Khuitam HE Project Arunachal Pradesh - EIA

Adishankar Power Private Limited
New Delhi
Environmental Impact Assessment

For
66 MW Khuitam HE Project
Arunachal Pradesh
Prepared by:
Energy Infratech Private Limited

Gurgaon, Haryana
CONTENTS
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
CHAPTER NO CONTENTS PAGE NO
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 HYDRO POWER POTENTIAL OF : 1-1
INDIA
1.2 POWER SCENARIO AND : 1-4

ARUNACHAL PRADESH
1.3 KHUITAM HYDROELECTRIC : 1-5

PROJECT (66 MW)
1.3.1 Background of the Project : 1-7
1.3.2 Need for the project : 1-10
1.3.3 Location of Project Area : 1-10
1.3.4 Accessibility : 1-11
1.3.5 Alternative Studies carried out for 1-11

various major components of the
Project and Final choice of Project
Parameters
1.3.6 Salient features of Khuitam (66MW) : 1-13

HEP
1.3.7 Policy, Legal and Administrative : 1-15

Framework of Khuitam HEP
CHAPTER 2 CONCEPTS &

METHODOLOGY
2.1 CONCEPTS : 2-1
2.2 METHODOLOGIES : 2-3
2.2.1 Study Area : 2-3
2.2.2 Field Surveys : 2-4
2.2.3 Scoping Matrix : 2-5
2.2.4 Geology : 2-7
2.2.5 Meteorology : 2-7
2.2.6 Hydrology : 2-7
Contents____________________________________________________________________
i

KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
2.2.7 Land Environment : 2-7
2.2.7.1 Data acquisition and preparation : 2-8
2.2.7.2 Land use / Land Cover : 2-9
2.2.7.3 Delineation of catchment, watershed : 2-11

and sub-watersheds
2.2.7.4 Slope : 2-11
2.2.7.5 Soils : 2-11
2.2.7.6 Composite erosion intensity mapping : 2-11
2.2.7.7 Delineation of Influence zone and : 2-12

submergence zone
2.2.8 Ambient Air Quality : 2-12
2.2.9 Ambient Noise Level Measurement : 2-12
2.2.10 Water Quality and Aquatic Ecology : 2-12
2.2.10.1 For Physico-Chemical Parameters of : 2-12

River Water
2.2.10.2 Aquatic Ecology : 2-13
2.2.11 Floral Sampling and Phytosociological : 2-14

Analysis
2.2.11.1 Indices used for phyto-sociological : 2-15
analysis
2.2.12 Faunal Assessment and Indices used : 2-17
2.2.12.1 Methodology used for avian : 2-17

fauna/butterflies/ Insects
2.2.12.2 Mammals : 2-18
2.2.13 Socio-Economic Assessment : 2-19
2.2.13.1 Secondary data sources : 2-19
2.2.13.2 Primary data collection : 2-19
2.3 PREDICTION OF IMPACTS AND : 2-20

THEIR ASSESSMENT
Contents____________________________________________________________________
ii

KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
2.3.1 Matrix system : 2-20
2.3.2 Battelle Environmental Evaluation : 2-21

System (BEES)
CHAPTER 3 PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT

3.1 PHYSIOGRAPHY : 3-1
3.1.1 Introduction : 3-1
3.1.2 Drainage : 3-2
3.1.3 Relief : 3-3
3.1.4 Slope : 3-4
3.1.5 Aspects : 3-4
3.1.6 Land Use/Land Cover : 3-5
3.2 SOILS : 3-6
3.3 HYDRO-METEOROLOGY : 3-10
3.3.1 Temperature and Humidity : 3-11
3.3.2 Rainfall : 3-11
3.3.3 Discharge Data : 3-12
3.3.4 Water Availability Studies : 3-14
3.3.5 Design Flood : 3-15
3.3.5.1 Design Flood Criteria : 3-15
3.3.5.2 Design Flood Approach : 3-16
3.3.5.3 Development of Unit Hydrograph. : 3-17
3.3.5.4 Design Flood : 3-17
3.3.5.5 Conclusion and Recommendations : 3-18
3.3.6 Sedimentation : 3-18
3.4 GEOLOGY : 3-20
3.4.1 Regional Geology : 3-20
Contents____________________________________________________________________
iii

KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
3.4.2 Geology of Project area of Khuitam : 3-20

HE Project.
3.4.3 Tectonic setup of the Area : 3-21
3.5 GEOLOGY OF PROJECT

COMPONENTS
3.5.1 Geology at Barrage Site 3-25
3.5.2 Geology of Reservoir Area 3-25
3.5.3 Geology at Head Race Tunnel 3-26
3.5.4 Geology at Surge Shaft and Pressure 3-26

Tunnel & Penstock Systems
3.5.5 Geology of Power House Complex 3-27
3.6 SEISMICITY : 3-27
3.7 RESERVOIR RIM STABILITY & : 3-30

COMPETENCY
3.8 LAND SLIDES IN THE PROJECT : 3-31

AREA OF KHUITAM H.E.PROJECT
3.9 LAND REQUIREMENT FOR : 3-32

KHUITAM HEP
3.10 AIR ENVIRONMENT : 3-34
3.11 TRAFFIC DENSITY : 3-35
3.12 WATER ENVIRONMENT : 3-35
3.13 NOISE ENVIRONMENT : 3-38
CHAPTER 4 BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT

BASE LINE STATUS
4.1 INTRODUCTION : 4-1
4.2 FOREST TYPES AND : 4-1

VEGETATION
4.2.1 Tropical Forests : 4-3
Contents____________________________________________________________________
iv

KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
4.2.2 Subtropical Forests : 4-5
4.2.3 Moist Mixed Deciduous Forest : 4-6
4.2.4 Pine Forests : 4-7
4.2.5 Temperate Forests : 4-7
4.2.6 Coniferous Forests : 4-8
4.2.7 Bamboo Forest : 4-9
4.2.8 Alpine Forests : 4-9
4.3 STUDY AREA : 4-10
4.4 VEGETATION : 4-12
4.4.1 Vegetation in influence zone : 4-12
4.4.2 Lower Groups of plants : 4-16
4.4.3 Phytosociology of the Influence Zone : 4-19
4.4.4 Phytosociology of the Submergence : 4-20

area
4.4.5 Phytosociology of the Power House : 4-21

area
4.4.6 Phytosociology of the colony area : 4-21
4.4.7 Phytosociology of the downstream area : 4-21
4.4.8 Phytosociological Indices used for : 4-22

Quantitative Analysis
4.5 INFERENCE ON : 4-23

RARE,THREATENED AND
ENDANGERED FLORA
4.6 FAUNAL ELEMENTS : 4-23
4.6.1 Faunal Composition and Distribution : 4-24
4.6.2 Mammals : 4-25
4.6.3 Diversity Indices of Mammals : 4-26
Contents____________________________________________________________________
v

KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
4.6.4 Avifauna : 4-27
4.6.5 Diversity Indices of Avian Fauna : 4-30
4.6.6 Reptiles : 4-30
4.6.7 Amphibia : 4-31
4.6.8 Insects : 4-32
4.6.9 Aquatic Fauna : 4-33
4.6.9.1 Phytoplanktons : 4-34
4.6.9.2 Zooplanktons : 4-34
4.6.9.3 Benthos : 4-35
4.6.9.4 Fishes : 4-35
4.6.9.5 Composition and Distribution of : 4-36

Fishes
4.6.9.6 Conservation Status : 4-37
4.6.9.7 Fish Migration : 4-38
4.6.9.8 Breeding Ground : 4-38
4.6.9.9 Fishing and Society : 4-38
CHAPTER 5 SOCIO ECONOMIC

ENVIRONMENT
5.1 SOCIAL AND CULTURAL : 5-1
BACKGROUND
5.1.1 Arunachal Pradesh : 5-1
5.1.2 West Kameng District (General : 5-2

Profile)
5.1.3 Demographic Profile of West Kameng : 5-3
5.1.4 Occupational Profile of West Kameng : 5-4

District
5.1.5 Educational Profile of West Kameng : 5-5

District
Contents____________________________________________________________________
vi

KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
5.1.6 Ethnographic Profile : 5-5
5.2 PROJECT INFLUENCE ZONE : 5-7
5.2.1 Demographic Profile : 5-8
5.2.2 Literacy in influence zone village : 5-11
5.2.3 Occupational profile of influence zone : 5-12

village
5.3 LAND REQUIREMENT OF THE : 5-13

PROJECT
5.3.1 Salari Village : 5-14
5.3.2 Rahung Village : 5-17
5.4 PROJECT AFFECTED FAMILIES : 5-19
5.4.1 Demographic Profile : 5-20
5.4.2 Educational Profile : 5-21
5.4.3 Occupational Profile : 5-21
5.4.4 Livestock Population : 5-22
5.4.5 Immovable Assets : 5-23
5.4.6 Health and Sanitation : 5-23
5.4.7 Infrastructure & other facilities : 5-24
5.4.8 Cultural Heritage and Old Monuments : 5-24
5.4.9 Public perception about the Project : 5-25
CHAPTER 6 PREDICTION OF IMPACTS

AND THEIR ASSESSMENT
6.1 INTRODUCTION : 6-1
6.2 IMPACTS ON LAND : 6-2

ENVIRONMENT
6.2.1 Construction Phase : 6-2
6.2.1.1 Change in Land use pattern and : 6-3
Contents____________________________________________________________________
vii

KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
pressure on land forms
6.2.1.2 Soil Pollution : 6-4
6.2.1.3 Landslides : 6-5
6.2.1.4 Soil erosion : 6-5
6.2.2 Operational Phase : 6-5
6.3 IMPACTS ON AQUATIC : 6-6

ENVIRONMENT
6.4 IMPACTS ON WATER QUALITY : 6-7
6.5 IMPACTS ON TERRESTRIAL : 6-8

FLORA
6.6 IMPACTS ON TERRESTRIAL : 6-9

FAUNA
6.7 IMPACTS ON AQUATIC ECOLOGY : 6-10
6.8 IMPACTS ON NOISE : 6-12

ENVIRONMENT
6.9 IMPACTS ON AIR QUALITY : 6-12
6.10 IMPACTS ON SOCIO-ECONOMIC : 6-13

ENVIRONMENT
Contents____________________________________________________________________
viii

KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
6.11 IMPACT ON GEOLOGICAL : 6-15

ENVIRONMENT
6.12 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT : 6-15

ASSESSMENT
6.13 APPLICATION OF BATTELLE : 6-21

ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
SYSTEM (BEES)
6.13.1 Investigated Environmental Impacts : 6-21
6.14 OVERALL IMPACT EVALUATION : 6-23
Contents____________________________________________________________________
ix

TABLES
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
LIST OF TABLES
Table No Description Page No
rd
Table 1.1 All India Region wise generating installed capacity (MW) as on 3 March 1-2
2010.
Table 1.2 Capacity addition targets and achievements during 2009-10. 1-4
Table 1.3 Capacity addition targets for 2010-11. 1-4
Table 1.4 Abstracts of Hydro Power Potential of Major River Basin. 1-5
Table 1.5 Cascade Development of Gang River Basin. 1-7
Table 1.6 Key Environmental Legislations in India. 1-16
Table 2.1 Sampling Frequency for various Environmental Parameters. 2-5
Table 2.2 Scoping Matrix. 2-5
Table 2.3 Village Meeting and Socio-Economic survey conducted in project affected 2-20
village of Khuitam HEP.
Table 3.1 Area under different relief categories of Catchment of Khuitam HE 3-3
Project.
Table 3.2 Area under different slope categories of catchment of Khuitam HE Project. 3-4
Table 3.3 Area under different aspect categories of catchment of Khuitam HE 3-5
Project.
Table 3.4 Land use/ Land cover pattern in free draining area of Khuitam Project. 3-5
Table 3.5 Land use/ Land Cover pattern in influence zone of Khuitam HE Project. 3-5
Table 3.6 Properties of soils found in the free draining catchment of Khuitam HEP 3-8
Table 3.7 Soil quality of different selected sites during winter season. 3-8
Table 3.8 Soil quality of different selected sites during summer season. 3-9
Table 3.9 Soil quality of different selected sites during monsoon season. 3-10
Table 3.10 Meteorological characteristics of the project area based on data from 3-11
January 2008 to December 2008.
Table 3.11 Observed monthly average rainfall (mm) at Dirang (1998 – 2006) 3-11
Table 3.12 Design Flood Prescription Criteria. 3-16
Table 3.13 Succession of litho tectonic Units in Arunachal Himalayas (Modified after 3-22
Singh and Chowdhary, 1990).
Table 3.14 Litho stratigraphic units of West Kameng, Arunachal Pradesh. 3-23
Table 3.15 Major Earthquakes in the Northeastern Himalaya, Arakan-Yoma and 3-28
Shillong Plateau regions.
Table 3.16 Landslides on Reservoir Rim on Khuitam HE Project. 3-31
Table 3.17 Details of land requirement for Khuitam HE project. 3-33
Table 3.18 Air quality parameters in project area of Khuitam HE project. 3-34
Table 3.19 Traffic Density on State Highway from Bomdila to Tawang and Bomdila 3-35
to Nafra.
Table 3.20 Water quality of Gang River at different selected sites during summer 3-36
season.
Table 3.21 Water quality of Gang River at different selected sites during Monsoon 3-37
season.
Table 3.22 Water quality of Gang River at different selected sites during Winter 3-37
Season.
Table 3.23 Average ambient noise levels in the study area. 3-39
Tables____________________________________________________________________
i

KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL

Table 4.1 Forest Types of Arunachal Pradesh. 4-3
& 4.2
Table 4.3 Transects/sampling points used for biodiversity survey. 4-12
Table 4.4 List of Tree species and their uses along with their status in Project 4-13
Component Area (SA) and influence (Inf.) zone of proposed Khuitam HE
Project.
Table 4.5 List of shrubs species and their status in Project Area and influence (Inf.) 4-14
zone of proposed Khuitam HE Project.
Table 4.6 List of herbs species and their uses along with their status in Project Area 4-15
and influence (Inf.) zone of proposed Khuitam HE Project.
Table 4.7 Lower plants reported in the influence zone and Project Area and 4-16
influence zone of proposed Khuitam HE Project.
Table 4.8 Distribution of plant groups by family, genera and species in Influence 4-18
area of Khuitam HE Project.
Table 4.9 Total numbers of Families and Species of plant taxa in proposed Khuitam 4-19
HE Project influence zone.
Table 4.10 Values of indices used for Phyto-sociological analysis in influence zone 4-22
and (Submergence zone, Power house area, colony area, upstream and
downstream of proposed Khuitam HE Project).
Table 4.11 Distribution pattern based on A/F ratio of the vegetation in influence zone 4-23
and study area (Submergence zone, Power house area, colony area,
upstream and downstream of proposed Khuitam HE Project (Values
depicts number of species).
Table 4.12 Mammalian composition in the influence zone and Project Component 4-25
Area(PCA)of the proposed Khuitam HE Project.
Table 4.13 Diversity Indices of Mammals in the Study area of proposed Khuitam HE 4-27
Project.
Table 4.14 Composition and status of avifauna in the Study area and Influence zone of 4-27
proposed Khuitam H.E. Project.
Table 4.15 Diversity Indices of avian fauna in the Study area and Influence zone of 4-30
proposed Khuitam HE Project.
Table 4.16 Composition and status of reptiles in the influence zone of Khuitam Hydro 4-31
Electric Project.
Table 4.17 Composition and status of amphibians in the Study area of proposed 4-32
Khuitam HE Project.
Table 4.18 Butterflies recorded from the Project area and Influence zone of Khuitam 4-33
HE Project.
Table 4.19 List of Phytoplankton and Zooplanktons of the Project area and Influence 4-34
zone of Khuitam HE Project.
Table 4.20 Benthos composition in Gang river. 4-35
Table 4.21 Fish composition and their status in the Gang river of Arunachal Pradesh 4-36
recorded during surveys at Khuitam HE Project area.
Table 4.22 Average production rate of fish species (kg/day). 4-38
Table 5.1 Demographic Profile of West Kameng District, Arunachal Pradesh (As per 5-3
Census 2001).
Table 5.2 Circle wise Population, West Kameng District, Arunachal Pradesh. 5-4
Tables____________________________________________________________________
ii

KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL

Table 5.3 Category of Workers and Marginal Workers in West Kameng District. 5-4
Table 5.4 Literacy rate in West Kameng District. 5-5
Table 5.5 Infrastructure Facilities at Dirang Block. 5-7
Table 5.6 Population in the age group 0-6 Years in the Influence zone villages. 5-9
Table 5.7 Village name and house hold, of Influence zone 5-10
Table 5.8 Population profile of the influence zone villages. 5-11
Table 5.9 Literate population in influence zone villages. 5-12
Table 5.10 Occupational Profile of the influence zone villages. 5-13
Table 5.11 Land requirement for Khuitam HEP 5-14
Table 5.12 List of Project Affected Families of Khuitam HE Project in Selari village. 5-15
Table 5.13 List of Project Affected Families of Khuitam HE Project under Rahung 5-18
village.
Table 5.14 Number of affected families (individual land owners/Community land 5-20
owners) in Khuitam HE Project as per socio-economic survey.
Table 5.15 Demographic profile of the individual land owner of Project Affected 5-21
Families of Khuitam HEP.
Table 5.16 Livestock holding of the individual land owner of Project affected families 5-22
for Khuitam HEP.
Table 5.17 Immovable Properties of the individual land owner of Project affected 5-23
families for Khuitam HEP.
Table 5.18 Basic facilities 5-24
Table 5.19 Public Perception 5-26
Table 6.1 Environmental Impact Assessment of Khuitam HEP without EMP. 6-16
Table 6.2 Environmental Impact Assessment of Khuitam HEP with EMP. 6-18
Table 6.3 Environmental Impact Evaluation-Category: Ecology. 6-22
Table 6.4 Environmental Impact Evaluations-Category: Environmental Scenario. 6-22
Table 6.5 Summary of Environmental Impact Evaluation. 6-23

Tables____________________________________________________________________
iii

FIGURES
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure No Description
Fig. 1.1 All India Generating Installed Capacity (MW) (As on 3rd March 2010).
Fig. 1.2 Location Map.
Fig. 1.3 Project Layout Plan.
Fig. 2.1 Inputs and Outputs related to evaluation of Impacts (Source: Erickson, 1994).
Fig. 3.1 (a & b) U-shaped Gang River Valley section d/s of Dirang & Gang River flowing through
deep entrenched meander in Bomdi La Groups of Rocks, near Rahung.
Fig. 3.2a Drainage map of Gang River Catchment up to Proposed Barrage Site of Khuitam
H.E. Project.
Fig. 3.2b Drainage map of Free Draining Catchment of Proposed Khuitam H.E.Project.
Fig. 3.2c Drainage Map of the Influence zone within a 10 Km radius of Proposed Khuitam
H.E.Project
Fig. 3.3 Relief map of Gang River Catchment up to the proposed Barrage site of Khuitam
H.E.Project
Fig. 3.4a Slope Map of Gang River Catchment up to the Proposed Barrage Site of Khuitam
H.E.Project.
Fig. 3.4b Slope Map of Free Draining Catchment Area of Proposed Khuitam H.E.Project.
Fig. 3.4c Slope Map of the 10 KM radius Influence zone of proposed Khuitam H.E.Project.
Fig. 3.5a Aspect map of Khuitam H.E.Project Catchment up to the Proposed Barrage Site.
Fig. 3.5b Aspect map of Free Draining Catchment of Khuitam H.E.Project.
Fig. 3.5c Aspect map of 10 KM radius Influence zone of Khuitam H.E.Project.
Fig. 3.6a FCC of Catchment area up to proposed Barrage site of Khuitam H.E.Project.
Fig. 3.6b Land use/ Land cover of Free Draining Catchment of Proposed Khuitam H.E.Project.
Fig. 3.6c Land use/ Land Cover map of 10 KM radius influence zone of Khuitam H.E.Project
Fig. 3.7a Soil Map of Khuitam H.E.Project Catchment up to the Proposed Barrage Site.
Fig. 3.7b Soil Map of Free Draining Catchment of Khuitam H.E.Project.
Fig. 3.7c Soil Map of 10 KM Influence Zone of Khuitam H.E.Project.
Fig. 3.7d Sampling Sites for soil at different locations within 10 KM radius influence zone of
Khuitam H.E.Project.
Fig. 3.8 Comparision of 10 – Daily Mean Discharges.
Fig. 3.9 Maximum, minimum, and mean monthly flow for Bhalukpong.
Fig. 3.10 Maximum, minimum, and mean monthly flow for Bichom.
Fig. 3.11 Maximum, minimum, and mean monthly flow for Jameri.
Fig. 3.12 Plot of Synthetic Unit Hydrograph (SUG) at Khuitam Diversion Site.
Fig. 3.13 Geological Map of Khuitam HE Project Area.
Fig. 3.14 Geological Section across Bomdila and Dedza-Menga Belt. ( After Surendra Singh
and P.K. Chowdhary, 1990)
Fig. 3.15 Seismic zoning map of India ( Source: BIS,2001, New Delhi)
Fig. 3.16 A seismotectonic map of north east India and its adjoining region prepared with the
earthquake from the data catalogue of period 1976-2006 (>4 Mw).
Fig. 3.17 Landslides in area of Khuitam HE Project
Fig. 3.18 Sampling Sites for Air at different locations within 10 KM radius Influence Zone of
Khuitam H.E.Project
Fig. 3.19 Sampling Sites for Water at different locations within 10 KM radius influence zone
Figures____________________________________________________________________
i

KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
Figure No Description
of Khuitam H.E.Project
Fig. 3.20 Sampling Sites for Noise at different location within 10 KM radius influence zone of
Khuitam H.E.Project
Fig. 4.1 Location Map of Quadrats for assessing biological wealth in the Khuitam HEP areas.
Fig. 4.2 Groups showing maximum representation of plant taxa in influence zone of proposed
Khuitam HE project.
Fig. 4.3 Families showing maximum representation of Plant taxa in Influence Zone of
proposed Khuitam HE project.
Fig. 4.4 Graphical representation of faunal species recorded in the Study Area.
Fig. 5.1 Influence Zone villages of Khuitam HE Project.
Fig. 5.2 Project Affected Families at Selari and Rahung.
Fig. 5.3 Demographic Profiles of PAF’s at Selari and Rahung.
Fig. 5.4 Percentage Distribution of livestock of PAFs of Khuitam HEP.

Figures____________________________________________________________________
ii

ABBREVIATION
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
ABBREVIATION
AISLUS : All India Soil & Land Use Survey

APHA : American Public Health Association
ASPT : Average Score Per Taxon
BEES : Battelle Environmental Evaluation System
BIS : Bureau of Indian Standard
BMWP : Biological Monitoring Working Party
CAT : Catchment Area Treatment
CAGR : Compound Annual Growth Rate
CBH : Circumference Breast Height
CEA : Central Electricity Authority
CEIU : Composite Erosion Intensity Unit
CS : Constructional Stage
CMO : Chief Medical Officers
CWC : Central Water Commission
DEM : Digital Elevation Model
DGPS : Differential Global Positioning System
DMP : Disaster Management Plan
DoE : Department of Environment
D.O. : Dissolved Oxygen
DPR : Detailed Project Report
EAP : Emergency Action Plan
EIU : Environmental Impact Unit
EIA/EMP : Environment Impact Assessment/Environment Management Plan
El : Elevation
E.Q. : Environmental Quality
FCC : False Color Composite
FIS : Forest Survey of India
FRL : Full Reservoir Level
FYM : Farm Yard Manure
GE : General Electric
GIS : Geographic Information System
GOI : Government of India.
GoAP : Government of Arunachal Pradesh
GPS : Global Positioning System
GSHAP : Global Seismic Hazard Assessment Program
GSI : Geological Survey of India
GW : Gega Watt
GWh : Gega watt hour
ha : Hectare
HEC RAS : Hydrologic Engineering Centre’s River Analysis System
HEP : Hydro Electric Project
Abbreviations____________________________________________________________________
i
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
HHC : High Himalayan Crystallines

H : Height
HOM : Himalayan Orogenic Movement
HRT : Head Race Tunnel
HRT D/S : Head Race Tunnel Down Stream
HRT U/S : Head Race Tunnel Up Stream
IAEG : International Association of Engineering Geologist
IPP : Interregional Partnership Platform
IVI : Importance Value Index
IWPA : Indian Wild-life Protection Act
Km : Kilometer
Kwh : Kilo watt hour
LAA : Land Acquisition Act
LADP : Local Area Development Plan
LHC : Lesser Himalayan Crystallines
LUP : Land Use Planning
MCT : Main Central Thrust
MDDL : Maximum Draw Down Level
MDG’s : Millennium Development Goals
m : Meter
MCM : Million Cubic Meter
MoU : Memorandum of Understanding
MoP : Ministry of Power
MPN : Most Probable Number
MWL : Maximum Water Level
MW : Mega Watt
NBSS : National Bureau of Soil Survey
NEEPCO : North-Eastern Electric Power Corporation
NEFA : North East Frontier Agency
NHPC : National Hydro Power Corporation
NRRP : National Rehabilitation and Resettlement Policy
NTFP : Non-Timber Forest Product
NTPC : National Thermal Power Corporation
ONGC : Oil and Natural Gas Commission
OS : Operational Stage
PFR : Pre-Feasibility Report
PGA : Peak Ground Acceleration
PHC : Primary Health Centres
PHS : Primary Health Sub-Centre
PIV : Parameters Importance Value
PIU : Parameters Importance Unit
PSU : Public Sector Unit
R : Species Richness
RBL : River Bed Level
RGGVY : Rajiv Gandhi Grameen Vidyutikaran Yojana
Abbreviations____________________________________________________________________
ii
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
RS-GIS : Remote Sensing – Geographic Information System

SBCSAP : State Biodiversity Conservation Strategy Action Plan
SLAO : State Land Acquisition Officer
SMP : Surveillance and Monitoring Plan
SPF : Standard Project Food
STP : Sewage Treatment Plant
Sq.km : Square Kilometer
SYI : Silt Yield Index
TSC : Total Score
TGA : Thermo-gravimetric Analysis
TIS : Total Impact Scores
ToR : Terms of Reference
UG : Unit Hydrograph
USF : Unclassed State Forest
VFC : Value Function Curves
V : Volume
WIHG : Wadia Institute of Himalayan Geology
Abbreviations____________________________________________________________________
iii
Chapter 1
INTRODUCTION
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
Hydropower apart from being non-polluting, clean and cheap energy, in contrast to other
sources like thermal, gas, oil, etc. provides unique benefits, rarely found in any other sources of
energy. These benefits can be attributed to the electricity itself, or to side-benefits, often
associated with reservoir development resulting in a number of benefits for the well-being of
humans, such as secure water supply, water storage, irrigation for food production, flood and
drought mitigation, enhanced environmental management, and broader socio-economic
development; such as energy storage, back-up for intermittent generation technologies, overall
power system stability, increased recreational opportunities, improved navigation, development
of fisheries, cottage industries, etc. which is not the case for any other source of energy. Today
hydropower accounts for about 21% of global electricity production, making it by far the
largest source of renewable energy. However, theoretical potential of worldwide hydropower
as estimated is 2,800 GW, which is about four times greater than the 723 GW that has been
actually exploited (Source: http://www.erg.com.np/hydropower_global.php). It is estimated
that, while development of all the remaining hydroelectric potential could not hope to cover
total future world demand for electricity, implementation of even half of this potential could
thus have enormous environmental benefits in terms of avoided generation by fossil fuels.
Carefully planned hydropower development can make a vast contribution for improving living
stand in the developing world, where the greatest potential still exists and also to the
sustainable solution of the most urgent water and energy needs. With good planning and
management, hydropower is a catalyst for the sustainable improvement of people’s lives.
1.1 HYDRO POWER POTENTIAL OF INDIA
India ranks 6th in the world among the largest energy consumer nations and accounts for 3.4 %
of global energy consumption, with the growth of economy, increasing population and urban
proliferation the demand for energy has grown at an average of 3.6 % annually over the past 30
Introduction________________________________________________________________
1-1
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
years. This increasing energy demand also translates into higher demand for electricity. Many
parts of the country still do not have access to electricity. According to the Government of
India estimates, the power requirement in the country will increase to 200,000 MW by 2012
and to 400,000MW by 2020 (Source:http://www.policyproposalsforindia.
com/article.php?article_id=105&languageid=1). Therefore, hydropower development is all
the way necessary for country. Geomorphologically, India offers great source of river specific
to well-defined regions. To meet the ever increasing power need the Government of India has
been exploring the possibility of tapping the potential in those specific areas for hydropower
generation. Moreover, additional hydropower capacity is desirable in India’s generation mix, as
it provides the system operator with technically vital flexibility to meet the changes in demand
which typically affect a power network like that of India. These characteristics of hydro power
plants make them ideal choice for meeting out the peaking shortages while other sources of
power cannot do this as economically. The Government of India has decided to acquire an
increasing portion of this additional power from the country’s vast untapped hydropower
resources, only 23 percent of which has been harnessed so far. India’s energy portfolio today
depends heavily on coal-based thermal energy, with hydropower accounting for only 26
percent of total power generation. The Government of India has set the target for India’s
optimum power system mix at 40 percent from hydropower and 60 percent from other sources
(Source: http://power.indiabizclub.com/info/hydropower_development). The generating
installed capacity of the country from various power sources is enumerated below:
Table1.1: All India Region wise generating installed capacity (MW) as on 3rd March 2010
S. Thermal Nuclear Hydro R.E.S.@
No. Region Coal Gas DSL Total (MNRE) Total
1 Northern 21275.00 3563.26 12.99 24851.25 1620.00 13310.75 2407.33 42189.33
2 Western 28145.50 8143.81 17.48 36306.79 1840.00 7447.50 4630.74 50225.03
3 Southern 17822.50 4392.78 939.32 23154.60 1100.00 11107.03 7938.87 43300.50
4 Eastern 16895.38 190.00 17.20 17102.58 0.00 3882.12 334.76 21319.46
5 N. Eastern 60.00 766.00 142.74 968.74 0.00 1116.00 204.16 2288.90
6 Islands 0.00 0.00 70.02 70.02 0.00 0.00 5.25 75.27
7 All India 84198.38 17055.85 1199.75 102453.98 4560.00 36863.40 15521.11 159398.49
Captive Generating capacity connected to the Grid = 19509
RES- Renewable Energy Sources includes Small Hydro Project (SHP), Biomass Gas (BG), Biomass Power (BP), Urban & Industrial
waste Power (U&I), and Wind Energy.
(Source: http://www.cea.nic.in/power_sec_reports/executive_summary/2010_03/8.pdf)
Introduction________________________________________________________________
1-2
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
Figure 1.1: All India Generating Installed Capacity (MW) (As on 3rd March 2010).
(Source: http://www.cea.nic.in/power_sec_reports/executive_summary/2010_03/8.pdf)
With the aim to accelerate the development of Hydropower, the Ministry of Power (MoP),
Government of India (GoI) introduced the National Policy on Hydropower Development in
1998. Further, in support to the 1998 National Hydropower Policy, GoI has an ambitious
mission of Power for all, which plans to wipe out all energy shortage by the end of 2011-12,
i.e. by end of XIth Plan and also to provide spinning reserve and ensure uninterrupted quality
power at affordable cost. This mission would require that the installed generation capacity
should be at least 200,000 MW by 2012 from the present level. During the year 2009-10, a
capacity addition of 14,507 MW has been planned, out of which a capacity of 9585 MW has
been commissioned. Now for the year 2010-11 a capacity addition target of 20359 MW has
been fixed. The capacity addition targets and achievements during 2009-10 and capacity
addition targets for the year 2010-11 are given in the table below:
Introduction________________________________________________________________
1-3
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
Table 1.2: Capacity addition targets and achievements during 2009-10
Sector Hydro (In MW) Thermal (In MW) Nuclear (In MW) Total
Target Achievement Target Achievement Target Achievement Target Achievement
Central 252 0 2490 1740 660 440 3402 2180
State 301 39 4679 3079 0 0 4980 3118
Private 292 0 5833 4287 0 0 6125 4287
Total 845 39 13002.0 9106 660 440 14507 9585
(Source: http://www.infraline.com/power/stats/generation/eleventhplan/CapacityAddProgramme)
Table 1.3: Capacity addition targets for 2010-11

Central Sector State Sector Private Sector Total
Thermal 5890 6012 5891 17793
Hydro 529 597.5 219.5 1346
Nuclear 1220 0 0 1220
Total 7639 6609.5 6110.5 20359
(Source: http://www.infraline.com/power/stats/generation/eleventhplan/CapacityAddProgramme)
1.2 POWER SCENARIO IN ARUNACHAL PRADESH
Arunachal Pradesh, the land of rising sun, is a thinly populated hilly tract lying on the North-
East corner of India with an area of 83,743 sq. km, between latitude 26 30' N and 29 30 ' N
and longitude 91 30' E and 97 30' E, which attained its statehood on 20th February 1987. The
State of Arunachal Pradesh has abundant hydro-power potential on account of moderate to
heavy rainfall in the region and the mighty Brahmaputra River and its tributaries. The
topography of the State also provides ideal conditions for development of hydro-electric power
Projects. There are eight major river basins in the State namely Siang River basin, Subansiri
River basin, Dibang River basin, Lohit River basin, Kameng River basin, Tawang River basin,
Dikrong River basin and Tirap River basin with many smaller river systems in the State which
offer excellent sites for hydropower Projects.
Introduction________________________________________________________________
1-4
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
According to estimates of the Department of Hydro Power Development, Government of

Arunachal Pradesh (GoAP), Probable Hydropower potential of the state is 57002.50 MW from
above mentioned river Basins. Irrespective of such a huge potential so far a capacity of 423.5
MW has been developed which is just 0.74 % of the total potential, Hydro Projects of about
2600 MW are being constructed which is again just 4.56 % of the total potential leaving behind
a potential of about 47304.55 MW (93.99%). Therefore, to utilize this huge potential and to
meet the shortfall in peak power and energy requirements of Arunachal Pradesh and other
deficit areas in the country, State & Central Govt. accords highest priority to harness this hydro
potential and are encouraging/allocating private developers for development of hydropower
Projects in the State, which will generate economic activity in the State leading to its growth
and will also serve as an engine to achieve the objective of promoting all round development of
the State and the Country. Below is the list of Hydro Electric Project Development at various
river Basins (Table 1.4).
Table 1.4: Abstract of Hydro Power Potential of Major River Basins

S. Name of the River Prob Hydro Potentials Prob. Hydro Potentials allotted to CPSUs
No. Basin (MW) and Private Power Developer (MW)
1 Tawang 2057 1982
2 Kameng 6183 3602
3 Subansiri 12248 125
4 Siang 17308 5610
5 Dibang 10977 8387
6 Lohit 7679.5 5816.5
7 Tirap 140 --
8 Dikrong 410 200
Total 57002.5 25722.5
(Source: GoAP Hydro Policy, 2008)
1.3 KHUITAM HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT (66 MW)
Khuitam Hydroelectric Project (66 MW) is run of river Project proposed on Gang River, a
tributary of Bichom River in West Kameng District of Arunachal Pradesh. The barrage site is
located at Latitude 27o19’13.5”N and Longitude 92o23’54.9”E. The proposed Project envisages
construction of a 19 m high barrage from the river bed level, a Head Race Tunnel of 6.3 m
Introduction________________________________________________________________
1-5
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
diameter to carry a design discharge of 100.35 cumecs over a length of 3 km, a surge shaft of
21 m dia, 3 numbers penstocks of 2.90 m diameter and a surface power house with an installed
capacity of 66 MW (22 MW X 3 units). Gang River originates from an elevation of more than
4200 m and joins Bichom River at EL 760 m. It is a right bank tributary of river Bichom in
Kameng River Basin which lies between longitude 92001’ E to 93022’ E and Latitude 26038’ N
to 27058’ N and covers almost the entire West Kameng and East Kameng districts and also a
part of Lower Subansiri district. The main tributaries joining the Gang River are Saskang
Rong, Pasom Rong etc. The total Catchment of the Gang River is 1352 sq. km. The catchment
area up to the proposed diversion site is 1123 sq. km and the free draining Catchment for the
Project is 84 sq km between Khuitam HE Project and Gongri HEP site which is located at a
distance of about 10.43 km upstream of the proposed Khuitam HEP barrage site. The cascade
development of Gang river given in Table 1.5.
The Project Component Study Area is spreads over a 0.49 sq km (49 ha) land and covers the
area where various Project components will be set up including reservoir area covering 0.0632
sq km (6.32 ha) and extending for 0.8 km along Gang river.
Introduction________________________________________________________________
1-6
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
Table 1.5 Cascade Development of Gang River Basin

S Particulars Saskang Rong Gongri HEP2 Khuitam HEP Dinchang HEP3
1
No HEP
1 Location Power House Near: Power House Near: Power House Near: Selari Power House near
About 300m Rahung Village, West Village, West Kameng Confluence of
upstream of Kameng District District Gong River with
confluence of Barrage: 27°29’22"N, Barrage: 27o 19’ 13.5” N Bichom River:
Milang Kang Nala 92°18’52“E 92o 23’ 54.9” E Dam:
with Timkong Rong PH:27°19’09"N, PH:27°19’35.8"N, 27°19’09.99"N,
River near Khork 92°23’22“E 92°25’49.2“E 92°28’25.30“E
Village, West PH:27°18’33.21"N,
Kameng District 92°31’37.11“E
Barrage:
27°24’17"N,
92°08’26“E
2 Installed 36 MW 90 MW 66 MW 90 MW
Capacity
3 Catchment 240 sq.km. 1039 sq.km. 1123 sq. km. Not Available
Area
4 FRL EL. 1922 m EL. 1455.5 m EL. 1252 m EL. 1160 m
5 Elevation of El. 1910.0 m El. 1439.0 m El. 1236 m Not Available
River Bed
6 Average 13m 17.5 m 19 m Not Available
Height of
Barrage
NOTE:
1: Saskang Rong HEP is the upstream project. Details given are as per Proposal submitted by M/s Patel
Engineering Ltd. to MoEF for TOR.
2: Gongri HEP details given are as per DPR submitted by M/s Patel Engineering Ltd to CEA.
3: Downstream of Khuitam HEP, But HEP & Mathithing HEP were two CEA identified projects. However, as per
the latest information available Dinchang HEP has been awarded by GoAP to M/s. KSK, coordinates of But &
Mathithing HEP as per CEA Study are as under:
S. No. Name of Scheme Latitude Longitude Probable Installed
Capacity (MW)
1 Mathithing HEP 27o 20’ 92o 30’ 40
2 But HEP 27o 19’ 92o 27’ 26
1.3.1 Background of The Project:
Government of Arunachal Pradesh has accorded highest priority to harness the hydro power
potential state. Number of hydro electric projects on smaller tributaries of the main rivers of the
project has been identified to be developed through private investment. Khuitam hydroelectric
project on Gang River is one such project, Memorandum of Agreement for Khuitam HE
Project has been signed on 12.06.2007 between GoAP and Adishankar Power Private Limited.
Initially the project was a ‘B’ category project which envisaged constructing 18 m high barrage
Introduction________________________________________________________________
1-7
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
across Gang River with generation capacity of 29 MW and clearance was accorded by the
Ministry of Environment (MoEF) for preconstruction activities along with “Terms of
Reference (ToR)” for EIA /EMP study vide letter No. J-12011/64/2008/-IA.I dated 07-11-
2008. But, after thorough study and investigations, hydrological observations and detailed
study of project features and layout generation capacity was revised to 66 MW and Detail
Project Report (DPR) was submitted to the GoAP on 1st Aug 2009. GoAP granted permission
for revised 66 MW project on 6.08.2009 while, MoEF accorded clearance for revised capacity
of 66 MW for preconstruction activities along with “Terms of Reference (ToR)” vide letter no.
J-12011/49/2009/-IA.I dated 25.01.2010.
Introduction________________________________________________________________
1-8
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
Figure 1.2: Location Map
Introduction________________________________________________________________
1-9
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
1.3.2 Need For The Project :
It is well known reality that there is huge demand for the power in the country. To balance the hydro
thermal mix, any new proposal for hydro power development shall provide relief to the national grid
to mitigate the miseries of power starved industry and people. Hydro power being environment
friendly is being given preference to other sources of power generation such as thermal, gas and
nuclear. The greatest merit of Hydro power is its suitability, durability, variability and economic
viability. As such development of Hydro power becomes essential as an infrastructure development
of the country for quality of power/grid stability. Khuitam HEP would form the integral part of the
north eastern grid and will contribute in projected energy requirement. It will also provide peaking
load capacity to other regional grid in turn helps in optimizing the generation from thermal stations
which are forced to operate at a very poor load factor due to absence of matching hydropower
contribution.
The Project has been found commercially viable and the generation from the project shall mitigate the
miseries of power starved industry and people particularly in the eastern and north eastern state.
1.3.3 Location of The Project Area:
The Project lies in the West Kameng District near Bomdila Town in the State of Arunachal Pradesh.
The barrage site is located downstream of Rahung village and the power house site is located
upstream of Selari Village. The longitude and latitude of barrage site and power house sites in WGS
- 84 co-ordinate system are as under:
Barrage site : Latitude 27o 19’ 13.5” North

: Longitude 92o 23’ 54.9” East
Power house site : Latitude 27o 19’ 35.8” North
: Longitude 92o 25’ 49.2” East
Location map of the project is given in Figure 1.2.
Introduction________________________________________________________________
1-10
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
1.3.4 Accessibility:
The project site is accessible by road from Guwahati via Tejpur. Tejpur an important Town in
Assam is about 180 Km from Guwahati. Distance from Tejpur to Bhalukpong Town is 60 Km
which is the border town between Assam and Arunachal Pradesh. From Bhalukpong onwards, the
hill journey up to Bomdila Town is 100 km. Bomdila Town is situated at an elevation of 2400 m.
The road from Bhalukpong to Bomdila is maintained by Border Roads Organization (BRO) as
strategic road to Bomdila and Tawang. The nearest rail head is located at Tejpur and nearest Airport
is at Tejpur. Project is approached by Bomdila Tawang Road.
The local road network from Bomdila to barrage and power house sites of Khuitam HE Project is as
under:
Barrage site : The barrage site is located on a branch road (about 5 km) taking
off from Bomdila – Selari – Nafra Road. The take off point is
about 21 km from Bomdila.
Power House Site : The power house site is located near Selari village and is
approached by Bomdila – Selari – Nafra road. Selari village is at a
distance of about 25 km from Bomdila.
1.3.5 Alternative Studies Carried Out For Various Major Components of The Project and
Final Choice of The Project Parameters:
During the detailed project report phase, following different options of the Project layout and
components have been studied:
 Selection of suitable height of diversion structure.
 Study of dam alternative vis-à-vis barrage alternative.
 Study of different alternative locations of power house.
 Study of surface power house vis-à-vis underground power house.
 Study of Head Race Tunnel layout on the left bank vis-à-vis right bank of the river.
Introduction________________________________________________________________
1-11
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
Dam alternative has not been found suitable on account of non availability of suitable site and need
to keep the submergence to acceptable levels. A barrage structure with a moderate height of 19 mts
has therefore been selected. The Head Race Tunnel length has been kept short (only 3 Km) to have
less quantum of civil works and in turn reduce the cost. The power house location for Surface Power
House has been selected keeping in view the topography of the area, where a flat terrace is available.
Considering that the project capacity is only 66 MW and a high diversion structure if attempted in
non- favorable geological environment could render the project economically unviable in the very
first instance, as such focus on the barrage as a diversion structure has been envisaged; since the
requirement of sound foundation and abutment for a barrage structure of 15-20 m height are
significantly less than those needed for a concrete dam or rockfill dam.
The present layout plan for the project is a low cost option as alternative structure such as dam or
underground power house could have rendered the project unviable. The project layout is such that
minimum access roads are needed as all the project features are approachable by existing motorable
roads and land required has also been worked out as significantly low, which makes the project
economically as well as environmentally attractive.
In respect of transmission line, the power generated has been proposed to be fed to the nearest
proposed 132 Kv. substation at Bomdila. The distance from the project site from Bomdila is only
about 25 Kms, which would make it economical for transmission and distribution arrangements
reducing the transmission losses.
Hence, Khuitam HEP is being developed by maintaining the low cost of all the features with the
least possible costings. Development of Khuitam HEP would help the people residing in the vicinity
of project in improving the employment, education, health levels and economic development.
Development of Khuitam Hydroelectric Project has been defined by the tail water level of the
upstream Gangori Hydroelectric Project being (investigated by other private developer) and the
Introduction________________________________________________________________
1-12
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
Selari Bridge near Selari village. This in combination with topography and geology related factors
have defined the Full Reservoir Level of the Project as 1252 m and Tail Race Level as 1173 m. The
layout as conceived for the Project consists of a diversion barrage (only 19 m high), a Head Race
Tunnel 3 Km long on the right bank and a surface power house in flat topography upstream of Selari
village discharging into the river through a small tail race channel. Layout plan of the project is
given in Figure 1.3.
1.3.6 Salient Features of Khuitam (66 MW) HEP:
Salient Feature:
1. LOCATION
(i) State Arunachal Pradesh
(ii) District West Kameng
(iii) River Gang, a tributary of Bichom river
(iv) Location of Barrage site (WGS-84)
Latitude 27° 19’ 13.5” North
Longitude 92° 23’ 54.9” East
(v) Location of Power House (WGS-84)
Latitude 27° 19’ 35.8” North
Longitude 92° 25’ 49.2” East
(vi) Nearest rail head Tejpur
(vii) Nearest Airport Guwahati
2. HYDROLOGY
(i) Catchment Area 1123 sq. km
(ii) Design flood (SPF) 5000 cumecs
3. RIVER DIVERSION ARRANGEMENT Non-monsoon diversion for barrage
construction in stages.
4. BARRAGE
(i) Barrage top EL 1255 m
(ii) River bed level at Barrage site EL 1236 m
(iii) Barrage height 19 m
(above river bed level)
(iv) Design flood (SPF) 5000 cumecs
(v) Crest elevation EL 1236 m
(vi) Nos. and size of spillway opening ( w x h) 6 Nos. 7.6 m wide X 10m high
(vii) Energy dissipation Stilling Basin
5. RESERVOIR
(i) Full Reservoir (FRL) EL 1252 m
(ii) Min. draw down level EL 1251 m
(iii) Area under submergence at FRL 6.32 ha
Introduction________________________________________________________________
1-13
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
(iv) Gross storage 31.5 ha-m

