GOVERNMENT OF INDIA MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT & FORESTS NORTH EASTERN REGIONAL OFFICE LAW-U-SIB, LUMBATNGEN NEAR M.T.C. WORKSHOP, SHILLONG-793021 TEL: (0364) - 2537609 (0), 2536041 (F) GRAM: PARYAVARAN, SHILLONG. Email: [email protected]

No. 8-65/2011-FC/

~

19"'}}

May 18,2012

To The Addl. Director General of Forests (FC) Ministry of Env. & Forests Paryavaran Bhawan, CGO Complex Lodhi Road New Delhi - 110003

Sub: Proposed diversion of 143.4928 ha. for construction of 520 MW HEP Teesta Stage-IV under Mangan and Dzongu Range in North District of Sikkim - Site Inspection Report. Ref: F. No. 8-65/2011-FCI

Govt. ofIndia,

MoEF (FC Section), New Delhi dtd. 29.6.201 1.

Sir, As desired by the Ministry, the site inspection of the proposed diversion of 143.4928 ha. of forest land for construction of 520 MW HEP Teesta Stage-IV under Mangan and Dzongu Range in North District of Sikkim by NHPC has been carried out by the undersigned on l" and 2nd May, 2012 along with the project proponent, Nodal Officer as well as local Divisional Forest Officer. A detailed site inspection report in the prescribed format together with its enclosures is attached with this communication for your needful.

End: As stated. (B.N. a) Addl. Principal Chief Conservator Copy to:The DGF & Spl. Secy., Ministry ofEnv. & Forests, Paryavaran Road, New Delhi - 110 003 for information.

of Forests (C)

Bhawan, CGO Complex, Lodhi

.':iII'.

/

SITE INSPECTION REPORT ON PROI)OSED FOREST LAND DIVERSION TEESTA STAGE IV HEP IN SIKKIM BY NHPC

FOR

1. Legal status of the forest land proposed for diversion The legal status of the land proposed for diversion is Khasmal (Protected Forests) as stated by the State Forest Deptt .. 2. Itemwise break-up details of the forest land proposed for diversion Land requirement (in ha) for proposed Teesta Stage-IV H.E. project in Sikkim by NHPC. Components

Right bank Private

1. Dam complex 2.

Power house complex

3.

Adit-II area

4.

Colony area

5.

Reservoir area a) Land submergence

7

Dumping area

8.

Underground (Head race & Tail race tunnel)

21.25

14.92

36.18

24.26

4.18

33.45

13.30

46.76

27.69

0.87

27.69

0.87

28.56

14.14

15.24

36.55

37.32

73.86

31.51

31.51

6.66

9.19

9.12

16.42

.15.98

15.10

11.63

Govt.

2.84

12.08

75.78

Private

55.37

14.59

22.08

Govt.

28.80

8.62

22.41

Total

Sub-Total

26.57

12.82

Quarry area

, Total

Private

17.95

b) Water course 6.

Govt.

Left bank

20.40

32.03

32.03

1.12

3.03

1.25

3.03

2.37

5.40

73.63 14.40

104.81

55.46

180.58

129.09 14.40

309.67 14.40

Grand Total

3. Whether proposal involves any construction If yes, details thereof.

143.4928 324.07

of buildings (including residential)

or not.

Though a residential Colony for the staffs of the NHPC is proposed to be constructed near Tingchim Village on the Left Bank of Teesta River but the colony is proposed to be constructed over Private Land and only a small nallah falling between the colony area (0.87 ha) is the Govt. /Forest Land, which is proposed for diversion. The details of permanent residential and non-residential buildings proposed for construction are as below:-

DETAILS OF NON-RESIDENTIAL

B ILDI

G

Sl. No

Description

No

01 02

Hospitals at main Colony Field Hostels with canteen facility at main colony Non - Executive Field Hostel Executive Field Hostel Workshops Stores/ Warehouse at various location in project Quality assurance laboratories Tel. ExchangelPost office/Bank! SchoollPolice station/Shopping Centers/ Co-operative stores/ Canteen/ Fueling Station / Gas Depot., etc. Guest House at main colony Officer Club Staff recreation club at main colony Auditorium for training and cultural activities etc. Sheds for DG sets Explosive Magazine Office accommodation Substation Building Other misc. Building/Security Barracks, etc. Total

