 99. Mr. Md. Asharaf Ali, Register, Department of Co-operative, Dhaka. 100. Mr. Md. Shahidul Hassan, Chief Engineer, LGED, Dhaka. 101. Mr. Nurul Islam, Superintending Engineer, LGED, Dhaka. 102. Mr. Shahidul Hoque, Executive Engineer, LGED, Dhaka. 103. Mr. Bashir Uddin Ahmed, Project Director, Second Small Scale Water Resources

Development Sector Project. 104. Mr. Anwar Faruque, Chief Conservator, Department of Forest, Dhaka. 105. Mr. S. Mahmud, director General, Department of Livestock Services, Dhaka. 106. Dr. M.A. Satter, Proffessor, Department of Environment, Bangladesh Agricultural

University, Mymensingh. 107. Chairman, Department of Geography & Environment, Dhaka University. 108. Chairman, Department of Geography & Environment, Jahangir Nagar University, Savar. 109. Mr. Farid Uddin Ahmed, Chief Engineer, DHPE, Dhaka. IWM 110. Mr. Emaduddin Ahmed, Executive Director, IWM, Dhaka. 111. Mr. Zahirul Hoque Khan, Division Head, Coast, Port & Estuary, IWM, Dhaka. CEGIS 112. Dr. Riaz Khan, Executive Director, CEGIS, Dhaka. 113. Mr. Mujibul Hoque, Director, CEGIS, Dhaka. 114. Mr. Md. Waziullah, Water Resources Specialist, CEGIS, Dhaka. ICZM 115. Dr. Rafiqul Islam, Team Leader, ICZM, Dhaka. Local Experts: 116. Prof. Dr. Ainun Nishat, Country Representative, IUCN, Dhaka 117. Mr. Salauddin Md. Humayan, Ex-Chief Engineer, WASIP, Dhaka. 118. Mr. Noajesh Ali, Ex-Chief Engineer, BWDB, Dhaka. 119. Dr. Q.K. Ahmed, Chairman, BUP. BUET: 120. Mr. M.F. Bari, Professor, Department of Water Resources Engineering, BUET, Dhaka. 121. Mr. Mohammad Ali, Head, Department of Water Resources Engineering, BUET, Dhaka. 122. Dr. Jahir Uddin Chowdhury, Professor, IWFM, BUET, Dhaka. 123. Dr. Monwar Hossain, Professor, BUET, Dhaka. 124. Director, IWFM, BUET, Dhaka.


Appendix 7 4

Donors: 125. Mr. Mohinder S. Mudahar, Economic Advisor, Agriculture and Rural Development, South

Asia Region, The World Bank, Dhaka. 126. Mr. S.A.M. Rafiquzzaman, Irrigation Engineer, The World Bank, Dhaka. 127. Mr. Toru Shibuichi, Country Director, Bangladesh Resident Mission, ADB, Dhaka. 128. Mr. Kenichi Yokoyama, Project Director (Mission Leader), Agricultural, Environment and

Natural Resources Division, South Asia Regional Department, ADB, Dhaka 129. Mr. K.H. Ryn, Project Implementation Specialist, Bangladesh Resident Mission, ADB,

Dhaka. 130. Representative from ADB. 131. Dr. Armand Evers, First Secretary (Water Sector), The Royal Netherlands Embassy,

Dhaka. 132. Mr. Zahir Uddin Ahmed, Adviser (Water Sector), The Royal Netherlands Embassy, Road

No. 90, House No. 49, Gulshan-2, Dhaka. 133. Mr. Robert Beadle, Consoler and Head of Development Cooperation, Canadian High

Commission, Dhaka. 134. Mr. Mohammad Sariatullah, Development Adviser, CIDA, Dhaka. NGOs: 135. Mr. Imranul Haq Chowdhury, Director, Uddipan, Dhaka. 136. Mr. Sharif A Kafi, Director, Bangladesh Development Partnership Centre (BDPC), Dhaka. Halcrow: 137. Mr David K. Milton, Team Leader, SAIWRMP 138. Mr. Najmul Hasan, Regional Director, Regional Business Development, Halcrow Group

Ltd. 139. Mr. Ali Ashfaq, Regional Finance Director, Halcrow Group Ltd. 140. Mr. Ghulam Mustafa, General Manager, Halcrow Group Ltd. 141. Mr. Wahedul Huq, Water Resource Engineer/ DTL, SAIWRMP 142. Mr. Meser Uddin Ahmed, Agricultural Economist, SAIWRMP 143. Mr. Mahbub Ali, Water Resource Planner, SAIWRMP 144. Mr. Sailendra Chandra Saha, PDS/ Sociologist, SAIWRMP 145. Mr. A.K.M. Rafique Uddin Ahmed, Chairman, EPC. 146. Mr. S.C. Sutradhar, Director, EPC. 147. Mr. A.B.M. Siddique, Managing Director, Kranti Associates. 148. Mr. Syed Anwar Yusuf, Director, Kranti Associates. 149. Dr. Mohammad Zaman, Resettlement Specialist, SAIWRMP 150. Mr. A.M. Alamgir Kabir, Engineer/ Systems Analyst, SAIWRMP 151. Mr. Mashiur Rahman, Office Manager, SAIWRMP 152. Mr. Benjamin Huda Chowdhury, Business Development Executive, Halcrow, Dhaka.

Table 1-2: List of Participants for Project Inception Workshop Date: 24 October, 2003 Venue: BRAC Center, Mohakhali, Dhaka Ministry of Water Resources: 1. Mr. Md. Sayef Uddin, Secretary, Ministry of Water Resources. 2. Ms. Nasima Begum, Senior Assistant Secretary, Ministry of Water Resources. 3. Mr. Md. Tajul Islam Miah, P.S. to Secretary, Ministry of Water Resources. Planning Commission: 4. Mrs. Rokeya Begum, Deputy Chief, Irrigation Wing, Planning Commission. IMED: 5. Mr. Zahid Hossain, Director (Water Resources), IMED.


Appendix 7 5

ERD: 6. Mr. Mohammad Shahidullah, Deputy Chief (ADB-I), ERD. 7. Mr. Jasim Uddin, Senior Assistant Secretary (ADB Desk), ERD. 8. Mr. Monjurul Islam, Senior Assistant Secretary (ADB Desk), ERD. Bangladesh Water Development Board: 9. Mr. Mukhlesuzzaman, Director General, BWDB, Dhaka. 10. Mr. Md. Moinul Hossain, Additional Director General (Planning), BWDB, Dhaka. 11. Mr. Jasim Uddin, Controller (Finance & Accounts), BWDB, Dhaka. 12. Mr. Md. Monjurul Karim, Chief Monitoring, BWDB, Dhaka. 13. Mr. Md. Anwar Hossain Bhuiyan, Chief Planning, BWDB, Dhaka. 14. Mr. Noorul Amin Talukdar, Chief Engineer, FFW, BWDB, Dhaka. 15. Mr. Aminul Islam, Chief Engineer, Design, BWDB, Dhaka. 16. Mr. Md. Saeedur Rahman, Chief Engineer, CERP, BWDB, Dhaka. 17. Mr. Sharif Rafiqullslam, PO, PMU-CAD, BWDB, Dhaka. 18. Mr. Md. Obaidul Hoque Sarker, Chief Water Management, BWDB, Dhaka. 19. Mr. G.A. Jafor, Secretary, BWDB, Dhaka. 20. Mr. Md. Mosharaf Hossain, Director, Planning-III, BWDB, Dhaka. 21. Mr. A.N.M. Wasim Chowdhury, Director, Staff Development, BWDB, Dhaka. 22. Mr. Md. Masudur Rahman, Director, Public Relation, BWDB, Dhaka. 23. Mr. M.A. Salek, Director, Land & Revenue, BWDB, Dhaka. 24. Mr. Md. Aminul Haque, Director, Planning-II, BWDB, Dhaka. 25. Mr. Abdul Haque Sarkar, Superintending Engineer, Design Circle-V, BWDB, Dhaka. 26. Mr. Morshed Ahmed, Director, Project Evaluation, Directorate, BWDB, Dhaka. 27. Mr. Sahabuddin, Executive Engineer, Planning-II, BWDB, Dhaka. 28. Mr. Mosadeque Hossain, Executive Engineer, Planning-II, BWDB, Dhaka. 29. Mr. Habibur Rahman, Executive Engineer, Planning-II, BWDB, Dhaka. 30. Mr. A.K.M. Shamsul Karim, Executive Engineer, Planning-II, BWDB, Dhaka. 31. Mr. Abdul Jalil, Executive Engineer, Staff Development Directorate, BWDB, Dhaka. 32. Mrs. Anwara Begum, Deputy Chief Fisheries, Planning-II, BWDB, Dhaka. 33. Mr. Nirmal Kumar Ganguli, Deputy Chief Agronomist, Planning-II, BWDB, Dhaka. 34. Mr. Rafiqul Islam, Deputy Chief Agronomist, Planning-II, BWDB, Dhaka. 35. Mrs. Feroza Khatun, Assistant Chief Economist, Planning-II, BWDB, Dhaka. 36. Mr. Saiful Alam Bhuiya, Sub-Divisional Engineer, Planning-II, BWDB, Dhaka. 37. Mr. Sree Charan Bhowmik, Sub-Divisional Engineer, Planning-II, BWDB, Dhaka. 38. Mr. Md. Abdul Halim Patwary, Sub-Divisional Engineer, Planning-II, BWDB, Dhaka. 39. Mr. Mahbubur Rahman, Design-V, BWDB, Dhaka. 40. Md Anwarul Kamal, PS to DG, BWDB, Dhaka. Field Office: 41. Mr. Md. Panna Sheikh, Chief Engineer, South-Western Zone, BWDB, Faridpur. 42. Deputy Commissioner, Faridpur District, Faridpur/ Representative 43. Deputy Commissioner, Rajbari District, Rajbari/ Representative 44. Deputy Commissioner, Magura District, Magura. 45. Deputy Commissioner, Narail District, Narail/ Representative WARPO: 46. Mr. H.S. Mozaddad Faruque, Director General, WARPO, Dhaka. 47. Mr. Md. Arzel Hossain Khan, PSO, WARPO, Dhaka. 48. Mr. Abdul Halim Miah, PSO, WARPO, Dhaka. 49. Mr. Md. Jakir Hossain, SSO, WARPO, Dhaka. 50. Mr. Nur Mohammad Khan, SSO, WAPRO, Dhaka. 51. Mr. Md. Siddiqur Rahman, SSO, WAPRO, Dhaka. 52. Mr. Md. Rezaul Karim, SSO, WAPRO, Dhaka. 53. Mr. Rafiqul Islam, SSO, WAPRO, Dhaka. 54. Mr. A.B.M. Golam Faruque, SO, WAPRO, Dhaka.