6. INTAKE
(i) Numbers One
(ii) Intake invert level EL 1239.80 m
(iii) Size of gate 5.2 m X 6.3 m (w x h)
(iv) Design discharge 100.35 cumecs
7. HEAD RACE TUNNEL
(i) Numbers One
(ii) Size and type 6.3 m dia, horse shoe shaped, concrete
lined.
(iii) Design discharge 100.35 cumecs
(iv) Length 3 Km
(v) Adit 2 Nos. (one at inlet end and the other
at surge shaft end)
8. SURGE SHAFT
(i) Size & type 21 m diameter, Restricted Orifice
(ii) Vertical shaft height 70 m
9. PRESSURE SHAFT
(i) Numbers One
(ii) Type Steel lined
(iii) Diameter 5.40 m
(iv) Upper horizontal pressure shaft length 120 m
10. PENSTOCK
(i) Numbers Three
(trifurcated from 5.40 m to 2.90 m)
(ii) Type Steel lined
(iii) Diameter 2.90 m
11. POWERHOUSE COMPLEX
(i) Type Surface
(ii) Minimum Tail water level at outlet EL 1173 m
(iii) Turbine axis elevation EL 1168 m
(iv) Type of turbine Vertical Francis
(v) Generating units 3 x 22 MW
(vi) Gross head 79 m
(vii) Rated net head 71.49 m
(Design head)
(vii) Power house size 63 m (L) X 19 m (W) X 28.6 m (H)
12. Tail Race Channel
(i) Numbers One
(ii) Size & type 34 m wide concrete lined.
(iii) Design discharge 100.35 cumecs
(iv) Length 260 m
13. POTHEAD YARD
(i) Type, size Surface 60 m x 30 m
14. POWER GENERATION
Introduction________________________________________________________________
1-14
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
(i) Installed capacity 66 MW (3 x 22 MW)

(ii) Energy generation in 90% Dependable year at 279 MU
95 % machine availability
15. Project Cost
(i) Total Hard cost (excluding escalation & IDC) Rs. 367.74 Crores
16. CONSTRUCTION PERIOD 3½ Years
1.3.7 Policy, Legal And Administrative Framework of Khuitam HEP
In the emerging scenario of rapid economic growth, sustainability of existing resources for the
present and future generations requires an integrated approach so that, the existing resources are
optimally utilized without causing undue damage to the environment. To achieve this objective, the
Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India has enacted Acts, Legislations,
Guidelines and Standards to ensure sustainable development and conserve the environment. These
are required to be compiled by the Project proponents while executing the development of Project.
The Project proponent thus prepares the EIA report, incorporating management plans to mitigate the
adverse impacts (if any) for perusal of the MOEF. The MOEF in turn evaluates the proposal and
suggests stipulations for mitigation of adverse impacts while granting the clearance for execution of
the Project. The important Environmental legislations laid down for conservation of environment are
presented in Table 1.6.
Introduction________________________________________________________________
1-15
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
Table 1.6: Key Environmental Legislations in India

Name Scope and Key Areas Operational
Objective Agencies/Key Players
Water To provide for the Controls sewage Central and State
(prevention and prevention and and industrial Pollution Control
Control of control of water effluent discharges Boards
Pollution) Act, pollution and
1974, 1988 enhancing the
quality of water
Air (Prevention To provide for the Controls Central and State
and Control of prevention and emissions of air Pollution Control
Pollution) Act control of air pollutants Boards
1981, 1987 pollution
Forest To consolidate Regulates access State Government and
(Conservation) acquisition of to natural Central Government
Act,1980, 1988 common property resources, state
such as forests; halt has a monopoly
India’s rapid right over land;
deforestation and Restriction on de-
resulting reservation and
Environmental using forest for
degradation non-forest purpose
Wildlife To protect wildlife Creates protected Wildlife Advisory
(Protection) Act, areas (National Boards; Central Zoo
1972,1993 parks/ sanctuaries) Authorities
categories of
wildlife which are
protected
Environment To provide for the An umbrella Central Government
(Protection) Act, protection and legislation; nodal agency MoEF,
1986 improvement of supplements can delegate powers to
Environment pollution laws state departments of
Environments
National Policy Resettlement and Social issues Central Government
on R&R Rehabilitation of
2003,2007 Project affected
people
EIA Notification Environmental Environmental Project Developer,
1994, 1997, 2006 Impact Assessment Protection State and Central
government
(Source: Government of India Publications)
Like many other developmental activities, the proposed Project, while providing planned power
generation could also lead to a variety of adverse environmental impacts. However, by proper
Introduction________________________________________________________________
1-16
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
planning at the inception stage and by incorporating appropriate mitigatory measures in the planning,
design, construction and operation phases, the adverse impacts can be minimized to a large extent,
where as the beneficial impacts could be maximized. The main objective of the EIA study is to assess
the positive and negative impacts likely to accrue as a result of the construction and operation of the
proposed Project and to suggest suitable Environmental Management Plans (EMP) to ameliorate the
adverse impacts, if any. A well-designed environmental monitoring programme covering various
critical parameters to be covered in the Project construction and operation phase would also be
required. The present EIA for "Khuitam HE Project (66 MW)" has been prepared based on the
analysis of baseline data and accordingly Environment Management Plan has been prepared for
seeking Environment Clearance.
Introduction________________________________________________________________
1-17
Chapter 2
CONCEPTS & METHODOLOGY
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
CHAPTER 2
CONCEPTS & METHODOLOGY
2.1 CONCEPTS
Changes in the practice of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and advances in

information technology have greatly expanded the range of tools available to the EIA
practitioner. For example, map overlay methods, originally pioneered by McHarg (1971),
have evolved into sophisticated Geographic Information Systems (GIS). Expert systems, a
branch of artificial intelligence, have been developed to help in screening, scoping,
developing Terms of Reference (ToR) and conducting preliminary assessments. These
systems use comprehensive checklists, matrices, and networks in combination with
hundreds of impact rules developed by EIA experts. The global embrace of sustainable
development has made the analysis of costs and benefits as an integral part of EIA.
Figure 2.1: Inputs and outputs related to evaluation of impacts (Source: Erickson, 1994).
Methodology____________________________________________________________________
2-1
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
EIA is a systematic process for evaluating the environmental consequences of any proposed
policy, plan or programme initiatives in order to ensure that the concerns are fully included
and appropriately addressed at the earliest stage of decision-making at par with economic
and social considerations. Economic, social and environmental changes are inherent to
development. Whilst development aims to bring about positive change, it can lead to
conflicts. In the past, the promotion of economic growth as the motor for increased well-
being was the main development thrust with little sensitivity to adverse social or
environmental impacts. An impact or effect can be described as the change in an
environmental parameter, which results from a particular activity or intervention. The
change is the difference between the environmental parameter with the project compared to
that without the project. It is predicted or measured over a specified period and within a
defined area. The need to avoid adverse impacts and to ensure long term benefits led to the
concept of sustainability. This has become accepted as an essential feature of development
if the aim of increased well-being and greater equity in fulfilling basic needs is to be met
for this and future generations.
An EIA may be defined as:

“a formal process to predict the environmental consequences of human
development activities and to plan appropriate measures to eliminate or
reduce adverse effects and to augment positive effects”.
EIA has three main functions:

 To predict problems,
 To find ways to avoid them, and
 To enhance positive effects.
The third function is of particular importance. The EIA provides a unique opportunity to
demonstrate ways in which the environment may be improved as part of the development
process. The EIA also predicts the conflicts and constraints between the proposed project,
programme or sectoral plan and its environment. It provides an opportunity for mitigation
measures to be incorporated to minimize problems. It enables monitoring programmes to be
established to assess future impacts and provide data on which managers can take informed
decisions to avoid environmental damage. Thus the main aim of having EIA studies carried
Methodology____________________________________________________________________
2-2
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
out is to understand and prioritize the impact of development activity on the natural life
support systems and processes with main emphasis on the continuation of ecosystem
processes and functions, so that adequate remedial/mitigating measures are taken right from
the design stage.
The study of various baseline parameters viz. Air, Land, Water, Flora, Fauna, Socio aspects
includes EIA. The principal phenomenon or pathways of impacts are Soil impacts, Air
pollution impacts, Noise and Health effects, Ecology impacts including endangered species
assessment, Geological hazards assessment, Water pollution and Aquatic impacts, etc.
Whereas related analysis of Social impacts is achieved through Social impact assessment.
Integration of these parameters gives an overall perception of both rather positive and
negative impacts due to any project construction. This section presents an overview on the
methodologies adopted for the present study of EIA for Khuitam HE project.
2.2 METHODOLOGIES
Standard methodologies of EIA were followed for conducting the Comprehensive EIA
study for the proposed Khuitam HE project. The details of methodologies followed for
collection of baseline data and impact identification related to various Environmental
attributes have been discussed in brief under different sections of this chapter. These
methodologies were structured in such way so that the identification, collection and
organization of baseline environmental data, assessment of developmental component and
their impacts on the baseline environment can be done easily and correctly. The outcome of
the study has been analyzed and presented in the form of a number of visual formats for
easy interpretation and decision making.
2.2.1 Study Area
In order to conduct EIA/EMP study for Khuitam HE project, the project area has been
delineated into:
 Free draining Catchment area (i.e. catchment area between Khuitam HE project and
Gongri HE project in the upstream) of Khuitam barrage covering an area of about
84 sq. km.
Methodology____________________________________________________________________
2-3
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
 Influence zone covering an area of 10 km in radius from the outer most components
of the project.
 The Project Component Study Area which is spread over 0.49 sq km (49 ha) land
and covers the area where various project components will be set up including
reservoir area covering 0.0632 sq km (6.32 ha) and extending for 0.8 km along
Gang River.
 Downstream area. (i.e., stretch of 13 km from power house site)
Project is located on Gang River which originates from an elevation of more than EL 4000
m and joins Bichom River at EL 760 m. Gang River is right bank tributary of river Bichom
in Kameng River Basin. The geographical location of the barrage site is at 27 0 19’ 13.5”
North 92 0 23’ 54.9” East while location of powerhouse site is at 27 0 19’ 35.8” North 92 0
25’ 49.2” East. A total of 25 numbers of villages are falling within the Influence Zone area
total population of about 2645. Total land requirement for the project is 49.14 ha which
belongs to 38 number of individuals (PAFs) and 3 communities belonging to 2 villages of
Salari and Rahung.
2.2.2 Field Surveys
The field survey for the collection of the baseline data commenced from November 2008 to
March 2010 covering various seasonal data i.e. Pre-Monsoon/Summer, Monsoon and
Winter to collect data related to air, water, noise, geology, flora, fauna, forest types and
ecological parameters including soil types. In addition, detailed surveys and studies were
also conducted for understanding aquatic ecology and fish life of Gang River. A
comprehensive door to door socio-economic survey of the project affected villages and
families were also conducted. Field surveys in the study area were also conducted for the
purpose of ground truthing and augmenting the remote sensing data. For this purpose
various attributes such as land features, rivers, and forest and vegetation types were
recorded on the ground. The details of surveys conducted in the project affected regions and
the project catchment are given in Table 2.1.
Methodology____________________________________________________________________
2-4
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
Table 2.1: Sampling frequency for various Environmental Parameters

Parameters Pre-Monsoon Monsoon Winter
Water Sampling, soil Mar-May, 2009 July, 2008 Dec, 2008,2009
FloralliStudyd Mar-May, 2009 l 2008
July, b 2008, 2009
Dec,
July, 2009 Nov, 2008
Jan-Feb, 2009
Faunal Study Mar-May, 2009 July, 2008 Dec, 2008, 2009
Jan-Feb, 2009
Nov, 2008
Air Sampling May, 2009 July, 2008 Jan-2009
Aug, 2008 Feb, 2009
Noise Level Recording May, 2009 July, 2008 Jan-2009
& Traffic density
Land Use/ Land Cover May, 2009 July, 2009 Dec, 2009
(Ground truthing)
Socio-Economic Survey March-May 2009, March 2010
2.2.3 Scoping Matrix
Various environmental attributes are scaled on the scoping matrix to identify the
significance of various resources and the extent of impact on these resources due to the
construction of project, accordingly prioritization of study has been done in the collection
of baseline information to quantify and understand the impacts from the construction and
operation of the proposed project. Scoping matrix has been presented in Table 2.2 given
below:
Table 2.2: Scoping Matrix

Environmental Aspects Likely Impacts
Land Environment
Construction Phase  Increase in soil erosion
 Solid waste from labour camps and construction works
 Pollution by construction spoils
 Human Pressure on land due to acquisition of land for
construction of colonies
Operation Phase  Change in Land use pattern
 Acquisition of land for various project components
Water Environment
Construction Phase  Increase in turbidity of nearby receiving water bodies due
to siltation and sedimentation
 Degradation of water quality due to disposal of sewage
and other wastes from labour colony and construction
sites
Operation Phase  Change in hydrological regime due to damming and
impounding of water
Methodology____________________________________________________________________
2-5
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
Environmental Aspects Likely Impacts
 Sedimentation and siltation risks

 Risk of Eutrophication
 Reduction in D.O.
 Reduced flow in downstream river course
Aquatic Ecology
Construction Phase  Increased pressure on aquatic ecology
 Reduced productivity due to sedimentation and siltation
of river body
Operation Phase  Impacts on fish migration
 Impacts on spawning and breeding grounds
 Degradation of Riverine ecology
 Increased fisheries in reservoir
Terrestrial Ecology
Construction Phase  Disturbance to wildlife due to construction activities
 Increased Human pressure on forest from labour camps to
meet fuel wood and timber requirements.
Operation Phase  Impacts on wildlife habitats
 Impacts on wildlife movement
 Loss of forest area due to submergence
Noise Environment
Construction Phase  Increase in sound level due to blasting activities
 Increase in sound level due to vehicular movement and
operation of construction equipments
Air quality
Construction Phase  Impacts due to emission from fuel combustion in
construction equipments.
 Impacts due to emission from increased vehicular
movement and crushers.
 Impacts due to fugitive emission.
Socioeconomic environment
Construction Phase  Pressure on existing infrastructure facilities
 Impacts on mineral resources
 Impacts on demographic composition due to labour
influx
 Friction between labour force and native population
 Improved employment potential during the project
construction phase.
Operation Phase  Increased revenue from power generation.
 Industrial development due to power generation.
 Infrastructure development around project area
 Loss of land due to submergence/project components
Public Health
Construction phase  Impacts due to disposal of untreated sewage from
construction works camps
 Transmission of diseases by immigrant labour population
Operation phase  Increased incidence of vector borne disease due to
increase in water spread area
Methodology____________________________________________________________________
2-6
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
2.2.4 Geology
The regional geology around the project area highlighting geology, stratigraphy and
structural features based on the information collected during the detailed geological
investigations/survey carried out as a part of Detailed Project Report (DPR) preparation of
the project. In addition, important parameters related to seismicity of the region was
assessed using published literature on seismic history and seismo-tectonic nature of the
regional rock types in the area.
2.2.5 Meteorology
Meteorological data i.e., rainfall, humidity and temperature have been collected and
analyzed as part of the DPR preparation and the same have been adopted during the
preparation of the EIA study.
2.2.6 Hydrology
The rainfall data has been obtained from Dirang rain – gauge station within the catchment
area of project is available for the period November 98 to January 2007. From this data
monthly and annual rainfall values have been worked out. Monthly and annual rainfall for
23 rain – gauge station in Arunachal Pradesh for the years 1991 to 2005 observed by Rural
Works Department is also available. Discharge data of Bichom dam site is available for the
intervals from 1969 to 1982, 1989 to 1992 and 2000 to 2008. The Hydrology data for Gang
River has been abstracted from DPR of the Project and suitably incorporated in EIA.
2.2.7 Land Environment
Detailed Project Report (DPR) of the project was at first thoroughly studied and details of
land requirement for the project falling under various categories of Private/forest and
Government land were collected. Simultaneously, to understand the details of land use and
various physiographic & geological features; base maps of Survey of India and Geological
Survey of India were collected for the influence zone and free draining catchment area of
the project. Property survey has been carried out in consultation with District administration
Methodology____________________________________________________________________
2-7
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
and the local public to identify the ownership of the land required for construction of
project. Field surveys were carried out to study the soil characteristics, and identification of
erosion and landslide prone areas in the study area. Based on the studies data related to
Physiography, land use/ land cover, lithology, structure, drainage pattern, slope
characteristics, landslides/slips, etc have been generated. These data sets were used for
preparation of the thematic maps, calculation of sediment yield index (SYI) and Erosion
Intensity Units in the free draining catchment area.
The Remote Sensing-Geographical Information System (RS-GIS) database was generated

for the study area of Khuitam HE project to ascertain the details pertaining to land use/land
cover, soil types, geology, geomorphology, and composite erosion intensity mapping apart
from basic information on settlements and roads network.
2.2.7.1 Data Acquisition and Preparation
Remote sensing satellite images from IRS-P6, LISS III sensor data of 2008 (Path-110,
Row-52, and Date of Pass- 07th January 2008) have been used for the data analysis. Various
information maps were also obtained from different secondary sources viz. Survey of India
Topo-sheets (83A/07, 08 & 11), Soil map from National Bureau of Soil Survey & Land Use
Planning (NBSS&LUP), Forest department, Irrigation department, etc. The printed/drawing
maps were scanned and digitized and registered as per requirement and different GIS layers
were developed.
Data was prepared depending on the level of accuracy required and any corrections required
were made. All the layers were geo-referenced and brought to a common scale (real
coordinates), so that overlay could be performed. The formats of outputs from each layer
were firmed up to match the formats of inputs in the program. The grid size to be used was
also decided to match the level of accuracy required, the data availability and the software
and time limitations. The format of output was finalized. The input data was analyzed for
each layer as detailed later. The acquired RS images were analyzed using image-processing
software (ERDAS IMAGINE) to assess the major land use predominant in the catchment.
Derived maps were rectified by ground truthing. The watersheds delineated from Survey of
Methodology____________________________________________________________________
2-8
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
India (SoI) topographic sheets were overlaid on the land use map in order to determine the
details of drainage and land use of the respective watersheds. All the thematic layers of the
catchment, viz., base map, drainage map and land use/ land cover map, etc. were then
transferred to GIS for building spatial queries and further overlay analysis.
Digital Elevation Model (DEM) was developed to extract slope class information. The
results of the modeling were interpreted in pictorial form to identify the areas with high soil
erosion rates. This output and the other primary and secondary data collected as a part of
the field studies were also used. For the present study digital satellite data obtained from
IRS-P6, LISS III sensor is used for interpretation and classification. Multi-spectral data is
necessary for interpreting the land use classes on the ground. Various land use classes on
the ground were verified by conducting detailed ground truth studies.
2.2.7.2 Land Use/ Land Cover
Nearest neighbor re-sampling technique was used for geometric correction, since the image
is to be classified later. This technique simply chooses the actual pixel that has its centre
nearest to the point located in the image. The pixel is then transferred to the corresponding
grid location on the topo-sheet. The original brightness value of the pixel is thus
maintained. The satellite data was classified using supervised classification technique.
Supervised classification is an essential analytical tool for the extraction of quantitative
information from remotely sensed image data. It is assumed in supervised classification that
each spectral class can be described by a probability distribution in multi-spectral space.
This is a multi-variable distribution with as many variables as dimensions of the space.
Such a distribution describes the chance of finding a pixel belonging to that class at any
given location in multi-spectral space. Gaussian or Normal distribution is generally used for
analysis. As the multi-dimensional normal distribution is specified completely by its mean
vector and its covariance matrix, if these are known, then it is possible to compute the set of
probabilities that describe the relative likelihood of a pattern at a particular location
belonging to each of those classes. It can be considered as belonging to the class, which
indicates the highest probability. This method referred to as maximum likelihood
Methodology____________________________________________________________________
2-9
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
classification, is the most common supervised classification method used with remote
sensing image data and the same was used in the present study.
The essential practical steps followed for supervised classification were:

 Identification of land use classes into which the image is to be classified. For the
present study, eight broad classes were used.
 Preparation of training data, i.e. selection of representative or prototype pixels from
each set of classes. This data was collected from site visits or ground truthing and
maps, topo-sheets, photographs, etc.
 Use of training data to define the parameters of the particular class, called its
signature.
 Using the training classifier, every pixel in the image was classified as one of the
desired land use classification type. The whole image area of interest in the image
i.e. directly draining catchment was classified in eight land use classes. The area
under each land use class was computed.
 Map compositions were then produced.
Training sites within the image that are representative of the land-cover classes of interest
were selected after unsupervised classification. The training data should be of value, if the
environment from which they were obtained is relatively homogenous. During the
preliminary stages of a project, all significant environmental factors that contribute to
confusion in classification of similar appearing ground data should be identified. There
could be differences in water depth and clarity, crop species, unusual soil moisture
conditions, etc. Such environmental conditions should be carefully annotated on the
imagery and the selection of training sites made using geographic stratification of these
data. Once signature extension factors have been considered, representative training sites
for each class were selected and the spectral statistics for each pixel found within each
training site were estimated. Each site is usually composed of many pixels. The general rule
is that if training data are being extracted from n bands then >10 n pixels of training data
are collected for each class. This is sufficient to compute the variance-covariance matrices
required by some classification algorithm especially maximum likelihood that is mostly
used for land use classification.
Methodology____________________________________________________________________
2-10
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
After the supervised classification procedure, a land use map was prepared which the team
at field verified, and any errors or omissions were identified. A reclassification of the land
use categories implementing the details and corrections, if any, were done. The
reclassification output was used for the preparation of the final land use classification map.
This map after due verification was then composed and printed, as desired. The land use
classification map of the directly draining catchment area was prepared and important
locations were marked on it. For modelling purpose, this map was geo-referenced to real
coordinates and converted to a vector layer and each land use class was converted to a
polygon in different layers with its land use class information attached to it.
2.2.7.3 Delineation of Catchment, Watershed and Sub-Watersheds
Hierarchical delineation system developed by All India Soil & Land Use Survey (AISLUS
Technical Bulletin – 9) was followed for the demarcation of watershed in the area.
2.2.7.4 Slope
In accordance with the soil classification developed by AISLUS, the different classes of
slopes identified in the study area are gentle slope (upto 15%), moderate slope (15% to
30%), moderately steep (30% - 50%) and strong slope (above 50%).
2.2.7.5 Soils
The Soil map of Arunachal prepared by NBSS & LUP (Headquarters at Nagpur) was used
for the superimposing of Results. All parameters pertaining to soil classification viz. soil
texture, depth, erosion tendency and classification as per international standards have been
taken.
2.2.7.6 Composite Erosion Intensity Mapping
Determination of erosion intensity unit is primarily based upon the integrated information
on soil characteristics, physiography, slope and landuse/ landcover. The composite map for
delineating different erosion intensity units was prepared through superimposition of the
Methodology____________________________________________________________________
2-11
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
maps showing soil types, slope and land use/land cover. This thematic mapping of erosion
intensity for entire catchment was done using the overlay and union techniques. Based on
ground truth conducted during fieldwork and published data, weightage and delivery ratio
was assigned to each erosion intensity unit.
2.2.7.7 Delineation of Influence Zone and Submergence Zone
The elevation of the Full Reservoir Level (FRL) of Khuitam HE project was marked using
Topographic survey data and based on this FRL; submergence area of the project marked
on DEM. Using this submergence level, influence zone demarcation has been done taking
10 km aerial distance from the outermost components of the project area.
2.2.8 Ambient Air Quality
The ambient air quality was monitored at 7 locations in the influence zone. The frequency
of monitoring in each season was twice a month. The parameters monitored were SPM,
RPM, SO 2 , and Nox using Respirable Dust Sampler (Model APM 460 BL) of Envirotech
SPM and RPM have been estimated by gravimetric method. Modified West and Geake
method has been adopted for estimation of SO 2 and Jacobs Hochheiser method has been
adopted for the estimation of Nox.
2.2.9 Ambeint Noise Level measurement
Hand held Digital sound level meter SL 4001 has been used for monitoring sound levels at
various locations. The sound levels were measured at different sites such as near
powerhouse site, residential area, road head, etc.
2.2.10 Water Quality and Aquatic Ecology
2.2.10.1 For Physico-Chemical Parameters of River Water
The water samples are collected at 5 different locations along the Gang River, which were
then thoroughly analyzed for various physic–chemical characteristics as per the American
Public Health Association (APHA) standards.
Methodology____________________________________________________________________
2-12
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
2.2.10.2 Aquatic Ecology
The data on prevailing fish species was collected from Fisheries Department of State
Government and books, papers and journals. Fish sampling was carried out at various sites
in the project area and in the river stretches both upstream and downstream of the project
site to ascertain the disposal pattern of fish species. Identification and measurements fish
catch was done and an inventory of the fish species was also prepared with the help of
available literature. Biological characteristics that were assessed involve zooplankton and
phytoplankton.
For the quantification of zooplankton and suspended algae 50 liters of water for each
community was filtered at each site by using plankton net made up of fine silk cloth (mesh
size 25 μm). The study was repeated three times at each site and the samples were pooled.
The filtrate collected for suspended algae was preserved in the Lugol’s solution while
unpreserved samples of zooplankton were brought to the laboratory. Epilithic phytobenthos
were obtained by scrapping the surface of rocks and boulders (4 x 4 cm2) with the help of a
hard brush. Three replicates, obtained from each site were pooled and preserved in Lugol’s
solution for further analyses. Before going further for other analysis of the plankton and
benthic samples the density was estimated by using drop count method. The density of
suspended algae and phytobenthos were estimated with the help of APHA (1992). The
suspended algae and phytobenthos were identified with the help of Sarod and Kamat
(1984), Hustedt and Jensen (1985) and Edmondson (1959). The zooplankton was identified
by using literatures of Edmondson (1959) and Battish (1992). The macro-invertebrates were
obtained with the help of a square foot Surber’s sampler or a square foot quadrate. The
substrate, mainly stones were disturbed and immediately transferred to a bucket underwater
and later rinsed thoroughly to dislodge all the attached macro-invertebrates. The organisms
trapped in the Surber’s sampler were also transferred to the bucket. The material was sieved
through 100μm sieve. Samples were collected in three replicates and pooled for further
analysis. The samples were preserved in 3% formalin or 70% ethyl alcohol. The organisms
obtained were then counted after identifying them up to family level by the procedure
described by Pennak (1953) and Edmondson (1959). Biological Monitoring Working Party
score (BMWP, 1978) and Average Score Per Taxon (ASPT) (Armitage, et al., 1983) were
Methodology____________________________________________________________________
2-13
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
used to assess the water quality. For the collection of benthos, scraping of boulders was
made in area of 3 cm2 and the samples were preserved in 10% of formalin. For qualitative
analysis keys, by Trivedi and Goel (1984) was followed. Microscopes were also used for
the plating of algae. Same process was followed for zoo and phyto planktons. Aid of keys
given by Usinger (1950), Needham and Needham (1962), Macan (1979), Edington and
Hildrew (1995) were used for identification.
2.2.11 Floral Sampling and Phyto-sociological Analysis
During the reconnaissance survey, in view of the difficult terrain, Random Quadrat
Sampling and Least Count Quadrat Sampling method was found to be the most suitable for
survey of influence zone, and project study area including submergence area respectively.
For vegetation sampling a total 55 quadrats were laid at the Project Study Area and
Influence Zone which was further divided into a)U/s of barrage on left bank of river b)U/s
of barrage on right bank of river c) D/s of barrage on left bank of river d) D/s of barrage
on right bank of river at different elevations in the entire influence zone of Khuitam HE
project. In each quadrat, trees were recorded individually taking 10 m x 10 m quadrat size;
each quadrat was further subdivided into 5 m x 5 m for recording shrubs/ saplings and 1 m
x 1 m for herbs/ seedlings.
For the quantitative analysis of forest communities, Phyto-sociological analysis was carried
out. The phyto-sociological analysis of the forests was conducted during three seasons
(summer, winter and monsoon) of 2008-09 by using quadrats randomly distributed
throughout the influence and submergence area. In each quadrat, the tree vegetation was
sampled, Trees with > 31.5 cm CBH (circumference at breast height i.e., 1.37 m from the
ground) were individually measured and the species were identified. Individuals within the
CBH range of 10.5 to 31.4 cm were considered as saplings and individuals < 10.5 cm CBH
were considered as seedlings. The vegetation data was quantitatively analyzed for
abundance, density and frequency according to the standard formulae. The relative
dominance, relative density, and relative frequency of all tree species were added together
to represent Importance Value Index (IVI). The ratio of abundance to frequency, below
Methodology____________________________________________________________________
2-14
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
0.025 indicates regular distribution, between 0.025 and 0.050 indicates random distribution,
and when exceeds 0.050 it indicates contagious distribution (Curtis and Cottam, 1956).
During the vegetation survey, herbaria were prepared for the plants those had flowers. Rare
and endangered species were identified referring to the Red Data Book of India and other
available literature, flora and herbarium pertaining to the rare/ endangered species of
Arunachal Pradesh
2.2.11.1 Indices Used For Phyto-Sociological Analysis
For each vegetation type, the field data were analyzed for computation of Importance Value
Index (IVI), which is the sum of relative density, relative frequency and relative dominance
(Curtis JT & Mc Intosh RP, 1950).
1. Frequency: It provides information on the number of times a species encountered.
Total number of quadrats in which species occur

Frequency (%) = --------------------------------------------------------------x 100
Total number of quadrats studied
2. Density or plants per unit area: The reciprocal of density provides an estimate of
the mean growing space per plant and be of interest in some ecological studies.
Total number of individuals of a species in the entire sampling unit

Density = -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total number of quadrat studied
3. Abundance: The density and frequency can be combined to obtain an estimate of

the number of individuals per quadrat, or unit area for the quadrat in which the
species occur, this measure is referred as abundance.
Total number of individuals of species occurring

Abundance = --------------------------------------------------------------------
Total number of quadrats in which species occur
Methodology____________________________________________________________________
2-15
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
4. Relative randomness of the species I: If we divide the abundance (A) by

frequency (F), this provides a measure of the relative randomness of the specie of
the interest.
A
R = ------
F
5. Basal Cover (Dominance): The area of coverage is used to express the dominance.
The higher the coverage area, the greater is the dominance.
Total Basal Cover = Mean Basal Cover x Density
6. Relative Frequency
Frequency of the Species
Relative Frequency = -------------------------------------x 100
Total frequency of all species
7. Relative Density
Density of the Species
Relative Density = -------------------------------------x 100
Total density of all species
8. Relative Dominance
Dominance of the Species
Relative Dominance = -------------------------------------x 100
Total dominance of all species
9. Importance Value Index (IVI): This total value out of 300 is called Importance
Value Index (IVI) of the species. The importance of IVI was first coined by Curtis
and McIntosh (1951).
IVI = Relative frequency + Relative Dominance + Relative Density
10. Species Richness IndI(R): Species richness can be described as the number of the
species in a sample or habitat per unit area.
S 1
R (As per Margalef 1958)
ln N
Methodology____________________________________________________________________
2-16
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
11. Index of Dominance: As per Simpson (1949)
S
n
  i  1
(
N
i
) 2
12. Index of Diversity: This measurement takes into account subspecies richness and
proportion of each species within a zone. As per Shannon & Weinner 1963:
s
ni ni
H '  i 1
(
N
) ln(
N
)
13. Evenness Index or Species Evenness: Evenness contrasts with dominance, and is
maximized when all species have the same number of individuals. (As per Hill,
1973)
H '
E 
ln S
Where, S = Total number of species, N = Total number of individuals of all the species, and
n i = number of individuals of the ith species.
2.2.12 Faunal Assessment and Indices Used
2.2.12.1 Methodology Used For Avian Fauna/Butterflies/Insects
The points located for quadrat study were taken as the center point for faunal study. Belt
transects were laid in all four directions, at least for 500 m distance and observations were
recorded for a total 2 to 3 km transect. At inaccessible locations trail method was the best
option.
Methodology____________________________________________________________________
2-17
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
500 m
500 m
Strata of forest for each location were also observed apart from elevation and exact
locations through handheld Global Positioning System (GPS). Predominantly, the sampling
has been carried out in the morning hours as it is the most suitable period for avian fauna.
Sometimes sampling in the evening hours were also carried out to know the habitual nature
of the species. Local people were involved during the sampling to know vernacular name
and the status of the species. Published literature of Grimmet and Inskipp 2001 has been
referred for the identification of the avi-fauna.
Butterflies and Insects were also studied using Transect method. With the help of hand
scoop net butterflies were caught and after the identification they were released.
2.2.12.2 Mammals
Transect method was used for observation of mammals at project area and influence zone..
In case of mammals, signs of their presence such as scats, pugmarks, droppings, and claw
marks, pellets, hoof marks, scrapping, and vocalizations were also considered. Interviews
with the local people were also done near the sampling points for recording their
knowledge. Initial compilations of the species were made using Working Plan of the
Bomdila Forest Division.
Methodology____________________________________________________________________
2-18
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
2.2.13 Socio-Economic Assessment
2.2.13.1 Secondary Data Sources
Secondary information was collected mainly from the District Statistical office, Block
Development Offices and Panchayat offices. Available literatures on socio-economic status
of the Arunachal Pradesh including Census Data (2001) were also used.
2.2.13.2 Primary Data Collection
Detailed socio-economic census survey was conducted in all the villages likely to be
affected by the proposed project. A detail property survey was also conducted for
identification of owners (PAFs) of land required for construction of Project. Door to door
survey was conducted to assess the socio economic status of the villages as well as the
actual losses likely to be caused by the Khuitam HE project. Collection of data was done at
both at village level and individual household level. The socio-economic survey at the
village level was aimed at finding out the status and extent of amenities and resources
available in villages.
Detailed questionnaires (Annexure 2.1) were filled by door to door survey of PAFs
including information on demographic structure of the house holds (information on family
size, age and sex of the family member), number of people in working age group (18 to 60
years), division of labour, level of literacy, occupation, size of land holding, live stock
holding and crops grown. The people were also interviewed to know their perception about
the project. To assess the dependency on forests, and loss to movable and immovable
assets, special meetings and discussions were done with village Gaon Bura (GB) and other
experienced villagers. The details regarding public consultation with village GB, local
people and survey conducted in affected village are given in Table 2.3.
Methodology____________________________________________________________________
2-19
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
Table2.3: Village Meetings and socio-economic survey conducted in project affected villages of
Khuitam HE project
S. No. Village Name Date of meeting/consultation with villagers/ senior

citizen
1 Salari Dec. 2008, Jan 2009, March 2009, Feb- March 2010
2 Rahung March 2009
3 Salari Dec. 2008, Feb- April 2010
4 Rahung April 2010
5 Influence zone March- April 2009
2. 3 PREDICTION OF IMPACTS AND THEIR ASSESSMENT
2. 3.1 Matrix System
The present EIA has been carried out adopting graded matrix system (Wegner and Rhyner,
1972). Effects of various activities on the environment were ranked on a scale of 1 to 4,
based on the order of increasing importance to arrive at Parameter Importance Value (PIV).
The score of each parameter has been converted to probability and than recalculated by
multiplying with thousand. The values thus obtained are used for evaluating the degree of
impacts on the project activities. The matrix used for EIA consists of project activities on x-
axis and environmental parameter likely to be affected by the project activities on y-axis.
The degree of impacts range from 1 to 10, with value of 1 to 2 for minimum impacts, 3 to 4
for moderate impacts, 5 to 6 for appreciable impacts, 7 to 8 for significant impacts and 9 to
10 for extreme impacts. A positive or negative sign indicates the impact value depending on
its beneficial or adverse impact. The total score (TSC) has been than calculated as under:
n
TSC i = (PIV) i  I ij …..(1)
j=i
Where PIV is parameter importance value
I represents Impact value (1 to 10, positive or negative) due to project activity j on
environmental parameter i.
The total Impact Score (TIS) has been calculated using the formulae:
m
TIS =  TSC i …..(2)
i =1
Where, m is the total number of environmental parameters considered.
Methodology____________________________________________________________________
2-20
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
Adopting the above methodology, EIA of the Khuitam HE project is carried out for
construction and post-construction stages with and without incorporation of environmental
impacts corrective/mitigative measures.
Based on the project details and the baseline environmental status, potential impacts as a
result of the construction and operation of the proposed Khuitam HE project have been
categorized as follows:
 Land Environment
 Water Environment
 Terrestrial Flora
 Terrestrial Fauna
 Aquatic Ecology
 Noise Environment
 Ambient Air Quality
 Socio Economic Environment
2. 3.2 Battelle Environmental Evaluation System (BEES)
 Environmental quality assessment for the proposed activity of Adishankar Power

Pvt. Ltd. at Khuitam village in West Kameng District, Arunachal Pradesh has been
undertaken by evaluating various environmental parameters. These parameters
represent the various components of environment viz. biological, environmental
pollution including water, air, land and noise pollution, aesthetics and human
interests. Functional relationships have been developed for each of the parameters
relating them with environmental quality.
 A checklist has been used for assigning importance weight for each parameter by an
inter-disciplinary team of experts, from different fields. Ranked pair wise
comparison technique has been used to arrive at the Parameter Importance Units
(PIU).
 Impact evaluation has been accomplished through the use of functional relationship
according to BEES. Functional relationships for each category of environment also
Methodology____________________________________________________________________
2-21
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
called Value Function Curves (VFC) refer to graphical means of transforming

environmental data (baseline and predicted) into subjective evaluation. In VFC
objective measurements have been presented into a subjective interpretation of
Environmental Quality (EQ) on a scale of 0 to 1 where unity represents conditions,
viz. the baseline (without project options), project without Environmental
Management Plan (EMP), and project with EMP. The index value is the summation
of the product of EQ and PIU for individual parameters for above conditions as
follows:
i=n
EIUj = (EQ) ij *(PIU) i
i=1
Where,
EIUj Environmental Impact Unit for jth environmental condition
n Number of parameters considered for environmental impact evaluation
EQij Environmental Quality for ith parameter and jth Environmental condition
PIUi Parameter Importance Unit for ith parameter
 The inference regarding impact of proposed project is drawn on the basis of extent
of positive or negative change obtained in EIU from the difference in EIU due to the
project with EMP and the EIU for baseline environmental conditions. The efficiency
of the EMP is judged by calculating the change.
Methodology____________________________________________________________________
2-22
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
Methodology____________________________________________________________________
2-13
Annexure 2.1
SOCIO-ECONOMIC SURVEY OF AFFECTED FAMILIES DUE TO PROJECT

RELATED ACTIVITIES
1. General Information
(i) Name of the village ………………………………………………………
(ii) Name of the Gaon Burah (GB) ………………………………………….
(iii)Tehsil -------------------------------- & District ----------------------------------------------
2. Information Related To The Land Owner

(i) Name in the Revenue Record:
(ii) Head of the family……………………………….. Father’s

name…………………………..
(iii) Present owner of the land ……………………….............

Age……………………………..
(iv) Duration of stay of interviewee: Since birth: ………… Years …………..

