See Full Document Text
Subject: Record of Discussion of the 136th mee(cid:415)ng of the PPPAC for considering the
following project proposals: -
(i) Widening & Upgrada(cid:415)on of exis(cid:415)ng highway from Khagaria (Design Ch.
270+000) to Purnea (Design Ch. 413+529) sec(cid:415)on of NH- 31 & NH- 231
to 4 lane with paved shoulders under NH(O) on BOT (Toll) in the State
of Bihar.
(ii) 4 laning of Muzaffarpur-Sitamarhi-Sonbarsa sec(cid:415)on of NH-22 (Design
Ch. Km. 0+000 to Design Ch. Km. 82.578) under NH(O) on HAM in the
State of Bihar
(iii) Construc(cid:415)on of 2-Lane Major Bridge across River Gandak along with
its both side approaches connec(cid:415)ng Manuapul (Be(cid:427)ah on NH-727)) in
Bihar at Km 0.00 and Tiwaripa(cid:427) (Sewarhi on NH-730) in U(cid:425)ar Pradesh
at Km. 29+248 of Na(cid:415)onal Highway 727AA.
1. The 136th mee(cid:415)ng of the PPPAC was held on 01st October 2025 at 1100 hours to
consider the above three proposals of MoRTH.
2. List of a(cid:425)endees is placed at Annexure-I.
3. With the permission of Secretary (EA), Joint Secretary (ISD) welcomed all the
a(cid:425)endees to the mee(cid:415)ng. NHAI made a detailed presenta(cid:415)on on the proposed
road projects.
(i) Widening & Upgrada(cid:415)on of exis(cid:415)ng highway from Khagaria (Design Ch.
270+000) to Purnea (Design Ch. 413+529) sec(cid:415)on of NH- 31 & NH- 231 to 4 lane
with paved shoulders under NH(O) on BOT (Toll) in the State of Bihar.
1. The details of the project are given in the table below:
Table-1: Details of the project
Widening & Upgrada(cid:415)on of exis(cid:415)ng highway from Khagaria (Design
Project Descrip(cid:415)on
Ch. 270+000) to Purnea (Design Ch. 413+529) sec(cid:415)on of NH- 31 &
Page 2 of 35NH- 231 to 4 lane with paved shoulders under NH(O) on DBFOT (Toll)
in the State of Bihar.
PPP Model BOT (Toll)
Sponsoring Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, Government of India
Authority
Implemen(cid:415)ng Na(cid:415)onal Highways Authority of India (NHAI)
Agency
State: Bihar
Loca(cid:415)on
District: Khagaria, Bhalgalpur, Ka(cid:415)har, Purnea
Type of Pavement Flexible, except at Toll Plaza
Lane configura(cid:415)on 4-lane with Paved Shoulder
S. Description Khagaria to Purnea Section
No
.
1 Alignment Type Brownfield Upgradation to 4-Lane.
Existing Road to be retained
2 End Lane Status 4 lanes with Paved Shoulders
3 Concession Period 30 years including 2.5 years Construction
Period1
4 Total Alignment 143.529
Length (Km)
5 Bypass (Km) Extended Purnea Bypass Greenfield -
6.729 Km (To provide seamless
Details of connectivity with Patna- Purnea
Structures Expressway)
6 Realignment (Km) 2.59 Km
7 Upgradation 134.21 Km
(Widening)
8 Length of Service Service Road-65.099Km (including both
Road/Slip Road sides)
(Km) Slip Road-100.908Km (including both
sides)
9 Existing Right of 60m throughout except in a length of
Way (EROW) 700.0m in Maheshkunt, where EROW is
45.0m
10 Proposed Right of 60 m at Re-alignment & Bypass locations
Way (PROW)
1 As per the recommenda(cid:415)on of the PPPAC (Para No.10), the concession period is reduced to 25 years.
Page 3 of 3511 Design Speed 100 Km/Hr
(Km/H)
12 Type of Pavement Flexible Pavement, except at Toll Plaza.
(Flexible/Rigid)
13 Number of 1 No.
Interchange (Nos.)
14 Minor Junction Minor At-Grade Intersections- 115 Nos.
(Nos.) Intersections below Grade Separator - 49
Nos.
15 Major Bridge 1 No. New- 4-lane bridge (75.0m)
(Nos.) 4 Nos. New-2 Lane bridge (1089.779m,
140m,78m,74m) parallel to existing 2-lane
bridges of same length which are to be
retained.
16 Minor Bridge 2 Nos New- 4-lane bridge (25m,50m)4
(Nos.) Nos New-2 Lane bridge (All 16m) parallel
to existing 2-lane bridges of same length
which are to be retained.
17 Railway 04 Nos. New-2 Lane (98m,74m,86m,74m)
Crossing/ROB parallel to existing 2-lane ROBs which are
(Nos.) to be retained.
18 Flyover (Nos.) 9 Nos.- New- 4-lane (15m+30m+15m)
19 Interchange (Nos.) 1 No. including 1 flyover of
15m+30m+15m
20 VUP (Nos.) 9 Nos.- New- 4-lane (20m* 5.5m)
21 LVUP (Nos.) 10 Nos.- New- 4-lane (12m* 4m)
22 SVUP (Nos.) 20 Nos.- New- 4-lane (7m* 4m)
23 Culverts (Nos.) Project Road-276 Nos., Cross Road-157
Nos (box type structure), Interchange-04
Nos.
24 FOB(Nos.) 3 Nos.
25 Bus Bay/Bus Bus Bays-02 Nos. on Both Sides,
Shelters (Nos.) Bus Shelters-30Nos. on Both Sides
26 Truck Lay Byes 04 Nos on both sides
(Nos)
27 Toll Plaza (Nos.) 2 Nos. (Retain) Existing Lane-2+1 (Both
Sides) Widening 01 Additional Lane as per
NHAI Policy Circular 2021- 3+1 (Both
Sides)
Page 4 of 35S. Description of work Rs. in
N Crore
1. Civil Cost with escalation up to start of project 2591.15
(Appointed Date)
2. Escalation during Construction Period (As per 148.18
Model)
3. IC/Pre-Operative Expenses (As per Model) 27.39
4. O&M during Construction Period (As per Model) 25.05
Es(cid:415)mated Capital
5. Financing Expenses (As per Model) 11.97
Cost with Break-up
6. Interest During Construction (IDC) 117.06
under major heads
7. Cost incl Centages 2920.80
of expenditure
8. ADD GST @ 18% (excl IDC) 504.67
9. Estimated Total Project Cost/ Cost Put to tender 3425.47
10. Add Contingency 1% 24.68
11. Land Acquisition Cost & Affected Structures Cost 290.16
12. Other Pre-Construction Cost 232.81
13. Total Capital Cost 3973.12
14. Construction Support (Rs in crore) 226.64
S Description Khagaria to Purnea Section
N
1. Land Acquisition o Total Land Required-875 Ha.
o Available land-764.08 Ha.
o Total Govt. Land - 18.44 Ha.
o Total Private land-92.48 Ha.
o Additional Land Required: 110.92 Ha
o 3(A) is under progress
Land Acquisi(cid:415)on
2. Environment Not required.
and other
Clearance
clearance 3. Forest Clearance Under process as there is no forest land
within the proposed ROW. However, Tree
Cutting permission is required.
