Draft RSA Report - 2nd Construction Stage - Khammam - Devarapalle - PKG - 2 - 7.7.23

National Highways Authority of
India
Draft Safety Audit Report (3rd Construction Stage)
Safety Consultancy Services

SUBMITTEDfor “Construction
BY of 4 lane
Access Controlled New Greenfield Highway Section of NH-
365BG (Khammam – Devarapalle) of length 29.513 km
from Somavaram village to Chintagudem village (Design
Ch. km 33+604 to 63+117) under Inter Corridor Route
UnderM/s. CIVILBABA
Bharatmala INFRACONSULTANT
Pariyojana on Hybrid Annuity PVT. mode
LTD. in
the state of Telangana (Package-II)”.
Plot No. 37B, 4th floor, Sector 32
Gurugram-122001
December 2023
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................ 2
2. AUDIT TEAM..................................................................................................................... 2
3. PROJECT BACKGROUND...................................................................................................4
4. AUDIT DETAILS................................................................................................................. 6
5. SAFETY AUDIT...................................................................................................................7
6 CERTIFICATION............................................................................................................... 19
Annexure: - 1 Audit Checklist for Construction Safety Audit..................................................20

“Construction of 4 lane Access Controlled New Greenfield Highway Section of NH-365BG (Khammam Draft Safety Audit Report
– Devarapalle) of length 29.513 km from Somavaram village to Chintagudem village (Design Ch. km (3rd Construction Stage)
33+604 to 63+117) under Inter Corridor Route Under Bharatmala Pariyojana on Hybrid Annuity
mode in the state of Telangana (Package-II)”.
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2-1: Safety Audit Team................................................................................................... 2

Table 3-1: Project Details......................................................................................................... 4
Table 5-1 Safety observations with appropriate recommendation..........................................7
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 3-1: Project Location Map.............................................................................................5
LIST OF ANNEXURES
Annexure A: Delineator Post..................................................................................................27

Annexure B: Signage Plan for VUP construction.....................................................................28
Annexure C: Road safety Equipment for worker...................................................................29
Annexure D: Standard Barricading.........................................................................................29
1. INTRODUCTION
Project stretch falls in the state of Telangana, which is situated in the Southern region of
India. It is the Twelfth-most populous state and the Eleventh-largest state by area in India.
Covering an area of 1,14,840 Sq. Km Part of the Telangana of the Indian subcontinent.
Telangana is surrounded by Maharashtra and Chhattisgarh in the North, Karnataka in the
West and Andhra Pradesh in the South and East directions. Major cities of the state include
Hyderabad, Warangal, Nizamabad and Karim nag. Telangana is a semi-arid area and has a
predominantly hot and dry climate.
National Highway Authority (NHAI) of India entrusted the assignment of Safety Consultancy
Services for Safety Consultancy Services for “Construction of 4 lane Access Controlled New
Greenfield Highway Section of NH-365BG (Khammam – Devarapalle) of length 29.513 km
from Somavaram village to Chintagudem village (Design Ch. km 33+604 to 63+117) under
Inter Corridor Route Under Bharatmala Pariyojana on Hybrid Annuity mode in the state of
Telangana (Package-II)”.
1
NHAI has appointed M/s CivilBaba InfraConsultant Pvt. Ltd. for the above work to carry out
the Safety Audit Services for “Construction Stage and Maintenance Stage”.
2. AUDIT TEAM
The team of the safety consultant comprises of the following personnel:
Table 2-1: Safety Audit Team
S. No. Position Name

