MZ02 Performance Monitoring System Rev F - 1 Baseline

PERFORMANCE MONITORING SYSTEM
and
BASELINE SURVEY REPORT
for the proposed
NORTH EASTERN STATE ROADS INVESTMENT PROGRAM
Serchhip – Buarpui (MZ02)
(Tranche-2 road in the State of Mizoram)
Reporting Period
Date : Aug 2010 Ref. TA No. 4814-IND & TA No.7134-IND
Performance Monitoring System & Package MZ-CW2
Baseline Survey Report (Tranche-2 Road) Road Code :MZ02
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Document / Report Control Form
Project Name: ADB TA 4814-IND TA Cluster for Project Processing and Capacity Development –
Design and Project Management Support for the Proposed North Eastern State Roads
Investment Program
and
ADB TA 7134-IND Preparing and Enhancing Implementation Readiness of the
Proposed North Eastern State Roads Investment Program
ADB Contract Number: COSO 70-125 /COCS/80-91
SMEC Project Number: 5061090/5061110
Report for: Asian Development Bank
Report Name: Performance Monitoring System & Baseline Survey Report for North Eastern State Roads
Investment Program Tranche-2 roads: Mizoram
SMEC Report Cataloguing No: DPMC 0067

PREPARATION, REVIEW AND AUTHORISATION
Revision # Date Prepared by Reviewed by Approved for Issue by

D0.1 24 Apr 2008 G Strid G Strid G Strid
F0.0 09 Nov 2009 LR Dua LR Dua
F0.1 01 Aug 2010 LR Dua LR Dua
ISSUE REGISTER
Distribution List Date Issued Number of Copies

ADB 10.08.2010 1
MDONER 10.08.2010 1
PWD (Mizoram) 10.08.2010 2
Delhi Office Library 10.08.2010 Electronic only
1 copy + Electronic
Report Project File 10.08.2010
attached to hard copy
SMEC International
222-226 Sharp Street Cooma NSW 2630, Australia
PO Box 356 Cooma
Tel: 61 (0)2 64520222
Fax: 02 6452 0380
Email: bob.jenkins@smec.com.au
www.smec.com.au
The information within this document is and shall remain the property of SMEC International.
North Eastern State Roads Investment Program Rev.F0.1 Page i

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Abbreviations and Acronyms
AADT Annual Average Daily Traffic

ADB Asian Development Bank
Crore Ten million
CSC Construction Supervision Consultant
DPR Detailed Project Report
EA Executing Agency
GOI Government of India
HDM4 Highway Development and Management System
IRC Indian Roads Congress
IRI Unit of Measurement of Roughness
km Kilometre
Lakh One hundred thousand
LAP Land Acquisition Plan
PWD Public Works Department
M metres
MDONER Ministry of Development of the North Eastern Region
Mil Million
MIS Management Information System
Mm Millimetres
NES North Eastern States
NESRIP North Eastern State Roads Investment Program
PIU Project Implementation Unit
PMC Project Management Consultant
PMS Project Monitoring System
PPMS Project Performance Monitoring System
PPTA Project Preparatory Technical Assistance
Project North Eastern State Roads Improvement Project
Rs Indian Rupee
The Consultant SMEC International Pty Ltd in sub-consultancy with SMEC India Pvt Ltd
The Sub-Consultant Consultants employed by SMEC to carry out certain project tasks
Performance Monitoring System Rev F.0.docx Page i

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Contents
1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................ 1
1.1 General .............................................................................................................................................. 1
1.2 ADB TA 4814-IND ................................................................................................................................ 1
1.2.1 Project Roads Under TA 4814-IND ................................................................................................... 2
1.3 Present TA 7134-IND .......................................................................................................................... 3
1.4 Performance Monitoring System & Baseline Survey ............................................................................... 4
1.4.1 Background ................................................................................................................................... 4
2.0 PROJECT ROAD DESCRIPTION ..................................................................................................... 10
2.1 General ............................................................................................................................................ 10
2.2 Tranche-2 Project road in Mizoram ..................................................................................................... 10
2.2.1 Serchhip to Buarpui (MZ02) ........................................................................................................... 10
2.3 Improvement Proposal ...................................................................................................................... 12
3.0 APPROACH & METHODOLOGY .................................................................................................... 13
3.1 General ............................................................................................................................................ 13
3.2 Project Lifecycle ............................................................................................................................... 13
3.3 The Deliverable Elements .................................................................................................................. 14
3.4 Indicator Targets .............................................................................................................................. 15
4.0 SPECIFIC DETAILS OF PERFORMANCE INDICATORS ...................................................................... 20
4.1 General ............................................................................................................................................ 20
4.2 Output Elements ............................................................................................................................... 20
4.2.1 Indicator A-1 ................................................................................................................................. 20
4.2.2 Indicator A-2 ................................................................................................................................ 22
4.2.3 Indicator A-3 ................................................................................................................................ 23
4.2.4 Indicator A-4 ................................................................................................................................. 24
4.2.5 Indicator A-5 ................................................................................................................................. 26
4.2.6 Indicator A-6 ................................................................................................................................. 28
4.2.7 Indicator A-7 ................................................................................................................................. 29
4.3 Outcome Elements ........................................................................................................................... 31
4.3.1 Indicator B-1 ................................................................................................................................. 31
4.3.2 Indicator B-2 ................................................................................................................................. 32
4.3.3 Indicator B-3 ................................................................................................................................. 34
4.3.4 Indicator B-4 ................................................................................................................................. 36
4.3.5 Indicator B-5 ................................................................................................................................. 39
4.4 Impact Elements ............................................................................................................................... 41
4.4.1 Indicator C-1 ................................................................................................................................. 41
4.4.2 Indicator C-2 ................................................................................................................................. 43
5.0 BASELINE SURVEYS ..................................................................................................................... 45
5.1 General ............................................................................................................................................ 45
5.2 Baseline Surveys for Tranche-2 Roads ............................................................................................... 45
5.3 Indicator Values at Baseline Date ....................................................................................................... 48
6.0 THE TIME TABLE FOR DATA COLLECTION ..................................................................................... 49
7.0 STAFFING REQUIREMENTS .......................................................................................................... 50
8.0 INSTITUTIONAL SET UP ............................................................................................................... 51
9.0 MILESTONE SURVEYS ................................................................................................................. 52
10.0 CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................................................ 53
10.1 General ...................................................................................................................................... 53

ANNEXURES
Annexure – 5.1 Baseline Performance Monitoring Indicators
Annexure – 5.2 Traffic Survey Report
Annexure – 5.3 Roughness Survey Report
Annexure – 5.4 Vehicle Operating Costs

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary
Measuring the outputs, outcomes and impacts of a project is a standard practice during the implementation
period of an ADB financed project. To measure these outputs, outcomes and impacts, a monitoring system
needs to be developed and operated throughout the life of the project.
In accordance with Clause 15 of the Terms of Reference (TOR) of the Design and Project Management
Consultant (DPMC) contract, the DPMC was required to develop a performance monitoring system (PMS) for
the North Eastern State Roads Investment Project (NESRIP) including the institutional set-up, monitoring tools,
and resource requirement for the operation of the system, which would be in line with the monitoring
mechanisms proposed in the draft design and monitoring framework in Appendix 3 of the TOR.
For these purposes, the DPMC was required to:

(i) prepare a draft of a performance monitoring system that details out study methodology, approach,
schedule and staff mobilization plan, in consultation with the state governments;
(ii) carry out baseline surveys for the Tranche 1 subprojects to collect data necessary to derive
performance indicators in the design and monitoring framework; and
(iii) based on the field experience of the above baseline surveys, refine and finalize the performance
monitoring system.
The Draft report fulfilled the requirements of the first point described above i.e. preparation of a performance
monitoring system (PMS).
The PMS uses indicators as the method to measure the performance of the Project. Indicators are a
measurable output, outcome or impact of the Project. These indicators include technical, social, environmental
and economic features. The PMS is designed to provide meaningful information to ADB, yet at the same time
also provide the central and state governments with a tool they too can use to assess the Project’s
performance.
The final list of indicators selected for inclusion in the PMS as per PPTA Report is shown in Table E.1.
Table E.1: Indicators Selected for NESRIP

Element Indicator
A. Output 1. Approximately 920 km of state roads (state highways and district
roads) reconstructed or rehabilitated by end of Year 5
2. Procedures and computer systems are established within PWD PIUs

by end of Year 5 for project management purposes
3. Staff training and capacity building of PWD PIUs in all essential road
management functions by end of Year 5
4. Road safety program for Project roads with coordinated engineering,

enforcement and education components in place by end of Year 5
5. Sustained funding for road operations and maintenance established

for Project Roads and in place by end of Year 5
6. Compliance with GoI and ADB’s relevant policies and guideline on

land acquisition by end of Year 5
TABLE OF CONTENTS
7. Compliance with GoI and ADB’s relevant policies and guideline on
environmental management by end of Year 5
B. Outcome 1. Number of district headquarters connected by two-lane national

highways and improved state roads increased 34 by end of Year 5
2. Actual growth rates of traffic on the project and connector roads
surpasses those assumed growth rates (average annual growth are
to be at least 9%) by end of Year 5
3. Frequency of passenger bus services on the project roads to double
one year after completion
4. Reduced vehicle operating cost on the project roads by 50% for 3 axle
trucks, and by 20% for passenger buses by end of Year 5
6. The project roads maintained with IRI below 5 by end of Year 10
C. Impact 1. Increase in per capita state domestic product by 35% by end of Year
10
2. Percent of households below poverty line decreased by 20% by end of
Year 10
Targets have to be set for each indicator. These targets are normally time bound so that desired results can be
monitored in equal intervals over the life of the Project and for a period thereafter. The monitoring period is
normally set at an interval of one year.
Full details of the indicators, targets, data collection requirements and method of calculation of indicator values
are discussed in this report.
The DPMC was required to undertake baseline surveys for Tranche-1 roads only under ADB TA:4814-IND..
The baseline represents the start of the project. Baseline surveys were not undertaken for the reasons that
start of Project was delayed. Based on initial rate of progress of pre loan activities, the loan would not become
effective for a year or so. Undertaking the baseline surveys then, would have proved ineffective as the Project
roads would deteriorate further prior to Project commencement. A further set of surveys would need to be taken
again at time of loan effectiveness. It was therefore recommended to the ADB to defer these surveys until loan
effectiveness and to the start of the Project roads.
The ADB TA: 7134-IND provided for Baseline surveys for Tranche 1 roads as per TOR clause 14 and preparing
final PMS Report.
Considering that the Stage of loan appraisal was around, Baseline surveys for Tranche-1 roads have been
conducted and the Performance Monitoring System and Baseline Survey Report has now been finalized and
forwarded to the Tranche-1 States.
The report in hand presents an updated Performance Monitoring System to be adopted for Tranche-2 road in
the State of Mizoram, during implementation of NESRIP along with the methodology to be adopted for carrying
out baseline surveys at the appropriate time.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 General
The North-Eastern Region (NER) of India comprises eight states – Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, Manipur,
Meghalaya, Mizoram, Nagaland, Sikkim and Tripura, covering 262,000 sq. km, or about 8% of India’s total land
area and with 4% of the nation’s population. Over 90% of inter and intra-regional trade and personal travel
depends on the road network, which is constrained by low capacity roads, comprising mainly sub-standard single
and intermediate lane roads. The state roads have deteriorated over the years due to heavy rains and floods in
some areas of the state, failure of sub-grade and sub-base courses under increasing traffic load and paucity of
maintenance funds and resources for the timely and adequate maintenance of such roads.
Development in the region is therefore hindered by the low quality of existing transport infrastructure, unreliable
services, restriction on transit traffic through Bangladesh, and the largely hilly and rolling terrain. Coupled with this
is the relatively low level technical ability of both the contracting industry and the PWDs labour force.
1.2 ADB TA 4814-IND
The Asian Development Bank (ADB) is assisting the Government of India (GOI) in addressing the issues related
to the condition of these roads through a program of works called the North Eastern State Roads Investment
Program (NESRIP).
The North Eastern State Roads Investment Program (NESRIP) initially comprised of (i) to improve about 1,000
km of priority road sections in the eight states in the north eastern region (NER) of India, and (ii) to provide
capacity building support to the executing agency of NESRIP, the Ministry of Development of North Eastern
Region (MDONER), and the implementing agencies (IAs), the state public works department (PWD) or its
equivalent in each of the eight states for road improvement as well as for road management, road safety, and
environmental and social impact management. Feasibility study earlier carried out under a project preparatory
technical assistance (PPTA) for NESRIP identified about 1,200 km of key state road sections for improvement,
and development implementation arrangements for the road improvement as well as the capacity building
support.
The proposed NESRIP’s design involved features to address various risks of delay. To mitigate the risk of delay
at the start of projects and in complying with ADB requirements, two sets of technical assistance, since
completed, provide “pre-loan effectiveness” support to raise the level of MDONER’s and the state PWD’s
readiness for implementing NESRIP. The first is the technical assistance to facilitate further preparation of
NESRIP and includes design and project management support. This technical assistance has been implemented
as a component technical assistance (CTA) of the technical assistance cluster (TAC) for Project Processing and
Capacity Development under ADB TA-4814-IND. A Design and Project Management Consultant (DPMC) was
engaged under the component TA for:
(i) Preparation of detailed project reports for the subproject roads found to be feasible under the initial
PPTA, including bidding documents for civil works and social and environmental safeguard documents,
and land acquisition plans;
(ii) Impact monitoring plan and baseline survey (only for Tranche1 subprojects);
(iii) Feasibility study of additional subprojects;
North Eastern State Roads Investment Program Rev.F0.1 Page 1