4. Wildlife Clearance Not required.
5. Approval of GAD ROB Under process
from Railways
6. IWAI Clearance Under process.
As per IWAI notification, Kosi River falls
under NW-58 which is classified in Class-
Page 5 of 35III requiring minimum Navigational of
50.0m. The span arrangement of the
existing and proposed new bridges has
been planned in such a manner that it
aligns with the existing piers with more
than 50.0m (Variable Span 56.294m to
71.067m) length. Proposal for NOC
submitted to IWAI which has been
recommended by Regional Office, IWAI-
Patna.
7. Utilities Shifting The survey with concerned department
is under progress, however the details of
utility shifting are already mentioned
under Schedule A, costing has been
considered into estimates deduced from
similar types of works of nearby projects.
Particulars Khagaria to Purnea Section
Financial Viability PIRR 13.67%
EIRR 15%
The DCA has been prepared based on the MCA dated 09.12.2020
issued by MoRTH duly incorpora(cid:415)ng the Amendment dated
Concession
15.03.2024 issued by MoRTH (changes in the provisions of MCA for
Agreement
capacity augmenta(cid:415)on on BOT(Toll) and other circular issued by
MoRTH/NHAI.
Bidding parameter Lowest quoted Grant or Highest quoted premium
Bidding process Single Stage Two-part system of bidding
2. The primary purpose of the proposed corridor is to enhance travel efficiency
between the Khagaria and Purnea sec(cid:415)ons of NH-31 and NH-231 in Bihar. This
proposal involves the construc(cid:415)on and upgrada(cid:415)on of the exis(cid:415)ng 2-lane
configura(cid:415)on from Parmanpur, Gogri (Km 270.0) in Khagaria to Gulab Bagh (Km
410.0) in Purnea, Bihar. The present tollable traffic on the corridor is 13143 PCUs
per day and has exceeded the design capacity of 2-lane highway i.e. 10,000 PCUs
per day (for plain terrain). The instant proposal will also enhance interstate
connec(cid:415)vity to West Bengal, U.P. and Jharkhand.
Page 6 of 353. The project road traverses through four districts, i.e. Khagaria, Bhagalpur, Ka(cid:415)har,
Purnea and will ensure smoother, faster, safer & un-interrupted traffic movement
for both passenger and freight vehicles with increase in the average speed from
40 kmph to 80 kmph & decrease in travel (cid:415)me from ~ 4 hrs to ~ 2 hrs between
Khagaria to Purnea. Presently, the 2- lane project highway is under BOT (Annuity)
Concession agreement up to October 2029. As the traffic on this stretch is
reaching to the tune of 15000 PCUs and as per extant policies, the project
required augmenta(cid:415)on/upgrada(cid:415)on from present 2-lane to 4-lane. Since there is
no provision of capacity augmenta(cid:415)on under Ar(cid:415)cle-29 of the Concession
Agreement signed for the subject project on BOT (Annuity), the present
Concession Agreement is under process for foreclosure.
4. The project will be executed under the BOT(Toll) with a Total Capital Cost of Rs.
3,973.12 crore, and a total project cost of Rs. 3425.47 crore. Under the BOT (Toll)
mode, NHAI es(cid:415)mated a total VGF of Rs. 1145.64 crore (i.e., 33.44% of TPC) for a
concession period of 30 years, out of which Rs. 226.64 crore shall be given as
Construc(cid:415)on support and Rs. 919 crore shall be given as grant payable by the
Authority during the construc(cid:415)on period to the Concessionaire. The project IRR
is 13.67% with an equity IRR of 15%.
5. A(cid:332)er the detailed presenta(cid:415)on, the Chair asked the PPPAC members for their
observa(cid:415)ons. DoLA supported the proposal and stated that no further comments
to offer.
6. Deputy Director, DoE raised the following observa(cid:415)on: -
a) What is the concession period proposed for the project?
7. PD, NITI Aayog raised the following observa(cid:415)ons:
a) The project IRR has been computed at 13.67% with a proposed VGF of Rs. 919
crore. However, there appears to be scope for op(cid:415)mizing the VGF requirement
by reassessing the Project IRR (PIRR) more realis(cid:415)cally.
Page 7 of 35b) The proposed project highway includes 75 km of retaining wall. The ra(cid:415)onale
for the same to be indicated.
8. JS(ISD) highlighted the following observa(cid:415)ons:
a) In order to bring more viability, less VGF requirement and encouraging more
projects in BoT (Toll) mode, allowing concession of 30 years is a welcome step
from MoRTH.
b) The total VGF proposed may be clarified as the proposed VGF of Rs. 1,145.64
crore includes Rs. 226.64 crore as construc(cid:415)on support and Rs. 919 crores
labelled as equity support. How is the construc(cid:415)on support of Rs.226.64 crore
arrived? In addi(cid:415)on, VGF support cannot be in the form of equity support. It is
a financial grant to the project to enhance viability.
c) Out of the total project length of 143.529 km, what is the bifurca(cid:415)on between
greenfield and brownfield development? Does the land acquisi(cid:415)on cost
included in the Total Project Cost (TPC) pertain only to the greenfield por(cid:415)on
or does it also cover the brownfield sec(cid:415)on?
d) Whether the cost of the project comparable with the cost of other similar
projects in the region?
e) Out of 143 km stretch, the slip road is for 100.908 km. What is the ra(cid:415)onale
behind proposing such substan(cid:415)al length of slip roads?
9. The Chair made the following observa(cid:415)ons:
a) What is the approximate distance between the instant proposal and the
proposed Patna–Purnea Greenfield corridor?
b) Why was the instant proposal considered as a separate package and not
integrated with the preceding project packages, especially given that the 4-lane
development from Patna to Khagaria has already been completed?
Page 8 of 35c) The proposal currently refers to the project structure as BOT (Toll) on a DBFOT
pa(cid:425)ern. The term "DBFOT pa(cid:425)ern" is not clear and it creates ambiguity due to
overlapping terminology.
10. MoRTH submi(cid:425)ed the following to the queries raised by the PPPAC Members:
a) The project is ini(cid:415)ally structured for a concession period of 30 years, however,
to avoid uncertain(cid:415)es of a longer concession period, it is suggested to go for a
25 years concession period. (The cost assessment including the grant
requirement for a 25-year concession period is given at Annexure-II).
b) In road sector projects, extending the concession period can introduce risks
such as traffic uncertainty, compe(cid:415)ng corridors, and changing demand
pa(cid:425)erns, which may affect project viability and investor interest. Unlike other
sectors where longer concession periods may be beneficial, road projects
typically prefer a shorter concession period to manage these risks effec(cid:415)vely.
