PDG r-2
PDG r-2
PDG r-2
PROGRAMME GUIDELINES
(PMGSY-II)
June 2013
1
CONTENTS
Page No.
Part I - PROGRAMME OBJECTIVES AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES
1. Introduction 1
2. Objectives of PMGSY-II 2
20. Audit 45
21. Miscellaneous 48
22. Convergence 49
2
Part I - PROGRAMME OBJECTIVES AND GUIDING
PRINCIPLES
I. INTRODUCTION
2. Objectives of PMGSY-II.
Under PMGSY-I, out of the targets fixed under new connectivity as well as
upgradation over 70% of the projects have been sanctioned and many of
them have been completed. The Ministry has already cleared projects for
over 74% of eligible habitations and over 51% habitations have been
connected upto March 2013. Similarly, over 78% of the targeted Upgradation
length was cleared; out of it over 65% has been completed upto March
2013. However, the roads, both taken under the PMGSY - I as well as other
3
schemes for rural roads, have not received the desired attention on the
maintenance front. This has led to erosion of assets created under different
programmes and the sustainability of assets created has not been ensured.
The need for maintenance and consolidation of existing rural roads network
has been stressed at various fora, such as XII Finance Commission, XIII
Finance Commission, Working Group on Rural Roads for 12 th Five Year
Plan. In this backdrop, the need for consolidation of existing network was felt
to ensure that it fulfills the primary objective of connectivity along with
mobility to the extent possible for the local community and enable
economical transportation of goods and for services to provide better
livelihood opportunities as a part of poverty reduction strategy. This is now
proposed through a programme called PMGSY-II.
4
hinterland, including availability of white goods, automobiles etc.
3.2 The District Rural Roads Plan would include the entire existing
road network system in the District a n d w o u l d b e u p d a t e d t o i n c l u d e
r o a d s b u i l t u n d e r P M G S Y , R I D F e t c . Whereas the concept of
Through Routes and Link Routes was basically included in Core Network in
PMGSY I, under PMGSY II, the revision of DRRP would encompass
identification of the Through Routes (TRs), Major Rural Links (MRLs) and
Link Routes (LRs). Notably, PMGSY-II would be based upon DRRP, which
being a broader concept than Core Network, is more comprehensive. The
Census 2011 will be used for purposes of population data of the habitations
in the DRRP including the Growth Centres which will determine the
5
candidate DRRP Roads for purposes of upgradation.
3.3 (i) Under PMGSY – II, District Rural Roads Plan is the basis for selection
of roads. Therefore, the existing DRRP prepared for PMGSY–I would be
revised and updated incorporating new constructions and improvements of
the surface type and condition of the roads, in the earlier DRRP as well as
by coverage of roads proposed for New Connectivity under various schemes
as on 1st July 2013.
.
3.3 (ii) The revised and updated DRRP, duly taking into consideration the
census data of 2011, with due identification of Through routes (TRs), Major
Link Routes (MRLs) and Link Routes (LRs); would first be brought on to a
GIS platform. Notably, uniform meta-data standards and colour coding
systems and legends would be adopted throughout the State/UT. While
developing DRRP on GIS platform, as an add-on layer to the GIS, an
inventory of local and marginal materials for road works would also be
created to encourage use of such materials to facilitate cost-effective
construction of cleared rural roads.
3.5 The DRRP (including all Block level Rural Roads Plan i.e. BRRPs)
would be placed before the Intermediate Panchayat for consideration and
approval of the concerned BRRP. It would be simultaneously sent, along
with the list of higher ranking growth centres, all candidate Through
routes/ Major Rural Links to the Members of Parliament (MPs) and
MLAs, for their comments, if any. After approval by the Intermediate
Panchayat, the Plans would be placed before the District Panchayat for its
approval. It will be incumbent on the District Panchayat to ensure that the
suggestions given by the Members of Parliament are given full consideration
within the framework of these Guidelines. Once approved by the District
Panchayat, a copy of the DRRP would be sent to the State Level
Standing Committee (SLSC) and after its approval to the State-level
Rural Roads Development Agency as well as the National Rural Roads
Development Agency. No road work shall be included in the CUCPL unless it
forms part of the approved DRRP.
The Growth Centres are such rural places where comparatively better
7
socio-economic services are available for rural people. The roads
connecting such growth centres would serve a large population (road
users). Since traffic flow is to and fro between a lower ranked growth centre
and a higher ranked growth centre, the roads selected for upgradation shall
trace the path connecting the rural growth centers and terminating in a
Rural Hub.
The candidate roads are to be selected by tracing the road joining growth
points and growth centers leading to higher order growth centers or higher
order roads leading to such growth centers.
The growth points or growth centres or growth poles with increasing scores
are notably only points. As such their scores are point wise scores.
However, since a road is a line to be traced joining such growth points/
centers/ poles, it is imperative to arrive at line score. The line score would
be computed as the cumulative score of the rural settlements directly
connected by the candidate road.
Before taking the PMGSY-II projects it will need to be certified that all MDRs
and Through routes and atleast 50% of Link routes under DRRP, are under
area based “Batch Maintenance” and a commitment by the State to provide
the requisite funds would be an essential requirement to participate in the
programme.
The allocation of fund for PMGSY-II would be within 15-20% of the annual
PMGSY budget of Ministry of Rural Development during the Twelfth plan,
so as to adequately focus on PMGSY-I projects as well.
