[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index ][Thread Index ]



Source: edesk <edesk@xxxxxxxxxxxx>

Date: 17th May 1999. Vol. 2

1. First Phase Of Salween Dam Survey Completed
BurmaNews - BC:  April 28, 1999 (based on reports from S.H.A.N., SARN

2. Plans to build the Salween Dam at Ta Sang in Southern Shan State
South-East Asia Rivers Network, March 8, 1999

3. JICA Interview Relating to the Kok-Ing-Nan Water Diversion Project
Mekong Watch, Japan, Wednesday, May 12, 1999

4. International Committee on Dams, Rivers and People
WCD UPDATE No. 2,  May 1999

5. First round of Salween Dam survey completed
S.H.A.N., April 28, 1999

6. Northern Thai Hill People's Demonstrate for Rights to Citizenship,
use of Traditional Lands and Resources
"Jong"  cmgreent@xxxxxxxxxxx


First Phase Of Salween Dam Survey Completed

BurmaNews - BC:  April 28, 1999 (based on reports from S.H.A.N., SARN

Power shortages a long way yet from solution

CHIANG MAI -- Companies interested in building a dam on the Salween
River in
southern Shan State have completed the first round of their field
according to a Shan Herald source recently returned from Shan State.

The site being surveyed is a gorge to the north of Ta Sang Bridge, which
links the roads between Mong Pan and Mong Ton townships, 90 miles north
the Thai border. The surveying began in October last year and ended on
31 this year.

The survey team representing Thai, Japanese and Burmese companies has
moved out of the area.   The companies involved include Thailand's MDX
Co., the main Thai contractor, Japan's Electric Power Development
Corporation, and a Burmese company, Aye Chan Aye.  There were several
security alerts halting activities during the survey, owing to the
of the Shan States Army's 727th Brigade in the region.

A Southeast Asia Rivers Network (SARN) report issued recently estimated
construction time for the dam at this site or another possible location
south of Ta Sang would be upwards of five years.  The potential
capacity is said to be anywhere from 2,500 to 4,000 megawatts.

Burma has chronic power shortages due to a number of factors including
rapidly expanding consumption and low water levels at the country's

hydro electric generating station.  Official figures estimate current
electricity consumption at 750 megawatts while the maximum generating
capacity is only 680 megawatts per day in the central power grid.

The Law-pi-ta power plant has an installed capacity of 196 MW, but has
providing only 70 MW due to water shortages brought on by drought
and forest devastation in the Inle Lake catchment basin in southwestern

In the latter part of 1998, Chinese corporations signed loans and
to provide the hardware needed for three new generating stations.  The
Paunglaung project in Pyinmana township is the nearest to completion
work moving ahead on the second penstock. Yunnan Machinery Equipment
Corporation (YMEC) inked a $US 160,000,000 contract with the state power
company last October to install generators and other equipment needed
this project.  When completed, it is slated to produce 280 MW daily for
national power grid.

Dam and power station construction projects at Thaphanseik in Sagaing
Division and Mone Creek in Magwe Division are still at least three years
away from the generation stage.


Plans to build the Salween Dam at Ta Sang in Southern Shan State

A translation of a report issued by the South-East Asia River Network on
March 8, 1999 (Note: In translation from Thai to English, some details
have become unclear.)

Size and Type of Dam

The Ta Sang dam project is currently in the pre-feasibility study stage.

According to preliminary studies, the dam will be built on the Salween
in the southern part of Shan State in Burma, near to Ta Sang, which lies
km east of Taunggyi, and about 130 km from the BP-1 Thai-Burma border

This project will be located somewhere between 12 km north of the Ta
ferry crossing and 5 km south of the ferry crossing. This area is
mountainous and the river is narrow, passing through steep sided gorges.

The river bed consists of layers of sandstone and siltstone, suitable
construction of either a concrete faced rock-fill dam (CRF dam), a
compacted concrete dam (RCC dam), a gravity dam, or an arch-gravity dam.

The type of dam built will depend on the land on either side of the
The electric power generator will be at the base of the dam.

