Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Social Safeguard Monitoring Report
Semi-Annual Report (Revised) January 2020
Loan 3199-MYA: Maubin–Phyapon Road Rehabilitation Project July – December 2019 Prepared by SMEC International Pty. Ltd., in joint venture with Oriental Consultants Global Co. Ltd., and Pyunghwa Engineering Consultants Ltd. for the Department of Highways, Ministry of Construction of Republic of Union of Myanmar, and the Asian Development Bank.
This social safeguard monitoring report is a document of the borrower. The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent those of ADB's Board of Directors, Management, or staff, and may be preliminary in nature. Your attention is directed to the “terms of use” section of this website. 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.
3
Table of Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................................................... 5
1 A BRIEF PROJECT BACKGROUND ............................................................................................. 6
1.1 Background .........................................................................................................................6
1.2 Institutional Arrangements ...................................................................................................6
1.3 Resettlement Impacts ..........................................................................................................7
1.4 Resettlement Impact Categorization ....................................................................................8
1.5 Resettlement Scope of the Project based on 2016 Supplemental RP ...................................8
1.6 Objective, Approach and Scope of this Semi-Annual Monitoring ..........................................9
1.6.1 Objectives ......................................................................................................................... 9
1.6.2 Approach of Semi-Annual Monitoring ................................................................................. 9
1.6.3 Physical Progress of the Project Activities ........................................................................ 10
2 SEMI-ANNUAL MONITORING RESULTS.................................................................................... 12
2.1 HIV/ AIDs Training ............................................................................................................. 12
2.2 Affected Households Rural Rapid Assessment (RRA) ........................................................ 12
2.2.1 Characteristics of Respondents ....................................................................................... 12
2.2.2 Change in Income Generating Activities ........................................................................... 13
2.3 Livelihood Support and Enhancement................................................................................ 15
2.4 Local Employment Opportunities ....................................................................................... 16
2.5 Grievance Redress Mechanism ......................................................................................... 17
2.6 Road Safety ...................................................................................................................... 18
2.6.1 Managing Road Safety .................................................................................................... 19
3 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................... 21
APPENDIX 1: LINE OF QUESTIONING .............................................................................................. 22
APPENDIX 2: Supplementary Resettlement Plan 2016 ....................................................................... 27
APPENDIX 3: Payment Received List for Compensation 2014 ............................................................ 28
4
Figures
Figure 1: Respondents by Sex and Head of Household ....................................................................... 12 Figure 2: Incomes of APs and resident's per month prior to and since the road upgrade ...................... 14
Figure 3: Km 8 showing newly built shops becoming more established than previous roadside January 2020…………………………………………………………………………………………………….16
Figure 4: Female labourers working on the road site in ICB-2 for remedial works................................. 17 Figure 5: Accidents/Fatalities .............................................................................................................. 19 Figure 6: Children riding bicycles to school Risky walking middle of the road during construction ... 20 Figure 7: Road safety pamphlets for school and training purposes ...................................................... 20
Tables
Table 1: Compensation Payment List of Maubin-Pyapon Road Rehabilitation Project ............................ 7 Table 2: Affected households and entities within the project area .......................................................... 9 Table 3: Consultations and discussion points ...................................................................................... 10 Table 4: Status of two civil works contracts ......................................................................................... 10 Table 5: Summarises HIV/AIDS training carried out in 2018 ................................................................ 12 Table 6: Number of men and women employed by Contractors ........................................................... 16 Table 7: Grievance Redress Mechanism ............................................................................................. 17
5
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Semi-annual Report includes the safeguard implementation status of Maubin – Pyapon Road
Rehabilitation Project covering the period July 2019 to December 2019. This report specifically covers:
Key advances and issues relevant to the Social Safeguards monitoring of the Maubin – Pyapon
Road Rehabilitation Project including updated Rapid Rural Livelihoods Assessment of a sample
of 6 Affected Persons (APs) including one Significantly Affected Person (SAP) and 10 local
residents. This considers impacts of the road on the livelihoods of APs – in terms of small
businesses and the changing business environment along the road that has eventuated from
the road upgrade;
Status of HIV/AIDS Awareness training;
Current mechanism and status of Grievance redress; and
Other – Road safety concerns and local awareness – that is impacts of the road on lifestyle in
terms of safety and access to transport, towns and markets.
The road construction is complete, despite several areas where remedial works are being carried out.
Hence, this Semi-annual Monitoring Report is undertaken alongside a Benefit Monitoring and
Evaluation (BME) report which provides an overview on both impacts and benefits of the Project on the
local stakeholders, including the APs. Thus, this report has considered a sample of contactable APs as
well as specific concerns which have an impact on commuters and other stakeholders along the Maubin-
Pyapon expanse of the road.
HIV/AIDS awareness training for staff and local communities has been completed in the early part of
2019 by both ICB1 and ICB2, hence there is no further trainings to report under this Semi-annual Report.
The Grievance Redress Mechanism (GRM) has been considered over the past year from the standpoint
of key stakeholders and local mechanisms and whether this is in line with Asian Development Bank
(ADB) preferred process. While some areas require strengthening such as recording of current status, it
is reported (by community heads, and Contractors) to be largely operating well. Furthermore, no
grievances were reported during the semi-annual reporting period.
Road safety was considered in response to concerns of all APs and local residents in terms of speeding
and accidents as well as through observation and accident statistics. While road safety trainings under
the Project were carried out in 2018, there is a continued need for training especially to priority groups
such as school children, bus and truck drivers and stall holders. Traffic police with some support from
commercial sponsors (e.g. Telenor, Mytel, Ooredoo) carry out road safety training to schools and
communities upon request. The training is comprehensive, yet upon request as departmental resources
limit the ability to carry out ongoing programs.
A recent Road Safety Audit has just been completed and notes that the main causes of road accidents
are due to driver behaviour including carelessness and speeding by commuters. Alcohol also plays a part
in some accidents. This is a growing concern as accidents have increased more than threefold over the
past year. Some risky behaviours continue, such as hanging out of buses, parking and pedestrians selling
produce and/or walking along the roadside. Driving at night indicates a well reflected road with clear
visuals.
In concurrence with a request from ADB to ensure and reinforce initial compliance with all ADB
resettlement processes, additional Appendices (Appendix 2 and 3) have been added. These provide the
signed endorsements of all APs upon receival of compensation prior to project implementation.
6
1 A BRIEF PROJECT BACKGROUND
1.1 Background
1. The Maubin – Pyapon Road Rehabilitation Project has been implemented as part of the
program of the Government of the Republic of the Union of Myanmar to improve access to the densely
populated, poor and productive agricultural areas. The Maubin to Pyapon road is the main north-south
artery of the eastern side of the Ayeyarwady Delta. It provides a vital link to the economic, health,
education and employment opportunities for the resident population. The road improvement has
targeted improved access to the agricultural hinterlands through connecting waterway landing points
at numerous locations where waterways meet the road.
