FINAL REPORT RP1355 v4 Road Sector Development Team ...

FINAL REPORT

RP1355 v4

Road Sector Development Team

Federal Ministry of Works

Abbreviated Resettlement Action Plan (ARAP)

For the Construction of alternate Bridge at (Km 7+350) along Enugu-

Abakiliki Road, Emene Enugu State

Prepared by

MULTIPLE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES LTD

October, 2012

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Abbreviated Resettlement Action Plan for the alternate Bridge at km7+350 along Enugu – Abakaliki Road

1 | ARAP OF ALTERNATE BRIDGE NO 2 CONSTRUCTION ENUGU – ABAKALIKI ROAD BY MDS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS 1

LIST OF TABLES 3

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS 4

DEFINITIONS 5

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 7

1. INTRODUCTION 11

1.1 Background 11

1.2 Applicability of ARAP: Involuntary Resettlement 12

1.3 Aims and Objectives of the ARAP 13

1.4 Scope of Work 13

1.5 Methodology of Study 14

1.5.1 Field Surveys 15

1.5.2 Major Sub-activities of the ARAP 16

1.5.3 Identification of PAPS and Affected Assets 16

1.5.4 Work Program me 17

2. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT 19

2.1 General Description of Study Area 19

2.2 Socio-Economic Survey of the Project Area 21

3. POLICY AND REGULATORY FRAMEWORK 24

3.1 World Bank Safeguard Policies 24

3.2 Nigeria Regulatory Framework 25

3.2.1 The Federal Ministry of Environment (FMEnv) 26

3.2.2 The National Environmental Standards and Regulations Enforcement

Agency (NESREA) Act No 25 of 2007 27

4.2.3 Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Act Cap 131 LFN 1992 28

4.2.3.1 Sect oral EIA Guidelines 29

3.3 Nigeria Urban & Regional Planning Law No 88 of 1992 29

3.4 Land Use Act Cap 202 LFN 1990 30

3.5 Comparison between Land Use Act and World Bank OP 4.12 31

4. IDENTIFICATION OF PROJECT IMPACTS AND PROJECT AFFECTED PERSONS 31

4.1 Approach to Impacts and PAPs Identification 31

4.2 Eligibility Criteria for Affected Persons 32

4.3 Proof of Eligibility 33



4.4 Entitlement Policy 33

4.4.1 PAPs Losing Structures 34

4.4.2 Vendors displaced from road corridors 34

4.4.3 PAPs with loss of economic trees 34

4.5 Notification 34

4.6 Duration for Civil works 35

4.7 Inventory and Census of Affected assets and PAPs 35

5. VALUATION AND COMPENSATION OF AFFECTED STRUCTURES AND PROPERTY 35

5.1 Introduction 36

5.2 Method of Valuation for compensation 36

5.3 Category of Payments of Compensation 37

5.4 Entitlement Matrix 37

5.5 Valuation of Resettlement/Compensation and Assistance Cost for PAPs 38

6. INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENT AND RESPONSIBILITIES 39

6.1 Introduction 39

6.2 Institutional Arrangement 40

6.3 Grievances and Appeals Procedure 41

6.3.1 Grievance Redress Mechanisms 42

7. MONITORING AND EVALUATION 43

7.1 Internal Monitoring 43

7.1.1 Tasks of the Monitoring and Evaluation Officer 44

7.2 Independent Monitoring 45

7.2.1 Implementation Schedule 46

8. COMPENSATION FUNDING ARRANGEMENT AND TIMETABLE 48

8.1 Budget for Resettlement activities related with the Road Project 48

8.2 World Bank-RSDT 49

8.3 Training Needs 49

9. PUBLIC CONSULTATION 50

9.1 Introduction 50

9.2 Public Consultation Process 51

9.3 Overview of Public Consultations Programme 52

9.3.1 Otukwu Emene village 52

REFERENCES 53



LIST OF TABLES

Table E1: Indicative budget for ARAP implementation

Table 4.1: Comparison of Nigerian Land Use Act (1978) and World Bank’s OP 4.12

Table 5.1: Entitlement Matrix showing categories of project affected persons, type

of loss and compensation

Table 5.2: Valuation of Compensation and Assistance Cost for Project Affected

Persons

Table 6.1: Institutional Arrangement and Responsibilities for ARAP

Table 7.1: Summary of Responsibility for Implementation of Abbreviated

Resettlement Action Plan

Table 8.1: Timetable for Abbreviated Resettlement Action Plan

Table 8.2: Recommended Training and Awareness

Table 9.1: Attendance at a Focus Group Discussion with Otukwu village Emene



ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

ADT - Average Daily Traffic

ARAP - Abbreviated Resettlement Action Plan

DP - Displaced Persons

ESIA - Environmental and Social Impact Assessment

ESMF - Environmental and Social Management Framework

ESMP - Environmental and Social Management Plan

FMW - Federal Ministry of Works

FGN - Federal Government of Nigeria

FGD - Focus Group Discussion

FERMA - Federal Roads Maintenance Agency

FRDP - Federal Roads Development Project

IDA - International Development Association

LGA - Local Government Authority

PAD - Project Appraisal Document

PAP - Project Affected Person

PRA - Participatory Rural Appraisal

PIU - Project Implementation Unit

PIM - Project Implementation Manual

PSP - Private Sector Partner or Private Sector Participation

RAP - Resettlement Action Plan

ROW - Right of Way

RPF - Resettlement Policy Framework

RSDT - Road Sector Development Team

SPIU - State Project Implementation Unit

SRMC - Sector Reform Management Committee

SSI - Semi Structured Interview

WB - World Bank.



DEFINITIONS

Children: all persons under the age of 18 years according to international regulatory

standard (convention on the rights of Child 2002).

Community: a group of individuals broader than households, who identify themselves

as a common unit due to recognized social, religious, economic and traditional

government ties or shared locality.

Compensation: payment in cash or in kind for an asset or resource acquired or

affected by the project.

Cut-off-Date: the date of completion of inventory of losses and census of project

affected persons

Economic Displacement: a loss of productive assets or usage rights or livelihood

capacities because such assets / rights / capacities are located in the project area.

Entitlement: the compensation offered by RAP, including: financial compensation; the

right to participate in livelihood enhancement programs; housing sites and

infrastructure; transport and temporary housing allowance; and, other short term

provisions required to move from one site to another.

Head of the Household: the eldest member of the core family in the household, for the

purpose of the project.

Household: a group of persons living together who share the same cooking and

eating facilities, and form a basic socio-economic and decision making unit. One or

more households often occupy a homestead.

Involuntary Resettlement: resettlement without the informed consent of the displaced

persons or if they give their consent, it is without having the power to refuse

resettlement.

Lost Income Opportunities: lost income opportunities refers to compensation to

project affected persons for loss of business income, business hours/time due to project

Operational Policy 4.12: Describes the basic principles and procedures for resettling,

compensating or at least assisting involuntary displace persons to improve or atleast

restore their standards of living after alternatives for avoiding displacement is not

feasible

Physical Displacement: a loss of residential structures and related non-residential

structures and physical assets because such structures / assets are located in the

project area.



Private property owners: persons who have legal title to structures, land or other assets

and are accordingly entitled to compensation under the Land Act.

Project-Affected Community: a community that is adversely affected by the project.

Project-Affected Person: any person who, as a result of the project, loses the right to

own, use or otherwise benefit from a built structure, land (residential, agricultural, or

pasture), annual or perennial crops and trees, or any other fixed or moveable asset,

either in full or in part, permanently or temporarily.

Rehabilitation: the restoration of the PAPs resource capacity to continue with

productive activities or lifestyles at a level higher or at least equal to that before the

project.

Relocation: a compensation process through which physically displaced households

are provided with a one-time lump-sum compensation payment for their existing

residential structures and move from the area.

Replacement Cost: the amount of cash compensation and/or assistance suffices to

replace lost assets and cover transaction costs, without taking into account

depreciation or salvage value.

Resettlement Action Plan (RAP): documented procedures and the actions a project

proponent will take to mitigate adverse effects, compensate losses, and provide

development benefits to persons and communities affected by a project.

Resettlement Assistance: support provided to people who are physically displaced by

a project. This may include transportation, food, shelter, and social services that are

provided to affected people during their resettlement. Assistance may also include

cash allowances that compensate affected people for the inconvenience associated

with resettlement and defray the expenses of a transition to a new locale, such as

moving expenses and lost work days.

Resettlement: a compensation process through which physically displaced

households are provided with replacement plots and residential structures at one of

two designated resettlement villages in the district. Resettlement includes initiatives to

restore and improve the living standards of those being resettled.

Squatters: squatters are landless household squatting within the public / private land

for residential and business purposes.

Vulnerable: people who by virtue of gender, ethnicity, age, physical or mental

disability, economic disadvantages, or social status may be more adversely affected

by resettlement than others and who may be limited in their ability to claim or take

advantage of resettlement assistance and related development benefits.



EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

ES 1 Introduction

The Federal Government of Nigeria (FGN) through the Federal Ministry of

works, (FMW) requested the World Bank’s support towards the Federal Roads

Development Project (FRDP). The purpose is to meet the immediate and

short term funding needs for the federal road network and support

Government’s efforts with policy and institutional reforms promoting

improved service delivery, road management and financing.

As part of the ongoing efforts to ensure a sustainable rehabilitation works on

the Enugu Abakaliki Route length, the suggestion to construct an entirely

alternate bridge to replace the No 2 bridge counting from Enugu end at

7+300Km which has recently showed great structural failure becomes very

imperative.

An abbreviated resettlement Action Plan has been prepared for the

rehabilitation of the road, which did not capture the provision of the

alternate bridge at Km 7+350 hence, the need to prepare an abbreviated

resettlement action plan (ARAP) for the bridge which is consistent with the

RPF prepared for the project and in line with World Bank OP 4.12 to ensure

that the Project Affected Persons (PAPs) are adequately compensated or

provided assistance.

ES 2 Objectives of the Abbreviated Resettlement Action Plan of the Project

The specific objectives of the ARAP are:

To identify persons (individuals or groups) who are affected by

the project;

To identify, through consultation, appropriate options for the

resettlement and compensation of PAP, which are consistent

with Nigeria Laws, World Bank’s Operational Policy 4.12 and IFC

Performance Standards 5: Land Acquisition and Involuntary

Resettlement and

To determine a process for resettlement, compensation and

land acquisition, consistent with the project’s objective.

ES 3 Scope of Work

The scope of work underlying this ARAP is the identification of project impacts

and affected population through the following:



Thematic maps;

Census that enumerates project affected persons (PAPs) and registers

them according to location;

An inventory of lost and affected assets at the household, enterprise,

and community level;

Socio-economic surveys and studies of all affected populations as may

be deemed necessary;

Analysis of surveys and studies to establish compensation parameters,

to design appropriate income restoration and sustainable

development initiatives;

Identify baseline monitoring indicators

Consultation with affected populations regarding mitigation of impacts

and development opportunities

ES 4 Approaches and Methodology of Social Assessment

Resettlement planning is necessary whenever displacement or relocation

occurs as part of project activities. Prior to implementation of the

resettlement activities, baseline data is collected and potential impacts are

identified and analyzed. Mitigation measures are then put in place to

address negative impacts and compensatory plans are designed and

recommended.

The resettlement team visited the local authorities, the Bridge site, affected

facilities along the proposed transition road corridor, vendor unions and the

project affected persons in Otukwu village Emene Enugu, being the major

areas with possible significant impacts on socio-economic lives of

communities, especially PAPs.

Detailed field visits were carried out across the communities of project area

of influence. The field visits were used to identify and undertake detailed

inventory of PAPs as well as update baseline information of the project areas.

ES 5 Impacts of the Project

The impacts of the construction project as it concerns the social aspect are

categorized into positive and negative impacts. Whereas the positive



impacts are more, the negative impacts are minimal and subject to

mitigation.

Positive Impacts

o More guaranteed access to market and business

o Reduction in the rate of accidents due to dilapidating bridge

o Improve condition of living due to easy movement of input and

output by farmers and business people

o Inter-state transportation convenience and reduction in traveling

time

o Reduction in road congestions

Negative Impacts

o Disturbance of access to business and movement especially during

construction

o Displacement of vendors along the right of way of the high way

o Destruction of economic trees

Negative impacts are neutralized via involuntary resettlement budget plan.

ES 6 Indicative Budget for ARAP Implementation

The total indicative budget for the ARAP implementation is Eight Hundred

and Twenty Seven Thousand, Four Hundred and Fifty Naira only

(N827,450.00). This is comprised as shown in the table below:

Table E1: Indicative budget for ARAP implementation

Description PAP’s by group Total in

Naira

Otukwu

village

NNPC PHCN Block

industry

Sand

miners

1. Cost of

replacement

of structure

and /or cost

of shifting

affected

structure/kiosk

21000 105000 70000 73500 NA 269500

2. Loss of Income NA NA NA NA 42000 42000 3. Compensation

for Economic

Tree

157500 10500 NA NA NA 168000

Sub-Totals 178500 115500 70000 73500 42000 479,500



4. Capacity

Building and

enlightenment

for ARAP

Implementatio

n (Lump sum)

300,000

5. Monitoring

and

Supervision of

ARAP

Implementatio

n (10 % of

Total)

47,950

Total 827,450


11 | ARAP OF ALTERNATE BRIDGE NO 2 CONSTRUCTION ENUGU – ABAKALIKI ROAD BY MDS.

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

In response to the enormous transport challenges in linking communities together,

reducing passenger travel times, transport cost for both freight and passengers,

vehicle operating costs, traffic related fatalities on targeted federal roads while

increasing access to markets, jobs, education, and health services as well as assisting

the Federal Government of Nigeria (FGN) to manage Nigeria's federal road assets in a

sustainable manner; The Federal Government of Nigeria (FGN), through the Federal

Ministry of Works (FMW), has requested World Bank’s support for the Federal Roads

Development Project (FRDP).