1. Sr. Road Safety Auditor cum Team Leader Mr. Rajesh Kumar Jindal
2. Traffic Planner Mr. Iswinder Singh Dua
3. Sr. Road Safety Auditor cum Project co-ordinator Mr. Upendra Kumar
4. Sr. Road Safety Auditor Mr. Mashkur Ahmad
5. Traffic & Road Safety Engineer Mr. Manower Alam
6. Highway & Safety Engineer Mr. Ravi Kumar
7. Road Safety Engineer Mr. Abdul Majid
Construction Stage Methodology
Construction zone is that area of the road, which is affected by the works, traffic flow, safety
of workers and road users. In this context, it can also be called ‘Traffic Control Zone’. In rural
areas, problem at these zones is accentuated by the reduced availability of carriageway,
acquisition of land for diversions, etc. In urban areas, the problems are even more acute as
diversions may have to be over adjacent road street of the road network as well as the
sharing of road space by different categories of road users. Traffic control zone can be
divided into five major components i.e., Advance Warning Zone, Approach Transition Zone,
Work/ Activity Zone, Terminal Transition Zone and Work Zone End. The Indian Roads
Congress publishes manual on Traffic Management at Construction Zones in IRC: SP: 55-
2014. Steps involved in Construction Stage Audit are given below -
2
Advance Warning Zone, Approach Transition Zone, Work/ Activity Zone, Terminal
Transition Zone and Work Zone End
Safety Of Workmen and Safety Of Road Users
Application Of Traffic Control Devices And Other Safety Measures
Any Other Parameter Noticed Which Can Enhance Safety
Steps involved in Construction Stage Audit
Motorists need to know about safe driving requirements in construction zones. Major
problems in work zones are attentiveness and speed. It is necessary to help the drivers to be
more attentive by using signage, rumble strips and anything that brings alertness and gets
them to realize that there is something different about this stretch of road and there would
be lower speed limits in the work zones. Work zone safety measures should be aggressive
and comprehensive. It should include public service announcements, safety training for
workers in work zones, lower speed limits in work zones, rumble strips and other speed
reducing measures, proper signage, flagman to control and guide traffic, stepped-up
enforcement.
The diagram shows the checklist for the construction stage audit is given below.
3
3. PROJECT BACKGROUND
The project road starts at Km 33+604 (Somavaram village) and ends at km 63+117
(Chintagudem village). The project is green field alignment and the section of NH- 365BG
(Khammam to Devarapalle). The project falls in the state of Telangana. The length of the
project road is 29.513 Km.
Table 3-2: Project Details
S.NO Item Description

1. Project Name Safety Consultancy Services for “Construction of 4
lane Access Controlled New Greenfield Highway
Section of NH-365BG (Khammam – Devarapalle) of
length 29.513 km from Somavaram village to
Chintagudem village (Design Ch. km 33+604 to
63+117) under Inter Corridor Route Under
Bharatmala Pariyojana on Hybrid Annuity mode in
the state of Telangana (Package-II)”.
2. Length 29.513 km
3. Location map Fig.3-1
4. Concessionaire/Contractor M/s. HG Infra Engineering Limited
5. Appointed Date 31.10.2022
6. Construction period 2 Years
7. Independent Engineer M/s. LEA Associates South Asia Pvt. Ltd. in

association with M/s Pioneer Infra Consultants
Pvt. Ltd.
8. Safety Consultant CivilBaba Infra Consultant Pvt. Ltd
4
Figure 3-1: Project Location Map
4. AUDIT DETAILS
The relevant guidelines/codes of practices were considered for the safety audit with special
emphasis given to IRC: SP: 88-2019 - Manual on Road Safety Audit, Indian Road Congress,
New Delhi. Further, Ministry of Road Transport & Highways, Govt. of India (MoRTH) circulars
that have safety considerations are considered by the road safety expert to more-in-depth
review.
5
Road safety audit performed to spot deficiencies for the safe and efficient movement of all
road users. The road safety consultant team visited the site along with representative of
Concessionaire/Contractor from 11th to 12th December 2023. The traffic flow was normal
under pleasant weather.
It was observed that the Concessionaire/Contractor has installed various features related to
safety aspect as per the IRC standard and requirement of the project. However, as per
observations at site, major recommendations were given on missing of advance sign boards
before diversion location, Barricading, PPE kit, missing of OHM and delineator Post. The
details of the road safety observations and appropriate recommendations are given in
section 5.
6
Safety Consultancy Services for “Construction of 4 lane Access Controlled New Greenfield Highway Section of NH-365BG (Khammam – Devarapalle) of Draft Safety Audit
Report (3rd Construction
length 29.513 km from Somavaram village to Chintagudem village (Design Ch. km 33+604 to 63+117) under Inter Corridor Route Under Bharatmala Stage)
Pariyojana on Hybrid Annuity mode in the state of Telangana (Package-II)”.
5. SAFETY AUDIT
Table 5-3 Safety observations with appropriate recommendation
Safety Concerns and Audit Findings Recommendations Client

