Chapter I: INTRODUCTION...Owns and operates the 12MW Jhimruk Hydropower Plant and the 5.1MW Andhi Khola Hydropower Plant. Besides supplying power to the national electricity grid,

Environmental Impact Assessment Study of Kabeli ‘A’ Hydroelectric Project

I - 1

Chapter I: INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background The Kabeli A Hydroelectric Project (KAHEP) located in between the geographical coordinates, latitudes 27o17'32"N to 27o13’41"N and longitudes 87o45'50"E to 87o40'55"E in Pachthar and Taplejung district, Mechi zone of Eastern Development Region of Nepal, is based on the water resources of the Kabeli Khola, a natural border between the Panchtahar and Taplejiung districts in the Middle Mountains of Eastern Nepal about 620 km east of Kathmandu. This project utilizes a more than 15 km long loop of Kabeli River formed with Tamor River. The Kabeli River is diverted through a 4.322 km long tunnel and discharges into Tamor River for power generation. Initial identification of the project was made during the Koshi River Basin Master Plan Study (1983-85).

Successive studies (MHSP/NEA, 1998) formulated the 30 MW Kabeli-A Hydroelectric Project with an

average annual estimated energy of 164 GWh. The project was later offered for competitive bidding to

private developers on build, own, operate and transfer (BOOT) model. Butwal Power Company Limited

in JV with Shangrila Energy Ltd and Khudi Hydropower Ltd from Nepal and two foreign companies

SCPHI (Canada) and APP, China won the bid and established a Project company named Kabeli

Energy Ltd (KEL)and signed the Project Development Agreement (PDA) with the Department of

Electricity Development (DoED), Government of Nepal (GoN) in 2010 AD. Subsequently, DOED has

assigned the survey license of the project to KEL (Annex 1.1).

The Project configuration was decided by performing project optimization studies during updated feasibility study by KEL in 2010. Major project features of KAHEP are diversion weir, side intake, settling basin, headrace tunnel, surge shaft, surface penstock, powerhouse and tailrace. Now KEL is undergoing the detailed design and environmental and social studies and is set for the development of the Project at the earliest possible. The updated feasibility study (KEL, 2010) proposed a 34.7 MW installed capacity to the project. The

gross head of the project is 116.8 m and the design discharge based on the 40 percentile flow in the

river is 37.73 m3/s.The proposed project is a Peaking Run-Of-River (PROR) type project with a peaking

reservoir constructed by damming the Kabeli River at the headworks. The live storage capacity of the

reservoir is 0.315 million m3. The plant has been designed as a 6 hour peaking plant but at a reduced

capacity of 26.5 MW during the month of the lowest mean monthly flow. The peaking will be done in

two slots in a day with 2 hour in the morning and 4 hour in the evening peak. The annual average

energy generation is estimated as 191.2 GW-h before outage and 179.8 GW-h after considering an

outage of 6%. The firm energy of the project has been estimated as 142.6 GW-h and 134.1 GW-h

respectively before and after outage.

1.2 Project Proponent The KEL is the project proponent and has signed a Project Development Agreement (PDA) with the Department of Electricity Development (DoED) for the development of KAHEP dated 31 January, 2010 (Annex 1.2). The detailed address of the project proponent is given below:

Kabeli Energy Limited

Ganga Devi Marga - 313, Buddha Nagar,

P.O Box: 11728, Kathmandu, Nepal

Tel: +977 – 1- 4781776 / 4784026;

Fax: + 977 1-4780994;

e- mail: [email protected]

The KEL is a subsidiary company of the Butwal Power Company Ltd (BPC), established to develop, own and operate the Kabeli ‘A’ project. BPC holds 54% stake, while other JV partners SCP Hydro International Inc. (Canada), Shangri-La Energy Ltd. (Nepal), Khudi Hydropower Ltd. (Nepal), and Asia


I - 2

Pacific Power Tech. Ltd. (China) hold 30, 5, 6, and 5% respectively. Butwal Power Company Limited (BPC) is a leading hydropower developer of Nepal. The company's assets and key features are as follows:

� Around 300 employees � Owns and operates the 12MW Jhimruk Hydropower Plant and the 5.1MW Andhi Khola

Hydropower Plant. Besides supplying power to the national electricity grid, the company has electrified more than 35,000 households through these power plants under its rural electrification program

� It owns 16.88% of the shares in Khimti I Hydropower Plant (60 MW), 51.3% in Nepal Hydro and Electric Ltd, 20% in Hydro Lab Pvt. Ltd and 24% in JIDCO. It also owns 60% of the shares in the 4 MW Khudi Hydropower plant which has been in commercial operation since 30 December, 2006.