5. PROPOSALS
10
5.1 In order to manage the rural road network for upgradation and
maintenance planning, all States will (inhouse or outsourced through a
procedure approved by NRRDA) carry out on a continuing basis with a 2-
year cycle, a Pavement Condition Survey of Rural Road Network
(DRRP). Detailed Guidelines on the methodology and analysis will be
issued by the Ministry from time to time. The Survey will yield a Pavement
Condition Index (PCI) on a scale of 1 to 5 (poor to good). Each PIU shall
maintain a PCI Register and the results of the survey will be recorded in the
Register in the following format:
District:
Year of
Amount spent
Code Name of last
Name Population Year of on routine Type of Length Date
no.in Length habitations periodic ADT* PCI
of road served construction maintenance pavement (km) of PCI
DRR Connected renewal
since PR
P (PR)
Block : -------------------------------______________
All up-gradation and maintenance prioritization will be done from this list.
11
5.2 The potential roads for upgradation identified as candidate roads for
PMGSY-II are listed and a Comprehensive Upgradation cum Consolidation
Priority Lists (CUCPL) is to be prepared as mentioned in para 3.6 above
District:
Average Total
Year Average per km population of the
Road Name of Present mainten Habitations
Year of of last PCI
Bloc code in through surface Utility ance served by road
constr period exp. In directly and
k DRRP route / type Value
uction ic last 3 indirectly
MRL years
renew
al
The roads will be ranked by utility value. Annual proposals will be made from this
list in order of ranking, subject to qualifying the PCI and maintenance criteria. The
List may be revised on 31 st March each year based on latest PCI and
maintenance expenditure.
The CUCPL will be got verified on the ground on sample basis through the
STAs and the NQM system before it is processed for further approvals. The STAs
will do 100% verification of the List for consistency check on the basis of the PCI
data furnished by the District and also sample ground checking.
5.3 After the initial CUCPL is prepared and verified, it shall be placed before
the District Panchayat. The Members of Parliament / MLAs shall be given a copy
of the CUCPL and their suggestions and suggestions of lower level Panchayati
Institutions shall be given the fullest consideration by the District Panchayat while
according its approval. The approved CUCPL shall be the basis of all
12
upgradation proposals. Such proposals that cannot be included would be
communicated in writing to Members of Parliament with reasons for non-inclusion
in each case.
5.4 The list of road works to be taken up under the PMGSY-II will be
finalised each year by the District Panchayat from the updated CUCPL in
accordance with the Allocation of Funds meant for PMGSY-II communicated to
the District. The District Panchayat shall finalise the list through a consultative
process involving lower level Panchayati institutions and elected representatives.
It must be ensured that the proposed road works are part of the updated
DRRP.
5.5 The Annual proposals will be based on the CUCPL following the Order of
Priority (subject to PCI and maintenance). However, it is possible that there are
inadvertent errors or omissions, particularly in the selection of Through routes.
Accordingly it is desirable to also associate public representatives while
finalizing the selection of road works in the annual proposals. The proposals of
the Members of Parliament are required to be given full consideration, for this
purpose:
(i) The CUCPL should be sent to each MP with the request that their
proposals on the selection of works out of the CUCPL should be
sent to the District Panchayat. It is suggested that at least 15 clear
days may be given for the purpose.
(ii) In order to ensure that the prioritisation has some reference to the
funding available, the size of proposals expected may also be
indicated to the Members of Parliament while forwarding them the
CUCPL list. District wise allocation may be indicated to enable
choice with the requisite geographical spread. It is expected that
such proposals of Members of Parliament which adhere to the
Order of Priority would be invariably accepted subject to
consideration of equitable allocation of funds, availability of balance
target and need for upgradation .
13
(iii) The proposals received from the Members of Parliament by the
stipulated date would be given full consideration in the District
Panchayat which would record the reason in each case of non-
inclusion. Such proposals that cannot be included would be
communicated in writing to the Members of Parliament would
be communicated in writing with reasons for non-inclusion of
such proposals in each case. It would be preferable if the
communication is issued from the Nodal Department at a senior
level.
14
b) Freshly identified Through Routes/ Link Routes in revised District
Rural Roads Plan (DRRPs) to be upgraded to existing carriageway
width or higher carriageway width up to 5.5 meters depending upon
traffic volume and growth centre potential.
c) Roads constructed/ upgraded under PMGSY-I, experiencing
comparatively higher volumes of traffic justifying upgradation from
existing carriageway width or higher carriageway width up to 5.5
meters covered in the Core network.
Notably, roads already constructed under PMGSY–I will become eligible for
PMGSY-II on completion of design life and on the basis of capacity requirement
to accommodate traffic if it has gone beyond the projected traffic and such
traffic cannot be accommodated in the existing carriageway width, with the
required level of service. The deteriorated condition of the road due to non -
maintenance or not giving the renewal at the required time cannot become
criteria for taking the roads of PMGSY-I in PMGSY-II.
The Through routes or Major Rural Links would be identified from the revised
DRRP. Such roads normally connect growth centers leading to growth poles
(higher order growth centers), rural hub and terminating at higher order centers or
the roads leading to higher order growth poles. The identified new Through route
is a trace of roads having potential for traffic and serving large number of people
in providing access to the socio-economic, health, education and places of Tourist
interest. While identifying the candidate routes care must be taken to see that the
traffic flow aimed is from lower order centers to higher order centers or on to
higher order roads leading to growth centres / growth poles.
16
responsible for maintenance management and road safety. The broad
structure of the ‘SRRDA would be as follows:-
CEO SRRDA
6.4 The State Level Standing Committee (SLSC) set up for PMGSY-I would
also continue to function for PMGSY-II. The SLSC would be headed by the
Chief Secretary or Additional Chief Secretary with members of various
stakeholders of the programme namely Secretaries of the Departments of
Rural Development, Panchayats, PWD, Forests, Social Welfare, Finance,
Revenue, Health, Education and Transport . The State Technical Agencies and
State Informatics Officer (SIC) would be the special invitees.