The latest results of the survey show that the full supply level (FSL)
be between 320-370 metres above sea-level. At each site there can be an
installed electricity production capacity of between 1,500-5,000
The sites have been chosen because of their access to roads from BP-1
the fact that they can send 500kV AC to join the Burmese grid and 500 kV
to Thailand.

This project will involve building another dam downriver to control the
water that is released from the turbines 16 hours a day, 6 days a week.

One cost of the project may involve having to move the bridge at Ta Sang
to Kunhing on Highway 4.

>From the survey, the two most interesting plans are to build an RCC and
electric power generator at site 840, 6 kilometres north of Ta Sang, and

site 725, 2 kilometres south of Ta Sang. However, there is still not
sufficient geological data to make a final decision.

One plan is to build a CFR at site 840, with an underground generator
kind of dam is very common in Japan.) The site and type of dam will
on the geological survey and drilling during the feasibility study.

Level of water

The water level has been chosen at 350 meters above sea-level. The
the level, the more possibility for attracting investment. However, the
engineering survey, the social and environmental impact assessments and
amount of water will all be factors affecting the chosen level.

The size of the generators

The assessment shows that the lowest energy generation may be between
to 4,000 megawatts. A quarter of the electricity produced will be sent
Burma. The rest will be sent to Thailand.

If there are 6 turbines, each would produce 550 megawatts. (6x 550 =

The cost and duration of the project

The CFR project at site 840 will cost 3,397 million US dollars, and take
about 6 years. The RCC dam at site 840 will cost about 3,076 million US$
at site 725 will cost 3,316 million US$, and will take about 5 years.

The details about the respective dams can be summarised as follows:

                                                       Project at
Project at         Project at
840           at
site 840        at site 725

Type of dam                                      CFR dam         RCC dam
RCC dam

Site in relation to Ta Sang                   6 km north      6 km north
2 km South
                                                        of Ta Sang    
of Ta
Sang         of Ta ang

Size of catchment area                        207,000 km2

Average flow rate                               2,583 cm3/sec

Full Supply Level                                 350 m above sea level

Max. reservoir surface area                  660 km2

Reservoir highest storage volume          36,100 km3

Highest live storage volume                  14,200 km3

Max. height of dam                              188 m            193 m
190 m

Dam crest length                                  768 m            783 m
955 m

Rate of water flow into turbines             430.5 cm3/sec

Head of turbines                                  142 m             145
147 m

Installed capacity (in megawatts)           3,327              3,399
including all 6 turbines

Electricity to be produced                    16,076 Gw       16,136 Gw
16,307 Gw
(in gigawatts / hour) per year
at upper dam

Electricity produced                             6,930 Gw          7,923
8,001 Gw
per year at lower dam

Total electricity produced                   23,005 Gw         24,059 Gw
24,308 Gw
per year (Gw/hr)

Cost in US Dollars                     $3,397,000,000   $3,075,000,000

Length of time to build                           6 years             5
years               5 years

Note: The Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand has been

academics in Thailand to conduct an EIA for the project.


JICA Interview Relating to the Kok-Ing-Nan Water Diversion Project

>From   Mekong Watch, Japan
Sent   Wednesday, May 12, 1999 128 AM
Subject:     Kok-Ing-Nan JICA study

Dear friends,

We had an informal meeting with a JICA staff in Tokyo who is responsible
the Kok-Ing-Nan water diversion feasibility study which will be
completed in
coming September. The following is a summary of his comments. Any
and additional information would be appreciated.

Satoru Matsumoto,
Mekong Watch,
Tokyo, Japan


DATE:   13 April 1999

Venue:   JICA, Tokyo

>From JICA---
Mr.Masaru Nakamoto (Second Development Study Division, Social
Study Department), and Yasuhiro Yamaguchi (Joint Cooperation Promotion
Division, Planning Department)

>From NGO's---
Hiroshi Kanda (IACOD, Mekong Watch), Sayoko Iinuma (Independent observer
northern Thailand)

Q. Present stage of a study project

Based on an initial proposal for the Kok-Ing-Nan (KIN) project from the
government of Thailand (GOT) in 1996, JICA sent a study team in
December  of
that year. JICA and GOT discussed the Scope of Work for a feasibility
which was divided into two phases. The current study belongs to Phase 2,
which may finalise September 1999.