TABLE OF CONTENTS
(iv) General assistance in pre-construction activities including establishment and development of the
capacity of a Project Management Unit in MDONER and Project Implementation Units in state PWDs for
taking full responsibility for NESRIP implementation as per the Operations Manual for NESRIP to be
developed under CTA; and
(v) Assistance in civil works procurement and recruitment of consultants to be financed under the ensuing
loans.
Financing of technical assistance components under TAC by the funding source, the Government of United
Kingdom, ended at the end of June 2008. Status of the proposed NESRIP is currently at the stage of loan
appraisal. NESRIP is proposed to be processed as a multitranche financing facility (MFF) with its first tranche
expected to start in early 2011. There is a need to continue the assistance provided under TAC until the start of
NESRIP implementation.
1.2.1 Project Roads Under TA 4814-IND
Based on the feasibility study carried out under the PPTA for NESRIP about 1,100 km of key state road sections
for improvement, divided into a three phase program called Tranche 1, 2 and 3 was identified. The list of the
project road sections, including location, approximate length, and Tranche is shown in Table 1.1. Subsequently
during the discussion with Assam State PWD in the meeting held on 5th December, 2007 to discuss the
increased cost of construction for NESRIP project roads, it was agreed to drop some of the road sections
because of some roads having been undertaken by other Government agencies. The minutes of the discussions
so arrived at, were sent to the Assam State PWD and the ADB. The MDONER was also apprised of the decisions
so taken. The Asian Development Bank conveyed its concurrence vide its mail dated 26.03.2008 to reduce the
scope of study.
Table 1. 1 List of Project Roads - TA 4814-IND

State Road Contract Road Name Tranche Length Remarks
No. No. km
Arunachal AR06 AR-CW1 Pasighat to Pangin 1 75.0
Pradesh
Assam AS01 AS-CW3 Barama to Tamulpur 2 28.9
AS02 Tamulpur to Paneri 2 43.0
AS03 Paneri to Udalgiri 2 18.6
AS04 Udalgiri to Rowta (NH52) 2 12.5
AS11 AS-CW7 Futkibari to Bilasipara (NH31) 3 16.2
AS37A Bongaigaon (NH31) to North 3 17.0

Salmara (NH31B)
AS15 AS-CW5 Dudhnoi (NH37) to Tikrikilla 3 31.7
(border with Meghalaya)
AS17 Boko to Hahim 3 15.0
AS37C AS-CW1 Kalitakuchi to Barpeta 1 58.50
Manipur MN06 MN-CW1 Tupul (NH53) to Kasom - 2 128.6
Khullen
Meghalaya ML01 ML-CW2 Mawngap (NH44E) to Umpung 3 76.2
MLN1 ML-CW1 Garobadha to Dalu (NH51) 1 93.4

TABLE OF CONTENTS
MLN2 ML-CW3 Mawshynrut to Hahim, 3 36.8
Mizoram MZ01 MZ-CW1 Champhai to Khawbung 2 68.2
MZ02 MZ-CW2 Serchhip to Buarpui 3 55.0
Nagaland NL01 (Tuli to Tizit Approx. Conducted
100.0 Feasibility
Study
Sikkim SK01 SK-CW1 Melli to Nayabazar 1 26.6
SK02 Nayabazar (Akar Bridge) to 1 19.7
Namchi
SK03 SK-CW2 Rumtek (Intersection with 3 24.2
NH31A) to Sang
Tripura TR01 TR-CW2 Teliamura (NH44) to Khowai 3 32.6
TR02 TR-CW1 Udaipur (NH44) to Melaghar 2 20.30
Screening and finalization of Feasibility Study Report for the Project road from Tuli to Tizit (NL01) of approximate
length of 100 km in the state of Nagaland had also been carried out under this T.A.
As per TA-4814-IND, Detailed Project Report for Pasighat to Pangin (AR06), Contract Package AR-CW1 was
prepared and submitted by DPMC to the State PWD Arunachal Pradesh, MDONER and to the ADB. However,
this road section was subsequently excluded from NESRIP as this road was taken up for improvement in another
program.
Under TA-4814-IND, Champhai to Khawbung (MZ01) and Serchhip to Buarpui (MZ02) were grouped under
Tranche-2 and Tranche-3 roads respectively. State PWD, Mizoram vide their letter no.F.2/27/2006-IC dated
21.08.2009 desired that the road section Serchhip to Buarpui (MZ02) shall be given priority and the project roads
be interchanged. ADB/MDONER has given their concurrence to this interchange and accordingly road section
Serchhip to Buarpui (MZ02) is included in Tranche-2. Road section Champhai to Khawbung (Mz01) has been
grouped under Tranche-3 roads.
Road section (AS11) Bilasipara (NH31) to Fakiragram was grouped under Tranche-3 roads, keeping in its length
and proximity to another road (AS-37A) Bongaigaon (NH31) to North Salmara (NH31B) to make a viable
construction package and the Detailed Project Reports were prepared accordingly. However, due to non-
trafficable condition of the Project road and public demand for making the project road traffic worthy at the
earliest. State PWD Assam desired the Project road section Bilasipara (NH31) to Fakiragram (AS11) be taken up
under Tranche-1 roads. Accordingly, this road was put under Tranche-1 road category.
The revision of length of Detailed Project Report for MN06 Tupul (NH53) to Kasom – Khullen was necessary as
the project road passes through Loktak Lake. Improvement programe in Lake area i.e., between Bishnupur and
Mayang Imphal shall be kept in abeyance till approval is obtained from competent authority. The exclusion of the
stretch would result in reduction of length.
1.3 Present TA 7134-IND
As a follow up to the work carried out earlier by the DPMC under TA4814-IND, the Consultants are now proposed
to carry out further project preparatory activities including Pre-Loan Effectiveness and Preconstruction Activities,
including resettlement study, assistance in civil works procurement, assistance in ‘Construction Supervision
Consultant ‘(CSC) recruitment, Performance Monitoring etc.
Further assistance was required to the NER PWDs in completing the roll-out of the computerized Asset
Management and Project Management Systems, data entry for the initial pilot network areas previously identified,

TABLE OF CONTENTS
gradual expansion of the systems to other states and districts within the NER and training of PWD staff in the
operation and usage of the systems. This task has been covered under the present T.A.
The terms of reference cover the services to be provided by the Consultants after the closing of the TAC until the
expected commencement of NESRIP in mid 2010. However, the expected commencement of the Tranche-1
subprojects has been further delayed till early 2011 due to administrative reasons The services described under
these terms of reference are proposed to be financed on a grant basis by ADB’s technical assistance special
fund.
1.4 Performance Monitoring System & Baseline Survey
The Design and Project Management Consultants (DPMC) had developed a Performance Monitoring System
(PMS) for NESRIP under ADB TA 4814 INID and submitted a draft Performance Monitoring System and
subsequently an updated version under TA 7134-IND during Nov. 2009 which included institutional set up,
monitoring tools and resource requirement for the operation of the system. The monitoring system has to have a
baseline datum of various monitoring elements, termed in indicators which have to be established immediately
before the start of the Project. The indicators are the methods to measure the Performance of the Project.
Indicators are a measurable output, outcome or impacts of the Project. These indicators include technical, social,
environmental and economic features. The PMS is desired to provide meaningful information to ADB, yet at the
same time also provides the central and state governments with a toll they can use to assess the Projects
Performance.
1.4.1 Background
Managing for and then monitoring the results is a key component of good public sector management. Strong
performance monitoring systems help improve management strategies, improve knowledge of the job, help
ensure that resources are focused on key results, encourage interest in the outcomes and promote
accountability. Project monitoring systems can be a powerful management tool as they provide an early warning if
a project has problems, allowing management to take a proactive approach to resolve the problem. Yet these
systems are often impractical and out of alignment with organizational skills and budgets, that are normally
available.
Measuring the outputs, outcomes and impacts of a project is a standard practice during the implementation
period of an ADB financed project. To measure these outputs, outcomes and impacts, a monitoring system needs
to be developed and operated throughout the life of the project.
Under the terms of reference (TOR) of the current consultancy contract, the consultants are required to develop
a performance monitoring system (PMS) for the North Eastern State Roads Investment Project (NESRIP)
including the institutional set-up, monitoring tools, and resource requirement for the operation of the system,
which is in line with the monitoring mechanism proposed in the draft design and monitoring framework in
Appendix 3 of the TOR of Design and Project Management Support for the Proposed NESRIP. ADB TA 4814-
IND. The framework is reproduced in Table 1.2.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table 1. 2 Appendix 3 To TOR: Draft Design and Monitoring Framework
Design Performance Targets/Indicators Data Sources/Reporting Assumptions
Summary Mechanisms and Risks
Impact (of the Assumptions
Investment Program) By 2015 National socioeconomic data  Various government
and statistics development schemes for
Increased economic Increase in per capita state domestic the North Eastern Region
growth and reduced product by 35% are effectively coordinated
poverty in the North with road sector
Eastern Region Percent of households below poverty investment
line decreased by 20%  Security situation remains
stable so that investors
and tourists are not
deterred on security risk
factors.
Outcome (of the Number of district headquarters Post-implementation Assumptions
Investment Program) connected by two-lane national measurement by PMC 1. SARDP-NE Phase A to
highways and improved state roads progress as programmed
Improved road increased from 51 to 85 by 1 year Data collection through the 2. The project states to
transport services after completion. Road Asset Management allocate maintenance
System (RAMS) budget sufficient enough
Actual growth rates of traffic on the to be eligible for grants-in-
project and connector roads aid available during
surpasses those assumed growth FY2005-2009 as indicated
rates (average annual growth are to in the Twelfth Finance
be at least 9%) Commission ruling.
3. Sustainable mechanisms
Frequency of passenger bus services in place for funding the
on the project roads to double one required road maintenance
year after completion works
4. Transport modes and
Reduced vehicle operating cost on services to be available for
the project roads by 50% for 3 axle the project roads
trucks, and by 20% for passenger
buses at completion
Freight charges and passenger bus

fares on the project roads reduced by
the same extent as the reduction in
vehicle operating cost one year after
completion
The project roads maintained with IRI

below 5
Outputs (of the Assumptions

Investment Program) By the end of the Investment EA’s Progress Reports  Civil works are
Program in 2015: implemented on schedule
ADB review missions  Institutional development
1. Reconstructed and Approximately 522 km of state roads and capacity building
rehabilitated state (state highways and district roads) progress as programmed
roads reconstructed or rehabilitated by
December 2015 Risks
2. Improved business  Participation of qualified
process and staff skills Procedures and computer systems civil works contractors and
are established within PWDs by consultants deterred due
December 2009 for planning and

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Design Performance Targets/Indicators Data Sources/Reporting Assumptions
Summary Mechanisms and Risks
project management purposes to security concern
 Implementation affected
Staff training and capacity building in by floods, landslides and
all essential road management other natural calamities
functions beyond human control.
Road safety program with

coordinated engineering,
enforcement and education
components in place by December
2009
Sustained funding for road operations

and maintenance established and in
place
Established outsourcing of road

construction and road maintenance
to contractors and of engineering
services to consulting firms
This framework was developed by the project preparation and technical assistance (PPTA) consultant for the
North Eastern State Roads Investment Project (NESRIP) funded by the ADB and undertaken by Technoconsult
International Limited (TCIL), VisionRI Connexion Services Pvt Ltd, Development Consultants Private Limited
(DCPL), David Lupton and Associates (DLA) and Design and Planning Management Consultants (DPMC) and
updated as per amended loan program and modified scope of work.
The indicators shown above are described in the Appendix C.1 of the PPTA Final Report of July 2006. This Table
C.1 is repeated below as Table 1.3. This table shows how the PPTA consultant proposed to measure these
indicators including details such as baseline value and target values to be used, timing for measurement and
source of data.
For the purpose, the DPMC was required to:

(i) prepare a draft of a performance monitoring system that detail out study methodology, approach,
schedule and staff mobilization plan, in consultation with the state governments;
(ii) carry out baseline surveys for the Tranche 1 subprojects to collect data necessary to derive
performance indicators in the design and monitoring framework; and
(iii) based on the field experience of the above baseline surveys, refine and finalize the performance
monitoring system.
The Draft Design and Monitoring Framework has been updated and amended appropriately to meet the
requirement and scope of services under the current TA and are discussed in following chapters.
Baseline surveys for the Tranche-1 sub-projects have since been completed and a final Performance
Monitoring System Reports along with Baseline Survey Reports relevant to Tranche-1 roads have been
submitted to the State concerned.
The report in hand is a final document on Performance Monitoring System and methodology to carry out
baseline surveys under NESRIP for Tranche-2 and Tranche-3 roads.

Table 1. 3 Proposed Indicators, Targets and Timings from Appendix C.1, PPTA Final Report
Item Indicator Baseline Value Target Value Timing Source
Goals
Regional integration and • % Of roads rated “good” • NESRP TA Study Report • 40% of the state and should be • One year after completion • One • State statistics
improved traffic flow and Number of STP bridges rated “good” based on the years after completion
road management International Roughness Index (IRI)
• Reduce STP bridges by 10%
Purpose
Reduce vehicle • 3 axle/ Heavy trucks Estimate VOC using HDM4 for Estimate VOC for IRI of 3.5 One year after completion • Direct measurement of
operating costs (project • 20 seat / standard bus IRI of 12 (the average for the (average after project) sample IRI and use HDM4 to
roads) • Vehicles of less than 12 seats project roads) estimate VOCs
and pick-ups
• car/jeep
Reduce transport • Freight charges on heavy and Obtain sample tariffs from Assume same % reduction as VOCs One year after project completion • Direct measurement and local
service charges medium trucks truckers and bus operators of for 3 axle truck and standard bus price control authority
• Passenger bus fares representative project roads • Resample same sources
as baseline
Expanded road usage Traffic counts on the project NESRP TA Study report Average annual growth rate equal to • At completion • One year after • Direct measurement and
and transport services and connector roads at least 9% completion vehicle registrations
Vehicle occupancy for Actual survey of the selected Equal or higher than the One year after project • Vehicle counts at same
trucks, buses and cars and sample districts and count 2007 figures. completion station
% loaded for trucks. stations in 2007 • Vehicle registrations in
sample Districts
Improved Road Safety Accident rate per 10,000 2003 deaths per 10,000 vehicles: 25% improvement on the 2003 One year after completion
vehicles • Assam = 17 figures by 2010
• Arunachal Pradesh = 61
• Manipur = 13
• Meghalaya = 23 • Statistics from annual state
• Mizoram = 21 Police road accident statistics
• Nagaland = 2.5*
• Tripura = 26
• Sikkim = 29
* Based on questionable data