The Committee shall vet the DRRP list of identified growth centres, CUCPL and
shall clear the annual project proposals. The Committee shall also
17
e. ensure convergence of development programmes including
construction planning and transport facilities on the constructed
roads and afforestation (greening alongside the roads).
The PIU engineers implementing PMGSY-II should be well versed with the quality
assurance mechanism. The engineers will be trained at reputed training
centers, drawing faculty from both academia as well as from the practicing
engineers, as an essential part of the programme.
7.1 After approval by the District Panchayat (refer Para 5.4 above), the
proposals would be forwarded through the PIU to the SRRDA (refer Para 6.3
above). The PIU will at that time prepare the details of proposals forwarded by
the Members of Parliament, and action taken thereon, in Proformae MP-I and
MP–II and send it along with the proposals. In all cases where the proposal of
an MP has not been included, cogent reasons shall be given based on the
reasons given by the District Panchayat.
7.2 The SRRDA shall vet the proposals to ensure that they are in
accordance with the Guidelines and shall place them before the State-level
Standing Committee along with the MP-I & MP-II Statements.
7.3 The State Level Standing Committee (SLSC) would scrutinize the
proposals to see that they are in accordance with the Guidelines and that the
proposals of the Members of Parliament have been given full consideration.
18
After scrutiny by the State Level Standing Committee, the Programme
Implementation Units (PIUs) will prepare the Detailed Project Report (DPRs) for
each proposed road work in accordance with the Rural Roads Manual and
instructions issued from time to time.
7.4 While commencing with the preparation of the DPR, the PIU will hold a
consultation with the local community through the mechanism of the Gram
Panchayat in order to determine the most suitable alignment, sort out issues of
land availability (including forest land) especially due to road widening / minor
change in alignment etc., proposed tree plantation, moderate any adverse
social and environmental impact and elicit necessary community participation in
the programme. For this purpose the PIU will organise a formal ‘Transect
Walk’ as follows:
iv. At least Ten digital photographs of the Transect walk and some
digital photographs of Gram Sabha must be taken.
At the end of the walk, a Gram Sabha Meeting shall be held, alignment shall be
finalised after recording the issues that arose during the walk and the action
taken / proposed to resolve the issues. This shall be reduced to writing in the
form of Minutes of the Gram Sabha Meeting signed by the Pradhan / Panch,
19
Secretary of the Gram Panchayat, other officials and Gram Sabha Members
present. A copy of these minutes along with at least 10 digital photographs of
Transect Walk and some digital photographs of Gram Sabha must be attached
to the finalised DPR.
7.5 Even though the roads taken under PMGSY-II require only upgradation
of the existing roads whose alignment is already fixed, still transect walk is
important, because of cases of private land becoming necessary for upgrading
the road especially if road widening or improvement in road geometrics is
required and for putting tree plantations. During such transect walks, Project
Affected Persons (PAPs) must be invited in writing.
7.6 The PIU will ensure the following in preparing the Detailed Project reports:
(i) The Rural Roads constructed under the Pradhan Mantri Gram
Sadak Yojana must meet the technical specifications and
geometric design standards given in the MoRD’s
S p e c i f i c a t i o n s f o r R u r a l R o a d s , Rural Roads Manual of
the IRC (IRC:SP20:2002) and also, where required, the Hill Road
Manual (IRC:SP:48-1998).
(ii) Independent Traffic survey will be done on all Candidate roads and
corresponding MDRs.
(iii) The choice of design and surface for the road would be determined,
inter alia, by factors like traffic, soil type and rainfall, following the
technical specifications laid down in the Guidelines for the design
20
of Flexible pavements for Low volume rural roads (IRC:SP:72-2007)
or IRC (SP-37-2012) and guidelines for design of rigid pavements
(IRC: SP 62: 2004)
(iv) Where the road passes through a Habitation, the road in the built-
up area and for 50 metres on either side may be appropriately
designed preferably as a Cement Road or with Paved Stones,
besides being provided with side drains. Appropriate side drains
and cross drainage will be provided, so that improper drainage
does not damage the road or the dwellings alongside.
(v) Wherever local materials, including Fly Ash, are available, they
should be prescribed subject to adherence to technical norms and
relevant Codes of Practice.
21
maintenance cost and cost of renewal at the end of the period. The maintenance
component will be contracted out along with the upgradation, to the same contractor.
7.8 The cost of preparing DPR, including survey and investigations, safety
audit, and testing of materials will form part of the project cost, and becomes a
shared cost between State and Central Government .
7.9 The detailed estimates will be based on the State Schedule of Rates (SSR)
prepared using the Book of Specifications and Standard Data Book prescribed by
the NRRDA.
7.10 The Schedule of Rates (SoR) for States/UTs shall be published annually
and used for all rural roads. The Schedule of rates may be State/ Circle specific.
The cost of the each project will cover the cost of construction and administrative
cost. The estimated cost of construction will be shared between Central
Government and State Government. Administrative cost @ 2% of Central
Government share of construction cost shall be payable by the Central
Government and balance by the State Government, if required. Further, the
administrative and management cost share by GoI would be meant for
strengthening of the executional agencies, capacity building, quality management,
internet and mobile technologies, mainstreaming of R & D technologies and
incorporating road safety in design.
In order to meet the State share under PMGSY-II, States may use NABARD’s
RIDF loan facility or levy additional taxes, utilize Mandi related revenues etc. For
the roads having traffic due to mining vehicles, mineral cess funds should be used
by the States wherever possible.