Addi(cid:415)onally, the design life of road assets is generally 25 years, making a 25-
year concession period both prac(cid:415)cal and sector-appropriate.
c) A project IRR of 13.67% is reasonable for a BOT (Toll) project. For a 25 years
concession, 43% VGF is required as per financial modelling. However, the
requirement of VGF or premium shall be determined by the market and
keeping in view the current market trend, the actual VGF is likely to be within
40% of TPC.
d) The proposed widening of the project road is planned on both sides, subject to
the availability of the ROW and while retaining the exis(cid:415)ng carriageway, a
retaining/toe wall of average 2m height has been proposed to accommodate
the 4-laning withing the available ROW.
e) According to the new amendments in the MCA for BOT (Toll) project, tolling
rights will be with the Authority during the construc(cid:415)on period. The
construc(cid:415)on support of Rs.226.64 crore is the es(cid:415)mated toll revenue collected
by the Authority during the construc(cid:415)on period. This amount shall be due and
payable to the Concessionaire in ten equal instalments during the construc(cid:415)on
Page 9 of 35period. Further, the term “equity support” has been incorrectly used in the
proposal and will be revised to grant which will be given during the
construc(cid:415)on period.
f) The total length of the instant project is 143.529 km, of which 134.210 km is
proposed as brownfield upgrada(cid:415)on, and the remaining 9.319 km is greenfield
development. The greenfield por(cid:415)on includes curve improvements at four
loca(cid:415)ons totalling 2.59 km, and the Purnea Bypass of 6.729 km. The land
acquisi(cid:415)on cost included in the TPC pertains only to the greenfield por(cid:415)on.
g) The es(cid:415)mated cost aligns with the recently awarded similar projects in and
around the region. Further, the es(cid:415)mated civil construc(cid:415)on cost including
u(cid:415)lity shi(cid:332)ing for the project is Rs. 2468 crore with the civil cost per km length
per lane of Rs. 4.30 crore which is well within the norma(cid:415)ve cost.
h) The proposed 100.908 km of slip roads—comprising 50.454 km on each side of
the main carriageway—is necessitated by the presence of 48 grade-separated
structures (including flyovers, VUPs, LVUPs, and SVUPs) and le(cid:332)-in/le(cid:332)-out
access arrangements at 40 loca(cid:415)ons. These slip roads are essen(cid:415)al for ensuring
safe and efficient traffic movement, facilita(cid:415)ng local access, and maintaining
uninterrupted flow on the main corridor.
i) The proposed Patna–Purnea Greenfield corridor lies approximately 50 to 60
km north of the instant project alignment.
j) Based on the traffic assessment in 2010, Patna – Bakh(cid:415)yarpur sec(cid:415)on (50km)
and Bakhiyarpur – Khagaria sec(cid:415)on (114km) were planned and awarded as 4-
lane project on BOT(Toll). At that (cid:415)me, the traffic in Khagaria – Purnea sec(cid:415)on
was less for 4-lane upgrada(cid:415)on. Based on current traffic assessment, Khagaria-
Purnea sec(cid:415)on is now proposed for upgrada(cid:415)on to 4-laning.
k) The term DBFOT pa(cid:425)ern is incorrectly used and shall be revised with BOT (Toll).
Page 10 of 35Recommenda(cid:415)ons
11. A(cid:332)er detailed delibera(cid:415)ons, the PPPAC unanimously recommended the
proposal for “Widening & Upgrada(cid:415)on of exis(cid:415)ng highway from Khagaria (Design
Ch. 270+000) to Purnea (Design Ch. 413+529) sec(cid:415)on of NH- 31 & NH- 231 to 4-
lane with paved shoulders under NH(O) on DBFOT (Toll) in the State of Bihar”
subject to following recommenda(cid:415)ons, for considera(cid:415)on of the competent
authority for giving administra(cid:415)ve approval.
a) The appraised Total Capital Cost of the Khagaria to Purnea sec(cid:415)on is Rs.
3936.05 crore with a total project cost (incl. GST) is Rs. 3388.40 crore.
b) The project shall be taken up on BOT (Toll) mode. With a concession period
of 25 years including 2.5 years of construc(cid:415)on period and 22.5 of O&M
period.
c) The maximum admissible VGF support shall be Rs. 1355.36 crore, i.e., 40%
TPC which shall be given by MoRTH under NH(O).
12. Revalida(cid:415)on of its recommenda(cid:415)on by the PPPAC is not required for following
post recommenda(cid:415)on changes in the project costs/bid documents: -
a) Any change in the date/(cid:415)me period for any (cid:415)me-bound ac(cid:415)ons like appointed
date, financial close, construc(cid:415)on period etc.
b) Non-substan(cid:415)al change in risk-alloca(cid:415)on.
c) Any other changes/modifica(cid:415)on in the project proposal with the overall
objec(cid:415)ve of making project successful.
d) Further, MoRTH/NHAI may decide whether the changes proposed post
recommenda(cid:415)ons of the project proposal by the PPPAC fall within the
threshold criteria as stated above. All such changes falling within the threshold
criteria shall be appraised at the level of Secretary (RTH)/BoD of NHAI as the
case may be, without any further need of revalida(cid:415)on by the PPPAC and shall
proceed with the approval process accordingly.
Page 11 of 35(ii) 4-Laning of Muzaffarpur-Sitamarhi-Sonbarsa sec(cid:415)on of NH-22 (Design Ch. Km.
0+000 to Design Ch. Km. 82.578, Total Length – 82.578 Km) on Hybrid Annuity
Mode (HAM) under NH(O) in the state of Bihar.
1. The details of the project are given in the table below:
4-Laning of Muzaffarpur-Sitamarhi-Sonbarsa sec(cid:415)on of NH-22 (Design
Project Descrip(cid:415)on Ch. Km. 0+000 to Design Ch. Km. 82.578, Total Length – 82.578 Km)
on Hybrid Annuity Mode (HAM) under NH(O) in the state of Bihar.
PPP Model Hybrid Annuity Mode
Sponsoring Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, Government of India
Authority
Implemen(cid:415)ng Na(cid:415)onal Highways Authority of India (NHAI)
Agency
State: Bihar
Loca(cid:415)on
Districts: Muzaffarpur & Sitamarhi
Type of Pavement Flexible, except for toll plaza
Lane configura(cid:415)on 4-Lane with Paved Shoulder
S. Description Muzaffarpur-Sitamarhi-Sonbarsa section
No
.
1 Total Alignment 82.578
Length (Km.)
2 Flyovers (Nos.) 02 (1170 m & 270 m)
3 VUP/LVUP/SVUP 06 /15 /14
(Nos.)
Details of 4 Major Bridges 07
Structures (Nos.) Reconstruc(cid:415)on - 01 (new 4-lane bridge) &
New – 06 (new 2-lane bridge on one side
by retaining the exis(cid:415)ng 2-lane bridge)
5 Minor Bridges 29
(Nos.) Reconstruc(cid:415)on/New – 03
Widening – 09
Addi(cid:415)onal 2-lane – 17
6 Railway Crossing/ 03 [(2*25.2m), (1*26m) & (1*11m +
ROB (Nos.) 1*27m + 1*11m)]
Page 12 of 357 Length of Service 54.279 Km (including both sides) / 44.048
Road / Slip Road Km (including both sides)
Length (Km.)