In principle, an implementing agency is GOT while the Government of
(GOJ) is not in the position to promote any projects.

Q. Process after this study project

It is expected that JICA write up a draft final report in August this
and finalise it by September. Then, they organise a technical transfer
workshop among the relevant government agencies. The final report
includes a
feasibility study for engineering design but it covers only a part of 
as a feasibility level. The rest of EIA will be complemented by GOT.
Although the project area is very large, the study duration was short.
Probably JICA's part of EIA will give some recommendations for a further
EIA. The process until a final approval of the KIN project may have two

For engineering design>
Consultant (contracted with GOT) ---> NESDB ---> Cabinet

Consultant ---> NEB---> OEPP ---> RID ---> NESDB ---> Cabinet

It is recognised by the National Committee that in the case of KIN, GOT
should assure its financial sources from outside the country, but JICA
not be involved in National Committee.  Therefore, JICA will not be able
influence the final decision.

It seems very difficult to begin construction by 2000 because of a
difficulty of donors.

Q. Information disclosure and public participation

This study project implies a difficulty of PR or information
disclosure.  If
they disclose any information at the early stage, it brings about a
confusion. It happened in this case. Even though a plan was uncertain,
publicised the information. Since such information would lead to an
issue of
compensation or speculation, I wonder if we should disclose information

such a stage.

This is the first large scale study project for JICA to take in public
participation. But even a consultant in charge of it does not understand
well. They organised public workshops six times at three places by each.

was responsible for them, but they also did not know how they should
them well.

It is important to share information among central, provincial and 
governments before disclosing for the public. Unless the governments at 
different levels have same information, the public will be confused. In
order to avoid such misunderstanding among the governmental agencies, 
support to organise technical seminar to share the outcomes of this
in Bangkok, which will be a closed meeting only for the officials.

They plan to publish the final report in English, and the summary both
Thai and Japanese.

Q. Study on current water use

The Operation and Maintenance division of RID has conducted a study on
current water use, especially upstream and downstream of the Sirikit
Data they use is not newly collected one. The study is not a field-based
research but rather a desk analysis of present data concerning water

Q Impacts of economic crisis

The project considers an impact of economic downturn. Since a current
financial crisis push GOT back to a vision towards an agriculture
this economic turmoil seems to be following for RID.

Q Water crisis in the northern Thailand

I realise that since the KIN divert water from 'the poor' to 'the
rich',  it
is indispensable to obtain an agreement from the people along Kok and
rivers. Because those areas have faced flood  during the rainy season
drought in the dry season, it is designed so that water will be diverted
only during the rainy season, August - October. However, an actual
will be decided through a discussion with the affected people.

It is important to estimate how much water demands are expected to be. 
consider some different cases of water demands for this study.

Q. Unregistered ethnic groups which might be affected by the KIN project

It is not the stage for the project team to specify affected people. But
study team understands an issue relating to ethnic groups in mountainous
areas who have no legal status for land registration. I would like to
GO's about the potential problems of this project when they promote
type cannel to mitigate environmental negative impacts.

Q. Impacts on the mainstream of Mekong River

The study identified that 1-3% would be reduced based on an estimation
the volume of diverted water.

Q Information disclosure of JICA documents

The official document marked 'JR' can be disclosed at any JICA offices
including Bangkok.


