PCR: India: Rajasthan Urban Infrastructure Development Project · India: Rajasthan Urban Infrastructure Development ... Rajasthan Urban Infrastructure Development Project ... UDD

Completion Report

Project Number: 29120 Loan Number: 1647 December 2011

India: Rajasthan Urban Infrastructure Development Project

CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS

Currency Unit – Indian rupee or rupees (Re or Rs)

At Appraisal At Project Completion 5 November 1998 11 June 2009

Re1.00 = $0.02370 $0.02116 $1.00 = Rs42.23 Rs47.26

ABBREVIATIONS

ADB – Asian Development Bank ALA – amended and restated loan agreement BME – benefit monitoring and evaluation BPIU – Bisalpur project implementation unit BWSS – Bisalpur water supply scheme CAPP – community awareness and participation program CBO – community-based organization CWR – clear water reservoir DSC – design and construction supervision consultants EIRR – economic internal rate of return EMP – environmental management plan ESR – elevated service reservoir FIRR – financial internal rate of return GSP – gross state product IEE – initial environmental examination JFPR – Japan Fund for Poverty Reduction MSW – municipal solid waste NGO – nongovernment organization O&M – operation and maintenance PCR – project completion report PHED – Public Health Engineering Department PIU – project implementation unit PMC – project management consultant PMU – project management unit PWD – Public Works Department ROB – rail over bridge RRP – report and recommendation of the President RUIDP – Rajasthan Urban Infrastructure Development Project SAP – social action plan SGIA – second generation imprest account STP – sewage treatment plant UDD – Urban Development Department UDT – urban development tax ULB – urban local body WTP – water treatment plant

WEIGHTS AND MEASURES cum – cubic meter KL – kilo litre km – kilometer lpcd – liters per capita per day m – meter mm – millimeter m2 – square meter mld – million liters per day psi – pound per square inch t – ton

NOTES

(i) The fiscal year (FY) of the Government of India ends on 31 March. FY before a calendar year denotes the year in which the fiscal year ends, e.g., FY2009 ends on 31 March 2009.

(ii) In this report, "$" refers to US dollars.

Vice-President Xiaoyu Zhao, Vice-President, Operations 1 Director General S. Hafeez Rahman, South Asia Regional Department (SARD) Director H. Kim, Country Director, India Resident Mission Team leader A. Kaneko, Senior Urban Development Specialist, SARD

Team members S. Majumder, Associate Project Analyst, SARD

P. Srivastava, Senior Project Officer (Urban), SARD

In preparing any country program or strategy, financing any project, or by making any designation of or reference to a particular territory or geographic area in this document, the Asian Development Bank does not intend to make any judgments as to the legal or other status of any territory or area.

CONTENTS

Page BASIC DATA i

I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1 II. EVALUATION OF DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION 2

A. Relevance of Design and Formulation 2 B. Project Outputs 3 C. Project Costs 4 D. Disbursements 5 E. Project Schedule 5 F. Implementation Arrangements 6 G. Conditions and Covenants 6 H. Related Technical Assistance 7 I. Consultant Recruitment and Procurement 7 J. Performance of Consultants, Contractors, and Suppliers 7 K. Performance of the Borrower and the Executing Agency 8 L. Performance of the Asian Development Bank 8

III. EVALUATION OF PERFORMANCE 8 A. Relevance 8 B. Effectiveness in Achieving Outcome 9 C. Efficiency in Achieving Outcome and Outputs 9 D. Preliminary Assessment of Sustainability 10 E. Impact 10

IV. OVERALL ASSESSMENT AND RECOMMENDATIONS 12 A. Overall Assessment 12 B. Lessons 12 C. Recommendations 13

APPENDIXES 1. Project Components and Outputs 16 2. Breakup of Foreign Exchange Cost And Local Currency Cost 23 3. Allocation, Reallocation and Actual Disbursement by Category 24 4. Contract Awards and Disbursements 25 5. Summary of Contract Details 26 6. Project Implementation Arrangements 46 7. Status of Major Loan Covenants 47 8. Benefit Monitoring and Evaluation 54 9. Socio-cultural, Resettlement, and Environment Impacts 58 10. Economic and Financial Analysis 63 11. Implementation Schedule: Appraisal–Actual 75 12. Action Plan for Outstanding Issues 76

BASIC DATA A. Loan Identification 1. Country 2. Loan Number 3. Project Title 4. Borrower 5. Executing Agency 6. Amount of Loan 7. Project Completion Report Number

India 1647 Rajasthan Urban Infrastructure Development Project India Urban Development Department of the Government of Rajasthan US$250 million PCR:IND 1298

B. Loan Data 1. Appraisal – Date Started – Date Completed 2. Loan Negotiations – Date Started – Date Completed 3. Date of Board Approval 4. Date of Loan Agreement 5. Date of Loan Effectiveness – In Loan Agreement – Actual – Number of Extensions

6. Date of Amended and Restated Loan Agreement

7. Date of Amendments to the

Amended and Restated Loan Agreement

8. Closing Date – In Loan Agreement – Actual – Number of Extensions 9. Terms of Loan – Interest Rate – Maturity (number of years) – Grace Period (number of years) 10. Terms of Relending (if any) – Interest Rate – Maturity (number of years) – Grace Period (number of years) – Second-Step Borrower

17 August 1998 28 August 1998 29 October 1998 31 October 1998 3 December 1998 1 December 1999 29 February 2000 18 January 2000 3 24 July 2002 4 May 2005 30 June 2005 11 June 2009 3 London inter bank offer rate (LIBOR) based (floating) 25 Years 5 Years

ii

11. Disbursements

a. Dates

Initial Disbursement

25 October 2000

Final Disbursement

11 June 2009

Time Interval

105 months

Effective Date

18 January 2000

Original Closing Date

30 June 2005

Time Interval

66 months

b. Amount ($ million)

Category Original

AllocationLast Revised Allocation a

Amount Canceled

Net Amount Available

Amount Disbursed

Undisbursed Balance

01 Civil Works 143.00 158.37 (15.37) 158.37 158.09 0.28

01A Civil Works (10%) 2.58 (2.58) 2.58 2.58 0.00

02 Equipment and Materials 45.00 2.55 42.45 2.55 3.67 (1.12)

02A Equipment and Materials (10%) 0.13 (0.13) 0.13 0.13 0.00

03 Consulting Services 23.00 12.56 10.44 12.56 12.37 0.19

03A Consulting Services (10%) 0.19 (0.19) 0.19 0.19 0.00

04 Implementation Assistance 4.00 4.62 (0.62) 4.62 4.74 (0.12)

05 Interest and Commitment Charge 24.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 0.00

06 Unallocated 11.00 0.00 11.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

07 Bisalpur Water Supply Scheme 57.00 (57.00) 57.00 56.23 0.77

Total 250.00 250.00 0.00 250.00 250.00 0.00 a Last revised allocation takes into account the reallocations carried out in October 2004, March 2005, December 2005, and March 2009.

12. Local Costs (Financed)

- Amount ($) 108,457,091.00

- Percent of Local Costs 88.17

- Percent of Total Cost 43.38

C. Project Data

1. Project Cost ($ million) Cost Appraisal Estimate Revised Estimate Actual

Foreign Exchange Cost 127.00 154.00 141.54

Local Currency Cost 235.00 239.00 304.41

Total 362.00 393.00 445.95

iii

2. Financing Plan ($ million) Cost Appraisal Estimate Revised Estimate Actual

Implementation Costs

Borrower Financed 93.00 124.00 168.16

ADB Financed 226.00 238.00 238.00

Other External Financing

Total 319.00 362.00 406.16

IDC Costs

Borrower Financed 19.00 19.00 27.79

ADB Financed 24.00 12.00 12.00

Other External Financing

Total 43.00 31.00 39.79

ADB = Asian Development Bank, IDC = interest during construction. Note: The revised estimate was prepared during the major change in scope of the project in October 2004.

3. Cost Breakdown by Project Component ($ million) Component Appraisal Estimate Revised Estimate Actual

Part A Community Awareness and Participation 4.00 1.00 0.89

Part B Water Supply Rehabilitation and Expansion 91.00 71.00 75.58

Part C Urban Environmental Improvements 96.00 93.00 111.69

Part D Urban Transportation and Management 24.00 51.00 56.69

Part E Implementation Assistance and Capacity Building 33.00 20.00 31.64

Part F Bisalpur Water Supply Scheme -Phase 1, Part 1 120.00 129.67

Contingencies

Physical 24.00 6.00 0.00

Price 47.00 0.00 0.00

Interest During Construction 43.00 31.00 39.79

Total 362.00 393.00 445.95

4. Project Schedule Item Appraisal Estimate Actual

Date of Contract with Consultants

Design and Supervision Consultants I 5 July 2000 28 June 2001

Design and Supervision Consultants II 5 July 2000 28 June 2001

Design and Supervision Consultants III 5 July 2000 28 June 2001

Project Management Consultant 8 June 2000 28 May 2001

Consultant for Community Awareness and Participation Program 20 October 2003 30 October 2003

Benefit, Monitoring and Evaluation Consultant (Baseline study) 3 September 2004

Project Management Consultant (from Nov 2006) 15 November 2006

Construction and Supervision Consultant (BWSS) 1 July 2007 10 October 2007

Benefit, Monitoring and Evaluation Consultant (Final) 8 June 2008 16 June 2008

Completion of Engineering Designs 1 September 2001 28 January 2005

iv

Item Appraisal Estimate Actual

Civil Works Contract

Date of Award 1 September 1999 1 December 2001

Completion of Work 31 December 2004 25 June 2011

Equipment and Supplies

First Procurement 1 July 1999 13 January 2003

Last Procurement 1 January 2000 20 June 2006

Completion of Equipment Installation 31 December 2001 31 January 2007

Start of Operations

Completion of Tests and Commissioning 31 December 2004 31 March 2010

Beginning of Start-Up 31 December 2004 20 April 2010

5. Project Performance Report Ratings

Implementation Period

Ratings

Development Objectives Implementation Progress

From 3 December to 31 December 1998 Satisfactory Satisfactory

From 1 January to 31 December 1999 Satisfactory Unsatisfactory

From 1 January to 31 December 2000 Satisfactory Satisfactory


From 1 January to 30 June 2002 Satisfactory Satisfactory

From 1 July to 31 December 2002 Partially Satisfactory Satisfactory

From 1 January to 30 September 2003 Partially Satisfactory Satisfactory

From 1 October to 31 December 2003 Satisfactory Satisfactory

From 1 January to 29 February 2004 Satisfactory Satisfactory

From 1 March to 31 March 2004 Partially Satisfactory Satisfactory

From 1 April to 31 December 2004 Satisfactory Satisfactory






D. Data on Asian Development Bank Missions

Name of Mission Date No. of

Persons No. of

Person-Days Specialization of Members

Loan fact-finding 13–29 April 1998 8 136 a, b , c, d, e, f, g

Loan appraisal 17–28 August1998 3 36 h, h, i

Loan inception 13–22 September 1999 2 20 h, j

Special project administration 1 26 April 2000 2 2 k, l

Special project administration 2 25 August 2000 1 1 l

Loan review 1 17–18 May 2001 2 4 l, j

Loan review 2 29–31 October 2001 3 12 k, l, m, n

Loan review 3 3–4 April 2002 1 2 l

v

Name of Mission Date No. of

Persons No. of

Person-Days Specialization of Members

Special joint loan review 26–28 June 2002 2 6 o, p

Loan review 4 23–24 July 2002 1 2 l

Loan review 5 23–25 October 2002 1 3 q

Loan disbursement 1 11–12 November 2002 1 2 r

Loan review 6 22–23 February 2003 3 6 s, o, q

Loan review 7 9–10 April 2003 2 4 p, t

Loan review 8 26–27 June 2003 2 4 j, u

Loan reappraisal 1 18–19 November 2003 5 10 q, t, v, j, u

Loan reappraisal 2 3–5 December 2003 5 15 q, t, v, j, u

Follow-on reappraisal 1–2 March 2004 1 2 q

Loan disbursement 2 9–17 March 2004 1 9 r

Loan mid-term review 19 April – 7 May 2004 4 76 q, t, j, g

Loan review 9 16–24 August 2004 5 37 w, q, t, j, g

Loan review 10 22–23 November 2004 3 6 q, j, q

Loan review 11 21 April 2005 1 1 q

Loan review 12 20–24 February 2006 2 10 e, j

Loan review 13 10 March 2006 2 2 q, e

Brief review 17 April 2006 1 1 x

Special loan administration 3 6–8 November 2006 2 6 x, e

Special loan administration 4 21–23 January 2008 2 6 y, j

Special loan administration 5 30 June – 5 July 2008 1 6 z

Loan review 14 17–25 November 2008 2 18 e, j

Project completion review 26 April–6 May 2011 5 47 a1, b1, j, v, c1

a = senior project specialist (environment); b = senior program officer; c = senior economist; d = project engineer; e = project implementation officer; f = project economist; g = staff consultant; h = senior project specialist; i = project manager; j = assistant project analyst or assistant analyst, India resident mission (INRM); k = resident representative, INRM; l = senior project implementation officer; m = programs officer; n = control officer; no. = number; o = country director, INRM; p = principal project implementation officer; q = head, urban development or urban unit; r= senior control officer; s = executive director; t = head, project administration unit; u = social development consultant; v = social safeguard specialist or expert; w = director’s advisor (observer); x = principal urban specialist, INRM; y = urban development specialist, INRM; z = resettlement and social development officer; a1 = senior project officer (urban); b1 = senior finance and administration officer; c1 = financial management expert.

I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION

1. The Rajasthan Urban Infrastructure Development Project (RUIDP) was intended to improve living conditions and the investment climate in the largest cities of the state of Rajasthan in India by meeting basic needs for safe water, improving environmental health conditions, and fostering sustainable social and economic development. 1 The project cities of Ajmer, Bikaner, Jaipur, Jodhpur, Kota, and Udaipur were the main centers of economic activity in Rajasthan, which at the time had the largest concentrations of urban poverty in the state and inadequate urban services.

2. The project’s objective was to facilitate policy reforms that would strengthen urban management and to support priority investments in urban infrastructure and services to (i) redress immediate infrastructure and service deficiencies and meet future demand for fulfillment of basic human needs, (ii) act as a vehicle through which policy reforms could be effectively executed, and (iii) have a demonstration effect for replication in other cities in Rajasthan and other states. The Asian Development Bank (ADB) helped in the project preparation with a technical assistance, which identified an investment need of $362 million.2 ADB approved a loan of $250 million for the project in December 1998 and entered into a project agreement with the state, which was to be responsible for the remaining $112 million of the projected project cost. The loan closed on 31 March 2009 while the closing of loan account was on 11 June 2009.

3. The project original comprised five components, with some elements later deleted or added, and an entirely new sixth component approved in 2004:

(i) Community awareness and participation program. This program aimed to have communities participate in the project and contribute to delivery of sustainable urban services. The community awareness and participation program (CAPP) also included a community awareness component to stimulate civic concern about the quality of the environment, environmental health, environmental sanitation and the responsibilities of urban residents for its upkeep.

(ii) Water supply rehabilitation and expansion. The rehabilitation was intended to reduce the exposure of existing consumers to pathogens caused by sewage infiltration into the water system. The water supply system was also to be expanded to areas and households then with no access to piped water. It was also to provide links between slum area water supplies and municipal systems, with full metering, computerized billing, and financial management systems.

(iii) Environmental improvements. This component aimed to improve wastewater management, solid waste management, drainage, living conditions in slums, fire services, provide sites and services such as construction of community centres or commercial centres and protection of historical sites. Improvement of existing hospitals and construction of new hospitals were also added later in 2004 under this component.

(iv) Urban transport and management. The project was to upgrade critical sections of roads and bridges, as well as truck and bus terminals, parking, and traffic management.

1 ADB. 1998. Report and Recommendation of the President (RRP) to the Board of Directors on a Proposed Loan

to India for the Rajasthan Urban Infrastructure Development Project. Manila. 2 ADB. 1995. Technical Assistance to India for the Rajasthan Urban Infrastructure Development Project. Manila.

2

(v) Implementation assistance and capacity building. This component included incremental administration; provision of equipment, vehicles, and logistical support; consulting services for design and supervision; project management services; and capacity building.

(vi) Bisalpur water supply system. The project’s scope was expanded in 2004 to include phase 1 of the Bisalpur water supply system (BWSS), which was to comprise an intake pump station, a raw water pipeline, a 400 million liters per day (mld) water treatment plant (WTP), a high-lift pump station, a 100 kilometer (km) treated water line, and electrical works.

4. The project was expected at appraisal to improve water supply for 7.7 million people in the six cities, provide better wastewater management for 5.2 million residents, and improve drainage for 4 million individuals, particularly poor families living in low-lying areas. It was also to deliver better infrastructure facilities to 600,000 slum dwellers. Other benefits for the project cities were to include better urban transport services, solid waste management, and fire services, improvement of sites and services such as construction of community centres or commercial centres and the protection of historical sites. A socioeconomic survey conducted for appraisal found that about 50% of the intended beneficiaries were poor and about 19% lived in extreme poverty. The poor suffered in particular from inadequate and unsafe water supply and sanitation conditions. The project was expected to improve living conditions and make the lives of many people healthier.3 Better water supply and sanitation services would reduce exposure to pathogens and especially benefit children, who were most susceptible to water-borne diseases. The 30% of the women and children in the project areas who then needed to fetch water every day would have more time available for more productive pursuits once these improvements were made. Appendix 1 shows the project framework and the actual project achievements.

5. At the behest of the Government of India, ADB also prepared an innovative poverty reduction project for financing by the Japan Fund for Poverty Reduction (JFPR) to pilot sustainable approaches to rainwater harvesting and slum development in slum areas in three of the project cities—Jaipur, Jodhpur, and Bikaner. This project was closely aligned with the RUIDP and also closed on 31 March 2009.4

6. In October 2004, ADB approved a major change in scope to (i) add the BWSS, (ii) reallocate $60 million of loan funds, and (iii) extend the loan closing date from 30 June 2005 to 30 June 2006.

II. EVALUATION OF DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION

A. Relevance of Design and Formulation

7. The project was highly relevant to government and ADB sector strategies when it was appraised and remained so at completion. It continues to be highly relevant to ADB’s Strategy

3 The RRP for the project reported a higher prevalence of such vector-borne diseases as malaria in Rajasthan,

where 5,103 cases per 100,000 were reported in 1992-1993, compared with an average of 3,324 cases per 100,000 in the country as a whole in the same period.

4 ADB. 2002. Proposed Grant Assistance to India for Supporting Rainwater Harvesting and Slum Development in Rajasthan. Manila.

3

2020 because of its emphasis on infrastructure-led growth and poverty reduction.5 It was consistent when appraised with the government’s Ninth Five Year Plan (1997–2002), which made poverty reduction and the provision of basic infrastructure primary goals, and was in line on completion with the focus on infrastructure in the country’s tenth and eleventh five-year plans.6 The project responded to the government’s evolving needs7 and to ADB policy on support to weaker states, the bridging of regional economic disparities, and the creation of conditions for inclusive growth.8

8. The project loan modality was the most relevant of the two modalities available at that time—project and program loans—since program lending was better suited to mature executing agencies. By the time the project was completed, the multitranche financing facility had been introduced. It would have suited the project better, had it been available at the time the project was prepared, and was the modality adopted for ADB’s subsequent intervention in Rajasthan.9

9. The project design carried out under ADB project preparatory technical assistance was sound and the level of detail satisfactory (footnote 2). Contract packages were prioritized through a rigorous process of cross-sector evaluation, which compared their technical, financial, and economic feasibility and their likely social and environment impacts. Some interventions were dropped, however, due to an 18 month delay in engaging consultants that led to the government funding and executing these components on its own. Loan savings identified when most of the contract packages were tendered in 2003 were mainly used for part financing of components such as (i) the BWSS,10 which met a critical need for clean water supply in Jaipur on completion;11 and (ii) Improvement of existing hospitals and construction of new hospitals, which improved health services significantly. These changes greatly enhanced the project’s relevance. The project design incorporated lessons from the only previous urban sector project funded by ADB in India, the Karnataka Urban Infrastructure Development Project, as well as from the experiences of the World Bank and other funding agencies in similar projects in the country.12 These lessons included the importance of strong project management and clear institutional arrangements.

10. Feasibility studies during design found widespread environmental and social benefits and a base economic internal rate of return (EIRR) of 12%–32% for the project components.

B. Project Outputs

11. The project provided 7 million people with improved water supply, as targeted during appraisal. Wastewater management achieved coverage of 3.5 million people, compared with

5 ADB. 2008. Strategy 2020. The Long-Term Strategic Framework of the Asian Development Bank 2008-2020.

Manila. 6 Government of India. Planning Commission. http://planningcommission.nic.in/plans/planrel/fiveyr/welcome.html 7 ADB. 2010. Country Operations Business Plan India 2011–2013. Manila 8 ADB. 2009. India Country Partnership Strategy 2009-2012 (Abridged Version). Manila. 9 ADB. 2007. Report and Recommendation of the President (RRP) to the Board of Directors on a Proposed

Multitranche Financing Facility to India for the Rajasthan Urban Sector Development Investment Program. Manila.

10 ADB. 2004. Major Change in Scope: Rajasthan Urban Infrastructure Development Project, India: Manila. The paper provides the rationale for adding the BWSS to the project. It is based on a reappraisal of the project on technical, environment, social, resettlement, financial, and economic grounds.

11 The BWSS component also led to a change in source of water from ground water-based supply to surface water supply, which brought significant environmental benefits.

12 ADB. 1995. Report and Recommendation of the President (RRP) to the Board of Directors on a Proposed Loan to India for the Karnataka Urban Infrastructure Development Project. Manila

4

the appraisal target of 5.2 million.13 The drainage component fell marginally short of the target of 4 million, providing coverage to 3.7 million people. Due to the downsizing of the slum improvement component from 220 slums at appraisal to 129 slums, the targeted coverage of 600,000 people was reduced to about 100,000 people. The transport component benefited 3 million people. The hospital component, added after appraisal, provided access to improved health services not only to residents of four towns (Jaipur, Ajmer, Kota, and Udaipur) but also to their hinterlands (Appendix 1).

12. The project had two major successes in meeting physical targets: it achieved source augmentation of 184 mld for water supply, against an appraisal target of 163 mld for four project cities (Jodhpur, Kota, Bikaner and Udaipur), and reduced dependence on ground water to 57 mld, compared with an initial target of 108 mld, largely due to the 400 mld BWSS, which was based on surface water. Project changes also led to lower achievements in wastewater management than originally planned. Sewage treatment capacity was expanded by 169 mld, compared with the appraisal target of 575 mld, primarily due to a downsizing of the planned Jaipur sewage treatment facilities and dropping of wastewater management in Udaipur. Four landfill sites with a total capacity of 1,200 metric tons per day were provided. However, because the project was designed before India’s Municipal Solid Waste (Management and Handling) Rules 2000 (MSW Rules) were introduced, sanitary landfills with systems of segregation, processing, and treatment of waste required under the new regulations were not provided. The project provided 71 km of storm water drainage (target: 115 km), 14 bridges, and 96 km of the targeted 105 km of road. It improved 17 historic sites and built 10 fire stations. A first phase of e-governance reforms that involved software development collection for property taxes, better financial management, administrative, and other citizen services was completed in the project cities. Appendix 1 provides details of the outputs anticipated at appraisal and those achieved.