2. The Maubin Pyapon road covers approximately 54.5 km and traverses three townships namely
Maubin, Kyaiklat and Pyapon. Of the three townships, Maubin is under the Maubin district while
Kyaiklat and Pyapon are under the Pyapon District. The two districts lie within the Ayeyarwady Region
(Division).
3. The Republic of the Union of Myanmar received a loan from the Asian Development Bank
(ADB) towards the cost of rehabilitation of the Project road. The rehabilitation works on the 54.5 km
road have been undertaken under two construction contracts, 25.5 Km and 29.0 Km in length. The
contracts are delivered using the FIDIC MDB Harmonised Edition, June 2010 Conditions of Contract for
Construction.
4. The loan from the ADB also includes the provision of Project Implementation Support (PIS)
services to provide capacity building and institutional strengthening to Ministry of Construction (MOC)
- Department of Highways and Project Management Unit (PMU).
1.2 Institutional Arrangements
5. The Project’s Executing Agency is the government’s MOC and the implementing agency is
MOC’s Department of Highways (DOH) and a PMU. The MOC-PMU supervises and monitors progress
of Project implementation including management of safeguard concerns with the technical assistance
and support of the Construction Supervision Consultants (CSC). Implementing resettlement activities
is the primary responsibility of the DOH of Maubin and Pyapon districts assisted by a Resettlement
Coordinating Committee (RCC) created under each of the three townships (Maubin, Kyaiklat and
Pyapon) participating in the Project. The district DOHs and RCCs of the three townships have worked
together with the CSC’s Social Safeguard and Resettlement Specialist during the construction phase to
verify and confirm the impacts and affected persons (APs). Consultation with APs has been ongoing
throughout Project implementation and during remedial work, initially regarding compensation and
more recently considering impacts of the road on livelihoods and opportunities for APs.
6. All entitlements were received by APs prior to the award of civil works contracts in 2015 and
for the start of the new works in 2017. There was some concern voiced from ADB that no Resettlement
Implementation Plan had been prepared upon compensation payment and prior to project
implementation in 2015. If the payments had not been made and documented prior to project works
commencing, this could have been a compliance issue under the terms of the ADB loan agreement.
The award of compensation occurred prior to the engagement of the CSC on 05 Oct 2015 during which
period the process was under the jurisdiction of the DOH and PMU. While this is not a current
Safeguards monitoring issue, it clearly needed to be resolved urgently. In consultation with ADB and
PMU the appropriate documents have been identified from 2014 and 2017 and have been
subsequently documented in Appendix 2 and 3 of this Semi-Annual Report. The supporting evidence
7
contained herein provides a record that all compensation and assistance was provided to all APs prior
to commencement of project operations, in compliance with project resettlement policy and with ADB
SPS (2009). The payments are signed and dated for 2014. Project implementation commenced with
the issue of the Notice to Commence for the Civil Works Contracts on 19 October 2015, highlighting
that all required resettlement commitments have been met in a timely manner.
7. This Semi-annual Social Safeguards Monitoring Report subsequently provides an update to the
information regarding project resettlement impacts on APs, including one Significantly Affected
Person (SAP) who was affected as a result of the 2016 adjustment of the horizontal alignment of
certain sections of the Project road. As a landowner she received compensation and ongoing dialogue
has continued with her to ensure that the road upgrade had not negatively affected her livelihood.
1.3 Resettlement Impacts
8. A Resettlement Plan, MYA: Maubin - Pyapon Road Rehabilitation Project (2014), was prepared
during the Feasibility Study Stage to address the impacts of the Project on displaced persons and
properties within the Corridor of Impact (COI). Affected households/persons (AH/P) as well as affected
assets were identified and assessed based on road Right-of-way (ROW) requirements during the
Project feasibility/design stage. Other impacts such as trees and crops and ancillary structures as well
as vulnerable groups affected were also inventoried. Based on this initial assessment, the cost for the
implementation of the RP (compensation, relocation and rehabilitation measures and implementation
support) was estimated and provided to each AP. All 62 APs were compensated prior to the
commencement of civil works in 2014. The list of APs’ with amount of compensation and assistance
paid is included as an Appendix 3.
9. A supplementary Resettlement Plan (RP) was prepared in 2016 to cater for adjustments in
road alignment in a specific section of the road which required land purchase/compensation from four
APs.
Table 1: Compensation Payment List of Maubin-Pyapon Road Rehabilitation Project
Sr.No Name National ID Location Compensation Amount (MMK)
Remarks
1 U Tin Nwe Oo 14/Ka La Na (N)099195 Bon Lon Chaung Village 2,480,567.10
2 Daw Cho Mar 14/Ka La Na (N)157079 Bon Lon Chaung Village 17,361,973.90 Already Moved
3 U Moe Swe 14/Ka La Na (N)111057 Suganan Village 1,099,839.76 Already Moved
4 U Aye Shwe 14/Ka La Na (N)046396 Suganan Village 624,919.88
Total (MMK) 21,567,300.64
NOTE: Compensation Payment list of the affected land, house, fruit giving trees and trees which are within the right of way of
Maubin-Pyapon Road Rehabilitation Project Date 10-3-2017 Payment was received by all APs prior to the onset of the
updated civil works in 2017.
10. Loss of Structures: Affected structures (62 structures as highlighted in Table-2) were made
mostly of light materials and were easily removable and were largely constructed for temporary use
for livelihood activities. The large majority of these businesses were squatters who set up within the
government ROW. Many APs simply moved these structures outside the COI beside the Project road,
while others returned to their home village and reconvened farming activities. Cash assistance mostly
ranging from MMK10,000 to 40,000 were provided per AP for the removal and transfer of these
structures.
8
11. Loss of Livelihood Income: Most of the original 62 affected structures were utilized for
livelihood activities (selling of cooked food items/fruits and vegetables and other personal
consumables, motorbike repair stalls, etc.). The recent effects of the changes in business location, and
current livelihood activities, have been assessed under this report through a rapid rural livelihood
assessment of a sample of APs and residents along the road as well as observation.
12. The Maubin-Kyaiklat-Pyapon road is classified by the MOC as a D-IV road with a total ROW of
45.7m. The existing ROW is owned by the Government, and as such, the AHs fall under the ADB
Safeguard Policy Statement (SPS) category of “persons who lost the land they occupy in its entirety or
in part who have neither formal legal rights nor recognized or recognizable claims to such land.” While
compensation was given to the 62 households initially, as noted in Paragraph 9 the ROW is owned by
the Government and all 62 fell within this ROW. The further 4 APs in the 2016 amended RP, owned
their land and were compensated accordingly. The one SAP was given additional assistance and
support for moving and rebuilding her house, levelling the land for her house as well as compensation.
