ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

HPP1

AGAGO-ACHWA HYDROPOWER PLANT IN PADER DISTRICT

SUBMITTED BY: PREPARED BY: ARPE LIMITED GREENBELT CONSULT LTD Unicalo House, 1st Floor Amber House, Suite 413B Archer Road Pilkington Road Kampala-Uganda P.O. Box 24854, Kampala, Uganda

FINAL UPDATED REPORT

MAY, 2017 CONSULTANCY TEAM This Environmental and Social Impact Statement has been updated by the following Certified Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Practitioners and Technical Experts from Greenbelt Consult Ltd. Name and Expertise Signature Dr. Bob Humphrey Ogwang

Team Leader Ms. Pamela Tashobya

Social Development Specialist Mr. Johnson Arinaitwe

Pollution & Waste Management Specialist Ms. Madinah Kasauli Namyalo

Aquatic Ecologist Joseph Kyagulanyi

Hydrologist Mr. Joseph Aguma-Acon

Occupational Health and Safety Expert

Contributing Experts 1. Mr. Ocamgiu Francis Jawotho -Environmentalist

2 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

ACKNOWLEGDEMENT

The Environmental Impact Assessment Study Team would like to thank all those who provided information that made it possible to prepare this report. In particular, the team is grateful to the Management of ARPE for giving them the opportunity to undertake this ESIA update study and for facilitation of the various activities.

Special thanks go to Mr. Ocamgiu Francis Jawotho for providing all the necessary information that was needed for the ESIA update.

The team is further grateful to the ARPE field team that accorded them all the necessary field support, the Pader District Local Government officials for sparing their time to contribute to the study by sharing information as well as the Angagura sub county leadership and the communities around the project that also provided vital primary information.

Finally the Team is grateful to everyone else not mentioned here whose input made it possible for this work to come to a final conclusion.

3 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

TABLE OF CONTENTS CONSULTANCY TEAM ...... 2 ACKNOWLEGDEMENT ...... 3 LIST OF TABLES ...... 12 LIST OF FIGURES ...... 14 ACRONYMS ...... 16 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... 17 1. INTRODUCTION...... 31 1.1 The ESIA Update Report ...... 31 1.2 Project Overview and History ...... 31 1.3 Need for the Project...... 33 1.4 Alternatives to Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) ...... 33 1.4.1 Hydropower ...... 34 1.4.2 Dam versus weir ...... 34 1.4.3 Comparison of Achwa Hydropower with other energy sources using multi- criteria decision tool ...... 34 1.5 Project Description of River Achwa Hydropower Plant 1 (HPP1) ...... 34 1.5.1 Project Development Objectives...... 34 1.5.2 Location of River Achwa Hydropower Plant one (HPP1)...... 35 1.6 The Sponsor...... 37 1.7 Capital investment ...... 37 1.8 Main Plant structures ...... 37 1.8.1 Intake and weir structures ...... 38 1.8.2 The Headrace Channel (Canal) ...... 39 1.8.3 Forebay and bypass channel ...... 42 1.8.4 Penstock ...... 42 1.8.5 Power house ...... 42 1.9 Summary of the Main Features of HPP1 ...... 46 1.10 Estimated Energy production ...... 46 1.11 Conclusion ...... 47 1.11.1 Other features of HPP1 ...... 49 1.11.2 Time Schedule of the Project ...... 50 1.12 Purpose of this Environmental Impact Assessment ...... 50 1.13 Objective and scope of the EIA study ...... 51

4 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

1.14 Methodology for undertaking EIA ...... 51 1.15 Preparers of this Report ...... 51 1.16 Structure of the EIA ...... 53 2. LEGAL, POLICY AND INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK ...... 55 2.1 Ugandan Policies of relevance to hydropower development ...... 55 2.1.1 The National Environmental Management Policy, 1994 ...... 55 2.1.2 The National Energy Policy, 2002 ...... 55 2.1.3 The National Water Policy, 1999 ...... 56 2.1.4 The National HIV/AIDS Policy, 2004 ...... 56 2.1.5 The Resettlement/Land Acquisition Framework, 2002 ...... 56 2.2 Ugandan Laws of relevance to hydropower development ...... 56 2.2.1 The Constitution of the Republic of Uganda, 1995 ...... 56 2.2.2 National Environment Act, Cap 153 ...... 57 2.2.3 The Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations, 1998 ...... 58 2.2.4 The National Environment (Control and Certification of Environmental Practitioners) Regulations, 2001 ...... 58 2.2.5 The National Environment (Waste Management) Regulations, 1999 ...... 59 2.2.6 The National Environment (Wetlands, River Banks and Lake Shores Management) Regulations, 2001 ...... 59 2.2.7 The National Environment Regulations (noise Standards and Control), 2003 ...... 60 2.2.8 The National Environment (Audit) regulations ...... 60 2.2.9 The Water Act, Cap 152 ...... 60 2.2.10 Electricity Act, 1999 ...... 61 2.2.11 The Roads Act, 1964 ...... 61 2.2.12 Local Government Act, 1997 ...... 61 2.2.13 Land Act, Cap 227 of 1998 ...... 61 2.2.14 Land Acquisition Act, 1965 ...... 62 2.2.15 The Investment Code Act, 1991 ...... 62 2.2.16 Historical and Monuments Act, 1967 ...... 62 2.2.17 Fisheries Act CAP 197 ...... 63 2.3 Health, Safety and Employment Legislation...... 63 2.3.1 Occupational Safety and Health Act, 2006 ...... 63 2.3.2 Public Health Act, Cap 281 ...... 63 2.3.3 Workers Compensation Act, CAP 225 of 2000 ...... 63 2.3.4 Employment Act, 2006 and other related Acts ...... 64

5 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

2.3.5 Factories Act (1964) ...... 64 2.4 International Treaties and Conventions...... 64 2.5 Donors and Financing Institutions ...... 65 2.6 Institutional Framework ...... 66 2.6.1 Ministry of Water and Environment ...... 66 2.6.2 Directorate of Water Resources Management (DWRM) ...... 66 2.6.3 The National Environment Management Authority (NEMA) ...... 66 2.6.4 Directorate of Water Development ...... 67 2.6.5 Electricity Regulatory Authority...... 67 2.6.6 2Donors and Financial Institutions ...... 67 2.6.7 Local Government Authorities ...... 67 3. EIA PROCESS IN THE ENREGY SECTOR IN UGANDA ...... 69 3.1 Introduction ...... 69 3.2 The EIA Process ...... 69 3.2.1 Preparation of Project Brief ...... 71 3.2.2 Environmental Screening ...... 71 3.2.3 Environmental Impact Study ...... 72 3.2.4 Environmental Monitoring...... 73 3.2.5 Monitoring plan ...... 73 3.2.6 Environmental Evaluation ...... 74 3.2.7 Public Consultation ...... 74 4. METHODOLOGY FOR CONDUCTING THE ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACT STUDY UPDATE ...... 76 4.1 Background to the ESIA update ...... 76 4.2 General view of the ESIA Update ...... 76 4.3 Methodology used in undertaking the ESIA update ...... 76 4.3.1 Aquatic Assessment ...... 76 4.3.2 Hydrological Assessment...... 77 4.3.3 Social economic assessment ...... 79 5. BASELINE STUDY OF THE PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT ...... 83 5.1 Regional hydrology ...... 83 5.1.1 HPP1 Catchment characteristics ...... 83 5.1.2 Climatological Conditions ...... 84 5.1.3 Land cover ...... 85 5.1.4 Geology ...... 86

6 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

5.1.5 Soils...... 87 5.1.6 Topography ...... 88 5.2 Flow Regimes for River Achwa ...... 88 5.2.1 Flow statistic and hydrographs (annual and Monthly) ...... 88 5.2.2 Flow duration ...... 89 5.2.3 Low flows ...... 93 5.2.4 Peak flows ...... 94 5.3 Hydraulic Behavior with and without the HPP1 Intake ...... 95 5.4 Current and Future Water Use ...... 101 5.4.1 Current water use ...... 101 5.4.2 Future water use ...... 102 5.4.3 Onsite Baseline conditions ...... 102 5.5 Operational Plan ...... 104 5.6 Hydrological relationship between HPP1 and HPP2 ...... 104 5.7 Environmental flow ...... 105 5.8 Noise levels ...... 105 5.9 Ambient Air Quality...... 106 5.10 Soil composition ...... 107 5.11 Water quality ...... 108 6. THE BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT ...... 111 6.1 Terrestrial Vegetation ...... 111 6.1.1 The Direct Impact Zone ...... 111 6.1.2 The Indirect Impact Zone ...... 111 6.1.3 Materials and methods for vegetation study ...... 111 6.1.4 Vegetation Status ...... 112 6.2 Fauna ...... 113 6.2.1 The Direct Impact Zone ...... 113 6.2.2 Indirect Impact zone ...... 113 6.2.3 Materials and Methods used for studying wildlife ...... 113 6.2.4 Findings...... 113 6.3 Birds ...... 114 6.3.1 The Direct Impact Zone ...... 114 6.3.2 Indirect Impact Zone ...... 114 6.3.3 Materials and Methods ...... 114

7 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

6.3.4 Findings...... 115 6.4 Aquatic Ecosystem ...... 115 6.4.1 Direct Impact Zone ...... 115 6.4.2 Indirect Impact Zone (INDIZ) ...... 116 6.4.3 Materials and Methods ...... 116 6.4.4 Macrophytes ...... 116 6.4.5 Aquatic macro-invertebrates ...... 116 6.4.6 Plankton community ...... 117 6.4.7 Phytoplankton ...... 118 6.4.8 Zooplankton ...... 118 6.4.9 Fish fauna ...... 118 7. THE HUMAN ENVIRONMENT ...... 122 7.1 Introduction ...... 122 7.2 Direct Impact zone ...... 122 7.3 Indirect Impact Zone ...... 122 7.4 Key Findings ...... 122 7.4.1 Demographics ...... 122 7.4.2 Ethnic groups ...... 123 7.4.3 Settlement patterns ...... 124 7.4.4 Gender relations ...... 124 7.4.5 Occupation ...... 124 7.4.6 Land Tenure and Land holding ...... 127 7.4.7 Water sources and uses of the River Achwa ...... 128 7.4.8 Energy use ...... 128 7.4.9 Health care ...... 128 7.4.10 Education ...... 129 7.4.11 Road network ...... 130 7.4.12 Administrative structure ...... 130 8. PUBLIC CONSULTATION AND DISCLOSURE ...... 132 8.1 Objective of Public Disclosure ...... 132 8.2 Consultation Meetings and Key Issues Raised ...... 132 8.3 Summary of key issues from consultative meetings ...... 132 9. POTENTIAL PROJECT IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES ...... 135 9.1 Positive Impacts ...... 135

8 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

9.1.1 Employment opportunities ...... 135 9.1.2 Economic benefits from sourcing of local construction materials ...... 136 9.1.3 Benefit to local retail businesses ...... 136 9.2 Negative Physical impacts ...... 137 9.2.1 Contamination of water resources ...... 137 9.2.2 Effect on water quality ...... 137 9.2.3 Effects of water intake structures on organisms ...... 138 9.2.4 Effects of change in flow regimes ...... 138 9.2.5 Impact on surface Water Quality ...... 139 9.2.6 Impacts of soil erosion due to stripping of vegetation ...... 139 9.2.7 Location of the dumping site ...... 140 9.2.8 Impact on ambient air quality ...... 140 9.2.9 Visual Intrusion ...... 141 9.2.10 Impacts on soils and land due to contamination by chemical and petroleum spillage 141 9.2.11 Soil degradation and Erosion and River sedimentation ...... 142 9.2.12 Re-vegetation ...... 142 9.3 Negative Social-Economic Impacts ...... 142 9.3.1 Occupational health and safety risks concerns ...... 142 9.3.2 Increased crime and disease prevalence ...... 143 9.3.3 Impact of noise and vibrations ...... 144 9.3.4 Road traffic risks ...... 145 9.3.5 Decline in Fishing Income ...... 146 9.3.6 Destruction of woodlots ...... 146 9.3.7 Restriction of access to the River banks and water ...... 146 9.3.8 Effect on social facilities such as education and health facilities ...... 147 9.4 Impacts on the Biological Environment ...... 147 9.4.1 Mammals...... 148 9.4.2 Amphibians and Reptiles ...... 148 9.4.3 Birds ...... 149 9.4.4 Fisheries ...... 149 9.5 Summary of the positive Environmental and Socio-economic Impacts ...... 150 9.5.1 Long term positive impacts include: ...... 150 9.5.2 Medium term positive impacts include: ...... 151 9.6 Cumulative Impacts...... 151

9 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

9.6.1 Impact of reduced flows...... 151 9.6.2 Effect on Aquatic Ecosystem ...... 151 9.6.3 Effect of water pollution ...... 152 9.6.4 HIV/AIDS risk ...... 152 9.6.5 Economic development ...... 152 9.6.6 Improved availability of social services ...... 152 9.6.7 Increased crime ...... 152 9.6.8 Effect on social facilities such as education and health facilities ...... 152 9.6.9 Effect on Fauna/ Wildlife ...... 153 9.6.10 Noise impacts ...... 153 9.6.11 Effect of activities on air quality ...... 153 9.6.12 Other cumulative impacts will include; ...... 153 9.7 Analysis and categorization of impacts ...... 154 9.7.1 Overall impacts assessments ...... 154 9.7.2 Overall impact significance ...... 154 9.8 Summary of Mitigation Measures and Anticipated Effects ...... 158 10. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN ...... 162 10.1 Introduction and Background ...... 162 10.2 Goals and Objectives of the EMP ...... 162 10.3 Stakeholders ...... 162 10.4 Roles and Responsibilities ...... 162 10.4.1 Pre-construction Phase ...... 162 10.4.2 Construction Phase ...... 164 10.4.3 Operational Phase ...... 165 10.5 Mitigation Measures ...... 165 10.6 HSE Manager ...... 165 10.7 Capacity building ...... 166 10.8 Public Awareness Campaigns ...... 166 10.9 Closure Plan ...... 174 10.10 Decommissioning Plan ...... 174 11. ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING...... 175 11.1 Physical and Chemical Environments ...... 175 11.1.1 Pre-Construction...... 175 11.1.2 Project Construction ...... 175

10 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

11.1.3 Project Operation...... 176 11.2 Biological Environment ...... 176 11.2.1 Terrestrial Vegetation and Conservation Areas ...... 176 11.2.2 Birds ...... 176 11.2.3 Aquatic Ecosystem ...... 176 11.3 Socio-economic Environment and Health Issues ...... 177 11.3.1 Compensation ...... 177 11.3.2 Health ...... 177 11.3.3 Other issues ...... 178 12. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 179 13. REFERENCES ...... 182 14. ANNEXES ...... 184 14.1 ANNEX 1: NEMA ESIA CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL FOR HPPI ...... 184 14.2 ANNEX 2: CONSTRUCTION PERMIT FOR HPPI ...... 193 14.3 ANNEX 3: WATER ABSTRACTION PERMIT ...... 197 14.4 ANNEX 4: APPLICATION FOR CHANGE OF NAME ...... 201 14.5 ANNEX 5: ANALYSIS OF WATER SAMPLES FOR HPP1 TAKEN DURING THE ESIA UPDATE FIELD WORK ...... 202 14.6 ANNEX 6: A LIST OF PLANT SPECIES IN HPP1 ...... 203 14.7 ANNEX 7: A LIST OF BIRD SPECIES IN PROJECT AREA (HPP1& HPP2) ...... 205 14.8 ANNEX 8: DETIALS OF CONSULTATIONS WITH DIFFERENT STAKEHOLDERS ...... 206 14.9 ANNEX 9: STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATIONS LISTS ...... 214

11 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

LIST OF TABLES Table 0-1: GPS coordinates for some of the HPP1 Project structures ...... 17 Table 1-1: Coordinates of the project structures ...... 38 Table 1-2: List of the ESIA Team...... 52 Table 5-1: Land use and cover for HPP1 catchment area ...... 85 Table 5-2: Flows exceeded at different times based on annual flow duration curve ...... 90 Table 5-3: Flows exceeded at different times based on monthly flow duration curves ...... 91 Table 5-4: Flows exceeded at different times based on quarterly flow duration curve ...... 92 Table 5-5: Minimum flows exceeded at different times based on n-days aggregations ...... 93 Table 5-6: Peak flows exceeded at different times ...... 94 Table 5-7: Peaks flows exceeded at different times based on n-days aggregations ...... 95 Table 5-8: Hydraulic analysis of the Achwa 11 River (River Achwa) Section for proposed installation of Intake structure ...... 96 Table 5-9: Hydraulic analysis of river section with the proposed installation of intake structure 98 Table 5-10: Baseline noise levels at the major project sites ...... 105 Table 5-11: The chemical composition of soils taken from HPP1 intake and HPP1 outlet ...... 108 Table 5-12: In-situ Water quality measurement taken during the survey ...... 109 Table 5-13: Summary of Laboratory water quality analysis results ...... 110 Table 6-1: Plant species in HPP1 that have immediate value/use ...... 112 Table 6-2: Diversity of Macro-invertebrates Recorded in the Project Area ...... 117 Table 6-3: Diversity and Abundance of Phytoplankton Recorded in the Project Area ...... 118 Table 6-4: Diversity and Abundance of Zooplankton Recorded in the Project Area ...... 118 Table 6-5: Fish Species, their Families and Conservation Status ...... 118 Table 7-1: Demographic statistics as of 2014 ...... 123 Table 7-2: Livestock by type by Sub-county ...... 125 Table 7-3: Land Use in Pader District ...... 127 Table 7-4: Distribution of water sources and use in Pader district ...... 128 Table 7-5: Local Government Structure in Uganda ...... 131 Table 7-6: No. of administrative units ...... 131 Table 8-1: Summary of key issues raised by stakeholders during Consultation Meetings ...... 132 Table 9-1: Scaling/magnitude of potential impacts ...... 154

12 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

Table 9-2: Environmental significance of impact based on SP value ...... 154 Table 9-3: A summary of Impact levels and their nature ...... 156 Table 9-4: Description of mitigation measures and anticipated effects of implementing the mitigation measures ...... 158 Table 10-1: Responsibilities, participants estimated costs for mitigation measures for HPP1 together with HPP2 & HPP5 over 4 years ...... 167

13 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1-1: The typical HPPI Plan and section ...... 32 Figure 1-2: The general location of Achwa-Agago Hydropower Project...... 35 Figure 1-3: Location of HPPI in respect to HPP2...... 36 Figure 1-4: The intake structures ...... 39 Figure 1-5: Section in soil excavation ...... 40 Figure 1-6: Section in Rock excavation ...... 41 Figure 1-7: Section in Embankment ...... 41 Figure 1-8: Layout of HPPI option 1 ...... 43 Figure 1-9: Option 2 layout...... 43 Figure 1-10: Weir structure for option 3 ...... 44 Figure 1-11: HPPI option 3 layout ...... 45 Figure 1-12: Estimated energy production ...... 46 Figure 1-13: HPP1 general plan with overlying preliminary design and 3 alternative layouts .... 48 Figure 1-14: HPP1 general plan whit overlying preliminary design and 3 alternative layouts .... 49 Figure 3-1: EIA process flow for the Energy Sector ...... 70 Figure 4-1: Pictorial of meetings held with District leaders, Sub-County leaders and community members ...... 81 Figure 5-1: HPP1 Catchment area ...... 83 Figure 5-2: Annual rainfall trends for Achwa and Agago Basins ...... 84 Figure 5-3: Land cover for HPP1 catchment ...... 86 Figure 5-4: Soils for HPP1 catchment ...... 87 Figure 5-5: Annual flow hydrograph at old bridge on river Achwa II ...... 88 Figure 5-6: Flow hydrograph based on monthly flows ...... 89 Figure 5-7: Annual flow duration curve at Old bridge for period 1949-1980 ...... 90 Figure 5-8: Monthly flow duration curve at Old Bridge for period 1949-1980 ...... 92 Figure 5-9: Quarterly flow duration curve at old period 1949-1980 ...... 93 Figure 5-10: Peak flow frequency analysis plot ...... 94 Figure 5-11: Settlements within the ranch ...... 101 Figure 5-12: Signs of erosion into the river at the proposed intake points ...... 103 Figure 5-13: The current site status at the proposed intake points ...... 104

14 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

Figure 5-14: HPP2 intake under construction a few metres from HPP1 tailrace site ...... 106 Figure 5-15: Source of fugitive dust (HPP2 works) ...... 107 Figure 6-1: The intake point at HPP1 on Achwa River - Pader district ...... 115 Figure 6-2: Macrophytes recorded within the project area ...... 116 Figure 6-3: Fish species caught within the project area and their ecology ...... 121 Figure 7-1: Recent illegal encroachment in Achwa Ranch ...... 122 Figure 7-2: Some of the settlements within the Achwa Ranch ...... 124 Figure 7-3: Some of the economic activities along the road leading to the proposed site ...... 125 Figure 7-4: Grazing observed within the Ranch ...... 126 Figure 7-5: Evidence of fishing in River Achwa ...... 127 Figure 7-6: Achwa Ranch HC II ...... 129 Figure 7-7: Some of the schools along the road leading to the proposed Achwa HPPI ...... 130 Figure 7-8: Status of the existing road within the ranch leading to HPP2 site ...... 130

15 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

ACRONYMS

AfDB African Development Bank DEO District Environment Officer DfID Department for International Development DIZ Direct Impact Zone DWD Department of Water Development DWRM Directorate of Water Resources Management EIA Environnemental Impact Assessment EIS Environnemental Impact Statement EMP Environnemental Management Plan ERA Electricity Regulatory Authority ESIA Environmental and Social Impact Assessment GDP Gross Domestic Product HPP Hydropower Plant IDP Internally Displaced People INDIZ Indirect Impact Zone IUCN International Union for Nature Conservation LC Local Council MEMD Ministry of Energy and Mineral Development MW Mega Watts NEMA National Environment Management Authority NGOs Non-Governmental Organizations NORAD Norwegian Agency for International Development PAPs Project Affected Persons RDC Resident District Commissioner SIDA Swedish International Development Agency STD Sexually Transmitted Disease TOR Terms of Reference TSCs Timed Species Counts UETCL Uganda Electricity Transmission Company Limited ULI Uganda Livestock Industries UPDF Uganda People’s Defense Forces

16 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Following the results of the studies conducted in northern Uganda on the hydropower potential of the river Achwa during 2010 and 2011, PAC S.p.A. identified and assessed certain sites suitable for the construction of run-off river hydroelectric plants on the stretch of the river. One of these is HPP1. Currently, ARPE LTD which later took over the ownership of the projects is developing two hydropower projects on the Achwa River one of which is already under way 55% into development (Achwa HPP-2). The developer subsequently is in the process of starting on the development of the second project (Achwa HPP-1).

ESIA processes were conducted in 2013 and the PAC S.p.A. was issued with certificate of approval on the 28th Feb 2014 (Certificate NO: NEMA/EIA/4871), titled “the Proposed Agago- Achwa Hydropower Plant- HHPI in Pader District in Northern Uganda”. This certificate necessitated the developer to commence construction works within 24 months from the above date of approval which was never achieved. It was thus imperative that re-assessment be made to check how the area has changed in different aspects from the earlier given information prior to the proposed commencement of works. HPP1 is planned to generate 42 MW of electricity.

It should be noted that the construction works are already ongoing on HPP2 with general construction status at 55% at the time of the ESIA update exercise in March, 2017.

The overall goal of the project is to construct a hydropower scheme utilizing the available water resources in Achwa River to generate electricity. One of the aims of the project is to incorporate environmental and social planning at an early stage in project design to avoid or reduce negative impacts and enhance its benefits.’

The project area is located on Achwa River about 19 km north-west (downstream) of the new bridge on the Gulu-Kitgum road. The new bridge is found almost half way between Gulu and Kitgum (40 km North from Gulu and 60 km South from Kitgum. Connection from the Project area to Gulu is by means of a murram road. The access road to the site starts from an existing road from Angagura Trading Center running northwards for about 5 km from the Gulu-Kitgum Road where one side of a planned road branches off westwards for about 12 km up to HPP1 intake area; while the other already made gravel road runs northwards for about 6.5 km to HPP1/HPP2 area. Both roads pass through Achwa Ranch down to the east bank (Pader side) where most of the Project activities will take place. GPS coordinates for some of the HPP1 Project structures are given in Table 0-1 below.

Table 0-1: GPS coordinates for some of the HPP1 Project structures Structure GPS Coordinates N UTM Coordinates E Intake structure (rubber dam) 36N 0441431N 0345014E Delivery Point 0445996N 0345929E Forebay 0445914N 0345733E Penstocks - - Power Station 0445986N 0345910E Tailrace (outlet) 0445986N 0345929E

17 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

The west bank (Gulu side), where almost no activity will take place except for anchoring one side of the weir foundation, is bordered by Medde and Labworumor Parishes, Palaro Sub-county in Gulu District.

THE SPONSOR

The sponsor is ARPE Ltd and following successfully feasibility studies on all hydro power potential sites on River Achwa and River Agogo and acquisition of all necessary permits, licenses and approvals, the developer was issued with a license to construct, own and operate 83MW hydropower projects by ERA that became effective on 19 August 2014 and is valid for a period of 40 (forty) years, including the construction period, during which ARPE Limited will construct, own and operate two hydropower plants. With the above, ARPE commenced construction of HPP2 (now at about 55 %) and plans to start within this year on the construction of HPP1. These two hydropower projects have potential to generate 42 and 41 MW respectively.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The detailed description of the project is give in section 1 of this report. In summary, HPP1 will have the following features;  Maximum discharge: 100 m³/s;  Minimum flow (Vital Flow Rate): 1.500 m³/s;  The intake structure will consist of two water-filled Rubber Dams, each of them 3.5 meters high and 33 meters long;  Gross Hydraulic Head: 50.45 m;  Installed Power: 4 x 10.5 MW.

TIME SCHEDULE OF THE PROJECT

HPP1 is planned to be in operation in approximately 36 months (i.e. about 3years) from the start of works. The expected time for the full project realization, including training of personnel for operation and maintenance of systems, testing and commissioning, is four years (48 months).

OBJECTIVE AND SCOPE OF THE EIA STUDY

The objective of the Environmental and Social Impact Study presented in this report was to identify, predict and evaluate environmental impacts due to the proposed development of hydropower on Achwa River (site HPP1), with a view to integrate environmental concerns into the project’s planning, design, construction and operational stages.

METHODOLOGY FOR UNDERTAKING ESIA UPDATE The methodology for undertaking the ESIA update has been presented in detail in section 4 of this report. It however included; literature review, stakeholders consultations, field investigation and observation as well as undertaking specialist studies such as; soil and noise assessment, water quality analysis, hydrology, flora and fauna, etc.

18 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

STRUCTURE OF THE ESIA REPORT

The report is presented in twelve main Chapters including the Introduction; Policy, Legal and Administrative Framework; EIA process for the Energy Sector in Uganda; the methodology used to conduct the ESIA update; the Physical, Chemical, Biological and Human Environment; Public Consultation and Disclosure; Potential Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures; Environmental Management Plan; Environmental Monitoring and Conclusions and Recommendations.

POLICY, LEGAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE FRAMEWORK

Various policies, laws and institutional structures were reviewed in relation to hydropower projects. Under the National Environment Act, the National Environment Management Authority (NEMA) is the principal agency in Uganda for the management of the environment. NEMA coordinates monitors and supervises all activities in the field of the environment. NEMA also reviews and approves the Environmental and Social Impact Assessments (ESIAs). However, the actual implementation of the ESIA process remains a function of the relevant line ministries and departments, the private sector, NGOs and the general public. In the case of hydropower projects the lead agency is the Directorate of Water Development (DWD). The National Environment Act requires a developer to obtain a permit from the DWD before the developer can undertake any construction activities which will affect water resources. An EIA must be carried out before this permit for constructing the hydropower project can be issued.

At the international level, a range of treaties and agreements related to the environment, as well as requirements and guidelines of some donors and financiers (e.g. the World Bank Group) are of great importance and have been reviewed and followed in this ESIA. This ESIA therefore has followed the requirements of the Ugandan EIA regulations as well as the World Bank Operational Policies and Directives on environmental and social issues. The EIA regulations reviewed included the EIA Guidelines (NEMA 1997), the EIA Regulations (NEMA 1998) and Environmental Impact Assessment Guidelines for the Energy Sector (NEMA 2004).

DESCRIPTION OF THE ENVIRONMENTS/BASELINE CONDITIONS

For the purpose of this ESIA, the project area was divided into two zones:  The Direct Impact Zone (DIZ), covering areas that will be directly affected by the Project e.g. camps, access roads, reduced river flow etc.  The Indirect Impact Zone (INDIZ), covering areas that will be indirectly affected by the Project (e.g. surrounding areas affected by human activities induced by the Project)

Physical and Chemical Baseline Conditions

Noise During the initial ESIA exercise, noise levels were found to be low and generally within the set limits for noise in the general environment with some mild noise coming from the resultant wind from plants and from the flow of the River downstream (see Table 5-10). No noise assessment was conducted during the ESIA update exercise. No new features have come up in place at the proposed intake points and thus less has changed from the original findings. However, the noise

19 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 levels at the proposed tailrace end have been influenced by the ongoing activities at the intake of HPP2. The levels are however sporadic and dependent on the action of machinery.

Air quality The initial assessment indicated a complete natural environment with all project sites still having natural vegetation. No air quality assessment was conducted during the ESIA update exercise. However, the visual assessment indicated an accumulation of dust emissions in the air especially at tailrace end due to the ongoing construction activities at HPP2. It is recommended that the contractor undertakes a baseline air quality assessment at the commencement of the HPP1 construction works to form basis for future monitoring.

Soil status The initial ESIA exercise carried out soil assessment at the intake and tail race and concluded that the results portrayed an environment with satisfactory quality indicating minimum soil pollution (see results and analysis in Table 5-11). The results showed that there were only a few minor differences in soil chemical composition between the intake and tailrace of HPP1 although levels of all chemical components were higher at the tailrace than at the intake. The chemical oxygen demand was moderate at both points. No new soil assessment was conducted during the ESIA update since the area still exhibited the same natural status.

Water quality: Of the water quality parameters measured, there were only a few minor differences in water quality between the intake and tailrace. The water was also found to be safe for both human and animal consumption.

Biological Environment

Terrestrial vegetation/habitats In general, the DIZ of HPP1 has not been much affected by human activities presumably because people lived in IDP camps far away from the area during the insurgency in the north. The vegetation here is therefore relatively stable although there is some charcoal burning from popular trees such as Shea.

The INDIZ of the HPP1 within Achwa Ranch has been abandoned for over twenty years due to the Lords Resistance Army (LRA) insurgency. Although the area was predominantly grassland, it has since been invaded by woody species such as Combretum spp. Evidence of rampant tree cutting especially for charcoal is rampant in the area. Similarly, intensive harvesting of vegetation for construction is evident.

Terrestrial fauna Evidence of the presence of small and large mammals, reptiles and amphibians was recorded both in the DIZ and INDIZ. This is due to the generally thick vegetation both bush and grassland in the area. For large mammals such as bush bucks, the population in the Project area seems to be minimal due to heavy hunting pressure. . For large mammals, we encountered several monkeys. There was also evidence of edible rats (from the grass eaten) and squirrels. We were told that there could also be lions, elands, hyenas, antelopes and wild dogs in the area but there was no

20 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 proof of this. Some of these animals seem to have been subjected to heavy hunting pressure due to lack of official protection.

For reptiles, shells of dead tortoises were also noted and reports of the presence of pythons, chameleons and other snakes were also given. As for amphibians, several species of frogs were seen near the River banks.

A total of 25 species were recorded, about 2.5% of Uganda’s total, which is a good number for the time spent in the project area. One species was recorded that is Near-threatened regionally i.e. the Brown Snake Eagle (Circaetus cinereus).

Aquatic ecosystem Various aquatic species were identified in the water around the HPP1 area. The area had limited diversity of aquatic macrophtes with Kyllinga as the dominant species while the dominant aquatic macro-invertebrates and amphibians included mosquitoes, earthworms, dragon flies and tadpoles on the fringes of the River and toads and frogs. Phytoplanktons were dominated by Microcystis spp and Merismopedia spp with Scenedesmus spp and Ankistrodesmus spp in small traces. These are species adapted to fast flowing water. A wide variety of fish species were also recorded including Alestes, Bagrus, Tilapia, Nile Perch, Elephant snout fish, African catfish and Lungfish. Due to the isolated nature of the Project site, there was little evidence of intense fishing in the area.

Human Environment The proposed Achwa Hydropower Project (HPP1) is located approximately 18 km downstream of the new Achwa Bridge on the Gulu-Kitgum road and about 18km off Angagura Trading Centre. It’s a small hydro power plant that is expected to generate about 42 MW and is estimated to be completed in 48 months (i.e. about 4 years) from the start of works. Apart from a few illegal encroachers inside Achwa Ranch, no settlements are anywhere near the power plant and local communities in the INDIZ will be at least 10 km away and these would be indirectly affected by vehicle movements and a few other inconveniences. No land will be needed from the local communities hence no compensation or resettlement will be necessary. Any compensation necessary will be between the developer and the owners of Achwa Ranch. The nearest Parish to the Project area on the Angagura side is Burlobo. On the Gulu side of the River, the nearest settlements were reported to be at least 3 km away and the two neighbouring Parishes in the vicinity are Medde and Labworumor in Palaro Sub-county.

Ethnic groups: The majority of the population of the four villages are Acholi and a few Langi. But in nearby Angagura Sub-county headquarters there are soldiers and entrepreneurs who come from outside the project area.

Archaeology and cultural heritage: The ancient history of this region is not yet fully documented and there appears to have been no archaeological work done in the project area. No cultural site was reported to be at the proposed HPP1 area.

21 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

Resource Use Outside Achwa Ranch, the majority of the population consists of subsistence-oriented farmers who sell a small amount of produce on the local markets in order to purchase manufactured goods. Most of the land in the area is communally owned with no land documents. The inhabitants practice a combination of rotation cropping patterns of staple crops and cash crops combined with limited small livestock raising. The sandy loam soils of the area combined with ample rainfall result in fairly good harvests and some surplus produce for sale.

Accessibility to safe water in the area is very low. The majority of the population depends on unprotected wells and a few springs which promote high incidences of sanitation related diseases and conditions. The villages have some boreholes that provide access to clean water. However, these boreholes are few in number and are also far from some homes making it difficult to access and thus promoting consumption of unsafe water from the river.

The majority of villagers use wood fuel for cooking while charcoal burning is common to raise cash for the family.

Local Economy The standard of living in the project area is also low. People live in mud-brick huts with thatched roofs and own very little in the way of utensils, furniture or material goods.

The improved security situation in the district has encouraged the return of people to their traditional land. This has resulted into increased accessibility to land for agricultural production, increased rearing of poultry and livestock, fishing on Agago, and hunting for wild animals such as squirrels and edible rats in the woodlands of these areas as well as cutting and selling bamboo stems. It has also led to the development of trading centers which have promoted the sale of produce and other commodities. The area has only one main trading centre known as Angagura Trading Centre found near the Sub-county headquarters. This trading centre is composed of permanent, semi-permanent, and temporary structures.

Health Health facilities are generally poor in the Project area. If a serious illness strikes a particular household, most people opt for visisting local clinics and Health centers but combine recovery with visits to traditional healers who use local herbal medicine. Angarura Sub County has only two health centres namely Angarura HC II and Aswa Ranch HCII. Common diseases in the area include malaria, cough, flue, diarrhea and nodding disease. Flue, cough, nodding disease and diarrhea are the most common diseases amongst the children.

Education Very few schools are found in the Project area. Within the project area, there are primary schools which are along the road leading to the Achwa HPP I. The schools identified include; Achwa Ranch Primary School, Akelikng Primary School and Achwa Army Bridge Primary School. However, in Angagura Sub-county there no secondary school which impedes enrollment in Universal Secondary Education programs. The conditions of these schools are poor, materials are lacking and teachers are hard to come by given the lack of adequate housing for them and the

22 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 low standard of living in the area. The result is that there are few people with skills and higher education in the project area.

Road network There is a road that can be used to access the HPP1 site from Angagura Trading Centre up to the ranch that initially existed. This road is murram and motorable. The status of the road is being affected by the heavy trucks plying along the road to the quarry site but overall it was in good state. There is an established road within the ranch leading to the ongoing HPP2 campsites and project area. This will be the same road leading to the HPP1 tailrace and powerhouse. It is anticipated that new roads will be opened leading to HPP1 especially the intake site through the ranch and off the existing one.

Public Consultations Consultation with relevant stakeholders and regulatory institutions was carried out by the ESIA Team during the field exercise. The consultation process ensured public participation in the EIA process, as recommended by the National Environmental Act, Cap 153. In this context, meetings were held with relevant Government Lead Agencies, and the Local Government of Pader District as well as the local communities in the Project area.

The key concerns expressed by all the stakeholders consulted were similar and had a relevance to the experience to the ongoing HPP2 and they hoped would not happen during the implementation of HPP1. Some of the issues pointed out included;  Grievances by the workers on HPP2 due to poor pay and unfair termination;  Gaps in information sharing from the developer and/or contractor;  Restrictions to access the river and hunting area around the ongoing works.  Less involvement of the district by the project management especially contractor.

Positive impacts and anticipation  They called on government to construct a substation in Angagura TC to enable local people utilize the power from their area;  The also pointed on the need for ARPE Ltd to construct maternity ward at Achwa Ranch HC II and also put in place a borehole as part of CSR.  Job creation for local communities (casuals, mansions, welders etc.) and called on company to employ local people.  Improved standards of living due to increased incomes  Development of the agricultural sector with variety of food to meet the demands of the increased population in the area  Development of Small Medium Enterprises due to possible availability of electricity through connections by Electricity Distribution Company (UMEME)

Negative impacts were anticipated to be:  Decreased water flow due to water diversion into the canal  Vegetation destruction may affect all components of the environment including biodiversity loss  Increased air and noise pollution caused by heavy vehicles, machinery and blasting

23 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

 Soil and water contamination from chemicals, hazardous waste etc.  Increased HIV/AIDS prevalence in society due to population influx

Potential Project Impacts The ESIA for HPP1 considered positive and negative impacts in the pre-construction, construction and operational phases of the Project. Impacts could occur from causes directly and indirectly related to the short-term construction phase (about 3 years) and the long- term operation phase (more than 30 years).

The most serious negative impacts of the HPP1, both environmental and social, are related to the anticipated rapid growth of the population in the vicinity of the Project. This will cause a ‘boom- town’ phenomenon, a common characteristic of large-scale development projects. A typical characteristic of such a situation is a sudden and rapid increase in the demands and needs for all kinds of goods and services, both physical (e.g. housing, food supply, energy, transportation, and waste disposal) and social (e.g. health, education, law enforcement, entertainment). Consequently, significant assistance from Government and some from the developer will be needed to cope with these demands in a prompt and effective manner. Given the minimal physical and social infrastructure presently existing in the project area together with the limited financial, managerial, administrative and organizational capacities in the area, the need for this kind of assistance will be imperative. Details of the impacts of the HPP1 are to be found in the text. Some of these impacts include the following:

Impacts on the Physical and Chemical Environments All earthmoving construction activities as well as weir construction and water diversion from the River into the penstocks will have the potential for increasing erosion and sediment load into River Achwa. Handling of large amounts of fuel, oil, lubricants and other chemicals implies a risk of spills and accidents, which could have significant negative impacts on soil and water quality during construction in particular.

It is expected that population influx and poor sanitary conditions could also result in reduced water quality. Impacts on water quality are expected to be of short-term duration. Population influx is also likely to result in land use changes, soil degradation and increased erosion and contamination.

Impacts on the Biological Environment

Terrestrial vegetation/habitats There will be clearance and disturbance (permanent and temporary) of vegetation during project construction as well as for cultivation and fuel wood collection by people moving into the area. Project related population influx implies an increase in harvesting of all kinds of natural resources, possibly exceeding sustainable levels. Overall, the impacts may be considered to be ‘small negative’ and will, to a great extent, be of long-term duration.

Terrestrial fauna Project construction will result in habitat change which will mostly be confined to already highly degraded natural habitats with low species diversity and abundance. The general disturbance

24 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 during construction will cause at least temporary avoidance of the area by some of the animal species. In addition, population influx may change more valuable habitats in the INDIZ and also increase hunting of some animals. Reduced river flow along the 6 km long stretch of River Achwa will change habitat characteristics which could be favourable for some species and unfavourable for others. Overall, the impacts are expected to be ‘small negative’ during project construction and ‘small negative’ impact during project operation.