13. The most significant change in project scope was the addition of the BWSS at an estimated additional cost of $120 million (ADB financing limited to $60 million), involving a loan extension of 2 years.

C. Project Costs

14. The projected project cost at appraisal was $362 million. The project was reappraised in October 2004 to incorporate the major addition of the BWSS and the overall cost estimate was revised to $393 million. Actual project cost at completion was $446 million. The BWSS accounted for the major part of the overall cost increase. Loan savings of $60 million were assessed in 2003 due to (i) lower-than-expected contract prices at the initial stage, (ii) lower-than-expected consulting fees, (iii) higher allocation under contingencies at appraisal, (iv) a reduction in the scope of the Jaipur water supply subcomponent, (iv) lower interest during construction due to conversion from a pool-based loan to a loan based on the London interbank offered rate, and (v) appreciation of the US dollar against the Indian rupee. The BWSS component was to use these loan savings to provide long-term water supply to Jaipur. Its cost was estimated at $120.0 million and completed for $129.7 million. There was no major shift between foreign and local costs. Despite the increase in actual project cost over the original and revised estimates, the ADB loan remained unchanged at $250 million. The difference was met by the state government, whose share increased from a projected 30% at appraisal to 44% of the actual final cost. Appendix 2 provides details of the original allocation, the reallocation, 13 The appraisal target of creating treatment capacity of 575 mld could not be achieved as 323 mld capacity is

being implemented using other sources of funds. Lack of ownership of the project by the urban local body (ULB) in Ajmer and Kota, downsizing of the sewage treatment capacities in Jaipur, and dropping of wastewater management in Udaipur were the main reasons for the reduction in the number of beneficiaries.

5

and the actual disbursement of ADB financing by category. Appendix 3 compares project costs at appraisal with actual costs.

15. The JFPR approved a grant of $1.9 million for the project, of which $1.6 million was utilized. Contributions from other sources totaled $0.74 million, of which the government contributed 29%, the private sector 42% and communities 29%.

D. Disbursements

16. Loan disbursements were initially slow because of the long lead time taken to prepare for implementation. The disbursement schedule was not adhered to in the initial few years of the implementation, due to the delay in project implementation. Appendix 4 provides a breakdown of disbursements.

17. The loan had provided for an imprest advance to enable quick payments to contractors and ensure low tender premiums. In 2007, however, ADB advised the executing agency to keep the imprest funds in a current account rather than a savings account. The executing agency did not want to keep the imprest funds in a non-interest bearing account and returned the advance.

E. Project Schedule

18. The original loan closing date was 30 June 2005. The loan was extended by 12 months to 30 June 2006 in October 2004 and to 31 March 2008 in September 2005. The loan was extended again by 12 months for completion of the BWSS. Several factors contributed to the delays:

(i) A difference of opinion between the executing agency and ADB delayed appointment of the project management consultant (PMC) by 18 months. The issue was resolved with the intervention of the government of India.

(ii) An additional two months than originally envisaged was needed to set up of the offices of the project consultants.

(iii) Escalation of steel and cement prices in 2003–2004 affected the performance of a few contractors in the bridge projects as they slowed down the implementation for the prices to stabilize. Unanticipated technical issues, including the presence of rock and the absence of bedrock, put some contractors behind schedule. The sewerage system in Ajmer and the Sewashram Bridge in Udaipur were among the subcomponents affected.

(iv) The addition of the BWSS and the hospitals to the project led to a 12 month loan extension. The award of the BWSS contract, originally planned for the first quarter of 2005, was delayed by 15 months due to a change in social safeguard documentation from short resettlement plan to full resettlement plan in accordance with ADB’s requirements and litigation over bids.

19. To overcome delays, the executing agency identified fast-track subprojects, which were implemented simultaneously with detailed design.

20. Although the project closed on 31 March 2009, the rail over bridge (ROB)—a road bridge over railway tracks—at Bikaner and the wastewater management works in Ajmer were still not

6

complete.14 Preparation of this project completion report (PCR) was deferred until substantial completion of the ROB at Bikaner in May 2011. The ROB finally became operational in September 2011.

F. Implementation Arrangements

21. The project’s implementation arrangements were satisfactory. A committee chaired by the Rajasthan minister of urban development was established in November 1999 with full decision making powers on all matters relating to the project at the state level. The project director was a member and secretary. Other members included the state secretaries of finance, planning, tourism, art and culture, and of the Public Health Engineering Department (PHED), the Public Works Department (PWD), and the Urban Development Department (UDD). The executing agency was the state’s UDD, acting through a project management unit (PMU) headed by a project director. The PMU was assisted by the PMC. City-level committees were established in November 2001 in each project city to provide overall guidance and ensure stakeholder consultation. Design and supervision consultants (DSCs) were engaged to help the city PIUs prepare detailed designs and bid documents and supervise contract packages.

22. The officer in charge of each PIU acted as a project engineer and the DSC was the PIU’s technical assistant. All major decisions were taken by the PMU and PIUs. Contractor review meetings chaired by the PMU and attended by the PIU, the DSC, and the contractor were conducted in the field and were successful in discussing and resolving issues. The contractor review meetings initially took place every 2 weeks and were later held every 2 months. The project director also issued construction management system circulars to improve the understanding and implementation of project activities and contract administration.

G. Conditions and Covenants

23. The majority of the loan covenants were fully complied with. The covenant related to non-revenue water reduction was partially complied with.15 Covenants related to increases in water tariffs and institutional reforms were partially complied with after a delay of about 2 years. Appendix 7 provides the status of compliance with loan covenants.

24. Loan covenants relating to water tariff reforms, resettlement, and environment planning and monitoring were modified or added during the project period.16 To begin moving towards compliance with clauses related to water tariff revision in the amended loan agreement, the state government prepared a road map for water tariff rationalization in May 2004 and an action plan for formulating water tariff structure adjustments that aimed for full recovery of operation and maintenance (O&M) costs for water supply systems by 2007–2008.17

14 ADB. 31 December 2009. Project Performance Report (PPR). Manila. The PPR stated that 217 of 220 contracts

had been physically completed as of 31 March 2009 and that the state government had confirmed the availability of state funding to complete the remaining portion of the three ongoing contracts.

15 Kota, with high non-revenue water estimated at 40%, remains non-compliant. 16 ADB. 2005. Amendments to the Amended and Restated Loan Agreement: Rajasthan Urban Infrastructure

Development Project, India. Manila. The amended loan agreement incorporated clauses requiring that the resettlement plan (RP), environmental management plan (EMP) and social action plan (SAP) be implemented to the satisfaction of ADB and that confirmation of proper implementation of the plans would be a precondition to the award of any contracts related to the BWSS. The amended agreement also included clauses regarding commencement of implementation of a water tariff action plan and recognizing that time would be required for the BWSS (including its Japan Bank for International Cooperation funded component) to be implemented..

17 Government of Rajasthan, Public Health Engineering Department, 2004. Road Map for Water Tariff Rationalization. Jaipur.

7

H. Related Technical Assistance

25. The project preparation technical assistance for the project ($600,000) was approved on 15 August 1995 (footnote 2). It identified targets in the six project cities for improvements in water supply, sewerage, and solid waste management, as well as in urban transport and community awareness. It also planned to upgrade slums, civic sites and services, and fire fighting capabilities.

26. The following changes were later made in project design: (i) the addition of the BWSS and hospitals in Jaipur, Ajmer, Udaipur, and Kota to the project’s scope; (ii) the dropping of projects to upgrade wastewater management, solid waste management, fire fighting, and slums in Udaipur due to resistance by the urban local body (ULB) to availing of the loan; (iii) the elimination of some components of slum improvement, such as thrift and credit societies and community centers in Udaipur and Jodhpur; (iv) the dropping of slum upgrading projects in Jaipur, which were instead funded by JFPR; (v) the dropping of site development for commercial centers, and residential development; (vi) dropping of bus and truck terminals and parking; and (vii) a reduction in the scope of the CAPP. The addition of components was made possible due to loan savings (para. 14).

I. Consultant Recruitment and Procurement

27. Differences of opinion that arose between ADB and the UDD over evaluation of consulting firms during recruitment of the PMC were resolved through discussion. Disagreements between ADB and the UDD on timely release of payments to consultants were resolved through dialogue. This resulted in a decision by the PMU in 2003 to process consultant invoices within 15–30 days of receipt.

28. By the time the firms providing the DSCs were appointed, several personnel suggested in their proposal had left the firms. Old rates quoted by the DSCs affected the quality of replacement personnel provided as person-month rates had increased over 18 months period. As a result, the UDD held meetings with the management of the concerned consulting firms and ensured that personnel with the requisite qualifications and experience were posted. Because the state government could not provide counterpart engineers in the PIUs on time, contract variations were made for the DSCs and additional posts of engineers were created and filled by consultants. In the case of the PMC, an international firm, expatriate consultants other than the team leader were not perceived to add value, leading to a consensus on greater suitability of national experts. Packaging contracts, tendering, and evaluation of bids were executed smoothly and were RUIDP’s strong points.

J. Performance of Consultants, Contractors, and Suppliers

29. The overall performance of consultants was generally satisfactory. Slow initial mobilization of personnel by consulting firms and frequent replacement of personnel by individuals without equivalent qualifications and experience led to delays in planning and design. In addition, inadequate pre-design investigations, design changes, and delays in the finalization and issuance of technical drawings led to problems during construction and the need for variation orders. The PMC provided strong support to the PMU.

30. On the whole, the performance of contractors was also satisfactory. A few contractors performed exceptionally well in terms of quality and timely completion, including those that constructed the BWSS, the sewage treatment plant at Delawas in Jaipur, the raw water tunnel

8

at Udaipur, the drainage works at Sursagar in Bikaner, the flyover at Borkheda in Kota, the ROBs at Mandor and Basni in Jodhpur, the Bichwal WTP at Bikaner, and the Mother and Child Hospital at Jaipur, the heritage works in Jaipur, and the fire station at Jaipur. Others overcame unanticipated hurdles due to inadequate geotechnical surveys and showed great commitment to the completion of projects despite the losses they incurred. The UDD helped these contractors finish their work through discussion, dialogue, and some leniency on the project schedule.

K. Performance of the Borrower and the Executing Agency

31. The performance of both the borrower and executing agency was satisfactory. The borrower was represented by India’s national Department of Economic Affairs, which chaired tripartite review meetings with ADB and executing agencies held at least twice a year in the initial period and more frequently later on. It also chaired portfolio reviews involving the executing agency and ADB at least twice a year. These meetings helped identify bottlenecks and monitor project progress on disbursement targets and contract awards. The borrower also facilitated major scope changes proposed by the UDD and helped enhance project effectiveness.

32. After slow progress in the initial 2 years, the UDD improved its performance as the executing agency. Acting through the PMU, it contributed significantly to project development and identified the new components that were taken up with surplus funds from loan savings. The UDD was committed to meeting the implementation schedule and all but three contract packages were completed within a reasonable time. The committee chaired by the UDD minister for overall project monitoring met regularly. RUIDP was characterized by strong and committed leadership throughout the project period. The UDD established effective project implementation procedures, monitoring mechanisms, and procedures for progress reporting from the field early on.

L. Performance of the Asian Development Bank

33. The performance of ADB was satisfactory. The UDD found the training ADB provided to the PMU and its support and expert advice, particularly related to contract packaging highly useful and necessary. In the case of sensitive decisions, ADB monitoring and its transparent procedures enabled smooth project implementation without political interference. Strong ADB commitment to the project was made evident by regular review missions, close monitoring of project progress, and discussions with the UDD to speed up disbursements. ADB also ensured UDD’s presence at bilateral review meetings and portfolio review meetings chaired by the Department of Economic Affairs. This helped the UDD address major hurdles. However, the UDD perceived ADB consultant selection procedures as complex and time-consuming.

III. EVALUATION OF PERFORMANCE

A. Relevance

34. The project was highly relevant to government and ADB country and sector strategies at the time of appraisal and on completion. The changes in the components and outputs of the project design enhanced the project’s social, environmental, and operational impact.

9

B. Effectiveness in Achieving Outcome

35. Overall, the project was effective in achieving envisaged outcomes. Water supply and urban transport components were successful due to the quality of service delivery and innovative designs. A benefit monitoring and evaluation (BME) survey showed that a majority of the respondents reported that these improved services have resulted in a better quality of life.18

36. The improvement of hospitals resulted in significant benefits for the population and slum improvement, better drainage, and heritage protection have also had a positive effect on quality of life.19 Better drainage has been particularly beneficial in Kota, Bikaner and Jaipur.20 In Kota, construction of a diversion channel now prevents the flooding that used to occur in large parts of the town during rains. The wastewater management component was partially effective in achieving its objectives in Bikaner and Kota. It will achieve its objectives in Ajmer only when the planned house connections are provided. Solid waste management facilities provided under the project in Jodhpur, Bikaner, and Kota have not met the new MSW rules. The MSW landfill site in Ajmer is not in use.

C. Efficiency in Achieving Outcome and Outputs

37. Overall, the project is rated efficient. The EIRR, the FIRR, and the financial sustainability of all components other than sewerage, solid waste, slum improvement, and fire fighting services were reassessed for this PCR. The EIRR for water supply components implemented in the six cities, which comprised about 55% of the project cost, ranged from 12.4% in Jaipur to 16.7% in Jodhpur.21 The EIRR for the wastewater management interventions in three cities was assessed as 14.9% in Jodhpur, 25.6% in Bikaner and 32.2% in Jaipur.22 The EIRR for drainage works in six cities ranged from 12.7% in Bikaner to 31.6% in Jaipur. In the case of solid waste management, the EIRR in five cities ranged from 14.0% in Bikaner to 15.3% in Jodhpur. The EIRR for the internal roads in five cities and bridges in six cities ranged from 17.9% in Jaipur to 22.7% in Udaipur.23 No EIRR has been estimated for the slum improvement, fire fighting services, heritage protection, and medical services because these benefits are difficult to quantify. Nonetheless, these subprojects clearly improved the quality of life in the project cities by providing people better access to municipal services. Excluding these subprojects, the overall project EIRR is 17.2% (Appendix 10).

38. The PCR finds the FIRR for the water supply, sewerage, and solid waste management subprojects to be negative. Tariffs are inadequate to recover even operation and maintenance costs the tariff revisions for water and sewerage and the introduction of user charges for solid waste envisaged in the financial improvement action plan at the time of appraisal were not carried out.

18 Government of Rajasthan. Local Self Governance Department. 2009. State Level Benefit Monitoring and

Evaluation Report. Jaipur. 19 The state BME report reported a reduction in average waiting time for emergency cases of 50%, a 33% increase

in number of cases attended to per day, a reduction in average time taken to attend to emergencies from 15 minutes (pre-project) to 5 minutes (post-project), a 30% overall improvement in cleanliness, and more waiting space for patients in the hospitals improved under the project (footnote 18).

20 Drainage channel works in Bikaner have significantly raised the quality of life of residents in the Old City area and improved the environment in Sursagar Lake.

21 The cost of civil works and equipment is considered in the economic analysis. 22 Because the household connections for sewerage in Ajmer and Kota are partially completed and Udaipur did not

implement a sewerage component, the EIRR for sewerage has not been estimated for these cities. 23 The EIRR for the ROB in Bikaner was not assessed.

10

D. Preliminary Assessment of Sustainability

39. Overall, the project is rated likely to be sustainable. This is because the state and/or national governments are likely to ensure the sustainability of the majority of the components. The BME survey in 2007 showed that beneficiary satisfaction with water supply is high in all six project cities (footnote 18). Feedback regarding quantity, pressure, and duration was positive. This augurs well for the sustainability of this component, which is considered likely. The PHED has adequate funds to continue maintaining the water supply systems in all the project cities despite low tariffs24 and the absence of revenue reforms because the sector is highly subsidized by the state government. 25 However, water harvesting through small check dams in the catchment area is being promoted under other government schemes and can threaten source sustainability for large investments like the BWSS.

40. Overall sustainability of the environment improvement component is less likely. However, subcomponents such as hospitals, fire stations, and slum improvements are likely to be sustainable because these facilities are widely used and their comparatively lower O&M funding needs could be met by the ULBs. Sustainability of the sewerage, solid waste management drainage, and heritage protection subcomponents is less likely.26 The project sewerage system in Ajmer has not been handed over to the ULB yet and still lacks the envisaged house connections. Solid waste management projects also appear less likely to be sustainable. The MSW landfill site at Ajmer is unused and MSW Rules are not followed in sites provided in other project cities. Although the ULB in Jodhpur has invited a private operator to manage the MSW landfill site, it is uncertain whether segregated waste is available to ensure viability. Illegal dumping of solid waste in drainage channels continues, indicating the need for awareness generation. Fire stations in cities other than Ajmer are being used and maintained and are likely to be sustainable. Some of the heritage sites are not being well maintained. 41. The sustainability of transport subprojects is likely. Roads and bridges handed over to Urban Improvement Trust and the PWD are being maintained. Despite their initial success and demonstrated effectiveness, CAPP activities are unlikely to be sustainable because the component was gradually downsized. Sustainability of implementation assistance and capacity building is likely because capacity has been built up in the UDD, which is able to manage projects well. Recommendations for follow-up action are in Appendix 12. Those for additional assistance to enhance sustainability of assets created are in para. 55.

E. Impact

42. The BME survey generated the following findings:

24 Water tariffs were last revised in 2007 in the six project cities by the introduction of water infrastructure

development surcharges of 25% for water consumption of 15 cubic meters (cum) to 40 cum per month and 35% for monthly consumption exceeding 40 cum. Even with these tariff adjustments, operation and maintenance cost recovery for the 2010 financial year in the six project cities ranged from 16.5% in Kota to 33.7% in Bikaner.

25 The revenue potential of property taxes has not been tapped in Rajasthan. In 2007, the state abolished its property tax and introduced a new urban development tax (UDT) for properties larger than 300 square yards. The UDT’s potential as a significant revenue source has not yet been realized, however. In April 2011, the state government has decided to extend the UDT to other properties but has not worked out the modalities.

26 Sewerage tariffs are linked to water tariffs as a surcharge, ranging from 20% to 33%, and are collected along with water bill by the PHED. Since water tariffs are low, the sewerage surcharge is inadequate for operation and maintenance cost recovery. To strengthen the ULBs fiscally for better municipal solid waste management, the state government has levied a surcharge on power tariffs of Rs0.15 per unit.

11

(i) Water supply. Improved service in the six project cities has increased per capita water availability. The per capita water supply has increased to 120 liters per capita per day (lpcd) in Udaipur to 150 lpcd in Kota. Less time needs to be spent on water collection because water is available at the doorstep. No water-borne disease was reported by sample households in Bikaner, Jodhpur, Jaipur, or Udaipur and a significant reduction in water- and vector-borne diseases was reported in other towns.

(ii) Wastewater management. A primary survey of 1,418 households revealed that hygienic disposal of wastewater has increased significantly in Bikaner, Jaipur, and Jodhpur. Mosquito populations, poor aesthetics, and damage to roads have been reduced.

(iii) Drainage. Fewer blockages and an increase in the flow of water through proper drainage channels, with less spread, have been reported.

(iv) Urban transport. Commuter traffic has increased and delays have been reduced on the improved roads.

(v) Slum improvement: The percentage of project beneficiary households with access to basic services has risen. Average monthly income in these households has increased 80%–95%.27

(vi) Hospitals. The number of admissions and outpatients has reportedly increased by an average of 21% and overall hospital facilities have improved (Appendix 8).

43. The project had also had other impacts:

(i) The institutional capacity of the UDD increased and staff, consultants, and contractors gained experience in project implementation. This led to greater efficiency in subsequent projects and compliance with ADB policy.

(ii) Economic impacts included a rise in property values in project areas due to the improvements in the environment and quality of life. A special economic zone was developed near Jaipur due to the availability of water, even though the full benefits of BWSS could not be achieved. The construction of flyovers increased access to outlying areas—for example, Sanganer, near Jaipur, and Basni near Jodhpur. This led to greater regional prosperity.

(iii) ADB’s initial investments in urban infrastructure investments triggered investment in some project cities by the Japan International Cooperation Agency and Agence Française de Développement.

44. Under the project reforms, tariff has not increased for households consuming upto 15 kiloliter (KL) water per month. The poor, therefore, have not been affected. 27 The JFPR component aligned with the RUIDP exceeded its targets significantly. It benefitted 25,000 slum

families through (i) improvements in environment and quality of life from better drainage, sanitation, toilets, and garbage collection and (ii) an awareness campaigns. The target had been 20,000. A total of 5,000 families benefitted from access to drinking water through rainwater harvesting, 2,000 more than envisaged. The JFPR component also benefitted 2,000 families through employment of family members as garbage collectors, achieving its target. A particularly successful intervention was the introduction of a computer education program through mobile buses undertaken in slum schools identified for help by the state’s education department in three project cities—Jaipur, Jodhpur and Bikaner (footnote 4).

12

45. The resettlement plan approved by ADB for the BWSS aimed to minimize land acquisition. Land acquired for the WTP and pipelines was either barren or used for rain-fed cultivation. Affected families were granted non-transferable usufruct rights to 32.5 meters of land along both sides of the access road constructed under the project. No one was displaced physically. Except for 19 families who found the compensation amount too less and entered into litigation, compensation and assistance was provided to all those affected. The socioeconomic survey of the affected families in eight villages showed no significant change in their economic status due to land acquisition by the project or its impacts on other assets. ADB approved a social action plan (SAP) in March 2006 for income restoration activities to help people affected by the Bisalpur dam and reservoir component. Overall, implementation of the SAP and the resettlement plan was satisfactory and complied with ADB’s Involuntary Resettlement Policy, 1995.

46. Environment covenants have generally been complied with. None of the subprojects required environmental clearance under regulations in effect at the time. The UDD confirmed that the requisite “Consents to Establish” were obtained from the Rajasthan State Pollution Control Board before works began. However, the UDD reported that “Consents to Operate” the WTPs and sewage treatment plants and “Authorization” for MSW landfill sites were not obtained. Details of social and environmental safeguards compliance are provided in Appendix 9.

IV. OVERALL ASSESSMENT AND RECOMMENDATIONS

A. Overall Assessment

47. Overall, the project is rated successful. It was highly relevant to government and ADB policies at appraisal and remained so on completion. The project is assessed as effective in achieving the envisaged outcomes. It has contributed significantly to achieving the Millennium Development Goals in the project cities, particularly the goal related to water supply and sanitation. This overall success can be attributed to sound planning and monitoring processes and quick corrections in the project’s course when they were needed. The CAPP component succeeded in generating awareness and fostering demand for the project from the public in the initial stages. The project led to significant improvement in the project management abilities of PMU and PIU personnel and the consultants and contractors.28 Reassessment of economic returns of all completed projects revealed an EIRR over 12%. However, all the completed subprojects show a negative FIRR and sustainability targets have not been achieved because the planned tariff reforms have not been implemented. Service roads have not been completed for the ROB at Bikaner, the sewerage system in Ajmer has not been turned over, and house connections to sewerage have not yet been provided in Ajmer and Kota. Completion of these unfinished project elements should be emphasized and strictly monitored.