Improved maintenance • Budget allocated for routine • NESRIP TA Study report • Doubling of road maintenance • At completion of the Project • Annual State budget
of state roads and periodic maintenance • NESRIP TA Study Report budget • 3 year after loan effectiveness • Implementation progress of
• Maintenance planning and • NESRIP TA Study Report • Operating Road Asset • 4 years after loan effectiveness an improved road maintenance
management system • NESRIP TA Study Report Management System and Planning • 4 years after loan effectiveness system, and performance
• Preventive maintenance a Unit evaluation of the maintenance
key element of the road • Dedicated pavement maintenance system
strategy units, • Assessment of system
• Improved maintenance • Dedicated unpaved road grading operations
practices program and use of alternate cold • Measure Rs/km expenditure
mix in road patches. • Budget data
• Assessment Maintenance
Operations and staff
Outsourced routine None Routine maintenance 1 and 3 years after the Assessment of maintenance
maintenance contracted on project roads end of the last contract contracts and operations
Outputs
Reconstruction and • Project road standard / Road • 1,073 km • 1,073 km • At completion • Project completion report
upgrading of project sections and other road • > 4m - 24% • > 4m - 96%
roads and bridges structures • < 4m -76% • <4% -4%
• BT -85% • BT - 100%
• Unpaved: 15% • Unpaved 0%
• Average IRI =12.5 • Average IRI= 3.5
• Substandard or missing bridges • 7.5 m wide bridges = 4550 m
= 4550 m
Redefining the Role and • Updating the PWD Codes • Existing PWD Codes and vision • New operations and management • 2 years after loan effectiveness • Annual reports
responsibility of the and making them the principle documents manual • 3 years after loan effectiveness • PMC progress and final
NER PWDs road manager and planner; • NESRP TA Study Report • 10 year Road strategies and 3 • End of 2010 report
• 10 year Road strategies and • NESRP TA Study Report works programs
3 forward programs • PWD strategy incorporated in state
• Acceptance of the road strategies and forward programs.
strategy and 3 year works plan
by State government
Road maintenance • Effective road network • NESRP TA Study report • Operational system and road • By start of 2010 • Project completion report
management maintenance management • Road condition data in maintenance • End of 2010 • NER State PWDs
improvement system in place 2008 (after RMS is operational) program inventory and maintenance
• Condition of non-project • Average roughness should be system
roads same or improved

Road safety • Road safety audit • NESRIP TA Study report • Road safety audits on at least 50% • 2 years after “loan effectiveness” • Project completion report
• Road safety education • NESRIP TA Study report of the state highway network; • 3 years after “loan effectiveness” • Project post-evaluation report
program • NESRIP TA Study report • Implemented program for road • 3 years after “loan effectiveness”
• Functioning Road safety • NESRIP TA Study report users and pedestrians • End of 2010
Council • NESRIP TA Study report • Operational road accident
• Implementation of mitigation mitigation road works program
measures identified during the • 25% reduction in the number of
Road Safety Initiative accidents per 10,000 vehicles
• Reduction in the road
accident rate
Social • Social impacts as indicated • NESRIP TA Study report • Compliance with GoI and ADB’s • Commencement of reconstruction • • Statistics of local government
SIA and Poverty Impact Study relevant policies and guideline • Once a year of the Project • Household survey •
Implementation of resettlement plan implementation Participatory research methods
monitoring for each subprojects, as
required
Environment • Mitigation measures • NESRIP TA Study report • Compliance with GoI and ADB’s • Commencement of reconstruction • Direct measurement and
recommended in the SIEE and • NESRIP TA Study report relevant policies and guidelines • Annually, during project period surveys
IEE • Implementation of the EMP
• Contractors Implementation
Plan for EMP

TABLE OF CONTENTS
2.0 PROJECT ROAD DESCRIPTION
2.1 General
As outlined in the previous chapter, the Key State road sections for improvement under NESRIP are divided into
a three phase Program called Tranche-1, 2 and 3. The list of the Project road sections, including location, length
and tranche is shown in Table 1.1. The scope of services under the current contract (ADB TA Preparing and
Enhancing Implementation Readiness of the proposed North Eastern State Roads Investment Program )
envisages carrying out Baseline Surveys of Tranche-1 roads and to finalize the Performance Monitoring System
Report to be followed for other Tranches. The Tranche-2 roads are indicated as under:
Table 2. 4 List of Tranche- 2 Roads
State No. From To Length (km)

Assam AS01 Barama Tamulpur 28.9
AS02 Tamulpur Paneri 43
AS03 Paneri Udalgiri 18.6
AS04 Udalgiri Rowta (NH52) 12.5
Manipur MN06 Tupul (NH53) Kasom - Khullen 128.6
Mizoram MZ02 Serchhip Buarpui 55
Tripura TR02 Udaipur (NH44) Melaghar 20.3
Total 306.9
Say 307 km
The report covers the Performance Monitoring System and Baseline Surveys Methodology for the Tranche 2
roads, Statewise, for monitoring the Performance of the Project, by measurement of the Performance indicators,
at intervals described hereunder the report.
This report, in general, describes the final Performance Monitoring System and monitoring data specific to the
Tranche-2 roads in the State of Mizoram as well as the methodology to be adopted for Baseline Surveys.
2.2 Tranche-2 Project road in Mizoram
Road section, referred above, in Mizoram State, is designated as Tranche-2 road for improvement under
NESRIP.
2.2.1 Serchhip to Buarpui (MZ02)
The detailed Project road description for the section of the road is given in the Detailed Project Report, Vol.I
Chapter 4.
The Project road MZ02, in the State of Mizoram, is a Major District Road (MDR) which connects Serchhip, a
district head quarter town in the middle sector of the state, to Buarpui, a block headquarter town towards west.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
The project road is in two parts:
Part I- Serchhip to Sialsuk junction on State Highway (Aizawl – Lunglei):15. 2km)
Part II- Thenzawal to Buarpui. The second part of the project road takes off from km 82 of Aizawl – Lunglei State
Highway at Thenzawl. The length of the second section is 39.8 km.
Total length of the project road is 55.km.
The road takes off from Sailankawn junction on NH 54, about 4 km from Serchhip town with the starting
Kilometerage of 0 and ends at Buarpui via Sialsuk and Thenzawl. Buarpui is situated on another Major District
road which takes off from
Aizawl – Lunglei State
Highway. The road
sections lie in Serchhip,
Aizawl and Lunglei
districts.
The entire road section,

under study lies in hilly
terrain passing through
dense forest area with
minor sections through
agricultural fields and
plantations and a few road
side villages and
settlements enroute.
The existing road sections

are single lane, and the
condition of the pavement
is very poor due to cracks,
depressions, ruts and pot
holes. There are two
major bridge locations
across rivers, where new
bridges are proposed.
Presently there are Bailey
bridges which are catering
to the light traffic. In
addition, there are 5
minor bridges along the
Project road which are in
good condition and shall
be retained except 1
minor bridge which is
proposed to be
reconstructed.
Engineering Features
Various engineering
features, as at present,
are discussed at length in
the DPR Vol.1 and cover
present alignment, cross

TABLE OF CONTENTS
section, pavement, right of way, drainage, junctions and intersections, C.D. structures, ie. bridges and culverts
and other road side features.
2.3 Improvement Proposal
The Detailed Project Report envisages improvement of the road section, by raising, reconstruction, widening and
strengthening to required lane standards including improvement of geometrics and construction / reconstruction
of the bridges and culverts, to make the road all-weather traffic worthy.
The improvement Proposal with design is discussed in DPRs, Vol.I of the project road.
Following improvement proposals are envisaged on this Project road.
(i) The project road is proposed to be upgraded to intermediate lane configuration carriageway by
widening the existing single lane road carriageway. The widening is proposed to the extent possible
by hill side cutting to accommodate the formation width, drains and breast walls. In approaches to
bridges and structures, which are proposed to be retained, and in the built up areas the widening is
proposed concentrically.
(ii) Improvement of horizontal geometry and vertical grades have been attempted in the design. The
low lying stretches are proposed to be raised and regarded.
(iii) The road is proposed to be widened to intermediate lane comprising of:
 Pavement width of 6.9m (5.5 m + 0.5 m widening at curves less than 300m. radius + 0.9m paved
shoulder on hill side.)
 Formation width 7.8m (6.9m pavement + 0.9m unpaved shoulder on valley side)
 Formation cut will be 8.7m(7.8m. formation width + 0.9 m drain)
(iv) Flexible Pavement is proposed, for widening and strengthening and / or reconstruction, as per
design requirement from traffic considerations.
(v) Provision for drainage, both surface and cross drainage has been made by providing side drains
and widening / reconstruction of culverts and bridges and provision of new culverts.
(vi) The Project road crosses a number of streams and minor rivers resulting in a number of culverts
and bridges. There are 7 bridges, on the Project road. Out of these 5 bridges are minor on small
streams and nullahas. The other 2 bridges are major across rivers which are temporary, fit for light
traffic. These are proposed to be replaced.
The DPR also proposes provision for construction / reconstruction of bus ‘Q’ shelters, intersections and junctions,
road side furniture including traffic signs, traffic markings and traffic safety features.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
3.0 APPROACH & METHODOLOGY
3.1 General
Too often, on previous ADB financed projects, Performance Monitoring System (PMS) did not provide ADB or
the client with the results they expected. There were shortcomings in the systems proposed that resulted in poor
results. A good Performance Monitoring System needs to satisfy a number of basic requirements such as:
 It must be precise and unambiguous – specific;

 It must be measurable – reliable and verifiable;
 The indicators must not be costly to measure;
 The indicators must be realistic and achievable;
 The system must be relevant to the needs of the ADB and the client; and
 It must be a time bound system.
This PMS should use indicators as the method to measure the performance of the Project. Indicators are a
measurable output, outcome or impact of the Project. These indicators are not just a measure in number of
kilometres of road reconstructed but also include other technical, social, environmental and economic features.
The PMS is proposed to be designed to provide meaningful information to ADB, yet at the same time provide the
central and state governments with a tool, they too can use, to assess the Project’s performance.
These indicators are measured throughout the life of the project (project lifecycle) and for a period thereafter. The
first series of indicator measurements will be at the start of the project called the baseline measurements. All
future measurements are compared to these values. This allows the ADB and client to measure the success of
the project.
3.2 Project Lifecycle
The lifecycle of any project consists of a number of elements. These elements are:
 inputs being provided into a project;

Inputs Activities
 activities being undertaken;
 short term outputs;
 longer term outcomes; and
impact on the environment surrounding the project.
Outputs O utcomes
The Project lifecycle is graphically depicted here.
Impacts

TABLE OF CONTENTS
The PMS will assess the success achieved in each of the three deliverable elements i.e. outputs, outcomes and
impacts.
3.3 The Deliverable Elements
The PMS will generally use the indicators recommended by the PPTA consultant in the PPTA Final Report.
These indicators have already received ADB approval and it is assumed that they have also been reviewed by
the various stakeholders.
The PMS will consist of three elements each divided into a number of indicators.
The first element is the outputs of the Project. Outputs are the project deliverables or the tangible results of the
loan i.e. what will the project leave behind.
The second is the production of specific outcomes from the Project. These can be generally considered the
government’s immediate development objectives. Outcomes result from the use of the outputs. Some will be
immediate. Some will be longer term. The PMS in hand will focus only on the immediate outcomes. Outcomes
are what are required to be achieved from the Project. They address the problems and constraints the ADB and
client want the Project to resolve. The Project, in itself, will not ensure that progress of all of these outcomes will
be attained either during the life of the Project nor following its expiry but the Project should encourage and be a
catalyst in their achievement.
The third element is the Impact of the Project. This element generally includes some of the government’s long
term development objectives. This element is not just directly linked to the output of the Project but the outcome
as well. The impact is the long term vision of the government. To this extent the Project is intended to have an
impact on progress towards positive achievement of these visions. These visions could include institutional
development impacts including:
 Impacts on poverty;
 Impacts on the environment;
 Impacts on social organisation;
 Impacts on political development;
 People informal norms and practices;
 Institutional or organisational strengthening;
 Institutional skill levels;
 Attitudes of society; and
 Macro-economic or sector policy framework.
As required by the TOR for the DPMC contract, the indicators shown in Appendix 3 of the TOR shall be used as
basis for the selection of the indicators for the PMS. One indicator shown in Appendix 3 of the TOR is described
as “Freight charges and passenger bus fares on the project roads reduced by the same extent as the reduction in
vehicle operating cost one year after completion”. This is not regarded as relevant as freight charges and bus
fares are more affected by the price of fuel than condition of road and it will be impossible to co-relate the
relationship between the improved condition of the road and change of freight charges and bus fares. Bus fares
will change notwithstanding what happens to the condition of the roads. This indicator is not proposed to be

TABLE OF CONTENTS
included. Another indicator included in Appendix 3 of the TOR was described as “Established outsourcing of road
construction and road maintenance to contractors and of engineering services to consulting firms”. NESRIP has
no component that attempts to address this issue and as such any changes to the level of outsourcing could not
be attributed to the Project. This indicator is also not included in the system..
Besides the indicators shown in Appendix 3 of the TOR, it is important to include at least one social and one
environmental impact type indicator. These aspects of project implementation are important. The Government
and ADB have agreed to implement the project under the guidance of a social and environmental framework.
This needs to be monitored.
The final list of indicators selected for inclusion in PMS is shown in Table 3.1. The PMS in hand is for Tranche-2
roads only and is proposed to be Project road specific in the State concerned.
Table 3. 1: Indicators Selected for NESRIP

Element Indicator
A. Output 1. Approximately 307 km of state roads (state highways and district roads) under
Tranche-2 reconstructed or rehabilitated by end of Year 5
2. Procedures and computer systems are established within PWD PIUs by end of
Year 5 for project management purposes
3. Staff training and capacity building of PWD PIUs in all essential road management
functions by end of Year 5
4. Road safety program for Project roads with coordinated engineering, enforcement
and education components in place by end of Year 5
5. Sustained funding for road operations and maintenance established for Project
Roads and in place by end of Year 5
6. Compliance with GoI and ADB’s relevant policies and guideline on Resettlement &
Rehabilitation issues by end of Year 5
7. Compliance with GoI and ADB’s relevant policies and guideline on environmental
management by end of Year 5
B. Outcome 1. Number of district headquarters connected by two-lane national highways and
improved state roads increased by end of Year 5
2. Actual growth rates of traffic on the project and connector roads surpasses those
assumed growth rates (average annual growth are to be at least 9%) by end of
Year 5
3. Frequency of passenger bus services on the project roads to double one year after
completion
4. Reduced vehicle operating cost on the project roads by 30% for 2 and 3 axle
trucks, and by 20% for passenger buses by end of Year 5
5. The project roads maintained with IRI below 6 by end of Year 10
C. Impact 1. Increase in per capita state domestic product by 35% by end of Year 10
2. Percent of households below poverty line decreased by 20% by end of Year 10
3.4 Indicator Targets

Indicators are a measurable output, outcome or impact of the Project. In order to use these to measure the
success or failure of the Project, targets have to be set for each. These targets are normally time bound so that
desired results can be monitored over the life of the Project and for a period thereafter. The monitoring period is
normally set at an interval of one year.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
It is necessary to define desired targets for these indicators. Target is defined as an explicit statement of desired
results for an indicator at a specific point in time. The timing of the targets depends on the indicator and generally
commences from the start of the project.
Indicators need to be monitored on the target dates. This generally involves the collection of information (data) for
calculation of the value of the indicator. The start date for monitoring of indicators is called the baseline date and
is generally just before the start of the Project, This is because the purpose of the indicator is to monitor the
outputs, outcomes and impacts of the Project viz-a-viz the base line data.
The PMS is normally bound into the Loan agreement. Although the loan agreement is yet to be finalised, it is
assumed that indicators will be monitored annually over the life of the Project up to a point one year after project
completion for most indicators with monitoring for other indicators extending up to 5 years past Project
completion. The 5 years is so because of the extended maintenance period for this project and some indicators
relate to the effectiveness of maintenance. The start date of the Project is not known precisely. As such the target
dates will not be calendar dates but simply periods i.e. Year 1, Year 2 etc. It is assumed that the Project will be of
5 years duration (NESRIP as a whole). Most indicators will be monitored for a period of about 6 years. Year 0
represents the date of Project loan effectiveness. End of Year 1 represents a point in time one year after loan
effectiveness.
The reason for selecting the targets for each indicator is discussed in more detail in Section 4 of this report. The
method of collection of indicator data and calculation of the indicator values are also described therein.
Table 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 provide a summary of the indicators and time bound targets for each indicator for Tranche-
1 and Tranche-2 roads put together as phase 1 of the loan, which is under appraisal.