Aquatic ecosystem An increase in sediment load and other pollution (nutrients, chemicals, bacteria) is likely to affect aquatic life during project construction. However, the large flow of Achwa River could significantly dilute any pollution. Species adapted to rapid flowing waters will decrease in diversity and abundance and species adapted to slow flowing water will increase in diversity and abundance during project operation along the 6 km long stretch of the River that will carry reduced river flow. All aquatic species will, however, remain abundant upstream and downstream of the DIZ.

Population influx might increase fishing pressure. Overall, impacts are expected to be medium negative during project construction and ‘small negative’ during operation phases.

Biodiversity Biodiversity values identified in the HPP1 area are very low. Consequently, no major negative impacts are expected on species of conservation concern.

Positive ecological impacts Change in the physical, chemical and environmental conditions in the project area will change competitive relationships between various species. For instance, some bird and fish species will benefit from a more slow flowing 6 km long section of the River. Such impacts will likely be ‘small positive’ and of long-term duration.

Impacts on the Human Environment

Social and Health Impacts No land take will be required from the local communities for the construction of HPP1 structures and consequently there will be no direct compensation to or resettlement of the communities regarding HPP1. However, the Project will require approximately 315 ha for HPP1 and HPP2 project areas, for access roads and for camp area. This land will be curved out of Achwa Ranch after concluding all negotiations between the developer and the Ranch owners.

Although the influx of people as an indirect result of the Project will provide a large market for local produce and business opportunities for some individuals, it will strain the already weak resource base of the area (water, food and wood fuel) and weaken health and educational facilities. Malaria and STDs, especially HIV/AIDS, will be of particular concern. The increase in traffic, pollution and general social disturbance will also be important impacts to be considered.

Overall, the impacts are expected to be ‘medium to high negative’ during project construction and ‘medium negative’ during the operation phase if mitigation measures are not implemented.

25 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

Visual impacts Excavation, deposition of rock spoils as well as excavated soil will cause changes in topography and other landscape characteristics. Such impacts will however be small and negative but also short term.

Positive impacts The main impact brought by the project will be the generation and addition of 42MW power to the national grid. Other significant direct positive impacts from project construction are mostly related to the employment activities during project construction, both directly through the Project but also as a consequence of an increase in economic activity in the area. This impact will be ‘medium positive’ during project construction and ‘small positive’ during project operation.

Construction of access roads (about 18.5 km) will result in improved access. This will be a ‘small positive’ impact during project operation. The most important positive impacts are related to the mitigation measures and utilization of development opportunities rather than impacts directly from the Project. These measures are discussed briefly in the following sections.

Cumulative impacts  The commencement of HPP1 in addition to the ongoing construction works on the HHP2 will result in a number of cumulative impacts. Some of these impacts include;  Reduced flow of the river and the resultant effect on the aquatic ecosystem  Possible increase in the HIV/AIDS risks due to the influx of people in the area  Spur in the area economic activities  Improvement on the availability of social services including road network, health infrastructure, etc.  Increased social concerns such as crime  Stress on the area existing social services including schools and health facilities mainly.  Accumulated noise levels and its effect on human environment and wildlife  Accumulated release of fugitive dust and other carbon emissions from automobiles affecting the area air quality.  Effect of sediment load on the water quality; and  Restriction to communities from accessing the areas previously used for fishing and hunting.

MITIGATION MEASURES

Mitigation measures have been proposed to eliminate or reduce the magnitude (duration and extent) of potential negative impacts. Thorough consultations with the affected populations and relevant stakeholders have been held and their input should continue to be sought during the detailed planning, implementation and follow-up on the environmental and social mitigation and monitoring activities proposed in this report.

A central aspect to the mitigation and monitoring is an ongoing public consultation with the affected peoples in the project area. A thorough presentation of the Project with its various components and a time schedule needs to be made as soon as plans are finalized. During the pre- construction phase, when a number of activities will be starting up, constant contact will be

26 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 required and a feed-back process set up to monitor adjustments, grievances and allow for participation throughout. Strengthening existing institutions will form an important part of the process. A framework for an Environmental Management Plan (EMP) has been made and the EMP allocates administrative and financial responsibility for mitigation and monitoring activities, with estimates of costs of the various activities. HSE Manager and an Environmental Review Committee should be appointed as early as possible before the Project takes off.

Pre-construction activities in the fields of health, agriculture, energy supply, institutional capacity building and other interventions should receive particular attention and would prepare the affected populations in the project area for the influx of people and changes the Project will bring. This will be of vital importance to reduce potential negative impacts on both the biological and human environment as well to optimize the potential positive impacts of implementing the Project.

Some of the mitigation measures for the various impacts identified in the ESIA include the following:  Soil erosion prevention/control  Appropriate location of a dumping site  Improving scenic beauty  Re-vegetation of cleared area  Pollution control  Improved welfare of the workforce  Awareness creation among the population  Monitoring the Environmental flow over a trial period of three years  Fencing of open ditches  Improving air quality  Noise control measures  Preventive health measures  Adequate Occupational Safety and Health measures  Support to Agricultural Intensification programmes  Support for the provision of safe drinking water  Enhancing opportunities for accessing Electricity in Angagura  Capacity building and institutional strengthening  Affirmative Action to access Employment Opportunities  Support to improved Security in the Project area  Introduction of Traffic safety measures  Compensation for any land take

MONITORING Some of the parameters to be monitored will include the following:

Monitoring of the Physical and Chemical Environments Monitoring noise levels: This should be done periodically using the methodology described above and the results compared with the baseline noise levels.

27 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

Ambient Air Quality: Similarly levels of air quality should be measured bi-annually with appropriate equipment to describe any changes with a view to putting in place appropriate mitigation measures.

Monitoring soil quality: This should be done annually and compared with the baseline values in the report. Soil composition should be closely co-coordinated with the aquatic ecology sampling (see below).

Monitoring water quality: It will be important to undertake water quality assessment at the start of construction works and periodically during construction. To ensure adequacy of the results in the early periods of project construction, monthly water monitoring should be done for at least four months. It is then recommended that quarterly water quality monitoring be undertaken in the preceding months and also increasing to bi-annual. These samples should be taken at the intake and at the outlet, upstream and downstream of the project area. River flow will be monitored continuously.

Monitoring of the Biological Environment Monitoring of the biological environment should focus on monitoring terrestrial vegetation, birds and aquatic ecology as these groups have been selected as indicators. However, it is also recommended that other animal groups should be surveyed occasionally for comparison with the baseline studies.

Terrestrial vegetation and Conservation Areas Monitoring of terrestrial vegetation is important to measure habitat changes and excessive exploitation of natural resources. Focus will be on the riverine forest and the upland woodland vegetation, which is likely to be put under pressure due to population influx and increased demand for various natural resources for food, energy and building materials.

Birds Birds have often been suggested as an appropriate group to serve as bioindicators of environmental conditions. It is proposed that monitoring should focus on selected bird species mentioned in this report especially the forest generalists and forest visitors. Monitoring should be based on the methodology described in this report.

Aquatic Ecosystem Monitoring of the biological aspects should be carried out and based on the parameters used to determine the baseline conditions.

Monitoring river flow rates: A systematic review of the consequences of variations in the flow volumes and patterns of the bypass flow should be made in the wet and dry seasons, at the same time as water quality samples are collected. If, during the first three years of project operation, the hydrology of the Achwa River produces any adverse effects on aquatic life, then it is recommended that monitoring continues until sufficient data to evaluate the actual effects of the minimum bypass flow have been collected and the maximum discharge adjusted accordingly.

28 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

Monitoring aquatic life: Monitoring of plankton, macrophytes, macro-invertebrate and fish species diversity and abundance should be performed following the procedures employed during the baseline studies.

Monitoring of the Human Environment Internal and external monitoring of health, economic and social conditions through the construction phase and for a time after construction is complete is recommended. The most important issues will be to negotiate a mutually agreed compensation rate between the developer and the owners of Achwa Ranch. In addition, there are a number of other issues that affect the Project and its relationship with the local communities. The following issues are the most relevant and monitoring results will have to be compared with the baseline data collected:  Available supplies of fuel and food so that inflation does not cause hardship for the resident population  Adequate supply of drinking water in the DIZ and INDIZ  Functioning educational facilities  Monitoring of key health indicators, including regular testing for malaria, STDs and parasites based on the information from the health baseline studies  Monitoring of economic activities to ensure that the resident population are able to participate and benefit through the working of credit schemes and training and by ensuring that unskilled workers come from the resident population  Security and the ability of local institutions to patrol the area and deal with crime, conflicts and social problems  Impacts of pollution, traffic and other disturbances on the population, including distances from machines and heavy traffic to the homesteads during the construction phase  Monitoring for archaeological finds - that they are reported and the proper procedure is followed

Regular monitoring, especially of socio-economic and health conditions, should be ongoing during the construction period and should continue for up to five years after construction.

A framework for an Environmental Management Plan (EMP) has been prepared and forms the link between the impact assessment and recommendations in the ESIA and the implementation of the mitigation and monitoring activities. The EMP outlines mitigation and monitoring activities as well as financial and administrative responsibilities and schedules for implementation during the pre-construction, construction and operation phases.

It is proposed that an HSE Manager be appointed at least six months before construction activities are initiated in order to update the EMP and to harmonize any pertinent issues between the developer and the other stakeholders.

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

This report has extensively discussed all the project activities and possible potential positive and negative impacts of this hydropower project (HPP1). It can be concluded that the run-of-the-river Hydropower Project (HPP1) and the project area have several characteristics that reduce the negative impacts to almost negligible levels. Successful implementation of environmental and

29 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 social mitigation and monitoring management activities will further reduce the potential impacts and optimize potential benefits. It’s on the above aspects that the Consultant strongly recommends that the HPP1 Project management implements the stated mitigation measures and monitoring activities and any other activities aimed at achieving best environmental, safety and social practices. The following are also recommended for action by the developer/contractor.  ARPE undertakes to commission independent ESIAs for all those activities that fall under the third schedule of NEA as requiring ESIA including transmission lines during operation, creation of campsites, etc.  ARPE ensures that all land acquisition processes follow the right procedures and that all land affected entities have approved the activities before construction commences. These include among others Uganda Livestock Industries and Privatization Unit in the Ministry of Finance, Planning and Economic Development.  ARPE and the contractor undertakes close monitoring of the effects of the reduced river flow on aquatic ecology through the construction period and at least two years after commissioning of the plant. Provisions should be made for some flexibility in the operation regime of the power station in the dry seasons.  At the completion of the construction phase every effort will be made to restore the sites that have been temporary used to close their original state. All redundant facilities including machinery and boulders will be removed from the project area in order to reduce visual intrusion while any standing structures that are no longer of use by the project will be demolished or given to communities for other uses.  ARPE and all its contractors will make attempts to involve local government leadership especially Pader District Local Governmnet and Angagura sub county leadership for smooth operation of works in their area and easy project reception. This will also help in fostering the social economic aspects of the project within the communities and the district.  Regular environment, health and safety inspection protocols will be conducted as per the requirements of the National Environment (Audit) Regulation, 2006  There will be strict adherence to the legislation of Uganda that requires ongoing monitoring, audits and regular reporting to NEMA, ERA and other relevant authorities during planning, operations, decommissioning and rehabilitation  ARPE will implement the environmental management and monitoring plan and ensure that appropriate mitigation measures are sought in liaison with relevant authorities if any other adverse impacts are identified during the course of implementing the hydropower project.

30 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 The ESIA Update Report

This ESIA update report has been produced following field studies conducted during March 2017. It comes about due to condition II in the NEMA ESIA approval certificate for the same project (the Proposed Agago-Achwa Hydropower Plant- HPPI in Pader District in Northern Uganda) that was issued on the 28th Feb 2014 (Certificate NO: NEMA/EIA/4871) that necessitated the project to commence within 24 months from the above date of approval. It was thus imperative that re-assessment be made to check how the area has changed in different aspects from the earlier given information. This updated report therefore presents the area current physical, chemical, biological and social baseline conditions, potential positive and negative impacts anticipated from the implementation of the project (HPP1) as well as cumulative impacts due to combined construction and operation of HPP2 and HPP3. Recommendations for mitigation of the impacts and monitoring activities to deal with the impacts are discussed.

1.2 Project Overview and History

Following a survey of some rivers in Uganda carried out in 2009-2010, PAC S.p.A. identified a stretch of Achwa and Agago Rivers as particularly favourable for the construction of a hydropower scheme. In order to assess the hydroelectric potential of the river, a preliminary study was performed and submitted to Electricity Regulatory Authority (ERA) in June 2011 with the "notice of intended application" for the Agago-Achwa Hydropower Project. In September 2011 ERA approved and issued "Permit" no. 2011/035, giving PAC S.p.A, the previous developer, clearance to develop the site and to do the necessary feasibility studies. The design of the final layout of the hydroelectric plant was approved by ERA in June 2012.

PAC S.p.A. carried out and completed the Feasibility Study and other necessary studies to enable determination of project technical features enabling the performance of the financial model and plan for the project. Further studies including environmental and social impact assessment, Resettlement Action Plan, detailed sub-surface survey for the construction and construction reports have been carried out and approved in subsequent years.

A study that was carried out for the submission to ERA of the "Notice of intended Application" contemplated the construction of 1 (one) hydropower plant on Agago River and 2 (two) other plants on Achwa River for quick development and 2 more further upstream under feasibility, with a total installed power generation capacity of 88 MW. Achwa HPP-1 will generate 42MW. Satellite Topographic survey of the entire project area was carried out at the end of November 2011. The survey enabled the consideration of different layout options and the improvement of the proposal for the development of hydropower potential of the project area and to optimize the production capacity of each plant. The drawings below show the HPP1 plan and typical section as in Preliminary design:

31 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

Figure 1-1: The typical HPPI Plan and section

One of the options, developed as a result of the satellite topographic survey details, involves the construction of two more power stations; named HPP3 and HPP4, located in an intermediate position between Agago Plant (HPP5) and Achwa 1 Plant (HPP1). That option was proposed to ERA with the submission of a Final Layout Design that envisaged five stations, including four stations on the Achwa River and one station on the Agago River.

ERA reviewed the Final Layout Design submitted by PAC and has since decided to approve only three of the five centers of generation proposed for the Hydropower Scheme on Achwa and Agago Rivers, that is HPPl, HPP2 and HPP5.

However further studies continued following the above response from ERA to determine the viability of the projects. PAC Spa finally found the implementation of HPP5 not feasible since its Environmental flow is fixed to 0.52 m3/s. They have thus embarked on the implementation of

32 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

HPP2 (currently undergoing construction) and HPP1 which is about to commence and also subject of this ESIA review and update.

1.3 Need for the Project

The overall policy objective of the Government of Uganda for the energy sector is to continue to improve the quality and quantity of energy supplies at least cost to the national economy, while also promoting efficiency and conservation of energy resources. Meeting the energy demand of a growing economy on a sustainable and efficient basis and improving the living standards of the citizens is a priority. The main challenge in the energy sector therefore is how to develop Uganda’s considerable hydropower potential, simultaneously increase the biomass resource base and use the present resources efficiently.

The three most common sources of energy in Uganda are biomass, petroleum and hydro- electricity, providing 96.5, 1.5, and 2 per cent, respectively, of the total energy consumed in the country. Use of biomass energy, in particular fuel wood and charcoal, has detrimental environmental consequences for Uganda. Uganda’s per capita energy consumption is one of the lowest in the world. The modern segment of the energy sector, electricity and petroleum, is also one of the lowest in sub-Saharan Africa.

The Ugandan economy has surpassed the impact of economic changes induced by globalization relatively well, with a constantly positive growth in GDP, which in the years from 2000 to 2011 saw an average increase greater than 7%. The estimates for the foreseeable future call for 6.7% growth from 2012 to 2015 and a double-digit increase in 2016.

Uganda has a population of approximately 35 million, with an average age of 15.1, and it is the fourth country in the world in terms of demographic growth with an annual increase of 3.5%. The level of electrification in Uganda is still very low. Only 8% of the total population and less than 2% of the rural population are connected to the national grid. About 80% of the population lives in rural areas.

In order to ensure sufficient supply of energy for the development of the country and to reduce the poverty level in order to maximize access to electricity by more users, the Ministry of Energy and Mineral Development (MEMD) has commissioned an investment plan for the Power Sector (Power Sector Investment Plan-PSIP). The PSIP is based on information obtained from a series of correlated studies which forecasts an average growth of 7.2% in electricity demand for the period 2008-2020. In order to meet this growing demand for electricity, other low cost power plants must be built. The proposed establishment of these Hydropower Project projects in Pader District will therefore be a timely contribution to improving energy availability for the socio- economic development of the country.

1.4 Alternatives to Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1)

Environmental Impact Assessments typically should address alternatives. Decision making is improved by existence of various options from which to choose, with details of their respective environmental and socio-economic implications. Alternatives can be considered at several levels and could include alternative energy sources (for instance petroleum verses hydropower),

33 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 alternative locations of one energy source (e.g. different hydropower sites along a river) or alternative development options at one site (e.g. a project based on dam/reservoir verses run-of- the-river scheme).

1.4.1 Hydropower Despite Uganda’s large hydropower potential (of over 2,000 MW), less than 50% of this potential has so far been exploited. One result has been pressure on the natural resource base, mainly forests leading to serious land degradation with negative climate change consequences. Most of hydropower potential is concentrated along the Nile River. Several small scale hydropower sites have also been identified elsewhere, especially in the hilly parts of western Uganda. While no definite studies have been made to compare hydropower potential in these locations in terms of environmental and socio-economic challenges, the Achwa-Agago hydropower scheme is located in this Virgin River complex, which presents itself as a suitable area for development.

1.4.2 Dam versus weir Because of the unique nature of the geology of the Agago-Achwa River complex, the run-of-the- river scheme alternative has been selected in preference to the traditional dam. The run-of-the- river is created using a technique of a mobile dam (rubber dam) on a concrete foundation. During flood flow events, the rubber dam will be completely deflated and will allow the entire hydraulic section to be restored. Because of these flexible adjustments, it is envisaged that the dam would cause inundation of a much smaller area compared to the traditional dam and reservoir. This would also avoid possible future resettlement of local communities, also reducing the risk water borne diseases and water quality problems.

1.4.3 Comparison of Achwa Hydropower with other energy sources using multi- criteria decision tool A detailed evaluation of the different energy sources (Hydro, Geothermal, Heavy Oil, Wind Power, Biomass Cogeneration, Nuclear and Energy import) by JICA for the Energy Master using different criteria (neutral case, environmental priority case, technical and economic case) shows that from the technical and economic perspective, hydropower scores very highly so that its development should take priority. The Achwa hydropower project conforms to the findings of this study. In the same study, solar thermal power is shown to be the most suitable from the environmental point of view but from the technical and economic point of view, solar thermal power is shown not to be the most suitable. While Geothermal power scores highly in all cases, it is still not yet developed in Uganda. Considerable time and funding is required to determine capacities of thermal power and bring them to implementation stage. Hydropower therefore still remains the best option for Uganda including the Achwa plant.

1.5 Project Description of River Achwa Hydropower Plant 1 (HPP1)

1.5.1 Project Development Objectives The overall goal of this project is to construct a hydropower scheme utilizing the available water in River Achwa to generate electricity. One of the aims of the project is to incorporate environmental and social planning at an early stage in project design to avoid or reduce negative impacts and enhance benefits.

34 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

Having earlier conducted the ESIA exercise in 2013 and received certificate of approval from NEMA (Cert. NO: NEMA/EIA/4871), the developer felt it imperative to update the information so that the final design fully maximizes the input of these studies. The ESIA update has been carried out by an interdisciplinary team of professionals in parallel with technical design studies allowing for continued incorporation of ideas to optimize design and limit negative impacts.

1.5.2 Location of River Achwa Hydropower Plant one (HPP1) The project area is located on Acwha River about 19 km north-west (downstream) of the new bridge on the Gulu-Kitgum road. The new bridge is found almost half way between Gulu and Kitgum (40 km North from Gulu and 60 km South from Kitgum as shown in Figure 1-2. Administratively, HPP1 is located in Burlobo Village, Burlobo Parish, Angagura Sub-county, Aruu County, Pader District. Connection from the Project area to Gulu is by means of a murram road.

Figure 1-2: The general location of Achwa-Agago Hydropower Project

The more specific and closer location of the hydropower plant one in relation to Hydropower Plant 2 is shown in Figure 1-3 below.

35 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

Figure 1-3: Location of HPPI in respect to HPP2

36 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

The access road to the site starts from an existing road from Angagura Trading Center running northwards for about 5 km from the Gulu-Kitgum Road where one side of a planned road branches off westwards for about 12 km up to HPP1 intake area; while the other planned road runs northwards for about 6.5 km to HPP1 power house/HPP2 area. Both roads pass through Achwa Ranch down to the east bank (Pader side) where most of the Project activities will take place.

Achwa Ranch is owned by Uganda Livestock Industries and is presently in the custody of the Privatization Unit of the Ministry of Finance, Planning and Economic Development. All the necessary docuemnetation and approvals leading to the use of part of this ranch land for the hydro power purposes has been done and approval has been accorded for use. All the relevant studies have been made and the necessary permits received by the developer ARPE including among others construction permit, water abstraction permit, dredging permit, etc.

The west bank (Gulu side), where almost no activity will take place except for anchoring one side of the weir foundation, is bordered by Medde and Labworumor Parishes, Palaro Sub-county in Gulu District. Therefore, no access roads will be built in the Gulu side.

1.6 The Sponsor

The sponsor is ARPE Limited. Following their application to ERA in March 2014 to construct, own and operate hydropower plants (HPP1 and HPP2), Electricity Regulatory Authority (ERA) issued a license to ARPE Limited, trading as PAC S.p.A, for the generation and sale of 83 MW of electricity across River Achwa in Pader and Gulu Districts. The license became effective on 19 August 2014 and is valid for a period of 40 (forty) years, including the construction period, during which ARPE Limited will construct, own and operate two hydropower plants. The Authority’s decision was supported by the consideration that ARPE Limited possesses the technical and financial capacity required to undertake the project, which once commissioned, will add 83 MW of electricity to the national grid. ARPE Limited has also obtained approval for environmental and social impact assessment studies for its projects from the National Environment Management Authority; water permits from the Directorate of Water Resource Management; and land for the hydropower plants.

1.7 Capital investment

ARPE Ltd plans to invest an extra US $90 Million towards the development of Achwa HPP-1 as an addition to the US $100 Million that was put aside for the development of Achwa HPP-2 currently under construction.

1.8 Main Plant structures The main project components are located on the right bank of the river (Weir, the channel, forebay and the powerhouse). Part of the Weir shall be located on the left bank of the river in Gulu district.

37 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

Table 1-1: Coordinates of the project structures Structure GPS Coordinates N UTM Coordinates E Intake (rubber dam) 36N 0441431N 0345014E Delivery Point 0445996N 0345929E Forebay 0445914N 0345733E Penstocks Power Station 0445986N 0345910E Tailrace (outlet) 0445996N 0345929E

1.8.1 Intake and weir structures After further studies, the project will consider three options to intake and weir structures.

The intake and weir structures consists of the following parts, all of each with a summit quote 2 meters higher than the respective parts in the preliminary design.

 movable weir in the river-bed formed by two “Rubber Dams”, each of them 33 m long and 3,5 m high. The movable weir is anchored to a reinforced concrete basement slab, about 80 m long, with variable height. The rubber dams are governed by a technological center located in a square building on the right bank. The left shoulder of the movable weir is modelled at lower elevation than right shoulder: in this way a possible flood would interest firstly the left bank of the river. The hydraulic section of the movable weir on the Achwa River has been verified with deflated rubber dams, obtaining respectively no residual freeboard and 0,5 m of residual freeboard with the 200 years of return period discharge and with the 100 years return period discharge;  De-silting gate: on the right side, in the body of the weir, two desilting gates with size 4 m x 7.25 m and tightness on 3 sides has been inserted. The bottom in the section of the gate is 1.25 m under the crest of the reinforced concrete basement slab of the movable weir. That difference of elevation favours the desilting of the zone in front of the intake grid and allows to by-pass the movable weirs in conditions of low flow in the river. Moreover the adjustment of the opening degree of the gate makes possible the release of the amenity flow. Downstream of the gate, a 3 m wide footbridge allows the access to the right shoulder of the weir;  Intake trash rack: the trash rack of the intake is 30 m long. The cleaning of the trash rack will be operated by means of a cleaner of “backward and forward” type. The cleaner is completed by a conveyor belt which brings the collected material, leaves and branches, downstream of the weir. It is assembled on a cast on site concrete bridge with overall 4 spans supported by 3 central piles;  A transition basin connects the real intake of the headrace channel downstream of the intake trash racks. At the end of the transition basin a bottom outlet reaches the river through a 3.000mm diameter conduit. It is controlled by a plain gate with tightness on 4 sides and manual actuation;  Headrace channel intake gates: at the end of the transition basin, corresponding with the headrace channel intake, 3 plain gates are located. They have size 4.0 m x 6.0 m. Downstream of the gates a 7.5 m wide road bridge allows the channel crossing.

The intake structure is located on the right bank, in the same position of preliminary design.

38 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

Figure 1-4: The intake structures

1.8.2 The Headrace Channel (Canal) The headrace channel has been sized in order to operate in conditions of uniform flow for the maximum design discharge of 100 m3/s, with three transverse typical sections: the first one in rock excavation, the second one in soil excavation and the last in embankment. It has been conceived assuming a slope of the channel axis of 0, 00075 m/m. This condition allows to maintain an about 50 cm freeboard, independently from the transitions, in enlargement or in narrowing, of the section. In consideration of these new typical sections and the new regulation quote, the channel length is decreased. The characteristic dimensions are explained in following chapter.

39 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

1.8.2.1 Section in soil excavation The section in excavation presents: a width at the bottom of 7 m; an overall height of 3,50 m; a slope of the sides of 26.5°. The roughness has been assumed 60 m1/3s-1 because it is realized in flattened concrete. Under the concrete layer, reinforced with a double mesh of steel, there is a drainage system composed by selected gravel, geotextile and two micro slot pipes.

Figure 1-5: Section in soil excavation

1.8.2.2 Section in rock excavation The section in excavation presents: a width at the bottom of 12.50; an overall height of 3,6 m; a slope of the sides of 78,5°. On the bottom the roughness has been assumed 60 m1/3s-1 because it is realized in flattened concrete; on the sides, as they are covered with undulated shotcrete, a roughness of 50 m1/3s-1 is considered. Due to the presence of hard rock, the section of the channel is developed in depth in order to reduce the overall volumes of excavation.

The stabilization of the side slopes of the channel will be ensured by an average 10 cm layer of fibre-reinforced shotcrete, associated to spot dowels L= 3 m (Fig. 31), to be realized where, during the excavation, the possibility of formation of unexpected large removable rock wedges or blocks will be detected.

40 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

Figure 1-6: Section in Rock excavation

1.8.2.3 Section in embankment The section in embankment is similar to section type 1.

Figure 1-7: Section in Embankment

On the basis of these three typical sections the channel has been adapted to the ground. Then the resulting structure has been verified in permanent flow conditions for 5, 25, 50, 75, 100 m³/s.

41 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

1.8.3 Forebay and bypass channel The forebay with trapezoidal plan is located at the end of the headrace channel. The elements which delimit the forebay are as it follows:  Bypass spillway: the spillway of the bypass channel is located on the left of the forebay. It consists of 3 self-regulated tilting gates with sizes 5.5 m x 3.0 m. Downstream of the gates, a short channel excavated in rock with high longitudinal slope returns the water to the Achwa river-bed.  Penstocks access: at the end of the forebay, 4 independent blocks lead to as many penstocks. The intake of each of them is protected by a trash-rack with cleaner. Downstream of the grids, in front of the cone shaped connector with the penstocks, a plain gate with tightness on 4 sides intercepts each penstock. It follows a vent pipe and the penstock safety system.

Differently the preliminary design, the geotech study shows that a rotation of about 10° upstream can reduce penstock’s length in the order of 10-15% ( about 200m vs 230 in current situation).

1.8.4 Penstock The penstock consists of 4 open air welded steel pipes with hydraulic diameter variable from 2,8 m to 2,5 m for the turbines big size and from 2,2 m to 1,8 m for the turbine small size, about 200 m long and variable thickness between 10 mm to 12 mm.

In plan lay-out the axis are lightly divergent, from up to down, with a minimum distance of 5.05 m downstream of the forebay, and 8.60 m before entering the Powerhouse.

Along the longitudinal profile two vertex, provided with reinforced concrete anchors, are placed: the first one is about 13 m downstream of the forebay and the second one about 7 m before the Powerhouse. The straight parts between the two anchors, are supported by stiffener rings connected on reinforced concrete piers. The typical distance between the piers is 12 m.

In the middle section of the straight part one expansion joint is placed.

The parts of the penstocks near the Powerhouse and below the level of the service area are covered with a reinforced lining and buried.

The area between the penstocks, from the forebay to the Powerhouse, is covered with reinforced concrete slabs, in order to allow inspection and maintenance operations. For the same reason the pipes, near the two ends, are provided of manholes.

The penstocks structural steel section is designed, in particular, to resist the static and water- hammer pressure.

1.8.5 Power house The Powerhouse is located more upstream differently from preliminary design; this is caused by the rotation of forebay. The dimensions are similar to HPP2 powerhouse.

42 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

Figure 1-8: Layout of HPPI option 1

1.8.5.1 Option 2 According to the report for construction produced in November 2016, the study found that there is a slope of 0,001 m/m on Achwa river level from the current intake’s position (option 1) in the first part of river. With a little increase of the weir basement, it is possible to reduce significantly the length of channel. The HPP1 main structures in this option are similar to the option 1.

Figure 1-9: Option 2 layout

1.8.5.2 Option 3 and 3bis In the option 3 and 3 bis, the design proposes weir location and type changed, using flap gates 6 m high vs rubber dams. Channel length is decreased furthermore in respect option 2, but the typical sections are the same of the other solutions. Forebay, bypass, penstocks and powerhouse are the same of solution 1 and 2. Weir is located downstream of option 2, where the Achwa river flows through a gorge. Considering the geomorphological condition, the higher difference in level from the height of regulation and the bottom, the 1000 years flood return, it is better choose for a different weir solution.

43 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

Figure 1-10: Weir structure for option 3

The intake structure consists of the following parts:  Movable weir in the river-bed formed by four flap gates, each of them 10 m long and 6 m high. The movable weir is anchored to a reinforced concrete basement slab, about 55 m long. The flap gates are governed by a technological control room located in a square building on the right bank. A possible flood will pass all from the structure with open flap gates. The concrete structure forms a creager profile to optimize the hydraulic section;  De-silting gate: on the right side, in the body of the weir, a de-silting gate with size 4 m x 3 m. That difference of elevation favours the de-silting of the zone in front of the intake grid and allows to by-pass the movable weirs in conditions of low flow in the river. Moreover the adjustment of the opening degree of the gate makes possible the release of the amenity flow. Downstream of the gate, a 3 m wide footbridge allows the access to the right shoulder of the weir. The only difference between Option 3 and 3 bis is the turbines size. In Option 3 the turbines are optimized in according to the layout while in Option 3 bis the turbines are the same as used in HPP2.

44 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

Figure 1-11: HPPI option 3 layout

45 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

1.9 Summary of the Main Features of HPP1 HPP1 will have the following features;  Maximum discharge: 100 m³/s;  Minimum flow (Vital Flow Rate): 1.500 m³/s;  The intake structure will consist of two water-filled Rubber Dams, each of them 3.5 meters high and 33 meters long;  Gross Hydraulic Head: 50.45 m;  Installed Power: 4 x 10.5 MW;

1.10 Estimated Energy production All alternative layouts have a Gross Hydraulic Head increase of about 3.95 m respect to preliminary layout. The head increasing corresponding 7.8%. The increasing in energy production will be roughly the same percentage. The estimated energy production in all alternative layouts (in detail for Option 3) presented on this report is about 195.8 GWh/year.

The results in Figure 1-12 below shows the P50, P75 and P90 for the preliminary design and for the alternative Layouts (in detail for Option 3 and Option 3bis).

Figure 1-12: Estimated energy production

46 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

1.11 Conclusion The results of geological investigations carried out in the months of August and September 2016 have highlighted the high costs to build a channel in the expected position emanating from the major stability problems due to quantity of rock, poor quality of the soil/ rock. It is therefore imposed the necessity of moving aside the channel from the river and move the channel route towards the east, so as to ensure stability. The displacement has resulted in a significant increase in the quantities, especially of excavation, and in the construction costs. Starting from preliminary design, the following successive changes were made, in order to decrease the cost of construction: . The channel track was slightly shifted and optimized. In this way, the stability of the channel is ensured and its length was decreased for all the successive options. . The level of the starting channel bottom was raised of about 2 m and the longitudinal gradient was decreased to 0.00075 against 0,001 of the preliminary draft. . Three different typical cross sections of the channel were adopted, to be adapted to geo- morphological conditions of the place. . The access road AR01 was abolished and access to the HPP1 facilities was expected through the service roads of HPP2 and HPP1. The width of the stretch of service road that will serve both plant channels was extended to 6m. . The location of the powerhouse has been slightly shifted. In such a way, the length of the penstocks has decreased. . The position of the weir has been moved downstream of about 650m for option 2 and of about 1400m for Option 3. This change allows constructing a channel much shorter and this saving of costs compensates largely the increasing of cost in the weir, which is obviously higher due to the fact that they are larger in height. . For Option 3, so larger that the rubber dam cannot be adopted and the features of the weir has to be changed completely.

47 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

Figure 1-13: HPP1 general plan with overlying preliminary design and 3 alternative layouts

48 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

Figure 1-14 below shows a HPP1 general plan with overlying preliminary design and 3 alternative layouts. It shows rotation of Forebay, decrease of penstocks length, slightly shifting of powerhouse position.

Figure 1-14: HPP1 general plan whit overlying preliminary design and 3 alternative layouts

1.11.1 Other features of HPP1

Workforce Estimated 500-750 skilled and unskilled workers are estimated to be required during peak construction period for the three Power Plants (i.e. HPP1, HPP2). However, HPP1 alone with require about 200-400 during construction through ought different activities of the project.

49 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

Labour camps The labour camp to be built in Acwha Ranch will contain lodgings, facilities and other buildings for the permanent staff (permanent camp). It will also include a workshop, storage structures, offices and residence for senior staff and expatriate staff during the construction period and homes for staff during the operation period. A second camp will be built at an appropriate location to cater for skilled and semiskilled workers during the construction period only. This camp could then either be pulled down after construction or handed over to Sub-county Local Government Authorities. An ESIA will be conducted separately as recommended by NEMA but before construction of these camps.

Rock and soil disposal Just like it is during the construction of HPP2, the excavated rock and other materials will be managed within the working zones in the areas approved by the developer. These zones will be considered less prone to erosion. These will be reused during construction works.

Power supply Power supply during the construction phase will be by diesel generators at the site.

Water supply Drilling of a deep borehole is being considered as the major water supply especially if it proves to be adequate and suitable for human consumption.

Installed Power The maximum installed capacity of the HPP1 plant will be 42 MW with an average annual energy production of 151,000,000 kWh. The point of delivery of the energy (switchyard or sub- station) will be provided next to the Power house. The power will be connected to the national grid by a new transmission line which will be built between Gulu and Kitgum by Uganda Electricity Transmission Company Limited (UETCL) before the project is completed and commissioned. Plans for constructing this power line are already underway by the Ministry of Energy and Mineral Development (MEMD). The Transmission connection will however require a separate ESIA according to recommendations by NEMA and it will need to be completed before the commissioning date of the generation plant.

1.11.2 Time Schedule of the Project HPP1 is planned to be in operation after 48 months (i.e. about 4 years) from the start of works. The expected time for the full project realization, including training of personnel for operation and maintenance of systems, testing and commissioning, is four years (48 months).

1.12 Purpose of this Environmental Impact Assessment The National Environment Act CAP 153 introduced the requirement for Environmental Impact Assessment into the Uganda Laws. Section 19 (3) of the National Environment Act, CAP 153 requires that all projects or policies that may, are likely to or will have significant impacts on the environment be subjected to an EIA so that adverse impacts can be eliminated or mitigated, and beneficial impacts enhanced.

50 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

The proposed Hydropower Project (HPP1) on Achwa River is one of those activities listed in the Third Schedule of the Act that should be subjected to a full Environmental Impact Assessment before its implementation, and a report submitted to National Environment Management Authority (NEMA) in a prescribed form and giving the prescribed information. In the Third Schedule, the Act mentions: “Dams, rivers and water resources including- (a) Storage dams, barrages and weirs; (b) River diversions and water transfers between catchments”

Section 35 (1) of the Act also defines limits on the use of water resources and states that no person shall, in relation to a river or lake “(a) Use, erect, reconstruct, place, alter, extend, remove, or demolish any structure or part of any structure in, on, under or over the bed; (b) Excavate, drill, tunnel or disturb the bed otherwise” (c) Divert or block any river from its normal course (d) Drain any lake or river

Based on the relevant sections of the National Environment Act, an EIA will therefore be conducted for the proposed construction of Achwa Hydropower Project 1 (HPP1) in Pader District.

1.13 Objective and scope of the EIA study

The objective of the Environmental and Social Impact Study was to identify, predict and evaluate environmental impacts due to the proposed development of hydropower on Achwa River (site HPP1), with a view to integrate environmental concerns into the project’s planning, design, construction and operational stages.

The scope of the Environmental Impact study is in accordance with the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations (1998) and NEMA EIA Guidelines. Section 20 (i) of the National Environment Act provides for the developer of a project described in the Third Schedule of the Act to submit an EIS/project brief to the lead agency, in the prescribed form and giving the prescribed information (in this case according to an approved ToR given in Annex 6).Thus the Environmental and Social Impact study covered the Physical, Biological and Socio-cultural aspects of the River Achwa hydropower project.

1.14 Methodology for undertaking EIA The methodology for undertaking the ESIA update has been presented in detail in section 4 of this report. It however included; literature review, stakeholders consultations, field investigation and observation as well as undertaking specialist studies such as; soil and noise assessment, water quality analysis, hydrology, flora and fauna, etc.

1.15 Preparers of this Report

This ESIA update Report has been prepared by the Team Leader based on specialist reports prepared by various EIA Certified Practitioners and Technical Experts from Greenbelt Consult

51 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

Ltd. Table 1-2 below presents a summary of the ESIA team, their areas of expertise and tasks in this study.

Table 1-2: List of the ESIA Team

Name and Tasks during EIA study Expertise Dr. Bob Humphrey  Team Leader and Project Manager Ogwang  Mobilization, supervision/coordination of field activities Team Leader  Quality control of field reports  Description of project activities  Lead consultations with Stakeholders/Lead Agencies  EIA report compilation  Quality assurance of reports prior to submission to ARPE. Dr. Bob Humphrey  Lead Terrestrial ecology group Ogwang  Collection and compilation of primary and secondary baseline data Biodiversity on fauna biodiversity Specialist  Prepare mammal, reptile and amphibian baselines  Studying and evaluating likely impacts on fauna species in the subject area  Developing practical mitigation measures for - likely adverse impacts on fauna species  Contributing to impact assessment and prediction;  Contributing to EMP development and ESIA report compilation Ms. Pamela  Collection of primary and secondary socio-economic and socio- Tashobya cultural baseline data on the subject area Social Development  Organization of local community consultations Specialist  Evaluating likely Socio-economic impacts  Developing and advising on mitigation measures for likely adverse socio-economic impacts  Developing a Social Action Plan to enhance social benefits in the project Area  Contributing to the ESIA report compilation Ms. Madinah  Give a general description of the fisheries in the adjacent aquatic Kasauli Namyalo systems (lakes, wetlands, rivers, streams) to the sites likely to be Aquatic Ecologist affected by oil and gas exploration drilling activities, and prepare a checklist of the fauna  Develop a sampling and analysis plan for sediment and water quality in the aquatic environment  Identify and give brief notes on local areas/sites of aquatic ecological importance such as breeding sites, fish distribution, habitats, breeding and feeding patterns;  Propose mitigation measures that would minimize the likelihood of contamination of near-by lakeshore, wetlands or rivers;  Identify and give brief notes on identified fish species of economic

52 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

importance and species of ecological importance;  Identify likely impacts of proposed exploration drilling activities at proposed site Cs) near aquatic ecosystem(s) and propose mitigation measures; Joseph Kyagulanyi  Description of area hydro geological conditions and advising on Hydrologist mitigation measures to prevent surface and ground water pollution;  Description of proposed activity, required resources, safety measures and advise on mitigation measures;  Contributing to EMP preparation for development activities Mr. Joseph  Undertaking occupational risk analysis Aguma-Acon  Proposing areas of compliance with labour laws Occupational Health  Proposing good Occupational Health and safety practices for and Safety Expert workers  Contributing to EMP development Mr. Johnson  Propose measures for wastewater prior to disposal into the natural Arinaitwe environment Pollution & Waste  Investigate all pollution and waste management issues Management  Propose a site restoration plan for the above waste disposal sites and Specialist contribute to the Site  Environmental Management Plan for monitoring impacts on aquatic ecology

1.16 Structure of the EIA

The structure of this report is in conformity with the NEMA and the Energy Sector EIA guidelines, as well as other international EIA standards. The main sections are as outlined below.