1

Total Plinth area (Sq. meter) 1200

1 1 1 1 1 1

2700 3100 400 300 150 4500

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

1150 600 400 0 0 100 4500 500 200

03 04 05 06

07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15

DEtAILS

OF RESIDENTIAL

19800

BUILDING

Sl. No

Description

No

01 02 03 04 05

General Manager Type - IV (Spl.) Chief Engineers Type - IV Sr. Manager / Managers Type - III Asstt. Deputy Managers/Principle Type- lIB Engrs/AE/AOIRO/ARO/AAO and other officers Type-IIA AGII/ AGIIIIDr. Man/Nurse/Compounder/Security GuardslDrivers/ Attendants Type -I Quarters for equipment erectors Total

1 2 12 80 100

Total Plinth area (Sq. meter) 225 400 1500 7600 4875

150

2700

06 07

Total plinth area of Non-Residential & Residential building

=

0

17300 19800 + 17300

=

37100 sq.m.

4. Total cost of the project at present rates. Rs. 3594.74 Crs (at July 2009 PL). 5. Wildlife Whether forest area proposed for diversion is important from wildlife point of view or not. As informed by the State Forest Deptt. officials, the proposed area for diversion does not form part of any Wildlife Protected area, or on any wildlife migration route. The area also does not inhabit any rare, endangered or unique species of flora and fauna, however Jungle Cat,

Fishing Cat, Leopard, Barking Deer, Mongoose, Common Otter, Himalayan the area.

oral. ild Bear, Macaque, Jackals, Squirrels, Bats, urt .n, different varieties of snakes and birds abound

There are two Wildlife Protected Area in the vicinity of the project. As per map provided by the State Forest Deptt. Kanchcndz nga National Park/Kanchendzonga Biosphere Reserve is at a distance of 5.83 km (aerial di tancc) in the North from the Dam site whereas in the South lies Fambonglho Wildlife Sanctuary at a distance of 4.3 km. from the proposed underground power house area. The prop sed dam site is about 12 km. (11.99 km.) away from Kanchandzonga National Park/Kanchendzonga Biosphere Reserve. The HEP is listed under activities requiring environmental clearance under EIA Notification 2006 (as amended in Nov'2009); therefore this proposal shall require clearance from NBWL as the distance of Kanchendzonga National Park/Biosphere Reserve as well as Fambonglho Wildlife Sanctuary is only 5.83 km. and 4.3 km. respectively from proposed dam site and underground Power House site respectively (as required by Guidelines of MoEF dt. 19.,08.10 under FCA). As per EIA studies, in the influence area of the project there are 32 spp. of mammals, 170 spp. of birds, 11 spp. of Amphibians and 35 spp. of Reptiles whereas in project areas there are 5 spp. of Mammals, 36 spp. of birds, 3 spp. of Amphibians, 3 spp. of Reptiles and 35 spp. of butterflies. Avifauna includes Cuckoos, Doves, Pigeons, Parakeets, Flycatchers, Kingfishers, Wagtails, Thrushes, Bulbuls, Warblers, Tree pies, Sandpipers, Hawks, etc. 6. Vegetation Total number of trees to be felled; effect of removal of trees on the general ecosystem in the area. , The tree canopy comprises of species of Duabanga, Schima wallichi, Albizia, Alnus nepalensis, Tenninalia myriocarpa, Betula, Ficus, Rhus chinensis, Bischofia javanica, Bombax etc. Species of tree fern, pandanus, grasses, various climbers etc. were also seen together with the trees on both the banks of the river which is very steep ( >75°). As per enumeration list the proposed project is to affect 8322 no. of trees together with about 17000 no. of poles, and about 9000 no. of bamboos. The ruling crown density in the project area is very dense (having estimated density of about 0.8). Effect of removal of trees on the general eco-system in the area: The number of trees which shall be affected due to this project is large and its removal may affect the local eco-system. The immediate effect will be accelerated soil erosion which may lead to landslips/slides on steep slopes. The felling, logging, extraction all shall add together to this. Removal of top canopy shall have effect on middle/lower canopy as well as on ground flora and fauna. The general eco-system may not get much impacted in the wider area as the area is having thick tree cover all along, but the local eco-system may get affected. To reduce impact of tree felling (if any) should be done in phased manner with concurrent planting in the vicinity/project land! CA site. While executing felling all precautions should be taken to minimize soilloss/erosionllandslips etc. 7. Background note on the proposal Teesta river is the largest river of Sikkim and there is enormous fall of the order of about 3600 m over a length of about 175 km. along the course which makes the river ideal from point of view of Hydro Power tapping/generation. The Central Water Commission has identified six stages ofHEPs to harness about 3635 MW Hydro Power potential of Teesta. Teesta Stage IV is