� Established in 1986 as the company's consulting wing for engineering and consulting services in hydropower, water and irrigation sector. Today BPC Hydroconsult is recognized as a leading consulting organization and it undertakes multi-disciplinary projects.

1.3 Institution Responsible for Preparing the Document Nepal Environmental and Scientific Services [NESS] Private Limited, a pioneer consulting firms in the

country in the field of environmental studies is assigned as a consultant by KEL to carryout the IEE

study as per the provision of EPA 1997 and EPR 1997 and EIA study as per requirement of the World

Bank. The address of the consulting firm is:

GPO Box 7301, Jitjung Marga-26,

Thapathali, Kathmandu, Nepal

Tel.:977 1 4244989 / 4241001; Fax: 977 1 4226028

E-mail: [email protected]; Website: www.ness.com.np

NESS is a company incorporated under the Ministry of Industry, Government of Nepal. Established in 1992, the company has its head office at Thapathali, Kathmandu Nepal. It has a core permanent staff of 30 professionals and maintains a pool of over 150 resource personnel.

1.4 Purpose of the Project The purpose of KAHEP is to harness the hydropower potential of the Kabeli Khola within the licensed geographical coordinates by optimizing the available water resources with a minimum possible environmental and social damage in the project development area. The project proponent has the objective to deliver the generated electricity to the central electricity grid under a power purchase agreement with the concerned electricity transmission and distribution agency of Nepal and assist the Government of Nepal to overcome the on going load shedding and contribute to the national development efforts.

1.5 Statuary Environmental Requirement The statuary environmental legislation for the development of the proposal in Nepal is the Environment

Protection Act (1997) and Environment Protection Rule (1997). The Environment Protection Rule

Schedule 1 classifies KAHEP as Initial Environmental Examination (IEE) category project, since the

project has an installed capacity of less than 50 MW and does not affect forestland area above 5 ha

and lies outside the limits of the officially gazetted National Parks, Wildlife Reserves, Sanctuaries and

Conservation Areas (refer EPR Schedule 1, Section UU, sub-section 2). Hence, KAHEP has to

undergo IEE level study and its approval as per the EPR procedures to satisfy the environmental

requirements of the Government of Nepal prior to development.

Since the project is seeking financial loans from the World Bank to meet part of the project

development cost, it has to comply with the environmental and social safeguard policies of the Bank.


I - 3

The project has been classified by the World Bank as a 'Category A' project and therefore a project

specific EIA report will be required within the framework of the World Bank’s Policies to be eligible for

financial loans.

1.6 Objectives of the EIA Study The objective of the EIA study is to assess whether the proposed project is acceptable or not from the

environmental point of view and make the proposed project technically and environmentally

sustainable. The objectives of the EIA study are to:

� Collect baseline data on environmental conditions of the project area

� Carry out alternative analyses for various power generation, layout and design from the environmental point of view

� Identify environmental impacts of the selected alternative in terms of magnitude, extent and duration that may be expected to occur during pre-construction, construction and operation

� Identify the critical environmental problems that require further studies and/or monitoring.

� Suggest mitigation measures for adverse impacts and enhancement measures for beneficial impacts

� Develop an Environmental Management and Monitoring Plan

� Assess the institutional arrangements and capacity for the implementation of the Environmental Management and Monitoring Plan

� Develop information dissemination and consultation strategy for the implementation of the project

� Consult and inform the project affected parties and other stakeholders, and ensure active people's participation

� Advise decision makers regarding the environmental implementation of the project

� Conduct a rapid environmental assessment of cumulative impacts of planned hydropower development in the Kabeli basin and identify measures that need to be incorporated in the Kabeli A hydropower project from basin environmental considerations.