(v) Religion: Hindu/Muslim/Christian/Buddhist/Donyipolo/Others ………………….
(vi) Caste: General/OBC/Schedule caste/Schedule tribe ……………………………
(vii) Voter ID No: ………………….
(viii) Category: APL/BPL ……………………..
3. Family Description
S. No. Names Relationship Sex Date of Marital Edu. Occupation Income
of family with Family birth/age status Qual.
members head Primary Secondary Primary Secondary
I.
II.
III.
IV.
V.
VI.
VII.
VIII.
IX.
X.
i
(i) No. of Family member ……...
(ii) No. of Earning member ……...
(iii) No. of literate ……..
(iv) No. of Male ………
(v) No. of Female ……….
(vi) Whether living in village: (a) Permanently (b) Temporarily (c) Not living
(vii) School going children ……………….. & Name of the School ……………………….
3.1 Details of Family Members Who Are Staying Outside Village

Name of the member Name of the Reason Whether stay Out of Does he send
place where for outside village money to home?
the member exodus permanently/ since Yes/No. If yes, how
stay temporary when much (in Rs)
3.2 No. of Vulnerable Persons in The Family

(i) Destitute……………………….
(ii) Orphans………………………
(iii) Widows……………………….
(iv) Abandoned Women……………………..
(v) Handicap …………………………………
(vi) Servant or labor……………………………
4. House Hold & Basic Amenities

(i) No. of house/houses owned……………………… Area (Acres) ………..
(ii) Location: At same village …………… At some other village/place ……………….
(iii) Owner ………….. Tenant ……………………….
(iv) Size of House Hold ……………….
(v) Number of Room …………………
(vi) Type of Household (Construction Materials) ……………
(vii) Separate Kitchen: Yes ………….. No ……………
ii
(viii) Basic facilities: TV, Telephone, mobile, Two wheeler, Four wheeler, LPG others
5. Sanitation
(i) Open area
(ii) Forest area
(iii)Toilet
(iv) Whether individual toilet or community toilet
(v) Mode of waste disposal: In open area or pit
6. Water Availability for Household Use

Purpose of use River Nallah Water falls Natural Pipe Tank Other
source line sources
Drinking water
Water for
bathing
Water for
livestock
Others
7. Health Status
- No. of Disabled Person (if any): Physically /Mentally /Polio
- Name of the major diseases by which family

members fell sick in last 2 years ……………………………………………………………..
- Type of treatment, family generally avails:
(i) Allopathic (ii) Homoeopathy (iii) Ayurvedic (iv) Unani (v) Others
- Where does family go for treatment: Name of Place………………………………….
(i) Household treatment (ii) Pvt. med. practitioner (iii) Govt. hospital (iv) PHC
- Have any member got vaccinated in the last one year

(Cholera, Jaundice, any other)………………………………………………………………
iii
- Does family knows preventive measures of the above diseases
(Immunization / water treatment / personal hygiene / do not know)
- Due to severe illness, which place preferred for Treatment
8. Immovable Property
Details Materials used Year of Approx. cost Is the property No.
in construction construction involved in going to be acquired/
construction affected by land affected
acquisition
Cattle – Shed
Thrashing floor/yard
Granary
Water Tank
Community Hall
Shops
Wells / Ponds
Others
9. Animal Husbandry/Livestock
S. Livestock Varity of No of No of livestock sold last Income (Rs)
No. Livestock milk/meat year generated from
producing livestock last year
livestock’s
Number Amount (Rs)
1. Cow
2. Bull/Ox
3. Buffalo
5. Goat
6. Sheep
7. Poultry
8. Duckery
9. Horse
10. Mule
11. Mithun
12. Yak
13. Piggery
14. Cross bred
animals
15. Others
10. Horticulture
Type of plants Year of Sowing Area of land under Income (Rs)
horticulture (Ha/local generated last year
unit)
iv
11. Total Land Owned By A Family
Type of landuse Total Land) Land to be Type of land Remarks

(ha/Local unit) acquired left (ha/Local
(ha/Local unit) unit)
Name of Land Owner
Type of Agriculture Practices
(Jhum/ Settled)
Total land under agriculture
Irrigated
Non irrigated
Barren
Home garden
Horticulture/orchard
Grazing
Forests
Others
12. Store and Consumption of Fodder / Fuel

Products Store (Kg/yr) Land Sold quantity/ Income /yr
yr
Community forest Private forest
Wooden Post
Fuel wood
Fruit
Medicine
13. Forest Products

Description Collection/ Consumption Store/ yr Round/ day No of Source of collection
day / day Member
Community Private forest
forest
Fodder
Fuel
14. Details of Loan Taken
Source Name of the Year of Amount (In Rate of Amount (Rs)

scheme taking loan Rs) taken as interest returned
loan
Govt
Money lender
Relative
Others
v
15. Yearly Income (In Rs) And Expenditure Last Year
Source Income (In Rs) Source Expenditure (In Rs)
Agriculture Agriculture
Livestock Livestock
Labour Food
Job Education
Travel Health
Handicraft Cloth
Business/ Contract Ornaments
Homegarden Marriage
Horticulture Festival
Milk Others
Others
16. Willingness to Accept:

a) Willing to accept the loss of land (homestead/agricultural) Yes / No
b) Is ready to accept the proper compensation offered Yes / No

for the loss as per the State policy
c) If answers to above questions are No, then give reasons
17. Your Idea about LADP:

a) School
b) Hospital
c) Community centre
d) Others
18. Comments on HEP

Are you in favour of HEP?
Yes
No
No idea
(a) What is the positive impact in your opinion (
1 is for maximum priority and likewise)
Are you satisfied with property survey
It helps in generating sources of income
Helps in electricity production
Can get a good compensation
Want to shift to better place
Leads to developmental activity in the area
Gives employment opportunity
Any other comments or reasons and give rank
vi
(b) What is the negative impact in your opinion
( 1 is for maximum priority and likewise)
The land is being submerged
It is unsafe to stay in this area
It is increasing other destructive activities
Fuel, fodder and timber collection will be difficult
Fish population will be threatened
Trees and vegetations that are of economic
importance and with which religious values are
associated will be threatened
Wild animal survival will be threatened
Any other comments or reasons and give rank
19. Land Ownership of Acquisition Area for HEP

a. Community
b. Individual
c. Clan
20. Religious Place/ Cremation Site/ Mela Ground (5 Km radius):

Wild Animal
S. No. Name Numbers Where Seen When Seen
Flora
S. No. Name Tree Shrub Herbs Uses
Signature of Interviewee
Name of the surveyor
Signature
Date
vii
Chapter 3
PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
CHAPTER 3
PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT
3.1 PHYSIOGRAPHY
3.1.1 Introduction
Physiography, the study of physical features of land surface, helps in identifying specific
characteristics of the landscape that offers advantages for developmental works in a region.
Features that define the physiography of a river basin includes drainage network, glaciers,
lakes, snow fields, ridges, peaks, slopes and their azimuths, aspects, etc. These features also
control the hydrometeorology of a river basin. Hence, understanding the landform pattern
of an area provides information for taking strategic and environmentally sound decisions.
Therefore, the study of physiography of catchment and the project area in the EIA of the
Khuitam HE project is regarded as an integral as well as the most important aspect of
project development. To begin with the baseline data sets on physiography, initial
information from available literature & reports has been collected from government offices
and project proponents regarding the location of the project and its salient features.
Project is located on Gang River, a right bank tributary of Bichom River in Kameng River
basin, which originates at an elevation of more than EL 4000 m and joins Bichom River at
EL 760 m. The river flows in North-South direction in its upper reaches where it is known
as Gongri River, and then flows in West-East direction after joining Khouma Nala. The
total length of Gang River up to barrage site of Khuitam HE project is about 55 km from its
origin and river meets the Bichom River, one of the major tributary of Kameng River after
traveling the distance of about 82 km from its origin. Kameng River basin lies between
longitude 920 01’ E to 930 22’ E and Latitude 260 38’ N to 270 58’ N and covers almost the
entire West Kameng and East Kameng districts and also a part of Lower Subansiri district
of Arunachal Pradesh. The main tributaries of Kameng are Bichom, Tenga, Pachi, Papu and
Puchak.
The catchment area of Khuitam HE project lies between longitude 920 01’ E to 920 26’ E
and Latitude 27015’ N to 270 40’ N, in Arunachal Pradesh. The state is situated in the North
Physical Environment__________________________________________________
3-1
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
– Eastern part of the Himalayan region and can be divided in to four distinct zones; the
snow capped mountains above EL 4500 m, the lower Himalayan ranges between 3500 m
and 2000 m; the sub – Himalayan Siwalik hills at around 700 m and the eastern Assam
plain. The Gang River catchment is fan shaped and its elevation varies from 760 m to more
than 4000 m. The total Catchment of the Gang River is 1352 Sq. Km. The catchment area
up to the proposed diversion site is 1123 sq. km and the free draining catchment area i.e.
catchment area between barrage site of Khuitam HE project and barrage site of Gongri HE
Project is 84.00 Sq. Km. In order to conduct EIA/EMP study for Khuitam HE Project, the
project area has been delineated into:
 Free draining Catchment area of about 84.00 sq. km.
 The influence zone i.e. the area within 10 km radius from the project components
and the reservoir margin,
 The Project Component Study Area which is spread over 0.49 sq km (49 ha) land
and covers the area where various project components will be set up including
reservoir area covering 0.06 sq km (6.32 ha) and extending for 0.8 km along Gang
river.
 Downstream area. (i.e., stretch of 13 km from power house site)
3.1.2 Drainage
The Khuitam HE Project is located in Kameng (Bhareli) River basin in its upper reaches
across Gang River, a tributary of Bichom River. The river has two important tributories
namely SE flowing Khouma Nala and southerly flowing river Gongri with there confluence
at Dirang. The Gongri River originates at an El. of more than 4000 m from snow capped
hills south of Gongri Chen Mountain. Khouma Nala, meeting Gongri, d/s of Dirang
originates from Sela Lake at an EL of almost 4800 m. The upper reaches of the basin close
to the water divide are dotted with small glacial lakes and bear signatures of glaciations.
After the confluence of Gongri River and Khouma Nala, the Gang River flows towards E-
SE with deeply dissected gorge with local anomalous entrenched meanders (for e.g., near
Rahung, Figure 3.1a,b). The Gongri River sub-basin has a dendritic drainage with sub-
rectangular to rectangular stream segments of 2nd order. On the other hand, Khouma Nala
has dendritic to sub-parallel drainage pattern. Further downstream, the river takes NE wards
3-2
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
turn and skirting around a prominent fluvio- glacial fan at Selari, further travels easterly and
meets the Bichom River. The map showing drainage network of the catchment of Khuitam
HE project is given in Figure 3.2a and drainage network within the free draining catchment
of Khuitam HE project is given in Figure 3.2b respectively, whereas Figure 3.2c presents
the drainage network with 10 km radius influence zone of the project area.
Figure 3.1(a & b): U-shaped Gang River valley section d/s of Dirang & Gang River flowing
through deep entrenched meander in Bomdi La Group of rocks, near Rahung.
3.1.3 Relief
The catchment area of Khuitam HE project falls between elevation range of 1236 m to 5000
m. The higher elevation range of catchment area is always under snow cover. The relief
map of the catchment of the proposed Khuitam HE project is shown in Figure 3.3. A total
10 classes are made in this relief map of catchment and the bottom-most band covers the
elevation region 1235-1600 m and the topmost band is spread between 4,800 to 5035 m.
Each of the intermediate bands between 1600 to 4,800 m covers altitude difference of 400
m. More than 70% of the area lies between EL 2000 m to EL 4000 m and about 11 % of the
area is below EL 2000 m.
Table 3.1 : Area under different relief categories of catchment of Khuitam HE Project
S No Elevation Range, m Area (ha) % Area
1 1235-1600 1951.26 1.74
2 1600-2000 11008.79 9.80
3 2000-2400 16495.63 14.69
4 2400-2800 20413.92 18.18
5 2800-3200 18189.23 16.20
6 3200-3600 14494.13 12.91
7 3600-4000 11114.65 9.90
8 4000-4400 11024.00 9.82
9 4400-4800 7153.63 6.37
3-3
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
10 >4800 454.76 0.40

Total 112300.00 100.00
3.1.4 Slope
In a mountainous topography, the slope plays major role in controlling the sediment / soil
movement with water and the soil retention. Together with the nature and texture of soil, it
also determines the erodibility of the soil. In accordance with the classification developed
by AISLUS, the different classes of slopes identified in the catchment area are gentle slope
(0 to 15%), moderate slope (15% to 30%), moderately steep (30% - 50%) and strongly
sloping (above 50%). The land use capability is a direct function of slope, which signifies
the change in the value of elevation over a distance and is expressed either in degree or in
percentage. The slope in catchment area is enumerated in Table 3.2. Majority of the area is
under moderately steep category, followed by moderately sloping category. Slope
categories in the catchment, free draining catchment and 10 km radius influence zone of
project are shown in Figures 3.4a, 3.4b, & 3.4c, respectively.
Table 3.2: Area under different slope categories of catchment of Khuitam HE Project
S. No. Slope Category Area (ha) Percentage (%)

1. Gently Sloping (0-15%) 13823.34 12.31
2. Moderately Sloping (15-30%) 46024.32 40.98
3. Moderately Steep (30-50%) 51121.48 45.52
4. Strongly Sloping (> 50%) 1330.86 1.19
Total 112300.00 100
3.1.5 Aspect
Aspect of the catchment is derived from relief. Eastward aspect of the catchment covers
maximum area which is more than 15% of the catchment area. Aspect map of the
catchment, free draining catchment and influence zone is shown in Figures 3.5a, 3.5b and
3.5c, respectively. Area under different aspect categories is given in Table 3.3 from which it
is clear that catchment area of Khuitam HE project is evenly distributed in all aspect
categories.
3-4
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
Table 3.3: Area under different aspect categories of catchment of Khuitam HE Project
S. No. Aspect Area (ha) % Area
1 Flat 0.12 0.01
2 North 12074.66 10.74
3 North-East 14406.71 12.83
4 East 17025.43 15.16
5 South-East 15516.58 13.82
6 South 12169.48 10.84
7 South-West 14158.68 12.61
8 West 14905.44 13.27
9 North-West 12042.90 10.72
Total 100.00
3.1.6 Land Use/ Land Cover
Arunachal Pradesh over the past decades has not only resulted in the large scale loss of
forest cover, but has also experienced the land cover change, fragmentation of the
remaining habitat into numerous isolated patches (Nair, 1991; Ramesh et al., 1997; Menon
& Bawa, 1998; Prasad et al., 1998; Jha et al., 2000). Attempt to model vegetation and land
cover particularly in Indian region e.g., forest cover change at landscape scale (Menon and
Bawa, 1998; Giriraj, 2005; Pontius & Spencer, 2005), as a direct function of socio-
economic changes, land use pattern with biophysical characteristics predicts areas most
susceptible to future deforestation and biodiversity loss. The land use/land cover pattern for
the free draining catchment and the influence zone was interpreted from RS-GIS data for
the year 2008. Figure 3.6a shows the FCC of catchment area upto barrage site whereas the
interpreted land use/ land cover map of the free draining catchment and influence zone is
given in Figures 3.6b & 3.6c and area and percentage is given in Table 3.4 & 3.5.
Table 3.4: Land use/ Land cover pattern in free draining area of Khuitam HE project
S. No. Forest type & Landuse Area (ha) Percentage Area

1 Dense forest 4336.46 51.62
2 Open Forest 1708.47 20.34
3 Barren 401.05 4..77
4 River/Water Body 110.39 1.31
5 Scrub 1074.62 12.79
6 Alpine Scrub 251.27 2.99
7 Cultivation 517.74 6.16
Total 8400.00 100.00
3-5
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
Table 3.5: Land use/ Land cover pattern in influence zone of Khuitam HE Project
S. No. Forest type & Landuse Area (ha) Percentage Area

1 Dense forest 22220.13 53.29
2 Open Forest 10368.34 24.86
3 Barren 1346.62 3.23
4 River/Water Body 372.21 0.89
5 Scrub 4224.80 10.13
6 Alpine Scrub 817.55 1.96
7 Cultivation 2350.71 5.64
Total 41700.35 100.00
3.2 SOILS
Arunachal Pradesh, the largest mountainous state of India, is situated in the Northeastern
part of the Himalayan region and is characterized by high annual rainfall, forest vegetation
and diversity in soils. A soil resource inventory and subsequent database creation for
thematic mapping using a GIS is presented in this study. Physiographically, Arunachal
Pradesh can be divided into four distinct zones: Snow-capped mountains (5500 m amsl);
Lower Himalayan ranges (3500 m amsl); the Sub-Himalayan Siwalik hills (700 m amsl);
and the Eastern Assam plains. Soils occurring in these physiographic zones are Inceptisols
(37 %), Entisols (35 %), Ultisols (14 %) and Alfisols (0.5 %). The remaining soils can be
classed as miscellaneous. Soil resource inventory studies show that the soils of the warm
per-humid eastern Himalayan ecosystem with a ‘thermic’ temperature regime are
Inceptisols and Entisols; and that they are highly acidic in nature. Soils of the warm per-
humid Siwalik hill ecosystem with a ‘hyper-thermic’ temperature regime are also Entisols
and Inceptisols with a high to moderate acidic condition. The dominant soils of the
Northeastern Purvachal hill ecosystem with ‘hyper-thermic’ and ‘thermic’ temperature
regimes are Ultisols and Inceptisols. Inceptisols and Entisols are the dominant soils in the
hot and humid plain ecosystem. Steeply sloping landform and high rainfall are mainly
responsible for a high erosion hazard in the state. This is evident from the soil depth class
distribution of Arunachal Pradesh, which shows that shallow soils cover 20 % of the total
geographical area of the state. Most of the state is covered by hills and agricultural practices
are limited to valley regions. However, the soils of other physiographic zones (lower
altitudes & moderate hilly terrain) provide scope for orange, banana and tea plantations.
3-6
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
Four typical pedons representing different physiographic units in the shifting cultivated area
of Arunachal Pradesh were studied to characterize, classify and evaluate their suitability for
crop production. The soils were deep to very deep, well drained, acidic, variable in texture
and had ochric epipedons. The soils of the ridge/summit have been classified as Typic
Udorthents, while those on moderately steep hills with a cambic horizon and poor base
saturation are Umbric Dystrochrepts. The soils on moderately sloping side hills and foothill
slopes with well developed argillic horizons and poor base saturation are Typic
Haplohumults and Typic Paleudults, respectively. The major limitations of these soils are
very steep slopes, stoniness, low fertility, high acidity, and severe erosion. The soil type of
the catchment is mostly shallow, stony and dry; the details of different types of soil and
their classification are given in Table 3.6. Figures 3.7a, 3.7b & 3.7c shows the soil map for
catchment area, free draining catchment and 10 km radius influence zone, respectively.
Soils on the ridge/summits are unsuitable for arable farming, whereas those on steeply
sloping hills are marginally suitable. Soils on the moderately sloping side hills and foothills
slopes which have been stabilized by terracing and/or bunding are moderately suitable for
cultivation of maize and rice. As a part of field studies, soil samples from various locations
in the study area at a depth ranging from 20 to 50 cm were collected and analysed during
winter, summer and monsoon season. Soil sampling is carried out at Barrage Site, Power
House, Munna Camp, and Salari & Rahung Village. The results of the analysis of soil
samples for the winter, summer and monsoon seasons are given in Tables 3.7, 3.8 & 3.9.
3-7
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
Table 3.6: Properties of soils found in the free draining catchment of Khuitam HEP
Dominant Soil Type Associated Soil Type
Soil Soil Soil Depth Soil Drainage Temperature Erosion Stoniness Description Soil Soil Soil Erosion Stoniness Description
Code Classification Classification Depth Drainage
1 Loamy Soil Shallow Excessively Thermic Severe Moderate Loamy Soil Typic Shallow Excessively Severe Moderate Loamy Soils
(Typic Drained on Steep Udorthents Drained with Loamy
Udorthents) Slopes with Surface
Loamy
Surface
2 Loamy Moderately Excessively Thermic Severe Moderate Loamy Typic Moderately Excessively Severe Slight Coarse
Skeletal Soils Deep Drained Skeletal Soils Udorthents Shallow Drained Loamy Soils
(Typic on on Steep
Udorthents) Moderately Slopes with
Steep Slopes Loamy
Surface
3 Coarse Shallow Excessively Thermic Moderate Slight Loamy Lithic Moderately Excessively Moderate Slight Loamy
Loamy Soil Drained Skeletal Soils Udorthents deep Drained Skeletal Solis
(Typic on Steep with Loamy
Udorthents) Slopes Surface
4 Loamy Shallow Excessively Thermic Severe Strong Loamy Typic Moderately Excessively Severe Moderate Sandy
Skeletal Drained Skeletal Udorthents deep Drained Skeletal
(Lithic Calcareous
Udorthents) Soil on Steep
Slope with
Loamy
Surface
6 Sandy - Shallow Excessively Thermic Severe Strong Sandy Soil on Typic Moderately Excessively Severe *** Fine Loamy
Skeletal Drained Steep Slopes Udorthents deep Drained Skeletal Soils
(Lithic with Loamy with Loamy
Udorthents) Surface Surface
8 Loamy Shallow Excessively Thermic Severe Strong Fine Loamy Typic Moderately Excessively Moderate *** Fine Loamy
Skeletal Drained Soils on Steep Eutrochrepts deep Drained Skeletal Soils
(Typic Slopes with Loamy
Udorthents) Surface
10. Fine–Loamy Very Deep Excessively Thermic Moderate Slight Fine Loamy Pachic Excesive Well Moderate *** Fine Loamy
(Umbric Drained Soil of Hill Haplumbrepts Deep Drained Soil with
Dystrochreptus with Loamy Loamy
) Surface Surface
3-8
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
Table 3.7: Soil quality of different selected sites during winter season
LOCATION
S.
Parameters Barrage Power Munna Salari Rahung
No.
Site House Camp Village Village
1 pH 6.9 7.15 7.3 7.2 7.0
2 Bulk Density (g/cc) 1.21 1.32 1.25 1 .3 4 1.32
Water Holding
3
Capacity (%) 40 38 41 38 37
Sandy Sandy Sandy Sandy Sandy
4 Soil Texture
Loam Loam Loam Loam Loam
Brown Brown to Brown Brown to Brown
5 Soil Colour
Black Black
Available Nitrogen as
6
N (mg/kg) 41.16 44.2 42.46 42.33 42.53
Available Phosphorus
7
(mg/kg) 1.76 1.8 1.9 1 .8 2 1.94
8 Carbonate (mg/kg) 120 119 118 123 122
Magnesium as mg
9
(mg/kg) 126 132 137 148 142
10 Conductivity (μS/cm)
325 332 346 344 338
11 Organic matter (%) 2.6 3.2 2.2 2 .1 2
12 Chloride (mg/gm) 0.19 0.21 0.18 0.116 0.14
(Source: Primary Survey)
Table 3.8: Soil quality of different selected sites during summer season
Location
S.
No.
1 pH 7.2 6.93 7.12 7.22 7.16
2 Bulk Density (g/cc) 1.41 1.35 1.34 1 .3 2 1.32
Water Holding
3
Capacity (%) 41 38.5 42 3 8 .5 37
4 Soil Texture
5 Soil Colour
Black Black
6
N (mg/kg) 45.7 44.37 45.3 44.1 43.2
Available
7
Phosphorus (mg/kg) 1.78 1.9 1.92 2 .0 4 2.1
8 Carbonate (mg/kg) 127 128 117 114 95
Magnesium as mg
9
(mg/kg) 136 147 144 168 172
346 342 332 337 334
11 Organic matter (%) 2.4 2.7 2.69 2 .9 3
12 Chloride (mg/gm) 0.22 0.24 0.19 0.221 0.18
3-9
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
Table 3.9: Soil quality of different selected sites during monsoon season
LOCATION
S.
No.
1 pH 7.06 7.19 7.18 7.02 7.06
2 Bulk Density (g/cc) 1.44 1.3 1.42 1 .3 4 1.3
Water Holding
3
Capacity (%) 39.5 38.5 40 38 36.5
4 Soil Texture
5 Soil Colour
Black Black
6
N (mg/kg) 41.0 43.24 43.19 44.9 43.4
Available Phosphorus
7
(mg/kg) 1.86 1.74 1.81 1 .9 2 2.0
8 Carbonate (mg/kg) 121 120 122 122 124
Magnesium as mg
9
(mg/kg) 1 36 128 118 115 107
330 342 336 337 344
11 Organic matter (%) 2.8 3.1 3.4 2 .6 2.4
12 Chloride (mg/gm) 0.14 0. 16 0.18 0.09 0.08
3.3 HYDRO-METEOROLOGY
The climate of the Kameng basin can be divided roughly in to four seasons, namely (1) the
winter season from December to February; (2) the pre – monsoon season (summer Season)
from March to May, (3) The South–Western monsoon season from June to September and (4)
the Post monsoon season in October & November. The lower reaches of the basin have
typical tropical monsoon type climate. The South–West monsoon normally enters Assam and
adjoining areas by the end of May, establishes firmly over the entire North – Eastern India by
the end of June and withdraws from the region by the end of October. Most of the rainfall is
received during the months of June to October. There is wide variation in rainfall from place
to place and average annual precipitation varies from 1300 mm to 3500 mm. The barrage and
power house sites are at general elevation range of EL 1200 m to EL 1300 m. The climate of
the project area is similar to the climatic conditions of Bomdila whose average annual rainfall
is 2000 mm. There is considerable variation in the temperature from place to place depending
upon the elevation.
3-10
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
3.3.1 Temperature and Humidity
The average maximum and minimum temperatures reported near project site are of the order
of 18.2 0C and 7.5 0C respectively. The relative humidity in the project area is high
throughout the year which ranges from 75 % to 91 %, however, winter months are slightly
less humid (Table 3.10). Rain gauge stations have been established at Munna Village, Dirang
Village and Rama Camp whereas temperature recording is carried out at Munna Camp.
Table 3.10: Meteorological characteristics of the project area based on data from January 2008
to December 2008
Meteorological
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
parameters
Av. Rainfall
15.8 4.9 64.5 103.5 64.5 269.5 115.5 145.0 184.9 85.2 132.1 6.7
(mm)
Av. Mean
7.5 8.5 11.3 13.0 15.5 16.5 17.6 18.1 18.2 16.5 12.5 8.2
Temp.,0C
Av. Relative
83 84 75 78 85 83 87 91 84 85 81 83
Humidity, %
(Source: Meteorological observations stations)
3.3.2 Rainfall
Daily rainfall data for Dirang rain gauge station within the catchment is available for the
period November 1998 to December 2006. From this data monthly and annual rainfall values
have been worked out and given in Table 3.11.
Table 3.11: Observed monthly average rainfall (mm) at Dirang (1998 – 2006)
Period 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
January - 0 4 0 5 15 7 12 2
Feb - 0 8 13 5 14 9 1 0
March - 15 23 10 8 39 28 17 1
April - 23 71 39 95 76 131 45 103
May - 115 76 136 91 90 47 143 120
June - 123 158 118 232 284 236 91 107
July - 254 180 131 212 127 211 122 151
August - 380 211 170 303 128 208 138 101
Sep - 539 162 98 141 189 94 106 92
October - 145 43 97 47 65 150 133 25
November 3.85 35 4 0 35 13 7 11 26
December 0.25 0 0 5 0 16 0 0 6
Annual - 1628 941 816 1173 1057 1126 818 735
(Source: Dirang PHE Department)
3-11
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
3.3.3 Discharge Data
Discharge data for following sites of river Kameng and its tributaries are available:
Site C.A. Type of Period of Data
S. No. River (Sq km.) Data Availability
1. Bhichom Dam Bichom 2277 Daily March 1969 to April 1982

Site March 1989 to May 1989
Jan 1990 to Dec 1992
May 2000 to Feb 2008
2. Jameri Point Tenga 1019 10 – Daily
Jan 1969 to April 82
3. Bhalukpong Kameng 10,450 10 – Daily May 1990 to Dec. 2004
4. Munna Camp Gang 1054 Daily July 07 to ……
Bridge
(Source: DPR)
Mean 10 – daily discharges for Bichom dam site, Jameri & Bhalukpong have been plotted on
a common graph (Figure 3.8). It is seen that the river flows start rising from April end or May
and maximum flows are observed in July to August. Maximum, minimum and mean monthly
flow for Bhalukpong, Bichom and Jameri sites are plotted in Figures 3.9, 3.10 & 3.11.
Bhalukpong Discharges
Comparison of Discharges
Jamiri Discharges
Bichom Discharges
2500
2000
ec)
1500
Discharges(cum
1000
500
0
I II III I II III I II III I II III I II III I II III I II III I II III I II III I II III I II III I II III
JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY
Period
Figure 3.8: Comparison of 10 – Daily Mean Discharges
3-12
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
River Kameng at Bhalukpong

Monthly series - Mean, Minimum and Maximum
4000
Average
3500 Minimum
Discharge (Cumecs)
3000 Maximum
2500 Maximum Year

Minimum Year
2000
1500
1000
500
ay
ne
ly
r il
ch
y
st
r
r
er
ry
be
be
be
ar
Ju
Ap
gu
M
ob
ua
ar
Ju
nu
em
em
em
M
Au
ct
br
Ja
ov
ec
pt
Fe
Se
D
Duration (M onths)
Figure 3.9: Maximum, minimum and mean monthly flow for Bhalukpong
River Kameng at Bichom

Monthly Series - Mean, Minimum and Maximum
600
Mean
500 Maximum
Minimum
Discharge (Cumec)
400 Maximum Year

Minimum Year
300
200
100
0
r
ne
ry
ly
il
y
er
ch
r
ay
t
be
be
be
pr
us
ar
Ju
ua
ob
Ju
ar
M
A
em
nu
ug
em
m
br
ct
M
te
Ja
A
ov
O
ec
Fe
ep
D
S
Dura tion (Months)
Figure 3.10: Maximum, minimum and mean monthly flow for Bichom
3-13
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
River Tanga at Jameri

Monthly Series - Mean, Minimum and Maiximum
200
Mean
180
Maximum
160
Minimum
Discharge (Cumec)
140
Maximum Year
120
Minimum Year
100
80
60
40
20
0
r
ne
ly
ril
ry
y
er
ch
ay
r
st
be
be
be
ar
Ju
Ap
ua
ob
gu
Ju
ar
M
nu
m
m
em
br
ct
M
Au
ve
ce
Ja
O
Fe
pt
No
De
Se
Duration (Month)
Figure 3.11: Maximum, minimum and mean monthly flow for Jameri
3.3.4 Water Availability Studies
Water availability study is one of the most important aspects for the success of any hydro
power project, as this forms the basis for the optimal development of water resources of the
river at the proposed site. Since the flows are stochastic and vary from year to year,
appropriate assessment of dependable flows for various probabilities is essential for proper
planning of the project features. For carrying out water availability studies, working group
constituted by Government of India in 1980 for preparing “Guideline for Planning and
Design of H.E. Projects,” has recommended the following norms pertaining to hydrological
data requirement for water availability studies:
S. No. Type of Project Minimum Length of Data (years)

1. Diversion Project 10
2. Within a year storage Project 25
3. Over the year storage Project 40
(Source: DPR)
It is generally found that hydrological data at the project site is seldom available for the
desired length and in such cases the extension of the runoff series from the data of nearby
stations in the basin or adjacent basins having similar hydro – meteorological characteristics
3-14
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
or from long term catchment rainfall values is resorted to. Since discharge observations at
Gang River were started in July, 2008 only, the available discharge data of river Bichom at
Bichom dam site (C.A. = 2277 sq km), river Tenga at Jameri and river Kameng at
Bhalukpong has been considered for water availability studies after checking the consistency
of the data.
From consistency checks as detailed in DPR it is observed that the data of river Bichom at
Bichom dam site is consistent with the data of river Tenga at Jameri. An effort was made to
extend the Bichom dam site discharges, by correlating them with Bhalukpong discharges, but
correlation coefficients for monsoon, non – monsoon and annual correlations were poor. Also
the catchment area at Bhalukpong (10,450 sq km) is considerably high, as compared to
Khuitam diversion site (1123 sq km). Hence it is not desirable to extend the flow series at
Bichom dam site based on the flow series at Bhalukpong.
Since Khuitam HE project is a run of the river project, as per Central Water Commission
guidelines, minimum flow series for 10 years is required for its planning. Hence the
discharges of Bichom dam site have been reduced in catchment area proportion to estimate
the discharges at Khuitam dam site. It is seen that the estimated discharge during the lean
months compare well with the observed discharges at Munna discharge site for the lean
months. The computed discharges of river Gang at Khuitam, thus obtained are given in
Annexure 3.1.
3.3.5 Design Flood

3.3.5.1 Design Flood Criteria
The standards and guidelines for the prescription of the appropriate design flood given by
CWC & Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS) are summarized in Table 3.12.
3-15
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
Table 3.12: Design Flood Prescription Criteria

Type of Structure Flood Prescription
CWC: criteria for According to the importance and level conditions, a flood of 50 to 100
pick up weir years return period should be adopted
IS: 6966 (1989): For purpose of design of items other than free board, a design of 50
Criteria for years may normally suffice. In such cases, where risks and hazards are
hydraulic design of involved, a review of this criteria based on site conditions may be
barrages & weirs necessary. For designing the free board, a minimum of 500 years return
period flood or the Standard Project Flood (SPF) may be desirable.
IS: 11223 (1985): Spillways of small dams with gross storage between 0.5 and 10 MCM
Guidelines for and hydraulic head between 7.5 and 12 m are to be designed to safely
determining pass the 100 year flood.
spillway capacity Intermediate dams with gross storage capacity between 10 and 60 MCM
and hydraulic head between 12 and 30 m are to be designed for safely
pass the Standard Project Flood (SPF).
Large dams with gross storage capacity greater than 60 MCM &
hydraulic head greater than 30 m are to be designed to safely pass the
Probable maximum Flood (PMF).
3.3.5.2 Design Flood Approach
Following approaches are adopted for the estimation of design flood:

i) Hydro – meteorological approach
ii) Flood frequency analysis of annual peak series
Since long term annual peak values are not available, flood frequency approach can not be
applied for the estimation of design flood for Khuitam HE project. Also short duration gauge,
discharge and rainfall data for any discharge site for Bichom River or other rivers in the
vicinity having similar hydro – meteorological characteristics, is not available, derivation of
unit hydrograph based on the observed hydro – meteorological data is not possible. Hence
design flood for the project has been worked out based on synthetic unit hydrograph derived
from the basin characteristics and used for the estimation of design flood from hydro –
meteorological approach.
For estimating the design floods for gauged and ungauged catchments in India, under Short -
Term and Long -Term plans, as recommended by Khosla committee, India was divided into
hydro – meteorologically similar zones (8 Zones and 22 Sub – Zones). After detailed analysis
of short duration gauge, discharge and rainfall data for a number of catchments, varying from
25 to 3200 Sq. Km. Central Water Commission has published design flood estimation reports
3-16
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
of 22 Sub – Zones. Regression equations presented in the sub – zone reports for deriving
representative 1 – hour Unit Hydrographs on the basis of physiographic parameters of the
catchment, vary for various sub – zones. Since Khuitam HE project falls in North
Brahmaputra basin, Sub – Zone 2a, the relations developed in sub – zone 2 a report of CWC
have been utilized for estimating Synthetic Unit Hydrograph, based on the physiographic
characteristics of the catchment of Gang River up to Khuitam diversion site.
3.3.5.3 Development of Unit Hydrograph
Physiographic characteristics of the catchment viz., A, L, L c, S have been found out and
utilized for deriving the synthetic unit hydrograph parameters by utilizing the relations
developed in Sub- Zone 2a Report of CWC. The values of L, L c measured for the
catchment of river Gang up to Khuitam diversion site are 73.5 km & 31.5 km respectively.
The equivalent slope (S) works out to 19.25 m / km. Synthetic U. G. for the project has been
computed using the basin characteristics & the relations derived in Sub Zone 2a Report of
North Brahmaputra Basin. Knowing the peak & time to peak of the unit hydrograph (UH),
width of UH at 50 % & 75 % peak and base width, unit hydrograph was plotted and its
volume adjusted to give 1 cm runoff. Since time to peak is 7.0 hours, unit duration of the UH
has been taken as 1 hour. The Synthetic Unit Hydrograph of Gang River at Khuitam
Diversion site thus obtained is plotted in Figure 3.12.
3.3.5.4 Design Flood
The effective rainfall values obtained (As detailed in DPR) are applied to 1 hour unit
hydrograph ordinates. The effective rainfall ordinates are arranged against the ordinates of
the UG in such a way that the maximum value of rainfall is placed against the peak value of
the UG, the next lower rainfall values are arranged against the next lower values of the UG in
appropriate order. The order of the effective rainfall values thus obtained is reversed to get
the critical sequence. The first rainfall excess value is multiplied with each of the UG
ordinate to obtain the corresponding direct runoff ordinates. The computation is repeated with
the remaining rainfall excess values & the direct surface runoff derived from each successive
rainfall excess is lagged by 1 hour. The total direct surface runoff for various time periods is
added to get the direct surface runoff hydrograph. The base flow is then added to each of the
3-17
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
direct surface runoff hydrograph ordinate, to get the values of flood hydrograph ordinates.
Standard Project Flood is estimated as 5009 Cumec (Say 5000 Cumec). The detailed
computations are given in Annexure – 3.2. Similarly 100 year flood is estimated as 3996
Cumec (Say 4000 Cumec). The detailed computations are given in Annexure – 3.3.
3.3.5.5 Conclusions and Recommendations
Since Khuitam H.E. Project envisages the construction of a diversion barrage across river
Gang, it has to be designed for a flood of 50 Years. Since there are a number of HE projects
in series on Gang River and considering the risks, it may be desirable adopt a 100 year flood
instead of 50 – year flood for the design of structure other than free board. However,
freeboard has to be designed for a 500 year or SPF as per Bureau of Indian Standards IS 6966
(1989). Hence for the design of structure other than free board, a design flood of 4000 Cumec
(100Year Flood) may be adopted. Free board may be designed for the Standard Project Flood
of 5000 Cumec.
3.3.6 Sedimentation
The construction of Khuitam HE project would create a reservoir; however, given the nature
of topography, soil type, and land use practices, it is well known that every year Himalayan
rivers in general and River Gang and its tributaries in particular carry large quantities of
sediment load. At present, all these material goes down to the plains, however with the
upcoming of reservoir, the entire sediment load is likely to get deposited in the reservoir
thereby reducing the effective storage of the reservoirs resulting into cost benefit analysis of
the project.
3-18
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
Time U.G-Ordinates
0 0 S.U.G at Khuitam
1 10 400
2 31
350
3 65
4 128 300
5 202
Discharge (Cumecs)
6 297 250
7 360
200
8 327
9 280 150
10 235
11 200 100
12 172
50
13 149
14 128 0
15 110 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1011 12 1314 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Time (Hrs)
16 95
17 79
18 67
19 55
20 44
21 33
22 23
23 16
24 10
25 5
26 0
Figure 3.12: Plot of Synthetic Unit Hydrograph (SUG) at Khuitam Diversion Site
3-19
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
3.4 GEOLOGY
3.4.1 Regional Geology
The lithology in West Kameng district of Arunachal Pradesh can be broadly grouped into
three formations i.e. sedimentaries, low grade meta sedimentaries and high grade
metamorphites. The sedimentaries (Siwaliks & Gondwana) are least deformed and exposed
as a linear belt in outer Himalayan foothill in southern part of the district. The low grade
metasedimentaries exposed in lesser Himalaya, structurally overlie the sedimentary belt and
exhibit complex deformation. These have been classed under Bomdila Group, Rupa Group
and Bichom Group. The high 4 grade metamorphites are exposed in higher Himalayas &
have been classed as “Se La" Group.
The geological and geotechnical investigation of the Khuitam HE project consisting of

regional mapping (1:10,000 Scale), large scale mapping of individual project components
(1:2000 scale), drilling and rock mechanic and soil mechanic testing, has been conducted
under the supervision of engineering geologists of the Adishankar Energy Private Ltd during
the year 2008-2009. The maps and sections are evolved to illustrate the geotechnical frame
work. The geology section as detailed in DPR pertains to the studies and presents a
comprehensive account of (i) geological framework of the area, (ii) methodology of the
studies conducted (iii) detailed account of geotechnical investigations conducted, (iv)
geotechnical framework of different project components and (v) seismo-tectonic framework
of the project domain.
3.4.2 Geology of The Project Area Of Khuitam HE Project
Arunachal Himalayas remained geologically least known till mid-60’s when it received
considerable attention from geologist and paleontologist of Geological Survey of India (GSI),
Oil and Natural Gas Commission (ONGC) and subsequently by Wadia Institute of Himalayan
Geology (WIHG) and others in the last 3 decades. The pioneer worker who took geological
traverses in the Western Arunachal Pradesh in West Kameng District is La Touche (1885).
Bakliwal & Das (1970-71) for the first time carried out traverse mapping and brought out the
stratigraphic sequence of the area between Bhaluk Pong and Se La Pass. They divided the
Cambrian rocks of the area into Se La Group occurring north of Main Central Thrust (MCT)
3-20
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
and Bomdi La Group divisible into two Formations viz., Bomdi La Gneiss unconformably
overlain by Dirang Schist, South of MCT. These two formations were shown to be overlain
by Dedza and Tenga Formations. Acharyya et. al (1975) retained the nomenclature given by
Bakliwal et.al (1971). Verma & Tandon (1976), for the first time included Tenga Formation
within the Bomdi La Group and divided them into 5 units. They also revised the stratigraphic
sequence considering that the Bomdi La Gneisses lie in the basement of the meta-
sedimentary sequence instead of treating them as youngest unit of the succession.
Subsequently, Jain et. al (1978-79) again considered Bomdi la Gneisses as the basement of
Dirang Schist. Further, Kaura & Basu Roy (1980-81) divided the Proterozoic sequence in the
area into Bomdi La & Tenga Groups, the former divisible into Bomdi La Gneiss & Dirang
Formation and later into Tenga, Miri & Buxa Formations. Tripathi et.al (1982) considered
Bomdi La Group to be of Early Paleozoic to Pre-Cambrian in age, whereas Tenga group has
been shown as to be of lower Paleozoic age. They added some new nomenclature and divided
Tenga Group into two Formations viz., Lower Rupa/Jhameri Formation and Upper
Chilipam/Dedza Formation. Acharyya (1980 a) subdivided the Lesser Arunachal Himalaya
into 2 structural belts viz., (i) the lower one, made up of Daling – Miri - Gondwana and its
equivalents and the Abor Volcanics and (ii) the Upper one comprising gneissic formation,
high grade metamorphites and amphibolites. Geological map of Khuitam HE project area is
shown in Figure 3.13.
3.4.3 Tectonic Setup of the Area
Singh & Chowdhary (1991) and Patel & Sarkar (1997-98) have reviewed the structure &
tectonics of Kameng District and Himalayas in continuity. Singh & Chowdhary (1991) have
delineated six litho - tectonic belts namely, Se La Belt, Bomdi La Belt , Dedza – Menga Belt,
Gondwana Belt, Siwalik Belt and Brahmaputra Alluvium separated by NE-SW trending
prominent faults of regional continuity (Table 3.13). The tectonic fabric of the area has
evolved through different episodes ranging from Early Proterozoic to recent times and in
different stages of Himalayan Orogenic Movements (HOM-I to HOM-IV Table 3.14).
3-21
Figure 3.13
GEOLOGICAL MAP OF KHUITAM HE PROJECT AREA

KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
Table 3.13: Succession of litho tectonic Units in Arunachal Himalayas (Modified after Singh and
Chowdhary, 1990)
Western Part Eastern Part Correlation with
Bhutan/Sikkim units
Kameng, Dibang Valley Lohit Valley
Subansiri & Mishmi Belt Mishmi Belt
Siang Valleys -------------Lohit Thrust---------------
Tuting-Tidding Belt Tuting-Tidding Belt
-------------Thrust-------------
Se La Belt Se La Belt Se La Belt Thimphu/Tashigong
------------- -------------MCT-------- -------------MCT-------- Crystallines
MCT----- ----- ---
Bomdi La Belt Bomdi La Belt Bomdi La Belt Daling/Shumar Formation
------------ ------------Thrust-------- ----Mishmi Thrust---
Thrust--- ----
Dedza - Menga Dedza - Menga Belt Buxa/Phuntsholing
Belt Formation
Gondwana Belt Duiri Bolder Belt
------------MBT- ------------Fault--------- Slate and Thungsing
--- -- Quartzite
Siwalik Belt Siwalik Belt Siwalik Belt
------------Fault-- ------------Fault--------- ------------Fault---------
-- --- ---
Brahmaputra Brahmaputra Brahmaputra Brahmaputra Alluvium
Alluvium Alluvium Alluvium
(Source: DPR)
The successive belts have evolved with episodic thrusting and transport of thrust sheets
towards southeast. Gopendra Kumar (1997) has collated the structural attributes of Arunachal
Himalayas and has illustrated regional continuity of different faults identifying three
Structural delineating structural belts between Indus Tsangpo Suture in the north and
Brahmaputra Plane in the south. Gopendra Kumar (1997) has tried to sort out the
incongruencies and surmised a litho stratigraphic sequence for Bomdila Group which mainly
conforms to one proposed by Bhushan et.al (1991). An outline of the stratigraphic units of
West Kameng District focusing on Khuitam HE project area is indicated in Table-3.14 and
the brief descriptions are given in the following sections:
3-22
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
Table 3.14: Litho stratigraphic units of West Kameng, Arunachal Pradesh
Group Formation Member Lithology Remarks

Tourmaline granite-intrusive Catchment area – Se
Se La
High grade metamorphics-kyanite silimanite La Belt of Singh &
Group
gneisses with extensive feldspathisation. Chowdhary
Garnetiferous muscovite-biotite-schist, Catchment area
Dirang
phyllite, sericite quartzite, calc silicate and
Formation
tremolite actinolite marble.
Bomdi La Acid Magmatic intrusives; Sheared and Barrage site, Head
Gneisses mylonitized augen gneisses, streaky gneisses Race Tunnel, Surge
with schictose interbands and Tank and Power House
restrites/enclaves of quartzite, leuco-granite, complex
basic intrusives and quartz-veins.
Alternating sequence of grayish white
dolomite limestone and greenish gray purple
Niumi
carbonaceous phyllite with thin bands of
Dedza dolomite/limestone.
(Chilipam) Milky white light to dull gray
Bomdi
Formation massive/fragmented dolomite dolomitic
La
Kabak marble with thin bands of black phyllite.
Group
Interbedded sequence of phyllite quartzite
(Bomdi Exposed south of the
and dolomite.
La Belt) project area in a
White to grayish white, thick to thin bedded,
tectonic window
Jhameri fine-grained quartzite with intercalations of
phyllite.
Interbedded sequence of quartzite and pene-
Tenga
contemporaneous mafic volcanics, vesicular
Formation
to amydaloidal at places, altered to actinolite
Along
– hornblende phyllite, chlorite phyllite;
occasionally with thin bands of
marble/dolomite.
Quartzite, garnet mica schist / para- Exposed in Selari
Upper
Khetabari amphibolite window near Power
Formation Quartzite, acidic tuff, carbonaceous and House overlying
Lower
graphitic phyllite, marble, calc silicate. Dirang Formation
Bichom Diamictite, dark gray quartzite with lower
Bichom Formation Permian marine fauna. Reported from the
Group Selari Diamictite with vescular plant impressions window d/s of P/H site.
Formation resembling rhynia.
(Source: DPR)
NNW SSE
Figure 3.14: Geological section across Bomdila and Dedza-Menga Belt. (After Surendra Singh
and P. K. Chowdhary, 1990)
3-23
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
The Khuitam HE project is located in Bomdi La Belt between MCT in the north and the
thrust defining the northern contact of Dedza-Menga Belt. The project lies in Zone-I in the
domain having under gone deformations in the Late Paleozoic period and is located in the
South Western part of the overturned antiform, on appressed northern limb. The salient
aspects of faults straddling along the structural belts and fold patterns are as under:
Main Central Thrust:
MCT is north verging thrust fault with long regional continuity and marks the tectonic
boundary between high grade meta-morphics of Se La Group (High Himalayan Crystallines-
HHC) and medium grade meta-sediments of Dirang Formation of Bomdi La Group (Lesser
Himalayan Crystallines-LHC). East of the area concerned, Dirang Formation appears to get
delineated with a tectonic contact with underlying sequence of Bomdi La Group; further
eastward, the MCT is truncated by Tidding Suture in the Siang Valley. The MCT has a long
history of activation and its emplacement is surmised to have occurred during early phases of
Himalayan Orogenic Movement (HOM-I).
Main Boundary Fault:
It demarcates the tectonic boundary between the Main Himalayan Belt consisting of HHC
and LHC (Zone I & Zone II) in the north and Frontal folded Belt forming the Sub Himalayan
Domain (Zone III). It is also north dipping steep thrust fault and has a long ENE-WSW
traceability from border with Bhutan in the west to Roing in Dibang Valley in the east; it gets
abruptly truncated by Roing Fault and does not continue NE to join the Mishmi Thrust
(Gopendra Kumar, 1997).
Thrust binding Dedza-Menga Belt:
The tectonic outline of Dedza-Menga window is defined by NE-SW trending thrust which
marks the tectonic contact between Bomdila gneisses and Tenga Formation. The repeated
occurrence of the Dedza-Menga unit is owing to the fold illustrated in Figure3.14. The fault
has a traceability of nearly 150 km.
3-24
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
Thrust forming northern limit of Gondwana Belt:
Gondwana occurs as a linear thrust bound belt. The southern limit is defined by Main
Boundary Thrust whereas; the northern contact with lesser Himalaya is also characterized by
a tectonic line. The details of this thrust have been worked out by Acharyya et al (1980). This
tectonic line is a result of Hercynian activity and is traceable for long distance (>150 km)
from Sikkim-Bhutan in Arunachal Belt across Pasighat and further east where it is terminated
against Mishmi Thrust. In addition to these main faults/ thrusts, there are other faults such as
Tipi Fault within Gondwana Belt and WNW-ESE trending Bomdi La and associated NNE-
SSW trending transverse lineaments occurring as strike slip faults.
3.5 GEOLOGY OF PROJECT COMPONENTS
3.5.1 Geology at Barrage Site
The Barrage site has been explored resorting to large scale geological mapping (1:2000 scale)
and exploratory drilling and permeability testing. This reveals occurrence of >30m deep,
highly permeable (2.5x10-2 cm/sec) riverine- boulder- fill in the river bed domain. It is
redeeming that the boulder fill has frame work supported fabric and there are minor sand-
bands located at depth below 16 m with limited opportunity for destabilization due to
liquefaction on seismic loading. It is outlined that the barrage may be designed considering
permeable foundations. However, to exclude the possibility of presence of sand bands
susceptible to liquefaction at shallow depth, it is suggested to further explore the barrage
foundation area during pre-construction stage with the help of 3 drill holes (depth 30m).
3.5.2 Geology of Reservoir Area
The small reservoir (FRL1252m) behind the proposed barrage extends linearly along Gang
River spreading in to an area of 6.3Ha. The reservoir does not affect economic mineral
submergence. However, the reservoir rim is dotted with small size landslides, involving small
scale land mass destabilization (max 40,000m3). Thus, it has been suggested to further study
the landslide stability of the reservoir rim and, if need be, resort to measures to prevent
landslides. Intake is located on the right band taking advantage of a rocky precipice exposing
3-25
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
streaky gneisses. Beyond the intake level, the slope rises moderately and calls for preventive
measures resorting to grading, retaining and bio-engineering, against destabilization.
3.5.3 Geology at Head Race Tunnel
The Head race Tunnel (6.3m Ф and 3 Km long) is aligned across the southern face of the
Bomdi La Ridge, on the southern limb of the anticline. The tunneling media would consist of
augen and streaky gneisses healed with lit-par-lit permeation of quartz veins. Two prominent
lineaments transect the HRT alignment at RD 750 and 2040m. On orientation attributes, the
tunnel is classified into 3 sectors viz. BC (60 m length, orientation S150E), CD (2900 m
length, orientationN800E) and DE (90-m length and orientation N200E). Geo-technically, the
tunneling media in HRT has been classified as blocky mass and has been assigned Geological
Strength Index (GSI) of 50-60. Based on geo-mechanical considerations, the Rock Mass
Ratings (RMR) of 50,58,52 have been assigned to the tunneling media of three sectors
BC,CD and DE respectively
3.5.4 Geology at Surge Shaft and Pressure Tunnel & Penstock Systems
The surge shaft ( 21m dia and 70m deep ) is located on the northern margin of the Bomdi La
ridge overlooking Gang river valley and the Power House is located on the alluvial terrace
(T3) on right bank of the river channel. From Surge shaft to the power house water conductor
system would consist of horizontal penstock tunnel (5.4-m Ф and 120m long, an inclined
penstock shaft (40m long) and trifurcated surface penstocks (2.9mФ, 33m long). The tail
race Channel (TRC) of 260m is aligned across a boulder shoal with network of spill
channels.
The geotechnical attributes of the surge shaft have been explored with the help of a 70.50m
deep drill hole. The bed rock consisting of augen and streaky gneisses occur at 13.5m depth
underneath the debris cover consisting of rock blocks fixed in sandy matrix. The bed rock is
intensively fractured and weathered and has been characterized as poor rock mass and has
been assigned RMR of 45-50.Hence, it is suggested to opt for pre-grouting to ameliorate rock
3-26
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
mass prior to sinking of the shaft. It is also suggested to stabilize the slopes at the crown of
the surge –shaft by grading, soil nailing, and bio-engineering.
3.5.5 Geology of Power House Complex
The Power House with Francis type turbine (3 X 22 MW) would be located in a pit on T3
Terrace (EL 1190.50m). This would involve 30 m deep excavation in alluvial fill with pit
bottom at EL 1160m. The geotechnical framework of the power house domain has been
constrained based on explorations with 2 numbers of drill holes BH-1 and BH-2. The drill
hole located-180m NE (BH-2) of the power house pit has indicated presence of thick sand
bed (sand bar deposit) underneath 15m cover of bouldery channel lag deposit. The sand bed
has high penetration resistance of >30N; this indicates absence of liquefaction opportunity on
seismic loading. However, as the present exploratory holes are away from the power house
area, further explorations during pre-construction phase, are called for resorting to 3 numbers
of drill holes and Standard Penetration Testing to detect the presence of the sand bed, if any,
and map out their lateral persistence; this would be needed to exclude the possibility of
liquefaction hazard underneath the power house installations. Plate load tests may be
conducted on excavated pit to ensure desired bearing capacity at the foundation grade.
3. 6 SEISMICITY
The factors of active seismo-tectonic framework of Northeastern Himalayas and consequent

high seismic vulnerability have been imperative in keeping the area in Zone V of Seismic
Zoning Map of India (IS 1893-2002) (Fig. 3.15). The international efforts for seismic hazard
evaluation under Global Seismic Hazard Assessment Program (GSHAP) (Bhatia, 1999) also
corroborate the above views assigning high Peak Ground Acceleration (PGA) values 0.35 to
0.6 g for the area.
The Khuitam HE project lies in Zone V and for the domain, the PGA value as per GSHAP is
of the order of 0.4 g. As the barrage and other appurtenant structures of Khuitam HE project
are of small height (<100 m), as per the codal provisions (IS 1893-2002), the seismic hazard
may be evaluated following ‘Seismic Coefficient Method’. However, considering active geo-
dynamics of the Khuitam HE project domain and possibility of valley effect due to its
3-27
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
location in deep gorge, it would be advisable to perform dynamic analysis for seismic hazard
evaluation. In this context, based on “Response Spectrum Method”, the design horizontal
seismic coefficient (Ah) for the barrage structure (Natural Period 0.0255 sec.) is estimated to
be of the order of 0.29. The vertical Design Spectrum value, when required, may be taken
2/3rd of the Design Horizontal Acceleration Spectrum. The stability of the barrage may be
checked accordingly. As regards to, the building structures of the power house complex,
structural specific dynamic analysis and modal analysis should be performed. Some of the
major seismic events in this region have adversely affected the environment in Northeast
India (Table 3.15).
Table 3.15: Major Earthquakes in the Northeastern Himalaya, Arakan-Yoma and Shillong
Plateau regions
Epi-central Region Date and Time Magnitude Major Damage to Environment