Appendix 7 6

55. Mrs. Nazmun Nahar Chowdhury, Library & Publication Officer, WARPO, Dhaka. 56. Mr. Mojibur Rahman, Accounts Officer, WARPO, Dhaka. Other Departments: 57. Mr. Md. Azizul Haque, Director, Joint Rivers Commission, Govt. of Bangladesh, Dhaka. 58. Representative from NSI. LGED 59. Mr. Shahidul Hoque, Executive Engineer, LGED, Dhaka. IWM 60. Mr. Emaduddin Ahmed, Executive Director, IWM, Dhaka. 61. Mr. Zahirul Hoque Khan, Division Head, Coast, Port & Estuary, IWM, Dhaka. CEGIS 62. Mr. Mujibul Hoque, Director, CEGIS, Dhaka. 63. Mr. Md. Waziullah, Water Resources Specialist, CEGIS, Dhaka. ICZM 64. Dr. Rafiqul Islam, Team Leader, ICZM, Dhaka. Local Experts: 65. Prof. Dr. Ainun Nishat, Country Representative, IUCN, Dhaka BUET: 66. Mr. M.F. Bari, Professor, Department of Water Resources Engineering, BUET, Dhaka. 67. Mr. Md. Ali, Head, Department of Water Resources Engineering, BUET, Dhaka. 68. Director, IWFM, BUET, Dhaka. Halcrow: 69. Mr. David K. Milton, Team Leader, SAIWRMP 70. Mr. Najmul Hasan, Regional Director, Regional Business Development, Halcrow Group

Ltd. 71. Mr. Ali Ashfaq, Regional Finance Director, Halcrow Group Ltd. 72. Mr. Ghulam Mustafa, General Manager, Halcrow Group Ltd. 73. Mr. A.N.W. Wahedul Huq, Water Resource Engineer/ DTL, SAIWRMP 74. Mr. Meser Uddin Ahmed, Agricultural Economist, SAIWRMP 75. Mr. Mahbub Ali, Water Resource Planner, SAIWRMP 76. Mr. Sailendra Chandra Saha, PDS/ Sociologist, SAIWRMP 77. Mr. Syed Anwar Yusuf, Director, Kranti Associates. 78. Dr. Mohammad Zaman, Resettlement Specialist, SAIWRMP 79. Mr. A.M. Alamgir Kabir, Engineer/ Systems Analyst, SAIWRMP 80. Mr. Mashiur Rahman, Office Manager, SAIWRMP 81. Mr. Benjamin Huda Chowdhury, Business Development Executive, Halcrow, Dhaka Donors: 82. Mr. A.S.M. Rafiquzzaman, Irrigation Engineer, The World Bank, Dhaka. 83. Mr. Toru Shibuichi, Country Director, Bangladesh Resident Mission, ADB, Dhaka. 84. Mr. Kenichi Yokoyama, Project Director (Mission Leader), Agricultural, Environment and

Natural Resources Division, South Asia Regional Department, ADB, Dhaka 85. Mr. K.H. Ryn, Project Implementation Specialist, Bangladesh Resident Mission, ADB,

Dhaka. 86. Dr. Armand Evers, First Secretary (Water Sector), The Royal Netherlands Embassy,

Dhaka/ Representative.


Appendix 7 7

Table 2-1: List of Invites for Regional Level Workshop Date: 12 May, 2004 Venue: Deputy Commissioner’s Conference Room, Jessore District Ministry of Water Resources 1. Ms. Nasima Begum, Senior Assistant Secretary, Ministry of Water Resources. Bangladesh Water Development Board 2. Mr. Md. Moinul Hossain, Additional Director General (Planning), BWDB, Dhaka. 3. Mr. Sharif Refiqul Islam, Chief Planning, BWDB, Dhaka. 4. Chief Water Management, BWDB, Dhaka. 5. Mr. Md. Aminul Haque, Director, Planning-II, BWDB, Dhaka. 6. Mr. Habibur Rahman, Executive Engineer, Planning-II, BWDB, Dhaka. 7. Mr. A.K.M. Shamsul Karim, Executive Engineer, Planning-II, BWDB, Dhaka. WARPO 8. Mr. H.S. Mozaddad Fauque, Director General, WARPO. 9. Mr Arzel Hossain Khan, Principal Scientific Officer, WARPO. 10. Mr. Md. Ekram Ullah, Senior Scientific Officer, WARPO. 11. Mr. Nur Mohammad Khan, SSO, WARPO. 12. Mr. Md. Siddiqur Rahman, Senior Scientific Officer. LGED 13. Mr. Shahidul Hassan, Chief Engineer, LGED, Dhaka. 14. Mr. Nurul Islam, Superintending Engineer, LGED, Dhaka. 15. Mr. Shahidul Hoque, Executive Engineer, LGED, Dhaka. ADB 16. Mr. Kenichi Yokoyama, Project Director (Mission Leader), Agriculture Environment and

Natural Resources Division, South Asia Regional Department, ADB, Dhaka. 17. Mr. K.H. Ryu, Project Implementation Specialist, Bangladesh, Resident Mission, ADB,

Dhaka. Consultants 18. Mr David K. Milton, Team Leader, SWAIWRMP, Dhaka 19. Mr. Wahedul Huq, Deputy Team Leader, SWAIWRMP, Dhaka 20. Mr. Sailendra Chandra Saha, Participatory Development Specialist, SWAIWRMP, Dhaka 21. Mr. Ghulam Mustafa, Director, Halcrow Bangladesh Ltd. 22. Mr. Masiur Rahman, Office Manager, SWAIWRMP, Dhaka NGO’s 23. Mr Nurul Hoque, Team Leader, PRRA Team, Bangladesh Centre for Village Development

(BCDV) 24. Mr Iqbal Ahmed, Executive Director, Padakhep-Manobik Unnayan Kendra 25. Mr. Liakat Al Mahmud, Director, Socio-consult Ltd. 26. Mr. S.N. Anwar, Deputy Managing Director, TMC. 27. Md. Akhtaruzzaman, Program Coordinator, RDM & RMC. 28. Mr. Abul Hasib Khan, Director, Resource Integration Centre (RIC). Representative from 5 districts 29. Government Forest Reserve Officer, Rajbari. 30. District Co-operative Officer, Rajbari. 31. Deputy Commissioner, Faridpur. 32. Deputy Director, Agriculture Extension Department, Faridpur. 33. District Fisheries Officer, Faridpur.


Appendix 7 8

34. District Livestock Officer, Faridpur. 35. Government Forest Reserve Officer, Faridpur. 36. District Cooperative Officer, Faridpur. 37. Representative from two NGOs, Faridpur. 38. Two Union Parishad Chairman, Faridpur. 39. Executive Engineer, BWDB, Faridpur. 40. Superintending Engineer, Faridpur O&M Circle, BWDB, Faridpur. 41. Sub-Divisional Engineer, Faridpur O&M Circle, BWDB, Faridpur. 42. Deputy Director, Agriculture Extension Department, Magura. 43. District Fisheries Officer, Magura. 44. District Cooperative Officer, Magura. 45. Representative from two NGOs, Magura. 46. Two Union Parishad Chairman, Magura. 47. Md. Abdur Razzak, Executive Engineer, Magura O&M Division. 48. Mr. Nur Nabi Chowdhury, Superintending Engineer, Kushtia O&M Circle, BWDB,

Kushtia. 49. Sub-Divisional Engineer, Magura O&M Division, BWDB, Magura. 50. Executive Engineer, LGED, Narail. 51. Deputy Director, Agriculture Extension Department, Narail. 52. District Fisheries Officer, Narail. 53. Government Forest Reserve Officer, Narail. 54. District Cooperative Officer, Narail. 55. Representative from two NGOs, Narail. 56. Two Union Parishad Chairman, Narail. 57. Executive Engineer, BWDB. 58. Deputy Commissioner, Jessore. 59. Executive Engineer, LGED, Jessore. 60. Executive Engineer, DPHE, Jessore. 61. Deputy Director, Agriculture Extension Department, Jessore. 62. District Fisheries Officer, Jessore. 63. District Livestock Officer, Jessore. 64. District Cooperative Officer, Jessore. 65. Representative from two NGOs, Jessore. 66. Two Union Parishad Chairman, Jessore. 67. Executive Engineer, BWDB, Jessore. 68. Md. A.T. Khandaker, Superintending Engineer, Jessore O&M Circle, BWDB, Khulna. 69. Superintending Engineer, LGED, Jessore. 70. Sub-Divisional Engineer, Jessore O&M Division, BWDB, Jessore. 71. Md. Wazed Ali, Deputy Director, Jessore O&M Circle. 72. Md. Masud karim, DCEO, KJDRP, BWDB, Jessore. 73. Ms. Rahinoor Nahar, KJDRP. 74. Mr. A. Malek Biswas, KJDRP. 75. Mr. A.K.M. Shafiqul Islam, President, WMF. 76. Mr. Dipok Kr. 77. Mr. Zahirul Haque Khan, Head, Coast Port, IWM. 78. Mr. Khan Rafiqul Islam, Sectional Officer, BWDB, Jessore. 79. Md. Bazlur Rahman, SAE/BWDB, Jessore. 80. Md. Mosaraf Hossain, Superintending Engineer, Khulna O&M Circle, BWDB, Khulna. 81. Md. Shahjahan, Team Leader, BITS/Khulna. 82. Mr. A.H.M. Masud Dastagir, Assistant Director (L&R), Khulna O&M Circle, BWDB,

Khulna.


Appendix 7 9

Table 2-2: List of Participants for Regional Level Workshop Date: 12 May, 2004 Venue: Deputy Commissioner’s Conference Room, Jessore District BWDB 1. Mr. Md. Moinul Hossain, Additional Director General (Planning), BWDB, Dhaka. 2. Mr. Sharif Refiqul Islam, Chief Planning, BWDB, Dhaka. 3. Mr. Md. Aminul Haque, Director, Planning-II, BWDB, Dhaka. 4. Mr. A.K.M. Shamsul Karim, Executive Engineer, Planning-II, BWDB, Dhaka. 5. Md. Monirul Islam, BWDB. WARPO 6. Mr Arzel Hossain Khan, Principal Scientific Officer, WARPO. 7. Mr. Md. Ekram Ullah, Senior Scientific Officer, WARPO. LGED 8. Mr. Nurul Islam, Superintending Engineer, LGED, Dhaka. 9. Mr. M. Sultan Mahumed Khan, WMA Management Specialist, IWRM, LGED. 10. Md. Eklimur Reza, WRPS, LGED. ADB 11. Mr. Kenichi Yokoyama, Project Director (Mission Leader), Agriculture Environment and

Natural Resources Division, South Asia Regional Department, ADB, Dhaka. 12. Mr. S Ranawana, Environmental Specialist, ADB CEGIS 13. Mr N. Chakrabarty, Sr Socio-Economist, CEGIS. Consultants 14. Mr David K. Milton, Team Leader, SWAIWRMP, Dhaka 15. Mr. Wahedul Huq, Deputy Team Leader, SWAIWRMP, Dhaka 16. Mr. Sailendra Chandra Saha, Participatory Development Specialist, SWAIWRMP, Dhaka 17. Mr. Ghulam Mustafa, Director, Halcrow Bangladesh Ltd. 18. Mr. Masiur Rahman, Office Manager, SWAIWRMP, Dhaka NGO’s 19. Mr Nurul Hoque, Team Leader, PRRA Team, Bangladesh Centre for Village Development

(BCDV) 20. Mr Iqbal Ahmed, Executive Director, Padakhep-Manobik Unnayan Kendra 21. Mr. S.N. Anwar, Deputy Managing Director, TMC. 22. Md. Akhtaruzzaman, Program Coordinator, RDM & RMC. 23. Mr. Abul Hasib Khan, Director, Resource Integration Centre (RIC). Representative from 5 districts 24. Government Forest Reserve Officer, Rajbari. 25. District Co-operative Officer, Rajbari. 26. Deputy Commissioner, Faridpur. 27. Deputy Director, Agriculture Extension Department, Faridpur. 28. District Fisheries Officer, Faridpur. 29. District Livestock Officer, Faridpur. 30. Government Forest Reserve Officer, Faridpur. 31. District Cooperative Officer, Faridpur. 32. Representative from two NGOs, Faridpur. 33. Two Union Parishad Chairman, Faridpur. 34. Executive Engineer, BWDB, Faridpur.