1.7 EIA Study Methodology The following methodologies have been applied to the collect baseline information and impact prediction:

1.7.1 Literature Review and Consultation with the Stakeholders

The available published literature, documents and maps (GoN's topographic map with scales 1: 25000

and 1:50,000, land use maps, aerial photographs, cadastral survey maps, goggle maps etc) related to

the project area were reviewed. The existing policies, legislations, guidelines and manuals related to

the hydropower development in Nepal and World Bank's EA polices and guidelines were also

reviewed. Apart from the above, the EIA Scoping Documents, approved ToR and the Detailed Design

Report including the EIA study carried out by Nepal Consult (P) Limited in 1998 were thoroughly

reviewed to come up with the project study requirements both at the desk level and field level. The data

collected through literature review on the physical environment include physiography, geomorphology,

geology and soil, drainage and hydrology, meteorology, land use, erosion and land stability, water use

and rights, GLOF potential and seismicity. On the biological environment information related to the

forest coverage and types, floral & faunal biodiversity, rare, endangered and protected faunal and floral


I - 4

species, habitats and ecological conditions of the project area were collected. Demographic

characteristics of the project district and VDCs, quality of life, culture and traditions were the key

information collected in the socio-economic and cultural aspects.

Furthermore, series of discussions and consultations were carried out with the project technical team

involved in the updated feasibility study (KEL, 2010) to get updates on project location, design aspects,

project construction and operation modalities, concentration of activities in the different periods of

project construction and operation, etc. Design merits and demerits of the various alternative options of

project development and operation were also discussed.

In order to cross check the local concerns and local information available in the secondary literatures,

officials of the local and district level, particularly Village Development Committees, District

Development Committees, District Forest Office, Community Forest User Groups, District Soil

Conservation Offices and District Land Revenue Office were also contacted to solicit site-specific

information of the project area. Furthermore, the local, national and international institutions working in

the project area were consulted to verify the project specific information related to environmental and

social aspects.

1.7.2 Field Study

The field investigation was carried out by a multidisciplinary team, which comprised of a wildlife expert,

physical environment expert, environmental engineer, hydropower engineer, taxonomist and fishery

experts (see contract). The design and hydropower engineers of the proponent also assisted the team

member during the field survey. A month long field visit was conducted in September, October 2010 to

collect the baseline information. The study team carried out field visit in two VDCs of Pachthar district

(Amarpur VDC and Panchami VDC) and two VDCs of Taplejung district (Thechambu and

Nangkholyang)

The required baseline information on physical and biological environment of direct and indirect impact

areas of the project were collected during the field visit. The information on different environmental

components was collected by using the following tools.

(1) Physical Environment

In order to collect baseline information on the physical environment, an intensive field investigation

along the proposed project area was carried out using a checklist (Annex 1.3). Land use patterns,

topography and soil erosion were carried out through direct observation and field mapping. The

methods employed for the data collection were indirect assessment of air quality; water sample

collection at two locations (headworks and dewater zone) of Kabeli Khola and laboratory analysis on

different parameters like BOD, DO, TSS, TDS, etc for water quality; and direct observation &

measurements of sound pressure level at two locations (headworks and powerhouse) for noise quality.

The slope stability and landslides, fan deposits and rock fall within the project area were studied

thorough site observation and on site delineation in maps.

Apart from the above information, discussions were carried out with local communities to fill the information gaps such as flooding events, GLOF events, seismic history, landslide events and locations and land degradation process etc.

(2) Biological Environment

a. Forest and Vegetation Composition, distribution patterns and characteristics of vegetation and forest types and sensitive

habitat in the project area were assessed from direct field observations, quadrate sampling, transect

walk survey, photography, maps, interaction with forest user groups, and collection of information from

district forest offices. The type of forest and management practices around the project area were

studied and identified. The total area of the affected community forest, leasehold forest and private


I - 5

forest were quantified during the field survey and delineated in the maps. A detailed survey was

conducted in affected forests (Figure 1.1) for the identification of species, analysis of vegetation and

bio-diversity status. Trees losses were estimated by appropriate sampling procedures. For the

sampling purpose, quadrate size of 25m x 25 m was laid down for the tree species, 5m x 5m for shrub

species & saplings and 1m x 1m for herbs and seedlings.