The report is presented in twelve main Chapters: The ESIA has an Executive Summary outlining the major baseline findings, the most important positive and negative impacts along with measures to mitigate and monitor these impacts. The Executive Summary has a conclusion and recommendations on whether the Project should be implemented or not.

Chapter 1 Introduction: - Provides an introduction and background to the project.

Chapter 2 Legal Framework: - Provides an overview of the national and international regulations pertinent to hydropower as well as some of the more important stakeholders.

Chapter 3 EIA process in Uganda: -Outlines the EIA process for the energy sector in Uganda.

Chapter 4 Methodology used in conducting the ESIA.

Chapters 5, 6 & 7 The physical, Chemical, Biological and Human Environment — Describes baseline conditions in the vicinity of the Proposed HPP1 Project based mainly on field work undertaken in the Project area

53 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

Chapter 8 Public Consultation and Disclosure: - Describes consultations undertaken at various levels especially District to local levels.

Chapter 9 Potential Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures: This Section evaluates the potential impacts, positive and negative, long-term and short-term, direct and indirect, reversible and irreversible and Describes measures to avoid or reduce negative impacts and enhance positive impacts.

Chapter 10 Environmental Management Plan: — provides the Environmental Management Plan detailing how the company shall implement the proposed mitigation measures during the project life, and outlines the monitoring requirements to ensure that the EIA is being implemented effectively.

Chapter 11 Environmental Monitoring: Discusses monitoring activities before, during and after construction of the Project

Chapter 12 Conclusions and Recommendations — Presents the conclusions to the EIA process and makes recommendations that may be required to further reduce any potential significant environmental impacts.

54 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

2. LEGAL, POLICY AND INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK

This chapter summarizes the most relevant policies and laws, and international treaties and agreements that apply to energy development projects. It is a requirement that all aspects of an energy development project complies with such policies, laws, treaties and agreements.

2.1 Ugandan Policies of relevance to hydropower development

2.1.1 The National Environmental Management Policy, 1994 The National Environment Management Policy for Uganda (1994) is the cornerstone of the country’s commitment to social and economic development that is environmentally sustainable and brings the benefits of a better life to all. The National Environment Management Policy gives the overall policy framework, which calls for sustainable development that maintains and enhances environmental quality and resource productivity to meet human needs of the present generation without compromising ability of future generations to meet their own needs.

The framework points out cross-sectoral guiding principles and strategies to achieve sustainable socio-economic development. The policy sets a guiding principle that Environmental Impact Assessment should be required for any activities which cause significant impact on the environment.

The National Environment Management Policy 1994 supports and promotes the proposed hydropower development under its energy sector objective, that is, “To meet the national energy needs through increased use of hydropower and exploration and production of fossil fuels”.

Relevance: The policy sets a guiding principle that Environmental Impact Assessment should be required for any activities which may cause significant impact on the environment. This is the reason why the ESIA for the proposed Achwa HPP1 was undertaken, and later on this update.

2.1.2 The National Energy Policy, 2002 The policy goal in the energy sector is to meet the energy needs of the Ugandan population for social and economic development in an environmentally sustainable manner. Specifically, the energy policy seeks to meet the following broad objectives:

 To establish the availability, potential and demand of the various energy resources in the country  To increase access to modern, affordable and reliable energy services  To improve energy governance and administration  To stimulate economic development  To manage energy-related environmental impacts

In pursuit of these objectives, the government will ensure that environmental considerations are given priority by energy suppliers and users to protect the environment and will put in place a monitoring mechanism to evaluate compliance with established environmental protection guidelines.

55 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

2.1.3 The National Water Policy, 1999 The National Water Policy 1999, promotes an integrated approach to manage the water resources in ways that are sustainable and most beneficial to the people of Uganda. The goal of this policy is to provide guidance on development and management of the water resources of Uganda in an integrated and sustainable manner, so as to secure and provide water of adequate quantity and quality for all social and economic needs, with full participation of all stakeholders and mindful of the needs of future generations. The policy aims to: . Promote rational use of water; . Control pollution and promote safe storage, treatment and disposal of waste, which could pollute water and impact public health; and . Promotion of awareness of water management and development issues and capacity building. Relevance: This policy is relevant to the project since the proposed Achwa HPP 1 will draw water from river Achwa, hence rational use of the water resources (surface water) and avoidance of contamination of water course. The policy advocates for integrated and sustainable development management and use of water resources with full participation of the all the key stakeholders.

2.1.4 The National HIV/AIDS Policy, 2004 The National HIV/AIDS Policy 2004 provides an overall policy framework for national HIV/AIDS response, and in a nutshell, it mandates sectors to mainstream HIV/AIDS into their programmes, plans and activities hence, the need to have HIV/AIDS mitigation measures integrated into this project during its design and implementation process.

2.1.5 The Resettlement/Land Acquisition Framework, 2002 The Resettlement/Land Acquisition Framework, 2002 is an institutional safeguard against severe or adverse impacts of planned project activities on the social welfare of communities and proposes mitigation measures by:  Minimizing displacement of potentially affected project persons during project implementation;  Endevouring to ensure that the Project Affected Persons (PAPs) are adequately compensated and  Putting in place measures to minimize adverse concerns where it is inevitable.

This policy framework focuses on measures to reduce involuntary resettlement, ensuring that the PAPs are resettled and are not worse off than they were before the project. The framework outlines measures to be taken with respect to land acquisition matters and which should be in tandem with existing national and international provisions governing land acquisition.

2.2 Ugandan Laws of relevance to hydropower development

2.2.1 The Constitution of the Republic of Uganda, 1995 There are a number of legislative and regulatory instruments in Uganda that address environmental management in both general and specific terms. The most important of these instruments is the Constitution of the Republic of Uganda, 1995, which is the supreme law in Uganda.

56 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

The Uganda Constitution of 1995 (Articles 39 and 41), provide that everyone has a duty to maintain a sound environment. Every person in Uganda has a right to a healthy and clean environment and as such can bring legal action for any pollution or disposal of wastes. Chapter three, section 245 stipulates that Parliament shall by law provide measures intended to protect and preserve the environment from abuse, pollution and degradation.

For acquisition of land for development and other purposes, Article 237(1) of the Constitution vests all land in Uganda in her citizens. However, under Article 237(1) (a), the Government or Local Government may acquire land in the public interest. Such acquisition is subject to the provisions of Article 26 of the same Constitution, which gives every person in Uganda a right to own property. It provides procedures to follow during the acquisition of land for public interest and provides for the “prompt payment of fair and adequate compensation” prior to taking possession of land. The Constitution, however, does not make resettlement a right.

2.2.2 National Environment Act, Cap 153 The main law relating to the protection of the environment in Uganda is the National Environment Act (NEA), Cap 153 of 1995. Under the National Environment Act, Cap 153, NEMA is the principal agency for the management of the environment and shall coordinate, monitor and supervise all activities in the field of the environment. The Act provides tools for environmental management including EIAs. The Act imposes a mandatory duty on a project developer to have an EIA conducted and approved before embarking on a project. The EIA Regulations, 1998 specifies the types of projects to be subject to EIAs:  The Act defines developers as a person who is or intends to develop a project that is subject to an Environment Impact Assessment process. Environment Impact Assessment is defined as a systematic examination conducted to determine whether or not a project would have any adverse impact on the environment. The Act subjects projects to environment audits. An environment audit is the systematic, documented, periodic and objective evaluation of how well environment organization management is adhered to as project implementation progresses. The NEMA must be consulted when undertaking environmental audits. Such projects are also subjected to environment monitoring which is defined as the continuous determination of actual and potential effects of any activity or phenomenon on the environment.  The Act imposes an obligation on very person carrying out any activity to manage any waste generated by his activity. Any waste so generated has to be disposed of in accordance of hazardous waste and is supposed to make regulations and issue guidelines for the management of hazardous waste. Any person who discharges waste prescribed as hazardous without a license issued by the Authority commits an offence.  Part V (I) of the Act provides for environmental standards for air quality, water quality and discharge of effluents into water or on land have already been developed and the National Environment (Standards for Discharge of effluent into water or on land Regulations (1999) are in place.  The third schedule of the Act lists projects to be considered for environmental impact assessment. Specifically Section 4 refers to dams, rivers and water resources including – (a) storage dams, barrages and weirs (b) river diversions and water transfers between catchments

57 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

(c) flood-control schemes The Act requires a developer to obtain a permit from the Department of Water Development (DWD) before the developer can undertake any construction on water resources and that an EIA be carried out before the DWD will issue a permit to construct a hydropower project. Relevance: The Act governs and guides environmental management in Uganda. This ESIA was prepared to conform to the Act’s requirement that projects likely to have significant environmental impact undertake an EIA before they are implemented.

2.2.3 The Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations, 1998 Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations, 1998 provide for implementation of the NEA. These Regulations require that all projects of the third schedule in the NEA should be subject to an impact assessment before implementation.

Regulations 5 (1) of the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations (1998) require the developer to prepare a project brief stating:  The nature of the project in accordance with the categories identified in the Third schedule of statute  The projected area of land, air and water that may be affected  The activities that shall be undertaken during and after the development of the project  The design of the project  The materials that the project shall use including both construction material and inputs  The possible products and by-products including waste generation of the project  The number of people that the project will employ and the economic and social benefits to the local community and the nation in general.  The Environmental impacts of the materials, methods and by products of the project and how they will be eliminated or mitigated  Any other matter that may be required by the Authority  It specifies the types of projects to be subjected to EIAs, in which hydropower projects are included  The NEMA Guidelines on EIAs of 1997 and the EIA Regulations will govern the execution of this Achwa Hydropower Project.

The Guidelines also stipulate that the ESIA process should be participatory, that is, the public should be consulted widely to inform them and get their views about the proposed investment. The developer has the legal obligation to seek the views of the public, persons that may be affected by the proposed project, as well as all other stakeholders. In this ESIA, key stakeholders have been consulted in the course of the study and their views have been integrated into the study.

2.2.4 The National Environment (Control and Certification of Environmental Practitioners) Regulations, 2001 These Regulations apply to all persons certified and registered under the regulations as Environmental Practitioners, and corporate persons and partnerships registered under the regulations to co-ordinate individually registered persons to conduct environmental impact assessments or environmental audits. They also deal with those who wish to conduct EIAs in Uganda.

58 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

The regulations set out the procedures of the application for certification and the code of practice and professional ethics. The practitioners have to pay prescribed fees (Fourth Schedule) before they can be fully registered.

2.2.5 The National Environment (Waste Management) Regulations, 1999 These regulations provide for the management of waste. Regulation 4 describes the sorting and disposal of domestic waste and provides that the generator of domestic waste may, without a license issued under these regulations, dispose of non-hazardous waste in an environmentally sound manner in accordance with by-laws made by a competent local authority.

The Regulations also directly mention the application of cleaner production as a means to minimize production of wastes. Regulation 5 (1) states that: A person who owns or controls a facility or premises, which generate waste, shall minimize the waste generated by adopting cleaner production methods. These include the improvement of production processes through:  Conserving raw materials and energy;  Eliminating the use of toxic raw materials;  Reducing toxic emissions and wastes;  As well as monitoring the product cycle from beginning to end by:  Identifying and eliminating potential negative impacts of the product;  Enabling the recovery and re-use of the product where possible;  Reclamation and recycling; and  Incorporating environmental concerns in the design and disposal of a product.

Relevance: The Regulations oblige the project ownership to put in place measures for proper management of waste during construction and operation phases.

2.2.6 The National Environment (Wetlands, River Banks and Lake Shores Management) Regulations, 2001 These regulations provide for the management of wetlands, river banks and lake shores. Section 23 (1) (a) of the regulations points out that a person who intends to ‘use, erect, reconstruct, place, alter, extend, remove or demolish any structure or part of any structure in, under, or over the river bank or lake shore, shall make an application to the Executive Director (of NEMA); in form A set out in the First Schedule to these regulations.

The wetlands, river banks and lake shores regulations in section 34 provide that ‘a developer desiring to conduct a project which may have a significant impact on a wetland, river bank or lake shore, shall be required to carry out an environmental impact assessment in accordance with sections 20, 21 and 22 of the National Environment Act’.

Section 29 of the Regulations on Wetlands, River Banks and Lake Shores stipulates that the major rivers in Uganda including Achwa River shall have a protection zone of 100 metres from the highest water mark of the river. Section 23 of the Regulations also stipulates that a person who intends to excavate, drill, tunnel or otherwise disturb the river bank shall make an application to NEMA for a permit to use the river bank.

59 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

Relevance: Prior to the construction of any project components on river Achwa, the developer will be required to first acquire all the relevant permits from relevant lead agencies NEMA, as provided for in these Regulations.

2.2.7 The National Environment Regulations (noise Standards and Control), 2003 Section 7 of these regulations requires that no person shall emit noise in excess of permissible noise levels, unless permitted by a license issued under these regulations. Section 8 imparts responsibility onto the owner of a facility to use the best practicable means to ensure that noise do not exceed permissible noise levels. This project is obliged to observe these regulations by instituting measures to minimize noise in the project and such measures will include proper maintenance of equipment and providing workers with Personal Protective Equipment (PPEs).

2.2.8 The National Environment (Audit) regulations These Regulations operationalize Section 22 of the National Environment Act CAP 153 which provides amongst others that, an audit shall be conducted on all activities that are likely to have significant effects on the environment and that this should be done in consultation with NEMA. Under Regulation 31, it is mandatory for the project to undertake an Environmental Audit of its on-going activities especially after commencement of implementation as well as putting in place an Environmental Management System (EMS).

2.2.9 The Water Act, Cap 152 The Water Act, Cap 152 of 1995 provides for the management of water in Uganda under the mandate of the Directorate of Water Resources Management in the Ministry of Water and Environment. Section 31, subsection (1) of the Water Act deals with prohibition of pollution to water and stipulates that a person commits an offence, unless authorized under this Act, causes or allows:  Waste to come into contact with any water;  Waste to be discharged directly or indirectly into water; and  Water to be polluted.

Under section 107, the Water (Waste Discharge) Regulations (1998); the Water Supply Regulations (1999) and the Sewerage Regulations (1999) have been put in place in order to implement this Act and are aimed at minimizing pollution of public waters by developers and other users.

According to Regulation 4 (1) of the Water (Waste Discharge) Regulations (1998): No person shall discharge effluent or waste on land or into an aquatic environment contrary to the standards established under section 27 of the National Environment (Standards for Discharge of Effluent into Water or on Land) Regulations (1999); unless he or she has a permit in the format specified in the First Schedule issued by DWD.

In Part II of the Water Resources Regulations (1998), procedures for applying for a water abstraction permit are detailed.

60 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

2.2.10 Electricity Act, 1999 The Electricity Act, 1999 provides for the establishment of the Electricity Regulatory Authority (ERA) whose functions include: issuing licenses for the generation, transmission, distribution or sale of electricity; controlling activities in the electricity sector; liberalizing and bringing competition in the electricity sector; replacing the Electricity Act, 1964 and providing for a successor Company to the Uganda Electricity Board.

Section 29 of the Electricity Act requires that before a license is issued; the developer shall provide NEMA the description of the impact of the project on electricity supply, socio- economics, cultural heritage, the environment, natural resources and wildlife. Section 33 calls for assessment of the impact of a project on public interests and possible mitigation as well as the impacts on private interests including the interests of affected land owners and holders of rights. Reports on such assessments including environmental impact assessments should be provided. Section 37 of the Act stresses the need to protect the environment and to conserve the natural resources as well as to be mindful of the social, cultural and recreational life of the community. The prevailing land use as well as siting or route of the project should also be taken into account. Section 39 of the Electricity Act concludes that, except for the promotion of efficiency and fair competition, nothing in the Act shall prevent the holder of a license, who has fulfilled all the obligations under the Act, from applying for and obtaining any other license under the Act.

The Act, 1999 authorizes ERA to delegate some of its licensing functions to local governments and to be paid royalties by the developers.

2.2.11 The Roads Act, 1964 The Roads Act of 1964 is a critical piece of legislation with respect to the construction of access roads to energy provision facilities. It defines a road reserve as that area bounded by imaginary lines parallel to and not more than fifty feet distant from the centre line of any road.

The Act is silent on whether such land is “taken” for the state, but states that no person shall erect any building or plant trees or grow permanent crops within a road reserve. However, it allows the roads authorities to dig and take materials from the road reserve for the construction and maintenance of roads. The road authority is required to give written notice to an illegal occupier of the land on which prohibited activities have been carried out.

2.2.12 Local Government Act, 1997 The Local Government Act, 1997 provides for decentralization and devolution of government functions, powers and services from the central to local governments and sets up the political and administrative functions of local governments. Local governments are responsible for the protection of the environment at the district level. This therefore, implies that local governments shall be consulted on projects to be located within their jurisdiction and on matters that affect their environment.

2.2.13 Land Act, Cap 227 of 1998 The Land Act, 1998 provides for the ownership and management of land. It provides for four different types of land tenures (Customary, Leasehold, Mailo and Freehold) and the procedure

61 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 for applying for grant of any of the tenures. The Act states that non-citizens of Uganda may only be granted leases not exceeding 99 years.

The Act inter alia provides that the construction of electricity transmission and distribution lines, construction of dams and hydropower plants are public works and any person authorized to execute public works on any land may enter into mutual agreement with an occupier or owner of the land in accordance with the Act.

The developer of an energy project should seek to enter into mutual agreement with the occupier or owner of the land. The Act creates a series of land administration institutions consisting of Uganda Land Commission (ULC), District Land Boards (DLB), Parish Land Committees (PLC) and land tribunals. Section 78 of the Act gives valuation principles for compensation. Section 40 requires the written consent from the spouse(s) and children before the household head transfers, sells or enters into contract of land where the household derives its livelihood. The District Land Tribunals have power to determine any disputes arising out of compensation for land.

Under the Land Fund, there is a provision for resettling persons who have been rendered land- less by Government action. For energy development projects in general, the developer will have to source funds for resettlement or compensation.

2.2.14 Land Acquisition Act, 1965 This Act provides for the procedure and method of compulsory acquisition of land for public purposes whether for temporary or permanent use. The minister responsible for land may authorize any person(s) to enter upon the land and survey it, dig or bore the subsoil or any other thing necessary for ascertaining whether the land is suitable for a public purpose. The government is expected to compensate any person who suffers damage as a result of any action. Any dispute as to the compensation payable can be referred by the Attorney General to court for decision.

2.2.15 The Investment Code Act, 1991 The Investment Code Statute, 1991 sets out the procedure for obtaining an investment license. The code provides that investment in the energy industry is priority and requires the investor to conduct an EIA for approval by NEMA before the project can be implemented.

2.2.16 Historical and Monuments Act, 1967 The existing law relating to archaeological sites in Uganda is The Historical and Monuments Act, 1967 which the Commissioner for Antiquities and Museums has currently placed under review. The Act provides for the preservation and protection of historical monuments and objects of archaeological, paleontological, ethnographical, and traditional interest. Under this act the minister responsible may cause any of the aforesaid objects to be declared as preserved objects.

The Act prohibits any person from carrying out activities on or in relation to any object declared to be preserved or protected. Section 10 of this Act spells out the procedures and a requirement to declare and inspect newly discovered sites that may have archaeological, paleontological, ethnographical, historical and traditional significance for purposes of protection. This project

62 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 will undertake chance find measures in addressing possible encounters of any archaeological resources during project implementation.

2.2.17 Fisheries Act CAP 197 The Act makes provisions for the control of fishing, the conservation of fish and related matters. Under the Fish Act, the Fish (Quality Assurance) Rules 2007 in Schedule 5 and 8 set standards for portable water for use in fish processing and for fish products. Monitoring of upstream activities that could cause pollution is therefore a requirement.

2.3 Health, Safety and Employment Legislation

2.3.1 Occupational Safety and Health Act, 2006 The Occupational Safety and Health Act of 2006 consolidate, harmonize and update the law relating to occupational safety and health and repeal the Factories Act of 1964. It makes provisions for the health, safety, welfare and appropriate training of persons employed in work places.

The Act provides for administration and enforcement of the Act; general duties obligations and responsibilities of employers, general duties of manufacturers suppliers and transporters; duties, rights and responsibilities of workers; registration of workplaces; general safety requirements; fire preparedness; machinery, plant and equipment; hazardous material; chemical safety and special provisions and offences, penalties and legal proceedings.

According to this Act, employers must provide for the protection of workers from adverse weather, provision of a clean and healthy work environment, sanitary conveniences, washing facilities, First Aid and facilities for meals. The Act also provides for safe access to the workplace and safe work practices.

2.3.2 Public Health Act, Cap 281 Section 7 of the Public Health Act Cap 281 provides local authorities with administrative powers to take all lawful, necessary and reasonable practicable measures for preventing the occurrence of, or for dealing with any outbreak of, any infectious communicable or preventable disease in order to safeguard and promote the public health.

Section 105 of the Public Health Act (1964) imposes a duty on the local authority to take measures to prevent any pollution that is dangerous to the health to enter any water supply that the public has a right to use for drinking or domestic purposes. The Act further details the location of waste disposal facilities such as solid waste skips and septic tanks in relation to settlements and food points.

2.3.3 Workers Compensation Act, CAP 225 of 2000 The Act outlines responsibilities and obligations of both parties (employer and employee) in guaranteeing the safety and health of workers. The Act outlines matters of compensation for injuries and accidents as well as responsibility of employees to take care of their health and safety while on the project. The Act, 2000 also provides for the provision of financial compensation for work related injury or illness.

63 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

2.3.4 Employment Act, 2006 and other related Acts The Employment Act 2006 shall be the governing legal statutory instrument for the recruitment, contracting, deployment, remuneration, management and compensation of workers. The Employment Act 2006 is based on the provisions of Article 40 of The Constitution of Uganda. The Act mandates Labour officers to regularly inspect the working conditions of workers to ascertain that the rights of workers and basic provisions are provided and workers’ welfare is attended to. The Act also provides for the freedom of association of workers permitting workers to ‘join labour organizations. This provision is also supported by the Labour Unions Act 7, 2006, which provides elaborate guideline and regulation for membership. Of relevance to this project, the Act provides for matters of grievance settlement and issues of payment of wages and salaries and most importantly it obliges employers to repatriate employees especially those from other countries as well as those coming from more than 150km from their homes.

Other related laws requiring P.A.C. S.p.a. to ensure workers’ safety, social security and protection include The Labour disputes (Arbitration and settlement) Act, 2006; The National Social Security Act Cap 222 and the Labour Unions’ Act, 2005.

2.3.5 Factories Act (1964) This act provides for the health, safety and welfare of persons employed in factories and other places. Areas of concern under the Act include overcrowding, ventilation and lighting, housekeeping, and general safety aspects pertaining to work in confined spaces and fire safety. Workers must have adequate training for their specific jobs and also in the proper use of protective equipment.

2.4 International Treaties and Conventions

 Uganda has signed and /or ratified several international agreements relating to the environment, both global and regional. Agreements of potential importance are briefly outlined below:

o Uganda has ratified the Convention concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage (World Heritage Convention). Two sites in Uganda feature on the World Heritage List: Bwindi Impenetrable National Park and Rwenzori Mountains National Park. The Murchison Falls have been proposed to be included on the World Heritage List. o Uganda has ratified ‘The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD)’ - This Convention’s main objective is to ensure the conservation of biological diversity and the sustainable use of its components. o Uganda has signed but not ratified the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS). The objective of the Convention is to conserve those species of wild animals that migrate across or outside national boundaries. o Uganda has ratified the Convention on Wetlands of International Importance (Ramsar Convention). o Uganda has ratified the African Convention on the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (1968), signed the Protocol Agreement on the Conservation of Common Natural Resources (1982).

64 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

2.5 Donors and Financing Institutions

The World Bank Group has developed safeguard policies for environmental and social issues that project sponsors/developers ought to review before conducting their assessments. During the Bank’s appraisal process, policies that apply to a specific project are identified.

Projects seeking support from the World Bank will, therefore, have to adhere to the guidelines in The Environment Assessment Sourcebook (1991) and the Environmental Sourcebook Updates issued periodically since 1993. The World Bank Group has a range of relevant requirements and guidelines that apply to energy projects including those outlined below: Relevant Requirements and Guidelines by World Bank for Energy Projects:

 OP 4.01 Environmental Assessment: Outlines the general requirements regarding environmental assessment, and defines the possible instruments which include EIA.  OP 4.04 Natural Habitats: The Bank is committed to protecting natural habitats and provides for compensatory measures when lending results in adverse impacts. The Bank promotes conservation and management of wetlands (e.g. estuaries, lakes, mangroves, marshes, and swamps)  OP 4.07, Water Resources Management: Bank policy promotes the protection and management of watersheds, as an element of lending operations for dams, reservoirs, and irrigation systems  OP 4.11 Cultural property: Confirms the Bank’s commitment to protect archaeological sites, historic monuments, and historic settlements  OP/BP/GP 4.12 Involuntary Resettlement: Provides guidance on projects involving involuntary resettlement.  OD 4.20 Indigenous People (to be reissued as OP/BP 4.10): Provides specific guidance on addressing the rights of indigenous peoples, including traditional land and water rights.  OP 4.36 Forestry: Guidance on tropical forests is also provided by the Bank’s July 1991 paper Forest Policy and OP/BP 4.04 Natural Habitats  OP 4.37 Safety of Dams  OP/BP 7.50 International waterways: Provides guidance for projects on international waterways  OP 7.60 Projects in Disputed Areas  Induced development and other socio-cultural aspects: Secondary growth of settlements and infrastructure, often referred to as “induced development” or “boomtown” effects, can have major indirect environmental impacts, which local governments may have difficulty to address  International treaties and agreements on the environment, natural resources, and cultural property: The EA should review the status and application of such current and pending treaties and agreements, including their notification requirements  Land settlement: Land settlement should generally be carefully reviewed because it can have complex physical, biological, socio-economic, and cultural impacts

65 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

 Natural hazards: The EA should review whether the project may be affected by natural hazards (e.g., earthquakes, floods, volcanic activity) and, if so, should propose specific measures to these concerns (see OP/BP 8.50 Emergency Recovery Assistance)  Occupational health and safety: All industry and energy projects should include formal plans to promote occupational health and safety (see World Bank's Occupational Health and Safety Guidelines).

Other donor agencies, notably AfDB, SIDA, DfID and NORAD have also developed their own EIA guidelines. The guidelines apply to all forms of development assistance initiated and supported by these agencies. It is a standard requirement that developers seeking any form of support from such agencies must comply with the EIA guidelines of the relevant agency.

2.6 Institutional Framework

2.6.1 Ministry of Water and Environment The competent authority in respect of the environment is the Ministry of Water, & Environment. The Ministry is responsible for the protection, sustainable utilization and development of all environmental water resources in Uganda. The key functions of the Ministry include:  Planning, policy formulation and reviewing of national policies for the sectors of Water and Environment;  Setting standards for activities in these sectors;  Providing technical guidance and expertise to local government;  Inspection, monitoring and evaluation of water and environmental activities of local government; and  Co-coordinating national policies concerning water and environmental resources in their application at the local level.

2.6.2 Directorate of Water Resources Management (DWRM) The primary goal of the DWRM is to promote sustainable development of Uganda’s water sector. It is responsible for implementing the provisions of the Water Act related to regulating water abstraction. It does this through water use allocation (abstraction), water service regulation (drilling, construction, dam safety, easement, etc.), compliance monitoring and enforcement of water laws, review of Environmental Impacts Assessment reports related to water resources. Role on the project: The directorate processes permits to regulate abstraction of water and discharging wastewater in the environment which the developer should acquire before commissioning of this project. The directorate is one of the key stakeholders to review this ESIA report.

2.6.3 The National Environment Management Authority (NEMA) NEMA, the principal agency in Uganda on matters of environment management is empowered by the National Environment Act to manage, coordinate and supervise all activities in the field of environment. NEMA is responsible for undertaking enforcement, compliance, review, approval and monitoring of the ESIA.

The actual implementation of the EIA process remains a function of the relevant line ministries and departments, the private sector, NGOs and the general public as well as the developer. In the

66 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 case of hydropower project like this one, the lead agency is the Directorate of Water Development (DWD). Besides NEMA, other immediate institutions include the Department of Occupational Safety and Health (Ministry of Gender, Labour and Social Development); the Directorate of Water Resources Management (Ministry of Water and Environment); Ministry of Energy and Mineral Development; Ministry of Works and Transport, among others.

2.6.4 Directorate of Water Development The Directorate of Water Development (DWD) is under the Ministry of Water and Environment. The management framework for water resources in Uganda is spelt out in the Water Statute, 1995 and the National Water Policy (1997).The Minster of Water and Environment has the overall responsibility for the management of water resources. In doing this, assistance is provided by the Water Policy Committee. The DWD provides professional and technical services. The National Environment Act requires a developer to obtain a permit from the DWD before the developer can undertake any construction on water resources and that an EIA be carried out before the DWD will issue a permit to construct the hydropower project.

2.6.5 Electricity Regulatory Authority Electricity Regulatory Authority (ERA) has several functions including issuing licenses for the generation, transmission, distribution or sale of electricity; controlling activities in the electricity sector; liberalizing and bringing competition in the electricity sector.

2.6.6 2Donors and Financial Institutions This ESIA has followed International EIA standards and procedures e.g. those of the World Bank. The World Bank, for instance, has a range of relevant requirements and guidelines including Operational Policies (OP), Bank Procedures (BP) and Good Practice (GP) 4.01 and Environmental Assessment (WB 1999) that have been followed. Similarly, the International Finance Corporation (IFC), which is the private arm of the World Bank Group, has adopted “Environmental and Social Safeguard policies, which are quite similar to the requirements of the International Development Association (IDA) of the World Bank Group as described previously. It will therefore be possible, upon approval from NEMA, for P.A.C. S.p.a. to seek financing and donor support from private and government organizations if it so wishes.

2.6.7 Local Government Authorities Uganda is divided into 111 administrative districts. The districts are further sub-divided into counties, sub-counties, parishes and villages. The Achwa Hydropower Project is located within Pader District but also bordering on Gulu District.

The District is created under the Local Government Act. Its top administrators include the Resident District Commissioner (RDC), the Chairman Local Council Five (LC V) and the Chief Administrative Officer (CAO). These have been consulted both in Pader and Gulu Districts.

The Technical Officers at the district level which were consulted during this EIA process included the District Environment Officers, the District Forest Officer, the District Fisheries Officer and the District Agricultural Officer.

67 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

Although EIA technical expertise may not exist among the district officials, their proximity to and knowledge of the project area is key in implementing mitigation and monitoring activities of the project.

The Local councils (LC I and LC II) and the local communities are the most knowledgeable about project impacts and their consultations were paramount. These were intensively consulted as explained in Chapter 7.

68 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

3. EIA PROCESS IN THE ENREGY SECTOR IN UGANDA

3.1 Introduction

The National Environmental Act Cap 153 gives the National Environment Management Authority (NEMA) the responsibility for preparing and adopting guidelines for the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process in Uganda. The Act also mandates NEMA to administer and oversee the entire EIA process in the country.

NEMA developed EIA guidelines (NEMA 1997) for the purpose of guiding development actions that are likely to impact on the environment. Annex 3 of the guidelines lists energy projects amongst those that should be subjected to an EIA before they can be granted approval for implementation. The guidelines are not specific and so sectoral guidelines have also been developed specifically for energy development projects.

The EIA Regulations (NEMA, 1998) gives responsibility for the actual implementation of the EIA process to the relevant line ministries and departments in the private and public sector. The implementation of the EIA sectoral guidelines for development projects in the energy sector is therefore the responsibility of the Ministry of Energy and Mineral Development (MEMD).

3.2 The EIA Process

The EIA Guidelines (NEMA 1997) and the EIA Regulations (NEMA 1998) and the Environmental Impact Assessment Guidelines for the Energy Sector (June 2004) recognize the following stages of the EIA process:  Project brief formulation;  Screening;  Environmental Impacts Study;  Decision Making; and  Environmental Monitoring and Auditing.

In addition public consultation is required throughout the EIA process. The key stages of the EIA process are summarized in the following sections.

Figure 3-1 below summaries the EIA process for the Energy Sector in Uganda (Source; NEMA EIA Guidelines for Energy Sector, June 2004)

69 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

Figure 3-1: EIA process flow for the Energy Sector

70 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

3.2.1 Preparation of Project Brief A concise project brief shall be prepared by the developer for submission to NEMA. This shall provide essential project information to guide NEMA on the screening criteria to which the proposed project should be subjected.

The report shall include the following key information:  Contact details of the developer;  Characteristics of the project;  Project description;  Reasons for the project;  Background to the project;  Project site;  Baseline data;  Physical form of the development;  Construction practices;  Operations;  Preliminary analysis of alternatives;  Other large projects within the area of influence of the proposed project;  Characteristics of the potential impacts;  Nature, extent and magnitude of impacts;  Probability of impacts;  Duration, frequency and reversibility of impacts;  Mitigation measures proposed; and  Trans-boundary nature of the impacts.

The EIA process is initiated by submission of 10 copies of the project brief to NEMA. If NEMA deems the brief to be complete, a copy is forwarded to MEMD for review. NEMA reviews take a maximum of 14 working days during which comments are made on the report before commencement of consultations with MEMD on the proposed project.

3.2.2 Environmental Screening The objective of screening is to determine the extent to which a project is likely to affect the environment and therefore, be able to determine the level of assessment required. Screening is generally guided by the following criteria:  Size or location of the project;  Type of project; and  Potential impacts compared against set thresholds and standards.

There are three screening stages:  Screen I: The first screening decides on the projects that do not require an EIA.  Screen II: Energy projects that require mandatory EIA are directly subjected to a detailed Environmental Impact Study (EIS). Petroleum extraction and production, and petroleum storage facilities are in this category.  Screen Ill: Projects that do not fall under any of the above two categories do not require a mandatory EIA although they are associated with some adverse impacts. If adequate

71 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

mitigation measures are already prescribed for a project, it can be approved directly, and if not, then an Environmental Impact Review (RIR) is required. Depending on the results of the EIR, the project can be approved or subjected to a detailed EIS.

If a decision is made at the screening stage to exempt a project, or to approve its environmental aspects on the basis of identified adequate mitigation measures, such a decision shall be contained in a Certificate of Approval of the EIA issued by NEMA.

3.2.3 Environmental Impact Study According to the EIA Regulations 1998, EIS refers to the detailed study conducted to determine the possible environmental impacts of a proposed project and measures to mitigate their effects. The EIS process contains the following key stages: • Scoping and TOR; • Preparation of the EIS; • Review of EIS and Decision on project; and • Environmental Monitoring.

Scoping and ToR Scoping is the initial step in the EIA. Its purpose is to determine the scope of work to be undertaken in assessing the environmental impacts of the proposed project. It identifies the critical environmental impacts of the project for which in-depth studies are required, and eliminates the insignificant ones. The scoping exercise should involve all the project stakeholders so that consensus is reached on what to include or exclude from the scope of work. It is also at this stage that project alternatives are identified and taken into consideration. The contents of the scoping report are the same as that of the project brief; however, more detail is likely to be needed. This may involve some preliminary data collection and field work.

The Developer takes the responsibility for scoping and prepares the scoping report after consultation with NEMA, and other stakeholders. The developer with assistance from technical consultants draws up the TOR for the EIA and submits a copy to NEMA, which shall in turn be forwarded to relevant Lead Agencies for comments.

Preparation of the EIA In preparing an EIA, relevant information is collected on issues of real significance and sensitivity. These are then analyzed, mitigation measures developed for the adverse impacts and compensatory measures recommended for unmitigated environmental impacts. Measures aimed at enhancing beneficial or positive impacts are also given. An EIA documents the findings and is submitted to NEMA by the developer.

Review of EIA and Decision on Project The Developer is required to submit ten (10) copies of the EIA to NEMA for review and approval NEMA then forwards copies to relevant Lead Agencies for comments. This shall be done within thirty working days upon receipt of the EIA.

NEMA in consultation with the Lead Agencies shall review the contents of the EIA, paying particular attention to the identified environmental impacts and their mitigation measures, as well

72 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 as the level of consultation and involvement of the affected stakeholders in the EIA process. In this review, the levels to which the ToR set out for the study is addressed shall be considered. In making a decision about the adequacy of the EIA, NEMA shall take into account the comments and observations made by MEMD and other Lead Agencies, stakeholders and the general public.

NEMA may then grant permission for the project to go ahead with or without conditions, or refuse permission. If the project is approved, the developer will be issued a Certificate of Approval.

After approval or disapproval of the EIA by NEMA, MEMD and other licensing authorities will then take appropriate action to approve or reject the project based on all its merits (environmental, social, economic, or other factors), and a Record of Decision shall be prepared.

After reaching a decision on the proposed action, if it is approved, the developer will be licensed or permitted to go ahead with implementing the project in accordance with the mitigation measures stipulated in the EIA and any other terms and conditions attached to the approval. If it is denied, the developer may, if such denial is based on environmental considerations that can further be improved, be urged to revise the proposed action to eliminate adverse impacts.

3.2.4 Environmental Monitoring Monitoring is the continuous and systematic collection of data in order to assess whether the environmental objectives of the project have been achieved. Good practice demands that procedures for monitoring the environmental performance of proposed projects are incorporated in the EIA.

The purpose of monitoring is to:  Provide early warning information for unacceptable environmental conditions;  Ensure that the mitigation measures proposed in the environmental management plans are implemented satisfactorily; and  Assist in identifying additional mitigation efforts needed or where alteration to the adopted management approach may be required.

3.2.5 Monitoring plan To assist in the implementation of identified mitigation and monitoring strategies, an environmental monitoring plan will be developed. It will describe the various environmental management strategies and programmes to be implemented. It will also identify the management roles and a responsibility for ensuring that monitoring is undertaken, the results are analyzed and that any necessary amendments to practices are identified and implemented in a timely manner.

The monitoring plan shall provide for monitoring of both project implementation and environmental quality. It shall contain a schedule for inspecting and reporting upon the implementation of the project and associated mitigation measures identified in the EIA. The monitoring plan shall also identify the key indicators of environmental impacts. Further, the plan shall provide a schedule for monitoring each indicator and for reporting the monitoring results to MEMD and NEMA.

73 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

3.2.6 Environmental Evaluation The evaluation of the positive and negative impacts of a project should be carried out by MEMD and the developer, both during the implementation stage and after the decommissioning of the project. This exercise makes it possible for all stakeholders to learn from the experience gained.

The data collected during monitoring is analyzed with the aim of: • Assessing any changes in baseline conditions; • Assessing whether recommended mitigation measures have been successfully implemented; • Determining reasons for unsuccessful mitigation; • Developing and recommending alternative mitigation measures or plans to replace unsatisfactory ones; and • Identifying and explaining trends in environment improvement or degradation.

3.2.7 Public Consultation The environmental impacts or effects of an Energy development project will often differ depending on the area in which it is located. Such impacts may directly or indirectly affect different categories of social groups, agencies, communities and individuals. These are collectively referred to as project stakeholders or the public. It is crucial that during the EIA process, appropriate mechanisms for ensuring the fullest participation and involvement of the public are considered by MEMD and the developer in order to minimize social and environmental impacts and enhance stakeholder acceptance.

NEMA prepared EIA Public Hearing Guidelines (1999) providing methodological guidelines on public consultations. An effective consultation process should generally ensure that: • The public have got a clear understanding of the proposed project; and • Feedback mechanisms are clearly laid out and known by parties involved.