Mekong Watch, Japan
5F, Maruko-Bldg, 1-20-6, Higashi-ueno, Taito-ku,
Tokyo 110-8605, Japan
Tel  +81-3-3832-5034 Fax+81-3-5818-0520


Minutes of Meeting with JICA on Kok-Ing-Nan

Sent:  Monday, March 8, 1999

===========Minutes of Meeting with JICA on Kok-Ing-Nan ===========

Time: 1:30-3:00pm, Feb. 23,1999
JICA:Mr.Nakamoto (Second Development Study Division, Social Development
Study Department), Mr.Matsushima (Deputy Director, do)

NGO: Decharut (Kasetsart University), Tomoyo Saito (JACSES), Mihoko
(Mekong Watch, Japan)

JICA: =JICA's remarks,
NGO:  =NGO's remarks

1. Process of the project
JICA:  The process so far is as follows:
  1995 request from the Thai Government
  1996.3 contact mission (for S/W)
  1997 mission by consultants
  Phase I---baseline study (by the Thai Government, the study is almost
completed in Mar. 1997, some part of the study is still being
Phase II---F/S (by JICA , the report will be prepared in Sep. 1999)

JICA:   Mekong River Commission (MRC) has already approved the plan.

2. Outline of the project
JICA:   The purposes are:
1.) to divert the surplus water from Kok river and Ing River to Sirikit
so as to solve water shortage problem in Chao Phraya Basin and
2.) to control flood.

NGO:   Why you can judge that the water in the Kok is surplus?
JICA:   Because serious flood is caused in the Kok and Ing during the
season. The basins of the Kok and Ing will be usually flooded  surplus
the wet season according to a simulation study, even taking account of
future development plan.

NGO:   But the watershed of Kok and Ing and that of Nan have close
relationship. So when the Kok and Ing cause flood the Nan also have
water, and the Kok and Ing have a little water the Nan suffer from water
shortage. Do you know about it?

JICA: That kind of study will be done in the Phase II.
NGO:  How much 'surplus' water will be diverted?
JICA: 2 billion m3 in average and 2.8 billion m3 at the maximum.

3. EIA and participation
JICA: EIA will be conducted by the Thai Government after the completion
the F/S, and JICA will only assist them by providing data, etc..
JICA: The F/S by JICA includes the social impacts study, under which
interviews to the people in one or a few village(s) will be conducted so
to grasp what are the problems in general.
JICA: The workshops will be held in Bangkok and Chiengrai in the end of
JICA: The Thai Government has already studied about the alternatives and
they selected K-I-N, so JICA does not conduct the alternative study.
NGO:  I would like you to remember the terrible case of Puk Mun Dam.

4. Others
JICA: JICA has no plan to be involved in the diversion project from the
Salween to Bhumibol Dam.
NGO:  Who will decide the water volume to be diverted?
JICA: Royal Irrigation Department (RID) will be in charge of operation
they do.
NGO:  Will the final report be open after the completion?
JICA: It is also RID's decision whether the report will be made open or
NGO:  We can learn a lot from other similar large diversion project. For
example, there is a large-scale diversion system in Colorado, and I have
heard that it has many problems.



Mekong Watch, Japan
5F, Maruko-Bldg, 1-20-6, Higashi-ueno, Taito-ku,
Tokyo 110-8605, Japan
Tel : +81-3-3832-5034    Fax:+81-3-5818-0520


International Committee on Dams, Rivers and People

May 1999

The ICDRP WCD Update is intended to inform civil society groups about
work of the World Commission on Dams. This update is written from the
perspective of the International Committee on Dams, Rivers and People,
is composed of NGOs, people's movements and indigenous groups in the
Americas, Europe, South Asia and South Africa. This is not an official


The Work Programme has been approved by the commissioners and is
on the WCD web site at www.dams.org. The main elements of the programme
the 7-11 "Focal Dam/River Basin Studies", the 17 "Thematic Reviews" and
"Cross-Check Survey" of 150+ large dams.


According to the Work Programme, the purpose of the focal dam/river
studies is to "review, assess and illustrate the past performance and
development effectiveness of a number of large dams, and to extract
learned." Each study will include an "intensive study" of a single large
while a number of other "non-focal dams" in the basin "will be examined
important interactive and cumulative effects." The studies will
both where there is agreement among "stakeholders" on issues relevant to
dam/basin, and where there is disagreement.

Government permission has been obtained and preliminary work has begun
the following dam/basin studies. Press releases on each of these cases
available on www.dams.org. (The names are listed of WCD secretariat
responsible for each study).