Appendix 7 10

35. Superintending Engineer, Faridpur O&M Circle, BWDB, Faridpur. 36. Sub-Divisional Engineer, Faridpur O&M Circle, BWDB, Faridpur. 37. Deputy Director, Agriculture Extension Department, Magura. 38. District Fisheries Officer, Magura. 39. District Cooperative Officer, Magura. 40. Representative from two NGOs, Magura. 41. Two Union Parishad Chairman, Magura. 42. Md. Abdur Razzak, Executive Engineer, Magura O&M Division. 43. Mr. Nur Nabi Chowdhury, Superintending Engineer, Kushtia O&M Circle, BWDB,

Kushtia. 44. Sub-Divisional Engineer, Magura O&M Division, BWDB, Magura. 45. Executive Engineer, LGED, Narail. 46. Deputy Director, Agriculture Extension Department, Narail. 47. District Fisheries Officer, Narail. 48. Government Forest Reserve Officer, Narail. 49. District Cooperative Officer, Narail. 50. Representative from two NGOs, Narail. 51. Two Union Parishad Chairman, Narail. 52. Executive Engineer, BWDB. 53. Deputy Commissioner, Jessore. 54. Executive Engineer, LGED, Jessore. 55. Executive Engineer, DPHE, Jessore. 56. Deputy Director, Agriculture Extension Department, Jessore. 57. District Fisheries Officer, Jessore. 58. District Livestock Officer, Jessore. 59. District Cooperative Officer, Jessore. 60. Representative from two NGOs, Jessore. 61. Two Union Parishad Chairman, Jessore. 62. Executive Engineer, BWDB, Jessore. 63. Md. A.T. Khandaker, Superintending Engineer, Jessore O&M Circle, BWDB, Khulna. 64. Superintending Engineer, LGED, Jessore. 65. Sub-Divisional Engineer, Jessore O&M Division, BWDB, Jessore. 66. Md. Wazed Ali, Deputy Director, Jessore O&M Circle. 67. Md. Masud karim, DCEO, KJDRP, BWDB, Jessore. 68. Ms. Rahinoor Nahar, KJDRP. 69. Mr. A. Malek Biswas, KJDRP. 70. Mr. A.K.M. Shafiqul Islam, President, WMF. 71. Mr. Dipok Kr. 72. Mr. Zahirul Haque Khan, Head, Coast Port, IWM. 73. Mr. Khan Rafiqul Islam, Sectional Officer, BWDB, Jessore. 74. Md. Bazlur Rahman, SAE/BWDB, Jessore. 75. Md. Mosaraf Hossain, Superintending Engineer, Khulna O&M Circle, BWDB, Khulna. 76. Md. Shahjahan, Team Leader, BITS/Khulna. 77. Mr. A.H.M. Masud Dastagir, Assistant Director (L&R), Khulna O&M Circle, BWDB,

Khulna.


Appendix 7 11

Table 3-1: List of Invites for National Level Meeting Date: 15 May, 2004 Venue: BRAC Center Inn, 75 Mohakhali, Dhaka Ministry of Water Resources: 1. Joint Secretary, Ministry of Water Resources. Ministry of Finance 2. Joint Secretary, Economic Relation Division (ERD), Ministry of Finance, Sher-e-Bangla

Nagar, Dhaka Planning Commission: 3. Joint Chief, Irrigation Wing, Planning Commission. Bangladesh Water Development Board: 4. Mr. Mukhlesuzzaman, Director General, BWDB, Dhaka. 5. Mrs. Khaleda S. Kabir, Additional Director General (O&M-1), BWDB, Dhaka. 6. Mr. Md. Moinul Husain, Additional Director General (O&M-2), BWDB, Dhaka. 7. Mr. Md. Anwar Hossain Bhuiyan, Additional Director General (Planning), BWDB, Dhaka. 8. Mr. Sharif Rafiqul Islam, Chief Planning, BWDB, Dhaka. 9. Chief Engineer, O&M, BWDB, Dhaka. 10. Project Director, CERP, BWDB, Dhaka. 11. Director, Planning-I, BWDB, Dhaka. 12. Mr. Md. Aminul Haque, Director, Planning-II, BWDB & TA Manager, Phase-II. 13. Director, Planning-III, BWDB, Dhaka. 14. Superintending Engineer, Faridpur O&M, BWDB, Faridpur. 15. Superintending Engineer, Kushtia O&M, BWDB, Kushtia. 16. Superintending Engineer, Jessore O&M, BWDB, Khulna. WARPO: 17. Mr. H.S.M. Faruque, Director General, WARPO, Dhaka. 18. Mr. Mohsin Ali, Director, WARPO, Dhaka. 19. Mr. Arzel Hossain Khan, Principal Scientific Officer, WARPO & TA Manager, Phase-I,

Dhaka. Other Departments: 20. Director General, Department of Agriculture Extension, Khamarbari, Farmgate, Dhaka. 21. Director General, Department of Environment, Paribesh Bhavan, Agargaon, Dhaka. 22. Chief Engineer, LGED, Dhaka. 23. Chief Engineer, DHPE, Dhaka. 24. Director General, Department of Fisheries, Kakrail, Dhaka. 25. Managing Director, Dhaka WASA, Kawranbazar, Dhaka. BUET 26. Dr. Mohammad Fazlul Bari, Professor, Department of Water Resources, BUET, Dhaka. IWM 27. Mr. Emaduddin Ahmed, Executive Director, IWM, Dhaka. CEGIS 28. Dr. Riaz Khan, Executive Director, CEGIS, Dhaka. 29. Mr Mujibul Huq, Director Program, CEGIS, Dhaka JMREMP 30. Project Director, JMREMP, BWDB, Dhaka.


Appendix 7 12

Local Experts: 31. Prof. Dr. Ainun Nishat, Country Representative, IUCN, Dhaka 32. Professor Dr. M. Moniruzzaman Miah, Former Vice Chancellor, Dhaka University. 33. Mr. Kamrul Islam Siddique, Chairman, Bangladesh Water Partnership. Donors: 34. Mr. Kenichi Yokoyama, Project Director (Mission Leader), Agriculture Environmental and

Natural Resources Division, South Asia Regional Department, ADB, Dhaka. 35. Mr. S.A.M. Rafiquzzaman, Irrigation Engineer, South Asia Rural Development Sector, The

World Bank, Dhaka. 36. Mr. Arun Kumar Shaha, Project Implementation Officer, ADB, Dhaka. 37. Dr. Armand Evers, First Secretary (Water Sector), The Royal Netherlands Embassy,

Dhaka. 38. Mr. Mohammad Sariatullah, Development Advisor, Canadian High Commission. 39. Mr. Amirul Islam, Sustainable Development Advisor, UNDP, IDB Bhaban, Agargaon,

Dhaka. 40. Mr. Martin Leach, Advisor, Pro-poor Economic Growth, DFID, United House, Gulshan,

Dhaka. 41. Dr. K.H. Ryn, ADB, Manila. NGOs: 42. Executive Director, Padakhep-Manobik Unnayan Kendra, House # 548, Road # 10, Baitul

Aman Housing Society, Adabor, Shyamoli, Dhaka. 43. Deputy Managing Director, Socio-consult Ltd. & TMC Consortium, Rupayan Centre (13th

Floor), 72 Mohakhali C/A, Dhaka. Consultants 44. Mr David K. Milton, Team Leader, SWAIWRMP, Dhaka 45. Mr. Wahedul Huq, Deputy Team Leader, SWAIWRMP, Dhaka 46. Mr. Sailendra Chandra Saha, Participatory Development Specialist, SWAIWRMP, Dhaka 47. Mr. Najmul Hasan, Managing Director, Halcrow Bangladesh Ltd. 48. Mr. Ghulam Mustafa, General Manager., Halcrow Bangladesh Ltd. 49. Mr. Masiur Rahman, Office Manager., SWAIWRMP, Dhaka

Table 3-2: List of Participants for National Level Meeting Date: 15 May, 2004 Venue: BRAC Center Inn, 75 Mohakhali, Dhaka Bangladesh Water Development Board: 1. Mr. Md. Moinul Husain, Additional Director General (O&M-2), BWDB, Dhaka. 2. Mr. Sharif Rafiqul Islam, Chief Planning, BWDB, Dhaka. 3. Director, Planning-I, BWDB, Dhaka. 4. Mr. Md. Aminul Haque, Director, Planning-II, BWDB & TA Manager, Phase-II. 5. Mr. A.K.M. Shamsul Karim, Executive Engineer, Planning-II, BWDB, Dhaka. 6. Superintending Engineer, Jessore O&M, BWDB, Khulna. WARPO: 7. Mr. H.S.M. Faruque, Director General, WARPO, Dhaka. 8. Mr. Arzel Hossain Khan, Principal Scientific Officer, WARPO & TA Manager, Phase-I,

Dhaka. Other Departments: 9. Chief Engineer, LGED, Dhaka.


Appendix 7 13

BUET 10. Dr. Mohammad Fazlul Bari, Professor, Department of Water Resources, BUET, Dhaka. IWM 11. Mr. Emaduddin Ahmed, Executive Director, IWM, Dhaka. CEGIS 12. Dr. Riaz Khan, Executive Director, CEGIS, Dhaka. 13. Mr Mujibul Huq, Director Program, CEGIS, Dhaka Local Experts: 14. Prof. Dr. Ainun Nishat, Country Representative, IUCN, Dhaka 15. Mr. Kamrul Islam Siddique, Chairman, Bangladesh Water Partnership. Donors: 16. Mr. Kenichi Yokoyama, Project Director (Mission Leader), Agriculture Environmental and

Natural Resources Division, South Asia Regional Department, ADB, Dhaka. 17. Mr. S.A.M. Rafiquzzaman, Irrigation Engineer, South Asia Rural Development Sector, The

World Bank, Dhaka. 18. Dr. Armand Evers, First Secretary (Water Sector), The Royal Netherlands Embassy,

Dhaka. 19. Dr. K.H. Ryn, ADB, Manila. NGOs: 20. Executive Director, Padakhep-Manobik Unnayan Kendra, House # 548, Road # 10, Baitul

Aman Housing Society, Adabor, Shyamoli, Dhaka. 21. Deputy Managing Director, Socio-consult Ltd. & TMC Consortium, Rupayan Centre (13th

Floor), 72 Mohakhali C/A, Dhaka. Consultants 22. Mr David K. Milton, Team Leader, SWAIWRMP, Dhaka 23. Mr. Wahedul Huq, Deputy Team Leader, SWAIWRMP, Dhaka 24. Mr. Sailendra Chandra Saha, Participatory Development Specialist, SWAIWRMP, Dhaka 25. Mr. Najmul Hasan, Managing Director, Halcrow Bangladesh Ltd. 26. Mr. Ghulam Mustafa, General Manager., Halcrow Bangladesh Ltd. 27. Mr. Masiur Rahman, Office Manager., SWAIWRMP, Dhaka

Table 4-1: List of Invites Workshop on Draft Summary Environmental Impact Assessment (SEIA)

Date: 21 September 2004 Venue: BRAC Center Inn, 75 Mohakhali, Dhaka Ministry of Water Resources (MoWR): 1. Joint Secretary, Ministry of Water Resources. 2. Joint Chief, Ministry of Water Resources. 3. Deputy Secretary, Ministry of Water Resources. 4. Mst. Nasima Begum, Senior Assistant Secretary, Ministry of Water Resources.

