South Asia Network on Dams, Rivers and People 
Delhi INDIA
ht.sandrp@gmail.com, www.sandrp.in 

After a careful perusal of the Project Design Document submitted for the 48 MW Marjingla Lower Hydroelectric Project in Kameng District of Arunachal Pradesh, we are of the view that that project should be ineligible to receive carbon credits from the CDM mechanism of the UNFCCC Convention. The reasons for such conclusion are given below:  

1. Rightful Participation of Affected Peoples in Decision Making Process Undermined: 
Violation of Indigenous Peoples rights to Free, Prior and Informed Consent: The communities to be affected by the series of dam projects in this basin, including this specific project are indigenous peoples in their own land and territories and has not been consulted properly in an informed way and their consent not taken with due respect of their rights over their land and resources. The absence of Free, Prior and Informed Consent of affected indigenous peoples is also evident in the protests against Hydroelectric Projects in Arunachal Pradesh. Among the Memorandum of Agreements (MoA) on Dam projects signed by the Arunachal Pradesh Government till July 2011, a large number of Projects are in Kameng District. Moreover, these MoAs has been condemned for its lack of transparency and corruption.  
The efforts of project authorities to pursue the project without peoples’ participation and consent itself constitute a serious violation of the right to Free, Prior and Informed Consent of indigenous peoples (FPIC) affected by mega dams, a key provision of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, 2007, endorsed by the Government of India in its adoption at the United Nations in 2007.  The UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination had asked the Government of India in 2007 and 2011 to take FPIC of indigenous peoples before construction of mega dams in India’s North East , which is blatantly violated by the project authority.  

2. Wrong projection of Baseline Scenario In Arunachal Pradesh and in other seven states of India’s North East, there is no fossil fuel based power plant but only generations from hydropower sources and only a few gas based stations that too none in Arunachal Pradesh.  Interestingly, the  North East region power Grid, dominated by Hydropower has been clubbed with other  Northern Power Grid, Eastern Power Grid and Western Power Grid, which is dominated by Thermal based power generation, to form the NEWNE Grid  so as to facilitate arbitrary claims that the NEWNE is dominated by fossil based generation, when this is not the reality.  

3. Project is non additional Considering the large number of hydro projects being taken up in the area, and large number of agreements signed and even up front payment of millions and sometimes billions of Rupees made, it is clear that the project faces no barriers (the claim to the contrary in PDD in alternative 1 is wrong) and is in fact getting incentives from the govt of India and hence it is not an additional project. It is business as usual large hydro projects, of the kind of which very large number are being taken up. 

4. Project is not the least cost option If the objective is to provide electricity to the people nearby the project area, or people of the Kameng district or the people of Arunachal Pradesh, or the people of the North East India or the general development of any of these, than there are better options available in terms of sub MW scale hydro projects, for which there is huge potential, which has not even been assessed, leave aside the question of realised. Such projects would indeed be sustainable with less social and environmental impacts and great chance of community involvement from the planning to operation stages. Without assessment and realization of such options, taking up such big hydro projects would be detrimental to the interests of the people and the region, detrimental to the sustainable development and also to the global climate. 

5. Use of wrong financial indicator The project claim in PDD that Based on the assumptions, the project IRR works out to be lower than the established benchmark of 12.75% is wrong. As per the norms of India’s electricity Act, and Central Electricity Regulatory Commission, all projects are assured 14% return on equity, the tariff is calculated on that basis. In addition, they are allowed to sell 40% of power as merchant power, through which they can earn additional revenues. Hence the PDD is making misleading claims. 