Different stages of the EIA process require different levels of public consultation and involvement. The key stages are: • Public consultation before the commissioning of the EIS; • Public consultation during the EIS; and • Public consultation during EIS review.

Public Consultation before Commissioning of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) On submission of the project brief to MEMD and NEMA, it might be decided that the views and comments of the public on the project shall be sought. NEMA is obliged to publish the developer’s notification and other relevant documents in a public notice within 4 weeks from the date of submission of the project brief and/or notice of intent to develop.

It is important therefore, that a plan for stakeholder involvement is prepared before the EIA begins. Such a plan should consider: • The stakeholders to be involved; • Matching of stakeholders with approaches and techniques of involvement; • Traditional authority structures and political decision-making processes;

74 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

• Programming of the implementation, in time and space, of the different approaches and techniques for stakeholder involvement; • Mechanisms to collect, synthesize, analyze and, more importantly, present the results to the EIA team and key decision-makers; • Measures to ensure timely and adequate feedback to the stakeholders; • Budgetary / time opportunities and constraints; and • Public Consultations during the EIS.

Pubic consultation during the EIA During the EIA, the study team should endeavour to consult the public on environmental concerns and any other issues pertaining to the project. Though consultations are very critical at the scoping stage, ideally, they should be an on-going activity throughout the study.

Public Consultation during the EIA Review During the EIA review, the public may be given additional opportunity for ensuring that their views and concerns have been adequately addressed in the EIA. Any earlier omissions on or oversight about the project effects can be raised at this stage. To achieve this objective, the EIA and related documents become public documents after submitting them to NEMA. An official review appointment will be announced, where the reviewing authority has to answer questions and remarks from the public. These questions have to be handed in writing prior to the meeting.

75 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

4. METHODOLOGY FOR CONDUCTING THE ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACT STUDY UPDATE

4.1 Background to the ESIA update This ESIA update was commissioned by ARPE (the developer) in an attempt to assess the changes in the physical, social-economic and biological aspects in the project area since the previous ESIA exercise conducted in 2013. It should be noted that NEMA issued the certificate of approval for ESIA (Cert. NO: NEMA/EIA/4871).

4.2 General view of the ESIA Update This ESIA update has been conducted following the guidelines enshrined in relevant environmental legal framework in the country including; The National Environmental Act Cap 153, Guidelines for the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process in Uganda, EIA Regulation of 1998, etc. The ESIA update has been carried out by an interdisciplinary team of professionals in parallel with technical design studies allowing for continued incorporation of ideas to optimize design and limit negative impacts.

The following key methods and activities were used during the ESIA update exercise;  A review of all the available information regarding HPPI and the other projects including HPPII including designs, Hydrological records, previous ESIA report, certificates, approvals and permits received, etc.  A field reconnaissance exercise including undertaking fishing experiments and in- sutu water quality assessments and sampling for further analysis;  Identification of interested and affected parties and consultations with them.  Consultations with Pader local government technical and political leadership including also the Angagura S/C leadership.  Exploration of the project area for the purpose of identifying the Direct Impact Zone (DIZ) and the Indirect Impact Zone (INDIZ)  Assessment of the physical and biological environment within the project area, taking photographs where necessary.  Assessment of the socio-economic status of the local communities surrounding the project area.

4.3 Methodology used in undertaking the ESIA update

4.3.1 Aquatic Assessment The investigation area for this assessment was defined as a natural river occurring as the centerline of the proposed project. The potential impacts of the proposed HPP 1 on water quality and fisheries of and within the influence of the project area were considered.

4.3.1.1 Review of relevant literature ESIA reports for HPP 1 and HPP 2 were reviewed to obtain secondary baseline information on plankton, macro invertebrates and fish in the project area.

76 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

4.3.1.2 Field Investigations To establish the environment quality and in-situ measurements, samples of water were obtained. In addition, samples were collected for laboratory analysis for plankton and macro invertebrates. Fishing experiments were also conducted to capture fish for assessing diversity and relative abundance of fish in the project area. Macrophytes were identified and recorded at sites through observation and photography.

4.3.1.3 Consultations with stakeholders Secondary information on fisheries in the project area was obtained by making inquiries from the local fishers and community.

4.3.1.4 Assumptions and assessments considered The assessment of potential impacts of proposed project on water quality and fisheries was based on project lifecycle (construction and operation) and design (project components) approach. Assessments considered:  updated review of the potential presence for threatened aquatic species;  Results of water quality measurements and analysis; and  Results of plankton, macro invertebrate and fish sampling. The assessment of the potential for threatened species to occur at or near project area was based on updated searches for threatened species in the project area and the National Environment Act Cap 153 (1995) and the Environment Statute (1995) and the results of field surveys. The surveys were undertaken only once and appropriate sampling techniques were employed to capture the full range of fish species present. This survey provides no information on potential variations in fish populations through time; rather it presents an appropriate “snapshot” view of fish community.

4.3.2 Hydrological Assessment

4.3.2.1 Field Work Approach The hydrological studies for ESIA update process commenced with field reconnaissance visit on the 11th March 2017. During reconnaissance visit, the consultant reached to the key facility sites and areas 2km downstream to assess the proposed locations for HPPI option 2 and 3. During the survey, the consultant mainly used observations, photography and focused group discussions during community meetings to obtain information about the site and its environs. This was complemented with other datasets from construction reports, literature reviews and observations by other experts.

4.3.2.2 Desktop Studies The consultant collected the following but not limited datasets from the client for desktop studies: a) Topographic Data: The elevation datasets for catchment delineation and extraction of geometric data for hydraulic modelling of Achwa II (HPPII) was from 30m resolution STRM Digital elevation model. b) Hydro-meteorological data: The client consultant collected hydro-meteorological dataset especially discharge (river Achwa HPPII) and rainfall data for Achwa HPPII catchment.

77 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

c) Drawings and AutoCAD files: AutoCAD files and drawings of key project infrastructure like Intake, fore bay, canal tail race and Penstock were provided and thus referred to and used. d) Feasibility and construction Reports: The consultants obtained construction reports deemed relevant for hydrological assessment.

4.3.2.3 Flow assessment For EIA process and assessment of likely impacts of the proposed development on environment, discharge datasets for Achwa II at old bridge on Gulu- Kitgum road was used to characterize the flows in terms of low and high flows.

a) Flow duration analysis Stream flow records from the historical maximum and minimum flows, mean flows were established by derivation of duration curves. The flow duration curve segmented flows into intervals as indicators of the hydrologic conditions of catchments. The high flows (0-10%), moist conditions (10-40%), mid-range flows (40-60%), dry conditions (60-90%) and low flows (90- 100%). This approach placed the midpoints of the moist, mid-range and dry zones at the quartiles (25th, 50th and 70th, respectively). The high zone is centered at the 5th percentile while the low zone is centered at the 95th percentile. Monthly, annual, quarterly or any other user defined ranged flow duration curves were extracted using Hydrologic Engineering Center – Statistical Software Package (HEC-SSP).

Low flow analysis To define the specific values for low flows, the moving average filter for N-days was applied and then a minimum of the filtered series was selected for different exceeded times. Annual minimum N-day moving averages flows for N=3, 5, 7, 10, 15, 30 and 90 aggregated days exceeded at different times was applied. 10yr annual minimum 7-day flow was the key variable used to describe the low flow for catchment. The low flow percentiles to be from the flow duration curve included Q75% and Q95%; however mean annual minimum 7-day is numerically similar to 95%. This will be accomplished by volume frequency analysis component in HEC_SSP. Low flow frequency indices developed included the 99-, 98-, 95-, 90-, 85-, and 80-. 75-70-, 60- and 50-percent duration flows and median flow for different aggregation days. Other low flow indices included 7-day, 2-year and the 7-day, 10year low flows.

Peak frequency analysis The extreme events (peak flows) were considered to assess the flood risk which the in channel barriers (weir and intake) will be subjected too. Annual maximum series of peaks was generated. The Peak flow series was imported in HEC_SSP model to perform peak frequency analysis. Peak frequency analysis on peak flows was done using two components of the software (General Frequency Analysis and Bulletin 17) by fitting an appropriate distribution (Normal, Gumbel, Lognormal or Log Pearson Type III distribution onto the datasets). The principle of fitting was that parameters are generated from the available sample data to be used generate theoretical frequency curves peak discharges for recurrence periods of interest.

78 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

4.3.2.4 Assessment of soil erosion potential Soil erosion potential assessment was done to ascertain the amount of soil that could be lost from the construction site due to erosion and transportation of concentrated sheet flows. The soil erosion potential was assessed based on the Revised Universal soil Loss Equation (RUSLE). RUSLE2 model mainly uses the rainfall factor R as measure of erosive energy of rainfall, soil erodibility factor K, as measure of soil’s inherent susceptibility to erosion, topographic factor LS which is a combined factor accounting for the slope steepness and slope length, vegetation and management factor C which is used to determine the relative effectiveness of soil management in terms of vegetation cover and crop residue or artificial protection cover. The last factor considered by the RUSLE2 model is the support factor P which is a measure of the effects of practices designed to modify flow patterns, grade or direction of runoff and thus reduce soil erosion

4.3.2.5 Current and Future water use downstream The information about the current water use was entirely based on the field observations and earlier findings of the first ESIA report for the project. The consultant assess aquatic life within the river reach has been given due consideration by incorporating adequate environmental flow.

4.3.2.6 Assessment of Possible changes in Water surface elevations and hydraulic properties of stream Application of river analysis package HECRAS revealed the water surface elevations prior and after installation of weir. The model used earlier estimated peak flows for return periods and extracted river geomorphological data to derive the hydraulic properties at intake and resultant inundation area from the installation of the weir. The Water levels analysis using the HECRAS package to compare with the weir water levels and affects it will impose on the downstream users.

4.3.3 Social economic assessment In order to get the current situation of the project area as well as to ensure and adequately assess the social economic information and impacts resulting from the development of the Achwa HPP 1, the following methods were employed:

4.3.3.1 Literature Review and Secondary Data The literature review involved reviewing historical and current studies; current census data and social economic status; patterns of asset ownership, livelihoods, community structure, land use, and infrastructure; and service profile of the project area. This resulted in the socio-economic contributions to the previously submitted ESIA report in 2014 as well as continued secondary data gathering from previous studies related to the proposed development. The information obtained from this study included:

 District information on documented socio-economic baseline conditions; and  District statistics on population, health, literacy and poverty levels.

4.3.3.2 Stakeholder Consultation Consultation with key stakeholders is a continuous process that was carried out throughout the update of the ESIA; it is the intention of the developer to continue with it during the construction

79 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 and operational phases of the project. For purposes of updating the ESIA, the consultant carried out a stakeholders consultations with Interested and Affected Parties (I&APs) to the project. Each individual stakeholder or group of stakeholders identified had particular sets of priorities and objectives specific to the project. The purpose of the engagements were mainly to guide the social baseline survey and subsequently the impact assessment that could be associated with the implementation of the proposed project. The consultations were also important in determining the appropriate mitigation measures.

Stakeholder engagement comprised consultations with Pader District Local Government officials, Angagura Sub-County officials and the community members living within the project area. Notifications at the district and sub county levels were made through the CAO and sub- county chief respectively while the meetings at the community level were made through Local Council (LC) chairpersons. The meetings were held on 13th March 2017 at the respective offices. For Pader District Local Government, the consultant met the district official at the district offices in Pader, while the Sub-County officials; the engagements were made at the sub-county offices in Angagura.

To disclose the project and obtain views of communities, a meeting was held on 13th March 2017 with residents of Burlobo, Labwoto, Lubala, Bira, Arwgovon, Pabit and Obitto. A joint community meeting was held since all the villages are close to one another. Local council leaders of respective villages assisted in mobilizing and informing people about the venue and date of the consultation meeting.

Consultations with Pader District leadership at Consultations with Angagura S/C Pader District Headquarter boardroom leadership at the sub county headquarter

80 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

Community meeting at the community Market Figure 4-1: Pictorial of meetings held with District leaders, Sub-County leaders and community members

This social survey gathered community baseline information and initiated a process of dialogue with stakeholders. In particular, it was important to collect information relating to the following issues:

 What households and stakeholders within the project affected area knew and did not know about the project and sources of their information;  How important they thought the project was;  What benefits they hoped the project might bring;  What negative effects concerned them;  What suggestions they had about increasing positive benefits; and  What suggestions they had for reducing negative effects.

Collection of Available Information: Available primary and secondary data from different sources were collected and analyzed. Primary data, especially relating to the socio-economic and cultural issues were collected through discussion with informant groups and the local elders in the project area. As part of the data collection activities, the consultant’s team collected and reviewed the latest Pader DDP 2015/16– 2019/2020, Pader District Local Government Statistical Abstract as well as National Population Census 2014 report. Information on existing environmental and social conditions, necessary to provide the basic background for impact identification and assessment, has been obtained from the various reviewed documents.

4.3.3.3 Focus group discussions Focus group discussions were conducted with the local leaders and Sub-county and parish chief leaders and also with the women within the project area. Through these discussions, information was collected on:  Demographic profile;  Social institutions and networks;  Local employment, livelihoods and natural resource use;  Public services and infrastructure (waste, water, energy etc.);  Health and education facilities;

81 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

 Attitudes to the proposed project.

4.3.3.4 Field Investigation and Observations In order to gain first-hand knowledge of existing social and environmental conditions and to put the proposed design, construction and operation works into context, the study team carried out extensive site investigations and baseline studies. Observation was specifically aimed at assessing physical assets of people in affected areas, living conditions, settlement patterns, and capacity to diversify income, and social and economic networks. Where possible, observations were backed up by photographic records.

82 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

5. BASELINE STUDY OF THE PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT

This section describes the biophysical and hydrological characteristics of the river Achwa HPP I in Angagura Sub County in Pader district Northern Uganda. In order to assess the hydro-electric power potential of river Achwa, there was need to analyze their catchment characteristics and the discharge patterns including their low and high flows. The result of this analysis therefore constitutes an importance input into the design of its capacity and hydrological reliability. The data and information presented here has been sourced from various documents referred to and incorporates primary data collected during the ESIA study. The District Development Plan for Pader and the different project study reports have been reviewed and referred to. In addition, discussions held with lead agency representatives, key informants and consultations with the District Authorities and local communities yielded considerable information that is also presented in this report.

5.1 Regional hydrology 5.1.1 HPP1 Catchment characteristics The catchment area for the Achwa extends from the Hills in Karamoja and North Teso covering thousands of sq. km as shown in Table 5-1 below. The main Aswa river sub-basin has an area of 9.930 km². The Agago sub-basin has an area of 5.164 km²; however the catchment for HPP1 was approximated to be 12,804.90 km² (refer to the map in Figure 5-1 below;

Figure 5-1: HPP1 Catchment area

83 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

For this ESIA Report, it was felt not necessary to reproduce the whole Hydrological Analysis as given in the Feasibility Study Report. Rather use was made of the key parameters and figures influencing the Hydrology as well as the conclusions derived from the analysis in order to assess the environmental impacts in case some of the parameters change as a result of the implementation of the project. The ESIA should therefore be read in conjunction with /with reference to the volume on Hydrology in the Feasibility Study Report. For the hydrological analysis of the project, year data (1949-1980) for station Achwa II on river Achwa located on the Gulu- Kitgum was obtained from Directorate of Water Resource Management (DWRM)- Entebbe. However, PAC Spa also installed a new Gauging station on the Gulu-Kitgum road old bridge from which more relevant daily data was collected for a period of three years 2011-2014 (Daily data collection is on-going and will continue through the construction period).

5.1.2 Climatological Conditions In Achwa basin a bimodal rainfall pattern is dominant, with the first season occurring from April to May, while the second occurs from July to October tending to peak in August. The period between the end of the first season and the beginning of the second season is short, lasting for only one or two months (June-July) with the exception of Kaabong station, situated in the north- eastern part of the basin, where a unimodal rainfall regime clearly appears. Dry season extends from December to March. The rainfall in the region is characteristically episodic in occurrence during the rainy season, varying considerably from year to year and moreover from station to station. Based on investigation of several spatial interpolation techniques, the mean annual rainfall over the whole Achwa basin was estimated at 1,150 to 1,228 mm/year. When the rainfall for Achwa and Agago basins are compared, the graph below shows that Achwa receives slightly higher rainfall during the periods of September and October while Agago receives slightly higher rainfall in the period of June and July (Figure 5-2). The average monthly maximum temperature is 29 degrees centigrade and average monthly minimum temperature is 17degrees centigrade.

Figure 5-2: Annual rainfall trends for Achwa and Agago Basins

84 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

5.1.3 Land cover The dominant landuse/cover in the catchment is subsistence cropland taking over 43% followed by grasslands with over 40%. The vegetation in the catchment is predominantly dry savanna type comprising mainly of hyper hania, terinalia acacia and Butterspermum species. The vegetation is predominantly dry savannah woodland, while in the northeastern part of the District are mountain forest and shrubs. The table (Table 5-1) and Figure 5-3 below show the land use and land cover in the HPPI project area.

Table 5-1: Land use and cover for HPP1 catchment area Class Land_Cover_2 Area (sq Km) Percentage % 1 Built-up Areas 15.41 0.12 2 Bushland 1641.4 12.82 3 Commercial Cropland 1.33 0.01 4 Depleted Tropical Forest 191.76 1.50 5 Grassland 5134.22 40.09 6 Impediments 0.07 0.00 7 Plantation Forest 0.06 0.00 8 Subsistence Cropland 5502.7 42.97 9 Tropical Forest 73.22 0.57 10 Water 0.67 0.01 11 Wetland 194 1.51 12 Woodland 50.88 0.40 13 Total 12,805.7 100.00 Source: (NFA)

85 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

Figure 5-3: Land cover for HPP1 catchment

5.1.4 Geology The Project site is located within the Tanzanian Craton, bounded by the Western and Eastern branch of the East African Rift System and a series of normal faults. While the shield separating the two branches of the rift system is of Precambrian age, the rift itself consists of asymmetrical basins bounded by alternate high-angle normal fault segments on one side & a series of smaller normal faults. Major rock mass are undifferentiated gneisses of the Precambrian age and are composed of granitic gneisses and well foliated darker gneisses with a biotite and hornblende content with several NE trending amphibolites dykes. Structural geology of the area is controlled by tectonics associated with the East African Rift System.

The Project area is located within the northerly part of the Shield area just along the Achwa Fault zone and approximately 100-150 km from the western rift system. Undifferentiated granite gneisses constituting part of the basement complex are exposed at several places along the banks of the Achwa, which has cut down below the peneplain surface and its laterite cover.

The basement rocks in this area are gneisses and granulites, often very rich in biotite and amphibole. The pattern of the Orogenic Fold Belts and shear zones, distribution of volcanic centers and Pleistocene wrapping represent the major structural features in Uganda.

86 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

The Achwa Shear Belt is made up of highly deformed rocks with a mylonitic zone trending NW- SE for over 300 km across the Northern Region. This shear zone follows the course of River Achwa and continues into the Sudan along the course of the Nile. The western rift valley runs the length of Uganda on the west, and contains the Lakes Edward, George and Albert. The Ruwenzori Mountains represent the horst block of the western rift valley.

Late Pleistocene wrapping has produced sag through Central Uganda, which formed Lake Victoria and caused the reversal of westerly flowing rivers in Central Uganda to produce the two way flow of Kafu and other rivers and the drowned valley lake system of Lake Kyoga. Detailed geological investigations have been conducted at the commission of the client to aid the detailed construction design. The lengths, heights and alignment of the concrete dam foundations on which the rubber dams will be anchored will depend on the rock condition of the site as well as the soil conditions. Detailed tests of the physical and mechanical strengths of the rock and soil conditions have been carried out during geological investigations for the Construction Design.

5.1.5 Soils The soil is generally loamy with some areas having a lot of sand and clay soils (Figure 5-4 below).

Figure 5-4: Soils for HPP1 catchment

87 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

5.1.6 Topography Pader District lies at an average altitude of 1150mm above sea level. Further west of the District, the Land falls as the relief becomes gentler towards Gulu District. The District is also characterized by low plains and rolling hills with the main rivers such as Achwa and Agago flowing at approximately 900 meters above sea level. The district generally has flat landscape with intervals of undulating appearance especially on the eastern side with some inselbergs in the sub counties of Adilang, Lapono, Lukole and Parabongo.

5.2 Flow Regimes for River Achwa The purpose of this study is to determine the best use of the reservoir at the back of the rubber dam of HPP1 in order to optimize the use of the water available during the dry season, when the flow of the river is less than the minimum required to operate a turbine, but higher than the environmental flow.

5.2.1 Flow statistic and hydrographs (annual and Monthly) The annual hydrograph reveals two peaks of 47.3m3/s and 188.3m3/s during the late April to early May and Late August to early September. The available datasets from 1940’s to 1980’s revealed a long term mean annual flow of 42.6m3/s. The annual mean minima flow Achwa II at the old bridge was estimated as 0.3m3/s.

Figure 5-5: Annual flow hydrograph at old bridge on river Achwa II

The graph shows a peak flow during the months of August and September and a pronounced minimum in January and February. The most critical months with lowest flows are January, February and March. The mean monthly flows for January, February and March were estimated as 3.1m3/s, 1.3m3/s and 3.2 m3/s respectively.

88 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

Figure 5-6: Flow hydrograph based on monthly flows

5.2.2 Flow duration The derivation of flow duration curves was done for annual, monthly and quarterly timescales based on the imported daily flow values. The duration curves developed in this study is for realistic hydropower planning and development of HPP1, environmental sustainability and proper water quality management after non consumptive use of water in the power house.

a) Annual Flow Duration The annual flow duration curve for River Achwa at the old bridge indicated the high flows that are not sustained for long time and decline fast due to the steep gradient for the flows exceeded between 1 to 10% of the time. The a very steep section of high flow region of the curve indicated high flows for short time thus revealing the catchment’s inability to attenuation the peak flows during severe floods. The flatness of the curve towards the low flows reveals the ability of continuous water yield mainly due to large ground water which sustains base flow however under scenarios of long dry spells, River Achwa can behave as intermittent streams with no flow as revealed by the flow duration curve.

89 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

Table 5-2: Flows exceeded at different times based on annual flow duration curve Percent of Time Exceeded Flow (cms) 99.0 0 95.0 0 90.0 0.03 80.0 0.62 50.0 12.9 25.0 47.2 15.0 81.8 10.0 117.5 5.0 182.3 2.0 275.7 1.0 356.4 0.1 1004.1 Minimum 0.0 Maximum Value 1270.4 Number of Valid Values 11465.0 Number of missing values 482.0

Duration Analysis Plot for Flow Duration Curve 1,400

1,200

1,000

800

Flow Flow in cms 600

400

200

0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Percent of Time Exceeded Interpolated Curve Computed Curve Figure 5-7: Annual flow duration curve at Old bridge for period 1949-1980

b) Monthly Flow duration The monthly flow duration curves at old bridge were derived using HEC-SSP. The details in Table 5-3 below reveal that the driest months are January, February and March with the lowest flows exceeded for over 99% of time being zero. Of all the three dry months, February has the lowest flows. The highest flow is expected in month of August to September. Though there is a critical period of 3 months, the monthly flow duration curves indicate there is always excess of

90 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 water compared to the maximum design discharge of 100m3/s. This implies that some storage can be retained to sustain power generation for some extra days before HPP1 can be completely shut down when the flows are below the environmental flow of 1.5m3/s approved by NEMA.

Table 5-3: Flows exceeded at different times based on monthly flow duration curves Percent of Jan Feb Mar Apr Ma Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Time y Exceeded 99.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.8 0.5 0.1 0.0 95.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.6 3.4 2.1 1.1 0.1 90.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.2 0.5 9.9 11.3 6.8 2.0 0.3 80.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.2 1.3 2.1 5.6 22.4 23.5 13.8 4.9 0.9 50.0 1.5 0.3 0.2 2.3 12.9 13.3 0.7 59.9 72.5 40.3 23.0 5.6 25.0 10.2 3.7 2.8 9.4 36.3 32.6 41.8 120.0 144. 81.7 51.8 41.3 1 15.0 31.6 11.4 6.7 18.0 48.3 45.6 67.6 173.1 201. 126.8 79.9 79.7 3 10.0 66.5 32.0 12.2 29.0 63.2 60.0 93.2 223.4 258. 163.3 101. 113.2 1 4 5.0 112. 63.8 26.7 57.6 114. 97.3 128. 317.1 328. 222.1 168. 186.2 9 2 7 6 4 2.0 208. 137. 123.1 101.0 218. 141. 170. 832.7 439. 328.5 228. 257.1 1 9 1 4 7 0 3 1.0 272. 171. 235.2 149.8 365. 181. 192. 1046. 563. 532.4 252. 344.2 5 4 3 1 0 3 1 7 0.1 333. 233. 286.6 234.3 712. 258. 322. 1270. 867. 935.5 388. 425.1 7 7 3 6 5 4 2 9 Minimum 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.0 Maximum 333. 233. 286.6 234.3 712. 258. 322. 1270. 867. 935.5 388. 425.4 7 7 3 6 5 4 2 9 Valid Values 992. 900. 909.0 881.0 961. 934. 987. 966.0 960. 994.0 963. 1018. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 missing 0.0 4.0 83.0 98.0 62.0 56.0 36.0 57.0 30.0 29.0 27.0 0.0 values

91 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

Duration Analysis Plot for Flow Duration Curve 1,400

1,200

1,000

800

Flow Flow in cms 600

400

200

0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Percent of Time Exceeded January Computed Curve February Computed Curve March Computed Curve April Computed Curve May Computed Curve June Computed Curve July Computed Curve August Computed Curve September Computed Curve October Computed Curve November Computed Curve December Computed Curve Figure 5-8: Monthly flow duration curve at Old Bridge for period 1949-1980

c) Quarterly flow duration curve The quarterly flow duration curve segregated the curves into four quarters as indicated in Table 5-4 below. The first quarter 01 Jan-3 Mar is driest and most critical period for HPP1. It can be revealed that the 50% of the time 0.6m3/s is expected and it is also possible to have flows as close to zero for the dry year with prolonged droughts. The third quarter 01 Jul-30 September has the highest flows with 0.5m3/s and 42.3m3/s exceeded 95% and 50% of the time. Due to the intermittent nature of the stream especially during the dry years with long dry spells Q50% and Q25% are considered as indicators of low flow for River Achwa.

Table 5-4: Flows exceeded at different times based on quarterly flow duration curve Percent of Time 01Jan - 31Mar 01Apr - 01Jul - 30Sep 01Oct - Exceeded 30Jun 31Dec 99.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 95.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.4 90.0 0.0 0.1 4.3 1.0 80.0 0.0 0.8 12.8 3.2 50.0 0.6 8.0 42.3 23.2 25.0 4.3 27.8 101.4 58.1 15.0 14.2 42.2 148.6 95.3 10.0 31.6 52.7 192.1 134.3 5.0 78.3 86.1 282.8 196.4 2.0 154.3 153.5 430.0 263.7 1.0 221.6 206.4 682.7 349.0 0.1 322.7 588.6 1237.8 864.9 Minimum 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01

92 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

Maximum Value 333.7 712.3 1270.4 935.5 Valid Values 2801.0 2776.0 2913.0 2975.0 missing values 87.0 216.0 123.0 56.0

Duration Analysis Plot for Flow Duration Curve 1,400

1,200

1,000

800

Flow Flow in cms 600

400

200

0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Percent of Time Exceeded Quarter 1 Interpolated Curve Quarter 1 Computed Curve Quarter 2 Interpolated Curve Quarter 2 Computed Curve Quarter 3 Interpolated Curve Quarter 3 Computed Curve Quarter 4 Interpolated Curve Quarter 4 Computed Curve Figure 5-9: Quarterly flow duration curve at old period 1949-1980

5.2.3 Low flows

a) Minimum volume frequency analysis A minimum flow, or low flow analysis, could be used determine if a river could supply a given demand. A low flow analysis could also be beneficial for water quality and reservoir storage projects.

Table 5-5: Minimum flows exceeded at different times based on n-days aggregations Percent Chance 1 3 7 15 30 60 90 120 183 Exceedance 99 5.4 8 10.3 7.7 21.3 47.4 25.5 14 89 95 3 3.7 4.3 4.4 8.5 9.9 10.1 10.2 44.2 90 2 2.2 2.5 2.9 4.6 4.2 5.5 7.7 29.1 80 1.2 1.1 1.2 1.5 1.9 1.5 2.4 4.8 16.8 50 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.4 1.2 5.2 20 0.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.1 1.3 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.6 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.1 0.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

93 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

5.2.4 Peak flows

a) Peak flow frequency analysis Knowledge of flood frequency is necessary to ensure flood proof and adequate design for the key infrastructure especially the intake and dam.

Table 5-6: Peak flows exceeded at different times Curve Based on Data Percent Chance Computed curve Confidence Limits Peak Flows Exceedance (cms) 0.05 0.95 0.2 2593.6 4891.0 1687.7 0.5 2125.0 3813.6 1424.9 1 1797.2 3096.1 1234.9 2 1491.7 2458.3 1052.2 5 1120.9 1730.4 820.8 10 864.0 1261.9 651.8 20 625.2 859.4 485.5 50 328.2 418.6 257.9 80 166.5 214.2 121.4 90 115.2 153.2 78.4 95 84.4 116.4 53.7 99 46.2 69.4 25.5

General Frequency Analytical Plot for General Frequency Analysis Return Period

1.1 2 5 10 50 100 200 500 1000 10000 100000 10,000

1,000

Peak Flows in cms Flows Peak

100

10 0.99 0.9 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.02 0.01 0.005 0.002 0.0001 0.00001 Probability Computed Curve 5 Percent Confidence Limit 95 Percent Confidence Limit Observed Events (Weibull plotting positions) Figure 5-10: Peak flow frequency analysis plot

b) Maximum volume frequency analysis The HEC-SSP allows performing volume frequency analysis on the daily discharge data. Runoff volumes are expressed as average flows over time duration. Typical volume frequency analyses

94 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 would develop frequency curves for a number of volumes (flow-duration), like the 1, 3, 7, 15, 30, 60, 90, 120, and 180 day volumes. Maximum flow analysis could be used for determining the amount of reservoir storage required for a flood of specific frequency.

Table 5-7: Peaks flows exceeded at different times based on n-days aggregations Percent of Time 1 3 7 15 30 60 90 120 183 Exceeded 0.2 2401 2258. 2304. 1846. 1158. 912. 674. 606. 474 1 5 2 1 8 4 8 0.5 1928. 1808. 1781. 1440. 946.4 728 554. 495. 390. 3 3 2 5 6 9 3 1 1606. 1502. 1441. 1173. 798.4 604. 471. 419. 332. 3 9 4 7 6 4 9 8 2 1313 1225. 1144. 938.3 660.8 494 394. 350. 279. 6 8 2 1 8 5 966.7 899.5 811.7 670.5 494.1 365. 300. 266. 216 6 6 6 10 733.6 680.9 599 497.4 379 280. 235. 209. 171. 4 7 3 8 20 522.8 483.9 415.6 346.4 272.5 203. 175 156. 130. 8 1 5 50 269.3 248.2 207.8 173.2 141 111. 98.1 89.2 77.6 5 80 136 125.1 104.8 86.6 70.3 61.6 54.2 51 46.5 90 94.4 86.8 73.5 60.2 48.1 45.3 39.6 38 35.6 95 69.6 63.9 55 44.6 34.9 35.3 30.4 29.9 28.7 99 38.8 35.7 32 25.4 18.8 22.1 18.5 19 19.1

5.3 Hydraulic Behavior with and without the HPP1 Intake The river section for proposed installation of intake based on Option 2 was hydraulically analyzed using HECRAS with and without the proposed development. The steady flow profiles were developed based on 100yr flood event as indicated in tables Table 5-8 and Table 5-9. The 100yr flood modelled was 1797.2 m3/s compared to 1546 m³/s; to the construction reports as indicated by the clients. The longitudinal profiles and the cross-sectional profiles were also had values slightly higher than 1546 m³/s. In the second scenario, the 4 flap gates 6.0 m high x 10 m wide, hydraulically operated will be placed to the left of the weir with desanding function. This gate ensures the release of the environmental flow equal to 1.5 m3/s. Weir stability against sliding and overturning has been verified in operating conditions and assuming a design flood equal to a 100 years- return period value (1797.2 m3/s) which is higher than 200yr return period of 1741m3/s. Upstream and downstream water levels have been calculated using Hec-Ras Software. However the water surface level is slightly higher compared to the design water levels in the design reports and this mainly attributed to discrepancies as result of the STRM datasets from the real river geometric data extracted from the topographic surveys.

95 Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017

Table 5-8: Hydraulic analysis of the Achwa 11 River (River Achwa) Section for proposed installation of Intake structure River Profil Q Min Ch W.S. Crit E.G. E.G. Vel Flow Top Froude # Reach Station e Total El Elev W.S. Elev Slope Chnl Area Width Chl (m3/s) (m) (m) (m) (m) (m/m) (m/s) (m2) (m) Achwa 100 II 3200 yr 1797.2 844.56 852.3 849.59 852.38 0.000549 1.28 1385.15 345.7 0.19 Achwa 100 II 3100 yr 1797.2 845.53 851.18 850.93 852.15 0.012274 4.42 423.07 176.76 0.84 Achwa 100 II 3000 yr 1797.2 843.44 851.25 851.53 0.001993 2.35 781.42 214.29 0.36 Achwa 100 II 2900 yr 1797.2 841.34 851.36 851.41 0.000228 1 1841.96 361.51 0.13 Achwa 100 II 2800 yr 1797.2 841.55 851.36 851.39 0.000106 0.74 2291.7 345.07 0.09 Achwa 100 II 2700 yr 1797.2 841.22 851.36 851.38 0.000065 0.64 2694.03 349.13 0.07 Achwa 100 II 2600 yr 1797.2 840.73 851.36 851.37 0.00004 0.54 3284.31 395.27 0.06 Achwa 100 II 2508.97 yr 1797.2 838.64 851.36 851.37 0.000035 0.54 3435.01 413.67 0.06 Achwa 100 II 2424.637 yr 1797.2 836.22 851.36 851.37 0.000027 0.49 3749.69 421.49 0.05 Achwa 100 II 2294.825 yr 1797.2 836.39 851.35 851.36 0.000033 0.51 3506.87 373.79 0.05 Achwa 100 II 2203.386 yr 1797.2 835.43 851.34 851.36 0.000064 0.62 2903.38 377.99 0.07 Achwa 100 II 2103.723 yr 1797.2 838.62 851.33 851.35 0.000077 0.63 2880.47 443.83 0.08 Achwa 100 II 2015.846 yr 1797.2 839.11 851.33 851.35 0.000074 0.62 2920.95 431.98 0.08 Achwa 100 II 1880.055 yr 1797.2 835.68 851.32 851.34 0.000032 0.49 3725.9 453.53 0.05 Achwa 100 II 1700.943 yr 1797.2 832.25 851.33 851.33 0.000009 0.31 5527.72 446.92 0.03

Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 96

Achwa 100 II 1541.585 yr 1797.2 832.68 851.32 851.33 0.000022 0.47 3860.88 375.83 0.04 Achwa 100 II 1400 yr 1797.2 830.74 851.31 851.33 0.000022 0.49 3739.09 335.65 0.04 Achwa 100 II 1300 yr 1797.2 833.31 851.31 851.32 0.000027 0.53 3411.72 321.41 0.05 Achwa 100 II 1200 yr 1797.2 831.01 851.31 851.32 0.000028 0.54 3375.83 316.74 0.05 Achwa 100 II 1100 yr 1797.2 838.75 851.27 851.31 0.000125 0.91 1981.16 240.43 0.1 Achwa 100 II 1000 yr 1797.2 835.75 851.28 851.3 0.000056 0.66 2735.38 297.22 0.07 Achwa 100 II 900 yr 1797.2 837.23 851.26 851.29 0.000085 0.8 2252.28 247.58 0.08 Achwa 100 II 800 yr 1797.2 843.11 850.85 851.23 0.002221 2.72 659.79 132.7 0.39 Achwa 100 II 699.9999 yr 1797.2 839.9 848.43 848.43 850.58 0.016016 6.5 276.31 64.82 1.01 Achwa 100 II 599.9999 yr 1797.2 838.71 847.15 846.43 848.5 0.01002 5.16 348.62 82.61 0.8 Achwa 100 II 499.9999 yr 1797.2 839.78 845.7 845.7 847.2 0.017338 5.42 331.82 111.67 1 Achwa 100 II 400.0001 yr 1797.2 835.66 838.52 839.92 843.35 0.105328 9.74 184.6 100.01 2.29 Achwa 100 II 300.0001 yr 1797.2 835.2 839.89 838.82 840.67 0.006602 3.91 459.84 122.27 0.64 Achwa 100 II 200 yr 1797.2 832.32 838.07 838.07 839.58 0.017658 5.44 330.56 112.17 1.01 Achwa 100 II 99.99995 yr 1797.2 831.08 836.24 836.32 837.77 0.018901 5.47 328.36 116.25 1.04

Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 97

Table 5-9: Hydraulic analysis of river section with the proposed installation of intake structure River Q Min Ch W.S. Crit E.G. E.G. Vel Flow Top Froude # Reach Station Profile Total El Elev W.S. Elev Slope Chnl Area Width Chl (m3/s) (m) (m) (m) (m) (m/m) (m/s) (m2) (m) Achwa 0.00052 II 3200 100yr 1797.2 844.56 852.36 849.59 852.44 4 1.26 1405.69 345.95 0.19 Achwa II 3100 100yr 1797.2 845.53 851.47 852.24 0.00912 3.94 477.28 190.9 0.73 Achwa 0.00179 II 3000 100yr 1797.2 843.44 851.49 851.74 5 2.21 833.92 233.67 0.34 Achwa II 2900 100yr 1797.2 841.34 851.59 851.63 0.0002 0.96 1922.28 362.89 0.12 Achwa 0.00009 II 2800 100yr 1797.2 841.55 851.58 851.61 5 0.71 2368.43 346.22 0.09 Achwa II 2700 100yr 1797.2 841.22 851.58 851.6 0.00006 0.62 2771.76 350.72 0.07 Achwa 0.00003 II 2600 100yr 1797.2 840.73 851.58 851.6 7 0.52 3372.31 396.59 0.06 Achwa 0.00003 II 2508.97 100yr 1797.2 838.64 851.58 851.59 3 0.52 3527.46 417.66 0.05 Achwa 2424.63 0.00002 II 7 100yr 1797.2 836.22 851.58 851.59 6 0.48 3843.93 425.3 0.05 Achwa 2294.82 0.00003 II 5 100yr 1797.2 836.39 851.57 851.59 1 0.5 3590.59 377.52 0.05 Achwa 2203.38 0.00005 II 6 100yr 1797.2 835.43 851.56 851.58 9 0.6 2988.81 385.86 0.07 Achwa 2103.72 0.00006 II 3 100yr 1797.2 838.62 851.56 851.58 9 0.6 2980.87 450.56 0.07 Achwa 2015.84 0.00006 II 6 100yr 1797.2 839.11 851.55 851.57 7 0.6 3018.87 438.27 0.07 Achwa 1880.05 100yr 1797.2 835.68 851.55 851.56 0.00003 0.47 3828.66 458.81 0.05

Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 98

II 5 Achwa 1700.94 0.00000 II 3 100yr 1797.2 832.25 851.55 851.56 8 0.31 5628.59 449.67 0.03 Achwa 1541.58 0.00002 II 5 100yr 1797.2 832.68 851.54 851.55 1 0.46 3946.13 380.35 0.04 Achwa II 1400 100yr 1797.2 830.74 851.54 851.55 0.00002 0.48 3815.19 338.49 0.04 Achwa 0.00002 II 1300 100yr 1797.2 833.31 851.54 851.55 6 0.52 3484.69 324.41 0.05 Achwa 0.00002 II 1200 100yr 1797.2 831.01 851.53 851.55 6 0.53 3447.9 320.41 0.05 Achwa 0.00011 II 1100 100yr 1797.2 838.75 851.5 842.19 851.54 7 0.88 2036.52 244.39 0.1 Achwa Inl II 1050 Struct Achwa 0.00005 II 1000 100yr 1797.2 835.75 851.28 851.3 6 0.66 2735.38 297.22 0.07 Achwa 0.00008 II 900 100yr 1797.2 837.23 851.26 851.29 5 0.8 2252.28 247.58 0.08 Achwa 0.00222 II 800 100yr 1797.2 843.11 850.85 851.23 1 2.72 659.79 132.7 0.39 Achwa 699.999 0.01601 II 9 100yr 1797.2 839.9 848.43 848.43 850.58 6 6.5 276.31 64.82 1.01 Achwa 599.999 II 9 100yr 1797.2 838.71 847.15 846.43 848.5 0.01002 5.16 348.62 82.61 0.8 Achwa 499.999 0.01733 II 9 100yr 1797.2 839.78 845.7 845.7 847.2 8 5.42 331.82 111.67 1 Achwa 400.000 0.10532 II 1 100yr 1797.2 835.66 838.52 839.92 843.35 8 9.74 184.6 100.01 2.29 Achwa 300.000 0.00660 II 1 100yr 1797.2 835.2 839.89 838.82 840.67 2 3.91 459.84 122.27 0.64 Achwa 200 100yr 1797.2 832.32 838.07 838.07 839.58 0.01765 5.44 330.56 112.17 1.01

Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 99

II 8 Achwa 99.9999 0.01890 II 5 100yr 1797.2 831.08 836.24 836.32 837.77 1 5.47 328.36 116.25 1.04

Updated ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 100

5.4 Current and Future Water Use

5.4.1 Current water use The river stretch where the project site is located forms the boundary of the two districts of Pader and Gulu. Currently the stretch is almost entirely not inhabited and the few settlements that are found engaged in rain fed subsistence agriculture. The only exception are some limited irrigated areas and some lowland rice cultivation which relies on stream flow and wetland retention for the satisfaction of water needs. Not much of the water in the stretch is used by local communities as the eastern bank (Pader District) is bordered by the Government owned Achwa Ranch while on the western side (Gulu District), the nearest local community activity is almost 3 km away from the River bank. Here some livestock could be brought for drinking the River water.