B. Lessons

48. The project yields the following important lessons:

(i) Along with consultations related to project formulation and design, consultation with participating towns on cost recovery, tariffs, and user charges is crucial for

28 The infrastructure construction sector in Rajasthan was at a nascent stage when the project began but

experience gained by contractors during implementation has helped it develop into a mature industry. The project’s capacity building contribution was particularly evident in the highly specialized field of heritage conservation. Artisans who gained experience in heritage works under the project later became contractors for heritage works.

13

sustainability.

(ii) Advance action on the recruitment of project consultants can help avoid delays.

(iii) Acting in advance to begin designs, package bids, and obtain all statutory clearances can help avoid delays.29

(iv) Information, education, and communication aimed at changing the behavior of urban residents are necessary to achieve design results.

(v) Involving specialist agencies for specific components—the Indian National Trust for Art and Cultural Heritage for this project’s heritage component, for example— leads to positive outcomes.

(vi) A good project performance monitoring system is essential to avoid ad hoc or delayed decisions. Weekly contractor review meetings, a practice introduced by the UDD, can help get past implementation hurdles in a timely manner.

(vii) Small investments can have large impacts and make a big difference to people’s lives. Examples from this project include the hospitals in the project cities and the diversion channel for rainwater in Kota.

(viii) Including house service connections and door-to-door solid waste collection in the project scope ensures that the assets created will be used effectively.

(ix) Providing for price variation in the contracts of private operators reduces project risks and is a fair practice.

(x) Achieving critical mass in the staffing of the PMU and PIUs and retaining key staff members for the duration of the project are important factors in smooth implementation.30

(xi) Providing awards and incentives to contractors for quality and timely delivery, as done by the UDD, helps foster a spirit of competition and better performance.

(xii) Timely induction of counterpart staff and building up their capacity is critical to a successful handover of assets to ULBs and line agencies.

(xiii) Initiating CAPP activities early on and continuing them beyond the end of the project enhances a project’s effectiveness and sustainability.

C. Recommendations

49. This PCR recommends that ADB take the following steps to improve future projects and programs:

29 The cell for obtaining statutory approvals and clearances set up in the PMU at a later stage expedited

clearances. 30 A number of engineers involved in the project’s design and familiar with packaging and contract conditions

remained with PMU through implementation and greatly facilitated its execution.

14

(i) ADB should monitor the implementation of the financial improvement action plan developed for a project or program on a half-yearly basis. It should monitor progress on commitments to tariff reforms annually to ensure that projects are sustainable.

(ii) ADB should develop standardized procedures for the benefit monitoring and evaluation of urban infrastructure projects. The procedures should focus on data requirements for economic analysis of project components.

1. Project Related

50. Project completion delay. ADB should monitor progress quarterly for the next 6 months on the completion of project assets that are not yet fully operationalized or are not yielding the envisaged project benefits. This includes the sewerage systems in Ajmer and Kota and service roads for the ROB at Bikaner. The executing agency should submit action taken and progress reports.

51. Covenants. Preparation of the financial Improvement action plan for a project like this needs to involve the project cities if it is to realistic and fully implemented. A city’s ownership and the likelihood that it will adhere to proposed reform measures, such as tariff increases, needs to be assessed before covenants related to financial reforms are drafted at the appraisal stage.

52. Implementation arrangements. A loan covenant should include an appropriate institutional mechanism to provide staff in the PMU before loan signing.

53. Second generation imprest account. The executing agency should be allowed to maintain the second generation imprest account (SGIA) as an interest-bearing savings account rather than a non-interest-bearing current account. This would avoid imposing a loss of interest on the borrower and reduce the loan burden. Interest income could be used for incremental administration expenditures. ADB stipulates that reimbursement be credited to the SGIA “immediately.” The transfer of funds from the government to the SGIA took about 3 months during this project. ADB disbursements had to move through the government, the Reserve Bank of India, and the state finance department. This illustrates the need to define “immediately” in such circumstances.

54. Follow-up actions. These include completion of the ROB service road and house sewerage connections and are listed in Appendix 12.

55. Additional assistance. ADB should consider additional assistance to increase project effectiveness, improve on its outcomes and benefits, and reach people not included in the original project. Help is required to (i) provide similar levels of services to the growing peri-urban areas in each of the six project cities; (b) provide last-mile connectivity not undertaken as part of the project contracts; (iii) supply water meters to further reduce non-revenue water in the project cities; and (iv) ensure the adequate collection, segregation, and treatment of MSW to complement the MSW landfill facilities the project created.

56. Timing of the project performance evaluation report. The report should be prepared near the end of 2013 when all components should have been completed and operational for at least 2 years. Completion and a 2 year operational period is necessary for a proper assessment of the project’s use, operation and maintenance, and accrual of benefits from the Project.

15

57. Institutionalizing Project Management Unit of the Rajasthan Urban Infrastructure Development Project. It will be important to institutionalize the capacity developed during implementation of the RUIDP and use it for improved coverage and delivery of urban services in Rajasthan.

2. General

58. The PCR makes the following general recommendations:

59. Expanded technical assistance inputs. To speed up implementation during a project’s initial stages, project preparatory consultants should prepare detailed designs and bid documents for initial contract packages and for national competitive bidding, in particular.

60. Contingency. Allocation under contingency in project cost estimates during appraisal needs to be rationalized and reduced.

61. Recruitment of project consultants. Procedures for consultant selection need to be simplified to enable faster recruitment. Delegating more responsibilities to mature executing agencies could be considered in future projects. This might include eliminating the need for ADB approval of the short list of consulting firms and the draft request for proposals.

62. Clubbing of contracts. Contracts should be combined in fewer packages to reduce delays and facilitate effective management, coordination, and monitoring.31

63. Operation and maintenance contracts. Contracts for O&M need to cover longer periods (footnote 31).

64. Mobilization advance monitoring. Safeguards are required to ensure that contractors use mobilization advances for project purposes only.

65. Policy impacts. The impact of any new policy on previous policies or investment decisions needs to be carefully evaluated. In the case of water supply projects, source sustainability checklists need to be prepared and monitored at the state, provincial, or equivalent level.

66. Advocacy. Strong advocacy and awareness generation is needed to ensure that policy and institutional reforms are actually undertaken.

31 Based on learning from the RUIDP, the PMU has put this into practice in the subsequent loans.

16 Appendix 1

PROJECT FRAMEWORK

Design Summary

Performance Indicators or

Targets Project

Achievements Monitoring

Mechanisms Assumptions and

Risks

1. Goal

1.1 Improve quality of life in the urban areas

• Increase economic activities and revenue base of municipalities

• Compared with the 2004–2005 period, revenue base for water supply and wastewater management in 2009–2010 had increased by 5.1% in Ajmer, 5% in Bikaner, 11.6% in Jaipur, 9.6% in Jodhpur, 7.7% in Kota, and 8.5% in Udaipur.

• Statistical abstracts published by the Bureau of Economics and Statistics

• Reports by Chamber of Commerce

• Hospital and medical center records

• Natural disasters • Public health and

environment departments and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) support public education and environmental health awareness

• Time savings by improved services and reduction in morbidity due to improved public health conditions

• Time taken for water collection was reduced from 13 minutes per day in Jodhpur and 52 minutes per day in Bikaner in pre-project scenario to no separate time spent on water collection in post-project scenario, as per the State Benefit monitoring and evaluation (BME) report. Incidence of water borne disease was reported by 4.0%–34.0% of households in pre-project scenario and reduced to 0.2%–1.0% in the post project scenario

1.2 Improve gross state product (GSP)

• GSP to increase at a faster rate

• GSP growth rate changed from 5.2% in pre-project scenario (1990–1999) to 6.7% during 2000–2010.a

• Published documents of the state government

• Policies reformed for enhancing investments

1.3 Improve guided planning of urban areas

• Land optimization • Town planning legislation enacted in October 2008. New system for maintenance of urban land records for the six project cities implemented

• Monthly progress reports

• Review missions • Project completion

report (PCR)

• Laxity in enforcement of development control

• Lack of coordination with line departments for provision of sector

Appendix 1 17

Design Summary


Targets Project



Risks • Reduction in of

non-conforming uses

• Long-term city development plans prepared for all six project cities to ensure appropriate development control regulations through land-use controls.

services

• Optimization of infrastructure network

• Existing infrastructure network integrated with newly constructed facilities to achieve optimization in all six cities across different sectors

2. Purpose

2.1 Improve urban infrastructure, management, and resource mobilization in Project cities

• Provide urban infrastructure at service level to approximately 90% of the population (14.5 million) within the Project area by 2011

• 7 million people provided with improved water supply, 3.5 million people with wastewater management services, 3.7 million with storm water drainage, 3 million with urban transport, and 0.1 million with slum improvement


• Review missions • PCR

• The state cabinet approves the proposed increase in tariffs to a level that more closely reflects the real cost of supply, and approves other policy measures regarding cost recovery and devolution of powers to ULBs

• Recover cost, devolve powers to urban local bodies (ULBs), improve financial and technical capability of ULBs, enhance asset management capability of ULBs

• –

• Introduce public–private partnership

• Public–private partnership in the form of service contracts for operation and maintenance of treatment plants, waste management, and few historical sites introduced

3. Outputs

3.1 Improved water supply

• Source augmentation of 163 million liters per day (mid) with creation of additional treatment facilities in Jodhpur,

• 184 mld of water supply augmented with creation of additional treatment facilities in Jodhpur, Kota, Bikaner, and Udaipur

• Feedback from NGOs implementing the community participation component

• Project monthly

• Funding is made available in accordance with the loan disbursement schedule and financing plan

18 Appendix 1

Design Summary


Targets Project



Risks Kota, Bikaner, and Udaipur

reports prepared by Project management unit and consultants


• PHED have adequate skilled human resources to effectively manage and operate the increased asset base created under the Project

• Cost recovery through enhanced tariff

• Sufficient counterpart funds from the state government for the Bisalpur component

• Development of spot tube well sources in Jaipur to augment 108 mid of water supply

• 57 mld (49%) achieved with 190 tube wells

• Source augmentation of 400 mld of water from Bisalpur reservoir to supplement or replace dwindling ground water supply

• 400 mld BWSS augmented

• Rehabilitation and extension of distribution systems in all the Project cities to supply water to 8 million beneficiaries (equivalent) by 2011

• 1,763 km (100%) completed, benefitting about 7 million people

3.2 Improved wastewater management facilities

• Construction of interceptors and branch sewer lines (1,885 kilometers [km]), sewage treatment facilities (capacity 575 mld) stations to benefit about 6 million people by 2011

• 1,171 km (99%) sewer lines laid and 169.5 mld sewage treatment capacity achieved, with 5 STPs benefitting about 3.5 million people




• Funding is made available in accordance with the loan disbursement schedule and financing plan

• Community development program is effectively undertaken

• PHED and municipality have adequate skilled human resources

• Conduct public awareness programs, including providing incentives for promoting house connections

• Public awareness campaigns conducted

3.3 Improved solid waste management

• Improved collection system by providing door-to-door collection service

• Four landfills (1,200 t/day) constructed in Ajmer, Bikaner, Jodhpur, and Kota




• Municipality have adequately skilled human resources to effectively manage and operate the increased asset base created under the Project

• Community development program is effectively undertaken

• Public awareness program for effective collection

• Public awareness campaigns conducted

• Cost effective transport and environmentally safe disposal of waste by encouraging public-

• –

Appendix 1 19

Design Summary


Targets Project



Risks private partnership

• Safe, dedicated incineration of hospital waste

• Dropped from the project. Undertaken using other funds

3.4 Improved stormwater drainage

• Rehabilitation of 115 km of major open drains, and provision of adequate outfall to benefit about 3 million people

• 73 km of storm water drains rehabilitated and constructed, benefitting about 3.7 million people



• Improper maintenance will lead to choking of drains

3.5 Improved urban transport

• Construction of bridges at congested rail intersections

• 14 ROBs completed. Service roads of 1 ROB at Bikaner still in progress



• Delays due to coordination with railway authority

• Delays in land acquisition in Jaipur and Bikaner • Construction of

bridge over Chambal River at Kota

• Dropped from the project. Undertaken using other funds

• Rehabilitation and widening of 332 km of existing roads

• 96 km rehabilitated and constructed, including ROBs, benefitting about 3.0 million people

• Construction of parking lots, truck and bus terminals

• Dropped from the project

3.6 Improved living conditions in slums

• Improvement of infrastructure in about 220 slums to benefit 100,000 households (water supply, drainage, sanitation, solid waste management, roads and footpaths, and street lighting)

• Improvement of infrastructure in 129 slums completed (reduced from 220 slums), benefitting 100,000 households




• Effective community development program

• Delay in establishment of community development societies and neighborhood societies

• Beneficiaries contribute to costs and effectively maintain improvements

• Training in health education

• Completed

• Income-generation schemes including microcredit


• Construction of community centers

• Completed in Kota

• Establishment of neighborhood development fund, thrift and credit societies to benefit about 500,000 people


20 Appendix 1

Design Summary


Targets Project



Risks

3.7 Developed sites and services and protected historical and cultural resources

• Construction of community centers in Udaipur and Jodhpur




• Delays in land acquisition

• Lack of demand for the commercial facilities provided under the Project

• Nonremoval of encroachments around historical monuments

• Development of sites for commercial centers in Udaipur, Bikaner, and Jodhpur


• Site development for truck and bus terminals in Bikaner


• Site development for residential development in Jodhpur


• Land use control and environmental improvements at important historic sites in all Project cities

• 17 historical sites developed in Jaipur, Jodhpur, and Kota

3.8 Enhanced safety by improvement of fire services system

• Construction of fire station buildings

• Ten fire station buildings constructed in Ajmer, Bikaner, Jaipur, Jodhpur, and Kota.



• Employment of new staff

• Procurement of equipment and vehicles

• Equipment and vehicles procured

• Training of personnel

• Training completed

4. Activities

4.1 Civil works (water supply)

• 72 contracts ($108.8 million)

• Successful

completion of contracts

• 72 contracts

physically completed



• Availability of competent contractors

• Funding is made available in accordance with the progress of works

4.2 Civil works (wastewater management)


• Successful


• 46 contracts






4.3 Civil works (solid waste management)


• Successful


• 3 contracts






Appendix 1 21

Design Summary


Targets Project



Risks

4.4 Civil works (storm water drainage)

• 9 contract ($9.3 million)

• Successful


• 9 contracts






4.5 Civil works (urban transport)


• Successful


• 29 contracts


• 1 contract package substantially completed



• Delays due to coordination with railway authority




4.6 Civil works (slum improvement)


• Successful


• 5 contracts




• Beneficiaries cost contribution



4.7 Civil works (heritage and sites and services)


• Successful


• 8 contracts







4.8 Civil works (fire and emergency medical services)


• Successful


• 15 contracts






4.9 Equipment (water supply, wastewater, solid waste, fire)


• Successful


• 17 contracts




• Availability of competent suppliers


5.0 Inputs

5.1 Consulting Service

22 Appendix 1

Design Summary


Targets Project



Risks

• Project management

• Timely mobilization • Deliverable

provided in time

• Mobilized in May 2001 and contract completed



• Timely availability of competent consultants

• Design & construction supervision (DSC)


provided in time

• Three DSCs mobilized in June 2001 and contract completed. DSC for Bisalpur Water Supply Project mobilized in October 2007 and contract completed




• Benefit monitoring and evaluation


provided in time

• Consultants for baseline BME study mobilized in September 2004 and contract completed. Consultants for final BME study mobilized in June 2008 and contract completed




• Community awareness and participation program


provided in time

• Mobilized in October 2003 and contract completed




• Aerial photography, and production of base maps


provided in time

• Mobilized in February 2000 and contract completed




• Integrated computer system for Project cities


provided in time

• Mobilized in February 2005 and contract completed




BME = benefit monitoring and evaluation; BWSS = bisalpur water supply scheme; DSC = design and supervision consultants; GSP = gross state product; km = kilometer; t = ton; mld = million litres per day; NGO = nongovernmental organization; – = not available; PCR = project completion report; PHED = public health engineering department; ROB = rail over bridge; STP = sewage treatment plant; ULB = urban local body. a Government of India. Central Statistical Organisation. Ministry of Statistics and Program Implementation.

www.mospi.nic.in. Sources: Urban Development Department, Government of Rajasthan.

Appendix 2 23

BREAKUP OF FOREIGN EXCHANGE COST AND LOCAL CURRENCY COST BY COMPONENT ($ million)

Item

Appraisal Revised Actual

Cost Foreign Local Cost Foreign Local Cost Foreign Local

A. Base Cost by Component

Community awareness and participation 4.00 0.00 4.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.89 0.00 0.89

Water supply rehabilitation and expansion 91.00 41.00 50.00 71.00 32.00 39.00 75.58 21.53 54.05

Urban environmental improvements 96.00 29.00 67.00 93.00 28.00 65.00 111.69 31.28 80.41

Urban transportation and management 24.00 6.00 18.00 51.00 13.00 38.00 56.69 15.35 41.34

Implementation assistance and capacity building 33.00 9.00 24.00 20.00 5.00 15.00 31.64 5.15 26.49

Bisalpur water supply scheme Phase 1, Part 1 120.00 60.00 60.00 129.67 56.23 73.44

Subtotal (A) 248.00 85.00 163.00 356.00 138.00 218.00 406.16 129.54 276.62 B. Contingencies

Physical 24.00 8.00 16.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Price 47.00 10.00 37.00 6.00 1.00 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Subtotal (B) 71.00 18.00 53.00 6.00 1.00 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 C. Interest During Construction 43.00 24.00 19.00 31.00 15.00 16.00 39.79 12.00 27.79

Total 362.00 127.00 235.00 393.00 154.00 239.00 445.95 141.54 304.41

Source: Asian Development Bank

24 Appendix 3

ALLOCATION, REALLOCATION AND ACTUAL DISBURSEMENT OF ADB FINANCING BY CATEGORY

($ million)

Cat Code Category ADB Financing

Original Allocation

Revised Allocation (Oct 2004)

Revised Allocation (Mar 2005)

Revised Allocation (Dec 2005)

Last Allocation (Mar 2009)

Net Amount

Available Amount

Disbursed Undisbursed

Balance

01 Civil works 76 % (28% foreign and 48% local expenditure) 143.00 156.00 160.50 154.12 158.37 158.37 158.09 0.28

01A Civil works 10% of expenditure 2.88 2.58 2.58 2.58 0.00

02 Equipment and materials

100% of foreign and 31% of local expenditure 45.00 4.00 4.00 3.00 2.55 2.55 3.67 (1.12)

02A Equipment and materials 10% of expenditure 0.20 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.00

03 Consulting services

100% of foreign and 66% of local expenditure 23.00 10.00 11.00 12.60 12.56 12.56 12.37 0.19

03A Consulting services 10% of expenditure 0.20 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.00

04 Implementation assistance

100% of foreign and 50% of local expenditure 4.00 2.00 2.50 5.00 4.62 4.62 4.74 (0.12)

05 Interest and commitment charge 100% of amount due 24.00 15.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 0.00

06 Unallocated 11.00 3.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

07 Bisalpur water supply scheme

50% (100% of foreign expenditure) 60.00 60.00 60.00 57.00 57.00 56.23 0.77

Total 250.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 0.00

Source: Asian Development Bank, Loan Financial Information System.

Appendix 4 25

CONTRACT AWARDS AND DISBURSEMENTS ($ million)

Year

Contract Awards Disbursements

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Total Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Total

1999 Projection 3.00 3.00 0.00 0.00 Actual … … 0.40 0.40

2000 Projection 0.00 0.00 3.00 4.00 7.00 0.00 0.00 0.50 0.50 1.00 Actual 0.00 0.02 0.00 4.75 4.77 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.20 0.30

2001 Projection 2.20 7.10 0.00 0.00 9.30 0.00 0.10 0.80 0.40 1.30 Actual 0.00 0.00 3.10 8.14 11.24 0.00 0.34 0.11 0.53 0.98

2002 Projection 1.00 4.00 5.00 9.00 19.00 0.00 0.90 1.06 14.30 16.26

Actual 0.64 0.81 12.98 20.58 35.01 0.00 0.00 3.00 2.00 5.00 2003 Projection 5.00 10.00 20.00 5.00 40.00 5.00 5.50 6.00 7.00 23.50





Actual 0.00 1.55 0.00 1.52 3.07 0.52 12.41 10.34 15.10 38.37 2008 Projection … … … … 10.50 10.60 9.20 6.60 36.90

Actual 0.82 0.24 0.11 9.21 10.38 5.13 8.60 7.91 18.67 40.31 2009 Projection 5.70 0.00 5.70 6.80 8.10 14.90

Actual 3.06 5.60 8.66 3.49 11.39 14.88 … = data not available; Q = quarter. Source: Asian Development Bank.

26 Appendix 5

SUMMARY OF CONTRACT DETAILS

PCSS No.

Contract Amount

($)

ADB Financing

($) Disbursed

($) Contract Package Contract Description Contractors

Contract Award

Actual Completion

Community Awareness 0160 893,213 585,326 585,326 CAPP Consulting service for the community

awareness and participation program Indian Institute of Rural Management

30 Oct 03 1 May 05

Water Supply 0009 173,005 131,484 131,484 JAI/WS/03 Supply, installation, testing, and

commissioning of different sizes of polyvinyl chloride and DI pipelines in rising and distribution system in Khati

Anandi Lal Lalpuria 2 Feb 02 1 Jan 03

0010 143,682 109,198 109,198 JAI/WS/01 Construction of CWR of 2.5 million liters and overhead service reservoir of 1.0 million liters capacity

Lahoty Builders 16 Jan 02 8 Jan 03

0011 220,111 167,284 167,284 JAI/WS/02 Construction of pumping station, including mechanical, electrical, instrumentation, and power connection in Khatipura area

Dynamic Engineers 2 Feb 02 5 Mar 03

0025 630,701 479,333 479,333 JAI/WS/06 Works of supply, installation, testing, and commissioning of different sizes of polyvinyl chloride and DI pipelines in rising main

Tolani Fabricators 1 Jul 02 15 Nov 03

0048 2,054,353 1,542,784 1,542,784 JAI/WS/14 Laying of distribution pipeline in Murlipura, Mahesh Nagar, Vidyut Nagar, and Nirman Nagar

IVRCL Infrastructure and Project

29 Oct 02 24 Aug 06

0064 1,038,166 789,006 789,006 JAI/WS/11 Laying of transmission pipeline from Malviya Nagar Sector 9 to Jawahar Nagar, Mohan Nagar to Govind Nagar, Mansarovar Sector 1 to Shyam Nagar

Sheth and Sura Engineers

4 Dec 02 27 Dec 03

0065 212,103 132,941 132,941 JAI/WS/13 Construction of 3 pumping stations for Murlipura, Mahesh Nagar and Vidyut Nagar area

Trading Engineers International

10 Dec 02 31 Mar 06

0070 655,899 502,590 502,590 JAI/WS/04 Construction of 75 tube wells in various locations in Jaipur city

K Ramakrishna Contractor

10 Jan 03 15 Jun 04

0071 818,967 614,772 614,772 JAI/WS/05 Construction of 3 CWRs and 7 Engineering 10 Jan 03 31 Jul 05

Appendix 5 27

PCSS No.