The FRDP is a major investment in improving the quality of life of Nigerians, especially

those in the rural areas.

The Federal Roads Development Project is organized into three components to

support both the implementation of the proposed reform and the financing of

critically needed investments. The three main components are:

Policy and Institutional Reforms

Institutional Capacity Building

Upgrading, Rehabilitation and Maintenance of Federal Roads

The activities under the investments for the Unity Roads will entail routine and periodic

maintenance, rehabilitation, and upgrading of Federal Highway of about 5700

kilometers identified by the Project Appraisal Document.

The Enugu-Abakaliki road which is under Phase I roads of FRDP is a segment of the

Trans-African Highway linking Lagos on the West African Atlantic coast with Kenya

town of Mombassa on the East African Indian ocean coast. The road is about 239 km

long, running approximately west - east axis starting from Enugu through Abakaliki,

Ogoja junction, Ikom and terminates at Mfum at the border of Nigeria and

Cemeroon Republics. The road when completed will link Enugu in Nigeria with

Bamenda in Cameroon.The project, which was co–financed by the African

Development Bank, the World Bank and the Japanese International Co-operation

Agency, are targeted at increasing trade and strengthening co-operation between

Cameroon and Nigeria.



The sections under the AfDB funding are as follows:

Abakaliki-Ogoja Junction Road-86km Lot 1

Ikom- Mfum-22km Lot 2

While the sections under the IDA funding are as follows:

Enugu-Abakaliki-76km LotA

Mbok (Ogoja Junction)-Ikom-55km Lot B

As part of the ongoing efforts to ensure a sustainable rehabilitation works on the

Enugu -Abakaliki section of the road, it was observed that the bridge at km7+350 has

started showing sign of structural failures, hence the need to construct an entirely

alternate bridge to replace the existing bridge which was not initially in the scope of

work for the rehabilitation work.

Although there is land intake, but is within the ROW. However it was observed that

there are improvements on the land by some individual on the ROW. Those who have

made improvement on it will be compensated. Temporally shops, block industry,

NNPC water pipe lines and facilities, PHCN electric lines etc along the proposed

transition road corridor will be displaced. This will result to involuntary displacement

and disturbance of access to means of livelihoods, and therefore, triggering the World

Bank’s Operational Policy 4.12 (Involuntary Resettlement), hence, the need to

prepare an abbreviated resettlement action plan (ARAP) which is consistent with the

RPF prepared for the project and in line with World Bank OP 4.12 to ensure that the

Project Affected Persons (PAPs) are adequately compensated or provided with

assistance.

1.2 Applicability of ARAP: Involuntary Resettlement

This policy covers direct economic and social impacts that both result from the World

Bank-assisted investment projects, and are caused by:

The involuntary taking of land resulting in:

(i) Relocation or loss of shelter;

(ii) Loss of assets or access to assets, or



(iii) Loss of income sources or means of livelihood, whether or not the affected

persons must move to another location; or not.

The involuntary restriction of access to legally designated parks and

protected areas resulting in adverse impacts on the livelihoods of the

displaced persons. The Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF) report discusses

the applicability of this policy in detail.

The core requirements of OP 4.12 are as follows:

Avoid or minimize involuntary resettlement where feasible, exploring all viable

alternative project designs.

Assist project affected persons in improving their former living standards, income

earning capacity, and production levels, or at least in restoring them back to the

former status

Encourage community participation in planning and

implementing resettlement.

Provide assistance to affected people regardless of the legality

of land tenure.

Under the World Bank Safeguard Policy, on involuntary resettlement, a project is

classified as full Resettlement Action Plan (RAP) when the number of people to be

displaced involuntarily is from 200 and above and/or when the land take involves 10

percent of the total holding. On the contrary, if the number of people to be displaced

or affected is less than 200, and land take is less than 10 percent of the total holding, it

advocates for Abbreviated Resettlement Action Plan (ARAP).

1.3. Aims and Objectives of the ARAP

The objective of the consultation is to prepare an abbreviated Resettlement

Action Plan (ARAP) for the Enugu- Abakaliki Bridge No 2 of the FRDP.

To ensure that implementation of the bridge does no harm to the

environment and population.

Identification of project impacts and affected population(individuals or

groups) who are affected by the project

To identify, through consultation, appropriate options for the resettlement and

compensation of PAP, which are consistent with Nigeria Laws, World Bank’s



Operational Policy 4.12 and IFC Performance Standards 5: Land Acquisition and

Involuntary Resettlement and

To determine a process for resettlement, compensation and land acquisition,

consistent with the project’s objective.

1.4 Scope of Work of Consultant

The scope of work underlying this ARAP is the identification of project impacts

and affected population through the following:

Thematic maps;

Census that enumerates project affected persons (PAPs) and registers

them according to location;

An inventory of lost and affected assets at the household, enterprise, and

community level;

Socio-economic surveys and studies of all affected populations as may

be deemed necessary;

Analysis of surveys and studies to establish compensation parameters, to

design appropriate income restoration and sustainable development

initiatives;

Identify baseline monitoring indicators

Consultation with affected populations regarding mitigation of impacts

and development opportunities

1.5 Methodology of Study

Resettlement planning is necessary whenever displacement or relocation occurs as

part of project activities. Prior to implementation of the resettlement activities,

baseline data is collected and potential impacts are identified and analyzed.

Mitigation measures are then put in place to address negative impacts and

compensatory plans are designed and recommended.

Specifically for the project under review, the methodology is as follows:



Harmonization of project schedule and scope with Road Sector

Development Team;

Collection of relevant documents and literature materials

Reconnaissance survey of the project area to scope impacts along and out

of the right of way of the project site;

Documentation of existing land use activities within the Right-of-Way and the

status of PAPs along the proposed transition road corridor.

Staff organization and training of enumerators (Each of the enumerators

were given tag with numbers).

Review of various documents including:

o RAP document carried out for the proposed project area in 2010,

o the Nigerian regulatory framework on involuntary resettlement;

o World Bank safeguard policies on resettlement, and

o Baseline socio-economic survey of the project areas

Public Consultation and focus group discussions: This was continuous and a major

thrust throughout the project, for identifying PAPs, informing the communities about

the proposed project, eliciting their concerns and possible mitigation measures to

proposed impacts. The resettlement team visited the local authorities, vendor unions

and the project affected persons in Otukwu village Emene Enugu, being the major

owners of the areas with possible significant impacts on socio-economic lives of

communities, especially PAPs.

1.5.1. Field Surveys: Detailed field visits commenced in earnest on Saturday 13th,

October 2012 and were carried out at the 7+350km Enugu – Abakaliki bridge project

site and the village of project area of influence. The field visits were used to identify

and undertake detailed inventory of PAPs as well as update baseline information of

the project area.



1.5.2. Major Sub-Activities of the ARAP

In the preparation of the ARAP, stakeholders were sensitized of the project. The

following were carried out in doing the project:

Census and socioeconomic survey of the Affected Vendors and

Households;

Consultations and discussions with the PAPs;

Categorization and valuation of assets to be affected;

Preparation of an entitlement matrix detailing the PAPs names,

affected assets and costs;

Preparation of a budget and time table for the ARAP implementation.

Establishing a mechanism for Grievance resolution.

1.5.3. Identification of PAPS and Affected Assets

Identification of project affected persons (PAPs) was based on the following

considerations:

Owners of assets/structures and facilities along the established transition

road and the new bridge which has gone beyond the right of way (ROW)of

the existing high way usually about 5m radius from the road corridor;

Owners /tenants of houses, structures or means of livelihood located within

this same path;

Those found during census and before cut-off date engaged in economic

activities within this corridor

PAPs whose land or farm will be taken or removed due to the planned

construction work

Owners of Economic trees that may be affected by the planned project.

The support staff and enumerators for this ARAP were trained and equipped with

instruments including questionnaire and tape rule which was used to identify

assets/PAPs and obtained required personal inventories of PAPs. To ensure that PAPs



cooperate with the team, the Consultants engaged in wide consultation with the

community leaders of the affected community, dialogued with them and also

through them, recruited temporal staff that is familiar with the local terrain and

culture. Consultation of PAPs also included meeting with the NNPC deports manager,

PHCN distribution manager and the owner of African tinkers block industry in

negotiation of the relocation of their affected facilities.

1.5.4 Work program me

In order to achieve the drawn up target objectives, a work programme was

developed. This is as presented below.

DAY ACTIVITY MEASURABLE INDICATOR

Day 1 ARRIVAL TO ENUGU

Reconnaissance survey of the

project area

Thematic description of communities and

areas requiring Census

Recruiting of Enumerators Trained and tested with questionnaire

template

Day 2 Identification of Communities,

Leaders and stakeholders

1st stakeholder consultation

Day 3 Census of PAPs /Public

Consultations

Inventory/verification of completed forms

and pictures

General stakeholder consultation

Day 4 Census of PAPs

Public Consultations


and pictures


Day 5 Census of PAPs

Public Consultations


and pictures


Day 6 Commencement of Post field activities



The existing threatened bank of Ekulu River with score protection by the embankment completely

failed

Proposed stretch for the new Bridge To be displaced African Tinkers block

industry



2.0 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT AREA

2.1 General Description of Study Area

The project site is located at about 7+350km in Emene Enugu State South Eastern

Nigeria from the Enugu end of the Enugu – Abalaliki road. The proposed bridge to be

constructed is an alternative Bridge to the existing Bridge No 2 out of the 11 bridges

along the said road corridor as shown in table 2.1. It is geographically located

between N06o27.762’, E007o 35.096’ and N06o 27.775’, E007o 35.175’. It also has an

average elevation of 430ft above the sea level.

Table 2.1: List of Bridges along the Enugu – Abakaliki Road

CHAINAGE

SPAN

BRIDGE WIDTH

WALKWAY WIDTH

1+093

20m

(1 – Span)

11.40m

1.3m

7+350

40m

(2 – Span)

7.30m

1.3m

20+592

20m

(1 – Span)

7.30m

1.4m

20+916

30m

(1 – Span)

7.30m

1.3m

23+181

10m

(1 – Span)

7.30m

1.3m

27+254

9m

(1 – Span)

7.3om

1.3m

29+529

9m

(1 – Span)

7.35m

1.3m

37+104

75m

(3 – Span)

7.40m

1.3m

45+112

10m

(1 – Span)

7.40m

2.0mm

53+467

30m

7.30m

1.3m



(1 – Span)

63+247

9m

(1 – Span)

7.30m

1.4m

71+320

20m

(1 – Span)

7.30m

1.4m

74+824

20m

(1 – Span)

7.30m

1.2m

Figure 2.1 shows the Map of Nigeria showing the Eastern region with arrow pointing at

Enugu State, the project site location while an illustrative sketch of the immediate

project site is shown as figure 2.2.

Figure 2.1: Nigeria showing the Eastern Region with green arrow pointing at Enugu

the proposed project site location



Enugu Km 7+325 Abakaliki

---------------------------------------------------------------------

10m 3m 3m 10m

Transition road

Transition road

250m 10m 250m

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

EKULU RIVER flow KEY

1. A ---- NNPC facilities (Gate house, water pipe lines etc)

2. ----- Newly negotiated setback for NNPC access (8m from transition road)

3. Transition Road ---- A new proposed road connecting the existing Enugu –Abakaliki road (250m

from either side edge of the new bridge)

4. New bridge is 3m from the existing bridge

5. -------------- Existing PHCN high tension wire line to be relocated (10 poles in all, 5 on either side) –

Budget for relocation, yet to be given by PHCN but expected

6. -------------- Proposed line to relocate the PHCN line (10m from the new bridge)

Figure 2.2: Illustrative sketch of the immediate project site.

The prevailing condition of the existing Bridge is structurally bad and has technical

projections of not being there in the next two years. The bank of the river is seriously

threatened while the existing score protection by the embankment has failed

completely.

An ESIA has been carried out by the project developers in order to comply with the

statutory requirements and to identify, evaluate and mitigate the significant potential

40m Existing

Bridge No2

Proposed 60m New Bridge

A

B

B



impacts of the development project on the environment. Specifically in recognition

of the fact that environmental and social concerns may arise as a result of the

proposed project, the FMW commissioned an Environmental and Social Management

Framework (ESMF) study in fulfillment of the World Bank requirements for project

appraisal.

The ESMF was prepared to satisfy national and state regulatory requirements as well as

World Bank's mandate for Category B projects and it addresses the environmental

and socio-economic consequences of the project. As a category B project the

expected impacts from the projects are small scale and site specific thus easily

remedied.

The ESMF described the existing environment for those aspects of the physical,

biological, social and economic environment within the study area that are relevant

to the project. The framework also identifies the project-environment Interactions

during operational phase.

In addition, the ESMF defines standard procedures and methods for incorporating

environmental and social concerns into the selection, planning and implementation

of all sub-projects carried out under the project.

Furthermore a Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF) was conducted by RSDT. The

objective was to set out the resettlement and compensation principles, organizational

arrangements and design criteria to be applied to meet the needs of the people who

may be affected by the project, when project activities are identified. The

Abbreviated Resettlement Action Plan (ARAP) is prepared consistent with the

provisions of the RPF.

The bridge construction which is a sub-unit of the entire project will reduce the risk and

fright of collapse and thus ensure significant aid to the poor through greatly improved

transport infrastructure and access to marketplaces. The construction and operation

of the Project will bring a large number of direct and induced employment

opportunities to the local economy and further restore confidence on the users.

2.2. Socio-Economic Survey of the Project Area

A socio-economic survey was embarked upon within the project corridor. The socio-

economic survey was premised on PAPs with a view to determining their existing

socio-economic conditions, and how the project impact may affect them. Some of

the concerns along the corridor that are probably to be displaced are shown in plate

3.1.