Cachar March 21, 1869 7.8 Numerous earth fissures and sand
craters
Shillong plateau June 12, 1897 8.7 About 1542 people died
Indo-China border, Feb 17, 1905 Mw=7.1 Landslides
Xizang China 30º N and
95º E
Indo-China border, May 12, 1906 Mw=6.5 Landslides
North of Itanagar 28º N,
92º E
Indo-Myanmar border, Aug 31, 1906 Ms=7.0 Landslides
Near Chaukan Pass 27º
N 97º E
Sibsagar August 31, 1906 7.0 Property damage
Myanmar, Northern December 12, Ms=7.6 Property damage
Sagaing Division, 26.5 1908; 12:54:54
N, 97º E UTC
Srimangal July 8, 1918 7.6 4500 km2 area suffered damage
SW Assam September 9, 1923 7.1 Property damage
Dhubri July 2, 1930 7.1 Railway lines, culverts and bridges
cracked
Assam January 27, 1931 7.6 Destruction of property
Nagaland 1932 7.0 Destruction of property
Indo-Bhutan Border Jan 27, 1941; Ms=6.7 Landslips and damage to property
region, 27º N, 92º E 12:41:48 UTC
N-E Assam October 23, 1943 7.2 Destruction of property
Arunachal July 7, 1947 7.5 Destruction of property
Indo-China Border north July 29, 1947; Mw=7.3, Landslips and destruction of
of Itanagar, 28.5º N, 94º 13:29:25 UTC Ms=7.5 property
E
Upper Assam July 29, 1949 7.6 Severe damage
Upper Assam, Indo- August 15, 1950; Mw=8.6 About 1520 people died. It is the 6th
China Border, 28.7º N 19:39:28.5 IST largest earthquake of the 20th
3-28
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
Epi-central Region Date and Time Magnitude Major Damage to Environment

90.6º E Century.
Patkoi Hills, Tirap August 15, 1950; 8.0 Property Damage
District 25º N 95.8º E 21:42:16 UTC
North of Sadiya, Dihang Aug 16, 1950; 7.0 Bank collapse
valley, 28.6º N 94.2º E 06:41:59.5 UTC
NW Sadiya, Dihang Sept 13, 1950; 7.0 Landslides and Bank failure
Valley District 11:07:34.1 UTC
(Arunachal-Assam
border), 27.8º N 95.3º E
Indo-China Border north Nov 18, 1951; 6.7 Landslides
of Itanagar, 28.7º N 14:52:20 UTC
94.2º E
Manipur-Burma border 1954 7.4 Property damage
Darjeeling 1959 7.5 Property damage
Myanmar, SE of Patkoi Feb 20, 1962, Ms=6.7 Landslides
Hills, 26.13º N 96.94º E 22:02:35 UTC
Indo-Myanmar border August 6, 1988 7.5 No casualty reported
(Source: DPR)
Mw=Moment Magnitude, Ms=Surface Wave magnitude, Mb=Body Wave Magnitude, UTC:
Coordinated universal time, (Source: Tiwari (2002) and Amateur Seismic Centre at
http://asc.india.org).
Figure 3.16: A seismotectonic map of northeast India and its adjoining region prepared with the
earthquakes from the data catalogue of period 1976-2006 (>4 Mw). The tectonic features are adapted
from Seismotectonic Atlas of Dasgupta et al. (2000).The beach balls are taken from GCMT database
for earthquakes of Mw>5.4 ( after Thingbaijam et al. 2007)
3-29
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
3.7 RESERVOIR RIM STABILITY & COMPETENCY
The reservoir is confined in the valley with steep slopes laterally culminating in to broad
ridges leaving no scope for water loss through seepage and leakages across water divide.
However, the reservoir being located in the realm of active geodynamics, it needs to be
critically examined for its impact and future performance vis-à-vis reservoir rim stability. In
this context, the reservoir area has been geologically mapped on 1:2000 scale delineating
geological and geomorphologic features for analyzing the stability of the reservoir rim,
geodynamic impact of the reservoir impoundment and its operation.
After the incised meander upstream of village Rahung the river cascades at a uniform
gradient of 1:30 in the reservoir regime. In this sector, Gang River flows through deeply
entrenched “V” shaped valley with moderate slopes (450) on either bank. The left bank is
rocky abutment with shallow overburden cover and consists of three sectors viz. (i) 350 m
high steep slope segment rising to ESL 1600 m level, (ii) 200 m high segment of moderate
slope (300) between ESL 1600 m and 1800 m level and (iii) 400 m high gentle slope (<300)
segment above ESL 1800 m (max. 2217 m). As compared to this the right bank is
characterized by terraced shelves of depositional terraces T o to T 2 up to EL 1255 m beyond
which the debris covered slope raises to EL 2103 m at moderate angle (300) followed by a
rocky steep slope at the crown.
The reservoir spreads over Bomdi La allochthon exposing low grade metamorphics
consisting of well foliated, streaky gneisses, mylonitized augen gneisses, meta-basics and
chlorite schist of Bomdi La Group. The Bomdi La gneisses are highly tectonised and bear
signatures of D 1 – D 5 phases of Himalayan deformation. The D 1 and D 2 phases of
deformation have imparted well developed pervasive foliations (S1 and S 2 ) whereas other
deformations are reflected by folds of different geometry and fractures & cleavages. The
gneisses in the area are folded into an asymmetric anticline. The reservoir spreads along the
axial trace of the anticline with S o / S 1 foliation dipping in opposite direction towards the hill
/abutments on either of the banks.
3-30
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
3.8 LANDSLIDES IN THE PROJECT AREA OF KHUITAM HE PROJECT
The small reservoir (FRL 1252m) behind the proposed barrage extends linearly along Gang
River in vicinity to Rahung Village spreading in to an area of 6.32 ha. However, the
reservoir rim is dotted with small size landslides, involving small scale land mass
destabilization. Intake is located on the right bank taking advantage of a rocky precipice
exposing streaky gneisses. Beyond the intake level, the slope rises moderately and calls for
preventive measures resorting to grading, retaining and bio-engineering, against
destabilization.
Beyond the terraced slopes, the abutments rise at moderate angle and either of the banks are
dotted with minor landslides. These landslides have been mapped on 1:2000 scales.
Geomorphic parameters of these have been assessed as per guidelines of International
Association of Engineering Geologists (IAEG) and those are enumerated in Table 3.16. Map
showing landslide location in the project area is given in Figure 3.17.
Table 3.16: Landslides on Reservoir Rim on Khuitam HE Project

No. Location Height Width Volume Type of slide Remarks
(m3)
L1 LB, 400m 40m 12m 960 Composite Crown 70m above FRL
U/S and depositional zone at
reservoir rim.
L2 LB, 500m 80m 35m 14,000 Composite Toe at the reservoir rim
U/S with d/cone
L3 RB,665m 130m 100m 40,000 Rock slide – The detachment zone 70m
U/S Planar. above FRL. Depositional
Zone at reservoir rim.
L4 RB,430m 40m 20m 1200 Composite Crown 60m above the
U/S reservoir rim.
L5 LB, 325m 30m 10m 450 Rock slide Crown 50m above
U/S reservoir rim.
L6 LB, 300m 10m 4m 60 Rock slide – Crown 50m above
U/S Wedge. reservoir rim.
(Source: DPR)
3-31
Figure 3.17
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
3.8 LANDSLIDES IN THE PROJECT AREA OF KHUITAM HE PROJECT
The small reservoir (FRL 1252m) behind the proposed barrage extends linearly along Gang
River in vicinity to Rahung Village spreading in to an area of 6.32 ha. However, the
reservoir rim is dotted with small size landslides, involving small scale land mass
destabilization. Intake is located on the right bank taking advantage of a rocky precipice
exposing streaky gneisses. Beyond the intake level, the slope rises moderately and calls for
preventive measures resorting to grading, retaining and bio-engineering, against
destabilization.
Beyond the terraced slopes, the abutments rise at moderate angle and either of the banks are
dotted with minor landslides. These landslides have been mapped on 1:2000 scales.
Geomorphic parameters of these have been assessed as per guidelines of International
Association of Engineering Geologists (IAEG) and those are enumerated in Table 3.16. Map
showing landslide location in the project area is given in Figure 3.17.
Table 3.16: Landslides on Reservoir Rim on Khuitam HE Project

No. Location Height Width Volume Type of slide Remarks
(m3)
L1 LB, 400m 40m 12m 960 Composite Crown 70m above FRL
U/S and depositional zone at
reservoir rim.
L2 LB, 500m 80m 35m 14,000 Composite Toe at the reservoir rim
U/S with d/cone
L3 RB,665m 130m 100m 40,000 Rock slide – The detachment zone 70m
U/S Planar. above FRL. Depositional
Zone at reservoir rim.
L4 RB,430m 40m 20m 1200 Composite Crown 60m above the
U/S reservoir rim.
L5 LB, 325m 30m 10m 450 Rock slide Crown 50m above
U/S reservoir rim.
L6 LB, 300m 10m 4m 60 Rock slide – Crown 50m above
U/S Wedge. reservoir rim.
(Source: DPR)
3-31
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
3.9 LAND REQUIREMENT FOR KHUITAM HEP
In order to construct the Khuitam HE Project, an area of about 49.14 ha will be required
inclusive of 6.32 ha submergence area. The land requirements for various project components
are given in Table 3.17.
3-32
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
Table 3.17: Details of land requirement for Khuitam HE project

Land Requirement Area for Khuitam HEP (66 MW)
Surface Area (ha) Underground
S. N. Project Component Total Area (ha)
Area (ha)
Surface Land River Bed
1 Submergence 3.36 2.96 - 6.32
A Surface Structure
At Barrage Site : -
2 Barrage Complex Area 5.53 1.11 - 6.64
3 Borrow Area 2.69 . - 2.69
4 Construction Facilities Area 1.97 - - 1.97
5 Muck Dumping Area 2.21 - - 2.21
6 Proposed Road 0.34 - - 0.34
7 Magzine Area 0.16 - - 0.16
8 Proposed Foot Track 0.04 - - 0.04
At Power House: -
9 Borrow Area 4.45 - - 4.45
11 River/ Shoal Area - 1.28 - 1.28
12 P.H Complex & Cons. Facilities 9.15 - - 9.15
13 Surge Shaft & Adit Area 2.79 - - 2.79
14 Permanent Colony Area 1.12 - - 1.12
15 Rock Quarry 2.60 - - 2.60
B Under Ground Structures
Adit At Power House (* Area
A included in Surge Shaft Area at - - 0.16* -
Sl. No 14)
Surge Shaft & Pressure Shaft (
* Area included in Surge Shaft
B Area at Sl. No. 14 & P.H - - 0.19* -
Complex & Construction
Facilities at Sl. No.13)
Head Race Tunnel (HRT) (
*Out of 2.22ha, 0.01 ha area
C - - 2.22* 2.21
include in Surge Shaft at Sl.
No.14)
Adit At Barrage ( * Out of
0.20ha, 0.07 ha included in
d - - 0.20* 0.13
Muck Dumping Area at Sl. No.
5)
Barrage Intake Tunnel ( * Area
e included in Barrage Complex at - - 0.09* -
Sl. No. 2 )
2.86 (0.52
Common
Total 41.45 5.35 Area Under 49.14
Surface
Structure)
3-33
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
3.10 AIR ENVIRONMENT
The measurement of baseline ambient air quality before establishing any hydro plant is
important to predict the air quality of the area after the project is established. For this a well-
designed monitoring programme was carried out to assess the status of ambient air quality in
and around the project area at seven sampling locations (Figure 3.18) for three seasons
(summer, winter, and monsoon) during 2008 and 2009. 24 hourly sampling for two
consecutive days was done at each station with a frequency of twice a week for four weeks in a
season. The parameters studies were SPM, SOx, NOx and RSPM. Table 3.18 given below
shows the results of air quality recorded from the Barrage Site, Power House Site,Salari
village, Munna Camp, Jirigaon, Rahung village and 14 Mile Camp. Air monitoring
photographs can be seen in Annexure 3.4.
Table 3.18: Air quality parameters in project area of Khuitam HE project
Site Season SOx (µg/m3) NOx (µg/m3) RSPM (µg/m3) SPM (µg/m3) Features
Winter 7.6 9.5 24 71 Forest &
Barrage Site
Summer 8.5 10.2 30 74 micro
Monsoon 6.2 8.6 18 65 Hydel at
Mean 7.4 9.4 24 70 this site
Winter 8.2 9.8 30 75 Forest &
Power House
Summer 8.9 10.5 31 78 Agricultur
Monsoon 6.9 9.2 28 75 e Land
Mean 8.0 9.8 29. 7 76
Winter 9.2 11.5 33 121 Village &
Salari village Summer 9.6 12.3 38 126 a large no.
Monsoon 7.8 9.8 28 112 of Vehicle
Mean 8.9 11.2 33 119.7 Movement
Winter 10.2 13.5 39 122 Bomdila
Munna Camp Summer 14.8 15.6 42 128 Tawang
Monsoon 13.2 14.6 34 104 highway
Mean 12.7 14.6 38.3 118
Winter 7. 8 11.1 32 106
Jirigaon Summer 8.9 12.5 36 117 Nafra
Monsoon 7. 2 9.2 29 90 Bomdila
Mean 8.0 10.9 32.3 104.3 Road
Rahung Winter 12.2 15.4 38 118
village Summer 13.2 16.5 42 132
Monsoon 8.9 10.2 39 95 Bomdila
Mean 11.4 14.0 39. 7 115 Nafra road
14 Mile Winter 13.6 14.2 35 122 Bomdila
Camp Summer 14.2 16.8 36 120 Tawang
Monsoon 9.2 11.2 32 114 highway
Mean 12.3 14.1 34.3 118.7
3-34
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
3.11 TRAFFIC DENSITY
The baseline traffic studies are required for assessing the future traffic flow due to proposed
development activity like construction of various project components etc. For collecting
traffic data, sampling points at Bomdila Tawang State highway and road from Bomdila to
Nafra was selected and traffic movements were observed on hourly basis for various types of
vehicles during winter season, summer season and monsoon season. The average of
observations during the study period is tabulated in Table 3.19 as below.
Table 3.19: Traffic Density on State Highway from Bomdila to Tawang and Bomdila to Nafra
Monitoring Monitoring Heavy Light Two

Location Month Time vehicles vehicles wheelers Total
Morning 46 42 29 117
Summer Afternoon 138 67 58 263
Evening 95 39 27 161
Bomdila Morning 22 26 16 64
Tawang State Monsoon Afternoon 77 36 36 149
highway Evening 28 19 18 65
Morning 27 32 12 71
Winter Afternoon 96 54 32 182
Evening 66 27 17 110
Morning 4 12 5 21
Summer Afternoon 5 17 12 34
Evening 2 7 8 17
Morning 0 3 1 4
Bomdila to
Monsoon Afternoon 3 11 4 18
Nafra Road
Evening 2 5 2 9
Morning 1 4 2 7
Winter Afternoon 4 8 6 18
Evening 0 3 3 6
3.12 WATER ENVIRONMENT
In order to have a holistic view of water quality of project area, as a part of the field studies
baseline data pertaining to water environment for evaluating the existing physiochemical
parameters of the river Gang and its tributaries was carried out at five sampling locations as
shown in Figure 3.19 and water sampling photographs can be seen in Annexure 3.4. The
sampling was conducted for three seasons i.e., summer, monsoon and winter respectively and
samples were analyzed in field and laboratory for various physico-chemical characteristics as
per the APHA standards using Portable Water Quality Testing Kit of e-Merck (Spectroquant
3-35
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
Model). Tables 3.20, 3. 21 and 3. 22 given below shows the results of water quality recorded
from sampling locations. The values of the water quality parameters studied are within the
permissible limit of National river water quality standards and Bureau of Indian Standards
(BSI). This may be due to the fact that there is no major source of organic pollution loading
present in the basin and also due to low population density in the vicinity of project area.
At all measuring station the temperature varies from 10 ºC to 19 ºC and electrical
conductivity (EC) from 84 to 97 (µs/cm). The maximum EC level has been recorded during
summer season. The pH and hardness levels indicate the moderate quality of water. The
average value of DO levels indicate the absence of organic pollution sources and also the
microbial pollution is totally absent in the Gang River indicating good quality of water. As
there are no major industries in the project area the only possible source of pollutants is the
domestic source and runoff from the higher elevations.
Table 3.20: Water quality of Gang River at different selected sites during summer season
S.
Parameter Site-1 Site-2 Site-3 Site-4 Site-5
No.
1 pH 7.1 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.1
2 Temperature (0C) 17 18 19 14 16
3 Turbidity (NTU) <1 <2 <2 <2 <1
4 Colour Colourless Colourless Colourless Colourless Colourless
5 EC (µs/cm) 94 97 96 92 88
6 Total Dissolved 77 74 69 66 64
Solids (mg/l)
7 Chloride Cl (mg/l) 18.2 21.2 15 19.1 16
8 Sulphate SO 4 (mg/l) 8.2 8.5 7.9 7.6 9.2
9 Total hardness (mg/l) 38 32 27 35 28
10 Calcium Ca (mg /l) 5.6 5.8 6.8 6.1 7.3
11 Magnesium Mg 3.6 4.2 3.9 4 4.5
(mg/l)
12 Phosphate-P PO 4 -P 0.06 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.06
(mg/l)
13 Nitrate NO 3 (mg/l) 1.5 1.4 1.3 1.8 1.2
14 DO (mg/l) 8.3 8.1 7.9 8.2 8.2
15 Iron Fe (mg/l) 0.18 0.29 0.20 0.22 0.24
16 Fluoride F (mg/l) 0.16 0.17 0.17 0.11 0.17
17 Chromium (Cr) ND ND ND ND ND
(mg/l)
18 E.Coli (MPN/100 ml) Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil
19 Coliform (MPN/100 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil
ml)
Site 1- Barrage Site, Site 2- Micro Hydel site, Site 3- Power House , Site 4- Soshi chu tributary &
Site 5- Salari Bridge
3-36
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
Table 3.21: Water quality of Gang River at different selected sites during Monsoon season
S.
No.
1 pH 7.2 7.5 7.7 8.2 7.6
2 Temperature (0C) 15 15 16 12 14
3 Turbidity (NTU) <4 <4 <4 <6 <3
4 Colour Colourless Colourless Colourless Colourless Colourles
s
5 EC (µs/cm) 88 86 90 87 84
Solids (mg/l)
7 Chloride Cl (mg/l) 12 13.7 13 14 12.5
8 Sulphate SO 4 (mg/l) 4 7 7.8 7.2 7.8
9 Total hardness 24 26 22 28 22
(mg/l)
10 Calcium Ca (mg /l) 4.8 4.9 5.3 5.7 5.2
11 Magnesium Mg 3.2 3.4 3.2 2.5 3.6
(mg/l)
12 Phosphate-P PO 4 -P 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.05 0.06
(mg/l)
13 Nitrate NO 3 (mg/l) 1.5 1.1 1.12 1.8 0.9
14 DO (mg/l) 8 7.9 7.8 8.1 7.8
15
16 Iron Fe (mg/l) 0.18 0.17 0.17 0.15 0.18
17 Fluoride F (mg/l) 0.16 0.17 0.17 0.11 0.17
(mg/l)
19 E.Coli (MPN/100 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil
ml)
20 Coliform (MPN/100 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil
ml)
Site 1- Barrage Site, Site 2- Micro Hydel site, Site 3- Power House , Site 4- Soshi chu
tributary & Site 5- Salari Bridge
Table 3.22: Water quality of Gang River at different selected sites during winter season
S.
No.
1 pH 6.8 7.3 7.5 7.2 7.1
2 Temperature (0C) 10 13 11 10 12
3 Turbidity (NTU) <2 <1 <2 <1 <2
4 Colour Colourless Colourless Colourless Colourless Colourless
5 EC (µs/cm) 91 88 93 89 86
Solids (mg/l)
7 Chloride Cl (mg/l) 13 14.3 14.5 13.6 14
8 Sulphate SO 4 (mg/l) 7.2 7.8 8.1 8.1 7.8
9 Total hardness 32 28 28 30 26
(mg/l)
10 Calcium Ca (mg /l) 5 6 7 6 4
3-37
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
11 Magnesium Mg 3.3 3.5 3.7 3.1 4.2

(mg/l)
12 Phosphate-P PO 4 -P 0.03 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.06
(mg/l)
13 Nitrate NO 3 (mg/l) 2.4 1.9 1.6 1.3 1.1
14 DO (mg/l) 8.2 7.9 8.2 8.2 8.3
15
16 Iron Fe (mg/l) 0.18 0.19 0.17 0.15 0.20
17 Fluoride F (mg/l) 0.15 0.18 0.19 0.15 0.13
(mg/l)
19 E.Coli (MPN/100 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil
ml)
20 Coliform (MPN/100 Nil Nil Nil Nil ND
ml)
Site 1- Barrage Site, Site 2- Micro Hydel site, Site 3- Power House , Site 4- Soshi chu
tributary & Site 5- Salari Bridge
3.13 NOISE ENVIRONMENT
Noise is an important pollutant, which affects the environment and poses health and
communication hazards as noise beyond the tolerance limits leads to deafness and even
causes injuries to the tympanic membrane of the ears.The intensity of noise is measured in
decibel (db). In order to collect the base line data on noise level in the study area about seven
sampling locations were identified as presented in Figure. 3.20 and noise monitoring
photographs are attached as Annexure 3.4. The noise level data at the above mentioned sites
were collected for three seasons i.e., during summer, winter and monsoon season as per the
details given in Tables 3.23. The results shows that the ambient air quality in the study area
are well within the permissible standards in respect of noise, as there are no industries around
the project area and not much flow of traffic in the vicinity. The highest noise level of 60 was
observed at 14 Mile camp village because of high traffic density during daytime.
3-38
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
Table 3.23: Average ambient noise levels in the study area

Average Sound level in (db)
Location Winter Summer Monsoon
Barrage Site 35.2 32.9 34.8
Power House 38.1 38.1 37.1
Salari Village 44.5 45.6 44.8
43.3 48.7 42.2

Munna Camp
35.9 37.2 33.1
Jirigaon village
44.6 45.7 39.7
Rahung village
43.9 47.8 43.6
14 Mile Camp
3-39
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW) _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Annexure 3.1
Khuitam H.E.Project, Dist Kameng, Arunachal Pradesh
10 - Daily discharge, Khuitam site, C.A.=1123 sq km
MONTH PERIOD 1969 - 70 1970 - 71 1971 - 72 1972 - 73 1973 - 74 1974 - 75 1975 - 76 1976 - 77 1977 - 78 1978 - 79 1979 80 1980 - 81 1981 - 82 1982 - 83 1983 - 84 1984 - 85 1985 - 86 1986 - 87 1987 - 88 1988 - 89 1989 - 90 1990 - 91 1991 - 92 1992 - 93 1993 - 94 1994 - 95 1995 - 96 1996 - 97 1997 - 98 1998 - 99 1999 -2000 2000 - 01 2001 - 02 2002 - 03 2003 - 04 2004 - 05 2005 - 06 2006 - 07 2007 - 08
June I 103 106 105 56 63 129 68 87 89 71 14 59 43 35 184 40 94 110 74 50 99 79 141 65

II 84 84 138 68 156 86 103 115 84 104 47 78 64 35 241 58 133 114 121 94 121 108 96 87
III 112 150 152 72 108 92 121 129 76 125 81 111 88 42 321 162 122 119 94 109 208 118 144 116
July I 104 142 167 85 81 137 117 136 128 109 137 110 112 33 195 171 135 87 210 187 190 132 154 112
II 182 248 160 111 88 225 158 143 73 110 115 134 132 41 310 127 162 131 180 159 218 200 170 168
III 158 245 139 140 134 243 223 79 188 114 178 159 140 35 327 127 121 154 189 121 317 211 151 319
August I 116 263 154 155 174 238 155 142 128 166 131 166 134 117 289 183 134 167 210 164 300 186 101 145
II 105 188 177 101 173 124 124 162 131 106 106 146 153 134 229 158 154 145 262 127 194 309 88 221
III 129 169 151 110 99 187 116 167 157 79 163 130 149 108 136 160 208 158 183 130 172 257 130 179
Sept. I 167 110 128 146 94 169 175 155 109 97 148 115 126 103 183 119 232 157 124 219 167 178 114 316
II 119 122 106 107 132 174 182 96 127 116 112 102 133 127 164 123 179 161 134 237 126 117 181 239
III 107 162 113 86 94 141 135 77 150 90 72 102 76 76 119 95 195 166 122 228 163 144 110 116
Oct. I 68 146 136 63 90 151 132 38 179 91 70 64 56 114 105 69 101 163 118 114 237 120 93 0
II 55 88 97 59 75 130 95 31 80 66 54 56 44 84 103 78 86 116 79 118 136 69 65 0
III 46 102 65 46 58 98 77 25 62 56 36 50 38 60 71 54 88 71 66 82 90 91 51 0
Nov. I 37 63 59 40 53 71 58 22 45 47 29 36 31 49 41 46 69 57 52 61 73 46 42 0
II 38 59 50 35 45 60 51 22 43 43 25 31 26 36 33 36 68 53 51 61 62 40 38 0
III 37 50 43 32 39 50 44 25 35 40 28 28 21 36 31 333 49 48 43 49 50 37 37 0
Dec. I 33 40 39 28 37 45 40 21 33 33 29 23 19 30 26 29 42 42 38 48 55 28 28 0
II 30 37 34 27 36 40 35 20 29 27 21 20 23 28 24 25 39 37 32 39 53 25 27 0
III 28 35 32 26 30 36 32 24 24 24 20 19 18 24 21 21 33 31 35 37 52 24 30 0
Jan. I 27 34 30 25 28 26 27 22 22 21 21 18 16 21 21 18 33 28 33 28 50 23 25 0
II 26 32 28 25 27 24 25 21 21 19 18 17 15 20 19 16 30 27 29 26 47 22 24 0
III 26 32 26 24 26 23 23 19 20 18 17 17 14 20 17 16 28 25 28 25 46 23 24 0
Feb. I 24 26 25 22 26 23 22 17 19 17 16 16 14 20 17 14 27 25 29 25 43 24 25 0
II 25 25 23 25 24 22 23 16 21 17 16 16 14 19 15 13 26 24 29 24 42 23 26 0
III 24 25 24 29 29 24 25 17 19 15 19 17 14 20 17 14 30 23 28 25 46 25 26 0
March I 16 24 25 26 25 28 22 21 17 20 14 20 16 24 20 17 16 26 23 25 28 52 23 30 0
II 17 26 27 29 26 29 22 20 18 21 14 16 19 24 22 21 21 24 26 28 27 51 23 28 0
III 20 25 29 30 27 29 23 24 17 20 15 27 17 26 23 18 36 26 27 35 34 56 23 33 0
April I 17 24 33 30 36 33 27 23 29 21 19 26 24 26 23 20 27 30 30 43 34 54 29 45 0
II 28 28 43 33 31 34 22 28 31 29 23 33 33 27 27 21 26 32 31 43 61 50 31 44 0
III 22 29 48 39 35 51 24 31 27 38 23 29 33 31 32 24 33 61 37 51 56 53 68 33 44 0
May I 30 39 55 38 43 61 26 39 48 35 27 41 34 40 30 66 41 63 53 43 58 39 90 32 34 0
II 31 64 63 54 53 75 40 47 47 58 19 60 40 50 29 79 39 72 45 91 43 57 77 40 63 0
III 45 53 67 60 57 59 40 48 57 80 15 63 50 53 34 59 31 124 86 50 32 98 76 84 61 0
mean annual 65 88 76 58 67 84 74 59 67 55 57 58 56 49 98 83 78 82 84 109 83 70 58
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Annexure 3.2
ESTIMATION OF SPF FOR KHUITAM H.E. PROJECT
1 - Day Point PMP = 400 mm
24 Hr areal SPS = 281 mm
28.1 Cm
76% 21.36
24 % 6.74
1 st bell 2 nd bell
Time co.Eff cumm incr eff Critical Time co.Eff cumm incr eff Critical
1 0.17 3.65 3.65 3.41 0.88 1 0.17 1.15 1.15 0.91 0.11
2 0.33 7.03 3.37 3.13 1.17 2 0.33 2.22 1.06 0.82 0.20
3 0.42 8.99 1.97 1.73 2.01 3 0.42 2.84 0.62 0.38 0.47
4 0.53 11.24 2.25 2.01 3.41 4 0.53 3.55 0.71 0.47 0.91
5 0.62 13.21 1.97 1.73 3.13 5 0.62 4.17 0.62 0.38 0.82
6 0.68 14.61 1.41 1.17 1.73 6 0.68 4.61 0.44 0.20 0.38
7 0.74 15.74 1.12 0.88 1.73 7 0.74 4.97 0.35 0.11 0.38
8 0.80 17.14 1.41 1.17 1.17 8 0.80 5.41 0.44 0.20 0.20
9 0.86 18.27 1.12 0.88 0.88 9 0.86 5.77 0.35 0.11 0.11
10 0.91 19.39 1.12 0.88 0.88 10 0.91 6.12 0.35 0.11 0.11
11 0.96 20.51 1.12 0.88 0.88 11 0.96 6.48 0.35 0.11 0.11
12 1.00 21.36 0.84 0.60 0.60 12 1.00 6.74 0.27 0.03 0.03
21.36 18.48 6.74 3.86
Base Flow Flood Hydrograph

Time (Hrs)
(Cumec) Ordinates (Cumecs)
Time U.G 0.03 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.20 0.38 0.38 0.82 0.91 0.47 0.20 0.11 0.60 0.88 0.88 0.88 1.17 1.73 1.73 3.13 3.41 2.01 1.17 0.88
0 0 0.0 0 56.2 0 56
1 10 0.3 0.0 0 56.2 1 56
2 31 0.8 1.1 0.0 2 56.2 2 58
3 65 1.7 3.5 1.1 0.0 6 56.2 3 63
4 128 3.4 7.4 3.5 1.1 0.0 15 56.2 4 72
5 202 5.3 14.7 7.4 3.5 2.0 0.0 33 56.2 5 89
6 297 7.8 23.2 14.7 7.4 6.2 3.8 0.0 63 56.2 6 119
7 360 9.4 34.1 23.2 14.7 13.2 11.6 3.8 0.0 110 56.2 7 166
8 327 8.6 41.4 34.1 23.2 26.1 24.7 11.6 8.2 0.0 178 56.2 8 234
9 280 7.3 37.6 41.4 34.1 41.1 48.8 24.7 25.2 9.1 0.0 269 56.2 9 325
10 235 6.2 32.2 37.6 41.4 60.4 77.0 48.8 53.4 27.9 4.7 0.0 390 56.2 10 446
11 200 5.2 27.0 32.2 37.6 73.3 113.0 77.0 105.7 59.2 14.3 2.0 0.0 547 56.2 11 603
12 172 4.5 23.0 27.0 32.2 66.6 137.1 113.0 166.6 117.0 30.4 6.2 1.1 0.0 725 56.2 12 781
13 149 3.9 19.8 23.0 27.0 57.0 124.6 137.1 244.6 184.5 60.2 13.2 3.5 6.0 0.0 905 56.2 13 961
14 128 3.4 17.1 19.8 23.0 47.9 106.7 124.6 296.7 270.9 94.9 26.1 7.4 18.4 8.8 0.0 1066 56.2 14 1122
15 110 2.9 14.7 17.1 19.8 40.7 89.6 106.7 269.7 328.7 139.3 41.1 14.7 39.1 27.0 8.8 0.0 1160 56.2 15 1216
16 95 2.5 12.6 14.7 17.1 35.1 76.2 89.6 231.0 298.7 169.0 60.4 23.2 77.2 57.3 27.0 8.8 0.0 1200 56.2 16 1257
17 79 2.1 11.0 12.6 14.7 30.3 65.6 76.2 193.8 255.8 153.7 73.3 34.1 121.8 113.2 57.3 27.0 11.7 0.0 1254 56.2 17 1310
18 67 1.8 9.1 11.0 12.6 26.1 56.8 65.6 165.0 214.7 131.6 66.6 41.4 178.8 178.6 113.2 57.3 35.5 17.3 0.0 1383 56.2 18 1439
19 55 1.4 7.7 9.1 11.0 22.3 48.8 56.8 142.0 182.7 110.4 57.0 37.6 216.9 262.1 178.6 113.2 75.5 52.7 17.3 0.0 1603 56.2 19 1659
20 44 1.2 6.3 7.7 9.1 19.4 41.7 48.8 122.9 157.2 94.0 47.9 32.2 197.2 318.0 262.1 178.6 149.2 111.9 52.7 31.3 0.0 1889 56.2 20 1946
21 33 0.9 5.0 6.3 7.7 16.1 36.3 41.7 105.7 136.1 80.9 40.7 27.0 168.8 289.1 318.0 262.1 235.3 221.2 111.9 95.5 34.1 0.0 2241 56.2 21 2297
22 23 0.6 3.8 5.0 6.3 13.6 30.1 36.3 90.3 117.0 70.0 35.1 23.0 141.7 247.5 289.1 318.0 345.4 348.9 221.2 203.0 104.1 20.1 0.0 2670 56.2 22 2726
23 16 0.4 2.7 3.8 5.0 11.2 25.5 30.1 78.6 100.0 60.2 30.3 19.8 120.6 207.7 247.5 289.1 419.1 512.1 348.9 401.2 221.2 61.2 11.7 0.0 3208 56.2 23 3264
24 10 0.3 1.8 2.7 3.8 8.9 21.0 25.5 65.2 87.1 51.5 26.1 17.1 103.8 176.8 207.7 247.5 381.0 621.3 512.1 632.7 437.2 130.1 35.5 8.8 3805 56.2 24 3862
25 5 0.1 1.2 1.8 2.7 6.7 16.7 21.0 55.3 72.2 44.8 22.3 14.7 89.8 152.1 176.8 207.7 326.2 564.7 621.3 928.6 689.4 257.2 75.5 27.0 4376 56.2 25 4432
26 0 0.0 0.5 1.2 1.8 4.7 12.5 16.7 45.4 61.2 37.1 19.4 12.6 77.2 131.7 152.1 176.8 273.8 483.6 564.7 1126.7 1012.0 405.6 149.2 57.3 4824 56.2 26 4880
27 0 0.0 0.0 0.5 1.2 3.2 8.8 12.5 36.2 50.3 31.5 16.1 11.0 66.0 113.2 131.7 152.1 233.0 405.8 483.6 1024.2 1227.8 595.4 235.3 113.2 4953 56.2 27 5009
28 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 2.1 5.9 8.8 27.1 40.1 25.9 13.6 9.1 57.5 96.8 113.2 131.7 200.5 345.4 405.8 877.0 1116.1 722.4 345.4 178.6 4724 56.2 28 4780
29 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.9 4.0 5.9 19.1 30.0 20.6 11.2 7.7 47.6 84.2 96.8 113.2 173.6 297.2 345.4 736.0 955.6 656.6 419.1 262.1 4287 56.2 29 4343
30 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.7 4.0 12.9 21.1 15.4 8.9 6.3 40.4 69.8 84.2 96.8 149.2 257.3 297.2 626.4 802.1 562.2 381.0 318.0 3755 56.2 30 3811
31 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.7 8.6 14.3 10.9 6.7 5.0 33.2 59.2 69.8 84.2 127.6 221.2 257.3 539.0 682.6 471.9 326.2 289.1 3209 56.2 31 3265
32 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.7 9.5 7.3 4.7 3.8 26.5 48.7 59.2 69.8 111.0 189.1 221.2 466.7 587.4 401.6 273.8 247.5 2732 56.2 32 2788
33 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.1 4.9 3.2 2.7 19.8 38.8 48.7 59.2 92.0 164.6 189.1 401.2 508.5 345.6 233.0 207.7 2323 56.2 33 2379
34 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.1 2.1 1.8 13.9 29.0 38.8 48.7 78.1 136.4 164.6 343.0 437.2 299.2 200.5 176.8 1972 56.2 34 2028
35 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.9 1.2 9.4 20.4 29.0 38.8 64.2 115.7 136.4 298.5 373.7 257.2 173.6 152.1 1671 56.2 35 1727
36 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 6.3 13.8 20.4 29.0 51.1 95.2 115.7 247.4 325.3 219.9 149.2 131.7 1406 56.2 36 1462
37 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.7 9.2 13.8 20.4 38.2 75.8 95.2 209.8 269.6 191.4 127.6 113.2 1167 56.2 37 1223
38 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.0 9.2 13.8 26.9 56.6 75.8 172.6 228.7 158.6 111.0 96.8 954 56.2 38 1010
39 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.0 9.2 18.2 39.9 56.6 137.5 188.1 134.5 92.0 84.2 764 56.2 39 820
40 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.0 12.1 26.9 39.9 102.7 149.8 110.6 78.1 69.8 594 56.2 40 650
41 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.2 18.0 26.9 72.3 111.9 88.2 64.2 59.2 446 56.2 41 502
42 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.8 18.0 48.9 78.8 65.9 51.1 48.7 319 56.2 42 375
43 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.8 32.6 53.2 46.4 38.2 38.8 217 56.2 43 273
44 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.1 35.5 31.3 26.9 29.0 137 56.2 44 193
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 15.4 20.9 18.2 20.4 75 56.2 45 131
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.0 12.1 13.8 35 56.2 46 91
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.2 9.2 14 56.2 47 71
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.0 4 56.2 48 60
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 56.2 49 56
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Annexure 3.3
ESTIMATION OF 100 YEAR FLOOD FOR KHUITAM H.E. PROJECT
24 Hour 100 year point rainfall = 280 mm
24 Hour 100 year areal rainfall = 231 mm
23.1 Cm
76% 17.56
24 % 5.54
1 st bell 2 nd bell
Time co.Eff cumm incr eff Critical Time co.Eff cumm incr eff Critical
1 0.17 3.00 3.00 2.76 0.68 1 0.17 0.95 0.95 0.71 0.05
2 0.33 5.78 2.77 2.53 0.92 2 0.33 1.82 0.88 0.64 0.12
3 0.42 7.39 1.62 1.38 1.61 3 0.42 2.33 0.51 0.27 0.34
4 0.53 9.24 1.85 1.61 2.76 4 0.53 2.92 0.58 0.34 0.71
5 0.62 10.86 1.62 1.38 2.53 5 0.62 3.43 0.51 0.27 0.64
6 0.68 12.01 1.16 0.92 1.38 6 0.68 3.79 0.36 0.12 0.27
7 0.74 12.94 0.92 0.68 1.38 7 0.74 4.09 0.29 0.05 0.27
8 0.80 14.09 1.16 0.91 0.91 8 0.80 4.45 0.36 0.12 0.12
9 0.86 15.02 0.92 0.68 0.68 9 0.86 4.74 0.29 0.05 0.05
10 0.91 15.94 0.92 0.68 0.68 10 0.91 5.03 0.29 0.05 0.05
11 0.96 16.86 0.92 0.68 0.68 11 0.96 5.33 0.29 0.05 0.05
12 1.00 17.56 0.69 0.45 0.45 12 1.00 5.54 0.22 -0.02 0.00
17.56 14.68 5.54 2.66
Flood Hydrograph
Base Flow Time (Hrs) Ordinates
Time U.G 0.00 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.12 0.27 0.27 0.64 0.71 0.34 0.12 0.05 0.45 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.91 1.38 1.38 2.53 2.76 1.61 0.92 0.68 D.S.R.O (Cumecs)
0 0 0.0 0 56.2 0 56
1 10 0.0 0.0 0 56.2 1 56
2 31 0.0 0.5 0.0 1 56.2 2 57
3 65 0.0 1.5 0.5 0.0 2 56.2 3 58
4 128 0.0 3.2 1.5 0.5 0.0 5 56.2 4 61
5 202 0.0 6.4 3.2 1.5 1.2 0.0 12 56.2 5 69
6 297 0.0 10.1 6.4 3.2 3.7 2.7 0.0 26 56.2 6 82
7 360 0.0 14.8 10.1 6.4 7.8 8.2 2.7 0.0 50 56.2 7 106
8 327 0.0 18.0 14.8 10.1 15.4 17.5 8.2 6.4 0.0 90 56.2 8 147
9 280 0.0 16.4 18.0 14.8 24.2 34.6 17.5 19.5 7.1 0.0 152 56.2 9 208
10 235 0.0 14.0 16.4 18.0 35.6 54.5 34.6 41.5 21.7 3.4 0.0 240 56.2 10 296
11 200 0.0 11.8 14.0 16.4 43.2 80.1 54.5 82.0 46.0 10.4 1.2 0.0 359 56.2 11 416
12 172 0.0 10.0 11.8 14.0 39.2 97.1 80.1 129.3 91.0 22.0 3.7 0.5 0.0 499 56.2 12 555
13 149 0.0 8.6 10.0 11.8 33.6 88.3 97.1 189.8 143.4 43.6 7.8 1.5 4.5 0.0 640 56.2 13 696
14 128 0.0 7.5 8.6 10.0 28.2 75.6 88.3 230.2 210.5 68.7 15.4 3.2 13.7 6.8 0.0 767 56.2 14 823
15 110 0.0 6.4 7.5 8.6 24.0 63.5 75.6 209.3 255.4 100.8 24.2 6.4 29.2 20.7 6.8 0.0 838 56.2 15 895
16 95 0.0 5.5 6.4 7.5 20.7 54.0 63.5 179.2 232.2 122.3 35.6 10.1 57.6 44.1 20.7 6.8 0.0 866 56.2 16 922
17 79 0.0 4.8 5.5 6.4 17.9 46.5 54.0 150.4 198.8 111.2 43.2 14.8 90.9 87.1 44.1 20.7 9.1 0.0 905 56.2 17 961
18 67 0.0 4.0 4.8 5.5 15.4 40.2 46.5 128.0 166.9 95.2 39.2 18.0 133.4 137.4 87.1 44.1 27.8 13.8 0.0 1007 56.2 18 1063
19 55 0.0 3.4 4.0 4.8 13.1 34.6 40.2 110.1 142.0 79.9 33.6 16.4 161.9 201.6 137.4 87.1 59.0 42.1 13.8 0.0 1185 56.2 19 1241
20 44 0.0 2.8 3.4 4.0 11.4 29.6 34.6 95.4 122.2 68.0 28.2 14.0 147.2 244.6 201.6 137.4 116.6 89.4 42.1 25.3 0.0 1418 56.2 20 1474
21 33 0.0 2.2 2.8 3.4 9.5 25.7 29.6 82.0 105.8 58.5 24.0 11.8 126.0 222.4 244.6 201.6 183.8 176.8 89.4 77.2 27.6 0.0 1705 56.2 21 1761
22 23 0.0 1.6 2.2 2.8 8.0 21.3 25.7 70.1 91.0 50.7 20.7 10.0 105.8 190.4 222.4 244.6 269.8 278.8 176.8 163.9 84.2 16.1 0.0 2057 56.2 22 2113
23 16 0.0 1.2 1.6 2.2 6.6 18.1 21.3 61.0 77.7 43.6 17.9 8.6 90.0 159.8 190.4 222.4 327.4 409.2 278.8 324.1 178.8 49.1 9.2 0.0 2499 56.2 23 2555
24 10 0.0 0.8 1.2 1.6 5.3 14.9 18.1 50.6 67.7 37.2 15.4 7.5 77.4 136.0 159.8 190.4 297.6 496.5 409.2 511.1 353.6 104.3 28.1 6.8 2991 56.2 24 3047
25 5 0.0 0.5 0.8 1.2 3.9 11.9 14.9 42.9 56.1 32.4 13.1 6.4 67.1 117.0 136.0 159.8 254.8 451.3 496.5 750.1 557.5 206.2 59.6 20.7 3461 56.2 25 3517
26 0 0.0 0.2 0.5 0.8 2.8 8.9 11.9 35.3 47.6 26.9 11.4 5.5 57.6 101.3 117.0 136.0 213.9 386.4 451.3 910.2 818.3 325.2 117.9 44.1 3831 56.2 26 3887
27 0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.5 1.9 6.2 8.9 28.1 39.1 22.8 9.5 4.8 49.3 87.1 101.3 117.0 182.0 324.3 386.4 827.3 992.9 477.4 185.8 87.1 3940 56.2 27 3996
28 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 1.2 4.2 6.2 21.0 31.2 18.7 8.0 4.0 42.9 74.5 87.1 101.3 156.6 276.0 324.3 708.4 902.5 579.2 272.8 137.4 3758 56.2 28 3814
29 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 2.8 4.2 14.8 23.3 14.9 6.6 3.4 35.6 64.8 74.5 87.1 135.6 237.5 276.0 594.6 772.8 526.5 331.0 201.6 3408 56.2 29 3464
30 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.2 2.8 10.0 16.4 11.2 5.3 2.8 30.2 53.7 64.8 74.5 116.6 205.6 237.5 506.0 648.6 450.8 300.8 244.6 2983 56.2 30 3039
31 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.2 6.7 11.1 7.9 3.9 2.2 24.8 45.6 53.7 64.8 99.6 176.8 205.6 435.4 552.0 378.4 257.6 222.4 2550 56.2 31 2606
32 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.9 7.4 5.3 2.8 1.6 19.8 37.5 45.6 53.7 86.7 151.1 176.8 377.0 475.0 322.0 216.2 190.4 2172 56.2 32 2228
33 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.2 3.5 1.9 1.2 14.8 29.9 37.5 45.6 71.9 131.5 151.1 324.1 411.2 277.1 184.0 159.8 1848 56.2 33 1904
34 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 1.2 0.8 10.4 22.3 29.9 37.5 61.0 109.0 131.5 277.0 353.6 239.9 158.3 136.0 1570 56.2 34 1626
35 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.5 7.0 15.7 22.3 29.9 50.1 92.5 109.0 241.1 302.2 206.2 137.1 117.0 1331 56.2 35 1387
36 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 4.7 10.6 15.7 22.3 39.9 76.0 92.5 199.9 263.0 176.3 117.9 101.3 1120 56.2 36 1176
37 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 7.1 10.6 15.7 29.8 60.6 76.0 169.5 218.0 153.4 100.7 87.1 931 56.2 37 987
38 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.1 7.1 10.6 21.0 45.3 60.6 139.4 184.9 127.2 87.7 74.5 761 56.2 38 817
39 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.1 7.1 14.2 31.9 45.3 111.1 152.1 107.9 72.7 64.8 610 56.2 39 666
40 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.1 9.5 21.5 31.9 83.0 121.2 88.7 61.6 53.7 474 56.2 40 530
41 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.1 14.4 21.5 58.4 90.5 70.7 50.7 45.6 356 56.2 41 412
42 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.2 14.4 39.5 63.8 52.8 40.4 37.5 254 56.2 42 311
43 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.2 26.3 43.1 37.2 30.2 29.9 173 56.2 43 229
44 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 11.4 28.7 25.1 21.3 22.3 109 56.2 44 165
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.4 16.7 14.4 15.7 59 56.2 45 115
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.2 9.6 10.6 27 56.2 46 84
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.1 7.1 11 56.2 47 67
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.1 3 56.2 48 59
0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 56.2 49 56
DPR CHAPTER -6 (Hydrology)_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