Figure 1.1: Areas Evaluated for Direct Impact on Vegetation

Note: A = Headwork site including access road and reservoir, B = Powerhouse Site Including Surge Tank, Camp and

Penstock

The volume and biomass of the affected tree species (timber, fodder and litter) were quantified together

with the loss of forest. Tree species having more than 30 cm diameters at breast height (DBH) were

counted and measured as tree. Tree species having DBH range between 10 cm – 30 cm were counted

and measured as pole and rest were counted as seedling and saplings. Diameter at breast height (d)

was measured at 1.3 meter from the ground level.

Based on this information, loss of tree species, loss of standing wood volume, were calculated for each tree species using the following formulas:

Basal Area = π d²/4 Volume (m³) = Basal Area x Tree height

The economic values of forest ecosystems were estimated by projecting forest products values with

their economic prices and by adding them together and indirect use values. The indirect use value was

derived from the values of environmental services that directly support and protect economic activities

and natural environments such as watershed protection function, carbon sequestration and pollution

control through the release of oxygen.

A

B


I - 6

The socially useful and commercially important timbers as well as NTFPs of the project area were

investigated by an ethno-botanical survey. A checklist was used and consultations of local people were

carried out to get the ethno-botanical information of the project area. In addition, indigenous practices

and use of NTFPs were also documented.

b. Wildlife (Mammal, Bird and Herpetofauna) Both direct and indirect methods were used for collecting information on wildlife. For direct methods,

transect walk was performed to observe wildlife status in each forest area that belong to the impact or

activity area of proposed hydropower project ( headworks, quarry sites and surge shaft, powerhouse,

access road to headworks & powerhouse, camp sites at powerhouse). Animals, reptiles and birds

observed along the route were recorded, together with information on their habitat. This method of

continuous recording (1993, Chalise, 2003) was adopted for the collection of general information on

species diversity and population by direct observation. This method is also known as Visual

Encountered Sampling to reflect wildlife population and diversity (Mukherjee, 2007). Besides above, a

ten minute scan sampling (as described in Chalise, 2003) was also undertaken in each transect route

to observe wildlife species diversity in forest areas and open land. This was repeated several times

during an observation session, shifting the observation site in each hour interval. It was performed in

each site of headwork, access road and powerhouse. Continuous and libitum sampling was also

performed during the forest walk and all new observations were recorded (Altmann, 1974). A

continuous recording of the data during the forest walk was performed; whenever any new information

perceived it had been recorded (Chalise, 2003). Presence of animals, reptiles and birds were also

recorded by the identification of pug marks/footprints, droppings/pallets, ground digging and uprooting,

tree scratching and marking, remains [skin, Exuviae (scales of reptiles), fur, feathers, bones,

horns/antlers and carcasses], nests, holes and burrows etc. In addition, call counts, cries, smell/odor,

leftover food, trampling of plants, eaten up of flowers and fruit bunches were also recorded wherever

applicable. The materials and equipment used for the field work was camera with lens 200x, binoculars

(10 x 40), altimeter, pedometer, thermometer, landsite compass, DBH meter, map of the project area,

measuring tape, polythene bags, plastic bottles and nylon rope. The collection of the specimens was

carried out whenever possible and photographs were taken of uncollected items.

Additional information on animal presence and movements issues was obtained by using indirect

methods i.e. discussions with a range of stakeholders that included local people, forest-goers or cattle

grazers and also project local field staff, community forest user group, private forest owner and local

range post staff, etc. Sources of information on biodiversity were basically collected through the

organized and non-organized community forest users groups and individuals.

c. Fishes

Fish sample were collected at three different stations (dam Site, downstream of dam site and de-

watered zone, Figure 1.2) of the Kabeli River with the help of cast nets and other fishing gears (D-net,

Fishing hooks etc) by mobilizing the local fishermen. The number of efforts employed by the fishermen

was recorded to determine catch per unit effort (CPUE). The collected fish were identified at site to the

extent possible. For unidentified species, the samples were preserved in 10 % formalin and were

identified in the laboratory in Kathmandu later. Measurements of total length, weight and other

morphological characteristic were recorded. A detailed study of local fishes was carried out for

determining the dominant species, species diversity, taxonomic and endemic characteristics for local

and global listing.

d. Planktons and Aquatic Insects Zooplankton, phytoplankton and aquatic insects were collected from all sampling stations (Figure 1.2).