Some of the NNPC facilities that will be affected by the project; water pipe lines, manhole &

access gate

Consultation & enumeration of the items to be

affected by the 8m encroachment with the

Otukwu village exco & PAP’s

A petty trader (Mrs Patricia Anyanwu) along the

corridor of project

Specifically, this intended new development will during implementation affect the

following;

Local sand miners

African Tinkers block industry

NNPC facilities: water pipe line, manholes, perimeter fence, some economic

trees, gate house and access route

PHCN high tension line (10 no; 5 on each side of the bridge)

A woman’s (Patricia Anyanwu) local shop along the transition corridor



About 8m width by 100m length Otukwu village land with about 23 economic

trees (mainly palm trees and cashew).

3.0 POLICY AND REGULATORY FRAMEWORK

The following policy and regulatory frameworks guided the preparation of this ARAP:

3.1 World Bank Safeguard Policies

The World Bank Group is made up of two unique development institutions owned by

187 member countries: the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development

(IBRD) and the International Development Association (IDA).

Each institution plays a different but collaborative role in advancing the vision of

inclusive and sustainable globalization. The IBRD aims to reduce poverty in middle-

income and creditworthy poorer countries, while IDA focuses on the world's poorest

countries.

Their work is complemented by that of the International Finance Corporation (IFC),

Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency (MIGA) and the International Centre for

the Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID).

Whereas:

The World Bank uses Safeguard Policies which apply to projects

owned by States and the Public sector;

The IFC uses performance standards, and are used for projects

owned or sponsored by the private sector;

The MIGA provides political risks guarantees that may accompany

an investment in an untested environment.

This project is a public good under the ownership of the Federal Ministry of Works

therefore; the World Bank Safeguard Policies are used. The World Bank has ten (10)

Safeguard Policies to reduce or eliminate the adverse negative effects of

development projects, and improve decision making.

With respect to this report (ARAP), the OP/BP 4.12 (Involuntary Resettlement) is

applied. The above-mentioned policy is reviewed in section 1.2 of the chapter 1 of

this report.

http://go.worldbank.org/SDUHVGE5S0

http://www.worldbank.org/ida/

http://www.ifc.org/

http://www.miga.org/

http://icsid.worldbank.org/ICSID/Index.jsp

http://icsid.worldbank.org/ICSID/Index.jsp



3.2 Nigeria Regulatory Framework

With regards to management of the bio-physical environment throughout Nigeria, the

overall responsibility was held by the now defunct Federal Environmental Protection

Agency (FEPA), which was absorbed into the Federal Ministry of Environment (FMENV)

in 1999.

3.2.1 Federal Ministry of Environment (1999 Presidential Directive)

The Federal Environmental Protection Agency (FEPA) was established by Decree No.

58 of 1988 and subsequently amended by Decree 59 of 1992 with further amendment

by Decree 14 of 1999. FEPA was absorbed into the Federal Ministry of Environment

(FMENV) in 1999 by a presidential directive and its functions among others are now

the responsibility of the new Ministry. The FEPA Act has now been repealed in the

NESREA Act No 25 of 2007. Though the FEPA Act has now been repealed in the

NESREA Act No. 25 of 2007, the Regulations pursuant to it are still valid in Regulatory

terms.

3.2.2 The National Environmental Standards and Regulations Enforcement Agency

(NESREA) Act No 25 of 2007

The Agency, shall, subject to the provisions of this Act, have responsibility for the

protection and development of the environment, biodiversity conservation and

sustainable development of Nigeria’s natural resources in general and environmental

technology, including coordination and liaison with relevant stakeholders within and

outside Nigeria on matters of enforcement of environmental standards, regulations,

rules, laws, policies and guidelines.

NESREA mandate includes the establishment of federal Road air quality standards

and effluent limitations, protection of air and atmospheric quality; protection of the

ozone layer; control of the discharge of hazardous substances; inter alia and ensures

that all major development projects in Nigeria are subject to mandatory

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) pursuant to EIA Act. No. 86 (Decree No. 86) of

1992.

3.2.3 Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Act Cap 131 LFN 1992; This law makes it

mandatory to have an EIA study for any major development project likely to have

adverse effects on the environment and seeks to encourage the development of



procedures for information exchange, notification and consultation between organs

and persons when proposed activities are likely to have significant environmental

effects on boundary or trans-state or on the environment of bordering towns and

villages. The law prescribes the procedure for conducting and reporting EIAs.

3.2.3.1 Sectoral EIA Guidelines

In September 1995, FEPA (now Federal Ministry of Environment) published Sectoral EIA

Guidelines for Infrastructural Projects. The Guidelines are for any project that involves:

Coastal Development Project

Port and Harbour Development Project

Railways

Roads and Highways,

Airports

Urban development project

Domestic water supply and sanitation project

Electrification projects

3.3. Nigerian Urban and Regional Planning Law No 88 of 1992

Section 333 requires every developer of Land exceeding 4000 m2 or four floors to

submit a detailed EIA report to an appropriate Development Control Department in

the area of project location.

3.4. Land Use Act Cap 202 LFN 1990.

As contained in the Land Use Act of 1978, which was modified in 1990 all Land in

Nigeria is vested in the Governor of each state, and shall be held in trust for the use

and common benefit of all people. The administration of land area is divided into

urban land, which will be directly under the control and management of the

Governor of each state; and non urban land, which will be under the control and

management of the Local Government. The Governor of each state will have the

right to grant statutory rights of occupancy to any person for any purposes; and the

Local Government will have the right to grant customary right of occupancy to any

person or organization for agricultural, residential or any other purposes.

The rational for the Act was that dispute over land were resulting loss of lives and

properties; moreover, that the management and ownership of land needed to be



streamlined and simplified; and furthermore that citizens, irrespective of their social

status, need support to realize their aspirations owning a place where they and their

family can lead a secure and peaceful life. Therefore the twelve (12) sections found

to be relevant to the RAP purpose are hereunder stated.

i) Section 1: Subject to the provisions of this Act, all land comprise in the territory of

each state in the Federation are hereby vested in the Governor of each state

and such land shall be held in trust and administered for the use and common

benefit of all Nigerians in accordance with the provisions of this Act.

i) Section 2 (a): All land in urban areas shall be under the control and

management of the Governor of each state; and (b) all other land shall be

under the control and management of Local government within the area of

jurisdiction in which the land is situated.

ii) Section 5 (1): It shall be lawful for the governor in respect of land , whether or

not in an urban area (a) to grant statutory rights of occupancy to any person

for all purposes.

iii) Section 6 (1): It shall be lawful for a Local Government in respect of land not in

an urban area (a) to grant customary rights of occupancy to any person or

organization for the use of land in the Local Government area for Agriculture,

Residential and other purposes; (b) To grant customary rights of occupancy to

any person or organization for use of land for grazing purposes as may be

customary in the local government area concerned.

iv) Section 6 (3): It shall be lawful for a local Government to enter upon, use and

occupy for public purposes any Land within the area of its jurisdiction, and for

the purposes, to revoke any customary right of occupation on any such land.

v) Section 6 (5): The holder and occupier according to their respective interest of

any customary right of occupancy revoked under subsection (3) of this section

shall be entitled to compensation for the value at the date of revocation, of

their unexhausted improvement.



vi) Section 6 (6): Where land in respect of which a customary right of occupancy is

revoked under this Act was used for Agricultural purposes by the holder, the

local Government shall allocate to such holder alternative land for use for the

same purpose.

vii) Section 28 (1): It shall be lawful for the government to revoke a right of

occupancy for overriding public interest.

viii) Section 29(1): If a right of occupancy is revoked, the holder and occupier shall

be entitled to compensation for the value at the date of revocation of their

unexhausted improvements.

ix) Section 29 (3): If the holder or occupier entitled to compensation under this

section is a community the Governor may direct that any compensation

payable to it shall be paid (a) to the community or (b) to the chief or leader of

the community to be disposed of by him for the benefit of the community in

accordance with the applicable customary law (c) into some fund specified by

the Governor for the purpose for being utilized or applied for the benefit of the

community.

x) Section 29 (4): Compensation under subsection (1) of this section shall be (a)

the land for the amount equal to the rent, if any paid by the occupier during

the year in which the right of occupancy was revoked, (b) Buildings, installation

or improvements thereon, for the amount of the replacement cost of the

building, installation or improvement, that is to say, such cost as may be

assessed on the basis of the prescribed method of assessment as determined

by the appropriate officer less any depreciation together with interest at the

bank rate for delayed payment of compensation and in respect of any

improvement in the nature of reclamation works, being such cost thereof as

may be sustained by documentary evidence and proof to the satisfaction of

the appropriate officer, (c) crops on land apart from any building, installation or

improvement thereon, for an amount equal to the value as prescribed and

determined by the appropriate officer.



xi) Section 33(1): Where the right of occupancy of any developed land on which a

residential building had been erected is revoked under this Act, the Governor or

the Local Government, as the case may be may in his or its discretion offer in

lieu of compensation payable in accordance with the provision of this Act,

resettlement in any other place or area by way of a reasonable alternative

accommodation (if appropriate in the circumstance).

In the event of use of land for public interest, the Act specifies as follows:

That the government should resettle and/or compensate

occupants of land with Certificate of Occupancy (C of O); or

Issue notice to occupiers of land prior to displacement of land for

public project.

In practice, government does not compensate known rightful owners of

land/asset when the affected land/assets are located within the right of way of

utilities. Rather, the government enforces involuntary displacement by demolition

the structures and assets that are located within the land mapped for project.

3.5 Comparison between Land Law in the Federal Government of Nigeria and Bank

OP 4.12

The RPF also presented a comparison of the Land Laws in Nigeria with the World Bank

Policy. Whereas the law relating to land administration in Nigeria is wide and varied,

entitlements for payment of compensation are essentially based on right of

ownership. The Bank’s OP4.12 (Appendix 2) is fundamentally different from this and

states that affected persons are entitled to some form of compensation whether or

not they have legal title if they occupy the land by a cut-off date. However, as the

proposed Road Rehabilitation is to be funded by the World Bank, the principle of OP

4.12 is not negotiable and must be adhered to. As a result, the ARAP would adopt the

Land Use Act 1978 (modified in 1990) and where, there is conflict, the Bank OP 4.12

would take precedence. The comparison is presented in Table 4.1.



Table 3.1: Comparison of Nigerian Land Use Act (1978) and World Bank’s OP 4.12

CATEGORIES OF

PAPS/TYPE OF LOST

ASSET

NIGERIAN LAND USE ACT WORLD BANK

Land Owners Cash compensation

based upon market value

Recommends land-for-land

compensation, or cash

compensation at replacement

cost.

Land Tenants Entitled to compensation

based on the amount of

rights they hold upon land.

Entitled to some form of

compensation subject to the

legal recognition of their

occupancy.

Land Users Not entitled to

compensation for land;

entitled for compensation

for crops

Entitled for compensation for

crops, for land replacement and

income loss compensation for

minimal of the pre-project level.

Owners of Non

permanent Buildings

Cash compensation

based on prevailing

market value

Entitled to in-kind compensation

or cash compensation at full

replacement cost including

labour and relocation expenses,

prior to displacement.

Owners of

permanent Buildings

Cash compensation

based on prevailing

market value

Entitled to in-kind compensation

or cash compensation at full

replacement cost including

labour and relocation expenses,

prior to displacement.

The ARAP for this bridge construction will be aligned with the World Bank Operational

Policy (OP 4.12) which indicates best practices to rehabilitation of livelihoods of

people affected by the implementation of the project. Hence, where there are gaps

between the Land Use Act (1978) and the World Bank Policy (OP 4.12), in regard to

compensation of PAPs, the World Bank’s Policy will apply since it is to fund the project.



4.0 IDENTIFICATION OF PROJECT IMPACTS AND PROJECT AFFECTED PERSONS

4.1 Approach to Impacts and PAPs identification

Section two provided full details on impacts and PAPs identification which included

census/inventory survey and consultation with the PAPs. Consultation with the project

community and PAPs was continuous and started during the field survey on 12

October 2012 up to the extended cut-off date on 19th October 2012.

4.1.1 Road Corridor/Right of Way Re-consideration

Following the review of the initial submission by the ARAP Consultant in which the

starting and end points of the road were not clear, and in which the definition of ROW

was not well specified to reflect the Nigerian high way regulation the implementing

agency met with the design engineer and the ARAP consultant on the subject

matters. This was necessary to carry out the ARAP report based on the actual

scope/boundaries of the project. During the meeting, it was decided that in the new

design, the right of way (ROW) for the existing Enugu – Abakaliki Road which is 10m

from either side of the centre of the road has been exceeded in creating the

transition road and extensional 8m into the village land in order to grant NNPC a new

access to their water pumping facilities. The Consultant was asked to revisit the

inventory/census of PAPs based on this measurement.

4.2 Eligibility Criteria for Affected Persons

Any person who will suffer loss or damage to an asset, business, trade or loss of access

to productive resources, as a result of the project will be considered eligible for

compensation and/ or resettlement assistance.

The cut-off date for being eligible for compensation and/ or resettlement assistance

was the 15th October 2012, which is the last day during which the socio-economic

survey was completed.

The completion of the census represents a provisional cut-off date for eligibility for

resettlement assistance. Sufficient public awareness of the cut-off date was given to

the community through the Otukwu village chairman (Hilary Edeh) and his executives.

If there is a significant time lag between the completion of the census and

implementation of the RAP, resettlement planners should make provision for



population movements as well as natural population increase and expansion of land

use, which may include a repeat census.

Although concessions should be made for enumerator errors and omissions, as a rule

people moving into the project area after the cut-off date should not be entitled to

assistance.

Nevertheless individuals or groups who are not present at the time of registration but

who have a legitimate claim to membership in the affected community can be

accommodated. Such groups might include absent family members engaged in

migrant wage labor or nomadic pastoralists who use local resources on a seasonal

basis.