ANNEXURE- 3.4: PHOTOGRAPHS OF ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING
WATER SAMPLING NOISE LEVEL MONITORING
WATER SAMPLE COLLECTION PHYTOPLANKTON COLLECTION
AIR QUALITY MONITORING GROUND FLORA SAMPLING

Chapter 4
BIOLOGICAL_ENVIRONMENT:
BASE LINE STATUS
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
CHAPTER 4
BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT: BASE LINE STATUS
4.1 INTRODUCTION
Northeast India,comprises of eight states, viz. Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, Manipur,

Meghalaya, Mizoram, Nagaland, Sikkim and Tripura an area of about 2, 62, 179 sq. km is
known for its rich biological and cultural diversity. It occupies 7.7% of India’s Total
Geographical area (TGA) supporting 50% of the flora (ca. 8000 species), of which 31.58% (ca.
2526 species) is endemic. It is a transitional zone between the Indian, Indo-Burman–Malaysian
and Indo-Chinese regions. It is also a part of the Vavilovian centre of biodiversity and origin of
many important cultivated plant species and some domesticated animals. The region supports a
rich biodiversity spanning from tropical rainforests to alpine scrubs. Takhtajan describes the
region as the ‘cradle of flowering plants’ because of its diversified angiosperms. This rich
biodiversity has a significant role in the maintenance of the ecosystem. Besides, the
biodiversity of the region is used ethnologically by locals for various socio-economic and
developmental purposes. The region is rich in orchids, ferns, oaks (Quercus spp.), bamboos,
rhododendrons (Rhododendron spp.), magnolias Magnolia spp.), etc.
4.2 FOREST TYPES AND VEGETATION
Situated on the North-Eastern tip of the country, the State of Arunachal Pradesh is a part of
Eastern Himalayan Ranges. It occupies the largest area in the North-Eastern region of India,
and consists of mountainous ranges sloping to the plains of Assam. Arunachal Pradesh falls
within the Himalayan global biodiversity hotspots in India (Mayers, 2000). It is estimated that
over 5000 species of flowering plants occur in the State. The total plant wealth of the State
includes not only the large flowering vascular plants, but also large number of non flowering
plants viz., ferns, liverworts, lichens, algae etc. The diversity of topographical and climatic
condition has favoured the growth of luxuriant forests, which are home to countless plant and
animal forms. The State is ranked second among States and UTs in terms of area under forest
Biological Environment__________________________________________________ 4-1

KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
cover. The entire territory forms a complex hill system with varying elevations ranging from
low lying areas of the foot-hills and gradually ascending to over 6500 m, traversed throughout
by a number of rivers and rivulets. Rainfall greatly varies with respect to elevation, but the
rainy season is spread over 8-9 months excepting the drier days during winters. The richness of
life forms i.e. the flora & fauna that occur in these forests presents a panorama of biological
diversity with over 5000 plants, about 85 terrestrial mammals, over 500 birds and a large
number of butterflies, insects and reptiles. Such an unparalleled occurrence of life forms can
be attributed to the peculiar location of the State which is at the junction of the Paleoarctic,
Indo-Chinese, and Indo-Malayan bio-geographic regions. Biotic elements from all these
regions occur in this state making it very rich in floral and faunal resources. In the degraded
forests bamboos and other grasses are of common occurrence.
The forests are classified under 5 major categories i.e. tropical, subtropical, temperate, alpine
and sub-alpine vegetation, secondary forests and aquatic vegetation; each comprising subtypes
primarily based on altitude and climatic factors. Kaul & Haridasan (1989) has attempted a
broad classification of forest types and provided a comparision with that of the Champion and
Seth’s classification (1968).

KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
Table 4.1 & 4.2: Forest Types of Arunachal Pradesh

S. Broad Forest As per Altitudinal Range Important Species
No. Type Champion &
Seth
1. Tropical Semi 2/B/C1/Ia, Near Alluvial Amoora wallichii, Pterospermum
Evergreen 2/B/C1b/ISI Plains acerifolium, Stereospermum
chelonoides, Altingia excelsa.
2. Tropical 1/B/C1, 1/B/C2 Up to 610 m Kayea assamica, Mesua ferrea,
Evergreen Dysoxylum procerum,
Echnocarpus sp.
3. Tropical Wet 8/B/C1 Up to 900 m Phoeba paniculata, Actinodaphne
Evergreen obovata, Alnus nepalansis, Phoebe
attenuata.
4. Sub Tropical 3C3/Bb, 3C/IS2 Up to 900-1900 m Bombax ceiba, Lagerstroemia
broad leaved parviflora, Terminalia bellirica,
Sterculia villosa.
5. Sub Tropical III/9/DS/1 1000-1800 m Pinus Roxburghii, Pinus
Pine wallichiana and Pinus merkusii.
6. Wet Temperate IV/11/IIB/C1, 1800-2750 m Quercus lamellosa, Quercus sp.
Forests IV/11/IIB/C2 Castanopsis indica, Acer hookeri.
7. Mixed IV/12/C1/3a, 2300-3350 m Abies sp. Tsuga dumosa.
Coniferous IV/12/C/3b
Forests
8. Alpine V/C2, VI/ISC3, 3000-5500 m Rhododendron, Primula,
VI/16/C1, E1 Saussaurea, Saxifraga.
9. Bamboo 1B/2S Bambusa pallida, Schizostachyum
Brakes polymorphum, Bambusa tulda,
Dendrocalamus hamiltonii
Source: Forest Statistics Arunachal Pradesh, Up to Year 2000-2001
4.2.1 Tropical Forests
These forests occur up to an elevation of 900 m above MSL. They are present in all the
districts along the foothills of the State. These forests can further be classified into two main
types, viz. tropical evergreen forests and tropical semi evergreen forests.
A. 1B/C1: Assam valley Tropical evergreen forests
Annual rainfall is over 2,300 mm up to 3,800 mm or more, and is exceptionally well

distributed with only (November to January) 3 months dry. Monthly temperature does not
exceed 32 °C and mean minimum for January is close to 10 °C. The soils are largely of recent

KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
alluvial formation over tertiary sandstones and shales. The giant Dipterocarpus D.
macrocarpus, Mesua ferrea, Dysoxylum procerum, Kayea assamica, Vatica sp.and Shorea
assmica occur scattered and in patches. There is under wood and a shrub layer but the ground
is practically bare. Climbers are abundant as also epiphytes. Palms and canes are generally
present.
B. 1B/C2: Upper Assam valley Tropical evergreen forests
High rainfall and humidity area occurring at 200 m ascending valley to 800 m; soil well
drained, deep and porous, consist of Mesua and Kayea forest types.
C. 2B/C1a Assam alluvial Plains semi-evergreen forests
This is an evergreen, closed high forest community with varying proportions of deciduous trees
in the top storey. Middle storey is dense evergreen with luxuriant growth of canes and shrubs
in the understorey. These forests are seen in the heavy rainfall tract of Lesser Himalaya and
soil is usually light and alluvial. Important associates of the top storey include Terminalia
myriocarpa, Ailanthus integrifolia, Canarium strictum, Castanopsis indica, Dillenia indica,
Dysoxylum procerum, Garuga gamblei, Michelia champaca, Phoebe cooperiana,
Pterospermum acerifolium and Syzygium cumini. Second storey is represented by trees like
Albizia lucida, Cinnamomum pauciflorum, Dalbergia sissoo, Gynocardia odorata, Magnolia
hodgsonii, Meliosma simplicifolia etc. Understorey is represented by bamboos, Canes, and
many woody shrubs and climbers. This type of forest is found in downstream of Lai River.
Epiphytes are represented by a few ferns, orchids and lianas that grow on the large tree trunks.
Shrubs in these forests are represented by Boehmeria macrophylla, Calamus leptospadix,
Dracaena angustifolia, Oxyspora paniculata, Maotia puya, Phlogacanthus thrysiflorus,
Micromelum integerimum, Difflugossa colorata etc. The forest floor, wherever disturbed, is
covered with herbs and tall grasses like Ageratum conyzoides, Bidens bipinnata, Eriophorum
comosum, Commelina benghalensis, Imperata cylindrica, Pogonatherum paniceum,
Saccharum longisetosus and S. spontaneum.

KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
D. 2B/1S1 Sub-Himalayan light alluvial semi-evergreen forest
This is a mixed high forest community which occurs in the lower foot hills and all along the
river banks. The top canopy in these forests consists of many deciduous trees, while the second
storey is dense mixed and consists of both evergreen and deciduous tree species. The top
canopy comprises of Ailanthus integrifolia, Albizia lucida, Bischofia javanica, Duabanga
grandiflora, Garuga gamblei, Phoebe hainesiana, Artocarpus lokoocha, Spondias pinnata and
Terminalia myriocarpa. The second storey is represented by Callicarpa arborea, Glochidion
lanceolarium, Gynocardia odorata, Macranga denticualata, Mallotus roxburghii, Ficus
elmerii, Endospermum chinensis, etc. The understorey of these forests is represented by
bamboos, canes, palms and shrubs. Shrubby species include Bambusa pallida, Boehmeria
macrophylla, Calamus floribundus, Clerodendrum bracteatum, Costus speciosus, Boehmeria
hamiltonii, Micromelum integerrimum, Oxyspora paniculata and Pinanga gracilis. Caryota
urens, a tall palm, makes a noticeable presence in this forest. Climbers are represented by
species of Pegia nitida, Cayratia pedata, Dioscorea pentaphylla, Entada purseatha,
Pothosscandens, Raphidophora lancifolia, Stephania hernandifolia, Thunbergia grandiflora,
etc. Some common epiphytes present here are species of Dendrobium, Pholidota, Eria,
Asplenium, Hoya, Lepisorus and Microsorium. The forest floors which are disturbed at many
places show gaps and are covered with herbs and grasses like Polygonum chinensis, Ageratum
conyzoides, Alpinia alughas, Bidens bipinnata, Commelina benghalensis, Cyrtococcum
accrescens, Digitaria ciliaris, Oplismenus compositus, Saccharum longisetosus, S. spontaneum
and Thysanolaena maxima.
4.2.2 Subtropical Forests
This type of forests occurs in districts between altitudes 800 m to 1900 m. These are essentially
evergreen and dense in nature. The trees attain large dimensions (25-40 m high). The forests
are rich in species diversity and dominated by Fagaceae members. Castaniopsis lidica, C.
armata, Quercus lamellose, Q. griffithili, Q. spicata, Q. Semiserrata, Q. fenestrala, Michelia
oblonga, Manglietia insignis, Ostodes paniculata, Ulmus lancifolium, Engelhardia spicata,

KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
Ficus spp, Acer oblongum, Schima wallichji, S.khasiana, etc. are the dominant tree species.
Luxurious growth of climbers, orchids & ferns, occurs in these forests.
A. 8B/ CI: East Himalayan Sub-tropical wet hill forests
These forests generally occur on hilly terrain between 900-1800 m elevations and dominated
by evergreen species. A number of deciduous trees also occur in the canopy. The top canopy is
comprised of Alnus nepalensis, Castanopsis hystrix, Cinnamomum glaucesens, Engelhardtia
spicata, Phoebe attenuata, Prunus cersoides, Quercus lamellosa, Magnolia campbellii etc. The
second storey is represented by some medium sized evergreen tree species such as
Brassaiopsis speciosa, Macropanax undulatus, Rhus chinensis, Saurauia roxburghii, Persea
gambelii, Symplocos glomerata, etc. The understorey consists of a number of shrubs and
climbers and among shrubs found in these forests are Boehmeria macrophylla, Chasalia
curviflora, Debregeasia longifolia, Eurya acuminata, Medinilla erythrophylla, Oxyspora
paniculata, etc. There are numerous climbers and epiphytes and the species of Mastersia,
Cissus, Pegia, Bauhinia, Clematis, Dioscorea, Smilax, Entada, etc. constitute important
climbers and lianas. The ground flora at many places is disturbed and the canopy shows gaps.
These gaps are represented by herbs and grasses viz., Ageratum conyzoides, Aster mollisculus,
Anaphalis busua, Bidens bipinnata, Cardamine hirsuta, Crassocephalum crepidioides,
Impatiens sp., Persicaria capitata, P. barabata, Setaria glauca, Themeda arundinacea,
Thysanolaena maxima, Viola pilosa, etc.
4.2.3 Moist Mixed Deciduous Forest
A. 3C3/Bb: East Himalaya Moist Mixed Deciduous Forest
Constitute the deciduous forest occupying well drained soils on the bhabar terraces and plateau
of the outer Himalayan range upto 500- 650 m. It is a heavy rainfall zone with rainfall over
2,500 mm and often nearer 5,000 mm. The forest type is more or less closed in which
individuals trees often run to large size and abundance of under-wood and shrubby
undergrowth Lagerstroemia parviflora, Terminalia bellirica, Sterculia villosa, Salmalia
malabarica, Amoora spp.

KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
B. 3C/IS2: Northern Secondary Moist Mixed Deciduous Forest
These forests are mostly semi evergreen type. The original forest has been destroyed, and is
distributed over region of higher rainfall corresponding to semi-evergreen forests. The
important tree species of this region are Mangifera indica (E), Anthrocarpus cadamba,
Alstonia scholaris (E), Terminalia tomentosa, Melia composia, bambusa arundinacea.
4.2.4 Pine Forests
These forests extend both in the subtropical and temperate belt in between 1000 m to 1800 m
elevation. These are generally met with in rain shadow area and are represented by three
different sepecsies viz. Pinus roxburghii, P. wallichiana and P. merkusii is found in Rupa and
Dirang valley of Kameng district and forms either pure stands or occasionally mixed with P.
wallichiana, Quercus spp, Prunus sp. etc. P. wallichiana is widely distributed in Rupa, Dirang
valley (Kameng district), Hapoli (Lower Subansiri district), Mechuka (West Siang district),
Anini (Dibang valley district) and Melinja (Lohit district). In Kameng, Siang and Lower
Subansiri district it is found in nearly pure stands or less frequently mixed with P. roxburghii,
Quercus spp. Lyonia sp. etc. In Dibang valley they are found in association with Betula
alnoides, Alnus nepalensis, Lyona ovalifolia etc. In Lohit district it is less extensive and is
associated with Tsuga dimosa, Pinus merkusii occurs in Lohit district along the Lohit valley
extending from Kharang (Hawal) to Dichu.
4.2.5 Temperate Forests
Occur in all the districts as a continuous belt and can be divided into two sub types viz.
temperate broad leaved forests and temperate conifer forests.
A. 11b/C1: East Himalayan Wet temperate forests
These forests are closed evergreen forests of trees of medium height and occur between 1700-
2700 m in the higher hills. The important trees of the canopy include Acer campbellii, Alnus

KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
nepalensis, Betula alnoideds, Exbucklandia populnea, Castanopsis tribuloides, Engelhardtia

spicata and Quercus lamellosa. The middle storey is represented by some moderate sized tree
species such as Eurya acuminata, Ilex dipyrena, Litsea sp., Lyonia ovalifolia, Prunus
cerasoides and Mahonia pycnophylla. These forests are found in upper reaches of Khairang
and Chigunti areas. Shrubs are represented by the species of Berberis, Cotoneaster, Mahonia,
Rubus, Sinarundinaria falcata, Viburnum erubescens, etc. There are only a few climber and
twiners, while epiphytes are represented by musci, ferns and orchids. The ground flora is
represented by species of Anaphalis, Anemone, Cardamine, Campanula, Circium, Fragaria,
Plantago, Persicaria, Potentilla, Pilea, Sedum, Stellaria and Viola.
B. 11b/C2: Naga Hills Wet temperate forests
These forests are found in higher hills from 1,800 m upwards similar to Himalayan forest but
on usually less steep, including more rounded and rolling plateau land on which forest is
broken by grassland. Forms of evergreen shrubs and bamboo in the east, Magnolia,
Mangliatia, Michelia, Quercus, Acer, Prunus Pyrus etc forms the floristics.
4.2.6 Coniferous Forests
A. 12/C3a: East Himalayan mixed coniferous forests
The forests of this zone are dense evergreen, with predominating Oak, Rhododendron,
Hemlocks and Firs. Hemlock (Tsuga dumosa) makes appearance in the upper reaches as a
dominant tree species, especially on the drier ridges between 2400 m and 2700 m elevations.
These forests are found in Walong and Kibito areas, which form the catchment area of the
Project. At the higher elevations Hemlock gives way to Silver fir (Abies densa). Apart from the
conifers, some Oak mixed deciduous broad-leaved species such as Acer, Betula, Magnolia and
Rhododendron are also found in the forests. The undergrowth is represented by a number of
evergreen shrubs such as Berberis, Cotoneaster, Rhododendron, Salix, Thamnocalamus and
Viburnum. Ferns are in abundance most of the shrubs are laden with many epiphytic mosses

KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
and lichens. The common lichens include Cladonia furcata, Parmelia wallichiana, Peltigera
dolichorrhiza, Usnea baileyi, etc.
B. 12/C3b: Abies Delavayi forests
Abies delavayi is a Chinese sp. Confined to northern slopes of Piri between 2750-3350 m.
4.2.7 Bamboo Forests
These are seen as bambaoo breakes up to 2000 m altitude throughout the State. Bamboos grow
mostly in pure stands with very less of associated species. Normally bamboos appear in areas
abandoned after shifting cultivation, where they colonise fast. Bamboos of Arunachal Pradesh
are Bambusa tulda, B. pallida, Dendrocalamus hamiltonii, D. hookerii, Pseudostachyum
polymorphum, Chimonobambusa sp. Cephalostachyum sp. and Arundinaria spp.,
Phyllostachys sp. (both single stem bamboos) occurs in higher elevation 1000-2000 m.
A. 2SI Secondary moist bamboo brakes
These scattered bamboo brakes occur in areas which are abandoned and cleared for agriculture.
Bambusa pallida, Dendrocalamus hamiltonii and Schizostachyum sp. are some of the common
species which form large populations. Some tree species that grow here are Bombax ceiba,
Macaranga denticulata, Sterculia villosa, stereospermum colais, Spondias pinnata, etc. and are
found growing along the edges of degraded bamboo forests.
4.2.8 Alpine Forests
This type of vegetation occurs on the peaks of higher hills above an altitude of 4000 m upto
5500 m above timber line. For major part of the year, the area is covered by snow and plant
activity is restricted to a few months when snow melts. As a rule there are no tall trees but
dwarf branches and shrubs and mainly herbs with deep roots and cushioned leaves and
branches. The profusion of bright coloured flowers which is purely seasonal for a brief period
makes the area highly attractive. Plants like Rhododendron nivale, R. anthopogon, R.

KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
thomsonii, Sedum sp., Festuca sp., Rhodiola sp., Saxifraga sp. Saussaurea sp., Arenaria sp.,
Rheum sp. etc. form the major constituent of this peculiar vegetation.
4.3 STUDY AREA
The catchment area of Gang River is characterized by Tropical wet evergreen, Tropical semi
evergreen; Sub-tropical broad leaved, Sub-tropical Pine, Wet Temperate forests, Mixed
Coniferous forests, and degraded forest etc. The area within 10 km radius from the barrage and
power house site of proposed Khuitam HE project falling in Dirang valley basin is
characterized by tropical and sub tropical forests consisting of East – Himalayan mixed
Coniferous forest, East- Himalayan sub alpine birch/fir forest and degraded forest. The forests
area in and around the project site is covered under Bomdila Forest Division and is represented
by Subtropical and tropical forests with species viz. Albizia procera, Artyocarpous chaplasha,
Cinnamomum ecicodaphnea, Duabanga grandifolia, Mesua ferrea, Castanopsis indica,
Endospermum chinense, Syzygium cumini, Slopina molluccensis, Saruja punduana, Solanum
tervum, Citrus spp., Saccharum spontaneum, Imperata kakra etc.
The barrage site of proposed Khuitam HE Project is located at latitude 27° 19’ 13.5” North
and longitude 92° 23’ 54.9” East. The Power house site of the project is located on latitude 27°
19’ 13.8” North and longitude 92° 25’ 49.2” East. The topography of the area is mostly
mountainous. A greater part of it falls within the higher mountain zone, consisting of tangled
peaks and valleys. The altitude of the project area varies between 1160 m -1260 m and the
barrage site is at about 1236 m above msl. The project area is covered with moderately steep
hills at both the banks. The slope of the hill behind the terrace is moderate with exposed bed
rock. The hill slope is covered with moderate to dense bushes. Throughout the entire valley &
hill tracts on the either side of the river where the proposed Khuitam HE project is planned are
associated with steep gradients on either bank. Cultivation activities are generally observed in
gentle to moderate slope. Pine forest and small patch of Castanopsis spp. forest are observed
on the banks of Gang River. As the river progresses from Sella pass towards the Dirang valley
canopied forest occurs only in a few areas. In canopied forests too, there are frequent blanks
along the nallas.

KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
Present report on the flora of the surroundings of Khuitam HE project is based on extensive
and intensive field surveys made during the three seasons of 2008-2009 at various locations of
project components and influence zone. The study has been conducted in three seasons i.e.
summer, monsoon and winter season. Attempts were made to record all the possible plants of
the region. Besides the collection of plant species, information was also collected with
vernacular names of plant species made by local inhabitants. Plant specimens were collected
and identified consulting the Flora experts of North Eastern Regional Institute of Science &
Technology (NERIST), Itanagar Arunachal Pradesh. Figure 4.1 gives the location map of the
sampling points where Quadrats have been laid.
Figure 4.1: Location map of quadrats for assessing biological wealth in the Khuitam HE project
area.

KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
For the purpose of the present Study, the whole sampling area was divided into influence zone
and project area, covering 10 km radius from the project components of Khuitam HE project.
The distribution pattern of sampling sites is listed in Table 4.3.
Table 4.3: Transects/sampling points used for biodiversity survey.

S. No. of Latitude (N) Longitude (E)
No. Transects Name Quadrat Start End Start End
1 Influence Zone 55 27018’ 51.64” 27020’ 01.99” 92023’ 41.22” 92026’ 09.44”
2. Project Area
A Submergence zone 14 27019’08.51” 27024’ 26.97” 92018’ 00.36” 92024’ 55.83
B Power House Area 8 27015’ 27.99” 27018’ 54.46” 92020’ 05.96” 92024’ 42.89”
C colony area 12 27019’ 57.47 27021’40.47” 92025’ 26.44” 92029’ 20.50”
D Down stream area 6 27015’ 51.45” 27018’ 46.05” 92025’ 53.69” 92030’ 01.68”
4.4 VEGETATION
4.4.1 Vegetation in the Influence zone
Temperate broad leaved, Pine oak mixed, Pine and mixed coniferous forests are found in the
influence zone of proposed Khuitam HE project, A total of 28 tree species were recorded in the
influence zone during the primary survey (Table 4.3). The dominant species are: Casanopsis
chrysophylla, Bauhinia purpurea, Fycus spp. Phoebe lanceolata,, Pinus wallichiana, Ulmus
spp, Syzygium megacarpum, Rhododendron arboreum, Quercus lanata, Phoebe lanceolata,
Pyrus spp.etc. Similarly, the 30 species of shrubs (Table 4.4) and 37 species of herbs (Table
4.5) were recorded. The dominant shrub species in the influence zone were: Albizia, Barberis
sp, Bahunia sp, Rubus ulmifolius, and Citrus spp. Table 4.7 lists the lower plants recorded in
the area. Economic uses of these species have also been given in these Tables. The main uses
of these species were timber, fodder, firewood, fibre and medicinal. Besides above uses, the list
also contains the plants which are useful for ornamental value, edible fruits and bee forage.

KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
Table 4.4: List of Tree species and their status in Project area and influence (Inf.) zone of
S.No. Botanical Names Vernacular Family Status Conservation

Names SZ Inf Status
1 Abies densa Fir Pinaceae. A P Common
Indian Tree of A P
2 Ailanthus ezcelsa Heaven Simaroubaceae Common
3 Albizia procera White siris Fabaceae A P Common
Alnus nepalensis A P
4 D.Don Indian Alder Betulaceae Common
Ardisia griffithii P P
5 C.B. Clarke. Coralberry Myrsinaceae Common
6 Alpinia Spp - zingiberaceae A P common
7 Bauhinia veriegata Orchid tree Fagaceae A P Common
8 Bauhinia purpurea Orchid tree Fagaceae P P Common
Castanopsis P P
9 chrysophylla Giant chinquapin Fagaceae Common
Dysoxylum grande A P
10 Hiern. Rosewood Meliaceae Common
11 Elaeocarpus spp. Blueberry-Ash Elaeocarpaceae A P Common
12 Glycosmis spp. Orange Rutaceae A P Common
13 Irvingia spp. Wild mango Irvingiaceae A P Common
14 Litsea glutinosa Indian- Laurel Lauraceae A P Common
Litsea elongata A P
15 (Nees) Hk.f. Kali pahenli Lauraceae Common
Macaranga A P
16 denticulata Muell. Coral Tree Euphorbiaceae Common
Maesa indica A P
17 (Roxb.) A. DC. Wild Berry Myrtaceae Common
Southern A P
18 Magnolia griffithi magnolia Magnoliaceae Common
Myrine semiserrata A P
19 wall. - Myricaceae Common
Neolitsea cuipala A P
(D. Don )
20 Kostermans - Lauraceae Common
21 Oenothera rosea L - Onagraceae A P Common
22 Pinus kesiya Royle Green Pine Pinaceae P P Common
23 Pinus wallichiana Blue Pine Pinaceae A P Common
Rhododendron A P
24 arboreum Rhododendron Ericaceae Common
25 Scimmia anquetilia. Rutaceae A P Common
Syzygium P P
megacarpum (Craib) Katahal
26 Rathakr. & Nair Myrtaceae Common
27 Tsuga dumosa - Pinaceae A P Common
28 Ulmus spp. Elms Ulmaceae A P Common

KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
Table 4.5: List of shrubs species and their status in Project area and influence (Inf.) zone of
S.No. Botanical Names Vernacular Family Status

Names In
P Inf Conservation
A Status
Ardisia thyrsiflora P P
1 D.Don Coral berry Myrsinaceae Common
2 Blumea spp. - Asteraceae A P Common
3 Camellia acuminata Camellia Musaceae P P Common
4 Citrus spp. Citrus Rutaceae P P Common
5 Coriaria nepalensis Tanner'sTree Coriariaceae P P Common
Cudrania A P
6 cochinchinensis Cockspur Thorn Moraceae Common
Indian Paper A P
7 Daphne papyracea plant Thymelaeaceae Common
Diplospora singularis P P
8 Korth. - Rubiaceae Common
9 Elaeagnus spp. - Elaeagnaceae A P Common
Euonymus japonicus Japanese A P
10 Bl. euonymus Celastraceae Common
11 Eurya acuminata DC. - Theaceae A P Common
12 Juniperius chinensis Chinese juniper Cupressaceae A P Common
Northern A P
13 Lindera spp. spicebush Lauraceae Common
Maesa indica (Roxb.) A P
14 A. DC. Wild Berry Myrtaceae Common
Melastoma Malabar A P
15 malabathricum Melastome Melastomataceae Common
Memecylon A P
16 floribundum Bl. - Memecylaceae Common
17 Murraya koenigii Curry Leaf Tree Rutaceae A P Common
18 Opuntia monacantha Cactus Cactaceae A P Common
19 Pandanus spp. Screwpine Pandanaceae P P Common
20 Ricinus communis Castor oil plant Euphorbiaceae A P Common
Yellow A P
Himalayan
21 Rubus ellipticus raspberry Rosaceae Common
Rubus nepalensis Nepalese A P
22 (Hk.f.) Kuntze. Raspberry Rosaceae Common
Rubus paniculatus A P
23 Smith Rubus Rosaceae Common
Himalayan A P
24 Rubus tricolor bramble Rosaceae Common
Rhodendron
25 anthopagon - Ericaceae
26 Cudrania javanansis Cubanjute Moraceae P P Common
27 Solanam spirale Titikuchi Solanaceae A P Common

KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
Status
In
28 Spiraea spp. - Rosaceae P P Common
29 Urena lobata Caesarweed Malvaceae A P Common
Viburnum A P
cylindricum Buch.-
30 Ham ex D.Don - Caprifoliaceae Common
Table 4.6: List of herbs species and their uses along with their status in Project area and influence
(Inf.) zone of proposed Khuitam HE project.
S.N Botanical Names Vernacular Family Status Uses
o Names In
P In Conservation
A f. Status
P P
1 Ageratum conyzoides L. Ageratum Asteraceae Fodder Common
2 Anaphalis spp. - Asteraceae P P Fodder Common
P P Medicinal
3 Amaranthus spinosus Spiny ameranth Amaranthaceae plant Common
Anaphalis contorta A P
4 (D.Don) Hk.f. - Asteraceae Fodder Common
5 Artemisia annua Sweet sagewort Acanthaceae P P Fodder Common
6 Bambusa pallida Bamboo Poaceae A P Fodder Common
7 Blumea spp. Jangli Muli Asteraceae P P Fodder Common
A P Medicinal
8 Canabis sativa Common Hemp Cannabaceae plant Common
Crassocephalum P P Medicinal
9 crepidiides Thickhead Asteraceae plant Common
10 Crotalaria spp. Rattlepods Fabaceae A P Fodder Common
Cyanotis axillaris (L.) Common A P Ornamental
11 Schult.f. cyanotis Commelinaceae plant Common
Desmodium confertum Desmodium Fabaceae P P Fodder Common
12 DC.
Fabaceae P P Medicinal
13 Desmodium gangaticum - plant Common
A P Medicinal
14 Elscholtzia nlanda - Lamiaceae plant Common
Euphorbia hirta L. P P Medicinal
15 Asthama weed Euphorbiaceae plant Common
16 Fragaria ananassa Strawberry Araceae P P Fruit plant Common
Pink butterfly P P Medicinal
17 Hedychium spp. 


i
'1

i1H
ginger Zingiberaceae plant Common
Imperata cylindrica (L.) P. P P
18 Beauv. kunai grass Poaceae Fodder Common
19 Indigofera linifolia Torki Fabaceae A P Fodder Common
A P Medicinal
20 Inula spp. Yellow Starwort Asteraceae plant Not evaluated
Lespedeza gerardiana Prairie Bush- A P
21 Grah. Clover Fabaceae Fodder Common

KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
Status
In
22 Linum spp. Flax Loasaceae A P Fodder Common
23 Indigofera adenocarpa Torki Fabaceaa A P Fodder Common
24 Indigofera adenoides Torki Fabaceaa P P Fodder Common
25 Musa Spp. Banana Musaceae P P Fruit plant Common
Pink evening P P Ornamental
26 Oenothera rosea primrose Onagraceae plant Common
27 Peristrophe spp. - Acanthaceae P P Fodder Common
A P Ornamental
28 Phaius mismensis Reichb. f Orchid Orchidaceae plant Common
Phyllanthus fraternus A P Medicinal
29 Webster Gulf leaf flower Euphorbiaceae plant Common
Indian long A P Medicinal
30 Piper longum pepper Piperaceae plant Common
Dwarf white- A P
31 Pleioblastus variegatus stripe Poaceae Fodder Common
32 Poa spp. Blue grass Poaceae P P Fodder Common
A P Medicinal
33 Pogostemon spp. Pogostemon Lamiaceae plant Common
34 Poligonum caespitosum Tufted knotweed Polygonaceae A P Fodder Common
35 Pouzolzia hirta Ham. - Urticaceae A P Fodder Common
A P Ornamental
36 Smilax aspera Smilax Smilacaceae plant Common
Yellow-berried A P Ornamental
37 Solanum xanthocarpum Nightshade Solanaceae plant Common
A= Absent; P= Present
4.4.2 Lower Groups of Plants:
In the Project area, following genera of lower plants were recorded (Table 4.7) and none of
these species fall in any of the conservation categories mentioned in the Red Data Book of
Indian plants (Nayar and Shastry, 1987).
Table 4.7: Lower plants reported in the Project area and Influence zone of proposed Khuitam HE
Project.
Status
SZ
S.No. Botanical Name Family PA Inf Conservation Status
Pteridophytes
1 Adiantum venustum Polypodiaceae A P Common
2 Ampelopteris prolifera Thelypteridaceae A P Common
3 Angiopteris evecta Marattiaceae A P Common
4 Blechnum orientale Blechnaceae A P Common
5 Bolbitis heteroclita Lomariopsidaceae A P Common

KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
6 Diplazium esculentum Athyriaceae A P Common

7 Drynaria coronans Polypodiaceae P P Common
8 Loxogramme chinensis Loxogrammaceae A P Common
9 Microsorium pteropus Polypodiaceae A P Common
10 Osmunda claytoniana Osmundaceae A P Common
11 Pteris cretica Pteridaceae A P Common
Bryophytes( liverworts)
1 Brotherella falcata Sematophyllaceae A P Common
2 Brotherella nicnats Sematophyllaceae P P Common
3 Blasia pusila Blasiaceae P P Common
4 Geocalyx graveolens Geocalycaceae P P Common
5 Entodon ovicarpus Pterobryaceae P P Common
6 Folioceros paliformis Entodontaceae P P Common
7 Microdus assamicus Dicranaceae P P Common
8 Symphodon scabrisetus Pterobryaceae P P Common
Algae
1 Chlorococcum spp. Chlorophyceae A P Common
2 Closterium malivarianum Desmidiaceae P P Common
3 Euglena spiroides Euglenaceae P P Common
4 Microspora amoena Microsporaceae A P Common
5 Navicula spp. Bacillariophyceae A P Common
6 Nostoc commune Cynophyceae P P Common
7 Oscillatoria simplicissiana Cynophyceae P P Common
8 Phormidium autumnale Cynophyceae P P Common
9 Stigonema minutum Cynophyceae A P Common
Lichen
1 Dirinaria spp. Graphidaceae A P Common
2 Echinoplaca spp. Megalosporaceae A P Common
3 Heterodermia spp. Graphidaceae P P Common
4 Leptogium spp. Graphidaceae A P Common
A=Absent, P=Present.
The study area of the proposed Khuitam HE project is partially degraded and most of the area
is scrubby with grass cover and river bed portion is sandy with boulder. The vegetation in the
submergence zone study area consists of 5 tree species and most of them are fuel- fodder plants
and have less economic value (Table 4.4) and all these species are widely distributed in the
Dirang valley. Total number of species and their distribution in the influence zone area are
represented as Table 4.8 & 4.9 and Figure 4.2, 4.3. The photographs of Floral survey are
shown in Annexure : 4.6.

KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
Table 4.8: Distribution of plant groups by family, genera and species in Influence area of
Khuitam HE Project
Families Species
S. No. Groups Percentage Percentage
Number (%) Number (%)
1 Angiosperms 47 65 90 71
2 Gymnosperms 2 3 5 4
3 Pteridophytes 9 13 11 9
4 Bryophytes 6 8 8 6
5 Algae 6 8 9 7
6 Lichen 2 3 4 3
Total 72 100 127 100
Families Species
100
90
90
80
70
60
Percentage
50 47
40
30
20
9 11 9
6 8 6
10 5 4
2 2
0
Angiosperms Gymnosperms Pteridophytes Bryophytes Algae Lichen
Groups
Figure 4.2: Groups showing maximum representation of plant taxa in influence zone of proposed
Khuitam HE project.

KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
Table 4.9: Total numbers of Families and Species of plant taxa in proposed Khuitam HE Project
influence zone
Lower
S.No. Flora Tree Shrub Herb group Total
flora
Total no. of
1 28 30 37 32 127
Species
2 Total no. of Family 20 24 23 23 90
Total no. of Species Total no. of Family
40
37
35
32
30
30 28
24
25 23 23
Numbers
20
20
15
10
0
Tree Shrub Herb Lower group flora
Flora
Figure 4.3: Families showing maximum representation of plant taxa in influence zone of proposed
Khuitam HE project.
4.4.3 Phytosociology of the Influence zone
Phytosociological analysis of tree vegetation of Mixed coniferous forest, Sub Alpine Brich/Fir
forest & Pine forest of influence zone (Annexure 4.1) indicated maximum abundance for

KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
Pinus kesiya Royle followed by Castanopsis chrysophylla. Density was recorded maximum for
Pinus kesiya Royle followed by Castanopsis chrysophylla per ha area.. The IVI was maximum
for Pinus kesiya Royle followed by Castanopsis chrysophylla.
Phytosociological analysis of Shrubs of Mixed coniferous forest, Sub Alpine Brich/Fir forest
& Pine forest of influence zone is represented as (Annexure 4.1). Solanam spirale represent
the maximum abundance followed by Cudrania cochinchinensis. The maximum density is
represented by Rubus ellipticus followed by Blumea spp. Solanus spirale represents the higest
IVI value followed Lindera spp. and Cudrania cochinchinensis.
Phytosociological analysis of herbs/seedlings of mixed coniferous forest, Sub Alpine Brich/Fir

forest & Pine forest of influence zone (Annexure 4.1) indicated maximum abundance for
Solanum xanthocarpum and Anaphalis spp. Density was recorded maximum for Linum spp.
followed by Anaphalis spp. and Canabis sativa repectively. Maximum IVI value is
represented by Ageratum conyzoides L. followed by Indigofera adenoids and Solanum
xanthocarpum respectively.
4.4.4 Phytosociology of the Submergence zone
The total 19 species of flora have been identified in submergence zone viz. 5 species of tree, 4
species of shrub and rest of 10 species are herbs. The maximum frequency and density of tree
species at submergence zone are represented by Pinus kesiya Royle, Castanopsis chrysophylla
and maximum IVI of tree species is also represented by Castanopsis chrysophylla. The
maximum frequency, density and IVI value of shrub species in submergence zone is
represented by Citrus spp. Two herb species viz. Amaranthus spinosus and Desmodium
gangaticum represent the 100 % frequency. Amaranthus spinosus represents the highest value
of density and IVI value. The detailed floral analysis result of submergence area is given in
Annexure 4.2.

KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
4.4.5 Phytosociology of the Power House area
The total 22 floral species have been identified in power house area viz. 6 species of tree, 6
species of shrub and 9 species of herbs. Out of them Castanopsis chrysophylla has maximum
frequency value. Castanopsis chrysophylla also represent the maximum density and IVI value.
The maximum frequency, density and IVI of shrub species are found Coriaria nepalensis. The
maximum frequency, density and IVI value of herb species are represented by Ageratum
conyzoides L., Euphorbia hirta L. and Indigofera adenoids respectively The detailed floral
analysis result of submergence area is given in Annexure 4.3.
4.4.6 Phytosociology of the colony area
Total 23 floral species have been identified in proposed colony area viz. 7 species of tree, 4
species of shrub and rest of 12 species is herb. Out of them Castanopsis chrysophylla tree
species has represented the 100 % frequecy at coloney area. Maximum density and IVI value
of tree spesies are represented by Pinus kesiya Royle. Out of 4 species of shrub, Citrus spp.
represents the maximum frequency, density and IVI value in proposed colony area. The herb
species viz. Imperata cylindrica (L.) P. Beauv is recorded highest frequeny and IVI value. The
Maximum density of herbs species is represented by Canabis sativa. The detailed floral
analysis result of submergence area is given in Annexure 4.4
4.4.7 Phytosociology of the down stream area
The total 39 floral species have been recorded in down stream area viz. 13 species of tree, 11
species of shrub and 15 species of herb. Out of them Pinus kesiya Royle represents the
maximum frequency, density and IVI value of tree species in down stream area. Citrus spp
represents the 100 % frequency and also represents the highest density and IVI value of shrub
species in down stream area. As above mentioned 15 herb species have been recorded in down
stream area, out of them Cyanotis axillaris (L.) Schult.f., Bambusa tulda, Blumea spp and
Indigofera adenocarpa represent the 100 % frequency and Anaphalis spp represents the highest

KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
density and IVI value. The detailed floral analysis result of submergence area is given in
Annexure 4.5.
4.4.8 Phytosociological Indices Used for Quantitative Analysis
The vegetation data was quantitatively analyzed for abundance, density and frequency. The
importance value index (IVI) for the tree species was determined as the sum of the relative
frequency, relative density and relative dominance.The Diversity Index (H’), Evenness Index
(E), Index of Dominance (λ) and Richness Index (R’) were calculated for diversity and
evenness characteristics of communities (Table 4.10) whereas based on A/F ratio, the
distribution pattern is given in Table 4.11
Table 4.10: Values of indices used for Phyto-sociological analysis in influence zone and study area
(Submergencezone, Power house area, Colony area, upstream and downstream of proposed
Khuitam HE project
Study Location Vegetation Species Index of Index of Evenness
Type Richness Dominance Diversity Index
Index
Influence Zone Trees 4.4332 0.0044 3.6400 0.9092
Shrubs 5.6542 0.0302 3.3124 0.9734
Herbs/Seedlings 6.1882 0.0219 4.0848 0.9210
Submergence Zone Trees 1.3352 0.2300 1.5430 0.9587
Shrubs 1.4771 0.2178 1.5641 0.9718
Herbs/Seedlings 3.3262 0.0733 2.7660 0.9394
Power House Trees 1.4654 0.2433 1.6081 0.8264
Shrubs 1.7390 0.1429 2.0087 0.9660
Herbs/Seedlings 2.9413 0.1034 2.5099 0.9053
Colony Site Trees 3.3026 0.0768 2.6846 0.9288
Shrubs 0.9320 0.3088 1.2551 0.9054
Herbs/Seedlings 4.0141 0.0683 2.9048 0.9264
Downstream Trees 1.4025 0.0808 2.7741 0.8847
Shrubs 2.9708 0.1655 1.8604 0.9561
Herbs/Seedlings 3.2447 0.0477 3.2069 0.9429

KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
Table 4.11 Distribution pattern based on A/F ratio of the in influence zone and study area
(Submergencezone, Power house area, Colony area, upstream and downstream of proposed
Khuitam HE project (Values depicts number of species)
Study Location Vegetation Total number of Distribution pattern
Type species Contagious Random Regular
Trees 28 27 1 0
Shrubs 30 28 2 0
Influence Zone Herbs/Seedlings 37 34 3 0
Trees 5 4 1 0
Submergence Zone Shrubs 3 3 1 0
Herbs/Seedlings 10 8 2 0
Trees 6 5 1 0
Power house area Shrubs 6 5 1 0
Trees 7 6 1 0
Colony area Shrubs 4 3 1 0
Trees 13 11 2 0
Down stream area Shrubs 11 10 1 0
4.5. INFERENCE ON RARE, THREATENED AND ENDANGERED FLORA
Total 127 floral species present in the entire Study area of proposed Khuitam HE project, out
of them none of the species of RET category as per Red data Book (Nayar & Shastry 1987)
were recorded from the Influence Zone and Project Study area. Only one species (Phaius
mismensis Reichb. F) of orchidaceae family has reported in influence zone which is common
species as per Red Data book (Nayar & Shastry 1987). The nearest wildlife sanctuary is at
situated approx. 19 kms (arial distance) and 60 Km (By Road) from project area viz. Sessa
Orchid Sanctuary. Sessa is located in-between Bomdila and Bhalukpong in Arunachal Pradesh,
India.
4.6. FAUNAL ELEMENTS
Conservation of biological diversity is of paramount importance to the survival of man.

Conservation of biological diversity leads to conservation of essential ecological diversity to
preserve the continuity of food chains. The concept of wildlife conservation is very ancient to
India. Since time immemorial, wildlife here has enjoyed a privileged position of protection

KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
through religious philosophy. However, in recent times factors like exploding human
population, developmental activities, agricultural expansion and urbanization have led to the
immense pressures on the wildlife world wide, which have resulted into increasing rate of
extinction of species. The mélange of India's climate and topography is reflected in its rich
flora & fauna. Any change in natural topography and water regime of a river will affect its
ecological and biological diversity. In order to preserve biodiversity a detailed assessment of
wildlife is warranted for developmental project, which would be helpful in formulating the
suitable management strategy for biodiversity conservation. The present studies are carried out
in the study area of the Khuitam HE project, located in hilly terrains of Gang River in
Arunachal Pradesh.
The proposed project area is neither potential site for wildlife sanctuary nor offers migration
route to any major animal species. No National Park or Sanctuary exists in the vicinity of the
project area. The nearest protected areas are Eagle Nest Wildlife Sanctuary and Sessa Orchid
Sanctuary which are located at 24 km and 19 km (aerial distance) from proposed project,
respectively.
4.6.1 Faunal Composition and Distribution
The terrestrial fauna covers a wide variety of the taxa from vertebrates and invertebrates. In the
present context mammals, aves, amphibians, reptiles have been assessed from vertebrates and
insects from invertebrates. Information about the fauna has been collected based on Faunal
surveys , through field visits and direct and indirect sightings, Transact methods and
Interaction with the local residents, frequent interview and meeting were held with the local
people in order to collect the information regarding occurrence of wild animals and bird. The
primary survey has been conducted during three seasons in year 2009 (Monsoon, Summer &
Winter season) based on or as per the detailed methodology presented in Section 2.2.12 of
Chapter 2 and the sampling locations shown in Figure 4.4. Secondary information was
collected from Department of Forests, Zoological Survey of India and other scientific
publications. Figure 4.4 present a summarized overview of the faunal wealth of the Study Area
and Influence Zone.The Photographs of Faunal Survey are shown in Annexure 4.7

KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
Number of Species
Fishes, 12 Mammals, 11
Insects, 24
Birds, 43
Amphibian, 7
Reptiles, 8
Figure 4.4: Graphical representation of faunal species recorded in the Study area
4.6.2 Mammals
Mammalian fauna of the influence zone (10 km radius from all project components) comprises
of 11species of mammals belonging to 6 families.The family Sciuridae is largest, represented
by 3 species followed by Cercopithacidae. Each of the families like Felidae, Suidae, Ursidae,
Ochotonidae and Bovidae are represented by a single species. Detailed accounts of the species
are furnished in the Table 4.12
Table: 4.12: Mammalian composition in the influence zone and Project Componant Area (PCA)
of the proposed Khuitam HE project.
S. No. Common Name Zoological PCA IZ Conservation
Name Status
IUCN WPA
Family: Cervidae
1. Barking deer Muntiacus A P LC Sch-II
muntjak
Family:Cercopithacidae
2. Assamese macaque Macaca A A VU Sch- II
assamensis

KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
S. No. Common Name Zoological PCA IZ Conservation

Name Status
IUCN WPA
3. Common langur Presbytis A P LC II
entellus
Family: Felidae
4. Leopard cat Prionailurus A P LC I
bengalensis
Family : Sciuridae
5. Hairy footed flying squirrel Belomys A P DD -
pearsonii
6. Himalayan striped squirrel Tamiops P LC -
macclellandii
7. Himalayan palm civet Paradoxus A P LC -
hermaphroditus
Family: Ursidae
8. Himalayan black bear Ursus thibetanus A P VU -
Family :Ochotonidae
9. Moupin's pika Ochotona P P LC -
himalayana
Family: Bovidae
10. Serow Capricornis A P LC -
swinhoei
Family: Suidae
11. Wild pig Sus scrofa P P VU III
Source: Secondary data and primary surveys
PA= Project area where Project components area located, IZ = Study area 10km influence
radius from Project components, EN = endangered, VU = vulnerable, Lc: Least concern, DD-
Data deficient, P = presence, A = absence,
IUCN - International Union of Conservation of Nature and Natural Reserves, WPA - Wildlife
(Protection) Act
4.6.3 Diversity Indices of Mammals
Diversity indices value calculated for project area and influence zone is shown in Table: 4.13.
Influence zone shows higher species richness (1.676) and species diversity (2.060) when
compared to project area which showed 0.729 and 0.399 species richness and species diversity,
respectively.

KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
Table 4.13: Diversity Indices of Mammals in the Study area of proposed Khuitam HE Project
S.No. Area No.of Species Species Conc. of
Spp. Richness Diversity dominance
1 Influence Zone 11 1.676 2.060 0.147
2 Project Area 3 0.729 1.047 0.399
4.6.4 Avifauna
West Kameng district of Arunachal Pradesh is rich in avifauna. A total of 47 species of birds
belonging to 6 different families were recorded in the project area during the surveys. A
detailed list of bird species recorded in the study area is given in Table 4.14. The most
frequently sighted species in the study area were Ashy Wren Warbler (Prinia socialis),
Common Crow (Corvus splendens), Common Myna (Acridotheres tristis), Greyhooded
Warbler (Seicerus xanthoschistos), Spotted Dove (Streptopelia chinensis) and Hoopoe (Upupa
epops).
Most of the birds generally migrate to the nearby forested areas at different altitudinal ranges
depending upon the food availability and breeding habitat. Water birds are not very common in
the area probably due to the swift running water.
Table 4.14: Composition and status of avifauna in the Study area and Influence zone of proposed
Khuitam HE project.
S. No Common Name Zoological Migratory status P Inf. Conservation Status

Name M R A IUCN WPA
Family: Hirundinidae
1. Asian House Delichon + + A P
Martin dasypus LC V
Family: Campephagidae
2. Barwinged - + A P
Flycatcher Shrike Hemipus picatus LC IV
Family: Sittidae
3. Beautiful + + A P
Nuthatch Sitta formosa VU -
Family: Private
4. Black Drongo Dicrurus + + A P LC IV
macrocercus
Family: Phasianidae
5. Black Partridge Melanoperdix + + A P VU IV
niger

KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL

Name M R A IUCN WPA
6. Grey partridige Perdix perdix + + A P LC IV
Family: Timaliidae
7. Blackfaced Garrulax affinis + + A P LC IV
Laughing Thrush
8. Rufousnecked Garrulax + + A P LC IV
Laughing Thrush ruficollis
Family:Phylloscopidae
9. Chestnut - Seicercus + + A P LC IV
crowned Warbler castaniceps
10. Broadbilled Tickellia - + A P LC IV
Warbler hodgsoni
11. Ashy Wren Prinia socialis + + A P LC IV
Warbler
12. Grey hooded Phylloscopus + + A P LC -
Warbler xanthoschistos
Family: Aegithalidae
13. Black throated Aegithalos + + A P LC IV
Tit concinnus
Family: Sittidae
14. Chestnut bellied Sitta castanea + + A P LC --
Nuthatch
Family: Corvidae
15. Common Crow Corvus - + A P LC V
splendens
Family: Aegithinidae
16. Common lora Aegithina tiphia + + A P LC
Family: Sturniidae
17. Common Myna Acridotheres + + A P LC IV
tristis
Family: Prionopidae
18. Common Tephrodornis + + A P LC -
Woodshrike pondicerianus
Family: Accipitridae
19. Crested Serpent Spilornis cheela A P LC -
Eagle
Family: Picidae
20. Crimsonbreasted Dendrocopos + + A P LC IV
Woodpecker cathpharius
21. Stripebreasted Dendrocopos + + A P LC IV
Woodpecker atratus
22. Darjeeling Dendrocopos + + A P LC IV
Woodpecker darjellensis
Family: Muscicapidae
23. Ultramarine Ficedula - + A P LC IV
Flycatcher superciliaris

KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL

Name M R A IUCN WPA
24. Verditer Eumyias - + A P IV
Flycatcher thalassina
25. Slatyblue Ficedula + + A P LC IV
Flycatcher hodgsonii
26. Redthroated Ficedula parva + + A P LC IV
Flycatcher
Family: Columbidae
27. Speckled Wood Columba - + A P LC IV
Pigeon hodgsonii
28. Mountain Ducula badia + + A P LC IV
Imperial Pigeon
29. Spotted Dove Streptopelia + + P P LC IV
chinensis
30. Oriental Turtle Streptopelia + + P P LC IV
Dove orientalis
Family: Nectariniidae
31. Firetailed Aethopyga + + P P LC IV
Sunbird ignicauda
Family: Fringillidae
32. Greyheaded Pyrrhula + + P P LC IV
Bullfinch erythaca
Family: Accipitridae
33. Himalayan Gyps + + P P LC IV
Griffon himalayensis
Family: Upupidae
34. Hoopoe Upupa epops + + P P LC IV
Family: Fringillidae
35. Darkbreasted Carpodacus + + P P LC -
Rosefinch nipalensis
36. Darkrumped Carpodacus + + P P LC -
Rosefinch edwardsii
Family: Passeridae
37. House Sparrow Passer - + P P LC IV
domesticus
Family: Muscicapidae
38. Little Forktail Enicurus + + P P LC
scouleri
39. Pale blue Cyornis + P P LC IV
Flycatcher rubeculoides
40. Red throated Ficedula parva + + P P LC IV
Flycatcher
41. Rufous breasted Tarsiger + + P P LC -
Bush Robin hyperythrus
Family: Pycnonotidae
42. Red whiskered Pycnonotus - + P P LC IV
Bulbul jocosus

KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL

Name M R A IUCN WPA
43. Redyented Pycnonotus + + P P LC IV
Bulbul cafer
Project area= Project Area, IZ = Study area 10 km influence radius from Project components, EN =
endangered, VU = vulnerable, Lc: Least concern, P = presence, A = absence, M= Migratory bird, R=
Residential bird, + = Present, - = Absent, IUCN - International Union of Conservation of Nature and
Natural Reserves, WPA - Wildlife (Protection) Act.
4.6.5 Diversity Indices of Avian Fauna
Diversity indices value calculated for study area is shown in Table 4.15 and influence zone
shows higher species richness (3.938) and species diversity (3.247) when compared to project
area.
Table 4.15: Diversity Indices of avian fauna in the Project area and Influence zone of proposed
Khuitam HE Project
S. Area No. of Species Species Conc. of dominance
No. Spp. Richness Diversity
1 Influence zone 28 3.938 3.247 0.0418
2 Project Area 15 2.214 2.611 0.0804
No migratory route is reported in project area. There is no animal species distribution is found
here. Hence none of impact predicted due to construction of project.
4.6.6 Reptiles
The reptilian species covering snakes, lizards, skinks etc. are expected to be rich in the project
site and in the whole district. Moreover the community does not normally hunt them for protein
purpose. Power and Birand (2001) recorded a number of reptilian species in Arunachal
Pradesh. Reptilian fauna is comprised of 8 species belonging to 5 families has been reported
from the secondary sources indicate their presence in the study area. However, during the

KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
primary survey none of the RET species were encountered in the project area. The composition
of various reptilian species is listed in table 4.16.
Table 4.16: Composition and status of reptiles in the influence zone of Khuitam Hydro Electric
Project
Common Zoological Name Habitat Conservation Status
Name Characteristics
ZSI IUCN WPA
Family: Colubridae
Rat Snake Ptyas mucosus Closed to human Common - Schedule II
habitation, Dry
scrubland area.
Family: Elapidae
Krait Bungarus Agriculture field in Common LR/nt -
caeruleus around human
habitation rodent
holes.
Cobra Naja naja Plains, jungles open Common LR/nt Schedule II
field, hollow of tree,
rock piles.
Family: Boidae
Python Python molurus Scrub jungle, moist Endangered LR/nt Schedule I
& dense forest
marshes, and caves.
Abandoned
buildings.
Family: Lacertidae
Common Agama Commonly found Common - -
lizard tuberculata human habitations.
Family: Gekkoniade
Himalayan Cyrtodactylus Commonly found in Common - -
gecko himalayanus scrub
Common Hemidactylus Commonly found Common LR/ic -
house gecko brooki human habitations.
Family: Agamidae
Green forest Calotes jerdoni Commonly found in Common - --
calotes scrub
4.6.7 Amphibia
Total 7 species of two amphibian’s families has been reported during primary study. Rana spp.
and Bufo melanostictus are very common in influence zone and catchment area. Out of 7

KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
reported species, none of species of amphibians group is falls in any conservation category.
The detail composition and conservation of amphibian’s species are represented as table 4.17.
Table 4.17: Composition and status of amphibians in the Study area of proposed Khuitam HE
project.
S. No. Common Name Zoological Name Conservation Status
IUCN
Family: Bufonidae
1. Common Bufo Bufo melanostictus LC
Family: Microhylidae
2. Hyla Microhyla ornata LC
3. Rachophoridae
4. Himalayan tree frog Polypedates himalayana LC
5. Yembung Sucker Frog Rana gerbillus LC
6. Dicroglossidae
7. Indian bull frog Hoplobatrachus tigerinus LC
4.6. 8 Insects
The biodiversity rich West Kameng covering the study area is expected to have a large number
of insect species apart from Archanids and Crustaceans. The class Insecta represents 36 orders.
All the orders cannot be assessed. Out of these orders, Lepidoptera (butterflies & moths) is
important because of its color diversity, pollinating characteristics and acting as environmental
health indicators. Hence this specific group of Insects has been assessed in the present study.
Other insects sighted in the study area are grasshopper, mantis, Bugs, flies, a number of beetles
(Coleoptera), and few species of ants (Isoptera). Majority of the butterflies can be found during
flowering season, i.e. after winter, as they are mainly dependent on flowering species. Most of
the population is found nearby water sources. Indian cabbage white, common grasses yellow
were found enormously in the riverside. The common species recorded in the study area during
field visit are given in Table 4.18.

KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
Table 4.18: Butterflies recorded from the Project area and Influence zone of Khuitam HE
project
S. No. Common name Zoological name
1. Indian Tortoiseshell Aglais cachmiriensis
2. Autumn-leaf Doleschalia bisaltide
3. Common blue bottle Graphium sarpedon sarpedon
4. Common grass yellow Eurema hecabe
5. Common Jester Symbrenthia lilaea
6. Common mormon Papilio polytes
7. Dark blue tiger Tirumala septentrionis
8. Grassy tiger Parantica aglea melanoides
9. Grey Commodore Bhagadatta austenia
10. Himalayan Jester Symbrenthia hypselis
11. Himalayan Sergeant Parathyma opalina
12. Indian cabbage white Pieris canidia
13. Longbanded silverline Spindasis lohita himalayanus
14. Orange Staff Sergeant Parathyma cama
15. Pea blue Lampides bacticus
16. Psyche Leptosia nina nina
17. Purple sapphire Heliophorus epicles indicus
18. Small Staff Sergeant Athyma zeroca
19. Small Yellow Sailer Neptis miah
20. Lesser gull Copora nadina
21. Chocolate tiger Parantica melaneus
22. Common gem Poritia hewitsoni
23. Copper flesh Rapala pheretima
24. Common maplet Chersouesia risa
4.6.9 Aquatic Fauna
Planktons are floating micro-organisms and they are the crucial source of food to larger, more
familiar aquatic organisms such as fish. The occurrence of planktonic population in any river
depends on local conditions including the season and incidence of heavy precipitation in the
catchment area. The planktonic and benthos population in the river Gang is inherently poor as

KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
4.6.9.1 Phytoplankton
Planktons that are composed of the members of the plant groups are the Phytoplanktons. The
overall phytoplanktonic species were dominated by Basillariophycea followed by,
Chlorophycea and Myxophyceae.
4.6.9.2 Zooplankton
Planktons that are composed of the members of the animal groups are the zooplankton. Their
presence is an important indicator of the health of the aquatic ecosystem. Total 17 species of
zooplanktons were reported from the river.
Table 4.19: List of Phytoplankton and Zooplanktons of the Project area and Influence zone of
Khuitam HE Project
S.No Species Zoological name Family
Phytoplanktons
1 Fragilaria - Bacillariophyceae
2 Synedra - Bacillariophyceae
3 Achnanthes - Bacillariophyceae
4 Diatoma - Bacillariophyceae
5 Pinnularia - Bacillariophyceae
6 Navicula - Naviculaceae
7 Ulothrix Ulothrix zonata Ulotrichaceae
8 Natrium - Chlorophyceae
9 Cosmarium Cosmarium angulosum Chlorophyceae
10 Microspora - Chlorophyceae
11 Cladophora - Chlorophyceae
12 Penium Penium cylindrus Peniaceae
13 Zygnema Zygnema caeruleum Zygnemataceae
14 Closterium Closterium calosporum Closteriaceae
15 Oedogonium - Chlorophyceae
16 Desmidium Desmidium swartzii Desmidiaceae
17 Staurastrum Staurastrum affine Desmidiaceae
18 Cylindrocystis Cylindrocystis brebissonii Mesotaeniaceae
19 Oscillatoria Oscillatoria acuminate Oscillatoriaceae
20 Anabaena Anabaena aequalis Myxophyceae
21 Revularia Revularia Linckia Myxophyceae
22 Merismopedia Merismopedia affixa Myxophyceae
Zooplanktons
1 Lecane Lecane quadridentata Lecanidae
2 Monostyla Monostyla monostyla Lecanidae
3 Lepadella Lepadella akrobeles Myers Colurellidae

KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
S.No Species Zoological name Family

4 Cyclops - -
5 Philodina Philodina acuticornis Curculionoidea
6 Paramecium Paramecium Aurelia Parameciidae
7 Kakkicotia - -
8 Asplanchna Asplanchna priodonta Asplanchnidae
9 Canthocamptus Canthocamptus campaneri Canthocamptidae
10 Naupluis Nauplius sericeus Liliaceae
12 Ceriodaphnia Ceriodaphnia dubia Daphniidae
13 Gomphus Gomphus truncates Gomphaceae
14 Bosmina Bosmina affinis Bosminidae
15 Zoea larva Homarus gammarus Nephropidae
16 Daphnia Daphnia ambigua Daphniidae
17 Vorticella Vorticella campanula Vorticellidae
4.6.9.3 Benthos
Benthic organisms live on or just beneath the bottom of a water body. They crawl over, burrow
into, or are attached to the sediments or anything else on the bottom. Benthic organisms are
important links in the food chains, providing an important food source for fishes, birds, and
mammal. It is the benthic fauna play an important role in propagation of fish life. Benthos
comprised of four species (Table 4.20).
Table 4.20: Benthos composition in Gang river.

S.No. Species Zoological name Family
1 Chironomus Chironomidae
2 Gyraulus Gyraulus crista Planorbidae
3 Tubifex Tubifex blanchardi Tubificinae
4 Viviparus Viviparus achatinoides Viviparidae
4.6.9.4 Fishes
Among vertebrates, fish is the main fauna, whose occurrence varies with the velocity of
stream, nature of sub-stratum, water temperature, dissolved oxygen and availability of requisite
food. The water temperature also plays an important role in the distribution and local
occurrence of benthic fish species. The water current velocity, water discharge and water level
are important factors for the survival of spawn and fertilization of fish (Joshi, 1991).

KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
4.6.9.5 Composition and Distribution of fishes
Sehgal (1983) has classified the Himalayan Rivers into three zones with respect to fish
distribution.
Trout Streams: The streams in the upper most zones above 1400 m dominated by exotic trout
are known as trout Streams. These streams are characterized by low temperature, low turbidity,
low alkalinity and hardness. The substratum comprises of boulders and rocks while water
carries coarse silt. The species of fish reported from the river which falls in this category are
Schizothorax richardsoni, Pseudocheinis sulcatus.
Snow Trout Streams: The streams of middle zone from 850 to 1400 m, inhabited mainly by
snow trout. These streams record relatively higher temperatures, turbidity, alkalinity and
hardness. The water carries fine soil particles while riverbed is provided with boulders and
stones. The fish species in this zone comprise of Schizothorax spp.
Mahseer streams: The streams of lower zone below 850 m are comprised of a large
meandering zone and have much higher temperature and lowest water current velocity. The
substratum is comprised of pitted rocks and stones. This zone is inhabited by carp species. The
species of fish reported from the river which falls in this category are Tor tor, Tor putitora,
Labeo rohita, Botia dario, Garra gotyla gotyla. The composition of fish species of Gang River
are listed in the Table 4.21.
Table: 4.21: Fish composition and their status in the Gang river of Arunachal Pradesh recorded
during surveys at Khuitam HE project area
Conservation Status
S. No Common name Zoological name IUCN status WPA Status
1 Indian Longfin Eel Anguilla bengalensis EN -
2 Hamilton's barila Barilius bendelisis Not Evaluated V
3 Bola/ Indian Tourt Barilius bola Not Evaluated -
4 Queen Loach Botia dario Not Evaluated -
5 Cat fish Euchiloglanis kamengensis EN -
6 Seemira Garra gotyla gotyla Not Evaluated V
7 Rohu Labeo rohita Not Evaluated -
8 Sucker throat catfish Pseudecheneis sulcatus VU -

KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
Conservation Status
S. No Common name Zoological name IUCN status WPA Status
9 Torrent Stone Carp Psilorhynchus homaloptera VU -
10 Snow trout Schizothorax richardsonii VU -
11 Mahseer/ Hilghoria Tor putitora EN -
12 Mahseer/ Pithia Tor tor EN V
Source: Primary and secondary surveys
4.6.9.6 Conservation Status
Gang River is the tributary of Bichom River, the fish faunal diversity of river Bichom
comprises of 12 species belonging to the families Cyprinidae, Psilorhynchidae, Sisiridae,
Garrinae (sub family), Cobitidae, Balitoridae, Channidae, and Rosborinae. 4 endangered and 3
vulnerable fish species has been reported during the primary survey from Gang River.
4.6.9.7 Fish Migration
Fishes migrate on a regular basis, on time scales ranging from daily to annual, and over
distances ranging from a few meters to thousands of kilometers. Fish usually migrate from one
habitat to another for feeding or for spawning. The migratory species reported in the river are
Mahaseer (Tor tor, Tor putitora) which undertake long distance upstream migration in Gang
River during monsoon season for breeding purposes whereas other migratory species like
Garra gotyla gotyla and Psilorhnchus balitora are local migratory for feeding purpose.
High river discharge, fast water currents and want of suitable spawning ground in the lower
reaches of the river are the reasons which force the fish to swim upstream in search of suitable
eco-system to spawn. Mahaseer attain maturity in the size range from 30-40 cm. The fish lay
eggs in sandy/ gravelly pits in the river bed or beneath rocks boulders in shallow waters
receiving moderate current at a depth of 40-60 cm and in water sufficiently clean and
transparent. Size of Tor putitora fry and fingerlings found during the investigation ranged from
18 to 120 mm. Tor putitora species starts spawning from the onset of south-west monsoon in
mid July which continues till the middle of October in flooded river. The peak breeding occurs
in August-September in ambient water temperature from 180 C to 220 C.

KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
The other important migratory species Tor tor have a prolonged breeding period commencing
from July-August continuing sometimes till November in water temperature 17 0C – 22 0C and
flow depth of 20-30 cm. Fish species of the river belonging to other commercial and
miscellaneous groups have usual spawning periods well spread which make them available
throughout the year in shallow marginal areas of the river in clear water and steady velocity.
Their rate of growth is slow, average sizes vary from 35 to 125 mm.
4.6.9.8 Breeding Ground
From the available secondary literature and based on primary survey no breeding grounds were
identified in the project area.
4.6.9.9 Fishing and society
The local tribes of the district are involved in fishing for domestic purpose and often
community fishing is also carried out as a part of observing various religious ceremonies of the
area. It may be worth mentioning that in absence of permanent fishermen with fishes as
primary livelihood (either by caste or creed); no large scale fishing has been noticed. The
fishing appliances used is cast net, rod and line, beside the use of local bamboo traps are very
common amongst other local people in the West Kameng district. An average production rate
of fish species in Gang River and its tributaries are given in the Table 4.22.
Table 4.22: Average production rate of fish species (kg/day)

Rate of production (kg/day)
S. Zoological name Gang river Thembang Bridge
No. Tributaries Tributaries
1 Barilius bendelisis 0.50 0.75 -
2 Barilius bola 0.75 0.50 0.5
3 Botia dario 0.80 1.0 0.5
4 Euchiloglanis kamengensis 0.75 1.0 0.7
5 Garra gotyla gotyla 1.1 1.0 0.7
6 Labeo rohita 1 0.5 -
7 Pseudecheneis sulcatus 1.4 1.2 -
8 Schizothorax richardsonii 1.3 1.0 -
9 Tor tor 1.2 1.0 -
Source: Primary Survey

KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL

Annexure- 4.1
Phytosociology results of the tree species in Influence zone
Frequency (%) Density (Per ha) IVI

S. No. Scientific Name Summer Monsoon Winter Summer Monsoon Winter Summer Monsoon Winter
1 Abies densa 16.36 16.36 16.36 18.18 18.18 18.18 3.44 3.45 3.50
2 Ailanthus ezcelsa 20.00 20 20.00 14.55 14.67 14.68 5.14 4.99 5.27
3 Albizia procera 20.00 20 20.00 16.23 45.45 45.45 3.24 5.99 6.33
4 Alnus nepalensis D.Don 20.00 20 16.36 23.64 29.09 27.27 4.44 4.49 4.49
5 Alipinia Spp. 20.00 15.21 20.00 36.21 14.22 58.18 5.32 5.33 5.39
6 Ardisia griffithii C.B. Clarke. 10.91 10.91 10.98 16.36 16.36 16.36 3.22 3.24 3.28
7 Bauhinia variegata 18.18 18.18 18.21 81.82 81.84 81.86 6.20 6.23 6.26
8 Bauhinia purpurea 32.20 32.24 32.25 25.45 25.46 25.48 4.23 4.24 4.27
9 Castanopsis chrysophylla 18.18 18.19 18.28 81.83 124.10 125.13 9.25 9.27 9.28
10 Dysoxylum grande Hiern. 7.27 7.27 7.27 20.00 20.10 20.15 2.30 2.32 2.34
11 Elaeocarpus spp. 70.91 70.91 70.91 21.82 21.84 21.86 4.60 4.61 4.63
12 Fycus sp 12.73 12.73 12.73 23.64 32.73 23.84 3.41 3.42 3.43
13 Irvingia spp. 9.09 9.09 9.09 12.73 12.75 12.77 4.18 4.19 4.22
14 Litsea glutinosa 14.55 14.65 14.65 12.32 12.35 12.39 4.02 4.03 4.05
15 Litsea elongata (Nees) Hk.f. 10.91 10.92 10.93 13.12 13.15 13.19 1.98 1.98 1.99
16 Macaranga denticulata Muell. 7.27 7.28 7.29 40.00 40.04 40.07 2.20 2.23 2.25
17 Maesa indica (Roxb.) A. DC. 9.09 9.09 9.09 12.73 12.75 12.76 2.23 2.23 2.23
18 Magnolia griffithi 18.18 18.19 18.19 14.55 14.55 14.55 2.60 2.60 2.60
19 Myrine semiserrata 12.73 12.76 12.79 36.36 36.36 36.36 4.56 4.56 4.56
20 Neolitsea cuipala (D. Don ) Kostermans 12.73 12.76 12.79 12.73 12.76 12.78 2.96 2.98 3.00
21 Oenothera rosea L 16.36 16.38 16.39 23.21 23.25 23.28 4.20 4.26 4.28
22 Pinus kesiya Royle 62.12 62.18 62.22 130.25 131.30 130.32 10.34 10.36 10.39
23 Pinus wallichiana 45.12 45.15 45.22 98.23 98.26 98.29 8.65 8.67 8.69
24 Rhododendron arboreum 10.91 10.94 10.95 19.53 19.57 19.59 2.48 2.49 2.53
25 Scimmia anquetilia 29.09 29.19 29.19 47.27 47.29 47.30 5.21 5.26 5.28
26 Syzygium megacarpum (Craib) Rathakr. & Nair 7.27 7.28 7.29 12.73 12.76 12.79 2.30 2.33 2.37
27 Tsuga dumosa 20.00 20.10 20.17 29.09 29.13 29.16 4.96 4.98 4.99
28 Ulmus spp. 7.28 7.29 7.37 10.01 10.04 10.09 2.10 2.15 2.18
i
Phytosociology results of the shrub species in Influence zone

1 Ardisia thyrsiflora D.Don 16.36 18.36 19.36 58.18 63.18 70.18 7.40 7.60 7.90
2 Barberis wallichiana 14.55 15.55 15.75 43.64 48.64 53.64 7.21 7.41 7.61
3 Blumea spp. 10.91 11.91 13.91 152.73 159.73 162.73 7.04 7.34 7.54
4 Camellia acuminata 14.55 15.55 17.55 58.18 68.18 78.18 6.76 6.86 7.00
5 Citrus spp. 16.36 16.46 18.64 168.91 180.91 197.91 12.64 12.74 12.94
6 Coriaria nepalensis 14.55 17.75 21.55 130.91 143.91 152.91 6.76 6.86 6.96
7 Cudrania cochinchinensis 20.00 22.00 25.00 123.64 127.64 133.64 13.14 13.21 13.31
8 Cudrania javanansis 5.45 7.45 8.45 72.73 77.73 82.73 8.28 8.38 8.48
9 Daphne papyracea 9.09 10.09 13.09 94.55 97.55 101.55 5.98 6.00 6.37
10 Diplospora singularis Korth. 18.18 20.18 22.18 65.45 75.45 79.45 10.56 10.66 10.86
11 Elaeagnus spp. 18.18 21.18 23.18 50.91 60.91 69.91 8.05 8.15 8.25
12 Euonymus javanicus Bl. 14.55 16.55 18.55 65.45 72.45 78.45 11.34 11.54 11.84
13 Eurya acuminata DC. 12.73 15.73 16.73 58.18 60.18 62.18 6.11 6.21 6.31
14 Juniperius chinensis 14.55 17.55 20.55 36.36 50.36 76.36 10.88 10.98 11.00
15 Lindera spp. 5.45 7.45 9.45 43.64 53.64 73.64 11.44 12.44 13.44
16 Melastoma malabathricum 12.73 14.73 15.73 87.27 99.27 100.27 6.11 6.21 6.41
17 Memecylon floribundum Bl. 16.36 18.36 21.36 58.18 69.18 72.18 7.40 7.50 7.57
18 Murraya koenigii 14.55 16.55 17.55 43.64 56.64 73.64 6.76 6.86 6.96
19 Opuntia monacantha 5.45 7.45 9.45 50.91 66.91 79.91 10.65 10.75 10.85
20 Pandanus spp. 10.91 13.91 15.91 43.64 62.64 82.64 5.47 5.67 5.87
21 Rhodendron anthpagon 16.36 18.36 19.36 63.25 83.25 99.25 7.40 7.60 7.78
22 Ricinus communis 14.55 17.55 19.55 65.45 85.45 95.45 6.76 6.96 7.00
23 Rubus ellipticus 10.91 13.91 15.91 196.36 210.36 226.36 5.47 5.57 5.77
24 Rubus nepalensis (Hk.f.) Kuntze. 5.45 7.45 8.45 43.64 63.64 83.64 10.65 10.85 10.95
25 Rubus paniculatus Smith 12.73 14.73 17.73 36.36 46.36 76.36 6.60 6.98 7.10
26 Rubus tricolor 7.27 9.27 10.12 65.45 85.45 99.45 5.49 5.59 5.69
27 Solanam spirale 23.64 25.64 27.64 43.64 63.64 93.64 15.33 15.53 15.79
28 Spiraea spp. 10.91 12.91 15.91 58.18 78.18 98.28 5.47 5.66 5.87
29 Urena lobata 9.09 12.09 14.09 72.73 92.73 112.73 4.82 4.92 4.99
30 Viburnum cylindricum Buch.- Ham ex D.Don 7.27 9.27 11.27 43.64 63.64 82.64 7.47 7.57 7.77
ii
Phytosociology results of the herb species in Influence zone

1 Ageratum conyzoides L. 50.91 54.94 60.32 4182 4282 4388 12.86 12.96 13.06
2 Anaphalis spp. 40.00 45.21 47.21 15273 15473 15579 6.91 6.99 7.09
3 Amaranthus spinosus 34.55 37.21 40.28 7455 7655 7761 7.76 7.86 7.96
4 Artemisia annua 34.55 37.21 39.12 11818 11918 12024 9.07 9.17 9.27
5 Bambusa pallida 25.45 27.67 30.21 3818 399 505 5.13 5.23 5.33
6 Bambusa tulda 9.09 12.12 16.21 4364 4264 4370 4.16 4.26 4.36
7 Blumea spp. 20.00 23.21 27.21 6364 6471 6577 3.97 4.17 4.27
8 Canabis sativa 10.91 12.21 15.00 14364 14464 14570 5.16 5.26 5.36
9 Crassocephalum crepidiides 25.45 27.21 29.37 909 989 1095 8.37 8.47 8.57
10 Crotalaria spp. 23.64 25.23 28.12 7455 7525 7631 3.41 3.51 3.61
11 Cyanotis axillaris (L.) Schult.f. 29.09 33.1 36.21 3091 3191 3297 5.02 5.12 5.22
12 Desmodium confertum DC. 10.91 13.21 15.45 3455 3555 3661 3.80 3.90 4.00
13 Desmodium gangaticum 21.82 23.21 26.21 4364 4464 4570 3.67 3.77 3.88
14 Elscholtzia nlanda 9.09 13.23 16.21 4182 4182 4288 2.22 2.22 2.32
15 Euphorbia hirta L. 16.36 18.21 21.34 2000 2200 2306 2.84 2.84 2.94
16 Fragaria ananassa 27.27 29.1 31.21 2545 2645 2751 3.84 3.84 3.98
17 Hedychium spp. 25.45 27.12 29.01 4182 4232 4338 3.99 3.99 4.09
18 Imperata cylindrica (L.) P. Beauv. 25.45 27.32 29.23 4545 4625 4731 4.72 4.72 4.82
19 Indigofera linifolia 20.00 23.24 26.21 6182 6282 6388 6.48 6.48 6.76
20 Inula cappa 7.27 10.21 12.21 2182 2212 2318 1.68 1.68 1.78
21 Lespedeza gerardiana Grah. 7.27 9.21 11.21 2909 3049 3155 1.52 1.52 1.62
22 Linum spp. 3.64 5.21 7.12 16000 16102 16208 3.54 3.54 3.67
23 Indigofera adenocarpa 23.64 25.12 27.21 3091 3291 3397 3.16 3.16 3.26
24 Indigofera adenoides 54.55 58.21 60.21 2182 2242 2348 11.07 11.07 11.17
25 Musa Spp. 18.18 21.12 23.21 2000 2120 2226 3.00 3.00 3.10
26 Oenothera rosea 3.64 5.21 6.21 1455 1455 1561 3.54 3.54 3.64
27 Peristrophe spp. 12.73 14.21 16.12 3273 3323 3429 2.22 2.22 2.43
28 Phaius mismensis Reichb. f. 3.64 5.12 7.32 3091 3191 3297 2.45 2.45 2.55
29 Phyllanthus fraternus Webster 14.55 16.12 18.12 4364 4414 4520 3.01 3.01 3.11
30 Piper longum 7.27 9.21 12.12 8909 9009 9115 3.29 3.29 3.39
31 Pleioblastus variegates 16.36 18.21 21.12 3455 3555 3661 6.10 6.10 6.20
32 Poa spp. 9.09 11.21 13.27 2364 2464 2570 3.33 3.33 3.43
iii
33 Pogostemon spp. 12.73 14.23 16.87 1636 1736 1842 2.45 2.45 2.65
34 Poligonum caespitosum 10.91 13.21 15.23 1818 1918 2024 1.95 1.95 2.14
35 Pouzolzia hirta Ham. 10.91 12.12 14.21 1455 1555 1661 2.08 2.08 2.13
36 Smilax aspera 3.64 3.77 4.12 16727 16827 16933 2.45 2.45 2.55
37 Solanum xanthocarpum 40.00 42.12 45.21 4364 4464 4570 9.28 9.28 9.45
iv
Annexure- 4.2
Phytosociology results of the floral species in Submergence zone

Tree
Syzygium megacarpum (Craib) Rathakr. &
5 Nair 30.00 30.12 30.17 52.00 52.11 52.16 45.12 45.16 45.19
Shrub
1 Ardisia thyrsiflora D.Don 60.00 65.00 70.00 180 200 220 79.65 79.85 79.95
2 Camellia acuminata 40.00 42.00 45.00 160 180 196 61.36 61.46 61.56
3 Citrus spp. 80.00 82.00 85.00 210 220 234 97.73 97.83 97.99
4 Coriaria nepalensis 40.00 43.00 45.00 120 130 134 40.23 40.33 40.53
Herb
1 Ageratum conyzoides L. 100.00 100.00 100.00 20000 20120 20232 20.98 21.00 21.98
2 Anaphalis spp. 40.00 42.00 44.00 54000 54100 54300 11.33 11.80 12.00
3 Amaranthus spinosus 100.00 100.00 100.00 58000 58100 58300 27.00 27.10 27.20
4 Blumea spp. 40.00 43.00 46.00 20000 20100 20150 13.27 13.37 13.47
5 Crassocephalum crepidiides 20.00 23.00 26.00 6000 6200 6300 6.19 6.29 6.39
6 Desmodium gangaticum 100.00 100.00 100.00 4000 4100 4300 25.00 25.26 25.50
7 Euphorbia hirta L. 60.00 64.00 66.00 14000 14140 14254 14.99 15.09 15.49
8 Hedychium spp. 60.00 61.00 62.00 12000 12080 12120 10.98 11.37 11.58
9 Oenothera rosea 20.00 24.00 26.00 16000 16110 16200 7.66 7.76 7.87
Peristrophe spp.
10 80.00 82.00 84.00 22000 22111 22180 15.06 15.16 15.36
v
Phytosociology results of the floral species in Power House area Annexure- 4.3

Tree
5 Syzygium megacarpum 20.00 20.10 20.19 73.00 78.00 80.00 54.52 54.57 54.59
6 Ulmus sp 10.00 10.10 10.19 10.00 15.00 18.00 15.03 15.06 15.10
Shrub
1
Ardisia thyrsiflora D.Don 30.00 34.00 36.00 200.00 220.00 240.00 51.23 51.33 51.43
2
Blumea spp. 20.00 24.00 22.00 120.00 144.00 157.00 26.93 27.00 27.03
3
Coriaria nepalensis 60.00 62.00 65.00 110.00 122.00 132.00 66.03 66.13 66.23
4
Cudrania cochinchinensis 30.00 33.00 35.00 120.00 142.00 160.00 26.35 26.45 26.55
5
Lindera spp. 30.00 33.00 36.00 230.00 250.00 272.00 66.32 66.42 66.54
6
Spiraea spp. 60.00 63.00 64.00 80.00 100.00 120.00 44.12 44.22 44.32
Herb
1
Ageratum conyzoides L. 60.00 100.00 40.00 9000.00 9300.00 9400.00 23.45 23.55 23.75
2
Anaphalis spp. 50.00 42.00 44.00 2000.00 2100.00 2180.00 24.40 24.56 24.67
3
Amaranthus spinosus 40.00 100.00 100.00 8000.00 8200.00 8250.00 23.99 24.00 24.37
4
Crassocephalum crepidiides 30.00 34.00 37.00 10000.00 10200.00 10310.00 9.44 9.54 9.74
5
Desmodium gangaticum 40.00 42.00 44.00 4000.00 4100.00 4200.00 18.51 18.61 18.77
6
Elscholtzia nlanda 40.00 41.00 43.00 17000.00 17200.00 17270.00 15.22 15.32 15.42
7
Euphorbia hirta L. 40.00 43.00 44.00 30000.00 30100.00 30180.00 14.12 14.22 14.32
8
Indigofera adenoides 40.00 42.00 43.00 15000.00 15200.00 15350.00 26.18 26.28 26.48
9
Phaius mismensis Reichb. f. 10.00 12.00 13.00 8000.00 8200.00 8280.00 14.72 14.82 14.92
vi
Phytosociology results of the floral species in colony area Annexure- 4.4

Tree
1 Ailanthus ezcelsa 66.67 66.70 66.75 133.33 137.33 140.33 16.01 16.01 16.01
Dysoxylum grande Hiern.
5 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67 17.67 19.67 4.85 4.95 4.99
Maesa indica (Roxb.) A. DC.
6 95.12 95.21 95.24 68.12 69.21 70.10 15.40 15.47 15.50
Shrub
1
Blumea sp 66.67 68.67 71.01 120.00 140.00 162.00 103.42 103.62 103.72
2
Citrus sp. 83.33 85.33 88.33 156.00 175.00 191.00 120.46 120.66 120.86
3
Pandanus sp 50.00 53.00 55.00 112.30 132.30 142.30 76.15 76.25 76.32
4
Rubus tricolor 46.29 48.29 50.29 98.63 100.63 120.11 56.21 56.41 56.71
Herb
Anaphalis spp.
1 60.00 62.00 64.00 9000.00 9200.00 9290.00 23.45 23.55 23.65
Amaranthus spinosus
2 50.00 52.00 54.00 2000.00 2100.00 2210.00 24.40 24.50 24.70
Bambusa tulda
3 30.00 32.00 34.00 10000.00 10100.00 10200.00 9.44 9.54 9.64
Blumea spp.
4 40.00 42.00 44.00 4000.00 4100.00 4210.00 18.51 18.61 18.71
Canabis sativa
5 40.00 41.00 42.00 17000.00 17200.00 17280.00 15.22 15.32 15.42
Crotalaria spp.
6 40.00 42.00 43.00 15000.00 15100.00 15190.00 26.18 26.28 26.32
Hedychium spp.
7 10.00 12.00 14.00 8000.00 8200.00 8400.00 14.72 14.82 14.92
Imperata cylindrica (L.) P. Beauv.
8 90.00 92.00 94.00 3000.00 3100.00 31900.00 47.46 47.56 47.62