1.4 Resettlement Impact Categorization
13. Prior to implementation of civil works, resettlement impacts were screened and classified
using ADB SPS 2009 classification system as follows:
Category A: If the proposed subproject is likely to have significant involuntary resettlement
impacts to:
o 200 or more persons will be physically displaced from home; o 200 or more persons lose 10% or more of their productive or income generating assets;
or o 200 or more persons experience a combination of both.
Category B: If the proposed subproject includes involuntary resettlement impacts that are not
deemed significant; and
Category C: The proposed subproject has no involuntary resettlement impact.
14. The Maubin – Pyapon Road Rehabilitation has required minimal land acquisition both in the
initial stage of land acquisition as well as in 2016 when there were minimal changes in the designed
alignment of some sections and the further four allotments were impacted and compensated. Based
on ADB SPS 2009, the Project had been classified as category “B” in terms of Involuntary Resettlement
(IR). There was a total of 66 affected households with less than 10 percent of productive assets
affected. Accordingly, while the land acquisition was not deemed significant a RP was prepared in 2014
and a Supplemental RP was prepared in 2016 to address the additional land acquisition impacts
resulting from the realignment of a road section.
1.5 Resettlement Scope of the Project based on 2016 Supplemental RP 15. The initial approved 2014 RP had identified a total of 62 households and three organizational
entities located within and/or recently displaced from the Project ROW. As noted in Paragraph 11 this
ROW was government land. However, upon review of the road horizontal alignment in 2016, there
was a need for adjustment in a particular section around Km 24+049 and the need for land acquisition
which accordingly affected four landowners and their assets. Approximately 0.93 ha was acquired
from local landowners, and this included part of a water channel used for irrigation and pasture/paddy
land. Within the affected parcels of pastureland is a residence and a secondary structure. The number
of displaced households with their affected assets of the 2016 Supplemental RP in comparison with
the 2014 RP are summarized in Table 2 below.
9
Table 2: Affected households and entities within the project area
2014 RP Supplemental RP 2016
Affected
townships
HHs losing
structures
Public Entities losing
structures
HHs losing
agricultural
land
Of w/c, # of HHs losing structures
Of w/c, # of HHs losing trees/crops
Of w/c, # of
HHs experiencing
severe impacts
Maubin 26 1 (GAO) - - - -
Kyaiklat 29 1 (religious community) 4 2 2 1
Pyapon 7 1 (GAO) - - - -
TOTAL 62 3 4 2 2 1
Legend: GAO = General Administration Office.
HH – Households - Households experiencing severe impacts are those losing more than 10% of land utilized for income
generation and household losing entire house
16. To assess the impacts and benefits of the road rehabilitation on APs and residents, the CSC’s
Resettlement Specialist conducted a series of surveys, observation and gathering of available statistics
in January 2020. The assessment covered 6 out of the original 66 APs as well as 10 local residents.
17. To understand changes to living conditions and livelihoods that have occurred to all APs since
the Road Rehabilitation, an assessment had been made in January 2019 whereby all APs were sought,
and their current status considered. While 8 APs could not be located, 55 APs were located, and
information provided about their current socio-economic activities was collated through either direct
contact or through discussion with a close relative (e.g. spouse, son/daughter or cousin).
18. The current survey has further complemented the January 2019 survey considering an
updated status of 6 APs (including one SAP) and 10 non compensated residents in terms of livelihoods.
A line of questioning survey was undertaken to gain the information in these surveys (see APPENDIX
1: LINE OF QUESTIONING).
1.6 Objective, Approach and Scope of this Semi-Annual Monitoring
1.6.1 Objectives
19. The objective of this Semi-annual Monitoring Report is to assess the progress of social
safeguards implementation including:
Livelihoods and social status of APs who received compensation prior to works
commencement;
Identify the status of HIV/AIDS training to contractors and communities along the stretch of
the road;
Consider the Grievance Redress Mechanism (GRM) currently in place and recommend
necessary actions where the process does not comply with required standards; and
Consider other activities supporting Social Safeguards including road safety concerns voiced
by the respondents.
1.6.2 Approach of Semi-Annual Monitoring
20. For the semi-annual monitoring (July to December 2019), the following approaches and
methods were utilized:
Where logistically possible the surveys were carried out in association with the two PMU
officers to ensure the process is extended to the government agency responsible for ongoing
monitoring once the Project is completed;
Site visits and observation of the status of a sample of available APs since the road
rehabilitation activities were undertaken. This included the SAP where 0.76 ha of land was
10
acquired who was once again visited and the lady was met with to discuss her current situation
in terms of livelihoods. These site visits and surveys were carried out in January 2020;
Primary data collection through individual interviews with APs or other direct stakeholders
(e.g. two village chiefs and other residents located along the road who were not moved or
compensated). A line of questioning considered AP satisfaction to RP measures as well as
changes to socioeconomic status (SES) since the road was rehabilitated, including current
livelihood activities;
Observation of small businesses and other activities spanning the length of the road;
Secondary data information on records of training and road safety including 2019 accidents;
Discussions with local government officials including: Provincial Bus Administration, DOH and
RTA officials; two primary schools; Technical Education institution; and Provincial Traffic
Police;
Discussions with NGOs included an NGO responsible for ambulances and funeral services;
and
Discussions with businesses included: Roadside small shops; Nursery; Fish farm and 2 Petrol
distribution centres.
Table 3: Consultations and discussion points
Consultations Number Key discussion points
APs 6 Increase or decline in income levels since the road upgrade
Village chiefs 2 Changing operating environment; Road safety
Roadside vendors 16 (total including APs and residents) Changing operating environment and income levels
Businesses selling Tricarts, Bicycles and motor bikes
One business for each item was visited Rise /decline in purchase of transport items
Roadside businesses 3 – nursery, fish farm, petrol distribution centres – one large and one small
Increase or decline in income levels since the road upgrade
Local government agencies
3 - Traffic Police; Bus Administration Office; DoH officers
Road safety
Education facilities 3 (2 primary schools, one technical college)
Changing transport modes, safety concerns Increased access to education facilities
NGO 1 Charity ambulance and funeral services
Improved, more comfortable and faster travel to hospital
1.6.3 Physical Progress of the Project Activities
21. During this reporting period (July to December 2019), the physical progress of project activities
is summarized in Table 4 below. This progress report indicates that the Project is close to completion
and the main activities are remedial.
Table 4: Status of two civil works contracts
Contract Time elapsed
Progress as of 31.12.2019 Comment
Scheduled Actual Slippage
ICB1 100.00
% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00%
The ICB1 Contractor has already installed and completed Guard rails, KM Posts and Guideposts since 29 January 2019.