Acceptance
S. No &
Description (With images if any) Risk Description (With images if any) Priority Compliance
with Date
5.1 Traffic Management Plan (Design and Implementation)
5.1.1
5.2 Speed Control
5.2.1
5.3 Signs, Signals, Pavement Marking and Delineation
5.3.1 At km 38+600
 Barricading was missing at this location, High Barricading should be done for the Highly
which can be safety hazard for road safety of road users as per clause 5.2.5 Desirable
users/construction workers.
of IRC: SP: 55-2014 (fig: 5.15&5.16 of
the code, page:51-52) - Refer
Annexure –D
7

S. No Acceptance
Description (With images if any) Risk Description (With images if any) Priority &
Compliance
5.3.2 At km 39+700
 Delineators are missing at this location, High Appropriate safety measures should be Highly
which can be safety hazard for road taken along with placing of delineators Desirable
users/construction workers.
at this location as per clause 5.2.1 of
IRC: SP: 55-2014, (Fig- 5.10 of the
code, Page-47 - Refer Annexure-A
5.3.3 At km 40+100
 Delineators are missing at this location, High Appropriate safety measures should be Highly
which can be safety hazard for road taken along with placing of delineators Desirable
8

S. No Acceptance
Compliance
users/construction workers. at this location as per clause 5.2.1 of
IRC: SP: 55-2014, (Fig- 5.10 of the
code, Page-47 - Refer Annexure-A
5.3.4 At km 43+700
 Delineators with cautionary tape are missing Appropriate safety measures should be Highly
which can be a safety hazard at night time. High taken along with placing of delineators Desirable
with cautionary tape at this location as
per clause 5.2.1 of IRC: SP: 55-2014,
(Fig- 5.10 of the code, Page-47 - Refer
Annexure-A
5.3.5 At km 44+100
 Advanced sign board are partially placed at High People at work, Speed limit , No Highly
this location, which can be safety hazard for overtaking , OHM sign board should Desirable
9

S. No Acceptance
Compliance
road users as it can lead to road crash. be placed at this location for the safety
of road users/ construction workers as
per clause 10.2 of IRC: SP: 55- 2014
(Fig: 10.15 of the code, Page: 111) –
Refer Annexure -B
5.3.6 At km 45+500
 Delineators are missing with cautionary tape, High Appropriate safety measures should be Highly
which can be a safety hazard at night time. taken along with placing of delineators Desirable
with cautionary tape at this location as
per clause 5.2.1 of IRC: SP: 55-2014,
(Fig- 5.10 of the code, Page-47 - Refer
Annexure-A
10

S. No Acceptance
Compliance
6.3.7 At km 47+600
 Advanced sign board are partially placed at High Speed limit , No overtaking , OHM Highly
this location, which can be safety hazard for sign board should be placed at this Desirable
road users as it can lead to road crash. location for the safety of road users/
construction workers as per clause
10.2 of IRC: SP: 55- 2014 (Fig: 10.15 of
the code, Page: 111) – Refer Annexure
-B
6.3.8 At km 47+700
11

S. No Acceptance
Compliance
 OHM is wrongly placed (L.H.S) at this location. High L.H.S OHM should be replaced by R.H.S Highly
OHM for the safety of construction Desirable
vehicles during night time.
6.3.9 At km 39+900
 Delineators with cautionary tape are missing, High Appropriate safety measures should be Highly
which can be a safety hazard at night time. taken along with placing of delineators Desirable
at both sides with cautionary tape at
this location as per clause 5.2.1 of IRC:
SP: 55-2014, (Fig- 5.10 of the code,
Page-47 - Refer Annexure-A
5.4 Diversions From One Carriageway to The Other