Indigofera linifolia
9 10.00 12.00 14.00 10000.00 10100.00 10200.00 12.15 12.25 12.37
Linum spp.
10 10.00 13.00 15.00 7000.00 7100.00 7200.00 22.41 22.54 22.62
Peristrophe spp.
11 20.00 22.00 24.00 5000.00 5100.00 5200.00 16.46 16.61 16.82
Phaius mismensis Reichb. f.
12 25.00 27.00 28.00 8000.00 8120.00 8220.00 16.23 16.34 16.50
vii
Annexure-4.5
Phytosociology results of the floral species in down stream area

S.No. Scientific Name Summer Monsoon Winter Summer Monsoon Winter Summer Monsoon Winter
Tree
5 Dysoxylum grande Hiern. 18.18 18.20 18.28 25.65 27.65 29.65 4.12 4.21 4.29
6 Elaeocarpus spp. 9.21 9.29 9.38 18.36 20.36 25.36 3.60 3.70 3.90
7 Fycus sp 40.00 40.12 40.19 37.50 39.50 42.50 7.20 7.30 7.50
8 Maesa indica (Roxb.) A. DC. 20.00 20.10 20.25 27.56 29.56 33.56 4.92 4.98 5.00
9 Magnolia griffithi 32.00 32.12 32.19 28.12 29.17 33.12 6.27 6.31 6.34
10 Myrine semiserrata 40.00 40.18 40.21 34.25 35.25 36.25 6.27 6.32 6.35
11 Pinus wallichiana 82.00 82.12 82.19 96.12 99.12 100.12 20.36 20.40 20.56
13 Rhododendron arboreum 30.00 30.18 30.18 24.12 27.12 30.12 4.56 4.62 4.69
Shrub
2 Blumea spp. 60.00 62.00 61.00 120.00 142.00 161.00 32.25 32.35 32.55
4 Citrus spp. 100.00 100.00 100.00 256.00 267.00 276.00 46.23 46.43 46.63
5 Diplospora singularis Korth. 60.00 62.00 63.00 140.00 155.00 167.00 36.52 36.72 36.12
6 Rubus ellipticus 60.00 62.00 64.00 138.00 149.00 158.00 38.12 38.22 38.32
7 Rubus nepalensis (Hk.f.) Kuntze. 20.00 23.00 24.00 86.00 100.00 120.00 26.35 26.55 26.75
8 Solanam spirale 31.00 34.00 36.00 95.00 110.00 131.00 28.32 28.52 28.72
9 Spiraea spp. 54.00 56.00 58.00 114.00 132.00 144.00 31.02 31.12 31.22
10 Urena lobata 53.21 55.21 57.21 102.00 122.00 143.00 30.02 30.22 30.52
viii
S.No. Scientific Name Summer Monsoon Winter Summer Monsoon Winter Summer Monsoon Winter
Viburnum cylindricum Buch.- Ham
11 ex D.Don 20.00 23.00 27.00 75.00 95.00 105.00 18.14 18.34 18.54
2 Blumea spp. 60.00 62.00 61.00 120.00 142.00 161.00 32.25 32.35 32.55
Herb
1 Anaphalis spp. 60.00 62.00 64.00 36000.00 36100.00 36200.00 20.45 20.55 20.67
2 Amaranthus spinosus 40.00 41.00 42.00 8000.00 8200.00 8290.00 7.06 7.16 7.22
3 Bambusa pallida 20.00 22.00 23.00 6000.00 6100.00 6300.00 6.74 6.84 6.94
4 Bambusa tulda 100.00 100.00 100.00 26000.00 26100.00 26300.00 15.82 15.92 16.00
5 Blumea spp. 100.00 100.00 100.00 18000.00 18100.00 18200.00 12.80 12.90 12.99
6 Crassocephalum crepidiides 20.00 22.00 24.00 2000.00 2100.00 2280.00 3.05 3.25 3.45
7 Crotalaria spp. 100.00 100.00 100.00 18000.00 18200.00 18300.00 12.80 12.90 13.00
8 Cyanotis axillaris (L.) Schult.f. 100.00 100.00 100.00 20000.00 20100.00 20200.00 13.56 13.66 13.77
9 Desmodium confertum DC. 80.00 82.00 85.00 14000.00 14100.00 14220.00 10.57 10.77 10.97
10 Elscholtzia nlanda 20.00 22.00 24.00 8000.00 8100.00 8230.00 8.58 8.78 8.88
11 Indigofera adenocarpa 100.00 100.00 100.00 10000.00 10200.00 10280.00 9.79 9.89 10.00
12 Musa Spp. 20.00 22.00 24.00 8000.00 8100.00 8180.00 8.58 8.68 8.78
13 Oenothera rosea 20.00 22.00 24.00 8000.00 8120.00 8190.00 8.58 8.68 8.88
14 Peristrophe spp. 20.00 21.00 23.00 10000.00 10120.00 10190.00 10.42 10.62 10.82
15 Phaius mismensis Reichb. f. 20.00 21.00 23.00 10000.00 10100.00 10190.00 10.42 10.52 10.62
ix
ANNEXURE- 4.6 A: PHOTOGRAPHS OF FLORAL DIVERSITY
Ailanthus ezcelsa Citrus spp
Albizia procera Elaeocarpus spp
Bauhinia purpurea Macaranga denticulata

ANNEXURE- 4.6 B: FLORAL DIVERSITY
Alnus spp. Coriaria nepalansis
Eurya acuminata Rubus ellipticus
Berberis wallichiana Barberis spp

ANNEXURE- 4.6 C: FLORAL DIVERSITY
Rubus hoffmeisterianus Opuntia monocantha
Artemisia annua Bambusa pallida
Fragaria vesca Melastoma polyanthum

ANNEXURE- 4.7: PHOTOGRAPHS OF FAUNAL DIVERSITY
BOS GAURUS (Gaur) BLACK DRONGO
HILL PIGEON GRASSHOPPER
STREAKED LAUGHING THRUST BUTTERFLY

Chapter 5
SOCIO-ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
CHAPTER 5
SOCIO ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT
5.1 SOCIAL AND CULTURAL BACKGROUND
Socio-cultural and economic profile is an important part of the EIA of any developmental
Project. Such studies are conducted to develop the sustainability strategy for the area, where
the developmental project would be executed. It becomes more challenging when remote or
tribal areas are involved for this purpose. The present report addresses the socio-economic
profile of the tribal communities of West Kameng district in Arunachal Pradesh for the
Khuitam HE project. For this region, the developmental strategies must be planned in the
conformity sustainability of environment and community welfare. The socio-cultural and
economic aspects are, in general, divided into economy, demography, education, public and
community services, fiscal, employment, religious and ethnic values and aspirations of people
of the region. The affected persons are or must be treated as stakeholders of the developmental
activities, which include individuals, family, community or organization. The baseline
information on these aspects would be helpful in formulating the suitable rehabilitation plan for
the affected families of Khuitam HE project in West Kameng district of Arunachal Pradesh.
5.1.1 Arunachal Pradesh
Arunachal Pradesh is the largest state, in term of area, in the Northeast region of India. The
state is the habitat of about twenty-five major tribal groups divided into a numbers of sub-
tribes. The state of Arunachal Pradesh till 1971 was known as the North East Frontier Agency
(NEFA). On the 21st January, 1972 the NEFA was given the status of Union Territory and was
christened as Arunachal Pradesh. Subsequently, on the 20th February, 1987 the Union Territory
was declared as a state. Being a distinctly tribal state, festivals are an essential part of the
socio-culture life of the people in Arunachal Pradesh. Most of these festivals are connected
with agriculture. The festivities mirror the culture, the artistry and skills of the people in the
music and dance. Beside dance and music, the tribes in Arunachal Pradesh have a rich tradition
Socio-Economic Environment__________________________________________________
5-1
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
of artistic craftsmanship and sense of aesthetics reflected in variety of crafts such as weaving,
painting, smithy work, basket making and woodcarving.
5.1.2 West Kameng District (General Profile)
The West Kameng district is located in the western part of Arunachal Pradesh covering an area
of 7422 sq km and accounts for 8.86% of the total area of the state. Its main land extends
between 91031’ to 92054’E longitudes and 26054’ to 27053’N latitudes. The altitude of the
district varies from 650 feet to 13714 feet. The district is surrounded by Tibet region of China
in the north, Bhutan in the west, Tawang in the north-west, East Kameng in the east, and
Sonitpur district of Assam in the South. The name of the district is derived from Kameng river,
a tributary of the Brahmaputra that flows through the district. The topography of the district is
mostly mountainous. In West Kameng there are three principal mountain chains - part of Sela
range, Bomdila range and Chaku range. The Sela range consist of a series of mountains
arranged in the form of big line from Tibet in the North, Bhutan in the west and thus forming a
tough terrain to pass through it. The altitude of Sela range varies from 14000 to 15000 feet and
Sela pass is 13714 feet high. The Bomdila range having an average height of 9000 feet, South
of Bomdila range lies the Chaku range (foot-hills range) having hills of quite low altitudes.
Tenga, Bichom and Dirang Chu are the main rivers flowing through the district. All these
rivers are tributaries of the Kameng River which flows through Bhalukpong circle of the
district and joins the river Brahmaputra in plains of Assam.
The climate is conducive to agriculture and horticulture. Wet rice cultivation is practiced in
some pockets of Dirang, Thrizino, Kalaktang and Nafra. The major food crops being cultivated
are wheat (Triticum aestivum), paddy (Oryza sativa), maize (Zea mays), millets (Sorghum
vulgare) etc. while major cash crops include potato (Solanum tuberosum), Cabbage
(Cauliflower) and turmeric (Curcuma domestica). Jhumming is followed by Akas, Mijis and
Khawas. The production of the food and cash crops is quite low and cultivation by tractors is
not possible due to undulating topography. Thus the horticulture development has taken its
pace in the region. The main fruits grown are plum (Prunus cerasifera), apriocot (Prunus
5-2
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
armeniaca), pear (Pyrus communis), walnut (Juglance regia), lemon (Citrus limon), papaya
(Carica papaya), orange (Citrus reticulate), banana (Musa paradisica) peach (Prunus persica),
jackfruit (Artocarpus heterophyllus), jamun (Syzygium cummini), and guava (psydium
guajava).
In order to educate farmers on modern agricultural practices a farmers training centre was
started at Salari in 1981. Both temperate (apple, pears, plum, and peaches) and sub tropical
(Pineapple, orange and grapes) fruits are grown in the district. A state horticultural farm was
started at Shergaonn in 1976- 77 with a view to multiply good quality planting material and
imparts training on improved horticultural practices. Cultivation of apple is taken as
commercial activity in this region. Further, regional apple nursery was started at Dirang in
1977-78 to multiply temperate fruit plants. As the district is famous for orchids, Research and
training Centre has been functioning at Tipi. All these efforts helped in commercialization of
agriculture. The fields are scattered and cultivation is carried on terraces by levelling whatever
fields are available. This not only makes agriculture expensive, but also requires considerable
amount of labour for repairing terraces every year. Agriculture is manual and demands labour
of all the hands available in the household. As a result, during agriculture season the entire
household- men and women are engaged in agricultural operations.
5.1.3 Demographic profile of West Kameng
As per 2001 Census, West Kameng district has 213 villages and its district head quarter,
Bomdila being the only town. The total population of the West Kameng district is 74,599. The
broad demographic outline of the district is presented in the table 5.1.
Table 5.1: Demographic Profile of West Kameng District, Arunachal Pradesh (As per
Census 2001)
Total Population (2001) 74,599
Rural Population (2001) 67,906
Urban Population (2001 6,693
Scheduled Tribes Population 36,951
Scheduled Caste Population 372
(Source: Census 2001)
5-3
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
West Kameng district is composed of 10 circles. The population in these circles is provided in
the table 5.2 below.
Table 5.2: Circle wise Population, West Kameng District, Arunachal Pradesh
S. Circle Male Female Total Male Female Schedule Tribe
No. Population ST ST Population
1. Bomdila 4199 3627 7826 1866 1805 3671

2. Dirang 10230 8204 18434 6596 6401 12997
3. Nafra 3012 2806 5818 2376 2272 4648
4. Rupa 4628 3184 7812 1359 1293 2652
5. Kalaktang 4611 4006 8617 2684 2685 5369
6. Thrizino 1611 1591 3202 1240 1337 2577
7. Singchung 9681 4927 14608 1081 997 2078
8. Jamiri 829 710 1539 494 483 977
9. Bhalukpong 3072 2447 5519 711 666 1377
10. Balemu 669 555 1224 305 300 605
Total 42385 31933 74599 18652 18175 36827
5.1.4 Occupational profile of West Kameng District
Table 5.3 provides the estimates of the category of workers such as agricultural labours,
cultivators, household industries and other workers in West Kameng district. 35.42% of the
working populations are cultivators, 3.99% are agriculture labourers, 1.03% depends on
household industries, and 50.56% are engaged in other vocations.
Table 5.3: Category of Workers and Marginal Workers in West Kameng District.
S. No. Category Of Workers And Marginal Workers As On 31/03/2006
In Nos. Percentage
A Cultivators 11470 (35.42)
I Male 6235 (18.15)
II Female 5235 (17.27)
B Agricultural Labors 1370 (3.99)
I Male 722 (2.10)
II Female 348 (1.39)
C Household Industry 355 (1.03)
I Male 147 (0.43)
5-4
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
II Female 208 (0.60)

D Other Workers 20450 (50.56)
I Male 17766 (51.72)
II Female 2603 (7.84)
*Source: Economic Census 2005, District Socio Economic Review, 2006, District Statistical Centre,
Bomdila.
5.1.5 Educational profile of West Kameng District
The literacy rate increased from 38.48% in 1991 census to 50.5% in 2001 census. The gender breakup
of the literacy rates in 1991 and 2001 census is provided in the Table 5.4 below.
Table 5.4: Literacy rate in West Kameng District

Gender Literacy in 1991 Literacy in 2001
Male 55.03% 59.7%
Female 35.22% 38.4%
Persons 38.48% 50.5%
It is reported that there area 33 middle school and 6 secondary schools in West Kameng
District; thus the facility for middle and secondary school education is very restricted.
5.1.6 Ethnographic profile
There are five major Tribes in West Kameng District, viz., Monpas, Mijis, Sherdukpens, Akas
(Hruss) and Khawa (Gugun). A brief description of their cultural profile is provided here.
Monpas: The Monpas belong to the Tibeto-Mongoloid ethnic stock. A Monpa family is
patriarchal. Monpas have their own hierarchy of clans and castes. Monpas are 'Mahayan
Buddhist' by religion with close cultural religious affinities with Bhutanese and Tibetans.
Monpas are agriculturists. They practice both shifting and permanent type of cultivation. They
keep horse, yak, cow, pigs, sheep and fowls. They also do hunting by net, angle and trap. They
are known for their traditional skills in wood carving, carpet making, weaving and painting.
5-5
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
Sherdukpen: The Sherdukpen belong to 'Tibeto-Mongoloid Stock'. Their main concentration

is found to be spread over four main villages of Rupa, Jigaon, Shegaon and Thongri. Some of
them are also settled in Kemengbari area in the district. Sherdukpens are sub-divided into two
groups, viz., Thong and Chao. They are believed to be descendants of the king Japtang Bura,
however, each of these groups is further divided into several clans. The Sherdukpen family is
patriarchal. Like Monpas, the Sherdukpens are also Buddhists and are deeply religious.
Sherdukpens are agriculturists and practice both shifting and permanent cultivation. They keep
livestock like ponies, cows, goats, sheeps, bullocks and fowls. They hunt and practice fishing
by means of nets, angles and traps. Sherdukpen women possess traditional skills of weaving.
An interesting feature of Sherdukpen life is their 'annual migration'. They migrate during the
winter months to Doimara and in the adjoining foothills area for the purpose of trade and
maintain their age old relationship with plains.
Aka (Hrusso): The Akas mostly inhabit south-eastern part of the district. Their main
concentration is found in the 'Thrizino area'. Akas also bear tattoo marks in the face. The Aka
society has two groups, viz., Kutsun and Kavatsun. Aka family is patriarchal. The most
important community festival of the Akas is known as Nachido, performed by village priest
once in a year. The Akas are agriculturists and they practice 'shifting cultivation'. They keep
Mithun, Cow, Horse, Goat, Pig and Poultry. They also practice hunting by use of spears. The
women folk make colourful bags and basketry is a popular handicraft among men folk. The
most common form of art is wood painting.
Khawa (Bugun): The Khawas belong to the mongoloid stock, and they also call themselves
Bugun. Both men and women keep long hairs. They are also sub-divied into many clans.
Khawa family is patriarchal. They are found in some of the villages in Thrizino circle in west
Kameng district. The most important ceremony amongst the Khawas is Kshyatsowat. The
village priest (phabi) performs the ritual and officiate ceremonies. The Khawas are
agriculturists, they also practice shifting cultivation. They keep domestic animals like cow,
horse, pig, sheep, goat, foul and very rarely mithun too. They hunt and chase by means of
spear, traps and arrows.
5-6
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
Sajolang/Mijis: The Miji, also known by the names of Sajolang and Damai. Sajolang belong
to the 'mongoloid' ethnic stock. They mostly live in the Valley of Bichom River and they are a
small community. According to their traditional beliefs, they had originally been migrated from
the plains and claim to have close connection with the 'Ahom' kings who ruled over Assam.
They are divided into two classes, namely, Nyubbu and Nyullu.
5.2 PROJECT INFLUENCE ZONE
The Socio-economic scenario of the influence zone villages of Project has been assessed based
on the public consultation, information from government offices and from published reports as
well as from Census 2001 Reports.
The influence zone area comprise of 25 villages namely Chandar, Semnak, Cherrong,
Gonthung Namshu, Munna Camp, Darbu Dangsing Village, Lachong Village, Salari, Pangma,
Khellong Khoitam, Rahung, Saidle, Rurang, erigaon Longti, Ditchik, Bomdila, Pedung (New
Bomdila) Sera Village, Wanghoo Thembang Khoina and Ditching. The affected villages are
connected by the Tejpur–Tawang National Highway. The maximum distance to access the
National Highway is about 5 km. however the area has poor road network in the lower reaches.
The entire area falls in the Dirang Block of West Kameng district; the basic infrastructure
facilities are presented in Table 5.5.
Table 5.5: Infrastructure Facilities at Dirang Block.

Particulars Nos.
No. of veterinary disp./aid centre/cattle upgrading centre 26
No. of villages electrified 55
No. of villages having drinking water supply facilities 68
Post & telegraph office 6
Schools
Pre-primary 29
Primary 28
Middle 6
High 2
H.S. School -
5-7
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
College -
Central School -
Private/ Govt. Aided School 1
Technical Institution/Training Centre 2
Medical units
General Hospital -
Primary Health Centre/Sub-centre 5
Homeopathic dispensary -
T.B. Hospital/Leprosy clinic -
No. of registered Small Scale Industries 8
No. of social and cultural organizations 2
The location map of the influence zone and settlements within it is presented in Figure 5.1.
5.2.1 Demographic profile
Demographic profile of the influence zone villages is presented in the following paragraphs.
Population between 0-6 year’s age in study area villages
Maximum population in the age group of 0-6 years has been found in Bomdila village followed
by Salari village and the least in Chandar village. Village-wise total and male and female
population is given in Table 5.6.
Table 5.6: Population in the age group 0-6 Years in the Influence zone villages
S. No. Village Name Total Male Female
1. Chandar 5 3 2
2. Semnak 14 10 4
3. Namshu 78 41 37
4. Cherrong 9 6 3
5. Munna Camp 78 41 37
6. Darbu 62 33 29
7. Dangsing Village 30 9 21
8. Lachong Village 12 6 6
9. Gonthung 6 3 3
10. Salari 126 55 71
11. Pangma 6 1 5
12. Khoitam 21 13 8
13. Rahung 110 51 59
5-8
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
S. No. Village Name Total Male Female

14. Saidle 45 23 22
15. Rurang 60 37 23
16. Jerigaon 126 67 59
17. Longtin 71 28 43
18. Ditchik 138 67 71
19. Bomdila 902 462 440
20. Pedung (New Bomdila) 100 56 44
21. Sera Village 89 42 47
22. Wanghoo 107 44 63
23. Thembang 49 22 27
24. Khoina 77 39 38
25. Ditching 9 3 6
Total 2330 1162 1168
Households in the influence zone villages
Among 25 study area villages, Bomdila has maximum number of households followed by
Salari village. The least number of households are in Gonthung village. The average family
size is 6. The sex ratio is 754 females per thousand males. The detail description of villages
and total house hold are displayed as table 5.7
Table 5.7: Village name and house hold, of Influence zone.
Sl. Village Name No. of Total Literacy ST SC Total

No. (Circle wise) House Population % Worker
hold
1 Chandar 20 87 13.8 87 0 39
2 Semnak 17 74 25.7 74 0 43
3 Namshu 110 460 45.2 439 0 228
4 Cherrong 13 75 21.3 75 0 39
5 Munna Camp 110 460 45.2 439 0 228
6 Darbu 59 302 18.5 71 0 194
7 Dangsing Village 13 82 3.7 82 0 45
8 Lachong Village 10 59 15.3 54 0 22
9 Gonthung 9 47 27.7 47 0 20
10 Salari 173 641 43.8 442 0 281
11 Pangma 10 54 35.2 54 0 25
12 Khoitam 18 78 20.5 61 0 29
13 Rahung 164 698 33.8 433 1 246
14 Saidle 28 154 36.4 149 0 61
15 Rurang 43 233 25.3 225 0 122
16 Jerigaon 127 555 30.1 358 0 255
5-9
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
Sl. Village Name No. of Total Literacy ST SC Total

No. (Circle wise) House Population % Worker
hold
17 Longtin 63 330 28.2 321 0 148
18 Ditchik 110 543 5.9 537 0 277
19 Bomdila 1681 6693 67.8 2884 50 2293
20 Pedung(New 133 566 45.6 400 0 119
Bomdila)
21 Sera Village 136 567 52.6 387 0 244
22 Wanghoo 124 615 51.1 244 0 333
23 Thembang 62 301 45.5 278 0 136
24 Khoina 54 308 18.5 302 0 161
25 Ditching 15 90 21.1 90 0 57
Population of the influence zone villages totally belong to Scheduled tribe. However 50
individuals in Bombdila and one person in Rahung village belong to Scheduled caste. The ST
population accounts for about 49.5 % while the rest is SC and general population. Total
population and Sex Ratio of Influence zone is described as table 5.8.
Table 5.8: Population Profile of the influence zone villages.
Sl. Village Name Total Male Female Population Family Size Sex Ratio
No. Population below 6 yrs.
1 Chandar 87 47 40 5 4.0 851
2 Semnak 74 40 34 14 4.0 850
3 Namshu 460 238 222 78 4.0 933
4 Cherrong 75 40 35 9 6.0 875
5 Munna Camp 460 238 222 78 4.0 933
6 Darbu 302 162 140 62 5.0 864
7 Dangsing Village 82 32 50 30 6.0 1562
8 Lachong Village 59 26 33 12 6.0 1269
9 Gonthung 47 26 21 6 5.0 808
10 Salari 641 337 304 126 4.0 902
11 Pangma 54 22 32 6 5.0 1455
12 Khoitam 78 41 37 21 4.0 902
13 Rahung 698 363 335 110 4.0 923
14 Saidle 154 83 71 45 6.0 855
15 Rurang 233 124 109 60 5.0 879
16 Jerigaon 555 296 259 126 4.0 875
17 Longtin 330 160 170 71 5.0 1062
18 Ditchik 543 276 267 138 5.0 967
19 Bomdila 6693 3609 3084 902 4.0 855
20 Pedung(New 566 285 281 100 4.0 986
5-10
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
Sl. Village Name Total Male Female Population Family Size Sex Ratio
No. Population below 6 yrs.
Bomdila)
21 Sera Village 567 305 262 89 4.0 859
22 Wanghoo 615 305 310 107 5.0 1016
23 Thembang 301 156 145 49 5.0 929
24 Khoina 308 156 152 77 6.0 974
25 Ditching 90 46 44 9 6.0 957
5.2.2 Literacy in the influence zone villages
As indicated in the Table 5.9 for literate and illiterate population, the percentage of literate
population is about 67.8% in Bomdila followed by Sera village (52.6 %) and followed by
Wanghoo (51.1%)
Table 5.9: Literate population in influence zone villages.
Village Name Literate Illiterate

Total Male Female % Total Male Female %
Chandar 12 9 3 13.8 75 38 37 86.2
Semnak 19 9 10 25.7 55 31 24 74.3
Namshu 208 132 76 45.2 252 106 146 54.8
Cherrong 16 8 8 21.3 59 32 27 78.7
Munna Camp 208 132 76 45.2 252 106 146 54.8
Darbu 56 39 17 18.5 246 123 123 81.5
Dangsing Village 3 2 1 3.7 79 30 49 96.3
Lachong Village 9 5 4 15.3 50 21 29 84.7
Gonthung 13 7 6 27.7 34 19 15 72.3
Salari 281 178 103 43.8 360 159 201 56.2
Pangma 19 8 11 35.2 35 14 21 64.8
Khoitam 16 13 3 20.5 62 28 34 79.5
Rahung 236 150 86 33.8 462 213 249 66.2
Saidle 56 36 20 36.4 98 47 51 63.6
Rurang 59 33 26 25.3 174 91 83 74.7
Jerigaon 167 104 63 30.1 388 192 196 69.9
Longtin 93 58 35 28.2 237 102 135 71.8
Ditchik 32 27 5 5.9 511 249 262 94.1
Bomdila 4535 2650 1885 67.8 2158 959 1199 32.2
Pedung(New 258 135 123 45.6 308 150 158 54.4
Bomdila)
Sera Village 298 192 106 52.6 269 113 156 47.4
Wanghoo 314 199 115 51.1 301 106 195 48.9
Thembang 137 92 45 45.5 164 64 100 54.4
5-11
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
Village Name Literate Illiterate

Total Male Female % Total Male Female %
Khoina 57 34 23 18.5 251 122 129 81.5
Ditching 19 10 9 21.1 71 36 35 78.9
5.2.3 Occupational profile of influence zone villages
Main workers, Marginal workers and non-working population for the influence zone villages
have been summarized in Tables 5.10. The percentage of main and marginal workers with
respect to total population is 38.7 % and 7.4%. However the majority of the population
comprise of non workers (53.9 %)
Table 5.10:- Occupation Profile of the influence zone villages.
Village Total Workers Non-

Populatio Total Main Marginal workers
n
Chandar 87 39 39 0 48
Semnak 74 43 30 13 31
Namshu 460 228 212 16 232
Cherrong 75 39 38 1 36
Munna Camp 460 228 212 16 232
Darbu 302 194 177 17 108
Dangsing Village 82 45 31 14 37
Lachong Village 59 22 11 11 37
Gonthung 47 20 6 14 27
Salari 641 281 262 19 360
Pangma 54 25 12 13 29
Khoitam 78 29 29 0 49
Rahung 698 246 188 58 452
Saidle 154 61 58 3 93
Rurang 233 122 99 23 111
Jerigaon 555 255 183 72 300
Longtin 330 148 97 51 182
Ditchik 543 277 266 11 266
Bomdila 6693 2293 2248 45 4400
Pedung(New Bomdila) 566 119 83 36 447
Sera Village 567 244 153 91 323

Wanghoo 615 333 318 15 282
Thembang 301 136 62 74 165
Khoina 308 161 144 17 147
Ditching 90 57 36 21 33
5-12
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
5.3 LAND REQUIREMENT OF THE PROJECT
Total land getting affected either due to various Project components, including submergence is
49.14 ha out of which 6.32 ha is coming under submergence. The break-up of total land
requirement which is presented in Table 5.11
Table 5.11: Land requirement for Khuitam HEP
Sl. No Project Component Surface Area (ha) Underground Total Area

Surface River Area (ha) (ha)
1 Submergence 3.36 2.96 - 6.32

A Surface Structure
At Barrage Site : -
2 Barrage Complex Area 5.53 1.11 - 6.64
3 Borrow Area 2.69 - - 2.69
4 Construction Facilities Area 1.97 - - 1.97
7 Magazine Area 0.16 - - 0.16
8 Proposed Foot Track 0.04 - - 0.04
At Power House: -
9 Borrow Area 4.45 - - 4.45
11 River/ Soal Area - 1.28 - 1.28
12 P.H Complex & Cons. Facilities 9.15 - - 9.15
13 Surge Shaft Area 2.36 - - 2.36
14 Permanent Colony Area 1.54 - - 1.54
15 Rock Quarry 2.61 - - 2.61
B Under Ground Structures
a Adit At Power House (* Area - - 0.16 -
included in Surge Shaft Area at Sl.
No 13)
b Surge Shaft & Pressure Shaft ( * - - 0.19 -
Area included in Surge Shaft Area
at Sl. No. 13 & P.H Complex &
Construction Facilities at Sl. No.12)
c Head Race Tunnel (HRT) ( *Out of - - 2.22 2.21
2.22ha, 0.01 ha area include in
5-13
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
Surface Area (ha)

Surge Shaft at Sl. No.13)
d Adit At Barrage ( * Out of 0.20ha, - - 0.20 0.13
0.07 ha included in Muck Dumping
Area at Sl. No. 5)
e Barrage Intake Tunnel ( * Area - - 0.09 -
included in Barrage Complex at Sl.
No. 2 )
Total 41.44 5.35 2.35 49.14
Considering the legal position and community rights into consideration, a PROPERTY
SURVEY was undertaken by the State Government of Arunachal Pradesh in the project area at
the request of the project proponents. Based on the property survey findings, it was observed
above said such land belongs to the Project Affected Families of 2 villages, i.e. Salari and
Rahung. It would be appropriate to mention that the land requirement is base minimum and
same assessed based on the site specific and topography and project features. The legal status is
shown as per the findings of Property Survey. However the actual location of component wise
land requirement and ownership may slightly change as per the assessment of State Land
Acquisition officer (SLAO) and as per the provision of Forest Conservation Act–1980.
For the purpose of this evaluation, a “Project Affected Family’ means a family/person whose
place of residence or other properties or source of livelihood are substantially affected by the
process of acquisition of land for the project and who has been residing continuously for a
period of not less then three years preceding the date of declaration of the affected zone or
practicing any trade, occupation or vocation continuously for a period of not less than three
years in the affected zone, preceding the date of declaration of the affected zone.
5.3.1 Salari village
Project affected families and community along with their affected land in Salari village is
presented in Table 5.12. In this village, 24 families are Project affected families who are
individual land owners. The land of Raji and Chanadok Community is also getting affected as a
result of land acquisition for the Project. The total of individual land owners works out to 12.33
5-14
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
ha. Among community land affected, land of Raji community is 7.66 ha and that of Chanadok
community land is 5.1 ha.
Table 5.12: List of Project Affected Families of Khuitam HE Project in Salari village.
S. PLOT AREA TYPE OF

OWNER NAME FATHER'S NAME REMARK
No. NO. (HA) LAND
A) AT POWER HOUSE: - (SALARI VILLAGE)
Shri Jambey Dorjee 1 0.17 Individual Borrow Area
Dunglen (Equal
1 Late Shri Kektong Dunglen Proposed
ownership in Plot no. 6 26 0.08
Road
also)
Individual Muck
4 1.97 Dumping
Area
2 Shri Dada Rockpu Late Shri Chungpi Rockpu Proposed
Foot Track
35 0.00
for Magzine
area
Shri Mackri Rockpu
3 (Equal ownership in Plot Late Shri Cheten Rockpu 8 0.21 Individual Power House
no. 6 also)
Late Shri Sangey Tsering
4 Shri Philey Rockpu 8A 0.11 Individual Power House
Rockpu
9 0.13 Individual Power House
5 Shri Ledung Rockpu Shri Wangey Rockpu Magzine
34 0.16 Individual
Area
6 Shri Norgey Rockpu Shri Dega Rockpu 10 0.18 Individual Power House
7 Shri Pema Rockpu Shri Tashi Norbu Rockpu 11 0.05 Individual Power House
12 0.15 Power House
8 Shri Yamme Rockpu Shri Cheten Rockpu Individual Surge Shaft
28 1.05
& Adit Area
Shri Tasi Norbu Rockpu
9 (Equal ownership in Plot Shri Dega Rockpu 13 0.28 Individual Power House
no. 6 also)
Shri Tsering Jurmey
10 Late Shri Jombey Chanadok 14 0.15 Individual Power House
Chanadok
11 Shri Kainti Dunglen Late Shri Chenten Dunglen 15 0.17 Individual Power House
Shri Rinchin Norbu
12 16 0.30 Individual Power House
Chanadok
13 Shri Wangey Rockpu 17 0.20 Individual Power House
Late Shri Dorjee Khandu
14 Shri Kelong Chanadok 18 0.84 Individual Power House
Chanadok
19 1.21 Power House
15 Shri Themok Dunglen Late Shri Tsering Dunglen Individual Proposed
24 0.06
Road
Shri Kajang Rockpu Surge Shaft
16 Late Shri Bongmey Rockpu 22 0.15 Individual
Dunglen & Adit Area
5-15
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL

No. NO. (HA) LAND
Parmanent
1.00
Colony
Muck
31 0.28 Dumping
Area
Surge Shaft
0.37
& Adit Area
17 Shri Nemak Rockpu Late Shri Norgey Rockpu 27 Individual
Parmnent
0.12
Colony Area
Muck
18 Shri Norbu Chanadok Late Shri Wangey Chanadok 32 1.21 Individual Dumping
Area
Muck
Shri Darjee Wangdi
19 Shri Sangey Tsering Rockpu 33 0.62 Individual Dumping
Rockpu
Area
20 Shri Dorjee Chanadok
21 Shri Nichang Chanadok
22 Shri Jurmey Dunglen
23 Shri Khampa Dunglen
24 Shri Kejand Dunglen 6 1.26 Individual Borrow Area
Shri Jambey Dorjee
Dunglen
Shri Makri Rockpu
Shri Tasi Norbu Rockpu Shri Dega Rockpu
Raji
Raji Community Land 2 1.41 Community Borrow Area
Land
Raji
Proposed
3 0.18 Community
Road
Land
Raji
5 1.07 Community Borrow Area
Land
Raji
7 0.54 Community Borrow Area
Land
Raji
Rock Querry
20 2.60 Community
Area
Land
Raji
Proposed
23 0.21 Community
Road
Land
Raji
Proposed
25 0.26 Community
Road
Land
29 1.22 Raji Surge Shaft

Community & Adit Area
5-16
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL

No. NO. (HA) LAND
Land
Raji
Proposed
30 0.17 Community
Road
Land
Chanadok
21 5.17 Community Power House
Land
Chanadok Community Land Proposed
Chanadok
Foot Track
36 0.04 Community
for Magzine
Land
area
Forest Department 1.28 Others River Soal
TOTAL (A) 26.63
5.3.2 Rahung Village
Project Affected Families and Community along with their affected land in Rahung village is
presented in Table 5.13. In this village, 14 families are Project Affected Families who are
individual land owners. The land of Rahung Community is also getting affected as a result of
land requirement for the Project.
Table 5.13: List of Project Affected Families of Khuitam HE Project under Rahung village.
Sl. FATHER'S PLOT AREA TYPE OF
OWNER NAME REMARK
No. NAME NO. (HA) LAND
B) AT BARRAGE SITE: (RAHUNG VILLAGE)
Shri Tsewong
1 Shri Nila Nampo Muck Dumping
Nampo 1.5
Area
Late Shri Langa
2 Shri Tsering Nampo 3 Individual
Nampo
Barrage Complex
Late Shri Kanchung 0.05
3 Shri Wangda Nampo Area
Nampo
4 Shri Genden Sarmu
Shri Sang Tsering
5
Sarmu
6 Shri Bro Sarmu Barrage Complex
4 0.57 Individual
Shri Konjo Tashi Area
7
Sarmu
8 Shri Tashi Sarmu
9 Shri Karchung Sarmu
Late Shri Nido Muck Dumping
10 Shri Khatuk Nampo 5 0.25 Individual
Nampo Area
5-17
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL

OWNER NAME REMARK
Barrage Complex
1.42
Area
Submergence
0.03 Without River
Bed
Barrage Complex
6 0.47
Area
Late Shri Lobsang
11 Shri Gacha Brapho Individual Submergence
Brapho
0.14 Without River
Bed
Barrage Complex
0.26
Area
Shri Rinchin Khandu
12 Shri Lepu Nampo 7 Individual Submergence
Nampo
0.08 Without River
Bed
Barrage Complex
13 Shri Aju Nampo Shri Nidu Nampo 0.70
Area
8 Individual Submergence
Late Shri Richey
14 Shri Tsering Dorjee 0.07 Without River
Dorjee
Bed
Rahung
0.55 Community Borrow Area
Land
Rahung
Barrage Complex
1 2.06 Community
Area
Land
Rahung Community Land
Rahung Submergence
1.50 Community Without River
Land Bed
Rahung
Muck Dumping
2 0.46 Community
Area
Land
Submergence
1.54 Others without River
Bed
Head Race
2.21 Others
Tunnel (HRT)
Forest Department 0.13 Others Adit At Barrage
River Bed at
2.96 Others
Submergence
River Bed at
1.11 Others Barrage Area ext.
300m
Constructions
Land acquired by Dirang Energy Pvt. Ltd. 1.97 Others Facility &
Contractor Camp
2.14 Others Borrow Area
5-18
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL

OWNER NAME REMARK
0.34 Others Proposed Road
TOTAL (B) 22.51
GRAND TOTAL (A + B) 49.14
5.4 PROJECT AFFECTED FAMILIES
A comprehensive socio-economic, land use and demographic field survey was conducted to
quantify and understand the socio-economic status of the Project affected families. For
undertaking the survey, a questionnaire was framed which catered to the demographic features,
immovable assets, livestock holding, existing health and sanitation facilities, etc. The scope of
the field survey remained confined to the 2 Project affected villages Salari and Rahung in West
Kameng district which are likely to be affected by the acquisition of land for construction of
various components of the proposed project. Primary door-to-door socio-economic survey of
all the Project affected families was carried out and the pertinent details are as below Table
5.14 (Figure 5.2)
Table 5.14: Number of affected families (individual land owners/ Community land owners) in
Khuitam HE project as per socio-economic survey
S. No. Village Name No. of Project Affected family
1 Salari 24
2 Rahung 14
5-19
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
Project affected Families at Salari and Rahung
25 24
20 Salari
15 14
Rahung
10
0
Salari Rahung
Fig.5.2: Project Affected Families at Salari and Rahung
5.4.1 Demographic profile
Total number of individual Land owner of Project Affected Families Population is 210 and
they belong to 38 households. Sex ratio among the PAFs at Salari is 1140 and at Rahung 1300
this value is attributed to the higher female population compared to the males (Table 5.15 &
figure 5.3). The population within the age group 0–6 years accounts for 9% of the total
population. The average family size is 6 persons per family. All Project affected persons are
Scheduled tribe, which belong to Buddhist community. The maximum Project affected
peoples (PAPs) (137 peoples) comes from the Salari village followed by Rahung village (73
peoples).the entire population belongs to scheduled tribes.
Table 5.15: Demographic profile of the individual land owner of Project Affected Families of
Khuitam HEP
Village Households Total Male Female 0- 6 ST Sex Ratio
population Years
Salari 24 137 57 65 15 137 1140
Rahung 14 73 30 39 4 73 1300
Total 38 210 87 104 19 210 2440
5-20
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
Demographic profile of PAF'S
160
137 137
140
120
100
Salari
80 73 73
65 Rahung
57
60
39
40 30
22
20 14 15
4
0
Households Total Male Female 0- 6 Years ST
population
Fig. 5.3: Demographic Profile of PAF’S at Salari and Rahung
5.4.2 Educational Profile
Average literacy rate among the Project affected families is 66% which is significantly high in
male population. The high literacy rates in the affected families can be attributed to their
location near Bomdila Township which has well developed education facilities. About 40% of
the total population of affected families has got education up to primary level; it decreases to
10% at graduation level.
5.4.3 Occupation profile
Total workers population in the affected families is mainly farmers, contractors and daily wage
workers. Only about 10% are government employed amongst PAF’s. 10 % of the total
workers are engaged in the small scale business. Citrus and orange is the main horticultural
cash crop of affected families, while millets, maize, rice, etc. are main agricultural crops which
are being cultivated. People practice dry rain fed cultivation.
5-21
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
5.4.4 Livestock Population
It is a well known fact that in hills agriculture and animal husbandry are complimentary
economic activities due to the requirement of manure and draught animals. Most of the
household keeps cow, and few goats. Besides providing a source of supplementing the income,
the livestock serves as a source of nutritive diet. Livestock of affected families comprises of
cows, mithuns, horses, pigs, goats and other animals. Cows, poultry, and goats comprise the
major share of livestock population (Table 5.16) (Figure 5.4). Cows are reared mainly as
source of milk and rarely for beef. Mithun is a semi domesticated animal, owned by tribes. The
data for 2 villages of PAFs showed that of the total livestock cow comprised of 46.6%, goat
1931%, sheep constituted 2.9%, horse 0.9%, mule 0.45% and poultry 27.2% and buffaloes
were absent. Village wise information on livestock holding and its composition is presented in
Table 5.16 and Figure. 5.4.
Table 5.16: Livestock holding of the individual land owner of Project affected families for
Khuitam HEP
S.No Village No. of No. of Live Stock
Name families families C B M G P S H O Total
having
livestock
1 Salari 24 15 127 0 1 74 145 0 3 17 367
2 Rahung 14 13 142 0 0 36 12 17 2 1 210
Total 38 28 269 0 1 110 157 17 5 18 577
C- Cow, B- Buffalo, M- Mithun, G- Goat, P- Poultry, S- Sheep, H- Horse/ Mule, O- Others
5-22
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
50 46.6
45
40
35
Percentage (%)
30 27.2
25
19.1
20
15
10
5 2.9 3.1
0.0 0.2 0.9
0
Cow Buffalo Mithun Goat Poultry Sheep Horse/ Mule Others
Livestocks
Fig. 5.4: Percentage distribution of livestock of PAFs of Khuitam HE project
5.4.5 Immovable assets
A total of 69 houses, 18 Cowshed and 49 others facilities are owned by the PAFs, however,
none of these structures are located on the land that is proposed to be acquired. The village
wise detailed break up of these assets is presented in Table 5.17.
Table 5.17: Immovable Properties of the individual land owner of Project affected families for
Khuitam HEP project
S. Village House, Cowshed, Water Threshing Boundary Others
No. name no. no. Tank, no. yard
1 Salari 52 11 0 0 3 30
2 Rahung 17 7 3 0 3 19
Total 69 18 3 0 6 49
5.4.6 Health and sanitation
The existing sanitation condition in the villages is quite poor. Only 28 % of the total village
households have toilet facility with either septic or traditional toilets (Table 5.17), the rest 72%
5-23
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
of the village households use open place and forests for deification. Potable tap water is
available to the total population of the Project affected villages (Table 5.1). Malaria is
predominant disease among the affected families.
5.4.7 Infrastructure & other facilities
Most of the houses are kuccha house made of bamboo and wood, and raised about two feet
above the ground on the wooden posts. A house may have many rooms with separate kitchen.
Most of the houses have the electricity and tap water facilities. Wood is being used as fuel by
47% of the affected families and 53% use LPG as fuel (Table 5.18). More than 60% families
have access to television, which is the main medium of entertainment (Table 5.18). About 86%
families have telecommunication facilities (Table 5.18). Other infrastructure facilities such as
schools, banks, post offices, etc. are meager. Salari village is well developed and connected
with Pucca road network. The village has a worship place (Gompa), Primary Health centre,
Veterinary hospital, Primary & Middle school, Girls residential school, District Farmers
training center, Fisheries department, Horticulture department and Public Health &
Engineering department, etc, photographs of Socio-Economic Survey are shown in Annexure
5.1.
Table 5.18: Basic facilities

Category Basic Facilities
Village APL BPL TV Telephone Mobile Two wheeler Four Wheeler LPG
Salari 2 21 15 1 16 3 3 16
Rahung 9 5 8 2 12 6 3 5
APL-Above Poverty Line; BPL-Below Poverty Line
5.4.8 Cultural Heritage and Old Monuments
The West Kameng District is known as the center of majestic Buddhist Temple (Gompa) &
Monastery. Bomdila town is famous for its three Buddhist monasteries. A Gompa (Buddhist
temple) is situated at the distance of about 600 meter from proposed Power house site. One
community hall is also attached with Gompa in Salari village photographs shows in Annexure
5-24
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
5.2. A Lord Shiva Mandir (Hindu’s Temple) is situated at the distance of about 800 meter from
the power house site in Farmer Training Center at Salari village.
5.4.9 Public Perception about the Project
Most of the people in the area are aware of the Project coming up in the area (Table 5.18).
About 78 % of Salari village and 100 % from Rahung Village persons favoured the project as it
would be beneficial for the overall development of the area and locals as well as their villages.
Their general expectation from the Project is that it would provide opportunities of
employment and medical, educational and electricity facilities will improve due to the project
development. However, some of them (22 % of Salari village) raised apprehensions about the
Project that drilling and blasting would damage their houses, loss of community resources and
make the area earthquake prone. Suitable compensation package along with employment
opportunities should be given to affected person. Implementation of various mitigation
measures shall be taken up during construction for the safeguard of the environment.
5-25
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
Table 5.19: Public Perception