Contract Amount

($)

ADB Financing

($) Disbursed


Contract Award

Actual Completion

OHSRs Projects (India)

0109 1,527,850 921,585 921,585 JAI/WS/07 Laying of distribution pipeline for Jhotwara and Kalyan Nagar area

Nagarjuna Construction

20 Mar 03 31 Jul 07

0140 202,726 126,274 126,274 JAI/WS/08 Construction of 3 pumping stations for Jhotwara central, Jhotwara north, and Kalyan Nagar area

Trading Engineers International

16 Jun 03 31 Jan 07

0092 530,000 402,147 402,147 JAI/WS/09 Replacement of old and inefficient pumping machinery

International Pumps and Projects

21 Feb 03 26 Nov 05

0093 643,388 485,956 485,956 JAI/WS/12 Construction and commissioning of CWRs and OHSRs in Jhotwara and Kalyan Nagar, Jaipur

Jaihind Projects 24 Feb 03 14 Jul 06

0146 830,690 628,189 628,189 JAI/WS/15 Construction and commissioning of CWRs and OHSRs in various colonies of Jaipur

Jaihind Projects 4 Aug 03 19 Jul 06

0145 1,297,292 852,114 852,114 JAI/WS/16 Providing, laying, jointing, testing, and commissioning of water supply works in various colonies of Jaipur


4 Aug 03 30 Jun 07

0107 1,269,463 760,498 760,498 JAI/WS/17 Construction of tube wells in various colonies of Jaipur city


2 Apr 03 28 Feb 07

0162 190,003 97,343 97,343 JAI/WS/19 Construction and commissioning of pumping stations in Jaipur

Voltaz 20 Oct 03 31 Jan 07

0037 1,326,268 987,372 987,372 JOD/WS/04 Construction and commissioning of service reservoirs and ancillary works in Jodhpur city

IVRCL Infrastructure and Projects

23 Sep 02 12 Aug 05

0038 1,551,965 1,177,649 1,177,649 JOD/WS/08 Gravity transmission main system from Paola circle to Digan ESR and Chopasni gravity system, Jodhpur

Engineering Projects

23 Sep 02 30 Nov 04

0039 3,095,229 2,331,121 2,331,121 JOD/WS/05 Gravity transmission system from Kailana CWR to Paota Circle, Jodhpur


23 Sep 02 30 Dec 04

0086 1,065,059 826,053 826,053 JOD/WS/03 Construction, commissioning, operation, and maintenance of 60 mld WTP at Jodhpur

NV Kharote Construction

3 Jan 03 31 Mar 07

28 Appendix 5

PCSS No.

Contract Amount

($)

ADB Financing

($) Disbursed


Contract Award

Actual Completion

0128 937,214 385,931 385,931 JOD/WS/09 Augmentation of existing clear water supply pumping station and refurbishment of existing WTP, Jodhpur

Voltaz 8 Apr 03 28 Feb 06

0094 1,452,578 1,080,740 1,080,740 JOD/WS/11 Providing , laying, jointing, and commissioning of various sizes pipelines in Jodhpur

Mcnally Bharat Engineering Company

27 Feb 03 30 Apr 05

0149 909,939 691,361 691,361 JOD/WS/14 Construction and commissioning of CWRs and OHSRs in various colonies of Jodhpur

Gondwana Engineers

29 Jul 03 28 Feb 06

0018 127,221 96,691 96,691 UDA/WS/01 Construction of overhead service reservoir and pipeline at Amba Mata area at Udaipur

Anurag Enterprises 10 Apr 02 8 Sep 03

0042 328,259 248,493 248,493 UDA/WS/05 Construction of overhead service reservoir and CWRs at various locations of Udaipur city


24 Sep 02 31 Aug 05

0056 935,929 689,422 689,422 UDA/WS/04 Rising and gravity mains of Udaipur city, using DI Pipes

Shriram Engineering Construction

4 Oct 02 31 Aug 05

0060 2,412,417 1,830,238 1,830,238 UDA/WS/09 Pipelines of various sizes in Talai zone, Mansi Wakal zone, Jhamar Kotra zone at Udaipur


30 Oct 02 31 Aug 05

0066 624,099 488,935 488,935 UDA/WS/10 Construction of service reservoirs at various locations (Phase-II) in Udaipur

SN Enviro-Tech 9 Dec 02 31 Aug 06

0125 808,762 557,605 557,605 UDA/WS/08 Construction, commissioning, operation, and maintenance of 23.35 mld output capacity WTP along with construction of CWR at Udaipur

SN Enviro-Tech 1 Apr 03 30 Nov 07

0164 3,342,828 2,478,926 2,478,926 UDA/WS/12 Design and construction of 4.6 km tunnel with reinforced cement concrete lining in hills near Dewas dam for Udaipur water supply

Valecha Engineering

5 Dec 03 30 Jun 07

0183 1,817,431 1,414,081 1,414,081 UDA/WS/13 Providing, laying and jointing, testing, and commissioning of mild steel pipeline from outlet to WTP at Nandeshwar

The Modern Construction Company

17 Jan 05 30 Jun 07

Appendix 5 29

PCSS No.

Contract Amount

($)

ADB Financing

($) Disbursed


Contract Award

Actual Completion

0102 717,454 493,601 493,601 UDA/WS/O2 13.5 mld WTP, Teetardi, Udaipur Geo Miller 28 Dec 02 22 Jan 03

0199 1,167,105 136,820 136,820 UDA/WS/11 Lot 1

providing new distribution pipeline for 15 zones and connecting pipeline for newly built ESR to distribution system, Udaipur

Electrosteel Castings

26 Aug 05 31 Mar 07

0206 & 0239

650,088 307,823 307,823 UDA/WS/11 Lot 2

Providing new distribution pipeline for 15 zones and connecting pipelines for newly built ESR to distribution system, Udaipur

Electrosteel Castings

26 Aug 05 31 Mar 07

0035 243,317 184,921 184,921 BIK/WS/03 Rehabilitation of water supply pumping station, including supply, installation, testing and commissioning of civil, mechanical and electrical works, Bikaner

Mather and Platt Pumps

25 Jul 02 31 Mar 06

0036 992,471 729,233 729,233 BIK/WS/02 Providing, laying, jointing, testing, and commissioning of pre stressed cement concrete water transmission main from Beechwal to JPS, Bikaner

Vichitra Prestressed Concrete Udyog

4 Jul 02 28 Feb 05

0085 901,162 610,893 610,893 BIK/WS/01 Construction, commissioning, operation, and maintenance of 40 mld WTP at Beechwal, Bikaner

Gannon Dunkereley

30 Dec 02 31 Mar 06

0150 1,049,998 756,675 756,675 BIK/WS/04 Construction, commissioning, operation, and maintenance of 40 mld WTP, along with construction of CWRs at Bikaner

Driplex Water Engineering

21 Aug 03 31 Dec 06

0114 866,831 527,929 527,929 BIK/WS/05 Providing, laying, testing, and commissioning of pre stressed cement concrete Water transmission main from Sobhasar to new master head works, Bikaner

Aqua Prestressed Product (JV)

10 Mar 03 31 Jul 07

0119 1,624,750 1,098,349 1,098,349 BIK/WS/06 Construction of raw water reservoir with earthern embankment and allied works at Sobhasar head works, Bikaner

RSB Projects 31 Mar 03 31 Jan 2005

0157 1,759,655 1,205,710 1,205,710 BIK/WS/07 Construction of water pumping station and new master headworks at

WPIL 10 Oct 03 31 Dec 06

30 Appendix 5

PCSS No.

Contract Amount

($)

ADB Financing

($) Disbursed


Contract Award

Actual Completion

Sobhasar and Bikaner

0095 970,383 604,352 604,352 BIK/WS/08 DI secondary transmission pipelines (Phase-I) within Bikaner city

Electrosteel Castings (JV)

4 Feb 03 31 Jan 05

0124 1,509,033 1,136,893 1,136,893 BIK/WS/10 Construction of service reservoirs and ancillary works in Bikaner city

Jaihind Project 26 Feb 03 31 Mar 06

0116 2,292,588 1,713,633 1,713,633 BIK/WS/12 Providing, laying, jointing, testing, and commissioning of DI secondary transmission pipelines, Bikaner

Engineering Projects (India)

3 Mar 03 31 Mar 06

0151 517,621 391,733 391,733 BIK/WS/13 Construction of new pumping stations and refurbishment of existing water distribution pumping station at Bikaner

Trading Engineers 23 Aug 03 31 Mar 06

0193 & 0235

2,145,152 1,443,426 1,443,426 BIK/WS/11 Providing, laying, jointing, testing, and commissioning of various sizes pipelines for water distribution, Bikaner


16 Aug 05 30 Nov 07

0029 536,064 407,322 407,322 AJM/WS/01 Distribution network, including providing, laying, jointing, and testing of various sizes of polyvinyl chloride, cast iron and DI pipes, Ajmer

RB Construction 20 Jun 02 30 May 04

0104 1,765,281 1,272,934 1,272,934 AJM/WS/03 Distribution system and rising and gravity mains for Makhupura, Foyasagar, Vaishalinagar at Ajmer

Mcnally Bharat Engineering

26 Feb 03 15 May 06

0141 903,404 580,733 580,733 AJM/WS/04 Construciton of reinforced cement concrete OHSRs, ground level service reservoir and CWRs with or without pumping station at Makhupura, Foysagar, Vaishali Nagar at Ajmer

Geo Miller 29 Apr 03 30 Apr 07

0052 1,435,666 1,038,305 1,038,305 AJM/WS/02 pre stressed cement concrete pipeline at Ajmer

Aqua Prestressed Products in JV

22 Oct 02 30 Jun 07

0020 450,866 341,388 341,388 KOT/WS/01 Construction of 10.6 million liters capacity CWR at Akhelgarh headworks Kota, including rehabilitation of OHSRs at Kota


28 Jun 02 30 Aug 04

0030 25,519 19,389 19,389 KOT/WS/03 Rehabilitation of existing World Bank pump house at Kota

Voltaz 23 Jul 02 8 Jun 03

Appendix 5 31

PCSS No.

Contract Amount

($)

ADB Financing

($) Disbursed


Contract Award

Actual Completion

0059 967,309 707,819 707,819 KOT/WS/06 Construction of OHSRs at various locations in Kota

S N Environ-Tech 30 Oct 02 31 Mar 07

0080 621,428 425,350 425,350 KOT/WS/02 Construction, commissioning, operation, and maintenance of intake pumping station at Akhelgarh headworks at Kota


16 Jan 03 9 Mar 07

0111 943,671 574,048 574,048 KOT/WS/04 Construction of pumping stations, including mechanical, electrical, and civil works at Kota

Bharat Heavy Electrical

16 Apr 03 30 Nov 06

0068 941,170 700,094 700,094 KOT/WS/05 64 mld WTP at Kota Gannon Dunkerley 27 Dec 02 30 Nov 06

0088 955,642 726,288 726,288 KOT/WS/07 Construction of OHSRs in various colonies at Kota

Gammon India 6 Feb 03 31 Oct 06

0076 1,943,362 1,320,745 1,320,745 KOT/WS/08 Clear water and raw water pipelines at Kota


4 Feb 03 6 Mar 07

0153 1,067,793 686,136 686,136 KOT/WS/09 Construction, commissioning, operation and maintenance of pumping stations including civil, mechanical and electrical works in Kota

WPIL 12 Sep 03 30 Jun 07

0137 984,268 707,562 707,562 KOT/WS/10 Lot 2

Providing and laying of clear water transmission pipelines at Kota

Electrosteel Casting JV

23 May 03 30 Nov 06

0138 845,256 640,015 640,015 KOT/WS/10 Lot 3



23 May 03 30 Nov 06

0136 894,747 650,158 650,158 KOT/WS/10 LOT1



23 May 03 30 Nov 06

0174 842,731 550,648 550,648 KOT/WS/11 Lot 1

Providing, laying, jointing, testing, and commissioning of various sizes distribution pipelines in Kota


7 Apr 04 6 Jun 07

0175 790,375 503,344 503,344 KOT/WS/11 Lot 2

Providing, laying, jointing, testing, and commissioning of various sizes distribution pipelines at Kota


7 Apr 04 6 Jun 07

0184 1,137,279 767,879 767,879 KOT/WS/12 Construction of OHSRs in new developed areas and construction of CWR, pump house, tube wells at Kota

Gondwana Engineers

28 Jan 05 30 Sep 07

32 Appendix 5

PCSS No.

Contract Amount

($)

ADB Financing

($) Disbursed


Contract Award

Actual Completion

0185 1,864,035 1,385,670 1,385,670 KOT/WS/13 Providing, laying and jointing, testing, and commissioning of sanitary sewers at Malviya Nagar, Kota

Sheth and Sura Engineers

19 Jan 05 30 Sep 07

0220 410,070 244,311 244,311 KOT/WS/16 Providing, laying, jointing, and commissioning of various size clear water and raw water pipelines, Kota

Vichitra Constructions

7 Feb 08 25 Mar 09

0214 1,590,890 1,177,624 1,177,624 KOT/WS/17 Design, build, construction, commissioning of leftover work of intake pumping station at Akhelgarh headworks, Kota

WPIL 6 Sep 07 30 Sep 08

0148 1,461,882 880,871 880,871 BSL/CWR/01 Construction and commissioning of CWR of 30 million litres near Balawala, Sangner

Gondwana Engineers

18 Aug 03 31 May 08

0208 129,665,988 56,231,794 56,231,794 BSL/TKY/01 Bisalpur water supply project, transmission system works

Larsen and Toubro 30 Jun 06 31 Dec 10

0237 1,132,464 860,673 860,673 UDA/WS/11 Lot 7

Providing new distribution pipeline for 15 zones and connecting pipeline for newly built ESR to distribution system, Udaipur

Electrosteel Casting

26 Aug 05 30 Mar 07

0169 227,696 242,562 242,562 PMU/WS/03 Lot 1

Electromagnetic type flow meters up to 300 mm in water supply pipelines of project cities

Krohne Marshall 13 Apr 04 31 Jan 07

0170 264,886 196,073 196,073 PMU/WS/03 Lot 2

Electromagnetic flow meters of above 300 mm size in water supply pipelines of project cities

Krohne Marshall 13 Apr 04 31 Jan 07

Environmental Improvements 0012 140,753 106,972 106,972 JAI/WW/01 Supply, installation, testing, and

commissioning of sanitary sewers in Himmat Nagar and Indira Nagar, Jaipur

Krishna Contractors

2 Feb 02 15 Feb 03

0021 1,033,599 785,535 785,535 JAI/WW/05 Supply, installation, testing, and commissioning of property connection work in area of top Khana Desh, Modi Khana, Jaipur

Ramky Engineers 3 Jul 02 7 Aug 04

0027 1,008,595 766,532 766,532 JAI/WW/06 Supply, installation, testing, and commissioning of property connection

Ramky Engineers 15 Jun 02 28 Feb 06

Appendix 5 33

PCSS No.

Contract Amount

($)

ADB Financing

($) Disbursed


Contract Award

Actual Completion

work in areas of Gangapole, Ramchandraj, Jaipur

0031 1,305,778 991,997 991,997 JAI/WW/03 Supply, installation, testing, and commissioning of sanitary sewers in Dev Nagar and other places, Jaipur

Ramky Engineers 3 Jul 02 10 Nov 04

0032 932,544 707,678 707,678 JAI/WW/04 Supply, installation, testing, and commissioning of sanitary sewers in Imli ka Phatak, JP Colony and Madhuban Colony, Jaipur

Ramky Engineers 3 Jul 02 24 Feb 05

0134 324,637 246,381 246,381 JAI/HS/01 Renovation and construction for Galta Gate, Ajmeri Gate, and Sanganeri Gate and their surrounding, Jaipur

Rishabh Construction

24 May 03 25 Jun 04

0097 163,022 123,897 123,897 JAI/HS/02 Renovation and conservation of Chandpol Gate and New Gate and surroundings, Jaipur

Rajputana Construction

24 Feb 03 15 Feb 05

0098 90,956 68,611 68,611 JAI/HS/04 Renovation and conservation of Panna Meena Ka Kund, Amber, Jaipur


24 Feb 03 15 Jul 04

0177 4,745,707 359,631 359,631 JAI/HS/09 Renovation and conservation of Kundlab Gate, lake edges, Kheri, Mathura, Varaih Gate and surroundings, Amber, Jaipur

Ravi Brothers 30 Jul 04 31 Jul 05

0180 423,345 321,742 321,742 JAI/HS/11 Conservation of lake edges and revival of water bodies, Sagar Lake, Jaipur


3 Sep 04 30 May 06

0176 359,093 271,212 271,212 JAI/HS/12 Renovation and conservation of Surajpol Gate, Zorawae Singh, Ghati Gate and surroundings, Jaipur


10 Aug 04 29 Dec 06

0166 566,973 430,510 430,510 JAI/MS/01 Rehabilitation of infrastructure facilities and expansion of existing building of Zanana hospital, Jaipur


21 Nov 03 31 Jul 05

0163 1,043,026 792,181 792,181 JAI/MS/02 Development and rehabilitation of infrastructure facilities of Mahila Chikitsalaya at Sanganeri Gate, Jaipur

Offshore Industrial Construction

5 Dec 03 18 Nov 05

34 Appendix 5

PCSS No.

Contract Amount

($)

ADB Financing

($) Disbursed


Contract Award

Actual Completion

0181 1,311,820 906,032 906,032 JAI/MS/04 Construction development and rehabilitation of infrastructure facilities and expansion, Jaipur

UP Rajkiya Nirman Nigam

10 Sep 04 31 May 07

0182 4,302,734 2,908,728 2,908,728 JAI/MS/05 Construction of new outpatient department and operation theatre buildings and allied works of campus development in SMS hospital, Jaipur

UP Rajkiya Nirman Nigam

10 Sep 04 31 Oct 09

0047 149,336 113,495 113,495 JAI/FR/01 Construction of fire station buildings and allied works at Mansarovar and Sanganer near Bambala Nallah, Jaipur

Avas Vikas Limited 10 Oct 02 7 Oct 03

0129 967,897 735,602 735,602 JAI/DR/01 Construction and channelization of Brahmapuri and Jawahar Nagar nallahs at Jaipur

PD Kanojiya 12 May 03 31 Aug 04

0156 3,111,583 2,216,762 2,216,762 JAI/WW/10 Design, build, construction, commissioning, operation and maintenance of 62.5 mld STP at Delawas, Jaipur

Vatech Wabag 5 Nov 03 31 Aug 06

0161 1,436,336 677,992 677,992 JAI/WW/11 Renovation, modernization, operation, and maintenance of 27 mld STP at Jaipur

Hindustan Dorr-Oliver

2 Dec 03 31 Jan 2007

0155 1,117,401 838,007 838,007 JAI/WW/13 Providing, laying, jointing, testing, and commissioning of sanitary sewers, including outfall up to Jaisinghpura Khor, Jaipur

Mcnaaly Bharat Engineering

7 Oct 03 8 Oct 04

0127 1,180,812 871,338 871,338 JAI/WW/15 Lot 3

Providing, laying, jointing, testing, and commissioning of sanitary sewers in various colonies Jhotwara (West) and Sanganer, Jaipur

Anandi Lalpuria 12 May 03 11 Aug 04

0132 1,256,938 879,110 879,110 JAI/WW/16 Lot 3

Providing, laying, jointing, testing, and commissioning of sanitary sewers in various colonies of north zone and outfall, Jaipur

Larsen and Toubro 14 Apr 03 30 Sep 06

0131 931,093 708,242 708,242 JAI/WW/16, Lot 1

Providing, laying, jointing, testing, and commissioning of sanitary sewers in various colonies of north zone, Jaipur

Larsen and Toubro 7 May 03 22 Jul 06

Appendix 5 35

PCSS No.

Contract Amount

($)

ADB Financing

($) Disbursed


Contract Award

Actual Completion

0147 1,145,800 850,935 850,935 JAI/WW/17 Providing, laying, jointing, testing, and commissioning of sanitary sewers in various colonies of Sanganer, Jaipur

Mcnaaly Bharat Engineering

4 Aug 03 22 Jul 06

0186 1,155,911 897,293 897,293 JAI/WW/23 Providing, laying, jointing, testing, and commissioning of various sizes transmission pipelines, Jaipur

Anandi Lalpuria 1 Jan 05 30 Nov 06

0192 & 0234

275,365 192,854 192,854 JAI/MS/03 Development and rehabilitation of infrastructure facilities and expansions of existing building, Jaipur

Rajputana Constructions

23 May 05 31 May 07

0219 & 0232

300,772 109,975 109,975 JAI/MS/07 Supply, installation, testing, and commissioning at SMS hospital addressable type fire detection and protection system, Jaipur

Eureka Forbes 2 Aug 07 31 Aug 08

0203 & 0238

1,774,293 1,429,017 1,429,017 JAI/WW/ 21 Providing, laying of outfall sewer Jal Mahal to Jaisinghpura Khor in Jaipur

Ramky Infrastructure

28 Apr 05 27 Apr 07

0014 194,496 147,817 147,817 JOD/WW/02 Supply, installation, testing, and commissioning of sanitary sewers in Rajeev Nagar and Shakti Nagar Colony, Jodhpur

Swastic Constructions

7 Feb 02 15 Apr 03

0016 171,582 130,402 130,402 JOD/SI/02 Work for providing roads, sewage, and dainage in Sansi Basti and Harizan Basti at Jodhpur

Anurag Enterprises 9 Apr 02 15 Sep 03

0017 127,497 96,898 96,898 JOD/SI/01 Providing roads, sewerage, and drainage in Banzara Basti and Jagjivan Ram Colony at Jodhpur

Anurag Enterprises 9 Apr 02 28 Aug 03

0040 1,544,509 1,155,877 1,155,877 JOD/WW/03 Sanitary sewers in Mahamandir zone, service connections, and restoration of roads, Jodhpur


23 Sep 02 31 Mar 06

0101 1,946,352 1,354,407 1,354,407 JOD/SI/04 Area development works in various residential colonies, Jodhpur

ERA Construction India

22 Feb 03 10 May 05

0089 863,213 656,042 656,042 JOD/SI/05 Area development works at Jodhpur Rajasthan State Road Development and Construction Corporation

3 Feb 03 30 Sep 06

36 Appendix 5

PCSS No.