Environmental Management Plan (EMP) for our quarry was approved by Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Conservation (MONREC) on August 2019. Therefore, we submitted to the consultant on the 23 August 2019 with letter no. MP1-JHB/REO-850.
11
Contract Time elapsed
Progress as of 31.12.2019 Comment
Scheduled Actual Slippage
ICB2 100.00
% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00%
The ICB2 Contractor continued work on the pavement defect area on flexible, rigid and bridge approach embankment and settlement monitoring work of bridge approach embankment for Oo Yin Chaung and Chaung Twin Bridge. The contractor has additional work for riprap construction at Chaung Twin bridge and installation of deflection triangle block on bridges approach.
12
2 SEMI-ANNUAL MONITORING RESULTS
2.1 HIV/ AIDs Training
22. The HIV/AIDS training program carried out by both Contractors has been completed by the
end of 2018 with the prevention awareness campaign carried out during the reporting period for both
ICB-1 and ICB-2 workers. A total of 14 trainings for each contracting company were carried out
throughout the project implementation. The objectives of HIV-AIDS Awareness Program have been to:
Reduce the risk of HIV virus transmission among the Contractor’s Personnel and the local
community;
Promote early screening, diagnoses and treatment; and
Assist with care and support to infected individuals.
In line with this previously defined objective HIV/AIDS training was carried out by ICB-1 and ICB-2 to
workers and nearby communities. Training breakdown by sex included 53 percent women and 47
percent men. See Table 5 below for numbers of men and women provided with HIV/AIDS awareness
training in 2018. No further HIV/AIDs training has been undertaken in 2019.
Table 5: Summarises HIV/AIDS training carried out in 2018
Men Women
ICB-1 238 324
ICB-2 258 227
Total 496 551
2.2 Affected Households Rural Rapid Assessment (RRA) As indicated under 1.6.2 the following discussion will consider the following aspects:
A broad insight into all affected persons, their livelihood opportunities and current business
activities since the upgrade to the Maubin-Pyapon Road; and
An updated insight into the needs and concerns of APs and people living near to and/or
depend on the road for access to livelihoods, amenities and services.
2.2.1 Characteristics of Respondents
Figure 1: Head of Household
23. A combination of 6 APs and 10 Local residents were interviewed over the period from the 6th
to 17th January 2020. This included 8 women and 8 men in total. Of those interviewed only 2 (12.5%)
33%
67%
Head of AP households n=6
Female
Male
83%
17%
AP Respondents by Sex breakdown n=6
Female
Male
Figure 1: Respondents by Sex
13
reportedly came from female headed households (FHHs) while 14 were from male headed households
(MHHs).
24. Respondents interviewed totalled approximately 9 percent of original APs. These AP
respondents were contacted according to:
Able to be located during the interview period;
Affected persons compensated under the current Project;
Consideration of the overall benefits of the road to local residents both APs and non-APs;
One SAP affected, relocated and compensated under the current Project; and
Small businesses located near the roadside in locations of interest (i.e. close to waterways,
bridges and the road) which had been set up since the road upgrade.
2.2.2 Change in Income Generating Activities
25. All small shops besides the road have been moved 75m from the roads edge by DoH. While
new ones have tried to set up along the roadside the DoH moves them back. Despite this, in some
areas there remains areas of congestion, especially at Km 32 next to the bridge at the entry point to
Kyaiklat. A range of vehicles park dangerously inside the road guard rails in peak morning hours while
they conduct business in the market and local stalls.
26. Satisfaction and benefits from the rehabilitated road Key benefits from the rehabilitated road are summarised in the following responses and compiled
findings:
All AP respondents consider they have better access to nearby services and towns due to the
road upgrade;
Decreased travel time experienced – all respondents indicated that time for travel to the town
markets had been reduced to half in many cases dependent on traffic and weather conditions;
More comfortable drive along the road paving instead of potholes;
More buses travel along the road now; and
All APs also say that traffic has increased.
27. Change in business since the road has been upgraded
While overwhelmingly the businesses close to the waterways are reportedly doing well, the areas on
the opposite side of the road at Km 8 are reportedly not doing as well. This identifies that while the
road has increased movement and access to markets considerably, there remains a significant reliance
on water transport by many people. For example, many farmers continue to transport rice crops to
the rice processing factory in Kyaiklat, indicating that it is cheaper to transport rice by boat than by
road transport.
28. Note in Figure below that incomes of the four of the five APs interviewed have predominantly
increased since the road has been upgraded.
14
All respondents (APs and residents) were pleased with the road upgrade and the majority considered
that their income increased. While the landings which were hubs for transporting products are thriving
with the combination of water and land transportation, those water hubs where boats taxied people
have experienced a decrease in business as many people can now use the road to travel to their
29. Increases in purchase of goods
While not every respondent has purchased new items, there has been a significant increase in sales of
transportation items. For example, sales of motorbikes have increased by 70 percent; sales of
motorised tri-carts have increased 90 percent; and push bikes have doubled in sales (Vehicle shops
Maubin 2020). Upon observation from the previous mid 2019 Semi Annual Report, the usage of motor
bikes and motorised tri-carts have increased significantly.
30. Concerns regarding the rehabilitated road
All APs interviewed indicated road safety concerns pertaining to:
Increases in traffic;
Vehicles off-loading passengers and goods from vehicles on the road even on bridges;
Speeding drivers (speed is high);
Overtaking and accidents; and
Drivers careless and not following road rules.
While some animals roam across the road during the day, no respondent considered this an issue. A
succinct discussion on road issues will be considered under section Road Safety.
1 1 1
22 2
1
150000-300,000 301,000-500,000 501,000 -700,000 701,000-1,000,000 OVER 1 MILLION
Monthly Kyatt earnings of respondents (n=5)
Before road upgrade After road upgrade
Figure 2: Incomes of APs and resident's per month prior to and since the road upgrade
15
31. The Severely Affected Person – Sugana Curve:
This single mother (widow) has an 18-year-old daughter who will marry early 2020. She relies solely
on her land for income generation. As previously noted, the land for her house had been built up and
levelled prior to building her home by ICB-1. She has been interviewed each six months to assess what
particular investments could be made to help her improve her family income or business skill training
opportunities. During the most recent discussion she voiced the following comments:
She continues to do well with her sales of rice and vegetables. She did indicate that rice prices
have declined over the past six months, however she is still making a profit;
Prior to the road upgrade and her subsequent compensation, she regularly sought loans for
basic needs as well as to fund planting of rice and vegetables. Since the assistance provided
through compensation for use of her land, she no longer needs loans and she is also managing
to save extra money;
People know her and come to her home to purchase vegetables;
She bought three key items of machinery in 2019 to assist with her farming. These include:
o Plough; o Rice husk remover; and o Water pump.