6.4.1 At km 45+800
 Advanced sign board are observed missing High Men at work, Traffic diversion ahead, Highly
before the diversion, which can be safety OHM sign board should be placed at this Desirable
12

S. No Acceptance
Compliance
hazard for road users as it can lead to road location for the safety of road users/
crash. construction workers as per clause 10.2
of IRC: SP: 55- 2014 (Fig: 10.15 of the
code, Page: 111) – Refer Annexure –B
6.4.2 At km 58+600
 Advanced sign board are partially placed High Men at work, OHM sign board should be Highly
before the diversion, which can be safety placed at this location for the safety of Desirable
hazard for road users as it can lead to road
road users/ construction workers as per
crash.
clause 10.2 of IRC: SP: 55- 2014 (Fig:
10.15 of the code, Page: 111) – Refer
Annexure –B
13

S. No Acceptance
Compliance
5.5 Road Surface

5.5.1
5.6 Crash Barriers
5.6.1
5.7 Work Site Access
5.7.1
5.8 Road Workers Safety
5.8.1 At km 44+903
 Workers are working without Personal
protective equipment’s (PPEs) which can be a No worker should be allowed to work
safety hazard for workers. Very without PPE. Essential
High Worker safety are as follows:
14

S. No Acceptance
 Operate equipment with care and
Compliance
do not use equipment beyond their
capacity
 Use all safety devices and PPE as
provided
 Proper use of helmet, shoe and
coat in construction site.
Protective gears should provide for the
safety of workers as per clause 9.5 of
IRC: SP: 55-2014 (Fig: 9.4 of the code,
Page: 94) – Refer Annexure-F
5.9 General Safety
1.1.
5.10 Vulnerable Road Users (Pedestrians, Bicyclists, Two Wheelers and Three Wheelers, And Animal Drawn Carts)
Through the Work Site
5.10.1
5.11 Safety At Night
5.11.1
Note: The above observations were given for a few locations. However, the concessionaire or contractor is requested to comply with appropriate
recommendations on other similar observations in the project section.
15
Safety Consultancy Services for “Construction of 4 lane Access Controlled New Greenfield Highway Draft Safety Audit Report
Section of NH-365BG (Khammam – Devarapalle) of length 29.513 km from Somavaram village to (3rd Construction Stage)
Chintagudem village (Design Ch. km 33+604 to 63+117) under Inter Corridor Route Under
Bharatmala Pariyojana on Hybrid Annuity mode in the state of Telangana (Package-II)”.
6 CERTIFICATION
The Audit Team has carried out this worksite safety according to the IRC Manual on Road
Safety Audit and Guidelines for Traffic Management for Work zones (IRC: SP: 55-2014).
Rajesh Kumar Jindal

(Sr. Road Safety Auditor cum Team Leader)
16
Annexure: - 1 Audit Checklist for Construction Safety Audit
Issue Yes No NA Comments

1. Traffic Management Plan (Design and
Implementation)
Has a traffic management plan (TMP) been prepared Yes
for the roadwork site as per IRC: SP: 55?
Has the TMP been approved by the Supervision Yes
Consultant or other authorized person?
Does the Contractor have an appointed Safety
Engineer who is responsible for road safety at the Yes
work site, including checking the condition of the
installed TMP every day?
Does the TMP provide appropriate and correct
signage, delineation for all road users under all traffic No
conditions?
Does the TMP provide work site protection (barriers) No
for all road users under all traffic conditions?
Has the TMP been implemented correctly at the No

roadwork site?
Is the advanced warning zone appropriately signed to
alert approaching road users of the presence of the No
road works?
Is the transition zone correctly and appropriately
signed and delineated to guide approaching road No
users into their correct path?
2. Road Works Stage
Is the termination zone appropriately signed to