PAPs also include:

Those who have formal legal rights of land (including customary

and traditional rights recognized under the laws of the country);

Those who do not have formal rights to land at the at the time the

census begins but have a claim to such land or assets and become

recognized during the survey; as well as

Those who have no recognizable legal rights or claim to the land

they are occupying.

4.3 Proof of Eligibility

The PIU will consider various forms of evidence as proof of eligibility as stated in the

RPF, to cover the following:

PAP with formal legal rights, documented in the form of land title

registration certificates, leasehold indentures, tenancy agreements,

rent receipts, building and planning permits, business operating

licenses, and utility bills among others: unprocessed/unregistered

formal legal documents will be established in the ARAP.

PAP with no formal or recognized legal rights-criteria for establishing

non-formal, undocumented or unrecognized claims to eligibility

shall be established paying particular attention to each situation

and its peculiarities. Alternative means of proof of eligibility will

include

Affidavit signed by landlords and tenants;



Witnessing or evidence by recognized traditional authority,

customary heads, community elders, family heads and elders and

the general community.

However only PAPs enumerated during the baseline survey shall be eligible for either

the compensation or supplemental assistance. In other words the date of completion

of baseline survey (15th October 2010) is the cut-off date for receipt of compensation

or any assistance. Any new structures or additions to existing structures carried out

after the cut-off date and their occupants will not be eligible for compensation or

supplemental assistance.

4.4 Entitlement Policy

Since the project entails the construction of an alternate bridge beside an existing

one, we anticipate minor lands take; some relocation of facilities and displacement of

medium scale block industry.

On the above basis, project affected persons (PAPs) are mainly community people

whose economic trees in the portion of land to be used will be affected, NNPC whose

facilities will be relocated, PHCN whose electric lines will be relocated, sand miners

whose means of livelihood will be stopped, block molders who will be relocated,

economic trees and kiosks intercepts along the transition road. As a result, Project

Affected Persons (PAPs) would be entitled to the following types of compensation

and rehabilitation measures.

4.4.1 PAPs Losing Structures

Generally, all PAPs concerned in this project are without legal rights of

land use.

There will be no land compensation, but the structures and other

assets on land will be compensated as applicable to PAPs with legal

rights of land use.



4.4.2 Facilities displaced from road corridors

These include all the PAPs whose kiosks, facility lines that intercepts the

transition route. PAPs will be paid their relocation/replacement value

for their assets to be removed.

PAPs will be compensated for livelihood restoration due to loss of

business days which will be determined by the expected number of

days of construction.

4.4.3 PAPs with loss of economic trees

Full compensation will be paid for the estimated market values of the

economic tree in at least two seasonal harvests.

4.5 Notification

All properties affected by the proposed civil works have been valued and assessed

according to laid down procedure.

Owners of affected properties have been notified in several ways. These included one

on one notification during the socio-economic survey, and also during public

consultation. A compensation valuation of all affected properties was carried out to

assess commensurable values.

4.6 Duration for Civil Works

Subsequently due to the proposed bridge construction, articulated vehicles and

trucks are to be diverted to an alternative road thus further reducing the load on the

deck, and hence settlement rate. The road is probably going to be closed to traffic

for the duration of construction works (estimated at 6 months minimum).

4.7 INVENTARY AND SENSUS OF AFFECTED ASSETS AND PAPs

A total of 20 persons/groups will be affected by the project including :

o 13 PAPs involving physical and/or economic displacement

o 7 PAPs involving temporal disturbance from location of business; in

which case a shift back from ROW will be required



The categorization and summation of affected assets and PAPs in the project areas is

presented as follows:

Category PAP’s by group Total

Otukwu

village

NNPC PHCN Block

industry

Sand

miners

PAPs for loss of

land

4 N/A N/A N/A N/A 4

PAPs for loss of

economic trees

6 1 NA NA N/A 7

PAPs for relocation N/A 1 1 1 1 4

PAPs for removal

of Kiosks

1 N/A N/A N/A 1 2

Security House,

gate & Fences

1

1 N/A N/A N/A 2

PAPs for removal

of Thatch house

N/A N/A N/A 1 N/A 1

Total 20

5.0 VALUATION AND COMPENSATION OF AFFECTED STRUCTURES AND PROPERTY

5.1 INTRODUCTION

Valuation of assets to be affected by the implementation of the project was

conducted using a general principle adopted in the formulation of the compensation

valuation which follows the World Bank’s Policy that lost income and asset will be

valued at their full replacement cost such that the PAPs should experience no net loss.

The asset valuation was conducted by a qualified multi-disciplinary team based on

the current market prices in the concerned state of project influence.

5.2 Method of Valuation for compensation

The method has been briefly described below:

Replacement Cost Method

The Replacement Cost Method, which is used in estimating the value of the

property/facility, is based on the assumption that the capital value of an existing



development can be equated to the cost of reinstating the development on the

same plot at the current labour, material and other incidental costs. The estimated

value represents the cost of the property as if new.

Land Resettlement

The World Bank OP 4.12 requires that displaced owners of land be provided with an

area of land equivalent to their displaced land. Land restoration should be in a

location that has similar value as the one displaced to the project.

Disturbance and Other Incidental Contingencies

Affected business premises which will have to close shop or be relocated will be given

compensation for loss of business time or assistance for transportation.

Affected Structures:

Immovable Structures/Property:

This consists of all structures/property that are not moveable (Immovable) such as

Fence and Economic Trees etc.

Moveable Structures/Property:

This includes Kiosks, Metal sign posts, electric poles and wires and Tables.

The PIU will arrange and make payment of estimated values to the beneficiaries. This is

to enable the PAP’s start arranging for alternative accommodation or resettle

elsewhere.

5.3 Category of Payments of Compensation

Compensation to Owners of Immovable Structures

Owners of Immovable Structures will be paid compensation that will be based on

assessed values of their properties. The compensation will be paid by the RSDT which is

the implementing agency.

Compensation to owners of structures will be based on the

cost of replacement of structure;

Income loss per day of the construction operation estimated

at 21 days. (This is subjectively the time it will take the Project

Affect Persons to move and adjust for business in an

alternative place.

cost of agricultural crops to be affected at full market price



5.4 Entitlement Matrix

Table 5.1: Entitlement Matrix showing categories of project affected persons, type of loss and compensation

CATEGORY OF PAP TYPE OF LOSS ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA ENTITLEMENTS

Property Owners

Loss of land

Holder of a title, leaseholder

Compensation at current market

price

Compensation at full replacement

cost value, mobility allowance and

disturbance

Loss of structure

Building permit, structure drawings,

three neighbor witnesses and

photographs (of informal properties)

Compensation for missed profit

Farmers

Loss of farm land

Evidence of ownership


cost value

Loss of agricultural crops

Lease contract, rental receipts, MOU

Compensation at current market

price of produce

Business tenant No loss of land

Lease contract, rental receipt, MOU Compensation for advanced lease

Loss of rental

accommodation

Loss of goodwill

Lease contract, rental receipts, MOU

Compensation for equivalent lease

and lost goodwill fee, mobility

allowance and disturbance

Residence owners Loss of land

Holder of a title, leaseholder Compensation for equivalent lease

Loss of structure Building permit, structure drawings,

three neighbor witnesses and

photographs (of informal properties)


cost value

Residence tenant Loss of rental

accommodation

Lease contract, rental receipts, MOU Compensation for advance rent

Lease contract, rental receipts, MOU Compensation for equivalent

accommodation or three months

lease, mobility allowance and

disturbance

Vulnerable Groups Comfort and Security Elderly, physically challenged, long

term sick, Female Household Head

Supplementary compensation to be

settled case by case

Squatters/encroachers Loss of use of land Three neighbor witnesses Supplementary assistance, mobility

allowance and disturbance

Public amenities Relocation of amenities Amenities in the Right of Way

(ROW)

Relocation cost

Religious sites (church) Loss of structure Holder of a title, leaseholder

Building permit, structure drawings

Compensation for equivalent lease


cost value.

5.5 VALUATION OF RESETTLEMENT/COMPENSATION AND ASSISTANCE COST FOR PAPs

Based on the Entitlement Matrix and Valuation procedures the total cost of

compensation and assistance is given in table 5.2 below.



Table 5.2: Valuation of Compensation and Assistance Cost for Project Affected Persons

ALTERNATE BRIDGE NO 2 EMENE ENUGU PROJECT AREA

LOCATION NAME OF PAP IDENTITY

SIZE (m

2)

RATE REPLACEMENT COST AT BASE

YEAR

EXPECTED REPLACEMENT

COST

INCOME PER DAY

DAYS INCOME* DAY

COMPENSATION SUM(N)

SUB-TOTAL

EMENE HILARY UDEH ECONOMIC TREES

0 0 1,500 21 31500 31500

EMENE CHRISTOPHER UGWUEGU

LAND, ECONOMIC TREES

0 0 1,000 21 21000 21000

EMENE OGBONNA OKOLO


0 0 1,500 21 31500 31500

EMENE JUDE OKWOR


0 0 1,500 21 31500 31500

EMENE CHIKA UGWU


0 0 1,500 21 31500 31500

EMENE PATRICIA ANYANWU

RELOCATION OF KIOSK

0 0 1,000 21 21000 21000

EMENE

PETER ONUCHUKW NOMEH

ECONOMIC TREES

0 0 500 21 10500 10500

EMENE NWAOGU NDUBUISI

ECONOMIC TRESS

0 0 500 21 10500 10500

EMENE NNPC RELOCATION 0 0 5000 21 105000 105000

EMENE PHCN RELOCATION 0 0 7000 10 70000 70000

EMENE AFRICAN TINKERS RELOCATION

0 0 3,500 21 73500 73500

EMENE FABIAN EDEH SAND MINER

0 0 2,000 21 42000 42000

Total 479,500



6. INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENT AND RESPONSIBILITIES

6.1 Introduction

The major institutions that are involved in the Resettlement process are

the Road Sector Development Team- Federal Ministry of Works, the World

Bank, and the District Resettlement Committee (DRC) in each project

designated area.

6.2 Institutional Arrangement

The roles and responsibilities of the institutions regarding Resettlement

Implementation and Grievance redress is as per table 5.1.

Table 6.1: Institutional Arrangement and Responsibilities for ARAP

S/N

o

Stakehold

ers/

Institutions

Responsibilities

1 RSDT Establishment of District Resettlement Committee (DRC).

Ensuring that the project conforms to World Bank

safeguard policies, including implementation of the

Abbreviated Resettlement Action Plan (ARAP), as

required.

Engaging the services of contractors and consultants to

carryout preparation and implementation of ARAP and

subsequent engaging the service of external monitors for

the ARAP implementation.

Approval of payments to consultants for ARAP activities

carried out under the project.

Internal monitoring and evaluation of ARAP activities.

Preparation of quarterly and annual progress reports on

ARAP implementation.

Submission of Reports to RSDT, and World Bank for

review.

2 World

Bank

Overall responsibility of ensuring that the OP 4.12 is

complied with in the ARAP.

Responsible for the final review, clearance and approval



of the ARAP.

3 Monitorin

g and

Evaluation

Officer

from the

RSDT

Ensure that there are sufficient resources (time, money and

people) to supervise the implementation of compensation

Ensure that any changes during implementation process

that have significant environmental or social impact are

communicated to the RSDT in time and advice on actions

to be taken and costs involved.

Ensure that the PIU is sufficiently informed on monitoring

results.

4 Social

Safeguard

Specialist

from RSDT

Has a critical role to play especially in the implementation

of the action plan of the social mitigation measures.

Responsible for the implementation of Resettlement Plan

and social development. Will coordinate with the District

Resettlement Committee (DRCs)

5 District

Resettlem

ent

Committe

es (DRCs)

Being responsible for guiding compensation and

resettlement activities in district areas.

Form a survey team to carry out Detailed Measurement

Survey (DMS) for affected PAPs and assets; finalize DMS and

Entitlement forms for each PAP.

Checking the unit prices of compensation as used in RP,

suggestions for adjusting the unit prices in conformation with

market prices/replacement costs (if required) to Project

Implementation Unit for approval.

In co-ordination with RSDT, organize meetings with PAPs,

communal authorities disseminate copies of Resettlement

Information Booklet (RIB) and entitlement forms.

Based on the policy and proposed process/mechanism in

ARAP, the DRCs prepare the detailed implementation plan

(quarterly) and together with RSDT pay entitlements to PAPs

and implement for other activities in a timely manner.

Settling the complaints and grievances raised by

complainants and suggest solutions for the outstanding

issues to responsible institutions for improving of the ARAP

implementation.

Organise seminars to disseminate the ARAP report to

relevant stakeholders, communities, etc.

Assisting local people in overcoming the difficulties during

the implementation period.



6 Selected

independ

ent

NGO

Will be a grass root level worker, actually dealing with the

PAPs. Develop rapport with the PAPs, help in skill upgrading

where required, and help obtaining benefits of entitlement

framework and appropriate Government programmes.

Facilitate in negotiation, if required.

7 Project

Affected

Persons

(PAPs)

Giving their own opinions and, or support on alternative

project designs during Focused Group Discussion,

Support Community- based developmental project.

6.3. Grievances and Appeals Procedure

The objective of a proposed mechanism for complaint is to respond to

the complaints of the PAPs in a timely and transparent manner. The

mechanism is designed to be easy, transparent and fair. The procedures

are proposed as follows;

At the first stage, PAPs will register their complaints and grievances to

the grievance redress committee which will have to provide a written

response to the PAPs, within fifteen calendar days of receiving the

complaint.

If the PAPs are not satisfied with the decision of the DRC, the PAPs

should present the case to the PIU of RSDT within fifteen calendar days

of receiving the written response from the DRC authorities. The

decision of the DRC should be sent to PAPs by no later than fifteen

calendar days of receipt of the PAPs appeal.