a part of cascade development of Hydro pow 'J' on this river. A table showing Stage-wise power potential and project proponent involved in th d evclopment is as below:Stages Stage I Stage II Stage III Stage IV Stage V Stage VI

Capacity 320MW 750MW 1200 MW 495 MW (revised to 520 MW) 510MW 360 MW (revised to 500 MW)

Project proponent SMEC HIMUrja Teesta Urja Ltd. NHPC NHPC LANCO

A schematic diagram showing development of HEP on Teesta river in Sikkim is attached with this report to have a clear view of the distances from one dam to another dam in this cascade development together with their capacity and their elevation as obtained from NHPC authorities (Annexure - I). Out of above six projects, Teesta V (510 MW) has already been commissioned by NHPC in Feb'2008. Teesta IV HEP is the 2nd project on Teesta river proposed to be developed by NHPC. Other four projects are being developed by private companies. NHPC has signed an agreement with Govt. of Sikkim for implementation of the project in the year 2006 on Build, operate and maintain basis. The DPR of Teesta-IV H.E. Project (520 MW) has been concurred by CEA on 13th May 2010. ,

The TOR of the project was accorded by MOEF on 4th June 2009. EIAIEMP Studies reports have been prepared by CISHME, New Delhi.

Public Hearing of the project has been conducted on 29th March, 2012 and report sent to MoEF. The project is proposed between Teesta Stage III HEP (under construction) and Teesta Stage V HEP which has already been commissioned. The project is located in Mangan SubDivision of North District of Sikkim. It envisages utilization of gross head of 165.5 m. by construction of a concrete gravity dam at location near village "CHANDEY" and Hee-Gythang just downstream of the confluence of Runchu with Teesta. The Power House shall be located at village Phidang. This is a run of the river HEP. Salient features of the project are as follows:Installed capacity - 520 MW; No. of units : 4x130 MW Power House: Underground (166.2 m x 23.5 m x 254 m) Dam - Concrete gravity dam Length of dam - 197,2 m (at top) Maximum height above river bed level - 65 m Tail race tunnel: 2 nos., 8 m dia, 622 m (TRT-1) & 627 m (TRT-2) long, horse shoe-shaped. Gross storage at FRL : 18.6 MCM at MDDL : 8.2 MCM Submergence 105.37 ha. (Forest land - 68.82 ha.) (Pvt. land - 36.55 ha.)

Length of pond a c : 4.37 km. along Tccsta 644 IU along Tolungchu. FRL - EL 755 m MDDL - EL 740 m Length of Reservoir - 4.37 km. along Tcesta & 644 m along Tolung chu. Catchment area 3910 sq.km. Annual Generation - 2373 MUs (90% dependable year). Locational detail of the Teesta-IV H.E. Project (520 MW) State

Sikkim

District

North Sikkim

Dam

Lat.-27°28'50"N,Long.-88°31'

Power House

Lat.-27b25'N , Long.- 88°30'35"E

Nearest Town

Mangan (Distt. HQ)

Nearest Railway Station

New JalpaigurilSiliguri

Nearest main Airport

Bagdora (West Bengal)

23" E

(W.Bengal)