8 FOB (Nos.) 04
9 Culverts (Nos.) 337
10 Toll Plaza (Nos.) Open tolling with 1 no. Exis(cid:415)ng 8-lane Toll
Plaza at Km. 26+030
11 Construc(cid:415)on 30 Months
Period
12 Maintenance 15 Years
Period
13 Total Alignment 82.578
Length (Km.)
Concession Period 17.5 years including 2.5 years of construction
S. Description of work Rs. in
N Crore
1. Civil Cost 2217.28
2. Labour Cess 1% (on civil cost) 22.17
3. U(cid:415)lity Shi(cid:332)ing Cost 45.97
4. Seigniorage 12.20
5. Civil Construc(cid:415)on Cost (including U(cid:415)lity Shi(cid:332)ing
2,297.62
Cost, Seigniorage and 1% Labour cess)
6. Centages (as per Financial Analysis)
Es(cid:415)mated Capital
7. IC & Pre -opera(cid:415)on expenses @1% of civil cost 22.98
Cost with Break-up
8. Financing Expenses 8.57
under major heads
9. Interest during construc(cid:415)on (IDC) 111.90
of expenditure
10. Es(cid:415)mated Project Cost as on Bid Date (excluding
2441.07
GST)
11. GST 18% on Base Civil Cost 399.11
12. Es(cid:415)mated Project Cost as on Bid Date (including
2840.18
GST)
13. Escala(cid:415)on during Construc(cid:415)on Period 273.10
14. Es(cid:415)mated O&M cost for 15 Years Maintenance
294.47
Period
15. Con(cid:415)ngencies @1% on Civil Construc(cid:415)on Cost 22.98
16. Cost of Pre-construc(cid:415)on Ac(cid:415)vi(cid:415)es
Page 13 of 3517. Cost of Land Acquisi(cid:415)on, Re-se(cid:425)lement and
150.00
Rehabilita(cid:415)on
18. Cost of Diversion of Forest Area and Tree Cu(cid:427)ng,
10.00
U(cid:415)lity supervision Charges & EMP
19. Sub Total (17+18) 160.00
20. Total Capital Cost 3590.73
S Description Muzaffarpur-Sitamarhi-Sonbarsa
N section
1. Land Acquisi(cid:415)on o Total Land Required-495 Ha.
o Forest Land- NIL
o Available land-460 Ha.
o Additional Land Required:35 Ha (7%)
o 3(A) is under progress
2. Environment Not required
Clearance
3. Forest Clearance 1. There is no forest land within the
proposed ROW. For the trees cutting and
translocations from the ROW, marking
and counting work is in progress.
4. Wildlife Clearance NA
5. Approval of GAD ROB Under process.
Land Acquisi(cid:415)on from Railways Proposed at Ch. 3+215, Ch. 43+545, and
and other Ch. 50+080. The exis(cid:415)ng 2-lane ROBs,
which are in good condi(cid:415)on, have been
clearance
retained.
6. IWAI Clearance NA
7. U(cid:415)li(cid:415)es Shi(cid:332)ing The survey with the concerned
department is completed. Es(cid:415)mates of
LT/HT electric u(cid:415)lity & PHED amoun(cid:415)ng
to Rs.25.82 crore & Rs.2.49 crore
respec(cid:415)vely have been received.
Es(cid:415)mates from BSPTCL (3 nos. EHT Lines
/ 132 KV-2 nos. & 220 KV-1 No.) is
deduced from similar works of nearby
projects. The details of u(cid:415)lity shi(cid:332)ing
have been men(cid:415)oned under Schedule-A
within scope of the concessionaire.
Page 14 of 35Particulars Muzaffarpur-Sitamarhi-Sonbarsa
section
Financial Viability
PIRR 11.23%
EIRR 15%
Concession The project is proposed to be implemented as per Model Concession
Agreement Agreement of MoRTH issued in November-2020.
Bidding parameter Lowest Bid Project Cost
Bidding process Single Stage Two-part system of bidding
2. The primary objec(cid:415)ve of the proposed corridor is to enhance travel efficiency
between Muzaffarpur, Sitamarhi, and Sonbarsa (at the Indo-Nepal border) in the
state of Bihar. The project aims to alleviate traffic conges(cid:415)on by diver(cid:415)ng heavy
vehicles via flyovers in densely populated areas such as Muzaffarpur, Muksudpur,
Runni Saidpur, Thumma, Dumra, Bhutahi, and Sonbarsa. Currently, the
Muzaffarpur–Sitamarhi–Sonbarsa sec(cid:415)on carries a traffic volume of 13,299 PCUs
per day, surpassing the design capacity of a 2-lane highway in plain terrain, which
is 10,000 PCUs per day. Given that this highway serves as a vital corridor
connec(cid:415)ng northern Bihar to Nepal, upgrading it to a 4-lane road holds regional
and interna(cid:415)onal significance, along with offering substan(cid:415)al economic, social,
and logis(cid:415)cal benefits.
3. The proposed project will ensure smoother, faster, safer & un-interrupted traffic
movement for both passenger and freight vehicles. The proposed corridor will
reduce travel (cid:415)me between Muzaffarpur-Sonbarsa from approximately 2 hours to
1 hour with a design speed of 100 km/hr (Average-80 km/hr), ensuring safer travel
for all vehicles. It will also reduce accidents and minimize risks to local traffic and
pedestrians. It will also improve connec(cid:415)vity to major religious des(cid:415)na(cid:415)ons such
as Baba Garibnath Temple in Muzaffarpur District and Punaura Dham (Mata Janki
Temple) in Sitamarhi District.
4. The project will be executed under the HAM model under the NH(O) scheme for
the FY 2024-25. The total Capital Cost of the project is Rs. 3590.73 crore with a
total project cost (incl. GST) of Rs. 2840.18 crore. The financial assessment
indicates the project IRR is 11.23% and the equity IRR is 15%.
Page 15 of 355. A(cid:332)er the detailed presenta(cid:415)on, the Chair asked the PPPAC members for their
observa(cid:415)ons. DoLA supported the proposal and stated that no further comments
to offer.
6. Deputy Director, DoE raised the following observa(cid:415)ons
a) The cost of major structures in the proposed project is approximately 25%
higher as compared to similar structures in nearby projects. However, the
overall project cost s(cid:415)ll lower than the norma(cid:415)ve cost. What is the reason
behind this?
7. PD, NITI Aayog raised the following observa(cid:415)ons:
a) How many junc(cid:415)ons will directly connect to the main carriageway?
Addi(cid:415)onally, how many entry and exit points are currently provided in the
proposed project?
b) There are 38 loca(cid:415)ons along the proposed highway where the design speed
has been restricted to 80 km/h. The ra(cid:415)onale for this speed limita(cid:415)on to be
provided.
c) What is the current status of statutory clearances for the proposed project,
including tree cu(cid:427)ng?
8. JS(ISD) highlighted the following observa(cid:415)ons:
a) The exis(cid:415)ng two-lane highway is currently operated under a BOT (Annuity)
model, with the concession period valid un(cid:415)l May 2031. The Authority has
opted to foreclose the exis(cid:415)ng contract and ini(cid:415)ate a new concession under
the HAM model. What is the ra(cid:415)onale behind transi(cid:415)oning from one annuity
mode (BOT Annuity) to another annuity mode (BoT HAM)?
b) What is the current toll revenue collected under the exis(cid:415)ng BOT (Annuity)
contract? Has the traffic projec(cid:415)on for the proposed road accurately
accounted for poten(cid:415)al induced traffic?