Settlements within Ranch about 600m from Another settlement within the Ranch proposed option 1 intake Figure 5-11: Settlements within the ranch

Livestock keeping was observed within the ranch and catchment areas however the overall abstraction for livestock was very low. It was therefore concluded that from a basin-wide and even more so from a trans-boundary context, livestock demand is negligible.

Apart from the weir anchoring on the opposite side, the project is located entirely on the right bank in what was the Achwa ranch and it had a well-planned water use and distribution system. However it’s anticipated that in the event of revival of the life stalk industry in the area, a pumped abstraction of the order of 100-300 l/s from the original pumping station can be accommodated. The pumping station can also be effectively relocated to the tailrace of HPP2 for any volume of abstraction.

A similar water requirement is attributed to the left bank (Gulu District) where in a few locations; the settlements accessed the river directly for domestic and life stock watering. The volumes of water from the two minor tributaries (Abera and Labon) which are not considered in the model (because of downstream location from the modeling point) more than adequately cover this requirement. 5.4.2 Future water use There are no major industrial activities or establishments planned within the stretch of the river where the project is located. The project will be the only major user of water by abstraction. By nature, however, hydropower generation does not deplete water but rather returns exactly the same amount of water taken back to the river just a short distance downstream of the abstraction point. Due consideration for the aquatic life and ecosystem in the stretch affected by diversion has been given by providing adequate environmental/amenity flow.

According to the Irrigation Master plan for Uganda 2010-2035, no significant scheme is operational in the Achwa basin although some studies have identified a number of schemes such as Aringa/Agoro and Orom for future development. These proposals lie outside the proposed Achwa River Hydro Power Project 1 (HPP1). Under the Consultancy Services for Identification of Multipurpose water Resource Management Development Projects, in Achwa Basin (Uganda /Southern Sudan) under the Nile Basin, a number of Projects have been identified with multipurpose water usage which, chiefly, combines hydropower generation with water storage and thus promotion of dry season irrigation. Most of these projects are however outside the boundaries of the present HPP1 Project which proposes to build a run-of-river project with no serious restraint on the natural flow of water. Instead, the HPP1 Project could improve water usage by providing pumped water to other areas that might want to employ irrigation in future.

5.4.3 Onsite Baseline conditions

Vegetation and Land cover The vegetation cover within 500m buffer zone of the river centerline is dominantly woodland with grasses towards the river banks. Within the river cross-sectional profiles the stones indicated in photos below form a large part of the floodplain. It was observed during field reconnaissance that some vegetation was cleared and burnt by the communities in some part at proposed intake. There was evidence of scouring and developing sheet and rill erosions towards the river.

Rocks within the river flood plain Woodland and grass cover near the proposed intake

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 102

Evidence of erosion into the river Gulleys near the proposed intake

Figure 5-12: Signs of erosion into the river at the proposed intake points

Upstream of proposed intake and weir location Downstream of proposed intake and weir for Option 1 location for Option 1

Upstream of proposed intake and weir location Downstream of proposed intake and weir for Option 2 location for Option 2

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 103

Upstream of proposed intake and weir location Dwonstream of proposed intake and weir for Option 3 location for Option 3 Figure 5-13: The current site status at the proposed intake points

5.5 Operational Plan The operating Plan of the plant will be in accordance with the PPA requirements whose key factors are “Target Availability, Daily Declarations, and Tested Capacity etc. However for the periods of time when discharges will be less than 7.75m3/s, please see the document “Water usage during the dry season” which describes the mode of operation. Client intends to shut down the plant for maintenance for duration of two months in a year; the company has considered an environmental flow value of 1.5 m3/sec as being feasible and safe for HPP2.

5.6 Hydrological relationship between HPP1 and HPP2 For HPP1 is chosen Option 3 (the weir – flap gates – is relocated 1, 3 km downstream in respect to the preliminary design), the tail race for HPP1 discharge into river at point that is just 200m upstream of the proposed intake point for HPP2. HPP2 is 5.6 km downstream of HPP1 on the Achwa River. There are no significant tributaries along this stretch only seasonal rivulet that have no significant discharge contribution to the Achwa River at this point.

The hydrology of both HPP1 and HPP2 are influenced by the same and similar parameters/conditions (geology, temperature, rainfall, humidity, soils, vegetation cover etc.). Apart from the slight increase in the catchment area for HPP2 (owing to the 6 km stretch between the two plants), the catchment basin for the two power plants is the same and therefore the discharge for Achwa at HPP1 is considered to be the same as the discharge at HPP2. The contributions of the rivulets are insignificant for power generation but could improve the amenity/environmental flows along the 6 km stretch.

The operation of HPP2 can in some way depend on the operation of HPP1. As in all cascaded projects, the operating regime of the upstream plant affects the operational regime of the downstream plant since the water requirements of the downstream plant is supplied by the upstream plant.

In case of the Achwa HPP1 and HPP2, it takes approximately 40-60 minutes for the water from HPP1 to reach HPP2 and although there is no lag in operation due to the existence of the intake dam pond, any malfunction at HPP1 could affect the operation of HPP2. With this in mind, the design of the Forebay of HPP1 includes the provision of gated spillways that will discharge

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 104 directly into the intake of HPP2 (without passing through HPP1 turbines) in case of failure of HPP1plant. At the same time the Tail water of HPP1 can be discharged directly back into river Achwa without going to the Channel/canal of HPP2 in case of plant failure at HPP2. The operational Management of the two plants is simplified as both power plants have the same owner/operator who will establish an internal operational protocol for the two plants.

5.7 Environmental flow Environmental flow sustained in stream to ensure the ecological integrity of the natural environment, with particular reference to the protection of aquatic life. Keeping with standard guidelines, it is proposed that the environmental flow should be equivalent to a flow range that exceeds 90% of the annual flow which according to the flow duration curve above, however the annual flow duration curve reveals values close 0 for 90% exceedance. Client intends to shut down the plant for maintenance for duration of two months in a year; the company has considered an environmental flow value of 1.5 m3/sec as being feasible and safe for HPP2. This does not mean that water flow in this section of River Achwa will maintain permanently a flow rate of 1.5 m3/sec.

5.8 Noise levels The purpose of monitoring noise levels within the Project area is to ensure maintenance of a healthy environment for nearby communities, the tranquility of their surroundings and their psychological well-being by regulating noise levels. Noise in the Project site will come from various sources including from construction sites, rock blasting, moving vehicles and power engines. No noise levels were assessed during the ESIA update field exercise. However, no new features have come up in place at the proposed intake points and thus the baseline noise levels presented during the previous ESIA still suffice (refer to Table 5-10 below). On the other hand, the noise levels at the proposed tailrace end have been influenced by the ongoing activities at the intake of HPP2. The levels are thus sporadic and dependent on the action of machinery.

Table 5-10: Baseline noise levels at the major project sites

Point of measurement Noise level dB(A) GPS Coordinates Min Max Leq Achwa Old Bridge 48.0 60.0 53.6 36N 0453435 0326970 HPP1 intake 43 52.5 46.9 36N 044629 0345826 HPP1 Outlet 55.6 58.2 55.4 36N 0446153 0347089 Proposed Uganda Standard for -- -- 55.0 - a construction site

Table 5-10 above shows that noise levels measured as Leq at various locations were generally low and within the set limits for noise in the general environment according to the National Environment (Noise Standards and Control Regulations 2003), Regulation 6(1) Maximum Permissible Noise Levels for the General Environment. Much of the noise above was coming from the resultant wind from plants as well as from flow of the River downstream.

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 105 It is anticipated that the ambient noise levels will eventually increase during construction due to blasting of rocks at the construction site, moving vehicles and power engines but the noise will reduce tremendously as one moves away from the source points. Therefore, the resultant noise impact will mainly affect the workers at source and the public along access roads by automobiles. It may also scare away wildlife and birds from the area. These resultant effects have been felt during construction of HPP2.

Figure 5-14: HPP2 intake under construction a few metres from HPP1 tailrace site

5.9 Ambient Air Quality Much part of the section covering HPP1 depicts natural ambient conditions since it retains its natural state with primary vegetation. These conditions will be altered with the construction activities involving blasting and machinery movements that will generate fugitive dust and automobile emissions. Overall, there will be potential adverse impacts on ambient air quality during construction phase of the project from the following sources:  Fugitive dust emissions due to removal of vegetation, excavation of land, access road construction, hot mix plants and concrete mixers operation, excavation of canal etc.;  Air emissions from vehicles engaged for construction purposes; and  Occupational dust in the working areas. During operation phase, the potential emissions will be from plying of a few Project vehicles and from diesel generators at the power house. The dust will affect mainly the workers at the construction site as local communities reside far away from these areas and also the natural vegetation. Operations to create roads and canal will affect ambient air quality (see Figure 5-15 below).

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 106 Created road and canal for HPP2 (such conditions will affect ambient air quality)

Figure 5-15: Source of fugitive dust (HPP2 works)

5.10 Soil composition No new soil sampling was done during the exercise. The conditions at the points previously sampled (during the ESIA exercise) at proposed intake and tail race points are still the same. Therefore, the soil conditions are still the same. Following the analysis of the previous soils by National Water and Sewerage Corporation Central Laboratory in Bugolobi using standard methods for soil pH (soil acidity/alkalinity), electrical conductivity, Total Dissolved solids, hardness, sulphates, sulphites, nitrites, nitrates, total phosphorus, total nitrogen, phosphate, available bases (Ca, and Mg), chlorides, fluorides, iron and chemical oxygen demand (COD), the results of the analysis of the soil samples for HPP1 were as presented in Table 5-11 below.

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 107 Table 5-11: The chemical composition of soils taken from HPP1 intake and HPP1 outlet

Parameters Units HPP 1 Intake HPP 1 Outlet 36N 0441522 36N 0446136 0344629 0345158 WS Sample Nr -- K2732/13/C K2733/13/C& pH -- 6.93 7.68 Electrical Conductivity uS/cm 68 71 Total Dissolved Solids mg/Kg 34 35

Hardness: total as CaCO3 mg/Kg 45 110 Calcium Hardness mg/Kg 35 50 2 Sulphate: SO4 ' mg/Kg 3 5 Sulphite: S2" mg/Kg 0.02 0.04 Nitrite - N mg/Kg 0.104 0.107 Nitrate - N mg/Kg 0.196 0.208 Total Phosphorus (TP) mg/Kg 0.82 1.02 Total Nitrogen (TP) mg/Kg 1.21 1.44 Phosphate mg/Kg 0.32 0.41 Calcium: Ca2+ mg/Kg 14.0 20.0 Magnesium: Mg2+ mg/Kg 2.4 14.4 Chloride: CF mg/Kg 0.60 0.80 Fluoride: F" mg/Kg 0.00 0.00 Iron: total mg/Kg 2.56 4.15 COD mg/Kg 37.2 41.5 -- Darkish loamy moist soil. Darkish/Blackish loamy moist soil. Appearance & Soil Texture Humic with vegetation Highly humic with shrub roots roots (shrub roots) Moisture Content % 78 85 Particulate Size mm O.1-10 <0.1- 10

Results from Table 5-11 above indicate that there were significant differences in soil chemical composition between HPP1 intake and HPP1 tailrace. All chemical components were higher at the outlet than at the intake. The chemical oxygen demand was moderate at both points.

The soil samples portrayed an environment with satisfactory quality indicating minimum pollution. Moderate nutrient levels alongside soil texture indicate a fertile environment. While the texture indicates a poor soil for civil construction works, this was due to the shallow depth from which the soils were sampled.

5.11 Water quality To establish the environment quality of River Aswa at the time of ESIA update, in-situ measurements as well as samples of water were obtained. In addition, samples were collected for laboratory analysis for plankton and macro invertebrates. Findings Both In-situ measurements and laboratory analysis show that water pH at all sites was basic (pH 7.09-8.02) within the acceptable limits (6.5-9.0) to support aquatic life (fish). Dissolved oxygen was moderate (6.02-6.08mg/l) well above the minimum (3mg/l) to cause stress to fish. This could

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 108 be due to high temperatures (29.4-29.8). Light penetration into the water column is very high (0.71-0.98) indicating low turbidity (Table 5-12) in agreement with laboratory analysis results Table 5.13.

Results of laboratory analyses show that water samples from all sites studied meet the national standards for potable natural water.

Table 5-12: In-situ Water quality measurement taken during the survey Sites Parameters pH Temp. DO EC Transparency ( oC) (mg/l) (uS/cm) (m) Upstream at GPS coordinates: 7.09 29.8 6.02 233 0.98 (441463;344999) Downstream at GPS Coordinates: 7.81 29.4 6.08 232 0.71 (445813;345957)

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 109 Table 5-13: Summary of Laboratory water quality analysis results

(mg (CaCO3) Hardness Total Site pH EC TDS (mg/L) NTU) Turbidity Alkalinity Total Hardness Calcium Ca Mg TP (mg/L) TN (mg/L) Sulphides (mg/L) Sulphates (mg/L) Nitrate (mg/L) Nitrite (mg/L) O

-

Phosphate

2+

/L)

2+

(uS/cm)

(mg/L)

(mg/L)

-

-

N

N

Natural water 5.5- 2500 1500 25 600 N/S N/S 150 100 N/S N/S N/S 400 N/S N/S 100 standards 9.5 Upstream 7.98 239 138 0 1.24 0.01 0.011 0.37 GPS coordinates: (441463;344999) 116 231 45 18.0 17.2 0.98 3.0 0.001 Downstream 8.02 237 142 2 1.46 0.03 0.056 0.42 GPS Coordinates: 114 239 70 28.0 10.7 1.10 4 0.007 (445813;345957)

6. THE BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT

New studies have only been done on Aquatic Ecosystem. New studies on the other aspects of biological environment including Terrestrial vegetation, Fauna and Birds were not conducted. This is because there has been no alteration on the biological environment in the project area to affect most of these aspects. Therefore, the information presented in this section is as was captured in the specialized studies conducted during the first ESIA exercise in July 2013 at the HPP1 project site and its environs.

6.1 Terrestrial Vegetation The Project area lies in what can be broadly described as the East Sudanian Savannah. This hot, dry, wooded savannah (with temperatures ranging from 18-21C in the cold season to 30-33C in the hottest months) is composed mainly of Combretum and Terminalia shrub and tree species such as Shea trees, wooded acacias and tall elephant grass that has been adversely affected in most parts by agricultural activities, fire and clearance of trees for timber and charcoal.

6.1.1 The Direct Impact Zone The DIZ of this project is the area within which most on-site and near site activities would occur. At this stage the main components of the DIZ could include the following areas:

The DIZ is largely restricted to the east bank of Achwa River (in Pader District). The key DIZ areas identified are surrounding the following project components: a stretch of Achwa River from the intake of HPP1 through the channel to the forebay down the penstocks to the powerhouse up to the tailrace into Achwa River again (a distance of some 6 km) which will carry reduced river flow. It will also include the switchyard area, the access roads, the outlet (tailrace) area and sites of rock disposal (dump site). Most of the DIZ will be affected only during project construction as there is no reservoir in the Rubber dam arrangement. During project operation, the DIZ will be mostly confined to the access roads and the stretches of River experiencing reduced river flow

On the west bank (Gulu District side), it is anticipated that no land will be needed as construction of the mobile rubber dam will done during the dry season when river flow will be minimal. Also the local communities on this side of the bank live at least 3 km away from the river hence having minimal impact on the river.

6.1.2 The Indirect Impact Zone The Indirect Impact Zone (INDIZ) refers mainly to areas affected through human activities indirectly linked to the Project. Vegetation in Achwa Ranch surrounding the project components will constitute the INDIZ. No local communities are involved as the nearest settlements are almost 6 km away from the Project site.

6.1.3 Materials and methods for vegetation study A combination of field data collection, literature review and interviews was undertaken to derive information regarding the plant ecology of the area.

Specifically field site observation was made and data related to the ecology and plant species recorded. The data recording included plant species distribution (to identify common or key species). Sample materials, pressed in a plant press, photographs and video recording were used to augment the field data which were later used for species identification at the Natural Chemotherapeutics Research Institute in Wandegeya, Kampala. Reference literature materials namely the Flora of Tropical East Africa, Herbarium Voucher specimens, Monographs on specific species and Field Guide (illustrated drawings and photographs) of plant species were also used for species identification. The conservation status of the key species was cross referenced with the CITES appendices list and the IUCN red list for plants.

6.1.4 Vegetation Status The flora within Achwa River includes phytoplanktons that thrive in the river especially during the dry season when the volume of water is low and the river flow is slow. Visible within the river are also water weeds such as Pistia species, Algae colony and water grasses (Cyprus species). There are also climbers or twiner plants (such as the Curcubita species) that spread to the river banks.

There are also patches of riverine forests dominated by big trees such as Acacia spp. and Combretum spp. with Guinea grass (Panicum maximum) as the main understorey grass. Due to the thick vegetation surrounding the River banks and open grassland, there was not much evidence of soil erosion in the area.

A list of plant species encountered in HPP1 project area is presented in ANNEX 6. The following species are of conservation concern according to IUCN categorization: Shea nut trees which are being over-logged for charcoal; Borassus Palm trees which have restricted distribution in the area but are over-logged and Khaya trees (Mahogany) which are also illegally over- logged. These species need to be accorded special protection during Project construction.

Table 6.1 gives a list of species that were reported by local communities to have immediate uses also requiring special protection:

Table 6-1: Plant species in HPP1 that have immediate value/use

Plant species Reported immediate value/use Bamboo Local construction/buildings Borassus Palm Local construction/beehive making Cymbopogon grass Local construction/thatching Mahogany(Khaya) Medicinal, Cultural preservation “oput tree” Shea Commercial value, food value, medicinal value

Deforestation is likely to continue within the HPP1 area especially with respect to species in high demand such as Shea tree and Khaya.

The IDIZ of the HPP1 within Achwa Ranch has been abandoned for over twenty years due to the Lords Resistance Army (LRA) insurgency. Although the area was predominantly grassland, it has since been invaded by woody species such as Combretum spp. Evidence of tree cutting

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 112 especially for charcoal is rampant in the area. Although there are local byelaws which restrict charcoal burning from such a tree, the practice was still found to be widespread in the area. Construction materials, including roofing materials are also collected from the INDIZ. The main vegetation resources collected for roof thatching include Cymbopogon afronardus, Imperata cylindrica and Hyparrhenia rufa. Important poles for huts are from trees such as bamboos, palm trees and shrubs such as Albizia coriaria and Combretum molle. These trees are abundant in the vicinity. Bamboos are sold to far away places such as Gulu and even Kampala. Local people reported that various plants and roots were harvested for medicinal purposes such as Kigelia trees.

6.2 Fauna Animal studies included both large and small mammals; reptiles and amphibians. Large mammals include primates, ungulates and large carnivores while small mammals include terrestrial rodents, insectivores (e.g. shrews and moles). Large mammals are typical game species and might be of interest in the area from a hunting point of view. Small mammals can be indicators of habitat change. They are also important as a prey base or various animals and birds and significant components of terrestrial ecosystems.

6.2.1 The Direct Impact Zone The Direct Impact Zone for this study was considered to be the same as the DIZ for terrestrial vegetation. In addition, the affected river stretch where various animal species come to drink is of great importance.

6.2.2 Indirect Impact zone The Indirect Impact zone for this study was considered to be the areas surrounding the DIZ and the three affected villages. It is thought that an increased hunting pressure could affect an even greater area, the size of which will be highly dependent on the magnitude of the population influx and effectiveness of mitigation measures.

6.2.3 Materials and Methods used for studying wildlife Opportunistic observations and interviews with the local community were the key methods used to establish the presence of wildlife that were sighted or those that were not actually sighted. Observation of secondary indices such as faecal pellets and foot marks were also used.

6.2.4 Findings Within the limits of the time spent conducting the survey for this report, the variety of animals that were encountered were quite low. For large mammals, we encountered several monkeys. There was also evidence of edible rats (from the grass eaten) and squirrels. We were told that there could also be lions, elands, hyenas, antelopes and wild dogs in the area but there was no proof of this. Some of these animals seem to have been subjected to heavy hunting pressure due to lack of official protection.

For reptiles, shells of dead tortoises were also noted and reports of the presence of pythons, chameleons and other snakes were also given. As for amphibians, several species of frogs were seen near the River banks.

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 113 6.3 Birds Birds are sometimes regarded as indicators of the richness of biodiversity in a given area.

6.3.1 The Direct Impact Zone The Direct Impact Zone for this study was considered to be the same as the DIZ for terrestrial vegetation.

6.3.2 Indirect Impact Zone The Indirect Impact zone refers mainly to areas affected through human activities and is similar to that for terrestrial vegetation. The IDIZ is comprised of areas where terrestrial vegetation and the River will be affected and thereby the habitats of the birds. Bird life might also be affected by hunting activities in the vicinity of Project, a practice noted to be common in the area.

6.3.3 Materials and Methods On 3rd July 2013, inclusive, a total of one Timed Species Counts (TSCs) was conducted covering the main habitats. The TSC consist all the birds recorded within the habitat during that 1-hour walk, which aims to record as many species as possible within that time (Freeman et al, 2003). Species are listed in the order that they are heard or seen, and the time noted at ten-minute intervals. Then scores are allocated to each species according to those times, 6 for species recorded in the first ten minutes, down to 1 for those recorded in the last ten minutes.

Almost all identifications were made in the field, on the spot; in a few cases, the standard field guide, Stevenson & Fanshawe (2002) and the bird atlas (Carswell et al, 2005) were consulted, the latter indicating the likelihood of a species occurring in this area.

The TSC scores give an indication of relative abundance (Freeman et al, 2003, Nalwanga et al 2012) but other attributes are also relevant to the assessment of the importance of particular habitats to the various species. Thus, there are species that need trees, the most specialized of which are virtually confined to forest interiors (Bennun et al 1996). Other species are associated with wetlands or grasslands, habitats which are under threat in Uganda. Aerial feeders, such as swallows, are also of conservation concern, since they depend upon small flying insects, and there is evidence of decline in the numbers of these birds.

In addition to the categories just outlined, some species are known to be rare and/or declining, and are ‘red-listed’. There is a global list for such species, but none of these was recorded during this survey. However, some regionally-listed species were recorded; these are categorized in the same way as those of global concern, and are listed by Bennun and Njoroge (1996), Byaruhanga et al, (2001) and the IUCN updates these lists every year.

Habitat description was categorized as follows:

A Afrotropical migrant – a species migrating within Africa P Palearctic migrant - species which breed in Europe or Asia p Species with at least some palearctic populations FF Forest specialist – species typical of forest interiors G Grassland species

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 114 F Forest generalist – less specialized, also occur in small patches of forest f Forest visitor W Waterbird, specialist – normally restricted to wetlands or open waters w Waterbird, no-specialist – often found near water 6.3.4 Findings A total of 25 species were recorded, about 2.5% of Uganda’s total, which is a good number for the time spent in the project area; of these, 4 were ‘opportunistic’ records, outside the two TSCs. No species was recorded from every TSC, but the Common Bulbul was recorded in the two hour survey. Many species were recorded only once or twice, as is typical of such surveys.

Common species observed in the study area included the Lizard Buzzard (Kaupifalco monogrammicus), Red-eyed Dove (Streptopelia semitorquata), Eastern Grey Plantain Eater (Crinifer zonurus), Alpine Swift (Tachymarptis melba) and Angola Swallow (Hirundo angolensis). Surprisingly, there were only eight forest visitors (f) species (out of 25 for Uganda), and relatively few forest generalists (F-species, Annex 11). Although birds of prey, species recorded in this group can be considered as indicators of ecosystem health, since they are top predators of rodents or reptiles. One species was recorded that is Near-threatened regionally i.e. the Brown Snake Eagle (Circaetus cinereus).

6.4 Aquatic Ecosystem

6.4.1 Direct Impact Zone For the aquatic ecology, the Direct Impact Zone (DIZ) includes the area that would directly be touched by the changes and developments that will be made within the course of implementation of HPP1 activities. This will include the River area from the intake up to the output (tailrace) area at the end i.e. the entire length of the diversion that will receive the reduced flow of 10% of the water when the 90% is diverted for power generation.

Figure 6-1: The intake point at HPP1 on Achwa River - Pader district

The area at the intake where the dam will be established to raise sufficient water to meet the requirements of the diversion will be flooded with relatively slow-moving water at continuous intake as opposed to the current fast flowing river system. The type of fauna and flora currently

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 115 inhabiting the section are those adapted to fast flowing water and which may not be very adaptable to slow moving high volumes after dam construction.

6.4.2 Indirect Impact Zone (INDIZ) The INDIZ is the area outside the immediate environ of the River. It is comprised mainly of the upper slopes of Achwa Ranch which is presently not being used for any purpose. These will be areas where species of plants and animals that are not directly dependent on the aquatic environment are found. These include many birds of prey that are dependent on aquatic fauna of the river or mammals that use the river as a source of drinking water or some distant communities who use the river for fishing and recreation.

6.4.3 Materials and Methods The study on physical and chemical parameters as well as the diversity, distribution and abundance of aquatic flora and fauna was confined to two transects in the Project area, the intake area (transect 1) and the outlet area downstream (transect 2). Samples were fixed with ethyl alcohol and Lugol’s iodine solution to avoid any further changes that could occur while on the way to the laboratory.

6.4.4 Macrophytes The project area has limited diversity of aquatic macrophytes dominated by Cyperus esculentus, which occurred in-stream and on shore, while sesbania sp was restricted to on shore, especially at the intake site (Figure 6-2). The fringes of both the intake and outlet points are covered entirely by terrestrial vegetation that has limited attachment to the river.

Cyperus esculentus sesbania sp Figure 6-2: Macrophytes recorded within the project area

6.4.5 Aquatic macro-invertebrates Aquatic macro-invertebrates are organisms that live in the water (aquatic), part of their lifecycle or all their life, they include insects, worms, snails, mollusks, and crustaceans. Aquatic macro- invertebrates are typically found living under rocks or logs or living in congregated leaf packs. Aquatic macro-invertebrates are an integral part of the food chain in aquatic environments and they are sensitive to changes in the environment though degrees of sensitivity differ among various groups. They are good bio indicators since many of them are sensitive to pollution and

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 116 have relatively long life span, thus integrate short term and long term effects of environmental stressors (Agouridis et al., 2014).

Macro-invertebrates recorded in the project area included families from two main taxa; odonata (dragon flies) and mollusks (snails and mussels) (Table 6-2). The dragon flies included aeshnidae, gomphidae and libellulidae families. Snails and mussels included planorbidae, sphaeriidae and thiaridae. These families prefer lotic (running water) environments with moderate oxygen, can move and tolerate conditions of low moving water and are moderately tolerant to organic pollution (Mandaville, 2002).

Table 6-2: Diversity of Macro-invertebrates Recorded in the Project Area

Order Family Odonata Libellulidae Gomphidae Aeshnidae Mollusks Sphaeriidae Planorbidae Thiaridae

6.4.6 Plankton community The plankton community comprises of the phytoplankton (micro-plants) and zooplankton (micro-animals). They live in the water column and are incapable of swimming and include the animals, protists, algae and bacteria. They provide a crucial source of food to many large aquatic organisms including fish. When they die they sink to the bottom and decay hence increasing nutrient load to the water body. Phytoplankton are very important to the food webs of aquatic ecosystems and to the whole planet. They are at the base of the aquatic food chain; primary producers. Many small grazing animals including fish eat them, and then bigger fish eat the little animals, etc. The food chain continues and at some point in time we (people) come into it when we eat the fish. Zooplankton communities constitute the 2nd and 3rd trophic levels of the aquatic food wed, very vital link between producers and large organisms, and control populations of phytoplankton. They include organisms such as tiny Crustacea and rotifera.

Plankton community serves as a wonderful tool for measuring water quality (Suthers and Rissik, 2009). Phytoplankton and zooplankton are good indicators of changes in nutrient pollution because they respond quickly to changes in nutrient input, and allow for early detection of invasive species to the lake. Further, they can be sampled extensively in many locations with relative ease (Therriault et al. 2002). Water pollution causes high levels of nutrient input to the lake which created an overabundance of certain phytoplankton (Davis 1964) and zooplankton (Bradshaw 1964). Particular species that are intolerant to polluted conditions show a significant decrease (Kane et al. 2004). Therefore, this indicator is based on the abundance and different kinds of phytoplankton and zooplankton present which indicate the productivity level of the water body.

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 117 6.4.7 Phytoplankton Phytoplankton diversity and abundance recorded within the project area are shown in Table 6-3. A total nine genera of phytoplankton were recorded from sites within the project area. The downstream site (outlet) recorded more abundance of most genera. This could be attributed to impoundment due to construction works for HPP 2.

Table 6-3: Diversity and Abundance of Phytoplankton Recorded in the Project Area Taxa Sites Upstream Downstream Microcystis 5 13 Oscillatoria 2 7 Schizomeris 2 5 Spirogyra 1 3 Draparnildia 2 7 Pediastrum 3 6 Synedra 7 3 Navicula 3 3 Diatoma 2 0 6.4.8 Zooplankton The zooplankton diversity and abundance recorded within the project area are shown in Table 6-4. A total three genera of zooplankton were record from sites within the project area. Error! Reference source not found. Table 6-4: Diversity and Abundance of Zooplankton Recorded in the Project Area Taxa Sites Upstream Downstream Branchionus 3 8 Polyarthra 2 4 Diaphanasoma 0 3

6.4.9 Fish fauna Experimental survey effort of 12 hours yielded a total of seven species belonging to four families (Table 6-5). Interaction with local fishers and review of earlier ESIA report revealed that many more species of fish occur in this section of River Achwa including; Alestes baremoze, Bagriids, Oreochromis niloticus, moryriids, Synodontis schall, Clariids and Polypterus senegalus.

All the recorded fish species are not threatened and therefore do not require special conservation consideration. Though generally their medium and habitat (water) should be preserved.

Table 6-5: Fish Species, their Families and Conservation Status Family Fish Species Conservation Status Cyprinidae Brycinus macrolepidotus Not threatened Labeobarbus altinalis Not threatened

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 118 Family Fish Species Conservation Status Labeo horie Not threatened Barilius sp Not threatened Cichlidae Sarotherodon. Galilaeus Not threatened Latidea Lates niloticus Not threatened Alestidae Hydrocynus vittatus Not threatened Total 7

Below (Figure 6-3Error! Reference source not found.) are pictures of some fish species and their ecology that were caught in Achwa River during the ESIA update.

Nile perch (Lates niloticus): This species migrates. It prefers sandy bottoms but also found in rocky to muddy bottoms. Young ones are found in places with vegetation in calm waters while adults inhabit deep waters. Adults are voracious predators which predominantly feed on Tilapia spp and Alestes spp., while juveniles feed on larger crustaceans, insects and plankton. It probably spawns in shallow sheltered areas.

Sarotherodon galilaeus (Mango tilapia): Adults prefer open waters but juveniles and breeding adults are found inshore. Often associated with beds of submerged vegetation, feed

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 119 on algae and fine organic debris.

Hydrocynus vittatus: Prefers warm, well-oxygenated water, feeds on whatever prey is most abundant.

Brycinus macrolepidotus is potamodromous species, found more commonly in rivers than in lakes. It feeds on insects, crustaceans, small fish, vegetation and debris (Bailey 1994). It is a pelagic, potamodromous species. Spawning sites and season unknown.

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 120

Labeobarbus altianalis: inhabits inshore waters while young ones occur in shoals. Migrates upstream to spawn, probably in swift, rocky upper reaches of rivers. Feeds on gastropod molluscs, insects, plants, fishes and crustacean. Figure 6-3: Fish species caught within the project area and their ecology

The main food items for the fish come from the riverine habitat including plankton, macro invertebrates (insect nymphs), molluscs, high plant material and detritus.

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 121 7. THE HUMAN ENVIRONMENT

7.1 Introduction This section presents the socio-economic assessment, and current project socio-economic baseline situation formed through a combination of primary survey data, secondary data and stakeholder consultation. Knowledge of existing population, infrastructure (such as roads), available healthcare services and prevalent diseases, economic activity and literacy levels of the project area is essential to understanding project affected communities, potential benefits to recipient communities and likely challenges during project implementation.

Baseline information was derived from a review of available secondary information including the Pader District Development Plan, 2015/16– 2019/2020 and on field investigations conducted from the 11th March to 13th March 2017.

7.2 Direct Impact zone Within the project area, the HPP I will directly affect Achwa Government Ranch, located in Angarara Sub-county. This ranch is approximately 12 km from the nearest settlement zones and is to a large extent savannah woodland. There are pockets of illegal encroachers in the Ranch who have established their homes there. These homes are found about 4-8 km away from HPP1 area.

Figure 7-1: Recent illegal encroachment in Achwa Ranch

7.3 Indirect Impact Zone A total of 2 Parishes under Angagura sub-county in Pader district are likely to be indirectly affected by the HPP1. These Parishes are Lubala and Burlobo respectively. They are situated almost 14 km away from the Project site.

7.4 Key Findings

7.4.1 Demographics According to the 2014 population census, Pader district had a total population of 178,004 people, of which 86,838 (48.8 percent) were male and female were 91,166 (51.2 percent) (Table 7-1).

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 122 The population was projected to be 183,500 people in 2016. The population compared in 2002 population census has increased from 142,320 people with 70,610 were males and females at 71,710.

Over 90% of the population in Pader lives in the rural area (UBOS, 2014) of which 164,602 people live in rural areas and 13,402 live in urban areas. According to 2014 National Census, the population of Angagura Sub-county was at 8,973 with 4,447 males and 4,526 females. It was not possible to estimate the population of the key Parishes of Lubala and Burlobo be affected indirectly by the project but general observation showed that the population density in the project area is still relatively low as communities return from IDP camps.

Table 7-1: Demographic statistics as of 2014 Sub-County Land Area No. of Males Females Total Population (sq.km) Households Density Acholi Bur 125.4 2,625 6,794 7,244 14,038 112 Angagura 401.6 1,728 4,447 4,526 8,973 22 Atanga 285.3 2,822 7,470 7995 15465 54 Awere 321.1 3,781 9,368 10,185 19,553 61 Laguti 448.1 2,531 6614 6890 13,504 30 Lapul 345.2 3,610 8,823 9435 18258 53 Latanya 272.2 2,856 7,307 7,849 15156 56 Ogom 235.7 1,520 4,236 4315 8551 36 Pader 203 2,022 4,900 4,594 9,494 47 Pader Town 64.7 2,705 6,433 6,949 13,382 217 Council Pajule 318.9 4,177 11084 11629 22,713 71 Puranga 305.2 3,846 9159 9,758 18,917 62 Grand Totals 3,326.4 34,223 86,635 91,369 178,004 54 Source UBOS, 2014

It is difficult to estimate the rate of population growth in the project area but it is likely to be relatively high considering that Pader District as a whole as an annual population growth rate of 5.0% compared to the national population growth rate of 3.2%. Just like at the national level, the high population growth rate constrains the District’s capacity to deliver services. It also puts pressure on the available social services and natural resources. In the long run, this negatively affects the productivity of the population and increases the poverty levels.

7.4.2 Ethnic groups Ethnicity is the state of belonging to a social group with common culture, tradition and language. Ugandans are classified by ethnic groups as listed in the Constitution of the Republic of Uganda. The majority of the population within the project area and especially in Angagura Sub-county are Acholi and a few Langi. According to the Sub-County leaders, parish Chiefs and community member, Acholi was the main ethnic tribe within the project araea although some tribes such as Baganda, Bagisu, had migrated due to development of the Achwa HPP 2 under construction as well as from the construction of the road which has brought in people

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 123 from different areas. This influx of people could change the ethnic composition of the region, at least for the duration of the construction period.

7.4.3 Settlement patterns From the field studies and observation within the project site, it was observed that there were no human settlements that existed very close to the project area. There were a few settlements within the ranch although these were observed at a stretch of some 6-10 km from HPP1. There were only settlements that belonged to the security guards which were approximately 20 meters from the camp site for HPP2.

Figure 7-2: Some of the settlements within the Achwa Ranch

7.4.4 Gender relations Gender differences and inequalities in the Acholi Sub-region are still prevalent and have resulted in great inequality between men and women with respect to access to education, healthcare, water and sanitation and many other resources at all levels. From time immemorial men are decision makers, and opportunities for education are given to boys. The girls are for marriage.

From the Focus Group Discussion (FGD) with the women within Burlobo parish, they revealed that men were the decision makers in all homes. The cultural and religious attitudes about gender roles and relationships has continued to deter most women in rural areas from participating actively in decision-making and interaction with men.

7.4.5 Occupation

a) Agricultural production Subsistence farming is the most widely practiced form of economic activity within the project area in Angagura Sub-County and especially in Burlobo village. It is mainly done to meet the household food demand and sell off some to earn a living. Like other rural settings, both men and women participate in cultivation, but the role of women is much greater than that of men, especially in weeding, harvesting, processing and storage. Typically grown crops in the project area include; maize, Simsim, beans, and sorghum. Other crops grown include; millet, cassava, groundnuts, sweet potatoes, soya beans, and potatoes.

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 124 From the interaction with the community members of Angagura Sub-County as well as Parish leaders, they revealed that income from agricultural produce is used for procurement of domestic requirements such as sugar, salt, and soap. More to this the income earned helps to finance education for their children as well as access to healthcare services.

b) Petty trade Businesses in Pader and specifically Angagura sub-county are generally small units that deal in largely retail business. Common among the goods sold are household items such as salt, sugar soap and paraffin among others. Furthermore construction of HPP2 has created a market for local produce that comes from their farmland in Angagura sub-county in pader district and from this the sub-county receives local service tax.

From the field surveys, it was observed that petty trade is an occupation carried out by some people in Angagura Sub-County especially along the road that leads the Achwa HPP1. Petty trade is mainly carried out by women who sell most of the goods at the road side. The women reported selling mainly fish, charcoal, tomatoes, onions and paraffin.

Figure 7-3: Some of the economic activities along the road leading to the proposed site

c) Livestock According to the District development plan chicken are the most reared type of animal in Pader District. Consistent with the above report, field observations in Angagura project area reveal that chicken was the most reared type of livestock among the community. From the FGD with women it was reported that chickens are the main domestic poultry, and are kept principally for income and food however, these have been affected by the poultry disease which have wiped them out. Also observed were cattle and goats that were within the government ranch.