8. PROGRAMMATIC REQUIREMENTS:
8.1 On the part of the States, readiness on the following State Specific generic
22
Issues would be a pre-requisite to participate in PMGSY II.
(v) PCI survey of DRRP roads on an ongoing basis with a 2 year cycle
with data being reflected on OMMAS and on the GIS.
23
In addition, for each specific set of proposals the following would also be
required before the proposals can be considered by the Empowered
Committee:
9.3 After verifying that the DPRs have been entered on OMMAS, the
DPRsare to be scrutinised by the STAs in the light of the PMGSY Guidelines,
IRC specifications as contained in the Rural Roads Manual (IRC SP20:2002)
and where necessary the Hill Road Manual, and the applicable Schedule of
Rates. In doing so, it shall be ensured that no lead charges would be payable
for transportation of soil (except in case of Black Cotton Soil / Sodic soil or in
village portions). The STA will in particular check the following:
STAs would also ensure that all provisions are made in the DPR for structural
stability as well as traffic safety. Since the roads taken are important roads
carrying higher intensity of traffic, the design should satisfy the projected traffic
25
requirements.
9.4 The NRRDA will there upon scrutinise the proposals received from the
SRRDA to ensure that the proposals have been made duly keeping in view the
Programme Guidelines and that they have been duly verified by the STAs. The
proposals for each State would then be put up before the Empowered Committee
for consideration.
9.5 Under PMGSY-II, the scrutiny of project proposals will be made 100% on-
line at all levels. The projects would be uploaded on OMMAS by the executing
agencies for scrutiny at STAs/PTAs levels with all details including estimates and
drawings. STAs would scrutinize the projects on-line and will recommend the
projects on-line itself. STAs may also give remarks, if any on the proposal. PTAs
would further securitize atleast 10 % of the STA scrutinized proposals on sample
basis. The projects recommended by STAs/PTAs would be then forwarded to
NRRDA for scrutiny and thereafter the projects, if found eligible, would be
submitted before the Empowered Committee for consideration.
While clearing the projects of PMGSY-II, the Empowered Committee would adopt
the same procedure as that of PMGSY-I. However, it would ensure that the
States/UTs are fully complied with the requirements of Online Monitoring
Management and Accounting System (OMMAS). Empowered Committee would
review the performance of the State/UT based on OMMAS only as under PMGSY-
II it would be transaction based information system.
11.2 After the project proposals have been cleared and Technical Sanction has
been accorded, the Executing Agency would invite tenders. The well-established
procedure for tendering, through competitive bidding, would be followed for all
projects. All the projects scrutinised by the STA and cleared by the Ministry, will
be tendered as such, and no changes shall be made in the work without the prior
approval of the NRRDA. The States will follow the Standard Bidding Document
(SBD), prescribed by the NRRDA, for all the tenders.
11.3 Since PMGSY places high emphasis on time and quality, States shall
take steps to increase competition and to realistically assess Bid capacity. To
this end States shall ensure that all Tender notices are put out on the Internet
under the OMMAS. Centralised evaluation of Bid capacity will be done to give
effect to the provision of the SBD. States may empower the SRRDA to call and
decide tenders in the interest of speeding up the process.
11.4 The tendering and contracting process and time periods will be as per
the SBD. The State shall at all times update the OMMAS tendering module to
enable downloading of tender documents. Details of contracts entered into shall
also be immediately entered into database.
11.5 With the use of annual State Schedule of Rates it is expected that on
average the tendered value would approximate the estimated value. All costs
due to time over run, arbitration/judicial award shall be borne by the State
Government. In case the value of tenders received is above the estimate that
has been cleared by the Ministry, the difference (tender premium) pooled for
27
the entire District for works cleared in a phase/batch will be borne by the State
Government.
12.2 All staff costs will be borne by the State Government. The Pradhan Mantri
Gram Sadak Yojana does not provide for any staff costs. However, the
administrative and travel expenses of PIUs and SRRDA costs will be met to the
following extent, with the State Government bearing any additional costs:
28
(i) Administrative expenses shall, in addition to usual office expenses,
include all expenses incurred in relation to the operation of the
OMMAS computers and their maintenance, including internet
charges and data entry costs. Amounts paid on account of
outsourcing of execution and management related functions may
also be paid out of administrative expenses within the limits
prescribed. However, expenditure on purchase of vehicles, payment
of salaries & wages and purchase or construction of buildings is not
permissible.
(vi) The amounts shall be released to the SRRDA along with programme
fund releases. The SRRDA shall further allocate the amounts (by
way of limits set by the Empowered Officer) in respect of sl. no. a) &
b) to PIUs generally in proportion to the funds released to them, also
keeping in view the actual pace of work and requirements in the
PIUs.
29
nor shall the account be used other than for defraying admissible
administrative, travel and quality monitoring expenses.
(b) Appropriate dedication of the PIU and its clear linkage to the
SRRDA; and
12.3 No Agency charges will be admissible for road works taken up under this
Programme. In case Executing Agencies levy charges in any form, such as
Centage charges etc., it would have to be borne by the State Government.
13.1 The relevant projects would be executed by the PIUs and completed
within a period of 9 months from the date of issue of the Work order. A Work
Programme shall be obtained from the contractor for each work and approved by
the PIU. Payment shall be made only after the approval of the work programme,
deployment by the Contractor of the requisite number of engineers and setting
up of the Quality Control Laboratory at site. In this connection, it is clarified that:
(ii) Where a package comprises more than one roadwork, the total
time given for completion of the package shall not exceed 12
calendar months.