Page 16 of 35c) The civil construc(cid:415)on cost is es(cid:415)mated at Rs. 2,297.62 crore in the HAM
model, while the BOT model assumes a higher civil construc(cid:415)on cost of Rs.
2,343.12 crore. The jus(cid:415)fica(cid:415)on for the same to be provided.
d) The proposed construc(cid:415)on dura(cid:415)on for upgrading the exis(cid:415)ng two-lane road
to a four-lane configura(cid:415)on has been indicated as 2.5 years. However, similar
projects have typically adopted a construc(cid:415)on period of 2 years. The
jus(cid:415)fica(cid:415)on for the same to be provided.
e) Per km project cost of the project is Rs. 34 crore which appears to be
substan(cid:415)ally higher. The project cost to be reassessed and ra(cid:415)onale for the
increase in the project cost to be provided.
9. The Chair made the following observa(cid:415)ons:
a) Does the project involve any land acquisi(cid:415)on?
10. MoRTH submi(cid:425)ed the following to the queries raised by the PPPAC Members:
a) The higher cost of major structures is primarily a(cid:425)ributed to the long lead
distance for sourcing structural concrete aggregates, which must be procured
from Jharkhand, approximately 273 km away, due to the non-availability of
suitable quality aggregates within Bihar. This significantly impacts the cost of
concrete works. The norma(cid:415)ve cost comparison tool of MoRTH allows for
input of actual lead distances, enabling a more accurate and project-specific
cost assessment. When these factors are accounted for, the overall project
cost remains within the norma(cid:415)ve limits, as the tool adjusts the benchmark
accordingly.
b) No junc(cid:415)ons or crossroads will directly connect to the main carriageway. All
at-grade intersec(cid:415)ons have been designed to interface through dedicated
service or slip roads, which in turn connect to the nearest underpass or
crossing facility. Addi(cid:415)onally, there are a total of 37 entry and exit points (74
nos. for both side) and the same have been regulated via service/slip roads
to maintain uninterrupted traffic flow and minimize conflict zones.
Page 17 of 35c) The project highway has been designed for a design speed of 100 km/h, in
accordance with Clause 2.2.1 of IRC: SP:84-2019. However, at 38 specific
loca(cid:415)ons, the design speed has been restricted to 80 km/h due to geometric
constraints arising from terrain/topography, proximity to se(cid:425)lements,
junc(cid:415)ons, and exis(cid:415)ng structures. This adjustment ensures compliance with
IRC standards related to horizontal curvature, sight distance, and overall
safety. All provisions remain fully aligned with IRC guidelines.
d) The proposed project does not require Environmental Clearance or Wildlife
Clearance. Under Forest Clearance provisions, the only requirement pertains
to tree cu(cid:427)ng permissions. The process for obtaining this clearance is already
underway and is expected to be completed prior to the bid due date. Tree
cu(cid:427)ng, once approved, will be undertaken by the Concessionaire.
e) The project corridor currently experiences a daily traffic volume of
approximately 13,299 PCUs, which exceeds the threshold for maintaining
Level of Service (LOS-B) as per Na(cid:415)onal Highway standards. Given the
absence of provisions for capacity enhancement under the exis(cid:415)ng BOT
(Annuity) agreement, the Authority has decided to foreclose the contract to
enable (cid:415)mely upgrada(cid:415)on. Furthermore, with nearly 50% of the traffic being
non-tollable, the project is financially unviable under the BOT (Toll) model.
Therefore, the instant project has been proposed to be taken up under HAM.
Once traffic volumes reach sustainable levels, the highway can be mone(cid:415)zed
to op(cid:415)mize long-term revenue genera(cid:415)on.
f) The toll revenue of last FY: 2024-25 was approx. 22.42 crore. At this stage, it
is difficult to accurately es(cid:415)mate the volume of inducted traffic, as the
adjoining road projects that could influence traffic pa(cid:425)erns are s(cid:415)ll in
preliminary planning phases and their (cid:415)melines are yet to be finalized.
Therefore, the current traffic projec(cid:415)ons are based on available data and
exis(cid:415)ng condi(cid:415)ons.
g) In BOT (Toll) analysis, the civil cost has been assumed as Rs. 2297.62 Crore
only, however, considering the (cid:415)me gap between the (cid:415)me assessment of the
Page 18 of 35civil cost (Appraisal date) and actual Appointed Date, the cost is to be
escalated up to the start of construc(cid:415)on at 4% p.a. However, in case of HAM,
the escala(cid:415)on is payable to the Concessionaire from the Bid Due Date itself
and hence the escala(cid:415)on from Bid Due Date to start date of construc(cid:415)on is
not applicable in HAM financial analysis.
h) The construc(cid:415)on period of 30 months (2.5 years) has been recommended by
the DPR Consultant a(cid:332)er a comprehensive assessment of project-specific
parameters. These include the total project length of 82.578 km, the scope
of major structures—7 major bridges, 29 minor bridges, a 1170-meter
elevated corridor, and 3 ROBs—as well as the limited working window due to
the project's loca(cid:415)on in a high-intensity rainfall region. Addi(cid:415)onally, as per
the standard provisions outlined in the Model RFP for EPC projects, a
construc(cid:415)on period of 30 months is prescribed for 4-laning projects
exceeding 50 km in length and involving bridge structures over 200 meters.
i) The project cost and features have been thoroughly reviewed and op(cid:415)mized
in line with prevailing site condi(cid:415)ons. Any further reduc(cid:415)on would
compromise safety and structural integrity. The compara(cid:415)vely higher cost is
jus(cid:415)fied due to the requirement of seven major bridges and 29 minor bridges,
requirement of service roads, requirement of high embankment etc.
However, the base civil construc(cid:415)on cost of Rs. 2,217 crore remains below
the norma(cid:415)ve cost of Rs. 2,338 crore, calculated as per the norma(cid:415)ve cost
tool/ standard dated 19.01.2022 (The details of the cost reassessment and
jus(cid:415)fica(cid:415)on is placed at Annexure-III).
j) The project involves minor land acquisi(cid:415)on of approximately 35 hectares,
primarily required for geometric improvements of broken-back curves and to
meet design standards at specific isolated loca(cid:415)ons. The project is being
developed en(cid:415)rely within an exis(cid:415)ng brownfield corridor, u(cid:415)lizing the
available Right of Way (RoW). Out of the total land requirement of around
495 hectares, approximately 460 hectares (93%) is already available. The
acquisi(cid:415)on process for the remaining land has been ini(cid:415)ated, and it will be
ensured that full possession is handed over to the Concessionaire within 150
Page 19 of 35days from the Appointed Date, in accordance with Ar(cid:415)cle 4 and Ar(cid:415)cle 10 of
the Dra(cid:332) Concession Agreement (DCA).