Table 7-2: Livestock by type by Sub-county Sub county Cattle Goats Sheep Pigs Chickens Ducks Guinea fowls Atanga 1,093 2,082 213 1,298 4,469 894 19 Laguti 1,185 1,990 112 774 4,118 824 12 Acholibur 913 1,300 129 878 6,931 1,386 12 Lapul 2,788 1,567 157 2,051 5,412 1,082 20

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 125 Pajule 3,261 1,352 106 1,523 6,297 1,260 32 Pader 3,025 5,006 380 1,855 7,173 1,435 21 Puranga 4,282 4,650 336 1,922 8,527 1,705 17 Awere 3,233 4,390 325 2,138 6,680 1,336 32 PaderT.Council 496 635 34 293 1,310 262 27 Ogom 1,682 3,188 97 597 1,992 3,984 19 Latanya 1,562 1,893 167 1,012 2,800 560 24 Angagura 1,853 2,093 102 830 3,012 602 9 Total 25,373 30,146 2,158 15,171 58,721 15,330 244 Source: District Development Plan 2015-2019

Figure 7-4: Grazing observed within the Ranch

d) Fishing According to the District Development Plan, fishing is a potential economic activity in Pader district given the high coverage of wetlands coverage both (permanent and seasonal). There are close to 140 fish ponds in the district and most of them were abandoned during the civil unrest period from 2001 to early 2007. Most farmers have returned to their homes from the camps and have embarked on rehabilitation of their ponds and some have constructed new ones.

The main commercial fish species farmed in the district are Tilapia niloticus and Clarius gariepinus, both spp grow to about 300gm and 1000gm within a period of 8-10 months under polyculture farming practices. Additionally, from field observations and interaction with Sub County leaders and community members it was revealed that fishing was also carried out from River Achwa although at a minimal rate but that activity has been impeded by the ongoing construction at HPP 2. In addition, field observation showed evidence of some fish smoking within the Ranch by the community members.

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 126

Evidence of drying fish Nile perch species caught during field survey Figure 7-5: Evidence of fishing in River Achwa

c) Transportation (“bodaboda”) Motor bike (“Bodaboda”) transportation was also identified as an occupation and livelihood in the project affected area especially for the men and youth. This means of transport is the most highly utilized for ferrying agricultural produce to market centres, and people to health centres. It is important to note that most of these “bodabodas” are procured after agriculture produce has been sold off.

7.4.6 Land Tenure and Land holding Pader district has 3 major land tenure systems. The predominant system in the district is customary land tenure system. As a tradition land is normally obtained through inheritance from father to son and controlled by the household and elders of a given community. However, some individuals especially from urban centers and institutions obtain land through leasehold, which was formally under the management of the town council, but now directly under the District Land Board. Another type of tenure system in the district is free hold tenure. The district administration, development partners and religious institution in the district are established on freehold land. The land where the proposed Achwa HHP1 will be constructed is a Ranch owned by the government.

Table 7-3: Land Use in Pader District Total Land area 12,827.6 km Land under cultivation Forest and woodland 80% of total land Forest and woodland 860 sq.km Wetland 37.2 sq.km Food production 39,569.3 MT MT Human settlement pattern Nucleated % of land under public utilities 10% % of land disputes resolved 16 No of people/ Households with land Titles 3 Households with leasehold certificates 3 Source: District planning unit, 2009

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 127 7.4.7 Water sources and uses of the River Achwa The District has a number of urban growth centres most of which do not have safe and clean water supply systems. Due to inadequate water supply, the district risks sanitation related outbreaks including; hygiene and sanitation issues and waterborne diseases. The motorised water system put up by development partners should be assessed and maintenance mechanisms put in place where they exist. The population in urban growth centres is high and calls for a sound and reliable water source. Already, some of these areas are benefiting from the piped water system through interventions by our partners.

Table 7-4: Distribution of water sources and use in Pader district Sub-County Functional water Non Functional People Total Popn. Water Water points water points served population Expected coverage coverage Community owned Community in 2017 as of owned func. BH BH SW PS BH SW PS Acholibur 78 02 00 03 00 00 6,750 14,212 15,668 47% 88% Angagura 39 00 00 01 00 00 6,000 9,182 10,123 65% 96% Atanga 39 01 00 06 01 00 8,850 17,829 19,656 50% 61% Laguti 45 02 00 01 00 00 7,200 13,383 14,754 47% 81% Lapul 73 02 00 02 02 00 14,550 19,225 21,195 76% 91% Latanya 52 02 00 02 01 00 9,750 15,043 16,584 65% 88% Pajule 62 06 01 10 00 00 18,000 22,539 24,849 80% 100% Awere 72 06 04 02 00 00 13,050 19,265 21,239 68% 71% Ogom 45 01 00 00 00 00 15,600 10,391 11,456 100% 100% Pader 26 00 00 00 00 00 10,650 14,150 15,600 75% 100% Puranga 49 05 05 01 02 00 15,900 18,499 20,395 86% 100% Pader TC 37 06 00 02 00 00 13,350 14,080 15,523 95% 100% District 617 33 10 30 6 0 139,650 184,640 207,047 74% 92.7% Total Source: District Development Plan 2015-2019

Accessibility to safe water in the project area is very low. According to the discussion with the local community and leader, it was indicated that the majority of the population depends on boreholes and the River Achwa. The villages have some boreholes that provide access to clean water. However, these boreholes are few in number and are also far from some homes making it difficult to access and thus promoting consumption of unsafe water from the river.

The main uses of this river are fishing, water for domestic consumption and for livestock after grazing.

7.4.8 Energy use Biomass is used as a source of energy in most of the households. Over 90% of the district population uses firewood and charcoal as the main source of energy for cooking and kerosene for lighting

7.4.9 Health care Health has a unique classification of health centres, from Health Centre I (HC I) to Heath Center IV (HC IV), with HC I being the lowest level. Higher –level health facilities tend to serve larger

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 128 populations and are more autonomous. Typically HC IIIs are constructed at sub-county levels and HC IV at county level.

In Pader district, the health sector is mandated to deliver effective health services to the people The district has a total of 27 health units with 1 Army Field Hospital, 1 Health Centre IV, 08 Health Centre IIIs and 17 Health Centre IIs. According to the DDP for Pader District, the healthcare system is close to broken and is still overwhelmed by the consequences (morbidity and mortality) of low nutritional levels, unsafe drinking water, malaria and other preventable (immunisable) and curable diseases found in most tropical Africa and above acute shortage human resource for health.

Consistent with the above, the focus group discussions in Angagura sub-county also revealed that health facilities are generally poor in the project area where there is still a high disease prevalence. Hepatitis B, HIV/AIDS, Malaria and respiratory infections were among the diseases reported to be affecting the community. In addition, flue, cough, nodding disease and diarrhea were also reported to be the most common diseases amongst the children.

Within the project area, there exists two Health Centres (Achwa Ranch HC II and Angarura HC II) which is used by majority of the local population. According to the community members, there is inadequate supply of medicines, equipment coupled with few personnel, little health awareness creation and education programs.

Figure 7-6: Achwa Ranch HC II 7.4.10 Education The government of Uganda lays emphasis on education both at primary and post primary levels as highlighted in the various policy statements such as UPE, USE, Universal Post Primary Vocational Education and training. As a result of that the district has taken advantage of these programs and school enrolment has increased at all levels. The enrolment for Primary stands at 154,949(2007) 55% boys and 45% for girls.

Within the project area, there are primary schools which are along the road leading to the Achwa HPP I. The schools identified include; Achwa Ranch Primary School, Akelikng Primary School

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 129 and Achwa Army Bridge Primary School. However, in Angagura Sub-county there no secondary school which impedes enrollment in Universal Secondary Education programs.

Figure 7-7: Some of the schools along the road leading to the proposed Achwa HPPI

7.4.11 Road network There is a road that can be used to access the HPP1 site from Angagura Trading Centre up to the ranch that initially existed. This road is murram and motorable. The status of the road is being affected by the heavy trucks plying along the road to the quarry site. There is an established road within the ranch leading to the ongoing HPP2 campsites and project area. This will be the same road leading to the HPP1 powerhouse. It is anticipated that new roads will be opened leading to HPP1 especially the intake site through the ranch and off the existing one.

Figure 7-8: Status of the existing road within the ranch leading to HPP2 site

7.4.12 Administrative structure In the administrative structure, a district is subdivided into Counties and Municipalities or Towns depending on their size and other criteria set by the Ministry of Local Government. Every County is further subdivided into sub-counties, while municipalities are subdivided into divisions. The Sub-Counties, Divisions and Towns are further subdivided into Parishes and Wards, respectively (Table 7-5). The Parishes and Wards are further subdivided into villages, which are the lowest administrative units. Councillors are elected on individual merit and not based on political party affiliation at all the above levels running from LCI (village) to LCV (district/city). The LCIII, LC V and some LCIV (municipality councils) are local governments, while the others are administrative units. Local governments in Uganda have legislative,

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 130 financial and administrative powers. On the other hand, the administrative units largely have administrative roles. The law requires that the total number of councillors must not be less than 10, and their terms last four years.

Table 7-5: Local Government Structure in Uganda Level Administrative Head Political Head District Chief Administrative Officer (CAO) Local Council V Chairman Town Council Town Clerk Local Council IV Chairman (Mayor) Assistant Administrative Officer County Local Council IV Chairman (AAO) Sub-county Sub-county Chief Local Council III Chairman Parish Parish Chief Local Council II Chairman Village n/a Local Council I Chairman

Pader District has 1 County (Aruu) with two constituencies of Aruu and Aruu North; 1 Town Council; 11 Sub-Counties; 52 Parishes and 608 Villages as summarised in the Table 7-6.

Table 7-6: No. of administrative units # Sub-County Parishes Villages 01 Acholibur 04 28 02 Angagura 04 36 03 Atanga 05 59 04 Awere 04 43 05 Laguti 03 58 06 Lapul 04 66 07 Latanya 05 58 08 Ogom 04 47 09 Pader 04 30 10 Pader Town Council 03 28 11 Pajule 06 83 12 Puranga 06 54 Total 52 608

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 131 8. PUBLIC CONSULTATION AND DISCLOSURE

8.1 Objective of Public Disclosure

The objectives of consultations during the update of the ESIA process were to share Project information with a key stakeholders, to obtain baseline information, and to allow stakeholders the opportunity to make comments and express their views on the proposed Project‘s impacts and mitigation measures being proposed to address these impacts. It will be important to share the Project benefits and adverse impacts, as well as the proposed enhancement and mitigation measures. Information to be disclosed will include details of the purpose, nature, location and duration of Project activities.

The aim of these consultations was to identify any environmental and social impacts that could have occurred from the last ESIA that conducted in 2014 and take note of the concerns and views of all the stakeholders so that appropriate mitigation is incorporated before the project commences. In this context, meetings were held with relevant Pader District Local Administration, Angagura Sub-County and Parish leader and with the local communities.

8.2 Consultation Meetings and Key Issues Raised Consultation meetings were held with Pader district officials, LC V, Sub-County and Parish leaders as well as communities within the project area. These were conducted by the ESIA Team in the course of updating the ESIA report. Stakeholder engagement constituted an important part of the ESIA process, in light of the Project‘s commitment to adhering to national requirements, as well as a best practice approach to public consultation, i.e. an approach that encourages open and transparent dialogue, with as broad a range of stakeholder groups as possible. Pictures in section 4 (Figure 4-1) show some of the meetings held with the various stakeholders while Table 8-1 shows a summary of the findings from the stakeholder consultations.

8.3 Summary of key issues from consultative meetings A number of pertinent issues were raised from the meetings held with the different stakeholders. The major issues raised during meetings with the project affected communities were employment, access to fishing and utilization of community resources such as firewood. Table 8-1 below provides a summary of the key findings from the consultation process, while a detailed transcription of the meetings is provided in ANNEX 8.

Table 8-1: Summary of key issues raised by stakeholders during Consultation Meetings Stakeholder Key issues Influx of people The implementation of HPP1 Project will attract an external workforce to the project area hence having an influx of people. This would bring about: Angagura Sub-  increase in crime, County officials  social disorder and,  Fraternization of workers with community members which could increase risk of STDs Road Network

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 132 Stakeholder Key issues Expectation of better road networks especially on the road leading to the HHP 1. The road leading to the HHP 1 should be improved. There has been a burden on the road which is being used by two projects (ARPE project and Quarry site). Access to Fishing Construction of the HPP1 might impede the community members from continuing with their fishing on the River Achwa hence, having a big impact on people’s incomes. Employment The Contractor should consider employing people from the communities in which the project is in rather than people from outside the project area. There were complaints that the ongoing HPP 2 had not fulfilled their promise on employing the local youth from within the project area. Community Health Care There might be an impact on the Health care services due to the increase in population (influx of workers into the area). Within the project site, there is only one Health centre, Achwa Ranch Health Centre II which is already not enough to cater for the community members. On District Involvement There should be full cooperation and involvement with the district leadership of Pader. ARPE should always involve the district technical officials when interacting with community members. ARPE has had a number of community engagements without involving the district officials. Working together with the community could help them address a number of issues without getting resistance from the people. Labour issues There were grievances from the project workers (HPP 2) on unfair Pader District termination and poor payments. Local Information sharing Government officials Information sharing by the developer is poor. ARPE doesn’t fulfil their promise. There has been gap in terms of information sharing. The developer promised to visit the CAO, however this has not happened. Benefits The government should consider constructing a substation in Angagura after construction of the power plant so that they can benefit from the power in future. The developer should consider constructing a maternity block at the Achwa Ranch Health centre II as a way of benefit to the community. This was previously discussed with ARPE team during implementation of the

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 133 Stakeholder Key issues Achwa HPP 2. There was a request that a borehole should also be constructed within the Achwa HC II. At the moment they fetch water in jerry cans. Road Network ARPE promised to improve the road leading to the project sites. However this has not yet been implemented. There is a lot of dust affecting the communities within the project area. Project The was an inquiry from some members on when the project is expected to commence Livelihood The project area is an agricultural land of the people of Angagura. Majority use the land and river for cultivation crop, it is a hunting place, and fishing ground. Since the construction of the Achwa HHP 2, access to the land and river has been barred hence affecting people’s livelihood. Employment There was a request from the local community to consider giving first priority to the local when recruiting casual labour for the project. Angagura Community There was a request that the developer should consider recruiting the Human Resource officer who comes from within the region; if possible from Angagura Sub County. Benefit Some of the members wanted to know whether the community or Sub- county will benefit from the Achwa HPP 1. After construction of the hydro power plant, will the communities living within the project area benefit from the power generated by the power station? Project should make consideration for helping to improve the health care services at Achwa Ranch Health Centre II. The developer should consider setting boreholes at Acholi ranch Primary School, and Achwa Army bridge Primary School to help the communities who have been fetching water from the Achwa River.

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 134 9. POTENTIAL PROJECT IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES

These impacts are discussed in view of the expected project activities during construction and operations phases. They are discussed looking at short term, medium term and long term aspects of the project. It should be noted that this ESIA update comes at a time when the developer (ARPE) has already acquired most permits, licenses and approvals from various lead agencies including NEMA, DWRM, ERA, Ministry of Energy and Mineral Development, etc. It should also be noted that at the time of ESIA update field studies, HPPII was already under construction. Therefore, this section will also look at the cumulative impacts as a result of all these hydropower projects on Achwa River.

A vital part of an ESIA is to consider appropriate mitigation measures that could be applied to avoid, eliminate, or reduce the magnitude of negative impacts within reasonable environmental and economic constraints. Timing is an important issue as mitigation measures identified during the ESIA may be incorporated more economically and successfully at the design stage than subsequently. If these measures are successful, the need for compensation to affected parties may also be reduced or eliminated.

Similarly measures to optimize potential positive impacts should continually be integrated into Project design. Mitigation, measures can be divided into four categories, although the distinctions between these categories may, at times, be difficult to determine. The four groups are:  incorporation of environmental and social concerns into project design and in requirements to contractors  Mitigation measures to reduce or eliminate negative impacts caused by the project  Compensation and  Measures to optimize positive impacts and development opportunities.

Normally the developer is responsible for covering the costs of the first three categories and internalizing such costs into the economic and financial analysis. The last category does not normally come under the responsibility of the developer. The development opportunities should still be utilized and optimized through close co-operation with the appropriate authorities in accordance with national strategies within each sector.

Mitigation measures to reduce or eliminate negative impacts caused by the Project have been described below. Measures to optimize positive impacts and development opportunities are left for the relevant sectors of Local and Central Governments and NGOs in accordance with national strategies within each sector which should decide as to which measures must be carried out as a priority.

9.1 Positive Impacts

9.1.1 Employment opportunities The construction of the Achwa HPP 1 will require workers with various levels of skill, including skilled, semi-skilled and unskilled labour. Contractors will be required for construction of hydropower structural components and auxiliary facilities including workers shelters, etc. About

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 135 300-400 people will be employed during construction, with priority being given to qualified local residents when possible, and recruitment done together with local village leaders (LCs). While skilled labour required will be from specialized national and international contractors, semi-skilled and unskilled labour will be obtained from Ugandans depending on the nature of work and availability of the required labour. Although the positions will be relatively short-term, they nonetheless represent a high positive impact resulting in a degree of economic opportunity.

Enhancement Measures  The project developer is recommended to impress a contractual responsibility upon the contractor to hire 100% of un-skilled labour from local communities.  Wherever feasible, local people will be considered for job opportunities commensurate with their level of skills.  Workforce recruitment should be undertaken with involvement of local leaders who can identify their citizens.  Adequate occupational health and safety standards will be provided to ensure the work environment is conducive.  The Contractor will ensure that children under the age of eighteen are not employed at the site as per restrictions of the Employment Act 2006.

9.1.2 Economic benefits from sourcing of local construction materials The supply of construction materials such as aggregates, stones, murrum and steel among others will provide economic opportunities for the suppliers of these material. Within the project area, there is a quarry site of which the contractor can purchase construction material. This presents financial benefit for local and foreign suppliers- a short-term but significant socio-economic benefit.

9.1.3 Benefit to local retail businesses It is expected that the construction of the HPP1 which is expected to last at least two years, will necessitate a workforce of about 300-500 people. The workforce, construction staff will require food, accommodation and sundries most of which will be provided by local retail shops. This will present a short-term economic benefit for local business owners. This has already been achieved with the ongoing works on HPP2.

Enhancement Measures  During the sensitization meetings with local communities, the local residents need to be informed about the Project and how their businesses can benefit from the Project for example building rental houses to accommodate workers.  Contractors and subcontractors will encourage their workers to support businesses that conduct their businesses in line with national laws. Quality and safety of products will be advocated for amongst local businesses as this will have the overall effect of improving the standards of the local businesses.

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 136 9.2 Negative Physical impacts

9.2.1 Contamination of water resources The excavation and dredging of the river bed for setting dam structures, and construction of embankment on the river banks will be required to anchor the dam structures. Moreover, construction of rubber dam embankment and setting foundation will involve use of binders such as cement and machinery with oils and fuel which may spill into the river. These processes are anticipated to result into increased particles in the water column, including CaCo3 and fat, oil and grease (hereafter therein FOG).

Increment in suspended solids and turbidity, and introduction of FOG would low the acceptability of the water for other users for different purposes. And elevated CaCO3 levels cause water hardness while FOG corrodes breeding grounds and chokes fish and other aquatic life.

This impact is negative, local to immediate downstream reach and short-time lasting during construction. However, if not mitigated its severity is anticipated to be high since it is likely low acceptability of water for other purposes and the resultant water hardness may increase expenditure on soap and replacement of cooking utensils, and scarcity of fish protein for the poor rural.

Mitigation measures  The designs and mechanisms to be used should minimize introduction of sediment;  Minimize/ avoid damping construction waste into the river;  Minimize construction period to the shortest duration possible and target dry months of the year to undertake construction; and  Service machines regularly and avoid onsite repair and service of machines

9.2.2 Effect on water quality Construction phase The excavation and dredging of the river bed for setting dam structures, and construction of embankment on the river banks to anchor the dam structures will increase the sediments into the river. Moreover, construction of rubber dam embankment and setting foundation will involve use of binders such as cement which may leach into the water. These processes are anticipated to result into increased particles in the water column, including CaCo3.

Increment in suspended solids and turbidity would lower the acceptability of the water for other users for different purposes and elevated CaCO3 levels cause water hardness.

On the other hand, during site clearance and excavation at different sites for the dam structures, there will be use of explosive material to break the hard rocks on sites. These typically contain nitrogen, sulphur and various organic compounds which will end in the River causing some measure of water pollution. This impact is mainly short-term.

Besides the above, all earthmoving construction activities have the potential to increase soil erosion and sediment load in the River. The soil and sediment could contain various organic and

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 137 inorganic constituents that might pollute the water. The gentle terrain of the area will favor this aspect. This impact is negative, local to immediate downstream reach and short-time lasting during construction. However, if not mitigated its severity is anticipated to be high since it is likely low acceptability of water for other purposes and the resultant water hardness may increase expenditure on soap and replacement of cooking utensils, and scarcity of fish protein for the poor rural.

Operation phase There is a potential for pollution from chemical contaminants during operation stage. Contaminants introduced by operation could migrate into other watercourses downstream. The principal potential contaminants associated with the operation activities include: fuels and lubricating oils; domestic wastes and sediment. These are negative impacts, regional (whole downstream reaches) and long-term lasting through operation phase. The impact is assessed to be minimal since the operator will be required to have waste management procedures/plans.

Mitigation Strategies  Grass the embankment/banks of the canal to reduce soil erosion and sediment loading into the river;  Maintain healthy riparian by instituting vegetation buffer along the river banks. These areas help reduce the amount of contaminated runoff reaching the river; and  Monitor for water contamination.

9.2.3 Effects of water intake structures on organisms The presence of intake structure may be an obstacle to fish movement, especially migratory species (Labeo horie and mormyriids). At the intake, also a volume of water will be drawn from the main flow and channeled to the canal. Suction forces as result of drawing water have the potential to cause entrainment and impingement of fishes and invertebrates. Entrainment and impingement of aquatic organisms through, under or around intakes subject these organisms to adverse conditions such as increased heat, physical abrasion, pressure changes, and other detrimental effects. These conditions can result into stress or disorientation of organisms, loss of the organisms through direct damage, increased predation or disruption of breeding strategy. These are negative impacts, local at intake and longtime through operation phase. Severity of the impact is assessed to be low since it’s designed to install rubber dams.

Mitigation Strategies  The design at the intake structures should ensure fish passage as much as possible.

9.2.4 Effects of change in flow regimes For most of year power generation, despite river water volume fluctuations due to wet and dry seasons, river water flow will need to be controlled, thus altering the natural flow regimes. Flow regime is a major determinant of physical habitat in streams/rivers, which in turn is a major determinant of biotic composition. Aquatic species evolve their life history strategies in direct response to the natural flow regimes of their medium. In addition, invasion and success of exotic and introduced species (flora and fauna) in rivers is facilitated by the alteration of flow regimes.

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 138 Flow modifications might cause growths of submerged aquatic macrophytes in the river and disrupt macro-invertebrate communities, in the drawdown area of downstream reaches. Growth of aquatic macrophytes in the river channel may slow down the flow and create conditions that flavour disease vectors such as Bulinus spp. and mosquitoes. These are negative impacts, regional (whole downstream reaches) and long-term lasting through operation phase. The impact is assessed to be low since the project is design to maintain at least the minimum (10%) at all times and periodic reduction/ shut down of power general during the dry months of the year.

Mitigation Strategies  Manage flow releases to imitate the natural regimes.

9.2.5 Impact on surface Water Quality There is a real risk of pollution into the surface water drainage system during the construction of the project; the pollution might be attributed to hydrocarbons from fuels and sediment from the stocked soil piles. The movement of heavy vehicles on unsurfaced tracks, quarry activities, excavation and fill operations at the dam site, along with pollution spills of oil, petroleum, and bitumen/coal tar and other liquids and chemicals may all create hazards to surface water quality. Such activities will also increase the risk of suspended solids washing into the river system and causing turbidity. Clearing and grubbing of vegetation in certain places will increase the risk of soil erosion and resulting sedimentation into the river system. This is particularly a problem during the rainy season.

Mitigation measures . Extraction of the materials for construction will need to be carried out with care to minimize the risk of sedimentation into the downstream area.

9.2.6 Impacts of soil erosion due to stripping of vegetation Construction activities such as excavation, filling, development of access roads, construction camps, and disposal of materials (both solid and liquid) will affect the existing soil conditions in the Project Area and in its nearby surroundings. In addition, such work is likely to lead to changes in the existing drainage pattern and may have a significant adverse impact on the environment. It is likely that two soil layers could be affected, the top soil and the immediate layer beneath it. Large areas of the site will be stripped of vegetation which will increase erosion and sedimentation. The impact on the top soil layer will be of moderate magnitude as compared to the layer underneath it. The main location of this type of impact will be concentrated around a relatively small part of the reservoir area, immediately upstream and downstream of the intake site but with other locations along access roads, channel and quarry sites, as well as the tailrace outfall location where it discharges back into the main river. This has been scored as a moderate impact as the scale of the impact will be restricted to the site.

Mitigation measures It is recommended that engineering requirements regarding soil erosion control or prevention and construction techniques for all construction actions be strictly enforced, with the Engineer on site

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 139 having the possibility of stopping work until satisfactory procedures are used. These will include compaction or re-vegetation of exposed surfaces. Other measures will include in particular: . Minimizing the rate of excavation to what is absolutely necessary and landscape reinstatement with adequate drainage provision must be carried out after the completion of the works. . Land disturbances and vegetation cover clearing should be limited only to sites being worked on at the moment to avoid leaving larges soils piles unattended to and exposed to erosion agents (water and wind). The excavated rocks should be stored in appropriate areas prior for processing and reuse in construction works. . The contractor should endeavor to manage adequately both onsite and offsite storm water runoff by installing storm drains around the construction sites to reduce amount of soil carried always. This type of impact has thus been categorized as insignificant and temporary.

9.2.7 Location of the dumping site The Project is expected to generate huge volumes of solid waste in form of muck and rock spoil including overburden due to construction of roads, canal, camp site, and other project components. A large volume of this solid waste could be reused in backfilling and the remainder disposed-off in the identified dumping site. The volume of solid waste was not estimated at the time of this ESIA study although the proposed dumping site for HPP1 had already been identified. Other Project wastes such as metal scraps and plastic remains will be effectively collected, re-used or recycled or incinerated. The project will provide arrangements for collection and disposal of all this waste through onsite management systems and their operations will follow NEMA’s guidelines on waste management.

As a mitigation measure, the exact location of the dumping site shall be verified and approved by the developer environmental safeguards manager to ensure that the impacts of its disturbance is minimized, natural drainage is not disturbed and the impact on the aesthetics value of the Project area is reduced. Soil excavations for the establishment of structures such as the forebay and penstocks should be quickly and completely removed and taken to the disposal site. Rocks from these excavations should be reused for the construction of buildings, roads etc. Other mitigation measures around the dumping site should include the following:  Provision of retaining walls/ wire-crates at the disposal site to retain the muck in the specified area  Maintaining slope stability by making the angle of repose to be less than 35º  Provision of catchment and toe drains at each disposal site to guide rain water to natural drains  Provision of silt traps in the catchment and toe drains to arrest any screed escaping with running water and putting in place arrangements for regular cleaning of these drains;  Ensuring proper compaction by using bulldozers where required to maintain stability. Compacting may also significantly reduce area requirement for muck disposal  Stabilization and rehabilitation of the disposal site by planting indigenous grasses

9.2.8 Impact on ambient air quality Potential adverse impacts on ambient air quality during construction phase of the Project will come from the following sources:

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 140  Fugitive dust emissions due to removal of vegetation, excavation of land, access road construction, hot mix plants and concrete mixers operation, excavation of canal etc.;  Air emissions from vehicles engaged for construction purposes; and  Occupational dust in the working areas.

Mitigation measures Mitigation measures for ambient air quality will include the following:  Trucks carrying fine construction materials (sand, lime, gravel and soils) that can easily be blown by wind should be covered with tarpaulins  Transportation of muck to the disposal site should be done during non-peak hours.  Regularly sprinkling with water at the site and along the roads using bowsers.  Ensuring all vehicles and construction machinery are properly operated and maintained according to the manufacturers specifications.

9.2.9 Visual Intrusion Vegetation clearing and excavations in preparation of the dam site, equipment transportation, influx of project vehicles would alter the normal visual impressions of the Project surroundings. During the construction phase there will be a lot of visual intrusion with vehicles and machinery on site as well as loss of plant and tree species hence the impact is rated at medium negative although short term. Mitigation measures will include the following:  Destruction of aesthetic features should only be done where this is not avoidable. In areas where vegetation is likely to be lost, restoration should be undertaken.  Topography modification might result into improved scenic beauty. Although the slopes are quite stable around the HPP1 site, there will be need for slope stabilization in some areas where access roads and other infrastructure will be constructed. The use of environmentally friendly slope stabilization methods such as planting grass are recommended as opposed to shot crating  Site restoration and landscaping in work areas should be made part of the construction contracts. Massive stock piles of debris both murram and rocks should be handled as per NEMA guidelines.

9.2.10 Impacts on soils and land due to contamination by chemical and petroleum spillage During the construction stage of the project, large volumes of fuel and lubricants will be used for running plant, including large construction machinery and generators. However it is inevitable that there will be a risk of spillage and some pollution will occur. There may also be leaching of nutrients from dump sites. Any spillage could permanently contaminate the top soil and render it infertile making the effects permanent. Such impacts of soil pollution will generally be minor and short to medium term.

Mitigation measures . The storage facilities of significant quantities of fuel and lubricants need to be appropriately located, designed and constructed to minimize the risk of spillage. These should be contained and prevented from polluting the surrounding land and particularly the river system and groundwater.

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 141 . An adequately resourced contingency plan needs to be in place to deal with such a spillage.

9.2.11 Soil degradation and Erosion and River sedimentation During construction, project activities like creation of access routes, and channel dredging, quarrying are sources of unstable soil while compaction of soil due to movement of heavy machinery in the dumping site and other areas will increase the rate of surface runoff especially during torrential rains. These actions will likely increase soil erosion, gulling, siltation and increased sedimentation loads in River with impacts as described above. However, such impacts will be minor and short term.

9.2.12 Re-vegetation A re-vegetation programme should be defined by the HSE Manager with relevant vegetation specialists. This programme will have major positive effects on the physical, chemical, biological and human environments. Preference should be given to indigenous plant species for re-vegetation.

9.3 Negative Social-Economic Impacts

9.3.1 Occupational health and safety risks concerns Construction phase During construction works, over 200 workers will be working on different project sites. Construction will also involve moving heavy equipment and materials through settlements and trading centres. This potentially poses accident risk to the general public and construction workers. Inadequate OHS standards could also result from neglect of safety equipment, precautions and procedures. Inadequate OHS would be a negative but preventable impact if precautions were put in place during construction works. Injuries or potentially fatal accidents could arise from inept operation of heavy construction machinery or unsatisfactory safety around the construction site, or due to the potential for people to move through the construction site and being exposed to dangerous conditions that they are not accustomed to.

Minor injuries would be reversible and of short duration but impacts such as permanent disability, major injuries and fatalities are irreversible. Considering that construction workers would most likely be household heads, disabilities and fatalities would not only affect workers but also the livelihood of their families. Therefore, the likelihood of minor injuries occurring at the work site is high due to the nature of construction work involved. This impact intensity of minor injuries is assessed as low because the duration of these injuries is short-term. The severity of minor injuries is low but the severity of disabilities and fatalities is assessed as high, as they cause permanent injuries or result in loss of life. Therefore the impact significance is assessed as minor for minor injuries and significant for fatalities and disabilities.

Operation phase The OSH concerns during operation will be minimal since very few people will be involved in the day today works. These will be highly skilled and thus with ability to depict risk and manage it. The plant will also be automated which reduces day to day interaction with people apart from during maintenance woks.

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 142 For proper operation of the plant, trained and skilled operators will be required. The operators must be trained in the operation and maintenance of high voltage generators, transformers, switchgear and all related ancillary equipment. The operators and the general workforce will have to be aware of the risks to life of high voltages involved and must be prepared to deal with faults, fires, shocks and other potential risks such as drowning, wildlife attacks, snakes, thefts, injuries etc.

Mitigation measures  The contractor and Sub Contractors shall provide all workers with necessary Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) appropriate to the job at hand such as dust masks, ear muffs, leather gloves, hard helmets, heavy duty boots, eye goggles and waist bands and their usage should be enforced.  Contractors will be required to prepare an Emergency Management Plan to cover potential situations on the construction site and within emergency camps – to be approved by the developer.  The developer will spearhead the health, safety and environment campaign through the contractors. It is important to monitor the relationship between the environment and health hazards, health risks and health impacts. The proposed health awareness campaign should be developed in co-operation with other information campaigns concerning the environment.  The contractor will develop the OSH plan that will be approved by the developer. This plan should address all safety and health concerns anticipated on the project and how they will be addressed. The plan will address issues such as; fire occurrences, safety to excavations, emergency response, onsite sanitation, training, smoking control, etc.  The safety officer for the contractor will be responsible for administering the OSH plan and ensure monthly reporting to the developer on its success.  The contractor will institute project clinic in liaison with the developer to attend to all health, safety, STDs and HIV/AIDS programs. The project will recruit a trained project nurse. The ongoing works on HPP2 already have a clinic in place and this may be enhanced once HPPI comes on board.  Contractor shall provide appropriate signage reminding use of PPE at appropriate locations in the project area including ancillary work sites.  Contractor through the safety officer shall ensure the implementation of safety training programs for all workers and holding of regular tool box meeting to discuss safety.

9.3.2 Increased crime and disease prevalence During construction, external employees will be employed without their families and many of these shall be accommodated within the neighboring local communities of Burlobo and Angangura Sub County. In these local communities, construction workers might be lionized as richer with ready income to spend. Influx of workers seeking job opportunities could lead to an increase in social pathologies such as burglaries, alcohol or illicit drug abuse and prostitution raising the risk of contracting Sexually Transmitted Disease such as HIV/AIDS, and Gonorrhea.

If the contractor does not maintain a strict “no fraternization” policy, workers could be prone to prostitution or illicit sexual relationships, breaking up marriages and causing social disruption within adjoining communities.

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 143 Unless adequate sensitization of all workers is undertaken by contractor, the likelihood of the impact occurring is medium (considering some level of awareness among general populace). The impact severity will be high because diseases (such as HIV/AIDS) have long-term and irreversible effects to human life. Impact significance is therefore major.

Mitigation measures  The contractor will be required to hire an HIV/AIDS subcontractor to undertake HIV/AIDS awareness programs to contractor’s workers as well as the local communities. The sub-contractor will carry out training, distribution of condoms and IEC materials and also carry out Voluntary Counselling and Testing among workers and local communities and schools.  Contractor to undertake HIV/AIDS Management campaigning including Training, distribution of quality Contraceptives and Voluntary Counselling and Testing among workers and adjacent communities and schools.  Sensitization of workers and local communities will be undertaken by the contractor’s safeguards team.  To minimize population influx in project areas, ARPE will encourage contractors to utilize local labour within the respective project villages as long as they meet job skill requirements.  Contractor should implement a strict code of conduct for the workers that is well understood by all workers with violation implications.  The contractor should implement a sexual harassment policy.  It will be important that the contractor also engages sub county and district health offices to help in these aspects plus partnering local NGOs that sensitize local people in these aspects.

9.3.3 Impact of noise and vibrations Excavation of component sites will also involve blasting of rocks within the earmarked development sections. As evident, the intake to outlet stretch and the major surrounding land is full of rocks. Blasting will produce higher noise levels at source points of the noise level reducing as one moves away from source. As already stated, the noise may not be heavily felt by the people within the surrounding villages as the nearby homesteads are over 6 kms away from the Project site. Blasting will therefore affect mainly workers on site than communities in the villages. It will also have an effect on the wild animals. Consultations with the local communities indicated that most hunted animals have moved far away from project area of HPP2 and this will surely increase. The significance of the impact will be low since the communities are a distance away from the project site, about over 6km.

Construction activities including heavy flow of traffic will also cause significant noise levels locally and people living closest to access roads might perceive noise as a highly negative impact. Noise will be a medium negative impact but short term. No significant negative impacts are expected during Project operation.

Mitigation measures  A grievance procedure should be in place for communities in the project area to report effects and damage resulting from construction works.

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 144  Monitoring of noise in the project area should be undertaken to make sure it does not exceed the regulatory limits.  Use of controlled blasting techniques including delaying detonator.  Restricting major project activities such as blasting to day time hours to minimize any potential blast shocks in the nearby communities;  Avoiding blasting during bad weather.  Protecting people’s health from environmental risk and pollution through availing workers with adequate Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) such as masks, helmets, hand gloves, boots and ear muffs  All these concerns should be addressed in the contractor’s Health and Safety Programs which should detail the plans for managing noise, dust and safety in the work force which is to be overseen by the HSE Manager for the project;  The contractor should promptly compensate any damages arising from construction activities if any.  Prior communication about proposed blasting will always be given to the community and local leadership for ample preparation. The contractor will also work with police in managing explosives and guiding detonation.

9.3.4 Road traffic risks Vehicles hauling construction materials and workers might cause traffic hazards in trading centres, near schools, and health centres. Receptors located along the access route include Achwa Ranch Primary School, Akelikongo Primary School, Achwa Army Bridge Primary School and trading centres in the nearby villages. Children, women and elderly people are often at higher risk of traffic related accidents. Sensitivity of receptors to accident impact may be high considering that community has been experiencing low traffics. Therefore impact significance is predicted to be major.

Mitigation measures  The contractor will control haulage speed especially in trading centers or near schools by placing requisite warning signs and speed regulating measures such as humps. Some of these measures have already been put in place due to HPP2 works.  Drivers will be inducted at the start of the project about road safety and due diligence to ensure safety of other road users.  Flaggers and signage will be provided as may be deemed necessary to warn road users of heavy trucks or machinery turning off and joining the non-paved access road to the proposed project area especially along the Gulu-Kitgum highway at Angagura trading centre. The contract will prepare a traffic management plan that details the following: a) Traffic control procedures in populated areas. b) Community awareness. c) Traffic management personnel. d) Communication and warning system. e) Emergency procedures; and f) Travel speed limits and control measures.

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 145 9.3.5 Decline in Fishing Income Once the Achwa HPP I is in operation, the ecology of the fisheries will decline especially along the project stretch and fishing as a livelihood will no longer be viable. This will have a negative permanent impact on the livelihoods of fishermen for the villages located within the project area. During the community and focus group discussion that were conducted, the members indicated that fishing although is not a main occupation for the people within the project area, it is practiced to some degree and the construction of the HPP1 will have an impact. Fishing in the area is currently a seasonal occupation which is viable during a dry season. This significance of this impact will be minor since the people will be given alternative access routes to continue their fishing.

Mitigation measures  The contractor should ensure that alternative access routes to new fishing grounds are provided and maintained.  Engage an NGO to work with local authorities to plan the development of new fishing settlements that might develop on the shores of the reservoir.  The communities should be sensitized on other sources of livelihood other than fishing. For example better agricultural practices to produce better yields of crops, improved inputs (seeds, fertilizers and equipment).  Where feasible, local fishermen should be recruited on the project to boost their income and also get alternative income.

9.3.6 Destruction of woodlots The dominating source of energy in the area is fuel wood and charcoal. The project area still has plenty of large trees for fuel wood. However, these are quickly disappearing because of extensive charcoal making to support outside markets as far afield as Kampala. With the anticipated population influx and a growing energy need, the tree population will quickly diminish. Suitable measures will therefore need to be put in place to supply the population and workers with fuel, either as wood fuel, charcoal or paraffin. It is suggested that this be done by contacting suppliers in advance and providing outlets. A programme for establishing woodlots should also be initiated, in co-operation with the local and district authorities, including provision of seedlings and extension services to ensure that the programme succeeds.

9.3.7 Restriction of access to the River banks and water The construction phase will result in loss of access to parts of the east bank (Pader side) of the Achwa River, including access to sources of drinking water for wildlife, for fishing, bathing and for washing. There are a number of spots along the affected stretch that was spotted to be used these purposes. The community already noticed some restrictions in access to the water banks along the ongoing HPP2 and though access is still acceptable. This impact will be permanent with restrictions to construction zones and even during operation. Its magnitude is however minor since provisions will be made for people to access the river and also people don’t use this river water for day to day domestic works.

Mitigation measures

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 146  Through consultation with the community, an appropriate route should be identified and established to continuously provide access to the river.  Maintain existing access that may not hinder or disrupt construction works with limited access by the community to the site premises.