Contract Amount

($)

ADB Financing

($) Disbursed


Contract Award

Actual Completion

0069 2,100,164 1,581,949 1,581,949 JOD/WW/04 Construction of manholes, service connections, and appurtenances and restoration of roads in Jodhpur

Nagarjuna Construction Company

30 Dec 02 15 Nov 06

0108 3,544,723 2,461,733 2,461,733 JOD/WW/07 Supply, installation, testing, and commissioning of sewers in Jalamand zone in Jodhpur


27 Mar 03 31 Jan 06

0123 821,676 622,582 622,582 JOD/WW/09 (Lot II)

Providing, laying, jointing, testing, and commissioning of sanitary sewers in Pal-II zone, Jodhpur


1 Apr 03 31 Mar 06

0110 1,735,806 1,311,060 1,311,060 JOD/WW/09 LOTI

Providing, laying, jointing, testing, and commissioning of sanitary sewers in Pal-II zone, Jodhpur


1 Apr 03 31 Mar 06

0121 732,308 553,493 553,493 JOD/WW/10 Lot II

Providing, laying, jointing, testing, and commissioning of sanitary sewers in Pal-III zone and outfall sewer, Jodhpur

Khurana Engineering

1 Apr 03 31 Dec 04

0106 1,381,690 1,037,583 1,037,583 JOD/WW/10(Lot 1)

Providing, laying, jointing, testing, and commissioning of sanitary sewers in Pal-III zone, Jodhpur

Larsen and Toubro 31 Mar 03 31 Mar 06

0133 789,156 590,501 590,501 JOD/WW/11 Construction, supply, installation., testing, and commissioning of civil, mechanical and electrical works and operation and maintenance of STP, Jodhpur

Driplex Water Engineering

21 May 03 31 Dec 04

0105 1,683,008 1,098,821 1,098,821 JOD/WW/13 Providing, laying, jointing, testing, and commissioning of sewers including rehabilitation, Jodhpur

Aban Constructions 27 Mar 03 26 Feb 04

0113 1,210,278 914,632 914,632 JOD/WW/14 LOTII

Providing, laying, jointing, testing, and commissioning of sanitary sewers in Pal-I zone of Jodhpur, Lot 2

Aban Constructions 20 Mar 03 31 Dec 06

0112 1,502,900 1,034,589 1,034,589 JOD/WW/14, Lot I

Providing, laying, jointing, testing, and commissioning of sanitary sewers in Jodhpur

Aban Constructions 20 Mar 03 30 Nov 07

0041 184,350 140,106 140,106 JOD/FR/01 Construction of fire station building and allied works at Jodhpur

Avas Vikas Limited 24 Sep 02 29 Apr 04

Appendix 5 37

PCSS No.

Contract Amount

($)

ADB Financing

($) Disbursed


Contract Award

Actual Completion

0063 610,273 362,616 362,616 JOD/DR/01 Construction of new drains and strengthening of existing drains at Jaipur

Shivalaya Construction

5 Dec 02 30 Dec 04

0099 2,507,265 1,895,820 1,895,820 JOD/DR/02 Remodeling and strengthening of drainage channels and construction of new drains, Jodhpur

Jai Hind Projects 25 Feb 03 30 Nov 05

0194 & 0236

473,445 341,131 341,131 JOD/CW/01 Development of Fateh Sagar and Gulab Sagar sites of Jodhpur city

Rajputana Constructions

29 May 05 30 Jun 07

0077 -1,188 -1,188 UDA/WW/03 Outfall sewer from Manwa Khera to STP at Udaipur

Khurana Engineering

21 Jan 03 …

0067 1,085,048 814,693 814,693 UDA/DR/01 Construction of various storm water drains in Udaipur city

ANS Constructions 10 Dec 02 31 May 07

0191 & 0233

552,446 390,439 390,439 UDA/MS/02 Extension and rehabilitation of hospital buildings and development of infrastructure in MB hospital, Udaipur

Praman Construction

18 May 05 31 Jul 06

0043 1,105,870 676,625 676,625 AJM/WW/04 Supply, installation, and commissioning of trunk sewers in Shastri Nagar and Police Line area, Ajmer


25 Sep 02 19 Apr 07

0044 337,445 198,690 198,690 AJM/WW/03 Supply of main outfall sewers and lateral sewers Inana Sagar area, Ajmer


25 Sep 02 20 Apr 07

0051 3,596,983 1,969,557 1,969,557 AJM/WW/05 Trunk sanitary sewers at Ajmer Khurana Engineering

30 Oct 02 31 Oct 08

0173 612,348 461,606 461,606 AJM/MS/01 Construction of satellite hospital at Ajmer

Avas Vikas 26 Feb 04 31 Jan 06

0142 777,787 589,292 589,292 AJM/SI/01 Area development works such as water supply, roads, drainage in various housing colonies of Ajmer

Rajasthan State Road Development and Construction Corporation

12 May 03 18 May 05

0082 1,706,814 1,230,150 1,230,150 AJM/WW/06 Sewers in Kesar Ganj, Pahar Ganj, Bhagwan Ganj and Ram Ganj areas at Ajmer

Ramky Engineers 11 Dec 02 28 Feb 06

38 Appendix 5

PCSS No.

Contract Amount

($)

ADB Financing

($) Disbursed


Contract Award

Actual Completion

0081 2,922,449 1,640,795 1,640,795 AJM/WW/08 Sewers in Jones Ganj, Adarsh Nagar, Gaddi Maliyan, and Subash Nagar areas of Ajmer

Vichitra Prestressed Concrete

28 Dec 02 31 Dec 08

0049 686,396 513,349 513,349 AJM/DR/01 Realigning and construction of Kazika Nallah drain, Mahaveer Colony drain, Vaishali Nagar Diversion Channel, Ajmer

Khurana Engineering

30 Oct 02 5 Mar 05

0050 120,109 91,283 91,283 AJM/FR/01 Construction of fire station building and allied works at Ajmer

Avas Vikas 25 Sep 02 9 Oct 03

0084 682,184 482,442 482,442 AJM/DR/02 Construction of various storm water drains and development of landfill site at Ajmer

L.N Agarwal in JV 10 Jan 03 30 Sep 04

0213 & 0229

4,207,591 1,673,454 1,673,454 AJM/WW/12 Construction, commissioning, operation and maintenance of 20 mld STP at Khanpura, Ajmer

Geo Miller 9 Jun 07 31 Mar 10

0216 & 0231

749,424 464,436 464,436 AJM WW 13 Construction of retaining wall, earthwork of bed for Anasagar escape channel, compound wall of STP, Ajmer

Laxmi Narayan Agarwal

8 Oct 07 20 Apr 09

0054 2,446,195 1,464,128 1,464,128 BIK/DR/01 Construction of new drainage channel from culvert no.4 near police line to culvert no.17 in Bikaner


26 Oct 02 31 Dec 07

0046 858,170 416,809 416,809 BIK/DR/02 Remodelling of escape drainage channel from Soorsagar to Vallabh Garden in Bikaner


26 Oct 02 18 Dec 06

0053 142,029 107,935 107,935 BIK/FR/01 Construction of fire station building and allied works Rajasthan Industrial Investment Corporation, Beechwal Industrial Area and at Murlidhar Vyas Colony, Bikaner

Avas Vikas 27 Sep 02 12 Dec 03

0096 541,409 411,455 411,455 BIK/DR/03 Construction of new drain, remodelling of existing drain, and development of landfill site at Bikaner

Bharat Construction

17 Feb 03 5 Jun 07

0211 2,072,672 1,481,824 1,481,824 BIK/DR/04 Construction of leftover work of escape drainage channel from Soorsagar to Vallabh garden in

Prabhu Dayal Kanojiya

12 Apr 07 31 Mar 08

Appendix 5 39

PCSS No.

Contract Amount

($)

ADB Financing

($) Disbursed


Contract Award

Actual Completion

Bikaner

0143 1,194,415 687,305 687,305 BIK/WW/01 Construction, commissioning, operation and maintenance of 20 mld STP at Vallabh Garden, Bikaner

Petron Civil Engineering

12 May 03 30 Jun 07

0072 1,732,617 1,309,835 1,309,835 BIK/WW/03 Lateral interceptor and outfall sewer in Jai Narayan Vyas Colony and adjoining areas in Bikaner

Prabhu Dayal Kanojiya

10 Dec 02 31 Mar 06

0117 2,047,165 1,528,971 1,528,971 BIK/WW/05 (Lot 2)

Providing, laying, jointing, testing, and commissioning of laterals and interceptor sewers in Kothari hospital, Bikaner

ERA Construction 31 Mar 03 31 Mar 06

0135 1,678,688 1,231,966 1,231,966 BIK/WW/05 Lot I

Providing, laying, jointing, testing, and commissioning of lateral and interceptor sewers in Kothari hospital, Bikaner

ERA Construction 31 Mar 03 31 Mar 06

0115 1,024,913 770,328 770,328 BIK/WW/06 (LOT1)

Providing, laying, jointing, testing and commissioning of lateral, interceptor sewers in Pawanpuri area including house connection

Larsen and Toubro 20 Mar 03 7 Jul 06

0126 301,946 226,804 226,804 BIK/WW/06 LOT2

Providing, laying, jointing, testing and commissioning of lateral sewers in Pawanpuri area including house connection, Bikaner

Voltaz 16 Apr 03 31 Mar 06

0120 1,547,338 1,165,173 1,165,173 BIK/WW/07 Providing, laying, jointing, testing and commissioning of outfall sewer from Tulsi Circle to STP, Bikaner


31 Mar 03 31 Mar 06

0118 865,304 645,689 645,689 BIK/WW/08 Providing, laying, jointing, testing and commissioning of lateral sewers in Pawanpuri Area and house connections, Bikaner

Ramky Engineers 20 Mar 03 15 Jun 05

0058 135,509 102,987 102,987 KOT/FR/01 Construction of fire station building and allied works at Shrinathpuram, Kota

Vijay Galav Contractor

26 Sep 02 30 Nov 03

0062 1,786,372 1,113,434 1,113,434 KOT/WW/01 Supply, installation, testing, and commissioning of sanitary sewers

Nagarjuna Construction

5 Dec 02 31 Mar 08

40 Appendix 5

PCSS No.

Contract Amount

($)

ADB Financing

($) Disbursed


Contract Award

Actual Completion

including rehabilitation at Kota

0165 359,787 273,438 273,438 KOT/MS/01 Construction of satellite hospital at Kota

Avas Vikas 8 Dec 03 19 Jan 06

0188 355,430 270,127 270,127 KOT/MS/03 Upgradation of urban health facilities in different dispensaries of Kota

Navbharat Nirman 12 Jan 05 10 Jan 06

0139 1,039,495 790,016 790,016 KOT/SI/01 Area development work such as water supply, road, drain, community building in various colonies of Kota


19 Jun 03 4 Jan 07

0168 1,774,845 986,990 986,990 KOT/WW/05 Design, construction, operation, and maintenance of 20 mld capacity STP at Kota

Geo Miller 28 Feb 04 31 Mar 08

0187 1,039,962 671,455 671,455 KOT/WW/12 Providing, laying and jointing, testing, and commissioning of various sizes transmission pipelines at Kota

Keti Construction 3 Feb 05 30 Jun 07

0196 & 0226

3,275,300 1,612,969 1,612,969 KOT/DR/02 Construction of small pickup weir on Banda Dharampura nallah, excavation of about 5 km drainage channel, Kota

Keti Construction 25 Jul 05 31 Dec 07

0212 & 0228

1,673,606 716,430 716,430 KOT/WW/15 Construction of SPS—civil, mechanical, and electrical works in various colonies of Kota

Kirloskar Brothers 13 Apr 07 31 Mar 10

0195 & 0222

1,989,316 1,344,507 1,344,507 KOT/HS/03 Restoration and conservation of Jagmandir and CB tank including addition of viewers gallery

Navbharat Nirman 18 Aug 05 31 Aug 08

0197 & 0223

2,001,588 1,252,434 1,252,434 KOT/MS/02 Upgradation of medical facilities in medical college at Shrinathpuram at Kota

Avas Vikas 30 Mar 05 31 Dec 07

0087 520,315 499,196 499,196 PMU/FR/01 Supply of fire tenders Ashoka Engineering

15 Jan 03 15 Apr 05

0154 440,845 422,271 422,271 PMU/FR/03 Lot I

Procurement of water bauser Kamal Coach Works

20 Sep 03 17 Aug 05

0159 114,175 108,851 108,851 PMU/FR/03 Lot-2

Supply of portable pumps—14 numbers.

Kirloskar Brothers 15 Oct 03 14 Jun 04

0171 70,183 68,756 68,756 PMU/SW/01 Weighbridges at solid waste dumping Digital Weighing 15 Mar 04 31 Aug 05

Appendix 5 41

PCSS No.

Contract Amount

($)

ADB Financing

($) Disbursed


Contract Award

Actual Completion

sites of 5 project cities Systems

0079 301,826 248,509 248,509 PMU/SW/03 Supply of loader backhoe Escorts JCB 5 Feb 03 31 May 04

0100 33,706 33,160 33,160 PMU/SW/04 Supply and delivery of tractors with hydraulically operated tipping trolleys and water tanker trolley

Rajasthan Tractor Machinery

21 Feb 03 14 May 04

0078 261,228 236,199 236,199 PMU/SW/05 Supply of 90 horsepower track type bull dozers

Bharat Earth Movers

13 Jan 03 14 Jun 03

0172 89,130 84,863 84,863 PMU/WW/01 Lot 2

Vehicle mounted sewer line cleaning jetting machine of 500 liters capacity

CSG – JPWT Consortium

2 Apr 04 26 Apr 05

0178 409,595 407,741 407,741 PMU/WW/01 LOT1

Supply and delivery of sewer line cleaning machines (suction and/or jetting)—300 liters and 8500 liters capacity

Kam Avida enviro Engg.

20 Jul 04 3 Oct 05

0205 & 0243

566,988 343,298 343,298 PMU/SW/06 Lot 2

Supply and delivery of secondary storage containers of capacity 2.5 cum and its carrier vehicle

Eicher Motors in JV Technic Fabrications

16 Nov 05 15 Sep 06

0198 & 0240

319,428 292,611 292,611 PMU/SW/08 Lot 2

Supply and delivery of 1.1 cum bins and suitable compactors for solid waste management, Lot 2

TPS Manufacturing and Construction Company

6 Mar 06 15 Sep 06

0204 & 0242

515,971 322,722 322,722 PMU/SW/06 Lot 3

Supply and delivery of secondary storage containers of capacity 7 cum and its carrier vehicle for solid waste management

Eicher Motors in JV Technic Fabrications

16 Nov 05 15 Sep 06

0209 & 0244

109,676 97,293 97,293 PMU/SW/07 Lot 1

Supply and delivery of van for lifting and transportation of cattle

Technic Fabrications

16 Jun 06 2 Jan 07

0210 & 0245

120,184 107,169 107,169 PMU/SW/07 Lot 2

Supply and delivery of van for lifting and transportation of dogs

Force Motors 20 Jun 06 2 Jan 07

0201 & 0241

106,177 90,445 90,445 PMU/SW/08 Lot 1

Supply and delivery of road sweepers for solid waste management, Lot 1

TPS Manufacturing and Construction Company

4 Feb 06 15 Sep 06

Urban Transport 0008 159,248 120,725 120,725 JAI/ST/01 Widening and strengthening of road

from Transport Nagar crossing to Om Prakash Agarwal

2 Feb 02 30 Nov 02

42 Appendix 5

PCSS No.

Contract Amount

($)

ADB Financing

($) Disbursed


Contract Award

Actual Completion

reserved armed constabulary head quarter crossing on Jaipur-Delhi

0022 396,381 259,378 259,378 JAI/BR/02 Construction of ROB at Durgapura near Dalda factory in lieu of level crossing no.81-C

Nila Baurat Engineering

22 May 02 31 Dec 03

0023 496,371 328,212 328,212 JAI/BR/01 Construction. of ROB at New Sanganer road in lieu of level crossing no. 79,

Nila Baurat Engineering

19 Jun 02 31 Dec 03

0024 2,113,711 1,567,311 1,567,311 JAI/BR/03 Construction. of ROB at Khatipura in lieu of level crossing no. 227-B

Aban Constructions 19 Jun 02 30 Nov 04

0026 1,487,495 1,130,496 1,130,496 JAI/ST/03 Widening and strengthening of road from reserved armed constabulary head quarter crossing to Karbala Road junction on Delhi road, Jaipur

Bhoorathnam and Company

3 Jul 02 2 Jul 03

0028 1,793,408 1,362,990 1,362,990 JAI/ST/02 Widening and strengthening of Sikar road (NH-11) from Jhotwara junction up to C-zone bypass crossing

Bhoorathnam and Company

3 Jul 02 2 Jul 03

0144 2,128,713 1,373,265 1,373,265 JAI/BR/05 Construction of ROB at Hasanpura road railway crossing near Jaipur junction railway station at Jaipur

Stresscrete India 19 Jul 03 31 Mar 08

0167 2,992,927 2,143,245 2,143,245 JAI/BR/09 Construction of balance work of ROBs at Dalda factory railway crossing 81C and New Sangner road railway crossing

Aban Constructions 28 Jan 04 18 Jun 05

0122 3,077,465 2,324,208 2,324,208 JAI/ST/05 Widening and strengthening of road from Karbala junction to Amber road junction on Delhi bypass road, Jaipur

Valecha Engineering

13 Apr 03 29 Sep 06

0013 191,859 145813 145813 JOD/ST/02 Widening and strengthening of road Jaisalmaria Choraya to Kailana junction

Dwarka Das Doshi 20 Feb 02 24 Feb 03

0015 643,154 190001 190001 JOD/ST/01 Widening and strengthening of road from Nagori Gate to Mahamandir and Paota 'C' road to RTO Office

Dwarka Das Doshi 25 Feb 02 2 Oct 03

0033 1,064,159 803,383 803,383 JOD/BR/01 Construction of ROB near Mandore railway station on level crossing no. C11

Vijay M. Mistry Construction

10 Jul 02 30 Dec 03

Appendix 5 43

PCSS No.

Contract Amount

($)

ADB Financing

($) Disbursed


Contract Award

Actual Completion

0034 1,114,447 842,817 842,817 JOD/BR/02 Construction of ROB near Basni industrial area in lieu of level crossing no. C-206


10 Jul 02 24 Jan 04

0045 1,323,988 1,006,231 1,006,231 JOD/ST/04 Widening and strengthening of various roads of Jodhpur city

Aban Constructions 10 Oct 02 29 Dec 04

0090 2,246,759 1,679,256 1,679,256 JOD/BR/03 Construction of ROB on level crossing B-1 and B -172


3 Feb 03 2 Feb 04

0073 2,082,098 1,562,879 1,562,879 JOD/ST/05 Widening and strengthening of roads in Jodhpur city

GR Agarwal Builders

10 Jan 03 31 Oct 04

0055 347,173 282,216 282,216 UDA/BR/01 Widening of bridge across river Ayad at Udaipur

Khurana Engineering

9 Oct 02 30 Sep 04

0057 2,362,054 1,789,491 1,789,491 UDA/BR/02 Construction of ROB at Sewashram level crossing no. 77, Udaipur

Aban Constructions 11 Oct 02 30 Apr 07

0074 2,135,061 1,615,369 1,615,369 UDA/ST/05 Widening and strengthening of roads, including improvement to junctions, in Udaipur city


3 Feb 03 31 Aug 05

0091 890,311 676,636 676,636 UDA/ST/07 Widening and strengthening of road, Ambamata circle to Rampura circle, Udaipur

GR Agarwal Builders

19 Feb 03 31 Aug 05

0158 3,155,819 2,001,695 2,001,695 AJM/BR/03 Construction of ROB at central reserved police force Railway Crossing at Ajmer

Aban Constructions 8 Oct 03 30 Apr 07

0103 2,029,323 1,505,702 1,505,702 AJM/ST/02 Widening and strengthening of road from Ramganj to Transport Nagar on Beawar road and construction of ramp, Ajmer

National Builders 3 Feb 03 10 May 05

0083 1,355,383 1,017,935 1,017,935 AJM/ST/03 Widening and strengthening of roads from bus stand to MDS University Tiraha on Jaipur road


5 Dec 02 15 Dec 04

0019 1,674,666 1,272,746 1,272,746 KOT/BR/01 Construction of fly over at Chhawani circle, Kota


26 Jun 02 31 Dec 03

44 Appendix 5

PCSS No.

Contract Amount

($)

ADB Financing

($) Disbursed


Contract Award

Actual Completion

0152 2,791,103 2,107,879 2,107,879 KOT/BR/02 Construction of ROB on Borkhera–Anantpura bypass road at Kota


26 Aug 03 30 Jun 05

0075 2,518,798 1,906,974 1,906,974 KOT/ST/06 Widening and strengthening of NH 12 and NH 76 in Kota

National Builders 4 Feb 03 31 Mar 05

0200 & 0227

3,664,554 2,065,586 2,065,586 KOT/ST/12 Widening and strengthening of ring road from Borakhera NH 76 to delhi cloth mills circle to Anantpura at Kota

Ambay-KB (JV) 16 Jan 06 20 Mar 09

0207 & 0225

3,305,806 2,002,614 2,002,614 KOT/ST/11 Construction of bypass link road from Borakhera to delhi cloth mills railway crossing at Kota

Keti Construction 22 Mar 06 20 Mar 09

0202 & 0224

2,801,692 1,730,491 1,730,491 KOT/ST/10 Upgradation of road from aerodrome circle to delhi cloth mills railway crossing at Kota

Ambay-KB (JV) 16 Jan 06 20 Jun 08

0230 & 0215

4,341,925 1,168,020 1,168,020 BIK BR 02 Construction of ROB approaches and viaduct spans on Bikaner Gajner road (NH-15) level crossing no.1

Kirloskar Construction and Engineers

26 Sep 07 25 Jun 11 (Substantial completion)

Capacity Building 0218 1,103,970 271,206 271,206 PMC

REVISED Project management consultancy services from 1 December 2006 to 31 December 2008

Consulting Engineering Services and ORG

15 Nov 06 31 Dec 08

0221 185,415 105,837 105,837 BME Benefit, monitoring, and evaluation consultant

Lea Associates South Asia

16 Jun 08 31 Dec 08

0217 1,089,905 534,769 534,769 BSL/CSC Construction supervision consultant for the subproject of Bisalpur water supply project

Shah Technical Consultants

10 Oct 07 31 Mar 09

0004 1,517,845 1,517,845 1,517,845 Consultancy services for project management

Louis Berger International

28 May 01 15 Nov 06

0004 1,008,920 1,008,920 1,008,920 Consultancy services for project management

Louis Berger International

28 May 01 31 Dec 06

0005 3,582,638 2,318,095 2,318,095 Consultancy services for design and supervision in Jaipur (Package I)

Shah Technical Consultants

28 Jun 01 30 Jun 05

0006 4,771,203 3,249,031 3,249,031 Consulting services for design and construction supervision for Kota, Udaipur and Ajmer towns

Consulting Engineering Services

28 Jun 01 31 Dec 06

Appendix 5 45

PCSS No.