Grand Coulee Dam, Columbia River, USA
(Jamie Skinner, jskinner@xxxxxxxx; Sanjeev Khagram, skhagram@xxxxxxxx)

Tucuruí Dam, Amazon/Tocantins River, Brazil
(Elizabeth Monosowski, emonosowski@xxxxxxxx; Sanjeev Khagram,

Pak Mun Dam, Mekong/Mun River, Thailand
(S. Parasuraman, sparasuraman@xxxxxxxx; Bert Oud, boud@xxxxxxxx)

Kariba Dam, Zambezi River, Zambia/Zimbabwe
(Madiodio Niasse, mniasse@xxxxxxxx; Elizabeth Monosowski,

Tarbela Dam, Indus River, Pakistan
(Jeremy Bird, jbird@xxxxxxxx; Madiodio Niasse, mniasse@xxxxxxxx)

Raudalsvatn Dam, Glomma-Laagen basin, Norway
(Larry Haas, lhaas@xxxxxxxx; Jeremy Bird, jbird@xxxxxxxx)
(the press release on this study is expected to be posted mid-May)

The process for each study is:
1) WCD identifies "study team" of consultants/experts from country in
dam is located
2) team prepares "scoping paper" which is circulated to stakeholders
affected people, utilities, NGOs, irrigators etc.)
3) Scoping paper is discussed at "scoping meeting" with WCD staff, study
team and stakeholders
4) study team writes report based on data from available documentation,
site visits, interviews with stakeholders, and stakeholder submissions
5) draft report is circulated

6) second consultative meeting is held with stakeholders to discuss
7) final report is prepared

The process from scoping meeting to final report is envisaged to take
months. The scoping meetings are to take place in May and June (contact
relevant staff for more details).

Studies of the Danjiangkou Dam, Hanjiang/Yangtze River, China and
Hill Dam, Damodar/Ganges River, India have been put on hold because of
problems obtaining government permission.  The fate of proposed case
in Turkey and Russia is uncertain because of WCD funding shortages. In
cases where the WCD is unable to do detailed studies of specific dams,
may attempt overviews of the experiences with dams in the relevant

A study of the Gariep and Van der Kloof dams (both are operated in
conjunction with one another) on the Orange River in South Africa was
started in November 1998. The Orange study has been used as a "pilot"
testing and refining the focal dam/basin study methodology, but will
produce substantive results. The draft final report is supposed to be
in May after which the second consultative meeting will take place. WCD
staff contact is Jamie Skinner -jskinner@xxxxxxxxx


The 17 Thematic Reviews are listed below. Secretariat staff are
finalizing the scoping papers and terms of reference for each of the
studies. The scoping papers will be posted on www.dams.org.

The secretariat is contracting individuals and teams of
to carry out the studies and others to act as unpaid peer reviewers of
final drafts. Depending on the time and resources available, the WCD may
establish task forces to analyze further the most complex and

First drafts of the reviews are expected between July and September
Final versions are expected to be completed by December/January 2000
incorporating comments from peer reviewers and other relevant comments
information, including from the case studies.

Please contact Patrick McCully - patrick@xxxxxxx - if you have
for people who may be interested in helping do a peer review of the
reviews, either as part of the "official" WCD process or for the ICDRP.

List of WCD Thematic Reviews (and secretariat staff lead coordinators)

I.  Social Issues
I.1  Social Impact of Large Dams: Equity and Distributional Issues
(Madiodio Niasse)
I.2  Dams, Indigenous Peoples and Ethnic Minorities (S. Parasuraman)
I.3  Displacement, Resettlement, Rehabilitation, Reparation and
(S. Parasuraman)

II.  Environmental Issues
II.1  Dams, Ecosystem Functions and Environmental Restoration (Jamie
II.2  Dams and Global Change (Jamie Skinner)

III.  Economic and Financial Issues
III.1  Economic, Financial and Distributional Analysis (Sanjeev Khagram)
III.2  International Trends in Project Financing (Larry Haas)

IV.  Options Assessment
IV.1  Electricity Supply and Demand Management Options (Larry Haas)
IV.2  Assessment of Irrigation Options (Jeremy Bird)
IV.3  Assessment of Water Supply Options (Jeremy Bird)
IV.4  Assessment of Flood Control and Management Options (Jeremy Bird)