Recommenda(cid:415)ons
11. A(cid:332)er detailed delibera(cid:415)ons, the PPPAC unanimously recommended the
proposal for “4-Laning of Muzaffarpur-Sitamarhi-Sonbarsa sec(cid:415)on of NH-22
(Design Ch. Km. 0+000 to Design Ch. Km. 82.578, Total Length – 82.578 Km) on
Hybrid Annuity Mode (HAM) under NH(O) in the state of Bihar” subject to
following recommenda(cid:415)ons, for considera(cid:415)on of the competent authority for
giving administra(cid:415)ve approval.
a) The appraised Total Capital Cost of the project is Rs. 3590.73 crore with a total
project cost (incl. GST) of Rs. 2840.18 crore.
b) The project should be taken up on HAM under the NH(O) scheme.
c) The concession period of the project is 17.5 years including 2.5 years
construc(cid:415)on period and 15 years O&M period.
d) Land acquisi(cid:415)on and necessary clearances to be obtained in a (cid:415)me bound
manner before the bid due date so as to avoid any delays in the project.
e) For enhancing safety and reducing the risk of accidents, as suggested by
MoRTH, for all future highway projects, the entry and exit points to be
designed in such way that the exit point comes first followed by entry point.
12. Revalida(cid:415)on of its recommenda(cid:415)on by the PPPAC is not required for following
post recommenda(cid:415)on changes in the project costs/bid documents: -
a) Any change in the date/(cid:415)me period for any (cid:415)me-bound ac(cid:415)ons like appointed
date, financial close, construc(cid:415)on period etc.
b) Non-substan(cid:415)al change in risk-alloca(cid:415)on.
Page 20 of 35c) Any other changes/modifica(cid:415)on in the project proposal with the overall
objec(cid:415)ve of making project successful.
d) Further, MoRTH/NHAI may decide whether the changes proposed post
recommenda(cid:415)ons of the project proposal by the PPPAC fall within the
threshold criteria as stated above. All such changes falling within the threshold
criteria shall be appraised at the level of Secretary (RTH)/BoD of NHAI as the
case may be, without any further need of revalida(cid:415)on by the PPPAC and shall
proceed with the approval process accordingly.
Page 21 of 35(iii) Construc(cid:415)on of 2-Lane Major Bridge across River Gandak along with its both side
approaches connec(cid:415)ng Manuapul (Be(cid:427)ah on NH-727) in Bihar at Km 0.00 and
Tiwaripa(cid:427) (Sewarhi on NH-730) in U(cid:425)ar Pradesh at Km. 29+248 of NH-727AA
1. The details of the project are given in the table below:
Table-1: Details of the project
Construc(cid:415)on of 2-Lane Major Bridge across River Gandak along with
its both side approaches connec(cid:415)ng Manuapul (Be(cid:427)ah on NH-727) in
Project Descrip(cid:415)on
Bihar at Km 0.00 and Tiwaripa(cid:427) (Sewarhi on NH-730) in U(cid:425)ar Pradesh
at Km. 29+248 of NH-727AA
PPP Model Hybrid Annuity Mode
Sponsoring Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, Government of India
Authority
Implemen(cid:415)ng Bihar Rajya Pul Nirman Nigam Limited under RCD, Govt. of Bihar
Agency
Bihar (West Champaran Dist.)
Loca(cid:415)on
U(cid:425)ar Pradesh (Kushinagar Dist.)
Type of Pavement Flexible
Lane configura(cid:415)on 2-Lane with Paved Shoulder
S. Description Manuapul (Bettiah on NH-727) to
No Tiwaripatti (Sewarhi on NH-730)
.
1 Length (km) 29.248
2 Pavement Type Flexible
3 Major Bridge 3 Nos. (6x36 m ; 20x36 m+ 185x60 m+
15x36 m : 1x20.4 + 4x36 m)
Details of 4 Minor bridge 15 Nos.
5 ROB NIL
Structures
6 Flyover NIL
7 VUP/LVUP/SVUP 08-VUP (20x5.5), 14-LVUP (12 x 4),
8 Major/ 20 Nos.
Minor
Junc(cid:415)ons
improvement of
crossroads
9 Culverts (No.) o 24 Nos. of RCC Box Culvert,
Page 22 of 35o 3 Nos. of RCC Box Culvert cum
PUP cum Ca(cid:425)le Pass
o 5 Nos. of PUP cum Cattle Pass
10 Connec(cid:415)ng/ Slip/ • Slip Roads: 3.55 Kms
Service Road (Km)
11 Tolling Open tolling
12 Construc(cid:415)on 48 months
Period
13 Minor bridge 15 Nos.
14 ROB NIL
Concession Period 19 years (Including 4 years of Construction Period)
S. Description of work Rs. in
N Crore
1. Base Civil Construc(cid:415)on Cost “A” 1271.17
2. U(cid:415)lity shi(cid:332)ing (Electric Line, Poles and 11.17
Transformers)
3. Labour Cess @ 1% on (A) 12.71
4. Seigniorage Charge for Construc(cid:415)on Materials on 12.08
(A)
5. Base Civil Cost including U(cid:415)lity shi(cid:332)ing, Labour 1307.13
Cess and Seigniorage Charge “B”
6. IC/pre-opera(cid:415)ve expenses @1% of on “B” 13.07
Es(cid:415)mated Capital
7. Financing Cost (1% of debt amount) 5.75
Cost with Break-up
8. Interest during construc(cid:415)on 96.33
under major heads
9. Es(cid:415)mated Project Cost as on Bid Date including 1422.28
of expenditure Escala(cid:415)on (5+6+7+8)
10. O&M cost during concession period (15 yrs) 184.94
11. Con(cid:415)ngency on (A) @1% (As per Ministry’s 12.71
circular dated 09.05.2018)
12. Agency Charge 3% of (A) 38.14
13. Supervision Charge @ 3% of (A) 38.14
14. GST @ 18% on Civil Cost, U(cid:415)lity Shi(cid:332)ing, 271.96
Preopera(cid:415)ve,
Financing and O&M Cost
15. Cost Towards Implemen(cid:415)ng the Environment 5.6
Management Plan in Entire Project section
16. Cost of Forest Clearances 3
Page 23 of 3517. Total Capital Cost excluding LA Cost sanc(cid:415)oned 1976.77
earlier2 (in Cr.)
18. Es(cid:415)mated Bid project cost 1759.08
S Description Manuapul (Bettiah on NH-727) to
N Tiwaripatti (Sewarhi on NH-730)
1. Land Acquisition o Total Land Required-176.484 Ha.
o Private Land)-148.30 Ha
o Govt. Land- 28.18 Ha
o 3(A) - 176.484 Ha.
o 3(D) - 160.94 Ha (Bihar)
o 3(G) - 133.35 Ha (Completed in Bihar)
(3A, 3D and 3G for Bihar Portion
Completed. LA for UP Portion - 15.54
Ha.
3A Completed and “3D” is under
Progress in UP. Target Date for “3D”
Completion for LA in UP Portion is
October 2025)
2. Forest/ Wildlife Diversion of Forest Land Not Involved in
Land Acquisi(cid:415)on
Project section. Forest clearance in
and other
terms of NOC for Permission of Cutting of
clearance Roadside Trees is required for Junction
Improvement at start and at End of the
Project. Obtaining NOC with Forest
Department of Bettiah (Bihar) and
Kushinagar (Utter Pradesh) under final
Stage.