30
(iii) Similarly, time period of 18-24 months would be allowed for
completion of cross drainage works exceeding 25 meter length,
depending on site conditions. In both cases, however, no extra
liability, if any, on account of cost escalation shall be met from the
programme funds provided by the Ministry of Rural Development.
These conditions may be incorporated in the bid documents for
bids to be invited for PMGSY projects in future.
(iv) Time period provided in the Notice Inviting Tender (NIT) and the
Work Programme shall be strictly enforced. Since time is the
essence of the contract, action must be taken against the
contractor in cases of delay, as per the contract provisions.
13.2 With the above schedule and considering 75 days as the average
tendering time, all cleared works should be able to be reported as completed at
the end of 15th month from clearance by the Ministry. The eligibility for release of
second installment of a subsequent years’ cleared works will be determined
accordingly (refer to Para 19).
13.3 An important principle of the Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak Yojana is the
assured availability of funds, so as to facilitate timely completion of road works. It
shall be the responsibility of the Executing Agencies to ensure timely payments
to the contractors, subject to satisfactory execution of work. Delays in payment
due should be avoided. Settlement of final bill with the contractor will be one of
the parameters for monitoring the successful execution of works.
13.5 The execution of works under PMGSY-II will be on lines similar to as that
of PMGSY-I. However, adequate attention is to be given by the executive agency
keeping in view the importance of roads taken in PMGSY-II and all efforts shall
be made to make sure that the provisions made in the DPRs are transferred on
31
to the ground duly maintaining the quality at each stage of execution strictly,
adhering to Stage Passing system. It is to be further noted that the monitoring
and giving necessary direction to the concerned shall be fully online only.
14.1 The Ministry of Rural Development has set up the National Rural Roads
Development Agency (NRRDA) to provide Operational and Management support to
the Programme. The NRRDA will provide support, inter alia, on the following:
(x) Communications.
14.2 All State Governments would ensure timely furnishing of all necessary reports,
data and information to the National Rural Roads Development Agency.
32
14.3 Further, for effective overseeing of execution and monitoring of PMGSY-II
projects, National Rural Roads Development Agency (NRRDA) would be
strengthened to provide technical support to the programme. The structure of
PTAs and STAs would be further strengthened to provide technical and
management support to NRRDA. In the implementation of PMGSY-II project,
PTAs/ STAs are expected to play a pro-active role in motivating the executing
agencies in utilizing locally available materials and also adopting proven and new
technologies through Technology Demonstration Projects. This would result in
economy and also facilitate to preserve theDGquality aggregates. The broad
structure of NRRDA would be as follows:
Director
Director Maintena Director
15. QUALITY
DirectorCONTROL
Director MECHANISM
Projects-2 Director Director
nce & OMMAS
Technical Projects-1 Quality F&A
Road & GIS
15.1 Ensuring the quality of the road works is the responsibility
Safety of the State
Governments, who are implementing the Programme Quality shall be ensured in
relation to both construction and maintenance. To this end, all works will be
effectively supervised. The NRRDA will issue general guidelines on Quality
Control and prescribe a Quality Control Handbook to regulate the quality control
process at works level. Quality Control Registers containing the results of tests
prescribed in the Quality Control Handbook shall invariably be maintained for each
of the road works. A site Quality Control Laboratory will be set up by the
Contractor for each package. Payments shall not be made to the Contractor
unless the Laboratory has been duly set up and equipped, quality control tests are
regularly conducted, recorded and have been found to be successful. The
Standard Bidding Document (see Para 11.1) shall incorporate suitable clauses for
ensuring Quality Control and a Performance Guarantee by the Contractor, which
should be discharged only after consulting the Panchayati Raj Institutions
33
responsible for maintenance.
15.3 As the Second tier of the Quality Control structure, periodic inspections of
works will be carried out by Quality Control Units, engaged by the State
Government, independent of the PIUs. These Agencies (who will be called State
Quality Monitors) will be institutions engaged through a transparent process, on a
Quality cum Cost Basis System (QCBS), keeping in view their expertise to provide
quality assurance services. They would be expected to carry out regular
inspections and also get samples of material used tested in laboratories of the
State Government as well as, in certain cases, independent laboratories, say
those of the State Technical Agencies. SQMs would be provided guidelines
enabling them to graduate to the level of ‘Managing Agent’, with powers to
approve (in consultation with the STA) small changes in design to improve quality,
road safety and maintenance.
15.4 Each State Government will appoint a senior Engineer (not below the rank
of Superintending Engineer) to function as State Quality Coordinator (SQC) at the
State level. His function will be to oversee the satisfactory functioning of the
Quality control mechanism within the State. This function would also involve
34
overseeing the follow up action on the reports of the National Quality Monitors.
The Quality Coordinator should be part of the SRRDA. State Quality Coordinators
should be appointed keeping in view the following:-
(i) He/ She should be graduate Civil Engineer not below the rank of
Superintending Engineer
15.5 As third tier of the Quality Control Structure, the NRRDA will engage
Independent Monitors (Individuals / Agency) for inspection, at random, of the road
works under the Programme. These persons may be designated as National
Quality Monitors (NQMs). It will be the responsibility of the PIU to facilitate the
inspection of works by the NQM, who shall be given free access to all
administrative, technical and financial records. NQMs shall report on the general
functioning of the Quality Control mechanism in the District. The Monitors shall
submit their report to the NRRDA. The reports of the NQMs will be sent by
NRRDA to the State Quality Coordinator for appropriate action within a period to
be specified.