Table 3. 2: Key Performance Indicators for the North Eastern State Roads Investment Program (Outputs)
Project Monitoring Indicators Baseline End Year 1 End Year 2 End Year 3 End Year 4 End Year 5 End Year 6
Objectives (Start of Project (Project (Project
Completion) Completion + 1 Yr)
road) Year 0
1. Approximately 522 km of state roads (state

highways and district roads) reconstructed or
0% 0% 10% 30% 60% 100% 100%
rehabilitated by end of Year 5 under Tranche 1 &
Tranche 2. (% complete)
2. Percentage Increase in procedures and computer
systems established within PWDs PIUs by end of
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 100%
Year 5 for planning and project management
purposes
A. Outputs 3. Staff training and capacity building in all essential
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 100%
road management functions by end of Year 5
4. Road safety program with coordinated
engineering, enforcement and education
0 10 10 10 10 10
components for Project roads in place by end of
Year 5
5. Sustained funding for road operations and
maintenance established for Project Roads and in 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
place by end of Year 5
6. Compliance with GoI and ADB’s relevant policies
and guideline with respect to land acquisition (R&R 0% 33% 66% 100% 100% 100% 100%
issues) on Project roads by end Year 5
7. Compliance with GoI and ADB’s relevant policies
and guideline with respect to environmental 0% 25% 45% 65% 85% 100% 100%
management on Project roads by end Year 5

Table 3.3 Key Performance Indicators for the North Eastern State Roads Investment Program (Outcomes)
Monitoring Indicators Baseline End Year 6 End Year 10
End Year 5
Project (Start of Project (Project (Project
End Year 1 End Year 2 End Year 3 End Year 4 (Project
Objectives Road) Year 0) Completion + 1 Completion + 5
Completion)
Yr) Yr)
1. Number of district headquarters in
Project corridor connected by two-lane
national highways and improved state 0% 0% 20% 60% 80% 100% 100% Not measured
roads increased to 100% by end of Year
5
2. Actual growth rates of traffic on the
project and connector roads surpasses
9% 6% 7%
the assumed growth rates (average 5% 8% 9% Not measured
(Assumed)
annual growth are to be at least 9%) by
end of Year 5
3. Growth of passenger bus services on
the project roads to increase by 100% by 9%
B. Outcomes 5% 6% 7% 8% 9% 11% 18%
end of Year 10 (5 year after project (Assumed)
completion)
4a. Reduced vehicle operating cost by
20% for passenger buses by end of Year 100% 98% 96% 88% 80% 80% Not measured
5 (Project Completion)
4b. Reduced vehicle operating cost on the
project roads by 30% for 2 and 3 axle
100% 98% 90% 80% 75% 70%
trucks by end of Year 5 (Project
Completion)
5. The project roads length maintained
with IRI below 6 from Project Completion 0% 0% 10% 40% 80% 100% 100% 100%
till end of Year 10

Table 3.4 Key Performance Indicators for the North Eastern State Roads Investment Program (Impacts)
Monitoring Indicators Baseline End Year End Year End Year End Year 4 End Year 5 End Year 6 End Year 8 End Year 10
(Start of the 1 2 3 (Project (Project (Project (Project
Project Objectives Project Road Completion) Completion + Completion + 3 Completion + 5
Year 0 1 Yr) Yr) Yr)
1. Increase in per capita state

domestic product by 35% by end of 100% 102% 105% 108% 110% 114% 117% 125% 135%
Year 10
C. Impacts
2. Percent of households below
poverty line decreased by 20% by 100% 98% 96% 94% 92% 90% 88% 84% 80%
end of Year 10

TABLE OF CONTENTS
4.0 SPECIFIC DETAILS OF PERFORMANCE INDICATORS
4.1 General
For any Project to perform and deliver goods expected from it, in physical terms, as well as meeting aspirations
of the end users, including technical, social, environmental and economic features it is essential that the client
has identified the tools that are used to monitor the above requirements. A typical PMS shall use indicators as
the method to measure the Performance of the Project. These indicators are measured throughout the Project
life cycle, including the Project execution period. These indicators have been discussed in the previous chapter.
This chapter covers the specific details of the Performance indicators relevant to Tranche-2 road in the State of
Manipur.
4.2 Output Elements

4.2.1 Indicator A-1
Reconstruction or Rehabilitation of 55 km of road section in the State of Mizoram under Tranche-2.
Description of Indicator:
Road section Serchhip to Buarpui, an MDR starting from Serchhip to Sialsuk junction on State Highway (Aizawl
– Lunglei) and Thenzawal to Buarpui, with a total length of 55 km is proposed under Tranche-2 in the State of
Mizoram under the loan currently envisaged.
This indicator consists of measuring the percentage (%) of project road that have been reconstructed or
rehabilitated till the monitoring period. Partly completed roads are not generally usable and as such cannot be
considered in any way in these calculations.
Method of Calculation:
The formula to be used for calculation of the indicator value is shown below:
( Length of roads reconstructed / rehabilitated / constructed upto monitoring period

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Total length of Project road ) x 100%
Data Collection Methodology:
The data to be collected includes:
 length of Project road; and

 length of road constructed reconstructed / rehabilitated to date.
For a road, or part of a road, to be classed as a constructed road, a taking over certificate must have been issued
by the Engineer. This data shall be obtained from the construction supervision consultant (CSC) at time of PMS
data surveys. The format for the data collection table is shown in Table 4.1.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table 4.1: Spreadsheet for Collection of Data for Indicator A.1
North Eastern State Roads Investment Program Project Performance

Monitoring
Road Code State Tranche Road section Length as Length of
per current roads
Project Plan completed
(km) (km)
From To (A) (B)
MZ02 Mizoram 2 Serchhip Buarpui 55
B Total
Performance Indicator =
( --------------
A Total
) x 100%
Targets:
All projects start slow. This project is not expected to be any different. No package of work (roads) are expected
to be completed within the first year. Thereafter the project would be expected to be completed on a continuous
basis. The targets are shown in Table 4.2
Table 4.2 Tentative Targets for Indicator A-1.
State Road section Road Length Baseline End End End Year 3
Code (km) (Start of Year 1 Year 2
Project
road Year 0
Mizoram Serchhip to Buarpui MZ02 55 0% 15% 45% 100%

TABLE OF CONTENTS
4.2.2 Indicator A-2
Establishment of Procedures & Computer Systems within PIUs
This indicator measures the percentage increase in the number of procedures and computer systems established
within PWD PIUs by end of Year 5 for project management purposes.
This procedure will have two components, consisting of number of procedures introduced that relate to planning
and project management; and number of computer systems introduced for planning and project management
purposes. Surveys will be undertaken for each monitoring period (including baseline period) and the number of
procedures and computer systems counted and aggregated across the Project State.
The Indicators are calculated as follows:
For Procedures
( No of procedures during monitoring period/
No of procedures at baseline ) X100%
For Systems
( No of systems during monitoring period/
No of systems at baseline ) X100%
Data will be sourced from the concerned State PIU using both questionnaire and interview methodologies. A data
collection spreadsheet is shown in Table 4.3
Table 4.3: Indicator A.2 Data Collection Spreadsheet Format

Monitoring (state period)
Period
State Road Code Road Section No.of Procedures in No. of Systems in
Place Place
Mizoram MZ02 Serchhip to Buarpui
Targets:
The target indicators provided in this report are preliminary. The number of existing systems and procedures are
determined during baseline surveys. The baseline report includes a recommendation for additional systems and
procedures and the target figures modified according to these recommendations. It is expected that a reasonable
growth rate in systems and procedures would be 20% per year. The targets are shown in Table 4.4.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table 4.4 : Tentative Targets for Indicator A-2.
State Road Road Project Objective Baseline (Start of End End End End End End
section Code and Description Project road)Year Year Year Year Year Year Year
of Indicator 0 1 2 3 4 5 6(Proj
(Proje ect
ct compl
compl etion
ete) +1
year
Mizora Serchh MZ02 Percentage
m ip to increase in
Buarpu Procedures and Procedure 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 100%
i Computers
Systems within
PWD PIU by end
of Year 5 for
Planning and
Project System 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 100%
Management
purposes
4.2.3 Indicator A-3
Staff Training and Capacity Building for Project PIU Staff
This indicator consists of measuring the percentage (%) of Project staff training occurring in the state PWD PIU
as an indicator of the capacity building in all essential road management functions for the PIU by end of Year 5.
It is assumed that each PWD PIU staff will attend 30 days of training over the life of the Project. This indicator will
be calculated for each measuring period through measurement of the number of days of training courses
attended by PWD Project personnel divided by the number of PWD PIU personnel employed on a full time
permanent staff basis multiplied by 30. The indicator will be calculated using the following formulae:
( No of staff training days attended by PIU staff since start of Project

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No of PWD PIU Technical Personnel x 30
) x 100%
Data will be sourced annually from the Project State PIU using both questionnaire and interview methodologies.
Table 4.5 shows the format to be used for collection of data.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Monitoring Period: (state period)
State Road Section No. Staff Employed No. Staff Days at Cumulative No. Staff
by PIU Training Courses in Days at Training
Last 12 Month Courses Since Year 0
Mizoram Serchhip to Buarpui
Targets:
It is planned that each PIU staff person will be given 30 days training over the life of the Project. This will be
spread evenly over the life of the Project. As such the target after 5 years is 100% of the 30 days with 20% of this
target achieved every year. The targets are shown in Table 4.6
Table 4.6 : Tentative Targets for Indicator A-3.

State Road Road Project Baseline End End End End End End Year
section Code Objective and (Start of Year Year Year Year Year 5 6(Project
Description of Project 1 2 3 4 (Project completio
Indicator road )Year complet n +1 year
0 e)
Mizoram Serchhip to MZ02 Output:
Buarpui Staff training
and capacity
Building in all
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 100%
essential road
management
functions by
end of year 5
4.2.4 Indicator A-4
Establishment of Road Safety Program for Project Road
This indicator consists of measuring the number of road safety measures implemented in state PWD PIU for the
Project Roads by end of Year 5. Measures that could be implemented include implementation of road
construction safety mitigation measures, road safety audit, road safety education program, operation of a
functioning Road Safety Committee and implementation of mitigation measures identified as part of road safety
initiatives.
This indicator will be calculated for each measuring period through measurement of the number of road safety
measures implemented each year by PWD on the Project roads divided by the number of such safety measures
for carrying out work in that year. If a measure is initiated in one year and maintained in subsequent years, the
measure would count for each year it was maintained.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
The types of measures that are eligible for inclusion include:
i. use of barricades and flagging tape to demarcate unsafe areas on Project roads;
ii. use of speed limit signs on Project roads;
iii. use of safety helmets on Project sites;
iv. use of ear protection plugs on Project sites;
v. use of safety vests on site;
vi. use of traffic diversion signs and flagmen to regulate traffic flow
vii. establishment of a safety committee;
viii. operation of safety education programs;
ix. completion of road safety audits; and
x. other measures deemed to improve the safety of workers and public.
The indicator will be calculated using the following formulae:
( )
Cumulative number of road safety measure implemented
each year in the State
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- X 100%
10
Measures at (i) to (vi) are covered under the Civil Works contract as contract Mitigation measures, where as
those from (vii) to (x) are to be ensured by the PWD PIU in tandem with CSC.
Data will be sourced annually from the Project States PIUs and CSCs using both questionnaire and interview
methodologies. Table 4.7 shows the format to be used for collection of data.

Monitoring Period: (State Period)
State Road section Contract Road Safety Education Road Safety Other
Mitigation Audits Programs Committee Mitigation
Measures Measures
(MZ02)
Targets:
It is planned that PWD PIU will implement 10 features each year during the life of the Project execution. As such
the target for each year will be 10 safety features. The tentative targets are shown in Table 4.8.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table 4.8 : Tentative Targets
State Road Road Project Objective Baseline End End End End End Year
section Code and Description (Start of Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 5 (Project
of Indicator Project road ) 4 complete)
Year 0
Mizoram Serchhip MZ02 Road Safety
to Buarpui Programs with
coordinated
engineering
enforcement
and education 0 10 10 10 10 10
component for
Project roads in
place by end of
year 5
4.2.5 Indicator A-5
Sustained Funding for Maintenance of Project Road
This indicator consists of the percentage (%) availability of PWD budgets to sustain the contractor’s maintenance
program for Project roads up to end of Year 5 after completion of Civil Works. All contracts have a 5 year
maintenance period. During this period, the State government will be required to provide funding for the
maintenance. The maintenance component of the contracts is to be borne by the PWDs and not from the loan.
This indicator will be calculated for each measuring period through measurement of the value of PWD budget
allocated to maintenance of the Project roads divided by the estimated funds needed to meet requirements of the
Contractor as per Contract provision
( Amount of maintenance funding provided in year by PWD

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amount required to meet contractor’s maintenance costs
) x 100%
Data will be sourced annually from the Project State PIU using both questionnaire and interview methodologies.
Table 4.9 shows the format to be used for collection of data.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
State Road section Amount Provided by Contractor’s Maintenance
PWD towards Costs for Previous Year
Maintenance of Project
Roads for Previous
Year
Mizoram Serchhip to Buarpui (MZ02)
Targets:
It is planned that state will meet all funding requirements each year for the life of the Project. As such the target
for each year will be 100%. The targets are shown in Table 4.10.
Table 4.10 : Tentative Target for Indicator A-5.