Bangladesh Water Development Board (BWDB): 5. Mr. Mukhlesuzzaman, Director General, BWDB, Dhaka. 6. Mrs. Khaleda Shahariar Kabir, Additional Director General (O&M-1), BWDB, Dhaka. 7. Mr. Md. Moinul Husain, Additional Director General (O&M-2), BWDB, Dhaka. 8. Mr. Giasuddin Ahmed Choudhury, Additional Director General (Planning), BWDB,

Dhaka. 9. Mr. A. N. M. Abdul Hafiz, Additional Director General (Admin), BWDB, Dhaka.


Appendix 7 14

10. Mr. Khandker Abu Md. Abdullah, Additional Director General (Finance), BWDB, Dhaka. 11. Mr. Sharif Rafiqul Islam, Chief Planning, BWDB, Dhaka. 12. Mr. G. M. Shamsur Rahman, CS to Director General, BWDB, Dhaka. 13. Project Director/ CE, CERP, BWDB, Dhaka. 14. Chief Engineer, Southwestern Zone, BWDB, Faridpur. 15. Superintending Engineer, Jessore O&M Circle, BWDB, Khulna. 16. Director, Planning-III, BWDB, Dhaka. 17. Project Director, JMREMP, BWDB, Dhaka.

WARPO 18. Director General, WARPO. 19. Mr. Arzel Hossain Khan, Principal Scientific Officer, WARPO & TA Manager, Phase-1,

Dhaka. 20. Dr. Nilufa Islam, Chief Scientific Officer, Environmental, Forestry and Fishery, WARPO,

Dhaka.

LGED: 21. Chief Engineer, LGED, Dhaka. DHPE: 22. Chief Engineer, DHPE, Dhaka. Department of Environment 23. Director General, Department of Environment, Paribesh Bhavan, Agargaon, Dhaka. 24. Dr. Mostafa Kamal Farooque, Deputy Director (Technical), Department of Environment,

Paribash Bhavan, Agargaon, Dhaka. 25. Mr. Reaz Uddin, Director (Technical), Department of Environment, Paribash Bhavan,

Agargaon, Dhaka. 26. Executive Engineer, Narail O&M Division, BWDB, Narail.

Other Departments: 27. Director General, Department of Agriculture Extension, Khamarbari, Farmgate, Dhaka. 28. Director General, Department of Fisheries, Kakrail, Dhaka. 29. Joint Chief, Irrigation Wing, Planning Commission, Sher-e-bangla Nagar, Dhaka. Others: 30. Md. Mofiz Uddin, Head Master, Fedi Non-Government Primary School, Fedi, Narail. 31. Md. Salahuddin Ahmed, Chairman, Bhadrabila Union, Narail. 32. Md. Lutfar Rahman, Chairman, Chachuri Union, Kalia. 33. Mollah Abu Bakar Siddique, Chairman, Purulia Union, Kalia. 34. Md. Abdur Razzak Mollah, Chairman, Tularampur Union, Narail. 35. Mr. Mahbubur Rahman, Chairman, Bisali Union, Narail. 36. Md. Rawsan Ali, Principal, Mirzapur College. 37. Laxmi Kanto Biswas, Fisherman, Nirali. Development Partners: 38. Mr, A.S.M Rafiquzzaman, Irrigation Engineer, South Asia Rural Development Sector, The

World Bank, Dhaka. 39. Mr. Arun Kumar Saha, Project Implementation Officer, ADB, Dhaka. 40. Dr. Ainun Nishat, Country Representative, IUCN, Gulshan, Dhaka. 41. Executive Director, IWM, New DOHS, Mohakhali, Dhaka. 42. Mr Abu Saleh Khan, Division Head, Flood Management Division, IWM, Dhaka. 43. Executive Director, CEGIS, Gulshan-1, Dhaka. 44. Mr. Kamrul Islam Choudhury, Chairman, Forum of Environment Journalist Bangladesh

(FEJB), 42/1 Kha, Shegun Baghicha, Dhaka-1000.


Appendix 7 15

45. Dr. Anwara Begum Shelly, Director, Fisheries Program, Prokalpa Bhaban, 1/C, 1/A Pallabi, Section 12, Mirpur, Dhaka.

46. Mrs. Ira Rahman, Action Aid, Bangladesh, House CWN(A) 32, Road # 43, Gulshan 2, Dhaka 1212.

47. Mr. Aktaruzzaman, Coordinator, Polli Unnayan Anadalon (RDM), House # 52, Garib-E-Newaz Road, Sector 13, Uttara Model Town, Uttara, Dhaka 1230.

48. Dr. A. Atique Rahman, Executive Director, Bangladesh Centre for Advanced Studies (BCAS), House 10 (3rd floor), Road 16/A, Gulshan 1, Dhaka 1212.

49. Mr. Shafiqul Haque Choudhury, President, ASA, 1/2 Asad Avenue, Mohammadpur, Dhaka.

50. Mr. Md. Mokhlesur Rahman, Executive Director, Center for Natural Resources Studies (CNRS), House 14 (2nd floor), Road 13/C, Block-E, Banani, Dhaka.

51. Mr. Armand Evers, First Secretary (Water Sector), The Royal Netherlands Embassy, Dhaka.

52. Mr. Zahir Uddin Ahmad, Development Advisor of RNE, Dhaka. Consultants: 53. Mr..David K Milton, Team Leader, SAIWRMP. 54. Mr. Anders Malmgren Hansen, Environmental Specialist, SAIWRMP. 55. Dr. Md. Zaman, Resettlement Specialist, SAIWRMP. 56. Mr. Wahedul Huq, Deputy Team Leader, SAIWRMP. 57. Dr. A T A Ahmed, Environmental Specialist, SAIWRMP. 58. Dr. Kamrul A Choudhury, Resettlement Specialist, SAIWRMP. 59. Mr. Ali Ashfaq, Regional Finance Director, Halcrow. 60. Mr. Ghulam Mustafa, General Manager, Halcrow. 61. Mr. Masihur Rahman, Office Manager, SAIWRMP.

Table 4-2: List of Participants Workshop on Draft Summary Environmental Impact Assessment (SEIA)

Date: 21 September 2004 Venue: BRAC Center Inn, 75 Mohakhali, Dhaka Ministry of Water Resources (MoWR): 1. Mst. Nasima Begum, Senior Assistant Secretary, Ministry of Water Resources.

Bangladesh Water Development Board (BWDB): 2. Mr. Mukhlesuzzaman, Director General, BWDB, Dhaka. 3. Mr. Sharif Rafiqul Islam, Chief Planning, BWDB, Dhaka. 4. Project Director/ CE, CERP, BWDB, Dhaka. 5. Superintending Engineer, Jessore O&M Circle, BWDB, Khulna. 6. Director, Planning-III, BWDB, Dhaka. 7. Mr. Aminul Hoq, Director, Planning-II, BWDB, Dhaka. 8. Mr. A.K.M. Shamsul Karim, Executive Engineer, BWDB, Dhaka. 9. Mr. Nirmal Kumar Ganguly, CS & ASO, Planning-II, BWDB, Dhaka. 10. Mr. Md. Habibur Rahman, Executive Engineer, Planning-II, BWDB, Dhaka.

WARPO 11. Mr. H.S. Mozaddad Faruque, Director General, WARPO. 12. Mr. Arzel Hossain Khan, Principal Scientific Officer, WARPO & TA Manager, Phase-1,

Dhaka. 13. Dr. Nilufa Islam, Chief Scientific Officer, Environmental, Forestry and Fishery, WARPO,

Dhaka.


Appendix 7 16

Department of Environment 14. Mr. Khan M. Ibrahim Hossain, Director General, Department of Environment, Paribesh

Bhavan, Agargaon, Dhaka. 15. Dr. Mostafa Kamal Farooque, Deputy Director (Technical), Department of Environment,

Paribash Bhavan, Agargaon, Dhaka. 16. Mr. Reaz Uddin, Director (Technical), Department of Environment, Paribash Bhavan,

Agargaon, Dhaka. Other Departments: 17. Director General, Department of Agriculture Extension, Khamarbari, Farmgate, Dhaka. 18. Director General, Department of Fisheries, Kakrail, Dhaka. Chenchuri Beel Subproject: 19. Md. Mofiz Uddin, Head Master, Fedi Non-Government Primary School, Fedi, Narail. 20. Md. Salahuddin Ahmed, Chairman, Bhadrabila Union, Narail. 21. Md. Lutfar Rahman, Chairman, Chachuri Union, Kalia. 22. Mollah Abu Bakar Siddique, Chairman, Purulia Union, Kalia. Narail Subproject: 23. Md. Abdur Razzak Mollah, Chairman, Tularampur Union, Narail. 24. Mr. Mahbubur Rahman, Chairman, Bisali Union, Narail. 25. Md. Rawsan Ali, Principal, Mirzapur College. 26. Laxmi Kanto Biswas, Fisherman, Kalora Union, Nirali. Development Partners: 27. Executive Director, IWM, New DOHS, Mohakhali, Dhaka. 28. Executive Director, CEGIS, Gulshan-1, Dhaka. 29. Mr. Kamrul Islam Choudhury, Chairman, Forum of Environment Journalist Bangladesh

(FEJB), 42/1 Kha, Shegun Baghicha, Dhaka-1000. 30. Dr. Anwara Begum Shelly, Director, Fisheries Program, Prokalpa Bhaban, 1/C, 1/A

Pallabi, Section 12, Mirpur, Dhaka. 31. Mrs. Ira Rahman, Action Aid, Bangladesh, House CWN(A) 32, Road # 43, Gulshan 2,

Dhaka 1212. 32. Mr. Aktaruzzaman, Coordinator, Polli Unnayan Anadalon (RDM), House # 52, Garib-E-

Newaz Road, Sector 13, Uttara Model Town, Uttara, Dhaka 1230. 33. Dr. A. Atique Rahman, Executive Director, Bangladesh Centre for Advanced Studies

(BCAS), House 10 (3rd floor), Road 16/A, Gulshan 1, Dhaka 1212. 34. Mr. Md. Mokhlesur Rahman, Executive Director, Center for Natural Resources Studies

(CNRS), House 14 (2nd floor), Road 13/C, Block-E, Banani, Dhaka. 35. Mr. Mannan Bhuiyan, SPS, Dhaka. Consultants: 36. Mr..David K Milton, Team Leader, SAIWRMP. 37. Mr. Anders Malmgren Hansen, Environmental Specialist, SAIWRMP. 38. Mr. Wahedul Huq, Deputy Team Leader, SAIWRMP. 39. Dr. A T A Ahmed, Environmental Specialist, SAIWRMP. 40. Mr. Ali Ashfaq, Regional Finance Director, Halcrow. 41. Mr. Ghulam Mustafa, General Manager, Halcrow. 42. Mr. Masihur Rahman, Office Manager, SAIWRMP.