15.6 In case quality check by SQM or NQM reveals ‘unsatisfactory’ work, the
PIU shall ensure that the contractor replaces the material or rectifies the
workmanship (as the case may be) within the time period stipulated. In respect of
NQM Reports, the SQC shall, each month, report on the action taken on each of
the pending Reports. All works rated ‘unsatisfactory’ shall be re-inspected by an
SQM or NQM after a rectification report has been received from the State Quality
35
Coordinator. In case a completed work is found unsatisfactory, the State
Government will be liable to refund the Central share expended on the work.
15.7 Recurrent adverse reports about quality of road works or their maintenance
in a given District / State might entail suspension of the Programme in that area till
the underlying causes of defective work have been addressed.
15.8 The State Quality Coordinator/ Head of PIU shall be the authority to receive
and inquire into complaints/representations in respect of quality of works and they
would be responsible for sending a reply, after proper investigation, to the
complainant within 30 days. The SRRDA, for this purpose, shall ensure the
following:
(i) The name, address and other details of the State Quality
Coordinator will be given adequate publicity in the State (including
tender notices, websites, etc.) as the authority empowered to
receive complaints.
(ii) The State Quality Coordinator shall register all complaints and will
get them enquired into by the PIU or if circumstances so require, by
deputing a State Quality Monitor.
(vi) The SQC shall make a monthly report to the State Nodal
Department / State Rural Roads Agency (in a prescribed format) and
the status of action on complaints shall be discussed in the State-
level Standing Committee.
15.9 Quality Control expenses of the 2nd tier will be borne by the PMGSY in
respect of Institution engaged in accordance with procedures approved by
NRRDA and for expenses and testing fee etc., admissible as per PMGSY
monitoring Guidelines. An amount upto 0.50% of the cleared project cost shall be
released to the SRRDA for the purpose, as a proportion of the programme fund
released. The funds shall be credited to the Administrative Fund Account of the
SRRDA (see Para 12.2).
15.10.2 The Executive Engineer in-charge of a division will request the MLA and
Chairperson of the Intermediate Panchayat concerned once in three months for
joint inspection of any PMGSY project(s) as per their choice and according to their
convenience.
37
15.10.3 Similarly, the Assistant Engineer in-charge of the sub-division will request
the concerned Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat once in two months to select any
PMGSY project(s) for joint inspection. Joint inspection of the project(s) may be
arranged as per their convenience.
15.11 In sum, the PIU as the first level of quality control is directly responsible for
quality management ,i.e ensuring that at all times the contractor is delivering
quality in materials and workmanship in accordance with the specifications of the
DPR and conditions of the contract. The second level of quality control, of SQMs
under the SQC are responsible for Quality control i.e ensuring that the contractor
and the PIUs are working to achieve quality standards as per the prescribed
standards. The third level of quality control is in reality a quality assurance
mechanism. The NQMs are expected to randomly inspect works to ensure that
the State Quality control systems are working satisfactorily and will deliver the
requisite quality. The three sub-systems are thus not interchangeable, and need
to work in tandem.
In PMGSY-I the reports of second and third tier quality control officers, after their
inspection are uploaded on to the OMMAS for facilitating verification and
monitoring online. In PMGSY-II, quality tests of key parameters will be made
online even for the first tier, the balance being kept at the PIU level.
38
The implementation of projects under PMGSY-II will be monitored through
Regional Review Meetings, Empowered Committee Meetings, periodic reports
on OMMAS etc. The web based OMMAS would be transaction based
management system in order to monitor the projects on continuous basis.
OMMAS would make a paperless management programme, and regular
updation of OMMAS data by the implementing agency would be the pre-
requisite for holding Empowered Committee Meeting as it would play as a
decision support system.
16. MONITORING
16.1 Effective monitoring of the Programme being critical, the State Governments
will ensure that the officials are prompt in sending the requisite reports /
information to the SRRDA as well as the NRRDA. The On-line Management,
Monitoring and Accounting System (OMMAS), developed for the purpose will be
the chief mechanism for monitoring the Programme. To this end, the officials are
required to furnish, ‘On-line’, all the data and information, as may be prescribed by
the NRRDA from time to time, in the relevant module of the OMMAS. They shall
be responsible for uninterrupted maintenance of the Computer Hardware and
Software as well as the Internet connectivity. The Software for the OMMAS
developed by the NRRDA shall not be modified at any level in the States; any
requirement or suggestion for change shall be intimated to the NRRDA.
16.2 The State Government would provide necessary manpower, space and
facilities to set up the Computer Hardware at the District and State Level. Since
the data would reside on the State Servers, the State level Agency must ensure
that the State Server is functional all 24 hours.
39
16.3 It shall be the responsibility of the Executive Engineer / Head of the PIU to
ensure effective up-time and Internet connectivity of the computers at the PIU /
District level. He shall be responsible for ensuring placement of all Master data
including the Rural Roads Plan in the database and for the constant updating and
accuracy of data relating to the progress of road works, record of Quality control
tests as well as the payments made. Principal Secretary / Secretary In-Charge of
PMGSY shall also ensure regular updating of data on OMMAS. In case of
continued failure to update data on the OMMAS, further releases to the State /
district concerned would be adversely affected.
16.4 Each State Government would identify one officer of sufficient seniority and
having adequate knowledge of Information Technology to function as State IT
Nodal Officer. His function will be to oversee the regularity and accuracy of the
data being furnished by the Districts. The IT Nodal Officer, who shall form part of
the SRRDA, shall also be responsible to oversee the upkeep of the Hardware and
Software as well as the computer training requirements of the personnel dealing
with the PMGSY-II.