State Road Road Project Baseline Constru End End End End End
section Code Objective and (Start of ction Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10
Description of Project Period.
Indicator road ) Year 0
Year 0 to year
5 till
complet
ion of
Project
Mizoram Serchhip to MZ02 Sustained
Buarpui Funding for
maintenance To be
of Project borne
roads (After by
construction Contra 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
i.e. during ctor as
maintenance part of
period of 5 Project
year)

TABLE OF CONTENTS
4.2.6 Indicator A-6
Compliance with GOI and ADB’s Relevant Policies and Guideline on Land Acquisition involving R&R
issues for Project Roads
This indicator consists of measuring the percentage (%) of compliance with GoI and ADB’s relevant policies and
guidelines on land acquisition and R& R mitigation measures for the Project roads by end of Year 5.
This indicator will be calculated for each measuring period through measurement of the number of properties
where land acquisition has been successfully completed divided by the total number of properties where land
acquisition is required to be undertaken. The method of calculation is shown below.
( number of properties where land acquisition has been successfully completed

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
total number of properties where land acquisition is required to be undertaken
) x 100%
The total number of properties where land acquisition is required will be determined from the Resettlement Plans
prepared by the DMPC. The measuring period will be every 12 months measured from the commencement of the
Project.
The data will be collected during each measuring period for Project PWD. Table 4.11 shows the format to be
used for collection of data.

Monitoring Period: State Period
State Road Section Number of Properties where Total Number of
Land Acquisition Has Been Properties Where Land
Successfully Completed Acquisition is Required to
be Undertaken
Targets:
It is planned that state PWD PIU will fully achieve all land acquisition and R&R mitigation measures requirements
by the end of the third year of the Project. As such the target for each of the first three years from Year 1 will be
33%, 66% and 100%. The targets are shown in Table 4.12.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table 4.12: Tentative Targets for Indicator A-6
State Road Road Project Baseline End Year End Year End Year
Section Code Objective and (Start of 1 2 3
Description of Project road )
Indicator Year 0
Mizoram Serchhip to MZ02 Compliance
Buarpui with GOI &
ADBs relevant
policies and
guidelines on
land 0% 33% 66% 100%
acquisition
involved R&R
issues for
Project road
4.2.7 Indicator A-7
Compliance with GOI and ADB’s Relevant Policies and Guideline on Environmental Management of
Project Roads
This indicator consists of measuring the percentage (%) of compliance with GoI and ADB’s relevant policies and
guidelines on environmental management of Project roads by end of Year 5. The purpose of the indicator is to
ensure that the environmental aspects of the project remain in the mind of the PIU, MDONER and ADB during
execution of the Project.
The environmental management plan is generally a generic document i.e. the management plan is almost the
same from state to state and project to project. Four recommended mitigation practices will be selected from the
plans (ones common to all plans) and these will be monitored over the life of the Project for each package of
work.
The mitigation practices selected will be:
(i) Dust prevention on project road (100% is fully complying to 0% is not complying at all)
(ii) Soil erosion measures implemented on project road(100% is fully complying to 0% is not complying at
all)
(iii) Borrow areas reinstated fully (100% is fully complying to 0% is not complying at all)
(iv) Construction camps incorporated in contract EMP requirements (100% is fully complying to 0% is not
complying at all)

TABLE OF CONTENTS
This indicator will be calculated for each of the measuring period for each Project road by assessing the
success of implementing mitigation measures as described above and aggregating these as shown below.
( )
% dust prevention+% complying soil erosion+% complying borrow area+% complying
construction camp
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4
The state performances will then be added together and averaged for the Project, if there are more than one
Project roads under the scheme.
The measuring period will be every 12 months measured from the commencement of the Project Loan.
The data will be collected during each measuring period from each of the Project State PWDs. Table 4.13 shows
the format to be used for collection of data.

State Road % Complying Dust % % Complying % Complying
Suppression Complying Borrow Area Construction
Soil Erosion Camp
Targets:
It is planned that each state will improve their performance by 20% each year from a base of 25% in Year 1. The
targets are shown in Table 4.14.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table 4.14 Tentative Targets for Indicator A-7
State Road Section Road Project Baseline End End End End End Year
Code Objective and (Start of Year 1 Year 2 Year Year 4 5 (Project
Description of Project road 3 complete
Indicator ) Year 0 )
Mizoram Serchhip to MZ02 Compliance
Buarpui with GOI &
ADBs relevant
policies and
guidelines with
respect to 0% 25% 45% 65% 85% 100%
environmental
management
on Project
roads by the
end of Year 5
4.3 Outcome Elements

4.3.1 Indicator B-1
Increased Connectivity of District Headquarters on Project Road
This indicator consists of measuring the percentage increase in number of district headquarters adjoining to the
Project corridor district headquarters connected by good quality intermediate and two-lane Project roads. The
target over the completion of the Project is 100%.
The number of district headquarters along project road corridor adjoining each other is measured at the time of
baseline survey. At every monitoring period, number of district headquarters adjoining each other in the Project
corridor connected through good quality intermediate and 2-lane project roads is measured. The increased
connectivity is then calculated as under:
( )
No of district headquarters along Project corridor adjoining each other with good quality
access to each other at monitoring period
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- x 100%
No of district headquarters along Project corridor adjoining each other at time of
baseline

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table 4.15: Indicator B.1 Data Collection Spreadsheet Format

State Road section Number of District Number of District
Headquarters adjoining Headquarters adjoining each
each other along Project other along Project Corridor
Corridor with Good Quality Access
Targets:
It is planned that the Project road completion will improve connectivity by 20% each year from a base of 20% in
year 1. Tentative targets are shown in Table 4.16.
Table 4.16 : Tentative Targets for Indicator B-1.

State Road Section Road Project outcome Baseline End End End End End Year
Code and description (Start of Year 1 Year 2 Year Year 5 (Project
of Indicator Project road ) 3 4 complete)
Year 0
Mizoram Serchhip to MZ02 No.of district
Buarpui headquarters
connected by 2-
lane National
Highways and 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
improved State
roads increased
by end of year
5.
4.3.2 Indicator B-2
Increased Growth Rate of Traffic on Project Road
This indicator consists of measuring the percentage (%) of actual growth rates of traffic on the project and
connector roads surpassing those assumed growth rates for the road without the Project (average annual traffic
growth to be at least 9%) by end of Year 5 i.e., till period of construction on existing road under improvement.
The rates of traffic growth could be higher where a new road has been constructed and / or reconstructed.
Traffic Growth rates have been assessed in the PPTA report and further verified during the DPMC studies. A
growth rate of 9% is deemed to be reasonable growth rate for traffic without the Project. This is typical of the
growth across the north east region and is expected to be maintained into the future. Traffic counts will be carried

TABLE OF CONTENTS
out annually on all project roads and the cumulative AADT for the project roads calculated. The traffic growth rate
for the year of survey will be calculated and compared to the deemed rate of 9%.
The Indicator will then be calculated as follows:
( )
AADT at monitoring period - AADT at previous period
----------------------------------------------------------------------
AADT at previous period x 100%
Table 4.17: Indicator B-2 Data Collection Spreadsheet Format

Monitoring State Period
Period:
State Road Section Cumulative AADT Cumulative AADT Difference Percentage
at monitoring period at previous period growth
Mizoram Serchhip to
Buarpui (MZ02)
Targets:
It is assumed that there will be % increase in traffic growth rate over and above the do nothing scenario of 9%
growth rate for each year to the Project. The tentative targets are shown in Table 4.18.
Table 4.18: Tentative Targets for Indicator B-2.
State Road Section Road Project Baseline End End End End End Year End year
Code outcome (Start of Year Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 5 (Project 6 to 10
and Project 1 complete)
description road )
of Indicator Year 0
Mizoram Serchhip to MZ02 Normal
Buarpui growth
rate of
traffic on
the Project
road
corridor 9%
surpasses 9% 9% 9% 9% 9% 9% min. minimu
those m
assumed
growth
rates
(annual
growth
rates)

TABLE OF CONTENTS
4.3.3 Indicator B-3
Increased Frequency of Bus Passenger Traffic on Project Road
This indicator consists of measuring the percentage (%) increase in frequency of passenger bus services on the
project roads.
The number of bus passenger services is measured on each project road as part of the traffic survey both at time
of baseline survey and during the monitoring period surveys. The indicator is then calculated as follows.
( Number of bus passenger services at monitoring period

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of bus passenger services at time of baseline survey
) x 100%

Monitoring Period: State Period:
State Road Section Number of Bus Passenger Services at
monitoring period
Targets:
Normal traffic growth expected in the north east, is about 9% without any investment on the Project roads. With
the construction / reconstruction of the Project roads, this rate is expected to increase to 18% in incremental
steps over the period of 5 years after completion. The tentative targets are shown in Table 4.20.

Baseline Survey Report (Tranche-2 Roads) Road Code :MZ02
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table 4.20 : Tentative Targets for Indicator B-3
State Road Section Road Project outcome and Baseline End End End End End End End End End End
Code description of (Start of Year Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10
Indicator the 1
Project
Road)
Year 0
Mizoram Serchhip to MZ02 Growth of

Buarpui Passenger bus
services on the 9% 9% 9% 9% 9% 9% 10% 12% 14% 16% 18%
Project roads to
increase by 100%
.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
4.3.4 Indicator B-4
Reduction in Vehicle Operating Costs on Project Road
This indicator consists of measuring the percentage (%) of the indicator described as “Reduced vehicle operating
cost (VOC)” on the project roads by 30% for 2 - 3 axle trucks and by 20% for passenger buses by end of Year 5
(after Project Completion)
This indicator demonstrates the magnitude of savings likely to be achieved through implementation of NESRIP.
The flowchart describing method of calculation of the indicator is shown in Figure 4.1.
Figure 4.1: Flowchart for Determining of Percentage Reduction in VOC

TABLE OF CONTENTS
The process involves comparing the VOC for “with Project” and “without Project” scenarios.
The vehicle operating costs for vehicle type, both for trucks & buses, shall be determined as per guidelines
contained in IRC:SP-30 1993.
HDM4 will be used to calculate the VOCs for both cases. The “without-project” and end-of-monitoring-year VOCs
estimated for each vehicle type are multiplied by:
 the effective length of the subproject (kilometres)
 the daily traffic for the vehicle type.

This produces estimates of vehicle operating costs per day by vehicle type. The end of monitoring year VOC is
divided by the without project case to determine the percentage change in VOC per day by vehicle type.
Total daily VOC at end of monitoring year

( ---------------------------------------------------------- ) x 100%
Total daily without-project VOC
These calculations are carried out both for trucks and passenger buses.
The VOC figures for without project are worked out at baseline survey stage i.e. Year 0. No monitoring shall be
possible during construction period, till completion of the Project road, as neither the traffic flow is certain, nor IRI
(roughness measurements) are feasible. The first monitoring period shall be therefore be End Year 5 (Project
completion stage). This monitoring shall be carried out every year till end year 10, both for trucks and buses.
Table 4.21: Indicator B.4 Data Collection Spreadsheet format
Monitoring State Period

Period:
State Road Section Traffic Survey for Each Road Average Road
Roughness over Sections
Trucks Buses
IRI (M/Km)
(MZ02)
Targets:
As the road section after completion undergoes wear and tear (determination), the VOC will increase. It is
targeted that VOC would start rising up by 4% per year for buses and by 6%, per year for trucks. The tentative
targets are shown in Table 4.22.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
State Road Road Description of Baseline End Year 1 to End Year 5 End Year 6 End Year 7 End Year 8 End Year 9 End Year 10
Section Code Indicator (Start of the End Year 4
Project road)
Year 0
Truck Bus Truck Bus Truck Bus Truck Bus Truck Bus Truck Bus Truck Bus Truck Bus
Mizoram Serchhip to MZ02 Reduced Vehicle

Buarpui Operating Costs
by 30% for
Trucks and by
20% for buses
- - - - 30% 20% 24% 16% 18% 12% 12% 8% 6% 4% 0% 0%
over the
monitoring
period of 5 years
after Project
Completion

TABLE OF CONTENTS
4.3.5 Indicator B-5
Maintenance of Acceptable Road Roughness Levels on Project Road
This indicator consists of measuring the percentage (%) of project roads maintained with IRI below 6 by end of
Year 10.
The average IRI is calculated for each project road at time of baseline survey and during each annual monitoring
survey. The length of road with an IRI less than 6 are added across the Project. The length of road with IRI less
than 6 at time of annual monitoring is compared to the total length of Project road and the indicator value
calculated as shown below.
( Length of Project road with an IRI less than 6

----------------------------------------------------------
Total Length of Project road
) x 100%

Monitoring Period:
State Road Section Length of Project Road Length of Project Road
with IRI <6
Targets:
As more and more road is completed, the indicator will increase in value. It is planned for to have an increase of
20% per year for the 5 year life of the Project. There is a 5 year maintenance requirement to be built into each
contract, monitoring, therefore should extend up to Year 10. The targets are shown in Table 3.3.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
State Road Section Road Description of Baseline End End End End End End End End End End
Code Indicator (Start of Year Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10
the 1
Project
Road)
Year 0
Mizoram Serchhip to MZ02 The Project roads

Buarpui maintained with IRI
less than 6 from 0% 0% 10% 25% 65% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Project completion
till end of year 10

TABLE OF CONTENTS
4.4 Impact Elements
4.4.1 Indicator C-1
Increase in Per Capita State Domestic Product
This indicator consists of measuring the percentage (%) increase in per capita state domestic product.
The per capita state domestic product is collected for the state from a reputable source of statistical data at time
of baseline survey and during each annual monitoring survey. Because the Indian Department of Statistics is so
slow in providing its indices (up to 5 years behind), a private source of data supplier should be used. This could
be the Datanet India Pvt. Ltd. using the website http://indiastat.com
For each reporting period, the per capita income is collected from the data source at every monitoring stage. This
is then divided by the previous reporting period’s results and the percentage increase calculated. The indicator is
calculated as shown below.
State’s Per Capita Domestic Product at Monitoring period

( ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ) x 100%
Sates Per Capita Domestic Product at time of baseline survey
Table 4.25: Indicator C.1 Data Collection Spreadsheet Format

State Road Section Per Capita Domestic State Population
Product
(MZ02)
Targets:
This indicator does not just look at the impact of the road but the impact of all government initiatives. An increase
of 35% over 10 years is not regarded as unreasonable. The tentative targets are shown in Table 4.26

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table 4.26: Tentative Targets for Indicator C-1
the 1
Project
Road)
Year 0
Mizoram Serchhip to MZ02 Increase in Per

Buarpui Capita State
domestic Product by 100% 102% 105% 108% 110% 114% 117% 120% 125% 130% 135%
35% by end of year
10

TABLE OF CONTENTS
4.4.2 Indicator C-2
Reduction in Percent of Households Below Poverty Line
This indicator consists of measuring the percentage (%) reduction of families below poverty line by the end of
Year 10 as a result of impact of the Project road.
The percentage (%) of families below poverty line is collected for the Project from a reputable source of statistical
data at time of baseline survey and during each annual monitoring survey. Because the Indian Department of
Statistics is so slow in providing its indices (up to 5 years behind), a private source of data supplier should be
used. This could be the Datanet India Pvt. Ltd. using the website http://indiastat.com
For each reporting period, the percentage (%) of families below poverty line for the Project road area for each
State for Tranche-1 is collected. This is then divided by the previous reporting period’s results and the percentage
increase calculated. The indicator is calculated as shown below.
Percentage % of families below poverty line at time of monitoring period

( ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Percentage (%) of families below poverty line at time of baseline surveys
) x 100%
Table 4.27: Indicator C-2 Data Collection Spreadsheet Format

State Road Section percentage (%) of
families below poverty
line
(MZ02)
Target:
A 20% reduction over the 10 year period commencing from Project commencement is envisaged as being
reasonable. As such this has been targeted over the 10 years. The tentative targets are given in Table 4.28.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table 4.28 : Tentative Targets for Indicator C-2
the 1
Project
Road)
Year 0
Mizoram Serchhip to MZ02 Percentage

Buarpui reduction in families
below poverty line 100% 98% 96% 94% 92% 90% 88% 86% 84% 82% 80%

TABLE OF CONTENTS
5.0 BASELINE SURVEYS
5.1 General
In the forgoing chapter, various performance monitoring Indicators have been discussed. Indicators need to be
monitored on the monitoring dates. This involves the collection of information (data) for calculation of the value
of the indicator. The start date for monitoring of indicators is called the baseline date and is generally just before
the start of the Project. This is because the purpose of the indicators is to monitor the outputs, outcomes and
impacts of the project with reference to their values before the start of the project and subsequently evaluate the
results, at regular intervals and monitor the performance of the Project. The data collection with regard to various
performance indicators at the start of the Project is called the Baseline surveys.
5.2 Baseline Surveys for Tranche-2 Roads
Baseline Survey for the Tranche-1 roads was required to be carried out to collect data necessary to derive
performance indicators in the design and monitoring framework, which have been carried out. Based on the
Baseline surveys the PMS report was refined and finalized, project specific.
Baseline survey is to be carried out prior to the commencement of the Projects to ensure that the full impact of
the Specific Project can be measured. Undertaking the baseline surveys now for the Tranche-2 roads would
prove ineffective as all the specific roads will deteriorate further prior to Project commencement.
This report shall be considered as informative and an aid-memoire to the Surveys to be carried out for Tranche-2
roads.
5.2.2 Baseline cut off date : Start of the Project roads year 0 (2010)
A. Output Elements
 Indicator A-1 Length of construction / reconstruction or __ Km

rehabilitation of roads:
 Indicator A-2 Establishment of Procedures & Computer __ Nr

Systems within PIU:
This data covering across the State PWD PIU shall need to be collected from the
State PWD by holding meeting with them. The data comprises of procedures in
vogue relating to Planning and Project Management and Computer Systems
introduced for above in the State PWD, relevant to the Project.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
 Indicator A-3 Staff training and capacity building for Nr. of staff/
Project PIU Staff: training days
This data shall need to be collected from the concerned State PWD PIU, by holding
meetings, at Year 0.
 Indicator A-4 Establishment of Road Safety Programs : Nr
The data relevant to the safety programs under adoption, at Year 0, covering
following:
- Road construction safety measures;
- Road safety Audits;
- Road Safety Education Program
- Operation of a Functioning Road safety Committee
- Implementation of mitigation measures – identified as part of road safety
initiatives.
Above data shall need to be collected from the concerned State PWD PIU by holding
one to one meetings at Year 0.
 Indicator A-5 Sustained Funding for maintenance of

Project roads:
This data concerns percentage availability of PWD budget to sustain maintenance

program as on Year 0.
It is proposed to collect this data during the meetings with the PWD officers & PIU
Staff
 Indicator A-6 Compliance with GOI & ADB relevant

policies and guidelines on land acquisition
and R&R issues, herein so far adopted for
the project roads in terms of percentage of
compliance.
This data is proposed to be collected during the meetings with concerned PWD PIU
on review of their readiness for project execution at Year 0.
 Indicator A-7 Compliance with GOI & ADB guidelines

and policies on Environmental
Management on Project Roads
This data is not required to be collected at Year 0, but shall be carried out by the
PMC during execution of the Project, at regular intervals hereinafter.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
B. Outcome Elements
 Indicator B-1 Increased connectivity of Distt. HQs on

Project Roads
The data pertains to Distt.HQs connectivity along the Project roads at Year 0 and is
proposed to be collected during meetings with the Project PIU authorities.
 Indicator B-2 Increased growth rate of Traffic on Project

Roads
The baseline data shall need to be collected on actual traffic count prior to one
month of implementation (Year 0).
 Indicator B-3 Increased Frequency of Bus Traffic
Data to be derived from traffic surveys, proposed under Indicator B-2
 Indicator B-4 Reduction in VOC on Project roads for

Trucks and Passenger buses
Data collection involves, besides traffic count survey on project roads, carrying out
roughness survey which is proposed to be undertaken through sub-consultants at
Year 0 and calculation of Vehicles Operating Cost, per day by vehicle type.
 Indicator B-5 Maintenance of Acceptable Road

Roughness levels
Data is based on roughness survey, undertaken through sub-consultants as part of

Indicator and to establish average IRI, km-wise, of existing road at Year 0.
C. Impact Elements
 Indicator C-1 Increase in per capita SDP
The data is proposed to be collected in-house, from State Govt. sources, comprising
of Per Capita State Domestic Product for the concerned State from reliable data
bank at the start of the Project.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
 Indicator C-2 Reduction in percent of households below
poverty line (BPL)
Data proposed to be collected involves :

– percentage of families / households below poverty line.
- State Population as on the date of start of the Project for the concerned
State. This is proposed to be accomplished by putting in in-house inputs.
To sum up, all indicator data, except for Indicators B-1, B-3, B-4 & B-5 are proposed
to be collected in-house. Data relevant to B-4 & B-5 is proposed to be collected
through sub-consultants or as the PMC or CSC may consider it convenient.
5.3 Indicator Values at Baseline Date
Proforma and Spread sheets for collection of Baseline Performance monitoring indicator values are
given in Annexure 5.1.
These are based on data to be collected through meetings with the PWD PIU Team. For traffic figures,
traffic counts shall be conducted for 3 consecutive days and data posted in proformas prescribed in
IRC:SP:19-2001 at selected locations of the Project road, in accordance with the methodology
described in Annexure -5.2
For roughness survey, roughness data shall be collected using roughometer to asses IRI values. The
methodology proposed is at Annexure – 5.3.
Vehicle Operating Costs shall be worked out following guidelines in the IRC:SP:30-2009 “Manual on
Economic Evaluation of Highway Projects in India. The methodology proposed is at Annexure – 5.4.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
6.0 THE TIME TABLE FOR DATA COLLECTION
The timeframe for data collection surveys for the indicators will be yearly commencing from Year 0 i.e. the point of
Project Start.
The TOR for the DPMC contract required the DPMC to undertake collection of data as part of a baseline study.
Loan effectiveness was at least two years away. To collect data then as part of the DPMC activities would not
have provided data at the baseline for the project. The baseline date should be the start date of the project. The
baseline survey should be undertaken at Year 0. The TOR under the present Consultancy Services (ADB TA
7134-IND) too provided for conducting the baseline Surveys for Tranche-1 roads. As such, this data collection
has been undertaken by the consultants as Baseline survey. For further monitoring of the Performance of the
Project, during construction and subsequent to construction for 5 years (i.e. through maintenance period), the
data shall be collected by PMC with the assistance of CSC and the PWD PIU, as part of their early activities.
Similar approach shall be considered for data collection for Tranche-2 roads.
An indicative timetable for data collection is shown below:
Fig. 6.1. Timetable for Implementation of PMS for Tranche-2 roads in Mizoram.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
7.0 STAFFING REQUIREMENTS
The survey teams that undertake the survey work for the PMS will need to be managed. As such, a Senior
Survey Engineer will be required each year for this purpose. It is envisaged that the total amount of time required
will be 1 person month per year on the Project roads.
Once survey data has been collected, the PMS report will need to be produced by a senior monitoring specialist.
It is envisaged that the total amount of time required will be 1 person month per year for the State.
Table 7.1 shows the inputs required on an annual basis. Clerical support staff is also required.
Table 7.1: PMS Management Staffing Schedule
This staff schedule shall be for PMC during the construction Period (Year 0 to Year 5) and for the State PWD
during maintenance period (Year 6 to Year 10).

TABLE OF CONTENTS
8.0 INSTITUTIONAL SET UP
The management of the PMS will be the responsibility of MDONER. The Ministry will delegate this task to the
Project Management Consultant (PMC) who reports to MDONER.
The PMC will prepare the PMS Report annually for MDONER. The PMS report will be distributed annually to the
ADB and Project Directors of the Project (PWD) concerned. Figure 8.1 shows the organisational arrangements
for management and preparation of the PMS.
The contents of the PMS annual report will be discussed at Project co-ordination meetings.
Figure 8.1: Organisation Chart

TABLE OF CONTENTS
9.0 MILESTONE SURVEYS
The type of surveys to be undertaken at time of baseline survey are described in earlier sections of this report.
Baseline surveys should be carried out immediately before the commencement of the Project. The baseline
represents the start of the project. The baseline survey should be undertaken at Year 0. The TOR under the
present Consultancy Services (ADB TA 7134-IND) too provided for conducting the baseline Surveys for Tranche-
1 roads.
For future monitoring of the Project, the time table for collection of data is discussed in Chapter 6 of this report.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
10.0 CONCLUSIONS
10.1 General
The finalization of the report i.e Performance Monitoring System for Tranche-1 roads (Assam, Meghalaya and
Sikkim) has been undertaken, after incorporating inputs in the draft version from various stakeholders to the
Project.
This report, an informative and aid-memoire version for adopting PMS during implementation, has been evolved
for adoption by the Tranche-2 & Tranche-3 roads States. In absence of the consultants, the PMC & CSC, as and
when engaged, shall provide support during baseline surveys and evaluation of the Performance Indicators.
The consultants express their gratitude to the ADB, MDONER and the NESRIP States for their valuable
comments and suggestions on the draft document and the inputs provided by the Tranche-1 States during
meetings with them.

ANNEXURES
ANNEXURE – 5.1
BASELINE PERFORMANCE
MONITORING INDICATOR
ANNEXURE – 5.1
STATE : MIZORAM
Length (km)
Project Road Serchhip – Buarpui (MZ02) 55
OUTPUT ELEMENT
Indicator A-1 Reconstruction / Rehabilitation of Project Road

Monitoring Period As on:
 Total Length of Project road (km) 55
 Length of road constructed / reconstructed / rehabilitated
as on date (km) Nil

TABLE OF CONTENTS
STATE : MIZORAM
Project Road Serchhip – Buarpui (MZ02)
OUTPUT ELEMENT
Establishment of Procedures & Computer Systems within

Indicator A-2 PIUs
Monitoring Period As on :
No.of Procedures in place
No.of Systems in place
Note: (1) Procedures are the methodology or the operations relating to planning and Project
Management that the PWD PIU have introduced or adopted in their project management
system.
(2) Systems means the computers that the PIU have set up for Project implementation for
Tranche-2 road

TABLE OF CONTENTS
STATE : MIZORAM
OUTPUT ELEMENT
Indicator A-3 Staff Training and Capacity Building

 No.of Staff Employed in PIUs
 No.of Staff days at Training courses during the past 12
months

TABLE OF CONTENTS
STATE : MIZORAM
OUTPUT ELEMENT
Establishment of Road Safety Programs for the Project

Indicator A-4 Roads
 Use of barricades and flagging tape to demarcate unsafe
areas / stretches
 Use of speed signs on Project roads
 Use of Safety helmets on Project roads
 Use of ear protection on Project roads
 Use of safety vests on site
 Establishment of Safety committees
 Operation of Safety Program
 Completion of road safety audit
 Any other measures deemed to improve the safety of
works and public

TABLE OF CONTENTS
STATE : MIZORAM
OUTPUT ELEMENT
Indicator A-5 Sustained funding for maintenance of Project Roads

 Amount provided by PWD towards maintenance of Project
road during the year 2009-10

TABLE OF CONTENTS
STATE : MIZORAM
OUTPUT ELEMENT
Compliance with GOI & ADBs Relevant Policies &

Indicator A-6 Guidelines on Land Acquisition for Project Roads
 Total No.of Properties / structures required to be acquired
 Total No.of Km where land is required to be acquired
 Total No.of Properties / structures acquired till 31.3.2010
 Total No.of Km where land has been acquired till
31.03.2010

TABLE OF CONTENTS
STATE : MIZORAM
OUTPUT ELEMENT
Indicator A-7 Compliance with GOI & ADBs Relevant Policies &
Guidelines on Environment Management Plan for Project
Roads
 Dust Prevention on Project road
 Soil Erosion measures implemented on Project road
 Borrow Areas reinstated fully
 Construction camps incorporated contract EMP
requirements