If the PAPs are not satisfied with the decision at the second level, the

case can be submitted for consideration to the district court or to

Provincial Peoples Committee.

PAPs will be exempted from all administrative and legal fees.

6.3.1 Grievance Redress Mechanisms

A Grievance Redress Committee will be set up by RSDT to address

complaints from ARAP implementation. This committee will be directly under

the RSDT-PIU and its members will include legal and accounts

representatives of RSDT, and the legal expert from the ministry shall be the

secretary. The functions of the Grievance Redress Committee are:



Provide support to PAPs on problems arising from loss of private properties

and business area.

Record the grievance of the PAPs, categorize and prioritize the

grievances that need to be resolved by the committee; and

Report to the aggrieved parties about the developments regarding their

grievances and the decision of the project authorities.

The main objective of this procedure will be to provide a mechanism to

mediate conflict and cut down on lengthy litigation, which often delays

such infrastructural projects. It will also provide people who might have

objections or concerns about their assistance, a public forum to raise their

objections and through conflict resolution, address these issues adequately.

The committee will provide ample opportunity to redress complaints

informally, in addition to the existing formal administrative and legal

procedures. However, the major grievances that might require mitigation

include:

PAPs not listed;

Losses not identified correctly;

Inadequate assistance;

Dispute about ownership;

Delay in disbursement of assistance and improper distribution of

assistance.



7. MONITORING AND EVALUATION

7.1. Internal Monitoring

Implementation of the Abbreviated Resettlement Action Plan (ARAP) will

be regularly supervised and monitored by the Environmental Officer /

Social Officer in coordination with staff of the RSDT - PIU. The Social Officer

in RSDT will be directly responsible for the implementation of ARAP.

The findings will be recorded in quarterly reports to be furnished to the

RSDT - PIU, and the World Bank

7.1.1 Tasks of the Monitoring and Evaluation Officer (Social Officer)

Verify that the baseline information of all PAPs have been carried out

and that the valuation of assets lost or damaged, and the provision of

compensation, resettlement and other rehabilitation entitlements has

been carried out in accordance with the provisions of this policy

framework and the respective inventory and ARAP.

Oversee that the ARAPs are implemented as designed and approved.

Verify that funds for implementing the ARAPs are provided to the

respective local level (district) in a timely manner in amounts sufficient

for their purposes and that such funds are used by the local authorities

in accordance with the provisions of the ARAP.

Ensure the identification and signature/thumb print of PAPs before and

during receipt of compensation entitlements.

Record all grievances and their resolution and ensure that complaints

are dealt with in a timely manner.

7.2. Independent Monitoring

An independent agency will be retained by the RSDT to periodically carry

out external monitoring and evaluation of the implementation of the

ARAP. The independent agency will be either an academic or research

institutions, non-governmental organizations (NGO) or an independent



consulting firm. They should have qualified and experienced staff and

their terms of reference acceptable to World Bank

In addition to verifying the information furnished in the internal supervision

and monitoring reports, the independent monitoring agency will visit a

sample of 10% of the Project affected Population in each relevant district,

six months after the ARAP has been implemented to:

Determine whether the procedures for PAPs participation and delivery

of compensation and other rehabilitation entitlements have been

done in accordance with the Policy Framework and the respective

ARAP.

Assess if the ARAP objective or enhancement or at least restoration of

living standards and income levels of PAPs have been met.

Gather qualitative indications of the social and economic impact of

project implementation on the PAPs.

Suggest modification in the implementation procedures of the ARAP,

as the case may be, to achieve the principles and objectives of its

policy framework.

The terms of reference for this task and selection of qualified agency will

be prepared by the RSDT-PIU in collaboration with the World Bank at the

beginning of project implementation stage.

7.2.1. NGO Participation in ARAP

An NGO/consulting firm will be contracted by the RSDT to support the detailed design

and implementation of the various proposed schemes and measures mentioned

above or any additional acceptable schemes that would ensure proper treatment of

the PAPs. The NGO /consulting firm will also be responsible for periodical reporting on

progress and challenges facing implementation

The NGO will be recruited for the implementation of ARAP. The selected NGO will be

trained and have skills in resettlement policy and practices and will be based locally

with sufficient manpower and leadership. The ARAP Consultants will play a key role in

this venture. The following criteria can guide in assessing the NGOs suitability and

capabilities for assisting in the resettlement work. The NGO should:

Be from the project-affected area or have prior work’s experience in

the area;



Have a good track record in terms of program planning and

implementation in areas like rural development, poverty, gender and

environmental issues;

Have appropriate staff with technical and social skills in resettlement,

community development and participation, including familiarity with

the local language(s) and customs;

Be registered with the government as an NGO with good standing

and sound financial condition for project implementation purpose;

and

Not be involved with any political party or religious groups directly or

indirectly.

Involvement of NGOs in resettlement projects will be particularly useful in the

following areas:

• Gathering and sharing information and avoiding potential problems;

• Mobilization and motivation to PAPs to form community based organizations;

• Planning and implementing income-generating schemes;

• Developing information campaigns and community participation;

• Strengthening local institutions and community self-reliance; and

• Delivering services to hard-to-reach communities in a more efficient and cost-

effective manner.

RSDT will engage the services of the NGOs to partner in the ARAP implementation and

to work closely with the DRCs.

Key tasks that are to be carried out by the partnering NGOs will include:

Establishing rapport with PAPs, between the PAPs, the DRCs and RSDT for

improving cooperation and coordination;

Formation of CBOs to organize the PAPs and promote their participation;

Assessing the level of PAP skills and efficiency in pursuing economic activities,

identifying the scope and necessity for training, and conducting such programs

to improve the efficiency and/or to impart new skills to PAPs;

Assisting PAPs in receiving resettlement and rehabilitation entitlements due to

them, particularly compensation and/or assistance for land and property losses;

Providing proper guidance to PAPs for making the maximum use of benefits

under the Resettlement policy provisions, and motivating them for the same;

Helping the PAPs to derive benefits from development programmes;



7.2.1. Implementation Schedule

Table 7.1 below summarizes the implementation schedule of the Abbreviated

Resettlement Action Plan by phase, responsibilities and completion time for the

alternate bridge construction in Emene.

Table 7.1: Summary of Responsibility for Implementation of Abbreviated

Resettlement Action Plan

ROAD

PROJECT

CYCLE

PHASE ACTIVITIES RESPONSIBILITIES

PLANNING

Scoping

and

Screening

Initial site visit &

consultations.

Identification of

Resettlement and

Social issues

Application of

safeguard policies

Categorization

Action plan

Screening Report

WB No-Objection

Consultant;

Supervision by

RSDT- PIU

DESIGN Preparation

of ARAP

and

consultatio

ns

Draft ARAP

Consultations

WB No-Objection

Consultant;

Supervision by

RSDT -PIU

Disclosure Disclosure of ARAP

locally & to WB Info

Shop

RSDT –PIU

World Bank

Finalization

and

Incorporati

on

Final version of ARAP

Incorporation of

ARAP into contract

documents

WB No-Objection

Consultant;

Supervision by

RSDT –PIU

EXECUTION Implement Implementation Contractors



ation and

monitoring

Monitoring &

reporting on

environmental and

social mitigation

measures

Monitoring and

reporting of

Resettlement and

livelihood issues

Supervision by

RSDT/ and the

community

OPERATION

S (POST-

IMPLEMENT

ATION)

Operations

and

maintenan

ce

Maintenance

Monitoring and

reporting of

Resettlement and

social livelihood

issues

Contractors

Supervision by

RSDT-PIU/ and the

community



8. COMPENSATION FUNDING ARRANGEMENT AND TIMETABLE

8.1. Budget for Resettlement activities related with the Proposed Project

Based on the preliminary valuation of affected assets and affected

people presented in Table 4.3, the budget for resettlement activities

associated with the implementation plan of the ARAP is as follows:

8.2. World Bank-RSDT

The timetable and schedules for the completion of the Abbreviated

Resettlement Action Plan can be seen in Table 8.1 below. The ARAP has

to be completed and PAPs adequately compensated before operation

in the designated project area.

Table 8.1: Timetable for Abbreviated Resettlement Action Plan

No. Activities Completion time

CUT OFF DATE 15th October 2012

1. Completion of ARAP- draft document October 2012

2. Submit to RSDT –PIU, and the World Bank October 2012

3. Disseminate ARAP to zones and districts for

comments

November 2012

4. Return of Comments from Zones and World

Bank

December 2012

4. Update of Comment into Final ARAP

Document

December 2012

5. Submission of Final ARAP Document December 2012

6. Advertisement in Two Local Newspapers in

Country

January

2013

7. Posted in the World Bank Info Shop January

2013

8 Commencement of ARAP February 2013

6 Completion of ARAP February 2013

7 Commencement of civil work February 2013



8.3 Training Needs

Based on the assessment of the institutional capacities of the RSDT for the ,

implementation of the ARAP, it is recommended that RSDT Contract Consultant

to provide training and operational support to the project implementation unit

(PIU) and other agencies involved in the ARAP implementation. The training

needs for the responsible institutions are identified in Table 8.2.

Table 8.2: Recommended Training and Awareness

Item Description Course Content Target Estimated

Amount(N)

Training &

Awareness

Involuntary

Resettlement

and

Rehabilitation

1. Principles of

Resettlement

Action Plan

2. Monitoring &

Evaluation of

RAP/ARAP

Implementat

ion

3. Conflict

Manageme

nt and

Resolution in

RAP/ARAP

1. PIU-RSDT

2. FMW

Conflict redress/management committee members

200,000

Sensitization

and

Awareness on

ARAP process

3. Community

representative

officers

4. PIU-RSDT Officer

100,000



9. PUBLIC CONSULTATION

9.1 Introduction

Public consultation is considered as a best practices measure for project

sustainability by World Bank and other international development partners. It is

pertinent as a process of informing the community of the need for sitting a

project in their domain, the scope and the need for the community to own and

safeguard the project as beneficiaries and stakeholders. It also affords an

opportunity for input and feedback information, aimed at strengthening the

development project and avoiding negative impacts or mitigating where they

cannot be avoided.

9.2 Public Consultation Process

Consultation was done at two levels, viz community level and project affected

persons level. The following process guided the public consultations:

The Social safeguard team first identified the built up areas, particularly, the

areas with potentials for involuntary resettlement.

Name of village, the administrative organization and leadership structure

were sought, and subsequently, a visit was made to the leaders and/or

representatives of the Otukwu village Emene particularly to the groups that

PAPs belong.

Public forum with stakeholders on the project matter

Identification of PAPs and their social-economic baseline

Inventory of PAPs and affected assets

9.3 Overview of Public Consultations Programme

9.3.1 Otukwu Village- Emene Public Consultation.

Day and Time: The public consultation with the Otukwu village Emene held at the

site in order to be exact on the affected properties with the executives and PAP’s in

attendance. The meeting was held on the 12th October, 2012 by 10.30am.



Consultation & enumeration of the items to be

affected by the 8m encroachment with the

Otukwu village exco & PAP’s

ARAP Consultant with the Aim Engineering

Design Consultants & RSDT – ESE Engr.

Fidelis Anokwu monitoring the consultation

Fig 9.2: Public Consultation with Otukwu village-Emene

Participation: 16 people participated in the forum (see list in Table 9.2).

In participation were the leaders of the Otukwu village, farmers association, and

mineral miner’s representative.

Concerns: The people were happy for the alternate bridge project. They informed

that the affected piece of land is very strategic because of its high fertility for

agriculture. They also lamented on what is going to be the fate of sand miner’s from

the Ekulu River which has been their source of livelihood for a long time now. They

raised the following concerns:

That the government should be quick with the bridge construction to

save lost of life from the dilapidated existing bridge,

Government should engage their youths in employment even as

casual labourers in the proposed bridge and road construction.

That practical alternative in the form of by-pass be constructed where

feasible to enable the community’s movement during project

operation phase. This request for alternative bypass was made clear to

PAPs as being outside the project competence and should be

channeled to the State government through the local council.

It was also found that the PAPs along the transition road corridor have

some of them as widows who have got that land as the only

inheritance.



The consultant asked the community leaders never again to rent the

road to any vendor for trading activity; and this was happily received.

Recommended Action: It is recommended as follows:

That a workable time line be given to PAPs for early evacuation of

belongings by December 2012,

That a notification board indicating the period of work on corridor

and bridge be provided by the contractor by December 2012,

That the resettlement committee should ensure transparency in

dispensing compensation benefits, and

That contractor should show professional standards and social

responsibility during bridge construction by providing temporary

access way so that communities and commuters are not hindered

from going about their normal businesses.

That contractor should put in place appropriate safeguard measures

and signal words to prevent pubic intrusion into construction work

areas.

That site specific Environmental Management Plan is prepared by the

contractor to mitigate environmental impacts by January 2011.

Table 9.2: Public Consultation Meeting at Otukwu village- Emene on 12/10/2012

S/N Name Gender Contact

1 Hon. Hilary Edeh C M 08060375581 President

2 Mr. Christopher Ugwuegu M 07067196319 PRO

3 Mr. Ogbonna Okolo M 08077581217

4 Mr Jude Okwor M 08032155666

5 Mrs. Pamela Edeh F 08064094376

6 Mrs. Oby Okwor F 08067631552

7 Mrs. Chika Ugwu F 08157012568

8 Mrs. Peace Okolo F 08038312920

9 Mrs. Patricia Anyanwu F 07036430474

10 Mrs. Patricia Okeke F 07067199103

11 Miss Elizebeth Afer F 08165463829

12 Chief Richard Okwor M 08033372118

13 Mr Fabian Edeh M 08064082572

14 Mr Francis Edeh Ogbu M 08165057637

15 Mr Peter Onuchukwu Nomeh M 07065397701

16 Mr Ndubuisi D. Nwaogu M 08069110402



REFERENCE

International Finance Cooperation (IFC), Handbook for preparing a

Resettlement Action Plan.