16.5 The District Vigilance & Monitoring Committee set up by the Ministry will
also monitor the progress and exercise vigilance in respect of PMGSY-II.
40
rural core network, particularly the Through Routes, will be key to the continuance
of the PMGSY programme in the State. To this end, State Governments will take
steps to build up capacity in the District Panchayats and shall endeavour to
devolve the funds and functionaries onto these Panchayats in order to be able to
manage maintenance contracts for rural roads.
17.2 All PMGSY-II roads (including associated Main Rural Links / Through
Routes of PMGSY link routes) will be covered by 5-year maintenance contracts,
(see Para 8.2 (v) (a)) to be entered into along with the construction contract, with
the same contractor, as per the Standard Bidding Document. Maintenance funds
to service the contract will be budgeted by the State Government and placed at
the disposal of the SRRDA in a separate Maintenance Fund Account within the
stipulated time i.e. 50% by 31st May and remaining 50% by 30th November of
each financial year.
17.3 Since rural Through Routes / Main Rural Links carry comparatively larger
traffic and keeping them in good condition is particularly important, Through
Routes (whether upgraded under PMGSY or subjected to maintenance contract
as an associated Through Route of a PMGSY link route as per Para 6.6.2) on
expiry of 5-year post-construction maintenance (see Para 8.6 and 17.2) shall be
placed under Zonal maintenance contracts consisting of 5-year maintenance
including renewal as per cycle. The State Government will make the necessary
budget provision and place the funds to service the zonal maintenance contracts
at the disposal of the SRRDA in the Maintenance Fund Account.
17.4 A big thrust will be the capacity creation in the District level PRIs for
maintenance. The goal will be to ensure that by the end of the programme, all
Batch Maintenance Contracts are awarded and maintained by the districts
Panchayati Raj Institutions (PRIs). Till such time as District Panchayats take over
maintenance functions, the PIUs will continue to be responsible for administration
of post-construction and zonal maintenance contracts on PMGSY-II roads also.
(a) Prepares and submits to the State Nodal Department and NRRDA
an annual estimate of funds for proper maintenance of the Rural
Core Network
(b) Enforces a prioritization criterion for allocation of budgeted
maintenance funds. The criteria may be developed in consultation
with NRRDA, based on the Pavement Condition Index (PCI), giving
weightage to conditions like traffic / population.
(c) Liaises with the executing agencies receiving maintenance funding
for rural roads to ensure coordinated application of the prioritization
criteria; and
(d) publishes an annual PIU wise Road Asset Valuation and Network
Asset Valuation based on road maintenance investments.
17.7 NRRDA will develop a framework for maintenance and issue detailed
guidelines on maintenance management including performance based
maintenance and local contractor development for area based maintenance.
42
18. RURAL ROADS SAFETY
Since rural roads are generally low traffic volume roads and accident rates are
presently quite low, safety issues relate mainly to design and construction features
and road safety consciousness of local residents. At the Central level, these
issues will be addressed through coordination with the Road Safety Mission of the
Ministry of Road Transport & Highways. At the State level, the State Quality
Coordinator at State level and the Head of the DPIU at District level shall be
tasked by the State Governments to coordinate with the State Governments road
safety mechanisms and programmes, in particular through membership of the
State Road Safety Council and District Road Safety Committees respectively
created as per provision of Section 215 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (Act
No.59 of 1988).
As part of the rural road development and maintenance programmes, the State
Government shall ensure road safety audit of PMGSY-I works along with
quality monitoring. It shall also ensure adequate involvement of Panchayat Raj
Institutions in road safety awareness programmes. Awareness raising activities
including publication of pamphlets, audio-visuals, interactive programmes etc. will
be funded on the basis of annual proposals to be forwarded for clearance of the
Empowered Committee along with the road proposals.
Since PMGSY-II covers important Through routes and Major Rural Links expected
to carry high volume of traffic, traffic safety shall be ensured through traffic safety
audit at the design stage, during implementation and after completion of the
project. Special attention is required in correcting geometrical deficiencies of old
roads while preparing the detailed project report. The traffic safety audit is to be
carried out by trained personnel either from PTAs/STAs or other agencies like
CRRI.
NRRDA will issue a detailed Guidelines on Road Safety in the Rural Roads
Network which shall include provisions for building up of road user communities to
support maintenance and safety interventions.
43
Part III. FLOW OF FUNDS, PROCEDURE FOR RELEASE AND AUDIT of
PMGSY-II
19.1 The cost of the project will include cost of construction (preparation of
DPR and construction cost) and Administrative costs (limited to 2% of
construction cost of Central share). The cost of the project will be shared
between Central Government and State Government as follows:-
19.3 Central share for each installment will be released subject to the
condition that State Government has first credited its share in the Bank account
of the SRRDA.
19.4 The interest accrued on the funds deposited in the banks as well as
amount received towards liquidated damages if any, are Miscellaneous receipts
shall also counts towards release of Funds.
44
19.5 Release of Administrative Expenses fund i.e. 2 % of Central share of the
upgradation construction cost would be released along with each installment of
Programme fund through a different sanction letter for accounting
purposes.19.6 Works cleared and not awarded by the time of the second
installment would be deemed as lapsed and funds released in respect of un
awarded works will be adjusted against the further releases by the respective
Government. Where a work is declared ‘unsatisfactory’ on completion, the
amount shall be refunded by the State Government into the programme
account and shall be counted towards ‘available funds’.