2.3 Livelihood Support and Enhancement
32. While small businesses are extremely important for income generation for many households;
those located near the waterways have a definite advantage over those along the roadside as they
have clients from the road as well as the canals.
33. Some of the roadside vendors had previously indicated that it is more viable for them to
return to rice farming and selling rather than roadside stalls. This is likely to be the case as long as the
price of rice is high, but as noted above many are carrying out a mix of roadside stalls and farming to
maintain income levels especially when the rice prices fluctuate as is currently the case. This
combination of income sources appears to support their growth in income.
34. Upon observation and survey responses the following has been a definite trend over the last
six months:
Government has made a serious effort to remove stalls from along the roadside. Those few
(~5-10) located along the road are new operators rather than the previous stall owners. These
operators will also be moved away by the DoH for safety and better use of the road;
At Km 8 several stallholders have leased a piece of land back from the road and next to the
boat landing at 45,000 kyats a month. These businesses at waterway intersections are
changing the nature of business in the rural areas of the road. They are seeking a more
sustainable business environment for carrying out their business than the previous roadside
stalls. None of these new stall/shops were compensated APs;
Those APs who were compensated continue to have their stall/shops across the road. The
associated community have imposed a minimal standard stall/shop which has totally changed
the environment of the boat landing area and the roadside as it is the beginnings of a bustling
commercial area. See figure 4, showing the changing environment at the Km 8 mark along the
road;
The shops are made of thatch and are situated on both sides of the road. Those across the
road from the waterway reported that business is not as good as on the waterway side. This
indicates:
16
o A more formal business operation is being developed. With this certain rights and securities are established;
o The shops are set up on a more permanent basis than squatting along the roadside; and
o The shop owners can grow their business in accordance with local village bylaws and commuters needs.
As mentioned in the mid-year Semi-annual Monitoring Report (No. 7), there was a decline of
boat taxis business at Km 19 where the road and canal intersected, an area which had been a
hub for transport of people to homes and service facilities. Many people can now get to their
homes easier and in a timely manner using road transport;
While many respondents continue to walk to school or shops, there is a growing trend for
bicycles, buses and motor bikes. Walking has decreased by 50 percent as the main form of
transport amongst respondents; and
At Km 32 just before Kyaiklat, the stalls were moved back from the roadside, and a road safety
rail has been placed along the road entering the bridge and town. However, this means that
vehicles dropping off products for the stalls holders to sell must park beyond the road rail.
This is not occurring and in the morning peak time the entry to the town has many vehicles
stopped along the roadside within the road rail.
Figure 3: Km 8 showing newly built shops becoming more established than previous roadside stalls January 2020
2.4 Local Employment Opportunities Table 6: Number of men and women employed by Contractors
2016 2017 2018 2019 2019 from July to
December
Men Women Men Women Men Women Men Women Men Women
ICB-1 539 71 426 80 1611 134 89 8 58 3
ICB-2 1040 253 1299 437 2489 424 93 13 35 10
35. Employment opportunities in terms of short-term labour roles in construction had been
mentioned to APs and the community during the preparation of the original and supplemental RPs.
However, none of the respondents in this current survey have worked on the road project in any
capacity.
36. Table 6 above identifies the numbers of men and women employed by the Contractors at the
end of December 2019. This indicates ICB-1 has a 5 percent ratio of women to 95 percent men;
17
whereas ICB2 employed 22 percent of the workforce are women. Upon observation women also held
labour roles on the road managing traffic flows in operational areas as shown below.
37. All labourers are from Myanmar, with only ICB1 employing senior staff from Korea and
Philippines.
Figure 4: Female labourers working on the road site in ICB-2 for remedial works
2.5 Grievance Redress Mechanism
38. The Grievance Redress Mechanism (GRM) aims to reduce the risk for the Project, offers APs
and communities a constructive and effective means of airing concerns and issues and achieving
solutions. Specifically, the Project GRM is established to enable the APs to appeal any disagreeable
decision or action arising from the implementation of the Maubin - Pyapon Road Rehabilitation Project
and in particular related to the resettlement impacts and measures.
39. While a GRM was set up for the Project following ADB SPS requirements with the
implementation of the 2014 RP this did not function effectively. This was due to two key reasons:
Changes in government in 2016 resulted in changes in officials with replacements unfamiliar
with the project and/or local residents; and
Communities along this area already had an operational grievance mechanism situated within
the local governance system. Communities and local authorities are satisfied with the
mechanisms and outcomes within this system.
40. The existing mechanism (see Table 7) will be utilized in addressing issues and concerns
pertinent to the implementation of this supplemental RP.
Table 7: Grievance Redress Mechanism
ADB SPS on GRM Project’s GRM Current GRM processes
The government/client will establish a
mechanism to receive and facilitate the
resolution of APs’ concerns and
grievances about physical and
economic displacement and other
project impacts, paying particular
attention to the impacts on vulnerable
groups.
The RCC, an ad hoc body, was set-up in
each township. Apart from
representatives from the DOH, village
tract officials and village women
organization representatives were also
members since they are very familiar
with the socio-economic situation and
needs of the AHs in their village.
The local PMU office deal with complaints
from individuals, communities and
politicians pertaining to road construction
impacts and/or land acquisition.
Processes
18
The GRM should be scaled to the risks
and adverse impacts of the project.
The RCC was set up at the project level
with representatives from DOH, general
administrative office, village elders,
NGOs, and AHs.
1. Individuals in communities can report their grievance to the village leader
2. The village leader will then a. Inform the local PMU officer;
and b. Call both parties to the
complaint to discuss and negotiate and find a solution.
3. The PMU officer will record the issue and report the same to the local chairperson of the General Administration (GA) – this local governance mechanism manages all local government functions in each town.
4. Local politicians also have access to national politicians and can raise complaints to higher levels if the need arises.
5. If no resolution is reached the issue will be determined in local court.
The complaints may or may not be in writing - the process is often "the PMU have received a call" and a meeting is held which may or may not result in a written request (instruction). However, a written complaint is encouraged.
It should address APs’ concerns and
complaints promptly, using an
understandable and transparent
process that is gender responsive,
culturally appropriate, and readily
accessible to the APs at no costs and
without retribution.
The village tract chief was designated as
“point of contact” in the village. RCC
members are to be provided with
orientation and guidance by the
construction supervision consultants in
order to handle grievances.
The mechanism should not impede
access to the country’s judicial or
administrative remedies.
The RCC sought to receive and address concerns and grievances at the project level as part of the Project’s good management; it did impede with the Government’s judicial and administrative remedies.
The borrower/client will inform APs
about the mechanism.
The AHs were informed during
resettlement planning and the GRM
was reflected in the resettlement
information booklet included in 2014
RP.
41. All costs incurred in the process of grievance resolution are covered out of the project funds.
42. While all towns have been advised to keep proper reports and records of grievances received
and conveyed to PMU if any, this still needs to be encouraged and a PMU officer allocated this task.