Contract Amount

($)

ADB Financing

($) Disbursed


Contract Award

Actual Completion

0007 3,900,264 2,574,174 2,574,174 Consultancy services for design and construction supervision for Jodhpur and Bikaner (Package III)

TCE Consulting Engineers

28 Jun 01 31 Dec 06

0179 125,083 82,555 82,555 Consulting services for the benefit monitoring and evaluation

Dalal Mott Mac-Donald Private

3 Sep 04 4 Dec 05

0189 & 0246

1,884,430 277,798 277,798 PMU/CB/01 Development and implementation of integrated computer system for Jaipur, Jodhpur, Kota, Bikaner and Ajmer

Oswal Data Processors

16 Feb 05 31 Aug 07

0002 11,688,317 4,745,773 4,745,773 VARIOUS Salaries, travel allowance/ office supplies, equipment and furniture

Various 18 Jan 00 31 Mar 09

0003 & 0001

784,388 597,231 597,231 … Aerial photography, production of base maps for Kota, Udaipur and Jodhpur

National Remote Sensing Agency

9 Feb 00 31 Oct 02

cum = cubic meter, CWR = clear water reservoir, DI = ductile iron, ESR = elevated service reservoir, JV = joint venture, km = kilometer, mld = million liters per day, mm = millimeter, NH = national highway, no. = number, … = not available, , STP = sewage treatment plant, WTP = water treatment plant. Source(s): Urban Development Department, Government of Rajasthan.

46 Appendix 6

PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENTS

1. The executive agency for the project was the Urban Development Department of the Government of Rajasthan through the project management unit (PMU). The PMU was headed by a project director who coordinated and managed activities financed under the project. A committee, chaired by the minister of urban development was established in November 1999, with full powers to decide on all matters relating to the project at the state level. The project director was a committee member and secretary and other members included the secretaries of finance, tourism, art and culture and of the departments of public health engineering department, public works, urban development, and planning. The powers of the state government were delegated to the committee to ensure timely and effective project implementation and decision making. The PMU and the project implementation units (PIUs) and the related departments complied with the committee decisions.

2. City level committees were established in November 2001 in each project city to provide overall subproject guidance and ensure stakeholder consultation. The district collector chaired the city steering committees. Members included two elected representatives from the city (the member of Parliament and member of the legislative assembly), the municipal commissioner, elected chairpersons of relevant development committees, and participating community based organizations

3. Individual project city PIUs were established to carry out daily implementation activities. A dedicated, full-time representative of the PMU was appointed in each project city to maintain linkages between the PMU and the PIU. Domestic design and supervision consulting firms were engaged to assist the PIUs in preparing the detailed designs, bidding documents, and supervision of the contract packages.

4. In each of the project cities, the state government engaged a community liaison officer (CLO). The officer’s primary role was to coordinate between the PIU activities and the communities, particularly on works related to slum improvement and solid waste management. The CLOs were selected after rigorous screening in each of the PIUs. They coordinated closely with nongovernment organizations, community based organizations, public representatives, and beneficiaries. Providing government officers as CLOs ensured long-term sustainability of participatory practices in the project. These CLOs worked under overall guidance of highly qualified national and international experts hired through the project management consultants.

Appendix 7 47

STATUS OF MAJOR LOAN COVENANTS

Covenant Reference in Loan

Agreement Status of Compliance

Project Execution and Co-ordination The State shall cause an Empowered Committee to be established under the Chairmanship of the Minister of Urban Development by 31 March 1999. The Project Director shall be member-secretary of the Empowered Committee and its membership shall include the Chief Secretary, the Secretaries of Finance, PHED, PWD, Urban Development Department (UDD) and Planning, Mayors or Chairpersons of the Municipal Corporations or Counsels, Divisional Commissioners of the Project Cities, and the Chief Town Planner. The State shall delegate, or cause to be delegated to, the Empowered Committee, appropriate authority for efficient and effective decision-making in respect of all Project-implementation matters so as to ensure timely Project implementation, including engagement of consultants referred to in Schedule 5 to this Loan Agreement and award of contracts regardless of their costs. The Empowered Committee shall meet at least quarterly or as often as is required.

LA, Schedule 6, para. 1

Complied with.

A PMU shall be established within UDD and shall be responsible for coordination and management of the Project. The PMU shall be headed by its full-time Project Director and supported by qualified and experienced staff who shall be appointed as required throughout the period of Project implementation.

LA, Schedule 6, para. 3 (a)

Complied with.

To support the PMU, PIUs shall be established in each Project City to carry out day-to-day implementation activities, a dedicated, full-time representative of the PMU shall be appointed in each Project City to assist the PMU in carrying out its responsibilities.

LA, Schedule 6, para. 3 (b)

Complied with.

The State shall appoint a high-level officer as head of the PIU who shall convene quarterly meetings with CBOs, NGOs and other affected stakeholders. The head of the PIU shall select an officer as CLO who shall coordinate between PIU activities and the community-level organizations regarding information and clarifications on the Project and consultations with the stakeholders, particularly on slum improvement, low-cost sanitation, solid waste management and other such subprojects where community participation is essential.


Complied with.

The State shall ensure that the CLO shall (i) have first-hand knowledge of target community needs and desires; (ii) provide feedback to PIU; (iii) be responsible, together with community leaders for community subproject monitors; and (iv) be responsive to feedback from the monitors about dealing with construction delays.


Complied with.

The PMU shall identify, in consultation with CLOs, a State-based NGO or CBO to be retained by the Project to take responsibility for Community Awareness and Participation Program and assist in Project monitoring.


Complied with. Indian Institute of Rural Management selected.

48 Appendix 7



The State shall ensure that the CLOs shall be trained in advance in a workshop on their roles of coordination, community participation and selection and training of community subproject monitors under the Project.


Complied with.

Midterm Review In addition to the reviews to be undertaken during Project implementation, the Borrower, the Bank and State shall carry out a comprehensive midterm review about two years after the Effective Date. The objectives of the midterm review will be to evaluate critically (a) actual Project progress, (b) implementation procedures, (c) procurement, (d) monitoring and Evaluation activities and (e) the performance of design and supervision consultants. Following such review, the Borrower and State shall ensure that appropriate corrective action is taken.


Complied with.

Monitoring and Evaluation (ME) The State shall cause a ME program to be undertaken for the Project within the framework of the Bank's Project Performance Monitoring System. The PMU shall develop a ME program which will monitor the delivery of services anticipated and measure the benefits as they accrue. A sociologist, employed by the PMU, shall carry out periodic social surveys to determine changes in key social indicators, including health, welfare, economic and physical conditions. The PMU shall submit a detailed implementation plan for ME for the Bank's review and concurrence within six months after the Effective Date.


Complied with.

Environmental and Social Measures

The Borrower and the State shall cause the following activities related to the impact of the Project on the environment to be carried out: (a) water supply sources work including selection of efficient filter plants and chlorinators, regular monitoring of raw and treated water quality, adequacy of chlorine dosage at the consumer end, performance of filter media in WTPs, functioning of pumps and meters and checking leaks on water supply pipes


Complied with.

(b) the sewerage and sanitation facilities in each of the Project Cities including improvement of environmental conditions and reduction of risk of communicable diseases through sludge stabilization, regular monitoring of physical, chemical, biological and bacteriological parameters of treated effluent

Complied with.

(c) solid waste management including identification of disposal and treatment sites at locations away from the city, fencing of disposal sites and regular collection and transportation activities, covering of pathological wastes and close supervision and monitoring of solid waste management operation and maintenance (O&M) activities

Complied with.

(d) the drainage component including improvement of environmental conditions by reducing flooding and mosquito breeding, regular cleaning and disposal of drains and competent maintenance and systematic monitoring.

Complied with.

The Borrower and the State shall ensure that (a) any subprojects which require significant relocation and


Complied with.

Appendix 7 49


Agreement Status of Compliance resettlement are eliminated from Project consideration; and (b) any involuntary resettlement is carried out in accordance with the State resettlement policy and the Bank's Guidelines on Resettlement. The State shall further ensure that notwithstanding any resettlement requirements all land required for a Project component shall nevertheless be required no later than fifteen months after completion of detailed design for a subcomponent.

Policy and Institutional Reform Agenda The State shall cause policy institutional and financial reform measures to be undertaken in accordance with a Policy and Institutional Reform Agenda and timetable agreed upon by the Bank and the State. There shall be no amendment of the timetable without the prior consent of the Bank.


Complied with. Draft of town planning legislation prepared and submitted to the state’s law department for concurrence.

Community Participation The State shall develop and promote a policy on community participation for urban development and this shall include (a) micro credit financing for women in Project slums, with the involvement of NGOs and CBOs; (b) NGO and CBO programs on improvement of health of women; and (c) CBO thrift and credit programs under the Project; and (d) encouraging through NGOs and CBOs a demand-driven approach and willingness to pay.


Complied with.

Financial Matters Local Resource Generation and Improved Municipal Management The State and local bodies of Project Cities shall cause revenue improvement actions and devolution of intergovernmental resources for each of the Project Cities, including (a) introduction and rationalization of house tax and land and building tax in Project Cities or such other revenue mobilization measures for Kota and Udaipur as may be agreed with the Bank


(a) Complied with. Area-based property tax was introduced but later withdrawn by the state government. However, it was reintroduced as an urban development tax in August 2007.

(b) reform of house tax assessment procedures based on annual rental value revisions in accordance with the requirements of the Rajasthan Municipal Act of 1959 as amended and compulsory self assessment proposals of the State

(b) Complied with.

(c) introduction of land use conversion charges; (c) Complied with.

(d) indexation of rents from municipal property with market rents within the legal framework

(d) Complied with.

(e) ensuring that all Project Cities have a positive closing balance by no later than 2004.

(e) Complied with. The urban development tax introduced in 2007 was not sufficient to achieve the required revenues of the ULBs. At present, the positive closing balance is being achieved by grants from Government of Rajasthan.

50 Appendix 7



Improved Cost Recovery for Water Supply

The State and local bodies of Project Cities shall implement reduction of water supply subsidies and achieve financial sustainability for water supply systems in each of the Project Cities by actions, including: (a) reducing nonrevenue water to no more than 30% by no later than March 2004, through nonrevenue water program measures including improvement of collection efficiency to 90% and implementation of a water supply disconnection policy


(a) Partially complied with. The UDD submitted a report on non revenue water (NRW) that indicates all the project cities except Kota have less than 30% NRW. Kota has NRW of nearly 40%. Collection efficiency for all the project cities is more than 90%.

(b) increasing water tariffs averaged over all consumer categories to meet all O&M cost by March 2007, and increases thereafter to meet an operating ratio of 1:2 by no later than 2011

(b) Partially complied with. Water surcharge introduced in September 2007 in the six project cities. The UDD and PHED submitted an action plan for a water tariff increase on 21 July 2011. As per the action plan, new water tariffs will be introduced by March 2012.

Without limiting the generality of Paragraph 15 herein above, to ensure requisite increase in the water tariffs in the Project Cities, the Borrower shall cause the State to commence on or before 31 December 2005 or prior to the award of any civil works contracts for Part F of the Project, whichever occurs earlier, implementation of the time-bound water tariff plan annexed hereto as Annexure II.

Amendments to the Amended and Restated Loan Agreement (ALA), Schedule 6, para. 16

Complied with.

Financial Sustainability of Sewerage System

The State and local bodies of Project Cities shall ensure revenues sufficient and specifically allocated to cover the O&M costs of sewerage systems in each of the Project Cities.

ALA, Schedule 6, para. 17

Complied with. At present a cess is being charged on the water tariff @ 33% where there is a STP (Jaipur) and @20% where there is sewerage coverage but no STP. The treated water from the Jodhpur and Bikaner STPs is being sold to the farmers for agricultural production. The revenue generated is sufficient to finance the operation and maintenance of these STPs.

Capacity Building of Municipal Governments The State and local bodies of Project Cities shall prepare a plan by no later than November 1999 for capacity-building for each of the Project Cities for implementation in accordance with a timetable to be agreed upon by the Empowered Committee and the Bank.


Complied with. A special package was implemented under the project for computerization of municipal functions for all project cities to help them improve their revenue

Appendix 7 51


Agreement Status of Compliance generating capacities and administration of routine municipal functions, as well as to provide better service delivery to citizens.

Resettlement for Part F of the Project Without limiting the generality of Paragraph 11 herein above, the Borrower shall cause the State to be fully responsible for compensation, relocation and resettlement of Part F of the Project affected people. The Borrower shall further cause the State to ensure that such compensation, relocation, and resettlement are carried out in accordance with the Resettlement Plan agreed upon between the Borrower and the Bank, the Borrower's procedures, and the Bank's Policy on Involuntary Resettlement. Any material change in scope or implementation of the Resettlement Plan shall be subject to the Bank's prior approval. In case of any discrepancies between the Borrower's procedures and the Bank's. Policy on Involuntary Resettlement, the Bank's Policy on Involuntary Resettlement shall prevail. Award of any civil works contracts for Part F of the Project shall be subject to the full and timely implementation of the Resettlement Plan, to the satisfaction of the Bank.


Complied with.

Without limiting the overall application of the Bank's Policy on Involuntary Resettlement, the following principles shall apply in respect of compensation, relocation and resettlement of Part F of the Project affected people: (i) Affected people shall be compensated and assisted in such a way that their economic and social future shall generally be, at least, as favorable with Part F of the Project as without it; and (ii) Affected people shall not be required to have formal legal title to the land used by them to be eligible for compensation.


Complied with.

The Borrower shall cause the State to ensure that the twenty two (22) families, which were resettled by the State as a result of construction of the Bisalpur dam and reservoir, and which shall again lose their land for the construction of the water treatment plant under Part F of the Project shall be given special consideration in terms of provision of replacement land and new livelihood opportunities and specific measures shall be taken to mitigate their hardships and to assist such families in improving their livelihood.


Complied with.

Monitoring and Reporting on Resettlement The Borrower shall cause the State to establish a resettlement-focused monitoring and evaluation program, using baseline data collected through censuses and socioeconomic surveys, to evaluate effectiveness of the Resettlement Plan and its impact on Part F of the Project affected people, in particular, the vulnerable groups. The Borrower shall further cause the State to provide the Bank with regular reports on the implementation of the Resettlement Plan. In addition, the Borrower shall cause the State to provide reports to the Bank on the impact of the resettlement on Part F of the Project affected people,


Partially complied with. ADB’s comments on the social impact evaluation report submitted after completion of the resettlement process and 1 year thereafter is to be incorporated.

52 Appendix 7


Agreement Status of Compliance and the achievement of the objectives of the Resettlement Plan upon completion of the resettlement process and one (1) year thereafter. Reports by NGOs and monitoring and evaluation consultants engaged by the State shall be submitted to the Bank for review.

Action Plan The Borrower shall cause the State to conduct a social assessment survey of approximately ten percent (10%) of the families resettled by the State for the construction of the Bisalpur dam and reservoir to review their present social and economic status in the context of the State's resettlement plan carried out for the purposes of construction of the Bisalpur dam and reservoir. The survey shall entail interview of approximately one thousand (1,000) families of the affected people under the State's resettlement plan. The Borrower shall further cause the State to (a) discuss and agree upon the findings of the survey with the effected people, including, without limitation, over four hundred (400) relocated families that are still using their original land on the banks of the Bisalpur reservoir; and (b) prepare, on the basis of the findings of the survey and in consultation with the affected people, including, without limitation, the families referred to in (a) above, the Action Plan with necessary budget. The Borrower shall ensure that the State shall not remove the over four hundred (400) relocated families or the structures constructed by them on their original land until the Action Plan, acceptable to ADB, shall have been fully implemented. Award of any civil works contracts for Part F of the Project shall be subject to the prior approval of the Action Plan by the Bank.


Complied with.

Environment Without limiting the generality of Paragraph 10 herein above, the Borrower shall cause the State to ensure that Part F of the Project shall be carried out in accordance with the environmental rules and regulations applicable in India and the Bank's Environmental Policy and that adequate environmental protection and safety measures shall be Included in the design of Part F of the Project facilities and that Part F of the Project facilities shall be constructed, operated and maintained in accordance with the Bank's Environmental Policy.


Complied with.

The Borrower shall further cause the State to ensure that all environmental mitigation measures identified in the Summary Initial Environmental Examination Report are followed during the design, construction, operation and maintenance of Part F of the Project, including: (i) tight control of excavated materials to prevent blocking of drains and access roads; (Ii) dust control; (iii) proper disposal of all construction waste to approved solid, waste disposal sites; and (iv) control of construction traffic to minimize inconvenience and noise for the focal population.


Complied with.

Appendix 7 53



Monitoring and Environment Management Plan The Borrower shall cause the State to prepare, concurrently with the tendering of the civil works contracts, and implement, in an effective and timely manner, a comprehensive monitoring and environment management plan for the design, construction, operation and maintenance of Part F of the Project. The Borrower shall further cause the State to ensure that the: (i) PIU and the consultants engaged for Project management shall conduct design review to ensure compliance with the mitigation measures set out in the Summary Initial Environmental Examination Report; and (ii) PIU and the consultants engaged for Project design and supervision supervise and monitor compliance by the contractors with the environmental mitigation measures related to noise, dust and public, safety; and (iii) PIU shall address public grievances, conduct inspections and recommend and ensure remedial actions.


Complied with.

Specific Major Covenants in Project Agreement The State shall cause the Project Executing Agency to (i) maintain separate accounts for the Project and for its overall operations; (ii) have such accounts and related financial statements (balance sheet, statement of income and expenses, and related statements) audited annually, in accordance with appropriate auditing standards consistently applied, by independent auditors whose qualifications, experience and terms of reference are acceptable to the Bank; and (iii) furnish to the Bank, promptly after their preparation but in any event not later than 12 months after the close of the fiscal year to which they relate, certified copies of such audited accounts and financial statements and the report of the auditors relating thereto (including auditor’s opinion on the use of the Loan proceeds and compliance with the covenants of the Loan Agreement as well as on the use of the procedures for imprest account and statement of expenditures), all in the English language. The State shall cause the Project Executing Agency to furnish to the Bank such further information concerning such accounts and financial statements and the audit thereof as the Bank shall from time to time reasonably request.

Section 2.09 (a), PA Complied with.

ALA = amended and restated loan agreement, CBO = community based organization, CLO = community liaison officer, LA = loan agreement, ME = monitoring and evaluation, NRW = non revenue water, NGO = nongovernmental organization, O&M = operation and maintenance, PA = project agreement, PHED = public health engineering department, PIU = project implementation unit, PMU = project management unit, PWD = public works department, STP = sewage treatment plant, ULB = urban local body, UDD = urban development department, government of Rajasthan, WTP = water treatment plant.

54 Appendix 8

BENEFIT MONITORING AND EVALUATION

1. The Rajasthan Urban Infrastructure Development Project (RUIDP) included a benefit monitoring and evaluation (BME) program to measure conditions before and after the project and assess the benefits of subprojects objectively. BME studies were conducted in the project cities of Jaipur, Bikaner, Jodhpur, Ajmer, Kota, and Udaipur. The baseline sample survey was undertaken in 2004 and the final term data was collected in 2008. Questions based on memory were also used in the 2008 survey to capture the before and after situation. The BME program compares the two sets of data (collected for the pre- and post-project periods) to assess the physical benefits achieved and social impacts accrued through project implementation. The BME studies adopted the multistage sampling method and the process of interactive meetings with concerned project functionaries. They attempted to assess the extent to which the RUIDP met its infrastructure objectives in the six cities, the effects of its community awareness and participation component, and social impact variables associated with respective project components. A quantitative impact assessment of the project was then arrived at.

2. Project implementation began in 2001 and most of the RUIDP packages had been completed by 2009. The operation and maintenance responsibility for completed projects has been transferred to the respective urban local bodies or agencies such as public health engineering department or public works department. Of the 209 contract packages implemented in the six project cities, the BME program studied 63, including 19 under the water supply component, 14 under wastewater management, 6 under rehabilitation of streets, 5 each under storm water drainage and rehabilitation of bridges, 4 packages under slum upgrading, 3 each under firefighting and medical services, 2 each under solid waste management and rehabilitation of historical sites. The total investments for these 63 packages was Rs3,130 million, or 19.4 percent (%) of the total Rs16,137 million project investment. The following findings are based on information gathered through the pre-project baseline study, the post-project BME study and site visits conducted during the project completion review (PCR) mission, which included a review of selected BME study packages and a few others:

3. Water supply. Investment in the water supply packages in the BME sample totaled Rs860 million, or 27.5% of the total cost of the 63 package sample. The sampled project had benefited 3.83 million residents in the six project cities. The sample 19 packages of BME contributed 10 clear water reservoirs with additional storage capacity of 20.8 million litres, 47 overhead service reservoirs with a total storage capacity of 104.6 million litres, one water treatment plant with a capacity of 40 million litres per day, 731 kilometer (km) of distribution networks, 24.5 km of rising mains, 14 km of transmission lines, 75 tube wells, 5 new pumping stations, and 78 replacement pumps. A post-project primary survey of 5,970 households revealed a fairly high degree of awareness about the project among sample households in all the project cities. They reported their major source of water post-project to be public health engineering department, the agency to which the Urban Development Department handed over its water supply subprojects. Water consumption in all the cities had increased, with the highest per capita consumption recorded in Kota (150 litres per capita per day) and the lowest in Udaipur (120 litres per capita per day). Time spent in water collection in the pre-project scenario ranged from 13 minutes in Jodhpur to 52 minutes in Bikaner. No time needed to be devoted to this task after the project because water was available at the doorstep. Site visits during the PCR mission showed that this improvement from the water supply intervention had greatly benefited women and girls because they bore the prime responsibility for water collection. Incidences of water-borne disease had been reported by 4.0%–34.0% of households in the project cities before the project. Such diseases had been reduced to 0.2%–1.0% of households by the time of the post project survey. The project had shown an overall positive

Appendix 8 55

impact in several areas, including the quantity of water received. Higher water pressure at tail ends was recorded in Bikaner and Jaipur, with the increase from 4–6 pound per square inch before the project to 6–15 pound per square inch in the post-project situation in Jodhpur being particularly significant. Water quality had improved, except for fluoride content in Bikaner and nitrate content in Jaipur, which were above permissible limits in both pre- and post-project situations. Reliability had also improved, for example, water was supplied daily in Jodhpur after the project, compared with supply on alternate days in the pre-project situation. Water was available for more hours each day in all the cities. A significant proportion of respondents expressed satisfaction with the water supply services.

4. Sewerage. The total investment in the sample sewerage packages was estimated at Rs764 million, which is 24.4% of all the packages sampled. Of the five project cities where sewerage projects were implemented under RUIDP, the sample packages for BME were in four cities—Ajmer, Bikaner, Jaipur, and Jodhpur—and benefitted about 1.3 million people. Four sewage treatment plants with a gross capacity of 129.5 million litres per day were constructed in Bikaner, Jaipur, and Jodhpur. A total of 51.58 km of trunk sewers and 245.5 km of sewer lines were laid and 21,000 sullage connections provided in the four cities. The primary survey of 1,418 households revealed that hygienic disposal of wastewater had increased significantly in Bikaner, Jaipur, and Jodhpur and had significantly reduced mosquito populations, poor aesthetics, and damage to roads. Site visits during the PCR mission showed that people perceived the sewerage subprojects that had resulted in cleaner roads without open drains as beneficial. The anticipated sewerage subproject benefits had not been achieved in Ajmer, however, because the sewerage system and the sewage treatment plant were not yet functional due to the failure to complete house connections.