advise road users that they are past the road works No
and may return to normal road/highway speeds?
Are the flagmen highly conspicuous and placed
where they can give clear instructions to approaching No
drivers/riders in advance of the work site?
Has the safety buffer zone been provided as per IRC: No
SP:55?
3. Speed Control
Are the speed limit signs conspicuous? Partially
17
Are there sufficient numbers of repeater speed Partially

restriction signs through the length of the work site?
Is the signed speed appropriate for safe traffic Partially
movement through the work site?
Have local Police been requested to enforce the No
signed speed limit through the worksite?
Are speeds managed (through signs, enforcement and
if necessary, road humps) so that vehicle operating No
speeds that pass within one traffic lane width of any
work site are 40km/h or lower?
4. Signs, Signals, Pavement Markings and
Delineation
Are all necessary warning, direction and regulatory No
signs in place as shown in the TMP?
Are all existing road signs (those that are
unnecessary during the works) covered to avoid No
distraction or misinformation?
Are all “Men at Work” signs removed or covered NA
when work is finished for the day (Applicable in case
of maintenance works)? (NOTE: Signs must be
credible and it brings other signs into disrepute to
leave “Men at Work” signs in place if no workers are
present).
Do all signs satisfy the 6C’s of good signage practice No
Are temporary traffic signals clearly visible to the NA

approaching drivers/riders?
If the signals generate traffic queues, can the end NA
of the queue be easily seen by approaching
drivers/riders?
Are pavement markings consistent and clear through NA
the length of the work site for both day and night?
Is delineation through the site safe for all road users No

under all anticipated conditions?
With several layers of asphalt typically to be laid for
new roads, is temporary lane marking being used on No
each new layer to guide drivers/riders as an interim
safety initiative, especially at night?
18
5. Diversions from one Carriageway to the other

If traffic is to be diverted from one carriageway onto, Partially
the other, do the advanced warning signs provide clear
guidance about the diversion ahead and are they well
located to alert all approaching road users?
Is the transition zone well delineated (with plastic
cones and other forgiving devices) to reduce the No
number of traffic lanes well before the carriageway
ends?
Is the carriageway (on which the work is to take place) No
fully closed at all intersections?
Are drivers/riders from the side roads given
appropriate warning of the two-way traffic operation No
on the sole carriageway open on the main road?
Is the carriageway (on which the work is to take place) No
fully and clearly closed off to all traffic?
Are all drivers/riders in both directions on the other
carriageway appropriately reminded they are on a two- No
way section of road (such as with “Two Way” warning
signs)?
Is the management of all two-way traffic sections
through the road work site safe for all road users No
both day and night?
6. Road Surface
Is the road surface suitable for safe movement by all No

road users, especially two and three wheelers?
Are paved surfaces swept and kept free of gravel and No
sand?
Has a suitable paved surface been provided along
with correct lane markings to guide drivers/riders No
through diversions?
Have signs and markers/road studs been used to
highlight changes in road surface to approaching No
drivers/riders?
Have signs and markers/studs been used to highlight
locations where different layers of asphalt end, causing No
sudden changes in the road surface for approaching
19

drivers/riders?
7. Crash barriers
Are all crash barriers necessary and are they installed No

correctly?
Have safe terminals (that are suitable for the operating

speeds through the work site) been placed on the end No
of each section of barrier?
8. Work Site Access
Are work site access points located with appropriate No

sight distances for entering and exiting work vehicles?
Are all site access points closed off to unauthorized No
traffic?
Are appropriate traffic controls in place where works No
traffic and public traffic interact?
9. Road Worker Safety
Are all workers and supervisors at the works site

wearing good and required PPE as per HSE norms and No
as per the requirement of activity being performed?
Is safe ladder provided for workers at site to reach the No
working platform/area?
Is working platform provided for safe working with toe No
guard and railing to prevent worker’s fall?
Is there a suitable safety zone in advance of and beside No
the work site?
10. Vulnerable Road Users (pedestrians, bicyclists,
two wheelers and three wheelers, and animal
drawn carts) through the Work Site
Are pedestrians, bicyclists, and two/three wheelers No
able to move safely through the construction zones?
Are vulnerable road users able to cross the road No
safely?
In particular, is safe access across the road provided No
for the young, the elderly and the disabled?
20
Have all-weather footways been provided to assist