8. Compensatory Afforestation The proposed CA sites are located at 12 locations in Mangan and Dzongu Range in the North District of Sikkim ranging from 11 ha. upto a patch of 30 ha. totaling 287 ha. Due tosthe sites located distantly and scattered over 12 patches and having difficult approaches the CA sites could not be inspected. The map of CA sites have been enclosed with the proposal submitted to Ministry. Site suitability certificate of CA sites has been provided by the concerned DFO, but a certificate about non-encumbrances and CA sites not being important from Religious/Archeological point of view requires to be obtained from the State Govt. Total Financial outlay for CA -_Rs. 2,93,77000.00 The scheme of CA also includes components of soil and moisture conservation, stone wall fencing, overhead expenses, maintenance, monitoring etc. 9. Whether proposal involves violation of Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 or not. If yes, a detailed report on violation including action taken against the concerned officials. No violation seen. 10. Whether proposal involves rehabilitation of displaced persons. rehabilitation plan has been prepared by the State Government or not.

If yes, whether

No displacement of human population is involved in this project however private agriculture lands of about 256 families is partially involved. As there is no displacement involved therefore rehabilitation of displaced person is also not an issue in this project but Resettlement and Rehabilitation package has been prepared by the NHPC for people whose private land and other assets are getting affected. Project proponent (NHPC authorities) have stated that such "Resettlement and Rehabilitation Package" prepared by them has been

concurred by the competent authority of th . Stat Govt. Project affected people will get the R & R Package over and above the comp nsati n for their private land and other properties. Project proponent is being advised to make available a copy of package approved by State Govt. directly to Govt. ofIndia as well as thi Ifice too. However in case of non-receipt of the plan, the same may be called on from the project proponent or the State Govt. Resettlement and Rehabilitation translocation of oustees is involved.

Plan is not to affect any other forest area as no

11. Reclamation plan: Details and financial allocation : RESTORATION

OF MUCK DUMPING SITES:

Engineering and Biological Measures required at the dumping site A. Quantity and cost for Engineering Measures

ear ngineering tructure lam Complex

Dumping Site

Length (m)

Elevation (m)

Area (ha)

Total Capacit y(Cum)

.

Capacity of Dumping area @ 70% (Cum)

Remaining Qty. of Muck (Cum)

Retention Wall*

Sausage Wall**

Volume (Cum)

Cost (Rs. Lakh)

Cost (Rs. Lakh)

DSI

600

802-910

14.6

3124000

2186800

1252463

4800

148.18

Volume (Cum) 6089.2

DS2

252

635-674

3.12

447760

313432

144915

2000

61.74

2557.4

47.57

DS3

252

685-710

2.68

365317

255722

144800

2000

61.74

2557.4

47.57

DS4

500

610-750

11.63

2003200

1402240

1236754

4000

123.48

4029.6

70.95

610-910

32.03

4158194

2778932

12800

395.14

15233.7

279.35

113.26

IB ofTeesta

.ocation A Location

~ ;)

dit 2 site JB ofTeesta

,

Location A) xdit 2 site JB ofTeesta

Location B) 'owerhouse .ite

UB ofTeesta rotal

rOTAL COST (A) Required for Engineering Measures: Rs. 674.49 lakh

B. Ouantitv and cost for Biolozical measures Description

Quantity

Rate

Bench Terracing

10 ha

Rs.24019/ha

Afforestation

10.5 ha

Rs.21883/ha

Maintenance of afforestation

10.5 ha

Rs.5384/ha

Barbed wire! stone wall Fencing

3 Ian

Rs 4.89 lakhIkm

Grassing with doobgrass

20000sqm

Rs 50/sqm

Total Maintenance (20%)

Total Cost (Rs. in lakh) 2.4 2.3 0.56 14.67 10 29.93 2.99

TOTAL COST (B) Required for Biological Measures TOTAL COST for Engineering and Biological Measures (A+B)

32.92 (674.49+32.92) = Rs. 707.41 lakh

12. Details on catchment, command area and (Source: EMP Report) • • •

~lItchlll

'nt urea treatment

plan.

Area proposed to be brought under AT Plan i 4277.62 ha in 35 sub-watersheds in free draining catchment area of Teesta IV II 'P Engineering and biological measures for CAT Plan proposed. Financial outlay ofRs. 2157.821akhs for CAT Plan.