Land Use Act (1978), Federal Republic of Nigeria.

Resettlement Action Plan (2007) for the Dualization of Enugu-Abakiliki-Ogoja-

Ikom Road, African Development Bank

Road Sector Development Team (2010), Engineering Design of Rehabilitation of

Enugu-Abakiliki, Ogoja Junction-Ikom Road

World Bank (2001), Operational Policies: Involuntary Resettlement OP.4.12 and

Annex.

World Bank (2000), Resettlement and Rehabilitation Guidebook, Washington DC



Appendix 1: Minute of the meeting for the construction of the Bridge at km 7+350 with the Stake

Holder

MINUTES OF THE FOURTH MEETING WITH THE FEDERAL CONTROLLER OF

WORKS, HOUSING & URBAN DEVELOPMENT HELD AT FEDERAL SECRETARIAT,

INDEPENDENT LAYOUT, ENUGU ON TUESDAY 31ST

JULY, 2012,

1.0 ATTENDANCE:

1.1 Engr. Joe Onyejekwe …………. Fed. Controller of Works

1.2 Engr. Leonilo Q. Tavera …………. CRE (Aim Consultants Ltd)

1.3 Engr. Fidelis Anokwu …………. ESE, RSDT

1.4 Engr. Michael Feyisola ………… Snr. Structural/Bridge Engineer (AIM Consultants Ltd)

1.5 Surv. Isaac Eluma …………..Snr. Surveyor (AIM Consultants Ltd)

1.6 Engr. Steve Emefu ------------- Engr. Steve Emefu (Multiphase consultant Ltd)

1.7 Engr. Fouad Sarraf ………….. AM/PM (Setraco Nig. Ltd)

ITEM DESCRIPTION ACTION

2.0

2.1

2.2

OPENING PRAYER / ADDRESS BY CONTROLLER

The meeting commenced by 10:45am with an opening prayer by Engr.

Michael Feyisola followed by an apology by the Federal Controller of

Works for starting the meeting late. Aim consultants ltd’sER inevitable

absence was also presented, before the review of the minute of the

previous meeting.

The agenda for the meeting were:

1. Review of the minutes of the previous meeting.

2. Surveyor’s update on bridge settlement at km 7+350

3. Deliberations

4. AOB

3.0

3.1

3.2

REVIEW OF MINUTS OF PREVIOUS MEETING

The minutes of the last meeting was read by the minuter, Engr. Michael

Feyisola and thereafter reviewed.

Observations:

The following observations were made and correction effected.

a. Item 2.2, first line, “was instead of were”

b. Item 6.2, last line, “refusal depth instead of refusal stage”

c. Item 8.12, last line, “sub-soil test instead of soil test”

d. Item 8.12, third line, “hydraulic studies instead of hydraulic test”

e. Item 8.14, first line, “Nunkai instead of Dunken”

f. Item 8.15, second line, “Refusal Depth instead of refusal point”

g. Item 8.21, last line, “refusal state instead of refusal load”

h. Item 8.29, the omission of ‘was’ in the second line.



i. Rehabilitation portion instead of rehabilitated portion in the third

line of the addendum to item 8.27.

4.0

4.1

4.2

4.3

4.4

4.5

4.6

4.7

SURVEYOR’S UPDATE ON BRIDGE SETTLEMENT AT KM

7+350

The Controller requested the Surveyor to give an update report on the

monitoring of the bridge settlement at km 7+350.

The Surveyor stated that up till July 24th

, 2012, they have been recording

an average of 2mm settlement per day which sounded very alarming.

The CRE suggested that, because of this alarmic rate of settlement, the

jacking of the deck should be carried out immediately, otherwise the

leveling of the depressed portion be filled with asphaltic materials to

reduce the force of impact by vehicles.

It was also suggested that the surveyor should by himself cross-check the

information (levels) on the settlement submitted by the Setraco contractor.

The Controller also emphasized that the Surveyor should confirm the

correctness of the levels forwarded by the field men of the contractor and

inquired if their survey equipment is in good condition.

The Surveyor confirmed the efficiency of the survey equipment used to

monitor the settlement of the bridge at km 7 + 350

The Controller stated that, with the latest information at hand as regards

the settlement of the bridge at km7+350, at the rate of 2mm per day which

is very alarmic, he will have to travel to Abuja by Friday 2nd

August,

earlier than schedule to inform the FMW H/Q.

5.0

5.1

5.2

DELIBERATIONS

The Controller reminded the meeting that, it was agreed in the last

meeting that the estimation and costing of the repairs and jacking up of

the deck should be brought forward by the nominated consultant to fast

rack the solution.

RSDT stated that, information reaching him from their head office stated

that Setraco should come forward with their own proposal as regards the

repairs to be carried out on the bridge.



5.3

5.4

5.5

5.6

5.7

5.8

5.9

5.10

5.11

5.12

Setraco Nig. Ltd, agreed that, they have received the BOQ submitted by

the Nominated Consultant,Etteh Aro & partners for both repairs and

jacking up of the 2x20m span bridge deck at ch.7+350 from Aim

Consultants Ltd and promised to forward it to their Head Office with

explanation on the need for the document to be treated urgently.

The Controller asked the RSDT, if the on-going Enugu-Abakaliki Road

project accommodates the cost of executing, the nominated consultant

submissions, even if it is only the Jacking up of the deck.

RSDT stated that, though the project contains contingency, it is left for

their management to decide in view of the fact that there is no savings in

the project and if there is any as gathered from abakaliki end, it would be

used to augment the sections earmarked for asphaltic overlay,

rehabilitation or reconstruction after the rescoping of the works and in

particular the high traffic areas(where trailer parks). Noting also that there

was no intervention for the first 10km by the first consultant which had

also been taking care of by Aim consultant’s ltd. Nevertheless RSDT

wants Setraco to submit their quotation.

Aim Consultants Ltd stated that the project, is encouraging Setraco Nig

Ltd to submit their quotation and that the RSDT could as well wanted

other Contractor like Arab Contractor on the Dualization to also bid for

the bridge works if warranted.

The controller asked RSDT, if their Head Quarters is aware of the

deliberated situations to which the ESE answered in affirmative and.

The Controller inquired from the Contractor that with the urgency

attached to the situation at hand, how soon they could submit their pricing

of the BOQ.

Setraco Nig Ltd stated that, due to their company’s policy, they cannot

say exactly when but will as a matter of urgency forward the informations

to their management and explain the urgency attached to them, since it is

their tender department that handles such proposals.

The CRE was of the opinion that, the contractor could ask to speed up the

pricing for the jacking up aspect of the bill because of the urgency to

avoid any disaster.

The Controller wanted Setraco Nig Ltd to confirm the jacking up

technology relative to the nominated Consultant’s submission based on

their experience.

Setraco Nig Ltd stated that, their firm have in the time past done similar



5.13

5.14

5.15

5.16

5.17

5.18

5.19

5.20

5.21

projects and in fact they did the jacking of the Okoso bridge that is being

referred to in the deliberations and elaborated on what they did at okoso in

relation to the present situation. As regards the submission of the

nominated consultants, it will be looked into and if there is any short

coming, their head office will look into it.

Aim Consultants Ltd suggested that as a matter of urgency, traffic road

signs should be positioned accordingly at the approaches of the bridge

along with the provisions of the speed breakers and also speed up the

jacking up process.

Setraco agreed to talk to his supervisor to install the speed breakers 5m

away from the bridge approaches and increasingly in height progressively

from the first climb at 20 meters interval as agreed at the meeting, before

the end of the week .

RSDT & CRE, agreed that there is provision for traffic signs in the on

going contract.

The Controller reminded Aim Consultants to furnish his office with the

up-dated progress report of the on-going Enugu-Abakaliki Rehabilitation

project.

The Controller also inquired whether there are challenges mitigating

against the smooth execution of the project to which the consultant replied

there’s none that is beyond the control of the project.

The Controller wanted to know, to which extent has the issue of the

reconciliation of the levels at the transition between the dualization and

the on-going rehabilitation reached.

Aim Consultant Ltd stated that, they have met with the state consultant,

Multiphase consultants. Ltd alongside with the Arab Contractor’s

Surveyor and Setraco Nig. Ltd Surveyor on previous day of the meeting,

to exchange information regarding the reconciliation of levels via bench

marks and that the co-coordinating of the levels is on-going since gps was

used for the enugu-abakaliki project while they used automatic level.

The Controller wanted to know whether the issue of the new bridge

location/alignment was discussed but the Enugu state consultant

responded that, such is not in their brief otherwise they needed to be

instructed by the appropriate authority before embarking on that.

The state consultant however promised on the request of the controller to



5.22

5.23

5.24

5.25

5.26

5.27

5.28

5.29

5.30

5.31

5.32

discuss the issue of the new bridge location and alignment with the Hon.

Commissioner through his director.

And it was agreed that, discussion regarding the above is necessary in

view of the situation of the on-going development along the road even if it

is just for the state team to fly their levels and extend their alignment to

the bridge point at km 7+ 350 .

The issue of sensitization of the public as regards the traffic diversion and

the stoppage of the dredging and quarrying around the bridge was raised.

The Controller stated that, it is unfortunate that the EMW representative

has not been totally committed in the deliberations and of course was not

present in the day’s deliberations to brief the meeting.

The state consultant stated that, he will inform his principal regarding the

sensitization and quarrying around the bridge who may in turn influence

the talking when meeting with the Hon. Commissioner for works.

A rigorous deliberation on the workability of the submission of the

nominated consultant was embarked upon at the instance of the controller

based on the (assumption) that the submission of the nominated consultant

cold not be worked on by the contractor .

There were posers on whether the angle of barter of the existing piles and

the distance in between them will allow for the installation of new piles as

regards the nominated consultant‘s submission.

The question is how the contractor sinks new piles, if the existing ones are

not removed.

The contractor is to come up with their own proposal and the pricing of

the BOQ given to them.

After a long session of brainstorming regarding the practical execution of

the submission of the nominated consultant, the controller suggested that

the contractor should go back to site and work out the barter influence of

the piles and possibly come up with bigger sizes of piles to avoid the

influence.

Inclusion of additional piers at 10m-20m-10m distance was considered.

Setraco observed that, if the length of span changes, it would affect the



5.33

5.34

5.35

5.36

5.37

5.38

5.39

5.40

5.41

load on abutment.

The Contractor stated that, once there is a change in the position of any of

the piles, definitely others would change and also by affecting the length

of the beams, the abutment will also be affected.

A phone call was made to Etteh Aro & partners by ESE-RSDT, that

deliberation was going on regarding their submissions. And what could be

their opinion on how to construct the bridge if new piers and piles are to

be in place. Etteh Aro & partners promised to call back.

Multiphase consultant believed, that ette aro & partners could not be

blamed for any shortcoming in their submission because the time given to

them was too short and more or less a fire brigade approach.

RSDT stated that etteh aro & partners had earlier in the previous meeting

claimed that they have prepared the costing and promised to forward such

to the controller, which was corroborated by Aim consultants Ltd.

A phone call was also made to Setraco bridge department by the Area

Manager in Lebanese language and he reported to the meeting that,

Setraco confirmed that it is possible to execute the submission of the

nominated consultants if there is space not less than 1.0m between the

existing piles which of course is inevitable according to their contact on

phone.

It was discovered that the beme submitted by Etteh Aro & partners was in

adequate by not accommodating an item for the removal of existing pier,

piles and superstructure as portrayed in the summary and was relayed to

them on phone.

Etteh Aro & partners promised through the phone, to forward the missing

items in their BOQ to ESE-RSDT for onward delivery to the contractor.

Setraco Nig. Ltd should peruse the documents from the nominated

consultant and note their observations vis-à-vis any omissions and return

with their own pricing bearing in mind the sufficiency of the tender.

`The meeting agreed that, the contractor should concentrate firstly on

jacking up of the deck and the addendum to be sent by Etteh Aro &

partners to them as soon as collected by the RSDT for pricing on the

repairs.



6.0

6.1

6.2

6.3

AOB

The controller wanted the secretary (minuter) to be forwading text

messages to all involved as a reminder before the meetings but the

minuter confirmed that this is always done by the ER, through e-mail.

Though the controller still prefer phone messages as some people don’t

asses their e-mail regularly.

The adjournment of the meeting, was moved by surveyor Isaac Eluma and

supported by Engr steve

The meeting came to an end by 12.50pm with a closing prayer by engr

steve and the date for the next meeting will be Tuesday 14th

August, 2012

PREPARED BY : Engr Michael Feyisola

CHECKED BY : Engr Dele Betiku



MINUTES OF THE 5th MEETING WITH THE FEDERAL CONTROLLER OF WORKS,

HOUSING & URBAN DEVELOPMENT AT THE FEDERAL SECRETARIAT,

INDEPENDENCE LAYOUT, ENUGU ON MONDAY 28TH

AUGUST, 2012.

1.0 ATTENDANCE: Engr. Joe Onyejekwe ………… .Fed. Controller of works

Engr. Dele Betiku ………….Team Leader (AIM Consultants Ltd)

Engr. Leonillo Tavera ……………CRE (Aim Consultants Ltd)

Engr. Fidelis Anokwu …………RSDT Site Engineer

Engr. Archibong Nkposong …………..Partner (Etteh Aro & Partners)

Engr. Paul Amula …………..ACRE (FMW, Enugu)

Ewe him Chuka (Mrs) …………..Sec. (FMW, Enugu)

Engr. Michael Feyisola ………… Snr. Structural/ Bridge Engineer (AIM Consultants Ltd)

Engr. Isaac Eluma ………… …Snr. Surveyor (Aim Consultants Ltd)

Dr. R. Chaudhuri …………. ...Technical Director (Setraco)

Engr. Ali Hachew …………… .Technical Manager (Setraco)

Engr. Girma Feleke ………………QA/QC Engineer (Setraco)

Engr. Branco Koncarevic ……………..Project Manager (Setraco)


2.0

2.1

OPENING PRAYER/OPENING REMARKS BY THE

CONTROLLER

The meeting commenced at 10:50 am with an opening prayer by Engr.