The PMU currently consists of one key officer who also has other projects to coordinate.
43. Complaints – Status of Received Complaints. No further complaints regarding the road were
received or recorded during the reporting period.
2.6 Road Safety
44. As previously mentioned, all APs contacted indicated that the road is much better than before,
but speed and road safety is a growing concern. Combined with a poor understanding of traffic safety,
avoidable accidents continue. There have been 4 road deaths and 6 accidents between July to
December 2019, indicating a significant drop since the installation of road signs was completed in
August 2019. The majority of these appear to be a result of poor understanding of road rules,
carelessness and/or alcohol related causes. All of these are preventable with greater understanding
of road rules and care.
19
Figure 5: Accidents/Fatalities
2.6.1 Managing Road Safety
45. Two key areas to improve road safety were highlighted:
Ongoing awareness program:
o There is a critical need for commuters and pedestrians to learn road rules. These also need
to be enforced; and
o Buses speed through villages and were even seen to race with each other along the road
during the current mission. While bus drivers reportedly have a speed limit of 80 kph they
also need to undergo training.
Black spots - Upon observation along the road there continue to be a number of potential
black spots whereby accidents can quite easily be precipitated through carelessness.
‘Potential Black Spots’ include:
o Km 8 whereby commuters park trucks and buses along the road to load/offload
passengers or goods for transporting on the water taxis/boats;
o Entry onto bridges whereby people park despite the narrowed road width; and
o Right hand drive buses which stop on the road and commuters have to offload produce
from under the bus in the middle of the road.
Driving practices:
o Young people hang out of bus doors as the buses drive; and
o Motor bikes are expected to move to the edge of the road, yet this is also where many
pedestrians walk. Cars, buses and trucks constantly ‘toot’ for bikes to move to the side of
the road even where there is obviously very little roadside, or pedestrians are walking.
Road uses – people allow their animals to roam free during the day along the road. At night
they are tied up.
20
Figure 6: Children riding bicycles to school Risky walking middle of the road during construction
Figure 7: Road safety pamphlets for school and training purposes
21
3 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
46. This Social Safeguard interim report identifies key safeguards aspects that have been
addressed in the past six-month period from July to December 2019. The project is 100 percent
complete and any work undertaken by Contractors is remedial. As it is the dry season these remedial
works are well underway. A further Safeguards Monitoring Report in mid-2020 will assess the status
of the Safeguards against the baseline information from the commencement of the Project.
47. While commuters and residents acknowledge their satisfaction with the road itself and the
improved travel experience along it, there remains the need for ongoing road safety knowledge
through training and indeed enforcement to reduce the unacceptable level of road accidents largely
attributed to carelessness. While the local traffic police undertake trainings in communities and
schools upon request, their resources are limited and yet there is the need for a more expansive road
safety program to be carried out to enhance local awareness and decrease the high number of
accidents. This will need to continue under the local mechanisms – DoH in association with GA.
48. Furthermore, DoH will need to continue to record and address grievances related specifically
to the project as they assume ownership of the Maubin-Pyapon Road.
22
APPENDIX 1: LINE OF QUESTIONING
Benefit Monitoring and Evaluation questions for residents, businesses and commuters
Objectives of this consultation:
To gain a broad insight into the impact of the road upgrade on the local residents and
commuters social and economic situation; and
Identify any improvements to livelihood options through increased connectivity.
General
Name__________________________________
1. Location of business/residence along road_(km)____________________________
2. Sex:
o Male
o Female
3. Age
o Under 18
o 18-35
o 36-50
o 51-65
o Over 65
4. Head of household (if community member)
o Female
o Male
5. Were you an affected household given compensation under the road upgrade?
6. If so, has your lifestyle and economic situation improved since the road upgrade?
School line of questioning
Education
7. Has there been an increase in children riding bikes to school? (schools)___________________
8. If so, has this been a significant increase – estimate if possible _______________________
9. What are the benefits of children riding to school? __________________
o Get to school on time
o Enjoy the riding
o Less tired from walking
o Can spend more time at home
o Other please explain>_______________________
10. Does the school provide road safety training? ________________________
11. If so, for what years and how often? _____________________
23
12. Have there been any accidents involving children riding to or from school?
13. If so, please explain_____________________________
14. Are there any other incidents or concerns children face riding to school?
o Too many vehicles
o Vehicles travel too fast
o Cars push bike riders off the road at times
15. If your child rides a bike to school
o How far do they travel to school?
o Did you purchase the bike since the road was completed?
o Do you have any safety concerns regarding your child riding to school?
Bike/ motor bike/ motor cart (trishaw) sales
16. Have bicycle sales increased?
17. Average cost of different vehicles?
18. Have motor bike sales increased?
19. Have motor cart (trishaw) sales increased?
20. If so by how much?
21. Do more women or men buy the bike/motor bike/ motor cart?
Emergency services line of questioning
22. Can you estimate the time taken to reach nearest hospital from each town?
Services and amenities Prior to road upgrade Since road upgrade
Town - closest
Hospital or doctor
23. Are you pleased with the road upgrade?
o Yes
o No
o Uncertain
24. Has the road upgrade assisted you in providing a good emergency response to those in need?
25. If so in which ways?
o Decreased travel time
o Provided better access to hospitals and doctors
o Faster response time to reach those in need
o Save lives
Businesses
24
26. Have business opportunities changed since the road upgrade? ______________________
27. If so in what ways?
o Changed nature – i.e. more variety
o Increased o Decreased
o Uncertain
28. Name any new business opportunities?
29. Is your business seasonal?
Income
30. What was your income source before the road upgrade? ____________________________
31. What is your income source since the road upgrade? _______________________________
32. Has your business income increased since the road upgrade?
33. Can you estimate how much your income has increased (if relevant)?
34. Do you have an increasing number of customers?
35. Income prior to road upgrade o <33,347
o 33,347-66,694
o 66,695-100,000
o 100,000-150,000
o 150,000-200,000 o 200,000-300,000
o 300,000-400,000
o Above 400,000
36. Income since road upgrade o <33,347
o 33,347-66,694
o 66,695-100,000
o 100,000-150,000
o 150,000-200,000
o 200,000-300,000 o 300,000-400,000
o Above 400,000
Road condition changes
37. Has traffic increased along the road since the upgrade?
o Yes
o No
o Uncertain
25
38. How has changing traffic numbers affected your business?
o Increased
o Decreased
o Changed the type of business
o Other please specify?
39. Has access to boat landing points improved since the road upgrade?
o Yes o No o Uncertain
40. If so, does it provide more opportunities for income generation? o Yes o No o Uncertain
41. In which way? __________________________________________
42. What further could help improve business at the boat landing/road intersections? (e.g. km8 and
km 19 and km 27)
Village head person 43. What changes have you seen in your village since the road upgrade?