Appendix 7 17

Table 5-1: List of Invites for National Workshop on DFR Date: 5 December, 2004 Venue: Spectra Catering Ltd, House No. 19, Road No. 7, Gulshan 1, Dhaka Ministry of Water Resources: 1. Dr. Omar Faruque Khan, Secretary, Ministry of Water Resources. 2. Mr. Rahim Uddin Ahmed, Additional Secretary, Ministry of Water Resources. 3. Mr. Md. Habib Ullah Majumder, Joint Secretary, Ministry of Water Resources. 4. Mr. Abdur Razzak, Joint Chief, Ministry of Water Resources. 5. Dr. Anowar Hossain Munshi, Deputy Secretary (Admin), Ministry of Water Resources. 6. Ms. Nasima Begum, Senior Assistant Secretary, Ministry of Water Resources. 7. Ms. Aklima Jahir Rita, Assistant Chief, Ministry of Water Resources. 8. Mr. S.M. Shakil Akter, P.S. to Secretary, Ministry of Water Resources. Planning Commission: 9. Mr. S.A.S.M. Taifur, Division Chief, Planning Commission. 10. Mr. Md. Hamidur Rahman, Joint Chief, Irrigation Wing, Planning Commission. 11. Mr. Md. Rezaul Karim, Deputy Chief, Irrigation Wing, Planning Commission. 12. Mr. Jafor Ullah, Senior Assistant Chief, Irrigation Wing, Planning Commission. 13. Mr. Parimal Chandra Basu, Assistant Chief, Irrigation Wing, Planning Commission. IMED: 14. Mrs. Rokhsana Begum, Director General, Agriculture & Rural Development, IMED. 15. Mr. Zahid Hossain, Director (Water Resources), IMED. ERD: 16. Mr. Md. Shaheedul Haque, Joint Secretary, ADB Wing, ERD. 17. Mr. Mohammad Shahidullah, Deputy Chief (ADB-I), ERD. 18. Mr. Jasim Uddin, Senior Assistant Secretary (ADB Desk), ERD. 19. Mr. Monjurul Islam, Senior Assistant Secretary (ADB Desk), ERD. Bangladesh Water Development Board: 20. Mr. Mukhlesuzzaman, Director General, BWDB, Dhaka. 21. Mrs. Khaleda S. Kabir, Additional Director General (O&M-I), BWDB, Dhaka. 22. Mr. Gias Uddin Ahmed Chowdhury, Additional Director General (Planning), BWDB,

Dhaka. 23. Mr. Khandoker Abu Md. Abdullah, Additional Director General (Finance), BWDB,

Dhaka. 24. Mr. A.N.M. Abdul Hafiz, Additional Director General (Admin), BWDB, Dhaka. 25. Mr. Md. Saeedur Rahman, Chief Engineer, CERP, BWDB, Dhaka. 26. Mr. Abdul Aziz, Chief Training & Staff Development, BWDB, Dhaka. 27. Mr. Md. Amir Khosru, Chief Monitoring, BWDB, Dhaka. 28. Mr. Sharif Rafiqul Islam, Chief Planning, BWDB, Dhaka. 29. Mr. Quazi Golam Mostafa, Chief Engineer, Central Zone, BWDB, Dhaka. 30. Mr. Mohammad Inamul Haque, Chief Engineer, Design, BWDB, Dhaka. 31. Mr. Jasim Uddin, Controller (Finance & Accounts), BWDB, Dhaka. 32. Mr. Md. Zulfiqure Haider, Chief Engineer, Hydrology, BWDB, Dhaka. 33. Mr. Md. Aminul Islam, Chief Engineer, Bhaigakul Training Institute, BWDB, Dhaka. 34. Mr. Md. Shafiql Alam, Chief Water Management, BWDB, Dhaka. 35. Mr. Md. Shafiqul Alam, Chief Water Management, BWDB, Dhaka. 36. Mr. Md. Mustafizur Rahman Serniabat, Joint Chief, Planning, BWDB, Dhaka. 37. Mr. G.A. Jafor, Secretary, BWDB, Dhaka. 38. Mr. Sharif Al-Kamal, Project Director, PMU-CAD, BWDB, Dhaka. 39. Mr. Md. Azizul Haque, Director, Planning-I, BWDB, Dhaka. 40. Mr. Md. Aminul Haque, Director, Planning-II, BWDB, Dhaka.


Appendix 7 18

41. Mr. A.H.M. Kausher, Director, Planning-III, BWDB, Dhaka. 42. Mr. A.F.M. Mahbubul Alam, Director, Programme, BWDB, Dhaka. 43. Mr. Habibur Rahman, Director, ESPP, BWDB, Dhaka. 44. Mr. Morshed Ahmed, Director, Project Evaluation Directorate, BWDB, Dhaka. 45. Mr. Dhali Abdul Qaium, Superintending Engineer, Office of the Chief Engineer, O&M,

BWDB, Dhaka. 46. Mr. Abul Kalam, Project Director, Secondary Town Integrated Flood Protection Project-

II, BWDB, Dhaka. 47. Mr. Md. Humayan Kabir, Town Protection Project, Phase-II, BWDB, Dhaka. 48. Mr. Abu Jafor Ahmadullah, Director, Public Relation, BWDB, Dhaka. 49. Mr. M.A. Salek, Director, Land & Revenue, BWDB, Dhaka. 50. Mr. Anwar Hossain, Superintending Engineer, Processing & Flood Forecasting Circle,

BWDB, Dhaka. 51. Mr. Abdul Haque Sadar, Superintending Engineer, Design Circle-V, BWDB, Dhaka. 52. Mr. Abdul Jalil, Superintending Engineer, Bhaigakul Training Institute, BWDB, Dhaka. 53. Mr. Md. Sazidul Karim Chowdhury, Superintending Engineer, Office of the Chief

Engineer, Hydrology, BWDB, Dhaka. 54. Mr. Md. A. Wadud Bhuiyan, Superintending Engineer, Office of the Chief Planning,

BWDB, Dhaka. 55. Mr. A.K.M. Mukhlesur Rahman, Superintending Engineer, Office of the Chief Engineer,

O&M, BWDB, Dhaka. 56. Mr. Ahsanul Alam, Superintending Engineer, Office of the Chief Engineer, Central Zone,

BWDB, Dhaka. 57. Mr. Nirmal Kumar Ganguly, Chief Soil & Agriculture Survey Officer, Planning-II, BWDB,

Dhaka. 58. Mr. Md. Rafiqul Alam, Executive Engineer, Design Circle-V, BWDB, Dhaka. 59. Mr. G.M. Shamsur Rahman, CSO to Director General, BWDB, Dhaka. 60. Mr. Md. Abdur Noor, Executive Engineer, PMU-CAD Project, BWDB, Dhaka. 61. Mr. Mollah Ruhul Alam, Executive Engineer, PMU, Estuary Study Pilot Project, BWDB,

Dhaka. 62. Mr. Abdul Latif, Executive Engineer, Planning-I, BWDB, Dhaka. 63. Mr. Md. Abdul Hai, Executive Engineer, Planning-I, BWDB, Dhaka. 64. Mr. Md. Mohammad Ali, Executive Engineer, Design-V, BWDB, Dhaka. 65. Mr. Khalilur Rahman, Design-V, BWDB, Dhaka. 66. Mr. Md. Abdur Razzaque, Executive Engineer, Office of the Chief Training & Staff

Development, BWDB, Dhaka. 67. Mr. K.M. Anowar, Executive Engineer, Staff Development Directorate, BWDB, Dhaka. 68. Mr. Shahab Uddin, Executive Engineer, Planning-II, BWDB, Dhaka. 69. Mr. Farid Uddin, Executive Engineer, Planning-II, BWDB, Dhaka. 70. Mr. Md. Habibur Rahman, Executive Engineer, Planning-II, BWDB, Dhaka. 71. Mr. A.K.M. Shamsul Karim, Executive Engineer, Planning-II, BWDB, Dhaka. 72. Mrs. Anwara Begum, Deputy Chief Fisheries, Planning-II, BWDB, Dhaka. 73. Mr. Rafiqul Islam, Depty Chief Agronomist, Planning-II, BWDB, Dhaka. 74. Mrs. Firoja Khatun, Assistant Chief Economist, Planning-II, BWDB, Dhaka. 75. Mr. Abul Kalam Azad, Sub-Divisional Engineer, ESPP, BWDB, Dhaka. 76. Mr. Sree Charan Bhowmik, Sub-Divisional Engineer, Planning-II, BWDB, Dhaka. 77. Mr. Sultan Ahmed, Assistant Chief Agriculture, Planning-II, BWDB, Dhaka. Field Office: 78. The Chief Engineer, South-Western Zone, BWDB, Faridpur. 79. The Superintending Engineer, Jessore O&M Circle, BWDB, Khulna. 80. The Superintending Engineer, Faridpur O&M Circle, BWDB, Faridpur. 81. The Superintending Engineer, Kushtia O&M Circle, BWDB, Kushtia. 82. The Executive Engineer, Faridpur O&M Division, BWDB, Faridpur. 83. The Executive Engineer, Jessore O&M Division, BWDB, Jessore. 84. The Executive Engineer, Magura O&M Division, BWDB, Magura.


Appendix 7 19

85. The Executive Engineer, Narail O&M Division, BWDB, Narail. 86. The Deputy Commissioner, Faridpur District, Faridpur. 87. The Deputy Commissioner, Rajbari District, Rajbari. 88. The Deputy Commissioner, Magura District, Magura. 89. The Deputy Commissioner, Narail District, Narail. 90. The Deputy Commissioner, Jessore District, Jessore. WARPO: 91. Mr. H.S. Mozaddad Faruque, Director General, WARPO, Dhaka. 92. Md. Mohsin Ali, Director, WARPO, Dhaka. 93. Mr. Md. Shahjahan, Secretary, WARPO, Dhaka. 94. Mr. Md. Arzel Hossain Khan, PSO, WARPO, Dhaka. 95. Dr. Nilufa Islam, PSO, WARPO, Dhaka. 96. Mr. Md. Shahjahan, PSO, WAPRO, Dhaka. 97. Mr. Abdul Halim Miah, PSO, WARPO, Dhaka. 98. Mr. Saiful Alam, SSO, WARPO, Dhaka. 99. Mr. Md. Ekram Ullah, SSO, WAPRO, Dhaka. 100. Mr. Nur Mohammad Khan, SSO, WAPRO, Dhaka. 101. Mr. Md. Siddiqur Rahman, SSO, WAPRO, Dhaka. 102. Mr. Md. Rezaul Karim, SSO, WAPRO, Dhaka. 103. Mr. Rafiqul Islam, SSO, WAPRO, Dhaka. 104. Mr. A.B.M. Golam Faruque, SSO, WAPRO, Dhaka. Other Departments: 105. Mr. Md. Tariq Hassan, Director General, DAE, Dhaka. 106. Director General, Department of Environment, Paribesh Bhavan, Agargaon, Dhaka. 107. Mr. A.B.M. Nasiruddin, Director General, Department of Fisheries, Dhaka. 108. Mr. Md. Asharaf Ali, Register, Department of Co-operative, Dhaka. 109. Mr. Md. Shahidul Hassan, Chief Engineer, LGED, Dhaka. 110. Mr. Md. Khurshed Alam, Chief Engineer, DHPE, Dhaka. 111. Mr. Nurul Islam, Superintending Engineer, LGED, Dhaka. 112. Mr. Shahidul Hoque, Executive Engineer, LGED, Dhaka. 113. Mr. P.K. Roy Chowdhury, Executive Engineer, LGED, Dhaka. 114. Mr. Bashir Uddin Ahmed, Project Director, Second Small Scale Water Resources