public transport users to reach their stops without No
walking through the road work site?
Do the construction layouts and practices allow No
appropriate visibility for an approaching driver to see a
pedestrian waiting to cross the road?
Do the construction layouts and practices allow No
appropriate visibility funnel for an approaching driver
to see a small vehicle waiting to cross the carriageway
from side road or storage space of median?
11. Safety at Night
Are the road works conspicuous to all road users after No
dark?
Are travel paths obvious to all road users after dark? No
In particular, do carriageway closures have suitable

advance warning zones and transition zones that are No
conspicuous and clearly delineate for night time?
Yes = likely to be satisfactory for safety

No = there are possible safety issues
NA = not applicable
Annexure A: Delineator Post
21
Annexure B: Signage Plan for VUP construction
22
23
Annexure C: Road safety Equipment for worker
Annexure D: Standard Barricading
24

Draft RSA Report - 2nd Construction Stage - Khammam - Devarapalle - PKG - 2 - 7.7.23

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Draft RSA Report - 2nd Construction Stage - Khammam - Devarapalle - PKG - 2 - 7.7.23

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Draft RSA Report - 2nd Construction Stage - Khammam - Devarapalle - PKG - 2 - 7.7.23

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

National Highways Authority of

Draft Safety Audit Report (3rd Construction Stage)

Safety Consultancy Services

Annexure: - 1 Audit Checklist for Construction Safety Audit..................................................20

Table 2-1: Safety Audit Team................................................................................................... 2

Annexure A: Delineator Post..................................................................................................27

S. No. Position Name

2. Traffic Planner Mr. Iswinder Singh Dua

4. Sr. Road Safety Auditor Mr. Mashkur Ahmad

5. Traffic & Road Safety Engineer Mr. Manower Alam

6. Highway & Safety Engineer Mr. Ravi Kumar

7. Road Safety Engineer Mr. Abdul Majid

Construction Stage Methodology

Safety Of Workmen and Safety Of Road Users

Application Of Traffic Control Devices And Other Safety Measures

Any Other Parameter Noticed Which Can Enhance Safety

Steps involved in Construction Stage Audit

S.NO Item Description

3. Location map Fig.3-1

4. Concessionaire/Contractor M/s. HG Infra Engineering Limited

5. Appointed Date 31.10.2022

6. Construction period 2 Years

7. Independent Engineer M/s. LEA Associates South Asia Pvt. Ltd. in

Figure 3-1: Project Location Map

Table 5-3 Safety observations with appropriate recommendation

Safety Concerns and Audit Findings Recommendations Client

Safety Concerns and Audit Findings Recommendations Client

Safety Concerns and Audit Findings Recommendations Client

Safety Concerns and Audit Findings Recommendations Client

Safety Concerns and Audit Findings Recommendations Client

Safety Concerns and Audit Findings Recommendations Client

5.4 Diversions From One Carriageway to The Other

Safety Concerns and Audit Findings Recommendations Client

Safety Concerns and Audit Findings Recommendations Client

5.5 Road Surface

Safety Concerns and Audit Findings Recommendations Client

Rajesh Kumar Jindal

Annexure: - 1 Audit Checklist for Construction Safety Audit

Issue Yes No NA Comments

Has the TMP been implemented correctly at the No

2. Road Works Stage

Is the termination zone appropriately signed to

Are the speed limit signs conspicuous? Partially

Issue Yes No NA Comments

Are there sufficient numbers of repeater speed Partially

Are temporary traffic signals clearly visible to the NA

Is delineation through the site safe for all road users No

Issue Yes No NA Comments

5. Diversions from one Carriageway to the other

Is the road surface suitable for safe movement by all No

Issue Yes No NA Comments

Are all crash barriers necessary and are they installed No

Have safe terminals (that are suitable for the operating

8. Work Site Access

Are work site access points located with appropriate No

9. Road Worker Safety

Are all workers and supervisors at the works site

Issue Yes No NA Comments