44. Has the upgrade improved the lives of village residents?
45. If so, in which ways?
o Better access to schools and necessary services? o Improved business opportunities? o Decreased time travelling? For business, school and health o Improved comfort travelling o Able to better connect with temple and spiritualism o Able to better connect to other family members in other locations? o Caused some safety concerns o Other please note? ___________________________________
46. Are residents buying more goods that they did not have prior to the road upgrade?
o Tractor or farming equipment
o Transport (car, bike, motor bike)
o Electric items (DVD, TV, fridge, solar power unit, mobile phone)
o Other items (tyre repair equipment, welding machine etc)
47. Has the road upgrade impacted the rice crop growth and business? o Planted more since road upgrade
o Planted less since road upgrade
o No difference in size of crop
o Improved transport of rice crop to markets?
Technical School
26
48. Enrolment numbers – men and women in different disciplines?
49. Has this been impacted by the road upgrade?
50. If so, in which ways?
o Greater access for students
o Increased need for different disciplines as the region prospers
o Other? ________________________
27
APPENDIX 2: Supplementary Resettlement Plan 2016
Included herein are the signatures, dates and details of the four additional Affected Persons as determined and described under the Supplemental Resettlement Plan.
Compensation Payment list of the affected land, house, fruit giving trees and trees which are within the right
of way of Maubin-Pyapon Road Rehabilitation Project Date 10-3-2017
Sr.No Name National ID Location Compensation
Amount (Kyats)
Compensation
Amount
(Proposed)
(Kyats)
Remarks Signature
1 U Tin Nwe Oo 14/Ka La Na
(N)099195
Bon Lon
Chaung
Village
2,480,567.10 2,480,500
2 Daw Cho Mar 14/Ka La Na
(N)157079
Bon Lon
Chaung
Village
17,361,973.90 17,361,800 Already
Moved
3 U Moe Swe 14/Ka La Na
(N)111057
Suganan
Village
1,099,839.76 1,099,800 Already
Moved
4 U Aye Shwe 14/Ka La Na
(N)046396
Suganan
Village
624,919.88 624.900
Total (Kyats) 21,567,300.64 21,567,000
28
APPENDIX 3: Payment Received List for Compensation 2014 Included herein are the signatures, dates and details of the sixty-six Affected Persons as determined and
described under the final Maubin to Pyapon Road project Resettlement Plan 2014. Given that these affected persons were consulted and evidence of their compensatory payments recorded in the following signatures. It
can be ascertained that the Government of Myanmar has been compliant with the terms of the loan agreement
in terms of resettlement and timely compensation payments.
Compensation Payment list of the affected land, house, fruit giving trees and trees which are within the right of
way of Maubin-Pyapon Road Rehabilitation Project.
Sr.No
Name ID/ Father
Name
Location
(Mile)
Location (Km)
Compen
sated Amount
(Kyats
Remark Village
GPS
Location
(N Value)
GPS Loca
tion (E
Value)
Township
1 U Zaw Win
U Tin Thein 1/0-1/1
Km 1.6 - 1.76
20,000
Roof Maubin
2
Daw
Khin Mar Kyi
14/Ma Ah Pa (N)
060316 U Nyo Kyi
2/0-
2/1
Km 3.2-
3.42
10,000 Roof Maubin
3 DAW Shi Khue
14/Ma Ah Pa (N)
256383 U San Kway
2/0-
2/1
Km 3.2-
3.42
10,000
Moved
Roof Maubin
4 U Say Nay
U Mya Maung Lay
2/0-2/1
Km 3.2-3.42
10,000
Moved Betel
Shop
Maubin
5 Ma Ei
14/Ma Ah
Pa (N) 246457
U Hla Soe
2/1-2/2
Km
3.42-3.62
10,000
Moved
Betel Shop
16.68218
95.6
6541
Maubin
6 Daw Sabe
14/Ma Ah
Pa (N) 240198
U Maung Shwe
3/0-3/1
Km 4.83-
5.03
15,000
Moved Snack
Shop
Maubin
7 Daw Nwe Ni
Win
U Tin Maung
4/0-4/1
Km 6.44-
6.64
15,000
Moved Snack
Shop
Maubin
8 U Soe
Khaing
14/Ma Ah Pa (N)
233388 U Ohn Kyi
4/0-
4/1
Km
6.44-6.64
15,000
Moved
Snack Shop
Maubin
9 U Zaw
Zaw
14/Ma Ah Pa (N)
010707 U Toe
4/2-
4/3
Km
6.84-7.04
25,000
Moved
Betel Shop
Maubin
10 U Naing
Linn
14/Ma Ah
Pa (N) 085817
5/1-
5/2
Km
8.25-8.45
25,000
Moved
Welding Shop
Lat Khok
e Pin
16.55
49
95.7
0111
Maubin
29
11 U Kyi
Soe
14/Ma Ah Pa (N)
116042 U Tun Aung
5/1-
5/2
Km
8.25-8.45
20,000
Moved Motorbik
e Repairing
Shop
Maubin
12 Daw Ohn
May
U Aye Phay 5/1-
5/2
Km 8.25-
8.45
20,000
Moved Food
Shop
Maubin
13 U Chit Kaung
14/Ma Ah
Pa (N) 180345
U Hla Htwe
5/1-5/2
Km 8.25-
8.45
25,000
Moved
Snack Cold
Shop
Maubin
14
Daw
Myint Myint
Khaing
U Wan Kauk 5/1-5/2
Km 8.25-
8.45
25,000
Moved Betel
Shop
Maubin
15 U Thein Tun
U Chit Tin 5/1-5/2
Km
8.25-8.45
35,000
Moved
Food Shop
Maubin
16 U Kyaw Win
U Khwat Kyi 5/1-5/2
Km 8.25-
8.45
25,000
Moved Food