6 No Project level or Cumulative Impact Assessment and Flouting Indian Law, World Commission on Dams Recommendations       
Absence of Cumulative Impact Assessment: There is no detailed impact assessment of the project on wildlife, biodiversity, social, environmental and cultural impacts, human rights impacts both in upstream and downstream of the proposed dam with due participation of affected communities as per the guidelines of the recommendations of the World Commission on Dams. 
The PDD accepts the EIA is being carried out and at an appropriate time, the Environmental Clearance (EC) would be obtained from the Government of India. This clearly shows that the Environment Impact Assessment has not even been carried out. How can than the project be declared as environment friendly?  The project also thus violates requirement D2 mentioned on page 47. The requirements of section E, is also not possible to fulfill, without and impact assessment and clearance from the statutory environment angle, forests angle and wildlife angles. The description from the section E makes it clear that there has been NO public hearing or consultation has required under Indian law or under WCD guidelines. They are clearly making the UNFCCC process a laughing stock. 
As there is also no detailed and holistic impact assessment of the dam and also cumulative impact due to the planned construction together with other mega dams over major Rivers in Kameng District of Arunachal Pradesh, the project authorities has violated the recommendations and guidelines of the World Commission on Dams.  Moreover, it is not possible to certify the project to be of sustainable development, without the basic project level and cumulative impact assessment would be wrong, and improper. Without such an impact assessment it is not even possible to know if the impacts are quantifiable, acceptable, mitigable or desirable. Nor can the local communities and others know abut the impacts of the projects, without the impact assessment. 

7. Wrong claims about project impacts The PDD claims on page 6, where it is said that the project will involve a weir of 25-30 m. This statement also shows that the project authorities still do not know even about the basic dimensions of the various components of the project. The difference between impacts of a 25 m and a 30 m weir would be huge indeed. 

8. Biodiversity and Wild Life Impacts of HEP: The efforts to built Project along other series of dams across the rivers in Kameng District again constitute a complete disregard of the environmental impact, loss of rich and diverse flora and fauna of the region. The project will pose serious threat to rare species which are found in the area. The area is also a home to rare Himalayan Wild Plant species. 

9. Social and Cultural impacts:  The local indigenous peoples will be decimated due to the influx of migrant workers from other parts of India, which will further have a wide ranging impact on small local indigenous populations on their subsistence economy. Each Dam building requires more than 2000 to 3000 workers and with numerous dams planned in Kameng, dam workers will completely overwhelm the local indigenous populations, which will have a serious health, cultural and social impacts as well due to influx of migrant workers. These dams building will also lead to more militarization of the area which will further add pressures to land rights.  The economic benefits to locals as claimed by the project authority is again irrational as the actual benefits will go to the dam developers and other companies, which provides equipments, such as construction company and the turbine companies etc. 
Many holy and sacred sites are also situated along the River Basin. This and other Hydro Electric Projects in Kameng will lead to disastrous consequences for the people, their culture, religion and ecology of the Region. The PDD submitted by the project authority has failed to highlight these socio-cultural impacts.  

10. Undermining Emissions from HEP   The project authorities falsely mentioned repeatedly in the PDD that the HEP is an emission free project reasoning that it is a renewable project and a fossil fuel free project. Several Studies worldwide have already confirmed that mega dams in tropical situation like the one in project area could be some of the worse emitters of Green House Gases (GHGs). Range of emissions, such as the emissions due to the destruction of forests that are GHG sinks when forests are destroyed for various project components, the emission from dam reservoir due to submergence of forests, the emissions due to boring of tunnels and the emission from sudden release of water from power houses, emissions due to numerous vehicles to be used in the construction  of reservoirs and boring of tunnels, emission due to felling of trees and destruction of forest by numerous dam workers etc are not taken into consideration and completed omitted deliberately in the PDD submitted by the project proponent.  

11. Impact of Road construction:  The Government of India takes initiative to widen the original Road for transporting heavy equipments for this and other HEP planned in the region. If this particular stretch of the road is widened for the transportation of heavy equipments for construction of the HEP, it will have serious impact on the biodiversity and wildlife of the region. 
Projection of road building by the project authorities as part of social well being criteria  is completely misleading and meaningless as the people for their needs do not need this wide road, the widened road is only for the project. It also implies that the Government of India or for that matter the project authorities will never build roads if the area is not conducive for hydropower projects or other similar initiatives. Roads, Schools, health facilities are fundamental rights and needs of communities and has to be mandatorily created in far flung areas irrespective of whether the area has scope for companies to exploit its resources. 

We would like to reiterate that the Marjingla Lower HEP should not be eligible to receive carbon credits from CDM due to the aforementioned reasons. 

Himanshu Thakkar (ht.sandrp@gmail.com)					                 May 4, 2012
South Asia Network on Dams, Rivers & People (www.sandrp.in)