For zooplankton, 100 Liters of river water was filtered through a 50 mm plankton net with the help of a

50 ml jug. The zooplankton collected in the plankton net was then transferred into the sample bottle

along with water. A few drops of 5 % formaldehyde solution were added into the sample for


I - 7

preservation. The preserved sample was taken to the biological laboratory of the private sector in

Kathmandu for further identification with the help of a microscope and available literature.

Figure 1.2: Fish Sampling Sites

Note: A = Dam Site, B= Upstream Dam Site, C = Dewatered Stretch

For phytoplankton, one liter of water sample was collected in a glass jar. The Lugal’s solution was then

added into the glass jar till the weak tea color appeared. Then, it was allowed to settle down for 12

hours. The preserved sample water was siphoned out with the help of plastic tube till it reached 50 ml

mark on the glass jar. Then, the remaining solution of phytoplankton was transferred into the sample

bottle and was brought back to the laboratory in Kathmandu for identification.

Aquatic insects were collected by D-net (Drift net) and forceps which were preserved under 10%

formalin for identification. Preservation was done following the method used by Edmondson (1959) as

the main reference.

1.7.3 Impact Analysis

After the full documentation of the baseline environmental data of the project area, each of the

environmental parameters was examined against the project activities in the different stages of project

development using various methods and tools as required by the environmental parameter in question.

By using the format of the National EIA Guideline (1993), the impacts are categorized as direct and

indirect. Each of the direct and indirect impacts was further evaluated in terms of its extent as site

specific, local or regional. Each of these was further analyzed in terms of duration as short-term,

medium-term and long-term. The magnitude of each of the impact was then evaluated as high, medium

and low based on the conditions of the environmental parameter at present and estimated or projected

changes with the project. While doing so, reversibility of the impacts were also examined to qualify their

magnitudes for impact significance.. The evaluation of magnitude of impacts on value based system as

presented in the National EIA Guideline, 1993 is not used as this system does not take into account the

impact irreversibility and the impact rating for magnitude is often misguide the impact significance.

A B

C


I - 8

1.7.4 Public Consultation and Public Hearing

Regular informal public consultation was a part of the EIA study. Local people were consulted in a

number of occasions and forums During the EA process.

A total of 14 FGDs with the local people have been conducted in different location of the project areas

to identify the various issues related to the hydropower project development and its socioeconomic

consequences and corresponding mitigation measures. A total of 251 individuals of representing

different impact areas and groups such as dam site, dewatering zone, access road, powerhouse site,

CFUG, LFUG, Dalits, IPs and women participated in the FGDs. Out of the 14 FGDs, 2 were with

women, 1 with Dalit, 3 with IPs, 1 with Kabeli Concern Committee, 1 with CFUG, 1 with LFUG, 1 with

local school teachers and the rest 4 FGDs were conducted with mixed group comprising of male,

female, IPs, Dalit, Bahun, Chhetri and so on. Table 1.1 presents the locations of the FGD and the

members participating in the FDG.

Table 1.1: FDG Locations and Participant Details

SN Location of FDG Date

Participants

Sex Caste/Ethnicity Occupation

Total M F Br/Ch IP Dalit

Primarily farming

+suplimentarily

fishing

Job and business

Other (leader

s, school teache

r)