Shop
Maubin
17 Daw Hla
Than U San Lwin
5/1-
5/2
Km
8.25-8.45
25,000
Moved
Snack Shop
Maubin
18 U Myint Lwin
U Than Shwe
7/0-7/1
Km 11.27-
11.47
15,000
Moved Shop
16.61808
95.6796
Maubin
19 Daw Thidar
Hlaing
14/Ma Ah
Pa (N) 155059
U Aye Hlaing
7/0-7/1
Km 11.27-
11.47
10,000
Moved Betel
Shop
Maubin
20 U Zaw U Kan Nyunt 7/1-7/2
Km
11.47-11.67
15,000
Moved
Betel Shop
Maubin
21 U Thein
San
14/Ma Ah Pa (N)
176202 U Tin Myint
7/1-
7/2
Km
11.47-11.67
10,000
Moved
Betel Shop
Maubin
22
U Aung
Than Oo
U San
Maung
0/0-
0/1
Km 0-
0.2
25,000
Moved Fried
Snack Shop
23 U Ohn
Myint
14/Ma Ah Pa (N)
133816 U Tun
0/0-
0/1
Km 0-
0.2
40,000
Moved
Shop Maubin
24 U Nyan
Tun
14/Ma Ah Pa (N)
168931 Administrati
ve Office
0/0-
0/1
Km 0-
0.2
65,000
Bricknoki
ng One Story
16.71
75
95.6
6364
Maubin
25 U Tin
San
U Maung
Hla Aung
0/0-
0/1
Km 0-
0.2
25,000
Moved
Vegetable Shop
Maubin
30
26 Daw New
New Oo
U Myo Chit 0/5-0/6
Km 1.0- 1.21
40,000
Construction
Hut
Maubin
27 U Hla Win
14/Ma Ah
Pa (N) 110909
U Ohn Maung
0/5-0/6
Km 1.0- 1.21
20,000
Moved Food
Shop
Junction
16.70193
95.6649
1
Maubin
Intrusive Houses within the construction area (21.1836 m)
28 U Khaing
Win
14/Ka La Na (N)
084338
Km 13-
14
Tar Pat
10,000
Hut House
Maubin
29 U Mya
Oo
14/Ka La Na (N)
061142
Km 13-
14
Tar Pat
10,000
Hut
House Kyailatt
30 Daw Khin
Hla
Km 18-
19 Tharyar
Wel
10,000
Shop Tharyar
Wel
16.55502
95.7015
2
Kyailatt
31 U Than Tun
14/Ka La Na (N)
34090
Km 18-
19 Tharyar
Wel
10,000
Shop Kyailatt
32 U Than
Aung
14/Ka La Na
(N) 33989
Km 18-19
Tharyar Wel
20,000
Timber
House with
Corrugated Iron
Sheet
Kyailatt
33 U Naing Linn
14/Ka La Na (N)
085857
Km 18-
19 Tharyar
Wel
15,000
Shop Tharyar
Wel
16.5549
95.7011
1
Kyailatt
34 U Hla Wai
14/Ka La Na
(N) 033791
Km 18-
19 Tharyar
Wel
15,000
Hut
Workshop
Kyailatt
35 U Myint
Swe
14/Ka La Na
(N) 074592
Km 19
Tharyar Wel
10,000
Hut
House Kyailatt
36 U Yan Naing
Tun
14/Ka La Na (N)
048641
Km 21-
22
Suganan
20,000
Hut House
Suganan
16.52472
95.7038
6
Kyailatt
37 U Tin
Myaing
14/Ka La Na (N)
127416
Km 24-25
Khayarpin Sate
20,000
Timber
House with
Corrugated Iron
Sheet
Kyailatt
38 U Win
Naing
14/Ka La Na (N)
028806
Km 26
Khayarp
in Sate
20,000
Hut
House Kyailatt
31
39 U Saw Aung
Myo
14/Ka La Na (N)
018942
Km 26
Khayarp
in Sate
20,000
Hut House
Kyailatt
40
U
Thaung Kyi
14/Ka La Na
(N) 029635
Km 26-27
Khayarpin Sate
10,000 Shop Kyailatt
41 U Hla
14/Ka La Na
(N) 016537
Km 26-27
Khayarpin Sate
10,000 Shop Kyailatt
42 Daw Nu
Kyi
14/Ka La Na
(N) 030822
Km 26-27
Khayarpin Sate
10,000 Shop Kyailatt
43 U Aung
Tin
14/Ka La Na
(N) 157061
Km 26-27
Khayarpin Sate
10,000 Shop Kyailatt
44 U Hla Myint
Aung
14/Ka La Na (N)
029728
Km 26-27
Khayarpin Sate
15,000 Bus Stop Kyailatt
45
U Phyoe
Min Thu
14/Ka La Na (N)
121072
Km 26-27
Khayarpin Sate
15,000 Shop Kyailatt
46 U Kyaw
Htet
14/Ka La Na (N)
077854
Km 26-27
Khayarpin Sate
15,000 Shop Kyailatt
47
U Aung
Min Tun
14/Ka La Na
(N) 090375
Km 26-27
Pyin Htaung
Su
15,000 Shop
16.50
34
95.6
8258
Kyailatt
48 U Than
14/Ka La Na
(N) 016224
Km 26-27
Pyin Htaung
Su
15,000
Shop Kyailatt
49 U Aye
Thaung
14/Ka La Na (N)
103826
Km 26-
27 Pyin
Htaung Su
20,000 House
16.50
288
95.6
825 Kyailatt
50 Daw Mon
Mon
Still Appling
Km 0-1 (Wrong
Location)
Ward (1)
10,000
Betel Shop
Kyailatt
32
51 U Than Htike
14/Ka La Na (N)
076556
Km 0-1(Wron
g Location
) Ward
(1)
10,000
Shop Kyailatt
52 U Myo Ko
Still Appling
Km 0-1 (Wrong
Location)
Ward (1)
10,000
Shop Kyailatt
53 U Pu 14/Ka La Na
(N)
045199
Km 1-2 (Wrong
Location)
Kha Naung
20,000
Shop Kha Nau
ng
16.4239
95.7174
3
Kyailatt
54 U Than
Myint
14/Ka La Na (N)
144992
Km 1-2 (Wrong
Location)
Shwe Pay
Chaung
15,000
Hut
House Kyailatt
55
U Zaw
Win Naing
Still Appling
Km 1-2
(Wrong Location
) Kha
Naung
15,000 Shop Kyailatt
56 U Win
Zaw
Km 1-2
(Wrong Location
Kha Naung
15,000 Shop
Kha Nau
ng
16.42
383
95.7175
2
Kyailatt
Public Infrastructure Within the Construction Area 21.1836 m
57 Monastry Gate
Km 18-
19
150,000
Thar
yarwel
16.55492
95.7
0114
Kyailatt
58
Bus Stop
(Rest House)
Km 18-
19
50,000
Pa
Bell Su
Kyailatt
59
Bus Stop
(Rest House)
Km 18-
19
50,000
Kyee
Chaung
16.55
477
95.7
0147
Kyailatt
60 Red Cross
Office
Km 32-
33
50,000
Hlesate
Kyailatt
33
61
Kan Phone
Pwint Ceti
Gate
Km 0-1 (Wrong
Location)
300,000 Kyailatt
62
Bus Stop
(Rest House)
Km 4-5 (Wrong
Location)
50,000
Kan
Chaung
Kyailatt
63
Bus Stop
(Rest House)
Km 6-7 (Wrong
Location)
50,000
Ka
Lat Yap
Kyailatt
64 Administrative
Office
Km 32-
33
100,000
Hles
ate Kyailatt
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