TABLE OF CONTENTS
STATE : MIZORAM
OUTCOME ELEMENT
Increased Connectivity of District Headquarters on Project

Indicator B-1 Roads
 No.of District Headquarters along Project Corridors
 No.of District Headquarter along Project Corridor connected
with each other with good quality access as on date

TABLE OF CONTENTS
STATE : MIZORAM
OUTCOME ELEMENT
Indicator B-2 Increased Growth Rate of Traffic on Project Roads

 Cumulative AADT at Monitoring Period – As on __________

 Cumulative AADT at Previous Year – As on ____________
 Percentage Difference

TABLE OF CONTENTS
STATE : MIZORAM
OUTCOME ELEMENT
Indicator B-3 Increased Frequency of Bus Traffic on Project Roads

Monitoring Period As on _______
 No.of Passenger Bus Services on Project road – As on
_______________
 No.of Passenger Bus Services on Project road – As on

__________________
 Percentage Difference over the year

TABLE OF CONTENTS
STATE : MIZORAM
OUTCOME ELEMENT
Indicator B-4 Reduction in vehicle operating costs on Project Roads

Average daily traffic intensity in
No.of Vehicles VOC per day Rs. In lakhs
Trucks
Trucks(2/3 Average (2/3 Trucks(2/
Buses Axle) roughnes Buses Axle) Buses 3 Axle)
Project road Standard Mini s IRI Standar Mini
section Bus Bus Truck LCV m/km d Bus Bus Truck LCV
Serchhip –
Buarpui (MZ02)

TABLE OF CONTENTS
STATE : MIZORAM
OUTCOME ELEMENT
Indicator B-5 Maintenance of Acceptable road Roughness level

Monitoring Period
Length of Project road with
Length of Project road (km) IRI<6

TABLE OF CONTENTS
STATE : MIZORAM
IMPACT ELEMENT
Indicator C-1 Increase in Per Capita State Domestic Product

Monitoring Period As on:
 Per Capita Domestic Product ( for the State)
 State Population

TABLE OF CONTENTS
STATE : MIZORAM
IMPACT ELEMENT
Indicator C-2 Reduction in Percent of Households Below Poverty Line

Monitoring Period As on
 No.of Families in the State Below Poverty Line
 Total No.of Families in the State or State Population

ANNEXURE – 5.2
TRAFFIC SURVEY REPORT

TABLE OF CONTENTS
ANNEXURE – 5.2
TRAFFIC SURVEY
1. General
Outcome element indicators, as a result of improvement / construction and reconstruction of a Project road
are traffic impact related and the increased connectivity provided by the improved road corridors. The
increased growth of traffic on the project roads, specifically the passenger traffic are indicators of increased
social and economic well being of the population in the Project road area in particular, and State as a whole,
in general. With the above in view, traffic count surveys on Project road needs to be conducted as part of
baseline survey, at the start of the Project. The data derived from Traffic Survey is an essential input to the
PMS Indicators, namely;
Outcomes : B-2 : Growth rate of traffic

B-3 : Growth of Passenger Bus services
B-4 : Reduced Vehicle Operating Costs
For the Project roadMZ02, in Mizoram, following methodology is proposed to be adopted for conducting the
traffic survey, as a baseline survey component.
2. Classified Traffic Volume Count

2.1 There is only one Tranche-2 road in the State of Mizoram under NESRIP i.e, Serchhip to Buarpui.
The Project road description is given in Chapter -2 of this Report. The Project road comprises of two
sections, as described fully in the DPR-Vol.I.
Sl. Section Chainage Length Road Remarks

No (km) Classification
1 Serchhip to 0.0 to 15.135 15.135 MDR Hilly Terrain

Sialsuk
2 Thenzawl to 0.000 to 39.800 39.800 MDR Hilly Terrain

Buarpui
The Project road is passing through mainly rural hilly terrain and lies in Serchhip, Aizawl and Lungeli
districts connecting NH & SH enroute.
2.2 Traffic count is the basic traffic study required for any highway project. The system in vogue in the
country for traffic census is to carry out 7 day traffic count once or twice a year. The data from these
surveys can be decisively made use of if the past census data is available in the Project corridor area.
However, such annual traffic data is not available for the Project road. Therefore, it shall be

TABLE OF CONTENTS
necessary to carry out fresh traffic count survey, at the threshold of the project, as part of baseline
survey, data. Considering the prevailing low intensity of traffic movement in hilly area, where the
traffic movement is limited to only day time travel, there being practically no movement on roads
between dusk to dawn, it would be desirable to undertake traffic count during day break to sunset for
12 hours for 3 days only. However, to account for such uncounted traffic during night hours, a
reasonable increment of 5% is added to the traffic count to arrive at fair traffic census figures.
The Project road as described above comprises of sections developed in stages connecting villages
and town settlements in the area. The traffic count stations are proposed for the traffic survey, to
capture traffic intensity on such distinct sections, as under:
(i) Serchhip to Sialsuk: This section connects NH54 near Serchhip with Aizawl—Lunglei
State Highway at Sialsuk. The length is about 15 km. It is proposed to have traffic count in
Km 1 of this section (near Serchhip).
(ii) Thenzawl to Buarpui: This section of the Project road takes off from Aizawl—Lunglei State
Highway at Thenzawl and connects Buarpui. It is proposed to have the count in Km 1 of this
section (near Thenzawl).
2.3 The traffic count survey shall be conducted engaging enumerators and data posted in proformas
prescribed in IRC :SP:19-2001. Only motorized vehicles shall be counted. The three day traffic count
gives the Average Daily Traffic (ADT). This value is converted into Annual Average Daily Traffic
(AADT), applying seasonal considerations and using conversion factors applicable to traffic count in
the region.

TRAFFIC VOLUME COUNT Appendix - 5.1
Name of Road
Section
Date of Survey
Location: L-1 Direction: To

PCU Values 1.0 1.0 0.5 1.5 3.0 1.5 3.0 3.0 4.5 1.5 4.5 0.5 1.5 3.0 6.0
Public Transport
Passenger Vehicles Vehicles Commercial Vehicles Agri. Tractors Slow Moving Veh. TOTAL
Auto Tractor
Rickshaw Two Mini Standard 2-Axle 3-Axle with Cycle Hand Animal
Time Car (Passenger) Wheeler Bus Bus LCV Truck Truck MAV Tractor trailer Cycle Rickshaw drawn Drawn Vehicles PCUs
Total
SUMMARY OF Appendix - 5.1
TRAFFIC VOLUME COUNT

Name of Road
Section
Passenger Vehicles Public Transport Vehicles Commercial Vehicles Agri. Tractors Slow Moving Veh. Total
Tracto Cycle
Auto Rickshaw Mini 2-Axle 3-Axle r with Ricksha Animal
Day Date Car (Passenger) Two Wheeler Bus Govt. Bus Pvt. Bus LCV Truck Truck MAV Tractor trailer Cycle w Hand drawn Drawn Vehicles PCUs
Day 1: 0 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Day 2: 0 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Day 3: 0 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Day 4: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Day 5: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Day 6: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Day 7: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
ADT - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Tracto Cycle
Day 1: 0 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Day 2: 0 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Day 3: 0 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Day 4: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Day 5: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Day 6: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Day 7: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
ADT - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Location: L-1 Direction: Both

Tracto Cycle
Day 1: 0 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Day 2: 0 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Day 3: 0 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Day 4: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Day 5: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Day 6: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Day 7: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Total for 3 days - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Total AADT for 3 days - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Daily Average ADT - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Daily Average AADT - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
SCF 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.00 1.00 1.00
% of Modes #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! -
1.000 1.000 0.500 1.500 3.000 3.000 1.500 3.000 3.000 4.500 1.500 4.500 0.500 1.500 3.000
ANNEXURE – 5.3
ROUGHNESS SURVEY REPORT

TABLE OF CONTENTS
ANNEXURE – 5.3
ROUGHNESS SURVEY
1. General
Surface unevenness of a road pavement is an indicator which characterizes the riding quality of the road
surface. Surface unevenness commonly referred to as roughness indication of the road surface is influenced
by a number of road surface and pavement condition parameters, such as, deflection, pot holes, ruts, cracks,
failure of road pavement, corrugations, bumps, depressions etc. Surface evenness of highway pavements
refers to the regularity of surface finish, both in longitudinal and transverse directions. Almost in all major
highway works executed, control of surface evenness has been introduced as a mandatory requirement.
Surface evenness affects vehicle speed, comfort, vehicle operating cost and safety and therefore this aspect
is given careful consideration during initial construction and subsequent maintenance operations. Whereas
the surface evenness signifies the quality of construction and maintenance operations, the road roughness
level of pavement enables evaluation of the condition of the surface to establish further maintenance
intervention levels.
2. Pavement Roughness
The roughness of pavement surface is commonly designated as Unevenness Index Value and is expressed
as International Roughness Index (IRI in m/km).
For the purpose of assessing the roughness index of the Project road, the task can be outsourced or can be
carried out inhouse if the equipment is available with the PIU. The roughness survey is carried out in
accordance with IRC:SP:16-2004 Guidelines for Surface Evenness of Highways Pavements.
3. Determination of Pavement Roughness by Bump Integrator
Bump Integrator gives speedily a quantitative integrated evaluation of surface irregularities on a digital
counter. It comprises of a trailer of single wheel with a pneumatic tyre mounted on a chassis over which an
integrating device is fitted. A vehicle, usually a jeep or a truck, tows the machine. A standard pneumatic tyre
wheel inflated to a tyre pressure of 2.1 Kg/sqcm is mounted within the trailer chassis, with a single leaf spring
on either side of the wheel; supporting the chassis. Two dashpots provide viscous damping between chassis
and axle. The frame is provided with a counter-weight at the counter at the front to make the device practically
free from the vertical motion of the vehicle. The machine has a panel board fitted with six digit digital counters
for counting the length in meter and Bumps in cm with four digit length setting arrangement (Pre Set length)
for determining the unevenness index value at a pre set length from 50 Meter to 9.999 KM. or direct reading
at a reference point say KM stone or some other reference point by pressing reference point push button. The
operating speed of the machine is 32±1 km/hr.
Its wheel runs on the pavement surface and the vertical reciprocating motion of the axle is converted into
unidirectional rotary motion by the integration unit. The accumulation of this unidirectional motion is recorded
by operating Sensor inserted in the circuit of six-digit digital counter, once for every 1 cm of accumulated
unevenness.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Length of Path is indicated directly on another Six Digit Digital counter through Micro-Switch actuated by the
cam fitted on the hub of the wheel with least count of 1 Meter. The two sets of counter readings give the
unevenness index (UI) value in terms of cm/km. Unevenness/roughness Index is defined as the ratio of the
cumulative vertical displacement to the distance traveled and is expressed in mm/Km. UI may be converted
into IRI ( International Roughness Index) using the following equation as recommended by World Bank.
UI (mm/Km) = 630( IRI)1.12
On the basis of IRI in m/Km surface condition of road shall be classified as follows.
Riding Roughness
Quality IRI (m/km)
Very Good < 4.5

Good 4.5 – 5.5
Fair 5.5-6.7
Poor 6.7-8.5
Very Poor > 8.5
The readings shall be taken at each 200m interval by the Bump Integrator and the results shall be
summarized in Tabular form.

Appendix - 5.2
PAVEMENT ROUGHNESS
Direction1 Direction 2
Mean Value
Mean Value
Chainage in Km
Bump Wheel Road condition Bump Wheel Road condition Roughness
Sl. Reading Revolution (Type of Surface Reading Revolution UI Riding
(Type of Surface IRI
No. UI cm/km A cm/km Quality
Thickness, Thickness,
B W B W B ( A+B)/2 ( A+B)/2
Drainage, etc) Drainage, etc)
W R R R cm/km mm/km M / Km
ANNEXURE – 5.4
VEHICLE OPERATING COSTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS
ANNEXURE – 5.4
VEHICLE OPERATING COSTS

1. General
One of the outcome indicators of the Project Performance Evaluation and Monitoring System is the
reduced vehicle operating costs (VOC). Reduced vehicle operating cost is a direct benefit to the road
users from the Project improvement.
This benefit can be easily measured, following guidelines in the IRC:SP:30-2009 “Manual on
Economic Evaluation of Highway Projects in India”.
Vehicle Operating Costs (VOC), is one of the three components of Road Users Cost., the other two
being Time Cost and Accident Cost. Following features affect the Road Users Costs:
(i) Roadway feature:
(a) Pavement width
(b) Pavement surface type and its riding quality as measured by its roughness
(c) Vertical profile
(d) Horizontal geometry
(e) No.of junctions per km.
(ii) Vehicle Features
(a) Type
(b) Age
(c) Make
(d) Engine Horsepower
(e) Power – Weight ratio
(iii) Traffic Features
(a) Traffic Volume
(b) Traffic Composition
(c) Speed
(d) Congestion
2. Computation of Vehicle Operating Costs

The data required for generating the Vehicle Operating Costs (VOC) can be broadly divided
into two parts:
(a) Pavement and traffic related data
(b) Cost related data
2.1 Pavement and Traffic Related Data

This includes:
(i) Total Volume in PCUs per day.
(ii) Volume of Trucks, LCVs, Mini Buses, Standard Buses (in PCU) per day.
(iii) Pavement surface type and its riding quality, as measured by roughness (RG)-mm/km- with
either British Towed Fifth Wheel Bump Integrator (BI)/International Roughness Index (IRI)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(iv) Service Quality - Bituminous Concrete/ Surface Dressing/ Premix Bituminous Carpet/ WBM/
Cement Concrete
(v) Average Vertical Profile:
(a) Rise/Fall (m/km)

(b) Rise in m/km
(c) Fall in m/km
(vi) Terrain: Plain/ Rolling / Hilly
(vii) Road Width(in meters) -Single Lane/Intermediate Lane/Two-Lane
(ix) Capacity in PCU/hr
2.2 Pavement and Traffic Related Data
(i) Fuel Cost exclusive of taxes in Rupees per ltr
(ii) Cost of Std. Bus exclusive of taxes in Rupees
(iii) Cost of Truck exclusive of taxes in Rupees
(iv) Cost of LCV exclusive of taxes in Rupees
(v) Cost of Mini Bus exclusive of taxes in Rupees
(vi) Tyre Cost of Std. Bus exclusive of taxes in Rupees
(vii) Tyre Cost of Truck exclusive of taxes in Rupees
(viii) Tyre Cost of LCV exclusive of taxes in Rupees
(ix) Tyre Cost of Mini Bus exclusive of taxes in Rupees
(x) Engine Oil Cost exclusive of taxes in Rupees
(xi) Other Oil Cost exclusive of taxes in Rupees
(xii) Grease Cost exclusive of taxes in Rupees
(xiii) Wholesale Price Index (WPI) of the year of computation