Development Sector Project. 115. Mr. Mahabubul Haque, Project Director, Rubber Dam Project, Department of Agriculture

Extension, Dhaka. 116. Mr. Mahabubul Haque, Deputy Director (Planning Head), Room # 407 (4th floor),

Department of Fisheries, Dhaka. 117. Mr. Anwar Faruque, Chief Conservator, Department of Forest, Dhaka. 118. Mr. S. Mahmud, Director General, Department of Livestock Services, Dhaka. 119. Dr. M.A. Satter, Professor, Department of Environment, Bangladesh Agricultural

University, Mymensingh. 120. Chairman, Department of Geography & Environment, Dhaka University. 121. Chairman, Department of Geography & Environment, Jahangir Nagar University, Savar. 122. Mr. Aman Ullah Al-Mamun, Superintending Engineer, DPHE, Dhaka. 123. Mr. Shudhir Kumar Ghosh, Executive Engineer, Research & Development Division,

DPHE, Dhaka. 124. Dr. Mostafa Kamal, Deputy Director (Technical) Department of Environment, Paribesh

Bhavan, Agargaon, Dhaka. IWM 125. Mr. Emaduddin Ahmed, Executive Director, IWM, Dhaka. 126. Mr Anowar Hossain Bhuiya, Senior Water Resources Planning & Design Specialist, IWM,

Dhaka. 127. Mr. Zahirul Hoque Khan, Division Head, Coast, Port & Estuary, IWM, Dhaka.


Appendix 7 20

CEGIS 128. Dr. Riaz Khan, Executive Director, CEGIS, Dhaka. 129. Mr. Mujibul Hoque, Director, CEGIS, Dhaka. 130. Mr. Md. Waziullah, Water Resources Specialist, CEGIS, Dhaka. ICZM 131. Dr. Rafiqul Islam, Team Leader, ICZM, Dhaka. Local Experts: 132. Prof. Dr. Ainun Nishat, Country Representative, IUCN, Dhaka 133. Mr. Salauddin Md. Humayan, Ex-Chief Engineer, WASIP, Dhaka. 134. Mr. Noajesh Ali, Ex-Chief Engineer, BWDB & Consultant, Planning-II, BWDB, Dhaka. 135. Dr. Q.K. Ahmed, Chairman, BUP. BUET: 136. Mr. M.F. Bari, Professor, Department of Water Resources Engineering, BUET, Dhaka. 137. Mr. Md. Ali, Head, Department of Water Resources Engineering, BUET, Dhaka. 138. Dr. Jahir Uddin Chowdhury, Professor, IWFM, BUET, Dhaka. 139. Dr. Monwar Hossain, Professor, BUET, Dhaka. 140. Director, IWFM, BUET, Dhaka. Donors: 141. Mr. Mohinder S. Mudahar, Economic Advisor, Agriculture and Rural Development, South

Asia Region, The World Bank, Dhaka. 142. Mr. S.A.M. Rafiquzzaman, Irrigation Engineer, The World Bank, Dhaka. 143. Mr. Toru Shibuichi, Country Director, Bangladesh Resident Mission, ADB, Dhaka. 144. Mr. Kenichi Yokoyama, Project Director (Mission Leader), Agricultural, Environment and

Natural Resources Division, South Asia Regional Department, ADB, Dhaka. 145. Mr. Sanath Ranawana, Environment Specialist, ADB, Dhaka. 146. Ms. Jeniffer Francis, Social Development Specialist, ADB, Dhaka. 147. Ms. Ferdousi Sultana Begum, Social Development and Gender Officer, BRM, Dhaka. 148. Mr. Arun Kumar Shaha, Bangladesh Resident Mission, ADB, Dhaka. 149. Dr. Armand Evers, First Secretary (Water Sector), The Royal Netherlands Embassy,


No. 90, House No. 49, Gulshan-2, Dhaka. 151. Mr. Robert Beadle, Consoler and Head of Development Cooperation, Canadian High

Commission, Dhaka. 152. Mr. Mohammad Sariatullah, Development Adviser, CIDA, Dhaka. NGOs: 153. Mr. Kamrul Islam Choudhury, Chairman, Forum of Environment Journalist Bangladesh

(FEJB), 42/1 Kha, Shegun Baghicha, Dhaka-1000. 154. Dr. Anwara Begum Shelly, Director, Fisheries Program, Prokalpa Bhaban, I/C, I/A

Pallabi, Section-12, Mirpur, Dhaka. 155. Mrs. Ira Rahman, Action Aid, Bangladesh House CWN(A) 32, Road # 43, Gulshan-2,

Dhaka-1212. 156. Mr. Aktaruzzaman, Coordinator, Polli Unnayan Andalon (RDM), House # 52, Garib-E-

Newaz Road, Sector-13, Uttara Model Town, Uttara, Dhaka-1230. 157. Dr. A. Atique Rahman, Executive Director, Bangladesh Centre for Advanced Studies

(BCAS), House 10 (3rd floor), Road 16/A, Gulshan-1, Dhaka-1212. 158. Mr. Shafiqul Haque Choudhury, President, ASA, ½ Asad Avenue, Mohammadpur, Dhaka. 159. Mr. Md. Mokhlesur Rahman, Executive Director, Center for Natural Resources Studies

(CNRS), House 14 (2nd Floor), Road 13/C, Block-F, Banani, Dhaka.


Appendix 7 21

160. Mr. H. Iqbal Ahamed, Executive Director, House # 548, Road # 10, Baitual Aman Housing Society, Adabar, Shyamoli-I, Dhaka.

161. Mr. Hasib Khan, Executive Director, 9/2, Block-D, Lalmatia, Dhaka. 162. Mr. Anwar, Director, Rupayan Tower (13th Floor), Mohakhali, Dhaka. Local Representative: 163. Md. Mofiz Uddin, Head Master, Fedi Non-Government Primary School, Fedi, Narail. 164. Md. Salahuddin Ahmed, Chairman, Bhadrabila Union, Narail. 165. Md. Lutfar Rahman, Chairman, Chachuri Union, Kalia. 166. Mr. Mollah Abu Bakar Siddique, Chairman, Purulia Union, Kalia 167. Md. Abdur Razzak Mollah, Chairman, Tularampur Union, Narail. 168. Mr. Lazmi Kanto Biswas, Fisherman, Nirali Kalora Union, Narail. 169. Mr. Mahbubur Rahman, Chairman, Bisali Union, Narail. 170. Md. Rawsan Ali, Principal, Mirzapur College. BTV: 171. Mr. A.K.M. Hanif, Deputy Director General, Bangladesh Television, Rampura, Dhaka. KRANTI: 172. Mr. A.B.M. Siddique, Managing Director. 173. Mr. Komol Siddiquie, Advisor. 174. Mr. Joynul Abedin, Agricultural Extension Specialist. 175. Mr. Meser Uddin Ahmed, Agricultural Economist. EPC: 176. Mr. A.K.M. Rafique Uddin Ahmed, Chairman. 177. Mr. Ziaul Haque, Managing Director. 178. Mr. Wahedul Huq, Water Resource Engineer/ DTL. 179. Mr. Raza Ali, Design Engineer. 180. Mr. Mahbub Ali, Water Resource Planner. 181. Mr. M.A. Nur, Water Supply & Sanitation Specialist. 182. Md. Ahsan Ullah, Fisheries Specialist. 183. Mr. ATA Ahmed, Environmental Specialist. 184. Mr. Quamrul Ahsan Chowdhury, Resettlement Specialist. Halcrow: 185. Mr David K. Milton, Team Leader. 186. Mr Philip Riddle 187. Mr. A.T.M. Shamsul Huda, Institutional Specialist. 188. Mr. Sailendra Chandra Saha, PDS/ Sociologist. 189. Mr Nitayananda Chakrabarty, Socio-Economist. 190. Mr. Ghulam Mustafa, General Manager. 191. Mr. Ali Ashfaq, Regional Finance Director. 192. Mr. Abdul Matin, O&M Engineer. 193. Mr. Masiur Rahman, Office Manager. 194. Md. Asadullah, AutoCAD Technician.

Table 5-2: List of Participants for National Workshop on DFR Date: 5 December, 2004 Venue: Spectra Catering Ltd, House No. 19, Road No. 7, Gulshan 1, Dhaka Ministry of Water Resources: 1. Dr. Omar Faruque Khan, Secretary, Ministry of Water Resources. 2. Mr. Abdur Razzak, Joint Chief, Ministry of Water Resources. 3. Ms. Aklima Jahir Rita, Assistant Chief, Ministry of Water Resources.


Appendix 7 22

Planning Commission: 4. Mr. S.A.S.M. Taifur, Division Chief, Planning Commission. 5. Mr. Md. Hamidur Rahman, Joint Chief, Irrigation Wing, Planning Commission. 6. Mr. Parimal Chandra Basu, Assistant Chief, Irrigation Wing, Planning Commission. IMED: 7. Mr. Zahid Hossain, Director (Water Resources), IMED. ERD: 8. Mr. Monjurul Islam, Senior Assistant Secretary (ADB Desk), ERD. Bangladesh Water Development Board: 9. Mr. Mukhlesuzzaman, Director General, BWDB, Dhaka. 10. Mrs. Khaleda S. Kabir, Additional Director General (O&M-I), BWDB, Dhaka. 11. Mr. Md. Saeedur Rahman, Chief Engineer, CERP, BWDB, Dhaka. 12. Mr. Abdul Aziz, Chief Training & Staff Development, BWDB, Dhaka. 13. Mr. Sharif Rafiqul Islam, Chief Planning, BWDB, Dhaka. 14. Mr. Md. Zulfiqure Haider, Chief Engineer, Hydrology, BWDB, Dhaka. 15. Mr. Md. Aminul Islam, Chief Engineer, Bhaigakul Training Institute, BWDB, Dhaka. 16. Mr. Md. Shafiql Alam, Chief Water Management, BWDB, Dhaka. 17. Mr. Md. Shafiqul Alam, Chief Water Management, BWDB, Dhaka. 18. Mr. Md. Mustafizur Rahman Serniabat, Joint Chief, Planning, BWDB, Dhaka. 19. Mr. Md. Azizul Haque, Director, Planning-I, BWDB, Dhaka. 20. Mr. Md. Aminul Haque, Director, Planning-II, BWDB, Dhaka. 21. Mr. A.H.M. Kausher, Director, Planning-III, BWDB, Dhaka. 22. Mr. A.F.M. Mahbubul Alam, Director, Programme, BWDB, Dhaka. 23. Mr. Habibur Rahman, Director, ESPP, BWDB, Dhaka. 24. Mr. Morshed Ahmed, Director, Project Evaluation Directorate, BWDB, Dhaka. 25. Mr. Dhali Abdul Qaium, Superintending Engineer, Office of the Chief Engineer, O&M,

BWDB, Dhaka. 26. Mr. Md. Humayan Kabir, Town Protection Project, Phase-II, BWDB, Dhaka. 27. Mr. M.A. Salek, Director, Land & Revenue, BWDB, Dhaka. 28. Mr. Anwar Hossain, Superintending Engineer, Processing & Flood Forecasting Circle,