9.3.8 Effect on social facilities such as education and health facilities The ongoing construction of HPP2 has already seen the increase in the number of people in the project area. Consultations revealed that these have already had a corresponding impact on the available facilities especially health centres. There has been increase in demand for drugs and antenatal care services, etc. This will only increase the impact once HPP1 starts construction works. The constraint on these facilities will likely see an increase in the common ailments including malaria, cough, flue, diarrhea and nodding disease are the most common diseases in the Project area as well as HIV/AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases (STDs). These diseases are likely to increase as more people enter the project area. Health facilities are unable to cope with the present problems and will not be able to cope with the likely additional problems arising. Unless these problems area dealt with, the developer will also suffer through an unhealthy workforce. Several mitigation measures therefore need to be introduced including:

Mitigation measures  The developer will partner with the local health facilities in helping improve the health status through provision of health supplies like drugs, medical equipment, training to nurses, etc. this should be well coordinated with the district health services. This is already ongoing as part of HPP2 program.  The contractor will institute project clinic in liaison with the developer to attend to all health, safety, STDs and HIV/AIDS programs of the workers. The project will recruit a trained project nurse. The ongoing works on HPP2 already have a clinic in place and this may be enhanced once HPPI comes on board.  The Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) should also extend to the education facilities to boost their capacity to cope with the increasing numbers.  Awareness campaign in advance of construction concerning STDs, malaria and other diseases.  Distribution of treated mosquito nets and other health care items  Special emphasis on HIV/AIDS in the project area, including in the camps.  Periodic medical checks for STDs, malaria and other communicable diseases for the workers.

9.4 Impacts on the Biological Environment During project construction and operation, there will be both positive and negative impacts on the biological environment. Whether an impact is positive or not may be dependent on the habitat and species considered. Different species have different ecological requirements and the Project will change and create ecological conditions that may favour some species while being unfavourable to other species. When evaluating impacts, emphasis should be put on habitats and species of conservation concern, globally or regionally, for instance species included on the IUCN Red Lists or on the CITES lists.

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 147 9.4.1 Mammals Under the no project scenario, there are future negative trends that are likely to occur. Continued cultivation, settlement and hunting will make the area even more deprived of mammals. Construction phase Dam construction and other construction activities in the site will cause noise and general disturbance in the project area and many mammals might avoid using the main project area.

With some land take for construction of roads, camps, switchyard, rock disposals (dump site) etc.; habitat destruction and general disturbance will cause displacement of some species. However, since the HPP1 area is already highly modified and large mammals are non-existent, impacts will be small negative but long-term.

With the anticipated population influx, the demand for natural resources such as fuel wood, building materials (e.g. poles and thatching grass) and land for cultivation will increase. This will result in increased habitat alteration and hunting pressure. Species that are heavily dependent on forest vegetation, such as the primates, are likely to be negatively affected. Population influx will result in medium negative impacts with potential long-term consequences.

Pollution, erosion and increased sediment load due to diversion weir dam construction, soil and rock excavations and increased erosion of the river bank as a result of fluctuations in water levels are likely affect mammals that are dependent on the River either for drinking water or for feeding grounds. The effect will be medium negative and short-term.

Operation phase The impact of reduced river flow is difficult to predict as the change in water level cannot be reliably established. A lowered level is likely to expose some areas which are presently submerged and will therefore affect some level of water use by domestic livestock and wildlife. These impacts appear to be minor based on the observations made during the field studies.

9.4.2 Amphibians and Reptiles With the expected increase in human population and activities in the project area even without the implementation of the Project, the amphibians and reptiles of the area may be impacted in a similar manner but to a lesser extent than if the Project is developed.

Geographical ranges of amphibians are generally known to be smaller than those of other vertebrates. Hence, amphibians are likely to be affected more by habitat changes than other vertebrates. Most reptiles on the other hand are highly mobile and are diversified in habitats and can be encountered in aquatic habitats, shorelines, rock outcrops, trees and bushes. They can therefore very easily adapt to changing situations.

Construction phase The construction of access roads and other auxiliary structures involve the destruction of vegetation and consequently habitat loss. This may be particularly important for slow reptiles such as chameleons that have small ranges and are slow to escape from dangers. Population influx will also create habitat destruction and disturbance where the more mobile reptiles will suffer less than the less mobile amphibians.

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 148

Operation phase Reduced river flow is likely to modify the location and extent of suitable habitats, particularly for amphibians. Aquatic reptiles, such as the water cobra are also likely to be affected. Reduced river flow may reduce the habitat and feeding grounds for aquatic reptiles such as the water cobra. However, since reptiles faster than amphibians, they could relocate to other areas if there are other suitable habitats in the vicinity. Reduced flow will also expose more rocks, ideal habitats and sunning grounds for some species of lizards.

9.4.3 Birds If the Project is not implemented, it is unlikely that there will be any significant change to the aquatic avifauna. However, continued bush encroachment in the ranch may encourage more forest species in the Project area.

Construction phase Rubber dam construction and other construction activities in the site will cause noise and general disturbance in the project area and many bird species will avoid using the main project area, even though some generalist species may benefit from the presence of humans in the area. General disturbance is expected to be of minor negative impact of short duration.

Other construction impacts on birds will include:  Increased human activity and associated noise;  Possible increase in hunting due to increased influx of local communities that highly practice a lot of bird shorting using catapults as mentioned by local people and by a number of job seekers in the area;  Increased traffic and heavy machinery and associated noise generated;

Operation phase Operation of the Project is not likely to have any significant negative impact on the terrestrial avifauna since the area to be impacted is already degraded (in terms of its original vegetation) and hence has little potential for supporting species of conservation concern. It can generally be summarized that there is likely to be a minor negative impact on birds during construction and no impact during project operation.

9.4.4 Fisheries The assemblage of aquatic organisms in any system is as result of available resources including habitat, food and medium (water).

Habitat destruction/modification Currently the river bears an array of habitats for aquatic organisms, used for feeding, spawning and refugial. These special habitat forms include; cropping rocks, in-stream vegetation, banks hanging vegetation, glides, runs and pools. These may be destroyed/ modified by intake infrastructure installation, resultant flow volumes and regimes, and invasion by human. Some fish species supplement their diet with higher plant material hanging on the river banks while

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 149 others need vegetation to attach eggs during breeding. Similarly some species require swimming against fast flowing water to trigger spawning. Modification of habitats may disrupt fish livelihood in terms of feeding, breeding and spawning requirements. This impact is negative, local to immediate downstream reach and permanent and irreversible lasting beyond construction. However, it can be detrimental to fish stocks in the river. Therefore, the impact severity is assessed to be high since fish require to feed and reproduce for continuity.

Mitigation measures  Construction activities should not exceed the proposed construction boundaries by more than 15m to avoid the secondary impact of construction and increasing the areas that would require clearing and rehabilitation; and  Alien plant introduction should also be monitored, and any such species should be removed during the construction phase.

Effect on macro invertebrates Macro invertebrates are relatively immobile organisms that live on, under, and around rocks, sediments and aquatic vegetation in or near the bottom of the river. Macro invertebrates within the river may be residents for several months to multiple years, depending on the lifespan of the particular organism. Due to their limited mobility and relative inability to move away from adverse conditions, river bed excavation and dredging is likely to cause direct physical damage and death to these organisms. In addition, sediment stirred and transported from construction sites to downstream reaches is likely to dislodge these organisms as it moves, and to corrode and smother their habitat as it settles. This impact is negative, local to immediate downstream reach and short-time and reversible lasting during construction. None the less, if not managed it can be detrimental to macro- invertebrates community in the river. However, the impact severity is assessed moderate since run-off from crop fields in the upstream reaches occasionally introduces sediment which is transported and finally settles in the river, especially during wet season.

Mitigation measures  Minimize river bed dredging to critical sites;  The designs and mechanisms should minimize introduction of sediment;  Insert vertical sediment screens to immobilize sediment transportation to downstream reaches; and  Carry out river bed excavation/dredging in the shortest duration possible.

9.5 Summary of the positive Environmental and Socio-economic Impacts The proposed Hydropower project HPP1 will have several socio-economic benefits.

9.5.1 Long term positive impacts include:  Hydropower based power supply will increase the electricity supply to Uganda’s national grid, which in turn will reflect in tariff reduction  The zero carbon energy production not only makes the country eligible for carbon credit, but also reduces dependency on charcoal for heating and cooking purposes, which devours the country’s tree cover at an alarming rate

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 150  Hydropower project will boost the country’s rural electrification programme, accelerate and facilitate rural based industries and small enterprises  Higher probability that the rural villages influenced by the project will have electricity through UMEME power connections to business facilities and other institutions.

9.5.2 Medium term positive impacts include:  Increased money circulation in Angagura Sub-county and its environs resulting from construction related procurements of local materials, wages and salaries and spending by expatriate work population which eventually can contribute to the national revenue  Creation of job opportunities to the local unskilled, semi-skilled as well as skilled persons in the community and transfer of technology  Provision of markets for locally available resources needed for construction work e.g. aggregates, sand and cement the services such as transport, supply of dry rations etc  Improved road infrastructure including access roads and renovated bridges which will facilitate community movements and reduced road accidents due to the rugged nature of the road  Improved standards of living of the local communities due to increased incomes  Development of the agricultural sector with a variety of foods to meet the demands of the population influx in the area  Development of Small and Medium Enterprises due to a stable power supply  Improvement in social infrastructure such as health facilities, electricity for schools, more and better roads etc.  Increased revenue for the Sub-county local government from more business.  Market creation for agricultural produce

9.6 Cumulative Impacts Cumulative impacts are effects of the entire power sector or other new infrastructure developments in the project areas. This section identifies some of the potential impacts that will cumulate due to the construction of HPP1 in addition to the HPP2 already ongoing.

9.6.1 Impact of reduced flows Depletion of river flows for the river stretch between the schemes since water is discharge back into stream for short distance then abstracted back into channels to feed the corresponding scheme in series. This will greatly reduce the wetted perimeter within the channel. In its natural state, the Achwa is greatly affected by seasonal variations and in the months of January- to early March, long stretches of the river can have very little flow with no sanctuaries for the aquatic life.

9.6.2 Effect on Aquatic Ecosystem It is planned to have a series of hydropower plants developed along Agago- Achwa River. During the operation stages these plants’ demand for water for power generation may put pressure on the existing water resources. About 90% of the river flow will be drawn at Achwa HPP 1 intake and diverted to a canal which will deliver it to Achwa HPP 2 intake for further diversion. Channel stretch from Achwa HPP1 intake to Achwa HPP 2 tailrace (about 18 km) will have reduced flow of only 10% of the current river flow volume most of the year during

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 151 operation. The fish community within this stretch will likely change to opportunistic species which are usually small bodied and of less economic value.

9.6.3 Effect of water pollution The projects on River Achwa (Achwa HPP 1, 2, 3 and 4) are anticipated to increase pollutant concentrations in the river. During construction, land clearing, earthworks and concrete casting for structure foundation will introduce particulate matter (silt, sediment and cement) into the river. The amassed particulate matter loads may result in increased river water turbidity which restricts sunlight penetration and destroys aquatic life. In addition, both construction and operation exposes the river and it ecosystem to risk of contamination with hydrocarbons from inter alia diesel, oils and asphalt which are toxicity to any form of life (Pettigrove and Hoffmann, 2005).

9.6.4 HIV/AIDS risk HIV/AIDS risk during construction of the Achwa HPP 1 is a cumulative impact likely to occur during project implementation. This impact is on a regional scale because workers will migrate to other areas of the country looking for employment. It is, therefore, important that pro-active action such as preparation of an HIV/AIDS policy and management plan by contractors is taken. In addition, communities in the project area should be sensitized about HIV/AIDS. The contractor should hire an HIV/AIDS sub-contractor to sensitize the workers and communities on programs related to HIV/AIDS awareness and they should work hand in hand with the developer

9.6.5 Economic development The project will give rise to a number of economic and development benefits at both national and local levels. The key macro-economic benefit is proving infrastructure necessary to meet the demand for power in Uganda in a least cost manner. Increased availability of power on the national grid will increase proportion of the national population having access to grid electricity. Availability of power will stimulate entrepreneurship in industrial and commercial enterprises in many places around the country such as local grain mills, timber sawing mills, health clinics and village telephony all of which would spur economic development.

9.6.6 Improved availability of social services The improvement of the access roads is an improvement to the infrastructure of the project area. Local people will benefit through an improvement transport systems, less dust along the roads and widening of roads could facilitate trade in the area. This will be far better from the nonexistent access routes within the ranch to the river.

9.6.7 Increased crime The project is expected to employ about 300-400 people during the construction phase. End of the construction of the Achwa HPP1 will make many of the unskilled and semi-skilled labour hired redundant. This in turn may increase crime rate in the area when previously employed people especially the ones who are illiterate fail to get alternative job opportunities.

9.6.8 Effect on social facilities such as education and health facilities The ongoing construction of HPP2 has already seen the increase in the number of people in the project area. Consultations revealed that these have already had a corresponding impact on the

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 152 available facilities especially health centres. There has been increase in demand for drugs and antenatal care services, etc. This will only increase the impact once HPP1 starts construction works. The constraint on these facilities will likely see an increase in unmanaged common ailments including malaria, cough, flue, diarrhea and nodding disease are the most common diseases in the project area as well as HIV/AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases (STDs). These diseases are likely to increase as more people enter the project area. Health facilities are unable to cope with the present problems and will not be able to cope with the likely additional problems arising. Unless these problems area dealt with, the developer will also suffer through an unhealthy workforce.

9.6.9 Effect on Fauna/ Wildlife Development of the proposed projects on River Achwa is predict to attract immigrants in search for jobs and better social services. This is like to increase pressure on the carrying capacity/ resources leading to habitat fragmentation thus pushing fauna species into smaller habitats. As a result, reduction in fauna diversity may occur due to habitat loss, and at the worst animals may change their behavior which can increase potential interactions with humans leading crop raids or to transmission of diseases between wildlife and humans. This may lead to increased prevalence of zoonotic diseases such as Ebola, Hepatitis B, Dengue fever in the project area (Buttke et al., 2015). Furthermore, the projects may cause interference with migratory routes or wildlife movements, thus disrupting their life cycles.

9.6.10 Noise impacts The activities at HPP2 have already had an increase from the normal ambient noise levels. This was attested to by the community during ESIA update consultations. This has been as a result of construction activities involving blasting of rocks at the construction sites, moving vehicles and operation of power pumps etc. The noise level are anticipated to increase even further with the commencement of HPPI works. The resultant noise impact will mainly affect the workers at source and the public along access roads by automobiles. It will also have an impact on the wild life and birds from the area that will tend to move further away from the project area. The mitigation measures as already stated in 9.3.3 will be applied but mainly involving controlled blasting.

9.6.11 Effect of activities on air quality The creation of access roads, the blasting of rock at project component sites and the movement of automobiles coupled with the emissions from automobiles and fuel powered equipment will affect the area air quality. This impact will increase with an increase in bare grounds, movement of automobiles and emission from stationary equipment such as generators, power pumps, etc.

9.6.12 Other cumulative impacts will include;  Effect on water quality due to sediment loading and possibly contamination from fuels.  Increase in area under access restriction from the communities and thus restricted fishing and hunting.  There will be increase in job opportunities for the local people.

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 153 9.7 Analysis and categorization of impacts Some of the mentioned project impacts will occur in the pre-construction, construction and operation phases or both. In each of the categories, the environmental impacts are sub-divided according to the activities associated with the project component. It is also important to note that the effects have further been sub-divided on the basis of their magnitude (High-H, Medium-M, Low-L, Negligible-N) and Duration (short term, medium or long term) and permanency (reversible or irreversible) and these are summarized in Table 9-3 below.

9.7.1 Overall impacts assessments The overall impact of the activity of the project has been established based on a combination of considerations such as magnitude of impact, impact duration and its permanency and all these have been related on a continuous scale impacts. Table 9-1 gives a scaling of the impact value:

Table 9-1: Scaling/magnitude of potential impacts

Magnitude Description Impact value High >75 Medium 50-75 Low 30-50 Negligible <30

It is only negative impacts that are summarized in Table 9-3 below. The positive impacts have already been outlined above. It is recommended that ARPE addresses them (puts mitigation measures in place) so as to comply with national legislation and operational procedures.

9.7.2 Overall impact significance The maximum value is 100 significance points (SP). The potential environmental impacts were then rated as of High (SP >75), Moderate (SP 30 – 75) or Low (SP <30) significance, both with and without mitigation measures on the following basis: SP (significance points) = (magnitude + duration + scale) x probability

Table 9-2: Environmental significance of impact based on SP value SP >75 Indicates high Where it would influence the decision regardless environmental of any possible mitigation. An impact which significance could influence the decision about whether or not to proceed with the project SP 30 - 75 Indicates moderate Where it could have an influence on the decision environmental unless it is mitigated. An impact or benefit which significance is sufficiently Important to require management. Of moderate significance - could influence the decisions about the project if left unmanaged. SP <30 Indicates low Where it will not have an influence on the environmental decision. Impacts with little real effect and which significance should not have an influence on or require modification of the project design or alternative mitigation.

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 154 + Positive impact An impact that is likely to result in positive consequences /effects.

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 155 Table 9-3: A summary of Impact levels and their nature

No Project activities Project phase Nature of Permanency of impact Magnitude of the Duration of Overall impact impact* impact* impact Direct Indirect Reversible Irreversible H M L N L M S 01 Surveying and site mapping Pre-construction issues Direct Reversible L S L 02 Machinery mobilization Pre-construction issues Direct Reversible L S L 03 Labour mobilization Pre-construction issues Direct Reversible L S L 04 Initiation of camp establishment Pre-construction issues Direct Reversible L S L 05 Contamination of water sources Construction Direct Reversible M S H 06 Impacts on water quality Construction and Direct Reversible M L L operations 07 Loss of land/land take Construction Direct Irreversible M S M 08 Loss of crops Construction Direct Irreversible L S N 09 Low water level Construction and Direct Irreversible M L M operations 10 Noise and Dust Construction Direct Reversible M S L 11 Effects of blasting Construction Indirect Reversible L S L 12 Visual intrusion Construction Direct Reversible M S L 11 Materials, clearance for access Construction Direct Reversible M S L routes (roads) 13 Fragmentation of habitat and Construction Direct Irreversible M M M vegetative communities 14 Loss of existing vegetation Construction Direct Reversible M M M 15 Soil erosion and degradation Construction Direct Reversible S L L 16 Management of cut to spoil in Construction Direct Reversible L M -1 which, cut to spoil is deposited in a dump site 17 Access roads and alteration of Construction Direct Irreversible L M L landscape 18 Impacts on mammals Construction and Direct Irreversible L M L operation phases 19 Impacts on reptiles and Construction and Direct Irreversible L M L amphibians operation phases 20 Impacts on birds Construction and Direct Irreversible L S L operation phases 21 Impacts on aquatic ecology Construction and Direct Irreversible M M M operation phases 22 Waste management concerns Construction and Indirect Reversible M S M No Project activities Project phase Nature of Permanency of impact Magnitude of the Duration of Overall impact impact* impact* impact especially solid and effluent in the operation phases camp site 23 Health & Sanitation Construction and Direct Reversible M S H operation phases 24 HIV/AIDS Construction and Indirect Irreversible M L H operation phases 25 Disruption of social and economic Construction and Direct Reversible M M H structure operation phases 26 Occupational safety and health Construction and Direct Irreversible M L H concerns for the work force operation phases 27 Pressure on education facilities Construction and Direct Irreversible M M H operation phases 28 Effect on Ambient Air Construction Direct Reversible L S L 29 Road safety risks Construction Direct Reversible L S L 30 Loss of income from fish Construction and Direct Irreversible M L M operation 31 Restricted access to the water Construction and Direct Irreversible L L L resources operation

Magnitude of the impact*: H=high; M=medium; L=low; N=nil Duration of impact*: L=long term; M=medium term; S=short term

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 157

It is important to note that Table 9-3 above is based on an evaluation of impacts without implementation of mitigation measures. The impact assessment without mitigation highlights the most significant impacts which will receive attention during the actual project implementation. The Table shows that the construction of HPP1 will have very limited impacts on the environment, the key one probably being the disruption of water flow between the point of intake and the outlet. In other words there are no major impacts on the environment except for some socio-economic impacts on health and sanitation and the disruption of social and economic structure. The proposed mitigation measures should therefore be able to eliminate most of the negative impacts or at least significantly minimize them.

In summary, the majority of the project impacts are direct, most are reversible, all the impacts range from medium to low, the durations are generally medium to short term and the overall impact tends towards being minor. Major impacts will be more sociological in nature. This means that most of the environmental impact will become negligible if appropriate mitigation measures are put in place.

9.8 Summary of Mitigation Measures and Anticipated Effects Error! Reference source not found. below summarizes the mitigation measures to optimize benefits and the anticipated effects of implementing these measures. The first three points (i - iii) in the table are not direct mitigation measures in themselves; however, they will be important in order to facilitate effective implementation of the remaining measures. As such they are not discussed in this chapter, but form an important part of the Environmental Management Plan (EMP) which is discussed in Chapter 10.

Table 9-4: Description of mitigation measures and anticipated effects of implementing the mitigation measures

Mitigation measures- Anticipated Effects Organizational Framework i) HSE Manager hired to implement Environmental Management Preparation of detailed plan EMP, timely and efficient implementation of EMP ii) Capacity building and co-operation with local and District Increased capacity locally authorities, and residents and in the districts to deal with the new situation in the area and participate in both monitoring and EMP b) iii) Awareness raising campaigns for the local population Information sharing to regarding all major issues, including: ensure good  The project (components, timing, impacts, etc.) communication to prepare  Importance of biodiversity conservation the locals for the new  Socio – economic and social security issues situation and make a basis  Health for implementation of Traffic etc. mitigation and monitoring activities; reduced problems with respect to unsound natural resources management, socio- economics, social

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 158 Mitigation measures- Anticipated Effects Organizational Framework disruption, health, traffic, security etc Ensuring soil ability to Soil testing at the sites To maintain strong hold the dam structures structures that will not collapse Prevention and control  Acceptable drainage and erosion Reduction in erosion, of erosion and prevention and construction techniques sediment load and sedimentation for all project components disturbance of natural  Re-vegetation programme drainage; reduced  Installation of settlement vegetation/habitat ponds/sediment traps. disturbance; reduced aquatic ecosystem disturbance; reduced negative visual impacts Improving scenic  Destruction of aesthetic features should Topography modification beauty only be done where this is not might result into improved avoidable. scenic beauty and tourism  In areas where vegetation is likely to be development; improvement lost, restoration should be undertaken. in scenic beauty of the  There will be need for slope Project area stabilization in some areas where access roads and the Power Station infrastructure will be constructed  The use of environmentally friendly slope stabilization methodologies such grass planting  Site restoration and landscaping in work areas should be made part of the construction contracts.  Massive stock piles of debris both murram and rocks should be handled as per NEMA recommendations Pollution control  Measures to reduce organic and Reduced pollution to soil, programme: inorganic waste from the project water and air to acceptable  Dispose of waste according to a well- levels; reduced disturbance planned programme of vegetation/habitats; and  Carefully manage the dump site aquatic ecosystem.  Put restrictions on blasting e.g. during Reduction in noise daytime disturbance.  Appropriate locations, methods and information regarding handling, storing and disposing of oil products and other chemicals Minimum bypass flow Regularly monitor proper functioning of Secure an environmental along the 6 km stretch the rubber dam flow along the affected to carry reduced river stretch, increased water flow level; reduce aquatic ecosystem disturbance and water quality problems. Reduced visual impacts; secure fishing opportunities ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 159 Mitigation measures- Anticipated Effects Organizational Framework Provision of adequate  Chart estimated needs Improved access to water supply and  Install pumps or other supply system drinking water in the sanitation:  Install sewerage system for the project area. Avoid workforce shortages in safe drinking water and health problems in the short and long-term due to increased population. Increased opportunities Engage the local communities through Stimulation of small-scale for accessing Electricity sensitization to empower them to use the business and increased supply from Electricity available power opportunities. economic activity. Distribution Company Improved welfare effects Strengthening of health  Establish a clinic for construction staff. Improvement of overall services:  Partner with the local government to health situation in the improve the local health facilities with project area which at distribution of equipment, medicine present have inadequate and establishing buildings. health facilities and  Awareness raising and preventative services. health campaign (malaria, safe water, Reduced health risks due to sanitation, nutrition, STD’s) the influx of workers and  Training or upgrading of local health followers into the project workers area.  Distribution of treated mosquito nets Integration of health and other health care items improvement with district  Periodical medical checkups for the plans workers Enforcing occupational  Contractor to enforce the requirements Improvement of overall Health and Safety of the OSH Act, 2006 of Uganda. health situation among the among the workforce  The contractor should ensure that workers ensuring high workers are provided with appropriate labour productivity PPE such as dust masks, ear muffs, Reduced health and leather gloves, hard helmets, heavy accident risks among the duty boots, eye goggles and waist workforce bands and their usage should be enforced  Also the workers should be trained on the importance of using PPE and proper handling of equipment and machinery  Ensure that there is always a well- stocked First Aid Box and train workers on how to administer First Aid  The developer should develop and enforce a policy on accident reporting and investigation  Any accident victims should be promptly compensated according to the Workers Compensation Act, 2000 Improvement of  Improvement of existing school Improvements on existing educational facilities: facilities and construction of additional schooling in addition to buildings. coping with population influx. ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 160 Mitigation measures- Anticipated Effects Organizational Framework  Recruitment of teachers. Ensure that children are  Support for schools (materials, informed about project furniture etc.) activities, possible dangers and potential benefits. Agricultural  Extension services, establishment of an The threat of food Intensification office shortages and an increase in Programm  Supply improved inputs (seeds, food prices reduced. fertilizers, equipment etc.) Improved farming practices  Establish credit schemes with long-term positive  Vaccinate livestock effects Provision of energy  Establishment of woodlots for Fuel shortages and inflated fuelwood supply prices due to population  Extension activities influx reduced. Reduced Contacts with private plantations and pressure on useful nurseries indigenous trees such as Shea Increase employment  Encourage Contractors to hire labour Maximize gain by project and business from DIZ/INDIZ when required skills affected people. Reduction opportunities are available of influx of workers and the  Support to village authorities to social disturbance they organize list of people available for would cause the local work communities as fewer  Provide training programmes in workers from outside are villages for selected professions needed.  Support establishment of rotating credit Enhance business schemes for businesses and local opportunities for local entrepreneurs communities and stimulate Cooperate with local authorities regarding the local economy in renting land to new comers preparation for the influx of workers. Strengthen local institutions Institute Road safety  Construct along gently slopes Reduction in traffic measures  Establish speed humps accidents and increased  Institute speed limits awareness of traffic safety  Implement public awareness practices programmes  Employ flag personnel and put in place signage Institute adequate  Put security to patrol the Project area Reduce the chances of security measures  Consult local authorities, police and security problems and army units about the Project conflicts among the new  Careful monitoring of population comers influx, housing and security issues Enforce local agreements  Beef up Police Post at Angagura and national laws Trading Center Protect natural resources in the vicinity and project structures

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 161 10. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN

10.1 Introduction and Background This chapter provides the basis for an Environmental Management Plan (EMP). An EMP clearly defines environmental requirements in order to integrate the measures to eliminate, offset or reduce the expected impacts as identified in the ESIA. The EMP forms the link between the impacts and mitigation measures presented in the ESIA and the implementation of management activities. The EMP outlines the mitigation measures, monitoring activities and institutional arrangements to be followed during the pre-construction, construction and operation phases to avoid or control impacts as well as indicating the timing and budgets for the recommended mitigation and monitoring activities.

10.2 Goals and Objectives of the EMP This ESIA for Achwa River Hydropower Project1 (HPP1) identified a variety of impacts that the Project is likely to have on the chemical, biophysical and human environments. Timely and efficient implementation of the mitigation measures and monitoring activities are recommended in the ESIA to ensure environmental and social sustainability of the Project, which is the overall objective of the EMP. A variety of mitigation measures have been proposed to minimize negative impacts and maximize potential positive effects.

Initial plans have also been made for monitoring activities in order to detect whether an impact has occurred and to estimate its extent. Monitoring will also provide an early warning system to indicate unanticipated impacts and sudden changes in impact trends, as well as to indicate the effectiveness of mitigation measures and provide guidance for the adjustment of management strategies.

10.3 Stakeholders A large number of stakeholders or partners have been involved and consulted during the ESIA process including Ministries, District Authorities, Local Councils, NEMA, Department of Water Resources Management (DWRM), NGOs and the local population. The involvement of these groups should be maintained during the implementation of mitigation measures and monitoring. Certain mitigation and monitoring activities, in terms of project design, construction methods and project operation are clearly the responsibility of the developer. However, other stakeholders should be heavily involved in the implementation of the EMP, particularly in the mitigation and monitoring activities relating to such issues as conservation areas, agricultural intensification, and health and education services development. It is especially important to involve relevant stakeholders in these types of developmental activities in order for the benefits of the Project to be maintained in the long term. The Project developer has the financial responsibility for the EMP.

10.4 Roles and Responsibilities The main roles and responsibilities of the different agencies at different stages of project implementation phases are:

10.4.1 Pre-construction Phase

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 162 a) NEMA  Review of EIA report to ensure that the report is prepared as per the different legal guidelines and the approved TOR;  Approval of EIA report with or without conditions which might include design change, change in location, or incorporation of additional mitigation measures and monitoring requirements to minimize the environmental impacts;  Instructions for proponent in the approval letter to: (i) ensure that mitigation and monitoring provisions are incorporated in the design and tender documents and are implemented during project construction and operation stages; (ii) examine environmental monitoring report submitted over time and (iii) any other environmental requirement to be compiled with various phases of the project implementation and operation.

b) Project Proponent  Review of EIA report to ensure that it meets the EIA requirements and procedures as per he different legal guidelines administered by concerned agencies;  Submission of final EIA report to NEMA for review and for approval;  Ensure approval from NEMA.  Review of final design and tender documents to ensure that all recommendations of the approved EIA report are incorporated in the final design, project documents, and tender documents;  Establishment of inter-agency co-ordination mechanism and field office:  Establishment of stakeholders’ advisory committee, and dissemination of project information regularly as necessary,  Carry out activities such as: (i) get approval of government-owned, and private-owned land and property acquisition; (ii) consultation and notification with related stakeholders; (iii) acquisition and compensation; and (iv) preparation of tender documents and award of the construction contract.

c) Supervising Engineers (Appointed by Project Proponent)  Elaborate EMP, if necessary, with cost for the contracted component or sub-component as per component requirement on: (i) environmental awareness and skill development of workers, particularly of Severely Project Affected Families; (ii) workforce camps, other construction work sites; (iii) road and tunnel spoils; (iv) camp wastes; (v) management of explosives and toxic wastes; (vi) risk and hazard; (vii) erosion control and sedimentation; (viii) topsoil saving and reuse; (ix) quarry mining; (x) accident and emergency works; (xi) storage and stockpiling; (xii) reinstatement of services and facilities (xiii) rehabilitation works; (xiv) vegetation and wildlife conservation and enhancement; and (xv) community relation. The elaborated EMP should be submitted to project proponent for final approval.  Assist field engineers on the site inspection before approval of detail EMP, and also its implementation.

d) Local Bodies, NGOs and CBOs  Ensure that transparency of the project planning activities are maintained;

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 163  Ensure that land acquisition, compensation, resettlement and rehabilitation have been carried out as per approved EIA report and existing laws; and  Ensure that the local level grievances are adequately addressed.

10.4.2 Construction Phase Various agencies are responsible for the review of following project construction activities:

a) MEMD and NEMA  Review of periodic monitoring report including compliances;  Review of effectiveness of enhancement and mitigation measures; and  Taking of necessary actions in case of noncompliance. The proponent with the help of the supervising engineers and contractors should facilitate the implementation of EMP and carryout periodic monitoring activities and produce periodic reports for submission to the concerned agencies for information and review.

b) Supervising Engineers  Regular training to project staff on the environmental monitoring and preparation of monitoring report formats, inspection formats etc.;  Preparation of monitoring reports as mentioned in EMP with a list of compliance and noncompliance works with recommendations;  Site inspection of construction works quarterly to provide feedbacks;  Daily, weekly and monthly monitoring of contractors’ performance on meeting the provisions of tender documents, and EMP;  Monitoring of the effectiveness of enhancement and mitigation measures;  Recommendations for necessary actions for non-compliance of the works as per tender documents and EMP; and  Participation on the site inspections and monitoring carried out by the concerned agency.

c) Construction Contractors  Seek a prior approval from the supervising consultants to start construction works;  Ensure that all preparatory works are carried out as per the tender document;  Ensure that the priority in the employment is given to local people as per their skills and capabilities in the project works; and  Carry out all corrective actions or other instructions as given by the supervising engineers.

d) Local Bodies, NGO and CBOs  Ensure that transparency in the construction activities are maintained throughout the construction period;  Ensure that the environmental enhancement and mitigation measures and monitoring is carried out as per approved EIA report;  Ensure that the priority to local-level employment, regular participation meetings, involvement of VDCs, NGOs, and CBOs in the project implementation have been met as per EMP of EIA report; and  Ensure that local grievances are timely and adequately addressed.

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 164

10.4.3 Operational Phase

MEMD and NEMA  Review of the bi-annual monitoring reports for compliance and effectiveness of EPMs; and  Continuation of monitoring activities; and  Conduction of annual environmental auditing.

10.5 Mitigation Measures The recommended mitigation measures and their constituting activities are presented in Table 10-1below. The stakeholders responsible for each activity and other participants are also indicated. For further details of the mitigation measures refer to Chapter 9. Details of the impacts which the mitigation measures aim to combat can be obtained in same chapter.

An approximate cost is also presented with each main mitigation measure. Budgeting must be further detailed during the refinement of the plan. It has not yet been possible to access the budget allocated in the project developer’s cost estimates for environmental and social mitigation and monitoring but this information is needed to guide the cost estimates.

In order to implement the recommended mitigation measures effectively and in a timely manner, it is considered important that adequate organizational and managerial bodies are in place. The first group of measures (i-iii) listed in Table 10-1 refers to these administrative arrangements.

10.6 HSE Manager A suitably qualified HSE Manager should be recruited to lead the detailing and implementation of the Environmental Management Plan (EMP). This person should be appointed as soon as possible after the Project is ready for implementation. The HSE Manager should have a broad background in environment management including experience in ElA and Environmental Audits, with respect to environmental, socio-economic, heath and cultural issues. The HSE Manager should have experience in hydropower projects and have work experience from Uganda. The developer should provide financing for this position for up to 6 months after construction is completed.

The main tasks for the HSE Manager will be related to co-coordinating the detailing and implementation of the EMP including the following:  Coordination of detailing and implementation of the mitigation measures.  Coordinate and undertake inspections on all project areas and provide guidance on better practices.  Coordinate screening activities for temporary sites such as dump areas and provide mitigation measures and also supervise their implementation.  Coordination of detailing and implementation of the monitoring activities.  Compilation of data from monitoring activities.  Monitoring how project activities conform to the analysis, conclusions and recommendations of the ESIA.

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 165  Monitoring and follow-up of the implementation of measures aimed at meeting the conditions as stipulated in different lead agencies permits, certificates, licenses etc.  Internal and external reporting on the implementation of the mitigation measures and monitoring activities, including monthly internal reports for the Environment Review Committee (ERC) and quarterly as well as annual external reports to NEMA and other relevant agencies.  Acting as contact person for the people in the DIZ and 1NDIZ, the general public, the LCs, District authorities, NEMA, ERA and other central government bodies, NGOs, the Contractors and the financiers.

10.7 Capacity building Capacity building is an important element in any project that has long term objectives. In the case of the HPP1, efforts to maintain the environment and improve social conditions will be greatly enhanced by improving the capacity of local and district organizations to deal with the new situation. LCs will have a role to play in many aspects of the project including monitoring social and economic factors and coping with the influx of workers and followers. Regular meetings and workshops will be needed to discuss ongoing concerns, and improve understanding. Regular interactions between the Developer, the HSE Manager, LCs and other implementing organizations will be important.

The district and local authorities will also be involved in a number of activities that will require training and capacity building such as the agricultural intensification programme, monitoring of environmental concerns, health improvement and other development activities including credit schemes. Some of these programmes could be run with the involvement of experienced NGOs.

10.8 Public Awareness Campaigns The implementation of mitigation measures can be greatly enhanced by appropriate public information campaigns. Informing the public about the project itself, the components, timing, impacts, etc. is important in terms of maintaining good relations with the community and ensuring communication. Most of the mitigation strategies will also benefit from associated awareness campaigns such as information and advice on health and sanitation issues, natural resource utilization and business opportunities. Improving the availability of information to the local community is often the first step in implementing successful mitigation measures.

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 166 Table 10-1: Responsibilities, participants estimated costs for mitigation measures for HPP1 together with HPP2 & HPP5 over 4 years

Mitigation Measures – Organizational framework Monitoring indicators Frequency Responsibility Stakeholders Estimated involved Cost (USD) i. Hire HSE Manager (incl. housing, offices, HSE Manager hired and Throughout Project N/A 200,000 transport, etc) working Developer ii. Capacity building and co-operation with local and Number of meetings and Regularly HSE Manager LCs, District 25,000 district authorities, LCs and residents workshops Authorities, Local population, , NGOs, iii. Awareness raising campaigns for local population Number of awareness Regularly HSE Manager LC, District 25,000 regarding all major issues including: campaigns undertaken; Authorities, Local  The Project (components, timing, impacts etc.) Sensitization pamphlets population, NGOs,  Natural resources, conservation areas and prepared; data on relevant Police, UPDF biodiversity aspects available  Socio-economic and social security issues  Health  Traffic Provision of water and sanitation facilities at the site Number of water sources and During pre- Developer LCs 50,000  Put in place adequate provision for drinking water sanitation facilities in place construction  Put in place sanitation facilities to cater for workers employed at the site Establishment of data on the strength of the soil Data available on soil During pre- Developer NEMA Part of project  Test the ability of the soil to hold the foundations strength on the River banks construction cost for the weir and power house Prevention and control of erosion and sediments Number and area of Regularly Contractor HSE Manager, Mostly  Acceptable construction techniques in terms of trees/grasses planted Vegetation expert included in drainage and erosion prevention Soil erosion control measures construction  Institute a re-vegetation programme in place cost.  Restrict vegetation clearing Additional  Installation of settlement ponds/sediment traps 20,000  Confine vehicles to access roads allocated  Avoid using herbicides mainly for re- vegetation programme Reduction in Visual Intrusion Number and area of Regularly Contractor HSE Manager, Mostly  Destruction of aesthetic features should only be trees/grasses planted; Vegetation expert included in done where this is not avoidable. Contracts with site restoration construction

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 167 Mitigation Measures – Organizational framework Monitoring indicators Frequency Responsibility Stakeholders Estimated involved Cost (USD)  In areas where vegetation is likely to be lost, conditions cost. restoration should be undertaken. Additional  Undertake slope stabilization in some areas where 20,000 access roads and the Power Station infrastructure allocated will be constructed mainly for re-  Use of environmentally friendly slope stabilization vegetation methodologies such as grassing programme  Site restoration and landscaping in work areas should be made part of the construction contracts  Disposal of stock piles of debris both murram and rocks according to NEMA guidelines  Use rock piles for construction purposes e.g. building, road construction/rehabilitation; allow local people free access to the rocks Establishment and protection of dumping site Record of area where the Regularly Contractor HSE Manager , Mostly dumping site will be located Pader DEO included in and measures taken for its construction protection cost. Additional 20,000 allocated mainly for re- vegetation programme Maintaining the minimum bypass flow along the 6 km Relevant information to this Throughout Project HSE Manager , Included in stretch to carry reduced river flow effect available; a three year Developer DWRM, NEMA construction trial period to monitor the cost. impact of reduced flow on Additional aquatic biodiversity instituted 10,000 allocated for inspection Protection of the River banks through river bank Assess baseline condition of At project Project HSE Manager , Included in scoring relevant sections of the river initiation and Developer DWRM, NEMA construction banks and continue at annual cost. monitoring intervals Additional

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 168 Mitigation Measures – Organizational framework Monitoring indicators Frequency Responsibility Stakeholders Estimated involved Cost (USD) 10,000 allocated for inspection Measure to reduce river sediment deposition Assess baseline condition of At project Project HSE Manager , Included in sediment deposition in initiation and Developer DWRM, construction relevant sections of the river at annual cost. and continue monitoring intervals Additional 10,000 allocated for inspection Ensuring appropriate soil quality in strategic areas Assess baseline condition of At project Project HSE Manager , Included in soil quality in strategic areas initiation and Developer DWRM, construction of the river and continue at annual cost. monitoring intervals Additional 10,000 allocated for inspection Maintaining acceptable water quality Assess baseline water quality Baseline data Project HSE Manager , Included in in strategic areas of the river available but Developer DWRM, construction and continue monitoring continue cost. monitoring at Additional annual 10,000 intervals allocated for inspection Flora and fauna protection Awareness programmes Regularly Project HSE Manager , Included in  Sensitization and awareness programmes on the available Developer Biodiversity construction value of conservation Monitoring data on flora and Experts, NEMA cost.  Regular monitoring of the status fauna available according to Additional methodologies above 20,000 allocated for inspection Pollution Control Programme in place Measures to reduce organic Regularly Contractor HSE Manager , LC, Mostly and inorganic waste from the DEO included in Project; Appropriate disposal construction of waste; regular cost.