Village Willingness to Willingness to If no, so Positive Opinion on HEP Negative Opinion on HEP
accept accept Reason
compensation(L compensation(as
oss of Land) per State Policy)
Yes No Yes No A B C D E F G A B C D E F G
Salari 17 - 15 2 - 17 6 17 3 2 17 18 13 1 1 4 5 9 6
Rahung 14 - 14 - - 14 1 2 - - - - - - - - - - -
Abbreviation
Positive Opinion on HEP Code Negative Opinion on HEP Code
Are you satisfied with property survey A The land is being submerged A
It helps in generating sources of income B It is unsafe to stay in this area B
Helps in electricity production C It is increasing other destructive activities C
Can get a good compensation D Fuel, fodder and timber collection will be difficult D
Want to shift to better place E Fish population will be threatened E
Leads to developmental activity in the area F Trees and vegetations that are of economic importance and F
with which religious values are associated will be threatened
Gives employment opportunity G Wild animal survival will be threatened G
5-1
ANNEXURE- 5.1 A: PHOTOGRAPHS OF HORTICULTURE, FOREST
TRAINING CENTER & FISHERIES PONDS
FOREST TRAINING CENTRE (FTC) PLANTATION IN FTC
PLANTATION IN (FTC) VIEW OF GREEN HOUSE
SHOWING FRUIT PLANTATION BUDDING WORK IN HORTICULTURE

ANNEXURE- 5.1 B: PHOTOGRAPHS OF
HORTICULTURE, FOREST TRAINING CENTER & FISHERIES PONDS
APPLE BUDDING APPLE BUDDING
VIEW OF GREEN HOUSE PLANTATION IN GREEN HOUSE
VIEW OF FISH POND IN HORTICULTURE DEPARTMENT

ANNEXURE- 5.1 C: PHOTOGRAPHS OF ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING
A PICTORIAL VIEW OF SOCIO-ECONOMIC SURVEY & PUBLIC CONSULTATION

ANNEXURE- 5.2: PHOTOGRAPHS OF RELIGIOUS RITUALS
Gompa of Salari village Gompa of Salari village
Religious person Lama Religious Flag
Holy Place Religious Ceremony

Chapter 6
PREDICTION OF IMPACTS AND THEIR
ASSESSMENT
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
CHAPTER 6
PREDICTION OF IMPACTS AND THEIR ASSESSMENT
6.1 INTRODUCTION
Hydropower is a renewable, clean and non-polluting energy resource with high conversion
efficiency showing spectacular operational flexibility and economic superiority over other
power generation means. The construction of dam and filling of reservoir cause substantial
local change. All potential environmental impacts and measures to mitigate these impacts
needs to be adequately identified both qualitatively and quantitatively.
Hydroelectric projects require construction of Dams/Barrages and creation of reservoirs.
They undoubtedly provide significant economic benefits and also benefit the environment
in their capacity as a renewable energy source. The potential adverse environmental effects
of the project, however, can also be substantial, particularly as they relate to water quality,
the ecology, and risks from natural hazards and impact on the regional socio-economic and
socio-cultural framework. Changes in the regime of watercourses and land use pattern
together with soil erosion and waste discharges can lead to sediment and pollutant build-up
in reservoirs. Presence of pollutants may enhance waterborne diseases and significantly
impact the aquatic and terrestrial life. The loss of land to the reservoirs may require
shifting or relocation of population resulting into changes in the local and regional socio-
economic conditions and cultural (archaeological and historical) resources.
Anticipating the quantum of change, efforts were also made to analyze the degree of
alternations and strategies for suitable management to ameliorate the negative impacts
project activities. This exercise has provided a sound basis for formulation of different
management plans, which are presented in the EMP document of the project.
The proposed Khuitam HE project envisages generation of a total of 66 MW of peaking

electricity through construction of barrage across the Gang River. In the preceding sections,
an attempt was made to discuss the geology, ecology and socio-economics of the area in
which the proposed project is to be constructed with the help of baseline data.
Impact Prediction____________________________________________________________________
6-1
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
Simultaneously, with due consideration to the project details, and the understanding of
baseline environment, the potential impacts expected in view of the Scoping/Graded matrix
as presented in Chapter 1 (positive and negative) as a result of the proposed Khuitam HE
project have been analyzed for two scenarios i.e. during project construction and post
construction stages.
The present EIA has been carried out using Graded or Scoping matrix method (Wegner and
Rhyner, 1972). The Detailed methodology has been presented in Chapter-2 of the EIA
report. The following baseline parameters have been studied to delineate the impacts due to
the project execution:
 Land Environment
 Water Environment
 Terrestrial Ecology
 Aquatic Ecology
 Noise Environment
 Ambient Air Quality
 Socio-Economic Environment
6.2 IMPACTS ON LAND ENVIRONMENT
6.2.1 Construction phase
Few impacts of construction phase are permanent and majority of the environmental
impacts attributed to construction works are temporary in nature, lasting mainly during the
construction phase or quite often little beyond the construction period. However, if these
issues are not properly addressed, the impacts can continue even after the construction
phase for longer duration. The time required for construction of the project activities will be
3½ years.
6-2
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
6.2.1.1 Change in land use pattern and pressure on land forms: 49.14 ha of land will be
required by proposed Khuitam HE project, including all, project component facilities, the
reservoir, borrow areas and access roads. At the same time change in existing land use
pattern and pressure on land forms may likely occur due to the following activities:
1. Immigration of labour population: During the peak construction stage of the project
about 500 workers and 250 technical staff are likely to work in the project area apart
from service providers in the form of suppliers, vendors and small shops. However,
during the peak construction phase congregation of labour force is likely to create
problems of sewage disposal, solid waste management and felling of trees for meeting
fuel requirements, etc. These aspects need to be addressed in the form of suitable labour
camp facilities including fuel and sanitation facilities.
2. Quarrying operations and muck disposal: The sand and aggregate required for the
construction of barrage and canal are often mined and quarried from the borrow areas.
For construction of various components of the project about 2.4 MT of construction
material would be required. The quantum of muck generated is expected to be 5.28 x
105 m3, which will be partially utilized for construction of various civil structures like
barrage, approach roads, parking areas, etc. Disposal of the remaining quantity of muck
needs proper arrangements for its dumping so that the disposed muck does not gets
scattered unwantedly. The muck disposal yard (spoil tips) created for disposal needs to
be strengthened with the help of engineering measures and the drainage in such areas
needs to be executed properly. The requirement of construction material from other
sources would be met by quarrying from the Gang river shoals below the barrage site.
3. Operation of construction equipment: During construction phase, various types of

equipment will be used. These include crushers, batching plant, drillers, earth movers,
rock bolters, etc. The siting of all such construction equipment would require significant
amount of space. In addition, land will also be temporarily acquired, i.e. during project
construction phase for storage of the quarried material before crushing, crushed
material, cement, rubble, etc The various criteria for selection of these sites could be:
 Proximity to the site of use
6-3
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
 Sensitivity of forests in the nearby areas

 Proximity from habitations
Efforts should be made to select the site for locating the construction equipment at the
construction site itself to minimize the impacts on environment and local population.
During construction phase, there will be increased vehicular movement for
transportation of various construction materials to the project site. Large quantity of
dust is likely to be entrained due to the movement of trucks and other heavy vehicles.
However, such ground level emissions do not travel for long distances. In addition,
there are no major habitations in the project area. Thus, no significant impacts are
anticipated on this account. However for better control of the likely impacts, suitable
measures in terms of Green belt development around construction, quarry and
residential areas need to be developed.
4. Construction of roads, Barrage and power house: The topography of the project area
has steep slopes, which descends rapidly into narrow valleys. The project construction
would entail significant vehicular movement for transportation of large construction
material, heavy construction equipment. Most of the roads in the project area would
require widening. Construction of approx. 4 km long road to access the power house
complex and approx. 3 km long road to access the barrage complex shall be taken up in
the first instance. The construction of roads can lead to removal of vegetative cover and
trees on slopes and re-working of the slopes in the immediate vicinity of roads shall
increase the vulnerability of the area to landslides, erosion and formation of gullies, etc.
A suitable strategy needs to be formulated to stabilize and restore all such sites. It
should be ensured that drainage network along the roads is developed. Plantation of
suitable soil binding plant species needs to be carried out to stabilize the rim. For
control of the landslides/slips suitable engineering and biological measures also needs
to be framed and implemented.
6.2.1.2 Soil pollution: Approximately 5.28 x 105 m3 of muck is estimated to be generated

during excavation of the tunnel, power house and other project components. It is proposed
to utilize part of the muck generated for construction of barrage, approach roads, parking
6-4
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
lots, etc. Disposal of the remaining quantity of muck may change soil property and causes
soil pollution. Therefore, there should be proper arrangements for its dumping so that the
disposed muck does not get scattered unwontedly. The muck disposal yard (spoil tips)
created for disposal needs to be strengthened with the help of engineering measures and the
drainage in such areas needs to be executed properly. Besides it, during peak construction
phase, congregation of labour force is likely to create problems of sewage disposal and
solid waste management causing soil pollution. These aspects need to be addressed in the
form of suitable labour camp facilities including sanitation and disposal facilities.
6.2.1.3 Landslides: For the fragile ecosystem of Himalaya, landslide is one of the major
problems since past and any new developmental activity may cause the severity of this
problem. Nearly 6 major landslide zones have been identified along the periphery of
reservoir rim mostly along the roads network. During construction of project, landslides
may be triggered by the following reasons:
 Quarrying and blasting operations
 Construction of roads, barrage and power house
To control landslide due to project activities, proper construction management along with
treatment measures for unstable slopes etc. will be required.
6.2.1.4 Soil erosion: The topography of the project area has steep slopes, which descends
rapidly into narrow valleys. Any groundbreaking activity for construction works, whether
permanent or temporary, would require removal of vegetation cover from ground. With the
removal of vegetal cover, erosive action of water gets pronounced and accelerates the
process of soil erosion and formation of deep gullies. Excessive soil erosion and mass
movement of soil is likely to disrupt the natural drainage, which can lead to impounding of
runoff. Accumulation of sediment in the reservoir may decrease the water storage capacity
of the reservoir, ultimately leading in efficiency losses.
6.2.2 Operational phase
1. Inundation of land: The total land to be acquired for the project is 49.14 ha, the details
of which are presented in Table 1.6 of chapter 1. out of the above 49.14 ha, an area of
6-5
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
about 19.44 ha is required for temporary structures (Muck dumping, construction

facilities, quarrying, magazine etc) and land under submergence is 6.32 ha.
Undoubtedly, the economic and ecological services provided by the land to be acquired
can not be practically compensated for. However, as per the provisions of the regulatory
mechanism, compensatory afforestation in lieu of forest land to be diverted will be
taken up during processing of forestland diversion for the project. With relation to
private agricultural land, and the trees on it, adequate compensation needs to be worked
out for individuals/community holding the land as per prevailing norms at state and
National level.
2. Change in land use pattern and topography: The reservoir will create a new
landscape with new potential, but there will be a loss of some areas of landscape value.
The reservoir may induce and intensify recreation and tourism-related activities. Lack
of proper land use and management for the areas surrounding the reservoir may result in
damage to the riparian vegetation (caused by fires and/or deforestation).
3. Soil erosion and siltation of reservoir: It is well known that North East Himalayan
Rivers in particular carry large quantities of sediment load, which is going to be trapped
after completion of the project. Accumulation of sediment in the reservoir may decrease
the water storage capacity of the reservoir, ultimately leading in efficiency losses.
Accordingly, it is necessary to adopt corrective measures in the catchment area so as to
reduce the sediment load and for this suitable catchment area treatment plan shall be
framed for the Khuitam HE project.
6.3 IMPACTS ON AQUATIC ENVIRONMENT
The construction of barrage would lead to the formation of a small reservoir which will
impound the water during non-peaking hours. The diurnal flow of water from the reservoir
would take place only during peak hours of river Gang. In order to maintain the ecosystem
survival and aquatic life in this stretch of approx 3.5 km, minimum 10% of environmental
flow of water would be required to be released from the Barrage body based on the
assumptions of seepage losses, flow depth and width considerations. One major (Soshichu
6-6
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
river) and many small river tributaries also meet in river stretch before the power house. As
such the villages located on the left and right banks do not rely on river Gang for water
supply and therefore no impact is expected. From the available secondary literature and
based on primary survey no breeding grounds were identified in the project area.
6.4 IMPACTS ON WATER QUALITY
During the construction of the Khuitam project, the project will have crushers and batching
plants to generate aggregates and sand. The production of aggregates and sand entails its
washing by water and disposal of such sediment laden water in the river stream will require
sedimentation tanks to make it free from sediment before its release to river. In addition to
this, the water coming out of the tunnels during construction may also bring lot of
sediments with it and this requires being relieved of sediments before its discharge into the
river. These measures are necessary to check the alteration in physico-chemical properties
of river water.
The water quality of the river may also deteriorate if sanitations and solid waste
management practices are not adopted in the labour camps of the project during
construction phase. The excreta going to be generated must be disposed off in proper septic
tanks in order to check the propagation of feacal coli form and E-coli and check the level of
BOD in the river waters.
1. Change in hydraulic regime and downstream flow: Hydroelectric development can

have direct impacts on water quality, especially if fairly large impoundments are created.
Reservoir discharge may differ from natural stream water in many physicochemical
characteristics. The discharge of this water from the impoundment can strongly influence
the quality of water downstream. The major water quality parameters likely to be affected
are water temperature, dissolved oxygen, nutrient transport, and turbidity. Although in case
6-7
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
of Khuitam HE project very small reservoir along with daily discharge of water will not
affect hydraulic regime much. Further the downstream impact due to the dam break has to
be analyzed comprehensively and the detailed Disaster Management Plan has to be
prepared to mitigate any unfortunate event of dam break and their affect on the downstream
stretches.
2. Water pollution due to disposal of sewage: During the operation phase, due to absence
of any large scale construction activity, the cause and source of water pollution will be
much different. Since, only a small number of O&M staff will reside in the area in a well
designed colony with sewage/septic tank facilities and other infrastructural facilities, the
problems of water pollution due to disposal of sewage are not anticipated. Thus, no impacts
are anticipated as a result of disposal of effluents from the project colony. However, during
the operation of the machines in the powerhouse, oil spills are likely to occur from the
machine hall and therefore the sewage containing the oil spills should be disposed off in
separate disposal tanks.
3. Impacts on reservoir water quality: Creation of any reservoir will entail in deposition
of sediments and the breakdown of sediments in it. Decomposition of sediments and
organic matter in the reservoir may lead to enrichment of nutrients and may cause
eutrophication resulting in increased BOD in the longer run. In the reservoir of the projects
devised on the run-off-the-river scheme pattern, the quantum of water accumulated during
non-peak hours ultimately gets utilized during the peak hours and silt flushing of the
reservoir is very often practice; this reduces the chances of eutrophication. In the present
case also the eutrophication of the reservoir is not expected as the silt of the reservoir will
be flushed on regular intervals.
6.5 IMPACTS ON TERRESTRIAL FLORA
1. Pressure on existing natural resource: The direct impact of construction activity for
any water resource project in a mountainous terrain is generally limited in the vicinity of
6-8
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
the construction sites only. As mentioned earlier, a population of 750 including technical
staff, workers and other group of people are likely to congregate in the area during the peak
time of project construction phase. It can be assumed that the technical staff will be of
higher economic status and will not use wood as fuel, if adequate alternate i.e. Liquid
Petroleum Gas (LPG) sources of fuel are provided. However, workers and other population
groups residing in the area may use alternative fuel. Hence, to minimize such impacts, fuel
management not only for the labour force but for the villagers needs to be formulated. It is
also required that project proponent ensure that no illegal tree felling takes place in the
project area. Similarly options for community kitchen, etc. for the labour force can also be
worked out to reduce the overall fuel requirements.
6.5.2.1 Loss of floral diversity: The total 49.14 ha of land is required to establish the
proposed Khuitam HE Project. Out of which 6.32 ha of land will be required for permanent
submergence area and rest of 42.82 ha land will be required for different project component
and facilities. A compensatory afforestation scheme has been proposed for restoration of
forest land. To maintain the wealth of the biodiversity (flora and fauna), it is proposed to
improve the habitat of the forests in the influence zone as elaborated in following section.
6.6 IMPACTS ON TERRESTRIAL FAUNA
1. Disturbance to wildlife: Based on the survey of wildlife, a total of 20 species of

mammals are reported. Considering the large number of settlements in and around the
project area of Khuitam HE project and the low distribution of faunal species, it is unlikely
that the project will have any effect on the wildlife. .
2. Impacts on avian-fauna: With the construction of Barrage on the river, the reservoir
with submergence area of about 6.32 ha will be created, with quiescent/tranquil conditions.
The reservoir banks will have wet environment throughout the year which can lead to
6-9
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
growth of vegetation e.g., grass, etc. along the reservoir banks. Such conditions are
generally ideal for various kinds of birds, especially, water birds. Here it is also worth
noting that in the entire Gang River catchment, there are no sanctuaries or reserves or parks
as the biodiversity of the region is well spread. Henceforth, it is felt that habitat
improvement of the influence zone will not only help in attracting the avi-fauna, but would
at the same time help in attracting tourists.
During project operation phase, the accessibility to the area will improve due to
construction of roads, which in turn may increase human interferences leading to marginal
adverse impacts on the terrestrial ecosystem. Considering the very thin presence of
terrestrial fauna in this area, no adverse impact is anticipated during operational phase.
6.7 IMPACTS ON AQUATIC ECOLOGY
1. Impacts on Aquatic Ecosystem and Biodiversity: During the construction phase of

Khuitam HE project, the aquatic ecosystem and biodiversity is not expected to alter
considerably as the water of river Gang will remain in its original course. Construction of
Barrage on Gang river however require diversion of river affecting the span of river of
about 3.5 km in length and the water will be diverted through underground Head race
tunnel (HRT) and surge shaft are going to be executed underground on the right bank. The
minimum environmental flows and contribution by tributaries joining over downstream of
Barrage will maintain the aquatic ecosystem and diversity of Gang river. The extraction of
material is proposed to be carried out by open mining methods which will entail extraction
with the help of high earth movers and hauling of extracted materials by hauling dumpers
from the dry river bed. While extracting the material, the areas selected for extraction will
be enclosed with the help of stone wall fencing, which may act as a barrier to scattering of
material out of the enclosures.
6-10
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
2. Impact on fish population: The river stretch between Barrage site and Tail race outlet of
Khuitam HE Project is of about 3.5 km length. The local fishermen generally carry out
fishing activity in tributaries. Hence no significant impact envisaged due to the project
construction. However, for the sustenance of aquatic life, adequate fish management plan
has to be implemented to compensate the fish loss, if any.
3. Downstream Impacts: In the proposed project, power house is located at the just 3.5
Km downstream of the Barrage site; further the contribution from the tributaries (d/s of
Barrage) and the environmental flow on evaluation, indicate that no significant impact are
envisaged on aquatic ecosystem of Gang river and no part of the downstream river stretch is
ever dried. Therefore, major downstream impacts related to the water quality, fisheries,
socio-economic and aquatic biodiversity are not much envisaged in the Khuitam HE
project.
6.7.2 Operational Phase
1. Change in aquatic diversity: During the operation phase of the project, the obvious
change in aquatic diversity is going to take place in terms of fish movement upstream and
downstream of the Barrage. However, the provision of fish ladder in the design of the
barrage structure shall be able to facilitate the spawning and pre-spawning movements of
the migratory fishes. The reduced flow between the barrage and powerhouse in the river
course could bring a minor change in density and population of micro and macro benthic
biota. However, on the other hand, creation of a lake of about 6.32 ha spread will provide
lacustrine environment in the upstream which could provide a better habitat for some of the
lacustrine fishes. The migration of fish species like Mahseer (Tor putitora) and Snow trout
(Schizothorax sinatus) is likely to be affected by the 19 m high barrage. In order to maintain
the population density of these two species in the upstream and downstream reaches, efforts
must be made to explore the probability of fish farm and hatcheries for the project area
along with provision of fish ladder.
6-11
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
6.8 IMPACTS ON NOISE ENVIRONMENT
1. Impact on flora, fauna due to noise pollution: In a water resource project, the impacts
on ambient noise levels are expected only during the project construction phase, due to
operation of multiple construction equipment. Likewise, noise due to quarrying, blasting,
vehicular movement will have some minor impact on the ambient noise levels in the area
for a short span of time. No major impact will be recognized in fauna and human health.
6.9 IMPACTS ON AIR QUALITY
In a water resources project, air pollution occurs mainly during project construction phase.
The major sources of air pollution during construction phase are:
1. Pollution due to fuel combustion in equipments: The operation of construction

equipments requires combustion of fuel. Normally, diesel is used in such equipments. The
major pollutant which gets emitted as a result of combustion of diesel is SO 2 . The short-
term increase in SO 2 , will have no major impact on ambient air quality.
2. Dust pollution: The operation of the crusher during the construction phase is likely to
generate fugitive emissions. During construction phase, two to three crushers are likely to
be commissioned at major construction sites. During crushing operations, fugitive
emissions comprising mainly of the suspended particulate will be generated. Since, there
are no major settlements close to the project area; no major adverse impacts on this account
are anticipated however, sprinkler and green belt development should be used to control the
dust.
3. Fugitive emissions from various sources: During construction phase, there will be
increased vehicular movement and DG set emission. Lot of construction material like sand,
fine aggregate will be stored at various sites, during the project construction phase.
Normally, due to blowing of winds, especially when the environment is dry, some of the
stored material can get entrained in the atmosphere. However, such impacts are visible only
6-12
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
in and around the storage sites. The DG set stack would be installed as standard height. The
impacts on this account are generally, insignificant in nature.
6.10 IMPACTS ON SOCIO-ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT
The construction phase will last for about 3½ years. During this period about 750 labour
and technical staff will be inducted to complete the project. The congregation of influx with
different cultural and ethnic backgrounds may alter the demography and culture of the area.
It is required that the project proponents must keep this in mind and provide a self
sustaining system to the workers in close proximity of the project and ensure enforcement
of law and order in a very strict manner to its labour force so that no confrontation with the
society takes place. The project proponents are required to provide all the infrastructural
facilities to its work force such as health care, free fuel, sanitation and water supply in order
to reduce dependency on local infrastructure and confrontation with the society. Contract
labour and engineers will return after completion of construction work. Influx of outside
labour should not be allowed to stay for more than specified period mentioned in inner line
permit by State Government.
During the operation phase manpower will be involved along with necessary infrastructural
facilities. The following positive impacts may be foreseen during operation phase.
1. Tourism development and recreation facilities: Apart from above, it would be worth
mentioning here that in the project area of Khuitam HEP does not have any archaeological
monuments and structures, henceforth, no such consideration is required. Barrage will
create an aesthetic beauty of the area which will help in tourism.
2. Flood control and regulated water supply: One of the beneficial impacts of Barrage
construction is flood control. The Barrage will store water in the reservoir and will supply a
6-13
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
continuous down stream flow. It will provide a regulated water supply throughout the year
even in the seasonal scarcity of water.
3. Power generation and reduced pressure on natural resources: The total 66 MW of

power will be generated from Khuitam Barrage. The added availability of power in the
National power grid will help the Nation to progress. The availability of electricity to the
rural areas will reduce the dependence of the locals on forest resources and in this way it
will reduce pressure on natural resources.
4. Socio-economic development: A number of marginal activities and jobs would be

available to the locals in the project which will subsequently increase the economic status
of the local people. Education level of the local people will improve. The advantage of
education to secure jobs will quickly percolate through all sections of the population and
will induce people to get their children educated. Besides these benefits Khuitam HE
project will surely ensure the development of area through introduction of roads, hospitals,
school colleges, tourism activities, etc.
5. Commercial development of the area: There will be revitalization of commercial and

service activities in the surrounding, due to the increased demand for the project population.
In conjunction with the comprehensive socio-economic, land use and demographic field
survey, an effort was also made to understand the views of the respondents on the project of
PAFs. The survey team traversed through the entire project affected villages in which the
proposed project appurtenances (barrage, tunnel alignment, adits, roads, office and colony,
etc.) are likely to be constructed. The project affected villages are Salari and Rahung. They
are primarily dependent upon agriculture with a few families dependent on jobs and
business to augment their incomes.
The survey was mainly focused on their views regarding the existing resettlement and
rehabilitation plan of the project, benefits from the project and areas where the project
would affect their economic and social life. In the questionnaire for the primary household
survey, specific questions were put to understand their perceptions, and the survey was
conducted among all the affected families of the project. The proposed project is expected
6-14
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
to trigger a host of socio-economic benefits on the regional economy. The proposed project
does not involve the submergence of monuments, archaeological and other religious and
socially important and sensitive sites. Furthermore no community asset or structure is
coming under the direct or indirect effect of the present project.
6.11 IMPACT ON GEOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT
The Khuitam Hydro-electric Project is located in the Bomdila Belt of active geodynamic
domain of Eastern Himalayas. The augen gneisses and streaky gneisses with subordinate
bands of garnetiferous schist occurring as anticlinal fold form the country rock; the Gang
river follows the axial trace of the anticlinal fold. At the barrage site deep (>30m) riverine
boulder fill with subordinate sandy beds characterized by high permeability (2.5x10-2
cm/sec) are intercepted in the river bed domain. It is suggested to design barrage with
permeable foundation considerations. However, further explorations with three number of
drill holes with systematic Standard Penetration Tests are outlined to trace and characterize
the sand beds in the barrage foundation, if any; this is called for assessment of liquefaction
hazard in the barrage foundation domain on seismic loading.
Considering the location of the project in Zone V of Seismic Zoning map of India (IS:
1983; 2002) in close proximity to Bomdila lineament with Known Seismic history, it is
suggested to perform dynamic analysis for safe Seismic design and accordingly the project
features should be designed for resistance to Seismic activity.
6. 12 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Based on the scoping matrix as presented in Chapter 2 and the understanding of

environmental base line status as detailed in Chapter 3 to 5 under Land, Water, Air,
Biological (Flora and Fauna), and Socio-economic features, along with the analysis of
likely impacts as discussed above, EIA of the Khuitam HEP has been attempted adopting
graded matrix approach under the scenario of construction stage and operation stage of the
project without and with environmental management plans. The matrix of the impacts and
the rankings together with Total Impact Scores (TIS) for without and with EMPs are given
in Table 6.1 and 6.2 respectively.
6-15
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
Table 6.1: Environmental Impact Assessment of Khuitam HEP without EMP
Impact Parameters Ranking Minimum Moderate Appreciable Significant Extreme Overall Score
Activity CS OS CS OS CS OS CS OS CS OS CS OS
Impacts on Land environment
Landslide Construction of road, 4 -2 -4 -97.56 -48.78
Barrage and power house
Muck disposal 2 -3 -3 -36.59 -36.59
Quarrying and blasting 3 -1 -3 -54.88 -18.29
operation
Subsidence due to 2 0 -5 0.00 -60.98
submergence
Change in topography Construction of Barrage, 4 -2 -3 -73.17 -48.78
power house road and
other activities
Muck disposal 3 -2 -2 -36.59 -36.59
Quarrying operation 2 -2 -4 -48.78 -24.39
Due to submergence 1 -2 -5 -12.20 -30.49
Soil erosion and Construction of road, 3 -2 -3 -54.88 -36.59
change in land forms barrage and power house
Vegetation loss 1 -2 -4 -12.20 -24.39
Impounding and 1 0 -4 0.00 -24.39
damming of water
Increase in seismicity Construction activities 1 -1 -3 -18.29 -6.10
damming and impounding 2 -1 -1 -12.20 -12.20
of water
Change in land use Muck disposal 1 -2 -1 -12.20 -6.10
pattern Inundation of agriculture 2 -1 -3 -12.20 -36.59
land
Pressure on land form Immigration of labour 2 -3 -4 -36.59 -48.78
population
Soil pollution Solid waste from labour 1 -2 -2 -12.20 -12.20
camp
Pollution by construction 2 -2 -2 -24.39 -24.39
spoils
Water environment
Eutrophication risk Sewage from labour camp 2 -2 -2 -24.39 -24.39
Decomposition of 4 0 -4 0.00 -97.56
vegetation in
submergence zone
Muck disposal 1 -1 -4 -6.10 -24.39
Siltation and Effluent from crusher 1 -1 -4 -6.10 -30.49
sedimentation Muck disposal 1 -1 -3 -18.29 -6.10
operation
Change in water Construction activity 1 -2 -4 -24.39 -12.20
quality damming and impounding 2 0 -5 0.00 -60.98
of water
Effluent from crusher 1 0 -4 -24.39 0.00
Muck disposal 2 0 -4 -48.78 0.00
Quarrying operation 2 0 -4 -48.78 0.00
Sewage from labour camp 3 -2 -2 -36.59 -36.59
Change in hydraulic damming and impounding 4 0 -4 0.00 -97.56
regime of water
Muck disposal 2 -2 -2 -24.39 -24.39
Impacts on Flora
Reduced Dust generation due to 1 -2 -3 -18.29 -12.20
photosynthetic activity construction activity
Increase pressure on Immigration of labour 2 -2 -1 -24.39 -12.20
natural resources population &technical
staff
Loss of land Due to submergence 3 0 -4 0.00 -73.17
Loss of floral diversity Due to submergence 4 0 -4 0.00 -97.56
6-16
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
Impacts on Fauna
Disturbance to wildlife Construction activity 2 -2 -2 -24.39 -24.39
Deforestation 4 -2 -2 -48.78 -48.78
Immigration of labour 1 -1 -2 -6.10 -12.20
population
Quarrying/ blasting 3 -2 0 -36.59 0.00
operation
Due to submergence 2 0 -3 0.00 -36.59
Vehicular movement 2 -2 -1 -24.39 -12.20
Decrease in terrestrial Deforestation 3 -1 -3 -18.29 -54.88
faunal diversity Submergence 1 0 -4 0.00 -24.39
Impact in Aquatic ecology
Change in no. and Effluent from crushers 1 -2 0 -12.20 0.00
types of fishes which will increase
turbidity
damming and impounding 3 0 4 0.00 73.17
of water
Sewage from labour camp 2 -2 -1 -24.39 -12.20
which decreases DO level
Increase area for Damming and 2 0 -2 0.00 -24.39
mosquito breeding impounding of water
Adverse impact on Muck disposal 1 -2 0 -12.20 0.00
aquatic fauna Quarrying operation 1 -2 0 -12.20 0.00
Sewage discharge 1 -2 -1 -12.20 -6.10
Noise environment
Increase noise level Quarrying and blasting 3 -1 -1 -18.29 -18.29
operation
Working of construction 2 -1 -1 -12.20 -12.20
equipment
Impact on Air quality
Increase in dust Construction activity 1 -4 -3 -24.39 -18.29
concentration Quarrying & blasting 2 -1 -4 -48.78 -12.20
operation
Increase in SOx, NOx, Combustion of fuel in 2 -2 -3 -36.59 -24.39
CO 2 various equipment
Change in micro Impounding and 3 0 -3 0.00 -54.88
climate Barrageming of water
Emission of green Decomposition of 1 0 -4 0.00 -24.39
house gases vegetation on
submergence zone
Impact on Socio-economic environment
Increase in job Construction activity 4 7 9 219.51 170.73
opportunity Operation of project 3 5 9 91.46 164.63
Increase in income Construction activity 4 9 9 219.51 219.51
level Urbanization and 3 8 9 146.34 164.63
developments
Pressure on existing Immigration of labours 2 -1 -2 -12.20 -24.39
infrastructure facility and technical staff
Regulated water Creation of reservoir 3 1 8 18.29 146.34
supply
General social tension, Resettlement and 4 0 -1 0.00 -24.39
uprootedness, rehabilitation
displacement factor
Social exchange of Immigration of labour 3 3 6 54.88 109.76
diverse cultures and technical staff
Power surplus state Power generation 4 0 9 0.00 219.51
Increase in State Power generation 4 0 9 0.00 219.51
revenue
Increase incidence of Creation of reservoir 2 -1 -3 -12.20 -36.59
health problem Dust generation due to 1 -2 -3 -18.29 -12.20
construction activities
6-17
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
Loss of NTFP (Non- Due to submergence 1 0 -3 0.00 -18.29
timber forest product)
Tourism & Creation of reservoir and 4 0 10 0.00 243.90
recreational other supporting facilities
opportunities
TOTAL IMPACT SCORE -609.76 -18.29
Table 6.2: Environmental Impact Assessment of Khuitam HEP with EMP
Impacts on Land environment
Landslide Construction of road, 4 -2 -1 -48.7805 -24.3902
Barrage and power house
Muck disposal 2 -1 -1 -12.1951 -12.1951
operation
Subsidence due to 2 0 -3 0 -36.5854
submergence
Change in Construction of Barrage, 4 -1 -1 -24.3902 -24.3902
topography power house road and
other activities
Muck disposal 3 -1 -1 -18.2927 -18.2927
Due to submergence 1 -1 -4 -6.09756 -24.3902
Soil erosion and Construction of road, 3 -2 -1 -36.5854 -18.2927
change in land Barrage and power house
forms Quarrying operation 2 -2 -1 -24.3902 -12.1951
Vegetation loss 1 -1 -3 -6.09756 -18.2927
Impounding and 1 0 -3 0 -18.2927
Barraging of water
Increase in Construction activities 1 -1 -3 -18.2927 -6.09756
seismicity Barraging and 2 -1 -1 -12.1951 -12.1951
impounding of water
Change in land use Muck disposal 1 -2 -1 -12.1951 -6.09756
pattern Inundation of agriculture 2 -1 -3 -12.1951 -36.5854
land
Pressure on land Immigration of labour 2 -2 -2 -24.3902 -24.3902
form population
Soil pollution Solid waste from labour 1 -1 -1 -6.09756 -6.09756
camp
Pollution by construction 2 -1 -1 -12.1951 -12.1951
spoils
Water environment
Eutrophication risk Sewage from labour 2 -1 -1 -12.1951 -12.1951
camp
Decomposition of 4 0 -3 0 -73.1707
vegetation in
submergence zone
Muck disposal 1 -1 -3 -6.09756 -18.2927
Siltation and Effluent from crusher 1 -1 -3 0 -24.3902
sedimentation Muck disposal 1 -2 -1 -12.1951 -6.09756
operation
Change in water Construction activity 1 -1 -3 -18.2927 -6.09756
quality damming and 2 0 -4 0 -48.7805
impounding of water
Effluent from crusher 1 0 -3 -18.2927 0
Muck disposal 2 -2 0 -24.3902 0
Quarrying operation 2 0 -3 -36.5854 0
6-18
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
Sewage from labour 3 -1 -1 -18.2927 -18.2927
camp
Change in Damming and 4 0 -3 0 -73.1707
hydraulic regime impounding of water
Muck disposal 2 -1 -1 -12.1951 -12.1951
Impacts on Flora
Reduced Dust generation due to 1 -2 -1 -12.1951 -6.09756
photosynthetic construction activity
activity
Increase pressure Immigration of labour 2 -2 -1 -24.3902 -12.1951
on natural population &technical
resources staff
Loss of land Due to submergence 3 0 -4 0 -73.1707
Loss of floral Due to submergence 4 0 -3 0 -73.1707
diversity
Impacts on Fauna
Disturbance to Construction activity 2 -2 -1 -24.3902 -12.1951
wildlife Deforestation 4 -2 -2 -48.7805 -48.7805
Immigration of labour 1 -1 -2 -6.09756 -12.1951
population
Quarrying/ blasting 3 -2 0 -36.5854 0
operation
Due to submergence 2 0 -3 0 -36.5854
Decrease in Deforestation 3 -1 -3 -18.2927 -54.878
terrestrial faunal Submergence 1 0 -4 0 -24.3902
diversity
Impact in Aquatic ecology
Change in no. and Effluent from crushers 1 -2 0 -12.1951 0
types of fishes which will increase
turbidity
Damming and 3 0 4 0 73.17073
impounding of water
Sewage from labour 2 -2 -1 -24.3902 -12.1951
camp which decreases
DO level
Increased area for Damming and 2 0 -2 0 -24.3902
mosquito breeding impounding of water
Adverse impact on Muck disposal 1 -2 0 -12.1951 0
aquatic fauna Quarrying operation 1 -2 0 -12.1951 0
Sewage discharge 1 -2 -1 -12.1951 -6.09756
Noise environment
Increase noise level Quarrying and blasting 3 -1 -1 -18.2927 -18.2927
operation
Working of construction 2 -1 -1 -12.1951 -12.1951
equipment
Impact on Air quality
Increase in dust Construction activity 1 -2 -1 -12.1951 -6.09756
concentration Quarrying & blasting 2 -2 0 -24.3902 0
operation
Increase in SOx, Combustion of fuel in 2 -2 -1 -24.3902 -12.1951
NOx, CO2 various equipment
Change in micro Impounding and 3 0 -3 0 -54.878
climate Barraging of water
Emission of green Decomposition of 1 0 -4 0 -24.3902
house gases vegetation on
submergence zone
Impact on Socio-economic environment
Increase in job Construction activity 4 7 9 219.5122 170.7317
opportunity Operation of project 3 5 9 91.46341 164.6341
Increase in income Construction activity 4 9 9 219.5122 219.5122
6-19
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
level Urbanization and 3 8 9 146.3415 164.6341
developments
Pressure on Immigration of labours 2 -1 -2 -12.1951 -24.3902
existing and technical staff
infrastructure
facility
Regulated water Creation of reservoir 3 1 8 18.29268 146.3415
supply
General social Resettlement and 4 0 -1 0 -24.3902
tension, uprooted rehabilitation
ness, displacement
factor
Social exchange of Immigration of labour 3 3 6 54.87805 109.7561
diverse cultures and technical staff
Power surplus state Power generation 4 0 9 0 219.5122
Increase in State Power generation 4 0 9 0 219.5122
revenue
Increase incidence Creation of reservoir 2 -1 -3 -12.1951 -36.5854
of health problem Dust generation due to 1 -2 -1 -12.1951 -6.09756
construction activities
Loss of NTFP Due to submergence 1 0 -3 0 -18.2927
(Non-timber forest
product)
Tourism & Creation of reservoir and 4 0 10 0 243.9024
recreational other supporting
opportunities facilities
TOTAL IMPACT SCORE -195.122 426.8293
CS- Construction stage; OS- Operational stage
As is evident from the above Tables, the Khuitam HE project has TIS of –609.76 at
construction stage, whereas it is –18.29 only at operation stage when EMPs are not
incorporated in the implementation of Khuitam HE project (Table 6.1). This suggests that
the positive impacts of the project would be just able to compensate the negative
environmental impacts. It is further noted from Table 6.2, that the TIS at construction stage
becomes only –195.12 when EMPs are implemented along with the execution of Khuitam
HE project, still suggesting that the implementation of Khuitam HE project together with
EMPs is going to have minor impacts even when EMPs are implemented. However, the TIS
became a significant 426.83 at operation stage when EMPs have been incorporated in the
implementation of Khuitam HE project. The above analysis clearly demonstrates that
incorporation of EMPs in the implementation of Khuitam HE project is necessary.
6-20
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
6.13 APPLICATION OF BATTELLE ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION

SYSTEM (BEES)
For evaluating quality of the environment subsequent to implementation hydroelectric

project, a checklist consisting of various parameters (indications of environmental quality)
under four major environmental categories, viz. ecology, environmental pollution, transfer
technologies and socio – economics has been identified. Environmental pollution category
is further sub classified as air, water and land pollution, whereas socio–economics is
subdivided into economic benefits and human interests.
The higher the number, greater is the relative importance. The PIU allocated amongst the
selected environmental parameters for impact evaluation of the project, represent
consequences in the opinion of experts of an interdisciplinary team. Impact scaling in the
BEES has been accomplished through the use of functional relationships of identified 13
parameters. Functional relationships refer to transforming parameter measurements
(baseline or predicted values) into subjective evaluations through graphical means.
Objective measurements are transformed into subjective interpretation of environmental
quality (EQ) on a scale representing, a value of 1.0 for good quality and –1.0 for poor
quality.
6.13.1 Investigated Environmental Impacts
Ecology
The adverse impact on ecology of this area will be insignificant because the land has no
forest cover. Also rare species of flora and fauna as well as endangered species of animals
does not exist. The EIU values (+50) due to project with EMP are higher than EIU values (-
110) for the project without EMP. The changes in EIU from baseline values for ecology
category are presented in Table 6.3 below.
6-21
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
Table 6.3: Environmental Impact Evaluation-Category: Ecology

Parameter Assigned Environmental Impact Unit Change in EIU Net
Parameter (EIU) over Baseline Change in
Importance Values EIU Due
Units Baseline Without With Without With to EMP
EMP EMP EMP EMP
(PIU) (A) (B) (C) (B–A) (C–A) (C–B)
Geology 130 100 85 110 –15 +10 +25
Fauna 100 80 65 95 –15 +15 +30
Flora 150 120 60 135 –60 +15 +75
Aesthetics 120 100 80 110 –20 +10 +30
Total 500 400 290 450 –110 +50 +160
Source: Field Monitoring
Environmental Scenario
The existing quality of water environment is satisfactory for surface and groundwater
sources. As the EMP recommends appropriate measures, there will be negligible adverse
impact on water environment. The air quality of area under reference will only marginally
be affected during the construction phase of hydroelectric project. No major air pollutions
will generated during the operation phase of HE project. The evaluation of impacts on the
land environment indicates no detrimental effect due to expanded activity, as activities will
contribute insignificantly towards soil erosion and fertility. In fact, the existing pattern of
land use would improve. The respective score for all the environmental parameters are
Table 6.4: Environmental Impact Evaluations-Category: Environmental Scenario

Parameter Assigned Environmental Impact Unit Change in EIU Net
Parameter (EIU) Over Baseline Change in
Importance Values EIU Due
Units Baseline Without With Without With to EMP
EMP EMP EMP EMP
(PIU) (A) (B) (C) (B–A) (C–A) (C–B)
Water 200 150 125 165 –25 +15 +40
Air 100 60 50 80 –10 +20 +30
Soil 150 100 80 125 –20 +25 +45
Noise 50 35 30 45 –5 +10 +15
Total 500 345 285 415 –60 +70 +130
6-22
KHUITAM HEP (66 MW)___________________________________________________________________ _____
EIPL
6.14 OVERALL IMPACT EVALUATION
A summary of the evaluation for change in environment quality due to project without EMP
and with EMP is presented in project. The overall project index of +865 is obtained by
implementing proper EMP thus indicating a positive impact, which is given in Table 6.5.
Table 6.5: Summary of Environmental Impact Evaluation

Parameter Assigned Environmental Impact Unit Change in EIU Net Change
Parameter (EIU) over Baseline in EIU Due
Importance Values to EMP
Units Baseline Without With Without With
EMP EMP EMP EMP
(PIU) (A) (B) (C) (B–A) (C–A) (C–B)
Ecology 500 400 290 450 -110 +50 +160
Environmental 500 345 285 415 -60 +70 +130
Scenario
Total 1000 745 575 865 -170 +120 +290
6-23

Khuitam HE Project Arunachal Pradesh - EIA

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Khuitam HE Project Arunachal Pradesh - EIA

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Adishankar Power Private Limited

Environmental Impact Assessment

Energy Infratech Private Limited

CHAPTER NO CONTENTS PAGE NO

1.2 POWER SCENARIO AND : 1-4

1.3 KHUITAM HYDROELECTRIC : 1-5

1.3.1 Background of the Project : 1-7

1.3.2 Need for the project : 1-10

1.3.3 Location of Project Area : 1-10

1.3.4 Accessibility : 1-11

1.3.5 Alternative Studies carried out for 1-11

1.3.6 Salient features of Khuitam (66MW) : 1-13

1.3.7 Policy, Legal and Administrative : 1-15

CHAPTER 2 CONCEPTS &

2.2 METHODOLOGIES : 2-3

2.2.1 Study Area : 2-3

2.2.2 Field Surveys : 2-4

2.2.3 Scoping Matrix : 2-5

2.2.4 Geology : 2-7

2.2.5 Meteorology : 2-7

2.2.6 Hydrology : 2-7

CHAPTER NO CONTENTS PAGE NO

2.2.7 Land Environment : 2-7

2.2.7.1 Data acquisition and preparation : 2-8

2.2.7.2 Land use / Land Cover : 2-9

2.2.7.3 Delineation of catchment, watershed : 2-11

2.2.7.4 Slope : 2-11

2.2.7.5 Soils : 2-11

2.2.7.6 Composite erosion intensity mapping : 2-11

2.2.7.7 Delineation of Influence zone and : 2-12

2.2.8 Ambient Air Quality : 2-12

2.2.9 Ambient Noise Level Measurement : 2-12

2.2.10 Water Quality and Aquatic Ecology : 2-12

2.2.10.1 For Physico-Chemical Parameters of : 2-12

2.2.10.2 Aquatic Ecology : 2-13

2.2.11 Floral Sampling and Phytosociological : 2-14

2.2.12 Faunal Assessment and Indices used : 2-17

2.2.12.1 Methodology used for avian : 2-17

2.2.12.2 Mammals : 2-18

2.2.13 Socio-Economic Assessment : 2-19

2.2.13.1 Secondary data sources : 2-19

2.2.13.2 Primary data collection : 2-19

2.3 PREDICTION OF IMPACTS AND : 2-20

CHAPTER NO CONTENTS PAGE NO

2.3.1 Matrix system : 2-20

2.3.2 Battelle Environmental Evaluation : 2-21

CHAPTER 3 PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT

3.1.1 Introduction : 3-1

3.1.2 Drainage : 3-2

3.1.3 Relief : 3-3

3.1.4 Slope : 3-4

3.1.5 Aspects : 3-4

3.1.6 Land Use/Land Cover : 3-5

3.2 SOILS : 3-6

3.3 HYDRO-METEOROLOGY : 3-10

3.3.1 Temperature and Humidity : 3-11

3.3.2 Rainfall : 3-11

3.3.3 Discharge Data : 3-12

3.3.4 Water Availability Studies : 3-14

3.3.5 Design Flood : 3-15

3.3.5.1 Design Flood Criteria : 3-15

3.3.5.2 Design Flood Approach : 3-16

3.3.5.3 Development of Unit Hydrograph. : 3-17

3.3.5.4 Design Flood : 3-17