5. Storm Water Drainage. Investment in the storm water drainage packages sampled for the BME study was Rs259 million, or 8.3% of all the packages sampled, which benefitted about 1 million people. The construction of pucca drains had resulted in less blockage and spread and increased in discharge of water through proper channels. Almost all respondents in the primary survey of 1,377 households saw storm water drainage improvements as useful and reported less frequent flooding. The construction of a diversion channel for rainwater had translated into huge benefits for the population in Kota, in particular. The new channel had eliminated the flash floods that had often inundated the ground floors of buildings for days in localities such as Vigyan Nagar and Mahaveer Nagar, where it had previously caused considerable damage and affected water supply, sanitation, and other services.

6. Solid waste management. Investment in the sample solid waste management packages was Rs27 million and supplied 10 excavators, 3 bulldozers, and one hydraulic tipper to the project cities. In Jaipur, collection of solid waste is being done by the Jaipur Municipal Corporation in 23 wards and by private operators in 47 wards. The BME study and the PCR mission found the landfill sites in Bikaner and Jodhpur operational but the PCR mission found that the site developed under the project in Ajmer was not operating. Focus group discussions during the PCR mission also revealed that the community in Jodhpur, perceived bins placed in their localities as a nuisance and damaged them. The primary survey of 234 respondents in the project cities revealed that waste collection from designated and undesignated collection points by the respective municipal authorities is taking place every day. The percentage of respondents reporting improved waste collection systems in the post-project scenario was significant, ranging from 45% in Jodhpur to 96% in Bikaner.

7. Urban transport management. The project invested Rs 546 million in 6 sample road improvement packages, or 17.4% of the investment in sampled packages, benefiting 5.8 million

56 Appendix 8

people. A total 60.55 km of road was widened in the five cities where sample packages were selected. Commuter travel on the improved roads has increased. More than 40% of respondents in all cities covered in the BME study except Jodhpur commute 3 to 4 times a day. A survey of 1,124 respondents after the project showed that the proportion of commuters who were experiencing traffic congestion had decreased from before the project. For example, in Ajmer, Jodhpur and Kota, on an average, the proportion of people reporting traffic congestion declined from 96% in the pre project scenario to 55% post implementation. For rehabilitation of 5 sample bridge packages, Rs 373 million was invested, including Rs22.8 million in Jaipur. The primary survey of 916 respondents, covering the sample bridge packages showed that the average time taken to cross the bridges has declined by about 44%. Respondents in Jodhpur reported significant time savings. A reduction in the distance travelled was reported by 95% of respondents in Jodhpur and 83% of respondents in Udaipur. Site visits during the PCR mission confirmed the positive benefits to the population from investments in urban transport, except in Bikaner, where a project rail overbridge has not been completed.

8. Firefighting services. The project invested Rs14.8 million in the 3 sample projects for construction of fire stations and the purchase of 11 fire tenders, 8 portable fire pumps, and 9 water bowsers (mobile water tankers). The BME survey indicated that the average fire emergency response time had declined by about 33% in Jaipur and Jodhpur. Respondents were generally not willing to pay for firefighting services in these cities and considered it a responsibility of the municipal authorities. Site visits to sample fire stations during the PCR mission confirmed positive outcomes of interventions in the sector in Jaipur and Jodhpur. However, the envisaged project benefits in Ajmer were not realized because the municipality was using the fire stations built under the project for other purposes.

9. Slum upgrading. The total slum improvement sample packages investment of Rs176 million accounted for 5.6% of the cost of the 63 sample packages and benefitted 118 slums in Ajmer, Jodhpur, and Kota. The packages included 55.35 km of distribution lines for water supply, 23.00 km of sewer lines, 63.14 km of storm water drains and 78 km of roads. The survey of 1,083 households showed that the percentage of slum households with improved access to facilities like water supply, drainage, roads and sanitation had increased from before the project. The average monthly income of earning males in these households was reported to have risen by 95% while that of female earning members was up 80%. Slum households had also invested in housing in the wake of the project. The number of houses built with makeshift or temporary material had decreased by 76%, which indicated that the living standards of slum dwellers had improved.

10. Emergency medical and health services. In the sample BME study packages in Jaipur and Kota, Rs99 million was invested for improvement in medical services through construction and renovation of hospitals and the provision of other medical facilities. The primary survey (340 respondents) showed a 21% increase in admissions at the renovated Zanana Hospital in Jaipur and a 27% rise in the number of deliveries. In the JK Lon Hospital in Jaipur, the number of outpatients with surgery-related cases had increased by 10% and emergency cases were 29% higher. In the Satellite Hospital in Kota, a 33% increase in number of cases per day was recorded, while the average time taken to attend to an emergency case was shown to have been reduced from 15 minutes in the pre-project situation to 5 minutes after the project. The hospital environment had improved significantly, with about 46% of respondents reporting considerably cleaner premises. Site visits during the PCR mission revealed the need to employ professionals specializing in hospital architecture to ensure greater benefits to the medical practitioners and the community.

Appendix 8 57

11. Preservation and rehabilitation of historical sites. A total of Rs11 million was invested in the sample BME study packages in Jaipur for renovation and conservation of Chandpole Gate, New Gate, and Panna Meena Ka Kund. The perception survey of 110 respondents showed that there has been a marginal increase in tourist flow and improvement in business as a consequence of the intervention. However, Panna Meena ka Kund was not being maintained properly. In Jodhpur, the PCR mission found that the heritage works undertaken had not been maintained and therefore the envisaged benefits had not accrued. On the other hand, in Bikaner, heritage conservation work at Soorsagar was found to have significantly improved the quality of life of residents and impacted land values in the vicinity positively. This was revealed during focus group discussions during the PCR mission.

58 Appendix 9

SOCIOCULTURAL, RESETTLEMENT, AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

I. Socio-cultural and Resettlement Impacts

A. Introduction

1. The Rajasthan Urban Infrastructure Development Project (RUIDP) was aimed at poverty alleviation, community participation, and the provision of water supply, urban environmental sanitation (sewerage, solid waste, and drainage), slum rehabilitation, urban transport, rehabilitation of heritage sites, and capacity building in the six major cities of Jaipur, Jodhpur, Udaipur, Kota, Ajmer, and Bikaner in the state of Rajasthan in India. A major change in project scope included the addition of phase I of the Bisalpur water supply scheme (BWSS).

B. B. Approach and Methodology

2. The approach and methodology adopted is summarized below.

3. Consultation and documentation review. The project director and other officials involved in the RUIDP were consulted for a firsthand account of the social, resettlement, and environmental issues identified during project preparation and managed during implementation. The assessment reviewed the report and recommendation of the President on the project and its resettlement plan and social action plan (SAP).

4. Census, sample surveys, and consultations. The resettlement plan and the SAP were based on census and sample socioeconomic surveys of project affected persons. Primary data was collected by trained enumerators. Executing agency officials visited project sites several times along with consultants and implementing nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) and conducted consultations and focus group discussions with the relevant officials, affected persons, and other stakeholders.

5. Analysis, assessment and documentation. The data provided in the resettlement plan and the SAP were assessed to be in line with ADB’s Involuntary Resettlement Policy, 1995.

C. Assessment Based on Planning

6. The social and resettlement requirements and the resettlement plan annexed to the report and recommendation of the President were followed during implementation by the executing agency.

D. Social and Resettlement Impacts

7. Institutional arrangements. Under RUIDP, the project management consultants prepared the resettlement plan for the BWSS, which was implemented by Bisalpur project implementation unit (BPIU) with the assistance of two NGOs during September 2005–September 2006.

8. Implementation of resettlement plan: ADB approved the resettlement plan in October 2003 and has published it on its website.32 The Urban Development Department (UDD) 32 ADB. 2003. IND: Rajasthan Urban Infrastructure Development Project: Bisalpur Water Supply Project,

Resettlement Plan. http://www.adb.org/Documents/Resettlement_Plans/IND/BisalpurWater/default.asp

Appendix 9 59

reported that the NGOs conducted consultations and distributed the summary resettlement plan in the local language to affected families, verified the list of affected families, distributed identity cards, and formed resettlement and rehabilitation committees that helped redress the grievances of families. A total of 105.5 hectares of private land was acquired from eight villages under the BWSS following national and state laws and ADB’s Involuntary Resettlement Policy, 1995. Land acquisition was completed on 30 July 2006 and the project was handed over by the UDD to public health engineering department on 6 December 2010. Of the 706 families affected, full payment of about Rs0.8 million to six families and partial payments to 13 families were pending due to court cases, absence of titleholders, and lack of interest in collecting what they considered a small sum. This amount was deposited a by the land acquisition officer in Malpura in a separate account of a commercial bank.

9. Second time affected families: The UDD reported that none of the 19 second time affected families of BWSS, who were once resettled due to construction of the Bisalpur dam and then again resettled due to construction of the water treatment plant, showed interest in taking up an offer of agricultural land at concessionary rates using the cash compensation they had already accepted.

10. The UDD reported that it adopted an income restoration strategy and NGOs organized eight need-based vocational training programs for affected persons during April–July 2006. These programs enhanced the skills of some trainees to generate income, with 10 women who were engaged in embroidery enhancing their incomes by about Rs100 per day. The UDD reported that about 330 of the affected persons, including those from the eight affected villages, were provided employment during the construction phase and in the National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme, with priority given to vulnerable groups. Affected persons were also included in various government development schemes implemented in the Tonk district.

11. Implementation of the social action plan. ADB also approved a SAP in March 2006 for income restoration activities to families displaced by the Bisalpur dam under the BWSS. The two NGOs helped the BPIU form self-help groups that included enterpreneurship development programs for displaced persons during September 2006–September 2008. A total 120 of the groups, each with 12–15 members, received skills training. This assessment found that about 15% of the trainees benefitted from these activities and raised their average income by Rs1,000–Rs1,500 per month. The UDD has been following up with the district collectors in Tonk and Ajmer to provide livelihood benefits and rehabilitation under other government development schemes for the displaced families.

12. Internal and external monitoring on the implementation of the resettlement plan and SAP was conducted intermittently by project’s project management unit (PMU).

13. Effectiveness of implementation of social safeguards: The implementation and monitoring of the resettlement plan by the staff of the BPIU, with assistance of the NGOs and the external monitoring by an expert, was satisfactory. In addition to the compensation and assistance they received, the vocational training programs, employment opportunities, and the benefits of various government development schemes provided to the affected persons mitigated the adverse impacts made on their lives by the project. The affected families were granted non-transferable usufruct rights to use 32.5 meters of land for agriculture and grazing of cattle on either side of the access road constructed along route of the underground pipeline as part of the BWSS. No significant change occurred in the economic status of the affected persons. Overall, land acquisition and resettlement issues followed ADB’s social safeguard requirements and complied with social loan covenants.

60 Appendix 9

14. Lessons learned: The measures suggested for improving social safeguards performance in future projects are (i) hiring a dedicated resettlement expert at the PMU, (ii) planning rehabilitation activities in advance, and (iii) close monitoring, with an emphasis on adhering to the time schedule for implementing the resettlement plan.

II. Environmental Impacts

A. Background

13. The loan was environment category B. An initial environmental examination (IEE) report covering all project cities was prepared in May 1998. After loan effectiveness, the scope was modified to include the BWSS. A separate IEE report prepared by the executing agency for the BWSS was approved by ADB in 2004. In all, 220 work contracts were awarded under the loan, which was closed on 11 June 2009.

B. Implementation Arrangements

14. Project management and implementation: The project design envisaged establishment of a PMU responsible for coordination and management of all project related activities, including environmental aspects, and project implementation unit (PIUs) in project cities to support the PMU in implementation. A project management consultant (PMC) to provide support to the PMU and design and supervision consultants (DSCs) to assist the PIUs were also envisaged. Some of the tasks assigned to the PMC were establishing a system and training staff to monitor the project’s environmental indicators, review environment data, evaluate effectiveness of implementation of environmental mitigation and monitoring measures, and recommend actions to be taken. The design provided 12 person-months of environment specialists for DSCs. During implementation, no staff dedicated to the management of environmental safeguards was engaged in the PMU or PIUs, and the PMC did not mobilize the environment specialist during their contract period (2001–2008) as required by the contract. In addition, the DSC contracts for the three consulting firms recruited failed to include the provision for environment specialists that had been envisaged during design. An environment specialist was engaged by the DSC only in May 2008 to prepare report on implementation of environment management plan (EMP) for the BWSS. None of the contractors engaged environment or safety officers during construction phase, except for some designated staff at the BWSS sites. No capacity development or training programs were conducted for the executing agency or contractors’ staff for efficient monitoring of environmental safeguards.

C. Implementation of Environmental Safeguards

15. Loan covenants: The environmental covenants were assessed to be generally complied with.

17. Statutory environmental compliance: None of the subprojects were required to obtain environmental clearance under the then prevailing national and state regulations. The UDD confirmed that the requisite “Consents to Establish” were obtained from Rajasthan State Pollution Control Board prior to commencing with works. The UDD further confirmed that the “Consents to Operate” the water treatment plants and sewage treatment plants and “Authorization” for municipal solid waste management sites were not been obtained. The project director of RUIDP agreed with the PCR mission to immediately take the necessary steps in consultation with facility owners to ensure that all such subprojects obtain environmental permissions as per regulatory provisions.

Appendix 9 61

18. Implementation of environmental management and monitoring requirements: Most of the contracts were awarded during 2002–2005 and the works were completed by 2006. The UDD confirmed that none of subprojects were within or near any protected or ecologically sensitive areas or archeologically important or protected monuments, except for those involved in the rehabilitation of heritage sites. The IEE report approved in 1998 did not include an EMP. The BWSS was the only subproject under this loan for which an EMP was prepared in 2006. All bid documents included clauses pertaining to the protection of the environment and safety. Despite this, however, none of the contractors submitted the site environment plans called for by the contract conditions. The UDD acknowledged that structured supervision and monitoring mechanisms and grievance redress systems had not been put in place for environmental safeguards, except for some environmental reporting on the BWSS. The UDD said it had received no complaints from the public on environmental issues during project implementation. Some of the commissioned water treatment plants and sewage treatment plants are performing at the desired standards but a lack of capacity utilization and proper operation and maintenance of some facilities continues to be a cause of concern. The UDD reported that medical waste from the project cities was being treated at authorized bio-medical waste management facilities.

19. Overall improvement in environmental conditions. The targeted inventions were almost certain to lead to such improved environmental conditions as greater availability and access to a better quality of drinking water for a large population, reduced flooding in urban areas and slums due to improved storm water and sewage systems, the reduction of breeding grounds for vectors, reduced garbage on streets, and improved air quality and road safety in congested traffic areas, to name a few. In the absence of environmental data on the baseline situation or from the implementation and operation phases, assessment and quantification of actual environmental, health, and safety benefits is not possible. Despite several operational and performance related concerns and constraints, the loan has certainly contributed to some improvement in environmental conditions and further improvement is possible once these are addressed.

D. Effectiveness of Implementation of Environmental Safeguards

20. The loan was approved prior to ADB’s adoption of its Environment Policy (2002). A systematic approach to developing awareness and building capacity in the project staff regarding ADB’s safeguards requirements could have addressed some of the project’s shortcomings. The overall institutional arrangements for management of environmental safeguards remained inadequate throughout the implementation period, except for a very brief period during which the DSC mobilized an environment specialist for the BWSS subproject as a result of ADB follow-up in the late stages of implementation. In the absence of sufficient environment records, monitored data, or reporting mechanisms, the actual extent to which good environmental practices were used or environmental mitigation measures were effectively implemented cannot be ascertained. Nonetheless, the nature of the works carried out under this loan and the facilities constructed and commissioned are certainly expected to contribute to improved environmental conditions in the project cities.

E. Lessons Learned

21. The following measures are suggested to improve the environmental performance of ADB loan projects:

62 Appendix 9

(i) ADB should adopt a systematic, continuous approach to developing the awareness and capacity of project staff regarding ADB’s environment policy, procedures, and requirements.

(ii) ADB should ensure that the executing agency, consultants, and contractors mobilize environment experts on schedule and that these experts continue their activities until a loan closes.

(iii) ADB should ensure that there is systematic supervision, monitoring, and data mapping, as well as the necessary reporting mechanisms, for the implementation of environment safeguards. This should include management and monitoring plans.

(iv) Environment experts associated with the loan should undertake periodic review and corrective action when it is needed.

Appendix 10 63

ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL ANALYSIS

A. Physical Interventions

1. At the appraisal stage, the physical interventions identified in the six project cities under the Rajasthan Urban Infrastructure Development Project included water supply, sewerage, drainage, solid waste management, internal road, bridges, terminals, slum improvement including community centers (excluding Ajmer for community centers), sites and services and spot development, such as commercial site development and residential development, and fire fighting. However, some changes, additions, and deletions were made to the project during implementation. These included:

(i) The Bisalpur water supply scheme (BWSS) to bring water from Bisalpur to Jaipur city was added to the water supply component. Implemented water supply projects comprised about 55% of the project costs (footnote 21).

(ii) Sewage treatment works in Jaipur were downsized. Sewerage works comprised 18% of the project costs.

(iii) The sewerage, municipal solid waste, slum improvement, and fire services subprojects planned for Udaipur were not implemented.

(iv) Internal road works implemented comprised about 8% of total project costs and changes were made in scope. Bikaner implemented only about 5% of the road subprojects originally planned.

(v) Some changes were made in the bridge works component, which made up 7% of the total project costs.

(vi) The planned terminals and spot development was not undertaken.

(vii) The firefighting services component, which accounted for about 1% of total costs, was modified.

(viii) Slum improvement, about 1% of total costs, was carried out in only three cities, of the planned six cities.

(ix) Surplus funds were used to implement new subprojects in emergency medical services, which comprised 3% of overall costs.

B. Economic Analysis at Project Feasibility and Appraisal

2. The economic and financial analysis was undertaken at the project feasibility and appraisal stage only for the water supply and municipal solid waste component. For components like drainage, urban transport, firefighting services and slum improvement, only economic analysis was undertaken. No analysis was undertaken for terminals and spot development while financial analysis was done for the sewerage component, as per the Appendix 14 of the Report and Recommendation of the President (footnote 1).

3. For undertaking the economic analysis at project appraisal (i) all financial costs were converted to economic prices using a conversion factor of 0.9; (ii) constant prices at August

64 Appendix 10

1998 level were assumed; (iii) assumptions were sector-based and location-based; (iv) overall effect on land and property values were considered, (v) people’s health benefits in terms of reduction in morbidity rates was considered; (vi) time saved and reduced vehicle operating costs were considered for transport sector; and (vii) savings in operation and maintenance costs due to rationalization measures were considered.

4. For the water sector subprojects, the economic benefit in terms of (i) resource cost savings towards cost of alternative water sources, time saved in fetching water, cost of supplementary water storage and purification was considered as Rs1,200 per household per year; and (ii) economic benefits on incremental water consumption were valued in economic terms based on its average demand price.

5. Economic analysis of the drainage sector subprojects assumed (i) a reduction in damage to property to be equivalent to a 5% increase in the annual rental value; and (ii) a reduction in adverse impact on health of the population in flood prone areas.

6. Solid waste management sector subprojects economic benefit assumptions were (i) a reduction in adverse impact on the health of the population; and (ii) an increase in property values.

7. Urban transportation sector subproject economic benefit analysis assumed (i) vehicle operating cost savings; (ii) savings in travel time for passengers and goods; and (iii) a reduction in maintenance costs of vehicles.

8. The assumptions for the slum improvement subprojects’ economic benefits were (i) an increase in property values; and (ii) a reduction in adverse impact on the health of the slum population.

9. Analysis of the economic benefits of the fire services subprojects assumed a savings in property destruction

10. To arrive at the net present value of costs and benefits, they were discounted at 12%. The summary of economic evaluation for selected project components at appraisal is presented in Table A10.1.

C. Economic Re-evaluation Scope, Methodology and Data Input

11. Scope of economic re-evaluation. Economic indicators including economic internal rate of return (EIRR) and economic net present value were calculated for the post completion evaluation by comparing the with-project and without-project scenarios.

12. Methodology. The approach used for estimating the economic benefits for all subprojects is similar to that used when the project was prepared. Economic analysis at that time was based on incremental costs and incremental benefits—i.e., it compared the total capital and operation and maintenance costs of the with-project scenario with the without-project scenario, which is the base case. All costs and benefits considered in the analysis were in monetary terms expressed in economic prices to avoid distortions in the input prices due to taxes, grants, labor prices, and other such factors. Comparison between the total costs for with-project and without-project scenarios was done for the defined analysis period.

Appendix 10 65

Table A10.1: Summary of Economic Evaluation for Selected Project Components at Appraisal

City Component Item Base Case Cost +10%

Benefit (10%)

Cost +10% Benefits

(10%)

Benefits Delayed by

1 Year

Ajmer Water supply EIRR (%) SI

13.9

10.8 2.2

11.3 1.9

10.2

10.4

Streets EIRR (%) SI

25.3

23.0 0.9

22.8 1.0

20.6

20.8

Fire services EIRR (%) SI

12.4

11.1 1.0

10.9 1.2

9.7

10.6

Bridges EIRR (%) SI

25.3

23.0 0.9

22.7 1.0

20.6

20.7

Bikaner Water supply EIRR (%) SI

19.5

18.1 0.7

19.2 0.2

18.6

17.8

Streets EIRR (%) SI

29.0

26.7 0.8

26.5 0.9

24.3

23.9


18.0

16.5 0.8

16.3 0.9

14.8

15.4

Jaipur Water supply EIRR (%) SI

13.7

12.7 0.7

11.2 1.8

10.8

11.2

Streets EIRR (%) SI

23.4

21.8 0.7

21.7 0.7

20.2

20.3

Bridge EIRR (%) SI

22.6

20.7 0.8

20.5 0.9

18.8

19.1

Slum EIRR (%) SI

19.5

17.0 1.3

16.8 1.4

14.5

15.7

Jodhpur Water supply EIRR (%) SI

19.7

18.5 0.6

17.8 1.0

15.8

18.8

Streets EIRR (%) SI

28.1

26.0 0.7

25.8 0.8

23.8

23.5

Drainage EIRR (%) SI

20.9

18.0 1.4

17.7 1.5

14.9

16.3


15.4

13.0 1.6

12.7 1.8

10.6

12.2

Kota Water supply EIRR (%) SI

19.7

18.2 0.8

18.2 0.8

17.4

17.6


31.5

28.4 1.0

28.1 1.1

25.2

24.6

Slum EIRR (%) SI

14.4

12.4 1.0

12.2 1.5

10.8 11.1

Udaipur Water supply EIRR (%) SI

12.5

11.6 1.1

11.3 1.0

10.6

11.0

EIRR = economic internal rate of return; % = percent, SI = sensitivity indicator The SI equals the percentage change in EIRR divided by the percentage change in the variable tested. Source: Asian Development Bank estimates.

66 Appendix 10

13. To the extent possible, the same input variables used during the appraisal stage were used for the analysis for the project completion report.

14. Completed construction costs collected from records were discounted back at 6% to the base year of 1998. This was also part of an overall effort to make the post-evaluation exercise comparable to the one undertaken during project appraisal.