1 Amarput-6 Women 14/7/067 - 14 14 - 14 14

2 Thechambu-5, Downstream Affected households

15/7/067 14 02 03 13 - 07 04 05 16

3 Amarpur-6 Community Forest 16/7/067 25 01 12 13 01 24 - 02 26

4 Amarpur-8, Downstream Affected households

17/7/067 11 07 07 08 03 18 18

5 Amarpur-6 Kabeli Concern Group

18/7/067 22 - 13 09 - 18 04 22

6 Amarpur-9, Pinase affected communities of Panchami VDC

19/7/067 21 03 08 15 01 23 - - 23

7 Amarpur-9, Pinase affected Majhi indigenous community and Leasehold forest, Amarpur VDC

19/7/067 11 06 01 16 - 17 17

8 Nangkholyang-5, affected communities

21/7/067 27 11 10 28 - 25 05 08

38

9 Nangkholyang-5, School teachers

21/7/067 06 - 03 03 06 06

10 Thechambu-5 Indigenous peoples and VDC representatives

22/7/067 25 02 05 21 01 21 06 - 27

11 Thechambu-5 women group 22/7/067 07 01 06 07 07

12 Amarpur-6, Indigenous peoples of four affected VDCs

23/7/067 19 - 01 18 15 03 2 20

13 Dalit people of Amerpur VDC 23/7/067 7 3 10 8 2 10

14 Amberpur-9 Pinase, Consultation Meeting with Majhi Indigenous Community

19/7/067 10 7 17 17 17

Total 188 63 78 167 16 214 20 27 251

*M=Male, F=Female, Br=Brahmin, Ch=Chettri, IP=Indigenous People

The FGD meeting was organized by the SA consulting team by giving a prior verbal notice through a runner to the entire project affected VDCs. The main objectives of FGD were to collect information on socio-cultural landscapes, human-environment interactions, and livelihood practices, the views of local people towards the project, their perceptions, aspirations and expectations. FGDs were organized to collect the information on local development and their felt needs, their roles on project implementation, possible mitigation measures and institutional arrangements. Separate FGDs were organized for indigenous peoples, women, Dalits and affected households and other marginalized groups as they may have different agendas, interests and aspirations than the dominant groups. The following table gives the details of FGDs and consultation meeting conducted. However, the purpose of the focus group discussion meeting was:


I - 9

� To provide factual information on the project location, particularly the main project structures

such as dam, tunnel, adit portals, powerhouse, surge tank, tailrace and the project access

roads besides tentative locations of the quarry sites, construction camps and operation camps

of the project.

� To clarify the objective of the Project SA and its procedures

� To provide potential impacts of the project from technical considerations during project

construction and operation in the project area's physical, biological, social, socio-economic and

cultural domain.

� To collect information on the project areas physical, biological and socio-economic and cultural

environments from the local peoples’ perspective

� To collect opinion of the people on the project

� To get feedback on the potential impacts of the project in the eyes of the local people

particularly on the local infrastructure, social norms and culture and on the physical and

biological environments

� To solicit opinion of the local people on the alternative mitigation measures to abate, or avoid

the potential impacts

� To solicit opinion of the local people with regard to the development aspiration of the project.

The focus group discussion meetings were non-formal meetings. The meetings started with the consent of the members present. To start the meeting, lead member of the consulting team first introduced the consulting members with a note on the objective of the meeting. Then the project layout and its different components and their physical location in the field were explained with details of the type of construction and operation activities of the project. Then the forum was opened for public debate on the different issues. Annex 1.4 briefly summarizes the findings of the location wise FDG meetings.

Land acquisition and mode of compensation, livelihood related issues due to the loss of land, dewatering, prior information dissemination practices, ILO 169 and rights of the IPs, rural electrification, current uses of Kabeli river, perceptions towards project, socio-cultural practices associated with River Kabeli, local development needs, likely impacts due to the various project structures and corresponding mitigation measures were the major issues discussed during the FGDs. The participants freely discussed on the issues and expressed their ideas, views, suggestion, and comments on the various components of the project. The moderator (study team member) introduced the issues and agendas of the discussion and kept the discussion going, and tried to prevent domination of the discussion by a few participants. Information pertaining to the optimum environmental mitigation option and environmental enhancement

measures was also obtained from the discussions and consultation with the local people. The

information solicited has been used extensively in the preparation of this EA report, particularly for the

environmental baseline, prediction of environmental impacts, design of mitigation and monitoring and in

the preparation of environmental enhancement programs. The list of persons consulted in the

Community Forest User Group Meetings is presented in Annex 1.5.

Public hearing will be organized at the project area in the near future to present the findings of the EIA

study as well as to collect the concerns and views of the people of the project area. A summary of

public consultations, deliberations, comments and suggestions of the public hearings will be

incorporated in the EIA Report.