BWDB, Dhaka. 29. Mr. Abdul Haque Sadar, Superintending Engineer, Design Circle-V, BWDB, Dhaka. 30. Mr. Md. Sazidul Karim Chowdhury, Superintending Engineer, Office of the Chief

Engineer, Hydrology, BWDB, Dhaka. 31. Mr. Nirmal Kumar Ganguly, Chief Soil & Agriculture Survey Officer, Planning-II, BWDB,

Dhaka. 32. Mr. Md. Rafiqul Alam, Executive Engineer, Design Circle-V, BWDB, Dhaka. 33. Mr. Md. Abdur Noor, Executive Engineer, PMU-CAD Project, BWDB, Dhaka. 34. Mr. Mollah Ruhul Alam, Executive Engineer, PMU, Estuary Study Pilot Project, BWDB,

Dhaka. 35. Mr. Abdul Latif, Executive Engineer, Planning-I, BWDB, Dhaka. 36. Mr. Md. Abdul Hai, Executive Engineer, Planning-I, BWDB, Dhaka. 37. Mr. Md. Mohammad Ali, Executive Engineer, Design-V, BWDB, Dhaka. 38. Mr. Md. Abdur Razzaque, Executive Engineer, Office of the Chief Training & Staff

Development, BWDB, Dhaka. 39. Mr. Farid Uddin, Executive Engineer, Planning-II, BWDB, Dhaka. 40. Mr. A.K.M. Shamsul Karim, Executive Engineer, Planning-II, BWDB, Dhaka. 41. Mrs. Anwara Begum, Deputy Chief Fisheries, Planning-II, BWDB, Dhaka. 42. Mr. Rafiqul Islam, Depty Chief Agronomist, Planning-II, BWDB, Dhaka. 43. Mrs. Firoja Khatun, Assistant Chief Economist, Planning-II, BWDB, Dhaka. 44. Mr. Sree Charan Bhowmik, Sub-Divisional Engineer, Planning-II, BWDB, Dhaka. 45. Mr. Sultan Ahmed, Assistant Chief Agriculture, Planning-II, BWDB, Dhaka. 46. Mr. Md. Harun-or-Rashid, S.R. Lab, BWDB, Dhaka.


Appendix 7 23

Field Office: 47. The Chief Engineer, South-Western Zone, BWDB, Faridpur. 48. The Superintending Engineer, Jessore O&M Circle, BWDB, Khulna. 49. The Superintending Engineer, Faridpur O&M Circle, BWDB, Faridpur. 50. The Executive Engineer, Faridpur O&M Division, BWDB, Faridpur. 51. The Deputy Commissioner, Faridpur District, Faridpur. 52. The Deputy Commissioner, Rajbari District, Rajbari. 53. The Deputy Commissioner, Magura District, Magura. 54. The Deputy Commissioner, Narail District, Narail. 55. The Deputy Commissioner, Jessore District, Jessore. WARPO: 56. Mr. H.S. Mozaddad Faruque, Director General, WARPO, Dhaka. 57. Mr. Md. Arzel Hossain Khan, PSO, WARPO, Dhaka. 58. Dr. Nilufa Islam, PSO, WARPO, Dhaka. 59. Mr. Abdul Halim Miah, PSO, WARPO, Dhaka. 60. Mr. Hasan Parvez, PSO, WARPO, Dhaka. 61. Mr. Saiful Alam, SSO, WARPO, Dhaka. 62. Mr. Nur Mohammad Khan, SSO, WAPRO, Dhaka. 63. Mr. Md. Abdul Maten, WAPRO, Dhaka. 64. Mr. S.M. Shahab Uddin Mahmood, WAPRO, Dhaka. 65. Mr. G.J.N. Murshed, SSO, WAPRO, Dhaka. Other Departments: 66. Mr. Md. Shahidul Hassan, Chief Engineer, LGED, Dhaka. 67. Mr. Nurul Islam, Superintending Engineer, LGED, Dhaka. 68. Mr. Shahidul Hoque, CO TA Manager, LGED, Dhaka. 69. Mr. Bashir Uddin Ahmed, Project Director, Second Small Scale Water Resources

Development Sector Project. 70. Mr. Mahabubul Haque, Project Director, Rubber Dam Project, Department of Agriculture

Extension, Dhaka. 71. Mr. M. Eklimur Reza, LGED, Dhaka. 72. Mr. Monwar Ali, Executive Engineer, DPHE, Dhaka. 73. Mr. Mahabubul Haque, Deputy Director (Planning Head), Room # 407 (4th floor),

Department of Fisheries, Dhaka. 74. Mr. Shudhir Kumar Ghosh, Executive Engineer, Research & Development Division,

DPHE, Dhaka. 75. Dr. Mostafa Kamal Farooque, Deputy Director (Technical) Department of Environment,

Paribesh Bhavan, Agargaon, Dhaka. 76. Ms. Begum Shamsur Nahar, Gender and Development Specialist, SSWRDSP2, LGED,

Dhaka. IWM 77. Mr. Zahirul Hoque Khan, Division Head, Coast, Port & Estuary, IWM, Dhaka. CEGIS 78. Dr. Riaz Khan, Executive Director, CEGIS, Dhaka. ICZM 79. Dr. Rafiqul Islam, Team Leader, ICZM, Dhaka. Local Experts: 80. Mr. Salauddin Md. Humayan, Ex-Chief Engineer, WASIP, Dhaka. 81. Dr. Q.K. Ahmed, Chairman, BUP.


Appendix 7 24

BUET: 82. Dr. Monwar Hossain, Professor, BUET, Dhaka. Donors: 83. Mr. Kenichi Yokoyama, Project Director (Mission Leader), Agricultural, Environment and

Natural Resources Division, South Asia Regional Department, ADB, Dhaka. 84. Mr. Sanath Ranawana, Environment Specialist, ADB, Dhaka. 85. Ms. Jeniffer Francis, Social Development Specialist, ADB, Dhaka. 86. Mr. Arun Kumar Shaha, Bangladesh Resident Mission, ADB, Dhaka. 87. Dr. Armand Evers, First Secretary (Water Sector), The Royal Netherlands Embassy,


No. 90, House No. 49, Gulshan-2, Dhaka. 89. Mr. Heru Meering, IPSWAM. NGOs: 90. Mr. Kamrul Islam Choudhury, Chairman, Forum of Environment Journalist Bangladesh

(FEJB), 42/1 Kha, Shegun Baghicha, Dhaka-1000. 91. Dr. Anwara Begum Shelly, Director, Fisheries Program, Prokalpa Bhaban, I/C, I/A

Pallabi, Section-12, Mirpur, Dhaka. 92. Mrs. Nasreen Huq, Action Aid, Bangladesh House CWN(A) 32, Road # 43, Gulshan-2,

Dhaka-1212. 93. Mr. Aktaruzzaman, Coordinator, Polli Unnayan Andalon (RDM), House # 52, Garib-E-

Newaz Road, Sector-13, Uttara Model Town, Uttara, Dhaka-1230. 94. Dr. A. Atique Rahman, Executive Director, Bangladesh Centre for Advanced Studies

(BCAS), House 10 (3rd floor), Road 16/A, Gulshan-1, Dhaka-1212. 95. Mr. H. Iqbal Ahamed, Executive Director, House # 548, Road # 10, Baitual Aman

Housing Society, Adabar, Shyamoli-I, Dhaka. 96. Mr. Hasib Khan, Executive Director, 9/2, Block-D, Lalmatia, Dhaka. 97. Mr. Anwar, Director, Rupayan Tower (13th Floor), Mohakhali, Dhaka. BTV: 98. Mr. A.K.M. Hanif, Deputy Director General, Bangladesh Television, Rampura, Dhaka. EPC: 99. Mr. Wahedul Huq, Water Resource Engineer/ DTL. 100. Mr. Mahbub Ali, Water Resource Planner. 101. Md. Ahsan Ullah, Fisheries Specialist. 102. Mr. Quamrul Ahsan Chowdhury, Resettlement Specialist. Halcrow: 103. Mr David K. Milton, Team Leader. 104. Mr Philip Riddle 105. Mr. Sailendra Chandra Saha, PDS/ Sociologist. 106. Mr Nitayananda Chakrabarty, Socio-Economist. 107. Mr. Ghulam Mustafa, General Manager. 108. Mr. Ali Ashfaq, Regional Finance Director. 109. Mr. Abdul Matin, O&M Engineer. 110. Mr. Masiur Rahman, Office Manager. 111. Md. Asadullah, AutoCAD Technician.

Southwest Area Integrated Water Resources Planning and Management Project Final Report TA 4079-BAN Environmental Impact Assessment

Appendix 8

Appendix 8

Checklist of Environmental Parameters for Conducting IEE


Appendix 8 1

Appendix 8: Checklist of Environmental Parameters for Conducting IEE

CHECKLIST OF ENVIRONMENTAL PARAMETERS FOR WATERSHED DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS

For: Southwest Area Integrated Water Resources Management Project (ADB-TA No 4079 - BAN)

Rehabilitation of Chenchuri Beel FCD Scheme

All Impacts estimates are indicated as before recommended protection measures are implemented

NB: Present checklist includes selected relevant items from ADB checklists for Selected Agricultural and Natural resources Development Projects

IEE(D) Supplemental

Information Sources (E)

Significant Impact

Actions Affecting Environmental

Resources and Values (A)

Damages to Environment

(B)

Recommended Feasible

Protection Measures (C) No

Significant Impact D1

Small D2

Moderate D3

Major D4

Part B/II

Part/III

A. Environmental Effects Due to Site Selection

(i) Encroachment into forests/swamplands/ others

(i) Loss of precious natural resources (i) Careful planning/design/operation plus offsetting

X

(ii) Impediment to movement of wildlife, cattle and people

(ii) Impediment of wildlife and disruption of local economics/socioeconomics

(ii) Careful planning/design/operation X

(iii) Impediment of historical/cultural monuments, buildings and values

(iii) Loss of precious values (iii) Careful planning/design/operation to avoid damage

X

(iv) Conflicts in water supply/access rights (iv) Socio-economic inequities (iv) Proper resettlement and compensation X (v) Flooding/draining hazards (v) Severe socio-economic impact (v) Careful planning/design/operation Positive (vi) Dry Season River flows impaired (vi) Severe socio-economic impact (vi) Careful planning/design/operation X (vii) Water quality and quantity (vii) Critical for growth of bio-diversity including

human kind (vii) Careful planning

X

(viii) Local soil properties (viii) Reduce agricultural productivity (viii) Careful Planning X


Appendix 8 2

IEE(D) Supplemental Information Sources

(E) Significant Impact




(B)




Small D2

Moderate D3

Major D4

Part B/II

Part/III

(ix) Resettlement (ix) Serious social inequities (ix) Carefully planned resettlement program, including “hard” budget

X

(x) Endangered Species; Change in biodiversity

(x) Loss of precious ecology (x) Careful planning and mitigation measures X

(xi) Impediment to navigation (xi) Socio-economic disruption (xi) Careful planning and mitigation measures X B. Problems from Oversights in Planning and Design

(i) Erosion/scouring/siltation (i) Project benefits impaired (i) Appropriate attention in project formulation

X

(ii) Downstream water quality problem (ii) Impairment of downstream beneficial use (ii) Careful planning/design/operation X (iii) Suitability of water supply for irrigation (iii) Project benefits impaired (iii) “ Positive