3. Environment Environmental Clearance for the Project
has been granted in 412th meeting of
Expert Appraisal Committee (EAC) of
Infra–I(IA–III) through Hybrid Mode held
on 14th August 2025 for the projects
related to Infrastructure Development.
Final Letter from EC is awaited
4. Utility Shifting Joint site visit completed, estimates yet
to receive from concern agencies, details
of existing utilities are already specified
under the scope of concessionaire.
2 LA es(cid:415)mate amoun(cid:415)ng to Rs. 218.20 Cr sanc(cid:415)oned during 2022-23; Combining this cost, TCC: Rs. 2194.97 Crore
Page 24 of 35Particular Manuapul (Bettiah on NH-727) to Tiwaripatti (Sewarhi
s on NH-730)
Financial Viability
PIRR 12.59 %
EIRR 15%
Concession The project is proposed to be implemented as per Model Concession
Agreement Agreement dated 09.12.2016 uploaded on MoRTH website.
Bidding parameter Lowest Bid Project Cost.
Bidding process Single Stage Two-part system of bidding
2. The primary purpose of the proposed project is to provide a direct connec(cid:415)vity
of 29.248 km between Manuapul (Be(cid:427)ah) on NH-727 (Bihar) and Tiwaripa(cid:427)
(Sewarhi) on NH-730 (U(cid:425)ar Pradesh). By crea(cid:415)ng an all-weather crossing of the
Gandak floodplain, it establishes the shortest east–west link between Be(cid:427)ah and
Sewarhi, with onward connec(cid:415)vity to eastern U(cid:425)ar Pradesh, Nepal border trade
points and major northern corridors. Based on current traffic survey, of around
5000 PCU AADT (annual average daily traffic), instant project is proposed as 2-
lane with 1.5 m paved shoulder. The development to 4-lane may be taken up in
second phase once the traffic scenario in the areas is stabilized a(cid:332)er construc(cid:415)on
of Gorakhpur-Siliguri Expressway which is proposed at 8km southwards from the
proposed project.
3. The project is designed with a design speed of 100 km/h and will reduce the
overall travel (cid:415)me to approximately 30 min., while offering safer, faster, and
uninterrupted connec(cid:415)vity for both passenger and freight vehicles. The project
will ensure smooth and safe traffic flow, reduce Vehicle Opera(cid:415)ng Costs and
delays, improve logis(cid:415)cs efficiency, enhance access to markets and services, boost
tourism poten(cid:415)al, and foster broad-based economic growth across the trans-
Gandak region.
4. The project will be executed under the HAM model under the NH(O) scheme for
the FY 2025-26. The total capital cost of project is Rs. 1976.77 crore with a total
project cost of Rs. 1422.28 crore. The financial assessment indicates the project
IRR is 12.59% and the equity IRR is 15%.
Page 25 of 355. A(cid:332)er the detailed presenta(cid:415)on, the Chair asked the PPPAC members for their
observa(cid:415)ons. DoLA and DoE supported the proposal and stated that no further
comments to offer.
6. PD, NITI Aayog raised the following observa(cid:415)ons:
a) What is the tolling mechanism proposed for the project?
b) How far is the instant proposal from the proposed Gorakhpur-Siliguri
Expressway?
c) As per the PPPAC memo, the project implementa(cid:415)on agency is Bihar Rajya Pul
Nirman Nigam Limited under RCD, Government of Bihar. Why has the State
PWD been designated as the implementa(cid:415)on agency instead of NHAI? How
will the Ministry ensure effec(cid:415)ve project monitoring and (cid:415)mely comple(cid:415)on if
it is executed by the State PWD?
7. JS(ISD) highlighted the following observa(cid:415)ons:
a) In the proposed project, a(cid:332)er deduc(cid:415)ng the length of the main Gandak Bridge
(including Viaduct Approach) which is from Ch. 9-815 to 22+179 (length
12.364km), the remaining length arrived is 16.884km. In the remaining
16.884km length, the number of structures include 02 major bridge, 15 minor
bridge, 32 culverts, 08 VUPs, 14 LVUP's and 08 PUPs. The need for high number
of structures to be provided.
b) Whether the cost of the proposed project benchmarked against the cost of
any similar bridge project in the region?
c) The current traffic figures appear significantly underes(cid:415)mated, as they are
based on a 2022 survey. These projec(cid:415)ons do not account for the substan(cid:415)al
reduc(cid:415)on in travel distance from 81 km to 29.248 km between Manuapul (NH-
727) and Tiwaripa(cid:427) (NH-730), which is expected to induce considerable traffic
growth. Has this induced traffic been factored in, while arrived at total traffic
to assess the viability of BOT (Toll)?
Page 26 of 35d) The proposed project configura(cid:415)on is 2-lane with PS; however, the proposed
ROW is 60m. The ra(cid:415)onale for reserving a 60m ROW for a 2-lane+PS to be
provide
8. The Chair made the following observa(cid:415)ons:
a) What is the status of land acquisi(cid:415)on in the project?
b) What is the need of the project when a bridge on Gandak in Gorakhpur-Siliguri
Expressway is already proposed:
9. MoRTH submi(cid:425)ed the following to the queries raised by the PPPAC Members: -
a) A 6-Lane toll plaza is proposed between Ch. 24+850 to Ch. 25+150 (300 m.
length). No preceding and succeeding toll plazas is present.
b) The Gorakhpur-Siliguri expressway passes approximately 8 km south of the
instant project alignment.
c) The project is conceptualized as a 30 km standalone stretch, suitable for
execu(cid:415)on by the State PWD. However, NHAI will monitor the project
implementa(cid:415)on.
d) The proposed structures are based on site-specific requirements. The 16.884
km stretch passes through areas with dense irriga(cid:415)on networks and natural
drainage channels, necessita(cid:415)ng 2 major bridges, 15 minor bridges, and 32
culverts to maintain hydraulic con(cid:415)nuity and prevent flooding. Addi(cid:415)onally, the
embankment height of 4–4.5 meters make at-grade crossings unsafe and
imprac(cid:415)cal. To ensure safe and conflict-free movement for local residents, farm
vehicles, and pedestrians, 8 VUPs, 14 LVUPs, and 8 PUPs have been proposed—
strictly aligned with exis(cid:415)ng roads—to facilitate cross-movement without
compromising safety.
Page 27 of 35e) The proposed project comprises 13.62 km of structures, including 3 major river
bridges (notably the 11.10 km Gandak Bridge) and 15.63 km of greenfield
highway with an average embankment height of 4 meters. On a unit cost basis,
the project es(cid:415)mates Rs. 38.93 crore per lane-km for major bridges and Rs.