Michael Feyisola, followed by a welcome remarks and call for

introduction by the Federal Controller of Works, Engr. Joe Onyejekwe.

The introduction of the attendees was done.

2.2 The agenda for the meeting were:

Opening Prayer.

Remarks by the Controller/Introduction of the attendees.

Review of previous Minutes of Meeting.

The Engineer’s Representative brief.

Setraco Preliminary Report.

Nominated Bridge Consultant Report.

Aim Consultants comments.

Deliberation.

Resolution.

AOB

Closing Prayer.

3.0

3.1

REVIEW OF MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING

The minutes of the last meeting was reviewed and the motion for

adoption was moved by Engr. Leonilo Tavera and seconded by Engr.

Fidelis Anokwu after the observation by the Controller to add the

surname of Engr. Steve to read Engr. Steve Emefu.



4.0

4.1

4.2

4.3

4.4

4.5

4.6

4.7

4.8

4.9

THE ENGINEER’S REPRESENTATIVE BRIEF.

The Controller refered to the E-mail earlier sent to him by the ER

regarding the reports of the visits of the bridge experts that visited the

bridge location at ch. 7+325 from Setraco head office and requested the

ER to brief on the outcome of their visit because he was worried on the

tone of the mail which was alarmic.

The ER who formally welcome Dr. Chaudhuri and thanked him for his

presence, stated that it was noticed during the visit of Setraco experts to

the bridge at Km 7+325, that settlement continues but at reduced rate

but the beams are opening up at the expansion joint more pronouncely

which may lead to eventual collapse of the bridge.

The continuous settlement means that even if the jacking up of the

beam is embarked upon, the weak foundation may trigger off a

collapse, which is dangerous even for the bridge and people that would

work there because no guarantee that the foundation will carry the load.

According to the expert, the success of the jacking up of the bridge

then is 50/50 chance until he made more detail assessment with his

office experts.

The expert, after meeting with his head office assembled experts, later

considered that they could not embark on the jacking, due to the high

risk of embarking on it. They could not guarantee the safety of the

people that would work there and the bridge itself.

One of the immediate recommendations of the expert from Setraco

was that, the road should be closed for heavy and multi-axle vehicles

traffic, immediately in view of the numbers couple with the volume

and weight of multi-axle trailers passing the road regularly. No

problems with light vehicles like cars and light passenger’s vehicles

The expert emphasized that light vehicles, passengers’ car do not pose

threat but other petroleum product tankers and heavy trucks should be

discouraged from the bridge.

Jacking up is no longer considered feasible and there is need to embark

on the new design and construct a new bridge preferably at a new

location.

ER, stated that his team immediately started, thinking of diversion for

this heavy trucks and tankers, while the bridge should be limited to

light vehicles.



5.0

5.1

5.2

5.3

5.4

5.5

5.6

5.7

5.8

5.9

SETRACO NIGERIA LTD’S PRELIMINARY REPORTS

Dr. Chaudhuri, stated that he had to come in view of the pictures and

information given to him by their experts who visited the bridge at Km

7+325.

He stated that, they had handled similar situation on the East-West

road, and in that case, they didn’t have any choice than to take the risk

of jacking since there was no possibility of diversion and luckily up till

now, the bridge is still standing.

Dr. Chaudhuri stated that, he is skeptical when a bridge is in danger,

that in the case of Okoso bridge in East-West project, they had a base

to their jacking while in this case they may have to erect a platform on

the pile cap with a base that is still settling which may portends danger

to the process, and invariably risky to embark on the jacking.

Dr. Chaudhuri stated that they have been to the site and observed that

the expansion joint is now pronouncedly wide meaning that the bridge

is in great danger, therefore the jacking is not possible unless they are

instructed to go ahead by the stakeholders.

According to the director, It is not advisable to take a risk in this kind

of situation in view of the safety of life and the bridge itself.

He stated that the best solution is to consider a new bridge and this will

be easier if Etteh Aro & Partners have done the soil assessment

otherwise, they will bring their own experts to do that.

He stated that, since the bridge way constructed in 1971, they could

not confirm the Etteh Aro & Partners submission yet, but as soon as all

investigation is ready Mr. Ali, the bridge expert from Setraco could

design or they will liaise with Etteh Aro and that won’t be a problem

and construction will also be no problem if the design is acceptable and

the weather is clement by 2-5 months it’s ready.

The Technical Director cited the example of a bridge in Taraba State

which poses danger like this situation and when there was a flash of

flood it resulted in loss of over 200 lives and properties.

Dr. Chaudhuri also stated that because Setraco is the visible contractor



5.10

5.11

5.12

5.13

along the road now, they don’t want to take responsibility for any

catastrophe which may arise as regards the emergency situation.

He therefore, added that only light vehicle should be allowed to move

across the bridge and very conspicuous danger signs and warnings

should be erected along the road from vantage points to sensitize the

road users.

Setraco Director volunteered to discuss with the RSDT, Engr. Tope

Oyibuyaku and Engr. Ishaq Mohammed when he returns back to

Abuja, on the way forward as regards the financing of the new bridge.

He also expects the Federal Controller and RSDT to meet with the

Honorable Minister of Works and discuss the issue.

The Controller, who stated that it’s obvious that, there is problem and

challenges as regards this situation also said that nobody want to be

blamed for any fault, nonetheless, would see the Excellency, the

Governor of the State who is outside the State with the Commissioner

as soon as they return, even though we cannot afford to wait for them

in view of the dangerous situation at hand.

6.0

6.1

6.2

6.3

NOMINATED BRIDGE CONSULTANT’S REPORTS

Etteh Aro agreed with the Setraco position on the prevailing situation

and stated that all that has been in offing by them has been palliative

but they have done the survey and preliminary soil investigations.

Etteh Aro & partners added that the depth of the existing pile is around

10.0m deep of soft rock material, while they observed that the hard

strata is actually about 30m deep from their preliminary studies and

hope to discuss along with setraco nig. Ltd.

The nominated consultant, stated that the problem is the softrock

underneath and that the impact upon it over time have caused more

damage, they will also recommend a new bridge.

7.0

7.1

DELIBERATIONS

ESE-RSDT stated that they want a solution whereby the state

government would fund the bridge projects if it is possible.



7.2

7.3

7.4

7.5

7.6

7.7

7.8

7.9

7.10

7.11

7.12

The Controller stated that, from the look of things, the State of finance

of the State goverment is so tight and that payment of a few federal

projects embarked upon by the State government are still awaiting to

be refunded, but nevertheless all avenues will be exhausted to avoid

any disaster.

Setraco wanted to know under which parastal the bridge project falls,

which the Controller stated that it is the FMW.

The ER stated that the challenge facing the bridge project is funding

and that all along RSDT was considering accommodating the jacking

of the beam but as it is, constructing a new bridge may be beyond

them.

The ER suggested, writing SOS to the Ebonyi and Enugu State

Government and FMW, since the situation at hand needs urgent

disposal.

As regards the issue of funding, the Setraco director promised to see

the RSDT unit Manager and Project Manager as soon as he gets to

Abuja for their onward brief to the Honorable Minster, who will in turn

solicit for fund for the project.

The ER stated that the proposed road for the diversion has been

inspected by him and his team, and it was dicovered that the road has

some snags which should be attended to before any diversion is done.

The ER stated that the road is much more of pedestrian, cyclists and

has about

four culverts under construction which needs tidying up and suggested

that even residents along the road would prefer the heavy and long

trucks diversion to be done at night.

RSDT suggested that, Ecological Fund, could be approached for

emergency assistance and the Controller added that even the Taraba

State project referred to earlier was funded outside the ministry’s

budget (fund), and promised to harness the State Government avenue

and also the FMW.

Dr. Chaudhuri reminded the meeting that, he observed 2 distinguished

Senators were present during the commissioning of the project and

suggested they could also be approached to influence the quick

attention needed by the project.

The Controller submitted that with the latest update, it is imperative for

him to quickly talk to Abuja as regards a new bridge since he was



7.13

7.14

7.15

7.16

7.17

7.18

7.19

8.0

8.1

8.2

8.3

formally discussing the jacking up of the beam of the existing bridge

and moreso that Setraco have profered that they have a design which

could be adopted to the situation at hand.

The surveyor reported that the bridge is still going down at about 0.5

mm per day compared to the former rate of 2.0 mm/day before the

introduction of the speed breakers, aftermath the resolution in the last

meeting.

The Controller referred to the minute of the last meeting, item 5.13 as

regards the introduction of road signs, to which the report on the

introduction of the road signs was affirmative.

The ER suggested that, if need be, the Consultancy Firm that designed

the bridge could be contacted but the meeting was of the opinion that

this may not be necessary any longer, at this point.

The ER stated that, diverting long trucks to the inspected road without

proper preparation and sensitizing of the people could prove dangerous

because of the pedestrians and congested traffic nature of the road, the

trailer population on the road is always congested, the nature of the

traffic is pedestrian.

The usage of existing Airport road interchange may not be feasible

because of the turnings and also the construction of four culverts along

the other road to Abakpa junction needed to be speeded up for

completion.

The Setraco Director suggested that under 7days, broad danger signs

should be erected and the Controller must discuss with the

Governments of both State at Federal level while he will take the

matter up with the Engr. Tope and Engr. Isaq both of RSDT in Abuja.

Setraco summarized that the bridge is in danger and they will not take

charge of any disaster.

The issue of discouraging the dredging around the bridge will be

discussed by the controller with the State Government as is has been

recurring suggestions in the previous meetings

RESOLUTIONS

It was resolved that, there must be a diversion of all heavy and long

trucks from the bridge.

That, broad and conspicuous danger and warning signs should be



8.4

8.5

8.6

8.7

8.8

8.9

conspicuously displayed in 2 to 3 places before the first 1Km to the

bridge and that the ER’s team should proceed to observe the road well

and work on that.

The publicity and sensitizing of the public to be embark upon by the

Contractor-Setraco and the RSDT to request them to fund the publicity

before they go ahead.

Portal frames has to be erected to limit the passage of the diverted

categories of vehicle from using the bridge as soon as the publicity is

on and the road for diversion is ready.

Setraco also suggested a strong letter to emanate from the Controller to

the State Government and the Honorable Minister stating the

emergency situation of the bridge.

Setraco agreed to take over the improvement of the alternative routes

and make it motorable in 2-4 weeks if concluded and so instructed.

The improvement and traffic management of the alternative road is

imperative.

It was also resolved that a new 3-span of 20m bridge will be provided

by Setraco.

Setraco agreed to work with the nominated consultant, Etteh Aro &

Partners and moreso that Setraco is doing same type of project at Oji

bridge.

10.0

10.1

CLOSING PRAYER

The meeting came to an end by 2:45pm with a closing prayer by

Surveyor Isaac Eluma and the date of next meeting will be determined

and sent across.

PREPARED BY: Engr. Michael Feyisola CHECKED BY: Engr. Dele

Betiku ER/TL




HOUSING & URBAN DEVELOPMENT AT KM 7+350 BRIDGE SITE MONDAY 4TH

SEPTEMBER, 2012.

DAY 1

1.0 ATTENDANCE: Engr. Joe Onyejekwe ………… .Fed. Controller of works

Engr. Tope Oribuyaku …………….PM (RSDT)




Engr. Archibong Nkposong …………..Partner (Etteh Aro & Partners)

Engr. Paul Amula …………..ACRE (FMW, Enugu)



Engr. Rufai Abdul-Azeez …………..Environmental (RSDT)

Mr. Samuel Mene …………………Social/Safeguard Officer (RSDT)

Mr. Lanre Adigun ………………… Land Officer (Fed. Ministry of Lands Housing) HQ Abuja

Engr. Charles Ononuju ………………Contract Mgt. Specialist (Aim Consultants Ltd)

Surv. Kayode Adaramoye…………….. Compensation Expert (AIM Consultants Ltd)



2.0

2.1

HIGHLIGHTS

OPENING

The meeting commenced by 2:25Pm with the introduction of the new

bridge alignment to the RSDT project manager by the ER.

3.0

3.1

3.2

3.3

3.4

AIM CONSULTANTS LTD STATEMENT

The ER pointed out the setting out of the alignment of the new bridge

to the PM, RSDT.

The ER stated that, it was resolved during the fifth meeting held at the

Federal Controller’s Office that the new bridge will be 3-span, 20m

bridge of total height 60m span to avoid any future threat to the

abutment of the new bridge.

Engr. Dele Betiku stated that, an alternative route has been located for

the diversion of heavy (multi-axle) load traffic and it was also resolved

at the fifth meeting as volunteered by Setraco that, Setraco Nig. Ltd.

Will improve on the condition of the alternative route, (if) when

instructed by RSDT.

AIM Consultants Ltd. stated that, they had inspected the alternative



3.5

3.6

road and spined that proper preparation and sensitizing of the people

are important because of the human traffic and reported traffic

congestion on the road at certain times. Other signs are the culvert

construction works going on along the road with pot holes filled

surface.

The ER mentioned that, it was also agreed at the previous meeting that

portal frames has to be erected to limit the passage of the diverted

categories of vehicle from the bridge as soon as the publicity is on and

the road for diversion is ready.

The ER called the attendant of the PM to the fact that tests carried out

on the settlement rate which has reduced to 0.5mm/day and showed

that the increasing gap between the bidge g…. at the expansion joint

had increased considerably and may eventually signal the sudden

collapse of the bridge.