(iv) Overpumping of groundwater (iv) Water rights conflicts, salinisation, ground subsidence

(iv) “ X

(v) Adequacy of drainage planning (v) Project benefits impaired (v) " Positive (vi) Land tenure problem (vi) " (vi) “ X (vii) Farmer credit limitations (vii) " (vii) “ Positive

(viii) Feasibility of co-operatives (viii) " (viii) " Positive (ix) Feasibility of water users associations (ix) " (ix) “ Positive (x) Disruption of existing farmer co-operatives (x) " (x) “ X

(xi) Use of agricultural chemicals (xi) Project benefits impaired plus damage to downstream water quality

(xi) " X

(xii) Selection of pesticides (xii) Project benefits impaired plus environmental contamination

(xii) " X

(xiii) Land use conflicts (xiii) Social conflicts/project benefits impaired (xiii) " X (xiv) Inequities in water supply/distribution (xiv) " (xiv) " X (xv) Lack of maintenance (xv) Project benefits impaired (xv) " X (xvi) Passage ways (xvi) Loss of wildlife plus disruption of local (xvi) " X


Appendix 8 3






(B)




Small D2

Moderate D3

Major D4

Part B/II

Part/III

economics/soicioeconomics (xvii) Fisheries (xvii) Loss of natural fisheries (xvii) " X (xviii) Loss of wetlands & other sensitive

ecosystems (xi) Habitat disturbance (xviii) “ X

C. Problems associated with Project Operations (i) Inadequate O&M (i) Loss in Project efficiency (i) Careful operation plus monitoring X (ii) Adverse soil modifications (ii) Loss in Project efficiency (ii) " X (iii) Changes in Groundwater hydrology (iii) Adverse effects on other water and land use (iii) " X (iv) Water oriented disease hazards (iv) Increase in communicable diseases (iv) " X (v) Toxic chemicals hazard; fertilizers (v) Adverse effects on aquacullture and

downstream water quality (v) Careful use of agricultural chemicals and fertilizers, including training

X

(vi) Operations Monitoring (iii) If not provided, operations efficiency is likely (vi) Provision of monitoring X (vii) Aquaculture water supply (vii) Serious aquaculture losses (vii) Careful operation to ensure continuing

supply Positive

D. Environmental Problems Associated With Construction Stage

1. Soil erosion/silt runoff

2. Other construction hazards

(a) safety of workers

(b) sanitation of workers camp (c) water oriented diseases (d) dust/odor/fumes/noises/ vibrations (e) quarrying hazards (f) environmental aesthetics 3. Construction monitoring

1. Impairment of water quality and land uses 2.

(a) hazards to workers’ health/safety (b) hazards to health of workers and

nearby communities (c) “ (d) Hazards to workers and neighbours (e) “ (f) loss of scenic values

3. Without it construction contractor not likely to observe constraints

1. Proper construction planning, plus monitoring 2. “ “ “ “ “ “ 3. Appropriate construction monitoring

X

X X

X X

X X

X


Appendix 8 4

CHECKLIST OF ENVIRONMENTAL PARAMETERS FOR WATERSHED DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS


Rehabilitation of Narail FCD Scheme


NB: Present checklist includes selected relevant items from ADB checklists for Selected Agricultural and Natural resources Development Projects






(B)




Small D2

Moderate D3

Major D4

Part B/II

Part/III


(i) Encroachment into forests/swamplands/ others

(i) Loss of precious natural resources (i) Careful planning/design/operation plus offsetting

X

(ii) Impediment to movement of wildlife, cattle and people

(ii) Impediment of wildlife and disruption of local economics/socioeconomics

(ii) Careful planning/design/operation X

(iii) Impediment of historical/cultural monuments, buildings and values

(iii) Loss of precious values (iii) Careful planning/design/operation to avoid damage

X

(iv) Conflicts in water supply/access rights (iv) Socio-economic inequities (iv) Proper resettlement and compensation X (v) Flooding/draining hazards (v) Severe socio-economic impact (v) Careful planning/design/operation Positive (vi) Dry Season River flows impaired (vi) Severe socio-economic impact (vi) Careful planning/design/operation X (vii) Water quality and quantity (vii) Critical for growth of bio-diversity including

human kind (vii) Careful planning

X

(viii) Local soil properties (viii) Reduce agricultural productivity (viii) Careful Planning X (ix) Resettlement (ix) Serious social inequities (ix) Carefully planned resettlement program,

including “hard” budget

X


Appendix 8 5






(B)




Small D2

Moderate D3

Major D4

Part B/II

Part/III

(x) Endangered Species; Change in biodiversity

(x) Loss of precious ecology (x) Careful planning and mitigation measures X

(xi) Impediment to navigation (xi) Socio-economic disruption (xi) Careful planning and mitigation measures

X

B. Problems from Oversights in Planning and Design

(i) Erosion/scouring/siltation (i) Project benefits impaired (i) Appropriate attention in project formulation

X

(ii) Downstream water quality problem (ii) Impairment of downstream beneficial use (ii) Careful planning/design/operation X (iii) Suitability of water supply for irrigation (iii) Project benefits impaired (iii) “ Positive

(iv) Overpumping of groundwater (iv) Water rights conflicts, salinisation, ground subsidence

(iv) “ X

(v) Adequacy of drainage planning (v) Project benefits impaired (v) " Positive (vi) Land tenure problem (vi) " (vi) “ X (vii) Farmer credit limitations (vii) " (vii) “ Positive

(viii) Feasibility of co-operatives (viii) " (viii) " Positive (ix) Feasibility of water users associations (ix) " (ix) “ Positive (x) Disruption of existing farmer co-operatives (x) " (x) “ X

(xi) Use of agricultural chemicals (xi) Project benefits impaired plus damage to downstream water quality

(xi) " X

(xii) Selection of pesticides (xii) Project benefits impaired plus environmental contamination

(xii) " X

(xiii) Land use conflicts (xiii) Social conflicts/project benefits impaired (xiii) " X (xiv) Inequities in water supply/distribution (xiv) " (xiv) " X (xv) Lack of maintenance (xv) Project benefits impaired (xv) " X (xvi) Passage ways (xvi) Loss of wildlife plus disruption of local (xvi) " X


Appendix 8 6






(B)




Small D2

Moderate D3

Major D4

Part B/II

Part/III

economics/soicioeconomics (xvii) Fisheries (xvii) Loss of natural fisheries (xvii) " X (xviii) Loss of wetlands & other sensitive

ecosystems (xi) Habitat disturbance (xviii) “ X

C. Problems associated with Project Operations (i) Inadequate O&M (i) Loss in Project efficiency (i) Careful operation plus monitoring X (ii) Adverse soil modifications (ii) Loss in Project efficiency (ii) " X (iii) Changes in Groundwater hydrology (iii) Adverse effects on other water and land use (iii) " X (iv) Water oriented disease hazards (iv) Increase in communicable diseases (iv) " X (v) Toxic chemicals hazard; fertilizers (v) Adverse effects on aquacullture and

downstream water quality (v) Careful use of agricultural chemicals and fertilizers, including training

X

(vi) Operations Monitoring (iii) If not provided, operations efficiency is likely (vi) Provision of monitoring X (vii) Aquaculture water supply (vii) Serious aquaculture losses (vii) Careful operation to ensure continuing

supply Positive

D. Environmental Problems Associated With Construction Stage


4. Other construction hazards

(a) safety of workers


1. Impairment of water quality and land uses 2.

(g) hazards to workers’ health/safety (h) hazards to health of workers and

nearby communities (i) “ (j) Hazards to workers and neighbours (k) “ (l) loss of scenic values


1. Proper construction planning, plus monitoring 2. “ “ “ “ “ “ 3. Appropriate construction monitoring

X

X X

X X

X X

X


Appendix 8 7

CHECKLIST OF ENVIRONMENTAL PARAMETERS FOR COMMUNITY WATER SUPPLY PROJECTS


Rural Arsenic Mitigation and Sanitation Programme


NB: Present checklist includes selected relevant items from ADB checklists for Selected Water Supply Projects


(E)

Significant Impact




(B)




Small D2

Moderate D3

Major D4

Part B/II

Part/III


(i) Pollution of raw water supply (i) Increase in costs for treatment (i) Tailored design to accommodate special pollution problems

X

(ii)Water use conflicts (ii) Social conflicts (ii) Fair appointment of limited water rights X (iii) Hazard of land sunsidence (iii) Serious damage to land use values,

especially flood hazard (iii) Limit pumping to tolerable levels X

(iv) Resettlement inadequate (iv) Social inequities (iv) Proper resettlement and budgetting X (v) Impediment of historical/culture

monument/areas (v) Loss or depreciation of these values (v) Careful planning to minimise or offset

adverse effects X

B. Problems relating to design phase (i) Delivery of unsafe water to distribution

system (i) Increase in the cost of treatment (i) Competent attention to this problem in

project planning Positive

(ii) Inadequate protection of intake works (or wells) causes pollution

(ii) Increased treatment cocts/problems (ii) Competent design(O&M/Monitoring X

(iii) Excessive algae growth in storage reservoir (iii) Water quality depreciation (iii) Provision of covered storage X (iv) Increase in sewage production (iv) Sewage overflow into community

environment (iv) Parallel programme for

sewerage/excreta disposal X

(v) Inadequate disposal of sludges (v) Nuisance to affected properties (v) Proper sludge disposal planning X (vi) Unsatisfactory raw water quality (vi) Delivered water may not be accepted by

public (vi) Use of raw water sources of acceptable

quality X

(vii) Difficult water quality/treatment problems (vii) Increased treatment costs (vii) Careful planning/design/monitoring Positive (viii) Inadequate buffer zone (viii) Nuisances to neighbours and/or hazards of (viii) " Positive


Appendix 8 8


(E)

Significant Impact




(B)




Small D2

Moderate D3

Major D4

Part B/II

Part/III

damage to system facilities (ix) Management of chlorine used for disinfection

(ix) Health/safety hazards to workers and public (ix) " X

(x) Water and sewer pipes in same trench (x) Hazards of contamination (x) Careful design/construction X (xi) Problems from transmission lines

a) Encroachment into ecosystem b) Impairment in environmental

aesthetics c) Continuing soil erosion from non-

resurfaced exposed areas

a) Loss of precious ecosystem b) Loss of environment aesthetics c) Soil erosion plus damage to water

quality and land values

a) Careful siting plus protection and

offsetting measures b) " c) Proper resurfacing measures

X

C. Problems associated with Project Operations (i) Delivery of unsafe water to distribution

system due to O&M deficiencies (i) Community disease hazards (i) Competent O&M X

(ii) Inadequate distribution system monitoring (ii) Operations not likely to comply with constraints

(ii) Community Water Supply System does not realise intended objectives

X

(iii) Delivery of conceive water to distribution system due to inadequate O&M

(iii) Contractor not likely to comply with constraints

(iii) Competent O&M/monitoring X

D. Environmental Problems Associated with Construction Stage


6. Other construction hazards (a) safety of workers


1. Impairment of water quality and land uses

(m) hazards to workers’ health/safety (n) hazards to health of workers and

nearby communities (o) “ (p) Hazards to workers and neighbours (q) “ (r) loss of scenic values


1. Proper construction planning, plus monitoring “ “ “ “ “ “ 3. Appropriate construction monitoring

X

X

X X

X X

X X