Area (ha) under different intensity of erosion in the watershed catchment

of Teesta Stage-IV H.E. project

Slight

Moderate

Chakung Chhu

4.72

704.29

699.76

'; 60.82

9.78

0

1479.37

Rangyong Chhu

89.29

4825.93

5983.73

885.66

98.30

885.06

12767.97

Run Chhu

62.01

3490.66

726.97

11.57

16.79

0

4308.01

Teesta River

146.59

8874.58

7229.77

999.81

145.33

318.09

17714.17

Total

302.61

17895.46

14640.23

1957.86

270.20

1203.15

36269.52

Watershed

Year-wise plan for treatment

,

Severe

V. Severe

Year wise

Treatable

1 2 3 4 5

1st Year IInd Year IIIrd Year IVth Year Vth Year

838.44 902.20 1199.18 801.75 333.96

6

VIth Year

202.09

Total

4277.68 of State Forest Department

S. No.

Components

1

Forest Office Establishment (one office) Forest Fire Fiohtlno System Office Vehicle Road and Foot Path Development Machinery & Equipment* W&W Monitoring & Evaluation Adm. Cost Continqencv

2 3

4

--------5 6

7 .8

9

Total

* Machinery

Snow/ Glaciers

Total

of the sub-watersheds

S. No.

Budget for development

River/ Watersheds

Area

infrastructure Qty.fUnit

Amount lakhs)

(Rs.

25.25 5.00 12.00 6.58

2 No.

20.00 5.35 5.00 6.20 6.00

8 Nos.

..

91.38

& Equipment: Computers, Laptop, Photocopier, Digital Camera, etc.

in

Budget for Entry Point Activities S. No.

Plans

Amount (Rs. in Lakh)

1

12.00

5

Plantation of Avenue trees In the Villages and Towns LPG connection and alternate energy sources Maintenance of Hygiene In the Villages and Towns Training, Awareness, Extension and Other Activities Income generating schemes

6

Contingency

6.00

Total

50.00

2

3 • 4

Component-wise cost estimate for Catchment Teesta Stage-IV H.E. Project. S. No. A.

,

B.

C. D. E. F.

Area Treatment

Item of Work Engineering Measures Add 50/0for maintenance of structures Sub-total (A) Biological Measures Sub-Total (A+B) Micro-planning & Overhead expenditure @ 15% of (A+B) Forest Infrastructure (Vehicles, machinery & eaulement. paths. etc.) Entry Point Activities Monitoring and evaluation Grand Total (A to H)

13. Cost benefit ratio:

14. Recommendations

28867.742/88755.9000

of the Principal

Chief Conservation

8.50 8.00 10.00 5.50

works for

Amount (Rs. in lakhs) 659.34 32.97 692.31 1026.33 1718.64 257.80 91.38 50.00 40.00 2157.82 0.325 : 1

of Forests/State

Government

The diversion of forest land proposed has been recommended by the PCCF and Govt. of the State. 15. Recommendations reasons

of Regional

Chief Conservator

of Forests

along with detailed

There exists a large gap between demand and supply of power in the country and it is a known fact that the power is essentially required for infrastructure, social, economic and overall development of the country. It is also known that Hydro Power is one of the clean form of energy and water is put to a non-consumptive use in this process. On the other hand in the process of establishing HEP we have to lose a large number of trees in constructional phase and make ~e flowing river into almost a stagnant large pool. Loss of trees though can be compensated to a great extent by raising fresh plantations or rehabilitating degraded forests; but it remains a fact that it is almost impossible to grow a forest alike nature. The pondage of a dam

submerge trees, shrubs, herbs etc. between Full Reservoir Level (EL 755 m) and the present High Flood Level of the River Tee ta which is around EL 600 m at the dam site the submergence area in this case is 105.37 ha. (in luding 68.82 ha. of forest land and 36.55 ha. of private land). Therefore the forest between 00 m and 655 m = 73.86 ha. (105.37 ha - 31.51 ha. of river course) shall get totally wiped out.