RP195 Public Disclosure Authorized THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA MINISTRY OF ENERGY AND MINERAL DEVELOPMENT Public Disclosure Authorized ENERGY FOR RURAL TRANSFORMATION PROJECT Expansion of a Micro-hydro Station at Kisiizi: Environmental Impact Study Public Disclosure Authorized Final Report October, 2001 Prepared by: NORPLAN (U) Ltd. P.O.Box 7544 KAMPALA, UGANDA Tel: 257276, 34024415 Fax: 257861 Public Disclosure Authorized Email: [email protected] FiL | ^ Ministry of Energy and Mineral Development (MoE&MD) Environment and Social Assessment for the Rural Transformation Projects Page i EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Backqround There is growing demand for electricity in rural Uganda, which is cur- rently not being met by the present supply. The Government of Uganda (GoU) and the Uganda Electricity Board (UEB) have recently introduced measures to decentralise the sector as part of a strategy to correct shortfalls and encourage private participation in the power market. The World Bank (WB) is providing assistance through the Energy for Rural Transformation (ERT) project as part of a large initiative enti- tled African Rural Renewable Energy Initiative (AFRREI). The objec- tive for the programme is to facilitate private sector involvement in supplying electricity as a catalyst for general rural development. The proposed Kisiizi mini-hydropower project in the West Nile falls under the category of 'independent grid systems in isolated areas' and is thus eligible for financial support through the programme. The objective of this study was to conduct a scoping exercise in order to ensure that the first phase of the project would conform to GoU and WB guidelines on environmental and social safeguards. This en- tailed a review of an existing Business Plan and the Project Design and Cost Estimates Report, site visits and consultations with various stakeholders. The method used in appraising the project consists of three steps: evaluating baseline data, assessing impacts according to magnitude and duration, and arriving at an overall impact assess- ment. A review of the policy, legal and institutional framework is also provided. Project Description The proposed Kisiizi Electrification project (Phase I) is a an expan- sion of existing micro-hydro station from 60kW to 250kW and con- struction of distribution lines to serve the surrounding communities. The present project is currently supplying the Hospital Energy needs. The project is targeting; Kisiizi hospital, Kisiizi trading centre, Kisiizi market and the Kihanga area with a total peak demand of 182 kW. The local mini grid is to be extended to serve communities within a distance of 2km from the generation centre. The project will use local eucalyptus poles obtained from within their forest reserves within the site for construction of the 11 kV overhead lines. The project is estimated to cost USD 0.5 million plus additional distri- bution costs of USD 0.2 million, proposes to manage billing system by using smart card boxes or prepayment wherby one gets automati- cally disconnected once the prepaid bill expires. The tariffs to be lev- ied have been studied and are expected to be affordable compared with the current expenditures on alternative energy uses. Proiect Settinq The project is located at the Rushoma River, near Kisiizi Falls, Ru- kungiri District on the Rushoma River. There are no scale industries Kizirsi Scoping study 03.11.26 NORPLAN A.S Ministry of Energy and Mineral Development (MoE&MD) Environment and Social Assessment for the Rural Transformation Projects Page ii in the vicinity of the site and the resultant air and water quality is con- sidered to be fairly high. Vegetation and wildlife were considered as having a low value along with the aquatic ecosystem and biodiversity for the region. This is primarily because the area is highly cultivated and inhabited by native Bakiga people. The majority are subsistence farmers practising customary land tenure and limited crop rotation. Kisiizi Falls are within freehold lands owned by the hospital of the church of Uganda. There is little in the way of cash crop or other economic activity except petty trading. A few of the households de- rive their livelihood from employment income. Services and infrastructure are poor to inadequate. As a result, the local population welcome the project as a development opportunity. Proiect Impacts The most important impacts to consider are changes in river flow, water quality and aquatic ecosystem as a result of reduced flow be- tween the intake and the outlet, and general changes in water condi- tions and characteristics. Impacts on vegetation, wildlife and other environmental issues are considered low or minimal. Impacts on the human environment that warrant consideration are the loss of land