19.7 In order to monitor the sharing of fund between Central and State for
PMGSY II i.e. upgradation of roads separate head of account for receipt and
expenditure in the chart of accounts shall be opened in the existing Programme
Fund Account of PMGSY-I.19.8 Funds received from the MoRD and
State ,and releases to PIUs shall be shown under separate head of accounts to
be opened in the chart of accounts. (Details at Annexure-I). Similarly, for the
expenditure the separate head of account i.e. - “Up gradation of PMGSY-II
Roads” shall be opened under which two sub head (i) Up gradation of PMGSY-
II Roads Normal Area (ii) Upgradation of PMGSY-II Roads Special Area shall
be opened for the up gradation of PMGSY-II Roads in the existing Programme
Fund account. (Details at Annexure II).19.9 Funds for maintenance of
PMGSY-II roads during the post construction 5 year maintenance period and
also on expiry of five year post construction period shall be placed at the
disposal of SRDDA by State Government. The State Government will make
necessary budget provision to this effect in its budget.19.10 The release of the
second instalment in a year shall be subject to submission of the following
documents:
45
iii. A Certificate regarding the requisite physical completion of works
19.11For the purpose of releasing funds, the State would be taken as a Unit.
The banking arrangements, procedure for operation of bank account and other
modalities for operationalising the scheme will be similar in PMGSY I as there
is no separate bank account for PMGSY II.
19.12 It should be noted that flow of funds for all three accounts namely
programme fund, administrative fund and m maintenance fund should be
through on line financial management system. NRRDA would give necessary
detailed instructions from time to time.
20. AUDIT
20.1 The SRRDA will ensure that the accounts are audited by a Chartered
Accountant selected from a panel approved by the C&AG, within six months of
the close of the financial year. This account will be supported by a statement of
reconciliation with the accounts of PIUs and a certificate of the Chartered
Accountant on its accuracy.
20.2 In addition to the Audit by the Chartered Accountant, the works under this
Programme would be subject to audit by the Office of the Comptroller and Auditor
46
General of India (C&AG). The Audit of the work done by the C&AG may cover
aspects of quality, in addition to financial audit.
20.3 Both the State level Agency and the PIUs must provide all relevant
information to State and district level Vigilance and Monitoring Committees.
(iii) Funds received from State (iii) Funds received from State
Government for up Government for up
gradation of Road gradation of Road
47
Credit Head Debit Head Credit Head Debit Head
Bank State Bank State
Authorisation Programme Authorisation Programme
issued to PIU Fund issued to issued to PIU Fund issued to
PIU for up PIU for up
gradation of gradation of
PMGSY-II PMGSY-II
Road (Normal Road (Specail
area) area)
Entries in the books of PIU
(v) On receipt of Bank (v) On receipt of Bank
authorisation for Central authorisation for Central
Programme Fund for Programme Fund for Special area.
normal area.
Credit Head Debit Head
Credit Head Debit Head Central Bank
Central Bank Programme Authorisation
Programme Authorisation Fund received Account PIU
Fund received Account PIU by PIU From
by PIU From SRRDA for up
SRRDA for up gradation of
gradation of PMGSY-II
PMGSY-II Road (Special
Road (Normal area)
area)
21. MISCELLANEOUS
Concrete steps are suggested for capacity building and imparting training to all the
stakeholders. The example of National Academy of Construction (NAC),
Hyderabad needs to be replicated in different regions of the country for skill
development of construction workers. Vocational training in relevant road related
trades should also be introduced in a few ITIs in each district. SIRDs could be
requested to formulate a skill development strategy for construction workers for
rural infrastructure including rural roads.
The STAs and PTAs can be entrusted with the additional task of providing guest
faculty for training of the REOs so as to provide support to IAHE, CRRI, NIRD
AND SIRDs.
21.2 Planting of fruit bearing and other suitable trees, on both sides of the roads
would be taken up by the State Governments / Panchayats from their own funds
or through convergence with other rural development programmes. CAMPA/
Mineral cess funds may be utilized for this purpose.
21.3 DPRs for upgradation of MDRs and Through Routes will make provision for
optical fiber cable access.
49
machinery and equipment, capable of nurturing small contractors
21.5 The Ministry of Rural Development may, from time to time, issue such
directions as may be necessary for smooth implementation of the Programme.
22. CONVERGENCE
22.2 The NRRDA would provide 100% assistance for independent Studies to
establish the impact of the rural connectivity in a District from time to time.
*******
50
IDENTIFICATION OF GROWTH CENTRES AND RURAL HUBS
Growth centres are habitations which have a high population, high level of
educational facilities, good health service facilities, good agricultural produce
markets (mandis), are well served by buses, railways, are already electrified, have
retail shops selling agricultural inputs and items of daily consumption and postal
facilities.
WEIGHTAGE
A. POPULATION (as per 2011 Census) 25-35
A score of 1 for each 250 population subject 20
to a maximum of 30
C. MEDICAL FACILITIES 10
(Score of the highest category)
Sub Centre / ANM Centre 2
Primary Health Centre (PHC) 4
Community Health Centre (CHC) / Bedded 10
Hospital (and referral for PHC patients)
D. VETERINARY FACILITIES 5
Veterinary Hospital 5
51
Notified Tourist Centres 3
Post-Telegraph Office, PCO/ Bank/Regional 3
Rural Banks
One diesel /petrol authorized outlet 2 3
Additional Authorized Diesel Outlet 1
Electric Sub station 11 KVA 2 3
Electric Sub Station above 11 KVA 1
G. ADMINISTRATIVE CENTRES 5
(Score of the Highest Category)
Panchayat HQ 2
Sub Tehsil 3
Tehsil/ Block headquarter 5
100
For PMGSY II, the following criteria for prioritisation can be adopted.
52
53