13.48 crore per lane-km for the 2-lane paved shoulder highway. While no
directly comparable project exists in the region recently, the Kosi Bridge project
at Phulaut, awarded in January 2021, had a per lane-km cost of Rs. 29.55 crore
for the bridge and Rs. 7.43 Cr for the highway. A(cid:332)er applying a standard
escala(cid:415)on of ~5% annually, the adjusted costs for 2025–26 are Rs. 36.94 crore
(bridge) and Rs. 9.29 crore (highway), which validate the cost reasonability of
the current proposal.
f) It is expected that the induced traffic would be negligible mainly because of
the upcoming expressway, Gorakhpur-Siliguri, within a distance of 8 km from
the instant proposal. The project is not viable on BOT (Toll) and requires more
than 40% of VGF.
g) Earlier, a 4-lane bridge was envisioned on the current alignment in the year
2022. Keeping in view the embankment height of 4m and 4-lane configura(cid:415)on
of the highway, a 60 m ROW was considered appropriate. Later on, alignment
of Gorakhpur-Siliguri Expressway was finalized, which passes approximately 8
km south of the instant project alignment. Due to this reason, the instant
project was modified to 2-Lane with paved shoulder configura(cid:415)on. The Ini(cid:415)ally
proposed ROW of 60 m has been retained keeping in view of future
augmenta(cid:415)on.
h) The total land requirement for the project is 176.484 hectares, comprising
148.30 hectares of private land and 28.18 hectares of government land. In
Bihar, land acquisi(cid:415)on is substan(cid:415)ally completed—Sec(cid:415)on 3A (176.484 Ha),
Sec(cid:415)on 3D (160.94 Ha), and Sec(cid:415)on 3G (133.35 Ha). In the U(cid:425)ar Pradesh
por(cid:415)on, Sec(cid:415)on 3A acquisi(cid:415)on (15.54 Ha) has been completed, while Sec(cid:415)on
3D is currently under progress.
i) At present, there is no direct connec(cid:415)vity between Be(cid:427)ah in Bihar and Sewrahi
in U(cid:425)ar Pradesh. The commuters have to travel about 81 Km to reach Sewrahi
Page 28 of 35in U(cid:425)ar Pradesh using the exis(cid:415)ng Dhanha- Ratwal Bridge on river Gandak.
Upon comple(cid:415)on of the proposed project, it will offer a direct connec(cid:415)vity of
29.25 km between Be(cid:427)ah in Bihar and Sewrahi in U(cid:425)ar Pradesh. Earlier, a 4-
lane bridge was envisioned on the proposed alignment in the year 2022 and
accordingly land acquisi(cid:415)on es(cid:415)mate was approved and LA process was
started. Later on, alignment of Gorakhpur-Siliguri Expressway was finalized,
which passes approximately 8Km south of the instant project alignment and it
will cater the traffic going towards East Champaran and further for eastern part
of Bihar leading to West Bengal. However, the proposed bridge will benefit
people of West Champaran as well as northern part of east Champaran and
further towards Indo Nepal border at Raxaul.
Recommenda(cid:415)ons
10. A(cid:332)er detailed delibera(cid:415)ons, the PPPAC unanimously recommended the
proposal for “Construc(cid:415)on of 2-Lane Major Bridge across River Gandak along with
its both side approaches connec(cid:415)ng Manuapul (Be(cid:427)ah on NH-727) in Bihar at
Km 0.00 and Tiwaripa(cid:427) (Sewarhi on NH-730) in U(cid:425)ar Pradesh at Km. 29+248 of
NH-727AA” subject to following recommenda(cid:415)ons, for considera(cid:415)on of the
competent authority for giving administra(cid:415)ve approval.
a) The appraised Total Capital Cost of the Manuapul to Tiwaripa(cid:427) sec(cid:415)on is Rs.
1976.77 crore with a total project cost of Rs. 1422.28 crore.
b) The project should be taken up on HAM mode under the NH(O) scheme.
c) The concession period of the proposal is 19 years including 4 years
construc(cid:415)on period and 15 years O&M period.
d) It appears that the primary jus(cid:415)fica(cid:415)on for the proposed project is the
comple(cid:415)on of land acquisi(cid:415)on. For future projects, MoRTH should ensure that
the land acquisi(cid:415)on is taken up only a(cid:332)er obtaining the approval of the
competent authority.
Page 29 of 35e) The project shall be implemented by the Bihar Rajya Pul Nirman Nigam
Limited under State Government. However, NHAI/MoRTH shall monitor the
implementa(cid:415)on of the project very effec(cid:415)vely.
11. Revalida(cid:415)on of its recommenda(cid:415)on by the PPPAC is not required for following
post recommenda(cid:415)on changes in the project costs/bid documents: -
a) Any change in the date/(cid:415)me period for any (cid:415)me-bound ac(cid:415)ons like appointed
date, financial close, construc(cid:415)on period etc.
b) Non-substan(cid:415)al change in risk-alloca(cid:415)on.
c) Any other changes/modifica(cid:415)on in the project proposal with the overall
objec(cid:415)ve of making project successful.
d) Further, MoRTH/NHAI may decide whether the changes proposed post
recommenda(cid:415)ons of the project proposal by the PPPAC fall within the
threshold criteria as stated above. All such changes falling within the threshold
criteria shall be appraised at the level of Secretary (RTH)/BoD of NHAI as the
case may be, without any further need of revalida(cid:415)on by the PPPAC and shall
proceed with the approval process accordingly.
Page 30 of 35Annexure-I
List of the par(cid:415)cipants of the 136th mee(cid:415)ng of the PPPAC
a) Department of Economic Affairs, Ministry of Finance
1. Ms. Anuradha Thakur, Secretary (EA)
2. Shri Baldeo Purushartha, JS (ISD)
3. Ms. Arya Balan Kumari, Joint Director (PIU)
4. Shri Rajender Singh, SO (PIU)
5. Shri Manjeet Yadav, ASO (PIU)
6. Shri Deepak Meena, ASO (PIU)
b) Department of Expenditure
1. Shri Ranganath Audam, Deputy Director
c) NITI Aayog
1. Shri. Partha Reddy, Programme Director
d) Department of Legal Affairs
1. Shri Hemant Kumar, Deputy Legal Adviser
e) Ministry of Road Transport and Highways
1. Shri V Umashankar, Secretary (RTH)
2. Shri V.K Rajawat, DG(RD) & SS
3. Shri Atul Kumer, ADG
4. Shri Manoj Kumar, CE
5. Shri Vishnu Mur(cid:415), CE
6. Shri Jagat Narayan, SE
7. Shri Rohan Sinha, AEE
f) Na(cid:415)onal Highway Authority of India (NHAI)
1. Shri Santosh Kumar Yadav, Chairman
2. Shri Anil Choudhary, Member (Projects)
3. Shri L. P. Padhy, CGM (Tech.)
4. Shri Bhaskar Mishra, GM (Tech.)
5. Shri Kumar Saurabh, DGM (Tech.)
6. Shri Prashant Dwivedi, Dy. Manager (Tech.)
Page 31 of 35Annexure-II
Revised Cost es(cid:415)mates of Khagaria – Purnea sec(cid:415)on considering a Concession
period of 25 years.
Page 32 of 35Page 33 of 35Annexure-III
Details of cost reassessment and jus(cid:415)fica(cid:415)on for the Muzaffarpur–Sitamarhi–
Sonbarsa Corridor
Page 34 of 35***
Page 35 of 35