and agricultural and eucalyptus production due to in- undation by the reservoir. In addition, the creation of the reservoir may lead to increase in some water-borne diseases. Also influx of people into the project area may lead to an increased incidence of sexually transmitted diseases (STDs), including HIV/AIDS. Finally, the visual and aesthetic aspects of the rapids along this stretch of the Rushoma River will be diminished during the dry season. The potential benefits of the project are also highlighted. Clearly the demand for a regular supply of electricity to Kisiizi hospital and sur- rounding areas is most welcome and should lead to considerable economic development as well as social improvements touching on very many aspects of people's lives. In investments in anticipation of the project being built, the value of land has gone up and investments seem to be increasing. Recommendations In order to eliminate or reduce negative impacts a number of mitiga- tion measures are recommended. They include restrictions on clear- ing for construction, erosion prevention, waste disposal, awareness creation. There is spearheaded initiated need for optimising positive impacts through the employment of locals for non-skilled labour, improved in- frastructure by the district administration and credit schemes initiated by NGOs in the vicinity of the project. Kiziisi Scoping study 03.11.26 NORPLAN A.S Ministry of Energy and Mineral Development (MoE&MD) Environment and Social Assessment for the Rural Transformation Projects Page iii TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION ............................................... 1-1 1.1 Background ............................................... 1-1 1.2 Objectives of the study ............................................... 1-2 1.3 Study team ............................................... 1-2 1.4 Methods ............................................... .1-2 1.5 Policy, legal and administrative framework ............................................... 1-4 1.5.1 Environment Management ............................................... 1-4 1.5.2 Wildlife Management ............................................... 1-5 1.5.3 Electricity Regulation ............................................... 1-5 1.5.4 Water Resource Management ............................................... 1-6 1.5.5 Land ............................................... 1-6 1.5.6 Privatisation and Investment ............................................... 1-6 1.5.7 Local Government Act ............................................... 1-7 1.5.8 Local Councils ................................................ 1-7 1.5.9 Private Sector, Civil Society Institutions, NGOs ............................................... 1-7 1.5.100ther Relevant Legislation ...................... ......................... 1-7 1.5. 11 International Agreements (To be revisited) .................................... 1-8 1.5.12 Donors and Financing Institutions ........ ................................. 1-8 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ................................................ 2-1 2.1 Project development objectives ................................................ 2-1 2.2 Studies and present state of the project ............................................ 2-1 2.3 Technical Description ................................................ 2-1 2.3.1 The Present Scheme ............................................... 2-1 2.3.2 The Proposed Scheme ............................................... 2-2 2.4 Alternatives to the project ............................................... 2-2 2.44.1 Extend the UEB National Grid ............................................... 2-2 2.4.2 Diesel Generation ............................................... 2-3 2.4.3 The Zero Option ............................................... 2-3 3 PROJECT SETTING ............................................... 3-1 3.1 Biophysical environment .................... 3-1 3.1.1 Location ................... 3-1 3.1.2 Air quality ................... 3-1 3.1.3 Water quality ................... 3-1 3.1.4 Vegetation ................... 3-3 3.1.5 Wildlife ................... 3-3 3.1.6 Aquatic ecosystem ................... 3-4 3.1.7 Biodiversity ................... 3-5 3.2 Human Environment .. 3-5 3.2.1 Human Population .3-5 3.2.2 Agriculture .3-6 3.2.3 Economy and Trade .3-7 3.2.4 Land Tenure and Administration .3-7 3.2.5 Energy .3-8 3.2.6 Health .3-8 3.2.7 Education .3-9 3.2.8 Other Services .3-9 Kiziis; Scoping study 03.11.26 NORPLAN A.S Ministry of Energy and Mineral Development (MoE&MD) Environment and Social Assessment for the Rural Transformation Projects Page iv 3.2.9 Cultural heritage ........................................ 3-10 3.2. 1OAttitudes to the projects ........................................ 3-10 4 PROJECT