4.0

4.1

4.2

4.3

4.4

4.5

RSDT STATEMENT.

The Project Manager suggested and preferred a 40m- span new bridge

instead of the resolved 60m-span during the fifth meeting session.

Engr. Tope Oribuyaku stated that, if it would reduced the cost and

reduced the stress of the diversion exercise especially to the public,

then he suggested that new piles could be sunk at determine equidlll on

parallel to both sides of the bridge and beains seat across to lift the

existing bridge being palliative before the completion work on the new

bridge.

The PM, stated that the RSDT agrees to the constructing of a new

bridge and a meeting, must be schedule for agreement with the State

Ministry of Works.

Engr. Tope maintains that RSDT will not fund the jungle and publicity

of the road diversion and usurp the responsibility of who has the

upparatus to do that conveniently.

The PM stated the portal frame alongside other traffic signs will be

supported by RSDT but it has to be agreement with the state

government.

5.0

5.1

5.2

NOMINATED CONSULTANT STATEMENT

Etteh Aro & Partners supported the 2span-40m bridge suggested by

the Project Manager, RSDT.

The nominated consultant agreed with the PM that piles could be sunk

with beams across the underneath the deck of the old bridge as

palliative while the construction of a new one is being concluded.



5.3

Engr. Archibong explains the nature of the subsoil around the bridge to

the PM, RSDT.

6.0

6.1

6.2

6.3

FEDERAL CONTROLLER’S STATEMENT

Engr. Joe Onyejekwe stated that, he had reported the situation of the

bridge to the authority based on the minute of the previous meetings

and that diversion of heavy traffic is inevitable to avoid disaster and

that a new bridge had been resolved, and the diversion is already being

worked out.

The FC, pointed out that, the Setraco has volunteered to conduct and

sponsor the juples… and media, if the RSDT instruct them to take

charge.

The Controller also noted that, his report to Abuja was specific on the

previous celermic reports from the site that jacking of the existing

bridge is not safe and a new bridge should be provided.

7.0

7.1

7.2

7.3

7.4

7.5

7.6

RESOLUTIONS

Decision was concluded about stating action on the new bridge in the

next 2 weeks

The construction of New Bridge is has been jult in notion.

The RSDT approved the new bridge in principle and it has to be

conveyed to the governor.

The state governor to fast-track the diversion matters.

The state government should handle the jungle and publicity.

Improvement and Traffic Management needed on the diversion road.

8.0

10.1

CLOSING

The meeting came to an end by 3:20pm and the date of next meeting

will be determined.



DAY 2

2.0 ATTENDANCE:

Engr. Tope Oribuyaku …………….PM (RSDT)






Engr. Rufai Abdul-Azeez …………..Environmental (RSDT)

Mr. Samuel Mene …………………Social/Safeguard Officer (RSDT)

Mr. Lanre Adigun ………………… Land Officer (Fed. Ministry of Lands Housing) HQ Abuja

Engr. Charles Ononuju ………………Contract Mgt. Specialist (Aim Consultants Ltd)

Surv. Kayode Adaramoye…………….. Compensation Expert (AIM Consultants Ltd)


2.1

2.2

2.3

2.4

2.5

2.6

2.7

2.8

2.9

2.10

HIGHLIGHTS

The meeting commenced by 8:30 am

The ER briefed the PM, RSDT on the new ideas of how to mitigate the

challenges confronting the team as regards the new bridge and the

diversion.

The PM, RSDT stated that he had such an idea too and thinks, it should

be given consideration.

It was observed that, similar analogy of the idea is going on along

Azikwe Avenue in Enugu town and the PM suggested a visit to the site.

At the visited site, it was decided that the new bridge could be 1.0m

(paraphet to paraphet) fromthe existing.

And the Abutment could also be 10.0m back to back from the existing

and new bridge would be 60m span.

And that as the new bridge issue is in motion, action have started.

It was later in the evening decided as earlier proffered by the ER that

the new bridge should be 3.0m (paraphet to paraphet) from the existing.

The meeting came to an end by 9:30am.




HOUSING & URBAN DEVELOPMENT AT THE FEDERAL SECRETARIAT,

INDEPENDENCE LAYOUT, ENUGU ON TUESDAY 18TH

SEPTEMBER, 2012.

1.0 IN ATTENDANCE:

1.1 Engr. Joe Onyejekwe ………… Fed. Controller of works

1.2 Engr. Onodugo Uche ……...…. Director (Highways) M.O.W, Enugu

1.3 Engr. Okereke Anyaora ………... SEC (M.O.W Enugu)

1.4 Engr. Dele Betiku ………... ER/TL (Aim Consultants Ltd)

1.5 Engr. Leonilo Q. Tavera ..……… CRE (Aim Consultants Ltd)

1.6 Engr. Fidelis Anokwu …………. RSDT Site Engineer

1.7 Mrs. Ewelum Chika …..……. Sec. (Fed. Min. Works)

1.8 Engr. Michael Feyisola ………… Snr. Structural/Bridge Engineer (AIM Consultants Ltd)

1.9 Isaac Eluma ………… Snr. Surveyor (Aim Consultants Ltd)

1.10 Engr. Fouad Sarraf …………. Area Manager (Setraco)

1.11 Engr. Branko Koncarevic ………… Project Manager (Setraco)

1.12 Engr Samuel Ibitoye ………… Project Engineer (Greyline)


2.0

2.1

OPENING PRAYER / OPENING REMARKS BY THE

CONTROLLER

The meeting commenced at 12:00noon with an opening prayer by Engr.

Michael Feyisola, followed by opening remarks by the Federal Controller

of Works, Engr. Joe Onyejekwe.

3.0

3.1

3.2

REVIEW OF MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING

The minute of the last meeting was reviewed and the names, Mrs. Chika

Ewehim and Engr. Ani Ifechukwunanaemen were corrected to be Mrs.

Chika Ewelum and Engr. Ani Ifechukwunaeme.

Also Engr. Onodugo Uchet was corrected to read Engr. Onodugo Uche.

T.



4.0

4.1

4.2

4.3

4.4

4.5

4.6

4.7

4.8

4.9

4.10

DELIBERATIONS

The Federal Controller after welcoming and reminding the meeting of the

situation at hand, implored the Director to respond to the meeting in view

of item 4.0 in the previous meeting.

The Director beckoned on the Grey Line, representative to report on how

far they have gone with the mandate given to them to prepare the

diversion road.

Engr. Kayode Ibitoye stated that they had plan A&B to tackle the work on

site. In their plan A which involves earthworks, they are limited by the

rains and in their plan B, they are concentrating on the completion of the

concrete culvert works. He mentioned that the M.O.W, Engineer

inspected the site and encouraged them to clear the road of any

obstructing materials.

The Director (Highways) M.O.W, did not hide his unhappiness with the

report of the Grey Line and stated that he believed the contractor should

have completed the necessary preparation on the diversion road as agreed

and promised by them during the previous meeting.

The Director stated that the completion of the road preparation for

diversion is achievable and wondered why Grey Line is not living up to

expectation because they have no tenable excuse for the delay.

The F.C, was also disappointed on the level of report forwarded by Grey

Line against the promise they made in the previous meeting and wondered

if the Grey Line representation is the right person to speak to as regards

the delay.

Grey Line Engineer explains further that they are almost completing the

necessary aspect of the work but they met some challenges like the

underground water which they are trying to overcome.

The Director (Highways) stated that Grey Line was not doing what was

agreed in the previous meeting rather they are beating about the bush,

while, what they have to do on the road is precise and direct.

The Controller, while emphasizing on the crisis situation at hand stated

that now that, we are at cross road with the Grey Line approach to

completion of the surface preparation of the diversion road, what shall we

do?

Grey line repeated their believe, that the diversion road is motorable but,

FC preferred to inform or relate with their principals directly.



4.11

4.12

4.13

4.14

4.15

4.16

4.17

4.18

4.19

4.20

The ER, stated that the ridability of the road is important. The usage of

TSM (Traffic System Management) requirement is important. He also

emphasized that there is need to look into the diversion and the dual

carriageway critically and observe that basic thing in traffic is segregation

of pedestrian from the trailers and recommended that the controller and

the Director Hihgways,M.O.W should be decisive on this.

While the FC, is of the opinion that Grey Line has failed to deliver based

on their promise, the Director Highways, MOW stated that it was against

their expectation that Grey Line could have changed in their disposition

but he believes Grey Line has the capability and he would take it up with

their Directors later in the day.

On the question that should there be an alarm as regards the failing bridge

before the next 10days which may be extension for Grey Line, the

director stated that he would talk to the Grey Line principals and he would

respond but if there is an alarm, they would close the bridge and as

regards motorable, it could mean vehicles can pass.

Grey Line stated that they would finish before the extension of the 10

days.

FC, wanted the meeting to re-visit the ER’S earlier suggestion of Night

management of traffic for heavy trucks to alleviate the challenges.

The FC, stated that other principal stakeholders will be briefed after this

meeting in case if Grey Line failed. And assuming they fail, there could

be alternative B of Night traffic.

SSE, MOW, Enugu suggested that the closing of traffic for heavy trucks

during the day could start, from the abrupt of the Naira triangle at Enugu

axis and other convenient point before the Eke market.

The FC, enlightened the meeting on his experience during the

construction of Nunkai Bridge in 2001 in Taraba State and stated that the

military came to their rescue by providing a ‘float force bridge’ to pave

alternative access for road users and believes if the military is approached

by the proper authority, they should be willing to also assist since the

situation is emergency.

The ER and the meeting agreed to the FC’s suggestion if it would serve

the purpose to defeat the challenges of diversion, which is at hand.

The FC, who stated that though the military may not want to do it free of

charge promised to write to the Excellency, the Executive Governor of the



4.21

4.22

4.23

State, regarding the float force bridge and encouraged the Director

Highways (MOW) to follow up.

The FC inquired about the feedback as regards the Director (Highways)

liaising with his counterpart in the Transport Ministry.

The Director Highways stated that, he had briefed his principal who has

also discussed with the Commissioner for Transport and earlier in the

morning told him that the ministry of Transport will send a representative.

They have trashed the issue at hand to the extent of possibility of

providing a standby towing vehicle, but the only distraction for the

Commissioner for Works is the additional involvement of the

Commissioner for inter Ministerial Affairs on the matter.

The FC, stated that he has discussed with the Commissioner not to be

distracted or discouraged since the matter concerned fell under his

Ministry and that the ER should discourage further involvement of the

Commissioner for inter Ministerial Affairs to reduce any political

maneuvering.

5.0

5.1

5.2

5.3

5.4

RESOLUTIONS

The Director Highways, MOW to continue meeting with the Ministry of

Transport.

The FC, to write to the Governor as regards the float force bridge and the

Director, Highways to follow it up.

The Director Highways will meet with hi s principals and briefed them on

the resolution of the meeting that, they should not be distracted and that

the success of overcoming these challenges lies in their hand.

The Director promised to get back to the FC in 2 to 3 days.

6.0

6.1

CLOSING PRAYER

The meeting came to an end by 2:00pm with a closing prayer by Engr.

Okereke A.I, after the motion for the adjournment was moved by Engr.

Michael Feyisola and seconded by Engr. Okereke A.I. The date of the

next meeting will be communicated later.

Prepared by:Engr. Michael Feyisola Checked by: Engr. Dele Betiku ER



MINUTES OF THE MEETING WITH ALL THE STAKEHOLDERS IN RESPECT OF

RELOCATION OF THE NNPC PIPE LINE, HELD AT THE BRIDGE LOCATION ON

WENESDAY 10TH

OCTOBER, 2012.

1.0 ATTENDANCE: Mr. Lambert U.C 08033386474 NNPC - PPMC

Mr Odofin A.A 08023717070 NNPC - PPMC

Mr. Alawode A.A 08056225391 NNPC - PPMC

Mr. Ojo A.B 08033118886 NNPC – PPMC

Engr. DR. Anthony C. Nobo 08037164483 Consultants to ENSWC

Engr. Raphel 08065139757 Consultants to ENSWC

Mr Obriene Ofodu 08033240670 MD ENSWC

Engr. Eze Charles 08037112076 Project Engr. ENSWC

Engr. Leonillo Tavera 08099928673 CRE (Aim Consultants Ltd)

Engr. Kolawole Kusimo 08099928662 Snr. Q.Materials Engr. (Aim Consultants Ltd)

Engr Fidelis Anokwu 08035923222 RSDT Site Engineer

Engr. Branco Koncarevic 08177234730 Project Manager (Setraco)

ITEM DESCRIPTION ACTION BY

Highlights:

The meeting commenced at 10:00 am at the bridge location at

km7+125 with all the stakeholders basically to look into the

possibility of protecting or relocating of existing pipe line, manholes,

perimeter fence, gate house and access road to the NNPC.

Hence the under listed was agreed after the meeting:-

1. It was jointly agreed that a survey should be conducted the next

day, October 11 , 2012 to establish the extent of relocation and to

enable the Enugu State Water cooperation come up with the cost

of the relocation of the pipes which is to be submitted to the

NNPC and thereafter to Aim Consultants Ltd.

2. Aim Consultants Ltd requested the NNPC officials to forward to

them any detailed drawings that may be of help.

3. It was also agreed that during construction that the staff of the



Water Corporation should be present to supervise the relocation of

the pipes.

4. It was jointly agreed that the Water Corporation and NNPC

personnel to jointly come up with the cost estimate for the

relocation for the pipes.

The meeting came to an end by 11:05am.

Prepared By: Engr. Kolawole Kusimo Checked By: Engr. Leonillo Tavera

FINAL REPORT RP1355 v4 Road Sector Development Team ...

Documents

Transcript of FINAL REPORT RP1355 v4 Road Sector Development Team ...