IV.5  Operation, Monitoring and Decommissioning of Dams (Sanjeev

V.  Institutional Processes
V.1  Planning Approaches (Sanjeev Khagram)
V.2  Environmental and Social Assessment for Large Dams (Elizabeth
V.3  River Basins - Institutional Frameworks and Management Options
V.4  Regulation, Compliance and Implementation (Elizabeth Monosowski)
V.5  Consultation and Participatory Decision Making (Madiodio


The "cross-check survey" will include desk studies of mainly
indicators (eg projected and actual power production, area irrigated,
displaced) of around 150 projects. The dams will be selected to
represent a
diversity of different purposes, ages, functions, ownership structures,
regional locations. The cross-check survey "will have fewer parameters,
thus provide less in-depth analysis and illustration than the focal
dam/basin case studies."

The draft list of 150 dams should be available shortly. It will include
focal dams and around 50 non-focal dams from the basin studies.
dams on which submissions have been received but are not covered by the
basin studies may be included in the cross-check survey.


A "WCD Forum" has been established to provide a mechanism for the WCD to
consult with different stakeholders and interest groups (the WCD
the Forum as a "sounding board . . . for maintaining a dialogue between
WCD and the respective constituencies of the Forum members). The Forum
comprised of most of the members of the old "Reference Group" which
the establishment of the commission together with a number of new

The first WCD Forum meeting was held in Prague, March 25-26, immediately
before the fourth meeting of the commissioners. A list of the
NGOs, companies etc. which attended is given below. Forum members in
voiced their support for the WCD concept and process, but reserved
on whether or not they would give their approval of the Commission's

Two of the main issues emphasized at the meeting were 1) the importance
the WCD process being participative and transparent, and 2) the
of WCD highlighting the issues of human rights and indigenous rights,
including the issue of whether affected communities should have the
say on whether projects should be built, and how this principle could be
realised in practice. An important point stressed by WCD staff was that
their studies would not try to reach false consensus on issues but would
to clearly show where different sides agreed and disagreed.

Rather surprisingly the issue of community consent for projects was
raised by Jean-Etienne Klimpt of Hydro-Quebec who announced the
new policy that they will not build or even begin studies for new
until they have the consent of affected communities. M. Klimpt said that
recognized that their policy would likely mean they would not build any
dams in the near future and that any future demand increases would be
met by

building gas plants.

The main concern raised by hydro industry representatives at the
were that the WCD should not ignore the problems caused by non-dam
sources and in particular the supposed role of hydropower in mitigating
global warming.

Forum members were strongly encouraged by WCD staff to get involved in
implementation of the workplan by making submissions and reviewing
papers. A second meeting of the Forum is planned for early 2000.

Organizations Represented at the WCD Forum Meeting

   1. Multilateral Agencies

       FAO, Food and Agriculture Organisation, Rome
       UNDP, United Nations Development Programme, New York
       UNEP, United Nations Environment Programme, Nairobi
       WB, World Bank, Washington

   2. Affected Peoples' Groups

       CODESEN, Coordination for the Senegal River Basin, Senegal
       Federación de Indígenas del Estado Bolívar/COICA, Venezuela
       MAB, Movimento dos Atingidos por Barragens, Brazil
       NBA, Narmada Bachao Andolan, India

   3. International Associations

       ICID, International Commission for Irrigation & Drainage
       ICOLD, International Commission on Large Dams, South Africa

   4. Bilateral Agencies

       NORAD, Norwegian Agency for International Co-operation, Norway
       SIDA, Swedish International Development Agency, Sweden

   5. NGOs

       Berne Declaration, Switzerland
       ENDA, Environmental Development Action, Senegal
       Help the Volga River, Russia
       IRN, International Rivers Network, United States
       ITDG, Intermediate Technology Development Group, UK
       IUCN, The World Conservation Union, Switzerland
       Sobrevivencia-Friends of the Earth, Paraguay
       WWF, World Wide Fund for Nature, Switzerland