15. The data required and final costs for the analysis were provided by the Urban Development Department and collected from the reports, documents and information submitted by the consultants engaged under the Rajasthan Urban Infrastructure Development Project.

D. Economic Reevaluation and Assumptions

16. Assumptions. To keep the base parameters similar to those used in the appraisal documents, the same basic assumptions have been used as much as possible for the project completion economic evaluation. The key inputs and assumptions for economic benefits used in this include the following:

17. Water supply. Resource cost savings have been estimated separately for (a) savings in the time needed to fetch water; (b) storage tank cost savings; (c) health care costs; (d) purification costs; and (3) alternate water cost. Quantifiable benefits for time savings and health care costs have been estimated using the socioeconomic survey data of the project preparatory technical assistance wherever possible.33 For others, discounted estimated values have been used to quantify the benefits. Incremental economic benefits, which were considered at the time of appraisal, have not been used for this analysis because this benefit is no longer considered as per ADB’s Guidelines for the Economic Analysis of Water Supply Projects.

18. Sewerage. This component was not part of the appraisal analysis. Cost savings have been estimated separately for septic tank capital and cleaning costs and health care costs, both at discounted values.34

19. Drainage. Cost savings have been estimated for health care costs at discounted value (footnote 34). The economic benefit of reduction in damage to property has not been used for analysis, in the absence of quantified data, both at appraisal stage and at present.

20. Solid waste. Cost savings have been estimated for health care costs at discounted value (footnote 34). The economic benefit of an increase in property value, used at appraisal, has not been used for this analysis due to the absence of quantified data.

21. Roads and bridges. Cost savings were estimated for time costs and vehicle operating cost, with traffic data sourced from the Urban Development Department and the benefit monitoring evaluation report (footnote 18). The estimated unit values for the above have been discounted and adopted for analysis purpose. The economic benefit of reduction in maintenance cost, which was used at the time of appraisal, has not been used for this analysis due to the absence of quantified data, both at appraisal stage and at present.

33 Government of Rajasthan, Rajasthan Urban Infrastructure Development Project. 1998. City Investment Plans:

Final Report. Jaipur. 34 WSP, ADB, AusAID and UKaid. 2010. The Economic Impacts of Inadequate Sanitation in India. New Delhi,

India.

Appendix 10 67

22. Others. Benefits for slum improvement, fire services, heritage protection and medical services, which comprised about 6% of project costs, were difficult to quantify. These subprojects have been evaluated qualitatively and found to have benefitted the population of the six project cities.

23. Reevaluation findings. The economic indicators have been calculated considering savings outlined in the above assumptions for each project components viz. water supply, sewerage, drainage, solid waste, roads and bridges. The summary of economic re-evaluation for these project components at appraisal is presented in Table A10.2.

Table A10.2: Summary of Economic Re-evaluation of Project Components


Benefit (10%)

Cost +10% Benefits

(10%)

Benefits Delayed by

1 Year

Ajmer Water supply EIRR (%) SI

13.6

11.2 1.8

10.8 2.2

8.1 13.5

Seweragea EIRR (%) SI


14.2

12.9 0.8

12.8 0.9

11.5 14.1

Solid waste EIRR (%) SI

14.6

12.1 1.8

11.8 2.0

9.3 14.5

Roads EIRR (%) SI

15.9 14.6 0.7

14.5 0.8

13.3 15.8

Bridges EIRR (%) SI

24.1 22.4 0.6

22.2 0.7

20.6 24.1

Combined roads and

bridges

EIRR (%) SI

19.2 17.8 0.7

17.6 0.7

16.2 19.1

Bikaner Water supply EIRR (%) SI

15.9 13.9 1.2

13.6 1.4

11.6 15.8

Sewerage EIRR (%) SI

25.6

23.6 0.7

23.4 0.8

21.4 25.6


13.3

11.9 1.0

11.8 1.1

10.5 13.2


14.0

10.9 2.4

10.6 2.7

7.4 13.8

Bridgeb EIRR (%) SI

Jaipur Water supply EIRR (%) SI

12.4

9.8 2.2

9.5 2.5

6.9 12.2


32.2

29.8 0.7

29.6 0.7

27.3 32.1


31.6

29.4 0.6

29.2 0.7

27.1 31.5


14.6

11.5 2.3

11.1 2.6

8.0 14.4

Streets EIRR (%) 13.2 11.7 11.6 10.2 13.0

68 Appendix 10


Benefit (10%)

Cost +10% Benefits

(10%)

Benefits Delayed by

1 Year SI 1.0 1.2

Bridge EIRR (%) SI

21.1

19.7 0.6

19.6 0.6

18.3 21.0

Combined streets and

bridges

EIRR (%) SI

17.9 16.6 0.7

16.4 0.8

15.1 17.8

Jodhpur Water supply EIRR (%) SI

16.7

14.3 1.4

14.0 1.6

11.6 16.6


14.9

12.4 1.6

12.2 1.8

9.8 14.8


20.2

18.5 0.8

18.3 0.9

16.7 20.1


15.3

12.1 2.2

11.8 2.5

8.5 15.1

Streets EIRR (%) SI

12.6

11.2 1.0

11.1 1.1

9.8 12.4

Bridge EIRR (%) SI

24.8

23.0 0.7

22.8 0.7

21.1 24.7


bridges

EIRR (%) SI

19.2 17.6 0.7

17.5 0.8

16.0 19.1

Kota Water supply EIRR (%) SI

13.7

11.2 1.8

10.9 2.1

8.4 13.7

Seweragea EIRR (%) SI


14.4

13.0 0.9

12.8 1.0

11.5 14.2


14.9

12.2 1.9

11.9 2.1

9.1 14.8

Streets EIRR (%) SI

13.4

11.8 1.1

11.6 1.3

10.0 13.1

Bridge EIRR (%) SI

27.0

25.1 0.6

24.9 0.7

23.1 26.9


bridges

EIRR (%) SI

20.3 18.5 0.8

18.4 0.9

16.6 20.2

Udaipur Water supply EIRR (%) SI

12.5

10.4 1.7

10.1 1.9

7.9 12.5


12.7

11.6 0.8

11.4 0.9

10.2 12.7

Streets EIRR (%) SI

13.2

12.0 0.8

11.9 0.9

10.5 13.2

Bridge EIRR (%) SI

30.6

28.7 0.6

28.4 0.6

26.5 30.6

Appendix 10 69


Benefit (10%)

Cost +10% Benefits

(10%)

Benefits Delayed by

1 Year


bridges

EIRR (%) SI

22.7 21.0 0.6

20.9 0.7

19.2 22.7

EIRR = economic internal rate of return; % = percent, SI = sensitivity indicator a Sewerage connections not yet provided. b No traffic allowed on the bridge as finishing works ongoing. The SI equals the percentage change in EIRR divided by the percentage change in the variable tested. Source: Asian Development Bank estimates.

24. The qualitative assessment of the slum improvement, fire services, heritage, and medical services interventions found that they helped improved the quality of life in the project cities. Medical service subprojects had improved the quality of medical service by, inter alia (i) reducing waiting time for patients, (ii) increasing the number of patients attended to, and (iii) improving the waiting hall facilities. The slum subproject in Jodhpur had benefitted over 25% of households in the city by providing better water supply, drainage, sewerage, and solid waste facilities. Although fire services projects were implemented on a much reduced fund allocation, they had contributed to faster reaction time and better facilities, with consequential reduction in fire losses in the project cities. Heritage subprojects, carried out mostly in Jaipur, resulted in increased tourism and restoration of heritage monuments.

E. Comparison and Conclusion

25. The comparative summary of the key economic indicators for the project components at appraisal and after implementation is presented in Table A10.3.

Table A10.3: Comparative Summary of Economic Indicators at Appraisal and Completion Components Appraisal EIRR (%) Completion EIRR (%)

A. Water Supply Projects Ajmer 13.9 13.6

Bikaner 19.5 15.9

Jaipur 13.7 12.4a

Jodhpur 19.7 16.7

Kota 19.7 13.7

Udaipur 12.5 12.6

B. Sewerage Projects

Ajmer – NCb

Bikaner – 25.6

Jaipur – 32.2

Jodhpur – 14.9

Kota – NCb

C. Drainage Projects Ajmer 17.2 14.2

Bikaner – 13.3

Jaipur – 31.6

70 Appendix 10

Components Appraisal EIRR (%) Completion EIRR (%)

Jodhpur 20.9 20.2

Kota 31.5 14.4

Udaipur – 12.7

D. Solid Waste Projects Ajmer 29.6 14.6

Bikaner 18.6c 14.0

Jaipur – 14.6

Jodhpur 21.6c 15.3

Kota 23.2c 14.9

E. Streets or Roads Ajmer 25.3 16.2

Bikaner 29.0 –

Jaipur 23.4 13.2

Jodhpur 28.1 12.6

Kota 11.1c 13.4

Udaipur 32.5c 13.2

F. Bridges Ajmer 25.3 24.1

Bikaner 22.6 NC

Jaipur – 21.1

Jodhpur 29.5c 24.8

Kota 13.0c 27.0

Udaipur 27.2c 30.6

EIRR = economic internal rate of return; – = not assessed, NC = component not yet completed or operational, % = percent. a Includes Bisalpur water supply scheme’s cost and benefits. b Sewerage connections not yet provided. c Government of Rajasthan, Rajasthan Urban Infrastructure Development Project. 1998. City Investment Plans:

Final Report. Jaipur.. Source: Asian Development Bank estimates.

26. Conclusions. Overall, based on its EIRR, the project is rated efficient in achieving outcome and outputs. With the exception of the sewerage, solid waste, slums improvement and fire services subprojects in Udaipur, slum improvements in Bikaner and Jaipur, the project was fully implemented, with some changes in scope. This made it possible to recalculate the EIRR as well as to assess the financial internl rate of return (FIRR) and financial sustainability.

(i) The EIRR of the water supply component implemented in the six cities ranged from 12.4% in Jaipur to 16.7% in Jodhpur. The BWSS to bring water to Jaipur led to a significant cost overrun for the water supply project in that city. However, the BWSS provided a source of surface water source that was greatly needed, especially in view of constraints encountered accessing the ground water around which project was initially designed. Because the benefits of the distribution network provided under the project in Jaipur could not have been achieved without the water made available by the BWSS and the BWSS needed distribution to deliver its own benefits, the two components have

Appendix 10 71

been analyzed together. The EIRR for the Jaipur water supply considered the cost and benefits of the BWSS.

(ii) The EIRR of sewerage works in three cities was assessed as 14.9% in Jodhpur, 25.6% in Bikaner and 32.2% in Jaipur. Sewerage works were not implemented in Udaipur. Household connections have yet to be provided to the project beneficiaries in Ajmer and Kota and an EIRR for the subprojects in these cities have not yet been estimated.

(iii) The EIRR for drainage works in six cities ranged from 12.7% in Udaipur to 31.6% in Jaipur.

(iv) The EIRR for solid waste management in five cities ranged from 14.0% in Bikaner to 15.3% in Jodhpur. Udaipur did not implement this component.

(v) Internal roads were built in five cities and the EIRR ranged from 12.6% in Jodhpur to 16.2% in Ajmer. As Bikaner implemented only a few small contracts, EIRR was not assessed.

(vi) In case of project bridges and flyovers in the six cities, the EIRR ranged from 21.1% in Jaipur to 30.6% in Udaipur. The EIRR for Bikaner was not assessed because the finishing works were ongoing during May 2011 and was not operational. In Udaipur, the traffic flow and the resultant passenger car units were much higher after completion of the bridge over the Ayad river, which was not envisaged during appraisal. The EIRR for roads and bridges combined ranged from 17.9% in Jaipur to 22.7% in Udaipur.

27. An EIRR for slum improvement, fire services, heritage protection, and medical services, which comprised about 6% of project costs, was difficult to estimate and has not be assessed. These subprojects have been evaluated qualitatively and found to have benefitted the population of the six project cities.

F. Financial Analysis

28. At appraisal. A financial analysis was undertaken at appraisal for the projects revenue-generating components—i.e., water supply, sewerage and solid waste management. Financial analysis compares the costs incurred and revenue generated in the improved urban facilities and services and calculates an FIRR. Basic assumptions in the computation of the FIRR included the following:

(i) All revenues and costs were expressed at constant August 1998 prices on an incremental basis.

(ii) Project investment costs were derived from estimates less price contingencies and interest during construction, including all costs related to civil works, machinery, equipment, materials, consulting services, purchase of land, and physical contingencies.

(iii) Capital expenditures were recorded at the time they are incurred. Interest and depreciation are excluded.

72 Appendix 10

(iv) Incremental operating costs were calculated by subtracting the existing system’s operating costs from the projected operating costs for the whole system at project completion.

29. Incremental revenues arising from the water sales were calculated by multiplying the volume of water sold in each year by the proposed tariffs used for that year at constant August 1998 prices, with an annual increase in real terms of 9% in 2001–2004, of 20% in 2005–2007, and of 2% thereafter. Benefits and costs were constant after 2011, when all the facilities would be operating at near full capacity and the design demands were expected to be fully satisfied. Rehabilitation and extension of water supply system in all six cities would reduce non-revenue water from the current 35%–50% to 30% in 2004 and to 25% in 2011. This would increase water revenues. For sewerage, the estimated cash flows were based on the assumption that the current sewerage surcharge of 20% on water bills in all project cities would be increased to 25% in 1999, 30% in year 2000, 35% in 2001, 40% in 2002, 45% in 2003, and 50% in 2004 and onwards. For the solid waste component, it was assumed that (i) cost recovery would be set at the rate of Rs10 per month from each household, taking into account the total number of households in the subproject areas; (ii) cost recovery for removing the building debris would be borne entirely by the developer; and (iii) compost would be sold.

30. The FIRR, which is the discount rate that equalizes the present values of costs and revenues over the project life under the preceding assumptions, was estimated at 3.7% to 23.7% for water supply, at 2.4% to 7.5% for sewerage, and at 7.8% to 10.0% for solid waste management in the six project cities. The summary of the financial evaluation at appraisal is presented in Table A10.4.

31. Reevaluation. The financial analysis during reevaluation showed a negative FIRR for the water supply, sewerage, and solid waste management subprojects, with tariffs inadequate to recover even operation and maintenance costs. The analysis considered the actual construction costs, operation and maintenance costs and revenues at extant tariffs. The FIRR is negative, as the tariff increases and the introduction of user charges for solid waste as envisaged in the financial improvement action plan at the time of appraisal, have not been introduced.

G. Sustainability

32. Tariff and user charges. The tariff level was last revised in the six project towns in September 2007, when an infrastructure development water surcharge of 25% was introduced for water consumption of 15-40 cubic meter per month. The surcharge rises to 35% for monthly water consumption above 40 cubic meter. Even with these tariff adjustments, the cost recovery level of the project water supply operations is extremely low and water supply is highly subsidized by the state. Operation and maintenance cost recovery for the financial year 2009–2010 in the six project cities ranged from 16.5% in Kota to 33.7% in Bikaner. Sewerage tariffs are linked to water tariffs as a surcharge that ranges from 20% to 33% and is collected with the water bill by the public health engineering department, which transfers the sewerage charges to the municipal corporations, which are responsible for operation and maintenance of sewerage. The operation and maintenance cost recovery is low and inadequate. No solid waste user charges at all are levied by the municipal corporations to cover the operation and maintenance. Beginning in April 2011, the state government decided to levy a surcharge on power tariffs to help meet the solid waste management expenses.

Appendix 10 73

Table A10.4: Summary of Financial Evaluation at Appraisal

City Component Item Base Case

Capital Cost +10%

O&M Cost +10%

Benefits -10%

Benefits Delayed by

1 Year

Ajmer Water supply FIRR (%) SI

3.7 1.3 6.5

1.1 7.0

0.6 8.4

2.0

Sewerage FIRR (%) SI

2.9 2.4 1.7

2.4 1.7

1.8 3.8

2.3

Solid waste FIRR (%) SI

9.9 8.1 1.8

8.4 1.5

7.8 2.1

7.9

Bikaner Water supply FIRR (%) SI

14.8 14.2 0.4

13.7 0.7

13.0 1.2

12.5


3.2 2.4 2.5

2.2 3.1

1.2 6.3

2.3


10.0 8.3 1.7

8.6 1.4

8.1 1.9

8.0

Jaipur Water supply FIRR (%) SI

9.1 8.7 0.4

6.1 3.3

5.5 4.0

6.2


7.5 6.8 0.9

7.0 0.7

6.2 1.7

6.5


7.8 6.1 2.2

7.2 0.8

5.9 2.4

6.0

Jodhpur Water supply FIRR (%) SI

19.2 18.5 0.4

17.9 0.7

17.1 1.1

16.2


7.5 6.6 1.2

7.1 0.5

6.4 1.5

6.4


8.2 7.4 1.0

7.8 0.5

7.0 1.5

8.0

Kota Water supply FIRR (%) SI

23.7 22.4 0.5

23.0 0.3

21.6 0.9

20.0


9.5 8.0 1.6

8.6 0.9

7.6 2.0

8.1

Udaipur Water supply FIRR (%) SI

8.4 7.8 0.7

7.5 1.1

6.8 1.9

7.0


2.4 1.8 2.5

1.9 2.1

1.2 5.0

1.7

FIRR = financial internal rate of return; % = percent, SI = sensitivity indicator. The SI equals the percentage change in EIRR divided by the percentage change in the variable tested. Source: Asian Development Bank estimates.

33. Property tax reforms. The property tax reforms like revenue enhancement in urban local bodies (ULBs) through coverage of all properties, digital mapping using geographical information system and self assessment based on unit area method could not be undertaken. In 2007, the state abolished the property tax and introduced a new urban development tax (UDT) at the ULB level for properties larger than 300 square yards in area. The UDT was supposed have a more focused base, be more progressive, deliver better collection results, and mobilize substantial financial resources for the ULBs but it has yet to establish itself as

74 Appendix 10

significant revenue source. Although the state government decided in April 2011 to extend UDT to other properties, the modalities are still being worked out. In the meantime, the ULBs remain heavily dependent on revenue transfers and support from the state government.

34. The municipal corporations would have been able to sustain the subprojects had the envisaged user charges, increased tariff levels, property tax reforms, and improvements in collection efficiency and financial management actually taken place.

Appendix 11 75

IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE: APPRAISAL–ACTUAL

Task

Target Actual

Start Date End Date Start Date End Date

Training State Staff 1 Jan 99 30 Jun 99 NA NA

Public Awareness and Participation 1 Jul 99 31 Dec 04 12 Nov 03 31 Mar 08

Capacity Building 1 Jul 99 31 Dec 04 … …

Water Supply 1 Jul 99 30 Jun 04 1 Dec 01 20 Apr 2010

Nonrevenue water reduction 1 Jul 99 31 Dec 00 17 May 04 31 Jan 07

Detailed design 1 Jul 99 30 Jun 01 1 Dec 01 28 Jan 05

Construction of tube wells 1 Sep 99 30 Jun 00 10 Jan 03 28 Feb 07

Procurement of pipes and meters 1 Jul 99 31 Dec 01 NA NA

Construction 1 Jul 99 30 Jun 03 2 Feb 02 20 Apr 2010

Commissioning 1 Jan 03 30 Jun 04 8 Jan 03 20 Apr 2010

Wastewater Management 1 Jul 99 31 Dec 04 1 Dec 01 31 Mar 2010

Detailed design 7 Jan 99 31 Mar 01 1 Dec 01 24 Oct 07

Construction 9 Jan 00 31 Dec 03 2 Feb 02 31 Mar 2010

Commissioning 1 Jan 03 31 Dec 04 15 Feb 03 31 Mar 2010

Drainage 1 Jul 99 31 Dec 02 1 Dec 01 31 Aug 2010

Prepare master plans 1 Jul 99 31 Mar 00 … …

Detailed design 1 Apr 00 30 Sep 01 1 Dec 01 1 Feb 08

Construction 1 Jan 01 31 Dec 02 26 Oct 02 31 Aug 2010

Solid Waste Management 1 Jul 99 30 Sep 03 1 Dec 01 30 Apr 08

Prepare master plans 1 Jul 99 31 Mar 00 … …

Procurement of vehicles and equipment 1 Jan 00 1 Sep 00 1 Feb 03 30 Apr 08

Detailed design 1 Apr 00 1 Sep 01 1 Dec 01 1 Feb 08

Construction 1 Jul 01 30 Jun 03 NA NA

Contracting private sector operators 1 Oct 03 30 Sep 03 NA NA

Transport (R&B) 1 Jul 99 31 Dec 04 1 Dec 01 20 Mar 09

Detailed design 1 Jul 99 30 Jun 01 1 Dec 01 23 Aug 07

Construction 1 Sep 00 31 Dec 04 2 Feb 02 20 Mar 09

Slum Improvement 1 Jul 99 31 Dec 03 1 Dec 01 4 Jan 07

Organize community groups 1 Jul 99 30 Sep 99 11 Aug 06 4 Jan 07

Detailed designs 1 Oct 99 31 Mar 01 1 Dec 01 7 Aug 06

Construction 1 Oct 00 30 Jun 02 24 Apr 02 4 Jan 07

Employment enhancement schemes 1 Oct 99 31 Dec 03 NA NA

Other Works (Fire) 1 Jul 99 31 Dec 03 1 Dec 01 17 Aug 05

Detailed designs 1 Jul 99 30 Jun 01 1 Dec 01 8 Nov 02

Construction 1 Jan 00 31 Dec 03 26 Sep 02 17 Aug 05

NA = not applicable, … = not available, R&B = roads and bridges. Source: Urban Development Department, Government of Rajasthan.

Appendix 12 76

ACTION PLAN FOR OUTSTANDING ISSUES

Action Responsibility

for Action Time frame Monitoring

Responsibility Reporting Frequency

1.Completion of construction of service roads of ROB at Bikaner

PIU By 30 Sep 2011 PMU Quarterly to ADB

2.External monitoring social impact evaluation report

PMU By 30 Sep 2011 ADB Report to be sent to ADB

3.Inform PHED to supply drinking water to villages along the pipeline route

UDD and PHED As early as possible

ADB Report to be sent to ADB

4.Sewerage in Ajmer: handover to AMC and initiation of household connections

AMC By 31 Mar 2012 PMU Quarterly to ADB

5.Sewerage in Kota: initiation of household connections

KMC By 31 Mar 2012 PMU Quarterly to ADB

6.Environmental clearances—post facto

UDD to write to ULBs and PHED to apply for CTE, CTO, EC

ULBs to obtain CTE, CTO, EC Regular follow-up of ULBs for

obtaining CTE, CTO, EC

PMU

ULBs

PMU

By 31 Jul 2011

By 31 Dec 2012

Ongoing

ADB

PMU

ADB

Mark copy to ADB

Quarterly to

ADB Quarterly to

ADB AMC = Ajmer municipal corporation, CTE = consent to establish, CTO = consent to operate, EC = environmental clearance, KMC = Kota municipal corporation, PHED = public health engineering department, PIU = project implementation unit, PMU = project management unit, ROB = rail over bridge, UDD = Urban Development Department, ULBs = urban local bodies.