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 169 Mitigation Measures – Organizational framework Monitoring indicators Frequency Responsibility Stakeholders Estimated involved Cost (USD) measurements of water and Additional soil quality parameters 20,000 according to methodologies allocated above; mainly for Restrictions on blasting; waste Appropriate location, handling methods and information regarding handling, storing and disposing of oil product and other chemicals Provision of water supply and sanitation DIZ & Number of water sources and During Project HSE Manager s, 20,000 INDIZ sanitation facilities in place construction Developer Contractors, LCs,  Chart estimated needs NGOs  Install pumps or other supply system  Sewerage system Social conflicts and crime issues Employment laws in place; Regularly HSE Manager Police, UPDF, LCs, 60,000 Give priority to locals when Intelligence recruiting skilled and Agencies unskilled labour; Offer training in special areas to local people; workers’ accommodation decent; Minutes of meetings with law enforcement agencies in place Occupational Health and Safety for workers and Number of clinics in place or During HSE Manager District Authorities, 80,000 provision of general health services in Angagura: supported; Number of construction LC, NGOs  Establish a clinic for construction staff building constructed;  Establish/renovate clinics for DIZ/INDIZ awareness materials; number communities as found appropriate of training delivered to health  Construction of new buildings for the project staff. workers; number of mosquito  Support awareness raising and preventative health nets distributed; adequacy of campaigns ( for malaria, safe water, sanitation, PPE given to workers; Policy nutrition, STDs etc) in place for accident  Training of local health workers reporting; evidence of

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 170 Mitigation Measures – Organizational framework Monitoring indicators Frequency Responsibility Stakeholders Estimated involved Cost (USD)  Acquire and distribute treated mosquito nets and compensation of accident other health care items victims  Periodical medical checks for workers  Provide workers with appropriate PPE such as dust masks, ear muffs, leather gloves, hard helmets, heavy duty boots, eye goggles and waist bands and their usage should be enforced  Train workers on the importance of using PPE and proper handling of equipment and machinery  Ensure that there is always a well-stocked First Aid Box and train workers on how to administer First Aid  Develop and enforce a policy on accident reporting and investigation  Ensure prompt compensation of accident victims in liaison with Insurance Service provider. HIV/AIDS interventions in place An HIV/AIDS service Every six HSE Manager NEMA, DEO 40,000 Periodic HIV/AIDS testing provider in place; HIV/AIDS months Awareness programmes in place intervention programme in place; Reports of HIV/AIDS sensitization available Monitoring of ambient Noise & Air Quality Noise and Air quality All the time Contractor HSE Manager 10,000 Control dust by: Measurements; ensuring bi  Regularly sprinkling water at the site using Number of patients treated for annual air bowsers respiratory diseases quality  Covering haulage trucks with canvas monitoring  Ensuring all vehicles and construction machinery are properly operated and maintained according to the manufacturers specifications Control noise by:  Ensuring vehicles are properly maintained and in good mechanical condition according to the manufacturers specifications  Providing workers with appropriate PPE Improvement of educational facilities: Evidence of contribution of During HSE Manager District Authorities, 40,000

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 171 Mitigation Measures – Organizational framework Monitoring indicators Frequency Responsibility Stakeholders Estimated involved Cost (USD)  Improvement of existing school facilities & the Project to schools construction LCs, NGOs construction of additional building where necessary  Recruitment of teacher  Support for schools (materials, furniture etc) Compensation programme Number of consultation Pre- Project HSE Manager , 50,000  Consultations with relevant institutions meetings held with relevant construction developer LEC, Local  Detailed evaluation of productivity and land institutions; property Councils, Pader and assessment of losses evaluation records; records of Gulu District  Detailed recording of property and ownership for compensations Authorities, local compensation or replacement, permanent or residents, NGOs temporary Gender mainstreaming in project activities Reports of gender Regularly HSE Manager NEMA, DEO 5,000 mainstreaming in place Protection of Cultural sites Record of consultation As required Project Contractor, MEMD, 5,000  Properly handle the issue of cultural sites meetings held with the developer Uganda National custodians of the cultural sites Museums

Protection of Archaeological Resources Record of information As required Project Contractor, MEMD, 2,000  Protection of any archaeological artifacts and sites provided to Uganda National developer Uganda National that might be discovered during construction Museum Museums Agricultural intensification (optional and dependent A special agricultural Regularly HSE Manager District Agricultural 20,000 on the developer) extension office established Officers, LC, NGOs  Extension services, including establishment of in Angagura Sub-county; office evidence of inputs given to  Improved inputs (seeds, fertilizers, equipment) local farmers; Number of  Credit schemes Credit schemes developed  Vaccination of livestock Provision of energy Area of trees planted in the Regularly HSE Manager LC, Local 40,000  Establishment of woodlots for fuel woods supply area; names of private entrepreneurs and  Extension activities nurseries providing tree businessmen,  Contact with private plantations and nurseries seedlings private plantations, District authorities, NGOs

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 172 Mitigation Measures – Organizational framework Monitoring indicators Frequency Responsibility Stakeholders Estimated involved Cost (USD) Electricity Supply in project vicinity by UMEME Number of businesses After project Project HSE Manager , - supplied with electricity completion Developer Contractors, Local Councils, UMEME Increase local employment and other business Evidence of affirmative Pre- HSE Manager LC, Local 40,000 opportunities: action taken to recruit locals; construction Entrepreneurs and  Compulsory for contractors to hire labour from support to capacity building and during businessmen , DIZ and INDIZ when required skills are available of locals for employment; construction Contractors, Project  Support to village authorities to organize list of support to alternative Developer people available for work livelihood activities  Training programmes for certain selected professions  Rotation credit schemes for business and local entrepreneurs  Orientation to community concerning impacts  Co-operation with local authorities in organizing renting land to newcomers Road safety measures: Speed limit signs erected; Throughout Project Contractors, HSE 20,000  Gentle slopes speed bumps constructed; Developer Manager s Road  Speed humps number of Road safety Authority  Speed limits awareness programmes  Public Awareness Programmes conducted Security measures: Police Post in Angagura Throughout Project LCs, UPDF, 20,000  Patrolling project areas strengthened; record of Developer District  Consult authorities, police and army units about security meetings in the area Authorities/Police project  Monitoring of population influx, housing and security issues  Strengthen police post in Angagura Trading centre Contingency 100,000 TOTAL 942,000

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 173 10.9 Closure Plan

It may be desirable that some facilities are left in place and others removed and the land reclaimed after the construction period is over. All temporary buildings, machinery and vehicles should be removed from the project area upon completion of construction in order to reduce visual intrusion. If needed, a Closure Plan should be prepared for abandonment or for permanent use of temporary facilities or the transfer of some of the facilities to Local Authorities. The Plan should be made by the HSE Manager in conjunction with district and local authorities.

10.10 Decommissioning Plan

Restoration/Decommissioning Plan All projects are finite. Time comes when they have to be decommissioned. This section describes procedures and plan for closure and post operation so that the environment is restored to the "No project" status or as much as possible.

On completion of the project e.g. 30-50 years from now, the site should be rehabilitated to as close as possible to its original state. This will involve a lot of demolitions, etc. Inspection of the site should be carried out before decommissioning. This will eliminate regeneration of particulate matter and mineral dusts produced during the active days of the project. Demolition equipment must also be tested to ensure that it does not pollute the environment. Any contractor to undertake the decommissioning works must involve competent staff including if possible an Engineer, Environment Management Specialist and Occupational Health and Safety Specialist, among others. These Specialists will have to follow the Environment, Health and Safety procedures for such facilities. These will include the following:

 Inspection of the site to identify any new compounds that have formed and could be allergenic;  Inspection and evaluation of the structures and equipment before dismantling them;  Disconnection of all services such as electricity, water and telecommunications, making sure that utility companies and concerned institutions are informed. These include UMEME, National Water and Sewerage Corporation and National Environment Management Authority  Disposal of all wastes in areas approved by NEMA  Planting trees and grass to restore vegetation cover so as to minimize any soil erosion  The developer should make sure that he creates a safe environment that can be put to another use  All recyclable materials to be kept safely for proper usage  It is important that the developer fences all pits and trenches that are not covered and puts a post-warning sign of the danger of falling in a hole or trench  The site can be turned to another use provided that another Environment Impact Assessment is undertaken and approved by relevant authorities.

11. ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING

The aim of monitoring is to detect whether a negative environmental or social impact has occurred and to estimate its magnitude. Monitoring may also work as an early-warning system to reveal critical indicators, unanticipated impacts and sudden changes in impact trends. Monitoring is also useful to determine the effectiveness and enforcement of different mitigation measures, and provide guidance for adjustments. Some of the parameters to me monitored are given below; the rest can be found in the EMP in Chapter 10.

11.1 Physical and Chemical Environments

11.1.1 Pre-Construction

Water quality It will be important to monitor the water quality before construction so that there is further analysis of the status of the water on a number of parameters before actual construction begins. The parameters monitored will be similar or more than those analyzed in section 5.11 of this report as presented in Table 5.13. It is important that these samples are taken from the same locations described under baseline studies. All the necessary parameters should be analyzed for better future monitoring.

11.1.2 Project Construction

Water quality A water quality monitoring programme should be implemented to document any water quality changes during the construction phase, and whether these can be related to the Project. Water quality data should include at least the following:  Dissolved oxygen content  Air and water temperature  pH  Redox potential  Turbidity  Conductivity  Total dissolved solutes  Total dissolved phosphorous (P)  Total dissolved nitrogen (N)  Total alkalinity  Sediment load  Bacterial counts

To ensure adequacy of the results in the early periods of project construction, monthly water monitoring should be done for at least four months. It is then recommended that quarterly water quality monitoring be undertaken in the preceding months and also increasing to bi-annual. These samples should be taken at the intake and at the outlet, upstream and downstream of the project area. River flow will be monitored continuously.

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 175 11.1.3 Project Operation

Water quality The water quality monitoring programme should continue into the operation phase. It is recommended that monitoring continue for at least 5 years, with sampling 2 times each year. Water quality sampling should be closely co-coordinated with the aquatic ecology sampling (see below).

11.2 Biological Environment

Monitoring of the biological environment should focus on monitoring terrestrial vegetation, birds and aquatic ecology as these groups have been selected as key indicators. However, it is also recommended that other animal groups be surveyed, though less frequently, for comparison to the baseline studies.

11.2.1 Terrestrial Vegetation and Conservation Areas Monitoring of terrestrial vegetation is important to measure habitat changes and excessive exploitation of natural resources. Focus will be on the riverine forest and the upland woodland vegetation, which is likely to be put under pressure due to population influx and increased demand for various natural resources for food, energy and building materials.

It is recommended that monitoring plots be established as soon as possible at selected locations along the north bank (Pader side) and up the slope within the Project area. Monitoring should focus on the presence and distribution of the riverine forest, including epiphytes and their host tree species. Up the slope monitor the population of important species such as medicinal plants, Shea nut trees and other useful tree species for charcoal and timber. Monitoring should be performed yearly during the first 5 years after operation starts.

11.2.2 Birds Birds have often been suggested as an appropriate group to serve as indicators of biodiversity richness. It is suggested that monitoring be done by an ornithologist at annual intervals for the first 5 years. It should concentrate on aquatic dependent species (in terms of presence or absence) including those listed in the baseline study as these are likely to be the most adversely affected. In addition, TSCs should be done in the project area to observe any changes in avifauna populations and distribution.

11.2.3 Aquatic Ecosystem Many of the important impacts of the hydropower project, even though a run-of-the-river project will be on the aquatic environment. Monitoring of physical, chemical and biological aspects will be therefore an essential part of the monitoring process.

Monitoring of water quality aspects is discussed above and should be coordinated with other aquatic ecology monitoring activities.

A systematic review of the consequences of variation in the bypass flow patterns should be made. As mentioned above, the minimum bypass flow (environmental flow) has been recommended as

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 176 1.500 m3/sec with an initial trial period of three (3) years. After the trial period and evaluation of the monitoring data, adjustments may be made to the minimum flow if it is considered necessary.

Monitoring of plankton, macrophytes, macro-invertebrates and fish species diversity and abundance should be performed following the procedures employed during the baseline studies. It is recommended that monitoring be done twice a year during the wet and dry seasons.

11.3 Socio-economic Environment and Health Issues

Monitoring the human environment will focus mainly on economic and health issues. The most outstanding issues are how the project affected peoples (PAPs) of the INDIZ will cope with the influx of workers and outsiders who will reside in their midst for three to five years, and the possible health consequences of such an event.

The impact of a large influx of a more educated and better trained group on a resident population can be overwhelming. These could include: marginalization due to the fact that new arrivals have more resources and skills than the resident population; increased morbidity and mortality because of health and psychological problems; food insecurity; loss of common property such as common grazing areas and access to water; and finally disruption in the social fabric of a community, the break down in social co-operation, kinship ties and normal reciprocity.

Introducing measures that are preventative are essential, and this is the underlying goal of the mitigation measures suggested in the preceding chapter. However, without proper and effective monitoring, many of the mitigation and enhancements will not be realized.

11.3.1 Compensation Compensation for land needs to be monitored during the pre-construction phase and to a limited extent during the construction and the start of the operation phase. Monitors will need to check whether both the developer and the key stakeholders i.e. Uganda Livestock Industries and Privatization Unit in the Ministry of Finance, Planning and Economic Development are happy and satisfied with the arrangement. Any disagreements can be solved through mutually agreed mediators.

11.3.2 Health A number of health issues are vital to the safety of the population during the construction and operational phases of the Project. It will be important that the proponent puts in place a clinic to manage the day to day health aspects of the project. Monitoring them will involve the visits of a medical doctor on the Project site. It is recommended that monitoring be ongoing but that more thorough checks be made at 6-month intervals starting at the beginning of the construction phase and then at one-year intervals. Some of the issues to be monitored should include:  Distribution and use of mosquito nets  Blood tests for malaria  Stool tests for water-borne vectors  Weight-height ratios of children under 5 to check on nutrition  Sanitation conditions in the camps and Angagura Trading Center, including number and condition of latrines, rubbish disposal, etc.  Adequacy of safe drinking water supplies

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 177  Traffic safety measures in place  Conditions of local clinics  Testing workers for HIV/AIDS and other STDs and instituting prevention programmes  Introducing work safety programmes and facilities for workers during the construction phase.

11.3.3 Other issues A number of other issues should be monitored. These include:  Level of implementation of agricultural production in co-operation with extension workers.  The workings of local administrations (LCIs in particular) and how they handle a range of issues relating to the population influx, housing, and security.  Inflation of food and fuel prices based on available data.  Status of employment opportunities for the local population.  Status of housing and facilities for the workers and camp followers in the INDZ.  The functioning of educational and local health facilities to cope with the population influx.  Status of the general security in the region.

A more specific monitoring plan will be devised for the Environmental Management Plan (EMP) with the necessary inputs from ongoing data collection, co-operation with district and local authorities and the registration of the affected population.

Information obtained during monitoring can be used in a number of ways, for example, to detect whether an impact has occurred, to determine its magnitude, to indicate unexpected impacts and changes in impact trends. To achieve this, monitoring must be carried out, at regular intervals, on many different parameters. Usually monitoring is particularly important during project construction and at the start of the operation period. It is possible that monitoring efforts can be reduced after some time of operation if the information collected indicates that the situation is stable/good.

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 178 12. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

An ESIA is an important basis for making a decision on whether a project should be implemented or not. An ESIA should conclude with a 'yes' or 'no' towards implementation of a project, and if 'yes' under which conditions and requirements should the project be implemented.

A range of criteria should be put forward as the basis for the conclusion in the ESIA, including:

. Is there a need for the project? . Have various alternatives for meeting the need been considered? . Is the project environmentally and socially acceptable?

In the case of the Achwa River Hydropower Project1 (HPP1), there is a demand for the electricity generated by the Project and out of several alternatives considered by the developer, Achwa River was found to be one of the most feasible sites without many known alternative uses. The baseline studies have shown that both the DIZ and INDIZ are almost devoid of large animals, amphibians, reptiles and birds which are attributed to extensive human activities in the area. The habitat types of the project area are widespread, both in the country and the region and most of the species are of low conservation concern. Developing the River for hydropower will therefore have a minor impact on biodiversity in the region.

The almost 6 km long stretch which will carry reduced river flow has no unique aquatic life. Human use of the affected stretch is limited to minor fishing, collection of drinking water and washing and possibly limited drinking by wildlife. Achwa Ranch Management once used River water from this section for domestic and livestock consumption. It is still possible to obtain piped water from the River some distance upstream which is at a more convenient higher elevation for the same purposes.

The direct impacts of the Project on the west bank (Gulu side) appear also to be minimal. The vegetation along the River bank and up the slope is undisturbed and the nearest settlement and crop farming is some 3 km away from the River bank.

Predicted significant environmental impacts have been thoroughly discussed and include:  Site clearance (loss of vegetation) that could leave the area susceptible to soil erosion, given the shallow sandy soils in the area;  Increased traffic in the area likely to degrade roads, likely accidents and increase maintenance costs for Local Authorities;  Pollution from dust and noise  Potential occupational health and safety hazards to workers;  Negative impacts on water quality  Fragmentation of habitat and vegetative communities  Negative impacts on aquatic ecology

This ESIA study has proposed appropriate measures to mitigate these adverse environmental impacts that are summarized in a comprehensive environmental management plan presented in Chapter 10.

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 179 The most serious negative socio-economic impacts of Achwa River Hydropower Plant1 (HPP1) are related to the anticipated rapid growth of the population in the vicinity of the Project area, which are often termed a ‘boom-town’ phenomenon. Typical characteristics of such situations are sudden and rapid increases in demand and need for all kinds of goods and services both physical (e.g. housing, food, energy, water, and transportation, waste disposal) and social (e.g. health, education, entertainment and law enforcement). Significant external assistance e.g. from Government will be needed to deal with some of these demands. Given the minimal physical and social infrastructure existing in the project area, and the limited financial, managerial, administrative and organizational capacities in the area, the need for external assistance is considered very high. However, arrangements for provision of facilities and services must take into account the uncertain and dynamic nature of the population they will serve.

The people residing in the project area hold a positive attitude towards the Project and steps should be taken to ensure that this is not lost. So far, the community members have co-operated with the developer and contractor on the already ongoing HPP2 construction works and there are all indications that this will be the same with HPP1. Expectations, however, are very high regarding the project benefits as highlighted from the consultations records. As is often the case with such developmental projects and hydropower projects in particular, the expectations of the local people far exceed what can be done in the short term and how much people can benefit from the Project directly.

The population of the Project area is poor and suffers from inadequate healthcare, educational facilities and infrastructure. Thus, the Project can function as an important catalyst for development in the area by providing welfare improvements and stimulating business activities. Although the Project is likely to disrupt the normal functioning of these communities, it is expected that mitigation measures will both lessen the effect of negative impacts and optimize the positive impacts.

The run-of-the-river Achwa Hydropower Project has several characteristics that can reduce the negative impacts to almost negligible levels. Successful implementation of the above environmental and social mitigation measures and monitoring management activities will further reduce the potential impacts and optimize potential benefits.

Based on the above arguments, the Consultant strongly recommends that the HPP1 Project management implements the stated mitigation measures and monitoring activities and any other activities aimed at achieving best environmental, safety and social practices. The following are also recommended for action by the developer/contractor.  ARPE undertakes to commission independent ESIAs for all those activities that fall under the third schedule of NEA as requiring ESIA including transmission lines during operation, creation of campsites, etc.  ARPE ensures that all land acquisition processes follow the right procedures and that all land affected entities have approved the activities before construction commences. These include among others Uganda Livestock Industries and Privatization Unit in the Ministry of Finance, Planning and Economic Development.  ARPE and the contractor undertakes close monitoring of the effects of the reduced river flow on aquatic ecology through the construction period and at least two years after

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 180 commissioning of the plant. Provisions should be made for some flexibility in the operation regime of the power station in the dry seasons.  At the completion of the construction phase every effort will be made to restore the sites that have been temporary used to close their original state. All redundant facilities including machinery and boulders will be removed from the project area in order to reduce visual intrusion while any standing structures that are no longer of use by the project will be demolished or given to communities for other uses.  ARPE and all its contractors will make attempts to involve local government leadership especially Pader District Local Governmnet and Angagura sub county leadership for smooth operation of works in their area and easy project reception. This will also help in fostering the social economic aspects of the project within the communities and the district.  Regular environment, health and safety inspection protocols will be conducted as per the requirements of the National Environment (Audit) Regulation, 2006  There will be strict adherence to the legislation of Uganda that requires ongoing monitoring, audits and regular reporting to NEMA, ERA and other relevant authorities during planning, operations, decommissioning and rehabilitation  ARPE will implement the environmental management and monitoring plan and ensure that appropriate mitigation measures are sought in liaison with relevant authorities if any other adverse impacts are identified during the course of implementing the hydropower project.

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 181 13. REFERENCES

Adjanohoun, J.E., L. Ake Assi, A.M. Alia, C.A. Amai and E.A. Sofwora et al., 1993. Traditional Medicine and Pharmacopea: Contribution to Ethnobotanic and floristic studies in Uganda. Organization of Africa Unity/Scientific Technical and Research Commission, Uganda.

Bennun, L and Njoroge, P (eds). 1996. Birds to watch in east Africa: a preliminary red data list. National Museums of Kenya, Nairobi.

Bennun, L, Dranzoa, C and Pomeroy, D. 1996. The forest birds of Kenya and Uganda. Journal of East African Natural History 85, 23-48.

Bukenya- Ziraba, R. 1996)The non-cultivated edible plants of Uganda. Napreca monograph series No.9, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, March 1996–

Byaruhanda,A, Kasoma,P, and Pomeroy,D, 2001. Important Bird Areas in Uganda. Birdlife International. NatureUganda Kampala Uganda.

Carswell, M, Pomeroy, D, Reynolds, J and Tushabe, H. 2005. The bird atlas of Uganda. British ornithologists’ Union, London.

Department of Chemistry, Makerere University, 15 March, 2017. River water analysis results.

Directorate of Water Development (DWD), March 10, 2014; Construction Permit (JJA101230/1CPHDW 2014)

Directorate of Water Development (DWD), March 11, 2014; Surface Water Abstraction Permit (PAD901231/1SWHDW 2014).

Environmental and Social Impact Assessment: 192 MW Hydroelectric Power Project, Tehsil Manali, Distric Kullu, Himachal Pradesh; February 2009; Non Technical Summary –

Freeman, SN, Pomeroy, DE and Tushabe, H. 2003. The use of Timed Species Counts to estimate avian abundance indices in species-rich communities. African Journal of Ecology 41, 337-348.

Generation and Sale of Electricity from Rivers Achwa and Agago Hydropower Project in Pader, Gulu and Kitgum Districts, Volume 1: P.A.C. S.p.a., Technical Feasibility Study Report, 2013.

Generation and Sale of Electricity from Rivers Achwa and Agago Hydropower Project in Pader, Gulu and Kitgum Districts, Volume 1: P.A.C. S.p.a., Executive Summary, Feasibility Study Report, 2012.

Howard, P.C. 1991. Nature conservation in Uganda’s protected forest reserves. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland & Cambridge, U.K.

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 182 Howard, P.C. and Davenport, T. R. B. (Eds). (1996) Forest Biodiversity Reports. Vols. 1-33. Uganda Forest Department, Kampala, Uganda.

International Finance Corporation (IFC), Environmental, Health and Safety General Guidelines April 30 2007.

Ivens, G.W. 1967. East African Weeds and Their Control. Oxford University Press. Nairobi. Katende A.B. Wild food plants and mushrooms of Uganda (RELMA Technical Handbook series) Langdale-Brown, I., Osmaston, H.A. & Wilson, J.G. 1964. The vegetation of Uganda and its bearing on land uses. Uganda Government Printer, Entebbe.

Langdale-Brown, L, Osmaston, HA and Wilson, JG. 1964. The vegetation of Uganda and its bearing on land-use. Government of Uganda, Entebbe.

Najma Dharani and Abiy Yenesew. 2010. Medicinal Plants of East Africa; an Illustrated Guide

Nalwanga, D, Pomeroy, D, Vickery, J and Atkinson, PW. 2012. A comparison of two methods for assessing bird species richness and abundance in tropical farmlands, Bird Study 59, 83- 95.

National Environment Management authority (NEMA), Environmental Impact Assessment Guidelines for Energy Sector, June 2004

National Environment Management Authority (NEMA); 28th February 2014. Certificate of Approval of Environmental Impact Assessment for the proposed Agago-Achwa Hydro Power Plant (HPPI)

Pader District Development Plan 2012/2013.

Pomeroy, D. & Tushabe, H. (Eds) 2008. The State of Uganda’s biodiversity. Biodiversity, Trends and Ecological Footprint, Sixth Biennial Report.

Tallantire, E M & Lind A C (1962) Some Common Flowering Plants of Uganda.

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 183 14. ANNEXES

14.1 ANNEX 1: NEMA ESIA CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL FOR HPPI

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 184

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 185

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 186

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 187

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 188

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 189

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 190

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 191

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 192 14.2 ANNEX 2: CONSTRUCTION PERMIT FOR HPPI

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 193 ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 194

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 195

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 196 14.3 ANNEX 3: WATER ABSTRACTION PERMIT

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 197

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 198

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 199

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 200 14.4 ANNEX 4: APPLICATION FOR CHANGE OF NAME

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 201 14.5 ANNEX 5: ANALYSIS OF WATER SAMPLES FOR HPP1 TAKEN DURING THE ESIA UPDATE FIELD WORK

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 202

14.6 ANNEX 6: A LIST OF PLANT SPECIES IN HPP1

a) GRASS CATEGORY COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME Blue grass Cymbopogon afronardus Crab grass Digitaria diagnosis Guinea grass Panicum maximum Sickle grass Cetenium concinnum Surinam grass Brachiaria decumbens Spear grass Imperata cylindrica Wild papyrus /Sedge grass Cyperus sp. nr exculentus

b) LOWER PLANT FORMS COMMONNNAME PLANT GROUP Ganoderma Fungus

c) KEY SPECIES OF HERBS COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME - Rhus vulgaris Cat tails plant Acalypha bipartite - Afromomum species. Simple-leaved wild grape Ampelocissus africana Wild asparagus Asparagus sp. - Cissus adenocaule - Clematis hirsuta Benghal dayflower or spiderwort Commelina bengalensis Wild lima bean Phaseoulus species - Phyllanthus muellenaranus Senna Senna bicapsularis Prickly Sida or Prickly fanpetals Sida alba Stinging nettle Urtica massiaca

d) TREE CATEGORY COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME - Bridelia scleroneura Acacia Acacia species A. breviceps, A. hockii Wild custard apple Anona senegelansis Thorny bush Caesalpina decapitate - Capparis erythrocarpis Simple-spined num-num Carissa edulis - Clerodendrum myricoides Forest bush willow Combretum binderianum Flame tree Erythrina abyssinica Fig tree Ficus dicranostyla - Grewia mollis False marula Lannea schweinfurthi Palm tree Phoenix reclinata - Piliostigma thonningi - Saba comorensis Toothbrush tree Salvadora persica

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 203 'African violet tree Securidaca longepedunculata Monkey orange / wild orange Stryhnos innocua Water berry/ Snake bean tree Syzigium guineense - Terminalia species Shea tree Vitellaria paradoxa Wil plum Vitex species Shea nut tree Vittelaria parade - Ximenia Americana

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 204 14.7 ANNEX 7: A LIST OF BIRD SPECIES IN PROJECT AREA (HPP1& HPP2)

ATLAS No. Species name CODE TSC1 TSC2 109 LIZARD BUZZARD Kaupifalco monogrammicus 129 f 5 6 142 HELMETED GUINEAFOWL Numida meleagris 190 G 2 0 283 RED-EYED DOVE Streptopelia semitorquata 350 f 6 4 305 EASTERN GREY PLANTAIN EATER Crinifer zonurus 376 6 2 365 LITTLE SWIFT Apus affinis 443 Ae 3 4 367 ALPINE SWIFT Tachymarptis melba 449 p,Ae 420 AFRICAN GREY HORNBILL Tockus nasutus 524 1 1 426 SPECKLED TINKERBIRD Pogoniulus scolopaceus 553 F 2 3 512 ANGOLA SWALLOW Hirundo angolensis 627 w,Ae 3 3 529 YELLOW-THROATED LONGCLAW Macronyx croceus 988 G 6 6 562 COMMON BULBUL Pycnonotus barbatus 732 f 6 6 638 RED-FACED CISTICOLA Cisticola erythrops 857 w 5 0 658 TAWNY-FLANKED PRINIA Prinia subflava 913 f,w 6 5 677 GREY-BACKED CAMAROPTERA Camaroptera brachyura 837 f 4 6 787 SCARLET-CHESTED SUNBIRD Chalcomitra senegalensis 1122 f 1 2 815 GREY-BACKED FISCAL Lanius excubitoroides 1032 A,f,w 3 6 818 RED-BACKED SHRIKE Lanius collurio 1030 P 833 BLACK-CROWNED TCHAGRA Tchagra senegala 1025 2 4 843 BLACK-HEADED GONOLEK Laniarius erythrogaster 1003 f 2 5 850 AFRICAN BLACK-HEADED ORIOLE Oriolus larvatus 649 f 5 6 858 PIAPIAC Ptilostomus afer 659 3 0 973 BLACK-CHEEKED WAXBILL Estrilda charmosyna 1228 4 0 974 RED-CHEEKED CORDON-BLEU Uraeginthus bengalus 1261 0 1 980 BRONZE MANNIKIN Lonchura cucullata 1266 0 5

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 205

14.8 ANNEX 8: DETIALS OF CONSULTATIONS WITH DIFFERENT STAKEHOLDERS

a) Consultations with Angagura Sub-County Leaders The team had a consultative meeting with the Sub-County chief, LC III chairperson and the Parish chiefs of Angagura. The aim of the meeting was to disclose the project and to hear from the leaders any concerns or provide views and also hear from the leaders if there have been any major changes that had occurred in the project area since there was an ESIA study that was conducted in 2014. Table below gives the key concerns expressed by the leaders.

Purpose of To obtain views on the proposed project meeting: Date held & place: 13th March, 2017 Update: The Sub-County Chief welcomed the team to Angagura Sub- county (s/c).

The consultant representative gave a brief about the Achwa HPP 1 project and their involvement and the team present. The members were informed of the reason of the consultation which was to update the previously ESIA made on the Achwa HPP 1 project. The presentation included:  Project Background  Project location  Project Activities The leaders were asked to give their views or concerns or expectation they anticipate during construction and operation of the Hydro Power Plant especially picking from the experience from HPP2, which is under construction. Concerns and Views: Employment  The developer should provide employment for the people in the project area.  At the beginning of construction of the HPP 2, ARPE during consultation with the Sub-County and the community promised to employ local labour from within the project area. However, the contractor has been bringing labour from outside and thus the youth within Angargura Sub-County have not been employed. Before project inception, it was agreed that at least 60% of local labour should be got from within the Sub-County however this wasn’t not fulfilled. Lifestyle of the  Development of the HPP 2 in Angagura Sub-County has changed community (Selling the lifestyle of the women. Women leave their homes to sell road side goods) vegetables, which was not accepted culturally. In their culture, women were not allowed to sell goods on the road by themselves, however due the different people coming to the area to earn a living, the women of Angagura picked up the lifestyle.

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 206 Influx of people  According to the LC 3 chairperson, the implementation of the HPP1 Project might attract an external workforce to the project area hence having an influx of people. This was experienced with HPP 2 where a number of people increased in the area.  The influx of people has brought about increase in crime, social disorder and HIV/AIDS risk from prostitution.  Crime rate had increased due to external workforce who have come from outside the district to seek employment. On access to fishing  People were restricted from going to carry out fishing from the sites river which has been a source of income and food yet the river has been a fishing ground for some people. There is fear that construction of the HPP 1 would also have a big impact affecting people’s incomes.  According to the LC 3 chairman, the alternative access route that was given to the community fishing had been quite a long distance.  The Intake and power bank will change the course of the river bank and hence location of fishing will change. On Benefits  Positively the project has changed the mind-set of the community around the project area. Majority of community members have been able to come up with different business activities which has boosted their incomes. According to the Sub-County Chief, the people now do not only rely on farming as their main source of income.  The developer should build some schools within the project area as a CSR.  The developer has improved on the rehabilitation of the Angangura Health Center, this is a positive benefit.  The Sub-County has started receiving local service tax.  The developer has provided scholarships to secondary students especially the girls. On Health care  The increase in population due to the project may also increase on the pressure of the Health Centre services. Within the project site, there is only one Health centre, (Angagura Health Center) which is used by the communities around. According to the Parish chief, the number of population in Angagura sub-county as per 2014 census has increased to 9,200 people. On cultural  During construction of the HHP 1, the contractors should be resources mindful of the cultural resources of the community. Experience from HHP 2 shows that some trees which were of cultural importance to the community were cut down without consultation from the people.

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 207 On Social Services  The road leading to the HHP 1 should be improved. There has been a burden on the road which is being used by two projects (ARPE project and Quarry site). There are have been heavy vehicle which have had an impact to the community. According to the sub-county leaders, before development of the HPP the road used to be a community foot path with few access by vehicles. On Hunting  Land around project site used to be hunting ground for wild animals by the community members. The construction of the HPP in the area has had an impact since the community has been restricted to access the project site and in addition the noise from blasts have chased away most of the wild animals such as edible rats and antelopes. This according to the LC 3 chairman was the best place for animals.

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 208 b) Consultations with Pader District Local Administration The staff interviewed from Pader Districts included the District Environment/Wetland Officers, Chief Administrative Officers, LCV Chairman, District Health Officer, District Community Development Officer, and District Water Officer. Table below shows their views about the project.

Purpose of To obtain views on the proposed project meeting: Date held & place: 13th March, 2017 Update: The ACAO welcomed the team to Pader district.

The consultant representative gave a brief about the Achwa HPP 1 project and their involvement and the team present. The members were informed of the reason of the consultation which was to update the previously ESIA made on the Achwa HPP 1 project. The presentation included:  Project Background  Project location  Project Activities Concerns and Views: On Report  Where will this updated information of the report be shared? Because initially consultations were made at the district and recommendations given to ARPE. Will this information be shared with the district officials?  A copy of the report should be availed to the Environmental officer. Information  Information sharing by the developer is poor. sharing  ARPE doesn’t fulfil their promise. There has been gap in terms of information sharing. They promised to visit the CAO, however this has not happened. On District  There should be full cooperation and involvement with the district involvement leadership  ARPE should always involve the district technical officials when interacting with community. ARPE has had a number of community engagements without involving the district officials. Working together with the community could help them address a number of issues without getting resistance from the people. Road construction:  ARPE promised to improve the road leading to the project sites. However this has not yet been implemented. There is a lot of dust affecting the communities within the project area.

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 209 On Healthcare  The developer should consider constructing a maternity block at the Achwa Ranch Health centre II as benefit to the community. This was initially discussed with ARPE.  A borehole should also be constructed within the HC II. At the moment they fetch water in jerry cans.  There is an increase in the number of pregnancies and defilement between 17-19 years. This may be attributed to the project. There is need to have sensitization within the project area, that is to the community and the workers. Development Plans  The community development plans are not being fulfilled by the developer. Previously ARPE together with the district officials had discussed priority on community developments however, the developer has come up with their own plans which were initially not proposed.  Recommendation discussed between the developer and district regarding community development should be documented and shared with the district and a time frame provided. On benefits  When the Hydro power dam is constructed this power will be transported to the Substation in Lira hence not benefiting. The government or developer should consider constructing a substation in Angagura so as to benefit in future. On Labour Issues  There have been grievances reported by some of the workers regarding poor payments and unfair termination of workers. On Accidents  A number of accidents have been reported by community members. The district officials plan on going to investigate on the reports made

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 210 c) Local Community Consultations Local community consultations were conducted on 13th March 2017 in Burlobo village in Angagura sub-county. The purpose of these meetings was to:  Introduce the project to the local communities  Understand the resources available in the project area and the extent and nature of human socioeconomic activities  Using participatory processes, identify the probable socio-economic impacts arising from the implementation of the project  Seek a consensus and recommendation of mitigating the probable socio-economic impacts.

Over 100 community members from different villages within the project area attended the meeting. The table below gives the concerns raised by the community members who attended the meeting. The number was presented by both men and women with representatives of the local council.

Purpose of To obtain views on the proposed project meeting: Date held & place: 13th March, 2017 Update: Short prayer was conducted by Hon. BD Orec. Introduction were made from the consultants and leaders from the communities.

The chair person (LC chairperson Burlobo) welcome all members who turn up for the meeting, he welcomed the consultants.

The consultant representative gave a brief about the Achwa HPP 1 project and their involvement and the team present. The members were informed of the reason of the consultation which was to update the previously ESIA made on the Achwa HPP 1 project. The presentation included:  Project Background  Project location  Project Activities The leaders were asked to give their views or concerns or expectation they anticipate during construction and operation of the Hydro Power Plant especially picking from the experience from HPP2, which is under construction. Concerns and Views: On Project  Some of the community members inquire when the project will commence. They were earlier communicated that the HHP 1 construction will begin however there was not any works.  The female councillor Burlobo Parish Lawino Jackline welcomed the project and commended the developer for the works so far going on. However she informed the members that since the commencement of HPP 2 water in the area has depleted yet it has been the source of fish and domestic water for the community.

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 211 On Livelihood  The project area is an agricultural land of the people of Angagura. Majority use the land and river for cultivation crop, it is a hunting place, and fishing ground. Because of construction of the HHP 2, access to place has been barred hence affecting people’s livelihood.  There was a request from the community members that as part of the livelihood projects for women, the project should consider ox- ploughs, provision of seedlings, as well as capacity building on how to improve on Agriculture as a business. On Employment  There was a request that the local community be given first priority when recruiting casual labour  Angagura Sub County and Burlobo Parish has young women and men, both skilled and unskilled personnel who can benefit from the project however, majority have been denied opportunity to get jobs.  There was a request that the developer should consider recruiting the human resource officer from who comes from the region, if possible from Angagura Sub County. On Health  There was a request that the project helps improve the health care services at Achwa Ranch Health Centre II. One of the member mentioned that the Health unit of Burlobo lacks OPD, maternity ward, staff house and bore hole. Benefits  The community members appreciated the developer for the good work and support they have provided to people of Angagura. They were happy that the women are benefiting from the equipment that was donated to the maternity ward I Angagura H/C.  There was request from community members that scholarship opportunities on education should benefit both boys and girls since the communities are very poor and cannot fully afford paying school fees.  Some of the members wanted to know whether the Achwa HPP 1 will benefit the local community. After construction of the hydro power plant, will the communities living within the project area benefit from the power generated by the power station?  The community members requested the project developer to help support the women living in the project area. Women suggested support such as vocational school to help them pay the school fees of their children.  The developer should consider setting boreholes at Acholi ranch Primary School, and Aswa Army bridge Primary School to help the communities who have been fetching water from the Achwa River.

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 212 Cultural Resources  One of the elders of Burlobo informed the members that the location where the HHP 1 is to be constructed is a cultural site for the community members. Therefore construction of the hydro power plant would have interference with the local cultural sites.  The community members informed the team that ranch where the proposed HPP 1 will be constructed is a hunting ground for wild animals by the people. The construction of the HPP 1 will therefore have an impact. They reported experiencing the same challenge after development of the Achwa HPP 2 as the community has been restricted to access the project. On River Use  Members inquired whether the community will still use the Achwa River after construction of the HPP 1 since it is a source for domestic purpose.

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 213

14.9 ANNEX 9: STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATIONS LISTS

a) Pader District

b) Angagura Sub-County

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 214

c) Local communities surrounding Achwa HPP I

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 215

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 216

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 217

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 218

ESIA Update for Agago – Achwa River Hydropower Project (HPP1) by Greenbelt Consult - 2017 219