-Source: http://eaindustry.nic.in/
Example: If the Fuel Cost exclusive of taxes in March 2009 prices was 18.55 Rupees per ltr, the
current Fuel Cost in June 2009 is worked out by multiplying (523.7/452.2), where 523.7 is WPI of
fuel in June 2010 and 452.2 is WPI of fuel in March 2009.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
3. Methodology
The methodology for computation of VOC is detailed in IRC:SP:30 wherein various equations to
arrive at VOC, vehicle-wise are given. For the report in hand, VOCs are required to be computed for
(i) Trucks
(ii) LCV (Light Commercial Vehicles)
(iii) Standard Bus
3.1 Computation of VOC for Trucks (HCV)
(a) Distance Related Costs (DRC) consists of fuel consumption, spare parts cost, maintenance, labour, tyre
cost, engine oil, other oil and grease. These all costs are measured in Rs per km.
i. Fuel Consumption:
((44.08+(3904.64/Speed)+(0.0207*Speed*Speed)+(0.0012*Roughness))+(3.3281* Rise/ Fall)-
(1.7769* Rise/ Fall)))*(Fuel Cost exclusive of taxes /1000)
Speed: (50.11-(0.4468*Rise/Fall)-(0.00089*(Roughness-2000)))
ii. Spare Parts Cost(excluding taxes): EXP(-10.3677+0.0001413* Roughness +3.493/Road Width)*

Cost of Truck exclusive of taxes /100
iii. Maintenance Labour: 0.3692*Spare Parts Costs exclusive of taxes
iv. Tyre Cost: (No. of tyres/(24662+4205* Road Width -413.6* Rise/ Fall -1.142* Roughness))*Tyre
Cost exclusive of taxes in Rupees/1000 km
v. Engine Oil: (1.73+(0.042* Rise/ Fall)+(0.0003* Roughness /Width))*( Engine Oil Cost exclusive of
taxes in Rupees/1000 km)
vi. Other Oil: ((5.1037+0.0002646*Roughness)*Engine Oil Cost exclusive of taxes in Rupees/10000

Km)
vii. Grease: (0.9153+0.707* Rise/ Fall +0.000627* Roughness)*(Grease Cost exclusive of taxes in
Rupees/ 10000 km)
The total of 1 to 7 provides the distance related costs, in Rs. / Km.
(b) The above calculations are based on uncongested free flow conditions on an intermediate lane. As traffic
volume on a road increases, the vehicles have to overtake, cross, accelerate and decelerate. These
affect in drop in speed and increase in fuel consumption along with wear and tear of vehicles. The effect
of congestion on VOC is to be considered separately with a factor, which is called Distance Related
Congestion Factor (DRCF).
DRCF: (1.104+0.755*Vehicle Capacity Ratio)*0.8

Vehicle Capacity Ratio (in PCU per Day): Total Volume/Capacity
The Distance Related Congestion Factor (DRCF) is to be multiplied with Distance Related Costs to get
the Distance Related Costs in congested conditions.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
(c) Time Related Costs
The time related costs comprises of fixed cost and depreciation cost.
Fixed Costs: 641.86/Utilization Per Day

Utilization Per Day: (68.12+5.1637* Speed)
Depreciation Costs: 107.53/(68.12+5.1637* (50.11-(0.4468*Rise/Fall)-(0.00089*(Roughness-2000)))

The total thus provides the time related costs in Rs. / Km.
(d) Due to congestion factor already mentioned in (b) above, the time related costs has to be multiplied with
the Time Related Congestion Factor (TRCF).
TRCF: (52.35/(52.35-(0.0186*Volume)))*0.8
The TRCF has to be in the range of 1(minimum) to 2(maximum).
Thus, we get the Time related Cost by multiplying TRCF times the TRC/Km.
3.2 Computation of VOC for Light Commercial Vehicles (LCV)
(a) Distance Related Costs (DRC) consists of fuel consumption, spare parts cost, maintenance
labour, tyre cost, engine oil, other oil and Grease. These all costs are measured in Rs per km.
((21.28+(1615.327/Speed)+(0.0245*Speed*Speed)+(0.001524*Roughness))+(5.377* Rise/
Fall)-(0.8268* Fall)))*(Fuel Cost exclusive of taxes/1000)
Speed: (53.7-(0.4788* Rise/Fall)-(0.00095*(Roughness -2000)))
ii. Spare Parts Cost(excluding taxes): EXP(-10.9278+0.000141* Roughness +3.493/Road

Width)* Cost of Truck exclusive of taxes /100
iv. Tyre Cost: (No. of tyres/(22382+3817* Road Width -375.3* Rise/ Fall -1.037*
Roughness))*Tyre Cost exclusive of taxes in Rupees/1000 km
v. Engine Oil: (1.0635+(0.0257* Rise/ Fall)+(0.000171*Roughness/Road Width))*( Engine Oil

Cost exclusive of taxes in Rupees/1000 km)
vi. Other Oil: ((2.0415+0.0001058* Roughness)*Engine Oil Cost exclusive of taxes in

Rupees/10000 Km)
vii. Grease: (0.3661+0.0283* Rise/ Fall+0.000251*Roughness)*(Grease Cost exclusive of taxes

in Rupees/ 10000 km)

TABLE OF CONTENTS
(b) The above calculations are based on uncongested free flow conditions on an intermediate lane.
As traffic volume on a road increases, the vehicles have to overtake, cross, accelerate and
decelerate. These affect in drop in speed and increase in fuel consumption along with wear and
tear of vehicles. The effect of congestion on VOC is to be considered separately with a factor,
which is called Distance Related Congestion Factor (DRCF).

The Distance Related Congestion Factor (DRCF) is to be multiplied with Distance Related Costs
to get the Distance Related Costs in congested conditions.
Utilization Per Day: (28.773+2.181*Speed)
Depreciation Costs: 83.96/ Utilization Per Day
(d) Due to congestion factor already mentioned in (b) above, the time related costs has to be
multiplied with the Time Related Congestion Factor (TRCF).
TRCF: (52.282/(52.282-(0.0195*Volume)))*0.8
Thus, we get the Time related Cost/Km for each LCV by multiplying TRCF with TRC/Km.
3.3 Computation of VOC for Buses
(a) Distance Related Costs (DRC) consists of fuel consumption, spare parts cost,
maintenance labour, tyre cost, engine oil, other oil and Grease. These all costs are
measured in Rs per km.
((32.97+(3904.64/Speed)+(0.0207*Speed*Speed)+(0.0012*Roughness))+(3.3281* Rise/
Fall)-(1.7769* Fall)))*(Fuel Cost exclusive of taxes/1000)
Speed: (52.65-(0.4031* Rise/Fall)-(0.00123*(Roughness -2000)))
ii. Spare Parts Cost(excluding taxes): EXP(-10.44+0.007373* Roughness

+0.0000723*Roughness+1.925/Road Width)*Cost of Truck exclusive of taxes /100
iv. Tyre Cost: (No. of tyres/(38519-389.52* Rise/Fall-1.32*Roughness+983.829*Road width))

*Tyre Cost exclusive of taxes in Rupees/1000 km

TABLE OF CONTENTS
v. Engine Oil: (1.146+(0.00398*Rise/Fall)+(0.0021*Roughness/Road Width))*( Engine Oil
Cost exclusive of taxes in Rupees/1000 km)
vi. Other Oil: ((3.3201+0.002889*D12)+(0.0008217*Roughness)-(0.3295*Road width))

*Engine Oil Cost exclusive of taxes in Rupees/10000 Km)
vii. Grease: (4.992+0.03376* Rise/ Fall +0.3634* Road Width)*(Grease Cost exclusive of
taxes in Rupees/ 10000 km)
(b) The above calculations are based on uncongested free flow conditions on an intermediate
lane. As traffic volume on a road increases, the vehicles have to overtake, cross, accelerate
and decelerate. These affect in drop in speed and increase in fuel consumption along with
wear and tear of vehicles. The effect of congestion on VOC is to be considered separately
with a factor, which is called Distance Related Congestion Factor (DRCF).

The Distance Related Congestion Factor (DRCF) is to be multiplied with Distance Related
Costs to get the Distance Related Costs in congested conditions.
Utilization Per Day: (28.07+15.1476*Speed)
Depreciation Costs: 141.80/ Utilization Per Day
(d) Due to congestion factor already mentioned in (b) above, the time related costs has to be
multiplied with the Time Related Congestion Factor (TRCF).
TRCF: (56.222/(56.222-(0.0130*Volume)))*0.8
Thus, we get the Time related Cost by multiplying TRCF times the TRC/Km.
4. Results
The computation of VOC, vehicle wise, shall be appended.

Nayabazar to Namchi (SK02) Appendix 5.3
Vehicle Operating Costs (VOC)

State
Project Road
Terrain
Length (in Km.)
Traffic Capacity PCU/Day
Peak Traffic Capacity PCU/ Hour(10% of
capacity)
Traffic Volume in PCU per day

Traffic volume in PCU per hour (10% of
daily PCUs)
Roughness(mm/km)
Rise/ Fall (m/km)
Road Width (Meters)
Vehicle Capacity Ratio
Volume of Distance Time Mainten- Utilisation of VOC for the

Traffic volume in Fuel consum- Spare Total distance Total time VOC in Rs
particular Related Speed Related ance labour Tyre cost in Engine oil Other oil in Grease in Lubricants cost vehicles UPD Depreciation road length
Vehicle PCU per hour (10% Speed ption in Rs per parts cost related cost (Rs Fixed cost related cost per km per
Vehicle PCU Congestion Flow Congestion in Rs per Rs per km Rs perkm Rs per km Rs per km in Rs per km in km per cost (19.7 Km.) per
of daily PCUs) km Rs per km per km) (Rs per km) vehicle
per hour Factor Factor km day vehicle
Truck 70
LCV 70
Mini Bus 70
Standard Bus 70
VOC -Sample.xlsx
Appendix 5.3
Input Data
Fco Fuel Cost in Rupees per ltr
NP(ET)Bus Cost of Std. Bus exclusive of taxes
NP(ET)Truck Cost of Truck exclusive of taxes
NP(ET)LCV Cost of LCV exclusive of taxes
NP(ET)Mini Bus Cost of New Mini Bus exclusive of taxes
TC(Buses) Tyre Cost in Rupess per 1000 km
TC(LCV & Mini-bus) Tyre Cost in Rupess per 1000 km
TC(HCV) Tyre Cost in Rupess per 1000 km
EC Engine Oil Cost in Rupees per 1000 km
OL Other Oil Cost in Rupess per 10000 km
GC Grease Cost in Rupess per 10000 km
OTHER ABBREVIATIONS
FC Fuel Consumption in litres per 1000 km
EOL Engine Oil consumption in litres per 1000 km
OL Other Oil Consumption in litres per 10000 km
G Grease Consumption in litres per 10000 km
VOC -Sample.xlsx

MZ02 Performance Monitoring System Rev F - 1 Baseline

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

MZ02 Performance Monitoring System Rev F - 1 Baseline

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

PERFORMANCE MONITORING SYSTEM

ADB Contract Number: COSO 70-125 /COCS/80-91

SMEC Project Number: 5061090/5061110

Report for: Asian Development Bank

SMEC Report Cataloguing No: DPMC 0067

Revision # Date Prepared by Reviewed by Approved for Issue by

Distribution List Date Issued Number of Copies

North Eastern State Roads Investment Program Rev.F0.1 Page i

AADT Annual Average Daily Traffic

Performance Monitoring System Rev F.0.docx Page i

Performance Monitoring System Rev F.0.docx Page i

For these purposes, the DPMC was required to:

Table E.1: Indicators Selected for NESRIP

2. Procedures and computer systems are established within PWD PIUs

4. Road safety program for Project roads with coordinated engineering,

5. Sustained funding for road operations and maintenance established

6. Compliance with GoI and ADB’s relevant policies and guideline on

B. Outcome 1. Number of district headquarters connected by two-lane national

Performance Monitoring System Rev F.0.docx Page i

1.2 ADB TA 4814-IND

(iii) Feasibility study of additional subprojects;

North Eastern State Roads Investment Program Rev.F0.1 Page 1

1.2.1 Project Roads Under TA 4814-IND

Table 1. 1 List of Project Roads - TA 4814-IND

AS37A Bongaigaon (NH31) to North 3 17.0

North Eastern State Roads Investment Program Rev.F0.1 Page 2

1.3 Present TA 7134-IND

North Eastern State Roads Investment Program Rev.F0.1 Page 3

1.4 Performance Monitoring System & Baseline Survey

North Eastern State Roads Investment Program Rev.F0.1 Page 4

Freight charges and passenger bus

The project roads maintained with IRI

Outputs (of the Assumptions

North Eastern State Roads Investment Program Rev.F0.1 Page 5

Road safety program with

Sustained funding for road operations

Established outsourcing of road

For the purpose, the DPMC was required to:

North Eastern State Roads Investment Program Rev.F0.1 Page 6

North Eastern State Roads Investment Program Rev.F0.1 Page 7

Item Indicator Baseline Value Target Value Timing Source

North Eastern State Roads Investment Program Rev.F0.1 Page 8

Item Indicator Baseline Value Target Value Timing Source

North Eastern State Roads Investment Program Rev.F0.1 Page 9

Table 2. 4 List of Tranche- 2 Roads

State No. From To Length (km)

2.2 Tranche-2 Project road in Mizoram

2.2.1 Serchhip to Buarpui (MZ02)

North Eastern State Roads Investment Program Rev.F0.1 Page 10

Total length of the project road is 55.km.

The entire road section,

The existing road sections

North Eastern State Roads Investment Program Rev.F0.1 Page 11

2.3 Improvement Proposal

Following improvement proposals are envisaged on this Project road.

North Eastern State Roads Investment Program Rev.F0.1 Page 12

 It must be precise and unambiguous – specific;

3.2 Project Lifecycle

 inputs being provided into a project;

North Eastern State Roads Investment Program Rev.F0.1 Page 13

3.3 The Deliverable Elements

North Eastern State Roads Investment Program Rev.F0.1 Page 14

Table 3. 1: Indicators Selected for NESRIP